Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting, 12/07/00

HANCOCK BUILDING, WHICH IS LOCATED AT 3700 LAKE AUSTIN BOULEVARD. THERE ARE A FEW CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA. ITEM NO. 12 IS REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA. ITEM NO. 12 IS REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA. NO ACTION REQUIRED. ITEM NO. 18, ITEM NO. 18, WILL BE POSTPONED INDEFINITELY. ITEM NO. 18 WILL BE POSTPONED INDEFINITELY. ITEM NO. 27, WHICH RELATES TO THE APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QAUNG KWANGMYONG AS A SISTER SPEAK SHOULD ALSO INCLUDE AS SPONSORS MAYOR PRO TEM JACKIE GOOD MOON AND COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>> APPROVE A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER FOR THE PIECIBILITY OF PLACING PUBLIC ART WORK THROUGH THE ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM AND COORDINATEDDED BY THE AUSTIN ARTS COMMISSION, ON NUMBER 28, DELETE THE WORDS EAST AND WEST INSIDE EMBANKMENTS OF THE SOUTHERN UNION BRIDGE THAT CROSSES OVER THE 400 BLOCK OF SOUTH LAMAR. DELETE THAT AND PUT IN IT'S PLACE TO BE LOCATED ON THE INSIDE EMBANKMENT OF THE UNION PACIFIC BRIDGE THAT CROSSES OVER SOUTH LAMAR AT THIRD STREET. ITEMS THAT ARE SET FOR A TIME CERTAIN, 1:30 P.M., GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS, 4:00 P.M., ITEMS 38 THROUGH 41 AND 51, THOSE ARE ZONING ITEMS, 4:30 P.M., ITEM NO. 48. 5:30 P.M., LIVE MUSIC AND PROCLAMATIONS. 6:00 P.M., ITEMS 42, 43, 44 AND 45, ALTHOUGH IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT 44 HAD -- IS PULLED. WE NEED TO GET SOMEBODY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. ITEM NO. 44, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM COUNCIL'S REQUEST THAT IT BE PULLED AND CANCELED. SO NMS I HEAR AN OBJECTION -- OKAY. COUNCIL, WHAT MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WE DO IS -- IS GO TO THE CONSENT AGENDA, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, ITEM NO. 1 IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 30TH 2000. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MOTION IS TO APPROVE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 1. COUNCIL, I WILL CALL OUT THOSE ITEMS THAT I BELIEVE HAVE BEEN PULLED. ITEM NO. 8, ITEM NO. 10, OKAY. ITEM NO. 8, BACK TO THAT IN JUST A SECOND. ITEM NO. 8, ITEM NO. 10, ITEM NO. 12 AS I INDICATED HAD BEEN PULLED FROM THE AGENDA, ITEM NO. 17, ITEM NO. 18. AND THEN ON THE ADDENDUM, ITEM NO. 46 AND ITEM NO. 48. SO IS THERE ANY ITEM THAT CAN BE PUT BACK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OR THAT NEEDS TO BE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT, THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE -- ITEM NO. 9 ON SECOND AND THIRD READING, ITEM NO. 11 SECOND AND THIRD READING, ITEM NO. 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, -- ITEM NO. 46, BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS, BOND OVERSIGHT DR. STERLING LANDS AN APPOINTMENT AS A PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE BY NSENSUS. BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS, ALAN SCHUMAN A REAPPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS, BUILDING STANDARDS BOTH REAPPOINTMENTS BY CONSENSUS, TIM HILL AND MARK RODGERS, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WILL BOZEMAN, AN APPOINTMENT BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. THE DESIGN COMMISSION, REBECCA ALEMAN AN APPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS, THE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM, A REAPPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS, ELIZABETH GONZALES, E.M.S. QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM, BOTH REAPPOINTMENTS BY CONSENSUS, DR. PATRICK CROCKER AND DR. ROBERT TATE. ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION, SAMUEL LAUGH LYNN A REAPPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS. HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, BOTH CONSENSUS APPOINTMENTS, JANE MANASTER. AND LIZ [INAUDIBLE]. ALL THREE REAPPOINTMENTS BY THE MAYOR, HENRY FLORES, TAYLOR MORTON AND RITA [INAUDIBLE]. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, JAMES HILL A REAPPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS, MEG ANN SARTAIN APPOINTMENT BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMISSION, RICHARD CALLERMAN, KIDWELL AND MARGARET MOORE ALL CONSENSUS REAPPOINTMENT. M/W.B.E. COMMISSION, BOWMAN AN APPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS, WATER AND WASTEWATER KIM McFEAR SON A REAPPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS. ALSO ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WOULD BE ITEM NO. 52. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ. IS THERE A MOTION? IS THERE A MOTION? COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ MOVES APPROVAL, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE THAT MAY WANT TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM -- ON ITEM NO. 24, TREK ENGLISH. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NO. 24?

>> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS TREK ENGLISH, I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF JANET CROSS FROM THE NORTH CROSS ALLIANCE AND JOYCE BEST FROM HARRIS BRANCH AND AMY KIRSTEN FROM CHIMNEY HILLS. MOST OF THEM ARE WORKING OR COULDN'T BE HERE BECAUSE OF FINALS. I -- WE HAD -- THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE ABOUT THIS CONTRACT IS THAT WE ARE NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW THE WASTE IS HANDLED BEFORE IT ARRIVES AT THE LANDFILL. IS IT NEUTRALIZED BEFORE IT IS LOADED IN CONTAINERS, HOW IS THIS WASTE HANDLED NOW. WHERE IS IT GOING NOW? WE ALSO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE POSTING OF THIS -- OF THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT AND WHY IS IT THAT THE OTHER LANDFILLS WERE NOT ALLOWED TO BID ON IT? ALONG WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT? WASTE MANAGEMENT DOES NOT HAVE A GOOD BUFFER BETWEEN THE LANDFILLING PORTION AN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE NEIGHBORHOOD ADJACENT TO IT. AT THIS TIME, THEY ARE WORKING ON THE EAST CELL WHICH IS THE CLOSEST AREA TO GILES ROAD. WITH PREVAILING WINDS FROM THE SOUTH AND EXTREME SUMMER HEAT, THE ODOR FROM THESE WASTES WOULD BE HORRIBLE, ESPECIALLY FOR HARRIS BRANCH AT THIS TIME. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS COMPANY IS BEING REWARDED WITH CONTRACTS WHEN THEY DON'T GIVE ANYTHING BACK TO THE COMMUNITY. WE -- A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE REQUESTED TREES FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS IN ORDER TO FORM A SCREENING EFFECT BETWEEN THEM AND THE HOMES AND THE RESIDENTS AND WHILE THEY ARE CONSTANTLY ASSURING US THAT THEY WOULD PUT THEM, THEY DON'T. I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT CERTAIN STIPULATIONS BE ADDED TO YOUR BIDS IN THE FUTURE. TO STIMULATE THE COMMITMENT BY THESE WASTE COMPANIES SUCH AS SAYING THE PREFERENCE WILL BE GIVEN TO LANDFILLS WITH LARGE BUFFER ZONE OR TO COMPANIES WITH MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY -- ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY SURROUNDINGS. OR LANDFILL THAT'S DON'T CAUSE A NUISANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. JOHN HERR WILL BE SPEAKING ON ITEM NO. 27. COUNCIL, ITEM NO. 27 AS INDICATED IN THE CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS IS ALSO CO-SPONSORED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, THIS WOULD BE A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING KWANGMYONG AS A SISTER CITY. LET ME BRIEFLY INTRODUCE THIS. IT IS ON CONSENT BUT I WILL SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS ABOUT IT. FIRST OF ALL A DELEGATION FROM AUSTIN, TEXAS, THAT INCLUDED MR. HERR TRAVELED TO KOREA ABOUT THIS TIME LAST YEAR. AND MET WITH A -- A VARIETY OF ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE KOREAN GOVERNMENT AND ALSO THE MAYOR OF KWANGMYONG AND DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF A CREATION OF A SISTER CITY. THROUGH OUR SISTER CITY'S COMMITTEE AN THROUGH THE GOOD WORK OF MR. HERR AN OTHERS THAT HAVE HELPED THEM ON THIS, THEY HAVE SPENT THE PAST YEAR WORKING TO GET US TO A POINT TO CREATE THIS SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP. IN PART 1 OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR IN KOREA TO HAVE A SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP WAS OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE ROLE THAT SAMSUNG IS NOW PLAYING IN OUR COMMUNITY. MANY OF YOU KNOW THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT SAMSUNG DOES INCLUDING THE FACT THAT IT WAS ONE OF OUR LEADERS WITH REGARD TO CLEAN ENERGY AND GREEN CHOICE. ONE OTHER THING THAT YOU MAY NOT KNOW IS THAT RECENTLY SAMSUNG THE PARENT COMPANY NAMED SAMSUNG AUSTIN SEMICONDUCTOR AS ITS NUMBER ONE FOREIGN FACILITY. SO WE ARE REAL PLEASED WITH THAT, ALSO, WE ARE PLEASED TO HAVE YOU WITH US HERE TODAY MR. HERR, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. GOOD MORNING COUNCILMEMBERS. ON BEHALF OF THE KWANGMYONG AND AUSTIN CITY SISTER COMMITTEE, I'M HONORED TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF AUSTIN. THE CITY HAS A REPUTATION OF -- WHICH -- WHICH -- WITH PROGRESS, INTERNATIONAL GROWTH, AND WHILE MAINTAINING THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT, AS YOU KNOW, A BALANCING ACT TO MAINTAIN THE EXPLOSIVE GROWTH MAINTAINING THE QUALITY OF LIFE. THIS DOESN'T COME EASY. AND I WAS PERSONALLY INVOLVED FOR MANY YEARS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF REAL ESTATE, SO I APPRECIATE THAT MORE THAN MOST OTHER FOLKS IN THE CITY.

>> I BELIEVE THIS REPUTATION AND THE RESPECT IS NOT GIVEN. IT IS EARNED THROUGH THE HARD WORK AND THE PLANNED VISIONS BY -- BY CITY LEADERS LIKE YOU FOLKS AS WELL AS THE CIVIC LEADER IN THE COMMUNITY. SO THIS CREDIT THAT CITY OF AUSTIN EARNED GOES TO YOU AS WELL AS THE OLDEST CIVIC LEADERS IN THE COMMUNITY AND THAT SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED. THE INITIATION OF THE SISTER CITY IS NOT COMING BY ACCIDENT. A LITTLE OVER TWO YEARS AGO THE GROUP OF REPETITIVES FROM KWANGMYONG VISITED AUSTIN -- REPRESENTATIVES FROM KWANGMYONG VISITED AUSTIN TO CHECK US OUT. THE CITY OF AUSTIN DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT. WHAT THEY WERE DOING, AS YOU KNOW, KOREA IS A VERY PROGRESSIVE COUNTRY. FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF DECADES WAS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD. THEY ARE VERY AGGRESSIVE AND COMPETITIVE. OUT OF THAT EFFORT, THEY SELECTED AUSTIN TO PURSUE TO HAVE A SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP, AND AS THE MAYOR MENTIONED, THE LAST YEAR WHEN THE MAYOR'S DELEGATION VISITED IN KOREA, THEY CONTACTED US AND WE HAD A MEETING, A VERY PRODUCTIVE MEETING, AND OUT OF THAT I GUESS BOTH -- BOTH MAYORS FELT THAT THERE'S A GOOD MATCH AND A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANTED TO POINT OUT FOR THE FACT THAT AUSTIN AND KWANGMYONG IS VERY FAST GROWING CITY AND ALSO THEY ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUALITY OF A LIFE. AND YOU WILL FIND THE APPLICATION THAT MAYBE ABOUT HALF OF THE KWANGMYONG LAND IS BEING USED CURRENTLY AS A FARMLAND OR FOREST. AND BECAUSE THE GROWTH OF THE NATIONAL -- THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO ALLOW TO DEVELOP PART OF THAT FOREST AND THEY ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW TO DEVELOP THAT. TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROWTH. AND A COUPLE OF GOOD THINGS HAPPENING OVER THERE IN KWANGMYONG, IT'S NUMBER ONE, THEY WILL BE THE TERMINAL FOR NEW HIGH SPEED BULLET TRAIN FROM THERE TO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO SOUTH PUSAN AND THE OTHER THING IS VERY CLOSE TO NEW INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WHICH IS DESIGNATED AS AN INTERNATIONAL FREE TRADE ZONE, SIMILAR TO HONG KONG SITUATION. SO THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED IN LEARNING FROM AUSTIN, HOPEFULLY THEY CAN HELP US LEARN SOME OF WHAT THEY DO IN VERY SMALL LAND AND TO ACCOMMODATE ALL THAT -- ALL THAT GROWTH AND MAINTAIN THE QUALITY OF LIFE. AND I GOT MORE TO SAY, BUT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE TIME OF -- I WILL STOP HERE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION, I WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF THE WORK THAT YOU HAVE PUT INTO THIS OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. YOU HAVE BEEN VERY GOOD AT THIS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAKES FOR STRONG SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIPS IS WHEN WE HAVE GOOD STRONG CHAIRS OF THE SPECIFIC SISTER CITY COMMITTEE. YOU HAVE DEMONSTRATED YOURSELF TO BE THAT KIND OF A CHAIR, WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. ANY MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. HERR AT THIS TIME? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. HERR.

>> THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL THE CONSENT AGENDA HAS BEEN READ, ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. WE HAVE SOME FOLKS WITH THE SISTER CITY PROGRAM THAT ARE HERE, WHY DON'T YOU ALL STAND UP REAL QUICK THAT DO WORK ON THIS ON A WEEKLY BASIS. [APPLAUSE] THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. WITH THAT, COUNCIL, WE WILL GO TO JUST REAL QUICKLY A PREVIEW OF ITEMS FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETINGS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WILL MENTION THAT WE WILL HAVE ON FOR NEXT WEEK WILL BE -- I, THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCILMEMBER WYNN WILL BE CO-SPONSORING AN ITEM TO ACCEPT THE REPORT OF THE LIBRARIES FOR THE FUTURE COMMITTEE. ANY OTHER ITEMS FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING THAT COUNCILMEMBERS WILL BE SPONSORING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO LET US KNOW NOW.

>>GARZA: THE VIGNETTE ITEMS, THOSE WILL BE ON A SERIES ITEM, I THINK THERE WILL BE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. ALSO VERY HEAVY AGENDA NEXT WEEK WITH THE CANCELLATION OF THE 4TH, WE HAD TO PUT A LOT OF ITEMS SO BECAUSE IT'S A MONTH BEFORE YOU WILL HAVE ANOTHER COUNCIL MEETING. WE APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, LAST MEETING BEFORE THE CHRISTMAS BREAK, WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THE AGENDA SHOULD BE OUT TONIGHT, YOU WILL HAVE IT IN YOUR OFFICES THIS EVENING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ACTUALLY WITH THE LENT OF THE AGENDA, I THINK WE WILL GO INTO CHRISTMAS.

>>GARZA: MERRY CHRISTMAS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: NOW TO BRIEFINGS. THE FIRST ONE AN UPDATE ON THE AUSTIN MUSEUM OF ART DESIGN PLAN. WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GOOD MORNING MAYOR WATSON, MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCILL. I AM ELIZABETH FERRAR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE AUSTIN MUSEUM OF ART. WE ARE MOST GRATEFUL TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE YOU ON THE PLANS FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE MUSEUM'S NEW BUILDING. I AM JOINED TODAY BY SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE MUSEUM'S BOARD AND STAFF. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE JUST ALL STAND TO IDENTIFY YOURSELVES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE] ALSO BY THE MUSEUM'S ARCHITECT, RICHARD GLOCKMAN OF NEW YORK WILL BE ADDRESSING YOU IN JUST A MOMENT. I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE JUST A MOMENT TO PUT THIS PROJECT INTO A BIT OF CONTEXT, GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND. I KNOW THAT ALL OF YOU ARE AWARE OF HOW LONG PEOPLE IN AUSTIN HAVE DREAMT OF HAVING A WORLD CLASS MUSEUM IN THIS CITY. ONE THAT WOULD ACT AS BOTH A CIVIC GATHERING PLACE AS WELL AS A PLACE FOR LEARNING AND APPRECIATION OF THE ARTS. FOR PEOPLE FROM EVERY WALK OF LIFE. THE BARRED AND STAFF BEGAN TO WORK IN EARNEST -- BOARD AND STAFF BEGAN TO WORK IN EARNEST ON THE PLANS THE ARCHITECT WILL PRESENT TODAY IN 1996 WHEN WE OPENED OUR INTERIM DOWNTOWN SPACE AND BEGAN TO BUILD OUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF, RAISE FUND AND PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. WE UNDERTOOK AN INTERNATIONAL SEARCH FOR AN ARCHITECT IN 1998, IN THE SUMMER OF THAT YEAR WE HIRED RICHARD GLUCKMAN AND HIS FIRM WHO HAVE BEEN AT WORK FOR TWO YEARS ON THIS PROJECT. ALSO WE LAUNCHED THE QUIET PHASE OF A CAPITAL CAMPAIGN WHICH BEGAN WITH A VERY SIGNIFICANT LEAD GIFT OF OVER $16 MILLION FROM A GROUP OF DELL EXECUTIVES AND THEIR SPOUSES, SINCE THAT TIME WE HAVE BROADENED OUR BASE OF SUPPORT AND HAVE RAISED OVER $30 MILLION, HALF OF WHAT WILL BE NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE MUSEUM BUILDING. AS YOU ALL KNOW OUR TRUSTEES MADE THE DECISION EARLIER THIS FALL TO RETURN TO THE CITY 11.4 MILLION IN BOND FUNDS. IN PART BECAUSE OF THE SUCCESS OF OUR CAPITAL CAMPAIGN TO DATE AND ALSO BECAUSE A DESIRE AMONG THE BOARD LEADERSHIP TO OPERATE AN INDEPENDENT MUSEUM, BUT ONE THAT WOULD REMAIN FULLY COMMITTED TO EDUCATION, ACCESSIBILITY AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY, VALUES THAT HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AT THE BASE OF THE MUSEUM'S MISSION. AS OF THIS MONTH, WE ARE LAUNCHING THE MORE PUBLIC PHASE OF THE CAPITAL CAMPAIGN AND WE HOPE TO RAISE SIGNIFICANT FUNDS OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR. ONE IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS PROJECT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE IS THE FACT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO BASICALLY START FROM A CLEAN SLATE. THAT MEANS THAT WE HAVE A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A MUSEUM THAT REALLY, TRULY IS FOR THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN. THAT WILL MEET THE NEEDS AND THE INTERESTS OF OUR GROWING POP PLAS AS WE MOVE INTO THE NEW CENTURY. I THINK THAT ALL OF THE SPACES THAT RICHARD WILL BE TALKING ABOUT IN JUST A MOMENT WILL SUGGEST TO YOU THAT THIS IS A MUSEUM THAT AUSTIN REALLY DESERVES AND THAT PEOPLE IN AUSTIN FROM EVERY WALK OF LIFE TRULY END JOUFMT WE ARE PROUD THIS MUSEUM WILL PROBABLY BE SERVING AT A MINIMUM A QUARTER MILLION PEOPLE EACH YEAR OR DOUBLE OUR CURRENT AUDIENCE. THE BUILDING THAT RICHARD HAS DESIGNED WILL BE LOCATED ON A SQUARE BLOCK OF LAND ON FOURTH AND GUADALUPE FACING REPUBLIC SQUARE. THE BUILDING WILL HAVE SOME 145,000 SQUARE FEET OF INTERIOR SPACE. WE PLAN TO BREAK GROUND IN SPRING OF 2001, WE HOPE TO OPEN OUR DOORS TO THE PUBLIC IN THE FALL OF 2003. I WOULD BE REMISS TO NOT THANK EVERY MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR YOUR GREAT SUPPORT THAT YOU HAVE SHOWN THE MUSEUM OVER THE YEARS. YOUR SUPPORT HAS HAD A GREAT IMPACT IN OUR ABILITY TO MAKE SURE TERRIFIC STRIDES LATELY. ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER GREAT THANKS FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU ARE DOING TO CREATE SUCH A WONDERFUL ENVIRONMENT IN THIS CITY IN WHICH THE MUSEUM AND OTHER CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS WILL THRIVE. WITH THAT I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE RICHARD GLUCKMAN THE BEST PERSON TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE PLANS FOR THE BUILDING.

>> THANK YOU, WE ARE EXCITED THAT YOU ARE HERE WITH US TODAY.

>> THANKS ELIZABETH, MAYOR, CITY COUNCILLS, NICE TO BE HERE. ALWAYS NICE TO BE HERE IN AUSTIN. I HAVE BEEN COMING HERE FOR OVER TWO YEARS, FROM THE BEGINNING WHICH WHEN I FIRST WAS INTRODUCED BEGAN MEETING MEMBERS OF A MUSEUM STAFF, THE SUPPORTERS OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, WE BEGAN TO INTERVIEW LOCAL CONSULTANTS, GET ENGAGED WITH JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES. WE HAVE BEEN GUIDED BY A CITY TASK FORCE HELPING US TO PREPARE FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL, OUR MEETINGS WITH TRAFFIC UTILITIES HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT A PROFESSIONAL PLEASURE AND ONE THAT MY OFFICE AND STAFF HAS GROWN TO APPRECIATE COMPARED TO SOME OF THE PROJECTS WE ARE DOING IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD. WHEN I FIRSTIVED ONE -- ARRIVED ONE OF THE -- CONTEXT, SOME HAD NO CONTEXT TO SPEAK OF. BY THE TIME WE GOT OUT THE GROUND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT QUADRANT IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING DEVELOPMENT AREAS THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN. WE HAD HOPED THAT THE MUSEUM ITSELF WOULD -- WOULD INFLUENCE AND BE THE FOCAL POINT OF SOME OF THE EFFORTS GOING ON DOWN THERE. AND WE THINK IT WILL. EARLY ON WE HAD MEETINGS WITH SOME OF THE ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS OF SOME OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AND HAVE TRIED TO -- AND OUR -- IN OUR LIMITED WAY TO COME UP WITH A COORDINATED APPROACH TO THE STREET SCAPE AND TO HOPEFULLY THE -- THE CONTEXT OF THE BUILDING. WHAT MAKES A GOOD BUILDING? WE WANTED THIS BUILDING TO HAVE A SENSE OF PLACE. NOT JUST ON THE CITY SCAPE, BUT IN THE ENTIRE REGION OF THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES. WE WANT THIS BUILDING TO HAVE AN APPROPRIATE SCALE, A BUILDING THAT HAS A CLEAR STRUCTURE WITH A STRONG SENSE OF MATERIALALITY AND LIGHT. IN OUR APPROACH WE HAVE TRIED TO INTEGRATE ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING AS WELL AS THE PRACTICALITIES OF LOCAL BUILDING TECHNIQUES. AND DETAILING. WE THINK THAT THIS CONTRIBUTES TO A BUILDING OF CLARITY, INTEGRITY, I AM POLICE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMY. THE INTRINSIC BEAUTY OF THE NATURAL MATERIALS AND THEIR INHERENT VARIATIONS, THE LIGHT AND SHADOW OF THIS PART OF THE COUNTRY WILL BRING A RICHNESS TO A PLACE WHICH IS BOTH CALM AND CONTEMPLATE ACTIVE BUT ALSO CELEBRATORY. WE WERE VERY HAPPY WHEN THE SITE CHANGED MOVED ONE BLOCK TO FACE REPUBLIC PARK. IT'S BEEN OUR SENSE, OUR GOAL WAS TO INTEGRATE THE ENTIRE PARK INTO -- EXTEND IT ACROSS FOURTH STREET ON TO THE PLAZA AT THIS BUILDING. WE REFER TO THE PARK AS OUR FRONT LAWN. WE THINK OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING AS THE FRONT PORCH. WE HOPE THAT THE MAIN PUBLIC SPACE OF THE BUILDINGMENT BE THE LIVING ROOM FOR THE -- WILL BE THE LIVING ROOM FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN. I THINK -- GO THROUGH THIS FURTHER. AS YOU ALL KNOW PARKING AND DRIVING IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE EXPERIENCE HERE. WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. BUT WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE PRESENCE OF THE AUTOMOBILE, THE EXPERIENCE OF DRIVING A CAR INTO -- DROPPING OFF IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING, PARKING UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING. IN A PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE WITH A -- WITH AN EXIT AND ENTRANCE FROM THE GARAGE ON THE PROMINENT QUARTER OF THE BUILDING, THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE BLOCK WILL EXPEDITE THIS PARKING RELATIONSHIP AS WELL AS PEOPLE COMING INTO THE BUILDING OR ON TO THE SITE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU JUST REAL QUICKLY. CAN YOU DIM THE LIGHT IF WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT SLIDES I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE LIGHTS DIMMED. THANK YOU.

>>> IS THAT A HINT TO STOP TALKING, START LOOKING AT THE SLIDES.

>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I COULD SEE. I AM REACHING A POINT I CAN'T SEE UNLESS THE LIGHTS ARE OFF.

>> I THINK THAT I WILL GET TO THE BUILDING.

>> THAT YOU BELIEVE.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>> I NEED ANOTHER HAND. THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING IS HERE AS WE -- AS I TALKED ABOUT, WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE FRONT PORCH OF THE CITY. BY THE FRONT PORCH OF THE BUILDING, TO BE CONTAINED WITH -- WITH A WATER FEATURE DOWN HERE. THIS IS THE MAIN ENTRANCE, THIS IS THE CAFE ENTRANCE WHICH WILL BE ACCESSIBLE WHEN THE MUSEUM IS CLOSED. THIS IS A THEATER ENTRANCE HERE WHICH ALSO BRINGS YOU ON INTO THE LOBBY OF THE BUILDING, BUT WE HAVE A VERY GOOD -- WE ARE PUTTING IN A VERY GOOD THEATER TO HOPEFULLY BE PART OF THE SOUTH-BY-SOUTWEST FESTIVAL. THIS WILL BE OPEN, OBVIOUSLY, AT ALL TIMES OF THE DAY AND NIGHT AS WELL. LEADS INTO THE LOBBY. THIS LONG BAND HERE, WHILE IT LOOKS LIKE OWE PAGE, IT'S ACTUALLY AS YOU LOOK AT THE MODEL, AS YOU APPROACH IT FROM THE EDGE IT APPEARS SOLID, FROM THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, MORE TRANSPARENT AND MORE INVITING WAY TO GET INTO THE BUILDING. THIS GLASS BAR HERE IS THE UPPER BAR FOR THE LOBBY AND ON THIS CORNER IS THE ART TECHNOLOGY GALLERY WHICH I WILL TALK ABOUT A LITTLE BIT LATER. THIS PORCH HERE DEVELOPED OUT OF -- FOR TWO REASONS. WE NOTICED A LOT OF THE BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN HAD ELEVATED PORCHES. THIS WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. BUT ALSO PRIMARILY TO ACT AS A SHADING DEVICE FOR ALL OF THE ACTIVITIES ON THE PLAZA. THIS IS THE ADMINISTRATIVE WING. AND AS YOU SEE STRETCHING BEHIND THESE OTHER BARS ARE THE -- ARE THE GALLERIES AND THE STORAGE AREA FOR THE BUILDING. THE FRONT PLAZA ITSELF WITH THIS FOUND ELEMENT ON TO CREATE SORT OF BOTH A SENSE OF ENCLOSURE AT CERTAIN TIMES, IT WILL BE OPERATING IN SEGMENT, SO IT'S OFF MOST OF THE TIME ON THIS CORNER, BUT DOWN HERE WHERE THERE'S A FOUND AROUND THE OUTDOOR DINING OR CAFE HERE. AND AN EFFECT OF A TRANS -- PARTLY TRANSLUCENT SCREENING DEVICE MADE OUT OF ALUMINUM MEMBERS OVER THE TOP OF THIS TO BRING FILTERED AND SHADED LIGHT DOWN ON TO THE FRONT OF THE PLAZA. FROM THE OTHER DIRECTION, THIS IS THE EDGE OF THE CAFE HERE. THE CAFE ENTRANCE, THE MAIN ENTRANCE AND THIS CURVED DECK ABOVE, WITH THE SHADING ELEMENTS ABOVE THAT. AS YOU APPROACH DIRECTLY ON TO THE BUILDING, WHAT LOOKS LIKE A SOLID FACADE BECOMES TRANSPARENT, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE INTO THE LOBBY AND ENTRANCE HERE. THE UPPER GLASS IS GOING TO BE LIGHTLY SAND BLASTED GLASS RATHER THAN CLEAR GLASS ACROSS HERE SO IT COULD BECOME SORT OF THE AN ART INSTALLATION FOR THE MAIN LOBBY. ON THE CORNER THAT HAS BEEN A PART OF THE PROGRAM THAT THAT EVOLVED THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE DESIGN, ART AND TECHNOLOGY GALLERY. WE ARE WORKING ON MUSEUMS ALL OVER. NO ONE KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT AN ART AND TECHNOLOGY GALLERY IS. I COULDN'T THINK OF A BETTER PLACE TO HAVE ONE THAN IN AUSTIN, WE ARE CONSTANTLY UPGRADING OUR THINKING ABOUT WHAT GOES INTO THIS. A LOT OF THE ARTIST THAT'S WE HAVE DEALT WITH ARE EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE INTO A GALLERY INSTEAD OF BEING A BLOCK BOX INSIDE OF A BUILDING ACTUALLY BECOMES A TRANSPARENT BOX THAT RATHER THAN DIRECTING THE ENERGY OF THE ART INSTALLATIONS INTERNALLY THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO -- TO DIRECT THE WORK OUTSIDE THE BUILDING. SO WE LITERALLY GO BEYOND THE BOUND OF THE BUILDING, HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BECOME SORT OF THE LITERAL AND FITTING ACTIVE SIGN FOR THE CITY MUSEUM, ADMIN IS UP HERE. THAT WAS THE NORTH SIDE FACING THE PARK. THIS IS THE EAST SIDE FACING ON GUADALUPE, THIS IS THE THEATER ENTRANCE. PARKING ENTRANCE, MECHANICAL AND STAIR EXIT TOWERS, GLASS BARS OF THE SKY LIGHTS ABOVE. THIS -- THE MATERIAL THAT YOU SEE THERE IS -- ARCHITECTURAL STONE. WE HAVE GOTTEN GREAT COOPERATION FROM -- FROM THE -- ONE OF THE PRECAST COMPANIES OUT IN NORTHWEST AUSTIN, PLANNING ON USING ARCHITECTURAL STONE ON THE EXTERIOR, LARGE SCALE MATERIAL SO THE BUILDING HAS A DEGREE OF STRENGTH AND LARGE -- RELATES TO THE URBAN SCALE OF THE BUILDING. WHEN WE GET INSIDE, I WILL SHOW YOU AN IMAGE OF A SMALLER SCALE THAT -- THE USE OF TEXAS LIMESTONE THAT WE ARE ALSO GETTING NORTHWEST OF THE CITY ON THE INSIDE. ON THE SOUTH SIDE THIS IS BASICALLY A FAIRLY OPAQUE WALL FOR SEVERAL REASONS, NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH THIS IS ALL OF THE STORAGE FACILITIES ON THE LOWER LEVEL UNDERNEATH. UP ABOVE THIS IS A GALLERY, EXTERIOR SCULPTURE COURT HERE, ANOTHER GALLERY HERE. RATHER THAN LEAVE THIS SORT OF BLANK CONCRETE WALL, WE HAVE COME UP WITH THE IDEA OF CREATING A LARGE METAL STRUCTURE OF -- WITH GALVANIZED ACTUALLY -- OF WATERING TROUGHS THAT WILL BE FILLED WITH PLANTINGS THAT WILL DRAPE DOWN OVER THE EDGE OF THE BUILDING. NOT JUST TO CREATE A NICE EFFECT ON THIRD STREET, BUT TO ACTUALLY COOL AN ABSORB SOME OF THE HEAT GAIN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING. THIS IS THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING. HERE IS THE -- ARE THE FREIGHT ENTRANCE LOADING DOCKS HERE. THIS IS THE EDUCATION OFFICES. THERE WILL BE A BUS DROP-OFF ALONG HERE, THIS WILL BE THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT ENTRANCE. THIS IS THE CAFE HERE. THE PLAN, REPUBLIC PARK IS TO THE NORTH. MAIN ENTRANCE IS HERE. AS I MENTIONED THEATER ENTRANCE HERE. THE EDUCATION ENTRANCE IS HERE. PARKING IS IN THIS -- INTO A DOWN RAMP TO A THREE AND POTENTIALLY FOUR LEVEL GARAGE. THIS IS SORT OF THE TREASURE HOUSE, THE ART STORAGE AND ART HANDLING BAR HERE, FREIGHT LOADING HERE, THESE ARE THE EDUCATION OFFICES. THE BUILDING IS ORGANIZED AROUND TWO COURTS. THE MAIN STAIR, WHICH I WILL SHOW YOU SOME PICTURES OF. AND A LIGHT COURT HERE. OFF THE LIGHT COURT ARE THE TWO CLASSROOMS, FROM -- THAT SERVICE THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AND A HAND ON GALLERY HERE. THE LOBBY OF THE BUILDING, YOU SEE HERE, IS AGAIN THE CENTRAL PUBLIC SPACE OF THE BUILDING OFF OF WHICH ALL OF THESE OTHER FUNCTIONS TAKE PLACE. THE THEATER, THIS IS THE STORE, WHICH HAS BOTH LOBBY ENTRANCE AND A STREET ENTRANCE. AS I MENTIONED THE CAFE, WHICH HAS A LOBBY ENTRANCE AND A STREET ENTRANCE AND A SMALL OUTDOOR COMPONENT HERE. THIS IS THE KITCHEN AND SERVICE BACK HERE. THESE -- THIS IS A NEW WORKS GALLERY ON THE GROUND FLOOR. SORT OF THE FREE ZONE OF THE BUILDING ON THIS ENTIRE GROUND FLOOR. BUT PARTS OF IT CAN BE CLOSED OFF FOR USE AFTER HOURS WHETHER IT'S THE CAFE OR THE THEATER. OR THE LOBBY ITSELF. THIS IS OUTSIDE ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER LOOKING BACK TOWARDS THE CAFE AND THIS WATER ELEMENT THAT WILL DEFINE THE EDGE OF THE CAFE HERE. I NEVER TRUST THE COMPUTER. IN THIS CASE THE SUN IS SETTING IN THE NORTH. [LAUGHTER]. WHEN YOU COME INTO THE BUILDING, INTO THE MAIN LOBBY

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU KNOW ARCHITECTS ARE -- IS REALLY FEELING PRETTY GOOD ABOUT HIMSELF WHEN HE DESIGNS IT THAT WAY.

>> I WAS GOING TO SAY WE ORIGINALLY DESIGNED THIS FOR AUSTRALIA. [LAUGHTER]. THE MAIN PUBLIC SPACE LOOKING UP THE GRAND STAIR A TOP LIT SPACE, THE MAIN BLOCKS OF THE BUILDING, THE THREE MAIN BLOCKS THAT ARE SURROUNDING THESE TWO LIGHT COURTS WILL BE WRAPPED IN A SMALL HAND -- OR A CLEFT VERSION OF THE TEXAS LIMESTONE LAID UP IN HORIZONTAL PATTERN, SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT PATTERN THAN YOU NORMALLY SEE ON THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN. LOOKING TO THE RIGHT IN THE MAIN LOBBY, THE MAIN BLOCK HERE WITH NEW WORKS INFORMATION, RIGHT WHEN YOU COME IN, WHICH IS RIGHT HERE THE MAIN DOOR, LOOKING DOWN TOWARDS WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE ART WALL, LARGE SCALE INSTALLATION IN THE LOBBY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT HERE, THE -- THE COFFEE BAR, UBIQUITOUS COFFEE BAR IS HERE. AS YOU GET DOWN TO THE END OF THAT SPACE, YOU COME TO THE SECOND MAIN LIGHT COURT, OPEN TO THE SKY, AND WITH -- WE THINK WITH -- WITH A FAST GROWING -- PART OF IT TO SHADE THESE WINDOWS THAT FACE TO THE SOUTH. YOU CAN GO INTO THIS -- THIS LIGHT COURT, THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, STUDIOS ARE HERE, IMAGINE THIS SPACE WOULD BE USED BY THE KIDS ON SATURDAYS, BUT A QUIETER PLACE DURING THE WEEK WITH WATER ELEMENT AND A FOLIATED WALL BACK THERE. WE ARE DOING A PROJECT IN SPAIN, I AM AMAZED IN THE CITY BOTH ABOVE COURT YARDS AND BUILDINGS AS WELL AS THE STREETS, THEY HAVE CANVAS COVERS THEY PULL OVER. WE ARE GOING TO I THINK OPERATE THAT IDEA HERE TO BE USED IN SEVERE SUMMER DAYS. THE INSIDE OF THE CAFE LOOKING OUT TOWARDS A FOLIATED WALL BEYOND. LARGE SCHOOL LOPPING OF THE BUILDING COMING INTO THE CAFE HERE. THIS IS LOOKING THE OTHER DIRECTION TOWARDS THE THEATER ENTRANCE. THE COAT ROOM IN OUR OFFICE, THE WORKING TITLE OF THIS BUILDING IS THE NEXT PICTURE SHOW. CONCESSION AREA, THEATER ITSELF. 29 SEAT HIGH LEVEL MOVIE THEATER. THE SECOND FLOOR, THIS IS THAT MAIN LOBBY, FIRST COURT, STAIR COURT, LIGHT COURT. AND WITH THREE SUITES OF GALLERIES. I THINK THE BUILDING HAS A VERY CLEAR CIRCULAR ORGANIZATION. I KNOW WE ALL KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE MUSEUMED OUT IN LARGE BUILDINGS WITH NO SENSE OF ORIENTATION AND NOT A CLEAR CIRCULATION, WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO OVERCOME THAT SENSE OF IT. WE HAVE CHANGING EXHIBITION GALLERIES HERE. CONTEMPORARY GALLERIES HERE, PERMANENT COLLECTION AND WORKS ON PAPER HERE. THIS -- IT WOULD BE AN OUTSIDE SCULPTURE COURT HERE AND UP IN THE FRONT CORNER IS THE ART AND TECHNOLOGY GALLERY THAT I TALKED ABOUT BEFORE. THIS IS THE SDUPTURE COURT HERE WITH -- WITH THE -- WE ARE TAKING THE LIMESTONE OUT WRAPPING THE TWO BARS HERE. AND THIS -- THIS FOLIATED WALL THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, SHADOW, HOPEFULLY A COOLING EFFECT ON THE SCULPTURE GARDEN HERE WITH A TREL LESS ABOVE ONE END OF IT. TRELLIS. WE DO A LOT OF STUDIES ON THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. I HAVE SAID BEFORE IF WE CAN BUILD A STRUCTURE, A MUSEUM THAT CLEARLY EXPRESSES THE STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS WITH WHICH ITS BUILT, POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE, PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS, IF THE CHARACTER OF THE TRUE STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING CAN BE MADE TO EXIST NOT BE COVERED WITH GYPSUM BOARD OR PANELS AND WE CAN BRING IN MODULATE THIS WITH NATURAL LIGHT, THEN WE WILL A STRONG AND SUCCESSFUL BUILDING AS WELL AS A GOOD PLACE TO EXHIBIT CONTEMPORARY ART. SO IT'S A FAIRLY SIMPLE STRUCTURE, SIMPLE IDEA, COVERED WITH SKY LIGHTS ON THE EDGES OF THE SPACES, WHICH WE HOPE WILL ANIMATE THE BUILDING IN THE EVENING. LOOKING BACK DOWN THE MAIN STAIR, THE TWO BARS OF THE BUILDING WRAPPED WITH TEXAS LIMESTONE. DESCENDING DOWN INTO THE MAIN PUBLIC SPACE WITH A SKYLIGHT ABOVE. A NIGHT SHOT, WE HOPE THE BUILDING GETS ANIMATE UNDERSTAND THE EVENING, IS A PLACE FOR -- FOR CULTURAL ACTIVITIES, NOT JUST FOR THE ART COMMUNITY, BUT FOR THE THEATER AND MUSIC COMMUNITY. AND A BUILDING THAT WE HOPE WILL BE DEFINED BY LIGHT. THIS BUILDING WILL HAVE -- HOPEFULLY WILL HAVE A MAJOR IMPACT ON THE CULTURAL LIFE OF THIS CITY AND THIS REGION AND MAKE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL ARTS COMMUNITY, WE ARE VERY PLEASED AND VERY PROUD TO BE PART OF IT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU. ANY COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS? I WILL JUST SAY ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE COUNCIL, I THINK THAT I AM SPEAKING FOR EVERY MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL, THAT FIRST WE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF THE GOOD WORK THAT -- THAT THE AUSTIN MUSEUM OF ART HAS BEEN DOING TO BRING THIS PROJECT FORWARD. AND THAT INCLUDES NOT ONLY THE -- THE WONDERFUL FUNDRAISING, WORKING WITH PRIVATE DONORS IN OUR COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO THE APPROACH THAT'S BEEN TAKEN ON COMING UP WITH A DESIGN AND WORKING THROUGH THAT SO THAT I THINK WE ARE ULTIMATELY GOING TO HAVE A SPECTACULAR BUILDING IN A PART OF DOWNTOWN THAT THIS COUNCIL IS WORKING VERY HARD TO MAKE SURE THE -- IS A GREAT PART OF DOWNTOWN. THE SECOND THING THAT I WILL SAY IS THAT WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE WAY THE MUSEUM OF ART IN WORKING WITH THE CITY, WHICH IT DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NOT A NEED FOR THE BOND MONEY FROM THE CITY, THAT IT CAME FORWARD AND WORKED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT BONDING CAPACITY COULD BE USED FOR OTHER THINGS. EVEN THOUGH WE WANT AND NEED A GREAT MUSEUM OF ART. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THAT, ALSO, FINALLY CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU, MR. GLUCKMAN. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A PROJECT THAT WE ARE ALL GOING TO BE VERY PROUD OF, BUT YOU IN PARTICULAR IT'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE A PROJECT THAT YOU ARE GOING TO POINT TO WITH PRIDE. I THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE HARD WORK. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE. THANKS.

>> COUNCIL, I'M GOING TO GO TO ITEM NO. 4, WHICH WOULD BE THE PROPOSED PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SURFACE AREA OF WALLER CREEK. THEN WE WILL COME BACK TO THE WALLER CREEK FLOOD BYPASS TUNNEL PROJECT DESIGN, COST, SCHEDULE AND FUNDING ISSUES.

>>GARZA: THEY MAY HAVE TO TAKE A FEW MINUTE TO SET UP, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHO I AM THEY ARE DOING THAT, COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, ON ITEM NO. 10, HOW LONG DO YOU THINK ITEM NO. 10 WILL TAKE?

>>ALVAREZ: I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING BECAUSE THERE'S A DISCREPANCY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WILL CAME UP ITEM NO. 10. IF THERE'S STAFF THAT'S IN THE BACK LISTENING ON ITEM NO. 10.

>>GARZA: ALICE GLASGO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY, MS. GLASGO IS HERE, GOOD.

>>ALVAREZ: BASICALLY, MAYOR AND COUNCIL LOOKING AT THE MINUTES OF THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, ACCORDING TO THE MINUTES, WE HAD ZONED TRACT 1 OF THIS AREA AS -- AS L.I.-CO, TRACT 2, WLOCO, THEN THE POSTING LANGUAGE SAID SOMETHING OTHERWISE. SO LOOKING AT THE MINUTES, LOOKS LIKE WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA IS CORRECT, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

>>GLASGO: GOOD MORNING, COUNCILMEMBERS, I'M ALICE GLASGO. COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, YOU JUST SAID IT CORRECTLY. THE MINUTES INDICATE THAT THE CITY COUNCILL DID ZONE THE PROPERTIES, BOTH TRACTS ONE AND TWO, LI, AND THE POSTING ON THE AGENDA REFLECT THE COUNCIL ACTION. AND ANY DISCREPANCIES IN THE MINUTES WILL -- WE WILL HAVE THOSE ADJUSTED.

>>ALVAREZ: OKAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IF YOU WOULD DO THAT, MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT POSTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT IF WE NEED TO TAKE ANY ACTION WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

>>ALVAREZ: CAN I READ THE ACTUAL DISCUSSION?

>>MAYOR WATSON: PLEASE.

>>ALVAREZ: IT SAYS TRACT 1 BE ZONED LI, TRACT 2 ZONED LI WITH USES ON TRACT 2 LIMITED TO THOSE PERMITTED IN THE WLO DISTRICT EXCEPT SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND LIGHT MANUFACTURING WOULD BE PERMITTED.

>>GLASGO: THAT'S CORRECT.

>>ALVAREZ: THAT WAS ON CONSENT; IS THAT CORRECT?

>>GLASGO: YES, THAT WAS APPROVED ON CONSENT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

>>ALVAREZ: YEAH, I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. WHAT I AM GOING TO SAY IS THAT THE MOTION TO APPROVE ON SECOND AND THIRD READING, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS WITH THE INSTRUCTION THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MINUTE ARE ACCURATELY REFLECTED. IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL ACTION THAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO TAKE TO AMEND THOSE MINUTES WILL BE BROUGHT FORWARD TO US. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE -- ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ON THIS ITEM? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANY DISCUSSION? OPPOSED SAY NO. ON MOTION CARRIES. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER IS VOTING AYE. HOW CLOSE ARE WE TO BEING SET UP? WHAT WE WILL DO IS JUST KIND OF PAUSE WHILE THEY ARE DOING THAT. LET ME ASK REAL QUICK, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER ON ITEM NO. 8, COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS INDICATED HIS QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED AND COULD BE PUT BACK ON. HOW LONG DO YOU THINK THAT WILL TAKE?

>>SLUSHER: NOT VERY LONG, MAYOR. BUT -- DO YOU WANT TO TRY IT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET'S DO IT NOW WHILE THEY ARE SETTING UP.

>> I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: WE HAVE A VALID PETITION ON THIS, I UNDERSTAND?

>>GLASGO: YES, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, WE HAVE A VALID PETITION AT 24.76% AGAINST THE REZONING. THE PETITIONERS INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING ZONING, WHICH IS SINGLE FAMILY 3.

>>SLUSHER: THEY ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION MENTIONED THEY WOULD GO FOR S.F. 6. WHAT -- IN DENSITY TERMS OR UNITS, WHAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT AND THE MF 3?

>>.

>>GLASGO: THE SINGLE FAMILY 6 CITIZENS COMMUNITY IS 12.44 UNIT PER ACRE WHEREAS MF 3 IS I BELIEVE 36 UNIT PER ACRE. BUT THE NET DENSITY WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE LESS IN EITHER. IN EITHER CASE.

>> DO YOU KNOW AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHAT WAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD STANCE THERE OR WERE THEY THERE AT ALL?

>> THE -- LOOKING FOR THE MINUTES VERY BRIEFLY HERE. I'M NOT SHOWING THE MINUTES HERE. THE DISCUSSION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, I COULD BE WRONG, BUT THE MINUTES THAT I AM LOOKING AT IN THE BACKUP JUST INDICATE COMMISSION DISCUSSION WITH STAFF WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR -- THE MAYOR IS OFF THE DIAS. WHAT WOULD BE HELPFUL, APPLICANT FOR 3 MINUTES, REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THREE MINUTES. I DON'T KNOW IF THE -- IF THE MAYOR WANTED TO GET INTO THAT RIGHT NOW OR NOT, BUT THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO ME -- MAYOR PRO TEM IT'S JUST THREE AND THREE, I DON'T MIND. DO OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS MIND? WITHOUT OBJECTION?

>>GLASGO: THE APPLICANT IS MAKING HIS WAY TO THE PODIUM.

>> GOOD MORNING, I AM HERMAN THUN, I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT, WILLIAM GIETEMA, JR.. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR SOME SIX MONTHS, IF HE WANTED TO HAVE IT S.F. 5, S.F. 6, HE WOULDN'T BE HERE OR WE WOULD BE HERE WITH A DIFFERENT CASE. FROM THE GET-GO WE WANTED TO HAVE IT REZONED MULTI-FAMILY. WE WENT THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS. OKAYED OUT A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WHICH -- WORKED OUT A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WHICH THEY HAVE NOT DISAGREED WITH. UNTIL SUCH TIME -- IN ADDITION AGREED TO THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. THERE WAS NO -- THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND THEY WERE IN ATTENDANCE. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE WORKED WITH THEM CONSISTENTLY. BOTH BY TELEPHONE AND BY PERSONAL MEETINGS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THROUGH ALL OF THAT, THERE HAS BEEN NO DISAGREEMENT WITH EITHER THE ZONING AND THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY IN PREPARATION FOR SECOND AND -- FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READING WITH THE COUNCIL, THERE WAS FOR DISAGREEMENT WITH THE 9 POINTS OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, WHAT DID APPEAR AT THE END WAS THAT THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT CANNOT BE AND IS NOT ENFORCIBLE BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN. SO WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM TO FEIGN A WAY TO PROVIDE THEM THE PROTECTS THEY ARE -- THE PROTECTION THEY ARE LOOKING FOR. THE LAST OFFER WE MADE WAS TO GIVE THEM AN ESCROW ACCOUNT OF 10,000 THAT THEY COULD USE TO HIRE LEGAL COUNSEL TO GO AFTER THE APPLICANT IF THE APPLICANT DEFAULTED. WE DON'T PROPOSE TO DEFAULT. AT THE END OF THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE, THEY GET 5,000 OF ESCROW ACCOUNT OR TOGETHER WE SPEND THE 10,000 AND RELANDSCAPE MANCHACA ROAD ON THE EAST SIDE. THEIR COUNTER, VERBAL COUNTER WAS THEY NEEDED MORE MONEY IN THE ESCROW ACCOUNT, 25,000. WE HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO RESPOND FORMALLY, BUT WE DID THIS MORNING TO ONE OF THEIR REPRESENTATIVES, SAYING WE WILL AGREE TO THAT. AND WE WILL AGREE TO THE ISSUE OF -- OF NOT SAY INDICATING THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AFTER CONSTRUCTION. THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY MF 3, LOCO, [INAUDIBLE] A LITTLE FURTHER AWAY. MANCHACA IS A MAJOR STREET, THERE'S NO TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. WE HAVE OFFERED TO INCREASE THE WATER QUALITY AND DETENTION BY 30% TO HELP SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THEY'VE HAD WITH FLOODING ON THE BACK OF SOME OF THEIR PROPERTIES. THERE ISN'T ONE SINGLE FAMILY SITE [BUZZER SOUNDING] THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE OVERLOOKING, WE ARE GOING TO BE OVERLOOKING OTHER HIGH DENSITY ZONING. WE AGREE -- MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN THANK YOU, MR. THUN.

>> JUDGE BAIRD WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD?

>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, MY NAME IS CHARLIE BAIRD, PRESIDENT OF THE BARTON OAKS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. TODAY APPLICANT IS SEEKING A ZONING CHANGE WHICH WOULD PUT 116 DIFFERENT APARTMENT UNITS ACROSS THE STREET FROM BARTON OAKS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE HAVE WORKED DILIGENTLY AND IN GOOD FAITH TO REACH A COMPROMISE WITH THE APPLICANT. THAT WOULD PERMIT SOME FORM OF DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE WHILE PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IN AN EFFORT TO COMPROMISE WE HAVE MET WITH MR. THUN, PHONE CALLS, FAXES, E-MAILS, SPOKEN TWICE TO THEIR LAWYERS, WE HAVE TALKED TO LAWYERS TO REPRESENT US, WE HAVE SPOKEN TO THE CITY'S LAWYERS, WE HAVE SPOKEN TO EVERYBODY IN A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO COMPROMISE AND WORK OUT THEIR REQUEST TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT PROPERTY. THEIR POSITION IS ALL OR NOTHING. WE WANT TO CHANGE THIS FROM SF TO MF AND BUILD 116 APARTMENT UNIT. ON THE OTHER HAND WE HAVE SAID IT IS NOW S.F. 3, WE WILL GO TO 4, 5, 6, YOUR CHOICE. S.F. 6 WOULD PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF 48 DIFFERENT UNITS. ALMOST HALF OF WHAT THEY ARE SEEKING RIGHT NOW. EACH TIME WE HAVE COME TO THEM WITH THAT OFFER IT HAS BEEN DISMISSED OUT OF HAND. WE HAVE WORKED IN GOOD FAITH WITH THEM FOR MONTHS ON. REGARDLESS OF WHAT MR. THUN HAS SAID, WE HAVE NEVER EVER STARTED OUT WITH THE AGREEMENT THAT IT WAS OKAY TO CHANGE THIS FROM S.F. TO MF, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT EVERYTHING, BUT WE NEVER HAD THAT SPECIFIC AGREEMENT. THAT'S WHY WHEN WE CAME TO THIS IMPASSE, WE CAME BEFORE EVERY ONE OF YOU ALL OR REPRESENTATIVES AND TOLD YOU EXACTLY WHAT OUR POSITION WAS. I KNOW THAT I AM GOING TO BE SHORT ON TIME, TWO OTHER PEOPLE FROM OUR SUBDIVISION WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS YOU BRIEFLY. IS THAT OKAY? I SHOULD -- MAYOR PRO TEM IF YOU CAN DO IT IN ONE MINUTE AND TWO SECONDS.

>> I THINK WE CAN. YOLANDA LANDZA -- YOLANDA ZALINSKY IS THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF OUR ASSOCIATION. MAYOR PRO TEM HOLD THE TIME WHILE SHE GETS UP. THAT WAS 57 SECOND.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS CHANGING. IT'S BEEN CHANGING SINCE WE -- SINCE I MOVED THERE IN '70. RIGHT NOW, .6 MILES OF THE TWO STREETS THAT GO INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WE HAVE -- WE HAVE TWO STRIP CENTERS, 11 APARTMENT COMPLEXES, LARGE COMPLEXES, TREATY OAKS, SHADY OAKS, MANCHACA VILLAGE, TRY TOP, WOODGATE, HERITAGE OAKS, IV PARK, PEAR TREE, TWO CONDOMINIUM COMPLEXES WITHIN .6 MILES OF THE FRONT OF OUR. WE HAVE BEEN INUNDATED. WHEN WE CAME IN 1992 THE FIRST TIME ON THIS PROJECT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION, MS. GOODMAN, YOU ACTUALLY SAID AND I QUOTE, I THINK IT'S BEEN OVERKILL FOR A LONG TIME IN THIS AREA. ORIGINALLY THE THOUGHT IS THAT THIS IS A A TRANSITION FROM RESIDENTIAL USE TO MORE INTENSIVE THAT WE WOULD GO LO KIND OF USES. [BUZZER SOUNDING] ANYWAYS -- MAYOR PRO TEM IF YOU.

>>GOODMAN: IF YOU CAN FINISH --

>> YOU STATED ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, WE APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU, THAT WAS KIND OF YOU TO REMIND ME, ALTHOUGH I HADN'T REALLY FORGOTTEN. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: YES, MR. BAIRD, WOULD YOU REVIEW ME QUICKLY ON WHAT THE STATUS OF THE VALID PETITION IS.

>> RIGHT NOW 27.46%. IS THAT RIGHT? 24.76.

>>GRIFFITH: BUT IT'S ON.

>> YES, MA'AM

>>GRIFFITH: IT'S THERE, IT'S IN PLACE. WITHIN THE MINIMUM. DID YOU SAY THAT S.F. 4, 5 OR 6 WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO YOUR ORGANIZATION?

>> YES, MA'AM

>>GRIFFITH: TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THOSE TWO THINGS.

>> YES.

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU, MR. BAIRD.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: MS. GLASGO, LET ME ASK YOU A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. SO THE MF 2 WOULD BE 21 UNITS PER ACRE.

>> MF 2 WOULD BE -- WOULD BE 22 UNIT PER ACRE WHICH YIELD --.

>>SLUSHER: THIS HAS FM 2 TO THE -- MF 2 TO THE NORTH, MF 3 TO THE SOUTH OF IT.

>> THAT'S CORRECT GLRB HAVE WE LOOKED AT THE TRAFFIC SITUATION FOR NEIGHBORS COMING OUT TO MANCHACA AND TRYING TO TURN LEFT OR RIGHT, HOW THIS WOULD AFFECT THAT?

>> SINCE WE DON HAVE A SITE PLAN IN, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE HAVE. THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LOOK AT. IF THERE ARE ANY CONCERNS, THEN THE MITIGATION WOULD BE ADDRESSED. SO WE WOULD NOT HAVE LOOKED AT THAT DURING THE ZONING CASE. BECAUSE TYPICALLY WE ADDRESS THAT DURING THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE CAN MITIGATE. IF THERE IS A NEED TO MITIGATE, THEN THE APPLICANT IS AT THAT POINT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE APPROPRIATE MITIGATION THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. LET ME ASK, MR. THUN DID YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT QUICKLY IN.

>> YES, WE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY MADE ON BOTH SITE PLANS AND THE TRAFFIC COUNT. FIRST OF ALL IT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH UNITS TO PROVIDE THAT, BUT WE DID IT ANYWAY. THE CURRENT TRAFFIC IS AROUND 15,000 ON ROUGHLY 30 SOME THOUSAND RIGHT. SITE DISTANCES ARE WELL BEYOND THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR RIGHT PROPER TURNING.

>>SLUSHER: HERE'S WHAT I AM GOING TO RECOMMEND, IF OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS DISAGREE, I WON'T FIGHT TO THE DEATH OVER IT OR ANYTHING. BUT THAT WE PUT THIS OFF FOR ONE WEEK AND LET -- AND ONE WEEK ONLY. THEN WE ARE GOING TO DECIDE IT NEXT WEEK AND THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND APPLICANT MEET ONE MORE TIME, SEE IF THEY CAN COME TO A COMPROMISE. I THINK WE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO GO UP BEYOND THE S.F. 6 IS MY THINKING ON THIS SINCE IT'S MF 2 ONE SIDE, MF 3 ON THE OTHER. I WOULD FROM OUR STAFF I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE TRAFFIC, IN PARTICULAR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRYING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN, WHAT THAT SITUATION IS RIGHT NOW. AND THEN WE WOULD -- WE WOULD PRETTY QUICKLY DECIDE THIS NEXT WEEK. IT WOULD BE NICE IF THE APPLICANT AND NEIGHBORHOOD COULD COME TO AN AGREEMENT. I PREFER THIS CASE NOT GET INTO WHERE IT STARTS TAKING UP A LOT OF LOBBYING TIME OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS.

>>GOODMAN: COUNCILMEMBER, IF THAT'S A MOTION I WOULD SECOND IT.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. IT WAS.

>>GOODMAN: AND I WILL MENTION AS -- AS MY COMMENT ON BEING A SECONDER THAT THE REASON THAT I WAS QUOTED ABOUT SAYING THAT AS MULTI-FAMILY IN THIS AREA IS BECAUSE DID THE -- DURING THE REAL ESTATE BOOM THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WAS HAPPENING. THE FEAR WAS IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH MF IT WOULD ALWAYS BE CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE TO HAVE MORE MF SINCE IT WAS RIGHT NEXT DOOR, OR NEARBY OR THE AREA WAS HEAVILY ZONED AND USED IN THAT WAY. SO EVEN THOUGH I AGREE WITH MR. THUN THAT IT DEFINITELY LOOKS APPROPRIATE BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH THERE, I AGREE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THAT IT WAS EXACTLY THAT KIND OF SITUATION THAT CAUSED THIS ALL BACK THEN TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR SUPPORT WAS FOR MORE MIXED USE. SOME MORE ECLECTIC FEEL RATHER THAN SOLID WALLS OF MULTI FAMILY SUCH AS YOU GET DOWN ON RIVERSIDE FROM THE DAYS WHEN THERE WAS SUCH A PUSH FOR COLLEGIATE APARTMENT COMPLEXES. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: YES, THANK YOU MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. I'M IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH YOU AND WE WILL -- WILL SUPPORT CERTAINLY YOUR MOTION. AND YOUR PHILOSOPHY THAT WE DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A LONG, DRAWN OUT SITUATION. HOWEVER, AS ONE WHO DOES NOT AS A RULE VOTE AGAINST VALID PETITIONS, I WOULD HOPE THAT THE S.F. 6 WOULD BE STRONGLY CONSIDERED BY BOTH PARTIES IN YOUR -- IN YOUR DISCUSSIONS THIS WEEK. THANKS.

>>GOODMAN: JUDGE, WOULD YOU CARE TO RESPOND BRIEFLY.

>> WE WILL BE HAPPY TO COME BACK AND DO WHATEVER PLEASES COUNCIL. WE RIGHT NOW BEFORE YOU HAVE A VALID PETITION. IF WE COME BACK IN A WEEK WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT PETITION IS STILL VAF, IF WE CAN'T WORK SOMETHING OUT BECAUSE WE'VE HAD -- MR. THUN AND OTHERS HAVE TALKED TO PEOPLE AND OTHERS TRYING TO GET THEM TO WITHDRAW THEIR PETITION. I WOULD HAVE -- I WOULD HATE TO COME BACK AND WE ARE LESS THAN OUR VALID PETITION STATUS WHICH IS WHERE WE STAND RIGHT NOW.

>>GOODMAN: WOULD YOU CARE TO COMMENT?

>> WELL, I GUESS WHAT WE WOULD HOPE IS THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED TO THOSE WHO SIGNED THE VALID PETITION WAS ALL OF THE INFORMATION. THAT'S OUR INTEREST. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE CAN SIGN WHAT THEY WANT TO SIGN, WE UNDERSTAND THAT.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR PRO TEM, LET ME -- MR. BAIRD'S COMMENT. I MEAN, I THINK THE COUNCIL WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF THE FACTORS IN THE AND WHATEVER THE SITUATION OR ATMOSPHERE IS, BUT WE COULDN'T SAY RIGHT NOW THAT THE VALID PETITION WILL STILL BE VALID IF SOME NAMES ARE PULLED OFF ON IT. BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, I THINK THAT'S A CHANCE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO TAKE DURING THE ENSUING TIME, I THINK YOU UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> I DO, AGAIN WE ARE GOING TO DO WHATEVER PLEASES COUNCIL. WE HAVE BEEN AT THIS FOR A MIGHTY LONG TIME, WE HAVE WORKED ON THIS PETITION FOR A LONG TIME. I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK IN A WEEK ALL OF A SUDDEN HE ONLY NEEDS FOUR VOTES, RIGHT NOW HE NEEDS SIX.

>>SLUSHER: I UNDERSTAND THAT. WHEN WE FIRST HEARD IT, THERE WASN'T A VALID PETITION, IT WASN'T CLEAR HOW TO ME ANYWAY HOW STRONGLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSED IT. SO WE ARE ALL COMING INTO IT SORT OF LATE. THANK YOU,ER.

>> THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU. IT'S OUR HOPE THAT AS WE GET CLOSER TO THE SEASON OF PEACE AND FORGIVING THAT -- THAT MAYBE SOME RECEIVING AND GIVING CAN GO ON DURING THIS COMING WEEK. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS IN ADVANCE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.

>> AYE. SORRY TO MAKE YOU WAIT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ONE MOMENT PLEASE FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS] BLANK.

>> ... TO WALK WITH ME ON WALLER CREEK AND COUNCILMEMBER GOODMAN, I THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR DEDICATION TO THIS PROJECT. YOUR LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN VERY HELPFUL TO US DURING THIS MASTER PLANNING PROCESS. THIS PLAN WAS COMMISSIONED BY THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO LIVE ALONG WALLER CREEK AS WELL AS THE CITY AGENCIES THAT PARTICIPATED. AND I WOULD LIKE TO RUN QUICKLY THROUGH A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE MASTER PLAN AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT. FIRST OF ALL, IF I COULD JUST SAY, WALLER CREEK IS A VERY COMPLEX URBAN STREAM. IT HAS BEEN CHANGED DRAMATICALLY OVER THE LAST 60 TO 70 YEARS, TO THE POINT THAT IT REALLY IS NOT RECOGNIZED TODAY, IN MY OPINION, IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, AS A NATURAL LANDSCAPE, BUT A LANDSCAPE THAT HAS HAD A LOT OF HUMAN ENCROACHMENT AND HUMAN INVOLVEMENT OVER THE LAST 60 YEARS. THERE ARE NATURAL ELEMENTS IN THIS CREEK TODAY, BUT THEY ARE REALLY ALMOST SECONDARY TO THE KINDS OF ABUSES THAT WE PUT THEM TO OVER THESE PAST FEW YEARS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO REALIZE ABOUT THE CREEK IS THAT IT IS NOT ONE TYPE OF CHARACTER. IT'S A VERY DIVERSE URBAN CHARACTER. REALLY WHAT WE DEFINED AS COMPRISED OF THREE DIFFERENT KRARX, A LOWER CREEK CHARACTER, ROUGHLY FROM TOWN LAKE TO AROUND FIRST TO SECOND TO THIRD STREET, AN UPPER CREEK OR MIDDLE CREEK CHARACTER, ROUGHLY FROM THAT DIVISION ALL THE WAY UP TO WATERLOO PARK, AND THEN AN UPPER CREEK CHARACTER IN WATERLOO PARK. AND THESE CHARACTERS ARE VERY DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER. IN THE LOWER CREEK WE HAVE A NATURAL ENVIRONMENT MIXED WITH URBAN DEVELOPMENT. IN THE MIDDLE CREEK WE HAVE A VERY URBAN CHARACTER, BUT I CALL IT A CANYON-LIKE CHARACTER THAT HAS OCCURRED OVER THE YEARS. AND IN THE UPPER CREEK WE REALLY HAVE VESTIGAGES OF WHAT WALLER CREEK LOOKED LIKE MANY YEARS AGO, A MORE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THAT WE HAVE THOSE THREE DIFFERENT CHARACTERS BECAUSE SOLUTIONS FOR THE CREEK WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE TO ALL THOSE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. THEY WOULD BE UNIQUE, EACH OF THOSE CHARACTER LANDSCAPES. THE FIRST THING THAT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT IN TERMS OF DEFINING THE FUTURE CHARACTER OF THE CREEK IS TO DEFINE SETBACKS ALONG THE CREEK. I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT BUILDINGS THAT ARE DEVELOPED ALONG THE CREEK BE SET BOOK FROM THE EDGE OF THE CREEK BANK TO ALLOW THE CREEK TO CONTINUE TO FLOURISH AS A NATURAL RESOURCE. IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE HAVE RECOMMENDED THAT SOME MINIMUM SET BACK GUIDELINES BE ESTABLISHED FOR EACH OF THE VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE CREEK. IN THE LOWER CREEK WE'RE RECOMMENDING A MINIMUM OF 60 FOOT SETBACK, IN THE MIDDLE CREEK WE'RE RECOMMENDING A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 40 FEET FROM THE CENTER OF THE CREEK, AND IN THE UPPER CREEK WE'RE RECOMMENDING ACTUALLY NO SETBACK AT ALL. WE'RE HOPING IT REMAINS A NATURAL ENVIRONMENT FOR MANY YEARS TO COME. THE REASON WE THINK THE SETBACKS ARE IMPORTANT IS TO ALLOW SUNLIGHT TO PENETRATE TO THE CREEK FLOOR TO ALLOW THE NATURAL VEGETATION THAT HAS ESTABLISHED THERE TO CONTINUE TO FLOURISH, AND TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS UNIQUELY AUSTIN. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF COMPARISONS ABOUT WALLER CREEK BECOMING A SAN ANTONIO, AND I WOULD LIKE TO -- FOR RIGHT NOW DISMISS THAT AS EVER BEING A POSSIBILITY. I HOPE IT NEVER TURNS INTO SAN ANTONIO, NOT TO SAY ANYTHING NEGATIVE AGAINST THE RIVER WALK BECAUSE IT'S A FANTASTIC RESOURCE, BUT I THINK YOU HAVE A WONDERFUL LANDSCAPE RESOURCE THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED IN AN AUSTIN WAY. THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ARE DRAMATIC. WATER QUALITY HAS DECREASED, THE VEGETATION HAS DECREASED AND WILDLIFE HAS BEEN HAMPERED IN THAT CREEK. AND I THINK THAT ONE OF THE THINGS I'VE SEEN ON THE HORIZON BEING A TOTAL OUTSIDER WITH NO ACTIONS TO GRIND IS THE OPPORTUNITY OF THIS TUNNEL PROJECT, WHICH I KNOW YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR ON REPORT ON. I THINK THIS IS AN ESSENTIAL PROJECT FOR THE KIND OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE COMING UP WITH HERE FOR THE WALLER CREEK MASTER PLAN. WE'VE REALLY HINGED A LOT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME OUT OF OUR REPORT ON THE COMPLETION OF THIS TUNNEL. AND I REALIZE THAT'S A VERY DIFFICULT VISION FOR THIS COMMUNITY GIVEN THE COST OVERRUN FROM THE TUNNEL, BUT I THINK IT'S AN ISSUE OF INVESTMENT AND RETURN. THE MORE THAT YOU CHOOSE TO INVEST IN THE TUNNEL, THE MORE THAT YOU WILL SEE AN ECONOMIC RETURN IN THE LONGTERM AROUND WALLER CREEK. SO I THINK THAT ONE OF THE BENEFITS WOULD BE THAT IT WOULD IMPROVE THE CREEK'S HABITAT IMMEDIATELY, REFRESHING AND PROVIDING CLEAN WATER SUPPLY IN WALLER CREEK. HAVING IMPROVED STABILITY OF THE STREAM BANKS, REDUCING EROSION AND ALLOWING A VEGETATIVE BUFFER TO BE REESTABLISHED ALONG THE CREEK LANDSCAPE. NOW, WE'RE RECOMMENDING IN SURVEYING NATIONALLY SCREAM BUFFERS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES THAT A 25 TO 35 FOOT -- VEGETATED STREAM BUFFER BE ESTABLISHED WHERE PRACTICAL. THAT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME RECONSTRUCTION OVER TIME AND IT'S ALSO GOING TO TAKE SOME FLEXIBILITY ON THE PART OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND CITY OFFICIALS IN TERMS OF WHERE THAT CAN BE SUCCESS STES FULLY ESTABLISHED. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO STAB IT ALONG THE ENTIRE CREEK, BUT I THINK THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES YOU CAN DO THAT SUCCESSFULLY. WE ALSO FEEL THAT WALLER CREEK IS A LANDSCAPE THAT HAS BEEN OVERARTICULATED THROUGH DESIGN AND URBAN PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE. IT'S A REMNANT OF A 1970'S PHILOSOPHY THAT WENT OUT AND CREATED HIGHLY ARTICULATED SPACES. WHAT WE FIND IS THESE SPACES ARE DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN IN A SAFE WAY. I THINK PEOPLE THINK IT'S A SAFE ARGUMENT THEY DON'T FEEL SAFE THERE AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN THE REDEVELOPMENT IS USE CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNS WHICH HAS A WHOLE HOST OF PRINCIPLES INCLUDING A SAFER LANDSCAPE. A LOT OF THAT IS GOING TO BE SIMPLIFYING THE ENVIRONMENT OUT THERE, GOING AHEAD AND LINKING UP THE TRAIL SYSTEMS SO IT IS A CONTINUE USE FLOW ALONG THE ENTIRE CREEK AND ESTABLISHING A THREE TIER TRAIL SYSTEM, A CREEKSIDE TRAIL NEXT TO THE WATER'S EDGE, A STREET LEVEL TRAIL ON THE TOP OF THE STREAM BANK, AND A SYSTEM OF BIKE WAYS AND WALKWAYS THAT SPAN AROUND THE STREETSCAPES. CHARLIE HAS BROUGHT COPIES OF THE REPORTS AND I THINK HE'S GOING TO DISTRIBUTE THOSE WHILE I CONTINUE MY PRESENTATION. WE IS HAVE IDENTIFIED FOUR INMREEMENT TRAIL SYSTEMS WE THINK SHOULD BE COMPLETED. AT THE VERY TOP OF THE SCREEN AT THE TOP OF THE PROJECT IN WATERLOO PARK, I BELIEVE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO LINK THIS TRAIL INTO THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS CAMPUS, I BELIEVE THERE IS SOME INTEREST NOW ON THE PART OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS IN DOING THAT WITH THE BIKE WAY SYSTEM AND WALKWAY SYSTEM ALONG WALLER CREEK THROUGH THE CAMPUS. SOME ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS TO WATERLOO PARK WOULD ENABLE THAT TRAIL SYSTEM TO FLOW ALL THE WAY INTO THE EXISTING TRAIL SYSTEM AND THEN THE REST OF THE INCOMPLETE SEGMENTS ARE IN THE LOWER SECTIONS WHERE REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS BY PRIVATE SECTOR ARE UNDERWAY. AND I THINK THE PRIVATE SECTOR COULD GO AHEAD AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOWER CREEK TRAIL SYSTEM. WE ARE RECOMMENDING A SERIES OF TRAIL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT WRE THINK WILL MAKE STEP SYSTEMS COME ONLINE IN A MORE POSITIVE WAY IN THE FUTURE, A LITTLE CLEANER SET OF SYSTEMS THERE, AND PERHAPS GOING IN AND REMOVING SOME OF THE OLD TRAIL SYSTEM THAT WE THINK IS NOT VERY FUNCTIONAL TODAY AND IT COULD BE IMPROVED GREATLY BY JUST SIMPLIFYING THE WAY THAT ENVIRONMENT WORKS. WE ALSO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO LINK THE TRAIL TO THE SURROUNDING STREETSCAPE AND IN THE MASTER PLAN WE RECOMMEND SEVERAL LOCATIONS WHERE IMPROVEMENTS TO SURROUNDING STREETSCAPES CONNECTIONS COULD BE MADE. WE ALSO BELIEVE IN WORKING WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE DOWNTOWN -- AND THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE. IN THAT SECTION OF DOWNTOWN AUSTIN REALLY NEEDS SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS WITH REGARD TO STREETSCAPE FURNITURE AND LANDSCAPING AND EVEN PERHAPS OUTDOOR CAFES, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S REALLY MISSING FROM THIS ENTIRE ENVIRONMENT IS A COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM AND I KNOW P.D.A. IS IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THAT AND -- PARD IS IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THAT. THAT'S GOING TO HELP A LOT TO ASSIST IN FINDING A WAY TO MAKE PEOPLE FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE. THEN MAINTENANCE OF THE LANDSCAPE IS REALLY CRITICAL AND I KNOW THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS HAD A VERY DIFFICULT TIME KEEPING UP WITH THAT. YOUR AGENCIES WORK VERY HARD TO DO THAT. IT'S ALMOST A SITUATION WE NEED TO ENGAGE THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN ASSISTING WITH MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES AND I THINK WE CAN DO THAT SUCCESSFULLY THROUGH INTER AGENCY AGREEMENTS AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE AGREEMENTS EXECUTED WITH PROPERTY OWNERS. AND THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE IN THE PLAN AS WELL. NOW, HOW DO FUND ALL THIS. WE THINK THAT'S A CRITICAL ASPECT. WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THE THIS CITY, THIS COMMUNITY TAKE A HARD LOOK AT ESTABLISHING A TAX INCREMENT INVESTMENT ZONE. WE REALIZE THERE ARE PROS AND CONS TO THAT. WE THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE TO LOOK AT THAT HARD. IT COULD BE A WAY OF HELPING TO FUND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE TUNNEL PROJECT AS WELL AS LONGTERM MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY ALONG THIS PROJECT. AS FAR AS THE NEXT STEPS OUT OF THIS MASTER PLAN EFFORT, WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE CONTAINED IN THE PLAN, AS WELL AS WE WOULD LIKE THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES TO ACCEPT THEM AS WELL. WE WOULD LIKE FOR FOLKS TO START WORKING ON DEFINING A FIXED FUNDING SOURCE AS WE'VE RECOMMENDED IN THE PLAN. WE THINK MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT IS CRITICAL AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE AGREEMENTS THAT WE RECOMMEND IN THE PLAN ADOPTED RIGHT AWAY. THE PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CREEK I THINK WILL HAPPEN OVER TIME. ONE OF THOSE I THINK IS GOING THE HAPPEN RIGHT AWAY, POTENTIALLY WITH VIGNETTE IN THE LOWER SECTION OF THE CREEK. I THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE OF A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP THAT CAN BE FOSTERED ALONG WALL LER CREEK. AND I ALSO BELIEVE THAT -- I HAVE PUT IN HERE NON-AMPLIFIED MUSIC OR VOICES. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT PUTTING BANDS OUT IN WALLER CREEK, BUT I THINK SOME OF THE MORE PEDESTRIAN TYPE EVENTS WOULD REALLY HELP IMPROVE NOT ONLY THE APPEARANCE OF THE CREEK BUT THE FUNCTION. CREEK LANDSCAPE AND THE HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL OF THE FUTURE THIS. IS A VERY QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHAT HAS BNG A YEAR-LONG PROCESS. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU TODAY AND MAKE A PRESENTATION AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER THEM.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR PRO TEM? I THINK ONE OF THE BEST THINGS GOING ON WITH WALLER CREEK RIGHT NOW IS YOUR INVOLVEMENT. I AM DELIGHTED THAT A PERSON OF YOUR EXPERIENCE AND TALENT AND AESTHETIC SENSE AND UNDERSTANDING CARES ABOUT WALLER CREEK AND IS INVOLVED. SO THAT -- THAT'S PART OF THE GOOD NEWS. ALSO, YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT SETBACKS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF MAINTAINING THE NATURAL QUALITY THAT WE'VE ALL VALUED AND WORKED TOWARDS FROM -- CERTAINLY FROM -- FROM WATERLOO PARK DOWN. AND I HOPE YOU WILL REMAIN ENGAGED AND INVOLVED. THE -- YOU WENT RIGHT TO THE CHALLENGE RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS WHAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT IN A FEW MINUTES, WHICH IS THE TUNNEL. HOW TO PAY FOR IT. WE HAVE 25 MILLION APPROVED BY THE VOTERS AND IT CAME IN AT 53. SO THAT'S A CHALLENGE. BUT IT MAY BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK -- I'VE -- WHAT I'VE ASKED FOR FROM STAFF AND EXPECT TO SEE SOON IS FURTHER INCREMENTAL EVALUATION. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE SPENT 25 MILLION? WHAT WOULD THE SETBACKS IN THE FLOODPLAIN BE? AND I HOPE YOU WILL BE IN ON EVALUATING THAT. THEN AS YOU RATCHET IT UP IN TERMS OF PUBLIC INVESTMENT, WHAT CHANGES? AND I HOPE YOU WILL -- I HOPE YOU WILL BE THERE TO COMMENT ON THOSE. ALSO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS YOU MENTIONED PUBLIC-PRIVATE. ANOTHER THING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS HOW MUCH SHOULD -- OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 25 AND THE 53 SHOULD BE PUBLIC AND HOW MUCH SHOULD BE THE OBLIGATION OF THE FOLKS WHO ARE MOST DIRECTLY AFFECTED IN TERMS OF PROFIT AND NET WORTH. SO THOSE -- THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT AND IT'S GOOD THAT YOU ARE THERE TO HELP US THINK ABOUT THOSE THINGS. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER COMMENTS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MAYOR PRO TEM, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING?

>>GOODMAN: ONE QUICK COMMENT TO FOLLOWUP ON WHAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH SAID. I ALSO AM REALLY HAPPY THAT YOU ARE ON THIS JOB BECAUSE WE DO HAVE KIND OF A DIFFICULT PLANNING TASK AHEAD OF US OR MANY FUNDING TASKS AHEAD OF US. SO I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW THAT YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO PUT FORWARD AND I HOPE THAT YOU WILL BE AROUND FOR THIS NEXT LITTLE WHILE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. THAT WILL TAKE US TO ITEM 3, WHICH KIND OF FOLLOWS UP ON NOT ONLY THIS PRESENTATION BUT SOME OF THE COMMENTS MADE BY COUNCIL WITH REGARD TO THE TUNNEL PROJECT DESIGN, COST, SCHEDULE AND FUNDING ISSUES.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS GEORGE OZ WALLED, I'M WITH THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT AND I WILL BE JOINED BY JOHN STEVENS OUR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE IN PROVIDING A BRIEFING ON THE WALLER CREEK TUNNEL PROJECT. WHILE WE'RE SWITCHING COMPUTERS TODAY I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO MENTION THAT WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM OUR CONSULTANT TEAM HERE, BROWN & ROOT, GRABER SIMMONS AND COWAN AND FANTELL, A COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER WHO IS INVOLVED IN OUR BENEFITS ANALYSIS. TO BEGIN WITH A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE PROJECT, THE VOTERS IN MAY OF 1998 APPROVED A $25 MILLION PROPOSITION TO SUPPORT THE TUNNEL PROJECT THAT WAS PART OF THE CONVENTION CENTER COMBINED WITH THE TUNNEL VENUE PROJECT, AND THE EXISTING FLOODING CONDITIONS IN THE WATERSHED -- SUE, GO AHEAD AND JUST MOVE TO THE THIRD SLIDE. WE HAVE 12 ROADWAYS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO INNONE DATION DURING A 100-YEAR FLOOD EVENT BETWEEN WATERLOO PARK AND TOWN LAKE. THERE ARE 40 BUILDINGS IN THAT AREA THAT WOULD SUFFER INTERIOR FLOODING UNDER THOSE CONDITIONS. THE FLOODPLAIN IS UP TO 800 FEET WIDE IN THAT AREA. AND UNDER THESE CONDITIONS THERE IS ONLY ABOUT A LITTLE OVER 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF LAND THAT WE JUDGE COULD BE REDEVELOPED SAFELY WITHOUT WORSENING THOSE FLOODING CONDITIONS, SO WE'RE VERY LIMITED IN TERMS OF FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT AND NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THAT FLOODPLAIN AREA. THE GOAL OF THE ORIGINAL PROJECT WAS TO PROVIDE 100-YEAR FLOOD PROTECTION BELOW WATERLOO PARK, THAT IS, TO REDUCE THE FLOODPLAIN FROM UP TO 800 FEET WIDE TO WITHIN THE DEFINED CHANNEL AREA. SO THERE WOULD BE NO OVERBANK FLOODING. THAT WOULD REQUIRE A TUNNEL 22 FEET IN DIAMETER, APPROXIMATELY A MILE LONG, AND THAT -- THAT PARTICULAR APPROACH WOULD MAKE 1,243,000 SQUARE FEET OF LAND AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT. WE FOCUSED ON INTEGRATING THE INLET AND OUTLET FACILITIES INTO THE EXISTING PARK LANDS AND WATERLOO PARK AND ON TOWN LAKE. WE INCLUDED AUTOMATED TRASH MANAGEMENT BECAUSE OF LESSONS LEARNED IN SAN ANTONIO, IT IS CRITICAL ON THESE DIVERSION TUNNELS FACILITIES TO KEEP THE INLET STRUCTURE OPEN AND THAT REQUIRES AN AUTOMATED SYSTEM TO CATCH TREES, FLOATING CARS AND WASHING MACHINES THAT MAY COME DOWN THE CREEK AND KEEP THAT FACILITY OPEN SO THE TUNNEL CAN INTERCEPT FLOOD FLOWS. THE DISCOVERY WAS THAT THE COST OF THE PROJECT WOULD ACTUALLY BE 53 MILLION UNDER THESE CONDITIONS. ALSO IN OUR COORDINATION WITH THE DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE WE DISCOVERED THAT THERE WAS SOME INTEREST, AND AS CHUCK MENTIONED, IN HAVING A CREEK SCENARIO THAT IF SOMETHING LIKE THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER WALK. AND TO DO THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO INTERCEPT ADDITIONAL FLOWS BELOW WATERLOO PARK AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE ANOTHER APPROXIMATELY $10 MILLION IN EXPENDITURES TO INTERCEPT THAT LOCAL STORM SEWER DRAINAGE THAT ENTERS THE CREEK BELOW THE TUNNEL INLET FACILITY. NEXT SLIDE. AT THAT POINT, KNOWING THAT WE WERE FAR BEYOND THE AVAILABLE BUDGET FOR THE PROJECT, WE STARTED INTERACTING WITH THE CONSULTANT TEAM TO LOOK AT OPTIONS TO REDUCE COST, AND THE DISCOVERY WAS THAT IF WE ONLY INTERCEPTED 55% OF THE 100-YEAR FLOW IN WATERLOO PARK, WE COULD STILL RECOVER 98% OF THE FLOODPLAIN. AND THAT WOULD SAVE US $7 MILLION, REDUCING THE PROJECT COST TO $46 MILLION, AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE INTEGRATION INTO THE PARKLAND AREAS AND OUGHT MATTED TRASH MANAGEMENT. -- OUGHT MATED TRASH MANAGEMENT. I WANT TO ILLUSTRATE THE REDUCTION IN FLOODPLAIN USING THIS GRAPHIC. WE STILL HAVE THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN INDICATED BY THE RED LINE, RED LINE BOUNDARY. THE ORIGINAL PROJECT GOAL WAS TO REDUCES THE FLOODPLAIN INTO THE INCISED CHANNEL AREA, WHICH IS THE LIGHT BLUE GRAPHIC, PORTION OF THE GRAPHIC. WITH THE DIVERSION OF 55% OF THE 100-YEAR FLOW, WE STILL HAVE THE FLOODPLAIN GETTING OUT OF THE DEFINED CHANNEL AREA BETWEEN 8TH AND 10TH STREET, THE AREA TO THE EAST OF THE CHANNEL IS WALLER CREEK PLAZA AND TWO PARKING GARAGES THAT ARE USED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THE WATER WOULD NOT ENTER THOSE FACILITIES. IT MAY BE AROUND THEM AND UNDER THEM, BUT WOULD NOT ENTER. ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE CREEK IS STUBS BARBECUE. WE WOULD STILL HAVE TWO OF THE OLDER BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO THE CREEK SUBJECT TO SLIGHT INUNDATION, BUT WE ARE REDUCING THE FLOODPLAIN IN THAT AREA SUBSTANTIALLY. TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT THE INLET AND OUTLET FACILITIES LOOK LIKE IN THE PARKLAND, THIS IS A PLAN VIEW OR OVERHEAD VIEW OF WATERLOO PARK, TO YOUR RIGHT IS NORTH. WE ARE PROPOSING A FILLING LAGOON TO INTERCEPT FLOOD FLOW THAT WOULD COME DOWN THE CREEK SPILLING INTO A MORNING GLORY INLET. WE WOULD HAVE A DAM STRUCTURE ADJACENT TO 12TH STREET THAT WOULD CAUSE THE WATER TO RISE, BASICALLY JUST FILLING INTO A VERTICAL SHAFT DOWN INTO THE TUNNEL STRUCTURE. WE WOULD -- DURING NON-STORM EVENTS, WE WOULD RETURN FRESH TOWN LAKE WATER TO THE LAGOON TO KEEP IT FRESH. WE WOULD HAVE FOUNTAIN FACILITIES, AND THAT WATER WOULD SPILL DOWN THE CREEK TO AUGMENT THE FLOW. SO WHAT WE WOULD HAVE, ABOUT FIVE CUBIC FEET A SECOND, A FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL FLOW GOING DOWN THE CREEK IN DRY PERIODS AND THIS WOULD GREATLY ENHANCE THE AESTHETICS OF THE CREEK AND THE AQUATIC HABITAT. THE OUTLET IS PROPOSED TO BE ON THE WEST BANK OF THE CREEK, TO GET YOU ORIENTED, HERE'S THE FOUR SEASONS HOTEL, THE MAC SITE, HERE'S THE MOUTH OF THE CREEK. THIS IS THE ROWING CLUB FACILITY. WE ARE PROPOSING THAT IT BE CONSTRUCTED AS AN AMPHITHEATER. WE NEED A DISSTILG POOL. -- DISTILLING POOL. AND THE HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL WOULD COME ACROSS THE OUTLET AREA OF THE -- OF THE FACILITY. NEXT SLIDE. THE -- TO ILLUSTRATE THE LOCATION OF THE TUNNEL ALIGNMENT, IF WE BUILD THE PROJECT AS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED TO FULLY INTERCEPT THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, THE LEAST COST ALIGNMENT IS COME DOWN SA BISMT NE STREET. THIS WOULD INCLUDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTERCEPT THE LOCAL STORM SEWER FLOW AT A LATER DATE. BUT OUR RECOMMENDED PROJECT IS 50 AND A HALF FOOT DIAMETER TUNNEL INTERCEPTING 55% OF THE 100-YEAR FLOW, THE LEAST COST OF CONSTRUCTION ALIGNMENT FOR THAT OPTION IS COMING DOWN RED RIVER STREET. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT OPTION, WITH THAT $46 MILLION OPTION, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE STILL OUT OF BOUNDS WITH RESPECT TO THE FUNDING THAT'S CURRENTLY AVAILABLE. WE WENT BACK AND WE LOOKED AT DOES THE PROJECT STILL MAKE SENSE ECONOMICALLY AT THAT HIGHER COST. WHAT WE DID, WE LOOKED AT THE CREEK CORRIDOR BELOW WATERLOO PARK, WE LOOKED AT ZONING, EXISTING ZONING, THE LIMITATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, THE REQUIREMENTS TO PRESERVE CAPITAL VIEW CORRIDORS, PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PROGRESS LIKE VIGNETTE WE DID NO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO HAPPEN REGARDLESS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TUNNEL SYSTEM. AND WE ASSIGNED ACCEPTED OFFICE, RETAIL, HOTEL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO THOSE PLAN PARCELS. WE ALSO TOOK INTO ACCOUNT FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION TO THOSE 40 EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THE AVOIDED COST OF REPLACING THOSE 12 ROADWAY BRIDGES AT A HIGHER ELEVATION TO PREVENT FLOODING. WE LOOKED AT THE REVENUE POTENTIAL BOTH WITH RESPECT TO SALES TAX AND AD VALOREM TAXES COMING ONLY TO THE CITY. WE DID NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE REVENUE POTENTIAL ASSOCIATED WITH AISD REVENUE OR COUNTY REVENUE. NEXT GRAPHIC. THIS WAS THE AREA THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THAT ANALYSIS. THESE ARE THE PROPERTY PARCELS THAT WERE INCLUDED. AND THE FINDING FROM THAT ANALYSIS IS THAT IF WE DON'T BUILD THE TUNNEL AND WE ASSUME WE CAN RECONSTRUCT TO 50% OF MAXIMUM DENSITY WITHIN THE EXISTING 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, THAT WOULD RESULT IN 658,000 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL FLOOR AREA IN THE CREEK CORRIDOR. WITH THE TUNNEL ONLINE, 50% MAXIMUM DENSITY, 1,757,000 SQUARE FEET AND 100% OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DENSITY WOULD RESULT IN 3,841,000 SQUARE FEET. AND THAT WILL RESULT IN A PAY-BACK PERIOD AT THE MAXIMUM BUILDOUT DENSITY OF ABOUT NINE YEARS. AT 50% DENSITY ABOUT 14 YEARS. BUT THIS DOESN'T SOLVE OUR FUNDING PROBLEM BECAUSE WE -- WE DON'T GET THAT REVENUE UNTIL THE CORRIDOR IS BUILT OUT AND WE NEED THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE. SO OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PROJECT IS TO BUILD A 15 AND A HALF FOOT DIAMETER TUNNEL SYSTEM, INTEGRATED INTO PARKLAND, INCLUDING AUTO MATED TRASH MANAGEMENT AT A TOTAL COST OF 46 MILLION. THAT WOULD REQUIRE A INTIN PERIOD OF 19 MONTHS AND ADDITIONAL BID AND CONSTRUCTION PERIOD OF THREE YEARS AND NINE MONTHS. WE ARE CONTINUING NEGOTIATIONS WITH TXDOT, AS YOU KNOW, THEY ARE CONSIDERING LOWERING I-35 IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA BELOW GRADE THE REJOIN THE EAST SIDE WITH THE DOWNTOWN AREA, AND THEY WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO GET GRAVITY FLOW OFF OF THE ROADWAY. SO WE WERE LOOKING AT THE POSSIBILITY OF -- THE TECHNICAL POSSIBILITIES OF A JOINT PROJECT ACKNOWLEDGE WE SHOULD HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN ABOUT 90 DAYS. ANOTHER QUESTION HAS COME UP RECENTLY, WHAT CAN WE BUILD WITH THE $25 MILLION WE HAVE? THE ANSWER TO THAT IS WE CAN CON TRUKT A TUNNEL -- CONSTRUCT A TUNNEL SYSTEM 11 FEET IN DIAMETER, BUT THAT WOULD ONLY RECOVER ABOUT 20% OF THE FLOODPLAIN. SO THAT GREATLY REDUCES THE ECONOMIC POTENTIAL OF THE CREEK CORRIDOR. AND THAT WOULD NOT INCLUDE THE AESTHETIC INTEGRATION IN THE PARKLAND. IT'S BASIC STRUCTURES ON EITHER END OF THE TUNNEL, 11 FOOT TUNNEL, AND THAT WOULD RECOVER ONLY 20% OF THE FLOODPLAIN. ADDITIONALLY THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST ON INFORMATION ON HOW MUCH PARKLAND WOULD BE REQUIRED AT THE INLET AND OUTLET OF THE TUNNEL SYSTEM. IN EACH OF THOSE AREA THE LAND REQUIREMENTS ARE LESS THAN AN ACRE, BUT OBVIOUSLY DURING CONSTRUCTION THERE WOULD BE SOME DISTURBANCE BEYOND THOSE LIMITS. WITH THAT I'LL TURN THE PRESENTATION OVER TO JOHN TO DISCUSS THE FINANCIAL ISSUES.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR? YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION. THAT'S THE STARTING POINT ON MY REQUEST FOR WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE SPENT WHAT WAS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS, WHICH IS THE 25 MILLION. WHAT I HOPE WE CAN ALSO FIND OUT IS TWO MORE THINGS. ONE IS AS YOU INVESTED MORE IN TERMS OF SIZE OF TUNNEL, THEN HOW MUCH MORE FLOODPLAIN WOULD YOU -- WOULD YOU ELIMINATE AND WHERE, BECAUSE WHERE IS IMPORTANT AS WELL AS HOW MUCH. AND ALSO PART OF MY REQUEST, I BELIEVE, WAS WHAT KIND OF PLANS HAVE WE DEVELOPED OR COULD WE DEVELOP WHICH WOULD BE PUBLIC-PRIVATE, WHICH WOULD BE THE -- IN TERMS OF THE DELTA, THE GAP. HOW MUCH SHOULD THE PUBLIC BE EXPOSED FOR IN ADDITION TO THE 25 WE'VE -- 25 MILLION WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED AS TAXPAYERS AND HOW MUCH SHOULD BE THE OBLIGATION OF THOSE WHO BENEFIT MOST DIRECTLY. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT. THANK YOU.

>> LET ME ANSWER THE TECHNICAL ISSUE SZ. IF WE WERE TO BUILD THE SMALLER TUNNEL, THERE WOULD BE NO OPPORTUNITY TO ENLARGE IT IN THE FUTURE WITHOUT EX PENDING A WHOLE LOT MORE MONEY. ONCE YOU BUILD ONE OF THOSE SYSTEMS IT'S PRETTY MUCH FIXED. WE COULD CERTAINLY BUILD ONE WITHOUT THE AESTHETIC AMENITIES ON EITHER END AND ADD THOSE AT A LATER DATE. BUT AS FAR AS RECOVERING MORE OF THE FLOODPLAIN, THAT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE. WE DID LOOK AT WHAT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM COST OF THE 15 AND A HALF FOOT DIAMETER TUNNEL, AND THAT'S ABOUT $33 MILLION. IT'S PRETTY RISKY. IT DOESN'T THROUGH ANY OF THE AUTOMATIC TRASH SYSTEMS OR INTEGRATION OF THE PARKLAND. SO IF WE WANT TO START WITH THE BASIC SYSTEMS I THINK AT A MINIMUM WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE $33 MILLION TO MOVE FORWARD.

>>GRIFFITH: AND THAT'S THE KIND OF THING I'M AFTER IS THE INCREMENTAL -- IF YOU SPEND THIS MUCH MORE, YOU GET THIS MUCH LAND MORE OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN, AND IT'S HERE. AND THEN LET'S FIGURE OUT HOW WE CLOSE THAT GAP AND WHO IS -- HOW MUCH -- WHO IS -- WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY.

>> RIGHT. AND ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS HAS TO BE THE PROJECT WILL RESULT IN REDUCING THE FLOODPLAIN, OBVIOUSLY, AND FEMA WILL ACCEPT THAT INFORMATION AND CHANGE OUR FLOODPLAIN MAPS. AND THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO LENDERS WHEN THEY ARE CONSIDERING FINANCING FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THESE AREAS. SOMETIMES IT'S A SWITCH THAT GOES ON AND OFF BECAUSE IF A PARCEL OF LAND IS INNONE DATED BY THE FLOODPLAIN, FINANCING MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE. ANOTHER ISSUE THAT HAS COME UP MANY TIMES WITH THE DOWNTOWN RENAISSANCE AND I'M NOT A FINANCING EXPERT, BUT CERTAINLY RIGHT NOW IF YOU LOOK AT THE CREEK CORRIDOR, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF ACTIVITY IN THE FLOODPLAIN. CERTAINLY VIGNETTE IS AN EXAMPLE OF GREAT ACTIVITY IN THAT AREA, BUT THEY ARE LUCKY, THOSE PARCELS ARE NOT IMPACTED BY THE FLOODPLAIN.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT'S RIGHT, AND CERTAINLY THE LONEABILITY IS SOMETHING WE WOULD -- LOANABILITY IS SOMETHING WE WOULD NEED TO FIGURE IF WE'RE FIGURE OG THE OBLIGATIONS IN TERMS OF THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE MATCH IN ASSOCIATION.

>> LET ME CALL ON JOHN STEVENS, OUR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ADMINISTRATION TO WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE FINANCING ISSUES THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED AS A STAFF. WE OFFER THESE AS IDEAS AND POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS, BUT WE UNDERSTAND THERE NEEDS TO BE A LOT MORE DIALOGUE WITH RESPECT TO THIS BECAUSE OF THE MAGNITUDE OF THE DELTA. BUT JOHN, WHY DON'T I TURN IT OVER TO YOU TO WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE NUMBERS AND SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME KIND OF DISCUSSION FROM THE COUNCIL.

>> GOOD MORNING. I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST BRIEFLY DESCRIBE, RECAP THE HISTORY OF THE PROJECT AND TALK ABOUT FINANCING OPTIONS THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT BUT DON'T THINK ARE FEASIBLE AND THEN DISCUSS WHAT A POSSIBLE OPTION COULD BE. IN MAY 1998, AS GEORGE SAID, AUSTIN VOTERS APPROVED THE CREATION OF A SINGLE VENUE PROJECT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BOTH THE WALLER CREEK TUNNEL AND THE EXPANDED CONVENTION CENTER AND ALSO APPROVED THE ADDITION OF A 2% TAX ON HOTEL MOTEL REVENUES TO FUND THE TOTAL. IN 1999 THE CITY ISSUED 25 MILLION IN BONDS TO FINANCE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TUNNEL AND 110 MILLION IN BONDS TO FINANCE THE EXPANSION OF THE CONVENTION CENTER. THE 2% INCREASE AUTHORIZED BY THE VOTERS IS PLEDGED TO BOTH OF THOSE BOND ISSUANCES AS A FIRST LEAN PLEDGE ON THE 25 MILLION AND SUBORDINATE LIEN PREJUDICE ON THE 110 MILLION. THE BOND COVENANTS ALLOW FOR ISSUING ADDITIONAL BONDS, BUT OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR THINKS IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO ISSUE THEM GIVEN OUR EXISTING REQUIREMENTS. THE BONDS WOULD BE BACKED BY A SUBORDINATE LIEN PLEDGE ON THE 2% HOTEL TAX AND COULD BE DIFFICULT TO SELL. EVEN IF WE WERE ABLE TO SELL THEM THIS COULD CAUSE PROBLEMS PORE THE CONVENTION CENTER CASH FLOWS GIVING THEIR EXISTING REQUIREMENTS. ISSUING ADDITIONAL BONDS UNDER THE VENUE PROJECT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL. ANOTHER OPTION WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR BUT DO NOT RECOMMEND IS A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ZONE OR A T.I.F.. AND THE ISSUANCE OF T.I.F. BONDS, STATE LAW ALLOWS A MUNICIPALITY TO ISSUE TAX INCREMENT FANNING BONDS WHICH CAN BE ISSUED BY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCILL AFTER CREATION OF THE T.I.F.. HOWEVER, THOSE BONDS ARE TYPICALLY ISSUED FOR MUCH SMALLER PROJECTS AND CAN ALSO BE DIFFICULT TO SELL. FOR EXAMPLE, THE CITY OF DALLAS ISSUED 5 MILLION RECENTLY IN BONDS FOR THEIR CITY -- FOR A DART STATION, BUT THEY REQUIRED HIGHER COVERAGE ON THE DEBT SERVICE THAN NORMAL G.O. BONDS. THE CONSULTANT STUDY SHOWS THAT A T.I.F. COMPRISED OF THE AREA BENEFITED BY THE TUNNEL CAN EVENTUALLY DEVELOP SUFFICIENTLY ENOUGH TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE ON THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT WE NEED BUT NOT FOR SEVERAL YEARS. THE CONSULTANT ESTIMATES THAT BUILDOUT TO A LEVEL TO SUSTAIN THE DEBT SERVICE CAN OCCUR WITHIN THREE TO FOUR YEARS AFTER COMPLETION OF THE TUNNEL. HOWEVER, THE YOU WILL PROPOSED SHOWS CONSTRUCTION -- THE SCHEDULE SHOWS BEGINNING IN 2003 BY WHICH TIME THE CITY WILL HAVE TO ISSUE THE ADDITIONAL BONDS. CONSTRUCTION IS NOT COMPLETED UNTIL 2007 WITH ADEQUATE BUILDOUT NOT OCCURRING UNTIL 2010, A LAG OF ABOUT SEVEN YEARS BEAN ISSUANCE OF THE ADDITIONAL DEBT AND COLLECTION OF SUFFICIENT REVENUE TO PAY THE DEBT. A T.I.F. COULD BE CREATED FOR AN AREA LARGER THAN THE FLOODPLAIN AREA, BUT THE MAIN ADVANTAGE OF A T.I.F. IS THE PARTICIPATION OF MORE THAN ONE TAXING JURISDICTION. IT COULD BE AN OPTION IF WE COULD GET OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS TO PARTICIPATE, BUT WITHOUT OTHER PARTICIPATION THIS IS NOT A GOOD OPTION. ANOTHER OPTION THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED IS A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT OR A P.I.D.. HOWEVER, CREATION OF THE P.I.D. WOULD REQUIRE A PETITION FROM THE OWNERS OF 50% OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE DISTRICT. CREATING A P.I.D. COMPRISED OF THE AREA THAT WOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE FLOODPLAIN AND ASSESSING THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE P.I.D. WOULD IMPOSE A RELATIVELY HIGH COST ON THE OWNERS GIVE TEN AMOUNT NEED TO DO COMPLETE THE PROJECT AND THE RELATIVELY SMALL AREA THAT RECEIVES THE SPECIAL BENEFIT PROVIDED BY THE TUNNEL. IF THE BASIS FOR ASSESSING PROPERTY OWNERS WERE ASSESSED VALUE AS IS DONE WITH THE DOWNTOWN P.I.D., FINANCING THE OVERRUN ENTIRELY THROUGH THE P.I.D. WOULD RESULT IN IN ADDITION OF A CHARGE OF SOMEWHERE BETWEEN $150 AND $2. BY COMPARISON PROPERTY OWNERS CONTRIBUTE TO GO THE DOWNTOWN P.I.D. ASSESSED 10 CENTS PER ASSESSED VALUATION. THE ASSESSMENTS CAN BE DONE ON OTHER BAY CYSTS, BUT THE RESULTS WOULD STILL BE A RELATIVELY HIGH CHARGE FOR PROPERTY. AS I SAID, WE HAVE DISCUSSED FINANCING OPTIONS WITH OUR BOND COUNCIL AND FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND THEY BELIEVE THE BEST OPTION, THE MOST EXPEDITIOUS OPTION FOR FUNDING THE ADDITIONAL COST WOULD BE TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION THAT COULD BE PAID FOR THROUGH PROPERTY TAX OR DRAINAGE REVENUES. AS YOU KNOW, STATE LAW DOES NOT ALLOW SPENDING PROPERTY TAX ON VENUE PROJECTS, HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE THAT MOST OF THE ADDITIONAL COSTS FOR THE TUNNEL CAN BE CONSIDERED AS BEING OUTSIDE THE ORIGINAL VENUE PROJECT DUE TO THEIR NATURE. THEY ARE MORE LIKE PARKS AMENITIES. DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE ADDITIONAL FACILITIES THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR THE INLET AND OUTLET, THE AESTHETIC ENHANCEMENTS AND SO ON, WE BELIEVE THAT THESE CAN BE CONSIDERED AS OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THE ORIGINAL VENUE PROJECT. WHICH HAD, FOR EXAMPLE, A MUCH SMALLER INLET FEATURE. USING THIS APPROACH WOULD ALLOW THE CITY TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION WHICH COULD BE PAID FOR BY PROPERTY TAXES, BY DRAINAGE REVENUES OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH. WE'VE PREPARED DOCUMENTATION TO SUPPORT THIS OPTION AND WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH OUR BOND COUNCIL TO CLEAR THIS WITH THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. AS YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS USED CERTIFICATES FOR OTHER TYPES OF PROJECTS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE PURCHASE OF LAND, AND THEY DO NOT REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE SUBJECT TO THE [INAUDIBLE]. GIVEN OUR ANTICIPATED BOND SALE FOR NEXT FALL, FINANCING ALL OF THE ADDITIONAL COSTS THROUGH PROPERTY TAXES AT THE CURRENT LEVEL OF ASSESSED VALUATION WOULD REQUIRE A TAX INCREASE OF APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF CENT TO A DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE. THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER, THAT IS, THE OWNER OF A HOUSE THAT'S THE AVERAGE HOME PRICE THIS YEAR, $138,000, WOULD SEE A TAX INCREASE OF APPROXIMATELY 61 CENTS MONTHLY UNDER THIS APPROACH. FINANCING THE ENTIRE COST THROUGH DRAINAGE REVENUES WOULD REQUIRE A 9% INCREASE IN DRAINAGE FEE. UNDER THE EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNIT COST OF SERVICE METHOD DOLOGY THAT COUNCIL HAS DIRECTED STAFF TO IM MREFMENT, THIS WOULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE OF 38 CENTS MONTHLY FOR RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS AND $8.42 MONTHLY FOR COMMERCIAL ACCOUNTS. ALTERNATIVELY THEY COULD BE FINANCED BY A COMBINATION OF TAX [INAUDIBLE] REVENUES OF THE AGAINST, AT CURRENTLY ASSESSED VALUE LEVELS THIS WOULD REQUIRE A 40 CENT INCREASE IN THE PROPERTY TAX RATE AND 4 AND A HALF CENT INCREASE IN DRAINAGE RATE. IF WE GET APPROVAL FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE TO PROCEED WITH THIS APPROACH AND IF COUNCIL WANTS TO PURSUE THE ISSUANCE OF C.O.'S, THIS IS THE OPTION THAT WE COULD BRING BACK TO COUNCIL. THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. WE'RE NOT SCHEDULED FOR ACTION TODAY, THIS WAS A BRIEFING ONLY AND WE'LL BE WORKING WITH YOU OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS TAKING YOUR INPUT TO FINALIZE THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>>ALVAREZ: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>ALVAREZ: YES, I WAS JUST WONDERING, LISTED ON THERE IT SAYS QUARTER CENT INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX VAT THAT ACROSS THE BOARD OR FOR THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS?

>> IT WOULD BE ACROSS THE BOARD. THE HALF CENT TAX INCREASE WOULD BE ACROSS THE BOARD OR THE QUARTER CENT.

>>ALVAREZ: SO WHAT IS THE PACKAGE? THE QUARTER CENT TAX INCREASE PLUS THE DRAINAGE FEE INCREASE PLUS YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION. IS THAT PART OF THE --

>> THAT WOULD BE THE FINANCING OPTION THAT WE WOULD CHOOSE AND IT WOULD BE PAID FOR THROUGH -- IF YOU CHOSE TO FINANCE HALF OF IT THROUGH THE DRAINAGE REVENUE, IT WOULD BE A FOUR AND A HALF PERCENT INCREASE ON DRAINAGE FEES AND APPROXIMATELY A QUARTER CENT INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX RATE.

>>ALVAREZ: OKAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I MIGHT JUST -- TO THROW MY TWO CENTS IN, I OBVIOUSLY WAS A BIG SUPPORTER AND CONTINUE TO BE A BIG SUPPORTER OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WHAT I BELIEVE IT COULD DO IN TERMS OF HELPING US WITH THAT QUADRANT OF DOWNTOWN. BUT I AM AT THIS POINT HESITANT TO INCREASE THE DRAINAGE FEE OR INCREASE PROPERTY TAXES FOR THIS PROJECT FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, BUT I'LL MENTION TWO. ONE IS THAT IF -- IF WE ARE GOING TO INCREASE -- MY CURRENT THINKING IS THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE DRAINAGE FEE, THERE ARE SOME OTHER DRAINAGE PROJECTS THAT I BELIEVE SHOULD BE A HIGHER PRIORITY BECAUSE OF THEIR IMPACT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IN DIFFERENT WAYS THAN THIS PROJECT. AND IN FACT, FROM AN EQUITABLE STANDPOINT PROBABLY ARE HIGHER PRIORITY WITH ME. WITH REGARD TO THE PROPERTY TAXES, I FEEL MUCH THE SAME WAY, THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO EX, EVEN FOR A SMALL INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX -- RELATIVELY SMALL INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX, THERE ARE OTHER PRIORITY ITEMS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT I THINK I WOULD PREFER TO SEE THAT INCREMENTAL INCREASE ON. ANOTHER REASON THAT I'M HESITANT AT THIS POINT AND I WANT TO CONTINUE TO THINK IT THROUGH IS THAT WE CHOSE INITIALLY TO TAKE THIS TO THE VOTERS. AND THEY GAVE US APPROVAL FOR IT, BUT THEY GAVE US APPROVAL FOR IT AT A SPECIFIC PRICE. AND SO I'M HESITANT TO UTILIZE A MECHANISM FOR FUNDING THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE THE VOTERS AT LEAST IN THAT SENSE THROUGH CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION SINCE WE ORIGINALLY DID TAKE IT TO THE SKRORTS. ONE OF THE -- VOTERS. AND I HEARD YOUR PRESENTATION, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US THINK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IS THE CONCEPT OF WHETHER OTHERS MIGHT PARTICIPATE IN THE T.I.F., AND CLEARLY THERE ARE OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT BENEFIT BY A LOT OF WHAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS DOING WITH REGARD TO DOWNTOWN AND INCENTIVE PACKAGES AND OTHER THINGS. SO WHILE I HEARD EXACTLY WHAT HUH TO SAY ABOUT T.I.F., I DO THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IF OTHER JURISDICTIONS WOULD PARTICIPATE IN, IT MIGHT MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN HOW WE APPROACH THINGS AND THEY CLEARLY WOULD BENEFIT BECAUSE OF WHAT HAVING THAT TUNNEL WOULD DO TO THAT ENTIRE AREA OF DOWNTOWN. JUST SOME THOUGHTS. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: AND GOOD THOUGHTS. AND I AGREE WITH ALL THAT. THANK YOU. ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT IS I'M PRESUMING THAT TAXPAYERS AND RATEPAYERS ALL OVER TOWN WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THE INITIAL 25 MILLION. IS THAT RIGHT? THAT WOULD BE SPREAD OVER EVERYBODY. YES. SO IF ANYBODY THAT PARTICIPATES IN PAYING OFF THOSE REVENUE BONDS.

>> I'M SORRY, YES.

>>GRIFFITH: YES. OKAY. YOU MENTIONED THERE WAS A MECHANISM THAT COULD BE USED TO PAY THE DIFFERENCE THAT WOULD INVOLVE 50% OF THE LANDOWNERS ALONG THE CREEK WHO WOULD BENEFIT MOST DIRECTLY AND MOST SPECIFICALLY. YOU DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS A POSSIBILITY -- OR YOU SEEMED NOT TO THINK THAT WAS A POSSIBILITY, AND I PRESUME BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T THINK THAT 50% WAS A REALISTIC PERCENTAGE TO SHOOT FOR IN TERMS OF THAT KIND OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. IS THAT RIGHT?

>> I BELIEVE THERE WERE PROBLEMS IN ACHIEVE THANKING APPROACH WITH THE ORIGINAL PROJECT.

>>GRIFFITH:, WELL, I'M WONDER IF -- NOW IT'S REALLY DOWN TO IT. I MEAN IT IS FISH OR CUT BAIT. AND WE'RE SO FAR OVER THAT RIGHT NOW I'M NOT SURE THAT THE TAXPAYERS AND THE RATEPAYERS ARE GOING TO BE ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT NOT ONLY THE 25 MILLION, BUT THE RATEPAYERS AND THE TAXPAYERS PAYING ALL THE DIFFERENCE. WHAT I HOPE WE CAN DO IS WORK WITH -- WORK WITH THOSE FOLKS WHO WOULD BE MOST DIRECTLY BENEFITED AND SEE IF 50% MAY BE THERE. CAN WE FIND THAT OUT, SEE IF THAT -- BECAUSE I THINK WHERE WE'RE HEADED IF WE DO IT AT ALL IS A PUBLIC-PRIVATE SITUATION WHERE-WHERE WE SHARE THE RESPONSIBILITY. BECAUSE I THINK THE CITIZENS ARE UP FOR THE 25 MILLION, BUT I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH MORE THEY ARE UP FOR. THANKS.

>>GARZA: AND JOHN, THE INITIAL 25 MILLION, REMIND US HOW THAT'S BEING --

>> INITIAL 25 MILLION IS FUNDED BY THE TWO CENTS.

>>GARZA: WHICH IS THE VENUE -- THE HOTEL-MOTEL TAX. IT'S NOT ALL THE TAXPAYERS OF OUR COMMUNITY, BUT IT'S THAT SEGMENT THAT USE THAT INDUSTRY.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GARZA: I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLARIFICATION. THE BALANCE OF THAT IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIND.

>>GRIFFITH: RIGHT, AND IN TERMS OF --

>> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC ON].

>>GRIFFITH: WHAT SHOULD THE BREAK BE, THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALONG THOSE LINES AND WITHOUT EXCLUDING ANY OF THE POSSIBILITIES IN ALL OF THIS, I UNDERSTAND, THOUGH, ON A P.I.D., THAT HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS SELF-IMPOSED. AND I'VE JUST BRIEFLY LOOKED AT THE LAW ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH WAS TALKING ABOUT AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE ABOUT THAT IS AN OPTION IS NOT TO EXCLUDE AS AN OPTION, BUT TO THINK IT OUT LOUD IS THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT A GOVERNMENTAL BODY CAN PLACE ON A GROUP OF LANDOWNERS. IT IS INSTEAD SOMETHING THAT THE GROUP OF LANDOWNERS HAS TO VOLUNTEER TO HAVE. AND AS I ALSO UNDERSTAND IT, THE NUMBERS THAT WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT IF THEY WERE TO PLACE THAT ON THEMSELVES WOULD BE A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL INDIVIDUAL TAX, WAY ABOVE -- ABOUT A THOUSAND TIMES ABOVE WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE AS A TAX RATE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT WOULD ALSO BE WELL ABOVE ANYTHING THAT -- AND FAR ABOVE EVEN THE P.I.D.S IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBERS. BUT I DON'T THINK ANYTHING OUGHT TO BE TAKEN OFF THE TABLE, BUT THAT MAY NOT BE AN OPTION TRULY AVAILABLE TO US BECAUSE IT'S NOT AN OPTION THAT WE AS A GOVERNMENT BODY CAN SAY THAT HAS TO HAPPEN.

>>GRIFFITH: RIGHT. AND SHOULDN'T BE REALLY. THAT SH UB VOLUME -- SHOULD BE VOLUME TAEFRMENT I THINK THAT'S A GOOD RULE. I WAS IN ON SOME DISCUSSIONS OF THIS BEFORE WE PUT THE 25 MILLION UP, AND GOING BACK TO THAT, ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE FIGURING IS WHAT THE -- WHAT THE NET WORTH INCREASE, WHAT THE VALUE INCREASE WOULD BE IN TERMS OF THOSE PROPERTIES. AND AS I REMEMBER, IT WASN'T REALLY ALL THAT MUCH IN TERMS OF --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE AMOUNT?

>>GRIFFITH: INCREASED VALUATION, YEAH, OF WHAT -- IN TERMS OF BUILDOUT, WHAT THE VALUE WOULD BE IN TERMS OF INCREASE IN THE VALUE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'VE HEARD, AND I MAY BE WRONG, BUT IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT, I HEARD IT WAS MORE LIKE FIVE DOLLARS PER 100 DOLLARS VALUATION. AND OUR TAX RATE IS MORE IN THE 45 TO 50 CENT PER 100 DOLLAR VALUATION. I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT IS IN THE DOWNTOWN P.I.D.. MR. BETZ?

>>GRIFFITH: 10 CENTS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 10 CENTS, SAY 50 CENTS AND FIVE DOLLARS PER HUNDRED DOLLAR VALUATION.

>> IT'S BETWEEN $1.50 AND $2.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SOMEBODY MAYBE GAVE ME THE WRONG INFORMATION. EVEN THEN YOU ARE TALKING A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT.

>>GRIFFITH: IT'S A BUNCH. AND WHAT WE WERE COMPARING THAT TO IS WHAT THE INCREASE IN THE NET WORTH OF THE -- OF THOSE PROPERTIES WOULD BE AND THE RATIO -- AND IT'S CERTAINLY THEIR DECISION, BUT IT WAS PROPORTION ATE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: I FORGOT MY ORIGINAL THOUGHT. THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY, THOUGH, WAS SPEAKING TO WHAT BEVERLY SAID TO ME, THE REASON WE DIDN'T THINK OF THAT IN A REALISTIC WAY TRYING TO GET THE MONEY FROM PEOPLE WHO POTENTIALLY BENEFIT ECONOMICALLY, AND THAT WAS FOR THE FIRST 25. THAT'S WHEN PEOPLE WERE TELLING US IT ONLY WAS GOES TO COST 25. SO HERE WE ARE WITH THE SAME 25 MILLION DOLLAR FIGURE AND JUST BECAUSE WE HAPPEN TO HAVE 25 NOW, BUT FOUND OUT IT COST 52, THE PROPERTY OWNERS JUST DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF CASH AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GENERATE THAT KIND OF CASH ON THE BARREL HEAD. THEIR BENEFIT AND THEIR ECONOMIC INCREASE IN VALUE AND TAX GENERATION, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, REVENUE GENERATION, WILL COME OVER A PERIOD OF TIME THAT DOESN'T REALLY GIVE US A GOOD FINANCING OPTION, IN MY OPINION.

>>GRIFFITH: WELL, I THINK THAT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS --.

>>GOODMAN: EXCUSE ME. IT'S MY TURN. I HAVE THE FLOOR NOW. SORRY. ROAD RAGE IS STILL COMING OUT. THE OTHER OPTIONS THAT MR. STEVENS WAS TELLING US ABOUT, ON FIRST FLUSH DON'T SEEM TO ME SOMETHING LIKE THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF EITHER. SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO KEEP LOOKING AT THOSE AND SEEING IF THERE IS POSSIBLY SOME COMBINATION OR SOME NEW SOURCE THAT WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT OF IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS PROJECT YET. WE ARE DEFINITELY, I THINK, GOING TO HAVE TO COUNT A LOT ON THE KIND OF OFFERS, EVEN IF IT'S FOR REIMBURSEABLES, THAT THE VIGNETTE EFFORT HAS BROUGHT ALONG, AND MAYBE BY STRATEGIC PLANNING WE CAN USE THAT AND PERHAPS IF ALL ELSE FAILS REALLOCATE THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT IS THERE FOR SUCH A THING. THE C.I.P. MONEY THAT WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO GO FOR THE TUNNEL AND SEE IF WE CAN'T MAKE SOME MEANINGFUL IMPACT ON DECREASING FLOOD WATERS, IF NOT THE WHOLE PROJECT THAT WE ONCE WANTED WHICH WAS GOING TO ALSO HELP STABILIZE AND BEAUTIFY WALLER CREEK WATER-WISE, VOLUME AND VELOCITY. SO IN THAT SENSE, IT WAS VERY DEPRESSING TO TALK TO GEORGE AND JOHN BECAUSE WE DID THINK THAT WE HAD A VERY COMPLETE AND REALISTIC PROJECTION OF WHAT THE COST WAS GOING TO BE AND THAT'S WHAT WE WENT OUT AND ASKED THE VOTERS FOR, AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER, THAT WAS A WIN-WIN AND FOLKS VOTED FOR IT. IF WE GO BACK AND ASK FOR ME, IT'S MY FEELING THAT AT THIS MOMENT AT LEAST THEY WOULD NOT BE INTERESTED. WE'RE TRYING TO DO STRATEGIC IMPROVEMENTS IN SO MANY AREAS AND TO ASK FOR MORE ON THIS PROJECT I THINK PROBABLY WOULDN'T KNOW ANYWHERE. SO IN BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN WE FIND THE FUNDING I THINK WE OUGHT NOT SIT AND DO NOTHING. SO I'M HOPEFUL FOR VIGNETTE AND OTHERS. BUT FOR THE RECORD, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WHEN WE -- AFTER MANY, MANY YEARS, PUT THIS C.I.P. PROJECT BEFORE THE VOTERS, IT WAS ON THE PREMISE THAT WE HAD BEEN GIVEN ABSOLUTELY GOOD AND WELL THOUGHT OUT INFORMATION TO BASE THAT COST NUMBER ON. SINCE WHEN THE FIRST PROJECT WAS DESIGNED AND PUT FORWARD AS A POSSIBLE ANSWER, IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE 5 TO 8 MILLION. AND SO FOR IT TO BE 25 WAS DEFINITELY NOT SOME SORT OF NEBULOUS FIGURE THAT WE WERE PUTTING OUT. WE WERE BASING THAT ON WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS VERY GOOD ENGINEERING EXPERTISE AND PROJECTIONS. AND SO NOW WE FIND OURSELVES IN THE -- BUT IT WAS BECAUSE OF THAT MISCALCULATION. THANKS, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: YES. THANK YOU, MAYOR. YOU ARE RIGHT ABOUT OUR HAVING A LOT OF FINANCIAL TALENT AND A LOT OF ENGINEERING TALENT AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE BEEN TALKING TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT AND THE ENGINEERS ABOUT IS A WAY -- BECAUSE I REALLY WANT TO GET THIS DONE BECAUSE I THINK THE RETURN OF THE NATURAL CHARACTER OF THE CREEK IS -- AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN DEPENDENT ON THIS TUNNEL. WHAT I'M HOPING WE CAN FIND IS A WAY THAT MIGHT BE ACCEPTABLE TO THE TAXPAYERS WHICH WOULD BE THAT THE CITY FRONT THE MONEY TO GET IT GOING AND DOES IT IN A WAY THAT DOWN THE -- FIVE TO SEVEN YEARS WHEN THE REAL RUNUP HAPPENS IN TERMS OF VALUATION, THAT THEN THAT FUNDING MECHANISM CAN BE REIMBURSED AND CAN BE PAID OFF. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME OPTIONS, THAT MIGHT BE ONE.

>>GARZA: MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I WANTED -- JUST A COUPLE THINGS TO MAKE SURE WE'RE WORKING ON THE RIGHT PATH. WE'LL CONTINUE TO EXPLORE THE ISSUE OF PERHAPS OTHER JURISDICTIONS ASSISTING WITH SOME OF THE FUNDING FOR THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ZONE OR SOME OTHER MECHANISM. ANOTHER I WANT TO OFFER THAT WAS NOT PLACED ON THE SCREEN IS ONE WE'VE GOT TO WORK THROUGH THE NUMBERS AND BOND COVENANTS, INFLOW INFILTRATION IS IMPORTANT FOR OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER AND TO THE DEGREE THAT YOU HAVE OVERBANK FLOODING THAT GOES INTO MANHOLE COVERS THEREFORE CAUSING -- THERE MAY BE SOME AVENUE FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER TO ASSIST IN THIS TO DEAL WITH THAT ISSUE. THOSE ARE THINGS WE WILL EXPLORE AND COME BACK WITH A MORE THOROUGH AND COMPLETE REPORT TO SEE IF THAT'S AT ALL POSSIBLE AND BRING YOU BACK AN ADDITIONAL FINANCING OPTION HOW WE MIGHT GOT THIS DONE. IN ADDITION, PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS HELPING TO PAY FOR SOME ASPECT OF THIS WE DON'T WANT TO OVERBURDEN BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A DRAG ON THE ECONOMY AND THE DEVELOPMENT YOU WANT TO HAPPEN, BUT THAT'S THE DIRECTION YOU WANT US TO GO IN WE'LL COME BACK WITH VARIOUS APPROACHES TO THIS.

>>GOODMAN: IF I COULD, MAYOR, THE OTHER THING THAT I HAD FORGOTTEN ABOUT WAS THE SUGGESTION THAT AS OPPORTUNITIES COME ALONG SUCH AS TRIANGLE WHERE THEY ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO A SIGNIFICANT POND THAT IMPACTS AROUND THERE BUT COULD CONCEIVABLY -- MAYBE NOT, BUT COULD CONCEIVABLY BY BE DEEPENED HELP IN ONE MORE INCREMENT AT -- INCREMENTAL DECREASE OF FLOW FROM UPSTREAM. THE OTHER THING IS I COULD ASK GEORGE JUST AS A REFRESHER, IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE COULDN'T REALLY DO THIS IN PHASING, THAT WE HAD TO HAVE VIRTUALLY THE WHOLE AMOUNT OF MONEY READY TO GO IN ONE PLACE AT ONE TIME. IS THAT RIGHT?

>> WE COULD CERTAINLY PHASE SOME ELEMENTS. THE AESTHETIC ELEMENTS, BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHAT SIZE TUNNEL WE'RE GOING TO BUILD TO START WITH. AND -- BUT THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES ON THE AESTHETIC ELEMENTS TO ADD THEM AT A LATER DATE. THE OPERATIONAL ELEMENTS, I THINK THERE'S TOO MUCH RISK ASSOCIATED WITH THAT TO NOT ADD THEM AT THE BEGINNING. BUT -- SO THERE IS SOME OPPORTUNITY TO PHASE THE COST, BUT, AGAIN, IF WE BUILD SOMETHING IN PARKLAND THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT FITS THERE, WE WOULD BE -- WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT AT THE OUTSET. AND WE WOULD BE COMING BACK YEARS LATER TO ADD THE INTEGRATION ELEMENTS.

>>GOODMAN: SO THE MAJOR COST IS NOT THE TUNNEL ITSELF, NOT THE DIGGING OF THE TUNNEL, IT'S THE --

>> ABOUT HALF OF THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE TUNNEL AND HALF OF THE COST IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE INLET AND OUTLET STRUCTURES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANYTHING ELSE?

>>WYNN: YES, MAYOR. GEORGE, REMIND ME, WHO GAVE US THE $25 MILLION ESTIMATE?

>> THE ENGINEERING FIRM OF LUMAS AND ASSOCIATES.

>>WYNN: WERE THEY PAID FOR THAT ESTIMATE?

>> YES, SIR.

>>WYNN: HOW MUCH?

>> APPROXIMATELY $150,000 UNDER THAT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT.

>> AND WHEN WE HIRED THEM, WHAT WAS THE STIPULATION OF THAT $150,000 PAYMENT? WHAT PRODUCT DID WE GET FOR THAT MONEY?

>> THEY WERE BOUND IN THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE US WITH A COST ESTIMATE FOR THE PROJECT, AND TYPICALLY THE WAY THAT'S DONE AT THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE, IF THERE ARE UNCERTAINTIES, THE ENGINEER ADDS A CONTINGENCY. IT COULD BE AS MUCH AS 100% BECAUSE OF THE UNKNOWNS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT. IN THIS CASE, IT'S OUR JUDGMENT -- THERE WERE TWO ISSUES THAT CAME OUT. THE DIMENSIONS OF THE INLET AND OUTLET STRUCTURE WERE FAR TOO SMALL TO MANAGE THE FLOWS. THERE WERE -- THEY WERE BASICALLY UNDERSIZED. AND THE CONTINGENCY THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE UNKNOWNS.

>>WYNN: AND WHOSE -- WHO DESIGNED THE INLET AND OUTLET STRUCTURES THAT COULD NOT HANDLE THE WATER FLOW? I MEAN WHO MADE THAT ESTIMATE?

>> THAT FIRM, THAT FIRM IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT DESIGN. FOR THAT PRELIMINARY DESIGN DECISION.

>>WYNN: HAVE WE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THAT FIRM NOW THAT WE'VE --

>> YES, SIR. WE ASKED SOME MONTHS AGO WE SENT THEM A LETTER RAISING THESE ISSUES OF COST, INVITING THEM TO DEFEND THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS, BECAUSE IF THERE IS ANY WAY WE CAN GET THE PROJECT BACK DOWN TO 25 MILLION, WE WANT TO GO THERE. AND WE DID NOT GET AN ADEQUATE RESPONSE TO THAT LETTER. WE HAVE YET TO RECEIVE AN ADEQUATE RESPONSE TO THAT COMMUNICATION.

>>GARZA: BUT THERE ARE OTHER DISCUSSIONS WE'RE HAVING BEYOND THE ENGINEERING FEES. I DON'T MEAN TO GET IN THE MIDDLE, BUT WE ARE PURSUING THOSE.

>>WYNN: THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANYTHING ELSE? MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: IT WOULD BE INTERESTING AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE -- IF I COULD, IN THE INFORMATION LOOP ABOUT HOW THOSE TALKS GO. I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR A LONG TIME WHAT THEIR RESPONSE WAS, AND OF COURSE THEY DID RESPOND TO THE STATESMAN. SO MAYBE THAT'S AN INDICATION THAT WE'RE READY TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN A MAJOR PART OF WHY WE CANNOT DO THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. WITH THAT, LET'S GO TO ITEM 47. AND I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.

>>THOMAS: CHANGE CHANGE [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE].

>> WITH THAT EXCEPTION THAT WOULD BE FINE.

>>THOMAS: SO I MAKE A MOTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE A SECOND FOR THE MOTION? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, MOTION MADE AND SECONDED TO PASS THIS ITEM ON THIRD READING, ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 47.

>> ITEM NO. 17, COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

>>ALVAREZ: YES, MAYOR, I HAD QUESTIONS ON THAT ITEM THAT HAVE BEEN ANSWERED BY STAFF. I WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NO. 17, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. DISCUSSION. ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON ITEM NO. 17? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED NO, MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 17.

>>GARZA: MAYOR. ON ITEM, I BELIEVE IT'S -- IT'S 24, THERE WAS A LATE LAST NIGHT A WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMITTEE MEETING THAT HAD A CONDITION, A QUALIFIER FOR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. WE AS A STAFF DON'T AGREE WITH THAT QUALIFIER, BUT MR. LIPPE WHO WAS THERE LAST NIGHT WANTS TO READ THAT INTO THE RECORD SO THAT THE COUNCIL HAS THAT INFORMATION. SO THAT -- BECAUSE THAT WAS OMITTED DURING THE CONSENT PROCESS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, THIS IS ON ITEM NO. 24, WHAT I WILL DO IS RECOGNIZE MR. LIPPE, IF THERE IS A DESIRE TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION AT THIS TIME. I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW.

>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I'M CHRIS LIPPY, DIRECTOR OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT, I WANTED TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION LAST NIGHT ON ITEM NO. 24. THE ITEM FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT, THEIR RESOLUTION IS THAT WATER AND WASTEWATER RECOMMEND THAT'S COUNCIL APPROVE EXECUTION OF A 12 MONTH SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT OF TEAM TO PROVIDE ROLLOFF CONTAINER AND DISPOSAL SERVICES FOR GRIT AND SCREENINGS FROM THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $11,694 WITH TWO 12-MONTH EXTENSION OPTIONS. THIS APPROVAL IS ON ... BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ADJACENT TO THE LANDFILL SITE INVOLVED WITH THIS AGENDA ITEM. THE PRIMARILY CONCERNS WERE THE ABSENCE OF ADEQUATE BUFFERS. THE COMMISSION ENCOURAGES THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER A PUBLIC POLICY DECISION THAT CITY CONTRACTS WITH LANDFILLS SHOULD REQUIRE LANDFILLS TO HAVE ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL AND FUSE SANS SAFEGUARDS. SO THAT WAS THEIR RESOLUTION. I WANTED TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF THAT ON THIS ITEM.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR, CAN WE MOVE TO RECONSIDER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEM NO. 24, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. WE WILL RECONSIDER ITEM NO. 24. MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: WELL, I WOULD OFFER THAT SAME MOTION WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT MR. LIPPY READ, SO THAT THERE WAS NO AUTOMATIC EXTENSION WITHOUT OUR ABILITY TO -- TO SPEAK ABOUT THE VERY THINGS THAT THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION RECOMMENDED FOR US.

>>GRIFFITH: YES. COULD YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT -- ABOUT ROLLOFF CONTAINERS AND WHY THEY ARE -- IS THIS THE RIGHT TIME TO ASK THAT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET A SECOND TO THE MOTION. THEN WE WILL DO THAT. THE MAYOR PRO TEM MOVED APPROVAL OF THE ITEM WITH THE CONDITION THAT WAS MENTIONED BY THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU. I APOLOGIZE, I THOUGHT THERE HAD BEEN A SECOND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT'S ALL RIGHT. ROLLOFF.

>>GRIFFITH: YES, COULD WE TAKE ABOUT -- TALK ABOUT ROLLOFF CONTAINERS, WHY THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT THOSE.

>> YES. THE FIRST STEP IN THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESS IS THE HEAD WORKS, THAT'S THE REMOVAL OF TRASH AND GRIT AS IT'S COMING INTO THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS. IT'S REMOVED THROUGH SCREENS AND THROUGH BAY SINS THAT SETTLE OUT THE GRIT. THAT INERT MATERIAL IS CHREGTED. DUMP TRUCKS WE HAVE DONE OUR OWN HAULING TO LANDFILLS. FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS WE HAD A PILOT PROJECT AT WALNUT CREEK WHERE WE USE THESE ROLLOFF CONTAINERS. IT'S A CANER PROVIDED BY A -- BY A LANDFILL OR A WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE. THEY PROVIDE THE CONTAINER, THEN THEY COME AND PICK UP THE CONTAINER HOWEVER OFTEN IT NEEDS TO BE EMPTIED. IN OUR CASE IT'S USUALLY ONCE A WEEK. SO IT'S BEEN SUCCESSFUL. WE HAVE FOUND THAT IT'S BEEN ECONOMICAL AND SO WE ARE EXTENDING THIS SAME TYPE OF PROGRAM TO ALL OF OUR OTHER [INAUDIBLE]. THAT'S WHAT THIS ITEM IS

>>GRIFFITH: IN TERMS OF MATERIALS AND CHEMICALS. WHAT'S IN THERE.

>> I CALL IT INERT, GRIT, STICKS, RAGS, TRASH, THAT TYPE OF MATERIAL THAT'S ENTERING THE PLANT ALONG WITH THE WASTEWATER FLOW. ALTHOUGH IT IS OF COURSE OF COURSE YOU KNOW, SATURATED WITH WASTEWATER. IT'S -- THERE'S A REQUIREMENT IN THE TNRCC RULES THAT THE -- THAT THE MATERIAL BE DRAINED AND PASS A CERTAIN TYPE OF MOISTURE TEST SO IT CANNOT BE CALLED WET. IT CAN'T BE -- CANNOT BE HAULED WET. CONDITION BE HAULED DRIPPING FROM THE GARBAGE TRUCKS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THERE'S THAT REQUIREMENT, BUT BASICALLY IT'S THIS INERT TYPE OF MATERIAL THAT THESE LANDFILLS ARE PERMITTED TO RECEIVE AND HANDLE

>>GRIFFITH: THE MANAGER SAID THAT YOU WERE NOT IN CONCURRENCE WITH WHAT THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION WAS RECOMMENDING ABOUT THIS. CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR VIEWPOINT AND THEIR VIEWPOINT?

>> WELL, IT'S MINOR. WE HAVE BID THIS CONTRACT THREE TIMES NOW. WE HAVE LOOKED INTO THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS OF LANDFILLS. EACH -- EACH TIME WE HAVE BID, WE HAVE TRIED TO GET STRONGER AND HAD OUR CONCERNS LAID OUT IN THE SPECIFICATIONS ABOUT THE -- ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY AND THE RECORD OF THESE LANDFILLS. SO WE FEEL LIKE AT THIS POINT WE HAVE DONE WHAT WE CAN AS FAR AS MAKING SURE THAT THE LANDFILLS ARE -- ARE PROPERLY PERMITTED AND THAT -- THAT THEIR COMPLIANCE RECORD IS ADEQUATE. WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE LOOKED INTO -- THIS IS THE LOW BID FOR THIS SERVICE. IT WAS ADEQUATELY ADVERTISED AND -- AND WE JUST BELIEVE THAT -- THAT -- THAT YOU SHOULD -- WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ITEM. BUT -- BUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS CONTINUE TRACKING THEIR RECORD AS -- AS WE GO AND -- AND WHAT WE COULD DO WOULD BE LOOK AT IT. BEFORE WE DO THE AUTOMATIC EXTENSION, WHAT WE COULD DO WOULD BE LOOK AT THE RECORD AND SEE IF WE HAVE ANY CONCERNS AT THAT POINT. IT'S NOT AN AUTOMATIC EXTENSION. IT'S AN OPTION SO THAT WE COULD CERTAINLY LOOK AT IT BEFORE WE EXTEND IT.

>>GARZA: CAN I ALSO ADD WHEN YOU APPROVE THE DOWNTOWN ITEM HERE ABOUT -- I WANT TO SAY EITHER FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS AGO, YOU ASKED THAT THERE BE DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED TO US BY WASTE MANAGEMENT. IN TERMS OF THE ADEQUACY, TNRCC, THEY ARE COMPLIANT, IN THE END IT'S THE STATE AGENCY, THE TNRCC THAT GOVERNS THESE FACILITIES. WASTE MANAGEMENT, JUST LIKE TEXAS DISPOSAL NEEDS TO COMPLY WITH THE REGULATIONS PROVIDED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS IN THE OPERATION OF THESE LANDFILLS, CELLS, ET CETERA, THE TYPE OF COVERS THAT'S USED TO COVER THESE THINGS, THIS IS MATERIAL THAT'S APPROVED IN A CLASS 1 SOLID WASTE FACILITY. THAT'S WHY I THINK THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMISSION REALLY IS OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF WHAT THE CITY COULD REQUIRE, IN THE END MIGHT HAVE US INADVERTENTLY ELIMINATE SOMEBODY WHO HAS A CLASS 1 FACILITY AND TAKE SOMETHING THAT'S A MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE ON OPTION FOR US AS A CITY THAT IN THE LONG TERM ISN'T IN THE INTEREST OF A WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY. THAT'S THE REASON FOR -- FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THAT CONDITION NOT BE PART OF THIS MOTION.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: WHEN WE HAVE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACTS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, IT IS THAT WE ARE APPROVING SUPPOSEDLY A ONE YEAR OR A CERTAIN TERM OF CONTRACT. AND FOR CONTRACT RENEWAL IS AN ADDITIONAL THING THAT MAKES LIFE EASIER AN MORE CONVENIENT. BUT IT'S NOT A GIVEN AND SO MY MOTION WAS VERY CAREFUL TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT. BUT WITH THE NOTATION THAT THERE WOULD BE NO AUTOMATIC EXTENSIONS SO THAT WE CAN -- WE CAN LOOK AT THIS KIND OF THING. WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO IS -- IS AT LEAST KNOW AT THEY HAVE IN THE PAST THAT FOLKS ARE A LITTLE WARY OF THEIR OPERATIONS. SO IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY NOT ONLY FOR US TO CHECK ON THINGS, BUT FOR THEM TO GAIN SOMETHING OF A REPUTATION FOR TRUST AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND OPERATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORS, SO THAT SHOULD BENEFIT BOTH OF US.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I MAY BE MISUNDERSTANDING. LET ME SEE IF I CAN CREATE SOME CLARITY. WHAT I UNDERSTOOD THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION'S STATEMENT TO BE WOULD THAT THERE WOULD BE NO OPTION, THAT IT WOULD JUST BE ONE YEAR. WHAT I HEAR THE MAYOR PRO TEM SAYING IS THAT SHE DOESN'T MIND THE OPTION TO RENEW, SHE JUST WANTS TO BE IN A POSITION TO STATE THAT THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT IT WILL BE RENEWED. THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE AND VERY DISTINCT THINGS. WHAT I WANT TO ASK IS WHAT SHE'S SAYING ALONG THE LINES STAFF IS RECOMMENDING. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE CLARITY BECAUSE -- LIKE I SAY, I MAY BE MISUNDERSTANDING IT. THE MOTION THAT I WILL RECOGNIZE FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ'S SECOND IS TO RENEW THE CONTRACT FOLLOWING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT WITH A STATEMENT AS PART OF THAT MOTION THAT THERE IS NO GUARANTEE OF THE EXERCISE OF THAT OPTION TO RENEW.

>>GOODMAN: ANY OPTION TO RENEW OR EXTEND THE CONTRACT WOULD COME TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: VERY GOOD. THEN NOW I DO UNDERSTAND. SO STAFF -- SO THE MOTION AND THE SECOND WILL BE -- UNLESS SOMEBODY THAT MADE THE MOTION OR THE SECOND JUMPS UP AND TELLS ME THAT I AM WRONG ABOUT THIS, THE MOTION AND THE SECOND IS TO APPROVE THE ITEM WITH CLARITY IF IT'S NOT IN THE CONTRACT OR IF IT'S NOT OTHERWISE STATED, THAT ANY OPTION TO RENEW WOULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL. IS THAT YOUR SECOND COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON 24. ITEM NO. 47, I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. HE MOVES TO RECONSIDER ITEM NO. 47, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES, WE ARE RECONSIDERING ITEM NO. 47, COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

>>THOMAS: YES. I WOULD MOVE TO -- TO MAKE A MOTION THAT I NEED TO MAKE SOME CLARITY ON THE WORDING ON THE -- ON THE PARTICULAR MOTION OF 47.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MR. GUERNSEY. ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. TOM THOMAS I NEED TO PUT I DO APPROVE FOR THIRD READING, BUT I NEED TO STATE THAT IN THE -- THIS IN THE MOTION THAT I APPROVE THE ZONING EXEMPTED FOR ACTION ON THIS MARSH PROPERTY WHICH IS A PORTION OF TRACT 5, 1809 CHESTNUT AVENUE, TAX I.D. 2002-1011-0704 FOR A PERIOD OF 60 DAYS, SEPARATE ORDINANCE REZONING AS THIS MARSH PROPERTY MAY BE CONSIDERED BY COUNCIL AT A LATER DATE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTIONS CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 7 TO 0. -- MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 47. WHAT I AM GOING TO DO UNLESS THERE'S AN OBJECTION IS -- IS SEEK A MOTION TO RECESS THE COUNCIL SO THAT -- SO THAT WE CAN GET A COUPLE OF THINGS SET UP THAT WE WERE GOING TO DO MUCH EARLIER TODAY. BUT WE ARE NOT READY -- WE WEREN'T READY TO DO IT AT THAT TIME. THEN AT THE CONCLUSION OF THAT, WE WILL COME BACK AND I WILL SEEK AT THAT POINT I WILL CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER, SEEK A MOTION TO RECESS TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION DURING THE LUNCH HOUR. THAT WAY WE -- WE KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE. SO FOR RIGHT NOW I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS THE CITY COUNCILL. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES, WE ARE IN RECESS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL CALL BACK TO ORDER THE CITY COUNCILL AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE PURPOSE OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION -- ON ITEM 10 WE HAD A CITIZEN THAT HAD SIGNED UP AND WHEN I CALLED FOR PEOPLE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK APPARENTLY SHE WAS OUT BACK TALKING WITH SOMEBODY WITH REGARD TO THIS ITEM SO I'M GOING TO ASK MS. ENGLISH IF SHE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS POINT.

>> I REALLY WANT TO THANK YOU FORGIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY. I JUST WANTED TO BRING TO YOU ONE FACT, I AM NOT GOING TO ASK YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS PROJECT, HOWEVER, ONE OF THE THINGS I WITNESSED THIS MORNING ON MY WAY TO THIS MEETING IS THE VERY LONG TRUCK WITH METAL RIGGINGS MADE A U-TURN RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME AND ATTEMPTED TO MAKE A RIGHT-HAND TURN INTO TUSCANY CENTER. THE NAME OF THE COMPANY WAS FRISBEE TRUCKING FROM GARLAND TEXAS. I BELIEVE THIS CAN BE VERIFIED BY LOCKING AT THEIR DELIVERY LOGS. THIS TRUCK JAMMED AUM THE TRAFFIC. IT JUST LITERALLY CAUSED A BIG MESS THIS. PROBLEM WILL NOT GO AWAY ONCE CONSTRUCTION ENDS BECAUSE THE BUILDINGS BEING CONSTRUCTED ARE WAREHOUSES. MY SECOND PROBLEM WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT IS THAT I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE -- AT A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING TWO NIGHTS AGO, THE DEVELOPER EXPLAINED THAT THE INTENT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS NOT TO RESTRICT BUSINESS HOURS AFTER 10 P.M., JUST TRUCK ACTIVITY. THAT IS NOT THE CASE. HE ALSO STATED THAT FOR HIM TO AGREE TO FEWER RESTRICTED USES FROM MY LIST WOULD HAVE A RIPPLE EFFECT AND WOULD POSTPONE THIS ITEM FOR TWO OR THREE MONTHS. I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY HE WOULD NOT AGREE TO A FEW RESTRICTIVE USES ON TRACT 1, ALSO WHEN HIS PRESENTATION OF THE PROJECT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS FOR OFFICE SHOWROOM. AND I THANK YOU AGAIN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. COUNCIL, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE PURPOSE OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE TO ENGAGE IN PRIVATE CONSULTATION WITH OUR ATTORNEY PURSUANT TO 551.071 TO DISCUSS LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE AUSTIN POLICE ASSOCIATION AND REAL PROPERTY SECTION 551.072 TO DISCUSS ACQUISITION FOR REAL PROPERTY FOR PACKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT RELATED TO THE AVERY RANCH P.U.D.. ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY RELATED TO THE BARTON SPRINGS CLEAN DRINKING WATER PROJECT, PARTIALLY FUNDED BY PROPOSITION 2 BONDS AND PARTIALLY BY THE WATER WASTEWATER UTILITY. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> SO MOVED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION IS TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. WE ARE RECESSED INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. COUNCIL WILL BE IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30 P.M. IF WE COMPLETE THE EXECUTIVE SESSION PRIOR TO 1:30 P.M., I WILL COME OUT AND IN PUBLIC NOTE THAT WE ARE NOW OUT OF EXECUTIVE -- OR WHENEVER IT IS, WE ARE OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION. BUT WE WILL BE IN RECESS AS A COUNCIL UNTIL 1:30 P.M. ARE THEY ARE ON THE NORTH LAMAR TO 183 SOUTH OF 51ST STREET. SOUTH LAMAR TO OLTORF AND SOUTH CONGRESS FROM BEN WHITE TO STASSNEY. THOSE THREE ARE CATEGORIES BY OUR CITY IN THE CORRIDOR PLANNING PROJECT AS MAIN STREET CORRIDORS. AND MAIN STREET CORRIDORS ARE MIXED USE AND THEY PROVIDE USE TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY HAVE WIDE SIDEWALKS, STREETS, BENCHES AND THERE ARE EASE OF PEDESTRIAN CROSS WALKS. THE FOURTH IS A NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE CORRIDOR. IS RUNS FROM SOUTH LAMAR. IT INCLUDES SOUTH LAMAR AND MANCHACA GOING FROM OLTORF SOUTH AND THIN DOWN MANCHACA TO BEN WHITE. AND THAT'S CALLED A NEIGHBORHOOD BUILDING STREET. THE FIRST RESIDENTIAL, NARROW, CARRY LESS THROUGH TRAFFIC. IT'S GO SHOPPING AND STROELG. IT LINKS, SHOPS, CAFES, TRAILS AND PUBLIC PLACES. VERY NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED. THIS IS A DESCRIPTION FROM OUR CORRIDOR PLANNING PROJECT. THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THEREFORE CAMPO HAVE PLANNED FOR THOSE FOUR MAJOR ARTERIAL DIVIDED SIX-LANE HIGHWAYS. THEY'RE CALLED MASSIVE IN THE CAMPO PLAN. AND THIS IS GOING THROUGH THE COMMISSION AND IT WILL BE TO YOU PROBABLY AT THE COUNCIL MEETING ON JANUARY 11TH. THEY HAVE RAISED THE ISSUE ON THOSE FOUR AND I WANTED TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF FOREWARNING OF WHAT'S COMING. WE CAN'T HAVE MAD 6 DOES NOT TRANSLATE INTO NEIGHBORHOOD, VILLAGE AND MAIN STREET CORRIDORS. [BUZZER]. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. AND I'LL JUST POINT OUT THAT YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT HOW IT'S GOING GOING TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONS RIGHT NOW AND IN FACT, THE COUNCIL WAS EXPECTED TO VOTE SOMETIME IN MID JANUARY BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE'RE DOING OUR MEETINGS, IT WILL PROBABLY BE TOWARD THE END OF THE MONTH OF JANUARY AND THEN TAKE IT TO CAMPO. AND THE ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE BROUGHT UP ARE ITEMS THAT SOME OF US ARE LOOKING AT PRETTY CLOSELY IN ADDITION TO, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT TXDOT IS OUT TELLING PEOPLE MIGHT OUGHT TO HAPPEN TO MOPAC AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IS US LOOK PRETTY CAREFULLY AT SOME OF THESE THINGS BEFORE IT GETS INTO -- BEFORE WE THEN TAKE IT BEFORE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL THAT ARE ON CAMPO, TAKE IT TO THE CAMPO PACK. I APPRECIATE YOU CALLING THAT TO OUR ATTENTION.

>> I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. GUS PENA. GUS PENA? WELL, YOU HAVE TO TALK IN IN HERE. PAT BROCKIE? FOLLOWED BY SUSANNA ALMANZA AND ROBERT DONNELLY.

>> MAYOR WATSON, COUNCILMEMBERS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS PAT BROCKIE AND I'M HERE THIS AFTERNOON REPRESENTING THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE, AND MORNING SPECIFICALLY THE PAINT THE TOWN CAMPAIGN. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THE ART PANELS THAT ARE GRACING VARIOUS CONSTRUCTION SITES IN DIFFERENT AREAS DOWNTOWN. THOSE ARE THE RESULT OF THIS CAMPAIGN. AND THE PAINT THE TOWN REALLY EVOLVED TO BORROW THE MAYOR'S PHRASE, WHEN AUSTIN DECIDED TO RENOVATE THEIR DOWNTOWN LIVING ROOM. AND AS THE MAYOR POINTED OUT, WITH ANY SORT OF RENOVATION, COMES SOME INCONVENIENCES. BUT CHARLIE BEST OF THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE JUMPED ON THOSE INCONVENIENCES AND ENCOURAGED THE ALLIANCE MEMBERS TO FOCUS ON THE POSITIVE. STOP AND THINK WHAT WE'RE BUILDING. REMEMBER WHERE WE'VE BEEN AND WHERE WE'RE GOING. AND FRED SCHMIDT, OUR COMMITTEE CHAIR SAID WE CAN DO THAT. FRED, ALONG WITH MANY OTHER VOLUNTEERS FROM THE CORPORATE SECTOR, THE EDUCATIONAL -- MANY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC SECTOR JUMPED ON BOARD AND SAID WE CAN DO THAT. AND I'M HERE TODAY TO THANK THE CITY OF AUSTIN IN THEIR ROLE IN PAINT THE TOWN CAMPAIGN. THE PUBLIC INFORMATION MANAGER FOR THE DOWNTOWN JAM ATTENDED THE MAJORITY OF OUR MEETINGS. SHE KEPT US APPRISED TO THE STATUS OF THE JAM SO WE COULD WORK TOGETHER WITH THE JAM. ANY TIME WE NEEDED A MAP OR A RENDERING, SHE HAND DELIVERED IT. THE CITY'S HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES PROVIDED UNCONSCIOUS WITH FREE RECYCLED NON-TOXIC EXTERIOR PAINT THAT WE THEN COULD PASS ON TO OUR VOLUNTEER ARTISTS. MANY OF THOSE VOLUNTEER ARTISTS CAME FROM THE AUSTIN I BEG YOUR PARDON SCHOOL DISTRICT. AND GARY SALAGIE, A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN INVALUABLE TO PAINT THE TOWN. HE DEVISED AN EFFICIENT AND SECURE WAY FOR US TO EXHIBIT THE PANELS AND HE ALSO RECRUITED MEMBERS FROM HIS OFFICE TO WORK OVER TIME ON A SATURDAY, THOSE MEMBERS INCLUDING MELISSA, TIM, RIDEC AND KENNY TO WORK OVER TIME ON A SATURDAY SIDE BY SIDE WITH US TO BE CERTAIN THAT THE PANELS WERE INSTALLED SAFELY AND EFFICIENTLY. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS PANEL THAT WE HAVE HERE THIS AFTERNOON. THAT WAS A CONTRIBUTION FROM THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. IT IS SCHEDULED TO BE EXHIBITED AT THE PLAZA SITE AT 5TH AND GUADALUPE ONCE A SIDEWALK ENCLOSURE IS SCRUFTED. SO AGAIN, REPRESENT IS THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE, WE WANT TO INSEARLY THANK THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR HELPING US PAINT THE TOWN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SUSAN IN A ALMANZA? FOLLOWED BY ROBERT DONNELLY AND THEN GAVINO FERNANDEZ.

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M SUSANA ALMANZA. I BELIEVE LAST THURSDAY WE BROUGHT FOR YOU THE EAST CESAR CHAVEZ BALLOTS THAT SHOWED THAT THERE WAS DUPLICATE VOTING, I BELIEVE 56, AND OTHER DISCREPANCIES AND IRREGULARITIES THAT WERE FOUND IN REVIEW OF THE BALLOTS. AND THE REASON THAT I BRING THIS BACK FORTH IS BECAUSE THE REZONING OF THE EAST CESAR CHAVEZ NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AREA IS BASED ON THOSE BALLOTS. AND SO WE'RE REQUESTING AN INVESTIGATION BY THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND STAFF TO SEE HOW ARE THEY GOING TO REINTERPRET THOSE BALLOTS WITH ALL THE DISCREP ANTSIES AND ALSO TO ASK THAT DUE TO FACT THAT THE CESAR CHAVEZ PLAN IS IS -- RECONE REZONING IS BEING BASED ON THOSE PAL BALLOTS THAT THE PLAN SHOULD BE IN POSTPONEMENT AND WE SHOULD LOOK AT AL TRN ACTIVE WAYS THAT WE MIGHT BRING CHANGES INTO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE WAIVERS FOR SMALL LOT AMNESTY. THERE'S NO NEED TO DO NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN COMBINING DISTRICT WHEN THERE IS OTHER TOOLS THAT CAN HAPPEN OUTSIDE OF THAT PARTICULAR ORDINANCE. ALSO LOOKING AT THE AREA OF THE SECOND HOMES. I MEAN, THAT IS A CITYWIDE ORDINANCE ALSO. AND LOOK AT THOSE PARTICULAR THINGS. SO IT'S NOT AS THOUGH OUR PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS THAT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD COMBINING DISTRICT. SO I THINK BASED ON ALL OF THESE INACCURACIES, THAT WE NEED TO REVISIT THAT. AND I THINK THAT AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, HAD THEY BACK IN JUNE GIVEN THE COMMUNITY, WHICH WERE PROPERTY OWNERS, THE RIGHT TO REVIEW THE PLAN AND NOT TO FAST TRACK THIS PLAN AND EVEN THE POSSIBILITY TO GO INTO DISPUTE RESOLUTION, THAT WE PROBABLY COULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT SOME RESOLUTION TO THIS PARTICULAR -- AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE COMMUNITY DID COME BACK WITH ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT THEY WERE IGNORED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY STAFF ALSO. SO I THINK IT'S TIME TO REVISIT THOSE THINGS AND TO RELOOK AT THE CESAR CHAVEZ NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, AND ALSO BECAUSE WE'RE NOW IN OTHER PLANS, THE GOVALLE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN HAS RUN INTO SOME PROBLEMS TOO WITH CITY STAFF TRYING TO BULLY THE COMMUNITY AND TRYING TO RUN THAT PLAN INSTEAD OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND ACTUALLY, THEY CALLED A DISPUTE RESOLUTION, NOT THE NEIGHBOR, AND BASED ON ONLY SIX PEOPLE, WHICH WERE OBVIOUSLY -- TWO RESIDENTS, THEY ARE TRYING TO CALL FOR A REELECTION OF THE CO-CHAIRS OF THAT PLAN. THEY'RE ALSO SAYING THAT THEY WILL NOT HAVE A VOTE ON THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. SO AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AGAIN AT THE CITY TRYING TO TELL THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOW TO RUN THE PLAN AND WHAT WILL BE ACCEPTED IN A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. SO AGAIN, THIS IS JUST SOME OF THE ONGOING PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE HAVING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS. [BUZZER]. SO I ASK YOU TO REVIEW THEM -- .

>>MAYOR WATSON: OUR STAFF HAS WORKED EXTREMELY HARD WITH ALL THE INTERESTED PARTIES, PARTICULARLY ON THE MONTOPOLIS ISSUE THAT YOU RAISED A MINUTE AGO, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE TRIED TO WORK WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT GROUPS IN TRYING TO ADDRESS WHAT'S BEST FOR EVERYONE. AND I THINK WE MAY HAVE AN AGREEMENT, BUT -- A DISAGREEMENT, WE AGREE TO DISAGREE, BUT I THINK ANYONE ON MY STAFF HAS BEEN TRYING TO BULLY ANYBODY. I WANTED TO CLEAR THE RECORD.

>> MR. GARZA, I HAVE TO TELL YOU YOU HAVE NOT BEEN AT THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS. YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE PRESENT TO SEE THE PRESSURE -- AND ACTUALLY, AUSTAN LIBRACH WROTE THAT LETTER, SEVERAL COPIES OF LETTERS THAT WE PROVIDED TO YOU WHERE HE HAS NOT BEEN IN ATTENDANCE. SO WE HAVE STAFF THAT'S MAKING DECISIONS AND SAYING THIS HAPPENED AT A MEETING WHEN THEY WEREN'T EVEN THERE. HE'S THE ONE THAT CALLED FOR PULLING THE STAFF -- POOLING THE STAFF RESOURCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BECAUSE WE WOULD NOT SIGN THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. AND ALL WE ASKED WAS FOR LEGAL INTERPRETATION OF WHY THEY COULDN'T PUT CERTAIN THINGS UNDER MOU. SO IT WASN'T THAT WE WEREN'T WILLING TO SIGN, IT'S JUST THAT WE WERE ASKING QUESTIONS. AND I GUESS, AGAIN, WE'RE NOT LOUD TO ASK QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR. JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, IS ONE OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THE ONE WHERE YOU LIVE?

>> THE GOVALLE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN? NO, IT'S WHERE WE HAVE MEMBERS THAT LIVE THERE. WE ACTUALLY HAVE -- OUR OFFICE IS IN THE CESAR CHAVEZ PLANNING AREA. OUR OFFICE. MY HOME IS IN MONTOPOLIS. I'M IN THE MONTOPOLIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ROBERT DONNELLY, FOLLOWED BY MR. FERNANDEZ AND THEN JOSE QUINTERO.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ROBERT DONNELLY. I'M A MEMBER OF EL CONCILIO. AGAIN, I'M HERE TO REMIND YOU, RE, RE, REMIND YOU THAT WE ARE STILL WAITING FOR ACTIONS FROM THOSE THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE REPRESENTATIVES OF OUR COMMUNITY WHICH HAVE BEEN ABSENT WOW LEAVE AND WHO HAVE NOT SHOWN ANY SUPPORT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD PER SE. IN OUR PARTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN EAST AUSTIN, WE HAVE BEEN EIGHT YEARS IN THE PAST WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. AND IF WE ARE TO CONTINUE ALSO FURTHER THESE NEXT THREE OR HOWEVER MANY YEARS WE CONTINUE WITHOUT HAVING REPRESENTATION, I THINK IT IS A SHAME FOR A CITY THE SIZE OF AUSTIN AND ALSO TO HAVE ALL THE DIFFERENCES OF PEOPLE AND THE RACES THAT ARE HERE, TO NOT HAVE REPRESENTATION ACCORDING TO THE WAY THE CITY IS LAID OUT IN THE RACIAL. IT'S VERY SAD. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE TWO MINORITIES THAT ARE ON THE CITY COUNCILL AND ONLY ONE OF THEM HAS THE GUTS TO STAND UP TO THE REST OF THOSE WHO DO NOT CARE TO TAKE CARE OF THE NEEDS OF THE EAST AUSTIN COMMUNITY IS A VERY -- VERY SAD AND SHAMEFUL CONDITION. I ASK YOU AGAIN THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A POSTPONEMENT INDEFINITELY SO WE CAN LOOK INTO WHAT THE PROBLEMS -- AND THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF. AND AGAIN, YOU SEEM TO JUST GLOSS OVER THOSE PROBLEMS THAT OUR PEOPLE HAVE IN THE EAST AUSTIN COMMUNITIES. AS LONG AS YOU HAVE PEOPLE THERE THAT YOU CAN LEAD AND WHIP INTO SHAPE INTO YOUR WAY OF THINKING, THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO ATTEND TO US. YOU RETURN TO THEM AND SAY WHAT IS IT THAT YOU WANT? WE AS A PEOPLE CAN SPEAK FOR OUR OWN SELVES AND WE DO NOT HAVE REPRESENTATION AMONG THE COUNCIL. AND YOU SHOULD COME TO US AND ASK US RATHER THAN BRING THE WHIP AND WHIP US INTO A LINE AND SAY THIS IS WHAT WE WANT YOU TO DO. THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WE WANT YOU TO FOLLOW. NOW, IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A CITY-LED PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY, THAT'S ONE THING. BUT IF YOU SAY THAT YOU HAVE A PLAN THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE COMING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEN YOU SHOULD BE HONEST AND DO THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BUT BUZZ.

>>MAYOR WATSON: GAVINO HERNANDEZ -- FERNANDEZ, JOE HI QUINTERO.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M WITH EL CONCILIO, WHICH IS A FAMILY OF NEIGHBORHOODS IN EAST AUSTIN. AND I'D LIKE TO PUBLICLY THANK ALL THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN AND THE REGION FOR SEEING -- AND ALSO COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS FOR SUPPORTING OUR POSITION AND -- IN THE DEFEAT OF LIGHT RAIL. ONCE AGAIN, WE KNOW THAT THIS WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS IN THE BEST NEED FOR OUR COMMUNITY. ALSO, AS WE COME UPON DECEMBER THE 12TH, IT'S A DAY OF CELEBRATION AND A DAY OF FESTIVITY AND A DAY OF RECOGNITION TO OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE. AND EVERY YEAR PEOPLE MAKE PILGRIMAGES TO THE SHRINE? MEXICO CITY. AND IF YOU ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH MEXICAN CULTURE, THIS IS HER I HAVE ON MY BACK. AND ONE OF THE PROBLEMS AND EVERY TIME THE PILGRIMS GO, THEY HAVE A MESSAGE THAT THEY ASK OF OUR LADY OF THE GUADALUPE. AND THIS YEAR ONE OF THOSE IS FOR HER TO GUIDE US AND HELP US IN THE DEFEAT OF THIS PLAN THAT THE CITY HAS PUT TOGETHER, WHICH I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO ADDRESS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT SAYS SEIZE IS -- CESAR CHAVEZ IS ROLLING OVER IN HIS GRAVE SEEING IN THE WAY IT'S BEING USED TODAY IN THIS PLAN. BUT THAT IS ONE OF THE PROMISES THAT WE'RE ASKING OF HER THIS YEAR, TO HELP THE POOR PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO DO NOT HAVE THE LEGAL RESOURCES TO COMBAT A GOVERNMENT THAT IS ONCE AGAIN WANTED -- WANTING TO ENTER INTO OUR AREA WITH THE SAME MANIFEST DESTINY MENTALITY, WITH THE SAME LAND GRAB MANIFEST MENTALITY WAY BACK IN THE EARLY YEARS OF THIS COUNTRY. ISN'T IT IRONIC THAT WEST OF I-35 WE CONFISCATE AS MUCH LAND AS WE CAN TO PROTECT ANIMALS, YET IN EAST AUSTIN, WE DON'T WEIGH OR PLAY THE -- APPLY THE SAME PRINCIPLES OR THINKING TO APPLY FOR HOUSING AND HUMAN BEINGS. BUT IT IS THE MAJORITY OF THIS COUNCIL, MANY OF YOU CAME TO OUR DOORS IN OUR COMMUNITIES SEEKING OUR SUPPORT, BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THE TIME COMES AROUND EVERY THREE YEARS AND THE ELECTION SEQUENCE AGAIN, BUT I THINK THAT IT IS UNFAIR THAT THIS TACTIC THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS USING IN NOT BEING SUCCINCT AND HONEST WITH US -- AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE ASKING. SO THEREFORE I ALSO ECHO A POSTPONEMENT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITY'S NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IN EAST AUSTIN INDEFT ANILY UNTIL WE EDUCATE THE HOMEOWNERS. AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE THAT AREN'T IN THE AREA. THIS IS A STACK OF PETITIONS THAT ARE BEING SIGNED BY HOMEOWNERS, AND IT'S GROWING. AND IT'S GROWING TO DEFEAT THIS LAND GRAB OF OUR COMMUNITY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: JOSE QUINTERO.

>>THOMAS: COULD I ASK MR. FERNANDEZ A QUESTION?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MR. FERNANDEZ?

>>THOMAS: UD ON THERE AN UPDATE ON THE CLOSURE OF THE HOLLY PLANT. DO YOU NEED UPDATED?

>> YES, WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REQUEST THAT WE BE PROVIDED AN UPDATE ON THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL OF THE CLOSURE OF HOLLY PARK PLANT IN 2005. THAT HAS YET TO COME. WE HAVE YET TO HEAR FROM THE CITY ON THAT AND WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST AN AGENDA ITEM ON THE STATUS OF THE DIRECTION THIS COUNCIL IS TAKING IN ENSURING THAT THE COMMUNITY AGAIN IS NOT GOING TO BE BETRAYED BY NOT SHUTTING THE HOLLY POWER PLANT BY THE YEAR 2005.

>>THOMAS: OKAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: JOSE QUINTERO?

>>GOODMAN: THE CITY MANAGER KNOWS THAT ASKED FOR THAT AS WELL AND HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING. THERE'S A RUMOR GOING AROUND, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BE UPDATED.

>> WELL, I CAN QUICKLY UPDATE. WE'RE DOING A REPAIR TO A TUR BEAN. IT WILL BE ON NEXT WEEK AGO AGENDA. THAT REPAIR IS ESSENTIAL FOR US TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY FOR NEXT YEAR, FOR THE SUMMER OF 01. WITH EXPECT TO THE 05 DATE, I THINK WE'VE -- WE'LL ADDRESS THAT TO THE CITY COUNCILL. IF THERE IS A RUMOR, THAT WOULD BE THE ISSUE.

>> I'M ANDY. SUBSTITUTING FOR CHUCK MANNING. THERE ARE TURBINES ARRIVING AT THE OTHER FACILITY. PROOPZ THAT'S CAUSING SOME CONFUSION. -- PERHAPS THAT'S CAUSING SOME CONFUSION.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS JOSE QUINTERO. I'M WITH THE GREATER EAST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ON BEHALF OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE GREATER EAST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WE'RE ASKING THAT THE CESAR CHAVEZ REZONING BE POSTPONED UNTIL FEBRUARY 2001. THE COMMUNITY FEELS THAT THE CITY PLANNING STAFF, THE LEGAL STAFF NEEDS TO REVIEW THE REGULATED IRREGULARITIES AND INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BALLOT. ADDITIONAL TIME IS NEEDED TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES WITH THE BALLOT. THE REZONING OF THE CESAR CHAVEZ AREA IS BASED ON THESE BALLOTS. THE COMMUNITY NEEDS ADDITIONAL TIME TO MEET WITH CITY PLANNING STAFF, RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS REGARDING THE PEOPLE'S VALID PETITION. AT OUR COMMUNITY MEETING WE DISCOVERED THAT CONSTITUENT STAFF HAS OMITTED SEVERAL PROPERTIES FROM OUR BALLOT PETITION. WE ALSO NEED TIME TO MEET WITH LEGAL STAFF TO GET CLARIFICATION ON OUR BALLOT PETITIONS. EACH OF THE UP 'COMING HOLIDAYS IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO REVIEW AND CORRECT ALL OF THE IRREGULARITIES AND ERRORS THAT HAVE OCCURRED WITH OUR BALLOT RE -- VALID PETITION. AGAIN, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THE ABOVE MENTIONED CASING POSTPONED TO JANUARY 2001. THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE INCONSISTENT AS FAR AS I LIVING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND. IN THE CESAR CHAVEZ NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THERE WAS A FINAL RECOMMENDATION SUBMIT BID THE AUSTIN BOARD OF REALTORS. NOW, SINCE WHEN DOES THE AUSTIN BOARD OF REALTORS SUBMIT A NEIGHBORHOOD RECOMMENDATION AND NONE OF THESE PEOPLE LIVE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD? WHY WOULD THEY ASK TO GIVE -- WHY WERE THEY ASKED TO GIVE A FINAL RECOMMENDATION? WE NEVER SEEN THEM. NOBODY EVER TALKED TO THEM. MAYBE IF SOMEBODY FROM THE CESAR CHAVEZ NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN MEMBERS SUBMITTED THIS AND SAID WE NEED OUR RELIGIOUSES FOR THE EAST CESAR CHAVEZ NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. THIS BOARD HAS NO BUSINESS COMING IN TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND SAYING WE NEED -- THIS IS A FINAL RECOMMENDATION. THE FINAL RECOMMENDATION SHOULD HAVE COME THROUGH US. BUT THE MOST CONCERNED THAT WE HAVE NOW IS OF ZONING. WE ACCEPT PLANNING, BUT YOU HAVE IMPLEMENTED A ZONING IN A DISTRICT AND THAT'S KIND OF SURPRISING TO US. SO THAT'S THE REASON WE'RE GIVING THE INFORMATION TO OUR RESIDENTS, PROPERTY OWNERS, TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE EVER PASS THIS DISTRICT OR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WILL BE PROTECTED. IF THERE'S A DISTRICT, THERE HAS TO BE A RESTRICTIVE SDEED TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I'M ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT US IN THIS IN FAVOR OF THE COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: KELLY KOCHETT?

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS KELLY. AND I'M HERE TODAY TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN ABOUT THE SANCTUARY ORGANIZATION THAT'S OPENED A TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FACILITY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS CALLED SWEDE HILL. THIS SHELTER BORDERS MY PROPERTY AND OUR HOUSEHOLD CONSISTS OF A THREE-YEAR-OLD CHILD, MY HUSBAND AND MYSELF. AFTER ATTENDING A MEETING WITH THE LEADERS OF SANCTUARY, I HAVE STRONG OPPOSITION TO THIS FACILITY BEING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR ANY OTHER RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. A BRIEF SUMMARY OF POLICE ACTIVITY FOR JOE'S HOUSE IN 1998, '99 AND 2000 INDICATES 121 POLICE INTERVENTIONS. CALLS AND REPORTS INCLUDE ASSAULT, AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, THEFT, POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, FAMILY DISTURBANCES, ATTEMPTED SUICIDE, REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS. FOUND GUNS AND AMMUNITION. EMOTIONAL DISTURBED PERSON, NOISE DISTURBANCE AND FORGERY. THE MANAGERS OF SANCTUARY HAVE QUESTIONABLE HISTORIES THEMSELVES. ANNE TAYLOR DAY WAS ARRESTED IN AUGUST OF 2000 WITH INTERFERING WITH DUTIES OF A PUBLIC SERVANT. ANOTHER ONE HAS AN WARRANT OUT FOR THEFT BY CHECK. ANOTHER FOR POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, COCAINE AND HE HAS AN ACTIVE WARRANT OUT FOR HIS ARREST FOR FORGERY. THE LEADERS HAVE STATED THAT SANCTUARY HAS NO SEENING PROCEDURE TO RESIDENTS. SANCTUARY APPEARS TO HAVE POOR MANAGEMENT AND ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACTIONS OF THEIR TENANTS. THE STAFFING IS ONLY ONE PERSON WITH A RESIDENT STAFF WHO IS A TRUSTEE. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT MY FAMILY'S SAFETY AS I'VE BEEN BURGLARIZED SEVERAL TIMES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVE EVEN HAD A MAN ENTER MY HOME WHILE MY DAUGHTER AND I I WERE THERE. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS STRUGGLED TO COMBAT EXISTING PROBLEMS IN OUR AREA AND FEAR THAT SANCTUARIES PRESENCE WILL RAISE THE LEVEL OF CRIME. TIME A PROFESSIONAL SOCIAL WORKER AND AM I AIR WAVE R. AWARE OF ESSENTIAL SERVICES IN COMMUNITY. YET I FEEL THEY DO NOT HELP IT ANYWAY. SANCTUARY HAS NO LICENSES TO OFFER ANY MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT OR SUBSTANCE ABUSE SERVICES. THEY ARE NOT A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION. THESE PROBLEMS CREATE A HIGH POTENTIAL FOR EXPLOITATION OF AN ALREADY VULNERABLE POPULATION. THEY CHARGE 500 DOLLARS A MONTH FOR SERVICES AND STATE THAT A NUMBER OF THEIR CLIENTS RECEIVE DISABILITY INCOME OR OTHER ENTITLEMENTS. I FEAR THAT THE LEADERS OF SNG TWAER WITH ALL HER HISTORY WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE HOMELESS THEY SAY THEY HELP. SERVICES SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO BENEFIT THE HOMELESS UNDER THE REGULATION OF APPROPRIATELY SANCTIONED AGENCIES. IN CONCLUSION, THE CHARACTER OF THE SANCTUARY LEADERS BASED ON PUBLIC RECORDS IS DISTRESSING. I WANT THE CITY TO ENFORCE ITS OWN RULES AND REGULATIONS. I WOULD LIKE APD TO CARRY OUT THE LAW AND ACT ON THE ACTIVE WARRANTS AND I WANT A CLOSER LOOK AT JOE'S HOUSE AND A SANCTUARY ORGANIZATION OVERALL. I WOULD APPRECIATE A PROMPT RESPONSE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONCERN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE].

>> IT JUST US AWHILE TOO, MAYOR WATSON. MY NAME IS MIKE CLARK MADISON COMING TO YOU AT THIS MOMENT AS A RESIDENT HOMEOWNER AT 907 EAST 15TH. KELLY LIVES BEHIND ME. IT IS IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST OF ME. AND I'M A FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE SWEDE HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. KELLY HAS TOLD YOU WHY WE HAVE CONCERNS PRETTY MUCH ABOUT SANCTUARY AND LAZ RUSS HOUSE AS AN ORGANIZATION. AND I WOULD ADD TO THAT THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT EASY TO SCARE. WE'RE FAIRLY NON-NIMBY AND WE'VE ACCEPTED A LOT OF THINGS THAT A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS WOULDN'T. SO FOR US TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS IS SIGNIFICANT. MOSTLY MY POINT IS TO DEAL WITH THE LAND USE ISSUES THAT ARE INVOLVED AT FURNISH 06 WALLER IT'S STEF. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED GR, WHICH IS IS SPOT ZONING FROM 25 YEARS AGO TO ACCOMMODATE THE ORIGINAL SWEETISH HILL BAKERY. THE BUILDING THAT CURRENTLY STANDS ON THE SITE WAS DESIGNED AS AN OFFICE BUILDING. IT SEEMS CONSENSUS WITH ALL THE CITY PEOPLE WHO HAVE A TALKED TO THAT THIS SHOULD NOT BE ZONED GR CAME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON TUESDAY FOR CITIZEN COMMUNICATION AND THEY DECIDED TO PUT AN ITEM ON THEIR AGENDA FOR NEXT WEEK TO CONSIDER INITIATING A ZONING ROLL BACK. WE HAD RECOMMENDED LO. STAFF MIGHT RECOMMEND OTHERWISE. WE WOULD ASK THAT IF AND WHEN THAT COMES TO COUNCIL THAT YOU WOULD GIVE IT CONSIDERATION. A BIGGER PROBLEM, THOUGH, I THINK IS CODE ENFORCEMENT. RIGHT NOW THE ORGANIZATION OF SANCTUARY IS IN THIS FACILITY WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WITHOUT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS REQUIRED BY THE EAST AUSTIN. THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING. THEY'RE COMPLETELY ILLEGAL. AND OUR FEAR, AND THIS WAS ACTUALLY RAISED AT PLANNING COMMISSION BY COMMISSIONER AADULLA. IS EVEN IF WE ROLL BACK THEIR ZONING, WHAT WOULD WE DO ABOUT IT. SO WE WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO ASK THE CITY MANAGER GARZA OR TO ASK YOU TO ASK THE CITY MANAGER GARZA TO ASK DRID WHAT WE CAN DO TO EXPEDITE THE PROCESS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT FOR THE COMPLAINTS AND THE VIOLATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY OUT THERE WITH THIS TENANT. AND ALSO IF THIS TENANT DOES CHOOSE TO APPLY FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SITE PLAN THAT WE CAN EXPEDITE THAT FOR YOU AS WELL SO THAT THIS CAN BE RESOLVED. RIGHT NOW THE FACILITY IS CURRENTLY OPERATING. THERE ARE RESIDENTS THERE AND WE WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS AS BEST WE CAN BEFORE TOO MUCH TIME PASSES. AND IT BECOMES MORE ESTABLISHED. BUT ULTIMATELY WHAT WE WANT IS THE ZONING ROLL BACK AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU AND THE CITY TO THAT ISSUE.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. IN RELATION TO SOME OF THE SITE ISSUES, CAN WE ALSO BE KEPT INFORMED OF THE PERMIT STATUS, AND THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS, STATE LICENSING THAT POSSIBLY HAVE NOT BEEN PURSUED AS WELL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DANIEL -- .

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR? STIRP, IF WE COULD GET A REPORT BACK ON THE STATUS OF THAT PRETTY QUICKLY, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT. IT DOES SEEM LIKE THERE ARE SOME IMMEDIATE CONCERNS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DANIEL YANOZ? COUNCIL, THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR THE GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATION -- .

>> MAYOR, I DO WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ON A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WERE RAISED IN CITIZENS COMMUNICATION AND ABOUT THE CESAR CHAVEZ PLAN IN PARTICULAR. THAT WILL BE COMING UP NEXT WEEK. AND THERE WILL BE AN EXPLANATION OF, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THE PETITION AND -- AN EXPLANATION OF THE BALLOTTING AND HOW THAT WORKS TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT PROCESS WE WENT THROUGH. AND CERTAINLY WE ARE TRYING TO REPRESENT ALL OF THE INTERESTS HERE, NOT -- I SPENT MY WHOLE WEEK LAST WEEK GOING DOOR TO DOOR TALKING TO PEOPLE, SO I HAVE A GOOD IDEA FROM SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS THERE WHAT SOME OF THE SENTIMENTS ARE. AND I THINK ALL THE OF THE GROUPS INVOLVED, HOWEVER MUCH THEY MAY HAVE DUG THEIR HEELS IN, I THINK ARE ALL TRYING TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT I THINK WE'LL HAVE MORE OF A DISCUSSION OR A BROADER DISCUSSION ON THAT NEXT WEEK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, THOSE ARE ALL THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. WE HAVE NO OTHER BUSINESS THAT CAN BE CONDUCTED BEFORE A 4:00 O'CLOCK TIME CERTAIN. SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS UNTIL 4:00 O'CLOCK P.M.. MOTION IS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. WE ARE IN HE ARE ASSESS UNTIL 4:00 O'CLOCK P.M..

>> IF YOU WILL LEAVE A COUPLE OF DOLLARS. [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE NEXT ITEM THAT WE WILL TAKE UP WILL BE ZONING HEARINGS AND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCES AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. MS. GLASCO.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. ALICE GLASCO CITY STAFF TO PRESENT ZONING CASES TODAY. WE WILL START OFF WITH THE CONSENT CASES. I WILL SKIP ITEM NUMBER 38 BECAUSE WE HAVE CITIZENS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR AND AGAINST. ITEM NUMBER 39, OUR FIRST CONSENT ITEM, CASE THOURN H-OO-12. THIS CASE IS LOCATED 1809 NEWTON STREET OR DRIVE, AND IT CHANGES FROM SINGLE-FAMILY 3 RESIDENCE TO SINGLE-FAMILY 3 WITH A HOERL OVERLAY. THE HISTORIC COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THE CHANGE TO SINGLE-FAMILY 3 HISTORIC. THIS CASE IS READY FOR FIRST READING. ITEM NUMBER 40, CASE NUMBER C-14-00-2199 SH, WHICH STANDS FOR SHART HOUSING. IT QUALIFIES FOR SMART HOUSING INITIATIVE AND IS RECOMMENDED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING DEPARTMENT. THE CASE IS LOCATED ON STONELEIGH PLACE, SOUTH OF BLUE MEADOW DRIVE AND THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CHANGE FROM SINGLE-FAMILY 4 A WITH CONDITIONS TO SINGLE-FAMILY 4 A BY REALLY MODIFYING A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO ALLOW THE INCREASE IN THE INCOME OF UNITS THAT CAN BE BUILT ON THIS SITE. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE CHANGE IN ZONING TO ALLOW AN INCREASE IN NUMBER OF LOTS FOR THIS PROPERTY. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE -- FOR FIRST READING ONLY. MAYOR, CORRECTION, ITEM NUMBER 39, THAT CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM NUMBER 41, CASE C-14--002224, LOCATED AT 3924 SHOAL CREEK BOULEVARD, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE MULTI-FAMILY 4 WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. AND OTHER CONDITIONS. AND THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME GO THROUGH IT. ON ITEM NUMBER 38, WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE THAT AS A CONSENT ITEM?

>> MAYOR, I CHECKED THE SIGNED UP CARDS AND THERE WERE CARDS FOR PEOPLE OPPOSED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WELL, THEY HAVEN'T MADE THEM TO ME IS WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 38? IS THERE ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 38? AND LET ME READ THIS. IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND CHAPTER 25-2 OF THE AUSTIN SKI CODE BY REZONING PROPERTY LOCALLY KNOWN AS 2800 HOEKE, HOEKE LANE ROAD IN CARSON CREEK WATERSHED FROM SF-2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE STANDARD LOT ZONING DISTRICT TO CS GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES DISTRICT ZONING. THE CITY CLERK INDICATES THAT THERE WAS NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. I HAD SEEN IT AS -- IN MY NOTES IT INDICATED IT WAS READY FOR CONSENT A ALL THREE READINGS: COUNCIL, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION WE'RE GOING TO PUT THIS ON -- HANG ON.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR, ONE THING I WANTED TO CLARIFY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE'LL COME BACK TO IT. WE'LL DO THAT. OKAY. IT WILL BE ON CONSENT. THE CONSENT AGENDA, COUNCIL, WILL BE ITEM NUMBER 38 ON ALL 3D RA READINGS -- .

>> FIRST READING. ON 38 IT WILL BE FIRST READ. FIRST READING. DID WE MESS YOU UP?

>>MAYOR WATSON: NO. I'M JUST HAPPY TO BE HERE. 38 ON FIRST READING. 39 ON ALL THREE READINGS. 40 ON FIRST READING AND 41 ON ALL THREE READINGS. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. IS A A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: YES. THANK YOU. 2800 HOEKE LANE, I'M WONDERING IF THE LANDOWNER IS HERE. THERE'S ONE QUICK QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK YOU BEFORE WE VOTE. THE ROAD STOPS RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF YOUR PROPERTY. AND THE DISCUSSION HAS BEEN IF WE REZONE THIS IS THAT GOING TO TRIGGER A REQUEST FOR PAVING -- FURTHER PAVING BY THE CITY?

>> COUNCILMEMBER, MY NAME IS JIM WHITLIFF. I'M A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER. I JUST SPOKE TO THEM BY TELEPHONE AND THEY HAVE AGREED THAT THEY WOULD NOT REQUEST THE STAENTION OF HOEKE LANE AT ANY POINT IN THE FUTURE.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CHECK ON. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THAT ON THE RECORD. THERE'S NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ, BUT LET NECESSITY ME ASK. IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. COUNCIL, THAT WILL TAKE US TO ITEM NUMBER 51. MISS GLASCO.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, ITEM NUMBER 51 IS CASE NUMBER C-14-002969 LOCATED ON ROSE BOULEVARD AND ALSO THE 6,000 BLOCK OF FAIR WAY STREET. THE REZONING FROM THIS PROPERTY IS FROM LR, WHICH STANDS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, TO MULTI-FAMILY 2. THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE STAFF BASICALLY RECOMMENDS MULTI-FAMILY ZONING. THE PLANNING COMMISSION FORWARDED THIS CASE TO YOU WITHOUT A RELIGIOUS. THE CASE IS FOR THE LIFE WORKS PROJECT. THIS IS A PROJECT THAT MEETS OUR SMART HOUSING INITIATIVES, AND WE ALL RECOMMEND IT FROM THAT STANDPOINT AND WE BELIEVE IT'S A GOOD ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I WILL PAUSE HERE AND RESPOND TO QUESTIONS IF ANY ARISE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT? ALL RIGHT. WE WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WILL BE FIVE MINUTES FOR PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT. IS MR. LEE OUT THERE?

>> THERE HE IS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT.

>> MAYOR, COUNCIL, THANK YOU. WE'RE HERE TODAY TO SHARE WITH YOU LIFE WORKS PLANS FOR THE GROVE PACE APARTMENT PROJECT ON GROVE BOULEVARD. LIFE WORKS PROVIDES COUNSELING, EDUCATIONAL SUPPORT FOR YOUTH, INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES THROUGHOUT CENTRAL TEXAS. LIFE WORKS IS AUSTIN'S LARGEST SOCIAL SERVICE PROVIDER, OFFERING A BROAD RANGE OF SERVICES IN MULTIPLE LOEKS. EACH YEAR LIFE WORKS SERVES MORE THAN 10,000 CENTRAL TEXANS THROUGH SUCH SERVICES AS SHELTERING, COUNCIL AND DEBT MANAGEMENT. THEY ALSO HELP AN ADDITIONAL 25 THOUSAND RESIDENT INCLUDING THOUSANDS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN THROUGH EDUCATIONAL PRESENTATIONS, INFORMATION NATIONAL REFERRALS. LIFE WORKS PROVES THEY HAVE THE PROGRAMS, AND COMMITMENTS TO MAKE THE COMMITMENTS MADE WITH GROVE PLACE. HOUSE SG A FUNDAMENTAL PARTS OF LIFE WORKS MISSION. IT PROVIDES OVER 16,000 BED NIGHTS ANNUALLY AT EMERGENCY SHELTER, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND SUPPORTED HOUSING IN AUSTIN. THE EMERGENCY SHELTER PROGRAM SERVES RUN AWAY, ABANDONED, PUSHED OUT, ABUSED AND HOMELESS YOUTH AND 86% OF SHELTER YOUTH ARE DISCHARGED INTO A STABLE LIVING ENVIRONMENT. LIFE WORKS TRANSITIONAL LIVING SERVICES OFFERS SHELTER IN LIVING SKILLS FOR OLD ARE HOMELESS YOUTH. IT PLACES YOUTH WHO HAVE COMPLETED THEIR HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION, MAINTAINED EMPLOYMENT AND DEMONSTRATED COMPETENT LIFE SKILLS IN APARTMENTS FOR A LIMITED TIME TO GET THIS THEIR FEET. GROVE PLACE IS A MUCH NEEDED EXPANSION OF THIS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF LIFE WORKS HOUSING PROGRAMS. OUR COMMUNITY CONCEPT. GROVE PLACE IS A MIXED INCOME RENTAL COMMUNITY WITH AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. GROVE PLACE IS NOT A HALFWAY HOUSE. ARE REDUCED RATE RUNTS WILL BE OR RESIDENTS LAST STEP TOWARD SELF-SUFFICENCY, NOT THEIR FIRST. GROVE PLACE WILL SERVE MONTOPOLIS AND THE ENTIRE CITY OF AUSTIN AND WILL OFFER REDUCED RENT FOR TENANTS AT 30% AND 50% OF AUSTIN AREA MEDIAN INCOME, WITH RENTS STARTING AT 238 DOLLARS A MONTH. LIFE WORKS CURRENTLY SERVES ON AVERAGE ONE FAMILY PER DAY IN MONTOPOLIS. OFFICES ON SITE WILL ALLOW LIFE WORKS TO GREATLY EXPAND THEIR SERVICES TO RESIDENTS OF MONTOPOLIS. THEY WILL SERVE RESIDENTS OF LIFE WORKS HOUSING PROGRAM AND QULFIDE AREA RESIDENTS. MONTOPOLIS RESIDENTS CAN PARTICIPATE IN A PREFERENTIAL LEASING RATE FOR UNITS. AND IT WILL BE OPEN TO RESIDENTS AND THE PUBLIC. 10% OF THE UNITS WILL BE ADAPTED FOR PERSONS WITH MOBILITY DISABILITIES AND TWO PERCENT WILL BE ADAPTED FOR THOSE WITH SIGHT AND HEARING DISABILITIES. ALL GROUND FLOOR UNITS WILL BE VISITABLE. THE GROVE PLACE COMMUNITY HAS STRONG LOCAL AND AREA SUPPORT. WE HAVE SUPPORT OF A MAJORITY OF PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND WE HAVE THE SUPPORT OF SAFE PLACE. WE HAVE THE SUPPORT OF ADAPT AND THE MAYOR'S COMMITTEE FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES AND WE ALSO HAVE THE SUPPORT OF MAJOR AREA EMPLOYERS, INCLUDING AMD AND TOKYOTRON. DURING THE ZONING PROCESS WE'VE HAD NUMEROUS MEETINGS WITH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS. SIX AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS HAVE ENDORSED GROVE PLACE. THEIR NAMES ARE SHOWN ON THE SLIDE ABOVE. DURING THAT PROCESS, WE'VE LISTENED TO AND TRIED TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS RAISED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ARE OFFERING THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNPRECEDENTED ACCESS AND INVOLVEMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY. LIFE WORKS WILL FORM A NEIGHBORHOOD ADVISORY BOARD. THIS BOARD WILL ENABLE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES TO ADDRESS ANY PROBLEMS DIRECTLY WITH LIFE WORKS. LIFE WORKS COMMITS TO IMPLEMENT A COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROGRAM TO INFORM THE RESIDENTS OF THE FULL ARRAY OF SERVICES. 20% OF THE REDUCED RENT UNITS WILL BE AVAILABLE TO MONTOPOLIS AREA RESIDENTS THROUGH OUR PREFERENTIAL LEASING PROGRAM. AND THE ON-SITE STAFF OFFICES ASSURES THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF LIFE WORKS' CONTINUAL COMMITMENT AND ATTENTION. ONE OF THE ISSUES WE HEARD AND ADDRESSED IS SECURITY. AN OFF-DUTY APD OFFICER IS CURRENTLY ON SITE EVERYDAY AT SAFE PLACE AND THIS OFFICER WILL BE SHARED WITH LIFE WORKS. LIFE WORKS WILL ASSIST SHERIFF'S DEPUTYIES AND APD OFFICERS TO LIVE ON SITE. CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS WILL BE REQUIRED OF ALL RESIDENTS. THE ENTIRE SITE WILL BE FENCE AND AND VEHICLE ACCESS CONTROLLED. THE PROPERTY MANAGER WILL LIVE ON-SITE TO MONITOR THE COMMUNITY AND ITS RESIDENTS. THIS IS AN ANALYSIS THAT SHOWS LIFE WORKS' SUPPORTIVE -- POLICE SUPPORT STATISTICS FOR LIFE WORKS SUPPORTED HOUSING APARTMENTS OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS. DURING THE TIME THEY SDPLIED 6500 BED NIGHTS OF SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND ONLY HAD ONE POLICE REPORT FILED. AND THAT RELATED TO A FIRE. TRAFFIC IS ANOTHER CONCERN THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD RAISED AND WE HAVE TRIED TO ADDRESS. THE STREET WILL BE COMPLETED TO GROVE BOULEVARD, BUT WE WILL PERMIT NO RIGHT TURNS FROM OUR ENTRY ON TO FAIR WAY TO REDUCE TRAFFIC THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. LIFE WORKS COMMITS TO INSTALL PEDESTRIAN-CONTROLLED -- . [BUZZER]. FLASHING CROSSING SIGN AT GROVE BOULEVARD AT THE NEW LIBRARY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MR. LEE, I'M SORRY, BUT YOUR FIRE MINUTES HAS EXPIRED. THANK YOU.

>> WE'RE AVAILABLE TO FOR QUESTIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WHAT WE'LL DO IS GO TO THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. OR HAVE INDICATED INTEREST IN THE PROJECT. AND GLANCING AT THE CARDS, COUNCIL, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP JUST WISHING TO LET HER POSITION BE KNOWN WITHOUT SPEAKING AND I'LL CALL THOSE OUT TOO. BRYAN ALBRIGHT HAS SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. SUSANNA ALMANZA? SHE HAS SIGNED UP AGAINST. LINDA WATT KINS -- WATKINS? SHE SIGNED UP FOR AND INDICATES, EXCUSE ME, REPRESENTING RIVERSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. LORI RENTER REI CAN'T SIGNED UP OWE FOR. MR. RENTERIA SIGNED UP FOR. MS. GONZALES SIGNED UP FOR. IS DARLENE CAMANCHO HERE? BARB FOX SIGNED UP FOR. AND WRITES THE CROSSING GUARD HOMES ARE VERY CLOSE TO THIS PROJECT AND ALSO LONG-TERM SUPPORTERS OF SAFE PLACE. HAVING THE LIFE WORKS ADMINISTRATION OFFICE ON-SITE WILL ENSURE A QUALITY RUN PROJECT AND ADD TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. BRUCE OF THE AUSTIN TENANTS' COUNCIL SIGNED UP FOR. CATHERINE STARK, AUSTIN TENANTS' COUNCIL SIGNED UP FOR. ROW ORLANDO PENA, DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK? ROLANDO. FICTION.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON MAYBE, CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS ARLANDO PENA. THE REASON I AM HERE IS I AM PRESIDENT OF GALINDO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND I HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH LIFE WORKS FACILITY WHICH IS SITUATED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS A TEEN HOMELESS SHELTER THAT IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO GALINDO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THEIR STAFF HAS THROUGH THE FIVE YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN PRESIDENT HAVE PARTICIPATED ACTIVELY AND POSITIVELY WITH THE GROWTH OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY SHARED WITH US THEIR STAFF FACILITYIES FOR MEETINGS. THEY'VE BEEN HELPFUL IN PARTICIPATING IN MEETINGS INCLUDING THE CAMPUS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THE GALINDO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MEETINGS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT'S NECESSARY FOR THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY. AND WE ASK RESPECTFULLY FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT. LIFE WORKS IS GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THEY'VE PROVEN TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MR. PENA BILL MCCLELLAN? LINDA LEEMAN SIGNED UP FOR. WILLIAM SKEEN SIGNED UP FOR. IS MR. SKEEN HERE? I'M GOING TO HOLD YOUR CARD BECAUSE YOU INDICATED YOU WERE WILLING TO DONATE TIME. MR. MCCLELLAN, PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>> THANK YOU. I'M BILL MCCLELLAN, I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF LIFE WORKS AND MANY OF YOU KNOW ME FROM MY PREVIOUS LIE AT THE 3M CORPORATION. I WENT IN RETIREMENT AND CAME BACK AND -- [INAUDIBLE]. AT LIFE WORKS, EVERYBODY TALKS ABOUT BRANDING THESE DAYS, AND AN EXAMPLE OF BRANDING IS VOLVO. WHEN YOU BUY A VOLVO, YOU KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT AND THAT'S A VERY SAFE CAR THAT COSTS A LOT TO FIX. AND WITH LIFE WORKS WE'RE TRYING TO DO -- DEVELOP THE SAME KIND OF BRANDING POLICY. WHAT WE WANT LIFE WORKS TO MEAN REALLY IS SELF-SUFFICIENT. WE WANT TO TAKE PEOPLE FROM WHERE THEY ARE TO WHERE THEY NEED TO BE TO SKIED SKEED. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. AND IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WE SEE ABOUT 3.2% OF THE POPULATION COME TO US FOR SERVICES OF VARIOUS KINDS. WE HAVE ABOUT 13 DIFFERENT PROGRAMS. IN THE MONTOPOLIS WE SEE ABOUT 4.2% OF THE POPULATION. 361 FAMILIES GOT SERVICES FROM US LAST YEAR, INCLUDING 31 CHILDREN WHO CAME TO OUR SHELTER ON THE SOUTH SIDE TRYING TO GET THEIR LIVES BACK IN ORDER. AND IT'S INTERESTING THAT THREE OF THE PEOPLE IN OUR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROGRAM MR. LEE TALKED ABOUT ARE FROM THE MONTOPOLIS AREA AND ARE COMPLETING THE PROGRAM AND GRADUATING ON TO INDEPENDENT LIFE-STYLE. WHEN THESE PEOPLE CAME TO SEE US, DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO TRAVEL LONG DISTANCE TO GET TO US, OURER LOCATIONS ARE ON SOUTH FIRST STREET AND CHICON STREET, SO IT'S A PRETTY LONG WAYS FROM MONTOPOLIS. AS MR. LEE EXPLAINED, IT WILL BE A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING THAT WILL HOUSE SOCIAL SERVICES, CASE WORKERS, COUNSELING, HOPEFULLY COMPUTER PROGRAMS AND G.E.D. PROGRAMS TO HELP THE COMMUNITY PROSPER. LIFE WORKS IS DOING VERY WELL. IN THE LAST TWO YEARS WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WE SERVE IN THE AUSTIN AREA BY ABOUT 30% AND WE DO THIS THROUGH A WHOLE VARIETY OF SERVICES THAT WE HOPE BENEFIT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. WE THINK THAT THIS BUILDING WILL BE A GREAT ADVANTAGE TO US. WE CAN TAKE THE KID NOW THAT GRADUATE FROM OUR SHELTER AND TRANSITIONAL LIVING INTO SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND PUT THEM IN AN EFFICIENCY APARTMENT FOR 238 DOLLARS A MONTH, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME HELPING THE RESIDENTS OF SAFE PLACE, THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND OTHER RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. WE THINK IT'S A VERY GOOD THING FOR AUSTIN TO HAVE AND IT'S BEEN DESCRIBED AS A SHINING EXAMPLE OF SUPPORT SIEVE HOUSING BECAUSE IT TAKES PEOPLE AND WORKS ON THE WHOLE PERSON RATHER THAN JUST GIVING THEM A PLACE TO LIVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: STEVE B U.S.S. EY? MR. ROSENDO HAS SIGNED UP FOR. CINDY FOX SIGNED UP FOR. CHRIS GREGATAN SIGNED UP FOR.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I'M STEVE BUSEY, DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND HOMELESS SERVICES IN LIFE WORKS. I WANT TO QUICKLY DESCRIBE ONCE FURTHER WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, WHICH IS TO WORK WITH YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, PROVIDE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE IN A SAFE, STABLE PLACE, TO -- FOR US TO ADDRESS THEIR ISSUES, TO CASE MANAGEMENT AND OTHER SUPPORT SERVICES. AND TO GET TO THAT MILESTONE WHICH IS SELF-SUFFICENCY THROUGH RENTING AN APARTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY. WE HAVE 75 FAMILIES AND YOUTH LAST YEAR MOVED OUT OF OUR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND OUR TRANSITIONAL LIVING INTO THEIR OWN APARTMENTS. IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM. A LOT OF THEM HAD NO RENTAL HISTORY OR CREDIT HISTORY, BUT 1500 DOLLARS IN THE BANK WITH SIX MONTHS OF EMPLOYMENT AND A G.E.D.. THIS JUST FURTHERS OUR OPPORTUNITIES FOR FOLKS. THAT'S ALL I'D LIKE TO SAY. THANK YOU AND MERRY CHRISTMAS FROM SANTA. [LAUGHTER].

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU IMPROPERLY SIGNED UP YOUR CARD. [LAUGHTER]. WINDY VER KNELL SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. KATHY CRANSTON?

>> AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS KATHY CRANSTON, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE SUPPORT THIS PROJECT AND THAT WE KNOW THE DIFFICULTY IN FINDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND HOW DIFFICULT IT IS. AND WE THINK THIS IS A VERY POSITIVE SIGN THAT AUSTIN AND DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS IN AUSTIN WANT TO MAKE THAT POSSIBLE FOR ALL PEOPLE, NOT JUST PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. SO THIS IS A VERY POSITIVE MOVE AS WELL AS MAKING THE COMMUNITY INCOME INTEGRATED. WE SEE THAT AS A POSITIVE THING. WE SUPPORT IT AND WE HOPE YOU DO TOO. THANKS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JENNIFER MCFAIL? NATALIE RODRIGUEZ SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. MICHELLE CASANOVA SIGNED UP IN FAVOR.

>> THERE IT GOES. I'M JENNIFER AND I'M WITH ADAPT OF TEXAS AND AS KATHY SAID, WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT. IN ADDITION, THERE WERE -- BEING SOMEBODY IN ADAPT, I'M A MEMBER OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO KEEP MY NEIGHBORHOOD DIVERSE. THERE'S A LOT OF GROWTH GOING ON IN THAT AREA, BUT WHAT YOU SEE IS A LOT OF THE GOOD FOLKS THAT WERE THERE FIVE YEARS AGO OR EVEN LAST YEAR CAN'T SAY CAN'T SAY THERE BECAUSE THE COST OF LIVING IS RISING SO QUICKLY IN THAT AREA WITH ALL THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS. WHAT YOU HAVE IS PEOPLE THAT ARE LOW INCOME BLUE COLOR FOLKS THAT HAVE BEEN THERE AND HAVE BEEN WORKING HARD FOR THE CITY TO LIVE HERE ARE BEING PRICED OUT OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THEY HELPED BUILD. SO THIS IS JUST ONE MORE WAY TO KEEP MY NEIGHBORHOOD DIVERSE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ME IN ADDITION TO ALSO BEING IMPORTANT FOR THE LOW INCOME AFFORDABILITY AND ALSO THE ACCESSIBILITY. IN ADDITION TO THAT YOU WILL BE KEEPING MY NEIGHBORHOOD CHARMING. IT'S LOSING SOME OF ITS CHARM VERY QUICKLY AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT. SO THIS WILL BE JUST ONE MORE WAY TO ENSURE THAT FOLKS HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. AMY 15TON SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. SHEILA ROMESH SIGNED UP FOR. TRAY SOLANIZ SIGNED UP FOR. CAROL GREEN, FOR. CHRIS VON DOLEN, FOR. WILL BROWN? JULIET SHUNE ALSO SIGNED UP FOR. WELCOME MR. BROWN.

>> I THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS AFTERNOON. ON BEHALF OF THE AUSTIN MAYOR'S COMMITTEE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. THE AUSTIN MAYOR'S COMMITTEE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS YOUR APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FOR LIFE WORKS LIFE PLACE GROVE PLACE APARTMENTS. UPON REVIEWING THIS PROPOSAL WE BELIEVE THE LIFE WORKS APARTMENTS WILL SUPPLY BOTH LOCAL AND NATIONAL ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND WILL PROVIDE SOME MUCH NEED RED LEAF FOR AUSTIN CITIZENS. -- RELIEVE FOR AUSTIN CITIZENS. ACCORDING TO LIFE WOK, THE FIRST FOUR UNITS WILL BE ACCEPTABLE AND PRESENTABLE, REPRESENTING TO ABOUT 54 TO 58% OF THE PROJECT. 10% OF THESE UNITS WILL BE ADAPTED FOR TENANTS WHO HAVE MOBILITY DISABILITIES. ALL REQUIRED HARDWARE AND FIXTURES IN PLACE. TWO PERCENT OF THE ACCESSIBLE UNITS WILL BE ADAPTIVE FOR HEARING AND SITE DISABILITIES. IN A COMMUNITY WHERE SDAEBLT, AVAILABILITY, ACCEPTABILITY AND AFFORD ABLTED ARE CRITICAL TO HAVING HOUSING, IT'S ESSENTIAL TO THE 70% OF THE PEOPLE WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO ARE UNEMPLOYED AND AT LEAST ABLE TO AFFORD HOUSING. THE MAYOR'S COMMITTEE STRONGLY IS COMMITTED TO EXPANDING SUCCESSFUL AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES TO ALL AUSTIN CITIZENS. WE ALL ON THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL TO HELP EXPAND LOCAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES WITH THE APPROVAL OF LIFE WAYS REQUEST FOR A ZONING CHANGE AS THIS CITY COUNCILL MEETS. WE THANK YOU FOR THE HONOR OF BEING HERE, MAYOR.

>> KATHY JARRELL SIGNED UP FOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: KAETED JARRELL SIGNED UP FOR. I APOLOGIZE. I'LL TRY TO TURN THAT OFF BEFORE I COUGH INTO THE MICROPHONE. KATHY MCGIEFER, DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK OR JUST BE SHOWN IN FAVOR? OKAY. FOLLOWED BY MR. GUERRERO.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL I'M PLEASED TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY. I HAVE SERVED WITH BILLY ON THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING GROUP FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS NOW. AND I THINK AS ALL OF YOU ARE AWARE, HOUSING IS IN ABSOLUTE DIRE NEED IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND WHETHER WE CALL IT AFFORDABLE OR REASONABLY PRICED. I THINK WHAT LIFE WORKS IS PROPOSING IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO OUR COMMUNITY AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK WE ARE EXTREMELY FORTUNATE AND LUCKY TO HAVE A GROUP OF THIS CALIBER THAT WILL STEP FORWARD AND HELP US MEET THIS NEED. IT IS NOT EASY TO DO AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR REASONABLY PRICED HOUSING IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN. IT IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. AND WHEN WE HAVE A NONPROFIT OF THIS CALIBER STEPPING FORWARD, WILLING TO BE ACCOUNTABLE AND FEELING NOT JUST AS A LANDLORD, NOT JUST WITH THE SHELTER PART, BUT ALSO WITH THE SERVICES, THE EDUCATION, THE TRAINING FOR THE RESIDENTS, I THINK IT IS FANTASTIC AND ALSO THAT THE UNIT ARE VISIBLE AND ALSO A NUMBER OF THE UNITS WILL BE ACCESSIBLE. SO I WANT TO LEND MY SUPPORT AND REALLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS REZONING. WE REALLY DO NEED THIS HOUSING. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU. GUSTAVO GUERRERO. FOLLOWED BY JESSICA FARMER.

>> AND HOW MUCH TIME DO I GET?

>>GOODMAN: THREE MINUTES.

>> I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF. GOOD AFTERNOON MR. MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS GUSTAVO GUERRERO. I COME BEFORE YOU BECAUSE I WANT TO STATE MY OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING APPLICATION. I HATE TO BURST ANYBODY'S BUBBLES, BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE. OKAY? THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED TO US ALSO AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. THEY SAID IT WAS PROPOSED, BUT IT'S NOT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. OUT OF THE 190 UNITS COMPLEX, AT THE MOST 20, AND I CAN BE CORRECTED IF MY NUMBERS ARE WRONG, ONLY 20 WILL BE TRANSITIONAL HOUSING. NOT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. OKAY? ON TOP OF THAT, MY ISSUES ARE TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND SECURITY AND THE LOCATION OF THIS PROJECT. TRAFFIC HAS BEEN DISCUSSED A LOT. RIGHT NOW FAIRWAY DOES NOT EXTEND TO GROVE. THE PERSON HAS PROPOSED TO EXTEND FAIRWAY, WHICH ARE WE ARE OPPOSED TO BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC. SECONDLY, THE SAFETY AND THE SECURITY. RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE ANY LIGHTS OUT THERE. WE DO NOT HAVE SIDEWALKS OUT THERE. THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WALK TO AND FROM THE BUS STOPS ON GROVE. THEY HAD PROPOSED TO BUILD LIGHTS INSTEAD OF SIDEWALKS. WELL, WHY DON'T WE HAVE THAT NOW. THIRD, THE LOCATION. IT MY UNDERSTANDING BEFORE I GOT INVOLVED IN THIS THAT THE LIBRARY, RIVERSIDE LIBRARY WAS TURNED DOWN AT THAT SPECIFIC LOCATION SUPPOSEDLY BECAUSE OF THE COMPOSITION. BUT NOW WE GET THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT'S GOING TO BUILD THERE AND THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH THE COMPOSITION. IT'S GOOD. IT'S GOOD FOR THAT. WE ALREADY HAVE FAIR WAY APARTMENTS IN ONE END. I'M SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS ABOUT FAIRWAY APARTMENTS, I'M SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS ABOUT THE HISTORY. WE DO NOT WANT, DO NOT NEED ANOTHER SET OF APARTMENTS AT THE OPPOSITE END. WE ARE -- IF YOU ARE TRULY SERIOUS ABOUT THIS, GIVE US SOME LITTLE FAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THIS PROJECT IS -- I REPEAT, IS NOT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THOSE ARE MY MAIN GRIPES ON THIS. I COULD GO ON, BUT I DO NOT WANT TO TAKE ANY MORE OF YOUR TIME AND HOPEFULLY YOU'LL CONSIDER MY POINTS. I KNOW I AM OUTNUMBERED HERE. AND LIKE I SAID, I DO NOT WANT TO BURST ANYBODY'S BUBBLES, BUT PLEASE, PLEASE, LOOK AT THE FACTS WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION ON THIS. I AM OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT, THIS REZONING. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: COULD I ASK YOU A QUESTION? WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE 20 OUT OF 190, WERE YOU SAYING THAT IS TOO FEW AND THAT'S WHY YOU OPPOSE IT OR THE FACT THAT IT'S TRANSITIONAL?

>> WELL, I'M OPPOSED THAT -- WE WERE LIED TO FROM THE BEGINNING. WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED TO US IT WAS PRESENTED AS AFFORDABLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I KNOW I'M FROM MONTOPOLIS. A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE ARE ARE SKEPTICAL WITH ANYTHING THAT HAS TO DO WITH POLITICALWISE. IF IS REALLY AND TRULY FOR THE COMMUNITY, THEN WHY IS IT ONLY 20 UNITS OUT OF ALL THE UNITS? IF IT'S TRULY FOR THE COMMUNITY. OKAY? WE'VE GOT A LOT OF NUMBERS ABOUT THE ZIP CODE 78741. I THINK HE MENTIONED SOME NUMBERS RIGHT NOW THAT SUPPOSEDLY THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE THAT GO AND ASK FOR ASSISTANCE, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE MONTOPOLIS AREA, THE MONTOPOLIS AREA, WE'RE PEOPLE THAT ARE HARD WORKERS, WE DO NOT HAVE A LOT OF MONEY. THAT'S WHY HARDLY ANY OF THEM ARE HERE TO VOICE THEIR OPPOSITION TO THIS. SO IF IT'S TRULY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ETCETERA MAKE IT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND LET'S MAKE IT TRULY FOR COMMUNITY.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE]

>> AT THE TIME I WAS ALSO PREGNANT SO I WOULD HAVE BEEN -- IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THAT MUCH WORSE. THROUGH THEM THEY'VE NOT ONLY HELPED ME LEARN HOW TO BUDGET MY MONEY, BUT I CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE ON MY OWN, LIVE INDEPENDENTLY. THEY'VE ALSO HELPED ME LOOK FORWARD TO GO THROUGH WITH MORE SCHOOLING. I HAVE A REALLY GOOD JOB NOW. THEY ARE HELPING ME MAKE A SAVINGS SO THAT WHENEVER I DO GRADUATE THEIR PROGRAM, I WILL HAVE A HAND UP ONGOING OUT ON MY OWN. I'M REALLY FOR THE PROGRAM AND I REALLY HOPE THAT YOU WILL BE TOO. IT'S NOT JUST HOMELESS PEOPLE AND, YOU KNOW, TRASH COMING IN OFF THE STREET. IT'S NOT THAT AT ALL. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD DAMAGE THE COMMUNITY. THERE'S A LOT OF THE OTHER MOTHERS THAT I KNOW THAT ARE LIVING IN SUPPORTIVE HOUSING THAT ARE SINGLE MOTHERS JUST LOOKING FOR A HAND UP, NOT A HANDOUT. AND SO I REALLY HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL SUPPORT THIS PROGRAM. IT'S REALLY DONE A LOT FOR ME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MS. FARMER. JUDITH MONREKES.

>> YOU HAVE PROBABLY GIVEN SOME OF MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS SOME FUN RIBBING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET'S SEE HOW YOU DO IF I DON'T HELP THEM SOME MORE.

>> MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS, I AM A BOARD MEMBER OF LIFE WORKS AND IMMEDIATE PAST CHAIR OF THE LIFE WORKS BOARD AND HAVE ATTENDED AT LEAST ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AND HAVE LISTENED TO NEIGHBORS. I WANTED TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION WITH YOU AND THEN I WILL LEAVE EVERYBODY ELSE TO CONTINUE TO MAKE COMMENTS. AS YOU KNOW, LIFE WORKS WAS BUILT ON A DREAM AND IT CONTINUES TO BE FUELED BY A DREAM. PART OF THAT DREAM WAS ABOUT BUILDING A WAY TO DELIVER SERVICES THAT ALLOWED PEOPLE TO, AS JESSICA MENTIONED, GET A HAND UP, SO IT'S ABOUT SELF-SUFFICIENCY. ANOTHER PART OF THAT DREAM THAT CONTINUES US MOVING FORWARD IS THAT WE BELIEVE IN BUILDING CENTERS IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ALLOW US TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE YOUTH IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEIR FAMILIES. AND SO WE HAVE FOUND WAYS TO PLACE OURSELVES IN NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEN DEVELOP SERVICES THAT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS. THIS WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO DO THAT IN ADDITION TO BUILDING APARTMENT UNITS THAT WILL SERVE THAT COMMUNITY AS WELL. AS YOU KNOW, WE DO PROVIDE A DIFFERENT ARRAY OF SERVICES. WE PROVIDE TEEN PARENTEDDING SERVICES, PREGNANCY PREVENTION SERVICES. GED SERVICES, SHELTER SERVICES AMONG OTHERS AND ALL OF THOSE WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD. TODAY THOSE SERVICES ARE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE JUST DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO PUT THEM SO IT IS ACTUALLY PART OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT'S PART OF WHAT AS A VISION AND A BOARD MEMBER I SEE THIS BEING A BENEFIT TO US. I ALSO WANT TO JUST POINT OUT AS A LEADER FOR LIFE WORKS, THIS IS A HUGE RESPONSIBILITY, TO MOVE INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD AND BE A PART OF IT IS SOMETHING WE TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY SO I WANT YOU TO KNOW AND COMMENT ON WE ACCEPT THAT RESPONSIBILITY AND PLAN TO LIVE UP TO IT. ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT I KNOW THERE ARE MANY NEIGHBORS THAT SUPPORT US AND I ALSO KNOW THERE ARE MANY NEIGHBORS WHO STILL HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT LIFE WORKS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT I FIND THAT REASSURING BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT OUR NEIGHBORS CARE TO PARTICIPATE IN A DIALOGUE WITH US. I GREW UP IN EL PASO IN A VERY POOR PART OF EL PASO ALONG THE BORDER. AND I WISH THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR MY COUSINS, MY FAMILY, MY NEIGHBORS, AND THERE WASN'T. SO I'M DOING WHAT I CAN TO SEE IT HAPPEN HERE IN THE COMMUNITY WHERE I LIVE AND THE COMMUNITY THAT I SUPPORT. SO I DO ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT, AND AS A CLOSING, I WOULD LIKE FOR ALL OF OUR SUPPORTERS TO PLEASE STAND BECAUSE I KNOW THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE FROM LIFE WORKS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO HAVE COME FORWARD TO SHOW SUPPORT. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STAND IN SUPPORT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME IN LISTENING TO ME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. AMANDA MOSS SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. COREY PLINTELL IN FAVOR. ROZELDA, FOLLOWED BY ANGELA ATWOOD. MS. ATWOOD, IF YOU WILL MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE MICROPHONE.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I HOPE YOU BEAR WITH ME. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I COME BEFORE CITY COUNCILL. AND HOPE FOR IT TO BE A FAVORABLE EXPERIENCE. I HAVE SOME HANDOUTS THAT I WOULD LIKE FOR EACH ONE OF YOU TO GET AND IF POSSIBLE PLEASE TAKE YOUR TIME. IF NOT AT THIS MOMENT, AT SOME POINT, TO LOOK OVER. I WANT TO START OUT BY SAYING THAT THIS IS NOT ABOUT SUPPORT FOR THE SERVICES LIFE WORKS PROVIDES. I DON'T THINK I OR ANY ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS OR ANYONE ELSE CAN QUESTION THE SERVICES THAT LIFE WORKS PROVIDES. THEY ARE AN INTEGRAL PART TO THE POPULATION THAT THEY SERVE AND FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE WHOLE CITY. THIS IS ABOUT THE SELECT -- THE SELECTION AND JUSTIFICATION OF THE SITE FOR THEIR NEW BUILDING. I AM NOT ANTI-YOUTH. I MYSELF AM RAISING FIVE CHILDREN AND WILL DO ANYTHING WITHIN MY POWER TO PROTECT THEIR ENVIRONMENT AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY GROW UP IN A HEALTHY NEIGHBORHOOD IN A HEALTHY HOME AS MUCH AS I CAN. I WOULD URGE YOU TO PLEASE CONSIDER ALL THE INFORMATION PRESENTED TO YOU. MONTOPOLIS RESIDENTS DO CARE, CONTRARY TO POPULAR BELIEF. PLEASE DO NOT CONFUSE DISTRUST OF THE SYSTEM WITH APATHY OR OPPRESSION WITH LAZINESS. LIFE WORKS HAS MORE OPPORTUNITIES THAN RESOURCES TO BUILD ELSEWHERE. MONTOPOLIS RESIDENTS RESOURCES DO NOT COMPARE AND THERE IS NOWHERE FOR US TO GO. PLEASE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. BEFORE YOU I HAVE THE MONTOPOLIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH IS A DRAFT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. IT IS PRESENTLY -- IT HAS PRESENTLY BEEN MAILED TO RESIDENTS FOR APPROVAL FOR VOTE. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHED SITE MAP, MMS PLANNING AREA, DOES NOT -- MONTOPOLIS PLANNING AREA DOES NOT INCLUDE A MULTI-FAMILY ZONING FOR THE LOCATION THAT LIFE WORKS IS PRESENTLY ASKING FOR. ALSO PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE UNIT, NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE GOING TO BE BUILT THERE, AND THE NUMBER THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE CONSIDERED LOW INCOME AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. OVER 140 UNITS WILL NOT BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THEY ARE ACTUALLY MARKET VALUE RATES. AND I HAVE SOME INFORMATION ACCORDING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE AS TO THE TRAVIS COUNTY, AUSTIN MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME AND SOME INFORMATION THAT CAME OUT WITH THE AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN ABOUT THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME FOR PRE SINGT 428, WHICH IS MONTOPOLIS AREA, WHICH IS $23 955, SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN THE MATERIAL THAT LIFE WORKS HAS BEEN PASSING OUT WHICH THEY CLAIM IT TO BE IN THE $30,000 VICINITY. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSISTS OF ELDERLY -- [BUZZER SOUNDS].

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE].

>> OKAY. UH-HUH.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ANGELA ATWOOD, I'M DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OUT REACH FOR SAFE PLACE AND I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED LIFE WORKS APARTMENT COMMUNITY. SAFE PLACE USED TO BE A CENTER FOR BATTERED WOMEN AND THE AUSTIN RAPE CRISIS CENTER AND TODAY WE CURRENTLY SERVE HUNDREDS OF FAMILIES A YEAR IN OUR EMERGENCY SHELTER AS WELL AS IN OUR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROGRAM WHICH WE CONSTRUCTED FIVE YEARS AGO OVER IN MONTOPOLIS. FIVE YEARS AGO WHEN WE MADE THE DECISION TO MOVE INTO DOING TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IS BECAUSE -- WE SAW SO MANY WOMEN LEAVING OUR SHELTER TO GO BACK TO AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT FIND AN AFFORDABLE PLACE TO LIVE. THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES AND DID HAVE THE CREDIT OR THE INCOME TO MOVE INTO A FAIR MARKET APARTMENT. AND AS YOU KNOW, MANY AFFORDABLE OR SUBSIDIZED HOUSING COMMUNITIES HAVE LONG WAITING LISTS. WE ALSO SAW A LOT OF OUR FAMILIES MOVING INTO SUBSTANDARD HOUSING AS AN OPTION AND IN LOSING THAT HOUSING OR FOR HEALTH REASONS RETURNING TO AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP OR TO OUR SHELTER BECAUSE IT WASN'T A SUSTAINABLE HOUSING SITUATION. FIVE YEARS LATER WE HAVE A VERY SUCCESSFUL TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROGRAM OR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROGRAM WHICH IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO WHERE LIFE WORKS PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT ITS NEW APARTMENT COMMUNITY. THAT PROGRAM HAS BEEN A IMMENSE ASSET TO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO WITH THE FAMILIES THAT COME TO OUR SHELTERS. BUT WE HAVE SEEN A REAL BOTTLE NECK OCCUR BECAUSE TODAY, AS FIVE YEARS AGO, THE NO. 1 CHALLENGE THESE FAMILIES FACE IS LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AUSTIN. THESE FAMILIES ARE ALMOST ALL -- THESE FAMILIES WE WORK WITH ARE ALMOST ALL SINGLE INCOME, SINGLE PARENT HOUSEHOLD THAT CANNOT AFFORD THE MONTHLY RENT AS WELL AS THE AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT THAT'S REQUIRED TO MOVE INTO PRIVATE RENT APARTMENTS. MOST OF THE FAMILIES WE WORK WITH DO NOT WANT TO MOVE INTO SUBSIDIZED HOUSING, THEY WOULD LIKE TO WORK TOWARD HOMEOWNERSHIP BUT CANNOT BE IN A POSITION OF SAVING FOR THEIR OWN HOME BECAUSE OF RENTS THEY PAY. WE SEE THIS PROJECT THAT WOULD NOT ONLY BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE FAMILIES THAT SAFE PLACE SERVES BUT ADVANTAGEOUS TO MANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK WHEN PEOPLE HEAR THE WORD AFFORDABLE THEY IMMEDIATELY THINK IT WILL BE A POORLY MANAGED, RUNDOWN SORT OF APARTMENT COMMUNITY THAT WILL HURT RATHER THAN HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I THINK WE HAVE SO MUCH COMMUNITY EDUCATION WORK TO DO AROUND WHAT AFFORD BUILT MEANS. I'M SURE MANY PEOPLE BEFORE ME HAVE SPOKEN TO THE ISSUE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IF THERE WERE MORE UNITS THAT WERE TRULY AFFORDABLE TO PEOPLE EARNING LESS THAN 30% MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO BETTER USE OUR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FACILITY. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU MR. LEE, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL. WILLIAM SKEEN SIGNED NEWSPAPER FAVOR.

>> MR. MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. 20% OF THE UNITS WILL BE AFFORDABLE, 10% FOR PEOPLE AT 30% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME. THERE ARE NO PROJECTS CURRENTLY TO MY KNOWLEDGE THAT ARE PROVIDING ANY UNITS AT 30% OF MEDIAN INCOME SO THESE WOULD BE THE FIRST TO HAVE BEEN DONE IN RECENT MEMORY. THE BALANCE OF THE UNITS WILL BE AFFORDABLE, BASICALLY FOR PEOPLE BETWEEN 55 AND 65% OF THE AUSTIN AREA MEDIAN INCOME. WHICH IS HIGHER THAN THE LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD. HOWEVER, THIRD PARTY RESEARCH INDICATES THAT WITHIN ONE MILE OF THAT SITE THERE ARE 1400 RENTER HOUSEHOLDS WHO CAN AFFORD OUR MOST EXPENSIVE UN. AS YOU GO DOWN IN -- UNIT. AS YOU GO DOWN IN SIZE AND RENT, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WITHIN A MILE WHO CAN AFFORD IT EXPANDS TO OVER 3,000. WE WOULD LOVE TO BE DOING MORE. WE WISH WE COULD. GIVEN THE RESOURCES THAT THE PROJECT PROVIDES, THE RESOURCES THAT WE HOPE TO GET FROM THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, IT'S A REAL STRETCH TO DO WHAT WE'RE DOING. WE WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO DO MORE, AND I THINK WE HAVE DONE AS CREATIVE A JOB AS POSSIBLE IN PROVIDING AS MANY AFFORDABLE UNITS AND VERY AFFORDABLE UNITS AS ANYONE IN AUSTIN. SO WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY AND WE ARE GLAD THAT WE CAN BE PART OF AN AREA OF TOWN THAT WE THINK WE CAN SERVE WELL. AND I APPRECIATE THE TIME. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MR. LEE. COUNCIL, THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THAT WAS MR. LEE.

>>GLASGO: MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THERE IS A REQUEST TO EXCLUDE A .552 ACRE TRACT FROM THIS REZONING. THAT WILL REMAIN ZONED LR TO ALLOW FOR THE LIFE WORKS OFFICE WITHIN THE SITE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. COUNCIL, WHAT IS YOUR WISH? DO YOU WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH A MOTION OR DO YOU WANT DISCUSSION? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. IS THERE A MOTION? COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. MOON TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>ALVAREZ: MAYOR? I DID WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS BECAUSE ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS WHERE THERE ARE SOME RESIDENTS WHO DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL AND THERE HAS BEEN OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS SOME DISCUSSIONS THERE AND I WANTED TO -- I DO PLAN TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL, BUT I WANTED TO EXPLAIN WHY THAT IS BECAUSE THERE IS JUST A LOT OF THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND NOT JUST IT'S A REAL CLEAR-CUT ISSUE OR NOT ONE DEFINING THING YOU LOOK AT WHEN YOU ARE TRYING TO DECIDE HOW YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS. BUT -- AND WE'VE HEARD MANY DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE PROPOSAL AND SOME OF THEM ARE CONFLICTING, BUT AT FIRST WHAT WE HEARD IS FOLKS DIDN'T WANT TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, AND EVEN -- IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE HEAR FROM A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT THEN WE FIND OUT THAT A -- ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE WOULD BE TRANSITIONAL, QUOTE UNQUOTE, BUT AGAIN WE FIND OUT, WELL, THE FOLKS WHO WOULD BE USING IT HAVE ACTUALLY ALREADY GONE THROUGH A WHOLE BUNCH OF SERVICES AND ACTIVITIES AND SO THEY ARE ACTUALLY AT A POINT THEY ARE READY TO GET BACK ON THEIR FEET AND THIS IS THE SERVICE THEY NEED TO KIND OF GET ON THEIR FEET. AND THEN ANOTHER ARGUMENT THAT WE'VE HEARD IS, AGAIN, I GUESS THE TYPE OF FOLKS OR WHATEVER, THE TYPE OF FOLKS THAT FOLKS -- THAT PEOPLE THINK MIGHT BE THERE, AND LIFE WORKS HAS STIPULATED THAT THERE WILL BE NO VIOLENT CRIMINAL OFFENDERS OR FOLKS THAT HAVE THAT KIND OF RECORD IN THIS PARTICULAR KIND OF -- OR AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE. SO -- AND ANOTHER ARGUMENT WE'VE HEARD IS AGAINST MULTI-FAMILY ALTOGETHER AND ACTUALLY IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN, I GUESS THERE WAS REFERENCE MADE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THE PROPOSED SITE IS ZONED COMMERCIAL, AND THEN IF YOU GO -- IF YOU CONSIDER THAT MULTI-FAMILY IS A LESS -- OR A MORE RESTRICTIVE USE THAN COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, YOU REALIZE IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE TAKING AWAY LAND THAT WAS SET ASIDE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY OR -- IN ADDITION IT'S IN A TRACT THAT'S IN THE PERIPHERY OF THE MONTOPOLIS NEIGHBORHOOD AREA AND SO I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER THING I LOOK AT IS, YOU KNOW, IS IT SMACK IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE IT MIGHT AFFECT THE SINGLE-FAMILY CHARACTER OR IS IT, YOU KNOW, ON THE PERIPHERY WHERE IT WOULDN'T HAVE AS MUCH OF AN IMPACT IN TERMS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR SINGLE-FAMILY CHARACTER. AND THEN THERE'S I GUESS SOME PROS -- SOME FOLKS WHO SUPPORT THE PROJECT BECAUSE IT HAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR-POSE IT BECAUSE IT HAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND OTHERS OPPOSE IT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND I DID GET A CHANCE TO MEET WITH TWO OF THE PEOPLE AND SO I DO KNOW THE CONCERNS, THE SPECIFIC CONCERNS AND HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE LIFE WORKS PEOPLE, PEOPLE WHO WORK WITH LIFE WORKS ON THIS ISSUE. AND IN ADDITION TO SOME OF THESE THINGS OBVIOUSLY WHAT THEY ARE PROVIDING IS THE FACT THAT -- AND I GUESS THERE'S BEEN SOME COMPARISONS TO FAIRWAY AND SO ANOTHER WAY YOU MIGHT LOOK AT IT IS HOW MIGHT THIS BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THAT IS. AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF STIPULATIONS OR COMMITMENTS THAT LIFE WORKS HAS MADE, FOR INSTANCE, THEY DO HAVE THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES THERE SO I THINK THAT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF WHAT HAPPENS ON SITE. AND IN ADDITION THERE WILL BE AN A.P.D. OFFICER THAT SERVES THE AREA OR THAT IS SHARED WITH SAFE PLACE SO THAT SHOULD BE IN ADDITION SOME REASSURANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AS WAS MENTIONED, THERE'S SEVERAL FOLKS IN MONTOPOLIS THAT ARE CURRENTLY PART OF OR THAT RECEIVE SERVICES FROM LIFE WORKS, AND BECAUSE, AGAIN, THERE WOULD BE, LIKE, A COMMUNITY CENTER THERE, IT WOULD FURTHER EXPAND WHAT DL IS IN MONTOPOLIS. AND I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER WAY THIS PROJECT COULD HELP, YOU NOTICE, THE MONTOPOLIS COMMUNITY BY PROVIDING SOME SERVICES, AND THERE'S BEEN SOME MENTION OF A PREFERENTIAL LEASING PROGRAM FOR RESIDENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PROS -- A LOT OF REASONS I GUESS TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT AND THERE'S CERTAINLY SOME LEGITIMATE CONCERNS, BUT I THINK LIFE WORKS HAS COME IN AND TRIED TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS AS MUCH AS WE CAN. SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THE FOLKS WHO ARE TRYING TO COME INTO YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE NOT ALWAYS AS RESPONSIVE AS THIS SO I DO WANT TO THANK THEM FOR THAT. AND ONE FINAL POINT I GUESS IS -- IS ANOTHER ISSUE BEEN RACED ON FAIRWAY AND ACCESS TO THE NEW LIBRARY SO THERE HAS BEEN SOME COMMITMENT TO LIMIT ACCESS TO FAIRWAY, DO SOME TRAFFIC CALMING ON FAIRWAY AND HAVE A GOOD CROSSING POINT FROM THE LIFE WORKS SITE TO GET TO THE LIBRARY, WHICH HAS BEEN A CONCERN IN THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE GROVE IS A VERY -- IT'S A BUSY STREET AND IT'S A VERY LARGE STREET. SO IF WE CAN GET A SAFER CROSSING, AGAIN, NOT JUST -- THAT WOULDN'T JUST SERVE LIFE WORKS, BUT THE COMMUNITY ALSO I THINK THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING ALSO POSITIVE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD I GUESS -- THAT IT WOULD SUPPORT OR BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN THAT BECAUSE I HAD MET WITH SOME RESIDENTS WHO WERE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROJECT AND I WANTED TO JUST -- I DID WANT TO MAKE SURE TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHY I'M VOTING THE WAY I'M VOTING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: I JUST WANTED TO LET THEM KNOW ALSO, THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSING THIS, AS I LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, IT'S KIND OF HARD FOR ME TO DECODE BECAUSE IT'S SO DARK, BUT HAVING ACCEPTED THIS AS A MULTI-FAMILY, I CAN'T REALLY TELL WHERE YOUR PROJECTED MULTI-FAMILY IS, BUT WHEN YOU GET BACK TO PLANNING, THEN HAVING ACCEPTED THIS, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU ALL TALK ABOUT ANOTHER SPOT WHERE YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE IT THAT YOU ARE THEN ABLE TO COMPENSATE FOR SO YOU DON'T KEEP ADDING ON EXTRA MULTI-FAMILY IN YOUR PLANS. AND MAYBE IF I MAKE A COPY OF THIS AND LIGHTEN IT UP A LITTLE I CAN READ BETTER, AND THEN I WILL GIVE YOU A CALL AND SEE IF YOU'VE GOT TIME TO COME MEET WITH ME AND TALK ABOUT IT. IF THAT'S OKAY. THANKS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER COMMENTS?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: I'LL JUST KEEP MY REAL SHORT. I AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ AND THE MAYOR PRO TEM. I ALSO WANTED TO POINT OUGHT THAT LIFE WORKS IS A REALLY SOLID, A GOOD OPERATION, WHICH I THINK WILL BE AN ASSET TO MONTOPOLIS. I WOULD POINT OUT THAT LIFE WORKS IS A NEIGHBOR OF MINE, PRETTY NEAR TO MY HOUSE AND IN MY GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD. I'VE TALKED TO CLIENTS OF AGENCIES THAT ARE HEADING DOWN THERE ON THE CAPITAL METRO BUS AT TIMES AND I'VE JUST SEEN NO DETRIMENT TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FROM LIFE WORKS AT ALL. AND THERE WAS A CRITICISM ABOUT THERE NOT BEING ENOUGH AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I THINK OTHERS ABOUT THERE BEING TOO MUCH, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S BEEN LEARNED OVER THE YEARS IS THAT YOU REALLY WANT TO HAVE A RANGE OF PRICES AND A RANGE OF INCOME IN HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS. AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS, SO IT'S GOING TO BE A GOOD PROJECT, I THINK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.

>>THOMAS: YES. I AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER AND ALVAREZ AND THE MAYOR PRO TEM. I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH THE LIFE WORKS, ALSO SOME OF THE EMPLOYEES AT LIFE WORKS. THE SITE THAT IS AT MLK SHOWS THAT IT'S -- IT HAS BEEN VERY PRODUCTIVE IN THE COMMUNITY. THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY COMPLAINTS. ALSO THE SITE AT SOUTH. SO MY CONCERN IS THAT WE HAVE TO REALIZE THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE FROWN ON TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, BUT 10% IS NOT A LOT. IT SHOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE. PEOPLE COMING OUT OF THE INSTITUTIONS JUST WANT A SECOND CHANCE IN LIFE AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT. AND I EVEN THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT OUR PROJECTS TO TRY TO HELP BECAUSE I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO STATE JAIL ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO AND WE HAD AVERAGE ABOUT 60 TO 70 MEN COMING OUT OF JAIL THAT DIDN'T HAVE ANYWHERE TO GO. SO I THINK THIS IS A POSITIVE STEP IN HELPING IN THE TRANSITION PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING OUT OF THE INSTITUTIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU WERE THERE VOLUNTARILY, RIGHT?

>>THOMAS: BEG PARDON?

>>MAYOR WATSON: JAIL. AT THE JAIL, YOU WERE THERE VOLUNTARILY?

>>THOMAS: YEAH. VOLUNTARILY. [LAUGHTER].

>>MAYOR WATSON: I DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER YOU WERE DISCLOSING SOMETHING ELSE.

>>THOMAS: OH, NO. VOLUNTARY. BUT IT'S A SERIOUS MATTER. BECAUSE THEY ARE COMING OUT AND THERE'S NOWHERE TO GO AND THEN WHAT IT IS, IT'S A VICIOUS CIRCLE BACK IN. AND I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY AND I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THIS PROJECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER COMMENTS? LET ME JUST SAY REAL QUICK, NO. 1, LIFE WORKS IS A MAJOR, POSITIVE ASSET OF THIS COMMUNITY. NO. 2, WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE TALK ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME. WE EVEN HAVE A PROGRAM CALLED SMART HOUSING, WHICH THIS IS RECOMMENDED, IT MEETS OUR ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES FOR SMART HOUSING, AND WHAT THAT IS SUPPOSED TO MEAN, AMONG OTHER THINGS, IS THAT WHEN AN APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED, 45 DAYS LATER IT'S IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL TO VOTE ON. THIS TOOK 121 DAYS THAT. IS ONE OF THE REASONS WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS WE SAY WE WOULD LIKE, BECAUSE, FRANKLY, SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE -- I'LL SAY THIS MEANING IT IN A POSITIVE LIGHT, SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE STUCK WITH THIS SO THAT IT GETS TO COUNCIL TONIGHT ARE CRAZY. [LAUGHTER]. NOT EVERYBODY IS CRAZY AND WILL STICK WITH A PROJECT LIKE THIS THIS LONG. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO WORK ON IS THE DISCIPLINE TO MAKE OUR SMART HOUSING PROGRAM WORK. THE THIRD THING I WILL SAY IS IT IS VERY COMMON THAT WE TALK TO OUR FRIENDS WHO TELL US WE NEED MORE HOUSING THAT WILL HELP PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. AND THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THAT. AND THEN I'LL JUST SAY THAT I AGREE WITH THE COMMENT THAT THE OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE MADE, INCLUDING WHAT COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS JUST SAID. FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 7-0. GRATSZ AND THANK YOU ALL FOR ALL YOUR GOOD WORK. [APPLAUSE]. COUNCIL, TWO QUICK ISSUES ON ZONING MATTERS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. FOLKS, IF I COULD GET YOU ALL TO DO -- HEY, COULD I GET EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION REAL QUICK? IF I COULD GET EVERYBODY TO HOLD DOWN YOUR CONVERSATIONS UNTIL YOU GET OUT. COUNCIL, ON ITEM NO. 38, STAFF INDICATED THAT SHOULD BE ON FIRST READING BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER THE APPLICANT WAS AGREEABLE TO THE ROAD CONDITION. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH ASKED THAT QUESTION AND ON THE RECORD THE APPLICANT INDICATED THEY WERE AGREEABLE TO THAT ROAD CONDITION. WITH THAT, IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE PASSED ON FIRST READING ONLY, IT CAN BE PASSED ON ALL THREE READINGS. SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS WE CAN PASS IT ON ALL THREE READINGS. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEM 38.

>>GOODMAN: SO MOVED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION MADE BY MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. I'LL CALL BACK UP ITEM 38 AND ASK FOR A MOTION TO PASS ON ALL THREE READINGS. MOTION MADE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 7-0. COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ I'M ASSUMING YOU ARE VOTE YES ON ITEM 38. YOU VOTED YES OUT ON TIRS FIRST READING. SO THAT IS -- ITEM 38. ON ITEM NO. 40, HE MAY HAVE ALREADY LEFT, IS MR. HIRSCH IN THE ROOM? WELL, I'LL COMPLIMENT HIM IN HIS ABSENCE. COUNCIL, ITEM 40 WHICH WE PASSED ON FIRST READING TONIGHT THAT IS CORRECT IS ANOTHER SMART HOUSING PROJECT. STEWART HIRSCH OUGHT TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR THE GOOD WORK HE DID ON ITEM NO. 40 TO MOVE THAT SMART HOUSING PROJECT THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND GET IT IN FRONT OF US. I JUST WANTED TO SAY A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO HIM FOR THAT EVEN THOUGH HE'S NOT IN THE ROOM. ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, WHAT THAT WILL DO -- EXCUSE ME. WHAT THAT WILL DO IS THAT WILL TAKE US TO ITEM NO. 48. IT IS 5:00. APPROXIMATELY AT 5:30 WE WILL RECESS SO WE MAY GO TO PROCLAMATIONS AND LIFE MUSIC. BUT LET'S GO AHEAD AND BEGIN ON ITEM NO. 48. AND LET ME ASK IF COUNCIL WOULD PREFER THAT WHAT WE DO IS GET A MOTION OUT ON THE FLOOR BEFORE WE THEN GO DIRECTLY TO HEARING FROM ANYBODY. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.

>>WYNN: YES, I WOULD PREFER THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. GO AHEAD.

>>WYNN: THANKS, MAYOR. I'M PROUD TO INTRODUCE THIS RESOLUTION. I HAPPEN TO BELIEVE THE OBVIOUS, THAT IS, THE CONCEPT OF A LAND SWAP OF PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE FOR STRATUS PROPERTY IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE COULD HAVE AN ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN. THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS RESOLUTION IS ONE TO GATHER INFORMATION. SO WE AS A COMMUNITY CAN MAKE A BETTER INFORMED DECISION. SINCE THE MUELLER REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY HAPPENS TO BE IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE, THE RESOLUTION HAS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE TO PROTECT THE IMPORTANT VISION THAT IS THAT MUELLER MASTER PLAN. THIS IS OF COURSE ON THE HEELS OF LAST WEEK'S EFFORTS BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, THE MAYOR AND I TO NOT ONLY APPROVE THE MASTER PLAN, BUT ALSO INSTRUCT THE CITY MANAGER TO BEGIN THE CODE IF I INDICATION AND ZONING PROCESS. I EVEN WENT A STEP FURTHER AND WANT THIS COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE IDEA OF SAVING THE MUELLER TERMINAL TOWER AS IT IS NOW. I'M WHOLLY PREPARED TO AMEND AND IMPROVE THIS RESOLUTION. WE FREQUENTLY DO THIS. THAT'S HOW WE CREATE GOOD POLICY. BUT THIS TOPIC MAKES FOR GOOD POLITICS. AND IN MY OPINION, THAT IS ALWAYS AT THE EXPENSE OF GOOD POLICY. WHILE I AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER WERE PREPARED AND ANTICIPATED THIS GOOD POLICY PROCESS, COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH TUESDAY SENT OUT AN E-MAIL, MASS E-MAIL FROM HER OFFICE THAT BEGINS, AND I PULL IT UP ON MY SCREEN, DEAR FRIEND, COUNCILMEMBER WYNN HAS OPPOSED THE RESOLUTION AND BLAH BLAH BLAH. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER AND I WEREN'T COPIED ON THIS MASS E-MAIL. IT GOES ON TO MISCHARACTERIZE THE INTENT OF OUR RESOLUTION. AND EVEN TO OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION. NORMALLY WE HAVE THESE SESSIONS ON THE DAIS AND OFTENTIMES MUCH OF ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBER'S INTENT IS CONSIDERED FRIENDLY AND THEREFORE ADOPTED INTO THE RESOLUTION AND WE HAVE BETTER POLICY BECAUSE OF THAT. THE UNFORTUNATE RESULT OF THIS HAS BEEN TO MANUFACTURE A CONFLICT AND CONTROVERSY WHERE THERE IS NONE AND TO ATTEMPT TO CAST OTHER MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCILL IN AN UNFAIR, UNFAVORABLE LIGHT. WITH THAT SAID, I DON'T OPPOSE THE INTENT OF THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION AS I HAVE NOW READ IT IF IN FACT THE INTENT IS TO GATHER MORE INFORMATION FOR US TO MAKE A BETTER DECISION AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE. I SHARE A STRONG COMMITMENT AND INTEREST TO ENSURING THE FULL POTENTIAL OF THE MUELLER DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY. IT'S A FANTASTIC OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS COMMUNITY. THAT'S WHY LAST WEEK I MADE SUCH AN EFFORT ON THE APPROVAL OF THE MASTER PLAN, THE BEGINNING OF THE ZONING PROCESS, ET CETERA. AND THAT'S WHY I'M NOW OFFERING THIS RESOLUTION, ALONG WITH COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, TO HOPEFULLY ALLOW US TO GET EVEN MORE INFORMATION AS WE THINK ABOUT PRIMARILY THE CONCEPT OF A LAND SWAP OF PROPERTY SOMEWHERE IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE FOR THAT STRATUS, BARTON SPRINGS ZONE PROPERTY. I'M FULLY COMMITTED TO THIS PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND FULLY ANTICIPATED IT AND WAS LOOKING FORWARD TO THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND CREATING BETTER POLICY AND I WELCOME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE, AMEND THE RESOLUTION AS NEEDED, AS NECESSARY AND FOR US TO HAVE GOOD POLICY THAT ALLOWS THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO REAP A EEK LOGIC BENEFIT IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, AN ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY BENEFIT THROUGHOUT OUR DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. MUELLER AND ELSEWHERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THOSE COMMENTS AS A MOTION ON THAT RESOLUTION. IS THERE A SECOND.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, HAVE I A SECOND. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. WELL, MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBER WYNN I THINK WAS PRETTY MEASURED IN HIS COMMENTS CONSIDERING WHAT HE DESCRIBED, AND I'LL TRY TO BE MEASURED AS WELL. I THINK ONE OF THE WAYS THAT THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL WAS ABLE TO HAVE THE KIND OF SUCCESS THAT WE DID WAS THAT WE WORKED TOGETHER AND WE WORKED TOGETHER VERY CIVILLY. WE ASSUMED AND REALLY BELIEVED THAT EVERYONE ON THE COUNCIL HAD THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY AT HEART AND WE -- WHEN WE HAD A DISAGREEMENT, WE TRIED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK OUT THAT DISAGREEMENT. I THINK AND SOMETIMES DISAGREEMENT ENDED UP IN HAVING A BETTER POLICY BECAUSE YOU ALL -- YOU HAD SMART, COMMITTED PEOPLE WORKING TOWARD THE SAME GOALS AND THEY ZEED, THEN YOU PROBABLY HAD A -- DISAGREED, YOU PROBABLY HAD A DISAGREEMENT ON WHAT YOU THOUGHT WAS BEST FOR THE CITY AND THE BEST WAY TO GET THERE AND SO YOU PUT YOUR HEADS TOGETHER, DISCUSS IT AND YOU USUALLY CAME UP WITH A BETTER WAY 6 DOING THINGS. WHAT WE DIDN'T DO WAS SEND OUT MASS COMMUNICATIONS TO THE CITIZENS ACCUSING COUNCILMEMBERS OF THINGS, ACCUSING COUNCILMEMBERS IN PARTICULAR OF WHAT THEY DIDN'T -- AREN'T DOING. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE BEST POSSIBLE REDEVELOPMENT OF MUELLER AIRPORT, AND IT'S POSSIBLE THAT WE CAN DO BOTH, WE CAN MEET TWO CITY GOALS WITH ONE ACTION. AND I SAY THAT'S POSSIBLE. ALL WE WERE TRYING TO DO HERE AND ARE TRYING TO DO WITH THIS MOTION, RESOLUTION IS DISCUSS THE POSSIBLE SWAPPING OF MUELLER OR SOME DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS SWAPPING WITH STRATUS OR TO LOOK AT OTHER POSSIBILITIES IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND JUST TO TALK ABOUT IT. AND IT'S SORT OF AMAZING WE DON'T KNOW EVERYONE HAS SEEN THE MASS E-MAIL THAT WENT OUT OR THERE'S AN AD IN THE -- ONE OF THE LOCAL PAPERS TODAY TALKING ABOUT SECRET GOVERNMENT, BACK ROOM DEALS GOING ON IS REALLY SORT OF AMAZING TO ME THAT THIS GOT CON TORTED INTO THAT. ALTHOUGH I'VE BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE. IT'S NOT THAT AMAZING, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GO THROUGH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY OF THAT. A FEW WEEKS AGO I CALLED FOR ALL DISCUSSIONS ON STRATUS TO HENCE FORTH BE IN PUBLIC OR FOR THEIR TO BE NO MORE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS ON THE STRATUS ISSUE. AND COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND THE MAYOR QUICKLY -- QUICKLY CALLED -- I MEAN QUICKLY BACKED THAT UP. AND THEN THERE WERE CALLS IMMEDIATELY, INCLUDING, FRANKLY, FROM COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, TO CANCEL THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WAS COMING UP. AND I DIDN'T -- I WAS A LITTLE MISS IF I PHI TO GO ME, BUT WE ENDED UP DOING THAT BECAUSE OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, WHICH IS WHERE SOME OF THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION WAS TAKING PLACE, OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WANTED MORE TIME. SO WE AGREED TO DO THAT. AND THEN AS PART OF THAT, WE SAID -- WE HAD TALKED ABOUT WE WANTED TO HAVE THE MUELLER SWAP LOOKED AT JUST -- WE JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IT AND THERE WERE COUNCILMEMBERS WHO SAID WE SHOULDN'T EVEN TALK ABOUT IT. WE DON'T EVEN WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT. AND I THINK WE'LL FIND OUT THAT I THINK THERE WAS A MAJORITY THAT WANTED TO AT LEAST DISCUSS IT, BUT SINCE -- AND WE COULD HAVE, WE HAD THE AUTHORITY SINCE THIS IS -- THERE'S A LAWSUIT INVOLVED HERE, WE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO JUST GIVE THAT DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. BUT WE DIDN'T. WE SAID -- COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND I SAID AND WE ANNOUNCED IT LAST WEEK, WE WOULD PUT THE ITEM ON FOR DISCUSSION AND A VOTE THIS WEEK, PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS. AND SOMEHOW THIS GOT TURNED INTO A SECRET DEAL. SECRET NEGOTIATIONS. AND IT'S REALLY AMAZING HOW MUCH COMMUNICATION I'VE GOT ON THAT ABOUT DON'T -- YOU KNOW, STOP THIS, STOP THIS SECRET DEALING. YOU KNOW, I GUESS THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO APPROACH ON THIS. I'M BEING REAL FRANK AND HAVING A DISAGREEMENT WITH ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES, AND WE DON'T ORDINARILY DO IT THAT WAY, BUT WE DON'T ORDINARILY MAKE THESE KIND OF CHARGES ABOUT EACH OTHER IN PUBLIC EITHER SO I FEEL JUSTIFIED IN TALKING ABOUT IT ON HERE. SO IF ON -- IF, FOR INSTANCE, I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE MADE -- COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND I THINK -- AND I PUT MYSELF FIRST IN THAT, MIGHT HAVE MADE A MISTAKE IN THE WAY THE WORDING WAS AND THE WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED BECAUSE WE SAID WE HAD THE WORDS NEGOTIATIONS IN THERE, AND SO SOME TOOK THAT TO MEAN SECRET NEGOTIATIONS, BACK ROOM DEALING. AND I CAN EVEN SEE HOW SOMEONE WOULD HONESTLY GET THAT IMPRESSION. BUT IT WOULD BE EASY TO CLEAR THAT UP, ESPECIALLY IF YOU THINK YOUR COLLEAGUES HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY AT HEART, JUST WALKING DOWN THE HAUL AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS -- I THINK WE COULD -- I HAVE SOME WORDING SUGGESTIONS, I WANTED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS, THAT COULD HAVE EASILY BEEN CLEARED UP LIKE THAT. BUT I GUESS -- IF YOUR INTENT IS SOMETHING ELSE, LIKE MAYBE TO MAKE YOURSELF LOOK GOOD AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS AND MAKE OTHERS LOOK BAD, THEN YOU COULD -- YOU COULD MISCHARACTERIZE PEOPLE'S INTENTIONS TO THE COMMUNITY AND GET A LOT OF PEOPLE STIRRED UP AND SHARING IN THE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THE COUNCILMEMBERS. WELL, I DON'T THINK THAT IS APPROPRIATE. I'M JUST GOING TO LEAVE IT AT THAT, BUT I THINK EVERY COUNCILMEMBER UP HERE IS DEDICATED TO THE ABSOLUTE BEST POSSIBLE REDEVELOPMENT OF MUELLER WE CAN GET. THAT'S WHY THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND I PUT ON THE MASTER PLAN LAST WEEK TO ACCEPT THAT AND TO GET THE ZONING PROCESS STARTED FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT. AND WE'RE ALL COMMITTED TO PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT, AND IF WE CAN DO BOTH AT THE SAME TIME AS PART OF ONE AGREEMENT, I THINK WE SHOULD AT LEAST TALK ABOUT HOW WE CAN DO THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE].

>>GOODMAN: YEAH, MAYOR. MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: I WAS GOING TO SAY A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT DARYL SAID AND SINCE HE ALREADY DID THAT I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT IT IS NOT A SECRET THAT DARYL SLUSHER HAS A VERY VISIBLE AND LONG-TIME COMMITMENT TO TRYING TO PROTECT WATER IN OUR SENSITIVE WATERSHEDS. AND IT'S ALSO NOT A BIG SECRET THAT DARYL SLUSHER HAS ALWAYS BEEN AVERSE TO HAVING ANYTHING BEHIND CLOSED DOORS THAT DIDN'T NEED TO BE. AND IN FACT, COUNCIL HAS MOVED TOWARD A WHOLE NEW TRADITION OF TAKING WHAT HISTORICAL CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS WERE VISITED IN THAT WAY AND BRINGING IT OUT INTO THE PUBLIC, EVEN TRADITIONALLY CONFIDENTIAL SUBJECTS LIKE LAWSUIT SETTLEMENTS. AND SO I DO THANK DARYL FOR THAT, I APPRECIATE THAT. I HATE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS MYSELF AND SO I APPRECIATE THAT. AND WHEN I LOOK AT AN AD LIKE THE ONE THAT CAUGHT MY EYE TODAY, I JUST WANTED TO SAY IN FACT IT'S NOT TELL THE CITY COUNCIL TO STOP THE BACK ROOM DEALING WITH DOLERS AND OPEN THE PROCESS TO THE PUBLIC, IT IS THAT THE COUNCIL DID EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE AND IN FACT WAS SAYING TO OTHERS, NO, WE REFUSE TO KEEP THIS AS A BACK ROOM DEAL. WE'RE BRINGING IT OUT INTO TO PUBLIC. SO IT WAS SO CONTRADICTORY THAT IT CAUGHT MY EYE IMMEDIATELY AND IF ANYBODY WANTS TO CALL US THINKING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP THIS IN THE BACK ROOM, THEN IF YOU ARE LISTENING, I JUST A SAY NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO CALL. THIS IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO FOR WEEKS NOW. AND I WANTED TO THANK THE COUNCILMEMBERS FOR INCORPORATE RATING WHAT I FIRST SAW FROM COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT INTO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BECAUSE WHEN IT BECAME A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, THE MEANING WAS VERY DIFFERENT AND I WAS NO LONGER SUPPORTIVE. BUT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, I THINK THAT YOU'VE DONE EXACTLY WHAT WILL BENEFIT THE PUBLIC AND COUNCIL AS WE TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO LOOK AT THIS CONCEPT AND THEN MOVE FORWARD. THANKS, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU, I AM BEVERLY GRIFFITH. I DIDN'T RECOGNIZE WHO WAS JUST DESCRIBED. [LAUGHTER]. OR ANY OF THE BEHAVIOR THAT WAS JUST INDICATED. CERTAINLY I HAVE MALIGNED NO ONE AND HAVE NO INTENT TO DO THAT. ALSO, I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY WHAT THE MOTION IS. I DIDN'T -- I DIDN'T HEAR A MOTION. IS THERE ONE?

>>MAYOR WATSON: WELL, I TELL YOU WHAT, WHAT I UNDERSTOOD WAS THE RESOLUTION THAT COUNCILMEMBER WYNN HAS DONE AND I'LL RECOGNIZE HIM. IF YOU WANT TO GIVE UP THE FLOOR NOW, I'LL RECOGNIZE HIM SO HE CAN READ WHATEVER RESOLUTION HE WANTS TO READ OR HOWEVER HE WANTS TO CLARIFY THAT. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AS THE FLOOR.

>>WYNN: THANK YOU, BUT ACTUALLY, MAYOR, I CAN'T FIND MY COPY OF THE RESOLUTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HERE YOU GO.

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY. LET ME READ THE ONE THAT IS THE ONE THAT HAS BEEN CAUSING SOME COMMENT. IT IS NO. 48 IN OUR BACKUP AND IS THE ONE THAT THE PUBLIC SAW UP UNTIL JUST VERY RECENTLY. THE CITY COUNCILL DIRECTS CITY MANAGER TO ENTER NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS PROPERTIES, INC., TO DISCUSS THE TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM PROPERTY OWNED BY STRATUS PROPERTIES, INC., IN SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY TO CITY-OWNED PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FORMER ROBERT MUELLER AIRPORT AND TO REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCILL ON THE STATUS OF THOSE NEGOTIATIONS IN 45 DAYS. I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS LANGUAGE AND THE LANGUAGE FOR WHAT STARTED OUT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WITH OFFICE -- WITH WILL WYNN'S OFFICE AND WITH COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. THE REASON, MAYOR PRO TEM, IT CHANGED FROM A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF THE IDENTICAL THING, FROM A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO A SUBSTITUTE MOTION IS BECAUSE IT WAS MADE CLEAR TO ME THAT IT WOULD NOT BE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, SO THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE THEN WAS FOR IT TO BE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION. SO THAT'S HOW THAT CHANGE -- HOW THAT CHANGE HAPPENED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ARE YOU FINISHED?

>>GRIFFITH: YES. LOOKS LIKE COUNCILMEMBER WYNN WAY HAVE AN UPDATED VERSION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.

>>WYNN: YES, I HAVE THE -- THE UPDATED VERSION JUST AS COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER INDICATED, TOOK OUT THE WORD NEGOTIATE AND PUT IN TO EVALUATE AND DISCUSS AND AS WAS IN THE ORIGINAL -- THE INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION THAT WAS CLEARLY STATED WAS THAT NO AGREEMENT SHALL BE EXECUTED BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND STRATUS PROPERTIES REGARDING THE TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AT THE MUELLER SITE UNTIL ALL ZONING CHANGES ARE COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ADOPTED ROBERT MUELLER AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT AND REUSE PLAN. AND AS I SAID EARLIER, WE STAND WHOLLY PREPARED TO IF NEED BE AMEND THAT RESOLUTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE SECONDING?

>>SLUSHER: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DO WE WANT TO HAVE ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE WE GO TO THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>ALVAREZ: I GUESS I'LL GIVE MY TWO CENTS. FIRSTLY, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THIS BACK ROOM DEAL THEERLY CAME FROM, BUT I REALLY DON'T SEE THIS NECESSARILY AS A BACK ROOM DEAL, BOUGHT AGAIN, I'VE HARDLY TALKED TO ANY OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS ABOUT THIS ISSUE SINCE COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER MADE THE MOTION THAT ALL THE DISCUSSIONS BE HELD IN PUBLIC. AND AGAIN, HE WOULD BE MAKING A PUBLIC DECISION THAT EVERYBODY WOULD KNOW ABOUT. BUT ANYWAY, WHAT I REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON IS WHAT WE'RE DECIDING ON IS WHETHER TO BRING MUELLER INTO THIS WHOLE STRATUS DISCUSSION. AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, WITH THE STRATUS PROPERTY IS ABOUT SIX AND A HALF MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION I'M ASKING MYSELF IS DO WE REALLY THINK THAT BRINGING MUELLER INTO THIS IS GOING TO MAKE A DENT IN THAT, EVEN IF YOU GET RID OF TWO ON OR THREE MILOSOVIC SQUARE FEET OF DEVELOPMENT SPACE YOU SDIL HAVE TWO TO THREE MILLION OVER THE AQUIFER. THE PLAN LAST WEEK SAID IF NO BUILDINGS OVER FIVE STORIES, SO IF YOU ARE TALKING SOMETHING THAT'S ABOUT SIX OR SEVEN BARTON CREEK SQUARE MALLS, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY OF THOSE CAN YOU FIT INTO AN AREA THAT SIZE THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE MORE THAN FIVE STORIES OR FIVE -- YOU KNOW, FIVE STORIES -- FWHALGDZ ARE GREATER THAN FIVE STORIES -- BUILDINGS THAT ARE GREATER THAN FIVE SORS. I THINK COUNCIL NEEDS TO TALK ABOUT THAT AND ANY DECISION IF IT IS ACTUALLY MADE. AND THE OTHER REASON ON THIS SUBSTITUTE MOTION OR THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, NO. 4 SAYS CREATE GUIDELINES FOR ANY POTENTIAL LAND SWAP OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TRANSFERS FOR CITY OWNED PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE, AND THAT IS REALLY I THINK WHAT IS LACKING RIGHT NOW. AND FOR THIS REASON I THINK BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD TO -- TO APPROVE ANYTHING, IF WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE ANYTHING, THEN WE HAVE TO SET SOME GUIDELINES BEFORE WE MAKE THAT DECISION BECAUSE THERE ARE NO GUIDELINES. AND SO THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM FOLKS AS THEY COME UP TO SPEAK, ARE THERE ANY GUIDELINES OR, YOU KNOW, ISSUES WE SHOULD KEEP IN MIND WHEN WE'RE CONSIDERING WHETHER TO DO THIS OR NOT.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR? WE CAN TRY THIS AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AGAIN AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS. MAYBE -- MAYBE WE HAVE COME TOGETHER MORE THAN WE KNOW. THERE ARE TWO THINGS WE NEED TO FOCUS ON RIGHT NOW. ONE IS HOW TO GET THE FINEST QUALITY REDEVELOPMENT OF ROBERT MUELLER THAT IS POSSIBLE, BECAUSE THE QUALITY OF HOW THE ENTITY THAT EXECUTES THAT PLAN, THE QUALITY OF THAT ENTITY IS WHAT IS GOING TO DRIVE THE QUALITY OF ROBERT MUELLER DEVELOPMENT AND THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO DRIVE THE QUALITY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THAT QUADRANT OF THE CITY. IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND IT'S STRESSED OFTENTIMES IN OUR ROMA REPORT THAT WE NEED AN ENTITY TO BE IN CHARGE OF THAT REDEVELOPMENT, IN CHARGE OF IMPLEMENTING THAT MASTER PLAN THAT HAS EXPERIENCE WITH TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPT, THAT HAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXPERIENCE AND VERY IMPORTANTLY HAS REDEVELOPED SOMETHING BIG AND COMPLEX BEFORE AND HAS EXPERIENCE IN PUBLIC-PRIVATE FINANCING, AND IN ALL THE THINGS THAT OUR ROMA REPORT TELLS US WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE. IT SOMETIMES SAID IT'S REALLY NOT IMPORTANT WHO IS -- WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF MUELLER AS LONG AS THEY SAY AND COMMIT TO FOLLOWING A PLAN, BUT IT DOES MATTER. IT MATTERS A GREAT DEAL. WHAT OUR -- WHAT OUR PLAN RECOMMENDS IS THAT WE VERY CAREFULLY CONSIDER KEEPING AS MUCH CONTROL AS WE CAN AND AS MUCH OWNERSHIP AS WE POSSIBLY CAN FOR THE CITY. AND THERE ARE THREE OR FOUR REASONS FOR THAT. ONE IS, AFTER -- IT'S GOING TO BE DONE -- OR IS RECOMMENDED BY OUR HIGH-LEVEL CONSULTANT THAT ROBERT MUELLER BE DEVELOPED IN THREE FADESES. AND IF WE -- PHASES. AND IF WE KEEP CONTROL OF THE LAND BY, AS IS SUGGESTED, SELLING THE LAND THAT IS UNDER THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING, BUT DOING LONG-TERM LEASES FOR THE -- FOR THE COMMERCIAL AND THE INDUSTRIAL, IF WE DISCOVER AFTER PHASE 1 IS DONE THAT WE HAVE TO GO ON [INAUDIBLE] THAT WE WENT -- THAT WE GOT -- WE GOT THE MANAGER OR THE MASTER DEVELOPER, THE ENTITY THAT WE CHOSE WASN'T THE RIGHT ONE, THEN WE CAN MAKE A CHANGE IF WE OWN AND CONTROL THE LAND. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ONE OF THOSE OPTIONS WE CAN EXERCISE IF WE HAVE TRADED IT OFF OR SOLD IT. ANOTHER THING IS IF WE HAVE CHOSEN THE BEST POSSIBLE MASTER DEVELOPER AND PHASE 1 IS THE SUCCESS THAT IT CAN BE, THEN THE PRICE OF THE CITY-OWNED LAND FOR THE NEXT PHASES WILL GO UP IN VALUE. THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE CITIZENS OWN ROBERT MUELLER NOW. ANOTHER THING TO THINK ABOUT IN TERMS OF LETTING GO CONTROL OF THAT LAND FOR ANY REASON IS THE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PORTIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT CAN BE LONG-TERM GROUND LEASE, ENSURING INCOME FOR OUR CHILDREN AND OUR GRANDCHILDREN. AND ANOTHER BIG REASON IS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PART. OFTENTIMES AFFORDABLE HOUSING STARTS OUT THAT WAY, BUT AFTER FIVE OR TEN YEARS IT REVERTS TO MARKET. BUT IF WE OWN THE LAND AND OWN THOSE BUILDINGS, THEN WE CAN KEEP IT AFFORDABLE FOREVER AND EVER. SO THE -- THERE ARE RIFTS IN DOING LAND SWAPS. SO LET'S -- ALSO, LET'S THINK ABOUT HOW TO BROADEN THE DISCUSSION GREATLY. NOT TO LIMIT IT TO -- TO ROBERT MUELLER AND TO STRATUS. NOT TO LIMIT IT AT ALL, BUT TO GO TO -- GO TO THE POLICY QUESTION. GO TO THE BIG ONE. THE OTHER THING BESIDES DEVELOPING ROBERT MUELLER WITH THE FINEST QUALITY WE CAN GET, THE OTHER THING WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE IN RATHER SPECIFIC TERMS TO SAVE BARTON CREEK AND BARTON SPRINGS AND THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. AND WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH AND WE KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THAT, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD TAKE. AND IT WOULD BE, I THINK, QUITE FOOLISH TO RISK THE -- THE SPENDING, THE DISPOSITION OF 80 TO 100 MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF CITY ASSETS TO ATTEMPT TO HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON SAVING THE SPRINGS AND THE AQUIFER, WE DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW WHAT THAT WOULD TAKE. ALSO, THERE'S NO IRAN TO GET IN A BIG HURRY. -- NO REASON TO GET IN A BIG HURRY. LET'S BE CAREFUL AND METHODICAL ABOUT THIS. SO I WOULD OFFER AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WE ESTABLISH A PROFESSIONALLY FACILITATED AND EXPEDITED OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL, BUSINESS, DEVELOPER AND NEIGHBORHOODS' INTERESTS, BOTH ROBERT MUELLER REDEVELOPMENT QUALITY AND SAVING THE AQUIFER ARE SUCH BIG, BIG QUESTIONS AND SUCH BIG CHALLENGES THAT WE NEED EVERYBODY INVOLVED IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: CAN I ASK A FAVOR? SEE IF WE CAN APPROACH SOMETHING. BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO A DISCUSSION OF EACH ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS, IT'S 5:30, VERY CLOSE TO 5:30. AND AS I INDICATED WHAT WE WOULD DO IS STOP AT 5:30 TO DO THE PROCLAMATIONS AND COME BACK AT 6:00.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT SOUNDS GOOD.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU IMMEDIATELY WHEN WE COME BACK.

>>GRIFFITH: WELL, LET ME JUST TICK THROUGH THE NEXT THREE THINGS AND WE'LL BE THROUGH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: BUT I'M WORRIED THERE'S GOING TO BE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AS YOU GO THROUGH AND I ASK WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE IN FACT FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS. AND THAT WILL TAKE US, MY GUESS IS, MORE THAN JUST TICKING THROUGH. SO WHAT I'M REQUESTING OF YOU IS THAT I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU IMMEDIATELY AS WE COME BACK AND THEN WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION ON EACH WITHIN OF THOSE ITEMS AS YOU TICK THROUGH THEM.

>>GRIFFITH: IF THAT'S THE WAY YOU WANT TO WORK IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M JUST WORRIED IT'S NOT GOING TO IMMEDIATELY BE ACCEPTED AS FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS WITHOUT SOME DISCUSSION AND SINCE WE'VE PROMISED PEOPLE WE WERE GOING TO DO IT, THAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO THE. SO WITH THAT I'M GOING TO ASK DERRICK IF YOU WILL COME UP HERE. AS I HAVE INDICATED, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF EACH COUNCIL MEETING INTRODUCING TO AUSTIN ONE OF OUR YOUNG PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO HAS WRITTEN AN ESSAY AND IS THE MAYOR FOR A DAY. AND THIS IS OUR SECOND OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. AND SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS READ THIS FOLLOWING PROCLAMATION. BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM DERRICK SCOTT MACK CRACKEN AS MAYOR FOR A DAY IN AUSTIN AND CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN RECOGNIZING THAT DERRICK IS IN THE FIFTH GRADE AT OAK HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND LIKES MATH, PLAYING CHESS AND READ HARRY POTTER BOOKS. IN RECOGNIZING THAT HE IS ACTIVE ON THE STUDENT COUNCIL AND WANTED TO BE MAYOR FOR A DAY SO HE COULD ATTEND THE CITY COUNCILL MEETINGS. YOU MAY REGRET THAT. [LAUGHTER] IN RECOGNIZING THAT DERRICK PLAYS SOCCER, IS A BLACK BELT IN TAIWAN DOUGH AND IS A GREAT BIG BROTHER TO ALEX AND IN RECOGNIZING THAT HE WANTS TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN AUSTIN BECAUSE HE LIKES HIS CITY. WE ARE PLEASED TO HONOR DERRICK AS MAYOR FOR A DAY AND ENCOURAGE HIM TO CONTINUE DEVELOPING HIS LEADERSHIP SKILLS AND SERVING HIS COMMUNITY THROUGHOUT HIS SCHOOL CAREER AND BEYOND. AND IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, AND I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE MAYOR MCCRACKEN TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCILL.

>> I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS THE COUNCIL MEETING. [LAUGHTER].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.

>>THOMAS: SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ALL OPPOSED SAY NO. WE ARE RECESSED TO LIVE -- TO DO LIVE MUSIC AND PROCLAMATIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR. [APPLAUSE]. WITH THAT WE WILL GO TO OUR LIVE MUSIC AND PROCLAMATIONS. COUNCIL IS IN RESET UNTIL APPROXIMATELY 6:00.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FOLKS, WE'VE GOT A REAL TREAT TODAY. THE MAYOR AND I ARE GOING TO INTRODUCE YOU TO A GROUP OF FOLKS THAT ARE GOING TO SING TO US AND IT'S A VERY UNIQUE GROUP. AND THE UNIQUE STYLE OF TYMZ3 OFFERS A DISTINCT HIP-HOP SOUND. THEY DRAW THEIR MATERIAL FROM SEVERAL INDUSTRY GROUPS. THEIR SONGS CONSIST OF IMPECCABLE ARRANGEMENTS, TIGHT VOCAL HARMONYS AND THEY CREATE A BEAUTIFUL SOUL FULL GROOVE. THEY HAVE BEEN PERFORMING TOGETHER SINCE APRIL. EACH OF THE BAND MEMBERS WON THE AUSTIN LEAGUE'S DOING THE RIGHT THINGS AWARD AND ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON THEIR FIRST CD WHICH WILL BE OUT IN FEBRUARY. CONGRATULATIONS. SO WE'RE GOING TO WELCOME TYMZ3 AND THE MAYOR IS GOING TO READ THE PROCLAMATION. HERE IS KESHA HAYWOOD. CHARITY WASHINGTON. CANDANCE WASHINGTON AND VELICIA WASHINGTON. MAYOR, WOULD YOU READ THIS PROCLAMATION?

>> BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I DERRICK MCCRACKEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, FOR TODAY DO HEREBY PROCLAIM DECEMBER 7TH, 2000 AS TYMZ3 DAY IN AUSTIN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, TYMZ3. [APPLAUSE]. (music) (music) MUSIC PLAYING (music) (music) (music) (music) SINGING (music) (music) [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: TYMZ3. REMEMBER, THEIR CD WILL BE COMING OUT IN FEBRUARY AND I WANT TO MENTION THAT SONG WAS WRITTEN AND PRODUCED BY ONE OF OUR U.T. FOOTBALL STARS WHO JUST GRADUATED NAMED CHRIS BUTCHER. THAT WAS WELL DONE. GOOD JOB, YOU ALL. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR MCCRACKEN AND I ARE GOING TO MAKE THE NEXT PRESENTATION, A CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION. ONE OF THINGS THAT HAPPENS IN OUR COMMUNITY QUITE FREQUENTLY IS WE HAVE DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT HAVE BEEN A PART OF AUSTIN, TEXAS FOR SOME TIME OR EVEN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, BUT THEY ARE HERE BECAUSE THEY LOVE OUR CITY, DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF OUR CITY AND THEN THEY WANT TO GIVE TO OUR CITY IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. SO WE'VE GOT SOME FOLKS FROM ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, BILL GARDNER IS HERE. WHY DON'T YOU COME ON UP, BILL. [APPLAUSE]. WE ALSO HAVE FOLKS FROM THE LIBRARY FOUNDATION HERE AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THEM TO COME UP TOO. LET ME READ THIS CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION. COME ON UP, YOU ALL. THIS IS TO CERTIFICATE THAT THROUGH THEIR 50,000 DOLLAR CONTRIBUTION -- YEAH, THAT DESERVES APPLAUSE, DOESN'T IT? [APPLAUSE]. TO THE AUSTIN PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION FOR THE TECHNOLOGY COLLECTION OF BOOKS FOR YOUTH, ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES HAS RENDERED AN EXTRAORDINARY GIFT TO THE CITIZENS THAT WILL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE THE LIBRARY'S COLLECTION OF BOOKS ON TOPICS RANGING FROM COMPUTERS TO CAREERS IN ENGINEERING. THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED IN RECOGNITION OF THEIR GENEROUS DONATION AND IT'S DATED THIS 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2000, IT'S ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCILL OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, BUT IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR MAYOR FOR THE DAY, MAYOR MCCRACKEN. I WANT TO SAY A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO BILL GARDNER AND ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES FOR MAKING THIS VERY GENEROUS CONTRIBUTION, AND HE HAS A COPY OF THE CHECK HERE. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: FIRST I WANT TO ASK BILL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING? PLEASE DO.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MAYOR WATSON, CITY COUNCILL MEMBERS, AS WAS MENTIONED, I'M BILL GARDNER, A MEMBER OF THE A.M.D. CONTRIBUTION COMMITTEE. WE'RE A GROUP OF EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT REPRESENTATIVES WHO WORK WITH COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS TO GRANT CONTRIBUTIONS AND ALSO TO DEVELOP VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR EMPLOYEES. ON BEHALF OF A.M.D. I'M VERY PROUD TO PRESENT THIS CHECK FOR $50,000 TO THE AUSTIN PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION. THIS CONTRIBUTION WILL PROVIDE 2,000 BOOKS FOR THE YOUTH TECHNOLOGY COLLECTION. THE COLLECTION WILL BE AVAILABLE IN LIBRARIES THROUGHOUT AUSTIN AND WILL INCLUDE BOOKS ON COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY AS WELL AS CAREERS IN THE HIGH-TECH INDUSTRY. AT A.M.D. WE REALIZE THAT TODAY'S YOUTH ARE FUTURE EMPLOYEES AND LEADERS OF THIS COMMUNITY. OUR GOAL IS TO PROVIDE THEM WITH THE TOOLS SUCCEED WHETHER THOSE TOOLS ARE COMPUTER CHIPS, BOOKS OR TRAINING. SOME OF THE BOOKS PURCHASED BY THIS GRANT ARE FROM THE DANIEL E. LUIS LIBRARY TO BE BUILT IN OUR MONTOPOLIS NEIGHBORHOOD. WE SALUTE OUR NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS FOR THEIR VISION IN WORKING WITH THE CITY TO PUT THIS VALUABLE RESOURCE IN MONTOPOLIS. WE ALSO APPLAUD THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCILL WHO ARE WORKING TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. AT A.M.D. WE MANUFACTURE THE BRAINS OF A COMPUTER, THE SEMICONDUCTOR. OUR STATED PURPOSE AS AN ORGANIZATION IS THAT WE EMPOWER PEOPLE EVERYWHERE TO LEAD MORE PRODUCTIVE LIVES. WHEN WE ON THE CONTRIBUTION COMMITTEE LEARNED THE AUSTIN PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION RECEIVES ABOUT 9 CENTS PER CAPITA FROM PRIVATE FUNDING AND WE COMPARED THAT TO OTHER COMMUNITIES LIKE PORTLAND, OREGON YOU, THAT RECEIVES ABOUT $5 PER CAPITA WE FELT THIS DECISION WAS AN EASY ONE TO MAKE THIS CONTRIBUTION. WE HOPE THIS $50,000 WILL HELP THE FOUNDATION TO LAUNCH A PROGRESSIVE PLAN FOR THE BEST LIBRARY SYSTEM IN TEXAS AND THE U.S. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> GOOD EVENING, I'M CAROL, ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE AUSTIN PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION. AND ON BEHALF OF THE FOUNDATION, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK A.M.D. FOR THIS WONDERFUL CONTRIBUTION. IT IS AN AMAZING AND WONDERFUL EVENT TO BE HERE TO ACCEPT SUCH A SIZABLE CONTRIBUTION FROM A CORPORATION RECOGNIZING THE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND ESPECIALLY RECOGNIZING THE NEEDS OF YOUTH. AS IN MY OTHER LIFE AAM THE ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND SO I RECOGNIZE THE VERY IMPORTANT NEED OF COMMUNITIES TO SEEK PARTNERSHIPS WITH CORPORATION ON BEHALF OF OUR CHILDREN. AND ALTHOUGH THIS IS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE AREA OF AUSTIN, I RECOGNIZE THAT THIS SETS THE TONE FOR OTHER COMMUNITIES AND SETS THE AGENDA FOR OTHER COMMUNITIES TO EMULATE THIS ON BEHALF OF CHILDREN THROUGH THESE COMMUNITY AND CORPORATE PARTNERSHIPS, SO I THANK YOU AGAIN A.M.D., I THANK THE CITY COUNCIL FOR LETTING US HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU AND ACCEPT THE CHECK AND I WANT INDICATE TO SEE WHAT GOODIES ARE IN THE LIBRARY AS A RESULT OF THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: GIVE YOU ALL THE CHECK. [LAUGHTER]. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE]. LET'S GO UP HERE AND TAKE A PICTURE. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE].

>> DO HERE BY PROCLAIM DECEMBER 4TH THROUGH THE EIGHTH OF 2000 AS FREE ENTERPRISE WEEK IN AUSTIN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND WE CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN RECOGNIZING THAT FREE ENTERPRISE IS THE FOUNDATION OF OUR AMERICAN ECONOMY. IN RECOGNIZING THE STUDENTS OF WESTWOOD HIGH SCHOOL FOR OPENING A COFFEE AND DRINK BUSINESS CALLED BEST WINDS INC. AS PART OF A NATIONAL DECA PROJECT WHICH TEACHES THE CONCEPTS OF FREE ENTERPRISE AND FREE ORGANIZATION. I OUGHT TO HAVE YOU READ THIS WHOLE THING IF I'M GOING TO COUGH ALL THE WAY THROUGH. AND ROSE ROIZ THAT THESE STUDENTS ARE LEARNING SKILLS AND ECONOMICS FIRST LAND HAND AS HE PUBLICIZE AND PROMOTE THEIR NEW COMPANY. WE JOIN ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN COMMENDING THESE YOUNG PEOPLE FOR ACCEPTING THE CHALLENGE AND THE FINANCIAL RISK FOR OPENING A BUSINESS AND IN WISHING THEM ALL GREAT SUCCESS WITH THIS PROJECT AND IN THE FUTURE. AND SITS SIGNED BY ME. AND WE ARE PLEASED TO MAKE THIS PRESENTATION, MAYOR MCCRACKIN AND I TO HEATHER BUSH AND MARK MCGRIN OF WESTWOOD HIGH SCHOOL. [APPLAUSE].

>> BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, DER RICK MCCRACK LIEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR TODAY DO HERE BY PROCLAIM DECEMBER 7TH, 2000 AS MARGARET WRIGHT DAY IN AUSTIN. AND BOTH THE MAYORS CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN RECOGNIZING THAT MARGARET WRIGHT IS CONSIDERED BY MANY TO BE AN AUSTIN INSTITUTION, SINCE SHE'S BEEN SINGING AND PLAYING THE PIE AN KNOW HERE FOR MORE THAN 50 YEARS. AND IN RECOGNIZING SHE ENTERTAINS FOR YEARS IN THE DRISKILL HOTEL PIANO LOBBY BAR, AS WELL AS MANY FUNCTIONS FOR MANY OF AUSTIN'S WELL-KNOWN CITIZENS AND IN RECOGNIZING THAT SHE'S USED HER TALENT TIME AND TIME AGAIN TO BENEFIT WORTHY CAUSES. WE CALL ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN CON GRATING MARGARET WRIGHT ON HER LONG-STANDING CAREER, HER WILLINGNESS TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY AND HER CONTRIBUTION FOR AUSTIN'S REPUTATION AS THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITOL OF THE WORLD. SIGNED BY KIRK WATSON, MAYOR AND, OF COURSE, PROCLAIMED BY OUR OTHER MAYOR. AND IN MARGARET'S INSTEAD WE'D LIKE TO OFFER THIS TO YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MS. MARTINEZ AND I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MARGARET WRIGHT. SHE'S NOT ABLE TO ATTEND BECAUSE OF HER OBLIGATION TO THE SCHOOL CHILDREN AT MANOR ISD. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY FOR HER THAT SHE WISHES TO HAVE BEEN HERE AND ACCEPT THIS IN PERSON. THANK YOU MAYOR WATSON AND THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBERS, AND THANK YOU GOD. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: NOW, THAT CONCLUDES OUR LIVE MUSIC AND PROCLAMATIONS, BUT I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE HAVE SOME OTHER PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO DESERVE TO BE HONORED. WE HAVE BEEN HONORING TODAY BECAUSE OF THE HE IS SAY HE WROTE AND HIS COMMITMENT TO THE CITY OUR MAYOR FOR A DAY, MAYOR MCCRACKIN, BUT IT'S MY PERSONAL BELIEF THAT YOU DON'T HAVE SUCH A FINE, OUTSTANDING YOUNG MAN AS MAYOR MCCRACKIN WITHOUT OUTSTANDING PARENTS. AND SO WHAT I WANT THE MAYOR TO DO, BECAUSE I KNOW HE LOVES THEM AND RESPECTS THEM, I WANT HIM TO STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE AND INTRODUCE HIS PARENTS TO ALL OF US. SO I'LL TURN THE MICROPHONE OVER TO MAYOR MAC CRACK IN.

>> MY DAD, SCOTT MCCRACKIN. [APPLAUSE]. MY MOM, STACY MCCRACKIN. [APPLAUSE]. AND MY LITTLE BROTHER AL ELECTRIC MCCRACKIN. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: GOOD JOB. WHY DON'T YOU STEP OVER HERE

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL WILL BE IN RECESS FOR A FEW MORE MINUTES AND WE'LL HAVE A QUORUM AND START BACK UP.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL CALL THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL BACK TO ORDER AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. I'LL CALL THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL BACK TO ORDER. I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: YES, THANK YOU, MAYOR. WE'RE ON ITEM NO. 2 ON WHAT WE HOPE IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HANG ON. SINCE WE DIDN'T -- BECAUSE I BROKE IT UP ON ITEM NUMBER ONE, LET'S GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER ONE AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>>GRIFFITH: I'D RATHER NOT DO IT THAT WAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU WANT TO OFFER IT ALL AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>>GRIFFITH: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FINE.

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY. NOW WE'RE GOING TO DEVELOP A COMPETENCE SIEVE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE ON TO SAVE THE CREEK AND THE SPRINGS AND THE AQUIFER. AND REALIZING THAT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN PUT ON OUR STAFF. REALIZING THAT THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE CERTAINLY SOMETHING OUR STAFF WILL BE INVOLVED IN AND WILL BE VERY MUCH IN CONTROL OF, BUT KNOWING THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE AN INVESTMENT, BUT IT'S ALSO GOING TO BE -- COULD BE OUR GREATEST LEGACY AS A COUNCIL. CERTAINLY RIGHT UP THERE WITH THE AIRPORT, RIGHT UP THERE WITH THE NEW CITY HALL BECAUSE KNOWING WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO SAVE THE CREEK AND THE SPRINGS IS GOING TO BE AN ENORMOUSLY IMPORTANT THING TO THIS COMMUNITY. THE NEXT THING WE NEED TO DO IS SET THE CRITERIA FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT. CERTAINLY ROADS AND SEWER LINES. WE KNOW THAT YOU CAN'T LOAD NEARLY AS MUCH DEVELOPMENT ON A PIECE OF LAND WITHOUT CENTRAL SEWER. THE CRITERIA FOR DOING THAT IS GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT TO DEVELOP. THEN THE NEXT THING WE NEED TO DO, ALONG WITH OBVIOUSLY THE APPRAISAL OF ANY LAND THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR DISPOSAL, CREATE THE GUIDELINES FOR ANY POTENTIAL LAND DISPOSAL AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TRANSFERS FOR CITY-OWNED PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. AND WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE MANAGER COULD COME BACK WITHIN 30 DAYS AND GIVE US A STATUS REPORT ON HOW THOSE FOUR ITEMS ARE GOING. AND I WOULD OFFER THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, AS THE MAKER OF THE MOTION, I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>>WYNN: THANKS, MAYOR. IF I CAN, LET ME TAKE THESE IN ASENDING ORDER AND MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS DOES INDIVIDUALLY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE WORD AS SENDING.

>>WYNN: POINT NUMBER FOUR IS TO SKAEB GUIDELINES FOR A POTENTIAL LAND SWAP IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ZONE OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS. TO ME THIS IS GRATIFYING. I INTREPT THIS TO MEAN THAT THE COUNCIL IS WILLING TO TALK ABOUT AND ESTABLISH WHAT A GOOD LAND EXCHANGE OR A BAD ONE IS. SO IN FACT, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE AMEND THE RESOLUTION WITH A -- QUOTE, THE CITY MANAGER SHALL REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL WITH GUIDELINES THAT SHOULD GOVERN ANY EXCHANGE OF CITY OWNED LAND IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE].

>>WYNN: I CONSIDER THAT TO BE FRIENDLY YES, SIR.

>>GRIFFITH: CERTAINLY. LET'S DO THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT -- .

>>SLUSHER: REPEAT THAT LAST PART.

>>WYNN: THE CITY MANAGER SHALL REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL WILL GUIDELINES THAT SHOULD GOVERN ANY EXCHANGE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS OR PROPERTY INVOLVING CITY-OWNED LAND IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE.

>>SLUSHER: ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S VERY PRUDENT. I DID WANT TO -- I WOULD LIKE TO ASK COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, I ACCEPT THAT, BUT DOES THIS MEAN YOU'VE CHANGED YOUR MIND AND ARE NOW WILLING TO DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY OF A LAND SWAP WITH STRATUS SOMEWHERE IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE BECAUSE I WOULDN'T WANT TO ADD A BUNCH OF AMENDMENTS ON THERE THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED TO KILL THAT POSSIBILITY.

>>GRIFFITH: CERTAINLY. WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS NOT LIMIT -- WE NEED TO DO -- WE NEED TO OPEN THE WHOLE PROCESS UP, CERTAINLY. AND TALK TO AS MANY DEVELOPERS AS WE CAN ATTRACT. THE WAY THAT OUR ROMA CONSULTANTS SUGGEST WE DO IT, THEY HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC PROCESS TO NARROW DOWN. WHAT THEY WANT US TO HAVE IS THE FINEST MASTER DEVELOPER, MANAGER OF THE PROJECT THAT WE CAN GET. AND WHAT THEY'RE SUGGESTING IS THAT -- AND WHAT THE NEXT STEP THEN WOULD BE IS THE FIRST STEP OF THE TWO-STEP PROCESS, WHICH IS TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION. THEN YOU GET YOUR RESPONSES. YOU TALK TO ANYBODY THAT RESPONDS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THEIR NAME IS OR WHAT THEIR BACKGROUND IS: THEY CAN COME. THEN YOU NARROW IT DOWN TO TWO OR THREE. YOU GET YOUR SHORT LIST. AND THEY GET A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. THEN THOSE ARE THE ONES YOU HAVE IN VARIOUS NEGOTIATIONS. THE WHOLE THING IS COMPLETELY OPEN AND COMPLETELY PUBLIC. AND THAT'S ITS BIG STRENGTH. AND IT'S NOT ONE ON ONE. IT'S NOT LIMITED TO ANY ONE ENTITY. SO WITH THAT KIND OF OPENNESS, I THINK WE NEED TO PROCEED THE WAY OUR ROMMA DESIGN GROUP IS RECOMMENDING AND OUR ADVISORY GROUP TO DO.

>> OKAY. I THOUGHT WE ALREADY HAD OPENED UP THE PROCESS. BUT I DIDN'T GET FROM THAT ANSWER AN ANSWER TO MY QUESTION, WHICH WAS HAVE YOU -- ARE YOU SAYING THAT IT'S OKAY, YOU'VE CHANGED YOUR POSITION TO WHERE IT IS OKAY TO CONSIDER A SWAP WITH MUELLER AND OTHER PROPERTIES, OTHER POTENTIAL PROPERTIES AS IT STATES IN THIS RESOLUTION?

>>GRIFFITH: I HAVE NOT CHANGED MY POSITION AT ALL. I AM STILL VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF WHAT OUR RMA DESIGN GROUP HAS REMAINED AND WHAT OUR MUELLER NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION HAS RECOMMENDING, AND WHAT OUR MUELLER ADVISORY GROUP IS RECOMMENDING, WHICH IS AN OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS, A TWO-STEP PROCESS, WHICH IS YOU DO YOUR REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND GET -- THROW AS BROAD A NET AS YOU CAN, THEN GET IT DOWN TO YOUR SHORT LIST. THEY GET A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL YOU NARROW IT DOWN TO THE BEST ONE YOU CAN GET.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. BUT THIS RESOLUTION IS NOT ABOUT THE TWO-STEP PROCESS. THIS IS ABOUT EVALUATING AND DISCUSSING THE FEASIBILITY OF A TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY AND/OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY OWNED BY STRATUS PROPERTIES, INC. IN SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY AND CITY OWNED PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FORMER ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. I'M READING THE RESOLUTION AND WHAT I'M WONDERING, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT TO IT ANYWAY BECAUSE I THINK IT MAKES SENSE, BUT IT IS A TIME-HONORED TACTIC AS A DELIBERATIVE PROCESS IF YOU WANT TO TRY TO KILL SOMETHING WITH AMENDMENTS. AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU ARE GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.

>>GRIFFITH: WHAT I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IS -- AND I HOPE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING, WHICH IS THE RMMA DESIGN GROUP PROCESS, WHICH IS DOING A NATIONAL SEARCH FOR MASTER DEVELOPER, MANAGER FOR THE PROCESS. IF THAT'S -- IF THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING, THEN WE'RE TROEG.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I'LL GIVE UP ON TRYING TO GET AN ANSWER, BUT YOU GO AHEAD. MATURE MAYOR I WAS GETTING READY TO ASK YOU TO DO THAT. LET ME ASK IF I CAN CUT TO THE CHASE ON THIS ASPECT OF THE PROPOSED FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER HAVE MOVED AND SECONDED THE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH HAS OFFERED A LENGTHY THAT HAS SUBPARTS AMENDMENT. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN HAS ACCEPTED -- I DON'T HAVE HIS EXACT LANGUAGE, BUT I'LL ASK HIM TO READ IT AGAIN. HE HAS ACCEPTED LANGUAGE RELATING TO THE CREATION OF GUIDELINES FOR ANY POTENTIAL LAND EXCHANGE OR LAND SWAP, WHATEVER LAND WORDS YOU USED. I THINK COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH USED THE WORD LAND SWAP OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TRANSFER IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. I'M GOING TO GET YOUR EXACT LANGUAGE IN JUST A SECOND. SO THE ISSUE I WANT TO TAKE CARE OF AS PRESIDING OFFICER RIGHT NOW IS WHETHER OR NOT THAT ASPECT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH ULTIMATELY VOTES FOR THE ENTIRE MOTION, IS CONSIDERED TO BE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO COUNCILMEMBER WYNN'S MAIN MOTION. AND COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, WILL YOU STATE THAT -- THE LANGUAGE AGAIN THAT YOU HAVE ACCEPTED? AND THAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH SAID SHE WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT BEING TAKEN.

>>WYNN: THE CITY MANAGER SHALL REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH LIED GIED LINES THAT SHOULD GOVERN ANY EXCHANGE OF ANY PROPERTY INVOLVING CITY OWNED LAND IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, I KNOW -- .

>>SLUSHER: I DON'T HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION YET.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME PAUSE FOR JUST A SECOND BECAUSE AS I TOOK DOWN WHAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH HAD INDICATED, SHE INDICATED, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I GOT THIS WRONG, BUT I'M READING FROM THE NOTES FROM AN E-MAIL. BUT THAT UD TALKED ABOUT WITHIN 30 DAYS. AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO TRY TO CLARIFY IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE MEETING WITHIN 30 DAYS AND IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T MAKE THE BEST SENSE FOR IT TO COME AT THE NEXT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCILL. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE AT LEAST -- WE START WORKING OUR WAY THROUGH THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT THERE IS SOME CLARITY ABOUT THAT. WOULD THAT BE OKAY WITH YOU?

>>GRIFFITH: THE NEXT MEETING. IF 30 DAYS IS NOT PRACTICAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

>>WYNN: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: YES, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

>>WYNN: OKAY. NEXT POINT IS THE CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE OVER THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. IT'S A GREAT IDEA -- .

>>GRIFFITH: ACTUALLY, EXCUSE ME, OVER THE EDWARDS AQUIFER.

>>WYNN: I'M SORRY. THAT'S EVEN BETTER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SAY THAT AGAIN SO I CAN TRY TO KEEP UP.

>>WYNN: OKAY. SO I'M PREPARED TO ACCEPT THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS ADDITIONS -- ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE. THE CITY MANAGER SHALL REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCILL WITH A FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF EXTENDING PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INTO THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER ZONE. PERIOD.

>>GRIFFITH: MAY I CLARIFY THAT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: CERTAINLY.

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY. SET CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT OVER THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER. CAN WE DO IT THAT WAY? IT'S SET THE CRITERIA, IT'S SET THE CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, WITH ESPECIALLY -- I THINK WE'RE READING OFF OF TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. WHY DON'T I JUST -- .

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHAT I'VE GOT IS FROM YOUR E-MAIL, SET CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS, IE SEWER, ROADS, ETCETERA, IN BDSZ. IF YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING BETTER. -- THEY MAY HAVE THEM OUT THERE.

>>GRIFFITH: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: NOW, HERE'S WHAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WAS, COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. SET CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT, IE SEWER, ROADS, ETCETERA, OVER THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER. NOW, LET ME HAVE YOU KMINT ON THAT AS WE ON OWE TO SEE IF WE CAN'T GET TO A POINT.

>>GRIFFITH: ONE OF THE REASONS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS WAS BECAUSE WE EXPECT THAT HAVING CENTRAL SEWER ON -- [INAUDIBLE]. IS GOING TO PASS. THAT CAME UP.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

>>WYNN: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ARE YOU OKAY WITH THIS?

>>WYNN: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: YES, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. THAT WILL BE -- THAT SUBPART WILL ALSO BE ADDED TO THE MAIN MOTION ON THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

>>WYNN: THE NEXT POINT IS TO TO -- ACCORDING TO WHAT I SEE NOW, DEVELOP THE COMPREHENSIVE SCIENTIFIC STUDY. I'M NOT PREPARED TO AUTHORIZE WITHOUT A COST ESTIMATE, SPENDING THAT MUCH MONEY, SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO READ, WHICH IS ACTUALLY FROM AN OLDER E-MAIL WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH AND SEE IF SHE LIKES THIS. MY ANALYSIS OF YOUR OLDER E-MAIL. THE CITY MANAGER WILL WORK WITH ALL RELEVANT ENTITIES, INCLUDING THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, TO GATHER THE BODY OF EXISTING SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER, PRESENT THEM TO COUNCIL, THAT COUNCIL SHALL CONSIDER AT THAT TIME WHETHER THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT GAPS IN THIS INFORMATION. AND IF FURTHER STUDY IS REQUIRED. AND IF SO, THAT THE CITY MANAGER BRING FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL THAT CLEARLY DIN 80 WHAT INFORMATION IS NEEDED. AND EXPECTATIONS OF THE RESEARCH TO BE CONDUCTED AND A REASONABLE COST ESTIMATE OF THAT STUDY. IT'S WORD DI, BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IS LET US SEE THE BODY OF INFORMATION AND WHEN WE SEE WHAT'S MISSING, IF ANYTHING IS MISSING, THEN THE MANAGER CAN GIVE US A COST ESTIMATE OF WHAT THAT COST ESTIMATE MIGHT BE.

>>GRIFFITH: COUNCILMEMBER, I'M LOOKING AT WHAT YOU'RE READING OFF OF AND THAT'S NOT OKAY. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT CAME FROM.

>>WYNN: WHAT I'M PREPARED TO ACCEPT IS -- POTENTIALLY IS LET US SEE WHAT INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE, ALLOW THE MANAGER THEN IF WE DECIDE THAT THERE'S MORE INFORMATION NEEDED, TO THEN COME BACK WITH A COST ESTIMATE AS TO WHAT THAT WILL BE. SO FAR NOTHING ELSE WE'RE DOING COSTS MONEY AND I DON'T WANT TO LUMP IN TONIGHT SOMETHING THAT COSTS MONEY.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT'S WHERE WE DIFFER. I KNOW IT'S GOING TO COST MONEY. THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. OUR STAFF -- I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH OUR STAFF, AND THEY HAVE SAID CLEARLY I CANNOT DO, WE CANNOT DO A THOROUGH ANALYSIS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH EXISTING STAFF AND EXISTING STAFF TIME. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS GOING TO BE A CONTRACT. WHAT I'M HOPING WE'RE GOING TO DO IS GET -- TO CREATE THIS LEGACY. IT'S GOING TO COST YOU MONEY. WE'RE GOING TO GET, I HOPE, ONE OF THE BEST PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY ON A CONTRACT BASIS TO COME IN AND DO THIS BECAUSE WE ARE -- WE ALREADY KNOW THAT OUR STAFF CAN'T DO IT. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MAKING AN INVESTMENT. WE DON'T CREATE A LEGACY WITHOUT SPENDING SOME BUCKS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME PAUSE AND TRY SOMETHING HERE. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, LET ME HAVE YOU RIDE BACK WHAT YOU WOULD BE PREPARED TO ACCEPT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ON THIS ITEM. AND WE'LL SEE IF COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH AGREES WITH THAT. IF SHE DOESN'T, THEN YOU WOULD -- IT SOUND TO ME LIKE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT HER SPECIFIC LANGUAGE AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THAT SUBPART. AND I'LL DEAL WITH THAT AT THAT POINT. SO READ BACK WHAT UD SAID.

>>WYNN: WHAT I'M PREPARED TO ACCEPT IS THE CITY MANAGER SHALL WORK WITH ALL RELEVANT ENTITIES TO GATHER THE BODY OF EXISTING SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER AND PRESENT THEM TO COUNCIL. THAT COUNCIL SHALL CONSIDER AT THAT TIME WHETHER THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT GAPS IN THIS INFORMATION AND WHETHER FURTHER STUDY IS REQUIRED. AND IF SO, THAT THE CITY MANAGER BRING FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL THAT CLEARLY DELINEATE WHAT INFORMATION IS NEEDED AND EXPECTATIONS OF THE RESEARCH TO BE CONDUCTED AT A REASONABLE COST ESTIMATE TO THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, THAT IS HIS EFFORT TO COMPROMISE ON YOUR SPECIFIC LANGUAGE.

>>GRIFFITH: I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IT IS NOT THE SAME THING AT ALL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: VERY GOOD THEN. WHAT WE HAVE IS HE DOES NOT CONSIDER THAT SUBPART TO BE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. SO IF YOU WANT TO OFFER THAT SUBPART AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, I'M GOING COME BACK TO THAT AND WE'LL -- NOT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, AS A SUBSTITUTE, WE'LL GRASSY DRAES THAT. LET'S GO BACK UP TO THE NEXT ITEM AND SEE IF WE CAN -- IF THERE'S FRIENDLYNESS THERE.

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY. SO IF YOU WOULD USE THAT ONE, THAT WOULD BE GOOD.

>>WYNN: IT'S WRITTEN HERE, ESTABLISH A PROFESSIONALLY FACILITATED AND EXPEDITED OPEN, PUBLIC PROCESS, INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL BUSINESS, DEVELOPER AND NEIGHBORHOOD INTERESTS. I'M JUST NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS IN COULD NOT TEXT OF OUR EXISTING BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. AS AN EXAMPLE, WHAT I'D BE PREPARED TO ACCEPT THAT I TRUST IS APPROXIMATELY THE SAME THING, WE CURRENTLY HAVE OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, OBVIOUSLY, MANY OF WHOM ARE AS AN EXAMPLE REVIEWING THE FORMER STRATUS TERM SHEETS NOW. IN FACT, LAST NIGHT THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD EFFECT EFFECTIVELY REVIEWED THIS AND AS AN EXAMPLE VOTE THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION, THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD BELIEVES THAT A CONCEPT OF LAND SWAP OF PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE ON THE STRATUS PROPERTY MAY RESULT IN OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN. MY POINT IS WE ALREADY HAVE EXISTING BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT ARE VERY OPENLY REVIEWING ALL THIS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IN QUESTION EVEN HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWING THE STRATUS TERM SHEET, SO WE EASILY CAN CONVENE THOSE INDIVIDUAL SUBCOMMITTEES INTO ONE FORMAL COMMITTEE OR WE CAN CONTINUE THE EXISTING, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC BOARDS AND PROS. AND WHETHER WE HIRE A PROFESSIONALLY FACILITATOR TO BRING THOSE TOGETHER, THAT'S FINE TOO, I SUPPOSE. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD HAPPEN.

>>GRIFFITH: COUNCILMEMBER, WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS MUCH BROADER. IT'S INCLUSIVE OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, BUT BROADER THAN THAT. AND IN ORDER TO HAVE A PRODUCT AS WELL AS A PROCESS, I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE DO HAVE A PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCED FACILITATOR TO BE ABLE TO BE SURE THAT WE GET SOMETHING AT THE END OR HAVE A BETTER SHOT AT IT. WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS MUCH BROADER AND MORE INCLUSIVE THAN JUST BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPROACH, BUT INCLUDING THEM, OF COURSE. SO I'M NOT SURE WE'RE TOGETHER ON THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO HE DOES NOT CONSIDER YOUR PROPOSAL TO BE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, LET ME ASK YOU THIS: ARE YOU OFFERING WITH REGARD TO THE APPROACH THAT YOU READ ABOUT ASKING THE CITY MANAGER TO BRING BACK TO THE COUNCIL AN ANALYSIS OF ALL THE SCIENTIFIC DATA -- AND I DIDN'T GET THE EXACT LANGUAGE, BUT IN CONJUNCTION WITH RELEVANT ENTITIES AN ANALYSIS OF THE SCIENTIFIC DATA, THE ANALYSIS OF WHAT WOULD NEED TO BE DONE TO BRING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL RURKS OFFERING THAT AS AN AMENDMENT TO YOUR MAIN MOTION?

>>WYNN: YES, I AM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT FRIENDLY?

>>SLUSHER: I'M SORRY, MAYOR, WOULD YOU REPEAT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN IS OFFERING TO AMEND HIS MAIN MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO DO AN ANALYSIS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RELEVANT REGULATORY AGENCIES, INCLUDING FISH AND WILDLIFE, TO DETERMINE WHAT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE A -- TO DETERMINE WHAT SCIENTIFIC STUDY WE CURRENTLY HAVE AND REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL REGARDING ANY GAPS IN THAT SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS, INCLUDING WHAT IT WOULD TAKE, ASSUMING THERE ARE GAPS, WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO GO FURTHER TO HAVE THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY WITH SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND COST OF THAT. HE IS OFFERING THAT AS PART OF HIS MOTION. AND I'M ASKING YOU AS MAKER OF THE SECOND -- .

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I WOULD ACCEPT THAT, BUT I WANT TO COMMENT ON THE OVERALL CONCEPT LATER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL COME BACK TO YOU, I WANT TO TRY TO GET A MOTION OUT THERE.

>>SLUSHER: I'M WITH YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, WITH REGARD TO WHAT YOU JUST SAID ON THE PROCESS OF HAVING -- ON THE PROCESS, WHAT I UNDERSTOOD YOU TO IS THAT -- TO SAY IS TO LOOK TO OUR CURRENT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, INCLUDING THOSE THAT HAVE SUBCOMMITTEES, AND IF NECESSARY -- AND I GUESS YOU'RE ASKING IF THEY REQUEST. I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE YOU'RE WANTING TO GO AHEAD AND DO IT ANYWAY. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION. THEY WOULD APPOINT -- AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE COMMITTEES ARE THREE PEOPLE. THEY WOULD APPOINT THOSE BOARD AND COMMISSIONS THAT WE ALREADY ARE ASKING TO LOOK AT THIS, THEY WOULD 8.3 PEOPLE APIECE TO CREATE A COMMUNITY PROCESS OR TO CREATE THE PROCESS THAT INCLUDES THESE VARIOUS INTERESTS, AND IF NECESSARY WE CAN HIRE A PROFESSIONAL FACILITATOR. DO YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT PART OF YOUR MOTION?

>>WYNN: YES, I'M PREPARED TO MAKE THAT PART OF MY MOTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME ASK YOU A COUPLE OF THINGS FOR CLARIFICATION. I THINK WE OUGHT TO IDENTIFY THOSE BOARD AND COMMISSIONS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE AS PART OF YOUR MOTION. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS A COMMITTEE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, WATER AND WASTEWATER HAS LOOKED AT THIS. THEY DON'T HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT I'M JUST -- YOU'RE ASKING THEM TO PROVIDE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THREE. WATER AND WASTEWATER, PARKS, AND THE MILLER -- MUELLER NEIGHBORHOOD -- IMPLEMENTATION OUGHT TO BE PART OF THAT WOULD BE MY GUESS. SO THAT IS 15. AND THE ONLY QUESTION I WOULD HAVE ABOUT ALL THAT IS -- AND COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE, SHE WANTED -- SHE MENTIONED INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL, BUSINESS, DEVELOPER AND NEIGHBORHOOD INTERESTS. I SUPPOSE THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME NECESSITY OR -- MAYBE NOT, BUT THERE COULD BE. THAT WE LOOK AT WHO THE 15 PEOPLE THAT GET APPOINTED HERE DETERMINE WHETHER IT MEETS THE BALANCE THAT IS IMPLICIT IN COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S PROPOSAL.

>>WYNN: THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: HANG ON ONE SECOND. LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET SOMEPLACE ON THIS. WHAT I SEE YOU ADDING TO YOUR MOTION IS THAT COUNCIL WOULD REQUEST THE FOLLOWING BOARDS, COMMISSIONS OR GROUPS. PLANNING COMMISSION, ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, WATER AND WASTEWATER, MUELLER IMPLEMENTATION AND PARKS BOARD TO 8.3 PEOPLE APIECE TO EVALUATE AND LOOK AT THIS ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY RECOMMENDED OR WAS IMPLICIT IN WHAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH HAD OFFERED. AND UPON THOSE APPOINTMENTS, THE CITY COUNCILL WOULD EVALUATE WHETHER IT REACHES A BALANCE CONCERNING THE ENVIRONMENT AL, BUSINESS, DEVELOPER AND NEIGHBORHOOD INTERESTS. WE MAY NOT PUT THREE MORE PEOPLE ON, BUT WE WOULD APPOINT UP TO THREE PEOPLE.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HANG ON A SECOND. ARE YOU MAKING THAT PART OF YOUR MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: YES, MAYOR. NOW, NOT ALL OF THEM HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I UNDERSTAND. AND THOSE THAT DON'T WERE ASKING THEM TO 8.3. IF THIS PASSES. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN'S MOTION IS THAT HE WOULD ASK THEM TO 8.3 PEOPLE.

>>SLUSHER: ALL I WOULD SAY IS AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T PREVENT THE EXISTING SUBCOMMITTEES OR ANY BOARD OR COMMISSION THAT MIGHT MEET BETWEEN NOW AND THE TIME THEY'RE ALL ABLE TO APPOINT A SUBCOMMITTEE DOESN'T PREVENT ANY OF THEM FROM BEING ABLE TO DISCUSS THIS -- DISCUSS IT AND AID US IN OUR DISCUSSIONS.

>>WYNN: AGREED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER ARE MAKING THAT PART OF THE DISCUSSION. I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL THING ABOUT THIS FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS THE OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS, INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL, BUSINESS, DEVELOPER AND NEIGHBORHOOD INTERESTS. THE BROADNESS OF IT IS THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL THING AND WOULD DRIVE THE OTHER -- AND BE VERY MUCH A PART OF AND A DETERMINING PART OF THE OTHER FOUR. SO IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO NUMBER ONE, THEN -- WHICH IS NUMBER ONE, I WOULD WITHDRAW MY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. WELL, IT WASN'T CONSIDERED -- TWO OF THEM WEREN'T CONSIDERED FRIENDLY. AND AS A MAKER OF THE MOTION, WHAT I HAVE INTERPRETED COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AS ATTEMPTING TO DO IS ADD SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING AS PART OF HIS MOTION, SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD SINCE THE OTHER TWO ITEMS WERE ALREADY ACCEPTED, UNLESS HE WANTS TO WITHDRAW THEM -- .

>>WYNN: NO, I LIKE THEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO YOU'RE WITHDRAWING THE PROPOSED FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, BUT -- .

>>GRIFFITH: SINCE THE FOUNDATION OF IT IS NOT GOING TO BE THERE, YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FAIR ENOUGH. I HEAR YOU. SO NOW, COUNCIL, WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US IS COUNCILMEMBER WYNN'S MAIN MOTION WITH FOUR CHANGES THAT HE HAS PUT ON REGARDLESS OF HOW IT FIRST GOT HERE. ONE RELATES TO THE CITY MANAGER COMING BACK WITH A PROPOSAL FOR GUIDELINES OF THE EXCHANGE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS OR TRANSFERS BETWEEN SOMEONE -- OVER THE AQUIFER AND SOMEONE IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. THE EXACT LANGUAGE I'M RELYING ON OUR CLERK TO HAVE. SECOND IS AN ESTABLISHMENT OF CRITERIA, FINANCIAL -- SETTING CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS INCLUDING FINANCIAL, OVER THE HE HAD HE DID. THIRD IS THE CITY MANAGER -- THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER. THIRD IS THE CITY MANAGER DOING AN ANALYSIS OF THE SCIENTIFIC DATA THAT WE HAVE IN CONJUNCTION WITH RELEVANT REGULATORY AGENCIES AND REPORTING BACK TO US REGARDING WHAT WOULD BE -- IF ANYTHING IS MISSING AND WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE SCIENTIFIC STUDY WITH SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS. AND THE FOURTH IS TO REQUEST OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD. THE WATER AND WASTEWATER BOARD COMMISSION, THE MUELLER IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND THE PARKS BOARD, THAT THEY 8.3 PEOPLE TO A COMMITTEE THAT WE WILL CREATE THAT WILL HAVE AN OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS ANALYZING ANYTHING RELATED TO A PROPOSED AGREEMENT OR EXCHANGE OR ANYTHING THAT GOES ALONG THOSE LINES. AND ONCE THAT'S DONE, THE COUNCIL WOULD BE IN A POSITION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT IS BALANCED AMONG ENVIRONMENTAL BUSINESS DEVELOPER AND NEIGHBORHOOD INTERESTS AND BE IN A POSITION TO APPOINT UP TO THREE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE AND THAT THAT WOULD NOT RESTRICT THOSE VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FROM GOING AHEAD AND MAKING MAKING -- VISITING, TALKING ABOUT IT, HAVING THE KIND OF MEETINGS THAT HAVE CURRENTLY BEEN ONGOING. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WENT ON UNTIL AFTER MIDNIGHT LAST NIGHT WITH REGARD TO THESE ITEMS. NOW, THE ONE OTHER THING IS I THINK I SCREWED SOMETHING UP BECAUSE I SAID THAT WE EARLIER AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS THAT WE COULDN'T DO IT IN 30 DAYS BECAUSE WE WERE NOT MEETING IN 30 DAYS, SO I TALKED ABOUT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. THAT WOULD BE NEXT WEEK. WHAT I MEANT WAS THE COUNCIL MEETING AFTER NEXT WEEK. AND -- SO IT WOULD BE IN JANUARY. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU REALLY MEANT AND YOU TOO, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>WYNN: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. COUNCIL, WHAT I'M GOING TO DO AT THIS POINT IS WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE'VE TRIED TO REACH SOME CONSENSUS AND HAVEN'T DONE IT AS WELL AS MAYBE SOME OF US WOULD HAVE LIKED, WHAT I'M GOING TO NOW SUGGEST WE DO IS WE -- WITH THAT MOTION OUT THERE, WE GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC AND AT THAT POINT IF WE WANT TO DO ANY MORE AMENDMENTS OR OFFER SUBSTITUTE, I'LL CALL US ON ON THAT. SMA OKAY? MAYOR PRO TEM, DO YOU HAVE OBJECTION ON TO THAT?

>>GOODMAN: A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE COULD DO A BETTER JOB BEFORE WE WENT TO THE PUBLIC.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IF YOU HAVE AN OBJECTION, THAT'S WHY I SAID GO AHEAD.

>>GOODMAN: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, COULD I ASK YOU FOR CLARIFICATION IN THE ADDITION THAT YOU JUST MADE TO YOUR LANGUAGE ABOUT THE OPEN FEW SILL AT A TIMED, EXPEDITED PROCESS -- FACILITATED, EX-PE DATED PROCESS, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE FACILITATOR?

>>WYNN: I'M OPEN TO THAT.

>>GOODMAN: WHAT I SUGGEST IS THAT THE ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATION THAT WAS MENTIONED, COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH MENTIONED IN ALL HER AMENDMENTS, CAN BE ACCOMMODATED. YOU DO NEED A FACILITATOR. AND I'D LIKE TO ALSO SUGGEST THAT THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, WHICH IS IN MANY MORE DISCUSSIONS THAN IT OUGHT TO BE ONE OF THOSE, IT WOULD TAKE A FACILITATOR. YOU COULD ALSO THEN EASILY ADD REPRESENTATIONS, SPECIFIC REPRESENTATION AND PARTICIPATION BY ENVIRONMENTAL, NEIGHBORHOOD AND BUSINESS FOLKS BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE SOMEONE WHO KNEW HOW TO HANDLE A MEETING OF THAT SIZE.

>>WYNN: GOOD COMMENT. I LIKE THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DO YOU CONSIDER A THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>>WYNN: YES, I DO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, WHAT I HEAR IS THAT'S URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, THEY WOULD ALSO BE REQUESTED AND THAT WHAT WE WOULD DO IS AS PART OF THE ANYBODY ELSE WE MIGHT APPOINT, WE WOULD APPOINT SOMEBODY WITH FACILITATION EXPERIENCE.

>>SLUSHER: APPOINT SOMEBODY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YEAH.

>>SLUSHER: I THINK THAT'S GOOD. I WOULD PREFER TO DO IT LIKE THAT THAN TO TRY TO HIRE SOMEONE. OR MAYBE WE HAVE PEOPLE ON THE STAFF I THINK THAT CAN HANDLE THAT. I WOULDN'T BE TOTALLY OPPOSED TO HIRING SOMEONE, BUT I THINK WE OUGHT TO FIRST TRY TO DO IT IN HOUSE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE AFTER?

>>GOODMAN: JUST A GOOD FACILITATOR. I DON'T CARE WHERE WE GET THEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. THEY CONSIDER THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE MAYOR PRO TEM? ALL RIGHT. -- .

>>THOMAS: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

>>THOMAS: WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR A GOOD WHILE AND WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I UNDERSTAND.

>>THOMAS: I THINK MAYBE WE CAN SOLVE SOME OF THIS PROBLEM AS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION WITH A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. EVERYTHING SOUNDS SWELL, BUT THE WORDING THAT I HAVE CONCERNS WITH, AND I'VE MADE THEM BEFORE, IS REMOVE -- I LIKE THE CITY-OWNED PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. I THINK I WOULD REMOVE, ROBERT MUELLER, AIRPORT AND APPRAISAL OF ROBERT MUELLER ACCORDINGLY AND THE ROBERT MUELLER AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT. AND I THINK WE WOULD HAVE -- WE WOULD BE ON SMOOTH GROUND BECAUSE WE SAY THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE, THE CITY PROPERTY, THAT WOULD GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK INTO OTHER ISSUES, NOT TO LIMIT OTHER AREAS THAT WE MIGHT COULD UTILIZE OR SETTLE WITH STRATUS. THE REASON I SAID THAT IT'S A GOOD QUESTION IS IT'S BEST FOR MUELLER. WE HAVE TO GIVE A QUALIFICATION ON STRATUS. STRATUS HAS A HISTORY OF DEALING WITH TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT. THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY MIXED MAJOR PROJECTS. AND WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMEONE THAT HAS BEEN WORKING ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT FOR YEARS. I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS REMOVE -- MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO REMOVE THE COMMENTS -- TO REMOVE THE WORDING OF ROBERT MUELLER AIRPORT OUT OF THIS SPECIFIC RESOLUTION, PERIOD.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>>WYNN: NO. I THINK WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT ALL PROPERTY IN THE DDZ.

>> THAT WAS GOING IN THE SAME DIRECTION THAT COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS WAS GOING. AND I THINK WE'RE DOING A LOT OF THIS BEFORE WE EVEN HEAR THE PUBLIC SPEAK, SO I'M NOT SURE THE THAT THAT'S APPROPRIATE, BUT AT LEAST THE WAY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT DONE, BUT I LIKE ALL THE ADDITIONS, BUT THEY DON'T REALLY ADDRESS THE MUELLER QUESTION. AND IN THE BODY OF THE MOTION HERE YOU STILL HAVE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO DISCUSS THE FEASIBILITY AND TRANSFER OF A DIRECT EXCHANGE OF PROPERTIES. SO WHAT I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST IS WHENEVER WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A DECISION IS THAT WE REPLACE THE LANGUAGE EVALUATE AND DISCUSS THE FEASIBILITY OF WITH DEVELOP GUIDELINES FOR THE POTENTIAL TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY. AND THAT WAY WE'RE NOT DIRECTING ANY KIND OF NEGOTIATIONS, BUT WE'RE DIRECTING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF GUIDELINES FOR THAT TO HAPPEN THEORETICALLY IF WE EVER APPROVE THOSE GUIDELINES. AT SOME POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT -- I DON'T KNOW IF NOW INVITE NOW TIEM, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD ALSO ADDRESS WHAT COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS IS TRYING TO ADDRESS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: RIGHT. AND I THOUGHT I WAS CLEAR, BUT MAYBE I WASN'T. BECAUSE THERE WAS SUCH DIFFERENCES AND POINT OF VIEW ABOUT HOW WE GOT HERE, WHAT I WAS ATTEMPT TO GO DO WAS GET US, IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, TO AT LEAST A CLOSER POINT BEFORE WE OPENED IT UP TO 65 PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK WHERE THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LEVEL OF AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT IS. AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS I ASKED THE COUNCILMEMBERS IF THEY HAD ANY OBJECTION TO THAT. WE I THINK HAVE GOTTEN AS CLOSE AS WE CAN GET NOW WITHOUT HEARING FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, SO WHAT WE'LL DO NOW IS GO TO THAT PART OF IT. AND INTO THAT I WILL ASK AGAIN IF THERE ARE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OR SUBSTITUTE MOTIONS.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR, THAT WILL BE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, AND IT WILL BE -- IT WILL BE THE PURE VERSION THAT WE CAME IN WITH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I DIDN'T DOUBT THAT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET TO A CLOSER POINT.

>>GRIFFITH: RIGHT. I JUST WANTED THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THE UNADULL TRAITED VERSION WILL BE OFFERED AT SOME POINT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. MARY ARNOLD? MARY ARNOLD? SHE SIGNED UP AGAINST AND SAID THERE SHOULD BE A PUBLIC PROCESS, NOT CITY MANAGER NEGOTIATIONS. ROBERT SINGLETON? JEFF WOODROUGH? IS JEFF HERE? JEFF WOODRUFF. HE SIGNED UP AGAINST AND SAID THIS IDEA IS WELL INTENTIONED. LET'S HELP EVERYBODY AND WE ZONE BEFORE WE TUCK TALK. SUSAN ALMANZA SIGNED UP AGAINST. GO AHEAD, MR. SINGLETON?

>> SOMEONE WANTED TO GIVE ME AN EXTRA THREE MINUTES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHO? ADAM GALLONBUTTER? OKAY. I'LL LOOK FOR YOUR CARD. YOU WILL HAVE UP TO SIX MINUTES IF YOU NEED IT MR. SINGLE TON.

>> I THINK IN THE SPIRIT OF TRYING TO BRING EVERYONE TOGETHER, I THINK WE SHOULD GIVE COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER CREDIT ON THIS. HE DIDN'T WANT THE HEARING TO START UNTIL SIX TO NO ONE WOULD BE INCONVENIENCED. THINGS USED TO BE SO SIMPLE AT COUNCIL. I USED TO JUST LOOK AT BOB LARSEN AND JUST LOOK THE OTHER WAY. NOW I'M LOOKING AT COMPETING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH AND COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. NONE OF THEM CAN BE CONSTRUED AS RUINING BARTON CREEK OR CAN THEY BE AGAINST GOOD GOVERNMENT. IN A WAY SOMETIMES I ALMOST MISS LOUISE ESPECIALLY STEIN AND BOB LARSEN AND RONNIE REYNOLDS AND EVEN BRUCED TO BECAUSE THEY ALWAYS SERVED AS AN UNSWERVING COMPASS POINTING SOUTH AND PROCLAIM TG NORTH. SO I ALWAYS KNEW NO MATTER WHAT THEY WERE TELLING ME I KNEW WHAT THE TRUTH WAS. AND I SUPPOSE I SERVED A FUNCTION FOR THEM TOO. BRUCE TODD ALWAYS KNEW WHAT TIME IT WAS BECAUSE HE WAS ALWAYS LOOKING AT HIS WATCH. BEFORE I GET TO THE RESOLUTIONS ON THE TABLE, LET ME STATE THREE THINGS THAT I THINK ARE TRUE ABOUT THE STRATUS DEAL. AND THE FIRST ONE IS BEYOND OBVIOUS. THE TERM SHEET AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN IS GROSSLY INADEQUATE. NUMBER TWO, LAND SWAPS SHOULD HAVE PART OF THE NEGOTIATING UNIVERSE. AND I TALKED TO A WOMAN FROM THE REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT A LITTLE WHILE AGO AND ASKED HER IF A COUNCILMEMBER WERE TO ASK HER FOR A LIST OF PROPERTIES THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR A LAND SWAP, HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE TO PREPARE THAT LIST, SHE SAID IT COULD BE DONE IN A WEEK IF SOMEBODY SOMEONE ASKED HER TO DO IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT THESE TO BE PART OF THE MOTION OR NEEDS TO BE DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL, BUT IN A WEEK SHE SAYS SHE CAN HAVE YOU A LIST OF PROPERTIES THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR LAND SWAPS. AND THE THIRD POINTED IS WE HAVE MORE TIME THAN WE THINK. RICHARD SUTTLE IT WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION LAST NIGHT SAID IF THE DEAL WENT THROUGH TOMORROW, IT STILL MIGHT BE 20 YEARS BEFORE STRATUS STARTED BUILDING. HE LATER REVISED THAT DOWN TO FIVE YEARS, BUT HE DID SAY 20 YEARS. SO I THINK WE HAVE TIME TO SETTLE THIS. AND ABOUT MR. SUTTLE, I THINK HE'S A MARKSIST. HE'S INVOLVED WITH SO MANY PROJECTS, THAT I THINK HIS GOAL IS TO MAKE PEOPLE RISE UP AND REBEL. [LAUGHTER]. THERE SEEM TO BE SOME STICKING POINTS AND REALIZE THAT PART OF THIS WAS WRITTEN BEFORE THE MOST RECENT REWRITE OF THE VARIOUS MOTIONS AND THE OTHER VERSIONS, BUT THE STICK WILLING POINT SEEM TO BE IN THE WYNNE SLUSHER MOTION, WHAT NEGOTIATION MEANS AND I THINK WE PRETTY WELL GOT THAT SETTLED THAT IT DOESN'T MEAN BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND THAT EVERYBODY CAN PLAY. BUT THE SECOND STICKING POINT, AND IT IS NAMING ROBERT MUELLER IN THE DOCUMENTS LOCK US IN ANY WAY INTO ONE COURSE OF ACTION. DOES IT GIVE PREF REN TO THAT ALTERNATIVE OVER OTHER OPTIONS. AND IF THAT'S NOT THE INTENTION, THEN WHY ARE WE TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT MUELLER IN THIS. MUELLER IS BY DEFINITION A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT COULD BE TRADED. AND IF WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT LOOKING AT PEACES OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY TO TRADE, MUELLER SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT LIST. BUT I THINK NAMING IT ELEVATES IT TO A POSITION THAT MAY BE WE DON'T WANT TO PUT IT IN. WE WANT TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE UNIVERSE OF OPTIONS, NOT JUST TRADING MUELLER. AND THE FINAL THING THAT I SAW AS A STICKING POINT, IT WAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO RESOLUTIONS AND THE 45 DAYS VERSUS THE 30 DAYS IN THE SUBSTITUTE. AND MY QUESTION IS IS EITHER ADEQUATE? AND I THINK THAT'S BEEN CLEARED UP. YOU KNOW, AN EASIER WAY THAN SAYING THE COUNCIL MEETING FOLLOWING THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING WOULD BE TO LOOK AT THE CALENDAR AND SEE WHAT DATE OF THAT MEETING IS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I HAD JUST FORGOTTEN. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANYTHING YOU JUST SAID ABOUT IT.

>> OKAY. THE ESSENCE OF COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S RESOLUTION SEEMS TO BE THE FOUR POINTS OF PROFESSIONAL MEDIATION WITH OPEN PROCESS, A SCIENTIFIC STUDY, WHICH SEEMS TO BE THE LEAST ACCEPTABLE TO SOME OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS. THE CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND FOR THE GUIDELINES FOR THE LAND SWAP. I AM HOPING THAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH WILL OFFER THAT AS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOME THINGS IN ONE AND TWO THAT DEFINITELY SHOULD BE IN THIS, BUT IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, I THINK THERE'S AN AN AMALL GUM OF THESE TWO RESOLUTIONS THAT MAY BE WRITTEN THAT MAY BE BETTER THAN EITHER ONE OF THEM. AND WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IN THAT IN THE TWO RESOLUTIONS IS DROP ANY MENTION OF MUELLER AND OPTING INSTEAD FOR UNSPECIFIED LAND SWAPS. AND LET'S NOT FORGET MY FAVORITE TRADING CHIP, THAT PIECE OF LAND ON WALTER E. LONG LAKE BEFORE THE VOTERS PUT A PUMP IN THAT DEVELOPMENTED IDEA. AND LET'S NOT RULE OUT PURCHASE AND CONSERVATION EASEMENTS. I'M UP FOR ANOTHER BOND ELECTION. HOW ABOUT YOU GUYS? THE SECOND THING SHOULD BE TO USE COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S LANGUAGE ON HER FOUR MAJOR POINTS. THERE'S BOUND TO BE SOME REWORDING OF THE CONCEPT THAT SHE WANTS IN ONE AND TWO OF HER SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT CAN BE MADE ACCEPTABLE. I DON'T THINK YOU GUYS ARE THAT FAR APART ON WHAT YOU WANT TO DO ON THIS, AND I THINK THAT THAT LANGUAGE SHOULD BE INCLUDED, MAYBE IN SOME REVISED FORM IN WHATEVER YOU COME UP WITH. POINT 3 IN THE AMALL GUM IS A MOOT POINT BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST A 45 DAY DEADLINE, BUT WE'VE BEATEN THAT TO DEATH. AND THE FOURTH THING IS LET'S MAKE SURE IF IT'S NECESSARY THAT THE DIRECTIONS TO JUNE E PLUMBER TO PREPARE THAT LIST OF OTHER PROPERTIES THAT COULD BE SWAPPED ARE FACILITATED IN WHATEVER WAY THAT NEEDS TO BE. I HAVE ONE HANDWRITTEN COPY OF MY SUGGESTION FOR HOW TO CRAM THESE TWO THINGS TOGETHER, AND SO I THINK I'LL JUST CONCLUDE BY GIVING YOU THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IF YOU WILL GIVE THAT TO ME. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: WELL, MR. SINGLETON, I WAS GOING TO SAY IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU DOWN HERE AGAIN. I APPRECIATE THE HUMOR AND THE -- I'VE ALWAYS SAID THAT YOU'RE THOUGHTFUL AND OFFER ALTERNATIVES. AND I'M NOT TRYING TO DAMAGE YOUR REPUTATION BY SAYING SOMETHING -- .

>> I'LL BE TALKING TO YOU EARLIER IN DATE.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. I THINK THE CAMERAS WERE ON, SO IT'S ALREADY DONE MUCH. BUT AT LEAST NOW WE'RE TALKING IN PUBLIC. AND I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT ON THE -- AS FAR AS ASKING MS. PLUMBER TO GO AND IDENTIFY THOSE PROPERTIES, THAT WOULD BE IMPLICIT IN THE MOTION THAT WE HAVE ON THE TABLE, BUT, OF COURSE, WE WOULD HAVE TO PASS IT AS PART OF ALLOWING THE CITY MANAGER TO EVALUATE WHAT IS POSSIBLE, AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS HE WOULD DO IS ASK HER TO COME UP WITH THAT LIST, BUT FIRST WE WOULD HAVE TO PASS A MOTION. AND THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT WE COULD HAVE DONE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, BUT WE CHOSE TO DO IT OUT IN PUBLIC. BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR APPROACH.

>> THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND I'M GOING TO RISK SOMETHING HERE BECAUSE BECAUSE -- HE'S THE FIRST SPEAKER. I JUST DREAD WHAT THIS MAY BE OPENING UP. BUT I THINK YOU SAY SEVERAL THINGS THAT ARE RIGHT AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS TAECHTING TO CRAFT ON THE DIAS IN ORDER TO CREATE WHAT YOU REFER TO AS AN AMALGUM. FOR EXAMPLE, ME PERSONALLY, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW ANYBODY ELSE ON THE COUNCIL FEELS, BUT ME PERSONALLY, MUELLER DOESN'T HAVE TO BE -- ANY PIECE OF PROPERTY, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, CAN BE CONSIDERED. AND I DON'T INTEND TO SAY -- IN FACT, I HAVE PUBLICLY SAID, I SAID AT THE LAST MEETING, THAT I'M NOT SURE THAT THE MUELLER DEAL WITH WORK. I'VE GOT A LOT OF SKEP TA SISM ABOUT WHETHER IT CAN WORK. I JUST WANT TO BE IN A POSITION WHERE I CAN TALK ABOUT IT. SO IT WOULDN'T BOTHER ME IF IT WEREN'T MENTIONED IF IT WERE UNDERSTOOD THAT IT CAN BE TALKED ABOUT. AND SO I LIKE THE WAY YOU'VE APPROACHED THAT. AND I KNOW THAT COUNCILMEMBER WYNN HAS A THOUGHT ON THAT. AND I'LL RECOGNIZE HIM. AND AGAIN, I KNOW I'M RISKING THAT WE END UP AFTER EVERY PERSON SPEAKS DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT AT THIS POINT IT MIGHT HELP US GET TO SOMEPLACE. SO COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

>>WYNN: I WILL TELL YOU INITIALLY THAT THE DRAFT SIMPLY SAID CITY-OWNED PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. AND FRANKLY, I REALIZE THAT IF WE DIDN'T MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTOOD THAT MUELLER WAS IN THE DDZ THAT I THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE THIS HOWL THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO REAL QUICKLY DO SOME -- DO SOME INDEPENDENT MUELLER DEAL AND IN FACT THE WHOLE INTENT IS THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE, BUT IPED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SENSITIVE ABOUT MUELLER, INCLUDING MYSELF, IDENTIFY AND RECOGNIZE THAT MUELLER IS SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DDZ.

>> AND COULD I SAY ONE NICE THING ABOUT YOU GUYS BEFORE I GO? I FIGURE THAT'S A GREAT WAY TO ALSO GET MORE TIME. I LIKE THE WAY YOU'RE CONDUCTING THIS IN THAT YOU DID A MINIMAL AMOUNT OF DISCUSS IN WHAT YOU'RE DOING IN WAIT OF SUBSTITUTE MOTION AND THEN HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN FINALIZE IT. TOO OFTEN SUBSTITUTE MOTIONS COME AFTER PEOPLE HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I APPRECIATE THAT. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU. SO CLARIFY WHAT SUBSTITUTE MOTIONS WILL MEAN LATER, WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK ABOUT MUELLER. WHAT I'M TRYING TO BE SURE WE DON'T DO IS NEGOTIATE EXCLUSIVELY WITH ONE LANDOWNER BEFORE WE DO THE BIG NET AND TALK TO ANY OF THEM THAT WANT TO BE INVOLVED. WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM IS THE EXCLUSIVE, PREMATURE NEGOTIATIONS WITH ANY ONE DEVELOPER ANYWHERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MARY LAYMAN?

>> IS THIS BRIGHT LIGHT IN FRONT OF THE POETEDIUM NECESSARY?

>>MAYOR WATSON: I HAVE NO IDEA. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT IT'S FOR. IT COULD HAVE BEEN. I'LL GET SOMEBODY -- MS. LAYMAN, FOLLOWED BY JIM WALKER. AND THEN KATHY CRANSTON.

>> THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. [INAUDIBLE]. IT IS IMPORTANT TO A GENERATION OF AUSTINITES TO KEEP THE LAND THAT DOES BELONG TO THE CITY AND DEVELOP IT FOR THE WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS. [INAUDIBLE]. CALL FOR OPENNESS. I THINK IT'S VERY SIMPLE. AND IT'S A CALL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EXACTNESS AND FAIR PROCEDURE. AND I THINK THAT THIS COUNCIL AND I HOPE THE COUNCIL CAN GET TOGETHER BEHIND THEM. BUT WE ARE -- AND WE ARE ALSO IN AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT SINGLETON THAT -- AND WITH BEVERLY GRIFFITH THAT WE SHOULDN'T FOCUS OUR ATTENTION EXCUSE LIVE -- OWE EXCLUSIVELY ON MUELLER. BUT MUELLER DOES HAVE A UNIQUE ROLE. WE ARE REALLY DELIGHTED WITH THE LATEST VERSION OF THE WYNNE-WATSON-SLUSHER PART OF THIS BECAUSE -- [INAUDIBLE]. HOW CAN YOU NEGOTIATE WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE NEGOTIATING? [APPLAUSE]. [INAUDIBLE]. [INAUDIBLE]. -- LEASING MUELLER WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT AS AN ALTERNATIVE OR SUPPLEMENT TO SWAPPING LAND BECAUSE AS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS FROM THE [INAUDIBLE]. [INAUDIBLE]. WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH TO BUY UP THIS TRACT OF LAND. [INAUDIBLE]. HERE ARE SOME OF THE APPRAISER'S REMARKS. THE AIRPORT LAND LEASE WOULD PROVIDE A GREATER DISCOUNTED LOSS TO THE CITY THAN THE PROJECTED MARKET VALUE THAT WOULD BE OBTAINED BY A CURRENT STAY SALE. THIS FINDING WAS BASED ON A RENT THAT WAS SUPPLIED TO ME BY TRAVIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT. [BUZZER]. F.

>> WHAT'S THAT MEAN.

>>GOODMAN: THAT MEANS YOUR TIME IS UP.

>> I'M THROUGH?

>>GOODMAN: YES, MA'AM.

>> CAN I -- OKAY. I'M PASSING IT AROUND TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCILL WITH THE REMINDER THAT ONLY LAND OWNERSHIP ASSURES CONTROL OVER THE LAND. WE ALWAYS HAVE YEAR AFTER YEAR THE INCLUDE OF LEASING MUELLER TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS. [BUZZER]. AND OTHERWISE ACCORD TO GO A NUMBER OF -- [INAUDIBLE].

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, MARY. JIM WALKER? [APPLAUSE]. FOLLOWED BY KATHY CRANSTON.

>> SHE'S HARD TO FOLLOW. I DOPT TO SAY FIRST I DO AGREE THAT WE NEED TO LOOK. THE QUESTIONS ARE HUGE FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS PROJECT. THE FIRST HAT I WANT TO WEAR AS PRESIDENT OF THE AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD'S COUNCIL. GER TRUD HAS DONATED HER THREE MINUTES. AS WELL AS SCOTT WHITE. GERTRUDE GREEN AS SCOTT WHITE HAVE BOTH DONATED TIME TO ME. IS THAT ALL RIGHT?

>>GOODMAN: ARE SCOTT AND GERTRUDE HERE?

>> THEY BOTH DONATED THEIR TIME.

>>GOODMAN: GREAT. I'LL FIND THEM.

>> THANK YOU. AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL BACKS TWO RESOLUTIONS, ONE RELATED TO STRATUS PROPOSAL AND ONE TO THE ROBERT MUELLER REDEVELOPMENT AT THEIR LAST REGULAR MEETING. AND I BELIEVE THAT YOU'VE ACTUALLY ADDRESSED THE STRATUS ISSUE WHERE THE RESOLUTION WAS THAT ANC RECOMMENDED THE CITY COUNCIL TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO MAKE A COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY FOR THE BREEKZ ZONE AND IN NEGOTIATING WITH STRATUS. I BELIEVE YOU'VE ADDRESSED THAT. THE AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL ON MUELLER SUPPORTED THAT THEY SELECT THE MASTER DEVELOPER FOR MUELLER PREER TO ANY DISTRIBUTION OF LAND INED LAND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS. I THINK YOU ARE TOUCHING ON THAT AND PROBABLY WILL RETURN BACK TO THAT. ALSO AT ANC WE WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE IN THE SOUTHWEST AREA THAT ARE ALREADY OUT IN THE AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND THEY ARE WRAPPED UP IN ALL THIS AND THEY DESERVE IN MANY REGARDS TO HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING, NOT NECESSARY CAPITAL N, CAPITAL M, BUT AS TO HOW THIS ALL EFFECTS THEM AND I HOPE YOU WOULD CONSIDER THEM NEIGHBORHOODS IN THIS FIGHT AS WELL. WEARING MY HAT AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MUELLER NEIGHBORHOODS COALITION, I HAVE A SERIES OF COMMENTS. WE UNDERSTAND WHY WE'VE -- WE'VE ALWAYS UNDERSTOOD WHY THIS WOULD BE TALKED ABOUT AND IS BEING DISCUSSED. SO WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH WHY. I THINK, THOUGH, THAT WE HAVE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT IT WAS TOO EARLY TO REALLY SERIOUSLY CONSIDER DOING THIS. WE DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THE SPEED AT WHICH THIS IS PROCEEDING RIGHT NOW. IT'S TOO EARLY TO PROPERLY KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET OUT OF MUELLER, WHAT THE OPPORTUNITIES ARE OF THE MASTER PLAN. WE'VE ALWAYS SUPPORTED PUBLIC DISCUSSION, WE'VE ALWAYS SUPPORTED TALKING ABOUT IT. I THINK WHAT CONCERNS ARE FOR THE OPPOSITION THAT YOU ARE FEELING AND YOU MIGHT HEAR TONIGHT IS COMING FROM THE FACT THAT WE'RE COMMITTED TO MUELLER BEING A GREAT PROJECT. AND WE HAVE AN ACUTE FEAR THAT EVALUATING AND DISCUSSING A SWAP PERHAPS ISN'T THE BEST WAY TO ASSURE THAT THIS BECOMES A GREAT PROJECT. STRATUS COULD BE THE BEST. I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING, ANY RULES IN PLACE, ANY ZONING, ANY PERFORMANCE GUIDELINES ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN A WHOLE ARRAY OF OTHER THINGS BY WHICH TO EVALUATE THE DEVELOPER, STRATUS OR OTHERWISE. AND I THINK THAT'S SOME OF WHAT YOU'RE HEARING ARE CONCERNS ABOUT WHY WE WANT TO FINISH IT. YOU ALL HAVE MADE A GREAT STEP HERE LAST WEEK BY INITIATING ALL THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR DOING THAT. LETTING GO. LET IT KEEP GOING. LET IT GET DONE. AND BY THAT I MEAN HAVING REZONING AND HAVING SOME PERFORMANCE ORDINANCES IN PLACE. THAT'S A CERTAINTY THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. I HEAR DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNITY AND STRATUS AND THE CITY TALK ABOUT NEEDING CERTAINTY. THAT'S ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR AS WELL. AND I KNOW THAT YOU ALL AGREE WITH THAT. SO I'M JUST SAYING WE NEED TO GET THERE BEFORE WE CONSIDER TRADING THIS THING. I THINK THE FEAR THAT YOU'RE HEARING ABOUT DIRECTING THE ATTORNEYS TO EVALUATE AND DISCUSS THE SWAP IS THAT -- THAT ROBERT JUST TOUCHED ON. ONCE YOU SEND THEM AWAY TO EVALUATE AND DISCUSS, THERE'S A PERCEPTION THAT ON JANUARY 18TH THEY'RE GOING ON COME BACK WITH A PROPOSAL, AND AT THAT POINT OUR INPUT MAY BE MORE MOOT THAN IT IS RELEVANT. I KNOW THERE'S SOMEBODY NOBODY'S INTENTION. I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT'S A PERCEPTION THAT WE'RE ALL WRESTLING WITH RIGHT NOW. AND WHAT YOU'RE HEARING A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT THIS. AND IF I WAS EVER ASKED, I WOULD DEFINITELY SAY THAT OUR CONCERNS ARE NOT OVERBLOWN IN THIS REGARD. AND IF ANYBODY THINKS THAT OUR CONCERNS ARE BLOEFER BLOWN, I WOULD LOVE TO TALK TO THEM. ON THE IDEA OF AN APPRAISAL SPECIFICALLY, I THINK THAT LANGUAGE IS STILL IN THE MOTION. HERE ARE MY CONCERNS ABOUT AN APPRAISAL. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR MORE INFORMATION. I UNDERSTAND WANTING TO KNOW THE VALUE OF SOMETHING BEFORE YOU START DISCUSSING DISTRIBUTION OF IT. BUT AS I UNDERSTAND LAND APPRAISAL, PROPERTY APPRAISAL, YOU ARE APPRAISING WHAT EXISTS, NOT WHAT MIGHT EXIST. AND WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT THERE IS A LOT OF RUNWAY THAT NEEDS TO BE DEMOLISH AND A PLAN WHICH MIGHT GET LAID DOWN IN ZONING. WE'RE 99% SURE THAT IT WILL, BUT I DON'T KNOW ANYONE HERE THAT CAN TELL ME WHAT THE ZONING WILL BE THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE TO ACHIEVE THE MASTER PLAN. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT AN APPRAISER IS GOING TO APPRAISE THERE. I WOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT THAT. I WOULD BE WORRIED THAT WE WOULD BE UNDERVALUING MUELLER INADVERTENTLY BY NOT HAVING SOME OTHER PREDICTABILITY IN PLACE. IF SOMEBODY CAN CORRECT ME ON THAT THAT KNOWS MORE ABOUT APPRAISAL THAN I DO -- AND I WILL AGREE WITH WHAT WAS SAID A SECOND AGO, WHICH IS GET MORE APPRAISALS IN OF PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. DEFINITELY AGREE WITH CONSIDERING THE UNIVERSE OF PROPERTIES ABOUT WHAT ELSE IS POSSIBLE. AND WHAT -- AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, I'M VERY NERVOUS ABOUT VALUING THE LAND AT MUELLER, VALUING ACREAGE BECAUSE THAT ACREAGE, FOLKS IS GOING TO GO UP. WE DON'T NEED TO PRIME THE PUMP ON DEVELOPMENT AT MUELLER. I JUST -- I THINK THAT THING IS GOING TO GET DEVELOPED. WE DON'T NEED TO HELP THAT THING GET DEVELOPED. YOU KNOW, I JUST THAT THIS OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT 15 YEARS IT WILL GO THROUGH AT LEAST ONE CYCLE OF DOWN TURNS, OKAY, BUT IT'S GOING TO GO UP. IF YOU GO TO AVIATION RIGHT NOW AND IT'S TORN UP RUNWAYS. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO PRIME THAT PUMP. THE FOUR AMENDMENTS THAT I UNDERSTAND ARE ON THE TABLE, THOSE ARE ALL GREAT. I LOVE INVOLVING THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. YOU MIGHT DIRECT THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND STRATUS TO PRESENT TO THE UBER COMMISSION THAT Y'ALL CREATED TONIGHT ON WHAT THEY BELIEVE KIND OF THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS SHOULD BE AND WORK WITH THAT COMMISSION ON DEVELOPING THE GUIDELINES. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT COMMISSION. THE UBER COMMISSION IS A GREAT IDEA THAT HELPS KEEP IT IN THE PUBLIC REALM, WHICH IS A DR. IDEA. AND -- A GREAT IDEA. AND IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT MILER CAN BE TALKED ABOUT. WHAT -- WHAT WE THINK IS TOO EARLY TO BE UNDERSTOOD IS SERIOUSLY VALUING OR APPRAISING IT TO KNOW WHAT THE POTENTIAL FOR IT IS. BECAUSE NONE OF US IN THE ROOM, WE ALL WANT THIS TO BE A GREAT PROJECT. THAT IS THE ONE COMMON GROUND WE'RE ALL COPPING FROM, BUT WE'RE AGREEING NOW ON -- DISAGREEING NOW ON HOW FAST TO GET GOING ON IT. LET'S COMPLETE THE PROJECT FROM FOUR YEARS ON SO WE CAN ALL BE ASSURED WITH THAT. AND I KNOW I'M STARTING TO RAMBLE. THAT'S WHEN I KNOW IT'S TIME FOR ME TO SHUT UP. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME ON HERE. BUT PLEASE USE THE UBER COMMISSION.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU. YOU STILL HAVE -- UD A MINUTE 30 SECONDS LEFT, BUT LET ME ASK -- .

>> OKAY. I CAN GO -- .

>>GOODMAN: YOU CAN GIVE IT BACK.

>> OKAY. WELL, I THINK WHAT SOME OF THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAY, A LOT OF NEIGHBORS AROUND HAVE SPERVEG CONCERNS ABOUT HOW AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO AFFECT THEIR PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. FIGURING OUT WHAT THOSE CONCERNS ARE AND WORKING THEM INTO A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BE EASIER. IT'S -- BEFORE WE SIGN A CONTRACT WITH THEM ABOUT THEM HAVING A VALUED RIGHT, A VESTED INTEREST THERE. AND THEN THE OTHER SOCIAL GOALS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THE WALK TO WORK, THE BUY IN WE HOPE TO GET FROM MAJOR EMPLOYEES THAT WE -- EMPLOYERS THAT WE HOPE THE CITY WOULD PUSH, ALL OF THIS COULD BE EASY TO DO BEFORE A DEVELOPER IS GIVEN IT. 43 SECONDS OUT, I'LL WRAP IT UP.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: A QUESTION?

>>SLUSHER: I'M NOT CLEAR ON WHY YOU ASSUME THAT A CONTRACTED WOULD BE SIGNED BEFORE ANY OF THAT NEGOTIATION OR RESOLUTION OF IT TAKES PLACE.

>> I THINK THAT LOOKING AT THE TYPING OF THINGS, A SETTLEMENT NEEDS TO BE REACHED FAIRLY SOON, BUT GET TG REZONED, GETTING -- GETTING IT REZONED, GETTING EVERYTHING IN PLACE IS GOING TO TAKE LONGER THAN WE HAVE FOR A SETTLEMENT TO BE REACHED BECAUSE THEN YOU'RE DEVELOP AGRICULTURE VESTED INTEREST. WE'RE SAYING STRATUS, YOU HAVE A INTEREST, THAT WILL BE YOUR REVENUE SOURCE FOR UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES PAYING DOWN YOUR DEVELOPMENT. FINISH THE MASTER PLAN, LOCK IT IN AND THEN WE'LL COME IN AND LOCK DOWN THE VALUE.

>>SLUSHER: BUT YOU ASSUME HOW QUICKLY A SETTLEMENT IS GOING TO BE REACHED, SO YOU'RE TAKE TAKING IT OFF THE TABLE. EVEN THOUGH A MINUTE AGO YOU SAID YOU UNDERSTOOD THAT IT WAS ON THE TABLE.

>> I MAY NOT AGREE IT'S ON THE TABLE. I UNDERSTAND WHY IT IS. THERE'S TWO FAT BIRD SITTING ON THE GROUND AND WE'VE GOT A BIG ROCK. WE'VE GOT STRATUS AND MUELLER SITTING HERE AND IT VERY CONVENIENT TO SOLVE THOSE TWO THINGS TOGETHER, CONVENIENCE ISN'T NECESSARILY THE BEST REASON TO DO IT THOUGH. AND IF SOMEONE COULD EXPLAIN KNOW WHAT ASSURANCE WE WOULD GIVE -- THEY WOULD ACCEPT THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO COMPLETE EVERYTHING WITHOUT THEIR INTEREST BEING POSSIBLY PUTTING THAT AT RISK, -- DID THAT MAKE ANY SENSE. LUSH.

>>SLUSHER: IT MAKES SENSE, BUT THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT, AT LEAST THE MAIN MOTION THAT'S ON IS TO PERMIT DISCUSSION OF THE POSSIBILITY, SO THAT'S THE KIND OF QUESTION THAT WAS VERY APPROPRIATELY BE TAKEN UP AS PART OF THAT DISCUSSION. BUT SO FAR WE HAVEN'T EVEN REACHED THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE THE COUNCIL SAYING WE CAN -- .

>> EVERY OTHER PERSON I TURN AROUND, EVERY TIME I TURNED AROUND, SOMEBODY IS DISCUSSING THE MUELLER STRATUS SWOP WITH ME. IT'S BEING DISCUSSED. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE DISCUSSING IT. WHAT I UNDERSTAND Y'ALL ARE DOING TONIGHT IS YOU ARE DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND OUR ATTORNEYS TO FORM FORMALLY BEGIN DISCUSSING -- EVALUATING AND DISCUSSING THE FEASIBILITY OF A SWAP.

>>SLUSHER: THAT'S BASICALLY THE LANGUAGE, BUT THE -- WHETHER OR NOT PEOPLE ARE DISCUSSING IN THE COMMUNITY OR NOT, I'M SURE YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THAT. I KNOW YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THAT. BUT THE -- YOU'RE RIGHT. IT'S THE FORMAL STEP WHETHER IT CAN BE DISCUSSED. SO CONSENTLY ANY -- IT'S ALL SPECULATION AS TO -- WHICH I THINK IS -- THAT'S SORT OF MY POINT. YOU'RE ASSUMING THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN BEFORE SOMETHING ELSE HAPPENS WHEN -- AND THAT'S A VERY LEGITIMATE QUESTION, LIKE I SAID, BUT UNTIL WE APPROVE THE FACT THAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO EVEN CONSIDER THIS POSSIBILITY, THAT'S THE KIND OF QUESTION THAT CAN'T REALLY BE ANSWERED. SO I'M -- IT SORT OF SURPRISED ME YOU'VE ALREADY ASSUMED THE ANSWER TO THAT.

>> WHY I OPENED UP WITH THAT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU ALL ARE HAVING TO WRESTLE WITH TONIGHT IS THE PERCEPTION THAT ONCE YOU DIRECT THE ATTORNEYS TO DO THIS, TO BEGIN FORMALLY DISCUSSING IT, ONCE YOU'VE MADE THAT COUNCIL INTENTION, YOU'VE SET THAT POLICY DIRECTION, THEN THE -- A FEAR, A PERCEPTION IS THAT WHAT WE'LL COME BACK WITH IN JANUARY 18TH IS AN ACTUAL PROPOSAL.

>>SLUSHER: BUT MAYBE THE WAY SOME OF THE PERCEPTION GETS SET IS IF PEOPLE MAKE ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BEFORE YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE]

>>SLUSHER: BUT THAT'S ALL RIGHT. WE -- BUT I'M JUST WONDERING, IF YOU KNOW THAT NOW, AND THEN WHEN WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE PROCESS YOU ARE WORKING VERY HARD ON TO DO AN APPRAISAL?

>> I THINK THAT -- AND MY -- THE E-MAIL I SENT WITHOUT WAS VALUING -- THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL, IF IT'S A REAL ESTATE ACTION, IT IS YOUR HIRING SOMEBODY TO GO AND EVALUATE WHAT A PROPERTY IS WORTH AS IT SITS THERE ON THE GROUND. I HAVE NOT HEARD VERY MUCH WHERE YOU CALL AN APPRAISER SO YOUR HOUSE AND SAY HERE'S MY HOUSE, CAN YOU APPRAISE IT FOR ME? BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M GOING TO ADD ALL THESE IMPROVEMENTS SO JUST ROLL THAT INTO YOUR APPRAISAL.

>>SLUSHER: YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT ZONING IS THE MAIN THING YOU ARE SAYING.

>> I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT ZONE.

>>SLUSHER: IN YOUR MIND THIS RESOLUTION SAYS NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN UNTIL IT WAS ZONED AB IT SAYS ASSUMING THE ZONING AND THE PLANS AND -- BASICALLY -- LET'S DON'T DEBATE THAT. JUST -- IN YOUR SCENARIO, I'M JUST INTERESTED AT WHAT POINT -- YEAH, WHEN.

>> I THINK ONCE ZONING WAS APPROVED AND IN THE MARKET WAS WOULD THEN VIEW THE THING DIFFERENTLY ONCE IT HAD ZONING ON IT, THAT WOULD BE MY FUNDAMENTAL INTEREST WOULD BE TO HAVE A MODIFIED T AND D, WHATEVER WE'RE GOING TO DO, NO ONE CAN TELL US WHAT THE ZONING WOULD BE, WE HAVE A GOOD IDEA. THAT'S NI FUNDAMENTAL. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE IS LUXURY OF HAVING OTHER PERFORMANCE CRITERIA RELATED TO GUARANTEEING THE COMMUNITY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 25% AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SPREAD ACROSS HOUSING TYPE, INCOME TIME, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE ALL THAT STUFF TOO.

>>SLUSHER: YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S IN THE PLAN?

>> YES, I AM. BUT THIS JUST TALKS -- OKAY. I SEE THE RESOLUTION THAT APPRAISAL IS GOING TO GET A DIFFERENT CLAUSE FROM GETTING THE WHOLE THING APPROVED. AM I READING THAT WRONG?

>>SLUSHER: YES.

>> SO IT WON'T BE APPRAISED UNTIL IT IS REZONED.

>>SLUSHER: IT ASSUMES THE REZONING. DON'T COME BACK TO IT AGAIN. LET'S GO ON TO OTHER SPEAKERS.

>> YOU ARE NOT HEARING THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE. I WANT TO SEE HOW YOU TELL AN APPRAISER --.

>>SLUSHER: MAYBE WE CAN DISCUSS THAT IN THE QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. I'VE ALREADY WRITTEN IT DOWN.

>> I'M SORRY FOR TAKING UP MORE TIME THAN I SHOULD HAVE.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR? YES. THANK YOU. I HEARD YOUR CONCERN THAT THERE COULD BE A DOWNSIDE TO HAVING THE CITY'S LAWYERS AND STRATUS'S LAWYERS START TO NEGOTIATE PRIVATELY NOW. I'M READING YOUR AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION THAT SUPPORTS THE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL. IF THE LAWYERS FOR THE CITY AND THE LAWYERS FOR STRATUS START NEGOTIATING OUTSIDE THAT REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS THAT YOU AND -- AND OUR -- AND I WONDER WHERE THEY ARE, WHY WE'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION, YOU AND OUR ESTEEMED ROMA DESIGN GROUP HAVE SET UP, IF THOSE MEETINGS START HAPPENING, WHAT'S THAT GOING TO DO TO THE R.F.Q. AND RFC PROCESS?

>> I DON'T KNOW. AND I THINK THAT THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT. I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS YOU INTEND TO HAVE THEM LOOK AT. I WOULD HOPE THAT AS A RESULT OF THIS ACTION YOU ARE TAKING THE CITY MANAGER WOULD COME BACK WITH AN OPINION ON IF WE DO A SWAP, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE R.F.Q. THAT HAS BEEN CALLED FOR. THAT SHOULD BE PART OF WHAT THEY COME BACK WITH. I DON'T THINK THEY ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE NECESSARILY, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT YET. THERE'S A RISK, TO MY MIND, THAT ONE WOULD HURT THE OTHER. BUT --.

>>GRIFFITH: WHAT DO YOU THINK THE -- THE NATIONALLY RANKED EXCELLENT MASTER DEVELOPERS MIGHT THINK IF THEIR -- THERE ARE NEGOTIATIONS GOING ON WITH A LOCAL PRIVATE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY'S LAWYERS BEFORE THE R.F.Q. GOES OUT?

>> I CAN'T -- I DON'T KNOW. I CAN SPECULATE, BUT I GET IN TROUBLE WHEN I DO THAT.

>>GRIFFITH: I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MR. WALKER. I'M SORRY, MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, KATHY IF SHE IS HERE, --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: KATHY KRANSTON, JENNIFER MACK FAIL.

>>GOODMAN: I WANT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT OFTEN ENOUGH THERE IS NOT THE ACTUAL ZONING IN PLACE BEFORE THE EVALUATION OR APPRAISAL IS ASSUMED ON PROPERTY. APPROVALS OF ANY KIND ARE PART OF WHAT GOES INTO 1704, FOR INSTANCE, AND ALSO WHAT GOES INTO THE VALUE THAT YOU TELL A BANK A PIECE OF PROPERTY HAS. THEREFORE, THE ACTUAL ZONING CATEGORY WOULD BE LESS IMPORTANT THAN THE LAND USES THAT ARE PART OF THE PLAN AND THAT PLAN IS SOPD BY US EVEN -- ACCEPTED BY US EVEN BEFORE THE ZONING IS COMPLETE. BUT THE OTHER ACTION IS ALSO TO SEND THE PLAN INTO THE ZONING PROCESS. SO I THINK YOU DEFACTO HAS AN APPRAISAL EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN OFFICIAL APPRAISAL. AND I THINK THAT IN THE GENERAL CONSENSUS OF FOLKS WHO MAY FLY IN RESPONSE TO OUR R.F.P., IT'S NOT GOING TO REALLY MATTER TO THEM, I DON'T THINK, WHETHER WE'RE TALKING TO STRATUS OR NOT BECAUSE THE PLAN ITSELF HAS THE COMPONENTS INTACT AND IF IT'S PART OF THE OVERSIGHT OF THAT MASTER PLAN, THEY WOULD OVERSEE STRATUS AT WHATEVER, A RETAIL SITE, A RESIDENTIAL SITE OR WHAT HAVE YOU, THAT'S PART OF WHAT THE MASTER DEVELOPER WOULD DO. AND IF YOU WANT A PERCENTAGE TO BE GUARANTEED OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR WHATEVER ELSE, THAT GOES INTO THE OVERLAY OF THE OVERALL ZONING CATEGORY. SO EVERYTHING IS PROTECTED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: KATHY CRANSTON. KATHY CRANSTON. SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. JENNIFER MCPHAIL. JENNIFER SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. LILA, LEILA, LEVONSON. LEILA LEVONSON DIDN'T SIGN UP FOR OR AGAINST. MARK EMMERT. FOLLOWED BY DIANE EMMERT.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, GOOD EVENING. AUDIENCE GOOD EVENING. I'M HONORED TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK BEFORE YOU TONIGHT AND TO SPEAK TO A FEW ISSUES THAT ARE VERY DEAR TO ME. I FIRST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE HOW BLESSED WE ARE TO LIVE IN THIS WONDERFUL CITY. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF JEWELS, A NUMBER OF VERY IMPORTANT THINGS THAT WE WISH TO PRESERVE. ONE -- TWO OF THEM I WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT TONIGHT. THE FIRST IS OUR NATURAL JEWEL, THAT IS THE JEAN SPACE THAT WE HAVE IN THIS CITY. AND ALSO -- GREEN SPACE WE HAVE IN THIS CITY. AND ALSO THE OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP AND PROVIDE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO A CITY THAT DESPERATELY NEEDS IT. FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THE SIZE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT OVER THE EDWARDS AQUIFER IS -- IS A HUGE -- IT'S ENORMOUS, AND I THINK IT MERITS A LOT MORE DISCUSSION AND I'M IN FAVOR OF SOMEHOW GETTING MORE STUDIES IN TO LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT IT'S GOING TO MAKE, IN BRINGING IN -- I'M IN FAVOR OF COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR FURTHER STUDY, ALSO BUSINESS, ENVIRONMENTAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD PARTICIPATION. I THINK THIS -- THIS IS AN ENORMOUS -- IT'S NOT A SMALL DEVELOPMENT, THIS IS AN ENORMOUS DEVELOPMENT. AND SOMEONE POINTED OUT EARLIER THAT IT IS GOING TO COVER -- IT'S GOING TO BE EQUIVALENT TO FIVE, PERHAPS SIX BARTON CREEK MALLS OVER THE AQUIFER. I THINK THAT'S AN AMAZING -- THAT'S A HUGE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT AND WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT ROADS AND ADDITIONAL FACILITIES NEEDED. AND BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT PROVIDING SEWAGE AND MORE ROADS, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO THE AQUIFER AND TO TO THE WATER AND AIR QUALITY. I ALSO AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE -- THE MUELLER DEVELOPMENT. I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THIS -- IN FAVOR OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. IT'S VERY EXCITING. WE HAVE AN INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITY IN OUR HANDS AND I'M SO DELIGHTED WE'VE ASKED ROMA CONSULTANTS TO GIVE US FEEDBACK. AND I REALLY -- I REALLY WOULD BE MORE THAN DISAPPOINTED, OUTRAGED IF WE QUICKLY MAKE A DECISION ON GIVING THIS DEVELOPMENT TO -- TO SOMEONE IN PARTICULAR. I THINK WE NEED -- I SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S IDEA THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT ALL OF OUR OPTIONS AND ALLOW THIS TO GO ON A NATIONAL LEVEL TO GET IN EXPERTS TO DEVELOP THIS -- THIS AREA, AND BY LINKING IT TO -- YOU KNOW, HAVING A SWAP REALLY IS A CONCERN OF MINE. I'M VERY TROUBLED BY THIS. JUST WE'RE TRYING TO KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE. WITH ALL OF THIS -- [BUZZER SOUNDS] --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>> I SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S PROPOSAL AND I'M TOTALLY AGAINST THE CURRENT ONE AS IT STANDS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: AS THE NEXT SPEAKER COMES UP, IT MAY BE UNCLEAR TO FOLKS THAT STRATUS IS NOT COMING TO US FOR ANY KIND OF APPROVAL. THEY NEED NOTHING FROM US. THE APPROVAL IS YEARS BACK. THE ABILITY TO DEVELOP, AND I'M JUST -- FOR INFORMATION, I'M NOT ASKING FOR A RESPONSE, THERE IS NO APPROVAL FOR STRATUS DEVELOPMENT THAT COMES BEFORE THIS COUNCIL. IT'S ALL DONE LONG AGO. WHAT IS HERE OR WAS HERE WAS THE POSSIBILITY NO --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR RESPONSES. THE MAYOR PRO TEM HAS AN OPPORTUNITY WHEN SHE ASKS FOR IT TO BE RECOGNIZED SO SHE CAN MAKE POINTS OR COMMENTS TO THE PUBLIC.

>>GOODMAN: AND IT IS FOR INFORMATION. BECAUSE SOME FOLKS WHO HAVE TALKED TO ME LATELY SPEAK AS IF STRATUS HAS COME TO US FOR APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT AND WE ARE SAYING WE WILL OR WILL NOT APPROVE THAT DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE AT HAND. WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY AT THIS TIME IN HISTORY. THAT TOOK PLACE MANY YEARS AGO. SO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS YES, IT WILL MAKE AN IMPACT ON THE AQUIFER. IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN TRADE SOMETHING OF VALUE TO STRATUS SO THAT THEY DO NOT BUILD THERE SO THAT WE CAN TAKE SOME OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AND PUT IT ELSEWHERE. AND THAT'S THE REASON THAT MUELLER AND ANY OTHER PROPERTY THAT THE CITY OWNS CAME UP INTO THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE THAT'S A POSSIBILITY THAT WE HAVE CONTROL OVER. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. DIANE EMMERT.

>> I LIVE IN CENTRAL AUSTIN AND I HAVE TWO MAIN POINTS. FIRST OF ALL, I AM VERY TROUBLED AND I'M VERY OPPOSED TO ANY CLOSED DOOR MEETINGS THAT ARE DEALING WITH LAND USE. AND I WISH TO BE INFORMED ABOUT EVERYTHING DEALING WITH STRATUS PROPERTIES IN PARTICULAR, BUT ANY OF OUR LAND USE DISCUSSIONS. I WANT TO BE INFORMED, AS I SAID. AND THEREFORE I SUPPORT, EVEN THOUGH SHE DID NOT NOTIFY ME, I DIDN'T GET ANY E-MAILS OR ANYTHING FROM HER, BUT I DO SUPPORT WHAT I'VE HEARD TONIGHT, THOSE FOUR POINTS OF HERS, HER SUBSTITUTE MOTION AND I'M RELATING RIGHT NOW THAT FIRST POINT TO HER FIRST POINT. I JUST FEEL THAT WE NEED TO FORMALLY STATE THAT WE, THE HOMEOWNERS, THE PEOPLE INVOLVED NEED TO -- NEED TO BE AWARE OF WHAT IS GOING ON. AND THEN MY SECOND POINT IS I'M OPPOSED TO USING THE WORD NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS PROPERTIES. I FEEL THAT WE NEED TO SLOW DOWN. WE NEED TO STUDY. WE NEED TO DISCUSS. SO I DON'T -- I HESITATE TO SEE THAT WORD AT ALL. I'M A RETIRED TEACHER SO I'M A SENIOR CITIZEN. WHATEVER YOU DECIDE, IT WON'T AFFECT MY QUALITY OF LIFE. THE REST OF MY YEARS ARE GOING TO BE GREAT IN AUSTIN. HOWEVER, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT FUTURE GENERATIONS. I HAVE -- I HAVE FIVE GRANDCHILDREN. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC THAT'S GOING TO BE RESULTING. I LIVE ON ENFIELD, I LIVE CLOSE TO MOPAC. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO BE HAPPENING THERE. AND ALSO, I PERCEIVE SOME OF THE OLD AUSTIN PATTERNS, AND THAT WORRIES ME. FOR EXAMPLE, I'M AFRAID THAT WE'RE USING OUR FEAR OF SPENDING MONEY FOR FUTURE LAWSUITS. I'M A RETIRED TEACHER. I LIVE ON A LIMIT AMOUNT OF MONEY, BUT I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO PAY EXTRA TAXES, I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT, PROTECTING OUR CITY FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. [APPLAUSE]. DON'T WORRY WHAT STRATUS IS GOING TO DO. AND I'M ALSO CONCERNED THAT WE JUMP IN TOO QUICKLY AND SPEND MILLIONS OF MY TAX DOLLARS TO BUILD ROADS AND TO MAKE UTILITIES ACCESSIBLE FOR THESE OTHER PLACES WHEN WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS DESTROYING OUR CITY. SO I WANT TO PUT A HALT TO --. [APPLAUSE]. YOU ARE TAKING UP MY TIME. I WANT TO PUT A HALT TO LINING SOME DEVELOPERS' POCKETS. I'M SAYING LET'S FIGHT FOR OUR QUALITY OF LIFE HERE IN AUSTIN. LET'S PRESERVE BARTON SPRINGS. LET'S LET OUR GRANDCHILDREN OR MAYBE YOUR CHILDREN, OR YOU, OUR YOUNGER PEOPLE, I WANT TO PRESERVE IT FOR YOU. I'M AN OLD LADY. I DON'T NEED IT. BUT I WANT TO LOOK TO THE FUTURE AND NOT JUMP INTO SOMETHING. SO SLOW DOWN. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: DAWN SMITH. DAWN SMITH. DAWN SMITH. PUT A QUESTION MARK BY WHETHER HE IS FOR OR AGAINST OR NEUTRAL BUT WROTE WE'RE GETTING THE CART WAY IN FRONT OF THE HORSE. ADOPTION OF ROMA PLAN AND REZONING LAND TO MATCH PLAN NEEDS TO BE DONE FOR ANY LAND DEAL. TIM JONES. IS NANCY SCANLON HERE? NANCY SCANLON SIGNED UP AGAINST. DANA BLANTANT SIGNED UP AGAINST. SANDRA TROXELL SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

>> MAYOR, CITY COUNCILL, MY NAME IS TIM JONES. I'M ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE. ANY COMMENTS I MAKE TONIGHT AREN'T DERIVED FROM WHAT WE DISCUSS IN THAT SUBCOMMITTEE PARTICULARLY. BUT ARE MORE DERIVED FROM MY INVESTIGATION OF BARTON CREEK. AND THE FIRST THING I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU ARE TWO PHOTOGRAPHS THAT I MADE ON THE 25TH OF NOVEMBER AND THEN AGAIN LAST SATURDAY. I'M GOING TO PASS THOSE AROUND. PERHAPS I COULD PUT THOSE ON CAMERA SO THE OTHER WATCHERS COULD SEE WHAT THOSE ARE REFLECTING. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT OR WHAT YOU ALL WILL BE SEEING ARE TWO PHOTOGRAPHS OF BARTON CREEK AS IT EXISTS THIS FALL. IN BOTH OF THEM THERE IS A MASSIVE ALGAE BLOOM. THE FIRST IS JUST ABOVE CAMPBELL'S HOLE. IT'S AN ALGAE BLOOM THAT GOES ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE CREEK IN ALL OF THE WHITEWATER. AND THIS ALGAE BLOOM IS IN WHITEWATER ALL THE WAY FROM CAMPBELL'S HOLE THROUGH SCULPTURED FALLS. I FIND THAT SOMEWHAT ALARMING. THIS KIP TYPE OF ALGAE IS A POLLUTER ALGAE. VERY SUCCINCTLY CRAIG SMITH SAID THAT [INAUDIBLE] AND WHAT I'M SEEING IS DEATH OF A STREAM. I'M VERY ALARMED ABOUT THIS ONE. WHAT I'M EVEN MORE ALARMED ABOUT IS WHEN LEE CHAIRED THE BOARD AND WE WENT TO LOST BOULEVARD WE DIDN'T SEE ANY ALGAE. WHAT WE SAW WAS A RUSTY BROWN SLIME ON THE ROCKS. AND WE KNOW THERE IS A HISTORY OF CLUB CORE FOR BARTON CREEK PROPERTIES OR WHOEVER HAVING USED AN HERB SIDE TO KILL THE ALGAE THAT WAS BEING GENERATED BY THEIR GOLF COURSES. AND THERE WAS, LASTLY, A CLAIM THAT THERE WAS HYDRILLA IN ONE OF THEIR PONDS AND THEY WERE GOING TO TREAT THE HYDRILLA IN SOME WAY. AND I PERHAPS -- ALL OF THE CREEK ADJACENT TO THEIR PROPERTY HE PAST LOST CREEK BOULEVARD. I'M NOT LAYING BLAME HERE. ALL I'M SAYING IS FROM MY OBSERVATIONS -- [BUZZER SOUNDS].

>> I HAVE ANOTHER THREE MINUTES IF I MAY CONTINUE FROM KIM DONNER.

>> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC ON].

>> AND THAT'S ABOUT ALL I WANT TO SAY. WE HAVE AN ALGAE BLOOM, WE HAVE AN ALGAE KILL.

>> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC ON] [LAUGHTER].

>> WE WENT ABOVE -- JUST TO FINISH THAT OFF, WE WENT ABOVE BARTON CREEK PROPERTIES TO HIGHWAY 71 WHERE IT CROSSES BARTON CREEK TODAY AND ONCE AGAIN NOTICED A SLIGHT FILM OF ALGAE ON THE ROCKS FURTHER CONFIRMING MY ASSERTION THAT SOMETHING IS HAPPENING IN THE CREEK DOWN BELOW THESE GOLF COURSES THAT WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE HAPPENING IN THAT CREEK. THIS BRINGS US TO WHAT I REALLY WANTED TO SAY WITH RESPECT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT AND THE LAND SWAP. THERE ARE CERTAIN PARCELS OF STRATUS PROPERTY THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE INCLUDED. SECTION N IS THE PRIMARY PARCEL. THAT IS WHERE THEY WANT TO PUT A GOLF COURSE ALONG THE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY. THAT IS WHERE IF THEY DON'T GET A SEWER LINE, THEY ARE GOING TO DO EFFLUENT IRRIGATION FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. THERE ARE INDEED DEVELOPMENTS, THEIR CLUBHOUSE, RESORT CENTER, AND SOME 1600 APARTMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE ADJACENT TO AND ALONG SICK MORE CREEK. THAT SICK MORE -- SYCAMORE CREEK FLOWS THROUGH SECTION N ALONG SIDE THE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY, THEN IT GOES TO TRAVIS COUNTRY AND ENDS UP IN BARTON CREEK ABOUT 200 YARDS UPSTREAM OF TWIN FALLS. IF WE PUT A GOLF COURSE THERE, THE SAME EFFECT THAT WE'RE SEEING IN BARTON CREEK DOWNSTREAM OF BARTON CREEK PROPERTIES GOLF COURSES ARE GOING TO BE COMING IN JUST ABOVE TWIN FALLS. AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. I DON'T THINK RICHARD SUTTLE WANTS TOO SEE THAT HAPPEN. AND THAT'S WHY I'M MAKING A VERY STRONG EMPHASIS ON NOT DEVELOPING SECTION N IN ANY WAY. AND CERTAINLY ELIMINATING THE POSSIBILITY OF A GOLF COURSE BEING PUT IN THERE. ANOTHER PRIORITY FOR ACQUISITION, THE PROP 2 KIND OF ACQUISITION, LAND SWAP, HOWEVER WE'RE GOING STOD IT, I THINK THE APPROACH YOU ARE HAVING IS APPROPRIATE. I REALLY DON'T CARE HOW YOU DO IT. ALSO THAT PORTION OF LANTANA THAT'S ADJACENT AT THE CORNER OF VEGA AND THE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY, THAT'S IN THE BARTON CREEK WATERSHED, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THERE BEING SOME ADJUSTMENT IN DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY ON THAT -- ON THOSE FOUR PARCELS UP THERE WHICH ARE NOW GENERAL RETAIL, GENERAL OFFICE, LIMITED OFFICE. ALSO IF THERE WAS ANYTHING LEFT FROM CITY LAND THAT WE COULD MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT TO ATTENUATE THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT OVER THE AQUIFER, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT TRACT OF LAND AT BRODIE AND SLAUGHTER LANE, WHICH IS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER, THE LOW BLOWING -- PARDON ME, SINK TRACT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT ACQUIRED. AND THEN THERE ARE -- THERE IS A LIST OF PRIORITIES THAT WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING, GOING TO MOPAC AND SLAUGHTER LANE AND THEN -- [BUZZER SOUNDS] --. AND I WILL QUIT AT THAT POINT. BUT THOSE ARE THE PRIORITIES I WOULD LIKE TO SEE EMPHASIZED. THANK YOU.

>> I AM FOR THE CITY NEGOTIATING WITH STRATUS TRADING MUELLER AIRPORT PROPERTY FOR BARTON CREEK LAND OWN OWNED BY STRATUS. I CAN'T MAKE OUT THIS WORD. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT SHOULD BE REQUIRED. I SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S PROPOSAL.

>> GOOD EVENING, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M SANDRA TROSTEL, I LIVE IN DELLWOOD 2 AREA AND BEFORE MOVE TO GO AUSTIN SOME SIX YEARS AGO I LIVED IN LOS COLINAS, WHICH IS ONE OF THE VERY OLD DEVELOPMENTS OF A MASS TER PLANNED COMMUNITIES IN IRVING, TEXAS. AND I LOVED LIVING THERE, BUT I DECIDED NOT TO GO BACK THERE BECAUSE I'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO LIVE IN AUSTIN AND I REALLY DO ADMIRE THE COMMUNITY TURNING OUT HERE AND REALLY FIGHTING FOR -- TO PRESERVE SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY QUITE UNIQUE. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE HEARD THIS EVENING THAT REALLY DOES BRING TO MY MIND WHY I'M HERE IS THAT THERE IS A LOT OF DISTRUST IN TERMS OF THE PROPOSAL THE WAY THAT IT WAS WRITTEN, AND A LOT OF THAT SEEMS TO BE BECAUSE THERE IS NOT A PROCESS THAT'S LAID OUT THAT SHOWS US STEP BY STEP EXACTLY WHAT WE'LL DO BEFORE WE DECIDE TO SWAP LAND OR TO MAKE ANY KIND OF A DEAL WITH A DEVELOPER. AND I THINK THE PROCESS IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO DEVELOP NOW AND FOR THE FUTURE AS WELL. THAT'S THE WAY THAT YOU ARE GOING TO GET THE COMMUNITY BEHIND YOU IS BY SHEDDING THE LIGHT OF DAY ON THE PROCESS. SO I REALLY DO FAVOR THE ZONING THAT WAS PROPOSED THAT, THAT WE REALLY LAY THAT OUT, AND WOULD LIKE TO COMMEND ALL OF THE PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AROUND MUELLER FOR ALL OF THEIR HARD WORK AND TIME. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. MARY THORNTON.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MARY THORNTON SIGNED UP AGAINST AND SAYS I SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S PROPOSAL. YES TO CITY NEGOTIATING WITH STRATUS. MORE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT. LINDA SPARKS. SHE IS AGAINST CLOSED NEGOTIATIONS, PUBLIC PLEASE. GARY THORNTON WRITES HE IS AGAINST CLOSED NEGOTIATIONS. PLEASE MAKE NEGOTIATIONS OPEN TO PUBLIC. D. E. LAKE WRITES I'M AGAINST -- I'M FOR THE CITY TRADING MUELLER PROPERTY FOR BARTON CREEK PROPERTY. STRATUS COULD DEVELOP AT MUELLER WHILE HELPING THAT AREA. LARRY SMITH SIGNS UP AGAINST. LINDA THOMASON AGAINST. MIKE HARTWELL AGAINST. ROGER TAYLOR, DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK? OR JUST BE SHOWN AGAINST?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU ARE WELCOME TO DO THAT. YOU SIGNED UP. PLEASE COME FORWARD. RUSTY OSBORNE. RUSTY OSBORNE. RUSTY OSBORNE. RUSTY OSBORNE SIGNED UP FOR. ROBERT SCHNEIDER. MR. SCHNEIDER, IF YOU WILL MAKE YOUR WAY UP HERE.

>> I'M ROGER TAYLOR, A RESIDENT OF JJ SEE BOOK ASSOCIATION DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE AIRPORT. I LIVE AT 1906 GREENWOOD AVENUE, I'VE BEEN THERE SINCE 1962. I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL FOR SUPPORTING WILL WYNN'S EFFORTS TO TRY TO SAVE THE TOWER OVER THERE. I BROUGHT THAT UP -- I WAS A LITTLE BIT UPSET BECAUSE I SAW THE MAYOR CHASTISE JIM WALKER BY MENTIONING IT LAST WEEK A LITTLE LATE. I BROUGHT THAT UP ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, BUT TO THE ROMA GROUP. BUT WE COULDN'T GET ANY FURTHER THAN FIRST BASE. SO AT ANY RATE, I'M GRATEFUL THAT YOU ALL DECIDED TO TRY TO SUPPORT MY EFFORTS. I THINK THAT THE TOWER COULD SERVE AS A LANDMARK. I THINK THAT THE FOOTPRINT THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT COULD BE DONE. I WANT TO KNOW -- I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU'VE DONE FOR THAT. NOW, ON THE OTHER ISSUE, I'M LEANING TOWARDS COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH BECAUSE I'VE LISTENED TO CONVERSATION AND I WAS ALWAYS TAUGHT AND I BELIEVE IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON, YOU JUST SAID NO. BUT LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING, SOME OF US -- SOME OF US HAVE BEEN FIGHTING WITH THIS MUELLER THING SINCE ABOUT 1984 AND I'M ONE OF THEM. I'VE BEEN IN FRAFL COURT. I'VE WALKED, -- FEDERAL COURT. I'VE WALKED, MARCHED, DONE EVERYTHING. WE WERE HOPING SOME DAY WE COULD GET THAT AIRPORT MOVED, WHICH WE HAVE DONE. WE SPENT A LOT OF HOURS. I'VE SPENT A LOT OF HOURS WITH THE ROMA GROUP PROVIDING INPUT ON BEHALF OF MY NEIGHBORS TRYING TO HELP THEM DO A REAL GOOD PLAN, AND I THINK THAT THEY HAVE DONE THAT. SO LIKE I SAID, IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, JUST SAY NO. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> GOOD EVENING, EYE NAME IS ROBERT SCHNEIDER ON THE SOUTHWEST SECTOR REPRESENTATIVE FOR AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL AND A RESIDENT OF THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS NEIGHBORHOOD. I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE TO YOU TONIGHT THE COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY PORTION OF THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU BY AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL AND TO BE REAL HONEST WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE GONE FORTH I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHERE THINGS STAND OUT. I DO SUPPORT MRS. GRIFFITH'S RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED EARLIER AND HOPE THAT THE STRATEGY ELEMENTS OF THAT DO GO FORWARD IN WHATEVER RESOLUTION YOU ADOPT. OF IMPORTANCE TO SOUTHWEST AUSTIN IS TO DEVELOP SOME KIND OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT ADDRESSES THE ENVIRONMENTAL NEEDS AND NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING. ONE OF THE STATEMENTS THAT WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN EARLIER THIS EVENING KIND OF CONCERNED ME THAT NEIGHBORHOODS OUT IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN ARE SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDE AT THE MOMENT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS. THERE ARE ONLY THE CORE URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS ARE INCLUDED AND THERE IS NO PLANNING OUT THERE AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS I'VE REPEATEDLY HAD IS WE'RE PER PET YOU EIGHT THE SAME MISTAKES MADE IN THE CORE OF THE CITY WHETHER IN THE SOUTHWEST OR NORTHWEST AND THAT'S WHY WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS OCCUR OUT THERE OR AT LEAST BE OFFERED TO US IN SOME WAY. AND I THINK THAT IF YOU DO THIS AND YOU LOOK FOR ENVIRONMENTALLY APPROPRIATE WAYS TO USE THE LAND OUT THERE THIS COULD RESOLVE A LOT OF CONCERNS PEOPLE HAVE WHETHER IT'S IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN OR OTHERWISE. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT LAST WEEK YOU HAD THE VISION TO DEVELOP A MASTER PLAN FOR THE MUELLER NEIGHBORHOOD. JUST TRY AND DO THE SAME THING TONIGHT WITH THE SOUTHWEST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: FOR CLARIFICATION SAKE, THE SOUTHWEST AND THE OTHER OUT LYING NEIGHBORHOODS ARE NOT CLUED EXCLUDED, BUT WE -- EXCLUDED, BUT WE HAD THE RESOURCES TO START IN THE SFRAL CITY AND WORK OUR WAY OUT WITH A GOAL OF 50 OR MORE IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. OBVIOUSLY THAT'S GOING KIND OF SLOW, SO I HAD ALSO A BUDGET ITEM PROPOSED THAT WAS GOING TO EXTEND AT LEAST SOME KIND OF PERSONNEL AND DEPARTMENT ENHANCEMENTS -- EXCUSE ME -- TO GIVE SOME KIND OF PLANNING MECHANISM TO VIRTUALLY EVERYONE, AND WE'RE WAITING FOR A MID-YEAR AMENDMENT BECAUSE THERE IS ALSO STAFF REORGANIZATION GOING ON AND WE HAD TO SEE HOW IT WOULD FIT INTO THAT. SO AT THIS MOMENT WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES AND THE PERSONNEL TO DO IT. BUT THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN OR AT LEAST AS SPECIFICALLY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR SOMETHING WE ARE WORKING ON.

>>MAYOR WATSON: PAM THOMPSON. FOLLOWED BY HORACE WILLIS AND ROGER BAKER.

>> HI, I WORE THIS T-SHIRT IN HONOR OF STRATUS BEING MENTIONED HERE AND THEY SEEM LIKE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES TO ME. MUELLER SEEMS A HOPEFUL THING, SOMETHING WE COULD ALL WORK TOGETHER ON AND BE HAPPY WITH THE RESULT. AND WORKING WITH FREEPORT MACK MORE RARNTION THE PARENT COMPANY OF STRATUS WHOSE HEAD IS JIM BOB MOFFETT, TODAY WAS THE ANNIVERSARY OF EAST T-MOORE'S INDEPENDENCE. THAT'S A PLACE WHERE FREEPORT MCMORAN OPPRESSED THE PEOPLE THERE AND GIVEN THE HONOR OF BEING THE WORLD'S WORST WATER POLLUTER DURING THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD WANT TO INVOLVE THEM IN A PROCESS THAT WOULD INVOLVE A NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY EFFORT AND COOPERATION, BECAUSE THEY HAVE A HISTORY OF TAKING ADVANTAGE OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE, AND IN LOUISIANA POLLUTING THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER. SO I SEE THIS AS TWO SEPARATE ISSUES. ONE, THAT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH STRAT NEWS A WAY THAT WILL CONTAIN THE DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY ARE THREATENING US WITH THAT WILL POLLUTE OUR WATER SYSTEMS HERE EVEN MORE THAN THEY ALREADY HAVE, AND THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO THIS DEGRADATION. WE DON'T KNOW IF FISH AND WILDLIFE WILL STOP THEM. AT HEALTH HAZARDRD AND THIS POINT AND THE DEATH TO CREEKS IS AT HAND. SO WE ARE FORCED IN A POSITION TO DEAL WITH THEM. BUT TO OFFER THEM SOMETHING THAT WE ALL FEEL SO HOPEFUL ABOUT, I THINK THAT THESE THINGS SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED AND THEY SHOULD DEFINITELY KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHAT THEY WOULD BE OFFERED. I DON'T THINK THAT THEY SHOULD [INAUDIBLE] OUT OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH. I THINK YOU SHOULD OFFER THEM SOMETHING AND SAY TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT BUT DO NOT SIT AT THE TABLE BECAUSE THEY ARE BAD NEIGHBORS. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: HORACE WILL LUS FOLLOWED BY ROGER BAKER AND THEN BILL BUNCH.

>> MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, I'M MR. WILLIS AND I AM THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION REPRESENTATIVE ON THE MUELLER -- WITHIN MUELLER NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION. WE ARE AGAINST ANY TYPE OF SWAP AT THIS TIME. AND WE WILL STAY AGAINST IT UNTIL REZONING TAKES PLACE AND THAT WE FOLLOW THE ROMA PLAN THAT THEY RECOMMENDED. OR NOT JUST PICK ONE TIP PARTICULAR PERSON, BUT DRAW FROM A NUMBER WITH THE BEST. OH, INCIDENTALLY, WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MUELLER, SOMEBODY AT THE CITY NEEDS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY KEEP THAT GRASS CUT OUT THERE. IT'S LOOKING LIKE THE GHETTO OUT THERE, MAYOR. ALSO, OF INTEREST TO US, ALTHOUGH WE'RE NOT ADJACENT, WE'RE ONE NEIGHBORHOOD OVER, OUR CONCERN IS ABOUT THE TRAFFIC THAT FLOWS THERE, AND ALSO SOMEONE FROM THE CITY NEEDS TO, ONCE IT RAINS AGAIN, GO OUT MLK AROUND THE [INAUDIBLE] AND SEE HOW IT FLOODS THERE. SOMEONE NEEDS TO GO THROUGH -- ALTHOUGH THE BOND ISSUE IN 1992 WAS SUPPOSED TO FIX THOSE THINGS, SOMETHING IS WRONG BECAUSE IT'S NOT WORKING. AND INCIDENTALLY, THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH I TEND TO SIDE WITH YOU. BUT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WHERE -- WHEREBY WE ENLIST BOARD PERMISSION -- BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, I'VE SEEN THEM ON TELEVISION AND SOME IN PERSON INTELLIGENTLY, BUT SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE YOU ARE GOING TO NEED AN EXPERT. SO PUT THAT IN YOUR AMENDMENT, I THINK, COUNCILMEMBER, AND THANKS FOR ALLOWING ME TO TALK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ROGER BAKER FOLLOWED BY BILL BUNCH AND LAURIE HOFFMAN. ANN ARSENO SIGNED UP AGAINST. AS HAS STELLA ROLONDS. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK? OKAY. YOU WILL FOLLOW LAURIE HOFFMAN. WELCOME, MR. BAKER.

>> WELCOME. I THINK WHAT STRATUS SEEMS TO BE PROPOSING IS THAT THEY WON'T DO AS MUCH DAMAGE AS THEY COULD DO IF YOU GIVE THEM A PIECE OF MUELLER. I THINK IT'S A BAD DEAL TO LINK MUELLER AND STRATUS IN ANY WAY, AND I THINK AUSTIN OUGHT TO OWN AND CONTROL MUELLER AND NEVER TRADE IT AWAY. FIRST, I THINK --. [APPLAUSE]. FIRST, I THINK YOU OUGHT TO DISSOLVE ANY LINK BETWEEN STRATUS AND MUELLER, AND SECOND, I THINK YOU SHOULD FINISH FIGURING OUT THE BEST RULES AND GUIDELINES FOR MUELLER INDEPENDENTLY ON ITS OWN BECAUSE THEY ARE AUSTIN'S NEW CROWN JEWEL. AND I LIVE RIGHT BY THERE. RIGHT NEXT TO MUELLER. NEXT, IF MUELLER -- IF STRATUS WANTS TO HAVE THEIR LAWYERS COME DOWN HERE TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND OFFER THE CITY SOME KIND OF DEAL UNDER FULL PUBLIC SCRUTINY, THEY ARE WELCOME TO. AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE IF THE PUBLIC LIKES THE DEAL THEY OFFER. BUT CERTAINLY WHATEVER KIND OF DEAL THAT I WOULD SUPPORT AND LOTS OF ENVIRONMENTALISTS WOULD NOT INVOLVE EXTENDING CITY INFRASTRUCTURE OVER THE -- OVER THE BARTON CREEK WATERSHED AND DOING ANYTHING TO BENEFIT DEVELOPMENT. I THINK WE OUGHT TO DISCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT. I THINK THE WATER QUALITY IN BARTON CREEK IS GOING DOWNHILL PRETTY RAPIDLY RIGHT NOW DUE TO EXISTING DEVELOPMENT THAT THIS AND OTHER COUNCILS HAVE APPROVED ALREADY. AND I THINK TIM JONES' PICTURES SHOW THAT. I THINK THE EFFECT OF WHATEVER STRATUS MIGHT BE WILLING TO DO IN TERMS OF MITIGATION AT THIS POINT MIGHT BE MARGINAL, ASSUMING THAT THEY DEVELOP AT ALL. I THINK ANY SCIENTIST WOULD TELL YOU IF WE WANT TO PROTECT IT, WE SHOULDN'T DEVELOP AT ALL OUT THERE. [APPLAUSE]. AND FINALLY, I THINK THE END OF THE CURRENT HIGH-TECH GROWTH BOOM IN AUSTIN WILL PROBABLY HAVE MUCH MORE IMPACT IN THE LONG RUN THAN WHATEVER KIND OF DEVELOPMENT RULES YOU WORK OUT AND TRY TO NEGOTIATE WITH STRATUS PROPERTY SO I DON'T -- I REALLY THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO LOOK PRIMARILY AT MUELLER AND PROTECTING IT IN ITS OWN -- AND IN ITS OWN WAY BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING WITH THE STRATUS PROPERTY. LET'S -- LET'S DEAL WITH MUELLER FIRST AND THEN IF STRATUS WANTS TO OFFER US A DEAL, THEN MAYBE WE OUGHT TO CONSIDER IT. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. BILL BUNCH. MR. BUNCH.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCILL, I THINK I HAD A COUPLE OF PEOPLE WHO HAD DONATED SOME TIME FOR ME.

>> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC ON].

>>MAYOR WATSON: LAURIE HOFFMAN. LAURIE HOFFMAN. SHE SIGNED UP AGAINST. MS. ROLAND, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE MICROPHONE. MR. BUNCH, YOU HAVE 12 MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WILL DO MY BEST NOT TO USE THEM ALL. I AM BILL BUNCH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WITH SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU TONIGHT. I ALSO APPRECIATE THE RENEWED COMMITMENT TONIGHT TO CLARITY, TO UNDERSTANDING, AND OPEN PUBLIC DIALOGUE AND ALSO TO HUMOR AND I'LL DO MY BEST TO UPHOLD THAT. ON THE PUBLIC DIALOGUE SIDE, I ACTUALLY HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. AND I HOPE HE WILL RETURN MOMENTARILY SO THAT WE MIGHT HAVE THAT VERY -- [LAUGHTER]. I DON'T HAVE THE QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW, BUT THEY WILL BE COMING UP. [LAUGHTER]. OKAY. FIRST, TO BE VERY CLEAR, WE STRONGLY SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S SUBSTITUTE MOTION. WE THINK IT'S CRISP AND CLEAR AND COVERS ALL THE BASES THAT WE CAN SEE. AND I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT'S ON THE TABLE ALTERNATIVELY FROM COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND SLUSHER BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION THERE. FIRST OF ALL, I'M ALSO NOT CLEAR WHY THERE WAS SO MUCH ANIMOSITY SHOWN TOWARDS COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S E-MAIL. THE E-MAIL PROMOTES COMMUNICATION. THERE'S SOME OTHER ASPERSIONS CAST AT E-MAIL. WE BROADCAST E-MAIL. WE DO THAT TO INCREASE THE INFORMATION IN THE COMMUNITY. IF YOU ARE NOT ON OUR E-MAIL LIST, I HAVE A SIGN-UP AND WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO SIGN UP.

>>SLUSHER: YOU DON'T SEND THEM TO THE COUNCIL SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ALL ARE SENDING OUT AND THEN WE GET THEM CUT AND PASTED SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE WHOLE THING.

>> SURE. I THOUGHT YOU WERE ALREADY ON THERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MIGHT CHECK EVERYBODY'S ADDRESS.

>> OKAY. I WILL DO THAT. NOT EVERYBODY ON THE WHOLE LIST BECAUSE I CAN'T DO THAT. BUT IN THE -- IN THE E-MAIL MESSAGE THAT SHE SENT OUT, I SAW ABSOLUTE NOTHING OFFENSIVE IN HER LETTER. I THOUGHT IT WAS RESPECTFUL AND IT WAS CLEARLY JUST LAYING OUT AN ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL AND IF THERE WAS SOMETHING OFFENSIVE, WHICH CLEARLY THERE WAS, I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO EXPLAIN THAT TO THE COMMUNITY. SECONDLY, THERE IS A CLEAR QUESTION THAT IS STILL ON THE TABLE, AND THIS IS MY QUESTION FOR YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. ARE WE CONTEMPLATING WITH THIS MOTION TO CONTINUE ALLOWING STRATUS'S REPRESENTATIVES AND LAWYERS TO MEET PRIVATELY WITH THE CITY'S LAWYERS AND REPRESENTATIVES TO TALK ABOUT EITHER A MUELLER SWAP OR A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? YES, PLEASE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THIS IS GOING TO COUNT ON YOUR TIME.

>> I UNDERSTAND.

>>SLUSHER: HOW LONG I DO HAVE?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU'VE GOT NINE MINUTES.

>> THIS IS MY TIME AND IT'S A YES OR NO QUESTION.

>>SLUSHER: BILL, I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE EVER HEARD YOU ANSWER YES OR NO. WOULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION.

>> IS YOUR PROPOSAL GOING TO ALLOW THE CITY'S ATTORNEYS AND REPRESENTATIVES TO CONTINUE HAVING PRIVATE NEGOTIATIONS OR DISCUSSIONS WITH STRATUS'S LAWYERS -- LET ME FINISH THE QUESTION.

>>SLUSHER: I REMEMBER IT NOW. THE -- FIRST OF ALL, AS FAR AS I KNOW, THERE AREN'T ANY NEGOTIATIONS GOING ON NOW EXCEPT AT THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS SINCE WE OPENED THE WHOLE THING UP, BROUGHT IT OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO IT STILL WOULD BE POSSIBLE, THOUGH, UNDER WHAT I CONTEMPLATE FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR INSTANCE, AFTER CITY MANAGER EVALUATES WHAT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE, TO CALL UP STRATUS AND SAY WELL, WHAT DO YOU ALL -- IS THIS FEASIBLE? WOULD YOU ALL BE INTERESTED IN THIS? AND IF THEY SAID YES, THEN WE WOULD BRING IT BEFORE THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE THAT IS CONTEMPLATED IN THE MOTION. THE MAIN MOTION THAT'S ON THE TABLE. AND I DON'T -- SO I DON'T THINK YOU CAN EVER TELL PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN'T TALK ON THE PHONE OR CAN'T MEET WITH EACH OTHER, BUT I WOULD NOT SEE IF WHAT -- I HEARD MR. WALKER DESCRIBE THAT HE FEARS AND THAT MANY PEOPLE FEAR THAT THERE WOULD ALL OF A SUDDEN BE A TERM SHEET POP UP AND THEN WE WOULD WORK FROM THERE. NO. THIS WOULD NOT PERMIT THAT. OR WOULD NOT RESULT IN THAT.

>> IS THERE SOME REASON WHY THOSE DISCUSSIONS CAN'T HAPPEN IN A MEETING WHERE STRATUS'S REPRESENTATIVES ARE SITTING AT THE TABLE? I HAVEN'T NOTICED THAT MR. ARMSTRONG WAS WILLING TO COME OUT HERE AND TALK WITH THE COMMUNITY TONIGHT.

>>SLUSHER: I STILL DON'T THINK YOU CAN PROHIBIT PEOPLE FROM CALLING UP SOMEBODY ELSE ON THE PHONE. I THINK THAT IS A LITTLE BEYOND THE -- FOR INSTANCE, THERE IS AN E-MAIL SENT TO THE MAYOR THAT WAS COPIED TO ME FROM YOUR CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD. AND HE ASKED THE MAYOR FOR A MEETING NEXT WEEK. I THINK IT WAS THIS WEEK. ASKED THE MAYOR FOR A MEETING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO DISCUSS THE MUELLER, STRATUS SWAP, AND SO THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PRIVATE MEETING. SO WAS THE PUBLIC INVITED TO THAT? HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN'T CALL THE STRATUS ATTORNEY ON THE PHONE AND -- BUT YOU CAN ASK FOR A PRIVATE MEETING LIKE YOU -- LIKE I GAVE YOU --

>> YOU USED THREE MINUTES OF MY TIME NOW, OKAY, SO IT BECOME TO BULT IN. I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S PRIVATE SKUGZ THAT HAPPENED BETWEEN TWO OR THREE PEOPLE. BUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR FUNDAMENTALLY IS THAT THE DIRECTION TO THE CITY ATTORNEY IS THAT THOSE SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSIONS THAT HAPPENED WITH STRATUS, IF THEY ARE GOING TO HAPPEN AT ALL, HAPPEN WITH THE OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES AT THE TABLE. EXACTLY LIKE IT HAPPENED IN 1993 IN THE PROCESS THAT YOU REFERENCED IN YOUR COMMENTS LAST WEEK, WHERE THERE WAS A COMMUNITY EFFORT TO COME UP WITH COMMUNITY BASED SOLUTIONS. AND WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS NO, YOU WANT TO ALLOW THERE TO CONTINUE TO BE PRIVATE NEGOTIATIONS GOING ON WHILE ALL THIS OTHER STUFF IS HAPPENING. AND THAT'S HOW WE GOT WITH THE TERM SHEET THAT NOBODY SUPPORTS.

>>SLUSHER: LET ME INTERRUPT AND THEY CAN STOP THE CLOCK.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>>SLUSHER: I JUST -- YOU JUST SAID THAT'S HOW WE GOT THE TERM SHEET. I ALREADY TOLD YOU THAT I DON'T ENVISION -- THAT WE DON'T ENVISION THIS COMING UP IN A TERM SHEET THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC. IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND ASSUME THAT FOR THE PURPOSES OF YOUR DISCUSSION OR LECTURE OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, THEN THAT'S FINE, BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT IS ON THE TABLE. THAT IS NOT ACCURATE INFORMATION. AND THE 1993 THING THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, THERE -- I'M POSITIVE THAT THERE WERE PRIVATE DISCUSSIONS AND MEETINGS THAT TOOK PLACE AND THEN WERE PRESENTED TO THAT COMMITTEE, AND THAT COMMITTEE DID END UP WITH AN INCREDIBLE WEALTH OF INFORMATION THAT WAS STACKED FEET HIGH BY THE END OF IT, BUT THERE WERE NOT ANY PRIVATE DISCUSSIONS THAT WERE FOR BIDDEN LIKE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW. IT'S REAL EASY SAYING TO TAKE THAT POSITION THAT THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY PRIVATE DISCUSSION EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE ASKING FOR PRIVATE DISCUSSIONS YOURSELF, BUT IT IS JUST -- I DON'T THINK THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED IN HISTORY WHERE PEOPLE ARE FORBIDDEN FROM MAKING PRIVATE PHONE CALLS TO EACH OTHER AND I'M NOT GOING TO SIGN OFF ON THAT SORT OF THING.

>> VERY WELL. I THINK YOU COULD MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, THOUGH, TO THE COMMUNITY BY INCLUDING IN YOUR RESOLUTION THE DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER THAT THE PRIMARY COMMUNICATIONS WILL HAPPEN WITH THE INTERESTED PARTIES AT THE TABLE JUST AS HAS HAPPENED IN THE 1993 PROCESS. ANOTHER BENEFIT OF THAT PROCESS WAS IT WAS ONE WHERE THE INTERESTED PARTIES HAD THEIR REPRESENTATIVES INVOLVED RATHER THAN BEING LOADED UP WITH BOARDS AND COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES. I'M NOT SAYING THEY SHOULDN'T BE INVOLVED, THEY SHOULD BE. BUT THOSE PEOPLE ARE APPOINTED BY YOU, THEY ARE NOT APPOINTED FROM THE COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS. SO THAT'S -- WILL YOU PUT IN THE SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS FOR THE CITY MANAGER THAT THE PRIMARY DISCUSSIONS HAPPEN IN THESE COMMUNITY MEETINGS WHERE ALL THE INTERESTED PARTIES ARE PARTICIPATING?

>>SLUSHER: MR. BUNCH, THAT SEEMS TO BE CLEAR TO ME. I'LL CONSIDER THAT REQUEST LIKE I WOULD FROM ANY OTHER CITIZEN, BUT TO ME THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF REALLY, FRANKLY, MISLEADING THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE THAT ALREADY IS THE CLEAR INTENT OF THE COUNCIL, OF THE SPONSORS, ANYWAY, AND I'VE ALREADY SAID HOW THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO END UP IN A TERM SHEET THAT WILL TEN BE MOVED -- THEN BE MOVED DOWN THE ROW.

>> THEY HAVEN'T STOPPED MY CLOCK YET. YOU NEED TO STOP OR YOU NEED TO STOP THE CLOCK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU ARE THE ONE ASKING THE QUESTIONS AND YOU SAID IT WAS OKAY FOR HIM TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS. STOP THE CLOCK. STOP THE CLOCK.

>>SLUSHER: ACTUALLY I WAS DONE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. GO AGAIN.

>> OKAY. THE SIMPLE FACT IS THAT THE ITEM THAT WAS POSTED FOR THIS WEEK CALLED FOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS. WHAT WE FUNDAMENTALLY SUPPORT IS THAT NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS CEASE AND THAT THERE BE THE BROADER DISCUSSION ABOUT WE'RE INTERESTED IN SWAPPING, IT'S A VERY GOOD IDEA, WE'RE EXCITED THAT THE COUNCIL IS INTERESTED IN THAT IDEA, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE A FAIR SYSTEM WHERE YOU ARE ENCOURAGING ALL DEVELOPERS IN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS TO BID AND TO BID ON EQUAL FOOTING. AND BY SINGLING OUT STRATUS, YOU PUT THEM IN A MONOPOLY OR INSIDER STATUS THAT DISCOURAGES COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND ASSURES THAT THE CITY WON'T GET THE BEST VALUE FOR THE TAXPAYER AND WON'T GET THE MOST AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT TRANSFERRED OUT OF THE ZONE. WE'VE BEEN KICKING THIS IDEA AROUND FOREVER. IF STRATUS WANTS TO LEAD THE TALKS, THEN LAY A PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE FOR SWAP AND QUIT TALKING ABOUT IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AND SO SOMEBODY ELSE CAN COME UP WITH A BETTER IDEA. THEY'VE BEEN REFUSING TO DO THAT. THE TERM SHEET -- OUR MISUNDERSTANDING WAS BECAUSE THE TERM SHEET WAS CUT -- WAS DEVELOPED ENTIRELY IN SECRET NEGOTIATIONS WITH NOBODY PARTICIPATING. WE DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN ANY MORE EITHER WITHOUT MUELLER.

>>SLUSHER: HOLD ON. STOP HIS TIME. MR. BUNCH, HOW MANY TIMES ARE YOU GOING TO COME BACK TO THE SAME THING THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, THAT THIS DOESN'T RESULT IN A TERM SHEET COMING OUT TO THE PUBLIC? THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE -- THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SAYING. THAT'S NOT HOW I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION -- THE QUESTION TWO OR THREE TIMES YOU ASKED IT. AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY -- WHY YOU ARE COMING BACK TO -- NO, YOU JUST SAID THAT YOU DON'T WANT A TERM SHEET TO COME OUT LIKE THAT AGAIN ON THE MUELLER SWAP. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE SAID REPEATEDLY. WHAT I'VE SAID REPEATEDLY DURING YOUR NINE MINUTES, WE'RE PROBABLY OVER THAT NOW. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU KEEP COMING BACK TO MAKING THE SAME POINT WHEN YOU'VE ALREADY GOT ANSWERED TO YOUR SATISFACTION, AS LEAST AS FAR AS THE TERM SHEET.

>> THERE'S TWO THINGS BEING MISSIONED. ARE WE ALSO -- MIXED. ARE WE ALSO NOT GOING TO GET TERP SHEETS ON THE STRATUS LAND AND THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE SEPARATE FROM A POTENTIAL SWAP?

>>SLUSHER: IT'S ALL IN THE PUBLIC, MR. BUNCH.

>> SO YOUR ANSWER IS NO.

>>SLUSHER: YOU MEAN A NEW TERM SHEET?

>> YES.

>>SLUSHER: NO. NO. I HADN'T HEARD -- YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE I'VE HEARD BRING THAT UP. AND IT'S AT THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, WHICH I THINK YOU'VE BEEN ATTENDING. THEY'VE ASKED FOR MORE TIME TO LOOK AT THINGS. I ASSUME SOME OF THEM MIGHT COME FORWARD WITH SOME IDEAS. SO NO, I MEAN IT'S NOT -- YOU SET THAT UP AS SOMETHING THAT NOBODY ELSE HAS EVEN --

>> YOU ARE TAKING MY TIME AGAIN. I WOULD RATHER YOU NOT TAKE ANY MORE OF MY TIME. WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS NOT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS HEARING ON A TERM SHEET THAT YOU'VE REJECTED. WHAT WE WANT YOU TO DO IS STEP BACK AND HAVE A COMMUNITY INCLUSIVE PROCESS TO ANSWER THE QUESTION WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO SAVE THE SPRINGS. AND THAT LOOKS AT STRATUS, BUT IT LOOKS AT THE OTHER GRANDFATHERED PROJECTS, IT LOOKS AT INFRASTRUCTURE. AND IT DOES IT IN AN OPEN PROCESS WHERE WE GET A REAL ANSWER. AND IF THAT MEANS THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF GRANDFATHERING THAT GOES ON WHILE WE EVEN GOUJ THAT PROCESS, WE NEED TO DO IT. BUT THE PROCESS WE HAVE IS BROKEN AND WE NEED A NEW ONE. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH DOES. ONE EXAMPLE, WE'VE BEEN THREATENED WITH HOW ALL THIS TERRIBLE DEVELOPMENT ON LANTANA IS GOING TO HAPPEN. FREEPORT'S OWN 10-A PERMIT SAYS IMPERVIOUS COVER AT LANTANA WILL BE 20%. YOUR STAFF DIDN'T KNOW THAT. THAT COMPLETELY CHANGES THE SCARE FACTOR OF LANTANA. IF THE COMMUNITY HAD BEEN INVOLVED FROM THE BEGINNING, YOU WOULD HAVE HAD THAT INFORMATION ALONG TIME AGO, SAVED A LOT OF PEOPLE A LOT OF TIME AND SAVED US A LOT OF LAWYER FEES. SO PLEASE DO A REAL PUBLIC PROCESS, DON'T TRY TO SUGAR COAT IT WITH SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS THE BACK ROOM DEALING TO CONTINUE WITH A CHARADE OF A PUBLIC PROCESS ON THE SIDE. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: STELLA ROLANDS.

>> GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS STELLA ROLAND AND I HADN'T PLANNED TO SAY ANYTHING TONIGHT BUT I WAS REALLY OVERWHELMED TO COME IN TO SEE ALL THE HOOPLA GOING AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS ITEM AGENDA NO. 48 AND IF I REALLY DIDN'T KNOW ANY BETTER AND REALLY DIDN'T THINK I DROVE MYSELF OVER HERE, I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT I WAS IN FLORIDA. [LAUGHTER]. NEEDLESS TO SAY, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. IF THERE HAS NOT BEEN A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE PROS AND CONS, THEN WHAT'S THE RUSH TO JUDGMENT TO VOTE TONIGHT? THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER. AND ALSO, THERE IS ALWAYS THIS THING OF DUMPING EVERYTHING IN EAST AUSTIN AND NOW WE'RE SWAPPING. SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE DUMPING OR SWAPPING, BUT PLEASE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DO SOMETHING POSITIVE FOR EAST AUSTIN. AND I GUESS MY LAST COMMENT -- AND I DO HAVE E-MAIL SO I WOULD LIKE TO BE CONSIDERED TO BE PLACED ON THE E-MAIL LIST. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING OFFENSIVE ABOUT IT. BUT I GUESS IF THE SHOE FITS, YOU NEED TO WEAR IT. AND I REALLY SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, I SUPPORT YOUR FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, THAT YOU WOULD GO BACK AND CONSIDER, ESPECIALLY THE FIRST ONE WHERE YOU CONSIDER ALL THE PLAYERS COME TO THE TABLE. WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT ALL THE DIFFERENT GROUPS AND ALL OF THE FOLKS WHO DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOODS, REALLY DON'T CONSIDER THEM, AND THEN YOU HAVE THEM TO MAKE DECISIONS AND YOU LEAVE US AS NEIGHBORHOODS -- US NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS OUT, WE'RE REALLY NOT HAPPY ABOUT THAT. I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO SAY. ONE MORE THING SINCE I STILL HAVE ONE MINUTE AND 8 SECONDS, THE LANGUAGE. I HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH NEGOTIATION. AND I ALSO HAVE SOME ISSUES ABOUT LIMITED TO THE ROBERT MUELLER. BECAUSE IF YOU SAID THAT YOU PUT IT IN THERE BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T WANT US TO THINK THAT IT WAS NOT GOING TO BE INCLUDED. BUT THAT LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THAT IF IT'S IN THERE, THAT THAT'S ALL THAT YOU ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IS ROBERT MUELLER. SO APPLES IN ONE HAND, ORANGES IN THE OTHERMENT THANK YOU. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE].

>>GRIFFITH: AND THE ONES THAT UNDERSTAND TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPTS AND HAVE DONE THAT, THE RISK IS THAT EAST AUSTIN WILL NOT GET ONE OF THE FINEST DEVELOPERS IN AMERICA THAT THEY COULD HAVE TALKED TO IF THE NEGOTIATIONS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BETWEEN THOSE LAWYERS HAPPEN. SO THAT'S -- YOU WENT RIGHT TO IT IN TERMS OF WHO'S GOING TO BE AFFECTED. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MATILDA LEWIS THOMPSON.

>> I GIVE MY THREE MINUTES -- [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT'S NOT THE RULES. MA'AM, I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. SHE CAN'T DO THAT. SHE CAN DONATE THE TIME IN THE ORDER WE GO IN, BUT THE RULES DON'T ALLOW FOR THAT.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. DON'T ALLOW HER TO DO THAT. SHE CAN DONATE HER TIME TO SOMEBODY ELSE THAT HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, BUT HAS NOT ALREADY SPOKEN, BUT THE RULES DON'T ALLOW THAT.

>> I THINK YOU SHOULD LET HER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I APPRECIATE YOUR ADVICE. VIOLATES THE RULES.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO IT BECAUSE THERE'S NO NEED TO SPEND THE NEXT FIVE MINUTES TALKING ABOUT IT, BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW IT'S NOT THE RULES AND I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IN THE FUTURE IF YOU COME DOWN TO SPEAK, YOU WOULD DO IT WHERE YOU GET THE -- .

>> IN ORDER, I SHOULD HAVE SPOKEN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: GO AHEAD AND TALK.

>> WELL, ONE THING I SAY IS GOOD GRIFFITH, GO. WE ARE GOING TO FIND -- I HOPE AND I BELIEVE THAT THE COUNCIL WILL -- [INAUDIBLE]. BECAUSE IT'S A VERY SIMPLE THING. THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, BUT I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT ABOUT -- [INAUDIBLE]. WHAT DOES NEGOTIATING MEAN. IT MEANS MAKE A DEAL WITH. DO WE REALLY HAVE TO? THE FOLKS HERE MENTIONED FREEPORT MAC MORAN? DID YOU READ WHAT THEY DID, DESTROYING A WHOLE MOUNTAIN IN COLLUSION WITH A CORRUPT INDOUGH KNEESIAN GOVERNMENT AND THEY'RE NOT AT OUR DOORSTEP NO FOR THE FIRST TIME, BUT FOR THE SECOND TIME. AND I THINK WE CAN HAVE THE GUTS TO -- [INAUDIBLE]. VALUE OUR ABILITY TO RAISE REVENUE AND PAY THEM OFF, GET RID OF THEM. GO SOMEPLACE ELSE. AND I THINK AUSTIN'S. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MARY GAY MAXWELL.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: I TELL YOU WHAT, I'LL READ HER CARD, HOW ABOUT THAT? SHE SIGNED UP AGAINST AND WRITES, FOR GRIFFITH'S SUBSTITUTE MOTION. TISH WILLIAMS? MR. AND MRS. A. PAJAZI SIGNED UP AGAINST. DONNA CARTER? YOU'LL FOLLOW MS. WILLIAMS.

>> AM I SPEAKING TO THE MICROPHONE? WHAT'S IN A NAME? THE NAME HOME, FOR INSTANCE. BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS SAY THEY SELL HOMES, BUT AS A MOTHER AND GRANDMOTHER, I'LL TELL YOU THAT A HOME CANNOT BE BOUGHT. HOUSES CAN BE BOUGHT. HOMES ARE MADE BY THE LOVING HEARTS AND HANDS OF WOMEN, NOT MEN. A NICE HOUSE AND DRIEPRYIES ARE LOVERY, BUT REAL HOME CREATION IS SUPPORT. SUPPORT FOR DEVELOPMENTS AND CHILDREN, THE LAYING OF A BASE FOR FUTURE PHYSICAL NUTRITIONAL, EMOTIONAL AND RELATION AILAL HELP FOR CHILDREN AND SUPPORT AND HELP FOR ALL FAMILY MEMBERS, INCLUDING MOM AND DAD. AM I SAYING ALL WOMEN SHOULD CREATE HOMES? CERTAINLY NOT, BUT IF A FAMILY WANTS TO FINANCE A WOMAN'S HOME CREATION THESE DAYS, THE CHANCES ARE BECOMING MORE REMOTE FOR THIS CHOICE IN THE AUSTIN ECONOMY. AUSTIN NEEDS TO BE A PLACE FOR MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES TO SUPPORT THE WELL-BEING OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY MEMBERS. NO LONGER SO. THE SO-CALLED ROBUST ECONOMY PERHAPS CREATES ROBUST WILDCATTERS, GOLD RUSHERS, HIGH ROLLERS AND ENTREPRENEURS THAT NOW CHARACTERIZE OUR CITY, BUT NOT CHILDREN. AND THE HOUSES WHERE SO LITTLE HOME LIFE IS CREATED ARE EMPTY HOUSES, CREATING METIER OF THOSE COMMUNITIES. SPREAD ACROSS OUR HEELS ARE PHANTOM COMMUNITIES BUILT AT A COST OF MASSIVE DESTRUCTION OF WILDLIFE, NOT TO MENTION DISSIN AT THE GRAITION OF FAMILY LIFE. IN CALIFORNIA PEOPLE USED TO SAY THERE'S GOLD IN THEM THAR HILLS. IN AUSTIN'S HILLS CAN BE FOUND DESTROYED NATURE, DISINTEGRATED FAMILIES, POLLUTED SKIES AND GROUNDWATER, TRAFFIC GRIDLOCK AND SPRAWL AND THE DISAPPEARANCE OF GREEN HILLS. WE NEED A NEW STANDARD. WE NEED TO STOP SAYING GROWTH IS GOOD. WE NEED TO START ASKING WHAT IS OUR RESOURCE BASE? AND THIS MEANS ANIMALS, PLANTS, WATER, AIR AND HGZ. HUMAN BEINGS. WE NEED TO ASK WHO PROFITS, BECAUSE IT'S CERTAINLY NOT THE CHILDREN. IT'S TIME TO SAY NO TO CITY GROWTH AND YES TO OUR CHILDREN'S GROWTH. VOTE NO TO STRATUS. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> MY NAME IS DONNA CARTER AND I'M A MEMBER OF THE MUELLER IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE, BUT I'M HERE TODAY AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN AND AS A ADVOCATE FOR THE SUCCESS OF THE MUELLER PROJECT. I'M A RELATIVE NEW COMER TO THE PROCESS. I'VE LIVED IN AUSTIN FOR 25 YEARS, BUT I HAVE NOT ACTUALLY BEEN INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING PROCESS THAT WENT INTO IT. AND I THINK BECAUSE OF THAT I OFFER A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ON IT. AND THE ONE THING THAT I THINK ABOUT THE TALKING ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF SWAPPING LAND WITH MUELLER IS THAT IT'S TOO EARLY IN THE PROCESS. THE MUELLER MASTER PLAN LAYS OUT A PROCESS THAT SHOULD BE USED IN ORDER TO DO THE PROJECT. AND ONE OF THOSE IS TO GO OUT WITH AN RFP TO GET A MASTER DEVELOPER. BUT BEFORE WE CAN GO OUT FOR AN R.F.P., WE HAVE TO KNOW WHAT WE WANT TO ASK FOR. WE HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IT IS WE HAVE AND THAT WHICH WE'RE WILLING AND WANT TO OFFER FOR THAT DEVELOPER. EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE GOLD IN THE MASTER PLAN, THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE AS THE IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE STILL HAVE TO WORK OUT, CONCERNING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, MAKING SURE THAT'S THE BASIC TENET OF THIS PROCESS. SO I AM VERY CONCERNED BECAUSE I'VE SEEN TWO THINGS ALREADY THAT GO AGAINST THE MUELLER MASTER PLAN. AND THEY'VE BOTH BEEN INSTITUTED BY THE CITY SAYING THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING TO HELP ME. ONE OF THEM IS A REGIONAL CALL CENTER. AND I REALIZE IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROJECT, BUT THE WAY IT WAS DONE, THE PROCESS BY WHICH IT HAS BEEN PLACED ON THAT SITE AND THE FACT HA THAT IT VIOLATES MANY OF THE BASIC TENETS OF THE PLAN IS AN APPALLING BEGINNING TO THIS PROJECT. AND WE'RE ABOUT TO START THE SAME KIND OF CARVING OUT, SOMETHING THAT'S A BASIC TENET OF THIS PLAN AT THE VERY BEGINNING. SO WHAT DOES THAT SAY TO A POSSIBLE MASTER DEVELOPER LATER ON? SO I THINK WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT VERY CAREFULLY. THE MIX PROCESS OR THE NEXT PROBLEM IS WE HAVEN'T INTEGRATED OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WE HAVEN'T INTEGRATED THE GOALS OF THE MASTER PLAN THAT WERE FORMALLY ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCILL, THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY IN THE PLAN AS WE HAVE NOW. AND ALL OF THAT HAS TO BE INTEGRATED SO WE CAN DISCUSS THAT WITH A DEVELOPER. SO SUDDENLY I HAVE THE CITY COUNCIL SAYING THAT WE HAVE THINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DONE, THAT ARE GOOD FOR ME. AND THE LAST ONE INVOLVES BARTON CREEK AND THE WATERSHED SHED WHICH I FEEL IS VERY IMPORTANT, BUT SUDDENLY I'M PITTING WEST AUSTIN GOALS THAT HAVE BEEN GONE ON THAT MAY BE SWAPPED FOR SOME VERY BASIC AND VERY GOOD EAST AUSTIN NEEDS. AND SUDDENLY I'M BALANCING. I'M TRYING TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THE BABIES. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S A FAIR POSITION TO PUT A VERY NEW IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE OR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS. [BUZZER]. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]. F.

>>GRIFFITH: MS. CARTER, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ON THE COMMITTEE. TALKING ABOUT VIOLATING THE PLANS SOON AND OFTEN, THE -- THE CHAPTER IN THE PLAN THAT'S CALLED IMPLEMENTATION IS ONE THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING VIOLATING RIGHT NOW. CHAPTER 8, AS YOU KNOW, YOU'RE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PLAN, SAYS WE DO A TWO-STEP PROCESS. THE STEP ONE IS THE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION WHEN YOU CAST YOUR NET BROADLY AND YOU DON'T HAVE PRIVATE NEGOTIATIONS WITH FOLKS BEFORE THAT. YOU HAVE THOSE WITH THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON YOUR SHORT LIST WHO RECEIVED THE REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL. THEN WE'VE NARROWED IT DOWN AND YOU HAVE THE KIND OF LAWYER TALKING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING BEFORE WE EVER PUT OUT THE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS. SO ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS IS IF WE DO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED WE WILL BE VIOLATING THE PLAN WHICH WE ACCEPTED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.

>> THAT'S A CONCERN THAT I HAVE HAVING TO WORK ON THE COMMITTEE. THAT OUR WORK MAY NOT BE WORTH ANYTHING. AND I'M WILLING TO DO IT AND WILLING TO PUT THE TIME IN. IN FACT, LOVING DOING IT, BUT I DO WANT IT TO WORK. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: CLARK ANTHONY? FOLLOWED BY LYNETTA COOPER AND SCOTT HENSON.

>> GOOD EVENING. MANY PEOPLE HERE HAVE TALKED OF MUELLER AS A GENTLEMEN OR A JEWEL. AND I THINK OF IT AS A GEM THAT HASN'T EMERGED INTO A JULIET. AND I THINK THAT Y'ALL ARE TRYING TO DO IS SHAPE THE GEM CUTTER'S HAND WHILE HE'S TRYING TO MAKE IT INTO A JEWEL. AND BY DOING THAT YOU RUN THE RISK OF HAVING A JEWEL THAT DOESN'T SHINE AS BRIGHTLY OR AS DEEPLY FOR ALL OF AUSTIN. AND YOU CAN TELL TONIGHT THAT WE CARE DEEPLY. I SHARE STRONG CONCERNS WITH COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS AND COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ ABOUT AFFORDABILITY. I REALLY WANT US TO LOOK AT INTERGENERATIONAL. I AGREE WITH MS. GRIFFITH SAYING IN 10 YEARS WE COULD LOSE GOOD HOMES AND HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH VERY LOW INCOME. I'M VERY CONCERNED. IN FACT, I THINK ANY LAND SWAPPING THAT Y'ALL CONSIDER SHOULD HAVE AN OVERLAY, PARTICULARLY THE LOTS THAT ARE IN THE URBAN CORE ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, LIKE LEVERAGED BET PROPERTY. LEVERAGE IT LIKE YOU DID THE CORPORATION ON THE LAKE. I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. THE PEOPLE OF LOW INCOME, NOT EVEN LOW, BUT MODERATE INCOME ARE BEING DRIVEN FROM THE CORE. AND IT'S NOT FAIR AND IT'S CONTRARY TO THE CONCEPTS THAT WE WANT IN AN ACCEPTABLE CITY. I DO AGREE AND I THINK THAT YOU HAVE LOOKED AT OPEN MEETINGS, BUT I REALLY THINK THAT MULE IRRELEVANT SHOULD BE PULLED COMPLETELY OUT OF THE NEGOTIATIONS. AND I SERVE ON THE COMMISSION, THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION AND WE GOT SOME INFORMATION FROM STRATUS AND WE AGREE WITH MR. BUNCH, I AGREE WITH MR. BUNCH TO SOME EXTENT THAT Y'ALL REALLY NEED TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND ASK STRATUS TO. THEY SHOULD BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. THERE'S A LETTER OF FIVE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE VERY BIG CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. AND GOOD NEIGHBORS DON'T MAKE JUST GOOD FENCES, THEY NEED TO MAKE GOOD FRIENDS. AND I DON'T THINK THAT THEY'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY. THEY'VE STARTED TALKING, BUT THEY'RE NOT THROUGH YET. ALSO, THE FISH AND WILDLIFE GUIDELINES SHOW MUCH MORE REDISTRICT ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS THAN WERE PUT BEFORE. SO I ENCOURAGE YOU BEFORE YOU START LOOKING AT MARKET VALUES AND APPRAISALS IS TO SEE WHAT ACTUALLY THEY CAN BUILD OUT THERE. AND I REALLY ENCOURAGE Y'ALL NOT TO DO CENTRAL SEWER OUT THERE. I THINK IT'S CONTRARY TO YOUR SMART GROWTH GOALS BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT MATCH THE LAND USAGE AND GEOLOGY WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE. I THINK TO NOT PUT CENTRAL SEWER WOULD ALSO BE CONSISTENT WITH YOUR AUSTIN TOMORROW, WHICH IS YOUR MASTER PLAN. AND THIRDLY, PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WE'VE HAD ON THE ON-SITE SEPTIC FACILITY RULES SAY THAT CENTRAL SEWER IS MORE DANGEROUS TO THE ENVIRONMENT BECAUSE THERE ARE SPILLS OF GIANT MAGNITUDE. AND THE SPILLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION THAT'S BEEN COMING FROM THE ON-SITE FACILITIES HAVE BEEN LESS. IN FACT, Y'ALL SHOULD BE FOCUSING YOUR ENERGY RIGHT NOW, MOVING YOUR MUELLER PROJECT ON A SEPARATE TRACT AND AT SOME LATER DATE BRING ALL YOUR DEVELOPERS FROM, MAKE SURE -- . [BUZZER]. WELL, I'LL STOP THERE. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS LARK ANTHONY AND I'M PRESIDENT OF THE PECAN SPRINGS SPRINGDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH AS YOU KNOW IS VERY CLOSE TO ROBERT MUELLER. THE FORMER MUELLER AIRPORT SITE IS A VERY CHOICE PIECE OF REAL ESTATE. IT IS ONLY 10 MINUTES OR LESS FROM DOWNTOWN AUSTIN OVER REASONABLY GOOD STREETS. MOST OF THE LAND IS NEARLY FLAT, THUS IT CAN BE EASILY BUILT UPON. IT HAS EASY ACCESS TO I-35 AND U.S. HIGHWAYS 183 AND 290. THE ENTIRE 711 PLUS ACRES IS ARGUABLY MORE VALUABLE FROM A DEVELOPER'S STANDPOINT THAN 4,000 PLUS ACRES IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN, PROVIDED THAT DEVELOPER IS ALLOWED TO BUILD WHATEVER HE WISHES ON MUELLER. THEREFORE THE MUELLER SITE MUST BE ZONED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RMMA'S MASTER PLAN BEFORE ANY SALE OR SWAP OF LAND OCCURS. THE NEIGHBORHOODS ADJACENT TO THE MUELLER SITE CONSIST MAINLY OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, DUPLEXES AND A FEW APARTMENT HOUSES, PLUS SMALL STORES. FAMILIES UNDER THE THIRD GENERATION LIVE IN THE WINDSOR PARK AND PECAN SPRINGS, SPRINGDALE NEIGHBORHOODS. NO LARGE DEVELOPER HAS SHOWN AN INTEREST IN BUILDING NEW HOUSES ON THE LOTS AVAILABLE IN NORTHEAST AUSTIN UNTIL NOW. YOU KNOW, WE'RE CALLED THE WRONG SIDE OF I-35 UNTIL THE MUELLER LANDS BECAME AVAILABLE. THIS IRONY IS NOT LOST ON CITIZENS WHO HAVE LIVED HERE FOR 25 TO 35, EVEN 45 OR MORE YEARS, BECAUSE WE KNOW WHAT A GOOD AND CONVENIENT LOCATION THIS IS. SO PLEASE, ZONE THE MUELLER SITE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE PER THE RMMA DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: A COUPLE OF PEOPLE ARE ALSO READY. MR. BEERS AND MR. MITCHELL WILL FOLLOW MR. HENSON.

>> MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS SCOTT HENSON. I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSAL AS IT IS ON THE TABLE. I SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S SUBSTITUTE MOTION. TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST, I THINK THAT YOU'RE MIXING TWO ISSUES THAT DON'T NEED TO BE MIXED HERE. I PERSONALLY AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS THAT HONESTLY MUELLER SHOULD NOT BE ON THE TABLE HERE. THE CITY HAS OTHER PROPERTIES. WALTER E. LONG IS WHAT WOULD COME TO MIND TO ME SINCE WHAT YOU WERE PLANNING TO DO WITH IT JUST GOT NIXED BY THE VOTERS. MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THEY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN. MUELLER IS A PROPERTY THAT THAT'S SO MANY COMMUNITY RESOURCES WRAPPED UP IN THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT THAT REALLY TO COME IN AT THIS LATE DATE AND TO SAY OH, WE'RE GOING TO JUMP START THESE NEGOTIATIONS WITH STATISTIC STRATUS AND DO A DEAL WITH THEM AND NOT DO THE THING WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT ALL ALONG, THAT FRANKLY, THAT GIVES BOONDOGGLE A BAD NAME. THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT PEOPLE WANT -- YOU HAVE THIS PLANNING PROCESS AND SOMEBODY SAYS I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS FOUR YEARS AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO COME IN AND SAY OH, NO, WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS INSTEAD ON THE SPUR OF THE MOMENT. A MONTH OR TWO NOTICE. THEN ALL YOUR WORK IS DOWN THE DRAIN. THAT'S NOT A PROJECT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON, BUT I KNOW THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE AND I KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT AND I DON'T WANT IT TO BE WASTED. I THINK THE OTHER ISSUE IS OBVIOUSLY WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT STRATUS LAND. TO BE PERFECTLY FRANK, I HAVE BEEN FIGHTING OVER WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THAT PROPERTY MY ENTIRE ADULT LIFE. I WAS 23 YEARS OLD THE NIGHT OF THAT BARTON SPRINGS HEARING. AND HAVE BEEN FIGHTING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OUT THERE WITH GREATER OR LESSER INTENSITY TO THIS DAY. AND THE FACT IS THAT THE SOLUTION IS TODAY THE SAME SOLUTION AS PROPOSED THAT NIGHT 10 YEARS AGO, 10 AND A HALF YEARS AGO, AND THAT IS THAT ULTIMATELY THE CITY HAS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTIES THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE SPRINGS ARE PROTECTED. I AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH THAT WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT TAKES TO PROTECT THE SPRINGS, BUT WE DO KNOW THAT ARE CERTAIN TRACTS THAT ARE ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL FOR US TO ACQUIRE TO TO PROTECT THE SPRINGS. TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST, WE SHOULD DO THAT. WE SHOULD CONDEMN THE PROPERTY THAT WE THINK IS MOST CRITICAL AND DO IT IMMEDIATELY. WE SHOULDN'T WAIT UNTIL THE PRICE GOES UP ANY FURTHER. WE SHOULD PICK THE TRACTS THAT WE'RE MOST WORRIED ABOUT. WE SHOULD PICK A TRACT THAT TIM JONES SUGGESTED AND WE SHOULD PICK EVERY SQUARE FOOT OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING, WE SHOULD CONDEMN IT, WE SHOULD PURCHASE IT AT THE LOWEST PRICE WE CAN. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GIVING UP VALUABLE PROPERTY AT MUELLER. ON A DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR BASIS, THAT'S NO DIFFERENT. YOU'RE GIVING UP VALUABLE ASSETS. I'D RATHER YOU DEVELOP THAT ASSET. I PAY PROPERTY TAXES. I'M WILLING FOR YOU TO HAVE ANOTHER BOND ELECTION. I'D VOTE FOR IT. IJ THE CITY OF AUSTIN WOULD VOTE FOR IT. THEY VOTED FOR EVERY OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL BOND ELECTION. THE CITY VOTERS HAVE. I DON'T SEE WHY THEY WOULDN'T IN THIS ONE. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU SHOULD DO. I THINK YOU NEED TO TREAT THEM AS SEPARATE ISSUES. AND IF YOU ARE QING TO PROCEED, I WISH YOU WOULD SUPPORT GRF'S PROPOSAL. THANK Y'ALL. [BUZZER]. [APPLAUSE].

>> AM I NEXT? I WAS OUT IN THE FOYER. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE STARTED YET, BUT I'D LIKE TO POSITION THIS THING WHERE MAYBE IT CAN BE SEEN. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT IS. YEAH. YEAH. THANKS A LOT. I'M STEVE BEERS. I'D ALSO LIKE THREE MORE MINUTES IF SOMEBODY COULD GIVE IT UP, BUT -- OKAY. [INAUDIBLE].

>> CAN'T HEAR YOU, MAYOR.

>> OKAY. WELL, THANKS A LOT. I'M STEVE BEERS. THANKS FOR BEING HERE AND LISTENING TO THE CITIZENS. TODAY WAS A PERFECT DAY. IT REMIND ME OF THE BEAUTY OF THIS PLACE. ONE OF THE BIG REASONS I'M HERE. AND THE OTHER THING THAT'S BEAUTIFUL TODAY IS TO HEAR THESE CITIZENS STANDING UP FOR THEIR CITY. I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT SOME ASPECTS OF THIS STRATUS TERM SHEET. SPECIFICALLY I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE UNRELIABILITY OF INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE PUBLIC BY CITY BUREAUCRACY. SPECIFICALLY, ALMOST A YEAR AGO TODAY THERE WAS A STUDY THAT CAME OUT -- THIS WAS A STORY DATED DECEMBER 3RD AND DECEMBER 2ND OF 1999 FROM THE AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN. THERE THEY PRAISE A REPORT THAT CAME OUT ABOUT ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS PLANNED IN THE PIPELINE AND GRANDFATHERED UNDER THE STATE LAW 1704. THEY SAID THAT SPECIFICALLY DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES PLEASE WATERSHED ACTIVISTS. CITY STUDY OUTLINES WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT. AUSTIN OFFICIALS SAY SURFACE COVERS BELOW LEVELS THAT WOULD HURT BARTON SPRINGS. FURTHER IT SAYS, CITY OFFICIALS SAID 85% OF THE DEVELOPMENT AREA THAT COULD BE BUILT UNDER THOSE OLD RULES IS OWNED BY STRATUS PROPERTIES OR COMPANIES DEVELOPED WITH DEVELOPER GARY BRADLEY. WELL, WHAT DID THAT STUDY SAY? I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT IT. IT SAYS SPECIFICALLY THE MOST I COULD TELL WAS 17 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE. IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE GRANDFATHERED. THIS WAS IN DECEMBER '99, A YEAR AGO. ONE YEAR LATER ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE APPEARS A TRAFFIC STUDY. BARTON SPRINGS LAND USE AND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REPORT. WHAT DOES IT SAY? INSTEAD OF THE 17 MILLION OF COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET, IT REPORTS 51 MILLION SQUARE FEET. ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'VE BALLOONED FROM TWO DOWNTOWNS OVER THE AQUIFER UP TO FIVE. IN ONLY 11 MONTHS. IT ALSO SAYS THAT THERE'S 86,000 RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE PIPELINE AT TODAY'S DENSITY'S THAT'S A CITY OF 250,000 OVER YOUR AQUIFER. -- OUR AQUIFER. WHAT'S STRATUS AND BRADLEY'S PART OF THAT? WELL, I DON'T HAVE PERCENTAGES HERE, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S SOMETHING ON THE ORDER OF BOTH OF THEM TOGETHER, LET'S SEE, SEVEN MILLION OUT OF 51 -- I DON'T KNOW. GET SOME MATHEMATICIAN TO DO IT. BUT THE POINT IS THAT IT'S FAR FROM BEING 85% OF WHAT'S OUT THERE SO I THINK WHAT THIS UNDERLINES IS THE NEED TO HAVE THE KIND OF STUDY THAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH IS ADVOCATING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A HANDLE ON WHAT'S OUT THERE. THE OTHER POINT I WANTED TO RAISE IS ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE DEAL THAT'S BEING OFFERED TO YOU. REFERRING TO THIS BAR CHART HERE, -- I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN DO THIS OR NOT. WELL, ANYWAY, THE BAR CHART -- THE BAR ON THE FR LEFT-HAND CORNER, THE PURPLE ONE, IS WHAT THEY CAN DO IF THEY DON'T GET THIS DEAL. THE MIDDLE ONE, THE RED ONE, IS WHAT THEY CLAIM, WHAT THEY'RE OFFERING AS A SETTLEMENT TO MAKE US FEEL BETTER ABOUT APPROVING ALL THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND ON THE FAR RIGHT SIDE, THE YELLOW ONE, IS WHAT S.O.S. WOULD ALLOW IN TERMS OF POLLUTE TANT LOADS. SO I THINK YOU GET THE GENERAL IDEA THAT THE ONE ON THE LEFT IS UNIMAGEBLY GREATER. I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT A FEW THINGS ABOUT THIS. IN THE CASE OF THE CIRCLE C TRACT, WHICH IS 1200 ACRES, CURRENTLY THAT IS ZONED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, RR. ONE UNIT PER ACRE. SO THEREFORE IF THE CITY GOVERNMENT SIMPLY DID NOT GRANT A ZONING CHANGE, ALL OF A SUDDEN WHAT THEY ARE THREATENING WOULD GO DOWN FROM A MILLION AND A HALF SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AND RETAIL AND A COUPLE THOUSAND APARTMENTS WOULD TURN INTO 1200 HOMES. I THINK THAT WOULD BRING DOWN THAT PURPLE LINE A LOT. THE OTHER BIG HOT SPOOT FOR POLLUTIONS IS THE LANTANA DEVELOPMENT WHERE THERE'S 183 ACRES THAT ARE UNDER OLD WATER QUALITY CONTROLS, THE SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION PONDS RATHER THAN TODAY'S RETENTION IRRIGATION WHICH IS REQUIRED UNDER S.O.S. COMPLIANCE DEVELOPMENT. I DID SOME QUICK CALCULATIONS HERE, AND THE DIFFERENCE IN COST FOR THEM TO DO THE UPGRADED CONTROLS IS ONLY A MILLION DOLLARS IN COMMITTING 14 ACRES FOR SPRAY IRRIGATION. SO I THINK THAT SINCE THEY'RE ASKING FOR CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE WORTH MANY OR POTENTIALLY HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS' WORTH OF EXTRA DEVELOPMENT AT FULL BUILDOUT, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A MILLION DOLLARS TO FIX THIS PROBLEM. AND I WOULD SUGGEST IF THEY DON'T THAT THE CITY OUGHT TO CONDEMN THOSE PONDS AND BUILD THEM RIGHT AND COMMIT THE AREA TO SPRAY IRRIGATING. [BUZZER]. SO THIS THING IS A SHAM. WE HAVE BETTER CHOICES THAN THIS. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>SLUSHER: KIRK MITCHELL, YOU'RE UP.

>> I'M WITH THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS EYE LINES AND REPRESENTING THE 3,000 MEMBERS OF OUR ORGANIZATION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS AND CRITIQUES. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE VALUATION QUESTION. AS WE AUTHORIZE CITY STAFF TO -- I WOULD HOPE WE WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE THEM YET, BUT I'LL AFRAID WE MIGHT AUTHORIZE THEM TO NEGOTIATE OUT OF PUBLIC SCRUTINY, AS ALWAYS HAPPENS, TO SWAP THIS LAND FOR MUELLER. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THE VALUATION THAT YOU'RE GIVING TO THE LAND THAT STRATUS OWNS AND THE LAND OVER THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE IS PROPERLY VALUED AND VALUED WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE CITY WILL FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL FOR THE NEXT 500 YEARS TO PREVENT THAT AREA FROM BEING DEVELOPED WITH THE OXYGEN OF CITY FINANCED INFRASTRUCTURE. IT IS THE LIFE BLOOD OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE STILL COMING TO US FOR WHATEVER WE CAN GET THEM. THEY WILL NOT EVER MAKE THEIR MONEY BACK IF WE DO NOT BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE. ROADS, SEWERS, SCHOOLS, AND THE NATURE OF SUBURBAN SPRAWL IS THAT THE FINANCIAL BURDEN IS CARRIED BY THE HIGHER POPULATION AT THE CENTER FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE DEVELOPERS, NOT NECESSARILY THE CITIZENS THAT LIVE THERE AFTERWARDS IN THE DEVELOPMENTS. SO WE START WITH THE VALUATION THAT IT IS THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE WILL NOT BUILD MORE THAN THE LAW REQUIRES US TO BUILD IN AN INFRASTRUCTURE FOR STRATUS. WE HAVE SECONDLY ASSUMED THAT MUELLER IS VALUED WITH ALL OF THE CITY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE CAN PROVIDE FOR A MASTER PLAN OF THIS COMMUNITY ADOPT IN A PUBLIC PROCESS AND APPROVES OF THAT MEETS THE GOALS AND ASPIRATIONS OF OUR GREAT CITY. SO WITH THE CITY INFRASTRUCTURE AT MUELLER AND WITHOUT AT STRATUS, THAT'S THE BASIS FOR THE VALUATION THAT I WOULD APPROVE OF. AND AFTER YOU GET THROUGH WITH THAT PROCESS, YOU NEED TO KNOW THAT YOU CAN GO INTO THE MARKET TODAY AS OF TODAY'S VALUATION IN THE STOCK MARKET AND BUY THE WHOLE COMPANY FROM STRATUS PROPERTIES FOR 66 MILLION DOLLARS TODAY. THEN YOU COULD SELL OFF THE OIL AND GAS PROPERTIES IN A GOOD MARKET, YOU COULD SELL OFF THE DALLAS, HOUSTON AND SAN ANTONIO PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT AND YOU CAN SELL THE REST OF THE LAND WHICH WE'RE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT WITH BEYOND RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING. AND YOU WOULD MAKE A PROFIT PROBABLY, BUT AT LEAST YOU WOULD HAVE SPENT A LOT LESS THAN GIVING MUELLER. NOW, COUNCILMEMBER -- SORRY ABOUT THAT. ONE OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS SAID THEY DON'T NEED US. THEY'VE GOT THE APPROVAL THEY NEED. BUT THEY DON'T HAVE OUR SEWER, THEY DON'T HAVE THE PROPER ZONING -- . [BUZZER]. THEY WANTED CIRCLE C AND THEY NEED CHANGES IN ZONING AT LANTANA. SO IT'S NOT ACCURATE.

>>SLUSHER: YOUR TIME IS UP.

>> WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO OFFER THREE MORE MINUTES?

>> SHE WOULD.

>>SLUSHER: WHAT'S YOUR NAME? OKAY. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. YOU'VE GOT THREE MORE MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU, DARYL. THEY NEED OUR SEWER, THEY NEED OUR ZONING APPROVALS FOR THE CHANGES THEY WISH TO HAVE. AND THEY WILL BE COMING BACK TO US FOR THE KINDS OF APPROVAL THAT THIS CITY GIVES THAT LEAD TO HIGHER VALUATIONS FOR THEIR PROPERTY, NOT TO MENTION THERE WILL BE DEMANDS ON OUR PUBLIC PURSE AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR DECADES TO COME. AND THAT'S ALL IN AN AREA OF TOWN THAT THE CITY HAS AGAIN AND AGAIN EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO STOP DEVELOPING INSTEAD OF ACCELERATING NOW. NOW, WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL, THERE'S A COMMITMENT TO DO THE COMPREHENSIVE SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO PROTECT BARTON SPRINGS. SO TO DO THE COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS, NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING, ETCETERA, TO KNOW THAT WE ARE ACHIEVING A DESIGN, A MASTER PLAN FOR TREASURED AREAS OF OUR COMMUNITY THAT WILL MEET THE PUBLIC'S NEED AND DESIRES. AND IS THERE A COMMITMENT. ONCE WE KNOW THESE THINGS TO ADOPT A COMPREHENSIVE ALL-INCLUSIVE STRATEGY TO SAVE THE SPRINGS AND NOT TO WHEEL AND DEAL PIECE BY PIECE UNTIL WE FIND OUT THAT WE'VE GIVEN AWAY THE CROWN JEWELS OF THE CITY WITHOUT SAVING THE SPRINGS. SO I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT THERE'S NOT A -- THERE'S NOT A PROVEN OR AT LEAST A METHOD BY -- BY WHICH INEXPIRES CONFIDENCE IN THE CITIZENS BY WHICH WE WILL SAVE THE SPRINGS, WHICH IS THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF OUR ORGANIZATION. AND I KNOW THAT ALL THESE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN THAT AS WELL ALONG THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL AS AS THEY'VE BEEN IN OFFICE, BUT I DO NOT HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THIS PIECE MEAL WAY WE GO ABOUT IT QUITE OFTEN GETTING BEATEN AT THE NEGOTIATING TABLE AND ALWAYS ADDRESSING ONE SMALL PART OF THE PROBLEM AT ONCE, I'M JUST NOT CONFIDENT THAT SAVING THE SPRINGS, WE ALREADY HAVE DRAMATIC EVIDENCE THAT WE MAY BE LOSING THE RACE. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. AND I URGE YOU TO DO THAT WITH CONVICTION. THANK YOU.

>>SLUSHER: THANK YOU, MR. MITCHELL. DR. ROBERT HOFFMAN. SOIR IF I MISPRONOUNCED THAT. ROBERT HOFFMAN? NOT HERE. MR. HOFFMAN IS FOR ITEM 48. TRS TRACY HAYS? AND FOLLOWING MS. HAYS WILL BE SONYA SAN TAN IN A. SHE DOESN'T WANT TO SPEAK, BUT SAYS PLEASE KEEP THE PROCESS OPEN. NO CLOSED BACK ROOM DEALS. LET THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN. AND GERARD KENNY WILL FOLLOW MS. HAYS. GO AHEAD, MA'AM.

>> I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION WOULD BE WHY ARE WE CONSIDERING DEALING WITH STRATUS OR FREEPORT MCNAMARA KNOWING HA KNOWING THAT THEY'VE HAD SUCH A HORRIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD, WHY IS THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOING THIS? AND HAVE WE DONE OUR RESEARCH AND HAVE YOU ALL GOTTEN A FULL REPORT OF WHAT THEIR HISTORY IS, WHAT THEY DO WHEN THEY DO GO TO BE MASTER PLANNERS, HOW YOU PUT IT, MASTER DEVELOPERS? I THINK THAT'S A SHAME THAT ANYBODY COULD CALL THAT COMPANY A MASTER DEVELOPER KNOWING WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN INDONESIA AND OTHER PLACES WHERE THEY'VE DEVELOPED. AND I DO HAVE SERIOUS QUESTIONS. WHY WOULD WE EVEN DEAL WITH THEM. AND WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT SAVING SOMETHING WHEN WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT IS ARE WE GOING TO LET SOMEBODY DESTROY IT. WE'RE NOT GOING TO SAVE IT. IT'S SAVED. WE NEED TO STOP PEOPLE FROM DESTROYING WHAT WE HAVE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING A AND SO WE NEED TO CHANGE OUR LANGUAGE WITH THAT. I DON'T HEAR OF ANY GOALS FOR ANY KIND OF GREEN DEVELOPMENT OR ANY KIND OF, YOU KNOW, HEY, IF WE'RE GOING TO DEVELOP, WHY DON'T WE START USING THE TECHNOLOGY THAT IS NOW AVAILABLE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT POLLUTING, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE BUILDING SUSTAINABLE HOUSING, THAT WE ARE NOT CREATING MORE OF A MESS THAT OUR CITIES, OUR SMALL CITIES THAT ARE GROWING ARE FINDING THEMSELVES IN. I'M FROM MAJOR CITIES. I JUST MOVED TO AUSTIN TWO YEARS AGO. I'M A NEW PERSON HERE, BUT ALREADY THE CHANGE IS UNBELIEVABLE. WE ARE HEADING TOWARDS -- WE'RE HEADING TOWARDS THE FATE OF HOUSTON, WITH THE WORST AIR QUALITY IN THE UNITED STATES. OR VERY LITTLE RESOURCES, NATURAL RESOURCES TO BE ABLE TO ENJOY. AND AND ALL THE DISEASES AND CANCERS THAT ARE RELATED WITH ALL OF THAT. WHAT ELSE WAS I WANTING TO TALK ABOUT? THIS IS ALL REALLY CONFUSING. AND THE LANGUAGE THAT IS USED, I REMEMBER THE LANGUAGE THING EARLIER. Y'ALL ARE CITY OFFICIALS AND YOU KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR LANGUAGE THAT YOU USE. AND IT'S HARD TO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE CITY OFFICIAL WHO SAYS OH, I DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY. YOU ALL KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR LANGUAGE. THAT'S WHY AND HOW YOU GOT TO YOUR POSITIONS. AND I WOULD EXPECT THAT YOU WOULD BE -- ACT RESPONSIBLY WITH THAT SO THAT IT'S CLEAR TO PEOPLE WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO LISTEN TO YOU AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON THAT WE HAVE A CLEAR PICTURE AND THAT IT'S NOT VAGUE AND THAT WE'RE NOT PUT IN A POSITION WHERE WE HAVE TO BE DISTRUSTFUL AND LIKE WHAT DO THEY MEAN BY THIS? YOU KNOW HOW TO BE CLEAR AND IT SHOULD BE CLEAR. WE AUSTIN SHOULD BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON WITHOUT HAVING ALL THESE ARGUMENTS ABOUT IT. AND I GUESS LASTLY, I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULD GIVE ANY TYPE OF CORPORATION PERMISSION TO DEAL WITH A PROJECT THAT IS COMMUNITY-LED AND COMMUNITY-ORGANIZED. IT'S UP TO THE COMMUNITY TO DECIDE WHERE THEY WOULD TO GO WITH MUELLER. AND AS FAR AS THE WATERSHED AREA GOES, I DON'T SEE WHY WE CAN'T GUY BYE THAT BACK. I DON'T SEE WHY STRATUS SHOULD MAINTAIN OWNERSHIP OVER THAT. [BUZZER]. IT SHOULD BE PUBLIC PROPERTY.

>>SLUSHER: THANK YOU. MR. KINNEY, THEN KAREN KAUFF. YOU CAN COME UP AND GET READY.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> COUNCILMEMBERS AND MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM, WHO I HOPE ARE ALSO LISTENING, I AM GERARD KINNEY. I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE MUELLER QUESTION FOR ACTUALLY MOST OF MY ADULT LIFE. I COAUTHORED THE 1984 CARE PLAN FOR MUELLER AND I ALSO CHAIRED THE 1995-1996 TASKFORCE THAT DEVELOPED THE GOALS THAT UNDERLAID THE RMMA PLAN WHICH WERE ADOPTED. AND THAT'S A KEY WORD, ADOPTED RATHER THAN ACCEPTED. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT, ADOPTED IN 1996. THE RMMA PLAN, WHICH I SUPPORT, SUMMARIZED SOME OF THOSE GOALS. I URGE YOU TO GO BACK AND LOOK, THOUGH, AT THE VISION STATEMENT THAT CONTAIN GOALS THAT YOU ADOPTED BACK IN 1996 BECAUSE THEY ARE STRONGER. AND, FOR INSTANCE, IN THE AREAS OF SUSTAINABILITY, THE RMMA PLAN TALKS ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY AS IT SHOULD, BUT THE GOALS THAT I ADOPTED INCLUDED MAKING MUELLER A MODEL OF SUSTAINABILITY, A MUCH STRONGER STATEMENT. AND THERE ARE OTHER STATEMENTS THAT ARE STRONGER AND I URGE YOU TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THEM. ANOTHER THING THAT THE TASKFORCE GOALS THAT YOU ADOPTED DID WAS TO TALK ABOUT FAVORING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OVER A PHYSICAL REGULATORY PLAN, NOT THAT A REGULATORY PLAN IS NOT IMPORTANT. THE RMMA PLAN THAT YOU ACCEPTED, WHICH I'M GLAD YOU DID THAT, BUT I WISH UD ADOPTED IT AND WOULD NOW ADOPT IT, BUT IT DOES NOT HAVE AS STRONG A LANGUAGE ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AS DID THE ORIGINAL. SO I WOULD URGE YOU AS YOU MOVE FORWARD IN THIS TO CONSIDER IF YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS IDEA THAT YOU CONSIDER PERHAPS GOING AHEAD AND ADOPTING THAT AND GOING BACK AND SIMILARLY RECOMMITTING TO SOME OF THE GOALS IN THE TASKFORCE THAT MAY HAVE, YOU KNOW, FALLEN AWAY A LITTLE BIT SO THAT THOSE THINGS UNDERLAY UNDERLAY -- UNDERLIE WHAT YOU ARE DOING NOW. I THINK YOU ALSO -- ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT THERE IS SORT OF -- IT'S SORT OF UNDERSTANDABLE SOME OF THE SKEPTICISM. I THINK DONNA CARTER SAID IT WELL, ABOUT THE ONE PROJECT THAT HAS GONE FORWARD, THAT IS THE CALL CENTER, REALLY DOES NOT REFLECT THE VISION AND IT DID NOT FOLLOW THE PROCESS THAT HAD BEEN LAID OUT. AND I THINK MOST OF THE COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS THAT. WE ARE NOW SORT OF HOPEFUL THAT YOU WON'T LOOK AT THAT AS A PRECEDENT, BUT THAT'S A SAD SORT OF THING TO GO BEFORE. AND IT'S CERTAINLY UNDERSTANDABLE THE SKEPTICISM THAT WE NOW SEE AS WE MOVE FORWARD INTO THIS. [BUZZER]. F.

>>SLUSHER: I BELIEVE THE NEXT SPEAKER FOLLOWING MS. HAUL WOULD BE -- WHY DON'T YOU GO AHEAD, MR. PAUL SINCE THE STACK IS SO HIGH. THE NEXT SPEAKER WOULD BE KRISTIN WORMAN. PLEASE COME ON UP. GO AHEAD.

>> GOOD EVENING MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS KAREN POPP. I SPEAK THIS EVENING AS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVOCATE, AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CAN HOUSING WORKING GROUP WHICH YESTERDAY VOTED TO ADOPT THE PLAN FOR MUELLER AND IS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CHERRY NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH IS WEST AND SOUTH OF MUELLER AIRPORT. I WORKED WITH GERARD KINNEY IN 1984 WHEN THE AIRPORT EXPANSION WAS PROPOSED FOR THAT AREA. YOU ASKED US TO ADDRESS THINGS THAT HADN'T BEEN ADDRESSED IN THE MOTION UP TO THE POINT YOU STARTED TAKING PUBLIC COMMENT. AND ONE OF THE THINGS I REALLY WANTED TO EMPHASIZE IS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION THAT RMMA HAS RECOMMENDED AND THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS RECOMMENDED. IN THE EXCHANGE BETWEEN MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT EARLIER AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, YOU REFERENCED THE CONCEPT THAT MUELLER REDEVELOPMENT WOULD BE A BROAD -- BROADLY AFFORDABLE. THE DEFINITION THAT THE CONSULTANT HAD IS THE 80% FEDERAL DEFINITION. AND THAT'S NOT REALLY GOOD ENOUGH TO ACHIEVE AFFORDABILITY AT MUELLER. SOMEBODY COULD DEVELOP MUELLER AND THEY COULD DEVELOP ALL THE AFFORDABLE COMPONENT FOR PEOPLE AT ABOUT 48,000 DOLLAR INCOME AND SATISFY THAT. BUT THE VISION IS MUCH BROADER ONE. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE WOULD BE A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT MUELLER. SHOULDN'T EVERYBODY FROM THE CAFETERIA LINE TO THE PRINCIPAL'S OFFICE BE ABLE TO LIVE NEARBY WHERE THEY WORK AT MUELLER? THE ONLY WAY THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS IF YOU STRAT IF I, SO TO SPEAK, THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS IN HERE. YOU NEED TO ADD MORE GUIDELINES IN ORDER TO ASSURE THAT IT TRULY IS A DIVERSE INCOME RANGE AT MUELLER. I ASK YOU THIS EVENING TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO ASSURE THAT THAT VISION OF A BROAD INCOME GROUP, A BROAD AFFORDABILITY IS INCLUDED AT MUELLER FOR ANY DEVELOPER, BE IT STRATUS OR ANYBODY ELSE. AND THERE ARE SOME TREMENDOUS MODELS IN THE INCLUSIONARY ZONING PROGRAMS AND OTHER COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY HAVE INCLUDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT. AND I ASK IF YOU WOULD INCLUDE IN THE LIST OF DIFFERENT INTEREST GROUPS THAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVOCATES SO THAT WE CAN GET INCLUDED INTO THE -- IN THE AGREEMENT GOOD LANGUAGE BORROWED FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY HAVE HAD A SUCCESSFUL RECORD OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND LASTLY, MUELLER IS A BIG RESOURCE. I THINK TO HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS THAT ARE SAYING LET'S INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS ALSO A MAJOR RESOURCE. I'M VERY PROUD THAT THAT'S WHAT MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS RECOMMENDING THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'VE WORKED ON A LONG TIME. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU. AND YOU'RE RIGHT, KAREN, I FORGOT. WHEN I REMEMBERED UTC, I FORGOT CDC. THANKS. KATHY CRANSTON? DID SHE HAVE TO LEAVE AGAIN? OKAY. SHE MARKS, NEUTRAL. HAD TO LEAVE, SO -- CONDITIONS THAT WE WOULD SUPPORT WOULD BE TO REMEMBER TO SET ASIDE A CERTAIN PERCENT OF HOUSING TO PEOPLE THAT ARE AT 30% OR BELOW MFI. ALSO MAKE SURE THAT HOUSING NOT ONLY IS AFFORDABLE, BUT ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE WITH DISABLES. WE WANT OUR COMMUNITIES TO BE DIVERSE, SOCIOECONOMICALLY, KEEP THE WORKERS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. [APPLAUSE]. THANKS, KATHY. JENNIFER MCFAIL? SHE'S NEUTRAL. ADAPT WANTS HOUSING THAT'S AFFORDABLE FOR PEOPLE BELOW 30% MFI. THAT IS ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. AL DOTSON? DID HE HAVE TO LEAVE? I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS YOUR NAME?

>> KRISTIN WARNER?

>>GOODMAN: I DIDN'T SEE YOUR CARD. GO AHEAD.

>> OKAY. MY NAME IS KRISTIN WARMAN AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE TRAVIS COUNTRY COMMUNITY SERVICES ORGANIZATION AND I'M HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL ON BEHALF OF THE TRAVIS COUNTRY NEIGHBORHOOD. ARGUABLY TRAVIS COUNTRY POSITIONED AT SOUTHWEST PARKWAY AND FOSTER RANCH ROAD IS A NEIGHBORHOOD MOST IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED STRATUS DEVELOPMENT. AS MOST OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS KNOW, WE DELIVERED A POSITION LETTER TO ALL OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS LAST WEEK THAT OUTLINES THE CONCERNS THAT TRAVIS COUNTRY HAS WITH REGARD TO THE STRATUS DEVELOPMENT. WE'D LIKE TO APPLAUD THE COUNCIL FOR BRINGING THIS PROCESS OUT INTO THE OPEN AND IN INVOLVING THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE DISCUSSION. WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER'S PROPOSED MOTION MOTION THAT WOULD FURTHER EXPLORE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SWAP OTHER LAND THAT THE CITY OWNS IN EXCHANGE FOR THOSE LANDS THAT ARE CRITICAL TO THE PRESERVATION OF BARTON CREEK AND THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE LAND THAT STRATUS CURRENTLY PROPOSES TO DEVELOP. WE, HOWEVER, RECOGNIZE THAT SOME OF THOSE LANDS, INCLUDING MUELLER AIRPORT, ARE SENSITIVE, AND WE WOULD SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE MUELLER NEIGHBORHOODS' EFFORTS TO REDEVELOP THAT AREA TO THEIR OWN DESIRES AND TO THE PLAN THAT THEY HAVE DEVELOPED AND PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL. AND WE APPLAUD THEIR EFFORTS TO DO THAT. SO WE WANT TO SAY THAT WE ARE OPEN TO THE IDEA AND WE WANT COUNCIL TO BE OPEN TO THE IDEA OF THIS LAND EXCHANGE, BUT WE WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO OUR FELLOW NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT'S REALLY ALL I WANTED TO SAY THIS EVENING. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE]. AL DOTSON? HE HAD TO GO. HE'S AGAINST. KEITH LANGFORD? MR. LANGFORD IS AGAINST. SHELEEN JOHNSON? SHE IS AGAINST. MIKE RUTHER? FOLLOWED BY WILL BOSEMAN. IS WILL HERE?

>> I HAVE A QUICK PROPOSAL TO MAKE BEFORE I START MY STATEMENT. I THINK THAT THERE'S A WAY IN CASE COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S PROPOSAL DOES NOT PASS, AND I SINCERELY HOPE THAT IT DOES, I THINK THAT'S A WAY TO REWRITE IT THAT AT LEAST ADDS A FEW WORDS TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EVALUATE AND DISCUSS IN PUBLICLY POSTED MEETINGS WITH ALL INTERESTED PARTIES THE FEASIBILITY OF A TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY AND/OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY OVER THE HE HAD HE DID INSTEAD OF OWNED BY STRATUS PROPERTIES. THAT WILL GET US THE PROTECTION I THINK A LOT OF FOLKS ARE LOOKING FOR ON TWO FRONTS. ONE IS THAT THE MEETINGS BE OPEN AND PUBLICLY AVAILABLE, AND TWO THAT THESE DISCUSSIONS NOT BE LIMITED TO STRATUS PROPERTIES, BUT INSTEAD ADDRESS THE PROBLEM OF GRANDFATHERING DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE. SO I'M GOING TO WRITE THAT UP AND PASS IT AROUND LATER. IF Y'ALL ARE INTERESTED. I HAVE SEVERAL CONCERNS WITH THE AMALGUM AS WRITTEN AND I FULLY SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S SUBSTITUTE MOTION. I THINK IT HAS SEVERAL ADVANTAGES OVER THE AMALGUM AS ROBERT CALLS IT OR WHAT I CALL THE RECENTLY CREBT CREKTED VERSION OF ITEM 48. FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THE REASON THAT PEOPLE ARE UPSET IS VERY UNDERSTANDABLE. ITEM 48 AVAILABLE FOR NEARLY A WEEK OVER THE CITY'S WEBSITE AND AVAILABLE IN PRINTED FORM ALL THIS WEEK. IN FACT, I PICKED ONE UP OUT HERE, SAYS VERY CLEARLY DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS PROPERTIES. WHICH VERY CLEARLY GIVES A GREEN LIGHT TO PRIVATE NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS DEVELOPERS. I CANNOT IMAGINE ANOTHER INTERPRETATION OF THAT. YET LATE LAST NIGHT I RECEIVED A, QUOTE, MASS E-MAIL THAT ACTUALLY WENT OUT FROM COUNCILMEMBER WYNN'S AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER SAYING THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN PUBLICLY POSTED FOR DAYS AS AN ITEM FOR COUNCIL SPONSORED BY THEM BOTH WAS NOT ACTUALLY THE LANGUAGE THEY INTENDED. AND THEN IN FACT THEY INTENDED TOTALLY DIFFERENT LANGUAGE OF A DIFFERENT LENGTH AND DIFFERENT WORDING. WELL, THIS IS THE LANGUAGE HERE THAT HAS BEEN POSTED AND AVAILABLE ALL WEEK AND THAT'S WHY Y'ALL HAVE RECEIVED THE E-MAILS. Y'ALL WROTE THE LANGUAGE THAT WAY, YOU POSTED IT AS AN ITEM FOR COUNCIL. AND I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE MIGHT BE UPSET ABOUT THAT. SO LET'S SEE, AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHEN MASS E-MAIL BECAME A BAD THING OR A BAD NAME. IN FACT, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER WAS THE FIRST ELECTED OFFICIAL I'M AWARE OF TO USE THIS FORM TO COMMUNICATE TO THE PEOPLE. AND IN FACT, SOME OF HIS HAVE CONTAINED THINLY VEILED AND SOME NOT VEILED AT ALL SLIGHTS AIMED AT THE COMMUNITY LEADERS OR EVEN OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS. AND I CAN READ SOME OF THEM TO YOU IF I LIKE. I SAW BEVERLY'S E-MAIL AND IT ACTUALLY CONTAINED NONE OF THAT. SO I WAS TOTALLY CONFUSED BY WHAT CONVERSATION Y'ALL WERE HAVING PREVIOUS TO THIS. [BUZZER]. I HAVE THREE MORE MINUTES OVER HERE.

>>GOODMAN: CAN I HAVE YOUR NAME SO I CAN FIND OUR -- PARDON?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> AND THE CONTENT OF ANOTHER MASS E-MAIL FROM DARYL, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME RECONCILING BECAUSE IT CLEARLY SAYS THAT ALL FURTHER STRATUS NEGOTIATIONS WOULD BE, AND I QUOTE, TOTALLY IN THE OPEN. BUT ITEM 48 WAS POSTED BY THE SAME COUNCILMEMBER. AND IT SAID DIRECTED THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER PRIVATE NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS. AND I'M HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING THAT. I EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT SOME COUNCILMEMBERS ACTUALLY ADVOCATED THAT INSTEAD OF HAVING THIS MEETING ON SUCH AN IMPORTANT ITEM TONIGHT, AT A TIME THAT'S AVAILABLE TO MOST FOLKS AFTER WORK, THAT SOME COUNCILMEMBERS ACTUALLY FOUGHT TO HAVE IT DURING THE DAY WHEN IT WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR THE MAJORITY OF CITIZENS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER WAS ONE OF THOSE. SO I THINK THAT WE NEED A CALL FOR OPENNESS, WE NEED TO HEAL SOME OF THE WOUNDS THAT ARE AMONGST THE COUNCIL AND BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE THESE ARE VERY BIG ISSUES. AND I THINK WE NEED TO ALL STOP THE PETTY FIGHTING AND THE PETTY FIGHTING AND MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER AND THAT NEEDS TO BE IN A STRUCTURED PROCESS. BACK TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE PROPOSAL THAT SEEM TO BE CURRENTLY ON THE TABLE. I DO SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S PROPOSAL AND I THINK FOR SEVERAL REASONS. ONE, IT CALLS NOT JUST FOR THE COLLECTION OF FACTS ABOUT THE STATE OF THE AQUIFER, BUT CALLS FOR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND STRATEGIES FOR BEST PROTECTING THE AQUIFER. AND IT DOES NOT LIMIT THE DISCUSSIONS TO STRATUS AND STATISTIC TRUSS-OWNED PROPERTIES, BUT INSTEAD SET COMMUNITY AGREED UPON CRITERIA SO THAT ANY DEVELOPER COULD COME AND APPLY FOR A LAND SWAP, A DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TRANSFER OR ANY OTHER STRATEGY THAT WE MAY DEVELOP. AND WHILE THE AMALGUM OR CORRECTED VERSION PUT'S THE CITY IN THE CRITERIA FOR THE LAND SWAP IN THE CITY MANAGER'S PLAN, COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S PLAN TAPS INTO THE COMMUNITY ITSELF. AND WITH A FACILITATOR WOULD GIVE THE COMMUNITY THE TOOLS IT NEEDS TO SET THEIR OWN CRITERIA GUIDELINES AND RULES FOR INFRASTRUCTURE EXTENSION, LAND SWAPS, DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TRANSFERS AND EVEN OUT RIGHT PURCHASE. HERE I WAS REFERRING TO WHAT I THINK WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE COMMUNICATION BREAK DOWN THAT'S HAPPENED. AND EVEN THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS IS NOT WORKING FOR MOST PEOPLE. A LOT OF FOLKS HAVE LOST FAITH IN IT AND DON'T THINK IT MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE AT ALL. CLEARLY, YOU HEAR COMMENTS ALL THE TIME THAT Y'ALL DON'T LISTEN OR YOU MOVE IN AND OUT. AND I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO DO THAT, BUT I THINK NOW THAT THE LAWSUIT WITH STRATUS IS SETTLED, WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO START FRESH AND INCLUDE EVERYONE, WORK TOGETHER AND IF YOU INCLUDE EVERYONE IN AN OPEN, INCLUSIVE PROCESS, INCLUDE THEM ON THE FRONT END, YOU SET A MEASURE OF COMMUNITY BUY IN TO THE RESULT. BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A TRUISM THAT IF YOU EXCLUDE FOLKS AND YOU TAKE THE EXACT SAME RELATIVE HUMIDITYIES AND PUT IT IN THEIR LAPS, THEY'LL HAVE A DIFFERENT LOOK AT IT. LET THE PROCESS GO FORWARD AND SAFE BARTON SPRINGS. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO CORRECT ONE THING THAT WAS SAID. AND I APPRECIATE MR. BLIZZARD'S CALL FOR HEALING. BUT I DID NOT FIGHT TO GET THE ITEM DURING THE DAY. I DID SUPPORT THE 4:30 POSTED. SO IF HE HEARD OTHERWISE, THAT WAS INACCURATE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WILL BOSEMAN? MR. BOSEMAN SAYS SUPPORT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AND ENSURE LONG-TERM PROTECTIONS OF BARTON SPRINGS AND SOUND REDEVELOPMENT OF ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. KEN MARSH SAYS PLEASE DON'T MAKE SECRET DEALS WITH DEVELOPERS. WE THE PUBLIC ARE THE ONES WHO MUST DEAL WITH RESULTS. KRISTIN WARMAN? OKAY. THANK YOU. RITA THOMPSON?

>> GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU. WHEN I FIRST READ THIS AND HEARD ABOUT IT, I HAD A VERY INITIAL REACTION. AND GRANTED, I'M NO EXPERT ON PUBLIC POLICY, BUT I'LL JUST TELL YOU I SAID OH, MY GOSH, THAT LOOKS LIKE TERRIBLE PUBLIC POLICY. PLEASE DO NOT PUT EAST AUSTIN IN ANY WAY, EVEN THE APPEARANCE OF IT BEING A BARGAINING CHIP. [APPLAUSE]. NOT WITH STRAT TUS, NOT WITH ANYONE. AND I'M THINKING OF AN OLD FRIEND, WALTER BROWN, WHO SAID TO ME ONCE, RITA, VERY GOOD, YOU'VE MANAGED TO MAKE BOTH SIDES EQUALLY ANGRY WITH YOU. AND I WAS A LITTLE ANGRY WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD POSITION, WHICH I REALLY RESPECT THEIR WORK AND MOST OF THE MEMBERS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S AN ISSUE FOR THEM TO TAKE ABOUT BARGAINING AWAY MUELLER. I KNOW THEY'RE CONCERNED. I AM TOO ABOUT THE WATER QUALITIES, BUT THIS IS A PUBLIC POLICY ISSUE ABOUT MIXING THE INTEGRITY OF A NEIGHBORHOOD AND ITS SELF DETERMINATION AS A BARGAINING CHIP FOR OUR WATER. I WILL NOT MAKE A CHOICE BETWEEN THOSE TWO. I WILL COMPROMISE, BUT NOT WITH VALUES, VOT WITH THE INTEGRITY OF EAST AUSTIN. IT HAS PAID A PRICE WAY TOO LONG. UNDO THIS TANGLED MESS. LET A MASTER DEVELOPER COME IN AND GO FAR BEYOND ZONING. ZONING IS A VERY BROAD THING. TALK TO THE COMMUNITY, GET IT VERY SPECIFIC. WHAT DO THOSE COMMUNITIES WANT, WHAT DO THEY NEED? IT'S THEIR COMMUNITY. AND THEN YOU CAN PROCEED AND THEY CAN COME FORTH AND HAVE A RIGHT TO MAKE AMENDS FOR THEIR PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT AL ERRORS AND THEY CAN PROPOSE A QUALITY PROJECT AND DO IT LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. I JUST WANT TO SAY IT'S NOT THAT I HAVE LESS OF A COMMITMENT TO THE QUALITY OF WATER. THIS SUMMER I TOOK MY CHILDREN SWIMMING AS USUAL AND EVERY TIME WE WOULD SWIM, THE TWO WOULD ARGUE. I WANT TO GO TO DEEP EDDY BECAUSE IT'S NOT AS COLD. AND THE OTHER ONE WOULD SAY BUT IT HAS CHLORINE. AND THE OTHER ONE WOULD SAY, I KNOW, BUT BARTON IS TOO COLD AND WE WOULD GO BACK AND FORTH. WELL, HERE ENTERED A NEW DISCUSSION FOR THE FIRST TIME. THE 12-YEAR-OLD SAID, YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT, AND IT'S GOT THAT YUCKY STUFF IN IT, LOTS MORE, LOTS MORE. SO NOW, INSTEAD OF THIS DELIGHTFUL DISCUSSION WE USED TO HAVE OVER 12 YEARS ENTERED IN THAT THE QUALITY OF WATER IS APPARENT EVEN TO THEM. IT'S NOT THAT I'M NOT CONCERNED, BUT I DON'T REALLY LIKE BEING FORCED TO PUT EAST AUSTIN IN THE MUELLER IN ANY KIND OF POSITION WHERE IT CAN -- IT WOULD HAVE TO SACRIFICE ANY OF ITS QUALITY, SO KEEP THE PROCESS VERY OPEN AND THEN LET STRATUS COME FORTH LIKE ANY DEVELOPER AND SEE WHAT THEY HAVE TO OFFER. THANK YOU. DLAP. [APPLAUSE]. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE]

>> ... ANOTHER REASON TO PROTECT OUR NATURAL RESOURCES. AT THE SAME TIME WE'VE GOT THIS KIND OF SHADY DEAL HANGING OVER OUR HEADS HERE. AND I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT -- I USE THE WORD ARROGANT AND I'M USING THAT BOTH STRONGLY AND CAUTIOUSLY. IT'S GAR GANT OF YOU TO DO THIS TO US AT THIS TIME. AND I HOPE YOU WILL GIVE IT SOME MORE THOUGHT. RIGHT NOW -- I'VE ONLY SWAM IN THE LAST MONTH, NOT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO. IT'S TOO DIRTY. TOO DIRTY FROM THESE RAINS. YEARS AGO BACK IN THE '70'S IT DIDN'T STAY DIRT THINK LONG. THAT'S A MAJOR CHANGE. AND NOW WE HAVE FINDINGS THERE IS ARRESTS NICK AND LEAD, PESTICIDE BREAKING SHOWING UP. THIS CAN HARM CHILDREN. WE NOW HAVE SOME EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT A COMMONLY USED WHICH WILL DM PONDS AND LAKES CAN LEAD TO PARKINSON'S IN MICE. WHAT DOES IT DO TO HUMANS? WE'LL FIND OUT PROBABLY TOO LATE. ANYWAY, NEIGHBORHOODS ARE GOING TO SUFFER AND I'M CALLING -- I'M HOPING THAT THE HONORABLE MR. THOMAS AND MR. RAUL ALVAREZ WILL VOTE AGAINST WILL WYNN AND DARYL SLUSHER BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT LOOKING OUT FOR YOUR COMMUNITY. THEY ARE LOOKING OUT FOR THE BIG BOYS, THE FAT CATS IN THIS ONE. YOU MAY GET A FEW CRUMBS, BUT THEY WILL BE MOLDY BY THE TIME YOU GET THEM. AND JACKIE GOODMAN, MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'VE COME A LONG WAY ENVIRONMENTALLY, WORKING FOR NEIGHBORHOODS, I'M HOPING YOU WILL BE THE FOURTH VOTE TO VOTE THIS THING DOWN. YOU'VE GOT A GOOD TRACK RECORD AND I KNOW YOU WANT TO KEEP IT. AND I HOPE YOU WILL. BE HONORABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS. THAT'S THE LOSER HERE. NOT ONLY ARE THEY GOING TO GET TRAFFIC, BAD AIR, BUT THEY ALSO RUN THE RISK OF BEING PRICED OUT OF THEIR OWN HOMES VERY QUICKLY. AND AGAIN I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH FOR SHOWING SOME VISION. I'VE KNOWN HER AS LONG AS I'VE KNOWN ANY OF YOU, HONORABLE CHAIR OF THE PARKS COMMISSION, BOARD THERE, AND A LONG TIME PERSON WHO HAS GOT A DEEP INTEREST IN AUSTIN AS WELL AS SOME SOLID BUSINESS SENSE. AND BEVERLY GRIFFITH IS AGAINST WILL WYNN AND SLUSHER, I THINK WE'RE IN GOOD HANDS WITH HER PROPOSAL. SHE REPRESENTS THE BEST OF AUSTIN. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: LINDA CURTIS FOLLOWED BY -- GO AHEAD.

>> HI THERE. I DON'T COME DOWN HERE TOO OFTEN. I THINK I'VE BEEN DOWN HERE TWICE IN ABOUT A DECADE. AND THE REASON I DON'T COME DOWN HERE IS BECAUSE I BELIEVE AS I THINK MOST PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY BELIEVE THAT INCREASINGLY THESE KINDS OF FORUMS ARE UNHELPFUL, THAT PEOPLE DON'T LISTEN A WHOLE LOT, IF THEY DO, THEY DO WHAT THEY WANT ANYWAY. AND I HOPE I'M PROVEN WRONG TONIGHT. OF, BY THE WAY, AND THAT'S WHY I CAME DOWN HERE BECAUSE SOMEBODY ASKED ME TO DO THIS. I ALSO FELT I WANTED TO GIVE COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS AND COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH SOME SUPPORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS FOR STANDING UP FOR PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY. I REALLY DO APPRECIATE IT. I AM WATCHING YOU EVERYDAY, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T COME DOWN HERE BECAUSE I CAN'T BEAR BEING HERE TOO MUCH. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO SAY IS TO THE AUDIENCE, SEE, I THINK THAT THE GREEN COUNCIL HAS GOTTEN CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT KIND OF GREEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. [LAUGHTER]. AND THOSE WHO ARE ON THE COUNCIL CAN TAKE THAT AS AN INSULT BETTER THINK ABOUT WHY YOU ARE TAKING THAT AS AN INSULT. I HOPE YOU ARE NOT ONE WHO IS TAKING IT AS AN INSULT, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT SPECIAL INTERESTS ARE RULING AUSTIN MORE AND MORE THESE DAYS. THIS IS JUST ONE MORE EXAMPLE. I DO BELIEVE THE REASON PEOPLE ARE SO UPSET BY THESE E-MAILS IS BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE THE COMMUNITY GET ORGANIZED AND THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE UPSET ABOUT, THAT PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO ORGANIZE INDEPENDENTLY OF THE TRADITIONAL SORT OF ORGANIZATION OF THIS COMMUNITY THAT HAS KEPT THINGS THE STATUS QUO WHERE IT IS. SO PLEASE ALL OF YOU KEEP ORGANIZING, AND WORK WITH ME TO BUILD SOMETHING INDEPENDENT OVER THIS NEXT YEAR THAT'S GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WRONG PEOPLE ON THIS COUNCIL GET REPLACED AND THAT WE HAVE THE POWER TO RECALL OFFICIALS WHO ARE LAME DUCK OFFICIALS, JUST WAITING FOR THE END OF THEIR TERM, AND YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. WE NEED THAT KIND OF ORGANIZATION THAT'S GOING TO MAKE THESE MEETINGS FINALLY MEANINGFUL. THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING HERE, BUT BE OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY OVER THE NEXT YEAR TO BUILD SOMETHING. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: JOHN VAN STREAM SIGNED UP AGAINST. MATT HARRIS. SIGNED UP AGAINST AND WRITES -- I HOPE THE STRATUS AND I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE NEXT WORD. TRACT IS NOT GOOD FOR THE CITY. MICHELLE WESTON. PLEASE COME FORWARD. NORM KATUR SIGNED UP AGAINST SWAP, AGAINST STRATUS DEVELOPMENT ON AQUIFER. WELCOME.

>> HI. MY NAME IS MICHELLE WESTON. MY GRANDMOTHER'S NAME IS COREDELL AND THIS HAS BEEN SOME OF OUR TRADITIONAL LAND. I'M LOOKING AT HAVING KIDS THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS SO I WANT TO KEEP THIS LAND THE BEST CAN I. I LIVE ON THE EAST SIDE, I'M AN EAST SIDE ACTIVIST. YOU MIGHT RECOGNIZE ME. I DON'T WANT THE EAST SIDE TO BE POLLUTED. I DON'T WANT STRATUS TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE EAST SIDE EVER. [APPLAUSE]. ACTUALLY I DON'T WANT STRATUS TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH AUSTIN EVER. I'M AGAINST THE MUELLER SWAP. I'M AGAINST NEGOTIATING AT ANY FORUM AT ANY TIME IN ANY WAY WITH STRATUS. I JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT OBVIOUSLY THEY HAVE A BAD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD. THEY ARE ALWAYS ON THE E.P.A.'S TOP 10 BAD LIST. BUT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT FREEPORT MCMORAN, THAT'S WHO STRATUS REALLY IS. LET'S TAKE OFF THE MASK AND REALIZE WHO THEY ARE. PAM MENTIONED EARLIER 25 YEARS TODAY IS THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE INVASION OF EAST TIMOR. DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY IDEA HA THAT HAS TO DO WITH US? YEAH, IT'S THE KILLING OF 500,000 PEOPLE OF FREEPORT MCMORAN OPENLY SUPPORTED THE SUARTA GOVERNMENT IN INDONESIA. THIS IS A COMPANY THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SUPPORT OF THE DEATHS OF 500,000 PEOPLE 25 YEARS AGO TODAY. THIS IS GENOCIDE. THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WE'RE DEALING WITH. I DON'T WANT YOU TO DEAL WITH THEM. I FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THIS. MORE ON THEIR RECORD, HENRY KISSINGER, THIS -- THE INVASION OF EAST TIMOR HAPPENED THE DAY AFTER KISSINGER WENT TO INDONESIA. HE'S ON THE BOARD. DID YOU ALL KNOW THAT? THE GOLD MINE IN WEST PAPUA WHERE SOME PEOPLE AND THE DANE PEOPLE CONSIDERED THE SACRED MOUNTAIN WHERE FREEPORT MCMORAN FOUND GOLD AND COPPER ALSO DID GENOCIDE. YOU DESTROY SOMEONE'S RELIGION, YOU DESTROY THEIR CULTURE. THAT'S CALLED GENOCIDE. AND BECAUSE OF WTO'S LAWS, INDONESIA SNA -- CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY BACK FREEPORT PORT SO THEY MURDER ALL THESE PEOPLE DURING A FUNERAL TORE 800 PEOPLE, 200 MORE PEOPLE WERE MURDERED. THIS IS THE SUARTA GOVERNMENT. FREEPORT MCMORAN OPENLY SUPPORTED THIS. THEY USED THEIR HELICOPTERS AND CARGO TRANSPORTS TO SUPPORT ARMS TO DO THESE. FRAS THEIR EQUIPMENT THAT TRANSPORTED THE GUNS. IT WAS THEIR CARGO SHIPS THAT WERE TORTURE WAS COMMITTED. DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHO WE'RE DEALING WITH? WE DO NOT WANT THESE PEOPLE IN EAST AUSTIN. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALFREDOREYSTON.

>> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC ON].

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHAT IS YOUR NAME?

>> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC ON].

>> I BELIEVE I WAS GIVEN THREE MINUTES BY NORM, THE GUY THAT WAS BEFORE ME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS HE HERE?

>> NO, BUT HE WROTE IT ON THE CARD.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE RULES SAY YOU HAVE TO BE PRESENT TO DONATE TIME.

>> ALL RIGHT. OKAY. DO YOU ALL REMEMBER WHEN KISSINGER CAME AND LIKE THE CITY OF AUSTIN RAN HIM OUT? THE POINT IS -- THE POINT OF THAT WHOLE THING WAS WE DON'T LIKE THESE GUYS. LIKE MICHELLE WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT THEIR GENOCIDEAL TENDENCIES. THEY WANT TO DO THAT TO US. WE GO OUT SIGHTED AND READ THE NEWSPAPER ABOUT WHO IS GOING TO BE PRESIDENT AND THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IS BASICALLY A SHAM. I HAD FAITH IN LOCAL ELECTIONS AND I VOTED FOR VERY MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THIS COUNCIL. NOW, I DON'T APPRECIATE PEOPLE WRITING [INAUDIBLE] BACK INTO A POSITION OF POWER AND THEN BETRAYING ME. THAT MAKES ME PUT THE WHOLE -- THE WHOLE PROTEST MAKES ME SKEPTICAL ABOUT THE WHOLE THING. TOM HICKS, HE'S THE GUY THAT OWNS -- HE RUNS CHANNEL 1 COMMUNICATIONS OR CLEAR CHANNEL I GUESS IT IS NOW, THEY HAVE LIKE 300 STATIONS, THE BIGGEST RADIO OPERATORS, THEY ARE THE ONE THAT CRUSHED FREE RADIO AUSTIN. FREE RADIO AUSTIN WAS THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE AND I'M SAD TO SAY THE CITY OF AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT PARTICIPATED IN THAT. LET'S SEE. I'VE BEEN FIGHTING AGAINST FREEPORT EVER SINCE I WAS WET BEHIND THE EARS, FRESH OUT OF COLLEGE. SOME OF YOU MIGHT RECOGNIZE ME AND I ACTUALLY HELPED SOME COUNCILMEMBERS GET WHERE THEY ARE SITTING RIGHT NOW AND I HOPE THEY ALL REMEMBER THAT. I DON'T WANT, LIKE, THERE'S A HOUSING CRISIS IN THIS TOWN. I KNOW, I LIVE UP IN AN ATTIC, I REALLY DO, ON THE EAST SIDE AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE THERE. IF YOU LET FREEPORT PUT HIGH END DEVELOPMENT THERE YOU ARE GOING TO PUSH US OUT, PUSH US INTO THE FRINGES AND I'M ANGRY. I'M ANGRY ABOUT IT. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS DEAL WITH JIM BOB AND I DON'T APPRECIATE THE GARY BRADLEY DEAL. THAT WAS NASTY. IT MAKES ME REALLY ANGRY.

>>. I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME. NO DEAL, REMEMBER THAT PHRASE? I REMEMBER PEOPLE SITTING IN THIS CHAMBER SAYING THAT, NO DEAL. AND IT WAS IN REFERENCE TO FREEPORT AND IT WAS YEARS AGO AND NOW IT'S TIME FOR US TO START SAYING THAT AGAIN. NO DEAL, NO AIRPORT, NO SEWER. WE DON'T NEED TO GIVE THEM A SEWER, WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE IT EASY FOR THEM. OKAY. LET'S SEE WHAT ELSE. YEAH, JUST REMEMBER THE TRIBESMEN, THEY DON'T WEAR SUITS AND TIES, THEY HAVE STONE AGE IMPLEMENTS. REMEMBER THOSE PEOPLE. THEY ARE ALL DEAD, YOU KNOW. AND DEMOCRACY IS FAILING ME, IT'S WHAT IT SEEMS LIKE AND I'M REALLY ANGRY ABOUT UT AND WE'RE THINKING ABOUT ALTERNATIVES. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MA'AM, I DON'T HAVE A CARD FOR YOU. BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND SPEAK AND THEN SIGN A CARD SO WE'LL HAVE A RECORD OF IT. JACQUELINE THOMAS SIGNED UP AGAINST. MARSHA ROBERTS SIGNED UP AGAINST. JOSE MORERO SIGNED UP FOR SUPPORT GRIFFITH'S NEGOTIATION -- EXCUSE ME, SHOULD BE PUBLIC. RYAN GREEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>> I'M JUST A HIPPY MOM, YOU KNOW, AND I CARE ABOUT AUSTIN. THE GREENBELT IS A VERY IMPORTANT PLACE IN AUSTIN AND IT'S ONE OF ONLY SO MANY CITIES THAT HAS SO MUCH GREENERY AND TO DESTROY IT OR EVEN CONSIDER DESTROYING IT IS JUST ABSURD. IF STRATUS WANTS TO MAKE MONEY, WHY DON'T THEY MAKE A BIG PARK AND CHARGE PEOPLE TO GET INTO IT. DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. YOU KNOW. I DON'T KNOW. BUT I DO KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS NO TREES, THERE IS NO -- AND YOU BUILD STUFF ON A WATER AQUIFER SHE THEN IT'S GOING TO KILL PEOPLE BECAUSE NO TREES, YOU KNOW, NO PEOPLE. NO AIR. YOU KNOW. AND IT MIGHT NOT BE FOR US NOW THAT ARE ALL SITTING AROUND BEING RELAX UNDERSTAND THIS NICE ENVIRONMENT, BUT, YOU KNOW, LATER, 100 YEARS FROM NOW IT'S GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN AUSTIN. IT'S GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HOMELESS, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE WHETHER YOU GUYS BUILD HERE OR THERE. STOP THE BUILDING. START WORKING ON WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE. LOWER THE -- LOWER THE PRICES OF REPRESENT IN AUSTIN. LOWER THE PRICES OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE AND THAT'S ALREADY THERE, YOU KNOW. MAKE COME MOONS OUT OF RICH PEOPLE'S HOUSES THAT ARE BIG MANTIONS THAT THEY COULD BE SHARING WITH OTHER PEOPLE INSTEAD OF MAYBE ONE OR TWO PEOPLE LIVING IN THEM. AS THE MAYOR OF AUSTIN, I THINK THAT MAYBE -- THAT YOU YOURSELF WOULD WANT TO CARE ABOUT YOUR GRANDCHILDREN AND WHETHER THEY HAVE TREES TO BREATHE AIR, YOU KNOW, TOMORROW OR THE NEXT DAY. AND IF YOU KEEP ON CUTTING DOWN THE TREES OF THE GREENBELT, THEN IT'S NOT -- IT'S GOING TO GO AWAY. YOU KNOW. AND IT'S ALREADY DESTROYED ITSELF A LOT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW ERX THERE'S ALL THIS TRASH OUT THERE. I DON'T KNOW PEOPLE OUT THERE, MAYBE YOU CAN'T BECAUSE YOU ARE THE MAYOR AND YOU HAVE TO LIVE BEHIND GUARDS OR SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW. BUT I DO KNOW IF YOU KEEP CUTTING DOWN TREES IT'S GOING TO DESTROY THE HUMAN RACE, PERIOD, WHETHER IT'S HERE, THERE. AND STRATUS, THEY DO KILL PEOPLE. THEY ARE MURDERERS. YOU KNOW. AND THEY ARE BAD PEOPLE. AND YOU SHOULDN'T LET THEM COME IN AND MAKE A DECISION FOR AUSTIN THAT ISN'T ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WANT IT AND UNLESS IT'S A VOTE THAT GOES AS A TREATY TO THE CITY, THEN IT'S NOT FAIR TO ALL THE PEOPLE AND YOU ARE JUST DOING IT ON YOUR OWN INTENT AND IT'S ABOUT MONEY. IT'S ABOUT DOLLARS. YOU KNOW. AND IT'S NOT ABOUT PEOPLE. YOU KNOW, REAL REASONS OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, ABOUT AIR, AND IT IS ABOUT NATURE, YOU KNOW, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LAND THAT HAS BEEN HERE THAT PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, HAVE SPENT YEARS TO HAVE A BEAUTIFUL CITY LIKE THIS. THIS IS THE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD AND WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE PLACES TO HANG OUT THAT ARE COOL TO HAVE TREES SHE NOT TREES THAT ARE CUT DOWN THAT ARE BUILT INTO SOME YUPPIE BUILDINGS OF PLACES WHERE THEY COULD TURN AROUND AND JUST, YOU KNOW, HAVE THEIR DEVELOPMENTS AND WHO CARES ABOUT THE POOR PEOPLE OR LEAVE OUT THE TABLE OR LET'S PUT OUT THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN WHERE THE EAST SIDE IS. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. SO OTHER PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THAT CHANCE EITHER. I'M NOT MUCH ON LITTLE BEEPERS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT I DO KNOW THAT IT'S ABOUT THE PEOPLE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, MA'AM, BUT YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY?

>>MAYOR WATSON: NOT CURRENTLY.

>> NO. OKAY. BUT DO YOU CARE ABOUT THE TREES?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MA'AM, YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.

>> ALL RIGHT. BUT IT'S YOUR TIME. DO YOU CARE ABOUT THE TREES OF AUSTIN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MA'AM, YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.

>> OKAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: RYAN GREEN HAS SIGNED UP AGAINST.

>> I'M HERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OH, I'M SORRY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WILLIAM SIMPER. I'M SORRY, MR. GREEN, GO AHEAD.

>> ALL OF YOU COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE COPIES OF THE COMMUNITY CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATION ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN, STRATUS PROPERTY AGREEMENT. THESE RECOMMENDATIONS RUN COUNT TOR THE ITEM WHICH IS CURRENTLY IN FRONT OF YOU AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO NAME THE MEMBERS OF THAT COMMITTEE WHO HAVE ENDORSED THIS STATEMENT. THAT WOULD BE THE AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL, THE AUSTIN SIERRA CLUB, SAVE BARTON CREEK ASSOCIATION, SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE, THE ESTATES OF BARTON CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, THE FOOT HILLS AT BARTON CREEK PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE WOODS AT BARTON CREEK PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, AND FINALLY, AND THIS LAST GROUP DID NOT ENDORSE ITEM NO. 3, WAS THE LOST CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THESE ARE VERY STRANGE BED FELLOWS, IF YOU SHOULD ASK ME. ON TO A MORE PERSONAL NOTE, I HAVE BEEN A CITIZEN OF AUSTIN FOR TEN YEARS AND A MEMBER OF THE SAVE BARTON CREEK ASSOCIATION BOARD FOR NINE YEARS. THE STATEMENTS I MAKE ARE -- REPRESENT MY PERSONAL VIEWS. I WOULD LIKE TO PRENLT AN HISTORICAL POINT TO THIS COUNCIL. ALMOST TEN YEARS AGO WE HAD A BRAVE AND COURAGEOUS GRAY COUNCIL. THAT'S GRAY AS IN CONCRETE. THEY KNEW WHO PUT THEM IN OFFICE. THEY KNEW WHO THEY ANSWERED TO. THIS COUNCIL WAS DOMINATED BY A GANG KNOWN AS RULES. SOMETIMES IT WAS REFERRED TO AS RULE LET WHEN THAT CURRENT MAYOR ALSO JOINED THEM IN THEIR VOTES. THIS RULE MAJORITY HAD THE FORTITUDE TO IGNORE THE LAWS OF TEXAS, THEY COLLUDE DID TO BOYCOTT CITY COUNCILL AND DELAY THE VOTE ON S.O.S.. CITIZENS ON THE S.O.S. CITIZENS INITIATIVE IN VIOLATION OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. THIS CHARGE OF ILLEGALITY DID NOT ORIGINATE FROM S.O.S. SUPPORTERS BUT FROM THAT CURRENT GRAY MAYOR OF THAT ERA, MAYOR TODD, WHO WAS AS I SAID IN T IN ROULET THE E. THIS WAS PUBLISHED IN AN ARTICLE IN THE AUSTIN AMERICAN REAL STATESMAN. IF THAT OLD GRAY CITY COUNCILL COULD HAVE THE COURAGE AND FORTITUDE TO FIGHT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO PUT THEM IN OFFICE, TO IGNORE THE LAW, THEN WHAT I AM ASKING FOR THE CURRENT COUNCIL, THE CURRENT GREEN COUNCIL, IS TO DEFEND OUR LEGAL STANDING AND OUR LEGAL RIGHTS TO THE FULLEST EXTENT AND TELL THOSE INITIATIVES OR THOSE POSSIBILITIES ARE EXHAUSTED WITH THE SAME VIGOR AND COURAGE THAT THE GRAY COUNCIL BEFORE YOU MANAGED TO PULL TOGETHER. I HAVE A FEW MORE SECONDS. I DON'T KNOW HA TO SAY ACCEPT THAT I REALLY DON'T LIKE THE REFERENCE TO STRATUS PROPERTIES. IF SADDAM HUSSEIN CHANGED HIS NAME TO GOLDILOCKS, I DON'T THINK WE OR OUR MEDIA WOULD FOLLOW THAT. LET US PLEASE REFER THIS TO -- REFER TO THEM AS THE COMPANY PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS FREEPORT MCMORAN. OKAY, THAT'S WHO THEY ARE. WE KNOW WHO IS ON THEIR BOARD. WE KNOW WHO PULLS THEIR STRINGS. WE KNOW WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THIS COMPANY. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, SIR. [APPLAUSE]. IS DALE BULLA HERE? DALE BULLA. WOULD YOU PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE MICROPHONE. WELCOME, SIR.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO BEVERLY GRIFFITH FOR PUTTING THIS ALTERNATE RESOLUTION ON THE TABLE. I SUPPORT IT. I THINK IT'S MAYBE THE STRONGEST -- I THINK WHAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT FROM A LOT OF THE PUBLIC HERE IS THAT ALMOST EVERYONE HERE IS THAT WE NEED MORE PUBLIC INPUT. AND IF WE'RE SEARCHING FOR ASSURANCES THAT THERE AREN'T GOING TO BE A SURPRISE. I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE DISSATISFIED WITH THE GARY BRADLEY DEAL AND I THINK A LOT OF THE STRONG LANGUAGE BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN IN SEARCH OF YOU MAKING -- TAKING A STRONG STAND AND SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO -- WE ARE ABSOLUTELY NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY SORT OF PRIVATE DEALINGS WITH -- BETWEEN LAWYERS OF THE CITY AND LAWYERS OF STRATUS OR OR ANY DEVELOPMENT FOR THAT MATTER. SO I THINK BEVERLY GRIFFITH'S PROPOSAL IS LIKE THE STRONGEST STUFF ANYONE HAS TAKEN SO FAR, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE DON'T HAVE MORE. WE NEED A VERY STRONG ASSURANCE THAT THIS ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN AND THAT THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO HAVE ADEQUATE INPUT INTO THIS PROCESS. THE SITUATION IN -- THE WATER SITUATION IN AUSTIN IS BECOMING CRITICAL. THE MEDICAL SIGNS -- THE OBVIOUS, LIKE, PHYSICAL SIGNS AS WELL AS THE NOT SO OBVIOUS SCIENTIFIC DATA ARE ALL SHOWING THAT DEGRADATION IS TAKING PLACE NOW. IT'S GETTING WORSE. WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING IMMEDIATELY ABOUT IT. IT'S GOING TO BE A MOOT POINT IF WE WAIT ON IT. I AND SOME OTHER PEOPLE HAD OCCASION TO RUN A LITTLE TEST ON SOME WATER THAT WAS COMING OUT OF THE SPILLWAY, AND IRONICALLY ENOUGH IT WAS A LCRA TEST, LIKE A SIMPLE WATER TEST, AND THIS IS -- THIS ISN'T RECENT LIKE THESE LAST RAINS OR WHATEVER. IT WAS KIND OF DISTRESSING TO FIND OUT THAT ONE OF THE INDICATORS, LIKE A NI TRATSZ INDICATOR THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY -- IN THE MEMORY OF THE PEOPLE I WAS PERFORMING THE TEST WITH, WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS REGULARLY, IT HAS COME OUT ZERO. IT'S A SCALE ZERO TO NINE. THIS CAME OUT TO A TWO. LIKE TWO LEVELS HIGHER THAN WHAT IT HAD BEEN IN OUR MEMORY. AND THAT'S -- I MEAN THAT'S JUST ONE DATA POINT. I MEAN ALL OF THE EVIDENCE IS SHOWING THIS IS BECOMING A CRITICAL SITUATION. WE NEED A CITIZENS TASK FORCE. OKAY, DON'T GIVE THEM SEWER SERVICE, DON'T GIVE THEM ZONING PRIVILEGES, AND THAT'S NOT ENOUGH, WE NEED SOME CONCRETE ACTION NOW. THE PUBLIC HAS RESOURCES, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF MONEY, WE DO HAVE A LOT OF TIME AND INFORMATION AND A LOT OF SMARTS AND SO PLEASE INCLUDE NEWS THE PROCESS. WE NEED A SEAT AT THE TABLE. PLEASE GIVE US THAT SEAT AT THE TABLE. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MR. BULLA.

>> THANK YOU. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE ATTENDED ONE OF THESE HEARINGS IN PERSON AND THANKS TO COUNCILWOMAN GRIFFITH, HER E-MAIL, SOME OF YOU HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT THE E-MAIL, BUT I WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AWARE -- I KNOW THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL CHANGES IN MEETINGS, BUT HER COMMUNICATION HAS BEEN VERY HELPFUL. SO I WANTED TO JUST MAKE AN OBSERVATION THAT THERE IS SOMETHING MAGICAL ALMOST HAPPENINGS HERE. THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT CARE A WHOLE BUNCH. THERE ARE A LOT OF CITY COUNCILS AROUND THIS COUNTRY WHERE YOU CAN HAVE A MEETING AND NOBODY WOULD SHOW UP. AND YOU ARE DOING A LOT BY JUST SITTING HERE AND LISTENING, WHICH IS -- WHICH IS IMPORTANT. BUT THE FACT THAT THESE MANY PEOPLE ARE HERE, THAT THEY CARE ABOUT THIS CITY, WE HAVE ONLY BEEN LIVING IN AUSTIN ABOUT THREE YEARS, AND WE CAME FROM AN URBAN AREA WHERE THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN. AND THE FACT -- THIS IS A GREAT RESOURCE, AND I THINK YOU NEED TO VALUE IT AND LISTEN TO IT. WHEN WE FIRST MOVED -- WE LIVE IN JESTER, WHICH IS IN THE BULL CREEK AQUIFER, WE USED TO DRIVE DOWN 360 AND REMARK AT THE TREES AND WE'VE JUST NOTICED THERE IS FEWER AND FEWER. IT'S STARTING TO LOOK LIKE LEMON AVENUE IN DALLAS. AND I KNOW YOU HAVE CERTAIN LIMITATIONS, BUT THERE ARE THINGS YOU CAN DO AND WE APPRECIATE ANY TYPE OF SENSITIVITY TO WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD FROM I THINK YOUR CITIZENS. AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC ON].

>> HOW ARE YOU TODAY. I NEVER COME DOWN HERE ANYMORE. I DECIDED IT WAS A PRETTY IMPORTANT THING TO COME DOWN HERE. I THINK THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE ABOUT THE OPEN PROCESS THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED AND SINCE THE SITUATION IN FLORIDA, WE HAVE TO DISCUSS WHAT OPEN MEANS. AND WHAT OPEN PROCESS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND I THINK PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO DO WOULD BE FOR THE CITY TO DEVELOP A PROCESS, A MAP THAT WOULD TELL US WHAT IS POSSIBLE TO BE DEVELOPED RIGHT NOW UNDER THE LAW. HOW MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER CAN THEY PUT OUT THERE RIGHT NOW. HOW MUCH OF THAT LAND THAT IS IN THE WATERSHED CAN BE DEVELOPED AT THIS VERY MOMENT. WE NEED TO KNOW THAT. YOU NEED TO KNOW THAT. I THINK THE CITY COUNCILL MIGHT BE AFRAID TO KNOW THAT. BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE A LOT MORE THAN THEY THINK. IF YOU DRIVE DOWN SOUTHWEST PARKWAY, IT'S BEAUTIFUL. I DRIVE OUT THERE ALL THE TIME. BUT IF YOU START FROM 71 AT THE Y AT 620 AND COME BACK YOU WILL NOTICE THERE ARE MORE PRESERVES COMING TOWARDS THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THEY ARE NOT PRESERVES, THEY ARE DEVELOPMENTS CALLED PRESERVES. AND RESERVES. THE RESERVE OF BARTON CREEK. THE PRESERVE OF BARTON CREEK. I'VE GOT A LIST MUCH I THINK THERE ARE RIGHT NOW IN AUSTIN THERE ARE ABOUT 10 DEVELOPMENTS IN AUSTIN CALLED THE PRESERVE. AND I THINK ONE OF THEM FINALLY DECIDED ON -- THE ONE IN BARTON CREEK DECIDED TO CHANGE THEIR NAME TO THE GATEWAY APARTMENTS. WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOME TRUTH IN THAT. SO I THINK WE NEED TO DEVELOP -- BEFORE WE MAKE ANY NEGOTIATIONS. ALSO THE CONCEPT OF NEGOTIATING WITH THE CITY MANAGER WHO IS NOT AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, IT SEEMS THAT SOMEWHAT LUDICROUS. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. I THINK THE CITY COUNCILL NEEDS TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WHAT IS HAPPENING, I THINK THE CITY IS FEELING THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL CITY COUNCILL IS STARTING TO SLOWLY TURN INTO THE CITY COUNCILL OF THE LAST ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL WHERE THERE WAS MORE PERMITS GIVEN FOR DEVELOPMENT OVER THE AQUIFER UNDER THE ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL THAN UNDER ANY OTHER COUNCIL AND WE'RE KIND OF REACHING THAT POINT AGAIN WHERE, YOU KNOW, YOU FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT SHE BUT THEN AT THE END OF THE DAY EVERYBODY WANTS TO GO HOME BECAUSE THEY ARE TIRED AND THEY WANTED TO CASH IN ON THEIR STOCK OPTIONS ON THE DOT-COM COMPANIES. YOU KNOW SOMETHING ELSE I THINK WITH A WAS A REALLY GOOD IDEA, THIS CITY COUNCILL SHOULD BE BACK ON KUT. ONE OF THE GREATEST DISSERVICES THAT MAYOR T.D. H. T STAPDING OUT IN THE HALL, MR. TODD OUT IN THE HALL WAS HE TOOK IT OFF KUT. SO THE AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION, PEOPLE DIDN'T LISTEN TO THE CITY COUNCILL MEETINGS DRIVING HOME. I CAN'T EVEN FIND THE STATION THAT THE CITY COUNCILL IS ON. I COULDN'T FIND IT ON MY RADIO DIAL. SO ANYWAY, OPEN UP THE PROCESS. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. LET EVERYBODY KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, THOSE ARE ALL THE PEOPLE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. WE'LL HAVE -- OR HAVE THEIR OPINION HEARD ON THIS ITEM. LET ME TRY TO GET US TO A POINT -- YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING?

>>GOODMAN: I JUST WANTED TO FIND OUT, AREN'T WE TILL STILL ON KIZE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IT WASN'T A DECISION NOD TO DO IT SO PEOPLE COULDN'T HEAR IT, WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT WE HAVE RADIO STATIONS BID ON THE ABILITY TO DO THAT AND IT'S CURRENTLY ON A RADIO STATION THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE HAPPY THAT IT'S ON THAT RADIO STATION, BUT --.

>>GOODMAN: 88.7.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YEAH, 88.7. OKAY. WHERE WE ARE IS WE HAVE A MOTION AND WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS READ THROUGH WHAT I THINK IS THE CURRENT MOTION SO WE'LL HAVE THAT OUT, AND THEN -- WE'LL HAVE IT OUT ON THE TABLE WHERE EVERYBODY FWHADZ IS OUT ON THE TABLE, THEN WHAT I'LL TRY TO DO IS DEAL WITH ANY PROPOSALS FOR CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS OR SUBSTITUTES. AND COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, SINCE IT'S YOU ALL'S MOTION I WANT YOU TO LYNN CLOSELY AND. WHEREAS IT IS THE POLICY OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO DISCOURAGE URBANIZATION OF LAND OVER THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE AND WHERE WAS STRATUS PROPERTIES, INC., HAS SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS OVER THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE WHICH THE COMPANY WANTS TO DEVELOP AND WHERE WAS STRATUS IS OPEN TO EXPLORING CHANGES THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO DEVELOP IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE RATHER THAN IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. NOW TL BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCILL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER TO DEVELOP THE GUIDELINES FOR A POTENTIAL TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY AND OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY OWNED BY STRATUS PROPERTIES, INC., IN SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY AND CITY OWNED PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE -- I'M GOING TO PAUSE TO SAY WHAT THAT DOES FROM THAT POINT ORYX IT DELETES ANY REFERENCE TO ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. IF YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION AND THE BACKUP VERSION 2, IT DELETES IT FROM THE COMMA THERE, DEVELOPMENT ZONE ALL THE WAY TO THE END OF THE SENTENCE. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCILL -- AND LET ME BE CLEAR. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WHAT THAT DOES ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT THE FIRST SPEAKER POINTED OUT IS IT RECOGNIZES THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT ALL PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE WHICH WOULD INCLUDE, OF COURSE, MUELLER, BUT IT WOULD NOT LIMIT IT TO MUELLER AND IT WOULD NOT CREATE THE APPEARANCE, AS MR. SINGLETON I THINK POINTED OUT ACCURATELY THAT THAT IS THE TOTAL IN GAIN. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCILL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, NO AGREEMENT SHALL BE EXECUTED BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND STRATUS PROPERTIES, INC., REGARDING THE TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY AND/OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AT THE MUELLER SITE UNTIL ALL ZONING CHANGES ARE COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ADOPTED ROBERT MUELLER AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT AND REUSE PLAN. FURTHERMORE, THE PROPERTY VALUATION OF THE MUELLER PROPERTY WOULD BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS CORRESPONDING ZONING. AND COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT PART OF WHAT YOU ARE PUTTING INTO THE MOTION IS EVEN THOUGH IT MENTIONS MUELLER, IT MENTIONS IT SO THAT IT PROTECTS IT IF IT IS CONSIDERED. IS THAT CORRECT?

>>WYNN: CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE CITY MANAGER WILL REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH GUIDELINES THAT SHOULD GOVERN ANY EXCHANGE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND/OR PROPERTY INVOLVING CITY-OWNED LAND IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. THE CITY MANAGER WILL REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCILL WITH CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS OVER THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO REVIEW THE EXISTING SCIENTIFIC DATA WITH ALL RELEVANT ENTITIES AND ADVICE THE CITY COUNCILL AS TO WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDED AND TO GIVE AN ESTIMATE OF THE COST REQUIRED TO OBTAIN SUCH. THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO SET UP AN EXPEDITED OPEN, PUBLIC PROCESS WHERE PLANNING, ENVIRONMENTAL, WATER AND WASTEWATER, PARKS, URBAN TRANSPORTATION, AND THE MUELLER IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE WOULD APPOINT THREE PEOPLE TO A COMMITTEE AND THE COUNCIL WOULD EVALUATE IF THE NEW COMMITTEE HAS A BALANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL, BUSINESS, DEVELOPER AND NEIGHBORHOOD INTEREST. IF NOT, COUNCIL COULD APPOINT THREE OTHERS TO OBTAIN THAT BALANCE. ONE OF THE COUNCIL APPOINTEES WOULD BE A FACILITATOR WHO COULD MANAGE A LARGE GROUP. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT IS THE MOTION THAT IS CURRENTLY BEFORE US.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: REL TOUF THE A SPEAKER WHO REMINDED ME THERE WAS ONE OTHER GROUP THAT SHOULD BE IN THIS DISCUSSION, WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY ACTION -- I MEAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. AND THEY -- THEY ALSO HAVE TIES LIKE WITH THE COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK TASK FORCES AND SO ON, BUT RELATIVE TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING SO THAT WE SPECIFICALLY ENTER THAT ADVOCACY. WOULD YOU ACCEPT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WE ADD THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION?

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN CONSIDERS THAT FRIENDLY. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO THAT WILL BE ADDED TO THAT ITEM IN THE MOTION. FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, JUST ONE CLARIFICATION, WOULD YOU REPEAT WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT WILL -- THE STUFF ABOUT MUELLER?

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHAT I WILL DO IS I WILL READ WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE. THEN I WILL READ WHAT IS NOW THERE AND TRY TO POINT OUT WHAT HAS BEEN STRICKEN. WHAT ORIGINALLY WAS THERE WAS THE CITY COUNCILL AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER TO EVALUATE AND DISCUSS THE FEASIBILITY OF A TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY. LET ME PAUSE THERE. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN HAS STRUCK THROUGH THE WORDS EVALUATE AND DISCUSS THE FEASIBILITY OF A TRANSFER, AND REPLACED THAT WITH FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO DEVELOP THE GUIDELINES FOR A POTENTIAL TRANSFER OR EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY AND/OR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY OWNED BY STRATUS PROPERTIES, INC., IN SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY AND CITY-OWNED PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. IT ORIGINALLY SAID, AND THIS IS ALL STRICKEN, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FORMER ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND THAT THE EVALUATION INCLUDE CONDUCTING A PROPERTY VALUE APPRAISAL OF THE MUELLER SITE ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT AND REUSE PLAN ACCEPTED BY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 30TH, 2000. ALL OF THAT IS BEING DELETED.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. BUT THE MUELLER WOULD STILL BE INCLUDED BECAUSE IT'S IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE?

>>MAYOR WATSON: AS I UNDERSTAND THE -- WHAT I HAVE HEARD AT LEAST DURING THESE DISCUSSIONS, AND COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, YOU NEED TO BE THE ONE THAT CORRECTS THIS, IS THAT -- AND TO SOME DEGREE I'M DEFERING TO MR. SINGLETON'S INITIAL COMMENTS. IT IS LOOKING AT ALL PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE WHICH WOULD NECESSARILY INCLUDE MUELLER AIRPORT, BUT IT IS DELETING THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE REFERRING TO MUELLER SO THAT IT DOESN'T CREATE THE MISIMPRESSION THAT IT'S A DONE DEAL AND MUELLER IS THE ONLY PLACE THAT CAN BE HAD. THE ONLY TIME THE RESOLUTION NOW MENTIONS MUELLER IS TO PROTECT MUELLER AND TO SAY THAT NO AGREEMENT COULD BE ENTERED INTO WITH STRATUS -- IF MUELLER IS WHAT ENDS UP BEING DISCUSSED, NO AGREEMENT CAN BE ENTERED INTO WITH STRATUS UNLESS THE ZONING IS IN PLACE AND FURTHERMORE THAT THE PROPERTY VALUATION OF THE MUELLER PROPERTY WOULD BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS CORRESPONDING ZONING.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. DO YOU HAVE --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING MORE?

>>SLUSHER: NO, I WAS JUST CONCERNED THAT LAST PART WAS STRICKEN TOO AND THAT WOULD LEAD FOLKS TO BELIEVE WE WEREN'T GOING TO GO WITH THE MASTER PLAN IF THAT DID HAPPEN PURSUANT TO SOME OF THE STYLE WE'VE SEEN IN THE LAST FEW DAYS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I UNDERSTAND THAT. AND FOR PURPOSES OF A STATEMENT OF INTENT, AND I'LL LAY THIS OUT AND COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, SINCE YOU ARE THE MAKER OF THE MOTION, I'M JUST TRYING TO GUIDE THIS THING AT THIS POINT, DISAGREE WITH ME AND TELL ME IF THAT'S NOT YOUR INTENT. BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THE STATEMENT OF INTENT, IF A PERSON VOTES FOR THIS RESOLUTION, THEY ARE VOTING TO ALLOW FOR CONSIDERATION OF A TRADING OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR ANY PROPERTY IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, BUT IT WOULD NOT BE LIMITED TO ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT.

>>WYNN: THAT'S CORRECT. AND AS AN EXAMPLE, JUST SAY DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE, THAT ALSO AS WE KNOW INCLUDES DOWNTOWN, ALTHOUGH THE CITY HAS FEWER PROPERTIES DOWNTOWN, ALSO HAPPENS TO INCLUDE 2700 ACRES OWNED BY AUSTIN ENERGY THREE MILES WEST -- EAST OF LAKE LONG, A LITTLE BIT EAST OF THE PROPOSED ROUTE FOR SH 130 AND IT INCLUDES ALL CITY-OWNED OR CONTROLLED ASSETS IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE, THAT INCLUDES ROBERT MUELLER.

>>GARZA: MAYOR? ON THE ISSUE OF THE DATA COLLECTION AND THE ANALYZING THAT AND THEN COMING BACK WITH ANALYSIS OF WHAT THE GAPS ARE, I THINK THE ORIGINAL DATE THAT WAS GIVEN WAS JANUARY 18 AND WE WOULD LIKE IF AT ALL POSSIBLE TO MOVE THAT TOWARD THE END OF JANUARY TO GIVE OUR STAFF THE TIME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT --.

>>GARZA: I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT IS STILL IN THIS REST LOOK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT IS AND IT'S A QUESTION WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO TALK ABOUT BEFORE WE GET TO THE STOOTSZ AND AMENDMENTS AND THAT KIND OF THING. SOME PEOPLE HAVE SUGGESTED AND I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE WHY THAT THERE'S SOME SORT OF RUSH. I THINK THAT AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, AND I PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE TALKING ABOUT IT AT THIS POINT, THAT THERE'S NO NEED TO RUSH. AND IF STAFF TELLS US IN ORDER TO DO THE THINGS BEING ASKED FOR AND THAT FRANKLY MANY PEOPLE HERE SPEAKING TONIGHT HAVE ASKED FOR, WE ASKED STAFF TO TELL US WHAT IS A REASONABLE TIME. BUT MIGHT WANT TO SET A DATE AND HOW YOU WANT TO PLAY WITH THAT.

>>WYNN: I AGREE THERE'S NO RUSH. THE INTENT IS TO GET THE PRODUCTS DONE AND DONE AS WELL AS WE POSSIBLY CAN. I APPRECIATE STAFF'S INPUT AND THE END OF JANUARY IS FINE WITH ME.

>>GARZA: WE'LL BE DILIGENT AND IF IT BECOMES AN ISSUE WE'LL LET THE COUNCIL KNOW WHERE WE WERE IN TERMS OF THE ANALYSIS AND THE PITFALLS IN GATHERING INFORMATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, AS THE MAKER OF THE SECOND, DO YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT.

>>SLUSHER: NO, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, THEN COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>GRIFFITH: GO AHEAD.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>ALVAREZ: YEAH, THE ONLY THING I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AS A NRENDLY AMENDMENT IS THAT -- FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS THAT WHATEVER GUIDELINES ARE PREPARED WITH REGARD TO ANY EXCHANGE OR TRANSFER OF PROPERTY WITH STRATUS BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC AT LEAST A WEEK PRIOR TO ITS CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL BY COUNCIL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT FRENTLY.

>>WYNN: ABSOLUTE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I CONSIDER THAT FRIENDLY, ALTHOUGH I'M CONCERNED, COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ IS FAIRLY NEW ON THE COUNCIL, I'M AFRAID BY SAYING A WEEK HE'S SETTING HIMSELF UP FOR TRYING TO RAILROAD SOMETHING THROUGH. [LAUGHTER]. BUT I'LL ACCEPT IT. WHY DON'T WE SAY THREE WEEKS. FOUR?

>> HOW ABOUT FOUR WEEKS? THINK ABOUT IT A LONG TIME.

>> HOW ABOUT A YEAR OR MORE OR NEVER?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MA'AM. YOU ARE OUT OF ORDER AND I WOULD ASK THAT YOU PLEASE NOT DO THAT. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COUNCIL TO DISCUSS WHAT -- HOW THEY ARE FEELING ABOUT THINGS, INCLUDING THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED AS PART OF THE APPROPRIATE PUBLIC HEARING.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, LET'S GET THAT WORKED OUT. A WEEK BEFORE, WHAT WERE YOU SAYING?

>> A WEEK BEFORE IT IS -- YOU KNOW, IT COMES BEFORE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL, AT LEAST. WE COULD SAY TWO WEEKS, THREE WEEKS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HOW ABOUT AS SOON AS PRACTICAL, BUT IN NO CASE LESS THAN ONE WEEK BEFORE IT COMES BEFORE COUNCIL.

>>SLUSHER: AND JUST LET ME ADD THAT I DOUBT VERY SERIOUSLY WE'LL HAVE ANYTHING COME UP AND THEN VOTE ON IT THE NEXT WEEK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, DO YOU AGREE WITH THE ADDITION OF THE LANGUAGE THAT IT WILL BE ANY GUIDELINES SUBMITTED BY THE CITY MANAGER WILL BE MADE PUBLIC AS SOON AS AS PRACTICAL, BUT IN NO CASE --.

>>ALVAREZ: TWO WEEKS, MAYOR.

>>SLUSHER: I SAID THREE ALREADY. YOU ARE TRYING TO GET IT DOWN AGAIN.

>>ALVAREZ: HE HAD SAID ONE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HANG ON, EVERYBODY. BUT IN NO CASE LESS THAN THREE WEEKS BEFORE IT IS SUBMITTED TO COUNCIL. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>>WYNN: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, I TAKE IT YOU DO.

>>SLUSHER: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING MORE? COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH AND COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU, MAYOR. IN TERMS OF PROTECTING ROBERT MUELLER, PRESERVING THE PLAN, IT'S NOT ABOUT ZONING, IT'S ABOUT WHO OWNS IT. THE WAY TO PROTECT IT IS TO KEEP IT. AND THAT IS THE ONLY RELIABLE WAY. WE WON'T KNOW HOW IT'S BEING VIOLATED UNTIL DOWN THE YEARS. AND NO ONE WILL BE LEFT WHO IS SITTING HERE TONIGHT EXCEPT THE NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THE ODDS OF THEIR BEING ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER THE LEVEL OF RESOURCES, FINANCIAL RESOURCES THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO DO THE SERIES OF LAWSUITS THAT IT WOULD TAKE TO ENFORCE THIS -- THE ODDS OF THAT ARE NOT GOOD. BUT IF WE OWN IT AND DON'T TRADE IT OFF, THEN THE CITIZENS WILL BE ABLE TO CONTROL IT THROUGH THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS. SO IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO KEEP WHAT'S NOT UNDER THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES. ALSO, WHAT IS BEING PERMITTED WITH THIS PROPOSAL, AND CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, IS PRIVATE NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN ATTORNEYS FOR THE CITY AND ATTORNEYS FOR ONE DEVELOPER. I DON'T SEE PERMISSION TO ISSUE THE R.F.Q.. I DON'T SEE PERMISSION TO MOVE RIGHT AHEAD WITH THE PLAN THAT WE ADOPTED TWO WEEKS AGO. THE REASON I'M GOING TO HAVE TO OFFER THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION IS NOT BECAUSE EVERYBODY HERE IS NOT WELL INTENTIONED, ENORMOUSLY WELL INTENTIONED. IT IS BECAUSE WE REALLY HAVE TO ESTABLISH A PROFESSIONALLY FACILITATED AND EXPEDITED OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS, INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL BUSINESS DEVELOPER AND NEIGHBORHOOD INTERESTS. THE CONGLOMERATION OF MEMBERS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IS NOT REALLY THAT. AND THE SECOND THING IS WE COULD TRADE OFF ROBERT MUELLER, WE COULD TRADE OFF EVERYTHING WE'VE GOT AND STILL NOT KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO SAVE THE SPRINGS AND THE AQUIFER. THE FIRST THING WE DO BEFORE WE GIVE AWAY OR TRADE AWAY ANYTHING IS TO FIND OUT WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT GOAL. AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF YEARS TO BUILD OUT THE LAND THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. WE HAVE TIME. WE CAN LOOK AT EACH PROPOSAL FOR EACH SUBDIVISION ONE AT A TIME, JUST LIKE WE'RE DOING NOW, WHILE WE'RE GETTING THE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IT WOULD TAKE THE SAVE THE CREEK AND SPRINGS, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A VERY SOLID PLAN TO DO THAT. RIGHT NOW WE DON'T BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD TAKE. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE WILL DISCUSS FOR A MOMENT THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. I WILL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. IF IT PASSES, THAT WILL BE THE MOTIONMENT IF IT FAILS, WE WILL GO BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION. DISCUSSION ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>GOODMAN: I'LL DEFER TO RAUL TEMPORARILY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>ALVAREZ: I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS PARTICULAR SUBSTITUTE, BECAUSE IF MY VIEW, IT SEEMS THE ONE ON THE TABLE IS ALMOST IDENTICAL. AND IF TERMS OF THE GUIDELINES WE'VE ASKED FOR, IN TERMS OF A MUELLER SWAP, SOME KIND OF EXCHANGE -- .

>>MAYOR WATSON: DON'T SNOW WHERE YOU'RE HEADED.

>>ALVAREZ: IN TERMS OF THE GUIDELINES RELATED TO ANY KIND OF EXCHANGE WITH STRATUS OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER, WITH REGARD THO THOSE GUIDELINES, THOSE ARE THE GUIDELINES THAT WE WANT TO DEVELOP. THE CITY WANTS TO DEVELOP THAT WOULD GOVERN ANYONE COMING IN, NOT JUST STRATUS OR ANYONE ELSE, BUT THESE WOULD BE THE GUIDELINES THAT US, THROUGH THE PUBLIC AND OPEN PROCESS, WOULD DEVELOP AND THEN IF THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO STRATUS OR ANY OTHER DEVELOPER, THEN I JUST NEED -- IN CONSIDERATION I GUESS IN TERMS OF ANY KIND OF EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY, BUT I'M JUST COMFORTABLE I GUESS WITH THE WAY WE WORKED THE ORIGINAL MOTION. I THINK THAT WE'VE CAPTURED THE SPIRIT CERTAINLY, BUT IF NOT -- BUT NOT EXACTLY THE LETTER, I THINK, BUT CERTAINLY THE SPIRIT OF WHAT COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S MOTION, SUBSTITUTE MOTION AIMS TO ACHIEVE.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, I WAS GOING IT SAY MOST OF THE SAME THINGS. THE AMENDMENTS THAT I ORIGINALLY SUPPORTED FROM COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH ARE INDEED INCLUDED IN THIS MOTION AND IN FACT THIS MOTION IS MUCH MORE COMPREHENSIVE. AND IT SEEMS TO STATE EVERYTHING THAT FOLKS WANT TO BE SAFEGUARDED. THE OPEN AND EXPEDITED PUBLIC PROCESS I THINK IS MUCH IMPROVED BECAUSE WE MADE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS IN THIS ONE. AND THAT ALL THE DISCUSSIONS ARE PUBLIC IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT FORUM. AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE. AND ALSO THE GUARANTEES OF SAFEGUARDING THE MUELLER REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN ARE MUCH, MUCH BETTER AND MUCH MORE DEFINED IN LAYING OUT THE GUARANTEES THAT WE'RE COMMITTED TO, SO I THINK THAT THE ORIGINAL MOTION ACTUALLY WENT FURTHER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION IS FOR THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. THE VOTE WILL BE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. PLEASE, SIR CALL THE ROLL. A VOTE OF AYE IS FOR THE SUBSTITUTE VOTE MOTION. A NO WOULD BE AGAINST. IF THE MOTION FAILS, THEN WE WILL GO TO THE MAIN MOTION. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: NO.

>>GOODMAN: NO.

>>ALVAREZ: NO.

>>GRIFFITH: YES.

>>SLUSHER: NO.

>>THOMAS: NO.

>>WYNN: NO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE BEING TWO YES'S AND FIVE NO'S, THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILS. THAT WILL TAKE US BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION, UNLESS THERE'S FURTHER DISCUSSION, I'LL ASK FOR THE CITY CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL. PLEASE CAL THE ROLL.

>>GOODMAN: YES.

>>ALVAREZ: YES.

>>GRIFFITH: NO.

>>SLUSHER: YES.

>>THOMAS: [INAUDIBLE].

>>WYNN: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE BEING FIVE YES'S AND TWO NO'S, THE MOTION PASSES. THAT CONCLUDES DISCUSSION ON ITEM NUMBER 48. COUNCIL, THAT WILL TAKE US BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 43, WHICH IS TO KUK A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION OF THE 140 ACRE BRANDT CROSSING TRACT LOCATED IN EASTERN TRAVIS COUNTY APPROXIMATELY .5 MILES EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF IH-35 AND EAST SLAUGHTER LANE. DO WE HAVE A PRESENTATION?

>> YES, MAYOR, LET ME GO GET HIM.

>> MAYOR, THE INDIVIDUAL WHO WAS GOING TO DO THIS PRESENTATION WAS TOLD THAT IT HAD BEEN PULLED. SO I WILL SIMPLY REFERENCE YOU TO THE RECORD OF WHAT WE HAVE IN THERE AN THERE MAY BE SOME PEOPLE HERE TO SPEAK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE'S NOBODY HERE TO SPEAK, THAT'S WHY I WAS HOPING WE COULD GET THE PRESENTATION DONE AND WE COULD USE THIS AS A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM, BUT WE'LL JUST PULL THE ITEM. ITEM NUMBER 42, IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY SOUTHERN CROSS AMBULANCE, INC. FOR A NON-EMERGENCY MEDICAL -- EXCUSE ME. A NON-EMERGENCY MEDICAL TRANSFER FRANCHISE UNDER CHAPTER 6 OPINION 3 OF THE CITY CODE. COULD I PLEASE ASK EVERYONE TO PLEASE TAKE YOUR CONVERSATIONS OUTSIDE OF THE CHAMBERS. FOLKS, THE EXIT IS -- FOLKS, THE EXIT IS OVER HERE. DR. ROCK?

>> MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, I'M ED ROCK, THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES. THIS ITEM IS THE DISCUSSION OF SOUTHERN CROSS' APPLICATION FOR A NON-EMERGENCY AMBULANCE TRANSPORT FRANCHISE IN THE CITY. CURRENTLY THERE ARE TWO PROVIDERS OF NON-EMERGENCY AMBULANCE TRANSPORTATION IN THE CITY, AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE AND GUARDIAN SERVICES. AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE SINCE 1980 AND GUARDIAN SERVICES SINCE 1988. BASED ON THE ISSUES IDENTIFIED IN THE ORDINANCE, THE E.M.S. DEPARTMENT REVIEWED VARIOUS COMPONENTS OF THE CURRENT EXISTING SYSTEM AND NUMBERS TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. THE DEPARTMENT EVALUATED CURRENT TRANSPORT VOLUMES. WE LOOKED AT SURVEYS AND AUDITS OF THE CURRENT PROVIDERS THAT PROVIDE THE NON-EMERGENCY AMBULANCE TRANSPORT IN THE SYSTEM AT PRESENT. WE LOOKED AT SURVEY DATA FROM LONG-TERM CARE FACILITYIES AND ACUTE HOSPITAL FACILITYIES IN THE AUSTIN MARKET AS WELL AS THE MARKET THAT SOUTHERN CROSS CURRENTLY PROVIDES SERVICES IN. AND BASED ON THAT BETA AND ANALYSIS OF THAT DATA, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME TO NOT AWARD A FRANCHISE TO SOUTHERN CROSS. THE ISSUE WAS PRESENTED TO THE E.M.S. QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS NOT TO AWARD A FRANCHISE APPLICATION AT THIS TIME. THE INFORMATION WAS PRESENTED TO THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, WHO OPTED TO RECOMMEND TO AWARD THE NON-EMERGENCY AMBULANCE TRANSPORT FRANCHISE AT THIS TIME. AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF DR. ROCK AT THIS POINT?

>>WYNN: MAYOR? DR. ROCK, CAN YOU BRIEFLY DESCRIBE TO ME WHAT IT SEEMS TO ME TO BE AN OBVIOUS CONFLICT OF WHY NOT HAVE MORE COMPETITION? WHY WOULD THE E.M.S. BOARD AND STAFF RECOMMEND, IN MY PERIPHERAL VIEW, NOT TO HAVE A SECOND COMPETITOR?

>> COUNCILMEMBER, BASED ON THE ORDINANCE, THE STAFF'S EVALUATION OF THE DATA OUT THERE WAS TO LOOK CURRENTLY AT SPECIFICALLY HOW THE PROVIDERS IN THE SYSTEM WERE MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. WERE THE SERVICES THAT WERE REQUESTED BEING MET, WERE PATIENTS BEING MOVED FROM ONE AREA TO ANOTHER. WERE RESPONSE INTERVALS APPROPRIATE? IN ESSENCE, WAS THERE A PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, HOWEVER MANY PROVIDERS WERE OUT THERE. AND BASED ON OUR SURVEY DATA IN TERMS OF TIMING ISSUES, WE DID NOT FEEL THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM OR A DEFICIENCY IN MEETING THE HEALTH CARE COMMUNITY OR THE USERS' NEEDS AT THIS POINT. WE ALSO EVALUATED THE CALL VOLUME THAT'S OUT THERE. AND SPECIFICALLY THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAD THAT INDICATED THE GROWTH OR CHANGE IN THE SPECIFIC PATIENT POPULATION OR THE NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORT PATIENT POPULATION TO LOOK AT THAT GROWTH. AND BASED ON THOSE TWO CONCEPTS, WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT THERE WAS, A, A PROBLEM CURRENTLY EXISTING IN THE AUSTIN MARKET. AND SECONDLY, THE GROWTH WAS NOT SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO WARRANT AN ADDITIONAL PROVIDER IN THE MARKET.

>>WYNN: YOU SAY YOUR STUDY LOOKED INTO THE SERVICE PROVIDED AND THE QUALITY AND THE CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS, ETCETERA. DID YOU ALSO LOOK AT FINANCIALLY HOW THE AUSTIN MARKET RATES TO OTHER COMPARABLE CITIES AS PERHAPS HAVE ONE OR MORE SERVICE PROVIDERS?

>> I'M NOT SURE, COUNCILMEMBER, I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION EXACTLY.

>>WYNN: DID YOU ALSO LOOK AT THE PRICE THE CUSTOMERS PAID? APPARENTLY THE CUSTOMERS SEEM TO BE PLEASED WITH THE SERVICE AND THE QUALITY ETCETERA AND THE TIME RESPONSE, ETCETERA. WHAT ABOUT THE PRICE?

>> WE WERE -- WE'RE KIND OF A UNIQUE MARKET IN THAT WHAT AUSTIN DOES IN THIS PARTICULAR MARKET IS WE HAVE A MANDATED OR A SET FEE. IN OTHER MARKETS THE FEE CAN BE NEGOTIATED. IT'S BASICALLY A FREE MARKET. SO BY DEFINITION, OUR FEE IS SET. AND THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT IN EVALUATING THE PROCESS, PARTICULARLY IN THE SURVEY. THE SURVEY DID NOT DEMONSTRATE THAT CUSTOMER SERVICE WAS AT A HIGH RATE ACROSS THE BOARD. INDEED, THERE WERE ISSUES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP IN THE SURVEY ABOUT CUSTOMER SERVICE. AND PART OF THAT BEGS THE QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THE INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE ANSWERING THAT SURVEY WERE DISPLEASED WITH, THEIR ABILITY TO HAVE MULTIPLE PROVIDERS, WHICH IS CERTAINLY A CONCERN OF MANY, OR ISSUES RELATED TO ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE FOR PRICE, ETCETERA. SO BECAUSE THE ACTUAL COSTS OR THE PRICE IS FIX UNDERSTAND THIS MARKET, NO, WE DID NOT EVALUATE THAT.

>>WYNN: OKAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DR. ROCK, MY COUGH PERSISTS. WILL YOU HANG AROUND?

>> YES. WE HAVE TUBES, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT'S WHAT I'M AFRAID OF. LET'S GO TO THE FOLKS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. AND FIRST OF ALL, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES OF THE CITY COUNCILL TO ALLOW THE MEETING TO GO AFTER 10:00 O'CLOCK. THE MOTION IS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. VERY ENTHUSIASTICLY. [LAUGHTER]. IS THERE A SECOND?

>>GOODMAN: I'LL SECOND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. LET ME SAY TO THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE, YOU SAW HOW HAPPY EVERYBODY IS. THERE IS NO NEED TO BE -- TO USE A KIND OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL PHRASE, BEAT A DEAD HORSE. IF YOU'RE JUST GOING TO REPEAT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN ELSE HAS SAID, DON'T DO IT. THERE'S JUST NO NEED FOR IT.

>> MAYOR, WILL YOU SHOW ME AS NOT VOTING ON THE MOTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: NO. KRIEG LE BLANC? FOLLOWED BY CHRIS THAME AND ANGELA LUCAS.

>> MAYOR WATSON, COUNCILMEMBERS IF I COULD ASK, I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER OUR TESTIMONY, IF WE COULD, UNTIL WE COULD HEAR SOME OF THE OTHER PEOPLE SPEAK SO WE COULD ANSWER -- .

>>MAYOR WATSON: NO, YOU CANNOT DO THAT.

>> WELL, IN THAT CASE, FIRST OF ALL, WHAT I WANT TO DO IS THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HEARING US TONIGHT. WE DO HAVE SOME MATERIAL WE WOULD LIKE TO HAND OUT TO YOU BECAUSE IT IS KIND OF A FOLLOW ALONG IN THE PRESENTATION. THERE ARE SOME CHARTS AND GRAPHS AND SOME HISTORY ON SOUTHERN CROSS AS WELL WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO HAVE IN ADDITION TO SOME OF THE OTHER INFORMATION THAT WE'VE GIVEN YOU IN THE PAST.

>> MR. MAYOR, I THINK YOU WILL LIKE MY PRESENTATION, BECAUSE I AM TEAR TIED OF PUBLIC SPEAKING, SO I'M GOING TO BE BRIEF.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ME TOO. THAT'S WHY I ALWAYS GIVE SHORT SPEECHES.

>> I WANT TO THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF MY STAFF, MY WIFE, FEZ PREZ AND OWNER OF SOUTHERN CROSS AMBULANCE AND MYSELF. SOUTHERN CROSS IN A REAL BRIEF SCENARIO, WE STARTED OUR COMPANY SIX YEARS. WE STARTED IN ONE AMBULANCE OPERATING AS A BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEM. TODAY WE HAVE 20 TRUCKS THAT OPERATE IN NINE DIFFERENT CITIES. WE HAVE THE E.M.S. SERVICES FOR CLAY BURN AND KENNEDY COUNTY. WE'VE MIGRATED TO THIS AREA. WE HAVE IDENTIFIED AN AREA THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO WORK AND ASKING YOUR PERMISSION TO GRANT US THIS FRAN TIES CHIES TO WORK IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN. WE HAVE SOME DATA WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO SOME OF THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND POINTS THAT THEY MADE THAT WILL SHOW THAT AUSTIN IS WANTING AND ASKING YOU TO ALLOW ANOTHER SERVICE TO COME INTO THIS MARKET AND ASSIST IN THIS TRANSFER BUSINESS. WITH THAT SAID I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO CHRIS RIGHT NOW AND CHRIS IS OUR DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS. AND HE HAS SOME FURTHER INFORMATION WE'D LIKE TO PASS ALONG. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. MR. BAME, IS ANGELA LUCAS HERE? I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO READ THIS FIRST NAME. IS IT REVETA? THEN YOU HAVE NINE MINUTES IF YOU NEED IT MR. BAIN.

>> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. THERE ARE SEVEN FINDINGS THAT THE QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM REVIEWED CONCERNING SOUTHERN CROSS' FRANCHISE APPLICATION. I WOULD LIKE TO BRIEFLY RUN THROUGH THOSE SEVEN POINTS. THEY ARE GOING TO PAINT A PICTURE OF THE AUSTIN AMBULANCE MARKET. WHAT I'M WORKING OFF OF IS A LETTER SENT BY STAFF TO THE QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM BACK IN JUNE. IT'S IN YOUR PACKET THERE, YOUR EXHIBIT B. I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 9 AND 10. WE'VE GOT AGAIN SEVEN POINTS. THESE ARE ALL PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. THE FIRST POINT, JUST IDENTIFIED SOUTHERN CROSS AND MEETING THE OPERATIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CITY CODE. WE'RE CERTAINLY GOING TO AGREE WITH STAFF ON THAT. WE DO. EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEMENT ON THAT. NUMBER TWO VERY SIMPLY, THE AUSTIN CUSTOMER BASE IS IN ADDITIONAL OF CHOICES IN NON-EMERGENCY TRANSFER SERVICES. WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT A SURVEY THAT WAS DONE BY AUSTIN E.M.S. ON THE 23RD OF MAY. PRIMARILY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, THIS IS EXHIBIT N IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT IT A LITTLE CLEAR HEER THAN WHAT THE OVERHEAD WILL ALLOW. THEY'RE UNDER EXHIBIT N. WE'RE LOOKING PRIMARILY AT TABLE 3 WHERE 76.68% OF AUSTIN WORKERS SAY THEY BELIEVE THE RESOURCES OF AN ADDITIONAL AMBULANCE PROVIDER WOULD INCREASE TIMELINESS. A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO RESPOND TO THAT. THAT WAS NEARLY 75%, THREE QUARTERS OF THE PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT ADDITIONAL RESOURCES ARE GOOD. I'LL MOVE ON TO NUMBER THREE. WE'RE KIND OF IN AGREEMENT ON THIS. THIS WAS THE DATA FIGURE. 28.76 GROWTH FOR THE TARGET MARKET. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE 50 AND OVER. OUR NUMBERS CAME IN CLOSE ENOUGH TO THIS THAT WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO ARGUE THE POINT, A FEW PERCENTAGE POINTS. HERE'S WHERE WE DIFFER A LITTLE BIT IN THIS INITIAL REPORT THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM. NUMBER 4 HERE, I'M ON PAGE 10, AGAIN OF EXHIBIT B, THE ACTUAL CAL VOLUME OVER THE TWO-YEAR COMPARATIVE PERIOD SHOWED AN INCREASE OF ONLY 1.8%. IF YOU WILL TURN TO EXHIBIT C AND. AND I KNOW WE'RE BOUNCING YOU ALL AROUND HERE. THIS IS A REPORT WRITTEN BY RICHARD HARRINGTON. WE REQUESTED SOME ADDITIONAL DATA AFTER THE INITIAL REPORT CAME OUT. WE SAW SOME NUMBERS THAT DIDN'T QUITE SIT RIGHT AND WHEN WE RAN THE NUMBERS WE SAW SOMETHING PROXIMATING A 10% GROWTH AND WE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHERE AUSTIN E.M.S. CAME OUT WITH THE ONE% GROWTH. WHAT STAFF DID IS THEY WENT BACK AND REQUESTED THE NUMBERS AGAIN FROM AMR AND GUARDIAN. IT TURNS OUT THAT GUARDIAN HAD MISREPRESENTED SOME OF ITS NUMBERS TO THE STAFF. THE NUMBER TURNED OUT TO BE, AND I'M GOING TO READ IT FROM THE LETTER. THE FIRST YEAR COMBINED AMR AND GUARDIAN GROWTH THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US IN JUNE AS 1.82% IS REALLY 7.96 PERCENT. THE SECOND YEAR ANALYZED GROWTH IS NOW 9.67. WE BELIEVE THIS TREND IS CONTINUING AND WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING LIKE 12% GROWTH NOW. AGAIN, BACK IT UP, WE HAD EIGHT PERCENT GROWTH THE FIRST YEAR, NEARLY 10 PERCENT THE SECOND YEAR. WE BELIEVE THE MARKET IS EXPANDING ABOUT 12% CORRECTLY. FLIP BACK HERE TO NUMBER FIVE. THAT'S OF EXHIBIT B. PROPOSED MEDICARE CHANGES MAY CONTINUE TO ERODE REVENUE DOLLARS AND DECREASE COST OF EXISTING SERVICES. WE DO KNOW THAT EFFECTIVE JANUARY FIRST THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE FOR BLS TRANSPORTS GOES UP FROM 125 TO 10057. THERE WILL ALSO BE A MILEAGE MODIFIER THAT WILL GO INTO THAT THAT WILL RESULT IN A NET REVENUE GAIN OF ABOUT 21 TO 25% PER CALL, MEANING THAT THE CURRENT PROVIDERS JUST HAVE TO SHOW UP JANUARY FIRST, DO THE SAME JOB THEY'VE ALWAYS DONE AND THEY'RE GOING TO GET UP TO 25% MORE REVENUE IN DOING THE SAME AMOUNT OF WORK. THESE ARE CHANGES IN MEDICARE AND FOUND IN DIFFERENT MEDICARE SOURCES. NUMBER SEVEN, WHAT WE'VE GOT HERE IS A SURVEY I THINK IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SHOW. CURRENT SERVICE PROVIDERS ARE MEETING CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS. DR. ED ROCK JUST OUTLINED THAT. FRANKLY, WE DON'T SEE WHERE THE SURVEY INDICATES THAT. IF YOU LOOK PRIMARILY AT NUMBER SEVEN HERE, WHAT WIFE GOT IS AMBULANCE ARRIVES WITHIN ONE HOUR OF -- TO REQUESTS FOR SCHEDULED TRANSFERS. IT WAS A 59% -- THEY WERE GIVEN A FIVE ON THAT SCALE OF ONE TO 10. THAT MEANS THAT NEARLY HALF OF THE TIME THEY'RE OPERATING OUTSIDE OF THE PARAMETERS OF THE ORDINANCE, WHICH CLEARLY REQUIRES THAT AN OPERATIONAL STANDARD, THE SERVICES TO -- I'M SORRY, THE SERVICES TO RESPOND TO A REQUEST FOR AMBULANCE TRANSPORT WITHIN ONE HOUR OF THAT REQUEST. I THINK ALL OF THIS DATA REALLY INDICATES WHAT THE PICTURE IS HERE IN AUSTIN. WE HAVE A MARKET THAT'S EXPANDING, HAS DOCUMENTED NEARLY 10%. WE SUSPECT SCHZ 12%. WE HAVE REVENUE INCREASES EXPECTED AT THE FIRST OF THE YEAR. WE HAVE A CUSTOMER BASE THAT SAYS THEY'RE NOT CURRENTLY SATISFIED WITH CURRENT PROVIDERS AND THEY'RE NOT MEETING ONE OF THE MAIN PORTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE, WHICH IS RESPONSE. WE BELIEVE THAT THE ADDITION OF A QUALITY PROVIDER SUCH AS OURSELF WOULD IMPROVE THE OPERATIONAL STANDARDS OF EXISTING SERVICES. IN ADDITION TO JUST THE REPORT CONDUCTED HERE BY STAFF THROUGH SURVEY, WE ALSO HAVE LETTERS FROM SETON AND ST. DAVID'S. THEY'RE IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL UNDER E AND F. I ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THOSE. AGAIN, THEY SUBSTANTIATE THAT THE CURRENT PROVIDERS ARE OPERATING OUTSIDE OF THAT PARAMETER AND THE ORDINANCE REQUIRING THEM TO RESPOND IN ONE HOUR. WITH THAT I'M GOING TO KIND OF JUMP AHEAD TO WHAT'S -- WHAT WE'VE GOT LABELED AS -- ACTUALLY, I'M SORRY, IT'S NOT LABELED. THE PAGES DIDN'T GET NUMBERED HERE, BUT IT'S BASICALLY TO ASK THE CITY COUNCILL AND WHAT THEY MUST CONSIDER IN APPROVING A FRANCHISE. CONSISTS OF REALLY THREE THINGS. DETERMINING PUBLIC CONVENIENCE THE CITY COUNCILL SHALL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING. ONE, THE NUMBER OF TRANSFER SERVICE PROVIDERS WHICH ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE IN THE AREA AND WHICH THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO FURNISH SERVICE. PARDON ME, I'VE JUMPED AHEAD TO NUMBER THREE. BASICALLY THERE'S THREE THINGS. ONE, DO WE HAVE A A STATION IN AUSTIN. YES, WE DO. SUBSTATION IN AUSTIN, MAIN AUSTIN STATION THAT IS ALL IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE. NUMBER TWO ASKS IF WE ARE PROVIDING THE SERVICE ARE OUR CUSTOMERS SATISFIED. YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SURVEY CONDUCTED ON THE 23RD OF MAY THAT CUSTOMERS ARE SATISFIED. WE SCORED HIGHER THAN THE TWO CURRENT PROVIDERS. LASTLY IT ASKS WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT ON THE EXISTING SERVICES. THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD LIKE TO CERTAINLY TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE LETTERS FROM ST. DAVID'S AND SETON AND SHOW THE EXISTING SERVICES ARE OPERATING AT THE BASE OF THE ORDINANCE NOW. THERE'S A PERFORMANCE FLOOR THAT'S SET IN THE ORDINANCE WHERE YOU CAN'T DROP BELOW THAT AND WE'RE SAYING THEY'RE OPERATING AT THAT FLOOR NOW. THAT'S A DEFINITE IDENTIFIED NEED IN THE COMMUNITY, NEPT AN ADDITIONAL PROVIDER. CERTAINLY SETON AND ST. DAVID'S WANT AND THE RESOURCES OF AN ADDITIONAL PROVIDER. WITH THAT I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TURN IT OVER TO CRAIG WALKER WHO IS GOING TO WRAP THIS UP WITH SOME DEMOGRAPHICS AND SOME MIGRATION ISSUES TO SHOW HOW IT IS THAT AUSTIN GOT TO THE POINT THAT IT IS. AGAIN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, SIR. CRAIG WALKER. IS DEBRA LA WALK HERE? SHE'S DONATING YOU THREE MINUTES. SO YOU WILL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU. MAYOR WATSON, COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS CRAIG WALKER. I'VE BEEN ASKED TO ASSIST SOUTHERN CROSS IN PUTTING TOGETHER A DEMOGRAPHIC AND OVERVIEW OF THE MAY GRAITION ISSUES PERTAINING TO HEALTH CARE. PARTICULARLY IF YOU LOOK IN YOUR PACKETS, ON THE EXHIBIT G YOU WILL SEE THAT PRIMARILY AUSTIN HAS EXPERIENCED TREMENDOUS GROWTH OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS, AVERAGING A LITTLE OVER SIX% ANNUALLY. THIS EXPECTS TO CONTINUE TO GROW ALL THE WAY OVER INTO THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS. IN ADDITION, WHAT WE ARE SEEING PRIMARILY IN SOME OF THE RURAL AREAS CAN KEEP IN MIND OUT OF THE 254 COUNTIES, 196 ARE RURAL. WE ARE ANTICIPATED THAT ONE-THIRD OF ALL THE RURAL PHYSICIANS ARE GOING TO BE RETIRING AND WHAT THIS ACCOUNTS TO IS THAT PEOPLE HAVE A TENDENCY AS THEY RETIRE TO MIGRATE TO THOSE AREAS WHERE THEY GENERALLY HAVE RESOURCES TO PROVIDE THEM HEALTH SERVICES. ACCORDING TO THE HEALTH POLICY STUDY IN WASHINGTON, D.C., WE ARE SEEING MIGRATION PATTERNS, PARTICULARLY IN THE RETIRING POPULATIONS MIGRATE TOWARDS SUBURBAN EPI CENTERS. WHY? BECAUSE THE RESOURCES ARE THERE. IN TEXAS ALONE IF WE EXPECT, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE-THIRD OF THE RURAL PHYSICIANS TO RETIRE AND THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ANTICIPATING TO LIVE IN THOSE AREAS MIGRATE TOWARDS THESE URBAN AREAS, THEN WE DO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE THE EXISTING HEALTH CARE INFRASTRUCTURE IN RURAL AREAS TO SUPPORT THEM. THEREFORE WHAT I'M SUGGEST IS THAT IN AUSTIN THE METROPOLITAN SERVICE AREA WHICH ONCE AGAIN IS AVERAGED OVER 3.6% GROWTH ANNUALLY WILL CONTINUE TO SEE MORE PEOPLE OF AN AGE POPULATION MIGRATE IN THIS AREA. IN ADDITION, THE QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM STUDY LOOKED AT TAKING PEOPLE OF AGE 55 AND ABOVE AND EVALUATING BASED ON THAT AGE AVERAGING -- REQUIRING THOSE PARTICULAR SERVICES. IN OUR STUDY WHEN YOU LOOK AT EXHIBIT G, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE AGE DISTRIBUTION IN AUSTIN PRIMARILY CONSISTING OF PEOPLE 20 AND ABOVE DO REQUIRE THESE SERVICES. AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT AROUND 61% OF THE POPULATION. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, FOR EXAMPLE, HERE IN AUSTIN, WHICH SETON IS AFFILIATED WITH, WHICH ALSO EXPRESSED THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE INCLUSION OF AN ADDITIONAL FRANCHISE, PROVIDES NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORTS FOR PREDOMINANTLY YOUNG POPULATION, CHILDREN. YET THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE OVERALL SAMPLE. AND I THINK THAT IT'S INCUMBENT UPON YOU TO EVALUATE LOOKING AT THE OVERALL STUDY THE QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM DID IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OVERALL SERVICES THAT THE AGING POPULATION OR AGED POPULATIONS REQUIRE. AND ARGUE THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS FRANCHISE APPLICATION THAT IT DIDN'T GIVE A FULL PICTURE OF WHAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND PARTICULARLY THE AGE POPULATIONS WILL BE REQUIRING, AND THAT CONSISTS OF AGES A LOT LESS THAN 55 YEARS OF AGE. IN ADDITION, THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH OR THE HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION ADOPTED RULES VERY RECENTLY WHICH IS GOING TO ENHANCE MEDICAID REIMBURSEMENT TO A LITTLE OVER TWO MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR, AND YOU WILL SEE THIS AS EXHIBIT K. THIS IS A COPY OF THE PUBLISHED RULES. THEY'RE EXPECTING THE -- TO PAY A LITTLE BIT OVER TWO MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR FOR NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORT SERVICES. AND I THINK THAT THERE MAY BE CONCERNS WITH REGARD SO IF YOU INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL FRANCHISE IT MAY HAVE AN ADVERSE REACTION ON THE OPERATIONS OF THE EXISTING FRANCHISE. I ARGUE THAT WITH THE INCREASED REIMBURSEMENT FROM MEDICAID AS WELL AS THE INCREASED RATE BY MEDICARE THAT YOU WILL SEE AN INFLUX IN REIMBURSEMENT PARTICULARLY FOR NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORTS. IN ADDITION, THE COMMUNITY WHICH HAS ONCE AGAIN EXPRESSED ITS SUPPORT THROUGH THE CORRESPONDENCE WHICH YOU HAVE IN YOUR FOLDERS, AND IN ADDITION TO THE OVERWHELMING SUPPORT, THE 74% THAT WAS SURVEYED BY THE CITY, I THINK ADEQUATELY REFLECTS THAT THE COMMUNITY IS FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS -- OF THE INCLUSION OF AN ADDITIONAL FRANCHISE BECAUSE IN REGARDS TO THE ORDINANCE, IT SEEMS TO STATE THAT THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT FOCUS ON WHETHER OR NOT THE PUBLIC WOULD BE INCONVENIENCED BY THE INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL FRANCHISE. AND I ARGUE THAT BASED ON THE TESTIMONY OR THE PROVIDED WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF THE COMMUNITY SYSTEMS, THESE HOSPITAL SYSTEMS, AS WELL AS THOSE RESPONDENT'S WHO WERE SURVEYED, IT SEEMS TO BE CLEARLY EVIDENT THAT THERE IS A COMMUNITY NEED TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL FRANCHISE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN. FINALLY, I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON YOU ONCE AGAIN TO LOOK AT SERIOUSLY WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE TO SIX MONTHS. COME APRIL 1ST THE UNITED STATES CENSUS DATA WILL BE MADE PUBLIC. WE'RE BASING MOST OF OUR NFERS ON DECADE OLD INFORMATION THAT WAS FROM THE 1990 CENSUS. WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE ARE SEEING MIGRATION PATTERNS, PARTICULARLY LARGELY AMONG THE HISPANIC POPULATION MOVING INTO THIS AREA OF AUSTIN. AND AS WELL AS OTHER ETEDZ THICK GROUPS. THESE POPULATIONS ARE TENDING TO REQUIRE SERVICES, BOTH EMERGENCY AND NON-EMERGENCY WHICH THESE PARTICULAR SERVICES ARE PROVIDED BY THE CITY. I ARGUE THEREFORE THAT WHEN GIVEN AS A WHOLE THAT THE POPULATION WILL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE AND THAT YOU WILL SEE SERVICES RELATED TO THESE VARIOUS ETHNIC POPULATIONS AS WELL AS THE INCREASED NUMBER, WHICH IS HARD TO GATHER. I MEAN, FOR YOU IT'S KIND OF LIKE LOOKING AT THE INFORMATION IS KIND OF LIKE IS THE CUP HALF FULL OR HALF EMPTY. AND I THINK THAT PARTICULARLY FOR THE CITY YOU MUST MAKE A DECISION THAT IS PROSPECTIVE IN TERMS OF HOW YOU VIEW WHERE WE WILL BE IN TERMS OF SERVICES. [BUZZER]. AND WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL GIVE STRONG AND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION FOR THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. RETT REED. FOLLOWED BY CRAIG SMITH.

>> I BELIEVE HE IS DONATING HIS TIME TO ME. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS RHETT REED. I'M THE VICE-PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF GUARDIAN SERVICES. THERESA REED AND I OWN AND OPERATE THE COMPANY. I AM ALSO A EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN AT BRACKENRIDGE HOSPITAL. WE HAVE BEEN A FRANCHISEE WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN SINCE AUGUST OF 1998. IN NOVEMBER OF 1999 AN AUDIT CONDUCTED BY AUSTIN E.M.S. FOUND GUARDIAN SERVICES TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THE CITY ORDINANCE. WE ANTICIPATE THAT OUR NEXT AUDIT WILL AGAIN CONFIRM OUR COMPLIANCE. THERE HAS ONLY BEEN ONE AUDIT WITH TWO PROVIDERS IN THE SYSTEM AND BOTH PROVIDERS WERE FOUND TO BE IN COMPLIANCE. A SURVEY WAS COMPLETED BY AUSTIN E.M.S. IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR. BASED UPON THE RESPONSES FROM CERTAIN FACILITYIS, THE SURVEY SUGGESTS THAT WE COULD IMPROVE OUR SERVICE. WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SEVERAL POINTS. FIRST, POOR RATINGS WERE GIVEN FOR RESPONSE TIMES. THERE IS A MISPERCEPTION THAT WE ARE NOT ON TIME FOR TRANSPORTS. OUR TRANSPORT LOG INDICATED THAT 97% OF OUR TRANSPORTS WERE PERFORMED WITHIN THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT. SECOND, THE WORST RATINGS FOR GUARDIAN SERVICES WERE GIVEN BY FACILITYIES THAT WE RARELY AND IN SOME CASES HAVE NEVER PROVIDED A SERVICE. THIS 16 FACILITYIES SURVEYED, EIGHT OF THE FACILITYIES TOTALED 1.2% OF OUR TOTAL VOLUME. THIS IS NOT AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF OUR MARKET SHARE. THIRD, THE NURSING HOME FACILITYIES PERHAPS HAVE THE WORST VIEW OF THE TRANSFER SYSTEM. AS A RESULT OF THE ORDINANCE, GUARDIAN SERVICES IS UNABLE TO PERFORM CERTAIN ACTIONS THAT THE FACILITYIES REQUEST. THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT WE CONTACT AUSTIN E.M.S. TO TRANSPORT PATIENTS WITH CERTAIN CONDITIONS AS SPECIFIED BY THE ORDINANCE. THIS MAY BE GOOD FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR THE COMMUNITY, BUT IT IS NOT GOOD FOR RELATIONS BETWEEN THE TRANSFER SERVICE AND THE FACILITIES. THE PERCEPTION CREATED IS A LACK OF KNOWLEDGE AS PROFESSIONALISM BY OUR PERSONNEL. THIS IS UNTRUE. WE ARE SIMPLY COMPLYING WITH THE RULES OF THE ORDINANCE. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS ASKED WAS DO YOU FEEL THERE IS A NEED FOR ANOTHER PROVIDER? MOST OF THE FACILITYIES ANSWERED POSITIVELY TO THIS QUESTION. SEVERAL FACILITYIES HAVE ADMITTED THAT THE REAL DESIRE IS TO HAVE A SERVICE, QUOTE, PARKED OUTSIDE THE FRONT DOOR, END QUOTE. WITH OVER 50 FACILITYIES IN THE AUSTIN AREA, THIS IS AN IMPOSSIBILITY. THE POINT BEING IS THAT THE FACILITYIES WILL ALWAYS RESPOND YES TO THIS QUESTION. WE BELIEVE THAT ALLOWING ANOTHER PROVIDER IN AT THIS TIME WILL NOT ACCOMPLISH FACILITY SATISFACTION. IT WILL CAUSE A REDISTRIBUTION IN THE MARKET SHARE. THIS CONSEQUENCE WILL FORCE THE EXISTING FRANCHISE PROVIDERS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TRANSFER AMBULANCES AVAILABLE. IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THE ADDITION OF A THIRD PROVIDER AT THIS TIME WILL HAVE A STRONG IMPACT ON THE EXISTING COMPANIES. ALLOWING ANOTHER PROVIDER IN AT THIS TIME WILL REDISTRIBUTE THE MARKET, RESULTING IN LOWER VOLUMES, WHICH WILL LEAD TO HAVING FEWER VEHICLES ON THE STREET. THIS WILL LEAD TO A DECREASED ABILITY TO TO HAVE A VEHICLE ABLE TO RESPOND, THUS PUTTING US OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE. THE QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED ARE WHAT PORTION OF THE MARKET IS NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE EFFECTIVELY IN THE FRANCHISE? AND WHAT IS THE THRESHOLD FOR ALLOWING ANOTHER PROVIDER IN THE MARKET? AT SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE THE SYSTEM MAY BE ABLE TO SUPPORT A THIRD PROVIDER. IT TOOK 17 YEARS BEFORE A SECOND PROVIDER WAS ADDED. WE HAVE ONLY HAD ONE AUDIT WITH TWO PROVIDERS IN THE SYSTEM. OUR PERFORMANCE IS SATISFACTORY. WE NEED MORE TIME TO EVALUATE THE TWO-PROVIDER SYSTEM BEFORE CONSIDERING A THIRD. THERE IS NOT CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT ADDING A THIRD PROVIDER WILL SERVE PUBLIC CONVENIENCE. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THERESA REED? FOLLOWED BY WILLIAM GATES.

>> HELLO. I'M THERESA REED. I'M THE PRESIDENT AND CO-OWNER OF GUARDIAN SERVICES. I WILL SAY THAT I WASN'T PLANNING TO SPEAK TONIGHT, HOWEVER, I WAS MADE AWARE OF ONE OF THE LETTERS THAT SOUTHERN CROSS BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION FROM ST. DAVID'S AND FELT AS THOUGH THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED TONIGHT. TRS I WAS VERY SURPRISED TO FIND OUT OF THE LETTER IMPLYING THAT ST. DAVID'S FELT AS THOUGH WE WERE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GIETED LINES. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS FROM SAINT DAVID REGARDING THE TIME LIMITS. AND SINCE IT WAS MADE AS A GENERIC LETTER, I ALSO CONTACTED AMR TO EIF THEY HAD ANY COMPLAINTS AND THEY SAID THAT THEY HAD NOT. AUSTIN E.M.S. WAS CONTACTED SINCE THEY ARE THE GOVERNING BODY OVER WHAT WE DO. IF THEY HAD RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS, AND THEY SAID THEY HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS FROM SAINT DAVID. SINCE IT WAS CONSIDERED A COMPLAINT, I THEN FOLLOWED UP WITH MARK DOORWOOD FROM ST. DAVID'S, AS I WOULD WITH ANY COMPLAINT, TO FIND OUT AND LET HIM KNOW THAT I WASN'T A WEAR THAT WE HAD A PROBLEM. AND BASICALLY ADVISED HIM OF WHAT WE HAD OF DATA REGARDING ST. DAVID'S AND THAT WE ASSESSED AFTER FINDING THE COMPLAINT ASSESSED THE 2000 DAT IT TA FROM JANUARY TO OCTOBER AND OF THE 724 CALLS THAT WE DID FOR ST. DAVID'S, 16 OF THOSE WE WERE IN EXCESS OF THE ONE-HOUR GUIDELINE. SO 16 OUT OF 700 CALLS GIVES US TWO PERCENT OF OUR CALL VOLUME FOR ST. DAVID'S WAS OUT OF THE ONE-HOUR TIME LINE. HALF OF THOSE WE TALKED ABOUT THAT WERE HALF OF THOSE 16 CALLS, SO EIGHT OF THOSE CALLS WERE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF THREE TO SIX, WHEN AUSTIN IS IN A TRAFFIC GRIDLOCK AND IT BECOMES A HARD TIME TO MANEUVER. IN CONTINUING TO FOLLOW UP I ASKED MARK IF HE HAD ANY DATA SO THAT WE COULD FURTHER INVESTIGATE THE COMPLAINT. IN OTHER WORDS, IF HIS STAFF OR DID HE HAVE ANY DATA SO WE CAN LOOK AT DATES AND TIMES IN WHICH WE ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE. AND HE SAID THAT HE DID NOT HAVE ANY SPECIFIC DATA, THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE DATA REGARDING THIS ISSUE. THAT HIS STAFF JUST MADE A COMMENT THAT THE GUIDELINES WERE NOT BEING ADHERED TO. FOLLOWING THE CONVERSATION WE BOTH AGREED THAT WE NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO COMPARE DATA TO BE ABLE TO INVESTIGATE THE SITUATION. AND HE IS GOING TO BE GETTING WITH HIS STAFF REGARDING THE ISSUE OF COLLECTING DATA. AND IN SUMMARY, WE CANNOT CORRECT A PROBLEM, IF WE WERE NOT AWARE THAT WE WERE HAVING A PROBLEM. WE ARE AWARE THAT WE WERE NOT IN -- WE ARE NOT IN 100% COMPLIANCE WITH THE ONE-HOUR TIME LINE. WE ARE 98% COMPLIANT OVERRULE OVERALL. AND A THIRD PROVIDER WILL NOT REDUCE THE COMPLIANCE CAPABILITY. THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD SINCE I'M UP HERE AND HAVE SEVEN SECONDS IS THAT THE MEDICARE GUIDANCE, THE FIXED FEE SCHEDULE THAT THEY'RE REFERRING ON TO THAT GOES INTO EFFECT JANUARY FIRST ACTUALLY DOESN'T GO INTO EFFECT JANUARY FIRST. [BUZZER].

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU. WILLIAM GATES. AND MR. GATES HAS SIX MINUTES IF THE PERSON DONATING TIME IS STILL HERE. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD EVENING. I'M BILL GATES. [LAUGHTER]. MAN, TRYING TO BE AS FUNNY AS THE BALD-HEADED GUY THAT STARTED OUT THE NIGHT AND HE WAS GREAT. I LOVED HIM.

>>GOODMAN: WE ARE DELIGHTED YOU'RE HERE.

>> I'M PRAISE $MANAGER FOR GUARDIAN SERVICES. I'VE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS FOR NEARLY 10 YEARS. I WAS A MUNICIPAL FIREFIGHTER. I'LL BE SPEAKING ON THE ASPECT OF CUSTOMER PERCEPTION. NOW, THE AMBULANCE BUSINESS IS A TRICKY, TRICKY THING. WHEN SOMEONE SAYS I CALLED AN AMBULANCE, WHAT FOR? I HAD AN INJURY. HOW LONG DID IT TAKE TO GET THEM THERE? 20 MINUTES. 20 MINUTES! OH, MY GOD. WHY WASN'T THE AMBULANCE CLOSER THAN THAT? WELL, I DON'T KNOW. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN, IT'S NOT 20 MINUTES, IT'S MUCH LESS OBVIOUSLY. BUT EVEN WITH THE CAPABILITY OF RUNNING WITH A LIGHTS AND SIRENS MODE, DUE TO THE CURRENT TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS IN AUSTIN, THOSE TIMES ARE INCREASING. YOU COMPOUND THIS ON US WHERE WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO RUN LIGHTS AND SIREN WITHIN THE CITY FOR A ROUTINE OR NON-EMERGENCY CALL, THIS REALLY EXCUSE THE PERCEPTION. AND IN THIS I MEAN THE FACILITYIES CALL US AND SAY ST. DAVID'S IS A GOOD EXAMPLE. THEY CALL AND SAY WE HAVE A PATIENT COMING OFF THIS FLOOR. THEY NEED TO GO BACK TO THEIR RESIDENCE, BACK TO A NURSING HOME. WHAT HAPPENS THEN IS THEY CONTACT US, WE HAVE TWO CREWS AVAILABLE. BOTH THESE CREWS ARE CLEARING OFF CALLS, ONE EXTREMELY NORTH AND ONE EXTREMELY SOUTH. ANOTHER TWO CREWS ALREADY ON THE ASSIGNED CALLS. IT TAKES APPROXIMATELY 20 MINUTES TO GET ACROSS TOWN IN TRAFFIC. THEY GET TO THE FACILITY, MAKE CONTACT, DO THE APPROPRIATE THING WITH THE PATIENTS AND THEY LEAVE FROM THERE 'AND BY NOW THAT RESPONSE TIME WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT ON PAPER IS LOOKING AT AROUND 30 AND 35 MINUTES. THAT'S AN AVERAGE. IN AUSTIN, THAT'S NOT A BAD TIME. COULD IT IMPROVE? YES. IF TRAFFIC WAS A LITTLE BIT BETTER COULD IT IMPROVE? YES. DO YOU HAVE THE MONEY TO BUILD MORE ROADS? MAYBE, MAYBE NOT. IT'S A MATTER OF PERCEPTION. NOW, TRUTHS ALSO COME UNDER DIFFERENT GUISE. COST PROHIBITIVE ISSUES ARE THE BIGGEST ONES. I'M SORRY, A COMMENT WAS MADE EARLIER ABOUT MEDICARE AND THE COST GOING UP AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY'RE GETTING THEIR INFORMATION. I WOULD REALLY LOVE TO SEE IT. IT'S GOING TO BE MORE COST PROHIBITIVE FOR US WITH THE NEW MEDICARE GUIDELINES. YOU KNOW, AUSTIN'S A TIGHT MARKET ANYWAY. THE FEES ARE SET, THEY'RE SCHEDULED. WE CAN'T CONTROL THOSE. YOU LOOK AT OPEN FREE MARKETS SUCH AS HOUSTON, THEY HAVE UNCONTROLLED COSTS. AVERAGE PATIENT CHARGE IN HOUSTON IS ALMOST FIVE TIMES WHAT IT IS IN THE AUSTIN MARKET. YOU GO TO ANOTHER FREE MARKET CLOSE TO US, SAN ANTONIO. SAN ANTONIO RIGHT NOW IS SO RACKET SCANDALLED THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS DOWN INVESTIGATING. WHEN YOU CREATE THE OPEN AND FREE MARKETS AND YOU LET EVERYBODY IN AND EVERYBODY RUSHES IN, IT SOUND REALLY GOOD, IT REALLY DOES, IT SOUNDS GOOD, BUT IN THE END IT END UP BEING A DOG EAT DOG WORLD. AND HERE'S THE BIGGEST MISCONCEPTION OF ALL. SPEED IS THE BEST THING. IT IS NOT. AUSTIN HAS SAID THAT WE'RE GOING TO MANDATE, WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW QUALITY ASSURANCE MODEL. THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE QUIET AND OTHER AGENCIES THAT ARE IN PLACE. IF SPEED IS REALLY THE FACTOR, WELL THEN I'M SORRY, I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT THE AUSTIN MARKET IS AFTER. IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR COST EFFECTIVENESS, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT WANT TO GO TO A FREE MARKET. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I'M SURE YOUR QUALITY ASSURANCE WOULD DRASTICALLY DROP. IT HAS IN OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE THAT COMPARISON. I'M TRYING TO REALLY GET THROUGH THIS FAST. I'M SORRY. THE LAST THING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT, KIND OF AN URBAN TRANSPORT PROBLEM. NOT ONLY THE TRAFFIC. WE ALSO ARE SEEING SOMETHING REALLY UNIQUE IN AUSTIN. OUR NURSING POPULATION IS AGING AND RETIRING. AND THEY'RE MOVING FROM AUSTIN. IT'S JUST TOO EXPENSIVE TO LIVE HERE. SORRY. BUT THEY'RE NOT BEING REPLACED. SO WE'RE SEEING A NEW ONSET OF NURSING PERSONNEL FROM OUTSIDE THIS AREA THAT ARE COMING IN, THEY'RE USED TO THE HOUSTON MARKET, THEY'RE USED TO THE SAN ANTONIO MARKET, USED TO THE DALLAS MARKETS WHERE SPEED IS WHAT MATTERS IN THOSE AREAS. THEY WANT TO PICK UP THAT PHONE, SAY HEY, I NEED A TRUCK, HAVE IT HERE NOW, CLICK, AND THEY EXPECT FOR SOMEONE TO WALK UP FROM THE PARKING LOT, CARRYING A COT, GET THEIR PATIENT AND GET THEM OUT OF THE WAY. THAT'S JUST -- THAT'S THE PERCEPTION THAT MOST PEOPLE HAVE OF THE AMBULANCE INDUSTRY. FORTUNATE UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT IT. I REALLY WOULD CAUTION THE COUNCIL INTO LISTENING TO WHAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE SAY. THERE'S A LOT OF MISCONCEPTIONS IN THIS INDUSTRY. I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE SOME OF THE DATA COMES FROM. ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP, WE HAD PRESENTED SOME DATA EARLIER TO QUAT AND I GUESS MY NAME BEING BILL GATES I KNOW HOW TO OPERATE THE COMPUTER, I WENT IN AND FOUND SOME ERRORS IN THE PROGRAMMING, SOME MINOR ERRORS, BUT THEY ENDED UP SKEWING UP SOME OF THE INITIAL NUMBERS THAT WERE REPORTED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN. THOSE WERE CORRECTED AND SENT BACK TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN WITH GOOD FAITH. THOSE NUMBERS WERE DISCUSSED. WE REALLY DIDN'T THINK IT WAS THAT BIG OF AN ISSUE AT THE TIME. APPARENTLY IT HAS COME TO BE. IN CLOSING, THE COUNCILMEMBERS' PERCEPTION TWO CURRENT FRANCHISE HOLDERS IS A DECIDING FACTOR. I HOPE I'VE SHOWN EACH OF OF YOU ANOTHER VIEW OF THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE].

>> MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, IT'S A DELIGHT TO BE WITH YOU TONIGHT AND TO DISCOVER THAT I'M STILL ON ROBERT SINGLE TON'S RADAR SCREEN. [LAUGHTER]. SOME THINGS DO NEVER CHANGE. VERY BRIEFLY, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE IS I THINK ONE FROM A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS BEING MET, AND THAT IS WILL THE AWARDING OF EXISTING FRANCHISE ADVERSELY AS TO LOWER THE STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SERVICES. YOUR STAFF I THINK RIGHTFULLY SO HAS FOUND THAT THAT IS THE CASE AND I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO REBUT THAT AND I DON'T THINK THEY'VE DONE THAT SUCCESSFULLY. IF INDEED THERE IS AN EIGHT TO 10% GROWTH IN MARKET SHARE, THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH BUSINESS KNOW THE COST OF LIVING AND KNOW THAT TRANSLATES MINIMALLY TO THE BOTTOM LINE WITH THE INCREASED COST OF DOING WORK, DOING WORK AND OPERATING IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT. AND I THINK FINALLY IT COMES I THINK TO THE COUNCILMEMBER WYNN'S QUESTION STARTING OUT THIS CONVERSATION, I THINK COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS REFERRED TO IT IN OUR DISCUSSION AND THAT IS A PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION, IS AUSTIN BEST SERVED BY A FRANCHISE MODEL OR AN OPEN MARKET AS YOU HAVE IN HOUSTON? YOU WILL HEAR -- YOU HAVE HEARD THOSE COSTS ARE AS MUCH AS FOUR TIMES HIGHER IN OPEN MARKET AREAS AS OPPOSED TO AUSTIN WHERE THAT ALL THE OF AIR IS ASSURED AND WHERE THE PRICE IS HELD TO A VERY REASONABLE LEVEL. SO I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT IT IS INDEED THE RIGHT DECISION TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. AND I WILL GIVE YOU BACK A MINUTE AND A HALF. THANKS VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M NOT SURE HOW TO REACT TO GETTING TIME BACK. LET'S SEE HOW GOOD STEVE RANDALL DOES. MR. RANDALL, YOU WILL HAVE UP TO SIX MINUTES IF YOU NEED IT.

>> I WILL CUT IT AS SHORT AS I CAN. I'M THE OLDEST OF THE GROUP. I'VE BEEN AT THIS 20 YEARS. STARTED THE BUSINESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. IT WAS IN THE 80'S WHEN I STARTED WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN IN THIS BUSINESS. MY NAME IS STEVE RANDALL. I'M THE GENERAL MANAGER OF AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE. ONE OF THE CURRENT FRANCHISE HOLDERS. THE CITY CHOSE THE FRANCHISE AS OPPOSED TO A FREE MARKET SYSTEM SO IT COULD AFFORD THE EXORBITANT COSTS OF NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORTS IN A COMPETITIVE MARKET AS WELL AS TO ENSURE THAT A HIGHER STANDARD OF CARE FOR PATIENTS WAS MET. WHILE IT'S OFTEN ASSUMED THAT COMPETITION WILL DRIVE DOWN THE PRICE, IT IS NOT USUALLY THE CASE IN THE AMBULANCE BUSINESS. OUR OFFICE DOES THE BILLING FOR THE HOUSTON SERVICE. WE DO ALL OF AMR'S BILLING IN AUSTIN. THERE ARE 63 SERVICES IN THAT CITY. THE AVERAGE COST FOR TRANSPORT, NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORT IN HOUSTON IS $650. COMPARE THAT TO AUSTIN'S FRANCHISE SYSTEM WHERE WE AVERAGE 250. OF COURSE, IN HOUSTON'S COMPETITIVE MODEL, IF A PATIENT CANNOT PAY, THE PROVIDER HAS THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE AND IN AUSTIN'S MODEL, WE TAKE EVERYBODY. THERE IS NO ARGUMENT THAT THE FRANCHISE SYSTEM HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED TO BENEFIT THE PATIENTS, HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE RATE CAP, THE RATES FOR NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORT SERVICES IS NOT A LUCRATIVE MARKET FOR PROVIDERS, BUT IT IS ONE THAT WE ARE PROUD TO SERVE AS WE HAVE FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS. HOWEVER, THE ONLY WAY TO RECOUP THE COST OF SERVICE AND MAINTAIN THE QUALITY CARE STANDARDS IS TO HAVE AVERAGE CALL VOLUME REASONABLY ASSURED BY THE FRANCHISE MODEL AND PROPERLY GOVERNED AS IT IS. LET ME ADDRESS A CRITICAL POINT ON THE SERVICE SURVEY. IT IS TRUE THAT ALTHOUGH ALL COMPANIES INCLUDED IN THE SURVEY HAVE PASSING GRADES, THE APPLICANT HAD HIGHER RATINGS THAN THE TWO EXISTING FRANCHISE HOLDERS. AFTER ANALYZING THE RESULTS CAREFULLY, WE BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE TWO PRIMARY REASONS. FIRST, YOUR TWO EXISTING FRANCHISE HOLDERS PRIMARILY MAKE INTERCITY CALLS FROM A POINT WITHIN THE SFLIMENTS TO ANOTHER LOCATION WITHIN THE CITY. SOUTHERN CROSS, THE APPLICANT, PRESENTLY OFFERS NO SUCH SERVICE. THEY'RE SERVICE CALLS EITHER ORIGINATE OR TERMINATE IN AN AREA OUTSIDE THE SFLIMENTS. I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU ABOUT TRAFFIC. WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THAT. IT'S HARDLY SURPRISING THAT WE HAVE TO STRUGGLE WITH THIS ISSUE MUCH HARDER COMPARED TO THE EFFORTS OF A COMPANY HEAD QUARTERED IN NEW BRAUNFELS. SECOND, THE PAPERWORK REQUIRED BY YOUR FRANCHISE HOLDERS IS OBJECTED TO BY THE FACILITIES. THAT WAS AN ISSUE ON THE SURVEY. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REQUIRES THIS PAPERWORK FOR MEDICARE PATIENTS. FURTHER MO MORE, THE TWO FRANCHISE HOLDERS TRANSPORT A GREATER NUMBER OF THESE PATIENTS THAN THE APPLICANT. WHERE THE TRANSPORT AREA AND MIX OF MEDICARE PATIENTS THE SAME FOR SOUTHERN CROSS AS THEY ARE FOR GUARDIAN AND AMR, WE BELIEVE THE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEYS WOULD BE THE SAME. FINALLY, THE ISSUE OF GROWTH. ALTHOUGH THE SURVEY NUMBERS IN FRONT OF YOU TALK ABOUT POPULATION OF AGE 50 PLUS, OUR MARKET IS PRIMARILY THE MARKET AGE 65 PLUS. WITH TRANSPORT BETWEEN HOME, HOSPITAL AND RETIREMENT HOME. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THIS MARKET GROWTH IS RELATIVELY STATIC OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS SINCE THE SECOND FRANCHISE HOLDER WAS ADDED. ADDING A THIRD OPERATOR AT THIS TIME WOULD ONLY DIVIDE THAT STATIC MARKET RATHER THAN COME FROM GROWTH AS IT CONTEMPLATED IN THE ORDINANCE GOVERNING THE FRANCHISE SERVICE. AGAIN, WE WOULD LIKE TO ASSERT OUR POSITION THAT THE MARKET SIMPLY WILL NOT SUPPORT THREE PROVIDERS AT THE MOMENT. IF A THIRD PROVIDER IS ADDED, IT WILL BE TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE SYSTEM ITSELF AND A DISSERVICE TO THE DEPENDENT PUBLIC. I HAVE JUST ENOUGH TIME AND I'LL LEAVE EARLY, I HAVE JUST ENOUGH TIME TO ADDRESS SOME MEDICARE ISSUES. MEDICARE IS GOING TO A FEE SCHEDULE TO PAY $157. THAT PART IS CORRECT. IT'S BEEN PUT OFF UNTIL AT LEAST JULY OF NEXT YEAR AND THE MEDICARE FOLKS SAID THEY'RE PRETTY SURE IT WILL BE JULY OF 2003. THE FEE SCHEDULE WILL NOT BE IN EFFECT AND IT WON'T EFFECT THIS MARKET AT ALL. SO THAT'S BOGUS. SECONDLY, THE FEE SCHEDULE WHEN IT DOES GO INTO EFFECT, THE PROVIDER IS GIVEN 20% OF THE AMOUNT THAT IS INCREASES EACH YEAR UNTIL YOU REACH THE 100% MARKET. IF IT DID GO INTO EFFECT IN SCRARN, WE WOULD SEE A $6.71 INCREASE PER CALL. THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE THE TRUTH. ANY QUESTIONS?

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. JIM WALKER HAS SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. HE SAYS MORE AMBULANCES ARE A GOOD THING. I SUPPOSE AS LONG AS THEY DON'T PARK ON MUELLER. [LAUGHTER]. SORRY ABOUT THAT. THOSE ARE ALL THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING. I'M GOING HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS OF DR. ROCK IN A MINUTE, BUT I'LL SPRAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION IS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. DR. ROCK, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? DR. ROCK? I WANT TO ASK A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE IS WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME WE GRANTED A FRANCHISE SIMILAR TO THIS?

>> THAT WOULD BE GUARDIAN SERVICES IN '98.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND WHEN IT COMES TO THE GRANTING OF FRANCHISES, DO WE DO THAT BASED UPON A DETERMINATION BY STAFF THAT IT'S TIME TO SEEK NEW FRANCHISES, GO OUT FOR RFQ'S, R.F.P. IS, THAT KIND OF THING, OR IS IT BASED UPON PEOPLE DECIDING THEY WANT TO BE PART OF THE MARKET.

>> THE LATTER, MAYOR, SOMEONE APPLIES TO THE MARKET.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SOITS ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS THAT SOMEONE DECIDES THEY WANT TO BE IN THE BUSINESS AND MAYBE IN A GROWING PLACE AND SO THEY WORK SOME WAY TO INR. INSERT THEMSELVES INTO THE MARKET, BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY BASED ON US AS A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY TRYING TO DETERMINE HOW MANY WE NEED; IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ON THE ONE THAT WAS GRANTED IN '98, DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE ONE BEFORE THAT WAS DONE?

>> NO, MAYOR, I DON'T. WAS 80 THE -- I'M TOLD 1980.

>>MAYOR WATSON: 1980? SO WE WENT FROM '80 TO 1998. ANOTHER QUESTION I'VE GOT IS THERE'S AT LEAST SOME INDICATION THAT AT LEAST SOME INDICATIONS THAT THERE ARE DELAYS OF UP TO 30 MINUTES. AND I'M GOING TO ASK YOU SPECLY ABOUT THAT 30 MINUTES IN A SECOND, BUT ONE THOUGHT THAT I'VE HAD IS THAT SINCE THIS IS NON-EMERGENT OR NON-EMERGENCY TYPE SITUATION, WOULD THAT BE ONE EXPLANATION FOR THE REASON AND MAYBE IT'S NOT THAT QUICK AND IT'S NOT FIVE MINUTES OR 10 MINUTES, IT'S NOT SOMEBODY YOU'RE DEALING WITH A HEART ATTACK. IT'S A NON-EMERGENCY SITUATION FOR TRANSPORT, THAT IS RIGHT?

>> RIGHT. THE CONCEPT IT ON -- YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. THESE PATIENTS BY DEFINITION SHOULDN'T BE IN ANY KIND OF POTENTIALLY LIFE-THREATENING SITUATION. IT'S MOVEMENT FROM ONE PARTICULAR AREA TO ANOTHER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO FIRST OF ALL, HAVE YOU GONE BACK AND TRIED TO VERIFY OR MAKE ANY DETERMINATION ABOUT WHETHER THE 30-MINUTE NUMBER IS ACCURATE?

>> WHAT WE DO IN TERMS OF OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION, LOOKING AT THE RESPONSE, REALLY IN E.M.S. ARE ON IN PUBLIC SAFETY THERE'S NO COMPONENTS TO A RESPONSE. THE SUBJECTIVE PERCEPTION PIECE, AS WELL AS THE OBJECTIVE PIECE. WE IN ESSENCE LOOKED AT FOUR PIECES OF DATA. ONE IS OUR AUDIT OF THE TWO EXISTING PROVIDERS WHERE WE LOOKED AT THEIR RECORDS, RANDOMLY REVIEW THE RECORDS TO LOOK AT RESPONSE TIME INTERVALS. AND TWO WOULD BE ANY COMPLAINTS THAT WE RECEIVE. WE RECEIVE A COMPLAINT FROM A LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY, FROM A HOSPITAL ABOUT A DELAY, WE'LL EVALUATE THAT. THREE IS IF WE ARE -- RECEIVE AN INTERNAL COMPLAINT FROM AUSTIN E.M.S. PARAMEDICS OR COMMUNICATIONS THAT RESPOND AN AMBULANCE TO A SCENE WHERE THE AMBULANCE HAS RESPONDED TO THAT SCENE BECAUSE A NON-EMERGENCY AMBULANCE WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT WITHIN A TIME INTERVAL. AND LASTLY, WE ALSO LOOK AT THE DATA, THE SURVEY DATA THAT SURVEYED THE INSTITUTIONS. BASED ON THAT, THE BIGGEST -- THE THING THAT WEIGHED THE HEAVIEST WITH US WAS OUR OBJECTIVE EVALUATION OF BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THOSE DEFINED RESPONSE INTERVALS FROM THE PROVIDER STANDPOINT AS WELL AS THE DATA THAT WE HAD INTERNALLY REGARDING ANY COMPLAINTS OR ANY INTERNALLY GENERATED DATA IN THAT TIME PERIOD THAT WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE HAD A PROBLEM WITH THE RESPONSE INTERVALS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON THAT. REGURGITATE, IF YOU WILL, THE RESULTS OF ALL YOUR FINDINGS.

>> BAD WORD FOR ME, MAYOR. [LAUGHTER]. BASED ON THAT DATA, ONE OF THE CONCEPTS IN EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES IS 90% COMPLIANCE WITH RESPONSE TIME INTERVALS. AND WHETHER THAT'S AN HOUR, WHETHER THAT'S EIGHT MINUTES 59 SECONDS FOR AN EMERGENCY, THAT KIND OF BALLPARK FIGURE SEALS TO BE A GUIDELINE THAT SYSTEMS USE. BASED ON OUR REVIEW OF THE DATA FROM AMR AND GUARDIAN ON OUR AUDIT WHERE WE RANDOMLY REVIEWED THEIR RECORDS, BASED ON OUR RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINTS ABOUT RESPONSE TIME INTERVALS, BASED ON OUR INTERNALLY GENERATED COMPLAINTS AND THE SURVEY DATA, WE DID NOT FEEL THAT THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM MEETING THE ONE-HOUR OR 60-MINUTE RESPONSE TIME INTERVAL REQUIREMENTS. THIS IS THE FIRST I'VE SEEN OF THESE TWO DOCUMENTS FROM SETON AND ST. DAVID'S, SO I CAN'T COMMENT ON THE SPECIFICSES BEHIND THOSE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR TO ANYBODY LISTENING TO THIS PRESENTATION. THEY HEAR AMBULANCE AND THEN THEY HEAR 60 MINUTES. THERE'S A COUPLE OF PEOPLE IN PARTICULAR I'M INTERESTED IN BEING CLEAR. [LAUGHTER]. AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST TRANSPORTING. YOU NEED AN AMBULANCE TO DO THE TRANSPORTING, BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AN EMERGENCY SITUATION, WE'RE -- THAT'S SOMETHING COMPLETELY SEPARATE THAN WHAT THIS ISSUE IS.

>> ABSOLUTELY, THAT'S CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO IT IS REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE AND FRANKLY IT IS ACCEPTABLE -- NOT JUST ACCEPTABLE. THE WAY IT IS DONE IN THE INDUSTRY TO CONSIDER THOSE TIMES AS BEING OKAY.

>> THE 60-MINUTE TIME INTERVAL?

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE TIME INCIDENT VALUES YOU'RE USING TO MAKE YOUR DETERMINE NAIRKSS HERE IN ROUR RECOMMENDATIONS TO US?

>> YES, IT IS. BECAUSE THESE PA PATIENTS ARE NOT IN EMERGENT LIFE THREAT, BUT DO NEED TO MORE FROM ONE AREA TO ANOTHER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: NOW, WHAT IS THE DOWNTIME? EVERYTHING IS GO AND EVERYTHING IS REASONABLE, EVERYTHING IS WITHIN APPROPRIATE STANDARDS AND LIMITS, BUT SO WHAT? WHY NOT GO AHEAD AND JUST GRANT ANOTHER FRANCHISE EVEN THOUGH IT'S ONLY BEEN TWO YEARS?

>> IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. AND THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT IN ESSENCE COUNCIL IS LOOKING AT. IN GENERAL THERE ARE TWO KINDS OF MODELS OF NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION IN A COMMUNITY. ONE IS THAT, AS WAS POINTED OUT EARLY,ER, ONE IS THE OPEN MARKET, WHERE ANYONE HAS A LICENSED AMBULANCE AS A PROVIDER CAN COMPETE IN THAT OPEN MARKET FOR SERVICES: THE OTHER IS WHERE THE COMMUNITY REGULATES THE NON-EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION ENVIRONMENT. THERE ARE PROS AND CONS OF BOTH MODELS. I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT ONE MODEL IS BETTER THAN ANOTHER. THE CON OF THE OPEN MARKET, WHICH IS THE SPECIFIC QUESTION YOU ASKED, THE MORE AMBULANCE PROVIDERS A COMMUNITY HAS, THE MORE OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITY THE COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE FOR THOSE PROVIDERS AND THE POTENTIAL THAT THERE WOULD BE DEVIATION BETWEEN THE STANDARDS OF THOSE CARE PROVIDERS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS IMPORTANT TO US AS A CITY OR AS THE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY IS IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS IN MOVING THE NON-EMERGENT PATIENTS THAT THEN RESULT IN MOVEMENT OF LONG-TERM CARE FACILITYIES TO THE EMERGENCY SIDE, IT PLACES A BURDEN ON THE EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE AND TIES THE EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE UP WITH MOVING NON-EMERGENCY PATIENTS. AT ANY POINT THE LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY OR HOSPITAL FOR THAT MATTER COULD CHOOSE TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL 911 AND WE WOULD RESPOND TO THAT PARTICULAR CALL AND WE WOULD TRANSPORT THAT PATIENT TO HIS OR HER FACILITY OR DESTINATION OF CHOICE. SO THE DOWN SIDE COULD BE THAT THE STANDARDS BECOME VARIABLE. THE MEDICAL STANDARDS BECOME VARIABLE. AND BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF PROVIDERS THE OVERFLOW POTENTIALLY COULD IMPACT THE EMERGENCY SIDE OF THE SERVICE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER. IN.

>>WYNN: A RELATED TOPIC TO YOUR LAST QUESTION. IT SEEMS TO ME IF IT'S NON-EMERGENCY SERVICE, WHY CAN'T THERE BE BETTER SCHEDULING? IF IT'S NOT -- IF IT'S NOT -- AM I MISSING THIS? IF IT'S NOT AN EMERGENCY, WHY ISN'T THERE A CALL A DAY IN ADVANCE OR HALF A DAY TO SAY I NEED A RIDE AT 3:30. WHY ISN'T THERE A BETTER SERVICE?

>> IT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION AND THE INDUSTRY STRUGGLES WITH THAT. WITH COMPUTER MODELING, ALL SORTS OF PROGRAMS TO BE ABLE TO PREDICT WHEN PEAK DEMAND AND VOLUMES ARE GOING TO IMPACT THE SYSTEM. AND WHAT MOST -- AND I CAN'T COMMENT ON ANY OF THE THREE PROVIDERS INVOLVED BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHAT THEY DO, BUT WHAT MOST NON-EMERGENCY SYSTEMS WILL DO IS HISTORICLY LOOK AT THEIR TRANSPORT VOLUME, STAFF, APPROPRIATE AMBULANCES, BASED ON WHAT THAT VOLUME IS TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE RESPONSE TIME REQUIREMENTS. IF, FOR EXAMPLE, SOMEONE NEEDS TO BE TRANSPORTED IN OUR COMMUNITY FROM SETON NORTHWEST TO SETON DOWNTOWN AND THAT'S AN UNSCHEDULED OR IT COMES UP OR SOMETHING CHANGES, THAT MODEL THEN OBVIOUSLY BECOMES A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT TO ADHERE TO. THERE ARE ALSO OTHER VARIABLES IN THERE, INCLUDING HOW LONG THEY'RE OUT AT A HOSPITAL. IS THERE PROBLEMS GETTING THE PATIENT READY TO BE TRANSPORTED. IDEALLY YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. YOU WANT A MODEL THAT WOULD SAY WE'VE GOT 14 TRANSPORTS TOMORROW. HERE IS THE TIME WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AND LET'S FIT THOSE IN WANT AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE REALITY DOESN'T ALLOW ANYONE TO DO IT REAL WELL, ALTHOUGH PROVIDERS CAN DO IT REASONABLY WELL. AND DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER?

>>WYNN: THAT HELPED. I HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS. I'LL DEFER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

>>ALVAREZ: YES, DR. ROCK, I BELIEVE IT WAS MR. HARRINGTON EARLIER AND IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING IN TERMS OF I GUESS WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE CONSIDERING IN MAKING OUR DECISION AS TO WHETHER THE NEW FRANCHISE SERVES PUBLIC CONVENIENCE; IS THAT RIGHT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>ALVAREZ: AND THERE WERE APPARENTLY THREE PARTS TO THAT TEST OF WHETHER OR NOT IT SERVES PUBLIC CONVENIENCE. AND WHAT ARE THOSE?

>> TLEET PARTS ARE THE DISTANCE FROM THE PERMANENT ADDRESS TO WHICH THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO OPERATE THE TRANSPORT SERVICE TO OTHER MEDICAL FACILITYIES OR HOSPITALS. THE PERFORMANCE HISTORY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE APPLICANT HAVE BEEN PERFORMED IN A SATISFACTORY MANNER AND THE NUMBER OF TRANSFER SERVICE PROVIDERS WHICH ARE AVAILABLE IN THE SERVICE AREA. AND WHETHER THE GRANTING THE FRANCHISE WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE SERVICES WHICH EXIST IN THAT AREA.

>>ALVAREZ: AND SO GIVEN YOUR RECOMMENDATION, YOU BELIEVE THAT GRANTING A FRANCHISE WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT EXISTING SERVICE. THAT THE AFFECT THE OTHER FRANCHISE? YOU MENTIONED THAT, BUT I WAS WONDERING WHAT THE RATIONALE IS.

>> THAT IS PART OF OUR RECOMMENDATION. THERE ARE REALLY TWO PARTS FROM OUR ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION. ONE IS, AND PROBABLY MOST IMPORTANTLY, IN OUR ANALYSIS, WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT A PROBLEM EXISTED IN THE COMMUNITY. WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT THERE WERE INDICATORS BASED ON THE DATA THAT WE LOOKED AT THAT SUGGESTED THAT CURRENT PROVIDERS WERE NOT MEETING THE SERVICEMENT CLEARLY, AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT, THERE ARE CUSTOMER SERVICE ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AND MODIFIED. BUT IN TERMS OF RESPONSE INTERVALS AND THE ACTUAL MEDICARE, MOVING PATIENTS AND DOING THOSE THINGS, WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT THAT WAS A PARTICULAR PROBLEM. THE OTHER PART IN TERMS OF ADVERSELY IMPACTING EXISTING SERVICES, THE COST OF AN AMBULANCE SYSTEM, AS MANY THINGS, IS BASED IN LARGE PART ON THE SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THE MORE AMBULANCE SERVICES YOU ADD TO A GIVEN COMMUNITY, IT MEANS THE MORE DISPATCHING UNITS, THE MORE INFRASTRUCTURE DISPLAY, THOSE KIND OF THINGS. AND OUR SENSE WAS, AND IT CONTINUES TO BE, AS YOU ADD MORE SERVICES TO A COMMUNITY YOU POTENTIALLY IMPACT THE ABILITY OF THOSE SERVICES TO MAINTAIN THEIR SAME LEVEL OR STANDARD OF CARE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, CAN I INTERRUPT YOU? ARE YOU DONE? I WANT TO INTREPT WHAT YOU JUST SAID. USED TO THIS N. THIS STATE WE HAD A HEALTH FACILITYIES COMMISSION. AND THE REASON WE HAD HEALTH FACILITYIES COMMISSION IS BECAUSE IF THERE WERE A WHOLE BUNCH OF HOSPITALS, ONE OF THE -- ONE OF THE REASONS WE HAD A HEALTH FACILITY COMMISSION IS IF UD IN A COMMUNITY OF X NUMBER OF PEOPLE UD TWO HOSPITALS AND SOMEBODY WANTED TO OPEN A THIRD HOSPITAL, YOU WOULD DO AN ANALYSIS OF WHETHER OR NOT OPENING A THIRD HOSPITAL WOULD ACTUALLY ADVERSELY AFFECT EXISTING SERVICES. THAT MAY NOT BE THE EXACT LANGUAGE, BUT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS. AND THE THEORY AT LEAST WAS THAT IF YOU'VE GOT TOO MUCH -- SOME PEOPLE THINK THAT CREATING A WHOLE LOT OF COMPETITION ACTUALLY ADDS TO QUALITY ASSURANCE BECAUSE -- FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. BUT ONE ONE OF THE REASONS IS THAT IF YOU HAVE TOO MANY ENTITIES TRYING TO PROVIDE THE SAME SERVICE TO TOO SMALL A POPULATION, THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH TO GO AROUND, IF YOU WILL, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OCCURS AS A RESULT OF THAT IS THAT PEOPLE WILL START CUTTING CORNERS AND YOU WILL ACTUALLY HAVE A REDUCTION IN THE QUALITY OF CARE. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MY MEMORY THAT WE USED TO LOOK AT WITH THE HEALTH FACILITYIES COMMISSION. WE USED TO ALSO HAVE TO DEAL WITH BANKS. BEFORE YOU COULD GET A BANKING CHARTER, AGAIN, THEY LOOKED AT THE QUALITY OF SERVICES. IF UD TOO MANY BANKS IN ONE AREA. WE DO IT WITH TAXI CABS. THE CITY COUNCILL DOES THAT RIGHT NOW WITH THE WAY WE TREAT TAXI CABS. IS THAT PART OF WHAT -- BECAUSE YOUR ANSWER HAS BEEN ASKED ABOUT THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT WAYS AND -- .

>> YES, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE CONCEPT IS. AND WE WENT THROUGH THAT SAME PROCESS AND THE COUNCIL MAY REMEMBER WITH STAR FLIGHT WHEN THERE WERE SOME OTHER PROVIDERS THAT WERE COMING INTO THE AREA. THERE IS AN IMPACT ON SERVICE WHEN CALL VOLUME GOES DOWN. SO YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, IF I INTERRUPTED YOU, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>>ALVAREZ: I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BECAUSE I'M READY TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION?

>>WYNN: ONE MORE QUESTION. DR. ROCK, WE HEARD A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO WHAT I WOULD CALL JUST A VERY -- A TRUE FREE MARKET SYSTEM. AND IN NO WAY BY ACCEPT WILLING SOUTHERN CROSS AS AN ADDITIONAL FRANCHISE SEE ARE WE ELIMINATING OUR FRANCHISE SYSTEM AND THERE BY GOING TO A FREE MARKET SYSTEM, CORRECT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. YOU WOULD BE ADDING THE FRANCHISE REQUIREMENTS FOR FRANCHISE SYSTEM STILL WOULD EXIST. YOU WOULD ADD ANOTHER FRANCHISE HOLDER. BUT IT DOESN'T OPEN IT UP TO COMPETITION OUTSIDE OF THOSE FRANCHISE HOLDERS.

>>WYNN: THE FEES WOULD BE THE SAME AND THE QUALITY QUALIFICATIONSES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES OF THE FRANCHISE SEES REMAIN THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXISTING ORDINANCE?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>WYNN: DID YOU PREVIOUSLY TALK ABOUT THE EXISTING ORDINANCE. HOW LONG HAVE WE HAD IT, WHO REVIEWS IT AND AT WHAT POINT DO WE THINK ABOUT OTHER MEASURES IN THE ORDINANCE?

>> THE EXISTING ORDINANCE AND THE EXACT DATE, KAY -- EARLY SNIERCHTS. IT'S A RELATIVELY OLD ORDINANCE. -- EARLY 90'S. E.M.S. TRANSPORT HAS CHANGED DRA MATT LICK HIGHLY IN THAT TIME PERIOD. SOME OF THE THINGS TO ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT HAVE CHANGED. THERE ARE SOME THINGS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED. THAT PROCESS IS OUTGOING AS WE SPEAK FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. BUT IT IS AN OLDER ORDINANCE.

>>WYNN: OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: YES, SIR, DR. ROCK. THE -- PART OF THE BIG CONCERN HERE IS THAT BY BRINGING ANOTHER -- A COMPETITOR THAT IT COULD HURT THE BUSINESS OF THE OTHER ONES THUS HURT THEIR SERVICE. DO I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY.

>> FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE IT WOULD BE THAT IT WOULD IMPACT -- THAT'S CORRECT, BUT THAT IT WOULD POTENTIALLY CHANGE THE STANDARD OF CARE PROVIDED BY THE CURRENT PROVIDERS. I KNOW THAT'S A SUBTLETY, BUT FROM OUR STANDPOINT, THE BUSINESS IS NOT REALLY IMPORTANT. THE STANDARD OF CARE IS IMPORTANT. I KNOW IT'S -- .

>>SLUSHER: I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BY HAVING MORE COMPETITION THEY MIGHT CUT SOME CORNERS OR SOMETHING?

>> CORRECT.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. UD SAID -- IT SAYS IN THE BACKUP THAT ONE OF THE KEY REASONS BASED PRIMARILY ON THE RELATIVELY SMALL INCREASE IN CALL VOLUME GROWTH BETWEEN SEPTEMBER '98 -- 1998 THROUGH MARCH 2000, BUT THEN THERE WAS WAS -- THERE'S ANOTHER MEMO DATED NOVEMBER 28TH WHERE THERE WAS A 17.5% INCREASE OVER -- IS THAT WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY REPORTED? THE WORDING IS A LITTLE UNCLEAR TO ME.

>> THE INITIAL NUMBERS THAT WERE GIVEN TO US BY GUARDIAN AND THERE WERE QUESTIONS REGARDING THOSE NUMBERS, AND AND -- THOSE NUMBERS WERE REEVALUATED BY GUARDIAN AND RESUBMITTED DIFFERENTLY WHICH INCREASED THE CHANGE IN YEAR TWO TO 7.96% IN YEAR APPROXIMATE TO 9.67%. SO EVEN IF YOU GO TO THE 10% RANGE ON THE HIGH END, THOSE NUMBERS DID CHANGE, YOU ARE CORRECT.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. AND THAT DIDN'T CAUSE YOU TO CHANGE YOUR RECOMMENDATION. IT CAUSED YOU TO REEVALUATE AT ALL.

>> WE DID. BASED ON THE NEW NUMBERS WE LOOKED AT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. AND THE DISCUSSION WE HAD AT WHAT POINT -- WHAT'S THE BREAK POINT? IS IT 12%, 14%? IS IT EIGHT PERCENT? THERE IS NO -- THERE'S NO BENCHMARK. THERE'S NO GOOD DATA ON THAT. BUT WE FELT GIVEN EVEN A 10% GROWTH THAT WE WOULD STILL MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION AT THAT POINT, THAT THERE WAS NOT BASED ON THE ADDITIONAL DATA THAT THERE WAS NOT A NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL FRANCHISE.

>> OKAY. AND SOME OF THE -- SOME OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, I WANTED TO ASK YOU ABOUT THAT. IS THIS ACCURATE THAT MEDICARE IS INCREASED OR INCREASED ITS PAYMENT EFFECTIVE THE FIRST OF THE YEAR FOR THIS TYPE OF SERVICE?

>> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DEFER, ACTUALLY DEFER TO HEATHER OR EVEN ONE OF THE APPLICANTS. THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR AMBULANCE SERVICES HAS CHANGED. AND THAT WAS TO TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON JANUARY THE FIRST. NOW, THAT WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED ON JANUARY THE FIRST. AS A MATTER OF FACT, WHAT SOME OF THE OTHER FRANCHISE HOLDERS WERE DISCUSSING THAT. WE HAD A BRIEF DISCUSSION BACK HERE TO SEE WHEN HCFA WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO INTRODUCE THE NEW FEE SCHEDULE 'AND I'VE HEARD EVERYTHING FROM JULY OF THIS YEAR TILL JANUARY OF TWU. LUSH SLUSH I'M SORRY, WHAT IS HCFA.

>> HEALTH CARE FINANCING ADD STRATION. I APOLOGIZE. THEY DO AN ACCEPTABLE FEE SCHEDULE FOR AMBULANCE REIMBURSEMENT.

>>SLUSHER: SO IT IS GOING TO INCREASE, BUT IT'S NOT CERTAIN WHEN IT'S GOING TO TAKE EFFECT?

>> AT THIS POINT IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME WHAT THIS WILL TAKE. WE KNOW IT WILL NOT TAKE EFFECT JANUARY THE FIRST OF 2001, WHICH WAS THE INITIAL.

>>SLUSHER: IS IT BEING RECONSIDERED OR JUST POSTPONED?

>> AT THIS POINT IT'S BEEN POSTPONED.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. SO IN ORDER, YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OR NOT?

>> I PERSONALLY DO NOT KNOW. NO.

>>SLUSHER: BUT IT'S NOT THAT -- I'M -- LET ME REPHRASE IT. IT'S NOT JUST THAT YOU DON'T KNOW, BUT IT'S UNCERTAIN NOW THAT -- .

>> THERE IS -- AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE IS UNCERTAINTY ON THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE, AND POTENTIALLY ON HOW THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED COMING FROM THE HEALTH CARE FINANCING ADMINISTRATION. AND I WOULD AGAIN DEFER TO MY COLLEAGUES IN REIMBURSEMENT FOR MORE SPECIFICS.

>>SLUSHER: DOES ANYONE WANT TO ANSWER THAT? [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE]

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T YOU MOVE UP TO THE MICROPHONE.

>>SLUSHER: I THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO SAY HE WAS GOING TO HIS TRUCK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: RUN OUT THERE AND READ IT TO US.

>> I HAVE IS BOOKLET REFERRING TO THE SHOP SHE WENT TO. SCENARIO ONE BASICALLY DICTATING WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN JANUARY 1ST. AT THIS TIME WE ARE TOLD THAT THEY WILL PREPARE AND OPERATE UNDER SCENARIO ONE, WHICH IS THIS IS THE LAW. JANUARY 1, YOUR NEW FEE STRUCTURE WILL BE $157.32. AND THAT IS SCENARIO ONE. SCENARIO TWO DID HAVE A CLASS. IN CASE WE CAN'T MAKE THE FIRST ONE WORK FOR JANUARY 1ST, THEN THIS IMPLEMENTATION WILL BE DELAYED. BUT START THE NEW CODING TO ENTER ALL YOUR BILLING DATA IS GOING TO CHANGE TO THE NEW SCENARIO REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT -- IF THE AMOUNT DOESN'T CHANGE, THE BILLING CODES DO CHANGE PREPPING FOR THE NEW FEE STRUCTURE.

>> CORRECT, BUT THE MONEY PART --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHOA, WHOA, WHOA. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER HAS UNLEASHED PANDORA'S BOX. [LAUGHTER]. DR. ROCK, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR AGAIN. NINLS HAVE ANY -- ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. WHY DON'T WE GET A MOTION. IT'S 11:05. I'M GOING TO NEED TRANSPORT IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING PRETTY QUICK. [LAUGHTER]. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR, I'M REALLY NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE NEED HAVING EXPANDED ENOUGH TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE A CHANCE ON ANOTHER FRANCHISE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE APPROPRIATE --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IT WOULD BE A MOTION TO DENY.

>>GOODMAN: THEN THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE MAYOR PRO TEM MOVES TO DENY. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. ANY DISCUSSION?

>>GOODMAN: LET ME JUST ADD I HAVE NO DOUBT ABOUT THE EXCELLENCE OF SERVICE AND WE ARE GROWING PRETTY FAST, SO MAYBE IT WON'T BE TOO LONG BEFORE WE HAVE NUMBERS THAT SHOW WE NEED ANOTHER FRANCHISE. RIGHT NOW I JUST DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ON ITEM 45 THE MOTION AND SECOND IS TO NOT APPROVE OR TO DENY THE GRANTING OF THE NON-EMERGENCY MEDICAL FRANCHISE FOR SOUTHERNCROSS UNDER CHAPTER 6-3 OF THE CITY CODE. FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I'M INCLINED TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS. I THINK PARTICULARLY THE LETTER FROM THE HOSPITAL FOLKS CONCERN ME ABOUT THE LENGTH OF STAY. BUT IT'S JUST UNCERTAIN -- IT'S REALLY BALANCED AND I'M NOT TOTALLY CLEAR ONE WAY OR THE OTHER SO IN THAT CASE I'M GOING TO GO WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>ALVAREZ: YEAH, I MEAN I WAS ALSO TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE WERE AT WITH THIS IN TERMS OF NEED BECAUSE THE GROWTH I THINK IS THERE OR WILL BE THERE AND CERTAINLY WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS RECEIVED ABOUT EXISTING SERVICE AND THE FACT THE GOOD NUMBERS OF THIS COMPANY AND OBVIOUSLY ALL THE HARD WORK THEY PUT INTO THE APPLICATION AND WE HAVE A VERY INTENSE PROCESS FOR FOLKS TO GO THROUGH AND I GUESS, YOU KNOW, I GUESS IF IT DOES GET DENIED DOES THAT MEAN IT COULD COME BACK IN A YEAR OR TWO THEY HAVE TO START THE PROCESS ALL OVER AGAIN?

>>MAYOR WATSON: AS I UNDERSTAND THE LAW, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND IT WOULD BE LIKE ANY -- THE SAME PROCESS FOR BEING GRANTED A FRANCHISE.

>>ALVAREZ: AND -- OKAY. SO I GUESS WHAT I WOULD LIKE IS FOR US TO ESTABLISH SOME KIND OF THRESHOLD THAT I GUESS, YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF SHOWS I GUESS WHAT WE MEAN BY -- MAYBE THAT WE BEGIN TO DEFINE WHAT WE MEAN BY NEED OR THAT THERE'S A NEED FOR US TO DO THAT SO THAT I GUESS OTHER FOLKS WHO WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, THEN WE CAN HAVE SOME KIND OF WAY OF KNOWING WHETHER THEY HAVE A GOOD SHOT AT IT OR NOT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND I THINK WE DO. I MEAN I THINK IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO COME FORWARD, WE HAVE A VERY PROFESSIONAL STAFF AT E.M.S. AND THEY ARE ABLE TO HELP DETERMINE THAT NEED, BUT SOME PEOPLE DISAGREE WITH THAT AND STILL WANT TO COME FORWARD WITH A FRANCHISE APPLICATION. FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 7-0. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. A LITTLE SLOW, BUT SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES, WE'RE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

End of Council Session Closed Caption Log