Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting
Thursday, June 27, 2002

Note: Since these log files are derived from the Closed Captions created during the Channel 6 live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. These Closed Caption logs are not official records of Council Meetings and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records or transcripts, please contact the City Clerk at (512) 974-2210.

I'M CALLING TO ORDER THE LEGAL MEETING OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL JUNE THE 27th. BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT WE'LL BE TAKING UP, CERTAIN ITEMS LATER ON, COUNCIL, WE NEED TO TAKE ACTION ON ITEM NUMBER 27. ITEM 27 IS TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO APPOINT COUNCILMEMBER BETTY DUNKERLY AND TO REAPPOINT DARYLER AND JACKIE GOOD MAN TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION FOR A PERIOD EXPIRING WITH THEIR CITY COUNCIL TERMS. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MOVE.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER AFL VEZ, WE ARE CONSIDERING THIS ITEM. SO YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE ON IT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

THE MOTION CARRIES WITH A VOTE OF 4-0 WITH TWO MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL TEMPORARILY ABSENT. SO COMING RIGHT UP. AT THIS TIME WE'LL GO TO THE 1:30 BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL. FIRST IS MR. ROBERT KELLEY. FOLLOWING THAT -- FOLLOWED BY MS. SARAH ANDRE. MR. KELLEY?

WELCOME, SIR.

THANK YOU.

GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ROBERT KELLEY. I'M A SENIOR SANITARIAN. I'VE BEEN WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR APPROXIMATELY EIGHT YEARS. I'M REPRESENTING PROUDLY THE SANITARIAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSUMER HEALTH UNIT OF AUSTIN HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT. OUR PRIMARY TASK IS TO ENFORCE AND INSPECT IN 4500 FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS, RETAIL FOOD STORES, LOCAL FOOD VENDORS THAT TEMPORARY EVENTS HELD THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. IN ADDITION TO THIS, WE ALMOST DAILY RECEIVE REPORTS OF FOOD BORNE ILLNESSS AND THUS WE GENERALLY INVESTIGATE SEVERAL HUNDRED REPORTED INCIDENCES OF FOOD BORNE ILLNESSS IN A YEAR. WITH THIS IN MIND YOU WILL NOTE BY LOOKING AT THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART THAT IS PROVIDED FOR YOU THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING WITHOUT A PROGRAM MANAGER, CUSTOMER SERVICE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISOR, AND AN ENFORCEMENT COORDINATOR. IN ADDITION TO THIS, EIGHT OUT OF THE 17 CITY FIELD INSPECTOR POSITIONS ARE CURRENTLY VACANT. WITH THE FOOD INSPECTOR POSITIONS FROZEN, OUR ABILITY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH IS IN SERIOUS JEOPARDY. OUR PURPOSE OF BEING HERE HERE TODAY IS TO REQUEST SALARY ADJUSTMENTS FOR THE SANITARIAN POSITION IN ORDER TO CREATE EQUITY WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST, OR TO BE RECLASSIFIED AS ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST. IN AS MUCH AS FOUR TO FIVE YEARS AN EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO INCREASE SALARIES, TO CREATE EQUITY OF THIS POSITIONS. THE INEQUITY OF THE SALARY SCALES VERSUS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE ZESHL SPECIALIST IS ON AVERAGE 28% DIFFERENCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST BEING THE HIGHER PAID OF THE TWO. HOWEVER, YOU WILL NOTE THAT JOB DESCRIPTIONS ARE VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL WITH EXCEPTION OF THE FACT THAT SANITARIAN POSITIONS REQUIRE A DEGREE AND A PROFESSIONAL LICENSE. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST NOT ONLY DOES NOT REQUIRE PROCHLTION LICENSING BUT MAY ALLOW EXPERIENCE TO REPLACE HE HAD -- PROFESSIONAL LICENSING BUT MAY ALLOW EXPERIENCE TO REPLACE EDUCATION, THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH IS A VERY IMPORTANT PROGRAM AND WITHOUT ADEQUATE LEADERSHIP OUR PROGRAM WILL SLOWLY SBINT GRATE. WE HAVE LOST SANITARIANS THAT HAVE LEFT THE HIGHER PAYING JOBS AND THE FACT THAT WE WERE UNABLE TO HIRE BECAUSE OF LACK OF COMPETITIVE SALARIES IN ADDITION TO THOSE POSITIONS BEING FROZEN, PUBLIC HEALTH IS AT RISK. IN CONCLUSION, SINCE WE ARE A REVENUE-PRODUCING ENTITY, THE PROPOSED FEE ADJUSTMENTS TO OFFSET THE FOLLOWING INCREASES. WE ALSO REQUEST THAT YOU CONSIDER OPENING AT LEAST HALF OF THE VACANT SANITARIAN POSITIONS FOR HIRE IN ORDER THAT WE CAN PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.

THANK YOU, MR. KELLEY. AND WE HAVE A COPY OF YOUR INFORMATION PACKET IS IN THE HANDS OF THE STATE MANAGER. WE'LL BE LOOKING AT IT. WE'LL ALSO BE LOOKING AT IT AT THE TIME WE DO THE NEXT. MR. SARAH ANDRE. AND FALLING MS. ANDRE IS MR. GUS PENA. MS. ANDRE, WELCOME.

HI. I'M SARAH ANDRE AND I'M WITH THE ENTERPRISE FOUNDATION HERE IN AUSTIN. ENTERPRISE IS A NATIONAL NONPROFIT THAT WORKS WITH OTHER NONPROFITS AND COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS TO HELP REBUILD NEIGHBORHOODS. SINCE 1982 WE'VE HELPED DEVELOP MORE THAN 132,000 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING NATIONWIDE. I'M HERE TODAY WITH A GROUP OF MY COLLEAGUES TO TALK ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AUSTIN AND I'D LIKE TO ASK THEM TO STAND JUST SO YOU CAN SEE WHO THEY ARE. THANKS. WE WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE WORK WITH AND SUPPORT THE EFFORTS OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING OPPORTUNITY TRUST COALITION. WE ALSO COORDINATE WITH MANY OF THE OTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASK FORCES HERE IN AUSTIN. HOWEVER, WE ARE FOCUSED ON THE ISSUES FACED BY NONPROFIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS, ALSO KNOWN AS COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS. FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS WE'VE BEEN MEETING AS A GROUP TO DISCUSS THE COMMON ISSUES WE FACE WHEN TRYING TO INCREASE PRODUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WHILE WE FACE NUMEROUS ISSUES OF VARYING COMPLEXITY, WE SEEM TO ALWAYS COME BACK TO TWO ISSUES: ACCESS TO LAND AND CAPACITY BUILDING. ONE RESULT OF OUR CONVERSATIONS IS THE WHITE PAPER THAT I'M PRESENTING YOU TODAY. ACCESS TO LAND AND SCEAFT BUILDING ARE DISCUSSED AT LENGTH IN THE PAPER, BUT WE HAVE ALSO TAKEN THE TIME TO HIGHLIGHT SOME UNIQUE SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN OTHER CITIES. FOR EXAMPLE, MANY CITIES AROUND THE NATION, INCLUDING DALLAS AND HOUSTON, HAVE PROGRAMS THAT HELP FUNNEL VACANT LOTS TO NONPROFIT DEVELOPERS. THE CITY OF FORT WORTH ALSO HAS AN EXCITING PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND OPERATING SUPPORT TO FLEDGLING NONPROFITS THAT WOULD LIKE TO BECOME THIS. INCLUDED IN OUR LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THREE MAJOR ITEMS WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IMPLEMENTED WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE CITY. FIRST, THE CREATION OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THAT FACILITATES THE TRANSFER OF LAND TO NONPROFITS TO BE USED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SECOND, WE WOULD LIKE TO ESTABLISH A PILOT PROGRAM THAT HELPS NONPROFITS CLEAR TITLE ON VACANT LAND. AND FINALLY WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CITY USE NONFEDERAL DOLLARS SUCH AS THE TRUST FUND TO PROVIDE OPERATING SUPPORT AND DEVELOP THE CAPACITY OF THESE. SUPPORTING NEIGHBORHOOD-BASED GROUPS IS ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO HELP STEM THE TIED AND MAINTAIN LOCAL CONTROL OVER THE LANDSCAPE. AS MORE AND MORE GROUPS BEGIN TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SEEK WAYS TO ADDRESS THIS COMMUNITY ISSUE, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE ALL WORK TOGETHER. WE NEED TO SUPPORT AND STRENGTHEN THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY DEVELOPING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND AT THE SAME TIME FOSTER THE GROWTH OF NEW ORGANIZATIONS AND NEW WAYS OF WORKING. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MS. ANDRE. MR. GUS PENA IS GOING TO BE FOLLOWED BY JEANNE STARTZEL. MR. PENA, WELCOME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILMEMBERS, GUS PENA. TO MY LEFT IS MY BOY LUCIO WHO FINISHED THE SUMMER SCHOOL AND I WANT Y'ALL TO LOOK AT THIS MEDAL, GUS, MAYOR GARCIA BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT YOU GET FOR EXCELING AND COMING IN FROM A SCHOOL THAT DID NOT ALLOW HIM TO EXCEL BECAUSE OF NEGATIVE INTERACTION WITH A TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL. BUT ANYWAY I'M NOT HEAR TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT. I'M HERE TO SPEAK TO WHATEVER TERMINOLOGY YOU USE NOW IN THE BUDGET AT THIS MOMENT. WE HAD AN ARTICLE IN THE PAPER STATE THAT PRELIMINARY CUTS IN YOUTH ACTIVITY PROGRAMS, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO BELIEVE ANYTHING UNTIL I SEE IT IN THE PAPER AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT BUT I WILL TELL YOU THIS MUCH, THAT IT'S NOT A PRETTY DAY FOR CUTS ON SENIOR CITIZEN OR YOUTH ACTIVITY PROGRAMS. IF I HAVE TO WE'LL FILL THIS PLACE UP. WHENEVER WE HAVE THE BUDGET HEARINGS BECAUSE WE HAVE ABOUT 4,062 MEMBERS JUST IN EACH. FORGET ABOUT THE RAINBOW COALITION WITH 3,462. WE CAN OVERFLOW THIS PLACE BUT ONE THING WE KNOW IS THIS. IF YOU CUT ANY KIND OF YOUTH PROGRAMS OR ANY KIND OF PROGRAMS THAT WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT THE YOUTH, THEY ARE GOING TO HANG OUT. THEY ARE GOING TO BECOME LATCH KEY KIDS, THEY ARE GOING TO BECOME LIKE THEY DID IN 1994. YOU REMEMBER WHEN THEY HELPED BOTH THE GANGS. WE WERE ACTIVE, VERY ACTIVE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, SO ACTIVE THAT WE WERE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT. BUT ANYWAY, AISB IS PROPOSING TO CUT THE INITIATIVES. I AM ON THE DROPOUT PREVENTION REDUCTION TASK FORCE. WE IN THE COMMUNITY, AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ARE WORKING CURRENTLY WITH 250 STUDENTS FROM JOHNSTON, REAGAN AND LBJ WHO ARE START INNING NINTH GRADE AND MENTORING, TUTORING ALL THE WAY THROUGH TWELFTH GRADE GRADUATION. I AM A DROPOUT. I DROPPED OUT IN 1969. I CAM BACK BECAUSE I HAD A GOOD PRINCIPAL, MR. GORDON BAILEY, MAY HE REST IN PEACE, WHO GAVE ME WHAT I WANTED AND CONTINUED TO GRADUATE. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO CUT ANY KIND OF PROGRAMS THAT WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE YOUTH, AND ALSO I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THIS, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, THAT GANGS ARE COMING BACK UP. GANGS ARE COMING BACK UP AND THEY ARE SOLICITING MEMBERS AND MEMBERSHIP. YOU HAVE KIDS OUT, THERE YOUTH OUT THERE HANGING OUT IN THE STREETS. WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, GANG ACTIVITY'S GOING TO BE LOOKING MORE AND MORE BRIGHTER THAN JUST HANGING ON THE STREET. CAN'T DO THAT. TONIGHT WE'RE GOING TO ATTEND THE BUDGET HEARING AT THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD MEETING. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO TELL THEM TO SEND THE MESSAGE, THAT WE DO NOT CUT DROPOUT PREVENTION FUNDING. THAT IS A NO-NO. THE SENATOR, EVEN THE GOVERNOR, EVEN THE PRESIDENT STATED WE DON'T DO THAT. THAT IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. HERE AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN BUDGETARY PROCESS, LET'S THINK ABOUT KIDS, LET'S THINK ABOUT SENIOR CITIZENS, HOUSING, LET'S THINK ABOUT ALL THESE ISSUES THAT WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE OR A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE TAX BILLS OF THE CITIZENS AND THINK ABOUT CHILDREN LIKE LUCIO, MY BOY WHO HAS A FUTURE. AND I'LL LEAVE IT AT THIS. KISS YOUR CHILDREN. HUG YOUR CHILDREN. TELL YOUR CHILDREN THAT YOU LOVE THEM. BECAUSE YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE THEM TOMORROW. THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH.

MAYOR? I WANTED TO ALSO GIVE A QUICK THANKS TO MR. PENA. IF YOU'LL REMEMBER LAST MONTH OR SO WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF AN ISSUE WITH ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR THAT DID WORK ON A CITY PROJECT AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW, SOME HARD FEELINGS BETWEEN THAT ELECTRIC COMPANY AND THE LOCAL IBW AND MR. PENA STEPPED IN AND COORDINATED THE MEDIATION EFFORTS WITH THE LOCAL AFL-CIO OFFICER AND I THANK MR. PENA FOR THAT.

MAYOR?

COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

FOR ME TO STAY HERE, THAT LIGHT IS BLINDING ME. AND I WEAR GLASSES. SO I THOUGHT IT WAS MY GLASSES, BUT IT'S THE LIGHT.

THIS LIGHT RIGHT HERE?

THE BRIGHT LIGHT THERE.

WE'LL WORK ON IT RIGHT NOW. AND YOU'RE RIGHT. THAT'S LIKE HAVING SOMEONE'S BRIGHT LIGHT IN YOUR LIVING ROOM.

AFTER I LOOK AT THE LIGHT, I CAN'T SEE THE PEOPLE. THANK YOU.

JEANNE STARTZEL AND FOLLOWING THAT, LEE MANFORD. WELCOME.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, AND MAY I DON'T RECOGNIZE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JEANNE STARTZEL AND I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY, AUSTIN METRO MARKET AND I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE AUSTIN HUMAN HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ASSOCIATION TO PUT PEOPLE FIRST CAMPAIGN. SEVERAL OF MY COLLEAGUE RS HERE AS WELL TO TALK ABOUT THE STATE OF COMMUNITY HEALTH IN AUSTIN. MOST PEOPLE THINK THAT AUSTIN IS A HEALTHY CITY. WE HAVE MANY SMOKE-FREE RESTAURANTS, WE HAVE MANY PEOPLE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF OUR PARKS BY RUNNING, HIKING AND BIKING. THE HEALTH OF MOST OF THE COUNTY IS GOOD. HOWEVER ALL CITIZENS YOUNG AND OLD DO NOT SHARE THIS GOOD HEALTH EQUALLY. IN THREE MINUTES I CANNOT PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ON ALL THE HEALTH SDPEARTS AND THE POPULATIONS AFFECTED. SO I WILL FOCUS MY -- DISPARITYS. SO I WILL FOCUS MY COMMENTS ON THE ALARMING INCREASE OF OBESITY IN OUR CHILDREN WHICH WILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON OUR CITY IN THE FUTURE. MANY DISEASES SUCH AS CANCER, HEART DISEASE, AND DIABETES CAN BE PREVENTED BY CHANGES IN LIFESTYLE BEHAVIOR SUCH AS PROPER NUTRITION AND INCORPORATING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN DAILY LIFE BUT AS A NATION WE ARE GETTING FATTER AND THAT IS PARTICULARLY TRUE FOR OUR CHILDREN. WE HAVE A REPORT THAT WAS JUST PASSED OUT THAT I PUT TOGETHER. IN 1999 AND 2000, A PILOT STUDY OF THREE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS IN AUSTIN SHOW THAT THE INITIAL BODY MASS INDEX MEASUREMENTS RANKED AS OBESE 8% OF THE KINDERGARTENIERS, 16% OF OUR FIRST GRADERS AND 24% OF OUR SECOND GRADERS. ACCORDING TO THIS DATA, THE PREVALENCE OF OBESITY IN AUSTIN CHILDREN IS NEARLY DOUBLED THAT OF THE NATIONAL AVERAGE BY SECOND GRADE. THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS 13%, AND AUSTIN IS 24%. AS A RESULT OF THIS OBESITY, THE NUMBER OF NEW CASES OF TYPE II DIABETES MELLITUS IN CHILDREN IS INCREASING IN AN ALARMING RATE. DOWN IN SAN ANTONIO IN 1990, THEY JUST HAD ONE CASE REPORTED OF TYPE II DIABETES BUT IN 1997 THEY HAD 30 CASES. I'M SURE THAT THAT'S TRUE FOR AUSTIN. AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND HISPANICS ARE THE HARDEST HIT. THERE'S A HUGE ECONOMIC COST TO THE OBESITY EPIDEMIC. THE TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COST ATTRIBUTED TO OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY AMOUNT TO $117 BILLION IN THE U.S. IN THE YEAR 2000. AND THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION REPORT -- SURGEON GENERAL THATCHER DECLARED THAT AMERICA'S EPIDEMIC ON OBESITY HAS REACHED A POINT WHERE THAT'S EVENTUAL POUNDS MAY PASS CIGARETTES IN THE LEADING CAUSE OF PREVENTABLE DEATH. SO IN THE FUTURE HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR HEALTHCARE WHEN MANY OF OUR CHILDREN GROW UP AND GO INTO THE WORKFORCE THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE THE WORKFORCE EARLY DISABLED BY COMPLICATIONS OF DIABETES, CANCER, CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE, HEART DISEASE, AND STROKE. OBESE CHILDREN SUFFER BOTH PHYSICALLY AND EMOTIONALLY. YOUNG PEOPLE CAN BUILD HEALTHY BODIES AND ESTABLISH HEALTHY LIFESTYLES BY INCLUDING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN THEIR DAILY LIVES. HOWEVER, YOUNG PEOPLE ARE NOT PHYSICALLY ACTIVE ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY DECLINES A DRAMATICALLY AS CHILDREN GET OLDER. OUR SCHOOLS ARE ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE, HAVE INCREASED THE PHYSICAL ACTIVITY DURING THE DAY FOR ELEMENTARY KIDS. OUR SCHOOLS DO NOT NEED TO BE THE ONLY ONES TAKING ACTION. WE NEED TO EDUCATE OUR COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS ISSUE, WE NEED TO EDUCATE PARENTS ABOUT BEING GOOD ROLE MODELS, WE NEED TO PROVIDE LOW COST OPPORTUNITIES FOR CHILDREN TO PARTICIPATE IN SCHOOL AND SUMMER COMPETITIVE AND NONCOMPETITIVE ACTIVITIES AND PROVIDE SAFE PLACES FOR CHILDREN TO PLAY. A HEALTHY BODY MAKES A HEALTHY MIND. THIS LEADS TO A HEALTHY COMMUNITY AND FOR OUR CHILDREN, WE NEED TO TAKE ACTION NOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ONE QUICK QUESTION. I THINK THERE WAS A TEXAS LAW THAT WAS PASSED IN THE SPECIAL LEGISLATURE DEALING WITH.

YES, SENATE BILL 19 THAT REQUIRED THAT ALL ELEMENTARY KIDS GET 135 MINUTES OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY DURING THE WEEK.

DURING THE WEEK? WHEN IS THAT SUPPOSED TO BE IMPLEMENTED? THIS COMING YEAR?

YES. SO THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT ACTUALLY, I THINK AT THEIR LAST BOARD MEETING, VOTED ON A WAY TO ACTUALLY HAVE THAT ACCOMPLISHED, BUT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR A BETTER WAY TO DO IT SO THAT IT IS A VERY GOOD AND COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM. AND ALL THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE LOOKING AT THIS AS WELL, BUT OUR CHILDREN ALSO, OUR PARENTS NEED TO BE AWARE OF THIS IN GETTING KIDS ACTIVE AND FEEDING THEM THE RIGHT FOODS AND I THINK OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS TO KNOW THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE AND IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE HEALTH OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN THE FUTURE AND SOME OF THESE PEOPLE ARE ALSO GOING TO BE IN THE PUBLIC HEALTHCARE SYSTEM. SO IT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON OUR CITY IN THE FUTURE.

Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT 1980 PERIOD THAT CAUSED IT TO START GOING UP?

WELL, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY FOR SURE. I CAN'T TELL YOU. I KNOW WHEN I WENT TO SCHOOL, I HAD PE EVERY DAY. AND IN THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT WHERE MY DAUGHTER GOES, AND SHE WAS IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, SHE HAD IT EVERY THIRD DAY AND SO IT WAS EVERY -- SO EVERY OTHER WEEK IT WAS JUST ONE DAY A WEEK. BUT I THINK ALSO THE FACT OF THERE'S MORE KIDS ARE EATING FAST FOOD AND PROCESSED FOOD. I MEAN, THERE'S SOME ISSUES GOING ON IN OUR SOCIETY THAT REALLY NEED TO BE CHANGED AND WE NEED TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT THAT.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: LEE MANFORD. FOLLOWING MR. MANFORD, ALICE WILSON.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, KMEBS, I'M LEE MANFORD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SERVICES OF AUSTIN. I'M ALSO HERE REPRESENTING THE AUSTIN AREA HUMAN SERVICES ASSOCIATION AS PART OF THE "PUT PEOPLE FIRST" CAMPAIGN. TODAY, JUNE 27th, IS NATIONAL HIV TESTING DAY. FOR THE ESTIMATED QUARTER OF A MILLION AMERICANS WHO ARE INFECTED WITH HIV BUT NOT AWARE OF IT, KNOWLEDGE CAN SAVE THEIR LIVES. WHILE WE'VE MADE TREMENDOUS STRIDES IN TREATING HIV DISEASE AND RELATED ILLNESSS, THOSE ADVANCES ARE NOT A CURE AND MEAN LITTLE TO SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT KNOW THAT THEY ARE INFECTED. FOR TOO MANY PEOPLE STILL LEARN THAT THEY HAVE HIV QUITE LATE IN THEIR INFECTION, OFTEN THROUGH SEEKING MEDICAL CARE IN THE EMERGENCY ROOM. THUS MISSING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EARLY CARE AND TREATMENT. MORE THAN TWENTY YEARS INTO THE EPIDEMIC, THIS SHOULD NOT STILL BE HAPPENING. IN 1995 THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR PEOPLE WITH AIDS LAUNCHED NATIONAL TESTING DAY AS A WAY TO REACH MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AT RISK WITH THE SIMPLE MESSAGE: TAKE THE TEST; TAKE CONTROL. PERSONS LIVING WITH AIDS KNOW FROM FIRSTHAND EXPERIENCE7 ? THAT KNOWING YOUR HIV STATUS IS AN ESSENTIAL STEP IN TAKING CONTROL OF YOUR HEALTH AND CONTROL OF YOUR LIFE. PEOPLE UNDER 25 MAKE UP HALF OF ALL NEW HIV INFECTIONS. HIV REMAINS THE LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE. THE IMPACT OF THE AIDS EPIDEMIC CONTINUES TO GROW WITH THE PROPORTIONATELY HIGH RATES OF INFECTION IN THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY. AIDS DEATHS REMAIN NEARLY TEN TIMES HIGHER AMONG AFRICAN-AMERICANS THAN AMONG WHITES AND IS THE LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH AMONG AFRICAN-AMERICANS BETWEEN THE AGES OF 25 AND 44. LATINOS NOW COMPRISE THE LARGEST AND FASTEST GROWING ETHIC MINORITY GROUP IN THE UNITED STATES. WHILE REPRESENTING 13% OF THE TOTAL U.S. POPULATION, LATINOS ACCOUNT FOR 18% OF ALL AIDS CASES. LATINOS ACCOUNT FOR 20% OF INFECTIONS AMONG FEMALES. HIV AND AIDS IS HAVING A GROWING IMPACT ON WOMEN. SINCE 1985 THE PROPORTION OF AIDS CASES IN THE U.S. REPORTED IN WOMEN HAS INCREASED FROM 7% TO 25%. FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE AIDS EPIDEMIC IN THIS COUNTRY, THE MOST DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT HAS OCCURRED AMONG MEN WHO HAVE SEX WITH MEN. DESPITE SIGNIFICANT DECLINES IN HEALTH INFECTION RATES AMONG MEN WHO HAVE SEX WITH MEN, THEY ACCOUNT FOR MORE THAN 40% OF NEW INFECTION IN THE UNITED STATES. WITH THE WORLD'S ATTENTION FOCUSED ON THE GLOBAL AIDS EPIDEMIC AS IT SHOULD BE, WE MUST ALSO RETAIN OUR FOCUS ON THE IMPACT OF AIDS IN OUR OWN COMMUNITY. IT'S ESTIMATED THAT BETWEEN 5,000 AND 6,000 INDIVIDUALS ARE CURRENTLY LIVING WITH F IV IN THE AUSTIN AREA. OF THOSE, IT'S ESTIMATED THAT AS MANY AS ONE THIRD, BETWEEN 1700 AND 2,000 OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS DO NOT KNOW THEIR HIV STATUS. TODAY AIDS SERVICES OF AUSTIN TCARE PROGRAM OF MHMR AND THE COMMUNICABLE DISEASE UNIT OF AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES HAVE JOINED TOGETHER TO PROMOTE NATIONAL HIV TESTING DAY IN AUSTIN AND TO GET PEOPLE OUT TO GET TESTED. THEY HAVE BEEN OFFERING TESTING AT THE ROSEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, RIVERSIDE, AND THIS AFTERNOON IN PEACE PARK AT 12th AND LAMAR. IN ADDITION TO HIV SCREENING THEY ARE OFFERING HEPATITIS C SCREENING, BLOOD PRESSURE, AND GLUCOSE CHECKS. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. TAKE THE TEST; TAKE CONTROL. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MR. MANFORD. MS. ALICE WILSON AND FOLLOWING MS. WILSON IS GAVINO FERNANDEZ.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, KMEBS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. MY NAME IS ALICE WILSON AND I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE BREAST CANCER RESOURCE CENTER OF AUSTIN, AND I'M ALSO HERE REPRESENTING THE AUSTIN AREA HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ASSOCIATION TO PUT PEOPLE FIRST" CAMPAIGN. MY LITTLE SECTION THAT I'M GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT CONCERNS WOMEN WHO HAVE HAD BREAST CANCER. THE COLEMAN FOUNDATION FUNDED A -- KOME N FUNCTION STUDIED AN AREA TO DRY TO ADDRESS THE LARGE PROGRAM THAT EVERYONE RECOGNIZES ON A NATIONAL LEVEL, WHICH IS THAT WOMEN WHO ARE HISPANIC AND WHO ARE AFRICAN-AMERICAN HAVE A LOWER LEVEL OF BEING DIAGNOSED WITH BREAST CANCER BUT A MUCH HIGHER LEVEL OF DYING FROM BREAST CANCER. SO THE ISSUES THAT WE WERE TRYING TO ADDRESS IS, WHY IS THIS THE CASE? AND THIS, THE KOMEN STUDY DREW HEAVILY ON STATISTICS AND SOME REAL HELP FROM THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY AND WHAT THEY PUT TOGETHER BOILED DOWN TO THIS FOR OUR COMMUNITY. IT LOOKS LIKE THAT WOMEN WHO ARE DIAGNOSED FROM THOSE MINORITY COMMUNITIES OFTEN LACK TRANSPORTATION IN ORDER TO GET TO THE FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE FOR THEM. SO TRANSPORTATION IS A HUGE ISSUE. ONE OF THE REASONS IS WE KNOW THIS FIRSTHAND. THE BREAST CANCER RESOURCE CENTER GOES TO BRECKENRIDGE'S NINTH FLOOR BREAST CLEN CLINIC AND WE WORK WITH THE WOMEN WHO ARE THERE. THE SITUATION THERE IS THAT A WOMAN IS CALLED IN AND SHE MAY HAVE A WAIT THAT IS MANY, MANY HOURS IN DURATION, AND SHE HAS NO IDEA FROM HER APPOINTMENT TIME TO WHEN SHE WOULD BE EVEN PICKED UP. SO SHE REALLY CAN'T SCHEDULE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION EASILY. THERE NEEDS TO BE ANOTHER MECHANISM IN PLACE FOR PEOPLE WITH THESE SEVERE DISEASE PROBLEMS WHERE THEY CAN GET A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY IN THE SCHEDULING OF THEIR TRANSPORTATION. ANOTHER HUGE ISSUE IS DAY CARE. MANY OF THE WOMEN WE SEE ARE GRANDPARENTS TAKING CARE OF CHILDREN FOR THEIR FAMILIES, AND THERE WAS ONE GRANDMOTHER WHO CAME INTO OUR OFFICE, HAVING JUST BEEN DIAGNOSED ON THE NINTH FLOOR, AND THEY COULDN'T TALK TO HER AND CONVINCE HER. SO THEY ASKED US, AND WE EXPLAINED TO HER AGAIN WHAT HER DIAGNOSIS WAS, AND SHE SAID, "NO, I CAN'T HAVE BREAST CANCER. I CARE FOR THE FOUR CHILDREN IN OUR FAMILY." AND SHE STARTED TO WALK OUT THE DOOR. THIS IS A PERCEIVED PROBLEM THAT WOMEN HAVE THAT EVEN KEEPS THEM FROM ENTERING INTO THE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT STEPS THAT ARE NECESSARY. SO THIS IS AN AREA THAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE FOR YOU TO ADDRESS AND LOOK CAREFULLY AT, GETTING SOME MORE FLEXIBILITY INTO TRANSPORTATION AND ALSO LOOKING AT SOME RESOURCES FOR DAY CARE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MS. WILSON. MR. GAVINO FERNANDEZ AND FOLLOWING MR. FERNANDEZ, MS. SUSANA ALMANZA. MR. FERNANDEZ, WELCOME, SIR.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS GAVINO FERNANDEZ, AND I COME TO YOU ASKING FOR ASSISTANCE IN REGARDS TO THE GROWING CONCERNS OF SAFETY IN OR AROUND THE PALM PARK. WE HAVE NOTICED AND RECEIVED MANY CALLS FROM HOMEOWNERS THAT LIVE ON 3rd STREET, AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AREA THAT UTILIZE THE PALM PARK, AND WE HAVE JUST LEARNED THAT THE DISTRIBUTION THAT USED TO BE DONE UNDER THE I H-35 BRIDGE IS NOW DISTRIBUTING COMMODITIES AT PALM PARK ON SUNDAYS. I WENT OUT THERE. THERE'S OVER 200 PEOPLE. NO REST ROOMS. THEY HAD MUSIC, NO SOUND PERMIT. BUT EVEN MORE UNFORTUNATE, NO ENFORCEMENT. NO ENFORCEMENT AT ANY PARK CURFEWS OR ANY POLICIES THAT ARE IN PLACE IN REGARDS TO PARKS AND RECREATION. I PERSONALLY WORKED FOR PARKS OVER 15 YEARS AND SO I'M FAMILIAR WITH THOSE TYPE OF ENFORCEMENTS THAT ARE IN PLACE, AND WE WANT TO -- WE'RE COMING TO YOU AND ASKING YOU FOR ASSISTANCE AND ALSO TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF PALM PARK. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? MAYOR, IT'S BEEN SINCE '94 WHEN WE JOINED WITH THE CITY AT THAT TIME TO PROVIDE SECURITY SO THAT -- BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP THE BATTLE FOR USERS OF PALM PARK. I MEAN, IT'S A UNIQUE POOL RIGHT SMACK IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY. AND PEOPLE CONTINUE TO USE IT. BUT THERE HAS BEEN NO COMMUNICATION. GUS PENA TALKED ABOUT CUTTING PROGRAMS. OUR PROGRAM WAS CUT THIS SUMMER. I CALLED MS. BARN HEART FROM THE RAINY DAY ASSOCIATION, FRANCIS MARTINA. NO ONE WAS INFORMED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO PLAYGROUND PROGRAM OR NO SWIMMING HOURS AT PALM PARK FOR THIS YEAR. EVERY YEAR WE'VE HAD TO STRUGGLE IN TRYING TO KEEP PALM PARK ALIVE AND USABLE FOR THE -- FOR OUR FAMILIES. WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF FUNDING TO UPGRADE PALM PARK OR YOU PUT ON THE AGENDA INITIAL, WHAT IS IT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH PALM PARK AND PALM POOL. WE WILL BE GOING BEFORE THE PARKS BOARDS COMMISSION TO HOPEFULLY COME UP WITH SOME SOLUTION AND SOME FUNDING. MAYBE WE CAN ASK FOR FEDERAL FUNDING IF FOR SOME REASON, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T DESERVE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS TO ADDRESS THIS ONE ISSUE. WE ALSO LISTEN TO THE ISSUE OF EXERCISE AND THE LACK OF IT IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS. AGAIN, THIS IS THE PART THAT WOULD PROVIDE THAT OPPORTUNITY, BUT THERE IS NO ASSISTANCE. SO WE'RE ASKING YOU TO WORK WITH US AND HOPEFULLY ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF THE SAFETY OF PALM PARK AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH PALM POOL. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MR. FERNANDEZ. MS. SUSANA ALMANZA. WELCOME. FOLLOWING MS. ALMANZA IS MR. DAVID L DUKES.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. I'D LIKE TO GIVE MY CONDOLENCES TO THE FAMILY OF MS. KING, HER FAMILY MEMBERS OR FRIENDS AND THE COMMUNITY AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A REQUEST THAT THE AUSTIN POLICE ASSOCIATION SET UP A FUND TO ASSIST THE FAMILY IN RAISING THE TWO CHILDREN THAT SHE LEFT BEHIND. I THINK THAT THIS IS ONLY RIGHT AND JUST FOR THE POLICE ASSOCIATION TO ASSIST THAT FAMILY AND SO I MAKE THAT REQUEST AND INVITE EVERYONE OUT TO THE TOWN HALL MEETING TONIGHT AT 6:30 AT KEELING JUNIOR HIGH AT 1607 PENNSYLVANIA DRIVE. ALSO MY SECOND CONCERN IS THE WHOLE ISSUE OF THE TANK FARM. IN FEBRUARY WE REQUESTED THAT THE TANK FARM ISSUE BE TAKEN OUT OF THE MLK PLAN BECAUSE THAT WAS THE END OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE MLK PLAN AND THE VALLEY AREA HAD BEEN HEAVILY INVOLVED IN THAT PLAN SINCE THE EARLY NINETIES. LOW AND BEHOLD THE BALLOT HAS BEEN SENT OUT TO THE MLK RESIDENTS AND ACTION 54 IS ACTUALLY REZONING THE TANK FARM AREA TO NEIGHBORHOOD URBAN CENTER. AND YOU KNOW WE HAD A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THAT WHOLE DESIGNATION IN THE CHAVEZ PLAN WITH THE HEIGHT REGULATIONS AND SO FORTH. YET, HERE IT IS, WE BEGIN. WE HAD TWO MEETINGS WITH WE TOOK OUT THE TANK FARM TO LOOK AT IT IN COMBINATION WITH MLK RESIDENTS AND THE VALLEY RESIDENTS AND NOW IT'S GOING TO BE COMING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE REZONING AS A NEIGHBORHOOD URBAN CENTER. SO I ASK YOU TO REVISIT THAT AND TO TAKE THAT PLAN OUT UNTIL WE FINISH LOOKING AT THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. ALSO, TOO, I'D LIKE TO ASK MAYOR GARCIA TO WRITE A LETTER TO THE SCHOOL BOARDMEMBERS ASKING THAT THEY NOT TAKE -- USE ANY OF THEIR MONEY FOR THE DROP HOUSE PREVENTION PROGRAM, THAT THEY KEEP THAT FUNDING IN. I WANT TO THANK THE MAYOR OF THIS EDUCATION TASK FORCE AND THE WORK THAT THEY DID. BUT I THINK IT'S UNJUST, ESPECIALLY HEARING THAT AUSTIN HAS THE HIGHEST AMOUNT OF LATINO DROPOUTS IN THE WHOLE STATE OF TEXAS. THAT SENDS AN ALARMING MESSAGE TO EVERYONE. AND THEN YOU HAVE THEM THREATENING TO GET THAT BUDGET -- YOU KNOW, LESSEN THAT BUDGET FOR THE DROPOUT PREVENTION. I THINK THAT'S VERY SCARY WHAT'S HAPPENING. I BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN'T SEND THIS, I'LL DO THIS MYSELF. I THINK THE DOCTOR DOESN'T DESERVE ALL THE MONEY AND THE RAISE THAT SHE'S BEEN GETTING. WHEN I SEE THAT DROPOUT THAT'S HAPPENING AND THE SPECIAL ED FOR THOSE THAT DON'T SPEAK ENGLISH, I DON'T THINK THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE DOCTOR DESERVE THE MONEY THAT THEY ARE GETTING AND IT SHOULD BE BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT THEY ARE NOT LETTING DROP OUT OF THE WHOLE WHOLE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND NOT JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN THERE. WE HAVE A CRISIS IN THE EDUCATION SYSTEM AND IT'S NOT GETTING ANY BETTER AND SO I WANT TO THANK Y'ALL FOR LISTENING TO ME BUT HONESTLY TO FOLLOW UP ON THE TANK FARM ISSUE AND ALSO THE EDUCATION ISSUE. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: INC. YOU READ IN THE PAPER ABOUT THAT LETTER, AND I WILL BE FOLLOWING UP ON THAT.

THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: MR. DAVID DUKES AND FOLLOWING MR. DUKES IS MR. CLINT SMITH. WELCOME, SIR.

THANK YOU. CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR. FIRST OF ALL, MY NAME IS DAVID DUKES. [ INAUDIBLE ] I HAVE A PROGRAM. I'D LIKE TO MENTION THAT I'M NOT A SELF-RIGHTEOUS INDIVIDUAL. THERE IS SOMETHING THAT TURNS MY ATTENTION WHEN I GIVE THIS TO YOU WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND I NOTICE THAT DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY COUNCIL CONFIRM. [ INAUDIBLE ]

THE AUSTIN PUBLIC LIBRARY HAS MADE AVAILABLE RATED R INDIVIDUAL I DON'T SEES FOR -- VIDEOS TO BE CHECKED OUT WITH YOUR CHILDREN'S LIBRARY CARDS, SEX SCENES WITH MEN WITH MEN, WOMEN WITH WOMEN, FORNICATION, PROFANITY. ALSO IN SOME BOOKS. THE MATERIALS THAT APPARENTLY THE COMMITTEES HAD OKAYED. AMERICANS CANNOT AFFORD THE GOD-GIVEN STANDARDS OF MORALITY, DECENCY, AUTHORITY TO BE CORRUPTED UNDER THE GUISE OF FREE SPEECH. SIN IS NOT RIGHT. IT IS WRONG. IN THE INCEPTION OF THIS GREAT NATION, THE CHURCH WAS THE PUBLIC SCHOOL. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS ARE THE STANDARDS ON WHICH OUR MORAL LAWS REST. THE BIBLE SAYS BLESSED IS A NATION WHOSE GOD IS THE LORD. AND PROVERBS 13:34. DON'T WE HAVE ENOUGH SEX SHOPS, STRIP JOINTS, PORNO SHOWS, INTERNET IMPORTANT, MOVIES, TV SHOWS, SEXUAL:a INNUENDOS, BOOKS AND HOW-TO MANUALS, PLANNED PARENTHOOD AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS TEACHING OUR CHILDREN HOW TO HAVE SEX WITH CANDY FLAVORS AND MULTICOLORED CONDOMS. THIS IS ONE THING THAT WE NEED TO COME BACK TO REALIZE. THE WORD CENSOR MEANS RULES, AND THERE ARE RULES THAT ARE IN PLACE BY PARENTS, DOCTORS, EMPLOYEES, TEACHERS, PREACHERS, BUILDERS, AND ARCHITECTS AND WE SHOULD ALSO2[N LOOK UP THE PROBLEM IN THE LIBRARIES WHERE THE PEOPLE WHO SEE PORNOGRAPHIC MATERIALS CAN BE SEEN FROM UNDERNEATH THE DESK FROM ACROSS THE ROOM. I APPRECIATE ANYTHING THAT COULD BE DONE IN REGARDS TO THIS MATTER BECAUSE I'M IN MINISTRY AND I'VE BEEN IN MINISTRY FOR OVER 24 YEARS AND I DO WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH PEOPLE, OF ALL KINDS OF BACKGROUNDS. I'VE SPENT HOURS AND HOURS WORKING WITH PEOPLE ON DRUGS AND HAVE ALL KINDS OF PROBLEMS, AND I APPRECIATE ANYTHING THAT COULD BE DONE TO HELP ALLEVIATE THIS SITUATION AT THE PUBLIC LIBRARIES. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MR. DUKES. COUNCILMEMBER?

ON THESE COMPLAINTS WITH THE PARTICULAR LIBRARIES, I WOULD ASK A QUESTION ON COMPLAINTS. I'LL ASK THE CITY MANAGER TO GET WITH YOU, SOMEONE TO GET WITH YOU TODAY BEFORE YOU LEAVE SO YOU CAN INQUIRE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THAT.

SURE.

SINCE YOU SAID THE PARTICULAR LIBRARY'S NAME.

RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, SIR.

Mayor Garcia: MR. CLINT SMITH. WELCOME, SIR.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR. MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS, CITY MANAGER, STAFF. I'M CLINT SMITH AND I'M HERE, FIRST OFF WE WANT TO TELL YOU THAT WE DO SUPPORT THE TOUGH JOB YOU HAVE TO DO AND WANT TO BE ABLE TO HELP WHEN WE CAN AS WE LOOK AT BUDGET MATTERS AND OF COURSE, WE DO HAVE A MEETING WITH YOU. THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE ON JULY 9th. ALSO, I WANT TO MENTION THAT CHARLOTTE FLYNN ASKED ME TO REMIND YOU, MAYOR, THAT WE ARE STILL LOOKING FORWARD THAT TA.... TA -- LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT KEG OF GERMAN PRODUCT THAT YOU PROMISED TO BRING BACK FOR US. SOME OF US ARE QUITE CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEED TO LOSE WEIGHT AND HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT SEVERAL TIMES, BUT WE DID WANT TO REMIND YOU OF THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THIS. WE HAVE A PRESENTATION TO MAKE AND I'D LIKE TO SAVE MY TIME TO FOLLOW A PANTHER MEMBER, MY FELLOW BROTHER PANTHER PAUL ROBBINS.

MAYOR, COUNCIL, I'M PAUL ROBBINS. I'M A CONSUMER AND ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATE. THE CITY IS IN A BUDGET SHORTFALL DUE TO THE RECESSION WITH THE LIKELIHOOD OF REDUCED SERVICES, INCREASED TAX COLLECTIONS, AND EMPLOYEE LAYOFFS. SO I'M HERE TO POSE THE QUESTION OF WHY THE CITY IS IN THE SITUATION, IN THIS SITUATION, WHILE IT HAS $100, MEAB $300 MILLION IN THE BANK. -- TO EXPLAIN ON THE 12th OF NOVEMBER 1996, THE COUNTY VOTED TO DECREASE ELECTRIC COSTS IN THE CITY'S ELECTRIC UTILITY WHILE KEEPING RATES THE SAME. THIS MONEY WAS INTENDED TO BUY DOWN THE ELECTRIC UTILITY DEBT AND LOWER RATES. PART OF THIS OVERT COLLECTION HAS GONE INTO A, QUOTE, DEBT FUND, AND ACCORDING TO A LETTER FROM THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT'S VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE, THERE WILL BE $183 MILLION IN THIS FUND BY THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. THIS IS IN SPITE OF THE MONEY ALREADY EXPENDED FROM OVER COLLECTIONS. THE MONEY SPENT OR OBLIGATED TO BE SPENT ON OVERCOLLECTIONS IS ROUGHLY $231 MILLION AND HAS BEEN USED TO BUY MAJOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN EQUIPMENT LIKE POWER PLANTS AND ELECTRIC METERS WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL. SO BY THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR, THE UTILITY WILL HAVE OVERCOLLECTED $478 MILLION. FOR THE RECORD I THINK BUYING DOWN UTILITY DEBT IS A GOOD IDEA. s GOOD, IN FACT, I'D LIKE YOU TO DO IT. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THE CITY COULD DO TO LOWER ELECTRIC BILLS AS WELL SUCH AS ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAMS AND INSTALLING CO-GENERATION. THAT IS INCREASING MONEY TO DO THIS. BUT THESE THINGS ARE NOT BEING DONE, EITHER. CAN THIS MONEY BE USED TO ELIMINATE THE BUDGET SHORTFALL? I'M AWARE THAT THE CITY ATTEMPTS TO KEEP UTILITY FUNDS AND THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND SEPARATE. BUT IF THIS IS THE CASE, THEN COULDN'T ELECTRIC RATES BE USED TO MAKE UP FOR TAX REVENUE INCREASES? THAT WILL PROBABLY OCCUR IN THE NEAR FUTURE?

[ ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS ]

VERY GOOD.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL THE CITIZENS THAT SIGNED UP ON THE CITIZEN COMMUNICATION. LET ME SAY THAT USUALLY WE DON'T ALLOW REPLACEMENT OF ONE SPEAKER FOR ANOTHER, SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK, PLEASE VISIT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, SO THAT YOUR NAME CAN BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA ITSELF. WE NOW GO TO THE 2:00 P.M. TIME CERTAIN BOND SALE. AND THE FIRST ITEM IS TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF APPROXIMATELY $12,250,000, CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS. AND -- MR. BILL?

GOOD EVENING. I'M BILL NEWMAN. WE SERVE AS FINANCIAL ADVISOR TO THE CITY. MY PARTNER IS HANDING OUT A BRIEFING BOOK, IF YOU WOULD, OR A PRICING REPORT ON THESE TWO BOND SALES. I'LL WAIT UNTIL HE GETS THEM ALL PASSED OUT. JUST TO START WITH, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, THE PURPOSE OF THIS -- THESE BOND SALES WAS TO DO A REFINANCING ON A FINANCING WE DID SEVERAL YEARS AGO FOR ONE TEXAS CENTER. WHEN WE DID THAT FINANCING IT WAS DONE WITH TAX NOTES. THOSE TAX NOTES ONLY HAD A SEVEN-YEAR LIFE. WHEN WE DID THAT FINANCING IT WAS DONE ON A TAXABLE BASIS. OUR GOAL AT THAT POINT IN TIME IN KEEPING IT SO SHORT WAS TO BRING IT FORWARD AT A LATER TIME WHEN WE MIGHT HAVE THE BENEFIT, IF YOU WOULD, OF LOWER TAX EXEMPT RATES. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE. THE REASON WHY YOU HAVE TWO SALES IS BECAUSE THE LARGER SALE, THE $12,190,000 IS THE TAX RATE. WE COULD CARVE OUT PART OF THE BUILDING IF THAT WAS TAX EXEMPT, THE OTHER HAD TO REMAIN TAXABLE BECAUSE OF THE NON-TAX EXEMPT OCCUPANCY IN THE BUILDING. WITH THAT SAID I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH THE BOOK BRIEFLY. NUMBER 2 JUST-- PAGE NUMBER 2 JUST GIVE YOU FOR PURPOSES OF THE BOND SALE AND THE FACT THAT ONE IS TAXABLE AND ONE IS TAX EXEMPT. PAGE NUMBER 3 JUST SAYS WHO THE PARTICIPANTS ARE. I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE SOMEONE FROM THE CITY. THIS WAS A COMPETITIVE SALE. WE DID THIS BOND SALE ON INTERNET AS WE HAVE ALL YOUR COMPETITIVE SALES IN THE PAST. IF YOU LOOK ON PAGE 4, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE VISIBLE SUPPLY OF BONDS HAS INCREASED QUITE A BIT OVER THE PAST SEVERAL WEEKS. PART OF THAT IS THE REASON YOU'VE SEEN THE STOCK MARKET GO DOWN. THE STOCK MARKET GOES DOWN AND BOND PRICES IMPROVE AND WE DO A LOT BETTER OF BAD NEWS FOR THE STOCK MARKET IS GOOD NEWS FOR US BASICALLY. ON PAGE 5, THAT'S REALLY RECOGNIZING THE FACT THAT WE NOTICE YESTERDAY THE MARKETS WORLDWIDE CRUMBLED AND U.S. TREASURY BONDS SOARED AFTER WORLD COM ANNOUNCED THEY HAD LOST SO MUCH MONEY. IT DID HELP AT THE END OF THE DAY OUR BOND SALE. ON PAGE OF IT SHOWS YOU WHERE THE BOND MARKET HAS BEEN GOING. THAT TREND DOWNWARD REFLECTS BAD NEWS FOR THE STOCK MARKET, AN IMPROVEMENT IF YOU WOULD IN THE BOND MARKET. PAGE 7 IS YOUR MATURITY SCHEDULE. IF YOU'LL NOTE ON BOTH OF THESE THAT THERE WERE RELATIVELY SHORT AND THE RATES I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU IN A MINUTE WILL DEPICT THAT. WE'VE GOT EXCELLENT RATES ON BOTH THE TAX EXEMPT AND THE TAXABLE SALE. PAGE 8 THOSE SHOWS YOU WHO WE'RE COMPETING WITH IN THE MARKET TODAY, SEVERAL SALES ABOUT THE SAME SIZE AS US. A FEW I WOULD ADD THAT WERE AS WELL RECEIVED. ON THE 12-MILLION-DOLLAR 190,000-DOLLAR PUBLIC FUNDING BONDS WERKS GOT A TOTAL OF SIX BIDS. THE LOWEST BID CAME FROM AVIRON AMBRO. WE HAD A TOTAL OF 26. ON THE SMALLER TAXABLE SALE WE ALSO GOT SIX BIDS VIA THE INTERNET. THE LOW BID THERE WAS 448. AGAIN, BOTH SALES WERE VERY SHORT. THESE RATES WERE EXTREMELY LOW AND EXTREMELY COMPETITIVE. AS A MATTER OF COURSE WHEN THE CITY SELLS THEIR BONDS, ALTHOUGH THEIR DOUBLE A RATED, THEY'LL SELL LIKE A TRIPLE A SECURITY IN THE MARKET. WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

QUESTIONS FOR MR. NEWMAN? THE RATE ON THE LARGER BOND ISSUE WAS 4.3 AND THE TAX EXEMPT.

YES, SIR.

WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT THE TAXABLE? THE WINNING BIDDER WAS MARCH AND KEY BEGAN AND COMPANY AND THE WINNING BID WAS 448.

THIS IS NOT ONE WHERE WE WERE GOING TO LOOK AT PRESENT VALUES AND --

NO, SIR. THE PURPOSE OF THIS ONE WAS TO MARCH THE ASSETS AND LIABILITIES TOGETHER AND TO TAKE IT, IT WAS ALL TAXABLE BEFORE AND WE WANTED TO PUT SOME OF IT ON THE TAX EXEMPT SIDE AND PUT IT OUT. BUT THAT WAS NOT THE INTENT HERE.

Mayor Garcia: SO WHEN WE GO TO TAX EXEMPT, WE HEAR A LITTLE -- WE SAVE A LITTLE MONEY.

YES, SIR. IT WASN'T LEVEL OF SAVINGS THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT TO THE COMMON FUNDING BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF THE TRANSACTION.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. QUESTIONS, FURTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'LL SPRAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS SALE. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. DISCUSSION? THIS IS ON BOTH ITEMS NUMBER 13 FOR $12,250,000 AND NUMBER 14, WHICH IS FOR 2,510,000, WHICH IS TO FINANCE THE ONE TEXAS CENTER. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE? OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SIX TO ZERO TO ONE, WITH COUNCILMEMBER WYNN TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU AND CONGRATULATIONS ON A GOOD BOND.

Mayor Garcia: AT THIS TIME I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL SO THAT WE CAN CONSIDER ITEMS UNDER THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE AUSTIN AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.

SO MOVE, MAYOR.

Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED NO? MOTION CARRIES. THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL IS RECESSED AND AT THIS TIME I'LL CALL TO ORDER THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, AND WE HAVE MR. HILGERS HERE. DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A PRESENTATION, MR. HILGERS.

THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD MEMBERS. MY NAME IS PAUL HILGERS. TODAY I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION WITH FIVE ITEMS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. FIRST I'D ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION SPECIAL CALLED MEETING ON MAY 9TH, 2002.

Mayor Garcia: I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON AFHC-1? MOTION BY NEWLY ELECTED BOARD MEMBER DUNKERLEY. AND I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO. ITEM NUMBER 2?

THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. ITEM NUMBER 2 IS TO ADDRESS -- ACTUALLY, ITEMS 2 THROUGH 4 ARE ALL RELATED ITEMS AND I WILL BRIEFLY READ THROUGH WHAT THOSE ITEMS ARE. NUMBER 2 IS TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION OF THE LOAN IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $125,000 TO STASSNEY CROSSING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFINANCING THE ACQUISITION OF THE MORTGAGE PROPERTY LOCATED ON EACH SIDE OF NUCKOLS CROSSING ROAD KNOWN AS THE VIEWPOINT AT WILLIAMSON CREEK SUBDIVISION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 101 LOTS FOR SMART HOUSING SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. NUMBER 3 IS TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION OF A GUARANTEE AGREEMENT WITH LIBERTY BANK TO PARTIALLY GUARANTEE A LOAN IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1.7 MILLION BETWEEN LIBERTY BANK AND STASSNEY CROSSING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OF WHICH THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION WILL GUARANTEE NOT MORE THAN $700,000 FOR THE PURPOSES OF REFINANCING THE ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NUCKOLS CROSSING ROAD KNOWN AS THE VIEWPOINT AT WILLIAMSON SUBDIVISION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 101 LOTS FOR SMART HOUSING COMPLIANT SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THIS WILL WILL ASSIST THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION IN MEETING ITS GOAL OF CREATING OR RETAINING FIVE THOUSAND UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANNUALLY BY 2005.

...> MAYOR GARCIA: THIS SAYS FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFINANCING EXISTING LOANS.

YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT. AND WHAT WE ARE DOING ON ITEM NUMBER IT IS REFINANCING FROM A 10% LOAN TO A ZERO PERCENT INTEREST LOAN, WHICH THAT SAVINGS WILL BE USED TO ENHANCE THE AFFORDABILITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT. AND ITEM NUMBER 4, VERY TIM TO ITEM NUMBER 3, BUT IT IS AUTHORIZING THE NEGOTIATION WITH -- IT'S A THREE-PARTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, STASSNEY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND LIBERTY BANK. ITEM NUMBER HAD IS TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION TO GUARANTEE A LOAN IN THE AMOUNT OF NOT LESS THAN 1 POINT 'MILLION BETWEEN LIBERTY BANK AND STASSNEY CROSSING OF WHICH HOUSTON HOUSTON WILL GUARANTEE NOT MORE THAN SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY ON NUCKOLS CROSSING ROAD SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF ST. ELMO ROAD KNOWN AS VIEWPOINT AT WILLIAMSON CREEK SUBDIVISION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 101 LOTS FOR SMART HOUSING COMPLIANCE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.

Mayor Garcia: THAT'S THE PROPERTY MARKED WITH A RED ARROW?

YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR MR. HILGERS ON ITEMS AHFC 2, 3 AND 4? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN' MOTION FOR APPROVAL. SLUSH.

Dunkerley: SO MOVE.

Mayor Garcia: DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO. AND THE LAST ITEM IS AHFC FIVE IS TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO ELECT.

....ACKIE GOODMAN AS VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION FOR A PERIOD EXPIRING WITH HER CITY COUNCIL TERM. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO DO THAT. MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SLUSHER, SECONDED BY ME. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO AND CONGRATULATIONS TO VICE-PRESIDENT JACKIE GOODMAN. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.

Slusher: SUE MOVE.

Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER SLUSHER. I'LL SECOND THAT ITEM. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES. WE'RE ADJOURNED. AND I'LL CALL THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL BACK TO ORDER. AND WE ARE ON PAGE 5 UNDER THE PREVIEW OF ITEMS FOR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. CITY MANAGER? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING?

WELL, OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE JULY 11th, SO THERE'S NEAR TWO-WEEK HIATUS FROM THIS WEEK MEETING TO THE NEXT. AND I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS WILL BE THE SECOND READING FOR THE STRATUS PROPOSAL AND WE ALSO INTEND FOR THAT TO BE A TIME CERTAIN IN THE EVENING SO PEOPLE CAN GET DOWN HERE AND SHARE THEIR FEEDBACK WITH US PROBABLY AGAIN AT 5:45 ON JULY 11th.

Mayor Garcia: I HAVE ONE ITEM THAT I WILL -- THAT I WILL SPONSOR TOGETHER WITH MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLEY TO CREATE A COUNCIL MEETING ON HEALTH CARE ISSUES. COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLEY RECOMMENDED THAT WE CONSIDER THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE AND I THINK EVERYBODY AGREES IT'S A VERY GOOD RECOMMENDATION, SO I'LL HAVE THOSE ON THE AGENDA. I HAVE THAT ITEM ON THE AGENDA TOGETHER WITH THE SPONSORS, THE OTHER SPONSORS ON THE NEXT MEETING, WHICH WILL BE JULY THE 11TH. ARE WE APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TODAY? WE WILL HAVE APPOINTMENTS TO THE ORDINANCE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND OTHER COMMITTEES AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. NOW, THIS CREATES A LITTLE PROBLEM BECAUSE -- NO, WE HAVE ENOUGH MEETINGS OF THE ORDINANCE FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE NEXT MEETING? YES, WE DO. SO WE'LL HAVE A REALIGNMENT OF SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEETINGS AT THE -- COUNCIL COMMITTEES AT THE NEXT MEETING. ANY OTHER ITEM THAT COUNCILMEMBERS WANT TO ANNOUNCE FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING? IF NOT, WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS THE READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MS. BROWN?

BROWN: FIRST I'LL READ THE CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS.

Mayor Garcia: SORRY ABOUT THAT.

BROWN: ITEM NUMBER 18, THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR MINOR CHANGES TO THE APPLICATION. ITEM 38 HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO JULY 11th, 2002. ON ITEM 49, AFTER THE WORDS COLONY PARK, PLEASE INSERT THE WORD DRIVE, AND IT CONTINUES TO THE EAST AND WENT WOOD DRIVE TO THE WEST. FOR ITEM 50, DELETE AT 4705-4737 AND INSERT IN THE 4700 TO 4730 BLOCK OF TEEWOOD DRIVE. ITEM NUMBER 66 HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO JULY 11th, 2002. THAT'S TRUE ALSO OF ITEM 67 AND ITEM 80. UNDER ITEM 107, AFTER THE WORDS GENERALLY IN THE CIRCLE C AREA INSERT THE PROVISIONS OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WILL BE MODIFIED TO REMOVE THE POTENTIAL 380 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ALL REFERENCES IN THE RCA TO THE 380 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHOULD BE STRICKEN TO REFLECT THIS MODIFICATION.

Z-26 IS THE -- ON Z-28, NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT IS RINGWALL PARTNERS, I LIMITED, TED W. ROLLINS. THE AGENT IS JIM BENNETT. ON Z. 29, DELETE THE WORD END AFTER ZONING AND INSERT THE WORD TO FOR THE ZONING TO CS-CO. ON Z 31, WE'RE MAKING A SIMILAR CHANGE AFTER FAMILY RESIDENT DISTRICT, ZONING. DELETE THE WORD AND, INSERT THE WORD TO CS-CO. THE ITEMS PULLED ARE 16, 28, 54, 97, 98, 103, 104, 105.

Mayor Garcia: AND ALSO ITEM NUMBER 86 IS BEING PULLED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. 86.

BROWN: IN THE TIME CERTAIN ITEMS ARE THE FOUR P.M. ZONING. 5:30 PROCLAMATIONS AND MUSIC. 5:45, CIRCLE C LAND CORPORATION AND 6:00 O'CLOCK ARE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT ITEMS 1 14 WILL BE POSTPONED AS REQUESTED BY STAFF TO JULY 11th, 2002 AT SIX P.M. THE CONSENT AGENDA STARTS WITH ITEM 17. ITEM 18 HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA.

Mayor Garcia: SO THAT ONE WILL BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR REMOVAL?

BROWN: YES, SIR. ITEM 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29 SECOND AND THIRD READING, 30 SECOND READING, 31 SECOND AND THIRD READING, 32 THIRD READING --

Mayor Garcia: LET ME BRING YOU BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 30. DID YOU SAY THAT ITEM NUMBER 30 WAS GOING TO BE POSTPONED TO JULY THE 11th?

BROWN: I DON'T HAVE THAT, MAYOR. I HAD IT FOR SECOND READING.

Mayor Garcia: SECOND READING? OKAY. LET ME CALL MY STAFF AND MAKE SURE BECAUSE THEY HAVE A NOTE ON MY AGENDA.

MAYOR, THAT'S CORRECT. THERE'S A REQUEST FROM THE AGENT TO CONSULT FOR POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 11th.

Mayor Garcia: SO THAT'S 28, 29 AND 30?

YES, MAYOR.

Mayor Garcia: SO THOSE ITEMS ARE POSTPONED UNTIL JULY THE 11th. SO WE'LL HAVE IT POSTPONED.

Brown: REPEATING THAT THEN, ITEMS 28, 29 AND 30 ARE POSTPONED TO JULY 11th, 2002. ITEM 31 IS FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING, 32 FOR THIRD READING.

Mayor Garcia: AND I HAVE MAY MY NOTES, MS. GLASGO, THAT THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST THE EIGHTH. 32. SO ITEM 32 IS POSTPONED AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TILL AUGUST THE EIGHTH. SO IT WOULD BE CONSENT FOR POSTPONEMENT.

Brown: 33 FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING, 34 FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING, 35, 36, 37, 38 FOR POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 11th, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49 WITH THE CHANGES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY READ INTO THE RECORD, 50 WITH THE CHANGES PREVIOUSLY READ INTO THE RECORD, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66 AS A POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 11th, 67 POSTPONED TO JULY 11th, 68, 69, 70,, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 POSTPONED TO JULY 11th,. 81,.

, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 9293, 94, 95, 96, 99, 100, 101 ARE BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS, WHICH I'LL READ INTO THE RECORD. FOR THE ARTS COMMISSION, THE FOLLOWING ARE ALL APPOINTMENTS. KATHLEEN HARMON BY THE MAYOR. GLORIA PENNING TON BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. MEL SEEINGER BY MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN. CHILD CARE COUNCIL, JOAN BURN HAM, REAPPOINTMENT, MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN. HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, THESE ARE ALL REAPPOINTMENTS AND THEY ARE ALL CONSENSUS APPOINTMENTS. JULIA BUNTON, JIM FOWLER, ELIZABETH GOINZ, LISA LACKEY. THERESA RABAGO.

LIBRARY COMMISSION, -- MAYOR'S COMMITTEE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, THESE ARE BOTH APPOINTMENTS AND THEY'RE BOTH MAYOR GARCIA. THERESA ESTROGAV AND DANIEL SERNA. PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD, THESE ARE ALL REAPPOINTMENTS. MARY RUTHHOLDER BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. MARY PRATT BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. PAUL VALDEZ, CONSENSUS. THE RENAISSANCE MARKET COMMISSION, PAUL FARMER IS A REAPPOINTMENT, CONSENSUS. URBAN FORESTRY BOARD, DAVID CATER, REAPPOINTMENT, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, URBAN RENEWAL BOARD, CHRISTINA VALDEZ, REAPPOINTMENT, MAYOR GARCIA. AND THEN WE HAVE TWO MORE ITEMS ON CONSENT. 102 AND 106.

Mayor Garcia: ALSO, ON ITEM NUMBER 31, MR. GARCIA, IF I READ THIS WRONG, THE FOLLOWING NEEDS TO BE ADDED AT THE END AND THAT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND APPLICANT AGREEMENT, THE DELETION OF THE 20% RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT APPROVED ON FIRST READING MUST BE READ INTO THE COUNCIL MOTION PRIOR TO SECOND AND THIRD READING APPROVAL. MR. GARCIA, CAN YOU GIVE THE CITY CLERK THE WORDING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED TO THAT PARTICULAR ITEM? WHAT ARE WE DOING SPECIFICALLY? WE'RE REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT THAT WE APPROVED ON FIRST READING?

YEAH, THE FIRST READING COUNCIL ASKED THAT THEY GO BACK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DISCUSS THE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT. THERE WAS A MUTUAL AGREEMENT TO DELETE THAT AND THEY'VE ENTERED INTO A PRIVATE AGREEMENT. AND WE BASICALLY HAVE TWO ORDINANCES FOR YOU TODAY. ONE IS THE ONE THAT YOU APPROVED ON FIRST READING THAT HAS THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE. WE HAVE ANOTHER ORDINANCE ALSO PREPARED THAT DELETES THAT REQUIREMENT. IF COUNCIL WISHES TO GO ALONG WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT'S AGREEMENT, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT'S YOUR DESIRE.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. ALL OF THE ITEMS DEALING WITH STRATUS, THOSE ARE ALL IN THE FOUR P.M. TIME CERTAIN. AND THE ONE MEETING WITH STRATUS WILL BE CONSIDERED AT 5:45, CORRECT?

THE ZONING ITEMS WE'LL ALSO TAKE UP THAT ARE RELATED TO THE STRATUS AT 5:45.

Goodman: MAYOR? COULD I SEND A TELEVISION MESSAGE TO MY PARKS BOARD REPRESENTATIVE THAT HER NAME WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ON HERE, BUT WE MISSED IT, BUT DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT, WE REAPPOINT YOU NEXT WEEK.

Mayor Garcia: ON THE 11th.... 11TH. OKAY. THAT PERSON WILL BE ON THE BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS ON THE 11th OF JULY. LET ME MAKE SURE THAT SOME OF YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON CONSENT, SO I'M GOING TO CALL YOU. MR. JEFF BENNETT SIGNED UP ON ITEM NUMBER 17.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M HERE TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE SELECTION PROCESS THAT WAS USED ON THIS PROJECT. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR I'M NOT HERE TO PROTEST OR TO CHANGE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT'S BEEN MADE TO JOURNEYMAN CONSTRUCTION. I'M HERE TO SPEAK FOR ALL THE CONTRACTORS THAT WORK FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN. AND OUR EXPECTATIONS THAT ALL PUBLIC BE DEALT WITH IN A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL MANNER. THE BID DOCUMENT SAID ALL RESPONSES ARE DUE PRIOR TO TWO P.M. AND IT ALSO READS THAT ALL RESPONSES AND COMPLIANCE PLANS NOT RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DATE AND TIME SET FORTH WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR CONSIDERATION. OUR EMPLOYEES WITNESSED THAT THE RECOMMENDED....CONTRACTOR SUBMITTED THEIR PROPOSAL AFTER TWO P.M. AND IT WAS REJECTED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF IN SUITE 1045 AND THE ENVELOPE WAS SET ASIDE UNOPENED. TODAY YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE THE AWARD FOR THIS PROJECT TO A JOURNEYMAN WAS CLEARLY NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES SET FORTH IN THE BIT DOCUMENTS. IN ADDITION, THE PERSONNEL WHO HAVE MADE THE RECOMMENDATION DID NOT FOLLOW THE PROCESS THAT THEY ESTABLISHED IN THOSE DOCUMENTS. I'M HERE TO I.. IMPLORE THAW AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH FUTURE CITY PROJECTS THAT THE INTEGRITY AND FAIRNESS ESTABLISHED IN THE BID DOCUMENTS IS FOLLOWED. IF NOT THESE ACTIONS PUT US ALL ON A SLIPPERY SLOPE WHERE THE RULES WE'RE ASKED TO PLAY BY ARE OPEN FOR INTERPRETATION AND THE FAIRNESS OF ALL BIDDERS IS SACRIFICED FOR THE BENEFIT OF A FEW ACCEPTING PROPOSALS FROM FIRMS THAT DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES IN MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS BY THIS COUNCIL KNOWING THE PROCESS WAS VIOLATED IS EXTREMELY UNFAIR TO OTHER PROPOSERS. FINALLY, I'M JUST HERE TO MAKE THE COUNCIL AWARE OF THIS PARTICULAR INDISCRETION AND ASK THAT THE CITY STEER CLEAR OF THESE SLIPPERY SLOPES IN THE FUTURE. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. ON ITEM NUMBER 22 MR. CHRIS RILEY.

WYNN: MAYOR? I'D LIKE TO ASK THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR OR MAYBE PURCHASING OR SOMETHING TO RESPOND TO THAT AND LET US KNOW IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION FROM THE STAFF'S PER.... PERSPECTIVE AS TO WHAT PARAMETERS WERE MET OR NOT MET.

MAYOR, COUNCIL, I'M SUE BRU....BRUBAKER I'M THE PURCHASING OFFICER. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A SITUATION THAT OCCURS WHEN YOU'RE USING MORE THAN ONE CLOCK. THE CLOCK THAT WAS THE OFFICIAL TIME CLOCK WAS NOT THE CLOCK THAT THE PERSON WHEN THEY RECEIVED THIS SAID TO THE PERSON THEY LAID THEIR BID ASIDE AND SAID THEY'RE LATE. THE PERSON WALKED TO THE DOOR, TURNED AROUND AND CAME BACK AND SAID, WHAT TIME IS IT? AND THEY SAID IT'S ONE MINUTE AFTER OR IT'S 2:00 O'CLOCK, WHATEVER IT WAS. THE OFFICIAL TIME WAS NEVER STAMPED ON THAT BID. AND SO IT'S A SITUATION WHERE THE EMPLOYEE'S WATCH DID NOT COINCIDE WITH THE TIME OF THE TIME CLOCK. AND SO WHAT HAS BEEN INSTITUTED AS A RESULT OF THIS IS WHEN YOU TAKE A BID YOU STAMP IT IN, PERIOD. THAT IS THE OFFICIAL TIME CLOCK AND NOT A WRISTWATCH OR SOMEONE SAYING, WHEN I LOOKED AT IT, IT WAS 2:00 O'CLOCK OR 2:01. AND BECAUSE YOU HAVE A COMPLETE DISAGREEMENT OF TIME PIECES -- I LISTENED TO THE FACTS OF THIS AND SAID THIS BID SHOULD BE ACCEPTED. BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE OFFICIAL TIME CLOCK WAS NEVER USED TO VERIFY THAT IT WAS LATE OR NOT LATE. IT WAS AN EMPLOYEE'S TIME SAYING YOU'RE LATE BECAUSE I HAD ANNOUNCED THAT IT WAS LATE.

Wynn: AND HAVE YOU TAKEN STEPS TO CORRECT THE PROCEDURES?

YES, SIR. WE'VE CONFERRED WITH PUBLIC WORKS. THEY IMPLEMENTED NEW WRITTEN PROCEDURES THAT SAY WHEN A BID DOCUMENT COMES IN THAT EITHER THE BID ITSELF, DEPENDING ON THE THICKNESS OR A PIECE OF PAPER IN THAT TIME CLOCK IS STAMPED AND PUT IT ON THE FRONT OF THE BID, AND THAT WAY THE PERSON SEES YOU STAMP IT. THERE'S A DOCUMENT ON THE BID THAT SHOWS THE TIME AND IT'S ALL OFF OF THE SAME CLOCK.

Wynn: I'M AMAZED THAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING THAT BEFORE. OUR PURCHASING PROCEDURES ARE GENERALLY SO THOROUGH, WE DO SO MUCH OF THIS WEEK IN AND WEEK OUT THAT IT STRIKES ME AS REMARKABLE THAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING THAT ALREADY.

WE DO THAT IN MY OFFICE. THEY HADN'T BEEN DOING THAT OVER IN PUBLIC WORK AND I THINK IT'S LARGELY BEEN BECAUSE SO MANY OF THE BIDDERS ARE ALWAYS WAITING UNTIL THE VERY LAST MINUTE CHANGING THOSE NUMBERS. AND SO WHEN I TALKED WITH THE CONTRACT ADMINISTRATORS THEY SAID WE TRY TO GIVE THEM THAT LAST MINUTE TO CHANGE THE BID AND THEN WE ANNOUNCED TO THEM THAT THEY'RE TYING THIS UP AND I SAID THERE IN LIES THE CONFUSION BECAUSE YOU MAY NOT BE USING THE RIGHT TIME. THE ONLY WAY YOU KNOW IS IF YOU USE IT OFF THE CLOCK. I APOLOGIZE FOR THE CONFUSION OVER THIS.

Wynn: BUT YOU'VE LOOKED INTO THE FACTS OF THIS CASE AND YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT?

I AM.

Wynn: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

Mayor Garcia: COUNCILMEMBER. LET ME ASK THE CITY CLERK IF THAT'S ALL OF THE ITEMS --

Slusher: MAYOR, WE HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD.

Mayor Garcia: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

Slusher: ON 28 THAT WAS INADVERTENTLY PULLED, SO I WOULD PUT THAT BACK ON ON.

Mayor Garcia: WHICH ITEM WAS THAT?

SLUSHER: 28. AND THEN 54 MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED ON THAT.

Mayor Garcia: 28 HAS BEEN POSTPONED.

Slusher: THAT'S RIGHT, 28 WAS POSTPONED. BUT SOMEHOW IT'S DOWN THAT I WAS PULLING IT. 54 I WOULD PUT BACK ON. 98 I'LL PUT BACK ON. ONCE IT'S ON THE FLOOR I'D LIKE TO HAVE AN AMENDMENT ON THAT. AND I'LL PUT BACK ON 105.

Mayor Garcia: SO 54 IS BACK ON CONSENT. 98 AND 105 SLUSH AND WHEN THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE, IF YOU WOULD RECOGNIZE ME FOR AN AMENDMENT?

Mayor Garcia: I HAD 105 ON CONSENT. 104 IS -- I'LL HAVE 105 ALSO. SO 105 IS ON CONSENT. 105 R. 4 YOU WILL PUT --

SLUSHER: I WOULD STILL LIKE TO KEEP THAT OFF TOO. PLAYER......

Mayor Garcia: AND 103 ALSO? I MISSPOKE, THERE'S THREE -- PROBABLY THREE OTHER PEOPLE THAT -- AT LEAST THREE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE SIGNED UP ON ITEMS THAT WILL BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. CHRIS RILEY, IS HE HERE? HE SIGNED UP ON ITEM NUMBER 22 AND HE ASKED ME TO READ THE COMMENT THAT HE WROTE ON THE BACK OF THE CARD. IS THIS ANOTHER 42,000 IN LEGAL FEES TO TAKE PRIME DOWNTOWN PROPERTY OUT OF THE TAX BASE. WE CAN'T AFFORD IT. THERESA MITCHELL LACK. ARE YOU HERE? I SAW HER EARLIER HERE. SHE SIGNED UP ON ITEM NUMBER 26 AS BEING AGAINST. LET'S SEE, ITEM 54, LARRY HALLFORD. LARRY DIDN'T SIGN UP TO SPEAK? SOMEBODY SIGNED YOU UP, I GUESS. THAT'S RIGHT, YOU DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I GET IT. I'VE BEEN OUT TOO LONG. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET'S SEE IF I HAVE ANY OTHERS. WE'VE GOT SO MANY ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA IS THE BOTTOM LINE. ON ITEM NUMBER 105, MR. GAVINO HERNANDEZ AND SUSANA AL MAN DEZ.

GOOD EVENING. I BASICALLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS EFFORT IN BRINGING ALL THESE COMMISSIONS TOGETHER TO LOOK AT THESE HISTORICAL ZONING AND THE EFFECT IT'S HAVING IN THE COMMUNITY. ALSO, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT THIS AREA DOES HAVE PLANNING TEAMS IN PLACE AND THAT THEY BE INVOLVED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE IN THIS PROCESS. AND THAT WE ALSO LOOK AT CONSIDERING -- AS YOU KNOW, THE GOVALLE PLAN AND THE HOLLY PLANT PLANT, THEY STILL HAVE THE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES. AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN STILL HAS NOT ADDRESSED THE LI ZONING PROPERTIES THAT EXIST IN THAT PLANNING AREA. COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IS THAT TRUE THAT THOSE PROPERTIES HAVE STILL NOT BEEN ADDRESSED IN REGARDS TO THEIR ZONING?

Alvarez: THAT'S CORRECT. WE WERE GOING TO TRY TO ADDRESS THOSE. THE GOVALLE CHANGE IS DIFFICULT IN ZONING PROPERTIES WITH -- [ INAUDIBLE ]

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE. IF WE ARE BRINGING ALL THESE RESOURCES TOGETHER AT THIS TIME, MAYBE ADDRESS THOSE LI PROPERTIES AT THE SAME TIME SO THAT WE WON'T HAVE TO REPEAT THE PROCESS SINCE WE ARE HAVING ALL THESE COMMISSIONS COME TOGETHER AND LOOK AT THESE WITH THE HISTORICAL ZONING AND ALSO THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. SUSANNA ALMANZA?

MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ AND DANNY THOMAS AND YOU ALL FOR PUTTING THIS ISSUE TO THE FOREFRONT BECAUSE IT IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. IT IS ONE THAT IS CONSTANTLY DISPLACING OUR COMMUNITY AND I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT POLICIES THAT WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT RELOCATED FROM THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE WERE FORCED TO LIVE IN BY THE MASTER PLANS OF THE LATE 19 20'S. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO BE NOTIFIED WHEN THESE MEETINGS ARE OCCURRING SO THAT WE WOULD MAKE SURE AND HAVE GRASS ROOT COMMUNITY INPUT AND THE INPUT OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREAS TO ALSO GIVE RECOMMENDATIONS. SO I THANK YOU IN ADVANCE.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. THOSE ARE ALL THE SPEAKERS WE HAVE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OR DO WE HAVE A MOTION?

Thomas: I'LL BE WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION, BUT ON 105 I WOULD LIKE TO, IF I COULD, IF THEY COULD AMEND -- THERE'S SOME WORDING WE LEFT OUT ON THE NUMBER 4 WHERE PARAGRAPH 3 DOES NOT APPLY TO THE HISTORICAL ZONING CASES, I DO NEED TO ADD RIGHT AFTER WE DO ROBERTSON BROTHERS WAREHOUSE, 501 EAST I-35, AND THEN I NEED TO PUT THE EAST FROM 15,451st STREET AND THEN WE CAN CLOSE THAT OUT.

AND ALSO THE CONNELLY HOUSE, RIGHT?

Thomas: I READ THAT, MAYOR.

Goodman: THERE WAS SOME LANGUAGE THAT I THINK WAS MISINTERPRET AND SOME PEOPLE HAVE INTERPRETED THE MEANING TO BE A PROHIBITION OF MEMBERSHIP ON THIS TASKFORCE IF YOU DO NOT CURRENTLY LIVE IN EAST AUSTIN. AND I WANTED TO ASK THE SPONSORS IF THEY HAD EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT LANGUAGE THAT WAS CLEAR OR IF IT NEEDED CLARIFYING TODAY BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT BECAUSE IT IS NOT A PROHIBITION.

Alvarez: MAYOR PRO TEM, LET ME EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHAT 105 IS. BASICALLY THIS ITEM ESTABLISHES A TASKFORCE TO CONSIDER THE GENTRIFICATION IMPLICATIONS OF THE ZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES HISTORIC IN EAST AUSTIN. THAT WAS AN ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED ABOUT A MONTH AGO, MAYBE A LITTLE MORE. AND I KNOW THAT OUR STAFF HAS HAD HAS BEEN WORKING AT THAT ISSUE. SO REALLY THAT WAS A WAY OF US PUTTING THE HEADS TOGETHER OF VARIOUS SITD 17 REPRESENTATIVES ON THE -- CITIZEN REPRESENTATIVES ON THE DIFFERENT BOARDS THAT MIGHT HAVE PURVIEW OVER THIS KIND OF ISSUE. SO THE TASKFORCE WOULD BE COMPRISED OF TWO MEMBERS EACH OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION, HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. AND THE PART THAT THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS REFERENCING IS A STATEMENT THAT SAYS PRIMARY CONSIDERATION FOR MEMBERSHIP ON THE TASKFORCE SHALL BE GIVEN TO COMMISSION MEMBERS WHO RESIDE IN EAST AUSTIN. AND I JUST -- WHAT WE WERE INTENDING BY THAT LANGUAGE IS TO MAKE SURE IN MY HEAD THAT THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE MEMBER FROM EACH COMMISSION THAT RESIDES IN EAST AUSTIN. BUT SOMEHOW TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S A SERIOUS CONSIDERATION THAT'S GIVEN WHEN PICKING THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH OF THE COMMISSIONS, BUT IN MY POINT OF VIEW IT WASN'T EXCLUSIVE TO JUST PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN EAST AUSTIN, BUT I WANTED TO ASSURE OR SEND A MESSAGE TO THE BOARD AND THE COMMISSION THAT WE DO FEEL THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT EAST AUSTIN BE REPRESENTED IN THAT PROJECT.

Goodman: THANKS, COUNCILMEMBER. AND THE REASON I ASK, MAYOR, IS BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME ON THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WHO DO NOT CURRENTLY RESIDE IN EAST AUSTIN, BUT GREW UP THERE AND RETAIN THEIR TIES AND ARE VERY PROTECTIVE AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE.

Mayor Garcia: SURE. OKAY. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA?

Goodman: SORRY, MAYOR, THERE'S ONE MORE THING. ON ITEM NUMBER 106, THAT'S AN ITEM SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, WYNN AND MYSELF, AND THAT IS THE FREE SWIM DAY AT BARTON SPRINGS POOL, WHICH WE DIDN'T MANAGE TO GET INTO JUNE. NORMALLY WE DO THIS IN JUNE. SO WE'RE SAYING IN JUNE THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IT IN AUGUST.

Mayor Garcia: IT'S HOTTER IN AUGUST, SO IT'S BETTER.

Goodman: THAT WAS TRUE, BUT IT WAS TO COMMEMORATE A JUNE DAY. JUST SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS THE ANNUAL FREE SWIM DAY AT THE SPRINGS WILL HAPPEN, BUT IT WILL BE AUGUST THE 11th AND WE'LL HAVE A PROCLAMATION ON THAT DAY.

Mayor Garcia: SO GO OUT AND GET YOUR SWIM SUITS BEFORE AUGUST THE 11th, AND WE'LL SEE YOU ALL AT BARTON SPRINGS. YOU CAN GET IN FREE. COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

Alvarez: BACK TO ITEM 105. I DID WANT TO ADD ONE SENTENCE IF POSSIBLE IF THE COUNCIL FEELS IT'S APPROPRIATE. BUT UNDER THE BE IT RESOLVED SECTION UNDER PART 1 IT'S JUST TO ADD A STATEMENT AT THE END OF THAT PART THAT SAYS THE COUNCIL ENCOURAGES SPECIFIED COMMISSIONS TO MAKE THEIR APPOINTMENTS BY JULY 15TH, 2002 BECAUSE THIS SETS A DEADLINE OF SEPTEMBER 26TH FOR THEM TO REPORT BACK. AND I THINK THE ONLY ONE THAT MIGHT AFFECT WOULD BE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION TODAY AND TO MEET AT THE END OF EACH MONTH, SO IT MIGHT ANTICIPATE A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, BUT IF POSSIBLE TO DO THAT AND TO GO THROUGH THE NORMAL PROCESS. AND SO TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE'RE USING ON THESE ITEMS THAT WE'RE NOT KEEPING ALL THESE HISTORIC CASES ON HOLD FOR VERY LONG.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. DID YOU NOTE THAT CHANGE?

Alvarez: I'LL MAKE THAT AS AN AMENDMENT.

Mayor Garcia: IT'S JUST A CHANGE TO THE ACTUAL WORDING OF THE RESOLUTION.

Slusher: MAYOR?

Mayor Garcia: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

Slusher: COULD I BE SHOWN AS ABSTAINING ON ITEM 32.? THAT'S NEAR MY HOME. AND IS THERE A MOTION ON THE TABLE YET?

Mayor Garcia: NOT YET.

Slusher: I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THEN I HAVE AN AMENDMENT ONCE WE GET A SECOND.

Mayor Garcia: I'M NOT SURE YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION IF YOU'RE ABSTAINING ON AN ITEM.

Slusher: OKAY. I'LL WITHDRAW MY MOTION. THANK YOU FOR CATCHING ME ON THAT. I'M TRYING TO GET A MOTION ON THE TABLE.

Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY NEWLY ELECTED COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLEY. WE HAVEN'T GIVE GIVEN HER A HAND, HAVE WE? YOU GOT ONE ON THE 15TH, DIDN'T YOU, BETTY? [ APPLAUSE ] OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLEY. AND I'LL READ INTO THE RECORD AGAIN THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT ARE BEING CONSIDERED. ITEM NUMBER 17, ITEM NUMBER 18 IS TO POSTPONE INDEFINITELY. ITEMS 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29 AND 30 TO POSTPONE TO JULY THE 11th. ITEM NUMBER 31 WITH THE CHANGES THAT WE READ INTO THE RECORD THAT WILL BE GIVEN TO YOU BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT. ITEM NUMBER 32 POSTPONED BY APPLICANT UNTIL AUGUST THE EIGHTH. 33 SECOND AND THIRD READING, 34 SECOND AND THIRD READING, 35, 36, 37, 38 TO POSTPONE TO JULY THE 11th. 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49 WITH THE CHANGES THAT WERE READ INTO THE RECORD. 50 WITH THE CHANGES THAT WERE READ INTO THE RECORD ON THE CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS. 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67 -- THOSE TWO, 66 AND 67 CONSENT TO POSTPONE UNTIL JULY THE 11th. 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 TO POSTPONE TO JULY THE 11th OF '02. 81, 82, 83, 84 -- I'M GETTING AS FAST AS MAYOR WATSON HERE. IF I'M GOING TOO FAST, SLOW ME DOWN. 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99, 100, 101. AND THE LIST OF APPOINTEES HAS BEEN READ INTO THE RECORD. IT'S AVAILABLE FOR ANYBODY WHO HAS QUESTIONS OR WHO MAY WANT INFORMATION ON IT. 102, 105 AND 106. AND ALL THE OTHERS ARE TIME CERTAIN ITEMS. ALL RIGHT. ALL THE OTHERS ARE TIME CERTAIN ITEMS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS OR ZONING CASES HEARING HEARINGS OR STRATUS PROPERTY ITEMS. THERE'S BEEN A MOTION AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS AND COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLEY. FURTHER DISCUSSION?

Slusher: I HAVE AN AMENDMENT. ON 98. I WOULD LIKE -- THAT'S THE FUNDS FOR THE HYDRILLA CONTROL. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT THOSE FUNDS THAT THE CITY GETS WILL NOT BE USED FOR HERBICIDES, PUTTING HERBICIDES INTO LAKE AUSTIN. AND MS. McCLINTOCK IS AVAILABLE TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY, STAFF MEMBER?

YES, SIR. WHAT THIS RCA DOES IS ENABLE US TO GET MATCHING FUNDS FROM TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT. THE PLAN IS TO USE THAT MONEY TO BUY STERILE GRASS CARP TO PUT IN THE LAKE TO HELP US WITH HYDRILLA IF THE TRACKING STUDY THAT'S NOW BEING DONE IN LAKE AUSTIN IS SUCCESSFUL AND TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DECIDES TO APPROVE A PERMIT FOR THE STOCKING OF THOSE FISH. SO IT WOULD NOT BE USED FOR CHEMICAL CONTROL IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE USED FOR THE BIOLOGICAL CONTROL.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. MS. BROWN, HAVE YOU GOT THAT? OKAY. FURTHER DISCUSSION?

Alvarez: MAYOR? ON 105, WHICH IS THE TASKFORCE TO LOOK AT THE ZONING ISSUES, I HAD AN ISSUE FOR MS. FUTRELL. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN SPECIFIC CONTACT ALREADY IN TERMS OF WHO IS LOOKING AT THAT ISSUE OR IF FOLKS WANT NOTIFICATION OF THAT MEETING, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, BUT WE CAN DIRECT THEM TO ONE -- WHEN THE FIRST MEETING OF THAT TASKFORCE OCCURS SO THAT THEY CAN BE NOTICED TO THOSE INTERESTED PARTIES.

WE'LL LOOK FOR A MECHANISM TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS AWARE OF THE MEETING AND LOOK FOR A SPECIFIC CONTACT FOR YOU TO GIVE NAMES OR CONTACT TO FOR INFORMATION.

Alvarez: THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE?

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES. AND YOU'VE GOT THE ITEM THAT COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER IS ABSTAINING ON, ITEM NUMBER --

32.

Mayor Garcia: I'LL ALLOW A COUPLE OF MINUTES FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LEAVING THE CHAMBERS AT THIS TIME. I'LL GO BACK TO NUMBER 15, APPROVAL OF THE WORK....THE WORK SESSION MINUTES AND THE REGULAR SESSION MINUTES. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. AND I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SIX TO ZERO TO ONE, WITH COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER TEMPORARILY ABSENT. ITEM NUMBER 16, COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

Wynn: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO ACTUALLY FOLLOW-UP ON YOUR AGENDA QUESTION EARLIER IN THE WEEK, MAYOR. I JUST HAVE -- I'LL GIVE A QUICK SYNOPSIS OF WHAT THE PROCESS WAS,. WHETHER THEY'RE SOLICITED OR UNSOLICITED PROJECTS AND HOW THE COMMUNITY SORT OF KNEW ABOUT IT, HOW TO PRESENT IDEAS, ETCETERA.

COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, THE HOLLY MITIGATION --

Mayor Garcia: PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THAT ARE WATCHING.

YES, SIR. MY NAME IS JUAN GARZA, I'M THE GENERAL MANAGER FOR AUSTIN ENERGY. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, THE PROCESS IS FAIRLY WELL-KNOWN IN THE COMMUNITY. WE DID NOT DO A FORMAL SOLICITATION OF PROPOSALS AT THIS TIME. WE DID RECEIVE SOLICITATION DIRECTLY TO MY OFFICE. WE HAD SOME GO DIRECTLY TO COUNCILMEMBERS AND WE HAD SOME GO DIRECTLY TO THE PUBLIC MEETINGS. WE TOOK THE VARIOUS SOLICITATIONS TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE EUC. WE REVIEWED THEM AND MADE A RECOMMENDATION. WE REVIEWED THE PROPOSAL TO MAKE SURE THEY COMPLIED WITH THE POLICY GUIDE...... GUIDELINES THAT WERE SET BY THE COUNCIL ORIGINALLY WHEN THE FUND WAS FIRST ESTABLISHED. THEY DO MEET THOSE GUIDELINES. WE DO INTEND TO DO A MORE FORMAL PROCESS AND COME BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL SOMETIME IN THE EARLY PART OF NEXT YEAR TO FURTHER MOVE THIS ALONG. WE WERE MOVING QUITE ALONG IN THE BUDGET PROCESS. WE WERE HOPEFUL THAT WE WOULD END THE YEAR WITHOUT HAVING BROUGHT SOMETHING TO THE COUNCIL, BUT WE DECIDED TO BRING THESE FORWARD TO YOU AT THIS TIME.

Wynn: OKAY. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, MAYOR, I MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 16.

Mayor Garcia: I'LL CALL ON YOU FOR THE MOTION. MS. SUSANNA ALMANZA. FOLLOWING HER IS [ INAUDIBLE ].

GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M SUSAN ALMA IS A WITH PODER. AND I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY THAT EVEN THOUGH SOME OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS MIGHT KNOW ABOUT THE MITIGATION FUND MONEY, THERE REALLY ISN'T A PROCESS THAT'S SET UP THAT NOTIFIES EVEN THE ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN THE AREA OF THE HOLLY PARK PLANT THAT THIS MONEY IS AVAILABLE AND THAT PROPOSALS CAN BE SUBMITTED. AS FAR AS I KNOW, THERE'S NO EXACT CRITERIA ON IT. THE VISIT THAT PODER GET AS PART OF THE HOLLY PLANT CLOSURE COMMITTEE, SO YOU WOULD THINK THE CLOSURE COMMITTEE WOULD BE INFORMED AND GIVEN THE APPLICATION PROCESS, WHICH IS NOT REALLY HAPPENING. IS THAT MR. JOE PEREZ'S OFFICE SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL FOR ACTUALLY RECONSTRUCTING HOMES FROM THE BOTTOM ON UP IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, WHICH HAVE BEEN DONE HARM BY THE MERE SITING OF THE POWER PLANT THERE AND THE FUNCTION THAT IT'S HAD IN THE PAST AND CONTINUES TO HAVE. SO I DO RECOMMEND AND WE HAVE MET WITH MR. JUAN GARZA AND ARE STARTING TO SET UP THAT STRUCTURED MEETING ON A REGULAR BASIS, BUT I THINK THAT THE PROCESS NOW HAS TO BE REVISITED SINCE IT HAS TO BE THE CRITERIA PUT IN PLACE AND THAT THAT CRITERIA AND THAT PROCESS HAS TO BE KNOWN TO THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE THERE, WHICH DOES NOT -- PROBABLY NOT NOOK ON THE DOOR OF THE SOME OF THE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROCESS AND KNOW ABOUT IT. BUT THERE'S NOT MUCH THAT KNOWN. I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT WE'RE USING THE MITIGATION MONIES WHEN THERE COULD BE MONEY TAKEN FROM OTHER SOURCES, NOT THAT WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED BEFORE YOU IS NOT IMPORTANT, BUT I THINK THAT THAT SHOULDN'T BE COMING FROM THE MITIGATION MONEY BECAUSE THE REAL HARM AND THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE I THINK WOULD BENEFIT MORE THE PEOPLE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSING ISSUES AND THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUES, ESPECIALLY WHEN AT ONE TIME YOU HAD THE WEATHERIZATION PROGRAM DONE, YOU HAD THE WINDOW UNITS HANDED OUT THERE, BUT HOW DID THE PEOPLE BENEFIT BY THOSE PARTICULAR AREAS WHEN THEY COULDN'T AFFORD TO PAY THE UTILITY BILLS, THEREFORE THE AIR CONDITIONING UNITS WERE NOT TURNED ON. AND HOW WAS IT WHEN WE DID THE WEATHERIZATION AND THE FOUNDATION OF THE HOMES WERE BASICALLY FALLING APART? SO I THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT THAT PROCESS AND THAT CRITERIA AND SET IT UP. I THINK NEXT YEAR IS WAY TOO LONG. I THINK WE NEED TO BEGIN THAT PROCESS IMMEDIATELY. AND THE HOLLY POWER PLANT CLOSURE COMMITTEE IS ONE COMMITTEE THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE INFORMED IN THAT PROCESS. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MS. ALMANZA. MR. GAVINOFER NAN SAYS. WELCOME, -- FERNANDEZ. THANK YOU, SIR.

I'M A MEMBER OF HE WILL CONCEAL WHY I DON'T AND ALSO A MEMBER OF THE HOLLY CLOSURE COMMITTEE. AND BEING PART OF THE DISCUSSIONS WHERE THE MITTATION DOLLARS CAME ABOUT, I DO SUPPORT THE IMPROVEMENTS REGARDING THE RESTORATION OF THE MURALS AND THE HOST OF THE PROGRAM AT METZ BECAUSE I THINK THESE ARE THE TYPE OF PROJECTS THAT THE MITIGATION INTENTION WAS IN ORDER TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE HARM THAT THE EXISTENCE OF THE HOLLY POWER PLANT HAS MADE TO THE EXISTING AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. I DO HAVE A PROBLEM, THOUGH RKSZ....WITH THE $49,000 WITH THE REC CENTER. BEING A PARKS EMPLOYEE, THIS IS A LIST, A PARKS AND RECREATION EQUIPMENT LIST THAT SHOULD NOT BE USED AND BE FUNDED WITH MITIGATION DOLLARS. THE MITIGATION DOLLARS WERE NOT SET UP TO MAUCK THESE TYPE OF -- MAKE THESE TYPE OF INVESTMENTS IN THE COMMUNITY. SOME OF THESE ITEMS ARE INSULTING. ONE BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET ORGANIZATION IS ASKING TO FUND ONE EIGHT-INCH SKILL LET FOR $11 OUT OF THE MITIGATION. THAT JUST GOES TO SHOW YOU THE EXTREME OF HOW THESE FUNDS ARE BEING USED. CANOES, $1,395. WHERE ARE THESE CANOES GOING TO BE KEPT OUT. A TRAILER FOR CANOES, ALMOST TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS. WE HAVE HOMES AND ELDERLY PEOPLE AROUND THE HOLLY POWER PLANT THAT THEIR ELECTRICAL WIRING IS A FAR CRY FROM UPGRADE. THE ROOFS ARE LEAKING VERY MUCH WHEN THE WEATHER COMES AROUND. THESE ARE THE TYPE OF THINGS THAT WE EXPECTED AND WOULD HOPE THAT THESE MITIGATION DOLLARS WOULD BE INVESTED IN. NOT IN GENERAL RECREATION EQUIPMENT THAT SHOULD BE PURCHASED OUT OF GENERAL FUND DOLLARS. YOU KNOW, THESE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE BASICALLY -- I MEAN,. AGAIN, SHOULD BE USED AND PURCHASED WITH GENERAL FUND DOLLARS IF THESE ARE THE KIND OF MONIES YOU WANT TO USE. BUT IT IS EMBARRASSING TO OUR COMMUNITY TO LEARN THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO RECEIVE ANY KIND OF FUNDS FOR REMODELLING OF HOMES FOR SENIOR CITIZENS AND OUR HOMEOWNERS, BUT AGAIN, WE CAN BE VERY, YOU KNOW, -- I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. WHEN THFTION BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, I THOUGHT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THIS, WE HAD THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS NO LONGER GOING TO CONTINUE. WE'VE ALREADY SUBSIDIZED GUIL AND THE CA... CAMACHO CENTER FOR ALL THESE YEARS. WE DID THE CINCO DE MAYO FOR MANY YEARS TO SUBSIDIZE THESE COSTS. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SUFFERS FROM THESE EVENTS IN ORDER THAT THEY CAN BUY THIS KIND OF STUFF, BUT NOT WITH THE MITIGATION DOLLARS. AND I DO THINK WE NEED TO GO AND SET UP A PROCESS THAT WILL INCLUDE ALL PEOPLE AND ALL PARTIES SO THAT INTEGRITY OF THE SPENDING WILL BE MAINTAINED. THANK YOU.

[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

Mayor Garcia: THERE'S BEEN A MOTION AND TWO AMENDMENTS.

FIRST OF ALL BEFORE WE GET INTO ANY DETAILS OF IT IN AN ITEM LIKE THIS, WE USUALLY SEPARATE THE NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION EVEN IF IT'S ONLY LONG ENOUGH TO READ THAT CONTRACT BEFORE IT IS ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED BUT THAT'S A LANGUAGE ISSUE THAT I WILL COME BACK TO LATER. I WANTED TO REMIND THE COUNCIL AND THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED THAT THE REASON THIS PARTICULAR CONSULTANT WAS INCLUDED IN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET WAS SO THAT THE CULTURAL EXTENDING PROCESS THAT ENDED IN SUCH CONTROVERSY AND SUCH PLIT I CANIZED NONPRODUCT I HAVE ACTION DID NOT HAPPEN THIS YEAR. THE CONSULTANT WAS TO BE IN PLACE SO THAT THIS YEAR'S SPENDING PROCESS DID NOT FALL INTO THE CONFLICT AND UGLINESS THAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. WE'RE JUST NOW GETTING TO THE CONSULTANT, THIS YEAR'S FUNDING PROCESS THAT AN END, VIRTUALLY AT AN END. AND THERE IS NO REAL CHANCE TO UNDO WHAT IS NOW THE SITUATION FOR THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMUNITY WHO HAVE TRIED TO BE RESPONSIBLE APPLICANTS TO THE PROCESS AND RECEIVE FAIR AND HOPEFULLY ENCOURAGING TREATMENT FROM THAT PROCESS. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. AND YOU ADD TO THAT THE FACT THAT THE ECONOMY THIS YEAR IS ESPECIALLY BAD, MUCH, MUCH WORSE THAN LAST YEAR WHEN, THROUGH VARIOUS LITIGATION FROM THE ARTS COMMISSION AND COUNCIL WE WERE ABLE TO KIND OF EVEN OUT THE PLAYING FIELD A LITTLE BIT AND MAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE FAIR DECISION MAKING, THEY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACQUIESCE TO. SO GIVEN THAT, THE FUNDING PROCESS ITSELF IS VIRTUALLY OVER AND THE CONSULTANT IS NOW NOT IN A POSITION TO DO ANYTHING AT ALL FOR THIS YEAR'S FUNDING OTHER THAN PERHAPS REVIEWING SOME THINGS RETROACTIVELY THAT ARE TOO LATE IN THE PROCESS TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT. I'D LIKE TO REMIND US ALL, TOO, THAT IN ADDITION TO THAT VERY SPECIFIC AND VERY NARROW FOCUS, THIS WAS A COUNCIL INITIAL I HAVE OF DEVELOPING POLICY AND IN FACT, IT WAS THE IMPETUS OR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ARTS COMMUNITY AS WE HAVE TRADITIONALLY KNOWN IT TO BE IS REALLY VERY DIFFERENT IN THE YEAR 2002 THAN IT WAS BACK IN THE SEVENTIES AND EIGHTIES WHEN THIS IDEA WAS FIRST BEING DEVELOPED INTO SOMETHING THAT WE COULD IMPLEMENT AND SUPPORT. SO IN TERMS OF WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CONSULTANT, THERE WILL PROBABLY NEED TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE COUNCIL INPUT INTO DEVELOPING THE RMP BECAUSE IT WAS AN INITIATIVE AND HAS TO DO WITH DEVELOPING POLICY AND THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY COME THROUGH IN THE BLACK AND WHITE THAT GOES OUT TO THE CONSULTANTS TO RESPOND TO. NONETHELESS, AS I READ QUICKLY THROUGH THE TOP THREE RESPONDERS TO THE RFP, I NOTICED THEY ARE ALL VERY EXCELLENT FIRMS AND THERE WERE SEVERAL INTUITIVE REMARKS IN ONE OF THE APPLICATIONS THAT I WAS DRAWN TO FOR WHAT WE NEED, FOR WHAT IT IS WE'RE GOING FOR. I WANTED TO SPECIFICALLY ADD TO WHAT I THINK THIS CONTRACT IS FOR AND THIS CONSULTANT WILL HELP US DO, IS AGAIN BEYOND THAT VERY NARROW FOCUS OF THE PROCESS ITSELF. THAT'S VERY PRACTICAL, BLACK AND WHITE, BREAD AND BUTTER, BUT IT'S REALLY TO GO BEYOND THAT. AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO ALSO ADD IS DIRECTION AT THIS POINT FOR THE CONSULTANT AND FOR THE AUDITER STILL AS THE LEAD DEPARTMENT IS TO SAY THAT AT THIS JUNCTURE, AT THIS BEGINNING OF A LARGER INITIATIVE, A LARGER COUNCIL INITIATIVE, I THINK THAT WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS BE SURE THAT SEVERAL ADVISORY GROUPS ARE USED FOR INPUT OF VARIOUS PARTS OF WHAT IS BEING LOOKED AT, AND THAT WOULD BE SO THAT WE COULD GET INPUT BACK ON PANEL REVIEW, ON COMMISSION GUIDELINES, AND THE MECHANICS OF THE PROCESS. BEYOND THAT, THOUGH, WE NEED TO ESTABLISH A CLEARER VISION OF WHAT THE CREATIVE ARTS COMMUNITY IS IN AUSTIN AND UNDERSTAND THE EXPANSION OF THEIR ROLE THAT GOES FAR BEYOND WHAT YOU MIGHT THINK OF AS ARTI SON AND GARRETT. THEY ARE REALLY THE BACKGROUND OF OUR COMMUNITY AND COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY HAS SOME LANGUAGE THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO MENTION LATER SO THAT WE ALL HAVE A CLEAR IDEA OF THE VISION THAT IS POSSIBLE FOR US TO GRASP. SO IN LOOKING FOR THAT, I THINK THAT THERE MUST ALSO BE A STAFF WORK GROUP THAT HELPS WITH OVERSIGHT AND JUST PARTICIPATING AND UNDERSTANDING FROM THEIR PART OF WHAT THEY SEE FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES THAT HAS NOT YET BEEN COORDINATED IN THAT CREATIVE COMMUNITY. SO NOT TO PRECLUDE ANYONE ELSE, BUT RIGHT AWAY WE KNOW THAT SOMEONE FROM FINANCE MUST BE THERE IN THEIR PURSUIT OF SUPPORT AND OPPORTUNITY IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS, MULTIMEDIA, FILM, MUSIC AND SO ON. THAT, TOO, IS PART OF THE CREATIVE ARTS COMMUNITY. REDEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS HEAVILY INVOLVED IN THAT SORT OF NATURE AND CHARACTER CULTURE ISSUES AND SO ON AND IT MAY BE THAT SOMEONE FROM AVIATION OR THE OTHER CULTURAL ASPECTS THAT WE'VE INTRODUCED INTO THE AIRPORT IS APPROPRIATE. AND CAN HELP. THERE MAY BE, OF COURSE, -- OF COURSE FROM PARKS, OF COURSE, AND WE HAVE ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES THERE, TOO, TO BE REPRESENTED AS WELL AS THE CULTURAL ARTS IN THE FUNDING PROCESS. AND THERE MAY BE OTHERS. THERE MAY BE SOMEONE FROM PUBLIC WORKS OR SOMEONE ELSE WHO'S INTERESTED IN HOW THE CREATIVE INTELLIGENCE OF OUR COMMUNITY ENTERS INTO DESIGN AND SO ON, BUT I JUST DIDN'T WANT THESE PARTICULAR ONES TO BE FORGOTTEN, AND WE CAN EXPAND MORE. AND FINALLY, INFORM LOOKING AT THE GOP OF THE -- SCOPE OF THE CONSULTANT'S WORK, I THINK THAT 60 DAYS, THAT AGAIN PROBABLY COULD HAVE BEEN CLARIFIED HAD THERE BEEN MORE INPUT IN DEVELOPING THE RFP WITH COUNCILMEMBERS AND WITH DIRECTION AND POLICY WE WERE TRYING TO HEAD FOR. SO WE HAVE ALL THE PIECES OF WHAT COULD BE A VERY PRODUCTIVE AND BENEFICIAL STEP FOR THIS COMMUNITY, ESTABLISHING WHAT IS, IN FACT, OUR BACKBONE AND FABRIC FOR THE NEW CENTURY. THOSE ARE MY SUGGESTIONS FOR WHAT MUST GO WITH THE SCOPE OF THIS CONSULTANT'S WORK, AND I WOULD TURN IT OVER TO COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY.

Dunkerly: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK THE MAYOR PRO TEM HAS MENTIONED SEVERAL GROUPS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE CONSULTANT COORDINATE WITH. SPECIFICALLY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM COORDINATE WITH COUNCILMEMBER WYNN'S GROUP THAT, I THINK IT'S THE MAYOR'S TASK FORCE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THE CREATIVE ARTS AND THE CREATIVE BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO BE ONE OF THE SIGNIFICANT ELEMENTS OF A COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CITY. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THAT COORDINATION WRITTEN INTO THE SCOPE OF WORK SO THAT WE CAN SEE HOW WE CAN BEST FOLD THAT IN TO OUR EFFORTS IN THIS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AREA. THANK YOU.

AND RELATIVE TO THAT? I THINK THAT SINCE THIS IS AN INITIALLY SHORT TIME FRAME NOW AS IT'S BENEFICIALLY PUT OUT THERE, ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK IT AT ALL IS THE LENGTH AND BREADTH OF THE SCOPE WE'RE GOING TO NEED, BUT COUNCIL, OR AT LEAST COUNCILMEMBERS WHO ARE INTERESTED NEED TO BE ROUTINELY UPDATED ON WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING, AND I WOULD SO NO LATER THAN EVERY OTHER WEEK, CONSIDERING THE TWO MONTH TIME FRAME THAT'S MENTIONED IN HERE. AND WITH THAT I HAVE A MOTION?

Mayor Garcia: READY FOR A MOTION.

ITEM NUMBER 86, I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION AFTER COUNCILMEMBERS ARE ABLE TO READ THAT CONTRACT OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH DABNEY AND ASSOCIATES.

OKAY. THIS PARTICULAR ONE ITEM, NO. 86, THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE INSERT THE NAME OF DABNEY AND ASSOCIATES IN THE PLACE WHERE IT SAYS THE CULTURAL PLUS PLANNING GROUP OF LOS ANGELES. AND IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT MOTION? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. DISCUSSION?

YES, MAYOR.

Mayor Garcia: COUNCILMEMBER?

PARDON?

THE ONE YOU ARE INSERTING.

OH, YEAH.

IS REALLY ON THE LIST.

THEY ARE ONE OF THE TOP THREE.

TOP THREE? OKAY. AND IF YOU WANT TO KNOW SOME OF THE REASONS?

NO, MA'AM, I NEED TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE COMPANY, TOO.

WELL, THEY ARE ALL EXCELLENT. THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE HOME WORK, A LITTLE RESEARCH FROM PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T KNOW THE VARIOUS PRINCIPLES INVOLVED AND ALTHOUGH ALL OF THEM ARE GOOD, NUMBER 1, IN A PRACTICAL SENSE, THIS ONE IS CLOSER TO HOME AND WE CAN CUT DOWN ON TRAVEL TIME AND EXPENSE BECAUSE THE SCOPE OF THE RFP IS, IN FACT, A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, IS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A BEGINNING RATHER THAN A REPORT, WHICH THE RESPONDENTS MAY HAVE GOTTEN MORE OF THAT IMPRESSION ABOUT WHAT IT IS WE WANT FROM THEIR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION HERE. THEY ARE ALSO EXCELLENT IN MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE, AND OUT OF THE THREE APPLICATIONS, THE ONLY ONE THAT REALLY KIND OF HIT AS JUST A MATTER OF FACT, PART OF THEIR PRESENTATION ON THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT HERE AND ADDRESSING THE PUBLIC POLICY AS A PART OF WHAT THEY OFFER AS DABNEY AND ASSOCIATES. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO OVERALL POINTS IN THEIR FAVORITE. AND AGAIN, NOT TO TAKE AWAY IN ANY WAY FROM THE OTHER TWO, I'M SURE ALL THE OTHERS BESIDES THOSE THREE ARE ALSO EXCELLENT, BUT I THINK THE WAY THAT THE RFP WAS PRESENTED, YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK FOR INSIGHT AND INTUITION AND I FOUND IT IN DABNEY.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: A MOTION AND A SECOND ON ITEM NUMBER 86. DID YOU -- MS. BROWN, DID YOU GET THE NAME OF THE FIRM? OKAY. FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT.

Mayor Garcia: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 7 TO 0.. NOW WE GO TO ITEM NUMBER 97. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, ITEM NUMBER 97. CAN YOU PUT THE MICROPHONE ON?

Slusher: YES. THIS IS SERVICE EXTENSION ASK WHERE IT WOULD GO FROM PROPERTY THAT'S OVER TWO ACRES WOULD GO TO FOUR HOUSES, BUILT FOUR HOUSES, AND I UNDERSTAND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO TO THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION FOR VARIANCE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO BE BUILT ON LESS THAN TWO ACRES, BUT WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER TO DO THE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST FIRST, AND IT SEEMS IT SHOULD BE THE OTHER WAY AROUND TO ME. AND I'M NOT SURE I -- IF I WAS ONE OF THOSE MEMBERS, I DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD VOTE FOR THIS VARIANCE, BUT IF WE VOTE FOR THE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST, IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME WE'D BE SENDING A MESSAGE THAT THEY SHOULD VOTE FOR IT. THAT DOESN'T, OF COURSE, MEAN THEY WOULD DO IT AS WE KNOW, BUT THAT CONCERNS ME. IT SEEMS LIKE MAYBE THAT'S A FLAW IN THE PROCESS.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MY NAME'S CHRIS LIPPE, DIRECTOR OF WATER AND WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT. THE TIJ OF THE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST IS VERY EARLY IN THE -- TIMING OF THE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST IS VERY EARLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. IT'S TYPICALLY ONE OF THE FIRST STEPS. THE AVAILABILITY OF WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES IS SO CRITICAL TO DETERMINING ANY OF THE -- TO MAKE PLANS FOR A PIECE OF PROPERTY. IT JUST COMES VERY EARLY IN THE PROCESS. WE'RE STARTING A PROCESS IMPROVEMENT TEAM TO LOOK AT THIS PROCESS AND REVIEW IT AGAIN BECAUSE THESE KINDS OF ISSUES CONTINUE TO COME UP WHERE WE GET THE REQUEST VERY EARLY BUT THERE ARE SOME REMAINING ISSUES. WHEN WE APPROVE A SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST, WE ALWAYS HAVE THE CLAUSE IN THERE THAT THE APPLICANT MUST MEET ALL, ALL CODE AND ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. SO IN THIS CASE AS WE MOVE FORWARD, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DEVELOP THE LAND UNDER THE EXISTING CODES AND ORDINANCES, BUT THIS IS JUST ONE OF THE INITIAL QUESTIONS THAT THE LANDOWNERS TYPICALLY ASK IS AVAILABLE OF SERVICE.

WELL, THAT WOULD MEAN THEN THINGS THEY HAVE TO DEVELOP UNDER THE SYSTEM CODES AND ORDINANCES, THAT WOULD MEAN IN ORDER TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO HERE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET THE VARIANCE. I THINK THAT WASN'T CLEAR TO ME FROM THE BACKUP. AND BEFORE I COULD VOTE TO -- I JUST REALLY NEED MORE INFORMATION. IT'S MORE LIKE A LAND DEVELOPMENT CASE TO ME THAN JUST A WATER CASE. WE COULD SEND IT TO HAVE AUR ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF LOOK AT IT A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY AND BRING IT BACK.

OKAY. IS THAT THE MOTION THAT YOU MAKE?

SURE.

Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER ON ITEM NUMBER 97 TO SEND THIS ITEM BACK TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT. WHICH DEPARTMENT OR WHICH COMMISSION?

Slusher: WATERSHED PROTECTION AND ANYBODY ELSE THAT SEES FIT TO LOOK AT IT.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. DISCUSSION? STATE AGAIN FOR PURPOSES OF THE RECORD THE -- WHAT YOU EXPECT OUT OF THE WATERSHED PROTECTION.

Slusher: I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN ANALYSIS ON THE IMPACT OF THE ENVIRONMENT FROM THIS PROPOSAL BEFORE WE JUST DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO, FOR THE WATER SERVICE AND THEN SEND IT OVER TO THE ZAP FOR VARIANCE BECAUSE IT'S NOT COMPLYING -- WHAT'S PROPOSED DOES NOT COMPLY WITH OUR ORDINANCES. WE HAVE TO HAVE A VARIANCE, AND IT SAID THEY -- IN THE BACK IT SAID THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE. WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO IS GET THE WATER SERVICE AND GO SEEK A VARIANCE UNLESS THEY WANT TO GET THOSE FOUR LOTS. THIS IS OUFLT WATERSHED, DRIPGING WATER SUPPLY. SO I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. I GUESS THE BOTTOM LINE IS I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE ON WATER QUALITY IN OUR DRINKING WATER SUPPLY.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. PARTICULARLY THIS BEING IN THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE, I THINK THAT'S THE REQUEST. FURTHER DISCUSSION?

Mayor Garcia: ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED, NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 7 TO 0.. ITEM NUMBER 103, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

Slusher: WELL, MAYOR, I GUESS WE HAVE THE PRESENTATION ON THIS. IS THIS THE ONE ABOUT THE TRAIN WHISTLE TRACK?

Mayor Garcia: THIS IS THE ONE ABOUT -- 103 IS THE SAME.

Slusher: WELL, HERE I JUST HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT TRAIN WHISTLES, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING SOME ALTERNATIVE TO TRAINS BLOWING THEIR WHISTLES WHEN THEY COME THROUGH TOWN. MAYBE IT'S A PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUE BUT I THINK IT SHOULD ALSO BE PUBLIC SAFETY. TRAINS BLOWING THE WHISTLES PROVIDES AS A PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM GETTING HIT BY TRAINS. IF THERE'S A ENGINEER OUT THERE THAT'S LAYING DOWN ON HIS HORN TOO MUCH, TO ME THAT'S AN ISSUE TO TAKE UP WITH UNION PACIFIC, BUT I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY. IF WE -- IF WE ASK, YOU KNOW, SOME OTHER MEASURE TO LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT A TRAIN IS ABOUT TO CROSS THE ROAD, AND PERSONALLY I LIVE ABOUT A BLOCK AND A HALF FROM THE RAILROAD TRACK, THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACK IN SOUTH AUSTIN. I LIKE TRAIN WHISTLES. I THINK THEY ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF AMERICAN CULTURE. SO I DON'T THINK I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR THIS.

Mayor Garcia: AND LET ME SEE IF THE PROPOSALS, THE -- , THE TWO SPONSORING HOUSE MEMBERS WANT TO SAY ABOUT THAT. MAYOR PRO TEM JACKIE GOOD MAN.

I AM DEFERRING TO MY COLLEAGUES.

THANK YOU. WHAT THIS ITEM IS, FIRST AND FOREMOST IT IS A RESPONSE TO A NUMBER OF CITIZEN COMPLAINTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED OVER THE YEARS. IT'S ABOUT THE NOISE OF THE TRAINS. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS PASSED A FEW PIECES OF LEGISLATION THE LAST FIVE TO SEVEN YEARS THAT BEGIN TO GIVE CITIES CERTAIN POTENTIAL AUTHORITY OVER THIS ISSUE, OVER THIS SORT OF QUIET ZONE, OVER ALTERNATIVE KIND OF SAFETY MEASURES. THAT IS, HAVING THE HORN ITSELF MOUNTED AND PLACED AT THE INTERSECTION, SO AS A TRAIN IS APPROACHING THE INTERSECTION, THE HORN IS GOING OFF AT THE INTERSECTION, NOT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE AS THE TRAIN APPROACHES. SO THINGS LIKE THAT. SEVERAL CITIES APPARENTLY HAVE ADOPTED THE ORDINANCES. NONE OF THEM HAVE IMPLEMENTED THE CHANGES, BUT THIS ITEM SIMPLY DIRECTS THE MANAGER AND THE CITY STAFF TO, YOU KNOW, RESEARCH OUR ABILITY TO DO THAT, TO GIVE US, YOU KNOW, AN ACCOUNT OF THE AT-GRADE CROSSINGS, MOST OF THEM BEING IN SOUTH AUSTIN, YOU KNOW, GIVE US AN ESTIMATE AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT EXPENSE THERE MAY BE, IF ANY, AND GIVE US THE LIKELIHOOD, A HANDICAP AND THE LIKELIHOOD THAT, YOU KNOW, AUSTIN AGREES WITH IT OR GOES ALONG WITH IT, I THINK IT'S WHOLLY APPROPRIATE -- TOTALLY APPROPRIATE FOR US AS A CITY TO ANALYZE THAT AND TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY. YOU KNOW, IT'S VERY LIKELY, YOU KNOW, A POSSIBILITY THAT THE ANSWER IS EITHER IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE OR IT'S TOO COMPLEX OF A NEGOTIATED ISSUE WITH UNION PACIFIC. BUT I THINK IT'S TOTALLY APPROPRIATE FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TRY TO BALANCE OUT THE NEEDS OF BOTH UNION PACIFIC RAILWAY AND OUR CITIZENS WHO LIVE ALONG THE TRACKS AND OUR CITIZENS WHO ARE, YOU KNOW, CROSSING THE TRACKS.

Mayor Garcia: SO I GUESS WITH THAT -- .

WITH THAT I'LL ASK FOR A MOTION OF APPROVAL.

SECOND.

Mayor Garcia: AND I GUESS SECONDED BY COUNCIL, MAYOR PRO TEM.

AND ADD ON TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER JUST SAID. OBVIOUSLY NOBODY WANTS ANYONE TO BE AT RISK OF WHEN A TRAIN COMES TO A CROSSING OR ANY SORT OF PLACE WHERE CONCEIVABLY A VEHICLE OR PEDESTRIAN COULD GO ACROSS THE TRACKS AT THE WRONG TIME AND BE IN DANGER. BUT THERE ARE SOME ALTERNATIVES AND WE'LL SEE WHAT THEY HAVE FOR US AS OPTIONS FROM THE FEDERAL LEVEL LATER IN THE SUMMER. THERE ARE SOME IDEAS ALONG WITH PLACING THE HORN OR A MORE SIGNIFICANT SIGNAL AT THE CROSSING AND RIGHT NOW WE ALWAYS HAVE THE BELLS CLING CLANGING AT THE CROSSING. SO IT WOULDN'T HURT FOR THAT TO BE A LITTLE MORE INTENSE, MAYBE AT DIFFERENT TIMES OF THE DAY OR NIGHT. THERE CAN BE AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE FOR SHORTER TRAINS OR A PAUSE TO WAIT UNTIL A CERTAIN TIME OF MORNING HAS BEEN PASSED OR WHATEVER. BUT IT DOESN'T IN ANY WAY ASK FOR SAFETY TO BE DISMISSED OR FOR ANYONE TO BE PUT AT RISK, MERELY THAT SINCE WE ARE SUPPOSEDLY ALWAYS TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCING, THAT WE LOOK AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OPTIONS.

Mayor Garcia: LET ME SAY THAT I DON'T KNOW WHAT -- DOES THIS INCLUDE DOING SOMETHING ABOUT SLOW TRAINS? BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEED -- WHETHER WE NEED HORNS, YOU KNOW. THEY HAVE STOPPED AT THE INTERSECTION OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD AND, LIKE, RIGHT THERE WHERE LEAF JOHNSON IS, AND THE TRAIN THAT WAS MOVING THROUGH THERE WAS MOVING AT 3 MILES AN HOUR, AND THEY HAD ALWAYS BARNUM AND BAILEY EQUIPMENT AND ANIMALS AND IT TOOK THEM FOREVER TO GET THROUGH THAT INTERSECTION. I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY NEED HORNS. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THEY MOVE PRETTY SLOW.

ARE YOU SAYING TO SPEED THEM UP AND ELIMINATE THE HORN? [ LAUGHTER ]

Mayor Garcia: I DON'T KNOW WHAT I SAID. IT'S JUST THAT I WAS HUNGRY, I WAS TRYING TO GET -- I WAS TRYING TO GET TO A HAMBURGER AND I COULDN'T GET ACROSS THOSE TRACKS. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SEC. FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT.

Mayor Garcia: ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED, NO..

Mayor Garcia: SO THAT GOES ON A VOTE OF 5-1-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS TEMPORARILY OUT OF AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER VOTING NA. AND NOW -- NAY. AND NOW TO 104 WITH COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

Slusher: WELL, I GUESS THIS IS ANOTHER TRAIN ITEM THAT I'VE MADE IT VERY CLEAR WHY THIS ONE IS UP. I MEAN, I'VE HAD SOME ABOUT THIS, TOO, BUT I'D RATHER HERE. IT'S NOT QUITE AS FUNDAMENTAL. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IDLING TRAINS. I'D LIKE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT BEFORE I SAY ANYTHING.

Mayor Garcia: THIS IS ONE THAT TALKS ABOUT IDLING ADJACENT TO THE ALLENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

I'LL DEFER TO MAYOR PRO TEM ON THIS ONE.

Goodman: FOR THE ALLENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD, THIS IS SOMETHING AKIN TO THE HOW THE HOLLY STREET NEIGHBORHOOD FEELS. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING, OF COURSE, BUT IT IS AN ISSUE OF A NOISE AND OF A NOISE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD ALL THE TIME. THAT IS ALWAYS PART OF YOUR DAILY LIFE. THERE DOES TEAM SEEM TO BE A POSSIBLE RESOLUTION TO HAVING THE TRAIN JUST SIT BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD IDLING WHEN THEY ARE NOT ON THEIR WAY TO AND FROM SOMEWHERE. BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THEY PAUSE. THEY DON'T HAVE A STATION, PER SE, THAT THAT IS WHERE THEY WAIT. IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO EXTEND THE TRACK SIGHTING, A TRACK SIGHTING SO THAT THEY COULD GO A LITTLE FURTHER AND MOVE CLOSER TO THE INDUSTRIALLY ZONED AREA FOR COMMERCIAL AND BUSINESS RATHER THAN RIGHT BY THE RESIDENTIAL AREA AND THE PLAYING FIELDS AND SO ON WHERE THE KIDS GO, THAT WOULD BE A RELATIVELY EASY AND SMALL RESOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM. THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD CERTAINLY BE APPRECIATIVE IF UNION PACIFIC WOULD CONSIDER THAT, AND THEY HAVE SAID THAT THEY WILL CONSIDER LOOKING AT IT. THERE ARE PHYSICAL ISSUES THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO BE, AND OF COURSE THERE IS THE WILL OF THE RAILROAD TO ACTUALLY DO IT EVEN IF THEY CAN. BUT RIGHT NOW THIS IS THE FIRST STEP FORWARD THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO TALK IN TERMS OF GETTING THE RAILROAD TO CONSIDER THIS AND ENTER INTO DISCUSSION WITH US IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SO WE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO EXACTLY THAT.

Mayor Garcia: WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM AND A FEW WHO WANT TO LISTEN TO THEM AT THIS TIME AND THEN WE'LL CONTINUE DISCUSSION. MR. ERIC WOLF. WELCOME, SIR.

MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS. I ONLY MENTIONED ABOUT THE BLOWING HORNS. WE HAVE THAT, TOO, ALTHOUGH USUALLY WHEN THE HORNS BLOW, THAT INDICATES THAT A TRAIN IS ABOUT TO LEAVE. SO FOR US IT'S A SENSE OF RELIEF. WE DON'T MIND HEARING THE HORNS BECAUSE THAT MEANS THAT TRAIN'S ABOUT TO LEAVE. BASICALLY WHAT'S GOING ON, THIS IS THE INFAMOUS RAILROAD TRACK THAT EVERYBODY SEEMS TO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH AND, YES, THE RAILROAD TRACK'S BEEN THERE SINCE BEFORE THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT WHO HAS CHANGED SO DRASTICALLY IN THE PAST FIVE, SEVEN YEARS OR SO HAS BEEN THE PASSAGE OF NAFTA AND THE RAILROAD CONSOLIDATION FROM THE MID-NINETIES AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THAT THIS RAILROAD TRACK HAS GONE -- I LIKE TO COMPARE WHAT IT USED TO BE, WHICH IS SOMETHING LIKE A COUNTY ROAD, OCCASIONAL TRAINS GOING BY. TRAINS STOPPING VERY OCCASIONALLY AND NEVER STAYING LONGER THAN A FEW MINUTES WHILE THE TRAINS PASS BUT NOW SINCE THE PASSAGE OF NAFTA AND THE RAILROAD CONSOLIDATION, THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC ALONG THE LINE HAS INCREASED TO THE POINT THAT TRAINS ARE CONSTANTLY STOPPING ON THE SIDELINE TO MOVE THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC ALONG THE LINE, WHICH IS PRIMARILY A SINGLE TRACK EXCEPT FOR THIS AREA, WHICH IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, TRAINS HAVE TO CONSTANTLY BE STOPPING AT THESE AREAS. AND IT'S NOT JUST FOR PASSING TRAINS. THEY ARE ALSO STOPPING FOR CREW CHANGES, THEY ARE STOPPING FOR CREW REST, THEY ARE STOPPING FOR FLOW CONTROL. AND BECAUSE FEDERAL REGULATIONS DICTATE THAT THE LOCOMOTIVES ALWAYS BE RUNNING TO SUPPLY PNEUMATIC PRESSURE TO AIR BRAKES, IT'S A LOW KIND OF VIBRATION THAT GOES RIGHT THROUGH THE HOUSES. YOU HEAR IT ALL THE TIME AND IT'S A REAL ANNOYANCE. PASSENGER TRAINS AREN'T SO BAD BECAUSE THEY ARE HERE AND THEY ARE GONE USUALLY IN A COUPLE OF MINUTES. WITHIN ABOUT TWO MINUTES A TRAIN PASSES AND IT'S GONE BUT WHEN A TRAIN PULLS IN, YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE THERE FOR TEN DAYS OR IN ONE CASE FOR SEVEN DAYS. SO WE FEEL THIS SOLUTION WOULD ALLOW UNION PACIFIC THE RUN THEIR OPERATION AS THEY NEED AND ALLOW THEM TO PARK THEIR TRAINS WITH THE NOISEEST PART OF THE TRAIN, LOCOMOTIVE, IN AN AREA THAT IS ZONED FOR LIGHT INDUSTRY, WHICH IS AN AREA AROUND HEARTS GRAPHICS AND THE ONLY AREA THERE ARE THE FLOOD RETENTION PONDS. SO IF WE CAN GET AS MUCH SUPPORT FOR THIS AS POSSIBLE, I THINK IT WOULD GET THE ATTENTION OF UNION PACIFIC AS WELL AS OUR CONGRESSMEN BECAUSE CONGRESSMAN DOING HE THE IS GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS AS WELL AS ANYTHING AS WE GO FORWARD ON THIS.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS WE HAVE.

I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

MOTION AND SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. DISCUSSION?

WELL, MAYOR, I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS. WE'RE NOT, THOUGH, ASKING UNION PACIFIC TO PRIORITIZE THIS OVER, SAY, REPAIRING AND LIFTING TRACK. I KNOW IN SOUTH AUSTIN THERE HAVE BEEN SOME RECENT REPAIRS TO THE TRACK AND I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD DO THAT. I JUST WANT TO -- I THINK THAT'S CLEAR. THAT'S CONTAINED IN HERE. I MEAN, IT'S NOT MEANT TO DO THAT, IS IT? OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD.

Mayor Garcia: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AP.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED, NO.. AND THAT, AS THEY WOULD SAY, THAT'S IT, FOLKS, FOR THE AGENDA EXCEPT FOR CERTAIN ITEMS.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, ALICE GLASGOW, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT FOR ZONING CASES AND THERE AS FOLLOWS. TEM NUMBER Z 1, L1, 17, THIS CASE IS LOCATED AT 1115 EAST 12th STREET. THE CHANGE IN ZONING IS TO ADD HISTORIC DID HE SAY IG NAS TO THIS PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED, COMBINING DISTRICT T. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED THE CHANGE IN ZONING BY ADDING HISTORIC DESIGNATION TO THE EXISTING ZONING AND THE CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. THIS IS LOCATED AT 5 10I8 NORTH I-35 NORTHBOUND, ALSO KNOWN AS 814 THROUGH 816 EAST 5th STREET T. CHANGE IN ZONING IS TO ADD HISTORIC DESIGNATION TO THE CURRENT ZONING, WHICH IS C S-M U-C O-NP. BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM Z.-3 C 14 R-83-138, (RCA ).

ITEM NUMBER Z4, C814-01-0113 NAMELY GRAND OBSERVATION PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MONCHACA ROAD AND DAVIS LANE. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CHANGE FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL AND SINGLE FAMILY TWO ZONING TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO DEVELOP NEAR TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON THIS ALMOST 100 ACRE SITE. BUT THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMEND A CHANGE. AND THIS CASE IS READY FOR FIRST READING ONLY. ; NUMBER Z.-5, C14-02-0001. THIS CASE IS LOCATED AT 5211 WASSON ROAD. THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT. THIS IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S FIRST REQUEST AND TYPICALLY ON A FIRST REQUEST AS SUBMITTED BY EITHER INTERESTED PARTY. THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 34% AGAINST THE ZONING CHANGE. ITEM NUMBER Z-6 WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM. Z-7, C14-02-0038, A CHANGE IN ZONING PROPERTY, WHICH STANDS FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT, TO MF-3, MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM NUMBER Z-8 LOCATED AT 6000 1/2 COOPER LANE. THE CHANGE IS CHANGED, RECOMMENDED BY THE TAXING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THE CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEMS NUMBER Z-9 THROUGH Z-23 RELATE TO STRATUS AND THOSE WILL BE HEARD AT 5:45 WITH ALL THE OTHER STRATUS-RELATED ITEMS AND THAT TAKES US ALL THE WAY TO ITEM NUMBER Z-24. ITEM NUMBER Z.-24, C814-02-43 T. CURRENT ZONING ON THE PROPERTY IS SINGLE FAMILY 3. THE CITY IS SEEKING A CHANGE FOR AN EMS FACILITY. THIS GETS US READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM NUMBER Z5, THIS IS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT DETERMINATION REQUEST AT 1109 SOUTH PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD. THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE TERMINATION OF A COVENANT. THAT ISN'T A REQUIRED ORDINANCE. IT'S A SIMPLE APPROVAL. ITEM NUMBER Z.-26, LOCATED 1109 SOUTH PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD FROM GENERAL OFFICE ZONING AND TO MULTIFAMILY 3. THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT MULTIFAMILY 28 ZONING FOR PLAT 1, 2, AND 3 AND RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL FOR TRACT 4. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION.

Mayor Garcia: DID YOU HAVE THAT IN THE CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS? Z-26? LET ME SEE IF I CAN -- .

I HAVE A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.

Mayor Garcia: Z-26, M. F. 2 CO, COMBINING DISTRICT?

COMBINING CONDITION. THAT'S THE CONDITION OVERLAY.

PLATS 1, 2, AND 3 FROM RR TO WHAT?

FOR TRACT 4. ITEM NUMBER Z.-27, C14-02-0055, THIS IS LOCATED AT 1109 SOUTH PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD AND THE CHANGE IN ZONING IS FROM GO, GENERAL OFFICE, TO GR, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONING. THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE GR-CO REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT FOR CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. THIS GETS US READY FOR FIRST READING. ITEM Z-28 LOCATED AT 1709 WEST PARMER LANE. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED LR, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CHANGE TO GR, WHICH STANDS FOR COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE ZONING AND PLATING CONDITION RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM Z-29 C14-02-0049 LOCATED AT 618 WEST POWELL LANE TO CHANGE FROM SF-3, FAMILY RESIDENCE, TO CS-CO, GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES AND THAT IS THE ZONING THAT IS RECOMMENDED BY THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION AND THE CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM Z-30, C14-02-0050 LOCATED AT 616 WEST POWELL LANE. THE CHANGE IN ZONING IS FROM SINGLE FAMILY 3 TO CS-CO GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. THAT'S THE ZONING THAT IS RECOMMENDED BY THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION AND THE CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM NUMBER Z41 LOCATED AT 700 WEST POWELL LANE. THE PROPERTY IS GOING FROM ZONED SINGLE FAMILY 3 AND IT IS CS WITH CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. THE CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM Z-32, LOCATED AT 4300 BLOCK OF WILLOW SPRINGS ROAD. THE CHANGE IN SEASONING IS FROM SINGLE FAMILY 3 TO LI, WHICH IS LIMITED INDUSTRIAL ZONING WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. THAT REQUEST IS RECOMMENDED BY THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION AND IS READY FOR ALL THREE. ITEM NUMBER Z-33 IS LOCATED AT 1190 THROUGH 1192 NAVASOTA HE THE STREET. THE CHANGE IN ZONING IS FROM SINGLE FAMILY 3 TO CS-MU-CO-NP. THE APPLICANT AMENDED THE APPLICATION BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT FOR CCURE. SO THE APPLICANT DOES NOT NEED THE CURE OVERLAY AND THAT CHANGE HAS BEEN READ TO THE RECORD. THE CASE IS READY FOR FIRST READING ONLY. ITEM NUMBER Z-346789 THIS IS A REQUEST TO AMEND CHAPTER 25-2 AND 25-6 OF THE CITY CODE TO ADD A NEW LAND USE KNOWN AS "ELECTRONIC TESTING" THAT PERMITS THE COMMERCIAL TESTING OF ELECTRONIC OR ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS FOR COMPUTERS, RADIOS, TELEPHONES, MEDICAL OR SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS, AND SIMILAR EQUIPMENT IN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, AND TO ESTABLISH SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE USE. THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE CONSENT ITEMS NOW.

.

Mayor Garcia:; Z-34, WHAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION?

Z-34 IS TO APPROVE IT. THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT.

ALL THREE READINGS?

YES, ALL THREE READINGS, MAYOR.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. SO GOING BACK TO THE -- .

MAYOR, LET ME JUST MAKE ONE OTHER NOTATION. ALSO, YOU HAVE AN ITEM Z-35 WHICH REPLACES ONE OF THE EARLIER Z ITEMS AND THAT WILL ALSO BE TAKEN OUT.

Mayor Garcia: G-35?

Z-356789 I THINK IT WAS ON THE ADDENDUM.

Mayor Garcia: I DON'T HAVE IT.

IT REPLACES Z-16. IT'S RELATED ON YOUR ADDENDUM. THAT'S RELATED TO STRATUS AND WILL BE TAKEN UP AT 5:45.

MAYOR, WE'LL JUST -- .

Mayor Garcia: I'M NOT SURE IBDZ THAT -- I UNDERSTAND THAT. I DON'T HAVE Z-35.

APPARENTLY THAT WAS ON THE ADDENDUM. AND WE COULD JUST READ THOSE ITEMS AT 5:45. YOU DON'T NEED TO -- DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THEM RIGHT NOW.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. SO GOING BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF THE FUNDING HEARINGS AND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCES AND RESTRICTED COVENANTS, Z-1 IS CONSENT FOR ALL THREE READINGS. NOW LET'S WATCH CLOSELY. WATCH ME CLOSELY ON THIS ONE TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M OKAY. Z-2 IS CONSENT FOR ALL THREE READINGS. Z-3 IS POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST THE 8th ON CONSENT. Z-4 IS CONSENT FOR THE FIRST READING. Z-5 IS CONSENT FOR POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JULY 18th. Z-7 IS CONSENT FOR ALL THREE READINGS. Z-9 IS CONSENT FOR ALL THREE READINGS. AND Z-8. AND Z-9 -- LET'S SEE. OKAY.

THAT'S PART OF THE STRATUS, Z-9.

Mayor Garcia: Z-9 THROUGH Z-23 IS ALL STRATUS. THAT WILL BE PICKED UP AT 5:45. Z-24 IS CONSENT FOR ALL THREE READINGS. Z-25 IS CONSENT TO TERMINATE THE RESTRICTED COVENANT. Z-26 IS CONSENT 3. 27 IS CONSENT FIRST. 28 IS CONSENT TO THREE READINGS. 29 IS CONSENT, THREE READINGS. 30 IS CONSENT, THREE READINGS. 31, CONSENT, THREE. 32, CONSENT FIRST READING. 33, CONSENT, FIRST READING.

MAYOR, 32 IS ALL THREE READINGS.

Mayor Garcia: 32 IS ALL THREE?

YES, SIR.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. THANK YOU. AND 34 IS CONSENT THREE. AND WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT 35?

35 WILL BE PART OF THE STRATUS. THAT WILL BE JUST PRESENTED AT THAT TIME.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. GLASGOW?

Mayor Garcia: I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION WHERE WE'RE CHANGING PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL TO LI. I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH ONE THAT WAS. IS THAT -- YEAH, NO. 32. IT'S SF-3 AND IT'S CHANGING TO LI-CO. IS THAT ONE OF THOSE PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT IS IN AN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND HAVE BEEN ZONED THE WRONG WAY BEFORE?

YES. MAYOR, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP, EVERYTHING SURROUNDING THIS PROPERTY IS PREDOMINANTLY SEASONED LI. IT IS -- THE PROPERTY IS WEST OF CONGRESS AVENUE SOUTH OF BEN WHITE BOULEVARD, AND THIS IS AN AREA THAT IS PREDOMINANTLY INDUSTRIAL.

Mayor Garcia: OTHER QUESTIONS? MAYOR PRO TEM?

Goodman: JUST A NOTE FOR PEOPLE TO NOTE THAT ALTHOUGH ON Z-8 THE ZONING REQUESTED IS SF-6, THAT WAS PART WHAF GENERATED A RELIST OF THE ORDINANCE FOR NOTIFICATION SO THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT MISLED BY NOTIFICATION.

Mayor Garcia: THE MOTION WILL BE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ORDINANCES AND IN THE CASE OF ITEM NUMBER Z-25, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE DETERMINATION OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. I'LL ENTER FINE A MOTION TO DO THAT. MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM. SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER WIN. DISCUSSION?

Mayor Garcia: ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED, NO.. THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM Z-6.

TEM Z-6, THIS CASE IS LOCATED AT 2031 EAST STATE HIGHWAY 71 ACROSS THE STREET FROM AUSTINBERG STROM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED INTERIM RURAL RESIDENTIAL T. APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CHANGE TO LIMITED INDUSTRIAL PDA WHICH ALLOW IT IS APPLICANT TO MODIFY TO LI TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT UPWARD. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING ZONING CHANGE TO GR FOR TRACT 2. THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT LIPDA, LIMITED INDUSTRIAL WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA OVERLAY FOR TRACT 1 AND GR FOR TRACT 2. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS TO GRANT CF-PO TO REALLY MAINTAIN A HEIGHT OF 60 FEET WHICH SEEMS TO BE THE HEIGHT THAT WOULD BE PREDOMINANT IN THE AREA. BASED ON THE ZONING TO THE EAST AND THE WEST OF THE SUBJECT TRACT. WE RECENTLY HAD A CASE THAT IS KNOWN AS INTERPORT THAT IS GOING TO BE LOCATED FURTHER EAST OF THIS TRACT WHERE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT WAS APPROXIMATELY 75 FEET. SO HENCE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. HOWEVER THE ZONING AND PLATING CONDITION DID RECOMMEND LI-PDA FOR TRACT 1, LIMITING THE HEIGHT TO 90 FEET AND ON TRACT 2, THEY RECOMMENDED GR. THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO SPEAK TO YOU AND HAVE PRESENTATION ABOUT INCREASING THAT HEIGHT TO 100 FEET AND EXPLAIN OTHER LIMITATIONS THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE WITH YOU.

Mayor Garcia: LET ME EXPLAIN THAT I FAILED TO BRING UP THE FACT THAT WE HAD SOME SPEAKERS BECAUSE THESE WERE CONSENT ITEMS. WE HAD SPEAKERS ON ITEM Z-4, Z-5 AND Z-8. SO AFTER WE FINISH WITH THIS ITEM, I'M GOING TO ASK THE RECONSIDERATION OF THOSE THREE ITEMS SO WE CAN HEAR SPEAKERS. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHY.

WERE THEY IN SUPPORT?

Mayor Garcia: WELL, THEY'RE -- IN Z-4 WE HAVE ONE AGAINST AND ONE NEUTRAL. ON 5 WE HAVE TWO AGAINST AND 8 WE HAVE FOUR. SO I THINK ON 8 I DON'T HAVE TO HAVE RECONSIDERATION. I'LL JUST READ THE NAMES INTO THE RECORD.

OKAY.

Mayor Garcia: THEY ALSO DON'T WANT TO SPEAK. SO I'LL ASK FOR A RECONSIDERATION OF Z4 AND 5 AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.

OKAY.

Mayor Garcia: SO LET ME JUST SAY THAT CATHERINE CALLAN AND BRUCE CALLAN ALL SIGNED UP FOR Z-8 AS BEING IN FAVOR OF. AND THAT ITEM IS PASSED. SO I WILL NOT BE CALLING YOUR NAMES AT THAT TIME THAT WE DO THE RECONSIDERATION OF THE OTHER TWO ITEMS. OKAY.

MAYOR, OTHER COUNCIL, MY NAME'S SARA CROCKER AND I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE JOHN Q. HAMMOND HOTEL. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING CONDITION WHEN I OFFERED WAS THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY FOOTPRINT ZONE A FOOTPRINT FOR THE HOTEL. THAT WOULD BE LI-PDA AND HAVE THE BALANCE OF THE TRACT SEASONED GR. WE DO NOT NEED THE ENTIRE TRACT ZONED LI-PDA. WE BASICALLY JUST NEED THIS PARTICULAR FOOTPRINT. OUR REQUEST IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT MR. HAM ONDZ AND THE JOHN Q. HAM ONDZ HOTEL FACILITY WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A BUSINESS CONFERENCE HOTEL. THIS SITE IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF THORNBERRY AND 71. IT'S ALMOST DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE CARGO ENTRANCE TO THE AIRPORT. MR. HAMMONS IS PROBABLY THE SINGLE LARGEST PRIVATELY OWNED HOTELIER IN THE UNITED STATES. HE OPERATES OVER 100 PROPERTIES IN 41 STATES, AND WHAT HE LIKES, WHAT HE'S FOUND AS HIS MARKETING NICHE OVER THE LAST 40 TO 50 YEARS IS HE LIKES CAPITAL CITIES AND HE LIKES AIRPORTS. HE CURRENTLY HAS AIRPORT HOTELS SUCH AS THESE, THESE BUSINESS CONFERENCE HOTELS AT DFW, AT HOUSTON HOBBY, AT PORTLAND, OREGON, DENVER, COLORADO, RALEIGH DURHAM, GREENSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, AND CHARLESTON, NORTH CAROLINA. ALL OF THESE HOTELS ARE EMBASSY SUITES AND THEY ARE TEN-STORY. OF THOSE HOTELS FOUR OF THEM WON THE TOP 10 AWARDS FOR EMBASSY SUITES LAST YEAR NATIONWIDE. BASICALLY THIS SITE IS LOCATED IN THE A-3 ZONE OUT BY THE AIRPORT WHICH DOES PERMIT CONSTRUCTION BY THE FAA UP TO 200 FEET. SO WE'RE WELL WITHIN THE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED AROUND THE AIRPORT. I KNOW THAT STAFF HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE HEIGHT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT TO THE COUNCIL THAT HAVING THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF A STRUCTURE NEXT TO AN AIRPORT IS FAIRLY COMMON PLACE IN MOST MIDSIZE OR LARGER CITIES LIKE AUSTIN, TEXAS. AND WE FEEL THAT THE HEIGHT FOR THE HOTEL IS APPROPRIATE. THE HOTEL WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 80,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THE FOOTPRINT. IT WILL HAVE 26,000 SQUARE FEET OF MEETING PLACE. IT WILL HAVE A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT, A POOL, AN EXERCISE ROOM, AND BASICALLY THIS IS THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PACKET THAT EMBASSY SUITES PACKAGES. THE HEIGHT OF THE HOTEL, THE EMBASSY SUITES HAS ASKED MR. HAMMONS TO BUILD IS 100 FEET. THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID REQUEST OR ASKED ME IF I COULD TRY TO WORK IT OUT AT 90. I HAVE WORKED, CONTACTED EMBASSY SUITES AND MR. HAMMONS AND WE'VE SPOKEN AT LENGTH ABOUT THIS. BASICALLY THE PACKAGE IS PUT TOGETHER IS BASED ON A NUMBER OF ROOMS IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THEIR MEETING SPACE, AND THE INVESTMENT THAT'S THEY ARE PUTTING IN HERE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT THE COUNCIL GRANT THIS ON FIRST READING AND ALLOW ME TO HAVE THE 100 FEET. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MS. CROCKER. IS IT 80,000 OR 90,000?

IT'S AN 80,000 SQUARE FOOT FOOTPRINT. WE HAVE 10,000 -- WE WOULD LIKE TO ZONE 90,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THE LI-PDA WHICH WILL GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM SINCE WE DON'T HAVE THE SITE PLAN NAILED DOWN COMPLETELY YET TO BE ABLE TO -- IF WE HAVE TO MOVE THE HOTEL FROM ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER, I WOULDN'T BE -- I WOULD HAVE THAT SORT OF WIGGLE ROOM.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND YOU WANT THIS ON FIRST READING ONLY?

YES, SIR.

Mayor Garcia: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

Councilmember Avarez: IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION 100 FEET OR IS IT DIFFERENT ON PLANNING COMMISSION?

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS ACTUALLY CF ZONING WHICH WOULD LIMIT THE HEIGHT TO 60 FEET. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE ZONING AND PLATING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.

Councilmember Avarez: OKAY. WELL, I'M GOING TO -- I THINK BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF USE IT IS AND WHERE IT IS, I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO -- WHETHER WE GO FORWARD WITH THE 100 FOOT -- .

Mayor Garcia: IS THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION ON FIRST READING?

Councilmember Avarez: TO GRANT THE LI-PDA, I GUESS THAT'S RECOMMENDED IN THE PLATING AND ZONING WITH THE CHANGE THAT IT BE TO 100 FEET.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. DISCUSSION? MS. GLASGOW? COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER HAS A QUESTION.

Slusher: MS. GLASGOW, DID THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON HEIGHT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE AIRPORT BEING NEARBY AS IN PUBLIC SAFETY?

NO. THE AIRPORT, WE CHECKED WITH THE AIRPORTS. THE AIRPORT DEPARTMENT. AND 100 FEET WAS NOT A SAFETY CONCERN AT ALL. IT WAS MORE FOR COMPATIBILITY.

OKAY. THANKS.

AND THE MOTION INCLUDES THAT THE LI-PDA WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE 90 SQUARE FEET, THE 100 SQUARE FEET. SHE IS LIMITED TO THE FOOTPRINT OF 90,000 SQUARE FEET.

WE CAN ADD THAT TO THE MOTION.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY.

AND THIS IS THE FIRST READING.

Mayor Garcia: FIRST READING ONLY.

AND ALSO THE REMAINDER OF TRACT 1 WOULD BE ZONED GR, JUST THE WAY THEY HAVE IT.

Mayor Garcia: LI-PDA FOR 90,000 SQUARE FEET AT 100 FOOT HEIGHT.

CORRECT. AND THE REMAINDER OF THAT WOULD BE ZONED GR.

Mayor Garcia: ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING.

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES WITH A VOTE OF 6-1 WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM TEMPORARILY OUT. AT THIS TIME I WOULD ASK FOR A VOTE FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ITEM Z-4 AND 5. MOTION MY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. DO I HAVE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? MS. GLASGOW, THESE TWO ITEMS, Z-5 PARTICULARLY IS BEING POSTPONED. Z-4 -- .

CORRECT. ON Z-4 I BELIEVE THERE'S SOMEONE HERE AND THE AGENT IS STILL HERE.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO RECONSIDER ITEM Z-5 BECAUSE THAT'S POSTPONED.

THAT'S CORRECT.

Mayor Garcia: SO THE MOTION THERE WOULD BE ONLY FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ITEM Z-4. IS THAT OKAY WITH THE MOTION AND SECOND? OKAY. SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF RECONSIDERATION OF ITEM 4, PLEASE INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, NO? MOTION CARRIES WITH A VOTE OF 6-1 WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM TEMPORARILY OUT.

[ PLEASE HOLD FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS ]

THE PROPERTY WAS ZONED SF-2. AND WHEN WE BEGAN STUDYING IT, WHAT WE FELT LIKE WAS IN TERMS OF SMART GROWTH, PRINCIPLES AND CONSERVATION PLANNING PRINCIPLES, WE FELT LIKE WE WANTED TO KEEP THE DENSITY THE SAME AND SIMPLY MAKE THE LOTS SMALLER AND CONVERT THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY TO OPEN SPACE, AND THAT'S THE 10 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS A MEANINGFUL OPEN SPACE WHICH RUNS ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY. WE ALSO HAD A NUMBER OF MEETINGS WITH GEORGE ZAPALAC AND OTHERS TO TEST THE CONNECTIVITY STREET STANDARDS. WHAT WE'VE LEARNED IN A LOT OF OUR COMMUNITY PLANNING PROJECTS IS IT'S NOT THE VOLUME OF THE TRAFFIC, IT'S THE SPEED OF THE TRAFFIC THAT IS THE SAFETY ISSUE. SO OUR APPROACH WAS TO HAVE SMALLER BLOCKS AND INTRODUCE TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES. AND IN THIS CASE WHAT WE HAVE ARE A NUMBER OF ROUNDABOUTS AND ALSO DIVIDED MEDIANS. AND THE GOAL OF WHICH IS TO SAVE TREES AS WELL AS SLOW DOWN THE TRAFFIC. SO WHAT WE HAVE IS A PUBLIC AMENITY AREA, A WET POND, A DETENTION POND AND ABOUT TWO MILES OF TRAILS GOING THROUGH THE PROJECT AND ALONG THE PERIPHERY. WE'VE CONNECTED TO STREETS -- STREETS TO THE WEST, MAJOR CONNECTION TO DAVIS LANE AND MANCHACA. AND THERE'S NO CONNECTION TO THE NORTH, TO THE SUBDIVISION TO THE NORTH. AND IN FACT, THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER ZONE EXCEPT FOR POTENTIALLY SOME PEDESTRIAN TRAILS. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS IS 317 LOTS, WHICH IS LESS THAN THE ALLOWABLE -- IF THIS WAS A SINGLE-FAMILY-2, AN ADDITIONAL AMENITY CENTER. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT. WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, SIR. MR. JACK BROWN?

I AM GLAD THERE IS LESS BEING PROPOSED FOR THAT AREA. ONE OF THE ISSUES I WANTED TO RAISE AND ARE CONCERNED, MY WIFE AND I LIVE NEAR THE NORTHERN SIDE AND OUR PROPERTY ABUTS AGAINST SOUTH BOGGY CREEK TO THE NORTH AND WE'VE REMODELLED OUR HOME LAST JULY, AND IN MID AUGUST WE WERE FLOODED ON NOVEMBER THE 15TH. WE SPENT $20,000 TO HAVE OUR HOME PUT BACK INTO SHAPE. I'M SURE THERE WERE A NUMBER OF OTHER PEOPLE ALONG BOGGY CREEK THAT WERE FLOODED AS WELL. IT'S TRUE BOGGY CREEK CAME UP INTO MY BACKYARD AS WELL AS MY NEIGHBOR'S. MOST OF THE DAMAGE WAS RUNOFF. THE CREEK COULDN'T HOLD IT BASICALLY AND SHILOH BECAME A TRIBUTARY LOOKING FOR WAYS TO MAKE ITS WAY INTO BOG BY CREEK. SO I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG BOGGY CREEK CREATING MORE RUNOFF. AND I KNOW THERE ARE THE PONDS THAT ARE PROPOSED. I THINK THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF MAYBE SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING ON. I THINK THAT THIS IS MORE DEVELOPMENT CREATING YET MORE RUNOFF IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA. I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT BEING DEVELOPED IN A FLOOD ZONE. THERE ARE FLOOD ZONE IN THAT AREA AND THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT BEING CONSIDERED. I GUESS THE OTHER ISSUE, THE MEDIAN DOWN THE MIDDLE IS I GUESS WHERE SOMEBODY CAN TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, A COUPLE OF EXXON PIPELINES RUN. LONGHORN PIPELINE RUNS ALONG THE NORTHERN EXTREME OF THIS TRACT. AS I UNDERSTAND THE CITY DENIED THE -- DID NOT APPROVE THE REPLACEMENT OF THAT PIPELINE ALONG THAT STRETCH. THEY DID NOT RECOGNIZE THE CITY'S AUTHORITY AND PROCEEDED TO -- AND THEY'RE STILL WORKING ON IT AND THEY HAVE JUST RECENTLY CONCLUDED REPLACING THE LINE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA. SO I GUESS I'M ALSO HOPING FOR SOME CONSISTENCY IN VELOCITY THAT IF WE DON'T APPROVE THE PIPELINES TO BE PLACED THERE, WHY WOULD WE SAY THAT IT'S OKAY TO GO AHEAD AND DEVELOP ON TOP OF EVEN MORE PIPELINE?

Mayor Garcia: MR. JOHN GARCIA. YOU INDICATED THAT YOU DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND YOU'RE NEUTRAL.

[ INAUDIBLE ]

Mayor Garcia: SURE, YOU CAN COME UP.

GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JOHN GARCIA. I AM CONTEMPLATING BUYING A HOUSE ON STAR CRAFT CIRCLE. IT'S OFF OF DAVIS LANE. AND BASICALLY MY QUESTION IS I'M CURRENTLY IN MY OPTION PERIOD TO BUY THE HOUSE. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE DEVELOPER. THERE'S GOING TO BE A PERIMETER OF GREENBELT AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. DOES THAT EXTEND ON THAT SIDE AS WELL?

YES, SIR, THE ENTIRE PERIMETER OF THE PROJECT.

AND IN THIS GREENBELT ARE BIKE TRAILS, PEDESTRIAN TRAILS PROPOSED.

HIKE AND BIKE TRAILS, TWO MILES.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET SOME KIND OF COPY OF WHAT -- LIKE THE SQUARE FEET BETWEEN LIKE MY BACKYARD, MY PROPOSED BACKYARD AND WHAT MY MAYBE FUTURE NEIGHBORS' BACKYARD WOULD BE.

SURE, WE'LL BE GLAD TO MEET WITH YOU AND SHOW YOU. IT'S A SCALE MAP AND THAT WILL HELP YOU MEASURE THE DISTANCE.

THAT WAS MY MAIN CONCERN.

Mayor Garcia: THOSE ARE ALL THE SPEAKERS THAT WE HAVE. THE APPLICANT NOW HAS THREE MINUTES OF REBUTTAL.

MAYOR, LET'S SEE IF I CAN FIND AN ANALOGY. WE HAVE -- THIS PROJECT -- WE'VE BEEN IN THIS PROCESS FOR ABOUT TWO YEARS. AND A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF TIME AND DISCUSSION HAS GONE INTO THE PIPELINE ISSUE. IN FACT, WE HAVE IN HAND THE LONGHORN PIPELINE ISSUE BY GRANTING LONGHORN AN EASEMENT SO THAT THEY ACTUALLY MOVE THE LINE FURTHER SOUTH OUT OF THE BACKYARDS IN QUESTION. WE'VE ALSO PROPOSED AND STAFF HAS ACCEPTED BERMING WITH RESPECT TO THE OTHER PIPELINES IN THE CASE OF SOME SORT OF SPILL EVENT, THE BERMING WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CONTAIN. THIS HAS BEEN SUBSTANTIALLY REVIEWED BY THE CITY, INCLUDING THE FIRE MARSHAL. WITH RESPECT TO THE DRAINAGE, WE ARE BY LAW TO NOT EXACERBATE THE SITUATION. THE DRAINAGE HAS TO BE AS GOOD OR BETTER THAN IT WAS PREDEVELOPMENT. SO WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT WE CAN ADDRESS THAT. THIS IS BEING RECOMMENDED TO YOU BY STAFF AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND HAS THE SUPPORT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT'S IN THE AREA. I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

Slusher: MAYOR, I'VE GOT SOME.

Mayor Garcia: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

Slusher: HOW FAR FROM THE PIPE LOAN, LONGHORN PIPELINE IS IT GOING TO BE?

THERE ARE NO HOUSES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PIPELINE.

Slusher: WHAT'S THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS?

I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THAT REGULATION IS.

Slusher: DOES STAFF KNOW?

COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, THE LAST TIME WE HAD A CASE CLOSE TO A PIPELINE WE FOUND OUT THERE WERE NO REGULATIONS REGARDING DISTANCE. THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS REGARDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS --

Slusher: THERE ARE NONE? I COULDN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS NONE OR IT WASN'T AS MUCH AS WE WOULD HAVE LIKED. SO THERE'S NONE AT ALL? I GUESS NOT SINCE THERE'S HOUSES IN HERE WHERE IT RUNS IN THE BACKYARD NEARBY HERE.

WE DIDN'T FIND THAT THERE WERE -- THAT THE PIPELINE DEVELOPERS SIMPLY HAVE AN EASEMENT, BUT NO OTHER SET BACK REQUIREMENTS WERE REQUIRED.

Slusher: WHAT IS THE 200-FOOT BASED ON? WHAT KIND OF SAFETY CONSIDERATION IS THAT BASED ON?

[ INAUDIBLE ] IT'S A DESIRE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SPACE.

WE HAD EXTENSIVE MEETINGS WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL, WITH PIPELINE EXPERTS FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY ACTUALLY TO GET THIS THING BROKEN LOOSE. IT HELD US UP FOR ABOUT EIGHT MONTHS, THE DISCUSSION OF THE PIPELINE. THE 200 FEET IS NOT NECESSARILY A FORMULA. BASICALLY WE SAID WE'LL MOVE THE PIPELINE ON TO OUR PROPERTY TO HELP THE NEIGHBORS IN SHILOH TO GET THE PIPELINE OUT OF THEIR BACKYARDS. AND WE HAVE OUR HOUSES AS FAR AWAY AS WE CAN GET IT WITHOUT BEING IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE. SO WE ARE UP AGAINST CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, THAT'S WHERE OUR HOUSES START. SO THERE WAS REALLY NO METHOD OR MADNESS TO THE DISTANCE.

Slusher: WHAT ABOUT WHEN PEOPLE BUY HOMES OR LOOK TO BUY HOMES IN THE AREA? ARE THEY GOING TO BE NOTIFIED THE PIPELINE'S THERE?

YES, SIR. WE HAVE EXTENSIVE SUBDIVISION ADDENDA THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE SIGN THAT THEY'RE NOTIFIED OF PIPELINES, THE FOLKS THEY SHOULD CONTACT IF THERE ARE ANY ISSUES.

Slusher: HOW DO YOU GO ABOUT THAT? BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN YOU BUY A HOUSE YOU SIGN A LOT OF DOCUMENTS ABOUT THAT HIGH. WILL THAT COME UP TO THEM AT THE LAST MINUTE?

NO, SIR, ACTUALLY WHEN THEY SIGN A CONTRACT. SO WHEN THEY ARE SIGNING A CONTRACT FOR THE HOUSE, THESE ISSUES ARE ALL DISCUSSED WITH THEM SO IT'S NOT A SURPRISE LATER ON.

Slusher: OKAY. WE'RE JUST DOING THIS ON FIRST READING? I'D LIKE TO TALK TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT MORE ABOUT THAT, BUT I'M GLAD YOU'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THEM. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THIS ITEM ON FIRST READING. MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

Mayor Garcia: THAT'S ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE UNDER THE ZONING HEARINGS. SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS UNTIL 5:45 ACTUALLY, AT WHICH TIME WE WILL TAKE UP THE ITEMS DEALING WITH THE STRATUS PROPERTY. MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. I'LL SECOND THAT. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES. 5:30 IS PROCLAMATIONS. THE COUNCIL DOESN'T COME BACK WITH ME. LIVE MUSIC AND PROCLAMATIONS AT 5:30 AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK UP AT 57:45. WE'RE IN RECESS UNTIL 5:45.

..

Mayor Garcia: TODAY WE HAVE A LITTLE EXTRA TIME BEFORE WE BEGIN THE PROCLAMATIONS, SO I'VE ASKED THE MUSICIANS IF THEY WANT TO PLAY A LITTLE EARLIER. EVERY TIME WE HAVE A COUNCIL MEETING WE HAVE MUSICIANS AT 5:30, BUT BETWEEN NOW AND 5:30, WE DON'T HAVE ANY ACTIVITIES, SO I ASKED THEM IF THEY WANT TO PLAY AND THEY SAID YES. IF YOU ALL COULD, YOU KNOW, INTRODUCE YOURSELVES.

HELLO.

I'M CALVIN RUSSELL.

[ APPLAUSE ]

[ INAUDIBLE ]. (music) MUSIC PLAYING (music).

YOU KNOW, I WAS FLYING AMERICAN AIRLINES DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY AND "THE AMERICAN WAY" THAT THEY HAVE, THERE'S AN ARTICLE ABOUT MICHAEL, THE GUY WHO PLAYS THE BONGOS NAKED,

Mayor Garcia: WE HAVE BASICALLY THREE ITEMS LEFT ON THE AGENDA. TWO OF THOSE ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT DON'T HAVE THAT MANY SPEAKERS. AS A MATTER OF FACT, ONE OF THEM HAS ONLY ONE SPEAKER. SO WE'RE GOING TO DO ITEMS NUMBER 115 AND 116 FIRST. THOSE ITEMS ARE 6:00 TIME STARTING AND WE THINK WE CAN GET THOSE DONE QUITE, YOU KNOW, QUICKLY. WHEN WE GET THROUGH WITH THAT, THEN WE'LL GO INTO THE STRATUS ITEMS WHICH HAVE A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND SOME ZONING. THERE ARE SOME SEATS THIS SIDE OF THE CHAMBER. SO IF YOU COULD FIND YOUR WAY TO LEAVE THE PASSAGEWAY CLEAR SO WHEN PEOPLE LEAVE, THEY WILL NOT -- DO WE HAVE A FIRE MARSHAL HERE? OKAY. IF Y'ALL WILL GIVE ME -- IF YOU THINK I NEED TO ANNOUNCE SOMETHING, YOU PLEASE LET ME KNOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING, THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL BACK TO ORDER AND THE FIRST ITEM IS ITEM 115, WHICH, TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE PROCESS FOR VARIANCES FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS 25-1-133, 25-1-134, 25-7-61 (A) 5) B), 25-8-281, 25-8-321 A, 25-8-341, 25-8-342 AND 25-8-361 FOR CERTAIN WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS NEEDED TO ELIMINATE SAN SEAR SEWER OVERFLOWS. IS THERE SOMEBODY HERE FROM WATER AND WASTEWATER WHO WANTS TO SPEAK BRIEFLY ON THIS? WE ONLY HAVE ONE SPEAKER.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M HERE TO, AND THE WATER DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS PER AND I THINK TO THIS ORDINANCE. WE DID THE PRESENTATION YESTERDAY AND ARE HERE TO FIELD ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE ON THE PRESENTATION.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF FROM WATER AND WASTEWATER AND WATERSHED PROTECTION? OKAY. WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER. LARRY HOLFORD. HE DOES NOT -- ACTUALLY HE DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK. SO HE IS IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE. SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ORDINANCE.

Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED? NO. THE VOTE IS APPROVED OF 6-1. THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER 116. AND THAT'S TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE CITIZEN COMMENT ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S 2001-2002 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN REQUIRED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT. AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S 2001-2002 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 333 OF TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND THE CITY'S PROPOSED 2002-2003 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN REQUIRED BY HUD, AND THE CITY'S PROPOSED 2002-2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REQUIRED BY THE CODE. THIS IS THE SECOND OF TWO CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THIS PLAN. THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD ON MAY 23rd, 2002. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN ON THIS TONIGHT. MR. HILGERS?

YES. YES, MAYOR. BRIEFLY MY NAME IS PAUL HILGERS. I'M THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN. THIS IS THE SECOND OF TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND JUST PROCEDURALLY WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THIS WILL BE THE COMPLETION OF OUR PUBLIC INPUT-RECEIVING PROCESS. WE WILL BE MAKING FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND BRING THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL TO THE COUNCIL ON AUGUST THE 1ST. WE HAVE A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING ON TUESDAY, JULY 16th WHERE THEY WILL FINALIZE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AND THOSE WILL BE ARRESTED, AS WELL AS PART OF OUR FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF. AND SO WITH THAT, MAYOR, I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE SPEAKERS HAVE AGREED THAT THEY WOULD TRY TO LIMIT THEIR NUMBERS TO ONE OR TWO SPOKES PERSONS IN THE INTEREST OF TIME AND RECOGNIZING THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY, ALMOST ALL OF THEM, SUBMITTED WRITTEN TESTIMONY ABOUT THE NEEDS THAT THEY'VE IDENTIFIED AND THEY WOULD REITERATE THEM AGAIN THIS EVENING.

Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS FOR MR. HILGERS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET ME BEGIN BY READING INTO THE RECORD THE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. ARTIS CONSA DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. IS HE SUPPORTS THE YOUTH INVESTMENT FROM AND NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003. THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSISTING CENTER PROVIDES FOR AN APPROACH TO ASSIST TROUBLED YOUTH. SERVICES CAN BE BETTER PROVIDED BY THOSE MOST IN NEED, AND THIS INITIATIVE IS DESIGNED TO ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING ISSUES, THE PROBLEMS THAT LEAD TO CRIME. IN ADDITION, SERVICES CAN BE PROVIDED FOR MORE LASTING IMPACT. THANK YOU. AND THAT'S FROM HER. DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF, AND SHE ALSO HAS A NOTE. PRIORITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE CREATION AND SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES FOR YOUTH AND FAMILIES. SUPPORTING THE YOUTH AND FAMILY CENTER ALLOWS SERVICES TO BE DIRECTED TOWARDS STRENGTHENING FAMILIES. THIS IS A GREAT NEED. THERE IS A GREAT NEED FOR INITIATIVES THAT SUPPORT FAMILY-DRIVEN CULTURALLY COMPETENT, COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES THAT LEAD TO EMPOWER FAMILIES AND SUCCESSFUL. THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER ENSURES FAMILIES GAIN ACCESS TO WHAT THEY NEED TO BUILD UPON THE STRENGTH WHILE OVER COMING THEIR CHALLENGES. STEPHEN BRIAN DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND WRITES TO THE FOLLOWING. PLEASE ACCEPT THIS AS SUPPORT FOR YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER. AS PART OF A COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO ADDRESS A FRAGMENTED AND LIMITED SERVICE SYSTEM FOR TROUBLED YOUTH, ESPECIALLY THOSE BELOW AGE 10. SERVICES ARE NOT ALWAYS DIRECTED TO THOSE MOST IN NEED. THIS MODEL WAS DEVELOPED AS PART OF THE COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS INVOLVING MORE THAN 75 STAKE HOLDERS. MOST CITY AND COUNTY HAVE ALREADY INVESTED FUNDS IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE FAC SO THAT THE CITY DOLLARS CAN GO TOWARD DIRECT SERVICES FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH. PLEASE CONSIDER THE CONTINUING OF YAFAC IN THE DEPARTMENT OF SPENDING PRIORITIES. THANK YOU, STEPHEN BRYAN. AND RONY EARL, ALSO REGISTERED NOT WISHING TO SPEAK AND IN FAVOR OF. AND HE WRITES: I AM WRITING ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY OF THE JUSTICE COUNCIL IN THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO STRESS OUR STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER AS A MEANS OF PROVIDING HUMANS SERVICES TO FAMILIES IN AUSTIN AND TRAVIS COUNTY. WE SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT CENTER BECAUSE IT PROVIDES A SINGLE ACCESS POINT FOR SOCIAL SERVICES MAKING THE SOCIAL SERVICES SEEM LESS CONFUSING FOR FAMILIES, TO PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ASSIST AND STRENGTHEN FAMILIES; THREE, PROVIDES FOLLOW-UP FOR FAMILIES TO ENSURE THAT THEY CONTINUE TO GROW; FOUR, SEN HANCES COMMUNICATION AMONG SOCIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGGIES, THEREBY REDUCING DUPLICATION OF SERVICES SPEM AND FIVE, PROVIDES COST-EFFECTIVENESS BY PROVIDING INTERVENTION SERVICES TO DIVERT YOUTH FROM THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM. THE COMMUNITY JUSTICE COUNCIL AND DISTRICT TOSH'S OFFICE ARE PLEASED TO COLLABORATE WITH THE SCHOOL REPRESENTATIVES, SOCIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS, BUSINESS LEADERS, AND COMMUNITY REMEMBERS TO HELP DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER. I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE COUNCIL'S SUPPORT IN THIS ENDEAVOR. AND THAT'S FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY. DR. LYNELL CLARK, IF YOU CAN COME UP.

THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER. I AM WITH THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AND I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE DISTRICT AS WELL. AS THE DROPOUT PREVENTION COORDINATOR I HAVE FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE AND OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THE BENEFITS OF SUCH A COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM AND INITIATIVE. NOT ONLY DOES THIS INITIATIVE SUPPORT FAMILIES, IT STRENGTHENS OUR STUDENTS. WE RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT AS MUCH AS WE TRY TO DO FOR OUR STUDENTS, WE CANNOT DO IT ALONE. IT TAKES AN EFFORT. IT TAKES A COMMUNITY EFFORT, AND THIS EFFORT HAS COME TO FRUITION WITH THIS TYPE OF PROGRAM WHERE WE NOT ONLY ARE ABLE TO HELP STUDENTS BUT WHEN WE HELP THE FAMILY, EVERYONE WINS. SO ON BEHALF OF THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, I STRONGLY RECOMMEND AND HOPE THAT YOU WILL AGAIN CONTINUE THE FUNDING.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, DR. CLARK. WAYNE HOLTSMAN DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK. AS PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF THE AUSTIN PROJECT THAT MANAGES THE YOUTH AND FPLLY ASSISTANCE CENTER AND AUSTIN ISD ON BEHALF OF THE 25 BOARDMEMBERS WHO STRUGGLE, THE CENTER HAS AN IMPORTANT PROGRAM BY THE CITY AND COUNTY AND THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT. THE 225,000 IN THE CURRENT CITY BUDGET FOR 2002-2003'S CRITICAL ITEM FOR CONTINUING THE CITY IN THE AUSTIN PROJECT AND THE CENTER. OUR BOARD HAS PLANNED TO UNDERTAKE A MAJOR CAMPAIGN RAISING FUNDS FROM PRIVATE CORPORATIONS FOR THIS COMMITMENT TO THE CENTER BUT ONLY IF THE CITY CONTINUES TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT AS CURRENTLY IT IS DOING IN THE 2002- -- 2002-2003 BUDGET. LEONARD RAY SAENZ DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND IS IN FAVOR OF. SUSAN DAWSON. SUSAN DAWSON. SHE DOESN'T INDICATE WHETHER SHE'S FOR OR AGAINST IT BUT , I THE CITY CENTERED FARMERS MARKET. BOB RUDEIS HOWEVER NOT WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE FAMILY ASSISTMENT CENTER, FOR AT HICH RISK YOUTH, THE SERVICES THEY NEED. -- AT-RISK YOUTH. TRACY, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK, REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF FOR THE CITY CENTER FARMERS MARKET. TERESA, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK AND IN FAVOR OF THE FARMERS MARKET PROPOSED BY THE SUSTAINABLE FOOD CENTER. WILLIAM SPAM, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK AND REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF THE CITY-CENTERED FARMERS MARKET PROPOSED BY THE SUSTAINABLE FOOD CENTER. GAIL ROTH, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK -- WISHING TO SPEAK, IN FAVOR OF THE FUNDING FOR THE FARMERS MARKET. MADDEN, NOT WISH TO GO SPEAK, IN FAVOR OF THE CITY CENTERED FARMERS MARKET. JENNIFER SPAWN, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK. REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF THE CITY-CENTERED FARMERS MARKET PROPOSED BY THE SUSTAINABLE FOOD CENTER. KELLY COMMIS, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK. REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. DEBRA MICHELLE. DEBRA MICHELLE? REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF THE FAMILY ASSISTMENT CENTER, YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSISTMENT CENTER. RACHEL WOLBERG, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK. IN FAVOR OF THE YOUTH AND FPLLY ASSISTMENT CENTER. RACHEL -- SHE WANTS TO SPEAK. IS SHE OUTSIDE? CHRISTINE A, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK. SHE ALSO ITION IN -- ALSO IS IN FAVOR OF THE SUSTAINABLE FOOD PROJECT. CLARICE EULICKE, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK, IN FAVOR OF THE AUSTIN PROJECT YOUTH AND FAMILY CENTER AND SUSTAINABLE FOODS. WENDY ANDREDES? IN FAVOR. I SAYS I STRONGLY URGE THE CONTINUATION OF FUNDING ON THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSISTMENT CENTER PROJECT. LAURA ATKINS, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF CHILDREN SERVICES. IS SHE HERE? [ INAUDIBLE ]

Mayor Garcia: ARE YOU MS. ATKINS?

I'M DEBRA MICHAELS.

OKAY. I'M GOING TO CALL YOUR -- I ALREADY CALLED YOUR NAME. YOU WANT TO COME IN AND SPEAK?

SURE.

Mayor Garcia: WELCOME.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS DEBRA MICHAEL. I'M THE MANAGER OF THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER FOR THE AUSTIN PROJECT, A COMMUNITYWIDE PROGRAM, A CITY/COUNTY INITIATIVE SERVING YOUTH AND FAMILIES IN THE EAST AUSTIN AREA. WE'RE IN THE JOHNSON HIGH SCHOOL TRACK AND WE'RE USING A WRAPAROUND TYPE APPROACH WHICH FAVORS FAMILY CHOICE AND VOICE TO WHERE THE FAMILIES CAN CHOOSE WHAT SERVICES THEY FEEL LIKE WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THEIR CHILDREN, AND COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT MONEY IS USED TO PURCHASE SERVICES. SOME OF THE SERVICES THAT WE'VE PURCHASED THAT SEEM TO BE THE HIGHEST PRIORITY ARE PARENT COACHING, SO THAT TO GIVE THE PARENTS SOMEBODY TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THEM AND TO HELP THEM LEARN PARENTING SKILLS, AS WELL AS SET UP BEHAVIOR PLANS FOR THEIR CHILDREN THAT ARE HAVING SEVERE PROBLEMS. THAT'S ONE OF OUR SERVICES THAT WE PURCHASE THROUGH A COMMUNITY AGENCY. SOME OF THE OTHER SERVICES WE PURCHASE ARE MENTORING FOR THE CHILDREN, TUTORING, INDIVIDUAL HOME-BASED TUTORING, WHICH IS VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND ON THE EAST SIDE, AND A LOT OF FAMILIES, THE KIDS CAN'T MAKE IT IN GROUP TUTORING SETTINGS. SO IT'S A VERY INDIVIDUALIZED SERVICE THAT THE KIDS NEED. SO THE MENTORING, TUTORING, AND THEN WE DO BASIC NEEDS ALSO. SO TO KEEP PEOPLE ON THE EAST SIDE FROM BEING EVICTED, WE HELP WITH BASIC NEEDS, UTILITIES, RENTAL ASSISTANCE, FOOD. WE DO -- WE'RE LIKE THE BROKER FOR SERVICES. AND SO WE LOOK AT LEVERAGE SERVICES THAT WE COULD OBTAIN THROUGH COMMUNITYWIDE AGGIES FIRST. SO WE LOOK AT -- AGENCIES FIRST. SO WE LOOK AT SERVICES LIKE THE FOOD BANK, SOME OF THOSE SERVICES THAT WE CAN ACCESS AND THEN IF WE CAN'T FIND THOSE SERVICES THAT EITHER MEET THE CLIENT'S NEEDS BECAUSE OF LOCATION, BECAUSE OF NOT BEING AVAILABLE WHEN THE CLIENT NEEDS THE SERVICE, THEN WE LOOK AT PURCHASING THE SERVICE FOR THE CLIENT. AND SO THERE'S LEVELS OF SERVICE PROVISION THAT'S NEEDED BY THIS COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. AND SO AGAIN THAT'S THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER. IT IS A COMMUNITYWIDE INITIATIVE. WE'VE STARTED IN THE JOHNSON HIGH SCHOOL TRACK. SO WE'RE SERVING THOSE MIDDLE SCHOOLS, ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, AND HIGH SCHOOLS. AND WE ARE STATIONED OUT, OUR MAIN OFFICE IS OUT IN THE EAST AUSTIN AREA.

THANK YOU.

UH-HUH. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: SUSAN DAWSON? WELCOME, MS. DAWSON.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBERS, I I WILL BE BRIEF. I KNOW THAT THERE IS A LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE HERE TONIGHT. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AMERICAN YOUTH WORKS WHERE I AM THE FIRST VICE CHAIR AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS. AS YOU ALL KNOW, THERE ARE MANY UNMET NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY FOR THE YOUTH IN OUR COMMUNITY, BUT THOSE ARE NOT SPREAD EQUALLY THROUGHOUT THE CENTRAL TEXAS AREA. MANY OF US HAVE BEEN WORKING STRONGLY ON DEVELOPING MORE CORE CAPACITY IN EAST AUSTIN, ESPECIALLY FOR THE UNMET NEEDS OF YOUTH. WE ARE WORKING TO DO THAT THROUGH A NEW AMERICAN YOUTH WORKS, YOUTH DEVELOPMENT CENTER. I ASK YOU TO PREAWARD $500,000 IN 2003 FUNDS. THIS AMOUNT WILL BE HIGHLY LEVERAGED BY FEDERAL MONEY AND WILL GO TO MEET HUGE NEEDS THAT WE THINK CAN BE VERY EFFECTIVELY CARED FOR AND PRODUCE RESULTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MS. DAWSON. JAMES TEMPLETON.s( I THINK THEY NEED TO WAIT TO SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME MICROPHONES. WIRE GETTING THERE. -- WE'RE GETTING THERE. [ INAUDIBLE ]

Mayor Garcia: HOLD IT JUST A SECOND.

OKAY. [ INAUDIBLE ] IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR ME TO DO THIS.

WE DON'T WANT TO GET HURT OR GET KILLED. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JENNIFER McFAIL. IF WE COULD GET SOME ROOM FOR JENNIFER TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE. DO YOU WANT TO -- .

MR. MAYOR, MY NAME IS DAVID WITY. I'M WITH ADAPTATECH. IN THE INTEREST OF CONSERVING TIME AND CONSOLIDATING OUR COMMENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN PREPARED IN WRITTEN FORMAT FOR YOUR PERUSEMENT. ANNA DIAZ WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL NOW.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. MS. DIAZ, AND THEN JENNIFER McFAIL. YOU CAN USE THIS OTHER MICROPHONE.

THIS ONE?

Mayor Garcia: THAT ONE, YES.

I'M AMANDA DIE AS WITH ADAPT OF TEXAS AND I'M GOING TO SPEAK TONIGHT FOR OUR GROUP, AND WHAT WE'RE REALLY INTERESTED IN IS TWO ISSUES. ONE IS THE VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT, WHICH EXPIRES ACTUALLY ON OCTOBER 9th OF THIS YEAR, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING PUT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTION PLAN STATING THAT THEY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR IT UNTIL THE 38 COMPLEXES THAT ARE INVOLVED ARE IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE THE LAST MEETING WE HAD, WE WERE TOLD THAT NONE OF THEM ARE IN COMPLIANCE YET. AND CONSIDERING THAT IT BASICALLY ENDS THIS YEAR, WE WOULD REALLY, YOU KNOW, LIKE SOME KIND OF A COMMITMENT THAT Y'ALL WILL CONTINUE TO TRY TO GET THESE THINGS, THESE PROPERTY OWNERS TO DO THE WORK THAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO. THE OTHER THING IS THE HOUSING TRUST FUND. LAST WEEK THE HOUSE FINANCE SERVICE COMMITTEE VOTED ON THE HOUSING BILL WHICH WILL GO OUT ON THE FLOOR AND -- OF THE SENATE ABT HOUSE -- AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR A VOTE, HOPEFULLY SOON, AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT WIND UP PASSING. SO WE WOULD LIKE SOME KIND OF A COMMITMENT TO THAT SO THAT WHEN THIS DOES BECOME A FEDERAL LAW THAT THE MONEY THAT'S IN THE HOUSING TRUST FUND CAN BE MATCHED BY FEDERAL DOLLARS, WHICH IS WHAT THIS BILL IS, YOU KNOW, HOPING TO DO. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. JENNIFER McFAIL.

SHE WAIVED.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS WE HAVE.

MR. MAYOR, YOU CALLED OUR NAMES JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO AND WE WERE SORT OF STUCK OUTSIDE.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY.

I'M LAURA ATKINS. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF CHILDREN SERVICES FOR TRAVIS COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE PLAN AND SPECIFICALLY IN FAVOR OF THE FUNDS THAT ARE DEDICATED FOR YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES. AND I JUST WANTED TO LET Y'ALL KNOW THAT IN MAY OF 2000, THE COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK DID A PUBLIC SAFETY ASSESSMENT. THEY CAME UP WITH A RECOMMENDATION ABOUT THE NEED FOR A MORE COORDINATED PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEM FOR YOUTH IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND THROUGH THAT PROCESS THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER MODEL GOT DEVELOPED AND IMPLEMENTED OVER THIS PAST YEAR. IT USES A WRAPAROUND APPROACH AND WHAT IS SPECIAL AND UNIQUE ABOUT THIS SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEM IS THAT IT FOCUSES ON FAMILY CHOICE AND ON FAMILY STRENGTH, AND OUR SERVICES TYPICALLY HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED TOWARDS DEFICITS AND APPROACHING FAMILIES IN A DEFICIT-BASED WAY AND WHAT'S REALLY SPECIAL ABOUT THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER IS THAT IT BUILDS ON FAMILIES' INHERENT STRENGTHS AND THE INFORMAL SUPPORTS THAT THEY HAVE AND CONNECT THEM THROUGH A COORDINATED SYSTEM. SO THE IMPLEMENTATION FOR THE YOUTH AND FAMILY ASSESSMENT CENTER REALLY REPRESENTS A SHIFT IN THE WAY WE DO DELIVER HUMAN SERVICES IN THIS COMMUNITY AND IT'S A PILOT THIS YEAR, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTION PLANS FOR 2002 AND 2003 ALLOCATES $242,000 FOR SERVICES TO GO DIRECTLY TO FAMILIES THROUGH THIS INITIATIVE AND THROUGH THIS PROJECT, AND I'M JUST HERE TO SEEK IF SUPPORT OF THAT AND THAT THE FUNDING BE CONTINUED IN THE PLAN AS IT IS.

I WORK HERE, ME AND MY KIDS, AND THEY HAVE REALLY BEEN A BIG HELP TO ME. IN THIS PROGRAM HERE, TOO. AND MY CHILDREN HAVE BENEFIT FROM THE PROGRAM, NOT JUST THEIR PROGRAM. BOTH OF THEM. THEY GOT A LOT OF EDUCATION OUT OF IT AND STUFF LIKE THAT. SO I'M JUST UP HERE TO ASK Y'ALL PLEASE, YOU KNOW, DON'T STOP, YOU KNOW, THE PROGRAM, YOU KNOW, AND STUFF BECAUSE IT'S REALLY A LOT OF USE FOR MY KIDS. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU.

HELLO. I'M LINDHY WITH AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY MHMR. I'M THE NETWORK MANAGER AND DEVELOPER FOR THE CENTER FOR CHILDREN SERVICES AND I'M ALSO HERE TO ENDORSE THE CONTINUATION OF FUNDING FOR THE DEDICATED FUNDS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST IN THE PLAN FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JEAN. I BELIEVE YOU HAVE MY CARD THERE. I AM WITH UNIT OONT -- UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY OF TEXAS AND THE TEXAS HOME OF YOUR OWN COALITION AND WE PROVIDE A HOMEOWNERSHIP PROGRAM FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU ALL TO CONSIDER IS IN YOUR DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THAT YOU CONSIDER A HIGHER AMOUNT FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. WE FOUND OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS WITH FUNDING WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS THAT THAT IS THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS THAT DOES WORK WELL FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES DUE TO SOME OF THE RESTRICTIONS ON THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS THAT THEY CAN ACCUMULATE. SO WE DO ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER A DIFFERENT AMOUNT FOR UP TO $15,000 FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES SO WE CAN CONTINUE OUR EFFORTS. THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS HAS FUNDED OUR PILOT PROJECT. THEY ARE STRESSING THAT IN THE COMMUNITIES WE SERVE THAT WE DO NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE HOME FUNDS THAT THE CITIES ARE RECEIVING TO PROVIDE THE ASSISTANCE BECAUSE THE STATE IS ONLY ALLOCATING THEIR FUNDS TO THE MORE RURAL TEXAS. BUT WE'VE SHOWN OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS THAT THIS CAN WORK. I DO HAVE SOME WRITTEN TESTIMONY TO PROVIDE TO YOU-ALL AND IN ADDITION, WE DO WANT TO LET Y'ALL KNOW WE HAVE BEEN SUPPORTERS OF THE HOUSING TRUST FUND AND AS ADAPT POINTED OUT, THE INITIATIVE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL FUNDS HERE IN AUSTIN. HOPEFULLY WHEN THAT LEGISLATION IS PASSED WE'LL BE ABLE TO DRAW DOWN MORE MONEY, AND WE ARE HERE IN SUPPORT OF THAT ALSO. THANK YOU.

ALBERT FOR NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING. RON QUINSTON IN FAVOR OF THE PROGRAM. AND ANN A REYES ARE SPOKE IN FAVOR OF THE PROGRAM. COUNCIL MEN, THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS THAT WE HAVE ON ITEM NUMBER 116. MR. HILGERS, DO WE HAVE A THIRD PUBLIC HEARING ON THESE ITEMS?

NO, MAYOR, WE DON'T.

THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING? AND THE MAIN THING WE WILL DO IS WE WILL BE APPROVING?

YES, SIR, WE WILL BE APPROVING THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME BEFORE, AND THAT WILL BE ON AUGUST 1ST. THERE WILL BE A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEETING ON TUESDAY, JULY 16th TO PRESENT OUR FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THOSE WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL ON AUGUST THE 1ST.

Mayor Garcia: SO JULY THE 16th?

YES, SIR.

Mayor Garcia: JULY 16th THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETS TO HEAR THE RECOMMENDATIONS?

YES, SIR.

Mayor Garcia: AND WHERE IS THAT MEETING GOING TO BE?

WE WILL POST THAT. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT MEETING WILL BE. DO WE KNOW? DPAR GAR AND THEN ON AUGUST 1ST -- .

Mayor Garcia: AND THEN ON AUGUST 1ST WILL COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL.

I'M SORRY. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING WILL BE THERE. I'M SORRY.

Mayor Garcia: IS THAT ON CUMBERLAND?

YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT. NO. THE MULTIPURPOSE IS ON SOUTH FIRST STREET.

Mayor Garcia: ON SOUTH FIRST, CLOSE TO. EVERYBODY GOT THAT? JULY THE 16th THEY ARE GOING TO BE THERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER DID YOU THINK EARLY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED, NO. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. NOW WE'RE PICKING UP THE ITEM THAT IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE STRATUS ITEMS AND LET ME EXPLAIN THAT WE HAVE TWO TYPES OF ITEMS HERE. ONE TYPE DEALS WITH SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT THE STAFF HAS BEEN NEGOTIATING FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS, I GUESS, OR SO. AND THE OTHER ONE SPEAKS TO THE ZONING ITSELF. I HAVE A STACK OF CARDS OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE REGISTERED AND ARE NOT WISHING TO SPEAK. I'LL READ THAT INTO THE RECORD AS SOON AS THE STAFF MAKES A PRESENTATION. I ALSO WANTED TO RECOGNIZE THE MAYOR OF THE VILLAGE OF BEXAR CREEK WHO WILL BE SPEAKING LATER BUT IF HE'S HERE AND NEEDS TO STAND, WE'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE YOU. THANK YOU FOR COMING, MAYOR. GOOD TO HAVE YOU HERE. YOUR PRESENTATION ON THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT?

WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER THE PRESENTATION MUCH LIKE WE DID AT THE WORK SESSION YESTERDAY SO THAT WE HAVE THE FRAMEWORK OF HOW WE'RE TRYING TO GET INFORMATION OUT TO THE PUBLIC ALL ON RECORD HERE AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING. BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO GIVE A BACKDROP FOR WHY WE'RE HERE. AND SOME OF THIS WILL SEEM SIMPLISTIC FOR SOME IN THE AUDIENCE, AND I RECOGNIZE A LOT OF THE FACES, BUT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS, AND WE WANT TO TRY TO REALLY JUST PUT THE ROAD MAP ON THE TABLE AS WE GET STARTED. THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS BEEN PAINFULLY DEALING WITH ONE VERSION OR ANOTHER OF GRANDFATHERING OR VESTED RIGHTS SINCE HOUSE BILL 4 WAS ENACTED BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IN 1987. AND MOST RECENTLY WAS THE VERSION OF HOUSE BILL 1704 PASSED IN 1999. THIS TYPE OF STATE GRANDFATHERING LEGISLATION ALLOWS DEVELOPERS TO LOCK IN THE LOCAL REGULATIONS THAT WERE IN PLACE WHEN THEY FILED THEIR FIRST APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT. IN SHORT WHAT IT MEANS IS DEVELOPERS CAN AVOID REGULATORY CHANGES. THEY CAN DEVELOP UNDER OUTDATED REGULATIONS. AND OBVIOUSLY THIS SEVERELY LIMITS LOCAL CONTROL OVER LOCAL DEVELOPMENT. I WOULD ARGUE THAT FACED WITH THIS SITUATION AND PROBABLY NOWHERE IN ALL THE HISTORY OF THE VESTED RIGHTS BILLS THAT ARE HAPPENING ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAS THE CITY AS AGGRESSIVELY TRIED TO CHALLENGE THAT LEGISLATION AS AUSTIN, TEXAS. NOT JUST THE GRANDFATHERING BUT THE KIND OF BRACKETED BILLS THAT HAVE GONE AFTER THE LOCAL CONTROLS OF HOW WE GROW AND HOW WE REGULATE OUR GROWTH. AS THE MAYOR, THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER WILL RECALL, THE 1999 COUNCIL HAD A LEGAL TEAM IN PLACE STUDDING POTENTIAL CHALLENGES TO HOUSE BILL 1704 BEFORE THAT BILL WAS EVEN SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR. IN THE SPRING OF 1999 AND INTO 2000, THE CITY HIRED LITERALLY A DOZEN ATTORNEYS TO COLLECTIVELY INVESTIGATE VIABLE LEGAL CHALLENGES TO HB 1704. THIS GROUP INCLUDED THE ATTORNEY WHO HAD SUCCESSFULLY ATTACKED THE SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE, AS WELL AS THE ATTORNEYS WHO REPRESENTED SUNSET VALLEY IN THE 1704 CASE. AND THEN MOST RECENTLY BEFORE EVER BRINGING THE STRATUS SETTLEMENT HERE FOR FIRST READING, WE WENT BACK AND REALLY LITERALLY AT THE BEHEST OF SEVERAL VIMENT AL GROUPS, INCLUDING S.O.S., WE HARD REMAIN HIRED AN ATTORNEY WITH EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE IN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW TO GIVE THE CITY YET ANOTHER SECOND OPINION ON THE STRENGTHS OF ANTI1704 OR GRANDFATHERING ARGUMENT AND ON THE STRENGTH OF THE STRATUS GRANDFATHERING CLAIMS. THE CITY HAS MOVED FORWARD BASED ON THE OVERWHELMING CONSENSUS OF ALL OF THAT LEGAL ADVICE. SO WHY ARE WE AT THE TABLE? TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, YOU HAVE TO DESCRIBE THE STRATUS GRANDFATHERING CLAIM, AND SOMETIMES THE CITY HAS BEEN RELUCTANT TO LAY THOSE CLAIMS ON THE TABLE BECAUSE BY PUTTING THOSE CLAIMS ON THE TABLE ARE WE SOMEHOW ACKNOWLEDGING THOSE CLAIMS ARE VALID BUT I'M GOING TO GIVE THIS AN ATTEMPT BECAUSE WE HADN'T DONE IT AS WE MOVED THROUGH THIS PROCESS. WHAT ARE THOSE CLAIMS? WHAT HAS THIS AT THE TABLE? FOR BEAR LAKE PUBLIC IS MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD. THE BEAR LAKE PUBLIC, THE QUESTION THAT HAS TO BE ANSWERED AND ASKED OF THE POLICY MAKERS IS THE VALUE OF TAKING AN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, A DEVELOPMENT ZONED FOR R&D AND REZONING IT TO AN S.O.S.-COMPLIANT SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. WHEN YOU GET TO THE REST OF THE PROPERTIES, THINK ABOUT THE PROPERTIES IN TWO PIECES, THE BEAR LAKE PUBLIC COMPONENT AND THEN ALL THE REST OF IT WHICH ARE PART OF THE CIRCLE C. SO FOR THE CIRCLE C PROPERTY, IT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE. STRATUS CLAIMS THE ABILITY TO DEVELOP CONSISTENT WITH THE 1984 M.U.D. LAND USE PLAN, BUT THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THE REDUCTIONS OF CONSTRAINT OF THEIR RECENT FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSULTATION. STRATUS CLAIMS THAT THEIR DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS VESTED IN THE MID 1980S WHEN THE FOUR CIRCLE C M.U.D.S WERE CREATED AND THE CITY AND STRATUS' PREDECESSOR ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT WITH THE M.U.D. AND THE CITY APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLANS CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSENT AGREEMENT. THE M.U.D. CONSENT AGREEMENT HAVE AN ATTACHED M.U.D. LANDING PLAN, AND THAT PLAN REFLECTS OFFICE, RETAIL, AND MULTIFAMILY TWOMENT ON THESE PARTICULAR STRATUS PROPERTIES. -- STRATUS CLAIMS THAT THE M.U.D. CONSENT AGREEMENT REQUIRED THE LAND TO BE DEVELOPED CONSISTENT WITH THE M.U.D. LAND USE PLAN, AND THIS IS IMPORTANT TO THE 1704 CLAIMS -- REQUIRED STRATUS' PREDECESSOR TO FILE SPECIFIC RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND. AMONG OTHER THINGS THE RESTRICTED COVENANT REQUIRED THE LAND TO BE DEVELOPED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WET FORTH IN THE WILLIAMS CREEK AND SLAUGHTER CREEK ORDINANCES. TO FULLY EVALUATE STRATUS' GRANDFATHER CLAIMS ON ITS CIRCLE C PROPERTY, YOU HAVE TO ALSO ANALYZE WHETHER ZONING CAN PREVENT STRATUS FROM DEVELOPING AT CIRCLE C PROPERTY CONSISTENT WITH THE 1984 M.U.D. LANDINGS PLAN. THE M.U.D. LANDINGS PLAN WERE UNUSUAL IN THAT THEY DETAILED DENSITY PER ACRE AND FLOOR-TO-AREA RATIOS THAT CAN BE USED TO ESTIMATE THE UPPER LIMIT OF CONVEYOR FOOTAGE OF USE OF DENSITY. SO FROM THAT -- SQUARE FOOTAGE. SO FROM THAT YOU CAN GET MORE THAN IMPERVIOUS COVER OR AREA. YOU CAN ACTUALLY GET THE DENSITY. WITH RESPECT TO THE ZONING QUESTION, STRATUS POINTS TO THE LANGUAGE IN HOUSE BILL 1704, A PROVISION THAT STATES, ZONING IS NOT TRUMPED BY VESTED RIGHTS SO LONG AS -- IN OTHER WORDS UNLESS -- THE ZONING CANNOT BASICALLY -- BASICALLY SO LONG AS THE ZONING DOES NOT AFFECT LOT SIZE, LOT DIMENSIONS, LOT COVERAGE OR BUILDING SIZE; AND THE ZONING DOES NOT CHANGE DEVELOPMENT PERMITTED BY A RESTRICTED COVENANT. REMEMBER? WE REQUIRE RESTRICTED COVENANT. REQUIRED BY MUNICIPALITY. SO THAT'S SORT OF THE SHORTEST VERSION I COULD COME UP WITH TO TRY TO DESCRIBE THE CLAIMS THAT HAVE US AT THE TABLE. SO HOW DID NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS BEGIN? THE PRESENT NEGOTIATIONS GREW OUT OF THE CITY'S VICTORY IN THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE CASE ALMOST EXACTLY TWO YEARS AGO. IN THE WAKE OF THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN OUR FAVOR IN JUNE OF 2000, BO ARMSTRONG, THE CEO OF STRATUS, ANNOUNCED HE WANTED TO END HIS LAND DEVELOPMENT FIGHT AND HE WANTED TO SETTLE ALL OF STRATUS' OUTSTANDING DEVELOPMENT ISSUES, AND THERE WERE A NUMBER OF THINGS ON THE TABLE, NOT JUST THE PROPERTY.

[ PLEASE HOLD FOR CHANGE OF CAPTIONERS ]

..

Futrell: THEY RAN A PARALLEL PROCESS WITH THAT, SO AT THE SAME TIME GETTING AND INCORPORATED PUBLIC FEEDBACK FROM NEIGHBORHOODS, ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERS AND KEYBOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. THAT DETAILED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN UP ON THE CITY WEB PAGE FOR OVER 10 DAYS, WITH SUPPORTING INFORMATION BEING UPDATED DAILY ON SITE. THERE WERE CHANGES THAT OCCURRED YESTERDAY FROM A DISCUSSION FROM THE WORK SESSION THAT REDUCED IMPERVIOUS COVER ON ONE OF THE MAJOR TRACTS. SO WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR THE NEXT FOUR WEEKS? WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR COUNCIL AND PUBLIC INPUT OVER THE NEXT FOUR WEEKS? COUNCIL RECEIVED AN INITIAL BRIEFING YESTERDAY. TODAY COUNCIL IS POSTED FOR REPEAT BRIEFINGS, THE ZONING PUBLIC HEARING AND IS POSTED FOR ACTION ON FIRST READING ONLY. SECOND READING IS SCHEDULED TWO WEEKS LATER ON JULY 11th.... JULY 11TH. AND THIRD READING IS SCHEDULED THE FOLLOWING WEEK, FOUR WEEKS OUT, ON JULY 18th. SO WE HAVE FOUR WEEKS FOR DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC INPUT ON THIS AGREEMENT. WE HAVE STRUCTURED THE FOLLOWING BRIEFINGS TO ANSWER SEVEN BASIC QUESTIONS. WHY ARE WE NEGOTIATING WITH STRATUS, ONE? TWO, WHAT ARE WE GETTING? THREE, WHAT ARE WE GIVING? FOUR, WHAT ARE THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND HOW IS STRATUS MITIGATING THOSE TRAFFIC IMPACTS? FIVE, HOW HAVE WE GOTTEN PUBLIC INPUT AND HOW HAVE WE INCORPORATED IT? SIX, WHAT HAVE THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS DONE? AND FINALLY, SEVEN, WHAT HAPPENS IF THE CITY AND STRATUS DO NOT REACH AN AGREEMENT? BASICALLY THE BEST ALTERNATIVE TO A NEGOTIATED SOLUTION. NOW, WITH THAT I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER LISA GORDON AND WE'RE GOING TO RUN THROUGH THOSE SEVEN QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER FUTRELL. AS WAS EXPLAINED EARLIER, THE STRATUS PROPERTIES HAVE 245 CLAIMED SPACE ON THE MID '80'S PRELIMINARY PLANS AND THE M.U.D. USE PLANS. TODAY WE WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF THE AGREEMENT, THE TERMS AND THE COMMONLY ASKED QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. PRESENTED WITH ME -- PRESENTING WITH ME TODAY ARE LES TULL, OUR SUPERVISING ENGINEER ON WATER QUALITY. HE IS ON MY LEFT. PAT MURPHY, THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICE TO MY RIGHT. AND NEXT TO PAT, TERRY MCMANUS, OUR PRINCIPAL PLANNER FOR TRANSPORTATION. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE SEVERAL STAFF MEMBERS SEATED IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK ON VARIOUS ISSUES. THEY ARE OUR LEGAL STAFF, MARTY TERRY, NANCY MCCLINTOCK, GREG GURNSEY, ALLISON GALLOWAY AND VICKY SCHUBERT. WE ALSO HAVE WITH US OUR OUTSIDE ATTORNEY, CASEY DOBSON. AND RENE HICKS WHO WAS BROUGHT IN RECENTLY TO REVIEW THE AGREEMENT. WHY ARE WE NEGOTIATING WITH STRATUS? TO EXPAND THE 245 CLAIMS BY STRATUS CARRY A LEGAL RISK FOR THE CITY IN TERMS OF LITIGATION AND AN --

Mayor Garcia: MS. GORDON, LET ME TALK TO YOU FOR JAWS A SECOND. CAN Y'ALL HEAR IN THE BACK? WE NEED TO HAVE MORE VOLUME ON THIS ONE SPEAKER, THIS ONE MICROPHONE. COULD WE -- TRY THAT AGAIN.

IS THIS BETTER? BETTER? OKAY. I'LL START AGAIN. WHY ARE WE NEGOTIATING WITH STRATUS? TO EXPAND ON THE 245 CLAIMS THAT STRATUS HAS, THIS CARRIES A RISK FOR THE CITY IN TERMS OF LITIGATION AND AN OUTCOME THAT WOULD IMPACT THE CITY'S AUTHORITY FURTHER THAN THE STATE LEGISLATION HAS. THERE ALSO IS THE POTENTIAL FOR A TAKEN IF THOSE CLAIMS WERE SUBSTANTIATED THROUGH THE LEGAL SYSTEM. BEYOND ANY LEGAL RISK, THE CITY HAS NEGOTIATED AN AGREEMENT THAT PROVIDES SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS BEYOND OUR CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS. THESE BENEFITS AFFECT THE COMMUNITY AND THEY COULD NOT BE ACHIEVED NOR ENFORCED WITHOUT AN AGREEMENT. THE AGREEMENT ALSO PROVIDES FOR CERTAINTY OF THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD OCCUR IN THIS SENSITIVE AREA OF THE CITY. THERE WILL BE KNOWN WATER QUALITY PROTECTIONS AND THE AGREEMENT ALLOWS FOR A POSITIVE CASH FLOW AFTER FIVE YEARS AND IT PAYS BACK FOR ITSELF AFTER 10 YEARS. LES TULL WILL GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF HOW THE AGREEMENT TALKS ABOUT WATER QUALITY, OPEN SPACE AND REDUCED DEVELOPMENT DENSITY. HE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY PAT MURPHY, WHO WILL DISCUSS THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE AND WHAT WE'RE PAYING FOR AND WHAT TYPES OF REVENUES WE'RE USING. I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR NOW THAT WE ARE NOT USING ANY PROPERTY TAXES TO BENEFIT THIS DEAL, NOR IS THERE ANY CASH THAT GOES DIRECTLY OUT OF THE DOOR FROM THE CITY. HE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY TERRY MCMANUS, WHO PROVIDED AN OVERVIEW OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION ISSUES. AND LET ME SAY THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THE TRANSPORTATION. I THINK TERRY'S PORTION OF THE OVERVIEW WILL PROVIDE YOU A LOT OF INFORMATION. LES?

THANK YOU, LISA. FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO DESCRIBE THE STRATUS PROPERTIES THAT ARE THE SUBJECT OF THIS AGREEMENT. THERE ARE 15 TRACTS TOTALING OVER 1250 ACRES. THEY ARE GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG SLAUGHTER LANE BETWEEN FM 1826 AND BRODIE LANE AND FROM MOPAC JUST NORTH OF SLAUGHTER LANE TO STATE HIGHWAY 45. EACH TRACT HAS AN INITIAL AND MAXIMUM ALLOCATION OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. RELATED TO THIS YOU MAY HAVE HEARD THE TERM BUCKET USED IN DESCRIBING THE IMPERVIOUS COVER DISTRIBUTION PROCESS. THIS IS SIMPLY ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING CLUSTERING. IN THE AGREEMENT THERE IS A FIXED AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER ALLOWED FOR ALL THE PROPERTIES, AND IT MAY BE CLUSTERED ON CERTAIN TRACTS WITHIN SPECIFIED LIMITS. IN THIS WAY SOME TRACTS WILL HAVE NO DEVELOPMENT, THAT IS NO IMPERVIOUS COVER, AND OTHERS WILL HAVE HIGHER IMPERVIOUS COVER. UNDER INSTRUCT S.O.S. COMPLIANCE, IMPERVIOUS COVER WOULD HAVE BEEN 15% UNIFORMLY OVER THE RECHARGE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND 25% OVER THE CONTRIBUTING PORTION. THIS ASPECT OF THE AGREEMENT WILL BECOME MORE APPEAR RANT AS -- PENTAGON AS I DESCRIBE EACH TRACT IN DETAIL. I WILL POINT THEM OUT AS I TALK ABOUT THEM. TRACTS 101 AND 102 ARE AT THE WEST END OF SLAUGHTER LANE AT FM 1826 AND WILL BE AT S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER OR LESS. TRACT 103 IS AT SLAUGHTER LANE NORTH OF THE ESCARPMENT AND IS FROAPD HAVE A MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER OF 32% BASED ON CODE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH CONSIDER BOUNDARY STREETS. NEW IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE TRACT WILL ACTUALLY BE ONLY ABOUT 30% OF THE NET OF THE SITE AREA. TRACTS 104 AND 105 ARE JUST SOUTH OF TRACT 103 ON EITHER SIDE OF ESCARPMENT AND WILL HAVE NO IMPERVIOUS COVER. TRACTS 107 AND 106 ARE WEST OF MOPAC ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF SLAUGHTER LANE. BASED ON CODE REQUIREMENTS, TRACT 106 IS PROPOSED TO HAVE 30% IMPERVIOUS COVER, WHILE TRACT 107 IS PROPOSED TO HAVE 45%. BASED ON THE ACTUAL NEW IMPERVIOUS COVER TO BE BUILT ON THE TRACT, THAT IS ACTUALLY 26% ON TRACT 106 AND 43% ON TRACT 107. TRACT 108 IS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BRODIE AND SLAUGHTER LANE. IT WILL BE S.O.S. COMPLIANT AT 15% IMPERVIOUS COVER. TRACT 109 IS WITHIN THE EXISTING CIRCLE C DEVELOPMENT. IT WILL HAVE NO IMPERVIOUS COVER. TRACT 1 10 FRONTS STATE HIGHWAY 183 AND MOPAC FROM ESCARPMENT TO THE WEST. AS COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER ANNOUNCED YESTERDAY, IMPERVIOUS COVER ON TRACT 110 IS PROPOSED TO BE S.O.S. COMPLIANT AT THIS POINT AT 15%. AND JUST TO POINT OUT FOR ANYONE WHO PICKS UP MATERIALS, THIS IS A CHANGE FROM WHAT WAS IN THE HANDOUT THAT THEY HAD RECEIVED AND THEY WILL BE PICKING THAT UP LATER. THE ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER OR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER BEING REMOVED FROM TRACT 110 IS PROPOSED TO GO TO TRACT 102, WHICH IS REMAIN S.O.S. COMPLIANT. TRACTS 111, 112 AND 113 ARE EAST OF MOPAC AND ABUT THE WILDFLOWER CENTER. THESE TRACTS WILL HAVE NO IMPERVIOUS COVER. TRACT 114 IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FM 1826 AND STATE HIGHWAY 45. IT WILL BE S.O.S. COMPLIANT. TRACT 115 KNOWN ALSO AS THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. IS LOCATED SOUTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 45 AND EAST OF FM 1826. IT WILL BE S.O.S. COMPLIANT IN BOTH THE RECHARGE AND CONTRIBUTING ZONE PORTIONS. THE BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT ARE MANY. FIRST, LOOKING AT WATER QUALITY. STRATUS WILL COMPLY WITH AN OVERALL S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT OF LESS THAN 17%. S.O.S. STORM WATER TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS WILL BE MET ON A TRACT BY TRACT BASIS. CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ARE BETTER THAN THOSE REQUIRED BY THE CITY CODE HAVE BEEN NEGOTIATED ON SEVERAL PARCELS AND LOWER DEVELOPMENT DENSITY WITH RESULTING DECREASE IN TRAFFIC SHOULD LESSEN OFF SITE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS COMPARED TO THE DEVELOPMENT WHICH OTHERWISE MIGHT HAVE OCCURRED. DEDICATION OF SIX PARCELS OF LAND BY STRATUS WILL PROVIDE 148 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE. THREE PARCELS, 111, 1 12 AND 113 WERE ABUTTING THE WILDFLOWER CENTER. TWO PARCELS WILL BE DEEDED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND WILL BE COMBINED WITH THE EXISTING CIRCLE C METROPOLITAN PARK. ONE PARCEL, 109, IS DEEDED TO THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AS A GREENBELT AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT. A SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT IS THE REDUCTION OF DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY BELOW LEVELS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED UNDER S.O.S. WITH ZONING BASED ON THE M.U.D. LAND USE PLAN. BY PROVIDING INCENTIVES TO STRATUS, LAND USES ARE CAPPED AT 750,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE, 250,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND 1,730 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. RESIDENTIAL USE IS FURTHER LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN 900 APARTMENTS WITH NO APARTMENTS ON THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. ALSO, ONLY 95 SINGLE-FAMILY UNITS ARE ALLOWED ON THE CRESCENT AREA OF THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. THE SLIDE BEFORE YOU NOW AND THE TWO THAT FOLLOW CLAIM REDUCTIONS OF DENSITY IN EACH LAND USE CATEGORY. THE CHART ON THE LEFT INDICATE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF OFFICE SPACE IS ACHIEVABLE UNDER THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE OR FISH AND WILDLIFE AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPOSED ZONING VERSUS THAT UNDER THE AGREEMENT. [ INAUDIBLE ] THE CHARTS WERE SHOWING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT WE ESTIMATE COULD BE ACHIEVED UNDER THE S.O.S. OR WILDLIFE AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPOSED ZONING. , WHICH WAS APPROXIMATELY 1.8 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE, COMPARED TO 750,000 THAT THE AGREEMENT ALLOWED. WE ALSO HAVE A CHART WHICH SHOWED THE OFFICE SPACE THAT WAS ALLOWED UNDER THE M.U.D. LAND USE PLAN, WHICH WAS OVER8 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF SPACE ON THE COMBINED PROPERTIES, THE CIRCLE C M.U.D. AND BEAR LAKE P.U.D.

IT LOOKS LIKE ETCETERA COME BACK UP.

RESIDENTIAL. AND APPARENTLY WE'RE MISSING TWO SLIDES. SO I WILL DESCRIBE THE RETAIL AT THIS POINT. FUTURE......FUTURE THIEWT THAT MAY BE HELPFUL.

Futrell: THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL HERE. WE HAVE THE MANUAL VERSE HERE.

AGAIN, THAT'S ALL THE RETAIL, SO AGAIN THE CHART IS SHOWING THE COMPARISON BETWEEN -- WHY DON'T WE LEAVE THAT ONE UP, TRACY, AND I'LL JUST GIVE THEM THE NUMBERS ON THE PLAN. THAT'S FINE. ON THE CHART YOU SEE THERE, ON THE LEFT IS THE OFFICE. WHICH SHOWS THAT WE ESTIMATED THAT THEY COULD HAVE 1.8 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE POTENTIALLY UNDER THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE WITH THE PROPOSED ZONING AND THAT IS NOW AT 750,000 SQUARE FEET. ON THE CHART ON THE RIGHT YOU SEE THE RETAIL DENSITY. SIMILAR TO THE OFFICE RETAIL SPACE, IT'S BEEN REDUCED UNDER THE AGREEMENT, APPROXIMATELY 310,000 SQUARE FEET COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT UNDER S.O.S. REQUIREMENTS. THE AGREEMENT ALLOWS 250,000. AND JUST A COMPARISON TO THAT, THE M.U.D. LAND USE PLAN ALLOWED FOR UP TO 1.7 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE. AND I'LL GO BACK TO THE POWER POINT AT THIS POINT WITH RESIDENTIAL. IN THE CHART ON THE LEFT YOU SEE THAT 2,300 UNITS WERE ESTIMATED TO BE POSSIBLE WITHOUT THE AGREEMENT WHILE A MAXIMUM OF 1,730 ARE NOW ALLOWED. SO THERE WILL BE NINE HUNDRED OF THESE MULTI-FAMILY. UNDER THE LAND USE PLAN SHOWN ON THE RIGHT, OVER 2800 UNITS WERE ALLOW AND ALL OF THESE WERE MULTI-FAMILY AND WOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ON FIVE TRACTS. AT THIS POINT I WILL TURN THE PRESENTATION OVER TO PAT MURPHY WHO WILL EXPLAIN THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE AND OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSED SHRVMENT.

IF EVENING MAYOR AN COUNCIL. AS LES DESCRIBED, IT SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASES THE AMOUNT OF GOAMENT THAT COULD BE ACHIEVED UNDER CURRENT REGULATIONS CONSISTENT WITH ZONING UNDER THE M.U.D. USE PLAN. THIS REDUCTION IN DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY PROVIDES A CORRESPONDING REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER AND LENGTH OF VEHICLE TRIPS. IT FOLLOWS THAT A REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC WILL POSITIVELY BENEFIT AIR QUALITY. THIS REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC WILL ALSO PROVIDE FOR IMPROVED ON AND OFF SITE WATER QUALITY, ESPECIALLY WHEN CONSIDERED WITH THE OTHER GREEN BENEFITS OF THE AGREEMENT. IN ADDITION TO A REDUCTION IN OVERALL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE AGREEMENT ALSO PROVIDES FOR A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS OVER WHAT COULD OTHERWISE BE ACHIEVED. IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THIS REDUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY THAT COULD OTHERWISE OCCUR, THE CITY WILL PROVIDE AN INCENTIVE PACKAGE VALUED AT $15 MILLION. THESE INCENTIVES WILL BE PROVIDED AS REIMBURSEMENTS, FUTURE REVENUE AND WAIVED FEES, INCLUDING $4.5 MILLION IN DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER FEE WAIVERS. $1.5 MILLION FOR A COMMERCIAL CHILLER OR TO BE USED FOR OTHER FEE WAIVERS. $4.5 MILLION IN WATER AND WASTEWATER FEE WAIVERS. $3.6 MILLION IN ON AND OFF SITE WATER EXTENSION. AND $.37 MILLION FOR SOUTH BAY LANE RIGHT-OF-WAY THROUGH TRACT 110 TO CONNECT SOUTH MOPAC TO DOG RUN. THESE INCENTIVES ARE LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF $1.5 MILLION PER YEAR. WHAT ARE THE COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENTS? NATIVE LANDSCAPING IS PROVIDED FOR BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND WILL BE ENFORCED THROUGH RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. PUBLIC TRAIL EASEMENTS ARE PROVIDED IN TRACTS 102 AND 112 FOR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO PARKS AND PRESERVES. GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS ARE BEING PROVIDED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT. AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE WILL BE DEDICATED WITHIN THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. AND AN OPTION WILL BE PROVIDED FOR A MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE ON TRACT 101 AT THE INTERSECTION OF SLAUGHTER AND 1826. THE CITY'S FINANCIAL OFFICE HAS DETERMINED THAT THE AGREEMENTS WILL HAVE A POSITIVE REVENUE STREAM AFTER 12 TO 13 YEARS, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION PROPOSED INCENTIVES. NO TAX REVENUES WERE INCLUDED IN THIS ANALYSIS. VICKY SLEW BETTER IS AVAILABLE TO DISCUSS FURTHER DETAILS OF THIS ANALYSIS IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. OTHER COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENTS ARE ALSO PROPOSE TO IMPROVE CAPABILITY WITH ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS OVER WHAT WOULD OTHERWISE ARE ACHIEVED. THESE ENHANCEMENTS INCLUDE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS, INCREASED DEVELOPMENT SETBACKS, ADDITIONAL SCREENING AND BUFFERING AND EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN UNDESIRABLE LAND USES. YOU WILL BE RECEIVING A MORE DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THESE ENHANCEMENTS DURING PRESENTATION OF THE ZONING FOR THESE PROPERTIES. THANK YOU AND I WILL NOW TURN THE PRESENTATION OVER TO TERRY MCMANUS, WHO WILL DISCUSS THE TRANSPORTATION RELATED ASPECTS OF THE AGREEMENT.

THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. TRANSPORTATION HAS EMERGED AS A VERY SIGNIFICANT ISSUE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSAL. WHAT ARE THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND HOW WILL THEY BE MITIGATED? THE STAFF ANALYSIS IS FOCUSED ON THE FORECAST TRAVEL DEMANDS AND ALSO CURRENT EXISTING LEVELS OF OPERATION UPON ROADWAYS AND AT INTERSECTIONS. THE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS CAN HANDLE THE INCREASED TRAFFIC WITHOUT MAJOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CHANGES. WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT THE EXISTING AS PLANNED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM WILL HAVE CAPACITY TO MATCH TRAFFIC FROM STRATUS AND ALSO OTHER DEVELOPMENT ANTICIPATED IN THE SOUTHWEST AREA. THE CUMULATIVE REGIONAL ANALYSIS APPROACH RECOGNIZES THE INTERACTION OF LAND USE AND IS CONSISTENT WITH GROWTH FORECASTS. WE ARE ACCOUNTING FOR SECONDARY GROWTH IMPACTS AND WE'RE BASING OUR ANALYSIS ON REGIONAL POPULATION FORECASTS THAT HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY THE TEXAS STATE DATA CENTER, THE RECOGNIZED EMPATHY FOR POPULATION FORECASTING AND THE STATE OF TEXAS BY THE U.S. CENSUS BUREAU. STRATUS' COMMITMENT TO FUND SPECIFIC TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS PROVIDES MORE CERTAINTY THAN WE WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE WITH INDIVIDUAL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. IF UP FRONT, NOT PIECEMEAL AND IT'S CERTAINLY NOT ISOLATION ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. OUR TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS IS CONSISTENT WITH REGIONAL PLANNING, MOLDS AND METHODS. IT HAS ALLOWED US TO COORDINATE OUR SYSTEM PLANNING IN THIS AREA WITH TRAVIS COUNTY, WITH CAMPO AND ALL THE MEMBER JURISDICTIONS OF CAMPO. WHAT ARE THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED BY STRATUS IN THIS AGREEMENT? THE AGREEMENT IN EXHIBIT N CONTAINS THE TOTAL TRANSPORTATION PACKAGE OF APPROXIMATELY $1.58 MILLION. THIS LIST OF IMPROVEMENTS IS INCLUDED IN THE AGREEMENT, ALSO IN YOUR AGENDA BACKUP. I'LL RUN THROUGH IT BRIEFLY. THERE ARE THREE INTERSECTIONS PROPOSED FOR FULL TRAFFIC SIGNALIZATION, MODIFICATION OF TWO INTERSECTIONS, FOR A TOTAL COST OF $421,000, TO BE FUNDED BY STRATUS. TURN LANES AND RESTRIPING AT THE INTERSECTION OF SLAUGHTER AND SOUTH LOOP 1 FOR A TOTAL COST TO BE FUNDED BY STRATUS OF $132,000. RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION AND ONE-HALF THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF ESCARPMENT BOULEVARD ESTIMATED AT ONE MILLION DOLLARS. SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED MONITORS AT KIKER ELEMENTARY ON LACROSSE FOR A COST OF $27,000. AND ALSO THE CONSTRUCTION OF SOUTH BAY LANE THROUGH TRACT 110 TO CONNECT WITH SOUTH LOOP 1. FINALLY, IF THE COST FOR THE IMPROVEMENT IN THE FUTURE IS GREATER, STRATUS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS WILL PAY THIS INCREASED COST. ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS IS WHETHER OR NOT THE PLAN MATCHES ROADWAYS. PRINCIPAL ROADWAYS PLANNED FOR THE YEAR 2015, THE TIMED HORIZON OF THIS ANALYSIS PROVIDES SUFFICIENT CAPACITY FOR THE PROPOSED DENSITIES IN THIS AGREEMENT. WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT THE PROJECTED LEVELS OF SERVICE ASSOCIATED WITH TRAFFIC GENERATED BY THE PROPOSAL WILL BE ACCEPTABLE. PRINCIPAL ROADWAYS PLANNED FOR 2015, HOWEVER, ARE NOT GOING TO BE ADEQUATE FOR HIGHER DEVELOPMENT DENSITIES ACHIEVABLE UNDER S.O.S. WHEN IT IS NOT LIMITED BY THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT. SPECIFICALLY, STAFF PROJECTS IMPACT AND PROBLEMS ON SOUTH LOOP 1 AND FM 1826. THE AGREEMENT COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT IN 38% FEWER DAILY VEHICLE TRIPS THAN DEVELOPMENT DENSITY'S ACHIEVABLE UNDER S.O.S., AGAIN WHEN IT IS NOT LIMITED BY THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT. CURRENTLY PLANNED ROADWAYS CAN ACCOMMODATE GROWTH ADDITIONAL TO THE STRATUS PROPOSAL, NOT STRATUS ONLY, BUT INCLUDED IN THE ANALYSIS FOR ANTICIPATED LEVELS OF GROWTH FORECAST FOR THE REGION AS I'VE MENTIONED BY THE YEAR 2015. SEVERAL ISSUE ROADWAYS EMERGED. ONE OF THEM IS SOUTH LOOP 1. WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS ON SOUTH LOOP 1? I'LL START BY EXPLAINING HOW IT EXISTS TODAY. FROM WILLIAM CANNON TO SLAUGHTER, SOUTH LOOP 1 EXISTS AS A FOUR-LANE PARKWAY FROM SLAUGHTER LANE TO SH 45. IT EXISTS AS A FOUR-LANE ARTERIAL. THERE ARE NO INTERCHANGES, THERE ARE NO FRONTAGE ROADS. IT EXISTS AS A ROADWAY WITH REGULAR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS. THE STRATUS PROPOSAL IS EXPECTED TO CONTRIBUTE ABOUT 2,800 VEHICLE TRIPS A DAY TO THROUGH TRAFFIC ON SOUTH LOOP 1. THIS ESTIMATE IS THE SECTION OF SOUTH LOOP 1 JUST NORTH OF SH 45 AND IT WOULD REPRESENT ABOUT SIX TO SEVEN PERCENT OF THE TOTAL 30,000 VEHICLE TRIPS THAT ARE PROJECTED FOR THE YEAR 2015. TODAY THERE ARE ABOUT 11,000 VEHICLE TRIPS JUST NORTH OF SH 45 ON SOUTH LOOP 1, WITH THE TOTAL CAPACITY OF ABOUT 34 TO 37,000 VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY, THAT..... THIS WOULD BE UNDER THE CAPACITY OF THE EXISTING ROADWAY, THEREFORE THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT TRIGGER A NEED FOR EXPANSION OF SOUTH LOOP 1. THERE IS NO DIRECT ACCESS PROPOSED. IN FACT, IT IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED TO SOUTH LOOP 1. ANOTHER ROADWAY OF REGIONAL IMPORTANCE IS SH 45. WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS ON SH 45? BRIEFLY, THE PROPOSAL WOULD CONTRIBUTE ABOUT ONE TO TWO THOUSAND VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY BY THE YEAR 2015 ON SH 45 BETWEEN SOUTH LOOP 1 AND FM 1626. THE TOTAL 25,000 VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY ON THIS SECTION OF ROADWAY IS ABOUT ONE-THIRD OF THE CAPACITY OF THE PROPOSED ROAD. AND THIS WOULD BE ASSUMING ITS CONSTRUCTION AS A FOUR-LANE PARKWAY. AGAIN, THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT TRIGGER A NEED FOR ROADWAY EXPANSION OR CONSTRUCTION OF THIS SECTION OF SH 45. I'D LIKE TO ALSO POINT OUT THAT THIS PIECE FARTHER TO THE EAST FROM FM 1626 TO I-35 IS NOT IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN ROADWAY PLAN, BUT IS INCLUDED IN THE CAMPO PLAN. HAVING ADDRESSED SOME OF THE MAJOR TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, I'LL REFER THE PRESENTATION BACK TO ACE TENT CITY MANAGER LISA GORDON.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, AS THE STAFF HAS REVIEWED WITH YOU, THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS HAVE BEEN INTENSE AND PROVIDE FOR LOTS OF AMENITIES. WE ALSO RECEIVED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INPUT THAT WAS VALUABLE INPUT THAT WE INCORPORATED INTO THE CURRENT AGREEMENT BASED ON OUR MEETINGS WITH VARIOUS COMMUNITY LEADERS, WITH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND STAKEHOLDERS. IN FACT, WE HAD OVER 25 COMMUNITY MEETINGS IN THE EVENING TO ENSURE THAT WE HAD INPUT FROM RESIDENTS IN ALL OF THESE AREAS AND INTERESTED PARTIES. WE ALSO HAD WEEKLY STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS BETWEEN THE CITY, STRATUS AND ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERS. THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION HAD A PUBLIC PROCESS THAT INCLUDED SIX MEETINGS, TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FOUR STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS WITH A COMPOSITION OF COMMISSIONERS FROM THE ZAP BOARD. AND THIS WAS DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIR. AT THOSE MEETINGS THEY HAD A TASKFORCE AND THERE WERE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME FORWARD. WE ALSO MADE PRESENTATIONS TO SEVERAL BOARDS, INCLUDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION. WE HAD A WEB PAGE THAT WAS UPDATED DAILY TO KEEP CITIZENS INFORMED OF ALL THE CHANGES AS WE PROGRESSED WITH NEGOTIATION OF THIS AGREEMENT. WHAT HAVE THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS DONE IS A VERY RELEVANT QUESTION TO APPROVING THIS AGREEMENT. THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD RECOMMENDED THE AGREEMENT WITH 14 CONDITIONS. 13 OF THE CONDITIONS WERE INCORPORATED INTO THE AGREEMENT. ONLY ONE CONDITION, OMITTING A GAS STATION FROM ANY TRACTS, WAS NOT INCORPORATED INTO THE TERMS. THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THE AGREEMENT WITH CONDITIONS THAT HAVE ALSO BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE AGREEMENT. THERE WAS ONE EXCEPTION WHERE THERE WAS A PROHIBITION ON -- OF WATER QUALITY CONTROLS ON ONE OR TWO TRACTS AND THE STAFF DID NOT INCORPORATE THAT, BUT THAT WILL BE BROUGHT UP LATER IN THE ZONING HEARING. THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TOOK A VOTE ON THIS MATTER, ALTHOUGH THEY DID NOT NEED TO BRING A RECOMMENDATION FORWARD, AND THEIR MOTION SAID THEY WERE NOT IN FAVOR OF DEVELOPMENT OVER THE WAWFER, HOWEVER -- AQUIFER, HOWEVER THEY ADDED TO THEIR MOTION IF DEVELOPMENT OCCUR AND THE AGREEMENT WAS -- THE CURRENT AGREEMENT INCLUDES AN INNOVATIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN TO PROVIDES FOR A SERVING OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, COORDINATION WITH CAMPO AND CAPITAL METRO TO ASSURE THAT THE ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES CAN BE UTILIZED BY THOSE CITIZENS IN THIS AREA. THE LAST QUESTION FOR OUR PRESENTATION IS WHAT HAPPENS IF THE CITY AND STRATUS DO NOT REACH THIS AGREEMENT? THE FIRST IS THAT THE FUTURE OF WHAT WILL BE ON THIS LAND IS VERY UNCERTAIN. STAFF NLZ THAT THIS -- BELIEVES THAT THIS AGREEMENT BEFORE YOU PROVIDES EXTENSIVE BENEFITS IN THAT IT ADDRESSES THE CERTAINTY OF WHAT WILL BE DEVELOPED ON THIS LAND. IT ALSO ADDRESSES WATER QUALITY. IT PROVIDES FOR DEDICATION OF OPEN SPACE. THERE'S MITIGATION OF TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION UPFRONT IMPROVEMENTS THAT USUALLY OCCUR LATER ON IN DEVELOPMENT IN THIS CITY. THERE IS REDUCED DENSITY, DENSITY FAR BELOW S.O.S. AND WHAT COULD BE CLAIMED BY STRATUS PROPERTIES UNDER THEIR M.U.D. LAND USE PLAN. THERE ARE COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENTS THAT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED WITHOUT THIS AGREEMENT. THERE'S A POSITIVE CASH FLOW. AND THIS DOESN'T INVOLVE PROPERTY TAXES. IF THE CITY DOES NOT APPROVE THIS AGREEMENT, WE WILL HAVE UNCERTAINTY. WE TAKE THE RISK THAT MORE INTENSE ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT WILL OCCUR AND IMPACT WATER QUALITY AND TRANSPORTATION. AS YOU ARE AWARE, COUNCIL, THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE WHERE MORE INTENSE DEVELOPMENT HAS OCCURRED IN OUR SENSITIVE AREA SUCH AS IN THE BARTON CREEK AREA. IF THIS AGREEMENT IS NOT REACHED, MOST LIKELY WE WILL SEE A TRACT BY TRACT APPROVAL, STARTING WITH THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D., WHICH WOULD TAKE AN INDUSTRIAL USE TO A SINGLE-FAMILY USE COMPLIANT WITH S.O.S., BUT WITHOUT THE AMENITIES THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED WITH YOU TODAY. AS NOTED EARLIER, THERE IS ALWAYS SUPPOSE........ EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION AND LEGISLATION, AND AS THE CITY'S HISTORY HAS SHOWN, IT IS MOST LIKE Y TO OCCUR. EVEN IF THE CITY WOULD BE SUCCESSFUL IN LITIGATION OR HAVE A VICTORY, A LEGAL DISPUTE CANNOT ACHIEVE ALL OF THE AMENITIES AND A BENEFIT THAT HAVE BEEN OUTLINED TO YOU. NOR WOULD WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE THESE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS. THOSE BENEFITS HAVE BEEN EXPLAINED IN GREAT DETAIL. AT THE WORK SESSION YESTERDAY, THE MAYOR REQUESTED AN UPDATE ON THE SALAMANDER AND ALSO TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS. WE HAVE NANCY McCLINTOCK TO PROVIDE THE FIRST UPDATE ON THE SALAMANDER. SHE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY VICKY SCHUBERT, WHO WILL GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF SPECIFIC DETAIL ON THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL, AS YOU KNOW, SINCE LATE JANUARY, 19 SALAMANDERS HAVE BEEN FOUND EITHER DEAD OR AFFECTED PRIMARILY AT UPPER BARTON SPRINGS, UP CREEK OF BARTON SPRINGS POOL. WE'VE DONE LOTS OF INVESTIGATION SINCE THAT TIME. WE FIRST SENT THE ANIMALS TO PATHOLOGISTS WHO LOOKED AT THEM AND WERE UNABLE TO FIND ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE BUBBLES AS AN ACTUAL PROBLEM. THEY REALLY COULDN'T PROVIDE US ANY EXPLANATIONS. THE GAS BUBBLE CONDITION ITSELF APPEARS TO BE GAS BUBBLES WITHIN THE SKIN AND THE VASCULAR SYSTEM. THE GAS BUBBLES APPEAR TO BE MADE UP OF THE CONSTITUENTS OF AIR. WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF WATER QUALITY TESTING. THE WATER QUALITY AT UPPER BARTON SPRINGS IS DEGRADED RELATIVE TO BARTON SPRINGS, BUT WE'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO IDENTIFY ANY ONE CONSTITUENT THAT COULD EXPLAIN THIS CONDITION. WE ARE WATCHING DAILY. WE HAVE THREE SCIENTISTS WORKING PRETTY MUCH FULL TIME ON THIS SITUATION, BUT WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY EXPLANATIONS FOR YOU RIGHT NOW AS TO WHAT IS CAUSING THIS CONDITION.

Futrell: AND NANCY, THE LAST TIME WE FOUND EITHER A SICK OR DEAD SALAMANDER WAS MID MAY.

UP UNTIL YESTERDAY THE LAST TIME WE HAD FOUND ONE WAS MAY 14TH.

Futrell: AND NOW WE HAVE ONE YESTERDAY.

THAT'S RIGHT. YESTERDAY AFTERNOON ANOTHER ONE WAS FOUND NOT DEAD, BUT WITH A GAS BUBBLE. WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL SCIENTISTS ON THIS PROBLEM. AND I HAVE TO SAY THERE'S BEEN A VERY LARGE EFFORT AND A LOT OF HELP FROM MANY DIFFERENT AGENCIES, INCLUDING THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, TEXAS A&M. WE ARE PLANNING A TECHNICAL WORK SESSION LATER IN THE SUMMER TO BRING AS MANY SCIENTISTS AS WE CAN GET TOGETHER TO REVIEW ALL THE DATA THAT WE HAVE COLLECTED AND TRY TO GET SOME COLLECTIVE -- ADDITIONAL COLLECTIVE WISDOM GOING AND SOME DIRECTION FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, NANCY. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER? YOU HAD SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

Slusher: YES, MAYOR, I DID. FIRST I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT AND CARING FOR AUSTIN. AND THEN I WANT TO SAY A FEW WORDS ABOUT MS. FUTRELL AND THE CITY STAFF BECAUSE IN A LOT OF THE CORRESPONDENCE I'VE GOTTEN OVER THE LAST TWO DAYS THEY'VE BEEN CRITICIZED AND I THINK MOST ALL OF THE -- A BUNCH OF -- A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE TONIGHT RESPONDED TO THE E-MAIL THAT THE THEME OF THAT E-MAIL WAS THAT THE CITY STAFF IN RECOMMENDING THIS PROPOSAL AND WORKING ON THIS PROPOSAL ARE ASSUMING THAT THE AQUIFER IS GOING TO DIE AND THAT BARTON SPRINGS WON'T SURVIVE. IT ALSO SAID THAT THE CITY STAFF IS ACCEPTING A MASSIVE URBAN SPRAWL THAT THEY'RE ACCEPTING OF UNBREATHABLE AIR AND WATER UNFIT FOR SWIMMING. I KNOW THAT'S NOT TRUE AND I REALLY DON'T SEE WHAT GOOD IT DOES FOR BARTON SPRINGS TO DEHUMANIZE CITY EMPLOYEES. THEY'RE CITIZENS JUST LIKE ALL OF US. THEY SWIM AT BARTON SPRINGS. THEY USE THE GREENBELT, HIKE AND BIKE TRAILS. THEY HAVE KIDS WHO THEY WANT TO GROW UP IN A LIVEABLE AUSTIN. AND EVERYDAY I SEE CITY EMPLOYEES WORKING ON A WIDE ARRAY OF FRONTS TO SAVE BARTON SPRINGS AND PROTECT ALL FEATURES OF AUSTIN'S ENVIRONMENT. IN RECENT YEARS I'VE SEEN THEM EMPOWERED BEYOND WHAT WAS REALLY ALLOWED FRANKLY BY A PREVIOUS CITY GOVERNMENT ON PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND THINGS THEY FELT EMPOWERED AND BEEN HAPPY ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO DO MORE OVER THE YEARS TO PROTECT AUSTIN'S ENVIRONMENT. I THINK -- I KNOW I WOULD AGREE WITH A LOT OF THE SENTIMENT HERE TONIGHT AND MOST OF THE CITY EMPLOYEES I THINK WOULD THAT BARTON SPRINGS IS IN TROUBLE. EVERYBODY WANTS TO SAVE IT. IT FACES A TREMENDOUS CHALLENGE. BUT WHEN PEOPLE FACE SUCH HUGE CHALLENGE AND WHEN PEOPLE HAVE THE SAME GOAL, I REALLY HATE TO SEE SOME OF THEM ATTACKED FOR THEIR INTEGRITY AND THE COMMITMENT OF OTHERS. SO I HOPE WE CAN PROCEED TONIGHT WITH RESPECTFUL DIALOGUE, WITH RESPECT FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED AND EVERYONE THAT'S HERE TONIGHT AND I HOPE WE CAN HAVE A CONSTRUCTIVE DISCUSSION. FOLKS KNOW THE CHALLENGES WE ALL FACE IN TRYING TO SAVE BARTON SPRINGS. AND NOW I'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS FOR MS. MCCLINTOCK. MS. McCLINTOCK, THERE'S BEEN -- A LOT HAS BEEN SAID THAT THIS AGREEMENT DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. AND IT'S BEEN STATED STRONGER, LIKE IT VIOLATES THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO GET TO THE TRUTH OF THAT MATTER RIGHT OFF THE TOP HERE TONIGHT. MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT IS THAT THE PROPOSAL THAT'S ON THE TABLE MEETS THE IMPERVIOUS COVER LEVELS OF S.O.S. IT MEETS THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL STANDARDS OF S.O.S. AND IT MEETS EVERY OTHER ASPECT OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THIS AGREEMENT, PROPOSED AGREEMENT ALLOWS CLUSTERING OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. SOME TRACTS WILL HAVE MORE THAN WHAT S.O.S. ALLOWS, BUT OTHERS WILL BE LEFT UNDEVELOPED. AND WE'VE SEEN ON THE MAPS HOW TWO OF THE TRACTS WILL BE LEFT UNDEVELOPED AND ARE CONTIGUOUS TO THE EXISTING SLAUGHTER CREEK METROPOLITAN PARK SO THAT THEY WILL BE ADDED TO THAT -- TO THAT PARK AND SOME OF THE OTHER TRACTS ARE CONTIGUOUS TO THE LADY BIRD JOHNSON WILDFLOWER CENTER AND TO PRESERVE LANDS THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY PURCHASED. SO WHAT I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO TALK ABOUT AS THE LEAD CITY BIOLOGIST IS YOUR VIEWS ON CLUSTERING AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT PROTECTS WATER QUALITY.

WELL, FIRST OF ALL, S.O.S. DOES ALLOW CLUSTERING, BUT IT ONLY ALLOWS CLUSTERING ON ONE CONTIGUOUS PIECE OF PROPERTY. AND WHAT'S REALLY DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS AGREEMENT IS THAT IT HAS DISCONTIGUOUS PIECES OF PROPERTY AND ALLOWS CLUSTERING AMONGST THOSE. CLUSTERING, AND I THINK THIS IS REALLY WELL -- WELL-KNOWN AND PERHAPS GROWING IN OUR UNDERSTANDING OF GROWING, IS ENVIRONMENTALLY ADVANTAGEOUS. AND I'LL JUST HIT SORT OF THE HIGH POINTS. BUT FIRST AND MOST OBVIOUSLY, BY CLUSTERING THE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON SOME PIECES IT ALLOWS YOU TO HAVE SOME COMPLETELY UNDEVELOPED AREAS LEFT OVER. THAT DOES A NUMBER OF THINGS, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS IT DOES IS IT REDUCES THE TOTAL SITE AREA THAT'S ACTUALLY DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION. WE DON'T HAVE A NUMBER TO PUT TO IT, BUT THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION ARE A HUGE PIECE OF THE NON-SOURCE POINT POLLUTION THAT WE GET FROM DEVELOPMENT. SO IN BARTON SPRINGS, FOR INSTANCE, THAT COULD RESULT IN LOWER TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS. THAT'S PROBABLY THE -- IN MY OPINION IT MAY BE THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ADVANTAGE OF CLUSTERING. WE CAN STILL GET THE SAME WATER QUALITY CONTROL BECAUSE THE PONDS -- CERTAINLY THERE IS A CAP ON HOW MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT COULD BE ALLOWED ON ANY PARCEL, BUT UP TO THAT CAP THE WATER QUALITY CONTROLS CAN BE SIZED AND DESIGNED TO TREAT THE ADDITIONAL VOLUME SO THAT WE STILL GET THE NON-DEGRADATION LEVEL OF TREATMENT THAT WE LOOK FOR IN S.O.S. THE OTHER THING THAT WE GET AGAIN WITH THE OPEN SPACE IS FURTHERERING ANOTHER ONE OF THE CITY'S GOAL, WHICH IS TO TRY TO PRESERVE THE NATURAL CHARACTER IN THE HILL COUNTRY AND BASICALLY EVERY HERE IN AUSTIN. YOU ALSO GET THE ADVANTAGE OF THE PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AND HOPEFULLY SOME SPACE FOR THE PUBLIC TO USE.

Slusher: DO YOU THINK IT HAS ALL THOSE ADVANTAGES AND STILL PROTECTS WATER QUALITY IN THIS INSTANCE? AT LEAST AS WELL AS SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE WOULD BE STRICT TRACT BY TRACT COMPLIANCE?

YES, SIR, I DO AND I WOULD EVEN GO SO FAR AS TO SAY THAT I THINK THAT THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE COULD BE IMPROVED WITH SOMETHING THAT THAT WOULD ALLOW THIS TYPE OF CLUSTERING.

Slusher: THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE RIGHT NOW.

Mayor Garcia: LET ME EXPLAIN THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED TONIGHT. THE FIRST ITEM ARE THE SETTLEMENT ITEMS THAT THE STAFF HAS MADE A PRESENTATION ON. WE NOW WILL GO TO A STAFF PRESENTATION ON ALL OF THE ZONING CASES. AND WE'LL START WITH MR. GURNSEY AND THEN THE APPLICANT WILL BE REPRESENTED BY MR. STEVE BRENNER. OKAY. SO THE CITY WILL MAKE THE PRESENTATION AS AN APPLICANT ON ALL THE ZONING EXCEPT THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. MR. BRENNER WILL FOLLOW MR. GURNSEY. AND AFTER THAT I WILL START RECOGNIZING FIRST THOSE CITIZENS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO -- THAT HAVE SIGNED A CARD, BUT DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK. AND AFTER THAT I'LL START RECOGNIZING ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WISH TO SPEAK. MR. GURNSEY?

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MY NAME IS GREG GURNSEY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. AND THE CITY IS THE APPLICANT AS YOU HAD SAID ON ACTUALLY 14 CASES THAT ARE POSTED ON YOUR AGENDA. AND THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. ITEM, WHICH IS ITEM Z-9 IS ACTUALLY FILED BY THE STRATUS OR CIRCLE C LAND CORP. LET ME IDENTIFY THESE TRACTS. AND I WANT TO POINT OUT RIGHT OFF THE BAT, THERE ARE TWO ITEMS THAT ARE ON YOUR AGENDA THIS EVENING -- IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER Z-16, WHICH HAS BEEN REPLACED BY AN ADDENDUM ITEM. IT IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SLAUGHTER AND MOPAC. CASE C-14,020,040.113 WHICH IS ITEM Z-22 ON YOUR AGENDA NEAR THE WILDFLOWER CENTER ON MOPAC. THESE ITEMS WILL NOT BE HEARD FOR ZONING AND PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT, DUE TO A NOTIFICATION ERROR AND WILL BE RESCHEDULED FOR JULY 18th AND WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THAT TIME: SO THE ZONING CASES THAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT ARE Z-10 THROUGH Z-15 ON YOUR AGENDA. Z-17 THROUGH Z-21. AND Z-23. THESE ARE THE CITY OF AUSTIN INITIATED ZONING CASES. Z-9, AGAIN, IS THE ITEM THAT'S INITIATED BY STRATUS PROPERTY THROUGH THE HOLDINGS OF CIRCLE C LAND CORP. LET ME POINT OUT A FEW THINGS ABOUT THESE TRACTS. THE MAP TO MY RIGHT IN BLUE SHOWS ALL THE TRACTS THAT HAS EITHER BEEN INITIATE BID THE CITY FOR ZONING OR BY THE CIRCLE C LAND CORP THROUGH STRATUS. THE FIRST ONE, WHICH IS BEAR LAKE P.U.D., THIS TRACT OVER HERE, WAS SUBMITTED LAST YEAR AND IT WAS A PROPOSED PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT FOR APPROXIMATELY 800 UNITS. ORIGINALLY STARTED OUT AS HAVING A MIXTURE OF MULTI-FAMILY, TOWNHOUSE, SINGLE-FAMILY SMALL LOTS, LARGE LOTS. WHEN THAT CASE WAS FILED A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS ALONG 1826 HAD MUCH OF A CONCERN OVER THE TRAFFIC THAT WAS COMING OUT ON 1826 AND THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE LAND USE ON BEAR LAKE P.U.D., ALONG WITH ALL THE ADJACENT SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS UP AND DOWN 1826. SO WITH MORE LARGE LOT SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. ALSO A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THROUGH THE LAST 10 YEARS, 10 OR 15 YEARS HAS BEEN DEVELOPING ALONG 1826 AND THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT THE INTERSECTION AT 45 AND EAT SVEN ACTUAL FLOW OF TRAFFIC FURTHER DOWN 1826. WHEN THIS OCCURRED, THE CITY COUNCIL TOOK ACTION AND ALLOWED STAFF TO INITIATE THE REST OF THE ZONING CASES THAT YOU SEE THAT ARE ON THIS MAP. THE NEIGHBORS HAD CONCERN THAT THEY WEREN'T GETTING THE WHOLE PICTURE, SO CITY STAFF BEGAN IN APRIL TO INITIATE THE ZONING ON 14 OTHER CASES, WHICH GO FROM SO 1, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 110, 109, 111, 112, 113 AND 114. AND THESE TRACTS OF LAND MAKE UP ABOUT 738 ACRES. THE ORIGINAL BEAR LAKE P.U.D. IS PROBABLY 30 PLUS ACRES OF LAND. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LAND IN SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY. ALL OF THESE TRACTS OF LAND WERE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PART OF BEAR LAKE P.U.D. THAT WAS ACTUALLY ANNEXED THIS YEAR IN 1997. AND WHEN LAND COMES INTO THE CITY, IT COMES IN WITH AN INTERIM ZONING CLASSIFICATION. AND THE CLASSIFICATION, SOME TYPE OF ZONING IS GIVEN TO ALL PROPERTY UPON ANNEXATION IN ORDER SO THERE WON'T BE A TAKING FOR THE PROPERTY AND THE INTERIM DESIGNATION IS TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT AN INTERIM ZONING IS NOT PERMANENT AND THE PROCESS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS EVENING WOULD ACTUALLY ESTABLISH PERMANENT ZONING. MANY OF THE TRACTS THAT ARE BEFORE US THIS EVENING, PARTICULARLY THOSE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. AND TRACT 114, WHICH IS OVER BY HIGHWAY 45 AND 1826. WERE ORIGINALLY IN THE SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY M.U.D. NUMBER 1, 2, 3, 4, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS CIRCLE C M.U.D. AND IT HAS BEEN THE PRACTICE OF THE CITY OVER THESE MANY YEARS TO ACTUALLY ZONE -- INITIATE ZONING ON THESE TRACTS AND THERE'S A M.U.D. THAT WAS LOCATED IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE CIRCLE C M.U.D. IT'S CALLED THE --

Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU STOP THE CLOCK. THIS IS NOT SUBJECT FOR TIMING THAT WE HAD FOR SPEAKERS. SO TURN IT OFF.

WE ALSO ANNEXED ALONG BRODIE LANE RUNNING SOUTH OF WILLIAM CANNON GOING FURTHER SOUTH, THREE TRACTS OF LAND WHICH ARE PART ANOTHER M.U.D. THE CITY OF AUSTIN INITIATED ZONING OVER ALL THOSE MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICTS WHERE THERE WERE LOTS OWNED BY INDIVIDUALS OR LOTS OWNED BY CORPORATIONS. IN THE CASE OF THE VILLAGE OF WEST OLYMPICS M.U.D., ALL THAT LAND HAD AN INTERIM ZONING CATEGORY. IT WAS EITHER INTERIM SF-2 OR INTERIM RR. AND WHEN WE BROUGHT THOSE TRACTS IN, THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AS WE'RE DOING TODAY, INITIATED ZONING ON THOSE PARCELS AND WE ZONED THE PARCELS PRETTY MUCH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR M.U.D. THE INTENSITIES OF THE ZONING WERE LESS THAN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT IF YOU DRIVE DOWN SOUTH MOPAC, FOR INSTANCE, YOU LOOK TO YOUR RIGHT BEFORE YOU GET TO CIRCLE C MUD, YOU SEE SEVERAL APARTMENTS. ON THE VILLAGE OF WEST OAKS M.U.D., THAT WAS DESIGNATED AS A MULTI-FAMILY. IT EVENTUALLY WAS ZONED MF MULTI-FAMILY AND HAS MULTI-FAMILY THERE TODAY. AT THE INTERSECTION OF DAVIS AND MOPAC THERE ARE SOME GR TRACTS THAT WERE DESIGNATED FOR COMMERCIAL USES IN THE OLD VILLAGE OF OAK HILLS AND CONSTITUENT INITIATED GR ZONING ON THOSE TRACTS AND THEY ARE ZONED GR TODAY. SO THERE ARE MANY SIMILARITIES THAT WE HAVE AS FAR AS THE PROCESS IS CONCERNED. WE DID SEND A NOTICE IN THOSE CASE AS WE DID THIS CASE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THESE TRACTS AND WE ALSO NOTIFIED THE REGISTERED HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OF THE ZONING CHANGES. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PROCESS WAS DIFFERENT AS FAR AS PARTICIPANTS, BUT THE PARTICIPANTS OF THE ZONING CASE, EVERYONE RECEIVED NOTICE AT THE SAME TIME. WHETHER THEY WENT TO THEIR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, THEIR TRUST COMPANY, THROUGH THEIR INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS, THEY WERE NOTIFIED. I WANT TO GO THROUGH THE INDIVIDUAL CASES STARTING WITH THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. THIS IS AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STATE HIGHWAY 45 AND 1826. IT'S COMPOSED OF APPROXIMATELY 800 UNITS AND WORKS OUT TO BE 1.5 UNITS PER ACRE. THERE'S A VARIETY OF LAND USES AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, SINGLE-FAMILY, A LARGE LOTS, SMALL LOTS, LOTS DOWN TO 3600 SQUARE FEET AND PROVIDED FOR TOWNHOUSE, ORIGINAL MULTI-FAMILY THAT HAS SINCE BEEN DELETED, CONDOMINIUM USES. THERE'S ALSO PROVISION FOR WHAT'S CALLED A COMMUNITY CENTER TYPE TRACT. ALSO PROVIDED FOR A SCHOOL. THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAME BACK AND RECOMMENDED THE P.U.D. ZONING TO THE COUNCIL AND HAD MADE SEVERAL CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FIRST AND FOREMOST THEY DID PROHIBIT THE APARTMENTS. THE AREA THAT IS KNOWN AS THE TRUST, YOU CAN SHOW ME AGAIN THE MAP ON MY RIGHT, THE CRESCENT AREA, WAS A HOTLY CONTESTED AREA. AND IT HAD A GREAT DEAL OF DISCUSSION. THEY HAD LIMITED THE DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO THIS, 1826, TO THE SOUTHERNMOST DRIVEWAYS ON THE P.U.D. THE OWNERS OF STRATUS CAME BACK AND NEGOTIATED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE THEN TO TELL ACTUALLY DELETE THIS DRIVEWAY. THERE WAS ALSO 100-FOOT SET BACK FROM THE LINE OF 1826, VARIOUS PROPERTIES AND A 200 PLUS SET BACK FOR CERTAIN OTHER PROPERTIES DEPENDING ON THE DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES. THESE HAVE SINCE BEEN MODIFIED. THERE HAVE BEEN LIMITATIONS ON HEIGHT THAT WERE AGREED TO AT THE TIME OF PLANNING COMMISSION THAT HAVE SINCE BEEN REDUCED AND THERE WERE PROVISIONS FOR SOME SOME FLASHING LIGHTS OR SIGNAL FOR A DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD COME OFF OF THIS CRESCENT THAT STRATUS WOULD AGREE TO PURSUE THOSE WITH TXDOT'S PERMISSION. THOSE HAVE -- THE NEED FOR THAT HAS SINCE GONE AWAY SINCE THAT'S NOT REQUIRED IF THERE'S NO DRIVEWAY. WHERE DOES THAT KIND OF BRING US TODAY? WE DO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF AND THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION AND THERE IS A HANDOUT THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE ON THE DIAS, AND I CAN PRESENT ANOTHER COPY TO YOU THAT IS ENTITLED STRATUS PROPERTIES, JUNE 27TH COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY NEGOTIATION MODIFICATION. SINCE THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION FOR BEAR LAKE P.U.D. AND I'D LIKE TO RUN THROUGH THOSE VERY QUICKLY. THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE M.U.D. LAND PLAN THAT HAS SINCE BEEN SUBMITTED WOULD LIMIT THE ACCESS POINT AT 1826 TO A SINGLE ACCESS POINT AS SHOWN ON THE LAND USE MAP THAT WAS SUBMITTED, AND THAT WOULD BE OUT OF THE CRESCENT AREA CLOSER TO HIGHWAY 45. THEY WOULD ALSO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A ROADWAY CROSSING TO CROSS A CREEK SINCE THERE WOULD BE NO OTHER ACCESS TO THE MIXED RESIDENTIAL AREA A, ALSO KNOWN AS THE CRESCENT. IT WOULD PROVIDE FOR CERTAIN VARIANCES IN ACCORDANCE TO ALLOW THIS ACCESS, A VARIANCE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW -- IT NORMALLY REQUIRES A 2,000-FOOT MINIMUM BETWEEN A COLLECTOR STREET AND ARTERIAL STREET OR OTHER COLLECTOR ARREST STERILE STREET OR -- OR ARTERIAL STREET OR WATER QUALITY ZONE, THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, ALSO TO MODIFY CERTAIN PERFORMANCE STANDARDS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE P.U.D. IN LIEU OF OTHERS PRACTICED IN THE COATDZ CODES. A WATERWAY CROSSING IN A MIXED RESIDENTIAL AREA A AS SHOWN ON THE P.U.D. LAND USE PLAN NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ACCESS THAT WOULD NOT OTHERWISE BE PROVIDED. ALSO TO APPROVE CUT AND FILL VARIANCES FOR A ROADWAY THAT CROSSES THE CREEK UP TO A CUT OR FILL OF 10 FEET. TO APPROVE A VARIANCE FROM A MAXIMUM LOT LENGTH, APPROVE A WAIVER FROM A SINGLE STREET STREET OUTLET RESTRICTION. AND AGAIN THESE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN APPROVAL BY OUR FIRE AND E.M.S. SERVICES. ALSO, TO APPROVE WAIVERS FROM THE CUL-DE-SACS AND OUTLET STREETS ACCORDING TO THE CRITERIA MANUAL AND BLOCK ROADS. A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT THIS WOULD DO IS APPROVE THE SHORTENING OF THE MAIN BOULEVARD THAT WOULD BE LEADING INTO THE DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN, THE CUL-DE-SACS PROHIBITION, BUT STRONGLY DISCOURAGED THEM TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT TO INSTALL THE SIGNAL AS I'VE MENTIONED BEFORE ON 1826 FOR THE AREA REFERRED TO AS THE CRESCENT, WHICH IS NO LONGER AN ACCESS POINT. TO RESTRICT THE RESIDENTIAL OF P.U.D. TO BE PERMIT ODD A NON-CURB AND GUTTER STREET. I'VE ALREADY MENTIONED THE MULTI-FAMILY USE TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE MIXED RESIDENTIAL AREA A CONNECTING THE 95. THE STRUCTURES IN THE MIXED RESIDENTIAL AREA, WE'D NOW BE LOOKING AT TWO-STORY INSTEAD OF THE HIGHER HEIGHTS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY APPROVED -- RECOMMENDED BY THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION. AND A PRIMARY EDUCATIONAL USE BE ADDED TO THE MIXED RESIDENTIAL AREA C, WHICH IS -- WOULD ALLOW FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, THE PROPOSED AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. ALSO ADDITIONAL BUILDING SET BACKS FROM THE INTERSECTION OF STATE HIGHWAY 45 AND 1826. AND THESE WOULD CONSIST OF THE SETBACK FROM 1826 FOR THE FIRST 2,000 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION IS 107 FEET. THE SETBACK FROM 1826 BETWEEN 2,000 AND 3,000 LINEAR FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION NEAR THE CRESCENT AREA IS 1 FWIFN FEET FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND FOR TOWNHOUSES AND CONDOMINIUMS IT IS 207 FEET. THE SETBACKS FROM 1826 FOR THE AREA BETWEEN 5,000 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION TO THE END OF THE PROPERTY IS 207 FEET. THE SETBACK IN THE STATE HIGHWAY 45 WOULD BE 45 TO 50 FEET. AND NOTING THAT THE SETBACKS I MENTIONED ON 1826 ARE FROM THE CENTER LINE. IT WOULD ALSO APPROVE VARIANCE YANSS FROM CUT AND FILL AND DETENTION PONDS AND RIRMS FOR SET BACK FROM AN UNCLASSIFIED WATERWAY OF FIVE ACRES OR MORE IS CLARIFIED AND DEFINED AS A 25-FOOT OFFSET FROM THE CENTER LINE. SO THIS IS THE PROPOSAL THAT YOU HAD BEFORE YOU ON BEAR LAKE P.U.D. AND AGAIN, THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT WAS FILED BY STRATUS AND CIRCLE C LAND CORP. THE REMAINING CASES I'M GOING TO TALK TO ARE CITY INITIATED.

LET ME QUICKLY TAKE YOU ON A WHIRLWIND TOUR OF THESE TRACTS AND I WILL SKIP THE ONES THAT WE ARE NOT HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT. THE FIRST TRACT TO MY RIGHT IS TRACT 101. THIS IS PROPOSED FOR GR-MU ZONING. THIS TRACT IS WEST OF CIRCLE C NORTH SUBDIVISION NORTH OF SLAUGHTER LANE AND EAST OF 1826. IT IS ACROSS FROM THE WATER TOWER THAT'S OUT THERE, WATER TANK THAT'S OUT THERE. THERE IS SEVERAL PROHIBITIONS ON THESE TRACTS, AND WHICH IS COMMON TO ALL OF THESE THAT I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO ON THE CITY INITIATED CASES, THERE WOULD BE NO DROPOFF RECYCLING AND NO PAWN SHOPS. ALSO THAT AUTO RELATED USES, UNLESS I SEE OTHERWISE, WILL BE PROHIBITED FROM THESE TRACTS. ALSO THERE'S A LIMITATION TO A SINGLE SERVICE STATION OR GAS STATION THAT'S ALLOWED ON THESE TRACTS AND I'LL POINT OUT WHERE THAT IS. BUT ON TRACT 101, RIGHT NOW WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS THERE'S A PROHIBITION OF RETAIL WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE EAST PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT TO THE CIRCLE C NORTH LOTS OF RETAIL USES AND THERE IS A BUFFER THAT RANGES FROM 175 FEET, WHICH IS PERPENDICULAR TO THE EAST PROPERTY LINE FROM SLAUGHTER LANE AND IT WOULD RANGE ALL THE WAY UP TO 375 FEET. IT ALSO PROVIDES A 25-FOOT BUFFER WHICH PROHIBITS BUILDING AND STRUCTURES ALONG SLAUGHTER LANE. AND WOULD ALLOW A SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL FACILITY. TRACT 101 IS A SITE THAT HAS THROUGH THE AGREEMENT, PROPOSED AGREEMENT, THEY WOULD HAVE AN OPTION TO PURCHASE A PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY, PROBABLY SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 25 AND 35 ACRES FOR A MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE. ALSO THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED A PROHIBITION TO ACCESS TO ALLETSON DRIVE, EXCEPT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES. AND LIMIT DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY ON THIS PROPERTY TO MF-3 DENSITY FOR THE MU. AND LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT THE MU IS. MU IS A MIXED USE DISTRICT WHICH ALLOWS FOR A VARIETY OF TYPES OF HOUSING. IT COULD BE MULTI-FAMILY, TOWNHOUSE, CONDOMINIUM, DUPLEXES, SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. AND SO THE MF-3 IS SOMETHING ACTUALLY THAT IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN WOULD NORMALLY BE REQUIRED. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT MANY OF THE BUFFERS I'LL BE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT NORMALLY IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN FROM A PROPERTY THAT'S DEVELOPED FOR COMMERCIAL THAT'S DEVELOPED FOR MULTI-FAMILY TYPE USES, A BUFFER IS NORMALLY 25 FEET FROM THE DEVELOPMENT FOR PARKING LOT OR FOR A BUILDING. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THE SETBACKS RANGE FROM 1075 FEET UP TO 375 FEET. SO THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE FROM WHAT NORMALLY SOMEONE WOULD ENJOY INSIDE THE CITY OF AUSTIN THAN ON THIS TRACT. ALSO, IF YOU WERE TO BUILD A BUILDING THAT IS 40 FEET IN HEIGHT, YOU WOULD HAVE A REQUIRED SET BACK OF 50 FEET IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE SAME RESTRICTIONS I HAD MENTIONED BEFORE ON THE SETBACK OF 175 AND 375 FEET WOULD ALSO APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY.

[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

ALL THESE SETBACKS I'M SPEAKING TO WOULD END ADJACENT TO WHAT A RESIDENTIAL IS AND RECENTLY WE'VE HAD A SUBDIVISION, WHEN I SPEAK TO THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE, THERE'S A RECENT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION THAT HAS JUST BEEN APPROVED BY THE ZONE AND PLATTING COMMISSION AND THESE BUFFERS WOULD BE ON THE AREA THAT'S NORTH OF ANOTHER PIPELINE THAT TRAVERSES THIS SITE CALLED THE PHILLIPS PIPELINE. IT ACTUALLY CUTS IT. THE LONGHORN PIPELINE IS ON THE NORTH AND SO THE AREA IN BETWEEN IS WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE THE DIFFERENT SETBACKS THAT WOULD APPLY. ALSO ON 103, AND THERE WAS A DEDICATION REQUIREMENT FOR 114 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A FUTURE EXTENSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S ROADWAY PLAN. THIS WOULDN'T BE REQUIRED AT THIS TIME. THIS WOULD BE REQUIRED AT THE TIME OF THE SUBDIVISION BECAUSE THIS IS A CITY-INITIATED CASE. ALSO THERE IS NO MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN SAWEDER LANE AND THE PHILLIPS PIPELINE. EXCUSE ME. THIS IS THE AREA THAT WOULD BE SAUT OF THE PIPELINE ADJACENT TO -- SOUTH OF THE PIPELINE ADJACENT TO SAUDER LANE. THE NEXT TWO TRACTS I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT ARE TO THE SOUTH OF SAUDER LANE, THESE TWO TRACTS OF THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WOULD BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND ARE PROPOSED FOR RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING. NORMALLY WHEN WE HAVE PROPERTY COMING IN, A LOT OF TIMES THAT PROPERTY IS REZONED TO BE PUBLIC. IF IT IS THE COUNSEL SAIL'S DESIRE, THEY COULD DIRECT STAFF TO ZONE THESE AS PUBLIC AS WELL. STAFF HAS ONE OBJECTION TO SOMETHING THAT THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED ON BOTH OF THESE PARCELS AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED WAS TO TAKE CARE OF SOME OF THE DRAINAGE FOR WATER QUALITY PURPOSES AND PREVENTION PURPOSES OFF OF SAUDER LANE AND STAFF WOULD ASK COUNCIL TO CONSIDER STILL ALLOWING IT, ALTHOUGH THIS IS CONTRARY TO THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW STORM WATER FACILITIES ON TRACTS 104 AND 105, SOUTHWEST ON EITHER SIDE OF THE BOULEVARD. THE NEXT TRACT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT IS TRACT 106. THIS IS AT WEST OF MOPAC, NORTH OF SLAUGHTER LANE AND THIS WOULD BE DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE APARTMENTS IN THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS. THIS TRACT IS PROPOSED FOR GR ZONING. THEY HAVE A HEIGHT LIMITATION OF 40 FEET. IT WOULD ALSO BE A BUFFER THAT WOULD BE ESTABLISHED SIMILAR TO THE OTHER BUFFERS I HAD MENTIONED BEFORE, AND THIS WOULD BE 100 FEET FROM THOSE HOMES THAT ARE PLATTED IN THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS, AND THIS WOULD BE OPPOSITE OF THE EXTENSION OF BECKETT ROAD, WHICH WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THIS PROPERTY. THAT ROAD IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY THE FAMILY SUBDIVISION PURT TO THE -- FURTHER TO THE WEST. EXCUSE ME. ON TRACT 107 THERE IS A PROHIBITION AGAINST A DRIVE-IN RESTAURANT AND IT WOULD ALLOW A GAS STATION OR SERVICE STATION USE ON THIS TRACT UNDER THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION. THIS IS ONE OF TWO TRACTS, 106 AT SLAUGHTER AND MOPAC AND TRACT 114 AT 1826 AND HIGHWAY 56 WHICH IS PROPOSED FOR THE SINGLE SERVICE STATION USE. THIS TRACT WOULD ALSO BE PROHIBITED FROM AUTO-RELATED USES LIKE AUTO RENTAL, AUTO SALES, AUTO WASHING, THAT KIND OF THING, BUT IT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF OTHER RETAIL USES ALLOWED IN GR. THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO PLACED LR SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WHICH ALSO ECHOES THE 40 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION, ON THIS TRACT AS WELL SIMILAR TO 103 AND 101 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ALLOWING ADDITIONAL HEIGHT FOR A SCHOOL ON THAT TRACT, AND 102 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE COMMUNITY STORAGE. HOWEVER, TRACT 106 DOES NOT HAVE THE NEW COMPONENT. TRACT 107 I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK TO TONIGHT BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK ON JULY 18th. THE NEXT TRACT I'M GOING TO TALK TO IS TRAKT 108. THIS IS LOCATED ACROSS FROM BUOY HIGH SCHOOL AT THE LOCATION OF BRODY LANE AND SLAUGHTER LANE. THIS IS PROPOSED FOR GR USE, SIMILAR TO TRACT 101. LIMITATIONS ARE HEIGHT OF 40 FEET. THAT PROHIBITIONS ON THE SERVICE STATION TYPE USE AND AUTO-RELATED USES. ON TRACT 108 THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION APPLIED LR SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO THIS TRACT. SO THERE WOULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL SETBACKS IN SLAUGHTER LANE AND BRODY LANE. ALSO THE DENSITY LIMITATION WOULD BE LIMITED TO AN MS 3 DENSITY ON THIS TRACT. THERE IS A 100 FOOT BUFFER THAT'S ALSO APPLIED TO THIS PROPERTY. ALTHOUGH IT'S A VERY SMALL PORTION FROM THE MULL BURN DEVELOPMENT THAT'S FURTHER TO THE WEST -- MILL BURN DEVELOPMENT THAT'S FURTHER TO THE WEST AT THIS POINT, AT THE EXTREME WESTERN END THAT WOULD BE A PROHIBITION OF BUILDINGS AND PARKING AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. THE NEXT TRACT IS TRACT 109. TRACT 109 IS KNOWN BY MANY RESIDENTS WITHIN THE CIRCLE C AREA AS THE GREEN BELT TRACT ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT DESIGNATED A GREEN BELT TRACT BY EASEMENT. THIS TRACT IS BEHIND HIKER ELEMENTARY AND THE DAY CARE AND EXTENDS BACK INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS PROPOSED FOR RR ZONING. THERE'S REALLY NO DEVELOPMENT THAT'S PROPOSED ON THIS AND IT'S ALSO RECOMMENDED BY THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION. TRACT 110, THIS IS THE LARGEST OF ALL THESE PROPERTIES, AND IT'S ABOUT A 246 ACRE TRACT THAT RUNS ALONG MOPAC AND CURVES BACK AROUND HIGHWAY 45. THIS TRACT, THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION HAD SOME PRETTY DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS AND SO LET ME WALK YOU THROUGH EACH PART OF THIS. ON TRACT 110 THEY IDENTIFIED THREE TRACTS WITHIN THIS TRACT. A TRACT A, WHICH PRETTY MUCH, IF YOU TOOK A LINE AND WENT DIRECTLY EAST OF THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF HIKER ELEMENTARY AND WENT ACROSS HERE TO NORTH OF, THAT IS TRACT A. TRACT B TAKES UP THE MAJORITY OF PROPERTY AND COMES DOWN TO A POINT ABOUT 2,000 FEET AWAY FROM ES CARTMENT BOULEVARD AND THAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 2,000 AND THE BOULEVARD THAT THE CITY WILL ACTUALLY CONSTRUCT IN MARCH OR APRIL OF NEXT YEAR IS TRACT C. WITHIN TRACT A, TRACT A'S MADE UP OF TWO PLATTED LOTS AND THESE ARE THE ONLY TWO PLATTED LOTS THAT ARE PART OF ALL THESE CITY CASES. THERE'S LOT 1 AND LOT 2. LOT 2 IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM HIKER ELEMENTARY AND THIS IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF DALRIN AND LACROSSE. ON THIS TRACT THE COMMISSION MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO LIMIT THE BUILDING HEIGHT ON THIS TRACT TO 35 FEET. THERE'S NO ACCESS TO DALGREN, THAT THERE BE A BUFFER THAT APPEAR IN PARKING AND BUILDINGS EXCEPT FOR SOME WALLS, FENCES, TRAILS, UTILITIES, REIRRIGATION FACILITIES WITHIN 50 FEET OF DALGREN AND 75 FEET OFF LACROSSE. ALSO THAT THE PARKING IS REQUIRED TO BE LOCATED BEHIND THE STRUCTURE EXCEPT FOR THE MINIMAL AMOUNT NECESSARY FOR VISITOR DROP-OFF AND HANDICAP ACCESSIBILITY. IN ADDITION ON LOT 1 WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR AND THIS WOULD BE AT THE CORNER OF LACROSSE AND MOPAC, HEIGHTS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO INCREASE UP TO 40 FEET. HOWEVER THIS WOULD BE PROHIBITED FOR MANY MULTIFAMILY, AUTO WASHING REPAIR, AUTO SALES, SERVICE STATION, DRIVE-IN RESTAURANTS OR FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS ARE PROHIBITED, DROP-OFF RECYCLING. ALSO WOULD PROHIBIT BUILDINGS AND PARKING WITHIN A CERTAIN BUFFER AREA, WITHIN 25 FEET OF LACROSSE BUT IF THE PROPERTY'S ACTUALLY DEVELOPED WITH A COMMERCIAL USE, THEN THERE WILL BE NO BUILDINGS WITHIN 50 FEET OR PARKING WITHIN 25 FEET OF LACROSSE AVENUE. WE JUMP OVER TO TRACT B NOW. TRACT B IS THE LARGEST OF THESE TRACTS. AND TRACT B THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT SETBACKS THAT ARE ACTUALLY PROPOSED ALONG THIS TRACT. RUNNING ALONG THE WESTERN PORTION ADJACENT TO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND GOING DOWN DALGREN, AGAIN NO ACCESS IS PROPOSED ON DALGREN. IN FACT ALL THESE TRACTS, EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE PROPOSED FOR GRU ON PART A, CSMU ON TRACT B AND ON C THERE'S NO MULTIFAMILY PROPOSED ON ANY OF THESE PROPERTIES. THE SETBACKS WOULD BE A 200 FOOT PARKING SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, A HOLDING POND IN ADDITION TO TRACT B. PARKING COULD BE LOCATED BETWEEN 200 AND 250 FEET AWAY FROM THESE LOTS. HOWEVER THERE HAD TO BE SOME ADDITIONAL SCREENING OF THE BERM AND THE LANDSCAPING IN EXCESS OF THE CITY STANDARDS, BUT THERE ARE NO BUILDINGS -- WELL BEYOND 250 FEET BUILDINGS COULD ATTAIN A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 45 FEET AND THEN 375 FEET, BUILDINGS COULD ATTAIN A HEIGHT OF 60 FEET. THERE ARE SEPARATE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN MADE BETWEEN THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND STRATUS THAT REGARD THE ORIENTATION OF BUILDINGS, AND ALTHOUGH THOSE DESCRIPTIONS WERE PRESENTED TO THE ZONING AND PLATTING CONDITION, THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY STANDARDS IN OUR CODE THAT SPEAKS TO ORIENTATION OF BUILDINGS BEING PERPENDICULAR OR NOT TO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. SO IN THE MOTION THE COMMISSION MADE, IF YOU LOOKgPn AT IT, IT SPEAKS TO ALMOST DUPLICATION OF 45 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATIONS AND DUPLICATES 65 FOOT LIMITATIONS AND WITH THE COMMISSION IT SIMPLY DOESN'T MEET THE ORIENTATION LIMITATIONS THAT WERE PART OF THAT. ON TRACT C THIS IS THE AREA THAT'S DEFINED BETWEEN HE IS CARPMENT AND EAST OF HE IS CARPMENT. THIS WOULD BE TO LR SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND WOULD PROVIDE BUFFERING FROM PARKING WITHIN 100 FEET OF PLATTED LOT. THERE'S NO ACCESS TO DALGREN. IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT THE EXTENSION ITSELF, APPROVED BY TxDOT, THAT INTERNAL DRIVERS BE PERMITTED TO CROSS THE DRAINAGE AREA ALONG THE SOUTH PROPER LINE -- OH, THIS IS LOT 1. TO BRING ACCESS TO TRACTS 1 AND 2 IN TRACT B. AND THERE'S -- EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE PROHIBITED ACCESS TO DALGREN LANE, THE APPROVAL OF THE WOULD NOT PREVENT AN INTERNAL PRIVATE BRIDGE TO GET FROM TRACT A TO TRACT B OVER THIS AT THIS LOCATION. TRACTS 111 AND 112 AND TRACT 113 I WILL NOT MENTION IN THAT WILL BE A HEARING POSTPONED UNTIL JULY 18th. ON TRACTS 111 AND 112, THESE TRACTS ARE ADJACENT TO THE WILD FLOWER CENTER AND ARE PROPOSED FOR RR ZONING. THERE'S ALSO A PROVISION THAT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE CERTAIN WATER QUALITY FACILITIES IN THESE AREAS, AND THAT MAY RUN CONTRARY TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION THAT MAY ALLOW FOR THE SOMEWHAT RETENTION OF WATER QUALITY FACILITIES. THE LAST TRACT I'LL SPEAK TO IS TRACT 114 AND THIS IS ACROSS FROM BUBBA'S CONVENIENCE STORE AT 1826 HIGHWAY 45, ACROSS FROM BARE LAKE POND. THIS IS PROPOSED FOR GR ZONING. IT WOULD PROVIDE FOR A 100 FOOT BUFFER AGAIN. IF THAT BUFFER IS LOCATED IN THIS AREA, AND IT CAUSES A PROBLEM FOR STORM WATER RETENTION, WATER QUALITY STAFF AGAIN WOULD ASK, SINCE IT RUNS CONTRARY TO THE WATER BOARD LIMITATIONS, THAT BE LIFTED SO WE COULD PUT THESE FACILITIES IN IF IT WAS NECESSARY. THIS IS ALSO THE OTHER TRACT THAT'S ALLOWED FOR SINGLE GAS STATION USE ON THIS TRACT, AND AGAIN THERE WOULD ONLY BE ONE GAS STATION AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION AND THAT WOULD EITHER BE ON 106 OR 114. LET ME CLOSE BY TELLING YOU ABOUT A COUPLE OF OTHER GENERAL RESTRICTIONS THAT APPLY TO SOME OF THE RETAIL. ON ALL THESE TRACTS THAT I HAVE SPOKEN OF THIS EVENING THAT WE'RE HOLDING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR, THE RETAIL USES ARE LIMITED, A SINGLE TENANT IS LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF 35,000 SQUARE FEET. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU PROBABLY WOULD NOT NORMALLY FIND WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS TO LIMIT THE SIZE OF THESE SINGLE TENANTS SO YOU ARE NOT DRAWING A LARGER SINGLE RETAIL USE. SO YOU WOULD BE DRAWING PEOPLE COMING FROM ALL OVER AUSTIN TO USE, LIKE, A WAL-MART OR A SAM'S OR SOME LARGE BIG BOX TYPE USE. THESE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE ALL MADE BY THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION, AND I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THERE WAS A LOT OF INPUT THAT WAS GIVEN AT A LOT OF THESE HEARINGS FROM NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS AND ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS HAVE TAKEN EXCEPTION TO THE PROPOSED ZONING. THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED. AND TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF ZONING AND PLATTING CONDITION WE HAVE HAD SOME HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS ACTUALLY SUPPORT THESE. THERE ARE SOME ISSUES ABOUT THE ROADWAY EXTENSIONS OF ESCARPMENT BOULEVARD AND BECKETT THAT HAVE BEEN MADE PART OF A ZONING DISCUSSION BUT REALLY THOSE TWO ROADWAY EXTENSIONS ARE MARCH OF THE ROADWAY PLAN. THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERN ALSO ABOUT THE LONGHORN PIPELINE THAT RUNS ALONG NORTHERN SIDE OF 106 AND 103. I KNOW THE CITY'S ACTIVELY TRYING TO PREVENT THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF GASOLINE RUNNING THROUGH THERE, BUT THE ZONING CASE CANNOT STOP WHAT GOES IN THAT PIPE OR CHANGE THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE STATE LAW MADE BY THE COURTS AS FAR AS THIS PROCESS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM THIS TIME.

Mayor Garcia: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

Councilmember Avarez: YOU MENTIONED A LOT OF THE STEPS, AGREEMENTS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE TO IMPROVE COMPATIBILITY AND SETBACKS AND ALL SUCH THINGS. BUT YOU ALSO MENTION, I THOUGHT YOU HEARD YOU REFERENCES VARIANCES, TOO. HOW MANY OF THOSE DO WE HAVE IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS?

SOME OF THE VARIANCES, MOST OF THOSE ARE ADDRESSED IN THE BEAR LAKE, AND IF YOU GO BACK TO THE HANDOUT I MENTIONED EARLIER, THAT COVERS MOST OF THE VARIANCES THAT ARE ENVISIONED WITH THAT ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT.

Councilmember Avarez: I'M FAMILIAR WITH THOSE.

THERE MAY BE OTHER ONE THAT WAS DISCUSSED. I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WAS FINALIZED IN THE ACTUAL TERMS SHEET THAT DEALT WITH CROSSING THE CREEK BETWEEN TRACTS A AND TRACTS B, AND I DON'T THINK CAME OF THAT.

Councilmember Avarez: THAT'S IN TRACT 110?

THAT'S IN TRACT 110. THE PROPERTY OWNERS AGREED TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS, HAS EXCEEDED THE COMPATIBILITY OF HEIGHT AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS TO A GREAT DEGREE, HAD -- I'VE BEEN MADE AWARE OF, BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN THE INDIVIDUAL AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE WITH CERTAIN HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION, BUT I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE AGREEMENTS WITH THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE BEEN EXECUTED ABOUT THE ACTUAL DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURES, ABOUT THE TYPES OF MATERIALS USED ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGS AND POSSIBLY EVEN COLORS.

OKAY. THANKS.

Mayor Garcia: OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. DARCY?

AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO TURN IT OVER TO MR. STEVE DRENNER GARS.

Mayor Garcia: I RECOGNIZED HIM AS AN APPLICANT. LET ME JUST PLAIN THE PROCESS THAT WE WILL FOLLOW. -- LET ME JUST EXPLAIN THE PROCESS THAT WE WILL FOLLOW AS FOLLOWS. WE HAVE HEARD STAFF PRESENTATION ON SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, WE HAVE HAD THE STAFF PRESENTATION ON ALL THE TRACTS THAT WERE DISCUSSED BY MR. GARCY. NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT ON THE BEAR LAKE PUBLIC. MR. DRENNER IS GOING TO PRESENT THAT. A LOT OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP AND GAVE TIME TO YOU. UNDER THE RULES OF THE COUNCIL YOU ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE 15 MINUTES TOTAL. YOU HAVE 600 PEOPLE SIGNING AND GIVING TO YOU. SO YOU HAVE 15 MINUTES TO MAKE THE PRESENTATION. I'M GOING TO ASK THE PEOPLE THAT ARE SIT INNING THE FRONT ROW ON THIS SIDE IF YOU COULD MOVE TO THE BACK ROW BECAUSE ONCE I START CALLING PEOPLE TO SPEAK, I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO COME AND SIT HERE SO THAT THEY CAN MOVE UP TO SPEAK QUICKLY. AND AS YOU FINISH SPEAKING, IF YOU COULD MOVE BACK TO THE BACK AND ALLOW THOSE PEOPLE IN THE FRONT TO BE LEFT FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE CALLED TO SPEAK. WE PROBABLY HAVE SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 300 SPEAKERS OR SO. SO NOT ALL OF THEM WILL BE SPEAKING ACTUALLY. WE HAVE 300 SIGNED UP MORE OR LESS, BUT WE'LL BE CALLING THEM, YOU KNOW, AND MAKING NOTES OF WHETHER THEY ARE GOING TO SPEAK OR NOT. MR. DRENNER, WELCOME, SIR.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF STRATUS PROPERTIES. MAYOR, LET ME ASK, DO YOU WANT ME TO COVER BEAR LAKE P.U.D. AT THIS POINT?

Mayor Garcia: BEAR LAKE P.U.D..

HOPEFULLY IT WILL BE SHORT OF THE 15 MINUTES THEN. I THOUGHT GREG DID A BEAUTIFUL JOB OF DESCRIBING WHERE WE'VE BEEN ON THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D.. SOME OF YOU WILL REMEMBER THE HISTORY OF THIS TRACT. IT WAS THE SO-CALLED MOTOROLA TRACT FROM SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN MOTOROLA LOOKED AT MOVING THIS PART OF SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY, AND AFTER THAT STRATUS TOOK A NEW LOOK AT EVENTUAL USES FOR THAT TRACT AND DECIDED THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO MAKE THE CHANGE FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ORIGINALLY PLANNED AND EVEN APPROVED A FINAL PLAT THAT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED 2 MILLION TO 3 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO A DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD BE LIMITED TO 800 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. AS GREG MENTIONED, ORIGINALLY THERE WAS A COMPONENT OF THAT COULD BE MULTIFAMILY IN PART OF OUR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE AFFECTED NEIGHBORS. THAT ELEMENT HAS COME OUT. THE ZONING CASE HAS ACTUALLY FILED IN APRIL OF LAST YEAR. SO WE'VE BEEN AT IT ON THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. FOR OVER A YEAR. WE WERE APPROVED AT THE ZONING AND PLATTING IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR. YOU'VE HAD IT ON YOUR AGENDA SEVERAL TIMES AS THE STAFF INDICATED IN A DESIRE TO PUT ALL THESE THINGS TOGETHER YOU'VE HAD A VARIETY OF THE ZONEMENTS FOR THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. SO THAT WE COULD REACH A POINT WHERE YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO CONSIDER ALL 15 TRACTS. WE ARE OBVIOUSLY AT THAT POINT. THE MAJOR FOCUS OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE OCCURRED SINCE ZAP, LET ME TELL YOU BRIEFLY THE ACCESS ON 1826 WAS PROBABLY THE LARGEST ISSUE. WE HAD ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THREE ACCESS POINTS ON 1826 WHEN WE WERE APPROVED AT ZAP, WE HAD TWO ACCESS POINTS ON 1826: MICHELLE'S GOING TO POINT TO THE CRESCENT AREA THAT GREG MENTIONED AS WELL. THAT WAS A TROUBLESOME AREA BECAUSE THERE'S A CREEK THAT RUNS IN A SEMI-CIRCLE THAT MEANS THAT YOU HAVE TO CROSS THE CREEK UNLESS YOU WANT TO ACCESS THE CRESCENT FROM 1826. AFTER OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE AFFECTED NEIGHBORHOODS ALL UP AND DOWN 1826, WE WENT BACK TO FISH AND GOT APPROVAL TO CROSS THAT CREEK. THE CITY STAFF HAS LOOKED AT THAT AS WELL AND THAT'S HOW WE WERE ABLE TO ELIMINATE THAT DRYWAY CUT ON 1826. SO THERE'S ONLY ONE ACCESS POINT ON 1826, AND THE MAJORITY OF THE ACCESS WILL OBVIOUSLY BE OFF OF SH 45. THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE DO AS A PART OF THAT DISCUSSION WAS WE LIMITED THE NUMBER OF UNITS IN THE CRESCENT TO 95. WE LIMITED THE HEIGHT OF THOSE UNITS TO TWO-STORY MAXIMUM. AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE ELIMINATED MULTIFAMILY WHICH ORIGINALLY HAD BEEN TARGETED FOR THAT CRESCENT AREA. THE BUFFERS, GREG ACCURATELY DESCRIBED THOSE. I THINK THOSE HAVE BEEN IMPORTANT TO THE FOLKS WHO LIVE UP AND DOWN 1826 SO THAT THAT AREA CAN RETAIN A RURAL CHARACTER, A RURAL FLAVOR. THE OTHER THING THAT CAME THROUGH THESE DISCUSSIONS WAS OUR AGREEMENT TO DONATE TO AISD AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE ON THIS TRACT. SO THE USES ON THIS SITE WILL BE A MAXIMUM OF 800 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS AND AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THAT'S 536 ACRES, EASY MATH, 1.5 UNITS PER ACRE. IT IS S.O.S. COMPLIANT. IN FACT, IT IS FAR BEYOND S.O.S. COMPLIANT. THE TRACT WILL BE SUBJECT TO GREEN BUILDER STANDARDS THAT I THINK YOU'LL HEAR MORE BILLION LATER THAT ARE MOTT REQUIRED BY THE CODE. THERE ARE SETBACKS FROM CES THAT ARE WELL IN EXCESS OF CODE MAXIMUMS ON THIS TRACT, AND AS GREG MENTIONED THERE ARE SETBACKS FROM UNCLASSIFIED CREEKS WHICH THE ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERTS I THINK ARE INCREASINGLY POINTING TO AS IMPORTANT AND IN COMPLETE COMPLIANCE WITH OUR FISH AGREEMENT, CREEKS THAT DRAIN FIVE ACRES OR MORE WILL ALL RECEIVE THAT SETBACK PROTECTION. I AM PROUD REALLY OF THIS RESULT. WE'VE WORKED HARD, WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. IT HASN'T BEEN EASY. FROM EITHER SIDE. BUT I THINK WE'VE -- WE FINALLY ACHIEVED A RESULT THAT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF AND THAT WE CAN ALL SUPPORT. I WOULD MENTION IN PARTICULAR THE THREE PEOPLE THAT HAVE WORKED TIRELESSLY THROUGH THIS PROCESS IN HELPING US IDENTIFY THE CONCERNS OF THE 1826 FOLKS AND HELPING US FIND SOLUTIONS, AND THAT WOULD BE MAYOR MARK BALM WITH THE VILLAGE OF BEAR CREEK AND JANIE WALL AND BRYAN DUDLEY AND WE ARE IN THEIR DEBT FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT THEY HAVE SPENT IN HELPING US FIND THIS SOLUTION. BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

Mayor Garcia: INCREASE FOR MR. DRENNER? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MAYOR MARK BALM, MR. MAYOR? LET ME CALL THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE SPEAKING. WELL, GO AHEAD BECAUSE I'M GOING TO DO SOMETHING ELSE AFTER YOU SPEAK.

OKAY.

Mayor Garcia: WELCOME, SIR. GOOD TO HAVE YOU HERE.

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO COME HERE TONIGHT. LET ME FIRST START BY THANKING YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE. I'M A RESIDENCE OF HAYES COUNTY. OBVIOUSLY NOT FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN. THE VILLAGE OF BEAR CREEK, AS YOU KNOW, SHARES A COMMON BORDER WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN. THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF THE LAND THAT IS ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN OF OUR COMMON BORDER IS STRATUS PROPERTY AND THE LAND IN QUESTION IS BEAR LAKE P.U.D.. AS HAS BEEN STATED EARLIER, WE WERE IN ABSOLUTE OPPOSITION TO THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. AS IT WAS PROVED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION. WE PROPOSED THIS PRIMARILY FOR TWO REASONS. ONE WAS TRAFFIC SAFETY AND THE OTHER WAS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL, LARGELY VERY RURAL, LARGE LOT, SMALL RANCHES AND PRIVATE HOMES. WE FELT THAT NEITHER OF THOSE ISSUES WERE ADDRESSED IN THE P.U.D. PLAN AS IT CAME OUT OF THE MEETING IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR AND IN THE MONTH SINCE THAT TIME AS STEVE MENTIONED, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN BOTH THE STAKE HOLDER MEETING PROCESS THAT WAS POSTED AND STARTED BY TOBY PETTRELL AND ALSO IN DIRECT MEETINGS WITH STRATUS PROPERTIES. LIKE STEVE, I'M PLEASED TO BE ABLE TO STAND BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING AND BACK THE PROPOSAL AS IT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO YOU. BOTH OF OUR ISSUES OF PRIMARY CONCERN THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER HAVE BEEN RESOLVED AS HAVE MOST OF THE ISSUES THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER TO BE SECONDARY. THIS HAS ALL COME ABOUT AS PART OF A VERY LONG AND RATHER TIRING PROCESS. IN FACT IT'S EVEN ONGOING JUST THIS WEEK. WE EVEN SETTLED ON SOME SLIGHT MODIFICATIONS AND SOME WORDING RELATIVE TO THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. THAT IS IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT I HOPE IS EITHER IN THE PACKETS BEFORE YOU OR WILL BE DELIVERED TO YOU SHORTLY. IT'S BEEN A LONG PROCESS. WE DIDN'T GET WHAT WE ASKED FOR BUT I FEEL THE PROPOSAL THAT IS BEFORE YOU IS FAIR AND BALANCED AND DOES REPRESENT THE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY. WHILE THE AGREEMENTS IS CONTROVERSIAL THAT IS EVIDENCED BY THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE WANTING TO SPEAK THIS EVENING, IT IS ALSO COMPLEX AND AS PART OF THAT COMPLEXITY, THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. IS NOW NO LONGER JUST A STAND-ALONE ZONING CASE. IT'S ACTUALLY PART OF THE LARGER SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. SOME OF THE TEXT IN THAT AGREEMENT DOES DIRECTLY RELATE TO THE P.U.D. AND THEREFORE THEY REALLY NEED TO BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER AS THE PACKAGE. AND I GUESS FINALLY I ASK THAT YOU LOOK UPON THE AGREEMENT BEFORE YOU AS A REASONABLE COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE NEEDS OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND THE DESIRES OF THE DEVELOPER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH MARCH THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. COME BACK. WHEN YOU'RE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I WANT TO READ THE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO GAVE TIME TO MR. DRENNER, MICHELLE HOUSEMAN AND ALL THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. LORI SWAN, DEWIT GAIL, PETER GARDARA, A FORMER FOOTBALL PLAYER, LUKE ARANDA, NATALIE, REBECCA MORGAN, HAL HARRIS, TONY BARCELONA, VICY DAYLY, J. B. BROWN, SUMNER PICKERING, FAIRLY FAAS, STEVE HAY, MARSHALL RAMSEY, MER LEAN HOUSE, ASA LANDERS, MATT MOORE, JERRY YASUHARA, BELINDA WELLS, EMILY PUCKETT, MICHELLE ALLEN, BELINDA -- OH, I READ THAT. KATHLEEN ORNADA. THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT DONATED TIME TO MR. DRENNER. NOW I'M GOING TO READ INTO THE RECORD THE DRIS OF -- THE LIST OF PEOPLE WITH THEIR COMMENTS THAT HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK. JANIE WALL. REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. ERIC OGERSHOCK, AGAINST. BEN LANE, IN FAVOR OF. JEAN I SORENSON, IN FAVOR OF. PHILIP SANGER, IN FAVOR OF. LEONARD RAY SAENZ, AGAINST. EARL W. HALL, IN FAVOR OF. MARY ROBINSON, AGAINST. KEN BLAKER, FOR. DAVID RICHARDSON, AGAINST. KELLY SMOOTH, AGAINST. JAMIE KEY, IN FAVOR OF. JAMIE GILLLY, IN FAVOR OF WITH REGRETS. ANDRE ELIC NFAVOR OF. RAY GILLEY, IN FAVOR OF. SCOTT JOHNSTON, AGAINST. DIANNE EMERT, AGAINST. DAVID EMERT, AGAINST. RYE ON GOLDEN, AGAINST. NICOLE GALLAS, AGAINST. JAMES AARON SELLERS, AGAINST. DONO ROJAS, FOR. NORA HANCOCK, AGAINST. ANN GALLOWAY, AGAINST. DORA BARKLEY, AGAINST. TIANEN PATELLI, AGAINST. TED APPLEWHITE, AGAINST. WILLIAM SPAWN, AGAINST. JENNIFER SPAWN, AGAINST. FARRAHBLOOM QUIST, KELLY KOMEZ, AGAINST. ELEANOR MADDEN, AGAINST. CHRISTIAN SCIANO, AGAINST. AND SOME OF YOU GAVE THE TIME TO MR. BUNCH WHO WILL ALSO GET 15 MINUTES TIME TO MAKE HIS PRESENTATION. HOFFMAN, AGAINST. CHRIS GULEY, AGAINST. JIM ERSON, AGAINST. MELISSA GOODRICH, AGAINST. PATRICIA CURTIS, AGAINST. RAY GOODRICH, AGAINST. LINDA McDANIEL, AGAINST. SUE DUNCAN, AGAINST. SELMER, AGAINST. ALISH A SARAPIGLIA, AGAINST. CINDY BURNS, NEUTRAL. ANYTHING STRATUS DEVELOPS OUT THERE IS A BAD DEAL FOR THE CURRENT RESIDENTS. I'M JUST READING WHAT THEY WROTE. RONI R. GILES, AGAINST. JESSICA FLARE, FOR. KIM BLAKER, FOR. STEVE BEERS. HE WANTS TO SPEAK. ELIZABETH MARTINEZ, AGAINST. THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP NOT WISHING TO SPEAK. OKAY. IF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING IN THIS FRONT ROW, IF YOU COULD FIND SEATS SOMEWHERE ELSE, I'M GOING TO BE CALLING SIX PEOPLE THAT NEED TO COME AND SIT. HOW MANY CHAIRS ARE THERE? SIX OR EIGHT? IN THAT FRONT ROW? SEVEN? OKAY. I'M GOING TO CALL SEVEN PEOPLE. I'M GOING TO PULL OUT SEVEN CARDS, AND IF YOU COULD COME AND SIT IN THIS FRONT ROW, THEN YOU CAN COME UP AND SPEAK. BECKY MORRIS, ROBERT SINGLETON, KEVIN ODWRE, ROBERT RUNIG, RAY OMAR, FONTAINE MAV RICK, AND MARY ARNOLD. BECKY MORRIS, IS SHE HERE? IS BECKY MORRIS HERE? IF SOMEBODY COULD TELL MS. MORRIS THAT SHE IS BEING CALLED AND WILL BE SPEAKING. ROBERT SINGLETON. YEAH, AFTER YOU SPEAK, YOU NEED TO LEAVE SO THAT OTHER PEOPLE CAN SIT THERE.

AT THE VERY LAST MOMENT I GOT A NOTE SAYING THAT I HAVE SOME ARE A EXTRA TIME. BILL BUNCH SAID THAT I HAD HIS TIME ON ZONING AND ALSO THAT I HAVE TIME ON ZONING FROM TRISHA J., NEEN A, BONY AND MI KALE A THOMAS. I ASSURE YOU I DON'T WANT TO USE 15 MINUTES BUT YOU SHOULD HAVE CARDS FOR SOME EXTRA TIME. I'LL JUST USE IT TO TALK SLOWER THAN WHAT I WOULD HAVE. IN ONE WAY I DIDN'T WANT THE EXTRA TIME BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO START WITH WAS THE OBSERVATION THAT TWELVE ZONING CASES IN THREE MINUTES FIGURES OUT TO 15 SECONDS PER CASE BUT I'LL MAKE IT ON BEHALF OF OTHER PEOPLE. AND I GUESS YOU'LL HAVE TO UNDERSTAND IF PEOPLE ARE UNWILLING TO GO TRACT BY TRACT IN, IN THAT LITTLE TIME. MY FIRST QUESTION IS WHY ARE YOU DOING THE ZONING FIRST. WOULDN'T IT MAKE MORE SENSE TO HAMMER OUT ALL OF THE DETAILS OF THE AGREEMENT AND THEN TALK ABOUT CHANGING THE ZONING? YOU ARE NOT GOING TO WANT TO CHANGE THIS ZONING TO THESE SPECIFIC CATEGORIES. IF THE DEAL FALLS THROUGH, ARE YOU? AND DOESN'T IT SEEM TO LOCK YOU IN?

Mayor Garcia: WE WILL DO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. WHEN WE GET TO THAT, WE WILL DO THAT FIRST.

LET'S SEE. LET'S TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF SPECIFIC TRACTS, THOUGH. TRACT -- CASE NUMBER Z-11 IS GOING FROM IRR, INTERIM RURAL RESIDENTIAL, TO CS-MU, GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES, MIXED USE. WHAT ABOUT THIS TRACT MAKES THIS THE APPROPRIATE ZONING OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT STRATUS WANTS IT THAT WAY? IT MIGHT BE ARGUABLY NO LONGER QUITE AS RURAL, BUT WHY THE SWITCH FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL? IN OTHER WORDS, THIS IS AB RO GAITING COUNSEL'S FUNCTION TO TRY TO DETERMINE WHAT THE BEST USE OF A PIECE OF LAND IS. WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS YOU ARE REACTING TO THE APPLICANT. YOU ARE NOT LOOKING AT A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND DECIDING, WELL, BASED ON SITE CONSTRAINTS OR THINGS THAT ARE NEARBY, IS THIS THE MOST APPROPRIATE ZONING. I MIGHT JUST NOTE IN PASSING I'VE TOLD YOU BEFORE MY OPINION ABOUT COMPATIBILITY ARGUMENTS. I ENVISION IT SORT OF LIKE SOMEBODY GROWING A SKUNK THROUGH YOUR FRONT WINDOW AND THEN THE NEXT DAY THEY COME AND THROW A SKUNK THROUGH YOUR BACK WINDOW AND SAY, BUT IT MATCHES THE ONE YOU'VE GOT. IF THE SKUNK WAS A BAD IDEA IN THE FIRST PLACE, IT'S A BAD IDEA JUST BECAUSE IT MATCHES THE ONE YOU'VE GOT. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: LET ME SAY THAT THE MORE YOU APPLAUD, THE LESS TIME MR. SINGLETON HAS TO SPEAK.

THE MORE YOU'LL ENCOURAGE ME TO. SO DON'T. NOW CASE Z-13 IS GOING FROM IRR TO RR. SO OBVIOUSLY SOMETIMES RURAL RESIDENTIAL IS THE APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR A PIECE OF LAND IN THIS AREA. SO THAT LEADS TO MY SUGGESTION, AND IT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT ON THE RISKY SIDE BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT YOU DO IT ANYWAY. WHY DON'T YOU CHANGE ALL THE TRACTS TO PERMANENT RR AND THEN SEE WHAT STRATUS CAN DO WITH THEM. DOESN'T REMOVE ALL VALUE FROM THE PROPERTY. SO IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY IFY TAKINGS CASE IF THEY DECIDE TO PRESS THE CASE AT ALL. HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO UNLESS YOU TRY THIS? ZONING IS A DISCRETIONARY FUNCTION, AND THE COURTS HAVE HELD THAT YOU HAVE BROAD LATITUDE TO ZONE AS YOU SEE FIT. NOTHING THE LEGISLATURE DOES CAN REZONE THIS FOR STRATUS.

Mayor Garcia: HOLD IT JUST A SECOND, ROBERT. PUT TWELVE MORE MINUTES ON. MR. SINGLETON HAS MORE THAN FIVE PEOPLE THAT DONATED TIME TO HIM. YOU GET A MAXIMUM OF FIFTEEN MINUTES. SO YOU'VE USED UP THREE. YOU'VE GOT TWELVE MORE.

GOT ANOTHER THREE? NOTHING THAT THE LEGISLATURE DOES IS GOING TO GIVE THE ZONING THE FREE PORTS ON THIS. YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN GIVE THEM THAT. SAME WAY THAT YOU ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT CAN GIVE THEM SEWER SERVICE, TOO. WHAT'S THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY UNDER RURAL RESIDENTIAL, AND HAS FREEPORT EVER EVEN -- OR EXCUSE ME. I KEEP CALLING IT FREEPORT. LET'S CLEAR THAT UP. LET'S TALK -- I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS IN THE DEAL BUT LET'S JUST CALL IT FREEPORT FOR A MINUTE. EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT FREEPORT OPERATING COMPANY'S CHANGED ITS NAME TO STRATUS PROPERTIES. IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE BEAST. I DON'T CARE IF THEY START CALLING THEMSELVES FUZZY BUNNY REALTY, THEY ARE STILL THE SAME OLD FREEPORT McMA RAND. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR DIRTY DEEDS OF THE COMPANY ALL AROUND THE WORLD. EVERYBODY KNOWS IT WAS THE SAME COMPANY. BO ARMSTRONG WAS AN OFFICER IN BOTH COMPANIES. I'VE RUN INTO ANY NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT HAD NO IDEA THAT STRATUS USED TO BE FREEPORT McMA RAND OPERATING COMPANY.gO? APPARENTLY AS A PUBLIC RELATIONS EMPLOY IT'S WORKED, AND THIS IS NOT ATYPICAL OF THIS COMPANY. IF YOU REMEMBER POD 9 FROM THEIR BARTON CREEK PLAN? IT'S GOING TO GO RIGHT THROUGH THE WAY. THEY ARE MASTERS OF PUBLIC RELATIONS. THEY WILL DO ANYTHING TO TRY TO GIVE THEMSELVES A BETTER PUBLIC IMAGE BUT IT DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE WE ALL REMEMBER THE LEGISLATOR, WE ALL REMEMBER JIM BOB MOFFETT STANDING IN FRONT OF THE CAMERA WHEN THEY INTERVIEWED HIM ON CHANNEL 7 AND SAYING, IF AUSTIN PASSES THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE I WILL BANKRUPT THE CITY. AND STRATUS INHERITS THAT BAGGAGE. WHERE WAS I?

[ APPLAUSE ]

I'VE GOT A QUESTION ABOUT THE TIMETABLE ON THIS. I KNOW THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WORKING LARGELY IN SEEK RECEIPT FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS BUT THERE ARE SOME OF US WHO HAVE ONLY RECENTLY COME ON BOARD. WHY THE DEADLINES THAT ARE IN THIS NOW OTHER THAN THE FACT AGAIN THAT FREEPORT SAID -- EXCUSE ME, STRATUS SAID THIS IS THE WAY WE WANT IT? WHY CAN'T YOU TAKE MORE TIME TO DO THIS? RIGHT NOW YOU ARE HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING WITHOUT THE PUBLIC. YOU GAVE STAFF PRESENTATIONS WITH A NUMBER OF VERY HIGH-TECH GADGETS INCLUDING LASER POINTERS THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE OUT IN THE LOBBY COULDN'T SEE. MY QUESTION IS, WHY DIDN'T YOU AT LEAST HAVE THE DECENCY TO PUT THIS HEARING OFF UNTIL YOU CAN FIND A LARGER ROOM THAT'S GOING TO ACCOMMODATE THE PUBLIC? RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE EFFECTIVELY --

[APPLAUSE]

THERE ARE PEOPLE RIGHT NOW, ME INCLUDED, WHO HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GO TO THE BATHROOM BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN TOLD IF WE LEAVE WE CAN'T GET BACK IN. AND, YOU KNOW, JUST LITTLE THINGS LIKE THAT SEEM TO ME THAT IT DOESN'T MUCH MATTER WHAT WE NEED OR WANT. STRATUS, FREEPORT, WHATEVER THEY ARE CALLED, IS CALLING ALL OF THE SHOTS HERE. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY IN CLOSING, KIND OF UNUSUAL, ALL BUT ONE OF THESE CASES ARE INITIATED BY THE CITY AND THE CITY IS THE APPLICANT. SO I'VE JUST GOT A RHETORICAL QUESTION TO ASK AT THE END. IF THE CITY IS THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE, DON'T YOU THINK THAT ANYBODY WHO DRAWS A CITY PAYCHECK OUGHT TO REACCUSE THEMSELVES FROM VOTING ON THIS ISSUE? THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: BECKY MORRIS, IS SHE HERE? OKAY. KEVIN ODUIRE.

MAYOR GARCIA AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME ADDRESS YOU HERE THIS EVENING. I SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE STRATUS LAND DEAL BECAUSE IT DENIES HOW SANDS OF CITIZENS OF AUSTIN THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO BE HEARD IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT. MY NEIGHBORS AND I DO NOT DENY THAT STRATUS HAS A RIGHT TO DEVELOP ITS LAND. WE SIMPLY ASK FOR AN EQUAL VOICE IN THE DEAL. THE DEAL BEGAN TWO YEARS AGO AND DID NOT INVOLVE MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION UNTIL SIX WEEKS PRIOR TO TONIGHT. OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE ALSO STRONGLY OPPOSED. ANY REPRESENTATION THAT THIS DEAL HAS HAD SUFFICIENT INPUT FROM ALL RESPECTIVE CITIZENS OR IS WIDELY ACCEPTED IS FALSE. FOLLOWING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO QUOTE A FEW LINES FROM YOUR OWN COUNCILMEMBER OFFICIAL HOME PAGES. FROM COUNCILMAN SLUSHER'S PAGE WE READ THAT HE LED, QUOTE, A SUCCESSFUL PUSH TO BRING INTO OPEN DISCUSSION CRITICAL INFORMATION WHICH WAS ONCE KEPT SEEK RECEIPT IN COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, UNQUOTE. ON COUNCILMAN WYNN'S PAGE WE SEE THAT, QUOTE, WE OUGHT TO LET THE VOTERS HAVE THEIR SAY, UNQUOTE. FROM COUNCILMAN THOMAS' PAGE WE SEE HIS MAIN THEME. TO, QUOTE, RESTORE THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE, UNQUOTE. FINALLY FROM MAYOR GARCIA'S CHANGE, WE SEE THAT HE WANTS TO BE BUILDING, "A PROCESS THAT ENSURES NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE A VOICE IN WHAT AFFECTS THEM." APPLAUSE ACT ON THESE PRINCIPLES OF OPENNESS AND FAIRNESS YOU HAVE ESPOUSED. THESE REMAND THIS AGREEMENT FOR MORE EQUITABLE NEGOTIATIONS THAT INVOLVE ALL AFFECTED NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS. WHAT HARM IS THERE IN TAKING MORE TIME IN TRYING TO BE MORE INCLUSIVE. DO NOT ALLOW FATIGUE, NOR SLICK PRESENTATIONS TO WEAR YOU DOWN. LAST, PLEASE REMEMBER THAT SHOULD YOU APPROVE THIS DEAL AS IT STANDS, WE, THE VOTERS FROM SILENCED NEIGHBORHOODS, WILL EVENTUALLY BE HEARD AT THE POLLS. WE'LL REMEMBER HOW MUCH INPUT WE HAD IN DECISIONS THAT AFFECT THE SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND WE WILL VOTE ACCORDINGLY. WITH THAT I SAY AGAIN THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE CHANCE TO SPEAK. I BID YOU PEACE AND I HOPE AND PRAY THAT YOU GOVERN OUR CITY WISELY. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR, I'VE GOT A QUESTION.

Mayor Garcia: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

Slusher: I'VE GOT A QUESTION. YOU REPRESENT THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS?

I DO NOT REPRESENT THEM, SIR.

BUT THAT IS YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD?

BUT THAT IS MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, SIR.

Slusher: BECAUSE -- I'M ALWAYS HAPPY. THE MORE PEOPLE THAT GET BEHIND PROTECTING THE AQUIFER IN BARTON SPRINGS, I'M ALWAYS HAPPY TO SEE NEW PEOPLE GET INVOLVED, BUT I KNOW THAT Y'ALL'S POSITION AT LEAST IN SOME STATEMENTS YOU'VE SENT OUT THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO DEVELOPMENT ON THESE TRACTS, AND ACTUALLY I WOULD -- THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS WELL, BUT SINCE STRATUS OWNS AND THE CITY IS IN A SERIOUS FINANCIAL CRUNCH, I THINK WE BOTH REALIZE THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. BUT THEY ARE OFFERING TO BUILD AT THE LEVELS IN THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. NOW, THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OERKS -- AND THAT'S 18% IN THIS CASE. WELL, THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS IS BUILT AT -- OR THE NEW VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS, BOTH OF THEM WERE BUILT AT 38% IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR RESIDENTIAL. 50 TO 60% FOR COMMERCIAL SITES. AND THAT'S WELL ABOVE S.O.S. STANDARDS. AND IT DOESN'T FEATURE THE S.O.S. WATER QUALITY CONTROLS OR ANYTHING ELSE RELATED TO THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE SEEN IT. THE LATEST UPDATE ON THE SALAMANDERS DOWN AT BART BARTON SPRINGS IS LISTED A NUMBER OF CHEMICALS THAT ARE TRACE CHEMICALS IN LARGE AMOUNTS THAT ARE SHOWING UP IN THE SPRINGS. AND A LOT OF THOSE ARE COMING FROM YARDS, FROM CHEMICALS THAT ARE PUT ON LAWNS, PESTICIDES AND FERTILIZERS, AND I KNOW YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND A LOT OF OTHERS HAVE -- ARE OUT IN THE HILL COUNTRY AND THEY HAVE ST. AUGUSTINE LAWNS WHICH AREN'T NATIVE TO HILL COUNTRY, HAVE A LOT OF OTHER PLANTS THAT NEED A LOT OF IRRIGATION AND PROBABLY HAVE A LOT OF CHEMICALS POURED ON THEM AND SO I'M HOPING THAT IN ADDITION TO OPPOSING THIS AGREEMENT AND TRYING TO PROTECT THE AQUIFER IN THAT WAY, THAT YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS WILL GET INVOLVED DIRECTLY THROUGH NOT PUTTING CHEMICALS ON YOUR LAWN THAT WASH UP IN THE BARTON AND WASH OFF INTO THE RECHARGE ZONE AND COME UP AT BARTON SPRINGS. SO I WOULD INVITE YOU TO LOOK INTO THE NATIVE PLANTS, PROGRAMS THAT THE CITY HAS BECAUSE THOSE PLANTS REQUIRE LESS IRRIGATION, AND NO RECOMMENDS REALLY. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE WAYS THAT PEOPLE -- NO CHEMICALS REALLY. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE WAYS THAT PEOPLE CAN CLEAN UP THE POLLUTION THAT IS GOING INTO BARTON SPRINGS RIGHT NOW. SO I'D REALLY APPRECIATE IF IT IF YOU COULD TURN YOUR ENERGY NOT ONLY -- I MEAN, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS, OF COURSE, THAT IS YOUR RIGHT AS A CITIZEN, BUT I WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO ALSO PUT YOUR ENERGY INTO STOPPING THE POLLUTION THAT'S COMING OUT OF YOUR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD.

IS THAT THE QUESTION, SIR?

Slusher: YOU ARE WELCOME TO ANSWER THAT IF YOU'D LIKE.

OKAY.

Mayor Garcia: I THINK THAT THAT WAS A STATEMENT THAT THE COUNCILMEMBER MADE AND I THINK YOU PROBABLY UNDERSTOOD THAT.

OKAY. I GUESS THAT'S AN ADMONITION IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?

Slusher: SIR, WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO, I THOUGHT WE BOTH SHARED IN COMMON THAT WE WANT A CLEAN BARTON SPRINGS. YOU DON'T WANT THIS TRACT DEVELOPED -- I'D PREFER IT'S NOT, EITHER. I'VE GOT TO MAKE A DECISION THAT I THINK IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF BARTON SPRINGS AS AN ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PEOPLE BUT I'M TELLING YOU THAT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS DEVELOPED WELL BEYOND S.O.S. STANDARDS AND PEOPLE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ONE OF THEM OR NOT, ARE PUTTING CHEMICALS ON THEIR LAWN THAT WASH INTO THE AQUIFER AND END UP AT BARTON SPRINGS AND PEOPLE ARE SWIMMING IN THERE. AND SO ONE WAY THAT YOU PERSONALLY CAN HELP CLEAN UP THE AQUIFER IS FOR YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS TO NOT PUT CHEMICALS ON YOUR LAWN, AND THERE ARE PROGRAMS THE CITY HAS TO HELP YOU HAVE BEAUTIFUL LAWNS WITHOUT PUTTING CHEMICALS ON IT AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT. THAT'S NOT AN ADMONITION. THAT IS A SUGGESTION TO YOU ON A WAY THAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN PROTECTING BARTON SPRINGS AND THAT EDWARDS AQUIFER THAT YOU CAN PERSONALLY NOT JUST PREVENT NEW POLLUTION BY OPPOSING THIS AGREEMENT, WHICH ALTHOUGH IT -- WELL, NOT ONLY CAN YOU PREVENT NEW POLLUTION, YOU CAN CLEAN UP EXISTING POLLUTION AND HELP CLEAN UP BARTON SPRINGS RIGHT NOW. [ APPLAUSE ]

AND, SIR, I BELIEVE THAT MOST OF MY NEIGHBORS DO THAT.

Slusher: SIR, I TELL YOU THERE'S A LOT OF -- I HOPE SO BUT I REALLY WISH YOU WOULD PUT -- RATHER, JUST TAKE THAT POSITION, I WISH YOU WOULD USE YOUR ENERGY. I REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THIS. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT BUT BARTON SPRINGS IS POLLUTED RIGHT NOW. WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THAT OVER AND OVER TONIGHT. IT'S TRUE. AND ONE OF THE MAJOR SOURCES IS CHEMICALS THAT PEOPLE ARE PUTTING ON THEIR LAWNS. AND YOU CAN COME DOWN HERE AND SAY, DON'T BUILD ANYTHING OVER HERE AT CIRCLE C. BUT THAT IS A MASSIVE DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS POLLUTING THE AQUIFER. THERE'S NO WAY AROUND IT. NOW THE BEST THING TO DO IF YOU WANT TO CLEAN UP THE SPRING IS JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AND DO WHAT YOU CAN TO KEEP THOSE SPRINGS, TO CLEAN UP SPRINGS AND KEEP THEM FROM GETTING FURTHER POLLUTED.

I WOULD LIKE TO FINISH MY STATEMENT, SIR. I THINK YOU MISSED MY POINT. MY POINT IS NOT PRIMARILY THAT I DON'T WANT ANY DEVELOPMENT. I ACKNOWLEDGE STRATUS' RIGHT TO DEVELOP HOWEVER. BUT I THINK THAT YOU MISSED THE FUNDAMENTAL THRUST OF MY STATEMENT HERE IS THAT THERE WERE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN AUSTIN WHO WERE NOT INVOLVED UNTIL LATE IN THE GAME. THIS THING IS BASICALLY, FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW IS TRYING TO BE RAM RODDED THROUGH. THEY ARE PRESENTING THIS AS A VERY HAPPY, WELL-NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT, AND IT'S NOT.

.

Slusher: MY FUNDAMENTAL REPORT IS YOU HAVE THE POWER IN YOUR HANDS TO CLEAN UP SOME OF THE POLLUTION IN BARTON SPRINGS.

BUT THAT'S NOT -- CIRCUMSTANCES THAT'S NOT MY PRIMARY POINT.

Mayor Garcia: LET ME INTERRUPT HERE. I THINK THAT BOTH OF YOU HAVE MADE YOUR POINTS AND WE HAVE 250 MORE SPEAKERS. AND I APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH.

YES, YOUR HONOR. THAN YOU ARE ARE THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

Mayor Garcia: MS. HADDON, THAT ROW IS RESERVED FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE CALLED UP TO SPEAK. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. ROONEY AND FOLLOWING MR. ROONEY IS MR. RAO MARCH AND LET ME CALL TO THE -- THAT -- MR. OMAR. LET ME CALL MR. RICKY BIRD AND MS. NANCY MILLER. MR. ROONEY, THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU, MR. GARCIA AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF THE LADY BIRD JOHNSON WILDFLOWER CENTER. TONIGHT I COME TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF CONTINUING THE PROCESS OF FINALIZING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND STRATUS PROPERTIES. AS I THINK YOU KNOW, THE WILDFLOWER CENTER HAS BEEN AN ACTIVE PARTICIPANT IN THESE DISCUSSIONS WITH STRATUS AND WE ARE A BENEFICIARY OF THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH THE TRANSFER OF 105 ACRES TO THE CENTER AS OPEN SPACE. IF THESE LANDS DO COME TO US, WE WILL MANAGE THEM WITH THE SAME LEVEL OF STEWARDSHIP WITH WHICH WE MANAGE OUR EXISTING LAND. FOR EDUCATION, FOR RESEARCH, FOR CONSERVATION, AND RESTORATION. BUT THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS, OUR FOCUS HAS NOT BEEN ON THE LAND WE MIGHT ACQUIRE. INSTEAD WE HAVE CHOSEN TO FOCUS TO ENCOURAGING A TOTAL PROJECT THAT ENCOURAGES -- THAT EMBODIESS THE VERY PRINCIPLES THAT HAVE GUIDED THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WILDFLOWER CENTER ITSELF. UNDERSTANDING THAT MUCH OF STRATUS' LAND, LIKE OURS, IS ON THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE BARTON SPRINGS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE AND UNDERSTANDING THAT STRATUS HAS PROPERTY RIGHTS AND PROBABLY GRANDFATHERED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, AND UNDERSTANDING THAT SOME FORM OF DEVELOPMENT OF THESE LANDS IS LIKELY, WE HAVE CHOSEN TO BE PROACTIVE, TO PARTICIPATE. WHEN WE BEGAN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH STRATUS, THEY HAD ALREADY AGREED WITH THE CITY TO DEVELOP AT S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER LEVELS AND WITH TRACT BY TRACT, S.O.S. COMPLIANT WATER QUALITY CONTROLS. WE ENCOURAGED THEM TO GO FURTHER. WE ENCOURAGED THEM TO REDUCE THE IMPACT ON LAND BY PROTECTING NATIVE WATER PURIFYING VEGETATION WITH TYPE CONSTRUCTION ENVELOPES. WE ENCOURAGED THEM TO USE NATIVE PLANTS TO REDUCE THE APPLICATION OF AQUIFER-DAMAGING FERTILIZERS AND PESTICIDES. WE ENCOURAGED THEM TO DEFINE AND ADVANCE THE SETBACKS FROM CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND TO MAKE THEM GENEROUS. AND WE ASKED FOR A PROHIBITION ON BIG-BOX STORES TO REDUCE EXTRA REGIONAL TRAFFIC INTO THE AREA. AND WE ASKED THEM, ALONG WITH OTHERS, TO REDUCE DENSITY. WE ALSO ASKED THEM TO PERMIT TO A STRONG ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS IN THE SIGHTING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THEIR BUILDINGS AND WE ASKED THEM TO USE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS THAT REDUCE STORM WATER RUNOFF, THE URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECT, LIGHT POLLUTION, WATER POLLUTION, AND WHICH FOSTER ENERGY AND WATER CONSERVATION. WE ASKED THEM IN SHORT TO PERMIT TO -- COMMIT TO BUILDING WHAT WOULD BE AMONG THE GREENEST BUILDINGS IN AUSTIN. THEY AGREED TO ALL OF THESE CONCEPTS IN PRINCIPLE. AND TODAY WE ARE WORKING TOWARDS FINALIZING THE DOCUMENTATION AND ENFORCEABILITY OF THESE CONCEPTS IN THE DRAFT AGREEMENT. CAN I JUST FINISH ONE SENTENCE?

Mayor Garcia: SURE.

OKAY. WE TOOK THIS APPROACH BECAUSE WE WANTED TO CREATE A POSITIVE VISION FOR WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT COULD BE LIKE IN THIS REGION. EMBODYING THE PRINCIPLES I JUST OUTLINED. WHILE THIS AGREEMENT IS A COMPROMISE AND WE DID NOT IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL GET EVERYTHING WE WANTED, STRATUS HAS ALSO MADE SOME SIGNIFICANT COMPROMISES. I HOPE TONIGHT THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO FINALIZE THIS AGREEMENT OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS AND TURN OUR VISION TO THE FUTURE, AND I THINK WE AS A COMMUNITY MUST NOW WORK TOGETHER AS NEIGHBORS AND WITH OUR OTHER NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH IN HAYES COUNTY TO DEVELOP A UNIFIED SLITION VISION FOR PROTECTING THE RURAL QUALITY AND OPEN SPACE OF THE HILL COUNTRY AND THE AQUIFER THAT UNDERLIES IT AND I HOPE THE CITY WILL ASSIST US IN AN EFFORT TOWARDS DEVELOPING A COMPREHENSIVE AQUIFER PROTECTION PLAN IN THE FUTURE.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MR. ROONEY. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: RAY OMAR AND FOLLOWING MR. OMAR, FONTAINE MAVERICK AND I'M GOING TO CALL UP TO THE FRONT ROW MR. STEVE DRENNER WHO WILL SPEAK ON THE AGREEMENT AND MR. KENNETH NORDEMAN. WELCOME, SIR.

GOOD EVENING. CAN YOU HEAR ME ALL RIGHT?

Mayor Garcia: YES.

MAYOR, COUNCIL, MY NAME'S RAY OMAR AND I STARTED SWIMMING AT BARTON SPRINGS. WHEN I WAS 38 I DECIDED TO GO TO COLLEGE AND GET A DEGREE AND FOR THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS I WORKED FULL TIME AND WENT TO SCHOOL AND THE SPRINGS GAVE ME A VACATION SPOT WHEN MONEY, NOR TIME WERE AVAILABLE. THE SPRINGS GAVE ME A PLACE TO GO TO DECOMPRESS WHEN PRESSURES WERE THE WORST. THE SPRINGS GIVE ME PLEASURE OF WATCHING PEOPLE LEAVE ALL THEIR CARES AND WORRIES AT THE GATE WHEN THEY COME IN. I'VE NEVER SEEN A SHOUTING MATCH OR A FIGHT AT THE SPRINGS IN ALL THOSE YEARS. THE SPRINGS GIVE ME PHYSICAL THERAPY FOR AN INJURY I RECEIVED MANY YEARS AGO. THE SPRINGS GIVE ME FRIENDS THAT I STILL HAVE TODAY AND WILL HAVE FOREVER.e OVER THE YEARS I HAVE MADE A POINT OF MEETING AND TALKING WITH PEOPLE THAT COME TO THE SPRINGS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES. I HAVE TALKED WITH PEOPLE FROM JAPAN, TAIWAN, SCOTLAND, SPAIN, GERMANY AND OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES, NEW SEE LAND, FINLAND, SWEDEN, CHILL I, BRAZIL AND OTHER AFRICAN COUNTRIES. BASICALLY THEY HAVE ALL SAID THE SAME THING. I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING AS BEAUTIFUL AS BARTON SPRINGS AND IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR CITY.

[ PLEASE HOLD FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS ]

THEY IDENTIFIED 25 HOT SPOTS AROUND THE WORLD. HE MEANT ECHO SYSTEMS THAT ARE CRITICAL TO THE PLANET. ONE OF SEVEN IN THE UNITED STATES IS THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER. IT WILL BE UP TO THIS COUNCIL AND FUTURE COUNCILS TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THOSE OF US WHO LOVE BARTON SPRINGS AND CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN THIS CITY AND ON BEHALF OF OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN I HOPE IECH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU ARE UP ON THIS DIFFICULT TASK AHEAD OF YOU THIS EVENING AND PROBABLY TOMORROW MORNING. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: FOLLOWING MS. ARNOLD IS MR. RICKY BYRD. AND I'M GOING TO CALL UP TO THAT ROW MR. PHIL MONCADO AND MS. AMY ROW. MS. ARNOLD, WELCOME.

GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS MARY ARNOLD. I TALKED TO DOROTHY RICHTER THIS MORNING. SHE WAS SORRY SHE COULDN'T BE HERE. SHE SAID TO TELL YOU ALL THAT BARTON SPRINGS IS VERY FRAGILE. THAT IT IS EXPERIENCING A LOT MORE FLOODING THAN IT USED TO. SHE IMAGE INS THAT THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVER OVER THE AQUIFER, AND SHE HOPES THAT THIS COUNCIL'S LEGACY FOR BARTON SPRINGS WILL NOT BE TO FINALLY KILL THE POOL. ON THAT HAPPY NOTE, I ENJOYED THE MUSIC. WE'RE AT A CROSS...... CROSSROADS YET AGAIN. I LOVE PAUL ELLIS' STATEMENTS ABOUT WE LIVE IN A WATER WORLD AND THE CORAL REEFS ARE DYING AND WE THINK THE SPRINGS MAY BE DYING TOO. SO HERE WE ARE AGAIN. WE NEED A PLAN TO SAVE BARTON SPRINGS. AND HOW DOES THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT DEAL GET US THERE? I HOPE YOU WILL HELP. I'D LIKE TO MENTION SOME SPECIFIC THINGS IN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND THERE'S A GENTLEMAN OVER HERE WHO HAS OFFERED TO GIVE ME HIS TIME. THE 30-YEAR LOCK IN.

Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU RAISE YOUR HAND AND GIVE ME YOUR NAME?

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. DID YOU SIGN A CARD?

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: ALL RIGHT. MR. TERRELL WILL GIVE YOU THREE MORE MINUTES.

THE 30-YEAR LOCK-IN IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I FAVOR. WE HAVE FOUGHT VERY HARD TO GET EXPIRATION DATES IN OUR ORDINANCES. I'M PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE STANDARDS FOR WATER QUALITY CONTROL FACILITIES OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS. THOSE STANDARDS HAVE CHANGED DRAMATICALLY. IN THE NEXT 30 YEARS THEY MAY CHANGE AS WELL DUE TO NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND NEW KNOWLEDGE THAT WE MAY HAVE. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT MORE LAND COMES IN FOR DEVELOPMENT AND THE LATEST WATER QUALITY CONTROL STANDARDS SHOULD APPLY. THE CREDIT BANK USE OF OTHER STRATUS PROPERTY IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO ME. THOSE PROPERTIES ARE NOT PART OF THIS AGREEMENT. WE DON'T NEED THEM TO HELP TO DEVELOP IN AREAS OUTSIDE OF THIS LAND. HOWEVER WE'VE TALKED ABOUT USING THAT CREDIT BANK IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND NOT HAVING LANGUAGE IN THE AGREEMENT ABOUT A 380 ZONE. WHEN WE DRAFTED THE ORDINANCE WE WERE VERY CAREFUL TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE TO TAKE CARE OF GRANDFATHER CLAIMS? AND IT SAYS THAT THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO CONFLICT WITH THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION OR ANY STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, AND THAT IF THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE COURT AS APPLIED TO A SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT VIOLATES ONE OF THOSE LAWS, THEN THE CITY COUNCIL MAY AFTER A PUBLIC HEARING ADJUST THE APPLICATION OF THIS ARTICLE TO THAT PROJECT TO THE MINIMUM EXTENT REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE CONFLICTING LAW. ANY ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE STRUCTURED TO PROVIDE THE MAXIMUM PROTECTION OF WATER QUALITY. NOW, THIS DOES REQUIRE A THREE-QUARTERS VOTE BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT IN MY MIND THAT WOULD BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE APPLICATION OF THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. LET'S SEE. I DID RUN ACROSS A MEMO TODAY IN SOME OF MY MANY, MANY PAPERS. I HAD SPOKEN TO A U.T. CLASS THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE, AND IN GOING THROUGH SOME THINGS I RAN ACROSS A SEPTEMBER THIRD 1991 MEMO FROM AUSTAN LIBRACH DEALING WITH PROSPECTIVE EFFECTS OF A STRONGER WATER QUALITY ORDINANCE ON THE SOUTHWEST M.U.D. AND AT THAT TIME AUSTAN LIBRACH SAID THAT THE CIRCLE C M.U.D. LAND PLAN FOR THE M.U.D. 3 AND 4 HAVING BEEN REVISED IN 1985 WOULD ALLOW APPROXIMATELY SO MANY HOUSES, PLUS 785,500 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AND RETAIL. SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT TO SEE WHAT THE WORST CASE SCENARIO IS AND WHY WE'RE GOING BEYOND THE 785,000 SQUARE FEET. LAUREN ROSS, WHO CAN'T BE HERE TONIGHT, HAS THREE VERY STRONG CONCERNS ABOUT THE WAY THE DEAL IS STRUCTURED RIGHT NOW. SHE FEELS THAT THE -- THAT THE CITY'S CONSIDERATION FOR THE DENSITY REDUCTION SHOULD ALSO INCLUDE REDUCTION IN THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. HER CALCULATION IS THAT THE DENSITY HAS BEEN REDUCED AND THAT WE SHOULD REDUCE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. SHE'S CONCERNED ABOUT THE CEF SET BACKS ON 107 AND WANTS TO SEE WHAT THE GREEN BUILDING LOOKS LIKE. NO GAS STATION ON THE RECHARGE ZONE, AND ENFORCE ABILITY -- THIRD-PARTY ENFORCEMENT. THESE ARE JUST THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]

Futrell: MARY, JUST TWO THINGS. I WON'T TRY TO ANSWER BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SPEAK TO ALL THE THINGS THAT CAME UP. BUT MARY, TWO OF THE THINGS YOU MENTIONED IN THE THE AGREEMENT HAVE BEEN CHANGED. THE 380 IS NO LONGER IN THE AGREEMENT AND THE CREDIT BANK CANNOT BE USED IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. IT'S IN ORDER TO TURN THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE WAY WE WANT IT TO IN THIS AREA. SO THAT HAS CHANGED.

Mayor Garcia: MR. RICKY BID. FOLLOWING HIM IS MS. NANCY MILLER AND CALLING UP ALSO LANDE MARTIN IF YOU COULD JOIN US IN THE FRONT HERE. MR. BYRD, WELCOME, SIR.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. EVENING, COUNCIL. THIS IS MY PERIOD I'M TAKING TO JUST TALK OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD ABOUT THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE BEING UNDER CONSIDERATION RIGHT NOW. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STRIKES ME IS PEOPLE ARE SO ATTACHED TO PROTECTING THE AQUIFER AND THROUGH IT BARTON SPRINGS THAT WE TEND TO LEAD WITH OUR BACK SIDE BEFORE WE LET THE BRAIN SIDE TAKE CONTROL. SOMETIMES THAT MEANS WE DO STRANGE THINGS. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE AGREEMENT. I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BY AND LARGE PASS THESE TRACTS THE WAY THEY'RE BEING RECOMMENDED TO YOU. I DON'T THINK THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THEM AND THEIR OPINIONS, ARE REALLY BEING PARTICULARLY WELL SERVED AT THIS POINT IN TIME BY THE LEADERSHIP OF THE S.O.S. ALLIANCE. 1704 ALLOWS THE VOIDANCE OF NEW DEVELOPMENT REGULATION. THAT IS THE LAW IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. WE CAN PRETEND ANYTHING WE WANT, BUT WE CAN'T GET AROUND THAT. WHAT THIS AGREEMENT DOES, WHAT THE VARIOUS P.U.D.S, THE VARIOUS M.U.D.'S, THE VARY YAS TRACTS, THE VARIOUS FACTS, THE VARIOUS EVERYTHING COMES DOWN TO IS WHAT IS GOING TO DO THE BEST TO PROTECT THE AQUIFER? THE FROZEN ARRANGEMENT OF APPLYING S.O.S. RULES AND REGULATIONS TO EACH OF THESE TRACTS IS NOT GOING TO PROTECT THE AQUIFER. NOTHING THAT YOU DO IS GOING TO STOP STRATUS FROM DEVELOPING. IT IS GOING TO DEVELOP. THE NEXT QUESTION AUTOMATICALLY SHOULD BE, IF WE CAN'T STOP THE DEVELOPMENT AND THERE IS NOTHING ON THE HORIZON THAT SAYS THAT WE CAN, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO MINIMIZE ITS IMPACT ON THAT AQUIFER? THAT IS WHAT THE COUNCIL AND THE STAFF ARE WORKING DILIGENTLY TO ANSWER. FOR PEOPLE TO CHARACTERIZE THIS COUNCIL AND THE STAFF THAT WORKS UNDER THEM AS ANTI-ENVIRONMENTAL OR PRO DEVELOPMENT OR SOMEHOW BOUGHT AND PAID FOR IS A LIE. I KNOW THAT EVERYONE IS FOR FRESHWATER, I KNOW THAT EVERYONE IS FOR PRESERVING THE AQUIFER. WHAT I DON'T KNOW IS WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION. THESE PEOPLE ARE REACHING OUT FOR THE BEST SOLUTION THEY CAN FIND RIGHT NOW.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MR. BYRD. [ APPLAUSE ] NANCY MILLER? MISS MILLER, WELCOME. AND FOLLOWING HER IS STEVE BRENNER.

I'M NANCY. I'M A RESIDENT WITHIN A MILE OF TRACT 103, AND I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE PILING ON THAT ONE PARTICULAR TRACT. AND MY MAJOR CONCERN IS THAT IT'S CLOSE TO THE LONGHORN PIPELINE. AND I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S AN ADEQUATE BUFFER ZONE OR SAFETY PRECAUTION THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN THAT AREA SO THAT PEOPLE WHO LIVE NEARBY TO THE LONGHORN PIPELINE OR VISIT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING INTO TRACT 103, I'M NOT SURE THAT THEIR PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY IS BEING PROTECTED. I GOT SOMETHING IN THE MAIL ABOUT -- WHICH SEEMS TO BE THE ONLY PLANS TO PROTECT US FROM LONGHORN PIPELINE THAT I'M AWARE OF, AND IT SAYS IF YOU SEND -- IF YOU SMELL, SEE OR I FORGET THE THIRD TEST. IF THERE IS A LEAK IN THE PIPELINE, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO LEAVE THE AREA IMMEDIATELY ON FOOT. THE SECOND THING YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO -- IT HAS A LONG MISS LIS OF WHAT YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO. YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TOUCH, BREETSD OR MAKE CONTACT WITH THE LEAK. YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO CREATE AN IGNITION SOURCE. YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SWITCH A LIGHT ON ARE OR OFF. YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO USE THE TELEPHONE AND YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO START A CAR. MY MOTHER LIVES WITH US, SHE'S 87. AND UNDER THE SAFETY PLAN, WHICH IS THE ONLY ONE THAT WE KNOW OF, SHE WOULD HAVE TO HOLD HER BREATH BECAUSE SHE CAN'T WALK. SO I'M CONCERNED THAT PERHAPS THE AGREEMENT THAT'S BEEN NEGOTIATED ON TRACT 103 DOESN'T PROVIDE SUFFICIENT BUFFER ZONE AND SAFETY PRECAUTIONS FOR PEOPLE WHO EITHER VISIT THAT TRACT OR LIVE WITHIN A MILE RADIUS OF THE AREA. I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE LACK OF A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS OR THE WAIVER OF A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, WHICH IS -- AND ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TRACT 103, WHICH IS ESCARPMENT AND IT HAS NO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OR DAY CARE CENTER. AND I KNOW THAT THERE ARE -- I'VE READ THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT POSTED ON THE WEB ON JUNE 17TH. I KNOW THERE ARE TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS IN THE AGREEMENT THAT WOULD BE PROVIDED EITHER BY THE CITY OR THE DEVELOPER. THEY DON'T SEEM TO AFFECT ESCARPMENT NORTH OF TRACT 103 WHERE THERE ARE A LOT OF FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN WALKING AROUND. AND I'M INTERESTED IN WHAT MIGHT BE OFFERED FOR THAT SITE. I ALSO HAVE SOME CONCERNS RELATING TO FINANCING. AS I READ THE AGREEMENT I AGREE WITH MARY ARNOLD THAT THE CREDIT BANK BEING APPLIED TO OTHER DEVELOPMENTS WOULDN'T BE ACCEPTABLE. I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S BEEN TAKEN OUT OF THE AGREEMENT AS OF NOW. THERE ARE OTHER COSTS. I DIDN'T HEAR THE RESULTS OF THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OTHER THAN THAT IN 12 OR 13 YEARS THERE WOULD BE A POSITIVE REVENUE FLOW TO THE CITY. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S A GLASS THAT'S HALF EMPTY OR HALF FULL. IT PROBABLY MEANS THERE'S NO REVENUE FOR 12 OR 13 YEARS. AND I HAVE SOME OTHER CONCERNS FROM READING THE AGREEMENT THAT I'LL SUBMIT IN WRITING. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: STEVE DRENNER. AND FOLLOWING MR. DRENNER, KENNETH W.NORDMAN. MR. DRENNER, WELCOME.

THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: AND SET THE CLOCK UP FOR 15 MINUTES. HE HAS PEOPLE GIVING HIM TIME.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. LET ME START BY TELLING YOU HOW PLEASED I AM TO BE HERE TONIGHT. WE HAVE -- AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN A LONG ROAD TO GET HERE. AND THE CITY MANAGER TALKED TO YOU IN DETAIL ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE UNDERGONE. I THINK IT IS A PROCESS UNPARALLELED IN AT LEAST MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE CITY. WE REALLY STARTED THIS MORE THAN TWO YEARS AGO. AND I WOULD -- I WOULD STRESS THE PROCESS BECAUSE I THINK THAT YOU REALLY HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT SHAPED THE PROPOSAL THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU. THE FIRST PART OF THAT PROCESS, AS THE CITY MANAGER INDICATED, WAS REALLY A PROCESS WHEREBY WE ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS. WE TALKED TO COMMUNITY LEADERS, ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERS, NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE TYPES OF ISSUES THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE -- WERE GOING TO BE MOST IMPORTANT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THESE 1273 ACRES. FOLLOWING THAT PROCESS WE FLOATED A PROPOSAL INFORMALLY NOT TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT TO THE COMMUNITY. AND THE GUTS OF THAT PROPOSAL WERE THAT IMPERVIOUS COVER USED IN AN AGGREGATE FASHION WOULD BE EQUAL TO WHAT COULD BE DEVELOPED IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE ON A TRACT BY TRACT BASIS THAT WATER QUALITY CONTROLS ON A TRACT BY TRACT BASIS WOULD BE EXACTLY THE SAME AS ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. AND THAT THERE WOULD BE OTHER THINGS THAT, FRANKLY, ARE NOWHERE SEEN IN THE CITY CODE THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED DURING THE FIRST PART OF THAT PROCESS AS THINGS THAT WERE IMPORTANT. IF YOU CAN PROVIDE THEM. AND THOSE RAN THE GAMUT FROM GREEN BUILDER PROGRAMS TO ADDITIONAL PROTECTION OF CERTAIN REALLY CRITICAL CES NATIVE PLANT LANDSCAPING AND A VARIETY OF OTHER THINGS. WE DETERMINED THAT WE DID NOT WANT TO BRING THAT PROPOSAL TO YOU UNTIL IT HAD REALLY UNDERGONE THE COMMUNITY ANALYSIS THAT IT DESERVED. AND WE ALSO DIDN'T WANT TO BRING IT TO YOU UNTIL FISH AND WILDLIFE HAD SIGNED OFF ON IT. FISH SIGNED OFF ON IT, AS YOU HEARD, LAST OCTOBER. AND WE REACHED A POINT LAST OCTOBER WHERE WE CONSIDERED BRINGING IT TO YOU. WE TOOK THE SUGGESTION OF BILL BUNCH LAST OCTOBER AND WE BEGAN A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, A FORMAL STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. WE FELT LIKE WE HAD BEEN INVOLVED IN A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS FOR A YEAR AT THAT POINT DOING ALL THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH THAT WE HAD DONE TO DATE. BUT WE WENT INTO A DIFFERENT PROCESS, AND THAT STAKEHOLDER PROCESS IS REALLY CONTINUED TO THIS WEEK, ALL THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF FORMATS. SOME PEOPLE JOINING THE GROUP, SOME PEOPLE LEAVING THE GROUP, LEAVING THE GROUP UNFORTUNATELY AND ATTACKING THE PROCESS IN SOME CASES. BUT I THINK THAT THAT STAKEHOLDER PROCESS WAS PRODUCTIVE. I WILL TELL YOU IT WAS GRUELING, IT WAS PAINFUL AND IT WAS FAR FROM A PERFECT PROCESS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS UNFORTUNATE IN ANY SORT OF PROCESS OF THAT TYPE IS NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY, SOMEBODY WILL BE LEFT OUT. AND THERE WERE SOME FOLKS WHO DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE ORIGINAL STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, BUT ALL OF THOSE FOLKS HAVE BEEN INCLUDED LATER AS WE STARTED THE TREK THROUGH THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. THE THIRD STAGE OF THAT PROCESS HAS BEEN OUR PUBLIC PROCESS. AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT AGAIN IN MY EXPERIENCE NOTHING THAT I WORKED ON HAS RECEIVED THIS AMOUNT OF SCRUTINY. THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION, BOTH FORMED SUBCOMMITTEES, BOTH MET EXTENSIVELY, BOTH SPENT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TIME. AND AGAIN, WE ARE GRATEFUL TO THOSE WHO WORKED SO HARD ON THOSE COMMITTEES BECAUSE I THINK THEY SERVE TO MAKE IT A BETTER PROJECT AND THEY ALSO SERVE TO HELP EDUCATE THE COMMUNITY. WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE FOLKS WITH US TONIGHT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE IN PARTICULAR. A COUPLE OF PEOPLE SPENT AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF TIME WORKING ON THIS PROJECT. ON THE ZAP SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR, SEVERAL OTHERS WHO ARE HERE TONIGHT ALSO SPENT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TIME, AND WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THAT EFFORT. I THINK THAT, AGAIN, IT YIELDED -- THE PROCESS WAS PRODUCTIVE AND AS YOU KNOW IT CULMINATED IN OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD AND UNANIMOUS SUPPORT FROM ZAP, WHICH I KNOW IS -- IT WOULD NOT BE THE NORM ON ANY 14 ZONING CASES, MUCH LESS ZONING CASES IN THIS PART OF TRAVIS COUNTY. SO THAT BRINGS US TO TONIGHT. AND LET ME MENTION A COUPLE OF THINGS ABOUT ZONING FIRST. ALTHOUGH THIS IS THE -- THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT THIS COUNCIL WOULD HAVE LOOKED AT THESE 1273 ACRES, IT'S HARDLY THE FIRST TIME THAT CITY COUNCILS HAVE DEALT WITH PERMANENT ZONING ON PROPERTIES THAT USED TO BE LOCATED IN A M.U.D. IF MY INFORMATION IS CORRECT, IF EACH CASE THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ZONED THE PROPERTY ON A PERMANENT BASIS CONSISTENT WITH THE M.U.D. LAND USE PLAN THAT WAS, OF COURSE, SIGNED OFF ON BY AN EARLIER CITY COUNCIL. I THINK THERE ARE LEGAL REASONS WHY THAT HAPPENS, BUT BEYOND THOSE LEGAL REASONS I THINK THAT'S GOOD PLANNING. IN EFFECT THAT PLAN HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR THESE SORTS OF AREAS FOR 20 YEARS. AND YOU'RE DEALING WITH IN THIS CASE MOST OF THESE TRACTS ARE AT INTERSECTIONS OF MAJOR ARTERIALS SURROUNDED BY A SINGLE-FAMILY, THAT'S SORT OF A CLASSIC PLACE TO PUT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. SO I WOULD TELL YOU THAT BEYOND THE LEGAL REASONINGS, I STILL THINK IT REFLECTS SOUND PLANNING. I WILL TELL YOU ON THESE TRACTS THAT EVERY SINGLE USE COMPLIES WITH THE ORIGINAL M.U.D. LAND USE PLAN WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THOSE TRACTS, 104, 105, 111, 112 AND 1 13 THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AT ALL. ALSO WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D., WHICH WAS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL M.U.D., BUT WE TALKED ABOUT THAT EARLIER ABOUT ITS CHANGE FROM A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DESIGNATION TO A SPARSELY DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL USE. THE SETBACKS THAT MR. GURNSEY WENT THROUGH EARLIER REALLY REPRESENT A PROCESS WHERE WE LITERALLY WALKED EVERY BOUNDARY LINE. AND WE TALKED NOT JUST TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WE TALKED TO THE PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE MOST DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT. WE TALKED TO THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED RIGHT NEXT DOOR. IN THE GREAT MAJORITY OF THE CASES, WE REACHED A RESULT THAT THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH. AND I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE RESTRICTIONS, YOU SEE THE EVIDENCE OF THAT LABOR. THEY GO FAR BEYOND WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES. AND THEY REALLY REFLECT A DESIRE TO CUSTOMIZE THOSE SETBACKS AND THOSE RESTRICTIONS BASED ON THE PARTICULAR FEATURES OF THAT TRACT. WE LOOKED AT RELATIVE TOPOGRAPHY BETWEEN THE TRACTS. WE LOOKED AT EXISTING VEGETATION. WE LOOKED AT THE USE THAT WAS PROPOSED ON THAT TRACT AND WE TRIED TO COME UP WITH A RESULT ON EACH AND EVERY BOUNDARY THAT MADE SENSE IN LIGHT OF THOSE FACTORS. IN TALKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, I THINK THAT WHAT GETS LOST IN THE SHUFFLE OF ALL THE TALK ABOUT CHAPTER 245 AND THE LEGAL ISSUES IS I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO COMPARE IT TO THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD BE BUILT OUT IN THE CITY'S BEST CASE LEGALLY, AND THAT WOULD BE UNDER S.O.S. WE WERE GOING TO PASS OUT A PIECE OF PAPER THAT WILL SHOW YOU THAT COMPARISON IN ABOUT NINE DIFFERENT AREAS. AND AGAIN, I WOULD -- AS ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN EARLIER SAID, I WOULD CHALLENGE ANYONE TO LOOK AT THOSE FACTORS AND TO SAY THAT DEVELOPMENT -- TRACT BY TRACT COMPLIANCE WITH S.O.S. YIELDS A BETTER ENVIRONMENTAL RESULT, A BETTER RESULT FOR THE NEIGHBORS, A BETTER RESULT FOR THE CITY, THAN THE PROPOSAL THAT'S ON THE BOOKS. SO IT'S NOT JUST A COMPARISON TO THE CITY'S WORST CASE POSSIBILITY AT THE COURTHOUSE, IT'S A COMPARISON TO THEIR BEST CASE. AND I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE AS COMPARED TO THE CITY'S BEST CASE THIS PROPOSAL IS THE RIGHT PROPOSAL. AND I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT'S WHY WE HAD A UNANIMOUS VOTE AT ZAP. THAT'S WHY THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD SUPPORTED IT, THAT'S WHY THE WILDFLOWER CENTER SUPPORTED IT, THAT'S WHY FISH AND WILDLIFE SIGNED OFF ON IT NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE. MOST RECENTLY JUST EARLIER THIS MONTH. THAT'S WHY THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION HAVE SIGNED OFF ON IT AND MANY OTHERS WHO ARE IN SUPPORT OF IT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT IT IN THAT CONTEXT, NOT JUST IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WORST CASE, I THINK YOU'LL AGREE THIS IS THE BEST ANSWER. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: I'M GOING TO DEVIATE A LITTLE BIT FROM THE PROCEDURE THAT WE'VE BEEN USING. WE HAVE A MEMBER OF THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION HERE THAT HAS A PERSONAL EMERGENCY, AND I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE HER AT THIS TIME. WELCOME.

THANK YOU. I'M A LITTLE SHAKY RIGHT NOW. MY PERSONAL EMERGENCY IS THAT MY BLOOD SUGAR HAS GONE DOWN NOW. I'M DIABETIC. I'M NOT NERVOUS IT'S VERY FEW THINGS THAT MAKE ME NERVOUS. I'M A MEMBER OF THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION. AND THANK YOU, MR. ALVAREZ FOR APPOINTING ME THERE. I DIDN'T THINK I WAS GOING TO ENJOY THIS VERY MUCH. AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, WHEN THIS ISSUE CAME UP AT THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D., I WENT OUT THERE AND I GOT TO MEET THE NEIGHBORS THAT HAD SOME ISSUES AND CONTENTION OF IT. I MET WITH THE STRATUS PEOPLE AND I TRIED TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO CONSIDER TALKING TO EACH OTHER MORE BECAUSE THINGS WERE BREAKING DOWN AS IT WAS AT THE VERY BEGINNING. BUT THAT I THINK CHANGED A LOT. JANIE WAS THE PERSON WHO TOOK ME OUT THERE AND WE TALKED THE PROPERTY AND THE ROIDZ AND THE REAL ISSUES WERE SAFETY. NOW, THIS NEXT PROJECT CAME BEFORE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES -- WE APPROVED BY THE WAY THE P.U.D. AND I WAS THE LAST VOTE FOR A VOTE OF FIVE, AND I THINK IT WAS FIVE-THREE. SOMEONE WAS ABSENT. AND WHAT MY VOTE DID WAS TO CREATE SAFETY ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY STRATUS, AND THEY ADDRESSED THEM. AND THAT SHOULD TELL YOU THAT THESE PEOPLE, WHETHER THEY'RE FREEPORT MCMORAN OR THEY'RE STRATUS, THESE PEOPLE HAVE A COMMITMENT TO AFFECTING POSITIVE CHANGE NOW. I MEAN, ALL OF US HAVE A HISTORY, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US HAS A HISTORY, AND I THINK THAT EVERY ONE OF US ALSO TRIES TO CHANGE THAT. AND SO IN EFFECT WHEN THIS ITEM CAME BEFORE US, THINGS WERE BREAKING DOWN AGAIN, BUT THEY WERE BREAKING DOWN IN THE FORM OF COMMUNICATIONS BECAUSE THINGS WERE NOT BEING EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATED TO THE ZAP BOARD AND TO THE PUBLIC. NOW, BILL BUNCH HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS. AS A MATTER OF FACT, HE'S THE ONE THAT CALLED THE STAKEHOLDERS MEETING ORIGINALLY AND HE CONSTITUTED THOSE MEETINGS. AND HE QUICKLY LEFT RIGHT HERE CLOSE TO THIS END PROCESS. SO YOU NEED TO KNOW THAT. NOW, YOU ALSO NEED TO KNOW THAT THE BOARD DID VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL FOR THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, AND WE ALL, AS MANY OF US COULD, AND I THINK THERE WAS ONLY ONE COMMISSIONER THAT DID NOT GO TO EACH OF THE SITES, AND THAT WAS MS. SPELLMAN. THERE WERE CONFLICTS THERE. BUT ALMOST EVERY ONE OF US WENT TO THE SITES AND WE SAW THE SITES, SO WE WEREN'T IN A VACUUM WHEN WE MADE THE DECISION THAT WE DID. MANY OF US COULD NOT ATTEND ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS THAT BETTY BAKER HAD SET UP FOR US, BUT WE WENT TO AS MANY AS POSSIBLE AND WE COMMUNICATED WITH EACH OTHER. SO HERE AGAIN, WE'RE NOT OPERATING IN A VACUUM. WE ALSO REALIZED -- AND MY COUSIN LEFT AWHILE AGO WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD AND I DON'T KNOW IF HE WANTS TO CLAIM ME OR NOT, BUT HE WORKED VERY HARD FROM HIS END OF THAT ANGLE BECAUSE BOTH OF US TALKED ABOUT ONE THING, WHAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF AUSTIN. [ BUZZER SOUNDS ] AND IN THE BEST INTEREST OF AUSTIN IS TO MAKE AUSTIN A LIVEABLE CITY. AND THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IS TO COMMUNICATE AND TO NEGOTIATE AND TO CREATE A PROCESS WHERE THERE'S OPENNESS AND A PROCESS THAT'S GOING TO BRING US WITH SOME SERIOUS DELIBERATIONS TO MAKE A POSITIVE IMPACT. AND I'M SORRY ABOUT THE SALAMANDERS, BUT DO YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU CAN BLAME ME FOR THE NOVEMBER 15TH RAIN. THAT WAS MY BIRTHDAY. THAT WAS THE DAY THAT IT FLOODED. AND MAYBE THEY'RE SWALLOWING ALL THAT STUFF THAT'S OUT THERE IN THE ENVIRONMENT ALREADY. SO I THINK THAT STRATUS IS MAKING A GOOD EFFORT TO PERHAPS CHANGE WHATEVER IT IS THEY'RE DOING AND EFFECT POSITIVE CHANGE IN THE AREA. AND THAT'S NOT ALL I WANTED TO SAY, BUT ANYWAY, MAYOR, CONGRATULATIONS, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK AND MAYBE I CAN GET HOME AND -- EITHER THAT OR EAT ANOTHER SUGAR PILL AND FEEL A LITTLE BETTER IN A LITTLE WHILE. BUT THANK YOU FOR THE TIME AND PLEASE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT WE'VE HAD TO SAY TO YOU TODAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: LET ME CALL MS. MARTHA MAVERICK AND MR. NORM KHURE AND MR. KENNETH NORMAN. WELCOME, SIR.

MR. MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, MAY IT PLEASE THE CITY COUNCIL, MY NAME IS KENNETH NORDMAN. I'M A RESIDENT OF CIRCLE C. I'VE LIVED IN CIRCLE C FOR APPROXIMATELY FIVE YEARS. I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSALS FOR CHANGE IN ZONING AND IN SUPPORT OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT'S BEEN WORKED OUT BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND STRATUS. I'M ALSO A PROUD AND ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, WHICH CONTAINS OVER 2,000 MEMBERS. AND I'M PLEASED THAT THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION HAS TAKEN AN ACTIVE ROLE IN ALL OF THE THINGS THAT GOT US HERE TODAY. WHEN I SIT DOWN AT MY DINING TABLE AT HOME, I LOOK OUT THE WINDOW AT TRACT 110. AND WHEN I -- EVERY TIME I AM ABOUT TO EAT, I LOOK OUT THAT WINDOW AND I GO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S GOING TO BE AN OFFICE BUILDING SOME DAY. AND THAT IS NOT A PARTICULARLY ATTRACTIVE IDEA FOR ME, BUT I KNEW THAT WHEN I BOUGHT MY PROPERTY. I KNEW THAT THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE WHOLE AREA INVOLVED OFFICE SPACE IN THAT PARTICULAR DEAL. AND I THINK IN THIS INSTANCE, RATHER THAN TAKING THE SELFISH NOT IN MY BACKYARD APPROACH AND SAYING I DON'T WANT ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THAT TRACT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO RUIN MY VIEW, THAT I NEED TO BEND TO WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE AREA AS A WHOLE. AND THEREFORE I THINK THAT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO YOU TONIGHT IS GOOD FOR THE AREA AS A WHOLE FOR THREE VERY PRACTICAL REASONS. NUMBER ONE, THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT WILL BE LESS THAN WHAT I BELIEVE STRATUS IS LEGALLY ENTITLED TO DO UNDER 1704. SECONDLY, WE'RE APPROACHING THIS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF A COORDINATED PLAN FOR THE WHOLE AREA. THIS IS NOT A PIECEMEAL APPROACH, TAKE THIS TRACT, DEVELOP IT. THERE IS A COORDINATED EFFORT TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF THE WHOLE AREA. AND NUMBER 3, IT'S THE BEST EFFORTS OF THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF YOUR STAFF'S TIME, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU EMPLOY THEM FOR. AND I RECOMMEND TO YOU AND URGE TO YOU THAT YOU CONSIDER FAVORABLE APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CHANGES AND THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. MR. MONCADA SIGNED A CARD AND HAD TO LEAVE, SO HE LEFT A STATEMENT THAT I WANT TO READ INTO THE RECORD. MY NAME IS PHIL. I AM CURRENTLY AN ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEMBER AND A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF AUSTIN. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE STRATUS AGREEMENT. IT WOULD BE UNFORTUNATE TO MISS THE OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE GREEN SPACE IN THIS PORTION OF THE CITY AND IT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE LADY BIRD JOHNSON WILDFLOWER RESEARCH CENTER TO ADD THREE PARCELS TO THEIR EXISTING SITE. WE ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO RESEARCH IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE WILDFLOWER CENTER REGARDING MITIGATION OF RUNOFF FROM LOOP 1. IN CLOSING, WITH THE WILDFLOWER CENTER'S OPPORTUNITY TO SECURE PARCEL NUMBER 113, WE WOULD IMPROVE PUBLIC SAFETY BY RELOCATING THE ENTRANCE FROM LACROSSE TO A MORE NATURAL SETTING. AS YOU ENTER THEIR FACILITY. YOU WOULD ALSO BE ASSISTING WITH THE REMOVAL OF VEHICLES THAT CLOG ACCESS TO THE VELOWAY AND THE SUBDIVISION THAT LIE DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE CENTER. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ALL THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY THE CITY STAFF AND ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. AND NOW IT'S TIME FOR AMY RUPP. AND YOU HAVE 15 MINUTES. YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE THEM, BUT YOU HAVE 15 MINUTES.

I WOULD LIKE TO USE THEM. I FEEL IT WOULD BE PRODUCTIVE. I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN READING FROM THE AUSTIN BUSINESS JOURNAL DATED FEBRUARY 1997. LOCAL POLITICIANS HAVE USED FREEPORT AND BRADLEY AS EXAMPLES OF DEVELOPERS WHO CONSIDER THEMSELVES TO BE ABOVE AUSTIN'S RULES OF DEVELOPMENT. THEIR CLAIMS STEMS IN LARGE PART FROM THE FACT THAT BOTH DEVELOPERS IN THE PAST TWO YEARS HAVE CONVINCED THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE TO RELEASE THEIR DEVELOPMENTS FROM THE CONTROL OF CITY OF AUSTIN REGULATIONS. AND WHILE FREEPORT MAY HAVE REFORMED, THEY HAVE ATTACKED US IN THE LEGISLATURE: [ INAUDIBLE ] IN A STORY TWO YEARS AGO IN A NEWSPAPER LABELED BRADLEY IS AUSTIN PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER 2 BEHIND ONLY FREEPORT PRESIDENT JIM BOB MOFFETT. IN THE REAL ESTATE CRASH OF THE '80'S WHEN BRADLEY FEARED HE WOULD LOSE THE CIRCLE C RANCH DEVELOPMENT HE HAD FOUNDED, FREEPORT BACKED THE LOANS THAT KEPT THE DEVELOPMENT OUT OF BUPT BANKRUPTCY. IN EXCHANGE BRADLEY GAVE THEM THE RIGHT TO BUY THE LAND. BRADLEY FAILED TO MAKE A SCHEDULED PAYMENT ON THE LAND AND FREEPORT STILL OWNS THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. NOW, OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WILL ASSERT TO YOU THAT THEY HAVE NEGOTIATED WITH STRATUS ALL THESE WONDERFUL SETBACKS AND ARCHITECTURAL CONTROLS, BUT THERE'S ONLY ONE PROBLEM. WHY IN THE HECK DIDN'T YOU DEED RESTRICT AND PROTECTIVE COVENANT THAT LAND BEFORE YOU SOLD IT? WE WOULD NOT BE HERE TONIGHT. SO I DON'T HERE ANYTHING ABOUT ALL THE WONDERFUL THINGS THAT AT THAT TIME EVERY OFFICER OF THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WAS A BRADLEY DEVELOPMENT EMPLOYEE. EVERY SINGLE ONE! [ APPLAUSE ] YOU COULD HAVE SAVED THE ENTIRE CITY A LOT OF TIME BECAUSE ANY DEVIANCE FROM ANY PROCESS IS COSTLY. SO I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT HOW CIRCLE C SCRAMBLED TO GET SOME OF THE RIGHTS BRADLEY SOLD AWAY. WE SHOULD HAVE HAD THOSE RIGHTS UNDER OUR M.U.D. AGREEMENT WHICH THE CITY IS SUPPOSED TO BE ENFORCING. WHEN I BOUGHT MY LAND IN '93, I AGREED TO EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE THINGS AND I HAVE COMPLIED. TO THE POINT THAT I HAVE A GREEN LAWN EVEN IF IT'S A DROUGHT. I TRY TO TAKE UP ALL THE WEEDS EVEN THOUGH I DO NOT USE ANY CHEMICALS ON MY LAWN AND THROUGH INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT HAVE A .44-ACRE LOT AND COMPLY WITH S.O.S. SO I DON'T WANT TO HEAR THAT. PLEASE -- IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE WHY PUT US THROUGH -- I WOULD LIKE AN EXPLANATION FROM THE PEOPLE FROM THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD AS TO WHY THIS LAND WASN'T RESTRICTIVE COVENANTED AND DEED RESTRICTED THE WAY EVERY BIT OF LAND IN THAT M.U.D. WAS SUPPOSED TO BE. I DON'T HEAR ANYTHING. I DON'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL, I DON'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT LAND USE. I HAD TWO COLORS OF SHIELDS TO PICK FROM, GUYS, TWO. TWO COLORS, NOT KIND, COLORS. WHY DIDN'T THEY PROTECT THE COMMERCIAL LAND IN THE SAME WAY!!?? IT WAS BECAUSE THEY WANTED MORE MONEY FOR BRADLEY AND THEY DID NOT CARE ABOUT THE HOMEOWNERS AT THAT POINT. WE WERE SOLD DOWN THE RIVER SEVERAL TIMES. THAT WAS THE FIRST. THE OTHER ONE WAS 3193. SO WHEN YOU HEAR PEOPLE IN SUPPORT OF THE DEAL, THEY WERE SCRAMBLING TO GET BACK WHAT THEY SOLD AWAY. THEY HAD EVERY RIGHT TO RESTRICT THAT LAND. I'M ANGRY BECAUSE I LIVE THERE AND I'M TIRED OF THE SHE NAN BEGANS. SPEAKING OF ZONING, TRACT 101, I WAS IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. I ATTENDED EVERY MEETING. I HAVE A CONCERN BECAUSE ZONING WAS CHANGED TO ALLOW A PRIVATE MIDDLE SCHOOL THERE, WHICH WOULD BE A TRAFFIC ATTRACTOR. IT'S NOT JUST AUSTIN AISD, THE CONDITIONAL ZONING ALLOWS FOR A PRIVATE MIDDLE SCHOOL, WHICH WOULD NOT ALLEVIATE THE OVERCROWDING AT BAILEY AND WOULD BE A TRAFFIC ATTRACTOR. TRACT 102, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THREE ACRE LOTS, FIVE OF THEM, THAT HAVE LIVED THERE FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND THEY WANT STORAGE BUILDINGS NEXT TO THEM? STHAS NOT COMPATIBILITY. TRACT 103, THAT IS WHERE BUCKETING BECAME PIG TROUGH BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU GOT STUCK WITH ALL THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. AND WHILE THE CITY MAY REALLY BELIEVE THAT BUCKETING IS GOOD AND THEY CONVINCED THE REST OF US THAT'S GOOD, BUT THESE POOR PEOPLE ARE THE ONES THAT GOT ALL THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE MAD. I'M SURE THEY'LL TELL YOU MORE ABOUT THAT. 106, -- 104 AND 105 ARE CURIOUSLY SUPPOSED TO GO TO THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THEY ARE GOING TO GET THE I AND THE ZAP SAID WE'RE USING PUBLIC MONEY. CAN WE USE IT FOR PARKS? I WAS TOLD THAT PARKS WASN'T INTERESTED IN THAT LAND. I PUSHED THE CASE. I SAID WE'RE ALREADY PAYING CIRCLE C TO MAINTAIN A HUGE STRIP OF RIGHT...... RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG SLAUGHTER AS PART OF THE BRADLEY SETTLEMENT? WE'RE ALREADY PAYING TO MAINTAIN PART OF THAT LAND. I'M VERY GLAD THAT THE CITY GOT THE PARKLAND, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHO DID THAT. BECAUSE IT WASN'T THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THE GAS STATION NEXT TO A PIPELINE THROORKS A LOT OF CONCERN THERE, THAT WOULD BE TRACT 106. TRACT 108, A GROCERY STORE ALONG BRODIE LANE WHERE TEENAGERS HAVE HAD THE UNFORTUNATE LANE OF KILLING THEMSELVES. YOU CAN GO LOOK AT THE CROSSES IN THE MEDIAN. I HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC BECAUSE I DISAGREE. WE'RE ALREADY AT CAPACITY AT BRODIE AND THE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT THE CITY HAS FUNDED WILL NOT BE IN PLACE NECESSARILY BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT KICKS OFF. THE SAME CONCERN IS ECHOED ALONG 1826, WHICH IS DEFINITELY AT CAPACITY RIGHT NOW. AND THERE ARE NO PLANS TO WIDEN IT. THERE IS NO FUNDING AND NOBODY IS STEPPING UP TO SAY THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT ANYWHERE SOUTH OF SLAUGHTER. FROM SLAUGHTER TO THE BEAR LAKE P.U.D. IS GOING TO BE A DEATH TRAP. TXDOT, THERE'S ONLY 80 FEET THERE, MAYBE 20 -- 200 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY. I TALKED TO THEM FOR 10 YEARS ABOUT THAT ROAD AND THEY SAID THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO WIDEN IT. AND IT CONCERNS ME TO HAVE A TWO-LANE COUNTRY ROAD LABELED A MAJOR ARTERIAL. THAT MIGHT BE WHAT IT IS IN THE CAMPO PLAN, BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S A TWO-LANE COUNTRY ROAD. TRACT 110, THE TRACT THAT BORDERS US. I DID NOT BUY MY HOUSE IN CIRCLE C, SO IT BE NEVER BE MULTI-FAMILY AND OFFICE BUILDINGS. I BOUGHT MY HOUSE THINKING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD PROTECT ME WITH S.O.S. AND WOULD REQUIRE ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE WATERSHED ORDINANCES AT THE TIME. I DIDN'T ANTICIPATE HOSTILE DEVELOPERS GOING TO THE LEGISLATURE AND BRIBING THEM OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS TO PASS A LAW. I EXPECTED OUR COUNCIL TO ENFORCE THAT, BUT NO, I DIDN'T ANTICIPATE HAVING OFFICE SPACE HERE AND MULTI-FAMILY THERE. I QUESTIONED THE BILL ABOUT PLANS ADJACENT TO MY LAND AND WAS LIED TO AND MISLEAD. AND I WAS SHOUTED DOWN AND THREATENED WITH A LAWSUIT WHEN I QUESTIONED AT A PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION I PAY SEVERAL HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS IN DUES A YEAR FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING EXCLUDE.

[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

AND SHE SAID SHE HAD SERIOUS PROBLEMS WITH THIS DEAL AND SHE PROBABLY WOULD EVEN AFTER SHE VOTED. THAT DOES NOT SOUND LIKE A UNANIMOUS MEETING TO ME. ONE HOMEOWNER NEAR 102 WAS TOLD, SORRY, YOU YOU WEREN'T NOTIFIED BECAUSE YOU LIVE IN THE COUNTY. THAT WAS HIS RESPONSE FOR HIS PLEA NOT PUTTING STORAGE BUILDINGS NEXT TO THE LAND BY HIMSELF. THE TASK FORCE PROCESS WAS REALLY NOT ALL THAT PRETTY, AND WHEN WAS THE LAST SAPCO MEETING AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO WATCH THAT MEETING, ALL FIVE AND A HALF HOURS OF IT, AND GET A FEEL FOR WHAT THE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE WAS SAYING, AND THEN LOOK AT THE INTERNAL STRUGGLES WITHIN THAT BOARD. (INAUDIBLE) COULD NOT ANSWER A QUESTION ABOUT THE 30 YEAR BECAUSE THERE WERE SEVERAL LAWYERS THAT WORKED ON THIS FIELD? THAT MADE ME REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE TO GO TO A ZONING MEETING WHERE WE HAD NOBODY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. I BELIEVE THAT THIS LAND WILL BE DEVELOPED. I BELIEVE THERE'S A BETTER PLAN. I BELIEVE THAT BY HAVING A COMPREHENSIVE REGIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I DON'T MEAN JUST CIRCLE C, BUT EVERYBODY IN THAT AREA THAT IS ADJACENT TO THOSE PROPERTIES, BY HAVING A COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN LIKE THE ONE ABOUT MILLER INFILL, BECAUSE, REMEMBER, WE WERE GOING TO SWITCH FROM A STRATUS TO MILLER, HOPEFULLY. WE WANT THAT SAME KIND OF PROCESS, AND WE WERE TOLD, OH, YOU'RE YEARS AWAY FROM THAT. WHY NOT NOW? I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT CAN'T BE NOW. OH, BECAUSE THEY'RE WORKING FROM THE CORE OF THE CITY OUT. BUT ISN'T SOME OF THE MOST CONTROVERSIAL DEVELOPMENT WHERE WE LIVE? AND IF WE ARE THE ONES WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE AQUIFER, WOULDN'T IT BE IMPORTANT TO GET US INVOLVED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE INSTEAD OF SAYING WAIT? BECAUSE I'VE CHANGED MY PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY WANT TO AGREE WEED, NOT MARIJUANA, BUT WEEDS. MAYBE THIS SUMMER I'LL HAVE TO SPRAY PAINT MY LAWN GREEN. I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU DO WHEN YOU HAVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS WHO TELL YOU TO FEATHERALIZE THE HELL OUT OF YOUR LAWN AND WATER IT. [ APPLAUSE ]

HOW DO YOU RECTIFY THAT? HOW DO YOU RECONCILE THAT? YOU KNOW, ALL US NEED TO BE STEWARDS OF THAT LAND BUT SOME OF US ALREADY ARE AND SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE BACKING -- IN FACT THE ONLY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION VOCHALLY BACKING THIS DEAL IS THE ONE WHO WATERS WHEN IT'S JUST RAINED. WHO TELLS ITS RESIDENTS DON'T N US TO THE CITY COPS, CALL US FIRST. 109 IS LIKE A GREEN BELT, HOMEOWNERS THOUGHT IT WAS A GREEN BELT AND YET STRATUS GETS TO USE THAT EMPERK BECAUSE NOBODY USED IT BEFORE. THE RESIDENTS WERE TOLD FROM DAY ONE THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE A GREEN BELT. HOW CAN STRATUS COME IN AND SAY, IT'S OUT SO WE CAN BUILD IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.

[ APPLAUSE ]

I VOTE AND I AGREE PLANTS XERISCAPELLY AND ORGANICALLY. IT PUZZLES ME THAT YOU AS REPRESENTATIVES OF GOVERNMENT AND AS PROTECTORS OF THE CITY AND ITS RESOURCES WOULD WANT TO ALLOW POLLUTION IN OUR WATER, FLORA AND FAUNA WE BOTH KNOW DEPEND ON IT, AND YOU KNOW THAT WATER IS A BARGAINING CHIP IN DESSERT COUNTRIES AND IT CAN BE A BARGAINING CHIP IF WE TURN AUSTIN, SAN MARCOS, SAN ANTONIO, THE HILL COUNTRY, AND THE COUNTRY ALL AROUND IT INTO A DESERT UNLESS WE'RE CAREFUL. IT'S ACTUALLY MORE VALUABLE THAN MONEY AND WE KNOW THAT A LOT OF TIMES DEVELOPERS JUST COME IN TO AN ENVIRONMENT AND MAKE A LOT OF MONEY AND LEAVE. AND THEY CARE LITTLE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THEY MAKE THEIR PROFIT. AND I THINK THAT IT'S TO EVERYONE'S ADVANTAGE THAT THE COUNCIL CARE ABOUT ITS CITIZENS AND ITS RESOURCES AND RATHER THAN HAVE PRIVATE FINANCIAL DEALS WITH DEVELOPERS, FIND OTHER WAYS TO MAKE MONEY AND TO PAY FOR CITY SERVICES AND TO MAKE THE CITIZENS AWARE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING AND ENCOURAGE CITIZENS TO FULLY PARTICIPATE IN WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE CITY. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

I HAD INDICATED THAT YOU WERE GOING TO SPEAK AFTER, BUT YOU GAVE YOUR TIME TO AMY ROBB, SO -- AND SHE SPOKE HER FIFTEEN MINUTES. MR. MARK KIRK PATRICK -- WAIT A SECOND. I NEED TO REARRANGE THIS. PAM THOMPSON, STEVA NAVMENT RAY, SUSAN ALMANS AND NEAL (INAUDIBLE) ARE AHEAD OF -- PAM THOMPSON, IS SHE HERE? JUST A SECOND. WE ARE NOT QUITE READY FOR YOU.

OKAY.

IS MS. THOMPSON HERE? OKAY. MR. RAY, STEFAN RAY? SUSANA ALMANSA. NEAL (INAUDIBLE)? NOW YOU'VE GOT FIFTEEN MINUTES.

OKAY. I'M NOT SURE I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO USE THOSE MINUTES BECAUSE I UNLIKE OTHER OCCASIONS OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN COMING TO COUNCIL, THERE'S NO OPTION TO PRESENT SLIDES, THERE'S NO SCREEN, AND I DID BRING SLIDES, SO I CAN WING IT UNTIL THAT HAPPENS, IF IT CAN HAPPEN. I WOULD LIKE TO USE THE SLIDES. SO I'M GOING TO BE WINGING IT, THOUGH, BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO USE THE SLIDES TO KIND OF GUIDE ME.

(INAUDIBLE)

ALL RIGHT, LET ME SEE WHAT I CAN DO.

THANK YOU. SO LET'S SEE, I WAS GOING TO FINISH WITH THIS BUT I BELIEVE I'LL BEGIN WITH IT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE MOST POTENT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENTS I'VE EVER -- I'VE EVER HEARD. BEFORE I DO THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND BY WAY OF MY PERSONAL HISTORY, I'VE SPENT MY ENTIRE ADULT LIFE WORKING AGAINST FREE PORT, WHICH IS WHO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NOW. THEY HAD TO RENAME IT. PEOPLE KNEW THEM FOR WHAT THEY WERE. THEY WERE THE NATION'S NUMBER ONE WATER POLLUTER FOR SEVERAL YEARS COMING. THEY'RE A COMPANY THAT HAS DISPLACED AN ENTIRE PEOPLE, WEST INDIA. THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN RELOCATED, HAVE DIED OF DISEASE AND HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED BY THE INDONESIAN MILITARY ON BEHALF OF THEM. SO THAT IS WHO FREE PORT MACMARAN IS.

SO YOU KNOW HOW TO ORGANIZE YOUR TIME, THE DILEMMA IS THEY DON'T HAVE THE MACHINES ANYMORE THAT DO SLIDE CAROUSEL, THEY DO POWERPOINT AND OTHERS. I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO HELP YOU GET THE SLIDES UP.

THAT'S ALL RIGHT. THANKS FOR TRYING. SO IN LIEU OF HAVING SLIDES, I'LL JUST GO FROM NOTES THAT I HAVE HERE. SO THAT'S WHY THEY HAD TO RENAME FREEPORT BECAUSE PEOPLE CAME TO KNOW THEM AS A HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE COMPANY THAT WAS DISRESPECTFUL OF HUMAN LIFE, OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND OF OUR SHARED FUTURE. THAT'S WHY THEY RENAMED IT, SO IF I USE FREEPORT THROUGHOUT THIS SPEECH IT'S BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE POINT THAT THIS IS THE SAME COMPANY. THEY MERELY MOVED IT OFF TO THE SIDE AND CHANGED SOME OF THE NAMES ON THE PAPERWORK TO CONFUSE THE ISSUE. IT'S BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE. A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON ANYMORE. SO I THINK TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT THEY'VE DONE TO THE FOLKS OVER IN WEST PAPUA, I WILL READ TO YOU A LITTLE BIT FROM TOM BEINAL WHO IS THE LEADER OF THE TRIBAL COUNCIL OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN PRIMARILY IMPACTED BY FREEPORT'S OPERATION THERE AND HE SAYS, INC., THESE COMPANIES HAVE TAKEN OVER AND OCCUPIED OUR LAND. EVEN THE MOST -- SORRY. "EVEN THE SACRED MOUNTAINS WE THINK OF AS OUR MOTHER HAVE BEEN TORN UP BY THEM AND THEY HAVE NOT BE FELT THE LEAST BIT GUILTY. WE HAVE NOT BEEN SILENT, WE PROTEST AND BEEN ANGRY. WE'VE BEEN ARRESTED, BEETEN AND PUT INTO CONTAINERS. IT'S ALSO SAID THAT WITH OUR OWN COUNTRY SOLDIERS ACTING AS GO BETWEENS. OUR ENVIRONMENT HAVE BEEN RUINED, OUR FORRESTS AND POLLUTED BY WASTE. THE FORREST WHICH SERVE AS OUR PRIMARY FOOD SOURCE HAVE BECOME TRY. THE ANIMALS WE HAVE HUNTED IN THE PAST HAVE DISAPPEARED SO WE NO LONGER KNOW WHERE TO HUNT. OUR SETTLEMENTS ARE COVERED WITH SO MUCH SAND THAT OUR PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SCATTERED APART. ONE MOVES HERE, ONE MOVES THERE. OUR WATER IS SO CONTAMINATED BY CHEMICALS SO WE CAN NO LONGER DRINK IT. THE LAND IN THE HIGHER ELEVATIONS HAS DISAPPEARED BECAUSE IT'S BEEN PILED HIGH WITH HUGE ROCKS. WE'VE ONLY GOTTEN INSULTS, TORTURE, ARRESTS, KILLINGS, FORCED EVIKZS FROM OUR LAND, IMPOVERISHMENT, AND ALIEN NATION FROM OUR OWN CULTURE. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS. THAT IS TOM BEINAL OF THE PEOPLE OF WEST PAPUA WHERE FREEPORT HAS A HUGE GOLD MINE. SO NOT ONLY ARE THEY ATTEMPTING TO KILL SOMETHING THAT IS VERY NEAR AND DEAR TO OUR HEART HERE IN AUSTIN, THEY'RE MAKING TROUBLE FOR PEOPLE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD, AND THE RECORD IN AUSTIN HAS BEEN CONSISTENTLY ATTACKING OUR CITY IN THE COURTS, IN THE LEGISLATURE, IN EVERY WAY IMAGINABLE, THEY'VE COME AFTER OUR CITY EVER SINCE THEY BOUGHT THAT LAND IN 1988 AND THERE'S FAR MORE DETAIL THAN I CAN GET TO TONIGHT. AN INCIDENT IN APRIL OF 1983 WHEN THEY SPILLED 4,000-GALLONS OF SEWAGE INTO BARTON CREEK CAUSING A 3 MILLION LONG ALGAE BLOOM WHICH BY LAW THEY ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT IMMEDIATELY. THEY WAITED A MONTH. AND WITH REGARD TO THE AQUIFER IN THE PERIOD THAT WE'VE BEEN FIGHTING OVER THIS, THE WATER QUALITY HAS CONSISTENTLY DECLINED, THE NUMBER OF DAY THE POOL HAS BEEN CLOSED DUE TO HIGH COUNTS HAS RIZEN, OTHER POLLUTANTS VERY AWFUL THINGS HAVE BEEN FOUND IN BARTON SPRINGS AND WE'VE BEEN SAYING EVENTUALLY THE BARTON SPRINGS SALAMANDER IS GOING TO GO, THAT'S WHEN WE KNOW WE'LL BE IN TROUBLE. AND LO AND BEHOLD, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING THIS YEAR. SO THE TEXAS WATER COMMISSION, WHICH IS NOW ROLLED INTO THE TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION DECLARED THE EDWARDS AQUIFER THE AQUIFER IN TEXAS MOST VULNERABLE TO POLLUTION. IT'S A VERY SMALL AQUIFER. IT BASICALLY ONLY GOES TO BUDA. THIS ACTION IS DISTINCT FROM THE REST OF THE AQUIFER SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE HARD TO RUIN IT AND IN MY OPINION, IF WE DON'T STOP NOW, IF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DOESN'T FIND A CONSCIENCE AND BEGIN TO DO SOMETHING OTHER THAN SEEK THEIR OWN ENRICHMENT, WE CAN SAY GOODBYE TO THE BARTON SPRINGS EDWARDS AQUIFER. IT'S JUST A MICROKOSM, IT'S JUST OUR LITTLE SPACE BUT I THINK IT'S INDICATIVE OF WHAT IS HAPPENING ACROSS THE ENTIRE PLANET. ON THAT NOTE I WOULD LIKE TO READ SOMETHING FROM THE WORLD SCIENTIST WARNING TO HUMANITY. THIS CAME OUT IN 1993. IT WAS SIGNED BY OVER 1670 SCIENTISTS INCLUDING 104 NOBEL LAUREATES, A MAJORITY OF THE RECIPIENTS OF THE PRIZE. THEY CAME FROM ASIA, EUROPE, AND LATIN AMERICA. I'M GOING TO READ YOU A COUPLE OF PARAGRAPHS OF IT. HUMAN BEINGS IN THE NATURAL WORLD ARE ON A COLLISION COURSE. THEY INFLICT OFTEN HARSH AND IRREVOCABLE DAMAGE ON CRITICAL RESOURCES. IF NOT CHECKED MANY OF OUR PRACTICES PUT AT RISK THAT WHICH WE WISH FOR HUMAN SOCIETIES AND MAY SO ALTER THE LIVING WORLD THAT IT WILL BE UNABLE TO SUSTAIN LIFE IN THE MANNER THAT WE KNOW. FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES ARE URGENT IF WE ARE TO AVOID THE COLLISION OUR PRESENT COURSE WILL BRING ABOUT. REMEMBER. THIS WAS WRITTEN IN '93. NO MORE THAN ONE OR A FEW DECADES REMAIN BEFORE THE CHANCE TO AVERT THE THREATS WE NOW CONFRONT WILL BE LOST AND THE PROSPECTS FOR HUMANITY IMMEASURABLY DIMINISHED. WARNING. WE, THE UNDERSIGNED SENIOR MEMBERS OF THE WORLD SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY HERE BY WARN ALL HUMANITY OF WHAT LIES AHEAD, A GREAT CHANGE IN OUR STEWARDSHIP IS REQUIRED. IF VAST HUMAN MISERY IS TO BE AVOIDED AND OUR GLOBAL HOME ON THIS PLANET IS NOT TO BE IRRETRIEVABLY MUTILATED. THAT WAS 9 YEARS AGO WHEN THEY SAID WE HAD ONE OR A FEW DECADES TO WORK ON THIS PROBLEM. OKAY. IT'S BEEN SAID THAT THIS AGREEMENT WAS NEGOTIATED. I DON'T THINK THAT IS AN APPROPRIATE TERM. I THINK NEGOTIATION UNDER THREAT IS NOT NEGOTIATION. IT'S THE DICTATION OF TERMS OF SURRENDER BY AN AGGRESSOR. [ APPLAUSE ] AND UNDER THE CORPORATE WELFARE ANGLE, THE $15 MILLION THAT WE ARE HAVING TO FORGIVE FOR FREEPORT, COULDN'T THAT BE USED TO KEEP SYSTEM OF THE LIBRARIES OPEN THAT WE ARE HAVING TO CLOSE DOWN ONE DAY A WEEK? [ APPLAUSE ] MAYBE GET -- MAYBE GIVE KIDS SOMETHING WHOLE SOME TO DO. I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S PROBABLY A FEW OTHER PROBLEMS IN OUR CITY THAT THAT MONEY COULD GO TO. AND ESPECIALLY PAYING BY THE WILD FLOWER CENTER ANGLE, I WAS AFRAID OF THIS WHEN THEY LOCATED DOWN THERE THAT THEY WOULD GET DRAWN INTO THIS SORT OF SITUATION, AND I'M A PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE RESTORATIONIST AND NATIVE LANDSCAPER, SO I SPEND ALL OF MY TIME WORKING ON THE VERY SAME THINGS THE WILD FLOWER CENTER WORKS ON AND I HAVE TREMENDOUS RESPECT FOR THEIR WORK AND TREMENDOUS -- I'M GLAD THEY'RE OUT THERE DOING WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND IT SICKENS ME TO SEE THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF A SITUATION LIKE THIS. I THINK IT'S SAD AND I THINK THEY WERE PUT UNDER TREMENDOUS PRESSURE BY FREEPORT. SO IN SUMMARY, WHAT DOES FREE PORT STRATUS, THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY WANT? THEY WANT THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP OUT THERE UP TO THEIR LEGAL LIMIT AND THEY WANT TO EXPAND THEIR LEGAL LIMIT BY ATTACKING US IN THE LEGISLATURE. THEY DON'T REALLY SEEM THAT SENSITIVE TO THE CONCEPT OF SAVING THE AQUIFER. WHAT THE AVERAGE WORKING CLASS AUSTINITES WANT? WE WANT BARTON SPRINGS HAS IT'S BEEN FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. PEOPLE OF NOT GREAT MEANS CAN GO THERE AND MEET AND ENJOY COMMUNITY WITH OTHER PEOPLE. IT'S A VERY SPECIAL THING FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A LOT OF OTHER SPECIAL THINGS IN THEIR LIVES. SO THESE THINGS ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. FREEPORT AND THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY CANNOT HAVE WHAT THEY WANT WITHOUT DESTROYING WHAT THE REST OF US WANT OR WHAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF AUSTINITES HAVE SAID TIME AND TIME AGAIN THAT WE WOULD -- THAT WE WANT. SO I WOULD DESCRIBE FREEPORT AS A CLASSIC PREDATOR. THEY'RE PREYING UPON THE FUTURE HEALTH OF OUR ENVIRONMENT AND UPON PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO RESIST THEM. IN WEST PAPUA, IN NEW ORLEANS WHERE THEY'VE BEEN DUMPING THINGS INTO TO CANCER ALLEY AND CAUSING UNTOLD SUFFERING THERE. ALL ACROSS THIS NATION THEY WERE THE NUMBER ONE WATER POLLUTER. REMEMBER? THEY'RE A PREDATOR. THEY EXHIBIT THE BEHAVIOR OF A SCHOOL YARD BULLY OR IN PSYCHOLOGICAL TERMS, A SOCIOPATH, A PERSON WHO CONSISTENTLY ENGAGES IN BEHAVIORS THAT ARE HURTFUL TO THE COMMUNITY. AND FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING FOR YOUNGER FOLKS. I KNOW THERE'S LOTS OF OLDER FOLKS WHO CARE ABOUT THIS STUFF, BUT ESPECIALLY FOR YOUNGER FOLKS LOOKING AT THE REST OF YOUR LIVE, THIS PREDATOR IS PREYING ON YOUR FUTURE, ON ALL OF OUR FUTURES AND YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE THE MOST. YOUR CHILDREN -- YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE THEM TO BARTON SPRINGS. IF YOU'RE LUCKY, THEY WILL AGREE UP HEALTHY, ALTHOUGH THAT IS GROWING INCREASINGLY IMPROBABLE IN THIS WORLD. I'M GOING TO FINISH WITH A QUOTE FROM RACHEL CARSON, SHE WAS THE WOMAN WHO WROTE THE BOOK SILENT SPRING THAT ALERTED US TO THE DANGER OF DDT, THE WAY IT WAS KILLING ALL OF THE BIRDS, SHE SAID IN 1963 WE STILL TALK IN TERMS OF CONQUEST. WE STILL HAVEN'T BECOME MATCH ENOUGH TO THINK OF OURSELVES AS ONLY A TINY PART OF A VAST UNIVERSE. MAN'S PART OF NATURE IS TODAY CRITICALLY IMPORTANT SIMPLY BECAUSE WE'VE ACQUIRED A POWER TO DESTROY NATURE. BUT MAN IS A PART OF NATURE AND THIS WAR AGAINST NATURE IS INEVITABLY A WAR AGAINST HIMSELF. NOW I TRULY BELIEVE THAT WE IN THIS GENERATION MUST COME TO TERMS WITH NATURE AND I THINK WE ARE CHALLENGED AS MAN KIND HAS NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED BEFORE TO PROVE OUR MATURITY AND OUR MASTERY, NOT OF NATURE, BUT OF OURSELVES. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. [CHEERING AND APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: THE COUNCIL RULES STATE THAT IF WE GO BEYOND 10:00 WE HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION TO WAIVE THAT RULE SO I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO DO THAT. MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND THE COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. THE RULE IS WAIVED. MR. BILL AKIN AND FOLLOWING MR. AKIN, MR. MARK KILL.....KIL PATRICK.

WAS THAT NEAL KIRKPATRICK THAT JUST SPOKE.

Mayor Garcia: MR. NEAL TETRA.

THANK YOU, NEAL, FOR THOSE KIND WORDS, I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR WHAT HE SAID. I HAVE TO THANK BILL BUNCH FOR HIS EXTREME OCCASIONS ON OCCASION WHICH BRINGS STRATUS OR FREEPORT TO THE TABLE FOR AN AGREEMENT. IT IS PEOPLE LIKE BILL AND ROBERT SINGLETON WHO SPEAK ELOQUENTLY AND AMY RUPP TO FORCE STRATUS TO COME TO THE TABLE, BECAUSE IF THEY WEREN'T HERE, STRATUS WOULD BUILD WHAT THEY WANTED TO BUILD. WE CAN'T HAVE THAT, WE'VE GOT TO PROTECT THE SPRINGS. I HOPE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS UP THERE WHERE THE PUBLIC IS COMING FROM. WE HAVE A HARD TIME NOT BEING IN THE LOOP LIKE Y'ALL HAVE BEEN IN THE LOOP FOR TWO YEARS. ALSO IN THIS DAY AND AGE IT'S HARD TO TRUST OUR POLITICIANS, OUR ELECTED LEADERS BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT GOES ON BEHIND THE SCENES. IT'S ALSO HARD WITH THE LIKES OF ENRON AND WORLD COM AND ALL OF THESE CORPORATIONS AND THEIR CEO'S WHO DO WHAT THEY DO. IT'S HARD TO TRUST CEO OOOF CORPORATION. IT'S HARD TO TRUST STRATUS TO KNOW WHAT THEIR PRINCIPLES AND MOTIVES ARE. I DON'T KNOW THE BEST WAY TO PROTECT THE SPRINGS AT THIS TIME. IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT POSITION THAT WE ARE ALL IN. STRATUS OWNS THE LAND. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? WE ARE HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT THEY WORK TWO YEARS ON AND THIS LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IS THE FIRST READING. THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO MORE READINGS, WE HAVE TO BE HERE TWO MORE TIMES. I WANT EVERYBODY TO SHOW UP BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE HERE. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THEY KNOW THAT WE STAND UP FOR THE SPRINGS. [ APPLAUSE ] SO WE ARE AT A STARTING POINT. THE STARTING POINT IS THE FIRST READING AND THIS AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US. IT CAN BE IMPROVED BIG TIME. SO WE NEED TO COME UP WITH WAYS TO IMPROVE THIS AGREEMENT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LAWSUIT THAT S.O.S. HAS FILED TO GO THROUGH THE COURT AND LET'S HAVE SOME CLARITY HERE. YOU KNOW, I'M TIRED OF HEARING THE OPPOSING SIDE AND THE LAYPERSON DOESN'T UNDERSTAND WHICH SIDE IS RIGHT. I WANT TO BELIEVE S.O.S. IS THE GUIDING PRINCIPLE HERE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE VOTED FOR IN 1990 AND IT SHOULD STAND UP IN MY OPINION. [ APPLAUSE ] I ATTENDED SOME OF THE OTHER MEETINGS, THE ZAP MEETINGS, AND SOME OF THE THINGS I HEARD COME OUT OF THAT MEETING I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT. I CALL THEM FALLACIES OF THAT MEETING BUT I HEARD A CITY STAFF PERSON SAY THAT TRAFFIC WILL INCREASE ON SOUTH MOPAC BY 5 OR 6%, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND THEY ALSO SAID THAT IS NOT TOO SIGNIFICANT GIVEN THAT MOPAC CAN HANDLE LIKE THREE TIMES THAT MUCH. 5 OR 6% IS SIGNIFICANT IN MY MIND, THE STATE OF TEXAS AND THE FEDS ARE SPENDING A BILLION DOLLARS TO BUILD 130 TO REDUCE TRAFFIC ON I 35 BY 1%. WE TALKED ABOUT INSTALLING LIGHT RAIL HERE. AND THAT WAS GOING TO DECREASE TRAFFIC ON LAMAR AND MOPAC BY 5% SO IT IS SIGNIFICANT, ESPECIALLY OVER THE AQUIFER. AND 5% -- ONE MORE THING ABOUT 5%. HOW MANY TIMES WILL WE SELL 5% TO DEVELOPER, 5% DEG DATES.

Mayor Garcia: YOUR TIME IS UP, SIR.

THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] MIRS MAYOR GARCIA LET ME READ INTO A RECORD A NOTE THAT MS. THOMPSON LEFT. SHE WAS NOT PRESENT WHEN I CALLED HER. .. ... THAN WHATEVER REASON THE GREEN SPACE IS DEVELOPED. PLEASE ASK STAFF TO IDENTIFY HOW MANY TIMES THIS HAS OCCURRED FOR WHATEVER REASON, BCCP, S.O.S., STATE LEGISLATURE RULE, DOESN'T MATTER, RESULTS ARE THE SAME. STAY WITH RR ZONING AND NO DOLLAR SIGNS. MR. BILL AKIN. UP E-MAIL SORRY. MARK KILPATRICK. THAT'S YOU. I GOT IT. IT'S BEEN A LONG EVENING.

MY NAME IS MARK KIRKPATRICK, I'M A PROFESSOR OF BIOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS. I'M ONE OF THE COAUTHORS OF THE PUBLICATION THAT LISTED THE SALAMANDER AS ONE OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES. THE LIST GOES AS FOLLOWS, ATROZINE, DIAZ NON, PROMATRON, DDT, DDE, DELTA BHC, ENDOSUL FINISH --

Mayor Garcia: HOLD IT JUST A SECOND. I HAVE 13 MINUTES TO THAT TIME THAT YOU HAVE, HE GETS FIFTEEN MINUTES.

I PROMISE YOU I WON'T NEED IT.

Mayor Garcia: THERE YOU GO. NOW YOU GOT IT.

INDO SULFIN, HEPTACHLOR, THAT IS NOT A LIST OF THE LATEST DESIGNER DRUGS, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE PESTICIDES, HERBICIDES AND BIPRODUCTS THAT HAVE BEEN SHOWING UP IN THE SPRINGS. DIAZANON HAS BEEN SHOWING UP IN THE SPRINGS. STROZINE IS A NERVE CRIED. ..............NERVICIDE. THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE CONCLUDES THAT HIGH AREAS OF HABITAT IN THE POOL HAVE DECREASED IN RECORRECT YEARS BECAUSE OF DEPOSITION OF SILT AND SEDIMENT THAT SEDIMENT IS PLACED WITH POISONS, ARSENIC, CAD MYIUM, COPPER, MERCURY, AND SILVER COMING OUT OF THE SPRINGS, THOSE ARE LETHAL HEAVY METALS THAT ARE FOUND IN LEVELS THAT EXCEED THE TOXIC GUIDELINES, COPPER, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH IS BY THE WAY USED TO KEEP ORGANISMS OFF THE BOTTOM OF SHIPS, YOU KNOW, WE USE IT AS A POINT VERY EFFECTIVELY, IT KILLS LIVING THINGS, IT'S BEEN FOUND AT FIVE TIMES THE CONCENTRATION LIKELY TO HAVE TOXIC EFFECTS FOR AQUATIC LIFE. SILVER HAS BEEN FOUND AT 50 TIMES THE CONCENTRATION NEEDED TO KILL AQUATIC LIFE. IT'S IN THE SPRING, IN THE POOL. THEN THE POLY HYDROATIC... PH HAVE BEEN DETECTED IN THE POOL SEDIMENTS EVERY TIME THEY'VE BEEN LOOKED FOR. (INAUDIBLE) IN THE POOL HAS HAD LEVELS 6 TIMES OVER THOSE NEEDED TO BE TOXIC TO (INAUDIBLE) WHICH IS CRITICAL TO THE FOOD CHAIN IN THE ECOSYSTEM IN THE POOL. IF WE THINK THAT 6 TIMES THE LETHAL LEVEL IS BAD, ONE SEDIMENT FOUND LEVELS AT 22% -- I DIDN'T MEAN TO DIGRESS INTO A BIOLOGY LECTURE HERE. WITH THAT WORK THE AIM WAS EXCLUSIVELY TO PROTECT THE SPRINGS FOR PEOPLE AS WELL. WE WERE TOLD DOZENS OF TIMES THAT WE NEEDED MORE DATA TO PROVE THAT THE SPRINGS WERE BEING BLIEWTED, WELL, WE GOT THE DATA AND THEY'RE REALLY, REALLY CLEAR, THE SPRINGS ARE NOT DEAD BUT THEY'RE SICK AND GETTING SICKER. . THAT'S NOT THE WAY THE SPRINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE. CLUSTERING DEVELOPMENT GENERATE MORE POLLUTION THAT IS KILLING THE SPRINGS. THIRD POINT, A POLLUTED AQUIFER CANNOT BE REVIVED. KILLING AN AQUIFER LIKE CAUSING THE EXTINCTION OF A SPECIE IS A ONE WAY TRIP. MY EVALUATION THE STRATUS PROJECT WILL PRODUCE A LOT OF NEW POLLUTION. THAT IS ANOTHER NAIL IN THE COFFIN OF THE SPRINGS AND I ASK YOU NOT TO VOTE FOR THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ] MR. KEN RIGSBY IS THE NEXT SPEAKER AND I WANT TO CALL LAUREN MCCARTHY.

MAYOR, BEFORE YOU LEAVE, MARK, COULD I ASK HIM A QUICK QUESTION BEFORE MR. RIGSBY SPEAKS.

Mayor Garcia: SURE. DR. KIRKPATRICK.

IF YOU CAN'T ANSWER THIS BRIEFLY, I'LL TALK TO YOU OVER HERE. I WAS WONDERING AS WE TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS CAUSING THE SALAMANDER'S CONDITION, DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW IF THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONTINUING WATER QUALITY THAT WOULD MAKE THE CREATURE -- WELL, OKAY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HELP ME SUPPLY JARGON HERE. HELP THEIR PHYSICAL CONDITION BE SUCH THAT THEY WERE VULNERABLE TO THOSE KIND OF THINGS AS OPPOSED TO AN EVENT OR A TEMPORARY PERIOD OF TIME THAT CAUSED IT? AND THAT SOUNDED REALLY GASH GARBLEED. WE'VE GOT TWO PROBLEMS, ONE IS THAT THINGS ARE SLIDING DOWNHILL EVERY DAY. THERE MIGHT ALSO BE SOME SHOCK. SOMEBODY MIGHT HAVE DUMPED SOME PESTICIDE DOWN THE STORM DRAIN. I DON'T KNOW WHICH -- WHETHER ONE OR BOTH OF THOSE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR KILLING THE DERS.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO FIND OUT THROUGH RESEARCH.

THERE ARE SOME VERY GOOD BIOLOGISTS WORKING ON THAT RIGHT NOW SO HOPEFULLY WE WILL FIND OUT. THERE'S A LOT OF PLAUSIBLE THEORIES RIGHT NOW BUT THERE'S NO SMOKING INSECTICIDE CAN YET.

OKAY. OKAY. THANKS. THANKS, MAYOR. THANK YOU MR. RIGSBY.

LAUREN MCCARTHY, MARK EMMERRITT, AND KARIN CREBBS AND JACKIE PRICE IF YOU COULD JOIN US UP IN THE FRONT ROW. MR. RIGSBY, WELCOME, SIR.

THANK YOU MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM, AND COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS KEN RIGSBY, SEEMS TO BE POPULAR TO REFER TO HISTORY TONIGHT. I FIRST ARRIVED IN AUSTIN IN 1943. MY FAMILY GOT HERE IN 1880. I LEARNED HOW TO SWIM IN BARTON SPRINGS AND WAS A REGULAR SWIMMER THERE FAR BEFORE MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM WERE BORN. I LOVE BARTON SPRINGS AND I WOULD LIKE TO PROTECT IT TO THE GREETEST EXTENT WE CAN. I'M AN OFFICER AND DIRECTOR OF THE CIRCLE C HOAMDZ ASSOCIATION AS SUCH I GOT INTO THE DISCUSSIONS AND THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH STRATUS, ITS PRINCIPLES AND REPRESENTATIVES TWO YEARS AGO WHEN THEY FIRST BEGAN, AND I MUST ADMIT WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TALKING I THINK I'VE EXPLAINED THIS TO SOME OF YOU, I WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE DEAL AT ALL. AS WE PROGRESSED AND BEGAN TO TAKE ON MORE DIFFICULT AND TOUCHY SUBJECTS -- AND THIS WAS FROM THE BEHALF OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO LIVE CLOSEST TO THEIR DEVELOPMENT, OUR NEIGHBORS, MORE AND MORE CONCESSIONS WERE GRANTED BY STRATUS AND AT THIS STAGE I THINK WE HAVE AS GOOD OF AN AGREEMENT AS CAN BE NEGOTIATED WITH A PRIVATE -- WITH A PUBLICLY HELD COMPANY THAT HAS IN ALL CANDOR RIGHTS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF S.O.S. AND WITH A HEAVILY INVESTED BOARD OF DIRECTORS I WOULD SUBMIT THAT THE LIKELIHOOD, SHOULD THEIR BE DENIED OF PRESSING THOSE RIGHTS WOULD BE STRONG. THE ON BEHALF OF THE HOMEOWNERS, WE HAVE DISCUSSED AND NEGOTIATED SOME SETBACKS AS WERE ALLUDED TO EARLIER, AS WELL AS SOME BUILDING ORIENTATIONS WHICH AREN'T CALLED FOR WITHIN THE ORDINANCES AND STATUTES OF THE CITY BUT WHICH ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE ADJACENT HOMEOWNERS, THE OBJECT IS TO MINIMIZE THE POSSIBILITY THAT SOMEONE ON THE THIRD FLOOR OF A BUILDING WILL BE LOOKING INTO THE BACK YARD. WHICH ORIENTING THE BUILDING DIFFERENTLY WE CAN MINIMIZE THOSE. WE HAVE GAINED CONCESSIONS ON HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS AND SETBACKS WHICH ARE VERY BENEFICIAL. MUST ALSO COMMEND STRATUS AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN STAFF, TOBARY AND HER STAFF, FOR NEGOTIATING A REASONABLE SETTLEMENT FOR US ON BEHALF OF OUR CHILDREN, BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GET SCHOOL BUILDINGS BUILT OVER THE AQUIFER AND IT'S CRITICAL THAT IF WE BRING THIS MANY MORE PEOPLE INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE PROVIDE FOR THE PUBLIC EDUCATION OF THEIR KIDS. SO IN CONCLUSION, I SINCERELY APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH YOU TONIGHT. I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO TAKE WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE BEST DEAL THAT WE CAN MAKE FOR THE CITY AND FOR THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MR. RIGSBY. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: AND IF ROBBINS COULD ALSO JOIN US IN THE FRONT ROW. ROGER BAKER. MR. BAKER, WELCOME, SIR.

HELLO THERE. I'M A MEMBER OF THE TRAVIS COUNTY GREEN PARTY AND ALSO THE S.O.S. ALLIANCE AND ALSO THE SAVE BARTON CREEK ASSOCIATION AND ALL OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS HAVE HISTORICALLY FOUGHT DEVELOPMENT OVER THE AQUIFER AND I EXPECT YOU TO AND TO OBEY THE S.O.S. LAW WITHOUT ANY VARIANCES AND TO REJECT THIS DEAL. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE PLANNING OUR CITY ON THE BASIS OF THREATS FROM PRIVATE DEVELOPERS. WE DON'T KNOW WHOSE BEHIND STRATUS PROPERTIES. WE KNOW IT'S A CORPORATION. LAST YEAR BACK IN MAY OF 2001, STRATUS PROPERTIES CEO, BO ARMSTRONG ANNOUNCED A RENEWED PUSH FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THEIR 1200-ACRES AT CIRCLE C BY TELLING THE STATESMEN, THE MINUTE WE START FIGHTING, I START UPPING THE DENSITY, SO THESE ARE THE KIND OF GUYS WE ARE DEALING THIS. THIS IS ANONYMOUS CORPORATE MONEY. THIS IS THE KIND OF MORALITY THAT IS GUIDING EXXON AND THESE OTHER COMPANIES. YOU KNOW, WHAT -- WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING AFTER HEARING THE TESTIMONY THAT WE'VE HEARD IS TO REALIZE THAT THE AQUIFER IS IN TROUBLE NOW. BARTON SPRINGS IS IN TROUBLE. YOU NEED TO ONLY GO DOWN THERE AND LOOK AT IT AND SWIM IN IT TO SEE THAT ALL THE STUFF THAT'S BEING COMING IN FROM UPSTREAM FROM DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS HAS THE SALAMANDER ON THE VERGE OF EXTINCTION AND TO HAVE THESE GUYS SAY THIS ANONYMOUS CORPORATE MONEY WHICH HASN'T MADE MUCH PROFIT, THIS IS THE SON OF THE -- OF THE BARTON CREEK PUD AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW IS FIGHTING THE SAME FIGHT AS THE BARTON CREEK UPRISING A DECADE LATER. BUT THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY WANT TO PUT OUT THERE, ESSENTIALLY THEY WANT TO PUT OUT A MILLION SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AND RETAIL WHICH AMOUNTS TO AN EDGE CITY OUT IN THE AREA EXACTLY THE AREA THAT WE SHOULDN'T PUT IT, WHICH IS OUT OVER THE AQUIFER, AND WE SHOULDN'T -- YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE -- THIS IS THE VERY ESSENCE OF BAD GROWTH AND WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WE ARE NEGOTIATING BECAUSE OF -- BECAUSE THIS DEVELOPER IS TAKING THE INITIATIVE TO FORCE US LEGALLY TO DO WHAT WE KNOW WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING BECAUSE IT VIOLATES THE CITY'S MASTER PLAN WHICH IS THE AUSTIN TOMORROW PLAN, WHICH SAYS WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THIS. AND TO DO IT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE BEST THING THAT CAN BE SAID ABOUT THIS DEAL IS THAT THE DEVELOPER CLAIMS HE HAS THE RIGHT TO DO. [BUZZER SOUNDING] THREE TIMES WORSE SO THEREFORE WE SHOULD ACCEPT THIS DEAL IS THE BEST WE CAN GET. I THINK THAT THIS IS A CLEAR VIOLATION OF S.O.S. ON THE BASIS OF CLUSTERING AND GROUPING, YOU KNOW, PARCELS OF LAND THAT AREN'T CONNECTED AND THAT UH-OH IT TO THE...OWE IT TO THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN AND I EXPECT YOU TO. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] LAUREN MCCARTHY AND FOLLOWING MS. MCCARTHY IS MARK EMRETT, AND IF MARK TRIES -- AND MICHELLE (INAUDIBLE) COME UP.

WHAT NUMBER?

Mayor Garcia: 40 AND 41. REQUEST.

MY NAME IS TAMMY GREKO. LAUREN HAD TO GO HOME FOR A MY RAINE. COULD I READ HER STATEMENT.

Mayor Garcia: AS LONG AS YOU STAY IN 3 MINUTES.

MY NAME IS LAUREN MCCARTHY AND I'M IN FAVOR WITH THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH STRATUS. MY PROPERTY BACKS UP NEXT TO THE HIGHEST BUILDING ON THIS TRACT. STRATUS HAS BEEN MORE THAN FAIR IN LISTENING TO OUR CONCERNS FOR THOSE -- AT LEAST FOR THOSE ALONG TRACT 101 AND HAS PUSHED THE SETBACK OVER THE TOP OF THE HILL TO 300 AND SOME FEET. THEY'VE LISTENED TO OUR CONCERN ON LAND USE, RESTRICTIONS AND PROHIBITIVE USES. AS A LAND OWNER THEY HAVE PROPERTY RIGHTS AND MADE MANY CONCESSIONS TO COME TO AGREEMENT WHILE WORKING WITH THE RESIDENTS OF CIRCLE C NORTH. THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD ADD TO THAT IS WE APPROXIMATE BOUGHT OUR PROPERTY IN CIRCLE C NORTH IN SEPTEMBER AND WHEN PEOPLE SAID THEY DIDN'T KNOW OF THESE REZONING ISSUES, I HAVE TO QUESTION THAT BECAUSE WHEN WE BOUGHT OUR PROPERTY WE WERE TOLD THAT TRACT 101 AND ALL OF THESE PROPERTIES WERE ALREADY ZONED AS COMMERCIAL, THAT THEY WEREN'T INTERIM OR WEREN'T RURAL. IF YOU GO TO THE CIRCLE C INFORMATION CENTER, GUENTHER LISTED AS BEING ALREADY COMMERCIAL USES. IF YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THE SIGNS THAT ARE ALREADY UP AND POSTED IN CIRCLE C, THEY'RE LISTED AS COMMERCIAL USES, SO TO ME IT'S SOMETHING I PLANNED AND EXPECTED ALL ALONG WHEN WE BOUGHT OUR HOME. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: MR. MARK EMMERT? KARIN CRUBBS? AND IF KIRK BECKER AND DAVID TERRELL -- DAVID, YOU GAVE YOUR TIME TO MARY ARNOLD, SO -- LET'S SEE. HOLD IT JUST A SECOND. SUSAN SCHAFFEL AND KEVIN (INAUDIBLE) COME UP TO THE FRONT. KARIN?

MY NAME IS KARIN, CREBBS, MAYOR, COUNCIL PEOPLE, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING AT THIS LATE HOUR TO ALL OF OUR ARGUMENTS, I HOPE THAT NOT ONLY YOU'RE LISTENING BUT THAT YOUR HEARTS ARE OPEN AND THAT YOU'RE OPEN TO CHANGING YOUR MINDS IF YOU CAME IN HERE WITH THE DECISION ABOUT THIS. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN CALL IT A DEAL WITH STRATUS. STRATUS IS GETTING TO STEEL OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING THE GENTLEMAN UP HERE WENT THROUGH A VERY LENGTHY DESCRIPTION OF THE BENEFITS OF THE STRATUS DEAL AND OF THE -- ALL THE CONCESSIONS, AND I LISTENED TO THEM AND THEY SOUNDED LIKE OXYMORONS TO ME. HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT A TWO-STORY BUILDING IS A CONCESSION RATHER THAN A THREE-STORY BUILDING, WHEN PERHAPS THAT BUILDING SHOULD NOT BE THERE ON THAT PLAT IN THE FIRST PLACE? WHAT WE DON'T NEED -- IF YOU LOOK AROUND AUSTIN AND YOU LOOK AT THE LANDSCAPE, WE DON'T NEED MORE CONDOS, WE DON'T NEED MORE APARTMENTS. I LIVE RIGHT ON SPY GLASS DRIVE AND MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS FILLED WITH FOR RENT SIGN, SIGNS SAYING YOU CAN GET FREE RENTS, BRING YOUR ANIMALS, WE NEED YOU, WE WANT YOU. HOUSING IS NOT AN ISSUE RIGHT NOW. OFFICE SPACE IS NOT AN ISSUE. HAVING MORE DRIVE THREW FAST FOOD PLACES, WENDY'S, JACK IN THE BOX, WE DON'T NEED MORE OF THAT, WE DON'T NEED A GAS STATION DOWN NEAR CIRCLE C. WE DON'T NEED ANY OF THAT SPRAWL BUT WHAT WE DO NEED IS PRESERVE THE PURITY THAT IS IN THREAT RIGHT NOW OF THE WATER SUPPLY. AS OTHER PEOPLE SAID THERE'S NOTHING MORE PRECIOUS THAN WATER. WHEN YOU GO OUT IN 90-DEGREE TEMPERATURES IN AUSTIN, YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY CAN'T DO WITHOUT. BEFORE COUNCILMAN SCHUBERT TOOK TASK WITH SOMEBODY ABOUT WHETHER HE FERTILIZED HIS LAWN, AMONG THE MANY CONCESSIONS I DID NOT HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT RESTRICTIONS ON YIEWTING FERTILIZERS. THERE WERE NO RULES SAYING THAT PEOPLE COULDN'T FERTILIZE THEIR LAWNS. I THINK IF WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, THAT THIS DEAL SHOULD INVOLVE THOSE THINGS. [ APPLAUSE ] I TOLD -- I MADE SOME OF THESE COMMENTS AT THE SAP MEETING RECENTLY AND I WAS REALLY SUCHED BY HOW MANY PEOPLE ECHOED MY SENTIMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE AND THEN THE WHOLE GROUP OF ZAP OFFICIALS VOTED THIS THING IN AND IT JUST MADE ME WONDER WHY, WHAT IS BEHIND THIS? AND KNOWING THE HISTORY OF THE COMPANY FREEPORT AND KNOWING HOW THE COUNTRY, THE WORLD HAS BEEN SHOCKED BY THE AGREED AND CORPS TION WE'RE SEEING IN ENRON AND WORLDCOM, I HAVE TO BE REALLY SUSPICIOUS OF ANYBODY WHO WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS AGREEMENT. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: JACKIE PRICE? JACKIE PRICE HERE? PAUL ROBBINS? MIKE PRICE? MICHELLE (INAUDIBLE)? LET ME READ THAT JACKIE PRICE IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. PAUL ROBBINS IS REGISTERED AGAINST. MIKE PRICE IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF, NUMBER 107. AND MICHELLE (INAUDIBLE) IS REGISTERED AGAINST. THAT'S YOU.

YES, SIR, I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER MY THREE MINUTES TO PAUL WHO IS REPRESENTING THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS BOARD.

Mayor Garcia: PAUL WHO? OKAY. YOUR CARD IS NOT UP YET SO I'LL GIVE YOU -- HOW DO YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME.

BEFLUK.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU. KIRK BECKER? AND FOLLOWING MR. BECKER IS SUSAN SCHAFFEL. IS SHE HERE? OKAY. THERE YOU ARE.

IN THE DISTANT PAST WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT LEGITIMATE AND REASONABLE BID EXPECTATIONS AS A PROPERTY RIGHTS ARGUMENT, I REALIZE THAT STRATUS ISN'T EXACTLY FREEPORT AND SHOULDN'T BE REGARDED WITH QUITE THE DISTRESS THAT MANY OF US HOLD AGAINST FREEPORT BUT AT THE SAME TIME STRATUS COULDN'T HAVE THE SAME EXPECTATIONS. ALSO OVER THE PAST DECADE SOMETHING CALLED HOUSE BILL 1704 HAS BEEN A DELIBERATE ELEMENT OF COUNCIL DELIBERATIONS.

SEVERAL YEARS AGO 1704 WAS, QUOTE, ACCIDENTALLY, UNQUOTE REPEALED AND THEN REINSTATED TWO YEARS LATER. THERE WAS NEVER ANY EXPLANATION OF HOW THE ACCIDENT HAPPENED. I LIKE TO THINK THAT THERE WAS A HIP PI ENVIRONMENTALIST AND LENLS LAIIVE TYPING POOL WHO RAN ACROSS IT AS PART OF THEIR JOB AND OOPS, MAYBE NOBODY WILL NOTICE. SOMEHOW I DOUBT THAT THAT'S WHAT REALLY HAPPENED. IT SEEMS MUCH MORE LIKELY THAT 1704 WAS CAUSING ENOUGH SIMILAR PROBLEMS THROUGHOUT THE STATE. THE DECISION WAS MADE TO REPEAL IT ALONG WITH THE QUIET PROMISE TO CALL THE REPEAL AND REINSTATE TO USE LATER IF DEVELOPERS LET IT GO. STATE CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS ENABILITY OF RETRO ACTIVE STATUTES. THE STRATUS PROPERTIES WEREN'T GRANDFATHERED. IT WOULD TAKE RETRO ACTIVE APPLICATION TO REINSTATE THE PROPERTIES. THAT IS CLEAR CONTRARY TO THE WORDING IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION. IT APPEARS THAT IT WAS A GOOD LAW IN PRINCIPLE THAT HAD BEEN BADLY ABUSED IN PRACTICE. THE GAS STATION THE YOU NEGOTIATE PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE T.I.A.S LEAKING, THE PROBLEM WITH GAS STATIONS, PEOPLE REFILLING THE T.I.A., MOST OF CREATES A FROTHY RUN OFF, AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY PROVISIONS TO CAPTURE IT. YOU PRIVATIZE OWNERSHIP WHERE YOU CAN IMPLEMENT A SURCHARGE, THE SURCHARGE WOULD LEAVE THE GAS STATION PLACE FOR MERGE REFILLING. WELL, AT THE SAME TIME DISCOURAGE DID MAJORITY OF RESIDENTS FROM TOPPING OFF THE TANK AT HIGHER PRICES, THERE BY REDUCING THE DEMAND FOR A SECOND GAS STATION. DEVELOPERS FORMED A REASONABLE BUSINESS EXPECTATION FOR THE TAX -- THE FEE ABATEMENTS CONCERNING THAT COUNCIL GRANTED SO MANY OF THEM IN THE PAST. THE CITY ALREADY CONTRIBUTES SUBSTANTIALLY THE VALUE OF THE LAND, THE PURCHASING PRIVATE LAND RATHER THAN INSTITUTING ZONING FOR INDUSTRIAL USES TO $15 MILLION IS LESS THAN THE NORMAL FLUCTUATION MARKET VALUE. THERE IS NO REASON TO GRANT THE FEE ABATEMENTS, NO REASON FOR THEM TO EXPECT US TO DO SO.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MR. BECKER.

THEY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO LIFT THEIR HEIGHT UP AND SAY IT'S JUST ONE LEVEL.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, SIR. [ APPLAUSE ]

MR. -- MR. OR MRS. L AUSTIN, IF Y'ALL COULD COME TO THE FRONT ROW? KRISTINE CROSS...... CROSBY, RUSTY MIDDLETON, LAURA WISDOM, I'LL BE CALLING YOU UP AFTER MS. SCHAFFEL SPEAKS. WELCOME.

GOOD EVENING, COUNCILMEMBERS, MAYOR. BY THE WAY, TOM SMITH HAS DONATED, HE'S NUMBER 275, THE MINUTES, I DON'T THINK I'M GOING TO USE IT ALL. I THINK IT'S TIME THAT THE COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS THAT EVERYONE WHO LIVES IN SOIRK DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION AND MANY RESIDENTS FEEL THAT THE HOA REPRESENTS US UNFAIRLY. IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THE HOA REPRESENTS THE INTERESTS OF BRADLEY DEVELOPMENT. LOOK AT WHO SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS ARE ON THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION. THEY WORK FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT. EVEN THOUGH MANY OF THE NEGOTIATIONS THAT THEY ARE WORKING TOWARDS MIGHT BE WHAT THEY WOULD LABEL OUR BEST INTERESTS, PLEASE BE CLEAR THAT MANY, AND I MEAN MANY, OF MY NEIGHBORS BELIEVE IT IS NOT IN OUR BEST INTEREST AND QUITE FRANKLY FIND IT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND DON'T TRUST THEM. [ APPLAUSE ]

PLEASE ALLOW... [ APPLAUSE ]

PLEASE ALLOW FOR THE OTHER VOICES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO COME OUT. THOSE THE BRADLEY CIRCLE C HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION WOULD LOVE TO STIFLE OUR VOICES AS THEY DO WHEN THEY PUT UP NOTICES OUR OUR COMMUNITY BULLETIN BOARDS EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO THEIR CHOICES ONLY TO FIND THEM REMOVED THE NEXT DAY. FREE SPEECH? OPEN HONEST COMMUNICATION? WHEN I MOVED TO -- WHEN I MOVED TO AUSTIN AND LOCATED TO CIRCLE C RANCH I COULDN'T WAIT TO TELL EVERYONE I KNEW IN THE WORLD WHAT A BEAUTIFUL PLACE I HAD FOUND SO CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN AUSTIN. I HAPPEN TO ENJOY BIRDING AS SOME OF YOU ALREADY KNOW AND HAVE SPOKE WITH ME ABOUT THAT TOPIC, AND THERE WERE LOTS OF BIRDS IN THE AREA. I SOON DISCOVERED THAT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ARE GENERATED EACH YEAR IN AUSTIN FROM TOURIST DOLLARS SPECIFICALLY FROM BIRDERS LOOKING FOR THE BEAUTIFUL AREAS TO INDIVIDUAL AND THE TEXAS HILL COUNTRY IS ONE OF THE BEST. THE HOMEOWNER REAL ESTATE AGENT, OBVIOUSLY LIVE IN CIRCLE C NEARBY THE TRACT, AND I WERE LOCKING OVER THE HILL COUNTRY WHAT IS NOW MY BEDROOM WINDOW AND WHEN I ASKED WHAT WAS GOING TO BE BUILD THERE. SHE REPLIED PROBABLY NOTHING. OBVIOUSLY IF SHE HAD A CHIP FACTORY OR THOUSANDS OF APARTMENTS OR OTHER COMMERCIAL WE WOULD HAVE NEVER MADE THE SALE AND JUST TO ADDRESS ONE THING THAT IS NOT IN MY LETTER, WHEN IT'S ASKED TO ME, WELL, WHY DIDN'T I KNOW THAT? BECAUSE I BOUGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FRENZY. IF I DIDN'T HAVE ANY DOWN PAYMENT ON THAT HOUSE THE NEXT GUY IN LINE WOULD HAVE BOUGHT MY HOUSE. I DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO GO. I DIDN'T CHECK IT OUT, THAT IS MY OWN RESPONSIBILITY. IF YOU GO FORWARD IN ALLOWING THIS PART OF AUSTIN TO BE BUILT LIKE THEY PROPOSE, WE WILL BE ANOTHER STATISTIC FOR AUSTIN. THE HEAD LINE MIGHT READ TAX PAYING RESIDENTS WHO CAN LIVE ANYWHERE IN THE U.S. LEAVE TO FIND A NICE PLACE TO LIVE WITHOUT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THEIR BACK YARD MAYBE WILL JUST HAVE TO MOVE OUT TO HAYS COUNTY OR FIND ANOTHER COOL PLACE THAT HAS A BALANCE OF EVERYTHING IN MIND WHEN CONSIDERING MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS TO AN AREA. NO, WE WON'T BE THE ONLY ONES TO TAKE FLIGHT. AND NO, WE MIGHT NOT BE THE MAJORITY BUT YOU MIGHT LOOK BACK AT THIS DECISION AS ONE WHERE YOU AFNGHTED A NUMBER OF THINGS -- AFFECTED A NUMBER OF THINGS. PEOPLE, ANIMALS, THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT USED TO EXIST IN THE EARLY PART OF THE 21ST CENTURY. THANK YOU. AND I HOPE THAT YOU REALLY, REALLY TAKE IN CONSIDERATION THAT I'M SURE A LOT OF US ARE THE SAME AGE, THAT WHEN WE PASS ON AND WE ARE NOTHING BUT ASHES, WHAT DO WE LEAVE FOR THE CHILDREN AND WHAT REALLY BLOWS MY MIND AS A RESIDENT IN CIRCLE C IS HOW CAN THESE PARENTS WHO LOVE THEIR CHILDREN SO DEARLY AND WANT THESE GREAT SCHOOLS AND GREAT ENVIRONMENT AND SAFE NEIGHBORHOODS NOT SEE THE FUTURE OF WHAT THEIR DECISIONS AND OUR DECISIONS ARE LEAVING OUR CHILDREN? THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

..

Mayor Garcia: LET ME SAY THAT LAURA WISDOM AND KRISTINE CROSBY HAVE DONATED THEIR TIME TO MR. BILL BUNCH SO THEY WILL NOT BE SPEAKING TONIGHT. KEVIN ODWIRE? IS HE HERE? WHAT ABOUT MR. OR MS. L AUSTIN? RUSTY MIDDLETON? RUSTY MIDDLETON? BECKY MORSE? BECKY MORRIS?

(INAUDIBLE)

Mayor Garcia: I CAN'T HEAR YOU FROM BACK THERE, BILL.

SAY FOR OR AGAINST.

Mayor Garcia: YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF THEY WERE HERE BEFORE I ANNOUNCED. MR. KEVIN ODWIRE IS AGAINST. MR. OR MS. L. AUSTIN IS AGAINST. RUSTY MIDDLETON IS AGAINST. AND BECKY MORRIS IS AGAINST. DONNA TIMON? IS SHE HERE? AGAINST. IF -- ALSO IF KOOTZ WOULD COME UP TO THE FRONT AND SUSAN NELSON, IF SHE COULD COME UP TO THE FRONT? AND RYAN GREEN? AND CARL CAPOLINO, IF THEY COULD COME UP TO THE FRONT?

MR. KOOTZ? SUSAN NELSON. RYAN GREEN? AND CARL CAPOLINO LET ME READ INTO THE RECORD THAT CORDY KOOTZ IS REGISTERED AGAINST. SUSAN NELSON IS REGISTERED AGAINST. RYAN GREEN IS REGISTERED AGAINST. MR. CAPOLINO.

MR. MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM, COUNCILMEMBERS, CITY MANAGER, I'M CARL CAPOLINO. I'VE LIVED IN CIRCLE C RANCH FOR 8 YEARS, BASICALLY THE LENGTH OF TIME I'VE BEEN IN AUSTIN. I'M A MEMBER OF THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION. I'M A MEMBER OF THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION STEERING COMMITTEE AND I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT I DON'T WORK FOR GARY BADLEY AND NOBODY HAS INTIMIDATED ME IN ANY WAY. IN FACT I HEARD SO MUCH TONIGHT THAT I'M SCRATCHING MY HEAD TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON HERE. I FEEL IT'S INCUMBENT TO SPEND A COUPLE OF MINUTES WITH YOU ABOUT THE WAY THINGS WORK IN CIRCLE C. WHEN I CAME TO CIRCLE C WE WERE INVITED TO JOIN THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION. WE WERE INVITED TO PARTICIPATE. THOSE FORUMS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN OPEN TO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO PARTICIPATE. THE COMMUNICATION IS FREE AND OPEN. THERE'S NO COERCING, THERE'S NO INTIMIDATION. IT'S BEEN A VERY GOOD WORKING ENVIRONMENT AND I'VE ENJOYING BEING NEAR IT AND SERVING MY COMMUNITY. I'VE BEEN IN THE BATTLES THAT WE'VE HAD WITH ANNEXATION. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THIS MOST RECENT TWO-YEAR WORKING PLAN TO TRY AND REACH A SETTLEMENT. I AM STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WITH STRATUS. COUNCILMAN SLUSHER WAS TALKING ABOUT USING OUR TIME EFFECTIVELY AND I'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT GOOD STEWARDSHIP BUT I'M TIRED OF COMING TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. I'M TIRED OF SPENDING MY LIFE AWAY FROM MY FAMILY. YOU KNOW, YOU REACH A POINT WHEN THINGS JUST NEED TO BE DONE. AND THE DUE DILIGENCE HAS BEEN DONE HERE. WE'VE GOT THE TEXAS FISH AND WILDLIFE THAT HAS AGREED. WE'VE GOT THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION THAT HAS AGREED. THE CITY OF AUSTIN COUNCIL HAS HEARD ALL THE ARGUMENTS PROAND AGAINST FROM THEIR OWN STAFF. I REALLY TAKE MY HAT OFF, AND I MEAN THAT SINCERELY, TO THE STAFF MEMBERS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN. I'VE NEVER COME ACROSS, AND I'VE LIVED IN A WILL THE OF COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT TEXAS, A HARDER MORE SINCERE GROUP OF PEOPLE IN THEIR EFFORTS AND I APPLAUD THEM FOR THAT. BUT I REALLY WANT TO BE CLEAR HERE. WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME. THIS HAS BEEN A WELL-THOUGHT AGREEMENT AND WE WANT TO PRESERVE OUR ENVIRONMENT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ALL PEOPLE TRY TO DO. THEY TRY TO KEEP THEIR ENVIRONMENT FROM BEING FOWLED AND WE ARE STAKEHOLDERS IN THAT COMMUNITY. WE WANT IT TO BE CLEAN. THAT IS OUR BEST INTEREST. THAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF EVERYTHING HERE. WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING STUPID. WE'RE CLEAR THINKING PEOPLE WHO HAVE A MODICUM OF INTELLIGENCE AND WE WANT TO TAKE CARE OF OUR COMMUNITY. I WOULD LIKE TO TELL YOU IT'S BEEN WELL THOUGHT, WE SUPPORT IT AND WE THANK YOU FOR THE EFFORT OF THE CITY AND THE COUNCIL AND THE VARIOUS CITY GROUPS THAT HAVE WORKED TO HELP COME TO THIS CONCLUSION. THANKS.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, SIR. PAUL? . YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES, AND IF STEPHEN SALSMAN COULD COME UP? ACTUALLY STEPHEN GAVE HIS TIME TO BILL BUNCH. MR. BUNCH, IF YOU COULD COME UP SO YOU COULD BE READY.

MY NAME IS PAUL TESLOCK AND I'M AN OFFICER AND A BOARD MEMBER OF THE NEW VILLAGES OF WESTERN OAK EKES AND MR. SLUSHER I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT YOU BROUGHT UP SO -- I THINK YOU WILL LIKE WHAT YOU HEAR. I'LL ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES FIRST. EVERY HOMEOWNER IN OUR ASSOCIATION WHEN THEY SIGN FOR THEIR HOUSE IS A MANDATORY PART OF THEIR CLOSING THEY GET CITY PROVIDED LITERATURE THAT WE HAVE THAT WE HAND OUT ABOUT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF LIVING OVER THE AQUIFER SO THEY GET THAT UPON CLOSING OF THEIR HOUSE. IN OUR NEWSLETTERS WE HAVE INCLUDED ARTICLES ABOUT XERI ESCAPING. CONTROLLING OAK WILT, WE'VE GONE AS FAR TO PUBLISH ARTICLES ABOUT THE POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS OF DOG POOP AND THEY NEED TO CLEAN THAT UP. WE WILL BE MAINTAINING A WET POND AREA THAT RESIDES IN OUR FUTURE. THAT IS DESIGNED TO FILTER OUT POLLUTANTS OUT OF THE WATER AS IT RUNS OFF INTO THIS POND AND GOES BEFORE IT GETS INTO THE AQUIFER. WE ARE ALSO PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE CARST PRESERVE. OUR BOARD SPEND AS LOT OF TIME DEALING WITH THE PARTICULAR ISSUES ON THOSE ITEMS. YES, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IT IS MANDATORY THAT YOU HAVE CERTAIN TYPES OF GRASS IN YOUR FRONT YARD. WHO -- WHEN -- PUT THOSE REGULATIONS IN PLACE? THE DEVELOPER. WE WOULD LOVE TO CHANGE THOSE, WE CAN'T, BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER PUT THEM IN. HE ALSO PUT A VERY NICE HEFTY QUORUM IN THERE THAT WE CAN'T CHANGE THOSE REGULATIONS AT THIS POINT. WHEN WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PLANTING FOR NEIGHBORHOODS TO SCREEN CERTAIN STRUCTURES AND STUFF WE RECOMMEND DROUGHT TOLERANT PLANTS SO WE ARE COMMITTED AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THINGS THAT WE CAN IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD GIVEN WHAT A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION CAN DO TO CONTINUE TO HELP THE ENVIRONMENT. IF OUR NAB....NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT WITH EXCESSIVE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT HAS CONTRIBUTED TO THE POLLUTION OF THE SPRINGS OR THE CITY, WELL, SHAME ON WHOEVER APPROVED THAT DENSITY AND SHAME ON THE DEVELOPER FOR REQUESTING IT, BUT I DID NOT DO THAT. [ APPLAUSE ] AND LET'S JUST BE CAREFUL HERE AND NOT MAKE THE SAME -- IF THAT WAS A MISTAKE, LET'S NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN. NOW, AFTER ADDRESSING THOSE PARTICULAR CONCERNS WHICH ARE DIRECTED TO MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I WILL GO ON TO MY NORMAL SPEECH THAT I HAD PREPARED. WE ARE PRESENTED APPROXIMATELY 1600 HOMEOWNERS AND 500 MULTIFAMILY UNITS OF WHICH A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER ARE ADD I DIDN'T SENT TO PARCELS 103 AND 106 57D WE BELIEVE ALL OF OUR HOMEOWNERS WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS DEAL. AFTER MANY MEETINGS, WITH CITY OFFICIAL, STRATUS, OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND INTERESTED ORGANIZATIONS IN THE ZONING COMMISSION, WE MET SEVERAL TIMES WITH OUR HOMEOWNERS. OUR MEETINGS WERE OPEN AND ANYONE COULD ATTEND. IN THE FIRST MEETING WE ASKED THE CITY AND THE S.O.S. ALLIANCE TO PRESENT WHAT WE CONSIDERED THE PROS AND CONS OF THE DEAL. WE WANTED OUR HOMEOWNERS TO UNDERSTAND ALL THE ISSUE ON BOTH SIDES. THE CITY WAS A ONE OF THOSE MEETINGS PRESENTING THAT SIDE. IN THE SECOND MEETING WE PRESENTED TWO OPTIONS TO OUR HOMEOWNERS BASED ON THE FACTS AS WE UNDERSTOOD THEM AS OF TUESDAY. ACCEPT THE DEAL AS IS OR OPPOSE THE DEAL. THERE WAS NOT A SINGLE HOMEOWNER ON THE DEAL IN ITS CURRENT FORM. ALTHOUGH THERE ARE MANY REASONS THAT WE OPPOSE THIS FORM. I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THREE SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT TECHNICALLY BEEN ADDRESSED HERE YET. WE WERE NOT INVITED TO THE INITIAL STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS THAT HAVE GONE ON FOR TWO YEAR, THOSE THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THE EARLY NEGOTIATIONS WERE SUCCESSFUL IN MOVING DENSITY AND IMPERVIOUS COVER AWAY FROM THEIR AREAS AND PLATING IT ON THE DOOR STEP OF THOSE THAT WERE NOT INVITED TO THE NEGOTIATIONS. THE CHANGES WILL BEAR THAT OUT. [ APPLAUSE ] IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN 17% OVERALL IMPERVIOUS COVER, 6 OF THE 15 PARCELS HAVE IMPERVIOUS COVER IN EXCESS OF THE 17%. NOT SURPRISINGLY TWO OF THOSE PARCELS ADJOIN OUR PROPERTY. WE WERE INVITED INTO THE PROCESS TWO MONTHS AGO. WE ARE DISAPPOINTED THAT THE CITY AND OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS WOULD SELL OUT ONE GROUP OF HOMEOWNERS OR SEVERAL GROUPS OF HOMEOWNERS IN ORDER TO NEGOTIATE IMPERVIOUS COVER AWAY FROM OTHER PEOPLE AND GET THEM TO AGREE TO THIS AGREEMENT. THE HOUSING SHIFTED TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WILL INCREASE THE STUDENT BURDEN ON AN ALREADY CROWDED ELEMENTARY. E PROBLEM OF SCHOOL OVERCROWDING AND TRAFFIC HAS SEEMED TO BE ADDRESSED IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGH TRAFFIC, CONCESSION, BUILDING NEW SKILLS BUT NOT AT MILLS. AGAIN, WE WERE INVITED TO THIS PROCESS TWO MONTHS AGO. WE WILL NOT PUT OUR CHILDRENS' LIVES AND EDUCATION AT RISK FOR THIS DEAL. ONE QUOTED IN THE AUSTIN AMERICAN STATESMAN WAS LAND CIRCLE C HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION THE WILD FLOWER CENTER AND CIC, THE ONLY DONATION TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS A GAS STATION AND STRIP CENTERS, BUT WE ARE WILLING TO TALK. WE HAVE SUGGESTED SEVERAL WAYS TO CONNECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO SOME OF THESE PARKS OR PERKS AND SO FAR THESE HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED THROUGH BIKE LANES, ET CETERA. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THOSE INVITED EARLY TO THE NEGOTIATION TABLE HAVE GOTTEN MUCH AND WE ARE LEFT TO FIGHT OVER THE SCRAPS. WE WOULD LOVE NOTHING MORE TO STAND UP HERE AND SAY WE SUPPORT THIS DEAL BUT T IN ITS CURRENT FORM WE CANNOT DO THAT.

[BUZZER SOUNDING]

THANK YOU.

[ APPLAUSE ]

[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS...]

STRAZ.

Slusher: SO THAT'S A PLACE WE'VE GOT TO GET. IF PEOPLE DON'T MOVE OVER THE AQUIFER, IF THEY SAY I'M GOING TO MOVE INTO THE CENTRAL CITY THAT'S WHY I VOTED FOR CONTROVERSIAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS AND APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT REALLY PEOPLE THAT COME HERE AND TELL US DON'T BUILD OVER THE AQUIFER, ALSO TELL US DON'T BUILD OVER BY U.T. AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I THINK -- I JUST APPEAL TO FOLKS TO REALLY TRY TO LOOK -- THIS IS NOT DIRECTED AT YOU PERSONALLY, BUT WE'VE REALLY GOT TO TRY TO LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE HERE IF WE'RE GOING TO SAVE BARTON SPRINGS. I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER. LET ME SAY THAT GARRETT NICK IS REGISTERED, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK AND IS REGISTERED AGAINST. MR. JOSEPH HANCOCK DID NOT INDICATE WHETHER HE WAS FOR OR AGAINST -- I MEAN WHETHER HE HE WANTED TO SPEAK. IS HE HERE? JOSEPH HANCOCK? HE'S REGISTERED AGAINST. CAT LINE HORNADAY DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK. IS COLLEEN LEE HERE? TOM BOSEMAN. MR. BUNCH. WELCOME.

THANK YOU, I'M BILL BUDGE WITH SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE MUCH JUST A COUPLE OF HOUSEKEEPING COMPLAINTS I GUESS YOU MIGHT SAY.

Mayor Garcia: BILL, HOLD IT JUST A SECOND. HE HAS 15 MINUTES. DID YOU MOVE THE TIME CLOCK? RIGHT THERE. OKAY. BACK TO YOU.

IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT SO MANY PEOPLE ARE LEAVING BEFORE THEY ARE ABLE TO SPEAK AND I THINK THAT'S A MATTER OF US STARTING SO LATE AND HAVING SUCH A LONG INTRODUCTION FROM STAFF. AND SO -- [APPLAUSE] I WOULD ASK THAT WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS IN THE FUTURE MEETINGS THAT START EARLIER, WHEN PEOPLE CAN BE HERE, BUT ALSO AFTER THE WORK HOUR.

[INAUDIBLE].

IN A BIGGER ROOM. ACTUALLY, THERE'S A GREAT PLACE TO MEET THAT HAS PLENTY OF ROOM, AND THE CITY OWNS IT, AND YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY ANY RENT. IT'S CALLED BARTON SPRINGS. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] SO I WOULD -- BEFORE WE HAVE ANOTHER MEETING ON A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ONE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT BARTON SPRINGS ON A PROTECTION AGREEMENT. [APPLAUSE] PLEASE ACCEPT THAT AS A FORMAL REQUEST ON BEHALF OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. FOR THOSE WHO MAY BE WATCHING OR LISTENING AT HOME, WE'RE AT 3700 LAKE AUSTIN BOULEVARD, ACRASS FROM THE HULA HUT OR MOZART'S CAFE. YOU CAN GET IN YOUR CAR AND DRIVE DOWN HERE AND SIGN UP AND SPEAK TO THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY AND BARTON SPRINGS. AND IF YOU DON'T TEND TO CARE ABOUT BARTON SPRINGS, BUT YOU DON'T LIKE THE TRAFFIC ON MOPAC, YOU MIGHT WANT TO COME DOWN HERE AS WELL SINCE THIS DEAL WOULD DUMP A FEW TENS OF THOUSANDS OF CARS ON MOPAC EVERY DAY. WHAT DO WE WANT? WHAT ARE WE ASKING THE CITY TO DO INSTEAD OF THIS DEAL AND INSTEAD OF THESE ZONING CHANGES? AND I WANT TO SAY WE'RE ASKING THE COUNCIL TO DO WHAT YOU JUST ASKED US TO DO, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE. SINCE THIS DEAL WAS FIRST FLOATED IN LATE 2000, 28 NEIGHBORHOOD AND ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS HAVE PASSED RESOLUTIONS REQUESTING THE FOLLOWING: A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO PROTECT THE AQUIFER, TO MANAGE TRAFFIC, AND TO PROTECT NEIGHBORHOODS BEFORE ANY UPZONINGS ARE APPROVED THAT INCREASE TRAFFIC. YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU 15 ZONING CASES THAT UPZONE AND THAT INCREASE TRAFFIC BY TENS OF THOUSANDS OF CAR TRIPS PER DAY. SO THE GROUPS THAT ARE ASKING YOU TO LOOK AT THIS BIG PICTURE BEFORE YOU ENGAGE ANY ZONING -- UPZONINGS ARE THE AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL, THE AUSTIN SIERRA CLUB, ALLENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BRYKERWOODS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, CHERRY CREEK ON BRODIE, THE CIRCLE C NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, DEER PARK AT MAPLE RUN, THE ESTATES OF BARTON SPRINGS, THE FOOTHILLS AT BARTON CREEK, FOX RUN RIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, HIGHLAND PARK BALCONES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, LOST CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, NEW VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS, OAK MONT HEIGHTS, OLD WEST AUSTIN, RIDGELEY, ROSEDALE, SAVE BARTON SPRINGS ASSOCIATION, SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE, TANGLE WOOD FOREST, TEXAS OAKS, SOUTH BY SOUTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WEST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WESTMINSTER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE WOODS AT BARTON CREEK AND THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD OZARKS. YOU...ASSOCIATION. I LEFT OUGHT BART VIEW W NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. IF YOU WOULD ADD THAT TO THE LIST. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. WE NEED A BIG PICTURE. WE NEED A PLAN TO SAVE THE SPRINGS BEFORE WE DO THESE DEALS. SPECIFICALLY, YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU A WHOLE BUNCH OF ZONING CASES THAT HAVE BEEN INITIATED BY THE CITY. YOU CAN WITHDRAW THOSE, AND WE'RE ASKING THAT THOSE BE WITHDRAWN IN FAVOR OF THE PLAN. THIS PLANNING EXERCISE WAS SPECIFICALLY CONTEMPLATED WHEN WE DID THE BRADLEY DEAL, AND IT WAS AN ENTICEMENT SO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO SUPPORT THE BRADLEY DEAL. THAT IF THE BRADLEY DEAL WENT THROUGH, BRADLEY WOULD HELP US WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION DO A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, GET THE NEIGHBORHOODS MOTIVATED TO OPPOSE THIS HIGH-DENSITY DEVELOPMENT THAT WE ALL NEW STRATUS WAS GOING TO BE COMING DOWN TO. THAT'S ACTUALLY SUGGESTED IN THE AGREEMENT THAT YOU ALL SIGNED WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THAT NEVER HAPPENED. WHY IS THAT? BECAUSE MR. BRADLEY, WHO DOES STILL CONTROL THESE OFFICERS, THEY STILL OPERATE OUT OF HIS OFFICES, AND I HAVE A LETTER HERE, IT'S IN YOUR PACKET, SHOWING THEIR ADDRESS OF THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AT 1111 BEST 11.. 11th STREET. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. MR. BRADLEY'S INTERESTS ARE STILL ALIGNED WITH STRATUS' INTERESTS AND IS WE DIDN'T GET THAT. BUT IT'S YOUR JOB TO PROVIDE IT TO THE COMMUNITY. THERE'S BEEN A LOT SAID ABOUT THIS PROCESS AND ATTRIBUTING ME TO HAVING STARTED IT. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF TRUTH IN THAT. WE DID ASK STRATUS TO HAVE A BROAD MEETING, BRINGING EVERYONE TOGETHER SO THERE WOULDN'T BE DIVIDE AND CONQUER. AND WE HAD ONE MEETING AT -- DOWN AT THE WILD FLOWER CENTER WHERE THAT SORT OF HAPPENED. I ASKED THE CITY AND STRATUS TO PAY THE MAIL NOTICE TO EVERYONE DOWN THERE. THEY WOULDN'T DO THAT. SO THE FOLKS NEVER FOUND OUT, THE FOLKS IN CIRCLE C, THE FOLKS IN VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS AND THE OTHER SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS DIDN'T FIND OUT ABOUT IT. THEY DIDN'T KNOW BIT. AND IT UNFORTUNATELY WENT DOWNHILL FROM THERE. WE HAD ABOUT 80 PEOPLE SHOW UP, BUT THEN STRATUS WANTED TO KEEP SHRINKING THE GROUP SMALLER AND SMALLER SO THEY COULD MANAGE THEM APPROPRIATELY. WHEN YOU ARE FEELING THREATENED BY SOMEBODY LIKE THIS, YOU DON'T EXCLUDE YOUR FRIENDS. YOU SEEK OUT YOUR ALLIES AND YOUR FRIENDS SO YOU FEEL STRONGER. UNFORTUNATELY THE CITY MANAGER TOOK THIS INTO THE BACK ROOM AND LOCKED EVERYBODY OUT, INCLUDING THE STAKEHOLDERS. IT WAS AT THAT JUNCTURE THAT I DID BAIL OUT. AT THE SAME TIME, IT BECAME OBVIOUS THAT IN FACT A LOT OF PEOPLE WEREN'T INFORMED. WE THOUGHT THAT THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS FOLKS WERE BEING REPRESENTED. THEY WEREN'T. THERE WAS SOME MODICOM OF PRESENTATION THAT THE CIRCLE C OAM HOMEOWNERS WERE BEING REPRESENTED. THEY WEREN'T. WE HAVE RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF YOU AN E-MAIL FROM MR. KEN RIGSBY, WHO CLAIMS TO LOVE BARTON SPRINGS SO MUCH, BUT HE'S BEEN UP THERE LOBBYING FOR BRADLEY FOR AUSTIN BASHING TAKING AWAY OUR POWERS TO PROTECT BARTON SPRINGS FOR ABOUT SIX OR SEVEN SESSIONS. HE WROTE TO CAMPO SAYING WE ARE SPECIFICALLY NOT TELLING THE HOMEOWNERS OF CIRCLE C THAT WE'RE NEGOTIATING THIS DEAL. IT'S IN BLACK AND WHITE HERE. SO THAT'S THE KIND OF REPRESENTATION THAT'S BEEN HAPPENING DOWN THERE. I TRIED TO GO TO THEIR MEETINGS TO PROVIDE THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY. THE NEW VILLAGE OF WESTERN OAKS FOLKS WELCOMED ME IN. I WAS LOCKED OUT OF THE CIRCLE C NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING. BUT I STOOD BY THE DOOR AND LISTENED, AND I HEARD THE CITY ATTORNEYS STAND UP, MR. DOBSON AND SAY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T DO THIS DEAL, IT'S GOING TO BE SO MUCH WORSE, AND THAT'S BEEN THE REFRAIN FOR THE LAST THREE MONTHS. IF YOU DON'T DO THIS DEAL, YOU ARE JUST GOING TO GET SCREWED TEN TIMES WORSE. NOW, HOW MUCH FREE WILL ARE PEOPLE EXERCISING WHEN THAT'S THE MESSAGE FROM CITY HALL? I THINK WHEN YOU HEAR ANYBODY SAYING THEY SUPPORT THIS DEAL, THAT IS THE TERMS ON WHICH THEIR SUPPORT IS GIVEN. IF YOU LOOK AT THE TAPES FROM THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION AND YOU LISTEN TO WHAT COMMISSIONER SPELL MAN AND A FEW OTHERS SAID, IT'S VERY CLEAR. THEY WERE TOLD YOU GOT TO PROVE THESE ZONING CHANGES. THIS DEAL IS HAPPENING, YOU GOT TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. THERE'S BEEN ENORMOUS HOURS SPENT AND TIME SPENT BY CITY STAFF WITH THE DEVELOPER, WHO IS THE BULLY HERE. RATHER THAN SPENDING THAT TIME REACHING OUT FINDING ALLIES WHO CAN MAKE YOU STRONGER, NOT JUST HERE BUT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE AQUIFER. IN SAN ANTONIO RIGHT NOW, 100,000 CITIZENS HAVE SIGNED A PETITION FORCING A REFERENDUM VOTE AGAINST A HUGE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED BY OUR BEST FRIEND LUMBERMEN'S INVESTMENT. AND P.G.A. GOLF. AND WHY ARE THEY FORCING A REFERENDUM ON THAT DEVELOPMENT? BECAUSE IT'S OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER AND BECAUSE IT HAS A GIANT TAX GIVE-AWAY. A GIANT FINANCIAL SUBSIDY. DOES THAT SOUND FAMILIAR? [APPLAUSE] WE HAVE ALLIES ALL OVER THIS STATE. PEOPLE WHO ARE TIRED OF EXCESSIVE GROWTH AND.... AND BULLYING CORPORATIONS TACK OUR.......................YOU ARE NOT REACHING OUT AND FINDING THOSE PEOPLE AND DEFENDING OUR HOME RULE AND HOME RULE POWERS AND OUR WATERS. AND THAT'S ALSO WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO, PUT THIS DEAL ASIDE AND SOLVE THE PROBLEM. QUIT MAKING AUSTIN BASHING THE EXCUSE FOR KILLING BARTON SPRINGS. ON THE WATER QUALITY ISSUES, I CONTINUE TO BE DISGUSTED BY YOUR STAFF CALLING THIS S.O.S. COMPLIANT. IT IS NOT. IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE. IT'S NOT S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER LEVELS. BECAUSE THE ORDINANCE, AS YOU CAN READ RIGHT HERE, SAYS IT HAS TO BE ON A SITE BY SITE BASIS. FOLKS WANT TO ARGUE CLUSTERING IS BETTER. WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT? CLUSTERING IS FORCED BY THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. IT'S CLUSTERING AT LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER LEVELS. AT 15% ON EVERY SINGLE SITE. THAT IS THE KIND OF CLUSTERING THAT PROTECTS WATER QUALITY. WHEN YOU START JACKING UP IMPERVIOUS COVER TO 30 AND 40% ON A GIVEN SITE, YOU ARE SHIFTING YOUR RELIANCE TO ENGINEERED CONTROLS, TO LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR, FROM COMPANIES WHO DON'T CARE, BECAUSE IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW MUCH MONEY THEY ARE MAKING. [APPLAUSE] WE SPECIFICALLY LIMITED IMPERVIOUS COVER TO FAIRLY LOW LEVELS ON EVERY SINGLE SITE FOR A FEW REASONS. ONE WAS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO RELY ON THE PASSIVE PROTECTION THAT NATURAL SOIL AND VEGETATION PROVIDES. AND MINIMIZE RELIANCE ON ENGINEERED CONTROLS. YOU ARE THROWING THAT AWAY. SECONDLY, WE DIDN'T WANT -- WE KNEW THERE WAS A WHOLE BUNCH OF LAND THAT WAS NOT PARTICULARLY DEVELOPABLE, IT WAS HARD TO GET TO, THERE WEREN'T ROADS ACCESSING IT, IT WAS STEEP, THERE WAS SOME SINKHOLES OR SOMETHING THAT MADE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP. SO IF YOU HAVE ON A SITE BY SITE BASIS, SOME SITES HAVE CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM. WE WANT THAT. YOU ARE TAKING THAT AWAY AND YOU ARE USING THIS THEORETICAL MAXIMUM OF S.O.S. THAT YOU CAN'T GET TO ON A LOT OF SITES. AND BY SHIFTING IT OVER TO OTHER SITES, HIGHLY PROFITABLE SITES, YOU ARE GETTING THE MAXIMUM THAT WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN UNDER S.O.S. YOU ARE ALSO INCREASING PRESSURE TO NOT SET BACK FROM RECHARGE FEATURES. THIS IS HAPPENING ON 107. ONCE THEY WERE LOCKED IN AND SAID, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO GET 40%, WELL, THEN THERE'S THIS HUGE PRESSURE TO NOT PROTECT SINKHOLES AS MUCH AS YOU SHOULD. WELL, WE GET 40% NOW, DON'T TAKE THAT AWAY FROM US, YOU KNOW. WHEN YOU LIMIT IT ON A SITE BY SITE BASIS, YOU HAVE A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY TO CHOOSE AND -- THE BEST SITE AND PROTECT YOUR ENVIRONMENT. THERE'S ANOTHER WAY THIS DEAL DOESN'T COME CLOSE TO S.O.S. AND NOBODY IS MENTIONING IT. S.O.S. SAID YOU DO THIS ON EVERY SINGLE SITE. WE WERE TIRED OF DOING DEALS. WE WANTED A LAW THAT EVERYONE COMPLIED WITH. THE BIG GUYS, THE LITTLE GUYS, AND THE IN BETWEENERS. AND WE WERE TIRED OF WASTING A LOT OF PEOPLE'S LIVES, A LOT OF CITY OF AUSTIN STAFF TIME AND MONEY DOING EVERY SINGLE PROJECT AS ANOTHER DEAL. AND WHERE ARE WE NOW? WE'RE WASTING ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF HUMAN LIVES DOING DEALS AND CHANGING EVERY SINGLE TRACT AS SOMETHING NEW. THAT IS WRONG AND IT'S TERRIBLE, AND IT IS A VIOLATION OF THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: THE CITY MANAGER WANTS TO RESPOND.

I WAS A WEE BIT ASTRON ISSUED -- I ASSUME WHEN YOU ARE SAYING CITY MANAGER IT WAS ME, THAT I TOOK THE DEAL INTO A BACK ROOM SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK A HANDFUL OF QUESTIONS. WERE YOU IN AN EXISTING STAKEHOLDER GROUP WHEN I JOINED THIS [INAUDIBLE]?

YES.

DID YOU WEEK WITH US WEEKLY MULTIPLE WEEKS IN A ROW?

NO, I MET TWICE, AND WHEN THE DEAL THAT YOU PUT ON THE TABLE WAS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO WHAT THE STAKEHOLDER GROUP HAD ALIGNED, WHICH WAS NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE COMMERCIAL ONLY AND LESS RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, AND IT WAS -- SO WHEN I SAW THE DEAL YOU LAID OUT AND WHEN -- WHICH WAS ABOUT THE SAME TIME IT BECAME CLEAR THAT A NUMBER OF AFFECTED NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS THAT WEREN'T BEING REPRESENTED, I WALKED.

THAT'S SO DISINGENUOUS BILL. YOU WERE AT THAT MEETING REPEATEDLY. YOU WERE THE ONLY PERSON WHO LEFT THE TABLE. WE WORKED OFF OF A SET OF PARAMETERS THAT YOU HELPED DESIGN. WE WORKED EACH WEEK ANSWERING EVERY QUESTION AND PIECE OF RESEARCH YOU ASKED US TO LOOK AT WEEK AFTER WEEK. AND IN FACT, AFTER YOU LEFT THE TABLE, A LONG TIME AFTER YOU LEFT THE TABLE, YOU ASKED ME PERSONALLY WOULD I TAKE A SECOND LOOK, A SECOND LEGAL LOOK, YOU SUGGESTED A SPECIFIC ATTORNEY. I DID THAT. AND WHEN THE OUTCOME WAS NOT WHAT YOU SAID -- WAS NOT WHAT YOU HAD BEEN TELLING OTHERS IT IS, YOU SUED THE CITY WITHIN THREE DAYS OF THAT OUTCOME. NOW, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, BILL, TAKING A DEAL INTO A BACK ROOM WHEN YOU WERE IN THE ROOM I WENT INTO IS KIND OF AN INTERESTING STATEMENT.

WELL, CITY MANAGER FUTRELL, LET ME BACK UP BECAUSE I DIDN'T EXPECT THIS TO BE TAKEN AS A PERSONAL ATTACK.

AND I DON'T REMEMBER ASKING ANYTHING BUT THOSE FOUR QUESTIONS, WERE YOU IN THE ROOM, DID YOU COME BACK REPEATEDLY, DID WE ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR YOU, AND DID YOU ASK US TO GET AN OUTSIDE LEGAL OPINION. AND I THINK YOU'VE ANSWERED THOSE. AND I APPRECIATE IT.

WELL, I DID ASK YOU TO DO THAT, AND YOU DID IT, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. AND I THINK IT'S ALSO ACCURATE TO SAY THAT A LOT OF FOLKS, MYSELF INCLUDED, ARE EXTREMELY PLEASED THAT YOU ARE OUR CITY MANAGER AND THAT YOU ARE VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE PREVIOUS CITY MANAGER THAT WE HAD. AND THERE'S SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS IN COMMUNICATION, BUT ON THIS PARTICULAR DEAL, NOBODY ASKED YOU TO TAKE THE DEVELOPER'S LAWYERS, THIS WHOLE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS NEGOTIATED, AND YOU KNOW THIS, BETWEEN YOUR LAWYERS AND THE DEVELOPER'S LAWYERS. AND NONE OF THE STAKEHOLDER PEOPLE, AS LIMITED IN THEIR REPRESENTATION OF THE AFFECTED PARTIES AS THEY WERE, WERE EVER ALLOWED INTO THOSE NEGOTIATING SESSIONS, AND YOU KNOW THAT.

WAIT A SECOND. [APPLAUSE] BEFORE YOU APPLAUD AT MISINFORMATION, EVERY WEEK THE DOCUMENTS CAME BACK INTO THAT ROOM. EVERY DOCUMENT WE HAD AND EVERY PIECE OF INPUT WAS DISCUSSED AND EVEN INCORPORATED OR NOT INCORPORATED BASED ON WHAT WE COULD GET CONCESSIONS ON. NOBODY WAS SURPRISED BY A DOCUMENT. WE EVEN WENT TO INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS WITH DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN THE STAKEHOLDER GROUP AND WENT LINE ITEM BY LINE ITEM THROUGH THOSE AGREEMENTS. YOU HAD LEFT THE TABLE AT THAT POINT, BILL, BUT ABOUT -- WELL, EVERYBODY BUT YOU WAS STILL AT THE TABLE WORKING THROUGH IT ALL THE WAY TOWARDS THE END. THE COMMENT OF A BACK ROOM DEAL AND -- [INAUDIBLE] [APPLAUSE]

MAYOR, I DID HAVE A COUPLE --

Mayor Garcia: BILL, JUST A SECOND. LET ME RECOGNIZE A COUNCILMEMBER.

Wynn: MR. BUNCH'S TIME IS UP AND THERE ARE FOLKS HERE WAITING TO SPEAK AND I WANT TO HEAR THEM.

Mayor Garcia: LET ME CALL MR. JIM-REALLY AND MAYOR PRO TEM, DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT?

I HAD WANTED TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS OF MR. BUNCH, AND I WILL BE CAREFUL AND BRIEF BECAUSE THEY ARE LEGAL. AND I'LL TRY NOT TO ASK ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO TAKE TOO LONG TO ANSWER. BUT I DO HAVE TO SAY AND AN INTRODUCTION TO THESE QUESTIONS BECAUSE IT IS LEGAL, THIS IS NOT AN EASY PROCESS, AND I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO THINK THAT THIS IS. THE DIFFERENT FORUMS THAT ARE BEING MELDED IN ESSENCE IN LOOKING AT TONIGHT'S PROPOSAL ARE FROM DIFFERENT LAWSUITS OVER THE YEARS, AND THAT OF COURSE HAS A DIFFERENT SORT OF PROCEDURE FOR COMING TO SOME AGREEMENT IF YOU CAN. AND OVER LEGISLATION, THERE'S LAWSUITS OVER LEGISLATION, AND THEN ADDITIONAL LEGISLATION IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ITSELF. SO THAT MAY BE WHY A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE KIND OF CONFUSED BY THE DIFFERENT FORUMS AND THE PROCESSES. AND THE REASON FOR INTRODUCING THAT OF COURSE IS BECAUSE WE LOOK AT THIS, THEN WE ALSO HAVE A LAWSUIT. SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK IS SOME OF THE CLARIFYING ISSUES THAT I THINK WON'T COMPROMISE ANYBODY'S POSITION ONCE THEY GET IN THE COURTROOM. AND I'VE ALREADY ASKED BILL IF HE CAN ANSWER THESE, YOU KNOW, IF THAT'S OKAY. SO THE ONE THING, KNOWING THAT WE HAVE TO BE BRIEF BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE, CAN YOU CLARIFY WHY S.O.S. IS EXEMPT OR MAYBE EVEN SORT OF AN ADJUNCT TO 1704, WHICH IS NOW CHAPTER 245?

YES. UZ FIRST...... FIRST OF ALL, THE GRANDFATHERING STATUTE SAYS YOU START FROM THE RULES AT THE BEGINNING. AND PART OF THE RULES FROM THE BEGINNING WERE THE CIRCLE C M.U.D. AGREEMENTS. AND THAT'S THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WE HAVE NOW, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO UPHOLD IT. AND IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO, THEN WE HAVE VERY LITTLE SAY THAT WILL UPHOLD THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. BUT KEY PROVISIONS OF THAT ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE M.U.D. AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY, PROVISIONS NEGOTIATED VERY HARD BY ROGER DUNCAN AND SOME OTHER FOLKS THAT I THINK YOU ALL RESPECT, ALTHOUGH THERE'S RECIGARETTES.............REGRETSTHAT THIS EVER HAPPENED, BUT BEING IT DID, WE OUGHT TO AT LEAST HOLD ON TO THE GOOD PARTS. AND PART OF THE GOOD PARTS ARE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS FILED AND RUNNING WITH THE LAND ATTACHING AND SURVIVING THE ANNEXATION, WHEREAS OTHER PARTS OF THE DEAL WENT AWAY WHEN THE NAIR WAS ANNEXED. -- WENT AWAY WHEN THE AREA WAS ANNEXED. THEY CONTINUE AFTERWARD AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANT NUMBER 2 STATES EXPLICITLY ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE DISTRICT INCLUDING THE ROUTING OF INFRASTRUCTURE SHALL COMPLY WITH THE APPLICABLE SPECIAL WATERSHED ORDINANCES AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME. THE AGREEMENT WE NEGOTIATED WITH THE DEVELOPERS AT THE BEGINNING SAID WE GET TO UPGRADE OUR WATER QUALITY STANDARDS BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT WAS A VULNERABLE SENSITIVE AREA THAT FED TO BARTON SPRINGS, AND WE KNEW THAT WE WOULD LEARN MORE ABOUT WATER QUALITY AND WE WOULD NEED TO UP... UPGRADE OUR STANDARDS. SO WE BARGAINED FOR THAT RIGHT AND WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE IT ENFORCED. AND TO ARGUE THAT SOME LAW DOESN'T LET US DO THAT, THAT LAW IS -- IF IT SAYS THAT, IS AN IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACTS AND IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL RETROACTIVE LAW. THE SECOND PROVISION IN THAT ORIGINAL AGREEMENT PROVIDES EXPLICITLY, AND THIS IS ALSO ONE OF THE ON COURT, ON FILE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE LAND, IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED THE DENSITIES REFLECTED ON THE LAND PLAN ARE NOT GUARANTEED LEVELS OF DEVELOPMENT, BUT REPRESENT THE MAXIMUM LEVELS OF DEVELOPMENT WHICH CAN BE ACHIEVED SUBJECT TO THE REDUCTION THEREOF NECESSITATED BY COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF APPLICABLE ORDINANCES. SO THE -- THOSE DENSITY LIMITS ARE MAXIMUM. THEY ARE NOT GUARANTEES, AND THEY NEVER WERE FROM THE BEGINNING. TURNING TO THE LAW ITSELF, THE CHAPTER 245, IF YOU IGNORE AND SOMEHOW ARGUE THAT THAT ORIGINAL DEAL IS NOT THE ORIGINAL RULE THAT APPLIES, THE LAW ITSELF SAYS THIS CHAPTER DOES NOT APPLY TO, AND IT LISTS A LIST OF EXEMPTIONS, BUT EXEMPTION NUMBER 9, REGULATIONS TO PREVENT IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTIES OR INJURIES TO PERSONS. IMMEDIATELY BELOW HERE I HAVE THE FIRST PART OF THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. AND I THINK IF YOU LOOK JUST AT THE ORDINANCE, AND IF YOU RECALL SOME OF THE FACTS THAT YOU HEARD FROM MARK KIRKPATRICK ABOUT THE LEVELS OF POLLUTION THAT WE'RE ENJOYING NOW, YOU WILL UNDERSTAND AND YOU AGREE, AND THIS DOESN'T TAKE A LAWYER. THE COMMUNITY CAN UNDERSTAND THIS LEGAL QUESTION AND ANSWER IT. EACH ONE OF US CAN ANSWER IT FOR OURSELVES. THE QUESTION IS IS S.O.S. ORDINANCE A REGULATION TO PREVENT IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY OR INJURY TO PERSONS. WELL, THERE'S NO DISPUTE THAT GROUND WATER, SURFACE WATER AND WILDLIFE AND SOIL AND VEGETATION ARE FORMS OF PROPERTY. IT'S NOT THE FIRST KIND OF PROPERTY YOU THINK OF, BUT THOSE ARE KINDS OF PROPERTY. THE ORDINANCE SAYS VERY EXPLICITLY THAT IT WAS WRITTEN TO PROTECT BARTON SPRINGS, BARTON CREEK AND THE BARTON SPRINGS EDWARDS AQUIFER. IT WAS CALLED THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE, S.O.S., BECAUSE WE KNEW THE THREAT WAS IMMATERIAL INNOCENT. THAT IT WAS BASICALLY -- IMMINENT. IT WAS BASICALLY AN EMERGENCY TEN YEARS AGO, AND NOW THE SCIENCE TELLS US WE WERE RIGHT. WE HAVE POLLUTANT LEVELS THAT ARE TOXIC TO AQUATIC LIFE AND VIOLATING DRINKING WATER STANDARDS. THAT'S THE OTHER PART. INJURY TO PERSONS. IS THIS ORDINANCE PREVENTING IMMINENT INJURY TO PERSONS? WE SAID WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE A SAFE DRINKING WATER SUPPLY. THAT'S THE DECLARATION OF INTENT IN THE ORDINANCE. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN DECLARE THEIR INTENT TO PRESERVE A CLEAN AND SAFE DRINKING WATER SUPPLY. TO PREVENT FURTHER DEGRADATION OF THE WATER IN BARTON CREEK, BARTON SPRINGS AND THE BARTON SPRINGS EDWARDS AQUIFER. ET CETERA, ET CETERA. TO PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE. AND FINALLY, THE CITY OF AUSTIN RECOGNIZES THAT THE BARTON SPRINGS EDWARDS AQUIFER IS MORE VULNERABLE TO POLLUTION FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT THAN ANY OTHER MAJOR GROUND WATER SUPPLY IN TEXAS. AND THAT THE MEASURES SET OUT IN THIS ORDINANCE ARE NECESSARY TO PROTECT THIS IRREPLACEABLE NATURAL RESOURCE. NOW, DR. KIRKPATRICK SAID EARLIER WHEN THIS AQUIFER IS POLLUTED, WE AREN'T CLEANING IT UP. NOW, IS THERE SOMEBODY HERE WHO HAS BEEN DOWN TO SEE THE SPRINGS? WHO HAS LOOKED AT THE SCIENCE? WHO HAS THOUGHT ABOUT THIS? WHO IS GOING TO TELL ME THAT THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE IS NOT AN ORDINANCE TO PREVENT IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY OR INJURY TO PERSONS? WELL, THAT'S WHAT YOUR LAWYER IS TELLING YOU. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: FOLKS, FOLKS. WE HAVE --

IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT OUR CAMPAIGN MATERIALS, WILL YOU SEE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT, IF YOU DON'T TRUST THE VERY WORDS OF THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THIS ORDINANCE IS CRYSTAL CLEAR. IT IS ONE OF THESE AND IT IS EXEMPT AND YOU SHOULD BE APPLYING IT TO EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF LAND IN THE WATERSHED AND STOP RUNNING YOUR STAFF RAGGED AND THE REST OF US INTO THE GROUND CUTTING A DEAL ON EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY. APPLY THE LAW ACROSS THE BOARD. AS IT WAS INTENDED. [APPLAUSE] [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

Goodman: YOU ARE WELCOME. THERE WAS ONE MORE PRECISE -- MORE PRECISE THING I NEED TO DO ASK YOU, AND THAT IS IN S.O.S. IT SAYS SITE BY SITE. AND THE WAY PEOPLE ASSUME THAT 1704/245, WHATEVER WE CALL IT, IS THAT A LOT HINGES ON THE WORD "PROJECT." SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT S.O.S. DOES NOT CONSIDER A PROJECT AS IT'S ASSUMED TO BE AND MAYBE LEGALLY IS ACCEPTED, I DON'T REALLY KNOW. LAWYERS WILL HAVE TO TELL US LATER. WHICH WOULD INCLUDE MANY SITES, IN THIS CASE IF YOU CALL THEM TRACTS. SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT SITE BY SITE MEANS TRACT BY TRACT?

THE ORDINANCE ADOPTED DEFINITIONS AND PRACTICES THAT WERE IN THE PREVIOUS CITY ORDINANCES. AND THEY'VE ALWAYS RECOGNIZED THAT EACH TRACT WAS A DIFFERENT SITE. YOU COULD PUT TWO TRACTS THAT ARE CONTIGUOUS TOGETHER, BUT A SITE THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, ON SLAUGHTER AND ANOTHER ONE THAT IS DOWN MOPAC, THAT'S NOT THE SAME SITE.

Goodman: OKAY. HOW ABOUT LOT BY LOT? DOES IT GO THAT MUCH INTO DETAIL?

NO, IT DOESN'T.

Goodman: OKAY. THANKS VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

Wynn: MAYOR PRO TEM? MR. BUNCH ASKED A LEGAL QUESTION AND I THINK WE SHOULD ANSWER HIM. HE ASKED WHICH LAWYERS OR WHO HAS TOLD US THAT S.O.S. IN FACT IS NOT EXEMPT. AND I THINK WE SHOULD ANSWER HIM. ALL 13 ATTORNEYS THAT WE HIRED, INCLUDING THE ATTORNEY WHO MR. BUNCH'S FORMER CO-COUNSEL ON MANY ISSUES, MR. RENEE HICKS, WHO AT MR. BUNCH'S SUGGESTION WE HIRED. ALL 13 LAWYERS WHO HAVE SPECTACULAR LITIGATION EXPERIENCE IN THIS STATE HAVE ALL TOLD US.

WELL, I OBVIOUSLY WAS NOT INVITED INTO YOUR EXECUTIVE SESSION WHERE THAT ADVICE WAS GIVEN, AND I THINK NOW YOU VIOLATED THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE THAT YOU SHARED WITH THE REST OF YOUR COLLEAGUES AND YOUR STATEMENTS WILL CERTAINLY BE USED AGAINST THE CITY IN A COURT OF LAW. AND -- BUT BECAUSE I WASN'T THERE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT MR. HICKS TOLD YOU. I'VE HEARD DIFFERENT STORIES. OTHER FOLKS HAVE LEAKED OUT WHAT WAS SAID IN THAT ROOM, AND I'VE HEARD A DIFFERENT VERSION. NOT ABOUT MR. HICKS, BUT ABOUT OTHER LAWYERS THAT WERE IN THAT SESSION.

Mayor Garcia: THOSE THINGS HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED PUBLICLY AND MR. HICKS IS HERE, HE CAN ADDRESS THAT ISSUE RIGHT NOW.

Slusher: MAYOR, COULD I ADD SOMETHING WHILE MR. HICKS IS COMING UP, THAT THE LAWYERS THAT MR. -- I MEAN THAT COUNCILMEMBER WYNN MENTIONED, THE 13 ATTORNEYS THAT WE BROUGHT THROUGH IN 1999 INCLUDED THE ATTORNEYS WHO WON TWO LAWSUITS AGAINST DECLARED AUSTIN BASHING STATE LEGISLATION UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND BROUGHT THOUSANDS OF ACRES BACK INTO THE CITY'S JURISDICTION, INCLUDING THE ENTIRE CIRCLE C DEVELOPMENT AND 17 SO-CALLED WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONES UNDER WHICH A DEVELOPER THAT HAD A THOUSAND ACRES IN THE CITY'S E.T.J. COULD JUST DECLARE THEM SELLS A WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE AND BE EXEMPT FROM ALL CITY WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS. THOSE WERE ATTORNEYS THAT WENT OUT AND WON THOSE LAWSUITS AND THEN GAVE ADVICE TO COUNCILMEMBER WYNN TALKED ABOUT. THEY INCLUDED NOT ONLY MR. HICKS BUT OTHER TONES THAT MR. BUNCH RECOMMENDED TO US. -- OTHER ATTORNEYS.

Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU ADDRESS THE ISSUE THAT MR. WYNN -- COUNCILMEMBER WYNN TALKED ABOUT, AND THAT'S THE ISSUE OF EMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY, THAT PROVISION WHICH HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN OPEN SESSION. I DON'T KNOW WHY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EXECUTIVE SESSION. THAT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED TO THE COUNCIL IN OPEN SESSION.

SURE. I CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT MY ANALYSIS IS OF IT IF THAT'S WHAT YOU ALL ARE ASKING.

Mayor Garcia: THAT'S RIGHT. MY BASIC ANALYSIS -- LET ME GIVE THE END ANSWER FIRST AND THEN I'LL EXPLAIN HOW I GET THERE. THAT MAY BE THE BEST WAY TO DO IT. NO, I WON'T DO IT THAT WAY. I'LL START OFF SAYING EVERYTHING IN THIS KIND OF ANALYSIS IS ON SOME KIND OF CONTINUUM. THERE'S A DEAD CERTAINTY YOU WIN A CASE, THERE'S A DEAD SENSE CERTAINTY YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE IT AND ALL SORTS OF STUFF IN BETWEEN AND THERE'S NOTHING EASE ANY LAW THAT HITS EITHER OF THOSE STREAMS. YOU...-- THOSE EXTREMES. SO ANYTHING I SAY ABOUT MY ANALYSIS I SUPPOSE SOMEBODY CAN SAY IS DEAD WRONG, BUT I'LL GIVE MY ANALYSIS OF THE EMINENT DESTRUCTION ISSUE. THE UPSHOT IS THAT I DON'T THINK THAT IT WOULD VALIDATE INVOCATION OF THE EXCEPTION THAT'S IN CHAPTER 245 IN THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN WITH RESPECT TO THE STRATUS AGREEMENT, WHAT IS GOING ON AT BARTON SPRINGS RIGHT NOW AND THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. NOW I'LL SAY WHY THAT'S -- AND I HAVE TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE STATUTE TO PULL OUT THE EXACT LANGUAGE BECAUSE MINE IS PRETTY CLOSE READING OF THE EXACT LANGUAGE. THE EXCEPTION SAYS THAT THE RESTRICTIONS OF CHAPTER 245 ABOUT VESTING, WHICH IS ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES IN THE LEGAL ANALYSIS, DON'T APPLY FOR EXAMPLE TO REGULATIONS TO PREVENT EMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY OR INJURY TO PERSONS. THEN IT GIVES KIND OF AN EXAMPLE ABOUT FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS. MY ANALYSIS OF IT IS THAT THERE CAN BE REGULATIONS THAT RELATE TO WATER QUALITY THAT MAY GO TO PREVENTING EMINENT DESTRUCTION OF EITHER PROPERTY OR EMINENT DESTRUCTION -- EMINENT INJURY TO PERSONS. THERE CAN BE SOMETHING ENACTED LIKE THAT. IT DOESN'T JUST HAVE TO HAPPEN THE DAY BEFORE THE BAD THING IS GOING TO HAPPEN, WHICH WOULD BE EMINENCE. BUT NOW WE COME DOWN WHAT DOES S.O.S. DO IN RESPECT TO THIS SITUATION. A REGULATION TO PREVENT EMINENT INJURY TO PERSONS WON'T APPLY HERE. WE DON'T HAVE ANY SITUATION WHERE THERE IS IMMINENT INJURY TO PERSONS IF SOMETHING GOES THROUGH RIGHT NOW WITH RESPECT TO DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT ISN'T THE KIND OF THING. SO THE QUESTION BECOMES -- THEN YOU GO TO THE SECOND PART OF THE REGULATION WHICH TALKS ABOUT IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY. ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT'S BEEN USED IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE SALAMANDER THAT MS. FUTRELL WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH MS. MCCLINTOCK AND ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT'S BEEN MADE, SOMETHING BAD IS HAPPENING EVERY MONTH, EVERY DAY, SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITH RESPECT TO MAYBE THE DEGRADATION OF THE WATER QUALITY, WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE WHAT IT IS. [LAUGHTER] PARAGRAPH I'M JUST SAYING --

Mayor Garcia: [INAUDIBLE] LEGAL OPINIONS SO PLEASE ALLOW HIM TO SPEAK.

I SUSPECT IT'S THE WATER QUALITY. FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. I'M NOT A SCIENTIST. BUT THE IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY. BUT SALAMANDERS UNDER THE LAW..............NDER THE LAW, SALAMANDERS ARE NOT ANYBODY'S PROPERTY. WILD ANIMALS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN HELD TO BE FREE. NOBODY OWNS THEM. SO THE INJURY TO THE SALAMANDERS DOESN'T COUNT AS IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY. SO THE QUESTION BECOMES WHAT ABOUT THE GROUND WATER, THE WATER COMING OUT OF THE SPRINGS? WELL, GROUND WATER IS PROPERTY SO I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY CAN REACH THE GROUND WATER THAT IS AFFECTED BY DEVELOPMENT. SO IT'S GETTING CLOSE TO -- COMING CLOSE TO THE QUESTION WHAT IS IMMINENT DESTRUCTION MEAN AND DOES S.O.S. APPLY TO THIS. AND MY CONCLUSION ABOUT THIS IS THAT THE VERY PURPOSE OF S.O.S. FROM ITS BEGINNING WAS TO PREVENT WHAT I WOULD CALL THE SLOW DEATH OF THE AQUIFER. NOT THE IMMINENT DEATH, TWROOS THE DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS, A LITTLE BIT OF THIS, A LITTLE BIT OF THAT AND IT ADDS UP TO SOMETHING REALLY BAD OVER THE LONG TERM. AND THAT S.O.S. IS KIND OF THE OPPOSITE OF SOMETHING TO PREVENT THE IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF LET'S CALL IT THE GROUND WATER HERE. AND THE PROBLEM WITH APPLYING IT TO THIS SITUATION -- I REALLY HATE GIVING MY LEGAL ANALYSIS IN FRONT OF THE WORLD, BUT THE PROBLEM WITH APPLYING IT TO THIS VERY SITUATION IS THAT LET'S ASSUME THAT BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN FROM THE DEVELOPMENT. BAD THINGS HAPPEN FROM ANY DEVELOPMENT. THERE IS GOING TO BE RUNOFF, INCREASED POLLUTION. EVEN WHEN S.O.S. APPLIES OR EVEN WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING MAYBE THE EQUIVALENT AS PEOPLE SAY THE SETTLEMENT IS. THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME ADDITIONAL POLLUTION OF THE AQUIFER FROM ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS OUT THERE. BUT THERE ARE A BUNCH OF OTHER THINGS HAPPENING THAT ARE BAD FOR THE AQUIFER TOO SFRAIMENT OTHER PLACES, AND ADDING THIS IS NOT THE THING THAT WILL IMMEDIATELY KILL THE AQUIFER, IT'S EVERYTHING TOGETHER IF IT EVER HAPPENS, WHICH WE HOPE WILL NOT HAPPEN, IT'S EVERYTHING TOGETHER THAT'S HURTING THE GROUND WATER. AND SO THIS PARTICULAR THING IS APPLYING S.O.S. HERE OR NOT PLYING S.O.S. HERE WILL NOT -- OR APPLYING IT HERE WILL NOT BRING YOU WITHIN THIS REGULATION BECAUSE S.O.S. IS INTEND TO DO GIVE US A DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS IDEA SHE NOT THE IMMINENT DESTRUCTION IDEA. THAT'S MY ANALYSIS, IT'S A BORING ANALYSIS, BUT THAT'S WHY I THINK IT'S A LEGALLY WEAK POSITION TO TAKE. IT'S NOT CRAZY, BUT IT'S A LEGALLY WEAK POSITION TO TAKE IN TERMS OF HAVING SOME SUCCESS, ANTICIPATING SUCCESS WITH A LAWSUIT TO SAY S.O.S. APPLIED IN THIS SITUATION IS GOING TO FALL WITHIN THIS EXCEPTION. THAT'S IT.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MR. HICKS. FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL?

Slusher: MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT --

Mayor Garcia: BILL, YEAR NOT GOING TO HAVE A LEGAL DEBATE.

WE'VE HAD TWO-THIRDS OF IT. IF I MIGHT RESPOND.

Slusher: MAYOR, USUALLY IN COURT ONE SIDE PUTS ON THEIR EVIDENCE, THE OTHER SIDE PUTS ON THEIR EVIDENCE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE. WE CERTAINLY HEARD FROM MR. BUNCH A LOT MORE THAN MR. HICKS.

DO YOU WANT TO PROTECT THE SPRINGS OR NOT?

Slusher: SEE THAT GETS TO THE HEART OF THE MATTER BECAUSE ANYBODY THAT DOESN'T AGREE WITH YOU ON ANY POINT EVEN ON THE POINT WHETHER YOU ARE OUGHT TO TALK FOR 30 MINUTES OR 40 DOESN'T WANT TO PROTECT BARTON SPRINGS -- [MULTIPLE VOICES] I CAN'T EVEN FINISH WHAT I'M SAYING.

WE LISTENED TO THE STAFF FOR TWO HOURS.

Slusher: I'LL ADDRESS THAT TOO. THAT'S SORT OF THE HEART OF THE MATTER. I THINK EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM WANTS TO SAVE BARTON SPRINGS. SOME PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE DIFFERENT STRATEGIES OR DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION, BUT IF ANYBODY EXPRESSES ANY AGREEMENT WITH BILL IT'S LIKE DO YOU WANT TO SAVE BARTON SPRINGS AND SOME OF YOU WON'T EVEN LET A COUNCILMEMBER FINISH HIS STATEMENT WITHOUT HECK HE WILLING. LET ME -- I WANT TO POINT SOMETHING OUT. ONE OF THE REASONS -- MR. BUNCH HAS HAD A NUMBER OF YEARS TO CHALLENGE 1704. HE COULD GO SUE OVER 1704, BUT HE NEVER HAS. HE'S ALWAYS WANTED THE CITY TO DO IT. FORMER CHAIR OF S.O.S. SAID THAT SHE BEGGED BILL BUNCH TO LITIGATE. SAID THIS IN THE MEDIA BACK IN 2000 AND HE WOULDN'T DO IT. SO SHE THEN ASKED TO GET THE SCARIEST LAWYER IN TOWN TO LOOK AT 1704 AND LOOK AT SUING OVER THAT. HE CAME BACK, CAME TO THIS -- MARCH 22, 2000, CAME TO THE BOARD MEETING IN AUGUST AND RECOMMENDED AGAINST IT IN THE STRONGEST POSSIBLE WAY. SO S.O.S. IS EVIDENTLY RECEIVED SOME SIMILAR ADVICE TO WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM 13 LAWYERS, AND THEY DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD ON IT DURING ANY OF THAT TIME. BUT INSTEAD, INSTEAD, REPEATEDLY CAME DOWN HERE AND SAID THE CITY OUGHT TO HAVE THE COURAGE TO SUE. AND WE WOULD NOT COMPROMISE THE CITY -- [APPLAUSE] -- WHY WOULD YOU ASK SOMEBODY ELSE TO SPEND THE TAXPAYERS' DOLLARS TO DO SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THE COURAGE TO DO YOURSELF? [MULTIPLE VOICES] [POUNDING GAVEL]

Mayor Garcia: PLEASE!

Slusher: I DID ASK A QUESTION. [LAUGHTER]. HARD TO HEAR EVERYBODY AT ONCE, THOUGH. I THINK IT'S SIGNIFICANT THAT SAME ADVICE APPARENTLY WAS RECEIVED. AND RATHER THAN JUST HOLLER AT EACH OTHER AND QUESTION WHETHER WE WANT TO PROTECT BARTON SPRINGS, I THINK IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY TO DO IT. AND I REALLY HAVEN'T HEARD BUT TWO OR THREE FOLKS THAT HAVE SPOKEN TONIGHT OFFER ALTERNATIVES TO WHAT IS ON THE TABLE. SO I WOULD -- MAYOR, I WISH WE COULD MOVE ON. I MAY HAVE UNDERESTIMATED THE AMOUNT OF TIME MR. BUNCH HAS HAD, BUT I THINK AT LEAST 45 MINUTES AT THIS POINT, UNLESS THE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE SOMETHING ELSE TO SAY.

Mayor Garcia: WE HAVE ABOUT 380 OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

MAYOR, THIS IS A PRETTY CRITICAL ISSUE. IF I COULD HAVE THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS -- [MULTIPLE VOICES]

Mayor Garcia: HE'S ALREADY HAD THE LIMIT OF 15 MINUTES.

THERE'S TWO ITEMS. DON'T WE GET 15 MINUTES ON EACH ITEM? THERE'S ACTUALLY 15 ITEMS.

Mayor Garcia: THREE MINUTES, BILL. LET'S CLOSE IT OUT IN THREE MINUTES, PLEASE. WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE THAT WANT TO SPEAK. [APPLAUSE]

I HAVE ENORMOUS RESPECT FOR MR. HICKS. I'VE ASKED HIM TO JOIN ME AS CO-COUNSEL IN A COUPLE OF CASES AND I'VE BEEN LUCKY ENOUGH FOR HIM TO SAY YES ON AT LEAST ONE. LET ME TELL YOU WHY I THINK HE HAS TWO IMPORTANT FLAWS IN HIS ANALYSIS. HE TALKED ABOUT IT IN THIS CASE. YOU DON'T LOOK AT DOES THE REGULATION IN ONE CASE PREVENT IMMINENT DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY OR INJURY TO PERSONS. YOU LOOK AT DOES THE REGULATION OVERALL -- IS IT INTENDED TO DO THAT. AND ABSOLUTELY IT DOES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MANY THOUSANDS OF ACRES, NOT JUST THIS ONE CASE. AND AS FAR AS THE DEATH OF A THOUSAND CUTS, IF YOU ARE GOING TO DIE FROM A THOUSAND CUTS, YOU ARE STILL GOING TO DIE. AND THAT DEATH IS STILL IMMINENT. OKAY? [APPLAUSE] WE KNOW THAT THERE IS RAPID GROWTH IN THIS WATERSHED. THE TREND LINES ON THE POLLUTION ARE SHOOTING THROUGH THE ROOF. AND I'M SORRY, BUT YOU CANNOT CONVINCE ME THAT THIS IS NOT IMMINENT. I WOULD ALSO POINT YOU TO THE STATUTE ITSELF. THE REST OF THE EXEMPTION -- I'M SORRY. THE REST OF THAT SENTENCE SAYS, INCLUDING REGULATIONS EFFECTIVE ONLY WITHIN A FLOOD PLAIN ESTABLISHED BY A FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL PROGRAM AND ENACTED TO PREVENT FLOODING OF BUILDINGS INTENDED FOR PUBLIC OCCUPANCY. IF YOU GO LOOK AT THOSE FEDERAL FLOOD PROGRAMS, THEY ARE PROTECTING PROPERTY FROM A FLOOD THAT ONLY HAPPENS ONCE IN 100 YEARS. NOW, IF THAT'S THE KIND OF THREAT THAT FITS THE DEFINITION OF WHAT'S IMMINENT, THEN THE DEATH OF BARTON SPRINGS IN THE SPACE OF A BLINK OF AN EYE, ONE DECADE OR TWO, CERTAINLY THAT'S IMMINENT. [APPLAUSE] WE CALLED IT THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE. IT WAS A CATCHY NAME. BUT THE TRUTH IS WE HAVE BEEN IN A CRISIS FOR SOMEBODY TO SAVE THIS RESOURCE FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS NOW. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL HAS HAD AN EXCUSE WHY NOT TO DO IT. [BUZZER] [APPLAUSE]

IT'S TIME FOR ONE COUNCIL TO HAVE SOME COURAGE TO GET THE JOB DONE. [APPLAUSE] [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: THE NEXT SPEAKER -- [APPLAUSE] [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: THE NEXT SPEAKER IS -- [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. JIM O'REILLY AND HE HAS NINE MINUTES. HE'S NUMBER 57 AND WE HAVE 380 MORE SPEAKERS. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: BOTH FOR AND AGAINST.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. I HAD PREPARED SOME WRITTEN STATEMENTS, BUT JUST --

Mayor Garcia: JUST A SECOND. GIVE HIM NINE MINUTES, PLEASE.

I WILL NOT USE THAT.

Mayor Garcia: I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU WHAT PEOPLE HAVE GIVEN YOU.

THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THERE YOU ARE.

I'VE PREPARED A HANDOUT FOR THAW TALKS A LITTLE BIT -- FOR YOU THAT TALKS TO THE COMMUNICATIONS THAT MYSELF AND OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HAVE DONE WITH OUR GROUP OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST FEW MONTHS. AGAIN, JUST AS AN EQUAL FIRE HERE, I AM PRESIDENT OF CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. I AM THE ELECTED PRESIDENT. EACH LOT IN CIRCLE C GETS ONE VOTE. ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS ARE ELECTED BY THE MEMBERS OF THAT ASSOCIATION. THERE ARE NO DEVELOPER APPOINTED BOARD MEMBERS THAT EXIST TODAY. PRIOR TO THE EARLY '90S THE DEVELOPER DID CONTROL THE BOARD. THOSE RIGHTS WENT AWAY BACK IN 1992. JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION THAT'S COME UP A COUPLE TIMES. I THINK I MAY BE THE CULPRIT BEHIND THE SECRET MEETINGS EVERYONE HAS BEEN HEARING ABOUT SO I'LL COME CLEAN ON THAT RIGHT AWAY. SEVERAL YEARS BACK WHEN THE BRADLEY SETTLEMENT TOOK PLACE IN THIS ROOM ALONG WITH THE HOMEOWNERS SETTLEMENT, IT WENT TO THE WEE HOURS. I CAME UP AFTERWARDS AND CONGRATULATED SOME OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS AS WELL AS THE THEN-MAYOR KIRK WATSON AND SAID THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOUR HELP AND EFFORT AND HOURS THAT YOU PUT IN ON THIS AND SUGGESTED TO THEM AT THAT POINT THAT THE MISSING PIECE FOR CIRCLE C WAS THE COMMERCIAL. AND SO IF WE COULD MOVE FORWARD AT THAT POINT, I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS. SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, I ACTUALLY SENT A COUPLE OF E-MAILS TO THE MAYOR TRYING TO GET HIM ENGAGE UNDERSTAND THIS AND HE SUGGESTED -- ENGAGED IN THIS AND HE SUGGESTED I SPEAK TO BOW ARMSTRONG MYSELF. AT THAT POINT I DID INITIATE SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH HIM ALONG WITH DR. BRUNER FROM THE WILD FLOWER CENTER. AND THOSE SECRET MEETINGS TOOK PLACE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO IN CIRCLE C WITH THE PROPERTY THAT YOU OWN OUT THERE. AND SO THAT'S WHERE IT ALL STARTED FROM. A COUPLE OTHER THINGS HERE. OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST TWO YEARS, WE HAVE HAD NUMEROUS MEETINGS WITH HOMEOWNERS, WITH THE CITY STAFF, WHO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMEND AND TOBY FUTRELL ESPECIALLY IN THIS PROCESS, EXTREMELY HELPFUL, ALWAYS THERE, PROVIDED STAFF AT AT LEAST TWO MEETINGS THAT WE DID TO OUR HOMEOWNERS, OFFERED FOR A THIRD. WE SUGGESTED THAT WE COULD HANDLE IT OURSELVES. THEY WERE VERY APPRECIATIVE BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN AT IT EVERY SINGLE NIGHT FOR ABOUT THREE WEEKS STRAIGHT. SO AGAIN, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GIVE THEM THE DUE THAT THEY DESERVE. A FEW OTHER THINGS. I'VE HEARD AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT STRATUS IS THE BIG BULLY IN THIS PROCESS. I MIGHT SUGGEST THAT A BULLY DOESN'T CONTINUALLY MEET WITH A VARIETY OF DIVERSE GROUPS TO TRY AND FIND SOLUTIONS THROUGHOUT THIS. CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN ACCUSED NUMEROUS TIMES HERE OF STRIKING OUR DEALS TWO YEARS AGO. WELL, I WISH THAT WAS THE CASE. IT'S REALLY NOT. I WISH IT... I WAS A BETTER NEGOTIATOR. I MIGHT NOT HAVE ALL THE APARTMENTS UP IN CIRCLE C PROPER, IF YOU WOULD. AT ONE POINT 400 OF THEM WERE GOING TO GO DOWN ON TO THE P.U.D. TRACT. I WASN'T A GOOD ENOUGH NEGOTIATOR AND THOSE GOT PUSHED UP. SO I THINK THAT NO ONE GETS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT IN THIS PROCESS. IT'S A GIVE AND TAKE. I THINK THAT FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE STRATUS HAS COME A LONG WAY TO MEET THE CONCERNS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK THAT THEY'VE GONE A LONG WAY TO MEET THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS THAT ARE OUT THERE IN TERMS OF DENSITY, THAT KIND OF THING. I'M GLAD THAT WE ARE ABLE TO INVOLVE THE WILD FLOWER CENTER IN THE DISCUSSIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO THIS I DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE LEADS PROGRAM. THEY WERE ABLE TO CONVINCE STRATUS TO GO WITH A NATIVE PLANT PALLET FOR THE BUILDINGS THERE. THEY WERE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT BUILDING ENVELOPES AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS. THINGS THAT I DON'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE IN. A FEW OTHER THINGS HERE IN TERMS OF THE WAY THAT CIRCLE C HAS ATTEMPTED TO EMBRACE CITY POLITICS. I THINK IT WAS COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER WHO ASKED US NOW THAT WE WERE IN THE CITY AFTER ANNEXATION IF WE COULD TRY AND BE GOOD STEWARDS BECAUSE WE WERE OVER THE AQUIFER. AND I THINK WE'VE TRIED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT AND DO A GOOD JOB AT THAT. I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NAME EXACTLY, BUT -- AND PERHAPS IT WAS ANOTHER SECRET MEETING THAT TOOK PLACE AT THE WILD FLOWER CENTER. I KNOW THAT YOU WERE THERE, COUNCILMAN, THE GREEN BUILDING PROGRAM, THERE WERE 60 OR SO PEOPLE THERE. WE PARTICIPATED, WE HAD OUR LANDSCAPE PEOPLE OUT AT CIRCLE C PARTICIPATE IN THAT. SO AGAIN, WE HAVE TRIED TO COME INTO THE FOLD NOW THAT WE ARE IN THE CITY, WORK WITH THE PROCESS AND I WOULD JUST LIKE THE SAY THAT IT'S WORKED WELL FOR US. HAD A LOT OF DIALOGUE WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND STAFF. IT HAS COME UP BEFORE ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS. THAT CAME UP IN THE DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND SEVERAL ATTORNEYS, AND IN FACT WE HAD WRITTEN A LETTER ABOUT THAT AND SHE SUGGESTED AT THAT POINT THAT THE PROGRESS THAT WAS BEING MADE AND THE ISSUES THAT WERE BEING ADDRESSED THROUGH THIS STAKEHOLDER PROCESS WAS VERY SIMILAR TO THIS AND WE SHOULD KEEP DOWN THIS TRACT, SO WE DID JUST THAT. AGAIN, THE HOUR IS LATE. I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH WHAT YOU DO FOR THE CITY. IT'S A THANKLESS JOB, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN ENDORSING THIS. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[APPLAUSE]

[ONE MOMEMT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

Mayor Garcia: BEFORE YOU START, LET ME READ INTO THE RECORD THAT CAMERON CUMMINGS DONATED TIME TO BILL BUNCH AND IS REGISTERED AGAINST. CAMERON NELSON IS NOT WISHING TO SPEAK AND REGISTERED AGAINST. ROBERT McARTHUR, IS HE HERE? HE'S REGISTERED AGAINST. SHARON ARDEMANI IS REGISTERED TO SPEAK, AGAINST. ROBIN CREAF, WHO WAS HERE, BUT I DON'T SEE HIM NOW. AND ANGELA YOUNG DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND IS NEUTRAL. JAMES COLETTE, IS HE HERE? HE'S REGISTERED AGAINST. JIM BENNETT DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS REGISTERED AGAINST. JOHN BARKLEY GAVE HIS TIME IS BILL BUNCH. AND HE DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS REGISTERED AGAINST. MARION MOTUK IS REGISTERED AGAINST. PAUL MULLINS, IS HE HERE? HE'S REGISTERED AGAINST. JANET BENNETT DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS REGISTERED AGAINST. DEBRA HOLLINGS HEAD, IS SHE HERE? REGISTERED AGAINST. SHE GAVE HER TIME TO BILL BUNCH. RUTH METERS IS REGISTERED AGAINST. JAMIE WALL, YOU'RE NEXT. WELCOME.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE LONE STAR CHAPTER OF THE SIERRA CLUB, THE STATE CHAPTER. WE'RE HERE WITH THE AUSTIN GROUP WHO IS OPPOSED TO BOTH THE ZONING UPGRADES AND ALSO THE SETTLEMENT DEAL. WE HAVE ABOUT FIVE THOUSAND MEMBERS HERE IN AUSTIN. I THINK STARTING WITH THE ZONING CHANGES, THIS IS SOMETHING REALLY EASY THAT THE CITY CAN DO THAT'S VERY LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE THAT WOULD MAKE A HUGE IMPACT. NEAL SAID EARLIER THAT HE SPENT HIS ALMOST FULL ADULT LIFE BY FREEPORT MCMORAN, AND I KIND OF FEEL THE SAME WAY. AND I KNOW THERE'S PROBABLY HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE HERE IN THE CITY THAT HAVE SPENT HUGE CHUNKS OF THEIR ENTIRE ADULT LIVES CITING THIS COMPANY AND ITS MANY MANIFESTATIONS. WORKING TO NOT ONLY FIGHT THE COMPANY, BUT PROTECT THE SPRINGS AND PROTECT THE AQUIFER THAT FEEDS THE SPRINGS AND THE VERY SPECIAL SACRED PLACES IN THE CITY, THE PLACES THAT MAKE ME WANT TO STAY THERE AND NOT MOVE SOMEPLACE ELSE AND THERE ARE BRINGING PEOPLE TO THIS CITY. WHAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED HERE OVER THE YEARS ARE FEELING RIGHT NOW IS JUST BITTER, BITTER DISAPPOINTMENT THAT WE'VE WORKED SO HARD TO ELECT COUNCILS TO DEFEND THE SPRINGS AND TO DEFEND US AT LAST, AND IT'S JUST DEPRESSING AND DISAPPOINTING THAT THAT MIGHT NOT HAPPEN. AND I'VE WORKED WITH COMMUNITIES ALL OVER THE STATE. THAT'S MY JOB, HELPING COMMUNITIES FIGHT POLLUTERS AND FIGHT DEVELOPMENT. AND I'VE SEEN COMMUNITIES WITH MUCH LESS -- MUCH FEWER LEGAL OPTIONS, LEGAL TOOLS, POLITICAL POWER AND POPULAR MANDATES THAN THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS, FACED CHALLENGES, FACED OPEN..... OPPONENTS THAT LOOKED IMPOSSIBLE TO BEAT, AND BEAT THEM BECAUSE THEY AT LEAST TRIED. EVEN THOUGH THE LEGAL STRATEGIES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT MIGHT NOT BE 100% GUARANTEE, I IMPLORE YOU TO AT LEAST TRY EVERYTHING WE CAN. [ APPLAUSE ] YOU JUST NEVER KNOW WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THE TIME FRAME THAT IT TAKES TO TRY EVERYTHING. AND SOMETIMES EVEN WHEN IT LOOKS IMPOSSIBLE, YOU CAN WIN. SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO TRY. THANKS. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].

Mayor Garcia: FOLLOWING MS. WALL IS ERIC OVERSHOCK, WHO DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS REGISTERED AGAINST. AND JEANNIE SORENSON, IS SHE HERE?

[ INAUDIBLE ]

Mayor Garcia: I CAN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: WHERE WERE YOU WHEN I CALLED YOU?

RIGHT THERE. I SAT THERE ON FRONT ROW WHEN YOU CALLED ME.

Mayor Garcia: WELL, YOU CAN SPEAK AFTER SHE FINISHES.

MAYOR GARCIA AND THE COUNCILMEMBERS, I'M JAMIE WALL AND I'M CO-PRESIDENT OF THE APALOOSA RUN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. NINE MONTHS AGO I NEVER WOULD HAVE IMAGINED THAT I'D BE SPEAKING HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE SETTLEMENT WITH THE STRATUS AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN, BUT I AM. AND IT'S DUE TO THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS THAT HAS ALLOWED THE DIFFERENT PARTIES TO HAVE INPUT INTO THIS FINAL PRODUCT. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE PROPOSED BEAR LAKE P.U.D., AND WE HAVE LOTS THAT ARE TWO ACRES AND MORE. AND OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE HAD THIS PROPERTY STAY RURAL RESIDENTIAL, BUT THAT'S NOT REALISTIC. STRATUS HAS LISTENED TO OUR CONCERNS ON TRAFFIC SAFETY AND DENSITY, AND THEY'VE RESPONDED WITH A PROCESS MUCH MORE ACCEPTABLE THAN WHAT ORIGINALLY WAS PROPOSED. SO WE APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN STAFF, STRATUS, THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERS AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS HAVE INVESTED IN ORDER TO COME UP WITH THE COMPROMISE AGREEMENT WHICH WE DO SUPPORT. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, MS. WALL. THOSE OF YOU THAT I CALLED EARLIER THAT DIDN'T SPEAK, IF YOU COULD LINE UP AT THIS OTHER -- AND IF YOU COULD INTRODUCE YOURSELVES SO THE RECORD WILL REFLECT WHO YOU ARE. SOME OF YOU CAN GET ON THIS SIDE TOO IF YOU WANT TO. YES, SIR, GO AHEAD.

ROBERT CORBIN. AND I CALL THIS LOOKING AT THE BIG PICTURE.

Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU BRING THE MIC DOWN?

YEAH. I CALL MY PRESENTATION LOOKING AT THE BIG PICTURE. AND I AM PRESENTING MYSELF AS A STAKEHOLDER WHO WAS NOT CONSULTED AND IN FACT, I BELIEVE I AM ONLY ONE OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF INDIVIDUAL STAKEHOLDERS AND CORPORATE STAKEHOLDERS WHO WERE NOT CONSULTED ABOUT THIS PROCESS. NOW, I LIVE IN THE INNER CITY AND SO HOW COULD I BE A POTENTIAL STAKEHOLDER CONCERNING THE STRATUS DEAL THAT'S SEVERAL MIERLZ AWAY? MY ANSWER IS SIMPLE, THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE USES BARTON SPRINGS POOL ON ITS WEBSITE AS SHOWING SOME OF THE ATTRACTIONS OF AUSTIN. AND USING IT AS A SELLING POINT TO RECRUIT NEW BUSINESS TO AUSTIN. HUNDREDS OF INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES DO THE SAME THING, BOTH LOCAL AND NATIONAL. THEY USE BARTON SPRINGS POOL AS A SELLING POINT, HOW WONDERFUL THE QUALITY OF LIFE IS HERE IN AUSTIN. AND THEY KNOW EVERYBODY EVERYWHERE THESE DAYS WANTS HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE AND ARE LIKELY TO BE ATTRACTED TO CITIES WHERE THEY HAVE HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE. SO IF BARTON SPRINGS IS DEGRADED AND AUSTIN'S QUALITY OF LIFE IS COMPROMISED, NEGATIVELY AFFECTED, EVERY PROPERTY IN AUSTIN IS NEGATIVELY AFFECTED. THAT MEANS PROPERTY VALUES ARE GOING TO DROP. SO SINCE I OWN PROPERTY IN THE INNER CITY, I COULD SAY THAT MY PROPERTY WOULD DROP PERHAPS AS MUCH AS 10 PERCENT IF SOMETHING HAPPENS TO BARTON SPRINGS POOL. AND I THINK THAT GOES FOR EVERY OTHER PROPERTY AROUND THE CITY AND BUSINESSES ALSO. SO WHATEVER HAPPENS OUT OVER THE AQUIFER THAT DID HE GRADES AUSTIN'S QUALITY OF LIFE ALSO DEGRADES THE FINANCIAL QUALITY OF LIFE IN AUSTIN. IF ALL PROPERTY VALUES DROP, EVERYBODY IS ROBBED. EVERYBODY'S A STAKEHOLDER. AND THEY HAVE NOT REALLY BEEN CONSULTED ABOUT THE ACTUAL POSSIBILITIES THAT WHAT IS GOING ON OUT OVER THE AQUIFER COULD ACTUALLY DEGRADE THEIR FINANCIAL PORTFOLIO IN A SENSE. SO I'M ASKING YOU TO PROTECT MY PROPERTY VALUES AND THE PROPERTY VALUES OF EVERYBODY HERE IN AUSTIN AND DO NOT BE A PARTY TO A TAKING PROCESS WHERE PROPERTY VALUES ARE ROBBED IN THE INNER CITY TO GIVE A BONUS TO SOMEBODY WHO LIVES WAY OUT OVER THE AQUIFER. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

HI, MY NAME IS MARION AND I HAVE A CONCERN, TOO, ABOUT BEING A STAKEHOLDER WHO WASN'T CONSULTED. I SWIM IN BARTON SPRINGS POOL. AND WHAT I GET TO SWIM WITH NOW ON SUMMER AFTERNOONS IS ALGAE BLOOMS AND TOXIC HEAVY METALS. I MISS THE SALAMANDERS. I'D RATHER BE SWIMMING WITH THE SALAMANDERS. AND DEVELOPMENT AT THE LEVELS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS REALLY NOT GOING TO INCREASE THE DENSITY OF SALAMANDERS IN A POOL IN MY OPINION. IT'S GOING TO INCREASE THE DENSITY OF TOXIC METALS IN THE POOL. THE CLUSTERING OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER IS GOING TO ALSO CREATE HIGHER RUNOFF LEVELS FOR GAS AND OIL FROM THE RUNOFFS FROM THE TRAFFIC. AND THAT'S GOING TO FIND ITS WAY INTO THE BARTON SPRINGS POOL AS WELL AS THE PESTICIDES AND THE FERTILIZERS FROM ALL THE NEW BUILDINGS. IT CONCERNS ME GREATLY THAT THERE'S NO THIRD PARTY OVERSIGHT FOR THIS AGREEMENT. IT CONCERNS ME GREATLY THAT THERE'S A GAS STATION RIGHT OVER THE AQUIFER. IT CONCERNS ME THAT WE'RE WILLING TO GIVE $15 MILLION TO STRATUS, AKA, FREEPORT MCMORAN, AND WE COULD SPEND THAT $15 MILLION USING IT FOR A LEGAL FUND TO FIGHT THEM. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]. THANK YOU,.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, VERY MUCH. THE NEXT SPEAKER THAT WAS CALLED OUT, COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF, SIR.

YES, MAYOR GARCIA, MY NAME IS JOHN LARKIN AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE CHERRY CREEK ON BRODIE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I'M ALSO AN ASSOCIATE MEMBER OF THE SOUTHWEST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION REPRESENTING ROUGHLY NINE THOUSAND HOMES. I WANTED TO SAY THAT WE ARE UNANIMOUS IN OUR OPPOSITION TO THE BILL THAT'S CURRENTLY STRUCTURED. WE THINK IT'S COME A LONG WAY. WE THINK IT'S GETTING PRETTY CLOSE AND WE'VE GOT SOME PRETTY SHARP PEOPLE TRYING TO GET IT TO WHERE WE THINK IT NEEDS TO BE. BUT THERE ARE MANY REASONS THE CITIZENRY WE REPRESENT ARE AGAINST THE DEAL, BUT OUR CORE CONCERNS ARE THE FOLLOWING FOUR: ONE, WE'VE GOT DEVELOPMENT DRIVING PLANNING RATHER THAN A COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN GUIDING DEVELOPMENT. [ APPLAUSE ] THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE TO US SINCE THE ONLY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS EVER ENACTED THAT WOULD GOVERN OUR NECK OF THE WOODS WAS THE AUSTIN TOMORROW PLAN OF 1979. AND THAT'S NOT A TOOL THAT'S USED AT ZONING AND PLATTING CURRENTLY. SO THAT CONCERNS US. THAT'S POINT NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO IS THIS DEAL ALLOWS FOR THE WAIVING OF A SIDE BY SIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. AND ON FACE VALUE WHEN YOU HEAR THAT THE CITY AND STRATUS REPRESENTATIVES HAVE HIRED COMPANIES LIKE GRAHAM DATA TO DO TRAFFIC COUNTING AND THEY SAID HEY, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SO BAD AND THEY CITE THE STATISTIC LIKE ONE MILLION SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE AT THE INTERSECTION OF SH 45 AND SOUTH MOPAC WILL ONLY JPB RATE TWO THOUSAND TRIPS PER DAY ON SOUTH MOPAC, WE'VE GOT TO SAY THAT THAT'S KIND OF LUDICROUS. THERE'S NO WAY THAT A MILLION SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE ONLY GENERATES TWO THOUSAND TRIPS PER DAY ON SOUTH MOPAC, BUT TERRY MCMANUS WILL GIVE YOU THAT STATISTIC IF YOU ASK HER. SO THAT JUST CRIES OUT THE NEED FOR A SIDE BY SIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SO WE CAN REALLY FIND WHAT THE IMPACT ON OUR INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S ALREADY OVERBURDENED IS GOING TO BE. THAT'S ONE OF OUR MAJOR CONCERNS. WE'VE GOT ONE ENTRANCE OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING ON A STREET. AND WE DON'T SEE THE CITY SETTING ASIDE ANY FUND TO PURCHASE KIND OF WAY TO FIX THAT PROBLEM. SO THAT'S NUMBER TWO. THREE, MAYBE WE COULD USE SOME OF THE $16 MILLION IN DEVELOPMENT SUBSIDIES THE CITY IS GOING TO USE ON THIS WHEN THEY COULD, YOU KNOW, MAYBE CUT BACK A FEW LESS SERVICES, LIKE LIBRARIES AND SOCIAL SERVICES AROUND TOWN -- [ APPLAUSE ] AND THAT'S A MAJOR POINT TOO. MY WIFE DONATED HER THREE MINUTES TO ME. [ BUZZER SOUNDS ] SO THE FOURTH POINT AND PROBABLY THE OVERRIDING.

Mayor Garcia: IS SHE HERE?

NO, SHE'S GONE HOME WITH THE BABY ALREADY.

Mayor Garcia: IF THEY'RE NOT HERE, THEY CANNOT GIVE YOU TIME.

THEY CAN'T?

MAYOR GARCIA: NO, THAT'S THE RULES THAT WE HAVE.

I'VE GOT THREE MINUTES COMING FROM OVER HERE. IS THAT FINE WITH YOU?

Mayor Garcia: DID YOU SIGN UP TO SPEAK? WHAT WAS YOUR NAME?

[ INAUDIBLE ]

Mayor Garcia: GO AHEAD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR. THE FOURTH POINT AND OUR FOURTH MAJOR CONCERN, AND THIS IS THE ONE THAT WE WOULD REALLY LIKE YOU TO TAKE A LONG, HARD LOOK AT, IS THE PRECEDENT, THE PROPOSED VARIANCE TO S.O.S. PER PET TWAITS. IT VAI INDICATES A VOTER INITIATED AND OVERWHELINGLY APPROVED ORDINANCE. THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE, WE BELIEVE THIS IS UNNECESSARY AND ENCOURAGES FUTURE CHALLENGES TO OUR MUNICIPALITIES RIGHT TO GOVERN. I WAS REALLY AMAZED TO LEARN WHEN BETTY BAKER CALLED ME AND ASKED ME TO SERVE ON THE ZONING AND PLATTING SPECIAL TASKFORCE ON THIS ISSUE, I WAS REALLY AMAZED TO LEARN WHEN I TALKED WITH FOLKS LIKE NANCY McCLINTOCK THAT THIS WASN'T THE FIRST TIME THAT WE CUT A DEAL LIKE THIS. THAT ACTUALLY WE'VE BEEN SETTING ASIDE THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE FOR QUITE AWHILE. AND AS A PERSON WHO POET VOETED FOR SOAS MANY YEARS AGO, I WAS PRETTY SHOCKED TO HEAR THAT BECAUSE I THOUGHT VOTER INITIATED ORDINANCES IF THEY WERE GOING TO BE AUTHORED REALLY HAD TO GO UP FOR REREN DUMB TO BE ALTERED. SO SINCE I HADN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, I WAS PRETTY SURPRISED AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS INTERPRET ITY SURPRISED. ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'RE GOING TO FIND AND YOU PROBABLY HAVE WITNESSED IS IF YOU LOOK AT ARTICLES IN THE AUSTIN BUSINESS JOURNAL OR THE "AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN" THAT HAVE BEEN COMING OUT SINCE ROUGHLY THE FIRST OF MAY ON THESE ISSUES, IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE WAY EVERYTHING THAT'S POSITIONED IS THE CITY WORKING WITH STRATUS TO REACH A COMPROMISE THAT BEST SERVES THE CITIZENRY OF AUSTIN BEING THROWN BY SOME SALAMANDER LOVERS. WHAT THEY'RE FORGETTING IS THE NINE THOUSAND HOMES THAT GROUPS LIKE MINE REPRESENTATIVE. WE'RE MAINSTREAM -- [ APPLAUSE ] -- MODERATE FOLKS. AND WE'RE NOT AGAINST STRATUS' RIGHT TO DEVELOP. WE THINK THEY'VE COME A LONG WAY. WE THINK THEY'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO GO. AND WE THINK WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS -- AND MY LAST SMAI SMAIL TO THE COUNCIL IN RESPONSE TO A RETURNED REPLAY FROM BETTY DUNKERLEY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOU WERE THE ONLY ONE I GOT A RESPONSE FROM, I MADE THE POINT THAT THE CITY IS LOOKING AT THE WORST CASE SCENARIO WHEN THEY LOOK AT DEVELOPMENT ACCORDING TO THE '84 AND THE '93 LAND USE PLANS THAT THESE ADVOCACY WILLINGLY ENTERED INTO AT THE TIME, WILLINGLY ENTERED INTO AT THE TIME AND AGREED TO BE GOVERNED BY OUR ORDINANCES AND RULES AT SUCH TIME AS THEY WERE ANNEXED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN. IN RETURN THEY GOT TO PROFIT FROM AN INVESTMENT IN SOME FARMLAND WAY OUT IN THE STICKS THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT WOULDN'T......... WOULDN'T BE FORTH A 10.. 10th OF WHAT IT'S WORTH RIGHT NOW. [ BUZZER SOUNDS ] SO WE WANT YOU TO LOOK AT THE LOWEST YOU COULD GIVE THEM UNDER THOSE REGULATIONS AND START BARGAINING FROM THAT PRICE POINT. DON'T START FROM THE WORST CASE AND COME BACK A LITTLE. START FROM THE BEST CASE AND SAY HEY, WE'RE WILLING TO WORK WITH YOU A LITTLE TO HELP YOU OUT IN THESE TRYING TIMES. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: GENERAL ANY SORENSON? GIVE ME YOUR NAME.

MY NAME IS DONNA TIEMENS. I'M A VOTING MEMBER OF BARTON SPRINGS ASSOCIATION AND THE CHAIR OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN BARTON VIEW. I APPRECIATE THE LONG HOURS AND HARD WORK THAT HAVE BEEN INVESTED IN THIS NEGOTIATED DEAL WITH STRATUS DEVELOPERS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS BY MANY OF OUR CITY STAFF. AND MEMBERS FROM SOME OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNITY. SOME OF WHOM I KNOW AT WORKING AT SAVE BARTON CREEK ASSOCIATION ON THE LONGHORN PIPELINE ISSUE AND THE HE BRODIE TRACT THAT BROUGHT TO PROPERTY ALONG BARTON CREEK THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR LIMITED DEVELOPMENT. HAVING SAID THIS, I CONTINUE TO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE DEAL THAT HAS BEEN BROKERED. I BELIEVE THERE ARE MANY QUESTIONS AND ISSUES THAT ARE STILL LEFT TO BE RESOLVED, AND IF APPROVED, I FEEL YOU'RE REMOVING THE LEVERAGE OUR CITY STAFF AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNITY HAVE TO NEGOTIATE BETTER CONDITIONS. I'M CONCERNED THAT MANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ABUTS WERE NOT CONTACTED UNTIL VERY LATE IN THE PROCESS, IF AT ALL. I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH INTERPRETATIONS OF THE DEAL AS BEING S.O.S. COMPLIANT. SPECIFICALLY IN REGARDS TO IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS. THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE SPECIFICALLY PROVIDES THAT DEVELOPMENT MUST BE DESIGNED, CARRIED OUT AND MAINTAINED ON A SITE BY SITE BASIS TO MEET THE POLLUTION PREVENTION REQUIREMENTS OF THE ORDINANCE. THE DEAL WITH STRATUS DEVELOPERS SIMPLY DOES NOT MEET THIS AND IS THEREFORE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH S.O.S. AT LEAST IF THE CITY IS GOING TO ALLOW FOR TRANSFER OF IMPERVIOUS COVER TO OCCUR, IT SHOULD ONLY OCCUR IN TRANSFERRING AREAS FROM A MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE TRACT TO ONE THAT IS NOT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE, SPECIFICALLY IN THE RECHARGE ZONE. INSTEAD THE STRATUS DEAL TAKES IMPERVIOUS COVER AREA FROM TRACTS IN THE CONTRIBUTING ZONE AND TRANSFERS THIS TO TRACTS IN THE RECHARGE ZONE OR THE MOST ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE TRACTS. THIS ENABLES THE DENSIST DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR IN OUR MOST SENSITIVE AREAS, WHICH BRINGS ME TO WHAT THESE IMPERVIOUS LEVELS HAVE EVOLVED TO. AND THESE MAY BE A LITTLE BIT OFF. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE NOALGHTED SOME OF THESE DOWN A LITTLE BIT LOWER. ON TRACT 106, 28%. TRACT 107 IS AT 43%. THIS SHOULD BE COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. THESE TRACTS ARE LOCATED AT THE ALREADY CONGESTED INTERSECTION OF SLAUGHTER LANE AND MOPAC. TRACTS 101, 103 AND 114 ARE AT 23% EACH AND TRACT 115 IS AT 25% IMPERVIOUS AREA. ONCE AGAIN, I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS MEETS S.O.S. COMPLIANCE, AND IF THIS METHOD OF TRANSFERRING HAS BEEN USED ON OTHER TRACTS AS WAS INDICATED BY... BYE-BYE ONE OF OUR CITY STAFF, THEN I WOULD HAVE TO CONCLUDE THAT OUR CITY STAFF IS NOT TAKING THE CITIZENS' WILL WHO.... CREATED THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE WITH SERIOUSNESS OR RESPECT. ANOTHER CONCERN IF WE LOOK AT THIS DEVELOPMENT ON A TRACT BY TRACT BASIS, MANY OF THE MOST DENSELY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS OCCUR ALONG LONGHORN PIPELINE, A 50-YEAR-OLD DORMANT OIL PIPELINE THAT OUR CITY, THE SAVE BARTON CREEK ASSOCIATION HAVE BEEN FIGHTING TO STOP AS EXXON MOBILE AND WILLIAMS ENERGY PROCEED TO CONVERT THIS OF FUEL UNDER PRESSURE OVER OUR AQUIFER. WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT YOU AS A COUNCIL WOULD BE APPROVING DENSE DEVELOPMENT FOR RETAIL AND HOUSING ALONG THE PIPELINE. HOUSING ALONG THE PIPELINE GOES TO THE VERY CORE OF OUR ARGUMENT OF ITS SAFETY AND PROXIMITY TO ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND HOMES. THERE STILL IS NO COMPREHENSIVE EVACUATION PLAN IN PLACE FOR THE POPULATIONS IN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS, MUCH LESS NEW ONES THAT YOU WOULD BE ALLOWING IF YOU APPROVED THIS DEAL.

Mayor Garcia: MA'AM, YOU'RE A MINUTE OVER YOUR TIME.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

I JUST HAD THREE MORE PARAGRAPHS, AND THEY'RE SHORT.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY.

THANK YOU. I WOULD ASK --

Mayor Garcia: WHAT WAS YOUR NAME, SIR?

[ INAUDIBLE ].

I WOULD ASK YOU TO CONSIDER NOT TO REWARD DEVELOPERS TO PURCHASE PROPERTY IN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS EXPECTING TO BUILD AS IF THEY WERE DEVELOPING IN HOUSTON. AUSTIN AND CENTRAL TEXAS ARE ENVIRONMENTALLY UNIQUE AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DRAW MORE PEOPLE TO THIS AREA. OUR WATER RESOURCES ARE ALREADY STRESSED AND EVEN THOSE IN OUTLYING COUNTIES ARE AWAKENING TO THIS REALIZATION. THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR EVEN MORE OMINOUS DEVELOPMENTS BEING PROPOSED FURTHER OUT OVER THE WATERSHED. AND I WOULD ADVICE ALL OF YOU HERE TONIGHT SPEAKING BEFORE THE COUNCIL OF THIS FACT. I WOULD ASK YOU TO SEND THIS PROPOSAL -- THIS PROPOSED DEAL BACK FOR FURTHER NEGOTIATION TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS BROUGHT TO YOU BY MYSELF AND ALL THE OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE THIS EVENING. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

Mayor Garcia: DENISE SORENSON -- JEANNIE SORENSON IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. RAFAEL, IS HE HERE? HE DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS REGISTERED AGAINST. ROBERT -- BARBARA ANDERSON? BARBARA ANDERSON? REGISTERED AGAINST. EVAN SCULLY? HE GAVE TIME TO MR. BILL BUNCH. OKAY. REGISTERED AGAINST. REED MURRAY, REGISTERED AGAINST. STEVE PRAYEDER, REGISTERED AGAINST. JIM WALKER, HE GAVE HIS TIME TO AMY RUPP. ROBERT McARTHUR, REGISTERED AGAINST. EARL HALL? IN FAVOR OF, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK. ALBERT CORTEZ DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND REGISTERED AGAINST. RON SPENCER, REGISTERED AGAINST. DAVID HELPNER DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, REGISTERED AGAINST. AND JIM WALKER WROTE SOMETHING THAT I DIDN'T READ. WILL RECOGNIZE AND APPLAUD THE EFFORTS TO DATE, ESPECIALLY THE AMENDMENTS MADE TO NEIGHBORHOODS ALONG 1826, BUT THERE REMAINS A NEED FOR BIGGER PICTURE PLANNING BEFORE SUCH DEALS ARE FINALIZED. THAT'S MR. JIM WALKER. JAMES ANDERSON FERGUSON, REGISTERED AGAINST. PAULA WYNN GAVE HER TIME TO BILL BUNCH, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS REGISTERED AGAINST. KEN HAYS GAVE TIME TO BILL BUNCH, IS REGISTERED AGAINST. STEVE ODOM GAVE HIS TIME TO BILL BUNCH, REGISTERED AINST. TROY LANIER, REGISTERED AGAINST. TOM HEARD DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, REGISTERED AGAINST. RUSTY'S.. OSBORNE, REGISTERED AGAINST. STEVEN BELL.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: YOU KNOW THE RULES, BILL.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: LET ME GO THROUGH THIS LIST, OKAY? I'LL PUT HIS CARD ASIDE. MIA THOMAS IS REGISTERED AGAINST. YOU'RE HERE? OKAY. YOU'RE UP. OLIVER HAS TIME. HE HAS NINE MINUTES TO SPEAK. [ LAUGHTER ] AS SOON AS I GET TO HIS CARD.

I'LL GIVE HIM MY TIME.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. LYNDON FLEPDZ, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK? ARE YOU GOING TO SPEAK FOR MR. PHELPS? HE'S GIVING YOU HIS TIME. GIVE ME -- GIVE ME YOUR NAME. MR. PHELPS HAS GIVEN YOU HIS THREE MINUTES, SO GO AHEAD AND SPEAK. [ LAUGHTER ] HE'S ALREADY GIVEN HIM HIS TIME, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT. YES, SIR. GO AHEAD.

I DON'T WANT TO --

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: ARE YOU GOING TO SPEAK OR NOT?

YES.

Mayor Garcia: YOU HAVE THE MICROPHONE.

I'M.... SPEAKING FOR MR. PHELPS. I'M RELATIVELY NEW AT THIS. I'M A NEW BOARD MEMBER OF S.O.S. I'VE BEEN AT THIS FOR JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS. I THINK EARLIER WHEN MR. HICKS, THE ATTORNEY, WAS TALKING ABOUT DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS IN A SITUATION, HE ALSO TALKED ABOUT LOSS OF SEEING A CONTINUUM AND THAT THERE'S NO BLACK OR WHITE, IT'S A GRAY AREA THROUGHOUT. I THINK A THOUSAND CUTS ARE ALSO A GRAY AREA, SOME CUTS ARE MUCH DEEPER THAN OTHERS AND I THINK THIS IS A VERY DEEP WOUND FOR THE AUSTIN AIR. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER THE IMMINENT ISSUE THAT THERE IS NO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH OTHER TIMES IN THE PAST WHEN THERE HAVE BEEN MORATORIUMS CONTROLLING DEVELOPMENT. RECENTLY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT PASSED DOWN A DECISION CONCERNING THE LAKE TAHOE MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT, AND DETERMINED THAT IT WAS LEGAL AND NO PROPERTY RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED IN DOING SO. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER A MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT UNTIL A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS MADE FOR THE AREA OF THE AQUIFER. [ APPLAUSE ] DICK SCALGHTSMAN. HE WAS HERE EARLIER. HE IS REGISTERED AGAINST. THIS IS AN ORDINARY DEVELOPMENT IN AN EXTRAORDINARY PLACE. MAC CLOVEGER IS REGISTERED AND DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. JOHN COREY? HE IS REGISTERED AGAINST. AARON GILES GIVES HIS TIME TO BILL BUNCH, REGISTERED AGAINST. MATTHEW SHOOK DOES NOT WISH TO SPI, REGISTERED AGAINST. MR. SAWYER REZ GAVE HIS TIME TO JOHN COREY AND IS REGISTERED AGAINST. DAVID NEW BURGER, REGISTERED AGAINST. ARE YOU HERE? OKAY.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: MR. PHELPS DPOA NATEED HIS TIME TO SOMEBODY ELSE. HE DIDN'T EVEN GIVE ME ON OWE WHAT'S YOUR NAME?

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: 296?

IT'S LATE.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. GO AHEAD, SIR. GO AHEAD.

I'M DON PHELPS -- I COULD CHANGE MY NAME IF IT WOULD WORK.

MR. PHELPS, GO AHEAD. YOU'VE GOT YOUR THREE MINUTES.

WELCOME EVERYONE TO -- WHAT DAY IS THIS, JUNE 28TH. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. WELL, I FIRST OF ALL WANT TO SAY THAT I'M AGAINST THIS PROJECT. SOME OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY STRIKE ME -- ONE OF THE THINGS I HEARD ON THE RADIO, I'M WONDERING CAN I ASK QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT? YOU FOLKS PROBABLY KNOW A LOT MORE ABOUT THIS THAN I DO. IS IT APPROPRIATE TO ASK COUNCILMEMBERS QUESTIONS ABOUT STUFF? OKAY. I'LL ASK. I HEARD THAT -- MAYBE I'M WRONG. MAYBE THE RADIO WAS WRONG, BUT I HEARD THAT THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN FINALIZED YET, AND ONE OF THOSE THINGS OF PROHIBITING USES, LIKE PROHIBITING USES OF CAR WASHES IN THIS PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD AND SOMETHING ABOUT SET.... SETBACKS. WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS ARE THESE -- FIRST OF ALL, WHY DO YOU MAKE A DECISION TO VOTE ON SOMETHING WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS YOU'RE VOTING ON? CAN ANYBODY ANSWER THAT? THEN I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. [ LAUGHTER ] IS THERE A GOOD GUESS ON THAT? BECAUSE AFTER THAT I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. IT'S KIND OF LATE. ANYBODY WANT TO --

Mayor Garcia: THIS IS YOUR TIME TO SPEAK.

BUT PART OF MY TIME IS I NEED TO GET CLARIFICATION BEFORE I CAN ASK THE NEXT QUESTION, WHICH IS WHY ARE YOU PREPARED TO VOTE ON SOMETHING EVEN THIS FIRST STEP TONIGHT, WHEN YOU ARE NOT SURE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE VOTING ON OR WHAT THEY REALLY MEAN. , LIKE PROHIBITING USES. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY IDEA?

GOODMAN: I'LL GIVE IT A SHOT, MAYOR.

Mayor Garcia: SURE.

Goodman: THE ZONING PROCESS IS ONE OF THREE READINGS, AN ORDINANCE HAS THREE READINGS. AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIRST ARE NOT NECESSARILY EXACTLY WHAT THE WISHES OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, DEVELOPER WERE. SO THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THERE FOR CONSIDERATION ALONG WITH THE ORIGINAL REQUEST, ALONG WITH WHATEVER ISSUES COME UP TO COUNCILMEMBERS THAT THEY MAY DISAGREE WITH FROM BOTH OF THOSE PROPOSALS. SO YOU HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL BECAUSE YOU GET INPUT FROM OTHER PEOPLE ON THE ISSUES THAT THEY HAVE. AND WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE -- ALL OF THE THREE READINGS, YOU HOPEFULLY HAVE TIME TO DISCUSS ALL THE ISSUES, LIKE PROHIBITION. AND THERE'S A LIST AND SO WHEN YOU GET TO THE THIRD READING AND THE FINAL READING, ALL OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN WORKED OUT BY DISCUSSION ARE IN THAT FINAL DRAFT. SO YOU DON'T WORK IT OUT UNTIL YOU HEAR EVERYBODY.

SO THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS PROCESS, IN THIS DECISION, THAT YOU ARE -- [ BUZZER SOUNDS ]

Goodman: NO, WE'RE HEARING ABOUT THEM.

OKAY. SOMEONE WAS GOING TO GIVE ME SOME TIME. WHAT NUMBER ARE YOU?

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: YOU ALREADY GAVE TIME TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

NO, HE DIDN'T. THEY'RE JUST SITTING NEXT TO EACH OTHER. WHAT'S YOUR NAME?

Mayor Garcia: NOT 295.

GOOD TRY.

Mayor Garcia: IF YOU WANT SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED, WE CAN PROVIDE A STAFF PERSON TO DO THAT BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A FORUM FOR ASKING QUESTIONS, THIS IS A FORUM FOR YOU TO SPEAK.

IT WOULD BE REALLY NICE IF IT COULD BE.

Mayor Garcia: SO IF SOMEBODY FROM THE STAFF OF WATERSHED PROTECTION COULD HELP MR. PHELPS, I'D APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, MR. PHELPS.

ALL RIGHT. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS DAVID NEWBURGER. I'M A MEMBER OF THE S.O.S. ALLIANCE. AND 12 YEARS AGO HUNDREDS OF AUSTIN CITIZENS SHOWED UP TO VOICE OPPOSITION TO DEVELOPMENT PLANS THAT FREEPORT MCMORAN HAD FOR LAND ON OUR AQUIFER. THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN WERE STANDING UP FOR PRESERVATION OF BARTON SPRINGS, THE HEART AND SOUL OF THE AUSTIN LIFE-STYLE. 10 YEARS AGO THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN VOTED TWO TO ONE TO PRESERVE OUR AQUIFER, TO PRESERVE BARTON SPRINGS, TO PRESERVE THE AUSTIN LIFE-STYLE. TODAY WE ARE HERE FACING A PROPOSAL FOR A MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE ON TOP OF OUR AQUIFER THAT WILL DID HE GRADE THE LIFE-STYLE OF ESTABLISHED SOUTHERN AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS, ENCOURAGE SUBURBAN SPRAWL, CREATE MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTIONS, INCREASE OUR AIR POLLUTION THAT IS ALREADY BEYOND LEVELS ALLOWED BY THE FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT. IT WILL INCREASE POLLUTION GOING INTO THE WATERSHED WHICH SUPPLIES DRINKING WATER TO 50,000 PEOPLE. THE LIFE-STYLE THAT IS SO DEAR TO THE CITIZENS OF CENTRAL TEXAS IS UNDER SIEGE. THIS DOES NOT HAVE TO BE. FOR A FRACTION OF THE DOLLARS THIS REGION IS SPENDING ON THE BUILDING OF FREEWAYS, OUR AQUIFER, THE BARTON SPRINGS AQUIFER, COULD BE PRESERVED FOREVER. CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE RECOGNIZING THE ENDLESS BUILDING OF FREEWAYS TO REACH SATELLITE OFFICE PARKS IN SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOODS ARE DESTROYING THE LIVE ABILITY OF THEIR COMMUNITY. PORTLAND, SALT LAKE CITY, CHICAGO AND OTHERS HAVE PULLED THEIR REGIONS TOGETHER TO FORMULATE REGION WIDE PLANNING TO DEAL WITH THIS UNWORKABLE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT THAT STARTED IN THE 19 50'S. CURRENTLY IN OUR COMMUNITY, FIVE COUNTIES HAVE BANDED TOGETHER IN THE CENTRAL TEXAS REGIONAL VISIONING PROJECT TO WORK TOWARDS A SOLUTION TO PRESERVING THE WAY OF LIFE IN CENTRAL TEXAS. WE NEED TO LET THE REGIONAL PLANNING PROCESS BEGIN TO TAKE SHAPE BEFORE WE MAKE DECISIONS THAT FURTHER HAMPER OUR SOLVING OF THIS REGIONAL PUZZLE. WE NEED OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO FOCUS ON HOW TO PRESERVE THE AUSTIN LIFE-STYLE. WE NEED TO PUT THIS PROPOSAL FROM STRATUS ON TOP OF OUR WATERSHED ON HOLD UNTIL OUR NEIGHBORS, THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN, THE CENTRAL TEXAS COMMUNITY HAS TAKEN TIME TO DELIBERATE AND PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE. MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, I ASK YOU TO TAKE A STAND AS OUR LEADERS AND PLEASE PUT THIS PROPOSAL ON HOLD. [ BUZZER SOUNDS ] [ APPLAUSE ]

..

YES, MAYOR PRO TEM, MY NAME IS RUSTY OWES BORN. O.O.'S BORNE.

Goodman: YOUR NOT WHO I HAVE NEXT. WAS YOUR NAME CALLED EARLIER.

IT WAS. I THOUGHT GUS WAS CALLING PEOPLE TO LINE UP AND NOT CALLING THEIR CARD.

Goodman: GO AHEAD. THANKS.

I'LL BE BRIEF. I'D LIKE TO ECHO THE SENTIMENTS OF OTHER SPEAKERS WHO HAVE SAID WHAT A HORRENDOUS DISAPPOINTMENT IT IS TO BE HERE AGAIN FIGHTING THIS FIGHT ON IMPERVIOUS COVER OVER THE WATERSHED. YOU KNOW, THE RULES, THE LAWS, THE SCIENCE IS ALL THE SAME. NOTHING HAS CHANGED EXCEPT THE NAME OF THE DEVELOPER AND THE EXACT LOCATION OF THE CRIME. THAT'S WHAT'S CHANGED. YOU KNOW, I KEEP THINKING FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS THESE CITIZENS HAVE HIRED BABYSITTERS TO COME DOWN HERE AND HANG OUT ALL NIGHT TO FIGHT THESE HIRED GUNS OVER THIS ISSUE. AND, YOU KNOW, I FRANKLY AM OUT OF WAYS TO SAY THIS DIFFERENTLY. WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER OPTIONS. OPTIONS TO PROTECT THIS EXCEPT TO TURN TO YOU, OUR ELECTED LEADERS, TO ACT RESPONSIBLY ON OUR BEHALF. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT A LAWYER. I'M A SCIENTIST. MY UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR LEGAL PREDICAMENT AND YOUR POSITION IN THIS IS THAT FREEPORT MCMORAN HAS YOU OVER A BARREL. IT'S DO THIS OR DO SOMETHING WORSE. I'D JUST LIKE TO QUOTE A HERO OF MINE ON A SUBJECT SIMILAR TO THIS ISSUE. AND THE FELLOW'S NAME IS JOHN BARCARD. HE IS NOT REAL, BUT HEROES ARE GETTING HARD TO FIND. [ LAUGHTER ] JOHN LUKE WAS ASKED WHAT HE WOULD DO UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN HE WAS BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE. AND THE JUDGE WAS GOING TO DECIDE HIDZ FATE. AND HIS ANSWER WAS THE ONLY ANSWER THAT MADE ANY SENSE AND ONLT ANSWER THAT MAKES ANY SENSE FOR YOU, AND THAT IS TO SAY, IF WE'RE TO BE DAMNED FOR BEING WHO WE ARE, THEN LET'S BE WHO WE REALLY ARE. AND WHO WE ARE IS A COMMUNITY OF ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO LOVE OUR RESOURCES. THAT'S WHAT SETS US APART FROM EVERY OTHER CITY IN THIS STATE. [ APPLAUSE ] I JUST IMPLORE YOU TO TAKE THE LONGVIEW AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT SATISFIES STRATUS' RIGHT TO DEVELOP -- [ BUZZER SOUNDS ] AND OUR RIGHT TO HAVE A CHERISHED RESOURCE. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] EMPLOY R.

Goodman: WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS READ OUT A BUNCH OF NAMES AND SEE WHO IS HERE. THAT WAY EVERYBODY CAN BE READY TO SPEAK WHO IS HERE. MAX CLOGGER, I MAY BE MISPRONOUNCING THAT. IS MR. CLOGGER HERE? HE IS IN FAVOR. MELANIE HAGERTON? MELANIE HAGERTON DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS AGAINST. ANDRE ILLIG -- ILEKS. HE IS IN FAVOR. JAMIE KEY? JAMIE KEY IS IN FAVOR. ROBERT JOHNSON? MR. JOHNSON, PHIL BROWN HAS GIVEN YOU THREE MINUTES. IS MR. BROWN HERE?

[ INAUDIBLE ]. HE YIELDED ME HIS TIME WHEN HE SIGNED UP YESTERDAY.

Goodman: HE WOULD HAVE TO BE HERE TO GIVE YOU HIS TIME, BUT LET ME CALL SOME MORE PEOPLE AND MAYBE SOMEONE ELSE WILL. JAMES GILLY? JANE GILLY IS AGAINST. RAY GILLY IS IN FAVOR. OKAY. INTERESTING CONVERSATION AT HOME. MEAGAN BARKIN? JOHN LARKIN?

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Goodman: OKAY. SHE WAS OPPOSED.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Goodman: I UNDERSTAND. PHYLLIS BARREN IS AGAINST. CRAIG BARREN IS AGAINST. ELAINE PUPPE DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, IS AGAINST. DARWIN MANN IS AGAINST. JESSICA FLARE, FLAIN IS IN FAVOR. LISA KIPPITZ IS OPPOSED. SUSAN HOOVER IS IN FAVOR. SCOTT JOHNSON? SCOTT JOHNSON IS OPPOSED. DIANE EMMITT OR MAYBE EMMORT IS OPPOSED. JACKIE PRICE IS IN FAVOR. MIKE PRICE IS IN FAVOR. NICOLE GOLITH IS OPPOSED. RYAN GOLDEN IS OPPOSED. GREGORY SEIBERS IS IN FAVOR. SUSAN BERGERON, WHO HAD DONATED TIME TO PAUL TESLEK. I THINK HE SPOKE. OKAY. SHE WAS OPPOSED. MIKE DAVIS IS OPPOSED. JAMIE PULLETZA IS OPPOSED. JAY AARON SELLERS IS OPPOSED. DONNA TIEMENS, WHO WAS HERE, IS OPPOSED. DONALD ROWES -- ROJAS DOES NOT WISH TO PE, IS IN FAVOR. CHERYL ROJAS IS IN FAVOR. MIKE DAVIS -- OKAY, THAT'S A DUPLICATE. HE'S OPPOSED. ROBIN TROUGH -- PARDON?

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Goodman: OH, THAT WORKS. OKAY. THE NEXT PERSON. OKAY. AFTER MR. JOHNSON, ANOTHER CHERYL ROJAS, STEVE BEERS IS THE NEXT ONE. I KNOW HE'S SOMEWHERE. I SAW HIM. SO LET'S STICK WITH THREE FOR THE MOMENT. WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE.

BEFORE I BEGIN, I WOULD LIKE THE ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES YIELDED TO ME BY PHIL BROWN. UP UNTIL JOHN LARKIN SPOKE, NO PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKED WHETHER THE PEOPLE YIELDING THEM TIME WERE PHYSICALLY PRESENT IN THE CHAMBERS.

Goodman: WELL, IT IS OUR YEAR, IF IT WASN'T ASKED, I'M SORRY.

HE HUNG ON HERE UNTIL MIDNIGHT. AND I THINK IT'S A LITTLE MUCH TO ASK THAT SOMEONE YIELDING TIME STAY PAST MIDNIGHT TO HAVE THEIR THREE MINUTES COUNT.

Goodman: IT IS OUR RULE. I'LL DEFER TO THE MAYOR.

..[ LAUGHTER ]

Mayor Garcia: LET ME SAY THIS. EXCUSE ME JUST A SECOND. WE PROBABLY HAVE 300 OR MORE SPEAKERS STILL SIGNED UP. AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO FINISH TONIGHT, SO IT PROBABLY WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN UNTIL THE 11th OF JULY, WHICH IS OUR NEXT MEETING, AT WHICH TIME MAYBE WE CAN HAVE A WHOLE DAY FOR THIS DEDICATED -- THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE THAT. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].

Mayor Garcia: THOSE WHO ALREADY SPOKE, ALREADY SPOKE. THOSE WILL NOT BE RECOGNIZED. BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO FINISH. THERE'S PEOPLE OUTSIDE CALLING PEOPLE TO COME IN RIGHT NOW. [ LAUGHTER ] THEY'LL BE SLEEPING UNTIL 5:00 O'CLOCK AND THEN WAKE UP AND COME HERE AND WE'LL STILL BE HERE. SO LET ME SEE IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO CONSIDER POSTPONING OR CONTINUING THIS PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY THE 11th. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THROUGH TONIGHT.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: WE HAVE HAD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON SATURDAY AND SUNDAY BEFORE. BUT WHAT ARE THE WISHES OF THE COUNCIL?

Wynn: MAYOR, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF EVERYBODY WHO SIGNED UP CERTAINLY GETTING A CHANCE TO SPEAK, BUT AT SOME POINT WE SHOULD SAY IF YOU'RE SIGNED UP NOW, YOU ARE GOING TO SPEAK. AND I AGREE WE WON'T GET IT DONE TONIGHT. WE DON'T CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUES AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, WHICH I GUESS IS THE 11th OF JULY, BUT EVERYBODY WHO SIGNS UP TO SPEAK SHOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK, BUT WE SHOULD CUT IT OFF NOW. IF YOU SIGNED UP NOW, YOU GET TO SPEAK. THERE'S 380 SOME-ODD STILL LEFT AND --

Mayor Garcia: LET ME SHOW YOU THE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]. LET ME ENTERTAIN A MOTION BASICALLY TO DO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER WYNN SAYS, AND THAT IS THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK TONIGHT, YOU WILL BE RECOGNIZED ON THE 11th FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. AND WE WILL -- WE WILL RECESS THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK UP ON THE 11th AND WE'LL TALK TO THE LEADERSHIP. MAYBE SOMETHING CAN BE WORKED OUT. WE HEARD A LOT OF PUBLIC HEARING. WE HAD QUITE A BIT OF GOOD PUBLIC INPUT, SO, COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, IF YOU -- NO, SIR. THE COUNCIL IS HAVING A DISCUSSION, OKAY, IF Y'ALL DON'T MIND.

Wynn: . FRANKLY, I'M HERE AND THERE ARE A LOT OF FOLKS HERE. I'M PREPARED TO STAY AT SOME POINT LONGER TONIGHT, BUT I WOULD -- I GUESS I'D MAKE A MOTION THAT WE AMEND WHATEVER RULES MIGHT BE EXISTING AND POTENTIALLY SAY IF YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED UP BEFORE ONE A.M. -- IF YOU SIGNED UP BEFORE ONE A.M. YOU WILL GET A CHANCE TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE'LL GO ANOTHER HOUR TONIGHT AND THEN EVERYBODY WHO SIGNED UP WHO HASN'T SPOKEN YET CAN SPEAK AT THE CONTINUATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH WILL BE TWO WEEKS FROM TODAY.

Mayor Garcia: THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR -- THERE ARE ENOUGH PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK TO LAST FOR A LONG TIME. AND THEN IF YOU SIGNED UP TONIGHT UNTIL AUSTIN OAK, -- 1:00 O'CLOCK, YOU WILL BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK WHEN WE CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 11th.

Goodman: MAYOR, CAN I ASK FOR A LITTLE CLARIFICATION?

Mayor Garcia: LET ME SEE IF THERE'S A SECOND TO THAT MOTION.

Goodman: I'LL SECOND IT FOR DISCUSSION. I WANT TO KNOW IF WHAT I WAS HEARING IF THOSE WHO ARE HERE TONIGHT WHO ARE STILL HERE THAT ARE SIGNED UP ARE THE FOLKS THAT WE CONTINUE TO LISTEN TO, AND WHEN THOSE IN THE ROOM WHO HAVE SIGNED UP ARE FINISHED SPEAKING, THEN WE CALL IT A DAY AND CONTINUE ON THE 11th. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?

Mayor Garcia: WELL, WHAT THE MOTION WAS IS THAT WE WOULD CUT OFF THE SIGNING AT 1:00 O'CLOCK AND THEN WE'LL STAY HERE UNTIL 2:00 O'CLOCK AND LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE. AND THEN WE WILL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 11.. 11th.

Goodman: THAT'S FINE, IF THAT'S THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY WHO LASTED THIS LONG GETS TO GO AHEAD AND SPEAK TONIGHT.

Mayor Garcia: SURE. A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE ALREADY SPOKE, SO WE CAN DO THAT. OKAY. IS THERE A MOTION. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. DISCUSSION?

Slusher: I HAVE A COMMENT. I WOULD JUST SOON WAIT UNTIL -- IT SEEMS TO ME WE WOULD WAIT UNTIL WE'RE READY TO DO THAT TO VOTE BECAUSE I THINK -- THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT AREN'T HERE THAT ARE IN THAT -- IN THAT STACK. I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND SEE WHAT WE CAN GET DONE TONIGHT. WE MIGHT FINISH TONIGHT. I KNOW I CAN MAKE IT AWHILE. I CAN MAKE IT AWHILE LONGER.

Mayor Garcia: THEY ARE PEOPLE COMING IN THAT HAVE SIGNED UP AND LEFT AND COME BACK. SO IT'S A CONSTANT FLOW OF PEOPLE COMING IN HERE. PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, PROBABLY HAD DINNER AND COMING BACK. SO WE COULD BE HERE UNTIL, YOU KNOW, 10:00 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING. [ APPLAUSE ] [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].

Mayor Garcia: RATHER THAN DOING THAT, WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR 13 HOURS. RATHER THAN DOING THAT, WHY DON'T WE JUST CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 11th? WE'RE NOT GOING TO DECIDE TONIGHT ANYWAY. WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO FINISH THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE HAVE TO ENTER INTO THE DISCUSSION. THERE HAS TO BE TIME FOR -- LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THE ITEMS ARE LEFT. WE WILL HAVE THE APPLICANT, DRENNER, GETTING A REBUTTAL, AND THEN WE HAVE VOTES ON THE SETTLEMENT ORDINANCE, ITEMS 107, 110 AND 111, AND THEN WE HAVE -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO -- WE'RE GOING TO DEFER THE VOTES ON THE RESOLUTIONS ON ITEMS 108, 109D, 112, 113, AND THEN WE HAVE THE VOTE ON THE ZONING, Z-9, Z-10 TO 15. Z-17 TO 21 AND Z-23 AND 24. SO IT'S AN ENORMOUSLY LARGE AGENDA IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

Mayor Garcia: YOU CAN PUT YOUR HANDS DOWN. WE'RE NOT SEEING THE ONES --

[INAUDIBLE]

Goodman: I THINK YOU ALL HAVE ALREADY BEEN COUNTED SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO HOLD YOUR HAND UP ANYMORE.

Mayor Garcia: LET ME HAVE YOUR ATTENTION, PLEASE. THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK WILL BE RECOGNIZED ON THE 11th FOR PURPOSES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY? SO WE'RE CUTTING OFF THE SIGN-UP. BECAUSE WE'VE HAD, YOU KNOW --

[INAUDIBLE]

Mayor Garcia: THE PEOPLE THAT SPOKE AND HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED, AND I'M GOING TO READ INTO THE RECORD THE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE SAID THEY DON'T WISH TO SPEAK. I'LL INDICATE WHETHER THEY ARE FOR OR AGAINST. ARE YOU READY? LET HEE DO..........LET ME DO THAT FIRST. KERR REBROWN IS AGAINST, NOT WISH TO GO SPEAK. SARAH WHEEL NOT WISH TO GO SPEAK, AGAINST. RACHEL ANDREWS. AGAINST, NOT WISH TO GO SPEAK. KEY ANDREWS. NOT WISHING TO SPEAK. I'M GOING TO READ ALL THE PEOPLE AGAINST NOT WISH TO GO SPEAK. KEITH I CAN'T REMEMBER BORROW. MATT GOODING. SARAH FUCH. SUSAN MASON. LARISSA ELLIOTT. ELIZABETH MARTINEZ. JACKIE BROWN. KATHERINE MATH THINKS. RICHARD LEVINE. KELLY ROBINSON. I CAN'T READ THE NAME. SOMETHING. LEE INGRAM. DEBORAH BYRD. SUSAN TATE. LYNETTE HALL..... HALLOW. ARDEN KIM. SUSAN -- THIS NAME AGAIN. SARAH CHEEL. KERRY BROWN. RACHEL McHENRY. THESE ARE THE SAME NAMES I ALREADY READ.

[INAUDIBLE]. MATT....

Mayor Garcia: MATT GOODING. LISA ELLIOTT. SALLY VIDAL. JACKIE BROWN. KATHERINE MATHIS. KELLY ROBINS. RICH DEVINE. WE ALREADY READ THAT INTO THE RECORD. RENEE FUCKUA. PAUL [INAUDIBLE]. RODNEY GIBBS. NANCY MIMS. [INAUDIBLE] ABE RAMS. DOUG MARCUS. EBRON DUNN. PAUL THRELKILL. NANCY MIMS. MARGARET JONES. LANE TODAY QUASI, I THINK. MIKE DORR. KAREN ABBOT. CHARLIE PEEVERT. PAIGE DID YOU KNOW..................PAIGE DUNLAP. THOMAS BUTLER. JEANNIE DEFREEZE. JERRY DEFREEZE. JULIE LOCK. DARRIN CLARY. ALEX LIGHT. ASIA GUINELL. PAUL SHIRLEY. STEVE BANKS. KATHLEEN MARTELL. BETH PLASIK. DAVID BAIN. DIANE BLYCH. LARRY COLATSE.

MARGARET JONES IS HERE AND WANTED TO SPEAK.

SHE SIGNED UP AND SAID SHE DIDN'T WANT TO SPEAK.

[INAUDIBLE] GLF ALL........

Mayor Garcia: ALL RIGHT.

MR. MAYOR, MAY I ASK A POINT OF ORDER?

Mayor Garcia: NO. THE COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING ONE MOTION AND THAT IS TO CUT OFF THE SIGNING AT 1:00. WHOEVER IS SIGN WILL BE RECOGNIZED. THAT MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION IN ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

Mayor Garcia: MOTION CARRIES.

Goodman: WELL, I DIDN'T HEAR THE CLARIFICATION. I HAD ASKED COUNCILMEMBER WYNN IS THIS FOR AN HOUR OR THIS IS RELATIVE TO THE PEOPLE SIGNED UP WHO ARE HERE?

Mayor Garcia: NO, WHOEVER SIGNED UP BY 1:00 IS GOING TO BE RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK EITHER TONIGHT OR NEXT -- ON THE 11th.

Goodman: WELL, HOW DO WE DECIDE WHERE OUR CUTOFF POINT IS.

Mayor Garcia: HUH?

Goodman: HOW DO WE DECIDE FOR OUR CUTOFF FOR DAY. WHOEVER IS HERE IS SIGNED UP IN.

Mayor Garcia: WELL THAT'S AN ISSUE OF HOW LONG THE COUNCIL WANTS TO STAY HERE.

Goodman: WELL, WE CAN REASSESS LATER. WE'RE NOT THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO NEED SLEEP.

Mayor Garcia: YEAH. BUT THE MOTION HAD TO DO WITH CUTOFF FIRST, AND THAT MOTION CARRIED. UNANIMOUSLY. NOW, WE'RE GOING TO NOW START GOING THROUGH THE CARDS, AND I'LL -- THE FIRST ONE IS ROBERT JOHNSON.

YES, SIR.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. YOU ARE ON.

MR. MAYOR, I WANTED TO ASK, I'M OUT OF TURN AND I WANTED TO ASK ONE BRIEF QUESTION. SEEMS A LOT OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE AGAINST BUT DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK ARE GONE BECAUSE IT WAS GETTING SO LATE.

Mayor Garcia: IF YOU ARE SIGNED UP --

I AM SIGNED UP AND I WOULD SPEAK. A LOT OF THOSE PEOPLE WOULD SPEAK IF THEY HAD THE CHANCE TO 11th.

Mayor Garcia: IF THEY SIGNED UP BY 1:00, THEY CAN SPEAK.

Wynn: I THINK IF I CAN CLARIFY, ACCEPT IF YOU'VE ALREADY READ THEIR NAME INTO THE RECORD AND STATED FOR OR AGAINST, IF THEY'VE ALREADY CHOSEN NOT TO SPEAK --

Mayor Garcia: THE ONES THAT CHOSE NOT TO SPEAK, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO SPEAK BECAUSE THEY REGISTERED NOT TO SPEAK. THEY DESIGNATED ON THE CARD OR ON THIS SHEET WHETHER THEY WANTED TO SPEAK. THE ONES THAT DON'T WANT TO SPEAK ARE NOT SPEAKING. THE ONES THAT WANT TO SPEAK, AND MR. JOHNSON, WE'LL GET TO YOU AS SOON AS WE FINISH THIS DISCUSSION. WHICH WE'RE FINISHED NOW.

MR. MAYOR, DOES THAT FOLLOW THE RULES --

Mayor Garcia: MR. JOHNSON.

I THINK AT ONE POINT I HAD AN OFFER OF AN ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES FROM SOMEONE WHO WAS HERE. AGAINST. YES.

[INAUDIBLE].

Mayor Garcia: GIVE HIM SIX MINUTES.

THANK YOU. MAYOR GARCIA AND MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCILMEMBERS, I'M ROBERT JOHNSON. I'M VICE PRESIDENT OF THE CHERRY CREEK ON BRODIE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I SHOULD START OFF BY SAYING --

Mayor Garcia: LET ME STOP YOU FOR JUST A SECOND. COULD WE CONCLUDE OUR CONVERSATION SO MR. JOHNSON CAN BE HEARD? GO AHEAD, SIR.

THANK YOU. AS I SAID, I'M VICE PRESIDENT OF CHERRY CREEK ON BRODIE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I'M ALSO CHAIRMAN OF ITS DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. I WANT TO BE UP FRONT. I'M NOT AN ENVIRONMENTIST. I AM NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT DEAD SALAMANDERS. I HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AND AS LATE AS IT IS IN THE EVENING, I HOPE YOU CAN GIVE ME A FRESH EAR. I COME TO YOU AS A LAWYER, AS A NEIGHBORHOOD LEADER, AND AS A TAXPAYER. AND I HAVE CONCERNS IN EACH OF THOSE THREE AREAS. AS AN ATTORNEY, I AM CONCERNED, AND IT'S MY BELIEF THAT THIS COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO THIS SETTLEMENT. THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE WAS PASSED BY PETITION AND REFERENDUM, BY DIRECT VOTE OF THE VOTERS OF AUSTIN. AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS COUNCIL SHOULD FEEL AT LIBERTY TO AMEND OR TO WAIVE THAT ORDINANCE WITHOUT GOING BACK TO THE SAME VOTERS WHO PASSED IT. [APPLAUSE] [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

IT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT CLUSTERING IS A GOOD IDEA AND THAT THE VOTERS WOULD APPROVE IT, BUT WE'LL NEVER KNOW UNLESS SOMEONE ACTUALLY PUTS IT ON THE BALLOT AND WE TEST IT. I PERSONALLY MIGHT SUPPORT CLUSTERING IF THERE WAS A CAP. IF THERE WAS A 25 OR 30% CAP. BUT THESE 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER TRACTS MAKE NO SENSE AT ALL. AND ALLOWING CLUSTERING WITHOUT ANY CRITERIA OR ANY GUIDELINES IS IN MY OPINION IRRESPONSIBLE. AS A TAXPAYER, I HAVE TO WONDER WITH THE TIGHT BUDGET WHETHER WE NEED TO BE GIVING THESE TAX CREDITS TO A LAND DEVELOPER. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD -- [APPLAUSE] OUR NEIGHBORHOOD'S PLAYSCAPE WAS BURNED BY AN ARSONIST A YEAR AGO. AT THE TIME WE ASKED FOR IT TO BE REPLACED AND WE WERE TOLD WE HAD MISSED THE CAPITAL BUDGET CYCLE. COME BACK NEXT YEAR. NOW WE'RE BEING TOLD DO NOT EVEN ASK FOR THAT PLAYSCAPE TO BE REPLACED FOR AT LEAST TWO YEARS BECAUSE THE BUDGET IS NOT THERE. AS A PARENT, I HAVE TO REMEMBER NOT TO TAKE MY TWO LITTLE GIRLS TO THE LIBRARY ON THURSDAYS BECAUSE IT'S CLOSED.

YEAH! [APPLAUSE]

IT WOULD BE MY SPRONG PREFERENCE THAT THIS -- STRONG PREFERENCE THAT THIS CITY COUNCIL TELL STRZ THE TAX CREDIT BANK IS -- STRATUS THAT THE TAX CREDIT BANK IS CLOSED AND KEEP THE LIBRARY OPEN. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

NOW, AS A NEIGHBORHOOD LEADER, I NEED TO TELL YOU OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS. NO ONE TOLD US ABOUT ANY STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS. EVEN THOUGH WE'RE ONE OF THE CLOSEST NEIGHBORHOODS TO TRACT 108. THERE ARE A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WERE NEVER INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROCESS WHEN THE TERM SHEET WAS BEING FORMED. WHEN THE IMPORTANT DECISIONS WERE BEING MADE. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS WHOLE THING ABOUT A WEEK BEFORE THE FIRST ZAPCO HEARING. AND WE IMMEDIATELY PUT IN A REQUEST FOR A P LIKE WE NT LIKE WE ALWAYS DO WHEN WE DON'T KNOW ANY DETAILS. CITY STAFF COULD NOT GIVE US A COPY OF THE REPORT TELLING US WHAT THE STRATUS DEAL WAS UNTIL THE AFTERNOON OF THE ZAPCO HEARING. ONE OF THE FIRST VOTES THE GAPCO TOOK WAS DENY ALL ACCUMULATED REQUESTS FOR POSTPONEMENT. IT WAS A SHOCK TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS WHO WERE MERELY ASKING FOR ENOUGH TIME TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS DEAL WAS ABOUT. TO THEIR CREDIT, BEFORE THE EVENING WAS OVER, THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION CHANGED THEIR COMMISSION AND TO HER GREAT CREDIT THE CHAIR OF ZAPCO, BETTY BAKER, PUT TOGETHER THE STRATUS TASK FORCE TO TRY TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAD BEEN EXCLUDED TO VOICE THEIR CONCERNS. BUT IT WAS TOO LATE. IF YOU LOOK AT HOW THIS DEAL WAS FORMULATED, CASEY DOBSON ON BEHALF OF THE CITY WORKED HARD. AND HE GOT THE BEST DEAL HE THOUGHT HE COULD GET. I'M CONVINCED OF THAT. HE'S NOT SELLING ANYBODY OUT. HE DIDN'T TANK. HE TRIED. CIRCLE C HOA CAME TO THE TABLE AND THEY PUSHED AND THEY GOT A LITTLE BETTER DEAL. THE WILD FLOWER CENTER CAME TO THE TABLE AND PUSHED AND IMPROVED THE DEAL STILL FURTHER. AND ALL THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE ASKING FOR IS A CHANCE TO MAKE THE DEAL THAT MUCH BETTER. BECAUSE I'VE NEVER SEEN A SETTLEMENT OR A DEAL THAT CAN'T BE IMPROVED BY ADDITIONAL VIEWPOINTS AND ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVES. AND WE ARE PROPERTY OWNERS WHOSE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS EARLY ON. WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN INVOLVED BEFORE A TERM SHEET WAS SIGNED. AND ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR IS THE CHANCE TO HELP THE COUNCIL HELP THE ATTORNEYS MAKE THE DEAL BETTER. I WOULD NOT HAVE LEFT WORK EARLY TONIGHT. I WOULD NOT HAVE SKIPPED DINNER, STAYED HERE THIS LATE AND LOST ALL OF MY FAMILY TIME FOR THE EVENING IF I DID NOT FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT THIS DEAL COULD BE IMPROVED BY THE INVOLVEMENT OF OUR ASSOCIATION AND ALL OF THE OTHER ASSOCIATIONS THAT WE'VE TALKED TO THAT WERE LEFT OUT. WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER A LOOSE COALITION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIRM UP INTO A PERMANENT COALITION. THE OPERATING NAME IS SOUTHWEST AUSTIN ASSOCIATION OF NEIGHBORHOODS. AND WE ARE TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER AN ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU HOLD OFF LONG ENOUGH TO SEE WHAT THESE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE TO SAY, SEE IF WE CAN MAKE THE DEAL BETTER AND UNDERSTAND THAT THE SAME PETITION AND REFERENDUM THAT PASSED S.O.S. CAN ALSO BE USED TO KILL THIS DEAL. IF YOU WANT THIS DEAL TO GO THROUGH, HAVE YOU TO GET THE PUBLIC SUPPORT TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. AND WE HAVE NOT SEEN THAT EFFORT YET. YOU KNOW HOW TO CONTACT US, AND WE WILL BE IN TOUCH. BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE INCLUDED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU, SIR. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

Goodman: MAYOR, I THINK STAFF SHOULD PROVIDE MR. JOHNSON WITH A COPY OF THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. AS A LAWYER, I THINK A GOOD THING YOU SHOULD HAVE. THE ISSUE OF CLUSTERING IS SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO GO INTO BECAUSE IT'S A PRETTY LENGTHY PRESENTATION.

[INAUDIBLE].

IN THIS ROOM ON THE COUNCIL, ANYONE INVOLVED IS SPENDING A LOT OF ENERGY THINKING OUTSIDE OF THE BOX, WHAT COULD WE DO HERE TO MAYBE PLEASE EVERYONE AND GET A WIN-WIN SITUATION. HOW COULD WE NEGOTIATE THIS. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE, BUT I'M HOPING THAT EVERYBODY SPENDS THEIR TIME DOING THAT. AND I HOPE THAT EVERYONE IS THINKING ABOUT DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE COULD WORK TOGETHER. YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING OF THINGS AND I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH REALLY TO OFFER YOU ANYTHING TONIGHT, BUT SOMEONE MENTIONED TAKING THE MONEY AND SPENDING IT ON LAWYERS TO FIGHT THIS CASE THAT WE ARE GOING TO TURN OVER TO STRATUS. OR MAYBE SOMEHOW FINDING SOME LAND SOMEWHERE TO OFFER THEM AS SOME SORT OF A TRADE OR SOMETHING AND MOVE THEM OUT OF THE SENSITIVE AREA. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE LOTS OF OTHER OPTIONS, I'M SURE. AND IT'S JUST GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF DIALOGUE TO GET TO THE RIGHT THING, I THINK. BUT WHAT I CAN OFFER YOU TONIGHT IS I WANT TO OFFER YOU A PICTURE -- AM I TOO LOUD? -- THAT I TOOK THIS MORNING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, BARTON HILLS. COUNCILWOMAN DUNKERLEY MAY HAVE SEEN THIS.

Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU HOLD JUST A SECOND? THE CLOCK IS NOT RUNNING. [LAUGHTER] PARALYZED IT OR WHAT?

I JUST HAVE A COUPLE SENTENCES LEFT ANYWAY. SHE MAY HAVE SEEN THIS BUILDING WHEN SHE DROVE TO THE MEETING. AT THE CORNER OF BARTON SKYWAY AND BARTON HILLS. WHEN YOU DRIVE TO THAT INTERSECTION AND YOU LOOK TO THE SOUTH, TO THE LEFT, YOU WILL SEE SOME HUGE -- TWO HUGE BUILDINGS THAT ARE BUILT RIGHT ON TOP OF BARTON CREEK BASICALLY RIGHT ON THE BLUFF, AND IT'S THE TERRACE. IT'S NOT STRATUS, BUT IT'S THE SAME PRINCIPLE. UNFORTUNATELY THEY GOT IN -- THEY BUILT SOME -- TWO MONSTROUS BUILDINGS RIGHT ON THE BLUFF OVERLOOKING THE CREEK. THERE'S A LOT OF -- I'M SURE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S RUNOFF. THERE'S TRAFFIC, MORE TRAFFIC COMING IN. IT'S RIGHT BY THE GUSFRU ACCESS. AND I WALK THE TRAILS, I SWIM IN THE CREEK, I ROCK CLIMB RIGHT ON THE CLIFFS BELOW THAT, AND THOSE BUILDINGS CAN BE SEEN FROM BARTON SPRINGS -- OR FROM THE TRAIL, FROM THE CREEK. THEY CAN BE SEEN FROM MANY DIFFERENT ANGLES WHEN YOU ARE IN THE BARTON HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD, IF YOU DRIVE AROUND, YOU WILL SEE THEM ALL OVER. AND A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT NO ONE REALLY SEEMED TO FORESEE BEING PROBLEMS IS THE LIGHT POLLUTION THAT COMES FROM THESE BUILDINGS AT NIGHT. AND I'VE GOT PICTURES HERE FOR THE COUNCILMEMBERS. AT NIGHT, THESE BUILDINGS -- AND I JUST HAVE A PICTURE OF ONE OF THEM. THIS IS A PICTURE I TOOK THIS MORNING FROM OUR BACKYARD. THIS IS -- I MOVED TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, I SPECIFICALLY LOOKED FOR A HOUSE IN THIS AREA BECAUSE IT'S A BEAUTIFUL AREA. AND I SPECIFICALLY WANTED A NICE VIEW OF THE GREENBELT AND FOUND THAT AND WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO FIND THAT. AND WITHIN A COUPLE OF MONTHS IN LIVING IN THE HOUSE THAT I'M IN, THIS IS NOW THE VIEW FROM MY BACKYARD. THIS IS THE VIEW WHEN I LOOK OUT A WINDOW IN MY BACKYARD, THIS IS WHAT I SEE. [LAUGHTER] AND THIS IS ONLY ONE OF THE BUILDINGS. THERE ARE TWO OF THESE BUILDINGS AND THIS DEVELOPER HAS THE ABILITY TO BUILD MORE OF THESE. BELOW.....BELOW..... [BUZZER] IT'S LIT UP ALL NIGHT LONG AND THERE ARE HUGE AIR CONDITIONERS THAT ARE BUILT -- THEY BUILT THE PARKING GARAGE RIGHT OVER THE GREENBELT THAT ARE EXTREMELY LOUD. SO YOU CAN HEAR THE NOISE ON THE GREENBELT, YOU CAN HEAR THE NOISE IN BARTON HILLS. AGAIN, I KNOW THIS IS NOT STRATUS, BUT THIS IS LIKE WHAT COULD BE HAPPENING MORE -- MORE OF WHAT COULD BE HAPPENING. SO I JUST HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES A PICTURE SAYS A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WORDS, AND I HOPE YOU LOOK AT THIS AND CAN SEE THAT.

Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WANT IN OUR BACKYARDS. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: STEVE BEERS AND FOLLOWING MR. BEERS, RYAN GREEN.

WHAT NUMBER ARE WE ON?

Mayor Garcia: 134.

MR. MAYOR, I HAVE NOTES HERE FROM BOB RUSSELL. I'M GIVING MY THREE MINUTES TO STEVE BEERS. HE'S NUMBER 385. I'M GIVING MY TIME TO STEER BEERS, RUSTY MIDDLE....... MIDDLETON.

Mayor Garcia: ARE THEY HERE?

SHANDRA IS. HAROLD DANIEL IS ALSO VOLUNTEERING HIS TIME.

[INAUDIBLE]

SO I HAVE UP TO 12 MINUTES; IS THAT CORRECT?

Mayor Garcia: GIVE HIM 12 MINUTES.

I'LL TRY NOT TO USE IT ALL. SORRY ABOUT THESE NOTES. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS WAS. WELL, YOU ALL KNOW ME, I'M STEVE BEERS. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN A LOT OF COMMUNITY ISSUES OVER THE YEARS, BUT ONE THAT'S ESPECIALLY CLOSE TO MY SKIN IS BARTON SPRINGS BECAUSE IT'S A VERY BRACING EXPERIENCE, AND WHEN YOU GET OUT, ALL THOSE CARES OF THE BUSTLING CITY JUST KIND OF MELT AWAY AND YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU REALIZE THAT HOUSTON, DALLAS, 100 OTHER CITIES, THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THIS. THEY DON'T HAVE A NATURAL SPRING-FED SWIMMING HOLE IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN. AND I THINK THAT WHEN WE'RE STUCK IN TRAFFIC, WHEN OUR TAXES ARE GOING THROUGH THE ROOF, WHEN WE'RE FED UP, THAT TO BE TOLD THAT BARTON SPRINGS IS CLOSED FOREVER MAY JUST KILL THE BLOOM ON OUR ECONOMIC ROSE AS WELL AS OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. AND I'VE LONG LOOKED AND LONGED FOR DEVELOPERS AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE THAT TRULY MEAN THE COLLABORATIVE VERBIAGE THAT THEY SPEW. BUT THEIR ACTIONS BELIE THEIR WORDS. I'VE NEVER SEEN THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF AUSTIN, FOR INSTANCE, ACTUALLY LOBBY FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW. BUT YET THEY SAY, WELL, WE'RE ALL ENVIRONMENTAL. THAT'S WHAT I HEARD THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, NOT THE CIRCLE C NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THAT'S WHAT I HEARD THE CIRCLE C HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, OF COURSE WE ALL ARE ENVIRONMENTALISTS. BUT WHO IS IN HERE FIGHTING FOR OUR WATER AND OUR AIR AND OUR LAND? I WANTED TO COVER THREE POINTS. ONE IS ABOUT JUSTICE. STRATUS, IT'S PREDECESSOR COMPANY, FM PROPERTIES, ACQUIRED THIS AFTER THE VOTE IN 1 #-..... 1992, BUT BEFORE THEY LOBBIED THE GRANDFATHER LAW INTO EXISTENCE. THESE PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE AN INVESTMENT-BACKED EXPECTATION OF A REASONABLE INVESTMENT-BACKED EXPECTATION OF ENTITLEMENTS. THEY LOBBIED THESE ENTITLEMENTS INTO EXISTENCE. BUT WE ALL KNOW JUSTICE DOESN'T RULE THE WORLD, SO I'LL TALK ABOUT LAW. [LAUGHTER] THERE ARE EXISTING AGREEMENTS THAT COVER THIS LAND. WHICH BILL BUNCH MENTIONED EARLIER. I HAVE EX SERPTSZ OF THEM THAT I'M GOING TO PASS OUT TO YOU. EXCERPTS. WHAT DO THESE AGREEMENTS SAY? THE OWNER SHALL BUILD -- THIS IS ON THE -- THIS IS ON THE NEXT TO LAST PAGE. LET'S SEE IF I CAN FIND IT HERE. IT SAYS THE OWNER SHALL BUILD ALL ARTERIAL ROADWAYS AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE. IT ALSO SAYS, WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS CAN SEE THIS, IT'S KIND OF A NARLY OLD PLAN, BUT WHAT IT SHOWS IS AN EIGHTH OF AN ACRE SITE RESERVED FOR A FIRE STATION. IT'S IN THE ORIGINAL 1984 LAND PLAN. IT'S IN THE 193 LAND PLAN AND SEVERAL PRELIMINARY PLANS. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS REPRESENTS A DEDICATION OF A SITE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE. SO WE'RE PAYING FOR THIS FIRE STATION THAT MAY POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN DEDICATED ALREADY, WE'RE PAYING FOR THESE ROADWAYS THAT IN THIS EXISTING AGREEMENT SAYS THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY FOR. IT ALSO SAYS IN A MEMORANDUM THAT THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS SHALL DETERMINE WHETHER THE CITY SHOULD ACQUIRE OR OTHERWISE PRESERVE PARK LAND OR GEOLOGIC SITES THAT ARE IDENTIFIED AS SENSITIVE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ACTUALLY GOT THAT REPORT, BUT IT'S IN THE MEMORANDUM TO THIS AGREEMENT. YOU DON'T HAVE IT WITH YOU, BUT IT'S EXHIBIT G. ON THE FOURTH PAGE AGAIN, IT SAYS THE OWNER AGREES TO DEDICATE APPROXIMATELY 301 ACRES ALONG THE SOUTHERN BRANCH OF SLAUGHTER CREEK AS PARK LAND. THEY ARE OFFERING TO GIVE 150 ACHE TOARS PRIVATE GROUPS, WILD FLOWER CENTER, BUT THEY DON'T MENTION THEY ARE CURRENTLY REQUIRED TO DONATE 300 ACRES THAT THEY HAVEN'T GIVEN YET. BILL ARMSTRONG CLAIMS THAT UNDER THE OLD PLANS THEY COULD BUILD OVER 6 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND OVER 3,000 APARTMENTS. HE DOESN'T MENTION IN TODAY'S PAPER THAT HIS AGREEMENT WITH US FISH AND WILDLIFE FORBIDS THIS. LET'S TAKE THE STATEMENT AT FACE VALUE AND GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT WHERE IT SAYS IT'S ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED THAT THE DENSITIES AND LAND USE INTENSITIES REFLECTED ON THE LAND PLAN ARE NOT GUARANTEED LEVELS OF DEVELOPMENT BUT REPRESENT THE MAXIMUM LEVELS SUBJECT TO REDUCTION. WHAT ABOUT WATERSHED ORDINANCES? IT SAYS ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE DISTRICT -- THIS IS THE OLD M.U.D. DISTRICT THAT IS NOW DISSOLVED R BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THE FRONT PAGE IT SAYS LAND WITHIN THE DISTRICT, SO I THINK THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR. IT SAYS ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE DISTRICT SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE SPECIAL WATERSHED ORDINANCES AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME. I THINK A PLAIN READING OF THAT MEANS S.O.S. BUT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT JUSTICE, WE TALKED ABOUT LAW. NOW TO COMMON SENSE. BECAUSE I'M SURE YOU CAN FIND 85 MILLION LAWYERS WHO SAY THAT THE PLAIN LANGUAGE IN THIS AGREEMENT IS SOMEHOW INVALIDATED BY LATER STATE LAW. BUT LET'S JUST ASSUME FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT THAT THEY MAY SOMEHOW HAVE GAINED THE SYSTEM AND DEFEATED THE MEANING OF THESE COVENANTS. WELL, IF THAT CAN HAPPEN TO THE OLD AGREEMENT THAT THIS LAND IS CURRENTLY UNDER, WHY CAN'T IT HAPPEN TO A NEW ONE? YOU ALL PASSED THIS AGREEMENT, AND THESE PEOPLE WILL JUST GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND PASS ANOTHER LAW. IT'S A DOOR THAT SWINGS ONE WAY, WHICH IS IT LOCKS US IN SO WE CAN NEVER GET ANYTHING BETTER, BUT THEY ARE FREE TO GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND GET SOMETHING WORSE. I THINK THAT WE WOULD BE ACTUALLY SAFER TO JUST GO AHEAD AND ZONE THIS LAND AND NEVER GIVE THEM $15 MILLION AND NEVER -- NEVER SIGN THIS AGREEMENT. [APPLAUSE] [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] PUT THEM UNDER S.O.S. AND IF THEY ARE CREATIVE, THEY CAN PROBABLY BUILD A MILLION SQUARE FEET AND 900 APARTMENTS WITHIN THE S.O.S. FOOTPRINT. THEY CAN PROBABLY DO THAT. IT SURE LOOKS THAT WAY TO ME WITH A CLOSE STUDY OF IT. SO I DON'T REALLY SEE WHY WE NEED ALL THE REST OF THIS BAGGAGE. ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE IS SIMPLY TO VOTE FOR TRACT 11 5 BY ITSELF SINCE THAT SEEMS TO BE THE LEAST CONTROVERSIAL. IT'S HALF THE ACREAGE AND IT IS UNDER S.O.S. AND GIVE MORE TIME TO CONTINUE THE PROCESS ON THE OTHER SEVEN TRACTS. NO, IT'S NOT SEVEN TRACTS, ACTUALLY IT'S 14 TRACTS, YEAH. SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING WITH THE STAKEHOLDER DIALOGUE. I WILL SALUTE STRATUS THAT I HAVE HEARD THAT THEY ARE GETTING MORE FLEXIBLE ABOUT SOME THINGS. FOR INSTANCE, THE TRACT 107 WHERE THE 43% IMPERVIOUS COVER WAS, I HEARD THE OTHER DAY THEY WERE WILLING TO MAYBE MOVE THE GROCERY STORE OVER TO TRACT 106. I THINK THAT'S KIND OF GOING FROM THE FIRE TO THE FRYING PAN, BUT IT DOES SHOW SOME CREATIVITY. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT NOTHING. I MEAN ONE REASON I STAYED AT THE STAKEHOLDER TABLE WHEN BILL BUNCH LEFT IS THAT I REALLY THOUGHT THAT A COMPROMISE MIGHT BE REALLY BEST FOR ALL CONCERNED SO THAT WE AROUND DRAGGED THROUGH THE LEGAL MILL. BUT FRANKLY, IN THREE MONTHS OF DISCUSSION, THEY REALLY HAVEN'T BUDGED. ALL THE CONCERNS THAT WE RAISED, I MEAN SINCE THE BASIC NUMBERS WERE SET, THERE'S BEEN NO PROGRESS. AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE BILL BUNCH SAYS A MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL IS TOO MUCH. I TOLD HIM IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE TO ME WHETHER IT'S THE FIRST MILLION IN THIS AREA OR THE LAST. AND WHAT I WANTED WAS A COMMITMENT TO A REAL PLAN TO SAVE THE AQUIFER. THAT MIGHT MAKE THIS GO DOWN A BIT EASIER. BUT WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THAT, NOT FROM YOU, NOT FROM THEM, NOT FROM ANYBODY. AND I'M JUST TIRED OF THIS STONEWALLING. I DON'T THINK THERE'S A REAL PARTNERSHIP ATTITUDE HERE. I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT THE HEAD LINE WITH BILL ARMSTRONG'S INTERVIEW IS BUILDING A PARTNERSHIP. [LAUGHTER] SO JUST FINISH UP THERE, I THINK -- I THINK WE CAN DO BETTER. I THINK WE HAVE TO DO BETTER. IF IT'S GOING OUT ON A LIMB TO MAKE A LEGAL CASE AGAINST THIS -- AGAINST THIS DEVELOPMENT TO DEFEND OUR ORDINANCES, IF IT'S A LONG SHOT, I SAY IT'S WORTH IT. AND -- [APPLAUSE] A COUPLE OF REQUESTS. KAREN HADEN ASKED TO PLEASE ALLOW THOSE WHO CANNOT BE HERE JULY 11th TO SPEAK TONIGHT. ANOTHER FELLOW SAID IF YOU WERE SIGNED UP AND WAND TO GO HOME NOW, IF THEY CALLED YOUR NAME, WOULD THAT MEAN YOU COULDN'T SPEAK NEXT TIME. SO I SAID I WOULD PASS ALONG THOSE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT. THAT'S IT. THANKS. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: STEVEN BELL. IS MR. STEVEN BELL HERE? HE WILL BE -- HIS CARD WILL BE RETAINED FOR NEXT -- JULY 11th HEARING. HE WAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. HE WISHES TO SPEAK. RYAN GREEN. HE WISHES TO SPEAK SO HE WILL BE RECOGNIZED ON THE 11.. 11th. COLLEEN LEE. WISHES TO SPEAK. JIM O'REILLY ALREADY SPOKE. R. ALLEN YOUNG. HE WISHES TO SPEAK SO HE WILL BE RECOGNIZED ON THE 11.. 11th. ROBIN CRAVEY WISHES TO SPEAK. MARION [INAUDIBLE]. YOU ALREADY SPOKE, RIGHT? DID MS. MUDLOCK ALREADY SPEAK?

[INAUDIBLE].

Mayor Garcia: WILL BE RECOGNIZED NEXT WEEK. PAUL MULLEN. RECOGNIZED NEXT WEEK. BARBARA ANDERSON. KEN HAYS. HE DONATED HIS TIME TO BILL BUNCH. RUSTY OSBORNE. ALL THOSE WILL BE RECOGNIZED NEXT WEEK. THE 11th.

[INAUDIBLE]

Mayor Garcia: HE SPOKE ALREADY. PULL HIM OUT OF THERE. REED MURRAY. ANN COLLETTE. JAMES COLLETTE. LEE WISE. BILL OLIVER. [APPLAUSE] MR. OLIVER WILL GET NINE MINUTES. [APPLAUSE] THAT'S TWO SONGS AT FOUR AND A HALF MINUTES A SONG.

COULD BE WORSE. YOU ARE RIGHT. YES, MY LOVELY BACKGROUND SINGERS AREN'T HERE NOW. THANK YOU ALICIA AND BIG CHAMPION. GOLLY. LAST WEEK I WENT TO SEE THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. AT DEEP EDDY. DID ANYBODY ELSE GO? IN 3-D. ACTUALLY IT WAS NOT THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO STEE THE CREATURE....SEE THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. MAYOR PRO TEM, I LOVE THE WAY YOU REFERRED TO THE CREATURE EARLIER. THE MOVE..... MOVIE WAS THE RETURN OF THE CREATURE OF THE BLACK LAGOON IN 3-D. WE BROUGHT 3-D GLASSES TONIGHT BECAUSE IT WAS A LITTLE EASIER TO SEE THE CREATURE WITH THOSE GLASSES. MAYBE HERE TONIGHT. IT WAS A LOVELY CREATURE. OKAY. [MUSIC PLAYING] (music) THERE'S A GHOST FROM THE PAST I THINK I HEAR ON BARTON SPRINGS. IT'S JIM BOB IN THE STRATOSPHERE, BARTON SPRINGS. THEY'VE DEVELOPED THEIR OWN STRATUS QUO, WE'VE BEEN BODY OVER BY STRATUS PROS, IT'S ANOTHER THREE PART OVERDOSE, THE BARTON SPRINGS [INAUDIBLE] (music) (music)ABLE WE'RE SUBSIDIZING BARTON SPRINGS [INAUDIBLE], SUBDIVIDING, COMPROMISING BARTON SPRINGS (music) (music) IT'S HARD TO SIDE WITH THE HIGH RISE COMMITTING TO US SEWER-SIDE -- [LAUGHTER] SOME WOULD CALL IT HOMICIDE OF BARTON SPRINGS RETURNS (music) THE FANCIEST STORES THAT WE CAN MUSTER FOR BARTON SPRINGS, BUT A CLUSTER IS A CLUSTER IS A CLUSTER IS A CLUSTER, BARTON SPRINGS ETERNAL. IT'S BEEN PROVED, VOTED AND PLANNED, THERE'S TOO MUCH CLUSTER AND TOO LITTLE LAND, THIS SHOULD BE CLUSTER'S LAST STAND. [LAUGHTER] [APPLAUSE] (music) BARTON SPRINGS RETURNS (music)

THANK YOU. [MUSIC PLAYING] (music) WHAT'S THE USE? HELP ME WITH THAT. (music) WHAT'S THE USE? THAT'S GOOD. (music) WHAT'S THE USE? (music) WHAT'S THE USE? (music) WHAT'S THE USE OF HAVING AN ORDINANCE IF YOU LET IT EXPIRE (music) (music) WHAT'S THE USE OF HAVING AN IRON IF YOU DON'T HOLD IT TO THE FIRE? (music) WHAT'S THE USE OF BEING GRASS ROOTS IF YOU DON'T LET THEM GROW? (music) WHAT'S THE USE OF RIVERS IF YOU DON'T LET THEM FLOW?

(music) WHAT'S THE USE?

BEAUTIFUL. (music) WHAT'S THE USE? DEEPER. (music) WHAT'S THE USE? GOOD. (music) WHAT'S THE USE OF BEING A REFEREE IF YOU NEVER SAY FOUL? FOUL! (music) WHAT'S THE USE OF BEING A GUARD DOG IF YOU NEVER GROWL?

GROWL!

(music) WHAT'S THE USE OF BEING A RAGING BULL IF YOU ACT LIKE A COW?

MOOO!

(music) WHAT'S THE USE OF BEING A COYOTE IF YOU NEVER HOWL? [HOWLING)

(music) WHAT'S THE USE? WHAT'S THE USE? A LITTLE VARIATION. DEJA VU. AGAIN. (music) DEJA VU. (music) DEJA VU. GARY BRADLEY, FREEPORT MCMORAN. (music) GARY BRADLEY, FREEPORT MCMORAN. (music) JIM BOB MOFFETT, FREEPORT MCMORAN. (music) JIM BOB MOFFETT, FREEPORT MCMORAN (music) I'M SORRY, SEEMS LIKE WE'VE BEEN HERE SO MANY TIMES BEFORE. GOOD MORNING. (music) NOW WE CAN SIT AND MARVEL AT WHAT IT WAS, BARTON SPRINGS ETERNAL. (music) TELL OUR GRANDKIDS ABOUT THE GRANDFATHER CLAUSE. (music) YOU CAN PUT TONIGHT A SUIT, YOU CAN PUT IT IN A DRESS, BUT DON'T TELL US IT IS IF IT AIN'T S.O.S. (music) IT'S BEEN TEN YEARS, WE WANT NOTHING LESS THAN BARTON SPRINGS ETERNAL. (music) BARTON SPRINGS ETERNAL (music) [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] [CLAPPING]

Mayor Garcia: KIRK MITCHELL. KIRK MITCHELL. GAIM MAYOR,...........

Goodman: AS KIRK COMES UB, CREATURES WAS PLURAL, IT WAS TO COVER SALAMANDERS, FROGS AND FISH.

Mayor Garcia: MR. MITCHELL, YOU HAVE ONE PERSON GIVING YOU TIME SO YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES.

OH, MAN. I LOST MY NOTES.

Mayor Garcia: THAT'S WHAT THE --

I WAS RUNNING FOR COFFEE AND PIZZA AND I DON'T HAVE MY NOTES SO I KNOW YOU ARE GOING TO BE DISAPPOINTED IN THAT. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I'M KIRK MITCHELL, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. HAVE I SOME OBSERVATIONS -- I HAVE SOME OBSERVATIONS ABOUT GOVERNING THE CITY. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN YOU ARE CALLED UPON AS LEADERS TO TAKE SOME RISKS FOR THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE TO BE SERVED. NOTHING IS GUARANTEED. WELL, NOW THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE CLOSE, AND ONE WOULD BE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN EUROPE....... YOU ARE OPPRESSED, YOU CAN JUST SURRENDER, DECLARE VICTORY AND GO HOME WITH YOUR TAIL BETWEEN YOUR LEGS WITH A LOT LESS THAN YOU MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN IF YOU STOOD UP. I KNOW MANY OF YOU ON COUNCIL IF NOT ALL OF YOU HAVE SAID THINGS LIKE THIS SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE IN YOUR CAREERS. BUT I NOTICED WHEN PEOPLE GET ON THE COUNCIL, THEY BECOME MUCH MORE REALISTIC, THEY SAY, MUCH MORE SEASONED. AND MUCH MORE COMPROMISED. AND THAT'S NOT A GOOD TREND AND IT CAUSES A LOT OF DISAPPOINTMENT IN THE PUBLIC. SO WHAT I -- I HAVE SOME OBSERVATIONS SPECIFICALLY IN THIS REGARD ABOUT THE S.O.S. LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND STRATUS PROPERTIES REGARDING 1704 ISSUES. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER SAID DURING HIS CAMPAIGN AND HE'S NOW SAYING TONIGHT, WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS GOT THE SAME ADVICE THAT WE GOT. WELL, WHAT WE GOT I CAN SHARE -- I'M NOT UNDER SWORN OATH, PUBLIC OATH TO PRESERVE OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION CONVERSATIONS AND. I'M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU ALL OF IT, BUT I WILL SAY THIS YEAR'S AGO WE HEARD IT WOULD BE EXPENSIVE FOR A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT HAS HABITUALLY HAD HIGH IMPACT WITH A SHOESTRING BUDGET NEVER EXCEEDING $250,000 IN A SINGLE YEAR TO PROSECUTE AND LARGE AND COMPLEX LAWSUIT RELATED TO 1704 ISSUES. WE WERE CONSTRAINED AT THAT TIME BY A CHAIR WHO WAS IN THE PROCESS OF DEFUNDING THE LAW AND NOT RAISING MONEY. ROBIN RATHER, A TOTAL FAILURE. HE WAS DRIVEN FROM OUR BOARD FOR BREACH OF TRUST, ONE OF THE LEADERS OF THE ENVIRONMENT THESE DAYS THAT IS PROBABLY ENDORSING THIS DEAL, ALTHOUGH I NOTICE SHE'S NOT HERE TONIGHT. BEFORE THAT SHE WAS DEFUNDING THE LAW PART OF OUR ORGANIZATION AND WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH LEGAL RESOURCES TO PROSECUTE A LAWSUIT. BUT THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS TAXING AUTHORITY. AND YOU'VE CERTAINLY FOUND THAT OUT WHEN IT CAME TIME TO SUB SI....... SUBSIDIZE TO THE TUNE OF $100 MILLION OF SUBSIDIES IN THE LAST THREE YEARS ALL KINDS OF UNDERSTANDS THAT BENEFITED PRIVATE CORPORATIONS, DEVELOPERS AND WHAT HAVE YOU. IF WE HAD THE $15 MILLION -- OKAY, JUST TAKE -- DARRELL IS ALWAYS FOND OF SAYING IT'S NOT CASH, I SAY IT IS A BOMB LINE PROBLEM FOR TAXPAYERS. BUT EVEN IF YOU CONSIDER IT TO BE WORTH ONLY WORTH 5 MILLION BUCKS OF CASH, IF YOU WOULD HIRE S.O.S. WITH $5 MILLION, WE COULD SAVE A HELL OF A LOT MORE THROUGH OUR WORK THAN YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN DOING BY SUBSIDIZING OUR OPPRESSORS. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] SO MAYBE WE COULD AT LONG LAST FEEL LIKE WE COULD GET BEYOND THE 11th HOUR AND 59 MINUTES SO WE DID NOT HAVE TO FEEL CONSTRAINED OF DOING ALMOST ENTIRELY LEGAL WORK TO PLUG THE DIKE WITH OUR FINGERS BECAUSE OUR CITY WHICH HAS SWORN AN OATH, LEADERSHIP OF OUR CITY HAS SWORN AN OATH TO UPHOLD THE CHARTER AND ORDINANCES THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND OF COURSE THE CONSTITUTION AND ALL THOSE GOOD THINGS TOO. YOU ARE FAILING TO DO THAT IN THE FORM OF ACQUIESCING WHEN YOU SHOULD BE FIGHTING TO PRESERVE OUR HOME RULE POWERS WHICH YOU LEAVE TO OFTEN -- NOT TO SAY YOU'VE NEVER DONE IT, YOU'VE DONE IT OFTEN A DAY LATE, DOLLAR SHORT, AND WHEN IT COMES TO THE LEGISLATURE A VERY CLUMSY MANNER SO WE BECOME THE LAUGHING STOCK OF THE LEGISLATURE BECAUSE WE HAVE A CLUMSY STRATEGY OF HOW TO CHANGE THAT OPPRESSION FROM THE LEGISLATURE. BUT REGARDING THE LAW, YOU COULD HAVE DONE SO MUCH MORE THAN YOU HAVE DONE -- SURE, YOU'VE DONE A FEW CASES, BUT YOU NEEDED TO DO ALLOTTED MORE TO PROTECT S.O.S. ORDINANCE AND OTHER ELEMENTS OF OUR HOME RULE POURS THAT HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY 1704. YOU SHOULD BE JOINING US IN OUR LAWSUIT. YOU SHOULD FLIP. YOU SHOULD NOT BE OUR OPPONENT IN THIS LAWSUIT. I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THE LEADERS OF MY CITY SAYING WE WILL GO INTO COURT AND TELL THE WORLD WE DO NOT WANT TO PRESERVE OUR HOME RULE POWERS. THAT WOULD BE A SHAME. I MEAN A DEEP SHAME. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE KIND OF SHAME THAT LASTS FOR GENERATIONS. [APPLAUSE] SO THE ANSWER TO DARYL SLUSHER'S QUESTION WHY DIDN'T YOU SUE, FIRST OF ALL, WE DIDN'T -- NO ONE IN THIS ROOM ELECTED US TO DO THAT JOB, WE DO IT ANYWAY WITH VOLUNTEERS, WITH LIMITED RESOURCES, WITH DONATED FUNDS THAT ARE NEVER SUFFICIENT. WE PAY OUR LAWYERS A THIRD, A FOURTH, A FIFTH OF WHAT SOME OF YOUR BEST LAWYERS FOR THE CITY DO. YOU HAVE DOZENS, I GUESS MAYBE 100 OF THEM, WE'VE GOT ONE, TWO, THREE AT A STIEM. WE CAN'T TAKE EVERYTHING ON EVEN THOUGH WE WOULD LIKE TO. [BUZZER] WE NEED YOU TO DO YOUR JOB AND THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN DO IT FOR YOU. [APPLAUSE] WE DO NOT HAVE YOUR AUTHORITY, TAXING POWER. WE SOMETIMES DO NOT HAVE YOUR STANDING TO DO SO. THANK YOU. APPLAUSE PLUS............. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: ALFREDORESSA.

HE'S HERE.

Mayor Garcia: WHERE IS HE? AND MR. SINGLETON, YOU'VE GOT THREE MINUTES ON THE ZONING AND INNING........... AND I THINK YOU WANTED OUT THE OTHER SIDE. YOU GET IT AFTER MR. RESSA. MR. RESSA HAS THREE MINUTES.

AM I ON?

Mayor Garcia: YOU ARE ON. WELCOME, SIR.

LET'S SEE. I GUESS I WAS ONE OF THE POLITICAL PRISONERS OF FREEPORT BECAUSE I WAS ARRESTED AT U.T. FOR THROWING ALGAE AT THE JIM BOB MOFFETT BUILD. [LAUGHTER] THEY INCOURSE RATED ME TWICE -- INCARCERATED ME TWICE FOR THAT. THE REASON I DID THAT WAS I WORKED ON BARTON CREEK AND I GOT OFF WORK OFTEN GOT SOME ALGAE FLOATING RIGHT THERE. I DIDN'T EVEN HAVE TO GO OUT INTO THE WATER TO PICK IT UP, IT WAS RIGHT THERE AND I JUST GOT A BUCKET FULL OF ALGAE, REDLEY WAS RIGHT THERE AND I TOOK IT TO THE CAMPUS AND THERE WAS A DEMONSTRATION GOING ON AT THE JIM BOB MOFFETT BUILDING WHICH THE UNIVERSITY NAMED AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE STUDENT POPULACE, WHICH AT THE TIME I WAS A STUDENT AT U.T. AND THAT'S WHEN I DECIDED THAT I WAS GOING TO THROW-EFFLUENT -- BACK WHERE IT BELONGED AND I THREW IT ON THE BUILDING. U.T. PD TOOK ME TO JAIL. TRAVIS COUNTY PICKED ME UP ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF LATER AGAIN FOR THE SAME THING. ANYWAY, I GOT IT EASY. OTHER POLITICAL PRISONERS OF FREEPORT DON'T GET IT TO EASY. AND EARY AND JIA ARE -- OF NEW GUINEA AS PEOPLE THERE CALL IT. WHEN THEY SPEAK OUT AGAINST FREEPORT SECURITY EITHER KILLS THEM OUT RIGHT OR TORT YOURSELF THEM AND FREEPORT CONTAINERS OR THROWS THEM OUT OF HELICOPTERS OR DISPLACES THEM FROM THEIR LAND AND ULTIMATELY FREEPORT HAS DISPLACED SEVERAL INDIGENOUS TRIBES WHICH ARE STILL STONO AGE TRIBES, THEY STILL HUNTED WITH BOWS AND ARROWS AND STILL WALK AROUND WITH LITTLE -- BARELY WEARING ANY GARMENTS AT ALL. AND FREEPORT, JIM BOB HAS LITTLE REGARD FOR THOSE PEOPLE, JUST LIKE THEY HAVE LITTLE REGARD FOR ANY OF US. AND IN FACT, I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT WHAT JIM BOB SAID BECAUSE IT WAS KIND OF PROFANE, BUT HE HAD A SLIDE SHOW GOING ON AND HE HAD THIS NEW GUINEA TRIBESMAN WORKING AT THE HOTEL IN INDONESIA AND SAID SOMETHING LIKE WELL, THIS GUY IS OBVIOUSLY HAPPY TO BE WORKING AT FREEPORT BECAUSE HE'S NOT HUNTING IN WORDS LIKE HE WOULD BE BEFORE. ANYWAY, THERE'S A BIG MOUNTAIN -- THERE USED TO BE A BIG MOUNTAIN THERE THAT HOLDS THE WORLD'S LARGEST GOLD RESERVE, AND UNFORTUNATELY FOR PREPORT THERE WAS THESE STONEAGE TRIBES THERE, BUT BECAUSE OF KISSINGER, HE WAS REALLY CLOSE FRIENDS WITH THE PRESIDENT AT THE TIME AND SUARTA JUST SENT IN A BUDGE OF SOLDIERS AND THEY ANILE EIGHT THESE PEOPLE AND THEY KILLED SEVERAL HUNDRED OF THEM AT A PROTEST DEMONSTRATION, AND BASICALLY ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT WERE OUT HERE EARLIER TODAY, IMAGINE A.P.D. COMING IN WITH MACHINE GUNS AND JUST LIKE MASSACRING EVERYBODY. KILLING THEM. AND THEN A YEAR LATER WHEN THERE WAS A FUNERAL, A.P.D. CAME AND KILLED EVERYBODY ELSE. ANYWAY, THAT'S THE KIND OF -- THAT'S WHAT FREEPORT DOES IN OTHER COUNTRIES, AND THEY DON'T REALLY TREAT THE REST OF THE UNITED STATES WITH ANY RESPECT. I WENT TO ST. JAMES PARISH IN LOUISIANA. IT'S ON THE MISSISSIPPI. AND THERE FREEPORT HAS A RADIOACTIVE GYPSUM PILE TO SHORE OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER. AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HERE HAS SEEN IT, I KNOW A FEW PEOPLE HERE HAVE SEEN IT, BUT THIS PILE IS 90 FEET TALL, IT'S LIKE NINE FOOTBALL FIELDS IN AREA, IT'S BIGGER THAN THE NEW CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. IF YOU PUT IT NEXT TO THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS IT WOULD DAFERB....... DWARF THE WHOLE BUILDING. IT WOULD MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A LITTLE STRUCTURE NEXT TO THIS BIG RADIOACTIVE GYPSUM PILE THAT EVERY TIME IT RAINS WASHES OFF INTO DID MISSISSIPPI RIVER. -- INTO THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER. AND FOR THAT FACILITY WHICH THEY EXTRACT URANIUM FROM GYPSUM -- LET'S SEE, PHOSPHATE ROCK THAT THEY STRIP MINE CLOSE TOTAL HAS I IN FLORIDA, THEY SHIP IT ACROSS THE GULF. AND THEN AT THE ST. JAMES PLANT, ST. JAMES PARISH PLANT THEY MAKE IT INTO FERTILIZER AND URANIUM, WHICH IS ASSEMBLED INTO NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND PEACEFUL NUCLEAR GENERAL SIDE REACTORS -- GENOCIDE REACT ORES. BASICALLY FREEPORT HAS A LONG HISTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION AND CIVIL RIGHTS ABUSES AND MURDEROUS -- I MEAN THEY ARE WAR CRIMINALS. IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR RECORD IN INDONESIA, THEY ARE CERTIFIED -- CIRTIN....... CERTIFIABLE WAR CRIMINALS AND I THINK JIM BOB AND HENRY KISSINGER SHOULD BE PUT IN FRONT OF A TRIBUNAL BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY'VE DONE OVER THERE. IT APPALLS ME THIS COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING GIVING THESE MURDERERS $15 MILLION OF OUR MONEY. THESE GUYS ARE CRIMINALS. THEY ARE CRIMINALS AND WE SHOULD NOT BE GIVING THEM ANY MONEY AND WE SHOULDN'T BE MAKING ANY DEALS. I WOULD LIKE THE REMIND ALL THE PEOPLE ON THIS COUNCIL THAT A LOT OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THIS COUNCIL GOT INTO OFFICE BECAUSE THEY SAID AT ONE POINT OR ANOTHER THEY WERE GOING TO FIGHT AGAINST FREEPORT.

THAT'S RIGHT!

THAT'S RIGHT!

AND THAT'S WHY WE PUT SOME PEOPLE HERE IN OFFICE, FOR THAT VERY REASON. WHETHER WE LOSE OR NOT IN THE COURTS, IN THE LEGISLATURE, THAT'S -- IT IS THE DUTY OF ELECTED OFFICIALS TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE AND NOT THESE CORPORATE SCUM BAGS. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

THEY ARE CRIMINALS. THEY SHOULD BE TRIED AND PUT IN PRISON ALL OF THEM.

Mayor Garcia: I'M SORRY. TIME IS UP. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: MR. SINGLETON.

BEFORE MY TIME STARTS, CAN I GET CLARIFICATION ON ONE THING? ARE YOU FINISHED CALLING NAMES FOR THE NIGHT? I HAVE A LIST OF AT LEAST THREE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT BEEN CALLED INCLUDING ONE PERSON WHO CAN'T BE HERE ON THE 11th. DO YOU HAVE THE NAMES OF --

Mayor Garcia: I HAVE ALL THE CARDS. NO, I HAVE NOT FINISHED READING. THERE'S A BUNCH OF NAMES IN THAT LIST, THE PAPER.

OKAY.

Mayor Garcia: THERE'S MORE THAN THREE.

OKAY. I PROBABLY TOLD YOU BEFORE ABOUT WOODY ALLEN LOVE AND DEATH. HIS CHARACTER IS SCHEDULED TO BE EXECUTED AT 7:00, BUT HE SAYS I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AT 6:00, BUT I HAD A GOOD LAWYER. THAT'S THE WAY I FEEL ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THAT THIS IS GOOD LAWYERING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE SCOOTED AT 7:00 INSTEAD OF 6:00. OH, GOD, THREE MINUTES TO SINK A BATTLE SHIP AND I'M ARMED ONLY WITH A CAN OPENER. LET'S SEE HOW MANY HOLES I CAN OPEN.

[ONE MOMEMT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

ONE LAST POINT. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT END OF THE FIGHTING. TRAVIS HAS THE ABILITY TO END THE FIGHTING ON THIS TOMORROW. THEY COULD WITHDRAW THIS PROPOSAL AND COME BACK WITH A PLAN THAT FULLY COMPLIES WITH S.O.S. THAT DOESN'T ASK US FOR ANY MONEY. THE TRUTH IS -- THE TRUTH IS THEY DON'T WANT TO. AND I REFUSE TO GIVE THEM ANY CREDIT UNTIL THEY DESERVE IT. [ APPLAUSE ] AND I THINK ALSO BEAUTY IS IN THE EYE OF THE STAKEHOLDER.

Mayor Garcia: I'M GOING TO READ INTO THE RECORD THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE -- LET ME GIVE YOU A SUMMARY OF THE MOTION AND THE RULES. THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE AND THE APPLICATION OF THE RULES OF THE COUNCIL, WITH THOSE WE REACHED A CONCLUSION, NUMBER ONE, IF SOMEONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK BY ONE A.M. ON JUNE 28TH AND HAS NOT DID HE NATE IT HAD TO SOMEONE AND HAS NOT EITHER HAD THEIR NAME READ OFF IN FAVOR WILL BE CALLED. THAT PERSON MAY TESTIFY WHEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS RECONVENED ON JULY 11th, 2002. REMEMBER THAT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON BOTH THE ZONE G AND THE AGREEMENT, YOU ARE ONLY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ONE TIME FOR NO MORE THAN THREE MINUTES. FURTHER, IN ORDER TO DONATE TIME TO A SPEAKER, THE PERSON MUST BE PRESENT AT THE TIME THE SPEAKER SPEAKS. LET ME TELL YOU THAT RULE, I COULD NOT FOLLOW IT BECAUSE SO MANY PEOPLE SIGNED UP FOR SOME DIFFERENT WAYS THAT I LOST CONTROL OF THAT. AND I WAS NOT THE ONE. I THINK THE CITY CLERK WAS OVERWHELMED ALSO. THIS WAS WHAT WE USED INSTEAD OF CARDS, SO I HAD A HECK OF A TIME. ONCE THE PERSON'S NAME HAS BEEN READ INTO THE RECORD AS NOT WISHING TO SPEAK OR NOT PRESENT UNTIL THE NAME WAS CALLED, THAT PERSON WILL NOT BE RECALLED TO SPEAK ON JULY THE 11th. THESE PEOPLE I AM GOING TO READ INTO THE RECORD INDICATED THAT THEY DONATED THE TIME OR DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK. KEN HAYS REGISTERED AGAINST. JIM CROSS BY REGISTERED AGAINST.

[TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES - PLEASE STAND BY]

Mayor Garcia: PAGE DONE LAP, KEN MARSH, CHRIS BENTLY, MICHAEL BOW, JERRY DEFREEZE, JIMMY DEFREEZE, SUSAN DESAI. GEORGE WHEEL, KEN SHACK HE WILL FORD, ORION STAR, JILL HUNTER, SHANE SHOW, MARK LITWHILER, ROSEMARY MERSKY AND ROADWAY RERSKY. ELAINE -- JEAN CUMMER, ROVALLE MCKEEVER. THESE ARE ALL PEOPLE SIGNED UP AGAINST NOT WISHING TO SPEAK. MARY CAIN. JIMMY RAY. TRACY HAYNES. MONICA SANCHEZ. MARY AIR HEART, STEVE SURLY, CHRIS KINDLIG. CAROLYN SILVA. DALE GENERAL WITH A, LEE SAYING EITHER, GEORGE SAY GERT. DANA BLANTON, MICHAEL CORAAJSS. LISA CSSALAC. THESE AGAIN WERE PEOPLE WHO INDICATED THEY WOULD NOT SPEAK. DAVID J. AN SELL, CARL BENSON. INGRID MORTON. MARK GOODRICH. MARK GOODRICH WILL SPEAK. ROWENA CALDWELL. BILL FAGELSON, JENNIFER BURGER, JEFF HUNKIN. NANCY TOE. PAT GORDON. LELA PERRY. TRACY THOMAS, MICHAEL THOMAS, DANNY THOMAS, DEANNA THOMAS, JAY THOMAS. IRENE PIQARD. ROBERT SESA. KIM DEAN, TOM LARKIN, CHAN DRA SANSING, NORM RIGHT. GINGER McHE WILL VAI. JENNIFER SHAIFER, ANTHONY BELL, MARCIA LUCAS, ALEX MARTIN, STACY MAPLE, DAN MAY. I'M SORRY. YEAH, HAROLD DANIEL WILL ALSO BE SPEAKING. KATHLEEN TURPIN. KLEMMIE CUMMINS, JASON TUREAU. DANA HALE. MELISSA BRYANT, AN... ANDREW MCKENNA.

HEAR.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. YOU'RE SPEAKING. HARRY CONNOR SOMETHING. ROGER JENNINGS, CHRISTIE SHAW, A LISH I CAN'T JERRY, ROBERT JERRY, ROBERT HAGEMAN, ROSE STELCA, ROBERT STELCA, ELAINE WAYER. DJ ANDREW. SUSAN BUTTS. JEFF KESSEL. TERRY DILL LADDER, MICHAEL POLACHEK, JIM BARKER, RACHEL KHANNON, CURTIS HERSH, ANGELA HOLLAND, GEORGE NAHER, KATHY MITCHELL, AMINI HAJI. MICHELLE WEST CITY OF AUSTIN -- WEST....SPEAKING. YOU'RE INDICATING THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: WHAT? YOU WANT TO CHANGE THAT? OKAY. YOU WANT TO SPEAK. OKAY. I'LL MAKE A NOTE.

[ INAUDIBLE ]

Mayor Garcia: THAT DECISION WILL BE MADE AS SOON AS I READ ALL THIS INTO THE RECORD, OKAY? BURTON PEARSON.

I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE. I WILL SPEAK.

Mayor Garcia: HE WILL BE SPEAKING. HELENA WILKINS, HILLARY EDWARDS, JOHN LITHGOW, SUE HIHOW, ROSE JOHNSON, DONNA COLVIN, JOSEPH CAIN, HE WILL LIEN BAR TELL, NANCY MORAN, JENNIFER PILES, TOM SMITH KAREN HADDEN WILL BE SPEAKING. FRAN LAMINTEA AND TONE CAMPER. -- TONY CAMPER. MOLLY CLARK. MR. CHAMBERS. AND SOMEBODY'S NAME ELOISE. ANYWAY, THERE'S TWO PEOPLE HERE THAT WILL BE SPEAKING. JEFFREY TODDLY MASTER,, JUDITH O'NEILL, KAREN LOVEDAY, JULIA BOND, MARISSA MILLER, ROBERT K. SHIELDS. JANET HAMPELL, JOSEPH A. KENNEDY. MR. RENE. ALEX LIGHT. ASHA GANNELL, PAUL SHIRLEY, ANDREW BAIRD. GEORGE COVER WILL BE SPEAKING. DAN KELLY HOPE. DAVID ANDREW BAINES. NOT SPEAKING SUSANLY SACK, GEORGE WHEEL, JEFF HUNTER, JILL HUNTER, O'NEILL SPAR, DAN SHACKLEFORD. MARK LIT WHEEL WHILER, JANE SHEA. ROSEMARY -- THIS LADY ALSO WAS ON ANOTHER LIST. JEAN CUMMERER, ROBIN MCKEEVER. HEIDI LINTO. MELANIE CASO. MARY KING, JIMMY RAY, ELIZABETH BISHOP, JEWELS HASTE, DEBRA ROTHCHILD, JUSTIN MERLE, MONICA SANCHEZ, VIVIAN CAPUTO WISHES TO SPEAK, SO SHE WILL BE RECOGNIZED. MARK ASHHEART. AND DON'T THROW THEM IN THE TRASH YET. CATHERINE MOSTY, MICHAEL PALASHO WILL SPEAK. KAY NORTH CUT, SHANNON SMITHTON. THESE ARE ALL AGAIN. CHRIS KINDLIG. GEORGE SEAGERT, LEE SEAG ERT. DANA BLANTON, LISA CSSELIG, DAVID ANSWER, JENNIFER BURGER, BILL FAGELSON, JEFF HUNKIO. JASON HULLEBECK, NANCY TOLLEY, NORMAN WRIGHT, JENNIFER SCHAEFER, MEN MAY. WE ONLY HAVE TWO MORE SHEETS, GUYS, SO HANG ON. JOHN BOTTI. SHANNON SMITH. DANA HALE. BRYAN HALE. MELISSA BRYANT. ANDREW McKENNA. ROGER JENNINGS, CHRISTIE SHAW, ROBERT JERRY, ALICIA JERRY. ROSE SEKHELLI. LINDA WITHTHROW. SUSAN BUCKS,. DAVID JOHNSON. ERIC ANDERSON, NICOLE GROVE, KIM BARKER, A. JESSE DAVIS, MARILYN QUOK, RACHEL SHANNON, CURTIS HERSH, ANGELA POLLACK, GEORGE NADAR, KATHY MITCHELL, KRISTIN COOPER, JOHN DALY, ANNIE HUXTO TON, ANNIE WILKINS. AND THAT'S ALL OF THE SPEAKERS, ALL THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. WHAT WE WILL DO WITH THIS LIST AND WITH THE CARDS IS THAT WE WILL GO THROUGH AND SUMMARIZE IT SO THAT WE HAVE A LIST OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY WANT TO SPEAK, AND THEY'LL BE RECOGNIZED IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY'RE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. LET ME RECOGNIZE -- THEY'LL BE RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES UNLESS THEY HAVE TIME DONATED UNDER THE CARDS THAT WE HAVE.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: BECAUSE THAT MEANS YOU'RE SPEAKING. I ONLY READ THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE WHO INDICATED THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO SPEAK. FOR ALL THE NAMES THAT I READ OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT TO SPEAK, THERE'S A VERY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THAT LIST, LIKE GEORGE COVER, WHO SIGNED UP THAT HE WANTS TO SPEAK. THERE'S QUITE A FEW OF THOSE.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: YES. IF THE RECORDS INDICATE THAT YOU HAD TIME DONATED TO YOU, YOU WILL GET THAT, OKAY?

I DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK ON THE ZONING ISSUE. I DID WISH TO SPEAK ON THE AGREEMENT. MY NAME IS ERIC ANDERSON. MY NAME WAS JUST CALLED.

MAYOR GARCIA: ERIC ANDERSON IS IN THERE I THINK TOWARDS THE LAST. YOU DID NOT SIGN UP TO SPEAK, RIGHT, BEFORE 1:00 O'CLOCK?

I SAID I DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK ON THE --

Mayor Garcia: YOU WANT TO SPEAK NOW.

I WANT TO SPEAK ON THE AGREEMENT. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: OKAY. VERY GOOD. EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THE RULES?

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: CAN THEY SPEAK WHEN?

[ INAUDIBLE ]

Mayor Garcia: HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE HERE THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE TO BE HERE JULY THE 11th. TWO. OKAY. KAREN, COME ON UP. OKAY. SCRATCH OUT KAREN. AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND SINCE YOU SPOKE, YOU WILL NOT BE RECOGNIZED ON THE 11TH. LET ME SAY THAT THERE MIGHT BE AN ADVANTAGE TO SPEAKING ON THE 11th BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE TIME TO STUDY THE AGREEMENT, SO THERE MAY BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO CONSIDER.

Slusher: MAYOR, HOW MANY DO WE HAVE LEFT THAT ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? CAN YOU TELL?

Mayor Garcia: PROBABLY A COUPLE HUNDRED, IN THAT RANGE.

Slusher: WELL, YOU HAVE TO BE PRESENT TO SPEAK, SO I'M WONDERING IF WE MIGHT STILL GET THROUGH TONIGHT.

Mayor Garcia: 200.

[ INAUDIBLE ].

Mayor Garcia: I'M RECOGNIZING THE PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE HERE ON THE 11th. BUT IT'S 2:30, COUNCILMEMBER. I HAVE A 9:00 O'CLOCK MEETING IN THE MORNING. SINCE I CAME FROM EUROPE, FOR ME IT'S ACTUALLY 9:25 ALREADY. [ LAUGHTER ]

Slusher: YOU'RE STARTING ANOTHER DAY.

Mayor Garcia: 9:25 ON FRIDAY MORNING FOR ME.

Slusher: LET ME CLARIFY, YOU READ SOMETHING A MINUTE AGO, IF THEY'RE NOT PRESENT WHEN THEY'RE NAME IS CALLED, THEN UNDER THE RULES THAT MEANS THOSE DON'T GET TO SPEAK ON THE 11th?

Mayor Garcia: IF THEY DID NOT HAVE THEIR NAME READ OFF AS IN FAVOR AGAINST OR ABSENT, THEY WOULD BE CALLED TO SPEAK.

Slusher: BUT IF THEY..... THEY DID HAVE THEIR NAME READ OFF, THEY'RE NOT ELIGIBLE TO SPEAK ON THE 11th?

Mayor Garcia: THAT'S RIGHT. IF THEY HAD A CARD THAT SAID I'M AGAINST IT AND DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK AND I READ IT INTO THE RECORD --

Slusher: OR IF THEY JUST WEREN'T PRESENT --

Mayor Garcia: AND I READ INTO THE RECORD THAT THEY WERE FOR OR AGAINST.

Slusher: THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES. THANK YOU.

Mayor Garcia: WELCOME.

HI. GOOD EVENING AND FIRST GOOD MORNING. AND FIRST OF ALL I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS LATE AND FOR LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE. AND I HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONTINUE TO LISTEN TO ALL OF US. AND WE'RE HERE WITH REAL REQUESTS FOR YOU. WE'RE NOT HERE JUST TO MAKE YOUR LIVES DIFFICULT. I LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE FLOWERS AND I BROUGHT SOME FOR YOU TONIGHT AS WELL. [ APPLAUSE ] SO MAY WE PURSUE MUCH BEAUTY. I RAN INTO THE MAYOR AT THE AIRPORT ON HIS WAY IN, SO I HOPE YOUR TRIP WAS GOOD. I WOULD LIKE TO RAISE SEVERAL POINTS TONIGHT. I'D LIKE FOR US TO STEP BACK FOR JUST A MOMENT AND LOOK AT THINGS ON A NATIONAL LEVEL. EVEN THOUGH WE'RE RIGHT HERE IN AUSTIN DEALING WITH AUSTIN ISSUES. WE ARE IN THE MIDST OF A MASSIVE ASSAULT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, EVERYWHERE WE LOOK. AND THIS IS A SAD FACT, BUT IT'S TRUE. MANY OF OUR PROTECTIONS ARE BEING ROLLED BACK. FOR EXAMPLE, RIGHT NOW THE CLEAN AIR ACT, WHICH IS -- NEEDS TO BE FULLY ENFORCED, THERE WERE HEARINGS IN FOUR PARTS OF THE COUNTRY. 130,000 CITIZENS TESTIFIED. AND THE E.P.A. TOOK THEIR TESTIMONY. WHAT HAPPENED? OVER 90% OF THOSE COMMENTS CAME IN THAT THEY WANTED THE CLEAN AIR ACT NOT CHANGED ONE BIT, THEY WANTED THE LAW ENFORCED. OVER 90%. SO WHAT HAPPENED? DID THIS GO TO A REPORT WHICH WAS DUE TO THE PUBLIC? NO. THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A 90-DAY REPORT COMING OUT OF E.P.A. 400 DAYS LATER THAT REPORT WAS QUIETLY PASSED OVER TO THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET AND RIGHT NOW INSTEAD OF PROTECTIONS THAT THE CITIZENS DEMANDED NATIONALLY, WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS AN ASSAULT ON OUR CLEAN AIR PROTECTIONS AND AN ATTEMPT TO REMOVE THEM AND KNOCK OUT KEY PROVISIONS SO THAT ALL INDUSTRIES IN THE U.S. WILL BE DIRTIER AND OUR AIR IN TEXAS WILL BE DIRTIER. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE UP AGAINST. OUR STATE AS A STATE DOES NOT HAVE A STRONG ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT RECORD. WE PUT IN PLACE VOLUNTARY MEASURES, LESS THAN ONE% OF THE INDUSTRIES CAME IN TO GET PERMITS THAT WAY. THIS IS THE ARENA IN WHICH WE OPERATE AND MAKE THESE DECISIONS. THAT IS WHY THIS DECISION IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER. THAT IS WHY S.O.S. IS MORE PRECIOUS, MORE VALUABLE, MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER. I'M HOPING THAT WHAT WE SEE HERE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, A CITY THAT WE ALL KNOW AND LOVE, WILL BE A DIFFERENT STORY THAN WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON A NATIONAL FRONT. I HOPE FROM THE GROUND UP. [ BUZZER SOUNDS ] -- THAT WE WILL BE TELLING OUR LEADERS THAT WE WANT OUR WATER AND OUR AIR PREKED. -- PROTECTED. THIS IS ABOUT SALAMANDERS, YES, IT'S ABOUT THEIR SURVIVAL. AND BY THE WAY, EARLIER TONIGHT, DR. MARK KIRKPATRICK TALKED ABOUT METALS IN THE WATER. THOSE CAN IMPACT THE REPRODUCTION OF AM FIBIANS AND THAT IS A THREAT IN ITSELF. SO WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT AS WE MAKE THESE DECISIO