Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting, 10/08/98

>>Goodman: we would like to begin the proclamations by starting with Mr. Jess Walters and if he would join me at the podium. This is an amazing man. In fact, a legend and I'm very proud to be reading this to you and for you to be here accepting it. It's a distinguished service award. In acknowledgement and appreciation for jess walters' untiring efforts and unselfish service to our community as founder of the Austin liar rick opera and as a meb of the advisory board for the gilbert and sullivan society of Austin as well as many other civic organizations, jess walters is deserving 'public acclaim and recommend nition. Signed of course by our Mayor, Kirk Watson, from the City Council of Austin, Texas, and because of the gilbert and sullivan, I have to tell you my mother would have killed me had I not been able to give this to you, she is enormous man of gilbert and sullivan and part of the reason this City is so appreciative of arts and its support is folks like you so thank you very much.

>> And thank you very much. [Applause]. I am very, very proud as I stand here. In fact, my head has swollen. [Laughter]. I thank everyone, absolutely everyone and you, Mayor. Thank you. But the real fault, the real fault about this stands -- sits right there, my wife. See back there? she is the fault. Stand up, dear. [Applause]. Thank you very much.

>>Garcia: good afternoon everybody. My name is Gus Garcia, I serve in place 2 and today we're issuing a proclamation for la faria. It is an employment fair, a opportunities fair that the hispanic Chamber of Commerce I think now is doing for the fifth year. Fifth year. Fifth annual. And the proclamation reads as follows: be it known that I Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin do proclaim october 9, 1999 at la faria, opportunities without borders in Austin and call on all citizens to join me in recognizing the hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Austin, Travis County and its sponsors in the presentation of its programs to our fine citizens by bringing forth tremendous opportunities regarding jobs, contracting procurement and consumer sales and joined by a diverse reputation of our community with an atmosphere of -- without borders. It is signed by the Mayor of Austin and I present it to the president of the hispanic chamber, Dr. Garez. [Applause].

>>Garcia: I forgot to say that I used to deliver the paper to this lady when she was about a year old. [Laughter].

>> He did. Our families are great friends. It seems, Mayor, Councilman Garcia, that we're always before you and I'm proud to say the hispanic chamber is very happy to accept this proclamation. This has become an annual event for the hispanic chamber and I think there's some really exciting things this year we're attempting to do. This year again the event is free and we invite everyone to join us. But more than that, this year for the very first time we're going to have a joint certification workshop where the major certifying agencies, certainly the City of Austin, capital metro, journal -- general services commission and who else? texdot, the Texas department of transportation will join us to go through the application process with all of those people who want these opportunities to be able to get contracts with all of these entities, so it will be a wonderful opportunity, we believe, for everyone who wants to do business to be able to do that. It's called faria because it does have a fair kind of atmosphere because there is music, certainly our City and governmental officials like u.s. Congressman lloyd doggett will be with us. Also the consul general here in Austin will join us so we are very excited about this. There are workshops, there's a lot of our corporate partners out there who are offering jobs so we -- if you want to call the chamber, please do so at 476-7502 to know what you should bring with you for that application process. I would like to just have the people that I've worked so very, very hard on this project for the chamber not only the staffer who is in charge, our manager, juan, but I do want to officially recognize the City of Austin because fred cortez has provided great leadership in partnership with the hispanic chamber and members of his staff and the hispanic chamber staff. So thank you very much, Mayor and Councilmembers for this. Thank you. [Applause].

>> Again, thank you for the proclamation. I'm fred cortez and I would like to invite everybody, it's more of a family affair. We have the folkloRico in the morning, we'll have the ribbon cutting ceremony and of course the mariachi will be there. We also have live music, some work sessions for vendors that want to improve their positions. It's a job fair, procurement fair and like the doctor said there is a joint certification this is the first time we'll have all of the four certifying agencies together, and anybody that wants to get certified or get multiple certification we certainly welcome that. It's a great opportunity t committee that has worked on this, it's a very diverse committee. It has general service commission, texdot, it's got capital metro, it's got some private firms, and of course the City departments that get involved and try to enhance the procurement of some of our vendors, certified vendors. Again I welcome you all to participate and that's on saturday from 11 to 4. Thank you. [Applause].

>>Mayor Watson: thank you all. Ms. Bohawk. As she comes forward, she is -- dorothy bowhawk the president of the travis Williamson county check karitage some of the. I Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin, testimony testimony do hereby proclaim october 25 through 311999 at czech heritage in Austin and call on citizens to join me in recognizing the czech population trace its roots to the 19th century immigration --.

>>Garcia: make it sure because the kolaches are arriving.

>>Mayor Watson: go ahead and start meeting, man. It traces its roots to the 19th century of ancestors from the austrian hungarian empire and now the present day czech rep. In recognizing they have contributed greatly to the strength and vitality of the state of Texas and our nation. In recognizing the proud ancestry and colorful history of czech Texass and commending the czech Heritage Society for its efforts to promote and preserve for future generations the heritage, culture, and language of czech Texass both locally and across the state and signed by me, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin. Congratulations.

>> Thank you. [Applause].

>>Mayor Watson: please speak.

>> We are happy to except this proclamation and as he said, I'm dorothy, the president of travis Williamson county czech Heritage Society and I have three officers here with me who are marie smith, sarah vitec and blasta vitek. And we want to thank Mayor Watson and the City Council for acknowledging czech heritage week to be celebrated october 25 to the 31 by this czech week resolution and as the Mayor had given you the history of the czeches how they got to Texas, we are very proud of our ancestry, our first immigrants that came were prosperous farmers but now we're prosper reduce in the professional field, doctors, lawyers, professors, teachers, politicians and whatever. [Laughter]. So -- and we're also proud of our language and our culture and we do have czech language classes offered at the community college, Austin community college of which we are very happy. And then another thing we are very happy about, the czech Texass have begun to -- the process of building a Texas czech heritage and cultural center in the City of lagrange. And it's an ongoing process. We're very happy to have this -- will be having this center to preserve our czech heritage and culture. And there are many things that will be happening during this week of czech heritage week. There will be exhibits in the public libraries here in Austin, taylor, round rock, georgetown, and there will also be many activities, there will be music on some of the -- some of the music stations and there will also be a big cultural dinner that's going to be sponsored by the czech historical society which will be on october 16th at 7 p.m. At the omni south park hotel and all are invited to attend this that are interested -- that are czech and interested in the czech culture. Again may I thank you, Mayor, and we have a little present for you. Mr. Garcia had already seen this.

>>Mayor Watson: he's already after it. Thank you.

>> This is for you.

>>Mayor Watson: depending on how to votes go today I may share them. [Laughter].

>> Okay.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you all very much.

>> She is the cook.

>>Mayor Watson: she told me she cooked these last night. I also asked if she was related to the vitec's in waco who served me more barbecue sandwiches when I was in law school than anyone on earth. Thank you.

>> Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: I'm going to get these spread out. Thank you all. Chief, are you here? chief warren? please come up. Be it known that I Kirk Watson Mayor of the City of Austin, Texas do hereby proclaim october 4 through 101999 as fire prevention week in Austin. And I call on all citizens to join me in recognizing that on average a u.s. Household will contact the fire department twice in their lifetime. In recognizing that three fifths of all fire deaths in this country occur in homes that do not have working smoke detectors, and one-third of the smoke alarms that are in homes now are not working. Usually because of dead or missing batteries. In recognizing the Austin fire department is dedicated to protecting life and property from the devastating effects of fire and in urging all citizens to join the Austin fire department in promoting fire safety and prevention in our community and to heed the message, improve your odds, test your smoke detectors. Signed by me, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin and I'm happy to declare this fire prevention week and present this to our chief of the fire department gary warren. Thank you, chief. [Applause].

>> Thank you, Mayor and Council. I appreciate this proclamation it -- it's not unusual for the Austin fire department to be working to prevent fires in the City of Austin, but we have chosen october as a month where we would urge all the citizens in the City of Austin to take a few moments and think about the preparations they have made in the case of a fire or accident in their home. I have brought with me a few members of our public education section. I would like to views them to you. I have lieutenant jeff fullgate, firefighter laura stevens and along with our assistant fire chief. If I could take a few minutes I would like lieutenant fullgate to list a few special things we've done for the month of october, fire prevention month.

>> Thank you, chief. Thank you, Mayor and Councilmembers. The Austin fire department is committed to protecting the lives and property of its citizens not only in a reactive way but also in a pro-active way. Fire prevention month is -- helps us to remember the importance of the pro-active approach to firefighting. To commemorate fire prevention month this october the Austin fire department has selected the theme improve your odds, test your smoke detector. Why? because natural fire protection association statistics show that odds are you will contact the fire department twice in your life time. Odds are you will have a fire in your home some day. And odds are that without a working smoke detector, you won't have time for you and your family to escape safely. Without a working smoke deekt your chances of escaping a home fire are cut in half. That's why the Austin fire department encourages you to improve your odds by ensuring you have a working smoke detector in your home and the only way to make sure they are working is test them monthly. More than 90% of the homes in this country have at least one smoke detector, but nearly half or one-third of those don't work. In Austin, most of our fire fatalities have occurred in homes that had no smoke detector or a smoke detector that was not working properly due to worn or missing batteries. A detector that isn't working can be worse than no detector at all because it can give you a false sense of security. Double your odds of surviving a residential fire by installing and maintaining smoke detectors in your home. The Austin fire department recommends that you have detectors on every level of your home, in every bedroom, and in the hallways adjacent to saul sleeping areas. Remember to test your smoke detectors monthly and to replace the batteries at least once a year. For firefighters and the families of fire victims, the effects are devastating. For the sake of your loved ones, we ask that you don't gamble with your safety, improve your odds, test your smoke detectors. Thank you. [Applause].

>>Mayor Watson: with it known that I Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin, Texas do hereby proclaim october 4 through 10 as public power week in Austin and call on all citizens to join me in recognizing that the citizens of Austin have chosen to operate a community owned locally owned utility and as a result the citizens have a direct impact on utility operations and policies. In recognizing that Austin energy's primary goal is to work in partnership with its customer owners to provide the best customer service at reduced cost rates, in recognizing Austin energy as a valuable community asset, providing homes, schools and businesses with reliable, efficient and cost effective electricity, in commending the management of Austin yrg for continued work to ensure that consumers benefit from changes in the electric utility industry and in honoring Austin energy for its contributions to our community and it's signed by me Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin. Chuck manning is going to accept the proclamation.

>> Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you very much. [Applause].

>> On behalf of the employees of Austin energy, I do want to thank the Mayor and Council for this recognition. We are hopefully a valued asset to this community. We are publicly owned and we are committed to providing the highest caliber and quality service that we can. And thank you very much. [Applause].

>>Mayor Watson: now for a little music. And we have a real treat here today. A lot of my friends and I'm not sure that may get you in trouble, but a lot of folks are here that do a lot of very good work in our community through their immense tall he want. What I'm going to first do is introduce Beverly reeves, the president of the Travis County bar association and ask her to introduce this group. Beverly reeves.

>> Thank you, Mayor Watson. I'm the president of the Travis County bar association. And I have the very great pleasure to introduce to you the Travis County bar association bar and grill singers. Now, this is a very, very talented group of lawyers. Not only do they practice law full time every day, but this group of very generous, very, very talented people sing, and they sing funny songs about the legal profession. This group has raised over $125,000 that we as the travis county bar as working lawyers in central Texas have been able to donate back to an organization called volunteer legal services of central Texas. What volunteer legal services does is work with volunteer lawyers like these lawyers in this group to provide free legal services to the very poorest in our community. We know that we as lawyers have an obligation to give back to the community for all the benefits that we've received. And we do that in any number of ways, but today we want to introduce to you our bar and grill singers. We have left a cd for the Mayor and for all the Councilmembers as well as one of our handy dandy bar and grill t-shirt and want to invite all the City Council and the Mayor to come and join us october 17th. That's a saturday evening. And at 8:00 we'll have a show at the paramount. And our show will be bar and grill singers and other fun skits about the legal profession and also about central Texas. So if you like what you hear today, and I know you will, please come out oon join us. All of the benefits from that show go back to volunteer legal services and will eventually go back to provide legal services for those people who are indigent in central Texas. So let me introduce to you two of our leaders of this great organization, claude declou who is past president of the association and Paul carmona, past president of the Austin young lawyers and recipient of the Texas outstanding young lawyer award to introduce our wonderful singers and give you guys a little entertainment. Thanks. [Applause].

>> Thank you, I think we'll have Paul introduce the song and as they all walk on, we'll introduce our bar and grill singers. Barry green, David dubois, Robert agoknow. And net chidas, deborah Robertson. Indicatey dux, and joan ely. We have multi talented group and Paul are you going to tell us what we'll hear today?

>> I will. Thank you. This song -- for those of you who like me watch this show every day, you know there's a lot of talking going on during the City Council proceedings. Some rather volatile issues, there's a whole lot of talking. And lawyers are known for doing a whole lot of talking as well. In fact it's something that we learn in law school. Truthfully though lawyers -- being able to do a whole lot of talking is something that you are born with. So this song is dedicated to the City Council who has to sit here and listen to a whole lot of talking and of course we're going to tell you all about lawyers who do a whole lot of talking. (Music)
(Music)
mama said on the day I was born there was a whole lot of talking going on, an end less debate, couldn't agree on my name, they argued about it all night long. I was raised to be sweet but think on my feet and to talk until my face was blue. When she september me on my way I heard my mama say we'll make a lawyer out of you. (Music)
(Music)
talk to you drop, talk, talk, talk till you drop, babble when you haggle, dicker when you bicker, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk. When you are caught in an art that's getting hot and you know you are right when someone thinks you are not, don't stop debating if it takes all night, don't give in when they say you are right, you are right, you are right (Music)
(Music)
. (Music)
talk until you drop, babble when you haggle, dicker when you bicker, talk, talk, talk till you drop, babble when you haggle, talk, talk, talk, talk babble, babble babble. Bicker, bicker bicker, talk, talk, talk, talk. (Music)
know that I'm a lawyer I'm debating every day and arguing for clients that will pay me to talk. I can quote every rule and statute on the fly, once you get me started I can never stop. I dream about it at night, I keep it up when I get home. When -- instead of being dishes I'll be hashing out the issues with the refrigerator door. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, baseball believe, babble, talk talk, talk, babble, babble, babble, dicker when you bicker. Talk, talk, come on and talk, talk, come on and talk, talk, when your logic doesn't seem too sound and I maybe start to thinking about quitting because it's driving you crazy don't -- you have to speak up and you got to be loud, speak up, speak up, get lout loud, loud, loud. Yada-yada yada-yada yada-yada, blah blah blah blah blah, talk come on and talk, talk, don't it make you want to get up and talk. Well, well, well, babble, babble, bicker, bicker, keeping on talking, talk until you drop, babble when you haggle. Come on, talk, talk, talk. Come on, babble, babble, babble.

>> Babble, babble, babble, dicker when you bicker. Dicker when you bicker.

>> Talk, talk, talk. Come on and talk, talk, talk. Come on and talk, talk, talk (Music)
(Music)
.

>> Thank you. [Applause].

>>Mayor Watson: thank you all very much. Thank you. Let me remind you they will be aappear -- there next appearance will be at the 7th annual bar and grill show october 17, at the paramount and the money raise goes to legal services for the poor in central Texas and it's a great show. It's a wonderful show and it's a very worthy cause. We appreciate you all being here, Paul, Beverly, kraud and the rest of you. Thank you very, very much. [Applause].

>>Mayor Watson: this is another -- we have another announcement today before we actually call the meeting to order. I would like to talk a little bit about it. It's an issue that is of great importance to the City. I'm very pleased today to announce that the u.s. Fish and wildlife service has issued the City of Austin a federal permit under the endangered species act. As we have said all along, barton springs pool must continue to run as a recreational facility while still protecting the salamander. After all is not a human versus salamander issue, and the City Council and I have continued to maintain that the health of barton springs is dependent upon what happens in the entire watershed, not just the pool. I want to thank representatives with the fish and wildlife service that have worked so diligently with the City of Austin and I also want to thank the employees of the City of Austin that have worked so hard to get us where we are now. First, although he couldn't be here today, I want to recognize the pivotal royal that David frederick has played. He is the field supervisor for the u.s. Fish and wildlife service ecological services office here in Austin. Through his leadership and experience he has been instrumental in the development of this plan. I would also like to recognize Bill sewell, who is here with us, the assistant field supervisor. He will say a few words in a moment. The technical name of the permit that we are receiving today is a section 10 a 1 b permit. I know everybody will remember that. It's a 10 a 1 b permit and we many times refer to it as the 10 a permit. Why is it significant? it is significant because it demonstratesist City's commitment to protection of endangered species and allows for continued recreational use of barton springs. Under the permit, the City can continue to clean the pool on a regular basis, to ensure a safe recreational facility tore all users. However, the City is committed to measures that will minimize the impact of cleaning activities on the salamander. Today, frankly, it's been a long -- has been a long time in coming. In original permitted and draft assessment habitat conservation plan was submitted in January of 1998. During the past eight months, that plan has been revised based upon new scientific data gathered from the experimental pool cleanings conducted joint by by the City of Austin and u.s. Fish and wildlife. Cleanings that were almost halted by a lawsuit. That lawsuit was brought against the City in order to stop the cleaning of barton springs pool. Fortunately this past june a federal judge agreed with the City that the cleanings -- I'm going to quote from the judge. Conducted under the scientific permit have actually improved the salamander's habitat overall and produced a net positive effect on the salamander population. Judge sparks went on to say that the pool cleanings under the scientific permit are helpful to the salamander species as a whole and bring no risk of extinction -- extinction whatsoever. The evidence further proves that absent appropriate cleaning, the salamanders could be substantially harmed. Those additional pool cleanings helped us to get where we are today. In addition, the permit reflects many of the useful comments received from the public during a 30 day public comment period. Officially the permit was issued on tuesday, october 6th and we are now waiting for a final copy of the document. The City believes that the measures set forth in the habitat conservation plan will provide a net benefit for all users of the pool, waders, swimmers and salamanders, plus we have the flexibility to make adjustments where necessary to ensure we continue to implement the best possible methods for cleaning as well as protecting the salamander. I also think it's important to put this permit into perspective. We are very please with today's announcement because it offers us just one more tool that the City Council and the City can use to help maintain and enhance our quality of life. This City Council's smart growth inititives, the purchase of buffer zone property as part of prop 2 as well as the mpdes permit, all of these are pieces of the puzzle that fit together to provide us a means to protect our precious environment. Which is an invaluable natural resource. I also want to thank the Austin City Council for helping us get here today. It has been their clear vision and their willingness to work to find creative solutions to things like people and salamanders in the same place that has allowed for this day to occur. I am very pleased that this permit like the other inititives I just mentioned is part of a longterm plan. It will be effective -- this permit will be effect I have for a period of 15 years. Now I would like to turn it over to Bill to say a few words about the permit. Mr. Sewell?

>> thank you.

>> Thank you Mayor Watson. I will certainly second your motion on this is a win-win situation. I think it's a win for the salamander, a win for the people of Austin and a win for the people of the united states. It's an excellent example of people and endangered species co-existing together and both deriving benefits from the solution to the problem. I would like to recognize specifically I think three key people, and I realize in this process I'm leaving out some folks who put in a lot of work but I would like to recognize Robert hanson and roger duncan from the City and matt light ner from our staff. Will you guys please stand up and take a bow? [applause]. And I think without the personal involvement effort and dedication and hard work of these folks the permit wouldn't be where it is now, signed. I don't want to draw it out, but in closing I would like to say I think the service has had a history of cooperative efforts with the City of Austin, starting with the bcp and I hope this is just a milestone that will continue those efforts. I do have a signed copy of the permit that I would like to present to Mayor Watson and thanks again, Mayor, for your cooperation in this effort.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. And I'll happily accept that. Thank you very much.

>>Mayor Watson: we'll get ready to start the Council meeting. And revisions and contributions to the Council agenda. Item no. 18 Will be to approve a contract with the Austin regional independent associates that is correct is postponed to october 22nd, 1998. Item no. 30, Authorizing the issuance of Austin housing finance corporation multi-family revenue bonds is pulled. Item 60 should read discuss ls ranch lmentd et all versus City of Austin cause no. 9713994 In the hays county district court. Item no. 61 Should read discuss legal issues regarding City of Austin versus club resorts, inc., cause no. 9800245, Travis county district court, this litigation concerns development regulations applicable in the barton springs zone. Item no. 66 Should read approval execution of an amendment to the contract with nancy ebe and associates to increase the amount of attorneys fees by $110,000 for a total contract amount not to exceed $140,000 for legal services in bradley a. Conner versus City of Austin cause no. 9709065 In the travis county district court. Items set for a time certain. At 2:00 p.m. Issues related to bonds. Items 8 and 9. At 3:30, Austin housing finance corporation items. Item no. 29 And addendum item no. 72. At 3:45 p.m., abia development corporation, items 31 and 32. At 4:30, zoning items, items 40 through 57. At 5:00, a resolution authorizing the establishment of an Austin Travis County health and human services trns ition team, item 69 on the aden item. At 6:00 p.m. A public hearing on the waiver of minimum separation distance requirement for a gas station convenience store at 5933 westminster drive, that item will be postponed to october 22nd, 1998 at 7:30 p.m. The first item on the agenda will be general citizens communications. We are not prepared to have a motion on item no. 1 So the first item will be general citizens communications. Gavino Fernandez followed by richard knowlton and then Paul robbins. Mr. Fernandez. Gavino Fernandez. Richard knowlton. Mr. Knowlton will be followed by Paul robbins, then Charles waits.

>> Thank you, Mayor. Richard knowlton, longterm resident of Austin and for almost as long I've been a City of Austin employee, specifically with the fire department. I promised the Mayor when I bumped into him last weekend I would have a different topic today so here goes. I've been accuse understand the past of not having all my performing arts center straight and I would like to make amend to an item sent out to you all in a letter from one of my executive board members who took the liberty of signing my name to it. Since my name was on it I apologize for the parts that I didn't have my facts straight. I would like to point out I think that's an ill-advised idea for Travis County to take over Austin e.m.s., that article that came out in the statesman was just rife with misrepresentation. There was a quote in there at one point about providing equal public service for everybody in the county, and that's not my idea of democratic government. I think it should be more along the lines of the greatest good for the greatest number. And if Travis County takes it over, I see Austin e.m.s. Service to the City residents suffering for ambulances being sent out to cover for any potential emergencies out in the county. I don't know what Aleshire has in mind, but it's -- it's kind of a crazy swa nachlt song I think he is singing and I don't agree with his opinion of you all either. But I do take exception to the citizens of Austin being treated like dogs, I'll tell you that much. Another item I had come up recently was there's a lack of encouragement for City employees to have any kind of input on how City government is run. I don't know if you've noticed this or not, but there's a tendency for big corporate City entities to waste money here and there, and there's just absolutely no encouragement, no formal process whatsoever in place for City employees to say, hey you are wasting a couple thousand bucks here and there. And I came across this because I had an excellent suggestion, you all sent out or rather human resources sent out a little information thing on my hidden City paycheck, as it is commonly called, where it talks about my insurance is subsidized and this and that. It was only one page in size and it came out in a large envelope which cost 60, 70 cents, I don't recall. You know, you could do basic first class pose age by folding the thing into threes and -- or you could send it out in the City pony where my paychecks arrive and save the money entirely. But anyway, that's my suggestion. You don't have to reward me. Is my time up already?

>>Mayor Watson: unfortunately, yes.

>> Dang. I'll have to come back.

>>Mayor Watson: look forward to seeing you. Thank you, Mr. Knowlton. Paul robbins, then Charles waits, then Gus pena.

>> Council, for the record, my name is Paul robbins, I'm an environmental activist, and consumer advocate. I'm here today to protest the take-over of the energy conservation department by the electric department, and I'm asking for specific remedy. It's my belief that this action was done in an illegal and ma nip la active manner and -- manipulative manner and I'm asking Council to open up the process, specifically put an item on the agenda four to five weeks from now that will confirm, amend or reverse the take-over and invite the relevant interest groups to be involved in the process. These groups should include environmentalists and conservation contractors, as well as other groups, but those two specifically, I think, have been left out of the process. I think the idea of the merger is naive at best and manipulative at worst. I'm not going to mince words. There are a lot of good individuals at the electric department. I know many on a first name basis. But as an institution, there is an inherent conflict of interest. They are there to make money, to generate revenue while the conservation department is there to save energy and thereby prevents revenue from occurring. I have been an observer of the department for 20 years. I -- from those observations, I think that historically they -- although it's grown and let me rephrase. There have been greater and lesser instances where they have been adverse to conservation and adverse to other types of progressive generation options like co-generation. There's not a lot more that I can add to this. I would like you to again put an item on the agenda four to five weeks from now that would confirm, amend or negate what has happened and open up the process so that the citizens of Austin can participate. Thank you.

>>Goodman: thank you, Mr. Robbins. Charles waits.

>> Mayor, Mayor pro tem, Councilmembers, ladies and gentlemen, I'm charlie watsz, I came today to speak about alleged global warming and the rules that will soon be imposed on the citizens of this nation as stated in the kioto summit agreement. Here our representatives obligated this nation to reduce man made carbon dioxide emissions to 7% below 1990 levels. To reduce global warming. And they, our leaders, consider carbon dioxide a pollutant. First, global warming can be likened to the lock nest monster, it doesn't exist. Carbon dioxide is an absolute essential. Plants take on carbon dioxide and in the presentation of light produce oxygen. Researcher Dr. Itsu of the u.s. Department of agriculture informs us at various time the earth has had as much as 20 times as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as there is today and plants and animals tlooifd. Concerning greenhouse gases, 96.7% of greenhouse gases are water or water vapor. This leaves only 3.3% that is other than water. Of this 3.3%, less than 4% is carbon dioxide. Of this 4% of 3.3% less than 5% is produced by man. We would have to increase man made carbon dioxide production 20 times to increase the -- that's 2,000 percent to double carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. On the other hand, if man kind reduced carbon dioxide production to zero, it would make no positive difference. Dr. Itsu informs us if we could increase cash dioxide in the atmosphere it would more than double the yield of most crops. In summary, carbon dioxide is absolutely essential. Second, more carbon dioxide is better than less carbon dioxide. When a blade of grass or leave or stick of wood dies, it ruts in the production of carbon dioxide. The kind man kinds produces is infintesimal. It goes along with the environmental were wolves, vampires and warblers and salamanders that go around here. Gus, I was going to acknowledge you if I had a opportunities to do so and looks like I will. I like the invitation that you gave to those two sickos. And I should hope you would when the occasion occurs use the s word and tell them what they are full of.

>>Goodman: thank you, Mr. Waits. Gus can tell us what that means later. Gus pena.

>>Garcia: let me explain I don't understand what the heck you are talking about, charlie.

>>Goodman: Mr. Pena, thank you.

>> Good afternoon, -- that was quick. Good afternoon, Mayor pro tem, Councilmembers, Gus pena president of East Austin concerned hispanics. Let's turn to human lives. We would like to see the City meet with the aisd administrators and reach an interlocal agreement to ko he's I feel set up a dare program that aisd would administer from the City of Austin and this prevention education program will start at the elementary school level and not in the middle school level as it was before when the City of Austin and ald h. A.p.d.. The newspaper ran a good series of articles on prison gangs, gangs in the community and the gangs methodology of recruiting. Gangs have set up political action committees to get candidates elected to office. As we enter the new millenium our children and youth are at a critical high impressionable stage and risk their lives and also being involved in engining gangs. We need to ensure that all possible measures are undertaken and prevention education and intervention programs are fully sported to ensure that our kids do not fall prey to these hoodlums and preditors called gangs and gang leaders. As we conduct our patrols and do out reach in the street we see more younger children that have joined gangs. Parents, Monday tr children, be aware of school -- monitor your children. Be advised this could be your children that might join gangs. Love your children, kiss your children, hug your children, tell them you love them because you might not have them tomorrow. Does it sound scary? it better be because it is happening out there. We need to support our principals, teachers, assistants and get involved in children's schools activities. Get involved in the aisd proposal to redraw the attend answers zones or boundaries. It will heavily impact your children and you as a parent and where the students will be attending schools. Ortega elementary principal, teachers, parents will have a neighborhood walk this saturday at 9:00. Please, I don't know what you all can do as a City Council, but work with the Austin independent school district to ensure that a dare program is in place over there and start at the elementary school level and not at the middle school level. It's funny? I don't think so. It's serious. I'm seeing too much kids out there we do outreach at all types of the morning. I'll show you there what is going on Councilmember Garcia, nils else having a strong doubt about the lives of our kids. Please, get this agreement done. The kids need it and we will appreciate you all very much for it. Thank you very much.

>>Goodman: thank you, Mr. Pena. [Applause]. Okay, the next thing on the agenda is to go through the consent and I really don't have a list of that. I guess the Mayor does.

>>Garcia: Mayor pro tem?

>>Goodman: yes, sir.

>>Garcia: I this Mr. Fernandez came in. He was called earlier.

>>Goodman: okay. Come ahead. Thanks, Gus.

>> Good afternoon, Mayor pro tem, Council, my name is Gavino Fernandez. I want to thank you for recognizing me, Mayor pro tem and Gus Garcia. I do want to speak about the smart initiative and as we all know that the quality of life with a given neighborhood or counity is based on the principle of the zoning that it has in its place. So what I want to speak about is the effects of some of the zonings that we have experienced in our community. The holly power plant, the holly power plant line route, if we remember that debate. The East Austin overlay as we learned had no teeth. The hand twisting of light rail in our community. The airport relocation. With no protection plan much less any moneys to address the infrastructure impact. The Arnold oil, the bfi, balcones, the tank farm property shouldn't be an issue of rezoning, it should be an issue of being purchased. Fiesta gardens parking lot. Exclusion from the smart initiative from its inspection. The Colorado river park development. Where we only invest 10 million as opposed to 60 million to get it redeveloped. The neighborhood plan. Once again, montopolis is ignored from being selected from a neighborhood plan. No plans for displacement in the smart initiative is the -- one of the elements and factors that really scares our community because one of the goals or objective -- one of the goals with the smart initiative is that funny wordings of enhancing the tax base in the innercity. What that means, increase of taxes. To most of us homeowners who live within the proximity of downtown. So there is no plan, there is no protection plan for those of us that are living there. We would like to request a tax abatement for all homeowners in this area because once again the smart initiative speaks about our area being the preferred growth area. Yet very few if any landowners and property owners of this area sit and or participate in the discussions of this plan. We are victims of many plans, the Austin tomorrow, the 78702 the Austin project, I mean we are a prostitute to social engineers in our community. And we are tired of that. So we -- we as a community wanted to begin revitalizing our community. And you know what steps those are, and that is rezoning allied properties within the innercity to protect our neighborhoods. Many of the elements within the smart initiative are great ideas and great policies that protect neighborhoods. [Buzzer sounds]. The sad part of this whole situation is that it does not apply to our community.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you.

>> Thank you very much, Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: has Mr. Mc Millan had his opportunity to speak? John mc Millan. John mc Millan. Next item on the agenda will be the consent agenda. Let me read to you -- tell you what, before we do the consent agenda, are we ready to go on the bonds? ms. Dunkerly? let's go to consent agenda. The consent agenda will be, unless items are added or deleted, 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27, 28, 33, 34 35, with a change on the vote of 6-0. The correction is -- it indicates Slusher absent. The correction should be Spelman absent. 36 By consent with the change. It indicates on a first reading a vote of 6-0 with slush irrelevant absent, it should be Spelman absented. 37, 38, 39, 66 From the amount of $140,000 that would increase the amount of attorneys fees by $110,000 for a total contract amount not to exceed $140,000. And item no. 70. I'll entertain a motion unless there are some changes where a Councilmember wants to pull an item or add something back. Are there any items to be pulled from the consent agenda? any items to be added back? Mayor pro tem.

>>Goodman: you can add 10 back.

>>Mayor Watson: item 10 will be on the consent agenda. Councilmember Lewis.

>>Lewis: yes, you can add 16.

>>Mayor Watson: any other items that need to be added, any items that need to be pulled?

>>Slusher: Mayor?

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Slusher.

>>Slusher: you can add back no. 14 And no. 23.

>>Mayor Watson: all right. The consent agenda -- and I'll read it again and I'll entertain a motion. Do you have something for the consented?

>> Mayor, you have item 33, that's an action item that should occur after the development corporation meet and so if you could pull that one, please.

>>Mayor Watson: you are right. I'm sorry, I read that. I didn't intend to. The consent agenda will be 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 34, 35 with the change, 36 with the change, 37, 38, 39, 66 in the amount previously read, and 70. I'll entertain a motion.

>>Lewis: so moved.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made by Councilmember Lewis. 10 Was added back in. Is there a second? seconded by the Mayor pro tem. Any discussion? let me make sure we don't have anybody signed up to speak on the consent agenda. I don't understand this. Is there anyone signed up to speak on the consent agenda? my records indicate there isn't. All right. Motion has been made and seconded. Councilmember Slusher.

>>Slusher: I would like the City attorney to affirm that no. 70 Is at no financial risk to the City.

>> I can confirm that. There's no financial risk to the City in that one.

>>Slusher: okay.

>>Mayor Watson: any further discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. Go to our 2:00 time certain. Welcome, Mr. Newman.

>> Mayor and Council, Bill newman to talk to you about items no. 8 And 9 which is a refunding transaction of some of the City's combined utility systems revenue bonds. This was negotiated transaction and some of the representatives from the senior underwriting form of morgan et al. Are here. We -- I should say ms. Dunkerly and dennis whaley helped push this deal out the door in a hurry seeing that this market has been improving the last week or two. We priced the transaction on tuesday and had originally anticipated a $213 million deal, that's what's what's in your agenda today. But cost of the -- because the transaction was so well received we were able to increase the size of the refunding bond issue and ultimately come out with at the end of the day a $245 million transaction that resulted in a savings to the City of $7.1 million and a pv savings percentage of 5.11 percent on $139 million refunding transaction. $7 Million in anybody's pocket is a lot of money and congratulations. Again we had a real hot market. I wanted to mention one other thing. Tuesday was a good day. As I said, betty and dennis pushed this and we got it in the mart and got it done. On wednesday the bonds that you sold the day before were worth 4.77% in the year 2028. The next day they were 4.85 so we hit it just right, just real goodment resulted in a true interest cost on 30 year bond issue 4.68% which is very commend al. Standard and poors called me right before I left the office to say they confirmed your underlying rating but they had to at some degree there's a business profile that they look at you and they had improved you on their business profile from a 5 to a 4. No. 1 Be the best on a scale of 1 to 10. Two of the reasons they felt like you had an improvement, one that utility was making progress on its plan to become competitive. They felt like you were following it very well and liked that. Secondly they thought the operating performance of south Texas nuclear project was very good. So again it's a great deal for you I think, certainly a good deal for the City and citizens and we recommend approval.

>>Mayor Watson: any questions? Councilmember Garcia a motion has been made to approve items 8 and 9. Is there a second? seconded by Councilmember Spelman. Any constitution r. Discussion?

>> thank you very much.

>>Mayor Watson: I was just going to check -- yes, thank you very much. Any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries on items 8 and 9. We appreciate that. Thanks for the good work. Council, what I thought I would do is go over to item no. 69. It's my understanding we have see people signed up to speak on item 69. Ms. Denyingerly.

>> Mr. Newman misspoke, the credit for the good rates that we got today belong to the Council. You cancelled the Council meeting so we moved it forward so we want to make sure you know who really deserves the credit for those rates.

>>Mayor Watson: it's all instincts, ms. Dunkerly. Thank you very much. We'll take up item 69. Under the rules if five people sign up on an item then it cannot be handled by consent -- I'm sorry, not 69. 68. Item no. 68. Under our rules if more than five people sign up an item can't be put on the consent agenda. So item no. 68 We will pull and I will take it up. Let me tell you that we have a number of people signed up to speak and I'm going to just first recognize the Mayor pro tem and then anybody else that wishes to discuss it and then what we'll do is bring up the people that want to speak. Mayor pro tem.

>>Goodman: I just want to say that lately there has been dissension between individuals and groups and I wanted to say for the record if you don't already know that I approach every appointment I make to any board and commission as an advocate of social justice, as a woman, as in this case also as an artist. Long time ago there were a lot of wars out there between arts and artists and particular funding and two very old and valued friends of mine had a great deal to do with taking us out of a really rancoros era and that is the current dhar of the commission and the former chair of the commission. There was also a move recently where some folks thought that some who had served for too long, quote unquote, on the commission were not of as much value as some newer people who had not had the opportunity to serve. I didn't support that. And in fact, it's taken a long time to negate something my predecessor did, but next meeting, whenever our next meeting is, I have an agenda item to delete that term limitation that was arbitrarily placed on commission service. I do want to say, though, that some of the things I've heard bear no resemblance to the person I know and respect as my appointment to the arts commission. I think communication has possibly been totally lacking, and I do not want to see a return to the arts wars. Whoever I appoint would not be a person who would ever seek to delete or negate the special charges and the special values that we as artists and -- artists in Austin have put into our process. So although I've heard a great many misperceptions and misrepresentations, I do want to say that I have not found a word of truth in allegations that have come my way. I think if we all look back to tackett and people's skills and actual communication maybe we will understand that all of our goals are the same. But I couldn't let me appointment be branded with with a brush that I know she doesn't deserve. Thanks, Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you Mayor pro tem. Any other discussion before I go to the public comment? all right. We have people, they've signed up but many do not wish to speak, they just wish to have their card read. Rebecca saldana indicated she is for. Pat warman's reappointment. Scott behind ler signed up for. Car man Garza signed up for pat orman's reappointment to the arts commission. Patrece parsons for -- I'm sorry, do you wish to speak? please come forward. Josie knight does not wish to speak but signed up for. Norm ma Garza toss not wish to speak but said I support arts commissioner pat orman's reappointment. I found her to be honest and direct. She has necessary -- asked necessary and difficult questions of the commission. These questions deserve direct answers. Ms. Parsons.

>> Thank you, Mayor and Mayor pro tem and City Council members. My name is pete parsons. I've lived in Austin 26 years, served on a number of community boards including the center for battered women, the aids services of Austin, the Austin drug and alcohol abuse program, the dance company and the developing board of the Austin children's museum. I have known pat orman since 1982 and in the 16 years I have known her to be plain spoken, intelligent, fair minded and a person of highest even teg ri ti. In her service on the arts commission, Austin arts commission, pat has taken the position that the procedures Written and implemented by the commission should be legal and inclusive. The arts commission al low indicates almost 3 million of bed tax money following procedures that the commission created without benefit of legal oversight and which have not been reviewed by legal counsel. It seems unbelievable some members of the arts commission opposed sending these proceedings to the City attorney with a letter requesting opinion of him but they did. The ordinance that created the arts commission directs the commission to recognize Austin's diversity in the allocation of funding and to promote art for historically underserved population. The funding procedures of the art commission skan a provision that purport to address historically underserved populations, but the language of the provision excludes such groups as the elderly and disabled. It seems unbelievable that some arts commissioners and members of the arts community oppose making that language more inclusive but they do. If a social agenda is to be incorporated into a City funding procedure, I firmly believe that on all margin or under served populations should be eligible for consideration for funding preference. Pat orman has taken a position consistent with these values and taken a lot of heat for it. She should be come menned for her commitment and I hope you will support her reappointment to the arts commission. Thank you very much for your time.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Marilyn good signed up not wishing to speak. She said she requests art commission appointments be pulled from the consent agenda so the community may be heard. The commission has made progress the past being a union phing body. New appointments need to continue that progress. The first step is for the Council sto hear serns. Maria rocha signed up and she is against the appointment of pat orman. Are you here? did you wish to speak? I'm sorry. Pleas come forward.

>> Mayor and City Council members and Councilmember good man, I honor your words and thank you very much. And I remain loyal and true to you. Of the many reasons that I came to speak against the appointment of patted orman the one I wanted to bring to your attention was the political one. The reason that I voted for you that my family, my friends that the community, people that I know voted for you was because of your politics, your political views, your philosophy, your commitment and extraordinary sensitivity to the minority community. And we expect your appointments to espouse that and to demonstrate that and for their behavior to reflect that. And that's not what I've seen. That's not what I've witnessed. So it heartens me to hear that you are watching and that you believe that that is what is going to happen and so I feel encouraged.

I have asked several people whether or not they would consider someone else, a community person step forward, Dr. Margi webb, from Austin community college and I am hole heart he hadly in support of her. She has been involved in the art community, the minority community, and she has been there to support our efforts at the most grass roots level and those are the people that I see as being sensitive to us and that's why you have been there. So thank you for at least considering what we were talking about. I think the record reflects that there have -- that lot of thins that were said were not incorrect. The records show statements on file that there were some vehement to do away with minority sfunding and the person who stated earlier we were against inclusiveness that's not right, that's not correct.

We want to be more inclusive. It's just there's a way to bring people in and it's not to force things that at the arts commission level without bringing us into some kind of dialogue. There has never been a dialogue and you know how important that is. So with guidance of your appointment I think we will make some progress. Thank you. [One moment please]. To ensuring equity in arts funding for both providing contract services and for those receiving those services. During this past funding cycle. She made an attempt to eliminate part of the process that helps to ensure equity. That motion -- the motion that she made failed to receive even a second, even though when she presented it, she said it was coming as a recommendation from the finance committee. No one else on that finance committee, including leslie pool, support heard motion. The motion failed. The part of the process that she was trying to eliminate is the fourth review process, I believe it's called. Fourth review action. That part of the process states -- in the fourth review action says in order to improve equity of arts funding allocation and balance of funding to services to populations, consider applicants from traditionally underserved communities and women applicants for possible increase in level of funding. She wanted to eliminate that step from the process when she tried to pass that motion, it failed. So consequently when the arts commission came to that time in the process to go through that, she removed herself from the dias the minute the first page of the handout I gave you is the minutes from that meegted and under item d is says ms. Orman state her concerns about the legality of the fourth review action. She explained she would not participate in this action until the legality of the issue was revolved. She excused herself from the table and noted herself as absent for any of the remains of the fourth review action.

For me it's really hard for me to understand how the fourth review action, which is in order to improve equity, how that could be illegal and why she questioned the legality of it. These notes don't really reflect what happened at those meetings. There was some harsh words and there was some behavior that was really inappropriate and unprofessional. And as an arts commissioner, our commissioners have a duty to perform to serve the citizens, to serve the clients. And when someone is behaving in that manner, they're holding up the process, they're impeding the process instead of miking it better or helping it to move along and serving their clients. [Buzzer]. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Yes, Councilmember Goodman?

>>Garcia: since this is -- since this is an issue that apparently has some legal implications, I was wondering at the conclusion of the testimony, the City attorney could talk about the potential for legal -- what does she call if? it? the legality issue of the fourth review action. You know, I understand that the they have not issued any kind of opinion on the legality of the fourth review action and I'd like to -- I have some other comments, but I would like to just ask the staff to be able to -- to be able to address this issue when we finish here in hearing testimony.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Cynthia perez? she signed up against, indicates we met with Jackie Goodman's aide to speak about ms. Orman's problem with minorities. She is against. And the question on the table of the meeting recommended she not be reappoint and please pull from consent agenda. Letty, please pull from the consent agenda, against the appointment of pat orman. Carl smith adams? carol smith adams signed up for the reaappointment of pat orman. Ms. Mac Alice ster? she signed up, but didn't sign up for or against. Edward dough ver ra? he wrote it is urgent not to a pointed pat orman. Reserve diversity in Austin parts. Pat orman?

>> I'm pat orman. I've serve on the Austin arts commission for two years and today my appointment is up for your consideration. I want to take this opportunity to provide some background on origins of this issue which arose in may when I took the initiative to propose some changes to funding procedures used by the arts commission. I've provided you with copies of the procedure currently in use and the procedure that was offered as a replacement. The current procedure contains the step, the fourth review action, also known as the special population funding step, which I perceived to be vulnerable to legal challenge. I serve on the funding committee of the commission and when I met with that committee, I shared with them my concerns. Working with the other commissioners on that committee, we developed the proposed procedure. In no way was I trying to sneak up on anyone with this document. Love it or hate it, it went through the proper channels. In fact, we followed the exact process step by step which had been followed by the funding committee in 1997 when I also served on it. In the proposed procedure there is no discreet special population funding step. Instead, the perbl population funding is threaded through the process. The document lays out a process that begins with acknowledgment of the special population's funding objective and that objective is revisited after each round of the funding process. It was in no way designed to eliminate or even limit funding for minority artists. This proposal drew a huge reaction, which believe me, I never saw coming. Even so, I stand by my position that all City boards that promulgate policy that affect the distribution of public monies should make every effort to ensure that those policies will in fact withstand strict legal scrutiny. Now, City ordinance mandates the Austin arts commission to, and I quote, equalize access to the arts, both participatory and professional, end quote. I believe that a commission that is charged with that responsibility should use every means available to it to reach out a hand to every member of this community to whom access to the arts is denied or restricted due to ethnicity, age, geographic location, religion, economic disadvantage, sexual orientation, gender, disability or any other basis of prejudice. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Garcia?

>>Garcia: one of the persons that testified just before you said that you brought a recommendation -- you serve on the finance committee?

>> yes, sir.

>> That you brought a recommendation presumably from that committee and that it was not -- and you presented it as a recommendation from the committee, but it was not the committee's recommendation and you didn't get a second; is that correct?

>> that's correct.

>>Garcia: can you explain?

>> I met with the funding committee or finance committee, the terms are used interchangeably, and there are three members of that committee. I kind of rolled out the idea in the committee meeting and one of the other commissioners said that in fact she had kind of been wanting to rework this language. And she agreed with it -- with this in concept and then she left town. That left me to work out the details with the other commissioner. And I did that over the next week. We exchanged phone calls, faxes, e-mails, et cetera, and I incorporated all of her comments into the document. And my last telephone conversation with her prior to the may commission meeting she reaffirmed her support for the procedure. And that was the last word I had on any of it until we got to the commission meeting. And then no one supported it.

>>Garcia: when was that?

>> it was in may, the may commission meeting.

>>Garcia: has that come up since then? has the issue been brought up again?

>> this funding procedure?

>>Garcia: yeah.

>> No, the proposed funding procedure hasn't been mentioned since then.

>>Garcia: has it gone back to the committee?

>> no. The committee hasn't met. Again, that committee is sort of an annual event that we get together before the commission has their funding allocation meeting. All I can tell you is what I've done in the past two years. That's the process I've been doing in the past two years.

>>Garcia: what I'm trying to establish is why if the -- if one commissioner agreed with you and left town and another commissioner agreed with you and, of course, you were the proponent of that particular resolution, why has that not been further discuss and why was it not seconded when it came to the arts commission?

>> well, there was a very strong reaction, which in my opinion were based on a misunderstanding of what were being proposed. And in the face of that strong reaction, my support slid out under the door. I don't know what else to tell you. People didn't do what they told me they'd do.

>>Garcia: I think the person who testified or maybe it was a caller that called my office, I don't recall, but said that you had changed the recommendation that came out of the committee; is that correct?

>> no, sir. No, sir. I finalized this document with one of the other commissioners and I sent her the final document and I talked to her on the phone and she said she supported it and then I provided it to City staff.

>>Garcia: that's all the questions I have. I have some further comments later, Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: all right. Thank you very much. Lisa bird wrote we as artists and cultural workers would like to see an arts commission do more than manage the cultural contracts process. We would like the commissioners to act as advocates of the arts community. Providing the Austin community with information about the contribution and needs of the arts community. Working with Councilmembers to help with issues affecting artists and qualifications for arts commissioners must have knowledge of the arts, also the ability to communicate these ideas to the general community, but to use Councilmembers and to the arts community itself. Ask yourselves will this person promote consensus and your vision of the arts in Austin. Betty nailer signed up not speaking, but for pat orman reappointment. Alex alford, followedly rolm salinas.

>> You will be relieved to know I'm not here to speak in favor or against ms. Orman. I have no ax to grind. However, I do want you to consider that if there is an opening, I hope you will consider steven skags for that position. I think he would serve add mir bli on the arts commission.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Mr. Al lien nas salinas.

>> Good afternoon Mayor Watson, Mayor pro tem, members of the Austin Councilmember. I would like to ask for a request for a reappointment of commissioners today. There appears to be a very serious -- very serious concerns and miscommunications and reservations with regards to the arts commission appointment. What's even more so bother some is the tone and actions that have resurfaced at the commission level with regards to diversity, equity and procedure. In a system that is undoubtedly in dire need of update and revision, racial and social overtones should not be the basis for change and not at the expense of traditionally underserved communities. I'm concerned with the polarsation that has been ensuing and the outlook of the next process that we, your clients, the clients of the city of Austin are about to enter into. As diversity in the City is expanding, it appears that the understanding of it is shrinking. Your leadership on this issue is need and I trust you will act with the community's heart and mind and reconsider the appointment of the arts commission, pat orman on the arts commission. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: Mayor pro tem?

>>Goodman: could I ask you a question before you go? a minute ago ms. Orman read through what the original proposal was, which I didn't hear in that proposal what you were just referring to. Can you tell me where in that proposal to change the process so that consideration of special population minorities artist funding, how that is harmed in any way instead of enhanced?

>> yes. Ms. Goodman, I've sat on the special populations committee since 1993 and one of the things that we look at on that committee is the actions that the arts commission makes. We as members of the community come together on that committee and try to assess and evaluate the I am Mr. Indications of changes in all the guidelines and all the other procedures that the arts commission makes. I think one of the things that we found in meeting in the course of the last couple of weeks at the special populations committee level is that some of the changes that were proposed awhile back would have had a detriment national affect to traditionally under served communities.

>>Goodman: tell me which one.

>> I don't have all the paperwork in front of me, but I do know that the committee is producing a report as we speak and we met last meeting. There were members that met at the recreation center and that they were going to be forwarding owe oat committee will be forwarding tig a recommendation to the arts commission. And at that point I think it's a little bit more formulated.

>>Goodman: okay. Well, having just listened to pat, I thought it was fairly straight guard, but let me ask you maybe one more thing. The way it was laid out and the way I understand it, even if this is not the ideal way or the consensus way to change, but the proposal as laid out with special consideration not separate but equal, but mandated within every step of the process, why is that detrimental?

>> I think what we find is the model that we have here in Austin is a very old model and the model that really doesn't -- doesn't reflect the changes that have occurred over the last couple of decades. I think when we start taking a look at the different levels and the systematic evaluation procedures, there's consistent areas that affect in a very I guess negative way the way, I guess, traditionally under served populations or evaluated and valued. A good example is one of the things that we're looking at in the special populations meeting, if I remember correctly -- and I think there may be folks here that were at the meeting last night -- was the evaluation sheets that's done at the initial onset of the procedure. It allows for site visits. Rarely do we have site visits that make it out into the traditionally underserved communities. So it's areas like that that there's compensation for the lack of I guess initiative from all the different levels, whether it's advisory or whether it's at the commission, there are steps in place that we're hoping will work to ensure a little bit more equity. I think when we take a look at funding, one of the things we should look is not just funding based on ethic background or all the other characterizations, but also take a look at demographic equity. I think it's real clear that there are different areas of the City that need to receive more services and it's through this process that hopefully those organizations that work within different sectors of the community will be, I guess, more appreciated, more valued and supported a little bit more. Community out reach is one of the areas that we in the special populations committee have worked to define for years and it's one that we continue trying to educate at the different levels the value of what community out reach is and how networking different parts of the community can benefit the whole City as a whole.

>>Goodman: I agree. And what you just said sounded very much what pat just said. So I'm not seeing -- acknowledging that at this meeting we can't come up with a perfect way to make sure that everything is protected and that our values are protected and enhanced and safely in hand no matter what threat, but I'm not understanding the depth of personal opposition when it sounds like it's all the same. And after we get through with all the testimony, could I ask you something? sorry to take so much of your time?

>>Lewis: I'd like to ask a question. Mr. Sal lien nas, are you saying that by making that termination one step at a time, you're only looking at that particular step rather than looking at the big picture at the end as to -- is that my understanding? in other words, when you're doing it and you're looking at it in individual steps, you're only looking at that particular point where if you wait until everything is completed, then you look at the percentages as a whole. Is that --.

>> Well, that's one of the factors, Mr. Lewis.

>>Lewis: what I'm saying is then you can look at the different -- the demographics and the special --.

>> Populations.

>>Lewis: yeah, special populations as a whole rather than as one group?

>> exactly.

>>Lewis: okay. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Garcia.

>>Garcia: I talked to ms. Orman this morning and, you know, we were talking about the historical significance of all of this that has transpired in the last few months. And I sense from the discussions that I've had with everybody that the concerns that the traditionally underserved communities have has to do more with what you perceive to be her attitude towards a fourth review action. Is that correct?

>> I think that step has been there traditionally as a safety net. And I think in eliminating that aspect and kind of sliding it over the entire pie, it doesn't retain the same value that it had up front. I think like a lot of processes, we would have loved to have participated in the development of a system that works. And I think what we found is this hit us on -- it hit us so fast, so quick, caught us all off guard and we were all left with trying to figure out how this is going to affect us.

>>Garcia: at the june 23rd, 1998 meeting that y'all had at the dougherty arts center in item d-4, the minutes indicate that ms. Orman excused herself and asked that she be shown absent on any motion for the fourth review action. Is that something that concerned you?

>> absolutely. And I think it concerns the special populations committee, which is a coalition, a group of folks from the grass roots community both east and south Austin that work on trying to bring diversity in the City. I think Austin is known as the -- one of the most culturally diverse cities in the nation and it's important to continue to promote diversity. And to remove safety nets causes a great deal of concern to the community.

>>Garcia: the cultural contracts office also sent us a fax with something that appears to be minutes where there's a comment by her that says, there is no way that this displaces funding for special populations. It's pretty much an ado about nothing, a bunch of hooey. Were you there when she made that statement?

>> yes, sir.

>>Garcia: did that disturb you?

>> that disturbed the entire assembly. There were about 35 to 40 members from different organizations and as that comment was made, that sent a slil through the spine of every organization that was there and I think that we were reacting to not just the policy change, but to the overtones.

>>Garcia: thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: Mr. Rocha, if you could come forward, Mayor pro tem has a question for you.

>>Goodman: I just wanted to proceed a quick answer to your question about the specific language of ms. Orman's proposal. One of the things about the language was that it said at every step of the way, the minority funding would be reviewed. And the next step was so simply saying it would be reviewed does not give a step and then motions will be taken for equity funding at that step and to make provisions like that. And I think that her statement about it hit her by surprise talks about her insensety to our community and our history insensitivety and our history. And comments she makes reinforce that feeling. I am very concerned that she hired her own attorney to review this process, which means that she's not satisfied with the City attorney slowness or opinion or whatever, so that means there's a crusade, a private crusade going on. So that's kind of the element of distress here.

>>Mayor Watson: those are all the people that have signed up to speak. Let me first entertain a motion on item no. 68. And what I will do, just for purposes of ease, is ask that the first motion on item -- tell me if I foul up so I can do it legally here. The first motion on item no. 68 Would be to approve all -- I'll read through the appointment, but for us to consider the appointments other than the arts commission appointment and then come back and visit that item. Can we do it that way? all right. Council, is there any problem with me doing is that way so we can come back and discuss the arts? charter revision committee, gore gla more ren no, reappointment by con 17 shus. Design commission, Paula for reappointment by Councilmember Griffith. Perry lower rens, a reappointment. Jan mckan, a reappointment by Councilmember Spelman. Environmental board, reappointment by consensus. The ethics review commission, reappointment. League of women voters representative by consensus. Mechanical plumbing and solar board, a reappointment, a licensed air conditioner representative by consensus. MhMr board of truss trees, a reappointment by consensus. Antoinette I think else. Music commission, harold mcMillan. Michelle levine. Solicitation board, a reappointment by consensus. Solid waste advisory commission, jerry acuna. Telecommunications commission, a reappointment. A meal I can't lopez by Mayor Watson. I'll also, unless somebody wants to do something different, there are two other appointments being considered to the arts commission that we could consider at this point. Does anybody have anything to say on that? the two other appointments are leslie pool, a reappointment by Councilmember Griffith and deanna rodriguez by Mayor Watson. I'll entertain a motion and we will revisit the remainer der. The motion is made by Councilmember Spelman, spekd seconded by the Mayor pro tem. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. I'll recognize the Mayor pro tem.

>>Goodman: I want to say that I do think the good people who sent in applications -- I do thank the good people who sent in applications in case I change appointments at this juncture and to reiterate just a little bit, I think what we need here is a real effort for everyone to have the kind of talk that we were almost ready to have today so that no one's motives are misunderstood. Now, I disagree with maria on one thing, and that's the City attorney thing. No offense, andy. But when you ask them for a legal opinion, if you had the money, maybe you should go hire your own attorney rather than wait because they do have a lot on their plate and they take a long, long time. Of course, now that we have a Mayor who is an attorney, we just go to him. But for some people it is very much an issue, and for me, I don't want us to be vulnerable in any way. I also want to make sure that pat orman knows, I know that she does not have a racist bone in her body and that social justice is as important to her as it is to me and that talking to folks it's kind of imperative to get your ideas across. If there is a way for us to go before we make any changes at all or if we make no changes, if we make language changes and find a way for consensus to be found, then that's what I'm looking for. And I'm not going to hang her out to dry because I know that she is dedicated and supportive and I hope that now that we've all had a chance to vent, maybe we can go out and get some things done. So I thank her for her service and I thank all the rest of the arts commissioners and all of the folks who are here today because some of them are old and dear friends and I know what your commitment is as well. Some of my reappointment requests.

>>Mayor Watson: I consider that a motion to reappointment pat orman to the arts commission. Is there a second? seconded by Councilmember Griffith. Discussion? I'll recognize Councilmember Garcia.

>>Garcia: I had asked the City attorney for his opinion, unWritten as it may be, but as I read the fourth review action that is in the proposed funding allocation procedures adopted by the Austin arts commission on may 18th, 1998, it says in order to improve equity of arts funding allocations and balance the services to special populations, consider applicants from traditionally underserved communities and women applicants for possible increase in level of funding. Let me say that having been here when we requested of the arts commission that they do this, this is very much in line with the request that we made. So I would first like for somebody from the law department to indicate to me what possible illegality there is in this particular section?

>>Mayor Watson: let me ask a question about that because one of the reasons it was brought up by ms. Orman was her concern about potential for litigation. If in fact there's a potential for litigation involving this matter, if in fact it is an item that we may find ourselves, however it was passed and however we apply it, needing to either defend what has occurred or making any considerations, it probably would be best that we do that in the context of a private consultation with our attorney. And so if you want that sort of information, my recommendation would be that we move that we go into executive session that that we might receive a private consultation with our attorney.

>>Garcia: so move, Mr. Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: motion is made by Councilmember Garcia that we go into private consultation on item no. 68 To receive advice from our attorney concerning certain issues regarding the legality of matters that are before us with regard to this appointment. Is there a second? seconded by Councilmember Spelman. Is there any discussion? Mayor pro tem?

>>Goodman: this is not the language that I think was problematic. It's in another place.

>>Mayor Watson: okay. I want to get advice from our attorney. Before we get advice about the legality, I'd rather get it. The motion has been made and seconded. Is there any more discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. We will recess to executive session on item no. 68.

>>Mayor Watson: I'll call the city Council back to order. We're on item no. 68. There has been a motion and there has been a second to reappointment pat orman. The motion is made by Mayor pro tem, it is seconded by grf. Is there any further discussion? Councilmember Garcia?

>>Garcia: thank you. First of all, I want to commend the arts commission for the work that they have done to be inclusive. They in essence were following a counsel's directive to address the issue appropriately. And I think they've done a magnificent job. I also had an opportunity this morning to talk to ms. Orman, though not at great length. And if richard is here, I'm going to tell you that I'm not going to give the speech I gave you this morning that lasted two hours. This is going to be a brief comment. I also talked to Mayor pro tem Goodman. I recommended to ms. Or man or I told her that I was going to vote against her appointment to the commission, but I told her that in case she was appointed that one of the things that I would recommend is that she take some time to explore and begin to get an understanding of why it is that the Council gave the directive that it gave in this particular instance.

We had had years, if not decades of art wars where historically underserved populations failed very strongly -- felt very strongly that their needs were not being served. Many of us went to work in what we thought was a very productive effort. Our office sent people, our administrative assistant, to work with the arts consortium, what turned out to be the la tina arts consortium with the instructions that they were to work towards making the inclusiveness a positive kind of thing. And some of them, like rudy mendez, went much further, much beyond what we expected. His company, like others, that is inclusive, you know to the nth degree. If you go to see his shows, you see that he has dancers from all the groups in this community. Notwithstanding that, we still wanted to make sure that those groups that spend the time focusing in on those cultural aspects that are considered important to providing the necessary self-esteem that we need in communities, that they go to work on that particular issue. And expressing one's art forms is a way of gaining self-esteem, first because we get an opportunity to do the things the way we think they ought to be done and secondly because we learn something about who we are.

And that's one of the things that has been missing in Austin among minority populations. I think the rebel onthat we see in young people of minority origins is directly tied to the lack of self-esteem. And it is very sad for me to see young men and women who come from cultures that are so old, so rich and so deep feeling that they don't have any self-esteem. And seeing a community that doesn't know how to respond to that. The numbers are there, 2500 to 3,000 gang members, most of them african-american and hispanic. Now, if a message was going to be sent, it is that those young people do not trust the system. They don't think that the system appreciates them and they just kiss it off. We saw the articles in the american-statesman about the gangs and the heavy, heavy, representation -- that's an area where we're overrepresented. Gangs and people in jail, african americans, hispanics, very well represented. As a matter of fact, overrepresented. And that speaks to what kind of culture we have. So we sent the message to the arts commission to do this and they struggled with it. The reaction, ms. Orman, to your comments and some of the things that you said was a -- sent a chilling effect because it hit some raw nerves. It was not what you said probably, but how you said it and how it impacted those particular feelings. And that's why I recommended to you that you spend some time, go out and visit with them so that you begin to understand -- you know, and it's a difficult process. Every time I go into east Austin, every time I go to Mexico, I went there last summer and I was stunned at the richness of the culture.

People that are much poorer than the poor people of Austin that have a self-esteem self-esteem that blows your mind. Why? because they have it. Nobody has said you people don't know what you're doing. So that's in essence what has brought me to this particular point. And Mayor, I could speak for much longer, but I'm not. I would like for this process to work, let me close by saying, I would like for this process to work. I would like for us to develop an inclusiveness plan that not only, you know, has organizations that serve -- say we're going to serve those communities, but actually have representation, significant representation, who can translate those wishes into actual action. And that's going to take time. It's not something that you do overnight. It's difficult. And I think those people who serve on the organizations need to be ever so sensitive to that particular aspect because if we don't do it right, we pay for it dearly. And that is something that I wouldn't want the City to incur. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, Councilmember. I'll just comment, I'm probably not going to vote with you on this, Councilmember Garcia, but once again, I want to thank you for -- I've listened to you for many years a much younger man, and now as I grow older, balancedder and hopefully a little wise -- balder and hopefully a little wiser, I learn from you. And I appreciate what you're saying. And it is one that I think is appropriate for to hear more than maybe we do, so thank you. Is there further discussion?

>>Slusher: I just want to say I am going to support the main motion, although I agree with everything that Councilmember Garcia said, but we've had an airing of this issue and this appointment and Councilmember Goodman has decided to stick with her appointment and I view it as her appointment, so I'm going to vote in favor of it. I would ask, though, that everyone on the arts commission try to learn from the history, from the past and that we not get back into any version of the arts wars that we had back during the 1980s. That was a very bad -- that was very bad for this City in a number of ways, I think. And there was a lot of effort that went into so farring that or stopping that and -- solving that or stopping that and then healing it and I'm concerned that some of the things going on in the commission now could lead to a version of that fairly soon. And I really hope everyone there would work to keep that from happening.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion?

>>Lewis: yes, Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Lewis?

>>Lewis: it disturbs me a little, knowing how much time the commission has put in doing what -- the tasks that they have before them to have the Council either disregard it or be in doubt as to whether or not it's in the best interest of the City. Since I did sit in on -- I was on the boards and commissions prior to coming to the Council, I know that in most cases, most people that take the time to volunteer have the best interest of the City at heart, but, you know, sometimes we lose sight of the facts just because we either have never encountered it or just the lack of insensitivity -- lack of sensitivity toward a situation. And this is going to cause, I know, probably four or five of us to take a lot more time in looking at the recommendations that come from the arts commission when they do come to the Council again just to see what -- what's there and the percentages of groups that was funded and all. So just by the mere fact of us asking to spend a lot more time, it disturbs me to some degree. But I -- I don't know if one commissioner would make that much difference, but I do have a problem with any commissioner or board member that challenged the procedures that the City have given them to work from while they still are on the commission. I think that if they're going to do it, they should resign and then go about it because no matter what comes out of it, they're part of it. And I can't see -- it would be the same thing as one of the Councilmembers sitting here and want to file a suit against the City. To me it's the same type of thing. But I don't know. I have a problem with anyone that's insensitive and without doing it -- if they do it and don't realize it, if they don't -- if they don't apologize, I have a problem with it. If they're doing it intentionally, I have a problem with it. So that's my position on it. And so I still haven't made up my mind as to how I'm going to vote on it, but we'll see. It's getting close, though.

>>Mayor Watson: I was going to say, there being no further discussion -- and I don't think there is. Motion has been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no.

>>Garcia: no.

>>Lewis: I abstain.

>>Mayor Watson: the motion carries on a vote of five yeses, one no, that being Councilmember Garcia and Councilmember Lewis abstaining. That completes item no. 68. We will go to items no. 29 And 30. I'll entertain a motion to recess the City Council meeting so we may have a board of directors meeting of the Austin finance committee. The motion is made by Councilmember Slusher, seconded by Councilmember Griffith to recess and go into the board meeting s there any discussion? opposed say no. Motion carries carries, the city Council is recessed. I now call to order the board of directors of the Austin housing finance corporation and I'll recognize Mr. Hilgers, although before I recognize Mr. Hilgers, on item no. 29, It is customary and typical that the Mayor pro tem of the Austin City Council serve as vice-president of the board of directors of the Austin housing finance corporation. Councilmember Garcia and vice-president Garcia has tendered his resignation and so what we need is a motion to approve a resolution accepting his resignation and I would recommend that the motion also include the naming of Jackie Goodman as vice-president to fill the vacancy created as vice-president of the board of Austin housing finance corporation. Gary.)[

>>Garcia: so move, Mr. Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: motion is made by board member Garcia, seconded by board mab Lewis. Is there any discussion? opposed say no. Motion carries. Jackie Goodman will serve as vice-president of the board. Ta takes us to item 30. I'll recognize Paul hilgers.

>> We have requested that item 30 be pulled and put on the agenda for october 22nd. I believe we do have an addendum item no. 72.

>>Mayor Watson: you do. Let me for purposes of clarify for those who are watching and for the board, when I read the original changes and corrections to the agenda, I did read that item no. 30 Was being pulled, but I didn't scratch it after of my pad, so that's why we did it. Let's go back to item no. 72.

>> Yes, sir. Mayor, very quickly, it is requesting a resolution that would authorize the manager of the Austin housing corporation to file an application for allocation of private activity bond authority with the Texas bond review board in the amount of 23 million or such additional amount as the corporation may be entitled to receive for the purpose of implementing a new bond or mortgage credit certificate program. This is simply for us to be able to file an application, to be able to come to you in the future with additional bond programs to develop reasonably priced housing in Austin.

>>Mayor Watson: does anyone have a question for Mr. Hilgers? [one moment, please]

>> before then we had it at the Council, but we came to you and separated about two and a half three years ago, we applied for authority. We got $23 million worth of authority, we have been issuing mortgages under that bond program. We are almost finished with it.

>>Garcia: did we do one with Travis County?

>> we did two or three. '91, '93 And '95, I believe.

>>Garcia: okay. Thank you, that's all of the questions that I have, Mayor. Nature any further questions?

>>Lewis: I have a question.

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Lewis?

>>Lewis: you said we have a backup $8.2 million, but authority is being used to help 101 first time home buyers. Is that the remaining 8.2 million out of the 23?

>> yes, sir. What we have here is it was put into a mortgage credit certificate program, which started september 1st, 1997. And that is from the -- we used $14,850,000, total. The 8 million was what was left over from what was in the single family, so --.

>>Lewis: when you say we used it, if we are doing mortgages, do we get a return, do we get a pay back of what some percentage of that -- of that money?

>> yeah, sure. Martin.

>> When we do mortgage revenue bonds for the financing of affordable housing, we sell the bond, the bonds are used to buy the mortgages. The people pay off the mortgages, the money received goes back to pay off the bonds. It's a self contained thing. The mortgage credit certificates are a little bit different. When we issue the certificate, the recipient of the certificate gets a credit against his income tax liability for 25% of the interest he pays on his mortgage. It's just the benefit is the fact that the government does not collect from him this -- these taxes. He gets a credit against his income tax liability for part of his interest payment. No money exchanges hands except that he saves money.

>> All right.

>> We do make money issuing the bonds, we do get a fee for doing the mortgage credit certificate.

>>Lewis: yeah, I noticed -- well, that's -- I won't discuss it now. I just wanted to make sewer that I was clear on the fact that it is a resolving mortgage bond -- it's paid back in other words by the mortgage, thank you.

>> Yes, sir, it is that's correct. I will.

>>Mayor Watson: I will entertain a motion. Motion made for approval by board member Spelman, seconded by board member Griffith. Motion carries on item no. 72, I will entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting of the board of directors of the Austin housing finance corps. Motion is made by vice-president Goodman, is there a second? seconded by board member Griffith. All of those in favor say aye, the board is adjourned. Motion carries. I will now call to order the board of directors member of the Austin-Bergstrom international airport international development corporation. The first item on the agenda is item no. 31, That is a resolution similar to the one that the board of the Austin housing finance corporation did, which is to accept the resignation of Gus Garcia as vice-president and to elect a vice-president to fill that vacancy, my recommendation again would be that it be Councilmember Goodman.

>>Garcia: so moved.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made by Garcia and seconded by/. Any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye., opposed say no., motion carries, takes us to item no. 32, I will recognize Mr. Brothers.

>> Mr. President, we ask that this item be postponed until october the 22nd. This approval is required for these bonds requires approval of the bond purchase agreement, that has not been finalized, not ready for presentation today. And so we would request that you postpone that item.

>>Mayor Watson: would that also apply to item no. 33?

>> It would, yes, sir that, a Council item, 33 is a Council item, sir.

>>Mayor Watson: I see what you are saying, yes, thank you, the motion has been made -- it has not been made, although Mr. Brothers attempted to make it, [laughter], I was almost letting you do it, I'm sorry, Mr. Brothers, I'm teasing you. I need a motion on item no. 32 To postpone to october 22nd, 1998. Motion made by vice-president Goodman, seconded by board member Slusher, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye., opposed say no., motion carries on item no. 32. I will entertain a manages to adjourn the meeting of the board of directors of the abia development corporation. Motion made by board member Griffith, is there a second? seconded by board member Lewis, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye., opposed say no., motion carries, back to order the Austin City Council, move to item no. 33, 33 Was related to to the vote we just took on item no. 32, I will entertain a motion to postpone 33 until october 22nd, 1998. Motion made by City Councilmember Lewis, seconded by Councilmember Lewis, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries on item no. 33. That will take us back to item no. 11, I will recognize Councilmember Lewis.

>>Lewis: last week I asked for information regarding the -- well, an opinion from the state. As to how our -- our ordinance related to the state's law as far as contracting and accepting bids. I haven't received any. I did get some information from the finance department. But I still have questions about whether or not we are -- whether or not we are sending the signal to the contractors that we are only interested in the low bid regardless of what benefit the City gets, other than the low bid. And so I have a problem with that. And since I didn't get the information, I would -- I would make a motion approximate that we postpone this until I do get the information from the state regarding the -- the comparison and what we -- what we can use or whether we can use anything other than just a low bid from the state attorney general.

>>Mayor Watson: last week you had indicated that you would be willing to set a date certain just so that we could have a date certain on it. Are you not willing to do that at this time?

>>Lewis: yeah. I know that the state -- when you send something to the state you don't get it back the same day. What is it, november? Garza Garza are we asking for the state attorney general to provide us an opinion on something?

>> provide us an opinion as to whether or not the low bid is the only thing that you can use when you are accepting a bill.

>> Garza: my understanding, I don't know if the City attorney can comment, I am not sure that we have that --

>> we are not on the list of the statute that provides of people that can request the attorney general --.

>>Lewis: can we send it to the county?

>>.

>>Mayor Watson: we would need to go through our legislative legallation. What we might could do is this, if your motion would be to postpone until october 22nd, 1998, we could work with trying to get someone that would get us on that list. The motion is made by Councilmember Lewis to postpone item no. 11 Until october 22nd, 1998, is there a second? seconded by Councilmember Garcia. One person is signed up to speak, David butler. Mr. Butler? he signed up for item no. 11. The motion made and seconded to postpone to october 22nd, 1998. Any discussion?

>>Spelman: yes, Mayor, I am going to vote against this. I agree very much with the sentiment, I think we do need as many options to the lock-in procedure of having to take the low bid in all cases. But this is a fire station which we very much need, we have promised our recently annexed areas, I am going to vote in favor of issuing this particular contract now. If that motion ever becomes before us. I agree with Councilmember Lewis on the general proposition, but I think we need to pursue that paralegal to continuing our construction process.

>>Slusher: I agree with the sentiments expressedded by Councilmember Lewis, but I also agree with Councilmember Spelman, we need to move forward on this station. Consequently I would make a substitute motion to move approval on item no. 11.

>>Spelman: second.

>>Mayor Watson: substitute motion on the table. Let me check, Councilmember Lewis do you consider the motion made by Councilmember Slusher to be a friendly amendment?

>>Lewis: no.

>>Mayor Watson: all right. So it would be a substitute motion. The substitute motion as made by Councilmember Slusher, seconded by Councilmember Spelman, any discussion?

>>Lewis: the reason that we say we need the fire station I have no problem with that. The last one a in or so ago, the fact that we didn't have a fire station serving in the area that we had recently annexed, I had some of the same questions about it. But I went along with it because I know it takes some time to develop these fire stations. But with this fire station, the fire station serves the same area that this fire station would serve. The pickfair is in effect now. I think the last time they said that they would improve the response time. Well, if it's in a different location, it may in fact improve the response time in one area, but it's going to decrease the response time in some other area. And whether that's good or bad, it would be the same thing as if we didn't until we have it built. But if we didn't have an operational fire station in effect now, I could understand the you are against of it. But now that -- I mean, the pickfair is now operating, it is maybe a feed for it. Need for it. But it's not an urgent need. On that note I will vote against the substitute motion.

>>Mayor Watson: let me comment on that briefly. There of course are arguments that can be made both ways with regard to whether any new fire station, some new fire stations, that sort of a thing. However, the determination was made at the time of the annexations that this was an appropriate action and this was, regardless of how all of the debate might have been at that time or even today, and we did make some commitments. We have done what I think is a remarkable job and one that is one that we can brag a little bit about in how we have lived up to our commitments with regard to annexation. We have recently opened another fire and e.m.s. Station in the northwest area, but we need to live up to those commitments. So I am going to be voting in favor of the substitute motion because regardless of what might be serving the area now, we did make promises, we made the determination at least at that time that these would provide -- this fire station would provide better enhanced as much as in the area. So we need to get on with it.

>>Slusher: I would like for someone from the fire department to comment on the service improvements.

>>Mayor Watson: chief warren, please come forward.

>>Slusher: could you tell me, for instance, this sort of the four points -- this will serve four points, also; is that correct?

>> yes, it also also --

>> tell me the difference between pickfair and this station. The response routes for this area, if you can visualize a c shape, and you can visualize the pickfair being up on the top part of the c. When we moved to anderson mill, we will be over around the curve on the c. So getting to the bottom portion of their response area requires them now to go way outlet to anderson mill, over to 183, down to spicewood springs and back over to get to the bottom of the c. Moving from pick fair over to anderson mill cuts a half mile off the travel time.

>> What does that do to the folks in the m.u.d.s, former m.u.d.s nick the pickfair.

>> It causes the unit to be half a mile away.

>>Slusher: right now it's in the middle?

>> right down in the dead end portion of the neighborhood right there.

>>Slusher: there is some sentment in the neighborhood to move the station; is that correct?

>> there have been a few complaints about siren noise at nighttime.

>>Slusher: but the service to that area would be well within the acceptable emergency response times?

>> yes, coming down that street that the station is on, togs a dead pend. That's the reason why the c shape response route. If the street had been connected at one time or is going to be connected some time, then pickfair would be a great location. But it's right at the end of that c leg.

>>Slusher: [inaudible] serve this area as well as --.

>> Everybody will be served better by moving up to anderson mill road.

>> Thank you, chief.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you chief, any further discussion?

>>Garcia: yes, Mayor. This is an issue that we have been discussed in the newly created m.b.e. W.b.e. Advisory committee. We still have uncertainties that we need to deal with. I am going to vote against the motion basically to send the message that the system that we have right for you is not addressing the intent of the ordinance. The intent was to broaden opportunities. People are finding ways to get around it. So I am going to vote against that motion.

>>Mayor Watson: further discussion?

>>Lewis: yes, Councilmember Lewis then Mayor pro tem.

>>Lewis: is the assistant City manager here?

>>Mayor Watson: while we are finding her, go ahead Mayor pro tem.

>> I am wondering if you would still pursue an attorney's opinion and guidelines?

>>Slusher: well, no, for future -- for the future.

>>Slusher: I thought the City attorney said we couldn't do that.

>>Goodman: not ourselves.

>>Mayor Watson: we would have to contact someone on the statutory list of people that can seek an attorney general's opinion and see if they would be willing to help us in that regard.

>>Slusher: I don't have any problem with that.

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Spelman would you consider that to be friendly?

>>Spelman: very.

>>Goodman: the reason I asked is because they does come up an awful lot. We are always caught in a time crunch, commitment crunch but we still need to know. I believe it was last session there was in fact a proposed piece of legislation that would allow Mayors, municipalities to ask for an attorney general's opinion but it went down. Ms. Latrell, Councilmember Lewis has a question.

>>Lewis: the question that I have is the fire station that -- at anderson mill, how time sensitive is that in relation to the service agreement that we -- that -- when we did the annexation?

>> in two of the three fire station sites there were reasons to expedite this. The third was in, out, it was not as critical. The one you passed several weeks ago was extremely critical. They are serving basically only volunteer service right now. We really needed that four point station up, we had a very, very strong commitment both in the service plan and verbally with the community. The fire station in front of you now has some reasons to try to expedite it. That's why we used a single design and customized it for both sites. It is not as critical as the four points station was. The four points station had no other close City fire station, so it was very important that we not have a delay. This fire station does have an existing fire and e.m.s. Crew that is working out of the pickfair station. The criticalness of this one is that we have probably doubled the staff that was in that building. Remember they had a fire crew but no e.m.s. Crew. They had a smaller fire crew than we have in there. We have literally remodeled even pantries in this house in order to give more space for the people to be in there this year. But this area does have close and existing fire and e.m.s. Service out of pickfair. It is not as critical as four points was.

>> Garza: I think the chief was able to explain why this specific site is preferable to the citizens that live in that area.

>>Lewis: notify problem with the citizens not wanting the siren noise. But by the same token, if you are going to move it a half a mile, for someone that is serving now it's going to take a half -- it would be a half a mile farther away from them, so -- chief, do you have any numbers as far as compilation increase or decrease in the number that would receive a shorter response time?

>> no, sir, I don't know any numbers. The area that I was talking about, since it is a c shape, it is a smaller piece of the territory that would be affected, a very small portion. Whereas the major portion of that response area would be improved.

>>Lewis: had we talk about response time, somebody is going to lose some response time while others gain it. I am just wondering if we had any numbers as far as the numbers and compilations.

>> Now, it would just be those people in the general area of the pickfair station, kind of dead. (End of proceedings) portion. Unless it's coming to your house.

>> All right. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made and seconded, voting on the substitute motion which is to approve item no. 11, Motion was made by Councilmember Slusher, seconded by Councilmember Spelman. And there is an amendment to that motion and that he is to seek -- that is to seek cooperation with one of the statutory designees for an attorney general opinion as set forth by Councilmember Lewis. Any further discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries with Councilmember Garcia and Councilmember Lewis voting no. That takes us to item 12, I will recognize Councilmember Garcia.

>> Thank you, Mayor, I am going to move approval of this ordinance, the second and third readings. I would like you to recognize me after a second.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made by Councilmember Garcia, seconded by.

>>Slusher:. I will recognize Councilmember Garcia.

>>Garcia: we have from habitat for humanity a letter saying they can do the compliance with the accessibility ordinance that they passed, so that's included in my motion. Also we had asked the question with regard to a green building program whether they complied. I have a them dumb from Mr. Duncan, I think it is, or somebody from pecst, is that you, mark? okay. This memorandum says that you all recommend that habitat use the old two star standard. And two paragraphs above that it says in the last few months green building program created a new star level standard to make achievement much easier, more flexible for the builder, more effective at achieving green building results. If it's easier to do the new green building, why are we recommending the old?

>> actually, that will be upon review of what they are actually doing. They will meet the two star standard under both criteria. Both new and old. There is no significant difference. The new is sort of a refinement, but they actually qualify for two stars.

>> Okay. We have a task force that's going to be looking at this, they may want to raise it to three later on. But that's something that we won't know until they finish their work. That's all the questions that I have Mayor, thank you very much. Nature thank you. Motion has been made and seconded? any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye., pose pose, motion carries on item no. 12. That should take us to item no. 25. And I will recognize Councilmember Slusher.

>>Slusher: I would like to have an explanation of what is the process from this day forward. Mr. Reike?

>> good afternoon, did I understand correctly the process from this day forward?

>>Slusher: we approved the design, what takes place then, what's the next step when it comes back to the Council, that sort of a thing.

>> This contract wouldn't come back.

>>Slusher: I mean in the building of Convention Center.

>> The next contract that would come up to Council.

>>Slusher: the design -- contract today. What's the next thing, do we get to see that design?

>> Garza: it's in essence what what we have done with the airport. We have brought models to the Council, explained to them where we were.

>> We will go through the same process. We will bring the design at the various stages, design development, I mean schematic design, design development back to Council to provide you with an opportunity to review the design options and express your preferences and your desires with regard to this specific design.

>>Slusher: okay because let me say I don't really want to design the Convention Center. Okay? but I think it would be good to have public input into that as we go along. That will be possible.

>> Yes, sir.

>>Slusher: okay. That's all that I have.

>>Garcia: peter, you sent us a memorandum that I cannot find now, that had to do with -- it had to do with the point system, it's dated today. In the matrix under the category of City of Austin work, which one is that? previous -- that was a -- I guess 6 points?

>> yes.

>>Garcia: first of all, is this an all or nothing?

>> yes.

>>Garcia: category?

>> yes.

>>Garcia: it doesn't say okay, if you haven't had work in four years --

>> excuse me, that's not -- hold on. Let me just -- there is actually a graduation on the number of points deducted. The graduation is not on the number of years, it is on the amount of work, or on the dollar amount of the work that was awarded. For instance, if you had zero to $50,000 and you get 6 points still. If you had $1 million or $2 million, you still get 1 point. If you had a contract greater than 2 million, you get zero points. So there is the time factors as well as the amount of fees that were part of the work awarded.

>> This memorandum that you sent to Mayor and Council indicate that recommended firm of page, southerland and page had a contract, I think you say, last contract that we awarded to them was in july 27th; is that correct?

>> no. The last contract awarded to them was I believe on the 19th of august of 1993.

>>Garcia: okay. What is the reference point of that date? is that the date we awarded the contract?

>> that's correct.

>> Then --.

>>Garcia: then from that day forward five years to what date, to the date that we award the contract or to the date that the rfp goes out, to the date that the last bid modification goes out?

>>, no, we use the date with the rfq response was due.

>> Okay. This -- you said that the last contract was awarded to them august --

>> the 19th of '93. ('93. Page souther land and page.

>>Garcia: as I understand it, you have a -- the rfp was -- the rfp date was before august -- the original request was for a date before august 19, 1998.

>> Correct.

>>.

>>Garcia: and then -- I am looking at the wrong page, that's the reason that I am having difficulty framing my questions, peter. There was an addendum issued on july 28 that revised the submittal date to august the 21st, which is two days after the five year period expired.

>> That is correct.

>>Garcia: in the letter you say that the -- that there were no objections to the extension of the time of the request.

>> That is my understanding, my understanding is that the extension was actually requested by two of the firms of joint ventures that were present at the preproposal of the rfq conference.

>>Garcia: but you were not there.

>> No I was not personally present.

>>Garcia: is there anybody in the room.

>> Garza: bob hutch was there, he may be in the back room.

>> I don't believe bob was personally present, but tom wood is here and he was personally at the time in the meeting.

>>Garcia: Mr. Wood my question is with regard to the paragraph 2 that says there were no objections to the extension at the time of the request, this was at -- after the addendum was issued to move the rfp date to the 21st of august.

>> That is correct.

>>Garcia: okay. What was the form of the question that was asked?

>> by whom?

>>Garcia: well, how was -- how did we arrive at the fact that there were no objections? did we ask and nobody said anything?

>> it was issued by addendum to all of the potential respondents and no one objected to it being issued. But it was asked for by two of the teams who were having trouble putting together their team if they wanted more time to put together a team. It was not requested by psp.

>>Garcia: I understand. It says the addendum was issued at the specific request of several of the attendees at the approval response meeting of 7-27-98.

>> Correct.

>>Garcia: were people aware of the critical date of august 19th, 1993. No,.

>> No, nobody was aware of that date, it didn't come to light until after we received all of the responses and gone through the process of going back and looking at the history. At that time no one was aware of that.

>>Garcia: who determined that the date ought to be august the 21st?

>> they asked me for two weeks, I gave them two weeks.

>>Garcia: it was due the 7th?

>> two weeks, yeah.

>>Garcia: it was originally due the 7th? I don't know if any other Council offices received any calls or correspondence on this, my office I guess received one or two. Because the top two are so close, if psp had not got 106 points, l and m would have been the architect that had the highest --

>> correct. But again when the six points were made, no one was aware of the tightness of the scoring, either. So we still didn't know what effect this was going to have on the final score.

>>Garcia: I understand. I just, you know, wanted to know --

>> that statement needs some corrections. After the evaluation team completed its scoring, Mr. Wood met with myself and nina rivera and brought the question or some concern that some of the team members had relative to that specific issue to my attention. And asked for guidance whether there was a change on the way to look at the 6 points or not, the evaluation team, as a matter of fact, when I first saw the matrix, did not have those six points included. In reviewing the language in our scoring matrix and the -- the backup and the date that was given as the date of contracted work by Council and we verified that, it was my determination that technically the five year period had been met with a contract award date of the 19th of august, 1993, versus an rfq receipt date of august the 21st. I felt that it would not be possible to uphold a decision not to grant the 6 points to psp. So while I had seen the point spread, I based my decision and my direction to add those six points strictly on the fact that by all intent and purposes the two days, however neurothey were, met the requirement of the five neurothey were met the requirement of the five years between contract award and submittal date.

>>Garcia: thank you, peter. Let me say one of the things that I do not like or appreciate in this type of process is to get anonymous notes. You know, whether they are on.or off.. I am going to ask all of the people that propose, if you want to send something to Council that I can rely on, sign the damn thing. Otherwise, I am not going to put any weight on it. It makes me react the wrong way. Now that my heart is working properly, I can blow more steam. Anyway, thank you, Mayor, that's all that I have.

>>Lewis: I have a question. Explain to me this 1993 date that the contract date. That's not the last date that psp had the contract with the city, that's not what I go saying, right?

>> that was the last time initial contract award to psp. There may have been change order or amendments to the agreement skentsly, but as far as a Council award of a contract for a new project, my understanding is that -- I have not seen anything to the contrary, but the contract awarded on the 19th of august, 1993, is the last new contract that was awarded to psp.

>>Lewis: does that include aviation, also?

>> that was aviation contract. That was for the terminal building.

>> It's just been an ongoing contract since you 3?

>> that's correct. [Laughter].

>>Lewis: I have a problem with that. Call it an ongoing contract if you may, it's been in different areas. Right? I mean, they -- it hasn't been just in one area that extensions was done. They have -- it's been contracted for other than just the initial -- whatever the initial contract was in '93, it's been other scopes of work that was contracted to them since then. Am I not correct?

>> as part of that particular contract. What we are looking at in this, please keep in mind this may tricks was developed with the professional community, architects, engineers, with input from Council several years ago, we have applied it consistently throughout time. But as far as what we were looking at here and as it is stated in the evaluation matrix, we were looking at the award date and that is relatively clear because it insin waits that if you have the award date five years ago, obviously you start the worn and it takes you one, two, three, years to do the design and construction services so you are clearly working within that five year window. But the award should have taken place prior to the five year starting. So -- [laughter] Councilmember, I know this may not satisfy you, but it's a process that we all have agreed upon in the past. And --.

>>Lewis: why have it in there at all to give points to someone that hadn't had a contract in five years? it stands to reason that I know psp has been working for the City for the last 10 years. To say that their last award was five years ago in '93, it is -- I mean, what are we trying to prove by giving points for someone that hasn't had a contract with the City for five years?

>> what the intent is, I was not involved in the original development of the matrix, but the intent as I understand it was to make sure that other firms have the opportunity to be successful in pursuing City work and that the work doesn't repeatedly go to the same firms.

>>Lewis: that's the way I understood it, also. In says sense what we are saying is that even though you have been working with the city for the last 10 years, because you had a contract that's lasted the last five years, you are still eligible to get the points.

>> That's correct.

>> Garza: we have applied that rule consistently from the date award. That's the only thing that you can do.

>>Lewis: well, you know, the -- I know for a fact that pnp [sic] have gotten extensions and different -- they have extended the contracts and -- in aviation during the -- I don't know about the last three or four years, but I know before that on an ongoing basis because they was already on site, they, you know, and rather than go out for another rfp, another bid, they just did change order, a lot of change order. I think I am going to recommend to the Council that we say from the last change order of that given. You know, would be more effective because, you know, this -- it's just defeating the purpose. A company that finished the job four years ago, five years ago, don't get any points. Basically we are saying because you finished four years ago, you don't get the points because, you know, you had a contract and you finished it and no matter how small or how large, you still had a contract with the City issued in the last five years, so you don't get the point. But this person that haven't worked for the City for five years get. So -- all right. I will be working on that. To bring something back.

>>Mayor Watson: we have people signed up to speak. Before I entertain a motion I will have the people that have signed up to speak, if they wish to speak to come forward and speak. I will make a comment that I love things involving -- regardless of how they come out, I love things involving architects because the signup cards are so neatly Written. [Laughter]. Yes, you can read all of the names and may not pronounce them correctly, but it's so well done. What's interesting is they also almost universally look like they are Written by the same person. Al simmons. Is kevin black burn here, Mr. Blackburn donated his time to you, if you wish to use it, you will have up to six minutes.

>>I appreciate that. I'm al simmons, with the firm of graber simmons and cowen, in joint venture with the firm of susman, tisdale and gail. Mr. Gail was here earlier, he had to leave for a meeting. We were one of the firms who did ask for an extension at the preselection or the preproposal conference. We were not aware at the time of the dates involving psp. I would like the Council to be aware, we have sent a letter to the Mayor and most of you have copies outlining things in there that we are concerned about in the selection process. And rather than go into detail of those, I won't do that today, you have that information, I will be happy to answer any questions that you might have on it. However, I would like the Council to be aware that we did attempt to find the information regarding the fees and contracts on all of the firms that were submitting for this project. We found it was going to cost us $3500 and we would not be able to get that information in time to make a difference in the selection process, it seems to be that is the process of the City, so you cannot obtain that information if you try to in a timely manner, it certainly is not free information. With that, I would like to say that we did receive a copy of a letter from Mr. Reike, in response to a letter that we had forwarded some weeks ago to the City Manager. That was on tuesday of this week. We also received on tuesday of this week the scoring matrix used by the selection committee. After reviewing that information, after due consideration, we had requested in our letter to the Mayor and to you members of the Council, that you actually withdraw this item from the agenda and that you have the proposals re-evaluated based on the original criteria as it was stated and as it was issued in writing by the City staff. However you are our elected officials. You are responsible for properly rendering a fair decision in this manner. We believe that you can do that without our prior request. And therefore we do ask that you not consider our request. There are the same issues that face the future projects that the City of Austin has on selection processes. We believe that the selection processes issue are valid and we would like to request -- let me restate that. We do not want to combine that concern with your decision today on the convention center. But we feel that those issues do need to be addressed for your future consideration on future projects. And we would like to ask a representative from the City Council and a representative from staff, Mr. Reike or his designee, to meet with us to talk about these issues, one of which was the time that has already been brought to your attention, the time of the latest project, when it was issued. Do change orders Council? how large was that project? how much work has that firm had over the last 15 years, not just the last five? who has not had work in the last five years, 10 years, 15 years? all of these issues, we think, are very critical to allowing to you do the intent of your rule. That is to allow everyone who is equally qualified in other areas an opportunity to work in public work. With that, we would like to make that request, I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. I thank for you the opportunity to speak with you today.

>>Goodman: thank you, any questions? dewitt gale.

>> Excuse me, dewitt is the gentleman that I mentioned was here and had to go to a meeting so he had left.

>>Goodman: he says that he is for neither. Not for or against.

>> Right because he and I discussed this before the meeting or during the meeting and decided that we would not oppose whatever decision that you make today. But what we are asking is that we do review the selection criteria because we think that you have major problems.

>>Goodman: right, I heard you. Thank you. Ruth parshall.

>> Mayor pro tem, members of the Council, my name is ruth parshall, a principal of the firm of parshall & associates architects. We lose if we do ensure that our ae selection process is fair and awards are based on merit and therefore encourage the best qualified professionals to pursue opportunities to serve the city. Thank you.

>>Goodman: thank you. Those are all of the speakers.

>>Spelman: Mayor pro tem I move approval on the staff recommendation.

>>Goodman: there's a motion on the floor to approve staff recommendation. And a second. Is there any discussion? proof paragraph not from anybody?

>>Lewis: I would like to say one thing. I would hope that the staff would entertain the requests made because I would like to see some changes, especially in the points of -- how you award points for work. Because the intention of that is so the work will be spread out. I know notice the size of some of three changes orders that pnp [sic] received. I am not against pnp [sic] doing work for the City. But if the case arrive again in this manner, I think it's defeating our own purpose. So I think we should set up something, define it some way as to how much work that a company has received from the city or what was -- or set a limit on the size of the last change order. And to what -- as far as the date, that, you know, if you want to say have you received a change order in the last five years, in excess of x dollars, I think would be a -- would be something that we could work with. But just to say the award of the contract the way we do change orders, people are -- a lot of them is around for a long time, so -- based on that, I really think that we need to work on it.

>>Goodman: I am going to agree with Councilmember Lewis. I think even for those design teams and represented subs or whatever who would normally be on a team who have been around for a long, long time, they don't quite understand sometimes why they are not getting the same kind of scorings that they would assume they could get. And so while you can't find fault I don't think with staff recommendation, I think we still obviously need to do a whole lot more to help the teams understand teams that apply and are not at this moment recommended for this job. Help them get a handle on what it was that didn't mesh for staff. So whatever staff that I am talking to.

>> I would only say I think with respect to how we score this, what I will suggest is that we take the comments made here tonight and go visit with the community, which would be the engineering community, architectal community, get a sense of how that is done.

>>Goodman: is your microphone on?

>> Garza: I think it is.

>>Mayor Watson: shout it out!

>> Garza: I tried that once before. Nearly got killed.

>>Mayor Watson: it's an oldy, but a goody.

>> Garza let's take a look and what peter has done is we have described the way -- the way he's described it specifically in terms of how you score that specific portion of the matrix.

>>Goodman: that would be good for everybody to know, because I think there's still some areas of -- so with that said, there's a motion and a second on the floor. Any more discussion? oh, sorry, the Mayor wasn't here. To approve staff recommendation.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made and seconded to approve staff recommendation, any further discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye., opposed say no. Motion carries on item no. 25. That will take us to items 40, through 57. I will recognize ms. Glasco. Good afternoon I would read through consent. Start off with item no. 40, C 14-98-29 located at 7800 north capital of Texas highway, zoning changes from s.f. 2 To limited family office. Plan commission recommendation, to grant loco limited office. Ready for all three readings. 41 Discussion, 42 c 14-98-78. We received a letter from the applicant requesting a postponement to november the 5th in order to pursue alternative prols with the neighborhood. 43 We also have a request to postpone c 14-98-79 at 1518 west Koenig Lane. This is the applicant's first request. The applicant was out of town today. Item no. 44, Is a consent item for approval. Case 14-98-86, 13584 pond springs road. The request is from interim s.f. 2 And interim rr to community commercial zoning. With a conditional overlay as recommended by the plan commission, ready for all three readings. 45 C-14-98-88, located at lacrosse avenue and escarpment boulevard, the case -- zoning change from interim s.f. 4-A to permanent single family 4 a. The Planning Commission recommended that request with a conditional overlay for dedication of right-of-way. That occurred the case is ready for all three readings.

>>Mayor Watson: that's item no. 45.

>> We've had one person sign up to speak against.

>> I will change that to a discussion item. 46, Case number c-14-9892 located at 6100 burleson road, the request fromsome 2 to li, limited industrial, there is a conditional overlay, placed on the case by the planning commission, ready for all three readings. Item no. 47, Case number c 14-98-93, located at 7212 to 7304 mcneil drive, zoning change from interim rural residential to li which stand for limited industrial services. The Planning Commission recommendation is to grant limited industrial services with a conditional overlay. This case is ready for all three readings. Item no. 48, Case number c c-14-98-94, 7208 mcneil drive, from interim rural residential to limited industrial services. The plan commission recommendation is to grant limited industrial services with a conditional overlay. This case is ready for all three readings. Item no. 49, Case number c 14-98-6 longted at the south side of board walk drive, the property is currently zoned sing gem family two. The applicant is requested cs, general commercial services, the plan commission granted that request with a conditional overlay. In has been a request that has been assessed by staff that a request deferring to the site plan stage, we recommend that deferchs, we would be able to the right-of-way dedication, it seems fezible when they are designing the project and able to hire someone to prepare it, we will obtain the right-of-way at that time. This case is ready for first reading only. Item 50, 14-98-97, also owned by the same property, same area, off south board walk drive. Request is from interim s.f. 2 To general commercial services. Plan commission recommendation is to grant general commercial services with a conditional overlay. Begin the applicant is also asked a deferral of the right-of-way dedication to the site plan stage, we recommend that, ready for first reading only. 51, 14-98-98 Longted on the out south side of board walk drive. And roxie drive from isf 2 to cs, general commercial sevens with a conditional overlay as recommended by the planning commission, this case is ready for first reading with a similar request of deferring right-of-way dedication to the site plan stage. Item no. 52, 14-98-99, Located on the north side of roxie drive, the property currently zoned interim s.f. 2. Applicant requesting general commercial services, planning commission recommended cs-co, ready for first reading. 53, 14-98, 101, Located at 1105 through 1107 clermont avenue. The applicant requested a postponement, indefinitely, simply because it's in an area where there's a neighborhood study currently in progress and they would like to await the outcome of that study and then decide whether they need to proceed with the case or not. That's a request to postpone indefinitely. On 53. 54, C 1498102 located at 6701 circle s road from s.f. 2 To p public. The Planning Commission recommendation was to grant p public zoning. There was a request that they be prohibition of parking to other City departments and their employees, but to also limit parking to those people using the library and employees of the library. There will be a resolution brought fort at second and third readings to address those prohibitions and what's permitted and this case is ready for first reading at this time. Item 55, I believe Mayor there's a citizen signed up to speak on that, we will discuss item 55. 56, Case c- -- c8 14-95-1, located 901 west ben white boulevard. The question is to amended the current existing planned unit development by I think operating 3 additional lots in an area that was recently vacated to the planned unit development, this was recommended by the plan commission ready for third readings.

>> C 148877 located at the north site of IH-35 service road. Existing zoning is cs zoning, applicant is requested to move an -- approximate that concludes all of the zoning cases.

>> Let me walk through these quickly. Item no. 40 Consent -- at the end of this I will ask for a motion to pass the consent agenda. 40 On all three readings, 42, poets poniment to november 5th 5th -- postponement to november 5, 43, postponement to october 22nd, item 4 4, all three readings, item 46, all three readings, item 47, all three readings, 48, three readings, 49, first reading only. 50, First reading only, 51, first reading. 52, First reading. 53, An indefinite postponement. 54, First reading. 56, All three readings. 57, With the restrictive covenant. Motion is made by Councilmember Spelman to approve. Is there a second? seconded by Councilmember Griffith. Councilmember Spelman, I'm sorry. I didn't understand it.

>>Spelman: move approval as you just read it. Any discussion?

>>Slusher: yes, Mayor. Ms. Glasco, number 40, could you tell me the map -- I didn't get to drive by this site. Who surrounds this on each side currently? the property on the other side of lake creek drive, the west side of loop 360 there is a recently constructed office complex, then you have the subdivision all developed to the west. On the east side the area is predominantly undeveloped, so as you drive toward spicewood springs road, this side of the property of loop 360 is not developed.

>>Slusher: how close is it to bull creek?

>> bull creek is fairly close to this sites as you get down to 2222.

>>Slusher: this is the drinking water protection zone of course.

>> That's correct.

>>Slusher: what is the impervious cover aloud?

>> the impervious cover aloud would be 40% of the net site area.

>>Slusher: I would offer a friendly amendment to limb the impervious cover to 25%. To limit it.

>> With transfers one would get up to 55% if they have some up land zone.

>>Slusher: I would limit it to 25 as a friendly amendment.

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Spelman do you consider that to be a friendly amendment?

>>Spelman: let's discuss that.

>>Mayor Watson: pull it.

>>Slusher: we could pass it on first reading, also, instead of all three. I am not saying we shouldn't discuss it.

>>Spelman: I would rather talk about it. Pull 40 out for a discussion item.

>>Mayor Watson: whale consider is a friendly amendment, you consider that to be friendly Councilmember Griffith to pull item 40 off the skag consent agenda. Any further discussion on the consent agenda? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no., motion carries. Lets jump to item no. -- Item no. 45. I don't have any idea where I came up with 36. I just said that. Item no. 45, Which we thought was going to be consent on all three readings, one person has signed up to speak on that. Let me see if he is here, Bill bunch. Bill bunch? Mr. Bunch? he signed up against, I will entertain a motion with regard to item no. 45.

>>Spelman: move approval.

>>Slusher: second.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made by Councilmember Spelman, seconded by Councilmember Slusher to approve item no. 45 On all three reading, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye., opposed say no., motion carries on item no. 45. Because we have some people here on some of these other items, instead of going right back to number 40. Let me see if we can work on a couple of these other ones. Item no. 5 5, Ms. Glasco, if you will give us a brief description, then I will call up the person signed up to speak. Just for clarity purposes, Mr. Guerrero, are you here? you will be speaking after ms. Glasco gives us a briefing. Item no. 55 Is c 14-98-137, the property is currently developed a church, a daycare center currently on the site. A proposal to expand the existing daycare center from its current 3,000 some square feet to approximately 8,000 square feet. There's a conditional use permit currently in house for the daycare center. However with the zoning change, any improvements on the site would require an administratively approved site plan, which would demonstrate compliance with xat stability standards, addressing the various refresh my memory of setbacks, location of playground areas, it requires screening of the facility and that would be assessed at the time of that site plan submittal. There is a request through neighborhood housing for cdbg funding to allow the expansion of this daycare center. The plan commission staff reallies the change in zoning. This falls within the neighborhood planning process. The neighborhood planning leaders support the change in this particular case. It's consistent with their plan.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, Councilmember Garcia?

>> I am concerned that the applicant doesn't have reputation here.

>>Mayor Watson: here's what my suggestion was going to be, since Mr. Guerrero is down here, you didn't sign up for or begins it. Are you for or against it?

>> I am not against it. I just have -- I will like to add a condition to it. I have questions.

>>Mayor Watson: here's what I was going to suggest Councilmember. Is that if based upon Mr. Guerrero's comments we wanted to do something other than take the recommendation, which everybody thought this was going to pass on all three readings by consent, then we would need to postpone it as opposed to voting against it or making changes to it until the applicant had an opportunity to be here. I thought we would wait to see what the wish of the Council was on that. Mr. Guerrero, come forward and address this. Let me ask you, have you had an opportunity or taken an opportunity to visit with the applicant on this issue?

>> no. I spoke with Paul saldano, he said that he was going to contact them. So they would contact me, I haven't heard frig from them yet. I have been out of town, I got in like an hour or so ago.

>>Mayor Watson: how long have you been gone?

>> all week.

>> They have my home listed as used auto sales. And it's been in my family for about 60 to 70 years, 1205 east Cesar Chavez, my back yard lines up with their back yard basically. My concern is while they were doing this proposal or whatever, zoning change, that they didn't take that into consideration and I want to make sure there was some kind of sound barrier or something there. If they are making this place bigger, everything else, I don't know if they realize that people live there. And that that needs to be taken into consideration.

>>Mayor Watson: what do you do there?

>> I live there.

>>Mayor Watson: all right.

>> It's never been used auto sales, it's been in my family for 70 years. And right beside it is another home that's being used as a print shop, I believe, but it still maintains a home look bit. In the back yard of that home there is two or three duplexes, what it seems like, people live there as well. I don't know that that's noted here.

>>Mayor Watson: did you participate at the planning commission level. Sn.

>> No, I didn't.

>>Mayor Watson: all right. Yes, Councilmember Garcia?

>>Garcia: did Councilmember Lewis have a question?

>>Lewis: yeah. Are you off of Cesar Chavez or wallace street?

>> I'm off of Cesar Chavez, see where it says dental office? right beside that is my home. There's -- there's never been used auto -- there's something across the street, used cars, that's correct.

>>Lewis: all right. The other two lots to the west of your --

>> they are like homes. To the east?

>> you said they are not residents, is that what you are saying?

>> no no no. The dental office is a dental office.

>> Mayor and Councilmembers.

>> Councilmember Garcia and then ms. Glasco.

>>Garcia: ms. Glasco -- she may wants to answer my question.

>> I have something to offer in case I didn't -- I didn't state it clearly earlier on in my present station. -- Presentation. There are certain uses that trigger xat stability standards. There are certain -- the conditions about buffers, landscaping. A fence is required to screen an adjoining property that is used for residential purposes while this property is on commercial services, there is a residence there. At the time of site plan review we will address compatibility standards required so that the screening, there will be landscaping, there will be setbacks, there's a playground proposed next behind his property, there's a 50 foot setback required. We have a general footprint shown to us on where the new building is going to be locate the. It appears to be set back appropriately under compatibility standards. So the screening that he is looking for is required by code. So any conditional overlay would be redone dantd if you were to impose that.

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Garcia?

>>Garcia: does that apply even though this particular lot that Mr. Guerrero is talking about is zoned cs?

>> yes, the compatibility standards are triggered no matter the zoning. As long as they are used for residential purposes.

>> That is my concern, I didn't know if they were going to adhere those because my property was listed as a business. You see what I am saying?

>>Garcia: you understand how it work. The City has the rules that it has to be compatible.

>> That's fine, I am happy with that. Glasgow you will also receive a notice that a site plan has been filed, you are welcome to come to the office and make sure all of your concerns are addressed, if they are not, we will assure that they are.

>>.

>>Mayor Watson: I don't know if the know the people that are involved in this. But the folks there I have always found to be exceptionally open and willing to visit.

>> I have no problem with that the first time that I heard of this was last week, I was out of town, I made phone calls but I didn't know what was going on, wayne has not contacted me. No literature or any phone calls, I don't know what the proposal is or really what's going on. I wanted to make sure this was stated.

>>Mayor Watson: you are satisfied.

>> I am satisfied.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made by Councilmember Garcia, seconded by Councilmember Slusher, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries on item no. 55. Mr. Guerrero thank you for being here tonight. That will take us back to item no. 41.

>> 41 Is c 1498-76. Located at 1205 wells branch parkway, it was recently annexed december of 1997. The property is currently zoned interim rural residence, the applicant is seeking zoning to limited industrial services. The plan commission recommendation was to zone it wlo, which stands for warehouse limited office. The staff recommendation was to grant commercial services. Cs. The applicant has now amended the zoning change request to conform with what the staff recommended, so what you have in front of you, basically, three scenarios. The -- the staff recommendation, which was not consistent with the applicant's request to industrial zoning, but rather a step down to the next zoning category. Which was commercial services. The Planning Commission was a little concerned about the proposalled use then, which had to do with manufacturing and repairing stacked pallets. So therefore the planning commission had a lot of conditions that added screening and setbacks. We have given you a copy, a yellow copy for item 4 1 summarizes the three scenarios, I will let the applicant make his case for the amended change and also the request to consider his proposal. What I am offering you is the Planning Commission rather restrictive, but the applicant has changed the proposal of the use to where that is prohibited. I will pause here and let the applicant make his presentation, then I will respond to questions.

>> Thank you, Mr. Bennard, are you representing the applicant? you will have five minutes to make your presentation, 3 minutes for rebuttal.

>> I am jim bennett here to presents the zoning application to you. I apologize for not paying close attention, I was working with Mr. Blackburn who may be addressing the Council as well. This piece of property is located on wells branch parkway, a four acre tract. As you can see, we have amended our application originally from the limited industrial zoning that we had originally requested. The property owner, Mr. Campbell, owns Austin pallet company. He was proposing to put a pallet company on this site, but after a reconsideration the Planning Commission's discussion, I think he's got the indication that a pallet company may not be the most appropriate use. In our amendment to our 2 cs zoning, we have put in some uses there that we are willing to prohibit. The property from being used for. One of which is a pallet company. And reviewing the planning commission's recommendations, their recommendation was for wlo. To have a lot of screening, that apparently was to try to protect the unsightly use of the property as a pallet company. Most of their comments and recommendations relate to that type of screening. They did recommend wlo. We are proposing to amended our application to csco, the cs zoning exists in the area. If you will look at the map, the yellow bounded property was one that recently came from Council a couple of weeks ago. That is zoned csco now. The property in blue is the property in question. That's the one that we are proposing the cs on. As you can see from this plat. The uses on the south side of wells branch appear to be commercial, industrial type of uses, we have truck freight companies, pawn shops, industrial uses, pest control. The north side is a shopping center pretty much with h.e.b. And strip center uses and then as you look at this map right now, there's not any residential properties for a thousand feet or so. All of the property is so the south of our site, it's large tracts that are undeveloped. We think csco is an appropriate use of the property because it appears that the zoning would be consistent, compatible with the surrounding land uses, the uses to the east, warehouses and distribution, would be for a fair and reasonable use of the site. The street right-of-way width is certainly there to accommodate any commercial traffic. From this map you can see there's not any connection to any residential street without going through the shopping center, you can't get through there, you would have to go back out to wells branch and back to the farm-to-market. That would conclude my presentation. And I will stand by.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, Mr. Bennett. Mr. Blackburn?

>> thank you, Mayor, City Council, members of the staff. I kind of got surprised here today in that several weeks ago we came up and we were told that the applicant had requested a second postponement because they put an agent on the project. But I didn't find out until I got a fax from staff today that they had in fact assigned an agent to the project. It doesn't show on your agenda. It didn't show on any other information that I had. Not only was I at the plan commission meeting adding this specific project, but I was addressing one that Mr. Bennett just referred to up the street, about 13 acres, now zoned cs. I objected to that one as well and the plan commission agreed with me. I didn't know that that one had come before you. I guess I need to be a little bit better informed or hire me a suit to come down here and look out for my interests. The property which I own and you can well see better I guess in your package as you can on the preliminary plat of the proposalled wells point commercial subdivision, which was approved back in the '80s, encompassing 110 acres. This particular property, the subject property has a creek on it, east boundry. Actually the headquarters water -- head waters of harris branch. It's not on any fema map but it's there. The property to the north of it is the head waters again of harris branch creek. Through a corporation I own the property directly north of wells branch, shown as irr, a 22 and a half acre tract. You may remember a year or so ago when we were discussing annexation in the area, we talked about the transition that was occurring. The problem in part of the property is located in the road district, various and sundry agreements which exist between the road district and current and former property owners regarding improvements to that road and who has the responsibility and who doesn't have the responsibility. The 22 and a half acre tract on the approved preliminary, which does have some semblance of some grandfathered protection, has a road which dead ends immediately across the street from this property. That road will continue to the north. And connects with 122 acre tract, some of which I still own, some of which I formerly did, has an approved preliminary and currently undergoing development for 517 single family residences known as the saris creek subdivision by the Bill milburn company. An affordable housing project, a small lot subdivision. The 22 and a half acres will be the subject of a zoning application before you before the end of the year. For some type of mf zoning. And I own an additional 60 acres east of this project, which I haven't discussed yet. I am here to speak in favor of the Planning Commission recommendation.

>>Lewis: I have a question. Let me ask you a question. Do you have a list of this new --

>> staff gave me a copy of this --

>> with the list of prohibited land use as csco, what would be the difference between that and the lo, the wlo?

>> the wlo --.

>>Lewis: you are concerned being across the parkway.

>> The wlo with the conditional year lay, which was the Planning Commission recommendation, had building and parking setbacks, hand scaping and it had some height limitation which would help make it more conducive to adjoining residential property. I think it would further limit the amount of traffic to o that road which is a narrow two lane road without shoulder or curbs. I think it would further limit the impervious cover adjoining that creek.

>>Lewis: oh, okay.

>> This lot actually used to be part of a drainage lot at one time. Was ultimately filled. Sometime over the last five or six years.

>>Lewis: the 22 acres that you are speaking of, that encompasses I guess the road there, going across, is that proposed to be residential or commercial?

>> residential in character, yes, sir. In fact there's been some discussion with City staff about doing kind of a t and d, attached, detached rear entry product with homeowners association amenities and exterior lawn maintenance loose lieu you mean you haven't had wells branch parkway extended, the same as it is off of 35? [laughter]?

>> well, I mean it starts off. It's supposed to be done, but it hasn't been done. They are taking all of the money and spending it down south along dessau road and howard lane and parmer lane to take care of Mr. Dell and Mr. Goddisman and some of that bunch down there.

>> When I saw wells branch parkway, I was thinking of the way it is coming off I-35 east. I didn't realize it was a neuropart of wells branch parkway.

>> Yes, sir.

>>Lewis: that's all of the questions that I have.

>>> That's the first time I've heard parmer lane called down south. [Laughter].

>> I have the northern entrance to the City of Austin.

>>Slusher: what's the price range on the affordable housing development that you mentioned?

>> I can't speak for the people who will be building and developing that project. I know with the saris creek subdivision, the small lot subdivision, they are hoping to begin under 90 and the goal for the 22 and a half acre tract, which would have some sort of an mf, maybe a four or six, would be something less than that. To become more affordable to the production line workers up in that area.

>>Slusher: what's the one you mentioned earlier?

>> yes, sir.

>>Slusher: thank you, sir.

>>Mayor Watson: any other questions?

>>Goodman: yeah, Mayor. I am not totally sure where you were saying milburn homes were going to go. Is that in the county, not in the City? right over that line? is it north of your property?

>> as you look at the application, this is the subject property, this is the 22 and a half acres, that we spoke of, this property is subject to a full preliminary, several final plats which will begin developing off of f.m. 1825 To the north. And work its way south.

>>Goodman: thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: Mr. Blackburn. Thank you. Mr. Bennett, you get rebuttal.

>> It does not appear that wells branch parkway would be an appropriate street necessarily for single family development as busy as that street is and with 120 foot of right-of-way, varying right-of-way. Staff is proposing 70 foot right-of-way, so it doesn't appear it's going to be a normal residential type of street. Relative to the traffic generated by our proposed csco, we are limiting our traffic to 2,000 trips per day, which would be the same thing that you would have with a wlo, gr. Relative to the impervious cover, we are limited by ordinance that impervious cover, we certainly intend to comply with the ordinance requirements for that. As you can see from your staff map, there is a detention pond immediately adjacent to the property already built. In use. We would be in conformance with all of those aspects of it. As I indicated earlier, we do have li and cs uses, we are sandwiched in between the industrial office to the east. Retention pond, warehouse distribution. Trucking facilities. So the csco does appear to be appropriate type of zoning from a planning standpoint. Thank you.

>> Mr. Bennett? let me ask you a question.

>>Lewis: the other speaker made reference to height restrictions. I guess that I could ask ms. Glasco. But the type of development proposed would it be compatible to what's already there, the warehouse distributions or industrial office?

>> yes, sir, we have also limited our height to 3 stories building height. We can actually make that a 40 foot height limit versus an arbitrary three stories, we don't have any problems with saying 40 tooth in height. That would be -- 40 foot in height. The warehouse and distribution buildings have tall ceiling heights in them, I am not sure of the height, I would speculate 25 feet tall at least.

>>Mayor Watson: additional questions of Mr. Bennett? I will entertain a motion on item no. 41.

>>Lewis: yeah, Mayor. With the restrictions there -- I have a question that I would like to ask ms. Glasco, if I may, before a make a motion. As far as the right-of-way, the width of the right-of-way, on wells branch in that area, what -- you have that -- is it --

>> the right-of-way -- existing is 120 feet, what's proposed is 140. Currently 120 feet.

>>Lewis: thank you, Mayor I move approval. Approval of the amended application. Staff recommendation I guess.

>> That would be the applicant's proposal because our recommendation is slightly different from what the applicant has proposed.

>>Lewis: oh. Well, is the list [inaudible] is that -- is that enforceable?

>> agree, we have modified to make sure what is listed is enforceable through the code. I would like to add if Council is going to consider that the applicant's proposal that there would be a height limit, 40 feet to three three stories, we don have a definition of stories.

>>Lewis: I move approval of the applicant's application, amended application with a height limit of 40 feet.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made by Councilmember Lewis to approve the amended application of 10-1-91 with a limited maximum building height to 40 feet. There is a second?

>>Goodman: Mayor I will second for discussion.

>> I will recognize the Mayor pro tem for discussion.

>>Goodman: I am not sure that I support that. [One moment please] of a solid fence or vegetation that grew to a maturitity of eight feet.

>>Goodman: and that would be right on wells branch parkway. No set back from the parkway?

>> the Planning Commission requirement was to have a 40-foot building set back from wells branch parkway, where as the applicant requested zoning only requires a 10-foot set back. So the commission wanted a setback clear away from wells branch parkway and in addition to that --.

>>Goodman: okay. The 15 foot wide planted screen to the property line with fence, that's for all other three boundaries?

>> that would be my understanding. And again, it's because of what was going to be occurring on the site to make sure it was screened from the adjoining property owners.

>>Goodman: okay.

>> So that proposal has changed so that the planning commission was not given the benefit of a withdrawal or prohibition of this use as you're hearing today.

>>Goodman: okay. Well, would it be a friendly amendment to ask that the 40-foot building set back, the eight-foot solid fence vegetation on the north property line and the 15-foot planted screen from the property line be amended into the already amended application for cs-co?

>>Lewis: well, would a 70-foot -- 70 feet of dedicated right-of-way and a 40-foot set back, that's 110 feet, I have no problem with the set back, it's just what are we going to -- it seems like to me if you have 40 feet out front, that gives more reason to maybe stack some pallets out there than it would if you only had a 10-foot set back from the street. So, you know, I have no problem with the 40 foot set back, but what are you going to put there. Are they going to put a parking lot or are they going to use it for storage?

>>Goodman: well, I would assume parking.

>> Well, unless you prohibit -- you could have parking near the building. I would like to add that for the right-of-way, it would only be about 10 feet from the property.

>>Lewis: the 70 feet is from the center line to the property line, right?

>> correct.

>>Lewis: so I'll accept it as a friendly amendment. I mean, with four acres, I think they can find room to put the building.

>> Mayor pro tem, may I address one of your issues? if you build an eight foot fence would require a variance from the board of adjustment. It allows you an average eight of six feet with an average of seven in doing that average, so we have a problem with the eight foot fence. We are going to certainly comply with the landscape ordinance and the tree ordinance and that kind of thing. And as ms. Glasgow said and the minutes reflect, ms. Baker was concerned about having pallets stacked everywhere and that was -- owe seemed to be the consensus of the planning commission to help hide these ugly things. We're not going to have those ugly things any more. We will certainly do the screen that's necessary, but I don't think we can do an eight foot fence if the board of adjustment doesn't let us.

>>Goodman: well, I was thinking cs-co still is, you know, something that traditionally has some good screening. And I don't know what use you might contemplate under what particular use you might contemplate under cs-co, but it was also my understanding that once upon a time we thought the eight foot fence had to go to the board of adjustment, but then there was a time where we were told by legal staff on the planning commission that if we introduced it as a part of the ordinance itself that they didn't have to go to the board of adjustment. So have we flipped back now?

>> if you locate -- if you locate the fence right on the property line, your maximum height is six feet. It has to do with visibility. But if you locate is beyond the required set back, I think you can go up to eight feet. If you give me a minute, I'll check the code and check precisely how that wording is stated to -- so that I can clearly let you know when you can locate an eight-foot fence without requiring a board of adjustment variance.

>>Goodman: okay. It may be possible that there's a setback from the road and we can do it without having to go to the board of adjustment.

>>Lewis: let me ask you a question. What type of building -- I mean, do you have any idea of the size of the building?

>> no, sir, we do not have a site plan yet, as indicated a couple of weeks ago when Mr. Campbell was proposing to put that pallet company on there, but after hearing the objections, he's been advised that that's not the use that needs to go in wells branch. He will be seeking, you know, people that will want to move into his building, so we haven't designed a building yet other than the height limit.

>>Lewis: so it's not going to be a pallet manufacturing?

>> no, sir. We may need some exposure from the wells branch parkway for for people to see our building. If we set is 40 feet back and put is behind some planted material, we may not be getting the exposure that a commercial operation may need, but we have no problem with planting the material.

>>Slusher: let me make sure. So it was because of the pallets storage going there, the reason for the fence and set back. Now that's not going to be the use any more, but it's still being required?

>> Councilmember Slusher, in reading just briefly the minutes, it says chair baker asked Mr. Campbell if we could screen his property from the roadway. She imagined pallets being stacked everywhere on the property. They can stack pallets 40 feet high. The commissioner wanted a clean business, she had a problem with the screening and landscaping for this ugly use. Chair baker made a motion and then it even further says that she has more of a problem with looking at the stacks of pallets. We've eliminated that use and are no longer proposing to do that. Most of those screening requirements seem to be geared toward the use of the pallet and having stacks and stacks of ugly pallets. So by doing our amended cs-co, we've eliminated the pallet business and won't any longer have that -- what the planning commission seemed to want the -- all the additional landscaping and buffing for, which was to hide the pallets.

>>Slusher: okay. And Councilmember Lewis, then your motion doesn't then include the fence and the set back; is that correct?

>>Lewis: no, because in the list of prohibited -- list of prohibited land use, it says custom manufacturing and manufacturing and repair pallets. So that's out.

>>Slusher: okay. I just wanted to make sure I understood it.

>>Lewis: the other one is no pawn shop and no residential treatment or guidance services, so that's the reason I didn't -- looking at the planning recommendation, I didn't recommend a setback.

>>Slusher: okay.

>>Goodman: and the reason I asked for it was in response to Mr. Blackburn and thinking about the potential residential uses for the future.

>>Slusher: don't you think likely the residential is going to be not on wells branch parkway, but somewhat a little bit behind there?

>>Goodman: well, the 22 acres is right on there and --.

>>Slusher: do you plan to front housing on wells branch parkway?

>> Mr. Slusher, it would be my guess that the property may well have an entrance off of wells branch, but I don't think that it would front or prefer access to individual residences from wells branch. I think that would be inappropriate planning. I think that we're talking more a village concept and there would be some screening and landscaping and walls and so forth around.

>>Slusher: because if you envision that sort of thing on the parkway rather than some commercial on the parkway?

>> that's correct. No, I think we're talking about the entire property having a single zoning and a characteristic which would permit the use which I have indicated to you.

>>Slusher: okay. I understand what you're saying.

>> I'm not disagreeing with Mr. Bennett's proposed use of the property as cs. I would suggest a full reading of the Planning Commission minutes that evening discussed transitionnary uses from the interstate down wells branch and then maybe back up when we hit arterial 14 or heather wild as we turn the corner into pflugerville. I think further the problem had to do with the perceived height of a structure down in that low lying area. I don't think visibility is going to be a problem when you have a 100 foot wide floodplain and creek as you approach the property. I think that that's more my problem than anything else. Mr. Bennett and staff and you fine folks are much more versed in the uses permitted under the various zoning categories than I. I'm simply looking at the overall visual impact.

>>Slusher: I appreciate it.

>>Goodman: if it is, Mr. Blackburn, cf-co -- sorry. If it is cs-co with the prohibitions that are listed here, then you don't really see the need for the eight foot fence vegetation on wells branch for the business?

>> I would love to see it all, but I think I would prefer to see a restriction in height to maybe two stories as opposed to three. We'd be talking about 25 feet and, you know, our density might not be quite as high sitting there on the creek.

>>Goodman: okay. Forget the eight foot fence. That doesn't seem to make everybody happy.

>>Mayor Watson: hang on one second just so I can catch up where we are. Are you still offering as a friendly amendment, the 40 foot set back from wells branch parkway and the 15 foot wide planted screen with a fence added to the motion?

>>Goodman: yes. And then if the maker of the motion had a comment on what Mr. Blackburn said about the 25-foot building height, then I think the motion now says 40 feet.

>>Mayor Watson: it does. But before I get there, let me -- ms. Glasgow, what's your comment?

>> Mayor pro tem asked a question about screening and she was correct, there is a provision in the code that draws a distinction between when you locate a fence on a property line versus a building set back sochlt if it's your property line, your maximum fence is six feet. If you locate it further away, then you can kbo go up to eight feet at the set back of the property or at the set back from the property line without a vary yns from the board of adjustment.

>>Mayor Watson: Councilmember Lewis, you made the motion. Would you consider the Mayor pro tem's proposal to be a friendly amendment?

>>Lewis: is that an eight-foot -- is that a vegetation fence or --.

>>Mayor Watson: ss 15 foot wide planted screen.

>>Lewis: and you said that you would have to do it at the set back? if you do it on the property line it's six feet, but how far back would you -- if you're building a setback 40 feet, where would you --.

>> That's exactly where they place the eight foot fence, at your required set back.

>>Goodman: I took out the eight foot.

>>Mayor Watson: she dropped the eight foot solid fence. Right now if you look at the -- the yellow sheet of paper, it's the 40 foot building set back from wells branch parkway and the 15 foot wide planted screen. That's the only two things she's overlaying, if you will, on your motion.

>>Lewis: 15 foot wide planted screen on the property line.

>>Goodman: so those are not the wells branch parkway property line.

>>Lewis: I don't have a problem with that. With four acres they should be able to find on room.

>>Mayor Watson: who made the second?

>>Goodman: I did.

>>Mayor Watson: good. I guess you will agree. It worked out real well.

>>Goodman: but then I also asked Councilmember Lewis if he would consider the comment that Mr. Blackburn just made about the 25 feet versus 40 that is in the motion right now?

>>Lewis: well, I don't know -- Mr. Bennett said that the warehouses is approximately 25 feet in height and with a retention pond next door, I don't -- I don't see what -- because the property behind that is undeveloped, I don't see anything that the three story would hide from across 140-foot street. 140 Feet street is quite wide. And, you know, so I see no reason to restrict it to two stories because I don't know what the industrial office east of it is.

>>Goodman: I was thinking from the south, the interim rr, which is potentially large lot residential.

>>Lewis: well, you have a cemetery. I'm sure those people are not going to be --.

>>Goodman: yeah, I haven't heard from any of them.

>>Lewis: have a problem with cutting off the view. If you have a cemetery to the south, you know -- and I couldn't imagine that the people in the north caring to look at the cemetery. So you know, what do you think about that, Councilmember Spelman? spell I've seen some very pretty semtaries in my day.

>>Lewis: it's a place we have we're all going to go some day. You want it to look nice.

>>Mayor Watson: people are dying to get if there. [Laughter].

>>Lewis: that's right.

>>Mayor Watson: I'm ready to vote. Have we come to an agreement between the Mayor pro tem and Councilmember Lewis on the height?

>>Goodman: well, I didn't offer it as an amendment. Mayor the motion that is on the table is the amended application with the limited maximum building height to 40 feet with the addition of a 40 foot building set back from wells branch parkway and a 15 foot wide planted screen from the property line with a fence. We'll put this on first reading.

>>Goodman: and the prohibited uses.

>>Mayor Watson: and the prohibited uses. That's in the amended application. Is there any more discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. The motion carries with Councilmember Garcia off the dias. There he is. He voted in favor. I'll entertain a motion to recess to go into executive session. The purpose of the executive session would be to engage in a private consultation with our attorney pursuant to section 551.075 we would be discussing legal issues regarding moore's crossing municipal utility district, proposed bond issue and we would be discussing ls ranch limited he will et al versus city of Austin in the travis county district court. I'm sorry. It was my understanding. I'm sorry. Well -- yeah, that's what she just told me. I apologize. Hang on. Is anyone signed up to speak on 40?

>> no, but the applicant is here.

>> I would like to respond.

>>Mayor Watson: sure. I think that's fair. Since I didn't take a motion, let's go to item no. 40.

>> Councilmember Slusher had some questions and we've obtained a map so he can see where bull creek is located vis-a-vis the property.

>> Council, my name is laura burr lien and I represent the applicant. I just wanted to -- and we are in favor of the planning commission's recommendation on this. I'd like to remind you that when the tract of land is close to a water body, the net site area does take that into account, so the 25% impervious cover on net site area I feel would be very punitive on this site and seems rather arbitrary that a reduced impervious cover happens due to its proximity because you can't count the critical zone in your net site area calculations.

>>Slusher: I've been thinking about proposing this impervious cover limitation. To me it's single family right now, the zone is, and to -- I don't think single family is realistic along there, along 360. It's clearly not realistic, but if you take it to the higher intensity use, I believe -- I can't support it without lowering impervious cover. Reasonable minds may disagree.

>>Spelman: Mayor, if I could ask a question? laura, how -- what percentage of this entire lot is not buildable area because of the water?

>> you know, unfortunately we have an engineer in the office who is project this is was unable to come tonight. I am familiar with the project. I would guesstimate probably about 25%. When you take into account the fact that it's on a hill country roadway because you have those restrictions as well as the critical zone and the transition zone.

>>Spelman: okay. So you're really talking about 30% of the total lot that you'd be able to build on if you're talking about 40% of the buildable area in that case.

>> Right, right. It starts being cumulative on that.

>>Spelman: exactly. What's the set back from the creek?

>> the critical -- I think the critical -- help me on this on what it is. It's probably --.

>> Critical water quality zone would extend 200 foot from the center line. We don't get the detailed information that gives us the specifics of that until we get into actual development plans for the project. But approximately -- this map that I don't know if you have a copy of, is showing the fema floodplain. And that should plox mate the critical zone, also proximate the critical zone, although it may be wider than that.

>>Spelman: the site here is not in the fema floodplain at all though.

>> Correct. And the other thing I would like to point out and I don't think it's really been brought up, but the single family is really about 90 feet above us, so in looking at compatibility and also we have the ability when we sight the building on this, it would be probably anywhere from 300 to 400 feet away from the single family as we get into the site.

>>Spelman: it would have to be. It's a real steep area to build on.

>> Right. The back is that really high cliff.

>>Mayor Watson: I'll entertain on motion on item no. 40. And one possible motion would be since there is -- I will tell you from my perspective, since this was on consent for all three readings and there's been a suggested change of some significance, I'm not sure I would feel comfortable voting even on first reading on anything on this if we want to change it from the consent. I was comfortable where we were on the consent. I don't know if the rest of the Council feels that way, but if what we want to do is make that change, I'd like some time so I can more thoroughly review. That would be my preference. If we're going to get into a discussion about it, I'd rather get into a discussion where at least I know what -- I know more the terms of the discussion than I know right now.

>>Slusher: how are we looking on the 22nd, Mr. Manager?

>> I was going to refuse to answer for just a moment. I'm really not sure. Alice, do you know what the schedule is looking like for zoning in particular? I know that because of the cancelled meetings, all of our remaining cancel meetings, probably through the end of the fiscal year are getting tight, but Alice, do you want -- dpoung you have enough room -- do you think you have enough room.

>> We have several cases coming up because we postponed quite a few to the 22nd. So we may have a big night that night.

>>Slusher: Mayor, I've been looking at this and it's pretty packed, so let's just put it on the 22nd so we don't delay the folks any further. Does that work for you?

>> I guess it does. I just try to think about predict ability in the process, which is something we aim to do. I wish it was acted on today on the motion that was sent to you from the planning commission. I think we've had a lot of discussion on trying to play by the rules and have some predict ability to the process.

>>Slusher: we just thought we could do what I suggested.

>>Mayor Watson: the motion is made to postpone until the 22nd. Is there a second? seconded by Councilmember Lewis. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. Now I will entertain a motion to recess --.

>>Garcia: Mayor, we only have one item left and I don't think it's going to be a long item for the rest of the people here?

>>Mayor Watson: which item?

>>Garcia: 69.

>>Mayor Watson: you're right. It's on the addendum. Yes. Let's call up item no. 69. I'll recognize the Mayor pro tem -- I mean, -- sorry Mayor pro tem. I'll recognize Councilmember Garcia.

>>Garcia: thank you. Ths a resolution authorizing the establishment of an Austin Travis County health department transition team. And I don't know if there's anybody here from the health department, but -- is there? are there? anybody here from -- but I think we have some speakers here that are concerned about how this is happening. Marcia is going to do a staff presentation.

>>Mayor Watson: I'm not sure that's true. One of the things that we might say is the purpose of this, for those who are here to speak on this item, what the motion -- what the purpose was was to create a group from the Austin City Council that can work with the county on this item. And the suggestion was that it would be the Mayor pro tem, Councilmember Garcia and Councilmember Spelman. And the resolution would be simply to establish that subcommittee. Who is going to make the presentation?

>>Garcia: Mr. Lury is here.

>>Mayor Watson: Mr. Lury?

>> yes, Mayor, Councilmembers, I think the assistant City manager marcia connor is also going to comment on this. Just briefly, there are four major areas where travis county is currently reviewing potential for organizational change with the primary objective to be to identify certain programs that are funded by Travis County to have a accountability and reporting relationship to the commissioners court. And those include the solid waste enforcement program, the private sewage facilities program, human services and primary care clinics. There's been an rfp out that's been processed relative to the primary clinics out in the county area. The major program that we've been working on most recently with Travis County has been the private sewage facilities program where they have taken action to transfer the county portion of that program over to Travis County and actually are targeting to have that fully implemented by the first of January, 1999, so we have a transition plan in place. The employees that have previously been -- have been serving as City employees, county reimbursed, have received offers from travis county to work in that program at the county level. And we're currently going for a review with various City departments in terms of what the City needs and objectives might be relative to private sewage facilities and we'll be developing a recommendation on that probably within the next month for the City Manager.

>>Garcia: the transition team is actually staff members?

>> that's correct. The current transition team is made up of staff members, both city and county. Gar gr that's what it says, the City Manager is authorized to assemble a team and staff to consult with county officials.

>>Mayor Watson: we talked about the meeting with the county and the City regarding Councilmembers serving on such a committee.

>> Well, actually, as you recall, Mayor, you had designated a subcommittee of three Councilmembers who have met I guess once to sort of review what's taking place. There's also the c joint committee of Councilmembers and commissioners court members that are meeting on a monthly basis.

>>Mayor Watson: but we were going to create a separate entity that was going to deal with -- it was at that meeting where they had the -- I'm reminded of the -- Alice's restaurant. In the song Alice's restaurant where they brought all the big pictures with the circles and arrows and the description on the back and if you recall, the county commissioners court brought in all those different boxes and circles and arrows and lines and we all sat there and said wow. And they were in color. And one of the things that was decided at that time was that the City Council was going to create a committee of the Council as a part of an effort at transition or otherwise or to deal with what they had done. Gar bar but Mayor, that committee has been named as we've been working.

>>Mayor Watson: that's already occurred?

>>Garcia: that's occurred. The next step is the technical stuff to take place.

>>Mayor Watson: I just wanted to know what the status of that was.

>>Garcia: and my motion is to approve that -- that creation of that team. I thought there were going to be some speakers. We were asked to pull this item for a time certain, but I understand we don't have any.

>>Mayor Watson: there's no one here to speak on this, right?

>>Lewis: I have a question. You said the people that worked in this area of the -- head office from travis county?

>> yes, sir, that's correct.

>>Lewis: is it a direct transfer -- across the board transfer? they're not offering them to come in at a starting salary, are they?

>> no, no, Councilmember Lewis. Travis county has basically developed a package that is comparable to what the employees are currently receiving in terms of compensation and benefits with, I believe, one exception, and that is the health care benefit. The Travis County benefit, I believe, costs the employees a bit more. I'm not sure if it's in co-payments or premiums, but there is a difference in the health care coverage, the costs associated with that for the employees, but all other benefits in terms of salary, seniority and so forth they've made a commitment to match the city structure.

>>Lewis: so the City, county -- I guess they would take into consideration the retirement transfers and things? you know, whatever it may be as being something that you could -- I mean your time for that probably would be able to transfer?

>> retirement is actually -- therefore actually two separate retirement systems, so the people who have accumulated in the City system would basically maintain that as anyone would leaving City employment and then in entering county employment would now be enrolled in the county retirement system.

>>Lewis: okay. My only thing was to find out if the people was on the move again because usually the people doing the work is the one that people forget sometimes.

>> I think generally speaking, I would characterize what's been done and what the county has proposed has been an attempt to as much as possible match the entire salary and benefit package that employees have, but there are those two exceptions, the health care and the fact that you are dealing with two retirement systems.

>>Lewis: all right. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: yes?

>> if I could, I think one of the questions that was asked I think by your office, there are actually three City employees who are part of the program. They have also received notice by the City for our rip program because the program itself is being eliminated. What we're trying to do is place them in positions in the health department. At the same time we've put a team together to assess whether or not one, we want to look at contracting from the county as an option on private sewage. We want to look at other options within the City to do a private sewage program and there are a couple of options they're looking at and we'll come back with a proposal. But there's been some concern by the City employees about what's going to happen with the City program.

>>Garcia: that's right. That is the issue. And I don't understand why if they're going to be providing services within the City that you're moving them over into the county? why didn't you leave them here?

>> actually, the three City employees will not be going to the county. The county's 16 positions are actually the 16 county reimbursed funding positions --.

>>Garcia: those are going over there.

>> Right. But the three City will stay with the City.

>>Garcia: I thought you said they were going to be rifed.

>> They are going to be because the whole program is going to be eliminated and perhaps hr can explain better what the policy is because actually the program itself is going away. If we want to reconstitute it in another matter, we can.

>>Garcia: that would be one of the things I would want to do. I made a motion. I don't know if it's been seconded. With a caveat that we look at keeping those three employees in the City.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion?

>>Goodman: just one, Mayor. I wanted to also say I think that we need to, whatever, reconstitute or slim down or whatever, but keep the program because it looks like we may even have different rules, better rules over here than elsewhere maybe.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made and seconded. There being no further discussion, all those in favor say aye. Oppose said no. Motion carries. On item 58 and 59, I'll make a motion to postpone those until october 22nd. Motion is made by Councilmember Lewis. Seconded by Councilmember Griffith. Is there any discussion. Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Moertion carries on 58 and 59. They're postponed on october 22nd. I'll entertain a motion to go into executive session to engage in a private consultation with our attorney to discuss ls ranch limited et al in the Travis County district court and to discuss level issues regarding City of Austin versus club resorts inc. In the Travis County district court. Hang on one second. I'm sorry. On ls ranch, it is not in the Travis County district court. It is in the hays county district court and the City of Austin versus club resorts, inc., cause number 98-00245 or 24 of 489 in the Travis County district court, this concerns litigation concerns development regulations applicable in the barton springs zone. We will also discuss morris crossing, and proposed bonds issue. I'll introin a motion. Is there a motion? motion is made by the Mayor pro tem, seconded by Councilmember Slusher s there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. We are recessed into executive session.

>>Mayor Watson: I will call back the order the Austin City Council, there being no further business to come before the Austin City Council as this regularly scheduled meeting I entertain a motion to adjourn, motion made by Councilmember Lewis, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye., opposed say no., motion carries with Councilmember Garcia, Councilmember Griffith, City Councilmember Lewis off the dias, we are adjourned. Thank you all.

End of Council Session Closed Caption Log