Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting, 03/25/99

>>Mayor Watson: welcome, everybody. I feel like I am surrounded. Our first proclamation is gene -- is jean Mueller here, come on up. I should have looked to see now. Nice to see. Our first proclamation relates to trail ride month here in Austin, Texas, let me read it. Be it known by these presents, that I, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin, Texas -- oops, I have hurt somebody.

>> He wants to go trail riding.

>> Let me start again. Be it known by these presents, that I, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin, do hereby proclaim March 1999 as trail ride month in Austin. And I call on all citizens to join me in celebrating the 1999 grand entry of the 62nd annual Austin Travis County livestock show and prca rodeo, hosted by the 15th annual Austin trail ride, headed up by trail boss jean Mueller, in recognizing that the trail ride recreates the old western cattle drives and trails along 114 miles through beautiful Texas hill country traveling just as our ancestors did with horses, mules, covered wagon from new brawn fulls, canyon like, Wimberly, buda, into Austin for the rodeo, encouraging everyone to put on their boots, spurs and cowboy hats an attend this fun and special historic event. Signed by me, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin, I am proud to present this to you. [Applause]

>> why don't you step up here and say something. Sure.

>> Well, head 'em up, move 'em out, wagons, ho! it's trail ride, rodeo time in Texas, I would like to thank Mayor Watson, the Austin City Council for this great honor, we are very proud to accept this proclamation, we would like to present them with honorary memberships in the 15th annual Austin founders trail ride. We kept this Texas and western heritage alive all week long from March the 5th through the 13th, had beautiful weather, had the blue bonnets, wild flowers all coming out, so it was very special for all of our Texass that were here in central Texas recreating the old wagon trains and cattle drives as we came across country for the 114 highland lakes to kick and you have this year's Austin travis county livestock show and rodeo. I was very proud to present four very special trophies, our fartherest distance trophy went to a father and son who came all the way from lake worth, florida. And they were helping my oldest nephew who started a website for the trail ride under the heading of usatrail rides.com. Which is the first for this industry to be under one heading. We are proud to be the first trail ride up on it. They were real excited to that that trophy all the way home from florida. Three other horseback riders brought their horses in from florida. Some from des suppose monines, iowa. Some from german many. It's very special to have them help create these traditions as we keep it alive as they come into Austin. I am very proud to be trail boss of the ride, hope to continue for many, many years to come. Happy trails. [Applause]

>>Mayor Watson: thank you very much.

>> Thank you, happy trails!

>> thank you. That's great. Is lisa Lewis here? are you responsible for all of these bears? man, okay.

>> Well, I am not responsible.

>>Mayor Watson: be it known by these presents, that I, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin, do hereby proclaim that today March 25th, 1999 as as junior forum day in Austin, I call on all citizens to join me in recognizing that the Austin junior forum was chartered in 1969. With the mission of supporting those in need across greater Austin, for gifts of time, talent and funds and in recognizing that the Austin junior forum is responsible for providing teddy bears, as if you couldn't tell, [laughter], and toy dalmatian puppies to Austin area emergency services, victims services, fire departments and sheriff's departments to distribute to children in crisis situation as a much needed comfort as well as many other community service and outreach projects. In commending all of the dedicated volunteers for their efforts to help others and make Austin a better place and in encouraging everyone to support this most worthwhile organize, the Austin junior forum. Thank you very much. [Applause]

>> on behalf of the Austin junior forum, I would like to thank Mayor Watson and the City Council and we have -- we would like to present you all each with a teddy bear so that they may comfort you through all of your meetings.

>>Mayor Watson: I need it.

>> Lisa, we have for you a special award from fire, e.m.s. And the police department, but first we are going to let a few people hear what a difference your bears and dalmatians have made. So detective don doyle is going to come up for a moment and tell you just exactly what that meant.

>> On behalf of the Austin police department officers and the fire department, e.m.s. Workers over the years, that have been able to give out these bears and dalmatians, I want to thank the Austin junior forum for all of your hard work and the money that it's taken to provide the bears. In fact several years ago I was called to the mariott hotel on a call to assist e.m.s. And a mother and young child had been staying at the hotel and the mom had gotten deathly sick and was having to be taken to the hospital. She was unconscious and the little girl who was 7 or 8 years old was terrified and didn't know what was going on. And even if she would have been at home she would have been scared in that situation, but she was from corpus Christi, they didn't have any friends or family up here, the mom was up here on business. And I was faced with the situation of taking care of this little girl who was scared to death, afraid her mom was dying. She didn't know me, I didn't know her. And she was just sitting in a chair like a turtle drawn up in her shell. And here I was going to have to spend a couple of hours with her, trying to make her think everything is going to be okay. I broke the ice by going out to my car and pulling out the teddy bear that the forum had provided us. I walked back into the hotel, just had it in my hand and said sweet heart, here, I want to give you this, and we need to go over to the hospital and wait for your aunt to come. That little girl just put a smile on her face, she reached out and grabbed the bear and gave it a big hug. And everything was okay from then on. She started talking to me, and I was able to -- to -- after ann's good folks with victims services got over there, I left knowing that little girl was feeling pretty good about what was going on. And had it not been for the bear, I don't know what I would have done. [Laughter]. As a police officers and emergency worker, you take a lot of memories away from you, you can't forget, most of them aren't very pleasant, that's one of the ones that will always stick with me is seeing the look on that little girl's face, I know there's a lot of other stories around the City just like that, so thank you. [Applause]

>> on behalf of the Austin fire department, we would like to say thank you so much for these wonderful things. For a lot of you that don't know, this program is not a fly by night program. It's not something that's just come and is a flash in the pan and has gone. This is a program that's been going on for years and years. Around town as these fire trucks roll down the streets, a lot of times up on the dash you will see these little guys sitting there. They are just as eager to be deployed I think as some of those rack lines that are on the back of those units. I know for the thousands, literally thousands that we have given out over the years, some of these coming off are just as valuable as those rack lines that come off those fire trucks to those little kids. With that we would like to thank -- say a very heart felt thank you to the Austin junior forum for making that possible. [Applause]

>> lisa, on behalf of chief knee who was unable to attend with us today, I would like to thank you and the forum for 15 years of service. We have a small token of our appreciation here from the fire department and e.m.s. Along with the police department it reads: the Austin police, fire, e.m.s. Would like to honor the ace junior forum for excellence in community service, for reassuring and comforting victims in times of tragedy. Thank you very much.

>> Thank you. [Applause]

>> at this time, I would like to announce that the teddy bear picnic will be held in september. Central market is going to now co-sponsor the event with us, we are very pleased to announce this. Thank you all. [Applause]

>>Mayor Watson: you want to get the bears approximate?

>> grab those bears.

>> You have already got one in your chair.

>> Good. I wanted to make sure I got one. [Laughter].

>>Mayor Watson: that big one is what I need. Stephanie pena. Stephanie pena. How are you?

>> well, as you just saw in talking about the group that we just honored, there's a lot of good community service that goes on in Austin, Texas. A lot of caring people in our community. And one of the people is here with us and I have the opportunity to present a community service award. Let me read this. It says community service award is presented in acknowledgment and appreciation of her participation and creative contribution in the community-wide contest to select a name for the millennium youth entertainment complex. What many people have known as central City entertainment center is now the millennium youth entertainment complex and her dedicated efforts to become personally active and involve others in the community. To demonstrate a spirit of volunteerism and to make a difference by shaping the future of Austin and other central Texas communities. Stephanie d. Pena is deserving of public acclaim and recognition, signed by me, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City, on behalf of the entire City Council of Austin, Texas, I am very honored and pleased to be able to present this to you.

>> Thank you.

>> Thank you. [Applause]

>> you know, this award is not just for me. It's for all of the citizens that are in the East Austin community. I am very pleased with the center being located where it is. I am a native Austinite as well as a native East Austin night. And I go way back. When the harlem theater was operating on east 12th street. I was a little girl then. I am a grown woman now with children of my own and this facility is something that is very, very needed in the east Austin community to save the young adults and the children that are in the East Austin community. It is needed, there is no question about that. So on behalf of the citizens of East Austin, myself, my family, I would like to thank the City Council, Mayor Watson eric mitchell, robin harvin, jennifer coal doyle and all of the other concerned citizens in East Austin for this community service award. I do challenge everyone here to take some time and to do some volunteer service at the millennium youth entertainment complex. It will be worth your while, you will feel wonderful for it. Thank you. [Applause]

>>Mayor Watson: dorothy lay. Come on up here. Yeah. [Applause] you have heard me say it before, I will say it again, the citizens of Austin are well served by very, very dedicated employees of the stay with us. As time goes -- of the City of Austin, as time goes by, some of those employees spend a lot of time working on behalf of the citizens, they stay at the city for a while and then they move on to other things, when they do that and have been such dedicated and tireless employees and public servants, we like to take a moment to recognize what they have meant to the citizens. Today we have that opportunity with dorothy lay. Many people that are here know that after raising a family and having her career as an elementary school librarian and teacher, she received her master's degree from the l.b.j. School of public affairs in 1984. Shortly after she graduated she joined the City of Austin's budget office. In '86 she then transferred to what was then the urban transportation department which is now part of the Public Works and transportation department. In 1993, she transferred to the health and human services department, accepting the position of manager of budget and analysis. And she has served in that capacity for the past six years. She's been with the City, as you can tell, if you did your math there, as an elementary school teacher, everybody knows you did your math [laughter], if you did your math, she's been with us for 15 years. That's 15 years of dedicated service where she's had several special projects, those have included such things as the pilot implementation of lgfs, which is the City's new accounting system working on the task force on improving the parking meter program, numerous budget process improvement initiatives and continued to be involved to provide the budget office with the assistance and support, even after she transferred out of that office. So that's -- that's wonderful and wonderful distinction. So the distinguished service award, distinguished service award is given in acknowledgment and appreciation for her untiring efforts and unselfish service to our community during her 15 year tenure as a dedicated employee of the City of Austin. Dorothy lay is deserving of public acclaim and recognition. And it's signed by me, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin, on behalf of the entire City Council of Austin, Texas, dorothy we -- [applause]

>>Mayor Watson: why don't you say something? [applause]

>> as you can see, I got a little later start than some others on this career. But it was one that I knew that I would enjoy and I want to thank the City and mike especially who hired me the first time and then he hired me again to come to the health department. And to give me the opportunity to have a career of public service. And the City will always be in my heart as something that I will carry with me into other areas of civic service and public service and I appreciate all of you. Thanks very much. [Applause]

>> well, dorothy I just want to say you referenced to it as a laid start, but we are really pleased that you chose the City and our department. As budget manager, we have over $100 million in our department budget, it's very complex, I have always been extremely impressed by dorothy's ability to take very complex information and put it in a form that is very clear, very easy to understand. We operate in a climate of tight deadlines, often a lot of stress and again dorothy is very effective in handling things in a calm and effective way. I appreciate that. We have over a thousand employees in our department. Many of them work in administrative support services and are here today. I think that oftentimes it's not recognized that the work that people do in terms administrative support kind of in the background is very important and very -- very effective in terms of our ability to provide direct services throughout our community. On behalf of the thousands of people in our depend and hundreds of thousands of people in the City of Austin and Travis County who have directly and indirectly benefited from our service, I want to express our appreciation, we will miss you. Thanks, dorothy. [Applause]

>> as some of you may know I have to leave now because I have to go do budget training. [Laughter].

>>Mayor Watson: congratulations and thanks. Are keely, shane and jenny here? come on up. It's my pleasure to provide certificates of congratulations to three people who really deserve all of our congratulations. They have participated in a writing contest that has been response -- sponsored by the american red cross. It's a writing contest that involves volunteerism. They all three have the same certificates, but I want to make sure that I recognize all three of them individually. Because it's very important. The certificate reads: certificate of congratulations, this is to certify that by participating as a contestant and exhibiting creativity jenny layman of thorndale middle school, shane girtz of smithville middle school and keely porter of lake travis junior high school have successfully earned awards. Jenny layman successfully earned third place, keely porter the first place award and shane gertz, the second place award, you would think that I could have done it in order. Keely first, shane second place and jenny third place in the american red cross volunteerism writing contest. This certificate is issued in support and recognition thereof, it's dated March 25th, 1999, signed by me, Kirk Watson, Mayor of the City of Austin, on behalf of the entire City Council of Austin, Texas, I want to take a minute to say we are so very proud not only of the work that the american red cross does, but we are so proud of the young people that participate in these kind of activities and we really do sincerely congratulate those who have succeed understand winning these awards.

>> [Inaudible].

>>Mayor Watson: why don't we inviolate somebody to come up. Thank you very much, congratulations.

>>Mayor Watson: folks this is keely porter, the first grade -- I mean first place winner. I am telling you, I have having that kind of day. Go ahead.

>> Dear editor in chief, a starving child lies freezing after she's been separated from her family in a third world country. A penniless spirit broken drug addict thinks hopelessly of his future, fortunately hope will find these people, they will discover hope after destruction and devastation, this new life will come to them in the form of volunteers from the american red cross, however there are many other homeless and heart broken people and not enough caring volunteers, because of this it's vital to the equally of life for much of mankind there be more compassionate people investing time in the american red cross. There are bountiful reasons for joining the Austin section of the american red cross, the best reason is that by volunteering you have the potential to make a tremendous difference in someone's life. It is amazing how a little dose of loving guidance can improve someone's outlook on life or how a warm meal and shelter for the night can nourish a tired helpless soul. It can transform lives, not only does volunteering make a difference in the lives you touch, your life will also be touched by the incredible joy and satisfaction that comes from helping others. Through the american -- through the red cross there are numerous ways to lend a hand. This is another reason why volunteering for this organization is great for anyone. Unlike clara barton, the founder of the american red cross, you don't have to be skilled at stitching up battle wounds to help someone out. Whether you enjoy counseling people, helping people after natural disasters or packaging food for the needy, there's a perfect place for you to serve in the red cross. Something to do before making a decision about volunteering is to ask yourself this question: is there any possibility my family or I will ever number a situation of need? the answer is absolutely yes. For this reason once you do -- one should do their best to help people who find themselves in tragic situations so hopefully when they find themselveses in a similar situation they will have someone helping them. Do not from tend there nor starving children and that no one in your community is in need. After all just one ordinary person like you can make a world of difference to a fellow human being. Sincerely keely porter. [Applause]

>>Mayor Watson: and keely is a student at lake travis junior high. Thank you. Congratulations. [Applause]

>> good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, Council Members and guests, my name is patricia shaw, I am the director of resource development for the american red cross of central Texas. Our mission as you probably know is to help relieve human suffering and help people prevent, prepare for, respond to emergencies. We are volunteer organization and your local chapter here in Austin currently has 70 volunteers to one paid staff. We could not live, we could not exist as the red cross, we could not do what we do without volunteers. As a national organization, as your local what chapter here are committed to developing programs not only for volunteerism both for youth, we were thrilled when we first got the call from some City of Austin employees who were involved in a program called leaps. Leadership, education, public service. These individuals are here. They are the ones who worked with us and they carried the brunt of the organizational and implementational activity for this writing contest, I would like to recognize them today. Kim bedroom wood, would you stand, please. Because I know you are here. Marsha simmons, moses ruiz, deborah frusia and richard everton. We are very grateful for your support. [Applause]

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Now for some music, today we have with us the blues crawlers. Come on up, let's get going. Go ahead and start setting up. I am going to tell the folks a little bit about you. Applauded as true to their blues, the blues crawlers offer songs that reflect the rich texture of everyday life, life with its sweetness, life with its sore error and life with some of the -- sorror and live with surprising twists. The blues crawlers deliver a show of pure music, deep grooves, rich lyrics and memorable arrangements. Some vaguely familiar and others wonderfully original and personal. You will not be disappointed listening to the sounds of the blues callers, gil jenkins, Charles seefus, mel davis, jplilliston, lawrence cool bell. I want to know who goes by cool. Okay. I should have known. [Laughter]. Lawrence cool bell and jeff plumber. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you today the blues crawlers and I am declaring March 25th, 1999 as blues crawlers day in Austin. The blues crawlers. [Applause] ( (Music)
music playing (Music)
(Music)
) [applause]

>>Mayor Watson: where are you playing next?

>> this Saturday, [inaudible], on Saturday, this weekend. Starting at 9:30, of course please come out and enjoy the music. We also have our t-shirts. We are originally right here from Austin, Texas. Right off of sixth street. A lot of household names here in the band, also.

>> He brought you one.

>> Oh, wow. Look there, folks.

>> That's the name of the cd.

>> The name of the cd is hard times.

>>Mayor Watson: great.

>> I would like to also say not long ago we had a musician that left us, his name was t.d. Bell, we would like to say, this is lawrence bell, thank you for everything that they have done for Austin and the blues. [Inaudible] musician right here in Austin.

>>Mayor Watson: great, thank you all very, very much.

>>Mayor Watson: would everyone please rise and join us in the invocation, it will be delivered today by minister rick laing of the highland village church of Christ. Thank you very much for being with us.

>> Thank you, would you bow with me. Father, we thank you for another great day in the beautiful City of Austin and the great state of Texas. We thank you for the prosperity that reenjoy in this marvelous City, so we enjoy in this marvelous City, we pray that we will neither waste nor want. We pray, father, that you will continue to impress upon and encourage this Council to hold up high the principles of justice and harmony and peace for all. And we pray that they will continue to look and always care for in some way of homeless and those who are hurting. We are thankful for all of these great things, we give thanks in the name of Jesus, amen.

>>Mayor Watson: amen, thank you very much. I will call to order the Austin City Council. We are meeting on Thursday, March 25th, 1999, we are meeting at the City Council chambers, which is located at 307 west second street. Let me read some changes and corrections to the agenda of March 25th, 1999. Item no. 18, Approve a resolution authorizing service extension request number 1881 for wastewater service submitted by Bill malone, Jr. That is postponed indefinitely. Item no. 22, Approve a resolution authorizing a service extension request no. 18 777 For water service submitted by blake mcgee is postponed indefinitely. No. 23, Approve a resolution authorizing service extension request no. 18 76 For wastewater service submitted by blake mcgee is postponed indefinitely. Item no. 26, Approve a resolution authorizing execution of a five year revenue generating contract with rowing dock is postponed indefinitely. Item no. 40, Should read, when you get to the end of the paragraph there, the brackets, currently they say to be reviewed by planning commission, delete to be reviewed by planning commission and put recommended by Planning Commission. Item no. 56, Should read on the first line, it reads set public hearings for the limited purpose annexation of the balfour p.u.d. Truck. P.u.d. Should be stricken. Item no. 616789 Ms. Glasco, I may have a question for you, that she'd should read item 61 is postponed until april 8th, 1999. Item no. 61,.

>> On 61 there's a request to postpone until april the 8th. Obviously you will be accident act on it at 4:30.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, item no. 64 The request is to be postponed indefinitely. Item no. 66, The same, it would be postponed indefinitely. Also item no. 68,Ment be postponed. Let me make sure -- item no. 61, 64, 66 Are specifically zoning items. So if someone is listening and planning on attending, at 4:30 to discuss those specific zoning items, 61, 64 and 66 I anticipate that they will be postponed. Item no. 68, Those who were intending to attend the 6:00 p.m. Hearing on the proposed amendments to the land development code to adopt the mitigation land pal policy in the barton springs zone, including changes to the sosz ordinance, that will be -- the s.o.s. Ordinance will be postponed. Items set for a time certain at 4:30, zoning items, 60 through 66. At 6:00, conducting a public hearing to approve an e.m.s. Increase for non-emergency transfer to $195 for each transfer leg and to $5 per mile. At 6:30, a public hearing regarding a change in the street name for the entire length of huntsville drive to riata vista circle, from the southeastern intersection of huntsville drive and parmer lane looping westerly to the northwestern intersection of huntsville drive and parmer lane. At 6:45 p.m., conduct a public hearing regarding the proposed plan for the City of Austin to lease downtown property to computer sciences corporation. And at 7:30 p.m., conduct a public hearing on a request to waive the minimum separation distance requirement of City code section 8-3-4 between a proposed gas station/convenience store, exxon tiger market, at 6707 cameron road at u.s. Highway 290 east, which intends to sell alcoholic beverages and a public school, reagan high school. The first item on the agenda is -- by the way, on the citizens communication, before we get to that, theres an addenda to the agenda. Number 87, pate brindle will be speaking no. 10, The 10th speaker to citizens communication and then there's a number 89, related to ordinances and resolutions. First item is the approval of the minimums for the regular meeting of March 11th, 1999. I will entertain a motion.

>>Garcia: on move.

>>Slusher: Mayor, the minutes aren't ready.

>>Mayor Watson: is there a question? all right. Then -- motion has been withdrawn. Next item on the agenda are general citizens communication, first speaker is John empey, followed by Robert thomas and then mike workman.

>> You should already have some information that may wife gave you grace at your desks. I am here to talk about proposed changes that need to be made to the land development code. In order to give them the same authority on my situation where the site plan is causing flooding and destruction of my property as they do to revegetate or for erosion controls. Here I am again, there has been no improvement in our problem no action. There's water, a foot deep, not 100 feet from our front door. Every storm front, every flash flood watch and grace and I are completely panicked just like last night. If this was your house, Mr. Mayor, if it was your children, if it was your parents, would this be happening or would someone do something?!! 10 years ago, I would have expected the City Council to stand by and watch a developer destroy adjoining property. But I am ashamed of you! they promised us right here on February 18th, that on February 25th his department would give Bergstrom open air market 30 days to complete their drainage. Then they would file in municipal court. Instead, susan scoroggins game them until april 1st because it seemed like a good number. They get extra time after a year just because?!! give me a break! mike heights also said on March the 4th when grace was here, in response to Council Member Goodman's request that they talk to the county that he would contact them the next week about how you could cooperate on solving this problem. That meeting is scheduled to take place next week from now on March 29th. I had dennis rutter from the health department out to our area last week to see all of the standing water we have. I fully expected him to issue citations under 1021. Instead he said that he would come back in 10 days or so because sag nant water was not enough, it had to be actively breeding mosquitos, that's how long it took. I strongly feel that's wrong because this ordinance doesn't even mention mosquitoes and because it only takes two or three days. I checked with the library, I have checked the reference material, two or three days, this is the man's job! he doesn't know how long it takes mosquitoes to hatch? is he ignorant or is dennis rutter a damned liar?!! I also spoke with his supervisor, I still don't understand why they won't enforce the order naps as Written. It doesn't -- ordinance as Written, it doesn't mention mosquitos, it says objectionable, unsightly March Marchner material of whatever nature. I object! it's enough!

>>Mayor Watson: your time is almost up.

>> My time is still going.

>>Mayor Watson: I understand, please act --

>> did you hear me this time. I have been here six times, did you hear me this time Mr. Mayor?

>>Mayor Watson: your time has expired. Thank you for being here. Robert thomas. Followed by mike workman an then Charles t. Waits. Mr. Workman, are you here? Mr. Workman? is Mr. Waits here?

>> thank you, Mayor Watson. Mayor Pro Tem Goodman and members of the Council. I am honored to speak to you today in concern of the rosewood recreation center. I am Robert l thomas of the building and construction trades department of the laborers international unions of north america, Texas and Austin AFL-CIO and Austin central labor district Council, national football league, world football league and american football association. I am the advisory Council from the international for the rosewood revitalization projects that stem from the administrative office building of 1987 up until the millennium youth entertainment center. And in the last meeting, this morning Jesus oliverez called me and told me that he would arrange to call me tomorrow and -- in concern of the developing an appointment so we can meet concerning the rosewood park and recreation center. Then the last meeting, I discussed that there had been too much discrimination within the parks and recreation department in relation to african americans. Getting managerial positions. Now, I had -- I talked to the Texas economics on human rights and they informed me that they would speak with the park the directorship down there concerning employable positions at the rosewood park and recreation center. Now, I feel that oliveras does nothing. He hampers the progress of african american. There's a dire need for new managers at rosewood, we have struggled for years at rosewood for jobs as professional sportsman. We brought to you a coalition of highly skilled builders for the millennium youth entertainment center along with other tasks as it is east Austin football field, located at the old alison site. We need a change now in management at rosewood. We feel that we brought employable skills and as professional sportsman we know well in relationship to businesses that are good for rosewood. The old manager that they have there now has been there for 15 years. In that span they have done nothing but depend on us to repair the land. Now we need oliveras to go along with us in meetings so we can get the type of jobs that we need in areas, try to bring forth fairness within labor management through our negotiations. Now I wanted for us now to -- to look on the progress we've had and look forward to the youth to coming into the lows wood -- rosewood that we have done a good job, we are not afraid to come there because in the old day there was gang violence and too much murder and they have done so much for the -- [buzzer sounding].

>> Done so much for the youth. I will schedule another meeting in april, we will talk about it then.

>>Goodman: thank you Mr. Thomas. Mike workman. Charles waits.

>> Thank you, I am charlie waits. A couple of weeks ago, environmental activists Paul robins challenged this Council and staff to consume at least two percent of our electric power with -- from alternative sources, namely solar, wind and biomass. This is promoted as green power. Let us look at photojournalist solar -- photo volume -- photo photovoltaic use. Austin owns and operates three state of the Austin photovo did ltaic systems using collectively rated at 126 kilowatts, with a 15% efficiency. This means they produce 20 kilowatts and will light 200 bulbs. What will it cost to produce one megawatt that's like 10,000 bulbs using our solar? 10,000 is 50 times greater than 200. When we mull apply one, -- $1,700,000 times 50, we get $85 million. It will cost $85 million to produce one megawatt with our solar systems. Austin has generating capacity of 2400 megawatts. Two percent equals 48 megawatts. 85 Million times 48 is 4,080 million dollars. It will cost that much to generate 2% of Austin power that's 48 megawatts with state-of-the-art solar systems now in use at the City of Austin. The proposal I heard was to allow ratepayers to volunteer to use green power for I think an additional 15%. The City will match this 15%. This is a green tax because we are the City. Green power is not a good idea. Green power is another feel good concept. I told this fellow at the drug store about green power and he said it sounds gory to me. It sounds gory. And he said, another fell low -- another fellow I told about our green power, said we haven't had an idea like this since we put duck weed in town lake. Thank you very much. I brought you a copy of this in case you want to check my figures, they come from your staff. [Inaudible].

>>Goodman: thank you Mr. Waits.

>> Thank you.

>>Goodman: I am sure Mr. Robins is listening and probably will want to talk to you about this. Carol blodgett.

>> Hi. Well, Austin is my hometown, but I have been living around so many places I hardly know where I live anymore. So this is just kind of not a discussion on advice to -- about homelessness, it is in fact advice about homelessness. Is somebody writing this down? is anybody going to get this message and actively do anything about it?

>>Goodman: about what?

>> where is the Mayor? why -- I wanted to talk to everybody?

>>Goodman: everybody is by a monitor and can hear you.

>> Excuse me?

>>Goodman: everybody is by a monitor and can hear you. If you go ahead and speak, we also take minutes and this is taped.

>> I'm sorry the police left because it's -- it really involves the police. I have been homeless in dallas and in -- in another City in Texas and now in Austin. And so I know a fair amount about homelessness. I understand that care takes -- caritas is going to be building a new edifice to do something about homelessness, but they are going to feed people and give them clothing and stuff. What we need as homeless people, those of us who are in fact homeless is enough food, of course, everybody knows that, enough solitude to grow spiritually, enough sleep to function and stay healthy. We need enough sleep. So if we are in the process of trying to get a permanent home or whatever, while we are homeless, we need enough sleep. Okay. There are not enough facilities for people to sleep in Austin. And there are facilities if you are women with children, there are facilities if you are battered, there are facilities if you are men, but older citizens. Now, let me just give you a model from dallas, which works well. And this is my advice to Austin to do something about it, perhaps to use the coliseum. If anybody is familiar with dallas, there is a City market, the marketplace there, there are these large buildings, anybody been to dallas and seen those market there? no? well, they are big buildings, smaller than the coliseum, but large with high ceilings. And people can -- there's a similar facility near those marketplaces it's called the Austin street elder, it's moved now on hickory street. People can go there who are homeless, they can check in at a certain time, they are issued a mattress, a pad to carry to their -- to a location, they sleep there overnight. They come in, daily, they can check out in and out and don't -- they do need I.d. To do that. But I have done this. This is on a continuing basis, you can sleep and get sleep when you need to. The salvation army is not adequately spaced, I guess, doesn't have enough space to [buzzer sounding].

>> Oh, no, my time can't be up! the police agency -- let me just --

>>.

>>Goodman: ma'am, since I used up by 10 seconds of your time, let's give --

>> I have 10 seconds more? the police need to know about the transient situation and involve themselves with homelessness in Austin, they are the first people to access the homeless people, they need to be actively involved in this, they need to know the salvation army just does not sit there open arms with room for everybody. If we have a large facility where people can check out, in and out by the daytime, daily, each day, that can give people enough sleep and can make us hopefully health these enough and desirerous -- I mean, I am desiring of doing something worthwhile and helping instead of being a useless segment of society.

>>Goodman: yes, ma'am, your time is up.

>> Thank you.

>> Marsha connor is our assistant City Manager, we have an initiative right now relative to all of the things that you have mentioned. If you have suggestions, I am sure ms. Connor would like to discuss the things that you mentioned.

>> Suggestions --.

>>Goodman: yes, ma'am.

>> [Inaudible].

>>.

>>Goodman: yes, ma'am.

>> Ms. Connor's assistant kim is also here, they can talk to you.

>> Here I am. Last time when I was trying to talk somebody came over here, so come find me, please, let's talk, y'all.

>>Goodman: they are coming. [One moment please] in past years the Austin american-statesman has endorsed as much as eight months early as they did when the Austin american-statesman endorse ted honorable Kirk Watson september 6, 1996. That was unethical. Then on the day of voting they claim that all candidates that just happened to not be members of the chamber of commerce not to be serious candidates including max nofzinger and myself. I'm asking the people of Austin to ignore both editorials and smul news items that you will find in the Austin american-statesman and in the Austin chronicle as these two papers represent the business community and continues to with leaders and direction. If you want evidence the only one on the -- is the Austin greater Chamber of Commerce. As of this March 25th, neither newspapers has created a news article that comes anywhere near from what you will get from the library april 15th from the lying of women voters. I'm also asking Austin area voters to ignore endorsement committees as the one question that comes up is who is most viable. You and you alone should determine who is the best candidate. The only way I can see of lettingizing the campaign is with a co-endorsement you, the one they believe is viable and the one they think would make a great Austin City Council member. There is also the matter of a lockdown at City hall. And as the certified public accountant jit horton who is implementing procedures that keep citizens from entering City hall and City related facilities, I as a candidate with a need to know have only 15 minutes to get in and get out. She reminded me of this has been going on for the past two years. I want each one of you to question a candidate that says they have made government more open. If you have any questions, if you don't believe what I'm saying or if you want to find out what's going on please call jill horton at 476-2222 and ask her who is implementing this, who is asking her to implement this. [Buzzer sounds]. Thank you honorable City Council Members.

>>Goodman: thank you. Barrett sandberg.

>> Honorable Council Members, Mayor Watson and Mr. Garza, I'm -- three weeks ago I had come to you with a request for the celebration at the closing of Mueller airport and this request was made because the neighborhoods wanted a ceremony near the runway, but the runway will be in just until june 1st according to faa regulations. And Mr. Garza suggested at the time that as long as we didn't require the runway arrangements could be made. We were very appreciative of that. But I am here today because they haven't been made yet and we are trying to lock them down. I did call Mr. Garza's office as requested. He has so much on his plate, I'll repeat, his staff has been swift in communicating with me. The inner neighborhood committee that's been working on this event appreciates that. We're not as wealthy ago the corporate sponsors supporting the Bergstrom ceremonies but we have chitd to providing security, entertainment and refreshments and the question of liability prb has been solved. The one key item remaining is for the City to arrange the actual location. Our committee has been open to any particular locations so long as one can be confirmed. It doesn't have to be the american airlines terminal, the entrance to the building, anything in particular, some staff members suggested a hangar and we think that would be ideal. Our no. 1 Choice of the three options we've outlined in our most recent e-mails is a hangar on may 2, the actual date. Our second choice would be on the runway after all the planes are gone, which we understand is not until june 1st. And the third option would be at the time and place at the gng of demolition which might end up being june 1st or 2nd. I'm not sure of the details on that. But I think something at least the hangar on may 2 which is our first choice probably could be implemented, but staff hasn't said that they could. So we're hoping that either something can be done shortly that the Council could direct it with more force.

>> I talked with Mr. Griffith yesterday and we went through a series of places where you might be able to hold this. What he had suggested was -- because I was thinking maybe a parking lot or adjacent to the terminal and he said people will still have cars parked there because you could be leaving down to 29th of april and not getting back until the 7th or the 8th of may in which case you are going to have to get shuttled over. Trying to find a place so we can be -- have a free and clear space where people can mill around without there being private automobiles, things of that nature. I hadn't talked to anybody about a hangar. If one is available, I think we would be amenable to that. I don't know whether the 2nd would work. I did indicate to him we wanted to co-sponsor the event so you wouldn't have to pay the liability insurance. We would cover that for you.

>> We're very glad of that. The hangar question, it might take talking to the lessies. I understand the hangars are mostly leased, but if there is an open space maybe they could work with you.

>> Week work something out. We do need to tie down a location fairly quicklyly so I'll talk to Mr. Griffith tomorrow.

>>Goodman: susan reid.

>> Good afternoon. My name is susan reid and I'm currently a member of the Austin library commission and I'm here today as a member of the Austin public library foundation. And I want first of all to say thank you very much to all of you for the very significant support that you have provided for the library in 1998-'99 budget. The foundation was created in 1996 to provide a framework for expressing the community's support for the Austin public library, to increase public awareness and broaden public understanding of the library and what it can offer to this very diverse community. And to enhance library collections, programs and services through financial support. I am here today to talk to you a little bit about the summer reading program which last year registered more than 7,000 children into the program, and through the story times and special events attracted almost 30,000. The materials that have received there are mostly from last year's program. The yellow sheet that Council Member Garcia is looking at tells you the current story times at all the branches. From primary children through teens the summer program promotes literacy and instills a lifelong love of reading. Every youngster gets a journal to record his or her surbl reading and as they return to the library each week the child receives stamps or stickers to put in their journal to mark their achievements. The Austin library foundation supports the summer reading program through funding for special incentives and events which keep the children coming back for more. Last year children all over Austin enjoyed learning about the buffalo soldiers, handling snakes and reptiles and watching the antics of wild and tropical birds and getting a closeup look at wildlife include a young off and on and iguana. Jugglers, puppet shows and special presentations by fire, police and e.m.s. Departments and craft activities rounded out a very successful summer. In the next few weeks leading up to the national library week, other foundation members will be here to share with you what they love about the Austin public library and why they have chosen to support this Austin institution. Thank you.

>>Garcia: may I ask a quick question, if I may, Mayor pro tem?

>>Goodman: please do.

>>Garcia: I noticed that blessing hill milwood and maybe some others have more programming than, let's say, oak springs manchaca, and sepeda. Sepeda has one preschool story time. The rest of the programming is presented at the laguna gloria art museum. I think carver has preschool only on Thursdays. How was -- how was the determination made as to where we were going to have this programming?

>> I cannot answer that question for you because I'm not on the staff and was not privy to that. But I think that I would ask the staff to please reply to you. I don't know if there is anyone --.

>>Garcia: because it looks like in areas where we really need to have this programming, we don't have it. We don't have it at carver as much as we have it at milwood, and we don't have it at terasas like we have it at housas.

>> I can get brend today to prepare a report for you.

>>Garcia: appreciate it very much.

>> Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Pate brendle. Welcome.

>> Thank you very much. Delighted to be here. Mr. Mayor, Council Members, I'm a homeowner in jester estates. I am a member of the jester estates traffic subcommittee, and also a member of the 2222 coalition of neighborhood associations. I know that you know we are facing a really serious traffic situation along the 2222 corridor. In fact it's rated for only 39,500 vehicle trips per day. We have met that capacity at present and with all the projects that have been approved to date, we are facing a potential of over 110,000 vehicle trips per day along the corridor. Every intersection along that corridor is rated f. I know you you know that. I'm here today to give you a project update and ask for a simple request. In december of the past year your City Council aides asked for a meeting between the jester traffic subcommittee and the developers of the champion track, which is a tract that basically meets at the end of 2222 and 360. One of the results of that meeting, and the meeting was called and we were able to discuss our concerns about the traffic density at that very unique intersection. One of the recommendations that came from that session by your aides and I think is a really smart suggestion was to form a 2222 coalition of neighborhood associations to jointly with the landowners, with the developers and with the City a comprehensive development plan for that entire corridor. I'm delighted to tell you that process has begun. In fact you have in front of you a copy of a letter sent to you March 4th stating that activity and who was participating. Recently on March 18th, we also received a letter from Austin lebrock, director of planning, it was a very professional letter, sympathetic, but basically stated he at this particular time, his staff, could not provide assistance to us because all the neighborhood planning areas had been previously selected. In fact Alice was kind enough to hand out those letters to you. We certainly understand that. We are not in conflict with that statement. However, due to the importance of this particular activity along one of the major arteries in the City, which is facing a situation that will soon be deplorable if not dysfunctional, we simply want to continue our planning effort. We are beginning to initiate time, effort and resources and probably significant amount of money to do so and do it professional for you. What I need from you today, if I may respectively request it, is your official or non-official endorsement to proceed with the project. [Buzzer sounds]. May I have that?

>>Mayor Watson: we're not posted to do anything like that so we wouldn't be able to do that today. The fact you brought it to the attention that way would allow for us to have consideration at some future date, but because we're not posted for action or to make an endorsement like that, it would be inappropriate for us to do it.

>> Could someone provide me guidance with what could be the next step?

>>Mayor Watson: I'll have somebody come talk to you about how we could get that brought up.

>>Goodman: I think one thing that anybody could say today is that no. 1, In order to have the kind of studies of corridors that we're talking about here and such as are happening in other parts of the City, we need some more fte's, and we need to be able to bring in, for instance, interns or class work from some of the u.t. Classes to help out with technical but not exactly staff support in the future. In order for the cooperative efforts that are being initiated by folks themselves in different areas to continue we need to offer them a little bit of help which would require a little bit of a budget discussion. Although not a onerous amount in my opinion.

>> What we could do is have the staff prepare an analysis of the request and what we think it would take to achieve what they want us to help with.

>> Thank you very much. Appreciate your time.

>>Mayor Watson: appreciate you being here. Items on the consent agenda are 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 21, 24, 27, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46 47, -- 46 on second and third reading, 47 on second and third reading, 48 on second and third reading, 49 on second and third reading, 51 on second and third reading, and 45 is also on second and third reading. 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, Those will be the items on the consent agenda unless there are items that need to be pull or placed back on the consent agenda. Councilmember Lewis?

>>Lewis: yes, Mayor, thank you. Item no. 37, Item no. 59 -- I mean 36, I'm sorry, 36 is the one. 36, 59 And 89 can be put back on.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you.

>>Slusher: would you repeat those?

>>Mayor Watson: 36, 59 and 89 on the addendum.

>>Slusher: okay. Mayor --.

>>Mayor Watson: yes, Council Member Slusher.

>>Slusher: I'll put back on no. 25. And I went ahead and take that off the rca could have used a little work. I wanted to say for instance that project is actually ahead of schedule is why we're having a budget amendment and I didn't figure that out from reading the rca.

>>Mayor Watson: all right. Thank you.

>>Slusher: and other -- I think you have this right, but it says on the changes and -- I mean on the items pulled 19 was pulled by me, glenn water water supply corporation, that's actually item 20. But I think you noted that.

>>Mayor Watson: I read 19 as consent and item 20 was pulled.

>>Lewis: Mayor, would you pull item 28 also back on?

>>Mayor Watson: yes. All right. Any other items? the consent agenda and I'll entertain a motion, 11, 13, 14 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 24, 25, 27 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 38 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45 through 51 on second and third reading 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 62, 63 65 and 89. I'll entertain a motion to pass the consent agenda as read.

>> So moved.

>>Spelman: question Mayor? you mentioned several numbers which were on the zoning hears 60, 62 and 63.

>>Mayor Watson: did I? that was an absolute foul-up.

>> Councilmember Lewis put 59 back on.

>>Mayor Watson: did I not read that? 59 would be on and if I read -- and I did obviously, 62, 63, those would not be part of the consent agenda.

>>Spelman: very minor last point, 50 would be a in order answer on all three reading not just on second and third because we haven't pass identity on first.

>>Mayor Watson: you are absolutely correct. The motion is made by Council Member Lewis to approve the consent agenda not as read but corrected. Seconded by Council Member Spelman. Let me make sure we don't have anybody that needs to speak. On those that were put back on is Bill ford here?

>> yes, sir.

>>Mayor Watson: do you need to speak if this item has been put on consent agenda?

>> yes, sir, I'm [inaudible].

>>Mayor Watson: if it's on the consent agenda, do you feel the need to speak?

>> not at this time, sir.

>>Mayor Watson: okay.

>>Slusher: Mayor, I had some questions about that item but I didn't pull it because Council Member Lewis --.

>>Mayor Watson: do you want to pull it?

>>Slusher: yes. Sorry I missed that. That is 59, I think.

>>Mayor Watson: that's item no. 36.

>>Slusher: 36. Slf all right. The consent agenda will be as read but we are going to pull item no. 36 If that's a friendly amendment. Councilmember Lewis and Council Member Spelman do you consider pulling item 36 a friendly amendment?

>> yes.

>>Mayor Watson: there has been no one signed up speak on the items put back on the consent agenda. I don't have anybody signed up to speak on the consent agenda so is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye? opposed say no. Motion carries. The consent agenda passes as read.

>>Garcia: Mayor?

>>Mayor Watson: yes, Council Member Garcia.

>>Garcia: which was the one that was first, second and third?

>>Mayor Watson: item 150. Cn item 50.

>>Garcia: it's posted correctly.

>>Mayor Watson: now, I want to be real clear because I notice we have a lot of folks here and on item no. 57, Which is approving a resolution supporting int grace requirements of the americans with disabilities act I'm assuming because it was on consent agenda the folks signed up to speak didn't feel the need to speak because it was going to be passed.

>> Mayor, I did sign up to speak on citizens communication, I didn't hear my name called and so --.

>>Mayor Watson: okay. Do you feel like even though it's just passed you need to speak.

>> I was going to be speaking in favor so if it's passed --.

>>Mayor Watson: it just passed by consent. I just wanted to make sure.

>> I thank you for that and I appreciate it and I can provide my rin comments if you like.

>>Mayor Watson: that would be great. Thank you. Anybody have any problems with that?

>> we would like to mention our rally on Tuesday --.

>>Mayor Watson: come over here to the microphone and do that. There is one right there in front of you.

>> Can you hear me? is it on? hi, my name is jennifer and I'm with adapt of Texas and we're a civil rights group for people with disabilities and we're having a March on Tuesday the 30th, 1999, in favor of supporting the most integrated manned date of the ada. The governor and the -- and the attorney general have signed on to a lawsuit that would repeal that part of the ada and it would take away people's right to choose where they live and how they receive their services so we want to have a rally and have as many people as possible support that rally. At the -- we'll be gathering at 209 west 14th street and lavaca on Tuesday p the 30th at 4 p.m. If anyone has any questions or wants to get involved, please call the office at 442-0252. And also I would like to invite any members of the City Council to come along as well. And, oh, thank you for passing the resolution on consent. We want to congratulate you for having the encourage -- having the courage to do that.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you all. Yes, ma'am?

>> I would like to -- sorry, I'm marie and I'm president of advocates for nursing home reform in Austin and I would like to present you with my testimony, I'm just going to give it to you.

>>Mayor Watson: great. Thank you very much.

>> And it concerns the amikus brief. And our concerns that the attorney general and governor bush have not done anything toward this and we would like for as many people that would and could in the City of Austin to call them and urge them to remove the name of Texas from that lawsuit. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you very much. Thank you all for being with us today. We've already passed the item so if you have testimony you would like to have passed out, if you will bring it up to the City clerk, she will take it and we'll pass it out.

>>Garcia: Mayor?

>>Mayor Watson: yes, Council Member Garcia.

>>Garcia: just a quick --.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you all very much.

>>Garcia: quick question. On item no. 50, This is a zoning case, this is not -- and it's first being second and third. Why is it not in the zoning cases?

>>Mayor Watson: I don't know the answer to that. Yes, ms. Cherry?

>> this particular ordinance, if you look at the posting, it is a corrective ordinance to correct field notes, so yes, you are correct that it is a zoning ordinance, but it is merely a corrective ordinance to correct errors. It does not require -- it is not required to have a public hearing.

>>Garcia: okay. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: item 12, Council Member Lewis.

>>Lewis: thank you, Mayor. Let me get back here to my agenda. My question is if there's someone from staff here -- they answered one of the questions that I asked, but I've received some calls about the types of vehicles. Is all of the small vehicles included in this?

>> I think so.

>>Lewis: is my mike on?

>> we've sent back for the answer to that question, but I think they are.

>>Lewis: okay. Then -- well, because I had a call from a couple of lube places that said that they didn't get the information on the bid is the reason I -- that was the reason for me pulling the item. And I notice in the backup it said that it was what -- the number -- it was sent out, it didn't seem it was consist wipt the --

>> we sent out 13, I believe.

>>Lewis: with the number of lube companies here in Austin. I mean the different entities that --

>> if you could give us their name we could double-check and see if we have the correct address for them in our system

>>Lewis: all right. Okay. That was my question was whether or not all the small vehicles that the City owned was on this, and you are only using as a supplement for our fleet, so I'll move approval.

>>Mayor Watson: months has been made to approve item 12. Secretaried by Council Member Garcia. Any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries on item 20. Item 20, Council Member Slusher

>>Slusher: good afternoon.

>> Good afternoon.

>>Slusher: give me a short overview of this item and why the City has to rule on it.

>> This item is a request from the glenlake water supply corporation for out of district service from the riverplace m.u.d. Actually back in 1996 a similar request went before Council as was approved for a two career time frame. That time time frame is up. They are requesting an additional request for out of district service. Why is this coming to Council? because we do not provide water service to riverplace m.u.d., but under the consent agreement with riverplace m.u.d., any time they want to serve outside their district they have to get the City of Austin approval. So that's why it's coming before Council. The reason that glenlake would like to continue this arrangement is that they have their own ccn from the state, they have the obligation and right to serve within their particular area, but under state rules they need additional capacity, they need additional storage and treatment capacity to meet the demands of their full buildout and they have decided it would be easier and more convenient if they could utilize some of the excess capacity that riverplace m.u.d. Has in their treatment plant as opposed to expanding their own facilities which they have the option of doing. So they are asking for our permission to allow them to continue to tie on to the riverplace m.u.d. In order to be -- in order to satisfy the state's rules related to capacity.

>>Slusher: okay. And two years ago when this arrangement was made for the two-year period, was there something that was supposed to happen during that period? was it based on that? contingent on that?

>> well, their option was whether -- kind of their decision point was whether or not to continue with this or to build their own facilities. The other option would be if the City of Austin had the capability to serve this area since it's in our etj and our service area. We do not have any facilities nearby that would be able to serve that. At some point in time in the future we might and that's why our recommendation is that this be an interim or a temporary arrangement until such time that the City of Austin would be able to provide service to that particular area.

>>Slusher: so how long would this interim be under what we're passing today?

>> it's really unknown. This particular development, if you look at your map, is out off of the old City park road, it's pretty far from any facilities we have, there's no plans for any lines to be extended out there in the next several years. If we were to ever annex riverplace m.u.d., which is I'm -- I don't think any time in the system, but if we would then we would probably serve them through the riverplace m.u.d. Facilities.

>>Slusher: well, is this document developing under City of Austin regulations?

>> I guess it is because it's in our et just a moment. I'm not sure -- etj. I'm not sure which particular regulations.

>>Slusher: could we get somebody that knows that because it would be important to me. Do you want to try? I thought you were saying you knew.

>> We'll find that out. One second.

>> You may want to see if pat murphy is in the back. He would have the answer.

>> They have the capability to build out about 375 units. Currently they have about 210 built.

>>Slusher: and that's on how many acres, do you know?

>> I can't tell you that.

>>Slusher: sounds like we need Mr. Murphy in here. If anybody else has any questions in the meantime or we could skip over this one.

>> We could come back to you or --.

>>Slusher: I guess we need to do that then. Okay. We better skip over it.

>> Keep come back to it.

>>Mayor Watson: do we need a motion to postpone item 20? oh, okay. Item no. 32, Councilmember Lewis.

>>Lewis: thank you. I would like to ask staff, the proposed items we are extending this contract for, have we did any -- I know we haven't did y2k, but have we had this service performed before?

>> we have had various engineering services performed by duke and other engineering providers. Some of this work is currently ongoing such as the work in the network area, systems and systems plannings, these are ongoing issues occurring essentially simultaneously and the y2k obviously is a major impact to us. Right now we have about 30 employees assigned from the normal duties supporting the y2k effort. Ae employees, not -- in addition to outside contract resources.

>>Lewis: well, the reason for asking that question is if it's an ongoing -- and I received an answer here says we staff engineering sections to handle the base level of work that is -- and utilize consultants for work that exceeds the base level. If it's an ongoing, where do we determine our base?

>> that's a good question. When we indicate ongoing, it's issues such as the work that we do ongoing is designing work orders and et cetera. We use -- we vault that as base load work, designing service to homes and businesses and et cetera. The work that this firm has done for us is ongoing engineering, but not necessarily ongoing the same issue. They've done a system reevaluation for us. They do specific peak project type activities for us that are above what we would have either the expertise or the normal resource to do.

>>Lewis: well, and they've been doing work for us what, since '95? and is it -- well, yeah, '96. '96, 7 And 8. And none of this that they are doing now is work that they did in the last three years?

>> no. It would not be duplicated work. If I understand the question correctly, no, they are not repeating or doing the same type work. There are special assignments and studies. With the growth in Austin and the transmission planning, everything is happening almost instantaneously. It's essentially new work that needs to be subpoena ported by this contract. Cn supported by this contract.

>>Lewis: well, the reason -- what caught my eye on this is that we just went through a thing with -- saying we needed holly power plant to meet the peak. Now later we coming back saying we're going to have engineers that determine our transmission, the transmission and distribution system. The generation, demand on generation, transmission and distribution system. So why do we need them to do that if we've already determined what we're going to need to meet the peak?

>> well, those are two different aeptions. One, it's fairly easy to determine the bulk load that our generation system will have to support. It's a very complicated analysis in terms of what type generation will be required, it's very complicated in terms of load flow on the transmission and distribution system. That's taking that load, put it in the right place and designing the facilities that will support that. So it's really -- one is very, very detailed and the other one is kind of a bulk process. You look at the total demand that's required and you know the base load generation that you would have to have. These are much more detailed, intricate involved projects than just how many mag watts are we going to have to provide in the summer of '99 or 2000.

>>Lewis: you know, to own our utilities, it would seem like we have have someone on staff that could make some type of prediction like this because actually what we're telling people is you can charge us whatever you want to because we're going to have to hire you anyway. And it just -- to me it gives companies a license to steal when you tell people that we're going to have to go out and hire people to tell us how and where to put the loads for our transmission when we own the company. It's something missing there someplace because that or we don't -- maybe we need to send some of our engineers to school to learn some of this. I don't understand what is such a specialty about the distribution of power when you are generating and transmitting the power yourself. Because, you know, that's --

>> there are very specific, and by know means do we ab I did indicate the engineering or project management of these activities, those are our responsibilities and we have the expertise to manage the projects and control those costs. There are certain skill sets and there are certain analysis if you ask me to sit down and look at a substation and tell you where all the load went, how that affects each customer and how those are all integrated together that is correct is a very time consuming, specific, deliberate effort. That's where we need the support and technical expertise that we do maintain our reliability and at the same time we can engineer new service and products to the load growth here. So the duke is a very -- it's helping us do our jobs, but by know means are we abdicatting the responsibility or project management of that.

>>Lewis: last dwe question, how can we measure the effect as to whether or not what they are doing is effective for us other than we say it maintains our reliability, I mean we have some reliability now without them doing this, so we had it last year and without them doing this, giving us this information, so how -- how are we going to measure the effect of what we're paying for?

>> part of that is one, our satisfaction of what they do. But indeed they were instrumental in helping us maintain our reliability this past summer. They did an engineering study on our under groud circumstance utsz coming out of substations and were able to help us eliminate potential outages. Before this summer occurs, we will have reworked substations transferred load to the correct location and replaced facilities based on our kree ki tear I can't. We develop the criteria, they perform the engineering service. Based on that measurement then we would spend that money. But we establish criteria, the measurements and evaluate their performance. If they were not acceptable, we would certainly not be asking to continue or increase that level of performance.

>>Lewis: it just appears to me that if they -- if they -- you know, it's like I hired an engineer -- I mean an architect to write up a report for construction. Well, once I get the report, I don't need to hire him again because I can write it up myself. Seems like to me some of this stuff that we should be able to hire a consultant, take his advice, if it works, fine, but seems like we would learn something from it that we could use to continue on without continuing to have this service performed by a consultant. Because, you know, I'm trying to figure out if they've saved us enough money to pay for what we are paying them, you know, and that's my problem.

>> We can bring you some additional data that shows what we've been able to do in terms of maintain service for liability and the outage avoidance and those type things. I'm not aware of any utility that correctly has sufficient staff on their employment that does not use contract consultant help. The utility I came from, every utility that I'm familiar with utilizes expertise in lieu of maintaining that constant overhead. And you learn from consultants what they've learned from other projects and other utilities and things they bring to you. You don't ignore what they provide, you learn from that, so it's not --

>> Council Member, every year we budget a significant amount of money in capital for capital projects for our system, whether it's the transmission, the distribution system. And what chuck is saying is that we don't staff up to do those peaks, what we do is use this kind of consultant services to help us do those designs, effect the project, get them constructed, things of that nature, and because those construction projects, once they are done, you move on. And if growth were to slow down, if we were not going to have that need because of the growth and number of customers then you obviously wouldn't need to contract as much services. You would use less, et cetera. What you do, right now we're in a tremendous growth mode, have been for a good while, and in effect this contract just helps us bridge those gaps.

>>Lewis: what is it that duke did for us before from '96 to '98?

>> we've been in a growth mode since '96. We haven't really stopped.

>>Lewis: that's what I'm saying. We didn't learn how to do this in three years?

>> you have to go hire the engineers, you would have to staff up to do those functions. It's not a matter of not learning. I think we could probably hire the expertise much it's a matter of finding live bodies to do the work for you.

>> As a matter of fact, Mr. City Manager, you bring up on good point. We have been recruiting for a year and have been unable -- one of the things -- our requirements for registered professional engineers are very strict, our competitors, Texas utilities, hl&p do not require licensed engineers. For us to do the work, we have to recruit licensed engineers. We have actively, we've had a person on staff actively recruiting engineering employees, and to hire this number of engineers would essentially be impossible to be -- have them on staff, available and get the work completed on time. So we have to have an additional resource.

>>Lewis: it just seems like to me that we're hiring people -- and I wouldn't go to work for a firm either if I could be hired on as a consultant. So, you know, but it seems to me that we are not learning from what we're paying for and we -- I don't know, maybe we need to just put them on staff if we're going to continually extend their contract. It's just -- you know, after four years surely, I mean we've been glowing for four years, surely we would learn how to do some of the things they've been doing. I don't know what they did last year. You said they are not going to do the same thing that they did last year and the year before, so, you know, what did we do last year and the year before for these items that they are doing now? the generation, transmission and distribution system, who did it last year when we was growing? that is my question.

>> I think what we're saying is it's a combined effort. That Austin energy is working long hours and doing things that are necessary, and with the help of this consultant. For example, the downtown network, all of the area that is underground downtown. Duke helped us identify where all of those facilities are. There was no record of those facilities. We will have very shortly a record of that that duke helped us do. That project will not be duplicated. We will have that record, we will know load flows, know where the voltage goes, know the critical points in the system and that service will be completed. We will not hire duke or anyone else back to do that service. That service will be completed. But we could not have done that without the consultant or some extra resource to help us do that.

>>Lewis: well, all right. I guess if we don't have a schematic of it we couldn't fix it if it broke. So, you know, all right, well, that's all the questions I have, Mayor Pro Tem.

>>Goodman: do you have a motion? Council Member Spelman, do you have a question.

>>Lewis: you have a question -- I hear you thinking. Yeah, okay.

>>Goodman: there's a motion to approve. Second. Further discussion? all those in favor please say aye. Which takes us to item no. 33. KMrb and Garcia pulled that.

>>Slusher: Mayor Pro Tem, could we go back to -- we might cut some staff members loose if we go back to no. 20.

>>Goodman: okay.

>>Slusher: I've got the answers to my questions. This tract is -- this development is under our ordinances, lake Austin ordinance, less than one unit per two acres, rural ranch zoning, under limited purpose annexation. So I would move approval.

>> Second.

>>Goodman: there is a motion and second. Questions or comment? all knows in favor please aaye okay. Back to item no. 33. 33.

>> Would you like a brief presentation on that, Mayor -- Mayor Pro Tem or Council Member? chuck.

>> That is item 33, correct?

>> yes, sir.

>> Austin energy undertook last year very, very detailed project study to develop a business plan for technology for our power delivery unit which basically is the unit that signals and operates our electrical system. Through that we interviewed numbers of employees, talked to them about the type of work they did, how they did their work, efficiencies they could gain, what type of technology would make a difference, can we be more competitive, less costly, more efficient, do things faster, respond to customers better inclusive of working in our call center, being able to call our call center, make one call, get a status on outage, report an out age, find status of a project, request a street light, any type services we did, how could we provide an integrated type of data system that would enable us to in effect meet Council resolution through lowering our construction and o and m cost in the future. This team worked diligently. It's unbelievable how many hours they put in. We involved the City iss staff we involved City iso, had a manager from the iso group working with this project team to make sure we didn't overlook City resources, existing data bases and to make sure that the data we created was ingrated and available to the balance of the City that would need those services. What was developed was the rfp. We selected three software firms and this item 33 represents one of those three that is an integrated suite of products that will help us achieve the cost reductions and improved customer service that we're targeting.

>>Garcia: Mayor Pro Tem, I have a quick question.

>>Goodman: oh, sorry. Go ahead.

>>Garcia: how many gis systems do we now have in the City, City Manager? I know we have one for the public safety.

>> I think public safety is in the planning department. Those are one mapping system. I don't have a specific answer.

>> Diane herman can tell us. She was in City iso and Diane?

>> Council Member Garcia, I don't have the exact number of gis systems in the City of Austin. The primary system is supported by iss and they are the folks who create the land base. I know the information system office has a gis system called apature, which that's how they track all of the gaat and network and things of that nature.

>>Garcia: didn't we have one that we were developing together with capco?

>> I think at some point capco expressed some interest and involvement with City iss. Is that true? betty?

>> I think through danny hobby and the big project that includes all the public safety there is a gis system component, electrical and the other departments are participating in that and I think we did a flyover year before last to get that system started. Capco did most of the original investment and I think we're planning to do another flyover this year so that is on the way. I'm not sure that it's complete at this time and I I'll have danny hobby get a memo off to you and let you know where we are in that process.

>>Garcia: how does that system interface with had?

>> is the information ha we get in that referable to this one?

>> I can answer that question. The intent of this project was never to duplicate data or resources already available in the City of Austin. The land base that is collected by iss will be used as part of this system. And the data will be transferred into the Austin energy gis.

>>Garcia: okay. And this one is gis plus facilities management, facilities management meaning what, Mr. Manning?

>> the facilities management, that's having a record of all our electrical plant, where it's at geographically, type of equipment, et cetera.

>>Garcia: don't we have that already?

>> we have a -- kind of a home-grown product that's not very effective. This will be replacing what we have. We will be converting the records that we have to this system. And it will be integrated into the other processes, items 34 and 5, I believe are the numbers.

>>Garcia: okay. As far as cost goes, there was about two or three vendors that were close when the matrix was done. Were the prices different from smallworld to ces and abb?

>> I'm sorry, I didn't catch that.

>>Garcia: price, because for instance in abb, price got 20 points. Small dollars word got 11. So -- smallworld got 11. Obviously price was much more competitive. I understand -- and they also got 41 points in functionality they really got whacked on existing integration, and I can understand you would be concerned about that. I was wondering what was the deficiency. Because they were so good in functionality and price, I was wondering what made them so deficient when it came to existing integration.

>> On abb and c, yes.

>> Let me ask, bryan davis is our process manager. Bryan, can you give that specific answer, please?

>> okay, if we're talking about the smallword outage management system or the gis.

>>Garcia: well, I don't know, I'm looking at a sheet of paper that is in the backup called oms vendors, and it's a matrix that has four criteria items and a total score.

>> Okay. That's the outage management system. And where it says smallword ces, abb?

>>Garcia: no, this -- this particular criteria item is called existing integration.

>> Oh, yes, sir. What we have --.

>>Garcia: the question is -- my question has to do with abb. They came in very high, higher than smallworld in functionality. They came in about the same on client satisfaction. They came in much better on price, but they really got clobbered, so to speak, in the existing integration. I don't know what -- they got five points and the other guys got 24.

>> That's a major component of this integrated suite of applications. That is our major concern right now. We have systems that don't talk real well with each other. And the main intent of this integrated suite of systems is you install data for onen it's utilized by others for any and all. And for the abb application, the integration aspect was much more complex, much more costly. So looking at the overall big picture, when you look at all the components, that's why the scoring turned out as it did.

>>Garcia: but the price was -- they had a better price than smallworld.

>> Yes, sir. But the integration aspect being 25% of our evaluation criteria, that was a major component. And integration is much more complex.

>>Garcia: was it the fact it was very complex or the fact it was very expensive?

>> not the expense. The complexity of doing the integration.

>>Garcia: when you talk about complexity, very difficult to --

>> yes, sir. Very hard to maintain and very challenge to go implement.

>>Garcia: okay. That's all the questions I had Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: any other questions? Council Member Lewis.

>>Lewis: go ahead. Yeah, I have one question. You said that this is a very complex process. Are we going to do -- do they understand what has to be done for the price that they are doing it or is it going to come back that they are going to have to have a group of change orders?

>> no, that's another advantage of this. In terms of it's off the shelf software that our data will be converted into and the integration between the outage management system and the gis system will be very smooth, very deliberate, and it will not be back for any change or overrun on project.

>>Lewis: this is an off the shelf software that they are doing?

>> yes, sir. We're converting our data into the smallworld system.

>>Lewis: and smallworld is the only one that has this off the shelf software?

>> no, all of these products are essentially off the shelf. That's how they were compared against each other. And as bryan said, one of the major differences is in the complexity of the integration. This project is in three phases. First was develop the business indication and plan, second is what we have before you today in terms of software, third phrase integration. Converting the data and doing the integrating is the most difficult and costly part. That's the reason that 25% of this evaluation, that's the reason it was so high in terms of integration feasibility because it reduces our cost as we bring all the products together and convert our existing data systems.

>>Lewis: that's the point I'm trying to get at, the integration part. Do they understand that this -- what they bid second degree what it's, you know, rather than bidding this now and then come back later saying, oh, well it's going to take more because your system is not what we thought it was?

>> no, that's taken care of and the next thing that will come before you is the integrator that takes these products and brings them together such that is all done but there will be no variance to what is quoted right here this. -- There will be no change in price. We've viewed the products, we know what they will do and the integrator will bring all three of these systems together. And displace the systems we currently have.

>>Lewis: I don't understand how these other companies can be so good at so many other things they are doing the same thing and be so lacking on integrating, because I'm sure we're not the only company that ever integrated.

>> We were very explicit in that we did not want both a provider and a integrator. The integration is a very, very specific business in itself, and that's the reason we sent out a separate rpf -- rfp so that it is done correctly with the quality controls, upstream validation and editing that we don't have a product that is not up and running when it's here.

>>Lewis: well, the -- that's what the other company was lower in, right? was the integration part.

>> No, that's what they got a lower score in.

>>Lewis: right.

>> Yes. That's not lower cost, that means it has less value.

>>Lewis: I'm saying, but their score was lower in.

>> The score, yes, for the abb was lower in integration, if I'm looking here --.

>>Lewis: but you said the software is going to come off the shelf and that's the same software that that small town the going to use, same one that anybody --

>> that's a good point. Each one of these is software products. Smallworld is a software product, abb, they are all individual software products. They are uniquely different to themselves.

>>Lewis: all right. That's all I have.

>>Spelman: Mayor?

>>Mayor Watson: Council Member Spelman.

>>Spelman: I mate to beat a dead horse, but I want to be sure I understand what this existing integration stuff is all about. Are we integrating all these products with one another and that's what these scores are based on or our current system?

>> both.

>>Spelman: okay. The reason I ask is I can imagine if we got two smallworld products, the existing integration of the two pieces would be really high, and they both scored pretty high on integration, but if we got for example to esi products those numbers might go up, might be different if we had two esri and one smallworld. Was there some flux in those numbers or how did we do that?

>> as far as numbers and you hit the nail on the head there is when you look at this vendor providing two different products, you expect them essentially to be able to shake hands pretty well. There really aren't any major integration issues and that ultimately affects the overall cost down the line when we look at integrating, where if you had two vond ores who don't normally talk to one another so they have to develop that new interface between these systems so you would expect to have elevated expenditures for that.

>>Spelman: so it makes sense in all these cases we find one vendor because they are going to -- at least a lot of the integration for us.

>> Yes, and of course we did let our business drivers make sure that we were meeting our business requirements, but certainly they hired -- they scored very highly on the integration issue because it was such a natural fit.

>>Spelman: okay. I notice that some of of these products have very on -- as we've been saying, some have very low integration numbers. Is that because we picked one of these products first because we liked it and compared the rests to that one or is it because esri really won't talk to the other esri product?

>> well, when we went through the evaluation phase we found out that there really was a natural fallout of products and vendors, but esri already had developed partnerships with certain vendors so there were interfaces already available in the same for smallworld so there was some natural delineation that started occurring because of that.

>>Spelman: okay. And that is taking into account these numbers?

>> yes, and you would expect to impact the integration cost.

>>Spelman: so by picking -- the reason that's 25% is in large part because it's going to save us cost downstream.

>> Yes, which is the really expensive part.

>>Spelman: how much can we expect the integration to cost us, roughly? the nearest million or so.

>> Eight to ten.

>>Spelman: that is a substantial amount of money. Okay. How often do upgrades become available? historically.

>> Yearly.

>>Spelman: yearly.

>> And a maintenance contract exists for the software.

>>Spelman: which means we get the upgrades as they become available. Given a price tag like this I can imagine a little more personalized service. Should it become necessary we need some change in the software is that the sort of thing covered by this maintenance contract?

>> that's for routine maintenance and one of the evaluation criteria we looked at was how do these vendors determine the types of changes that they make, how do we provide input into changes, so there's a couple different ways. Through user groups and the other is to actually do a change request to the vendor, which of course you would price out that change.

>>Spelman: okay. Are we buying the source code also?

>> don't normally buy source code but you want to hold that in escrow.

>>Spelman: so that could be made available to us if we needed it?

>> I think you would want to do that if the viability of the firm became an issue.

>>Spelman: got you. Thank. Much.

>>Mayor Watson: I'll entertain a motion -- Council Member Slusher.

>>Slusher: would you get this back for me, if I may, just a customer of the utility, how is this going to help me in my relations to the utility.

>> That's an excellent question. If you called in -- and again, looking at the suite of products, if you had an out age and you called in, if it's been a few minutes, you should be able to call in and get a response we are aware of your outage, it's in this area, we would anticipate this outage lasting x amount of time or this is the problem. You want a street light or you want to call in and want to inquire -- you want new service, build a project, you would -- any type of service, you should make one call. That call is ought matly created in a pro -- automatically created to a process to an area that can provide that service. Many of the services can be answered on the phone for you. If you have work to be scheduled, currently we design projects. It's a very manual system. We input data multiple times now to get into these various systems that were developed in-house and not on the same platform, so we are constantly inputting the same type of data. We will not be manually scheduling work. We will be able to look at the work flow. We will not buy all the same type trucks. Right now if you look at our trucks, they all look just alike. If we look at the type of work and can schedule that work and plan that work and know the type work, we can use smaller vehicles on a significant portion of our jobs. So we can take advantage of scheduling resources, we can have the right type resource, we can tell you when you call in the length of time when you should anticipate service from us. We should be able to make service commitments to you when you make that call.

>>Slusher: when will -- how long will it take us to get to that point?

>> this will take 18 to 24 months to have these services integrated and up and running.

>>Slusher: okay. Thank you. I move approval.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made by Council Member Slusher to approve. Second? seconded by Council Member Spelman. Councilmember Lewis.

>>Lewis: you said that a customer will be able to get this information. Is that from a person or from the computer?

>> both. Depends on what the request is. If you are calling in relative to a specific service, you will talk to a live person. If you call in relative to an out age, you are going to want to know if your phone could be intercepted and you will immediately know -- that we know your lights are off, they are going to be off 45 minutes then you don't want on person. You are satisfied you know we're aware of it, we're responding to it. But typically -- or you could call in and inquire through cis on what's the status of your Bill and other things and all of these will be integrated together with our customer information system.

>>Lewis: the reason I was asking that question is some of us old people still have dial phones and it just bugs me to no end to call in and it says punch one or two or three and if you don't punch that, then it hangs up on you. A lot of people that happen to.

>> We'll look at that because if you hang on it should go immediately to --.

>>Lewis: a lot of them don't and if you want english punch one, if you want spanish punch two. And if you don't punch anything, it just hangs up. You know, that's it.

>> Most of those systems the way to beat them is to do nothing and it will take you -- I don't want to say that about ours, but in many places that you dial in, if you just do nothing, you will go to a live person.

>>Lewis: all right. Well we'll find out.

>> Just a very briefly I wanted to point out in the report provided to you it does talk about three distinct faces. The third phase is the integration phase and I want the Council to let them now there's a third piece coming. Chuck mentioned it in his presentation and I wanted to make sure everybody understood that.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made and seconded. Discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed motion carries.

>>Garcia: Mayor, this was an ordinance? I like this new format that they are using, but that one said ordinance and it was a resolution.

>>Mayor Watson: right. Item no. 52. I'll entertain a motion to postpone item 52 indefinitely.

>>Goodman: Mayor, before we get there.

>>Mayor Watson: I'm sorry?

>>Goodman: just as an addendum to the discussion on the electric energy items, we did all see I think a copy of a customer's complaint, lengthy complaint about several different things. There was one question that wasn't respond to do by staff so in the future we can find out about the prevarication by the three folks who went to the residence and said they were not there to disconnect, they were there for a meeting and were in fact there to disconnect.

>> That's being investigated and I think the response was we don't know but we'll get back to you. We wrote that response this morning after receiving that memo last night and we will get back to Council on the -- I think the statement was we typically send one person, two max, and we will investigate this specific incident that supposedly had three people and we will specifically respond on that item.

>>Goodman: great. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: item 52 I'll entertain a motion to postpone indefinitely. Motion made by Council Member Garcia. Is there a second? seconded by Council Member Lewis. Any discussion?

>>Spelman: Mayor -- why.

>>Mayor Watson: it's my understanding somebody toptd make a motion to postpone it.

>>Garcia: my understanding is that there is a Bill in the letting that you remember deals with issues that may have an effect on what we're considering today, and that particular Bill was distributed to us and I would like to see what -- what the legislature does with this before we do anything because some of the things that we may be doing may be mute -- moot should this Bill pass.

>>Spelman: although that is true if the Bill doesn't pass, we could -- clearly we're just talking about time here. If the Bill does pass, there's no point. If it doesn't pass, we can take it up again later. But seems to me irregular for us to postpone action on an item we've been discussing just because our concern is to how the legislature may or may not respond.

>>Garcia: well, yeah, I agree that it is irregular. I just thought that it was better for us to wait. I did not see the -- well, and maybe you can explain. You pulled the particular item.

>>Spelman: because I presumed there was going -- it would be helpful for us to have a discussion on it. On the merits of the item.

>>Garcia: all right.

>>Spelman: and because I presumed there would be some people want to go talk about it. I just wanted to flag it for that reason.

>>Garcia: okay.

>>Mayor Watson: we can always discuss it. My understanding is that --.

>>Garcia: is there anybody signed up to speak on it.

>>Mayor Watson: Mr. Kinney signed up to speak.

>>Slusher: I have a question on the post ponment. So where would that leave us in the meantime? because my second question would be will we be getting lobbied anymore during that time?

>>Mayor Watson: what we can do what I was just -- I'm just trying on an item I thought we weren't going to be discussing and taking up a bunch of time, why don't we withdraw the motion and that way we can just call it up and at that time we can have a full discussion on the item.

>>Garcia: I'll withdraw the motion.

>>Goodman: Mayor, can I say something before we want to do that. Knowing some people would like to talk about it, that's fine, but I also would like to touch base with a particular legislator before taking final action. I didn't know that indefinitely.

>>Spelman: I'll withdraw my objection. If you would like to postpone it so you can have a chance to do that Mayor Pro Tem, I'm for it.

>>Slusher: so moved.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made by Council Member Slusher and seconded by the Mayor Pro Tem to postpone indefinitely item no. 52. Is there any discussion? Mr. Kinney, do you feel the need to talk if we're going to postpone this indefinitely? oh, come on!

>> I'm sorry. I want to make a brief point, Mayor. The Bill before the legislature, as you know if you have all read that bill, does in fact affect both the ordinance you've already passed and the one that you are going to be looking at today. And so indeed if they passed, you would have to do something else, there is no question. I want to point out to you that the -- I want to do two things. One, I didn't get a chance to this last time, I want to thank you sincerely from scenic Austin and scenic Texas for the leadership this Council has shown in trying to get rid of billboards. We appreciate it very much. I also want to point out, however, that of the five recommendations we made to you last time, you actually acted on two of our recommendations, and those -- those two recommendations will hold even with this bill. There are two recommendations we made to you that you have not moved forward on. One having to do with making billboard removal a condition of zoning, and the other having to do with not letting billboards that get taken down on I-35 be put back up. You have the power to do these things. It's going to take political will. You are going to -- you are going to be in court if you do it, there's no question. But it would not be affected by the Bill that's in the legislature right now. And I would urge you to reconsider these two much more powerful instruments that are available to you. Thank you, sir.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, Mr. Kinney. Billy reagan -- [inaudible] thank you very much. Motion has been made and seconded on item 52 to postpone indefinitely. Discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries: Council, I would entertain a motion to recess into executive session pursuant to 551.071 of the Texas government code for private consultation with our attorney to discuss sean mannix versus eco resources in the 26th judicial district court of Williamson county and related litigation. These lawsuits and claims arise out of last summer's incident involving City of Austin waste lifting station near brush and to discuss the barton springs edwards aquifer conservation district versus City of Austin in the 98th judicial district, travis county, Texas. To discuss real property pursuant to 551.072, the proposed lease of palmer auditorium to arts center stage for renovation and use as a performing arts center. And to discuss acquisition of real property located at 47 is is 12 boehm road for solid waste services administrative offices.

>>Slusher: Mayor? we have one more Austin energy item we might want to take up --.

>>Mayor Watson: I was trying to correspond with our informal policy we don't go into executive session after 5:00 p.m..

>>Slusher: I'll yield.

>>Mayor Watson: is there something that will move to recess? motion made by Council Member Garcia. Seconded by Council Member Spelman. Any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed motion carries. We'll recess into executive session.

>>Mayor Watson: we discuss fm companies operating companies cause no. T 8065 in the supreme court of Texas. This litigation concerns development applications applicable in the barton springs zone. We will be doing that pursuant to the Texas government code. There is a motion? motion made by Council Member Spelman and seconded. Any discussion in hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed months carries. We're recessed into executive session.

>>.

>>.

>> Intim. Intrim.

>>Mayor Watson: I'll call to order the Austin City Council. We'll go to item 84. Item 84 is an item that was discussed in executive session. So I would like for there to be a presentation and I'll recognize Mr. Goss.

>> Mayor and Council Members. This settlement is a settlement related to a dispute with the barton springs edwards aquifer undergroundwater district. This dispute goes back eferl years. The primary aspect of it is that the City did not pay approximately $45,000 related to the -- some conservation credits that we felt like we were owed from the district. We were sued by the district. In addition to that, the City did not pay some back billings related to some -- our share of previous years' pump acknowledges from some of their customers. With this lawsuit, we have come to an agreement that would give us a budgeting so that there would not be back billings that would interfere with our budget and we would also receive future conservation credits that could account for up to $20,000 a year, depending on the use acknowledge in that year. The settlement would be for $45,000 -- 45,311 dollars we would pay to the district immediately. And some additional that we would pay out over two years. Actually pay out in response to a dye testing study that would help us in terms of the results of how the aquifer operates and how it works underground. So that would be the recommended settlement is that the 45,000,311 and four cents immediately and over two years the 93,382 and 15 cents and we would receive the certainty and the conservation credit aspect of that. We would only receive those conservation credits if we're in compliance with the rules of the undergroundwater district. So we would have to make sure all our reportings and permits are proper.

>>Mayor Watson: I'll recognize Council Member Griffith.

>>Griffith: Mayor, I'll recommend and move approval.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made and seconded by grf, seconded by Council Member Slusher to approve the settlement agreement as outlined by Mr. Gosss. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries with the Mayor Pro Tem being shown as abstaining from the vote. Item number 85. Mr. Smith?

>> Mayor and Council, 85 is a lease agreement between the city and arts center stage. In a previous action the Council authorized the negotiation and we're bringing forward the completed lease document. This document calls for the city to lease up to nine and a half acres of land over on auditorium shores to arts center stage for the renovation of palmer auditorium into a new performing arts facility. The configuration of that land would be determined by a master plan which is currently underway. We would share parking of the facility. It would be on a 50 year lease, the target occupancy date for it would be july of 2001 to have the hall ready in 2003 for the performing arts. The facility would be managed by a board of trustees with the City appointing no less than eight, no more than 25% of the total voting board. The plan calls for a main hall of no less than 2200 seats, a mid size hall of no less than 500 seats, one black box theater finished and another black box that may be finished dmend depending on how the financing goes. And the lease also calls for the arts center stage to issue all contracts for construction and design in conformance with the City's m.b.e., w.b.e. Policy. In addition, there's provisions in there for arts center stage to make the facilities available at a minimum goal of 50% of the black box and intermediate theaters to small and minority arts groups. It also calls for an endowment of 10 million dollars to be raised in order to cover any gap between the operating revenue that they bring in on an annual basis and what is necessary to run the facility. In addition, they will have to submit to the City on an annual basis a capital improvement plan and fund in the capital reserves enough money to take care of that plan to ensure that the facility is well maintained since the City will continue to own it. That is a very brief overview of the outline of the lease. I'll be happy to answer any questions.

>>Mayor Watson: Council, do you have any questions? I'll entertain a motion on item no. 85.

>>Garcia: so move.

>>Mayor Watson: motion is made to approve by Council Member Garcia. Seconded by the Mayor Pro Tem. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. -- Hang on, hang on. I know we had some people signed up to speak, but I think y'all are in favor. Do I need to call for a reconsideration? motion carries on a vote of seven to zero. Congratulations, thank you very much for all the hard work.

>> Mayor, may I have a chance to speak?

>>Mayor Watson: he's not one of the people that signed up. Let me for the record say tomas solis signed up in favor. Christina Reed signed up in favor.

>> Mayor, could I say a few words?

>> certainly. You don't want to talk us out of it?

>> no. Mayor Watson, Council Members and City staff, thank you for this opportunity to speak on the City lease. As an Austin resident a support the palmer auditorium into a performing arts center. It makes me happy to have more spaces to do my work in, especially if those spaces will be letter and more affordable than what is currently available to us. Upon reading the lease I did have some concerns regarding access to the theater spaces by small minority arts groups, but after meeting with Mayor Bruce todd, Christina reed, I'm glad to report that they were very willing to address and work toward alleviating those concerns. I would like to thank them as representatives of arts center stage as well as Council Member Garcia, his assistant, jim smith and gentleman niece shaney for being so responsive on short notice. It is important that we all continue to work together in achieving equity in the use of city resource sos that no one is left out intentionally. I would encourage the City Council and City staff to work as diligently and quickly on moving the mac forward. We need your help in moving the street and bridge maintenance department out of that site and also in negotiating our lease agreement. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. We appreciate you being here. The items have been voted on and it passed. Item number 86 was to adopt a performance evaluation plan for the municipal court clerk. The let me state that we announced at approximately 12:40 that we were going to go into executive session to discuss personnel matters pursuant to 551.074. We did not cuss is those matters because of time. Those matters will not be discussed in executive session today and we will not be taking up item 86. Let's go to items 60 through 66. I'll recognize ms. Glasco.

>> Good afternoon Mayor and Council Members, Alice glasco, city staff to present zoning cases. We'll start off with item no. 60, Case no. C-14-158, located at 71 hundred through 7104 mcneil drive. The property is zoned interim rural residence. There's a request initially to limited industrial services. The applicant has since amended that application to mh, which stands for mobile homes. The applicant has hired a new agent who has requested that this case be referred back to the Planning Commission because the planning commission did not have an opportunity to consider the amended request to mobile homes. I would also like to inform you that the neighborhood association is here and they would prefer to have the plik hearing conducted tonight. Just for your information, you are not prohibited from hearing this case tonight with the amendment to mobile home zoning. You're within your legal limits to consider anything that is lower in classification than the original requested designation. The only difference is that the Planning Commission did not have the ability to assess that request and give you the ability of their input and their expertise regarding the appropriate zoning, vis-a-vis the mobile home zoning. So the request from the applicant is to refer this back to the planning commission and not hold a public hearing tonight. However, you may choose to hear is because the neighborhood association would like it heard. Item number 61, case number -- is a case number c-14-269. The applicant sent a letter on the 23rd asking for postponement to april the eighth because he could not be here due to a prior commitment. However, we have several speakers, the superintendent from the round rock school district, the principal of an adjoining school and several neighborhood representatives who had difficulty get together and they are here tonight and would like to be heard, but not close the public hearing, just give them the opportunity to express their concerns or give you their comments, but then go ahead and postpone or continue the hearing to april the eighth just so that they can have that opportunity to be heard. They will not be able to be here on april 8th as requested by the applicant. Item number 62 is a consent item, case c-14-271 located at 13,000 729 north u.s. Highway 183. The request is to change from interim rural residence to gr, community commercial. The Planning Commission recommends that request and the case is ready for all three readings. Item number 63, case number c-14-273, located at 13300 pond springs road. The request is from interim rural residence which stands for rural residence to lr, the Planning Commission recommends that request. This case is ready for first reading. Item number 64, case c-14-5, also located on pond springs road and san fe leap boulevard. The request is from interim rural residence so multi-family three. The Planning Commission recommends that request a a conditional overlay. Can this case is one where the applicant is requesting an indefinite postponement. I would like to remind you that your policy in the ordinance limits a postponement to either side for two months maximum; however, you may wish to modify that accordingly. The initial intent was to obviously not keep cases in the system for a lengthy period of time, that's why you capped it out at two months, but applicant would like obviously an indefinite time frame. Whenever they're ready we'll have to notify adjoining property owners, but the intent of the postponement was not to keep cases in the system indefinitely so we would bring close you are a lot sooner. Item number, case c-14-9. This is going to be a discussion item where there is one citizen opposed to it. Item 66 is another request for an indefinite postponement and again your same policy would apply and you can modify the two months limit on that item too. That concludes the consent on postponement items on zoning.

>>Mayor Watson: item number 60 will be a discussion item. 61 Will be -- we'll go ahead and open the public hearing and allow those people that are here to talk. Item 62 consent on all three readings. Let me call for the consent agenda. Item 62 consent on all three. Item 3 consent on first reading only. On item 64, the motion would be to postpone item number 64 and my recommendation would be that we bring -- although we stick with our policy and so we would bring it back by may 6th for another look at it. And on item number 66, ms. Glasco, help me. I didn't --.

>> There's a request to also postpone indefinitely. It's the same agent.

>>Mayor Watson: that would be to may 6. I would recognize that motion. Is there a motion on the consent agenda? motion has been made by Council Member Garcia. Seconded by Council Member Spelman. Consent agenda is item 62 on all three read,, 63 first reading. 64 And 66 to postpone until may 6th. Is there any discussion? is there anyone that wishes to be heard on those items?

>> item 60, sir?

>>Mayor Watson: item 60 hasn't been called yet. Anybody wishes to be heard on those items. There being no discussion, everybody say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries on the consent agenda. That will take us to item number 60. Ms. Glasco.

>> Mayor and Council Members, on item 60, case c-14-158, this is an area that we annexed in 19 -- december of 1997, not 1970. The applicant obviously has benefitted from our fee waiver which allowed property owners to come in and file a case fees waived for that first year. The property had received approvals to construct mobile homes while they were outside the City limits because we do not have land use control in the etj, however, the construction did not -- has not taken place at all and now that the property is in the city limits, the appropriate zoning is required in order to proceed. The request that was filed initially was for limited industrial. That has been now amended back to mobile homes and the applicant is seeking to be sent back to the planning commission for a rehearing of that request. I will pause there and let you hear from the neighborhood and maybe that will help you make a decision.

>> Do I need to first oppose the delay or can I go ahead and give my presentation?

>>Goodman: wait just a second. So we don't have an applicant presentation?

>> ms. Sara crocker is here as the agent. I guess she goes first.

>> Good evening members of the Council.

>>Goodman: it will be just a minute, sara goes first and then I'll call names.

>> Can I ask a procedure question, Mayor Pro Tem? if we were to decide to delay it or send it back to the Planning Commission, would then ms. Crocker's -- would this count as a presentation here or would she be able to present it anew when it comes back?

>>Goodman: yeah. After the Planning Commission recommendation it would be a whole new thing.

>> It's not my intent to take a presentation. I just got hired on this case several weeks ago. And I filed a letter with Mr. Walker in requesting that the case be sent back to Planning Commission for mobile home zoning. I've spoken to the neighbors that are here this evening. They've been involved in this case now for approximately five months and they feel pretty strongly about it not going back to planning commission. I told them I was not prepared to make a presentation this evening. However, I understand how they feel about being delayed again and I told them that I would also offer up to the Council if we didn't get sent back -- I will serchl attempt to make a presentation if you decide not to send it back or not to postpone it; however, I'm willing to agree that -- to a 60 day postponement or request a 60 day postponement in order to work with them and try to get some site plan layouts worked out and try to find a middle ground. I've told them that if we can work that out that I won't postpone it again, that we'll come in and hear it one way or the other, whatever the counsel's wish is.

>>Goodman: okay. Let me ask for then the neighborhood response to that proposal.

>> My response is that quite frankly we've been through -- this is my fifth time here and we've been delayed three -- two times in the planning commission, one time here and then the actual hearing at the Planning Commission. We've been through a lot. I've got 144 signatures from people in the neighborhood saying they oppose the li zoning. Many of them would have fought it even more strongly if they had -- if they had heard the proposal was mobile home. So they're not interested in mobile home or li. Okay? what they are ready to endorse is the City plan, which was proposed by the planning board, okay? every -- I would say a good 90% of the citizens that I talked to, okay, of the 144, all endorsed the City plan and thought it was an appropriate plan for the land use.

>>Goodman: and the City pln being?

>> I believe the --.

>> Well, I guess we need to clarify. There's a recommendation from staff and a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Which one are you referring to?

>> again, I was more partial towards the original City plan than the planning board's plan, but either one of them I would prefer above and beyond li or mobile home. And I do speak for the majority of the neighborhood.

>>Goodman: okay. Let me just jump in here, okay? recommendation instead of plan so that we can follow staff recommendation was different from the Planning Commission recommendation. And you all prefer the staff recommendation, which was sf-4.

>> The staff recommendation --.

>> Staff recommendation had lo in the middle, whereas the planning board's recommendation had sf-4 in the middle.

>>Goodman: okay. Thanks. Well, let me just ask then Council, what do you want to do?

>>Griffith: well, Mayor pro tem, to get the discussion started, I would move staff recommendation.

>>Goodman: okay. There's a motion on the floor. Do you want to hear -- do you want to hear the presentation from the applicant then and -- we only have three folks from the neighborhood signed up.

>> It won't take long.

>>Goodman: so if you want to -- so if your wishes are that we take some action tonight, then I think we should go ahead and hear everybody.

>>Spelman: I have a question of the neighborhood first if I could. At the time you circulated the petition and the time you were marshaling your forces to go before the Planning Commission, you were -- well, the plan was to go with an li zone. That's what the applicant was asking for. Do you have any more information from the applicant in what the applicant was proposing to do in the li zone?

>> absolutely. He originally proposed for the li zoning. He presented that at a barbecue, rudy's barbecue presentation to the community which originally had eight buildings with six loading zones for semies right in the middle of this residential neighborhood, which I thought was absolutely inappropriate. And I --.

>>Spelman: this was originally an industrial plan at least as presented to you.

>> Exactly and that's what I presented to every single person who signed one of these letters or statements saying that they oppose it, every single one. And I also defined for the citizens by the definition of the City what is li zoning and what does that entail. So I not only told them what the definition is, but also showed them the plan that the developer was proposing to the neighborhood.

>>Spelman: and when the developer -- the previous agent, not ms. Crocker, but the previous agent, made a presentation to the planning commission, was it that plan that you heard at rudy's barbecue?

>> yes, I believe so.

>>Spelman: so it was for an sfril plan?

>> li. The change to the mobile home was only in the last week.

>>Spelman: okay. Thanks.

>>Goodman: let me ask one more question, Alice. We've been hearing about petitions. Do we have a valid petition?

>> I'm not aware if one has been filed. If it has. It has not been validated. I think the petition he's talking about is soliciting input from his neighbors, but none has been filed. We can have visit with them to let them know how it could be validated. They're probably not aware of it.

>>Goodman: okay. Let me pass it on to debra, but -- I think that the language on the -- well, I don't know.

>>Spelman: ms. Glasco, while they're negotiating, if I could is ask you a question. Do we have a procedure if an applicant changes his or her mind with respect to what it is that they're looking for midway through a process, do with ask them to go back and start over again, do we ask them to -- can they change their request in the middle or how does that usually work?

>> the only thing that the ordinance speaks to in the -- in the ordinance, there's a penalty in the ordinance when you act. If an applicant changes or amends the application before Council action, then they cannot file a similar request for either 12 months or 18 months. But in this case it's really up to Council. -- To decide whether you're ready to hear the amended request. There is no prohibition in considering an amendment. There isn't a policy regarding that. The issue at hand is whether you feel like you have enough information to assess the new amendment that has not been heard by the planning commission or if you feel more comfortable just forwarding it back. And in the past, the Council have sent cases back to the commission if they felt like they did not have enough input.

>>Spelman: okay. My concern in this case is I'm not sure, -- although it's clear that people representing the neighborhood feel comfortable opposing a mobile home zoning, it's not as clear to me that the rest of the neighborhood would feel as comfortable. I was just wondering if we had a procedure for this. It's clear we don't have a procedure, so it's kind of a wide open game as to what we're going do here.

>> That's correct.

>>Goodman: Council Member Garcia?

>>.

>>Garcia: ms. Glasco? is this particular property subject to a valid petition since it has interim zoning?

>> that's a good question you asked. No, it is not because the property has the interim designation and so a valid petition would not have an affect on your vote.

>>Garcia: okay. And they requested li and they plan to put mobile homes there, is that not mh?

>> yes. The -- let me explain what occurred and maybe I think ms. Crocker wants to add to it. The applicant had filed a letter with me asking to be vested without a zoning change, which basically meant that when -- the request before me was to consider the fact that they had filed and received a development permit to construct mobile homes outside the City limits, which was definitely okay and appropriate. They satisfied the requirements then. Construction did not take place at all, has not taken place of the mobile home development, so I did not see that there was a justifiable reason to vest them and hence waive zoning and other land use requirements, hence the amendment here which reconciled the approved plan before annexation to mobile homes. The industrial zoning would not have allowed mobile homes, but would have allowed for a potential future industrial use should I have granted the investing for mobile homes as approved before annexation.

>>Goodman: should we just go ahead and progress in the normal manner and let ms. Crocker do her presentation and then hear the neighborhood speakers? or do we have more questions for staff or anybody?

>>Garcia: I think it would probably be appropriate to let the presentation go through and the speakers and then we'll ask our questions.

>>Goodman: okay. The way this works is that we all the applicant first and she'll make her presentation and then I have you all. I have joel tall torn, gerald tallton and ruth Christianson, so when she's finished and after any questions, we of of her, we'll call those names and you get your flee minutes as with well and we can ask you questions as well.

>> I'm the leader of the group, can I have five minutes?

>>Griffith: Mayor Pro Tem, in request for the process, I would withdraw my motion until we do our regular process.

>>Goodman: okay. Thank you.

>>Goodman: okay. It would be just awhile and I'll call you. That's the order you want to be called in or a different order.

>> Yes. As a leader will I be allowed at least five minutes.

>>Goodman: you can each get five minutes and you can trade that around if you would like.

>> Okay.

>>Slusher: I'm going to be off the dias, but I'll be watching dtv. [Laughter].

>>Goodman: okay. Ms. Crocker, thank you.

>> Okay. I'm going to sort of make this up as I go along. I hope you all understand. My name is ara crocker and I've been hired to -- by Mr. Greenburg to represent him on this particular case. As I told you, I was just hired a couple of weeks ago. To sort of give you some background on this, this property is located -- it's approximately 19 some acres on mcneil road just down from 183. In october of 1997, my client received approval of a site development permit and that was a d site plan. It was approved by the county and the City. This property was in the county at the time for approximately 129 mobile home units. The property was annexed in december, about 60 days after that. Shortly thereafter, my client had a contract on the property and there was a backup contract on the property and the original landowner who sold him the property was sued. That case went to district court and the litigation sort of proceeded forward. Due to that litigation, it was impossible to close the bank loan, get clear title or initiate construction on the land. So the property sort of sat there while the litigation was going through for several months. At the suggestion of my client's engineer at the time, because the property had come into the City, it was recommended that he zone the property, that he would have to obtain a zoning classification in order to develop it. There was some market studies done on the property at that time and one of the gentlemen who made the market studies came back and recommended to him that he thought this would be a good place to put a light industrial use. So there was a zoning case filed. My -- you know, I had asked him why they filed for li when you couldn't even do mobile homes in that. He basically took the advice of his agent, there was an li case filed, the ensuing material that I'm sure you have in your backup result frd that. Staff recommended lr-lo and I believe sf-1 in the rear of the tract. Planning commission recommended lr in the front and sf-4 foe the balance of the tract. So it's sort of gone all over the charts. I'm not real sure which zoning classification is the best, one of the things I offered to the neighborhood today was to be able to do some site plans on it to look at the development regulations to see exactly what we could end up with. From a land planning standpoint on looking at all three of those zoning classifications, what would be the best thing to have on that property. I can't really say that to you, you know, standing here in front of you right now. Because we haven't had the opportunity to do that and that's one of the things that that we wanted to do in this interim time period. I guess my request to you today would be that there be no action taken. That we be given at least a couple of weeks to be able to come back to Council with the correct number of exhibits to show you exactly how the property lays out from a compatibility standpoint, from a accept back standpoint, be able to show that to the neighborhood as well. And that's pretty much it. Thank you.

>>Goodman: thank you. Are there any questions?

>>Griffith: can we get agreement about the delay? would all parties be agreeable to that?

>>Goodman: well, I think that --.

>> I would like to have the decision tonight if I could. You know, again, at the planning board there were 10 people here. Today I've gotten three people. Many of the people that were saying they were going to come could not get off work. Again, many of the people that I've been talking to would like a decision.

>>Goodman: well, let's at least go ahead and hear the speakers. It's possible that we don't take a decision because it's obviously a new presentation, but let us at least hear you all on so that you don't have to go home without having spoken again.

>> Thank you.

>>Goodman: so let me call gerald tallton, first, followed by gerald tallton and then ruth Christian son.

>> Council --.

>>Goodman: okay. Is joel gefg you her time or are you trading.

>> Is it okay if I go first? thanks. Frank greenburg began his dialogue with the community, november 14th, 1998 at a lunch at rudy's barbecue on research boulevard. There he explained to the community that if we objected to the li zoning then he would sue the City for vested rights so he could put in a mobile home park that he had already gotten approval from the City for. Mr. Greenburg also stated that he was concerned about the people of the neighborhood and would request a postponement to the zoning board. After leaving the meeting, many of the people at the neighborhood felt they were being intim date and threatened by Mr. Greenburg and the possibility of a mobile home park, including myself. I realize that the planning board wasn't asking what could have ted overlays won't be asked what was on his owning but should it be granted at all and I will register a resounding no. The day after the first postponement, frank greenburg began initial clearing of the land with a light buzz doler which he proceeded to do without appropriate paperwork. On the december eighth meeting, there was a clerical error that caused the delay of the hearing of this case. This is what I would have presented then. I've supplied the board with copies of all the signatures of all the residents that oppose the li zoning. In the proposed piece of land. If you would examine my map of the surrounding piece of land, I have color coded. Blue represents houses that I have signed letters from opposing the li zoning and from -- and li zoning from and green represents empty lots. After looking at the map, it is obvious that this is an inappropriate zoning request. If one were to look at the surrounding neighbors of this plot of land, we see an apartment complex, duplexes, condos, single family homes and a retirement community which is the single largest piece of land with a border there. This is a residential area and I don't feel that this is an appropriate zoning request after considering the surrounding community and the abundance of li zoning south of mcneil road in the area. I count about seven, okay? also, many of the people signing indicated that they would like to see the City plan adopted. On the night of december eighth, I received a call from frank greenburg where I was again threatened by him with going ahead and putting a mobile home park on the site. In fact, he said he would name it the gerald and jill mobile home park after my wife and I, so they would know it was caused by my wife and I. After the poe of poef poniment, the clearing of the land began in full scaled. I would say that 25 percent of the ache easy is des nated. I have photographs to prove this. When zoning enforcement was called, he said he was executing on his mobile home site plan. What he didn't tell them is he didn't have the necessary land use site plan or appropriate zoning to execute on that site plan. On december 16th, the zoning enforcement gave the order to red tag the site for insufficient paperwork and over the holidays dii filed for special exemption to allow for the resumption of excavation of the land. [Buzzer]. Can I close?

>>Goodman: if it's like a sentence or two or someone can give you their time.

>> One minute, thank you. In closing I would like to state that the people living in the residential community when asked if they object to the granting of the li zoning, 144 of them have indicated that they do object and many agree with the City's plan. In my opinion, frank greenburg has demonstrated that he has no qualms about intimidating the citizens or misrepresenting himself to zoning firms. Therefore I hum bli request that the Council do the will of the people and deny the request for li zoninging and adopt the City plan. Thank you.

>>Goodman: thank you.

>> Hi, I'm his wife. We share a border with the piece of land. Like he said, we've been fighting this since we got the notice in october and from day one he has been threatening us and everybody has been very scared and a lot of the residents have been more afraid of mobile home park than limited industrial, which I don't understand, but I don't want either one. And what the planning board decided on was not sf four for the entire two-thirds. That was wrong. The back third was sf-2 and they would have continued the street and built a cul-de-sac, which would have been nice. It would have been very pretty. The middle, they decided on sf-4, they didn't let us speak on that. We would rather have the lo, which was suggested. And then lr in the front, which we think is fine. Like we said, there's a retirement home there and I think that if we had lo in the center and limited retail in the front, it would be very accessible to the retire rees, we would have a sidewalk, they could walk over to the doctors, dentist, insurance, whatever. I think it certainly would be better than a mobile home park. The traffic on mac theel nooel is really bad. If you try to drive down at eight a.m. On a weekday, it's bumper to bumper traffic. And frank greenburg did show us a site plan for his mobile home park. It showed 120 mobile homes. So if you guesstimate that there's a husband and a wife, both have a car, that's 240 cars going out on mcneil. We can't take any more than we have now. It's just totally congested. Also, they wouldn't be wouldn't be paying property taxes. They'd be leases their little lot of land, so they would be using our schools, which are already filled up and not paying taxes towards it. That's been a concern. And this issue with mobile home park has been up as long as the limited industrial has too and people are very, very against it. [Buzzer]. But like we said, they can't get off of work. So if you could please decide. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Do I understand that somebody has an extra minute? [inaudible]. Ms. Christian son, you will have two minutes?

>> okay. Thank you for listening to us tonight. We appreciate that. I'm against the li zoning. I don't think that was appropriate for the neighborhood being mainly residential in nature and mostly single family housing standard lots with some, you know, apartments and some -- oh, duplexes in the area, but immediately around this property. And so this property I feel needs to be developed very sensitively and I think the city staff and the planning commission have the right idea with their idea of the triple zoning of this sensitive to what fronts out on mcneil would be -- could be more commercial oriented. What's in the middle could either be that small lot, sf-4 a. I'm not against that. Or the lo, co. And the sf-2, the furthest back, which is closest so most of the residences in the neighborhood that are impacted by it. Also from the standpoint of the mobile home idea, I think that would lower property values. The microphone went off. Okay. It would lower the property values in the area. And I'm against that for that reason. I don't like that idea at all. And I don't think going back to the Planning Commission and looking at that would remedy that situation. You would have to have a big set back. And even so there is the traffic problem on mcneil. And there's no sidewalks on mcneil for people to walk. [Buzzer].

>>Mayor Watson: okay. Thank you very much. Those are all the signed people signed up to speak on item number 60. And ms. Glasco, I'm -- I'll get to you in a second. I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item 60. Motion is made by the Mayor Pro Tem, seconded by Council Member Griffith is close the public hearing.

>> I believe the man before you arrived -- the neighborhood public hearing left open to give them the ability to come back to provide additional information or if you close the public hearing, you have to open it again and allow testimony either to come back in two weeks to give you additional information.

>>Mayor Watson: why don't we go ahead and close the public hearing in case there's note a necessity for that and what we can do is we can suspend -- if there's, we can suspend the rules at that time and allow for some approach. Motion has been made and seconded to close the public hearing. The motion carries with Council Member Slusher and Council Member Garcia off the dias. Any discussion on item 60 or do we want to wait? Mayor Pro Tem?

>>Goodman: well, the applicant himself is not here tonight and I confess that I'm feeling a little uncomfortable about this in that he's put his agent in a really rough spot and it's real obvious that she wasn't able to present her usual kind of plan for what any proposal might mean. On the other hand, I'm also uncomfortable with dragging this out for the neighborhood and in fact the proposal that I heard by the neighborhood folks ties right in with the mixed use sustain abl type of development that we've been trying to encourage everybody to do. So I think they're kind of on the right line there. As far as protocol, tho though, I think ms. Crocker has been put at a disadvantage and I'm uncomfortable with that. So whatever we do, I want that on the record.

>>Mayor Watson: fine. Do you have a motion that you would like to make?

>>Goodman: Council Member Griffith did earlier and we --.

>>Griffith: in light of what's just been said, it seems like a delay would be appropriate in terms of ms. Crocker's being more confident in her preparation. So I would move --.

>>Mayor Watson: postpone for two weeks? [inaudible].

>>Griffith: what do you think, Mayor Pro Tem?

>> she said she would prefer 30 days.

>>Mayor Watson: the problem is the Mayor Pro Tem's comment by dragging it out for the neighborhood. Grave grave shall we say two weeks then? I would move a two-week postponement so that everybody can be better prepared.

>>Mayor Watson: motion is to postpone for two weeks. Is there a second? seconded by Council Member Spelman. Discussion?

>>Lewis: yes, I would like to ask a question. Ms. Glasco, the neighborhood was stating that the land had been cleared. Was that within the limits of his -- of the present zoning?

>> no. He's been cited for the clearing. The applicant has been cited and we were hoping that once the zoning case -- we asked that he halt any further clearing until the zoning is resolved.

>>Lewis: all right. Thank you.

>> Councilmembers, I would like to acknowledge that several months ago you did direct staff to initiate zoning that would convert interim zoning to permanent zoning. When we -- given the amount of area we annexed, when the first conversion we handled right after annexation to address the single family, we had to notify over 8,000 property owners. It's a big task to identify. What we do is we identify all the proeters within each other -- property owners that are within the area and notify them that we're changing the zoning from interim to permanent. And we're in the process of gathering that information. That's why it's taken us awhile. We have not ignored it. We're working on that and we just wanted to inform you that that is ongoing as soon as we've been able to identify all the properties we're bringing forward.

>>Mayor Watson: Council Member Griffith?

>>Griffith: Mayor, may I clarify something with staff? I believe the intent of Council in asking for just interim to be changed was a policy thing and not an inta cat detail thing -- intricate detail thing parcel by parcel and lot by lot. And piece of land by piece of land. Would it be possible for us to have an ordinance that was simply a policy stating that that did not include every single piece of land that that was going to apply to or not? I mean, if that's not possible, just tell me.

>> We've explored this with the law department. The legal way to handle this is to have a converse ordinance and the conversion ordinance means that you are basically changing the zoning on the property from an interim -- you're basically dropping the interim designation. That's considered a zoning change. And that requires the normal protocol of notifying and going through the normal process. The easier way to do -- if there were an easier way to do it, we would have done that.

>>Griffith: I think what our intent was with the policy matter rather than a specific parcel by parcel change, but if that's not possible, then it's not, so if you would advise you us as to what would be right and appropriate, that would be appreciated.

>> We'll send a memo to let you know what the appropriate procedure.

>>Griffith: thank you.

>>Goodman: Mayor? I think the policy change we could do is certainly for anything in the future that -- like we did for some particular parcels, these last annexations. When something comes in, it comes in at a permanent zoning as opposed to an interim zoning. So that the instant it is within the City limits there are petition rights.

>> Okay. I understand what you're saying.

>>Griffith: I'm one person, but that was my intent several months ago when we started this out. I thought that's what we were doing was not retro, but prospective.

>> Actually, the directive we got from Council was to retroactively go back and drop the interim that we annexed and what the Mayor Pro Tem is suggesting, we need to amend the code under the annexation and say that upon annexation, your zoning will be permanent and not interim. So we have to do both things.

>>Griffith: if we could have those options, that would be very, very helpful.

>> We'll send a memo to you and we'll also proceed towards an amendment that would address the prospective and also address those that are pending currently because obviously that's going to create a problem.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made and second todd postpone for two weeks. Is there any discussion?

>>Goodman: wait, wait. I think that the neighborhood would be well served if we could give them a time certain.

>>Mayor Watson: how about when we know what the agenda looks like for two weeks from now. We don't know what the agenda is going sto look like. And if you notice, it's 6:00 o'clock and when we set items for time certain, it creates real difficulty because then things start backing up and I don't mind setting something for a time certain, but right now we don't know what other public hearings there might be scheduled two weeks from now. And what we would be happy to do is once we have an idea of that, if it's appropriate to set it for time certain, set it and get back in contact with you at that point. Good about good and when might we know that?

>>Mayor Watson: you know how the agendas work. It would be right at a week and a half from now.

>>Goodman: it's not my fault.

>>Mayor Watson: that's right. But I know of a couple things already going to be there two weeks from now that could add to the time of things, but we just -- we will try to set something for a time certain after, say, four o'clock or so.

>>Goodman: and we can figure out what the format would be so that there will be an ability for both sides to talk.

>>Mayor Watson: and one of the things that the Council had previously agreed to is that we wouldn't set things for a time certain without a vote because we were running into difficulty setting items for time certain. There being no further discussion, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. [One moment, please] item no. 61 Will need very brief comments from representatives from the neighborhood because they had already made arrangements to be here and cannot be on the 8th. The applicant requested a postponement to april the 8th. What neighborhood representatives are asking because they made commitments and arched for speakers to be here, if you could just hear their presentation, and delay action to april the 8th as requested by the applicant to hear all parties, then they would appreciate it.

>>Mayor Watson: I anticipate unless I hear some dissent from Council at this point that's what we will do. I have called the public hearing. What I will do is call those -- call those people that are here that have signed up to speak and what we will then do is I will ask for a motion to recess the public hearing until april 8th. So let me call in the order we have them here, tre cutler, tom gall, romelle parker. Tre cutler.

>> [Inaudible].

>> Thank you, Mayor, my name is -- my name is Charles low, I am president of the neighborhood association. I would be willing to speak tonight, but I would be happy to come back on april 8th. We have here tonight Dr. Tom gall, who is the superintendent of the round rock isd, he would like to take a few minutes and speak. We also have reMonday hershal the president of the board of trustees of the round rock isd and parker who is principal of the forest north school. I will turn the time over to Mr. Gall thank you.

>> Please come forward and those who are going to speak tonight, if you will go ahead and make your way forward. And go to the opposite microphones, we will enjoy hearing from you. Mr. Gall thank you for being with us tonight.

>> Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Councilmembers, staff members, it's a real privilege for me to be here from florida to serve round rock, one of the great school districts in the nation. And I am the first to admit that after about 25 days on the job, I am not and was not hired to be an expert in the Austin zoning ordinances. However, I think that I have been hired by our board of trustees --.

>>Mayor Watson: you may been the first person that's come before us since I've been Mayor that didn't say that.

>> I have been hired by our trustees because I think that I have established a record of excellence in building grade school districts and it didn't take me long to recognize the fact that we really have an opportunity tonight to proceed with a vote without our applicant because it will save us a lot of trouble. First of all, because it's just not a good package. I have been hired to build grade districts and to protect children, this rezoning is not a good package for our children, particularly at this elementary school. It's too close and the covenants are just too unspecified. Our applicant is just all over the place and I would like to yield the rest of my time to our chairman who is very knowledgeable regarding some zoning issues and does profess such, so if you don't mind, I would just like to withdraw saying I look forward to working with Council and to making a mark in Austin and hopefully to a great relationship. Mr. Hartfield is our chair, if you don't mind, Mr. Mayor, I would like to yield the rest of my time to him.

>> Mr. Hartfield, you will have four minutes and 20 seconds to speak to the -- to address the Council.

>> I will give you back some time. I'm not the expert that Dr. Gall professed because I occupy so much real estate that I might be a zoning expert. Mayor Watson and Mayor Pro Tem Goodman and honorable Council Members, thank you for hearing our case or our appeal this evening. And we appreciate your time. I am speaking for the board of trustees for the round rock independent school district and they know that I am here speaking on behalf of them. That we are not -- we are not in support of the applicant's request to amend chapter 13-2 of the Austin City code for the property in question just north of f.m. 620 From a zoning of irr to gr. In fact we are in support of your Planning Commission's recommendation to grant the rr residence and the gr-co. We believe that this is in keeping with the basic premises of providing a quality education in the area. We have an instructional building which is within inches and feet, if you will, of the property line. Construction is planned currently to add five new classrooms on that side of the main building. No portables will be removed from the property based on the projections of the student population growth between now and the time the facility will be completed. Our concerns are the types of businesses that might be located there. The commerce that they may bring. The safety of our children and the noise associated with some type of businesses. These are our main concerns and we appeal to your better judgment and to your recommendation of your planning and zoning commission and I will render the floor back to the principal of forest, Mr. Parker.

>> Mayor Pro Tem and Council Members, I certainly am not an expert on zoning. I am an expert, I do believe on children, though, so I come this evening to speak here on behalf of our school and the children. Forest north is a small campus, though we have an expanding student population and as Mr. Hartfield indicated we will continue to need portables there. Currently portables are adjacent to the applicant's property. For that reason I would like for you to consider some things, increased traffic with any zoning changes would be a consideration and also the clientele of any businesses that were allowed to operate within a changed zoning thing and I would also want you to think about the noise level that would be involved there. I think that there could be some dangers to our children if there were loud noise there because they would not be able to hear communication from their teachers if they were on the playground or even from the building in case there were a fire or some other disasters and we needed to make a communication links with them. So in a rezoning change, I would like for you to consider the noise level there. And would appeal you to protect the integrity of a neighborhood school and to protect the children by considering only zoning that would allow for businesses or any other concerns there that would be safe and would protect the integrity of the school and would prevent our children from being exposed to businesses that would contribute to delinquency or truancy. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: tray cutler.

>> Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, Council Members, thank you, I am the president of the pta at forest north. Basically I am coming before you on behalf of the students. The 500 plus students that you all don't get to hear that us as parents feel that's our investment into the school. They may be Council Members, Mayor, governor.

>>Mayor Watson: don't go to threatening us.

>> The noise level of 70 decibels is set right now for that land and according to other states and other cities, that's pretty high and I do know that there is a poll out that shows that 85 is deafening to the hearing of kids, which I think if you look at it pretty closely, that's pretty close to 85, 70 and 85. As ms. Parker had stated, the safety of our kids, many of the kids in the neighborhood, the school was built -- built on the land and the neighbor was built around the school, so many of the kids walk, ride bikes, I don't know maybe even jog to school. But their safety should be taken into great consideration when allowing any zoning to occur as well as this land being in a flood area. What I would like to see happen possibly the City of Austin look at donating the land, buying and donating the land to the school to give the school the option of playground area. To where we don't have to worry about this or come before you again. We need to realize that the kids are there to learn and with the business going up right behind the classroom, within 25 feet, could be very distracting for kids and I do know that in the old days you used to have classrooms where it was all one room basically. And we have gone to classrooms with walls due to kids not being able to concentrate as well and when you have a business right beside -- right behind you, it's hard for kids to concentrate. So I would just like for you to take this into consideration and please put the kids first in this case. Thank you.

>>Slusher: yes. I agree with the gentleman, obviously, that we need to take the safety of the children into account in this decision. In any decision. But I would just like to point out to folks that this area, this area is covered by senate bill 1396 from a few years ago when the state representative that represents this area got passed and so we are forbidden by state law from considering the impact of traffic while making the decision on anything affecting this area. Now, I don't think anyone on the Council particularly believes that that is a sound piece of public policy or legislation, but we would actually be breaking Texas law if we consider the traffic impact of this development in making our decision. Nature thank you, I will entertain a motion to recess the public hearing. Until april 8th. Is there a motion? motion made by the Mayor pro tem, there is a second? seconded by Council Member Spelman. Any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries so the hearing is recessed. We appreciate the fact that you all came down tonight and we look forward to the remainder of the appeal being heard on april 8th.

>> Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you all for being here. Be safe going home. Item no. 65, Is a discussion item because someone has signed up to speak in opposition. Mr. Gurnsey.

>> Our next case is c 14-99-0009, a zoning change in the 9700 block of capital of Texas highway from ch-co to ch. This is a commercial highway services conditional overlay to ch zoning. The Planning Commission recommendation was to grant ch-co zoning. On the property. And the current restriction under the conditional overlay limits the height of structures to a maximum of 45 feet. It's the intent of the property owner to remove that restriction or to allow for the construction of a telecommunications tower of a height greater than 45 feet. The adjacent properties all in the area are zoned ch, gr or cs. There is already developed with several commercial buildings. If you have any questions I will be more than happy to answer them at this time. The applicant is here if you have any questions.

>>Goodman: thank you. Councilmember Garcia?

>>Garcia: Mr. Guernsey, have you all checked issue with the people in regulatory affairs office as to the hooilt --

>> I am not aware of a problem with actually exceeding the height of 45 feet. There are no residential properties nearby that would cause a limit to the height. I don't personally have knowledge if we checked with that office, but I am not aware of any height problems. The applicant is here, might be able to address that issue.

>> Is it -- is the -- is the town going to -- is the tower going to be where the rectangle is?

>> yes. The tiny little rectangle that you see, it's under 2/10ths of an acre, a very small area we are talking about, that would allow for the construction of the tower itself.

>>Garcia: are the all right, thank you very much, sir.

>>Lewis: Mayor Pro Tem?

>>Goodman: yes, Council Member Lewis.

>>Lewis: Mr. Guernsey, you said there's other commercial property in the area?

>> yeah, that's correct.

>>Lewis: what's the height of that property.

>> The adjacent property zoned gr would be allowed a height of 60 feet but would not be prohibited from having a height for cellular towers, that would be the area add just sent to the south and west. The remainder of this property is zoned ch-co would have that same limitation of 45 feet. The property that's further to the north along red hills trail would be allowed building heights of 60 feet, there would not be a restriction height for the cellular tower except by a current ordinance, our current ordinance would allow for cellular towers to have a height up to 120 feet if they are not within 540 feet or more of anisome 50 or more restrictive use district. Sf 5. The majority of the properties zoned xhernls on those properties would be allowed a height of 120 feet. I believe the closestsome 5 is across research boulevard -- sf 5 is across research boulevard on the west side. There is a church and further residences, but that is probably more than 500 feet away from the edge of this property, the edge of the north earn or right-of-way of research boulevard. Northern or right-of-way of research boulevard.

>>Lewis: am I reading this correctly that this is at the corner of capital of Texas highway and research boulevard?

>> that's correct.

>>Lewis: oh, okay. It's on that side.

>> If you were to consider capital of Texas highway running north and south, it would be on the west side. This is where it starts to curve back towards mopac.

>>Lewis: on the north side of research?

>> it's on the north side of research.

>>Lewis: yeah.

>> It would be across from the arboretum area.

>>Lewis: thank you, that's all that I have.

>>Goodman: did Alice leave already? did Alice have to go?

>> it was Alice's daughter's birthday.

>> Right. I wanted to -- to tell her happy birthday before she left. If anybody in the glasco house is watching Channel 6, oh, right, we can say happy birthday. They are videotaping it. [Laughter].

>> Happy birthday, she's 17. Emoni.

>>Lewis: what's her daughter's name?

>>Goodman: emoni.

>>Lewis: okay.

>>Garcia: a quick question, the Planning Commission recommendation and the zoning change review sheet is shown as their approving the staff recommendation of ch zoning by consent.

>> That's correct.

>>Garcia: in the posting it said they recommend ch-co. With conditions.

>> I am not aware of conditions being attached. It was just granted by ch zoning.

>> Co is not there.

>> It went on con sent, so there are no minutes for you to review.

>>Garcia: thank you.

>>Goodman: thank for you waiting, are you the applicant?

>> yes, ma'am. No. I'm an agent.

>> He's not the applicant.

>> No, I'm sorry.

>>Goodman: well, whoever is the applicant it's your turn.

>> I'm the applicant. My name is michael crane, I am with western pcs, we represent the home owner or the landowner which is wal-mart properties. We at western pcs is a wireless communications company or a cellular phone company, we are new to the Austin market. We purchased the sixth and probably the last license from the fcc to provide cellar phone services here and for the last seven or eight months we have been in the process of designing and collecting properties to put our system up. This particular site, and I think you have this in your packet that we prepared, also, just a quick summary on why we need a site in this area. Our engineers need to cover the intersection of 183 and loop 360, of course it's a high traffic area. They issued an order to our real estate department to go out and find a place to put antenna at the 120 foot level. We need to be at that height to make our system work in conjunction with all of our other antenna. Our company policy is always to co-loan on existing towers or buildings wherever possible, that's the first thing we looked for. Actually I am happy to tell you over 60% will be co-lows, maybe higher by the time we get done. Unfortunately in this area we could not find anything at the 125 foot height level, so we decided to look for a land site to build a mono pole. In working the area the sam's wholesale club property was the only property owner where we were able to successfully negotiate a lease to put the tower up. In doing our research, we came across the conditional overlay, the Austin telecommunications ordinance, which we follow, allows us to be in ch zoning and of course we have setbacks from residential. At the 120 foot height level the required setback is 145 feet from the nearest single family use or zoning. That site looked terrific because we are approximately 1800 feet from the nearest single family zoning and the only thing really that would prevent us from putting the tower there is the height variance. We contacted City staff, got them involved. Their research.ed out this 45 foot height limit was originally attended for buildings and in the subsequent rewrite the word building somehow became structures which is why we are here tonight. If it said buildings we would be able to build that tower by right on that lot. So we are before you tonight basically over the word structures. We -- when the public notices went out, to my knowledge we only had one piece of input from neighbors or surrounding property owners, which was the gentleman that owns the retail property next door. I did speak to him, I think we spoke to his concern. The Planning Commission did give us recommendation for the site and it did go on the consent agenda. So we hope that you will approve it tonight. Be glad to answer any questions that you may v..

>>Goodman: thank you very much, are there questions?

>>Lewis: I have a question.

>>Lewis: do you have another tower in that area?

>> no, sir.

>>.

>>Lewis: where is your next tower in that area.

>> The next closest site would be approximately maybe a mile to the north. Probably half mile to a mile in all directions. From that intersection.

>>Lewis: well, okay, that's all that I have, thank you, I am not going to pursue this.

>>Goodman: we have one person signed up in opposition, Mr. Jewel. Go ahead, you have 3 minutes.

>> Thank you. Members of Council, I am chad jewel, an agent here this evening to speak on behalf of the property owner richard ferrill, he asked me to speak in opposition of the zoning change for the wal-mart sam's club parcel because of the adverse effects that the proposed tower of western pcs will have on his retail center. He has two basic concerns, not the actual construction of the tower, but more the placement and the looks that could detract from his retail center. The placement of the tower as you can see on the site map is directly in the -- directly behind Mr. Ferrill's property and right close to the property line. It would be directly behind his retail center. Wal-mart has 18 acres, over 18 acres of land in which they could place this tower. And they have chosen to place it where it most affects Mr. Ferrill's property. The looks, it could be up to 10 feet tall. The retail center is only one story. And would be very visible and definitely detract from the looks of the property. In retail sales, looks and street appeal is very, very important. Could definitely detract from the value of Mr. Ferrill's retail property. There are other places on the west edge of the sam's tract that would be much more desirable location for such a tower. The two other adjacent property owners are home depot and office depot. And along this property line there's a large metal fence, there is loading docks, there is 18 wheelers unloading supplies, it looks very industrial. A very raw. It's a place that you would put a tower logically put a tower. Not directly behind a retail center. By affirming this request for a proposed zoning change, we are going to be granting wal-mart the right to profit from the land lease and construction of this tower at the expense of Mr. Ferrill, his retail tenants and the future property value of his center. Thank you.

>>Goodman: thank you very much. Questions?

>>Garcia: your property is the one that fronts on research?

>> yes, it is.

>>Garcia: okay. Is it this one?

>> it's labeled --.

>>Garcia: sp 30460.

>> C, yes.

>>Garcia: does the property line, the -- the unbroken line as opposed to the one that's --

>> as you can see right here, the area shaded is what I believe to be Mr. Ferrill's property. The property line is the solid line.

>>Garcia: you said, you believe, you are not for sure.

>> According to this, that's the way I understand it.

>>Garcia: thank you very much.

>>Lewis: Mayor Pro Tem?

>>Griffith: Mayor Pro Tem?

>>Lewis: go ahead. Well, I just wants to ask the applicant what's the dimension of the base on this antenna? I mean this tower?

>> the tower?

>>Lewis: yeah.

>> Approximately six, maybe seven feet.

>>Lewis: single pole?

>> yes, sir, it's a single pole. It's basically the same size as a highway light pole, it just that it would have antenna on top instead of lighting.

>>Lewis: 120 --

>> 120 feet. It has a big foundation under it, too.

>>Lewis: all right. Do you have lights on it?

>> it's not required to have lighting. No, sir. Faa requires lighting at the 200 foot level and above and the only time we would put lighting on it under 200 feet was if somebody in the neighborhood wants for it some reason like there's a helicopter pilot nearby or something like that, but on this one we wouldn't do it unless --.

>>Lewis: about 6 to 8 feet at the base?

>> yes, sir, single pole.

>>Lewis: that's all that I have.

>>Mayor Watson: Council Member Griffith?

>>Griffith: thank you, Mayor. It's been suggested that another location on sam's property might be appropriate. Have you talked with the folks who own that property and what's their thought about a location and if so what would be the best place?

>> you bet. We did work with sam's and we -- actually we spend a lot of time working with sam's on the best location for this. This is where they want it to be. They think in relation to surrounding properties and their own property that this is the is best place for it. Actually this tower is in front of their front door. So I mean they were not really trying to better themselves too much from the placement of the tower. This is just where they need it for the purposes of trucks that have to come in there and unload, this is the best place for them.

>>Griffith: they considered the flow of the trucks loading and unloaded.

>> Yes, sir, other issues, too.

>>Griffith: those pathways.

>> Yes, ma'am. Can I reply to the opposition brought up?

>>Mayor Watson: you have 3 minutes of rebuttal.

>> We did talk to Mr. Ferrill, he's the gentleman that I mentioned earlier did send a letter to City staff, I got a copy of the letter and talked to him at the time. The placement issue is brand new to me, I heard it tonight for the first time. Mr. Ferrill's letter and our conversation was simply based on he wanted to make sure he could put a tower on his property and that the placement of this tower would not prevent that. We were simultaneously negotiating with Mr. Ferrilll to put a tower on the block buster property 20 feet from this one, actually we have full drawings made up on it, we were unable to put together a lease, so this was a surprise to me tonight on the placement issue.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you very much. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

>>Garcia: so move.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made, is there a second?

>>Griffith: second.

>>Mayor Watson: seconded by Council Member Lewis, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no., motion carries, hearing is closed. I will entertain a motion with regard to item no. 65.

>>Spelman: I would like to ask a question to Mr. Ferrill's agent, if I could.

>>Spelman: sorry, I forgot your name.

>> Ted jewel.

>>Spelman: what's your basis for your telling us that is it block buster the video, big and tall shops tenants on this property, right?

>> yes.

>>Spelman: what's the basis for your telling that's the value of this property will be diminished by having a mono pole behind it?

>> in retail as with any concerns such as that having a large industrial type of feel or tower directly in the middle of his -- if you were to look at the front of his building, it's only one story tall. then you have another 100 stories or 100 feet, excuse me, of tower directly in the middle of his retail center, I just think that it could be avoided, it would definitely be the best option to put it in a lays that's more conducive to that type of structure.

>>Spelman: the applicant is -- has noted that you and Mr. Ferrill were negotiating with the applicant about putting a tower up on his property; is that correct?

>> I was not negotiating with them. I think Mr. Ferrill may have been, yes.

>>Spelman: so Mr. Ferrill was negotiating with them putting the tower on his property, not on sam's?

>> I believe. I believe that Mr. If her ril decided that the -- Mr. Ferrill that the value that he would get from the land lease would not offset the effect that the tower would have on the center.

>>Spelman: okay. Do you have any economic data to suggest in fact that the value of the land or the ability to lease it out would be diminished in any way?

>> no. There wouldn't be any data specifically towards a pcs tower or anything of that nature. I work with tenants every day. I'm a commercial agent. Just the littlest thing, the color of trim or just the way they feel about it has a lot to do whether they lease there or don't. And as to whether that will really impact the retail use, whether block buster would sell three less movies I could not tell you for sure. But when, you know, big tenants would be looking at the center, they might consider that as a factor that would lead them to go somewhere else.

>>Spelman: in your opinion it would take longer to lease it out then.

>> Yeah, exactly.

>>Mayor Watson: there is a motion? there is a motion?

>>Griffith: to get the conversation started, it went on I believe -- I believe on consent at the planning commission and I believe that is a unanimous recommendation; is that correct?

>>Mayor Watson: yes.

>>Griffith: I would like to move the Planning Commission recommendation of the.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation, is there a second?

>>Goodman: second.

>>Mayor Watson: seconded by the Mayor Pro Tem. Any discussion? Mr. Guernsey?

>> this is ready for all three readings.

>>Mayor Watson: I am going to accept the motion on all three readings, is that appropriate?

>>Griffith: please, Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made and seconded to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation on all three readings, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no., motion carries. Item no. 67, Public hearing to approve an e.m.s. Fee increase for non-emergency transfer to $195 for each transfer leg and to $5 per mile. Welcome, sir. Mayor and Council Members, I am richard herring representing the e.m.s. Department. They have requested rate increases for the non-emergency transfer services, proposed to I raise the rate for bask transport from $125 to $195 per patient transport segment and the mileage fee from the current $3.50 per mile to $5 per mile. The last rate increase approved was in may of 1995. Based upon survey information from select Texas cities, e.m.s. Agrees with the need for the increases and recommends the new rates. Both e.m.s. Quality assurance team and the urban transportation commission have approved staff's recommendation. With me here tonight are representatives from the city's two non-emergency franchises, american medical response and guardian services to answer any questions that you might have.

>>Mayor Watson: let me ask first does Council have any questions at this point? is there anyone that wishes to be heard on item no. 67, A public hearing to approve an e.m.s. Fee increase for non-emergency transfer to $195 for each transfer leg and to $5 per mile. Hang on one second Council Member Lewis. Anyone wishes to be heard? anyone that wishes to be heard. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing, made by Council Member Garcia, any second? seconded by.

>>Spelman:. Any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries, Council Member Lewis.

>> What you --.

>>Lewis: what you said 100 on a leg, what is considered a leg, what distance do you get for $195.

>> The better terminology is per transport segment. It's a patient -- there could be two -- fa doesn't mean it's $390 if you take the whole body as I was asked earlier. [Laughter].

>>Lewis: I meant in other words you charge by the mile from the pickup point. You don't -- with the $195 it's no given distance. Like in a taxi, you pay and the first -- for the first segment of a trip, but the $195 is initial plus any mileage that you travel.

>> Correct.

>>Lewis: is that in half miles or miles.

>> Rounded to the nearest mile. It follows medicare guidelines for reimbursement of mileage.

>>Lewis: so if it's -- if you drive 2.3 miles, you charge for 2 miles.

>>Lewis: two miles.

>>Lewis: that is what percent increase is that? from 25 to 95. 70, That's --

>> $65 increase, but --.

>>Lewis: that's 65.

>> The average state-wide for this service is $264 base rate. Austin is in a unique situation in that we regulate our non-emergency franchises unlike most cities in the state, that's why we only have two now, where san antonio and bexar county has 33 altogether.

>>Mayor Watson: I will entertain a motion with regard to item no. 67.

>>Garcia: I have a quick question. The percentage increase is about 55%.

>> Correct.

>>Garcia: is that -- what is the basis for establishing that percentage?

>> it was based on looking at the existing structure at 125, doing the survey of what other non-regulated services primarily were charging, coming up with a number that we feel was reasonable considering the unique situation in Austin, which is simply a fairly controlled population that they get to serve. It's not truly open market conditions here like it is in a lot of places. And both applicants were -- we felt it was a reasonable request given it's almost four years since the rate increased. In the past we only had rate increases every two years, they have generally gone up 25 to $30 at a time.

>>Garcia: the reason I asked is because if you look at the components, gasoline is not anymore expensive today than it was four years ago. As a matter of fact I think it's cheaper right now, it may go up, vehicles have not gone up 50% in cost, salaries have though the gone up 50 percent in four years, those to me are the components.

>> Also, you are correct in that. Salaries have gone up quite a bit in four years in this industry because it's very tight. The biggest issue is the changes that have occurred because of balanced budget act with medicare, which the primary payer is generally medicare, medicaid.

>>Garcia: more services that have to be rendered.

>> They don't get paid as often, they used to have guaranteed annual increases, now it's cpi minus one percent for the next six years.

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

>>Lewis: let me ask you a question. What is the average mileage that -- on a trip? what has been the average mileage on the trip?

>> I would have to defer --

>> one mile or 11 miles.

>> Steve says 11 miles.

>>Lewis: that's another, what, $55. What is it? $5 a mile, is that it?

>> the requested increase is to $5 a mile.

>>Lewis: so that would be another $55. On an average it's $260 a trip. That's a pretty neat of way of getting to the state average of 264 I would say.

>> The state average for mileage is $5.50.

>>Lewis: I am saying you said other areas the rate is $260 or so.

>> It's 264 for the basic transport components of the rate. There's three things in the rate, basic transport, flat fee, mileage fee and then generally this is an oxygen fee, separate charge. Which they are not asking for an increase in that rate.

>>Mayor Watson: I will entertain a motion. Motion made to approve by Council Member Garcia, is there a second?

>>Spelman: second.

>>Mayor Watson: seconded by Council Member Spelman, any discussion, hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Will be shown voting aye. A public hearing regarding the proposed plan for a change this the street name for the southeastern intersection of huntsville drive and parmer lane looping westerly to the northwestern intersection of huntsville drive and parmer lane.

>> There's really nothing. We haven't had any opposition to this.

>> Let me ask if anyone wishes to be heard on item no. 69, A street name change from huntsville drive to riata vista circle. Is there anyone that wishes to be heard? anyone to be heard? I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item no. 69. Motion made by Council Member Spelman, seconded by Council Member Garcia, any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. Item no. 73, I will entertain a motion. Motion made by Council Member Spelman to approve item no. 73. Is there a second? seconded by Council Member Garcia. Is there a discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. Councilmember Slusher, are you ready to take up number 36 briefly? we are very close to being on time with our time certain? do we think we can do 36 in about five minutes?

>>Slusher: probably so.

>>Mayor Watson: let's take up item no. 36.

>> Mr. Manning had to leave, but Mr. Williams is here.

>>Slusher: okay.

>>Mayor Watson: what does Mr. Manning play? [laughter].

>>Slusher: all right.

>>Garcia: do you suppose can he play at his age or what?

>>Slusher: may main concern on this was that we like to look at the wages and the benefits offered by our -- by people that contract with the City. These wages are within our living wage standard, but let's see that would be -- they are -- excuse me. 8.25 And 9.25 an hour. But this company does doesn't offer insurance. My understanding is we can't require that. But so we are sort of stuck. We are sort of stuck there. This is what -- for one year and how many extensions?

>> I am gary Williams, acting vice-president for power delivery, frost energy. It's one year with two extensions, I'm sorry, four extensions. For a total of four years.

>>Slusher: how does this compare did with the cost of doing it ourselves because our folks would have benefits?

>> correct, we have done an extensive analysis comparison of doing it in house because there's been quite a bit of interest both from the electric utility commission and I have heard from members of Council. We have looked at the initial cost of hiring full-time employees, providing vehicles, associated benefits, and it would be initially slightly more expensive to have it in-house versus the proposed contract that's in front of you all. What's going to happen in the future, though, is the benefits increase and the salaries increase, we are looking at an increased cost to do it in house versus outside. The other consideration we have looked at is the opportunities for technology improvements in automated meter reading, gang meter readings, a variety of things on the horizon that would allow technology to improve or limit how we have to do meter read in this the future having contracts available increases our flexibility to take advantage of technology in the future without tying into a fixed work force.

>>Slusher: if we do this, how many employees would that be?

>> we are looking at approximately 55 employees.

>>Slusher: when the City used to do this; is that correct?

>> yes, sir.

>>Slusher: how many of those employees then got laid off, how many of them went to other jobs with the City when we eliminated it or the City related it.

>> I will ask someone else to answer that question. Jarrett murphy. He has direct knowledge.

>> Good afternoon, Council. Back in 1995, I believe when we outsourced meter reading for the first time, there was a transition period where the meter readers that were permanent on staff through attrition we lost some of those folks and we restaffed with temporaries as best I remember. And through the course of that, when we finally went into the outsourcing phase of it, the permanent employees probably at 100% were going through attrition. I don't think any of them actually were terminate understand that process. The transition to temporary non-permanent City employees then, transition to your outsourced and contract services.

>>Slusher: let me make sure I understand what you said. They were all gone through attrition?

>> meaning either they accepted jobs else where or retired.

>>Slusher: I'm sorry to interrupt you. But some of those would have been outsourced in the City or are we talking about they left city employment through retirement or just --

>> through retirement. There was a handful of them, I don't remember the exact numbers, that transitioned to other City departments. The vast majority of them, -- through attrition, retirement.

>>Slusher: what what do we expect to have new technology that we might not need this contract. This is one year plus four extensions, that's five years. Do we anticipate we will be doing this the entire time? do we anticipate technological advancements where we won't have to renew this every time?

>> we are currently looking at -- there are a lot of things on the industry right now like swipe cards, prepaid meter reading, automated meter reading devices on the system right now. Quite a number of things of that nature. Probably within the next three years through the scope of this contract we would employ some of those things, for example, we have probably 20,000 meters or so on apartment complexes. To figure the best we to transition into technology, there's a technology phase that we would look into for cluster metering on apartment complexes that maybe would include an aMr concept. On the other hand, there's a ruler metering network where we have anywhere from 10 to 20,000 meter. We might want to do a tower there. Which way we go and when we do it is probably undecided at this time. I would say within the next three to four years we see some of that happening.

>>Slusher: from what I heard you say, the examples you mentioned are all phased in. Over time. We would not be talking about something where woe had if we went out and hired these folks, say we hired 55 people, say we have decided to switch over to new technology, then we have to find new jobs for those employees or lay them off, that would not be the case, it would be phased in?

>> it would be phased in over a period of time, we would still be downsizing with that phase in, how many I really couldn't tell you. We haven't gotten that far along in the process.

>> I understand that. I just have a real hard time sitting up higher and voting to save the utility money by people not having insurance. That's a hard hurdle for me to clear. What are our other options? if we don't do this contract tonight, what happens?

>> at this point, if we don't have the -- if we don let the contract tonight, we have a short term contract that you approved two weeks ago or so here at the cowboy that -- the Council that would take us three to four months. Near june by retaining the existing contractor and not the --

>> that would be burmex.

>> Yes. Then near june we would have to make decisions whether or not to return it in house or relet the contract. I don't have any options outside of those.

>>Slusher: how long do you anticipate a transition in house would be?

>> it would take anywhere from 60 to 0 days possibly, possibly more. -- 60 To 90 days.

>> We include the hiring process, training involved. Meter reading is tricky. I can teach you or train you how to read a meter in no time, but to move through the routes and what not that we have to generate in Austin, Texas, it would take three months to 120 days to get people ready.

>> You would be confident with 120 days if that were the route we took, within 120 days we could serve our customers adequately.

>> I think so, yes.

>>Slusher: okay. I am going to yield momentarily. Some of the other Council Members -- I'm sorry it took more than five minutes Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: anybody have any additional questions at this time. Mr. Spelman?

>>Spelman: this issue of contract employees who don't receive insurance has come up before. At one point to have an apples to apples comparison between two bidders, one of which paid insurance one of which would not, there was an estimated I think by our procurement staff as to the approximate cost per hour of an employee to buy insurance on the open market. Could you address that? do you remember that? sue?

>> yes. Council, the survey that we have done on that, we have prepared some information for Council, relative to some other questions about health insurance, it ranges from about $100 to about as high as 250 per employee to carry insurance. We have used the rule of thumb about $150 is what it would cost a company to provide that. So you can -- it's about a dollar an hour is what it would cost in that income. For an employee if they had to pay this kind of thing themselves. In this particular contract I would say to the Council however they are working to get health insurance. Another thing this company does offer is a bonus program that's quite attractive. So based on the performance of the employees they could earn as high as $500 a month in bonus pay. Which is something certainly outside of what we pay. They said they have looked at the economy in Austin and they recognize how competitive the market is, their health insurance issue goes to that whole issue of national equity because it's a national company and they hate to, you know, to have it here. They have health care in alabama, but the rest of the states are operating and they don't yet. So they are working on that Council Member.

>>Slusher: so they -- they don't want us to catch up with alabama on this? [laughter].

>> No, I think what the thing is by law that union restrictions. I think alabama was the state where they have to provide it. It's a union state, it's not a right to work state. So we are under the law there they have to provide it. In the other states they operate they don't have that instituted as a corporate-wide policy yet. And they are working on costs to do it. We certainly have made a case and they were very willing to take that forward to their corporate people that Austin is an exception, given the fact that we are city-supported medical for uninsured people and, two, the job mark: it would cause a lot of turnover if they are not able to provide stable work force which would require the insurance. So they recognize those limitations and they need to do it.

>>Spelman: I have two more questions.

>>Mayor Watson: I am going to suggest if it goes longer, there's inch in a wanted about the con -- there was insurance Council Member Slusher wanted about slightly different.

>>Slusher: he said it was slightly more to bring it in house. Can I see whatever figures we have on that?

>> we can provide those, approximately five percent at the outset. Partly due to vehicle acquisition and our salaries. Our salaries would be slightly higher, starting salaries would be slightly higher than what we are looking at.

>>Mayor Watson: I will entertain a motion to recess this item. We have a number of people signed up to speak on other items.

>>Slusher: so move.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made by Council Member Slusher to recess this item, is there a second? seconded by Council Member Lewis, is there a discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries with Mayor pro tem and Council Member Griffith off the dias. Item no. 70, Conducting a public hearing regarding a proposed plan for the City of Austin to lease downtown property to computer sciences corporation. I recognize ms. Lutrell.

>>Spelman: I will be off the dias, but paying attention.

>> What I will do because we have gone through the presentation several times, I will try to shorten it, do more of a summary, then just be available for questions as they come up in the course of presentation, basically you know when the computer sciences corporation decided they were expanding their headquarters, they were considering a site that was out in the barton springs edward's aquifer zone, they began to get community contacts about moving into the desired development zone. In october and november, staff had informal discussions with them on the ability to find a site in the desired development zone. The idea of a downtown location was raised. On december 4th, the Council voted to direct the City manager to begin formal negotiations. So for the last four months the City has been under formal negotiations to come to the essential ternls or a detailed term sheet. Two major things have been happening over the last four months. The first is a very intensive public information input process. I could go into all of the details, but I will hit the heights, 40 plus presentations, this week alone we have been out to five different organizations, five additional presentations scheduled next week. We have hit neighborhood associations, downtown groups multiple time, civic groups in fact any interested parties. We put out a request to neighborhoods through the city-wide neighborhood newsletter, we have developed an internet site, a stakeholder list that have received faxed weekly status report, public work sessions, public hearings, we have been running a Channel 6 informational piece to provide more information. Most recently what we have been doing since we began a series of public hearings leading up to this action item is answering a series of questions that have come from either the community or from Council or some of our downtown groups of. All of those questions are being put in writing, answered, are being put up on the internet site. You can access that internet site through the City web page. The second thing we did over the last four months is of course do very formal negotiations with c.s.c., we have reached an essential terms agreement which is in front of you no. We have used an outside law firm to help us that had specific real estate experience. There's a summary of the essential terms document that's available. It's in the branch libraries on the internet, in a public information office, and it's in the backup on the agenda item. We have sent copies of all of the essential terms to all of the major shake holders, all of the downtown advisory groups, of course anyone who desires more information on this once again City web beige, public information office, or any of the agenda backup. So the total project outcome. In front of you you see four pictures. These are representative of the blocks we are talking about. We are talking about a seven block mixed use project downtown. It a project men to renovate or replace blocks of crumbling infrastructure and deteriorating buildings, an boned and boarded up buildings, vacant lots. Whoa what the project ultimately achieves is 700,000 square feet of office for a major employer, computer sciences corporation, c.s.c., 100 square feet of a waterfront City hall with a large public plaza, shops and restaurants wrapping the first floor of four City blocks, 120,000 square foot public art museum, over 400 residential unit, including units available to persons at an income level of 80% of median income and over 4500 spaces serving the entire mixed use development. How specifically does the c.s.c. Project component work? probably one of the best ways to look at the project because it is complex is to look at the map. We have a large picture of it here on the easel in front of you. C.s.c. Will ground lease for 99 years blocks 2, 4, 21 for a total present value cost of 11.9 million. If the ground lease is not prepaid an annual rent of $753,000 will be paid with escalators of 10% each year. The City will develop three clean buildable sites. If improvement are significant on these blocks at the end of the lease and the City chooses not to buy out those improvements, by significant we have a preset criteria in the terms, that helps us determine at that point what is significant. Then the lease can be extended for up to 40 years to credit off those improvements at which time it reverts to the city with no additional cost. At different benchmarks and performance criteria throughout the term of the lease, the City has the right to terminate, the right of first refusal, and the right of first negotiation. Under any circumstance of assignment by c.s.c., the assignee must meet certain criteria that are spelled out in the essential terms, that includes such things as demonstrated financial viability and good business reputation. C.s.c. Will not be released much its monetary obligations in the events of an assignment or sub lease, but all City obligations do not transfer with certain assignments of the land. The waterfront c.s.c. Blocks 2 and 4 will each have shops and restaurants on the first floor, they will be City-owned with an additional 5 floors of office or 175,000 square feet per block. The parking is above ground on the north side of the block, and intgreated into the building. The back c.s.c. Block 21, will have a six level office building of 350,000 square feet and 4 levels of underground parking to serve that block. Block 3, which is a waterfront block, will be City-owned with approximately 100,000 square foot City hall, a large public plaza and three levels of underground parking. One level will serve the new city hall, one level will serve retail, City owned retail on blocks two and four. The City will build the third level of underground parking on block -- on this block to support c.s.c. Employees during the day. But that parking will be available at night to serve the public and the vows district as well as rail. -- Swms retail. The City will build and operate a central plant that will serve all seven blocks at a profit to Austin energy. We will have to terminate all existing leases on the city-owned blocks. We have an investment incentive package of $10.3 million. All in infrastructure. Public infrastructure. Sidewalks, court yards, street scapes, landscaping, utility relocations. Those dollars are only spent in conjunction with the c.s.c. Construction of the building. As the buildings go up, the infrastructure incentive package is spent. They are tied together. One does not happen without the other. We are going to provide traffic mitigation and waive about $700,000 in development fees and provide expedited development review for this project. The City is going to provide and enhance pedestrian activity by the shops and restaurants wrapping the perimeters of blocks two and four, the construction of this retail is capped at 5.8 million with a 2.4 million lease value spent to lease back the first floor retail, it's about 30% of the ground lease value that is attributable for the first floor retail on blocks two and four. We will receive the annual retail revenue from these blocks, estimated to be about a million annually and preserving the historic schnieder building and integrate it into the retail uses on block 2. There are few other key terms, all parties will agree on a set -- a set of design standards, all the parties, amli, c.s.c., the City will be working together along with our design commission, some of the urban planners on our staff on those design issues. C.s.c. Will comply with the city's m.b.e. Ordinance for all construction reimbursed by the City and they will use our goals as guidelines for their entire $160 million project. C.s.c. Additionally is committed to the use of staggered work hours, flex time, other employee policies that will help mitigate the traffic impacts of their project. Once again the goal here toys make sure that this consolidation of employees do not hit the downtown streets during peak rush hours. That's clearly where our intersections have trouble handling the traffic in the downtown area. A single jurisdiction, tif, tax increment financing district will be created and will dedicate 100,000 for approximately 10 years for the maintenance of the City owned retail, public spaces on blocks 2, 3, 4, 21 and the city hall. The City will use their best efforts to create a multi jurisdictional tif to fund approximately 2.4 million in additional public infrastructure or improvements in and around the project site. So how is the project financed. No new taxes. There is no tax supported debt used to finance the project. The revenue streams from the project finance the project. The requirements for the City are 48 million, 48.3 million. The amount we will have to finance deducting the lump sum cash payments is 29.7 million. That requires an annual debt service of 2.39 million and we have sources of funds revenue produced off the project that come from three particular sources, annual ground leases, the retail revenue, and the avoided rents of the employees going into the new City hall, those total sources of funds are 2.48 million. So -- actually, I'm sorry, let me run through the numbers real quickly because we did make two changes, I want to make sure that you are aware of the change. The total requirements are 48.3, amount to finance is 29.7, the annual debt service is 2.39, and the total sources of funds are 2.5. That leaves a project balance of $117,000. The two changes that caused that difference in the numbers are two things: we have a Bill that's moving through the state legislature that would help us purchase the vacate state lot that was the original Austin museum of art site. We have now specifically noted that purchase in our fiscal note and adjusted it. There are a range of values from 2.3 to 2.9 attributably to that site. A third appraisal will be required to determine the actual value. The second change is we are working on a relocation package for liberty lunch that has a $400,000 loan coming from the project cash flows and repaid to the project cash flows to relocate liberty lunch. It's a 20 year loan at low interest, 3% interest. So one of the beauty goes of this is that the project -- the beauty is is the project that is dislocating will also help produce the financing available to get them a new site and present tenant and ownership interest in a new site. The economic benefits of the project that are above and beyond getting a new City hall, plaza, shops and restaurants, above and beyond the project, none of these dollars are used to finance the project. There's $160 million c.s.c. Construction project, it has a one time infusion of about 500,000 in sales tax on construction material. There are approximately 2400 new jobs. Hired and trained whenever possible from the local Austin area. There is a 2.1 million in annual property and sales tax for the c.s.c. Project. There's a 2.3 million dollars if you include the total project all the blocks. And in addition to that, there's another 3 million a year in annual property and sales taxes that go to the school district, Austin community college and travis county. Now, to get a feel for 2.1 million dollars, you are talking about hiring 43 new police officers. Or building and quipping a branch library every three years or building a fire station every two years. That's the economic benefit that flows from this project above and beyond the actual revitalization of these blocks. The other thing that has been different since we started this series of public hearings is we are now talking about a seven block proposal versus a nine block proposal. We talked about that fairly extensively in our last public hearing. And it basically means that we have separated the state hobby building and the state parking garage for discussions with the state, moving on a separate time frame and path from this project. There are a number of concerns in our public hearings, we have talked about them before, the questions and answers are answered and 7 on the internet site, I am not going to go into them. We have our project team here available to answer questions as they might come up during the presentation. Once again how to get more information? call the public information office. We will come out, we have a speakers brew row that will do a presentation for any interested group. Bureau. The public information office also has copies of all of the materials, all of the material, maps, questions and answers, essential terms are up on a special website. The branch libraries have copies of this material. Finally what are your last or next steps? this is our second public hearing in a series of three. Our first was held on March 11th, actually was not our first public hearing, we've had earlier public hearings, but in this last chain since the essential terms have been complete. Of course the public hearing today and finally april 1st, the public hearing here at Council chambers at 6:30. There's a public hearing and that is the night we are anticipating Council action. So that's the presentation. I think that I will just defer to questions as they come up or as needed.

>>Mayor Watson: anybody have any questions of ms. Futrell at this point?

>>Slusher: I do. Back to the if this benefits. By the way, -- to the financial benefits. I would like to thank for you your work on this. $826,000 Per year property taxes from the c.s.c. Facilities. Is that correct?

>> rounds up actually to 827, but yes, $827,000 is the property tax alone just on the three c.s.c. Blocks, coming in every year. And an equal amount will then go to the county.

>>Slusher: actually a little more since the county now has a higher tax rate than the city. [Laughter]. Then the sales tax -- explain to me the 2400 new employees, now are we calculating them as -- a lot of them to come from inside of Austin, which we agree on. But if you put all of the money they are going for to get in sales tax down into this, that they are going to spend in sales tax, excuse me, isn't that counting like they are new people moving here? because they would be spending some of that anyway.

>> Let me explain that. It's a fairly standard formula, I may ask bettie to come up here and help me, but we used a fairly standard formula used for calculating sales tax from net new jobs. Even if c.s.c. Hires every one of these new jobs from our area, able to find skill set or do retraining and they are all hired here, there are theoretically 24 other jobs that either opened up or someone who was unemployed that now has the job. The concept is net new jobs. They are jobs that are not here now.

>>Slusher: okay. At some point they would be new people moving to fill either these or people that -- or jobs that these folks left.

>> Also, it is the policy of this company, it's not all for altruistic reasons, it is cheaper for companies to hire locally, they try wherever possible to hire locally. They also have a very extensive retraining program, kind of an interesting program. They look for people who have a demonstrated work history, but it can be in any profession. It ranges from music background to math background. They put them through a two to five month training course where they are full time, fully paid c.s.c. Employees and they basically create it or information technology professionals out of that training course. They look for the existing skill set to hire here, they have a training program to create the skill set, only then would they move or look to recruit from other areas.

>>Slusher: okay. I may ask more questions later, that's all for now.

>>Mayor Watson: let me ask something along the lines that Council Member Slusher asked about. We have talked about it before, but I think it bears repeating, currently on those three blocks, how much is collected by the four jurisdictions, city of Austin, Travis County, aisd, and acc?

>> you know, I think it was 8,000, something like that, may even be less than that, Mayor? do you remember the absolutely number?

>>Mayor Watson: my memory is 3,000.

>> Basically the bulk of these blocks have been off the property tax rolls for over 30 years.

>>Mayor Watson: now of the 800, can you put that in a -- in a way that I can understand it, the 800 some odd thousand dollars in terms of what that means when that money comes into the general fund and translate it into different uses that it could be.

>> The three examples, there are others, but if you take the total taxes that are coming off of the c.s.c. Project, coming in annually, you are looking at the equivalent of hiring 43 police officers or increasing our transportation road maintenance budget by 15%, a branch library with books, every three years, a new fire station every two years, and you know you can play with it, go on and on. But it's to give you an idea, a visual picture of what that level of taxes brings in to the citizens of Austin. Remember that money is also above and beyond the revenue streams that pay for the development of these blocks.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, let's go to people that have signed up to speak. Michael chaffin. Michael chaffin. He signed up, the organization of Austin hotel motel association for. Charles betts. He will be followed by jimmy castro.

>> Mayor, member of the Council, I'm Charles bets, on the staff the downtown Austin alliance, I just wanted to reiterate our organization's very strong support for this c.s.c. City of Austin proposal. We compliment your leadership in building the tax base of Austin and building what we feel very strongly would be a beautiful asset for our downtown Austin. We thank you very much. And we are -- all of us are near spirit, we will be here in body on april the first.

>>Mayor Watson: great, thank you. Jimmy castro.

>> Good evening, Mayor Watson, I am here to speak on my behalf, I have also served a as former board member of the millwood neighborhood association in Austin, this may well be the most important decision this City Council makes that affects the future of the downtown area. Austin City Council has offered to computer sciences corporation to locate on city-owned land along the downtown river front is a sound investment. Austin is a 21st century economy struggling under a 20th century tax and fiscal structure. To succeed in this new change, global environment, Austin needs a tax and fiscal structure that meets three basic criterias, that are responsive, investment oriented and reliable. According to the February 22nd issue of washington technology magazine, computer sciences corporation has secured the following: first, a $198 million contract with u.s. Postal service to revamp its payroll systems. Second an internal revenue services prime integration services contract bonaza. Potential worth, $8 billion over 15 years to modernize the agency's telecommunications systems. Third the commercial side of c.s.c. Won a $300 million outsourcing contract from at&t. With c.s.c., Austin is in good shape to compete. It is important to remember however the economically we will succeed or fail as a region. Not as a City. Thank you,.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, Robert barnstone. He signed up in favor. Bill ball. Bill ball. Bill ball signed up in favor. Juan cotera. Juan cotera. He signed up in favor. Stephen becker. Stephen becker. Mr. Becker signed up for. Elizabeth ferrar. Welcome.

>> Hello, Mayor. Mayor and members of the City Council, I am elizabeth ferrar, director of the Austin museum of art. I am speaking on behalf of the museum in favor of this plan that would profoundly enhance and revitalize Austin's urban fabric. We believe that it offers unprecedented opportunity for the public and private sectors to join forces in making the city of Austin an even better place to live and work than it is today. This proposal has elements that make great cities great. Especially its vibrant mick of corporate buildings, retail establishments, residential development and an art museum located in an appropriately civic location facing the City park. Thts divorce community that will attract a broad cross-section of Austinites who will want to live, work, and visit this neighborhood. I use the word neighborhood intentionally here because this mix of uses will generate a district that is active, day, night and weekends. And the very entities that will call this neighborhood home will support one another and help each other flourish. I for one, for example, have every expectationation that all of the new residents and workers in this neighborhood will want to visit and become members of the Austin museum of art. This brings me to the second reason why we support the c.s.c. Proposal. I've had the opportunity to previously address this body on this issue as have members of our board of trustees. So I will only briefly reiterate these points. First, the c.s.c. Plan anticipates a move for the museum's new building from the current site on third street to the block directly north on fourth street facing republic square. A park side location will afford our architect much greater possibility of designing a true civic monument. In other words the kind of building that would become a gathering spot for people and will become a place of pride for everyone in Austin. We look forward to being able to take advantage of the park that will be so nearby for varied educational and cultural activities for our growing audience of adults and young people. For these reasons we have the opportunity to create not just a good museum, but a great one and one that will provide a really memorable experience for over 100,000 visitors each year. I would like you to think about some of the great museums in this country, the metropolitan museum of art in new york, the art institute of chicago, the mcneil in houston, all of the museums of the smithsonian in washington. All of these museums are either in or face parks. And these parks offer a wonderful transition from the every day world to the environment and enchantment and inspiration that the best museums offer. I want the Austin museum of art to be one of those great world class museums, so it is my hope which I share with the museum's board of trustees and staff, that we will be part of the world class environment this plan envisions, thank you very much.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, early maxwell. Aerial maxwell. Signed up for. Robin rather. Robin rather. I seer standing there.

>> Welcome, Mr. Mayor, I wanted to say very quickly, I know that I have spoken on this topic more times than I would like. I want to say in talking with more and more s.o.s. Members over the past week or so, it's clear to me there's broad community support for the c.s.c. Deal. I am very, very impressed with the way the communications process has been going, I think people have been getting more comfortable literally day by day. I really hope that you all will understand how much we appreciate what you have done and thank you very much.

>> Thank you, ms. Rather. Brigid shea. Brigid shea. Ms. Shea signed up for. Tom stacy signed up for. Chris riley. Mr. Riley do you wish to speak or just be shown in favor? Mr. Riley shown in favor. Janet gillis do you wish to speak or just be shown in favor.

>> Just shown in favor.

>> You will be shown in favor. Karen richardson. Karen richardson is for. Bill bunch. Bill bunch? bill bunch is for. Will wind? will wind? Mr. Wind is for. Deanna granger. Followed by stuart shaw.

>> Good evening Mayor, Council Members of the City Council, City Manager. I am here as a board member of the Austin museum of art and on my own behalf. I want you to know that I wholeheartedly support the direction being taken by the City Council in the negotiation was c.s.c. For the future development of City owned space which will benefit Austin and the Austin museum of art as ms. Ferrar explained. Both projects will compliment and enhance each other. Many City Councils have shared your vision for a new City hall, for the consolidation of office space from municipal employees and for a gathering space for Austinites. You have the opportunity to bring this vision to fruition with the added benefit of a first class art museum in the downtown area which is also a vision that was shared by earlier Councils and the Austin voters. Under the guidance and leadership of elizabeth ferrar, the Austin museum of art is establishing its reputation as a new resource not only in Austin, in Texas, and probably the United States. Well planned growth and foresight to address the economic and cultural needs of the community now and for our children will allow Austin to continue to thrive and maintain its reputation as one of the best places to live, work, place and raise our children. I commend you and the staff for the work that's been completed to date, I urge you to move forward with the plans that have been developed in this area that will combine business, municipal and a cultural complex, thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, stuart shaw.

>> Good evening, Mayor. Council and staff. I am stuart shaw, I am a neighboring landowner to the c.s.c. Project with my partners. And my company has done a lot of the retail leasing in this particular area. We continue to have questions and approach City staff with these questions and every time our questions are answered. We are real impressed with that. I have spoken in favor of this, but I am so in favor of it I wanted to say again that the vision that this project offers to downtown Austin to help with the vie talent that we already -- vitality we already see in the warehouse district is phenominal. It's an amazing feat if we can accomplish it. I do support it, I ask that each of you support it. I want to just mention to you that that -- one of the things that we look forward to is having that many new employees in this particular area of downtown which needs this kind of redevelopment. Who are buying the goods and services and eating in the restaurants and the various places of businesses that could be offered in that ground level commercial space. That's an exciting prospect, exciting for us to be able to think in terms of seeing in the near term. I think it's exciting for Austin, everyone I talked to in the City of Austin thinks that that's a real benefit for it. For Austin and we look forward to having it. Thank you for all of the work that you and staff and Council are doing on this.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, sir. Natalie lemaru does not wish to speak, but is in favor. Daniel grecko not speaking but for. Ted siff. Linda taylor is signed up not speaking but for. Welcome.

>> Thank you, Mayor and Council. I appear here as an individual, ted siff, also as president of the old Austin neighborhood association, a downtown neighborhood association, part of the downtown Austin neighborhood association coalition of neighborhoods. Also as a downtown resident and/or property owner for the last 26 years. I am absolutely and solidly behind and in favor of this proposal. I am in favor much it because of its economic impact to the community's benefit. Its benefits to the environmental protection issues that it at least in part -- at least defers if not resolves and it's benefits to the community and livability issues that so many others have spoken so articulately for. I commend the City Council and Mayor for your vision forks your leadership and initiative that you have taken to make this decision to utilize downtown property that has been at the very least underutilized for as many have pointed out almost three decades. I also commend the chamber leadership, the environmental leaders in our community, the neighborhood leaders who have also supported this development. But to try to be just a little bit different from every other speaker who has been in favor of this development, let me just point out as an individual two issues that I do think not to anybody's surprise are certainly not completely resolved yet. The homeless resource center and liberty lunch issue raise the question of relocation. One area -- one potential source of relocation is other underutilized City properties. I point out two: there's a major building that's on the Austin recreation center land. Near lamar and 12th street. That has been unused since the the -- memorial day floods of '81. Obviously there are problems with that building, but it's a three story big building and might be able to be adoptively reused. A similar property exists on the deep eddy parking lot property. City owned property that is simply decaying and has been decaying for over two decades. The second issue of course is not completely resolved by this, although helped is what is going to eventually happen to the development entitlementments or lack thereof of the terrace p.u.d.. I strongly urge as robin rather and others have that we not lose sight of the fact that we are simply delaying the decision on what topped that land. Not completely resolving it by moving c.s.c. Downtown. All that having been said, let me -- [buzzer sounding].

>> Re-emphasize that I am in favor of this development and appreciate your leadership on it.

>>.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you very much. Bruce walinsik. [One moment please] and that is the amount of parking that is available for retail to be viable in the downtown area during the daytime in the warehouse district. Last year on the ten weekdays that we were open before evening, this is during daytime business hours, we had better than 10,000 paid attendants at the Christmas ba czar. That doesn't count the complimentary tickets on top of that. If we can't park these people downtown or they can't get downtown or all the construction is happening at once and they can't get to us by the construction we're going to have to move and we would like to stay downtown, be a vital attraction to downtown. When fortune magazine says Austin is a no. 1 Business City, they talk about our ace in the hole being the wonderful events and I would like to stay in Austin so when you plan this thing, please, as much paid daytime parking that is available to other businesses in the area that aren't necessary in those blocks so that we can continue to be a vital part of downtown a vital part of the Austin economy and a cultural attraction, we would appreciate it. I know other folks in the neighborhood that are in business would also like to have that kind of parking available. Thank you very much.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Go ahead, Council Member.

>>Slusher: I'll just say after the hearing I would like for ms. Futrell to address that issue and probably some others that come up before then.

>>Mayor Watson: I was getting ready to say, I will say one thing about it, you revitalize all those blocks and bring all those people down there, a lot of them will be down there and walking over to your event.

>> That's one of the reasons I have to be in favor of this because they will be.

>>Mayor Watson: we're creating a heck of a market for you, but I will ask ms. Futrell to address the parking because I think you will find that appealing too. Thank you for your comments. Ricky hall. Ricky hall. Mr. Hall.

>> Yes, sir.

>>Mayor Watson: please come forward.

>> I was. Councilmembers, how are you doing? rick hall. I'm always amazed when I come up here and talk because I'm scared to death to do it. My palms are sweating and everything. I'm against this in the sense that you all are selling out too short. Location, location, location. You have four light rail lines -- three light rail lines and one commuter light rain line coming down to this property abutting this property, running through this property. The projected green line coming down from howard lane to lamar to guadalupe is going to turn right at guadalupe and third. It's going to carry approximately 20,000 people on it. According to capital metro's estimates. The green light running in from the south on Congress avenue is another 10,000. That's 30,000 people coming in on this rail line right to this property. Then you have the blue line, which is going to share the commuter rail district line. The commuter rail district line provided by senate Bill sb 657, the commuter rail study just projected 10,000 people running on that rail line. So there you have another 10,000 coming right by the seaholm power plant and over to third and glap again. So that's the green, the blue, the commuter rail district, and then the orange. The orange is the one that the experts at the omni hotel who came in for the workshop were hesitant to do until the Mayor's office sent in a representative as requested by the chairman of the capital metro board. Capital metro chairman said the people had been telling him that there needed to be an orange line to the new airport. So there you have four different light rail lines which will all hub and abut this property. Guaranteeing tens of thousands of people coming in on a non-congested form of transportation. 11.9 Million sounds good on the short term. On the longterm, you are selling Austin short. Secondly, all cities which have been densified and infilled are the ones with the highest pollution levels and the highest congestion levels. The concept of pulling these projects out of the suburbs and putting them in town is going to help with congestion or pollution is false. Thank you for allowing me to speak.

>>.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, sir. Cheryl brown. Cheryl -- welcome.

>> Mayor Watson, Council Members, I would like to preface my remarks by saying that I have lived a good part of my adult life abroad outside of this country and I have lived in very dense urban environments, very pleasureably and happily and returning home to the united states and settling in Austin, Texas I have been long awaiting the day when I could anticipate living and working in the urban core with a degree of physical safety that I do not have tonight because when I leave here I'm going to have to walk four blocks the my car and I'm going to have to be alert, aware and quite asubstitute in order to be sure that I make it safely to my car. I hope that in five or six years that will not be the case. I have a few things that I would like to add to the argument on the c.s.c. Development and I hope that will gain a little bit of insight into my positive acceptance of this project. One thing that it will do undoubtedly from all of the research that we've been privy to look at is that it will signal to other businesses that Austin is moving forward in a bold manner to make decisions on a regional basis that will improve the quality of life and increase density. Density is not a bad word. It will spur public transportation. It will increase the tax base. Everyone agrees to that. One thing that it will do that has not been in the discussions that I had seen on the internet or in the paper on this project is it that will help to provide a 24-hour environment in the downtown core which will reduce crime and have a positive impact on the quality of life. Research studies have shown that communities, especially large metropolitan areas that have a 24-hour environment in their inner core are healthy cities. The music scene alone cannot do that. I suggest to you that a large residential base in the downtown area will do that. I am totally in favor of this project and I commend you on your boldness. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: ross smith and then Paul robbins.

>> I support the project and I'm working under the assumption that it is going to go through so I would like you to you on in a slightly different direction. Regardless of how this is done regardless what legal trappings you apply to it, the taxpayers here are the landords for this property, the c.s.c. Property. You folks are our agent. Whatever goes in on this property, we are going to be stuck looking at for a long, long time. That means that you folks are going to be the arbiters of architectural good sense on our behalf. I'm assuming that c.s.c. Is going to hire the architects to design the buildings, but I hope that you folks will keep some degree of control over what goes in. I have tleen things that I would hope that you keep in mind. The first is that whatever buildings get built are compatible with the warehouse district, seaholm, with City Council building that you folks put in, that they don't clash. I mean the worst thing in the world is to have a building sit here for 100 years that clashes with everything else. The second thing is don't forget the lessons of Congress avenue. If you walk up and down Congress avenue the first thing that you notice is a building that goes straight up ten stories, instantly turns that part of the street into a concrete canyon. Buildings that come out to street level at their first floor and stepped back from there give a sense of open space and airiness that are very easy to look at. The third thing is trees. There are lots of trees on the property that c.s.c. Is going to be building on. I don't need to tell you how bad the pr would be for computers coming up and down lavaca and guadalupe to see bulldozers pulling up those trees every morning. So to the greatest extent possible the greatest design they come up should preserve the trees. The trees that the City tries to plant often they go bottom up. The trees that are out here now have been thriving out here for a long time without anybody's help and I think we should just keep letting them.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. And at the end of the public speaking, I'll ask ms. Futrell to also address that because a number of of your issues are -- we've been discussing. Mr. Robbins.

>> Council, Paul robbins, an environmental and consumer activist. I wanted to first comment that when ms. Futrell said that she had made 40 presentations, these were after the fact. These people were told how this would occur, but they were not asked if it should occur. Second point I would like to make is that -- I ran into a former government official today when I was at u.t. Law school and this person questioned how you can lease a government building or government land without a bid. This former official who worked for another branch of government had never heard of such a thing. I am appealing to people in the listening audience who may be as upset as I am about the process by which this is being done. I am not completely convinced this is legal. How can you lease something for 139 years without a competitive bid? is -- if there is a lawyer listening or anyone who can afford to hire a lawyer to scrutinize this kind of thing, I am appealing to you. Consider this. Can the City attorney -- finally, can the City attorney please justify this for me? can this be explained on the website?

>>Mayor Watson: we'll be happy to provide you an explanation. It is legal, it has been looked at, we've even hired outside Council to assure us that, Mr. Robbins.

>> No doubt you think it's legal. I would like to hear justify indications.

>>Mayor Watson: it occurs to me whatever justification we give you you will

>>Slusher: add that to the lition of the things at the end of the hearing.

>>Mayor Watson: sure.

>> That is why there are courts, of course, because there are differing opinions. Good evening.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you very much, Mr. Robbins. Charles scalern. Charles scalern. Mr. Scalern, do you wish to speak?

>> no.

>>Mayor Watson: you will just be shown for. George cofer.

>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, good evening Council, City Manager. My name is george cofer and I'm here tonight to speak in favor of the project. I think it is going to be a great catalyst for good things for downtown Austin and for the future of Austin. I commend assistant City manager toby futrell for going through an extraordinary process with the environmental community. I've been involved in the environmental community since 1990. I'm a founding member of the s.o.s. Coalition and sit on the s.o.s. Alliance board. And she went out of her way to meet with several of us week after week to answer what began as probably a 10-page list of questions. As these questions have been answered, as the project has been improved, I believe the environmental community in general and a majority of the environmental community are now in support of this project because it does offer many benefits to the City that will to some degree shape what we look like 100 years from now. And as you know, the environmental community is most concerned and has as one of its priorities stopping urban sprawl. If for no other reason this is a good project, it is a good project because I think it reverses the trend of urban sprawl. Thank you all for the many, many hours you have put in on this. I realize that there are still questions, I realize that people are still working to be sure that the taxpayers get a good deal, and I urge you to continue those discussions and deliberations to be sure that we can get the best deal that we can for the taxpayers. Again, I support this project strongly. I hope it moves forward. And I thank c.s.c. For having the patience and the courage to work with us and to be a good partner. Welcome to Austin. I hope you stay here for a long time. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Bob all bright. Alice vargas signed up not speaking but for. Lucy buck. Lucy buck. Lucy buck has signed up for. Welcome, Mr. Allbright.

>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of Council, City staff I'm here to speak in favor of the c.s.c. Project and also in my capacity as vice president of development for amli residential who also plays a role in the larger project. Over 13 months ago this City Council approved a resolution to authorize the City Manager and City attorney to negotiate with amli to enter into a lease agreement for block 4, had is one of the blocks that is now under consideration for c.s.c.. We began our planning and spent a lot of time and money getting that plo ses in place and then we were -- process in place and then we were asked by p Mayor and staff about last november if we would step to the side and while the City had the opportunity to see if it could come to terms with c.s.c.. We did so and did so willingly because without question bringing a major employer like this to downtown Austin is in the best interest of the City. And speaking personally as someone who became a resident of Austin for the first time in 1966, I am delighted to see what is happening here with c.s.c.. But there is a bigger picture here with this project. What makes this project so appealing is not just c.s.c. But what we're buildings in terms of what some other speakers have spoken to already with the other elements, the museum, the retail, the residential and the -- the larger project as a whole. And so I really think that the people involved in this from toby futrell on the staff up to you Mayor, everyone who has been involved with this has shown tremendous foresight in trying to put together a very complicated project which we are delighted tore a part of and support completely. I want to speak to one of the issues which is parking. Part of our project in the amli portion of this contemplates parking for the public on both of our blocks above and beyond the parking for residents and we are quite aware of the parking issue in this area. Another thing I would like to speak to is taxes. Yes, c.s.c. Will be contributing about $870,000 I think it is in tax. Amli is going to be bringing in an additional over half a million in tax to the City and that's not chopped liver either. So what you have done here is created a combined project that's going to generate well in excess of a million three from taxes from the five blocks involved between amli and c.s.c.. Godspeed, good luck, let's get this done and I'm looking forward to working with staff and Council on getting our portion of the project finished up as soon as we get c.s.c. Done. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, sir. Chris mc fadden signed up not speaking but for. Sam allison for. Shelly branch. Shelly branch. Shelly branch is for. Allen kaplan. Allen kaplan. Allen kaplan is for. Charles nave. Charles nave. Charles nave is for. Pat brocky not speaking but for. Barbara grove not speaking but for. Tim findly. Tim findly is for. Richard a. Martin is not speaking but for. Bryan Johnson for. Oret nezer for. Rick -- rick houston would be my best shot at it. Rick houston. For. Page mitchell. Page mitchell. Page mitchell is for. Mary hur. Mary hur. She is for. Carl daywood. Does not wish to speak but is for. Fred schmidt marks for and writes absolutely positively. Robin cravey.

>> I'm sorry to punctuate that long string of not speaking.

>>Mayor Watson: you notice I didn't even try you.

>> Mayor, Council, City manager and City attorney, I'm robin cravey. I stand before you tonight in my capacity as president of the zilker neighborhood association. And at the behest of the association's executive committee. I wrote to you on behalf of the association on February 3 noting that the proposal to bring c.s.c. Downtown has promise, but that it also has flaws. The virt us are easy to see. The premium would add new substance and -- I should say will add new substance and momentum to the growth of downtown. It would also remove one prospective tenant of an unwand tenant in the barton springs zone. There are our virt us that folks here have adequately set out, but there are some flaws. The unwanted development in the barton springs zone is still alive and ambitious. And the growth that will be added to downtown will be on the old model, meaning car dominated. The parking ratio in this project, and I don't know the latest numbers, but so far as I'm aware is just too high. It's not aimed at our transit dominated future but at our heavy driving past. And I know that the City has negotiated to bring down the parking ratio and my neighbors and I appreciate that. I understand that c.s.c. Has been very insistent on a high parking ratio and I can think of only one reason, they intend for every employee to bring a ton of glass and steel downtown every day. From the perspective of the zilker neighborhood that means that a sizable number of those vehicles will be passing through our neighborhood along south lamar and barton springs road and probably down some of our inner residential streets. This comes at a time when many of my neighbors and fellow officers are struggling with the meaning of smart growth. What we've -- while we've discussed it at great length, some fear smart growth is not about neighborhoods. I think smart growth is about neighborhoods. And this project represents a large effort on -- by the Mayor, the Council and the staff and it's quite an achiefment. But as we build downtown, we must be resolute in building it on a transit oriented model. Thank you very much.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you Mr. Cravey. Those are all the people signed up to speak at the public hearing on item no. 70. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing but then we are going to have some additional questions answered. Is there a motion? made by the Mayor Pro Tem. Seconded by Council Member Garcia. Any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries, the public hearing is closed. Before I go the ms. Futrell and start asking some questions, I do want to say and will say it again at the end of this presentation that we have an additional public hearing that is scheduled for next Thursday, april 1st, and that is in addition to even what we had said we were going to do when we first laid out this chain of public hearings and as anticipated that it would be an april first that the Council would act. Ms. Futrell, there were some questions raised and I wrote down one of the questions was Mr. Walinsic and his question was about parking in that area. Would you address the issue of parking.

>> We just had a chance to talk a little bit while the public hearing was going on. I think we're going to have a lot of synergy and a lot of ways we can help the Christmas bazaar. His primary concern was about daytime parking. It's interesting we're talking about the parking because Mr. Cravey, one of the issues with the neighborhood shows you there are both sides of this issue. You have heard some people today talk about needing more parking and you've heard some people talk about it's too much parking. And we have found this to be true in four months of going out and talking all over this community. For the armadillo Christmas bazaar there are probably over 3 hyundai time paid parking slots that could be available probably on the amli block and there may even be more than that. On our block during the day there's another 250. At night and daytime weekends and nights, 750. So way over 1,000 spaces that can be available for the warehouse district for the retail. There is no doubt in my mind that this is going to work well with the Christmas bazaar. That it will augment it, and possibly even for this Christmas because we believe we will have clean sites should this proposal pass, we can maybe provide some surface parking on the cleared lots which will help the Christmas bazaar that right now goes three blocks after they've unloaded to park their trucks. There are a number of things we might think about to try to work hand in hand with the Christmas bazaar.

>>Mayor Watson: and we can make a fortune. That's a joke, Mr. Walensic.

>>Slusher: from parking, could you go to traffic?

>> sure. Absolutely. And probably I shouldn't have skipped in the front part of the presentation, the concerns we hear because you have just nailed them. Parking, traffic are by far raised in every presentation we've gone to. I will tell you that separate of csc I think transportation and trfk is just on everybody's mind in a City and particularly a growing City like Austin. For those of you who work downtown like I do you know there is plenty of capacity on our roads downtown accept in peak hours. In peak hours or inner sections fail. And that causes a backup and that's your traffic congestion. So there are a thof things that both c.s.c. And the City since we've begun these discussions with vz are trying to do to mitigate traffic. But the biggest, the most important is to make sure this concentration of employees do not hit the roads at the same time at peak hours. And that's why in the development agreement c.s.c. Is agreeing to talk through continuing their policies on telecommuting, fex time, compressed workweek, staggered work hours. For the City who have 950 employees downtown we have started an incentive program for paying people not to take a parking place. We have been working with capital metro on downtown express vans. There was another gentleman who speak earlier about light rail. The light rail, one of the proposed sites is fourth street. If this concentration of development and activity in employees doesn't enhance that possibility to make that viable, probably nothing else will. It's two blocks away. So you could talk on and on about parking, but in sum rewe've spent a lot of time talking about it. Because of this project we have put out a -- we are putting out a request for proposal that will do a comprehensive traffic analysis of the central business district. We have also already issued a request for proposal to do the same thing for supply and demand analysis of parking. So we're not just addressing the little area. We want to address it holisticly across downtown. And that is probably in summary what we've been trying to work on and do.

>>Mayor Watson: [inaudible] Mr. Smith raised the issues related to design and he talked about compatibility and -- compatible designs and trees and that kind of aspect. So describe the process that we are following with regard to design and since trees come up, let's talk about landscaping and what it means in this area. And I won't -- I'll fight the urge to ask whether or not the pictures I'm looking at are compatible -- those designs are compatible with anything. I'll stay away from that and let you answer.

>> And once again this is very reflective of the presentations we've done all over the community. Design issues are one of the issues that people are raising. It also answers a question or a comment at least that Mr. Robbins talked about earlier. One of his comments was that although we've been, you know, we've been all over town every night if not twice a day doing presentations that we've simply just been telling people what this proposal is and we haven't been engaging in a meaningful discussion or get feedback and actually changing and adjusting when in fact we have done that extensively and design has been one of those areas. We have been three times now to the design commission. We intend to put one of the design commissioners on our project team working through design standards for this area. You are going to have a -- probably a minimum of four different architects between the art museum, amli, City of Austin City hall and plaza and the c.s.c. Proposal. So we had originally started or I did naively thinking everything needed to be very consistent, and one of the things the design commission has helped me understand is that you want it to look different, you want it to blend, you want it to be compatible, but you don't want it to look alike. They have given us a number of suggestions. We have suggested we have someone on board to very strictly and singlely look at the public spaces on all these blocks and make sure they flow and work together, the public court yards, the big plub plaza, all the open space. We have just recently hired that urban design planner in our planning department and she will be working on this project team also. We are very conscious of the need for landscaping in this area. What you want to do to make this retail and these blocks attractive and not have them be ugly and old urban design is you want wide walkable sidewalks, you want them to be shaded and friendly. We've loaded a lot of money in the incentive package and in our own budget for heavily landscaping and putting trees along these sidewalks. Our goal is that you will have a walkable downtown with people living, working, shopping and on the streets and moving around with it being very, very friendly for all of that. So we're conscious of the design issues, we intend to coordinate together, we've hired a person specifically to work with this. We're working extensively with the design commission. We have also used the draft design guidelines that have come out of the design commission as the foundation for developing our design standards.

>>Mayor Watson: let me ask Mr. Cowser to come up. Mr. Robbins asked a question with regard to law and before I -- what I would like to do is ask you if you could address the issue of how one approaches this from a legal standpoint.

>> Sure. The City attorney's office and my firm have both looked at this question of the 99-year lease of City property specifically in the context of the state competitive bid statute. And I think there are four important points for the Council and the public to understand about that. The first is that a lease and a sale of real property are fundamentally different types of transactions. I mean it sounds self-explanatory, but at the end of a lease the property goes back to the lessor, that's what makes it a lease. In the case of a sale, once you sell the property, it's gone. And there is nothing in Texas law or the law of other american jurisdictions that we've come across that says that just because a lease lasts a long time that that converts it into a sale. In Texas in particular there are other types of public bodies, schools districts, counties, hospital districts, other types of special districts that have entered into longterm leases of pickup property that the attorney general of Texas has reviewed in different attorney general opinions and letter opinions and there's nothing we've come across in any of the attorney general opinions and letter rulings that suggest that the chief law enforcement officer of the state of Texas use a long-term lease as turning into a sale because some of these are longterm leases of 40, 60 or more years. Finally -- third, if you will indulge me just a minute in a history lesson, the City of Austin and c.s.c. Are not inventing the t 9-year lease. If you go back to mid evil england that's where the concept of the 99 year lease comes from and they've been with us since about the time of the battle of hastings I think. Under old english law --.

>>Mayor Watson: shortly after the rebuilding [inaudible]. [Laughter].

>>Spelman: Council Member Garcia voted on the first one. [Laughter].

>>Garcia: but still voting.

>> Certain properties such as church property and entailed property could not be sold and in order to make beneficial use of that property when an owner didn't want to use the property for his purpose or institutional purposes, 99-year leases were invented and so they have been with us for a long time in the english courts and english law for a long time have recognized that those type of leases as well were not illegal sales. The last point with respect to the City of Austin this is of course a home rule City and under the constitution and laws of the state of Texas a home rule City retains the governmental powers that are not specifically taken away from it or withheld from it by state law. Now, the City is subject to the competitive bid statute, but it's subject to the specific terms of the competitive bid statute and that statute addresses sales, it doesn't address leases. So when that statute is applied to the City, it would be applied under its terms, butted it would not be expanded beyond its terms because there would be no presumption that the state has taken away a power it otherwise would have or any other home rule status. To summarize, we've looked at this, we think that a lease and a sale are fundamentally different whether you are looking at Texas law or the law of other american jurisdictions and we're comfortable that the City can enter into this transaction.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you. Are there any other questions of ms. Futrell? thank you ms. Futrell. We've closed the public hearing and those are the major questions that came up. Again, let me reiterate, you can get information about this transaction on the City of Austin website. One thing I will point out with regard to the lease and that sort of possibility, one of the questions that I've heard, lease versus sale, one of the questions I've heard is does it make sense to lease, for example, to this company on this property. And I won't go into a whole lot of detail, but let me mention a couple of thing from the standpoint of the risk for the taxpayer. If you have a piece of property that let's say you decide -- just pick one of these pieces of property that's owned by the City of Austin and you decided that you wanted to put it on the block and let it go for sale in hopes that a developer who is speculating they will be able to achieve something will put together a good bid package, offer you money and go do it and then what could happen, one of the risks that you face is that speculative venture doesn't pan out for one reason or another. Then what happens is something may not be built, and so once again you do not end up with something on the tax rolls. In this instance, the developer, if you will, c.s.c. Is also your end user. They are seeking to build this because they have a specific need they are trying to fill. So it is a much less speculative venture on the part of the Austin taxpayer than many other configurations. In addition, because of computer science corporation's financial situation, they are in a position from a financial standpoint and a financing standpoint that it is a much less speculative venture than if you were to, say, have some sort of process, some sort of beauty contest that somebody wins that beauty contest, but then because of financial markets or otherwise they come back to us in six months or a year and say, well, we can't get our financing, and so the deal falls through and everything is back to square one. Again from a speculation standpoint and a risk standpoint, this is something that because of the strength of the financing of c.s.c. They are going to be able to build it and they are going to be the end user so it's less speculative. That also plays a role in this concept of sale versus lease, at least from some of the questions I've heard. Next Thursday, april 1st, there will be another public hearing. It is scheduled for a time certain of 6:30 p.m., and we welcome the public to come to that. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact us and contact us through our public information office or contact us on the website and obtain information. Next item, conduct a public hearing on a request to waive the minimum separation distance requirement of City code section 8-3-4 between a proposed gas station convenience store exxon tiger market at 6707 cameron road at u.s. Highway 290 east which intends to -- thank you all for coming tonight. Which intends to sell alcoholic beverages and a public school, reagan high school. It is filed no. Sp 980470 aw. Applicant exxon company usa and the agent is the wallace group, Christopher ruiz and I'll recognize Mr. Guernsey.

>> Our next request is an application for an alcoholic beverage waiver. It's for 6707 cameron road. Under section 834 a, no person may sell or engage in the business of selling any alcoholic beverage where the place of business of that person is located within 300 feet of a chump she public school or public hospital. The proposed gas station convenience store which there is already an existing gas station is within 300 feet of reagan high school. The proposed facility is on the exhibit to my right. It will include many gas pumps and a larger store that would have the potential of selling alcohol if this waiver is granted. The area directly to the south is bordered by u.s. 290 East, the high school is across the street to the north and northeast. There is a restaurant immediately to the east and some offices to the west. There is consent that should be in the form of a letter that's in your support material from the school in support of this alcoholic beverage waiver request with the Written consent to the waiver under the section of our codes by the school, the applicants -- for the proposed place of business may be considered by the City Council sufficient justification to grant this waiver. If you have any questions I would be more than happy to answer them for you at this time.

>>Goodman: thank you. Are there any questions?

>>Lewis: yes, I have a question. On the last one, didn't we -- have we redid the ordinance to include day care centers?

>> yes, there is a provision of the state law that allowed for separation of day care facilities. After Council passed that ordinance and additional research, it would not apply to a convenience store, it would apply basically to those stabments that sell more alcohol than food so they primarily would apply to cocktail lounges. This is just a gas station convenience store. To my knowledge there is no day care adjoining the property.

>>Lewis: well, it applies to someone that sells more than 51% alcohol versus food?

>> that's correct.

>>Lewis: if these people don't sell any food and they sell alcohol, why wouldn't it apply to them?

>> well, this is implying they would sell less than 50% alcoholic sales so they would qualify for food sales under our ordinance. Now, if they were to sell more than that amount we could go out and investigate and look at their receipts and then they would be considered a liquor store and they would need a zoning change to cs 1 district if their alcoholic beverage sales exceeded their food sales.

>>Lewis: well, I'm saying they are going to sell some food there, right?

>> yes. And I think they can probably go into greater detail. Our code actually specifies a certain amount of shelf space, a majority maintained for food sale type items as well as grocery.

>>Lewis: that's all I have.

>>Goodman: okay. Any other questions? okay. Why don't we go ahead and ask the applicant to make a presentation. You will have three minutes.

>> I'm karen buck, I work with exxon company usa and as greg briefly discussed the purpose of our being on the agenda tonight is to obtain the City Council's approval for a waiver of the 300 foot distance requirement to a public school. And more specifically in this case reagan high school. I'm not going to go back over the alcohol beverage code and the things greg discussed, but as he stated the code does state that justification tr a waiver does exist in your City code in the applicant obtains public consent from any public school, church or hospital and in this ways we have obtained reagan's approval to proceed into this request. I just want to give you a little bit of overview. First of all this is the site plan in a little bit more sketched detail to what greg had just shown you. I want to spend just a few minutes giving a description of what this concept is. These facilities -- first of all Austin is one of the highest growth markets in the country and I mean that in a very big sense. It's not just for gas station opportunities, it's for any type of growth opportunity. You all are well aware of that we as an organization, exxon, made a decision about a year and a half ago to make this one of our market modernization programs. What ha means is we made the decision to take all of our facilities and modernize those where we could to make it a better, more visible, bigger type facility for the customers. 17 Projects have been included in that market modernization program. We started the project in august of 1998 and we expect to complete the total modernization by july of 1999. We've invested about $25 million to bring in this mini grocery store concept to service neighborhoods and the travelers since we have a lot of sites off I-35. The concept is not just what you typically think of as a convenience store. We sell fresh fruit, sandwiches, frozen fruits, dairy, coffees, dispensed beverages, an area dedicated to the marketplace, which is fresh sandwiches we bring in, we have a contract with ann tones. The beer sales are -- they con toot a small part of the we sell food. We -- the beer sales as a swren rule in terms of total space within the store is probably about 20%. Is the total space that is taking up in this entire facility. We have three facilities completed at this point in time that started operating between January and March. One at burnet and anderson, one at ben white and Congress and one at 183 and burnet. Some of you may have been by those facilities. The customers seem to like the concept. They like the ability to find a lot of variety. [Buzzer sounds].

>>Goodman: if you could finish up.

>> I will they like the ability for one stop shopping and the other thing I want to touch on is the security of the we have off site security.

>>Goodman: let us officially ask you a question then because you are going way over. Do we have a question to ask?

>>Spelman: could you please talk about on site security. I would like to hear about it.

>> One of the questions the high school was concerned about was the security. And we have cameras located at all of the corners of the outside of the building. So that they are picking up the outside of the building from every perspective. And we monitor off-site. What that means is we actually have a place in another location that they can see from everywhere, they can see inside is store, outside, everything. They check in a minimum of once a day with cash here's to make sure everything is okay. This isn't let's just take a picture at a snapshot in time, it's constantly out there being monitored. That's basically what I want to be able to tell you about in terms of the concept.

>>Goodman: Council Member Spelman.

>>Spelman: do you have a policy on the number of clerks working the store at any particular hour?

>> we never have less than two people at the facility at any point in time.

>>Spelman: even 3:00 in the morning?

>> even at 3 a.m. There is two people at this facility.

>>Spelman: do you have a policy for some convenience stores have signs covering the windows so it's difficult for people to see in and out. Do you have a policy on that?

>> guess if I'm understanding your question correctly, from a visibility perspective, we prefer not to have anything blocking the windows because we like for people to be able to see into the facility for the very reason of safety.

>>Spelman: done your homework. Thank you.

>>Goodman: Council Member Lewis

>>Lewis: as I understand it, this facility is almost complete.

>> Yes.

>>Lewis: and you are just now coming for a waiver to -- for beer sales? is that because you had the idea since december that this was an automatic thing?

>> this is a facility -- we judge our facilities on an individual basis, in other words, we make each investment decision on an individual basis.

>>Lewis: I'm saying you built this tiger mart and I'm sure you built it to comply with beer sales. Without having the permit. And it's almost complete, because I live in that area. Is that -- is that not correct?

>> that is not a correct assessment. That's what I want to say, we make our investment decisions on a site by site basis. This particular site we made the investment decision that we felt like we would want to build it in particular because of the area that it's in. Because the demographic situation is such that there hasn't been a lot of reinvestment in the area. We made a decision that we felt like it would be a good investment decision for the market regardless.

>>Lewis: according to this letter it says that the -- one [inaudible] the sale of alcoholic beverages near schools. Did you contact any of the surrounding neighborhood organizations.

>> The surrounding neighborhood -- we did not contact any directly but they have to have notification as part of the process and to my knowledge I have not heard any objection up to this point in time from any of the surrounding neighborhoods on this site.

>>Lewis: can you shed some light on that? as to what neighborhood organizations was contacted?

>> Council Member, I'm not aware of opposition to this alcohol beverage request made by any neighborhood association. We do send out to the neighborhood associations that border this property within approximately 300 to 400 linear feet of the site. Let me just film back over here and I can tell you the ones we had actually notified. Looks like coronado hills association, old town homeowners association, edward joseph development, save our neighborhoods, zone watch neighborhood association, something called taking action inc., stant John's advisory board, villas, saint John neighborhood association. Podair, peoples forum. That looks like the neighborhood associations that we contacted.

>>Lewis: all right. I don't doubt that you have -- that they will have cameras at the store. My concern is not what is going to happen on the site but what happens when people come in and buy beer and take it off site. That's my major concern. Because just -- I guess east of that is the-he what is it? polo, the restaurant, and then on the other side of that is the school grounds. And I know that your cameras is not going to be monitoring east of the restaurant that's to the east of you so -- and that's my concern, even though it's still on the street, but it's adjacent to the school and it's entering into the school parking lot. So for that reason I can't support beer sales that close to any school, especially a school with the dropout rate and the problems that reagan have had in the past year or two years. So, you know, it's -- it's just something that I think that we can do better than offer beer sales to the area that close to school. I realize that there's other areas -- other places in the area that sells beer, but it's not something that would be approved today if it came forward today, and I -- because I don't -- I don't even understand the -- it appears that it wasn't too many people at the meeting when they held a meeting because reading the letter and the acceptance by the school of the waiver -- or request for waiver, it just don't seem that they took anything under consideration. So -- but knowing what I know about the area since I live in the area, it's inconceivable to me that even though you have cameras, security cameras there, that you can monitor east of your property. And it's not that people is going to drink beer in the store or next to the store or at the gas pumps. But they are going to take it and drink it off site. So, you know, that's my opinion about it.

>>Goodman: are there further questions for her right now? we have speakers. Okay. The first speaker was barrett Sunday berg and he was unable to stay. But he left a statement which I'll read to you. It's in opposition to this request. It says as a member of the winder park neighborhood association I am opposed to the request to wave the no alcohol sales near schools at reagan high school. Our teenagers have enough problems without having nor alcohol outlets marking their way back to school. Reagan also conducts classes at night so students are affected then too. The area near reagan is one where local neighborhood associations citizens on patrol, A.P.D. And the weed and seed program are trying to reduce crime. Two of the worst spots where trouble has been occurring are nearby convenience stores that sell alcohol t last thing we need is another convenience store selling alcohol in reagan's backyard. Please vote against the request for a waiver of the minimum distance requirement. Thank you, barrett sun berg. Speaker no. 2 Is David malik. Not here. He was in favor. Karen buck.

>> I spoke.

>>Goodman: chris reese.

>> I get three minutes, correct?

>>Goodman: yes.

>> I'm chris reese with the wallace group. I would like to go over with this picture right here shows the entire area of the exxon. And first off I would like to point out the location of the exxon. It's at the most visible corner at that intersection of cameron and 290. We have full visibility throughout and with the lighting scheme and the camera schemes it's the best security of anyplace in the area. I would also like to point out there are -- the purple shows 10 different places that currently sell alcohol surrounding the school. Included in those are two of them within the 300 foot boundary close to the school. I would like to point out also that it's on the frontage road which is more secure area, apd Austin police department better security in patrolling. It's also illegal to sell kmol to minors. So a lot of the problems you are talking about, they take it off site, we can't control it taking off site but we can prevent it from getting it on site so I don't really think that's an issue. The primary routes to the high school are from saint John's and berkman off athletic -- not athletic drive. Here is athletic drive and here is saint John's right behind the school and berkman. Here are your routes. And again, we're on the frontage road and driving traffic -- we don't have a lot of kids traffic from the school. Also on here this shows access x's, these x's shown on the map, they show ingress and egress points from the school. And again they are all from the furthest point away from the proposed exxon. In our -- our main point is that exxon would not want to be a competitive disadvantage without selling alcohol. Again, you can see ten other places that do sell alcohol. And our whole purpose is to be a won stop shopping. Our main goal is to sell gas, but if you can also sell other products that attract people when they do one stop shopping it's preferable. To summarize, the principal obtained support of the parties and with the principal's support we got the school district to support it and they sent a letter, a waiver request. The Austin City staff has a recommendation for approval. And exxon requests a vote from City Council for an alcohol distance waiver also. That will be it.

>>Spelman: Mayor Pro Tem?

>>Goodman: Council Member Spelman.

>>Spelman: if you could answer a couple questions for me. [Buzzer sounds].

>>Spelman: we don't want to keep the mic on. I'm looking at the purple spots on the map close to reagan high school particularly those close to the entrance and exit points.

>> Okay.

>>Spelman: the one right next to the exxon, that's a restaurant, is it not?

>> correct.

>>Spelman: slefr you. Okay. And you had presumably you couldn't take alcoholic beverages off site, you would have to drink them at the restaurant itself.

>> Correct, but they are still within 200 feet.

>>Spelman: I understand that. Up and to the left --

>> correct.

>>Spelman: who is that.

>> That's Texas market, a convenience store.

>>Spelman: and they have a permit they can sell alcoholic beverages already?

>> correct.

>>Spelman: and they are well within the entrance point at the northwest corner of the high school itself? they are right across the street basically, right?

>> yes.

>>Spelman: how about up and to the right there?

>> up here? that's a conoco gas station and convenience store.

>>Spelman: that's about what, two blocks away?

>> correct. That's a highly traveled route compared to the main frontage road.

>>Spelman: so most of the kids would be walking home or riding a bicycle home would be going up berkman?

>> berkman and saint John's are the main routes.

>>Spelman: so the logical places for them to pass if they wanted to pick up a beer on the way home would probably be the other two places, the conoco and the other, smashing?

>> it's illegal to sell it.

>>Spelman: I understand that. It would be just as illegal for them to sell it as you.

>> If they could obtain it, which is highly unlikely.

>>Spelman: thank you.

>>Goodman: Council Member Spelman.

>>Lewis: let me ask, you have the egress points to the school?

>> correct. Shown with the x.

>>Lewis: what is that along that right there by the -- right behind the restaurant there, the first two x's.

>> Right here?

>>Lewis: yes.

>> Those are parking entrances and exits.

>>Lewis: where? up at the parking lot? up at the corner of the parking lot?

>> right, that's the entrance and there's the exit for the cars parking. [One moment please]. I don't understand why you waited until after you built the building to come for the permit to sell alcoholic beverages rajs.

>> I'll address that question. And the make of the investment decision because we think it's the right thing to do in this case for the demographic area. May I finish, please? we did not wait to come into this process until after we were under construction. We started the process to request into this variance actually in august. That is the first time we met with Dr. Scott at the high school. And we had several conversations with her, phone conversations and met with her on two or three occasions. So we actually started the process in august. It was not until the december time frame when we were able to finally get the documentation, which is the letter, that allowed us to formally enter into the process through the City. And we submitted that application I believe in the latter part of January. It's just that this is the time that we've been able to get placed on the agenda based on the schedule and the agendas you all have had over the last two or three months. So we started this process back in august.

>>Lewis: so the denial of the application to sell beer is not going to determine whether or not the station -- goes into operation. Is that what you're telling me?

>> the station is going to open. We are there, we are building it. I am simply here to tell you again, we don't want to be put at a competitive disadvantage because there are other convenience stores that are within 300 feet of the school that are selling alcoholic beverages today. We would like to be in the other position as the other people we have to be out there working against.

>>Lewis: I mean, across the street those other places there, one of them is randall's, right?

>> correct. The randall's, centennial liquor store, City market, she will gas station convenience core, conoco station convenience store.

>>Lewis: but those are across the highway.

>> Correct. Those two are on the more traveled route for school access. They get far more student travel.

>>Lewis: Lewis I live in the area. I know what you're talking about. But as I said, you know, to add another place for beer to be purchased by teenagers or by people that's purchasing beer for teenagers, as far as I'm concerned is an unacceptable situation. And if any of those places that's not east of the -- south of the highway, but any of those other places that came in, especially that Texas market over there on st. John's, if they came in today for a permit, they wouldn't get it either. So, I mean -- and I think that you guys should have been aware of the flavor or the thing that we've been trying to do in that area. I don't know, knowing that the saint John's neighborhood as I do, I don't know what you guys have contributed or attended any of the meetings with the group that is working in the area to try to reduce the crime and reduce dropout and provide things for children, young people to do, but to -- to put another place for them to consume alcohol -- because I tell you, most of the kids that will be at that station do not drive. They won't be there to get gasoline, they'll be there for some 21-year-old to buy them beer. And I know that. It's just like any other place that's close around a campus, they -- at the Texas store over there, people hang around there and they buy kids beer, you know, and then they take the beer and put it in their car or walk off and drink it, and that's exactly what we're trying to stop. If no place in that whole area would sell beer, it wouldn't bother me a bit. So being at a disadvantage is not something that I can accept.

>> Well, I think you're talking --.

>>Lewis: because you didn't sell beer before. You wanted to sell gasoline.

>> That's why we're redevelop willing, to be more competitive. That's the reason we redeveloped.

>>Mayor Watson: Council Member Garcia?

>>Garcia: some of the questions that you had as to how the students move, all my three boys went to reagan, so -- the students that live in this area, which is core in a do hills, and that is the villa's, they walk on berkman and they don't have any contact. The ones that live in st. John's come out st. John's here and this is the only place that, like Council Member Lewis was saying, stands in the way of their neighborhood. My concern with this one is that this is where they practice football and this is where they practice baseball baseball. So during the football season and baseball season, the students congregate in this area. And then they move to here or they move this way, and this particular facility is in their way and it's not across the highway. Highway 290 is a pretty big obstacle. I know that they sell it here, they sell it at randall's and they sell at the at the liquor stores, but it doesn't have the same attraction to me because this one is right there. The kids congregate here to come watch the football practice or the baseball practice. So it is a bigger -- this one is a bigger attraction than any other. This one -- those ones are pretty far away. Kids come to nelson field basically when they go to nelson field to practice football or to practice band or whatever, they will move back this way and then they go home whichever way. So this has more of a propensity in my opinion to have attraction for students than the other side. I don't like lapalapa here, but they don't sell takeout. This is a restaurant and bar.

>>Spelman: are the students going to be gathering outside the fence looking inside the fence at the football practice and that sort of thing?

>>Garcia: yes.

>>Lewis: that's a four foot fence, so people jump over the fence. If people go there to run track, they go over the fence at any of those points along there.

>>Garcia: that's my biggest concern, is that because of the way this is located, it is in very close proximity to where students congregate.

>> Can I comment on that?

>>Mayor Watson: yes, briefly, but now is time for the Council to have a discussion.

>> Just on the fact of -- buying alcohol or having a place too sells alcohol is going to promote drinking. The teachers I think and the faculty know the children better than anywhere here does and they realize and they all make the same comment. If kids are going to get alcohol, they can walk 200 feet. If they want it, they're going it get it, just like drugs. We're legally selling it to adults that are allowed to drink it and we probably try harder than anyone else to prohibit minors from obtaining alcohol, especially on this corner right here, which is highly visible and I think, you know, kids aren't going to try to buy it here, it's so visible and well lit and police travel it quite far than they do down street. I just wanted to make that comment.

>>Mayor Watson: any additional discussion by counsel? Mayor Pro Tem?

>>Goodman: well, maybe you're who I'm asking my question of. I was wondering if this is why this is a problem that exists and we know that the other convenience stores or places where they sell liquor are attracting some kind of illegal activity, did we find out from apd what they thought about the addition of one more? and I'm curious as to why none of the neighborhood associations nor the school then opposed this, because they do in other sites. So why did they think this was okay? who am I asking?

>>Garcia: I may comment on that. Let me say, first of all, that I am surprised that the teachers that formed the tac would approve that because I don't think -- if you walk into the neighborhood and you ask people, you know, do you favor having, you know, places to sell beer close to the schools, they'll tell you no. Now, why the neighborhood associations did not respond is something that I cannot address, but one of the speakers today that lives in the area made the comment and I think that that's a comment that's shared not just in that area, but in many other areas. And Council Member Lewis is exactly on target when he says that district schools that have a high concentration of students that tend to drop out, so if there's one thing we need to do in those areas is encourage, you know, more -- encourage more activities that help kids stay in school as opposed to the opposite. And so, you know, a place that sells alcoholic beverages is in my opinion is not something that, you know, promotes that kind of behavior on the part of the students. And that's my concern with it. And I don't know whether I answered all your questions.

>>Lewis: let me say one thing, Mayor. This whole area, this whole northeast area from saint John's to loyola is a we'd weed and seed area. In other words, they're trying to weed out the bad things and put in something good. And people have been working over there for the last two years or longer on this weed and seed and to put more alcohol accessible accessible is something that not compatible with the weed and seed that the people in these neighborhoods are trying to do.

>>Mayor Watson: do you have a motion?

>>Lewis: I move to deny.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made by Council Member Lewis to deny. Seconded by Council Member Garcia. Is there a discussion?

>>Spelman: Mayor? I'm going vote yes on this proposal to deny this, but if there were a higher fence and it were more difficult for the kids in get in and out of that corner, I would have voted in favor to allowing thm to sell alcohol.

>>Mayor Watson: there being no further discussion, all in favor opposed say no. The motion carries. Let me ask, is there -- on item number 36, --.

>> Mayor?

>>Mayor Watson: hang on a second. Bill ford, y'all are still here. Hang on one second.

>> Councilmember Slusher had requested whether the staff would agree withholding this a week. He had some questions with respect to it. The only comment we'd make is we absolutely do need to have a decision next week so that the contractor that is trying to get itself going here can have a decision one way or the other if we're going to move on this or not. So we wouldn't mind a week postponement as long as we have a decision next week so that we can move forward.

>>Slusher: Mayor, I don't think that will be a problem, but I would like to look at this financial information and I think we'll make a better decision in a week, so I would move to postpone it a week.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made to postpone item 36 for one week, seconded by Council Member Lewis. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. Let's go back real quickly, folks. On item number 74, the motion has been made to reconsider by Council Member Garcia. Is there a second? seconded by Council Member Spelman. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries. I need to motion to close the public hearing on fum number 71.

>>Slusher: so move.

>>Mayor Watson: motion is made by Council Member Slusher, second by Council Member Lewis. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries, the public hearing is closed. I'll entertain a motion on item 74. Councilmember Lewis. Motion has been made by Council Member Lewis to deny, second bid Council Member Garcia. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries on item number 74. Item number 37, I'll recognize Council Member Garcia.

>>Garcia: well, why don't you recognize --.

>>Mayor Watson: it was Council Member Spelman who pulled it, maybe it was Council Member Griffith.

>>Spelman: it was me. Could somebody from staff tell us about this?

>> good evening, I'm chief engineer for Public Works.

>>Spelman: I've got a question with respect to the substance of this contract. It's my understanding that the partner in contract, the -- I can't remember the name of the contractor. Whoever these guys are would be doing three things. That they would assist us in developing partnering guidelines for us to do it in essence.

>> A manual that our staff would use. Spep.

>>Spelman: help us put a manual together. Would they be helping us put that together.

>> They would be helping us.

>>Spelman: they would be training the potential project team members and that they will actual provide some partnering participation over the course of the next 12 months are so.

>> Yes, sir.

>>Spelman: show us how it's done sort of thing. And at about $33,000 will be spent on the first two activities and something like 16 or $17,000 will be spent on the third; is that right.

>> Yes, sir.

>>Spelman: okay. My interest is not just in that the contractual obligations get fulfilled, but they get fulfilled well. With respect to that can you tell me how it is that we know they did a good job, not just something, but did a good job on helping us have a manual, train our staff and doing some partnering to show us how it's done?

>> okay. First of all, the first recommended firm has been working with aisd. We, the City of Austin, have been working with aisd in the partnering process and so we are already familiar with their performance. We were very impressed in the aisd model with what they did, therefore -- or not therefore, but although this contract is -- does not have performance measures, per se, it is task driven and should at any point we not be satisfied with what we're getting, we can certainly cease the contract at that point. We don't anticipate that happening, but that is certainly possible.

>>Spelman: let me ask you a more pointed question. How will we know whether we're satisfied or not?

>> we already have staff that have been trained in partnering. It's a matter of attrition and the fact that with the bond program we have had to hire a new staff. We have a whole lot of new project managers, new inspectors, folks in real estate who need to be trained. Due to our work load in-house, due to the fact that we have lost some of our own partnering trainers in house due to retairments, we're forced to bring in somebody else from the outside. But we are ourselves will be able to tell whether or not the quality of the services that we're getting is what we wanted.

>>Spelman: okay. Let me ask you about the training because that's probably the easiest one to monitor. How will we know we're getting good training or not?

>> we will certainly be able to monitor the progress of our students as they go through the training progress.

>>Spelman: are we going to have employees assisting in the training or sitting in on the training sessions?

>> we will have both.

>>Spelman: okay. So we'll be there watching the training. We'll be able to evaluate while it's going on?

>> yes, sir.

>>Spelman: tell me how we'll be able to evaluate the partnering itself in the next 12 months.

>> With the partnering, we already have staff that's familiar with partnering and good partnering practices at that. They will be present to monitor their performance for these few projects that they themselves will help us facilitate and we will certainly be giving feedback to them as we progress through the projects and if there's anything we want changed in subsequent processes, we will communicate that to them.

>>Spelman: like pornography, we can't define it, but we know it when we see it.

>> That's very true.

>>Spelman: okay. Thanks.

>>Mayor Watson: I'll entertain a motion on 37.

>>Lewis: may I ask him a question, please?

>>Mayor Watson: of course you can.

>>Lewis: let me ask you, why do we feel that it's necessary to get someone from san antonio to train us -- train our project managers on partnering?

>> it's -- partnering with who?

>>Lewis: is the contractors going to be involved or is the subcontractors going to be involved or who's going to be involved besides the project manager?

>> partnering is actually for the benefit of all stakeholders on a project. So it's not just the contractor and his subcontractor, City staff, but also other stakeholders that may be involved, like utilities, in some cases perhaps the county and in some cases txdot. We all come together and we all benefit from the partnering effort.

>>Lewis: well, what I'm trying to -- you know, I've had some input from some people about this and they didn't -- they didn't think too highly of it, but I don't understand what it is that we're trying to do that we're not doing already.

>> It's not a matter of we not doing partnering already, it's a matter of we have so many new staffers on board that we want to ensure consistency in how we administer our contracts. It's not been all that long ago that the mentality of owner representatives, particularly out on a construction job site, was that I am the authority. Communication was very often one sided and that was from the owner's representative to the contractor, very little communication coming back. Subsequently in our construction industry, we had an unacceptably high number of litigation cases, claims and change orders simply because there was not good communication. But we have turned that around. And we just need -- we need to make sure that these new employees that we have brought on board are with us in this partnering effort, in this teamwork effort and that they don't take out to the job sites this mentality that we're trying to ee rad cat, which is that I am the sole authority out there on the construction site.

>>Mayor Watson: Council Member Garcia?

>>Lewis: we haven't turned it around too much, because I've had problems with subs and all for the last six months anyway. Maybe we do need it. I don't know.

>>Mayor Watson: Council Member Garcia?

>>Garcia: yes, Mayor. The women in construction and the minority contractors have asked that we delay this for one week because they've asked questions that have not been answered, as I understand it. So I'm going to move that we delay it for one week.

>>Mayor Watson: motion is to delay number 37 for one week by Council Member Garcia.

>> This has been dlekted to the staff or to the Council?

>>Garcia: the staff?

>> do you know the questions that the hispanic contractors and the women contractors association have of us?

>> yes, I do.

>>Mayor Watson: seconded by Council Member Slusher. Is there any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries on 37. This that will take us to item number 44. I'll recognize Council Member Spelman.

>>Spelman: Mayor, I hold this one because I realized that putting it on the consent agenda because I realize we have to make a decision there.

>>.

>>Mayor Watson: I read it and I understand. Who do we have have staff that's going to make the initial presentation.

>> Good evening. I'm the manager of inspections with development review and snmtions. I'm going to make a brief overview presentation of this. We have ralph mary weather with the electrical board representation, gordon byrom. We also have the appellate, Mr. Steve moore and a few other people that are going to visit. So basically what this comes down to is that Mr. Moore took a test and -- in -- and was originally scheduled to take a third party test, electrical exam in san marcos as per an agreement that the electrical board and the City of san marcos and the City of Austin had agreed to that when san marcos went to a third party testing agency that they would administer their tests in the city of san marcos specifically. At the time Mr. Moore had applied, a few weeks before the test was taken, the testing center was moved to Austin. When he brought in his paperwork to have his rezip practice kol license applied for at the City, it showed that he had taken the test in Austin and therefore due to the specific Written agreement in the Austin electrical ordinances, he did not meet the intent, therefore we denied it. Mr. Moore then went to the electrical board and requested overruling of the denial by the building official. The electrical board denied his appeal and therefore that's why we're here tonight at Council. I think they can probably get a basic understanding of this if you have the people who are signed up to speak do their part.

>>Mayor Watson: steve moore? Mr. Moore, you've got somebody that -- yeah, why don't you please come forward. You will be followed by Mr. Ted bryan. Welcome, Mr. Moore.

>> Yes, sir. Basically I just have a couple of points to make. The first being which the testing site was beyond my control. I signed up, paid my registration fee knowing that the test was going to be given in san marcos. They moved it to Austin. That became an issue for not allowing me to recipro cat to Austin. That was basically beyond my control. And another point I'd like to make is there was no actual date or deadline set for non-reciprocation. And I passed this test in july last year and with no real date, no cut off date for non-reciprocation. How do you determine where I fall in that category. And that's basically all I have to say.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, Mr. Moore.

>>Spelman: Mayor, a very quick question. Mr. Moore? where do you live?

>> san marcos.

>>Spelman: do you have a place of business in san marcos?

>> no. I work for ted bryan electric.

>>Spelman: and where is that located?

>> san marcos.

>>Spelman: okay. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: Mr. Bryan? you will be followed by randy jen.

>> Mayor and Council Members, this is an unusual situation that's occurred. San marcos and quite a few cities are a member of the southern building Council. And we've been trying to through the City inspectors of san marcos and some other cities to coordinate a testing agency to work with the testing agency on so that we all kind of come under the same test patterns. And Austin has not joined that. And we have had rezip practice kol agreements for quite a few years. I've been in business in san marcos for 47 years. We've worked in and around Austin and we still do. We're all -- most of us are members of the capital area planning Council. We're trying to coordinate things, trying to get other entities together to build the whole building programs with things building as fast as they are down the interstate 35 corridor. There are a lot of combinations that need to be brought together. And as far as I'm concerned, there are a lot of little pet peeves and a lot of ideas that this little City and that little City that we need to get rid of. One of your gentleman here said tonight that it's time -- talking about your building program, that it's time it that we're not -- that we work as a region and not as little individual cities any more. And that's part of what's come about here. I'm going to let some of these -- I'm a member of the independent contractors association. Randy is going want to want to say something and the man is here from the southern building code Council. I'd like for him to say a little something about this. But I think it's just time that we need to sit down together and combine these things and start working together. There was a ton of Austin electricians that work in san marcos and we work in and around here and round rock and all through here. It's just too close. We're all unified together and it's time we bring these things together and get a little more joint workmanship together. I appreciate your consideration of steve. I've got some other men that fell into the same thing, but we just wanted to let this be known and be seen this way that we didn't change the testing site. I'll het the gentleman from the sbcci talk to that, but steve took the test in full goodness and I did too. I didn't know what had happened. I spent more money in the last two years teaching electricians and paying teachers to teach electricians and try to get more qualified electricians around here. I've never had anybody seriously hurt on any of any jobs. We've never had any serious accidents, we've never had any buildings burn down or anything like that. We've had a good track record for 40 something years and I'm going to keep it that way. I've got too many customers in and around over here that we want our men to be qualified and licensed in Austin. [Buzzer].

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, Mr. Bryan.

>>Garcia: Mayor?

>>Mayor Watson: yes, Council Member Garcia.

>>Garcia: Mr. Bryan, I'm over here. Are you eligible for reciprocity? there's the reciprocal agreement in.

>> Yes, sir. I have a recipro cal license.

>>Garcia: and you own the company.

>> Right.

>>Garcia: but everybody who works under you has to have a reciprocal agreement with us?

>> each electrician has to get his own license under me. Then I'm still responsible for what they do, but each journey man electrician has to have --.

>>Garcia: his own --.

>> His journeyman license.

>>Garcia: I understand they have to have a license, do they have to have a reciprocal agreement?

>> yes, sir, right. With Austin.

>>Garcia: k okay.

>> I have other men that already have it, but --.

>>Garcia: do you have any women electricians?

>> no, sir. We've attempted to hire some. We've had them in past years, but right at the present we do not.

>>Garcia: okay.

>> If we could find a good licensed electrician, I'd hire her right now.

>>Garcia: okay. Thank you.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, sir. I was calling out Mr. Jen.

>> Thank you, Mayor, Council Members, I'm randy jennings, executive director of the independent electrical contractors association of state of Texas, geographically our area extends from san marcos to waco. I'm here to support the appeal from steve more, who has been denied by the Austin electrical board a license under the reciprocal agreement with the City of Austin and there are some irony here. I want you to listen to this. Nobody has challenged steve moore's credentials as an electrician. He is a licensed journeyman electrician in the City of san marcos. There is an existing reciprocal agreement between two cities, the City of san marcos and the City of Austin to respect each other's requirements for licensing journey men. Steve did nothing wrong. He took the test that the City of san marcos uses, the sbcci test, passed that test, has met the experience requirement and is a licensed journeyman electrician in good standing. But the reason why the City of Austin will not grant him a reciprocal license is not that they think he's any less of an electrician than he would be if he took the City of Austin test. It's simply that he signed up for the test at a time when they moved it physically from san marcos to Austin. Now, here's the real irony, that test is a standardized test that's administered in 168 cities in Texas. It's the same test, whether he took it physically in san marcos or in Austin. The same test. Yet we're saying that he has site violated the spirit of the reciprocal agreement. I don't believe that and I don't think you do either. If you step back from this and look at this situation. So I hope that you will agree with us that steve moore is eligible for under the reciprocal agreement to be licensed as a injury my man electrician in the City of Austin.

>>Mayor Watson: if I might first, Council Member. Why is there a -- as I understand it, there's a requirement that for at least one of the requirements for the res pros si ti to apply is that the test be taken outside the City in which you're seeking the reprosty; is that correct?

>> no. As I understand it, if you're -- if you're asking for reciprocal license from the city of san marcos to the City of Austin, you must take the cbcci test in the City of san marcos. Even though it's a standardized test, the same test given everywhere else in the state. Mar Mayor maybe I said it poorly because that's what I understood. My question is do you know why -- what is the argument for that requirement that it be taken in a foreign City, if you --.

>> No, sir, I do not. That's a question best addressed to members of the e board who are here this evening. I'm sure they could explain that to you. I don't know the logic that supports that add being part of the agreement. If two cities agree to have standards by which they will license journey men and then to recipro cat it seems to me that ought to be enough and the rest of it gets into nitpicking.

>>Lewis: Mayor? do you administer the tests here in Austin?

>> no, sir, I do not administer the tests, but the next speaker represents the cbcci that does and so that -- that would probably be appropriate for him.

>>Mayor Watson: the next speaker is gordon might rom, followed by ralph mary weather.

>> I thought jack burleson was next.

>>Mayor Watson: no, he follows Mr. Merry weather.

>> I'm sorry.

>>Goodman: as gordon comes forward, can I ask a question for whenever somebody can answer this?

>>Mayor Watson: sure.

>>Goodman: if the cbcci test had not been moved to Austin, if it was still in san marcos, would Mr. Moore have been given the reciprocal credentials?

>>Mayor Watson: I'm going to ask that question too. The answer to that is yes, right.

>> The answer to that is yes. First of all, my name is gordon byrom, I'm on the electric board. I'd like to address one thing in the City electrical ordinance. It's in section 203.8 and it says appeals to the City Council. If you go down to c, it says a statement containing facts that clearly administrate that the decision that forms the basis of the appeal was incorrect because it was inconsistent with the City ordinance. Our state law because of finding of fact of a board was clearly contrary to the evidence of the board. Over in the reciprocal license part of the ordinance, which is section 206, we went through about two years of very heated discussion of the cbcci and reciprocal before we approved it in the ordinance. And it was a unanimous board approval. At that time we talked to the folks from san marcos, we talked to the people from dallas, we talked to the people from round rock who we reciprocate with right now. And they all recognize sscbbi as their testing agency. Austin does not. They have their own testing people. The Austin tests not only on the national electrical code, but on City ordinances, in meter specifications and criteria. So in order to be a good neighbor to san marcos, to round rock and to dallas, we put in there a section c that says that the applicant provide satisfactory evidence that the license issued only after the applicant passed a Written examination administered by the licensing city or pass the southern building codes examination administered in the reciprocating City. And everybody agreed to -- that that was there. The san marcos agreed to it, the City of round rock and the city of dallas?

>>Mayor Watson: could you read that again?

>> that's on page 10 of 22 and it's item -- in section 206 under reciprocal license. It's item c. It says the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that the license was issued only after the applicant passed a Written examination administered by the licensing City or passed the southern building codes conference -- southern building conference Congress examination administered in the reciprocating City. And also last year in 19 -- pardon me?

>>Mayor Watson: can I ask you a couple of questions about that?

>> sure.

>>Mayor Watson: all right. Help me understand what Mr. Moore failed to do.

>> He failed to take the test in the City of san marcos.

>>Mayor Watson: hang on a second. Before I get there. The applicant -- he passed a Written examination, right?

>> that's right.

>>Mayor Watson: who was it administered by?

>> it was administered by? supposedly administered by the si of City of san marcos.

>>Mayor Watson: I didn't hear you.

>> Was it administered by -- no, it was administered by the ssbcci.

>>Mayor Watson: so it was not administered by the licensing city.

>> That's right.

>>Mayor Watson: so it was an sbcci examination. What is the purpose of the phrase administered in the reciprocating City? why is that a requirement?

>> that's a requirement because we want the electrician checked out to make sure that he has a minimum standard of time in the trade. If -- I don't know if you have a copy of the reciprocal agreement with the City of san marcos. Has staff provided that?

>>Mayor Watson: my interest right now is more in the concept of what the -- I understand the substance of wanting for make sure he's got the time and skills. And we don't have any question that he has the time and skills necessary, right? isn't that right is that right?

>> let me answer that. The sbcci is merely a testing agency. Any one of you on that board can go up thrand give them the fee and take the test.

>>Mayor Watson: sure.

>> They don't check credentials.

>>Mayor Watson: help me out because I'm slow on it, so let me does it in the order that my simple mind will work on and that will help me out. I understand the concept of having time requirements. We don't have any question that Mr. Moore fits the time requirements that would qualify him to have reciprocity, do we?

>> I'm assuming not. I've never seen his paperwork, so I don't know.

>>Mayor Watson: and we don't have any question that he took a Written examination that was one that if it ended up physically being taken in the city of san marcos corporate jurisdiction, he passed that examination.

>> That's true.

>>Mayor Watson: okay. My question then comes back to I'm trying to figure out -- and I understand the substance of a requirement that says they've got to have a certain amount of time, a certain amount of time. I understand the substance of the requirement that says a person has got a pass a Written exam. My question -- and I understand the substance of saying that we either want it to be a test that is prepared by a City because we want to make sure it's a real test, and I understand the substantive requirement of it's not going to be to be one by the City, it needs to be one done by an entity we recognize and appreciate, such as the southern building Congress examination.

>> That's correct.

>>Mayor Watson: where I'm having difficulty is what is the substance of the requirement that you have to physically be sitting in the city that you want the reciprocity from in order to be qualified?

>> and I was trying to answer that because --.

>>Mayor Watson: I apologize I interrupted you then.

>> That goes back to the reciprocal agreement that we have with the City of san marcos. That was signed --.

>>Mayor Watson: and I understand there may be an agreement that says we want you sitting in that City at the time. My question is why other than the fact that we have such an agreement, why is it that we require that?

>> would you leet me read the requirement and that would agreement and that would explain itself. This agreement was made and entered into the 7th day of March of 1995, so it's nothing that we did last year or last ordinance.

>>Mayor Watson: just read it to me.

>> Number two, part of the agreement it says master electricians and journey men electricians tested and licensed in san marcos may obtain a reciprocal license in Austin and such electricians tested and licensed in Austin may obtain a reciprocal license in san marcos as long as a standards and testing remains on equal high level in both cities and provides that each electricians wanted to acquire a reciprocal license does the following. This is the agreement that san marcos sent to us. We didn't send it to them.

>>Mayor Watson: I'm sorry, maybe I'm missing it and apologize.

>> Mr. Byrom.

>>Mayor Watson: I know. I apologize.

>> He's got the dark hair. I've got the gray hair.

>>Mayor Watson: I hear you talking about standards and what you're after there and I hear --.

>> What we're trying to do is follow the law and the agreements.

>>Mayor Watson: I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm trying to understand what is the reason for saying the test is meaningless unless you take it sitting in inside the corporate boundaries of the city of san marcos? I'm trying to understand from an electricians standpoint.

>> We're not saying that the test is meaningless.

>>Mayor Watson: you're saying it doesn't qualify for reciprocity.

>> That's what I'm saying. It doesn't qualify for recipro indication. That's the basis.

>>Mayor Watson: help me on the other part about it. First of all, why do you think -- why do we have reciprocity agreements to begin with?

>> we had it as a good neighbor policy just just like the gentleman was saying over here is that when I was doing electrical work, I worked in san marcos and I worked in round rock and I've worked in all the neighboring communities.

>>Mayor Watson: but you agree that having a good neighbor policy is important and makes -- and makes sense?

>> yes, sir, I do, and that's why we supported this section c in there wholeheartedly. We had no problems with that.

>>Mayor Watson: sure. I suppose other cities could pass rules that say that they could write them in such a way that electricians in -- that are inside the City of Austin could end up not getting reciprocity in other cities if they don't think the City of Austin is handling its business in such a way where they really truly have a good neighbor policy.

>> And that's true. That does happen.

>>Mayor Watson: I'll bet that has. And one of the reasons another city might take offense and not give reciprocity to our electricians would be if they think that one of the requirements to get reciprocity inside the City of Austin is technical in nature, but doesn't have any substance to the requirement because it's the same test that just happens to not be administered in a physical location. Would you agree with me on that?

>> sure.

>>Mayor Watson: why did the testing site in san marcos get cancelled? do you know?

>> I don't know. I don't have anything to do with this.

>>Mayor Watson: do you know that, Mr. Merry weather.

>> I feel like he's been beat up here.

>>Mayor Watson: nobody is trying to beat him up. We're trying to make a decision that I need to have some answers to, Mr. Merry weather.

>> Let me try to clarify some things. We were sworn to uphold on oath by the City of Austin. We was appointed and sworn to uphold the oath. I swore to uphold this book right here as Written. For what reasons, why you have to be administer understand a city, that's the way it was Written. The parties all involved was there. We went through it two years. Just like you have a hard time understanding, evidently we must have too because we went through it for two years. The City of san marcos, if Austin recipro indicates to the City of Austin City of san marcos, we can only do it for one year. If san marcos reciprocates to the City of Austin, it's forever. So we can -- if this is a good neighbor policy, why not if I reciprocate my Austin license to san marcos, why come I can't have it forever? if we got a good neighbor policy? now, the question is that Mr. Moore is not at fault at anything?

>>Mayor Watson: I agree.

>> He is not guilty of nothing, okay? he cannot control what happened, but the point is -- the parties that made the decision can control what happened and those parties were the sbcci and the City of san marcos. They got a copy of this, they're intelligent people and they read it. Sbcci has been at every meeting that we had. Every board meeting. Sbcci sits there. There was a lot of people invited. We had it right here for two years. They was there. We all voted upon it. They all agreed upon it. Okay? this is the law. So as a board member when Mr. Moore came knowing that I don't have anything against Mr. Moore, I'm not questioning his qualifications, but if we were to go ahead and change all the laws as Written to make it fit what we want because we decided, the City of san marcos without coming to the City of Austin electric board, they didn't come to the city of Austin electric board and say, you know weerx going to go to third party testing, how will this affect your agreement. So if this was a good neighbor policy, why didn't they come and say we want a reciprocating license agreement with you, the City of Austin. Now we are thinking we might want a third party testing to sbcci. How is this going to affect your reciprocating agreement. The good neighbor policy didn't do that. We're not doing anything other than enforcing this.

>>Mayor Watson: nobody is accusing you of doing anything wrong either. We have an appeal in front of us and we don't eal with this everyday and so we're trying to find out what the requirements are because we don't want to unqualified electricians working up here either.

>> Exactly.

>>Mayor Watson: but I'll be real candid. One of my difficulties is regardless of sbcci, City of san marcos, City of Austin, the whole bit, we got a fellow who everybody seems to admit is probably a qualified electrician.

>> I'm not debating that.

>>Mayor Watson: he wants to work and he's running afoul apparently of a requirement that doesn't appear at least in my opinion to have an impact on whether or not he's qualified to work.

>> But that's not the question. The problem is what if our police chief took the same thing that you're taking, Mayor Watson and say, you know, it doesn't matter what City or anything, if you come up here, although you're it's okay to violent the law. We can't take that opinion on it. And let me say this also. The City of san marcos had a perfect -- they had all the time in the world to do whatever we want todd do and they decided not to do that, okay? so we can't control that. I'm sorry, Mr. Moore is here, but if we open this here up, then the next time sbcci said we're going to test in laredo, Texas. So what? it's the same test. We'll just bring everybody up here. It's the same thing. Or I decide I'm going to test in houston?

>>Mayor Watson: I guess my question about that would be if it's the same test and it is a test that we recognize as a qualifying test and the only difference between laredo and Austin is that we are doing it in Austin, but the fellows -- whoever is taking the test is taking the exact same test, my only question is whether or not we may need to look at what we do on reciprocal licenses to make sure we're really dealing with the substance of the qualifications as opposed to just the fact that we want them to take the test elsewhere. I mean, I understand where you're coming from. I just want --.

>> I can say this here is that if southern building code international truly wanted to be a good neighbor and they was aware of this here ordinance, the southern building code international should have taken the test -- gave the test in san marcos like they've done before.

>>Mayor Watson: if you don't mind, you've made a cogent presentation. If you don't mind, let me ask Mr. Burleson to come up so we can ask some of those questions.

>>Garcia: while he's coming up, if you ever want to talk about the differences between laredo and Austin, let me know. We need a whole afternoon on that.

>> I'll be glad to answer that issue because industry in Austin is totally different than the industry in laredo and also Mr. Moore can with work in Austin because there is a five to one ratio, one licensed journeyman to five unlicensed people. So he can work here.

>>Mayor Watson: and there may be differences. What I'm suggesting is the difference of where you physically take the test that we recognize strikes me as I'm having some difficulty understanding why that is a substantive requirement. And it may be that we need to fix that.

>> Let me make one more point and I'll sit down. Now, when this was all coming about, we have a City of Austin electrical ordinance, right?

>>Mayor Watson: right.

>> We go to the party that's doing the third party testing and we told them we would accept sbcci techting if you incorporate City of Austin ordinances that means all our city standards, meter heights, color code, everything that an electrician doing work in Austin should know. If you know there's been a number of electrical fires in Austin in the last couple of years.

>> In last year it was 1.6 million dollars.

>> I went to the fire department and I looked. This has got to be stopped. Mr. Moore may be qualified and know our ordinances does he know our criteria manual. We told them we would accept it? they said we don't care about your ordinance.

>>.

>>Mayor Watson: Mr. Merry weather, let's be fair. If you're going to accept the test to begin with, the concept of whether somebody's sitting at a desk in san marcos passing that test or sitting at a desk in Austin passing that test doesn't change whether or not they passed the test. Now, if the -- if the decision is you don't accept third party testing, that's one thing because we don't want to have good neighbor policy or we get upset about it, but the question is whether or not sitting in a chair in san marcos makes a difference in an electrician, than it does sitting in the City of Austin at least from my perspective and that's what I'm trying to figure out.

>> In the City of Austin we do not recognize the sbcci license in the City of Austin.

>>Mayor Watson: well, it says right here we do if they're sit ng a chair in san marcos.

>> Right. If they're sitting in there we will, but not here.

>>Mayor Watson: that's where I start running into real difficulty.

>> May I ask you a question?

>>Mayor Watson: sure you can.

>> You took your law test in the state of Texas, can you practice law in the state of arizona or new Mexico.

>> In some states. And my point is if I have a certain amount of qualifications, if I practice a certain number of years and if I take and pa pass the test. But I am no less a lawyer if I pass that test in Austin than if I pass that test in phoenix. And that's my problem is the physical place I take it is bothering me.

>> And we asked Mr. Moore, did you take the test, did you register to take the test in the City of Austin? he said no. Have you ever attempted to take the test in Austin? he said no.

>>Goodman: Mayor, can I ask him questions too? because I'm also having a real hard time following what the -- what the safeguard was. Back when you all were writing the language, do you remember why you wanted it to be in san marcos? I mean, why that specific language? there must have been a reason why you wanted it. Was somebody besides the sbcc I giving the test back then.

>> No, it was because of the good neighbor policy this that they want todd have with san marcos and round rock and Austin at the time. Because the City of Austin at this time only recipro indicates with four cities, dallas, round rock, san marcos and seguin.

>>Goodman: okay. And in our letter from -- okay. When somebody gets a license, does it say specifically a san marcos license is awarded or an Austin license is awarded? so if Mr. Moore took this test was the license he got specifically a san marcos license?

>> that's correct. He was tested -- he gets a letter from -- from my understanding he gets a letter from the sbcci saying that he has passed the test and he goes to the City of san marcos and he gets his license. Also from what I understand, he can go to 160 other cities in the state of Texas and -- that recognize the sbcci and get their license. Now, there are places in the state of Texas, san antonio, for instance, who will only -- they accept the sbcci in san antonio with some ordinances that they test on, but they will not reciprocate with san marcos, they will not reciprocate with see again or new braunfels or any other other towns. So this is not an isolated incident.

>>Goodman: okay. Well, when a person takes the sbcci in san marcos, do they also take -- and it's going to be reciprocal. I mean, we're trading off. Do they also have to take some additional test questions that have Austin ordinance oz them?

>> no.

>>Goodman: then why are we reciprocating?

>> well, we were trying to stay with the good neighbor policy. When we were working on this ordinance, we had several workshops. And at that time we -- I say we. The electric board that attended it offered to City staff to have a test a and a test b. And test a would be the sbcci and test b would be the City ordinances and the meter specifications. And City staff at that time said no, absolutely not. We will not do that, so that's why we made the decision to do what we did and to stick with the agreement.

>>Goodman: okay. Well, if we were going to continue to be in a reciprocating agreement, do you think that the electrical board would be opposed to changing the language of in administered in the reciprocating City as long as the specific license being awarded was with a reciprocating City so that somebody from abilene or laredo or whatever could not be rezip kel even if they take the third party test because their license is not with the reciprocating entity.

>> Well, in the ordinances and most in the state of Texas, you cannot reciprocate a reciprocal. If I took the -- if I take the Austin test, which I have an Austin journeyman's license, I can reciprocate it either to round rock or to san marcos. Now, the City of round rock used to reciprocate with georgetown. I couldn't reciprocate my reciprocated license to georgetown, okay? and it's just one community away in between the two of us. So does that answer your question? [laughter].

>> I also have a master's license in round rock, that was taken in round rock. And it will reciprocate back to Austin or it will reciprocate to san marcos or it will reciprocate I think even to georgetown.

>>Goodman: okay. I do understand why it took two years. [Laughter].

>> Because it's --.

>>Mayor Watson: who drafted 2-c? do you know?

>> the board.

>>Mayor Watson: there wasn't any one specific person that put it together?

>> no, sir. As a matter of fact, the basic language from c, if I'm not mistaken, came from ty run on, who at the time was president of the hic, independent electrical contractors, that was taken under his advisement. I think he brought it to us.

>>Mayor Watson: okay. Did -- and this may be a redundant question, but I'm going to try again. What was the board's thought about why if it was going to accept the south earn building Congress' examination that it was -- that in order to lift it to the level of acceptance you had to be sitting in a chair in the City that you wanted to reciprocation from.

>> Because that City of san marcos has -- his license is going to say he reciprocated from san marcos. Now, if he tests in Austin, he didn't do that. Okay. No matter if the test is the same. It says that it must be having a san marcos license in order to come up here. We didn't want sbcci testing. Whenever someone is running around, several people, with papers saying you paid $65 guarantee you a pass of this test, I've got a problem with that. I've got a problem with that. And that happens all the time. In fact, I think the sbcci sued the individual that was doing it. And I've got a problem with that. You don't hear that going on in the City of Austin.

>>Mayor Watson: but wait, wait, we're not going to do that. [Inaudible].

>> But that's why it's like that because it's coming from san marcos with the san marcos name.

>>Mayor Watson: so I hear something different now. One is we have to have a test that we trust. The test has to be a good test. The second is there has to be a process for the administration of the test that we trust.

>> In san marcos to come up here.

>>Mayor Watson: but wait, hang on. Stick with me here. Good test, good process to assure the sanctity of the test. Do we have any question about the sanctity of the process in which he took this case?

>> I don't think any problem with the sanctity of it other than I've taken it before as I thought it to be very simple.

>>Mayor Watson: we've at least accepted for purposes of tonight --.

>> We had to negotiate this in order just to reciprocate. You have to understand that.

>>Mayor Watson: thank you, why don't we have Mr. Burleson speak.

>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. It's been a long day. My name is jack burleson. I'm the regional manager of southern building code Congress international office here in Austin, Texas. I'm a resident of Austin. And I'm -- our apparent company is in alabama. Where our examination services is located and so forth. What I'd like to give to you is a list, if you will pass that out, please, is a list of the 167 cities. We could add one more that joined last week. Ironically, it was the City of burleson in the fort worth area. But anyway, we have -- a couple of things I'd like to clarify is that there's two issues here. One is testing and the other is reciprocity. And the qualifications in order to get a license, which means time and so forth as we discussed earlier. First of all, sbcci does testing. It does not write ordinances, it does not negotiate ordinances, it does not set up the qualifying how many years a person must work in the electrical trade before he can get his license. That's left entirely up to the municipality to make those determinations. We're simply a testing agency. We provide one of the finest electrical exams that is used in the state of Texas. One other thing, the City of san antonio does use an sbcci electrical exam. They do not use the sbcci what we call the standard electrical exam. We've been doing a special exam for san antonio for a little over 10 years. And they've been very please and satisfied with our electrical testing for us to be in the business with them for that long. But the idea was that there was a lot of other municipalities that were doing testing themselves, there was a lot of problems involved with that, so we were asked through a lot of local chapters and so forth to develop a standardized test that could be used thou Texas and that's exactly what we did. And if -- I had attended a meeting where an ordinance would have been Written that would have said you had to be physically in a location in order to take that exam, I would have said no because it doesn't make sense to me. Because our test, we have 20 test sites, they're geographical locations and I'll tell you the reason that we moved the test site from san marcos was simply because we didn't have enough room. We out grew the space we had and there were not facilities at that time that that test was given so in order to make the test in a location where the people from round rock, georgetown, cedar park, all the surrounding cities, could take the exam, we moved it from Austin. [Buzzer].

>>Mayor Watson: let me ask you a couple of questions. First of all,, did Mr. Moore -- did Mr. Moore in any way play a part in the decision to have the test not in san marcos, but have it in Austin?

>> no. He was just caught up in a situation that was just purely circumstantial.

>>Mayor Watson: Mayor did he apply to take the test in the city -- in the reciprocating city, that being san marcos?

>> I do not know whether he applied in -- I would assume he did. It would be a good presumption on my part.

>>Mayor Watson: he's nodding his head and indicating he did. When the test was administered, the test that Mr. Moore took in the City of Austin, were the standards for assuring the sanctity of that test followed in the City of Austin the same way they would have been followed if you had administered the test in --.

>> Exactly, exactly. The test would have been the same more than likely. We have a bank of questions, you know --.

>>Mayor Watson: I'm not interested -- first of all, I'm sooling it would have been the same test and met the same qualifications of the southern building Congress regardless of where it was located.

>> Exactly.

>>Mayor Watson: my next question is once we know it's the same test, the next question is did you follow process and procedures at the administration of the test that was the same or substantially similar to what you would have done had the test been administered in the city of san marcos to make sure nobody was cheating, that nobody was answering it for Mr. Moore or anything like that?

>> that's correct. The same procedure.

>>Mayor Watson: all right. Thank you very much.

>>Goodman: Mayor? I've got a couple of questions, if you don't mind. I was reading when you first began speaking, so I apologize if you already said this. Why did you move the testing site to Austin?

>> the space in san marcos that we had previously been using we had outgrown it and we were not able to find another test site at that particular time, so we relocated to the Austin area.

>>Goodman: and did you know about the language relative to reciprocal licenses?

>> me specifically? and I can only speak for myself at that time. I was not aware of the Austin electrical ordinance, the way it was Written. My predecessor may have been. I just took -- I've worked in the office here in Austin over 10 years, but I was not involved with that particular aspect. If he knew about it, I don't know. I did not.

>>Goodman: so nobody in the organization knew that by moving your site, your testing site, you were negating or at least seriously impacting agreements that had been come to after two long years of negotiation?

>> I can only speak for myself. I wasn't aware of of it. If somebody else was. I go back to the point that we are a member organization. We serve our members and if there's usually a conflict that we know about or a problem, we take care of it. We are known for that. I believe if it was known or understood at the time that it would be a problem -- but you have to understand, there are other people taking exams there that are going to reciprocate with other cities besides Austin.

>>Goodman: I can understand that.

>> It was nothing malicious or deliberate on our part to duplicate this issue because it is a complicated issue and we certainly don't want to be part of it.

>>Mayor Watson: I don't think anybody up here believes that anybody is involved in this issue. It's kind of an odd issue that anybody was trying to do anything wrong wore was malicious. Everybody is trying to do the best job they know how.

>>Goodman: since the language is there and it is very specific, what would your response be as to how we can correct the situation in.

>> I think just simply taking that last part of the sentence off saying that you have to be tested in that City when you use the standard building code standard electrical exam because location doesn't make any difference. I don't care if you take it in laredo, dallas or whatever, the same standards are going to apply, the same testing procedure is going to apply, everything is equal.

>>Goodman: well, and that may be, but I think there are also, Mayor, I think I'm finally get agriculture feel for why this may be in there: the reciprocal -- I don't know the word for this -- provisions are not the same for each to the other, and I can't remember whether it was byrom or ralph who said the one way from san marcos to here is forever and the recipro indication or whatever that word is that you were using from our --.

>> You understand we don't set those.

>>Goodman: I understand that. From our side is one year. I mean, for us to be able to practice there.

>>Mayor Watson: sure.

>>Goodman: so there's a whole lot more to it than just dropping off that one part.

>>Mayor Watson: if I might comment on that. That would be the dais kais if you're talking about what you want your reciprocity agreement to be. But our issue is what do we want in terms of the qualifications of somebody that's going to be practicing and be an electrician in our city, not without it's one year or five years. The question is what qualifies you. And that's where I'm having my difficulty is there may be things we want to do in terms of reciprocity dpraements, but if we're going to accept the examination that we will accept, then to tie that to something that is not a substantive requirement I think sometimes creates difficulty. It certainly can create hardship. Did good right, but I think since neither you nor I helped write the language, I think this was meant to do something more than what it seems to be doing.

>>Mayor Watson: that could be a good point. That could be valid.

>>Goodman: that was a safeguard that in this kind of language was covered by saying administered in the reciprocating City.

>>Mayor Watson: and that may -- thank you very much, sir.

>>Lewis: I have a question, Mayor.

>>Mayor Watson: Council Member Lewis has a question for you.

>>Lewis: the applies that you was using in san marcos -- the place that you were using in san marcos, was it because of the number of people that applied for this particular test that you moved to Austin or did you just decide to move the testing from no on to Austin?

>> well, once we moved that site and they set up -- set the site here in Austin, it was decided toed to leave it there. We can always or have always had the thought we'll move it back to san marcos if there's a facility there available that will accommodate the number of people.

>>Lewis: where do you test in Austin?

>> I believe it's at the four seasons -- sheraton four seasons. And there was one other location they used. I can't remember it.

>>Lewis: how many people normally take the test at one time?

>> I can't answer that. I've never been to the -- like I say, these exams are administered out of our birmingham office and they set up the exam site, they make the contract and so forth. And I never -- I do not go to that site. They have a proctor that they use for that purpose.

>>Lewis: so they contract with a number of cities when they get ready -- at a given time to take the exam.

>> Yes, sir. Sometimes it's at a hotel and sometimes a municipality will provide a facility because we do other types of testing, like inspector certification exams and things like that too, so it could vary. But we try to get it in one place and stay because we do print brochures like we have brochures that are printed up that tell the times and the dates that the tests are going to be given and we use those throughout that year period.

>>Lewis: well, the thing that I'm getting you, said you had a special exam for san antonio. So you would -- you wouldn't give that test here in Austin?

>> no, no. That test for san antonio is one that was Written specifically for san antonio and it does incorporate some of their order in a unanimouses and so forth. That was -- like I said, set up many, many years ago on that basis. Your testing on a national electrical code, regardless. And what we do is we expand that somewhat. But specifically for the -- for san antonio.

>>Lewis: do you know if san antonio have a rezip reciprocal agreement with any other City.

>> No, sir, I don't. I'm sure they do.

>>Lewis: because of an ordinance that they don't? would that be it.

>> It would have to be, I would say, they're ordinance, the way their ordinance is Written, but I can't speak for the City of san antonio as to who they reciprocate with. I do not have a list of those cities.

>>Lewis: all right. Thank you.

>>Goodman: Council Member Garcia?

>>Garcia: thank you, Mayor pro tem. One of the comments that was made by one of the speakers was that your test may be easier than the tests that we have here in Austin have you ever looked at that issue to see if the test in Austin is more difficult?

>> no, sir, I haven't. You have to remember a test that is easy to one may be based on their knowledge and experience rather than someone who hasn't studied as well or is knowledgeable. So --.

>>Garcia: somebody who took the standardized test many years ago, I can understand that very well. The second question that I have for you is given the special nature of cities like in the case of san antonio where they incorporate ordinances, is Austin one -- a city that perhaps ought to have a specialized examination for the requirements that we consider to be very key to the safety of our citizens?

>> no, sir, I don't. And let me go a little bit further and say I don't think san antonio does either because the ordinances, the local ordinances and so forth and modifications and changes can be taken care of in other bays ways as part of the licensing process.

>>Garcia: and that's the third question that I had. What was the licensing process? is it uniform? pretty much so from the sand point that once you pass the test and you take your document to that City, then each one of those cities has a requirement. And it can vary, one may say you've got to have two years' experience, one five years' experience. It depends whether you're getting a master license --.

>>Garcia: do they include knowledge of the specific ordinances that apply to that city?

>> it's possible, yes.

>>Garcia: let me ask our City official a question. Thank you very much, sir. If I may, Mayor Pro Tem?

>> the City ordinance requires that you know and use all laws and ordinances within the City of Austin, but there's nothing specifically Written into the electric code that deals with that. We're going to be adopting the 1999 national electric code later this year and that will be one of the issues that we'll take on when we do it.

>>Garcia: the reason that I wanted to ask you this question is because it seems to me that to be -- 2-b, section 2-b, holds the key to some of the concerns that the opponents to the appeal have. The applicant holds a current license issued by a City approved for reciprocation by the electrical board and presents the license to the building official with an application for a license in the City of Austin. Now, it seems to me that if what we are talking about is making sure that the people that come work here know what our ordinances are and that they know of the concerns that we have, special concerns that we have that you guys know about because you serve on those boards, that that's where the controls need to be. You know, just the other day, you know, my wife and I went to eat at this road house place over there on I-35. We were there Wednesday and the following week it was going up in flames and they said it was something wrong with the manner in which they did the electrical connections or wiring or whatever. Obviously there is -- and I followed you guys all the time that I've been on the Council and I think the points that you bring are extremely important. The people that work here know better -- know best what to do to protect the interests of the people that depend on you. So my preference would be to tighten up that process so that nobody comes to work here in Austin unless they have a very good working knowledge of the ordinances that we have and demonstrate that in some kind of a test. We have the same thing in the cpa exam. We take the uniform cpa exam, but if we're going to be licensed in Texas, we have to take another exam to, you know, demonstrate that we know certain aspects about how the profession is governed in the state of Texas. So I understand your concern, Mayor, and I think it's a good one. I think the guy who put this one, the fellow that ralph and -- was mentioning, is -- probably said this is one way we can do it. But I think there's a better way and I think the better way would be to tighten up 2-b so that whoever practices here needs to be somebody that understands and knows how it is that we're going to do electrical work here. And I think when we adopt the 1999 code we need to have those proichingss in it so that everybody knows that if you're going to come do business in this City, if you're going to work here, you need to know how we, you know, what kind of standards we observe here.

>>Mayor Watson: if I might make a suggestion with regard to Mr. Moore's case tonight, here is the suggestion I would make. I would suggest that we have two ways that if we want to recognize Mr. Moore's ability to practice in the City of Austin that one is in the exercise of our discretion as the governing body of the City of Austin we can find that the requirement that one must physically take the examination that we accept in the location -- in the City, the reciprocating City is not a -- does not have a substantive impact on the health, safety or welfare because we're accepting the examination and we're accepting the standard by which the examination was administered. The second possibility is that in the case of Mr. Moore we could find an exception because he intended to qualify under this bypassing the southern building Congress examination which indeed he did pass and it was indeed administered in a way that it would have been administered in that physical location in the City of san marcos, but through no fault of his own and at no involvement of his a decision was made by that testing entity to to not have the test in san marcos, but instead to conduct the test in the City of Austin. And/or a combination of the two. And my suggestion would be that there be a motion that says that Mr. Moore would be granted reciprocity but based upon the discretion of the Council to do that in those ways.

>> Mayor, one impact you need to understand is there were probably 40 or 50 people that took the test the same day. If you're going to make one exception, you need to do it across the board.

>>Goodman: there was only one man.

>>Mayor Watson: there's only one person here tonight.

>> So we make an exception for him specifically and if the other people come in we do them individually.

>>Mayor Watson: he's the only appeal we're considering here tonight.

>>Slusher: does that mean we have 40 next week?

>> that's what I wanted to let you know.

>>Mayor Watson: if we do, then my suggestion would be that we need to make a determination whether or not we believe that under this set of circumstances administering it in that specific place makes a difference and we would probably need to have an across the board approach to it.

>>Goodman: and Mayor, if I could.

>>Mayor Watson: Mayor Pro Tem. Councilmember Lewis?

>>Lewis: just getting back to what staff said. If the people -- and I don't know how many people took the test, but if all those people go down to san marcos next week and apply for a license and get a license from san marcos, then they come here and apply for a license here in Austin, regardless of where they are, whether they're in round rock or georgetown or taylor or where, we have no recourse. And that's -- because once they get the license in san marcos, which they can if they pass this test, is the whole point. So that may be -- we may be opening up pandora's box as far as the license because then nobody will have to know any of the ordinance or anything here or have any -- we can't say that they have to have any amount of time, whether it be one year, two years or three years, of apren advertise ship because if they issued a license in san marcos, we have to especially accept it.

>> All the licenses are required to meet certain criteria in san marcos for number of years of experience per test. They have to meet the same issue in Austin. The only concern I had was that if you grant Mr. Moore's appeal and you do it across the board and don't specify it, then you could have 40 more people coming up to the same people. And that's the concern I have from the staff side of it is by Friday I could have 40 more people up here. So I've got an impact I have to deal with.

>>Mayor Watson: Mayor Pro Tem?

>>Goodman: I'd like to speak to that one because those 40 people would still have to go to the electrical board, would they not? and the board was correct in their decision. They cannot possibly give anybody a waiver on this.

>> Right. The board was within their bounds.

>>Goodman: so they would have to go to the board and the board would have to in every case decide no and then they would come to us. Which seems to me a great incentive for fixing the problem. And I think it's not not necessarily even so simple as what it first sounded like, because at this moment sbcci is a test we accept and I don't know that we should, given the concerns. Maybe that's where we need to tighten things up because at this moment for Mr. Moore, he has no more or less knowledge for us to accept than he needed yesterday, but the fact that they moved their site to Austin is the whole reason why we're hearing this tonight.

>> If he would have tested in san marcos, they would not have been on the Council agenda.

>>Goodman: right. And that is what is so hard to follow. So that doesn't seem to be really the issue at all. Since being able to know what you're doing in the City of Austin that has specific safety and other regulations in our ordinances that we want people to know to work here, then that's the issue. And since it was tried to be covered, if that's gramaticly correct, since that was what was attempted by saying administered in the reciprocating City, then even if we change that language, it doesn't really fit --.

>> We can always go back and redo the reciprocal agreements and change them. It's brought to light all the of issues we can look at in both in the ordinance and in the reciprocal agreements.

>>Goodman: I think what we failed to do back then is offer them a couple of lawyers who know about straightforward language that maybe didn't come up in the board deliberations because maybe they were probably all sick and tired of talking to each other by that time and just wanted to get something down and get something in place. So I think we can help out with that. And if all the other 40 people did apply for a san marcos testing site, then they'll all come before us and in each and every case the board will have acted correctly to deny that.

>> Okay. Ited to bring that to your attention so I could resolve that before I had 40 people.

>>Mayor Watson: is there a motion? Council Member Garcia?

>>Garcia: Mr. Merry weather?

>> yes, sir?

>>Garcia: when are y'all going to bring the '99 code to the Council for approval?

>> in september.

>>Garcia: okay.

>> I think we've got a way to fix it.

>>Garcia: but we have to wait until september.

>> You have to wait until september in order to fix it, but I want to say this here, that is that I think that we can fix it, we tried to fix it by putting the sbcci in the way that we did. We tried to fix that so wekted be that good neighbor, okay? that's all I can say is all we're doing is try to enforce the ordinance. And whatever you guys vote we're going to live with it, but as the City of Austin electrical inspector, all I can say is you get the very best qualified people to wire your school, your hospital in your ordinances, because once of these days you're in brackenridge hospital and that plug isn't hooked up right, Lord help you. So whatever the decision is, we'll live with it.

>>Garcia: let me ask our inspector a question. Could b be interpreted differently so that the application for a license in the City of Austin be such that it would require more testing than sbcci?

>> well, the problem with the way it's Written is that you have to satisfy all of the conditions. You can't pick and choose which three or five. It has to be all of the conditions.

>>Garcia: I know, but right now two -- all I have to do is bring you evidence that they took the test in the City in which -- in which the reciprocating City.

>> The building official from the reciprocating City signs a a letter that they sign off saying that they tested and what their skor was and what their license is and that's what they bring up with them along with a copy of their current license. They do the application, pay the fee and if they meet all the criteria of Austin, which is the next two a, b, c, d and e, then they're issued a license. So it's not an and/or, it's an and.

>>Garcia: I understand, but what they were trying to do was protect the safety -- health and safety of the citizens of Austin and they did it by doing this, which I think the Mayor clearly established that it is not substantive in nature, you know. It's not -- that's not the way that he would have done it or me. I wouldn't have done it that way, but that's the way it was Written.

>> Right. But what I'm looking at is we've got an opportunity with the 1999 to clean it up. If we need to do it before, we're already bringing one amendment forward to change the part of the provisions of the '96 code. We can always do a separate ordinance, a correction ordinance if we need to. [One moment, please] could come in and consider, you know, doing his process -- going through the process of getting -- getting his reciprocity issue scared away.

>>Mayor Watson: my only problem would be that puts the man in a situation where taking this test is currently acceptable, we are going to make him wait six months. My experience here tells me that it may take that full six months and then who knows how that may ultimately look, he may not number a position to know. If in fact from the substantive standpoint we currently accept that test as being legitimate and appropriate test and we currently accept the way it was administered as a legitimate and appropriate way to administer it, and the only problem is through no fault of his own he wasn't sitting in a chair in san marcos, then I hate to put him through -- even if it works out perfectly for him at the end of six months, six months where he can't do it.

>>Garcia: I understand. Many people get caught by unfair provisions of the law. Anybody who has paid income tax knows that or anybody who has been stopped by a police officer or anybody who has done anything, the laws are not perfect, you know, I don't think -- they are Written by imperfect human beings, as up they are imperfect. What I am saying is we are going to try to correct this particular provision, but I don't want to be dealing with 40 more appeals.

>>Mayor Watson: we could sure deal with them a lot quicker because we have been through it once now. [Laughter]. Mayor Pro Tem?

>>Goodman: well, I have a thought but I want to ask a question first. Is there any time constraint or any time parameter within which we must make a decision once the appeal has come to us?

>> not that I know of. That would be something that the City attorney may have to answer for.

>> [Inaudible]. If you wanted to postpone it [inaudible].

>>Goodman: what I would like to find out about is a little bit about the basis for thinking -- well, for finding out what was thought to be covered by this phrase and, number two, the status of the 40 people who took the test and their -- as much as we can find out about whether they thought they were going to take the test in san marcos and in fact because intent is kind of a big part of this, that's why we are talking about this one gentleman, and I suppose whether sbcci has ever thought about -- they talked about having out grown their space, but until we get the language clarified and the intentions fully and clearly articulated, maybe the answers for you all to every now and then go rent a store front for a day so that you can get san marcos folks their test so that they comply. Otherwise you are setting them up. And although we can make this decision on a more global and comprehensive basis, the board can't. And so by continuing to do something that our ordinance doesn't cover, you are setting up everybody who tries to take a san marcos test with a reciprocal agreement. So I am also asking Mr. Burleson, I guess.

>> Well, we --.

>>Goodman: could you come to the microphone?

>> there's nothing to say that we will not go back to san marcos if we could find the space. Historically, san marcos has been a testing site for the electrical contractor exams and inspector exams that we do. We just got caught in an unfortunate situation of where we had to accommodate a lot of people, we moved it to Austin and just decided to leave it there because it's also more centrally located. And because this quirk in the ordinance, it -- but I hate for you to use the word set up because we don't want to set up anybody. We are getting caught up in a situation that we will certainly look at and do our best to try to work it out. I will talk to the people in birmingham and pass along those comments.

>>Goodman: well because I don't know how many people you give tests to, but every one who thinks that this is the course of their career, they are going to be able to take, will run into the wall that Mr. Moore did.

>> That's true.

>>Goodman: so in the meantime, if there are enough people in san marcos to take a test that might justify, you know, if -- however long it takes to take the test, a few hours rental of a hall there or some other store front so that we abide by the language of the law until we fix the law.

>> Okay.

>>Mayor Watson: Council Member Garcia?

>>Garcia: you also have the same situation with round rock, don't you?

>> no, they go to any of those testing sites -- san marcos is the only one we have in this area, san marcos -- I'm sorry, right now Austin is the only test site.

>>Garcia: we have a reciprocity agreement also with round rock and those guys come and take the test here, same situation, they have the same situation as Mr. Moore, right?

>> that's the -- the way the ordinance is Written, yes.

>>Garcia: so we have to correct the ordinance, you know, and if our goal is basically to protect the health and safety of the people that live in this community and there's something unique about that particular thing that our electrical board thinks ought to be done, then we need to incorporate that substantive part into the ordinance.

>> But I hate to see you do away with a standard test in doing that.

>>Garcia: no, I don't mean that at all.

>>Mayor Watson: I will entertain a motion. And let me just say one thing about it. Maybe I am missing something and I apologize if I am. There may be 30 or 40 people that are in this same position, but from my perspective, if those 30 or 40 people had been sitting in a chair in san marcos when they took a test we accept under a procedure we accept, and they would be able to practice their trade in Austin, Texas, then it's not a substantive difference than if somehow they ended up 30 or 40 people sitting in their chairs in Austin, Texas. And the electrical board did right, I am not questioning that, but now we are in a situation where there's a difficulty. If we are going to accept that, we ought to at least make sure if there are substantive requirements. If people get caught in a trap and -- I am not blaming anybody for that, it's just that we ought to be in a position to fix that. Councilmember Garcia?

>>Garcia: I want to move we postpone this issue for at least two weeks to -- to give us an opportunity to consult with electrical board members and with staff and to see -- to look at the issue -- at the issues behind the issue and figure out what needs to be done.

>>Mayor Watson: motion has been made to post phone for two weeks is there a second.

>>Goodman: I will second.

>>Mayor Watson: seconded by the Mayor Pro Tem.

>>Slusher: I would like to deal with it more rapidly.

>>Mayor Watson: my prayer, we have two weeks to pray to go to church, but -- is there --.

>>Goodman: Mayor?

>>Mayor Watson: yes, Mayor pro tem.

>>Goodman: my second was also predicated on the fact that I think at least for the short term we could conceivably think of some corrective language to amend this much sooner than -- at least this part much sooner than september.

>>Mayor Watson: I think I have done it. But I will -- we can visit, if the motion passes, we can visit over the next two weeks. Is there any further discussion?

>>Garcia: I want to ask the question. To amend this ordinance is it required that it goes to the boards and commissions?

>> uh-huh.

>>Mayor Watson: probably, yeah.

>> Yes. [Inaudible].

>> It would have to go to the board and commissions just like -- an amendment to the ldc at least by reference.

>>Garcia: how long is that process?

>> figure the notification time of a minimum of 3 weeks, Planning Commission has to go to the e board, so -- at least a month.

>>Goodman: just those two.

>> If we started tomorrow, sorry?

>>Goodman: Planning Commission and electrical, that's all, though?

>> the electric board, there's -- if there's no opposition.

>> Well, we will have to check, but I think it's by reference in the ldc, that may come into play, maybe it doesn't.

>>Garcia: if I sea two months instead of two weeks, would that give you enough time to go through this process and bring an amendment that would address the issues that we need to address? the Mayor says he has wording to correct this.

>> We would have to get cooperation from the e board and special meetings and the law department to help us, we probably could do it in two months.

>>Garcia: you are on the board, is that enough time for you guys?

>> yes, sir, I believe we have a meeting next week. We meet on last Wednesday of every month. And we could take this under control. I would like to say one thing in defense of the board that we asked numerous times to have legal counsel at the board meeting and they said because of budget constraints we couldn't have it.

>>Mayor Watson: nobody is -- there's no need to be in defense of the board. Nobody questions what the board has done. Everybody in fact I think would be unanimous in thanking the board for the amount of time and energy and effort it puts intorotecting the health, safety and welfare of this community. This may just be one of those instances where fortuitous or not, certainly I am sure Mr. Moore doesn't consider it to be fortitous, we have isolated a difficulty, something we might want to try to if I can. Please don't for a minute assume anybody feels negative at all about the way the board has handled this. It's to the contrary.

>>Slusher: Mayor, I think he was saying though was that they could have used a lawyer when they were drafting this and that they would like to have one this time.

>> We begged.

>>Mayor Watson: we will make sure that happens. I agree. But it was your phrasing in defense of the board. I don't feel the board ought to feel defensive.

>> I would also like to say we don't really blame the sbcci people here. We don't think it's their fault because like they say they are only a testing agency. It's the City of san marcos.

>>Mayor Watson: well --

>> they -- if they are going to administer the test like our agreement said, they should have told sbcci no, sir, you test here in the City of san marcos.

>>Mayor Watson: okay. All right. The motion has been made to postpone for two weeks.

>>Garcia: I am going to change that to two months.

>>Mayor Watson: Mayor Pro Tem do you consider that a friendly amendment?

>>Goodman: um, I'm not sure. Does it have to be two months? could it be like a maximum of two months?

>>Garcia: a maximum of two months. No more than 3 months, no more than 8 weeks.

>>Mayor Watson: postponement for a period up to two months. Do you consider that friendly?

>>Goodman: not to exceed.

>>Mayor Watson: now you are going to talk language, huh? up to two months or not to exceed two months.

>>Garza: I am not sure we should give them a lawyer there.

>>Mayor Watson: motion made and seconded, any further discussion? hearing none --.

>>Goodman: I want to say quickly, that did remind me, thank you to everybody who came tonight, thank you for waiting out until the end of the evening and I hope all of you feel like you are going to go home with an answer soon to come.

>>Mayor Watson: all those in favor say aye. Opposed show -- show me voting no. There being no further business to come before the Austin City Council, Council Member Slusher moves to adjourn, there is a second? come on, guys!

>>Goodman: I have a substitute motion. That if we have trouble finding a lawyer to go over and help them with that, we offer the Mayor's fine services.

>>Mayor Watson: I have lots of time to do that. Is there a second?

>>Goodman: second.

>>Mayor Watson: seconded by the Mayor Pro Tem? any discussion? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries, we are adjourned, thank you all very, very much. 10:15.

End of Council Session Closed Caption Log