Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting, 07/22/99

>>MAYOR WATSON: WELCOME, EVERYBODY. AS I TOLD FOLKS A COUPLE WEEKS AGO THAT ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS GOING TO BE DOING THIS SUMMER WAS RECOGNIZING SOME OF THE YOUTH IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT HAVE MADE POSITIVE CONTRIBUTIONS TO OUR CITY AND THE COMMUNITY AND RECOGNIZE THEM BY MAKING THEM MAYOR FOR A DAY. AND TODAY I AM VERY PLEASE TO DO HAVE WITH US CHRISTOPHER LUETA AND CHRISTOPHER IS AN 11-YEAR-OLD. HE IS AN ACTIVE YOUNG MAN. HE IS VERY ACTIVE MEMBER AT HIS CHURCH WHERE HE PARTICIPATES IN SUNDAY SCHOOL, HE ENJOYS SING WG THE OTHER CHILDREN THERE AND HE ENJOYS BEING -- WATCHING THE NEWS EACH NIGHT AND BEING A PART OF THE COMMUNITY IN THAT WAY. HE HAS ALSO PARTICIPATED AT SEVERAL FAMILIES OR VALUED CONFERENCES AND AS PART OF THE CHILDREN'S PARTNERSHIP. MHMR. HE HAS BEEN ASKED TO PROVIDE HIS PICTURE FOR INCLUSION IN A BROCHURE FOR CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES AND HIS MOST RECENT ACCOMPLISHMENT WAS AT A PARADE FOR THE DAY OF THE CHILD. HE WILL BE ATTENDING SUMMIT ELEMENTARY THIS FALL. HE HAS A DOG NAMED SCOOBY AND SO I AM PROUD TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING PROCLAMATION. BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM JULY 22, 1999, AS CHRIS IF I REMEMBER LUETA, MAYOR FOR A DAY IN AUSTIN. [APPLAUSE]. AND I CALL ON ALL OF THE CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN RECOGNIZING CHRISTOPHER AS AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE BAPTIST MISSION CHURCH WHERE HE PARTICIPATES IN SUNDAY SCHOOL AND ENJOYS SINGING WITH THE OTHER CHILDREN. HE IS A NATIVE AUSTINITE WHO LOVES MUSIC, PLAYING BALL AND PLAYING WITH HIS DOG. IN RECOGNIZING CHRISTOPHER AS A LEADER AND ROLE MODEL FOR OTHER YOUNG PEOPLE AND IN HEREBY APPOINTEDDING CHRISTOPHER AS HONORARY MAYOR OF AUSTIN WITH ALL RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND EMOLUMENTS APPEAR PERTAINING THERE TOO AND IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND CHRISTOPHER, THANKS FOR HELPING US OUT TODAY. [APPLAUSE]. WHAT CHRISTOPHER IS GOING TO DO IS HELP ME HAND OUT PROK LA MASZ AND CALL THE MEERGT TO ORDER. OUR FIRST ONE -- AND IT'S VERY FITTING THAT TODAY WE ARE GOING TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING PROCLAMATION AND THAT CHRISTOPHER GETS TO HELP ME WITH THIS PROCLAMATION. BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM JULY 19199 AS AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT AWARENESS MONTH AND CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN RECOGNIZE THANKING JULY 26, 1999 HAS A VERY SPECIAL MEANING FOR ALL CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES BECAUSE IT MARKS THE 9TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ENACTMENT OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OR ADA. IN RECOGNIZING THAT CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES HAVE A RIGHT TO BE FULLY INCLUDED AND HAVE ACCESS TO OUR SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC MAINSTREAM. IN RECOGNIZING THAT INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES HAVE A GREAT DEAL TO OFFER AND IN ACKNOWLEDGING AND REAFFIRMING THE STRONG COMMITMENT OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO FULL IMPLEMENTATION WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, THUS OFFERING MORE THUNTS AND AN ENHANCED QUALITY OF LIFE FOR EVERYONE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND I'M PLEASE TO DO MAKE THIS PROCLAMATION TODAY. PLAUTION PLAUS [APPLAUSE].

>> HONORABLE MAYOR WATSON AND CITY COUNCILLMEMBERS, THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, OUR NATION'S MOST COMPREHENSIVE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES TURNS NINE YEARS OLD ON MONDAY. JULY 26TH. OUR CITY CAN TAKE PRIDE IN KNOWING THAT OVER THE PAST NINE YEARS AUSTIN HAS MADE MANY ACHIEVEMENTS IN ACCOMPLISHING THE GOALS AND SPIRIT OF THE ADA. A FEW CHAMPS OF THESE ACHIEVEMENTS ARE THE ESTABLISHMENT AND CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE CITY ADA OFFICE WHICH SERVES AS A CLEARING HOUSE OF INFORMATION ON ADA AND OTHER DISABILITY LAWS, AND AS SUCH CITIZENS, BUSINESSES, EMPLOYERS, STATE AGENCIES ON A DAILY BASIS. THE CITY HAS MADE ALL EFFORTS TO IMPLEMENT AND COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990 WITH CONSTANT MONITORING. OUR THANKS TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN ADA OFFICE. THE CITY HAS ESTABLISHED A NETWORK OF ADA COORDINATORS, APPROXIMATELY 25, A CONTACT FOR EACH CITY DEPARTMENT. OUR THANKS ALSO GOES TO THEM. THE CITY THROUGH PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION AND PARKS AND RECREATION HAS FUNDED OVER $9 MILLION IN MODIFICATION OF CITY FACILITIES AND PARK FACILITIES FOR ADA COMPLIANCE. THE CITY THROUGH PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT HAS FUNDED OVER $4 MILLION FOR CURB RAMPS AND SIDEWALKS. THE CITY CHANNEL 6 IS CURRENTLY CLOSED CAPTIONING THE CITY COUNCILL MEETINGS FOR PERSONS WITH HEARING DISABILITIES. THE VOLUNTEER DISABLED PARKING ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM HAS ISSUED OVER 5,397 TICKETS FOR A TOTAL OF OVER $145,000 IN REVENUES. ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENTS AND REVIEWS WERE MADE FOR THE AUSTIN-BERGSTROM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WITH CITIZENS AND COMMUNITY ADVOCATES. IN 1995, THE CITY WAS RISED BY THE U.S. CONFERENCE OF MAYORS FOR AUSTIN AS AN EXEMPLARY ADA PROGRAM. MOST RESENTED EXAMPLES OF THE CONTINUED WORK AND SUPPORT OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN WITH THE AUSTIN MAYORS COMMITTEE FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ARE WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCILL THE PASSAGE OF A RESOLUTION ON MARCH 25TH WHICH SUPPORTED THE INTEGRATION REQUIREMENT OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THIS RESOLUTION AND YOUR SUBSEQUENT LETTER CALLING ON GOVERNOR GEORGE W. BUSH TO REMOVE TEXAS FROM THE AM ICU S BRIEF IN THE OM STED LAWSUIT REAFFIRMS AUSTIN'S SUPPORT OF THE RIGHT OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES TO BE ABLE TO LIVE AND RECEIVE SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY. THE VISITABILITY ORDINANCE FOR PUBLICLY FUNDED HOMES MAKES AUSTIN A PLACE WHERE NEIGHBORS INCLUDING PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, CAN VISIT EACH OTHER'S HOMES. ADA FUNDING FOR ACCESSIBILITY THROUGH THE PARKING ENFORCEMENT REVENUES HAS MADE IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE READING MACHINES AND COMPUTERS AT LIBRARIES, TELECOMMUNICATION DEVICES FOR THE DEAF LOCATED THOUGHT THE CITY OFFICES AND OTHER ACCESSIBILITY ENHANCEMENTS INVOLVING TECHNOLOGY AND EQUAL ACCESS. BUT WAIT, WE'RE NOT DONE. THE ADA IS AN ACT WHICH HAS HAD A LONG HISTORY OF DISCRIMINATION BOTH THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL BARRIERS AND ATTITUDE NATURAL BARRIERS TO REPAIR. THERE IS A LOT OF WORK STILL TO BE DONE AND WE APPLAUD THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR THE ENTHUSIASM AND MOMENTUM IN BREAKING DOWN THE BARRIERS. WE ARE PROUD TO BE A PART OF A CITY THAT GIVES SO MUCH SUPPORT TO THE ADA AND ITS CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES. ON BEHALF OF THE AUSTIN MAYORS COMMITTEE FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, WE THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]. [LAUGHTER].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. OUR NEXT -- IS MR. LUBER HEEFR OUR NEXT PROCLAMATION IS A COMMUNITY SERVICE AWARD AND IT'S BEING PRESENTED IN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND APPRECIATION OF THE AUSTIN CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU'S PARTICIPATION IN THE BACK TO SCHOOL INSTRUMENT DONATION DRIVE BENEFITING LONELY INSTRUMENTS FOR NEEDY KIDS. AND LET ME GO ON. IT'S DEDICATED -- THAT GROUP IS -- GROUP'S DEDICATED EFFORTS TO BECOME PERSONAL ACTIVE AND INVOLVE OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY TO SHOW A SPIRIT OF VOLUNTEERISM AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE LIVES OF THE CHILDREN OF AUSTIN IS PRESENTED TO THE AUSTIN CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUR YO AND STATES IT'S DESERVING OF PUBLIC ACCLAIM AND RECOGNITION AND IT'S SIGNED BY ME ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL AND I'M HAPPY TO PRESENT THIS TO RICK LUBER. [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING?

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND MR. MAYOR. ON BEHALF OF THE AUSTIN CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU WE WANT TO THANK ALL OF THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKING WITH US IN THIS PROGRAM AND WENDY MORGAN AND SHE IS GOING TO GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION WITH REGARD TO THE FUND DRIVE THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW. JUST IMAGINE THIS, COULD YOU IMAGINE A YOUNG PERSON IN AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT OR IN THE NEIGHBORING SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT IS INTERESTED IN MUSIC, IN THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD AND NOT HAVING A MUSICAL INSTRUMENT TO PLAY. THIS PROGRAM IS TO GET YOU TO GO INTO YOUR CLOSET AND YOUR ATTIC AND BRING THAT INSTRUMENT THAT IS GATHERING DUST OR THAT YOUR CHILD HAS USED AND NO LONGER IS USING AND BE A PART OF THIS CAMPAIGN WHERE WE CAN BRING THOSE INSTRUMENTS AND PUT IT IN THE HANDS OF THE YOUNG PEOPLE THAT CAN REALLY BENEFIT FROM IT. I'M GOING TO HAVE WENDY COME UP AND SHE CAN GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW AND COMMERCIAL ABOUT THE DRIVE ITSELF. WENDY?

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU MR. LUBER. WE ARE CONDUCTING A CAMPAIGN, AGAIN TO BRING MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS INTO THE HANDS OF NEEDY CHILDREN. THE WEEK OF JULY 26TH WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKING PEOPLE TO CLIMB INTO THEIR ATTICS, BRING OUT THOSE INSTRUMENTS AND DONATE THEM TAX DEDUCTIBLE TO THE LINKS PROGRAM, WHICH IS PART OF THE BROOK MACE FOUNDATION FOR MUSIC EDUCATION. LINKS STANDS FOR LOAN SFRUMENTS FOR NEEDY KIDS. YOU MAY DONATE INSTRUMENTS AT EITHER OF THE BROOKS MAY LOCATION WHICH ARE IN EXIT 251 IN ROUND ROCK OR AT THE SOUTH LAMAR LOCATION OR IF YOU WORK DOWNTOWN YOU CAN BRING YOUR INSTRUMENT TO THE AUSTIN CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU VISITORS CENTER AT SECOND STREET AND SAN JACINTO. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK SOME SPONSORS. TRAMEX TRAVEL HAS DONATED TWO ROUND TRIP TICKETS ANYWHERE IN THE U.S. TO ONE DONOR. WE HAVE AMY'S EYE CREAM GIVING OUT GIFT CERTIFICATES AND THEN EASY PAWN HAS A -- STARTED THE DRIVE BY DONATING MORE THAN $1200 WORTH OF INSTRUMENTS TO KICK THE DRIVE OFF. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THOSE SPONSORS AND THANK ALL OF YOU WHO BRING YOUR INSTRUMENTS OUT TO THE DRIVE. THANKS AGAIN TO BRENDA NEST RECHLT R. [APPLAUSE].

>>GARCIA: IF BENEFIT COULD COME UP. -- BEN COULD COME UP. THE OFFICE OF THE COUNCIL DURING SUMMERS AND SOMETIMES EVEN DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR INVITE YOUNG PEOPLE TO COME AND INTERN WITH US AND THIS YEAR WE HAVE THE GOOD FORTUNE OF HAVING BEN MALDANODO INTERN WITH US. BEN IS A RISING FRESHMAN. THAT MEANS HE WILL FINISH -- HE HAS FINISHED HIS 8TH GRADE, RIGHT?

>> UH-HUH.

>>GARCIA: AND IF HIS FATHER WOULD COME UP TOO. CHIEF? WE'RE PRESENTING HIM WITH A DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD THAT READS THAT WE ARE ACKNOWLEDGING AND APPRECIATING HIS SERVICE TO THE OFFICE OF -- MY OFFICE AT THE CITY COUNCIL. AND BEN IS AS AN INTERN IS DESERVING OF PUBLIC ACCLAIM AND RECOGNITION. LET ME SAY, MAYOR, THAT WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF INTERNS, BUT BEN IS ONE WHO HAS REALLY BENEFITED FROM THE PROCESS AND I'M GLAD THAT THE COUNCIL MAKES IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO HAVE THIS KIND OF SERVICE BY YOUNG PEOPLE. SO FUTURE COUNCILMEMBER BEN MALDANADO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE].

>> I JUST -- I JUST WANT TO THANK GUS AND CINDY AND PAUL AND EVERYONE IN THE OFFICE AND EVERYONE IN CITY HALL FOR BEING SO NICE TO ME AND, LIKE, LETTING ME KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND HELPING ME WHEN I HAVE QUESTIONS AND I THINK I REALLY DID BENEFIT FROM THIS AND I THINK IT'S REALLY GOOD THAT I EVEN GOT THE OPPORTUNITY AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO THANK GUS AND ALL THEM BECAUSE THEY REALLY HELPED. THEY REALLY HELPED ME LEARN, ME LEARN ABOUT BUSINESS LIFE AND ABOUT LIFE AND ABOUT OUR CITY, AND SO THANK YOU.

>>GARCIA: THANK YOU, BEN. HIS FATHER IS HERE. FIRE ASSISTANT CHIEF PAUL MALDANADO, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING YOUR SON TO COME AND WORK WITH US. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR, NOW IT'S TIME FOR US TO HAVE SOME MUSIC AND WE HAVE WITH US TODAY THE A TOWN WAGS, THAT GROUP IS AN AUSTIN BORN COMBO OF PLAYERS WHO DEFINITELY LIKE TO SHAKE THINGS UP. THEIR BLEND OF ORIGINAL AMERICAN THEMES AND GYPSY SOUL BRINGS A WHOLE NEW SLANT TO THE DETERMINE GETTING DOWN. THE MEMBERS ARE TONY ON GUITAR AND VOCALS, DID I SAY THAT RIGHT? LISA WITH VOCALS AND GUITARS AND MARY WITH VYE LEN AND I'M MISSING SOMEBODY HERE. WILLIAM WITH THE BASS AND TUBA. THAT IS WILLIAM THERE. LISA, MARIE AND TONY HAVE KNOWN EACH OTHER FOR YEARS AND WERE BAND MATES IN A GROUP CALLED GREASY WHEELS WHICH IS AN ARMADILLO ERA FAVORITE. THEY FOUND WILLIAM THROUGH A STROKE OF LUCK SO NOW WE HAVE TODAY WITH US -- IT'S TIME FOR A TOWN TO WELCOME THE A TOWN WAS R WAGS AND I'M PROCLAIMING TODAY AS THE A-TOWN WAGS.

>> THANK YOU. WE NAMED THE GROUP AFTER AUSTIN AND TONY IS NOT ACTUALLY HERE. HE'S VERY SICK AND SENDS HIS APOLOGIES AND WE HOPE THAT HE GETS BETTER REAL SOON BECAUSE WE MISS HIM. WE PLAY REGULARLY AT THE HOLE IN THE WALL ON WEDNESDAYS FROM ABOUT 7:15 TO 9:30. THAT'S EVERY WEDNESDAY, AND WE'RE PLAYING AT THE END OF AUGUST AT THE AUSTIN CHRONICLE SPONSORED HOT SAUCE FESTIVAL AND THAT'S AUGUST 29TH AND WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK BRENDA AND WENDY FOR GETTING US HERE. THANK YOU. (music) (music) [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE A-TOWN WAGS. THANK YOU ALL VERY, VERY MUCH. WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE RISE AND JOIN WITH US IN OUR INVOCATION WHICH WILL BE DELIVERED BY PASTOR T. J. THOMAS OF THE PENTECOSTAL CHURCH OF GOD - AUSTIN EVANGELISTIC CENTER HELP ME OUT. I CAN'T PRONOUNCE IT. PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> EVANGELISTIC.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.

>> FATHER, WE REALIZE TODAY THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE HERE IN POSITION TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR THIS CITY. AND IN YOUR WORD YOU'VE SAID TO ASK FOR WISDOM AND REVELATION AND ILLUMINATION AND WE PRAY, GOD, UPON THIS ENTIRE GROUP TODAY THAT THEY WILL BE A BLESSING TO THE CITY LORD, NOT ONLY THE DECISION, BUT THEIR LIVES WOULD BE LORD IN THAT PLACE WHICH MEN WOULD WANT TO FOLLOW. BLESS THIS MEETING TODAY AND LET YOUR WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH THESE MEN, THROUGH THESE LIVES, THROUGH THE MINDS AND THROUGH THE HEARTS IN JESUS' NAME WE PRAY. AMEN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AMEN. PASTOR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT, NOW IT'S TIME FOR OUR MAYOR FOR THE DAY TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. [GAVEL SOUNDS].

>>MAYOR WATSON: CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.

>> I CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MAYOR. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: I APPRECIATE MAYOR HELPING ME OUT AND I WANT TO INTRODUCE HIS MOTHER, BETTY AND HIS FATHER RICARDO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND WE'RE VERY PROUD OF YOUR SON AND I KNOW YOU ARE TOO.

>> NOW CAN I LEAVE?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, YOU CAN. THAT'S USUALLY WHAT I SAY WHEN I CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER, BUT I DON'T SAY IT QUITE AS PUBLICLY. GOOD JOB. THANK HE VERY MUCH. I'LL RATIFY THAT THE MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER FOR A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL. IT IS THURSDAY, JULY 22, 1999, WE ARE MEETING AT THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS WHICH ARE LOCATED AT 307 WEST SECOND STREET IN AUSTIN, TEXAS. WE HAVE SOME CHANGES TO THE AGENDA. LET ME READ THROUGH THOSE. ON ITEM NO. 11, THAT ITEM IS POSTPONED UNTIL JULY 29TH, 1999. ITEM NO. 24 IS TO SET TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS TO PRESENT AND RECEIVE PUBLIC INPUT ON THE PROPOSED CITY OF AUSTIN LOWER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY AND WE SHOULD ADD THE WORD WATER SUPPLY -- WATER FOR WATER SUPPLY PURCHASE. ITEM 20 AT THE END OF THAT SHOULD READ 23.8% MBE, 8.4% WBE. ITEM NO. 34 IS POSTPONED UNTIL JULY 29TH, 1999. ITEM NO. 64 IS SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER GUS GARCIA AND MAYOR KIRK WATSON. ITEM NO. 66, DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO INITIATE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PRIVATELY FUNDED PREFERRED RATE MORTGAGE PROGRAM FOR CITY OF AUSTIN PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONNEL, AND DELETE THE WORD WHO AND REPLACE IT WITH THE WORD TO LIVE WITHIN THE CITY. ITEM NO. 68, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 25 OF THE CITY CODE IS SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 5 1999. ITEM NO. 70, APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 25 OF THE CITY CODE IS SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 5, 1999. ITEM SET FOR A TIME CERTAIN, 4:00 ZONING ITEMS 50 THROUGH 62. AT 6:00 P.M. TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY THE TAXICAB FRANCHISE HOLDS TO CHANGE THE RATE OF FARE, ITEM 67. THE FIRST AGENDA WILL BE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 15TH, 1999. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES?

>>LEWIS: SECOND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I AIN'T GOT A MOTION BUT I'LL CONSIDER THAT ONE. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM 1.

>>GARCIA: SHOW ME ABSTAINING SINCE I WASN'T HERE AT THE MEETING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA ABSTAINING. ON GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATION GUS PENA FOLLOWED BY ARTHUR HARRINGTON AND ADRIAN PINEDA. GOOD AFTERNOON, GUS PENA, PRESIDENT OF EAST AUSTIN CONCERNED HISPANICS. ITEM 34 I UNDERSTAND HAS BEEN POSTPONED? NEXT WEEK. OKAY. WE'RE OPPOSED TO THAT ONE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME SPEAKERS SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THAT ISSUE. VERY CATASTROPHIC FOR THE PEOPLE AND WE DON'T FOLLOW WITH THAT. BETWEEN OCTOBER 1ST, '99 AND JUNE 30TH THE FOLLOWING NUMBER OF PATIENTS WERE SEEN AT THE SOUTH AUSTIN DENTAL CLINIC, 4,328, NORTHEAST 5,988, RBJ 1859 WERE SEEN WITH LIMITED SERVICES PROVIDED WITH LIMITED SPACE. IN OTHER WORDS, NOT OPERATING -- EXCUSE ME, NOT AT FULL OPERATING CAPACITY. IF THEY WERE FULLY OPERATIONAL HOW MANY MORE PARENTS WOULD HAVE BEEN SEEN TO THE 1859 AT THE RBJ CLINIC? IT DOESN'T TAKE A ROCKET SCIENTIST TO REALIZE IF SOUTH AUSTIN DENTAL CLINIC IS CLOSED AND THE SERVICES ARE CONSOLIDATED IT WILL HAVE A DEVASTATING CAT STRAUFIC EFFECT. AS IT'S NOW THE CLINICS NEED FOR DENTISTS AND STAFF TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE USERS. AGAIN, IT IS A BAD DIGS TO ENCLOSE THE SOUTH AUSTIN DENTAL CLINIC AND DISRUPT AND DISPLACE CLIENTS, MR. CITY MANAGER. AND ALSO THE FAR SOUTH AUSTIN AREA. AGAIN THE CITY HAS A FIDUCIARY STATUTORY AND MORAL OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE SERVICES WITHOUT DISRUPTION OR ADVERSELY IMPACTING THE INDIGENT, NEEDY OR POOR POPULATION OF THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY. KEEP THE SOUTH AUSTIN DENTAL CLINIC OPEN. DON'T CUT ANY SOCIAL WORKER POSITIONS AS THE SOCIAL WORKERS PROVIDE NEEDED ASSISTANCE TO THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, EXCUSE ME. DO NOT CLOSE ANY HEALTH CLINICS. WE ALSO ARE REQUESTING, MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCILMEMBERS, THAT WHEN THE GOGGIO CONSULTANT TEAM PRESENTS THEIR LONGTERM OPERATIONAL PLAN AND MANAGEMENT TEAM STATUS REPORT, THAT IT BE SET AT A TIME CERTAIN TO ALLOW PUBLIC SPEAKERS IN THE EVENING, NOT IN THE AFTERNOON. LET THEM GET OUT OF WORK WITHOUT HAVING TO TAKE TIME OFF. BOSSES MIGHT NOT APROFESSOR OF THAT. DON'T RAISE THE CO-PAY FOR DOCTORS VISITS OR PHARMACEUTICALS. PEOPLE HAVE ENOUGH TO PAY. ONE DOLLAR MIGHT NOT BE TOO MUCH FOR YOU ALL, BUT IT BUYS TORTILLAS, BEANS, BREAD, A GALLON OF GAS. WHAT ABOUT THE PATIENT'S RIGHTS? I KNOW THE MAYOR IS -- I DON'T KNOW IF THE MAYOR IS LISTENING. AS PRESIDENT CLINTON WAS ADVOCATING FOR. POOR PEOPLE PAY TAXES, THEY PAY MORE THAN THEIR FAIR SHARE. THIS IS SOMETHING THE CITY SHOULD PROVIDE AND CONTINUE TO PROVIDE WITHOUT DISRUPTION OR ADVERSELY AFFECTING OR IMPACTING THE COMMUNITY. MR. MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS, MR. JESUS GARZA, CITY MANAGER, THINK ABOUT THE POOR PEOPLE. DON'T THINK ABOUT THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR. THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE HERE LIVING MORE LONGER THAN YOU ARE. WE ARE NATIVES AND WE DON'T APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH. THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN, THE SENIOR CITIZENS. THEY ARE MOST AT RISK FOR HEALTH CARE OR HEALTH RISK, EXCUSE ME. AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR THIS TIME AND THINK ABOUT WHAT I'VE SAID. THIS IS COMING FROM NOT ONLY NATIONAL ORGANIZATION, BUT ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS THE STATE AND THEY WILL BE HERE IN THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ARTHUR HARRINGTON. ARTHUR HARRINGTON. ARTHUR HARRINGTON. ADRIAN PINEDA. WELCOME. FOLLOWED BY MICHAEL BONDS AND CARTER BREED.

>> CITY COUNCILLMEMBERS, MAYOR HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER LUETA, I APPRECIATE BEING HERE. I APPRECIATE THIS FORUM. I REPRESENT THE AUSTIN AREA HOMELESS COALITION AND I'VE GOT THE FOLLOWING THE READ. WE THE AUSTIN AREA HOMELESS COALITION UNDERSTAND THAT UNDER YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR '99-2000, THERE ARE SEVERAL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES THAT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY HARM INDIGENT HEALTH CARE. ALMOST FOUR YEARS AGO THE CITY SPENT APPROXIMATELY $156,000 TO RENOVATE THE CLINIC AT THE AUSTIN RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE HOMELESS. SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER THAT RENOVATION THAT CLINIC CLOSED ITS DOORS FOR THOSE HARD TO SERVE HOMELESS FOLKS WHO COULD NOT OR WOULD NOT GO TO OTHER PLACES FOR BASIC CARE SERVICES THERE WAS NO CONTINGENCY PLAN ON HOW TO CONTINUE TO SERVE THOSE FOLKS. THE SALVATION ARMY CLINIC WAS SERVING APPROXIMATELY 575 PATIENTS A MONTH. LAST YEAR WE ASKED YOUR OFFICE THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES OFFICE, TO HELP -- TO HELP US WITH A LACK OF HEALTH CARE FOR THAT PARTICULAR POPULATION. WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO USE EXISTING RESOURCES. SPECIFICALLY THE SALVATION ARMY CLINIC. WELL, WE DID. HOWEVER, SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER THAT THE CLINIC AT THE SALVATION ARMY CLOSED ITS DOORS TO SERVE THAT PARTICULAR SUB POPULATION WITH NO PLAN TO CONTINUE TO SERVE THOSE FOLKS. WE WERE FURTHER INSTRUCTED BY THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES OFFICE TO CONTINUE TO USE EXISTING RESOURCES, SPECIFICALLY THE EAST AUSTIN CLINIC. WELL, NOW TODAY THE EAST AUSTIN CLINIC IS BEING RECOMMENDED TO CLOSE. WE ASK THAT THIS CYCLE STOP. IF THERE ARE CERTAIN SERVICES THAT ARE GOING TO BE NOT GOING TO SERVE PARTICULAR POPULATIONS IN OUR COMMUNITY, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE CONTINGENCY PLANS IN PLACE SO THAT WE CAN GET TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY AND STRATEGY JIS SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO SERVE CERTAIN POPULATIONS. THIS IS OUR POSITION STATEMENT. WHILE WE SUPPORT REORGANIZATION IN THE NAME OF EFFICIENCY AND CITY GOVERNMENT WE DO NOT SUPPORT THE $500,000 CUT, NOR DO WE SUPPORT NOT REOPENING THE SALVATION ARMY CLINIC. WE FURTHER DO NOT SUPPORT THE LACK OF COMMUNITY INPUT ON THESE ITEMS. IF CLOSING THESE CLINICS ARE ACTUAL TARGETS THAT THE CITY IS WORKING TOWARDS, WE URGE THE DIVISION, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE AUSTIN AREA HOME LESS COALITION, THE INDIGENT COLLABORATION, THE AUSTIN MINORITY HEALTH NETWORK SO THAT WE CAN COME TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY AND CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SERVICES. FURTHERMORE, AUSTIN'S TAX BASE INCREASED BY 18%. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. LAST YEAR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>>GARCIA: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA.

>>GARCIA: I THINK THAT EARLIER ON IN THE DAY WHEN WE HAD THE WORK SESSION, ADRIAN, WE WERE TOLD BY MR. LOWRIE THAT THE SALVATION ARMY IS SCHEDULED TO OPEN WITH GOOD STAFF INCLUDED IN EITHER LATE AUGUST OR EARLY SEPTEMBER. SO THAT IS GOING TO BE REOPENED HERE PRETTY SOON.

>> WE APPRECIATE THAT AND WE'VE ALSO BEEN INFORMED OF THAT SAME INFORMATION SINCE LAST YEAR. IT ONLY TOOK ONE MONTH TO RENOVATE THE CLINIC AT SALVATION ARMY. IT'S BEEN CLOSED FOR 11 MONTHS.

>> ADRIAN, DAVID IS HERE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK WITH HIM ABOUT WHY IT TOOK AS LONG AS IT DID TO RENOVATE AND WHAT THE SCHEDULE IS FOR OPENING IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MICHAEL BONDS. MICHAEL BONDS. MR. BONDS. CARTER BREED. FOLLOWED BY JOHN MC MILLAN AND TRACY JOHNSTON. COUNCIL, ITEM NO. 74 ON YOUR ADDENDUM WOULD BE THE FINAL [INAUDIBLE]. WELCOME.

>> MR. MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH YOU. I COME AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN AS WELL AS A CONCERNED BUSINESS OWNER AND I'M KIND OF WEARING TWO HATS HERE. ONE, A LITTLE CONCERNED FOR MY PARTICULAR BUSINESS, AND TWO, CONCERNED FOR THE OTHER SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS HERE IN TOWN AND SOME THINGS THAT I'VE GOT TO ADDRESS WITH YOU. I OWN A BAKERY DELL KA TELL SAN CALLED THE KITCHEN DOOR THAT'S BEEN IN AUSTIN FOR 25 YEARS NOW. EMPLOY ABOUT 40 TO 42 PEOPLE AND HAVE THREE LOCATIONS, ONE OF WHICH HAS BEEN AFFECTED PRETTY SEVERELY RECENTLY BY THE INSTALLATION OF A WATER MAIN ON LAKE AUSTIN BOULEVARD. MY STORE IS LOCATED AT 24 -- 2504 LAKE AUSTIN BOULEVARD. AND A 72 INCH WATER MAIN IS BEING PUT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF LAKE AUSTIN BULLETIN. I'M ABOUT 74 INCHES TALL SO THIS IS A MASSIVE WATER MAIN THAT'S GOING IN FLONT. THE DIFFICULTY THAT I HAVE HAD IS MY STORE HAS NO OTHER ENTRANCES OR EGRESS, POINTS OF EGRESS OR INGRESS OTHER THAN LAKE AUSTIN BOULEVARD. MY POINT HERE IS NOT TO BE -- HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS PEOPLE OR TRIPLE H CONSTRUCTION. THEY HAVE BEEN VERY RESPONSIVE IN COMPLAINTS THAT I'VE REGISTERED WITH THEM. THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE AND THE QUESTION I MIGHT POSE TO THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL, IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME TO ASK QUESTIONS OF YOU, IS WHAT'S THE -- WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE FOR A SMALL BUSINESS WHOSE BUSINESS HAS BEEN AFFECTED ADVERSELY BY A NECESSARY -- I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY NECESSARY PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT, IN TERMS OF ADDRESSING SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE. I'VE HAD WATER TURNED OFF VARIOUS TIMES FOR A DAY. FOR A RESTAURANT THAT'S A BAD THING. I'VE HAD 18-WHEELERS COMPLETELY BLOCKING ACCESS. AGAIN, THE QUESTION I WOULD POSE THERE AND I APPRECIATE THE MAYOR ABOUT TO ANSWER THAT AND THEN SECONDLY JUST TO SEE IF THERE IS CONCERN ON THE PART OF THE COUNCIL ON THE EFFECT THAT KIND OF CONSTRUCTION DOES HAVE ON SMALL BUSINESSES AND IF THERE IS ANYTHING YOU CAN DO. I KNOW IT'S NECESSARY, I DRINK WATER, EVERYBODY HAS TO, WE HAVE A LOT OF GROWTH ON IF WEST SIDE, BUT IT'S REAL HI A BAD EFFECT ON ME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: CLEARLY, AND I THINK I SPEAK FOR EVERY MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL, YES, WE ARE CONCERNED WHEN ANY NECESSARY PROJECT HAS AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON ANYONE. THAT ANSWERS YOUR SECOND QUESTION. AND THAT LEADS TO ANSWER OF YOUR FIRST QUESTION THAT IS CORRECT IS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS IS MR. PETER RIECK AND HE IS STANDING OVER HERE AND HE WILL BE THE BEST PERSON TO ADDRESS ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS TO WITH REGARD TO THE SPECIFICS OF THAT PROJECT AND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT MIGHT BE DONE TO HELP YOU HAVE EITHER NO ADVERSE IMPACT OR CERTAINLY LESS ADVERSE IMPACT. AND SO WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO IS VISIT WITH MR. RIECK AND NOW IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT, MAYOR AND APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I WOULD POINT OUT WE'RE SORT OF PASSED THE ADVERSE EFFECTS. IT'S -- I HAVE ACCESS ON THE WESTERN SIDE AND THEY ARE MOVING TO THE EAST SO IT'S KIND OF PASSED ME. THE QUESTION BECOMES AND I'LL ADDRESS THIS TO HIM IS THERE ANY AVENUE OF REDRESS?

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T YOU TALK WITH MR. RIECK.

>> THERE'S A PROCESS MR. RIECK IS FAMILIAR WITH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WELCOME, MR. MC MILLAN.

>> THANK YOU. I'M JOHN K. MC MILLAN, PRESIDENT OF THE PROGRESSIVE PROHIBITIONISTS RELIGION OF AUSTIN THE PHONE NO. 3 05-4599. I UNDERSTAND THAT POLICE CHIEF STAN KNEE IS PLANNING TO APPROVE IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE EMPLOYMENT-RELATED EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW POLICE OFFICERS FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN WHO DON'T HAVE PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE BE INCREASED. ACCORDING TO A POLICE OFFICIAL I SPOKE WITH THIS WEEK. I'M HERE TODAY TO URGE THE CITY COUNCILL TO OFFICIALLY REQUIRE THAT ALL NEW POLICE OFFICERS FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN WHO DON'T HAVE PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE MUST HAVE A COLLEGE DEGREE IN ORDER TO BE HIRED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN. MY REASONS INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: NOUM ONE, THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, TEXAS, A CITY OF 300,000 RESIDENTS, EVER SINCE 1986 HAS HAD A POLICY LIKE THAT. THE EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENT IN ARLINGTON, QUOTE, HAS GIVEN US A BETTER POOL OF APPLICANTS TO SELECT FROM SAYS SERGEANT STEVE STAPLETON -- SORRY, SERGEANT JEFF STAPLETON OF THE ARLINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT. QUOTE, FOLKS WHO HAVE A COLLEGE DEGREE SHOWS AN APARTMENT ATTITUDE FOR LEARNING AND CERTAINLY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO A HIGHER LEVEL OF TRAINING. NO. 2, A 1993 PUBLISHED STUDY BY THE NEW YORK CITY RAND INSTITUTE ENTITLED POLICE BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS IN PERFORMANCE FOUND THAT NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS WHO HAVE A FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE DEGREE, QUOTE, HAD STATICALLY FEWER DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS INCLUDING TOTAL COMPLAINTS, TRIALS AND SUBSTANTIATED COMPLAINTS AGAINST THEM THAN NON-COLLEGE EDUCATED OFFICERS OF THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT. WE FOUND, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT 16.3% OF THE COLLEGE GRADUATES ON THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE FORCE WHO HAD ALLEGATIONS OF -- EXCUSE ME, HAD ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT BROUGHT TO TRIAL COMPARED TO 30.4% OF THE NON-COLLEGE GRADUATES. THE STUDY ALSO FOUND THAT, QUOTE, HOLDERS OF THE COLLEGE DIPLOMAS ON THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE FORCE ALSO HAD FEWER DEPARTMENTAL CHARGES AND CIVILIAN COMPLAINTS THAN AVERAGE. IN ARLINGTON, TEXAS, SERGEANT STAPLETON SAYS, QUOTE, MY FEELING IS THAT WE DO HAVE FEWER COMPLAINTS RELATING TO EXCESSIVE FORCE BY ARLINGTON POLICE OFFICERS AS A RESULT OF THE COLLEGE DEGREE REQUIREMENT IN ARLINGTON. THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR A THIRD REASON HAS A LONG TRADITION OF BEING AN EDUCATED-MINDED TOWN. AS IN 1997, CITY SMART GUIDE BOOK TO AUSTIN NOTES, QUOTE, AUSTIN IS OFTEN TOUTED AS THE MOST HIGHLY EDUCATED COMMUNITY IN THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES AMONG CITIES WITH A POPULATION OF MORE THAN 250,000. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. IT WOULD BE VERY APPROPRIATE FOR OUR CITY TO HAVE A HIGH EDUCATION REQUIREMENT STANDARD. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>>LEWIS: MAYOR, MAY I ASK A QUESTION. MR. MC MILLAN, MAY I ASK YOU A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, PLEASE.

>> YES.

>>LEWIS: NOW, DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW WHAT ARLINGTON'S [INAUDIBLE] IS VERSUS THEIR AUTHORIZED STRENGTH?

>> I'M SORRY?

>>LEWIS: DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW WHAT THE MANNING -- THEIR PRESENT MANNING IS VERSUS THEIR AUTHORIZED STRENGTH?

>> OKAY, THE ARLINGTON POLICE FORCE HAS A TOTAL OF 490 COMMISSIONED POLICE OFFICERS, I WAS TOLD, BY SERGEANT STAPLE TON.

>>LEWIS: WHAT ARE THEY AUTHORIZED?

>> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

>>LEWIS: DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW THE PAY SCALE IN RELATION TO AUSTIN'S PAY SCALE?

>> I BELIEVE I HAVE THAT IN MY NOTES BUT I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK BACK WITH OUT THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: TRACY JOHNSON. WELCOME, MS. JOHNSON.

>> I'VE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE SO IF I DON'T DO THIS EXACTLY CORRECT --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU WILL DO FINE.

>> I HAVE SOME STUFF I WOULD LIKE TO HAND EVERYBODY IF THAT'S OKAY. WE -- MY HUSBAND AND I RAN ACROSS THIS SITUATION OVER THE PAST YEAR WHERE WE HAVE BEEN BEING BILLED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN WATER AND WASTEWATER WAY MORE THAN I FEEL WE SHOULD BE. ONE MONTH OUR BILL WAS $784 FOR WATER. THEY BILLED US FOR 190,200 GALLONS OF WATER. CITY CAME BACK LATER AND ADJUSTED THAT SAYING THAT WAS UNREASONABLE. TOOK 100,000 GALLONS OFF WHICH LEFT US STILL WITH A BILL OF $350. WE HAVE OVER THE LAST -- WE'VE BEEN IN THIS HOUSE SINCE A YEAR AGO LAST FEBRUARY HAVE AMAZED $1300 WORTH OF DEATH IN -- DEBT OF WATER ALONE. WE'VE CALLED THE CITY. WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE HEARING PROCESS, WE GOT A PHONE CALL ONE THURSDAY NIGHT SAYING OKAY HERE'S THE RESULTS OF THE HEARING. WE TOOK $40 OFF, YOU OWE THE REST, PAY IT BY MONDAY OR WE'RE CUTTING OR WATER OFF AND LOCKING IT. WE HAD TO CALL AND MAKE PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS MENTS ON MONDAY FOR WATER WE DON'T OWE THAT WE DIDN'T USE. WE CAN'T GO ANYWHERE ELSE AND GET WATER. THAT'S WATER. EVERYBODY HAS TO HAVE IT. I WAS GOING OVER THE AGENDA FOR TODAY. THE WATER AND WASTEWATER -- THEY ARE REQUESTING OVER $11 MILLION THIS MEETING ALONE. NOW, IF YOU TAKE THAT AND CONSIDER THAT'S THEIR INCOME FOR THE MONTH OF JULY, TAKE OUR INCOME FOR THE MONTH AND JULY AND WHAT THEY ARE ASKING US TO PAY THAT WOULD BE LIKE SOMEBODY SENDING THE CITY OF AUSTIN UTILITIES A BILL FOR $3,769,000 SAYING PAY IT OR ELSE. I DON'T THINK THE CITY WOULD STAND FOR IT AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE TO EITHER. WE'VE GOTTEN NO HELP FROM ANYBODY. IN FACT ONE OF THE TIMES WE CALLED TO REQUEST SOMETHING BE DONE ABOUT THIS MY HUSBAND WAS CALLED A DEADBEAT FOR NOT PAYING THE BILL. IT'S BEEN A NIGHTMARE. IT'S BEEN HORRIBLE. WE STARTED TALKING TO THE CITY ABOUT THIS LAST SEPTEMBER. JANUARY THEY CAME AND PULLED OUR METER. OUR UTILITY BILLS HAVE BEEN RANGING JUST THE WATER PART FROM ANYWHERE FROM 90 TO THE $700. SINCE THEY PULLED THE METER OUR HIGHEST BILL HAS BEEN $22. THERE WAS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE METER. THEY ARE STILL INSISTING WE HAVE A LEAK OF THE PART OF THE PAPERWORK IS THE CITY ACTUALLY STATING ON PAPER WE HAVE NO LEAKS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROBLEM IS AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE HAVING TO PAY FOR THIS WHEN IT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT SOMETHING WE OWE. AND IF THAKT THAT NOT ONLY THAT BUT THE WAY THEY DEALT WITH IT. WE DIDN'T GET A HEARING UNTIL JUNE, NINE MONTHS AFTER WE FIRST TOLD THEM THERE WAS A PROBLEM. SO NINE MONTHS WE HAVE THIS WATER BILL THAT KEPT GOING AND GOING AND NOTHING WAS EVER DONE ABOUT IT. THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYTHING YOU ALL CAN DO ABOUT THIS, BUT WE TRIED EVERYTHING ELSE. DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO AND WOULD APPRECIATE SOME HELP. [BUZZER SOUNDS].

>>MAYOR WATSON: HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO VISIT WITH RANDY GOSS?

>> I HAVE SPOKEN WITH RANDY ON TWO DIFFERENT INDICATIONS.

>> I SAW YOUR LETTER YESTERDAY I READ THROUGH IT. I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE YET TO READ RANDY'S RESPONSE TO YOUR SPECIFIC LETTER AND CONCERNS. LET ME GET A CHANCE TO WORK WITH RANDY AND TOBY TO DERNL WHAT OUR RULES ALLOW US TO DO IN TERMS OF FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF A BILL. IF I UNDERSTAND THE FACTS --

>> CAN I GET A COPY OF RANDY'S LETTER?

>> YOU ARE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO ANYTHING I HAVE THAT'S A PUBLIC RECORD. AFTER WE REPLACED THE METER YOU SAID YOUR BILL HAS NOT BEEN MORE FOR WATER THAN $22.

>> THEY SAID THEY PULLED IT, TESTED IT, THE METER WAS FINE, PUT IT BACK ON.

>> SINCE WE PUT THE METER BACK ON -- LET ME TAKE A LOOK AT ALL THOSE FACTS, WORK WITH RANDY AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.

>> THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, I'M GOING TO READ TO YOU THE CONSENT AGENDA AS I UNDERSTAND IT FROM JUST BEFORE WE RECESSED, AND, YES, COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.

>>LEWIS: [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T YOU TURN ON YOUR MIC AND TELL ME.

>>LEWIS: ALL RIGHT. I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ITEM NO. 28 BACK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHICH ONE ARE YOU TAKING OFF?

>>LEWIS: 66. BUT 66 IS ONLY FOR AN ADDITIONAL -- SOMETHING ADDITIONAL THAT'S NOT --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. YES, COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA.

>>GARCIA: ON ITEM 26, THE NAME OF ONE OF THE SCHOOLS IS MISSPELLED. IT'S -- THE WAY IT APPEARS HERE IS HERMALINDA AND IT SHOULD BE HERMELINDA. THAT'S ALSO MISSPELLED IN THE ORDINANCE. SO IF THEY COULD CORRECT THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. THE CONSENT AGENDA IS 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 22, 23, 24, 26 WITH THE CHANGE 28, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 48, 49 63, 64, AND 76 AND 76 THE APPOINTMENTS ARE TO THE TELECOMMUNICATION COMMISSION AMY MOCK A REAPPOINTMENT BY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS AND ELONGO ROGER GOPAUL. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE PULLED OR ADDED?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PULL 13 AND 16 FOR -- I CAN PROBABLY PUT THEM BACK ON BUT THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT STAFF MEMBERS, ONE BEING THE ATTORNEY I NEED TO TALK TO. SO PULL THOSE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ITEMS 13 AND 16 WILL BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.

>>SLUSHER: AND ON NO. 44, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT THIS PROPERTY COMPLY WITH THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. IT'S ALREADY -- IT ALREADY HAS TO COMPLY ACCORDING TO OUR -- OUR BACKUP, BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GET THAT EXTRA SAFEGUARD ON THERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T WE PULL 44 TO MAKE SURE THAT'S NOT A DISCUSSION ITEM.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE SHOWN VOTING NO AGAIN ON NO. S 39 THROUGH 42. cN NUMBERS 39 THROUGH 42. I WOULD ACTUALLY PUT TWO BACK ON IF I COULD GET MR. HODGE UP HERE FOR JUST A SECOND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MR. HODGE, ARE YOU HERE?

>> MAYBE I CAN --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET'S JUST LEAVE THEM ON. LET'S -- AND WE'LL JUST COME BACK TO THEM. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS? I'M GOING TO READ THE CONSENT AGENDA ONE MORE TIME AND SEEK A MOTION. CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 24, 26 WITH A CHANGE, 28, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, AND ON 39 THROUGH 42 COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER WILL BE SHOWN VOTING NO. 43, 48, 49, 63, 64 AND 76.

>> MR. HODGE IS HERE NOW MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS. WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. WE NEED TO -- ALL RIGHT. BEFORE WE DO THAT, LET ME ASK ON ITEM NO. 28, IT'S BEEN PUT BACK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST 28 IN H. -- AGAINST 28? BEGIN HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST 28? ALL RIGHT. THEN WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO PULL ITEM 28 OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA. COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>>SPELMAN: SURE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS MADE THE SECOND BUT I'M GOING TO ASSUME HE ALSO SINCE HE ORIGINALLY PULLED THAT. ITEM 28 WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM. MR. FRED DUPIE SIGNED UP -- HE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEM 64. YOU WILL BE FOLLOWED BY STEVEN MEEKS. MR. MEEKS IF YOU ARE HERE PLAES MAKE YOUR WAY TO 2 OTHER MICROPHONE.

>> I'M A MEMBER ON THE DAY LABOR TRANSITION TEAM. I'M ALSO PRESIDENT OF THE I-35 AIRPORT BOULEVARD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT TODAY I'M HERE TO SPEAK AS AN INFORMED AND CONCERNED MEMBER OF THE HARMON TRIANGLE COMMUNITY. IT SEEMED THAT THE MAYOR WAS QUITE HAPPY WHEN THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM MORNING SIDE RIDGETOP BUNCH CAME UP AND PRETTY MUCH GAVE THEM A SET OF CONDITIONS THAT OUTLINED THE CREATION OF THIS BOARD WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE CITY COUNCILL WANTED. THE BOARD THAT IS BEING CREATED IS TURNING INTO A FARCE. THE MORNINGSIDE RIDGETOP NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WHO BROUGHT THESE CONDITIONS TO THE COUNCIL HAS NO BYLAWS, IT HAS NO ELECTIONS, AND FOUR OUT OF THE FIVE OFFICERS ARE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY HIRED BY THE CITY. AND I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU GUYS TO STOP TURNING TO THIS GROUP OF CITY EMPLOYEES FOR INPUT WHEN YOU ARE MAKING DECISIONS THAT AFFECT MY NEIGHBORHOOD. WHEN YOU WANT TO TALK TO SOMEONE, COME TALK TO ME. EVEN THOUGH THE PROGRAM HAS HAD -- HAS MADE SOME STEPS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION BECAUSE OF VIGOROUS INPUT FROM MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY, CITY STAFF HAS MADE SURE THAT THERE IS A MAJORITY OF CITY BIASED VOTES ON THAT BOARD. THE STAFF EVEN FELT IT WAS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE THE MEXICAN CONSULATE AS A VOTING MEMBER ON THE BOARD FOR OUR DAY LABOR SITE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS. THE CITY STAFF IS STACKING THE BOARD TO THEIR ADVANTAGE, FORWARDING ALL EFFORTS BY THE LABORERS AND THE COMMUNITY TO MAKE THIS A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM. THE STAFF LISTENS MORE TO A CONSULTANT FROM CALIFORNIA WHO HASN'T A CLUE HOW TEXAS LAW AND TRADITIONS WORK THAN TO THE PEOPLE MOST DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THESE DECISIONS. ALTHOUGH LEN WAS SURE QUICK TO POINT OUT HOW MUCH HE LIKED THE SITE, WELL, IT WILL JUST BE RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM HOME DEPOT, HER FORMER AND POSSIBLE FUTURE EMPLOYER, I FIND THAT THE CONCERNS OF THE PEOPLE ARE A BIT MORE IMPORTANT. ON TO THE TRANSITION TEAM. THE TRANSITION TEAM HAS BEEN MISLED BY MARSHA CONNER, AND IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME. SHE SAID SHE WOULD NOT BE A VOTING MEMBER AT THE FIRST TRANSITION TEAM MEETING. YET ON THE BOARD'S FINAL DRAFT SHE IS CLEARLY LISTED AS A VOTING MEMBER. SHE WAITED UNTIL THE LAST SECOND TO SQUEEZE THIS IN ABOVE OUR OBJECTIONS. I SEE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. I DO NOT WANT AN UNTRUSTWORTHY PERSON ON THE BOARD. SHE IS THE HIGHEST RANKING GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL AT THESE MEETINGS. COULD YOU PLEASE GET HER TO START TELLING THE TRUTH? AS A MEMBER OF THE TRANSITION TEAM I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MARSHA CONNER'S NAME STRUCK OFF THE LIST OF VOTING MEMBERS. I OPPOSE THE PROCESS THAT ESTABLISHED THIS BOARD. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. THROUGH THE TRANSITION TEAM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE ONE MORE THING. THE DECISION TO DETERMINE THE FATE OF THE PROGRAM INCLUDING POSSIBLE RELOCATION OF THE SITE ULTIMATELY COMES DOWN TO THE COUNCIL. THEREFORE CONCERNED PEOPLE FROM THE COMMUNITY, SEVERAL LOCAL BUSINESS OWNERS AND A NUMBER OF MEMBERS FROM THE TRANSITION TEAM AND I THINK THAT THE COUNCIL'S DECISION SHOULD BE GUIDED BY AN APPROVED CRITERIA THAT THE COUNCIL MUST USE TO BASE THEIR DECISION UPON.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>> I JUST WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT MARSHA CONNER HAS DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB, WORKED EXTREMELY HARD AND SHE IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF TREMENDOUS INTEG RI I DID AND HE IS JUST DEAD WRONG. [ONE MOMEMT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTINERS CHANGE].

>> A PLACE IS NEEDED FOR THE WORKERS TO BE SAFE SO THE EMPLOYERS ARE GOING TO PICK THEM UP AND THE EMPLOYERS WITH LABOR'S SOLUTIONS SO YOU CAN GET A GOOD DAY'S WORK AND HOPEFULLY A FAIR WAGE AND THE CITY CONTRACT WITH SCS A GOOD LIVING WAGE. AND THE PROGRAM IS NEEDED SO THEY'RE NOT SCATTERED OUT ALL OVER THE CITY. WORK CAN BE MODERATED, WORK CAN BE REGULATED AND WHEN THE PEOPLE HAVE A SAFE PLACE TO WORK, THEY CAN FIND WORK, EMPLOYERS TO GET GOOD, AVAILABLE WORKERS. THAT'S BASICALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY ON THIS PROGRAM. I KNOW THE CITY HAS BEEN DOING A GOOD JOB, MARCIA CONNOR HAS BEEN DOING A GOOD JOB AND SO HAS GUS GARCIA.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ON ONE -- COUNCIL, ON ONE OF THE ITEMS, ITEM 38, WE HAD THAT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST FOR A POSTPONEMENT. IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT HERE? MS. GLASCO OR MR. GURNSEY, IS THERE SOMEONE HERE THAT CAN HELP ME WITH ITEM NUMBER 38? ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, JUST FOR PURPOSES OF THE NOTES THAT I'VE BEEN GIVEN, COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN, WILL YOU CONSIDER IT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO PULL ITEM 38 OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA?

>>SPELMAN: YEAH, SURE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, WILL YOU CONSIDER THAT TO BE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>>LEWIS: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO ITEM 38 WILL NOT BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: IS 47 ON CONSENT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: 47 IS NOT ON CONSENT. YOU PULLED THAT.

>>SLUSHER: NO. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU DIDN'T HAVE IT MARKED. I WOULD LIKE FOR EITHER MS. FUTTRELL OR MR. GOS TO ADDRESS NUMBER 15, 17 AND 20. THESE ARE PROVIDING WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE TO ANNEXED AREAS THAT WE ANNEXED IN 97, AND THERE'S BEEN SOME QUESTION ABOUT THE CITY'S -- QUESTIONS RAISED, I DON'T THINK ACCURATELY, ON THE CITY'S INTENT AND PERFORMANCE ON THERE. SO IF I COULD GET ONE OF THEM TO COME UP, I'D APPRECIATE IT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: ARE EITHER ONE OF THEM HERE.

>> MR. GOSS WAS HERE EARLIER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET'S PULL 15, 17 AND 20.

>> HERE COMES TOBY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ARE YOU PREPARED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION?

>> AND MR. GOSS. IF THERE'S ANY STAFF OUT THERE THAT HAVE AGENDA ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, IF YOU WILL GET YOURSELVES IN THERE, IT WILL HELP US A GREAT DEAL.

>> AND HERE WE ARE.

>>SLUSHER: ON 15, 17 AND 20, THESE ARE PROVIDING WASTEWATER SERVICE TO THE ANNEXED AREAS. WOULD YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW -- WHAT TYPE OF SCHEDULE THE CITY'S FOLLOWING IF WE'RE ON SCHEDULE, THAT SORT OF THING.

>> I'M GOING TO LET RANDY GOSS, THE DIRECTOR OF WASTEWATER AND UTILITY ANSWER THAT. BUT IT'S GOOD NEWS.

>> UNDER THE ANNEXATION LAWS WE HAD TWO YEARS TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION TO PROVIDE THE SERVICES AS WAS LAID OUT IN THE SERVICE PLAN, AND WE HAD FOUR AND A HALF YEARS TO COMPLETE THOSE. WE'RE IN THE PROCESS NOW OVER THE NEXT -- WITH THIS MEETING, PLUS OVER THE NEXT REALLY TWO MONTHS HE'LL WE'LL BE BRINGING TO COUNCIL APPROXIMATELY 25 ADDITIONAL PROJECTS TO BE AWARDED WITH THE GOAL AND THE PLAN IS IS TO HAVE ALL THESE PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION BY THE END OF THE YEAR, WHICH IS THE TWO-YEAR PERIOD. AND WE'RE ON SCHEDULE FOR THAT. WE THINK WE CAN MEETED THAT AND WE CAN MEET THE COMPLIANCE OF THE ANNEXATION LAW.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. GOSS. I'D LIKE TO CON GRATE LATE THE DEPARTMENT ON THAT.

>> THANK YOU. MATURE MAYOR THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES. THAT WILL TAKE US TO ITEM NUMBER 13: I'M SORRY, ITEM NO. 8. LET ME ASK, MS. FUTTRELL, ARE WE READY ON ITEMS EIGHT, NINE AND 27?

>> YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO TO ITEM 8 AND ITEM NUMBER NINE. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER -- I'M SORRY, MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: COULD I ASK YOU A QUESTION BEFORE WE DO. ON 28 ON ARREST OFF?

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA IS SHOWN YES ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION, MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: 28, IS IT ON?

>>MAYOR WATSON: IT'S A DISCUSSION ITEM BECAUSE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM NEITHER FOR OR AGAINST, BUT WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CARDS.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, DO YOU WISH TO BE RECOGNIZED OR DO YOU WANT A STAFF PRESENTATION?

>>SLUSHER: JUST GO STRAIGHT TO MS. FUTTRELL?

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. MS. FUTTRELL?

>> THIS IS, OF COURSE, YOUR THIRD READING ON BOTH THE ANNEXATION AND THE PUD. WE'VE HAD -- WE'VE HAD SOME FINE TUNING OF THE AGREEMENT OVER THE LAST WEEK. THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S BEEN SUBSTANTIVELY CHANGED. THERE'S BEEN SOME CLARIFIERS. I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS -- DEBRA, DO WE HAVE ONE LANGUAGE CHANGE YOU NEED TO READ?

>> ON THE DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AND BALFOUR TRACT AND DISSOLUTION OF BALDWIN RANCH WATER PROTECTION QUALITY ZONE, ITEM NO. 2, THE LAST SENTENCE IS NOW AMENDED TO READ, OWNERS AGREE TO WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO INCLUDE THE PROPERTY IN A WQPZ IF THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT DETERMINES THAT WQPZ'S ARE CONSTITUTIONAL OR IS STATE LAW AUTHORIZING WQPZ'S IS AMENDED TO CORRECT ANY STATUTORY INFIRMITIS. AND THIS IS THE ADDITION, UNLESS THE ZONING IN CASE NUMBER C EIGHT 1498-002 IS NOT APPROVED OR IS AMENDED WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE OWNERS. AND NUMBER FOUR OF THAT SAME DOCUMENT -- EXCUSE ME, NUMBER THREE OF THAT SAME DOCUMENT IS AMENDED TO INCLUDE THAT SAME LANGUAGE. NUMBER FIVE OF THAT DOCUMENT IS THE FIRST SENTENCE IS AMENDED TO READ, CITY AND OWNERS AGREE THAT PERMANENT WASTEWATER SERVICE TO THE AREA SHALL BE PROVIDED BY PRIVATE ON-SITE SEPTIC SYSTEMS MAINTAINED BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND BY ON-SITE CLUSTER WASTEWATER SYSTEMS TO BE OPERATED, MAINTAINED AND MANAGED BY THE CITY AND THAT SO LONG AS THE CITY OPERATES AND MAINTAINS IT ON SITE PRESSURE SYSTEMS, THE CHANGES IS TO SAY SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA WILL NOT REQUEST CONNECTION TO A CITY CENTRALIZED WASTEWATER SYSTEM. COMMERCIAL USERS MAY RECEIVE WASTEWATER SERVICE AS DESCRIBED IN THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CASE NUMBER C C-814-98-00 IT. THOSE ARE THE CHANGES.

>>SLUSHER: AND WQPZ BEING WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONES?

>> RIGHT. AND COUNCILMEMBER, YOU HAD SOME QUESTIONS ON THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST ON THE CLUSTER SYSTEMS?

>>SLUSHER: THAT'S RIGHT, JUST THE CITY'S THINKING AND APPROVING THE SYSTEM, MAKING THAT AGREEMENT.

>> I THINK YOU HAD THE QUESTION ONCE BEFORE ABOUT THE COST OF THESE CLUSTER TYPE SYSTEMS. WE DID SOME ANALYSIS LOOKING AT OTHER EXISTING TYPE SYSTEMS IN OTHER AREAS. AND THE AVERAGE COST IS ABOUT 24 DOLLARS PER MONTH PER CUSTOMER FOR O AND M. OUR AVERAGE WASTEWATER BILL RIGHT NOW RANGES SOMEWHERE IN THE RANGE OF $22 PER MONTH PER CUSTOMER, THAT INCLUDES CAPITAL, O AND M AND ADMINISTRATIVE TYPE COSTS. SO THIS IS -- THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT THERE IS NO CAPITAL, SO YOU CAN COMPARE THOSE AND THEY'RE NOT TOO FAR OFF, SO THERE MIGHT BE SOME ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD COSTS IF YOU ADD ON TO THAT IT COULD MEAN THE ACTUAL COST IS SLIGHTLY ABOVE WHAT OUR CURRENT RATEPAYERS PAY, BUT IT WOULD NOT BE DRAMATIC.

>>SLUSHER: SO IT'S ROUGHLY -- YOU'RE CONFIDENT THAT IT'S ROUGHLY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'RE CHARGING NOW, WHAT IT'S COSTING NOW? OKAY. WHAT ABOUT THE COST OF EXTENDING SEWER SERVICE OUT TO THIS AREA VERSUS PROVIDING THIS CLUSTER SYSTEM?

>> THE -- I HAVE THOSE NUMBERS SOMEWHERE. LET ME ASK CHRIS IF WE HAVE THOSE NUMBERS ON HAND. ARE YOU GOING TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION?

>> THOSE PARTICULAR COSTS THAT WE HAD DEVELOPED FOR EXTENDING FROM THE CLOSEST POINT WERE IN THE RANGE OF SEVEN TO 10 MILLION DOLLARS FOR OFF SITE EXTENSIONS, INCLUDING THE ON-SITE DEVELOPMENT FOR A CENTRALIZED SYSTEM. THE COST FOR THE CLUSTER TYPE DEVELOPMENT AS IT IS BEING PROPOSED RIGHT NOW IS MORE IN THE RANGE OF SIX PLUS MILLION DOLLARS. SO THERE IS A CHANGE IN TERMS OF THE TOTAL COSTS INVOLVED.

>>SLUSHER: SO THAT WOULD BE ONE TO FOUR MILLION SAVINGS? DIFFERENCE.

>> IN ABOUT THAT RANGE.

>>SLUSHER: AND WHO WOULD BE BEARING MOST OF THOSE COSTS IF YOU DID THE SEWER?

>> WHO WOULD BE BEARING THE --.

>>SLUSHER: THE RATE PAIR OR THE CUSTOMER OR THE CITY?

>> IT WOULD BE LIKE A SERVICE EXTENSION WHERE THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO PAY THOSE COSTS.

>>SLUSHER: SO THIS IS ACTUALLY CHEAPER TO THE DEVELOPER?

>> YES, MOST DEFINITELY.

>>SLUSHER: WHICH MIGHT BE ONE OF THE REASONS THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DO IT. OKAY. THANK Y'ALL A LOT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM NO. 8. AND I'LL DO THIS, I'LL GO THROUGH ITEM NO. 8, NINE AND THEN 47.

>> MAYOR? I SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS RICHARD SUBTLE, I HAVE MY CLIENT HERE TODAY AND WE WANTED TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES OF YOUR TIME TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR ALL THE HARD WORK ON THIS CASE. AS YOU KNOW, THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY WAS PUT INTO A WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE BY THE PREVIOUS OWNER. JAY HAUS WITH BALFOUR CAME AND LOOKED AND DECIDED THAT HE COULD WORK WITHIN THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF AUSTIN. AND FOR THE LAST -- IT WILL BE COMING UP ON A YEAR NOW WE'VE BEEN WORKING HARD WITH STAFF AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT PUT INTO THIS AND WE WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUBLICLY THANK THE STAFF FOR ALL THE HARD WORK ON THE NEGOTIATIONS AND THE DOCUMENTS. IT COMES OUT THAT BASICALLY WHAT IS HAPPENING IS THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE IS GOING AWAY. THE CITY IS GETTING ADDITIONAL ASSURANCES ON IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT THE CITY NORMALLY WOULDN'T GET IN JUST A STRAIGHT CODE COMPLIANT SUBDIVISION. IN ADDITION, THE CLUSTER SYSTEMS WILL BE USED AND IT ENABLES THE CITY IN ANOTHER WAY TO EXTEND SERVICE. IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT WHAT JAY IS GETTING IS SOME CERTAINTY AND BEING ABLE TO PLAT UNDER THE ORDINANCES WITH SOME MINOR VARIANCES THAT YOU'VE SEEN IN THE PUD. THERE'S ONE ISSUE, THOUGH, THAT THE STAFF DIDN'T HAVE THE DISCRETION TO NEGOTIATE WITH US ON, AND IT IS AN ISSUE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION PUT INTO THEIR MOTION AND WE'D LIKE TO YOU TO CONSIDER TONIGHT TO TAKE OUT AND ALLOW. AND THAT IS THE ISSUE OF BEING ABLE TO GATE CERTAIN PODS OF THE SUBDIVISIONS IN THE BALFOUR PUD. THE REASON IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THIS REASON IS THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY HAS ONE ENTRANCE IN OFF OF BEE CAVE ROAD. AND BASICALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU COME IN A TWO AND A HALF MILE ROAD OFF BEE CAVE ROAD DOWN TO THE LAKE. THERE WILL BE A LOT OF EFFORT TO TRY TO GET TO THE LAKE AND UNFORTUNATELY ON THIS TRACT THERE'S NOT ANY PUBLIC ACCESS. IN ADDITION TO THAT THERE ARE SOME PRIVATE ROADS DOWN AT THE END THAT BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS THE ROADS ARE GOING TO BE SMALLER, THEY'RE GOING TO BE PRIVATE AND WE REQUEST THE ABILITY TO DO GATES ON THOSE PODS AND POSSIBLY SOME OTHERS WHERE IT'S NEEDED. IN CHECKING WITH CITY STAFF, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IN THIS INSTANCE ONLY THAT THERE IS A BIG PROBLEM. AND WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS REQUEST THAT SECTION SEVEN OF THE ORDINANCE BE MODIFIED TO ALLOW GATES ON ONLY THE PRIVATE STREETS WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION, WHICH -- THE SUBDIVISION IS GOING TO HAVE MANY, MANY PUBLIC STREETS, BUT ONLY ON THE PRIVATES BE ABLE TO HAVE A GATE, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS GATING A DRIVEWAY. JAY HAS WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK WITH YOU JUST A MINUTE AND THEN WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AND SEE ON BALANCE IF IT ALL CAME DOWN TO BEING ABLE TO ANNEX, BEING ABLE TO DO AWAY WITH THE ZONE, DOING A CODE COMPLIANT SUBDIVISION IN THIS AREA ON BALANCE, WE FELT LIKE IT WAS A REASONABLE REQUEST TO ASK FOR THE GATES AND WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THAT. THANK YOU. JAY HAS WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING PREVIOUSLY AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THAT ISSUE. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ON ALL THE OTHER ISSUES ON THIS VERY COMPLICATED PROJECT WE WERE ABLE TO WORK THEM OUT ON THE STAFF. THIS ONE ISSUE, WE COULD HAVE WORKED IT OUT ON THE STAFF IN MY OPINION BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A STRONG FEELING. IT'S JUST A TECHNICALITY. ONLY BECAUSE THE PLANNING COMMISSION PUT IT ON IS IT IN THE ORDINANCE AND BASICALLY IF IT STAYS IN THE ORDINANCE, JAY IS TAKING A STEP BACK FROM WHAT IS BEING IN THE ETJ.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>> I'D INTRODUCE JAY HAUS.

>> HI, I'M JAY WITH BALFOUR REAL ESTATE GROUP. I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A LANGUAGE DRAWNOUT THANK YOU, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY MY APPRECIATION TO THE CITY STAFF FOR THE TIME AND EFFORT AND REALLY OVER TIME THAT THEY PUT IN IN WORKING WITH US OVER THE LAST NINE MONTHS. THIS IS A BIG PROJECT TO US AND AN IMPORTANT PROJECT, AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED WITH WHERE WE'VE COME OUT WITH IT. AND IRRESPECTIVE OF THE OUTCOME OF THE VOTE THIS EVENING I AM VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE STAFF AND WHAT THEY'VE DONE FOR US. THE ISSUE ON GATING IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE TO US. IT I THINK WILL LEND ITSELF TO MAKE IT A BETTER PROJECT AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>>LEWIS: I HAVE A QUESTION, MAYOR? LET ME ASK, I GUESS, EITHER ONE. AS THE GATING ISSUE COME UP WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AT ALL?

>> NOT AT ALL, BUT WE WOULD BE WILLING TO STIPULATE THAT THE GATING ISSUE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THE TRAFFIC STAFF.

>>LEWIS: OKAY. WELL, BECAUSE YOU ONLY HAVE TWO ENTITIES, AND THAT'S E.M.S. AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT THAT NORMALLY GETS INTO GATING, SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? WHICH ONE --.

>>LEWIS: WHICH ITEM IS THIS?

>> IT'S THE ZONING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO IT WOULD BE ITEM 47?

>>LEWIS: 47?

>> LIKE I SAY, WE'D STIPULATE TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE FIRE, E.M.S. AND THE TRAFFIC STAFF.

>>LEWIS: ALL RIGHT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: IN BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN WE GET TO ZONING COULD WE ASK STAFF TO LOOK AND SEE WHERE THE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE LAKE IS IN THIS AREA?

>>MAYOR WATSON: I THINK THE DIFFICULTY WILL BE THAT IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT I JUST HEARD THERE'S SOME DIFFICULTY ON THE AGREEMENT TO ANNEX IF WE DON'T DO THEM ALL AT ONE TIME. AM I WRONG ABOUT THAT?

>> YES. TODAY IS THE DAY THAT YOU HAVE TO TAKE ACTION BASED ON A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT ON THE THIRD READING OF THE ANNEXATION. I BELIEVE WE COULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION NOW. YOU CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IF THE GATING ON THE PRIVATE ROADS, THE ACCESS IS AT THE PARK WHICH IS NEXT DOOR, WHICH IS COMMON FORD, IF I'M CORRECT, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR, BUT IT WOULD MEAN THAT THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION THERE WOULD NOT BE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE LAKE. IS THAT CORRECT, RICHARD?

>> IT WOULD NOT HINDER ANY OF THE EXISTING PUBLIC ACCESS AT COMMON'S FORD, BUT THERE WILL BE SOME LOTS WITHIN THIS SUBDIVISION THAT MAY OR MAY NOT NEED A GATE. AND WE'D LIKE THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO THAT.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. WHAT I WAS -- DID I JUST HEAR THEN THAT WE'RE GOING TO ZONE THIS ONE CASE BEFORE 4:00 O'CLOCK?

>>MAYOR WATSON: IT'S ALREADY -- IT WOULD NORMALLY BE ON CONSENT AGENDA. IT'S ON SECOND AND THIRD READING.

>>GOODMAN: SO WE DON'T HAVE TIME. WELL, THE MATH IS OUR TYPICAL MATH AND I CAN'T TELL. -- THE MAP IS OUR TYPICAL MAP. DO WE HAVE ANOTHER MAP?

>> IF YOU WOULD LIKE A FEW MORE SECOND $TO THINK AND TALK ABOUT THE GATE ISSUE I CAN SEE WHAT OTHER MAPS WE HAVE. THESE ARE ALL A PACKAGE. THEY ALL GO TOGETHER. ONE IS CONTINGENT ON ANOTHER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, UNLESS I HEAR SOME DISAGREEMENT, EIGHT, NINE AND 47, WHICH ARE THE ONES WE'RE CURRENTLY DISCUSSING UNTIL QUESTIONS CAN BE ANSWERED FOR INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, LET'S THOSE UP -- I'LL COME BACK TO THOSE UNLESS THERE'S ANY DISAGREEMENT. LET'S GO TO ITEM NO. 10. AND IF Y'ALL COULD -- ON ITEM NO. 10, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, COP, DO YOU WISH TO HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION.

>>SPELMAN: I'D LIKE A STAFF PRESENTATION MYSELF.

>>MAYOR WATSON: PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> TONY, A BRIEF PRESENTATION.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION ON THE ORDINANCE AND WHAT THE CHANGES ARE. I THINK YOU HAVE SOME MATERIAL IN YOUR BACKUP, BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE COPIES OF THE PRESENTATION SLIDES, I CAN GIVE THOSE TO YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: GO AHEAD AND GO WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.

>> OKAY. LISTED ON THE SIDE SLIDE ON THE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE. YOU'LL SEE A LOT OF MARKOUTS IN THE ORDINANCE AND MOST OF THOSE ARE DUE TO THE PLAIN ENGLISH CHANGE THAT THE LAW DEPARTMENT PUT IT THROUGH TO GET IT IN MORE TERMS THAT ARE EASIER TO UNDERSTAND. BUT BASICALLY THE BASIC CHANGES ARE IN STAGE 1, WHICH WOULD BE MAY 1ST TO SEPTEMBER 30TH OF EACH YEAR, OUTDOOR IRRIGATION BY PERMANENTLY INSTALLED AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEMS WOULD BE PROHIBITED BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 10 A.M. AND SEVEN P.M.. THESE ARE SYSTEMS THAT ARE PROGRAMMABLE THAT THERE'S NO REASON FOR THEM TO NOT RUN DURING THE EVENING, EARLY MORNING HOURS WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE A LOT MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE LANDSCAPE IN TERMS OF THE WATER NOT BEING LOST TO EE VAP WAITION. OUR PROVISION DOES NOT APPLY TO ANYBODY WITH A HOSE END SYSTEM. IT DOES NOT APPLY TO ANYONE WITH AN UNDERGROUND SYSTEM THAT DOES NOT HAVE AN AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER OR IF ANYBODY IS JUST WATERING BY HAND. SO THE HOUR PROVISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE AUTOMATIC UNDER GROUND SYSTEMS. AND THEN THERE'S THE WASTEWATER PROVISIONS. AGAIN, THESE ARE ONLY FROM MAY 1ST TO SEPTEMBER 30TH. FAILURE TO REPAIR A CONTROLLABLE LEAK, OPERATING AN UNDER GROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM WITH BROKEN OR MISS DIRECTED HEADS. THESE ARE BROKEN HEADS YOU OFTEN SEE AS A GEYSER AS YOU SEE A SYSTEM THAT'S ON OR MISS DIRECTED THAT HAD ONE SHOOTING OUT IN THE STREET AND HITS YOUR CAR OZ YOU GO BY OR ALLOWING A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF IRRIGATION WATER TO RUN OFF A PROPERTY OR POND TO A DEPTH OF GREATER THAN A QUARTER INCH. I THINK THE KEY WORD THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL. WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT A LITTLE BIT OF OVERSPRAY INTO THE STREET OR PARKING LOT, BUT WHEN THE WATER IS RUNNING MORE OR LESS LIKE A SMALL STREAM, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER A SMARBL R. SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF WATER. AS IT SAYS BELOW, THIS PROVISION IS INTENDED TO PROHIBIT ONLY THE FLAGRANT WASTE OF WATER. THERE'S A COUPLE OTHER CHANGES. NUMBER TWO, ADDITIONAL EMERGENCY MEASURES FOR A SEVERE DROUGHT CONDITIONS. THIS WAS ADDED TO COMPLY WITH THE SENATE BILL ONE PROVISIONS THAT WE HAVE A WAY TO ADDRESS A DROUGHT. THESE MEASURES WOULD ONLY COME INTO EFFECT IF WE WERE -- OUR WATER SUPPLY WAS WORSE AND THE DROUGHT OF RECORD WAS IN THE 50'S, SO THIS WOULD OCCUR MAYBE EVERY 50 OR 100 YEARS, BUT WE DID NEED TO PUT THIS LANGUAGE IN THERE TO COMPLY WITH THE TNRCC RULES IN SENATE BILL ONE. AND THEN THE THIRD ONE IS THE VARIANCE AND ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES. PREVIOUSLY TO GET A VARIANCE FROM ANY PROVISION OF THE ORDINANCE, WE HAD TO CONSTITUTE A REVIEW BOARD. WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD REQUESTS FOR COMPLIANCE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN IN ANY MANDATORY STAGES, BUT SINCE THERE ARE PROBABLY PEOPLE WHO MIGHT WANT TO SEEK A VARIANCE WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES, WE WANTED TO SIMPLY IF I THE VARIANCE PROCEDURE, SO INSTEAD OF HAVING A REVIEW BOARD, STAFF WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER AND HE WOULD BE ABLE TO GRANT THE VARIANCE. AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS THE PLAIN ENGLISH VERSION CHANGES AND THOSE ARE JUST NONSUBSTANTIVE WORD CHANGING -- CHANGES. AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE ORDINANCE IS HOW THE CITY WOULD ENFORCE IT. I HAVE A FLOW CHART I'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH WITH YOU THAT JUST WOULD EMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT WE'RE MOSTLY INTERESTED IN COMPLIANCE AND NOT IN ISSUING ANY TYPE OF TICKETS. SO ASSUMING THAT WE GOT A CALL -- A COMPLAINT FROM A CUSTOMER, WE WOULD -- IF THE CUSTOMER HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN NOTIFIED, WHICH WOULD BE THE NO ON THE CHART GOING DOWN, WE WOULD CONTACT THE CUSTOMER BY PHONE, ASK THEM IF HE'S AWARE OF THE SITUATION AND OFFER FREE IRRIGATION AUDIT OR OTHER HELP IN CORRECTING THE SITUATION. IN HE HAD ALREADY PREVIOUSLY BEEN NOTIFIED ONCE IN THIS MANNER, THAT WOULD BE THE YES AFTER THE FIRST BOX GOING TO THE RIGHT. THEN THE QUESTION WOULD BE HAS HE RECEIVED A WRITTEN WARNING PREVIOUSLY. IF NOT, DID CITY STAFF SEE THE VIOLATION THE SECOND TIME. IF NOT, NO ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN. BUT YET, IF THE CITY STAFF WAS ABLE TO GO OUT THERE AND SEE IT OR HAPPENED TO BE IN THE AREA, THEN WE WOULD SEND THE CUSTOMER A WRITTEN WARNING. IF A REPAIR IS NEEDED, FRARM, IF IT IS A BROKEN HEAD OR IT'S SHOODING OUT INTO THE STREET, WE GIVE THEM A REASONABLE TIME FRAME TO COMPLY TO GET THIS CORRECTED SO THAT IF ANOTHER VIOLATION OCCURRED THE NEXT DAY, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT WE SAID IN THE WRITTEN WARNING THEY HAD SEVEN DAYS OR A REASONABLE PERIOD TO GO AND GET IT CORRECTED, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE THAT PERIOD OF TIME TO WORK ON IT. SO GOING BACK UP TO THE TOP OF THE SECOND COLUMN AGAIN, IF THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A WRITTEN WARNING AND THERE WAS ANOTHER VIOLATION REPORTED AGAIN, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE WITNESSED BY CITY STAFF FOR ANY ACTION TO BE TAKEN. AND IF IT WAS, THEN A COMPLAINT COULD BE FILED WITH THE MUNICIPAL COURT. SO THAT'S A -- IT'S FAIRLY DIFFICULT TO GET TO THE END AND HAVE THE COMPLAINT FILED. THERE'S TWO OR THREE STEPS IN THERE FOR THE STAFF TO WORK WITH THE CUSTOMER AND TRY TO GET THE SITUATION RECTIFIED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION? LOOKING AT THAT CHART, WHAT CURRENTLY IS NOT DONE? DO YOU HAVE A CHART OF WHAT WE CURRENTLY DO?

>> CURRENTLY WHAT WE DO IS SORT OF THE FIRST COME. WE CALL THE CUSTOMER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO WE CALL THE CUSTOMER AND WE OFFER A FREE AUDIT AND EDUCATION MATERIALS. WE'VE NEVER GONE THROUGH WHAT'S THERE IN THE SECOND COLUMN?

>> RIGHT. WE'VE NEVER DONE ANY OF THE SECOND OR THE THIRD COLUMN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHAT WOULD BE WRONG WITH BEFORE WE GO IMMEDIATELY TO A SYSTEM WHERE SOMEONE WOULD RECEIVE A FINE -- LET ME BACK UP AND ASK ANOTHER QUESTION. CAN YOU SPECULATE FOR ME OR GUESS FOR ME IF WE GO TO COLUMN 1 AND COLUMN 2, HOW MANY PEOPLE DO WE THINK WILL END UP WITH WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE TO ULTIMATELY FILE A COMPLAINT WITH THE MUNICIPAL COURT OR DO WE HAVE ANY WAY OF KNOWING?

>> WELL, I THINK A LOT DEPENDS ON THE ATTITUDE OF THE STAFF, WHICH IS TO SEEK COMPLIANCE AND NOT ISSUE TICKETS. I WOULD SUSPECT WE WOULD ISSUE FEW IF ANY TICKETS IN THE END.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IF THAT'S THE CASE, LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION. WHAT WOULD BE WRONG IF INSTEAD OF RIGHT NOW GOING TO A SYSTEM WHERE WE SAY WE'RE GOING TO JUST -- A SYSTEM THAT ISSUES TICKETS. INSTEAD WHAT WE DO -- AND SINCE THE ATTITUDE IS GOING TO BE FROM THE OUTSET EVEN IF WE ISSUE TICKETS THAT WE'RE GOING TO TRY NOT TO ISSUE TICKETS, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO SEEK COMPLIANCE, BUT INSTEAD OF GOING TO THAT RIGHT NOW AND SINCE WE'VE NEVER DONE WHAT'S IN COLUMN 2, GOING WITH COLUMN 1 AND COLUMN 2 AND OBTAINING INFORMATION DURING THIS SUMMER WHERE WE FIND OUT HOW MANY PEOPLE WE ACTUALLY FIND OURSELVES DEALING WITH WHERE WE'VE GIVEN THEM A WRITTEN WARNING AND THEN THEY DON'T -- THEY BASICALLY DON'T FOLLOW THROUGH, THEY DON'T TAKE THE TIME, THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING TO SATISFY THE CONCERNS OF COMPLIANCE. AND AT THE END OF THE SUMMER THEN MAKE A DETERMINATION ABOUT WHERE WE ARE. WOULD THAT BE A PROBLEM?

>> NO. THAT WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM. WE DID HAVE SOME KERNS LAST SUMMER WHEN WE WERE HAVING THE DRY PERIOD IN JULY WE GOT OVER 450 COMPLAINTS FROM --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: BUT HERE'S MY QUESTION ABOUT THOSE 450 COMPLAINTS. DID WE DO ANY FOLLOW UP TO DETERMINE AFTER A WRITTEN WARNING WAS DELIVERED -- AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS I'VE GOT, BY THE WAY, IS THAT WE TALK IN TERMS OF TRYING TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO WRITE TICKETS, BUT WE'VE GOT THE LANGUAGE OF WARNING AS OPPOSED TO THE LANGUAGE OF COMPLIANCE. WE START OFF BY SAYING AS A WRITTEN WARNING BEEN DELIVERED AS OPPOSED TO HAVE WE GONE OUT AND CHECKED TO SEE WHEN WE OFFERED THE FREE AUDIT AND EDUCATION MATERIALS THAT IT ACTUALLY MIGHT SAVE THE CUSTOMER MONEY BECAUSE IF THEY'RE NOT BLOWING WATER JUST UP IN THE AIR OR THEY'RE WATERING IN AN INEFFICIENT PERIOD OF TIME OF DAY, IF STAFF MAKES AN EFFORT TO SEEK COMPLIANCE, THEY MIGHT ACTUALLY BE SAVING THEM MONEY. OF THOSE OVER 400 COMPLAINT THAT WERE RECEIVED LAST YEAR, WE DON'T HAVE ANY WAY OF KNOWING BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DONE THIS, WHETHER IF WE FOLLOWED UP WITH THE RIGHT ATTITUDE, AS YOU JUST EXPRESSED, WE WOULDN'T SEE A CHANGE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

>> WE DON'T HAVE A WAY OF KNOWING, YOU'RE RIGHT, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T DO THE LETTERS AND EVERYTHING TO EVERYBODY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND MY INCLINATION IS THAT IF WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET, I'M A LITTLE HESITANT TO JUMP RIGHT TO A FINE PROCESS. I'D EVEN HAVE YOU TAKE OUT OF YOUR FLOW CHART THE WORDS WARNING AND ANYTHING LIKE THAT SO THAT WE MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE RIGHT ATTITUDE. AND SEE IF WE CAN'T DURING THIS SUMMER GO WITH COLUMN NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING, GO WITH COLUMN NUMBER TWO AND THEN AT THE END OF THE SUMMER ASSESS A, HOW MANY CALLS WE'VE HAD OF COMPLAINT, B, HOW MANY PEOPLE THAT PUTS US IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO SAVE MONEY. AND SO NOW IT'S TIME THAT WE HELP THEM SAVE SOME MONEY. THAT'S MY WAY OF THINKING ABOUT IT, COUNCIL. I DON'T KNOW. COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN?

>>SPELMAN: LET ME FOLLOW UP ON THE SAVING MONEY ASPECT OF ALL THIS. TELL ME ABOUT HOW MUCH DOES THE AVERAGE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE USE ON IRRIGATION PER MONTH DURING THE SUMMER. ABOUT HOW MUCH WATER?

>> WELL, IT'S PRETTY VARIABLE. BUT PROBABLY ON AVERAGE YOU COULD SAY 10,000 GALLONS. THERE'S CUSTOMERS THAT USE A LOT MORE, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY THE AVERAGE.

>>SPELMAN: OKAY. I'VE ASKED YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE VAP RAITION EFFECTS AND YOU'VE HANDED ME THIS CHART. IF YOU WATER 10,000 GALLONS AT NIGHT -- IF YOU WATER AT NIGHT, CAN WE SAFELY ASSUME THAT ALL 10,000 OF THOSE GALLONS ARE GOING TO GO DOWN INTO THE GROUND AND HELP YOUR PLANTS OUT?

>> ASSUMING THEY'RE NO NOT ON THE STREET, YEAH. THE EVAPORATION AT MIGHT KNIGHT IS PRETTY LOW.

>>SPELMAN: SAY IF YOU WATER AT THE WORST TIME OF DAY, SAY 2:00 O'CLOCK, 3:00 O'CLOCK.

>> BETWEEN TWO AND FIVE. THAT'S WHEN IT'S HOTTEST.

>> RIGHT.

>>SPELMAN: WHAT PORTION OF THE WATER THAT HITS THE LAWN IS GOING TO GO UP IN TERMS OF EVAPORATION.

>> WELL, AT LEAST 20% AND MORE LIKE 40 PERCENT.

>>SPELMAN: SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 20 AND 40 PERCENT. SO FOLLOWING YOUR LOGIC AND ASSUMING THE COST WHEN YOU GET TO THAT LAST $10,000 GALLONS, THE COST IS 4.25 WHEN YOU GET TO THAT --.

>> THAT'S THE HIGHEST RESIDENTIAL RATE.

>>SPELMAN: THEN YOU ESTIMATED FOR THIS ME THAT THE MONTHLY COST OF WATERING DURING THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY RATHER THAN EARLY IN THE MORNING OR LATE IN THE EVENING, LATE IN THE AFTERNOON WOULD BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN NINE AND 17 DOLLARS PER MONTH.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>>SPELMAN: FOR THAT WHOLE PERIOD FROM MAY THROUGH SEPTEMBER THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S 45 TO 85, ROUGHLY 50 TO 80 BUCKS A SUMMER.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>>SPELMAN: SO YOU CAN GO TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE WHERE SOMEBODY HAS GOT AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND SAY I CAN SAVE YOU SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 50 AND 80 BUCKS THIS SUMMER BY CHANGING YOUR SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND IT ACTUALLY WON'T HURT YOUR LAWN AT ALL.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. SPELL PELL IT SEEMS TO ME THAT'S A MUCH MORE POWERFUL STATEMENT TO MAKE IN TWO WAYS. ONE THAT IT CHANGES THE TENOR OF THE NOTIFICATION PROCESS. INSTEAD OF NOTIFICATION BEING RATTING ON YOUR NEIGHBOR WHO'S WASTING WATER. I'M GOING TO GET YOU, FRED. INSTEAD WHAT I WOULD BE DOING BY TURNING MY NEIGHBOR IN IS OFFERING HIM SOME HELP. I CAN SAVE YOU 50 TO 80 BUCKS. I KNOW THEY CAN HELP YOU SAFE THAT MONEY AND WHY DON'T YOU HAVE THE CITY COME OUT HERE AND TAKE A LOOK AT THAT STUFF. IT WON'T HELP YOUR LAWN, IT WILL HELP IT AND YOU CAN GIVE IT MORE WATER AND STAFF MONEY AT THE SAME TIME. SO YOU'RE CHANGING THE TENOR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NEIGHBOR'S INTERACTION. AND AT THE SAME TIME I THINK YOU'RE MAKING IT A LOT MORE LIKELY THAT WHEN THE CITY STAFF COME OUT BY TURNING THIS INTO A I'M SAVING YOU A WHOLE BUNCH OF MONEY, LIKE 50 OR 80 BUCKS PROGRAM, RATHER THAN I'M TURNING YOU IN, THAT THEY'RE A LOT MORE LIKELY TO TAKE OUR SUGGESTIONS. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

>> IT MAKES SENSE. WE ARE DOING PART OF THAT. WE DO DO THE IRRIGATION AUDITS NOW AND MOST OF THE COMPLAINTS WE RECEIVE ARE NOT ABOUT RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS. THEY WERE ABOUT STRIP CENTERS AND APARTMENTS. SO YOU GET A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT REACTION SOMETIMES FROM THAT COMMUNITY THAN YOU DO THE RESIDENTIAL.

>>SPELMAN: LET ME FOLLOW UP ON ON THAT. YOU HAVE ESTIMATES FOR ANYWHERE FROM 10,000 GALLONS PER MONTH UP THROUGH 100,000 GALLONS PER MONTH. COULD YOU GIVE ME AN ESTIMATE FOR WHO KNEES GUYS ARE? WHO WOULD BE A 20,000 GALLON A MONTH IRRIGATION CUSTOMER.

>> SOMEONE WITH AN AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM, PROBABLY THE AVERAGE IS AROUND 20,000 GALLONS A MONTH.

>>SPELMAN: THAT'S THE AVERAGE.

>> SOMEONE WITH A HOSE END SYSTEM IS GOING TO BE ON THE LOWER END ON AVERAGE. AND YOU CAN'T PUT OUT 100,000 GALLONS, THERE ARE SOME CUSTOMERS THAT DO IT VERY EASILY, BUT YOU NEED AN AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND SYSTEM TO DO THAT. AND THERE'S NOT MANY THAT DO IT.

>>SPELMAN: SO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, 20,000 GALLONS IS ABOUT AS MUCH AS WE CAN KPPL.

>> THAT'S PROBABLY THE AVERAGE.

>>SPELMAN: WHO ARE THE 50 AND 100,000 PER MONTH USERS? THAT'S COMMERCIAL OF SOME KIND.

>> SOME RESIDENTIAL AND SOME COMMERCIAL.

>>SPELMAN: SO WE'RE TALKING APARTMENTS?

>> BIG APARTMENTS, SOME STRIP CENTERS. CONDO ASSOCIATIONS, THOSE SORTS OF FOLKS.

>>SPELMAN: IF YOU'RE USING AS MUCH AS 50 OR 100,000 GALLONS A MONTH IN IRRIGATION, THEN YOU ESTIMATED FOR ME THAT THE COST OVER THE COURSE OF THE SUMMER WOULD BE ANYWHERE FROM 215 TO $850. THAT'S MONEY THAT YOU'RE BLOWING BY WATERING AT THE WRONG TIME OF DAY.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>>SPELMAN: IT SEEMS TO ME ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RING TO A COMMERCIAL CUSTOMER, LIKE A APARTMENT OWNER ON THE OPERATOR OF A STRIP CENTER THAT IF YOU COULD SAVE THEM BETWEEN 200 AND NEARLY A THOUSAND GLARS DOLLARS OVER THE COURSE OF THE SUMMER BY MAKING A SMALL ADJUSTMENT THAT THEY WOULD BE DAM FOOLS NOT TO TAKE IT.

>> WE FIND THAT THE CASE MOST OF THE TIME. I GOT A LETTER FROM A CITIZEN WHO LIVES IN AN APARTMENT WHERE APARTMENTS ARE ALLOWED -- UNDER STATE LAW THEY'RE ALLOWED TO ALLOCATE THE WATER BILL FOR TENANTS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS, NUMBER OF PEOPLE, WHATEVER METHOD THEY WANT TO USE. IN THEORY THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO SUB EXTRACT OUT COMMON AREAS, BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR THAT. THIS GENTLEMAN IS BEING CHARGED $40 MONTH BY HIS APARTMENT. HE SAYS THE APARTMENT WATERS 365 DAYS OF THE YEAR THREE TIMES A DAY AND THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS DESPITE HIS COMPLAINTS. AND THE BOTTOM LINE OF HIS LETTER IS THE REASON THEY'RE DOING IS IS BECAUSE THEY CAN PASS THE WATER BILL ON TO US. SO YOU HAVE THOSE SITUATIONS IN SOME APARTMENTS WHERE YOU WOULD THINK THE FINANCING WOULD BE OF INTEREST TO THEM, BUT THEY'RE ABLE TO PASS IT ON.

>>SPELMAN: IT'S NOT HURTING THEM IN THE SLIGHTEST.

>> RIGHT.

>>SPELMAN: WOULDN'T THERE BE A WAY OF CRAFTING ARN ORDINANCE THAT ALTHOUGH LEGAL, WE COULD DISCOURAGE IT. WE NEED AN ORDINANCE THAT SAYS WE'RE GOING TO DISKOURMG PEOPLE FROM WATERING DURING THE DAY IS ANOTHER STORY. IS THERE A WAY OF CRAFTING AN ORDINANCE TO SAY IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL TO WATER DURING THE DAY AND AT THE SAME TIME PASS THE COST ON TO SOMEBODY ELSE. THAT I AS A RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER, YOU'RE GOING TO TELL ME YOU'RE A FOOL DO IT AND YOU'RE GOING TO TRY TO TALK ME OUT OF IT BUT I HAVE TOTAL CONTROL BECAUSE IT'S MY MONEY. BUT AT THE SAME TIME I DON'T HAVE TOTAL CONTROL IF I'M PASSING THE COST ON TO SOMEBODY ELSE AND I'M PAYING FOR THAT WATERING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY OUT OF SOMEBODY ELSE'S MONEY. COULD WE DO THAT?

>> I'M NOT SURE. WE WOULD HAVE TO GET WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT BECAUSE IT'S A STATE LAW THAT ALLOWS THEM TO ALLOCATE. THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF WRITING RULES, BUT I DON'T THINK THOSE RULES -- I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY IN THE TNRCC RULES TO SAY YOU CAN'T PASS YOUR COSTS YOU IF YOU'RE WATERING DURING THE DAY AND IF THE CITY COULD PASS SOMETHING THAT SUPERCEDED STATE LAW, I DON'T KNOW.

>>SPELMAN: I UNDERSTAND YOUR ARGUMENT ABOUT WANTEDDING TO HAVE A STRONGER NEGOTIATING POSITION WITH PEOPLE WHO INSIST ON WATERING DURING THE DAY AND WATERING WATER THEY DON'T NEED. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THE STRONGEST POSITION WOULD BE TO SHOW THEM HOW MUCH IT COSTS AND IF WE HAVE THE INFORMATION TO SHOW THEM THE STRONG CASE, IT SEEMS TO ME THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WOULD COMPLY WITH THAT BECAUSE IT WILL SAVE THEM MONEY. THE PLACES IT'S NOT I CAN SEE WHERE IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO US TO ISSUE WARNINGS AND FINES AND I WOULD LIKE OUR LEGAL STAFF TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DO. IN THE MEANTIME I THINK THE STAGE 2 STUFF THAT YOU CAME UP WITH IS TERRIFIC. MY ONLY CONCERN ABOUT THE STAGE 1 STUFF IS THIS IS -- THIS PLANNING ISSUE AND I THINK WE'VE ROLLED ALL THAT STAGE 1 INTO STAGE 2 AND THEN INITIATED A PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM WHERE YOUR FOCUSOGSAVING THEM MONEY RATHER THAN A FINING PEOPLE FOR NONCOMPLIANCE I THINK WE'D BE MUCH BETTER OFF.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND LET ME -- I'M GOING TO ACCEPT THAT AS A MOTION TO PASS AN ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING THAT ADDRESSES THOSE ISSUES. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA. LET ME PAUSE AND I'M GOING TO ASK FOR DISCUSSION HERE IN A SECOND FROM COUNCIL. I THINK Y'ALL HAVE DONE A LOT OF WORK ON THIS AND BY OUR QUESTIONS I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY FEELING THAT WE DON'T REALLY RESPECT AND APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE ON THIS BECAUSE I KNOW THIS IS A HARD ONE. THIS IS A DIFFICULT ONE AND WE NEED TO DEVELOP A BIT OF HISTORY. SO THANK YOU FOR THE AMOUNT OF WORK AND TIME AND ENERGY YOU'VE PUT INTO THIS. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSSION? COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, ONE THING THAT CAME UP IS IN COMPILING THIS DATA, THE LIST YOU HEARD, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU TALKED ABOUT -- FOR INSTANCE, IF WE HAVE TO GO OUT TO A BUSINESS REPEATEDLY, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A LIST UNDER THIS --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT'S MY HOPE. AT THE END OF THE SUMMER AFTER WE PASS THIS ORDINANCE THAT WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY FOR US TO DO AN ASSESSMENT OF HOW WE MIGHT APPROACH THINGS. FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT I JUST HEARD IN THE DISCUSSION BETWEEN COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN AND THE STAFF WAS THAT IN SOME INSTANCES YOU HAVE PROBLEMS BECAUSE PEOPLE MAY BE ABLE TO JUST PASS ON THE -- THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN SAVING THE MONEY BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO MASS ON THAT. THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS I THINK WE NEED TO BE IN A POSITION TO ANALYZE AT THE END OF THE SUMMER.

>>SLUSHER: THAT WAS MY NEXT ONE WAS THE -- DO WE HAVE ANY WAY TO DETERMINE HOW MANY APARTMENT COMPLEXES THERE ARE THAT HAVE THIS PRACTICE OF JUST DIVIDING THE WATER -- THEIR WHOLE WATER BILL AMONG THEIR TENANTS?

>> WE DO BECAUSE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO REGISTER WITH TNRCC. IT'S IN THE HUNDREDS, BUT I COULD GET YOU THE EXACT NUMBER.

>>SLUSHER: I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT. AND THEN HOW MANY -- OF COURSE, WE'LL BE KPIEG THE COMPLAINTS WE GET FROM THEM. -- COMPILING THE COMPLAINTS WE GET FROM THEM. AND I THINK -- THIS IS A TOUGH ONE. I WANTED TO THANK THE STAFF FOR THE WORK THEY'VE DONE ON IT. I TRIED TO -- I THOUGHT THROUGH IT A NUMBER OF WAYS AND I CAN SEE HOW THEY GOT TO THIS BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY NO ENFORCEMENT, BUT I THINK THE MAYOR HAS RAISED SOME GOOD POINTS ABOUT IF WE CAN FIRST TRY TO WRK WITH PEOPLE. I GUESS IT WOULD BE REPEAT OFFENDERS OR UNDER YOUR THING IT WOULD BE REPEAT REFUSERS TO RAISE MONEY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. WHICH I THINK MAY BE A WORST CATEGORY TO BE IN THAN SOMEBODY THAT -- CALL ME A REPEAT OFFENDER, BUT PLEASE DON'T CALL ME SOMEBODY THAT WON'T RAISE ANY MONEY.

>>SLUSHER: LET'S GIVE THAT A SHOT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN?

>>SPELMAN: I CAN IMAGINE WHAT DARRELL JUST SAID, WE PUBLISH THEIR HAD NAIP IN THE NEWSPAPER, THAT WOULD HAVE A SERIOUS EFFECT. THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO SPENT 50 BUCKS FOOLISHLY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE ONLY PERSON SIGNED UP THAT -- LET ME RUN THROUGH THIS. STERCH D SIGNED UP WITH RESOURCE WITH ANY QUESTIONS. THE SIERRA CLUB ENCOURAGES THE CITY TO USE ALL REASONABLE MEANS TO DISCOURAGE WASTEWATER, INCLUDING FINES WHERE NECESSARY. MICHELLE LEVINE SIGNED UP IN FAIR. NORA MILLER, LOWER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. DOES ANYBODY FEEL THE NEED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. YES, MA'AM?

>> I'M NORA MILLER WITH THE LCRA LCRA. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I DO SUPPORT THIS ORDINANCE, BOTH PERSONALLY AND FROM THE LCRA. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING NEW. THIS IS NOT A NEW ORDINANCE. SAN ANTONIO ALREADY HAS AN ORDINANCE LIKE THIS, SO DOES EL PASO. SOME OF THE OTHER COMMUNITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY, NOT JUST CALIFORNIA, ALTHOUGH SEVERAL COMMUNITIES THERE HAVE AN ORDINANCE SUCH AS THIS. FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, KERR RI, NORTH CAROLINA. SO YOU'RE FINDING THAT THIS IS HAPPENING ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND NOT JUST HERE. I DO THINK THAT I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT TONY SAID THAT FIRST OF ALL IT'S USUALLY NOT THE RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER THAT'S THE PROBLEM HERE. THEY'RE TRYING TO SAVE WATER. WHAT YOU FOUND AND WHAT I'VE HEARD THROUGH THE YEARS TOO AND I'M SORRY IT HASN'T BEEN DOCUMENTED LIKE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT, BUT THESE APARTMENT OWNERS, A LOT OF TIMES JUST WILL PASS THOSE COSTS ON TO THE CUSTOMER, THEY'RE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING THAT FRONT GREEN AND SO I WOULD RECOGNIZE THAT Y'ALL REALIZE THAT SITUATION. I WOULD HOPE THAT IF TONY DOES COME BACK IN A COUPLE OF YEARS THAT YOU MIGHT CONSIDER PASSING THIS IF YOU DON'T DO IT NOW.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. US IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH OFF THE DIAS ON ITEM NO. 10. THAT'S ON FIRST READING ONLY. ON ITEM 13, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: YES, MAYOR, THIS IS A SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST OUTSIDE THE CITY IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. AS AN EXTRA INSURANCE, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THE STIPULATION THAT IT COMPLY WITH THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE AND OUR STAFF. MY STAFF HAS BEEN CONTACTED THE ATTORNEY'S STAFF AND THEY SAY THAT IS OKAY TO DO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MS. GLASCO, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT?

>> KNOW, MAYOR, I DON'T. I THINK THE ORDINANCE WE PASSED OUT INDICATES THAT IT HAS -- IT WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE 25% IMPERVIOUS COVER.

>>SLUSHER: YOU'RE ON 44. I JUST ADD THAT TO EVERYTHING.

>> OKAY. I WAS JUST THINKING AHEAD, JUMPING AHEAD, RATHER. OKAY. 13, WE'LL COORDINATE WITH THE APPROPRIATE -- WE'LL ADD IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. THE ADDITION WOULD BE TO COMPLY WITH THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA. DISCUSSION DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM 13 WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH VOTING' AYE AND COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN VOTING AYE. ITEM 16, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, COULD WE SKIP WITH ONE FOR JUST A MOMENT. MR. RIEK HAS JUST ARRIVED TO TALK TO ME ABOUT IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: VERY GOOD. ITEM 25, I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA.

>>GARCIA: I'M GOING MOVE APPROVAL ON THIS ITEM AND I HAVE A COMMENT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO APPROVE. IS THERE A SECOND. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA?

>>GARCIA: THIS IS ONE THAT THE M W.B.E. COMMITTEE HAS BEEN -- THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH. IT'S A SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SEED I'M NOT GOING TO COMPLY WITH THE M.B.E./W.B.E. ORDINANCE BECAUSE I'M GOING TO DO ALL THE WORK. THIS HAS CREATED SOME DIFFICULTY WITH THE MINORITY AND THE WOMEN OWNED BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO LOOK AT HOW IT IS THAT WE CAN OFFER OPPORTUNITIES TO MINORITY FIRMS TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE TYPE OF CONTRACTS. I THINK THAT PARTICULAR SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE NEEDS SOME LOOKING INTO AND MAYBE SOME MODIFICATION?

>>MAYOR WATSON: DO YOU WANT COMMENT ON THAT NOW OR DO YOU WANT TO MAKE --.

>>GARCIA: WE'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH IT AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: VERY GOOD. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NUMBER 28. IT HAS BEEN PULLED FOR BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SPEAK ON ITEM 28. MR. HILGERS IF YOU WOULD COME FORWARD AND MAKE A BRIEF STAFF PRESENTATION BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M PAUL HILGERS, DIRECTOR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A FAIRLY BRIEF STAFF PRESENTATION ABOUT THIS ITEM THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY. THE ACTION BEING PRESENTED TODAY TO THE CITY COUNCILL IS THE CULMINATION OF FOUR MONTHS OF WORK TO PLAN FOR HOW THE FEDERAL FUNDS THE CITY OF AUSTIN RECEIVES FROM THE HUD SHOULD BEFTED BE USED TO ADDRESS AUSTIN'S NEEDS FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. THIS ACTION INVOLVES FOUR DISTINCT GRANTS, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT OR THE CDBG PRARJS THE HOME PROGRAM, THE EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM AND A GRANT CALLED HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE WITH AIDS. THE PROGRAMS THAT I WILL SPEAK OF SPECIFICALLY ARE REALLY FOCUSED ON CDBG AND HOME. IN PREVIOUS -- AS IN PREVIOUS YEARS, THIS CONSOLIDATED PLAN THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY ALLOCATES FUNDS INTO DIFFERENT PROGRAM CATEGORIES AND IN THE CITY WILL ISSUE RFP'S AND NOTICES OF FUND ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO COMPETE FOR SERVICES AND THAT WE WILL PURCHASE UNDER THESE BROAD PROGRAM CATEGORIES. THEY ARE AFFORDABLE AND ACCESSIBLE HOUSING, 6 MILLION 749 THOUSAND DOLLARS. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS OF ONE MILLION DOLLARS. PUBLIC SERVICE PROGRAMS OF 1.2 MILLION DOLLARS. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAMS OF 1.5 MILLION DOLLARS. AND THE ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING OF THOSE PROGRAMS WHICH IS 2 MILLION DOLLARS, FOR A TOTAL OF 13 -- A LITTLE OVER 13 MILLION DOLLARS. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE ALLOCATION THAT YOU'RE APPROVING TODAY WILL BE ADDED TO OUR EXISTING LETTER OF CREDIT FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR'S ALLOCATIONS AND TOGETHER WITH THOSE FUNDS WILL BE PRESENTED WITH A MORE COMPLETE OUTLINE OF ACTIVITIES THROUGH THE FORMAL BUDGETING PROCESS FOR NEXT MONTH. ALSO IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS IS THE FIFTH YEAR OF OUR FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN. SO WE'LL BE BEGINNING THIS PROCESS OF A FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN ALL OVER AGAIN NEXT YEAR. THE ACTION THAT THE COUNCIL HAS TAKEN TODAY IS THE CULMINATION OF FOUR MONTHS OF PLANNING EFFORTS ON THE PART OF THE STAFF, ON THE PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND IT'S ALSO THE RESULT OF FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS, A COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT, A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND IT DOES INCLUDE THE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, WHICH APPROVED THIS PLAN UNANIMOUSLY AT ITS MEETING ON JULY THE SIXTH. I'M PROUD TO PRESENT IT BEFORE YOU TODAY AS WE SUBMIT THIS PLAN AS WHAT WE BELIEVE IS AN ACCURATE REFLEX OF THE COMMUNITY I AM PUT AND IS RESPONSIVE TO SOME OF THE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY. I'D LIKE TO BRIEFLY MENTION SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS AND WHAT WE'VE LEARNED AND RESPOND TO SOME SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT I KNOW THE COUNCIL HAS EXPRESSED IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION EXPRESSED IN THEIR DELIBERATIONS OVER THIS PLAN. FIRST WE'VE LEARNED THAT WE NEED TO CLARIFY AND REINFORCE OUR COMMITMENT TO SERVE THE DISABLED COMMUNITY. WE HAVE HEARD AND RESPONDED TO A MEMO OF ISSUES AND CONCERNS FROM ADAPT AND WE'VE INCORPORATED THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF ADAPT INTO THE FINAL DOCUMENT THAT WE'LL BE SUBMITTING TO HUD BY AUGUST THE 15TH. SECONDLY, WE HAVE COMMITTED TO FOCUS OUR RESOURCES TO SERVE THOSE WHO NEED THEM THE MOST. WITH THE LEADERSHIP AND DIRECTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND THE INPUT OF THE COMMUNITY, WE'VE ESTABLISHED GOALS FOR OUR PROGRAMS. WE SET THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS FOR OUR FEDERAL PROGRAMS THAT WE SHOULD BE EVALUATED BASED UPON A STANDARD THAT 80% OF THE UNITS WE SERVED SHOULD BE FOR FAMILIES WITH 50% ARE BELOW MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME AND THAT 70% OF THE DOLLARS WE SPEND WILL BE -- OF THE DOLLARS WE SPEND WILL BE SPENT 50% OR BELOW FAMILY MEDIAN INCOME. AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE FOCUSING OUR EFFORTS ON THOSE MOST IN NEED, WE'RE ALSO USING OUR FRAMEWORK FOR A CONTINUUM OF HOUSING SERVICES TO BE USED FOR COLLABORATION AND COORDINATION, FOR INVESTMENT AND EVALUATION. AND WE HAVE PROGRAMS AND DOLLARS GOING IN ALL OF OUR EIGHT CATEGORIES OF HOUSING SERVICES, INCLUDING THIS ALLOCATION TODAY. WE WERE VERY PROUD TO BE A PART OF THE PRESENTATION THIS MORNING ON THE HOMELESS SHELTER AND NOTE THAT THE MONIES THAT ARE ALLOCATED TOWARDS THAT EFFORT HAVE BEEN PART OF THIS PLANNING PROCESS. WE ALSO ARE PROUD TO INCREASE OUR FUNDING IN THE HIP PROGRAM AND SPECIFICALLY EARMARK FUNDS HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IS OUR PLAN AT A MINIMUM FOR A SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY DEVELOPMENT THAT IS UNDER THE PLAN. COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA ASKED TODAY IN THAT PROCESS HOW DO YOU DEVELOP FOLKS SELF-SUFFICENCY. PART OF IT IS FOR US TO WORK IN DLAB RAITION WITH O. COLLABORATION WITH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND FOR THOSE AGENCIES PROVIDING SERVICES FOR THE HOMELESS AND TO PROVIDE THEM TO HAVE SELF-SUFFICENCY. AND WE'VE ADDED ADDITIONAL FUNDS AND WILL CONTINUE TO ADD ADDITIONAL FUNDS. ANY PROGRAM INCOME WE RECEIVE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE'VE EARMARKED WILL GO INTO THE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM AS DIRECTED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE'RE A BIT WEAK ON, BUT WE'LL BE BRINGING SOME OTHER INITIATIVES IN THIS PLAN IS THE AREA OF RENTAL HOUSING. WE DO HAVE A NEED TO INCREASE MORE AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING, THE NEXT WEEK AUSTIN FINANCING HOUSE CORPUS CHRISTI HAS SOME TOOLS TO DEAL WITH THAT AND WE'LL BE BRINGING IT BEFORE THE COUNCIL NEXT WEEK. WE'VE COMBINED OUR DIFFERENT PROGRAMS THAT WE'VE HAD TO COMBINE A VACANT LOT PURCHASE PROGRAM, A FIRST HOME BUYER CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM AND OUR DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INTO ONE HOME OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM. OUR DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THIS LAST YEAR LEVERAGE DOLLARS EXCEEDING 15 TO ONE FROM THE FEDERAL DOLLARS WE PUT IN TO THE DOLLARS THAT WERE ACTUALLY BROUGHT TO THE TABLE FOR HOME OWNERSHIP IN THIS COMMUNITY AND SERVED OVER 300 PEOPLE AND WE ESTIMATE THAT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. ANOTHER IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF OUR PLAN INCLUDES SUPPORT FOR OUR COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS. NEIGHBORHOOD BASED AND SOME CITYWIDE, THESE SERVICES -- THESE SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS CONTINUE TO PROVIDE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES TO THOSE MOST IN NEED AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE THE -- WORK TO INCREASE THE NUMBERS OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS AND TO MAKE THEM STRONGER. WE ALSO HAVE PLANS TO CONTINUE A MAJOR COMMITMENT IN THE AREA OF OWNER OCCUPIED SERVICES, RENTAL -- HOME OWNERSHIP, HOME REPAIR PROGRAMS AND ALSO ARCHITECTURAL BARRIER REMOVAL PLANS THAT WILL ALLOW PEOPLE TO HAVE THEIR HOMES RETROFITTED. WE'RE ALSO MAINTAINING OUR COMMITMENT AND OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS, WE'RE ALSO MAINTAINING OUR COMMITMENT IN THE REVAITTLE LIETION OF SEVEN $TH AND 12TH STREET. THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS IN THE DEBT SERVICE CATEGORY TO PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE FUNDS TO BE USED IN MORE SPECIFIC PROJECTS THIS YEAR. WE'RE ALSO MAINTAINING OUR COMMITMENT TO DEVELOP SMALL BUSINESSES THROUGH A CONTINUUM OF PURGE OF SERVICES THAT INCLUDES $210,000 FOR MICROENTERPRISE AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND LENDING SERVICES THAT WILL ALLOW FOR A VARIETY OF SERVICE PROVIDERS TO COME IN AND PROVIDE DIFFERENT TYPES OF SERVICES THAT WILL BUILD AGAIN TO SELF-SUFFICENCY FROM A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE. THAT WILL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CONTINUATION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AS WELL FOR SOME LARGER PROGRAMS AND LARGER LOANS. ONE OF THE KEY ELEMENTS AND THE KEY PRIORITIES OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION IS TO MAINTAIN A COMMITMENT THAT HAS ALLOWED IN THIS FEDERAL FUNDING FOR 15% TO BE USED FOR PUBLIC SERVICES. THAT'S ALL WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE BY LAW. AND WE MAKE SURE WE SPEND EVERY DOLLAR WE CAN IN THAT CATEGORY AND WE RECEIVE SOME GREAT SERVICES FOR SOME GREAT PROVIDERS IN THOSE PROGRAMS. WE HAVE PROVIDED A FOUR PERCENT INCREASE IN FUNDING FOR THE FAIR HOUSING AND TENANT COUNSELING AND THE 20% INCREASE IN FUNDING FOR SENIOR SERVICES. THE CONTINUED FUNDING FOR ENGLISH HAS A SECOND LANGUAGE. WE MAINTAINED FUNDING FOR THE ACCESSIBLE HOUSING INFORMATION REFERRAL SERVICE AND WILL CONTINUE FUNDING FOR THE YOUTH SERVICES PROGRAM THAT WE DID LAST YEAR AS WELL. WE ALSO WILL CONTINUE FUND FOG OUR OWN INFORMATION REFERRAL SERVICE. THOSE SERVICES THAT -- WE ALSO HAVE CHILD CARE SERVICES THAT WILL SERVE 20011 CHILDREN IN THIS COMMUNITY. THE FAIR HOUSING AND TENANT COUNSELING SERVICES PLAN TO SERVE 630 FAMILIES, ONE-80 FOLKS WITH SENIOR SERVICES AND WE ALSO ANTICIPATE PROVIDING INFORMATION REFERRAL SERVICES TO OVER 10,000 PEOPLE WHO CALL OUR OFFICES. YOU HEARD ABOUT THE PUBLIC FACILITIES CATEGORY THIS MORNING AND THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT IS EARMARKED FOR THE HOMELESS SHELTER. WE ARE ALSO EARMARKING SOME FUNDS FOR OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $250,000. FINALLY, WE WILL BE SUBMITTING OUR PLAN TO HUD ON AUGUST 15TH. WE'LL BE INCORPORATING THE NARRATIVE OF ALL OF THE CHANGES OF THIS PROGRAMS. WE ALSO BE CHANGING THE NAME FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOODS FROM MAKING THEM TARGETED AREAS TO PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THE RELIGIOUSES WE PROVIDE TO YOU TODAY AGAIN -- THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE PROVIDE TO YOU TODAY AGAIN WE THINK ARE A REFLECTION WE TRY TO INCORPORATE THE CHANGES THAT WERE BROUGHT TO US AND RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMUNITY IN THE PUBLIC PROCESS AND I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL HAS.

>>GOODMAN: COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA?

>>GARCIA: MR. HILGERS, ON THE INCOME SIDE, IT LOOKS LIKE PROGRAM INCOME FROM YEAR 24 TO YEAR 25 DROPPED BY ABOUT 400,000?

>> YES, SIR. BUT WHAT --.

>>GARCIA: EXPLAIN THAT. I WAS READING SOMETHING ELSE.

>> WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THIS YEAR'S ALLOCATION IS NOT PROJECT AS MUCH PROGRAM INCOME. WE ANTICIPATE THAT IN JANUARY OF NEXT YEAR WE HAVE MADE A COMMITMENT TO -- IN PROGRAM INCOME THAT COMES IN FROM YOUR HOME PROGRAM, THAT WILL BE COMMITTED INTO THE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM. IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, WE ARE BEING VERY CONSERVATIVE IN OUR ESTIMATES OF PROGRAM INCOME FOR NEXT YEAR AND WE ANTICIPATE COMING TO YOU IN JANUARY WITH A MORE REALISTIC EXPECTATION OF WHAT THAT PROGRAM INCOME WILL BE. THAT PROGRAM INCOME WILL BE ABLE TO BE DIVIDED BETWEEN 15% OF PUBLIC SERVICE ADMINISTRATIVE DOLLARS AND WILL ALSO BE AVAILABLE FOR EITHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR HOUSING PROGRAMS AS THE COMMUNITY DEEMS NECESSARY.

>>GARCIA: BUT AT THIS TIME YOU'RE NOT DID YOU KNOW CONTINUING ANY OF IT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GARCIA: YOU'RE NOT BUDGETING ANY INCOME IN THE HOME INCOME FUNDS.

>> WE ARE BUDGETING MONEY AS DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE. BEYOND THAT ANYTHING WE HAVE AGREED TO -- WITH THE POLICY THAT THE CDC ESTABLISHED IN ANY ADDITIONAL PROGRAM WOULD GO INTO THE HIP PROGRAM.

>>GARCIA: I'M TALKING ABOUT THE REVENUE SIDE BECAUSE UNDER THE HOME GRANT FUNDS YOU HAVE PROGRAM INCOME AT ZERO.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GARCIA: SO IN JANUARY OR SO YOU WILL COME BACK WITH A BETTER ESTIMATE AND THEN BY THAT TIME CDC WILL HAVE HAD INFORMATION TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.

>> YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GARCIA: ON HOW TO SPEND THAT MONEY. THE MATCH THAT WE HAVE IN THE HOME GRANT FUNDS WENT DOWN ABOUT $400,000. IS THAT A CITY MATCH?

>> YES, SIR. WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WORKING THROUGH THE BUDGETING PROCESS TO IDENTIFY OTHER SOURCES OF HOME MATCH THAT WILL BE USED -- THAT WON'T BE A DIRECT ALLOCATION FROM THE GENERAL FUND, BUT WILL AUTHORIZE US TO FIND OTHER IN KIND SERVICES TO SUPPORT THAT MATCH.

>>GARCIA: OKAY. AND ALSO, AS FAR AS PRIOR YEAR PROGRAMMING, LAST YEAR WE HAD 600,000, THIS YEAR WE DON'T HAVE ANY, THAT'S BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE LEFT AND THAT'S GOING TO BE APPROPRIATED LATER?

>> YES, SIR. AND ONE OF THE DILEMMAS ABOUT THIS PROCESS IS THIS DOESN'T REFLECT ANY OF OUR CARRY FORWARD LETTER OF CREDIT. AND SO IT'S HOW WE'RE SPENDING WHAT WE SHOW HERE PRIMARILY IS ALL NEW MONEY. AND HOW WE'RE PLANNING TO SPEND NEW MONEY. ONE OF THE THINGS WE WORKED WITH WITH CDC IS SHOWING THEM THE ENTIRE LETTER OF CREDIT AND HOW WE'RE SUPPLEMENTING WHAT WE HAVE THAT ARE IN EXISTING BUDGET LINE ITEMS. AND SO -- SOME OF THOSE CASES THAT'S WHERE THE -- IT SHOWS ZERO ALLOCATION BECAUSE WE HAVE ADDITIONAL MONEY THAT WE'LL BE CARRYING FORWARD -- THAT'S NOT REFLECTED ON THIS ALLOCATION. BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A BUDGET FOR OUR DEPARTMENT. THIS WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE BUDGET OF OUR DEPARTMENT OBVIOUSLY AND WE'LL BE BRINGING IT FORWARD NEXT MONTH AS A BUDGET. THIS IS JUST A PORTION OF THE NEW MONEY COMING IN FROM NEXT YEAR.

>>GARCIA: IN THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, AND I MAY HAVE ASKED THIS BEFORE, AND YOU MAY HAVE EXPLAINED IT, BUT I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BANK WE'RE ZEROING OUT, IS THAT BECAUSE THEY'VE COME TO THE END OF THE ROAD, SO TO SPEAK?

>> NO, SIR. T.W.A. WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE FOLDING THAT INTO THE MICROENTERPRISE TECHNICAL ASSESS TENSE AND LENDING PROGRAM. ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE LEARNED IS THAT WE CATEGORIZE OUR PROGRAMS SO SPECIFICALLY THAT WE END UP LIMITING OUR FLEXIBILITY WITH THOSE PROGRAMS. SO THE CDC RECOMMENDED THAT WE FOLLOWED THAT $50,000 UP INTO MICROENTERPRISE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND LENDING AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A MORE COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO ADDRESSING THOSE NEEDS AS OPPOSED TO SAYING, HERE'S ONE FOR COMMUNITY BANK, HERE'S ONE FOR MICROENTERPRISE, HERE'S ONE FOR LENDING. LET'S PUT A PROGRAM TOGETHER THAT ALLOWS MORE FLEXIBILITY TO RESPOND TO THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY.

>>GARCIA: OKAY. I THINK THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. IF I COULD -- LET ME ASK YOU ONE QUESTION. THERE IS A PROGRAM IN TUCSON WHICH TAKES CITY-CONTROLLED MONEY AND ALLOCATES IT TO EITHER BUILD AN AFFORDABLE HOUSE OR RENOVATE ONE. AND IN AN AREA WHERE THERE IS NOT QUALITY CHILD CARE AVAILABLE, THEY EMPLOY OTHER PROGRAM ASSISTANCE TO ALLOW A CHILD CARE WORKER TO PURCHASE THAT HOME WITH HELP OR WHATEVER, TO OPERATE A FAMILY HOME PROGRAM AND THEN OTHER TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FROM ANOTHER DEPARTMENT HELPS THAT PERSON BECOME NAYC ACCREDITED. WITHIN OUR EXISTING PROGRAMS CAN WE DO THAT?

>> YES, MA'AM, WE CAN. AND ACTUALLY, I'M EXPLORING THE OPTIONS AND THE OPPORTUNITIES TO DO THAT. I THINK THAT AGAIN ONE OF THE AREAS AND THE SPECIFIC AVENUES TO DO THAT IS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS, SO OFFER THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIND THOSE FAMILIES OR THOSE SINGLE MOTHERS POTENTIALLY WHO WOULD BE QUALIFIED CHILD CARE WORKERS. I KNOW THAT THAT PROGRAM WORKS SPECIFICALLY WELL WITH DUPLEXES SO THAT HALF OF IT CAN BE USED AS A CHILD CARE FACILITY AND THE OTHER HALF OF IT CAN BE USED AS A PLACE FOR THAT PERSON TO WORK. AND SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I KNOW THAT THERE'S INTEREST IN OUT THERE AND WE'RE LOOKING TO SEE HOW WE COULD WORK THAT INTO THESE PROGRAMS.

>>GOODMAN: THAT WOULD BE GREAT. SO I DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT --.

>> JUSTIN TO -- YES, MA'AM. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. -- JUST CONTINUE. -- THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>>GOODMAN: AND THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS WHEN YOU WROTE DOWN THERE RECOMMENDATION AND NOTE 3 ON PAGE 199, YOU WOULD HAVE SAID ANY ADDITIONAL SALES PROCEEDS ABOVE THE 9416 WILL BE ALLOCATED AS OPPOSED TO CONSIDERED AVAILABLE. WOULD YOU HAVE TROUBLE WITH US ASSUMING ALLOCATED INSTEAD OF AVAILABLE?

>> NO, MA'AM, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE -- NO, MA'AM. THAT WOULD BE FINE, ACTUALLY. THAT WOULD -- THAT MAY EVEN BE HELPFUL TO KEEP US FROM HAVING TO REPROGRAM.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHIILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE] THAT I NEED YOU TO -- ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO READ DIRECTLY FROM IT BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF A MOUTHFUL. WE FOUND MANY POSITIVE THINGS ABOUT THE DRAFT CONSOLIDATED PLAN. THE FIRST OF WHICH IS THE CONTINUING IMPLEMENTATION OF INCENTIVES TO ENCOURAGE PRODUCTION OF ACCESSIBLE, ADAPTABLE AND VISITABLE HOUSING. THE SECOND IS THE ARCHITECTURAL BARRIER MODIFICATION IN FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 EQUATES TO 600 NEW UNITS WHICH REFLECTS THE ADDITIONAL 100 UNITS REQUIRED UNDER THE VCA. ACCESSIBLE HOUSING INFORMATION AND REFERRAL SERVICE PROVIDED BY THE UNITED CEREBRAL PAULS YOU PROGRAM IS A GRAM PROGRAM. THIS SERVES ABOUT 545 INDIVIDUALS. HOWEVER, ADAPT REMAINS CONCERNED ABOUT THE LACK OF RENTAL HOUSING IN THIS YEAR'S PLAN. THE DRAFT CON TOLL DATED PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR '99-2000 HAS DECREASED RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE FROM 2,659,611 TOLLS FOR LAST YEAR TO 1,155,755 FOR THIS YEAR. FOR A SINGLE PERSON IN AUSTIN THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME AT 30% IS $11,650. PEOPLE ON SSI SEEF $500 MONTHLY WHICH ADDS UP TO AN ANNUAL INCOME OF $6,000. IT'S PRETTY HARD TO FIND AN APARTMENT WITH THAT KIND OF MONEY IN THIS CITY. DUE TO THE FINANCIAL BARRIERS, MANY PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AS WELL AS OUR LOW INCOME FOLKS DO NOT OWN A HOME, BUT RENT INSTEAD. ADAPT BELIEVES NACD SHOULD SHIFT MORE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND HOME DOLLARS FROM HOMEOWNERSHIP TO RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. HOWEVER, IN THE DRAFT CONSOLIDATED PLAN THE FUNDS USED TO ASSIST WITH HOMEOWNERSHIP OF 1,739,600 DOLLARS IN THE HOME PROGRAM AND $308,419 IN CBDG ARE ALMOST DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF ASSISTANCE FOR RENTAL HOUSING PROGRAMS. NOW, ACCORDING TO THE 1998 CENSUS PROJECTIONS, 236,286 HOUSEHOLDS IN AUSTIN, THAT COMES TO 48,305 WHO HAVE AN INCOME OF ZERO TO 15 A YEAR. THAT ADDS UP TO APPROXIMATELY 20% OF ALL THE HOUSEHOLDS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN. OKAY. NOW, THE HOUSING AUTHORITY SERVES 2,000 HOUSEHOLDS THROUGH THE SECTION 8 PROGRAM. APPROXIMATELY 6,000 ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLDS AT OR BELOW 50% OF THE FEDERAL -- I MEAN THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. RECEIVE CONTINUING --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HANG ON ONE SECOND. IS THERE SOMEBODY THAT WILL DONATE HER THREE MINUTE OF THEIR TIME? OKAY. GO AHEAD.

>> ALL RIGHT. WHERE WAS I? THE HOUSING AUTHORITY SERVES 2,000 HOUSEHOLDS THROUGH THE SECTION 8 VOUCHER PROGRAM AND APPROXIMATELY 6,000 ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD AT ON OR BELOW 50% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME RECEIVE CONTINUING HOUSING ASSISTANCE THROUGH STATE, FEDERAL OR LOCAL PROGRAMS. THIS REPRESENTS AUSTIN'S EFFORTS TO TARGET HOUSEHOLDS WITH INCOMES AT OR BELOW 50% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME. THAT MEANS AUSTIN IS ASSISTING ONLY 17% OF THE 48,HOUSEHOLDS WITH INCOMES OF ZERO TO 15,000 DOLLARS. THE VERY HOUSEHOLDS THAT NEED IT THE MOST. FINALLY, WE'RE ALSO CONCERNED THAT -- OR DISAPPOINTED THAT STAFF DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR RECOMMENDATIONS MADE IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. I THINK THAT INFORMATION THAT WE'VE GIVEN YOU ILLUSTRATES OUR POINT THAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE THESE MANY WEEKS AND I HOPE IT POINTS IT OUT BECAUSE I WAS SURPRISED WHEN WE WERE COMPILING THIS INFORMATION HOW GREATLY THE ENTIRE CITY IS AFFECTED BY THIS. AND I HOPE THAT THAT SWAYS YOUR THINKING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. CAN YOU REMIND ME YOUR NAME?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. WAYNE SPAWN.

>> MY NAME IS WAYNE SPAWN. WE NEED MORE ACCESSIBLE AND LOW INCOME HOUSING. FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN NURSING HOMES. WHO WANT TO GET OUT. AND TOO MANY PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO GET OUT; IT TAKES LIKE TWO MONTHS TO GET THE MONEY TO THE PERSON BECAUSE -- BECAUSE THE NURSING HOME GETS THE MONEY. BUT WHEN THEY GET THE MONEY, IT'S OKAY. BUT MANY PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR TURNING ON THE LIGHTS AND THE PHONE AND THE GAS. WE HAVE TO PAY MONEY FOR THE RENT AND THE DEPOSIT FROM THE APARTMENT. IF THERE COULD BE SOME WAY WE COULD HELP GET THESE PEOPLE STARTED LIKE A GIFT ALSO GIVE PEOPLE WITH SECTION 8 A CERTIFICATE SO PEOPLE --. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. -- SO PEOPLE CAN HAVE SOMEPLACE TO GO SO THEY CAN HAVE HELP TO PAY FOR THE APARTMENT. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MR. SPAWN. BILL SCARBOROUGH. FOLLOWED BY FREDDY GONZALES.

>> FREDDY IS NOT HERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. KAREN GREBEN. WELCOME.

>> YES, I'M A MEMBER OF ADAPT. YOU SAW ME SIT IN A WHEELCHAIR AND GET UP AND WALK UP TO THE MICROPHONE. I'M A HEART PATIENT. I AM NOT STRONG, BUT HERE I AM. I'M VERY LUCKY. I'M ONE OF THE LUCKY ONES. BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT COME HERE ALSO. AND THAT IS I SPENT YEARS AS A BILL COLLECTOR FOR THE MERCHANT'S PROFESSIONAL CREDIT BUREAU AND TALKED TO PEOPLE ABOUT THEIR PAST DUE ACCOUNTS AND ONE OF THE THINGS I LEARNED IS THAT THE POOR PEOPLE ARE DOING ALL THE GOOD THINGS YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO TO SAVE MONEY. IT ISN'T THAT POOR PEOPLE ARE SOMEHOW SPENDING MONEY IN UNTOWARD WAYS, IT'S JUST THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY. AND WE SHOULD REALLY BE CAREFUL ABOUT THIS THAT WE MAKE SURE TO ALLOCATE ENOUGH FOR THE POOR PEOPLE, AND OF COURSE, I MIGHT AS WELL REMIND EACH OF YOU INCLUDING PEOPLE WHO MAY BE WATCHING A CABLE CHANNEL 6 THAT BECOMING AN ADAPT MEMBER IS ONLY A HEART BEAT AWAY OR BANANA PEEL AWAY. AND REGARDS TO THESE SPECIFIC MATTERS, I JOIN THE PETITION THAT THERE BE MORAL INDICATED FOR THIS MATTER OF RENTAL PROPERTY BECAUSE WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THE FRONT MONEY TO BUY A HOUSE, THEN OBVIOUSLY YOU GO RENT AND IF YOU ARE LOWER INCOME, THEN BY DEFINITION YOU ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR -- YOU ARE GOING TO BE MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE LOOKING FOR RENTAL PROPERTY. TO UNDULY ALLOCATE LOW INCOME MONEY TO HOMEOWNERSHIP TO SOME DEGREE THE VALID, BUT A CERTAIN DEGREE IT'S SORT OF LIKE TALKING ABOUT LOW INCOME GENERAL AVIATION. SO IT'S TIME FOR ME TO SUM UP, I WOULD SAY THAT WE DO NEED TO ALLOCATE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT THE MOST. I WOULD RECOMMEND ALSO THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER HOUSING THERE IS, OUR MODIFICATIONS BE DONE FOR THE BENEFITS OF THE PEOPLE WHO REALLY ARE POOR. AND I WOULD SAY THAT WE SHOULD THINK IN HUMAN TERMS RATHER THAN IN TERMS OF BENEFITING THIS OR THAT PORTION OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY BECAUSE IT IS THE END USERS THAT THE WHOLE SOCIETY IS ABOUT. I GUESS THAT'S THE KIND OF A SCREWY WAY TO PUT IT, BUT THEN I'M USED TO LIVING IN AUSTIN, I WAS BORN HERE. [BUZZER SOUNDS].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. KAREN GREBON. FOLLOWED BY STEVEN MEEKS. CURT BECKER.

>> MY NAME IS KAREN GREBON AND I REPRESENT ADAPT. AND I WANT TO MAINLY SUPPORT WHAT HAS BEEN SAID TODAY. BECAUSE WHEN A PERSON COMES OUT OF A NURSING HOME, BECAUSE WHEN A PERSON COMES OUT OF A NURSING HOME, THEY DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO GO. BECAUSE IN THE FIRST PLACE, LIKE WAYNE SPAWN SAID AWHILE AGO, BECAUSE WHEN YOU ARE IN A NURSING HOME, YOU ONLY GET $25 TO $30 A MONTH, AND THE REST OF IT GOES TO A NURSING HOME. SO YOU DON'T HAVE A WAY TO SAVE ENOUGH MONEY, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN IN THAT PREDICAMENT AND I JUST HOPE YOU ALL THINK ABOUT THAT. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. BECAUSE IT WILL HELP EVERYBODY THE YOUNG, THE ELDERLY, EVERYBODY. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. STEVEN MEEKS. STEVEN MEEKS. MR. MEEKS. CURT BECKER. JEANETTE PETERS HERE? IS THAT RIGHT? JEANETTE PEDEN? OKAY, IS JEANETTE PEDEN HERE? SHE SIGNED UP FOR. RACHEL GONZALES. RACHEL GONZALES. OKAY, YOU WILL FOLLOW MR. BECKER. WELCOME.

>> OKAY. MY NAME IS CURT BECKER, LIKE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS IT'S HARD FOR ME TO BELIEVE THAT SELF-SUFFICIENCY IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE FORCED. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ESG GRANTS FOR THE HOMELESS SHELTER, IT'S A LONG HISTORY INVOLVED GOING BACK TO A BOAT ON TOWN LAKE AND HOMER THE GOOSE. WE NEED -- THEY SAID BACK THEN WE NEEDED AN ALTERNATIVE SALLY. NOW 15 YEARS LATER YOU PUT OUT AN RFP FOR SOMEBODY WITH EXPERIENCE RUNNING A HOMELESS SHELTER AND GIVE THEIR BID TO THE SALVATION ARMY WHO IS SOME ADJUNCT TO IT WHETHER THE CITY'S LONG TIME EXPERIENCE IS THE SALLY DOESN'T DO A GOOD JOB OF TARGETING THE POPULATION OF HOMELESS PEOPLE. RIGHT OFF THE BAT WE SEEM TO BE GOING THE WRONG DIRECTION. THEN WE HAD THE ENCAMPMENT ORDINANCE AND FORMED A HOMELESS CAMP FORCE. DOWNTOWN SHOWED UP WITH REPRESENTATION. THERE WEREN'T ANY NEIGHBORHOOD REPS. THEY CAME UP WITH A CAMPUS PLAN TO PUT IT IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS. OF COURSE, THAT BLEW UP. I'VE BEEN SINCE SHORTLY AFTER THE BEGINNING I WAS ON A HOMELESS TASK FORCE. WE HAD SUPPORT FROM THE CENTER FOR BATTERED WOMEN AND I THOUGHT WOW, SOME SYMPATHETIC HOMELESS PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HELP US OUT AND ENDED UP SAFE PLACE GOT MOST OF THE FIRST ROUND OF FUNDING FOR HOMELESS SERVICES. AND IT'S A LOT EASIER FOR ME TO FEEL MAGNANIMOUS ABOUT THAT THAN CHEATED. I MEAN THE HOMELESS PEOPLE RECOGNIZE THE GREATER AND MORE DESPERATE NEED THERE. THEN THEY CAME UP WITH A MAYOR'S INITIATIVE, AND RICHARD TROXELL FOUND OUT ABOUT THAT, HE BASICALLY HAD TO KICK THE DOORS IN TO FIND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON. THEY DIDN'T TELL HIM ABOUT IT. HE DRAGGED ME IN BEHIND HILL AND TOLD ME THEY WANTED A MODERATE HOMELESS REPRESENTATIVE, SOMEBODY WHO IS WILLING TO ACCEPT THE ENCAMPMENT ORDINANCE. SIX MONTHS LATER, NINE MONTHS LATER THEY STILL HAVEN'T FOUND A REPRESENTATIVE AND THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVES THEY HAD TWO HOMELESS PEOPLE, ROBERT BLAKE AND JEAN GOLDER DID A GOOD JOB OF SAYING WHAT I WAS SAYING AND THEY GOT IGNORED. THEN WE CAME UP WITH THE MAYOR'S INITIATIVE WHICH HAS LED TO THE CURRENT PLAN. AND, YOU KNOW, THE CITY MANAGER HAD SOME THINGS ABOUT THE CITY STAFF. FROM WHAT I CAN TELL IS THAT THE WHOLE CITY STAFF OPERATES UNDER ASSUMPTION WHAT THAT DOWNTOWN WANTS THE CITY IS GOING TO GET. AND JUST AN EXAMPLE, YOU GOT DOWNTOWN AUSTIN GUIDE HERE. AND IT'S GOT POST CARDS FROM THE MAYOR, LISTS ALL THE RESTAURANTS AND SERVICES AND FIELD TRIPS FOR DOWNTOWN PUT OUT BY THE AUSTIN CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU. EXCEPT YOU LOOK IN THE COPYRIGHT, IT'S PUT OUT BY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT. AND HOW IS ECSD PUTTING OUT A TOURIST GUIDE? WHAT DOWNTOWN WANTS THE STAFF WILL FIND SOME WAY TO GIVE IT TO THEM. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. THAT'S BEEN THE -- I WANT APPROVE THE MONEY FOR THIS. I THINK HOMELESS PEOPLE WANT HELP. BUT I WANT TO YOU WORK ON REPROGRAMMING IT TO SOMETHING THAT WILL ACTUALLY HELP.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MR. BECKER. RACHEL GONZALES.

>> HELLO, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, MY NAME IS RACHEL GONZALES AND I'M HERE TO REPRESENT UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY OF THE CAPITAL AREA. OUR PROGRAM HAS MODIFIED HOMEOWNERS AND RENTAL HOMES. IN A ONE YEAR -- EVERY YEAR I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING WHAT OUR GOAL IS FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR, AND LAST YEAR OR YEAR BEFORE LAST SHOULD I SAY ON A ONE-YEAR CONTRACT WE MODIFIED 326 HOMES. AND FOR A TWO-YEAR CONTRACT THAT WE'RE ON NOW, WE WILL BE MODIFYING 852 HOMES THAT. IS A LOT OF HOMES THAT WE HAVE MODIFIED AND MADE EASIER, ACCESSIBLE FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES AND/OR ELDERLY ALSO. WE ARE LOOKING AT YEAR 2000 CONTRACT AND MY GOAL IS TO SEE THAT WE MODIFY AS MANY HOMES AS WE CAN, BUT WE ALSO NEED YOU ALL'S HELP. WE NEED MORE CDBG MONEYS. WE HAVE COME ACROSS THIS YEAR MODIFYING BATHROOMS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND ALSO FOR ELDERLY AND WE HAVE COME ACROSS THAT WE ARE BUILDING MORE RAMPS, MORE BATHROOM MODIFICATIONS, GIVING THEM ROLL-IN SHOWERS, WALK-IN SHOWERS TO MAKE IT EASIER. WE ARE HAVING TO GO BACK EVERY YEAR BECAUSE WE DON'T FINISH THE JOB BECAUSE OF OUR MONEYS. WE HAVE LIMITED FUNDS. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A BUDGET OF $802,000 FOR A TWO-YEAR CONTRACT. THAT MANY HOMES IS HARD TO DO. WE'RE HAVING TO GIVE THE MINIMAL TO THE PEOPLE. PEOPLE OUT THERE DON'T UNDERSTAND -- EXCUSE ME -- WHILE WE'RE PROVIDING SO LITTLE. IT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE A GOAL TO MEET. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE MONEYS COME INTO OUR PROGRAM, THE UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY OF THE CAPITAL AREA AND THAT IS WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REMOVAL BARRIER PROGRAM. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THOSE ARE ALL THE PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

>> I WAS SIGNED UP, MAYOR WATSON.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M SORRY. I DON'T HAVE YOUR CARD. YEAH, PLEASE.

>> MY NAME IS STEPHANIE TOM MATION AND I'M ALSO A MEMBER OF ADAPT AND I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT JENNIFER'S COMMENT AND LIKE SHE SAID THERE ARE MANY, MANY GOOD THINGS IN THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS LOOK IN THE METRO SECTION OF TODAY'S PAPER TO LOOK AT SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT. IT'S ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THE METRO SECTION. THERE'S MANY THINGS THAT THE CITY COULD BE PROUD OF. BUT IF YOU LOOK ON THE FRONT PAGE OF TODAY'S PAPER, YOU WILL SEE AN ARTICLE THERE CALLED SHUT OUT BY GOOD TIMES. IT'S AN ARTICLE ABOUT THE FACT THAT ALL ACROSS TOWN THE LOWER RENT -- RENTAL UNITS ARE BEING CLOSED OUT BY PEOPLE BUYING OUT THOSE PLACES OR RENOVATING THEM AND REHABBING THEM AND USING THEM FOR HIGHER RENT PROPERTIES. AND IT'S -- IT WAS ON THE FRONT PAGE OF TODAY'S PAPER. IT'S JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE. JENNIFER GAVE YOU STATISTICS, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS GO AROUND TOWN, TALK TO LOW INCOME PEOPLE, YOU WILL SEE THAT WITHOUT MORE RENTAL HOUSING, WE ARE NOT TRULY RESPONDING TO THE NEEDS OF THIS COMMUNITY AND IT'S A NEED THAT IS GROWING AND GROWING, AND IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE CITY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. MR. HILGERS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WISH TO ADD IN SUMMATION?

>> IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER THEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: SPEAKING TO THE RENTAL SITUATION, AND I KNOW WE HAVE OTHER THINGS GOING BESIDES WHAT'S IN THE CDBG, SO WAS IT THAT OUT OF DEVELOPER ASSISTANCE FOR BUILDING RENTAL HOUSING WE TOOK THAT MILLION EIGHT AND PROGRAMMED IT INTO TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND RENT SUBSIDIES AND -- OR WHAT --

>> I'M SORRY, AND WHAT?

>>GOODMAN: THE MILLION EIGHT.

>> THAT WAS IN LAST YEAR'S ALLOCATION?

>>GOODMAN: YEAH. SO IS THAT COMPARABLE TO NOW PUTTING MONEY -- MORE MONEY INTO RENTAL SUBSIDIES AND THE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM AND THE -- [INAUDIBLE].

>> ACTUALLY IT'S DIFFICULT TO -- SOME OF THE FUNDS THAT WERE ALLOCATED IN LAST YEAR'S FUNDS UNDER RENTAL ARE STILL ALLOCATED IN THAT CATEGORY FOR THIS YEAR. THEY ARE JUST NOT IN THIS YEAR'S ALLOCATION TO BE CARRIED FORWARDMENT AND SOME OF THOSE -- THOSE PARTICULAR DOLLARS HAVE TO DO WITH THE SCIP II PROJECT SPECIFICALLY AND THE 48 RENLS PROPOSE UNDERSTAND THAT PROJECT. THE OTHER ELEMENT, AS YOU SAID WAS THERE ARE -- I DON'T WANT TO DISAGREE WITH THE NEED BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE ACCURATE -- THERE IS AN ACCURATE REFLECTION THAT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED HERE ABOUT THE NEED FOR INCREASE IN RENTAL PROPERTIES AND I AGREE THE NEWSPAPER TALKS ABOUT IT TODAY. THERE ARE OTHER MECHANISMS WE ARE ALSO EMPLOYING THROUGH OUR AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION BOND FINANCING AND -- THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO TRY TO ENCOURAGE THE CREATION OF MORE RENTAL HOUSING PROPERTIES T LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS THAT THE STATE PROVIDES GIVES US ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY AND WE'RE HOPING THAT SOME OF THOSE UNITS ARE SUCCESSFUL IN RECEIVING THAT STATE ALLOCATION THIS YEAR. BUT IT IS -- IT IS A PROGRAM THAT IS BADLY NEEDED AND IT IS -- THIS COMMUNITY DOES NEED TO ADDRESS THIS NEED AS A COMMUNITY AND WITH OTHER RESOURCES, NOT JUST CDBG BUT TRYING TO FIND UNIQUE AND CREATIVE WAVES TO CREATE MORE RENTAL HOUSING. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE NEED.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM NO. 28.

>>GARCIA: MOVE APPROVAL FROM THE RECOMMENDATION FROM CDC AND THE STAFF.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. DISCUSSION? MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: COULD I ASK IF THAT INCLUDES THE CHANGE IN WORDING FROM THE PROCEEDS ABOVE THE 941 600 WILL BE ALLOCATED FOR REPROGRAMMING?

>>GARCIA: YES, THAT'S PART OF THE NOTES ATTACHED TO THE ALLOCATION.

>>GOODMAN: THAT ISN'T HOW IT READS.

>>GARCIA: THIS NOTE.

>>GOODMAN: IT SAYS CONSIDERED AVAILABLE AND IT SHOULD BE ALLOCATED.

>>GARCIA: RIGHT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT CLARIFICATION, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON 28.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR, JUST BEFORE WE GO ON, TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, THERE ARE A WHOLE LOT OF HOUSING INITIATIVES GOING ON THIS YEAR, AND THEY ARE NOT -- THEY ARE NOT ALL IN HERE. THEY ARE EVERY CONCEIVABLE PLACE THAT WE CAN FIND TO FUND THEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IN FACT, COUNCIL IS WORKING TO TRY TO COME UP WITH AS PART OF THIS BUDGET CYCLE HE WILL SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS AS PART OF AN OVERALL GLOBAL EQUITY PROGRAM. BECAUSE THERE IS RECOGNITION AND IN THAT NEWSPAPER ARTICLE YOU CITE IT TALKS ABOUT THE RECOGNITION AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO TO ACHIEVE SOME OF THAT. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER ON ITEM 16 ARE YOU PREPARED TO GO WITH THAT ONE?

>>SLUSHER: MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 16. SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON NO. 16 -- ITEM 16. MS. FUTRELL ARE WE READY? I'LL CALL UP ITEM 47 FIRST. THIS IS 8, 9 AND 47, BUT THE ITEM WE'LL BE DEALING WITH FIRST IS ITEM 47.

>> COUNCILMEMBERS, WE PULLED OFF AND DID SOME DISCUSSIONS TO WORK THROUGH ON THE GREAT ISSUE. -- GATE ISSUE. RICHARD, I THINK I'M GOING TO LET YOU TAKE A STAB AT THE PROPOSAL AND THERE'S A COMPROMISE THEY WOULD LIKE TO OFFER ON THE GATING ISSUE.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. I'M RICHARD SUBTLE AGAIN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH ALL THE ISSUES. IT'S MORE THAN A GATE, IT'S A COMPLICATED ISSUE, WE'VE COME UP WITH SOME LANGUAGE THAT HAS IN THE EVENT THAT IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO YOU, IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO THE LAW DEPARTMENT. AND THAT IS ESSENTIALLY THE WAY THE SYSTEM WORKS RIGHT NOW IN ORDER TO GET A GATE ANYWHERE IN THE ETJ, YOU HAVE TO GO AND GET A VARIANCE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DO A PRIVATE STREET. AS THAT VARIANCE PROCESS WORKS RECENTLY THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS PUT ON A CONDITION THAT SAYS, WELL, YOU CAN DO PRIVATE STREET, BUT YOU CAN'T DO A GATE. JAY, IF HE WERE JUST OUT IN ETJ, HE COULD COME THROUGH AND ON EVERY SUBDIVISION ASK FOR THAT AND IF PLANNING COMMISSION GAVE HIM A GATE, GREAT. IF THEY DIDN'T, HE COULDN'T. UNDER THE ORDINANCE AS IT'S DRAFTED DARX HE DOESN'T EVEN HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. HE CAN'T EVEN COME ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A GATE SO HE IS IN FACT TAKING A STEP BACKWARDS WITH THIS ORDINANCE. THE PROPOSAL WE CAME UP WITH JUST A MINUTE AGO WOULD BE TO DELETE THAT PROHIBITION IN THE ORDINANCE SAYING HE CAN'T EVEN ASK FOR A GATE. WHERE THAT PUTS HIM IS HE'S GOT ONE VARIANCE FOR ONE PRIVATE STREET, WHICH IS DOWN AT THE END OF THE TWO AND A HALF MILE CUL-DE-SAC. COME IN OFF -- BEE CAVE ROAD, COME TWO AND A HALF MILES DOWN HERE, HE HAS A VARIANCE TO DO A PRIVATE STREET ON THIS SECTION RIGHT HERE. IF WE DELETE SECTION 7 OF THE ORDINANCE AS IT IS NOW, HE COULD IF HE CHOSE, HE COULD DO A GATE HERE, BUT ON EVERY OTHER SUBDIVISION WITHIN THE P.U.D. HE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE NORMAL PROCESS THAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAS TO GO THROUGH TO DO PRIVATE STREETS AND A GATE. THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS WORKED OUT WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT THAT WOULD IMPLEMENT THIS COMPROMISE READS: A GATE MAY BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE PRIVATE STREET IN PARCEL 14 AND AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE PARK PARCEL IDENTIFIED ON EXHIBIT B AS PARCEL 13. ANY OTHER GATE OR PRIVATE STREET -- ANY OTHER GATE OR PRIVATE STREET MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS PART OF ITS REVIEW OF A REQUEST FOR A PRIVATE STREET VARIANCE. SO IT PUTS HIM BACK TO WHERE HE WOULD BE. HE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO ONE GATE ON THE ONE SECTION, AND THEN HE'S AT RISK FOR ALL THE REST OF HIS SUBDIVISION FOR GATES, AND WE'RE HOPING THAT THAT IS A COMPROMISE THAT EVERYBODY CAN WALK AWAY FROM THE TABLE FEELING LIKE THEY GOT SOMETHING. AND --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. SUTTLE?

>>SPELMAN: I WANT TO MENTION IT'S IRONIC MR. SUTTLE IS NOW ARGUING IN FAVOR OF GATES.

>> I WON'T SAY ANOTHER WORD THAN THAT. HE GOT THE JOKE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HE KNOWS WHAT IS -- -- I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM 47.

>> CAN I PLEASE READ A FEW MINOR CORRECTIONS INTO THE RECORD?

>>MAYOR WATSON: SURE. TELL YOU WHAT, WHY DON'T WE SEE IF WE'RE GOING TO GET A MOTION. IT MAY NOT MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

>> MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. WHY DON'T YOU COME FORWARD.

>> IS THAT WITH THE GATE COMPROMISE?

>>MAYOR WATSON: WITH THE GATE COMPROMISE.

>>GRIFFITH: IS THAT WITH IT OR NOT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M ASSUMING HE DIDN'T -- [INAUDIBLE].

>> YES, ON PART 12, THERE'S A SMALL CHANGE SO THAT THE INTRO TO PART 12 NOW READS: WATERWAY BUFFER ZONES ARE ESTABLISHED ALONG THE WATERWAYS WITHIN THE P.U.D. AS DEPICTED ON EXHIBIT F. PART D OF-SUBSECTION D MUCH PART 12 READS: THE NET SITE AREA WITHIN THE WATERWAY BUFFER ZONE MAY BE TRANSFERRED TO A SINGLE FAMILY COMMERCIAL OR MULTI-FAMILY USE ON THE PROPERTY. IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR A COMMERCIAL OR MULTI-FAMILY USE MAY NOT EXCEED 50% OF A TRANSFER UNDER THIS PART. TRANSFER UNITS MAY NOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE WATERWAY BUFFER ZONES. ALSO IN PART 15, ITEM K-2, THAT NOW READS: APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAN OR SITE PLAN EXPIRES -- WELL, I SHID READ THE WHOLE THING. K READS: SECTION 25-2-4-23 OF THE CITY CODE IS AMEND TED REQUIRE THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT REQUEST THE COUNCIL TO INITIATE THE NEW ZONING OF PROPERTY IN THE P.U.D. IF PART 2 SAYS AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN OR SITE PLAN EXPIRES AFTER THE 20TH YEAR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE. AND THEN A CHANGE ON EXHIBIT G C-7 NOW READS: THE FIRST SENTENCE NOW READS RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE P.U.D. MAY BE ALLOWED ON THE BACKUP GRAIN AGE DRAIN FIELDS DESIGNATED FOR THE CLUSTER WASTE WATER SYSTEM SO LONG AS NO PERMANENT BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES ARE BUILT ON THESE AREAS, AND C-8 THE SECOND SENTENCE NOW READS CENTRALIZED WASTE WATER SERVICE BY A PROVIDER OTHER THAN THE CITY IS ALLOWED AS LONG AS THE CITY APPROVES THE SERVICE DELIVERY MECHANISM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.

>>GRIFFITH: YES. THANK YOU. ANOTHER IDEA, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN ABOUT MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC LOOKING FOR ACCESS POINTS THAT MIGHT -- MIGHT MISUNDERSTAND THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET TO THE LAKE COMING IN. ANOTHER WAY -- ANOTHER COMPROMISE COULD BE TO AVOID THAT KIND OF MISUNDERSTANDING THAT THE CITY INVEST IN SIGNAGE, SIGNIFICANT SIGNAGE AT THE ENTRANCE THAT WOULD SETTLE THAT KIND OF MISUNDERSTANDING AND CLEARLY SHOW THE PUBLIC -- I MEAN YOU COULD HAVE NO PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH HERE. AND CLEARLY SHOW WHERE PEOPLE COULD GET IN, WHICH IS COMMONSFORD, WHICH IS VERY, VERY NEAR. AND I THINK IF WE HAD SIGNIFICANT CLEAR SIGNAGE, THEN THAT KIND OF PROBLEM MIGHT NOT OCCUR. SO THAT WOULD BE I GUESS A SUBSTITUTE.

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

>>LEWIS: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. WELL, I DON'T AS MAKER OF THE SECOND. SO WHAT WE CAN DO IS IF THERE'S A SECOND TO COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S MOTION, SHE CAN MAKE THAT AS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND TO COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH'S MOTION? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN. THE VOTE WE'LL TAKE WILL BE FIRST ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. SUBSTITUTE MOTION IS TO NOT ALLOW THE GATES, BUT TO PUT UP SIGNAGE OF SOME SORT.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT THE CITY WOULD --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: RIGHT.

>>GRIFFITH: -- INVEST IN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DISCUSSION ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

>>GOODMAN: I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE RESPONSE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MR. SUTTLE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT? THE MAYOR PRO TEM WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THOUGHT ON THAT.

>> SINCE IT'S NEW, LET ME RUN IT BY MY CLIENT REAL QUICK.

>> HI, I'M JAY HAAS FROM THE BALFOUR REAL ESTATE GROUP. MY EXPERIENCE AND IN THAT EXPERIENCE IT'S BEEN IN THE AUSTIN AREA HERE IS THAT SIGNS LIKE THAT DON'T LAST ONCE PEOPLE FIND THAT THERE IS ACCESS TO WATER, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE THE UPPER PARTS OF BARTON CREEK AND MAYBE PARTS OF -- OTHER PARTS OF LAKE AUSTIN, THAT THOSE SIGNS TYPICALLY COME DOWN OR DISAPPEAR OVERNIGHT SO THAT WHEN -- WHEN THEY COME BACK TO VISIT THE WATER AND SO FORTH THEY CAN'T BE GIVEN A CITATION BECAUSE THERE IS NO SIGN UP THE DAY THEY ARE OUT THERE DOING IT. I'VE SEEN THAT HAPPEN AND IT WAS OUR INTENTION ALL ALONG TO PUT SIGNS UP, AND WE WERE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO THEM AT OUR EXPENSE. THAT'S MY -- THAT'S OUR POSITION ON THAT, IF THAT ANSWERS --.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN.

>>SPELMAN: MR. HAAS, HELP ME WITH THIS. SAY I'M LOOKING FOR A WAY TO GET TO THE LAKE. AND I FOR WHATEVER REASON DRIVE UP TO PARCEL 14, HOW WOULD I ACTUALLY GET TO THE LAKE IF I WERE DRIVING ON THE PRIVATE STREETS OF PARCEL 14? WHAT WOULD I HAVE TO DO TO GET TO THE LAKE?

>> WELL, WITHOUT A GATE --

>> THERE'S A MICROPHONE RIGHT HERE THAT YOU CAN GRAB.

>> WITHOUT A GATE, AND THE IDEAL STREET PATTERN FOR PARCEL 14 WILL BE AN ENTRY SOMEWHERE IN THIS VICINITY RIGHT HERE AND IT WILL GO DOWN AND LOOP IN PARALLEL TO THE WATER AND THEN COME BACK AROUND THAT WAY. YOU COULD -- AND AFTER A TWO AND A HALF MILE DRIVE, ASSUMING YOU WENT DIRECTLY DOWN WITHOUT DIVERTING TO SOME OF THESE OTHER SIDE STREETS TO FIND THE LAKE, YOU COULD COME IN, PARK YOUR CAR ALONG SIDE THE CURB AND TRY TO ACCESS THE LAKE EITHER BETWEEN THE HOUSE IN THE PARK OR THE -- BETWEEN TWO HOUSES. OR YOU COULD COME DOWN HERE TO WHERE WE HAVE PROBABLY A TWO TO 400 DREAD LINEAR OPEN PACE AND ACCESS THE LAKE THEER. THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY HOMES IN HERE.

>>SPELMAN: AND I WOULD BE ABLE TO GET TO THAT 200 OR 400 FOOT SPACE HOW?

>> WELL, THERE WILL BE A ROAD THAT COMES RIGHT ALONG LIKE THAT AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A DRIVEWAY, A CHON DRIVEWAY THAT ACCESSES THESE THREE LOTS OVER HERE. cN COMMON DRIVEWAY.

>>SPELMAN: SO I WOULD BE ABLE TO WALK DOWN A DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD TAKE ME INTO THAT LOOKS LIKE A GULLY?

>> CORRECT. THE BOTTOM PORTION IS A GULLY, YES, BUT IT'S QUITE WIDE. I MEAN THE GULLY PORTION OF IT IS NARROW IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE WIDTH SHOWN HERE.

>>SPELMAN: OKAY. LET ME ASK YOU THIS. THAT ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT BE A WAY OF GETTING TO THE LAKE, BUT FURTHER NORTH TOWARDS THE FURTHEST NORTHERNMOST POINT OF PARCEL 14, IS THAT A TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP? ARE THOSE TOPOGRAPHICAL LINES I SEE ON THE MAP THERE?

>> YES.

>>SPELMAN: LOOKS LIKE THERE IS A BLUFF ALL ALONG THE EDGE OF LAKE AUSTIN AT PARCEL 14. SO YOU ACTUALLY DROP DOWN INTO THE LAKE.

>> THE DIFFERENCE IN GRADE FROM WHERE THE FINISHED PAD WOULD BE FOR A HOME AND THE WATER I WOULD GUESS IS SOMEWHERE AROUND 15 FEET. 15, MAYBE 20 FEET. BUT IT'S A GENTLE GRADE. THIS IS ALL SANDY -- THIS IS OLD RIVER BOTTOM HERE AND THIS IS ALL SANDY. IT'S NOT A ROCK BLUFF OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

>>SPELMAN: OKAY. SO THOSE TOPOGRAPHICAL LINES ARE LIKE TWO NOT LINES, NOT 20 FOOT LINES.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>SPELMAN: OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER -- I SEE PARCEL 14 AND 14-A, ARE THERE ANY OTHER PARCELS DIRECTLY FRONTINGING ON LAKE AUSTIN?

>> WELL, PARCEL 4, BUT IT'S 100 PLUS FEET ABOVE THE LEVEL OF THE WATER.

>>SPELMAN: OKAY.

>> AND THEN THE 40 ACRES THAT'S WITHIN THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY M.U.D..

>>SPELMAN: OKAY. SO IF THE ARGUMENT FOR A GATE IS TO PREVENT ACCESS TO THE LAKE THROUGH SOMEBODY'S BACKYARD, REALLY IT'S 14 AND 14-A ARE THE ONLY PLACES WHERE YOU WOULD REALISTICALLY BE ABLE TO GET ACCESS WITHOUT HAVING TO CLIMB DOWN 100 FEET OF BLUFF.

>> IF THEY GAINED ACCESS TO THE WATER HERE, THEY ARE NOT COMING BACK UP TO THEIR CAR.

>>SPELMAN: YEAH. OKAY. THEY ARE FLOATING DOWN, HAVING TO WALK ALL THE WAY BACK AGAIN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>> ASSUMING THEY MADE IT DOWN SAFELY.

>> THAT WAS THE POINT OF THE COMPROMISE IS THAT IT DOES GIVE THE GATE FOR THAT ONE SECTION, BUT FOR NO OTHER PART IN THE WHOLE P.U.D..

>>SPELMAN: OKAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: YES, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. HOW MUCH TROUBLE ARE WE HAVING LOSING SIGNS? GETTING THEM HAULED AWAY, SIGNS LIKE WOULD SAY NO PUBLIC ACCESS THAT THE CITY WOULD --

>> I THINK MAYBE JESUS OLIVEIRA DIRECTOR OF PARKS DEPARTMENT SINCE HE DEALS WITH THE PARK SIGNS MIGHT BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU A BETTER ANSWER.

>> WE DO HAVE ON AN OCCASIONAL BASIS SIGNS BEING VANDALIZED, BUT THE PUBLIC IS VERY GOOD ABOUT LETTING US KNOW WHEN THE SIGNS ARE DOWN AND THEY CALL US AND WE MAKE A VERY STRONG EFFORT TO PUT THEM BACK UP AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

>>GRIFFITH: WOULD YOU BE -- WOULD IT BE PRACTICAL TO ERECT THIS KIND OF SIGN AND KEEP IT UP ON A PRETTY REGULAR BASIS SO THAT THERE WOULD BE NO CONFUSION BETWEEN THE ENTRANCE TO THIS SUBDIVISION AND COMMONSFORD IF WE HAD A GIANT SIGN?

>> YES, MA'AM, WE COULD TAKE CARE OF IT.

>>GRIFFITH: ALSO, WHAT KIND OF ACTIVITIES ARE GOING ON NOW AT COMMONSFORD AND WHAT KIND OF USAGE DO YOU HAVE NOW? I MEAN IS IT -- WHEN IS IT OPEN? WHAT KIND OF ACTIVITIES ARE PERMITTED AND NOT PERMITTED?

>> YOU HAVE A RENTAL FACILITY, THE COMMONSFORD HOUSE, IT'S RENTED FOR WEDDINGS, REUNIONS, RETREATS, IT HAS A SWIMMING POOL THAT'S ALSO UTILIZED. THE PARK IS OPEN ON A DAILY BASIS TO THE PUBLIC. PEOPLE GO FISHING. THERE IS AN AREA WHERE THEY GO SWIMMING. MOST IMPORTANTLY THEY GO OUT AND WALK THE TRAILS TLCHLT IS A LOT OF PASSAGE TRAIL USE IN THE AREA. BUT THE PARK IS FAIRLY UTILIZED WELL ENOUGH. A LOT OF WATER ACTIVITIES, PEOPLE DO STOP IN THE DOCK THAT WE HAVE OUT THERE DURING THE TIMES THAT THEY ARE OUT IN THE LAKE.

>>GRIFFITH: SO YOU THINK WE COULD BE REAL CLEAR ABOUT WHERE THE ENTRANCE TO COMMONSFORD IS AND THAT HERE AT THIS SUBDIVISION IS NOT A WAY TO DO THAT?

>> I THINK WE CAN BE VERY CLEAR ON THAT, MA'AM.

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE VOTE WILL BE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WHICH WOULD BE TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE BUT REQUIRE SIGNAGE AS OPPOSED TO THE GATE COMPROMISE THAT'S BEEN LAID OUT FOR YOU. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO SAY I WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR THE ORIGINAL MOTION AS IT WAS WITH THE COMPROMISE EVEN THOUGH I DON'T LIKE THE GATES AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE LAKE, PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DRIVE BY AND LOOK AT THE LAKE, BUT NONETHELESS SINCE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF SOUND AND GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS GONE ON BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT, AND I HOPE THIS GOES AGAINST THE APPLICANT'S WISHES THAT WOULDN'T CAUSE THEM TO ABANDON THE WHOLE AGREEMENT, BUT I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION AND SUPPORT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND OPPOSE THE GATE THERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: LET ME ASK A LOGISTICS QUESTION TOO. I WASN'T FOLLOWING CLOSELY WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT MR. SUTTLE WAS TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE PROCESS IS. IF YOU WOULD -- IF YOU WERE NOT TO BE ABLE TO GET THE GATE RIGHT NOW ON A PRIVATE ROAD, YOU DO HAVE AN OPTION OF COMING BACK IF THE SIGN DOESN'T WORK, BUT THERE IS A PROCESS TO GO THROUGH, RIGHT?

>> WELL, UNDER THE CODE -- UNDER THE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEFORE YOU RIGHT NOW WE COULDN'T EVEN COME BACK AND ASK.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, IS THERE A WAY FOR US TO ENTER INTO LANGUAGE THAT LEAVES US THAT OPTION? FOR THEM TO BE -- THEY WOULD OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO HAVE KIND OF PROOF, FINDINGS OF FACT THAT WE COULD LOOK AT AND SEE IT DID NOT WORK SO THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO REZONE IN ESSENCE TO DO IT.

>> WELL, THAT WAS KIND OF WHAT WE WERE GETTING AT WITH THE COMPROMISE AND THAT WOULD BE BY TONIGHT'S ACTION YOU WOULDN'T BE GRANTING GATES ACROSS THE WHOLE P.U.D.. YOU WOULD BE GRANTING A GATE, BASICALLY ONE. AND THEN IT'S UP TO JAY TO GO TRY TO CONVINCE THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT ANY OTHER GATE MIGHT BE OKAY. THAT'S ONE WAY. ANOTHER WAY WOULD BE, YOU KNOW A GATE ON THIS ONE ONLY AND NO MORE GATES.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE ONE OF THE POLICIES IS KIND OF COMING UP THROUGH THE SMART GROWTH PROCESSES IS TO TRY TO GET A WAY -- AWAY FROM THIS CONSTANT GATED COMMUNITY PRIVATE ROAD KIND OF THING WHICH IS IN MANY CASES ALMOST A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY ABOUT SECURITY. YOU HAVE JUST CREATED A SURPRISE PACKAGE THAT SOMEBODY WANTS TO OPEN UP SO THEY ARE GOING TO FIND A WAY WAY TO GET IN. AND SO IN THE PHILOSOPHICAL PURSUIT OF TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM THAT, BUT UNDERSTANDING YOUR ISSUE AS WELL AND BEING VERY GLAD THAT YOU ALL WERE REALLY GOOD AND HAVE OFFERED SO MANY BENEFICIAL THINGS TO US DURING THE NEGOTIATION OF THIS PROJECT, I THOUGHT SINCE YOU -- IF WE DIDN'T GIVE YOU ANY GATE AT ALL ACCORDING TO THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS NOW, YOU WOULD HAVE TO IN ESSENCE COME BACK AND GET A WHOLE NEW ZONING CATEGORY IN ORDER TO UNDO THAT ONE THING. I WANTED TO GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHECK THE SIGNS AND SEE IF THEY WORK. IF THEY DON'T WORK, THEN I DON'T WANT TO HAVE PENALIZED ANYBODY WHO HAS BEEN SO GOOD FOR THE CITY.

>> YOU MENTIONED TWO THINGS ABOUT THE SIGNS. YOU HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THAT IS LIMITED PURPOSE ANNEXATION. VOLUNTEER LIMITED PURPOSE ANNEXATION. THERE IS NO POLICE PROTECTION OUT HERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITY THE CITY HAS OUT HERE EVEN IF YOU PUT A SIGN UP. I KNOW -- I LIVE VERY CLOSE TO WHAT YOU ALL COMMONLY CALL THE FREEZEN HAUN TRACT AND THERE ARE SIGNS THAT SAY NO PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE CREEK AND I LIVE RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER AND THOSE SIGNS ARE DOWN A LOT. NOW -- AND THAT'S JUST A PERSONAL COMMENT. BUT AS FAR AS THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM, THIS IS LIMITED PURPOSE ANNEX AREA. YOU DON'T HAVE POLICE, FIRE, E.M.S., ANYBODY COMING OUT HERE. SO YOUR SIGNS -- I THINK JAY WOULD RATHER DO HIS OWN SIGN, AND HE WILL ON TOP OF THIS -- THIS ONE AREA THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST HAVE THE OPTION. HE IS GOING TO DO SIGNS JUST FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE MOTORING PUBLIC. BUT SIGNS ALONE, EVEN IF YOU HAD A SIGN THAT SAID YOU WILL GO TO JAIL IF YOU GO DOWN HERE AND ACCESS THE LAKE, YOU DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE IT

>>GOODMAN: WELL, AND UNDERSTANDING THAT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING TO FIND OUT IF WE COULD GIVE YOU THE OPTION OF NOT HAVING TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS, BUT ALSO THE OPTION OF TRYING TO SEE IF OFFICIAL SIGNS AND SOME MONITORING BY THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WOULDN'T WORK MORE THAN WHAT YOU SAY HAPPENS ON FREEZENHAUN.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PARK'S DEPARTMENTS AUTHORITY WOULD BE OUT HERE IN A LIMITED PURPOSE AREA. DOES ANYBODY?

>>GOODMAN: I DON'T EITHER. JUST MONITORING THE SIGNS.

>> I MEAN THE PARKS POLICE, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE AUTHORITY OUT IN LIMITED PURPOSE --

>> AND IF LUTHER IS IN THE CROWD, I DON'T SEE HIM, I BELIEVE ALL WE HAVE CLEARLY IS ZONING AND BUILDING REGULATION. WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THE REST OF OUR SERVICES. WE CAN DO CODE ENFORCEMENT, BUILDINGS INSPECTIONS AND WE HAVE ZONING. SO FOR THAT PERIOD OF TIME AS THEY ARE PHASING INTO FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF REGULATORY RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE AREA.

>>GOODMAN: QOO.

>> COUNCILMEMBER, I THINK THAT DEBORAH IS SAYING THAT THE ONLY WAY TO REVISIT THIS -- AND DEBORAH, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, WOULD BE TO AMEND THE P.U.D.. SO FOR EXAMPLE IF TONIGHT YOU DID NOT ALLOW THE GATE AND WE STUCK WITH SIGNAGE AND THAT DIDN'T WORK FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER THEIR OPTION WOULD HAVE TO BE TO COME BACK THROUGH AND AMEND THE P.U.D..

>>GOODMAN: AND THAT MEANS PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN COUNCIL?

>> I BELIEVE THAT IS THE FULL PROCESS.

>>GOODMAN: IS THERE A WAY TO DO THIS LIKE IN A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT INSTEAD AND AMEND THE -- WELL, THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION TOO. NEVER MIND.

>> ONE THING YOU MIGHT FIND INTERESTING WHEN YOU READ THE P.U.D. STATUTE, OUR P.U.D. ORDINANCE, ONE OF THE PROVISIONS VERY CLEARLY SAYS A P.U.D. WILL BE DESIGNED TO DISCOURAGE DRIVE-THROUGH TRAFFIC. IT'S LIKE SECTION B.

>>GOODMAN: I NEVER READ THAT.

>> I DIDN'T EITHER UNTIL THIS WEEK WHEN THIS POPPED UP, BUT IT'S VERY CLEARLY WITHIN THE INTENT LANGUAGE OF OUR NEW P.U.D. STATUTE TO DISCOURAGE DRIVE-THROUGH TRAFFIC LIKE THIS. AND REALLY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE GATE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT -- I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.

>>LEWIS: [INAUDIBLE].

>> 39.

>>LEWIS: [INAUDIBLE].

>> 39.

>>LEWIS: OH, OKAY. WHAT IS THE MOTION --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE MOTION CURRENTLY IS TO APPROVE ON SECOND AND THIRD READING THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE SIGNAGE AND NOT ALLOW-WHICH IS NOT CURRENTLY IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT WOULD NOT ALLOW ANY OF THE GATES THAT WOULD WORK OUT IN THE COMPROMISE.

>>LEWIS: [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: NO, YOU -- [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: THERE ARE SUBDIVISIONS ALL OVER THE CITY THAT HAVE HOMES THAT BACK UP TO THE WATER, AND MANY, MANY OF THEM DO NOT HAVE PEOPLE, MINE BEING ONE, COMING THROUGH THE SIDE YARD TO GET TO THE LAKE. I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF A PROBLEM WE'RE REALLY GOING TO HAVE, ESPECIALLY WITH COMMONS DS FORD RIGHT NEXT DOOR WHERE PEOPLE CAN GO AND IF THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION THAT IT'S RIGHT THERE. I JUST -- I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF A PROBLEM THIS IS REALLY GOING TO BE AND HOW -- HOW UNATTRACTIVE THIS MIGHT REALLY BE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I NEED TO BE CLEAR ON SOMETHING, MS. FEW TLEL TREMENDOUSLY, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND I MAY BE WRONG SO TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THIS IS AN AGREED UPON ANNEXATION.

>> YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AS PART THAT HAVE AGREEMENT THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF AGREEMENTS REACHED ON VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, THIS P.U.D. AND THE DETAILS OF WHAT CAN BE DONE THERE AND IN THAT P.U.D..

>> YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IN ORDER FOR US TO AND NEXT THIS PROPERTY ANNEX THIS PROPERTY WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT TONIGHT AND THAT WOULD BE ITEM 8 AND OF COURSE ITEM 9 IS PART OF THE RESTRICTIVE COULD HAVE NANTSZ IS PART OF THE AGREEMENT FOR ANNEXATION.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. THESE ARE ALL TOGETHER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ON ITEM NO. 47 WHICH IS NECESSARY FOR US TO PASS ON ALL THREE READINGS IN ORDER TO MEET ALL THE AGREEMENTS NECESSARY FOR THE AGREED ANNEXATION, DO WE KNOW -- DO WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT AS TO WHAT -- FIRST OF ALL, DO WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT AS TO THE LIMITED GATES, THAT'S THE COMPROMISE THAT'S BEEN WORKED OUT.

>> WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, WITHOUT THE COMPROMISE, IS ONE GATE THAT'S ALLOWED TO THE PRIVATE PARK, PLUS A GATE THAT COULD GO ON A DRIVEWAY TO THE MULTI-FAMILY SECTION. THE COMPROMISE THEY'VE OFFERED YOU IS ONE ADDITIONAL GATE ON THE FAR END OF THE TWO-MILE ROAD --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: BUT THE QUESTION IS WITH THAT, THERE IS AN AGREED UPON ANNEXATION.

>> YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE AGREED UPON ANNEXATION ABSENT THAT?

>> THAT'S A QUESTION WE NEED TO ASK JAY. IS WHETHER OR NOT THE GATE WOULD BE A MAKE OR BREAK FOR HIM IN THIS PROPOSAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M SORRY. COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN.

>>SPELMAN: MAYBE I'M MISUNDERSTANDING. I BELIEVE THE MOTION ABOVE US IS EXACTLY IS MS. FUTRELL TELLS US AN OPTION ON PARCEL 10, THAT'S NOT BEFORE US, THAT'S APARTMENT BUILDING AND THAT'S SOMETHING WHICH CAN BE DONE ANYWAY, AND A GATE IN FRONT OF THE PARCEL 13, BUT NO MORE GATES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT'S RIGHT. BUT WHAT SHE IS SAYING IS THAT THE COMPROMISE THAT IS PART OF THE AGREEMENT IS TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL GATE. AND THAT'S ON PARCEL 14. THE MOTION IN FRONT OF US DOES NOT INCLUDE THAT GATE.

>>SPELMAN: I UNDERSTOOD THE COMPROMISE TO ALSO INCLUDE AN OPTION ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS OF GOING BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASKING FOR PRIVATE STREETS AND GATES FOR ANY OTHER PARCELS THE MILK KANTDZ.

>>MAYOR WATSON: PARCEL 14 -- THE COMES PROMISE IS PARCEL 14 GETS A GATE AND THEY COULD COME BACK. THAT IS NOT THE MOTION IN FRONT OF US. INSTEAD THE MOTION IN FRONT OF US IS THE GATES THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY AGREED TO, WHICH WOULD BE ABSENT PARCEL 14 AND THE ABILITY TO COME BACK --.

>>SPELMAN: BASICALLY THAT'S WHAT IS IN FRONT OF US.

>>MAYOR WATSON: PLUS SIGNAGE.

>>SPELMAN: AND THE CITY WOULD PUT THE SIGNS UP.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE REASON I'M ASKING THE QUESTION IS I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE IS A VOTE AND ON THE MOTION THAT IS IN FRONT OF US, WHICH IS NOT THE COMPROMISE VOTE, AND IF THAT VOTE CHANGES THE AGREEMENT ON ANNEXATION, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT. IF THE VOTE ON SIGNAGE, FOR EXAMPLE, WERE TO PASS BUT ONLY WITH FOUR VOTES, THEN YOU HAVEN'T PASSED ON ALL THREE READINGS, WHICH WOULD PUT US IN A SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY WOULD NEED TO MOVE TO RECONSIDER BECAUSE IT WOULD PUT US IN A SITUATION WHERE IF WE WANT TO ANNEX THIS WE CAN GO BACK TO THE OTHER ONE. IF IT'S A MAKE OR BREAK, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT TOO.

>>GRIFFITH: AND THE GATES ALREADY APPROVED ARE STILL THERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AS I UNDERSTAND YOUR MOTION, THE GATES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN AGREED TO --.

>>GRIFFITH: ARE STILL THERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: RIGHT.

>>GRIFFITH: WE JUST DON'T ADD MORE, BUT WE DO ADD A VERY CLEAR SIGNAGE PUT UP AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST MOTION WE WOULD VOTE ON.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, MR. HAAS NEVER HAS COME UP TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.

>>LEWIS: LET HIM GO AHEAD AND SPEAK. GO AHEAD.

>> LET ME JUST MAKE SURE, ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M ANSWERING THE RIGHT QUESTION. [LAUGHTER]. I THINK WHAT YOUR QUESTION WAS --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN. WE SPENT A WHOLE LOT OF TIME AND ENERGY AND EMOTION GETTING TO THIS POINT HERE TONIGHT.

>> CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND THEN TONIGHT WE HAVE A NEW GATE. AND THE QUESTION IS DOES THAT NEW GATE MEAN THAT IF ITEM NO. 47, THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSES, WE DON'T GO TO ITEM NO. 8 AND 9?

>> WELL, LET ME -- NO. 1, IT'S NOT AN ULTIMATUM. THIS HAS BEEN A -- YOU KNOW, A NINE MONTH PROCESS OF GIVE AND TAKE AND I'M APPRECIATIVE EITHER WAY, YOU KNOW, WHETHER YOU APPROVE THE EXTRA GATE OR NOT, WE'RE STILL GOING TO GO FORWARD. WE THINK THIS IS A SOLID PROJECT. IT'S NOT REALLY A NEW GATE. I DIDN'T REALIZES UNTIL I GOT THE DRAFT OF THE ORDINANCE, WHICH WAS LATE LAST WEEK, THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE PRECLUDED FROM GATES ALTOGETHER. I NOW REMEMBER THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAID THAT THEY WERE OPPOSED TO GATES, BUT I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE JUST ABSOLUTELY RESTRICTED FROM GETTING THEM. I THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO BE REVIEWED ON A PLAT BY PLAT BASIS. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WE'RE DISCUSSING THEM TONIGHT FOR THE FIRST TIME VERSUS DURING THE FIRST READING. IT IS AN ITEM THAT IS FAIRLY IMPORTANT TO ME. I FELT LIKE AS DEVELOPERS, YOU KNOW, YOU ALL MIGHT YIELD TO OUR EXPERIENCE, AND WE FEEL LIKE IT WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO WITHIN THE P.U.D.. IT'S NOT A MAKE OR BREAK SITUATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANYTHING ELSE?

>> JUST I DON'T KNOW HOW THE VOTE IS GOING TO GO. I HOPE YOU WILL SEE IN YOUR HEART FOR ONE GATE FOR JAY BECAUSE I WANT TO TELL YOU WHAT JAY IS DOING FOR OUR CITY. ONE, IT'S A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION. TWO, IT'S A VOLUNTARY WAY TO SEE IF OUR CITY CAN PROVIDE SEWER SERVICE TO AN AREA WITHOUT EXTENDING WATER PIPES. LET ME TELL YOU, THERE ARE OTHER ENTITIES KNOCKING ON HIS DOOR EVERY DAY WANTING TO PROVIDE HIM SEWER SERVICE. HE IS PLAYING THE GAME OF -- PLAYING BALL WITH THE CITY TO DO THIS. THERE'S ANNEXATION, HE'S SUBMITTING TO LAND USE CONTROL. HE'S SUBMITTING TO MORE IN SOME AREAS THAN CODE COMPLIANCE ON WATERSHED ORDINANCE. WE'RE GETTING CAPS ON IMPERVIOUS COVER. WE'RE GETTING MORE BUFFER ON WATERWAYS THAT YOU NORMALLY WOULDN'T GET. GETTING AGREEMENTS TO TRACK THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. PAT MURPHY LIKES THIS BETTER THAN A STANDARD SUBDIVISION MEETING ALL THE CODES AND ORDINANCES. WHEN YOU BOIL IT ALL DOWN, JAY HAS -- HE'S WHAT THIS CITY TRIES TO ENCOURAGE AND IT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT, WHEN HE HAS A MARKETING ISSUE, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN A LOT OF SENSES, A MARKETING ISSUE AND HE'S JUST ASKING THE CITY TO GO WITH HIM ON AN ISSUE AND AS A DEVELOPER WHO HAS DONE HIS -- HIS COMPANY HAS DONE STUFF IN SEELGTSZ AND BOULDER AND A LOT OF JURISDICTIONS DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP IN AND THAT'S WHY HE'S NOT AFRAID TO DEAL WITH CITY OF AUSTIN, HE'S ASKING FOR A BREAK IN CHANGE EXCHANGE TORE A LOT OF THINGS HE'S OFFERING THE CITY. I WANT YOU TO BE AWARE, UNLESS YOU PORE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS, IT'S HARD TO REALIZE HOW MUCH THIS MAN HAS STEPPED UP TO THE TABLE AND COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT'S GOOD FOR OUR CITY. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE] .

>>GRIFFITH: CAN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT GATES ARE STILL IN PLACE AND HOW CLOSE COMMONS FORD PARK IS WITH THE PUBLIC ACCESS AND HOW CLEAR WE CAN BE ABOUT WHICH IS WHICH?

>> I'M SORRY, COUNCILMEMBER. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION?

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE GATES THAT ARE STILL THERE AND ALSO HOW CLEAR WE CAN BE ABOUT -- COMMONS FORD IS RIGHT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT LINE. AND HOW CLEAR WE CAN BE ABOUT WHICH IS WHICH AT THE BEGINNING, DOWN ON THE ROAD BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION WHICH WAY YOU GO?

>> IN THE PROPOSAL BEFORE WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT A COMPROMISE, YOU WOULD HAVE HAD THE ABILITY TO DO TWO GATES, BASICALLY A GATE TO A DRIVEWAY TO A MULTI-FAMILY SECTION AND A GATE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTEDDED THAT'S ALSO REALLY A DRIVEWAY INTO A PRIVATE PARK. SO 13 AND 10. THERE'S ALMOST A TWO-MILE ROAD WITH A SINGLE ENTRANCE INTO THIS SUBDIVISION. ON THE CURRENT PLAN RIGHT NOW HERE AT THE VERY END ON THIS PARCEL IS WHERE THE ONLY EXISTING PRIVATE ROAD IS, AND THIS IS WHERE THE -- WHERE JAY IS ASKING ABOUT PUTTING A GATE. HE IS -- HE INTENDS TO PUT IN SIGNAGE. I THINK YOUR PROPOSAL ALSO HAS TALKED ABOUT HOW WE COULD PUT IN SIGNAGE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE END.

>>GRIFFITH: AND MY QUESTION IS WHERE IS COMMONS FORD?

>> KMONDS FORD IS RIGHT HERE.

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY AND HOW CLEAR CAN WE BE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM? HOW CLEAR CAN HE BE ABOUT WHICH IS WHICH? I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE'RE REALLY GOING --.

>> I THINK IT WILL BE AS CLEAR --.

>>GRIFFITH: I'M WONDERING IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF MISCOMMUNICATION.

>> YOU THINK YOU CAN BE AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE ON SIGNS. AND JUST TO BE SURE EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THERE WILL BE DOWN THE ROAD HE'D LIKE THE ABILITY TO COME BACK. BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF YOU NOW IS SIMPLY TO ASK HERE.

>>GRIFFITH: YEAH. AND SO WE'RE PRETTY CLEAR THAT WE CAN BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHICH IS COMMONS FORD AND WHERE THE PUBLIC ACCESS IS AND WHERE IT'S NOT.

>>LEWIS: MAY I ASK A QUESTION, ONE QUICK QUESTION? THE ROAD IN AREA 12, IS THAT THE ENTRY TO THE PARK? ON 12 THERE?

>> IT'S RIGHT HERE, COUNCILMEMBER.

>>LEWIS: THE PUBLIC PARK.

>> THIS IS AN EMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD.

>>LEWIS: TO WHAT?

>> THAT GOES INTO COMMONS FORD RANCH, BUT IT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A PUBLIC ACCESS AND IT ACTUALLY GOES BY ONE OF THE OLD HOMES THAT'S THERE IN THE COMMONS FORD RANCH AREA. SO IT'S AN EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY.

>>LEWIS: HOW WOULD PEOPLE GET TO THE PARK?

>> PEOPLE ACTUALLY COME AROUND THIS DIRECTION AND COME INTO THE PARK HERE. AND STEW ART, IF YOU COULD SHED ANY LIGHT ON IT, WE DO HAVE STEWART HERE FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

>>LEWIS: SO THERE IS ANOTHER ENTRY TO THE PARK.

>> YES.

>>LEWIS: ALL RIGHT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN?

>>SPELMAN: MAYOR, IT'S CLEAR TO ME AFTER THINKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE, HEARING MR. HAWES DISCUSS HIS PROBLEM ON PARCEL 14 AND TAKING A QUICK POLL ON THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL THAT IF WE VOTE ONED ON THE MOTION BEFORE US OR ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT MR. SUBTLE PRESENTED TO US A MOMENT AGO THAT THERE WOULD BE A SPLIT ON THIS COUNCIL. SO LET ME OFFER A KROMS COMPROMISE WHICH I SUSPECT ALL OF US CAN SUPPORT. AS MR. HAWES SUGGESTED, I THINK THERE IS MERIT IN HIS CONCERN THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET TO THE LAKE THROUGH PARCEL 14, PERHAPS NOT THROUGH PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS BECAUSE YOU CAN PUT A FENCE THROUGH YOUR BACKYARD, BUT THROUGH THAT DRIVEWAY BETWEEN PARCEL 14 AND 14-A. THAT'S OPEN PARCEL SPACE. I THINK SOMEBODY IS GOING TO DISCOVER THAT AND FIND THAT AS AN ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF GETTING TO THE THE LAKE. SO I HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC SUGGESTION HIRE AND IF I COULD PROPOSE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION. AND I WOULD OFFER IT NOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE. THIS WOULD BE ON PAGE 2 OF SIX OF THE ORNTS NUMBER 47. PART SEVEN IT NOW STATES THE GATE MAY NOT BE CONSTRUCTED ON A STREET IN THE PUD EXCEPT THAT IT CURRENTLY SAYS A GATE MAY BE CONSTRUCTED. IF WE CAN TURN THAT INTO GATES CAN BE INSTRUCTED. SO THAT'S PLURAL. IN THE ENTRANCE TO THE PARK PAR OEL ON EXHIBIT B AS PARCEL 15, STRIP THE PERIOD, PUT IN COMMA, AND AT THE ENTRANCE TO THAT SINGLE FAMILY PARCEL DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO LAKE AUSTIN, PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIED ON EXHIBIT B AS PARCEL 14, CLOSES PARENTHESIS. WHAT THAT WOULD DO, IT WOULD GIVE THE CAPACITY TO THUT PUTT THAT GATE AT PARCEL 13 WHERE THE PARK IS AND ALSO IN FRONT OF PARCEL 14 WHERE WE ARE CONCERNED THAT SOMEBODY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET ILLICIT ACCESS TO THE GATE, BUT WOULD NOT GRANT THE CAPACITY TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASK FOR GATES OF ANY OF THE REFUSE OF THESE PARCELS. SO BASICALLY WE CLOSE THE ISSUE NOW AND WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND DEAL WITH IT AGAIN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE MAKER OF THE SECOND HAS WITHDRAWN HIS SECOND, SO THAT MOTION IS OFF THE TABLE. HE HAS OFFERED ANOTHER SUBSTITUTE MOTION WHICH YOU HAVE JUST HEARD. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA. NOW, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M RIGHT ON THE RULES HERE. BECAUSE I THOUGHT WHEN I FIRST LAID OUT AN APPROACH TO THIS THAT I HAD GOTTEN APPROVAL TO MY APPROACH, BUT APPARENTLY THAT'S CHANGED. HERE'S THE DIFFICULTY IS I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS AGREEMENT, AND IF I HAD A PERFECT WORLD -- FOLKS, YOU PROBABLY NEED TO TAKE THE CELL PHONES OUT OF THE CHAMBERS. THE DIFFICULTY WE HAVE HERE IS IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO ZONE THIS IN A WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AGREEMENT, THEN -- HERE'S WHAT I'M GOING TO DO. I'M GOING TO CALL FOR A VOTE ON THE ZONING ON ITEM NUMBER 47. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER NINE. AND ITEM NO. 8. AND IF WE VOTE FIVE VOTES OR MORE ON THE ZONING ITEM IN SUCH THAT WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AGREEMENT AND THEN WE GO BACK TO ITEMS NUMBERS NINE AND EIGHT AND WE VOTE TO ANNEX, THEN I'M GOING TO ASK THAT WE RECONSIDER ITEM 47, BECAUSE PROBABLY 47 WOULD NOT HAVE VALIDITY SINCE WE CAN'T ZONE IF WE'RE NOT ANNEXED. AND WHEN SOMEBODY -- I HOPE SOMEBODY MOVES TO RECONSIDER AND SECONDS THAT, WE'LL VOTE TO RECONSIDER AND WE'LL VOTE AGAIN AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL VOTE CONSISTENT WITH THE FIRST TIME WE VOTED ON ITEM NUMBER 47. SO WITH THAT WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON ITEM 47. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: A QUICK QUESTION. JUST A EDITING THING I GUESS. WHY ARE WE CHANGING THE WORD GATE TO GATES? WOULDN'T THAT -- WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS GETTING ONE MORE THAN LISTED ON HERE, ONE IN ADDITION TO THE PARK. IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME SPELL PELL IF YOU THINK A GATE AT A AND AT B IS APPROPRIATE, THEN THAT'S FINE WITH ME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT FRIENDLY? ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND HE COULDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?

>>SLUSHER: THAT WAS THE TAKE THE S OFF THAT WORD.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THIS WAS VERY WELL DONE. VERY WELL DONE. ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO. NOW LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER NINE. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER NINE. MOTION IS MADE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO APPROVE ITEM 9, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. THE MOTION HEARS ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO. ITEM 8 I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. IT IS APPROVE AN SEXSATION ON THIRD READING. MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEM 47. MOTION IS TO RECONSIDER ITEM 47 MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO. ITEM 47 I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 47 WITH THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT THAT WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN. I'LL RAISE COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN.

>>SPELMAN: SO MOVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION IS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA. THIS WILL BE THE PRECISELY SAME VOTE YOU JUST TOOK ON ITEM 47 BEFORE IT WAS RECONSIDERED. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NUMBER 47. GOOD TRY THERE, MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> THANKS AGAIN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOU'VE DONE. AND STAFF, THANK YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS ITEM. THAT WILL TAKE US TO ITEM NUMBER 27. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, THIS ITEM WHERE WE'RE INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF MONEY TO BE SPENT ON CELL PHONES AND THE AMOUNT OF CELL PHONES TO BE USED, I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY SOME SOUND JUSTIFICATION. I I THINK THAT ALL OF US HAVE THEM, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE -- SEE WHAT KIND OF CRITERIA WE'RE USING TO SEE THAT WE'RE GETTING MORE EFFICIENCY OUT OF OUR EMPLOYEES BY INCREASING THE CELL PHONE USAGE.

>> LET ME -- THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED, COUNCILMEMBER. ONE IS THAT THE NUMBER OF PHONES HAVE GONE UP IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'VE ISSUED. THE ANALYSIS IS DONE AT THE DEPARTMENT LEVEL IN TERMS OF MAKING A DECISION AS TO WHO NEEDS TO HAVE ACCESS TO THESE KINDS OF EQUIPMENT TO IMPROVE THEIR EFFECTIVENESS TO DEAL WITH CUSTOMERS AS WELL AS THEIR PRODUCTIVITY. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN TELL YOU TODAY THAT WE HAVE A REPORT INTERNALLY AS A STAFF TO SAY THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE PRODUCTIVITY GAIN, BUT WHAT WE HAVE DONE AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS IS WE HAVE ASKED TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT NUMBER, LOOK AT OUR PROCEDURES AND LOOK AT THE DOCUMENTATION OF EACH OF THE DEPARTMENT'S HAVE ON HAND IN TERMS OF THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF CELL PHONES AND THEIR USE. AND WHEN THAT IS DONE WE WILL BE HAPPY TO SHARE THAT WITH THE CITY COUNCILL, BUT IN EACH INSTANCE, THE INTENT BEFORE YOU TO ISSUE A CELL PHONE IS THAT THERE HAS TO BE A BUSINESS JUSTIFICATION FOR IT. THERE HAS TO BE AN ISSUE OF EITHER CUSTOMER SERVICE, THAT IS, YOU'RE ABLE TO DEAL WITH CUSTOMERS MORE EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THAT LEADS TO PRODUCTIVITY GAINDS. I KNOW THERE WAS STUDIES DONE IN THE BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT WHEN WE WERE DOING REDUCTIONS IN STAFF WHERE WE ACTUALLY SHOWED HOW MUCH THEIR PRODUCTIVITY INCREASED AS A RESULT OF HAVING THESE KINDS OF PREES PIECES OF EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE TO THEM, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE A SPECIFIC STUDY, BUT THAT'S THE INTENT.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. SO HAS THIS BEEN DONE DEPARTMENT BY DEPARTMENT?

>> THE DEPARTMENT REVIEWS THE REQUEST IN TERMS OF WHAT IT IS THAT THEY NEED, IN TERMS OF ISSUANCE OF CELL PHONES. AND THEY MAKE THE CALL IN TERMS OF WHO OUGHT TO BE GETTING THOSE. WHAT WE HAVE DONE AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE WILL BE BACK DURING THE COURSE OF THIS LATE SUMMER, EARLY FALL, GOING BACK AND EVALUATING THAT AGAIN TO ENSURE THAT ALL THE DOTS HAVE BEEN -- ALL THE I'S HAVE BEEN DOTTED AND ALL THE T'S CLOSED.

>>SLUSHER: FOR INSTANCE, SAY PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE SAME JOB, JOB CLFX, ARE WE LOOKING TO SEE IF LIKE ONE -- CLASSIFICATION, ARE WE LOOKING TO SEE IF ONE EMPLOYEE USED IT MORE THAN OTHERS?

>> THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE ANALYSIS IN TERMS OF ITS UTILIZATION. AND TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS USAGE THAT'S COMMISERATE WITH WHAT THE JOB -- WHAT THEY'RE TO BE DOING IN TERMS OF THEY'RE WORK.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I THINK I'M BORED THE REST OF THE COUNCIL ON THAT ONE.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. I'M SORRY. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, WHAT DID YOU SAY?

>>SLUSHER: I SAID I WAS THROUGH, DID YOU WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH COUNCILMEMBERS UP HERE.

>> YOU LOST YOUR QUORUM.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. THAT WAS CELLULAR. THAT WAS ITEM 27.

>> WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

>>SLUSHER: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? HE ASKED ABOUT IT IN THE BACKUP. DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON 27?

>>LEWIS: NO.

>>GARCIA: I JUST HAD A QUICK ONE, MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: PLEASE.

>>GARCIA: WE HAD DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE, THE CITY MANAGER CITY MANAGER, AND WE HAD DISCUSSED FOR SOME INFORMATION SIMILAR TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER WAS ASKING. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO QUANTIFY THIS IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE CAN MAKE SENSE OUT OF IT, BUT I THINK THE CONCERN THAT COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER EXPRESSES WHERE WE'VE HAD ABOUT A 40% INCREASE, I THINK NEEDS SOME SORT OF AN EXPLANATION AT SOME POINT, A MEMORANDUM FROM MS. DUNKERLY OR FROM SUE BRUBAKER WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AT SOME POINT.

>> AND WE'LL DO THAT AND WE'LL DO THAT AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS.

>>GOODMAN: ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE A MOTION?

>>GARCIA: SO MOVE.

>>GOODMAN: THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE. AND I'LL SECOND. FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? ABSTAINING? WITH COUNCILMEMBERS LEWIS AND SPELMAN AND MAYOR WATSON TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. OKAY. THERE'S A QUESTION, I GUESS, ABOUT THE ITEM, THE NEXT ITEM, NUMBER 38, WHICH I HAD THOUGHT -- PARDON?

>> I BELIEVE 29 AND 30.

>>GOODMAN: THE MAYOR WOULD LIKE TO BE HERE FOR THAT.

>> OKAY.

>>GOODMAN: BUT THERE WAS ALSO APPARENTLY A QUESTION ABOUT 38.

>> YES, THERE'S A DISCUSSION.

>>GOODMAN: AND I DON'T KNOW WHO.

>> I HAVE AN ANSWER ON 38. I THINK THERE WAS CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT WAS REQUESTED. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST THE 26TH IN ORDER TO TAKE CARE OF A FEW ISSUES THAT WERE STILL OUTSTANDING FROM THEIR END. POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST THE 26TH.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. IF NO ONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT THEN, IS THERE A MOTION?

>> WHICH ONE IS THAT?

>>GOODMAN: NUMBER 38. THERE'S BEEN A MOTION AND I'LL SECOND. FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? ABSTAINING? WITH COUNCILMEMBERS LEWIS SPELMAN AND MAYOR WATSON TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS.

>>GARCIA: PINPOINT DOPPLER RADAR TO THE 26TH, MAYOR PRO TEM?

>> TO THE 26TH OF AUGUST. ITEM 44?

>>GOODMAN: 44. OKAY. THAT WAS -- I THOUGHT WE DID THAT. COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN OR SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: I ADDED AN AMENDMENT TO THAT. I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WAS ONE THE I ALREADY ADDED AN AMENDMENT TO. I'LL MOVE APPROVAL. GA GOOD APPROXIMATE GOOD IS THERE A SECOND? MOTION AND SECOND. FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? ABSTAINING. WITH THE MAYOR TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. OKAY. WHAT ELSE HAVE WE GOT?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR PRO TEM, WE COULD PERHAPS BEFORE WE GO TO ZONING WE COULD DO THE CONVENTION CENTER ITEMS SO THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR COULD LEAVE.

>>GOODMAN: THE MAYOR WANTED TO BE WITH US WHEN WE LEAVE.

>>SLUSHER: ON SORRY.

>> WE HAVE 45 AND 46, AT LEAST MY NOTES SHOW THAT ARE THE NEXT ONES.

>>GOODMAN: 46 IS GOING TO BE PROBABLY A LITTLE TORE TUR US, PROBABLY LIKE THE ONE WE JUST GOT OFF OF WITH THE GATES.

>>SLUSHER: GREAT.

>>GOODMAN: WE'LL TRY IT MAKE IT QUICKER THAN THAT. OKAY. 45 WAS PULLED BY COUNCILMEMBERS SLUSHER AND SPELMAN.

>>SPELMAN: MAYOR PRO TEM, I SUGGEST THAT WE CONSIDER ITEM 45 AT THE SAME TIME WE CONSIDER ITEMS 51 THROUGH 54.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY.

>>SPELMAN: A QUESTION, IF I MIGHT. I THOUGHT WE HAD MADE THE POLICY DECISION ON 46 LAST WEEK, AND ALL WE WOULD ASKED THE CITY ATTORNEY IS TO PREPARE AN ORNGS CONSISTENT WITH THE DECISION WE MADE. SO IS IT TRUE THAT 46 WILL BE TORE TUR US, OR WE CAN DISPENSE WITH IT QUICKLY? GOOD IF GOOD. HERE IS THE --.

>>GOODMAN: GOOD. HERE IS THE MAYOR. WE CAN GO IT THE CONVENTION CENTER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ITEM 38 I UNDERSTAND IS DONE?

>>GOODMAN: WE'RE READY FOR 29 AND 30, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL CALL UP ITEMS 5929 AND 30. MR. HODGE, DO YOU WANT TO TALK TO US?

>> IF THAT'S YOUR PLEASURE, I WILL. DO YOU WANT TO TAKE 29 OR 30?

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET'S GO WITH ITEM NUMBER 30.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON MR. MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM, COUNCILMEMBERS. MR. GARZA, MY NAME IS BOB HODGE, DIRECT EITHER OF THE AUSTIN CONVENTION CENTER DEPARTMENT. ON AUGUST 21, 1998 THE CITY ISSUED A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR AN 800 ROOM FULL-SERVICE HEADQUARTERS HOTEL AND 1,000 CAR PARKING FACILITY IN PROXIMITY OF THE CONVENTION CENTER AND ITS EXPANSION THAT'S UNDER WAY. SEVEN RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED IN THE FIRST PHASE AND FOUR DEVELOPMENT GROUPS WERE SELECTED TO CONTINUE THE PHASE 2. THREE OF THE FOUR GROUPS SUBMITTED RESPONSES TO PHASE 2 ON APRIL 30 OF 1999 AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THRINT HAVE YOUS, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS AND EVALUATION. IT IS THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF HL HOTELS, LLC, A VENTURE BETWEEN THE HILTON HOTEL CORPORATION AND THE LANDMARK ORGANIZATION AS A SELECTED DEVELOPER FOR THE HEADQUARTERS HOTEL AND PARKING FACILITY. THE RELATION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT GROUP'S PROPOSAL IS A RESULT OF THEIR PROPOSAL BEING THE ONLY ONE THAT MET ALL THE CRITERIA SPECIFIED BY THE SPI STI. THOSE CRITERIA WOULD INCLUDE THE SIZE OF THE HOTEL AND THE PARKING FACILITY, IDENTIFICATION AND CONTROL OF THE SITE, A HOTEL OPERATOR WELL REGARDED IN THE CONVENTION HOTEL MARKET. AND I WOULD ADD THAT THE HILTON HOTEL CORPORATION CURRENTLY HAS 15 CONVENTION HOTELS REPRESENTING APPROXIMATELY 25,000 ROOMS AND 400 HOTELS WORLDWIDE. AND THE IMPORTANT CRITERIA IDENTIFIED IN EACH PHASE OF EVERY INTERVIEW WAS THE AMOUNT OF FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION BY THE CITY. THE HL HOTELS, LLC PROPOSAL REQUESTED NO FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION FROM THE CITY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN?

>> THE HL HOTELS LLC PROPOSAL REQUESTED NO FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION FROM THE CITY.

>>SLUSHER: CAN I PLUG IN THERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER WANTS TO INTERRUPT YOU TOO.

>>SLUSHER: I THINK HE'S ABOUT DONE NOW.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I THINK IT'S A GOOD TIME FOR YOU TO TALK.

>> ACTUALLY, THAT'S WHY I PULLED IT FROM THE AGENDA BECAUSE I WANTED TO NOTE THAT, THAT THERE IS NO SUBSIDY TO THIS PROJECT FROM THE CITY. I KNOW AT ONE POINT A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WERE SAYING WE MIGHT HAVE TO HAVE UP TO 25 MILLION DOLLARS SUBSIDY, AND SEVERAL OF US SAID, WELL, WE WOULD REALLY RATHER NOT DO THAT AND THAT'S THE APPROACH THAT THE DEPARTMENT TOOK. AND I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR THAT. IT'S CONSISTENT ALSO WITH WHAT WE TOLD THE VOTERS IN THE FALL ELECTION. I GUESS THAT WAS THE SPRING ELECTION. AND IT'S ALSO, I BELIEVE, A VOTE OF CONFIDENCE IN THE CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION THAT THIS COMPANY IS COMING IN AND DOING THIS WITH NO FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION. NOW, I GUESS WE SHOULD MAYOR IT CLEAR THAT YOU WILL PROBABLY GO ON AND DO SO THAT THE CITY IS ENABLING THE COMPANY TO GET TAX EXEMPT BONDS, BUT THOSE ARE NO OBLIGATION OF THE CITY.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. THE CITY WILL NOT BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ANY GUARANTEES AND WOULD NOT BE LIABLE FOR REPAYMENT OF THE BONDS.

>>SLUSHER: MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: YES. ARE THESE THE SAME FOLKS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH AT THE DONUT AT THE AIRPORT?

>> YES, THEY ARE. GRF GRIF AND THOSE RELATIONSHIPS HAVE BEEN GOOD AND POSITIVE AND WE HAVE THE SAME KIND OF ARRANGEMENT THERE IN TERMS OF THEY USE -- ESSENTIALLY USE OUR TAX EXEMPT STATUS?

>> YES. WE ARE THE CREATER OF AN AUTHORITY OF A TAX EXEMPT ENTITY TO ALLOW THE TAX EXEMPT SALE OF THE BONDS. ONCE AGAIN, WE ARE NOT GUARANTEEING THE BONDS, NOR DO WE HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR REPAYMENT OF THOSE BONDS.

>>GRIFFITH: AND THAT'S WORKING WELL WE AIRPORT?

>> ACCORDING TO THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT, THEY ARE VERY SATISFIED WITH THE ARRANGE.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S A GOOD RECOMMENDATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT GET OUT BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS. SOME FACTS AND FIKS ABOUT THIS. I THINK ON -- FIGURES ABOUT THIS. I THINK ON THE ONE HAND THERE'S SOME LEVEL AND I THINK COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER SAID IT VERY WELL. THERE'S NOT A SUBSIDY HERE. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH HAS JUST POINTED OUT THAT THIS IS A RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE WITH THAT HAS WORKED WELL AND THAT WE DON'T -- THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE ANY OBLIGATION ON THOSE BONDS. AND -- BUT BUT THERE'S A FLIP SIDE TO THAT TOO. THERE'S SOME BENEFITS THAT COME TO THE CITY AND I WANT TO RUN THROUGH A COUPLE OF THINGS AND CORRECT ME IF I GET THESE WRONG. BUT AS PART OF THIS CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT A 200 MILLION DOLLAR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT; IS THAT RIGHT.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. AND WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT THERE WILL BE DIRECTLY CREATED ABOUT 1,725 JOBS AND ANOTHER 750 OR SO WILL BE CREATED AS AN INDIRECT EFFECT, SO YOU WOULD HAVE A TOTAL OF ABOUT 2500 NEW JOBS CREATED AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT.

>> YES, WITH AN ANNUAL PAYROLL OF A SIZEABLE NUMBER. AROUND 69 MILLION DOLLARS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ABOUT 70 MILLION BUCKS. WHEN THE HOTEL IS OPERATIONAL, THERE'S -- IT'S ANTICIPATED THAT THE TOTAL ANNUAL PAYROLL WOULD BE ESTIMATED AT AROUND 24 MILLION DOLLARS FOR THAT; IS THAT CORRECT.

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: NOW, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOME OTHER DIRECT BENEFITS TO THE CITY, TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THINGS LIKE THAT AS A RESULT OF THIS. CURRENTLY ON THE BLOCK THAT THIS NEW CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL WILL OCCUPY, CURRENTLY THE TAXES THAT ARE RECEIVED FROM THAT, DO YOU HAVE THAT FIGURE?

>> IT'S APPROXIMATELY $55,000 A YEAR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND THAT'S A COMBINED TOTAL FOR BOTH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN.

>> YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WITH THIS PROJECT USING CURRENT TAX RATES, YOU WOULDN'T BE USING CURRENT TAX RATES. THE WAY IT'S GOING TO BE WORKED IS IS THERE GOING TO BE ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS MADE; IS THAT CORRECT.

>> TO THE AISD AND IN LIEU OF PAYMENT OF TAXES TO THE CITY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AROUND THOSE WOULD BE 500,000 TO AISD AND $500,000 IN LIEU OF TAXES TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN.

>> YES, ANNUALLY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANNUALLY AS OPPOSED TO BOTH OF US SPLITTING 55,000 A YEAR.

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WANT TO SAY THAT THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS CAN WORK AND HOW IN FACT PUBLIC PROJECTS IN OUR DOWNTOWN AREA STIMULATE TOTALLY PRIVATE ACTIVITY. AND I THINK COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER IS RIGHT WHEN HE SAYS IT WAS A VOTE OF CONFIDENCE IN THE CONVENTION CENTER. I THINK WHEN THE CITIZENS VOTED TO EXPAND THAT CONVENTION CENTER IN THE WAY THAT THEY DID AND THE CITY, MY HAT IS OFF TO THE CITY MANAGER AND TO THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SMITH AND TO YOU, MR. HODGE FOR MOVING AS RAPIDLY AS YOU DID REGARD TO THE CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL AND WITH REGARD TO THE EXPANSION BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE DEMONSTRATING THAT THINGS LIKE THE POTENTIAL TO WALLER CREEK TUNNEL AND THE POTENTIAL FOR WALLER CREEK STIMULATE PRIVATE ACTIVITY IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA IN A WAY THAT'S GOING TO BENEFIT ALL OF THE CURRENT TAXPAYERS. SO I'D LIKE TO SAY GOOD JOB, AND SPERVEGLY CITE YOU, MR. HODGE, MR. SMITH AND THE -- SPECIFICALLY CITE YOU, MR. HODGE, MR. SMITH AND THE WORK YOU'VE DONE ON THIS. YES, COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA.

>>GARCIA: ONE OF THE REQUESTS I'M GOING TO MAKE IS WE LOOK AT THE ISSUE OF THE THE BUSINESS THAT HAS GAINED A REAL GOOD REPUTATION, JUST LIKE WE HELPED LIBERTY LUNCH DO THEIR RELOCATION. I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO LOOK AT OPTIONS, PARTICULARLY SINCE OUR REVENUE IS GOING UP ABOUT $400,000 A YEAR IN TAXES OR AMOUNTS IN LIEU OF, THAT WE LOOK AT SOMETHING IN THE WAY OF A LOAN OR SOME OTHER FINANCING MECHANISM THAT WE CAN ARRANGE. I'D LIKE FOR US TO LOOK AT THAT PARTICULAR SITUATION. BECAUSE I THINK THE OTHER BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO ALREADY PRETTY WELL SET UP, SO TO SPEAK. SOME OF THEM MAY BE RETIRING, OTHERS MAY BE DOING OTHER THINGS, BUT I DON'T THINK ASH HAS MADE ANY SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENTS. UNLESS YOU KNOW ABOUT SOMETHING, MR. HODGE.

>> I'M NOT AWARE OF IT AT THIS TIME.

>>GARCIA: OKAY.

>> WE'LL EVALUATE THAT, COUNCILMEMBER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?

>>LEWIS: HOW LONG IS THE VOLUNTEER PAYMENT TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND TO THE CITY?

>> THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE BONDS.

>>LEWIS: OH. THROUGH THE LENGTH OF THE BONDS.

>> YES.

>>LEWIS: AFTER THAT THEY GO BACK TO THE TAX ROLL?

>> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE AUTHORIZING TODAY IS FOR US TO COME BACK WITH THE OPERATION AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND ALL THOSE PARTICULAR DETAILS WILL BE IRONED OUT IN THAT PROPOSAL AND WE'LL COME BACK IN FRONT OF THIS BODY FOR APPROVAL AS HOPEFULLY AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN NEGOTIATE THIS. THOSE KIND OF DETAILS WILL ALL BE IN THAT ISSUE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: YES. MR. HODGE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE HEADQUARTERS HOTEL, ITS SIZE, ITS IMPORTANCE, THE JOBS IT WILL CREATE. CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PARKING FACILITY?

>> YES. THEIR PROPOSAL INCLUDES A 1,000 CAR PARKING FACILITY. THE EXISTING PROPOSAL HAS IT FOUR STORIES UNDERGROUND WITH THE HOTEL AND THE OTHER RETAIL AND EVERYTHING ON THE TOP. THIS IS A GOOD AMOUNT OF THIS HOTEL -- OF THIS THOUSAND CARS IS TO HANDLE THE EXPANSION OF THE CONVENTION CENTER. AN 800 ROOM HOTEL WOULD NOT NEED A THOUSAND CAR GARAGE TO SUPPORT ITS ACTIVITIES AS MANY OF THEIR PEOPLE WILL NOT COME IN CARS. WE PUT IN THAT NUMBER TO HANDLE THE ADDITIONAL PARKING NEEDS THOR GOING TO BE REQUIRED BY THE EXPANSION OF THE CONVENTION CENTER AND THE LARGER GROUPS THAT WOULD BE COMING TO TOWN.

>>GRIFFITH: HOW MANY PARKING SPACES WILL, DO YOU ESTIMATE, THE HOTEL NEED?

>> WELL, WHEN WE PUT OUT THE PROPOSAL WE WERE ESTIMATING BETWEEN FOUR AND 500 FOR THE HOTEL AND FIVE TO 600 FOR OUR ADDITIONAL NEEDS. THAT WAS WHY THE THOUSAND CAR PARKING FACILITY WAS IN THE REQUEST.

>>GRIFFITH: SOUNDS VERY ATTRACTIVE. THANK YOU.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I'M GLAD COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH BROUGHT THAT UP ABOUT THE PARKING BECAUSE I SAW A LETTER IN THE PAPER THE OTHER DAY TALKING ABOUT HOW THE CITY BUILT THE CONVENTION CENTER WITHOUT A PARKING GARAGE. THAT IS A LITTLE BIT BACK THERE A FEW YEARS. AND SO NOW THIS HOTEL IS BEING BUILT WITH ADDITIONAL PARKING IN ADDITION TO THAT PARKING GARAGE THAT THE CONVENTION HAS THAT THE CITY PURCHASED A FEW YEARS AGO. BUT THAT'S NOT WHY I ASKED FOR THE FLOOR. I JUST THOUGHT I'D POINT THAT OUT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHATEVER THE SPIRIT MOVES YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.

>>SLUSHER: I WANTED TO ADD A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO MY OWN MOTION. THIS IS SOMETHING I HAD ASKED THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT AND MR. HODGE ABOUT, BUT BOTH THE HOTEL PROJECT AND THE CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION ARE GOING TO BRING A LARGE NUMBER OF WORKERS INTO THE DOWNTOWN AREA, AND I WANTED TO ADD ON THAT MR. HODGE AND THE DEPARTMENT LOOKED FOR WAYS TO SHUTTLE SOME OF THOSE WORKERS TO THE JOB SITE FROM OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN TO TRY TO HELP ALLEVIATE OUR TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. AT LEAST TO HELP KEEP THEM FROM GETTING WORSE. AND IF WE COULD ALSO TO COORDINATE WITH THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE TAKING PLACE TO SEE IF WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT ON THAT TOO.

>> WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. THERE BEING -- COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA?

>>GARCIA: I WANTED TO MENTION THAT THIS PARTICULAR ENTITY IS ONE THAT DEVELOPED IN THE AIRPORT I WILL TON. AND THEIR RECORD OF M.B.E. AND W.B.E. PARTICIPATION HAS BEEN VERY GOOD, INCLUDING SOME HEAVY PARTICIPATION BY ASIAN CONTRACTORS, SO I WANT TO COMMEND THEM FOR THAT. I THINK IT'S WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WILL WYNNE SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. CHARLIE BETS SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. THE A MAN ACCEPTING REPG THE ASIAN CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION ALSO SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. YOU FEEL THE NEED, HUH? HAVE YOU BEEN LISTENING TO THIS DISCUSSION?

>> 30 SECONDS?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME.

>>LEWIS: PUT 30 SECONDS ON THE CLOCK.

>> I SIMPLY WANTED TO INFORM THE COUNCIL THAT THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE BOARD VERY GRACIOUSLY RECEIVED A BRIEFING ON THIS AND VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO SUPPORT YOUR RESOLUTION. WE'RE VERY IMPRESSED, AS YOU ARE, AND WE THANK EVERYONE CONCERNED IN THE NEGOTIATIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM 30. ITEM 29, MR. HODGE?

>> ITEM 29 IS A REVISION TO THE EXISTING CONVENTION CENTER BOOKING POLICY. IT CHANGES A FEW TERMS THAT WE HAVE FOUND OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS OF THE EXISTENCE THAT NEEDED A LITTLE CLEAN UP AND ALSO THE MAIN ISSUE AS THEY CHANGED THE CONVENTION CRITERIA TO REFLECT THE EXPANDED CONVENTION CENTER AND THE HOTEL CAPACITY THAT'S GOING TO BE IN THE CONVENTION CENTER FOR THE NEXT FEW YEARS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION IS MADE TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. IS THERE DISCUSSION? HANG ON, FOLKS. MAY KEL KHAFFAN SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. HE SAYS IT IS IMPERATIVE TO THE SKETION OF THE EXPANDED CONVENTION CENTER. IT HAS BEEN APPROVED THE BOOKING POLICY. THIS POLICY IS THE BEST AND MOST COMPREHENSIVE METHOD TO USE PEAK AND OFF PEAK PERIODS AND HE'S REPRESENTING THE AUSTIN HOTEL AND MOTEL AUSTIN. WINDY MORGAN NOT SPEAKING, BUT IN FAVOR. MICHAEL REPRESENTING THE HISPANIC CONTRACTORS SIGNED UP IN FAVOR AND RICK LUBER SIGNED UP IN FAVOR. ANYBODY THAT NEEDS TO TALK? THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM 29. COUNCIL, THAT WILL TAKE US TO THE ZONING ITEMS, ITEMS 50 THROUGH 62. MS. GLASCO, WELCOME.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, ALICE GLASCO, CITY STAFF TO PRESENT ZONING CASES. STARTING OFF WITH THE CONSENT ITEMS. WE DO HAVE SEVERAL DISCUSSION ITEMS, BOTH --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: GOOD.

>> I WILL SKIP ITEMS BECAUSE THEY'RE DISCUSSION. I'LL START OFF WITH YOU ARE FIRTION DISCUSSION ITEM, WHICH IS ITEM 57, CASE C-14--99-34 WHICH IS LOCATED AT 2432 SOUTH FIRST STREET FROM SF THREE TO GO, WHICH STANDS FOR GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM NUMBER 58, CASE NUMBER C-14--36 LOCATED ON ANDERSON MILL ROAD AND POND SPRINGS ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CHANGE FROM GR-CO, WHICH STANDS TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, CONDITIONAL OVERLAY COMBINING DISTRICT AND INTERIM RURAL RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL MIXED USE. ZONING FOR ANOTHER TRACT. AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN ITS DELIBERATION DECIDED TO RECOMMEND THE REQUESTED ZONING AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT FOR TRACTS ONE, TWO AND THREE. AND THIS CASE IS READY FOR FIRST READING ONLY. ITEM NUMBER 59, CASE C-14--99-65, LOCATED ON WILSON PARK AVENUE. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED INTERIM RURAL RESIDENCE. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING SINGLE-FAMILY TWO ZONING. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE SINGLE-FAMILY FAMILY ZONING TO YOU AND THIS CASE IS READY FOR FIRST READING. ITEM NUMBER 60, CASE NUMBER C-14-99-84, LOCATED AT 1605 CENTURY STREET, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY-2. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CHANGE TO LIMITED INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ZONING DISTRICT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDS LIMITED INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ZONING WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. AND OTHER CONDITIONS. AND THIS CASE IS READY FOR FIRST READING ONLY. I BELIEVE THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE CONSENT ITEMS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ON THE ZONING, 58, 59 AND 60 ON FIRST READING ONLY. MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: ON 57, EVEN THOUGH THE RECOMMENDATION FROM EVERYBODY IS GO, ON THAT STRETCH OF SOUTH FIRST I WANTED COUNCIL TO CONSIDER DOING LO. THEY CAN DO THEIR PARKING ON LO OR EVEN NO, WHAT THEY NEED IS MORE PARKING SPACE AND --. AND IN THAT CREEK, WHICH IS BOULDIN, YOU CAN GET 80% IMPERVIOUS COVER WITH GO, 70% WITH LO AND 60% WITH NO. SO A COMPROMISE FOR ME WAS TO GO LO, WHICH ALLOWS THEM 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER AND IS IN A CREEK WATERSHED WITH PRETTY BAD WATER QUALITY. AND GUESS WHY, BECAUSE YOU HAVE VIRTUALLY ALL THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT YOU COULD EVER WANT AND NO GREEN OR STOPPING OF SPACE. SO I WANTED TO GET, YOU KNOW, RESPONSE FROM THE APPLICANT, BUT SINCE WHAT THEY WANT IS PARKING AND LO WOULD GIVE THEM THAT AND 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER, I WOULD PREFER THAT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD, MR. BENNETT?

>> MAYOR PRO TEM, I HAVEN'T DISCUSSED IT WITH MY CLIENT, BUT WE COULD PROBABLY ACCEPT YOUR LO, BUT WE ARE IN DISCUSSIONS AND CONTRACTS ARE BEING SIGNED ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AS WELL. IF WE ACQUIRE THAT PROPERTY AND ONE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY, THEN WE'RE ACTUALLY PROBABLY GOING TO DO A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, A BUILDING OF SOME SORT. SO AS AN INTERIM MEASURE, THE LO DOESN'T GIVE US A MAJOR PROBLEM.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. SO CAN WE GO ALL THREE, ALICE, ON LO INSTEAD OF GO? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS WHITE OUT.

>> AND UNDER THOSE CONDITIONS, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT.

>>GOODMAN: GREAT. THANK YOU. THEN THAT'S AN AMENDMENT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. THE AMENDMENT IS TO LO. CAN WE DO THAT ON ALL THREE READRSINGS, MAKE THAT CHANGE? THEN THE MOTION -- WE DO NOT HAVE A MOTION YET, BUT THE MOTION WOULD BE ON CONSENT ITEM 57 WITH THE CHANGE THAT THE MAYOR PRO TEM JUST PUT IN ON ALL THREE READINGS, 58, 59 AND 60 ON FIRST READING ONLY. IS THERE A MOTION. MOTION IS TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN. IS THERE A SECOND. SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. IS FL ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: I JUST WANTED TO SAY ON 59 THAT'S IN THE LAKE TRAVIS WAURTEDS, IT IS NEAR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD OR ADJACENT, I DO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT IT BEFORE THE SECOND READING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. THAT WILL TAKE US BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 50. MS. GLASCO?

>> ON ITEM NUMBER 50 IS CASE NUMBER C-14-98-156. ON THIS CASE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE FROM LIMITED OFFICE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND WLO-CO, WHICH STANDS FOR LIMITED OFFICE WAREHOUSE WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. AND ALSO SINGLE-FAMILY-3 TO MOBILE HOME ZONING. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION WAS TO GRANT THE MH, WHICH STANDS FOR MOBILE HOME ZONING, SEVERAL MONTHS AGO. THE PROPERTY INITIALLY COMPRISED 15 ACRES, HOWEVER, THE PROPERTY OWNER, WHO HAD LAND INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL 15 ACRES, HAS SINCE THEN WITHDRAWN FROM THIS REZONING CASE AND HAS SINCE THEN JOINED IN WITH OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS AND SIGNED A PETITION AGAINST THE REZONING AND THEY'LL GIVE THEIR REASONS AS TO WHY THEY OPPOSE THE ZONING CHANGE. THERE IS A PETITION WHICH IS VALID AT 26.7%, WHICH THEN REQUIRES SIX VOTES OF COUNCIL TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY TO MOBILE HOME. BOTH STAFF AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOOKED AT THE REZONING CHANGE AND FELT THAT MOBILE HOME ZONING WAS APPROPRIATE. BASED CURRENTLY ON MOBILE HOMES TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT TRACT, WHICH I BELIEVE IS OWNED BY THE SAME OWNER WHO WOULD LIKE TO EXPAND TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY BY ADDING A TOTAL OF 84 UNITS, MOBILE HOME LOTS, TO THE SITE, WHICH REALLY WOULD BE A PAD SITES. THE LAND USE SEEMS TO VARY. IT'S PREDOMINANTLY INDUSTRIAL ON -- IN VICINITY OF THE SUBJECT TRACT. THERE'S SOME SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY AND SCATTERED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OVER ALL IN THE GENERAL AREA. GIVEN THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF RECOMMENDS THE ZONING, I WILL PAUSE HERE AND RESPOND TO QUESTIONS AFTER YOU HEAR FROM THE PETITIONERS AND OTHER SPEAKERS. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: ALICE, LET ME ASK YOU IF YOU KNOW. I HAVE TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP HERE AND THEY'RE BOTH IN FAVOR.

>> BOTH OF THEM ARE IN FAVOR?

>>GOODMAN: YEAH. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ON THE VALID PETITION SIDE.

>> OKAY. WE DO HAVE -- YEAH, WE STILL HAVE A PETITION SIGNED. THEY PROBABLY COULDN'T MAKE IT TO THE MEETING.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. SO JUST IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS OF YOU RIGHT NOW?

>> I'LL WAIT. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. LET ME ASK THE APPLICANT THEN TO COME FORWARD AND YOU HAVE THE FIRST FEW MINUTES OF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU.

>> AND I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF VISUAL AIDS I JUST WANT TO PASS OUT. AND I'LL WAIT JUST A SEC FOR THOSE TO REACH ALL OF YOU.

>>GOODMAN: YOU DON'T NEED TO. YOUR TIME IS SLIPPING AWAY IF YOU DO.

>> MY NAME IS DOUG HODGE AND I'M THE AGENT FOR THE APPLICANT. I'M ACTUALLY THE OWNER OF THE EXISTING MANUFACTURED HOUSING COMMUNITY AND I'M ACQUIRING