Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting, 11/18/99

A DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.074 TO CONSIDER THE COMPENSATION BENEFITS PACKAGE PAID TO THE CITY MANAGER AND CONSIDER THE APPOINTMENT OF COMPENSATION AND MUNICIPAL COURT SUBSTITUTE JUDGES, ASSOCIATE JUDGES AND THE COMMUNITY COURT JUDGE FOR THE 2000-2001 JUDICIAL TERM. DISCUSS DANIEL L. GONZALES AND MARK GONZALES VERSUS CITY OF AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT, ERIC DE LOS SANTOS AND SUE ORTEN, CAUSE NO. 99-03298 IN THE TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT. DISCUSS CITY OF AUSTIN VERSUS L.S. RANCH, LTD., ET AL., CAUSE NO. 039800542-CV IN THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS, AUSTIN, TEXAS. THIS LITIGATION CONCERNS DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS APPLICABLE IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. DISCUSS F.M. PROPERTIES OPERATING COMPANY VERSUS CITY OF AUSTIN, CAUSE NO. 98-0685 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS. THIS LITIGATION CONCERNS DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS APPLICABLE IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. DISCUSS LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO THE NOVEMBER 1, 1999 NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUE FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT DELIVERED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN BY THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. DISCUSS LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHAPTER 245 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA. IS THERE A SECONDED? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM TEMPORARILY OFF THE DAIS ALONG WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH AND COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS. WE WILL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. TEST TEST TEST. THIS IS A TEST. PFLUGER RANCH AND OTHER PROPERTIES IN SELTSMENT OF RELATED LITIGATION. MR. DOB SON, I'LL ASK YOU TO MAKE THE INITIAL PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS. CASEY DOBSON, SCOTT DOUGLAS. I'M SORRY, I ALWAYS ACT LIKE I'M IN COURT IN HERE AND I'M NOT. I'M HERE THIS MORNING TO BRIEF THE COUNCIL ON A TERM SHEET ON A CITY SETTLEMENT OF VARIOUS LITIGATION WITH WHAT IS CALLED THE BRADLEY INTERESTS FOR GARY BRADLEY. YESTERDAY EVENING AT MY OFFICE WE SIGNED A -- MR. BRADLEY AND I SIGNED TERM SHEET. IT IS TITLED TERM SHEET, CITY OF AUSTIN SETTLEMENT WITH BRADLEY INTERESTS. THAT HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO ALL OF YOU AND WE'VE HAD A CHANCE TO GO OVER IT AND I'LL NOW GO THROUGH THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE TERMS AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT ANYONE HAS ABOUT IT. THE FIRST ITEM, AND OF COURSE THIS COVERS -- THIS AGREEMENT COVERS LAND CONSTITUTING 3,076 ACRES IN SOUTHWEST TRAVIS COUNTY AND NORTHERN HAYS COUNTY, ALL OF WHICH IS EITHER IN THE RECHARGE OR CONTRIBUTING ZONE OF THE BARTON SPRINGS SEGMENT OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. THIS AGREEMENT COVERS ALL THE LAND THAT THE BRADLEY INTEREST CONTROL OUT THERE. IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE MAKE THIS DEAL, THERE ISN'T ANY MORE LAND TO DISPUTE WITH HIM ABOUT THAT HE CONTROLS OUT IN THAT AREA, THAT I'M AWARE OF. WE'RE GETTING ALL OF IT IN THIS DEAL. IN TERMS OF THE LITIGATION WE'RE IN WITH HIM, WE'RE IN THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE LAWSUIT WITH HIM THAT WE CALL THE HORSE THIEF LAWSUIT THAT IS PENDING IN THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT. IT CONCERNS THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE LAWSUIT. ALL THE LAND THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT WOULD BE PART OF THIS AGREEMENT IS IN ONE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE OR ANOTHER. IT'S EITHER IN THE SLAUGHTER WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE, THE BEAR WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE OR THE PFLUGER RANCH WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE. WE ARE IN THE L.S. RANCH LITIGATION WITH THE BRADLEY INTERESTS. THAT IS NOW ON APPEAL AT THE AUSTIN COURT OF APPEALS, AND FOR PURPOSES TODAY WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS THAT CONCERNS THE VALIDITY OF THE SLAUGHTER WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE AND THERE ARE QUESTIONS AS TO ITS VALIDITY EVEN IF THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE LAWSUIT IS CONSTITUTIONAL. THE FINAL PIECE OF LITIGATION WE'RE IN WITH THE BRADLEY INTERESTS IS CALLED CIRCLE C LAND CORPORATION AND PHOENIX HOLDINGS VERSUS CITY OF AUSTIN. THAT IS PENDING IN DISTRICT COURT IN TRAVIS COUNTY AND CONCERNS M.U.D. REIMBURSEABLES IN CONNECTION WITH THE CIRCLE C ANNEXATION. BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE CASES THAT ARE ON APPEAL, THIS SETTLEMENT WILL NOT RESULT IN A DISMISSAL OF THOSE CASES. IT WILL RESULT IN THE END OF THE TRAVIS COUNTY REIMBURSEABLE LITIGATION AND AS FAR AS THE BRADLEY INTERESTS ARE CONCERNED IT WILL RESOLVE THE ISSUES BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE BRADLEY INTERESTS THAT ARE CONCERNED IN THOSE TWO APPEALS EVEN THOUGH THE APPEALS THEMSELVES BECAUSE OF THE PRESENCE OF OTHER PARTIES WILL REMAIN PENDING. SO THAT'S THE BACKGROUND ON THE LITIGATION THAT WE'RE IN WITH THEM THAT MY FIRM AND TOMMY JACKS AND OTHERS ARE HANDLING FOR THE CITY. WITH REGARDS TO THE TERM SHEET AND THE DEAL WITH THE BRADLEY INTERESTS, THE FIRST ITEM IN THE TERM SHEET IS IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITATIONS. ALL OF THE BRADLEY INTERESTS, 3,076 ACRES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, THEIR IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT IS GOING TO BE S.O.S., WHICH IS GOING TO BE 16%. IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU PUT A BUBBLE OVER ALL THE ACREAGE THAT THE BRADLEY INTERESTS CONTROL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER. 16%. WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW AS PART OF THE AGREEMENT FOR THEIR TO BE CLUSTERING OF DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS THAT EXCEED 16%. LARGELY, IF NOT COMPLETELY, THAT CLUSTERING IS GOING TO BE IN AREAS WHERE THE BRADLEY INTERESTS CLAIM TO HAVE RIGHTS UNDER CHAPTER 245, HOUSE BILL 1704 CLAIMS. IN OTHER WORDS, WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE DENSITIES ABOVE S.O.S. IS LARGELY IF NOT COMPLETELY GOING TO BE IN THOSE AREAS WHERE THERE ARE CHAPTER 245 CLAIMS. OBVIOUSLY IN OTHER AREAS TO MAKE IT COME OUT TO S.O.S., OTHER AREAS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED AT LESS DENSITY THAN EVEN S.O.S. WOULD ALLOW. TO ENFORCE THIS PORTION OF THE AGREEMENT, THE BRADLEY INTERESTS WILL DEED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN A CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT IT WILL BE RECORDED IN THE DEED RECORDS OF TRAVIS AND HAYS COUNTIES AND WILL GIVE US -- WILL GIVE THE CITY THE PROPERTY RIGHT TO PUT ANY MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THIS 3,076 ACRES OTHER THAN THE S.O.S. LIMIT IMPOSED BY THE AGREEMENT. IN OTHER WORDS, ONCE THE DEVELOPMENT GETS TO 16%, AT 16% PLUS A YARD OF CONCRETE, THAT YARD OF CONCRETE, THE RIGHT TO PUT THAT ON THERE IS GOING TO BELONG TO THE CITY AND IT'S GOING TO BE A PROPERTY RIGHT DEEDED TO US AND RECORDED IN THE DEED RECORDS. WITH RESPECT TO WATER QUALITY CONTROLS, IN THOSE AREAS WHERE THERE ARE NO CHAPTER 245 CLAIMS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE S.O.S. WATER QUALITY CONTROL STRUCTURES, COMPLETE COMPLIANCE WITH S.O.S.. IN REGARDS TO THOSE AREAS WHERE THE BRADLEY INTERESTS HAVE MADE CHAPTER 245 CLAIMS, THEY PRESENTLY HAVE IN THEIR CHAPTER 245 PLATS A WATER QUALITY CONTROL STRUCTURES PLAN. THOSE STRUCTURES ARE PRETTY FAR AWAY FROM WHAT S.O.S. WOULD REQUIRE. UNDER THE AGREEMENT, THEY ARE GOING TO IMPLEMENT A WATER QUALITY CONTROL STRUCTURE PLAN THAT GETS THEM MUCH CLOSER TO WHAT S.O.S. WOULD REQUIRE, IT IS NOT -- IT DOESN'T COME ALL THE WAY TO WHAT S.O.S. WOULD REQUIRE, BUT IT COMES MUCH CLOSER AND AS LES TALL CAN EXPLAIN IN A MINUTE, WE BELIEVE IF THE DETAILS WORK OUT LIKE THE CONCEPT HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO US THAT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT REDUCTIONS IN POLLUTANT LOADS IN THOSE AREAS AS A RESULT OF THE AGREEMENT AS OPPOSED TO WHAT THE BRADLEY INTERESTS COULD DO IF THEY MOVED FORWARD UNDER UNDER CHAPTER 245. WITH REGARDS TO COMPLIANCE WITH CITY REGULATIONS GOING FORWARD, THE BRADLEY INTERESTS AGREE AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT THEY ACCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY WAVED OR MODIFIED BY THIS AGREEMENT ALL OF THE CITY'S LAWS, ORDINANCES, CODES, REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OTHERWISE APPLICABLE TO ANY OF THEIR LAND OR ANY OF THEIR ACTIVITIES OUT THERE WILL CONTINUE TO BE APPLICABLE. THEY ARE ALSO AGREEING AS A MATERIAL TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT EVEN IF WE LOSE THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE LAWSUIT AT THE SUPREME COURT AND THEY ARE CONSTITUTIONAL AND THEN AGAIN IF WE FURTHER LOSE THE ONE IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ABOUT THE SLAUGHTER ZONE, EVEN IF WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONES ARE -- ARE DEEMED ACCEPTABLE BY THE COURTS, THEY WILL CONTINUE TO BE GOVERNORED BY THIS AGREEMENT. MORE OVER, THEY HAVE AGREED EVEN IF OTHER STATE LAWS, OTHER THAN WATER CODE SECTION 26.179 ARE PASSED OR MODIFIED, THAT WOULD OTHERWISE LIMIT, ELIMINATE, MODIFY OR IMPAIR THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE BRADLEY INTERESTS, IT'S NOT GOING TO DO THEM ANY GOOD. THEY ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE BOUND BY THIS AGREEMENT. THE PURPOSE HERE IS TO GET THEM CONTRACTLY BOUND AND THEN TO THE EXTENT SOME LAW IS PASSED THAT MIGHT AFFECT OUR CONTRACT RIGHTS, YOU GO BACK UP TO THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND WE HAVE A PROPERTY RIGHT. IN ADDITION TO THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND THE CONTRACT, THEY ARE ALSO AGREEING THAT THIS AGREEMENT IS GOING TO BE, AS LAWYERS SAY, A COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE LAND. THE FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WILL BE FILED IN THE DEED RECORDS AND WILL BIND ANY SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO THE BRADLEY INTEREST AND THEY WILL HAVE NOTICE OF IT BECAUSE IT WILL BE PART OF THE DEED RECORDS. WITH REGARDS TO THE AGREEMENT GOING FORWARD CONCERNING FURTHER DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS, THE BRADLEY INTERESTS WILL CONTINUE TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS SUBJECT TO THIS AGREEMENT TO THE CITY FOR APPROVAL UNDER OUR USUAL PROCEDURES. IN ADDITION, EACH AMOUNT -- EACH APPLICATION FOR A PARTICULAR PROJECT IS GOING TO HAVE TO INDICATE ON IT HOW MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER IS GOING TO BE BUILT AS A RESULT OF THAT PROJECT AND THEY HAVE TO KEEP A COOK LA ACTIVE RUNNING TOTAL OF HOW MUCH -- CUMULATIVE -- ON THE 3,076 ACRES SO AGAIN WE'LL KNOW AND OF COURSE WE'LL BE CHECKING THEIR MATH ON THAT, BUT WE'LL KNOW AT WHAT POINT THEY HIT 16% IN THE RIGHT TO PUT ANY IMPERVIOUS COVER OUT THERE IS THEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S. WITH REGARDS TO WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONES, THE BRADLEY INTERESTS CONTROL ALL OF THE PFLUGER RANCH ZONE AND THEY WILL SIMPLY DISSOLVE IT. WITH REGARDS TO THE BEAR ZONE, THEY WILL, IF THEY CAN, AND THERE IS SOME LEGAL THINGS TO BE WORKED OUT HERE, WITHDRAW THEIR PROPERTY FROM THE BEAR ZONE. FAILING THAT, THEY WILL CONTRACTUALLY AGREE THIS AGREEMENT GOVERNS THEIR PROPERTY IN THE BEAR ZONE. THEY ARE GOING TO DO THE SAME THING WITH REGARDS TO THE SLAUGHTER ZONE. IN OTHER WORDS, EVEN IF THE ZONES KEEP GOING AND WE WIN THE LITIGATION -- OR EXCUSE ME, WE LOSE THE LITIGATION AND THE ZONES STAY IN EXISTENCE, THIS AGREEMENT IS GOING TO COVER THE BRADLEY INTERESTS LAND IN THOSE ZONES. WITH REGARDS TO LAND USE, THE AGREEMENT WILL IDENTIFY AND RESTRICT PROPOSED LAND USES ON ALL LANDS SUBJECT TO THIS AGREEMENT. SPECIFIC THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS, PART OF THIS IS NO OVERSIZING OF ROADS. ROADS WILL BE SIZED TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE DONE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. COMMERCIAL USES WILL BE RESTRICTED TO SERVE LOCAL NEEDS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE DESTINATION RETAIL OR SO-CALLED MAGNET LAND USES WHERE YOU ARE GOING TO BE DRAWING IN A LOT OF TRAFFIC FROM OTHER AREAS. WITH REGARDS TO M.U.D. REIMBURSEABLES, WE'LL GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS WITH THEM WE RECENTLY WENT THROUGH WITH STRATUS WHERE REPRESENT OUR CONSULTANTS, THE CITY'S CONSULTANTS WILL CONSULT AN AUDIT OF THEIR NUMBERS, DETERMINE WHAT IT IS WE OWE THEM AND WE'LL PAY THEM WITH INTEREST. VERY SIGNIFICANTLY THEY HAVE AGREED TO WAIVE AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT ANY CLAIM TO STATUTORY PENALTIES UNDER SENATE BILL 262. I FEEL STRONGLY THAT STATUTE IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS SITUATION AND EVEN IF IT WAS I THINK IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL, BUT THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A SIGNIFICANT LITIGATION RISK AND IT'S A SEVEN FIGURE LITIGATION RISK, WERE WE TO LOSE THEIR WAIVING THAT CLAIM AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT. GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT PLAN. THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD ON THE SPILLAR RANCH OR A RESORT COMPANY IS GOING TO BUILD A RESORT-TYPE GOLF COURSE. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT PLAN SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID IN THE AGREEMENT LAST YEAR THAT CLEANED UP LOST CREEK COUNTRY CLUB WHERE WE SPECIFY WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE ON THAT GOLF COURSE IN TERMS OF IRRIGATION PRACTICES, PESTICIDE PRACTICES, SETBACKS FROM CREEKS AND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, ET CETERA. IT WILL BE VERY DETAILED. WE WILL ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO OUT THERE AND MONITOR WATER QUALITY ON THAT GOLF COURSE. THERE WILL BE A DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM TO TRY TO RESOLVE ANY DISAGREEMENTS THAT MAY ARISE. AND FAILING RESOLUTION, WE WILL HAVE A RIGHT IN THE AGREEMENT OF SPECIFIC ENFORCEMENT TO GO TO COURT AND HAVE A JUDGE ORDER THEM TO COMPLY WITH WHATEVER ASPECT OF THE GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT PLAN WE DON'T BELIEVE THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH. AS PART OF THE AGREEMENT, THE CITY WILL PROVIDE ACCORDING TO ITS USUAL TERMS AS DETERMINED BY THE WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY, WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE TO SPILLAR RANCH AND WATER SERVICE TO PFLUGER RANCH. ACCESS EASEMENTS. THE BRADLEY INTERESTS WILL DEED TO THE CITY ACCESS EASEMENTS FOR HIKING AND NATURE AND BIKE TRAILS ON THEIR PROPERTY. AS YOU ALL KNOW FROM LOOKING AT THE MAP, WE HAVE A LOT OF PROP 2 LAND THAT IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE LAND THAT IS SUBJECT TO THIS AGREEMENT, AND THE -- THE -- THE IDEA IS IS THAT WE CAN BY THIS AGREEMENT HOOK UP OUR PROP 2 LAND SO YOU CAN HAVE ONE CONTINUOUS OR A SERIES OF TRAILS THAT GO FOR MILES THROUGH THE HILL COUNTRY AND CONNECT THE PUBLIC LANDS. CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES, AS PART OF THE AGREEMENT, WE HAVE AGREED TO WAIVE CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, NON-RETAIL COMMERCIAL, BUT THE NON-RETAIL COMMERCIAL DOES NOT INCLUDE THE HOTEL OR GOLF COURSE. IT ALSO DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY NON-RETAIL COMMERCIAL BUILD IN EXCESS OF 50,000 SQUARE FEET. THIS PART OF THE WHOLE IDEA HERE IS WE'RE TRYING TO INCENTIVEIZE THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUT THERE AND DISCOURAGE WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO SEE. AND BY NOT WAIVING CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES, WHICH WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT FOR A BIG RETAIL OPERATION, WE ARE DISCOURAGING PUTTING IN A BIG RETAIL OPERATION, AND OF COURSE OUR LAND USE AGREEMENT WILL BE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THERE NOT BEING SUCH USES. AND BY PUTTING A 50,000 SQUARE FEET LIMIT ON ANY NON-RETAIL COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT WE WOULD WAIVE THE FEES, WE ARE SAYING IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE AN OFFICE BUILDING OUT THERE, IT'S GOING TO BE A COUPLE STORY, BELOW SLUM, SMALL CAMPUS TYPE OFFICE, NOT A BIG TYPE OFFICE BUILDING. AT LEAST IF YOU ARE GOING TO TRY TO PUT ONE IN, AND AGAIN WE CAN HANDLE THESE PROBLEMS IN LAND USE SECTION OF THE AGREEMENT, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES. THE LAST ITEM IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND THAT IS THAT THE PARTIES EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS IS JUST A BEGINNING. IT IS A TERM SHEET. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE NOW IS SEVERAL WEEKS OF INTENSE WORK DRAFTING A DETAILED, COMPREHENSIVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO IMPLEMENT ALL OF THE GOALS OUTLINED IN THIS TERM SHEET, AND IT IS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT, DETAILED WORK. AND BOTH SIDES EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE IN THIS TERM SHEET THAT UNLESS AND UNTIL WE HAVE A DETAILED AGREEMENT THAT THIS COUNCIL HAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED AND VOTED FOR MR. GARZA TO EXECUTE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY DEAL, WE HAVE NO OBLIGATIONS TO THE BRADLEY INTERESTS UNTIL THAT TIME. IN THE INTERVENING TIME, OBVIOUSLY I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL EXPECTS TO HAVE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMENT FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT IT. TO TRY TO SUMMARIZE AND PUTTING IT BACK INTO WHAT I DID FOR YOU, LITIGATION, I'VE TRIED TO LIST THE KEY ISSUES AND THE BEST ALTERNATIVE TO A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT. THE WORST ALTERNATIVE, AND THEN WHAT THE AGREEMENT DOES. FIRST ISSUE, IMPERVIOUS COVER ON LAND THAT HAS NO CLAIM UNDER CHAPTER 245. THE BEST ALTERNATIVE ON THOSE LANDS IS FULL S.O.S. COMPLIANCE IF WE WIN THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE CASE. THE WORST ALTERNATIVE IS THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CITY REGULATION IF WE LOSE THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE CASE. UNDER THE AGREEMENT, WE ARE GETTING S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS, 16%. WE ARE ALLOWING CLUSTERING ABOVE 16% IN SOME AREAS. I THINK VERY LARGELY IF NOT COMPLETELY THOSE AREAS IN WHICH THE BRADLEY INTERESTS HAVE CHAPTER 45 CLAIMS. SECOND ISSUE, IMPERVIOUS COVER ON LAND THAT MAY HAVE SOME CLAIM TO CHAPTER 245 RIGHTS. THE BEST ALTERNATIVE IS WE -- AGAIN, S.O.S. COMPLIANCE. BUT THERE WE'LL HAVE TO WIN THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE CASE AND AS YET UNFILED LITIGATION OVER WHETHER THE BRADLEY INTERESTS HAVE CHAPTER 245 RIGHTS, WE WOULD HAVE TO WIN BOTH THOSE LAWSUITS IN ORDER TO GET S.O.S. COMPLIANCE. AND I'VE ADVISED THAT THE COUNCIL PRIVATELY OF COURSE ABOUT THE PROSPECTS FOR BOTH THOSE PIECES OF LITIGATION. THE WORST ALTERNATIVE IS THERE IS NO CITY REGULATION IF THERE'S A VALID WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE. EVEN IF WE WIN THE LAWSUIT, THERE IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPMENT UNDER CHAPTER 245 UNLESS WE WIN A CHAPTER 245 LAWSUIT. UNDER THE AGREEMENT WITH BRADLEY, ALMOST ALL DENSITY THAT IS IN EXCESS OF S.O.S. STANDARDS IS GOING TO BE IN AREAS THAT ARE MAKING CLAIMS UNDER CHAPTER 245. WATER QUALITY CONTROL STRUCTURES, THE BEST ALTERNATIVE, AGAIN, IF WE CAN WIN BOTH LAWSUITS, WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE AND A CHAPTER 245 LAWSUIT, WE WOULD HAVE S.O.S. COMPLIANCE. THE WORST ALTERNATIVE, IF WE -- IF WE LOSE THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE LAWSUIT, WE'RE COMPLETELY GONE OUT OF THIS AREA. IF WE LOSE A 245 LAWSUIT, WE'RE -- THEN WATER QUALITY CONTROL STRUCTURES ARE GOING TO BE ACCORDING TO THEIR CHAPTER 245 PLAN, WHICH IS A LONG WAY FROM S.O.S.. UNDER THE AGREEMENT, AS LES TALL IS GOING TO EXPLAIN IN MORE DETAIL IN A SECOND, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE S.O.S. COMPLIANCE IN AREAS NOT CLAIMING 245 RIGHTS, AND IN 245 AREAS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE UPGRADES AND IMPROVEMENTS TO BRING THE CHAPTER 245 AREAS MUCH CLOSER TO WHAT S.O.S. WOULD REQUIRE IN TERMS OF WATER QUALITY CONTROL STRUCTURES. LAND USE, THE BEST ALTERNATIVE IS IF WE WON OUR WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE LAWSUIT INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, WE HAVE ZONING POWER. THE WORST ALTERNATIVE IS WE HAVE NO CITY REGULATION INCLUDING ZONING IF WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONES ARE VALID. IF WE WIN THAT LAWSUIT, WE WOULD HAVE LAND USE CONTROLS IN THE CITY, BUT AGAIN THAT WOULD BE LIMITED BY CHAPTER 245 CLAIMS UNLESS WE WERE TO WIN THAT SECOND LAWSUIT. UNDER THE AGREEMENT WITH BRADLEY, THE LAND USES ON ALL THE LAND SUBJECT TO THE AGREEMENT ARE GOING TO BE IDENTIFIED AND REGULATED BY THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT. THERE IS NO SCENARIO OTHER THAN AN AGREEMENT WHERE WE GET TO HAVE ANY SAY-SO ABOUT LAND USE OUTSIDE OF OUR CITY LIMITS. WITH REGARDS TO WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE TO SPILLAR RANCH AND PFLUGER RANCH, THERE IS NOT REAL ABEST AND WORST SCENARIO, THERE IS JUST UNCERTAINTY. IF WE DON'T PROVIDE SERVICE, THERE ARE GOING TO BE MORE WELLS DRILLED, IS LCRA GOING TO BUILD A PIPELINE OR OTHER PROVIDERS GOING TO STEP IN, WE DON'T KNOW. UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THE WATER AND WASTE WATER SERVICE AND THAT MAY HAVE SOME COLLATERAL BENEFITS. ROAD EXPANSION, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS A BEST AND WORST ALTERNATIVE TO AN AGREEMENT. THERE IS JUST UNCERTAINTY. AND CERTAINLY IF WE WERE TO LOSE THE LITIGATION, NOT MAKE THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AT HIGHER DENSITY, WHICH LOGICALLY IS GOING TO REQUIRE BIGGER AND MORE ROADS. UNDER THIS AGREEMENT THE ROADS ARE GOING TO BE DESIGNED TO SERVE ONLY THE PROPOSED USES TO BE DEVELOPED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. ON THE REIMBURSEABLES CLAIM, THE BEST ALTERNATIVE AND THE AGREEMENT ARE THE SAME. WE KNOW WE OWE HIM SOME MONEY, AND WHAT WE'VE SAID UNDER THE AGREEMENT AND WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST RESULT OF ANY LITIGATION IS WE'RE GOING TO PAY YOU WHAT OUR AUDIT SAYS WE OWE YOU PLUS INTEREST. THE WORST ALTERNATIVE IS WE GO WITH -- PAY THEM WHAT WE OWE THEM AND PAY THEM A SEVEN FIGURE DRA DMROFMENT IAN PENALTY AT WHAT IS IN ANY OTHER WORLD A USURIOUS INTEREST RATE AND IT'S A SEVEN FIGURE SAVINGS IF WE MAKE THIS DEAL VERSUS LOSING THAT CASE. GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, IT'S VERY SIMPLE, WE HAVE ABSENT AN AGREEMENT LIKE THIS, WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO POWER TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT HOW A GOLF COURSE IS MANAGED IN OUR E.T.J.. WE WOULD ONLY GET THAT BY VIRTUE OF AN AGREEMENT. THAT IS A SUMMARY. BEFORE I TAKE QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE LES TALL OF THE CITY STAFF TO TELL YOU ALL A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT WE HOPE TO ACHIEVE IN TERMS OF REDUCED POLLUTANT LOADS IN THE CHAPTER 245 AREAS.

>> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M LES ACTUAL WITH THE WATER'S DEPARTMENT. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO FIRST IS BRIEFLY GO OVER THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT WE'RE EXPECTING ON THE DEVELOPMENT UNDER BASICALLY THREE SCENARIOS. THE CHART WHICH I HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS A IMPERVIOUS COVER BAR CHART. THE BAR TO THE LEFT INDICATES A IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT WOULD BE EXPECTED WHERE AREAS WHERE THEY ARE MAKING CHAPTER 245 CLAIMS ARE -- IF THOSE WERE ACKNOWLEDGED WITH REMAINING AREAS BEING SHOWN AS SUBJECT TO S.O.S.. AND UNDER THAT SCENARIO WE WOULD EXPECT THERE TO BE ABOUT 25.5% IMPERVIOUS COVER. THE BAR ALL THE WAY TO THE RIGHT IS A S.O.S. COMPLIANCE CHART AND IF ALL THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS SUBJECT TO S.O.S. WE WOULD HAVE ESSENTIALLY 16% IMPERVIOUS COVER. UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THERE BE THAT 16% IMPERVIOUS COVER, AS CASEY MENTIONED, OVERALL WITH CLUSTERING IN SOME AREAS AND LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER IN OTHERS. MOVING ON TO THE ISSUE OF POLLUTANT LOADS THAT WOULD RESULT, AGAIN, WE ARE LOOKING AT THREE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS REPRESENTED BY THE THREE BARS ON EACH CHART. THE TOP CHART REFLECTS TOTAL EXPENDED SOLIDS, THE CENTER IS TOLL TALL PHOSPHOROUS AND THE BOTTOM IS TOE AT THAT TIME NITROGEN. AGAIN, IN THIS SITUATION WHERE AREAS WHERE THEY ARE MAKING CHAPTER 245 CLAIMS AND WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO S.O.S., WE SEE MUCH HIGHER LEVELS OF POLLUTANT LOADS. WHERE WE GO TO THE PROPOSED SETTLE MANY, THE CENTER BAR IS A SIGNIFICANT DECREASE. IN THE CASE OF THE TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS, THAT'S A DECREASE. NITROGEN OVER A 50% DECREASE FROM THOSE CLAIMS. THESE ARE STILL SOMEWHAT HIGHER THAN S.O.S. IN THE CASE OF TOTAL SOLIDS IT'S VERY CLOSE, ONLY ABOUT A 5% DIFFERENCE. UNDER TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS AND TOTAL NITROGEN, THEY WOULD DECREASE BY APPROXIMATELY ANOTHER 50% IF WERE IMPOSED -- IF S.O.S. WERE IMPOSED. THE PROPOSAL CURRENTLY IS FOR A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE AREAS WHERE THEY ARE CLAIMING CAPTURE 245 PROTECTION TO BE RETROFITED, IF YOU WILL, BEYOND WHAT THEIR ORIGINAL PLANS SHOW. MOST OF THIS IS IN AREAS UNDER CIRCLE C WEST AND ON HILESHIRE. THEY RECOMMEND STORAGE BE IN THERE CAPTURING RUNOFF AND THOSE BE IRRIGATED ELSEWHERE, PREDOMINANTLY ON THE EXISTING GOLF COURSE. OF THE PROPOSED 3,076 ACHE THAERS IS INCLUDED IN THIS PROPOSAL, 2,738 UNDER THE CURRENT CONCEPTUAL PLAN WOULD HAVE RETENTION IRRIGATION TREATMENT WHICH IS 89% OF THAT TOTAL WHICH WOULD BE 89D% OF THE AREA SUBJECT TO WATER QUALITY TREATMENT EQUIVALENT TO S.O.S.. I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR FOR THOSE LISTENING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE -- I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE UP THREE STEPS. BUT STEP ONE IS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER ON ALL OF THAT PROPERTY.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THEN WHEN WE GO TO WATER -- STRUCTURAL WATER QUALITY CONTROLS, THE SECOND STEP WOULD BE TO LOOK AT THOSE AREAS THAT-WHERE THEY ARE NOT CLAIMING CHAPTER 245 PROTECTION, AND IN THOSE AREAS THE WATER QUALITY STRUCTURES ARE S.O.S..

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IN THE AREAS WHERE THEY ARE CLAIMING CHAPTER 245 PROTECTION, THERE WOULD BE RECEIPT ROW FITS OR CHANGES THAT -- RETROFITS OR CHANGES THAT WOULD, AS YOU PUT UP HERE, RESULT IN A REDUCTION IN PLAT TANTS.

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. DOBSON, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE?

>> ONLY THIS, YOUR HONOR. THAT -- AND I'M SORRY. ONLY THIS, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU'VE CALLED ME WORSE. [LAUGHTER].

>> AGAIN, COMING BACK TO THE LAST ITEM ABOVE MR. BRADLEY'S SIGNATURE AND MY SIGNATURE AND THAT IS WE DON'T HAVE ANY OBLIGATIONS TO EACH OTHER UNTIL WE HAVE A DETAILED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. PART THAT HAVE PROCESS OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS IS OUR STAFF, LES AND NANCY MCCLINTOCK AND OTHERS ARE GOING TO BE TESTING THE ASSUMPTIONS UPON WHICH THESE FIGURES ARE BUILT. I GUESS ONE LAST THING, MAYOR, IS AS I'VE WORKED ON THIS DEAL, THERE HAVE BEEN OBJECTIONS THAT YOU JUST -- WE SHOULDN'T DO THIS BECAUSE WE CAN'T TRUST MR. BRADLEY AND THE PEOPLE WITH HIM. I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO THE COUNCIL I'M NOT HERE PROPOSING THAT WE TRUST MR. BRADLEY OR ANYBODY ELSE. WHAT I'M HERE PROPOSING IS THAT WE DO A DETAILED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT GIVES US PROPERTY RIGHTS, THAT GIVES US CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS, WHETHER IT'S MR. BRADLEY OR ANYONE ELSE, ACHIEVES OUR GOALS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I MIGHT HAVE SOME QUESTIONS IN A MINUTE. I WANTED TO ASK THE COUNCIL'S INDULGENCE FOR A FEW MOMENTS. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS ISSUE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. OBVIOUSLY THIS COULD BE A VERY SIGNIFICANT STEP IN SETTLING A REALLY LONG-RUNNING CONTROVERSY THAT WE'VE HAD HERE IN THIS ENTIRE REGION. AND SO I'M WILLING TO ENTERTAIN MR. DOBSON'S CONCLUDING COMMENTS THERE I THINK ARE VERY SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE YEARS AGO BEFORE ANY OF US WERE ON THE CITY COUNCILL, IN 1983, THE DEVELOPER, THE DEVELOPMENT WHICH WE'RE NEGOTIATING NOW SIGNED A CONTRACT SAYING THAT THEY WOULD COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S WATER QUALITY ORDINANCES AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME. YET WE'RE HERE TODAY NEGOTIATING TO TRY TO GET THAT DEVELOPMENT TO COMPLY WITH OUR WATER QUALITY ORDINANCES. AND I MIGHT ADD WAS PASSED BY OUR CITIZENS TWO TO ONE AFTER REFERENDUM OF ONE OF THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY. BUT AFTER A FEW TRIPS DOWN TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE, IT'S IN DISPUTE NOW WHETHER THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH S.O.S.. SO IT WOULD -- I'M WILLING TO REALLY GIVE THIS A REALLY HARD TRY TO TRY TO MAKE THIS WORK BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF THE CITY TO END THIS LONG STRUGGLE, BUT IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT IS CITIZENS HAVE WANTED FOR SO LONG AND THAT IS IT HAS TO PROTECT THE EDWARDS AQUIFER AND THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE OR I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS AGREEMENT. BUT I REALLY THINK OUR STAFF, MR. DOBSON AND OTHER ATTORNEYS HAVE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB OF NEGOTIATING AND I'M HAPPY THAT MR. BRADLEY WAS WILLING TO ENTER INTO THESE NEGOTIATIONS. NOW, LIKE I SAID, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS FOR A LONG TIME AND I KNOW A LOT OF THE HISTORY OF IT AND I FEEL THAT AS WE'RE POSSIBLY AT THE POINT OF A SETTLEMENT, WE SHOULD STEP BACK AND LOOK AT EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND LOOK AT SOME OF THE HISTORY. I'M NOT GOING TO GO BACK TO ALL THE WAY TO THE BEGINNING OF THE FORMATION OF THE AQUIFER -- [LAUGHTER] -- BUT I THINK MAYBE UNTIL ABOUT 1970 AND WORK UP FROM THERE. IN 1970 IS WHEN CITIZENS STARTED REALIZING THAT -- REALIZING THAT THERE WAS A THREAT TO THE SPRINGS AND THE AQUIFER, REALLY EVEN BEFORE THAT. ROY BEDICHEK WROTE A LOT IN THE 1950'S ABOUT FIGHTING TO PRESERVE BARTON SPRINGS AND BARTON CREEK. I JUST WANT TO READ A LITTLE FROM THE NEWSPAPER AD WHICH WAS IN OUR DAILY EWSPAPER BACK IN 1970, SAID THERE ARE NOT -- THERE CANNOT BE VERY MANY CITIES OF THE SIZE OF AUSTIN AROUND THE WORLD THAT ARE BLESSED WITH SUCH AN EXTRAORDINARY ENCLAVE OF WILDERNESS SO CLOSE TO THE HEART OF DOWNTOWN. A FREE-FLOWING STREAM WITH RAPIDS, WITH POOLS THAT REFLECT PRECIPITOUS BLUFFS, AND IT GOES ON TALKING ABOUT -- TALKING ABOUT BARTON CREEK. SAYS IN 1970 NEWSPAPER AD BY THE AUSTIN ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL CALLING FOR STRONG PROTECTIONS FOR ALL OF THE CITY'S CREEKS. THEY ALSO ENVISION A TRAIL STRETCHING FROM BARTON SPRINGS UP TO HIGHWAY 71, WHICH A LOT OF THAT, BUT NOT ALL OF IT, HAS BEEN REALIZED. IT'S INTERRUPTED BY GOLF COURSES AND FAIRLY INTENSE DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE BARTON CREEK IS ONLY ONE OF SIX CREEKS THAT CONTRIBUTES TO BARTON SPRINGS. AND THOSE ARE WILLIAMSON, SLAUGHTER, BEAR, LITTLE BEAR, ONION AND BARTON. BARTON FLOWS THROUGH BARTON SPRINGS. THE OTHER FIVE KBT WATER THAT GOES DOWN INTO THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE AND SHOWS UP IN -- AT BARTON SPRINGS. FOR INSTANCE, THIS PICTURE HERE IS ONION CREEK. IF WE COULD FOCUS ON THAT. AND THIS IS A WHIRLPOOL AT WHICH WATER IS GOING DOWN INTO THE AQUIFER AND WILL LATER COME UP AT BARTON SPRINGS. THAT'S THE WAY THE AQUIFER WORKS. NOW, HERE IS A DYE TEST THAT SOME OF THE CITY SCIENTISTS HAVE DONE IN WHICH DYE WAS PLACED IN THE -- IN PARTICULAR LOCATIONS AND THEN -- MOST OF IT CAME UP AT BARTON SPRINGS. IN PARTICULAR HERE ALONG SLAUGHTER CREEK, THIS NO. 8 IS NEAR THE CIRCLE C SOCCER FIELDS. THE DYE WAS PUT IN THERE, CAME DOWN TO BARTON SPRINGS IN A WEEK FROM MIDNIGHT TO 8:00. SEVEN TO EIGHT DAYS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS THE RUNOFF FROM THE DEVELOPMENTS CAN GO DOWN INTO THE AQUIFER, WILL GO DOWN INTO THE AQUIFER FROM THIS POINT NEAR THE CIRCLE C SOCCER FIELDS TAKES A WEEK TO GET TO BARTON SPRINGS. A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO THE EAST, AT NO. 7 WE SEE ON THE MAP CALLED BRODIE SINK, NEAR BRODIE LANE AND SLAUGHTER LANE, GOT TO BARTON SPRINGS IN ONE TO TWO DAYS. THAT'S A PRETTY RAPID HIGHWAY FOR A FLOWING RIVER UNDER THE GROUND HEADING FOR BARTON SPRINGS. THAT'S THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE ISSUES WE TALK ABOUT TODAY. SO ILLUSTRATE THAT, THIS PICTURE -- AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS IS -- SOMEONE HAS THROWN A TIRE IN THE WATER THERE, BUT THIS IS SLAUGHTER CREEK COMING INTO BRODIE SINK FLOWING, AND THEN YOU WILL SEE HERE IT GOES UNDERGROUND. THIS GOES DOWN TO THE AQUIFER. ONE TO TWO DAYS TO GET TO BARTON SPRINGS. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE CREEK IS DRY BECAUSE ALL THIS WATER THAT IS FLOWING VERY RAPIDLY AFTER A RAIN, APPARENTLY, AND AFTER A RAIN MEANS THAT WATER IS RUSHING DOWN AND IF IT'S FROM DEVELOPMENT, PARKING LOTS, IT'S GOING TO RUN OFF FAST AND HAVE POLLUTANTS IN IT, COMING DOWN INTO THE CREEK AND GOING UNDERGROUND. BARTON SPRINGS IN ONE OR TWO DAYS. AND WE HAVE A NUMBER OF THREATS TO THE AQUIFER EVEN THOUGH OUR CITIZENS AS FAR BACK AS 1970 WERE SAYING THAT WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS PAPER YOU WILL SEE ON THE SCREEN THERE, A GROUP OF SCIENTISTS HERE IN TOWN AND FROM AROUND THE REGION SAID THAT THERE HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED OCCURRENCES OF WATER QUALITY DEGRADATION AT WELLS AND SPRINGS. THEY WARNED INTENSE DEVELOPMENT WILL LEAD TO INCREASED CONTAMINATION. AMONG THE THREATS OF INCREASED CONTAMINATION ARE THE -- IS EXISTING SPRAWLING AND POLLUTING DEVELOPMENT OVER THE AQUIFER ALREADY -- AS WE'VE HEARD ALREADY THERE IS POTENTIAL FOR MASSIVE DEVELOPMENT UNDER STATE GRANDFATHERING LAWS. THERE ARE LARGE PROJECTS OUTSIDE THE CITY OF AUSTIN JURISDICTION, BEE CAVE, FOR INSTANCE, WE'VE READ IN THE MEDIA LATELY ABOUT THE MASSIVE DEVELOPMENTS PLANNED IN THE BEE CAVE AREA IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. HAYS COUNTY HAS AROUND A $200 MILLION ROAD PLAN THAT WOULD BRING MORE -- MUCH MORE DEVELOPMENT INTO THAT AREA IF THAT ROAD PLAN GOES THROUGH. THERE IS NOW -- THEY ARE HAVING KIND OF A DEBATE IN HAYS COUNTY NOW THAT WE'VE HAD FOR MANY YEARS IN THIS CITY. AND THEN THE AUSTIN BASHING LAWS THAT ARE STILL ON APPEAL THAT COULD COME BACK TO HURT US. SO HOW DID WE GET IN THIS SITUATION WITH THE SORT OF THREATS TO THE SURVIVAL OF BARTON SPRINGS AND THE AQUIFER IF OUR CITIZENS BACK IN 1970 AND EVEN BEFORE WERE SAYING THERE ARE THREATS TO THE EDWARDS AQUIFER, WE NEED TO MOVE TO PROTECT IT AND THEY DID MOVE TO PROTECT IT, TAKING ON A LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN TRYING TO EXERCISE OUR LOCAL CONTROL OF SELF-GOVERNMENT. ONCE AGAIN, ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY. HERE'S WHAT THE CITIZENS DID. EXCUSE ME. AUSTIN TOMORROW PLAN CALLED FOR SPARSE DEVELOPMENT OVER THE AQUIFER AND AROUND THE HIGHLAND LAKES. CALLED VERY SPECIFICALLY FOR NO DETERIORATION IN WATER QUALITY. AND CITIZENS WERE FOILED ON THIS AND THE CITY AT THAT TIME DID NOT CARRY OUT ITS OWN PLAN. THE COMPREHENSIVE WATERSHED ORDINANCE PASS UNDERSTAND 1986 ITSELF WAS A COMPROMISED ORDINANCE [INAUDIBLE] DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS AND COMPROMISED BEFORE IT PASSED AND THEN IT HAD AN 8 6 EXEMPTION RATE. A FEW YEARS WENT BY, THE CITIZENS GREW MORE CONCERNED WHEN IN 1990 THERE WAS A HUGE DEVELOPMENT, THE BARTON CREEK P.U.D. PROPOSED ABOUT SEVEN MILES UPSTREAM FROM BARTON SPRINGS, WE HAD 900 PEOPLE IN THIS CHAMBER OPPOSING THAT DEVELOPMENT CALLING FOR STRONGER PROTECTIONS. BUT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. THE CITIZENS HAD TO DO IT THEMSELVES, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM. WHEN THEY TURNED THE PETITIONS IN, THE CITY CLERK CERTIFIED THEM. ELECTION LAW SAID THE ELECTION HAD TO BE HELD IN MAY 1992. WE HAD FOUR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME SIT ON THIS DAIS AND ABSTAIN, REFUSE TO SET THAT ELECTION EVEN UNDER A COURT ODD TO DO SO. WHAT HAPPENED THEN, HUNDREDS OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FLOODED INTO THE CITY UNDER THE OLD, WEAKER ORDINANCES BEFORE S.O.S. COULD GO INTO THE ELECTION, WHICH TURNED OUT TO BE IN AUGUST OF 1992, AND IT PASSED OVERWHELMINGLY BY ALMOST A TWO TO ONE MARGIN. SO THEN THE ORDINANCE WAS CHALLENGED IN HAYS COUNTY AND 11 PEOPLE IN HAYS COUNTY THREW OUT THE TWO TO ONE MANDATE OF THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN. BUT ALSO TRACK AT THAT POINT IS WHERE CITY GOVERNMENT REALLY STARTED BECOMING MORE RESPONSIVE TO THE CITIZENS ACCEPTING ITS LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND CARRYING OUT THE WILL OF THE CITIZENS. AND THERE ARE STILL TWO MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL TODAY WHO WERE ON THE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME WHO VOTED TO APPEAL THE DECISION IN HAYS COUNTY THAT THREW OUT THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. AND THAT WAS A VERY CONTROVERSIAL DECISION AT THE TIME. YOU HAD A LOT OF FOLKS THAT FRANKLY WOULD HAVE BENEFITED FROM THERE NOT BEING AN APPEAL, THEY WERE RAISE AGO HUGE FURY SAYING THAT WAS A WASTE OF MONEY TO APPEAL THAT. IT WAS ALL OVER OUR LOCAL NEWSPAPER, AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE. AND THESE FOUR COUNCILMEMBERS HAD THE COURAGE TO STAND UP TO THAT SOUND AND FURY AND VOTED TO APPEAL AND EVENTUALLY IN AUGUST OF 1996 THE ORDINANCE WAS PUT BACK IN PLACE AND HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT. ALSO SINCE THAT TIME THE CITY HAS PURCHASED THOUSANDS OF ACRES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. THIS COUNCIL HAS PUT INTO PLACE THE SMART GROWTH PROGRAM WHICH HAS STEERED MANY DEVELOPMENTS INTO THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND AWAY FROM THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE. IN FACT, WE SET THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE BASED ON THE AUSTIN TOMORROW PLAN, WHICH WAS PUT TOGETHER BY THOUSANDS OF CITIZENS IN THE 1970'S AND THEN WIDELY IGNORED. THIS COUNCIL HAS HAD THE COURAGE TO CHALLENGE AUSTIN BASHING LAWS, BOUGHT THOUSANDS OF ACRES IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE AND OTHER AREAS BACK INTO AUSTIN'S JURISDICTION. PUT IN EXPIRATION DATES ON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS BECAUSE -- WHICH GOES A LONG WAY TOWARDS STOPPING THE PRACTICE OF CITY GOVERNMENT BEING AN AID TO REAL ESTATE SPECULATION AND INSTEAD PUTS US IN PLANNING AND ZONING BUSINESS INSTEAD. WE'VE ALSO REACHED COOPERATION AMONG FORMERLY OPPOSING FORCES AND HAD WIDE ACCEPTANCE THAT PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT MAKES ECONOMIC SENSE. BUT STILL WE FACE THESE THREATS TO THE AQUIFER. AND IT'S CLEAR AND IT MAY BE CONTROVERSIAL TO SAY OR MAYBE NOT EVEN WISE TO POINT OUT, BUT I THINK WE DO HAVE THE RIGHT AND RESPONSIBILITY TO EXERCISE OUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND CALL THINGS AS WE SEE THEM. AND WE'VE HAD CHALLENGES TO OUR LOCAL CONTROL FROM THE STATE GOVERNMENT EVEN THOUGH SUPPOSEDLY [INAUDIBLE] -- LOCAL CONTROL IS SUPPOSED TO BE ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT. WE IN FACT HEAR THAT PREACHED ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY. BUT HERE IN AUSTIN WHEN WE TRY TO PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT, THE AQUIFER, HERE'S JUST A FEW OF THE THINGS THAT WE RECEIVE. WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONES. WE ALSO CALL THEM BIG DEVELOPER PROTECTION ZONES. BECAUSE ANY DEVELOPER WHO OWNS A THOUSAND ACRES OR MORE IN THE CITY'S EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION UNDER THIS LAW COULD JUST DECLARE THEMSELVES A BIG DEVELOPER PROTECTION ZONE OR A WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE, THEN THEY ARE FREE FROM ALL THE CITY'S REGULATIONS. AND ESPECIALLY WATER QUALITY. THEY ARE FREE FROM ALL CITY WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS AND CANNOT BE ANNEXED AND BROUGHT INTO THE CITY'S JURISDICTION FOR MANY YEARS. THIS BILL WAS SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR IN 1995. AND THE CITY CHALLENGED IT IN AND IT WAS DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE IT WAS A LOCAL SPECIAL LAW. APPEAL PENDING AT SUPREME COURT. ALSO THE CIRCLE C'S SOVEREIGN DISTRICT IN WHICH THE LEGISLATURE TOOK ONE SUBDIVISION AND CARVED IT OUT AS A SEPARATE ENTITY, ONCE AGAIN FREE FROM ALL CITY REGULATIONS EVEN THOUGH THERE IS CONTRACT THEY WOULD COMPLY WITH CITY REGULATIONS COULD NOT BE ANNEXED EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS A CONTRACT THAT THEY WOULD BE ANNEXED. ONCE IT WAS -- AND THIS WAS NOT SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR. INSTEAD IT WAS ALLOWED TO BECOME LAW WITHOUT HIS SIGNATURE. THERE IS APPEAL PENDING AT THE SUPREME COURT. AND THEN HOUSE BILL 1704 WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED ALREADY AND WHICH WOULD ALLOW THOUSANDS OF ACRES BOTH IN THE AQUIFER ZONE AND OTHER AREAS -- COULD ALLOW THOUSANDS OF ACRES TO GO FORWARD WITHOUT STRONG ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS, WITHOUT THE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE BY THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN. SO I REALLY FELT THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO GET SOME OF THIS HISTORY ON THE TABLE. I APPRECIATE THE COUNCIL FOR BEARING WITH ME ON IT BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO POINT THESE THINGS OUT TO OUR CITIZENS AS WELL AND TO LET THEM KNOW THAT WE HAVEN'T FORGOT, WE TAKE THIS VERY SERIOUSLY. WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THE GROUND. AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, I'M SURE THERE WILL BE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROPOSAL, BUT I WOULD SAY THERE NEEDS TO BE INTENSE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON THIS. I'M GOING TO SUGGEST -- I'VE TALKED TO SOME OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS ABOUT IT ALREADY, THAT WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AT OUR NEXT MEETING ON DECEMBER 2 END AND ONE AT THE MEETING ON DECEMBER 9TH. I THINK THIS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ALSO NEEDS TO INVOLVE FOLKS FROM HAYS COUNTY BECAUSE THIS SPILLS OVER THE BORDER INTO HAYS COUNTY, AND WE'VE ALREADY NOTIFIED SEVERAL WEEKS AGO THE COUNTY JUDGE THAT THESE NEGOTIATIONS WERE TAKING PLACE, JUDGE POWERS IN HAYS COUNTY, AND HAVE ALSO BEEN IN CONTACT WITH SOME OF THE CITIZENS OF HAYS COUNTY TO TALK ABOUT THIS. SO I THINK THEY NEED TO BE INVOLVED AND ANY CITIZEN OF AUSTIN THAT WANTS TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS. AND ONCE AGAIN, FOR ME TO SUPPORT THIS AGREEMENT I THINK IT HAS TO PROTECT THE EDWARDS AQUIFER AND THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE BECAUSE IF IT DOESN'T DO THAT I THINK THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN WANT US TO CONTINUE TO FIGHT TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT, MAYOR. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY OTHER COMMENTS? LET ME SAY A FEW THINGS. I BELIEVE WE HAVE A VERY SIGNIFICANT OPPORTUNITY TODAY. THE VERY FACT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT A TERM SHEET FOR A POTENTIAL AGREEMENT INVOLVING THESE PARTIES AND THESE ISSUES AND THIS PROPERTY IS SOMETHING IN WHICH WE CAN TAKE SOME PRIDE. I WANT TO THANK MR. DOBSON AND THE CITY ATTORNEY AND ALL THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN GETTING US TO THIS POINT. BUT AS HAS BEEN NOTED, WE AREN'T DONE. THERE IS WORK TO BE DONE AND THERE WILL BE LOTS OF TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING OR SEEKING TO DO. SO I WANT TO TAKE SOME TIME TO PROVIDE WHAT I HOPE WILL BE A VALUABLE FRAMEWORK FOR THE COMMUNITY DISCUSSION REGARDING THIS. AND I'M GOING THE START OFF WITH A WARNING. I'VE BEEN DOING SOME THINKING ABOUT THIS, WHICH SOME PEOPLE WOULD ARGUE IF I'M THINKING, THAT CAN BE DANGEROUS, AND TODAY THE DANGER IS THAT MY FRAMEWORK IS SOMEWHAT LONG. SO COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER USED THE WORD INDULGENCE AND I'M GOING TO ASK FOR INDULGENCE ALSO. A FUNDAMENTAL REASON WE'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION IS BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE THAT IS WIDELY KNOWN AS 1704. NOW IT'S IN THE CHARTS THAT MR. DOBSON WAS USING IT WAS REFERRED TO AS CHAPTER 245 AND THAT'S A FOLLOWUP ON 1704. DEALING WITH THE ISSUE OF 1704 ISN'T EASY. AFTER MANY YEARS JUST SAYING THE NUMBERS 1704 WITHOUT SAYING ANYTHING MORE CREATES AN EMOTIONAL RESPONSE IN MANY PEOPLE. TO PUT IT IN VERY SIMPLE AND PERHAPS THE MOST FAVORABLE POLICY TERMS, THE ISSUE CONJURED UP BY THE PASSAGE OF 1704 IS HOW CAN WE AS A LOCAL COMMUNITY PROTECT THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THIS UNIQUE AREA AND BE FAIR TO THOSE WHO OWN PROPERTY OR WHO HAVE MADE REAL INVESTMENTS IN PROJECTS RELATED TO THAT PROPERTY. ANOTHER WAY IT MIGHT BE SAID IS HOW DO WE PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AND DEAL WITH LAND THAT BECAUSE OF PROTECTION OF 1704 MAY BE DEVELOPED UNDER OLD OR GRANDFATHERED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. NOW, THOSE ARE VERY SIMPLISTIC STATEMENTS OF A COMPLEX AND HEATED POLICY ISSUE. SOME WILL EVEN ARGUE WITH THOSE CHARACTER SDATIONS OF THE DEBATE. IN THE CONTEXT OF 1704, MY ULTIMATE GOAL AND I BELIEVE THE GOAL OF EACH MEMBER OF THIS COUNCIL IS TO FAIRLY AND RESPONSIBLY MANAGE GROWTH IN THIS EXTRAORDINARY BOOM AND PROTECT THE SPECIAL ENVIRONMENT WE ENJOY IN THIS AREA. IT IS TO PRESERVE THE ASSETS THAT HAVE DRAWN PEOPLE TO THIS AREA AND CAUSED THEM TO WANT TO STAY FROM THE BEGINNING OF AUSTIN. IN 1839, THE SCOUTS SENT OUT TO FIND A CAPITAL FOR THE NEW REPUBLIC COMMENTED ON THE GLORIOUS SURROUNDINGS, THE HILLS AND THE WATER. YES, I DID GO BACK FURTHER THAN COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. [LAUGHTER] IN 1999, 160 YEARS LATER, MONEY MAGAZINE NAMED THE AREA AS ONE OF THE MOST LIVEABLE IN THE UNITED STATES AND REFERRED TO THE CITY'S NATURAL BEAUTY. BUT MANY IN THE COMMUNITY ARE NOW ENGAGED IN A DISCUSSION AND A CAMPAIGN TO INFLUENCE THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS OF HOW DO WE ADDRESS THE PASSAGE OF 1704, HOW DO THOSE OF US WHO ACTUALLY HAVE TO APPLY THE LEGISLATION IN PRACTICE DO IT, AND HOW DO WE DO RIGHT AS LOCALLY ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THIS COMMUNITY. THE BEST APPROACH, WHATEVER IT IS, IS NOT IN MY OPINION BLACK OR WHITE. THE DIFFICULTIES CREATED BY 1704'S PASSAGE ARE NOT RESOLVED BY SIMPLE SOLUTIONS OR APPROACHES. ANALYZING 1704 AND DEAL WITH IT IS NOT ONE OF POLICY DISCUSSIONS WHERE YOU CAN EASILY SAY SOMEONE IS RIGHT OR WRONG SIMPLY BASED UPON THE APPROACH HE OR SHE CHOOSES. THIS IS PROVED BY THE HISTORY OF 1704 OR HOW WE GOT TO TODAY. LOOKING BACK IN HINDSIGHT, WE CAN AT ALMOST EVERY TURN POINTED TO SOMETHING THAT IF DONE DIFFERENTLY WOULD HAVE GIVEN A BETTER RESULT. THE CHALLENGE AS I SEE IT IS TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW TO DEAL WITH 1704, APPLY IT AND DO RIGHT BY OUR CONSTITUENTS OVER THE LONGTERM. SHORT-TERM GRATIFICATION, THE KIND THAT COMES WITH STANDING UP ON YOUR BEHIND LEGS AND LASHING OUT OR EVEN SHORT TERM VICTORIES THAT FEEL VERY GOOD ARE ULTIMATELY ILLUCORY. THIS CITY IS ON THE RIGHT TRACK. IT'S NOT PERFECT. IT'S NOT GOVERNOR VERND BY PERFECT PEOPLE WHO ALWAYS KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWERS OR EVEN ALL OF THE QUESTIONS. BUT USUALLY WE DO RECOGNIZE THE NEED TO ACT FOR THE FUTURE. THAT REALLY IS WHAT THE FOCUS ON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IS ALL ABOUT. AND THE FUTURE IS GOING TO BE A VERY DIFFERENT PLACE THAN WE HAVE KNOWN. PAST POLICIES AND PRACTICES NEED TO BE REEVALUATED BY EVERYONE IN PUBLIC SERVICE OR INTERESTED IN THE FUTURE AT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT. I BELIEVE THE NEXT CENTURY WILL BE THE URBAN CENTURY, OR THE CENTURY OF THE CITY. THAT'S NOT TO EXCLUDE SO-CALLED SUBURBS. SUBURBS LIKE THOSE IN THIS REGION ARE TIED TO AN URBAN CORE AND ARE PART OF A REGIONAL ECONOMY. THEY WILL SHARE THE URBAN ISSUES OF AIR AND WATER QUALITY, ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, THE NEED FOR EQUITY IN THE REGION, PUBLIC SAFETY, SCHOOLS, TRANSPORTATION AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA. PRIOR TO THIS CENTURY, WE SAW EMPIRES. THIS CENTURY WAS THE CENTURY OF THE NATION STATE. WE ARE NOW GOING TO SEE CITY STATES. IN THE NEXT CENTURY, UNLIKE IN THE PAST, GREAT CITIES WON'T NEED PORTS TO LEAD IN COMMERCE. THEY CAN BE PORTALS. THE GREAT CITIES OF THE WORLD WON'T NEED TO PHYSICALLY COVER LARGE MASSES OF LAND AND BE THE MOST HEAVILY POPULATED. THEY WILL BE ABLE TO ACCESS LABOR, CAPITAL AND MARKETS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD VIRTUALLY. CITIES, YOU ARE BEEN CENTERS WILL BE THE FOCUS OF THE NEW GLOBAL ECONOMY. IT HAS STARTED. THE U.S. CONFERENCE OF MAYORS AND THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES RECENTLY ISSUED A REPORT COMPILED BY STANDARD AND POORS DRI, DOCUMENTING THAT METROPOLITAN ECONOMIES ARE THE ENGINES OF AMERICA'S GROWTH AND DRIVING THE CURRENT ECONOMIC BOOM. THE STUDY ALSO REVEELSZ THAT METROPOLITAN ECONOMIES IGNORE STATE AND LOCAL BOUNDARY LINES N FACT THE DATA SHOWS THAT PLANNING AND PUBLIC POLICIES SHOULD ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF THE REGIONS AND NOT BASED UPON ECONOMICALLY IRRELEVANT, ARTIFICIAL POLITICAL BOUNDARIES. AND WE SEE THIS IN TEXAS. THERE IS REALLY KNOW STATE ECONOMY. THE ECONOMY OF TEXAS IS THE SUM OF ITS REGIONAL COMPONENT PARTS. THE CONFERENCE REPORT CONFIRMS THIS. TEXAS LEADERS IN AN EFFORT TO STRENGTHEN THE ECONOMY SHOULD PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO GROW THEIR LOCAL ECONOMIES. AFTER ALL, IT'S AT THE LOCAL LEVEL THAT THE PEOPLE FACE THE ISSUES EVERY DAY. THEY LIVE IT EVERY DAY. THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT MUST BRAINSTORM AND INNOVATE TO ADDRESS IMPORTANT AND CHALLENGING URBAN ISSUES. EVERY DAY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT MUST FACE THE TEST OF PLANNING FOR, PREPARING FOR AND PRESERVING THE FUTURE. EVERY DAY. NOT JUST ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS IN A FAST AND FURIOUS 140 DAYS. IT'S AT THE LOCAL LEVEL WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD THAT YOU SEE TRUE INNOVATION. YOU SEE REAL BRAINSTORMING WITHOUT JUDGMENT TO TRY TO FIND SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS, TOUCH PEOPLE'S DAILY NEEDS AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF DAY TO DAY LIFE. IT'S NOT ALWAYS PRETTY. IT'S NOT ALWAYS RIGHT. BUT IT'S CARRIED OUT BY OFFICIALS ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES AS BEST THEY CAN EVERY DAY. IN SOME STATES THE STATE GOVERNMENT DOSE PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES. THERE IS A RECOGNITION OF THE SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP. WHEN CITIES DO WELL, THE STATE DOES WELL AS A MATTER OF COURSE. SO THERE IS AN EXPRESS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATES AND THE CITY WHERE THE STATE HELPS. IF YOU LOOK AT A COUPLE OF THE AREAS THAT AUSTIN AND TEXAS COMPETES WITH EVERY DAY, PORTLAND, ATLANTA AND THE RESEARCH TREE ANGLE YOU CAN FIND EXCELLENT KPARCHS WHERE THE STATE GIVES TOOLS TO HELP SUCCEED IN GROBL ECONOMIES. IN TEXAS THAT DOESN'T REALLY HAPPEN. THE STATE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT ASSISTANCE FOR LOCAL OR REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. IT DOESN'T HELP WITH PLANNING. SINCE IT DOESN'T DO THESE THINGS, LIKE YOU SEE IN OTHER STATES WHERE THERE IS AN EX POLICE IT AGREEMENT BETWEEN STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, WE WOULD EXPECT THAT THERE WOULD BE AT LEAST AN IMPLICIT AGREEMENT THAT THE STATE WOULD STAY OUT OF THE WAY AND LET THE LOCAL COMMUNITY CONTROL ITS COURSE. WE ALWAYS HEAR A GREAT DEAL ABOUT LOCAL CONTROL BEING SOMETHING WE SEEK. I BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE MORE THAN RHETORIC. THE STATE SHOULD GIVE THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TOOLS, NOT TIE THEIR HANDS. THE STATE SHOULD GIVE THE LOCAL PEOPLE CONTROL OVER THE ISSUE THEY FACE, NOT CONTROL THE LOCAL WILL. LOCAL CONTROL SHOULD MEAN THE ABILITY OF A COMMUNITY TO CONTROL ITS DESTINY AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, NOT THE STATE CONTROLLING THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES COMMUNITY'S ABILITY TO ADDRESS ITS FUTURE. AND THAT SHOULD BE PARTICULARLY TRUE WHEN THE AREA IS THRIVING. ACTUALLY THRIVING IS NOT A STRONG ENOUGH DESCRIPTION OF WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE AUSTIN AREA. AUSTIN IS A NATIONAL LEADER. IN JUST THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, FOUR MAJOR CITIES OR AREAS, SAN FRANCISCO, DENVER, ORLANDO AND COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, HAVE COME TO AUSTIN TO STUDY WHAT THIS REGION IS DOING. SACRAMENTO, PORTLAND, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, RALEIGH DURHAM AND COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA HAVE CONTACTED US WANT TO GO COME NEXT YEAR. AND THERE WILL BE OTHERS. RECENTLY THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER OF SING GA MORE WAS HERE TO STUDY OUR GROWING TECHNOPOLIS. THIS WEEK WE HAVE OVER 20 PEOPLE REPRESENTING TAIWANESE COMPANIES IN AUSTIN. I WAS JUST? JAPAN. THAT COMPANY'S MINISTRY OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY IS VERY INTERESTED IN AUSTIN AND HOW IT IS WE ARE DOING SO WELL. I WAS INVITED TO SPEAK AT THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE IN -- REGARDING AUSTIN AND OUR SMART GROWTH EFFORTS. INCLUDING OUR AGGRESSIVE AND EFFECTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. AUSTIN WAS THE ONLY CITY ASKED TO MAKE A SPECIAL PRESENTATION ON LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES AS PART OF AN INTERNATIONAL MAYOR'S ROUND TABLE. IT IS BECOMING INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED THAT WE MUST TIE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THE CHINESE AND KOREAN GOVERNMENTS ARE ALSO EAGERLY WANTING TO KNOW HOW WE ARE DOING SO WELL AND WANT TO WORK CLOSELY WITH US. FORTUNE MAGAZINE NAMES US THE BEST CITY FOR BUSINESS IN NORTH AMERICA. IN THE PAST TWO WEEKS, FORTUNE ANNOUNCED IT WOULD BRING ITS YEAR 2000 CONFERENCE OF THE FORTUNE 500 CEO'S TO AUSTIN. MONEY MAGAZINE LISTS US AS ONE OF THE MOST LIVEABLE CITIES IN THE COUNTRY. THE NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION GOES ON AND ON. ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF BEING MAYOR IS THE ABILITY TO SEE THAT THIS CITY, OUR HOME, IS THE ENVY OF THE WORLD AND STANDS POISED TO BE ONE OF THE GREAT CITIES OF THE NEW URBAN CENTURY. FRANKLY, SOMETIMES I BELIEVE AUSTIN IS MORE APPRECIATED AS A CITY OF LIGHT AND VISION OUTSIDE OF TEXAS THAN IT IS RIGHT HERE IN THE CAPITAL OF TEXAS. AND I BELIEVE WE ARE IN AN ADVANTAGE US POSITION TO BE GREAT BOTH IN ECONOMICS AND IN LIVEABILITY OR QUALITY OF LIFE. IN FACT, WE WON'T BE ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER. WE ALL KNOW ABOUT THE ICF KIZER REPORT COMMISSIONED BY THE GREATER AUSTIN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. IT'S CALLED THE NEXT CENTURY ECONOMY. IT'S A THOUGHTFUL ROAD MAP FOR HOW TO ADDRESS ASPECTS OF OUR COMMUNITY. IT SAYS EXPLICITLY THAT WE MUST LINK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT, PRESERVING A KEY COMPONENT OF OUR PAST, A UNIQUE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CAN BE LEVERAGED AS AN ASSET FOR OUR ECONOMIC FUTURE. LOCALLY WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE NEW ECONOMY, AN INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY, FITS AUSTIN WELL. THIS ECONOMY LITERALLY KNOWS NO BORDERS. IT CAN LOCATE ANYWHERE IT WANTS. THIS ECONOMY WILL FOLLOW KNOWLEDGE, AND KNOWLEDGE WILL ALWAYS BE ATTRACTED TO A HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE. IN THE NEW INFORMATION AND CREATIVE ECONOMY, WHEN ALL OTHER THINGS ARE EQUAL, THE CITIES THAT WILL SUCCEED ARE THOSE OFFERING A HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE AND A STRONG ENVIRONMENT. BENEFITS THAT WE HAVE ENJOYED AND MUST PRESERVE. A DECLINING ENVIRONMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE MEANS A DECLINING ECONOMY. THE MATCH BETWEEN AUSTIN AND THE NEW ECONOMY MAKES SENSE IN OTHER WAYS. IT IS NO COINCIDENCE WE BRAG WE'RE THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD AND WE'RE BECOMING A FOCAL POINT IN THE WORLD WIDE INFORMATION ECONOMY. IT INVOLVES THE SAME TYPE OF CREATIVE ENERGY. IT'S NOT COINCIDENCE WE'RE SURROUNDED WITH GREAT SCHOOLS OF HIGHER EDUCATION FROM GEORGETOWN TO SAN MARCOS, INCLUDING A EVOLVING COMMUNITY COLLEGE, AND WE'RE CULTIVATING AN ECONOMY THAT IS BASED UPON INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL. OF COURSE WE'RE RIGHT FULLY RECOGNIZED AS EFFECTIVE IN PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE ECONOMY THAT IS GROWING IS A A RELATIVELY CLEAN INDUSTRY BASED UPON INFORMATION. TO ACHIEVE OUR COMMON FUTURE, WE ARE EXPERIENCING A SPIRIT OF LOCAL COOPERATION THAT WE HAVE NOT ENJOYED IN THE LAST TWO DECADES. IT IS A COOPERATION THAT IS ALLOWING US TO FOCUS ON THE FUTURE AND PRESERVING THE THINGS WE LOVE ABOUT THE PAST LIKE NEVER BEFORE. THE COOPERATION WILL LEAD TO LONGER TANGIBLE RESULTS. IT IS ALREADY YIELDED OUTCOMES THAT PEOPLE TOLD ME LESS THAN THREE YEARS AGO WHEN MANY HAD RESIGNED THEMSELVES TO A FUTURE OF JUNK BALL POLITICS THAT THESE THINGS COULD NOT HAPPEN. AND REMEMBER JUMP BALL POLITICS, THE POLITICS THAT SAID THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL WILL MEET AT CENTER COURT LIKE IN A BASKETBALL GAME AND PITCH UP THE BALL. WHICHEVER SIDE GOT THE TIP WON. OUR EFFORTS AT PLANNING AS A COMMUNITY LOOK LIKE THE LAST TWO MINUTES OF A PRO BASKETBALL GAME. ALL YOU SAW WERE FOULS. JUST STOP THE OTHER SIDE AND THAT WAS CONSIDERED A VICTORY. THE SIDE THAT GOT THE ONE STOPPED MIGHT NOT SCORE, MIGHT NOT EVEN GET THE BALL, BUT STILL DECLARED THE FOUL AND STOPPING THE GAME AS A WIN. THEN WE ALL MOVED TO THE NEXT PLAY WHICH TYPICALLY LED TO ANOTHER FOUL. IT WAS THE FIGHT OF THE WEEK. THIS CONSTANT TWO MINUTE DRILL MEANT THE BROAD COMMUNITY LOST THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP WITH PLANS OF SOLUTIONS THAT ALTHOUGH NOT MEETING EVERYONE'S ASPECT OF PERFECTION WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF THE FUTURE, CASUALTIES OF JUMP BALL POLITICS. PEOPLE CONSTANTLY TOLD ME OH, THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT'S DONE IN AUSTIN, IT WON'T CHANGE. TODAY WE AS A LOCAL COMMUNITY ARE WORKING MORE AS A TEAM. WE STILL HAVE OUR DISAGREEMENTS AND THERE ARE STILL EFFORTS TO FOUL. PROBABLY ALWAYS WILL BE. SOME DON'T WANT TO LEARN ANOTHER GAME OR THEIR TALENTS FOR FOULING ARE SO WELL HONED THEY CAN'T GET TO SOMETHING NEW. BUT LOOK AROUND AT THE CHANGES IN AUSTIN OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. THERE IS A NEW GAME BEING PLAYED THAT FOCUSES ON NOT FOULING AND SHORT-TERM RESULTS BUT ON SCORING TOGETHER AND LONGTERM GOOD. FOR EXAMPLE, SMART GROWTH. SMART GROWTH IS REALLY NEW AS A CONCEPT IN AUSTIN. IT WAS ANNOUNCED BY THIS COUNCIL LESS THAN TWO YEARS AGO. WE'RE LEARNING AS WE GO ALONG. WE KNOW IT HAS SOME WARTS ON IT AND IT NEEDS SOME CALIBRATION AND REFINEMENT. BUT PERHAPS SMART GROWTH'S GREATEST OUTCOME SO FAR IS THAT IT'S CREATED AN OVERALL TARGET, MANAGE OUR GROWTH SO WE PROTECT OUR QUALITY OF LIFE AND GROW OUR TAX BASE SO THAT CURRENT TAXPAYERS BENEFIT WITH NEW RESOURCES TO PAY FOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, POLICE, FIRE AND E.M.S. PROTECTION, PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS, LIBRARIES AND THE LIKE. IT'S A STRAIGHTFORWARD GOAL THAT WE CAN ALL SHOOT AT. WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REDUCE NEGATIVE CONFRONTATION THAT DRAINS THE -- DRAINS THE TOOKT TO LOOK LONGTERM. THERE ISN'T AGREEMENT ON EVERYTHING OBVIOUSLY. BUT LOOK WHAT HAS HAPPENED. AGAIN THE KIND OF THINGS THAT THREE YEARS AGO WOULD HAVE BEEN DISMISSED AS NOT POSSIBLE, NONE OF THEM PERFECT, BUT ALL OF THEM POSITIVE PROGRESS FOR THE LONGTERM. OVER 100 MILLION DOLLARS TO SET ASIDE LAND TO PROTECT WATER QUALITY, PRESERVING THE HILLS AROUND AUSTIN AND CREATING PARKS AND NATURAL AREAS IN EAST AUSTIN. PUTTING AID SIDE DECADES OF INDECISION AND STAGNATION IN DOWNTOWN SO THAT THE IDEA OF A TRULY 24 HOUR DOWNTOWN WHERE PEOPLE LIVE, WORK, SHOP AND ARE ENTERTAINED IN A DOWNTOWN DIGITAL DISTRICT IS POSSIBLE. PLANS FOR UPDATING AND CREATING A GREAT CULTURAL PARK ON TOWN LAKE WITH A NEW COMMUNITY EVENTS CENTER AND PERFORMING ARTS CENTER. THE AUSTIN MUSEUM OF ART IS MOVING FORWARD AFTER A DECADE OF RELATIVELY IDLENESS. MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO BE INVESTED IN THE TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY NEEDS OF AUSTIN. THE CREATION OF INCENTIVES FOR MAJOR EMPLOYERS SUCH AS DELL, MOTOROLA AND CSC SO LOCATE IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. THE FIRST EVER EQUITY INITIATIVE SEEKING TO INCLUDE ALL OF OUR CITIZENS IN THE ECONOMY AND QUALITY OF LIFE. AND SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT IN LACKING INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. OF COURSE THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES AND THAT'S JUST THE START. IN THE CONTEXT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, ONE OF THE BEST PARTS OF OUR COMING TOGETHER AS A LOCAL COMMUNITY IS THE COMMITMENT BY PARTIES THAT USED TO AVOID TALKING TO EACH OTHER, IN FACT THEY ONLY TALKED INSIDE A COURTROOM, TO ACTUALLY WORK TOGETHER TO SET ASIDE EVEN MORE LAND IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT TO STRENGTHEN THE ECONOMY. AGAIN, THE POINT IS THAT THE FOLKS WHO FACE THE CHALLENGES OF THIS AREA EVERY DAY ARE WORKING TOGETHER TO FIND SOLUTIONS THAT ARE GETTING POSITIVE RESULTS. IT IS MY VIEW THAT ALTHOUGH NOT IDEAL AND SUBJECT TO CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM, AUSTIN'S ORIGINAL RESPONSE TO INADVERTENT APPEAL OF 1704 WHICH WAS WORKED OUT BACK IN 1997 BY A BROAD CROSS SECTION OF THE COMMUNITY AS PART OF A EXPERIMENT IN NEW APPROACHES TO HEARING ONE ANOTHER, A FOCUS GROUP OF PIFT CITIZENS THAT MET AND WORKED WEEK AFTER WEEK TO FIND SOLUTIONS, THIS EFFORT WAS A RESPONSIBLE ACT OF LOCAL CONTROL THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ENDORSED. CERTAINLY THE SUBSEQUENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN S.O.S., RECA AND THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WHICH WAS RATIFIED BY THE ELECTED CITY COUNCILL WAS A REASONABLE EXAMPLE OF LOCAL PROBLEM SOLVE THANKING JUSTIFIED ALLOWING LOCAL CONTROL. I MADE THESE ARGUMENTS MANY TIMES. OTHERS INCLUDING REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND BROADER BUSINESS COMMUNITY HELPED ME MAKE THEM. AND IN THIS CONTEXT WE RECEIVED AS CLEAR A STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT REGARDING 1704 AS WE COULD. SADLY ITS PASSAGE CAUSED SIGNIFICANT RIPPLES IN THE LOCAL SPIRIT OF COOPERATION. I BELIEVE WE'RE BACK ON TRACK AND I CONTINUE TO ASK THE LEADERS IN OUR COMMUNITY TO MAINTAIN A COMMON VISION OF AUSTIN'S FUTURE. I OBVIOUSLY DISAGREE AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC POLICY WITH THE PASSAGE OF 1704. NO ONE IS SURPRISED BY THIS IF THEY KNOW HOW MUCH TIME I'VE SPENT WORKING ON THIS ISSUE OR HEARD ANYTHING I'VE HAD TO SAY IN THE PAST 30 MINUTES. I ALSO WORRY GREATLY ABOUT THE IMPACT THAT GRANDFATHERED PROJECTS MAY HAVE ON THE ENVIRONMENT WE SEEK TO PROTECT. I THINK A POINT THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE IS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IS A PART OF THIS LARGER COMMUNITY. INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENTERS AND THE -- DEVELOPERS AND THE ENGINEERS, LAND PLANNERS, LAWYERS, LOBBYISTS AND OTHERS WHO MAKE THEIR LIVINGS FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT AND DEVELOPERS BENEFIT WHEN THERE IS GROWTH AND HIGH ECONOMIC TIMES. CONSEQUENTLY, THEY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO PARTICIPATE FULLY IN THE EFFORTS TO PRESERVE THE ECONOMIC PROSPERITY. THAT MEANS PARTICIPATING IN THE PRESERVATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE. THEY SHOULD NOT LET SHORT-TERM, GETTING WHILE THE GETTING IS GOOD RUN COUNTER TO A TRUE LONG-TERM INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY'S SUSTAINABILITY. LIKEWISE, THOSE WHO ARE BUILDING THE NEW ECONOMY NEED TO HELP US PRESERVE THE QUALITIES THAT ASSIST THEM IN KEEPING AND RECRUITING THE WORKERS WE NEED. IT WILL DIMINISH OUR ABILITY TO SUSTAIN OUR VIBRANT ECONOMY IF WE HAVE WONDERFUL TECHNOLOGIES SAY WE'RE COMING TO AUSTIN OR WE'RE EXPANDING AND GROWING IN AUSTIN AND WE'RE DOING IT BECAUSE IT'S SO BEAUTIFUL AND HAS SUCH A HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE. ONLY TO SAY IN THE NEXT BREATH, NOW, WE WANT TO BUILD A LARGE CAMPUS-LIKE FACILITY COVERING LOTS OF LAND RIGHT IN THE MOST ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS OF THIS PRETTY PLACE AND BY THE WAY WE'LL NEED LOTS OF PLACES FOR OUR PEOPLE TO LIVE NEARBY. INSTEAD, FOLLOW THE EXAMPLES OF IBM, TOKYO ELECTRON, APPLIED MATERIALS, AMD, SAMSUNG AND MORE RECENTLY CSC, MOTOROLA, DELL AND ALTHOUGH THEY HAVEN'T DECIDED YET WHETHER THEY WILL LAND IN AUSTIN, TIVOLI, THESE COMPANIES HAVE ALL BUILT OR INTEND TO BUILD THEIR FACILITIES IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. WE WILL HELP YOU. TO OUR KNOWLEDGE WERE THE ONLY LOCAL COMMUNITY IN THE COUNTRY THAT HAS DEVELOPED AN INNOVATIVE SMART GROWTH MATRIX TO ASSIST US IN HELPING YOU. BETTER YET, HELP YOURSELVES FOR THE LONGTERM BY CONTRIBUTING TO BETTER MANAGED GROWTH THAT PROTECTS WHAT YOU LIKE ABOUT YOUR HOME AND THEREBY PROTECTS THE CHIEF ECONOMIC ASSET WE HAVE. ANYWAY, AS I SAID, I WISH THAT WHAT I BELIEVE WAS THE COMMUNITY WILL HAD PREVAILED INSTEAD OF REPASSAGE OF 1704. SOME HAVE SUGGESTED THAT THE BEST APPROACH TO THE REPASSAGE IS TO CHALLENGE THE LAW BY FILING A LAWSUIT. BUT I BELIEVE THAT A REVIEW OF HISTORY REVEALS THAT LEGISLATIVE BATTLES OF THE PAST HAVE NOT RESULTED IN PARTICULARLY GOOD OUTCOMES FOR AUSTIN. SIMPLY FIGHTING THE SAME FIGHT AGAIN IS NOT IN MY OPINION -- AND IT'S JUST MY OPINION, THE BEST LONGTERM SOLUTION. I'M NOT GOING TO RESIGN MYSELF TO DOING IT THE SAME WAY. THE PAST BATTLES HAVE BEEN VERY COSTLY. NOT JUST IN LEGAL FEES BUT IN THE NEGATIVE RESULTS OF THE BATTLES. WE'VE WON SOME. BUT TYPICALLY WE WERE SMART AND STRATEGIC REGARDING WHICH ONES TO FIGHT THAT RESULTED IN WINS. EVEN IF WE WERE TO WIN A LAWSUIT ON 1704, AND I'M NOT EXPRESSING AN OPINION ON A POSSIBLE OUTCOME. HAS A TRIAL LAWYER WHO HAS PICKED A FIGHT OR TWO IN MY DAY, I KNOW FOR SURE THERE IS AN ELEMENT OF UNCERTAINTY IN PRETTY MUCH EACH AND EVERY LAWSUIT. BUT EVEN IF THE CITY WERE TO WIN, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE SHORTSIGHTED TO SEE THERE WON'T BE A REACTION TO SUCH AN APPROACH ON OUR PART WHEN THERE WAS SUCH A CLEAR STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT. AS MUCH AS WE MAY NOT LIKE IT OR BELIEVE IT IS BAD PUBLIC POLICY, AS MUCH AS IT MAY OFF FEPD OR FEEL LIKE AN ASSAULT, WE AS LEADERS FOCUSED ON THE LONGTERM MUST BE APPROPRIATE IN OUR RESPONSE. THAT INCLUDES ANALYSIS OF RISKS AND BENEFITS OF A GIVEN APPROACH. IT ALSO INCLUDES A CLEAR-HEADED, UNEMOTIONAL, THOUGHTFUL ANALYSIS BASED ON THE LAW AS IT EXISTS OR SOME REASONABLE BASIS FOR ARGUING FOR A CHANGE IN THE LAW. IT REQUIRES GOVERNANCE FOR THE LORNG TERM, NOT ADVOCACY FOR THE SHORT TERM. IT REQUIRES SHEDDING SOME OF OUR PRECONCEIVED IDEAS AND BAGGAGE. I BELIEVE THE BETTER LONGTERM COURSE IS TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE THE PATH WE STARTED TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO. OUR CREATION OF GEOGRAPHIC PARAMETERS FOR SMART GROWTH IS NAME MAKING A DIFFERENT FRENS. THE CREATION OF INCENTIVES INCLUDING PUTTING INFRASTRUCTURE WHERE WE SAY WE WANT DEVELOPMENT TO GO IS MAKING A DIFFERENCE. THE COMMUNITY'S PURCHASE OF LAND UNDER THE MAY 1997 PROP 2 BOND ELECTION IS MAKING A DIFFERENCE. IT HAS HELPED THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THOSE WHO OWN LAND IN THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE AND HAVE EVEN ENTERED INTO SOPHISTICATED GREPTS SUCH AS THAT WITH CLUB CORP THAT ASSURES BETTER PROTECTION. THE FACT IS THAT WE HAVE PROOF THAT THESE THINGS COMBINED WITH THE COMMUNITY'S PASSAGE OF THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE AND BUILDING THAT IS OCCURRING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT ORDINANCE ARE MAKING A DIFFERENCE. WE CAN AND NEED TO DO MORE. FIRST AND FOREMOST WE NEED TO WORK CLOSELY AS A COMMUNITY TO HELP RECA AND S.O.S. WITH EFFORTS TO SET ASIDE MORE LAND. OTHER IDEAS OR EXAMPLES, I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT CREATING INCENTIVES. TO THOSE WITH 1704 PROTECTION TO HAVE THEM RELINQUISH THE PROTECTION IN RETURN FOR SMART GROWTH INCENTIVES LIKE THOSE WE GIVE TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. WE SHOULD ALSO WORK TO CREATE A MARKET FOR MITIGATION LAND. BY USING MARKET APPROACHES I THINK WE CAN ACHIEVE OUR GOALS. I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHERS SUGGESTIONS THAT WERE PASSED BY RESOLUTION A FEW WEEKS AGO CREATING NON-REGULATORY MEASURES WILL HELP. BUT THERE CAN BE SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS BY WORKING TO REACH AGREEMENT WITH SOME HISTORIC ADVERSARIES. BASIC BENEFIT IS PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT. ANOTHER BENEFIT IS REDUCING, IF NOT ELIMINATING, A DIRECT CONFLICT WITH A LEGISLATURE THAT HAS TOLD US ITS INTENTION WITH REGARD TO THIS ISSUE. ANOTHER BENEFIT IS TO PUT BEHIND THE COMMUNITY A CONFLICT THAT HAS DOMINATED FAR TOO MUCH TIME, ENERGY AND EMOTION. SO MUCH COULD HAVE BEEN AND WILL BE ABLE TO PUT INTO OTHER EFFORTS. EFFORTS THAT I BELIEVE WILL BE FOCUSING ON OUR COMMON FUTURE AS OPPOSED TO OUR DIVIDED PAST. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY ALSO ADDS TO THE DIFFICULTY. SOME CARRY GREAT BIASES AND PREJUDICES, NOT ALL OF THEM ILLEGITIMATE REGARDING CERTAIN PEOPLE OR COMPANIES. THERE WILL BE SOME WHO WHILE SAYING THEIR GOALS ARE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WILL ALLOW THEIR DISLIKE FOR HISTORICAL ENEMIES TO PREVENT THEM FROM EVER BEING ABLE TO CONSIDER AN AGREEMENT. EVEN ONE THAT MIGHT RISK GREATER ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION TO RETURN FOR A CERTAIN OUTCOME THAT CREATES PROTECTION. THERE WILL BE SOME WHO WILL BECOME SO INVESTED IN A FIGHT WHOSE PREDOMINANT FOLK NEWS LIFE IS A FIGHT THEY WILL BE BLINDED BY AN ALMOST FUNDAMENTALIST ZEAL THAT ALLOWS NO ERROR IN THEIR CONCEPT OF WHAT IS RIGHT. THERE MAY BE SOME WHO HAVE FOUGHT SO LONG THAT THEY AS A MATTER OF PROCESS, APPEARANCE OR I'M WILLING TO CONCEDE PERHAPS SINCERE BELIEF THINK IT BETTER TO FIGHT AND JUST GO DOWN IN FLAMES THAN DEAL WITH THE DEVIL EVEN IF IT ARGUABLY GIVES GREATER POSSIBLE PROTECTION. AND THERE MAY BE SOME WHO BELIEVE ANYTHING SHORT OF TOTAL AND ABSOLUTE SURRENDER BY THE OPPOSITION IS A LOSS THEY CANNOT STOMACH. FOR OUR FUTURE, WE NEED TO RISE ABOVE OUR HISTORY. AT THE SAME TIME WE REMEMBER IT SUFFICIENTLY TO PROTECT OURSELVES. AND WE MUST BE SATISFIED THAT IT IS A REASONABLE AGREEMENT. A REASONABLE AGREEMENT CONSIDERING ALL OF THE CONSIDERATION GIVEN, BENEFITS RECEIVED AND THE RISKS OF NO AGREEMENT. WE MUST ALSO BE WILLING TO CONSIDER ALL OF THE BENEFITS IN TOTAL AND NOT TO BE TOO NARROW IN OUR FOCUS. NOW, AGAIN, THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT PERFECT. I'M CONFIDENT THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OR PROBABILITY OF GREAT IMPROVEMENT. THERE WILL PROBABLY BE THINGS THAT CAN BE NEGOTIATED TO GET US TO A BETTER AGREEMENT. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD ACT DECISIVELY AND SINCERELY TO GET TO SUCH AN AGREEMENT. WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. ONE OF THE THINGS I'M MOST PROUD OF IS THE FRAMEWORK AND FOUNDATION WE HAVE BUILT TO HELP THIS CITY ACHIEVE ITS DESTINY IN THE FUTURE. I BELIEVE WE ARE POSITIONED TO MAKE ANOTHER POSITIVE STEP. I'M READY TO NEED WHAT I NEED TO DO IN THAT REGARD AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE COMMUNITY'S POSITIVE EFFORTS. AND I THANK THE COUNCIL FOR ITS INDULGENCE. I TOLD YOU THAT I HAD BEEN THINKING AND THAT'S ALWAYS DANGEROUS, BUT I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT -- APPRECIATE YOUR INDULGENCE AND THE WORK THAT COUNCIL DOES. THANK YOU ALL. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN?

>>SPELMAN: JUST A QUICK QUESTION, MAYOR. IF A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC IS INTERESTED IN LEARNING THE STUFF THAT'S ON THAT TERM SHEET, IF WE COULD HAVE SOMEBODY EXPLAIN HOW THEY CAN GET A COPY OF THAT TERM SHEET AND WHEN WE WILL BE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE WAY YOU CAN GET A COPY IS THROUGH THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE. IT WILL HAVE COPIES OF THE TERM SHEET AVAILABLE. WE WILL PUT THE TERM SHEET UP ON OUR WEBSITE SO THAT YOU CAN PICK IT UP ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S WEBSITE. AND THAT SHOULD BE UP IF NOT TODAY TOMORROW. AND THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE AT OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING, WHICH IS THE 2ND OF DECEMBER.

>>GARZA: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER ASKED WE SCHEDULE THE 2ND AND THE 9TH FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS SO WE'LL HAVE THAT ON THE TENTATIVE AGENDA YOU WILL GET NEXT WEEK. WE'LL HAVE THAT ALSO ON THE 9TH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY YOU DESCRIBED A PERSONALITY TYPE THERE AT ONE POINT IN YOUR REMARKS AND I KNOW YOU'VE THOUGHT ABOUT IT, I'M SURE THOSE ARE ACCURATE REMARKS ABOUT THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY LIKE THAT, I SUPPOSE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY I THINK THERE IS PEOPLE THAT CAN BE UNREASONABLE ON EVERY SIDE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: NO QUESTION.

>>SLUSHER: AND CERTAINLY NOT JUST ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL APPROACH TO THINGS. AND WE CAN SEE THAT EVERY DAY. AND I ALSO THINK THAT MEMBERS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNITY HAVE JUST BEEN INCREDIBLY COOPERATIVE IN TRYING TO WORK OUT AGREEMENTS WITH PAST ADVERSARIES AND I THINK WE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS ON THAT. FOR INSTANCE, THE CSC DEAL, THE CONVENTION CENTER, ALL THAT STUFF IS GETTING READY TO HAPPEN DOWNTOWN WHERE WE SAY WE WANT TO MOVE THINGS, AND I THINK SOME OF THE -- SOME OF THE CITIZENS MAY BE SURPRISED AT THE MAGNITUDE OF WHAT HAS BEEN APPROVED WHEN IT STARTS GOING UP AND STREETS GET BLOCKED OFF SO I THINK THAT CITIZENS HAVE GONE A LONG WAY IN TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE GROWTH AND BEEN VERY REASONABLE ABOUT IT AND ARE BASICALLY TRYING JUST TO PRESERVE ONE AREA FROM BECOMING URBANIZED. EVEN THE LAKE TRAVIS AREA AND LAKE AUSTIN AREA ARE -- WHERE IT'S STILL SOMEWHAT SPARSELY POPULATED, BUT EVEN THOSE ARE LINED WITH MILLION DOLLAR MANSIONS AND HIGH-PRICED HOMES THAT IT'S REALLY VERY DIFFICULT FOR FOLKS TO -- FOR THE PUBLIC TO FIND MANY PLACES TO GO THERE AND THAT BARTON SPRINGS, THE BARTON CREEK GREENBELT, THOSE BELONG TO EVERYBODY AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY PEOPLE ARE FIGHTING SO HARD TO PRESERVE THEM AND WHY THEY CAN BE SO EMOTIONAL ABOUT IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER COMMENTS? MR. DOBSON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. COUNCIL, WHAT I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND WE DO IS THAT WE RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION UNTIL 1:30. THE PURPOSE OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE TO ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.074, TO CONSIDER THE COMPENSATION BENEFITS PACKAGE PAID TO THE CITY MANAGER. CONSIDER THE APPOINTMENT AND COMPENSATION OF MUNICIPAL COURT SUBSTITUTE JUDGES, ASSOCIATE JUDGES AND THE COMMUNITY COURT JUDGE FOR THE 2000-2001 JUDICIAL TERM. PRIVATE CONSULTATION PURSUANT TO 551 IN THE GOVERNMENT CODE IN THE CASE OF DANIEL L. GONZALES AND MARK GONZALES VERSUS CITY OF AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT, ERIC DE LOS SANTOS AND SUE ORTEN, CAUSE NO. 99-03298 IN THE TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT. DISCUSS LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO THE NOVEMBER 1, 1999 NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUE FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT DELIVERED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN BY THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO 1:306789 MOTION MADE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. WE'RE IN RECESS. TEST TEST

>>LEWIS: DIDN'T I SEE SOMEONE HERE FROM THE HISPANIC CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION? OH, HERE YOU COME. OH, WE HAVE A WHOLE GROUP. WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED. I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE A LOT OF MONEY TO MAKE THIS AFTERNOON.

>> WE LOST HALF.

>>LEWIS: DON'T CHARGE IT TO ME BECAUSE I DIDN'T MAKE ANY. THIS IS A PROCLAMATION FOR THE COMMUNITY MENTOR INITIATIVE DAY SIGNED BY THE MAYOR AND -- WELL, IT DOESN'T LIST THE OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS SO I GUESS HE IS THE ONLY ONE THAT IS INITIATING IT. [LAUGHTER] LET ME READ -- I'M GOING TO READ JUST A PORTION OF THE BEGINNING AND THEN THE SPONSORS OR THE PEOPLE THAT IS WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION. THE COMMUNITY MENTOR PROTEGE INITIATIVE DAY IN AUSTIN AND CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN RECOGNIZING THE PROGRAM WELL ESTABLISHED CONSTRUCTION COMPANY MENTORS WITH SMALL ENGINEERING AND MINORITY OR WOMEN OWNED COMPANIES TO HELP THEM DEVELOP THAT YOU REMEMBER BUSINESS AND TECHNICAL SKILLS IN RECOGNIZING THESE LONGTERM WORKING RELATIONSHIP BENEFIT THE MENTORS AND PROTEGES AND THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. AND IN RECOGNIZING THE SUCCESS OF THIS PROGRAM IS DUE TO SUPPORT FROM THE AUSTIN CHAPTER OF THE ASSOCIATION OF GENERAL CONTRACTORS, THE AUSTIN BLACK CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, THE AUSTIN HISPANIC CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE CITY OF AUSTIN, THE BUSINESS INVESTMENT AND GROUP -- BUSINESS INVESTMENT AND GROWTH, THE TRAVIS COUNTY, THE CAPITAL METRO -- CAPITAL METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY AND THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. I CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN CONGRATULATING THESE GROUPS ON THE SUCCESS OF THE COMMUNITY MENTOR PROTEGE INITIATIVE AND ENCOURAGE THEM IN ENFORCING BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS. BASICALLY -- AND I'M SURE THERE IS SOMEONE OUT THERE THAT DOESN'T UNDERSTAND HA THIS MEANS, BUT BASICALLY LARGE BUSINESS, SMALL -- HELPING SMALL BUSINESSES TO DEVELOP THEIR SKILLS. WELL, THANK YOU. AND I'M GOING TO -- I DON'T KNOW WHO WANTS TO SPEAK --

>> WE WOULD LIKE FOR OUR CHAIRPERSON STEVE SWANSON TO SPEAK.

>>LEWIS: HOW ARE YOU DOING? I JUST WANT TO TELL THE PEOPLE, WHY DON'T WE JUST GO AROUND AND SO THE PEOPLE -- I'M SURIST CAMERA IS ON YOU GUYS. JUST GO AROUND AND SAY WHO YOU ARE SO THE PEOPLE WILL KNOW SO WHEN THE QUESTIONS COME IN THEY WON'T COME TO ME, BUT THEY WILL GO TO YOU GUYS.

>> MICHAEL, DEVELOPMENT.

>> [INAUDIBLE] DAVIS.

>> STEVE SWANSON WITH AUSTIN ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS.

>> ROBERT WERH, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR [INAUDIBLE].

>> PETE MONTOYA.

>> [INAUDIBLE] COMFORTERS ASSOCIATION.

>> BLAKE SMITH, CITY OF AUSTIN SMALL MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCES.

>> JANUARY WATSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR SMALL AND MINORITY BUSINESS RESOURCES.

>> JIM RAR REN. [INAUDIBLE].

>> PAMELA CUNNINGHAM, AUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.

>> LINELLE CLARK, AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.

>> CAROLYN BLACK, AUSTIN CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION.

>>LEWIS: COME ON UP AND SAY WHATEVER YOU LIKE AS LONG AS IT'S NOT TOO LONG.

>> FIRST OF ALL --.

>>LEWIS: NOT CHARGING ME.

>> WE WOULD LIKE TO START BY THANKING THE CITY. THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTED THE LAST TWO AND A HALF YEARS TO THIS EFFORT AND MAINLY THROUGH THE PARTICIPATION OF BLAKE SMITH, WHO IS NOT ONLY BROUGHT A GREAT DEAL OF EXPERIENCE, BUT HE'S ALSO LENDED A GREAT DEAL OF WISDOM AND ON REGULAR OCCASION A GREAT DEAL OF LEADERSHIP. SO WE WANT TO HAVE A SPECIAL THANK YOU TODAY FOR OUR REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE CITY. [APPLAUSE].

>> WE ARE YOUNG, WE ARE JUST STARTING. AND WE SEE THAT RIGHT NOW WHAT WE'RE DOING IS CULTIVATING, WE'RE STIRRING THE DIRT AND WE DO HAVE SOME SEEDS PLANTED. OUR VISION IS FOR THE FUTURE. WE HOPE IN FIVE TO TEN YEARS PEOPLE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK BACK AT THIS EFFORT AND SEE THAT IT'S BEEN PRODUCTIVE AND WORTHWHILE FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THIS GROUP FOUNDED ITSELF ON THE SPIRIT OF COMMUNITY. FIRST THING WE RECOGNIZED IS A NEED FOR RELATIONSHIPS, CARE AND UNDERSTANDING OF EACH OTHER. AND FROM THAT WE STARTED TO DISCOVER WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO TOGETHER. WE NOW ARE FOCUSING ON NEW RELATIONSHIPS THROUGHOUT OUR COMMUNITY, BUILDING THEM, CREATING THEM AND BUILDING THEM. HAVE THEM BE CONSTRUCTIVE AND EVENTUALLY SUPPORT OUR COMMON INTERESTS. WE LIVE AND ARE FORTUNATE TO LIVE IN A COMMUNITY THAT DOES SPEAK A GREAT DEAL ABOUT COLLABORATION. AND WE WOULD LIKE TO COMMIT THAT CMPI IS HERE TO DO OUR PART TO NOT ONLY LIVE IT BUT TO SHARE IT. AND WE WOULD ASK THE COUNCIL TO JOIN US IN THAT EFFORT. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING THAT ALL THESE ASSOCIATIONS HAVE DONE AND ESPECIALLY THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE RECOGNITION THAT WE RECEIVED TODAY. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>LEWIS: WELL, BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY, I DON'T KNOW WHO GETS IT. I KNOW WHO -- WHO IS GOING TO GET IT? YOU WILL GET IT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING, MR. SMITH, SINCE THIS IS -- -- HERE, LET ME GET A MICROPHONE HERE. SINCE EVERYONE GAVE YOU ALL THE CREDIT FOR EVERYTHING.

>> I BASICALLY WANT TO SAY IT'S BEEN A BIG HONOR TO WORK ON THIS PROGRAM WITH THESE PEOPLE. I THINK IT'S THE KIND OF PROGRAM THAT REALLY CREATES A LOT OF BENEFIT FOR THE COMMUNITY. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THE CITY OF AUSTIN -- SEE THE CITY OF AUSTIN INVEST ITSELF IN PROGRAMS BASED ON THE KIND OF PRINCIPLES THIS ONE IS BASED ON AND AS OFTEN AS IT POSSIBLY CAN. IT'S BEEN A REAL PRACTICAL PROGRAM THAT'S BROUGHT A LOT OF BENEFIT TO SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AND IT'S ALSO BEEN A REALLY GOOD COMMUNITY-BUILDING TOOL. WE HAVE A REAL DIVERSE GROUP THAT SUPPORTS THE PROGRAM,, HAVE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER AND DISCOVERED SOMETHING IN COMMON THEY CAN WORK TOWARD THAT WILL BENEFIT US ALL.

>>LEWIS: THANK YOU, BLAKE. [APPLAUSE].

>>GOODMAN: FOR OUR SECOND PROCLAMATION OF TODAY, LET ME GIVE A LITTLE PROLOG TO THIS PRESENTATION. LATELY THE AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN HAS BEEN LOOKING AT SOME OF THE MORE NEGATIVE SIDES OF OUR BOARD AND COMMISSION PARTICIPATION, AND I WANT TO COME OUT TODAY FOR A LITTLE RECOGNITION OF THE VERY POSITIVE COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN OUR BOARDS AND COMMITTEES. WHEN THE PERSON I'M ABOUT TO ACCLAIM RECEIVED A VERY PRESTIGOUS AWARD RECENTLY, THE PAPER WAS I GUESS UNAWARE OF THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT COVERED. SO WHEN WE DO THINK ABOUT THE MANY VERY HARD WORKING FOLKS WHO GIVE THEIR TIME AND EXPERTISE TO THIS CITY, I THINK THAT THAT DESERVES A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION TOO AND I HOPE THAT THE EDITOR AGREES WITH ME AND LOOKS AT ALL THE FINE FOLKS OVER THE YEARS WHO HAVE DONE SO MUCH FOR THIS CITY. AND THAT IS THE LEAD-IN TO A DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD FOR A PLANNING COMMISSIONER WHO HAS TO BE MY APPOINTMENT NAMED BETTY BAKER, AND IF I COULD ASK MS. BAKER, WHO HOPEFULLY NEVER HEARD A WORD OF THIS UNTIL THIS MOMENT WILL COME FORWARD. [APPLAUSE].

>>GOODMAN: I DID NOT CHECK OUT THE BACKGROUND, BUT I BELIEVE THAT MS. BAKER IS THE ONLY AUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSIONER EVER TO RECEIVE THE TEXAS CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION'S AWARD FOR BEST PLANNING COMMISSIONER IN TEXAS. SO LET ME READ THEN THE DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD IS A ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND APPRECIATION OF HER UNTIRING EFFORTS AND UNSELFISH SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY HAVING SERVED AS CHAIR AND CURRENTLY SERVING AS A MEMBER OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION AND IN RECOGNITION OF BEING NAMED 1999 PLANNING COMMISSIONER AWARD WINNER BY THE TEXAS CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION, BETTY BAKER IS DESERVING OF PUBLIC ACCLAIM AND RECOGNITION, SIGNED THIS 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, AD, 1999, THE CITY COUNCIL OF AUSTIN, TEXAS AND SIGNED BY OUR MAYOR, KIRK WATSON. THANK YOU, BETTY. [APPLAUSE].

>> YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT, BUT I'M GLAD YOU DID. [LAUGHTER].

>>GOODMAN: THAT'S IT? [APPLAUSE].

>>GOODMAN: THERE IS RICHARD. RICHARD. AND OUR SECOND PROCLAMATION IS ALSO VERY TIMELY CONSIDERING THAT WE'RE COMING CLOSE TO THANKSGIVING NOW AND WE ALL ARE POSSIBLY MORE AWARE AT THIS TIME OF YEAR THAN OTHERS OF WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE. THIS PROCLAMATION IS TO LET IT BE KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS DOES HEREBY PROCLAIM NOVEMBER 14 THROUGH 21, 1999 AS NATIONAL HUNGER AND HOMELESSNESS AWARENESS WEEK AND CALLS ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN RECOGNIZING THE SEVERE DEVASTATION FACED BY THE HOMELESS POPULATION IN AUSTIN AND THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY AND IN COMMENDING THE ADVOCATES FOR THE HOMELESS WHO ARE UNITING ACROSS THE NATION TO CALL ATTENTION TO THIS WASTE OF HUMAN POTENTIAL, NEED LESS SUFFERING AND TRAGIC LOSS OF LIFE. WE DO THANK YOU, WE DO APPRECIATE YOU, AND IT'S SIGNED BY KIRK WATSON, OUR MAYOR. RICHARD, PLEASE ACCEPT IT.

>> THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU, JACKIE, THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. MY NAME IS RICHARD TROXELL, I AM PRESIDENT OF HOUSE THE HOMELESS. EACH YEAR WE TAKE A MOMENT AWAY FROM OUR ADVOCACY AND MEMBERS OF THE HOMELESS COMMUNITY AND WE STOP AND WE RECOGNIZE THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE DIED ON OUR STREETS OF AUSTIN OVER THE LAST YEAR. WE ALSO HAVE AN ORGANIZATION CALLED THE AUSTIN AREA HOMELESS COALITION AND THEY MEET THE THIRD FRIDAY OF EACH MONTH WHERE PEOPLE FROM ALL PARTS, ALL WALKS OF LIFE TRY AND COME AND DEAL WITH CONCERNS ABOUT HOMELESSNESS. I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A SECOND AND INTRODUCE YOU TO THE CHAIR ELECT. BEFORE I DO THAT I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE TO YOU JOIN US ON THE SOUTH SHORES OF TOWN LAKE THIS SUNDAY. WE WILL HOLD OUR -- WHAT HAS BECOME AN ANNUAL EVENT, MEMORIAL SUN RISE SERVICE FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE DIED. IT WILL BE AT 7:01 AND IT WILL LAST NO MORE THAN AN HOUR. IT'S AN HOUR OF OUR TIME TO SEND A VERY CLEAR MESSAGE THAT WE NEED TO END THIS THING CALLS HOMELESSNESS IN OUR LIFETIME. I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE YOU TO BEN ABIDAGA WHO HAS BEEN THE CHAIR ELECT FOR THE LAST YEAR OF THE AUSTIN AREA HOMELESS COALITION AND IS NOW AND WILL BE FOR THE NEXT YEAR THE CHAIR OF THE AUSTIN AREA HOMELESS COALITION AND WHO WILL NEED THE SUPPORT OF EACH PERSON WHO HEARS MY VOICE TODAY AND ALL OF THE CITY COUNCIL. BEN? [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS BEN ABIDAGO. I'M HIGHLY DELIGHTED TO BE HERE TO THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE YOU. BUT I WILL NOT FORGET THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS ALWAYS BEEN AROUND AND THEY HAVE ALWAYS SUPPORTED HOMELESS ISSUES. BUT I ALSO WANT TO REMIND THE CITIZENS THAT HOMELESSNESS IS NOT ONE PERSON'S PROBLEM. I'M CALLING ON EVERY ONE OF YOU TO SUPPORT ME TO DO THIS WORK THAT YOU HAVE CALLED ME TO SERVE YOU. I THINK WE HAVE A RECORD OF DOING A PUBLIC WORK AND I BELIEVE IN YOU AND I NEED YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> I WOULD NOW ASK BEN TO LEAD US IN THE READING OF THE NAMES.

>> I WILL START BY READING THE FIRST THREE NAMES. JERRY NOONA AND STACIE HOPPY.

>> BRENT GAFFORD, ANDY, DON'T KNOW HIS LAST NAME, WHILEMAN.

>> WALTER C. ALLEN, JR., ANNA LOUISE GOMEZ AND ROBERT DURAN.

>> PRESTON HAMPTON, LINDA K. BRIGHT, GLENN BUYERS.

>> RUTH CUTLER, JAMES T. WALLEN AND ANTONIO OHAREN.

>> ROBERT FULLER, TEAR DROP, BERN ARRESTED TIMOTHY HAVEN.

>> PAUL ORTEN, CARLOS AGUILAR, DAVID JUNIOR.

>> ME. I ALREADY READ THEM.

>> MARK HUGSTEAD, FRED BUTCH WILSON AND SANTA CLAUS.

>> GEORGE KEITH MORRISON, PAM HATTEN AND LITTLE BEAR.

>> PAMELA BRAD FORWARD, STEVEN THOMAS, PRESTON HAMPTON.

>> MERCEDES RODRIGUEZ, MEXICAN CHA VERA AND CHICKEN FRIED MIKE.

>> LEWIS MASON, KIM ATKINS, GEORGE BAGLEY JUNIOR AND DARK CLOUD.

>> ROBERT EASILY, COLLETTE WALLERS AND GIGI THOMAS.

>> GARY URBAN, SHORTY, DAVID TIMOTHY ANDERSON, VICTOR PAUL LERMA, YOU'VE JUST HEARD THE NAMES OF 41 PEOPLE THAT DIED ON THE STREETS OF AUSTIN THIS YEAR. LAST YEAR WE READ 39 NAMES. PEOPLE ARE DYING AT THE RATE OF MORE THAN THREE A MONTH. THIS IS AN EPIDEMIC. DON'T PASS LAWS AGAINST US, HELP US TO HELP OURSELVES. PAY US FAIR WAGES. HELP US TO ENTER THE JOB STREAM. HELP US TO TAKE CARE OF EACH OTHER. THANK YOU, JACKIE. [APPLAUSE].

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE HAVE SOME FOLKS FROM WESTWOOD HIGH SCHOOL HERE. COME ON UP. BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM NOVEMBER 14TH THROUGH 21ST, 1999, AS FREE ENTERPRISE WEEK IN AUSTIN. AND I CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN RECOGNIZING THAT FREE KPER PRICE OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE AMERICAN ECONOMY, IN RECOGNIZING THE STUDENTS OF WESTWOOD HIGH SCHOOL FOR OPENING AN INTERNET BUSINESS CALLED AUSTIN SPECIALS.COM AS PART OF A NATIONAL DECCA PROJECT WHICH TEACHES THE CONCEPTS OF FREE ENTERPRISES AND REALIZE THEY ARE LEARNING ENTREPRENEURIAL SKILLS AND MARKETING AS THEY PROMOTE THEIR COMPANY. I CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN COMMENDING THESE YOUNG PEOPLE FOR ACCEPTING THE CHALLENGE AND FINANCIAL RISK OF OPENING AND BUSINESS AND WISHING THEM ALL GREAT SUCCESS WITH THIS PROJECT AND IN THE FUTURE AND IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN. CONGRATULATIONS AND THANKS FOR ALL YOU ARE DOING FOR US. PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELVES. [APPLAUSE].

>> HI, I'M FANNY.

>> I'M ANGELA NELSON.

>> AND WE'RE FROM WESTWOOD DECCA. WHAT THAT IS IS IT'S AN ASSOCIATION OF MARKETING STUDENTS AND THIS YEAR OUR PROJECT IS TO PROMOTE FREE ENTERPRISE.

>> OUR PROJECT CONSISTS OF EDUCATING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS, ALSO EVERYONE IN GENERAL. WE HAVE CREATED CURRICULUM FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENT TEACHERS SO THAT THEY CAN TEACH THEIR STUDENTS AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FREE ENTERPRISE AND THE FIVE BASIC ECONOMIC FREEDOMS. WE'VE ALSO MADE AN ILLUSTRATION CONTEST FOR THESE STUDENTS IN WHICH THEY COULD WIN A $1,000 SAVINGS BOND SPONSORED BY GUARANTEE FEDERAL BANK.

>> OUR DECCA CHAPTER ALSO HAS -- WE HAVE DEVELOPED THIS INTERNET BASED BUSINESS WHERE YOU CAN GO ON THE WEBSITE AND PRINT AND CUT OUT COUPONS THAT YOU CAN USE THROUGHOUT THE AUSTIN AREA RESTAURANTS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: GREAT. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU AND GOOD LUCK. [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE HAVE FOLKS HERE FROM THE COMMUNITY EDUCATION CONSORTIUM. GOOD DEAL. COME ON UP. WHILE THEY ARE COMING UP, BE IT KNOWN THAT I KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM NOVEMBER 15TH THROUGH 19TH, 1999, AS COMMUNITY EDUCATION WEEK IN AUSTIN AND I CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN RECOGNIZING THE COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAM AS A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. IN RECOGNIZING THAT COMMUNITY EDUCATION SPANS THE SPECTRUM OF FAMILY AND YOUTH H. YOUTH SUPPORT THROUGH A VARIETY OF PROGRAMS INCLUDING THE PRIME TIME AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM SERVING 14,000 CHILDREN FROM 37 SCHOOLS. THE VICTORY TUTORIAL PROGRAM AT AUSTIN PUBLIC LIBRARIES AND THE ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE PROGRAM FOR ADULTS. I CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN RECOGNIZING THAT THIS CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT PARTNERSHIP IS IN ITS 24TH YEAR AND IT HAS SERVED MORE THAN ONE MILLION CHILDREN AND ADULTS IN AUSTIN, AND IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS AND I COULDN'T BE MORE PLEASED TO PRESENT THAT TO YOU. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU, KIRK. AS PRESIDENT OF THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY EDUCATION CONSORTIUM AND ALSO AS PRESIDENT OF THE TEXAS COMMUNITY EDUCATION ADVISORY COUNSEL ASSOCIATION, IT GIVES ME GREAT PLEASURE TO ACCEPT THIS PROCLAMATION. THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST COOPERATIVE EFFORTS BY GOVERNMENTS THAT I KNOW ABOUT. IT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR SOME 27 YEARS. NOW NOT ONLY THE AISD AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN, BUT ALSO THE ACC AND TRAVIS COUNTY, AND THEY ARE ALL INVOLVED IN PROVIDING THESE -- HELPING PROVIDE THESE SERVICES TO THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN. AND NOW I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE DEACON FORD TO SAY SOME MORE WORDS. [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU. I WORK WITH CRIMINAL JUSTICE MINISTRY FOR THE DIOCESE OF AUSTIN AND SOME YEARS AGO I GOT TIED UP IN THIS AND I HAD THE MARVELOUS OPPORTUNITY, THESE PROGRAMS ARE THE BEST PREVENTION PROGRAMS WE HAVE FOR YOUNG CHILDREN TO KEEP THEM OUT OF TROUBLE. WE KEEP CHILDREN IN SCHOOL AND OUT OF TROUBLE AND GOING THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO JAIL, NOT GOING TO GET IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, NOT IN THE TEXAS YOUTH COMMISSION, NOT GOING TO GET IN THESE OTHER PLACES. IT'S A TREMENDOUS PROGRAM THAT HAS THE GREATEST WIDESPREAD REACH I THINK OF ANYTHING AND IT DOES A TREMENDOUS JOB IN KEEPING KIDS OUT OF TROUBLE. THAT'S OUR MAIN MISSION IN LIFE. IF WE CAN HELP THESE CHILDREN BE MOTIVATED AND FIND THINGS TO DO AND BE INTERESTED IN WHAT THEY DO IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS, THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE FINE. THESE CHILDREN HAVE A 3% HIGHER ATTENDANCE RATE THAN THE CHILDREN WHO DO NOT GO TO THESE PROGRAMS AND THAT'S PRETTY GOOD WHEN YOU START GOING OVER 90% IN ATTENDANCE SO IT HAS A TREMENDOUS EFFECT. WE THANK THE CITY COUNCILL FOR YOUR RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATE WORKING WITH THE CITY COUNCILL ON ALL OF THIS BECAUSE IT'S ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: NOW FOR A LITTLE MUSIC. WHY DON'T YOU ALL COME ON UP AND I'LL INTRODUCE YOU. HAVING TRAVELED VIRTUALLY THE WHOLE COUNTRY LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO LIVE, KAREN MAL AND CHRIS IRWIN CHOSE AUSTIN, THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD. KAREN IS ORIGINALLY FROM THE NEW EVENING LAND AREA AND CHRIS HAILS FROM TENNESSEE. THEY ARE BOTH NOW PROUD TO CALL AUSTIN HOME. AFTER SPENDING A NUMBER OF YEARS PERFORMING TOGETHER IN A THEATER COMPANY AS ACTORS AND MUSICIANS THEY HAVE HONED THEIR MUSICAL ABILITIES. THEY ARE HAVING TREMENDOUS SUCCESS PLAYING AROUND AUSTIN SINCE THEY ARRIVED SO LET'S GIVE A WARM WELCOME TO OUR NEW RESIDENTS, KAREN MAL AND CHRIS IRWIN AND I'M PROUD TO CLAIM NOVEMBER 18, 1999 AS KAREN MAL AND CHRIS IRWIN DAY IN AUSTIN, TEXAS. [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU SO MUCHAS GRACIAS. WE WOULD LIKE TO HONOR AN AUSTIN SONG WRITER WE RESPECT VERY MUCH, TISH HINOJOSA. (music) (music) SINGING IN SPANISH (music) (music) [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: TELL US WHERE YOU ARE PLAYING NEXT TIME. LET US KNOW WHERE YOU ARE GOING TO BE PLAYING IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

>> THIS WEEKEND THE 19TH, TOMORROW, FRIDAY NIGHT, IS FIVE STAR BARBECUE, SATURDAY NIGHT IS GILLIGAN'S AND EVERY THURSDAY AT SHAGGIES FROM 6:30 TO 8:30 AND WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO PUT IN A GOOD WORD FOR THE AUSTIN MUSIC NETWORK. SO THANKS. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU ALL. DON'T FORGET YOUR PROC. WE DECLARED TODAY YOUR DAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. BETTER TAKE IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU ALL. WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE RISE AND JOINS US IN THE DELIVERY OF THE INVOCATION WHICH WILL BE DELIVERED BY THE REVEREND TAMMY BROWN OF COVENANT PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. NO?

>> TOMMY JOHNSON.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WELL, I'M SORRY. PASTOR, THAT WASN'T MADE AWARE TO ME. I APPRECIATE YOUR BEING HERE WITH US TODAY. THANK YOU.

>> IF YOU WILL BOW YOUR HEADS. HEAVENLY FATHER, WE THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO LIVE IN SUCH A BEAUTIFUL CITY AS AUSTIN, TEXAS. FATHER, GOD, WE UNDERSTAND THAT SOMETIMES WE MAY NOT ALL AGREE ON THE THINGS THAT LIFE PRESENTS TO US, BUT HELP US TO BE DEGREEABLE WITH ONE ANOTHER. LORD, GOT, WE GIVE YOU ALL HONOR AND GLORY IN YOUR HONOR AND NAME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: PASTOR, WILL YOU TELL US -- GIVE US YOUR NAME AND TELL US WHERE YOU SERVE?

>> I'M PASTOR TONY JOHNSON. I RUN A MINISTRY CALLED THE MINISTRY OF CHALLENGE IN EAST AUSTIN THAT HOUSES PEOPLE WITH DRUG ADDICTION AND ALCOHOL ADDICTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO AND APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL CALL BACK TO ORDER THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PUBLIC SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCILL. FIRST LET ME READ CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA. ITEM NO. 35 IS TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE GENERAL SERVICE COMMISSION, THAT IS POSTPONED TO DECEMBER 2, 1999. ITEM NO. 59 IS TO AMEND AN ORDINANCE, NO. 990914-1, THE 1999-2000 OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE CULTURAL ARTS FUND. PLEASE DELETE AT THE END OF THAT PARAGRAPH FUNDING FROM THE CULTURAL ARTS FUND AND REPLACE IT WITH FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $144,810 WILL COME FROM THE CULTURAL ARTS FUND, $105,190 FROM GENERAL FUND AND SOME $100,000 ADVERTISING REVENUE IS EXPECTED TO COME FROM THE AVIATION FUND FOR ASSISTANCE AND INCREASING THE LIVE MUSIC VENUES AT THE AIRPORT FROM TWO NIGHTS TO FIVE NIGHTS PER WEEK. ITEM 62 IS POSTPONED INDEFINITELY. ITEM NO. 63 IS POSTPONED INDEFINITELY. ITEM NO. 65, INSTEAD OF INDICATING IT WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD, IT SHOULD SAY RECOMMENDED BY AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. ITEM NO. 68, THE SAME. IT SHOULD SAY RECOMMENDED BY THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. ITEM 84 IS TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS OUTLINING NEXT STEMS FOR DECOMMISSIONING THE SEAHOLM POWER PLANT AND SOLICITING PROPOSALS FOR REUSE OF THE PLANT SHOULD SHOW IT IS BEING SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH AND MAYOR WATSON. ITEM 13 POSTPONED TO -- ITEM 114 IS POSTPONED AND ITEM 115 POSTPONED. ITEM SET FOR A TIME CERTAIN, AT 3:30 P.M. ITEMS 88 AND 89. TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING WITH RESPECT TO ISSUANCE OF ABIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AIRPORT FACILITIES REVENUE BONDS AND TO APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF AIRPORT -- AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS, PRINCIPALSTON AND STONY CREEK PROJECT. AT 4:00 ITEMS 90 THROUGH 112. THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA --.

>>GARCIA: MAYOR, THERE IS A FEW LITTLE CORRECTIONS THAT ARE NOT HERE. ON ITEM NO. 37 THAT HAS A M.B.E. AND W.B.E. PARTICIPATION THAT IS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. THAT SHOULD BE 9.0 M.B.E., 18.2 DBE. ALSO ON ITEM 42, 43 AND 44, WE'RE SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN 42 -- 43 AND 44 WE'RE APPROVING THINGS. SHOULD THIS BE DONE AT THE TIME WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. FROM THE BACK JERUSALEM I COULDN'T FIGURE IT OUT. cN BACKUP I COULDN'T FIGURE IT OUT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE'LL PULL THOSE AND I'LL MAKE SURE YOUR QUESTION IS ANSWER.

>>GARCIA: ITEM 48, THESE ARE JUST SIMPLE THINGS, WE'RE EXTENDING THE DATE FOR PAYMENT, BUT THE BACKUP DOESN'T SAY WHETHER WE'RE ALSO EXTENDING THE LETTER OF CREDIT. THEY GIVE YOU -- GIVE US A LETTER OF CREDIT. WE'RE EXTENDING THE DATE FOR THEM TO PAY BUT I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE'RE ALSO SUPPOSED TO GIVE ONE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHAT ITEM?

>>GARCIA: 48.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: YES, THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO SET ITEM 77 FOR 6:30 IF THERE IS NOT ALREADY SOMETHING THERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME COME BACK TO THAT AND WE'LL SEE ABOUT IT. OKAY. I'LL COME BACK TO THAT. YES.

>>GARCIA: 42, 43 AND 44 ARE FINE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. ALL RIGHT OF THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 4, 1999. IS THERE A MOTION?

>>GARCIA: SO MOVED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBERS GARCIA AND SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. NEXT WILL BE GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS. THE FIRST IS ERNEST SAMUDIO. SECOND IS AUBREY EDWARDS AND THIRD DR. MARK BERSTEIN. ERNEST SAMUDIO.

>> HELLO, MAYOR WATSON AND CITY COUNCILLMEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TO YOU. TODAY I'LL BE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO BAN ANIMAL ACTS IN AUSTIN. I HAVE A LETTER FROM THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES THAT I WOULD LIKE TO READ TO YOU. TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES, THE NATION'S LARGEST ANIMAL PROTECTION ORGANIZATION WITH MORE THAN 6 MILLION MEMBERS AND CONSTITUENTS STRONGLY OPPOSES THE USE OF WILD ANIMALS IN CIRCUSES, TRAVELING SHOWS, PETTING ZOOS AND NIGHTCLUB ACTS BECAUSE CRUELTY TO ANIMALS IS INHIRNT. IF LIVES OF THESE ANIMALS ARE STRESSFUL AND THEY ARE ROUTINELY SUBJECTED TO INADEQUATE DIETS AND EXPOSED TO THE POOR AND OFTEN CRUEL PRACTICES OF UNTRAINED PERSONNEL. THEIR PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO IMMEDIATE. EXCESSIVE AND ABUSIVE TRAINING METHODS ARE USED TO COERCE THE ANIMALS TO PERFORM TRICKS. IN ADDITION THE STANDARDS FOR THE HUMANE HANDLING, CARE, TREATMENT AND TRANSPORTATION OF EXHIBITION ANIMALS UNDER THE FEDERAL ANIMAL WE WILL WEAR ACT ADMINISTERED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ARE MINIMAL IN NATURE AND POORLY ENFORCED. THIS PERMITS CIRCUSES AND TRAVELING ANIMAL SHOWS TO OPERATE JUST AT OR BELOW THE STANDARDS. FURTHERMORE THE FACILITIES WHICH ARE NOT IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE ACT ARE FREQUENTLY GIVEN ONLY A WARNING TO IMPROVE AND PERSISTENT VIOLATORS ARE RARELY PROSECUTED BY THE USDA. THE INCREASING NUMBER OF INJURIES AND DEATHS ASSOCIATED WITH PERFORMING WILD ANIMALS EACH YEAR IS CAUSE FOR SERIOUS CONCERN ALSO. THE POTENTIAL RISK OF SUCH ENTERTAINMENT IN THE VIEW OF THE HUMANE SOCIETY ARE TOO DANGEROUS FOR PEOPLE AND ANIMALS. IT HAS LED TO THE PASSAGE OF LOCAL LAWS THAT PROHIBIT OR RESTRICT THE USE OF WILD ANIMALS IN PERFORMANCE AND PROMPTED INVESTIGATION AND INQUIRY BY STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES RESPONSIBLE FOR BOTH ANIMAL WELFARE AND PUBLIC SAFETY. THE HUMANE SOCIETY QUESTIONS THE OFTEN HEARD NOTION THAT WILD ANIMALS AND PERFORMANCE SETTINGS ARE EDUCATIONAL TOOLS FOSTERING A SENSE OF CONCERN FOR THE PRESERVATION OF ANIMALS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT SUCH A CLAIM. ON THE CONTRARY, THE IMAGE OF AND ATTITUDE TOWARD WILDLIFE DEMONSTRATED AND REINFORCED BY PERFORMING ANIMALS IS NOT IN THE INTEREST OF ANIMAL, ENVIRONMENT OR AUDIENCE. INSTEAD OF PROVIDING A POINT OF VIEW THAT PROMOTES AN UNDERSTANDING FOR WHAT A WILD AND MA IS AND DOES, ANIMAL ABILITIES REDUCE THE ANIMAL TO MORE MORE THAN A FANTASY FIGURE OR A CLOWN FAR REMOVED FROM A NATURAL CONTEXT T MESSAGE SENT SAYS IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO TRAUMATIC AND ABUSE AN ANIMAL FOR THE SAME OF MASS ENTERTAINMENT. ANIMALS COMMONLY USED IN CIRCUSES AND OTHER ABILITIES ARE WILD AND DO BEHAVE INSTINCT I FEEL AND UNPREDICTABLE AND POSE A DANGER TO PUBLIC SAFETY. THERE SO NO REDEEMING EDUCATION OR CONSERVATION VALUE TO JUSTIFY THEIR PRESENCE IN ENTERTAINMENT. THE UNHUMANE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE MAJORITY OF PERFORMING ANIMALS CANNOT BE SUPPORTED BY ANYONE CONCERNED WITH ANIMAL WELFARE AND THIS IS SIGNED BY THE DIRECTOR OF CAPITAL WILDLIFE PROTECTION PROGRAM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>>GARCIA: I HAVE COPIES HERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AUBREY EDWARDS. AUBREY EDWARDS. YOU WILL BE FOLLOWED BY DR. MARK BERSTEIN. DR. BERSTEIN ARE YOU HERE?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: I JUST READ THEM AS I SEE THEM. IF YOU WILL COME FORWARD, I KNOW YOU AND I SHOULD HAVE DONE BETTER.

>> THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON AND THANK YOU, MAYOR WATSON AND CITY COUNCILL MEMBERS FOR GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS AUBREY EDWARDS AND TAKE I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BAN ANIMAL ACTS HERE IN AUSTIN. AS AN AUSTIN CITIZEN, I BELIEVE IT IS IMPERATIVE TO HALT CIRCUSES THAT USE ANIMALS THAT COME TO OUR CITY. THESE ANIMALS ARE A SERIOUS THREAT TO HUMANS. THERE HAVE BEEN 36 DEATHS AND OVER 100 INJURIES TO HUMANS DUE TO ELEPHANT ATAX SINCE 1990. 65 FELINE ATTACKS, ONE-THIRD OF THESE RESULTING IN FATAL INJURIES. OF THESE ATTACKS, SOME HAVE OCCURRED IN GAINESVILLE, LUBBOCK, SAN ANTONIO AND DALLAS. THERE IS ALSO THE WELL KNOWN CASE OF THE ELEPHANT TYKE WHO KILLED HIS TRAINER. INJURED AN ANIMAL HANDLER AND WENT ON A 30 MINUTE RAMPAGE IN THE STREETS OF HONOLULU. THESE CIRCUS ANIMALS DO NOT PROVIDE HARM ALSO ENTERTAINMENT AND ARE A THREAT TO THE CITIZENS OF OUR COMMUNITY. ELEPHANTS ARE ALSO A THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH N THE UNITED STATES THERE IS CURRENTLY AN EPIDEMIC OF TUBERCULOSIS AMONG CAPTIVE ELEPHANTS. TB IS AIRBORNE SPREAD FROM ELEPHANTS TO HUMANS. A DOCTOR WAS QUOTED AS SAYING IF TUBERCULOSIS IS DIAGNOSED IN AN ELEPHANT, THERE ARE CLEAR PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATIONS AS THE DISEASE CAN SPREAD BY CLOSE CONTACT BETWEEN THE INFECTED ANIMALS AND PEOPLE. ELEPHANTS ARE A THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH. THERE ARE MANY DOCUMENTED CASES OF CRUELTY AND ABUSE OF CIRCUS ANIMALS. IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR A RINGLING BROTHERS AND BARNUM AND BAILEY CIRCUS WAS UNDER FEDERAL INVESTIGATION FOR ELEPHANT ABUSE. AN ELEPHANT THAT REFUSED TO PERFORM HER TRICKS WAS BEATEN ON THE HEAD, THE TRUNK AND BEHIND THE FEET UNTIL THE HANDLE OF THE BULL HOOK SHATTERED. THIS LIST OF ABUSE IS NEVER ENDING. ELEPHANTS HAVE BEEN FOUND DEAD IN POORLY VENTILATED TRAILERS. MANY ELEPHANTS HAVE DEAD SKIN AND FEES SEES CAKED ON TO THEIR BODIES AND FOOT PADS AND THEY ARE COMMON BEAT WITH BULL HOOKS. WOUNDS ARE USUALLY DOUSED WITH MEDICAL OILS AND POWDERS INSTEAD OF BEING TREATED PROPERLY. ELEPHANTS ARE KEPT CHAINED EVEN WHILE SLEEPING. THEY ARE ONLY UNCHAINED TO PERFORM. CRUELTY AND ABUSE OF ANIMALS RUNS RAMPANT IN THE CIRCUS. IT IS FOR THESE REASONS THAT I ASK YOU TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BANNING EXOTIC ANIMAL ACTS FROM COMING TO OUR CITY. AUSTIN MUST PROTECT ITS CITIZENS FROM POSED HEALTH AND HARM DANGERS AND WE MUNT PERPETUATE THE CRUEL ABUSE OF THESE ANIMALS. WE MUST PASS THIS ORDINANCE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU.

>> MY NAME IS MARK BERSTEIN, A PHILOSOPHY PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS WHERE I'VE TAUGHT FOR A LITTLE OVER 17 YEARS. I SPOKE HERE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND I KNOW MOST OF YOU ARE TAKING NOTES SO I WON'T REPEAT MYSELF TOO GREATLY. BUT AS I SEE IT, THERE ARE THREE BASIC ISSUES HERE. WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERN, WE HAVE AN ANIMAL HEALTH CONCERN, AND SOMETHING WHICH IS A LITTLE MORE ETHERIAL BUT IMPORTANT IS A VALUE CONCERN, THAT IS WHAT KIND OF VALUES TO WE WANT OUR YOUTHS TO HAVE INSTILLED IN THEM AND TO BE GROWING UP WITH. DOCUMENTED CASES ABOUT PUBLIC HEALTH ARE WELL KNOWN, I'M NOT GOING THE REPEAT THE BULK OF THEM. WE HAVE MANY STORIES ABOUT THIS COUNTRY WHERE ENRAGED ELEPHANTS BREAK LOOSE AND TRAM BELIEVE HUMAN BEINGS, BIG CATS ESCAPING FROM CAGES AND ATTACKING PEOPLE. AS A MATTER OF FACT JUST HERE IN AUSTIN A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO I WAS PRIVY MYSELF TO SEEING A CARLOAD OF LIONS, MAYBE ABOUT FIVE OR SIX CARS, THE LAST ONE BECAME DECOUPLED FROM THE OTHERS WHILE SOMEBODY WAS DRIVING THIS TRAINLOAD OF CARS AND ONE OF THE LIE I DON'T THINK SO COULD HAVE EASILY ESCAPED FROM THE CAGE. AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT THE LION DIDN'T ESCAPE, BUT IT COULD HAVE AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A RATHER MESSY SITUATION HAVING AT THE ERWIN CENTER A WILD LION AMONG THOUSANDS IF NOT TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE. ALL RIGHT. SO THE HEALTH CONCERN WITH HUMANS I HOPE IS CLEAR CUT. THE HEALTH CONCERN WITH ANIMALS I HOPE WILL BE EQUALLY CLEAR CUT. YOU HEAR FROM THE OTHER SIDE THIS ABSOLUTE NONSENSE THAT THEY ARE NOT CRUEL TO THE ANIMALS. IMPOSSIBLE. IT'S INHERENTLY CRUEL TO THE ANIMALS TO -- THE WAY THEY TRANSPORT THEM AND BREED THEM AND TRANCE THEM FOR THEIR ANIMAL ACTIVITIES. AGAIN, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO THERE WAS A GUY WALKING THE -- ONE OF THE ELEPHANTS FROM THE AMTRAK STATION UP TO THE ERWIN CENTER, HELP THIS BIG BULL HOOK BEHIND THE EAR OF THE ELEPHANT GUIDING IT ALONG THE STREETS. AND I SAID DON'T YOU THINK THAT IS INCREDIBLY PAINFUL TO THE ELEPHANT AND HE SAID NO, ALL I'M TRYING TO TO DO IS APPLY PRESSURE TO THE ELEPHANT. HE FEELS THE PRESSURE SO HE WILL MOVE IN A CERTAIN DIRECTION. SO I SAID, I SEE. SO IF THAT'S TRUE WHY NOT USE A FLAT BOARD, SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T HAVE A SHARP HOOK OUT AND HE BECAME STRANGELY SILENT AT THAT MOMENT. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A SUBTERFUGE. IF IT WAS JUST PRESSURE THEY WANT THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO USE A HOOK FOR IT. ALL RIGHT, FINALLY WHAT KIND OF VALUES DO WE WANT INSTILLED IN OUR YOUTHS. YOUNG PEOPLE BY THEIR VERY NATURE HAVE A STRONG IDENTITY TO ANIMALS, THEY CARE FOR THEM, THEY LOVE THEM. ONCE THEY FIND OUT THAT ANIMALS SUFFER ABUSE TO BECOME CIRCUS ANIMALS, THEY ARE DISILLUSIONED BY THAT. DIFFERENT NICHES SHOULD BE TOLERATED AND APPLAUDED, IT SHOULDN'T BE SOMETHING THAT THE SUBSTANCE OF SOME OPPRESSION BY PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE POWER OVER THEM. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. LORENE MOORE. LORENE MOORE. LORENE MOORE. JASON NEUGENT. WELCOME, SIR. IS KAREN MEDICUS HERE? IF YOU WILL MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE MICROPHONE.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR WATSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS. I APPRECIATE THE CHANCE TO SPEAK TO YOU. MY NAME IS JASON NEUGENT, A ZOOKEEPER AT THE AUSTIN ZOO. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE STAFF OF THE AUSTIN ZOO IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO BAN ANIMAL ACTS IN AUSTIN. THE FOLLOWING IS A LETTER WRITTEN BY THE OWNER OF THE AUSTIN ZOO AND SIGNED BY THE STAFF. DEAR MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILL MEMBERS: AUSTIN ZOO EXISTS AS A SANCTUARY BECAUSE PEOPLE OFTEN GET OBJECTION ON THIC ANIMALS AND PETS AND FIND THEY CAN NO LONGER KEEP THEM. THESE ANIMALS ARE OFTEN COME WITH HEALTH PROBLEMS AND EMOTIONAL BAGGAGE. AUSTIN ZOO ATTEMPTS TO RIGHT THE WRONGS AND EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON THE HAZARDS OF WILD ANIMALS AS PETS. WE ASK THE CITY COUNCILL HELP US MEET OUR MISSION BY BANNING ANIMAL ACTS IN AUSTIN, TEXAS. IT HAS BEEN OUR EXPERIENCE THAT MANY EX COTIC -- EXOTIC PET OWNERS GET THE IDEA TO OWN A BIG CAT WHEN THEY SEE A CIRCUS ACT. THESE ANIMALS ARE FORCE TO DO HAVE AN UNNATURAL EXISTENCE FOR THE SAKE OF ENTERTAINMENT DOLLARS. MOST OF THE TRALING ANIMALS RARELY GET TO FEEL THE GROUND BENEATH THEIR FEET OR BASK IN THE SUN. OF UTMOST CONCERN ARE BIG CATS, ELEPHANTS AND PRIMATES, ALTHOUGH THE TRAVELING ABILITIES MUST BE LICENSED AND INSPECTED, IT IS REPAIR TO HAVE AN INSPECTION -- RARE TO HAVE AN INSPECTION ON THE ROAD. KPIBERS KNOW THIS AND ARE LACKS ON THE CARE AND TREATMENT OF ANIMALS DURING THIS TIME. NO ONE IS AROUND TO CORRECT THEM AND BY THE TIME USDA GETS A COMPLAINT THE EXHIBITER AND ANIMALS ARE OUT OF TOWN T PUBLIC IS NOT TRAINED TO SPOT AN ILL, MISTREATED ANIMAL AND IS OFTENTIMES SUBJECTING THEMSELVES TO DISEASE. TUBERCULOSIS, NOT UNCOMMON IN ELEPHANTS AND PRIMATES COMES TO MIND, NOT THE MENTION HERPES B. BIG CATS ARE DANGEROUS IN SIZE AND STRENGTH ALONE. MANY UNEXPERIENCED TRAININGER HAS DIED WHILE WORKING WITH A BIG CAT. PASSAGE OF THIS ORDINANCE WILL SHOW THE CITY OF AUSTIN CARES ABOUT WILD ANIMALS AND IS DOING SOMETHING PRO-ACTIVE. IT IS ALSO A PLUS IN REGARDS TO THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF ITS CITIZENS. SINCERELY, DIRECTOR OF THE AUSTIN ZOO AND STAFF OF THE AUSTIN ZOO. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. MY NAME IS KAREN MEDICUS, I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE HUMANE SOCIETY SPCA IN AUSTIN AND FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WE ARE IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO BAN ANIMAL ACTS. SECONDLY ON A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT SUBJECT, I WOULD LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXCELLENT MANAGEMENT TEAM IN PLACE AT THE CITY ANIMAL SERVICES UNIT. THEY NEED YOUR SUPPORT. ANIMAL SERVICES IS A LARGE PROGRAM UNDER HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND I THINK IT'S TIME FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO TAKE ANIMAL ISSUES SERIOUSLY AND CREATE A DEPARTMENT FOR ANIMAL SERVICES BRINGING IT OUT OF THE DARK AGES. IT IS TOO BIG TO BE UNDER THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND IT SHOULD BE ITS OWN DEPARTMENT. I HOPE YOU WILL GIVE THIS SERIOUS CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>GOODMAN: MS. ALESHIRE.

>> YES, MY NAME IS MARY ALESHIRE AND I'M NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE ANIMAL ACTS ALTHOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO TELL YOU SOMETHING THAT IS AN ANIMAL ACT. REGARDING THE CHAPEL THAT IS BEING REBUILT FOR THE SURVIVORS OF THE BRANCH DAVIDIAN MASSACRE THAT HAPPENED IN 1993. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DID WAS THEY KILLED ALL THESE PEOPLE'S DOGS AND THEY RAN OVER THEM WITH -- THEY KILLED ALL THEIR DOGS AND RAN OVER THEM AND THEN THEY PUT THEM UP SOMEWHERE SO WHENEVER THEY LOOKED OUTSIDE THE WINDOWS THEY COULD SEE THAT -- THEIR DEAD DOGS HANGING ON THE FENCES. THAT'S WHAT THE FEDERAL-FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DID AT MOUNT CARMEL TO THE BRANCH DAVIDIANS BETWEEN MARCH AND APRIL OF 1993. WELL, A GROUP OF US GOT TOGETHER AND WE DECIDED THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO OUT THERE AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO REBUILD THE CHURCH AND SAY THAT IF YOU BURN IT, WE BUILD IT. SO IF YOU GO TO THE WEB PAGE WWW.REBUILDTHECHURCH.COM YOU CAN SEE HOW FAR WE'VE COME. WE FINISHED ABOUT HALF OF IT. I THINK IT'S LIKE 60 SOME FEET BY 40 FEET. IT'S A RATHER BIG CHURCH. SUPPOSEDLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET A LOT OF VISITORS IN THERE WHEN WE COME BACK. BELIEVE ME WE'VE HAD VISITORS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD COME AND ESPECIALLY SINCE WE STARTED BUILDING WE'VE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE SHOW UP. FIRST IT WAS REAL SCARY TO GO OUT THERE THE FIRST DAY, EVERYBODY WAS REAL SAD AND EVERYTHING BECAUSE WE KEPT DIGGING THESE HOLES TO PUT CEMENT IN AND REBAR AND WE KEPT FINDING LIKE THIS GLASS THAT JUST KIND OF BOILED. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE]. IT'S REAL HARD ON THE GUYS BECAUSE THEY GO OUT THERE ON SUNDAYS TO VOLUNTEER BECAUSE SATURDAY IS THE SABBATH FOR THE BRANCH DAVIDIANS. SO WE CAN ONLY BUILD ON SUNDAYS. WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO HAVE IT FINISHED BY FEBRUARY 28TH, WHICH IS THE ORIGINAL DATE THAT THE SIEGE TOOK PLACE ON THAT FATEFUL SUNDAY MORNING IN 1993. AND WE NEED HELP NOT ONLY WITH MONEY BECAUSE WE'RE HALFWAY THROUGH BUILDING IT AND WE, LIKE, WE GET ENOUGH TO GET ENOUGH SUPPLIES TO BUILD THAT WEEKEND. AND THEN THE NEXT WEEK WE SPEND ALL OUR TIME GETTING ENOUGH MONEY TOGETHER TO BUILD THE SUPPLIES FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEKEND. AND WE NEED VOLUNTEERS, WE NEED PEOPLE WHO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING WITH A HAMMER. [BUZZER SOUNDS]. AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MS. ALESHIRE. PAUL ROBINS FOLLOWED BY SHARON BLYTHE.

>> I HOPE DARYL COMES BACK TO HEAR ME. THE CITY OF AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL, AUSTIN'S ELECTRIC UTILITY NEEDS NEW POWER, LOTS OF IT. ACCORDING TO THEIR GENERATION PLAN THEY NEAT 430 MEGAWATTS. THAT'S ABOUT 20% OF THEIR SUMMER PEAK. IF YOU ADD THE AMOUNT NEED TO DO MEET THE COUNCIL'S GOAL OF RETIRING HOLLY STREET POWER PLANT, WHICH FOR SOME REASON WASN'T IN THE GENERATION PLAN, YOU NEED 970 MAG FWA WATTS. MY QUESTION IN POINT IS WHY WE ARE NOT DEFRAYING MORE OF THE POWER WITHIN ENERGY CONSERVATION WHICH IS LESS POLLUTING AND EXPENSIVE. I WANT TO PASS AROUND SOME CITY DOCUMENTS. I HOPE THIS DOESN'T COME OFF MY TIME. AGAIN, I HOPE THIS DOESN'T COME OFF MY TIME. THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO SEE THIS TO KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: STOP HIS TIME. PLEASE STOP HIS TIME, STOP THE CLOCK. OKAY. READY? ATTACHMENT A IS FROM THE ANNUAL STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT REPORT FOR THIS YEAR. NOTICE THE HIGH LIGHTS ON THE NEXT TO BOTTOM ROW. IT SAYS THAT IN RECENT HISTORY WE SAVED 15 TO 24 MEGAWATTS WATTS FROM THE COMMERCIAL INCENTIVE PROGRAMS THIS. YEAR WE'RE SAVING 8. WHY ARE WE SAVING SO LITTLE WHEN WE NEED 970 MEGAWATTS? NEXT SEE ATTACHMENTS B AND C. B IS A JUNE 1ST, 1999 MEMO TO COUNCIL ON CONSERVATION PROGRAMS. THE HANDWRITING IS DERIVED COST PER KILOWATT. C IS A HANDWRITING, MINE, SHOWS DERIVED COSTS FOR NEW GENERATION. WITHOUT HUGE ADDED COSTS FOR FUEL AND MAINTENANCE. COUNCIL, THE BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT YOU REJECTED SEPTEMBER 14TH WAS FOR $100 A KILOWATT. AUSTIN ENERGY STAFF TOLD YOU THAT THEY DIDN'T NEED NEW SAVINGS, THAT THEY HAD ACCELERATED THE EXISTING PROGRAMS AND THAT IF THEY DID NEED MORE SAVINGS THEY COULD GET IT CHEAPER. AND COUNCIL, I ASK YOU ON ATTACHMENTS B OR C, DO YOU SEE ANYTHING CHEAPER THAN $100 A KILOWATT? YOU DON'T. DO YOU SEE BY STAFF'S OWN NUMBERS THAT THERE IS MORE POTENTIAL FOR SAVINGS? OVER SIX YEARS THE INCREASED CONSERVATION YOU WOULD SAVE 36 MEGAWATTS WOULD SAVE $11 MILLION IN CAPITAL COSTS COMPARED TO NEW POWER PLANTS. AND COUNCIL, YOU HAVE BEEN MISLED BY STAFF AT AUSTIN ENERGY AND THIS IS THE LATEST EXAMPLE OF WHY AUSTIN ENERGY HAS NO BUSINESS RUNNING A CONSERVATION PROGRAM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MR. ROBINS. SHARON BLYTHE. FOLLOWED BY ROW LON DOUGH PINA.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M SHARON BYTE. I HOPE ALL OF YOU LISTEN TO ME. I KNOW YOU ARE WORKING ON SOMETHING, BUT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE WITH THE CITY. I KNOW THAT WE LIVE IN A GREAT CITY, BUT IF WE CAN'T LOOK TO OUR PAST, WE CAN'T REALLY MOVE AHEAD AND THIS ISSUE IS REGARDING AUSTIN MEMORIAL PARK CEMETERY. I WOULD LIKE TO READ A STATEMENT. CAN WE TRULY MOVE AHEAD WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE PAST? TAKING CARE OF OUR HISTORY. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT AUSTIN MEMORIAL PARK CEMETERY "LONG MOPAC BOULEVARD. I'VE BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH THE CEMETERY FOR TEN YEARS SINCE MY HUSBAND WAS BURIED THERE IN 1989. SHORTLY AFTER THAT, INNER CARE CORPORATION CONTRACTED WITH THE CITY FOR THE PERPETUAL CARE OF THE CEMETERY. SINCE THAT TIME SEVERAL ISSUES HAVE ARISEN. THE CITY TRYING TO SELL PART OF THE CEMETERY TO A CHURCH, THE MAINTENANCE HAS BEEN MARGINAL AND ON TO OPEN SUBSIDING GRAVES WHICH I HAD TO SEND PICTURES TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO GET THAT TARRON CARE. IT SEEMS THE CORPORATION DOES MORE MAINTENANCE ALONG THE STREETS THAN THEY DO ON THE INTERIOR. IT IS ONLY UNTIL SOMEONE COMES BEFORE THE COMMISSION OR CALLS THE COMMISSION STAFF THAT ANYTHING IS DONE OUT THERE FOR INDIVIDUAL NEEDS. SINCE 1991 INNER CARE HAS PROMISE TO DO REMOVAL BALL MOSS, TRIM AND MOW BETTER AND STRAIGHTEN HEAD STONES. ONLY UNTIL SOMEONE TALKS TO CITY OFFICIALS DOES THE TRIMMING GET BETTER AND THE BALL MOSS GETS REMOVED. STONES HAVE NEVER BEEN ADDRESSED. I AM ASKING THAT A POLICY BE ESTABLISHED SO AUSTIN MEMORIAL PARK CEMETERY WILL BE TRULY TAKEN CARE OF SO THAT AUSTIN CAN BE PROUD OF IT. IN STRAIGHTENING THE HEAD STONES, REMOVING BALL MOSS, IMPROVING GENERAL MAINTENANCE, I'M ALSO REQUESTING THAT INNER CARE BE REQUIRED TO WATER THE CEMETERY MUCH LIKE THE GOLF COURSE GREENS ARE WATERED SO WHEN DRIVING ALONG MOPAC IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE A WET-DRY WASTELAND. I HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH BEVERLY GRIFFITH'S OFFICE. I WAS PROMISED THE BALL MOSS WOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY TREE WHERE MY HUSBAND IS BURIED. I WENT OUT THERE RECENTLY AND THEY MADE AN ATTEMPT. IT'S NOT OFF TODAY. THEY PROMISED ME IT WOULD BE OFF BY OCTOBER 22 WITH THE PROMISE THE OTHER WELCOME BACK REMOVED AFTER THE FIRST OF THE YEAR THIS. IS WHAT I'VE BEEN EXPERIENCING FOR TEN YEARS ARE PROMISE, PROMISE, PROMISE UNTIL I CAN TAKE MY TIME TO COME BEFORE YOU-BEFORE YOUR STAFF FOR SOMETHING TO EVER BE ADDRESSED. PLEASE MAKE IT A POLICY OF THE CITY THAT YOUR PAST WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. MR. PINA.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, HELLO, CITY MANAGER, COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M GOING TO READ IN PART FROM A LETTER FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN STAFF, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNER STEVE BARNEY, AND THEN I WOULD CONTINUE MY PRESENTATION. THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING TEAM IS DEVELOP AGO WORK PLAN TO DEVELOP NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS FOR ALL OF THE URBAN CORE NEIGHBORHOODS WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. RIGHT NOW THE TIMING OF MOST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREAS IS UNKNOWN. THE CITY COUNCILL HAS REQUESTED STAFF TO FOCUS ON NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE EAST AUSTIN OVERLAY. CENTRAL EAST AUSTIN, ROSEWOOD, HOLLY AND GOVALLE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREAS DURING THE NEXT YEAR. THIS IS GOOD; HOWEVER, LIKE EAST AUSTIN OVERLAY, WE HAVE IN SOUTH AUSTIN A DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH MUCH LESS AFFLUENT OR EXPERIENCED NEIGHBORS WHO WANT TO KNOW AND TRUST THE PROCESS. HAVING A SOUTH AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING TEAM WOULD CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE SOUTH AUSTIN NEIGHBORS WITH EAST AUSTIN TO VISIT THE PROCESS AND LEARN ALONG WITH STAFF THE ACTIVE WORKS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING TEAM. IT WOULD BEGIN TO IDENTIFY THE MANY STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT WANT TO BE IDENTIFIED AS STAKEHOLDERS FOR OUR COMMUNITY. AS THE UNITED STATES INS DETENTION FACILITY LOCATED NEXT TO GALINDO IN SOUTH AUSTIN. DEVELOP A REPRESENTATIVE PLANNING TEAM WITH MANY TIPTS OF STAKEHOLDERS WE HOPE WILL BRING MANY TYPES OF CITIZEN COMMUNICATION FOR SUCCESSFUL NEIGHBORHOODS AND AREA PLANS. WHEN YOU DIRECT STAFF TO FOCUS ON EAST AUSTIN OVERLAY, WE HOPE YOU WILL ALSO ASK STAFF TO FOCUS CONSIDERING A SOUTH AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING TEAM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MR. PINA. COUNCIL, THAT CONCLUDES THE GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS. LET ME READ TO YOU THE ITEMS THAT I BELIEVE ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. AND --

>> THE TIME CERTAIN THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME BRING UP TWO OTHER THINGS. ONE IS ON ITEM NO. 68, IN THE CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS THE PRINTED CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS THAT I WAS GIVEN TO READ FROM IT INDICATED IT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. THAT WAS A CHANGE. THE CHANGE SHOULD HAVE BEEN IT WAS NOT RECOMMENDED BY THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. AND THEN ITEM NO. -- COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, HELP ME REAL QUICK WHICH ITEM NO. .

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: 76 WILL BE SET FOR A TIME CERTAIN OF 6:30. WAS IT 76 OR 77?

>>GRIFFITH: 77.

>>MAYOR WATSON: 77. YEAH. 77. ITEM 77. ITEM 77 WILL BE SET FOR A TIME CERTAIN OF 6:30. ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 29, 30 -- 27, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74. ITEM NO. 76, THERE IS A POSTPONEMENT THAT HAS BEEN ASKED FOR BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD, A VALID PETITION WAS RECEIVED TODAY AND THE APPLICANT OPPOSES, BUT I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS. MS. GLASCO CAN YOU HELP ME OUT?

>> MAYOR, YOU HAVE TWO LETTERS IN FRONT OF YOU, ONE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT COORDINATED A PETITION EFFORT WHICH WE'VE DETERMINED TO BE VALID. THEY WOULD LIKE ADDITIONAL TIME TO BE ABLE TO ORGANIZE SMERS TO COME PRESENT THEIR SPEAKERS TO COME PRESENT THEIR CASE AND YOU HAVE A SECOND LETTER FROM THE APPLICANT OPPOSING THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST. THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD TODAY. THOSE ARE THE TWO LETTERS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THEN WE'LL -- ITEM NO. 76 WILL BE NOT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. 78 ON SECOND AND THIRD READING.

>>GARCIA: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, COUNCILMEMBER.

>>GARCIA: ON THIS ONE, MS. GLASCO, ON 76, WE ALREADY HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ONE, CORRECT?

>> YES, YOU HAVE. YOU'VE ALREADY HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO YOU RECEIVED A CALL FROM AN AJOINING PROPERTY OWNER WHO INDICATED THEY DID NOT RECEIVE NOTICE AND WOULD LIKE -- AND COUNCIL DELAYED SECOND AND THIRD READINGS IN ORDER TO HEAR THEM TODAY.

>>GARCIA: OKAY. AND NOW THEY ARE ASKING THAT IT BE DELAYED?

>>GLASCO: AGAIN.

>>GARCIA: THEY ARE NOT READY TO MAKE THE PRESENTATION?

>>GLASCO: THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GARCIA: THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR, COULD I FOLLOW UP?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: SO I'M ASSUMINGS THAT IF SOMEBODY GETS A PETITION TOGETHER -- LET ME TALK DIRECTLY INTO THIS. I'M ASSUMING THAT IF SOMEBODY GETS A PETITION TOGETHER ITS VALUE IDENTIFY AS LONG AS WE'RE STILL IN THE PROCESS AND HAVE NOT YET COME TO THIRD READING.

>>GLASCO: THAT IS CORRECT. THE EFFECT OF THE VALIDITY OF A PETITION IS EFFECTIVE ON THIS CASE EFFECTIVE NOW.

>>GOODMAN: SO DOES THAT BRING WITH IT THE REQUIREMENT FOR A PUBLIC HEARING?

>>GLASCO: NO, IT DOESN'T. IT DOES NOT BRING WITH IT THE REQUIREMENT FOR PUBLIC HEARING, IT JUST AFFECTS HOW YOU VOTE. IT REQUIRES SIX VOTES FROM NOW ON FOR SECOND.

>>GOODMAN: BUT THEY WANT TO GET TOGETHER SPEAKERS, RIGHT?

>>GLASCO: COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO SUSPEND ITS RULES TO ALLOW THEM TO SPEAK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING WHERE THEY WERE IN OBJECT SITUATION. SINCE THAT TIME -- OPPOSITION O FIRST READING IT DIDN'T REQUIRE THE SIMPLE MAJORITY. FROM HERE ON OUT IT WILL REQUIRE SIMPLE MAJORITY. THE ONLY REASON TO REOPEN WOULD BE IF WE DETERMINE BECAUSE THERE WAS A VALID PETITION THERE WAS A NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARING.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY, WE WILL, THEY ARE OBVIOUSLY ASSUMING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IT MAY BE THEY ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE RULES THAT WITH A PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED YOU GO ON TO SECOND AND THIRD READING.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY. SO THAT'S THE REASON FOR ASKING FOR POSTPONEMENT, RIGHT?

>>GLASCO: THAT'S CORRECT. THEY ARE HOPING TO BE ABLE TO TO BE HEARD WHEN COMMITTEE COME BACK WITH THE SPEAKERS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ITEM -- YES, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: MS. GLASCO, COULD YOU REFRESH MY MEMORY? DID WE HAVE SPEAKERS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT THE FIRST HEARING?

>>MAYOR WATSON: I HAVE PULLED 76. WHAT WE WILL DO IS --.

>>SLUSHER: SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE]. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO PULL 29 AND 38.

>>MAYOR WATSON: 23 AND 280. THEN 29 AND --.

>>LEWIS: 38.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE TAKEN OFF OR PUT ON?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: ON 42 THROUGH 44, THESE ARE DEALING WITH THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE, THE BUDGET, WOULD SOMEONE EXPLAIN WHY THEY WERE -- IF WE WERE SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT RATE, ON ITEM 42, BUT WE ARE APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT RATE ON 43, TODAY. I READ THE BACKUP, IT EXPLAINED THAT, BUT I STILL -- I STILL DIDN'T GET IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T WE DO THIS? I HAVE GOT -- I PULLED 44, LET ME GO AHEAD AND PULL 42, 43, 44, WE WILL DO THAT. IN A MOMENT. ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE PULLED OR ADDED? MAYOR PRO TEM AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN.

>>GOODMAN: IF THERE IS ANYBODY IN THE HOUSE THAT CAN ANSWER THIS QUESTION, I WOULD LIKE IT, ALTHOUGH I DON'T NEED IT BEFORE I VOTE. ON NUMBER 39, THAT'S ON CONSENT, RIGHT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THE PROGRAM GOES TO THE CAN PROCESS AND ANALYSIS OF OUTCOMES. [INAUDIBLE].

>>GOODMAN: IS THERE A WAY FOR US TO SORT OF INTERJECT THAT INTO IT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: ACTUALLY, I WOULD LIKE -- LET'S GO AHEAD AND PULL ITEM NO. 39 BECAUSE THAT RAISES A QUESTION ABOUT THE WAY WE HAVE BEEN HANDLING THINGS GOING THROUGH CAN.

>>GOODMAN: I AM NOT ASKING IF THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THAT WAS LIKE SEPARATE AND DIFFERENT, BUT I WOULD STILL LIKE IT TO BE IN THE MIX OF IS KNOWING WHAT THE OUTCOMES ARE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS, THAT'S THE WAY THAT WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO SOME THINGS, LET'S GO AHEAD AND PULL THAT, THAT WAY WE CAN ASK THOSE QUESTIONS. ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE PULLED OR PUT BACK ON? COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN I'M SORRY?

>>SPELMAN: YOU HAVE READ OFF THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHY YOU READ OFF THOSE THAT ARE NOT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE ITEMS WILL WILL NOT BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, 29, 35 BECAUSE OF POSTPONEMENT, 38, 39, 42, 43, 44, 59, 60, 62 AND 63 HAVE BEEN POSTPONED INDEFINITELY, 68, 75, 76, AND 77, 79, THAT'S IT.

>> WHO PULLED 59?

>>LEWIS: I DID.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.

>>SLUSHER: 61 IS RELATED TO THAT AS WELL. YOU MIGHT WANT TO PULL THAT ONE, TOO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALMOST READ THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA I WILL ASK FOR A MOTION, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 40, 41, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 6 4, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 712, 73, -- 72, 73, 74, 78, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, AND 116. IS THERE A MOTION?

>>GARCIA: SO MOVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? YES, COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN?

>>SPELMAN: ON 85, DO WE HAVE THE NAME OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES WE WILL BE APPOINTSING? I HAVE A BLANK RESOLUTION BEFORE ME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PULLED. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. THAT -- THAT ITEM SHOULD BE POSTPONED UNTIL DECEMBER 2ND. THE MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE TO POSTPONE IT UNTIL DECEMBER 2ND, 1999.

>>SPELMAN: SAME FOR 86. THE SELECTION PROCESS --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT IS RIGHT, THAT IS RIGHT. 85 AND 86 WILL A POSTPONEMENT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL POSTPONED UNTIL DECEMBER 2ND, 1999. MS. ALESHIRE, WOULD YOU PLEASE TELL US WHICH ITEM YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON.

>> YES, SIR, MAYOR. I HAVE TO SWITCH SUNGLASSES TO REGULAR GLASSES SO I CAN SEE. ITEM NO. 82, I AM MARY ALESHIRE, I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NO. 82, TO AMEND ORDINANCE NUMBER 990520-09 RELATING THE POLICE OVERSIGHT FOCUS GROUP TO EXTEND THE EXISTENCE OF THE GROUP AND TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE TO MARCH THE 15TH, 2000, FOR ITS REPORT TO COUNCIL. AND THIS IS SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN, MAYOR PRO TEM JACKIE GOODMAN AND MAYOR KIRK WATSON. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PUTTING THIS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE POLICE OVERSIGHT. BY A COMMITTEE. OF PEERS THAT ARE SELECTED FROM THROUGHOUT THE PUBLIC. IT'S VERY HARD FOR ME TO SPEAK. I AM HAVING A HARD TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. BECAUSE, SEE, I AM DISABLED, NUMBER ONE, AND IT'S HARD ENOUGH JUST TO THINK STRAIGHT. IF I WEREN'T DISABLED MUCH LESS BEING DISABLED, IT MAKES IT THAT MUCH HARDER. ESPECIALLY BEING A MIND CONTROL SURVIVOR AND AN ALTERED SURVIVOR, IT'S KINDS OF HARD, YOU KNOW, TO CONCENTRATE. AND I REALLY DON'T GET VERY MUCH SLEEP, EITHER. SO IT'S ALSO HARD TO CONCENTRATE AND THE NEUROLOGICAL DAMAGE THAT OCCURRED AFFECTS MY RIGHT HAND AND I DON'T KNOW, I -- IT'S TOO COMPLICATED TO REALLY GET INTO IT RIGHT NOW. BUT I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND ITS INTERACTIONS WITH THE PUBLIC. THE CEDAR AVENUE IS A -- IS A PRIME EXAMPLE, MATTHEW MCCONAUGHEY IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE. WE CAN GIVE YOU A WHOLE LIST OF EXAMPLES OF PEOPLE THAT HAPPEN TO PEOPLE, 40 HOMELESS PEOPLE DIED, THEIR NAMES ARE READ OFF IN A PROCLAMATION, I WONDER HOW MANY OF THOSE 40 HOMELESS PEOPLE ACTUALLY DIED FROM NATURAL CAUSES OR HOW MANY OF THEM WERE POSSIBLY TAKEN OUT. BUT THERE'S JUST A WHOLE BUNCH OF DIFFERENT ISSUES GOING ON WITH THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND I PERSONALLY DON'T WANT MY FAMILY SUBJECTED TO ANY MORE ABUSE BY THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT WE HAVE SUFFERED FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS SINCE MY EX-HUSBAND WAS COUNTY JUDGE AND THE TOP ELECTED OFFICIAL AND C.E.O. FOR TRAVIS COUNTY AND IT'S SOMETIMES -- SOMETIMES IT'S EASIER FOR THEM TO JUST SEND IT OVER TO A.P.D. AND LET THEM DO THE DIRTY WORK. I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE ORANGE SOCKS MURDERS AND CHIEF SHAW'S PARTICIPATION IN COVERING THAT UP SINCE 1979. ALONG WITH SHERIFF JIM BOUTWELL FROM WILLIAMSON COUNTY. YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO -- I DON'T WANT THEM TRYING TO KEEP ME QUIET BECAUSE OF THEIR CORRUPTION. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS BOARD EXTENDED. THANK YOU. [BUZZER SOUNDING].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MS. ALESHIRE. PEGGY ROMBURG SIGNED UP IN FAVOR OF ITEM NO. 40 WITH NO TESTIMONY. PAUL ROBINS -- PAUL ROBINS? PAUL ROBINS SIGNED UP, DIDN'T INDICATE FOR OR AGAINST ITEM NO. 30. JEWEL THREE THORP, JULIE THORP, JUST BE SHOWN IN FAVOR OF ITEM NO. 40. GUS PENA? GUS PENA? GUS PENA SIGNED UP FOR ITEM 41. JIM BENNETT? HANG ON. THAT'S ITEM NO. 76. NO LONGER ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? ANY DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL, HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. LET'S GO TO ITEM NO. 29, I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS. REDUCE LOOSE THANK YOU. ITEM 29 IS THE ONE FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT -- AND MR. REIKE WAS ATTEMPTING TO EXPLAIN ABOUT THE -- MY QUESTION WAS WHETHER WE NEED FIVE ACRES FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THEY ARE SAYING THAT THEY DIDN'T NEED FIVE ACRES, BUT IF WE BOUGHT LESS, THE OWNER DOESN'T WANT TO SELL ANY LESS THAN THAT. THAN THE FIVE ACRE TRACT. IT ALSO SAID THAT -- I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT OTHER CITY DEPARTMENT IS -- IS -- HAS EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN THE REMAINING PROPERTY.

>> COUNCILMEMBER, MY NAME IS PETER REIKE, THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION. WHAT YOU MENTIONED IS CORRECT, THE SELLER DID NOT WANT TO SELL ANY LESS THAN FULL LEGAL LOT SIZE, IF WE WOULD HAVE CONDEMNED IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PARTIAL TAKING. THE DAMAGES TO THE REMAINDER WOULD HAVE ALMOST COST AS MUCH AS THE ACQUISITION ITSELF. AS FAR AS OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS IS CONCERNED, THERE IS SOME INTEREST BY THE [INAUDIBLE] DEPARTMENT, THERE IS CURRENTLY NO FUNDING OR SPECIFIC SERVICE PLAN FOR THAT AREA. WE WILL LOOK AS PART OF FUTURE CIP PLAN DEVELOPMENTS, WHAT KIND OF SERVICES THE CITY CAN PROVIDE ON THE AREA OF THIS LOT THAT IS NOT USED FOR THE FIRE STATION AS PART OF A MORE COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO THE CITY'S CIP NEEDS. FACILITY NEEDS I SHOULD HAVE SAID.

>>LEWIS: HAVE WE GIVEN ANY THOUGHT TO MAYBE RESELLING OR PUTTING THE PROPERTY UP FOR SALE THAT WE DON'T USE?

>> NOT AT THIS TIME. BUT I THINK THAT WOULD CERTAINLY BE SOMETHING THAT -- THAT WE COULD LOOK INTO. HOWEVER, THIS PART OF TOWN IS VERY RAPIDLY DEVELOPING, AS YOU KNOW, THE FACILITY IS -- DELL FACILITY IS VERY CLOSE, IT WILL BECOME INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT IN THE FUTURE TO FIND OPEN LAND TO PROVIDE CITY SERVICES THAT WE MAY WANT TO PROVIDE AT A LATER TIME AS THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL ANNEXATIONS TOWARDS THE NORTH OR EAST.

>>LEWIS: WELL, MY ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT $200,000 AN ACRE IS AN AWFUL LOT TO BE PAYING FOR LAND IN THAT -- IN THAT AREA. AND TO -- THE CITY DEPARTMENTS TO USE LAND AT $200,000 AN ACRE, IT SEEMS A LITTLE EXCESSIVE. KNOWING THE -- THE VALUE AND THE SELLING PRICES OF LAND IN THAT AREA. I JUST DON'T -- IT'S HARD FOR ME TO COMPREHEND THAT IT'S NOT A THREE ACRE -- THERE'S NOT A THREE ACRE TRARKT SOMEWHERE IN THE AREA THAT WOULDN'T GIVE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT THE -- TRACT IN THE AREA THAT WOULDN'T GIVE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT THE RESPONSE TIME THAT THEY NEED. SOMEBODY THAT'S GOING TO BE -- SOMEBODY IS GOING TO HAVE A QUICKER AND A LONGER RESPONSE TIME, NO MATTER WHERE WE PUT THE STATION. SO -- SO THAT WAS MY REASON FOR MY QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW. THE -- I STILL THINK THAT -- SOMEWHERE IN THAT AREA, THAT A -- THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WOULD HAVE A -- A RESPONSE TIME -- IN FACT WE DON'T HAVE -- THE FIRE DEPARTMENT STATION IN THE AREA NOW AND SO -- SO WHEREVER WE PUT ONE IN THAT AREA, WE WOULD INCREASE THE RESPONSE TIME. I WOULD THINK. SO IT'S NOT [INAUDIBLE] FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, I DON'T GUESS, OR IS IT?

>> YES, ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF.

>>LEWIS: IS THIS FIRE STATION A RESULT OF ANNEXATION?

>> YES, I BELIEVE SO IT IS, SIR. IT'S BEEN PLANNED FOR.

>>LEWIS: I FEEL SORT OF THAT IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS BUYING THIS OUT OF THEIR OWN FUNDS THEY WOULDN'T PAY A MILLION DOLLARS FOR A PLACE THAT -- WHERE THEY ONLY NEEDED 60% OF THE LAND THAT THEY ARE BUYING. THAT'S MY QUESTION AND I DON'T -- YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REAL ESTATE PEOPLE ARE -- ARE -- WHAT THEIR INTENTIONS ARE, BUT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE WOULD BE TRYING TO RECOVER SOME OF OUR MONEY BACK ON THE PURCHASE OF THIS. WHY -- WHY THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION? I KNOW THAT YOU DRAW A CIRCLE AROUND THE LOCATION TO GET THE RESPONSE TIME, BUT WHY THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION?

>> TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THIS ONE WAS -- THE ONE THAT WAS JUST -- I GUESS BEST SUITED TO MEET ALL OF THE NEEDS, THE CRITERIA THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE FOR STATION LOCATION. I CANNOT REALLY COMMENT AS TO WHAT OTHER SITES WERE AVAILABLE WHEN THIS ONE WAS SELECTED.

>>LEWIS: I DON'T SEE ANYONE FROM THE REAL ESTATE OFFICE HERE.

>> MAYBE LARRY CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

>> I AM LARRY MCNEIL, DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION. IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA THAT WE ARE LOOKING IN, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAD IDENTIFIED ROUGHLY A HALF MILE TARGET AREA THAT WAS THE IDEAL LOCATION FOR THEIR FIVE STATION TO BE LOCATED IN. -- FOR THEIR FIRE STATION TO BE LOCATED IN. THE INITIAL PROPERTY WE HAD LOOKE AT WAS DOWN THE STREET FROM THIS, IT WAS LOOKED AT PRIOR TO THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF PARMER LANE. ONE OF THE BIG PROBLEMS WITH HAVING AN OPENING ON TO PARMER LANE IN THAT AREA IS THAT PARMER LANE IS 65 MILES AN HOUR SPEED LIMIT. THE SIDE STREETS ON HARRIS RIDGE PROPOSED TO HAVE A MEDIAN IN IT, WHICH WOULD ENTAIL NEEDING A MEDIAN BREAK REAL CLOSE TO THE INTERSECTION. HARRIS GLEN THE PROPERTY THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED AT THIS PARTICULAR INTERSECTION IS A FIVE ACRE SUBDIVIDED LOT WITH LR ZONING ON IT, WHICH IS A COMPATIBLE USE FOR THE FIRE STATION. SO THERE'S NOT REALLY ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO DESIGN AND BUILD A FIRE STATION ON THIS PARTICULAR TRACT. WE DON'T HAVE TO SUB DIVIDE IT, WE DON'T HAVE TO ZONE IT OR ANYTHING IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO GO IN THERE AND USE THIS. IT WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT MET THE CRITERIA FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WHERE WE COULD ACTUALLY GO IN AND START CONSTRUCTION SOON AND TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE CRITERIA FOR THE TRAFFIC ON PARMER LANE. HIS.

>>LEWIS: YOU ARE SAYING PARMER LANE HAS A 65 MILES AN HOUR SPEED LIMIT IS THAT THE REASON THAT YOU ARE USING IT OR REASON WE ARE NOT USING IT?

>> THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO HAVE YOUR DRIVEWAY COMING OUT ON TO PARMER LANE. YOU COULD PROBABLY GET SOME TYPE OF MEDIAN BREAK ACROSS THE DITCH THERE, TO BE ABLE TO ALLOW YOU TO GO TO THE EAST, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT A VERY SAFE MOVE UNLESS YOU ARE AT A CONTROLLED INTERSECTION COMING OFF OF A PUBLIC STREET ON TO A 65 MILES AN HOUR THOROUGHFARE.

>>LEWIS: WELL, YOU KNOW, I -- I HAVE SEEN OTHER PLACES WHERE A FIRE DEPARTMENT HAVE -- HAVE RED LIGHTS ON THE -- ON THE STREETS, BUT THAT'S -- THAT'S TURNS RED WHEN THE ALARM GOES OFF AND FROM THE TIME IT GOES OFF TO THE TIME THE PEOPLE GET IN THE VEHICLE, AND START IT UP, IT GIVES EVERYBODY PLENTY OF TIME TO STOP ALLOW THE FIRE TRUCKS IN AND WHEN THEY COME BACK THEY ALSO HAVE THE CONTROL IN THE TRUCK TO TURN THEM ON SO THAT THEY CAN COME BACK INTO THE STATION. SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T -- I DON'T ACCEPT THAT AS A REASON FOR NOT USING PARMER LANE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER, PARMER LANE IS A STATE-CONTROLLED ROADWAY, AS FAR AS I KNOW IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO CONVINCE THE STATE TO INSTALL DEVICES LIKE THAT ON THEIR HIGHWAYS FOR A NON-STATE FUNCTION.

>>LEWIS: OH. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. I WOULD SAY IT MAY BE DIFFICULT TO CONVINCE THEM TO INSTALL THOSE DEVICES ON THE -- ON PARMER LANE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE. SO ... I AM NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS ITEM BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S BEEN WELL THOUGHT OUT AND WELL RESEARCHED BECAUSE I KNOW THAT YOU CAN BUY PROPERTY IN THAT AREA FOR LESS THAN $200,000 AN ACRE. PLUS WE ARE BUYING 40% MORE THAN WE REALLY NEED. SO BASED ON THAT, I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS ITEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE A MOTION ON ITEM NO. 29?

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR COULD I --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: WHAT IS THE COMMENT ON THAT PRICE? I MEAN, --

>> WE HAD AN APPRAISAL DONE OF THAT LOT BY AN INDEPENDENT FEE APPRAISER. LAND OUT IN THAT AREA BACK BEFORE MOTOROLA WENT IN OUT THERE, BEFORE DELL WENT IN OUT THERE AND BEFORE SAMSUNG WENT IN OUT THERE, WAS, YOU KNOW, A FEW DOLLARS A SQUARE FOOT. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE SAMSUNG THAT WENT IN WHICH PROMPTED THE BUILDING OF PARMER LANE EXTENSION IN THE FIRST PLACE, THAT ESCALATESED THE PROPERTY VALUES, ALONG WITH THE BIG DELL WAREHOUSE THAT'S JUST TO THE NORTH OF THAT ON HOWARD LANE. THE PRICES OF THE LAND OUT THERE HAS JUST REALLY ESCALATED AS A RESULT OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA AND THE NEED FOR PEOPLE TO BUY AREAS -- LANDS IN THAT AREA. SO WE HAD AN INDEPENDENT FEE APPRAISAL DONE ON THIS TRACT OF LAND AND IT APPRAISED FOR $1,050,000. SO OUR CONTRACT WAS FOR $1 MILLION. WE ARE ACTUALLY BUYING IT FOR $50,000 LESS THAN THE PRAISED VALUE

>>GRIFFITH: DO YOU HAVE COMPARABLES IN THE AREA AT THAT?

>> YES, MA'AM, COMPARABLE SALES SUPPORT THAT DATA.

>>GRIFFITH: SOUNDS LIKE A BUNCH. SO I MEAN I UNDERSTAND THAT THE -- WHAT THE COUNCILMEMBER IS GETTING AT.

>> IT IS A BUNCH, BUT PEOPLE ARE PAYING A BUNCH OUT THERE FOR LAND.

>>GRIFFITH: 200,000 AN ACRE?

>> YES, MA'AM

>>GRIFFITH: IT'S HAPPENING?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: WELL, I WAS GOING TO SAY IF THERE'S NO REAL DEADLINE, MAYBE WE CAN POSTPONE THIS UNTIL DECEMBER THE 2ND SO WE CAN ALSO FIND OUT IF NECESSARY WHAT OTHER PROPERTIES WERE AVAILABLE OR WHAT THE TOP GRAPHICAL OR OTHER CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS PARCEL WERE THAT MADE IT BE A DESIRABLE PLACE FOR THE STATION?

>> WE HAVE LOOKED AT THE OTHER SITES IN THIS AREA, WE HAVE GONE OUT AND LOOKED AT OTHER LOCATIONS, THIS HAPPENS TO BE THE MOST IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE. I THINK PART OF WHAT'S DRIVING THE ACQUISITION OF THIS PARCEL IS OUR CONTRACT AND THE TIME THAT WE HAVE TO ACQUIRE IT IN. IN ORDER FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT UNDER THE ANNEXATION PROVISIONS TO PROVIDE SERVICES IN A NEWLY ANNEXED AREA, TO BREAK GROUND ON THE FIRE STATION IN A TIMELY MANNER, I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD REALLY HURT US IF WE HAD ANY KIND OF A POSTPONEMENT ON THIS. WE ARE DESIGNING A FIRE STATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOT THAT -- THAT THERE AREN'T ANY REAL GREAT PROBLEMS -- GRADE PROBLEMS OR ANYTHING ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE. WE'VE HAD AN ENVIRONMENTAL DONE, IT'S CLEAN.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, ACTUALLY THAT'S ALMOST THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION, BUT SO CAN YOU SAY THEN THAT THERE WERE NOT OTHER SITES -- EXCUSE ME -- THAT WERE AVAILABLE AND -- IN THE TIME WE NEEDED THEM THAT ALSO HAD THE TOP GRAPHICAL CHARACTERISTICS WE NEEDED?

>> I CAN SAY WE WEREN'T ABLE TO IDENTIFY ANY SITES THAT WOULD ALLOW US WITH THE ZONING AND STUFF THAT'S REQUIRED ON A PARTICULAR TRACT TO BREAK GROUND IN A TIMELY MANNER, THAT THERE'S NOTHING OUT THERE AVAILABLE.

>>GOODMAN: WHEN DID WE START LOOKING?

>> A MONTH AND A HALF AGO.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, NO WONDER WE DON'T HAVE ANY TIME RIGHT NOW. WHY DID WE WAIT UNTIL --

>> I CAN'T ANSWER THAT.

>>GARZA: WHEN DID WE START LOOKING, WHY DID WE WAIT UNTIL A MONTH AND A HALF AGO?

>> WE STARTED LOOKING THIS PAST OCTOBER, I CAN'T -- THAT'S WHENEVER WE GOT CALLED AND SAID WE HAVE TO HAVE A FIRE STATION SITE IN THIS AREA.

>>GOODMAN: BECAUSE IF WE HAD TIME TO WORK ZONING INTO THE TIME FRAME, MAYBE THERE WERE SOME MORE CHEAPER, I DON'T WANT TO SAY CHEAPER, BUT MAYBE SOME ALL AROUND GOOD SITES WE COULD HAVE CHOSEN FROM.

>> THERE HAD BEEN ONE OTHER SITE THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ITSELF HAD BEEN DEALING WITH, THE -- THE PROPERTY OWNER WITH, BACK IN 1996. PRIOR TO PARMER LANE EVEN BEING INSTALLED. IT SEEMED TO BE AN APPROPRIATE SITE AT THAT TIME. OF COURSE, BECAUSE THE STREET WASN'T EVEN IN. AS IT -- AS IT TURNS OUT, THAT PROPERTY, THE E-MAILS THAT I SAW THAT TRANSPIRED FROM '96 TO '97 TO '98 WENT FROM SOMEBODY THAT WAS WILLING TO DONATE A SITE TO THE CITY TO A SITE THAT THEY MAY CONSIDER SELLING TO THE CITY FOR A FIRE STATION SITE AND IT KIND OF EVOLVED OVER TIME. AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD, HOWEVER, THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY IS -- IT'S GOT SOME DRAINAGE PROBLEMS, IT'S BEHIND A -- BEHIND A GUARDRAIL AND IT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF A CURVE, WHICH IS NOT AT ALL DESIREABLE FOR A FIRE STATION SITE.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, MAYOR, CONSIDERING THAT WE SEEM TO BE IN BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE AND POSSIBLY WE COULD HAVE MITIGATED THE HARDNESS OF ONE OR THE OTHER OF THOSE, I WILL MOVE APPROVAL, ALTHOUGH I AM DEFINITELY DOING THAT WITH SOME CONCERN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION MADE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO APPROVE ITEM NO. 29, IS THERE A SECOND? MOTION SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN?

>>SPELMAN: MAYOR, TO ANY OF YOU, HOW BIG OF A CHUNK OF THIS FIVE ACRE LOT ARE WE GOING TO NEED FOR THE FIRE STATION ITSELF?

>> TWO AND A HALF TO THREE ACRES. THERE'S ABOUT TWO ACRES LEFT.

>>SPELMAN: WHY ARE WE GOING TO NEED THREE ACRES FOR A FIRE STATION? WE HAVE FIRE STATION ALL OVER TOWN THAT TAKE UP HALF ACRE LOTS?

>> THAT -- I MEAN, THE STATIONS THAT WE NOW HAVE ARE NO LONGER BUILT ON THIS SIZE OF LOT, IN MANY CASES WITH WATER QUALITY CONTROL RULES WE HAVE TO HAVE LARGER SITES IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH THE NECESSARY DETENTION FACILITIES OR WATER FILTRATION FACILITIES.

>>SPELMAN: THE IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS ON THIS SITE HERE?

>> I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT.

>> TYPICALLY WE NEED APPROXIMATELY 4,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THE BUILDING AND SO FORTH. THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING ITSELF GENERALLY IS AROUND 8500, I BELIEVE IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND IN BUILDING FIRE STATIONS TODAY ARE GENERALLY A JOINT FACILITIES FOR FIRE AND E.M.S. AND OF COURSE THOSE ARE MUCH LARGER THAN TRADITIONAL STATIONS THAT WERE BUILT YEARS PAST.

>>SPELMAN: AS YOU PROBABLY HAVE SEEN -- I SHOULD PROBABLY HAVE SEEN SOME OF THESE JOINT FACILITIES. MAYBE YOU COULD HELP ME WITH THIS. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION IF YOU WERE TO MAKE IT A JOINT FIRE-E.M.S. FALL, YOU JUST NEEDED ANOTHER PLACE FOR THE AMBULANCE TO PARK AND THEN ASSOCIATED ELECTRICAL CONNECTIONS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. YES, IT IS SOMEWHAT BIGGER THAN THAT. OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE ADDING AN ADDITIONAL BAY WHICH REQUIRES AN ADDITIONAL TYPE OF APPARATUS OR E.M.S. UNIT WHICH REQUIRES ADDITIONAL PEOPLE, SO YOU NEED MORE PARKING FOR THE STAFF THAT ACTUALLY COMES IN AND WORKS THERE AND SO EVEN THOUGH IT IS A COMBINATION STATION, IT WILL HAVE TO BE SOMEWHAT LARGER THAN TRADITIONAL STATIONS.

>>SPELMAN: SO SOMEWHERE BETWEEN TWO AND THREE ACRES?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>SPELMAN: FIVE ACRES THEN IS A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN OUR STANDARD SIZE FOR FIRE-E.M.S. STATIONS RIGHT NOW, BUT NOT A LOT BIGGER. HOW ABOUT OF A TENANT ARE WE PERCEIVED AS BEING IN THE COMMERCIAL WORLD? ARE WE GOING TO HAVE ANY TROUBLE FINDING SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO OCCUPY THE TWO OR THREE ACRES WE ARE NOT OCCUPYING?

>> WELL, AS -- AS MR. REIKE REITERATED A WHILE AGO, THE LIBRARY DEPARTMENT HAS A DESIRE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, SUBJECT TO FUNDING, TO BBLG A LIBRARY IN THIS AREA. -- BUILDING A LINE BREAKER IN THIS AREA. THERE'S QUITE -- LIBRARY IN THIS AREA. THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT GOING ON IN THIS AREA AS FAR AS PUBLIC USE.

>>SPELMAN: WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SERVICES WE HAVE IN MIND ARE A LIBRARY, WE DON'T HAVE A PRIVATE SECTOR TENANT IN MIND TO SHARE THE SPACE WITH US RIGHT NOW.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> EXCUSE ME IF I JUST MAY RESPOND TO THIS. COUNCILMEMBER, WE HAVE OTHER FIRE STATIONS THAT ARE SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL USES LIKE THE PARK AND THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A CONFLICT BETWEEN COMMERCIAL USE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE FIRE STATION AND THE USE OF THE FIRE STATION ITSELF. SO ON A COMMERCIAL SITE I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO PRESENT A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM AND JUST ONE OTHER COMMENT, WE PURCHASED SEVERAL SITES LATELY RELATED TO THE ANNEXATION PROGRAMS, PARTICULARLY IN NORTHWEST AUSTIN, ANDERSON MILL WE PURCHASED A TWO ACRE SITE, IT'S EXTREMELY TIGHT IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THE BUILDING PROGRAM FOR THAT FIRE STATION. SO TODAY WE ARE BASICALLY LOOKING AT A TWO ACRE MINIMUM, THAT MAY BE A LITTLE TIGHT DEPENDING ON WHAT KIND OF GRADE ISSUES WE HAVE, SO TWO AND A HALF TO TWO ACRES REALLY IS WHAT WE NEED.

>>SPELMAN: YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE FIRE STATION I SEE EVERY DAY IS THE ONE IN HYDE PARK, WHICH IS AN ANOLOMY IN ITSELF.

>> WE WOULD NOT BUILD IT THAT WAY TODAY. [ONE MOMENT PLEASE FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

>>SPELMAN: ALTHOUGH WE ARE SAYING -- YOU DID SAY A FEW MINUTES AGO YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO BUILD A FIRE STATION ON PARMER, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE ON HARRIS GLENN. IT WOULD NOT BE THE PRIME COMMERCIAL LOCATION.

>> BUT THE PROBLEM IS -- EXCUSE ME -- THAT GETTING A DRIVEWAY SO CLOSE TO HARRIS GLENN FROM PARMER FOR A COMMERCIAL LOCATION MAY ALSO BE DIFFICULT. AND SO AGAIN, WITHOUT HAVING A DETAILED ANALYSIS OF HOW THIS SITE CAN BE ACCESSED IF IT'S SUBDIVIDED ONCE MORE AND WHAT KIND OF USE YOU HAVE, WHAT SET BACKS YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE, PARKING REQUIREMENTS, IT'S DIFFICULT TO ANTICIPATE WHETHER WE ARE GOING TO BE EQUAL, LESS OR HIGHER IN TERMS OF SALES PRICE FOR THE REMAINDER.

>>SPELMAN: THE FACT WE ARE A TENANT IS NOT GOING TO DIMINISH THE VALUE OF THE LAND.

>> I DON'T THINK SO.

>>GARCIA: I WOULD HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT PUTTING A LIBRARY NEXT TO A FIRE STATION. I REALLY WOULD. THE NOISE AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF, TRUCKS MOVING OUT QUICKLY, FAST. I WOULDN'T WANT TO DO IT.

>> I AGREE WITH YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER FURTHER DISCUSSION? MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SEKED TO APPROVE ITEM 29. THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED?

>>GRIFFITH: SHOW ME ABSTAINING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS VOTING NO AND COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH ABSTAINING. ITEM WILL 8 IS -- ITEM 88 IS AN ITEM SET FOR A TIME CERTAIN IN RELATION TO BOND SALES. DO WE HAVE SOMEONE TO SPEAK ON THAT ITEM?

>> I'M GLENN WITH VINSON AND ELKINS, BOND COUNCIL TO THE ABIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY IS A PUBLIC HEARING WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS BY THE ABIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR THE AERO AUSTIN LP PROJECT. THESE BONDS ARE BEING ISSUED IN THE SAME FASHION AS THE CORPORATION HAS PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BONDS FOR THE TWO CARGO PORT PROJECTS AND THE BELLYPORT PROJECT. THIS IS ANOTHER CARGO FACILITY AND WHAT WE ARE DOING TODAY IS HAVING THE PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRED UNDER THE -- FOR FEDERAL TAX LAW WITH RESPECT TO THE PROJECT AND WE WILL BE BACK ON DECEMBER 2, WE BELIEVE, TO SIGN UP A BOND PURCHASE CONTRACT AND FINALIZE THE TRANSACTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD AT THE PUBLIC HEARING? WE ARE CONDUCTING A PUBLIC HEARING WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUANCE OF ABIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF AIRPORT FACILITIES REVENUE BONDS, AERO AUSTIN, LP PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $6 MILLION. THIS HAS NO FISCAL IMPACTED ON THE CITY. THE BONDS ARE NOT DEBTS TO THE CITY AND ARE THE SOLE OBLIGATION OF THE CORPORATION. THE BONDS ARE REPAID FROM REVENUE GENERATED BY THE FACILITIES. ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED. ANY SKITION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT ITEM WILL BE ITEM 89.

>> HE'S GOT A VERY, VERY BRIEF --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HANG ON ONE SECOND. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING SINCE MR. HILGERS IS WANT TO GO TALK TO US. I'M TEASING. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL SO WE CAN RECONVENE AS THE AUSTIN HOUSING AUTHORITY. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED AND CARRIED. I'LL CALL TO ORDER THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE KORTION, ITEM 89. MR. HILGERS.

>> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THE ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY IS -- INVOLVES RESCINDING THE APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 7TH, 1999 RESOLUTION ON THIS PROJECT. DUE TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE BOND PURCHASER AND THEN APPROVING THE SALE OF AN UP TO 10.5 MILLION DOLLARS OF MULTI-FAMILY BONDS TO ASSIST THE SAN ANTONIO ALTERNATIVE HOUSING CORPORATION, A NONPROFIT CORPORATION IN ACQUIRING AND REBILL TALGT TWO APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN AUSTIN. THE TWO COMPLEXES ARE THE STONY CREEK APARTMENTS AT 4911 MANCHACA ROAD AND PRINCETON APARTMENTS AT AIRPORT BOULEVARD. PREVIOUSLY THE COUNCIL HAS HEARD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS AND COUNCIL APPROVED THE SALE OF THE BONDS ON OCTOBER 7TH. THIS APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM WILL PERMIT CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION LATER THIS MONTH AND RESULT IN ONE-HALF OF ONE PERCENT OF A LOAN FEE OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION HOUSING ASSISTANCE FUND AND I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON ITEM 89? ANYONE TO BE HEARD? ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. HILGERS BY COUNCIL.

>>LEWIS: YES, HAVE I A QUESTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.

>>LEWIS: WE ARE CANCELLING -- OR ACTUALLY THE VOTE THAT WE TOOK IN OCTOBER.

>> YES, SIR, WE'RE RESCIND THANKING APPROVAL THROUGH THAT AGREEMENT. AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSACTION NOT GOING THROUGH WITH THAT ORIGINAL PURCHASER OF THE BONDS. AND WE HAVE RESTRUCTURED THE TRANSACTION FOUND -- WITH THE SAME HOUSING PROVIDER, THE INVESTMENT BANKER PIPER JEFFREY HAS FOUND ANOTHER PURCHASER, PRUDENTIAL, FOR THOSE BONDS AND THIS WILL ALLOW THAT TO GO FORWARD BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS NOVEMBER 30TH.

>>LEWIS: I DIDN'T REMEMBER HAVING IT STATING THAT THEY WAS -- HAD A SPECIFIC PURCHASER FOR THE BONDS WHEN WE PASSED IT IN OCTOBER. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WE WAS PASSING IT ON THE CONTINGENCY THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD APPRAISE AND ALL WITHOUT A PARTICULAR BOND PURCHASER IN MIND.

>> THE PURCHASING REQUIREMENTS AND THE PROCEDURES OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION REQUIRE US TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD WHEN A CHANGE IN THE PURCHASER HAS OCCURRED. THE ENTITY THAT IS PURCHASING THE BONDS WHEN THE ULTIMATE PURCHASER CHANGES, THEN THE BOARD IS STRUCTURED THAT WE WOULD BRING THAT ACTION BACK TO THE COUNCIL -- BACK TO THE BOARD, EXCUSE ME, FOR APPROVAL.

>>LEWIS: SO NOW THE PURCHASER IS GOING TO BE THE --

>> THE ULTIMATE PURCHASER IN THIS ONE WILL BE PRUDENTIAL. IF THEY AGREE TO ALL THE TERMS OF THE TRANSACTION BETWEEN NOW AND NOVEMBER 30TH. NOTHING ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OF THE PROJECT AS FAR AS THE RENT, OF ANY OF THE OTHER INVESTMENTS THAT THE COUNCIL HAD ASKED ABOUT BEFORE HAS CHANGED.

>>LEWIS: SO WHAT IT THAT HAS CHANGED BETWEEN THIS PURCHASER AND THE PREVIOUS PURCHASER?

>> ONE THING THAT'S CHANGED IS THE LEVEL OF INTEREST RATE HAS CHANGED, UP TO 7.75% FOR THE SERIES A BONDS AND 9% FOR THE SERIES B BONDS. THE THING THAT ACTUALLY CHANGED THOUGH IS THE ORIGINAL PURCHASER OF THE BONDS WOULDN'T CLOSE ON THE TRANSACTION AND WHEN IT CAME TIME TO CLOSE THE DEAL, THE ORIGINAL PURCHASER SAID THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT. SO IT WAS UP TO THE SAN ANTONIO ALTERNATIVE HOUSING CORPORATION AND BOND COUNSEL TO GO AND FIND AN ALTERNATIVE PURCHASER. THAT IS WHAT HAS OCCURRED IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO -- THE LAST TRANSACTION AND THE ACTION WE'RE BRINGING BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY.

>>LEWIS: SO HOW MUCH IS THE A BONDS AND HOW MUCH IS THE B BONDS? IN DOLLARS.

>> THE B BONDS ARE ABOUT 200 SOMETHING, 250,000 DOLLARS OF THE $10 MILLION OF THE ACQUISITION, SO VERY MINOR AMOUNT. SO MOST OF IT IS THE SERIES A BONDS.

>>LEWIS: ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM 89.

>>GARCIA: SO MOVED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 89. THANK YOU, MR. HILGERS. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION. MOTION MADE AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. WE HAVE ADJOURNED THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AHFC. I'LL CALL BACK TO ORDER THE MEETING OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL AND GO TO ITEM-ITEMS 42 -- OOPS. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER IS NOT HERE. GO TO ITEM NO. 38 AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.

>>LEWIS: THANK YOU, MAYOR. ITEM NO. 38, MY QUESTION IS I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IN THE ANSWERS, WHICH TO ME WASN'T VERY -- WASN'T -- DIDN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT I ASKED REALLY BECAUSE I ASKED WHY ARE WE SERVING THE OUT OF DISTRICT AND THEY WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THE COST OF THE -- THE COST OF THE DEVELOPER TO INSTALL THE WATER METERS. WHO IS SERVING THIS AREA NOW?

>> COUNCILMEMBER, I'M CRAIG BELL FROM WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY. THE AREA RIGHT NOW, THIS PARTICULAR TRACT OF COURSE IS UNSERVED. BUT THE AREA SURROUNDING IT IS GENERALLY SERVED BY THE SPRING WOODS M.U.D.. IN DECEMBER OF '97, WE ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT, IT WAS ONE OF THESE STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS WITH THAT DISTRICT, AND THROUGH THAT AGREEMENT WE WERE POSTPONING ANNEXATION, BUT WE ARE TO TAKE OVER THE DISTRICT FACILITIES [INAUDIBLE]. THAT MEANS IN DECEMBER OF 2001 WE WILL ACTUALLY TAKE OVER THE OPERATION OF THOSE M.U.D. FACILITIES. WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS IN THIS PARTICULAR TRACT IT IS SO FAR AWITH A FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN OPERATED FACILITIES THAT THE ONLY LOGICAL WAY TO PROVIDE SERVICE IS THROUGH M.U.D. FACILITIES. SO WHAT WE COULD DO IS WE COULD TAKE THEM ON AS OUR CUSTOMERS, PUT TWO LARGE DUCT METERS AND -- DEDUCT METERS AND SO WE WOULD BE FEEDING WITH M.U.D. AND WE WOULD DEDUCT THIS THIS PARTICULAR TRACT. THAT IS AN EXPENSIVE AND CUMBERSOME MECHANISM TO DO THAT. WE THOUGHT FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME WE HAD, MAYBE 18 MONTHS TO TWO YEARS, IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE JUST TO HAVE A TEMPORARY OUT OF DISTRICT SERVICE ARRANGEMENT WITH SPRING WOODS M.U.D..

>>LEWIS: SO WHO IS GOING -- THIS FACILITY -- THIS 39 ACRES IS NOT BEING SERVED AT THE PRESENT TIME?

>> NO, SIR, IT'S NOT. AS A MATTER OF FACT, IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS YOU WILL SEE A FORM OF A SERVICE EXTENSION AGREEMENT COMING TO THE COUNCIL AND THAT WILL BE FOR A COST REIMBURSEMENT FOR US AND FACILITIES THAT WILL GO THROUGH THAT TRACT AS THEY ARE DEVELOPING.

>>LEWIS: HAVE THEY PLANNED TO DEVELOP THIS TRACT PRIOR TO DECEMBER OF 201?

>> YES, SIR. THEY WILL ACT TO PROCEED FAIRLY SOON.

>>LEWIS: AND WHO IS GOING TO BEAR THE EXPENSES OF THE -- ARE WE GOING TO DO A REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE EXPENSES OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO THIS TRACT?

>> THIS PARTICULAR AGREEMENT RIGHT HERE DOES NOT ANTICIPATE THAT, BUT IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS THE SERVICE AGREEMENT WOULD -- FOR THIS TRACT WOULD BE PROPOSING THAT TO THE COUNCIL FOR WASTEWATER SERVICE. THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT THE LINE THEY WILL BE GETTING SERVICE FROM IS A C.I.P. PROJECT OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WE HAD BEEN NEGOTIATING FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THROUGH THAT TRACT. THEY ARE AGREEING TO BUILD THAT PORTION FOR US AND WE WOULD REIMBURSE THEM FROM OUR SIP FUNDING.

>>LEWIS: SO -- AND WHAT RECOURSE DO WE HAVE IF THEY DON'T DEVELOP THE TRACT BY 2001? DO WE HAVE ANY RECOURSE? SINCE WE'RE GOING TO REIMBURSE THEM FOR PUTTING IN THE LINE AND IF IT'S NOT DEVELOPED, MEANS WE DON'T GET ANY RETURN ON THE WASTEWATER UNTIL IT IS BUILT OUT SO THE BUILDOUT WOULD REPAY US FOR ANY INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS THAT WE INCUR SO MY QUESTION IS IF THEY DECIDE NOT TO BUILD IT OUT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD IT OUT SO THEN WE HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE GROUND THAT IS JUST COSTING THE TAXPAYERS MONEY.

>> YEAH, AND I'M SORRY TO HAVE KIND OF GOTTEN OFF TRACK. I WAS TALKING ABOUT A PROPOSAL TWO WEEKS FROM NOW. THIS ONE RIGHT HERE IS STRICTLY FOR SERVICE, AN OUT OF DISTRICT AGREEMENT, AND IF NO DEVELOPMENT TAKES PLACE, THERE WILL BE NO MONEYS EXPENDED FOR THAT. THIS IS JUST TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE DISTRICT FOR OUT OF DISTRICT SERVICE. ASSUMING THAT THEY WILL DEVELOP AND WANT THAT SERVICE. IT'S DETERMINING WHO HAS ACTUALLY -- IS ACTUALLY BILLING THIS TRACT.

>>LEWIS: WELL, LET ME GET IT -- LET ME SEE IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING NOW. THIS 39 ACRES IS THERE WITH 9 LOTS AVAILABLE TO BE BUILT, RIGHT?

>> THE SUBDIVISION, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED. I KNOW THERE IS A TRACT RIGHT NOW THAT WE CALL THE STANSEL TRACT.

>>LEWIS: BUT ACCORDING TO BACKUP MATERIAL IT'S SUPPOSED TO HAVE 99 LOTS AVAILABLE AND THERE'S NOTHING BUILT ON THEM AT THE PRESENT TIME?

>> CORRECT. YES, IT'S UNDEVELOPED.

>>LEWIS: SO WHEN WOULD WE PAY -- REIMBURSE THEM FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE? WOULD WE REIMBURSE THEM PRIOR TO 2001 OR WHEN WE TAKE IT OVER IN 2001?

>> ONCE AGAIN I'M SORRY TO HAVE CAUSED SOME CONFUSION ABOUT MIXING TWO DIFFERENT ACTIONS. THE ACTION TODAY IS SIMPLY AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE -- AND THE M.U.D.. AND THE ACTION A COUPLE WEEKS FROM NOW THAT YOU WILL BE SEEING RELATED TO THIS WILL BE THAT REIMBURSEMENT AND THAT WILL BE FROM C.I.P. FUNDS MOOZ MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM 38.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 38. LET'S DO 39 REAL QUICKLY. MR. LURE RE, IF YOU WILL COME FORWARD. I PULLED OUT OF NO. 39 AFTER MAYOR PRO TEM HAD ASKED A QUESTION THAT I THOUGHT WAS ONE OF THE -- IS A GOOD QUESTION. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN ATTEMPTING TO DO IS ON THE ISSUANCE OF MONEY FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROGRAM IS -- FOR SOCIAL SERVICE TYPE PROGRAMS IS TO ASKIST C.A.N. TO LOOK AT THOSE THINGS SO THAT WE ARE IN A BETTER POSITION TO DO THINGS LIKE MAKE SURE THERE ARE GOOD PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND WHEN WE HAVE SO MANY REQUESTS FOR MONEY FOR SOCIAL SERVICES, MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT DUPLICATING SERVICES.

>> RIGHT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT ACTING IN A WAY INCONSISTENT WITH OUR PREVIOUS APPROACH BY GO AHEAD AND VOTING ON ITEM 39 WHICH WOULD BE TO SEND THAT GRANT MONEY ON. I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET IT ON THE RECORD.

>> OKAY. I'M DAVID LOURIE WITH HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ABOUT THE C.A.N. PROCESS. THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT ALREADY KNOW THIS, BUT FOR OTHERS PERHAPS, IT'S BASICALLY A COMMUNITY-WIDE ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING PROCESS, LOOKING AT HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS COMMUNITY WIDE, IDENTIFYING GAPS AND HELPING US FOCUS RESOURCES TOWARDS THOSE GAPS. THE WAY WE'VE BEEN USING IT, IT'S BASICALLY BEEN MORE BROADLY FOCUSED AND IT BASICALLY INCLUDES A POOLING OF CITY AND COUNTY RESOURCES. THEN WE GO THROUGH THE COUNTY RFS PROCESS TO ACTUALLY ULTIMATELY ISSUE CONTRACTS AND PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. AT THE SAME TIME, HOWEVER, WE CONTINUE TO HAVE A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS AND CONTRACTS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT, WITHIN THE CITY THAT ARE MUCH MORE NARROWLY FOCUSED AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE. THIS WAS CREATED THROUGH A GRANT YEARS AGO. IT'S TARGETED TO A VERY SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC AREA. I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT, THE HIGH RISK YOUTH PREVENTION KINDS OF SERVICES HERE, THE PERFORMANCE MEASURES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE C.A.N. ASSESSMENT SO IT DOES RELATE TO THE OVERALL C.A.N. PROCESS IN THAT RESPECT. BUT THE ACTUAL FUNDING IS LIMITED TO CITY DOLLARS ONLY AND IT'S FOCUSED TO A VERY SPECIFIC AREA ON A LIMITED BASIS WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN IN PARTNERSHIP WITH AISD. THE -- WHEN THE GRANT TERMINATED IN '95, IT WAS RECOGNIZED AS A VERY EFFECTIVE AND SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM AND COUNCIL AT THAT TIME EXPRESS ADD COMMITMENT TO CONTINUE THE PROGRAM WITH CITY FUNDS. AND SO THIS HAS BEEN A CONTINUATION OF THAT. WHEN THIS CAME UP AGAIN FOR RENEWAL, WE WENT THROUGH THE CITY RFP PROCESS TO AGAIN ISSUE THIS CONTRACT AND CONTINUE THE PROGRAM.

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

>>GOODMAN: I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY BEYOND WHAT I HAD SAID. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE DATA GOES TO THE SAME PLACE AND THAT WE DO CONTRACT COMPLIANCE EVALUATION AND OUTCOME MEASURES WITH EVERYBODY THAT WE KNOW ABOUT BEING PART OF THOSE DATA GATHERING MISSIONS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SPELMAN.

>>SPELMAN: LET ME ASK A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION AND I THINK IT'S HYPOTHETICAL BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER WOULD BE IF I WERE TO ASK IT FOR REAL. IF IT WERE TO BE TRUE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE THAT THIS PROGRAM WERE NO LONGER NECESSARY OR THERE WERE NO LONGER A NEED TO HAVE THIS PROGRAM FOCUSED ON THIS PARTICULAR POPULATION IN THIS PARTICULAR GEOGRAPHIC AREA, HOW WOULD WE KNOW?

>> WHAT WE WOULD LOOK AT IS THE OVERALL ASSESSMENT IN TERMS OF THESE YOUTH ARE AT RISK FOR VARIOUS FACTORS, PRIMARILY ECONOMIC BECAUSE OF THE SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS OF THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM. IF OVER TIME WE SAW THAT SHIFT OR WE SAW SIMILAR RISK FACTORS EMERGING IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY, THEN WE WANT TO BE LOOKING AT SHIFTING RES