>> Scott: I'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. THOSE THAT ARE INTERESTED, THE MAYOR IS UNABLE TO BE HERE TODAY. I AM THE CURRENT MAYOR PRO TEM AND SO I'LL BE PRESIDING OVER THE MEETING. INVOCATION TODAY WILL BE GIVEN BY PASTOR KEVIN JENNINGS FROM MT. OLIVE LUTHERAN CHURCH. PASTOR PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING. IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT, AMEN. LORD GOD, WE PRAY FOR ALL WHO ARE IN AUTHORITY. GIVE US THE GRACE WITH OUR FELLOW CITIZENS TO VALUE THE OFFICERS, MAGISTRATES OF OUR GOVERNMENT AS THOSE SENT BY YOU. INSTILL IN US THAT RESPECT AND HONOR THAT IS DUE THEM. LORD, ENDOW THEM WITH WISDOM FOR THEIR SEVERAL DUTIES WITH THE SPIRIT OF SACRIFICE FOR THE COMMON WELFARE WITH MERCY AND JUSTICE, WITH UPRIGHTNESS AND KINDLINESS THROUGH JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD, AMEN. >> Scott: THANK YOU, PASTOR. WE HAVE THE PLEASURE TODAY OF DOING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE TEXAS FLAG GIVEN BY MATTHEW CRAIG. MATTHEW IS A 12th GRADE STUDENT AT ANNAPOLIS CHRISTIAN ACADEMY. MATTHEW PLAYS VARSITY FOOTBALL, IS AN A-HONOR ROLL STUDENT, AND IS RESERVED GRAND CHAMPION ADVANCED STEER CARCASS CLASS. MATTHEW, PLEASE LEAD US. >> PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE TO THE TEXAS FLAG. [HONORING THE TEXAS FLAG] >> Scott: REBECCA, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL OF REQUIRED CHARTER OFFICERS. >> City Secretary: MAYOR PAULETTE GUAJARDO IS ABSENT. [ROLL CALL] MAYOR AND COUNCIL, A QUORUM OF THE COUNCIL AND THE REQUIRED CHARTER OFFICERS ARE PRESENT TO CONDUCT THE MEETING. >> Scott: THANK YOU, MA'AM. NO BOARD APPOINTMENTS TODAY, WHICH LEADS US TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. AGENDA ITEMS 1 THROUGH 5. COUNCIL MEMBERS, INTERESTED IN PULLING ITEMS? >> I WANT TO PULL ALL OF THEM. [LAUGHTER] >> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> Scott: THAT'S JUST HATEFUL. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE ONE OF THESE ITEMS PULLED? >> Barrera: I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> Scott: ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> [CHORUS OF AYES] >> Scott: IS THAT OKAY, MS. SECRETARY? >> City Secretary: WE HAVE THE AUTOMATED VOTING SYSTEM AVAILABLE AS WELL. BUT IF YOU WANT TO DO A VOICE VOTE, WE CAN DO THAT. >> Scott: I THINK WE'RE GOOD. 1 THROUGH 5. NEXT, IT SAYS RECESS FOR LUNCH. THANK Y'ALL FOR BEING HERE. [LAUGHTER] NO, INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEMS, ITEM NO. 6, RESOLUTION AMENDING FINANCIAL BUDGETARY POLICIES ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION 033143 AND PROVIDING FINANCIAL POLICY DIRECTION ON PREPARATION OF FY2026 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGETS. I BELIEVE WE HAVE A PRESENTATION. >> DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND PROCUREMENT. AT THE LAST MEETING WE WERE ASKED TO BRING BACK SOME ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION FOR THE COUNCIL. SO I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION I'LL PROVIDE YOU WITH SOME HISTORICAL INFORMATION, PEER COMPARISONS, AS WELL AS OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. I JUST WANT TO CLEAR UP SOME TERMINOLOGY THAT I'LL USE TO KIND OF EXPLAIN WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. THE TERM FUND BALANCE, RESERVE FUNDS, AND RAINY DAY FUNDS ARE USED INTERCHANGEABLY. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME THING. FUND BALANCE IS AN ACCOUNTING TERM DEFINED BY THE DIFFERENCE OF ASSETS LESS LIABILITIES. FUND BALANCE IS FURTHER DEFINED THROUGH OTHER RESTRICTIONS. IN OUR POLICY WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE. SO THE SECTION OF THE POLICY THAT WE ARE TRYING TO AMEND HERE TALKS ABOUT GENERAL FUND FUND BALANCE AND WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE TO EXPLAIN IS THE UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE IS WHAT FUNDS YOUR RESERVE FOR MAJOR CONTINGENCIES. SO THIS ITEM SETS THE FLOOR OF WHAT YOU WANT IN YOUR UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE SO YOU CAN FUND YOUR RESERVE FOR MAJOR CONTINGENCIES. SO JUMPING INTO THE PURPOSE OF FUND BALANCE. MAINTAINING A HEALTHY FUND BALANCE CAN PROVIDE FINANCIAL STABILITY. IT CAN MITIGATE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH SHORTFALLS OR UNEXPECTED COSTS. EACH CITY IS UNIQUE SO IT WOULD BE PRUDENT OF THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER IN THIS AREA THE RISK OF TROPICAL STORMS, HURRICANES, FLOODING, ET CETERA. THE NEXT SLIDE IS GIVES YOU A HISTORY OF OUR RESERVE POLICY FOR THE CITY. THIS SECTION OF THE POLICY CAN BE FOUND IN OUR BUDGET BOOKS AND ARE POSTED ONLINE. THE POLICIES ARE WITHIN THE BUDGET BOOK ITSELF. SO STARTING WITH FISCAL YEAR 2015, THE FLOOR IN 2015 WAS A 10% FLOOR AND UP TO 25% OF TOTAL ANNUAL GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS IS THE AMOUNT WE WOULD SET AS A RESERVE FOR RESERVES. WHAT'S CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT OUR POLICY HISTORY IS EXCLUDING ONE-TIME APPROPRIATIONS. SO IF WE JUMP OVER TO FISCAL YEAR 2017, THE POLICY WAS AMENDED TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM AMOUNT UP TO 17%. AND WE ADDED AN OPTION TO USE OPERATING REVENUES AS A METRIC TO CALCULATE THE RESERVE. AND THEN IN 2019, WE BASICALLY JUST REMOVED OPERATING REVENUES AS AN OPTION TO CONSIDER WHEN CALCULATING THE RESERVE AMOUNT. IN FISCAL YEAR 2020, THE ONLY CHANGE THERE WAS REDUCING THE UP TO AMOUNT FROM 25% DOWN TO 20%. AND NOW WE'RE AT THE 2026 DRAFT, WHICH IS RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAINTAIN THE RESERVE AT THE MINIMUM OF 20%. THIS SLIDE HERE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH SOME INFORMATION ON THE RESERVE FOR MAJOR CONTINGENCIES THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED FOR THE PAST FIVE BUDGETS. IF YOU GO DOWN TO THE THIRD TABLE OF NUMBERS DOWN THERE, YOU'LL SEE THE FIRST ROW RESERVED FOR MAJOR CONTINGENCIES. SINCE 2021 THE CITY'S PRACTICE HAS BEEN TO SET ASIDE 20% FOR MAJOR CONTINGENCIES. NEXT WE HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS WHO ARE SPECIALIZED PUBLIC FINANCE INCORPORATED . THEY PROVIDED SOME BENCHMARKS FOR CONSIDERATION STARTING WITH THEY HAVE CONFIRMED THAT TWO MONTHS OF RESERVE IS A GOOD BASELINE FOR MOST OF THEIR CLIENTS. ALSO HAVING A RESERVE OF 20 TO 25% IS VIEWED FAVORABLY BY RATING AGENCIES. AND LASTLY, HAVING A POLICY THAT SETS A MINIMUM WITH A TARGET AND A PLAN TO REPLENISH -- TO RESTORE YOUR RESERVE IS LOOKED AT FAVORABLY. THE RECOMMENDATIONS PROVIDED BY FINANCIAL ADVISORS FOR CONSIDERATION INCLUDE ADOPTING A MINIMUM OF 20% WITH A TARGET RANGE BETWEEN 20 AND 25%. THE RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE TRIGGERS TO REPLENISH RESERVE IF THE RESERVE FALLS BELOW A MINIMUM AMOUNT. ALSO ADDING GUIDANCE TO THE POLICY AS FAR AS USING ONE-TIME REVENUES AND YEAR-END SURPLUSES TO REBUILD YOUR RESERVES. LASTLY, CONSIDERING ESTABLISHING A STABILIZATION FUND FOR ANY UNPLANNED BUDGETED EXPENDITURES. THIS NEXT SLIDE IS A NICE COMPARISON. PEER INFORMATION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. STARTING WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN. THIS IS BASICALLY THE RESERVES THAT EACH CITY IS SETTING ASIDE. SO CITY OF AUSTIN SETS A RESERVE OF 17% OF ONGOING EXPENDITURES. CITY OF DALLAS DOES 50 DAYS AND NOT MORE THAN 70 DAYS OF GENERAL FUND OPERATING EXPENDITURES. CITY OF FORT WORTH SETS A MINIMUM OF TWO MONTHS WITH A GOAL OF THREE MONTHS BASED ON BUDGETED OPERATING EXPENDITURES. HOUSTON HAS A 7.5% GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES SET ASIDE IN RESERVE AS WELL AS HAS A SEPARATE STABILIZATION FUND BEING THE GREATER OF 1% OF ADOPTED GENERAL FUND BUDGET EXPENDITURES OR $20 MILLION. THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS A RESERVE OF 15% OF RESERVES. THE NEXT FEW CITIES ARE COASTAL CITIES FOR COMPARISON. WE HAVE THE CITY OF GALVESTON WITH A GENERAL FUND RESERVE OF 90 DAYS. CITY OF BEAUMONT, NOT LESS THAN 20% OF THE ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES. CITY OF BROWNSVILLE HAS A 90-DAY FUND BALANCE RESERVE. SOUTH PADRE ISLAND HAS A SIX-MONTH OPERATING RESERVE. NEXT WE HAVE THE OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. OPTION NUMBER ONE IS THE OPTION THAT WE ORIGINALLY PROVIDED IS TO MAINTAIN A FLOOR OF 20% FOR RESERVE. OPTION TWO, IF THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE SAME RANGE AT 17% AND UP TO 20%. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND OPTION NUMBER ONE. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I'LL STAND BY FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Scott: ALL RIGHT. QUESTIONS ANYONE? YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SHOW ME HAVE TO TURN ON YOUR MIC. OH, THE DOUBLE TAP? ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. KAYLYNN, YOU'RE UP. >> Paxson: MY FIRST REQUEST, SINCE MY SEAT OVER HERE IS VACANT, IF I COULD TAKE YOUR TIME ALSO. NO, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF THINGS OUT OF CURIOSITY. ON SLIDE NO. 3 -- I'M SORRY. SLIDE NO. 5 WHERE IT REFERENCES 75 DAYS, IS THAT -- I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY. IS THIS UTILIZING THE 20% THAT THAT MEANS WE WOULD BE ABLE TO FACILITATE 75 DAYS OF OPERATION? >> WHICH SLIDE? >> Paxson: SLIDE 5 OF THE NEW PRESENTATION. >> THE ONE THAT HAS A GENERAL FUND RESERVE BALANCE BUDGET HISTORY? I'M SORRY. CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? >> Paxson: NO PROBLEM. IS MY UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY THAT WITH THIS ENTIRE PROPOSAL OF MAINTAINING A 20%, THAT GIVES US APPROXIMATELY 75 DAYS WORTH OF OPERATIONS UNDER THAT? >> YES. THAT'S CORRECT. >> Paxson: OKAY. PERFECT. AND THEN IN SLIDE NO. 6 UNDER THE POLICY MATTERS, IT LOOKS LIKE THE THREE THINGS THAT I NOTICE IS THAT IT SAYS THAT THIS PROCESS IS OPTIMAL FOR SETTING A MINIMUM, SETTING A TARGET RANGE AND A PLAN FOR RESTORATION IF THE RESERVE WERE TO DIP BELOW THE TARGET RANGE. UNDER SLIDE 9 AND 10 ARE OPTIONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS. I SEE THAT BOTH OPTIONS MEET PROVISION 1 WITH SETTING A MINIMUM. PROVISION 2 OF SETTING A TARGET RANGE. WHAT I DON'T SEE IN THIS SPECIFIC SECTION IS A PLAN FOR RESTORATION AND THEN IN REVIEWING THE ACTUAL FULL POLICY RED LINES. I DIDN'T SEE A REFERENCE IN THERE, AND I MAY HAVE MISSED IT. >> WE HISTORICALLY HAVE NOT HAD THE RESTORATION BUILT INTO THAT POLICY. THIS WAS PROVIDED BY OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS. IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN WORK TO IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR'S BUDGET. >> Paxson: WE NEED TO ADD A MEASURE OF HOW TO RESTORE IF WE DIP? >> Zanoni: IT WOULD BE IF WE DIP BELOW THE MINIMUM THRESHOLD. SO IN THE CURRENT POLICY, 17% IS THE LOWEST. SO IF WE GOT THERE, THEN THERE WOULD BE A CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN. IF WE GOT BELOW 17%. >> Paxson: YEAH. >> Zanoni: YEAH, WE DON'T HAVE THAT WRITTEN BUT IT WOULD BE A MATTER OF NOT SPENDING, ESSENTIALLY. IT WOULD BE CUTTING -- IF REVENUES WERE THE SAME WE WOULD HAVE TO CUT EXPENDITURES TO SHORE UP THE FUND BALANCE. >> Paxson: SO IF WE APPROVE THERE WITH A RANGE-TYPE THING, WE COULD ADD, PERHAPS, INCLUSIVE OF A SENTENCE REFERENCING IF WE DROPPED TO 17% WE WOULD NEED TO REDUCE SPENDING OR SOMETHING TO RESTORE FUND BALANCE? >> Zanoni: RIGHT. WE COULD PUT A SENTENCE IN OR TWO THAT SAYS IF WE FALL BELOW 17%, LIKE 16 POINT SOMETHING OR 16% THAT WE SHOULD DEVELOP A RESTORATION PLAN IN A SUBSEQUENT BUDGET. >> Paxson: I THINK SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS THAT WOULD MEET THAT PROVISION. >> WE CAN DO THAT. >> Paxson: AND LOOKING AT THE CITIES THAT WE WERE GIVEN AS EXAMPLES ON THESE, WAS THE SELECTION OF CITIES BASED ON CITIES THAT ACTUALLY HOLD A POLICY ON BUDGETS AND FINANCES? BECAUSE I KNOW LAST TIME WE SAID THAT NOT ALL CITIES HAVE A NECESSARY FINANCE OR BUDGET POLICY. WAS THAT WHAT DROVE THE SELECTION? >> SO THE SELECTION OF CITIES, SOME OF THE LARGER CITIES WERE SELECTED AS WELL AS THE COASTAL COMMUNITIES. THE ONES WE SELECTED ALL HAD POLICIES FOR THEIR RESERVE. >> Paxson: AND THEN I DID ALSO NOTICE -- I'M TRYING TO GO QUICKLY. I DID NOTICE THAT IT SEEMED LIKE OUR COASTAL CITIES HOVERED AROUND 90-DAY SUPPLY. ONE OF THEM ACTUALLY HAD A SIX-MONTH SUPPLY AND OUR MAJOR CITIES, ALL OF THEM WERE OVER THE 60-DAY, I THINK. MAYBE ONE WAS 50. IT LOOKED LIKE IF WE TRIED TO CATEGORIZE OURSELVES IN A LARGE CITY, THAT'S ABOUT 60 DAYS. IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT CAT G CATEGORIZING OUR CITIES, THAT'S 90-PLUS. DOES THE 20% UPPER THRESHOLD, THAT'S 75 DAYS, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT WE SAID? >> THAT'S CORRECT. THAT GETS YOU BEYOND THE BASELINE OF TWO MONTHS. >> Paxson: OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> YES, MA'AM. >> Scott: AWESOME. COUNCIL MEMBER ROY. >> Roy: THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION AND THE UPDATE. MY QUESTION IS KIND OF ON THE SAME LINE SO 17%, THAT'S APPROXIMATELY 60 DAYS? >> 17%, YES. >> Roy: AT 20%, THAT'S 70 -- >> 73 TO 75. >> Roy: OKAY. DEPENDING ON YOUR OPERATING EXPENDITURES. >> Roy: THE ONLY OTHER THING I THINK ABOUT BASED ON COUNCIL MEMBER PAXSON'S QUESTION IS THAT WHEN YOU COMPARE ONE OF THE SMALLER COASTAL BEND CITIES AND YOU COMPARE WITH OUR CITY AND OUR SIZE AND OUR BUDGET, YOU KNOW, AS A BANKER, I THINK WHEN I HAVE A PROJECT, THAT MIGHT BE A 4 OR $5 MILLION PROJECT AS OPPOSED TO A $300,000 PROJECT. WHEN I LOOK AT THE RESERVES, THERE'S A VARYING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A $400 MILLION PROJECT AND A PERCENTAGE OF RESERVES. IF I'M ASKING FOR 6% ON A $300,000 PROJECT. AT THE SAME TIME, IF YOU HAVE AN EVENT LIKE A HURRICANE, THE COST IS GOING TO BE THE SAME, BASICALLY, TO BE ABLE TO -- IF THEY NEED ADDITIONAL MONIES TO REPAIR OR MONIES TO HOLD THEM OVER UNTIL THEY GET REIMBURSED. THAT WAS JUST MY ANALOGY ON THAT. AND I'M OKAY WITH EITHER ONE. EITHER GOING 17 TO THE 20. I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF JUST PUTTING A SENTENCE IN THERE SO THAT IT'S CLEAR TO THE COMMUNITY TO KNOW THAT IF WE DIP BELOW THAT 16%, THAT OF COURSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT A PLAN IN PLACE. >> IT'S THE 17%, SORRY. >> Roy: 17. EXCUSE ME. THANK YOU. THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTIONS I HAD. >> Scott: THANK YOU, SIR. COUNCILMEMBER HERNANDEZ. >> Hernandez: THANK YOU. OKAY. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT WE ARE GOING TO LOSE OUR BOND RATING IF WE DON'T DO THIS? >> NO. THAT'S NOT IN THE SLIDE. >> Hernandez: THAT'S NOT IN THE SLIDE. IT'S KIND OF THE IMPLICATION THAT OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR IS SAYING. >> OKAY. I'M NOT -- >> Hernandez: THAT'S WHAT I HEARD. >> THEY ARE RECOMMENDING FAVORABLE AND IN THE SLIDE -- >> Hernandez: WILL THERE BE ANY NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES FOR US KEEPING IT 17 TO 20%? >> I COULDN'T SAY. WE COULD ASK THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR BUT HE WOULDN'T KNOW. WE WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE RATING AGENCIES. >> Hernandez: LAST TIME I CHECKED, WE HAVE HAD 17 TO 20% FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS? >> THAT'S BEEN THE POLICY. AS FAR AS THE POLICY, THAT SHOULDN'T IMPACT US. THAT'S WHAT WE MAINTAINED. >> Hernandez: THAT POLICY HAS BEEN IN PLACE AND OUR BOND RATING HAS GONE UP IN THAT TIME-FRAME. >> DEPENDING ON THE TIME-FRAME. I THINK AT ONE POINT WE HAD 25% IN 2019. AND THEN 2020 IS WHEN WE DROPPED IT DOWN TO 20%. YES. IF WE WENT UP DURING THAT TIME AND OUR RANGE WAS 17 TO 20%, THEN YES. >> Hernandez: I THINK THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY BUILT IN WHEN YOU PUT IN A RANGE VERSUS A SINGLE NUMBER. SO YOU HAVE SOME OPPORTUNITY. I THINK THE POLICY ITSELF REQUIRES YOU TO BRING UP YOUR FUNDING LEVELS TO MEET THAT POLICY ANY TIME YOU DIP INTO IT. I GUESS THE PLAN COULD BE VARIED BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, INCREASING REVENUE OR CUTTING EXPENDITURES. BUT I'M IN FAVOR OF KEEPING THAT RANGE. AND IF YOU JUST WANT TO ADD THE SECTION WHERE IT SAYS 20%, JUST SAY 17 TO 20%, THAT WAY YOU JUST KEEP IT SIMPLE IN TERMS OF WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS. I JUST -- >> CAN YOU REPEAT THAT PART, THAT 17%? >> Hernandez: YOU HAVE ON THE -- LET ME GET TO THE RIGHT LINE. WHERE IT HAS UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE OF 20%, YOU WOULD JUST PUT OF 17 TO 20%. OPTION 2. >> OKAY. >> Hernandez: THANK YOU. >> YES, SIR. >> Vaughn: WHAT'S THE DOWN SIDE OF DOING 20%? >> THE DOWNSIDE OF DOING 20%? FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THERE REALLY ISN'T. YOU'RE BEING PRUDENT RESERVING FUNDS AT 20%. OTHER THAN IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THOSE FUNDS AND REDIRECT THEM FOR ONE-TIME USES, THE DOWNSIDE IS IF YOU DO THAT, TRYING TO GET BACK UP TO 20% COULD BE A CHALLENGE. IT'S LIKE A PERSONAL SAVINGS ACCOUNT. IT'S UNIQUE TO EACH PERSON. IF YOU'RE CONSERVATIVE, YOU WANT TO SAVE UP AS MUCH. THAT MAY BE A PREFERENCE. IF YOU USE UP YOUR SAVINGS, THEN YOU HAVE TO BUILD IT BACK UP. >> Vaughn: FOR ME, I ALWAYS LIKE MORE. JUST IN CASE. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. WHAT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION, MR. ZANONI? >> Zanoni: GO TO THE 20%. THE PAST FIVE YEARS WE HAVE BEEN AT 20% BUT, YOU KNOW, SO THAT WOULD BE THE FIVE YEARS OF HISTORY SHOW ARE AT 20%. EVEN THOUGH WE HAD THAT RANGE OF BETWEEN 17 TO 20. I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE MORE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE COASTAL CITIES, THEY HAD SOUTH PADRE AT SIX MONTHS. >> Vaughn: I DO TOO. WE'RE RECOMMENDING OPTION 1, CORRECT? >> YES. >> Vaughn: I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR OPTION 1. >> Scott: THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. IS THERE A SECOND FOR OPTION 1? DISCUSSION? I'M GETTING THERE. EASY. HOLD ON. LET ME GET RID OF A COUPLE OF PEOPLE. KAYLYNN. >> Paxson: THIS IS JUST THE SECOND OF MY FIRST HALF. >> Scott: I KNOW. >> Paxson: I AM CURIOUS, TO THAT NOTE, ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR 1 AND 2. FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, GOING THROUGH THE PACKET, THERE WAS A PORTION THAT SAID THAT WE COULD EVALUATE MAKING A LONG-TERM GOAL STARTING IN YEARS THREE OR SO, OF GOING UP TO EVEN 25%. WHICH IS NOT THE SIX MONTHS THAT A LOT OF COASTAL CITIES DO. BUT IF WE ARE PRESENTLY HOLDING AT 20%, IT MAY BE A FEASIBLE LONG-RANGE GOAL. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. WE SHOULD PUT THAT -- I WOULD RECOMMEND PUTTING THAT IN THAT WE LOOK -- THIS BUDGET, WE'RE BRINGING THIS LATE. SO FOR THE '27 BUDGET, THE '27, '28, '29, LOOK TO GET TO 25% SOMEHOW IN THE SUBSEQUENT BUDGETS WE DEVELOP. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >> Paxson: PRECISELY. >> Zanoni: IF THE GOAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL IS TO ULTIMATELY TO TRY TO GET TO A 25% GOAL, THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO, BUT STRIVE TO ACHIEVE IT. >> Paxson: THAT'S MY OTHER QUESTION ON THERE. AND I KNOW THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT, PETER, JUST NOT TOO LONG AGO, IF WE DID A RANGE, THEN THERE'S SOME POTENTIAL TO DO A COUPLE OF PILOT PROJECTS SPECIFICALLY ON THE SIDEWALK WORK WHERE WE TAKE MAYBE ONE PERCENTAGE OUT OF THAT 3% RANGE FOR A ONE-TIME EXPENDITURE. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. >> Paxson: SPEAKING TO THAT INTEREST, BECAUSE I THINK THAT HAS THE LEAST -- I THINK THAT POSITIONS US IN A GOOD SPOT FOR OUR LONG-TERM MOBILITY PLANS AND OUR GOALS FOR THE COMMUNITY -- >> Zanoni: AGREED. >> Paxson: COULD YOU MAYBE EXPLAIN HOW THAT WOULD PLAY IN IF WE ADOPT OPTION 1 YEAR AS OPPOSED TO OPTION 2 THIS YEAR. >> Zanoni: IF WE DID OPTION 2, WE COULD DO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE THAT RANGE BETWEEN 17 AND 20%. 1% OF THE FINANCIAL RESERVE IS ABOUT $3.5 MILLION. IF WE WENT FROM 20 TO 19%, YOU COULD USE SOME PORTION OF THAT -- OR MAYBE EVEN 19.5%. YOU COULD USE SOME OF THAT $1.5 MILLION FOR A PILOT SIDEWALK PROJECT IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICTS 2 AND 4 AND THEN BE READY FOR THE BOND PROGRAM FOR A MORE ROBUST PROGRAM. THAT'S AN OPTION. >> Paxson: IS IT WITHIN OUR SCOPE TO ADOPT OPTION 1 ADDING A GOAL OF 20% FOR A LONG-TERM RANGE BUT STILL BE ABLE TO UTILIZE A 1% OR HALF PERCENT THIS YEAR? >> Zanoni: NO. AT 20% WOULD BE THE -- WOULD TAKE US TO THE $69.3 MILLION. IN ORDER TO TAKE OFF ANY OF THE FUND BALANCE OR THE RAINY DAY FUND FOR A SIDEWALK PROJECT, WE WOULD HAVE TO REDUCE BELOW 20%. >> Paxson: IS IT SOMETHING WE COULD UTILIZE IN THE FINAL 30 DAYS OF OUR CURRENT RESERVE THAT SAYS 17% BUT WE'RE AT 20. >> Zanoni: SAY THAT AGAIN. >> Paxson: RIGHT NOW OUR SERVE IS AT 20. THE POLICY FOR 2025 ONLY MENTIONED 17%. WE HAVE THAT 3% MARGIN. IS IT SOMETHING WE COULD DO THE PILOT BEGINNING WITH THE LAST 30 DAYS OF FISCAL YEAR 2025 AND ADOPT THIS TO GO INTO 2026. >> Zanoni: WE WOULD STILL BE IN THE SAME PREDICAMENT BECAUSE WE WOULD BE SPENDING 2025'S MONEY THAT ESSENTIALLY ROLLS INTO 2026. SO WE WOULD STILL BE SHORT -- >> Paxson: THE RESERVE. GOTCHA. >> Zanoni: WE WOULD STILL BE SHORT. >> Paxson: THAT'S MY ONLY CONUNDRUM RIGHT NOW. I THINK THAT'S THE EASIEST ROUTE, UNLESS YOU'VE GOT SOME OTHER IDEAS THAT COULD START THOSE PILOT. IS THERE SOMETHING YOU MAY HAVE IN MIND? I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH OPTION 1 ADDING THAT GOAL. >> Zanoni: THERE REALLY ISN'T. THERE WERE SOME MINOR ADJUSTMENTS YOU'LL SEE. YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALREADY, THE AGENDA WE POSTED LAST NIGHT FOR NEXT TUESDAY. THERE WAS A MINOR ADJUSTMENT IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE BUT THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY ALLOCATED TO INITIATIVES THAT THE COMMUNITY ASKED FOR LIKE RESTORING THE BOOK BUDGET AT THE HART LIBRARY AND RESTORING THE POSITION. SO THE ONLY OTHER WAY TO COME UP WITH THE MONEY TO DO A SIDEWALK PROJECT IS EITHER CUT SPENDING OR DIP INTO THE FINANCIAL RESERVES OR ISSUE DEBT. >> Paxson: OKAY. I'LL PAUSE ON THAT IDEA BUT I DON'T MIND OPTION 1 AND I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A LONG-RANGE 25% IN THERE. I KNOW THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR BUT IN SECTION 12 AND PAGE 7, TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS, IT TALKS ABOUT A 2% IN ANNUAL OPERATION CONTINGENCIES FOR SPECIAL REVENUES. THROUGHOUT THE POLICY THERE WERE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT PERCENTAGES. ARE WE KEEPING ON TRACK WITH THOSE? >> Zanoni: SO IN SECTION 12, WE ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET TO ELIMINATE THAT ONE TIME FOR '26. IN THE FIVE BUDGETS THAT I HAVE DONE, IT'S BEEN $500,000 AS AN OPERATING CONTINGENCY AND WE HAVE USED IT FROM TIME TO TIME. NOT EVERY OF THE FIVE PRIOR YEARS. BUT TO BALANCE THIS BUDGET, SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO CUT MORE SERVICES, WE RECOMMENDED REDUCING THAT TO ZERO FOR ONE TIME FOR 2026. SO THAT'S ALREADY BEEN -- THAT'S IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE BUDGET FOR '26. >> Paxson: FORGIVE ME. IF WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO REDUCE WHAT'S IN THE POLICY TO ZERO FOR ONE YEAR BUT WE'RE NOT WRITING THAT OUT, WE'RE NOT ADOPTING THAT AS A POLICY, IS IT NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO SIMILARLY. WE'RE ADOPTING THIS POLICY BUT WE'RE TAKING A HALF TO 1% ONE-TIME EXPENDITURE. >> Zanoni: THE FINANCIAL POLICY IS OUR GUIDELINES. THEY'RE NOT LAW THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO -- [MULTIPLE VOICES] >> Paxson: WE COULD STILL GET A PILOT. >> Zanoni: YOU COULD SAY OUR GOAL IS TO HAVE 20% BUT WE WANT A POLICY DECISION TO TAKE HALF A PERCENT TO GENERATE SOMEWHERE AROUND A MILLION DOLLARS. IT WOULD BE LESS THAN A HALF A PERCENT TO PILOT THE SIDEWALK PROGRAM. >> Paxson: SO WE COULD ADOPT OPTION 1, ADD THE 25%, AND DO A ONE-TIME? >> Zanoni: YOU COULD. >> Paxson: I'M FINE WITH THAT. THANK YOU, PETER. >> Scott: COUNCILMEMBER ROY. >> Roy: PETER, I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, DISTRICTS 2 AND 4 WHEN IT COMES TO SIDEWALKS, I KNOW WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT SIDEWALKS IN DISTRICT 1 MULTIPLE TIMES. BUT THE OTHER THING I WANT TO REMEMBER IS THAT AT ONE POINT WE WERE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT A SIDEWALK STUDY, RIGHT? >> Zanoni: YEAH. >> Roy: HAS THAT BEEN PUT INTO PLACE YET? >> Zanoni: NO. ERNIE AT THE TIME WAS THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, RECOMMENDED A COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE STUDY TO ASSESS NEED. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOURCED OUT TO A PRIVATE COMPANY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE. THE ESTIMATED COST WAS ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS TO DO THAT. THAT WAS NOT DONE BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE MILLION DOLLARS. THE REASON I REFERENCED 2 AND 4 IS 2, OBVIOUSLY COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS HAS BEEN A BIG CHAMPIONS OF SIDEWALKS, AS HAVE YOU, COUNCILMAN ROY. RECENTLY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FROM FLOUR BLUFF AND CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 4, WITH THE PASSAGE OF THEIR BOND PROGRAM, THEY WILL BE IMPROVING FACILITIES AND THEY WANT TO AT THE SAME TIME ADDRESS PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY. THERE'S A LOT OF ACCESS BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND NEIGHBORHOODS TO THE SCHOOLS THAT ARE ON GRASS SHOULDERS. SO THEY CAME TO US RECENTLY ASKING US TO CONSIDER PILOTING WITH THEM SIDEWALK INITIATIVES AROUND THE SCHOOL. THAT'S WHY I SAID 4. EVERY DISTRICT, EVEN DISTRICT 5 HAS SIDEWALK NEEDS. >> Roy: I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REOCCURRING THINGS. I HEARD THAT LAST NIGHT AT OUR COMMUNITY EVENT. I HEARD IT OUT IN THE WEST GUTH ALSO. WHERE I WAS HEADED WITH THIS IS THAT IF WE WENT WITH OPTION 1 AT 20%, THEN YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO SET A GOAL IN THE FUTURE. LET'S SAY HYPOTHETICALLY YOU SET IT TO 23 OR 25. WHEN WE GET TO THAT 23 OR 25, YOU COULD DEDICATE A PERCENTAGE TO THE SIDEWALKS OR WHATEVER WE WERE LOOKING AT. >> Zanoni: CORRECT. YOU COULD DO THAT. >> Roy: I THINK THAT'S THE SMARTEST THING TO DO. I KNOW WE WANT TO DO THINGS RIGHT NOW BUT WE WANT TO GET THE STUDY DONE BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO GIVE US THE ROAD MAP. IT WILL ALSO TELL WHAT DISTRICT HAS THE BIGGEST NEED AND IT GIVES US SOMETHING TO FOLLOW. I'M OKAY WITH THAT TOO. THE 20 -- IF WE SET A GOAL AT 23 OR WHATEVER THIS COUNCIL DECIDES, THEN WE HAVE THE ABILITY IN THE FUTURE TO BE ABLE TO DEDICATE SOME FUNDS. BUT, AGAIN, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY EVER ADMONISHES ANYONE FOR SAVING MONEY IN TERMS OF PUTTING MONEY AWAY. BECAUSE WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ECONOMY'S GOING TO DO OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. THERE'S SOME INDICATORS OUT THERE AND DEPENDING ON WHO YOU TALK TO. >> Zanoni: OR THE WEATHER. WHAT THE WEATHER CAN DO. >> Roy: THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAD. >> Scott: COUNCILMEMBER CAMPOS. >> Campos: THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. OKAY. WELL, I'VE BEEN HEARING THIS ABOUT, OH, THERE'S DIFFERENT KINDS OF MONEY, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF MONEY TO GET SIDEWALKS DONE BUT IT NEVER COMES TO FRUITION. HERE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND I'M LISTENING TO WHAT MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE SAYING AND I DO SYMPATHIZE WITH ALL THE OTHER DISTRICTS. KEEP IN MIND WE NEED TO START SOMEWHERE AND SINCE I STARTED RUNNING, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS I KNOW THAT WAS A BIG FACTOR AS FAR AS THE RESIDENTS IN MY DISTRICT. SOME OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE IN SUCH BAD SHAPE. BUT THE IDEA THAT ERNIE HAD WAS POSSIBLE, WHICH WAS LET'S START WITH THE FIVE-YEAR STREETS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN REPAVED YET THAT WE COULD START WITH THOSE STREETS, ADDING THE SIDEWALKS WHEREVER IT WAS POSSIBLE. AND LIKE I'VE BEEN SAYING BEFORE IS PEOPLE NEED TO SEE WHERE THEIR TAX DOLLARS ARE BEING USED AND IF THEY HAVE -- THEY CAN SEE THAT SIDEWALKS ARE BEING DONE, THEN THEY'LL BE MORE APT TO SAY MAYBE WE COULD DO A BOND NEXT YEAR. BUT WE HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE. I UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE SURVEY THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. THAT'S A MILLION DOLLARS WHEN WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF SIDEWALKS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED. AGAIN, I STILL WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PERCENTAGE OF THIS DEDICATED TO SIDEWALKS. AND I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS GOING TO DO IT. THIS WOULD ONLY GET US A MILLION IF WE WERE TO ADOPT THIS, THE OPTION 1. INSTEAD OF GOING WITH THE OPTION 2 THAT GOES DOWN TO -- IT SAYS IT IS THE GOAL OF THE COUNCIL TO UNASSIGN FUND BALANCE IN THE GENERAL FUND TO AT LEAST 17% AND UP TO 20%. THERE'S A VARIANCE. SO I WOULD SUPPORT THE OPTION 2. I UNDERSTAND MY CONSERVATIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT, YOU KNOW, WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO HAVE SOME RESERVES, BUT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO MANAGE WITH 17. AND WE HAVE HISTORY SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE HAVEN'T DONE IT BEFORE. I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE MY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SUPPORT, REALLY, OPTION 2. >> Zanoni: COUNCILWOMAN, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE HAVE ACTUALLY HAD 20% FINANCIAL RESERVES FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS. THERE'S BEEN A GOAL OF BETWEEN 17 AND 20 BUT WE'VE ACTUALLY BEEN AT 20% FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS. AND JUST TO ADD TO YOUR COMMENTS, ERNIE DID SAY WE COULD DO THAT, WHICH WAS PICK A STREET IN THE IMP AND THE RAPID PAVEMENT PROGRAM AND SEE IF THE SIDEWALKS HAVE NEED. THAT COULD BE DONE IN ANY ONE OF THE FIVE DISTRICTS. THE COST FOR ONE BLOCK ON BOTH SIDES, INCLUDING DRIVEWAY APPROACHES SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT, IS ABOUT $800,000 IS WHAT HE WAS ESTIMATING. JUST SO THE COUNCIL HAS CONTEXT FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT. >> Campos: OKAY. BUT THE ISSUE IS IF YOU DO THE $800,000 I KNOW IS NOT GOING TO GET US MUCH. >> Zanoni: A BLOCK. >> Campos: WHEN WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO EVEN HAVE AN OPTION TO PUT A BOND PROGRAM? WOULD IT BE THIS MONTH? FOR NOVEMBER? WHAT? WHEN WOULD IT BE? >> Zanoni: IF WE STAYED ON THE CYCLE THAT WE HAVE BEEN ON, IT'S EVERY TWO YEARS. SO WE WOULD BE DEVELOPING IT NEXT SPRING AND WORKING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION IN JULY TO BE PLACED ON THE NOVEMBER 2026 BALLOT. >> Campos: OKAY. OKAY. >> Zanoni: I THINK WHAT YOU SEE IN THE COUNCIL, REGARDLESS OF THE MEMBER, IS THAT EACH DISTRICT HAS A NEED FOR SIDEWALKS IN ALL FIVE DISTRICTS. YOU'RE PROBABLY TALKING A COUPLE MILLION DOLLARS, PROBABLY $5 MILLION. A MILLION PER DISTRICT TO BEGIN THE INITIATIVE. BUT I THINK IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED ENOUGH WHERE -- AND I THINK THE COUNCIL JUST HAS TO AGREE TO EVERY DISTRICT IS GOING TO NEED IT. INITIALLY IN THE '24 BUDGET WE RECOMMENDED JUST DISTRICT 2. AND THEN THE FOUR COUNCIL DISTRICTS SAID WE WANT OURS TOO. THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO DECIDE THAT $5 MILLION COMES OFF THE TOP AND A MILLION PER DISTRICT. THE NEED IS THERE. EVEN COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ, THE SIDEWALK GAPS, SIDEWALKS THAT ARE BUCKLING. IT'S NOT JUST THE OLDER INNER CITY DISTRICTS, THOSE DO HAVE TREMENDOUS NEED, YOU KNOW THAT, AND PROBABLY MORE THAT WAS ONE OF THE FACTORS ERNIE'S STUDY WAS GOING TO DETERMINE. THE NEED IS GREAT AND EVERY DISTRICT HAS NEEDS FOR SIDEWALKS. >> Campos: ALL RIGHT. I GUESS THAT'S ALL FOR NOW. >> Scott: THANK YOU, MA'AM. COUNCILMEMBER BARRERA. >> Barrera: WE'RE WAY OUTSIDE THE DEAL TALKING ABOUT BOND ELECTIONS OR WHATEVER. AND THAT'S ONE REASON I WANT TO ADVOCATE IF WE DO A STUDY, WE CAN DETERMINE WHAT WE NEED TO DO. I GO TO AUSTIN, TEXAS FREQUENTLY AND THE OTHER DAY I WAS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE STREETS HAD SIDEWALKS. HERE YOU HAVE A LOT IN DISTRICT 2 AND DISTRICT 5, THEY ONLY HAVE ONE SIDE AND I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU CAME UP WITH A PILOT PROGRAM OF 2 AND 4. WHAT ABOUT 3? THEY HAVE AREAS WHERE THEY HAVE NO SIDEWALKS. I THINK THAT'S ONE REASON WE NEED TO DO A STUDY. THAT BEING SAID, I BELIEVE WHAT YOU RECOMMEND IS OPTION 1 AND I BELIEVE IN HAVING A STRONGER FINANCIAL RATING. BASED ON YOUR DIRECTION IS HOW WE WOULD IMPROVE THAT FINANCIAL RATING. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> Scott: MY TAKE ON THIS IS THIS IS A GREAT CONVERSATION TO HAVE TO START A BUDGET PROCESS. IT'S KIND OF WEIRD TO HAVE THIS EIGHT DAYS BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE BUDGET, OR WHATEVER THAT DATE IS. I THINK SAVING MORE MONEY IS BETTER THAN SAVING LESS. IT SENDS A MESSAGE TO THE LENDING COMMUNITY THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN OUR FUND BALANCE. I THINK 90 DAYS IS BETTER THAN 60 AND IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE SWEET SPOT IS 3%-ISH. I THINK THE RATING AGENCIES WOULD BE HAPPY AND WE WOULD SLEEP BETTER AT NIGHT. I THINK THERE OUGHT TO BE A CONVERSATION IF THIS IS OUR INITIAL STARTING POINT FOR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET ABOUT A SET-ASIDE. I LIKE OPTION 1. ANYBODY ELSE? ANYONE? WE HAVE A -- YEAH. SO TECHNICALLY IT'S -- OKAY. YEAH, I THINK THIS WAS PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, CORRECT? I'M SORRY. DID YOU HAVE A -- YEAH. OKAY. CAN YOU TAKE OUR VOTE? >> Zanoni: EXCUSE ME, COUNCILMAN. JUST TO SEE, DOES THE COUNCIL WANT THE AMENDMENT TO PUT INTO THE POLICIES THE LANGUAGE THAT IF IT DIPS BELOW THE 20% THAT WE NEED -- >> Scott: I NEED SOMEBODY TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE MOTION. >> Zanoni: WE NEED A PLAN TO RESTORE THE FUND BALANCE. THAT LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE ADDED TO THE POLICY. >> Hernandez: I'M ALSO WAITING FOR THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE FOR THAT KIND OF AMENDMENT TO FERRET OUT WHAT THAT LANGUAGE WOULD BE. THE POLICY ITSELF REQUIRES US TO MAINTAIN A BALANCE. TO HAVE A POLICY TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT IF WE DIP IT THEN WE NEED TO DO SA PLAN FOR IT. WE'VE GOT TO DO A PLAN FOR IT. >> Zanoni: THAT'S FINE, COUNCILMAN. WE CAN DO THAT. >> Scott: SEEING NO AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION, I GUESS WE TAKE OUR VOTE. THE MOTION IS FOR OPTION 1 AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU, MA'AM. MOTION PASSES. NEXT UP IS -- BY THE WAY, I HEARD A RUMOR IT'S RAINING OUTSIDE SO THIS IS A GOOD TIME TO TALK ABOUT WATER. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS/UPDATE ON CITY OPERATIONS. >> Zanoni: THIS WEEK WE'RE GOING TO DO ANOTHER UPDATE ON OUR ALTERNATIVE WATER SOURCES. DREW MOLLY IS GOING TO PRESENT. WE HAVE A PRETTY -- A LOT OF WORK'S BEING DONE ON ALL OF OUR WATER PROJECTS AND YOU'LL SEE THE PROGRESS. THERE'S A LOT OF MEETINGS AND WORK EVENTS THIS WEEK ON EACH ONE OF THEM. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DREW. WE'RE HANDING OUT AN UPDATED PRESENTATION THAT DREW WILL GO THROUGH. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE MEMO THAT WAS SENT OUT TO THE CITY COUNCIL LAST FRIDAY ON OUR WEEKLY UPDATE. DREW, WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. >> Molly: THANK YOU, PETER, MAYOR PRO TEM, COUNCIL. THANKS FOR HAVING ME HERE TODAY. AS THE CITY MANAGER JUST SAID, THERE'S A PRESENTATION THAT WE STRIVE TO GIVE EVERY WEEK. IT ALSO FOLLOWS SUIT WITH A MEMO WE TRY TO PROVIDE EVERY WEEK SO YOU ARE UP TO SPEED AND UP TO DATE ON THE PROJECTS WE'RE WORKING ON. THERE IS SOME INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION THAT IS A LITTLE BIT NEW, SO BEAR WITH ME. BUT WE'LL GO THROUGH THESE SLIDES AND I CAN ONLY IMAGINE WE'LL HAVE GOOD DISCUSSION AFTERWARDS ON THIS INFORMATION. WITH ME TODAY IS NICHOLAS WINKLEMANN AND ESTEBAN RAMOS. SO I THINK WHERE I'M GOING TO START TODAY IS I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE NUECES RIVER GROUNDWATER WELL PROJECT. THAT PROJECT CONTINUES TO GO WELL, IN OUR OPINION. THERE'S TWO PHASES TO THIS PROJECT. THE FIRST PHASE IS WHAT WE CALL PHASE 1 AND THERE'S WHAT WE LIKE TO DESCRIBE AS PHASE 2. IT'S A CONCEPT. IT'S NOT BEEN APPROVED BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT DOING. AS FAR AS PHASE 1 IS CONCERNED, PHASE 1 IS WATER NOW. THAT MESSAGE HAS BEEN LOUD AND CLEAR. WATER NOW. I'LL SAY THAT A COUPLE MORE TIMES BEFORE THE END OF THIS PRESENTATION. WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS WATER NOW MEANS WE HAVE WATER THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PUMPING OUT OF THE GROUND AND PUTTING IT INTO THE NUECES RIVER. IT'S A PLAYBOOK THAT HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE FOR MANY DECADES IN OUR WORLD. AND SO WE'RE JUST BASICALLY REPEATING WHAT HISTORY HAS DONE. SO WE HAVE A BED AND BANKS PERMIT ON THE EASTERN WELL FIELD. SO THE EASTERN WELLFIELD IS ONE SET OF WELLS THAT WE HAVE DRILLED. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE ALL OF THESE WELLS COMPLETED. THERE'S EIGHT OF THEM WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS. MOST OF THESE WELLS ARE COMPLETED. WE HAVE A PERMIT FROM TCEQ THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US OR OBTAINED ON AUGUST 7th OF THIS YEAR. SO A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. THAT BED AND BANK PERMIT ALLOWS US TO PUT WATER INTO OR DISCHARGE WATER INTO THE NUECES RIVER. IT ESSENTIALLY PROTECTS OUR INVESTMENT. IT PROTECTS OUR ASSET. IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS THAT IF THERE WAS SOMEBODY DOWNSTREAM THAT WANTED TO TAKE THAT WATER, WE WOULD LEGALLY BE ABLE TO DEFEND OUR RIGHTS TO THAT WATER. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH ALL THE OTHER USERS THAT TAKE WATER FROM THE RIVER. ONE OF THEM IS WATER CONTROL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 3, IN OTHER WORDS, ROBSTOWN. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM. WE HAVE ALSO BEEN WORKING WITH OUR PARTNERS WHO HAVE CONTRACT WATER FROM US WHO TAKE RAW WATER OUT OF THE NUECES RIVER. THAT WOULD INCLUDE SAN PATRICIO WATER DISTRICT AND FLINT HILLS. SO THE TIMELINE FOR THIS PROJECT FOR THE PHASE 1 OF THE NUECES RIVER GROUNDWATER WELL PROJECT, THE TIMELINE FOR THIS IS IMMEDIATE. WE'RE DOING THIS NOW SO WE ARE ACTUALLY DISCHARGING TODAY ANYWHERE BETWEEN 5 TO 7 MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF WATER INTO THE RIVER. WE ALSO HAVE WHAT WE CALL IS A WESTERN WELL FIELD. THAT WESTERN WELL FIELD IS A WELL FIELD THAT WE'RE DEVELOPING AS WE SPEAK. WE HAVE DRILL RIGS OUT THERE. THERE'S A CLEARED SITE THAT WE'RE WORKING ON. I SAY THE VOLUME OF THIS WELL FIELD COULD BE UP TO 27 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. THAT IS A NUMBER THAT HAS NOT NECESSARILY BEEN COMPLETELY VETTED BY A HYDROGEOLOGIST BUT WE DO HAVE A REPORT FROM THEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO SHARE WITH YOU LATER IN THE WEEK. THE ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST FOR THIS PROJECT SO FAR IS $18 MILLION. SO WE HAVE A -- EVERY WEEK WE PROVIDE THIS ACTUALLY IN THE UPDATED MEMO TO YOU EVERY WEEK. EVERY WEEK AS WE'RE INCURRING COSTS TO DRILL THESE WELLS, WE'RE REPORTING THAT TO YOU. SO WE'VE INCURRED ABOUT $18 MILLION TO DATE. WE HAVE A GRANT FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR $30 MILLION. SO THAT CERTAINLY OFFSETS THESE COSTS AS FAR AS DRILLING THESE WELLS AND PUTTING THAT WATER INTO THE RIVER. I'M GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE CONSIDER COULD BE A PHASE 2. IF WE WANTED TO MAKE THIS A LONG-TERM PROJECT, WE COULD DO THAT. THAT'S OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN VOTED ON. IT HASN'T BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE BEEN TOLD TO DO BUT IT IS SOMETHING WE COULD DO, DEPENDING UPON HOW THINGS MOVE FORWARD. SO LET'S JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. SO ON THE EASTERN WELL FIELD, THAT'S THE SAME WELL FIELD WE ARE DRILLING -- AND WE HAVE ALMOST ALL OF OUR WELLS COMPLETED. WE HAVE A HYDROGEOLOGIST AND THAT HYDROGEOLOGIST HAS CONFIRMED WE WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE A SUSTAINED PRODUCTION ON THAT WELL FIELD AT 11 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. SO IF THERE WAS A NEED OR A WANT TO HAVE THIS WELL FIELD BASICALLY PROVIDE WATER LONG TERM TO A FUTURE BRACKISH RO PLANT LIKE AT O.N. STEVENS, WE COULD SUSTAINABLY PROVIDE 11 MILLION GALLONS A DAY FROM THAT WELL FIELD TO AN RO BECAUSE THIS WATER DOES HAVE HIGH TDS. IT ACTUALLY HAS PRETTY GOOD PROPERTIES OUTSIDE OF THAT SO WE'VE TESTED THIS WATER. WE'VE LOOKED AT IT FOR A WHOLE HOST OF DIFFERENT CONSTITUENTS. AND FROM WHAT WE HAVE SEEN AND FROM WHAT WE HAVE FROM OUR LAB DATA, IT LOOKS REALLY GOOD IN TERMS OF THE WATER QUALITY. TDS IS SOMETHING THAT IS ELEVATED, WHICH IS WHY WE ACTUALLY HAVE A TCEQ BED AND BANKS PERMIT WITH AN ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PLAN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING THAT WOULD DEGRADE THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE NUECES RIVER. WE FOLLOW THAT. AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT ON THE EASTERN WELL FIELD. AS FAR AS THE WESTERN WELL FIELD GOES, WE ALSO HAVE HAD OUR HYDROGEOLOGIST HAS LOOKED AT THE PRODUCTION, THE WATER QUALITY. HOW DOES THE HYDROGEOLOGIST KNOW THIS? WE HAVE TAKEN THE GEOLOGICAL LOG DATA AND PROVIDED THAT TO OUR HYDROGEOLOGIST. THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PUMP OUT OF THAT WELL. THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THE WATER QUALITY AND BASED ON SOME MODELING THEY HAVE DONE -- AND THIS IS PROBABLY PRETTY TECHNICAL BECAUSE IT'S COMPLEX MODELING THAT THEY DO -- THEY BASICALLY, THE INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE TO DATE, THEY HAVE ESSENTIALLY SAID THAT THERE COULD BE OR WOULD BE A SUSTAINED PRODUCTION OF 17 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. SIMILARLY TO THE EASTERN WELL FIELD WHERE WE'VE GOT 11 MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF SUSTAINED WATER, THE WESTERN WELL FIELD COULD POTENTIALLY GENERATE 17 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. AGAIN, IF YOU LOOKED AT THIS ALL TOGETHER AS A POTENTIAL CONCEPTUAL PROJECT, WE WOULD HAVE A 28 MILLION-GALLON A DAY SUSTAINABLE DRINKING WATER SUPPLY THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE TREATED . IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN RO FOR TREATMENT PURPOSES. THE BED AND BANKS PERMIT WOULD HAVE TO BE SECURED. AS YOU RECALL, WE DO HAVE A BED AND BANKS PERMIT FOR THE FIRST WELL FIELD, THE EASTERN WELL FIELD. WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO GET A BED AND BANKS PERMIT FOR THE SECOND WELL FIELD, THE WESTERN WELL FIELD. AND SO, AGAIN, I THINK THAT IS -- LIKE YOU SAID, THE PROJECT CONTINUES TO GO WELL AND ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I WANT TO FOCUS ON IS COST AND TIMELINE. IF COUNCIL WAS INTERESTED IN PURSUING THIS WATER AS A FUTURE DRINKING WATER PROJECT, WE'D BE LOOKING AT A TIMELINE OF 2028. THAT'S KIND OF THE GENERAL TIMELINE THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO COME UP WITH PUTTING THIS OUT AND PLOTTING ALL THE DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN. AND WE'RE LOOKING AT -- AND WE HAVE PRESENTED THIS BEFORE -- BUT THE COST FOR THIS WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $350 MILLION. THAT WOULD BE THE COST TO BUILD A BRACKISH RO FACILITY AT O.N. STEVENS WITH ALL THE NECESSARY POWER, WITH THE PIPING AND PIPELINES NECESSARY TO CONVEY THAT RAW GROUNDWATER TO A FUTURE TREATMENT SYSTEM AT O.N. STEVENS. AGAIN, CONCEPTUAL BUT SOMETHING WE THINK HAS SOME POSSIBILITIES AND MERITS. WHAT WE THINK IS GOOD ABOUT THIS IS WE HAVE REAL WATER COMING IN NOW AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO THIS. I WILL SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN I PUT THAT NUMBER UP THERE AT 27 MILLION GALLONS A DAY, AND I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THAT SOME ARE GOING TO SAY THAT'S A LOT OF WATER. THAT'S WHY I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT OUR HYDROGEOLOGIST HAS NOT CONFIRMED THAT 27 MILLION GALLONS A DAY IS SUSTAINABLE. BUT WE COULD POTENTIALLY DO THAT IN THE SHORT TERM. AND I'M SURE WE CAN COME BACK AND TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT HERE. SO THE NEXT PROJECT THAT WE'RE ALL VERY FAMILIAR WITH IS THE EVANGELINE PROJECT. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING PRETTY HARD OVER THE LAST WEEK OR SO TO KIND OF PUT SOME MORE PIECES TOGETHER ON THIS PROJECT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALL KNOW IS THAT THE EVANGELINE PROJECT IS SITUATED ON A LARGE TRACT OF LAND, APPROXIMATELY 23,000 ACRES. EVANGELINE, IN TERMS OF THE OVERALL COST, WE DO HAVE POTENTIALLY AN OFFER ON THE TABLE TO PURCHASE THE WATER RIGHTS ON THIS SITE AT $169 MILLION. THE ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST TO BUILD THE NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE PIPELINES, THE PUMPS, THE TANKS, THE ELECTRICAL, ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO PROVIDE THAT WATER INTO THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE IS ESTIMATED AT APPROXIMATELY $200 MILLION. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAY BE OF INTEREST IS THE TIMELINE. AND SO WE DO HAVE A TIMELINE OF 2029. WE HAVE BEEN REALLY LOOKING AT THAT HARD BECAUSE WE KNOW THERE'S PROBABLY SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. WE HAVE HAD GARVER, WHO HAS BEEN DOING A LOT OF WORK FOR US, TO TRY TO PUT THIS TIMELINE TOGETHER. THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT THEY HAVE. WE ACTUALLY HAVE TAKEN THAT TIMELINE AND WE'VE HAD AN INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW FROM AN OUTSIDE FIRM TO ALSO LOOK AT THAT. AND SO THAT'S THE ESTIMATE. WE CAN GET INTO MORE DETAILS ON HOW WE CAME UP WITH THAT. ADDITIONALLY WE KNOW THAT THE EVANGELINE PROJECT HAS SOME REAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR US BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE SOME SCALABILITY IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO GO UP FROM 12 MILLION GALLONS A DAY TO 24 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. ONE OF THE THINGS TO POINT OUT IS WHEN WE TALKED TO THE VARIOUS TEAMMATES THAT WE HAVE: GARVER AND THEN THE OUTSIDE FIRM THAT'S BEEN LOOKING AT THIS AS WELL. IS WHAT WOULD THE TIMELINE LOOK FOR ADDING 24 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TOLD IS THE TIMELINE'S PROBABLY SIMILAR TO 2029. REALLY THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE YOU DO GET THAT SCALING UP. THERE'S THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO THAT ARE THE SAME ACTIVITIES, IT'S JUST LARGER. IT'S JUST MORE WATER BUT YOU'RE STILL DOING THE SAME TYPES OF THINGS. YOU HAVE THE SAME CONTRACTOR. YOU HAVE THE SAME ENGINEERS. YOU STILL HAVE ELECTRICAL. YOU STILL HAVE PIPING. IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT. AS A RESULT, THE TIMELINE DOESN'T MOVE OUT FURTHER OUT FOR THE TIMELINE FOR 12 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. WATER RIGHTS PURCHASED WOULD BE THE SAME WATER RIGHTS PURCHASED AMOUNT THAT WE HAVE BEEN NEGOTIATING. AND THEN THE ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST IS OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE BIT MORE. BECAUSE THERE IS A BELIEF FROM MANY OF US THAT IN ORDER TO SAFELY PROVIDE THAT WATER WITHOUT HINDERING OUR ABILITY TO OPERATE ALL THE WATER THAT WE HAVE ON THE EASTERN SUPPLIES, WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE A PIPELINE THAT WOULD CAPTURE THAT WATER AND TAKE IT TO O.N. STEVENS. AND THERE WOULD BE SOME TREATMENT THAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE DO. SO THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE CAPITAL COST >> THE OTHER -- THE NEXT PROJECT I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IS ONE THAT WE'VE SEEN AND KNOW QUITE A BIT ABOUT IS THE NUECES RIVER AUTHORITY'S HARBOR ISLAND PROJECT. WE DID HEAR A PRESENTATION FROM JOHN BYRUM, WHO IS THEIR GENERAL MANAGER. MR. BYRUM WAS HERE ON AUGUST 12TH, AND HE TALKED ABOUT THIS. THIS IS A SLIDE THAT, FRANKLY, IS KIND OF TAKEN VERBATIM OUT OF HIS PRESENTATION. JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS PROJECT IS -- IS A PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. THAT'S WHAT IT'S BEEN OFFERED AS. PERMITS HAVE JUST RECENTLY BEEN SUBMITTED, SO THERE IS A PERMIT THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN FEBRUARY WITH THE ARMY CORPS. THEY'VE SAID THAT IT'S A FASTER PERMIT PROCESS. IT'S CALLED A FAST 41 IS WHAT IT'S BEEN REFERRED TO, AND THEN THERE'S A TCEQ DISCHARGE PERMIT THAT THEY APPLIED FOR A COUPLE MONTHS AGO, BACK IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR. AND THERE'S AN EASEMENT AMENDMENT THAT WAS MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION THAT IS STILL UNDER WAY TO BE SUBMITTED. THE COST MODEL HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED. THE TIMELINE THAT WE HAVE BEEN TOLD IS 2029 TO 2032. AND THEN THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAY HAS BEEN ASKED OF OUR STAFF, SO WE WANTED TO PUT THIS OUT THERE, BUT WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE IF WE WERE TO OFFER A RESERVATION FEE FOR THIS WATER. AND SO THESE ARE NUMBERS THAT CAME STRAIGHT OUT OF SOME COMMUNICATION BETWEEN US AND MR. BYRUM, SO AT A 30 MILLION-GALLON A DAY RESERVATION AMOUNT, WHICH WOULD BE A NONREFUNDABLE RESERVATION AMOUNT. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE WERE TO COMMIT 30 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY, IT WOULD BE A COST OF $821,000, AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING, AS WE UNDERSTAND, YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO THIS EVERY YEAR UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY HAVE THE WATER DELIVER. THERE WOULD BE NO REFUND ON THE RESERVATION. SO IF YOU COMMITTED TO IT FOR THREE YEARS AND ON THE FOURTH YEAR YOU DIDN'T COMMIT, THERE WOULD BE A QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THE OFFERING OF THAT WATER MADE AVAILABLE. SO THERE'S SOME THINGS I THINK WE STILL NEED TO THINK THROUGH, BUT ULTIMATELY, IT IS A ONE-YEAR OPTION THAT MUST BE RENEWED ANNUALLY AS WE UNDERSTAND. NEXT STEPS FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECTS, SO THESE ARE ALL THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE GOING ON IN OUR WEEK, AND IT'S A BUSY WEEK, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW. BECAUSE A COUPLE OF YOU ARE VERY MUCH EMBEDDED IN SOME OF THESE PROJECTS. SO THE FIRST ONE, THE EVANGELINE GROUNDWATER PROJECT. SO TODAY'S TUESDAY, TOMORROW'S WEDNESDAY. SO TOMORROW WE HAVE A MEETING WITH EVANGELINE. THIS WILL BE A MEETING WITH THE ENTIRE TEAM. WE HAVE OUR PROJECT SPONSOR, COUNCILMEMBER CAROLYN VAUGHN, WE HAVE THE MAYOR, WE HAVE CITY STAFF, WE HAVE OUR CITY CONSULTANT AND WE HAVE THE EVANGELINE LAGUNA TEAM THAT WILL BE MEETING WITH US TOMORROW. WE ALSO HAVE THE CC POLYMERS PROJECT, THAT MEETING IS ALSO TOMORROW. WE HAVE A MEETING WITH OUR TEAM, AND OUR TEAM IS DEFINED AS OUR PROJECT SPONSOR, COUNCILMAN GIL HERNANDEZ, WE HAVE THE MAYOR, CITY STAFF, WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM CC POLYMERS AND WE HAVE SOME CITY CONSULTANTS WHO ARE HELPING US. RYE LAND, WE HAVE A MEETING COMING UP ON THURSDAY, THIS IS CITY STAFF AND NRA STAFF TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TALK ABOUT TODAY. WE ALSO HAVE AN EFFLUENT REUSE PROJECT WHICH IS KIND OF INTERESTING BECAUSE THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT EFFLUENT REUSE PROJECTS THAT IS GOING ON AS WE SPEAK. IF YOU RECALL, WE HAVE GARVER WHO WAS HIRED BACK IN MAY AND CONTRACTED TO DEVELOP EFFLUENT REUSE. WE ALSO HAVE ARDURRA WHO HAS BROUGHT FORTH AN INTERESTING PROJECT COMPONENT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. IN FACT, WE MET WITH THEM YESTERDAY, WE'RE GOING TO BE MEETING WITH THEM THURSDAY, AND THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE A PRESENTATION ON WHAT THEY'RE OFFERING TO THE CITY AS A POTENTIAL OPTION TO BRING WASTEWATER EFFLUENT EITHER TO INDUSTRY OR POTENTIALLY OTHER LOCATIONS WHERE THAT WATER COULD BE PROVIDED. NOTABLY POTENTIALLY THE NUECES RIVER IS A LOCATION THAT'S BEEN CONTEMPLATED. SO THAT PRESENTATION IS SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 9. AND THEN LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE SOUTHWEST WATER AUTHORITY. WE HAD A MEETING A COUPLE WEEKS AGO WITH THEM WHERE WE MET WITH THE LEADERSHIP TEAM, WITH THEIR STAFF, WITH SEVEN SEAS AND SOME OF THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL, AND THEN WE'VE GOT A PRESENCE TAKES THAT WE'VE COMMITTED TO THE COUNCIL TO COME BACK AND TALK ABOUT WHERE WE STAND WITH THIS PROJECT ON SEPTEMBER 23RD. OKAY. AND THIS IS -- I THINK THIS IS THE LAST SLIDE, SO THIS -- THIS IS A SLIDE THAT I THINK IS REALLY INTERESTING. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AND WE FINALLY HAVE GOTTEN SOMETHING THAT I FEEL FAIRLY COMFORTABLE PUTTING THIS IN FRONT OF THE GROUP. THIS IS THE WATER SUPPLY DASHBOARD, SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE UPDATE EVERY TWO WEEKS. WE PUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT INTO THIS. THIS IS -- THIS IS A DASHBOARD VIEW THAT TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION SOME THINGS THAT ARE ASSUMPTIONS. AND SO WHEN YOU PROJECT OUT, WHEN YOU PROJECT FROM HERE OUT, THERE ARE ASSUMPTIONS THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE. SO ONE OF THE ASSUMPTIONS IS THAT WE ASSUME, THAT WE'RE GOING TO AS WE GO FORWARD IN TIME, THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE GETTING REALLY MUCH RAINFALL AT ALL. WE'RE GOING TO BE FAIRLY DIRE IN OUR OUTLOOK FOR WATER, BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T SEEN MUCH OF IT AND WE WANT TO HAVE A CONSERVATIVE APPROACH GOING FORWARD. MY GOODNESS, IF WE COULD JUST GET AVERAGE RAINFALL, THE TIMELINE WALKS OUT QUITE A BIT. BUT IF WE GET A TENTH PERCENTILE, THAT'S BASICALLY THE NUMBER, TENTH PERCENTILE, THAT'S A PRETTY DIRE LOOK ON OUR SITUATION, THAT IS KIND OF WHAT WE HAVE MODELED AS FAR AS PRECIPITATION AND INFLOWS GOING INTO OUR RESERVOIR SYSTEM. AT LEAST ON THE WESTERN SUPPLY. EASTERN SUPPLY IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT BALL GAME. EASTERN SUPPLY HAS BEEN A LOT BETTER, ESPECIALLY LAKE TEXAN FLA. SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS YOU SEE THE LINE THAT KIND OF STARTS AT ABOUT 30%, WHICH IS THE DARK BLUE LINE, AND IT KIND OF JUST CONTINUES TO FALL. AND THAT'S THE -- THAT'S THE WESTERN SUPPLY THAT WE HAVE, WHICH IS MEASURED AS CHOKE CANYON AND LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI. AND AS YOU SEE, WE'VE BEEN PRETTY DIRE IN OUR FORECAST. AND WE TAKE THAT PRETTY MUCH ALL THE WAY TO ZERO. AND SO THE QUESTION IS, IS WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO TO ESSENTIALLY LEVERAGE THE LACK OF -- OF WATER FROM THE WESTERN SUPPLIES? AND SO WHAT THIS WATER SUPPLY DASHBOARD SHOWS IS WE DO IT IN A COUPLE DIFFERENT WAYS. WE DO IT BY LEVERAGING EVERYTHING ON THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE, WHICH WE'RE DOING TODAY, SO 70 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY ON THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. YOU CAN SEE SOME -- SOME BARS THAT START TO PICK UP IN JULY, YOU CAN BARELY SEE THEM, AND THEY START TO GO UP. AND THOSE ARE THE GROUNDWATER WELLS THAT WE'RE ADDING ON THE NUECES RIVER. AND THEN THE LIGHTER COLOR OF BARS THAT ARE ON THE BOTTOM, AND FORGIVE ME, I AM COLOR BLIND, SO I HAVE A REAL HARD TIME SEEING THESE COLORS, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S SOME BARS THAT START TO GO UP. IF WE CONTINUE TO HAVE SUCCESS DRILLING WELLS, ESPECIALLY IN THE WESTERN WELL FIELD, WE CONTINUE TO REALLY MAKE SOME PROGRESS. AND AS YOU DRIVE OUT, AS YOU DRIVE OUT -- AND BEFORE I DRIVE ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE END OF THE CALENDAR, LET ME JUST POINT TO THE LITTLE TABLE THAT YOU HAVE ON THE RIGHT SIDE. SO WHAT WE HAVE ON THAT TABLE ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS ANTICIPATED VOLUME IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. AND AS YOU SEE ON THE TOP TABLE, YOU CAN SEE EASTERN WELL FIELD, WESTERN WELL FIELD, AND FRANKLY, INNER HARBOR, I'M JUST GOING TO PUT THAT ON THERE FOR NOW. BUT I THINK THE EXERCISE WILL HOPEFULLY POINT INTO SOME THINGS THAT I HOPE MAKE SOME SENSE. THE EASTERN WELL FIELD IS 11 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY. WE MENTIONED THAT A COUPLE SLIDES AGO. IT'S IN THE NEAR TERM, THAT'S WHAT WE CAN PUMP OUT OF THE WELLS ON THE EASTERN WELL FIELD. WE CAN DO THAT TODAY, AND WE BELIEVE EVEN IN THE LONG TERM, IF YOU WERE TO DEVELOP THIS AND BASICALLY CONVEY THAT WATER TO A FUTURE RO PLANT, YOU WOULD HAVE 11 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY. THE WESTERN WELL FIELD IS AN INTERESTING ONE. THE MODEL SHOWS THAT IF YOU HAD 27 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY FROM THAT WESTERN WELL FIELD, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO ESSENTIALLY COMBINE THOSE TWO, SO 27 AND 11, WHAT IS THAT, 38 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY, THAT WOULD BE ENOUGH WATER TO WHERE WE WOULD ACTUALLY NOT BE ABLE TO MEET DEMAND -- OR LET ME BACK UP. GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BOTTOM LINE, IT SAYS PROJECTED DATE OF ZERO WATER IN LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI AND CHOKE CANYON RESERVOIR. RIGHT NOW AS WE'RE TALKING, THAT DATE IS PROJECTED TO BE MAY OF 2027. THAT'S ASSUMING THAT WE DON'T HAVE, BASICALLY, THIS WESTERN WELL FIELD TO ADD MORE WATER TO OUR SUPPLY AT 27 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY. IF WE ARE ABLE TO DRILL ENOUGH GROUNDWATER, IN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING WATER THAT WE HAVE, OUR DATE MOVES OUT TO MAY OF '29. I JUST SAY THIS BECAUSE THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A PROJECT THAT WE BELIEVE MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. AND THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE ACCORDING TO THIS TABLE, IF SOME THINGS LINE UP, AND WE ALWAYS SAY THERE'S AN "IF" TO IT, WE ARE ABLE TO ESSENTIALLY MAKE IT BECAUSE WE HAVE NOW PUSHED THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT BACK FROM WHAT WAS ONCE BELIEVE AS A JUNE 2028, TO AN OCTOBER 2028 SCHEDULE. AND ESSENTIALLY, IF WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT, WE ARE ON A TIMETABLE SUCH THAT WE WOULD NOT -- NOT -- WE WOULD NOT NOT BE ABLE TO MEET DEMAND, SO WE WOULD NOT HAVE A CURTAILMENT, WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS SOMETHING THAT EVERY ONE OFF US IS TRYING TO AVOID. SO I WILL SAY THERE'S A LOT HERE, THERE'S A LOT TO UNPACK. WE DO HAVE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE BEHIND THE SCENES HELPING US DO THIS. WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY DO THIS ENTIRELY ON OUR OWN, WE HAD SOME FOLKS THAT HAVE HELPED US DO THIS. SO WITH THAT SAID, I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, DREW. COUNCILMEMBER PAXSON? >> Paxson: THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. DREW, THANK YOU FOR THIS PRESENTATION. SOME REALLY GREAT DATA IN ALL OF THESE PAGES AND THE FORMAT, INCREDIBLY HELPFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER FOR TODAY. JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN THE DYNAMIC THAT BEING BETWEEN PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 ON THE NUECES RIVER WELLS, AM I UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY THAT THE CHANGE IN VOLUME AVAILABILITY, FOR INSTANCE IN PHASE 1, WE GO FROM 16 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY ON THE EAST TO 11, AND PHASE 2, 27 MILLION-GALLONS IN THE WEST TO 17 IN PHASE 2. COULD YOU EXPLAIN HOW INVESTING IN A LONG-TERM RO AND PIPELINE SYSTEM ACTUALLY REDUCES THAT AVAILABLE VOLUME? >> Molly: RIGHT. SO ONE OF THE THINGS, I THINK'S REAL IMPORTANT IS THE HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION IS A HUGE COMPONENT OF GROUNDWATER PROJECTS. SO WE WANT TO BE VERY, VERY CAREFUL IN EVERYTHING THAT WE DO. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE ON THE EASTERN WELL FIELD, WHICH IS THE 11 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY, WE HAVE A PERMIT THAT HAS BASICALLY APPROVED US UP TO 16, BUT BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE SEEN, BASED ON THE MONITORING WELLS -- SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE ACTUALLY INSTALLED FIVE MONITORING WELLS IN THAT WELL FIELD, AND WE ACTIVELY MONITOR, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE CALLED A MONITORING WELL, WE ACTIVELY MONITOR THOSE WELLS TO SEE WHAT THE IMPACT IS OF THE PUMPING OF THOSE EIGHT PRODUCTION WELLS. AND SO ESSENTIALLY BASED ON THAT MONITORING, BASED ON THE HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE FROM OUR HYDROGEOLOGIST, WE BELIEVE AND WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THE SAFE PRODUCTION IS 11 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY. THAT'S TODAY, EVEN -- EVEN OUT INTO THE FUTURE, THE LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF THAT, ACCORDING TO OUR HYDROGEOLOGIST WHO HAS, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY WRITTEN A MEMO AND TOLD US THIS, SO WE HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THIS IS -- THIS IS GOOD INFORMATION -- IS 11 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY WELL INTO THE FUTURE. AND LIKE I SAID, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IS THAT WE CONTINUE TO ACTIVELY MONITOR THAT WELL FIELD. AND IF THERE ARE ANY THINGS, ANYTHING THAT WE SEE THAT POTENTIALLY SUGGESTS THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE, THAT WE MAKE IMMEDIATE CHANGES. WE MAKE IMMEDIATE CHANGES. SO THAT'S ON THE EASTERN WELL FIELD. ON THE WESTERN WELL FIELD, IT'S -- THERE'S -- WE'RE STILL DRILLING OUT THERE. WE -- YOU KNOW, WE JUST -- WE'VE GOT ONE TEST WELL HAS BEEN DONE. WE'VE GOT SOME REALLY GOOD DATA FROM THAT FIRST TEST WELL. WE'VE GIVEN THAT DATA TO THE HYDROGGEOLOGIST. WHAT THEY'VE SAID IF YOU WANT TO PUMP OUT OF THAT AQUIFER OUT OF THAT WELL FIELD YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO NOT SUSTAINABLY PULL 27 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY OUT OF IT. BUT BY NO MEANS WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO DO THAT FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME BASED ON THE DATA THAT HE HAS SO FAR, THAT THEY HAVE SO FAR, THEY'RE SAYING 17 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY IS A LONG-TERM SUSTAINABLE YIELD FROM THAT AQUIFER. NOW, AGAIN, I WOULD COME BACK TO SAY THAT THERE'S MORE WELLS THAT WILL BE DRILLED, THERE'S MORE DATA THAT WE WILL HAVE. AROUND, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THIS STUFF EVOLVES OVER TIME. SO WE JUST NEED TO BE -- WE NEED TO BE -- WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL, WE NEED TO BE VERY CONCERTED IN OUR EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE WE DO ALL THE DUE DILIGENCE SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS NO UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, THERE'S NO IMPACT TO THE FOLKS THAT LIVE OUT THERE. >> Paxson: SO -- THANK YOU FOR THAT. SO FOR THE 350 MILLION THAT YOU HAVE LISTED FOR THE BRACKISH RO AND THE PIPELINE, THAT INCLUDES BOTH OF THOSE PROJECTS UNDER PHASE 2, THAT WOULD GET US TO THAT APPROXIMATELY 28 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY FOR BOTH COMBINED? >> Molly: CORRECT. >> Paxson: SO IF WE -- BASIC MATH TO ME LOOKS LIKE 369ISH MILLION FOR THE 12 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY FOR EVANGELINE, 350ISH WELLS FOR THE 28 MILLION-GALLONS, WE'RE AT A LITTLE OVER 700 MILLION FOR 40 MILLION-GALLONS. AND THOSE ARE SUSTAINABLE SOURCES. >> Molly: CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT WE SEE SO FAR. YOU KNOW, THERE'S MORE -- MORE INFORMATION THAT WILL COME OUT AS WE DO MORE DRILLING, BUT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING. >> Paxson: OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN ON THE HARBOR I LAND, I SEE THAT WE HAVE A WATER RESERVATION ANNUAL FEE FOR THREE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. AND YOU SAID THIS WOULD BE PAID ANNUALLY EVERY YEAR UNTIL THE PROJECT STARTS. WE WOULD THEN TRANSLATE THAT FEE INTO A VOLUME COST; IT WOULD NO LONGER BE RESERVATION, THE PRICE POINT THERE WOULD CHANGE. >> Molly: ABSOLUTELY. SO BASICALLY, YOU'RE JUST -- YOU'RE PAYING TO GET IN LINE FOR A PROJECT THAT HAS A FUTURE DATE THAT'S NOT ENTIRELY DETERMINED AT A COST THAT'S NOT ENTIRELY DETERMINED, AND THEN AT ONE -- AT SOME POINT, THERE WILL BE A DETERMINED TIME AND A DETERMINED COST PER THOUSAND GALLONS, AND THEN AT THAT POINT, A DECISION MUST BE MADE. >> Paxson: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. MY LAST TWO THINGS AT THIS ROUND ON -- OH, THEY'RE NOT NUMBERED. YOUR DASHBOARD PAGE, TWO THINGS. >> Molly: UH-HUH. >> Paxson: ONE, UNDER THE MINE L RIGHT-HAND COL COLUMN, WHICH IS KIND OF LOOKING AT THAT PAST MAY '29 DATE, THAT'S PRESUMING WHAT? BECAUSE WHAT I'M READING IS FOR THE FIRST COLUMN WHERE IT SAYS EAST WELL FIELD NEAR TERM, IT SAYS THE 11 -- I'M ASSUMING THIS COLUMN PUTS US -- DOWN AT THE BOTTOM, THE MAY 27P, '27 IS WE ONLY USE THE 11. THE SECOND COLUMN, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE THE LOWER NUMBERS, WE'RE NOW SHOOTING MAY '29. >> Molly: CORRECT. >> Paxson: THE FINAL COLUMN, IF WE BRING ONLINE 30 MILLION FROM HARBOR ISLAND, WE'LL NEVER RUN OUT. WHAT I DON'T SEE IS THE WELLS CARRYING OVER. >> Molly: OH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. ONCE YOU GET TO THE -- YOU KNOW, BASICALLY OCTOBER, NOVEMBER '29 ON THE WATER SUPPLY DASHBOARD, WHEN YOU GET THERE, I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY YOU SEE, THERE'S NO WATER COMING OUT OF THE WESTERN SUPPLY. SO IT'S ZERO. SO ESSENTIALLY THE WATER THAT WE HAVE IN NOVEMBER OF '29, THE LAST DATE YOU SEE IS OCTOBER OF '29, BUT NOVEMBER OF '29, ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE DO IS WE SUPPLEMENT -- SO ALL THE WATER THAT WE ARE BRINGING ON -- THAT WE'RE PROVIDING IS WATER THAT'S FROM THE 30 MILLION GALLON PER DAY, LET'S CALL IT INNER HARBOR OR WHATEVER PROJECT WE WANT TO HAVE IT, 30 MILLION-GALLONS PER DAY FROM THAT, THEN YOU HAVE YOUR MARY RHODES PIPELINE AT 70 MILLION-GALLONS PER DAY, AND THEN WHATEVER DEALT TA IS REQUIRED FROM -- DELTA IS REQUIRED FROM YOUR GROUNDWATER WELLS THAT YOU'RE BASICALLY PUTTING INTO THE RIVER. . >> Paxson: BUT THIS QUOTE, UNQUOTE, NEVER RELIES ON THE CONTINUATION OF ONE OF THE PLANS OF THE WELLS. >> Molly: YES. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THESE -- THESE WELLS ARE IMPORTANT. >> Paxson: SO THAT IT'S -- IT'S -- THIS NEVER HAS TO GO AWAY IF THE WELLS GO AWAY. AND WE KNOW WE CAN ONLY SUSTAIN THOSE PHASE 1 NUMBERS FOR THREE YEARS APPROXIMATELY, IT'S NOT A FOREVER -- >> Molly: IT'S NOT A FOREVER. I THINK WHAT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT IS, IS THAT AT SOME POINT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO BACK AND REVISIT WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THOSE WELLS. I MEAN, LET'S -- LET'S ASSUME THAT IN THREE YEARS WE DON'T -- WE DECIDE WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE A BRACKISH RO PLANT, WE DON'T WANT TO USE THAT RAW WATER AS A SOURCE OF FUTURE WATER FOR AN RO FACILITY, THEN THERE'S A DECISION THAT HAS TO BE MADE. DO YOU KEEP THE ASSET AND IN THE EVENT WE HAVE A REALLY TOUGH DROUGHT, WE REACTIVATE THOSE WELLS AND WE USE IT AS A LIFELINE TO KIND OF CONTINUE OUR WATER SUPPLY OPPORTUNITIES GOING OUT. I MEAN, THOSE ARE THE KIND OF DECISIONS -- I JUST -- I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT WE HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE'VE INVESTED IN. IT'S THERE FOR US. IT HAS OPTIONS, AND THOSE OPTIONS ARE THINGS THAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT FOR MONTHS -- MONTHS AHEAD. >> Paxson: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BRING IT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO BASELINE FOR THE UNDERSTANDING OF EVERYONE WHO'S TRYING TO ANALYZE ALL OF THIS, BECAUSE THE WAY IT READS IS THE WELLS FALL OFF OF THAT PREDICTION, AND WE HAVE EITHER OPTION A, WHICH IS A SHORT-TERM OF 43 MILLION IN THE EAST AND WEST ON THE NUECES RIVER, SO THAT WOULD BE -- IF WE DID THAT ROUTE, THAT WOULD BE 43 PLUS 30, INNER HARBOR, OR IF WE DO A SUSTAINABLE WELL OPTION, IT GOES DOWN TO 28 PLUS 30 MILLION FOR INNER HARBOR, SO THAT MEANS WHAT WE ACTUALLY NEED IS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 60 MILLION-GALLONS TO GET TO THIS NEVER RUNNING OUT. >> Molly: I'M NOT SURE I QUITE FOLLOW WHAT YOU SAID. >> Paxson: WELL, GOING BACK TO WHERE YOU SAID IF WE LOSE THE WELLS, THEN WE HAVE TO TAKE THE NEVER OFF. >> Molly: LET ME TRY TO SAY IT IN A DIFFERENT -- OH, WE'VE GOT NICK UP HERE. >> Winkelmann: NICK WINKELMANN, DIRECTOR OF WATER SYSTEMS. ONE IMPORTANT NOTE ABOUT THE WELLS IS IF YOU -- IF YOU MAINTAIN PHASE 1, RIGHT, OUR GOAL -- WE'VE GOT A TEMPORARY BED AND BANKS PERMIT THAT'S FOR THREE YEARS. OUR GOAL IS TO APPLY FOR A PERMANENT BED AND BANKS PERMIT SO THAT THOSE WELLS, EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T DO A BRACKISH RO FACILITY, YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THOSE, THOSE ARE ASSETS, AND YOU WOULD UTILIZE THEM AS NEEDED. >> Paxson: BUT WE WOULD STILL NEED THEM. >> Winkelmann: YEAH, YOU'RE INVESTING IN THIS ASSET, THE STATE'S INVESTING IN THE ASSET, SO JUST LIKE WE DID IN THE '80S AND '90S, YOU USE THOSE WELLS WHEN YOU NEEDED THEM. >> Paxson: UH-HUH. >> Winkelmann: NOW, WHAT'S INTERESTING IS, MORE SUPPLIES COME ONLINE AND YOU'RE MEETING DEMANDS, WHAT YOU CAN DO IS MANAGE THE GROUNDWATER, RIGHT? YOU DON'T ALWAYS HAVE TO RUN EVERY SINGLE WELL. YOU MANAGE THAT TO MEET YOUR DEMAND. >> Paxson: SO IF I MAY, WE KNOW THAT OUR SUMMERTIME, OUR PEAK CONSUMPTION IS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 135 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY, GIVE OR TAKE FIVE. IN THE WINTER, WE DROP DOWN TO ABOUT 90, GIVE OR TAKE FIVE. SO FOR SUMMERTIME, IF WE KNOW THAT WE CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE 75 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY OUT OF MARY RHODES, THAT MEANS THERE'S 75 MILLION-GALLONS THAT WE HAVE TO ACCOUNT FROM SOMEWHERE. RIGHT NOW, THE WELLS ARE MAKING UP ABOUT 11 MILLION-GALLONS OF THAT, SO THAT PUTS US DOWN TO 60. THAT'S WHERE THAT FLUCTUATE SUMMERTIME AND WINTERTIME. IF WE ASSUME 75 STAYS CONSISTENT THROUGH MARY RHODES, SO IF WE ARE GOING TO SAY THAT THE WESTERN CHOKE CANYON, LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI IS GOING TO ZERO, THEN WE CAN'T RELY ON THAT TO SUPPLY THE OTHER 75. >> Winkelmann: RIGHT. >> Paxson: RIGHT. >> Winkelmann: SO REMEMBER THE GOAL IS TO DIVERSIFY YOUR WATER PORTFOLIO SO YOU HAVE OPTIONS AND LEVERS TO PULL TO MANAGE YOUR WATER SUPPLY, BECAUSE WE -- AND IT'S A HARD REMINDER, BUT -- AND WE TALKED ABOUT IT LAST MEETING, BUT MARY RHODES PIPELINE IS STILL ONE PIPELINE, AND THINGS CAN HAPPEN AT ANY GIVEN TIME. SO YOU'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL SUPPLIES TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE THOSE LEVERS TO PULL. >> Paxson: MAYOR PRO TEM, CAN I TAKE 22NDS. >> Mayor Pro Tem: YES. I GET THE SENSE YOU'RE TAKING IT ANYHOW. >> Paxson: I WAS GOING TO USE MY SECOND TIME IN A MINUTE. I THINK THE OTHER COMMENT I WAS GOING TO HAVE ON THE DASHBOARD, I REALLY LIKE HOW YOU ARTICULATED OVER ON THAT FAR RIGHT COLUMN THOSE SOURCES, AMOUNTS AND DATES. BUT WHAT'S MISSING, AND IT'S MISSING IN OUR DROUGHT CONTINGENCY, WE'VE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT IT, PETER, THE ONLY REFERENCE TO OUR WATER PERCENTAGE IN THE DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN IS LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI AND CHOKE CANYON. WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IN HERE IS A PERCENTAGE OF OUR ACTUAL WATER SUPPLIES, AND THAT'S GOING TO SCHAING AS OUR PORTFOLIO -- CHANGE AS OUR PORTFOLIO ENRICHES, BUT OVER HALF RIGHT NOW IS COMING FROM MARY RHODES. SO WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF THAT RESERVOIR? WE DON'T KNOW. IT'S NOT ON HERE. 10%, 12%'S COMING FROM THE WELLS, WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF THAT? WELL, AT CURRENT CAPACITY, THAT'S AT 100, SO THAT'S NOT -- AN ACTUAL. THAT'S THE TERM HERE, AN ACTUAL ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF OUR WATER SUPPLY SOURCES. THAT IS WHAT I THINK WE NEED TO REVISIT FOR THE DCP. >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. THE DCP IS CONNECTED TO OUR LARGEST WATER SUPPLIES, LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI AND CHOKE CANYON. THAT IS CONNECTED TO OUR WATER RIGHTS. THE POINTS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE WHERE WE HAVE THIS DATA, I INVITE ALL OF Y'ALL TO LOOK THE ENTIRE DASHBOARD. WE HAVE ALL THAT INFORMATION, COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON IS TALKING ABOUT, ON OTHER SLIDES IN THAT DASHBOARD THAT WE POST EVERY SINGLE MONTH. SO I INVITE Y'ALL TO LOOK AT IT, INVITE THE COMMUNITY TO LOOK AT IT, PLEASE DO. THANK Y'ALL. >> Mayor Pro Tem: AWESOME. COUNCILMEMBER HERNANDEZ? >> Hernandez: THANK YOU. OKAY. LOOKING AT THE EASTERN AND WESTERN WELL FIELDS, HOW MANY TOTAL ACREAGE DO WE HAVE OUT THERE? >> Molly: SO WE HAVE ON THE EASTERN WELL FIELD -- >> Winkelmann: IT'S ABOUT 16. >> Molly: 16 ACRES ON THE EASTERN WELL FIELD AND 250 ACRES ON THE WESTERN WELL FIELD HERNANDEZ I THOUGHT IT WAS 241. >> Molly: OKAY. IT'S ABOUT 250. >> Winkelmann: 251. >> Hernandez: 251? >> Mayor Pro Tem: KEEP TALKING, IT GETS BIGGER. >> KEEP GOING. >> Hernandez: SO WE'RE INTENDING TO GET 28 MILLION-GALLONS FROM THE WESTERN FIELD AND 11 FROM THE EASTERN FIELD ON 266 ACRES? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE -- >> Molly: THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT A HYDROGEOLOGIST AND WE'RE HAPPY TO SHARE THE REPORT. I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT WE DON'T OVERLEVERAGE ANY OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE. SO WE'VE GOT A REPORT FROM HYDROGEOLOGIST THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE SHARING. I'D LIKE TO SAY WE'LL SHARE IT LATER THIS WEEK. AS I MENTIONED, THE HYDROGEOLOGIST IS SOMEBODY WHO ACTUALLY DID THE ANALYSIS FOR THE EVANGELINE WELL FIELD. >> Hernandez: OKAY. SO FOR THE EVANGELINE WELL FIELD, WE'RE LOOKING AT 23,000 ACRES FOR 25 MILLION-GALLONS. >> Molly: RIGHT. AND I WILL POINT OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY IS LOOKING AT 10 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY ON 170 ACRES. AND SO THEY HAVE A REPORT THAT SHOWS -- I ACTUALLY HAVEN'T SEEN THE REPORT, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THE REPORT SUGGESTS THAT THEY CAN PULL 10 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY OUT OF 171 ACRES, SO I THINK THE POINT IS, IS THAT YOU NEED TO HAVE A GOOD HYDROGEOLOGIST, I THINK WE'VE GOT ONE OF THE BEST IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING WITHOUT A GREEN LIGHT FROM A HYDROGEOLOGIST. >> Hernandez: SO UNDERSTANDING THE 23 MILLION -- 23,000 ACRES AND LIMITING IT TO 25 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY IS INTENDED SO YOU DON'T AFFECT THE NEIGHBORS AROUND YOU AND THE OTHERS THAT ARE -- HAVE THE STRAW IN THE GROUND FOR THOSE -- FOR THOSE -- BECAUSE IT IS A SHARED ASSET, RIGHT? >> Molly: YEAH. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S IMPORTANT IS, IS THAT AT LEAST IN THE AQUIFER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH EVANGELINE, THAT IS AN AQUIFER THAT -- THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT USE IT FOR DOMESTIC PURPOSES RIGHT OFF THE TOP. THE AQUIFER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT WE HAVE SEALED OFF IS AN AQUIFER THAT NOBODY -- NOBODY IS USING IT. AT LEAST NOT FOR THE EASTERN WELL FIELD. THAT EASTERN WELL FIELD HAS -- HAS -- HAS SOME WATER QUALITY THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO USE IT DIRECTLY. SO I THINK THAT'S ONE THING THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. >> Hernandez: OKAY. SO WITHOUT THE BED AND BANKS PERMIT IS FOR THREE YEARS AND AFTER THAT YOU WOULD EITHER HAVE TO RENEW IT OR UTILIZE IT SOME OTHER WAY, LIKE THROUGH A BRACKISH WATER DESAL FACILITY. >> Molly: CORRECT. >> Hernandez: SO YOUR ESTIMATE FOR THE BRACKISH WATER DESAL FOR THIS FACILITY IS 350 MILLION, BUT THE SAME FOR EVANGELINE IS 640 MILLION. CAN YOU TELL ME THE DISPARITY BETWEEN THE -- OR WHY IT'S DOUBLE FOR THE EVANGELINE AQUIFER THAT HAS BETTER WATER THAN FOR THE BRACKISH WATER COMING OUT OF THE -- I GUESS ALONG THE NUECES RIVER. >> Molly: RIGHT. SO WHAT YOU'LL FIND OUT IS WHEN YOU LOOK AT -- CERTAINLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OPERATIONAL COST, THE OP EX COST FOR TE VANNING LINE AS COMPARED TO THE NUECES RIVER RIVER, THE OP EX COST ARE BETTER FOR THE EVANGELINE BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO TREAT THAT WATER AS YOU WOULD THE NUECES RIVER. I HAD A SLIDE THAT I SHOWED, AND I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN PUT OUT THERE, I DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT HERE WITH ME HANDY. I PROBABLY DO IN MY BOOK HERE SOMEWHERE -- >> Hernandez: WELL, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE YOU HAVE MORE VOLUME THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO TREAT TO RO, RIGHT, YOU HAVE -- YOU KNOW, IT'S ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF BRACKISH WATER YOU CAN MAKE INTO FRESH WATER, AND A QUARTER OF IT IS DISCHARGE. >> Molly: RIGHT. >> Hernandez: SO YOU HAVE A MUCH HIGHER TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS WITH MORE WATER COMING THROUGH, BUT YET THE COST ESTIMATE IS HALF AS MUCH. >> Molly: YEAH. SO, I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY WHAT I'VE GOT IS I'VE GOT -- AND THIS IS -- THIS WAS DONE BY THE ENGINEER FOR THE EVANGELINE, SO I -- THIS IS THEIR ENGINEER. THIS IS THEIR NUMBERS, THIS ISN'T -- I MEAN, WE'VE HAD A TEAM THAT HAS COLLABORATED WITH THEIR FORMER ENGINEER, BUT ESSENTIALLY THE NUMBERS THAT THEY HAVE IS THEY HAVE FOR THE WELL FIELD, THEY'VE GOT APPROXIMATELY $360 MILLION FOR THE 24 MGD, SO THAT'S THE WELL FIELD, THAT'S THE WELLS, THAT'S THE PIPING INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT'S THE PUMPS, THAT'S THE ELECTRICAL, IT'S THE SWITCH GEAR. IT'S THE TANKS. THOSE ARE THE NUMBERS THAT THEY HAVE COME UP WITH, OR THAT THEY HAVE DERIVED. THE PIPELINE, AS I MENTIONED, IS ABOUT $150 MILLION, AND THEN YOU HAVE SOME TREATMENT. THERE'S SOME TREATMENT COSTS ASSOCIATED, THE CAPITAL COST TO BUILD SOME TREATMENT. AND DISPOSAL, SO BRINE DISPOSAL, SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 120 MILLION. SO WITH SOME CONTINGENCIES, THE NUMBER THAT WE HAVE IS ABOUT $640 MILLION. >> Hernandez: OKAY. DO YOU SEE KIND OF HOW IT DOES. LOOK -- IT DOESN'T LIKE RIGHT, RIGHT? YOU HAVE MORE -- HIGHER BRACKISH WATER OVER HERE AND IT'S HALF AS MUCH. >> Molly: I THINK A COUPLE THINGS. I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS -- DID YOU -- DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT, NICK? >> Winkelmann: JUST ON THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. THINGS CHANGE. YEAH, COUNCILMAN, SO THINGS COULD CHANGE IF WE LOOK AT THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE CLOSELY, RIGHT, AND WE'VE GOT HDR'S TAKING A LOOK AT THAT TO GET MORE WATER INTO THE MRP. AND THAT MIGHT LIMI LIMIT OUR PIPELINE COST. HOWEVER, REMEMBER, IT'S STILL JUST THAT ONE PIPELINE AND YOU'RE NOT ADDING ANY REDUNDANCY. BUT THE -- BUT ALL OF THAT, ONCE YOU GET FURTHER DOWN THE ENGINEERING ROAD, THAT'S WHEN THOSE COSTS SORT OF -- THEY GET FINE TUNED. >> Hernandez: SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT WHY WOULDN'T YOU COMBINE THE RO TREATMENT COST? BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE THEM COMING TO OWENS STEVES AND YOU HAVE A FIEP LINE COMING DOWN FROM TWO SEPARATE LOCATIONS, WHY WOULD YOU HAVE TWO SEPARATE RO FACILITIES? >> Winkelmann: OH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IF YOU HAVE YOUR NUECES COUNTY BRACKISH RO FACILITY AND YOUR EVANGELINE RO FACILITY. NO, YOU WOULD MAKE 1RO FACILITY AT OWENS STEVENS AND YOU WOULD SIZE IT CORRECTLY TO SUPPORT BOTH SUPPLIES. >> Hernandez: SO YOU WOULD HAVE A COST SAVINGS BY COMBINING BOTH OF THEM. >> Molly: SORRY, I DIDN'T QUITE CATCH YOUR QUESTION. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ALL OF US THAT ARE LOOKING AT THIS, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE SOME TYPE OF RO TREATMENT, BOTH FOR EVANGELINE -- WE BELIEVE EVANGELINE'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SOME TREATMENT, AND THE NUMBERS SHOW THAT. THE NUMBERS SHOW THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO TREAT EVANGELINE TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO TREAT THE NUECES RIVER BUT AT SOME POINT, SOME TYPE OF RO SYSTEM NEEDS TO GET BUILT. WE THINK THE BEST LOCATION WOULD BE OWENS STEVENS, IT'S GOT ROOM FOR IT. YOU COULD RUN TREATMENT FROM BOTH EVANGELINE AND IF THERE WAS A DECISION TO PURSUE SOME ELEMENT OF A NUECES RIVER PROJECT, YOU COULD COMMINGLE BOTH OF THOSE WATERS AND YOU COULD TREAT IT BOTH. >> Hernandez: YEAH, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I DON'T THINK THAT THE WATER FROM EVANGELINE NEEDS TO BE TREATED THAT -- YOU KNOW, THROUGH AN RO SYSTEM, I THINK SINTON DRINKS THIS WATER EVERY DAY, IF I'M CORRECT. AND SO DOES -- WHAT, ST. PAUL ALSO DRINKS THIS SAME WATER WITHOUT ANY KIND OF REVERSE OSMOSIS TREATMENT. >> Molly: WELL, YOU KNOW, THEIR WATER, I'VE LOOKED AT IT, IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. THE WATER THAT WE'VE SEEN SO FAR FROM THE SECOND TEST WELL HAS SOME THINGS THAT HAVE RAISED SOME EYEBROWS. AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO SAY ANYTHING THAT IS DISPARAGING ON ANYBODY'S WATER. IT'S NOTHING THAT WE CAN'T OVERCOME, BUT I DO THINK THAT GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT DOES HAVE ELEVATED TDS FOR WHAT WE'RE USED TO, I'M NOT TRYING TO SAY ANYTHING DISPARAGING ABOUT WHAT SINTON DOES, BUT THAT WATER DOES HAVE AN ELEVATED TDS TO IT, AND ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO SAY, IS THAT OVER TIME AS YOU PUMP, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE SOME DEGRADATION IN WATER QUALITY, AND WE WOULD RECOMMEND, AS WELL AS OUR CONSULTANT TEAMS THAT WE'VE BROUGHT ON, THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME TREATMENT TO IT. >> Hernandez: BUT YOU DON'T NEED TO BUILD TWO SEPARATE FACILITIES. >> Molly: NO, YOU WOULDN'T NEED TO BUILD TWO SEPARATE FACILITIES. >> Hernandez: OKAY. LAST QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO THE HARBOR ISLAND SEE WATER, THE RESERVE -- THE RESERVATION FEE IS ACTUALLY KIND OF A PREPAYMENT ON WATER THAT COMES IN; IS THAT CORRECT. >> Molly: I WOULD DESCRIBE IT AS A RESERVATION FEE. SO IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT A PREPAYMENT, I GUESS THAT'S A PREPAYMENT. >> Hernandez: I MEAN, ANY TIME THAT YOU HAVE A RESERVATION FEE, THAT AMOUNT THAT YOU PAY UP FRONT IS APPLIED TO WHATEVER WATER YOU PURCHASE; IS THAT NOT THE CASE. >> Molly: NOT THAT I UNDERSTAND. >> Zanoni: JOHN BYRUM'S HERE. MR. BYRUM, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. THE WAY JOHN BYRUM EXPLAINED IT TO US LAST TIME WAS THAT THAT WOULD NOT HAPPEN, COUNCILMAN. WE'RE MEETING WITH HIM THURSDAY. >> Hernandez: WELL, WHEN WE DISCUSS RESERVATION FEES BEFORE, LIKE FOR SOME GROUNDWATER PROJECTS, IT WAS A -- >> Zanoni: THAT'S TRUE. >> Hernandez: YOU RESERVE THE WATER, BUT ANY RESERVATION FEE YOU HAD APPLIED TO ANY WATER YOU RECEIVED. >> Zanoni: THAT'S TRUE. WHEN WE DID THE LAST YEAR OF WORK WITH EVANGELINE, WE TALKED ABOUT RESERVING 12 MGDS, THAT MONEY WOULD BE CREDITED BACK TO THE CITY IN THE COST FOR WATER IN THE ROYALTY PAYMENT. I THINK THE WAY JOHN BYRUM EXPLAINED THIS RESERVATION FEE, IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY. IT WOULD BE A ONE-TIME PAYMENT USED TO DEVELOP THE PROJECT. WE WOULDN'T GET ANY CREDIT IN THE FUTURE. THAT WAS FROM DECEMBER OF '25, SO WE'RE GOING TO SEE THURSDAY IF THERE'S A NEW PLAN FOR THE RESERVATION FEE. >> Hernandez: OKAY. THANK YOU. MAYOR TAYL >> Mayor Pro Tem: ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER ROY? >> Roy: THANK YOU FOR THE UPDATE. A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANTED TO GET MY HEAD AROUND. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS UPDATE, AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE WELLS RIGHT NOW THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE USE -- WE HAVE A PERMIT THAT WILL ALLOW THREE YEARS, RIGHT? >> Molly: CORRECT. >> Roy: AT THE END OF THE THREE YEARS, WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND WE CAN APPLY FOR A PERMANENT PERMIT? >> Molly: YES. >> Roy: EVEN THAT PERMANENT PERMIT IS GOOD FOR FIVE YEARS, RIGHT? OR IS IT -- HOW LONG IS THAT GOOD FOR? AND IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT HOW MUCH PRODUCTION THAT THEY'LL ALLOW US ON THOSE WELLS. >> Winkelmann: SO AT THE TIME WHEN WE APPLY -- >> IT'S CALLED THE PERPETUAL WATER RIGHTS. >> Roy: YES. >> IT'S CALLING CLAIM TO THAT GROUNDWATER THAT YOU'RE DISCHARGING INTO SAID STREAM OR WATER BODY MINUS SOME CARRIAGE LOSSES, THAT'S WHAT WE'D BE APPLYING FOR ON A PERPETUAL BASIS. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A TEMPORARY, WHICH IS A SMALLER APPLICATION, SMALLER TIME, SO WE CAN MOVE THE APPLICATION AND TIME FRAME RIGHT NOW AS WE'RE IN THIS EMERGENCY SITUATION TO A LARGER PERPETUAL RIGHT. >> Roy: SO WITH THAT PERPETUAL RIGHT, DOES THE TCEQ IN THE FUTURE AT ANY POINT IN TIME COME BACK AND SAY, I'M GOING TO LIMIT YOU ON THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT YOU CAN PUMP FROM THAT WELL? >> NO. SO WHAT THEY WOULD LIMIT TO, MAYBE SOME SPECIAL CONDITIONS WITHIN THE APPLICATION PERIOD THAT WOULD CHANGE THE CARRIAGE LOSSES OF THAT WATER BEING DISCHARGED INTO THE WATER BODY. YOU'VE GOT TO REMEMBER, WHERE WE'RE DISCHARGING -- OR EXCUSE ME, WHERE WE HAVE OUR WELLS IS IN A COUNTY WITHOUT A GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT. SO THERE ISN'T ANY LIMITATIONS ON THE PRODUCTION OF THOSE WELLS LIKE YOU'RE DESCRIBING. >> Roy: OKAY. BUT UNLIKE DESAL, IT'S EVERY FIVE YEARS? >> NO. SO. >> Roy: SO ONCE -- LET'S JUST SAY THE INNER HARBOR WAS BUILT AND YOU'RE PRODUCING 30 MGD A DAY IS THAT PERMIT COME UP FOR REVIEW HOW MUCH. >> THAT'S THE DISCHARGE PERMIT THAT YOU'RE NOW -- >> Roy: YES. >> YES. THE DISCHARGE PERMIT NOW THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING IS A FIVE-YEAR ANNUAL RENEWAL, SO THAT WOULD BE THE LIMITATION. ON THE DIVERSION PART OF A SEAWATER DESALINATION, THAT'S THE DIVERSION FROM THE WATER BODY, THAT'S A PERPETUAL RIGHT ALSO. >> Roy: BUT THEY COULD COME BACK AND SAY, OKAY, BASED ON WHATEVER, WE'RE GOING TO LIMIT YOUR PRODUCTION DOWN TO 20 MGD. >> ON THE DISCHARGE. >> Roy: ON THE DISCHARGE. >> THEY COULD PUT FIVE YEARS AFTER MORE INFORMATION, THEY COULD SEE SOMETHING IN THAT RENEWAL PROCESS, THEY COULD LOOK AT IT AND THERE COULD BE CHANGES MADE. >> Roy: AND IF THERE ARE CHANGES MADE, AND SO LET'S JUST SAY -- SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY LOWER IT DOWN TO 20 MGD. IS THERE ANNAL AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN THAT YOU CAN DO SOMETHING WITH THE OTHER MGD AS FAR AS DISCHARGING IT? >> THAT WOULD BE THE TIME WHERE YOU WOULD START LOOKING AT THE DATA THAT'S COMING IN AND MAKING ANY ENGINEERING CHANGES TO THE PROCESS TO CHANGE THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THOSE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF THAT DISCHARGE PERMIT. >> Roy: SO YOU'RE SAYING, LIKE, PUMP IT TO THE GROUND OR SOMETHING. >> PUMP IT IN THE GROUND, ADD DIFFUSERS. >> Roy: SO THEY'LL ALLOW YOU TO GO BACK AND MAKE MODIFICATIONS. >> YES. >> Roy: OKAY. BECAUSE YOU KNOW -- AND THE REASON WHY I'M GOING DOWN THIS ROB IT HOLE IS THAT WHEN WHE TALK ABOUT WHAT -- RABBIT HOLE IS WE TALK ABOUT WHAT IS SUSTAINABLE. SO I START THINKING OF ALL THESE THINGS, THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE A PERMIT FOR AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WE'RE TRYING TO TOTAL UP THE TOTAL MGD THAT WE'LL HAVE ABLE, BUT THEN I ALWAYS WANT TO LOOK AT, OKAY, WHAT IS THE RISK? IS THERE ANYBODY THAT ANY ORGANIZATION OR SOMEBODY COULD SAY AT SOME CERTAIN TIME, BOOM, WE'RE GOING TO LIMIT YOUR PRODUCTION. >> ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN, YOU COULD LOOK POSITIVE, WHERE WE UNDERSTAND MORE INFORMATION MORE UNDERSTANDING OF THE DIFFUSER SYSTEM, WHAT'S GOING ON ACTUALLY THERE OVER THOSE FIVE YEARS, IT COULD ADD MORE TO YOUR DISCHARGE. >> Roy: I SEE. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: ALL RIGHT. MOVING RIGHT ALONG. COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN? >> Vaughn: DREW, I ONLY HAVE A COUPLE. ON THE WESTERN WELL FIELD, HOW MANY DO YOU THINK -- WELLS DO YOU THINK Y'ALL ARE ANTICIPATING DOING? >> Molly: WE'RE LOOKING AT 12. >> Vaughn: 12. >> Molly: IT DEPENDS ON -- I MEAN, WE'RE PUMPING THE [INDISCERNIBLE] >> SO I THINK AS NICK JUST UNDERSCORED, WE'RE PUMPING WE'VE GOT ONE WELL THAT WE'VE ALREADY INSTALLED. WE'RE ON THE SECOND ONE. WE WANT TO DO THIS VERY CAREFULLY, AROUND WE CERTAINLY WANT TO DO IT WITH THE CONSULT AND ADVICE OF THE HYDROGEOLOGIST. >> Vaughn: SURE. >> Molly: YES, MA'AM. >> Vaughn: AND HOW FAR IS THAT PIPELINE FROM OWENS STEVENS FROM THERE, DO Y'ALL KNOW? >> Molly: IF YOU GO AS THE CROW FLIES, AND THE CROW FLIES ACTUALLY ACROSS SAN PAT COUNTY, I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT 20 -- IS IT ABOUT 25 MILES. >> Winkelmann: SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> Molly: YEAH, IT'S ABOUT THAT. >> Vaughn: OKAY. AND THEN ON T THE EVANGELINE ONE, ABOUT HOW FAR IS THAT? MOLSZ THAT'S ABOUT 20 MILES. >> Vaughn: OKAY. OF COURSE, I'VE ALWAYS BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT THE RIVER WALLS BECAUSE OF ALL THE POPULATION OVER THERE. IT'S SO DIFFERENT FROM THE EVANGELINE THAT'S 23,000 ACRES, SO I'M CONCERNED. THE WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT IS VERY INTERESTING TO ME. I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO GET SOME INFORMATION ON THAT, MR. ZANONI. I THINK ACTUALLY THE COUNTY DOES IT. I DON'T THINK THAT WILL AFFECT US, I THINK IT JUST PROTECTS THE RURAL AREAS, AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. AND I KNOW YOU ARE, TOO, YOU HAVE FAMILIES THAT LIVE OUT THERE AND FARMERS AND RANCHERS, SO THAT CONCERNS ME. ON THE HARBOR ISLAND WAS, I THOUGHT THEY SAID WE MADE TWO PAYMENTS, ONE THIS YEAR, ONE NEXT YEAR, AND THEN WE DON'T PAY ANYTHING ELSE UNTIL THE WATER IS DELIVERED, AND HE'S SHAKING HIS HEAD YES. I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. >> I THINK WE'D LIKE YOU TO GET THAT ANSWER -- >> Molly: OKAY. THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. >> Vaughn: THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: AWESOME. I HATE TO BE THE SUBSTITUTE TEACHER, BUT COUNCILMEMBER PAXSON, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, BUT YOU'VE ALREADY -- OKAY. YOU'VE ALREADY USED SOME OF YOUR TIME. >> Paxson: THAT'S FINE. TWO MINUTES IS GOOD FOR ME. I JUST WANTED TO CIRCLE BACK. MY TIME RAN OUT. BUT I DO -- I KNOW THAT THIS DISCUSSION WAS CENTERED AROUND THAT DASHBOARD WITH THE CHART, BUT I -- TO ME, IT'S INCREDIBLY TIED INTO THE DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S RIGHT UNDER THE CHART, OR MAYBE IT'S RIGHT ABOVE IT, I FORGET. DEPENDS IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT COMPUTER OR CELL PHONE, I DON'T KNOW. WHAT WE PUBLISH IS THAT WE ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 14% ON OUR WATER SUPPLY. BUT WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT PERCENTAGE OF OUR OVERALL WATER SUPPLY THAT WE TAKE FROM THOSE SOURCES IS CONTINUING TO LESSEN. THAT'S THE GOAL, BECAUSE IT'S EMPTYING OUT. SO FOR US TO SAY 14% IS ALL OF OUR WATER SUPPLY IS NO LONGER COMPLETELY ACCURATE, AND I'M NOT -- PLEASE DON'T THINK I'M TRYING TO READ INTO -- TO ME, IF YOU HAVE TWO CUPS, ONE'S EMPTY, ONE'S FULL, AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU NET 50%. 50% COMES OUT OF THE WEST GENERALLY SPEAKING, 50% COMES OUT OF THE EAST. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO TAKE WHATEVER -- WE NEED TO DO WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO JUST PROVIDE A REALISTIC AND ACCURATE FORECAST OF OUR WATER SOURCES. I THINK IT DOES INCREDIBLY TIE INTO THE DASHBOARD. THAT'S WHAT I DON'T SEE IN HERE. I WOULD LOVE TO FOLLOW THAT THOUGHT AND GET IT UPDATED IN THE DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN. AND I KNOW THAT WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO DRAW OUT OF THE EAST CHANGES, AND THAT'S FINE. THAT'S THE POINT OF THE PLAN. IT'S BUILT TO BE FLUID AND CHANGING, BUT I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO -- IN EVERY AREA, PRACTICE REALISTIC, ACCURATE ACCOUNTING OF INFORMATION BECAUSE IF WE HAD TO SAY THAT ALL OF OUR WATER IS DOWN TO 14% OUT OF THE WEST, IT'S NOT -- NOT NECESSARILY TRUE. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? >> Molly: I WOULD ECHO YOUR COMMENT, COUNCILWOMAN, AND I WOULD ACTUALLY TELL YOU THAT OUR CITY MANAGER REALLY CHALLENGED US SIX, SEVEN MONTHS AGO, BECAUSE THE CHALLENGE WAS WE WERE USING AN OUTDATED METRIC TO ASSESS THE OVERALL HEALTH OF THE WATER SUPPLY, SO THE CHALLENGE THAT WE GOT PUT IN FRONT OF US WAS, WAS HOW DO WE PUT EVERYTHING IN ONE COMMON OPERATING PICTURE THAT WE CAN BASICALLY PROVIDE TO OUR COMMUNITY? AND SO THE WATER SUPPLY DASHBOARD WAS -- WAS THAT TOOL. AND SO YOU VERY RARELY SEE OR HEAR US JUST ONLY TALKING ABOUT THAT 14% NUMBER. WE'RE USING THAT WATER SUPPLY DASHBOARD -- AND THE OTHER THING I'LL POINT OUT IS, IS THE AGREED ORDER DOESN'T SAY A THING ABOUT STAGE 1 OR STAGE 2, IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT THAT. IT'S VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN WHEN YOU GET TO 40% AND 30% OF YOUR COMBINED RESERVOIRS, BUT IT'S AGNOSTIC AS TO WHAT HAPPENS BELOW THAT THRESHOLD, WHICH IS -- WHICH IS ACTUALLY, I THINK -- REALLY WHAT THAT SAYS IS, IS THAT THE AGREED ORDER GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP WITH THE RESTRICTIONS AND THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO TO PROTECT OUR WATER SUPPLY RESOURCES. AND THAT'S -- THAT'S WHERE WE'VE GOT. THAT'S WHERE WE HAD A FAIRLY HEALTHY -- I THINK IT WAS A HEALTHY PROCESS WHEN WE UPDATED THAT DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN. WE PUT THINGS IN IT LIKE YOU SUGGESTED THAT WHAT ARE THE OTHER WATER SUPPLIES THAT WE HAVE AND HOW DO WE BUILD THAT IN TO OUR OVERALL COMMON OPERATING PICTURE SO WE KNOW WE'RE MAKING THE RIGHT DECISIONS IN TERMS OF BEING CAREFUL AS WE GET, YOU KNOW, CLOSER TO HAVING SOME CHALLENGES LIKE WE'RE SEEING WITH REGARDS TO THE WESTERN SUPPLY. >> Paxson: I THINK THAT IT DOES -- I DON'T THINK IT DOES A FULL GREAT TESTAMENT TO THE WORK THE DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY HAS DONE ON ALL OF OUR COLLECTIVE WATER SUPPLIES TO SAY WE'RE DRASTICALLY OUT OF OUR COMPLETE PICTURE WHEN WE'RE NOT. CAN WE MOVE FORWARD R TOWARDS THAT WOULD BE MY BIG QUESTION IS GETTING THAT ACCURATELY UPDATED. >> Mayor Pro Tem: AWESOME. THANK YOU, MEMBER. COUNCILMEMBER BARRERA. >> Barrera: THANK YOU, MAYOR MAYOR PRO TEM. HOW LONG HAS ON TERRA BEEN THE HYDROGEOLOGIST. >> Molly: BEEVE HAD THEM ON BOARD FOR SIX MONTHS. WE'VE HAD THOSE GUYS PLUGGED IN FOR QUITE SOME TIME. AND WE HAVE NO REASON TO CHANGE. WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO USE THEM. >> Barrera: I THOUGHT THAT HEY HAD BEEN ON ALONG BRIAR WITH -- >> Zanoni: YOU DIDN'T FINISH THE STATEMENT, BUT THEY'VE BEEN WITH EVANGELINE FOR YEARS. >> Molly: YES. >> Zanoni: THEY'VE BEEN WITH US FOR THE NUECES RIVER WELLS FOR SIX MONTHS. >> Barrera: OKAY. >> Zanoni: TWO DIFFERENT AREAS OF STUDYING. TWO MONTHS ON WELLS, SIX MONTHS ON THE RIVER WELLS. >> Barrera: OKAY. I'M SURE THERE WILL BE MORE CAPITAL COST FOR THE EASTERN AND WESTERN FIELDS OVER AND ABOVE THE 30 MILLION. >> Molly: YES. WELL, LET ME PREFACE IT BY SAYING IF WE DECIDE AT SOME POINT THAT WE WANT TO BUILD THE PIPELINE AND AN RO, ABSOLUTELY THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL CAPITAL COST. >> Barrera: BUT JUST FOR THE COST OF USING THE WELLS ANDY VERTING THEM INTO THE RIVER. >> Molly: NICK, YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT? >> COUNCILMAN, WITH THE BENEFIT OF THE GRANT FUNDING FROM THE STATE, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE REALLY CLOSE, IF WE CAN KEEP IT AT OR NEAR THAT -- THAT GRANT FUNDING AMOUNT, SO THAT'S JUST FOR THE DRILLING AND DISCHARGE INTO THE RIVER. >> Barrera: AND THAT GRANT IS SPECIFIC TO THE NUECES RIVER. >> IT IS SPECIFIC FOR THAT NUECES RIVER GROUNDWATER WELL PROJECT YES SIR. >> Barrera: AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS INTRIGUING RECOMMENDATION FROM COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ, HAVE WE DETERMINED OPERATION COST FOR -- I MEAN, COULD WE DETERMINE OPEX FOR IF WE ONLY HAD ONE FACILITY AND THEN I GUESS THE TWO FACILITIES, HAVE WE BEEN ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT? OR DO WE KNOW WHAT THE OPERATIONS COST WOULD BE FOR EVANGELINE IF WE PURSUED THAT OR THE NUECES RIVER WELLS? >> Molly: RIGHT. SO BASED ON OUR ASSESSMENT, I DO HAVE THE TABLE HERE. SO FOR 12 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY OF WATER FROM T THE EVANGELINE, WE'RE ESTIMATING ABOUT $5.2 MILLION A YEAR FOR OPEX COST. AND FOR 12 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY FROM THE NUECES RIVER WATER WELLS WE'D BE LOOKING AT ABOUT $7.5 MILLION. SO THAT REPRESENTS THE FACT THAT THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL POWER AND TREATMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE NUECES RIVER WELLS. >> Barrera: AND THEN WHAT ABOUT THE 28 FOR NUECES RIVER WELLS IF WE WENT AHEAD AND CONSTRUCTED THE RO FACILITY? >> Molly: YES, SIR. SO THAT. >> Barrera: THAT WOULD BE THE 5.2 MILLION IN ADDITION? >> Molly: SO IF WE WERE TO CONSTRUCT THE FULL RO FACILITY AND A PIPELINE FOR THE FULL 28 MILLION-GALLONS A DAY, WE WERE ESTIMATING ABOUT $350 MILLION OF CAP EX COST FOR THAT. >> Barrera: NOT CAP EX. OPEX. >> Molly: FOR OPEX, WE'RE LOOKING IN THE BALLPARK FOR $15 MILLION A YEAR. >> Barrera: FOR EVANGELINE. >> Molly: YES, ABOUT $11 MILLION A YEAR FOR EVANGELINE. >> Barrera: SO IF WE WENT AHEAD AND BUILT THE ONE FACILITY, WOULD IT BE ADEQUATE TO COVER THE VOLUME OF BOTH FACILITIES, BOTH -- >> Molly: YOU KNOW, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE REALLY STRATEGIC IS THAT IF YOU BUILT THE FACILITY, YOU COULD ACTUALLY TURN OFF AND ON DIFFERENT GROUNDWATER WELLS HOWEVER YOU WANT TO PULL WATER FROM, SO IT ALMOST WOULD BE KIND OF LIKE A HUB. YOU COULD HAVE ALL THAT WATER, BECAUSE IT'S ALL COMING TO OWENS STEVENS, THAT'S WHAT WE BELIEVE IS THE RIGHT APPROACH. SO YOU WOULD HAVE WATER COMING FROM EVANGELINE, IF YOU WANTED TO PULL THAT DOWN, YOU RUN IT THROUGH SOME TREATMENT. AND A 28 MILLION-GALLON A DAY RO FACILITY AT OWENS STEVENS, SO IF YOU'VE GOT MOST OF YOUR WATER FOR WHATEVER REASON FOR THAT DAY COMING FROM EVANGELINE, WELL THEN YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO TREAT ALL THE WATER FROM THE NUECES RIVER WELLS, SO YOU'D HAVE TO REST THOSE. SO THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT GO IN. >> Barrera: SO THERE COULD BE MORE C CAPITAL COST AS A RESULT OF TRYING TO FACILITY ONE FACILITY, AN RO PLANT AND ALL OF IT GOING TO OWENS STEVENS. >> Molly: RIGHT. I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU DON'T WANT TO BUILD TWO FACILITIES. >> Barrera: I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. BUT I STILL THINK, IS OWENS STEVENS GOING TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE ANOTHER POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, 28 AND 24? THAT'S REALLY MY BIG THING. THERE'S GOING TO BE A CAPITAL COST INSERTED WITH THAT. I'M PRAYING, DAILY, HOURLY, THAT WE PURSUE THE INNER HARBOR, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A REDUNDANT WATER TREATMENT PLANT, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROVIDE THAT -- BECAUSE WE'RE ALL -- THE NINE LAYMEN, WE COME UP WITH ALL THESE GREAT THEORIES AND WE THROW IT TO THE ENGINEER. WHEN WE WOULD SING, I HAVE GREAT IDEA IN MY HEAD, HE'D SAY, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO WRITE IT? HE'D SAY, YOU'RE GOING TO DO IT. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR NOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Mayor Pro Tem: AWESOME. COUNCILMEMBER CAMPOS? >> Campos: THANK YOU. SO BACK TO THE PERCENTAGES, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'VE -- YOU KNOW, WENT AWAY FROM, I GUESS, BACK IN MARCH, THE PERCENTAGE OF OUR WATERSHED, WE, YOU KNOW, WOULD TIE IT TO THE STAGES RIGHT? IT WAS -- THAT'S THE WAY -- AND THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP IN STAGE 3, BECAUSE WHAT WAS THE PERCENTAGE? IT WAS 15 -- ISN'T IT -- >> Molly: STAGE 3 IS 20%. >> Campos: 20. OKAY. AND SO I REMEMBER IF WE WERE GOING TO GO INTO STAGE IV, NOW IT'S CALLED EMERGENCY, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN 15%. RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT 14%. AT THAT POINT, THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRING AND WOULD HAVE BEEN -- I MEAN, IT WOULD HELP US ALL IF INDUSTRY WERE TO CUT BACK, BUT INSTEAD, WE CHANGED THE RULES IN MARCH AND DECIDED THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH TCEQ, THAT IT WOULD NOT BE -- IT WOULD BE NOW AN EMERGENCY STATUS AT 180 DAYS, CORRECT? SO REALLY, WE'RE -- LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, I'VE SAID IT BEFORE, WE CHANGE THE RULES FOR INDUSTRY BECAUSE WE DECIDED THAT ONCE WE WERE GETTING CLOSER TO STAGE IV, WE CHANGED THE RULES AND WE SAID, OH, WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE THE PERCENTAGES ANYMORE OF OUR WESTERN RESERVOIRS, BUT YET WE ARE USING IT AS -- WE ARE USING THE EASTERN, THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE TO -- TO STILL HAVE WATER, YOU KNOW, AND THE PUMPS -- I MEAN, AND THE PIPES. SO IT'S LIKE -- YOU KNOW, I AM -- IT DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT. IT DOESN'T SEEM FAIR THAT -- IT DOESN'T SEEM ACCURATE. THAT'S WHY WE KEEP SAYING, NO, WE'RE NOT GOING -- I MEAN, RUN OUT OF WATER, BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE ALL THESE OTHER PROJECTS, PLUS, AGAIN, THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE THAT WE INCLUDE, BUT YET IT'S NOT IN OUR DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN. SO, AGAIN, IT IS CONFUSING AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, THIS -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF WATER, WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF WATER, BUT IN REALITY, WE'RE NOT, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT INCLUDING, AGAIN, ALL WHAT WE'RE GETTING FROM THE WELLS, THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. SO IT'S LIKE WE ENDED UP CHANGING THE RULES AND IT IS STILL HARD TO KEEP UP. SO THAT'S WHY I'M STILL ADVOCATING AND DEMANDING THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW SOMEWAY THAT INDUSTRY FIGURE OUT A WAY, BECAUSE EVEN IF WE WERE TO CUT BACK ON THE FLUSHING OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, WE -- WE CAN'T CUT BACK ENOUGH TO -- TO GET US OUT OF THIS DROUGHT THAT WE'RE IN. SO, AGAIN, IT REQUIRES COOPERATION, AND I'M HOPING THAT INDUSTRY IS LISTENING, BECAUSE WHEN WE SAY CUT BACK, I'M MEANING CUT BACK IN OPERATIONS. THAT DO DOESN'T MEAN, YOU KNOW -- IT'S NOT LAYING OFF. I'M SAYING JUST NOT PRODUCING AS MUCH, YOU KNOW, PRODUCT, WHATEVER THE PRODUCT IS. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE STILL GOING FULL SPEED AHEAD. I KNOW THEY WEREN'T AT ONE TIME AND THEN THEY WERE. AND THEY STILL KEPT THE SAME PERSONNEL, SO, AGAIN -- I'M JUST -- YOU KNOW, IT MAKES IT CONFOCONFUSING WHEN YOU DON'T ALLOW ALL THE WATER TO BE INCLUDED. SO I'LL CONTINUE TO SAY THAT UNTIL, YOU KNOW, IT IS, SO THAT'S ALL I HAD TO SAY. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU. >> Molly: I WOULD JUST SAY I HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH YOU WITH ALL DUE RESPECT. I DON'T THINK IT'S CONFUSING, I THINK IT'S GOTTEN PRETTY SIMPLE. WE HAVE A WELL DEFINED PLAN. WE'VE GOTTEN SMARTER WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE. WE HAVEN'T CHANGED ANY OF THE RULES, THE RULES APPLY FOR EVERYBODY, AND THE RULES ARE THAT ESSENTIALLY WE'VE GOT NOW A WATER SUPPLY DASHBOARD AS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. AND THE DASHBOARD INCLUDES ALL OF THE WATER. AND IN THE OLD PLAN, THERE WAS NEVER A PLACE THAT HAD TO DEFINE WHERE WE WOULD GO INTO A WATER EMERGENCY. WE'VE DONE THAT NOW. THE WATER LEVEL 1 WATER EMERGENCY IS VERY CLEARLY DEFINED AND WE'VE ACTUALLY USED THE TCEQ AS A BENCHMARK FOR DEFINING THAT. THAT IS 180 DAYS WHEN WE CAN'T MEET DEMAND, AND THAT COULD -- THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE, DEPENDING ON A LOT OF THINGS. THAT IS OUT THERE FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE. SO I THINK WE'VE GOT SOMETHING THAT WORKS PRETTY WELL. >> Mayor Pro Tem: SHE WANTS RESPONSE, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PUT YOU UP UNLESS CAROLYN AND ERIC HIT THEIR BUTTONS. >> Vaughn: I'M NOT DOING THAT. >> Mayor Pro Tem: WE'LL COME BACK. YOU HAVE A SECOND SHOT. THERE YOU GO. >> Campos: OKAY. AGAIN, IT IS BECAUSE WE WOULD NOT BE -- WE CHANGED THE STAGE IV. IT SHOULD BE, LIKE NOW, IT'S AN EMERGENCY, BUT IT WOULD HAVE -- WE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN STAGE IV HAD WE NOT CHANGED THAT PLAN, AND IT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED INDUSTRY TO CUT BACK BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE BEEN AT 15%. THAT'S CLEAR. SO I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU'RE SAYING IT'S CONFUSING. IT -- WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY IS THAT IT'S -- IT'S DIFFERENT FOR INDUSTRY BECAUSE WE ARE NO LONGER FOLLOWING THE OLD PLAN. >> Molly: NOWHERE IN THE OLD PLAN WAS THERE A DEAF NIX OF -- >> Campos: YES, THERE WAS. IN STAGE IV, IT WAS 15%, YES. >> Molly: I DON'T -- I -- I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT -- >> Campos: I MEAN, WE CAN -- I CAN'T PULL IT UP NOW, BUT I KNOW THAT IS TRUE. SO I KNOW THAT THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO REQUIRE TO PULL BACK AT 15 -- BELOW 15%. THEY KNEW IT AND WE KNOW IT. >> Mayor Pro Tem: I THINK IF YOU CAN JUST GET HER THAT ANSWER. YOU SHOULD ASK HIM IN THE OLD PLAN DID IT HAVE AN AUTOMATIC CURTAILMENT IN INDUSTRY. >> Campos: THEY DID. >> Zanoni: ESTEBAN WOULD HAVE TO. [SIMULTANEOUS SPEAKING]. >> Zanoni: IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ACROSS THE BOARD BY PUC, PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION REQUIREMENTS. WE CAN'T JUST SAY INDUSTRY WOULD HAVE CUT BACK, EVERYBODY WOULD HAVE HAD TO CUT BACK. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> Campos: JUST LIKE WE ARE -- JUST LIKE WE WOULD BE IF WE WERE IN EMERGENCY. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. EVERYBODY HAD -- YOU CAN'T PENALIZE ONE CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATION. >> Campos: NO, BUT JUST LIKE WE'RE REQUIRING THAT WE CUT BACK, EVERY -- ALL WATER CUSTOMERS WOULD HAVE HAD TO BEEN REQUIRED TO CUT BACK. THAT'S MY POINT. >> Mayor Pro Tem: BUT ANSWER THE QUESTION. THAT'S WHAT SHE WAS SAYING. SHE AGREED WITH YOU. >> WHAT I'M GETTING, NO, IT WAS NOT -- STAGE IV WAS NOT AT 15% AND YOU WOULD ALSO -- YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A PRO RATA ALLOCATION, SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO IT TO ALL. >> Mayor Pro Tem: GOT IT. >> Campos: SO PRO RATA. OKAY. CORRECTION, PRO RATA. >> Mayor Pro Tem: ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER CANTU? >> Cantu: DREW -- THANK YOU. MAKE ME UNDERSTAND THIS, SO IF WE DO AN RO SYSTEM ON THE WELLS IN NUECES COUNTY, WE WON'T HAVE TO DO IT FOR THE OTHER PROJECT IN SINTON, CORRECT? IS THAT -- >> Molly: I WOULDN'T TAKE ANYTHING OFF THE TABLE. I MEAN, I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, AS EVERYBODY'S SPOKEN VERY CLEARLY, WE WANT TO DO ALL THE WATER PROJECTS WE POSSIBLY CAN. >> Cantu: NO, NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ESTIMATE CAPITAL COST WILL GO DOWN, RIGHT? >> Molly: YES. YES. YOU WOULD HAVE SOME BENEFIT, RIGHT, BECAUSE -- TO THE POINT THAT I THINK COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ WAS MAKING WAS THAT IF YOU BUILT AN RO FACILITY AND YOU BUILT IT SUFFICIENTLY IN SIZE, YOU COULD USE ■IT TO NOT JUST BENEFIT THE NUECES RIVER, BUT YOU COULD ALSO USE IT FOR THE EVANGELINE. >> Cantu: SO THAT WILL SAVE US HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK IT WILL SAVE US. >> Molly: MAN, I'D BE FIBBING IF I TRIED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >> Cantu: YOU DON'T KNOW? OKAY. THAT WAS THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD ON IT. IS THIS YOUR LAST MEETING? ARE YOU GOING TO BE HERE NEXT TUESDAY. >> Molly: NO, I'LL BE HERE NEXT WEEK. >> Cantu: OKAY. SO I CAN TELL YOU MY GOODBYES. WE'LL CRY TOGETHER. >> Mayor Pro Tem: AWESOME. COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHN. >> Vaughn: WHEN WAS THAT LAST DROUGHT K CONTINGENCY PLAN. >> Molly: UPDATED IN MARCH OF 2025 AND PRIOR TO THAT IT WAS 2019. >> Vaughn: OKAY. TELL ME, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, ON -- WHENEVER YOU GO INTO THE DROUGHT ON THE CONTINGENCY PLAN, WHAT DO Y'ALL ADD UP TO GET TO THE STAGES, IS IT CHOKE CANYON, LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI THAT TELL US THAT WE'RE IN THE DROUGHT. >> Molly: SO I MAY HAVE TO CALL A FRIEND HERE IN CASE I GET STUCK. WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY EARLIER IS -- >> Vaughn: YEAH. >> Molly: -- THAT THE AGREED ORDER IS VERY SPECIFIC ON SOME THINGS AND VERY LEFT TO OUR OWN DEVICES ON HOW WE CONTROL OUR OWN FATE. >> Vaughn: YES. >> Molly: WHERE IT'S VERY SPECIFIC IS, IS IT SAYS AT CERTAIN THRESHOLDS OR CERTAIN LEVELS OF COMBINED R RESERVOIR TORE RAJ, SO WHEN YOU ADD CHOKE CANYON AND LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI AND YOU HIT 50%, 40%, AND 30%, YOU HAVE CERTAIN THINGS THAT IT REQUIRES YOU TO DO. AND IT'S BECAUSELY WHAT IT'S SAYING -- BASICALLY WHAT IT'S SAYING IS, AS YOU START GETTING MORE AND MORE STRESS ON THE WESTERN SUPPLIES, THERE'S LESS WATER THAT YOU HAVE TO RELEASE INTO THE NUECES DELTA. >> Vaughn: OKAY. >> Molly: AND AS A RESULT OF THAT, THE AGREED ORDER BASICALLY SAYS, AND I'M KIND OF PARAPHRASING, IF LESS WATER GOES IN THE DELTA, THEN THE COMMUNITY IS GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOME THINGS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE VERY FUN, WHICH IS CONSERVE. ONCE YOU GET BELOW 30%, THERE ARE NO RELEASES REQUIRED. WE HAVEN'T -- WE HAVEN'T RELEASED A DROP OF WATER INTO THE NUECES DELTA. >> Vaughn: YEAH. >> Molly: SO ALL OF THAT BELOW 30% IS REALLY UP TO US TO DEFINE HOW WE WANT TO CONSERVE WATER. AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE ACCOMPLISHED AS A RESULT OF THE DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN THAT WE APPROVED THIS FALL -- OR THIS FALL -- THIS SPRING. AND SO THAT -- THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I FEEL LIKE WE'VE DONE A GREAT JOB ON JUST COLLECTIVELY, THE COUNCIL AND OUR STAFF. WE'VE LOOKED AT ALL OF THE OTHER SUPPLIES, THE EASTERN AND THE WESTERN AND COMBINED THAT, SO THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS FAIR AND REASONABLE, BECAUSE IT LOOKS AT EVERYTHING. >> Vaughn: I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE PEOPLE ASK THAT, HOW DID Y'ALL GET TO THAT? HOW DID YOU FIGURE THAT UP? SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE CITIZENS SEE THAT BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH PERCENTAGES OF THE COMBINED. SO IT'S 50, 40, 30, SO THAT'S HOW YOU GOT TO IT. >> Molly: RIGHT. >> Vaughn: IT'S NOT JUST CHOKE CANYON, LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI. >> Molly: NOWHERE IN THE AGREED ORDER DOES IT SAY TEXANA AND THE COLORADO. >> Vaughn: Y'ALL FIGURE IT OUT ON YOUR OWN, Y'ALL KIND OF MAKE THE DECISION ON HOW IT'S DONE. >> Molly: ONCE YOU GO BELOW 30%, THAT IS WHAT STAFF HAS WORKED TOGETHER TO PROPOSE TO THE COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL ULTIMATELY APPROVED THAT NEW DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN. >> Vaughn: OKAY. AND I SEE THAT, I'M SITTING THERE THINKING HOW LOW THE LAKE IS, I'M THINKING DID WE ADD MARY RHODES, DID WE ADD FORMOSA, ALL THE SUPPLIES THAT WE CAN GET, SO WE REALLY DON'T. >> Campos: WE DON'T. >> MAYBE TRY IT ANOTHER WAY. >> I KIND OF WANT TO SAY YES WE DO, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT IN AN EMERGENCY -- RIGHT? WE HAVEN'T CALLED LEVEL 1 WATER EMERGENCY. >> Vaughn: THANK GOD. >> SO YES, IT IS ACCOUNTING FOR THE MARY RHODES SUPPLIES. >> Vaughn: OKAY. >> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE AGREED ORDER, THE AGREED -- YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND, THE AGREED ORDER IS JUST TALKING ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL. >> Vaughn: I KNOW. >> -- ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE. SO IT IS ONLY WORRIED ABOUT WHAT WAS THE AFFECT OF CHOKE CANYON RESERVOIR ON THE ENVIRONMENT WHEN THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED. THERE'S A LITTLE SPECIAL CONDITION IN THAT PERMIT THAT MADE THE AGREED ORDER POSSIBLE. SO IT'S PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT. IT'S NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE AGREE -- THE AGREED ORDER IS NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE SITUATION WITH THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND ITS WATER SUPPLY. >> Vaughn: I KNOW ALL THAT, I UNDERSTAND THAT. >> BUT IT CONNECTS TO THE DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN TO MAKE THE CITY -- TO ALLOW THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI TO DO CERTAIN THINGS. SO WHEN WE GET INTO THAT 40, 30, IT STARTS CUTTING DOWN. AND THEN WHEN IT'S 30 PERCENT, IT SAID THE ENVIRONMENT IS NO LONGER RECEIVING ANYTHING, SO THE DCP, YOU CAN -- YOU NEED TO DO SOME ACTIONS OVER HERE TO PROTECT YOURSELF ON YOUR SUPPLY, YOUR CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI WATER SUPPLY. SO WE TALK ABOUT THEM AS THE SAME THING ALL THE TIME ARE CONNECTED, BUT YOU'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT IT AS THE ENVIRONMENT, THINKING OF WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE CHOKE CANYON WAS CREATED, AND THEN THE DCP IS WHAT IS THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI DOING TO PROTECT ITS OVERALL WATER SUPPLY IN A DROUGHT SITUATION WHEN IT'S BEING AFFECTED. VERY COMPLICATED, BUT THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL HAVE. >> Vaughn: IT'S NOT THAT COMPLICATED. JUST PEOPLE USUALLY DON'T THINK ABOUT THE AGREED ORDER. WE KNOW WE QUIT RELEASING, WE KNOW THAT. SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT Y'ALL FIGURED UP TO SAY THIS IS HOW WE GOT TO THIS STAGE. I THINK I GOT IT. I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY ELSE DOES, BUT -- >> Mayor Pro Tem: I GOT IT. THANK YOU, MA'AM. COUNCILMEMBER HERNANDEZ? >> Hernandez: OKAY. JUST REAL QUICK WITH REGARDS TO THE AGREED ORDER, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO OPEN UP THAT CAN OF WORMS WITH REGARDS TO HOW THAT GOES, BUT ARE WE MONITORING THE CONDITION OF THE DELTA AS -- SINCE WATER'S NOT BEING RELEASED AND THE HEALTH OF IT SO THAT WE CAN GO BACK TO TCEQ AND SAY, HEY, WE HAVEN'T RELEASED WATER FOR OVER A YEAR AND IT'S STILL FINE. WE DON'T NEED TO RELEASE THIS WATER GOING FORWARD. SO -- BUT YOU'VE GOT TO -- YOU HAVE THIS TIME FRAME TO BE ABLE TO COLLECT DATA ON THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THIS SITUATION BEFORE RIGHT? SO NOW WE HAVE THE SITUATION, LET'S TAKE THE DATA AND MAKE THE ARGUMENT, WE CAN REOPEN THAT SO WE DON'T HAVE TO RELEASE THAT MUCH WATER. >> Molly: THAT'S A GOOD POINT. >> Hernandez: THAT MAKE SENSE? >> YEAH. >> Hernandez: THANK YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: ALL RIGHT. I JUST HAD A COUPLE THINGS. YEAH, SO I WAS LOOKING AT THE DASHBOARD, SO IF THE DASHBOARD -- I'D BE CURIOUS, WE WANT TO SEE AT WHAT POINT THAT SUPPLY EXCEEDS DEMAND, RIGHT? >> Molly: RIGHT. >> Mayor Pro Tem: SO OUT IN THOSE OUT YEARS, YOU REDUCED THE WELL -- THE NUECES WELL WATER RIGHT? BECAUSE YOU'RE SHOWING THAT WE CAN MEET DEMAND. IT WOULD BE KIND OF INTERESTING TO SEE IF THE NUECES WELL FIELDS CONTINUED AT THE PEAK, I GUESS LIKE IN JULY OF '29, SO IF THEY JUST WERE AT THAT PEAK FOR ANOTHER YEAR, WOULDN'T THE BLUE LINE BE ABOVE THE TOTAL DEMAND, RIGHT? >> YEAH, SO WE'RE -- WE'RE CREATING THIS CHART JUST TO MEET THE DEMAND. >> Mayor Pro Tem: YEAH. >> SO IF YOU WERE TO ACTUALLY PUT ALL THE WATER THAT YOU HAVE AVAILABLE, THAT. [SIMULTANEOUS SPEAKING]. >> Mayor Pro Tem: KIND OF INTERESTING. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ALSO. AT THAT POINT YOU'RE NOT USING ANY OF YOUR LAKE WATER ANYHOW. >> Molly: CORRECT. >> Mayor Pro Tem: YOU MADE A COMMENT, TENTH PERCENTILE. >> Molly: WE KIND OF FIGURED THAT QUESTION WAS GOING TO GET ASKED TODAY SO WE ASKED THE FOLKS THAT ARE BEHIND THE SCENES, AND SO JUST TO KIND OF PUT THINGS INTO PERSPECTIVE, IT'S LIKE A 10 PERCENTILE NUMBER, WHICH IS PRETTY DARN LOW. >> Mayor Pro Tem: LIKE THE TOTAL SUPPLY INTO THE LAKES IS AT THE TENTH PERCENTILE. >> Molly: YEAH, 90% WOULD BE MUCH HIGHER THAN NORMAL, 50% IS AVERAGE AND 10 PERCENTILE IS PRETTY DARN LOW MAYO MAYO. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THAT'S GOOD. IT'S PRETTY LOW. I WROTE 18 VERSUS $30 MILLION, $30 MILLION GRANT, I GUESS WHAT -- I THINK I HEARD WAS WE CAN DO THE EASTERN AND WESTERN NUECES WELL FIELDS WITHIN THE $30 MILLION GRANT THAT THE STATE OF TEXAS MADE, AND I WANT -- IS THAT PRETTY MUCH -- IS THAT CLOSE? THAT'S A GREAT STATEMENT, SO DON'T CORRECT ME. NO, GO AHEAD. >> Molly: IT IS A GREAT STATEMENT. THAT'S WHY WE'RE SO EXCITED ABOUT THE GRANTS. YOU KNOW, JUST -- JUST ANOTHER -- JUST A SIDE NOTE, WE'RE STILL DRILLING, WE'RE STILL IN DEVELOPMENT, SO THE COSTS AREN'T FINAL, PROBABILITIES MOVING VERY QUICK WHICH IS WHY WE UPDATE THE COSTS EVERY WEEK IN THE WEEKLY MEMO. >> Mayor Pro Tem: MY LAST QUESTION DREW. SO THE LARGEST GROUNDWATER RO PROJECT IN THE COUNTRY IS IN EL PASO, IS THAT -- >> Molly: AS I UNDERSTAND, THERE'S TWO BIGGIES. THERE'S ONE IN SAN ANTONIO THAT'S LIKE 25, 26, AND THEN THERE'S ONE IN EL PASO THAT'S 28. >> Mayor Pro Tem: AND THEY BOTH DEEP WELL INJECT. >> Molly: BELIEVE SO. >> Mayor Pro Tem: 25, 26, THOSE ARE THE BIGGEST THAT WE KNOW OF. AND IF WE DID A COMBINED EVANGELINE AND NUECES THAT WOULD BE 24 AND 30, THAT'S DOUBLE THE SIZE. >> Molly: YEAH. >> Mayor Pro Tem: I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, DIDN'T SLEEP AT THE HOLIDAY INN, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S GOING TO BE A CONVERSATION -- I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA AND IT'S ECONOMY TO SCALE, I GET ALL THAT, BUT IF 24 MGD DEEP WELL INJECTION'S A BIG DEAL, I SUSPECT 50'S GOING TO BE MONUMENTAL, BUT I KNOW PEOPLE LIKE YOU CAN DO IT. HEY, THANK YOU, DREW. >> Molly: YOU GOT IT. >> Mayor Pro Tem: ANYTHING ELSE? I THINK THAT CONCLUDES -- AND THAT'S A PRESENTATION, SO THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON PRESENTATION. SO THAT INCLUDES OUR AGENDA AT THIS POINT. WE WILL. >> Zanoni: YES, IT DOES. >> Mayor Pro Tem: WE WILL RECESS THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING UNTIL WE COME TOGETHER TO GO BACK INTO SESSION AT 5:30 THIS EVENING. >> Zanoni: THAT'S CORRECT, COUNCILMAN -- OR CHAIRMAN. >> Mayor Pro Tem: AWESOME. [CITY COUNCIL RECESSED UNTIL 5:30 P.M.] >> Mayor Pro Tem: ALL RIGHT, FOLKS, WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THE TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, IT'S 5:31, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE MINUTE. I'M GOING TO READ YOU THE PUBLIC COMMENT MEMO THAT SAYS WE HANDLE SIGNATURE MATTERS CONCERNING TAXPAYER DOLLARS, MAKING IT IMPERATIVE WE UPHOLD THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF DECORUM AND ADHERENCE TO OUR POLICIES. OUR CORE POLICIES OF OPENNESS, TRANSPARENCY AND INCLUSIVENESS AND WE AIM TO ACHIEVE THEM WHILE RESPECTING OUR CITY COUNCIL POLICY WHICH HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 30 YEARS. PUBLIC COMMENT SERVES AS ONE AVENUE FOR COMMUNICATION. IT'S NOT THE SOLE METHOD. YOU MAY ALSO REACH OUT TO MEMBERS ON THIS COUNCIL BY PHONE, E-MAIL OR SCHEDULING IN-PERSON POIMENTDS. WITH THAT SAID, LET'S PROCEED WITH PUBLIC COMMENT. HEY MILES. KEEPING IN MIND THE IMPORTANCE AND ADHERENCE OF THIS POLICY. BEFORE WE BEGIN, WE WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO ADDRESS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER IS A PLACE FOR IMPORTANT BUSINESS, DECISION-MAKING AND SERVICE TO THE CITIZENS OF CORPUS CHRISTI. IT'S NOT A PLIES FOR CIVIL ATTACK, VULGARITY AND WE DON'T TOLERATE VIOLATIONS OF THE QUORUM. THERE HAVE BEEN REPEATED INSTANCES OF INDIVIDUALS USING PROFANITY AND SHOWING DISREGARD FOR THE RULES. WE'LL CONTINUE TO WELCOME RESPECTFUL DISAGREEMENT. WE'RE HERE DO THE PEOPLE'S WORK, LET'S BEGIN IN THAT SPIRIT. WE ASK MILES TO REVIEW THE CITY COUNCIL RULES OF DECORUM. >> Risley: ALL CITIZENS MUST BE COURTEOUS, POLITE AND RESPECTFUL OF EACH OTHER, INCLUDING THE CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF. MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS WILL BE REFERRED TO BY TITLE OR TITLE SURNAME, ALL REMARKS MUST BE ADDRESSED TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL AND NOT TO THE COUNCILMEMBERS AS INDIVIDUALS. CITIZEN TION ARE ONLY CAN SPEAK ON CITY-RELATED SUBJECT MATTER. LOUD, BOIS ROWSES, PROFANE OR OBSCENE LANGUAGE OR BEHAVIOR IS NOT ALLOWED. CITIZENS MUST REFRAIN FROM ANY DISTURBING NOISE, DEMONSTRATION OR OTHER ACT DISRUPTING TO THE CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS. >> Mayor Pro Tem: AWESOME. FOLKS, WE HAVE 25 NAMES ON THE LIST. WE ASK YOU TO PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND THE CITY IN WHICH YOU LIVE IN BEFORE BEGINNING YOUR COMMENTS. CITIZEN COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES WHILE NONRESIDENTS ARE LIMITED TO ONE MINUTE. A VISIBLE TIMER WILL BE PRESENT AND POSITIONED NEAR THE CITY CERTIFICATE'S DESK TO HELP YOU MANAGE THE ALLOTTED TIME. RESIDENTS OF CORPUS CHRISTI ARE GIVEN PRIORITY OVER NONRESIDENTS. IF YOU DO HAVE A PETITION OR RELEVANT INFORMATION PLEASE PRESENT IT TO THE CITY SECRETARY BEFORE BEGINNING YOUR THREE MINUTES. I'M GOING TO READ THE FIRST FIVE NAMES, MRS. ANDERSON, YOU'RE FIRST UP, FOLLOWED BY CARRIE MEYER, JULIE ROGERS, SHANNON ROSS AND BRAD BART L SON. FIRST FIVE. . >> I HAVE SLIDES. >> ALL RIGHT. GAIL ANDERSON, I LIVE IN CORPUS CHRISTI, THE BODY OF CHRIST. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THE LEADERS OF OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY. WHAT AN AWESOME PRIVILEGE. WE MAY HAVE DIFFERENT APPROACHES AND THOUGHTS ON HOW TO SOLVE THE WATER PROBLEM, BUT I THINK THE MOST OBVIOUS SOLUTION IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF US. THANK YOU, PASTOR HENRY WILLIAMS FOR SUGGESTING WE TAKE IT TO GOD. I CAN'T HELP BUT THINK OF THE SCRIPTURE THAT SAYS WE HAVE NOT BECAUSE WE ASK NOT. IF WE HUMBLE OUR HEARTS AND SEEK HIS FACE, HE IS FAITHFUL AND WILL ANSWER US. I KNOW THAT TO BE TRUE. REMEMBER THE STORY OF THE PRODIGAL SON, ALL WE HAVE DO IS STEP OUT IN FAITH AND THE FATHER WILL GATHER UP HIS ROBE AND RUN TO HIS BELOVED CHILDREN. ONE SMALL ACT OF REPENTANCE ON OUR PART AND THE FATHER THROWS A PARTY AND GIVES HIS CHILDREN THE CYGNET RING. I KNOW MANY INDIVIDUAL CHURCHES ARE PRAYING FOR RAIN, BUT THE BIBLE SAYS WE SHOULD BE UNIFIED AS A BODY. AS PASTOR WILLIAMS SAID, WE NEED TO GRASP THE VISION OF OUR CITY AS THE UNIFIED BODY OF CHRIST. IT WOULD BE A TOTAL GAME-CHANGER IF THE WHOLE CITY CAME TOGETHER, WE NEED -- WHAT WE NEED IS OUR AWESOME CITY LEADERS, YOU, TO LEAD US IN A DAY OF PRAYER AND FASTING. INVITE THE CHURCHES TO COME INTO CITY HALL, SET ASIDE 24 HOURS AND SEEK THE LORD. SURELY, HE WILL BE MERCIFUL ON THE CITY THAT IS HIS NAMESAKE, THE BODY OF CHRIST. SEPTEMBER WOULD BE A GREAT MONTH BECAUSE CORPUS CHRISTI WAS INCORPORATED IN SEPTEMBER AND PRAYER GROUPS HAVE HISTORICALLY LED OUR CITY IN A DAY OF REPENTANCE IN THIS VERY MONTH. RASH A SEAN IS ALSO IN SEPTEMBER WHICH ALMIGHTY GOD TOLD HIS CHILDREN TO SET ASIDE. ONE OF GOD'S GREATEST GIFT IS GRACE, AND MATTHEW 5:45, GOD SAYS HE SENDS HIS RAIN ON THE RIGHTEOUS AND UNRIGHTEOUS. IF HE'S WILLING TO BLESS THE UNRIGHTEOUS, HOW MUCH MORE WILL HE BLESS THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO HUMBLE THEMSELVES AND SEEK HIS FACE. THIS ONE DAY COULD TRULY BE A GAME-CHANGER FOR CORPUS CHRISTI. IT COULD UNIFY US AS A BODY, IT COULD BE THE DAY THE LORD SHINES HIS FACE UPON HIS NAMESAKE, IT COULD BE THE LAST DAY OF OUR DROUGHT. AS A UNIFIED BODY, I HUMBLY ASK THAT YOU CALL FOR A DAY OF PRAYER AND FASTING IN SEPTEMBER. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU. NEXT UP, CARRIE MEYER. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR PRO TEM. CARRIE MEYER, NORTH BEACH, DISTRICT ONE. I LISTEN TO THE DISCUSSION EARLIER AND THERE WERE A LOT OF DETAILS, YOU REALLY GOT INTO THE WEEDS WITH A LOT OF NUMBERS. THAT'S GREAT, BUT ZOOMING OUT FOR MORE OF A SIMPLE OVERVIEW OF WHERE WE ARE AND WHY WE'RE HERE, I THINK THAT IT'S A PLACE WE'VE REALLY NEVER BEEN BEFORE AS A CITY, AND WE'RE LOOKING TO SPEND POSSIBLY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON ALTERNATIVE WATER, DEPENDING ON WHERE WE -- HOW WE GO. BUT YOU ALSO GOT TO SAY, HOW DID WE GET HERE? AND I WAS HERE FOR THAT. AND THAT WAS WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL -- MANY CITY COUNCILS AGO, DECIDED TO SELL WATER TO EXEXXON SABEC THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE. AND PROMISE THAT WATER, AND THEN IT HAPPENED AGAIN AND AGAIN WITH DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES. AND NOW WE'RE -- IT'S CAUGHT UP TO US. AND NOW WE'RE IN A BAD SITUATION WHERE WE'RE -- YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALMOST A PANIC, LIKE, OH, WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT. AND THEY SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT OF THAT BEFORE THEY SAID, YEAH, COME TO TOWN, WE'LL SELL YOU WATER. KEEP COMING, WE NEED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE SUSTAINABLE. SO WE'RE IN A DROUGHT, WHICH WE'VE BEEN BEFORE IN DROUGHTS, AND OUR LAKES ARE DOWN; HOWEVER, LAKE TEXARKANA AND THOSE LAKES OVER IN EAST TEXAS SEEM LIKE THEY'RE REALLY FULL. AND FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, AND THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE THAT GOES OVER THERE SHOULD BE THEN JUST LOGICALLY THE WATER SOURCE THAT WE KIND OF GO TO. WE REALLY NEED TO IMPROVE IT AND WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPROVING IT, WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MAYBE DOUBLING IT OR AT LEAST MAINTAINING IT BETTER THAN WE HAVE, AND THAT'S NOT YOUR FAULT, THOSE ARE THE PAST LEADERS. AND NOW WE'RE -- BUT INSTEAD OF DOING THAT, THEY LOOKED AT THE INNER HARBOR AND NOW THE PRICE HAS SKYROCKETED, AND REALLY IT JUST NEVER WAS, TO ME, A GOOD IDEA. AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD GO ANY FURTHER WITH IT. AND I WANT TO THANK CAROLYN VAUGHN, GIL HERNANDEZ, SILVA CAMPOS, KAYLYNN PAXTON AND ERIC CANTU FOR BEING BRAVE AND SAYING MAYBE I THINK WE NEED TO RECONSIDER THIS. I HOPE YOU CONTINUE IN THAT VEIN UNTIL SEPTEMBER 2ND. LAST TIME I TALKED ABOUT WHEN YOU'RE IN A HOLE, STOP DIGGING. AND I THINK IT WAS COUNCILMAN ROY WHO ASKED, WELL, WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO, GET BURIED? NO, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO GET OUT OF THE HOLE AND GO SOMEWHERE ELSE AND LOOK ANOTHER PLACE. THE INNER HARBOR IS THE HOLE. IT'S THE MONEY PIT, IT'S EXTREMELY UNKNOWN, IT'S EXPERIMENTAL. THE SCIENCE IS PAID FOR BY AN ENTITY THAT WANTS IT TO HAPPEN, MEANING THE CITY. AND WE DON'T KNOW -- NOBODY'S DONE THE ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDIES OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF IT AFFECTED THE BAY, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO OUR TOURISM. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM POINT OF CLARIFICATION, MR. ROY? >> Roy: MA'AM, I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW, THAT WASN'T ME THAT MADE THAT STATEMENT. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: ALL RIGHT. WE CAN MOVE ON. ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP, JULIE ROGERS, SORRY. JULIE ROGERS. JULIE ROGERS IN THE HOUSE. JULIE ROGERS? SHANNON ROSS? SHANNON ROSS HERE? SHASHANNON ROSS? LET ME JUST MAKE A NOTE FOR MYSELF. HOW ABOUT MR. BARTLESON, YOU'RE NEXT. AND AFTER MR. B BARTLESON IS MARK MÜNSTER, THEN JASON HAIL AND THEN FATIMA GUERRA R RATCHETY, I HOPE I GOT THAT CLOSE, MY APOLOGIES, FOLLOWED BY RACHEL CABALLERO. MR. BARTLESON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. COULD WE GET TO SLIDE 1, WHICH IS THERE. THERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT. I'LL START. THANK GOD FOR PHYSICS. I'M BRAD BARTLESON, DISTRICT 5. THIS YEAR'S REGIONAL WATER PLAN FINDS US AT NIL POPULATION GROWTH, PAST AND FUTURE, YET THE WATER USAGE IS PROJECTED TO INCREASE 54% DUE TO INDUSTRIAL DEMAND. THAT'S ODD. HOW DO YOU GET MORE JOBS FROM INDUSTRY WITH NO POPULATION GROWTH? NOTE THAT THE GUIDELINE FOR WATER USAGE BY A CITY IS 10% FOR INDUSTRY AND WE'RE CURRENTLY OVER 40%. WE'RE NOT SEQUENCING THE SLIDES. CAN YOU STOP MY TIME. SHOULD BE SLIDE 2. WE'RE MISSING SLIDE 2. IT WAS UP THERE BEFORE. HAD SAM ALTMAN'S PICTURE IN IT. IT GOT ELIMINATED. ALL RIGHT. I'LL TALK -- >> Mayor Pro Tem: WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US, THOUGH. >> THERE IT IS. WE CAN START AGAIN. SAM ALTMAN, CEO OF OPEN EYE FORESEES THE FIRST ONE PERSON, $1 BILLION COMPANY A UNICORN. AI AND DATA CENTERS ARE A CLEAR EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR RESOURCES FROM. HUGE RESOURCE DRAWS FOR THE BENEFIT OF A VERY FEW. HAVING FIGURES OF MERITS AND A HEALTHY RESOURCE PLAN WITH LIMITS IS HOW WE PREVENT THIS. THIS IS NOT SEQUENCING CORRECTLY AGAIN. >> Mayor Pro Tem: JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE DO HAVE IT IN FRONT OF US, THOUGH, SO THAT'S IMPORTANT. >> OKAY. IT'S HARD TO TALK TO WHEN IT'S OUT OF SEQUENCE THERE. >> Mayor Pro Tem: RIGHT THERE. >> NOW, OKAY, IN THAT PLAN, CHOSEN WATER RESOURCES WOULD MEET AN ENERGY FIGURE OF MERIT THAT THE WATER BE LOCALLY USED, OF LOW ENVIRONMENTAL RISK, MEET CAP EX AND OPEX LIMITS. WHERE WOULD WE BE NOW IF WE HAD PLACED A LIMIT OF $20 MILLION PER MGD AT THE ONSET WITH INNER HARBOR? SO I'LL GO TO OUR LAST SLIDE HERE, SO WHAT RESOURCES WILL PROVIDE US A GOOD FUTURE? PHYSICS IS THE TELL. SURFACE WATER, OUR LONGSTANDING RESOURCE, REQUIRES THE LEAST PRESSURE, IMPARTING THE LOWEST ENERGY AND COST. WE ARE BLESSED AND WE HAVE MORE OF THIS TO CAPTURE AND STORE. IT IS WATER FOR PEOPLE. GROUNDWATER IS ALSO A NATURAL RESOURCE WITH SOME READY TO USE AND SOME SLIGHTLY SALINE REQUIRING A SMALL AMOUNT OF SALT TO REMOVE TO MAKE POTABLE WATER. ACCORDINGLY, IT REQUIRES A BIT MORE ENERGY AND COSTS A BIT MORE. SEAWATER DESALINATION REQUIRES THE HIGHEST PRESSURE, HIGH ENERGY CONSUMPTION, YIELDS WATER AT THE HIGHEST COST. THIS IS WHERE YOU GO WHEN THE OTHER TWO OPTIONS AREN'T AVAILABLE. LET INDUSTRY AND UNICORNS FUND SEAWATER RO, THE ENERGY COST RELATIONSHIPS OF THESE THREE RESOURCES IS DOCUMENTED. >> Mayor Pro Tem: KEEP GOING. WE'RE GOING TO -- GIVE HIM TWO MORE MINUTES BECAUSE WE HAD SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. BUT BY THE WAY, YOUR ORDER OF SLIDES ARE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU GAVE US. >> OKAY. >> Mayor Pro Tem: KEEP GOING. JUST SO YOU KNOW, WE'RE KEEPING UP WITH THE WAY THE SLIDES WERE EARLIER. >> JEEZ, THAT'S A NEW NUMBERING THING FROM POWERPOINT THEN. SO SEAWATER RO ON ENERGY BASIS YOU SEE HERE IS WHAT DRIVES EVERYTHING ALL THE WAY THROUGH. AND I SAY TO LET THE INDUSTRY AND THE UNICORNS FUND THAT HIGH PRESSURE AND USE THE LOWER COST, LOWER PRESSURE INHERENTLY MORE FRIENDLY TO US OPTIONS TO USE, SO WE NEED A BETTER STRATEGY WE CAN USE THESE FIGURES OF MERIT AS A GUIDELINES BEFORE WE GET THIS FAR INTO THINGS. WE NEED A BETTER STRATEGY TO PRESERVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, SIR. I APOLOGIZE IF WE HAD -- FOR THE INCONVENIENCE. NEXT UP, MARK MÜNSTER. MARK, YOU'RE NEXT FOLLOWED BY JASON HALE AND THEN FATIMA GUERRA RACHITI. >> HI, COUNCIL AND CITY STAFF. I THINK I HAD A SLIDE. OH, MAN, WELL, THAT DIDN'T COME IN THE FORM I WANTED. IT WAS REALLY JUST A VISUAL GUIDE FOR WHAT I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT AND I WAS GOING TO HARP ON THE IDAS AND THE POTENTIAL OF THAT REVENUE AND BECAUSE IN CONTEXT WITH THE DESALINATION PLANT AND THE RATE IMPACT TO RESIDENTS, SO THE SLIDE SHOWS, LIKE WHAT -- IT WAS JUST IDEAS OF WHAT 50 MILLION COULD DO, IMPACT TO THE CITY. AND THAT 50 MILLION IS TALKING ABOUT THE IDA REVENUE THAT THE CITY WAS TALKING ABOUT, THAT THEY'D BE GETTING IN AROUND 2031 FROM THREE COMPANIES, AND USING THAT REVENUE TO OFFSET THE RATE IMPACT TO RESIDENTS FROM THE PROJECTS. SO WHAT 50 MILLION -- THIS 50 MILLION ISN'T JUST IN THE FUTURE, THIS IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN MISSING OUT ON BECAUSE OF ALLOWING THEM TO HAVE THESE DEFERRALS. AND YOU COULD PROVIDE SO MANY -- 60,000 OR MORE JOBS IN HEALTHCARE, IN PUBLIC TRANSIT, IN LIBRARIES, GETTING PUBLIC INPUT FOR RESIDENTS, AND THE BIG PICTURE IS, IS THAT LIKE IF WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT JOB LOSS AND ECONOMIC GROWTH, THERE'S OTHER AVENUES TO GET THERE. AND IT'S NOT JUST WHAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT HERE. AND ALSO JUST WANTING MORE TRANSPARENCY WITH THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENTS, MAKING SURE THE PILOT PAYMENTS -- BECAUSE THE PAYMENTS THAT WE RECEIVE ARE BASED ON VALUATIONS, AND THAT'S JUST NOT LIKE A SET NUMBER. THOSE CAN RANGE -- ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU CAN APPEAL THEM. SO WHEN THERE'S HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS ON THE TABLE AND POTENTIALLY JUST 50 MILLION, WHAT THE ILL PACT OF THAT COULD HAVE TO CITY SERVICES, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD SEE WHAT -- HOW EXACTLY THESE PAYMENTS ARE COMING IN AND IF IT'S EQUITABLE TO THE RESIDENTS, BECAUSE THESE SAME COMPANIES PUT US IN THIS SITUATION BECAUSE OF THEIR WATER DEMAND. AND THEY ALSO -- IT'S VERY RELEVANT, THE POLLUTION TO THE AIR AND THE WATER THAT THEY'RE -- THEIR MANUFACTURING AND THEIR OPERATIONS CAUSE. SO THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY OF THE IDAS, WHAT DO -- WHAT DO THESE INCENTIVES BRING INTO OUR COMMUNITY AND CITY AND WHAT'S THE IMPACT? AND FACTORING THAT INTO IF THEY'RE A GOOD DEAL FOR US OR NOT. SO, YEAH, THERE'S ALTERNATIVES THAT WE COULD -- THAT COULD MATERIALLY IMPACT AND BENEFIT PEOPLE'S LIFE AND IMPACT THE BUDGET AND PROVIDE US WAY MORE REVENUE IN THE BUDGET TO OFFER SERVICES, AND I JUST FEEL LIKE OVERALL THE AVERAGE RESIDENT IN CORPUS, THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT'S EXACTLY GOING ON OR EVEN HAVE ANY KIND OF UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE BUDGET AT ALL, I WOULD SAY THAT'S A REALLY LOW PERCENTAGE OF OUR POPULATION OF PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT WE COULD DO, WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE, AND JUST LIKE WE COME -- THERE'S -- WE COULD BE A CHANGE FOR THE BETTER. LIKE THERE'S ALL TYPES OF STUFF GOING ON HERE BEYOND JUST OUR CITY, NATIONAL AND THE WORLD, AND WE COULD BE A CHANGE FOR THE BETTER, BECAUSE THERE'S OPTIONS. WE'RE ASKING YOU TO LOOK AT OTHER ALTERNATIVES. AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE TIME AND ATTENTION THEY'VE COME UP HERE, AND NEXT WILL YOU JUST CONSIDER ALL THE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE GIVEN INPUT AND THOSE THAT CAN'T BE IN HERE OR DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON THAT WOULD BE FINANCIALLY AFFECTED BY THE RATE INCREASES. SO THANK Y'ALL. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT UP MR. HALE. >> OKAY. JASON HALE, CORPUS CHRISTI. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, GOOD EVENING COUNCILMEMBERS. TODAY I'M GOING TO TALK ANT GROUNDWATER, THE EVANGELINE PROJECT, IT'S BEEN IN THE NEWS A LOT LATELY, PEOPLE ARE GETTING CURIOUS ABOUT GROUNDWATER, SO I WANTED TO SHARE SOME RESOURCES. THE FIRST RESOURCE I WANTED TO SHARE IS THE AQUIFERS OF THE GULF COAST OF TEXAS, IT'S A 300-PAGE PAPER WITH A TON OF CHAPTERS ABOUT DIFFERENT GROUNDWATER ISSUES. IT COVERS BASICALLY ANY ISSUE YOU CAN THINK OF WITH GROUNDWATER. IT COVERS, FOR EXAMPLE, SUBSY DENSE, BRACKISH DESALINATION AND GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT. SO QUICK FACTOID, DID YOU KNOW THAT THE GULF COAST AQUIFER CONTAINS ABOUT ONE FIFTH OF THE ESTIMATED QUANTITY OF BRACKISH GROUNDWATER THAT IS USABLE FOR DESALINATION IN TEXAS. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT. IT'S KIND OF COOL. IF YOU DO READ ONE CHAPTER I RECOMMEND READING THIS CHAPTER THE CHALLENGE OF MANAGING GROUNDWATER IN THE GULF COAST AQUIFER. EVEN THOUGH IT WAS WRITTEN IN 2006, IT FEELS LIKE IT WAS WRITTEN TODAY. SOMEHOW THE AUTHOR WAS LITERALLY PREDICTING THE FUTURE, SO I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT CHAPTER. THE NEXT RESOURCE THAT I WANTED TO SHARE IS THE SAN PATRICIO COUNTY GROUNDWATER DISTRICT CONSERVATION DISTRICT'S WEBSITE AND THEIR DISTRICT MANAGEMENT PLAN. BASICALLY, WHAT THEY DO IS THEY CHOOSE A DESIRED FUTURE CONDITION FOR THEIR GROUNDWATER RESOURCES, SO LIKE 1 FOOT LESS OF THE WATER TABLE EVERY YEAR, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND THEY PLUG THAT NUMBER INTO A GROUNDWATER AVAILABILITY MODEL, AND THEN THAT DICTATES HOW MUCH GROUNDWATER'S AVAILABLE FOR USE. AND IT'S IN THE MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT, IT SHOWS THAT FREE THOUSAND 43,000-ACRE FEET IS AVAILABLE PER YEAR BASED ON THE FUTURE CONDITIONS THAT THEY CHOSE. AND THE LAST RESOURCE -- THAT'S WAY LESS THAN EVANGELINE, RIGHT -- OR WAY MORE THAN EVANGELINE, EVANGELINE'S LIKE TWO-THIRDS OF THAT. LAST RESOURCE IS HOW MUCH WATER CCW SOLD TO SAN PATRICIO MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. LAST YEAR IT WAS 41 MILLION-GALLONS. THAT'S ABOUT A THIRD OF OUR WATER USE. SO IN CONCLUSION, WHISKEY IS FOR DRINKING, WATER IS FOR SHARING. WE SHARE ONE-THIRD OF OUR WATER RESOURCES WITH SAN PATRICIO COUNTY. THE LEAST THEY COULD DO IS SHARE SOME OF THAT BURDEN WITH US. AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE WATER RIGHTS OWNER WANTED TO SELL THEIR WATER RIGHTS. SOMEONE ELSE WOULD HAVE BOUGHT IT IF WE DIDN'T. THE COASTAL BEND NEEDS LONG-TERM DEPENDABLE AFFORDABLE SUBPOENA MRIS OF WATER. THE STATE LAW RECOGNIZES GROUNDWATER SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR THESE PURPOSES. INSTEAD OF POINTING FINGERS AT EACH OTHER AND PITTING COMMUNITIES AGAINST EACH OTHER, I BELIEVE WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO UTILIZE THESE REST SOURCES THAT'S EQUITABLE FOR EVERYONE. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, MR. HALE. NEXT UP FATIMA GUERRA RACHITI, ARE YOU HERE? RACHEL CABIERIO, AND WHILE SHE'S COMING DOWN. WE HAVE ESSEN UPSHAW AFTER HER AND MRS. DELA SANTOS, I SAW YOU, MELINDA, AND ADAM RIOS. SO MRS. CABALLERO. >> >> ALL RIGHTY. RACHEL CABALLERO, D1, GOOD EVENING, I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY TO BE AWARE OF THIS SITUATION. I HOPE NOT TO GET INTERRUPTED. >> YES, I DID, THAT WAS A QUESTION. AND WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT IF IT'S NOT SUPPORTED BY YOUR ANALYSIS. >> BECAUSE AT THE TIME WHEN THEY WERE SAYING THAT IT WOULD HELP OUT DOWNTOWN, THEN, YOU KNOW, I'M FINE WITH THAT. I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. >> OKAY. SO FOR -- IN OTHER WORDS, WOULD IT BE FAVOR TO SAY THAT FALLS OVER ON THE POLITICS SIDE. >> YES. >> OKAY. SO THE POLITICS OF IT WERE FOR YOU TO GET BEHIND IT? >> YES. YES, IT WAS. >> ASK INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONS. >> SO WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME THEN IS THAT THE MAYOR HAD DEFINITELY BEEN MADE AWARE THAT THE ALTERED FEDERAL DOCUMENT USED AT THE TIME OF THE FIRST READING TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST FOR $2 MILLION, THAT EVEN THOUGH IT HAD BEEN A FEDERALLY ALTERED DOCUMENT, SHE WAS STILL -- HAD INDICATED SHE'S STILL OKAY WITH MOVING FORWARD AND APPROVING IT? >> CORRECT. >> AND SAME THING FOR MIKE PUSLEY? >> CORRECT. >> AND IF I HEARD YOU RIGHT EARLIER, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE SAME THING FOR ROLAND BARRERA BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU EXPLAINED EARLIER. >> CORRECT. I DON'T KNOW -- FROM MEMORY, I'M GOING TO TELL YOU WHO I BELIEVE I TOLD. I MA I HAVE TOLD OTHERS, BUT I'M NOT FOR SURE. I KNOW I TOLD THE MAYOR, I KNOW I TOLD COUNCILMAN ROY, COUNCILMAN PUSLEY AND MAYBE COUNCILMAN SUCKLEY. BUT FOR SURE, PUSLEY AND THE MAYOR IN ONE PHONE CALL I WAS RIGHT AFTER I HAD MET WITH THE -- WITH THE ARCHITECT. >> RECORDING STOPPED. >> YOU ALL JUST HEARD THE VOICES OF MIKE CULBERTSON AND PETER ZANONI'S DEPOSITION IN A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY. WHAT I LEARNED FROM HEARING THESE TESTIMONIES IS EVEN KNOW THAT FEDERAL DOCUMENTS HAD BEEN ALTERED WITH, TAMPERED WITH OR FORGED INDIVIDUALS WERE POLITICALLY PRESSURED TO ENDORSE A PROJECT AND THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY STAFF STILL ALLOWED THE PROJECT TO BE PRESENTED AS VIABLE AND THE CONCERNS WERE NOT SHARED WITH OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS. IN COMPARISON TO THE $1.2 BILLION EXPERIMENTAL DESALINATION PROJECT, THIS WAS ONLY A $2 MILLION TAX INCENTIVE. IMAGINE THE CHAOS, THE 1.2 BILLION INNER HARBOR PROJECT WILL BRING. THE ARCHITECT FIRM INVOLVED IN THIS LAWSUIT IS ALSO INVOLVED IN THE INNER HARBOR DESAL PROJECT. IF THEY ARE WILLING TO LIE AND FORGE FEDERAL DOCUMENTS FOR $2 MILLION, WE WOULD BE EXTREMELY NAIVE AND GULLIBLE TO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT THIS ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR WILL PROBABLY REPEATED ITSELF THROUGHOUT THE $1.2 BILLION INNER HARRY STYLES PORE DESAL PROJECT. -- INNER HARBOR DESAL PROJECT. THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE. THE PEOPLE OF OUR COMMUNITY DESERVE BETTER. IT IS TIME TO PULL THE PLUG ON THE INNER HARBOR DESAL PROJECT. DISHONEST CITY STAFF, THE CITY MANAGER AND COMPLIESENT COUNCILMEMBERS SHOULD NO LONGER BE TRUST AND THEY SHOULD BE REMOVED. MRS. CABAL LERO, YOUR TIME IS UP. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. THE NEXT IS S.N. UPSHAW. LET ME MAKE A NOTE. MELINDA DELA SANTOS, COME ON DOWN, FOLLOWED BY ADAM RIOS AND MARLINNA GARZA AND HENRY WILLIAMS. MRS. DELA SANTOS. >> >> Mayor Pro Tem: YOU'RE FINE. AND... >> GO. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MELINDA DELA SONS TO, CORPUS CHRISTI, RESIDENTS ARE NOT BEING HEARD, EXPERT OPINIONS ARE BEING IGNORED AND OUR WATER'S BEING TAPPED OUT BY BIG INDUSTRY. IN AN ARTICLE JUNE 8TH, 2024, FIGHTING FOR 40 YEARS, THE TINY TEXAS COMMUNITY FACING DOWN BIG INDUSTRY, A RESIDENT DESCRIBED THE BAY AS A PLACE WHERE THE COMMUNITY COULD BIKE, BIRD WATCH AND HAVE SOME QUAWMENT OF LIFE. NOW THAT'S ALL UNDER THREAT. THOSE IN POWER DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE, THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT OUR NATURAL RESOURCES, THE CITY HAS A LONG HISTORY OF SELLING OUT THE COMMUNITY WATER TO CORPORATIONS. WHAT WAS SAID WAS WHILE RESIDENTS ARE SUBJECT TO RESTRICTED WATER ACCESS AND FACE FINES AS HIGH AS $500, INDUSTRIAL WATER CUSTOMERS CAN BUY DROUGHT EXEMPTIONS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL. HILLCREST RESIDENTS STATED BIG INDUSTRY FEELS THAT THEY CAN JUST WALK ALL OVER US AND THAT'S WHAT THAIF THEY'VE BEEN DOING FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS. THEY ALSO STATE THE FEAR OF WORSENING HEALTH CONDITIONS. IN 2021, A STUDY FOUND THAT THEY HAD A LIFE EXEC TANSY 15 YEARS SHORTER THAN PEOPLE LIVING IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COASTAL BEND. A HEALTH SURVEY OF REFINERY ROW SHOW HIGHER RATES OF ASTHMA, TWO TYPES OF BIRTH DEFECTS AND CERTAIN CANCERS COMPARED TO OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY. AN ARTICLE IN TEXAS MONTHLY, CORPUS CHRISTI FIRST WATER DESALINATION PLANT COULD CREATE DEAD ZONES, DECEMBER 2024, IT SAYS DESAL PLANTS IN CALIFORNIA AND SAUDI ARABIA AVOID DUMPING THEIR DISCHARGE IN COASTAL BAYS AND INSTEAD SEND IT INTO DEEPER WATER. THE DISCHARGE SITS RIGHT WHERE EXPERTS HAVE WARNED COULD CREATE SUFFOCATING DEAD ZONES FOR MARINE LIFE. OTHER RESEARCHERS CAUTION THAT THE MODELING USED BY THE CITY TO PREDICT THE OUTFALLS REACH IS GIVING STATE REGULATORS AN INCOMPLETE VIEW OF THE PLANT'S IMPACT. THE DISCHARGE BRINE COULD CAUSE HYPOXIA, A LACK OF OXYGEN. CHRISTIAN NIELSON, AN AQUATIC SCIENTOLOGIST SAYS IT CAUSES FISH AND PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING ELSE TO DIE. SHE WARNED THE EVALUATIONS USED BY THE CITY PROVIDED TO TCEQ UNDERTAKE THE ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS. BIG INDUSTRY TAPPING OUT OUR WATER SUPPLY. ACCORDING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2023, THE LARGEST RETAIL WATER CUSTOMERS BY BILLED USAGE WERE VALERO, 9 MILLION PLUS MGD, FLINT HILLS, 6 MILLION PLUS, MGD, LION DELL, CITGO, 4 MILLION PLUS MGD. THE FULL-TIME YEAR-ROUND CIVILIAN EMPLOYED POPULATION AGED 16 AND OLDER FOR OIL AND GLASS AND MINING WERE 3.8%, THAT'S ABOUT 7,779 EMPLOYEES, VALERO WAS 730 EMPLOYEES, FLFLINT HILLS, 1,000 PLUS EMPLOYEES, CITGO 1,050 EMPLOYEES. >> Mayor Pro Tem: YOU'RE ALMOST THERE. >> OKAY. I'M ALMOST THERE. >> Mayor Pro Tem: WELL, WE NEED TO MOVE ON. WE'VE GOT TO KEEP THREE MINUTES. >> SO WE NEED TO LISTEN TO OUR CITIZENS, NOT INDUSTRY. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU SO MUCH. PERFECT. >> OUR HEALTHCARE HAVE A LOT MORE AND OUR RETAILERS HAVE A LOT MORE. >> Mayor Pro Tem: NEXT UP, ADAM RIOS. ADAM, COME ON DOWN. THEN YOU'RE FOLLOWED BY MARILYNNA GARZA, HENRY WILLIAMS AND THEN ALENA MARTINEZ. MR. RIOS. >> YES. GOOD AFTERNOON, ADAM RIOS, CORPUS CHRISTI, DISTRICT 5. I WAS HERE LAST WEEK AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BMX CORPUS CHRISTI AND THE POSITIVE MOVEMENT THAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. WE'VE ALREADY HAD COMMUNICATION WITH PARKS AND REC, BUT AT SOME POINT THIS TOPIC IS GOING TO COME IN FRONT OF YOU AND I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M COMING FROM WITH WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY WITH THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF WHAT THIS COULD DO. TEXAS, AS A STATE, IS ONE OF THE MOST ACTIVE BMX STATES IN THE UNITED STATES. THERE'S OVER 20 SANCTIONED TRACKS INCLUDING HOUSTON, DALLAS/FORT WORTH, AUSTIN, SAN ANTONIO. HOPEFULLY SOON CORPUS CHRISTI. USA BMX REGULARLY HOLDS STATE, REGIONAL AND NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS EVENTS IN TEXAS. A SINGLE EVENT CAN BRING AS MANY AS 1500 RIDERS AND AT LEAST 5,000 SPECTATORS FROM THE STATISTICS THAT WE'VE GATHERED. MANY OF THOSE ACTUALLY COME FROM OUT OF STATE. ACCORDING TO USA BMX, ECONOMIC REPORTS A NATIONAL EVENT OFTEN GENERATES AT LEAST $3 MILLION IN LOCAL ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, BENEFITING HOTELS, RESTAURANTS, RETAIL AND TRANSPORTATION. NOW, TEXAS ANNUALLY HOSTS MULTIPLE SUCH EVENTS, MEANING THAT SANCTIONED BMX CONTRIBUTES 10S OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ANNUALLY IN DIRECT TOURISM SPENDING. WE SHOULD HAVE THAT IN CORPUS. WE SHOULD BE A PART OF THAT, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO THIS AT SALINAS PARK, WHICH IS IN AN AREA OF TOWN THAT DOESN'T GET A LOT OF ATTENTION AND IT CERTAINLY WOULD GENERATE SOME ATTENTION. YOU CAN HAVE BASKETBALL TOURNAMENTS AND YOU CAN HAVE SOCCER TOURNAMENTS, NOTHING AGAINST THOSE, BUT ESPN ISN'T CLAMORING TO COME DOWN HERE AND COVER THAT. THEY'LL COME TO THIS. I'VE HAD SOME INTEREST AND PEOPLE HAVE REACHED OUT FROM FUEL NETWORK ASKING ABOUT IS THIS POSSIBLY GOING TO HAPPEN, ESPECIALLY, LIKE I SAID LAST TIME, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HOLD THE BMX HALL OF FAME INDUCTION CEREMONY HERE WITHOUT EVEN HAVING A S SANCTIONED PARK TELLS YOU HOW MUCH THEY LOVE CORPUS CHRISTI AND WANTED TO BE A PART OF THIS. HOSTING WEEKLY RACES ATTRACTS A LOT OF FAMILIES WHICH CREATE ECONOMIC BOOSTS FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES, IN THAT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL THIS, WHEN FAMILIES HAVE DO ANYTHING HERE, THE NEAREST PLACE THEY'RE GOING TO GO IS SAN ANTONIO AND IT'S GOING TO COST ABOUT $250 A DAY FOR EACH RIDER. IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO GENERATE THAT MUCH MONEY, WE HAVE A LOT OF PARKS THAT DON'T GENERATE ECONOMY AT ALL. IT'S FREE FOR EVERYONE, AND I GET THAT PART, WE WANT IT ACCESSIBLE FOR EVERYTHING, BUT IF WE COULD HAVE A PARK THAT'S ACTUALLY GENERATING THAT MUCH MONEY ANNUALLY, IT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. IT'S A LOW BARRIER TO ENTRY SPORT COMPARED TO OTHER YOUTH SPORTS. IT'S A SANCTIONED EVENT WITH THE OLYMPICS, JUST LIKE SKATEBOARDING AND YOU HEAR ME HARP ON ALL THAT. IF THE DIRECT ANNUAL IMPACT IS GOING TO BE MINIMUM $30 MILLION STATEWIDE, C CORPUS SHOULD DEFINITELY JUMP ON BOARD AND BE A PART OF THIS BMX EXPHEUNTY THAT I'M SO -- COMMUNITY THAT I'M SO PASSIONATELY A PART OF. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. APPRECIATE IT. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, MR. RIOS. NEXT UP MARILYNNA GARZA, AND THEN OF COURSE FOLLOWED BY REVEREND WILLIAMS AND ALENA MARTINEZ. >> MARILYNNA GARZA, DISTRICT ONE. YOU KNOW, I REALLY FEEL FOR YOU GUYS. I LOOKED AT THE AGENDA FOR NEXT WEEK, LIKE THAT'S WHAT I'VE TALKED ABOUT MEETING LINKS, FIVE ITEMS TODAY, 35 NEXT WEEK, AND THERE ARE SOME SERIOUS ITEMS THAT I HOPE YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO DISCUSS ABOUT. AND, YOU KNOW, I KIND OF WONDER, LIKE, WHERE ARE YOU AT IN A MENTAL SPACE WHEN YOU'RE AT 9:00 AT NIGHT, YOU'VE HAD TO GO THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENT AND YOU'RE HAVING TO DISCUSS SOME OF THESE SERIOUS ITEMS, TALKING ABOUT INCREASING FEES, TALKING ABOUT WATER, IT'S ALMOST LIKE THEY ARE SETTING YOU UP FOR FAILURE. AND YOU KNOW WHO ELSE IS SETTING YOU UP FOR FAILURE? FLOUR BLUFF ISD WITH YOUR HARTE LIBRARY, SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR HAND IS A PETITION THAT'S BEEN CIRCULATING SINCE AUGUST 8TH IN RESPONSE TO THE BUDGET AND CONCERNED COMMUNITY MEMBERS CONTACTING LIBRARY ADVOCATES LIKE ME REGARDING CUTS TO THE LIBRARY BUDGET. ON THE NE 19TH DURING LAST PUBLIC COMMENT, WE TURNED IN THE FIRST BATCH OF PEOPLE THAT SIGNED IN, IT WAS AT 304. ON THE 28TH, IT'S RISEN TO 461. SO IN JUST 20 DAYS, ALMOST 500 PEOPLE ARE ASKING YOU TO NOT DEFUND OUR LIBRARIES, AND THE RESPONSE IS JUST TO ROLLOVER TO FLOUR BLUFF ISD IT ALMOST SEEMS LIKE. YOU KNOW, HARTE IS A CITY LIBRARY, THAT IS A CITY LIBRARY THAT IS ON A COMPLEX AGREEMENT THAT PEOPLE ARE JUST NOT BEING TRANSPARENT ABOUT. PEOPLE ARE NOT GETTING THE REQUIRED NOTICE. I GO TO THOSE LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS EVERY SINGLE MONTH, I'M THERE, I'M TALKING TO PEOPLE. NOT ONCE DID CCISD TALK TO US ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS, NEITHER DID FLOUR BLUFF ISD. THEY MAKE IT SOUND LIKE AT THE TOWN HALL THAT PEOPLE CAN JUST RUN THROUGH THAT LIBRARY AND GET INTO OUR SCHOOLS AND JUST START SHOOTING IT UP, AND THAT IS JUST A FLATOUT LIE. THE DOORS ARE LOCKED TO THE HIGH SCHOOL. AND DID YOU KNOW THAT THE HIGH SCHOOL IS ONLY REALLY USING THAT LIBRARY FOR A STUDY HALL? YOU KNOW WHAT THEY DO AT VETS? THEY USE THE CAFETERIA, THEY MULTIPURPOSE BECAUSE THEY HAVE THAT NEED. SO IF FLOUR BLUFF ISD REALLY NEEDS THAT LIBRARY, WHY DON'T THEY DO A BOND? THE TAXPAYERS ARE BONDED OUT AND TIRZED OUT. AND WE'RE GOING TO JUST STICK THE LIBRARY FUNDING FOR THIS NEW LIBRARY IN THIS NEW BOND. YOU KNOW, AND AT THE SAME TIME IN THE SAME BREATH, PEOPLE ARE LIKE, WELL, WE'RE POURING ALL THIS MONEY INTO LA RETAMA, YOU'RE POURING MONEY INTO LA RETAMA BECAUSE THE VOTERS SAID ZERO DO IT IN 2022 WITH THE BOND. DON'T PAT YOURSELF AND SAYING WE'RE GIVING MONEY TO THE LIBRARY. NO, THE TAXPAYER IS GIVING MONEY TO THE LIBRARY. IF FLOUR BLUFF REALLY NEEDS THAT LIBRARY AND NEED TO KEEP OUR STUDENTS SAFE, WHY DON'T THEY PROPOSE A BOND, WHY IS THE TAXPAYER GETTING THROWN OUT ONTO THE STREET. WHY ARE THE SCHOOL ISSUES OUR ISSUES AND THERE ARE SO MANY VIOLATIONS IN THAT CONTRACT THAT MOST OF YOU GUYS HAVE PROBABLY NOT EVEN GOTTEN TO SEE OR EVEN READ. THAT'S NOT SCREAMING TRANSPARENCY. THAT'S LEAVING US OUT IN THE DARK. NO LIBRARY FOR DISTRICT 4 OR DISTRICT 5, WHAT A SHAME. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT UP, MR. -- YEP, HENRY WILLIAMS. MR. WILLIAMS, COME ON DOWN, ANDAL LANE THAT MARTINEZ, ROBIN COX, EMILY BARRERA. . >> GOOD EVENING TO YOU ALL, AND GOD'S BLESSINGS TO YOU ALL. AND I WANT TO THANK MR. CANTU, MRS. PAXSON AND CAROLYN VAUGHN FOR COMING TO THE HILLCREST NEIGHBORHOOD TO -- >> City Secretary: CAN YOU PLEAS STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY PLEASE. >> HENRY WILLIAMS, CORPUS CHRISTI, DISTRICT ONE. I WANT TO SPEAK TO YOU ALL CONCERNING THE IMPORTANCE OF PRAYER AND HOW PRAYER HAS BEEN IMPORTANT, BOTH IN OUR NATION AND IN OUR COMMUNITY. WHENEVER THERE HAS BEEN A GREAT CRISIS IN OUR NATION, THE LEADERS HAVE ALWAYS CALLED UPON OUR NATION TO PRAY AND TO SEEK GOD. GEORGE WASHINGTON, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, DURING THE CIVIL WAR, AND FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT, WORLD WAR II, PRAYED AND CALLED UPON OUR NATION TO BE A NATION OF PRAYER. I PASSED OUT SOME STATISTICS TO YOU ALL HAVING TO DO WITH CRIME STATISTICS IN OUR CITY. 1995 AND 1996, OUR CITY WAS GOING THROUGH AN AWFUL PERIOD OF TIME OF VIOLENCE. CHILDREN WERE GETTING SHOT IN THEIR HOMES, CRIME AND VIOLENCE AND LAWLESSNESS WAS OUT OF CONTROL. IN MAY OF -- IN JANUARY OF 1996, PETE ALVAREZ BECAME POLICE CHIEF. HE INVITED THE COMMUNITY TO COME AND BECOME INVOLVED IN FINDING A SOLUTION. HE ACCOMPLISHED SEVEN COMMITTEES, ONE WAS A SPIRITUAL OUTREACH COMMITTEE. MYSELF AND A PASTOR BY THE NAME OF RAFAEL GARCIA BEGAN ATTENDING THOSE MEETINGS, AND HE ASKED IF I WOULD HEAD THAT COMMITTEE. AND PASTOR GARCIA AND I HAD A VISION OF A DAY OF FASTING AND PRAYER FOR THE WELL-BEING OF OUR CITY. AND THAT BEGAN IN MAY OF 1996. AND FROM MAY OF 1996 TO THIS PRESENT DAY, WE HAVE -- WE GO TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE AUDITORIUM, AND WE PRAY FOR OUR CITY. WE HAVE A DAY OF FASTING AND PRAYER. WE KEEP ANNUAL STATISTICS. THAT'S WHAT THIS SHEET IS ABOUT. EACH YEAR AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH YEAR OUR GOAL TO POLICE CHIEF MARKLE, ASSISTANT CHIEF DAVID BLACKMAN AND ASK FOR THE CRIME STATISTICS FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR, OKAY. CRIME IN OUR CITY HAS CONTINUED TO DECREASE OVER THAT 29-YEAR PERIOD, OKAY. AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH PRAYER AND THE EFFECTIVENESS OF OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, REVEREND WILLIAMS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, SIR. >> GOD BLESS YOU ALL. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. AALLENA MARTINEZ, P MRS. COX, EMILY BARRERA. >> ELAINA MARTINEZ, CORPUS CHRISTI, DISTRICT 4. TONIGHT I'M PROBABLY GOING TO FOCUS MOSTLY ON LIBRARIES, JUST BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT. I HAVE A FEW OTHER THINGS I MAY TOUCH ON IF I HAVE TIME. FIRST, I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR ACTUALLY BEING HERE AT 5:30, EVEN THOUGH YOU'VE HAD A VERY SIGNIFICANT RECESS. I KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT EASY TO DO, AND I WAS KIND OF WONDERING HOW MANY OF Y'ALL WOULD SHOW UP, AND I'M PLEASANTLY SURPRISED. SO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT OUR LIBRARIES. LIBRARIES ARE SO IMPORTANT. THEY PROVIDE -- THEY'RE MORE THAN JUST A PLACE TO STORE BOOKS. THEY PROVIDE ALL KINDS OF SERVICES. I WAS DOING SOME RESEARCH THIS WEEK, THERE ARE SOME LIBRARIES THAT USE THE -- SOME STATES AND CITIES USE THEIR LIBRARIES TO HELP THEIR HOMELESS POPULATION NOT BE HOMELESS ANYMORE. THEY HELP THEM RECEIVE SERVICES TO GET IDS, WORK ON THEIR RESUMES, THEY WORK ON HAVING A PHYSICAL ADDRESS BECAUSE THAT IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO GETTING A JOB. THERE ARE, I THINK SOMEBODY MENTIONED BEFORE, THAT THERE ARE SOME LIBRARIES THAT LEND OUT POTS AND PANS TO PEOPLE WHO MAYBE ARE JUST GETTING STARTED AND JUST NEED SOMETHING TO COOK WITH FOR A LITTLE WHILE. AND I LOVE JANET F HARTE LIBRARY, IT'S BEEN ANY LIBRARY FOR YEARS, I WENT TO SCHOOL IN THE BLUFF FOR 12 YEARS. I REMEMBER CHECKING OUT BOOKS FROM THAT LIBRARY WHEN I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL AND NOW I CHECK OUT BOOKS FOR MY K KIDS AND MYSELF AS AN ADULT. THERE WERE A LOT OF SUGGESTIONS MADE YESTERDAY AT THE MEETING THAT I WAS VERY APPRECIATIVE OF, ONE OF WHICH WAS A SATELLITE LOCATION. THE BALDWIN BECHER BRANCH FOR THE HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY FOR YEARS FUNCTIONED OUT OF BASICALLY A GLORIFIED GARDENING SHED, AND IT ACTUALLY WORKED. YOU COULD GET BOOKS FROM THE WHOLE SYSTEM BROUGHT TO THAT LIBRARY, SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT, THAT MIGHT BE A LOW-COST OPTION TO BRIDGE THAT GAP FOR SERVICES. BUT, YEAH, JUST MRS. GARZA EARLIER, SHE MENTIONED WE'VE GOT TO STOP DEFUNDING OUR LIBRARIES. WE'RE PUTTING $1.2 BILLION INTO A DESAL PLANT THAT MOST OF THE CITY DOESN'T WANT, AND HOW FAR COULD THAT GO TOWARDS SORTING OUT OUR LIBRARY ISSUE? AND A LOT OF OUR ISSUES, LIKE CRIME STATISTICS, LIKE HOMELESSNESS, ALL OF THOSE THINGS WOULDUALLY BE SERVED WELL BY PUTTING MONEY INTO OUR LIBRARIES. ALSO STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT COMMUNITIES WITH WELL-FUNDED LIBRARY PROGRAM ARE HEALTHIER. AND ON THE POINT OF DESAL IN THE LITTLE TIME I HAVE LEFT, I JUST WANT TO SAY, WHEN THERE IS NOBODY THAT CAN SURVIVE IN OUR ENVIRONMENT BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN RUINED, WHO IS THIS INDUSTRY GOING TO EMPLOY? THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANYBODY COMING FOR TOURISM, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY FISHING, OUR ECONOMY'S GOING TO TANK AND WE'LL BECOME YET ANOTHER GHOST TOWN. SO THANK YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, MRS. MARTINEZ. ROBIN COX, FOLLOWED BY EMILY BARRERA, AMANDA BRIE LYNN. >> HI, I'M ROBIN COX DISTRICT 3, AND AFTER HEARING WHAT MRS. CABALLERO HAD TO SAY, I'M KIND OF CHANGING MY TOPIC. WHEN WE HAVE A CITY COUNCIL THAT LIES TO US OR BREAKS THE LAW, IT'S EMBARRASSING. IT SHOULD BE EMBARRASSING, IT'S A STAIN ON OUR CITY. I'M A TEACHER AND A TUTOR, IF I HAVE A STUDENT THAT FORGES THEIR PARENTS' SIGNATURE, I FAIL THEM. IF I HAVE A STUDENT THAT PLAGIARIZES, I FAIL THEM. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE TO GET WINDSTORM OR POLICIES, IF WE FORGE SOMETHING ON THOSE DOCUMENTS, WE'RE IN TROUBLE. SO MY DAD ALWAYS SAID, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TELL A LITTLE WHITE LIE, WHAT'S THE BIG LIE YOU'RE COVERING? I MAY NOT ALWAYS AGREE WITH SOME OF MY DEMOCRATIC FRIENDS, BUT THE DEMOCRATS THAT SIT ON COUNCIL, AT LEAST I KNOW THEY'RE NOT LYING TO ME. OR THEY'RE NOT FORGING OR THEY'RE NOT STEALING FROM ME. SOMETIMES I'VE -- I'VE TOLD MY FELLOW REPUBLICAN FRIENDS THIS, MAY NOT ALWAYS AGREE WITH THEM, BUT I KNOW THEY'RE UP THERE AND THEY BELIEVE WHAT THEY SAY. THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO DO THE CITY INJUST. WHEN I LOOK AT PEOPLE AND WONDER WHY THEY'RE SO DEEP IN DESAL, I WANT TO FOLLOW THE MONEY. FOR THOSE OF YOU SITTING ON THE COUNCIL AND KEEP GETTING RICHER AND RICHER, YOU'RE NOT MAKING IT OFF YOUR $6,000 A YEAR. I HAVE TO WORK TWO JOBS, I HAVE A MASTER'S DEGREE AND I OWN MY OWN BUSINESS. IF WATER RATES GO UP FROM DESAL, I CAN'T AFFORD TO STAY IN BUSINESS. I'LL HAVE TO PASS ON TO MY TENANTS, AND I KNOW SOME OF YOU THINK AN EXTRA $50 A MONTH ON WATER? I KNOW THAT SOME OF YOU'S HAIR GEL BILL, BUT MY TENANTS CAN'T AFFORD THAT. MAYBE THEY CAN GET A PART-TIME JOB AT THE COSTCO WE WERE PROMISED OR THE BIG FISHING PLACE THAT WAS GOING TO OPEN, THE CABELLA'S. WHEN WE'RE PROMISED FALSE THINGS JUST TO GET ELECTED, IT'S EMBARRASSING, BUT MAINLY WHEN I HEARD THAT VIDEO JUST NOW, EVERY ONE OF YOU UP HERE SHOULD BE EMBARRASSED FOR OUR CITY. AND EVEN THOSE THAT DEPARTMENT TAKE PART IN IT -- AND ESPECIALLY MR. PUSLEY, WHO COMES BACK, HE'S NOT ON COUNCIL ANYMORE, AND CRITICIZES EVERYBODY WHO GOES AGAINST HIM FOR DESAL. SHAME ON YOU, MIKE PUSLEY. I WISH YOU WERE RIGHT HERE SO I COULD SAY IT TO YOUR FACE. SHAME ON YOU FOR EVERY TIME I POST SOMETHING YOU COMING BACK. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THINKING EVEN OF A BOTTLE OF WINE TO GET, WE CAN'T AFFORD THAT IF OUR WATER RIGHTS GO UP. OUR CITY'S NOT PAYING FOR IT. BUT IF YOU'LL TELL ONE LIE, THAT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE COVERING UP ANOTHER LIE. PLEASE, WE DESERVE BETTER. WE ENTRUSTED IN YOU. THANK YOU, ERIC CANTU, KAYLYNN, SYLVIA, GIL AND CAROLYN VAUGHN, DOING THE RIGHT THING, MY DAD ALWAYS SAID THIS, SOMETIMES DOING THE RIGHT THING ISN'T THE POPULAR THING, BUT YOU'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING AND KNOW THAT THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE -- IT MAY SEEM LIKE THE SAME ONES OF US COME UP AND SPEAK, BUT WE'RE SPEAKING FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AFRAID TO COME UP. THEY'RE LITERALLY AFRAID FOR THEIR BUSINESS. THEY THINK THAT WE'RE RUN M MAFIOSA STYLE, THAT SHOULDN'T BE A PART OF IT EITHER. WE WENT TO BEACH THIS WEEKEND, AND I SAW AGAIN PEOPLE FISHING FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE. DON'T TAKE AWAY WHAT MOST OF US MOVED HERE FOR. BUT THANK YOU FOR THOSE OF US BEING HONEST. WE APPRECIATE YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, MRS. COX. EMILY BARRERA, AMANDA BRIELAND AND MAGGIE PEACOCK. EMILY BARRERA. >> >> HELLO. HI, MY NAME IS EMILY BARRERA, AND I RESIDE IN DISTRICT 2. I AM A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND I HAVE A DEEP LOVE FOR THE PEOPLE OF MY CITY. I AM HERE TO EXPRESS MY THOUGHTS REGARDING THE PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE 2025-2026 FISCAL YEAR. I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A FALSE ASSUMPTION THAT COMES WITH THE PRIORITIZATION OF OUR LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT AND OUR CITY'S FUNDING. WHILE I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT TAKES TO RUN A CITY, I KNOW WHAT IT TAKES TO BE A RESIDENT, AND AS A RESIDENT, I KNOW THAT OUR CITY IS MOST DEFINITELY IN NEED OF A BETTER SYSTEM FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD REALLOCATE THE FUNDS INTO THE SERVICES THAT PREVENT CRIME INSTEAD OF MONITORING IT AFTER IT HAS HAPPENED. IF YOU COMBINE THE PRO PROPOSED FUNDING FOR OUR HOMELESS FUNDING, OUR PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND OUR LIBRARIES, THE TOTAL PERCENTAGE MAKES UP NEARLY HALF IS WHAT IS PROPOSED TO BE SPENT ON THE LAW ENFORCEMENT, DESPITE THE RECENT UPDATES WITH LARA TEM MA. IN A PERFECT WORLD WE COULD USE THIS MONEY TO INVEST IN A BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE, FURTHER CHALLENGING THE CLIMATE THAT ENABLES MOST OF THE CRIME THAT CYSTS IN OUR CITY. THE UNFORTUNATE REALITY IS WE DON'T LIVE IN A PERFECT WORLD. I CAN'T SAY THIS WOULD COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THE EXISTENCE OF CRIME, IT WOULD BE A BETTER SOLUTION. I CANNOT NAME A SINGLE INSTANCE WHERE I HAVE FELT PROTECTED OR SERVED FROM OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND I KNOW THAT I'M NOT ALONE IN SAYING THAT. I THINK BACK TO JANUARY OF LAST YEAR WHERE MY CAR GOT BROKEN INTO, MY WINDOWS WERE SMACHED IN, MY CENTER CONSOLE WAS DISABLED AND MY STEERING WHEEL WAS COMPLETELY REMOVED. THE POLICE DID NOT BRE VENT THIS CRIME, IT WOULDN'T BE FOR ANOTHER TWO HOURS UNTIL A SINGLE OFFICER SHOWED UP WHILE I WAS WAITED OUTSIDE. I WAS GIVEN A SINGULAR BUSINESS CARD AND A VERBAL DIAGNOSIS OF, IT LOOKS LIKE YOUR CAR GOT BROKEN INTO. I THINK BACK TO THE SEVEN OFFICERS WHO REMOVED A SINGULAR MAN FROM MY WORK DOWNTOWN, THEY STOOD IN A CIRCLE AROUND HIM FOR 30 MINUTES. THE FUNDING IS THERE, WE SEE IT, BUT THIS FUNDING ISN'T PROVIDING ANY SORT OF SOLUTION, SO WHY ARE WE PAYING SO MUCH FOR A SERVICE THAT DOES SO LITTLE. AND I DON'T SAY THIS TO JUST BASH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A BIG ISSUE WITH OUR HOMELESS POPULATION AND WE CAN'T EXPECT THINGS TO GET BETTER IF WE'RE ONLY MOVING IN CIRCLES. FOR SOMEONE TO BE PICKED UP, JAILED AND RELEASED A FEW BLOCKS DOWN, THAT DOESN'T SOL F ANYTHING, FROM DISTRICT WUND TO DISTRICT FIVE, HILLCREST TO FLOUR BLUFF, WE'RE ALL RESIDENTS UNDER THE BODY OF CHRIST AND AS RESIDENTS I BELIEVE THAT WE DESERVE MORE IN THAT REGARD. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, MA'AM. SO NEXT UP, AMANDA BRIELAND. RIGHT? AMANDA. AND THEN MAGGIE PEACOCK AND DANIEL PEÑA. >> OKAY. AMANDA BRIELAND, CORPUS CHRISTI. I DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO PREPARE SOMETHING, SO I'M JUST GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET INPUT SESSION FROM YESTERDAY. WHILE I FEEL IT'S A BETTER FORMAT THAN LAST YEAR, I STILL DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD ENOUGH. Y'ALL ARE VOTING ON THE BUDGET NEXT WEEK AND THEN Y'ALL ARE HAVING THESE BUDGET INPUT SESSIONS AND SAYING Y'ALL ARE GOING TO LISTEN TO THE CITIZENS, BUT WHENEVER WE GO UP THERE AND PRESENT OUR ISSUES OR PRESENT ALTERNATES OR PRESENT SOLUTIONS, WE'RE MET WITH EXCUSES, LIKE IT'S NEVER, LIKE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GOOD POINT. IT'S ALWAYS, WELL, WE'RE DOING THIS, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN TO YOU. ONE THING I'VE BEEN HARPING ON A LOT LATELY IS TREES. THERE ARE MANY STUDIES THAT SHOW INVESTING IN PARKS AND GREENSPACES ACTUALLY REDUCES CRIME MORE THAN INVESTING IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. IT CREATES SAFE NEIGHBORHOODS, IT CREATES PLACES WHERE THE COMMUNITY CAN CONGREGATE AND BE WITH EACH OTHER. YOU CAN JUST -- ALL YOU HAVE DO IS A SIMPLE GOOGLE SEARCH. I FOUND INFORMATION ON THE EPA WEBSITE STATING HOW TREES ALSO HELP WITH THE WATERSHED, THEY HELP -- THEY HELP WITH WATER. THEY HELP WITH OUR WATER ISSUES, ESPECIALLY NATURAL, NATIVE TREES. I SPOKE TO THE PARKS AND REC REPRESENTATIVES YESTERDAY AND ASKED, FOR INSTANCE, WHY THERE WEREN'T MORE TREES IN COLE PARK. THE EXCUSE I WAS GIVEN IS THAT NOTHING GROWS THERE BUT PALM TREES. THOSE PALM TREES THAT ARE THERE AREN'T EVEN NATIVE, THOSE ARE CALIFORNIA PALM TREES. THEY'RE NOT NATIVE TO THIS AREA, THEY'RE NOT NATIVE TO THIS CITY. SO HONESTLY, THAT WAS A WEAK EXCUSE TO ME. AND IT MAY SEEM COUNTERINTUITIVE TO PLANT MORE TREES CONSIDERING WE'RE IN STAGE III DROUGHT RESTRICTIONS, BUT IF THE CITY'S ALREADY USING EF FLUENT WATER, THEY'RE NOT USING OUR DRINKING WATER, THEY THEY'RE NOT USING WATER THAT WE -- PEOPLE WOULD USE, SO IT'S NOT TAKING AWAY FROM ANYTHING. SO TO ME, THAT'S ALSO A WEAK EXCUSE. I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE ABOUT PARKS INVESTING IN PARKS. THIS IS JUST FROM A WEBSITE TIME SPENT IN NATURE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO HOME HELPS PEOPLE RELIEVE MENTAL FATIGUE, REDUCING AGGRESSION. GREEN RESIDENTIAL SPACES ARE GATHERING PLACES WHERE PEOPLE CAN FORM SOCIAL TIES. BARREN SPACES ARE MORE FRIGHTENING TO PEOPLE AND ARE MORE CRIME PRONE THAN PARKS LANDSCAPED WITH GREENERY AND OPEN VISTAS. >> Mayor Pro Tem: THANK YOU, MRS. BRIELAND. MRS. PEACOCK, YOU'RE NEXT. SORRY, GETTING AHEAD OF MYSELF. >> YEAH, MAGGIE I ALSO WANTED TO ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT I HAD MENTIONED AT LAST NIGHT'S DISTRICT 1 BUDGET INPUT SESSION, SPECIFICALLY AROUND DEMOCRACY AND TRANSPARENCY AND ALSO QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAMS. AT THESE BUDGET INPUT SESSIONS, COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE COMING UP AND EXPRESSING GENUINE CONCERN ABOUT THE MATERIAL CONDITIONS THAT THEY ARE FACING IN THEIR EVERYDAY LIVES. INSTEAD OF TAKING NOTE IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITY STAFF THAT ARE IN ATTENDANCE ARE BASICALLY DEFENDING THEMSELVES AND PATTING THEMSELVES ON THE BACK. FOR INSTANCE, COMMUNITY MEMBERS LAST NIGHT EXPRESSED CONCERN FOR OUR UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS. AND INSTEAD OF GENUINELY LISTENING, Y'ALL ARE BASICALLY PATTING YOURSELVES ON THE BACK FOR ADDING ONE STAFF PERSON TO ADDRESS HOUSELESSNESS SERVICES. IT'S LIKE Y'ALL ARE LISTENING TO ANSWER, ARGUE, AND JUSTIFY WHATEVER INSTEAD OF LISTENING TO ADDRESS. ADDING ONE STAFF MEMBER FOR HOUSELESSNESS SERVICES IS NOT A SOLUTION. BEHAVIORAL CRISIS RESPONSE PROGRAMS, COUNSELING SERVICES, ACCOUNTABILITY PROCESSES, RECOVERY PROGRAMS, EVIDENCE-BASED YOUTH PREVENTION PROGRAMS, TARGETED DIV DIVERSION PROGRAMS, THOSE ARE REAL SOLUTIONS. ALL OF THESE ARE OUTLINED IN THE PEOPLE'S BUDGET, WHICH I BELIEVE Y'ALL RECEIVED LIKE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING OR THE ONE BEFORE. AND I ALSO ENCOURAGE ANYONE IN THIS ROOM TODAY WHO IS INTERESTED IN BUILDING AN ALTERNATIVE BUDGET FOR THE PEOPLE TO TALK TO ME AFTERWARDS. I THINK IT IS UTTERLY RIDICULOUS THAT THE POLICE BUDGET IS BASICALLY HALF OF THE BUDGET. AND WE ARE INVESTING IN THINGS LIKE VIRTUAL REALITY FOR POLICE INSTEAD OF QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAMS FOR RESIDENTS THAT WILL IMPROVE HEALTH AND REDUCE CRIME. YEAH. ANOTHER INSTANCE ABOUT LAST NIGHT. SPECIFICALLY REGARDING THE BUDGET INPUT SESSIONS IS WHEN I NOTICED RESIDENTS OF THE HILLCREST SPOKE ABOUT THE VERY URGENT NEED TO REPAIR ROADS AND THEIR CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPLIED, WELL, ALL ROADS ARE BAD. I THINK THIS IS INCREDIBLY LUDICROUS, ESPECIALLY TELLING THAT TO COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO ARE ALREADY BEARING THE BRUNT OF SO MANY THINGS Y'ALL ARE PERPETUATING AND HAVE CONTINUOUSLY FOR MANY YEARS EXPRESSED THESE CONCERNS. HOW DARE YOU MINIMIZE THE MATERIAL CONDITIONS AND CONCERNS OF THE PEOPLE THAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT. LASTLY, DO NOT INVEST IN ADDITIONAL $50 MILLION OF OUR MONEY ON DESALINATION. NOT ONLY IS IT ENVIRONMENTALLY A RACIST PROJECT, IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE AND OUR MONEY IS BEING USED TO PROVIDE WATER FOR HEAVY INDUSTRY. WE ARE IN AN EXTREME DROUGHT BUT -- >> Scott: THANK YOU, MS. PEACOCK. >> SORRY I COULDN'T MAKE A SLIDE SHOW. OTHERWISE, I WOULD DO THAT. DANIEL PENA. I'M FROM DISTRICT 1. LIFELONG RESIDENT OF CORPUS CHRISTI. THE PAPER SHE'S PASSING OUT TO YOU IS SOME E-MAILS THAT I'VE HAD WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL, ACTUALLY THE DEPUTY FIRE MARSHAL REGARDING THE FIRE CODE. CHAPTER 3 SECTION 319 OF THE 2021 NATIONAL FIRE CODE, WHICH IS THE NEW FIRE CODE Y'ALL VOTE INTO EFFECT IN AUGUST OF '23, I BELIEVE IT WAS. I HAVE HAD THE LIBERTY OF TALKING TO A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS. I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE WITH OTHERS. BUT THIS AFFECTS MYSELF AND PROBABLY ABOUT 219 OTHER FOOD TRUCKS. I HAVE A FEW OTHERS BEHIND US. THIS SHOWS -- THE FIRST PAGE SHOWS THE CITY ORDINANCE AND WHAT NUMBER IT IS. IF YOU GO TO PAGE 2, IT SHOWS WHERE THE RAILROAD COMMISSION IS OUR STATE MANDATOR FOR ANYTHING REGARDING PROPANE. I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED THING ON HERE WHERE IT INCLUDES SECTION 611 -- 11.7.1 AND IT SHOWS THE TEXAS RAILROAD COMMISSION ESTABLISHED THE RULES THAT APPLY TO DESIGN, INSTALLATION, OPERATION OF LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS KITCHENS WHICH INCLUDES OUR TRAILERS. WHEN Y'ALL DESIGNED THAT, HE PROPOSED NEW HOSES, NEW SYSTEMS, THINGS THAT WERE ALREADY IN PLACE. I DON'T THINK THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL DID DUE DILIGENCE TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE SOME OF THE OTHER RULES THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE. WE JUST KEEP MAKING MORE AND MORE RULES AND DON'T GO BACK AND LOOK AT WHAT'S ALREADY IN PLACE. THERE ARE RULES IN PLACE FOR A REASON. THAT WAY PEOPLE DON'T GET HURT. I REPRESENT QUITE A FEW FOOD TRUCKS AND I TRY TO HELP THEM UNDERSTAND WHAT WE GO THROUGH. MOBILE KITCHEN, MOBILE PROPANE EXPLOSIONS. IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY FIRES UNTIL RECENTLY. HOW MANY KITCHEN RESTAURANTS HAVE HAD EXPLOSIONS OR FIRES BURN DOWN? 21. WE HAVE STRICTER RULES ON US. BEFORE WE GET ANY INSPECTIONS, ANY PERMITS, WE HAVE TO HAVE THOSE IN PLACE BEFORE WE GET INSPECTED. WHY DON'T THE RESTAURANTS HAVE THE SAME GUIDELINES AS WE DO? BECAUSE THEY'RE BRICK AND MORTAR. MOST OF THE RULES HE QUOTES IS FOR GAS INSTALLATIONS. IF YOU NOTICE, GAS AND LP PROPANE, LP IS IN FRONT OF THE WORD "GAS." ON THE THIRD PAGE REPRESENTS THE TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CODE, 113.054. IT COMES OUT OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE 311.005 AND IT STATES IN HERE THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE ANY CHANGES, ANY SLIGHT CHANGE, ANYTHING, YOU STILL HAVE TO COMMISSION THE DIRECTOR OF THE RAILROAD COMMISSION. YOU HAVE TO REPRESENT YOURSELF. YOU HAVE TO TURN IN -- THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> Scott: THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER -- ERIC, DID YOU WANT TO GO? >> Cantu: PETER, CAN YOU GET SOMEONE TO TALK TO HIM ABOUT THIS? >> Zanoni: WE CAN, COUNCILMAN. WE'LL GET THE FIRE MARSHAL. >> Cantu: APPRECIATE IT. >> Scott: GIL, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? COUNCILMEMBER HERNANDEZ. >> Hernandez: PETER, I REMEMBER WHEN WE ADOPTED THE CODE, THE INTERNATIONAL -- NO, THIS WAS A WHILE BACK. I DON'T RECALL THE GAS CONNECTOR PORTION OF THAT. OBVIOUSLY, IT WAS A HUGE COMPONENT TO IT. IF YOU COULD PROVIDE US THE ACTUAL VERBIAGE OF THAT PARTICULAR SECTION OF CODE? THAT WAY WE CAN READ IT AND SEE IF IT MATCHES UP. >> Zanoni: I'LL DO THAT. >> Scott: AWESOME. THANK YOU, MR. PENA. BELLA MUNOZ FOLLOWED BY MICHAEL MILLER AND THEN WEBEX, CHRISTINA ENGLISH. >> HELLO. I AM BELLA MUNOZ AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT 2. I TAKE A LOT OF PRIDE IN MY OCCUPATION AS A TEACHER BUT I CARRY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ADVOCATING FOR MY STUDENTS AND THE NEXT GENERATION THAT WILL INHERIT THE CITY AND THE PLANET. I AM HERE TODAY DESPITE MY NERVES TO TRY TO LIVE UP TO THOSE VALUES AND FULFILL THAT RESPONSIBILITY. I THINK IT'S REALLY CRUCIAL FOR ANY LEADERS TO BE ABLE TO CONSTANTLY ASSESS AND REASSESS BASED ON THE CURRENT MATERIAL CONDITIONS AND KNOWLEDGE THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE PREVIOUSLY HAD. IT IS FOR THAT REASON I WANT TO STRONGLY ADVISE AGAINST MOVING FORWARD WITH THE INNER HARBOR DESALINATION PLANS AND ANY SUBSEQUENT DESALINATION PLANS. I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO CONSIDER ALL OPTIONS AND FOR A WHILE DESALINATION SEEMED TO HAVE BEEN THE BEST OPTION. I THINK WE KNOW MORE NOW AND THAT IS NO LONGER THE CASE. IT SEEMS CLEAR AND CLEAR THAT DESALINATION WOULD NOT ONLY WRECK OUR BAY BUT THAT WOULD ALSO BE FAR TOO COSTLY ON OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH IS ALREADY OVERBURDENED WITH AN INDUSTRIAL BUILTOUT AND EXPANSION THAT DECREASED PUBLIC SERVICES AND QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAMS. ACCORDING TO RESEARCH BY THE HART RESEARCH INSTITUTE, CORPUS CHRISTI BAY IS OVERBURDENED BY SALINITY. IT COULD SEVERELY IMPACT THE ECOSYSTEM INCLUDING SPECIES' ABUNDANCE AND DIVERSITY. OUR COMMUNITIES IN THIS CITY CANNOT AFFORD TO KEEP CENTERING OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY AROUND PROSECU POLLUTERS. PLEASE CONSIDER WHAT THIS WOULD DO TO YOUR LEGACY AS CITY LEADERS IF YOU EFFECTIVELY CONTINUE TO SACRIFICE HILLCREST AND OTHER COMMUNITIES AT ANY INTEREST OF THESE INDUSTRIES WHO ARE NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE IN TAXES AND DO NOT CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO US. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR LEGACY AS A LEADER OF OUR DOLLARS. >> Scott: THANK YOU, MA'AM. MICHAEL MILLER FOLLOWED BY CHRISTINA ENGLISH, ELI McKAY, AND THEN JOHN WEBER. >> MICHAEL MILLER, DISTRICT 2. COUNCIL AND STAFF, I AM HERE TO SAY THANK YOU, PARTICULARLY TO COUNCIL PERSONS VAUGHN, HERNANDEZ CANTU PAXSON AND CAMPOS FOR LOOKING INTO ALTERNATIVE WATER SOLUTIONS. OUR SITUATION HAS GONE FROM BEING DESCRIBED TO ACTUALLY SEEMING QUITE MANAGEABLE. OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN LED TO BELIEVE THAT OUR ONLY PATH TO A SUSTAINABLE SOLUTION WAS VIA THE INNER HARBOR DESALINATION PLANT. TODAY WE HAVE A MULTITUDE OF SHORT, MID, AND LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS BEFORE US AND I APPLAUD THE EFFORTS OF YOU GUYS AND GALS AND THE STAFF BRINGING THEM FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION. WITH EACH PASSING WEEK, I AM FURTHER ENCOURAGED THAT WE ARE MAKING EXCELLENT DECISIONS FOR OUR WATER FUTURE THAT DO NOT INCLUDE WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE A RISKY PROJECT. I DID NOT OPPOSE DESALINATION. IN FACT, I AM CERTAIN THAT IT WILL EVENTUALLY BECOME A PART OF OUR FULLY DIVERSIFIED WATER PORTFOLIO BUT I THINK IT'S FOOLISH THAT WE GO FORTH INTO UNCHARTERED WATERS ALONE. IF THE INNER HARBOR FAILS TO PRODUCE THE 30 MGD, THE CITIZENS WILL SUFFER FAR GREATER THAN THE LARGE-VOLUME WATER USERS THAT STAND TO BENEFIT THE MOST. I DID NOT INTEND TO DISPARAGE INDUSTRY. IN FACT, I AM A HUGE SUPPORTER BUT THE FACT IS THEY HAVE OPTIONS AND WE DO NOT. I HAVE HEARD MANY MEMBERS OF THIS COMMUNITY DESCRIBE THE ANTI-DESAL 5 AS SHORT SIGHTED BUT THE ONLY THING I VIEW AS SHORT SIGHTED IS BETTING 1 TO $2 BILLION ON A RISKY DESAL PLANT THAT ONLY PROMISES AROUND A QUARTER OF OUR FUTURE DEMAND. LET'S FIND A PROJECT WHERE THE RISK IS SHARED AS THE OLD ADAGE GOES, IF YOU WANT TO GO FAST, GO ALONE. IF YOU WANT TO GO FAR, GO TOGETHER. ALSO, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN REGARDING THE BONDS WE HAVE ALREADY CASHED IN BUT SOMEHOW I HAVE A FEELING THERE MAY STILL BE SOME FLEXIBILITY. WHEN AND IF THE INNER HARBOR IS VOTED DOWN, IF WE CAN AGREE ON THE ALTERNATIVES, REAPPROACHING THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD WITH A UNITED FRONT WILL LIKELY PRODUCE FAVORABLE RESULTS MOVING FORWARD WITH REALLOCATION FOR THE FAVORED ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS. THANKS AGAIN TO THE DEDICATED AND COURAGEOUS FAB FIVE. WITH THE LAST 50 SECONDS OF MY TIME, REGARDING WHAT MS. CABALLERO REVEALED AT THIS MEETING, I HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS FOR A LITTLE WHILE AND I WANT TO THANK AJEET DAVID FOR THE COURAGE TO BRING FORWARD HIS OWN FINANCES, NOT SEEKING TO RECOVER ANY OF HIS MONEY OR ANY LOSS -- ANYTHING LOST, BUT TO BRING TO LIGHT SOMETHING THAT GOES ON IN THIS CITY EVERY SINGLE WEEK. AND A LOT OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE IMPLICATED IN THAT HAVE SAID THAT FOLKS LIKE MS. CABALLERO, MYSELF, AND THE REST OF THE PEOPLE SITTING IN THIS PEANUT GALLERY ARE THE REASONS WHY THIS CITY DOESN'T MOVE FORWARD. IN FACT, THE REASON WHY THE CITY DOESN'T MOVE FORWARD IS BECAUSE OF THOSE THINGS THAT GO ON. SO I'M GLAD THAT IT'S BEING BROUGHT TO LIGHT AND I HOPE THAT EVERYBODY THAT IS IMPLICATED IN IT GETS WHAT THEY DESERVE. >> Scott: THANK YOU, MR. MILLER. WE'RE MOVING ON TO WEBEX VIDEOS. FIRST UP IS CHRISTINA ENGLISH. >> CHRISTINA ENGLISH, DISTRICT 1. TODAY IS A LITTLE EXCITING FOR ME BECAUSE I HAVE THE NOW RARE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM BEFORE IT'S CONSIDERED. SADLY, THE ONLY REASON I HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY IS BECAUSE OF A DELAY. TYPICALLY, A COMMUNITY MEMBER WOULD HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PHYSICALLY ATTEND THE MEETING IN PERSON AND WAIT FOR THEIR ITEM TO BE CALLED IN ORDER TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT. COMMENTS MADE AT 5:30 ARE TOO LATE TO BE CONSIDERED. WHAT A DISGRACEFUL SYSTEM. ON SEPTEMBER 2 THE COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD WITH ADDITIONAL FUNDING ON THE INNER HARBOR HILLCREST DESAL PLANT. PLEASE USE THE IMPORTANT AUTHORITY THAT YOU RECENTLY PULLED BACK FROM CITY STAFF AND REFUSE TO CONTINUE TO [INDISCERNIBLE] ON THIS PROJECT. DO NOT FALL VICTIM TO A SUNKEN COST FALLACY AND INSTEAD MAKE FINANCIALLY SOCIALLY AND ENVIRONMENTALLY-RESPONSIBLE DECISIONS FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS. I'LL USE ANY OF MY REMAINING TIME TO DEFINE THE WORD BOISTEROUS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COUNCIL, LEGAL, AND THE COMMUNITY. IT IS OF A PERSON, EVENT, OR BEHAVIOR NOISY ENERGETIC AND CHEERFUL ROWDY. I REPEATEDLY WATCHED OUR CITY ATTORNEY, MILES RISLEY, TARGET SPECIFIC COMMUNITY MEMBERS, INTERRUPTING OR STOPPING ENTIRELY THEIR CONSTITUTIONALLY-PROTECTED SPEECH ON THE GROUNDS OF BEING BOISTEROUS. LAST WEEK, MILES RISLEY INTERRUPTED AN INCREDIBLY CALM AND MEASURED SPEAKER ON THESE GROUNDS. THIS SPEAKER WAS NOT NOISY, ENERGETIC, CHEERFUL, OR ROWDY. MILES RISLEY OBJECTED TO THE CONTENT, THE TONE, OR MAYBE THE APPEARANCE OF THE COMMENTER. AND ABUSED HIS POWER AS CITY ATTORNEY WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO HALT THEIR SPEECH. IN CONTRAST, I CAN THINK OF MANY OCCASIONS, AND THE TAPES SHOW IT, WHEN ANY OF THOSE WORDS WOULD BE A FAIR DESCRIPTION OF THE PEOPLE, EVENTS, AND BEHAVIORS BEHIND THIS DAIS. I ENCOURAGE THIS COUNCIL, MAYOR, AND LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO STOP INFRINGING ON THE PROTECTED RIGHTS OF THOSE THEY VIEW AS POLITICAL OPPOSITION. ALSO, PUBLIC COMMENT SHOULD BE HELD AT 5:30 ON MONDAY, NOON ON TUESDAY, AND AT EVERY ITEM. VIRTUAL SPEAKERS SHOULD HAVE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON ITEMS. >> Scott: MS. ENGLISH, ARE YOU STILL THERE? YOU STILL HAVE FIVE SECONDS. ALL RIGHT. I THINK SHE'S MOVED ON. ELI McKAY. ELI McKAY, ARE YOU THERE? >> YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> Scott: YES, MA'AM. >> MY NAME IS ELI McKAY AND I LIVE IN BEAUTIFUL UPTOWN CORPUS CHRISTI, DISTRICT 1. SO I'M MAKING COMMENT TODAY TO ENSURE THAT I CAN PUBLICLY VOICE MY OPINION ON THE HILLCREST DESALINATION PLANT AHEAD OF ANY VOTES THAT MAY BE TAKEN AT NEXT WEEK'S COUNCIL MEETING. I COULD PROBABLY COUNT ON BOTH HANDS AND MORE HOW MANY TIMES I HAVE STOOD BEFORE YOU ASKING YOU NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT. BUT WHILE I CANNOT STAND BEFORE YOU IN PERSON TODAY, I AM HERE ONCE AGAIN ASKING THAT YOU DO NOT SUPPORT THE HILLCREST WATER TREATMENT CAMPUS PROJECT ANY FURTHER. EVANGELINE, NUECES RIVER WELLS, REUSE PROJECTS, LARGE-SCALE RAINWATER CAPTURE, FLOATING SOLAR ARE ALL PROJECTS THAT SHOULD BE PURSUED BEFORE ANY DESAL. ASK YOURSELF HOW MUCH WATER DO WE NEED AND WHY. ANY DECISION YOU MAKE YOU WILL LIVE WITH AND MOST OF YOU WILL LIVE TO SEE THE IMPACTS OF YOUR DECISIONS. IT'S NOT A COINCIDENCE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THOSE OPPOSING THIS PROJECT ARE MILLENNIALS, GEN-Z, AND EVEN GENERAL ALPHA, AS WE HAVE SEEN AT THE LAST COUPLE OF MEETINGS. WE HAVE SO MUCH TO LIVE FOR THAT IS A SUSTAINABLE, CLEANER, MORE RESPECTFUL WAY TO LIVE ON THIS PLANET. THE DAYS OF GOVERNMENT AT ALL LEVELS MAKING DECISIONS BASED ON GREED ARE NUMBERED BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE AWAKE, PAYING ATTENTION, AND KEEPING RECEIPTS. SO THANK YOU TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE SHOWN BRAVERY. PLEASE CONTINUE TO DO SO AND NEXT WEEK VOTE NO TO THIS DESAL DISASTER AND SET OUR COURSE WITH A MORE VIABLE, MORE RESPONSIBLE PROJECT. THANK YOU. >> Scott: THANK YOU, MS. McKAY. OUR LAST SPEAKER THIS EVENING IS JOHN WEBER VIA WEBEX. MR. WEBER. >> JOHN WEBER FROM OUT OF TOWN. GOOD EVENING, PRO TEM AND CITY COUNCIL. PLEASE REFER TO THE PRESENTATION IN MY WRITTEN COMMENTS. IT APPEARS THE CITY STARTED SELLING A LARGE VOLUME OF WATER TO A CUSTOMER THE CITY HAS NO OBLIGATION TO SELL WATER TO. THIS IS AT THE SAME TIME THAT IT IS ENFORCING DROUGHT RESTRICTIONS ON RESIDENTS. I WONDERED WHY AND WHO APPROVED THIS WATER SALE. I HAVEN'T SEEN THE COUNCIL APPROVE THIS. COUNCIL, PLEASE FIND OUT WHY THE CITY IS SELLING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF GALLONS OF WATER A DAY TO A COMPANY THAT GOT HUGE TAX BREAKS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T NEED ANY SERVICES, INCLUDING WATER. AS ALWAYS, HAVE A NICE EVENING. >> Scott: THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT THINKS THEY SIGNED UP IN TIME? DO WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT YOU HAVE TO SIGN UP BY 4:30 TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC COMMENT? >> City Secretary: IT'S BY 4:00, YES, THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO SIGN UP FOR THE 5:30. >> Scott: MY APOLOGIES. I'M JUST A HUMBLE EMPLOYEE. I JUST FOLLOW THE RULES. COUNCIL MEMBERS, I SEE NO FURTHER ACTION. WE STAND ADJOURNED. [MEETING ADJOURNED]