Heat. Heat. Okay, good morning everyone. Welcome to city hall and to council chambers. I'd like to call this meeting to order. Our invocation this morning will be given by Bishop CE Richardson Senior with Calvary First Baptist Church. We pray eternal and gracious father in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord that we thank you for life, for health, and for strength. I pray today for our city council meeting as they consider the the agenda items that they must deliberate on today. I pray master that you will lead them, guide them, and direct them. I pray for your blessings upon all of our city leadership. Bless our honorable Pette as she continue to give great leadership to our city. Bless all of our city council men and women that they may work together in unity. Bless our city manager and his staff. Bless our police chief Markle and all of the officers who put their lives on the line each and every day for this city and for our citizens. Bless all first responders and help all of us to make Corpus Christi a better place. We pray for guidance and wisdom as the city council engage in meaningful dialogue to reach decisions that will be for the betterment of our community. May our city council work together in unity and you bless us in all of the efforts. Bless us even when we face crisis to overcome every crisis knowing that with your help and strategy we are a city that can overcome. Thank you Lord for the leadership. Thank you for this time of prayer. In Jesus Christ's name we pray. Amen. >> Amen. >> Thank you, Bishop. >> You're welcome. >> And our pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States and to the Texas State flag will be led by Briana Suri Pettis. She is a senior at Foy H. Moody High School. She's in the top 10 of her class for the past three years and a student ambassador for the superintendent. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Please join me in honoring the Texas flag. I honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible. Thank you, Briana, and good luck in your study. Thank you. >> Go Trojans. >> That's right. >> Miss Wa, would you please call the role? >> Mayor Plet Wardo, >> present. >> Council members Roland Beretta >> here. >> Uh, council member Sylvia Compos is absent. Um, she did ask me to announce that it's due to um outpatient medical procedure that she's uh receiving today. So, we do wish her a quick recovery. Eric Anthoop >> here. >> Gillard Nandez >> here. >> Kaylin Paxton >> here. Ever Roy >> here. >> Mark Scott >> here. >> Carolyn Vaughn >> here. >> City manager Peter Zenoni >> here. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Michael Rodriguez for the record. Deputy city manager. City attorney Miles Rizley. Mayor and Council. A quorum of the council and the required charter officers are present to conduct the meeting. >> Thank you, Miss Wera. Uh Mr. Rodriguez, would you uh please go into the city manager's comments and update on city operations? >> Yes, ma'am. Thank you so much. Peter, he's out in the hall doing some interviews. So, I'll do the CM report really quick and he'll finish up as he joins us. So, thank you. We have one item today and it's a really good news item and we're happy we have our police officers and firefighters here today with us. So, we recently had the 85th Police Academy graduation. We had 16 graduates and we really proud to have them here today. So, we have three of the graduates here and they're in field training officer program and we're going to hear a little bit from Chief Markle in a second here, but we wanted just to let Mayor and council know how proud we are of them. So, we want to just start there and I'll bring Chief Markle up for a few words and and then we have a a video. Well, good morning, Chief Markle Police Department. Um, yeah, we have a little small sampling of our graduated academy and their lead officers. Um, thank you and congratulations to these cadetses. I know former cadets now police officers and their FTOs and and we we can never overemphasize how important Peter these FTO's are to their to the future of you young officers. Um, I always try to highlight that in our graduation ceremonies because these men and women that field train are responsible literally for the lives of these young officers, keeping them out of danger, keeping showing them how to read calls, how to understand the many, many dimensions and nuances of public service. So, you can't overstate the importance of of what they do. So, for the next six months, they'll be literally graded every day on everything they do. It's a it's a very stressful time, but I have no doubt that you can rise to that occasion. And on a follow-up note, I do want to thank Peter. I want to thank the mayor and this city council for this new academy. This uh this was a smaller class and and again, we have a mantra. I have a mantra. I'd rather maintain a vacancy than than a bad hire. So, we we hire those that we um will suit the position. But this current hiring list, we're already at 1,400 applications. It's about a 40% increase in year-over-year for what we what is normal for our applications for this city, for the police department. That is part and parcel because of our new training facilities. >> It's the talk of South Texas. I have no doubt we have the best training facility in South Texas, the best training staff both in class and in the field. And that is because of all of you and because of our citizens and the wonderful support that we share from good people like pastor here. So, so, so we're blessed. We're blessed and we we recognize that. So, thank you. Thank you, Peter, for recognizing these officers. >> Right. Yeah. Thank you, Chief. We're we're not quite done yet, so sorry for being late, council. I was doing some media interviews, but uh Michael may have touched on some of this, but I did want to highlight because several members on this council uh and prior councils are instrumental in this following fact. So, uh when I began here about 7 years ago, one of the first goals, uh that the community and the city council then had for me was to increase the amount of police officers in our department. And so we had a goal that Chief Markle put together with myself and that was to add five officers over five years or a total of 25 officers. And we beat that goal substantially. We added in the past couple of years 60 positions, 60 police officer positions. Uh that is tremendous right? >> Yeah. >> And so Chief Markle and his team and really our community or region has 506 uh sworn officer positions. And so the graduation of a of an academy is is pretty important because it fills vacancies uh that come from either new positions being added or retirements that happen every year. And so we're we're always excited to go to the uh to the graduation ceremonies. They uh that uh the there's a whole team of uh of uh professionals that work with the chief who train uh these young men and women. And it's to me this last graduation, it kind of seems like a like a parent graduating your your children. And I think that's probably how our our our teachers at the academy uh feel. But it's a pretty tremendous event. We want to highlight it today. Um just two things cuz you'll see it in the video. It does take about 7 months to train our officers at our academy. That includes in in that includes in-classroom instruction and then skills training. So that's seven months. And then once they graduate, then they do uh field training for six months. They're in the field with a with a a field training officer, a more senior police officer who is partnering up with the with the just graduated uh police officer. And so we have a we have a a few that were able to make it today. Miles, can you move that green the shamrock thing? Yeah. I can't see. Uh so we have a few as as we said earlier, the the graduating class um was uh was uh how many achieve? 22. How many in the graduating class? >> 16. Sorry, 16. But we have a few that were able to make it here today and they they represent uh that graduating class. And with them today, uh the field training officers. So, I'm going to name them the sitting in the front row. And when I do name you, I'll just please stand up. I I don't have you I don't I don't think I have your names memorized to person. So, let's start with the the first officer, Ethan Munoz. Ethan's here, and he is with his field training officer, Curtis Voling. And so, Curtis is riding along with him. And then we have Zachary Shaw and he is uh with his field training officer Ryan Tim. And then we have Lauren Fuentes and she is here with her field training officer Jesse Man. And then I don't know if we have uh if is Jason is Jason Lee here. What's that? J. Okay, great. Okay, Jason Lee is our field training coordinator. So, great. So, those are just an example of some of our our tremendous teammates. You know, we've been working a lot on water, and that's a tough that's a tough job, but I I still believe that our police and firefighters have the toughest job in the city. And we thank you for the work that you all do as leaders in our community, uh, keeping us safe every day. and we're always glad to have new cadets join us. So, for the mayor and council in the community, we do have a video that'll show you some of their training uh work. Just about a two-minute video. So, we're going to show that now. Boots on the line. Sun burning names in the yard. Every breath of promise, every set back, another scar. Sirens in our future. But today it's sweat and sand falling. Then we're rising, learning how to take a stand. THIS IS OUR BADGE AND BACKBONE built from every broken eye. Every mile, every bruise, every moment we chose to stay and fight. We are the steel in the storm. Now heartbeats maring as one. Endurance, strength and passion. THAT'S HOW THE WATCH IS ONE. Oh yeah. Voices in the darkness. Can you hold the fragile line? We answered in the silence, grinding teeth and stubborn eyes. Brother, sister, shoulder, carrying each other's weight. Trusting more than armor, TRUSTING WHAT WE CULTIVATE. This is our backbone built from every broken night. Every mile, every bruise, every moment we chose to stay. >> Okay, that's tremendous. That video is done in house by Officer Pace. So, he does he continues to uh outperform every time he does one. We always like watching those. So before we turn it over to the mayor and council for some comments, we have to acknowledge the other side of our of our public safety house and that is our fire department and they are here today. Coincidentally, uh the chief uh recently uh had a leadership promotional ceremony. This is the first time he's uh done it this way. Usually it was in increments whenever there was a leadership event. He'd have something at the um at his headquarters. Uh but he uh he said let's do a a bigger one in the two in maybe two seasons the spring and and the the fall winter and it was pretty tremendous. It was a packed house uh with the leaders that were promoted in rank with their families and it was at the Delmare College the OSO campus uh really just well done a really step above what we what what we used to do. So I did want to highlight uh these uh these uh leaders that are here with us today and uh similarly after I speak we'll have the chief come up and then we have a short video as well. So uh let me just find where that is here. So uh it was on March 4th uh that we were at this ceremony and we recognized 23 firefighters uh that were promoted in rank. Uh uh several council members were there including Paxton and and Hernandez and both spoke and the promotions reflect the expertise, the training and really the dedication that was that came up a lot in that in that in that ceremony. The dedication that these men and women have in being leaders in our fire department. And so the promotions included two deputy chiefs and they're here with us today. Deputy Chief David SCS and Deputy Chief Danny Valdez. Right. Stand up you guys. So due to recent retirements, uh these are uh second in command positions. We only have two deputy chiefs and so these are our new leaders working with with Chief Wade uh to lead the department forward. Also promoted that day were three assistant fire chiefs and that includes uh Assistant Chief David Zarate, Assistant Chief Jim Deviser and Assistant Chief Frank Zalinsky. And are they here today, chief? I think they're here, right? Yeah. And then the fire chief also promoted five captains that day. There were 11 firefighter twos. These are kind of coveted positions because as a firefighter uh moving up in rank, you get to drive uh one of the fire apparatus and trucks. And it's kind of a coveted position. And so chief made 11 firefighter 2 promotions and two firefighter 2 EMS promotions. Those those individuals will drive the EMS vehicles. And so each of these firefighters, as we heard in the ceremony, they demonstrated leadership and professionalism and operational excellence. Uh that'll help them lead. It's all about leading uh people, right? The department has a similar number of uh of persons, but they need strong leaders. And especially these individuals who have years, decades of expertise, uh who could easily retire, but instead have chosen to stay on the force and teach uh the new individuals the skills that they've learned. And it takes experience uh to be able to be that teacher. And so we're real grateful uh for them stepping up and and and uh and being in these leadership roles. And with that, we want to uh acknowledge all the firefighters that are here as well. And then we're gonna have Chief Wade just come up and say a few comments and then we'll show a short video and then we'll turn it over to the council. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. Uh Brandon Wade, fire chief and uh thank you for the opportunity for us to highlight our people in our department. And I I think the recognition is one thing allowing us to come up, but really the support that y'all have given us through the years through your actions is what has made a true difference and why we do see these leaders with 35 years stay on promote through the ranks and continue to want to be leaders within this organization and continuing to push us forward and being at the next level. So, thank you for everything that you've done with it. And as Peter said that um you know we changed the promotion ceremony up from doing kind of onesie twoozies and having some family members to really taking the opportunity to put it in one bring the team together of the folks that are promoting. Uh and it's a lot for them and but a lot of times our firefighters just like our police officers will say well this is just part of my job. A big part of it is for us to recognize their families as well and the sacrifices that the families go through uh with our um law enforcement, our firefighters that are at work and then you know they see some crazy incident happen on there and they're wondering is my family member there handling that emergency. So, it's a great time for us to honor them as well during these promotion processes and the sacrifices that we have made. And I thank you all for being there uh for that, you know, and with it, we truly say we have leaders at all levels and we know that from the first firefighter that goes uh on the job, we know that they have to make critical decisions. They're right in a medic unit. It could be the first day that they're out and they're making critical calls. But what we see with these uh uh individuals that promoted, they're taking that step into formal leadership and they're responsible not just for uh making the calls, protecting the citizens, their property, but also making sure that our firefighters are safe and they're going home as well. So to see them take that that step up, that lead, that formal role is amazing. And uh you know, I just had the opportunity yesterday to see it in action. We had four fires within an hour yesterday with all of that wind. And you get to see some of those newly promoted folks are out there making critical decisions to search homes under zero visibility and they're making that call. And I think that's where it's important as we see these leaders that are making captain, chief officers, our drivers. Uh they make a difference in the community and we couldn't be more proud of them. and we thank you for the support, the continued support y'all give us for them to do that job and be able to uh make an impact on where it matters to to the public that we serve. So, thank you very much and thank you for this opportunity. >> Thank you, Steve. >> We're going to show this short video. So, a lot of the pictures or all of the pictures I should say from the exact ceremony that took place. So you'll see just pay attention how well done it was by the chief and his team and and we encourage council to if your schedule's allowed to make those future ones. Um because it's just a just there was real good energy in the room and and it's a big deal uh for the chief and and his team. So we're going to show that video now. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Okay, mayor, that concludes uh my comment. So, thank you and thank you to our all our law enforcement uh professionals and our firefighters. Uh this community is all the better because of you all and we we really appreciate everything you do. Thank you, Mayor. >> Thank you. Thank you. And and you y'all I don't know who timed that because it's noon. Maybe you did, Peter. Perfect timing. But um yeah, thank you all. Congratulations on the promotions. Very well spoken, Chief Wade. Um it speaks volumes for our department and truly both departments are the best departments. Um so so thank you for all that you continue to do. Y'all are our frontline heroes. Our police officers, especially um alongside our firefighters, have a huge job to do and and that is protect to protect us without knowing what's coming. That's the scary part. And as soon as someone leaves, you know, to to on a call, you don't know if you're coming back and you're someone's son, you're someone's brother, cousin, you know. So, so it's we we appreciate you all very very much and and we have you in our prayers always. Congratulations and and thank you for all that you do. Thank you. So, so at this time it is noon. Um we're going to Peter with Did that conclude your >> Yes, ma'am. That does conclude the report. So then we're going to go ahead and go on to uh public comment to stay on track here. Uh let's see. So as we begin the meeting, I'm going to take a quick moment to address the rules of decorum. This council chambers is a place of public business, a forum for civic discussion, decisionmaking, and service to the people of Corpus Christi. It is not a stage for personal attacks, disruptions, or vulgarity. And we will not tolerate those violations of decorum. There have been repeated instances of individuals using profanity, shouting over others, and shout, excuse me, showing blatant disregard for the rules that govern our proceedings. I've allowed space for differing viewpoints and will continue to welcome respectful disagreement, but I will not allow this council or the public we serve to be disrespected. We are here to do the people's work, and we would like to proceed in that spirit. So, if you would like to speak on a specific agenda item during its discussion, you do not need to sign up beforehand. I will ask for public comment when the council considers the item. At that time, you can come up and uh to the podium and speak. At this time, I'll ask uh city attorney Miles Rley to review the council meeting rules of decorum. These rules will also be displayed on the television screens for our audience's reference. Mr. Risley, >> all citizens must be courteous, polite, and respectful of one another, including the city council and city staff. The mayor and council members shall be referred to by title and/or title surname. All remarks must be addressed to the mayor and city council and not to the council members as individuals. Loud, boisterous, 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. Uh, thank you, Mr. Ry. So, please state your name and the city in which you live before beginning your comments. Inerson comments are limited to three minutes. Uh for call-in or WebEx video speakers, Corpus Christie residents receive up to three minutes and non-res non-residents up to one. Uh a visible timer positioned near the city secretary's desk will help manage that aotted time. If you have a petition or any relevant information, please present it to the city secretary before speaking and she will distribute it to us. So with that, we will start with uh Miss Mariah Boon. Hello, I'm Mariah Boon. I live in Corpus Christi. Um, I'm here to point out to the city council that the United States Supreme Court this month uh upheld one of um many decisions that have been made in the past that state that unhoused individuals have the constitutional right to ask for help in public places. Um, and I want to remind the city council that we have long had on the books an illegal panhandling ordinance that is in direct contradiction to that Supreme Court decision and many previous court decisions. That ordinance, the panhandling ordinance, opens our city up to liability. Um, the only reason that we haven't had a court case brought that we would have lost so far is because none of our unhoused brothers and sisters have brought one forth yet. But the our unhouse brothers and sisters should not have their civil rights violated in our city and um the Corpus Christie taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for an illegal city council policy. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Boon. Bradley Bartlesen. Morning all of you. Um Brad Bartlesson, Corpus Christi. The city manager Zenown recently stated that cost, environmental concerns, and politics have been the biggest roadblocks for our inner harbor del. We've attempted to address cost and are belatedly addressing the environmental concerns with our farfield study. Addressing these will take care of the politics. In 2018, under HB 2031 directive, the GLLO and Texas Parks and Wildlife completed an exhaustive study of where to place desiled plants in Texas. Salt buildup over time resulting in hypoxia was the central concern. HB 2031 then specifically removed bays and estuaries from acceptable discharge sites. The city ignored that. HB 2031 went further indicating that discharge be greater than three nautical miles offshore. We ignored that. The study provided a map of recommended discharge locations shown in green that excluded our bays and had Barney Davis as our acceptable location. We ignored that. Contrary to HB 2031, TCEQ rendered a permit to Inner Harbor on the basis of a very confined plume model in the Inner Harbor, not addressing the important concerns of salt accumulation and effluent move from Inner Harbor to New Bay via the power plant discharge. GHD's model did the same thing. The government's scientific assessment of hypoxy and coastal water study described how salinity nutrient discharges make for low oxygen or hypoxy hypoxy at the bottom of our water bodies. That study found hypoxy expanded in Corpus Christi Bay when salinity was high. These all work together. we could find ways by not dumping the inner hard inner harbor effluent into it and by processing the city's storm water into 9 29 mil excuse me MGD of reuse and plottable water making good of bad given the reference studies inner harbor should have always been a case of proving that it won't harm rather than the other way around finally our farfield study is doing this with scheduled completion in June we're likely 5 to 10 years off from having water from an operating del. So logically we can take a few months to see if the recommendations against IH prove true from modeling. Lastly at oneird the cost of inner harbor expandable having available power and identified for fast permitting. Why would the city use up our funding on an inner harbor where we could easily be short of capacity before the plant is halfway done? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Blesson. David Ainsworth. Can I ask did my PowerPoint make it in time yesterday to be put up on the screen? It's loaded, sir. Thank you. Okay. I've had the U PowerPoint presentation handed to each one of y'all so that y'all can have it afterwards and you can read through this. This is my third time to be here to speak with y'all. >> Can you state your name and city, please? >> I'm sorry. Excuse me. I knew better than that. David Ainsworth, Senior, District 1, Living Castle River, born and raised here in Corpus Christie. I'm a proud graduate of Kell Allen High School 1978 aka Riverrat. I want to take and thank everybody for your green St. Patrick's Day clothing. And I wanted you to know I didn't have a green suit, but I do have green boxers on. So, uh, anyhow, just a little humor there. And we appreciate this opportunity here to present the potential option that may help the city address the current water challenges. As everyone here knows, South Texas is experiencing historic drought conditions and the Noasis River supply feeding the Oen Stevens water treatment plant is under increasing pressure. At the same time, Corpus Christi is experiencing strong industrial growth from the LNG exports, refining prochemicals, and advanced manufacturing, all of which increase water demand. The city has already taken important steps with major projects such as seawater desalination, brackish groundwater treatment, and groundwater expansion. These are critical long-term solutions, but they require 2 to 10 years to fully deliver supply. Why Puronix is proposing is a bridge solution that can help increase usable water much sooner. We have developed a modular water treatment platform that can be developed in months rather than years. These systems combine planet electromagnetic water conditionings, nanobubble oxidation and submicron ceramic filtration to remove any of the contaminants that typically require more complex treatment systems. Our approach is not intended to replace the city's long-term projects. Instead, it helps augument existing supplies and improve the quality of available water sources so more water can be safely fed into the Owen Stevens treatment plant. We are currently working with the produced water solutions to deploy rental treatment equipment that can be processing water streams within 3 to six months if needed. At the same time, DPX Enterprises, our manufacturing partner of over a 100red years of industrial experience, will fabricate modular systems for longerterm deployment. Over the next few weeks, we are refurbishing and upgrading our prototype system. And we will be conduct conducting demonstration testings to validate the effectiveness of our patented process and establish definitive construction and operating cost estimates. Our primarily analysis suggests that this approach could operate at lower cost. Okay. Wish I had more time, but hopefully one day y'all will be able to meet with me so I can explain it more. Thank you and God bless you. >> Thank you, Mr. Answorth. Amanda Breeland, Amanda Breeland, uh Rachel Kamayto, Rachel Cavayto, D1. We are Corpus Christi. We are the body of Christ. While some community members are atheists agnostic faith-driven or whichever, that will never change the fact that we are the body of Christ. We have an obligation more than any city in our country to protect the body of Christ, which is our community. It is important that we all understand why we are in the situation that we are currently in. We have two sets of representatives, public servants and politicians. Public servants serve the people of this community while still following their oath to protect the business structure of the government. And then there are politicians who only serve themselves. Many of you politicians have had very unfortunate events happen to you directly or to your family members. From health scares to arrests of loved ones to unexpected deaths. What if God is trying to talk to you and warn you that you are on the wrong path? Where there are lies, there is cheating, there is theft, there is mass manipulation, and there is gaslighting. Your narratives are constantly changing. We're running out of water. No, we're not running out of water. This water's for the community. No, this water's for economic development, aka industry expansion. Our narrative has never changed. We want the truth. We want transparency and accountability. We want a city council, a mayor, a city manager that works for our community as it's meant to be. I would like to thank councilmen Gil Hernandez, Eric Gthu, and Councilwoman Carolyn Vaughn for putting the petition to remove the mayor on next week's agenda. I filed the petition to remove the mayor on August 29th, 2025. I also filed the articles of impeachment last week. I was neither asked nor paid to do this. I do this because it is time that we put our foot down against corruption. We are living in a dystopian world time where elected officials have the confidence to lie under oath in a deposition without recourse, consequence, or accountability. This isn't political theater. This is me and my community demanding accountability from those that are supposed to be honest, ethical, and should be conducting themselves in a way that support our community. This is not happening with at least four of you. The tide is turning. We're all getting involved now. We won't be manipulated to elect your groupies pushing your experimental projects. We defeated your $721 million convention center hotel scam in November of 23 by 69%. We will no longer be underestimated or taken advantage of. We deserve and demand to have ethical and moral leaders. We deserve the truth and we deserve representation. We are going to fight against unethical and immoral behavior and we will win. >> Thank you, Miss Gabrito. I'm sorry. We're not going to have um that's we're not going to have applausing applause. Yes, that that's against that's against the um decorum. So, I'm I'm letting y'all know we have a long list. We have um 44 Let's see. I'm sorry. 47 in total that includes WebEx. So, I'm asking everyone up front and we're not going to tolerate it. So, know that now. All righty. Uh, Patricia Anderson Good afternoon, mayor and city council members. My name is Gail Anderson. I live in Corpus Christi, District 2. There is a petition circulating in our city to remove our mayor. This is a very serious action. So, I wanted to review the evidence. The petition is based on the mayor having full knowledge that FEMA documents were altered prior to attending prior to awarding the Homewood Suites project. Three areas of misconduct are one, knowing the documents had been altered, the city manager asked the mayor not to place the project on the agenda for approval. Two, the person that altered the project documentation received an additional 2 million in taxpayer incentive. and three, they also contributed to the mayor's campaign. These actions raised a lot of eyebrows and precipitated an investigation by the city auditor's office. George Holland, a certified internal auditor, and Amir Hussein, a certified fraud examiner, both found a reasonable basis for fraud. According to article 2, section 11 of the city charter, the grounds for removing a city council member are one, willful violation of any code of ethics or conflicts of interest provision. Two, I'm skipping. Three, misconduct, malfeasance, incompetence, inability or willful ne neglect in performance of official duties. In my mind, the threshold for an ethical violation is much lower than the threshold for fraud. Therefore, if fraud was found, then you've way exceeded an ethical violation. The audit committee weighed their words very carefully when pressed as to whether the mayor had committed a crime only to say they believe fraud had been committed and they were leaving criminal intent to law enforcement. It seems prudent to me to refer this matter to our ethics board for their consideration. In regard to misconduct and ability to perform official duties, one certified auditors found fraud was committed. A very high bar. A very high bar indeed. City council members agreed with auditors there was sufficient evidence to warrant investigation. Three, over 2100 people have signed the petition to remove the mayor. Four, there is historic record of three signature agenda items which points directly to lack of leadership. Though no criminality was found, the question remains, was this an ethical violation, a much lower bar. I hope city council will expedite this matter because our city needs strong leadership now. We do not want to be micromanaged by the state. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Anderson. Carrie Meyer. Good afternoon, city council. Carrie Meyer, District 1. I'm here to urge you today to delay any further decision on the Inner Harbor plant. To me, it seems like we've put the cart before the horse. The city seems to be moving forwards with the inner harbor desalination plant before the full results from the farfield modeling can be known. The council requested, I think it was back in January, that extensive scientific modeling be conducted to determine any future environmental impact to the bay from the inner harbor proposed plant. But the contract that city staff created requires that the model measure only the levels of salinity in the bay, not the level of dissolved oxygen, which is uh what can be detrimental to marine life. Because in the areas where the oxygen is depleted due to high salinity plumes coming from the plant, hypoxia or a lack of oxygen can occur, making that area a dead zone incapable of supporting marine life. The contractors for the modeling have been tasked with measuring only salinity. Even though the top scientists on the farfield advisory committee have stated since the first day that the level of dissolved oxygen should also be measured to add do levels to the modeling study that contractors would need much more time. When asked during the committee meeting they said that a year would be ideal. Instead they have been given two months to have at least preliminary results ready for council because an important Inner Harbor vote is scheduled for next month. Here's my question. What happens if you pull the trigger next month on the Inner Harbor plant and invest that threequarters of a billion dollar that Abbott was talking about alone alone that the residents of Corpus Christie will be paying back for decades to come and then the more refined Farfield study results come in several months from now or a year from now and those later results show that the diesel plant will negatively impact the bay. You've all said you don't want that, that you want to protect the bay and the communities that rely on it. Yet apparently next month you're being asked to go down that road before the final results are known. That's what I mean by putting the cart before the horse. What is the city plan to do if the farfield final results show that the replacement of a del plant in the inner harbor will result in severe negative impact to the bay? What will the city do then after even more money has been spent? An experimental diesel uh seawater desalination plant will take several years to design and construct. Everyone knows that del is not a short-term solution and you've come up with several solutions that do provide a short-term solution through pipelines, wells, and an aquifer. Granted, you're farther along with the IH plant than the Barney Davis, but that doesn't mean it's the better choice or the right choice. So, please hold off spending any more money on the IH and await and also fund more money to go toward that study so that they can actually do a good job. keep pushing forward with the studies and permit applications for the Barney Davis plant like it looks like you're doing today in agenda number 19. Thank you so much. >> Uh Susie Salana, >> Susan Salana, District 2. Couple of issues. First of all, I want to thank uh the city manager for his work with the police officers and the firefighters. I was there when we first started asking for the police officers and uh crime control and I'm very proud of the fact that they've moved forward so much. Another issue that I want to bring before you is that our previous speakers talk about family. When you run for office, you run for office, not your family. And it is disgraceful and shameful that they bring it up. It is truly disgraceful. They don't speak for me as a community or the people that come and talk to me. We want to see fair and equitable treatment of all people, including the people that are sitting up there. No one has a right to come up with those things. No one has a right to degrade another person because of their families. Because honey, if you want to talk about things that are happening with family, think about what's happening with you or others. It is wrong to do that. It is wrong to come up here and make judgment. You don't represent the body of Christ because Christ would probably not have agreed with you. So, another object that I want to talk to you about is the fact that I want to thank all of those city council people that voted to save taxpayers $350 million by stopping the plant, the DSAP plan when they did. And yet they're not against DAL. Like I'm not against DAL. We're for it. We want to see it happen. It may take longer. It may take time, but it's something that we have to do. Do I like the location? No. I used to live there. But do I want DAL to come forward? Yes, I do. The majority of our community does. So don't blame people for doing the right thing. And don't put your judgment against others because it's wrong. >> Jeff RHED. Jeff Road. Oh, sorry. >> Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Roodie and I'm a homeowner and resident in District 5. Like m many residents of this city, I have watched the leadership with a mix of disbelief and frustration as we approach a water crisis that many know is both predictable and preventable. The failure to proactively secure a long-term water supply, including the inability to move the Delaw project forward, has brought our city dangerously close to a state level emergency, and it significantly increased the cost of the available solutions. What makes the situation even more troubling is how the burden of this crisis is being distributed. >> Under the city's March 2025 drought contingency plan, large commercial users are allowed to pay a search charge exemption fee to avoid curtailment requirements. In plain terms, large industrial water users, refineries, manufacturers, plants, and wholesale water suppliers were given a path to avoid the restrictions that residents must follow. The citizens of Corpus were not given that option, homeowners cannot write a blank check to exempt themselves. At the same time, while water rates have increased across the board, commercial wastewater entities saw a roughly 17% decrease in their minimum rate, while residential customers experienced roughly a 9% increase. That's a 26% disparity in favor of large commercial users. Once again, residents are forced to pay more while large industrial customers are given relief. Even as we approach a level one water emergency, the city continues to issue permits and approvals for new homes, new subdivisions, car washes, swimming pools, and large commercial developments. According to the city's own drought plan, permit restrictions will not incur until the most severe emergency stage. And even then, it's still optional. This is unacceptable. This raises an obvious question. If there's enough water to support continued largescale development, then why are residents being told they cannot even minimally water their lawns, something many homeowners rely on to help protect foundations and maintain basic property safety such as fire prevention? If the situation is truly critical, then the city must treat it as critical. That means pausing new home building permits, residential subdivisions, new high water use commercial developments, plant expansions, and other projects that increase demand until the water supply is stabilized. Very recently, our governor publicly addressed our water situation and stated that the state of Texas would ensure that residents are going to have the water they need to live their lives like the rest of the people in this state. notably in the city managers and city's response to those remarks. The focus was on regional water security. What was missing was a direct acknowledgement of the residents themselves. The governor mentioned the citizens of Corpus. The city's response did not. That should concern all of us. Many members of this council and the current administration have served this city for a long time. Yet during that time, our water situation has only grown more severe. Residents rightly feel that business interests are being prioritized while the people who live here shoulder the restriction and costs. The lack of proactive planning has put our community in a reactive emergency posture. For the sake of the citizens, that needs to change starting now. >> Thank you, Mr. Roadie. Sandre Meyer. Good afternoon, Sandra Meyer, District 4. This last week has been a brutal week in the news media. Um, I spent a lot of time this weekend researching what's happened in the past, and I'm really happy to say that I've seen the council since 2019, 2020, 2021 work to improve our water supplies. There's so many been so many issues and things that y'all have been trying to do. I watched a video last night of when the city went into drought one or stage one drought restrictions and it's kind of sad to look back and see where we're at now. if I had a chance to meet anybody. I've got Doug Allison on the mind right now is at that time he was working for the Port of Corpus Christi and they were have trying to get permitting for Harbor Islands Del. I would love if I had five minutes with him to ask him what has changed. Think about Doug Allison. I did not realize that side of him but I knew more about him representing Mr. David for the Homewood Suites thing and then also our auditor. It is good that we have an attorney in town that people can turn to to handle their concerns. So I am not criticizing this attorney by any means. But I am asking from an ethics standpoint is we do have the code of ethics and there's been discussions about conflict of interest. You all have talked conflict of interest on almost so many meetings, especially with audit stuff. Yet, some of you have gotten donations from Mr. Allison. Mr. Allison is not required to tell any of y'all how you should handle your donations, whether it should be disclosed. The code of ethics 2-311 section 8E talks about um elected officials may not use their position to influence the action of a city official or city employee in the relance to their duties yada yada involving any individual or organization who contributed to the officials campaign contributions during the most recent election either directly or indirectly via a third party. So, I think from watching so many meetings since last September that we have people up here that have should have recused themselves from votes because Mr. Allison donated to their campaign. Now, we have somebody that he donated 2021. That was a long time ago. You were not required to disclose that. But y'all really need to consider when you're accusing others of being unethical, what you're doing yourself. That's all I'll say. Thank you. Thank you, Sadi Lopez. Good morning, mayor, city council, and fellow neighbors. My name is Sadi Noami Lopez and I'm a resident of Corpus Christi and currently attaining my MERS at the University of Texas at Austin. I'm here today as someone who grew up in the west side of Corpus Christi. I'm an alumni of Westo 2020 and with family who still lives here to speak about our city's water crisis and what it reveals about our priorities. Right now, residents are being asked to do more with less. We are under stage three drought restrictions. Families are being told to cut back, to conserve, and to accept this uncertainty about something as basic as turning on the tap. At the same time, industrial users, especially oil and gas refineries, continue to use enormous amounts of water with very few limits and with little accountability with returning clean water to our bay, our wershed. This is not just a water supply issue. It's a planning issue and it's a justice issue. For decades, growth oriented planning in Corpus Christi has promised large volumes of municipal water to industry while communities, especially our black and Latino and low-income neighborhoods, have carried the burdens of pollution, displacement, and neglect. Today, industrial users continue to consume far more water than residents. Yet, is everyday people who are told to sacrifice. The proposed inner harbor desalination plan continues this pattern. It would displace a historically black neighborhood. It would dump brine in into an e ecologically sensitive bay. And even after all that harm, it would not truly solve our long-term water deficit. Corpus Christi is nothing without its people and its environment. We cannot protect our communities if we're not and we will not be able to safely evacuate everyone in disasters, let alone most people will not have the ability to just pick up and leave. If we keep pushing residents out for industrial projects, we will not be able to remain in place with dignity. If we neglect our bays and ecosystems, we will not have a healthy city to pass on to these next generations. So again, Corpus Christi is nothing without the community we see her today in throughout our neighborhoods. And we need to prioritize what matters, our citizens, our neighborhoods, and our bay. So I'm asking you to do three things. Place reasonable and forcible water restrictions on industrial users, not just on our residents. reject or relocate the inner harbor desalination plant away from vulnerable, historically black and brown communities and ecologically sensitive areas as was proposed earlier today. Commit to long-term water planning that starts with conversations, demand management, and environmental justice, not with projects that deepen racial and spatial inequalities. Community organizations and residents across the city are already imagining more sustainable and more ways to justly manage our water. Please um please advocate for a new location and thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Miss Lopez. Daryl Magcuire. Mr. Mayor, council, my name is Daryl Magcguire from District 5, represented by Mr. Gil Hernandez. Please hold your questions to the end if that's acceptable to Carum. I'm going to start with waste. Drilling wells not a sustainable source of water for the city. Building and filling swimming pools, both residential and commercial, not sustainable. restrictions, no watering of grass and limited watering of ornamental plants and home foundations. That brings rise to security concerns, fire and grassland surrounding our neighborhood. Much like the Wilder incident, the potential does exist. Construction water is used to bind materials, not to mention once these homes and businesses are built, water use will increase. Roads are rough in the construction areas but passable. The egress onto the roadways leading to our homes are minimally maintained like driving on the back road bumpy. On any given day, contractors and residents park in any old way causing difficulty to navigate the roadways in the neighborhood and also rise vib visibility. Gosh dang, I can't speak English. Visibility issues. water prices have increased uh for this year and I'm not one to complain without a solution. Mr. Mayor, Mr. Hernandez, I cordly invite you uh to come out and take a look at what we see every day in our neighborhood. Um stop drilling wells and build a desalinization facility with discharge out into the Gulf. Stop issuing permits to build pools, both city and uh residential. Allow controlled watering to take place to allow for a fire break. Stop issuing building permits for new residents and businesses. More of each increases water demand and you can't keep pace with what we already have. Use your city equipment regularly to repair temporary egress points and construction areas and enforce the parking laws. Also run the street sweepers through the neighborhoods uh with advanced notifications so that folks can get their vehicles out of the side of the road. I understand there's a cost to provide water, but our citizens should not have to foot the bill for the city's lack of planning. It's not important till it's important. Stop the half measures and really put together a long range lasting plan to source water for our city. Build a del plant again with discharge out into the Gulf. Governor Abbott said it best in a media event 10 March of this year. Y'all make a decision. Marine Corps leadership philosophy says says it the best. Lead follower or get out the way. I for one uh I welcome the state's involvement in running this city. Maybe we can uh get some more accomplished. Thank you for your time. Y'all have a great day. God bless. >> Thank you, Mr. Magcguire. >> Oh, Lisa French. Lisa French, Julie Trovinho is Julie T. Yes. Yes, ma'am. >> Good afternoon, Mayor Guardland and city council members. My name is Julie Trevinho here from Corpus Christi. My comment is on the resoning of the street I live on, Biola Avenue. My husband and I have lived at 2400 block of Viola Avenue. I was born and raised at this resident from 1956 to 1986 when I got married. In 2008, we moved back in after my father had passed away. My father bought the lot with a small block house on it. Throughout the years, he built a big, beautiful home for our family. My husband and I are planning remodeling as soon uh soon to keep it up to date. Commercial use industrial like car repair will greatly reduce the value of our home. Viola Avenue is not equipped for additional traffic, is very narrow with ditches on each side and barely allows two cars to pass through side by side. The car repair and sales business on the corner of Iola and Ayer Street is blight and has been for decades. We don't want that type of business in the neighborhood and especially across the street. I respectfully ask that you vote no to this matter. Thank you for listening to my concerns. God bless you all. >> Thank you, Mr. Vingo. Sandra Garcia. Sandra Garcia, uh, Fatima Magetta Rashidi, Father Mashidi, District 1. I don't know what else to say. All of the things I have said about oceans and microbes and oxygen and climate are being repeated in different ways by different people. So what I'm saying now sounds quite redundant. Like everyone here, I just want you to listen to our voices. Yet even if you do listen, and some of you have been listening, you don't even have the power to do the right thing anyway. It seems like big industry in DSA will win because greed causes people to simply not care about what they're doing to our delicate ecosystem, to water, to trees, to animals, and to the people of Corpus Christi. There already has been so much damage caused by human greed, getting our wants, even when it means the end. We don't really need this artificial convenient world. But the power hungry wants and wants and wants. So we continue to pay the price. Do we really want to end what is left of Corpus Christiey's precious bay? Just because people in other places want more fuel for more planes, more cars, and using like like 10 lights at once and so much more and more and more. We're all guilty. It would take a miracle to save and protect our base because humans, especially those at the top, demand more. It will take a miracle. So, I'm praying for a miracle. Thank you and God bless you and your families. >> Thank you, Mr. Rashidi. Miriam Rashidi. Miriam Gara Rashidi, District 1. Again, thank you for all you do. I'd like to begin with a short anecdote to help you understand how I feel about trusting our experts concerning our environment. Well over a decade ago, when fracking was a new innovative means of extracting oil, I visited a museum in Dallas, Texas, where I attended an exhibition that simulated this new fracking method. We entered an elevator and felt the experience of going deep down into the earth. Soon I felt the continuous shaking of the elevator as a representative explained how the shaking aids in extracting oil. At that moment, I remember thinking, I'm no expert, but it seems that all this shaking will cause earthquakes. But who am I? I'm no expert. I'll trust the experts. It turns out that now in Texas, well well over 200 earthquakes greater than a 3.0 magnitude have occurred due to injection of waste water into wells and especially due to fracking. So what does this have to do with us? You are considering desalination proposals. I'm no expert, but it seems to me like interfering with our delicate ecosystems would be detrimental to our bays, to our wildlife, to us citizens of Corpus Christi. It may not happen overnight, but it is inevitable. The temperatures of our oceans are increasing every year. Meanwhile, big industry is increasing throughout Texas, drinking up all of our water supply. Not all, but a lot. Especially here in our once upon a time sparkling city by the sea. Those who defend desalination are not aware of the catastrophic effects it will have on all of us. I've come to understand that we, the residents of Corpus Christi, simply don't matter. As Rachel Gavayto said earlier today, we are the body of Christ. So I continue to defend us, the body of Christ. May God, the creator of our beautiful earth and our beautiful city and our beautiful bays, our beautiful ecosystems, help us all. May God have mercy on us all. Thank you and God bless you and your families. >> Thank you, Mr. Rashidi. David Heasley, David Heasley, Alejandro Chaveeta, Mayor, Council People, members, and the people who have I've been here a few times and I've talked about other meth methods that we could use, but I know that the >> Can you state your name and city, sir? Excuse me. I'm sorry. >> Alejandra Chave. >> Thank you. >> Is that okay? >> Yes. And then your city. Are you You're in Corpus. You live in Corpus Christie. >> Corpus. Thank you. >> There's my my district here. Three. >> I've been here a few times, like I said, and I've talked about other things that we should be doing, but I know that the council is already in a tight schedule. It's already been made up. You're going to do del. I know that everybody here is concerned about the things that Del brings, explicitly the brine, but I think that the perfect place to do the del plant would be on Padre Island along the the canal, maybe on Chaplain Ranch, buy some land from them. Then you're going to have to go about a mile into the ocean to get that brine out so it can mix again with the waters in the ocean. Why are you guys going all the way from inside over here? Over there is calm water. That's what you need for del. Why the bay where you can have uh problems? Because with del comes, you know, the degradation of the equipment. you're going to have to use expensive equipment for for that del. So when it comes to del I'd say that would be the perfect place you can uh make another reservoir the city is growing that way anyway use that reservoir to pump water towards the lake also another thing drilling I know that's an emergency thing and they are correct we are doing the wrong thing because when we remove water something else is going to have to take its place if it's along here it's going to be salt water so that's going to destroy more than just the water table. It's going to destroy crops and all that kind of stuff. If you're going to drill, drill along the creeks, even the dry creeks. Those things have been there for centuries. They've had water going through them. They might be dry now, but they do have an underground system. The water does go into the ground. Use those same creeks that go right into the river. You don't have to put no pipeline. you know simple. Another thing is we can harvest the clouds for water. Technology does exist to do this. It just takes money to put it together. UT is doing this. They're working on a material that in less fog than you can barely see still collects water. These could be all put along the river and the lake which has high ground on it all the way around and it would fill the lake when there was fog events, when there was rain events. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. Chvida. Um, Kelly Harland, Kelly Harland, Amanda Geta, Amanda Gera, Scott Barza. Good afternoon, Scott Barasa, Noricas County. Want to say congratulations with the governor giving y'all that temporary exemption to pump in the river uh from the western whale fields. Uh causes us great concern. Y'all been pumping on the eastern whalefield. Not at the 10 y'all been saying, but 3 million gallons a day on average. Uh 6 months time period, it's dropped another uh residents out there. His well 15 ft over there on the on the eastern side. And that's only 3 million gallons. It's not the like 26 you're going to do at the western whale field. So that's got us concerned. Um your good neighbor program, y'all said y'all have that. Y'all been pumping on the eastern field for 9 months now. There's no good neighbor program that y'all say y'all been working on. We haven't seen anything in writing. I have seen nothing, no assurances that we will be taking care of in the country. So when y'all start on the western whale field and draw down our wells and cause them to go dry, what are we going to do? How do we seek uh to get remedied? I bought a 3200gallon water tank just in case my wells go dry. Can I come to the city and fill that water tank for free or are you going to take my water from the ground and sell it back to me? These are answers that need to happen. We need to know. Y'all have wrecked the river uh WC3 with the arsenic and the TDS. Y'all did an interconnect for them for free or reimburse them after they did it. Peter Zenoni came out to the Rock and K farms at the at our town hall and offered to do an interconnect for all of us out in the country to turn on a spot to give us water. Your infrastructure does not come to my house at all. That is you can't do it. That's just an asinine statement. But you can give us water for free to haul out. It's going to be costly, but it that's what's going to happen when our wells go dry. We are going to have to haul water and we're going to have to get that somewhere. The city is going to be the first place people are going to come to. So, whenever I come to you to get my tank filled and go to my house twice a month for that 6,000 average household use, that doesn't include livestock. What is that going to do to CCW's water system and your demand? Your demand is going to shoot up. Your drilling's is going to be a drop in the bucket considered for the rural county. And it's not just Noises County is we're talking Sand Pat and Jim Wales, the nearby county. They're going to be affected too because the water does not stop at county lines. Doesn't stop at GCD lines. What you're doing affects everybody in the country. So, we need to know what's going to happen. I have had no reassurances through that good neighbor program on what's going to happen. How are you going to remedy us? What requirements are you going to ask us to prove that our wells went dry because of your pumping? Are you just simply going to say it wasn't our whales, tough luck, and then here I am looking for water? So, that's just something to think about before y'all proceed with the uh western rail pumping that is soon to start up uh now that you've been given that temporary exemption to do whatever with the river. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Parisa. Uh Mark Mester, Councilman, you state. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, as a point of fact, Peter, it was about a month ago >> where I um asked if we could have in writing our good neighbor pro program so that we can present it to our neighbors along the wells, the river. We were just reported they haven't seen anything. It was a month ago. >> Yeah, I'm going to have to look into it, Councilwoman. I'm not I know we have I know we have one for uh San Patricio County. Uh but we need I need to see where we are with the one for uh Newasis County. We do what we do do right now without getting the written policy is uh we do free water testing and so there's a number that is available if we if individuals want their wells tested for water quality. We also do water depth testing in the wells. Uh but I'm not aware of any interconnect program that we have in Newasis County in Noasis County. So, um, we'll have to meet with you and and we'll get Nick to to make sure we understand what's what the the difference is in the two different uh well areas. >> So, help me understand when we had a group of individuals come to our public comment, they were concerned that they had nothing concrete as an assurance from us that we intended to be good neighbors. I asked for clarification on that because as a decision maker I'm being told we have a pro a program in place. I was told that it's listed on the website that we have a status quo that we tell people that this is what is entailed in our good neighbor program. >> And I said, "Well, if we already have it, let's get it written down and let's give them something that they can go off of." >> Okay. >> That was a month ago. >> Yeah, we um we can do that. Uh, we do have the website that does have all that information that I just mentioned. >> Wasn't good enough a month ago. >> Okay, no problem. We can get it. >> ETA, at what point? Maybe by the end of >> I hate to commit right now, but we'll get it soon. It's a matter It's all written down already. So, it's a matter of just taking it from the website and putting it in a on a a document. >> Well, perhaps you can understand that having this concern raised a month ago and being told right now that you'll need to look into it. >> That's my concern. So it needs to be a priority please. >> No problem. >> Thank you. >> Yes ma'am. >> Mark Minster Corpus Christie. A small part of me feels bad for y'all. The decisions and votes y'all are going to make are going to impact hundreds of thousands of more people. And it concentrates it very small where like they only have to flip one or two of y'all to to flip things. Right behind y'all is the big influence of industry, large corporations, and they're the big player above. We should not allow decisions that impact everyone to be made by entities and people that it's their job to maximize profits. It's unintelligent to allow our society and our government to be run and driven by them because that's what they're doing. They're it's their job to maximize profits and not be primarily concerned with the impact on social socially and on ecologically and environmentally. The wells, groundwater projects, all these projects have concerns that impact residents. So you have to think about those same concerns of all the people that have opposition to inner harbor. All these projects are unsustainable because the industrial water usage is unsustainable. Through my experience here at city council and what I've learned and people I met through DSA for the greater good, I believe it is possible that we could have a system that works for the people. And I believe that we can get to that one day. And that's we are going to work towards regardless of what happens in the vote April 9th. We're working towards that to raise the contradictions to work towards a system that does not allow our resources to be hoarded up by corporations and our natural land and resources be exploited and extracted for profits where money isn't your god where jobs or economic impact is put ahead of people with the environmental impact and the bay and the animals. We don't want workers to be laid off. These corporations and the prior city leaders and the people that made the decisions should have thought of that ahead of ahead of time or put that ahead of them using just resources. The farfield model meeting I was watching when people were saying someone at the meeting this past week was asking if there's seed creatures at the bottom of the of the inner harbor ship channel right now right when at this stage where we're at. Put yourselves in the shoes of the north side and the Hillrest residents. Y'all are in a position of privilege up here. Imagine you had to go through what those people were going through. If the people that are struggling to pay their water bills. I'm speaking here and people come here over and over again. April TCQ last meeting. All the times where so many people have come up here. There's so many other people that can't come that are teaching that are working that are working to pay their water bills that don't have the billions of dollars that Valero has to to for lawyers to contest their industrial district property tax agreements or G Coast Growth Venture has. People use water for life, not for profits like these people. Our economy should not dominate society. It should just be a part of it. And the concerns of people and like the the place we live in, the earth, the one earth we have should be considered. And it's very clear at this point that who you're working for that you're not working towards the regular people. And I'll see the rest of my time. >> Karina Liberto. Karina Liberto. Uh, Chris Quer. >> Good afternoon, council, uh, mayor, staff. Uh, I've got my badge of honor upside down today. Just a little symbolic gesture of the state of distress that we're in. Indecision has led the governor >> Can you state your name and city? I'm sorry to interrupt. >> I'm sorry. Chris Quayer, Newsis County. Indecision has led the governor of Texas to remove the basic guard rails of public safety to allow you, the council and this staff, more time, additional time. In doing those he he basically puts communities of Robstown, Cal Allen, and all the others that take from the river as senior water right users uh takes away their god-given right to have safe quality drinking water. Uh it's taken a win by this council. I'm sure you're congratulating yourself today for that action by the governor, but it is truly shameful for the city, the community, the county, and the entire state. I'm not a paid consultant of the city and I certainly will never get the accolades that your consultants do get by this council. But the NDC has continued to provide real data and warning to the very things that you are experiencing right now off the eastern wellfield and the lower Newasis River. We've been saying it for months. your hydro uh and I'll just finish it out. By the way, uh Nick, we did over 150 water testing samples last Saturday in a 6-hour period. I've tested probably more static levels than your group has. I'd love to have that number publicized. Uh, we previously I previously reported between July of last year and February 2nd or 4th of this year, my well had dropped 15 ft. I checked it 32 days later and has dropped an additional foot and a half. So I'm looking at 16 and 1/2 ft. If you take that over a year, that's 18 ft. That's at only 3 million gallons a day. If you produce more than that on the eastern well field, if that's a one-third of what you're permitted to do. So I'm looking at a 54 foot drop per year at 10 million gallons a day. That's not what my hydro hydro geologist told me. That's what I'm measuring and I'm measuring it on multiple points. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Quer. Beatatrice Alvado. Beatatrice Alvarado. And then we have uh anonymous. Well, let's see how far we get today. It's 10 seconds usually, right? Good. You >> have three minutes. >> All right. Thank you. So, I had a there was a citizen came up here and said that there was >> the speaker has failed to identify himself in accordance with the rules of decorum. >> That is hindering the public meeting. Will you please take care of him? >> Miss Wther, would you please ask for like you do with everyone else? >> Sure. I got it. I will I will introduce myself. I identify as we the people. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you, >> mayor. The speaker is required by the rules of decorum to state his name and city. >> I identify as we the people and my city is America. >> Can you can you restart my time now since this guy keeps interrupting an official meeting? >> Please stop my clock. I haven't even got to talk yet. >> I'd like to speak. >> I went with your illegal rule. That's all. >> Go ahead. >> I can't hear you. The microphone is off. Mayor, >> you can't silent somebody's microphone. You did want to see personally. So, please let me start over and have my speech. >> And you know exactly what I'm talking about. So, may I talk? >> Mayor, the rules of decorum require that the speaker identify him his name and his city. >> Okay. America, Texas city. None of your business. >> Fine. Aran's pass. There you go. Go ahead, May. >> Mayor, the the rules of decorum require that the speaker identify his name. >> Identify name. We the people. Would you like to see my ID? >> See that? That's right. >> Can I speak now? >> Speak, Mr. Flewell. >> I would like my time back. Y'all took it all away from me because y'all were talking. >> Go ahead. >> No, I don't want I want my time back. >> Okay, just let's start. >> Start my time and I will. >> Mr. Fwell, please. >> You keep taking my time. Please do what's right and let me talk. Can I have my time? Can I have my time since she's looking at you the whole time? Do I get three minutes or are you going to break my three minutes? I will take your 50 seconds and I guess I get two minutes after that. Fine. Okay. You had a citizen come out here and said you said prod. These guys aren't going to do anything. Of course, but before my speech is over, these guys are going to surround me and illegally throw me out of this building. Okay. I come up here each time to talk about decorum. That's the line we use when they when you don't want an answer. Example, when y'all laugh and she's okay with it, it's okay. When the citizens clap against her, that's illegal. The quorum is not a right. It's not even a law. The constitution, first amendment, is the law of the land. And you know that one protects feelings, the other protects truth. And truth is rarely polite. The quorum is not the first amendment. The first amendment doesn't exist to protect polite speech. It exists to protect uncomfortable speech. Speech that calls out your corruption. Do I get my other two minutes? >> Thank you, Mr. Fellowwell. >> You're only giving me one minute. >> Mr. Fwell, thank you. >> Oh, you're a >> Thank you. Please leave. You're done. No, you're done. >> I need you to leave. Decorum. >> Come here, buddy. What did I tell y'all? >> Ridiculous. The issue is none of these men in here will come up with me. >> You're out of order, sir. Please leave. >> Under threat of arrest. >> Thank you, sir. Piece of >> Marty Lena Garza. >> Miss Garza. >> I want men. If men would stay with me, THIS WOULDN'T HAPPEN. >> NOT EVEN. >> You're not even a man. >> Miss Garza. >> Ma Garza, District 1. I want to first off by say thank you for the generator at La Ratama. Squeaky wheel does get the oil and I am closely watching when we get that generator at Ben Garza. I want to be wellversed in the type of generators that we have at our buildings. Do do you mind pausing that? That is interrupting. >> Yeah, we need to shut that door. Officer Can we keep that door closed, please, so we can not hear everything going on there? Go ahead, Miss Cars. I'm sorry. >> That's no problem. Um, so two things that I really don't like are uh threats and liars. And that's exactly what our governor, Gregory Abbott, is doing to the elected officials uh here. And um I don't do well with threats. I don't like it when people threaten other elected people. It's like saying that the voters got it wrong. And a lot of you guys up here are reelects. So I guess Greg Abbott is saying that we don't know what we're doing as voters. And um I don't appreciate liars. You know, Greg Abbott lied during uh Winter Storm Yuri and people died. People died. I was out there on the streets helping people while he was making excuses for his buddies on Urkot. And that's just wrong. You know, seeing uh leadership who's saying that you guys squandered the money when I've been here since you guys were debating on taking that swift loan. I was one of the people who was like, I don't think we should take this swift loan. There's a lot of fine print in here on how you can spend it, when you can send it, uh the penalties if you don't spend it. And I was like, I think we should pump our brakes. But we made a decision out of fear and we got buyer's remorse bad. And there he is throwing you guys under the bus saying you squandered it when I know the money hasn't been squattered. Some of it has been spent if people were paying attention to everything that's been going on for the past couple years. Some of the money is still there. Some of the money isn't. Um so to have leadership, so-called leadership undermining local leadership, that's gross. That's gross. And then people coming up here and saying, "Gee, thanks. Gee, thanks for the permit so that you guys can keep stealing water from the wells." That's terrible. Those are my neighbors. I'm worried about the water, too. I don't think that we should be making decisions out of fear. Okay? So, I think there is a quorum of leaders up here that can do this. It's the fourth quarter with two minutes left on the clock. This isn't the time that we start pulling our quarterback and firing the coach. Forget what Jerry Jones is saying upstairs. Ignore the dude. He's used to losing. Okay. Don't be a loser like Greg Abbott. >> Henry Williams. >> Pastor Henry Williams. Yeah. Henry Williams, District 1. Let me let me be begin by saying that you all are public servants and you do the respect that your position requires. You know, and and scriptures tell us that we do not disrespect our servants. And so, let me let me say to all of you that we appreciate your service to our city and thank you very much. There is a scripture which says which speaks to solving problems among Christians. And it says, "If my people which are called by my name shall humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven will forgive their sin and will heal their land. Our land and our community is very much in need of being healed." Prayer is a spiritual point toward bringing that healing to our land and to our city. You know, the the manner of deselination, the manner of of of our water problem. And we as corpus Christians, we as Christians should not have a problem that does not have a solution. Some 20 years ago, we had a problem of crime, violence, and lawlessness in the city. And we began to pray. Over the years, we have seen that problem decrease tremendously working with our police department, working with our first responders, and we can do the same where our water problem is concerned. Um, we need to walk by faith to solve this problem. Okay. And there's a spiritual aspect and there's a technical aspect. And I was speaking with uh Mr. David Ainsworth. Okay. If you all would give him time on next week's agenda indeed to to speak to you concerning this probable solution to our problem. and he's already working with um with one of the refineries, you know, concerning presenting what uh Pionics can do for them if you would. But let us work together and we can solve the problems that that are currently weighing so heavily in our city. And may God bless you all. Thank you. >> Thank you, Pastor Williams. Etien Rosas. And mayor, do you mind if I just give a couple of comments here? Councilwoman Paxton. So, u Nick informed me and he'll brief us more at the water briefing later today. But there is a good neighbor program that has written out and it it's been submitted for review to the arifer storage and recovery district uh for their review and feedback. It was a requirement as part of the drilling permits. So, it's written uh and uh they're reviewing it. And um that's uh that's a quick update. Nick will give more information later today. >> I understand I'll have him bring copies today when he gives a presentation. It's uh it's been submitted for their reviews draft subject. >> A timeline at least to when it's going to get in the hands of the community. >> What was that? >> A timeline of when it >> we'll get Nick will get us that today when he comes in. >> Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. But I'll we'll hand out copies later today. >> Thank you, Peter. Uh, hi everyone. My name is Dr. Ethan Roses. I'm from Brownsville, Texas. Um, my PhD in public policy analysis and your former future congressman for Texas 34th district. Uh so now that I'm back to my academic form, allow me to dive a little bit into the concepts of power disparities, which is really at the base of it what the water crisis in Corpus is all about. So since uh 2015, Corpus Christi city leaders have aggressively recruited prochemical plants, steel mills, and liqufied natural gas export facilities, selling key resources like land and water that were never really theirs to sell. Just a few days ago, my hometown of Brown Brownsville was notified that we would be the lucky new home to a new oil refinery, the first in 50 years in the US. So, they've locked Corpus Christi and Brownsville in the mirage of devel of development. And I say mirage because true development, the one that is based on community advancement and prosperity, always seems to elude us even as profits are secured and expanded year after year. If refineries, desalination, and LG plants were the key to fair and sustainable development for our people, Texas would have human development indices on par with that of Scandinavian countries. Governor Greg Abbott has stated Corpus Christi is a victim not because of a lack of water, but because of a lack of ability to make a decision. But Abbott, as usual, is wrong. As someone who has been kicked out of Abbott's event by police for asking him questions, I know he has little tolerance for push back and a flawed understanding of democracy. But I would never have run for office as a grassroots candidate against the corporate establishment if I cared about its distaste for disscent. The people of Corpus have already made their decision. He just doesn't like what it is. And faithful to his industry backers, he's here to force it upon our people. Greg Abbott is using the old trick in the authoritarian book to use crisis even one that his backers created to justify power grabs. But a crisis that has materialized because of a suppression of democracy should not be addressed through further suppression of democracy. And that's exactly what Abbott expects all of you to do. He wants you to accept the manufactured scarcity that continues to deprive our people from essential life resources in order to deliver unlimited power to those who empower him in a pyramid scheme of patronage. We have enough to satisy satisfy all people's needs, but we will never have enough to satisfy a few people's greed. In the richest country in the world and most abundant period in history, we find ourselves in a constant state of crisis. The crisis mindset that aims to keep us all in a perpetual fight orflight mode. But the first suggestion we get to identify a scam is a sense of urgency to rush a hasty decision that otherwise would require planning, uh, forethought, and community input. If uh if Hillrest desalination plant were in the interests of people here, there would be no need to ram it through repeatedly after it was opposed by the people of Corpus. Every major injustice from corrupt bank bailouts to imperial wars of aggression has been justified as necessary. Every bad deal has been rushed through in the name of crisis. And every time it is elites who end up better off than they did before because it is they who determine the rules of recovery. >> Thank you, Mr. Rosas. >> Sure. I'll end just by saying remember that there was life here before industry but there may not be life after it if we do not stand up for our communities over corporations and people are profits coritos >> Michael Miller. >> Good afternoon. Michael Miller, District 2. Um, I like everybody in this room heard the governor's comments and they were harsh and I appreciate your uh response to that by attempting to call for an emergency meeting which you know kind of turned into a special meeting and I know the reasons why and you know I'm sorry that you're taking a lot of heat for calling it a little bit early but you know it's kind of like your dad telling you a long time to clean your room, clean your room, clean your room and then finally he's like clean your room but you know but you need to tell him the house is on fire right now, you know, cuz nothing that we do with regards to Inner Harbor is going to solve the problem that we're in right now. So, I think it's important to slow down a little bit, you know, let the farfield study, you know, committee go through its minations, figure out what the findings are, ask the right questions, get the right answers, get comfortable about it. Also, I don't want to rush the contracts with uh Corpus Christie Diesel Partners. I think we didn't pay very close attention to the contracts that we had with Kiwit uh which was made evident whenever Brett Van Hazel revealed that, you know, any savings that were realized during the construction of that project goes back to the contractor and not the city. You know, I think that that was irresponsible. So, we don't need to rush this. You know, nothing that we could do. Even if we started this project 3 years ago, it would likely not be online right now and saving our butts. So, we need to slow down. Um, I think if we really want to have an emergency meeting, I think the emergency meeting needs to be with all nine of you, plus all five of the county commissioners, plus all of the port commissioners, plus, you know, members of the school boards, plus the city councils of Rockport and Beville and Matthysse and all the cities that we supply water to and create a united front and go to the governor, go to the president and ask for not loans, but cash because we are in a very unique situation here in the city of Corpus Christi. We are, you know, city of San Antonio's gallon per capita per day is under 82 gallons per citizen. Right here, we're at 233. You know, it's a whole lot of water that we're supplying for industry. And we need industry. We need them to survive, but we have to ask for help because we cannot fund this with 450 to 500,000 people, right? So, I think it's very important. You know, uh, Council Member Scott was with me. He's sitting right next to me while the president was giving his remarks. The president was saying, "I'm going to bring you millions of barrels of oil, additional crude to refine down here to Corpus Christi. Eggs are cheaper, milk's cheaper, everything's going on." And I'm sitting next to Mark and I'm nudging him in the in the ribs. And then I scream out, "But water is a mill billion dollars." you know, like thank you for all the things that you've done, but you know, and appreciate all the additional, you know, barrels of crude that you're going to bring to our town, but we need help with the water. So, call an emergency meeting, get everybody together, go ask for some cash. Thank you, >> Trey Cranford. ready. Good afternoon, council and uh mayor. My name is Trey Cranford and I live outside the city. We've been standing in front of you since at least last September, warning you exactly what would happen and now it has. Let's start with water quality. Based on your own published data, total dissolved solids at the Owen Stevens intake has increased from 361 milligs per liter to 1,512 millig per liter in just one year. That is not a fluctuation. That is a system failure. And we told you this would happen when you started pumping ground water directly into the Noasis River. Peter, I want to thank you for finally admitting that production from the Eastern Wellfield is being limited by TDS. Now, let's talk about volume because the numbers keep changing. For months, this council and the public were told that the wellfield would produce 10 to 11 million gallons a day. Then, it became eight. And now, with actual transparency, we're seeing it's closer to 2 to 3 million gallons per day. That's not a rounding error. That's a massive overstatement. If you calculate the lost opportunity since full pumping began in July, this city is short over two billion gallons of water. That's roughly 20 days of supply that should already be in your system. That matters. How many of you would still have a job if you overstated your budget forecast for almost a year? But that doesn't line up with your own uh we are now being told that arsenic is coming from the lake, but that doesn't line up with your own data. Only 9% of your supply is coming from the lake and about 17% from the river. Yet arsenic levels are rising at the Oo and Stevens intake in direct correlation with increased groundwater production. Just in the first 14 days of the month, you've increased groundwater production from 40 million gallons last month to 60 million million gallons this month. Does anyone up there want to take a bet make a bet with me that we don't see an arsenic violation next month with WCID3? While all this is happening, the city continues to push expansion, more wells, more production, more discharge into the river. At the same time, you're asking regulators to relax water quality standards. You don't lower standards to match a failing system. You fix the system. Overstated production, declining water quality, shifting expectations, no accountability. You're you are being built out at the state level now while the cost is being pushed onto the river, onto rural land owners, and onto future water quality. When leadership starts making excuses, they're admitting failure. If an organization tells you that they have 76 million gallons per day available, but in reality they're producing two to three, you demand accountability. Because right now, the people paying the price are downstream rural and watching their water be put at risk. In true transparency, true true transparency to y'all because we've always been transparent. We have had significant financial support step up and we are now installing monitoring equipment in all directions around your western in Edell wellfields. We will soon have real-time data, cloud-based data that shows exactly what is happening in the aquifer. Any extreme draw down or any water quality changes will be fully transparent and available to the public. >> Thank you, Mr. Stanford. >> Peter Davidson. Oh, C. Councilwoman, >> Mr. Cone, you know, I've not voted for any of those drilling at the at the river but >> you know, we've had a lot of comments come up here from a couple of the guys. Can you because what happens is sometimes we get misrepresented on the things that are said. So, can you come up? You heard all those questions talking about where they monitor the wells, all of those things. Is there any way that our staff can check out some of those things? I'm not saying they're lied. I'm just saying I think you need to hear both sides and see if that's true. And if it is true, there's a problem. But can we do something where you can bring that back to us and tell us what is and what isn't? >> Yeah. Yeah, we can do that, Councilwoman. So, Nick is scheduled to do a water briefing today and he's listening to this council meeting. So, we'll have him respond to those common uh Yes. >> common statements, which we we can, you know, we have a counterpoint for every one of them. >> Okay. >> To include TDS. That's an important one. That's that's not fair to misuse that not TDS arsenic. >> Uh the the the river water comes from the reservoirs that have higher arsenic. So >> and it's important for us to know right >> either way >> we've tested all the wells that we're having in production and they're all except for one. All eight are all seven of them are non-detect one has elevation in arsenic but it's not contributing to the the situation. And so Nick can explain it today and if and if we have to do a separate presentation next council meeting we can do that as well. >> It's important for the public to know. >> I agree. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Absolutely. Thank you for bringing that up. >> Councilman uh Roy >> U. Peter I want to make sure just to re to even further clarify that that when he comes up today and he speaks some of the questions and some of the things that they said for example about the two to three MGD a day and that's what we're down to. Can he specifically say I am um answering one of the things that was bought up >> during public comment? Because I you know sometimes what happens is is he's going from A to to Z >> and I want to specifically hear him say this is a response to what was mentioned in today's public comment. >> Okay, we can do that. And just for the record, there's no two number. So it's three to four and four to five of the numbers, right? Okay. >> Two. We're not doing two. >> Mr. Davidson. >> Uh, good afternoon. Um, honorable mayor, council members, city manager, and staff. Peter Davidson, 1525 Northshoreline Boulevard, District 1. For the past 4 and a half years, the American Bank Center, now known as the Hillad Center, has been consistently closing the 200 block of Raka Street. The parking lot of our building located on 1525 North Shoreline is only accessible from the 200 block of Raka Street. The closing of a public road without approval of the adjacent owners is not appropriate. Attached as exhibit A, Miss Werta handed out, is a list of closures from February to March 26 supplied by the operators of the Hillad Center. Onethird of the days in March are listed as closed. The actions of the management of the Hillad Center and the city of Corpus Christi have rendered our property unusable and unsalable. Although the building has been for sale or lease since August 21, it has remained empty. Often when realtors show the building, the road is closed, which prompts the prospective buyer to inquire as to how they would access the property. We have lost a lot of prospects. During meetings with Daniel Malise over the past 4 and a half years, we are told numerous times that there was anou. He clearly stated it was not executed. Each time we would request a copy, but Mr. Malise never produced a copy. The attached was released in response to our open records request for allus dated 1 2020. Only one MAU was produced which was dated 12226 is attached as exhibit D. However, nous seemed to exist for the time period 8121 to 12126. However, the road was closed whenever OVG pleased. Theou produced is dated 2 days after our last meeting with Meliss during which he again stated theou was not executed. Two days later, abracadabra one one was finally executed after 4 and 1/2 years of asking for a copy. Interesting, don't you think? We have paid taxes, insurance, utilities, maintenance, and other various fees for four and a half years, totaling close to $100,000. We have a 77year-old housekeeper visit the property weekly. Recently, she was unable to leave and panicked when OVG closed the road while she was inside cleaning. Unacceptable. We are asking 24/7 365 access to our property just as other property owners are afforded. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Mr. Davidson Peter, would you be able to address the issues? >> Um yeah, I I spoke to Mr. Davidson earlier this morning and I'm aware of the situation and uh he and I are going to talk. >> Okay. >> So I'll set up a separate meeting with Mr. Davidson and some of our staff as I told them this morning. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. We'll see you soon. >> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> Gloria Mer. >> Gloria. Yes. >> I'm here about the water. I'm about the water because I've been watching the news and in the news I saw that you people said I know there's around three or four of >> ma'am can you please state your name in your city for the record. >> I'm a concerned citizen a taxpaying concerned citizen. >> Anyway, this I know there's three or four of you that that um >> miss uh mismount mismount your >> you want to pull the you want to pull this down a little bit. There you go. If you'll just your name and if you live in Corpus Christie. >> I'm a concerned citizen. A text paying concern. >> Yes, ma'am. But we've got to that's part of the >> I already put my name up there in the thing. >> You live in Corpus Christ. Yes. >> Okay. >> Anyway, I saw in the news where you people have put contracts out. >> Mayor, >> I know there's three or four good councilmen here that really care about Corpus Christi and want to take out the people that really can't make decisions here. But also I also want to say that I heard on the news that you had contracts already made out with waste water. >> I asked my friend I go what is waste water from the sewer? >> Yo, hold on one second. >> Third country. I mean that's ridiculous. >> You wonder why that I heard on the news also. >> Miss I need you to hold on a second please. >> I heard on the news also that the children are missing so much school. Yes. >> Do you understand that it's because they're drinking like a water fountain? >> Sure. We We need you to hold on a second please. >> Mayor, section 1G of the rules of decorum require that the name and city be stated by the person making the um comment. >> I already wrote my name down over there. I don't want to be arrested by anybody. >> We understand that. We need you like everyone else that has gone before you and after. >> Not everybody did. I a few people didn't have to. >> They they asked for >> No, not a few people didn't. >> If you'll just state your name, please. You already told us the city. If you'll just state your name. >> I'm an American citizen. I'm not a wag. I can talk if I want to. I mean, you made it quite clear that you had wags in here. >> Miss I'm sorry, Miss Manager. Well, that's a breaking decorum. And we have to treat everyone equally. Please. >> What? >> And also, >> yeah, thank you. Thank you, ma'am. >> Thank ma'am. We're we're your your your comment period is over, ma'am. Thank you. them to pay for the for the connection of the sew line. >> Miss Mer, thank you. Ma'am, your public comment is over, please. >> Okay, your public comment is over. Thank you. Yes, please. Please, please leave the podium. >> Okay. Thank you, ma'am. >> Ma'am, there are rules. Jason Hail. Is Jason Hail here? Yes. Come on down. Thank you, mayor. Good afternoon, council members. Uh Jason Hail, Corpus Christie. Um going to make it quick. I just wanted to respond to governor's comments. Um, you know, I think this council and city staff is doing everything they can to secure as much water as possible uh to meet the upcoming possible deficit of 50 million gallons a day. Um, and I don't think you'll get enough credit for that. Um, I also wanted to clear the record that the city has moved forward with seawater desalination. Um they've moved forward with the Harbor Island project and that's going to be offshore which you know most people uh are in support of. It's a great project and uh and yeah it's just uh it's really difficult to shore up water right now and y'all are doing everything you can. So thank you for that. >> Thank you Mr. Dale Switella. Dale Swatella, District 1. I want to share how Barney Davis would be a better place for Del. Barney Davis has proposed uh been proposed for Del for many years and has pipes to the Gulf already. And their pipes intake and discharge are located in the green zone which uh you can see by that paper I'm passing out. uh that's was studied and recommended for expedited permitting by the General Land Office and Texas Parks and Wildlife and the 84th Texas Legislature. Page 40, if you get that print out, uh Barney Davis's location can produce more than Inner Harbor and at a cheaper price. Why should CC taxpayers pay a billion dollars for one company, Exxon, to uh to have water that leaders promised back then uh with little thought given to residents having to pay for it? We have several lies about inner harbor cell circulating from officials interviewed on local news and talk shows. And I'll just give you one. Inner harbor diesel can be expanded to 50 million gallons a day. That's definitely a lie. Studies done by Texas&M CC show that the CC bay water movement takes 12 to 18 months to make complete circulation. Freeze and nickels under city contract commissioned two&mCC scientists in 2019 to investigate how the inner harbor plant could affect local waterways. Because many marine animals in their earliest stages of life depend on estuaries where ocean waters mix with fresh water from a river as in Corbus Christie or newis bay. The researchers determined that releasing the discharge into the Gulf of Mexico more turbulent water is the best option. Quote releasing into the bay presents many potential environmental concerns that may not be easily minimized or mitigated. A combined confined area like a canal or ship channel where dilution or mixing is limited could create a a water quality issue. And I say when Emer Harbor Del is built, it'll just be like when Choke Canyon Lake and the two Merry Rose pipelines were built. City leaders are going to start inviting more big water users here again because they do the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Reminds me of the definition of insanity. Like a councilman told CCW in April of 2021 about Del, I can assure you that within the next 5 years, you're going to have many more Exxons here. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Swallo. Robin Cox, Robin Cox, District 1. Um, I'm going to start off with I'm first going to do something y'all are going to be shocked at. I'm going to actually thank the mayor. I found in 2022 the city of Corpus Christie and mayor Paula Wardo took the time to address teen dating and violence. Then I fast forward in 2023. The mayor wanted the city council in Ever Roy to read a proclamation recognizing April 23rd to 29th National Crime Victims Week. I take this very personally. I'm going to share something with y'all that normally don't. I was in a domestic of a relationship with domestic violence and my father though didn't let any sheriff or anyone come and ask for a favor. At that time um this city police chief did come to my dad and say listen the person that did this to your daughter we have a favor. But my dad came with him from another favor. He said no tell this man to get away cuz in two seconds we can turn him from a rooster to a chicken. And that's the way my dad handled things. They were going to use the city council back then to bully me and my dad didn't allow it. We have a large amount of domestic violence going around and I know families aren't responsible for the actions of their children like I wasn't responsible for the actions of some of my family members but it is a crime >> related to city business. >> It is if you let me finish. I don't interrupt you when you're talking. >> Do it because this is not city business. I don't I don't interrupt you and I just thanked you. I just thanked you. So don't don't take that don't let that be part of my time. That was her talking. >> So don't let that be part of her time. We we in this city are letting we are letting certain individuals there are crimes for two classes of citizens. Crimes for everyday citizens. I've seen kids get arrested here or been threatened to be arrested. When we help cover up a crime there they've even been laws against that. BF Skinner said discipline children is a part of life. You you have it is part of >> Almost there. >> Yeah, I'm almost there. Take that time away. Can you able to take that time away? Cuz she's making this personal. >> City business. >> This is city business. >> Crime in the city is city business. >> Then take note for that. Everybody is seeing this. It's She thinks it's personal. It's not. >> The city business. We have had three women in the last year. Enria Ree, Karina Castillia, and my own friend Felicia Franco all murdered by their boyfriends. all died at the hands. Now, if we can't even shed a tear for that or think about that, there's a serious problem here because these women all went to law enforcement at one point. They had boyfriends threaten them. We've got to nip city violence in. We've got to nip domestic violence before it gets any worse. So, that is city v business. My dad had a plaque in his in his office till the day he died and later he had it by his bed. It said, "Don't you won't remember me by the car I drove or my tax returns." I I'll interject something else or the purse I carried, >> but I will remember you by the difference you made in a child. >> Thank you so much. Thank you, >> Jim Klein. >> Disgusting. Jim Klein. >> Disgusting. >> Uh, good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is Jim Klein. I live in district 2 here in Corpus Christi. I want to just make a couple of comments about an agenda item today. This is agenda item I believe it's 18 if I got my information correct. Uh regarding selection of a contractor to conduct the farfield modeling uh in the for the inner harbor diesel plant. I have some concerns about this. I think as I recall as I according to the the paperwork that I've seen uh two contractors submitted bids for this uh I may mispronounce these so forgive me. Spheros and Hazen Sawyer. uh Sphero on the one hand, Hazen Sawyer on the other. Uh Sphero scored higher than Hazen Sawyer and yet the recommendation I think from coming from staff uh to you folks uh is that uh the city hire both of them. Uh Hayen Sawyer has not conducted a modeling previously, but rather merely consulted in modeling uh done back in 2023. Uh and so I have some concerns about that as well, and I just ask you keep that in mind when this agenda item comes up later this afternoon or this evening. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. time. Andrew Gonzalez. >> Good afternoon, Mayor Council Balls Marine. We improvise. We'll come with that. My idea is to run Standill Pipeline 5 foot. >> Sir, can you state your name and city, please? >> Oh, Andrew Gonzalez, Corpus Christie, marine. My great idea is to run 5 foot sandstone pipe down the first uh lake all the way down to Lake Tarana or all the way down in the valley. How we're going to pay for it? There's billionaires that are here in Texas. Billionaires in Oklahoma all the way up to the Great Lakes. The refinery should pay most of it cuz they waste most of it. the water towers. I would my idea is to put a water tower to uh so catch water and then put solar panels on top and below the the water tower make into apartments so the people that working on the pipeline are living there on that uh towers. Other ideas of mine yellow if it's yellow let it mellow your urine. We shouldn't have to flush a toilet every time you use number one but of course if it's brown we flush it down right. Also, if we could afford it, we need to put hot water loops in every home so that we're not wasting water waiting for the water to get hot. Perfect plumber. Rain gutter. If you could afford it, put rain gutters and put the rain so it's collecting at the corners. Those two uh part of the bridge of the old harbor bridge still uh concrete peers are in front of the the what you call it the water park. I think we should leave those peers up and leave that part of the bridge because it's a great piece of history. Turn that bridge and so we could repel off it like Marines do. We could make stairs on the way up so the fire department could go do exercise and rescue on the way up. Have elevators and other pillars so they could pull us up and going up. Put a roof so reflecting all that water and therefore we have to move those dolphins that got to be removed if we ever have to take down that bridge. Other idea is a solar panel. And when I shave, I pull up my bowl instead of running water like I used to. We should all do this, man. Pull up a bowl of hot water and shave with that bowl of hot water. My son, he's a pen head. He takes a shower twice a day. If you don't have to take a shower twice a day, none of us should be taking a shower twice a day. Uh what else? But also we start with one uh five foot pipe and then we stretched to other uh great lakes. So when if one gets contaminated we could go to other uh great lake pipeline. The pipe should be resting on concrete peers above ground. So when there there's an earthquake instead of being below ground like we used to back 30 years ago when we laid our pipe our water lines would pack it with sand and the inspector would have to uh inspect it. Then we pull our dirt on top. That's why the mayoral pipeline when it's in the ground, the ground shifts and that's why we're having these leaks. Perfect plumber. Great afternoon. Watch your back. >> Thank you, Mr. Gonzalez. >> Uh that concludes our in person. Rebecca, do we have people online? >> Yes, ma'am. There's a few individuals I understand. Sean Merritt. >> Mr. Merritt, >> can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Go ahead, sir. >> Thank you. Sean Matt, District 5, and I feel like I'm into hunger games every week saying that. Uh, the truth is, if we don't solve this water crisis, our city could end up competing over limited water like it's a survival resource. During Friday's water briefing, several important facts were confirmed. Corpus Christi is no longer just a municipal uh water system. It now serves roughly 500,000 people across multiple counties and regional systems. This city now operates a regional water provider. Officials also confirmed that large industrial users consume 55 to 60% of the water supply with roughly a dozen major industrial customers in that category. Simple math. You all know I love doing that. Roughly 12 industrial users consuming 60% of our 100 MGD. 60 MGD. Uh that's an average of 5 MGD each. To put it bluntly, the city approved water commitments to industry and surrounding municipalities before the infrastructure existed to reliably support that demand. Historically, Lake Corpus Christie and Cho Canyon provided about 70 MGD to the system. Today, that number is closer to 60. The city is now trying to replace that loss supply through groundwater projects, reuse agreements, and diesel. City officials have stated that upcoming projects could eventually provide up to 76 MGD of additional supply, but internal planning documents show only about 32 MGD actually arriving in 2026 with the rest spread over several years dependent on permits, aquifier performance, construction timelines, and legal approvals. and listen carefully to the language around those. They could produce if permits get approved. They are projected to produce if construction is completed. They may produce if everything goes according to plan. That's a whole lot of ifs. Residents don't fill their bathtub with models. They don't water their lawns with projections. And they certainly can't drink ifs or could be. We need water that actually exists in the system. Even if every one of those project works exactly as planned, the system would land at roughly 96 to 104 MGD. That's after more than two years and 2 billion already invested in water infrastructure. And even then, it only barely matches the roughly 100 MGD the system already uses today, leaving almost no margin for growth or drought protection. For example, Evangeline is projected to produce 24 MGD. It still requires permits and is currently facing protest from the city of Sentin. Sentin has stated the groundwater modeling and pumping data should be reviewed before permits are issued and has raised concerns about potential long-term impacts to the aquifier. You see, unlike us, Sentin takes care of their citizens and the environment first. At the same time, the proposed inner harbor diesel project carries a cost of 979 million. Earlier city estimates projected residential water bills increasing 113 about 9.92 per month. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Your time's up. Uh, >> thank you for my time. >> Thank you. So, we have um Herbert Garcia. I believe he's not online, but just in case. Mariana Alore, Isabelle Arisa, Emily Barera. Okay. Robert Harvey, >> I'm here. >> All right, go ahead. >> Harvey Freeberg, Houston, Texas. I'm here to speak about how the mayor is abusing her authority. At the February 17th meeting, Jason Fawwell was interrupted during his public comment. Three council members tried to correct the issue and respect Mr. Followwell's constitutional rights, but the mayor blatantly violated them and doubled down at the next meeting on February 24th. Leadership is not forcing people to agree with you because of your title. That's a dictator. People follow a good leader because they want to, not because they're forced to because of your title. And it seems like that's what's going on here with the mayor. His microphone was cut off for saying the word ass. We all hear words like that everywhere. And now the city attorney, Miles Rizley, is acting like a tyrant, too. Enforcing decorum rules over constitutional rights. And you got a bar license. That's ridiculous, man. You're a clown. This isn't about decorum or order. This is about control and silencing citizens. Like Jason said. >> Thank you, Mr. Harvey. >> Next is James Perkins. Mr. Perkins. >> Hello. >> Can you hear me? >> Yes, now we can. Go ahead, sir. >> Okay. Uh, James Perkins, uh, district 2. Thank you. Um, calling in to talk about I mean, what everybody else is talking about the water issue, right? Um, we the governor's going to throw his weight around, but he doesn't live here in Corpus. We do. We all do. Um, and y'all are going to throw people who uh have lived their entire lives where they're at, under the bus, destroying the neighborhood for something that won't may not work for the next 2 to 10 years is what everybody else is saying. You want an immediate solution that's going to be that you take away these drought exemptions from the industry. Um, one, they pay more in their water bill. That's more money in Corpus Christiey's pocket. And I don't know if we if y'all ever fix that deficit issue that y'all said we may be dealing with with our budget. Um, and then if y'all can just kind of get their if they can get their water use under control, if they can if they can work with like us residents who can't water our lawns, we can't wash our cars, we can't we got we got all these restrictions on us, but they don't if they could just rein in their water use, you know, uh, I believe the word the others have been thrown around is curtailment. If they could curtail their water use, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. People are going on and on about the economy, on and on about jobs, on and on about all this. They drink up all the water. There ain't going to be no Corpus Christie to to be at a going to matter about no jobs at no city. And then where are they going to go? What are they going to do? What are we going to do? Not everybody here has the money to move. You know, y'all need to think about the people of Corpus before y'all think about the businesses that are putting money in other people's pockets. I don't know who y'all is with and who y'all is lined up with and none of that other extra stuff that they're throwing around because I I work too much to pay to be able to pay attention to all this stuff. But I do know that my water bill keeps going up, but I ain't I ain't making nothing with it. I'm just trying to take care of myself and I can't take care of myself and I can't contribute to the city as far as work and all this goes if my water bill keeps going up, too. And that's for everybody there. Y'all are going to throw so many people down just to just to just so that they can get what they need to do what they want to do. And it's not for us. It's not for the residents. It's the little amounts of water that all these projects are going to add up to is not going to be enough to take care of the city of Corpus Christie. It's only going to be enough for that refinery row, a refinery row, I might add you, uh that I've lived across from for several years at my when I was younger. And I had a severe asthma asthma problem because of it. And that's what these people are going to be dealing with in their backyard, too. Think about the city and ask these not ask but demand that these industries curtail their water usage so that the city can continue. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have Alberto Zeruche. >> Hello. >> Okay, we can hear you sir. Go ahead. My name is Robert Sartuche, District 3, veteranowned of Hard Life Bait and Tackle, Team Hard Life YouTube. I want to thank all those who listened to us and voted against the Inner Harbor Diesel plant and stood against those who tried to levy their weight against you in our city. All the information that is being brought to you that those that continue to sell out our city to big industry truly shows you they don't have our city taxpayers as their priority. So on that note, I will repeat the request we have been asking where the fraud is being approved over and over and over again. Getting the taxpayers to pay the city manager is crazy. The amount he's being paid, he must go as well as the mayor. I encourage everybody to sign the petition to remove the mayor from office because this has gotten us nowhere but further in debt. Taking a second to collect my thoughts here because this is outrageous the amount that has been going on with it. Uh we've already spent a billion dollars trying to secure water and you want us to spend another billion dollars for a inner harbor diesel plant that is not proven to work. It's an experimental project. Most importantly, the price tag still doesn't show the taxpayers what the actual cost is to run and maintain this diesel plant. What is the cost to remove the sludge and or other hazardous materials? What are the costs for the truck and drivers fuel and everything included? What are they? We've been asking these questions and have yet to be answered today. Now, we want to know these answers before any further monies are even asked for from us or you all vote on. Is the 3 million gallons of sludge still going to be dumped into the inner harbor with this permit? How much water will that pollute per day? How far will the sludge spread and what kind of hazards will it create? Who will be affected by it? How much is it going to cost us? We still haven't had these answers, these questions answered and we are all paying attention. There's going to be a lot of names that are being called that are against the inner harbor detail plant and we encourage everybody who's on the YouTube channel watching and commenting to stop being lazy. Get out here, get to these public comments and share your thoughts because right now we are going to end up having higher water bills, higher light bills, higher taxes, all because these guys want to front their friends businesses. And what happens if this experimental project fails? We are still on the hook for a billion dollars. Stand up, stand united, vote these guys out of office and encourage that the mayor be removed immediately while the rest of us try to recoup and fix our city. This is Corpus Christi, the body of Christ, and we can we can do it. >> Thank you. >> All right, mayor. That concludes the public comment period. >> Thank you, Rebecca. Our public comment is uh closed now and we're going to go to board and committee appointments. We have quite a few and I'll hand it back to you, Miss Worth. >> Yes, ma'am. So, the first board is the animal care. Hold on just one second. Let me let my staff. >> All right. The first board is the animal care advisory committee. It has one vacancy representing the preferred but not required category of community at large. >> Open nomination. I'm going to open nomination. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and open nominations for the one spot that is open. >> I'm sorry, you said Miss Paxton. >> Karen Christ. >> Okay, thank you. Karen, >> are there any nomination? I mean, are there Would anybody like to nominate? >> She nominated Karen. >> Right. But she nominated Laura. >> Laura Strata. Okay. Okay. >> Okay. Any other nominations? Okay, we'll close we'll close nominations and I'll start with Councilwoman Vaughn. It's just one. >> So, we have two Stephanie. Is that correct? >> There's one nominations. >> No, Councilman Kentu. >> Oh, two nominations but one. >> Yeah, there's just one vacancy. >> One seat, but we have two nominations. Estrada or Okay, we couldn't see them earlier. Maybe they can zoom in there. All righty. >> Christopher. Okay. >> Christopher. >> Estrada. >> Uh, Estrada. >> Christopher. >> Christopher. >> Christopher. All right, Miss Christopher is appointed. Next, we have the building standards board. There are three vacancies and they represent the categories, the preferred but not required categories of one at large, one engineer, and one alternate. So, Lindseay Clark, who's the alternate, Chick Hernandez, I'm sorry, Henderson, excuse me, is at large. and Carlos Martinez is the engineer. They're seeking reappoint and their attendance rates are in your packets. >> Move to reappoint. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any oppose say no. >> Motion carries on three reappoints. >> Okay, next we have the construction trade advisory and appeals board. There are nine vacancies representing the following categories. one master plumber, one HVAC technician, one plumber contractor, one general contractor, one HVAC contractor, one Texas professional land surveyor, one master electrician, one electrical contractor, and one engineer architect. So, at this time, staff recommends postponing the master electrician, electrical contractor, and Texas professional land surveyor positions for further recruitment. So, that leaves us with six positions um to fill today. So, Sa Saul Eskeel, uh, Ty Gentry, Brandon Harper, and Tommy A. Lee. They are seeking reappoint, and their attendance rates are in your packet. >> Second. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second to reappoint. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any oppose? Say no. >> Okay. So, then we have two positions to fill today. The master plumber and the engineer architect. >> I move to appoint uh John I mean I'd like to appoint nominate John Hansit for what? general contractor. I'd >> like to nominate Brandon and >> Okay. But the categories we have open are master plumber and engineer architect. >> Yeah. >> Yes. So the Mr. Yeah. >> What's your question, Councilman? the as I understand it's for an architect and a master plumber and the only two that are here are Gary Adams and Nathan Smart. Gary Adams being the co the architect and Nathan Smart being the master plumber. >> So you nominate them. >> So I Nathan Smart has been nominated. I'll nominate Gary Adams for the art techch position. >> Okay, perfect. >> Yes. Yeah, Mr. Hens is not eligible. I >> understand. I'll I'll withdraw my nomination. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. So, we have the nomination. Who would like to make the the the motion? >> Move to appoint Gary and Nathan. >> Okay. Second. We have a motion in a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any oppose? Say no. The motion carries. Okay. So, then we have the Corpus Christi Aquafer Storage and Recovery Conservation District. Uh section 88.1.024 of the Texas Special District Local Laws Code requires the city council to confirm the election of officers annually. The board has elected the following officers and are seeking council confirmation. The president and Stan McGinn, the vice president, Bill Mafy, and the secretary, Jeff Edmonds. >> Okay. Do we have a motion to >> I move for approval. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any oppose, say no. The motion carries. >> Okay. Last, we have the landmark commission. There's one vacancy for the preferred but not required category of realtor. >> I'd like to nominate Senator Meyer. Any other nominations? Okay, we'll close nominations and I'll start with Councilman >> Kentu. Excuse me. >> Yep. Yes, Miss Paxton, you're next. She said Meer. >> Sandre Meyer. >> Meer. >> Meera. Garza. >> Okay. Miss Myers appointed. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Rebecca. And that concludes our board and committee appointments. We'll move on to consent. We'll move on to consent agenda. Are there any requests from council to pull an item for discussion? Items 3 through 12. >> You want to look at 81? >> Number seven. >> Number seven. 811. Okay. With that, I'm going to go ahead and uh ask the public, is there any request from the public to make public comment on at this time? >> Okay, we'll close that public comment. >> 7, eight, and 11. I'm going to entertain a motion to approve consent agenda with the exception of items 7, 8, and 11. >> I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> Any oppose say no. >> The motion carries. Item number seven is a motion awarding a construction contract to KJM commercial DBA as Victory Building Team of Corpus Christi for the White Cap wastewater treatment plant operations. And who pulled that one? Councilman uh Hernandez, your question or comment. >> Okay. I don't I don't I don't have a problem with the with who selected or the process. That's it. But I do have a question about some of the costs with this 5 thou a little over 5,000 ft² building that's going to be $700 a square foot and the only thing that's in there is a lab. And then I went back I went and looked at some of the the cost uh associated with it and you know there was $85,000 for paint uh $400,000 for for it looks like for the HVAC system you know um $35,000 for ceramic tile. uh and just kind help me kind of understand, you know, why a 5,000 foot building cost $3.5 million or over $3.5 million. >> Well, let me uh start with this, then I'm going to let Wes explain what what we do in this building. Uh so um this is consistent with what we've been seeing on uh our commercial construction projects. Uh for example, the um uh fire station 10 had a square foot cost of $746. Uh fire station 8 was $732. Uh the uh >> what was the square footage on those? >> Those were in the order of uh 12,000. So, a little over twice the size of this. Um, uh, Far South Police substation was $88 a square foot and, uh, Northwest Police substation was $823 a square foot. So, this was, >> and you don't see anything wrong anything wrong with us paying over $700 a square foot for essentially a a building with no real mechanical, you know, complex machinery associated with it. Well, so uh I mean if you're >> you're asking my opinion, so if if you're asking what I want to pay, I'd rather pay zero dollars. But what we do is we follow a procurement process that's full and open. And uh you know, we had five biders on this. Uh they grouped fairly closely. All the bids came in below the the uh engineers estimate or architect's estimate. And so I feel like we've got competitive pricing on this. Uh I don't see anything that is is goldplated here. It looks like it's very functional. Uh we do have it in the IBC risk 4 category. So it's designed to be survivable and operable and you know like storm events. Uh that probably has a little bit of a delta on the cost. You know, I understand commercial construction is higher than than residential construction, but I mean, there are homes on Ocean Drive that cost less than this. And so I I I you know, this is where I this is going to go to uh um to the point I was making with trust funds versus impact fees. And and we'll talk about that later, but you know, I'd rather have a private sector solution than a government solution because we always pay three times as much as what the building's actually going to be worth. And it it is it is honestly embarrassing uh sitting here as a you know voting on these things that this is so expensive for a 5,000 ft building and you know I I would expect to pay somewhere about a million and a half for this thing but wow it's it you know this is really expensive. I mean, like I said, I don't I don't know if there's gold flaking in this paint that we're using. Uh, but it seems like it. Uh, I I don't know what we can do, Peter. Is there anything we can do to to try and help reduce some of this cost? Because I mean, this is going to our wastewater uh expenditure and we're borrowing money for this and we have a consent decree that we have to, you know, pay for and we're we're paying $700 a square foot. >> Yes, Councilman. So, as Jeff said, the city engineer, the probable cost estimate from uh from an engineer was four four million was 4 million and it's coming in about, you know, 350,000 uh less than the probable cost estimate. You can see as Jeff said, there were five biders and really it comes down to the market and uh the the cost proposals for the five were pretty close, which means there's general agreement that this is what it takes to build a building like this. It is I would would admit or would highlight I don't know if we could show a picture but it's on the water. It's right on the edge of a peninsula down there on the island. The current building because of those conditions and probably less robust building um design is falling apart literally. It's splitting at the seams and the corners uh p uh tiles are falling off the building. So these buildings are 50-year plus life cycle buildings and it's not a home on Ocean Drive. It's a very different type of building. So it's the market. The only if we don't like the bid pricing, we can reject it and just not do the project. >> And I've got a couple of clarifications. So the the building is replacing was actually built by Padre Island Investment Corporation back in 1974. uh and uh so so there's definite need to replace that facility. Um there are some additional things that when you just take the total cost of the project and you divide by the square footage, you're you're buying more than just the the building itself. So there's site development here. There's paved parking, access driveways, there's there's parking there for uh I believe 19 vehicles. Uh there's uh water line extension, fire hydrant, uh there's uh a sewer line extension. So there's site development costs that are you normally pay and the cost of a lot if you're buying a house. So if you're just comparing it to like the construction cost of a house, you're you're missing the cost of >> No, I I'm fully aware that this is commercial construction, right? And you would expect to pay twice as much or as you would for a house of similar size, right? Because you have to have all the conduit, your electrical run through conduit as opposed to just be open and exposed. There's lots of things in commercial construction. I'm assuming this is a concrete building too, right? Concrete structure. So there there's an expectation that it's more expensive. Uh it's just not, you know, this expensive, right? I I expect it to be half of this in terms of of the per square foot cost in line with a lot of um some other commercial construction, but uh heck, this doesn't even co include the cost of the property, right? >> Correct. >> So, makes it makes it worse. And and and just for the record, I did talk to uh um Wes Nebkin here prior to this discussion and we were kind of stating what some of these costs associated with it. >> Yes, sir. Wesley Nebin, uh director of water systems infrastructure. And as Jeff said, um this project, uh we don't take these costs lightly. We don't take the CIP projects lightly, especially when it relates to the consent decree. Um, this building however is in such a condition that it's starting to pose a safety issue to some of the staff that work in that building. Uh, if uh you look at the presentation, you can see the cracks in the wall. You can actually see daylight through the uh cinder block walls before we patched them um at the at the facility. So, this is um something that's uh very badly needed on the island. uh expectation of this building as Jeff said was functionality over really the cost. It's very simple, very straightforward. Uh we did go with concrete walls to try to increase the uh life expectancy of this building considering where it is. So all in all uh I do believe it's a good design. Uh simple design but very functional. Now >> who is the designer? >> Turner Ramirez. Okay. Thank you, >> Councilwoman Fawn. >> How much was the design? What it cost us? >> The design was I it's I have the CIP page. >> I can get that for you. I don't have that. >> You know, something you said was >> it's 290,000. >> 290,000. Um, something y'all said was it's consistent in what we are doing. And I know this isn't y'all's fault. I know that. And it's hard to come up here and ask for this kind of money. And I get it. And I understand that you need the building. But it is very frustrating to see that a 5,000 foot building is going to cost this. No more than is in it. And I know it's commercial, too. This is ridiculous. All of these biders, were they from Corpus? >> Uh, did we have any from out of town? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> One was four out of five. Sorry. Right. >> Four out of five from Corpus. >> Yes. >> That should tell us something, too. Because it's been accepted. We just do it. Whatever it is, we just say, "Okay, it's okay." And it's not okay. I mean, at some point, we're going to have to start looking at the prices because our citizens can't afford this. This Who in the world in the right mind spends this much money for 5,000 square foot? Only a government entity would do that. >> Yes, ma'am. >> I'm not I'm not ridiculing you or getting on to you. I'm frustrated cuz I think it's ridiculous. I just think it's ridiculous. Uh, what kind of roof is it? >> The roof on the building is going to be a It is a tile roof. I believe it's a >> It's not actual tile. >> Tile. It It's to match the decor of the existing buildings in the area, but it's You want to speak to that real quick, Jeff? >> When you tell me tile on a roof, that word >> tile, but it's it's it's metal. It'll have the look of tile, which matches the other. >> And you're sure it's not tile? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. How much is that roof about? I'm just curious since you're tell you you said tile so that concerns me. I'm sorry I didn't have that on the typical >> Okay. 141,000 >> 141,000 >> 141,000 for >> is now and what we were saying this is the itemized breakdown that the the contractor put on his bid. So um >> it's 141,000 for the roof. >> Yes. >> Whoa. That's an expensive roof, isn't it? Okay. Um, let me ask you one more question. I seem to see the same names over and over and over that get these bids. Victory has done a lot. They did a lot for the police station. I don't know how >> they've got both of those police substations. >> I don't know how good they are. Let me ask you, are they um do they do a lot of change orders? So far, we haven't had any uh significant change order requests on either of the substations, >> but in in as a group, do they do a lot of change orders? >> Um, in the the past, they they haven't done a lot of work with the city. So, those are the the two most recent projects that uh they're working on and they're they're both underway and >> Okay. >> Uh we're satisfied with their performance on those. >> Okay. Okay. Just want to know because that's always a a flag for me. If you do a lot of change orders, that means they're gonna make them way more money than what they bid it. So, I'm hoping this is all this is. >> Yeah. Well, over our whole portfolio, we average about a little over 2% of contract value and change orders. >> Okay. >> Now, our target is try and stay under 3%. But that gives you idea what these are. And a lot of times they're negative. So that's when you average them all together, it's plus a little bit over 2%. And we'd send you all a quarterly report with all of those change orders. >> And Jeeoff, I know it has to be frustrated for you, too, because I know that if you were in the private sector, you wouldn't do that. If you own a business, you wouldn't be paying this kind of money. So that's got to be very frustrating. And I know you can't get up here and say things, but it's got to be frustrating because I feel like the city is just getting fleeced. >> I I I'm not sure I can agree with the the premise there. Oh, come on. >> Um, >> you do agree it's too high. Will you admit that? Do you think that's too high for a 5,000 foot building? >> Uh, I I've got to assume that it's a competitive price for for the work uh that >> that's included in the project. In fact, we've got five biders. It's under the architect's estimate. >> But I think it's something they get used to in this city is what I'm trying to say. But I appreciate your comments. I I would say if you're comparing apples to apples, I I do not think that we're paying a significant delta. Now, there are things that we have to get like like performance and payment bonds. Now, and private, you might not need to get that. Uh we manage the construction very closely. So, if a contractor is doing something for private citizen, they might think, hey, we can cut corners on this. we can, >> you know, cheapen what we deliver because they won't know the difference. They won't figure it out right away, but we're going to catch it. They know they're going to get held to complying with the letter of the contract and providing everything uh the materials and workmanship that uh are called out for in the bid documents. >> And we're in a position that we know we need to replace the building as well. And I'm sure they know that too. But I would be curious that we could check in some other cities and just to see that would be a simple thing to do. See if some of the cities the same size we are in different areas are they paying this kind of money for what they're building. Thank you. >> Councilman Kentu. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um >> what's inside this building? Just workers. Is there anything special inside? >> Uh well there's um cubes uh for workers. There's a control room for the SCADA. There's a laboratory, water quality laboratory, and that's got uh some chemical resistant finishes and uh ventilation associated with it. Uh and then there's restroom, locker room area. >> You know, $400,000 for HVAC is pretty pretty high for a 5,000t building. Um, I get that a lot of companies, y'all, bid it out five, five bids, whatever the case is, because they're so used to charging so much money to the city because we pay for it. Um, I just I know there's a lot of small businesses out there would love to build a building for us half the cost, but because we have so much red tape to get those people in here, you know, they they get discouraged. You know, I talked to one contractor and he's like, I want to do work for the city, but man, they give us all this stuff to fill out and they want this and they want that. All we want to do is build a 5,000t building. I mean, just $3.6 million. It's a lot of money. Um, and I know for sure they're going to have change orders. They always do. And it's going to end up being over $4 million for a $5,000 square foot building like office space. I mean, I just blows my mind is just go put some damn trailers out there and nice trailers, office trailers, and call it a day. I mean, that's just that's a lot of money. Um, I support you guys. I support, you know, the water department. I understand, you know, I support the employees. They want to be in a nice building. I get it. But paying $3.6 million plus is ridiculous. And I will vote no on this project today because I cannot I I'm not going to how am I going to explain to the public that we just spent $3.6 million. >> The SCADA controls had the technology installed to be able to control the plant um and optimize its efficiency uh throughout throughout. However, the building wasn't included in those upgrades. Now that we're moving forward, that's one of the things this building will have in it is is those uh the controls and the INE tech to be able to control that. In addition, the laboratory is crucial for any wastewater treatment facility. Um wastewater treatment is considered by many to be much more difficult than water treatment simply because it's both chemical and biological. So you have to do continuous testing on the water, not only coming in, but going out as well to ensure that we're meeting our permit requirements. And that's why the laboratory is also so important in these buildings. But sorry, big words, Wes. Big words. Hey, I just want to say thank you for uh letting me take a tour of the building. Uh Mayor, I'll tell you it was it's it's it's not going to make it through a hurricane. I mean, it was really interesting. By the way, the folks that gave me the tour, great employees. They do a great job. So, please pass on that I appreciated their their time when they probably should have been, you know, doing what they do. So, that's all my my sense is I got a couple things. One, it's below the the engineers estimate. I I know several of the biders. I don't know all of them, but I I mean I think they're I think they're wonderful people, you know. So, the fact that they were close together, I don't want to spend, you know, a lot of money, but it it I was I was um I was alarmed at the condition of the building and believe it needs to be replaced. Uh so, I'll vote yes. >> Councilman Betta. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um uh first off, I I think it's overly simplistic and not responsible just to imply that it's a 5,000t building. It's more than a 5,000t building. >> It's not a warehouse. It's not it's not a warehouse. It's not a house on Ocean Drive. It's not um it it's it's it's comparing apples to oranges. Not even apples to oranges. Maybe apples to blueberries. I mean, it's just so far off the thing. or maybe apples to a hot dog is just way so far off. I mean, if you look at if you look at the bid tabulations, there's thermal and moisture protection, masonry, the structural concrete is about $2 million. That's correct. >> Yes, sir. >> So, so right then and there, and that's a requirement that we have because of the location that is designed as a for a risk category 4 that this this building is essential in the event because this is where we do all our testing. you know, the challenges that we've had before with with all the TCQ requirements, all all the all the the requirements that we have to remain compliant as uh a a you know for for wastewater is essential of what we need and we and how long was the service life? You said in 1974 a building that we acquired. >> Yes, sir. That's So, we went through a process basically where we've tightened our belt for 52 years. For 52 years. So, I want to commend you. Whoever's Nobody's been here 52 years, right? >> You're 54, right? 54 or 55. >> More than that, but >> you wear it well. You wear it well. >> Thank you. So, so my point is is that now we've rewarded we're going to reward our staff who's extens extended the service life of a facility and what is it when this is very important because this is required by the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality to maintain a certain standard for our citizens for our citizens and now because we don't understand how it works and we want the nine laymen want to suggest how we should go around our processes I know that I saw u all all the biders all of which all the ones that are local I know are are highly qualified highly qualified and they come up with the same price. I mean the thing is is that it's not it it's not uh you know marble countertops you know it's not it's not marble countertops it's not it's not all the the luxuries that somebody would want to have in their home. These are requirements that we need to have for to so that way we can be compliant and we can ensure the safety and the well-being of the citizens that we serve. So it's just a it's it's just a political punchline to be able to say we can't afford this. So the thing is is that we have professional engineers, we have professional architects that we employ so that way they can put us in this position and we have well-qualified bar I mean the insurance and bonding itself is about $250,000. I would think that we wouldn't you know hey I'm a small business owner. I'm a small business owner and I understand the challenges of the small business owner. You know, my employees made more money than I did last year, you know, so I understand those challenges, but the thing is is that we have a responsibility to our citizens to do to do things to be prudent, to do it right, and to understand that there's certain there are certain requirements. We're not, unfortunately, we're required to do that. So, obviously, I support this and I thank you for all this. One other quick question, and I got a minute and a half left, and I promise I won't use it all. Is this in the capital budget? >> Yes, it is, Councilman. Yes. >> So, once again, I want to I want to remind my colleagues if you have an issue with regard to the cap when we're going through the capital improvement program to review that information because that's the time this money this money has already been budgeted and we've already gone through the extensive process of procurement of designing. We've already spent the money to design it. We've gone through the procurement process. We've had staff put all this together so that way they could bring it to us and all of a sudden we're questioning and comparing it to a a a house on Ocean Drive. You know, I'm sorry. You know, that's just political posturing. Campaign season's here already. All right. So, once again, I support this. >> Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> Yes, it's an expensive property. No, nobody's really happy to spend that much. I mean, maybe Roland might be happy about it, but I don't think genuinely happy about it. I think the premise is it's expensive. Um, I'll couple that statement with my opinion that is that's a system that I know I've talked at length with our engineering department about and the it's going to take more than one meeting and one item to fix that system. There's there's issues when we go out for qualifications. There's issues in our procurement processes. It's a bigger process that we that we need to fix in order to get these price drivings down. I am curious. Um, this is something that the island needs, of course, and and that's my district. I mean, the building, everybody who has been there knows that it's basically falling apart. We take severe weather and and environmental challenges out there and so it does need repaired. Um, when we issued the um when we issued the project documents for this, were the materials consistent with what we detailed or were these areas that we could perhaps say maybe there's some cost savings in some of those if that makes sense. >> Um, let me see if I understand the question. Are you looking for some kind of postawward uh looking for some savings on this or >> I presume when we were to bid it out that we had certain specifications that we needed whether that was by space, whether that was by number of rooms, whether that went down to the details on which type of material we would like it to be specked out. >> Oh no, this is fullblown construction drawings. uh you know every aspect of this is called out in excruciating detail and the the plans and the specifications. >> Okay. So it's it's we asked for this material and they bid that out. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. That that helps me make sure that all of our biders are on the same >> they are all bidding on the same set of documents. >> Okay. Thank you so much. Then my next concerns is is actually with this whole property. Um, when I last year we had an issue out there where I had constituents reaching out because it is on the on the tip of white cap and I had to reach out to several team members because the landscaping, we've got trees out there, we've got different things out there and they were fading. No one was maintaining them. So, the upkeep of the property was not being maintained to a good standard. They went out, they fixed it that one time that I reached out last year and I was told by the constituents, you know, thank you, they took care of it, but it doesn't seem like it was kept up. And unfortunately, recently, those same individuals have reached out and now have had to say they took care of it once and let it all go back down. So, something that's consistent with our packet is we were maintaining the property to the bare standard. we weren't there wasn't any measures in place of course cuz we we assumed an old property but there wasn't those ongoing maintenance mechanisms in there. So to me I'm interested in hearing that we have a plan for the building and the property because my experience so far has been very difficult in finding a home for who's maintaining the property. If I reach out to parks and reccks they say that's water. If I reach out to water they say we don't have the budget for maintaining the grounds. So now we're going to put a big building in there and invest a lot in it. Needs done, but I'm concerned because so far in a year, this has been a problem to me. >> Sure. Uh, great question. It's actually the property at the end of White Cap is not just the wastewater plant itself. It's actually four separate properties that are maintained by four separate entities. And uh, the yacht, the Padre Island Yacht Club, >> but everything in the fence is CCW. >> Inside the fence of the wastewater treatment plant, yes, is CCW. So if it is inside the fence, but we are also I'm curious to know what wasn't being maintained. I would like to know the issue >> specifically when Boers are passing, they can see the shrubs and the bushes and the trees, the landscaping that are on that side because there's a yach club and then the dog park and then the treatment plant. >> They went out, they cleaned all that up and it was allowed to all deteriorate again. And now what their eyes were was now we invested in fixing it. So we put new landscaping that was a cost and then it all deteriorated again. I I've I've I'm I'm out there quite a bit. Um I not I'll have to look at it more closely and I'll report back to you, but the last time I was there, the shrubs, the uh oleanders that were planted along the fence are still there, still growing. It's a great droughtresistant plant that works well on the island. Um they do require every couple of years to go back and just kind of prune them to keep them from taking over the fence where our >> I would check on the water side for boating boating pass. >> Yes. >> And those are details but to me it's important that the details are thought of because we want to maintain a big investment especially if if this is something we need and we're going to commit to. >> The second item was we have that dog park there and there was an invasive plant species that I got a hold of parks and Rex are super responsive. They came out and cleared it out, but it had jumped through the fence to W. Couldn't get any help on that. Nobody had a budget. Nobody had a place. >> Yeah, it was in CCW. >> Yeah, that's it. Right. That's a legacy project. So, there's an intrical agreement, a group of of uh >> I'm I'm not I don't mean the dog part. I'm sorry to interrupt. So, that was cleaned up by >> Okay. >> parks and wrecks and the dog parks, right? where we hit problem was there was what I'm trying to articulate is there's a gap in this maintenance standard once we hit the fence and cross over somebody needs to be responsible >> we are and Wes will check it out as he said and we'll see if there's an issue >> I I can resend you the emails that say we don't have a team or a budget for that so we need to put something in place so that we're maintaining all >> Let us have Wes check it out and like he said he's there quite frequently we'll get current conditions and then we'll report back. >> That to me is going to be super important, especially with the location and the care of this property. >> We agree. Councilwoman >> Councilman Hernandez, >> is the SCADA buildout part of this construction cost? >> The SCADA controls room is Yes, sir. >> So, >> the server the server room >> all the all the SCADA infrastructure associated with it or is that a separate expense? So I want to make sure I understand that you and I are well I mean um because the PLC's you have controls that are actually at the uh treatment processes themselves. So at the head work. >> So yeah I mean like all the servers and stuff like that that you would have in the building. >> We would have that in the building plus the computer systems that control it and then the background programming as well inside >> that's separate from this construction. >> No that's part of this. That will be >> they're going to install all the servers and computer equipment. >> Yes. and the fiber needed to go to those systems to be able to control it. And in-house staff, of course, we have our own IME technicians where we, this is where it's great. Once you get this built out, we can actually expand our INE capabilities using in-house staff, um, install new technologies, be able to do more at the plant. >> Okay. So, you know, I don't fault the the contractors cuz they're going on a set of plans, but if the plans are so expensive uh on what they're bidding because they're all pretty close, consistent in terms of what what they were bidding on. Did we I mean, did we review the plans to make sure they weren't, you know, they weren't I mean, why the why the metal tiles on the roof >> as opposed to is it's a it's a formed metal roof is what it is. >> So, it's formed metal roof. It's not not individual metal tiles. >> No, sir. It's It's hard to explain. It's like a form metal roof that's been coated has a weather uh not a weather resistant corrosion resistant coating on it. >> Because of the location. So I I just you know sorry it >> you know just looking at it from a perspective of you know construction and buildings and stuff where you know there's similar structures built by other um organizations it just it doesn't amount to these kind of expenses and you know you know for our to be my fellow council member to trust everything that's comes in front of him >> uh it just I it's hard this is very difficult I don't know Have you done value engineering or >> we we eliminated during the process? Of course, we're using low-grade tile. You'll see areas that are actually just uh coated concrete. Instead of actually putting any sort of flooring down, we eliminated the flooring. Just going to coat the concrete. Uh in addition, like I said, all there there's only one office in the building. We pretty much left it open so that we saved on electrical. We saved on that. Um it's mostly cubicles throughout the building that staff will use to be able to record input data. Um areas like that. The uh one area that is uh you do have to plan for on the island is the corrosive nature. Like I brought up a minute ago, I know the AC system and the mechanical system. After our conversation, I reached out talked to some folks. One of the reasons on the mechanical system, they said it's going to have a lot of stainless steel parts on the intake, places like that that you wouldn't see necessarily inland more, but because of the location, you're going to see much more stainless steel in out there. Well, and I understand when contractors bid on stuff, sometimes they put costs in different areas that were different from from other biders. You know, like you had one bidder uh put 200 236 million for uh the HVAC system, another one put 400, another one put 209. And you know, I honestly you put stuff I mean uh in different places, >> right? Yeah. I I would like to make a a comment on that. So, we are in the process of changing a little bit the the way that we bid that. So, uh in my opinion, we had too much detail on that. And uh we we're going to compress that and just start bidding it by the the category rather than have that breakdown. So, what you saw, a lot of the items that were called out, they put zero dollars in there. Uh, because they ask a sub to give them a quote on the mechanical and they get >> No, I get that. >> Subs, they give them a price, >> all of those items. So, they have to say, "Okay, which item do I put it in?" So, >> I made that assumption. I made the assumption that it was kind of bundled together. >> Yeah. And we want to This is too much detail. So, we're we're looking at uh basically condensing that down. And I'm thinking, you know, like a dozen pay items feels about right. If it's going to three pages, that's too much detail. >> Well, it does give us some visibility to how these bids look. >> It does, but it can also skew it because one contractor might spread it across all the items or another would put it all in one item under that category. Man, you have to make it difficult for us, Jeeoff, man, I tell you. >> All right. Thank you, >> Councilwoman Vaughn. >> Real quick, mayor, um, did we have to purchase land for this building or did we have it? We did it and we had it. >> No, that's on the existing Okay. >> wastire treatment plant site. >> So, are y'all tearing it down? I mean, the other building, you're tearing it down. Do we have a cost on that? You don't have to give it to me. Just an estimate off the top of your head. $15,000. I know that's wrong. >> Probably three million. >> You can tell me later. It's okay. It doesn't It doesn't matter. I'm just curious. But I will just say this to Roland. Please don't preach to us. I don't care if it's a CIP project. If we want to come back and check it before we even bid on when we bid on stuff, we get to do that. That's being proactive. So don't tell us we can or can't. This is the way it should be doing. Don't you start telling us about political posturing, sir. Thank you, >> Councilman Roy. >> Thank you. Um, I want to ask a question. As far as I think what was indicated before, is this a turnkey project? In other words, there was some questions about all the things. Does this price include everything that needs to to go into it so that the day that it's completed um you open the door, you walk in and everything's there? >> Yes. >> Okay. Perfect. Thank you. I wanted to make sure that the number one the public understood that and that I understood that. Um another question is if the cost of the build is less, let's just say because it does happen. And I think it's happened in a couple projects uh recently. If the cost of the build is less, do they automatically get the amount that they bid on or is it basically you're going to look at receipts and you're going to look at everything and you're going to reimburse based on what was spent, right? >> Uh well, this is this is what we call a hard bid job. So it is a hard. So, um there are typically some allowances that we put in. If those are not used, those return to to us. Uh there are also the potential for substitutions. You know, if the contractor comes and says, "Look, I'd rather use these carpet tiles instead of the ones you call out." And if it's for contractor convenience, typically we're we're saying, "Okay, and what kind of credit do we get for that change?" And if we view this favorably, we'll do a deductive change order and allow that substitution. Sometimes it's no value change. Um, sometimes it's an increase, but there's reconciliation as you go. If you're doing something for contract or convenience, you're typically looking for consideration as well. >> Okay. So, this is a hard cost. The other thing I I was what I looked at and I I wanted to kind of share is that I I took a look at what commercial buildings as a whole cost. And I didn't look at just the Coastal Bend area. I looked nationwide and what the cost per square foot was. And you know, it's interesting that you had five um biders on this. And um based on the 5,000 square feet, they're actually within at least what was provided. what is the actual cost right now? But my one of the things I wanted to make sure I understand is that you're tearing down the old building. What are you doing for the infrastructure? So, in other words, I'm assuming you're going to put a new building in. What are you doing as far as from the street in? I know that you said you had to do the parking lot. It has 19 stalls, right? What are you doing though? I'm I'm sure you're are you are you change are you changing new pipe or I mean, you're not going to just hook into the old stuff, right? Well, it it's in a different location. So, >> Oh, it's in a different location. So, that means you're going to have to put all new all new plumbing, all new basically to that new >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I'm just trying to understand because I heard somebody earlier talk about apples to apples, apples to oranges. I want to just make sure I understand the scope of this project. Yes. I mean, I can read it, but it's easier for you to and I did read it, but I want to >> I want you to summarize that, especially for the public, >> right? And and essentially, the existing building is going to stay in place and continue to be used. We we we can't demo the existing building until the next building is in place. So, um that's why the new location will have, like Jeff was saying, all new uh all new sewer, all new water, the fire hydrant at the parking lot. And when the existing and and then when that's finished, the old building will be demoed, the water lines removed, the sewer line removed. >> Yeah, I think that's important for everybody to understand because I was thinking about a couple projects that we had in the past. One of them was when we were talking about animal control and we were talking about remember building that that uh parking lot over on the side and what the cost of that was going to be and we were kind of in sticker shock on that. So now we're we're basically I mean this is going to have new everything. It's going to it's going to have new infrastructure, brand new parking lot, brand new building. It's it's going to be basically set up so that it is turnkey so that the computers everything needed to operate is in controlled in this cost because I know >> part of it as a commercial banker when we build a building nine times out of 10 we build the building and the cost is the shell and then whoever like if we do a retail center and that like the 46,000 foot building that I financed on Simmeron and airline when you take a look at that building then the tenants are the ones that came after that and spent the money to build it out, >> right? >> And we don't most of the time we don't see the cost of that because depending on who the tenant is, they can get really elaborate or it can be really cheap. You know, it was interesting because one of the things I saw that nail salons and the and how they're set up, it was actually that build was a lot more expensive than a physician's office that went into this same retail center. I say all that um because I just want to make sure that I'm comfortable and and and um so I see that basically it's within the national average. We're getting new infrastructure. It is turnkey. Um do I wish locally that we had more companies that could bid? You know what I mean? I mean how many for the most part how many architects do we have typically in this city? That's >> I'm going to say about half a dozen that are Yeah. doing work for the city. >> And the same thing when it goes to contractors, too. I mean, local contractors. >> Yeah. It's it's I'd say there's more that do the the civil stuff, roadways. >> Yeah. And everybody has a specialy >> stuff. >> Yeah. So, okay. >> But four of the five were local. So, it's, you know, it's interesting because >> a lot of times the public's ask us and they say, "Okay, you want to make sure you use local, right?" In this case, you said you had four out of five that bid local right? >> Yeah. Now, I I can't take any credit for that. I mean, we publicly advertise this. People can bid on it from where? >> No, but I'm just saying right now in this project, we had it was it was bid and for the majority of it was local, right? >> Yes, sir. I think that's important because I mean a lot of times we're sitting up here and and I'm I'm going to say darn because that's not a swear word, but we're darned if we do, if we darned if we don't because we're using local contractors like people want us to. And if we don't, if we would have bid this out to Dallas and Houston, California, whatever the case is, and we came in, people would have been saying, "Oh, okay. What are you doing there?" So, that's all I had. >> Make a motion. >> Perfect timing. >> A motion in a second. I'm going to go ahead and open public comment. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to make comment on item number seven? >> That makes sense. >> Rachel Cavayto D1. Um, this is the part where why the community does not have any faith in our local government. Um, we're rewarding people who have done business with other people who have admitted to forging federal documents to get an additional $2 million in their projects. We are accepting the same contractors who always put in change orders who have the same ties to the same groups of politicians. This is a repeated record that we continuously go through. This is why when out oftowners come here and they say, "Man, this looks like a third world country. This Corpus Christi has so much potential." All of our money is going into corruption. This is this is too much. We we you put the council's being put in a very precarious situation because they know it's too much, but they need the solution for their area and and community. We wake up. We have to vote these people out and get better representation, better city staff. Why isn't the developer here pleading his case? Why is the city staffer doing it? This this is this is insanity. Anyone else? Okay, we're closing public comment on item number seven. We have a motion in a second. Uh everyone, please submit your vote. Oh, the motion carries unanimously. Okay, we are going to break. It's 2:50. We're going to break for 30 minutes. We're really taking 30 minutes for lunch and then we're going to come right back and start uh on item number eight which was pulled and number 11 that was pulled and then we'll go into public hearings. So, we will return in 30 minutes. Hello, Mr. Bass. >> Mr. Mask, Okay, we're going to go ahead and resume our meeting. We are on item let's see, item number eight was pulled and I think that was Councilman Hernandez. This is a motion authorizing change order number two for SR Trident, Inc. of Gregory for the People's Boardwalk Project. Oh, it was not you. Who was that? >> It was me. >> It was you. Okay. Councilman Vaughn, not Gil. >> Okay. >> Put your light on. >> Yeah. We had a lot of change orders. >> Is this the only one? >> Well, this is the second one. >> Okay. >> Uh it's several items that were rolled into this change order. >> Okay. >> So, here the here's the story. So, um there's three main items that are part of this change order. Um uh two of the items were discovered when they started demolition. Uh they found out that the structure down at Harrison's Landing was not as anticipated and that uh Harrison's Landing was supported uh by some of the piles that were scheduled to be demolished and replaced. So, we had to make some changes to the design uh to separate the boardwalk from Harrison's Landing. Uh, also during demolition, they noticed that there were some bulkhead failures and it was mining soil out from under the bulkheads and uh our construction manager directed them to go ahead and correct that. Uh, at that time it made sense to do that. That was addition work. Uh the third thing when they started driving piles, uh they uh were hitting debris that was causing the piles to deflect and they'd have to pull the pile out and restart it. And uh they put us on notice early on that this was a differing site condition claim. We agreed that there was entitlement and then uh there was uh after they got through it and they were able to ask for a certain dollar amount, there was negotiation over that. Um, we've reached the point where our owner's authorized representative is in agreement with pricing. Uh, we feel like there's entitlement, but of course, the amount is above what we have staff uh, authorization to approve. So, that's why we're here to get council approval. So, >> this is a little bit worse than we typically do. Like I said in the last item, we we target to be under 3% uh on change orders. Uh this one uh will take this project uh to just above 13% of contract value. Uh if there's any good news, the good news is that um uh this is still about $1.2 million below what was programmed in the CIP for construction. >> Okay, good. Okay, thank you. Motion to approve. >> Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a second. Um would anyone I'm going to open public comment. Would anyone in the audience like to make comment on item number eight? Okay, there being no one, we're closing public comment. Please submit your vote. >> The motion carries. And the last item pulled was item 11. Um, and this is an ordinance accepting a payment of $75,000 from the Corpus Christie Housing Authority to support procurement of professional services to develop a uh housing needs assessment. And I believe that is Did you want to say a word or >> No. >> Okay. So, I I just like to bring up Mr. Renb Bass to make comment. Yeah, Jennifer, we're you're good. >> No, that's Yes. >> Uh, Mr. Renbass is the new CEO of the housing authority. He has been the chief financial officer at the housing authority for several years. Um we're very excited to be working with Mr. Bass um and starting a new partnership on the housing study. So, thank you for coming. >> Good afternoon, honorable mayor, city council members, city manager. Randass, District 5, Corpus Christi. I am the new CEO and president of the Copus Christie Housing Authority and I stand before you humbled and honored that our board has entrusted me with the responsibility of leading one of the most essential organization that is at a such critical time involving affordable housing and homelessness. And you know the Corpus Christie Housing Authority exists to provide one of the most essential public services in this city. Safe, decent, affordable housing for families and seniors and veterans and individual who depend on us for stability and support. Behind every unit and every voucher and every program, there are residents who simply want the same thing, a safe place to call home and to build a better future. My primary reason before you today is to thank you for the city's contribution to supporting the housing to support the procurement of professional services for the developing a housing needs assessment and toolkit. Each organization has provided $75,000. This housing needs assessment and toolkit is the first step in helping this community understand the housing need and find datadriven solutions. Additionally, I would like to thank the housing authority for the $1.4 million in tenantbased rental assistant funding to support housing vouchers that will help more families. That investment alone will make a real and meaningful difference in the lives of our residents and our community. Today, the housing authority waiting list exceeds 30,000 applicants. A clear reminder of the significant demand of affordable housing in the city. The study that you are considering will help us provide additional information and a strategic insight for the necessary bringing together the leadership, housing providers, community partners to work together to effectively come up with solutions. I am committed to working collaboratively with the city, with the county, school district, nonprofits, and community organizations to develop meaningful and thoughtful sustainable solutions and to expand affordable housing and reduce homelessness. So on behalf of the Corpus Christie Housing Authority, I want to thank you, city council, you mayor, you city manager for your leadership, partnership, and continued commitment to help the residents of this great city. So together we can build a stronger communities and ensure that everyone could live within the sparkling city by the sea in safe, affordable, and stable housing. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Bass. We appreciate that very much. We really do. We We appreciate you being here as well. And this is a great item. So, thank you. >> Hey, thank you. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. We have a motion in a second. Would anyone in the audience like to make public comment on item number 11? >> Okay. The motion uh public comment is closed. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. U moving on to section K, public hearings, items 13 through 15. Item number 13 is zoning case number ZN 8771, Jason Lubie, District 2. Are you okay? >> Good afternoon, mayor, council. Iette Wallace, interim director of development services. Uh, today we'll be presenting a zoning KZN8771 submitted by applicant Jason Lubie. So, this request involves a property located at 2409 Biola Avenue within which is within district number two. The applicant is requesting to reszone the property from RS6 single family residential 2CN1, which is neighborhood commercial with a special permit. This request is intended to allow the limited commercial activities that have been ongoing at this property and aligns with the neighborhood scale development. And just before I go on to the next slide, just a little bit of background between the CN1 and the general commercial and why we went with the special permit. So for a CN, a neighborhood commercial, it allows lower intensity uses such as multif family hotels, offices, medical uses, and restaurants up to 5,000 square ft. A general commercial is going to have a more in uh intensive use and could allow a bar, a nightclub, or a lounge. Um, and the automotive portion that Mr. Lubie has been operating there since 1953 is technically considered general commercial. So as a compromise and to keep the integrity of the neighborhood, we thought a special permit allowing those specific units, but having the neighborhood commercial as a buffer would be best approach. So the subject property is 76 acres in area and consist of multiple lots. The current zoning is RS6 with established date of 1951 annexation. The applicant's proposed use includes indoor and outdoor storage and light vehicle service. The property is within the Bayside area development plan which was adopted December the 10th of 2024. The future land use designation is medium density residential which does not specifically recommend commercial zoning. The current resoning is RS6, a single family district that was I'm sorry that was duplicate. Although the flume does not call for commercial, the applicant is requesting a low inensity commercial designation that is more compatible with nearby development than other commercial options. As part of the required notification process, 34 notices were mailed within the 200 ft of the subject property. No notices were mailed outside of the 200t buffer zone. We did receive two opposition notices which represent 6.48% of the weighted land area. The neighborhood opposition cites traffic, existing uh conditions of Biola Avenue, homeless, and crime as factors. We receive zero notices of support. The overall opposition remains well below the 20% threshold that would require supermajority vote. Our staff analysis finds the following. The request is inconsistent with the flume. However, the CN district is among the lowest intensity commercial districts and is often used to provide neighborhood service serving uses in areas transitioning or adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Although the plan does not designate commercial uses here, the applicant's request is less intensive that what is allowed in the CG districts and the special permit allows us to tailor conditions to protect nearby residents. The request is compatible with existing surrounding zoning patterns which include a mix of residential and commercial uses along Biola Avenue. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the reszoning to CN1 with a special permit. We did work with the applicant, Mr. Lubie, um to come up with a special permit conditions. So, there are use limitations. only indoor storage, warehouse, indoor and outdoor vehicle storage, vehicle sales, and light vehicle service would be allowed beyond what the CN uh allows by right. The hours of operation would be 8 to 8 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily. And then a 10T 10-ft buffer yard would be required where the property is adjacent to residential uses. This buffer yard exists today. A one-year time limit applies for securing permits or a certificate of occupancy, otherwise the special permit would expire. and staff will be assisting in granting an SEO for the existing building that was constructed in 1953. These conditions will help ensure the use remains orderly and compatible with neighboring homes. And just want to show the site images here that date back to 2004. Uh the images prior to 2004 are very grainy and hard to see, but this building has been in place since 1951. And as you can see, it has remained in place every year since then. Um and the imagery show 2004, 2011, and 2022 most currently. This concludes the presentation. I stand by to address any questions and the applicant is present today. >> Thank you, uh, Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, thank you very much for helping between the last time we discussed this and now to come up with the solution that works for everybody. Um, if my understanding is correct, essentially what has been taking place at that property is not changing. We're just updating the zoning. >> Correct. So there's some parameters. >> The uses were already existing since 1953. There has been automotive repair on that site. It could be equipment repair. And there's been an occasional sale of a vehicle that was in the ownership of the loopies. So they've been maintaining that use consistently since it was annexed and since the property was constructed in 1953. >> Okay. Okay. I know we had one um one resident come up and say some concern with putting business in that area. Um, but I I do think that this was something pre-existing that's not the intentions of this zoning. >> Correct. And I don't want to speak for Mr. Lee, but I did have multiple conversations with them. And he intends to keep this property in the family with no additional um arrangements or selling of the property to develop it in this time. Um, and again, not wanting to speak for Mr. Lubie, but Mr. Libby has made it very clear that this property is in his family to use for their use for their own recreational purposes of restoring vehicles, restoring equipment, and then the occasional sale of those vehicles and/or equipment. >> Okay, perfect. I appreciate that. My only other comment would be whoever built that building, I wish they were still around because we we just spent almost 45 minutes talking about $4 million on another building and this one's been here for a while and it's still holding. See, you have a you have a phone number. >> I I would agree. Since 1953, the building is in great condition. >> Yes. Well, it's a good testament to taking care of things in the right way and they last. So, thank you for your patience, Mr. Lubie, and thank you for the presentation. >> Yes. Thank you, >> Councilman Hernandez. >> Okay. Thank you for getting this kind of fixed. I understand that there's residences around this property, but you can't I think what we did unfortunately is downzone a property that was being utilized and meant wouldn't us happened a long time ago. Uh but I don't think they were ever aware of that. Uh do we have any records of any official notices that were sent to the Louvies for for the zoning way back when? >> Unfortunately, that the information wasn't readily available and in discussion with Mr. Lubie, they weren't aware that it wasn't zoned. And and I understand that things were done differently back then. We're not, you know, we're not going to try and fix what what happened in the past, but you you know, by downgrading somebody's property, you basically change the value of that property. So that we can't do that. We're not supposed to do that, right? You you guys are well aware of this. So, I appreciate um uh you taking the time to figure this out to make it commercial uh neighborhood which doesn't allow, you know, heavy intense uh commercial usage like on like on the frontage on airs. There's concerns about the width of that road, right? That might be, you know, it's basically a county road. Uh it's not really a city uh city street the way we can we classify them. So, uh all that being said, this he's not going to change the usage of the property. It's been like that for forever and in and a day I guess since the 50s. And so I think if we can make sure those buffers are in place so it doesn't affect the the local neighborhood and he continues to use it as the property as it has been for the last, you know, 70 years. So I I make a motion to approve. >> Councilwoman Vaughn, >> just a quick one. I had a couple emails on this. So two people do matter. They their opinion matters and they're and they were concerned about the traffic. So by has the traffic increased? I'm sure it's not because of his business, but Viola Road's not really a county road, right, Gail? You just said that it's a city road, correct? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, do y'all foresee anything there with the traffic? >> So, has Mr. Luby's uh use contributed to the excessive traffic? No. Um, and that's in discussion with Mr. Lubie. it's very minimal that they bring vehicles in or equipment in or have somebody visit their site. Um, could the traffic on Biola be used extensively now because of the reconstruction of heirs or people finding different routes? Absolutely. >> And that's my question. So, that is just something that we have done because of errors and all that. It has nothing to do with his business. >> It could have easily been that was under construction for quite some time and Mr. Lubby will attest to to that and even using his property as a layown yard for that construction. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second on the item? >> I know, but we don't have >> There was no second. >> A second. >> Thank you. >> There is a second now. Um, and we're going to go ahead and open public comment. Uh, is there anyone in the audience that would like to make comment on item number 13? Again, thank you for um Mavina, right? Is this are you Julie? You spoke of the u during public comment. So, uh we have um a rule in place that if you speak, you can speak during public comment or when the item comes up, but not both times. >> Oh, I did not know that. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. >> I just want to make you aware. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Vin. Okay. So, we have a motion in a sec. Oh, anyone else? Yes, sir. >> Good afternoon. My name is Valentine Garcia Corps Christie. Um, and I'm here to speak on behalf of a lot of the residents that are adjacent to the property being questioned. Um, we are against it. I guess but if I've understood it correctly, he Mr. Louie plans to keep the property the way it is. Uh we're understanding that you know who's to say that once he gets his yes to his reasonzoning no that will change even though there are from what I hear specifications of what he can or cannot do. Um most of our residents there are I guess you call it old school. There's some seniors there. Like my mother lives right across the street from me. My property is right adjacent to his. Um, you know, if that were to change, if he was to change his way of how what he's doing now, of course, that would increase, you know, traffic through our thing. And as gentleman said, you know, our city looks like a county road. Yes, it's paved, but we have no sidewalks, no curbs, there's ditches. If somebody would, you know, take the time or somebody visit somebody there close to his property, I mean, they park it on edge of the road, that bit nearly blocks the whole street. Now, businesses being open there with more traffic coming in, I mean, that's unsafe. Okay. And two, it you know, who knows what kind of how much of of traffic it would create through our street as it is. We already have it bad that people go from heirs through our street to get to Kalahar. I mean, that's children live and we have children that live on the street. I mean, I know it's not right, but sometimes they'll get out there playing ball in the middle of the street, traffic's going by. Bad thing is there's no there's no no speed limit signs on there. Traffic just I mean they just zoom through there. Okay. There's no control of that. Our worry is like I said just like other residents is that if if a business does open up big or small it will create more traffic. Okay. It will be unsafe. It'll cause safety issues and that's what we're looking at. And depending also what business may be open. if he decides to let someone open a business. I mean businesses at some point in time and it's you know it is it it does draw criminal element. Kids, teenagers, others will break in. Okay. To do that my like I said mine is property is right adjacent to him. Who's to say somebody comes in to break in jump the fence come into my yard. Okay. I don't want that. And that'll be a fear of mine as long as my fear that like I said my mother lives right across the street from me. She's alone. No. Who said they won't go from yard to yard or whatever it is or you know see okay well you know what I like that house. Let me see what's over there. I'll break in there. That is our concern of that being changed. We would like for it to stay a resident zoning. I mean there's new houses being built on the street. Our street is as far as residents it is growing. Okay. Um he made a comment that if he didn't get zone that he would no do what a section 8 but he said that would be bad for us. What is that saying? That what low-income individuals are are bad? >> No. Okay. I guess status wise I'm considered what? A low-inccome individual. I'm not bad. I'm not a criminal. >> Thank you Mr. Garcia. >> Thank you. >> Thank you sir. Is there anyone else? >> Am I allowed to speak? Yes. Right after. Oh, yeah. Hang on. Mr. >> Evening. My name is Admonos and I also live in the neighborhood. I live with my dad and we're a third generation family and I don't agree with the reasonzoning. Um, if we get it done, who's going to say that the traffic isn't going to be worse than it already is? And like my neighbor said, we do have family there. We do have kids that play. And another issue is the construction if to get done. It's hard to get into our houses as it is when they do work on the roads there to patch up holes. We can't even get in. We got to park further down. So, I'm voting no on the resoning. Thank you for hearing me. >> Thank you, ma'am. Yes, sir. the uh traffic that goes through there. Most of that fast traffic is uh people avoiding the light at Heirs and Galahar and they turn and go down Viola Street and go back in >> I'm sorry to interrupt. Can you state your name for the record, sir? >> Jason Lubby. >> Thank you. >> And uh I've noticed that myself, but I don't I don't know what the remedy is. Uh we we thought it was dangerous for us. Uh but uh in the only area there Mr. Garcia said they don't have any curbs and gutters. Well, we have uh a drain pipe that runs right along our property. Mr. Garcia parked his car there and that's the only improved part of that street. There's no ditch. It's it it has a pipe in it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Libby. Is there anyone else that would like to make comment on item number 13? Okay, we'll close public comment. Councilwoman Paxton, thank you. Um, is there something we can It sounds to me like this that makes perfect sense for people to be avoiding the traffic light. And by all accounts, this property is not going to really change in nature from what it's been for over 50 years. So, if this property is not going to change in his nature and in effect, we're having him update it. It's not that he's pursued and updated zoning to us. We need him to update it. So, if the traffic light is causing unsafe traffic in that area, and again, that's potential. Of course, we haven't done a traffic study or something. That's something I'm glad is being brought up right now because it needs it needs its own set of attention. >> Yeah, Councilwoman, I was trying to see if there was a map here on the um in the attachments, but we'll have Ernie Erness Delgard, our public works director, assess the situation and uh we can see what we can do >> because we we have similar roads out um throughout our district. There's no sidewalks, there's no >> there's nothing. And so any kind of pedestrians when there's traffic going through at high speeds, it becomes incredibly unsafe and and so I sympathize with that area, but I don't want to slight the property that we are telling needs to be in compliance. >> Right. Well, we can I'm not sure if the department worked with public works or not, but we can look at it. >> And then um quick question. I know that the applicant, Mr. Lubie, he said he's not intending to do any kind of development or anything at this time. So, we're not changing the nature of the property, but um should the property change hands in the future if there is there a protection over this to where we'd re-evaluate this um for those residents to protect their interest to keep that traffic low in this residential area? >> That's a great question. So, the special permit would have it has restrictions in it. So at any time if the use that's currently granted in the special permit discontinues for greater than 6 months then it reverts back to the base zoning of the neighborhood commercial. >> Okay. >> So it's not going to allow those general commercial uses. >> Okay. So that that is the first mechanism but there's that's the first of several to protect the residents. >> Correct. And as any new commercial development were to come in of course they have to address certain uh infrastructure improvements as part of development process. >> Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Yeah, we Miles pulled up the street map. So, it does appear to be um a little more unusual in terms of a cut through street. So, we can uh I'm not the engineer, but I'm noticing you could probably put a couple midblock stop signs, but we'll have Ernie, as I said, look into it and see what we can do to mitigate uh if this is true that there's high high volume traffic at high speeds, there's ways we can mitigate that. >> Right. >> Mhm. >> What's that? >> I was agreeing with you. Yeah. But I'm just wondering and I don't want to delay but that's something that should probably happen as we're looking at this not because of our direction I think when there's an issue and not you maybe staff you know when >> I mean unless they called the city and told us we might you know it's a big city we get >> no but like Mr. Lubie has been working with staff. >> Oh I'm not sure >> it wasn't brought up before. >> Did you tell us Mr. Lubby before that there was an issue with traffic on there? >> No. See he never told us before. So we didn't know we don't know everything that's going on. No, I wouldn't assume you did it, but I just assumed he did. So, I take that back, Mr. Ley. >> But we can look at it. We know now. And I just looked at the map, and I'm not the engineer, but Ernie is. And so, there's several ways to mitigate volume and speed in a street. So, we'll look at it. Not saying we can, but we'll look at it. >> Right. Absolutely. Yes, Councilwoman. >> Thank you. Just to add one thing. Is it could we get um have staff grab contact information for the residents who are in the audience today and when we ascertain the cause and the solution we could just follow up? >> We can do that. I think we uh they emailed us a correspondents. I think we have most of them already but um our development services staff will manage their names and we'll we'll get those. >> Thank you. I' I'd like to also be included to just pro track. Thank you. >> Okay, we can do that. >> Okay. Thank you, Evette. I think we do we have a motion. Oh, Councilman, you're on. >> Okay. I wanted to kind of talk about CN1 and you this is the lowest use of commercial ability that we have as a zoning and it's very limited to uh basically what it can be used for. You can't put a bar there. You can't put you know highintensity commercial stuff. It's basically for office for neighborhood offices and maybe some minor retail. That's it. You would And the special permit allows him to continue to do what he's doing, which has been doing for a long time. But if he ever leaves and sells it, it goes back to the CN1 um uh permitting, which is almost it's almost nothing. It's limited use. And I if you can kind of expound on that. >> Sure. >> And kind of describe because there's some concerns that the the residents have next to it about what can be actually done there. So if you could just kind of describe. >> Absolutely. So this the CN1 is intended to be that buffer between residential uses or multif family uses and that more intensive commercial district or as we call general commercial. So for the CN uh one that we're going with, which is the least intensive, it allows multifamily, which would allow for additional housing units on that lot. It allows for hotels, offices, medical uses, and restaurants up to 5,000 square ft. And it could allow for a neighborhood scale scale retail. The property is small. It's under an acre. It's 76 acres. So that also limits what can be done on that specific property. If we would have went with the general commercial that was initially requested, that would have allowed for more intensive uses such as smoking lounges, bars, nightclubs, mini storage, and auto dealerships, which is something that you'll see alongs because heirs is zoned as that general commercial unit. So the CN1 or CN2 or any of the neighborhood commercials act as that buffer that we don't have that very intensive use right next to residential uses. >> Okay. So I want to just make clear that there is some protections in place if he sells the property. So it won't be utilized for those kind of highintensity activities like a car lot or anything like that or any future repair places. So, it I I just wanted to make sure that was clear that we're not, you know, we're trying to balance property rights and usage of the property within the zoning and the neighborhood around it. So, that's I just want to say thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Evette. Um, do we have a motion in a second on this one? We did. Okay. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Next item is item number 14. It's an ordinance amending the unified development code uh 8.5 to revise water and wastewater trust fund administration fees and reimbursement procedures. 8.4 UDC to revise participation agreements. >> Uh good afternoon, Mayor Council. I bet Wallace, interim director of development services. if I can. This presentation is going to cover items 14 and 15 because they are items that work together and move forward together. >> And Evette, let me go ahead and read Sure. 15 then. So item 15 is is a resolution setting a public hearing on May the 12th of 2026 to consider the possible adoption of water, wastewater, storm water, and roadway impact fees for the city of Corpus Christi and its extr territorial jurisdiction. >> Thank you. So the the overview that we'll be going over today provides the recommendations from the capital improve improvement advisory committee following several years of study master planning and review. I'd also like to mention that Moses Mastagashi who is the chair of the capital improvement advisory committee as well as other committee members are present today and at the end of this presentation if you have any specific questions for the committee chair he will be available to answer those. So just a a brief background and I'll try to make it as as brief as possible. It's been going on for seven years, so it's it's a pretty long background. Um, but we started this in 2019. City council directed staff to reexamine the trust fund system and explore alternative funding options for growth related infrastructure. That direction set in motion a comprehensive review of how we plan, fund, and deliver water, wastewater, roadway, and storm water improvements. So, in 2020, the city issued the RFQ for a full master planning and impact fee study. Um, the contract for the work was just over $3.48 48 million and the planning effort concluded in 2023. As the master plans were being completed, SEAK reviewed each plan and its associated capital improvement program. In July 2023, SEAK recommended the wastewater master plan and CIP, followed by roadway, storm water, and wastewater. In September, council adopted all four master plans and their associated CIPs in January 2024. the same time and shortly after uh we brought the master plans forward, we did bring the resolution to set the public hearing for impact fees back then in 2024. And at that time, we were directed to take a step back and go revisit the trust fund fees again and bring two recommendations forward to council. So that's why I say the two items kind of go together because there's two recommendations that are being brought forward to you today. So, out of all of our capital improvement advisory meetings, which Moses I think says is 78 now. We we quit counting, but it it's pretty much up to about 78 to 80. Uh there are two recommendations that came out of that committee. So, the first recommendation is the adoption of impact fees under chapter 395 of state law. Impact fees are designed so that new development pays its proportional share of the system expansion. They are tied directly to our adopted water, wastewater, roadway, and storm water master plans and to our 10-year CIP. That means the fees are based on actual growth related improvements identified in those plan, not on acreage, frontage, or sir charges like the current trust fund system. SAK recommended that impact fees become effective October 1st, 2028, and that the existing trust fund line acreage and prata fees sunset at the same time to avoid duplicative charges. It's important to note that even if council chooses to move forward with setting the resolution for the impact fee hearing, we still need to look at amending the UDC because we have to live in the UDC if that's the direction um until October 1st of 2028. That's why the items are moving forward together. So that brings me to the second item and why there is an andor. So the second recommendation is to amend the existing trust fund policy. Trust funds have been in place since 1982 and have reimbursed more than 4 point uh $41.5 million between 1982 and 2024 in water and wastewater infrastructure. But over time, several structural issues have emerged that limit their sustainability. SEAK recommends modernizing the policy by consolidating the current buckets water and wastewater into two and versus four, clarifying the reimbursement rules, and removing lift stations from trust fund eligibility. These changes will improve transparency, consist consistency, and long-term solveny. Um, just a little history. We're going to give a history on impact fees and give you the recommendation. Give you history on trust fund and give you the recommendation as well. So, impact fees were legislatively created in 1989 under chapter 395, the Texas Local Government Code. Chapter 395 defines an impact fee as a charge imposed on new development to fund or recoup the cost of capital improvements or facility expansions that are necessitated by and attributed to that new development. Water, wastewater, storm water, and roadway impact fees are all governed by chapter 395, and they must be tied directly to the city's adopted master plans and the 10ear CIPs. Impact fees are legally allowed to fund u to fund impact fees can only be used for capital improvement cost associated with expanding our systems to serve new development. So we can't just use it for operation and maintenance. It has to be for that new development in infrastructure. In our discussions with SEAK, the recommendation that came out of SEAK is that we have a maxed allowed fee. And I'll clarify the difference between maxed allowed and adopted because it took us some time to wrap our heads around this 395 policy as well. But basically the max amount is the city legally authorized amount that you can charge under 395. However, SEAK recommended an adopted rate that they felt was an appropriate rate to move forward as the impact fee. So the first column is going to show you the maxed allowed fee that represents the full cost of growth, the amount of each home or new business would need to pay to completely cover its proportional share of the infrastructure identified in our adopted master plans and associated CIPs. The second column shows the adopted fee. That's the actual rate the city chose to charge or or could choose to charge after applying local decisions. The adopted rate must still comply with 395, but it gives us the flexibility to not price a lot out, right? To not make that fee so astronomically high that we are pricing out affordability of homes. So trust funds again since 1982 the trust funds have been in existence and over that time they've reimbursed a lot of infrastructure in this city water and wastewater and lift stations. It's important to go over the history a bit because the system has been effective. It has been um but in two uh 20 or 2003 we added lift stations to the trust fund reimburseable items and when we did that we saw a significant decrease in available reimbursement dollars. Lift stations are very costly whereas our water and wastewater extensions were 100,000 200,000 500,000 lift stations were easily 1 million 4 million 5 million depending on the size. So it took a a greater draw on those trust fund dollars that are available. So I want to also clarify before we go to the next that trust funds now because we do have adopted master plan still have to adhere to the master plan. So if you are going to ask for a reimbursement, you do have to qualify. It needs to be what we've said we are going to build in our master plans. If if you don't want to build that, you have to go through the master plan master plan amendment process that's in place today. So the what are the recommendations for the trust funds? Again high level these are the major shifts that we feel would help make this bucket more solvent if that's council's direction is to stay on trust fund fees. So the trust fund amendments that that recommended would be uh to streamline the trust fund structure from four buckets to one. It's an accounting nightmare right now moving money around all of the buckets. So that really does help us manage that money for the trust funds. The second is the largest one and that is to remove lift stations from the trust fund. I will tell you since 20 2020 to 2025 lift stations alone was $6.5 million paid out in lift stations alone. That was for three lift stations. Three lift stations. That's that's not a lot of lift stations uh for 6.5. And in 202025 if we would have excluded lift stations we would have only paid out $18.6 6 million in trust fund fees versus the 26.5 million that we did pay out. So it's a huge huge difference with these amendments and I have a slide for that if you'all want to look at that later too. Um one of the next amendments is the PR ratapy collection and some of our developers can attest to this that it was never really applied fairly across the board. So we strengthened that language to make sure there was no loopholes in interpretation and that we're all playing on the same field, right? we all understand what should be charged and how it should be collected. The the other biggest draw for us is design memorandums. For anybody who's in the construction business, that's a taking a dart and throwing it at a dart board and giving it your best guess on what you think the project would be. What that causes is a lot of addendums to the projects and more draws on the trust fund. So now we're asking for a full approved public improvement plan that has actual cost estimates with plans that have been approved by the city. And and the last one which is probably one of the biggest ones is to limit the time extensions. So right now we we have several projects that started um started maybe cut a road and they considered that starting and have asked for extensions. Those funds are tied up because those projects are sitting because they started. They were able to ask for multiple extensions. So now we're proposing to limit it to one 12-month extension. And then outside of that extension, you have to come to council to explain the reason why you're asking for more time for that development. That helps frees up free up those encumbered dollars for the next person who is ready, right? So, if you're ready to start developing and you can get it done in 12 months, you're going to get your reimbursement quicker than somebody who may been sitting on it for 5 years or six years holding that money in line. So, that's a big one for us. And with the recommendation, the last one would be, and I know this may not be frown or this may be frowned on, is no fee adjustment at this time. And the reason why is because we'd like to see what the amendments would do if trust funds is the chosen path forward. We feel that the amendments could help us get us closer to solveny with a minor fee increase in fiscal year 2028, but we would like to see that before we just blanket fee recommendations now and increase that dollar because the trust funds are made to remain solvent. They're not supposed to be a piggy bank with, you know, absorbinous amount of money and they're not supposed to be in a deficit. So, just a quick comparison of of where we are right now. So, our current trust fund fees versus the impact fee. So, currently for water, it's about $1,800 per residential unit. And we speak residential more often because commercial, it's not as big of as an impact as it is for residential to keep homes affordable. Uh, for wastewater, it's about $1,200. Uh the impact fee for water is 950 is what they recommended for adoption and then 612 for wastewater. Um in totality it's it's right around the same amount by a couple of hundred. The trust fund actually collects a bit more than what we're proposing as the adopted rate with the impact fees. And it's also important to note that that adopted rate and maxed allowed rate was something we developed with SEAK two and a half years ago. So that data in our mind is is already old data. So, we would probably have to look at revisiting that fee sooner rather than later to bring that up to a current cost of construction or participation in the impact fees. So, what are the key differences between impact fees and trust funds? Impact fees blend developer contributions with city participation as required by state statute. They're governed by state law and subject to changes at the state level. Impact fees are directly connected to master plan improvements, ensuring changes correlate to needed capacity expansions, which create a more standardized and predictable framework. Trust funds are fully local, funded solely by developers through lot, acreage, and prata fees with maximum local control, but limited scalability. Master plans still are utilized to determine the infrastructure need and does not allow the developer to build what they want. Again, if they if they want to deviate from the master plan, they'd have to do a master plan amendment. So again, there there's two items. They they work together and they also work apart. So for consideration here today is two options. Option one. So option one is approve the resolution to set the public hearing for impact fees and amend the existing trust fund language until it sunsets on October 1st, 2028. Option number two is approve a trust the trust fund amendments only. So if you choose option number one, we do two actions today. if we decide to move forward with trust funds as a council, we do one action and the resolution does not move forward. And I I know it was kind of hard to piece that together. Um, but we wanted to bring them together because they are the two recommendations that this uh committee was tasked with looking at and providing recommendations on. And so I stand by for question and any additional background information that you need. >> Okay. Thank you um I bet for a very good presentation. Um, first off, I want to say thank you to the committee who has been working a very long time and a lot of time and effort put into into this work. I know I mean it's been up and down for years. Um, and gosh, this has been ongoing for a long time. So, thank you and your team as well. Um, I want to get a couple I want to hear from Peter um, your insight. I want to hear from Mr. Mastagasi who's here as the chair I think of the right of the seak. Um and I guess and I wanted just for clarity and transparency staff is re um are you recommending one way or the other and I know we'll hear a little bit more from the from from Moses in terms of the group but what what is staff's is does staff have does staff have a specific recommendation? >> So after looking at everything and I'm going to go to this the slide I have here. Uh, one of one of the things that that we really looked at is what was the previous five years? What was 2020 to 25? How what did that look like? So, we collected $20.5 million um in you can't call it revenue. It's not revenue, but money that went into the trust fund bucket. Out of that 20.5, without the UDC amendments, we would have encumbered $26.0 million. If we would have had these amendments back in 2020 or if these amendments would have never been added, if lift stations were never added in 2003, we feel that the trust funds could have been solvent. Um because we know that we would have only spent or encumbered $18.5 million and that would have left 2 million 2 I it's 2.2 million in the buckets whereas today right now we are in a deficit. We're at $1.3 million. Um and again that changes every month. Every day we're collecting trust fund dollars and every day people are are submitting their reimbursements for projects that were approved. If if you're asking for a staff recommendation, we can manage either one. uh for the impact fees. That's a very hard one for us to build out, which is why we did almost an 18-month leeway to doing it because it's going to have several um IT integrations with, you know, the CIP projects, with finance, with our operating system. The trust funds for for us, we understand it. We have a very good understanding of the trust funds now that we've been through several audits and we feel that we could manage this project and make it more solvent now that we understand with the developers what is actually needed to maintain this >> which are the amendments because we were pretty adamant uh Peter weren't we for years that it was we need to go to impact fees we need to go to impact fees but but these amendments are what make it um workable >> I'm trying to remember the deficits So it was close to 10 million at one point. >> It was it was close. >> So I recommended in two budgets that the basically the city uh fix the deficit with um water and wastewater fee adjustments to the average uh uh rate payer. >> So to that for that reason uh something has to be done. We we continue to have to subsidize it >> uh from all accounts and that's not right. But as a way to get it get it out of debt, we did recommend that and council approved it. So the the adjustments that are being made that the committee recommended um almost a near unanimous approval right of these amendments. >> So the amendments both amendments moving forward were the the SEAK was not tasked with figuring the path forward. The task >> on the amendments amendments to the trust fun. Yes. >> Yeah. So the so the committee members whose job wasn't to do this but did it anyway unanimously approved the amendments to the trust fund that are being recommended today. So that that'll fix we think that'll fix the the uh financial condition of the trust fund. >> And you're supporting that. >> We're going to we're going what did you say? >> You're supporting that? >> Yeah, we need something because we can't keep having the average rateayer bail out this development. That's what that's unfortunately what's happened. So >> uh if we can make the if council doesn't want to do the impact fees, we have got to change the rules of the trust funds >> like that are being recommended that were unanimously approved by the committee to keep it solvent. So the average rateayer doesn't have to uh pay for new construction in new subdivisions. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Peter. >> Okay. >> And can we can I ask Mr. Musagosi to come down >> and give us your two cents >> since you've been there for how many years? >> Waiting for this day for a long time. I forgot every binder that I have. Um, so yeah, as a part of the impact fee committee, um, Moses Moscowi, District 5, by the way, um, we we looked at the impact fees. Ultimately, the rates were discussed with y'all. That was a vote of 132 that ultimately gave a rate for your sewer, water, and your drainage, uh, excluding roadways. Then what we were tasked to do as a committee was look at how we could um adjust the trust fund because the trust fund is an impact fee. So ultimately this city has had an impact fee. It's called a trust fund. Um a lot of cities don't have any impact fees. So development is 100% on a developer whereas cities that do have impact fees share a certain amount of costs with uh the city. So what y'all are deciding on basically is if you want to move to impact fees which are governed by a certain site certain type of rules which is 395 or if you want to stick with trust funds which is by the UDC. So what we've done is looked at the UDC and said okay if you eliminate this this and this you you basically take some of the language that's in article 395 uh that guides impact fees and then update it with the trust fund language. So giving you two different options. The committee did not look at or did not look at again which one we should go with. We believe both could be um a path forward. Ultimately the good thing that's come out of all this is that the city of Corpus Christie did not have what were called master plans. And that's really what the development community pushed uh for and what the the city invested the dollars into. The committee looks at what the rules are and aren't for impact fees, but what the city invested dollars in is creating master plans. So, it tells you where a pipeline goes, what size it is, so tomorrow you don't have four of the same pipelines going to four different properties. It gives you a more efficient system, a less costly maintenance system. Um, and that system is now, well, now we have those documents for the whole city. So, um, as far as when it comes to development, whether you go with impact fees or trust funds, I think the the committee, and I don't want to speak because we didn't take an exact vote, but based on the votes, uh, everybody unanimously supported the trust fund changes because they have to happen today regardless. That's a separate vote you're taking. It's going to increase the rates. It's going to decrease uh, any of the issues. and it's going to take away from the notion that the account is insolvent because something is encumbered. It re it might receive credits for reimbursed and oversized lines that it's doing for the city. But what it's also uh doing is it's creating dollars going back into the same bucket. So this is a developerdriven bucket that ultimately creates growth going to an impact fee. you're going to be looking at still a fee put on the on the on the development, but it's going to be put on the permitting side, not on the developing side. So, that is one big factor to look at. When you have a trust fund, the developer pays the fee uh the tap and uh the tap and acreage fees. Whereas on an impact fee, it's going to be the person pulling the permit. So, it won't be the developer, it'll be the enduser who takes it vertical. And again, those are the differences between what the UDC requires, which is the developer to pay the trust fund fees before the plat's recorded, whereas the chapter 395 requires the enduser to pay for the fee when after the plat's recorded, but before the permit to go vertical comes up. So again, um the fees are very similar. Uh that's the good part about it. If if this community goes to an impact fee, we know it won't become a weapon where some communities raise the fees so high it discourages growth or certain type of growth. Um and that's also different cases that um the Supreme Court's looking at. So, in the 18 months that we've taken to get to this point from where we were, we looked at updating the UDC, which I would do anyways because if we move to impact fees, it'll it'll still take you 18 months to get to impact fees either way. So, um, and you might want to look at state law that's changed and, um, just Supreme Court cases that are challenging some of the impact fee, um, mechanisms or how they're implemented by different councils again to make sure they're not weaponized. So, we could go either way is really the answer. Um, I don't there's no recommendation from the actual committee. One recommendation was impact fees 132. The other recommendation is 150 that we make the adjustments to the trust funds because they're needed and they could at the end of the day uh stay in place uh with the amendments that will still allow more amendments to happen. We just put kind of a time frame of 2028 because that that aligns with anything uh that potentially happens if we move to impact fees. But with trust funds, you still use the same master plans. They still relate to that. Everything that's credited is still related to those same master plans that got approved in January of 24 that tell us how to build a city, not redundantly or incorrectly or undersized uh to where we just have better drainage, better water pressure, better sewer um and better roads. So, >> right. Well, thank you. >> Yep. >> Thank you, Moses. Any other questions? >> Um, >> I can sit here. >> Yeah. Yeah, sit there. Councilman Hernandez. >> Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Um, you know, I have not been a supporter of impact fees and for a very specific reason. Impact when it create when you create the impact fees that means they pay the the permanent fee and that becomes city money. The trust funds are developer money that the city ma manages. Those are two different things. Once it becomes city money, you have to go through the procurement process of the city in order to spend it. Okay? So, if that's the case, we'll end up with a situation we had just recently with a 700 foot um $700 a square foot building because we have to use city procurement processes where under the developer uh under the trust fund developers don't have to use that process. that can use their own um methods for uh developing and building their their development. So what and it costs us three times as much to build something under our processes because you have to have all these rigomearroll and and processes associated with it that are just cumbersome to the development of a city. Plus also, he mentioned it earlier, some communities have weaponized uh impact fees in order to limit growth or to direct growth in a certain area or they assign impact fee cost differently for different areas. You know, you know, it might not be the intent for this particular uh staff or council to do it, but that's not to say that that won't be abused in the future. So, I'd rather I'd rather utilize and maximize the the the private sector for development and know what's best for that particular development and infrastructure with guidance from the city via the master plans which we paid for which was phenomenal. So, they know exactly they have the blueprint to know exactly what they need to build. So, I think if we make the improvements to the trust fund, and I and I'm going to make the the motion to go with option two and eliminate going forward with impact fees because that's going to create a whole bureaucracy within development services for you guys to manage. And I'd rather continue on improve the trust funds so we can maximize the use of the private sector and not create a lot of additional burden on us as a as a city or on the developers or or builders going forward. So this the improvements we need to make it solvent. We need to make it um ability to pay for itself. I think we also need to include at some point storm water and some and some roads because uh you know I think developers are required for C1 but once you go beyond C1 that comes back to us there has to be some you know skin in the game there. Doesn't have to be all of it but you can include something along those lines in the future. Um, so, so I'll make the motion for option two. Thank you. >> Okay, good. Uh, Councilwoman Bon, just curious. I know the impact fees are used by other cities. Do you know of any that are used the trust fund? >> So, the tr the trust funds are exclusive to the city of Christie and that's why most communities went to an impact fee because they didn't have something established like the trust fund system. >> Okay. Well, kudos for us, right? Okay. Thank you, >> Councilwoman Paxton. Thank you. Um, I seconded that motion because I concur. I' I've felt for a long time that the trust fund tends to put the strength or a little bit more favorable circumstances with working with local businesses with these with the vision of of business sector. Um, and so that's my comments on it and I'm I applaud the way that the committee and and your presentation has been able to identify how we can uh make those improvements so that a system that for a long time worked really well can go back to that. So I really appreciate that work and and your presentation. Thank you. >> Councilman Roy. Um, I just have to say this, which doesn't really have anything to do with impact fees, and then I'll talk about it. What's the square footage on a pump station? >> It depends >> on the building. >> Depends on the the size of the development, but it's typically not just one building. It's usually a development, whether it's large scale commercial or residential. Um, I do actually have a couple of the list stations here. They're broken down, and they vary by the number of units that can actually uh the capacity can meet. Yeah, you may not have been privileged to our other conversation, but the reason why I brought this up is that it you saying on average it's costing about how much to do a pump to to do a pump station right now. >> Michael Dice weighed in at 150 per square feet. >> 150 >> 150 ft. >> Yeah. 150 square feet at the tune of 3 to four million. Just remember that we we always got to compare apples to apples. But as a former member of the SEAK and being part of the entire process early on, you know, it's interesting where we've evolved and I do think probably I mean a lot of good has come out of this and one of them is the fact that when you take a look at the workflow as far as developing the master plans because if you remember I mean I know that you guys have lived this and I don't want to call it a nightmare but it wasn't it's a little bit of a nightmare because when things would come back I mean if you think about the times in the past where we had the IGA situation and the and the uh pipeline up there and terms of what to build and how much to build. It gives us consistency and um I thought that in terms of trust funds, I thought there was another city. I thought there were only two cities in the United States that had trust funds. I might be wrong, but if there's one, kudos to us. Um, I I also like the fact that the path forward, if you choose to modify the trust fund, it's a lot simpler. It it it really is, than trying to adjudicate the um the uh impact fees. But the other thing that does concern me is the increased litigation around impact fees. So, there's there are a lot of cities that are out there. There's a lot of communities that are out there. There's a lot of builders out there that are challenging impact fees because unfortunately sometimes they're used as a deterrent and they're used for certain groups to be able to promote certain things and and and um limit others. So, um I I know which way that I re, you know, I'm a trust fund guy and and I think uh there's a lot of merit to that. So, but great job overall and I'm glad we finally got to this day when we can get a vote on this. So, thank you very much. Yeah. Councilman uh Betta. Um, Evette, can you can you comment or or perhaps Moses um on I guess that's one thing you know one of the reasons I supported um I mean I was a a trust fund guy but then I wanted us to be able I wanted us to move to a system that was comparable to other communities so that way there's a benchmark uh so that way because of this other system that we have if a developer wants to come from another community and I've shared this with you. I'm just saying this for publicly or actually repeater too is that um as a community if someone comes in and says okay like say for example I know the the the trust fund fees in Portland are somewhat more are are quite a bit more expensive. And so what it is is that it encourages an individual to come to Corpus Christi because we're easier to do business with. And we've got a system in place that way they can come they can compare if uh if Frost Bank wants to develop another project in Victoria and they see well the administrative cost to be able to to to to build that facility is much less in Corpus than if we have a better market so we can do so. But I I want I'm curious about um uh Councilman Hernandez's comment with regard to us facilitating the um the infrastructure improvements. >> So just for clarification, the master plans was the catalyst that we needed either direction, right? Whether we go impact fees or we go trust funds, the master plans give us more certainty when we're taking reimbursements forward. prior to that is kind of what you were stating is that it was it was subject to to council approval and anyone can bring a recommendation forward. We allowed for so many differing reimbursements. Um so so that's number one to the first point just to kind of clarify that. So the master plans is really opened our eyes because even as we started as the department we were 100% the only way we should move forward is an impact fee. And as we went through this process, once we had the master plans in place, we saw the reimbursements come in in in the order in which they should um we saw projects that were ready that met the intent of the master plan and they moved forward. The projects that weren't paid their own way to do the infrastructure or if it was oversizing or participation, they went that route if they wanted to do that route. Um so for us, yes, uh at the very beginning, we were for impact fees or transitioning to impact fees too. And again, we'll do either one. Is it going to take a lot more for us to manage the impact fees? Absolutely. Um, it's a lot of integration. We're going to have to work closely with the CIP projects. If there's alterations in a CIP project, I mean, it can affect ours. We will have to keep the committee um around, which is great. We love their input. That's how we got here today. They will have to run through all of those CIP projects every 10 years. Anytime we want to do a fee assessment, it would have to go through them as well. Um, so there are some some complexities on going to the impact fees. Again, we'll go either way. Um, but there is also uncertainty with anything that's governed by state law. So, every year since we started this process, we've seen legislative items taken forward for 395. As Moses said, part of it is to deweaponize 395 because there are jurisdictions that make it so unaffordable um to build a lot where we've seen uh impact fee rates at like $40,000 for a single family lot. That is not affordable because the developer or the builder in this case because impact fees collected with the builder, they're just going to put that on the cost of the home. Um and as the city moves more to that affordable development and the smaller lot so we can get more affordable development that fee that we do by lot is going to be key to keep affordability. >> Okay. I I I agree with that and I think I think that's the thing the idea my my my my perspective is one and I I've said this over and over again. Peter says that it's now it's it's it's about saying a predictable regulatory environment and and that's all that number one I want to make sure that we have a predictable regulatory environment so that way we're saying Corpus Christiey's open for business you know and and that's that's the perspective with which and I think with the master plans that we have that drive that then it basically it it has that roadmap but the the thing is is that I I you know and Moses this is made that's why I'm asking for comment from you you've obvious developed in other communities. >> Yes. >> And which is the most developer friendly? >> Well, developer friendly actually impact fee is more developer friendly, right? But um trust fund is actually more enduser friendly, right? So when you ask the question, somebody wants to come from out of town where they're used to paying in San Antonio 10,000, San Marcus 20,000, they come to Corpus and they're like, "Oh, we just pull a permit." There's no impact fee. it's actually more uh friendly to them to where they go to Portland, for example, they go, "Okay, we have a $10,500 impact fee." So, in this case, it's a developer cost where an impact fee would ultimately be a enduser cost, meaning whoever takes it vertical. Now, obviously, we can say as a developer, I hand that cost to them. they hand the next cost over and it's really the public's fee when they have the total cost of what their end project is. But um again in this case it's nobody has ever called the city of Corpus Christie and said darn there's no impact fee. I'm not going to build there. It's actually um for them they they have a cost savings probably built in their model or something that gives them a savings because in their model they have an impact fee where in this case it's really a trust fund fee but that's paid by the the developer who's taking the raw land and platting it into whether it's one commercial lot or a thousand individual lots. So >> and then Okay. Okay. One commercial lot. Okay. So I see. So it just moves to the developer not necessarily the end. Yeah, an impact fee is going to be on the enduser where trust fund fee still stays on the developer. And that's why I can stand up here and say as a developer, not the enduser, you know, trust fund has its advantages. Uh impact fee has it advantages. And if the city goes either way, I think obviously there's an adjustment period going through the impact fee process. But the changes that have made to the trust fund process will make or hopefully make that process to where it stays solvent to the point where it it it moves consistently. The the biggest thing that changed was is that money is not going to sit there and cumber not producing money. So, you want development producing development and that'll you're not going to get those agenda items where it says something is a negative account because that bank account can't ever be negative. It doesn't write a check and go negative. It's encumbered based on the projects in order to be paid out. But a lot of those projects don't end up happening or sit in order where now they get pushed to the bottom of the list or reapply. And it it'll keep that thing going. And especially going back to there's developers that have probably done a project paid in but haven't been paid out. And this is for oversized lines, things that ultimately be every one of these lines is a city asset. So ultimately every development that's done, every pipeline, every water, sewer, drainage and roadway becomes a city asset that then becomes an advalorum tax or rateayer. So >> Okay. Okay. And then speak to the com the on council's commentary that the the infla inflated cost. >> Well, at the end of the day, I mean, as a developer, um you know, who you guys hire, what you have to go through, y'all pay more for putting in roads or sidewalks, curves, gutters compared to private development. I mean, that's just, you know, >> I know it's not three times, but it is. >> I I don't know what it is. And that that's something y'all deal with through your procurement process. us. I mean, at the end of the day, uh, private development tends to be more affordable just because, you know, we are going to beat down every contractor where you guys eventually have to pick one and that's the lowest bidder. So, >> all right. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thanks for all your your work and the work of your team. >> Councilman Scott, >> Mayor, I'll be quick. Uh, Moses, thank you for sticking with us. Uh, any and everyone involved in the master plans, I think that was the key. So, thank you for that. And thank you past council members that, you know, pushed that along because we wouldn't be here had you not done that. Uh thank you for everyone that's made these recommended changes to the trust fund. Uh and I I think with all the trauma that is being injected in the marketplace today, some of which is not on us, but some of which is on us like water. I am um I am I am uh against major changes to the way we fund these projects and so support the trust fund with the changes as to as opposed to going to this new whole system that we have to educate our development community on but at the same time people are here saying we need to limit permits for them. So yeah I'm okay I'm okay with trust fund appreciate your work and I'm ready to go. >> Great. Okay. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and open public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to make comment on item 14 or 15 or Yeah, 14 or 15. Okay, there being no one, we'll close public hearing. And I believe we have a motion and a second. Um, and that would be to keep the trust funds with the amendments 14. >> No, actually this is just for 14. Yeah, this we're only voting on 14, which is trust funds with amendments. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. So, we don't need item 15 then. And that moves us over to section L, individual consideration items. Number 16 is a one reading ordinance amending certain terms in ordinance 033784, authorizing execution of a groundwater rights purchase and sale agreement with the Vangeline Lagona LP. Good afternoon, mayor and council. Happy St. Patrick's Day. >> Um I I do have a short presentation. I'd like to go through it. >> Okay. >> So, the the background is uh this is a one reading ordinance authorizing the execution of the groundwater rights purchase agreement with Evangelene Lagona. The amount is 169,491,700. In October 2025, city council authorized the purchase agreement which included 22,000 789 acres of real property. As part of our due diligence effort, the city hired a surveyor and surveyed the property. The survey shows 21,483 acres. Due to that change, we are bringing this contract back for approval. Couple other items that that are changes to the contract is the updates to the surface use agreements. Those are typically referred to as SUAS. You'll hear us refer to that pretty frequently. The changes uh summary of the changes to the surface use agreements were actually then they are actually part of this water right purchase contract is it reserves the groundwater above a depth of 175 ft to the surface owner. Uh it adds uh prohibition of entering the property on subject properties during season deer season except for Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. There's a payment of two times the fair market value of any animal lost due to the city's failure to close a gate or secure the site. The roads were in the agreements were updated from Khichi roads to gravel roads and then additionally the surface damages uh for the land owners have increased. The original estimate with the contract as presented had the surface damages totaling approximately $450,000. that was based on the buildout and the design of the evangelene property. The changes are resulting in surface damages uh totaling approximately $12 million and the the detail the detail of the substantial changes are shown on the slide. staff does recommend uh the execution of this agreement and the purchase of the groundwater rights and the changes as described uh within this presentation and within your packets. >> I'll stand by for questions. >> Okay. Thank you for the presentation, Nick. Uh we Let's see. Councilwoman Vaughn, >> one thing that stood out, you're prohibited from entering the property um during se um deer season except for Monday through Friday. What happens if something happens on the weekend? >> Yeah. So, there are emergency provisions where staff and and that is a definite possibility where staff will have to enter uh those parcels. It might be to check on an operating well. they might need to check on a failure, a pump failure, things like that. Notifications will have to be given. Uh, one of the reasons is um the security and the safety of staff because if it is hunting season, we need to make sure our CCW employees are safe >> and I understand that, but just making sure that they can go in because you never know when there's going to be one. So, that's in the contract. >> That's correct. Yeah, that's that's absolutely correct. And one thing we know is uh anytime operating uh equipment, it requires access and there will be times when we're going to have to access it uh at odd times in odd times of the year. >> Okay. Thanks, >> Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. And so my understanding with this item is we're hoping to approve this at single reading. >> This a one reading. One read. Yeah. and it was approved previously just that there's the the changes that we detailed earlier. >> Okay. Got it. Got it. I had a little deja vu there. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. I think that's all the questions. Um, I'm going to go ahead and >> and mayor, can I just add one more thing just for we would tell you in writing, but since we're all here with these final changes now and with working with the families on the ranches, you know that um we will be able to execute now the water right agreement. We hadn't executed it until this until now. It hasn't been executed even though it was approved months ago. So these final actions that have taken us a few months to get through will allow me and the sellers of the water right to execute the contract either tonight or tomorrow morning. >> Okay. So >> we'll be able to execute >> we'll be able to execute the contract that says we will be buying the water rights from the evangel. >> Yeah. Probably tomorrow is what it would be. So, up to this point, we haven't been able to because the sellers, the families still had some u some some um discrepancies that they were working through, >> ironed that out >> with the LP. Those have all been ironed out now. And we even got involved and worked through Christmas with many of the family members, >> right, >> on some of these surface use agreement adjustments. Okay. So now everything is in order and both the seller, the LP group from San Antonio, the locals and San Patricio County, the Welder family and heirs and now the city will all be in agreement and we can execute >> the water right agreement and of course it's subject next to closing on obtaining the permits. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thank you, Peter. Okay. >> Councilman Scott. >> Yeah. I want you because what when you started that conversation looks like we're buying the rights. It's up to us to get the permits. So say that again for the >> right. Yeah. So the the contract that was already originally approved. Remember this is just an amendment today. >> The original contract that council approved uh requires the seller to obtain drilling permits and transfer permits and that's what we've been working on. But until those permits are in hand uh the the the agreement doesn't go through. So >> which means no money is paid out. >> Correct. There is some earnest money. There's some small money. >> That's correct. But it doesn't close and the the funds transferred until permits are in hand. >> Correct. >> Is there is there a timeline on permits? I mean, does this go on in perpetuity? Are we locked into this contract if if the the sellers can't get the permits? >> I think they can instantly, but >> I think we have Do we have a time >> there? There was a time limit in there and I'm going to um look to Miles. I I believe it was 6 months from the contract. >> You're right. Yeah. >> I'll get that to you. >> Would you please? Yeah. I mean, I I think I think I think they'll get the permits, but I I think the public needs to know if >> you know, we're that's a good point. >> Write a big check. We're expecting to get the permits. We don't get the permits, we might have to go on, although we're about to spend a ton of money, which is frankly odd to me. >> Uh but I I get it. All right. Yes, sir. >> And if I could add to that, so that timeline doesn't start until the contract's executed, >> but the parties have been working in earnest until now to obtain those permits, >> right? Yeah. Um, did you have >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I don't do this very often. I don't like speak in public. No, I want to I want to thank you all for the work you've done and helping the development team get the permits. I mean, I think you all have done extraordinary work uh and doing everything you can to help them get the permits so we can acquire the rights and you know and develop the the water. So, I just wanted I wanted you only do that enough, you know, but you guys I mean it would been one thing to say, "Hey, yeah, man. We're going to write you a massive check. Go make it happen." But you guys just said, "What can I do today? What can I do today?" And in fact, you were in Ran's Pass. We were in Arandas Pass last night, Nick and I, presenting to that city council for the second time. >> Yeah. >> But we've been up in Cinton many times still. And the permits, we don't have the permits yet, but we're we're working towards that. >> Well, what what needs to happen is if we don't get the permits, we want to feel like we did everything we could to get the permits and and it's my sense that you all are doing everything you can to help them get the permits. And for that, thank you. >> That's correct. Thank you, >> Councilman Beda. >> Here, just just one more time. the surface use agreements went from$500,000 how much >> to approximately 12 million >> to $12 million >> correct >> so you know I just want to reiterate that's another thing I wanted to just I was going to say what Mark already did he took it from me but oh well >> but I I I guess that's the other thing that I want the public to know that you know this is this is $182 million without the next step of what we're going to do. So, it's $182 million just to purchase the rights and to to you know, I've I've got it's a it's a bitter pill to swallow with the surface use agreements for another for for the addition of what we've added on what we've already agreed upon. >> Right. the uh and recall for on the positive side that initially it was 25 million that would have been the cost for the surface right uh SUA adjustments but working with the families uh they conceded recognizing this is a public project and >> well it's not as bad as a 5,000 foot building that's $700 a square foot >> you know so it's yeah you got better news you know and hopefully we get some water out of this so >> and you'll see uh >> the 3.6 6 million >> not going into a level one water emergency. It's the only thing right now that'll keep us out of a level one water emergency. You're going to see that. So, yes, it's expensive, but it's it's the only it's the only thing right now that'll keep us out. So, it's a and the council's known that we've been working on this for over a year on this iteration, and it was worked on before under a diff under a different proposal, but you'll see it. You'll see it in the presentation coming up. >> Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Yeah, look forward to that. Councilman Hernandez, >> just want to say thank you and she had cross back there and Ly Larson and you know I remember Hamlet Newsome. I don't know where he's at but you know the uh you know we they've been trying to work something out with us for a long time ever since I've been on council and so I'm glad we finally come to fruition. I just wanted mine it's still less expensive than seawater detail. Thank you >> Councilman Bon. Well, I also want to thank you, too. But, um, Bruce Hill was awesome. And I want to thank you, Mr. Cone, because you really pushed this through when it looked like we were going to have trouble and you took it upon yourself and Nick, you as well. And thanks for that work because it could have fallen really quick, but you you just kept plowing. Thank you. >> Okay, I'm going to go ahead and open public comment. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to make comment on item number 16? Okay, there being no one, we'll close public comment and I will entertain a motion to approve item number 16. >> No, >> I don't think we did. >> Who who had who made the motion? You did. Okay, we have a motion in a second. Please submit your vote. >> My eye button is working. Oh, >> okay. The motion carries. Item number 17 is a one breeding ordinance authorizing amendment number two to the construction management at risk or Seymar contract with Garnney Companies, Inc. of Kansas City, Missouri uh for construction services in the amount of 187,876,831 for a total contract amount of 373,266,623,000. surface use agreements for a total amount of uh I'm sorry up to 11,947,397 and a contribution in aid of construction agreement with American Electric Power Texas AE for $8,953,223 for the Evangeline San Patricio Company uh groundwater program. >> Thank you, mayor. And I didn't say my name last item. So, Nick Wkelman, chief operating officer, Corpus Christi Water. And I do uh I do have a short presentation here as well. And I I absolutely want to thank uh the sellers Ed Cross and Ly Larson for being here today on the previous item. So, this is a one reading ordinance. It primarily consists of amendment two. That's to Garnney Companies. They are our construction manager at risk. It is the amendment is in the amount of $187,876,831. It also includes that before mentioned uh cost for the surface use agreements that's at approximate $12 million and to be exact it's 11,947,397. It also includes a contribution in aid construction agreement that's uh with AE. So that is infrastructure required to bring permanent power to our wells 24 well sites plus our pump station. And then there's also the reimbursement agreement and the adjustment to the um the capital improvement plan. So again, this project is uh 22 additional wells, 24 total. There's two wells existing. There's approximately 30 to 35 miles of water lines within the well field includes the connection to the Mary roads pipeline, that electrical infrastructure that I just talked about, a ground storage tank, and a 24 million gallon a day pump station at the site which will pump and deliver the water to the Merry Roads pipeline and eventually find its way to the Owen Stevens treatment plant. The actions taken to date by this council is in September a master service agreement was issued to Pape Dawson Engineers. They have been working uh non-stop since then. They'll have the project at 60% design by the end of this month and there's tremendous progress on the design side. in October uh was the first authorization of the uh of the water rights agreement which you just uh renewed previously and then in December was amendment number one to PE Dawson and Garnney contractors. So amendment one consisted of the purchase of long lead items and it included the contracts with the two drilling firms who will be doing the drilling on the project. The long lead items substantially consisted of electrical equipment controls and of course uh some of that 30 to 35 miles of waterline piping. Today is uh execution of amendment two for Garnney. So with this uh approval, it'll include the transmission main installation, the connections to all the wells, the connection to the Mary Roads pipeline, which is very detailed and very um uh it it's a difficult process to say the least. Uh includes the construction of a temporary pump station which will allow us to bring water, deliver water in a more expedient time frame. And then additionally uh there is the on-site work for the electrical contractors, site clearing, site construction. Roads are being built and these water lines would be installed under this amendment. and and we of course we have the contribution in aid of construction which is also seak not to be confused with previous development ser services item um but that that item is important with a because that allows us to bring the power infrastructure into that wellfield. Then of course we just talked about the surface use agreements. This provides for the payment of the the surface use and and lastly it's the reimbursement resolution uh for the city to reimburse itself for this project and to draw the bonds to fund the project. Staff recommends approval of this item to move forward. what it will allow. And this is this is significant because with the agreement is signed, the surface use agreements in place, we can proceed with the installation of access roads, the installation of water lines, the construction of pump stations, all that can be done ahead of the time of drilling so that we can continue to move forward with our goal of of delivering some water into the Mary Roads pipeline by November or by the end of the calendar year. We're going to have to work closely with Pape Dawson to make sure that can happen. But the intent is to move forward with the installation of this infrastructure so that we are advanced and ready when the well permits are approved by the groundwater conservation district. The the last slide is the estimated delivery of water from this project. uh working with PE Dawson and Garnney. Uh we are still working fast with the goal of delivering 4 million gallons a day into the Mary roads pipeline in November. But you can see the schedule how it the water is delivered when wells come online. Now depending upon uh the actions of the groundwater conservation district, the preliminary hearing, this schedule may need to be adjusted. But with the path identified so far and moving forward with the installation of water lines, roads and power, we are we are still working towards this goal and this schedule. With that, I'll stand by for questions. Oh, and I do want to and I apologize. I do want to recognize and thank uh Chris Snowy and Andy from Pape Dawson who's here today and Andy Hawthorne from Gardening Companies who's also here today. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Councilman Scott. God, >> man, I hate to go first. All right, I'm jumping to your um infamous six scenario presentation that you're going to at this point sometime after midnight. Um you're telling me the way we avoid curtailment is uh no projected level one water emergency is for water to start coming on Evangeline in May in November of 26. I thought Peter that you've been saying all along that if we didn't have a hearing and get good news in that meeting in February that we couldn't make November. Am I using the wrong words? >> No, that was correct. But we uh we came up with a new plan which is the one that uh Nick just talked to you about which is we're taking a and this is with council support. It's just not me and Nick doing something. Uh we're taking a calculated risk and and continuing the design and we're going to build we're going to start building the project uh in about five weeks without the permits without the drilling permits. So the alternative is to not do anything, maybe lose Garnney and and lose the engineer of record and wait and just continue to wait to get the permits. We're not recommending that. We're recommending we take a calculated strategic uh direction, which is one of uh finishing the design and beginning the construction in about 5 weeks. And that's what this item on the agenda allows us to continue to do. We may recall just in round numbers uh the last approval of uh of uh the project was about 200 million uh for continued design work and early ordering of well uh pump material and >> electrical equipment. This second phase valued at about another 200 million is more for Garnney to actually do the the work in the field uh to uh lay down the pipe to bring in roads to bring in power. Uh it also uh um it uh would allow us to build pump stations, holding tanks on the property. >> So that's different than what you articulating in I don't know early February when we were saying that sentin friends either get on board or you're going to you know >> right well Cinton our friends and Cinton didn't get on board and so we we had two choices at that point. We could have stopped the whole project and said okay we're just going to stop this and hope for the best. >> We didn't recommend that. We said, let's strategically, and we talked to council about this, let's strategically continue to move forward with the project. Uh, knowing that the permits that are required are are kind of secondary to the one that they already have, which is the production permit. Six years ago, the sellers of the of the water rights obtained the production permit, which is kind of the overarching permit. That's the most important one. The drilling permits and the transportation or transfer permits are are generally uh not as uh as difficult to get and you rarely have to uh show standing to uh protest those or have have standing in the protesting of those uh by all account. So uh we just have to go through the the steps now with trying to get sent into the table with an administrative law judge. And up to this point, they've they've uh dismissed about six opportunities to do that. >> So, um I just so we're all on the same page. My heartburn is that I I thought we were going to it was a no-brainer to get these permits and they would happen very quickly. So, I'm that's my heartburn here. And so, now I'm walking the plank about to spend and I'm just won nine votes, but about to spend how much money based on the assumption >> that we're going to get those permits. Right. Right. How much how much you want me to? But that's that's in addition to what we purchased the purchase agreement and then the >> what we agreed to. So how what's my total? How how what's my checkbook? How much am I committed to give Nick? >> Well, you're not giving it to me. >> I know. I would trust you with it though, baby. I trust you. >> But but but and I I want to give you the the >> gonna give it to Camille, right? Yeah. Excellent. So the the total project amount including water rights is currently estimated at $665.2 million. Now that that estimate was uh we we developed that about a month or so ago month or more ago. One thing that I can say is uh as design has completed you know numbers are going to shift and change. The second amendment that this item is for is is the 187 million for Garnney. It's the 11.9 million for the surface use agreements. It's the 8.9 million uh for the um uh for um uh the uh construction and aid with a so all all of those are additive. That's what this agenda item is. How much a I was daydreaming. Tell me again. And it's in my 8 >> A is 8.9 million. >> I got that. Yeah. >> Good to be a >> Yeah. >> And that that's power for the pump station and uh each of the the 24 wells. We have to bring power to the existing two wells. And that's based on the assumption that we we're going to get our permits like what what do I need to look at before I you know blow a gasket that we've committed $665 million and you know our permits are delayed I guess. >> Right. So there's there's uh three protestants and the process is the groundwater conservation district retains an administrative law judge which they have and then to select what's called the preliminary hearing. The the date of the preliminary hearing is not yet confirmed. Once that hearing is had, then the administrative law judge determines who has full or partial standing. So, one thing that could happen is the judge could say, "Okay, protestant A, you have no standing. Protestant B, you have standing for six wells, right? But no standing on the other." I mean, that's an option. >> Interesting. >> Or or there's the the judge could say everyone has standing or no one has standing. We just don't know. We've got to work through that process. It then it could go to what's called a contested case hearing, >> which is more like a um a trial, you know, it's a latigious uh event. And if it goes to a contested case hearing, what the experts have told us, the lawyers, is it could it could be two years. >> Is that is that a is that a locked in stone process? I mean, is that a TCEQ process or is that just a state regulated process? And can can someone somewhere say, "Hey, they need water in corpus. Let's let's cut to the chase here and do this contested case hearing in 6 months." I mean, I don't I don't know. I've never been in one. >> Do we know how that works? >> We do. Yeah. So, uh, you want me to answer it? So, it's >> it's regulated by the San Patricio Groundwater Conservation District and other state law that applies to groundwater conservation districts. So that's the uh that's the issue. Each groundwater district uh might have slightly different rules rule making capabilities there. >> Is there a way to expedite that process? >> There is a way. Yeah, there is a way. So uh we know the governor is helping us. Our state uh our four legislative delegation members have uh bending over backwards to help us and we appreciate the work. Uh there there are opportunities based on the lawyers uh if we're in an emergency uh to uh have uh officials higher up uh declare emergencies and request uh waving of certain rules. And so that's something we're looking at. >> It Okay. >> Yeah. I was just going to say the process is managed by the groundwater conservation district. >> But okay, I had an argument with someone and my my point I thought that hey that's locked in stone. It's 30 days to respond and you get 30 then I get 60 and then we have you know but somebody said no no no somebody somewhere can say no we're going to cut this in half and you guys you know you can deliberate but get to the answer quickly that's fine I I just like to understand that process at some point because what I want to know is what am I looking for to have a good day or bad day right so you get the date that's one thing they have the hearing I I don't know is it 30 days afterwards the judge has to decide >> that's usually that today or the next day. >> Okay. All right. And if it comes back no standing, then we're geniuses, right? You know, let's make it happen. If it comes back, say you got standing on all of them, then you know, we're spending $665 million waiting two years. Now, I get that we run we have a water problem, right? But I'm just saying that it put stress on the body that we've spent all this money and have to wait. >> Yeah. So, Councilman, the original plan was that the the then selected administrative law judge was was to hold a hearing on March uh >> March 2nd. >> So, the plan uh prior was that we would have been able to advise the council on the outcome of that March 2nd uh hearing, >> right? >> Whether or not to proceed quickly, proceed at all or or keep, you know, or just go normal pace. Um unfortunately the judge that was selected uh had a conflict with one of the protestants or the the whole hearing and so with uh recused themselves. Um it's taken time from the uh for the district to select the next administrative law judge. One has been selected and they have provided uh six to eight dates of when the next uh hearing could be. >> We of course picked the first date. the uh the protestants picked the last possible date which is 30 days from now. Yes sir. >> So essentially they're delaying the process by 60 days >> is what's going on. >> 60 days. But but the theory is that even if it's delayed 60 days if we if we pay Garver to get it going, we can still bring 4 MGD on in November if if they don't have standing. Right. >> Right. Yeah. If there's no standing or like Nick said, if there's standing but just some of the wells. So the plan is the business plan is let's see what happens at the hearing when that takes place. Let's see what the administrative law does says and we're going to come back to this council and advise you again to say do we continue because if it goes into if it goes into if it goes into a contested case hearing >> it's at least two years. So a couple options then include slowing the project down not paying premium prices for expedited work. It could include pausing the project, putting just putting everything on hold, returning equipment, terminating contracts. We're not sure we're going to recommend that, but uh so there's many options that we have. What uh we don't have the the facts to make the recommendations cuz the hearing hasn't happened >> and sentence slow moving. >> Okay. But you're open to coming back to us. It's bad news. That's what we've been saying all along is that that administrative hearing will be an important decision point for the council on how to proceed forward. >> And if there's a deal to be made with the protestants, >> right, >> and half the water, does it require a redesign of all this work? >> We wouldn't recommend that. Yeah, because it'd be the price for water would be like $30 a >> It would it would be uh I think it Camille ran the numbers like 15, right? It's $15 per thousand gallons if we got half. >> Well, that's based on the sales price, too, right? So, of course, >> with our friends at the on the developers, but we have an agreement that that number whether it's 24 or 12. Is that what you're telling? >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Okay. I appreciate that. I just need to know what I'm getting into. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> Councilman Betta. >> Okay. So, let me >> Oh, sorry. >> Okay. So, thank you, Mayor. Could just expand upon that. So right now we're authorizing $187 million spend and then obviously all all the other components. So um so so you're if we have to come back and reassess in 60 days I mean that that's really the thing I'm concerned with is that we're going to proceed to construct and then worst case scenario it takes two years. So >> what what moving with that? I know you gave us some options, but yeah, just give me the next option. >> Um, well, let me just make sure we're clear. So, the 60 days was if the hearing had been in in March 2nd. So, 30 days of lap. So, the next hearing date could be 30 days or so from now. 30 35. It's not 60 from now, but >> so it's if it's not favorable >> if the outcome >> what how much I mean it's like >> I mean the the the thing that I worry about with all the expenditures that we've been made on would that include risk because there's no certainty, >> right? >> You know, there's no we haven't got the permits even though we were told it was going to be very easy. Of course, that was the developer telling us, you know, they've got they've got some um u uh what is it? uh um they've got a reason to want to do that, you know. So, but um that that's my thing. I mean, I know it it's just like I'm not I I think I think uh the the example of Harbor Island is way ambitious and I think it was way premature for us to spend 2.7 million. And so, my thing is is that we've already expended how much on this project? So the the first amendment with um the first amendment with Garney was was I think it was $196 million plus or minus. >> Yeah. Yeah. But how much have we spent so far? >> Oh, you know, to date, we've we've only spent a couple of million dollars to date. So, in my weekly water supply memo, I'm including the expenditures. >> Yeah. And I saw that I saw that on Friday. >> So, I I think that's the thing. you know, I'm just, you know, pretty soon we're going to be pricing ourselves out of out of out of out of uh what is it? A speculation, >> you know, and that's the thing I'm worried about is all of a sudden the cost of speculation on moving forward with a project that may take that may not be available for two years, then that there's a there's a cost associated rateayer you to the rateayer because of the fact that we've expended money to either design and then put it on the shelf. And so at what point I I guess that's the thing I would ask maybe perhaps or and you know you don't have to provide it for the whole council if you want to provide it for me or if you want to provide it for everybody. I just want to see what's what's the speculative loss if it doesn't work because we're obviously not going to build we're not going to spend $187 million on pipeline and pump stations and electrical deal if if in 30 days the we're we're told that you know there's going to be another additional process and we're not going to pay the permits but I know that we're expending dollars so to speak and then what's what's the speculative loss That's really what I'm worried about because now we're worried about water. We're worried about the cost of the rateayer. Well, we're adding additional cost and we still don't have water. >> Yeah, that's true. >> You know, >> nobody's arguing that. >> So, that that's my that's really been my frustration and and I understand I mean, you know, going back to Del, I mean, yeah, it's it's about a $250 million difference, but we had we had permits. uh we had the only thing speculative was the difference in the funding that we already had of which we'd already baked that into the rate. So right now we've got this additional funding. I mean, I'm going to say at Nauseium, we're complaining about a 5 5,000t building, you know, and yet, you know, what is it? Uh, here we are spending funds on a speculative investment that we don't know where it's going to go because there's no certainty. And I just want the public I just want to know for my own fact for my own is that how much money how much speculative funds are we spending on the ch and the fact that we don't have a project that's certain. Yeah, Councilman, we're going to get you that answer, but I I I you would have to define speculative. I think this is more calculated strategic engineering work, you know. >> No, no, no. It's not this is not a this is not a this has a lot of information behind the decisions and the recommendations but >> Well, well, any perspectives is going to provide that for you because there's risk >> and that's all I'm saying. You said you agree with the fact that we're spending funds Yeah. on on a project that may that I mean this project I think it's going to make I really do. I just I just I'm not I'm not so bullish that I think it'll happen in by November by next year. >> Yeah. Well, it really needs to. You're going to see why it needs to do here momentarily. But let me just add a couple things on the speculative nature that that I don't think is speculative. So in the water plan, the state water plan, this project has been in there for four decades. Uh, so the Evangeline project has been in the state's water plan, developed locally and then, you know, submitted to >> and there's a reason it hasn't been developed. >> Well, it's it's >> in the plan. It's in the plan. That's part of the administrative process. >> Well, a lot of the other facilities the same thing, you know. Yeah. >> I mean, I agree with you, but I I just think that there still is there there is small component. You may I may be more bearish and you're more you're more bullish. So, no, we're together on this because we we're recommending and council has to approve it every step. >> I'm I'm with you. I'm with you. And I'm not trying to I don't want to get into a power struggle with you. I'm not trying to do that. I'm just saying that there's a cost associated. >> That's correct. >> And that that's all. And I just want I just think the public should know what that is. >> So that and I and I appreciate you putting that information out there that this is a cost that's spent to date. Now, and then and then if if permits aren't obtained or uh you know, that's the whole thing. If we only get let's say for example like you said uh you know six permits have six wells the you know these permits have standing or these applications standing and then these don't. Well then once again we're we're we're still going to spend almost $700 million and still go through all this process. >> Yeah. We may make a recom we may have to work with the if that happens we might want to renegotiate the sales contract. We're not going to spend if all we can get is six wells, you know, and this there's uh more time in the future to get the others, we may have to put a minor amendment in the contract term. So, I think the key thing is this. >> That's great news. >> What's that? >> That's good news. >> Yes, sir. Yeah. I think the key thing is we have to see what the administrative law judge rules. >> I agree with that. >> And if we've been saying this, this is not the first time we're saying this. Once that decision comes out, we're going to give the council a series of choices or recommendations and and we're going to give you series of options with a recommendation because if it's a if it turns into a contested case hearing, it's at least a two-year delay. >> Yeah. >> Based on all the all the lawyers that are talking to us. >> And and I want to commend you and your team for the sense of urgency just like we did before. Uh because I think I think you've worked hard almost harder than the developers. And I think because you know that the I would say that you have worked harder than the developers and the thing is is I I don't know of any other organization private sector or otherwise that would put so much urgency into making somebody else some money and what is it but that shows your commitment to the city of Corpus Christi >> you know and they're they were quite bullish and we just it hasn't come to fruition. So I but but I I just want to say that yeah I have my concerns. I've said my piece. Um I just I'm saying that for the record. Some of it's theater, but keep up the good work. You're doing a great job. You're what's keeping us alive. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. >> Okay. Thank you, Councilman. >> Councilman Hernandez, >> I don't even know what to say to that those comments. Um, you know, I I appreciate that we're trying everything we can to get this water following every rule that is required by the the San Patricio groundwater conservation district. >> That's right. >> Normally, it's a ride of capture unless you have a groundwater conservation district. So Cinton is protesting our permitting or the permitting uh obtained for following the rules set forth by the groundwater conservation district. >> That's correct. >> Uh which is very minimal >> with when you look at it 1.25 acre feet of water per acre of land. So you know, you know, my anticipation be very hard for them to have standing. And if they have standing on some wells, I don't think we have to eliminate those wells. I think we could just move them uh or make some accommodation for where their wells are. >> Um >> you know this >> we've already Sorry, Councilman. I was just going to say we've already submitted as part of the permits um reductions in pumping at the five wells closest to Cinten wells. So by about a 40% uh we'd only pump 40% of what we could from those five wells that are closest to the Cinten wells. >> Right. But we haven't drilled them yet. >> No, we haven't. Yeah. >> Okay. So there's always the opportunity to move them. >> Well, let Nick talk. >> Slightly different location, you know. >> I mean, how many how many uh you have 10,000 ft between these wells, right? >> So the Yeah. So it differs that it it's not 10,000 ft between the wells, but we are typically three to four times greater distance between the wells than what is required by the groundwater conservation. So, which makes it even more kind of laughable in the sense of what we're having to experience with sitting on this, >> right? >> And I, you know, I understand their concern, but it I you know, we're following the rules. >> That's right. >> We're following the rules set forth by this by the groundwater conservation district. >> Yeah. >> You know, which makes it kind of frustrating, right? And I understand there's a little bit of calculated risk on our part for moving forward with the with the with the design and with, you know, getting pumps and stuff and ordering stuff like that, but I think it's it, you know, it's a calculated risk and probably a better situation than what we're describing right now. you know, I I appreciate the work that you're doing and I know we've kind of beat you up on this a long time, you know, and you know, we've um we've gotten a long way to get here. I think this is the right move to do to get the water that we needed we need. This is one of the fastest way to get it. I mean, even if we if we're contested, what pushes it out two years, it's still >> it's still relatively quickly compared to other um other things. >> Yeah. >> Right. So, you know, I hope that we don't have to go through that. I hope the administrative law judge sees that we're following all the rules that you know that it it's case. I I you know, I wish Sitt was a little more understanding in in our situation. Uh but it it's I think we're moving the right thing. We're moving forward. We're doing the the you know, at a very reasonable cost considering, you know, the other projects that we've seen. It's important to to move forward with this. And I'm I support it fully. Thank you, >> Councilman Roy. >> Yep. Uh, thank you for your presentation. You know, I I want to I want to go as far as saying that not only are we meeting the rules, I think we're exceeding the rules, you know. Um, >> that's right. >> We're in a situation where we're four times greater in terms of the distance than what's required. >> And and that's got to be meaningful, I would think, you know. But we don't have time on our hands. I think we had a minor setback when we had to get a new administrative judge. But um when you take a look at this project, the couple things that we know we can do and the way it relates to the rateayer um and and this is a long-term project, right? >> Absolutely. Yes. >> Yeah. These these are assets that have to be maintained, >> right? And the quality of the water is what we know is is good, right? approximately 800 TDS. We talk about TDS a lot. That is acceptable. Yes, that's good. >> But what it does is that >> and and I really do believe at the end of the day that we're going to get to where we need to be. I mean, I think yes, we've got to jump through a few hoops. I think that the calculated risk is is at this point worth it, but it also relieves us from being able to have to worry about the burden of some of the temporary sources that we're looking at. And um it gives us more options there too. And so that's why this is this is a critical it's an important project that we really need to get behind the success because as we've heard earlier and some of the things that we've heard in the last couple weeks is that we don't want to limit our neighbors. We don't want to damage our neighbors if we don't have to. You know um we certainly when you want to compare the other the well fields this is a better option in terms of distance and doing our job to make sure that we can do anything we can to minimum subsidance. Correct. That's correct. Yeah. So part of this will be a complete subsidance monitoring plan. >> And the other thing is is that with the water treatment, that's just another good prudent backup that we need. So again, I understand it's a little scary, but we're in a situation where we should be afraid right now. So um it's got my support. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and we have a second. Um, I'm going to ask if anyone in the public would like to in our audience would like to make comment on item number 17. Yeah, just come up. Suzila Sana Corpus Christi, your staff should be black and blue by now. All the abuse they've taken and everything that's got happened to them, but they've come up with good solutions. I do want you to remember one thing that I keep emphasizing to you and some of you might not like it when I say it. You were voted in by the citizens of Corpus Christi. You represent them. We are your priority. I want you to be good neighbors after you take care of us. First take care of Corpus Christi. First take care of us and then you can be good neighbors. Okay. Thank you to staff. Thank you for the state manager and thank you for all the work you've done. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Uh Jason Hail, Corpus Christie. I think this is a great groundwater project. Um I want to thank the city um city staff for all the hard work they put into this. Um one thing that I'm confused about, well, okay, first I'm just gonna explain. So, this is a land owner who has water rights that they want to exercise and basically the city of Sentin is saying, "We don't like the way that you want to use your water rights." So, it's a value judgment, right? But the San Patricio um groundwater conservation district has a clear set of rules and this meets all of them. So, for me, it doesn't make sense. Um, and also worst case scenario, San Patricio Municipal Water District uses 39 million gallons a day. We sell that we sell to them. You know, worst case scenario, if we can't get a transfer permit, you know, we could sell that water to them, couldn't we? I don't understand why hasn't that been brought up. Anyways, that's it. Thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. H. I think we've got one more. >> Just have a real short one. Before you make any decisions, I would confirm what your actual production permit is, not only from 2019, but whenever >> you state your name, please, sir. >> Troy Cranford, outside city limits. >> Thank you. Uh anyways, I would confirm what the actual production permit is from 2019 that was uh renewed in uh January 2025 and see how many wells are actually on that production permit. Um just a word of advice. Thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. Cranford. Anyone else? Okay, I'm going to close public comment and I would act I'd like to ask that question >> uh about the about the production >> our production permit. Yeah. >> So the the produ conservation district has uh approved the production permit twice. That permit was 20 for 25.4 million gallons a day. So, what you're seeing is um the the reduction in the in the acreage of the property. It still allows us to obtain that goal of 24 million gallons a day. What the attorneys have stated is that since that the production permit is approved, so the withdrawal of that amount of water has already been approved twice by the groundwater conservation district. The drilling permits themselves are particular locations uh within the property that have to meet those those regulations I talked about in terms of spacing and >> Okay. But if if if you're restricted with how many wells you can drill. >> Yeah. Mayor, excuse me. Just so what Mr. Cranford said, uh just want to I want to I'm I'm not sure if I want to correct it, but the production permit has nothing to do with the wells. It has nothing to do with the number of wells or where the wells are. >> The amount of water. >> It's the amount of water. So, the amount of water you can produce from one well or or 24 wells, >> right? >> So, uh I'm not sure what he was talking about, but just so the council doesn't get confused, the production permit is a standalone permit. It has nothing at all to do with well, the number of wells. >> And I would imagine it does because >> No, it doesn't. >> Okay. Well, let me finish. You can help me understand. >> Yes, ma'am. Okay. >> Okay. I mean, you can you can you can have 24 million, but if you can't drill enough wells to get 24 million, then you're not going to get 24 million. >> Uh, if you don't That's correct, but it's not But he he was saying that you might want to check to see the number of approved wells in the production permit. >> Okay. You're saying there's no wells in the production permit. There's NDS. >> There's no The production permit doesn't reference, right? The production permit doesn't reference number of wells or where the wells should be or could be. It just says based on the uh on the on the uh acreage of land and the and the per and the rules of the district >> and amount of water. >> Yeah. You can you can produce this much water. Okay. >> And that permit has been approved not once but twice. >> Twice. Okay. >> And we've had numerous lawyers. >> We have no doubt that there's that the production permit is solid >> at 25.4. >> Correct. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Understood. Okay. Anyone else? Okay. will close public comment if I didn't already do that. And I think we've had some really good comments. I I appreciate him. You know, there there's concern. Absolutely. And I don't think it's a you're for or against the project. It's a we need to be concerned with with what our expenditures are, what we're getting, what we were told, um what is actually happening. And and I I'm a realist and and I we've had this conversation, Peter, but you know, we stood here and said, "No problem, right? Permits are going to be no problem." We we didn't we were told and and they were a problem because there are some things in in all of these projects didn't even have to I mean, all of these projects that that are out of our control, but we we need this water. We're we cannot let it go because we're going to get it. It's just again it's just you know hopefully there is no standing and if there is we get to work it out. Um but but again I think we have to plan right for for the worst case scenario and I I know maybe during the water supply uh update you know we'll talk more about that but but we have to plan. I mean we pray to God that this comes through um you know but if it doesn't we've got to be able to know what what's going to come in in lie of that. if it's a judge says, you know, our worst case scenario. Hopefully not, but >> yeah, >> either way, that's a conversation I'm sure that y'all have had and we'll we'll talk about during the supply. Anyhow, this is another milestone in in this project and and we have to move this forward and um hope for the best and and do everything we can. Uh so, with that, I think we have a motion. We have a second and I'll ask everyone to please submit your vote. Okay, great. The motion carries. U item number 18 is a motion authorizing a professional services contract with Spheros Environmental Group Parent Inc. of Round Rock, Texas for farfield modeling. >> Correct. Thank you, mayor. And I have a short very short presentation for this as well. So it as you recall uh we have established a farfield advisory committee and under the city manager's direction we are moving forward with a farfield model of the entire base system. Requests for qualifications were um were issued. We received a number of qualified applicants. The top scorer from both si the city staff panel and also from the farfield advisory committee was Spheros which is who the city's contract will be with SP working with Spheros uh they have identified that they've worked with a company called Hazen and Sawyer which has done work for the city uh as a company that they've worked with previously in the past enough to the fact that they have an existing master services agreement with them. So what we have is we have a proposal from Spheros with Hazen and Sawyer as their subconsultant working on this project. The project itself will include uh modeling work that will commence immediately pending approval of this uh council. They will the modelers will review all previous work that has been done to date. However, certain things will be done to bolster the modeling effort. The model grid resolution throughout the the area will be increased. Efforts will be made to further simulate the effects of large ship traffic and mixing throughout the inner harbor channel. The model domain will be expanded as well. And also uh modeling will um be reviewed to include additional uh dry period uh periods around throughout the years the historic data as well. The one thing to note and we talk about timing of all of this and we've been we were very pleased with the uh presentation given by Spheros at the last farfield uh committee meeting. I feel very encouraged by it. uh they are ready to start to work immediately with the goal of providing this council uh modeling data and and significant work done by in at sometime in the April time frame. The final report will not be completed in April. That will follow. But what they're working towards is having add uh significant data available for review, not just for this council, but for the farfield committee as well. The total amount of the contract, including Spheros and their subcontractors, is $298,210. staff is recommending approval of this contract and moving forward so the modelers can get to work ASAP. And I do want to uh recognize so we do have uh Jordan Ferdinand from Spheros here as well. And then there is also a representative from Hazen and Sawyer here and we we thank them for being here but also uh really thankful to them for participating in last week's farfield modeling committee advisory committee meeting. With that I'll stand by for questions >> and I just Nick and mayor if you don't mind I just want to add because one of the speakers this morning talked about we're hiring both firms even though uh one ranked higher than the other. So that was an initial recommendation from Nick, but we did hear some feedback from the farfield committee of 19 members and they didn't like that. And so at the same time, the two uh the two biders talked with each other as well and they felt that the the highest scoring which is Jordan Ferd Ferdinand who's here >> um would be the would be the the we would contract with him. uh but he said he would like to have Hazen and Sawyer be a subconsultant to peer review to do other work to support Jordan's model. Uh be before we agreed to that, we we reviewed this concept with the committee who supported it, even those that were uh that had issue at first with the two. >> And so uh so that so the committee supports and endorse it. The city staff does and the consultants uh recommended it. And so there's there's only one contractor that's that's Spheros who on their own valition as as Nick said have already a a on call contract with Hazen and Sawyer and so they'll use them uh to do work that they need to get done to get the model done in time. It also to Nick's the reason Nick liked the idea and we did is because it brings additional power to the project so to speak a lot of it brings more mental capacity more computing more expertise. We know I know and that's why I recommended that this is a critical piece in the question of the inner harbor and so having the best minds work on the question of will this impact the bay the more the better is what we think and so this is a a good recommendation that is supported by the committee I don't think there's anybody that's opposed to this concept so I just want to make sure in case anybody if the council members heard that comment this morning from one of those speakers the scenario has changed >> thank you >> yeah y >> councilman Kentu >> thank you mayor Um the stud is going to be throughout the whole bay itself. Correct. >> It's the entire bay system. So Noasis Bay, Corpus Christi Bay, and the ship channel of course. >> What was the reason for having two companies? >> Well, there's one company. So the city has one contract with Spheros. Uh >> that's who we already do business with. Correct. >> Are the city contract will be with Spheros. It won't be with any other modeler. Spheros has actually two sub consultants working for them in support of this project. >> Was that their idea or was that the city's idea to do that? >> So what we did is uh initially it was my idea like the city manager said to bring on uh uh to bolster the team to bring on more um uh a stronger effort and more of a knowledge base. One thing that the committee uh stated is they were very concerned about uh QAQC as well. So one of my initial thoughts was if we had two reputable firms working together, they would they would work together to provide the best quality product. >> It just was my understanding that we were going to get a company who has no interest with our city to do a farfield study in the beginning. no no financial is no financial um gains or anything like that. My understanding now is that the the second company we are giving them millions of dollars um for other projects and I just my understanding was we're going to hire somebody who has zero interest with the city just you know just like this committee is supposed to have been 10 people we have 20 people whatever the case is. Um, but if Jordan's involved, I I trust Jordan. I think Jordan's will do a good job. Um, a little concerning that's going to be done in April. That's pretty quick. That's pretty fast. Um, all the studies that people said they could do whenever whatever the cases will take months. This is going to take a month, month and a half. Um, that's a little concerning. Um I don't know if he's using they're using this some data they got from the port what they're doing but um just to start fresh on a farfield study. I mean that's pretty quick. Don't you agree? >> Well the couple of things there councilman is uh they they are not starting fresh. They're using the previous work that's been done. However, during the last farfield committee meeting, they identified various items that uh that Jordan and his firm agreed that need to be strengthened to improve the quality of the model. >> Okay. >> So, they're utilizing previous work as your as the base, but then they're making it even stronger by by uh confirming the inputs, adding inputs, uh adding the the additional information to provide the the basis needed. And and again, Hazen and Sawyer is the subconsultant of Spheros. They are not working. They are working for Jordan and his firm Spheros. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Councilman Hernandez. >> Okay. I just want to confirm this. This was the the contractor that did the the farfield model for the Lita U location for the port. >> Yeah, he did the previous port work. >> Just want to verify that. Uh second um there's also the fact that we're not releasing water from the noises river anymore. I mean was that taken into consideration in the previous model or is that going to be taken in consideration? >> So those the let me answer your second question first. So the current conditions will absolutely have to be uh considered and there and also future conditions because there will be a time when the Noasis River will flow again. your first question about the previous model. I can't speak specifically to that. Um what was uh what was included in the model or not? I I could find out for you, but I don't have that information. >> Okay. So, you know, I'm assuming they're taking historical data since they're not going to be actually monitoring much more than a month of of current data, right? I mean, you generally want these things to have like a year's worth of information. Um >> so they are using years worth of information but they won't be compiling years worth of information going forward in the future. They're utilizing existing data that's available. >> Okay. Do you have any issues with the the premise of their model? >> No. I you know the uh committee meeting uh it was three hours last week. I was very impressed uh with not only the uh the modelers themselves uh Jordan but also with the farfield committee. There's a lot of great discussion, a lot of good input. I feel very confident about the quality of the product we're going to get. Um in inputs are are are critical. You know, I I know one thing like uh the city of Porterancis is developing a new wastewater treatment plant, right? that I know for sure that was not included. Those effluent flows into the bay weren't included previously. So, like any any model, you've got to adjust for current conditions, >> Porter. Okay. Thank you, >> Councilwoman Bonn. >> Well, I went to the last two meetings and that last one was three hours long. I don't know how y'all did it, but I want to thank the city staff for doing it because that was a lot of work. But I want to thank the committee. That was a really good committee. You had a lot of smart people on there. Jason Hill was on there and he asked some really good questions and there were maybe a couple of them that didn't just sit there and didn't say anything, but the majority of those people, boy, they covered everything. And Jordan did a great job answering the questions and covering things that they didn't even ask. I feel very comfortable with him doing it. and I was um not sure about having the other one Hazeman and Sawyer, but after listening to them, I think there's a lot that they can add that helps you and I think you saw that too. So, I think it's great that you're going to do a miss consultant, but I have complete confidence and thank you all for doing that and having the committee. The committee did a great job. >> Councilman Scott, >> hey, I just I I don't know anybody. C can you point out other humans? Who Who is Hey, you good-look guy. I'm all in. And is that Jordan? Are you Jordan on Jordan on left? Thank you for doing this. I just I I know the names just because I've read it in my council packets, but I just hadn't I didn't know if they wanted to say anything. I You don't have to. Trust me, we we all want to get to dinner, but uh I don't I the the committee knows you guys, right? Cuz I guess y'all spoke, but I'm you know, I'm a humble servant to the committee, but I'd sure like to see if you're human. >> Uh thank you. I'm Jordan Fernand. Uh I did come here six seven years ago to make a real brief comment but um >> really excited to be working on this type of project again. Uh this is this is what I did my dissertation on about 20 years ago now. This is what I I the project I most enjoyed when I worked for the water development board uh in 2025. We started doing field work in Corpus Christie Bay and I really enjoyed that. working for the port, building that model is has been the highlight of my professional career to do this type of work and so I'm excited to do it again and improve what we came and gave you before. Um Tim Oing with Hazen Sawyer. Uh he and I have intertwined our careers over 20 plus years. Uh I was his TA in grad school. He was my first boss at the water development board. You know, we we have a long history of working together. So, that's why I I think it'll work uh fairly seamlessly to have two different competing consultants work together on a project for you. I think it's going to be beneficial. I wouldn't do this with with many other companies. So, I'm I'm happy that that Tim's on board uh to work with me on it. He's already provided some insight uh that I wouldn't have thought of and and hopefully vice versa. So, I'm excited by that. Uh again, thank you for the the vote of confidence in this and it is fast to >> I was going to ask you talk to us about the speed of of the study. Well, I mean, every time I come into this room, you tell me you need the answers quickly. And >> yesterday, yesterday, >> we have the opportunity to do great modeling for Corpus Christie Bay and for this system. You can build the the premier model, not necessarily just in the United States, but probably worldwide in terms of what we can do hydrodnamically with the data that we have and the models we've got and the supercomputing. >> We could make this as as fantastic as you want, but that takes time. We have an existing model that I built for the port that is very good. It's not perfect. Uh I told the committee there's there's four things, four modifications we want to do to improve it. >> Um one of those modifications is is new and a novel idea that hasn't been built into any hydrodnamic model that exists out there in the world right now. So that's going to give I mean if you wanted to brag as a city, you could say, "Hey, we've got something nobody else has." >> Yeah. >> Right. And this is for for that reason. That's why I needed to subcontract with DSI Incorporated. They're the group that wrote the model model code, the EFTC code that we're going to use. I need their expertise to rewrite a different part of it to do this new functionality that's going to work for you specifically for this inner harbor. But it's also going to work for modeling the Barney Davis plant, the Noasis Bay Power Plants, and almost any other discharge where you're going to take water in one location, use it, and put it back somewhere else. >> What's the DSI? TSI, what' you say? >> DSI is the company. It's it's based in Edmund, Washington. Um they've been doing hydronomic modeling for 20 years and they they have built both the code and the the graphical un user interface that makes the code look cool on on screens to show the public and attorneys and such. U so they'll be a big asset to the team. And then I've got Hazen Sawyer working on an additional task of expanding the model time frame. Right now it only does 2010 and 2011. Uh we were instructed to make it do more time. >> Sure. And uh that's what what Tim and his group are going to be doing. That one can be done simultaneously with the other modifications that we're doing. The modification that DSI is going to do is going to take a little bit longer. It's not going to be done in April. Um but the the modifications of enhancing the model grid resolution, expanding the time frame, and doing the ship traffic uh mixing part of it, those can be done quickly, and those are what I will be back in front of this podium in in April to show you. I I had a question that was brilliant and I've since forgotten it. Um, so it so the fact that Oh, I know what it was. So is it a it requires massive computing? I mean, is this a a huge program that require I thought you may have said it required a big computer system >> to run. >> So there's all sorts of sophistication within the model code that could mean you need a bigger computer to do it. the code, the computer that I have in my laptop or in my laptop bag right up there. It's it's a normal Dell. It's four years old now. It can run this. And it did run the the model that I built for the port. >> Okay. >> It'll be slower once we make these modifications, but it'll still run on a on a basic laptop. It doesn't need the UT supercomput >> like the the model I built in 2019 did. And so at one point, I don't know if they said it here at the council meeting, I assume because I never met with them privately, that the DH, no, the the previous modeling group talked about filling the the inner harbor with Rubik's cubes and each face on each Rubik's cube was a different data point, you know, whether and then they just said we just started turning them and that's when they ran their 400 million iterations because each, you know, you're turn is that generally are you taking all this data and say if it's a sunny day and the weather, you know, the temperature is this and the wind's that and the ship traffic is that and then you say, "Okay, everything else is the same, but now we're going to double the ship traffic." Is that generally >> That's the concept. Yeah. Yeah. We haven't quite figured out what ship traffic scenarios we're going to do yet. But yeah, that's the idea. >> I will close by telling you I've spent the last 20 minutes trying to figure out who you all were. I don't know who you three in the back are, but I thought you were with them. So, we can't wait to see what brings them up. Uh uh uh to the committee, thank you. Uh Peter, thank you. Uh Nick, thank you. And gentlemen, thank you for doing this and go to work. Appreciate it. >> Thanks, >> Councilwoman Paxton. Thank you, Mayor. Um so, if this study is going to be utilizing old data, uh well, former former uh former models because we're, you know, we're trying to expedite the study. How will we account for things like our modified water releases? Is that going to be accounted for? >> I'm I'm gonna pull Jordan back up here because he's a modeling expert. >> I'm sorry. I tried to catch him, but >> I'm not trying to run away. I'm I'm here all day. Um >> so, uh modified water releases, what do you mean? >> Um as far as we're going to be recapturing our effluent water, um different things like that. We're doing a lot of changes to our water system right now. >> Okay. So, this model takes uh as as input into the model, it takes anything we want to give it. So, if if we're having the Oasis River come in, that's that's an input. We have Oso Bay or Oso Creek flow into Oso Bay, that's an input to it. If we know of a a freshwater or even a saline discharge, we can put that into the model. So, right now, I don't believe this these discharges are all in the model uh as it was currently built. the the model was built for simulating where the best discharge location would be around the linta channel area and so we didn't focus on trying to get everything else in the rest of the bay right that's what we're trying to fix in in this iteration of the model so we can put whatever inputs you want into it uh reduced or not it doesn't matter to us >> that kind of leads me to that next question was um I I don't I don't mean here to go into a full 40page dissertation on the parameters that will be used for the study. But in those same in that same context, I am curious um it sounds like the farfield committee was all able to give inputs on what was important for the modeling, but something as simple as that, you know, there's a big change coming to our effluent water. There's I am searching for the reassurance that some of those key parameters are going to be included. you know, we're going to test all the effects on the different different um things that we find through that discharge and how it's going to impact the different depths, the different you locations, the different ecosystems, all of those things within both bay systems. >> And it will I mean, it's as simple as that. As soon as we know what discharges and things you want included in the model, we can put it in there. It doesn't take time to do. It's just another input that we add. So, it's it's straightforward and happy to do it. >> So, something that we heard earlier today um was that there was some discussion in the committee that the timelines that were being given to this project were were a little too expedited. If we were to give it justice, it needed a little bit more time to evaluate. My question is from the professional and scientific standpoint, is this procurement going to be meaningful in the ways that we need it to with the timeline that's being requested or do we need to take a realistic perspective and say that's not going to work for what we're looking for. We'll be able in, as I said, in in coming back in April, I'll be able to show you model results that give an idea of the salinity and temperature plumes that might or might not arise in the inner harbor and might or might impact areas outside in the bay proper. We'll be able to do that in April. taking more time is the the additional modification that I want to do that's in should once it works uh provide a a answer to the question is is the discharge of the inner harbor diesel plant going to affect the intake of the deh diesel plant and therefore is there going to be a sort of feedback loop between them that's a that's a key question that we'll be able to answer but not in April that'll be answered by the end of June the the biggest thing that the committee mentioned last week that requires is is going to require more time if you wish to go down that road is to study dissolved oxygen and and dissolved oxygen is important because of course that's what the the critters that live in the benthos in the bottom of your bay they need that dissolved oxygen it gets to them by wind mixing so you have high winds on the surface it brings that oxygen downward to the bottom if there's a high salinity layer that forms on the bottom of of the bay that will prevent that oxygen exchange and cause hypoxia cause the problems that do naturally occur in the bay system in certain locations at certain times. The question is, are we exacerbating the DO problems? What we'll be able to do with our modeling without doing the DO modeling is to identify areas where this high salinity plume may or may not exist. If it exists there, then you can think you might have a dissolved oxygen problem. If it doesn't exist, you're not likely to have that dissolved oxygen problem. So, I came to the committee and I said, we can study dissolved oxygen if you want. That's another 12 to 18 months. And and Tim at Hazen Sawyer has done a lot of that work. He gave a proposal that I agree with that would add about $450,000 to study dissolved oxygen specifically in 12 to 18 months on top of what we're doing now. The hydronamics, the salinity plumes, the mixing, that can all be done in the April to June time frame that we're talking about. Will you have any sort of an indication towards the outcome in terms of dissolved oxygen by April or that has to be a completely separate item that's going to take the additional 12 to 18 months? >> Well, I I'm actually not going to model dissolved oxygen unless I get direction to do so. Um, and and the modeling that I'll do in April will identify just where stratification is going to occur that could affect hypoxia. Mhm. >> So it gives you an indicator saying it's likely to be here, maybe we should study it or maybe we don't need to study it. That type thing. We'll have that answer in April. >> Okay. So it's it's very it's confirmed that by the end of the study that we're doing now engaging, you will be able to tell us this is pointing to concern in these areas. If you're going to rule that out or confirm it, you need to do study XYZ, but this indicates the potential for this risk. >> Yes. I mean, if the model shows there's going to be stratification that's persistent and and strong that's likely to cause hypoxia, we may want to study it more, but I don't I right now I can't guarantee that the model's going to say that or not. >> Okay. I appreciate that information. I really do. Thank you for that. I have one quick question for one of our committee members, um Jason Hail, who is here. Um if you if you don't mind, you can come on up just so it's on the record. Um, could you explain through the committee your interpretation of the selection of firms and and utilizing both and all of that? And I know that we're not engaging that subcontractor. That's up to the other uh that's up to the firm that's on our agenda. But I I do want to know because I wasn't in the meeting. I do want to know what the committee members feelings were about the relationship of both on the project. Um so I haven't talked with the committee members or we haven't had a discussion um specifically about that. There was a lot of discussion about the contract being awarded to both of them that initial uh proposal. Um the next day we got an email from Nick saying that they picked Spheros to get the contract and have Hazen as the subcontractor subconultant. And um at the next committee meeting, no one spoke about it. So I don't want to speak for anyone, but um no one had any objections to it at the meeting. And based on my conversations with other committee members, no one has objected to that. >> Okay. And so with the dialogue that was there through the meetings, um you feel confident in the parameters that were discussed and recommended and their representation in the study? >> Yeah. Um, if I'm going to be completely honest, uh, the only thing I'm concerned about is, um, I I really think that that last component that is going to take until June, I think it is absolutely critical just because um, that's the only way you'll be able to tell if CC polymers is raising the salinity at Inner Harbor and if that's going to increase the outfall salinity. um and vice versa, Inner Harbor on CC polymers in addition to Inner Harbor possibly raising its own salinity. >> Was it discussed at all the potential of evaluating that um on hypothetical terms? >> So um that will be done by the end of the study, but it will not be done by April because they have to rewrite the source code and that's what the DSI subcontractor is for. >> So we will have no data that models the inclusion of CC polymers by April. That'll be summer. >> Sorry. CC polymers will be in the model as far as I know. I'm just saying the capturing their interactions with each other because it is a pretty small water body um compared to most receiving water bodies for this type of discharge that I'm aware of. >> Okay, I appreciate that. And we do have heart research institute represented there. So they were able to share comments. >> Yes. Um, so I I will say that DO is very important and um I wish I would have said something more about it when that first RFQ came out to make sure that DO was part of the RFQ and I totally dropped the ball on that and um I'm really kicking myself in the butt for it. But, uh, I know like Perth, they had done it for just two one-month periods for DEO. And, um, I think, you know, if we could maybe narrow down that scope for DOE and try to get that cost down lower than $450,000, I think it is possible because I don't think we need a year or two's worth data. I think we just need the month worst case scenario to have a better idea and then go from there if we need to. >> Okay. I really appreciate that. Thank you, Jason. We and uh it's Jordan, is that correct? Your thoughts on the 69 um sorry, 30 60day evaluation similar to Perth >> Well, interestingly enough, I mentioned this is a small community. I studied at at University of Western Australia in in Perth, Australia. So, I'm very familiar with that whole system there, too. Um, I think you know, hypoxia is is naturally seasonal uh a lot of times in in Corpus Christie Bay and and so you'd have to hit the right season in their modeling. I think having a longer time period is just would be more beneficial if you're really going to get a good answer on on dissolved oxygen. Um, I wanted to follow up too on the CC polymers. CC polymers is in the current model right now. Um and and we can add I think it's it was told to me that I should model it at whatever they're planning the discharge is not their permitted amount. So we can model it the permanent amount. We can do whatever we want to do with it but it's in the model now. Uh it's one of the discharges that was already simulated. >> Okay. >> So adding it in and enhancing it is not a not an issue. Um >> okay. And um I asked and we we went off on talking about DO and its effects and timelines. Heart Research Institute were there what their feedback has been included in the information provided? >> It has. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Thank you very much. >> Sure. >> Yeah. Councilwoman Dr. Dr. Wetsz I think is his name. I appointed them so he's on the committee from the heart institute. >> Yeah. >> Councilman Hernandez. >> Okay. real quick the you know the inputs we're looking to uh as mentioned by Councilman Paxton to reduce the amount of fresh water we discharge from our wastewater treatment plants at Oso Greenwood which comes in also goes into Oso Bay I didn't see that image on page two on the background it didn't mention Oso Bay but um you also have Allison's going to be reduced in their in their freshwater discharge but there's also um a brackish water plant that we're designing that we haven't really decided on whether it's going to be a ground a deep well injection or it's going to be discharged uh you know I'm assuming noises bay or maybe even the ship channel. So there's an additional amount there that hasn't been decided yet. How do you take these factors into play if you're not sure if they're actually going to happen? >> I mean it can be I mean you can use this model as a tool to assess the impact of of discharging that salinity brackish seat del into noasis bay if you wanted to. So this would >> might want to keep that around in case you know for for permitting for uh for the for any discharge from the brackish water plant that we're planning. >> Yeah. In fact, it came up during our committee meeting. It was uh Greg Smith who brought that up and reminded the modelers of that. So even the the committee brought that up uh before I was even able >> and I'm assuming you're also taking in consideration our wells that we're adding TDS to the Nois River that's going into Nois Bay. Uh >> well remember the Noasis River isn't flowing right stops at the Allen barrier dam. It hasn't flowed for quite some time. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So I mean you have a whole lot of factors in there. So uh hopefully you can capture them all. >> I plan to. >> Well with that I'll make a motion to approve. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second. Um, I'm gonna pause a second. Just should be right back. That way. >> Oh, I'd like to open up for public comment if there's anybody that has public comment. >> Seeing that there's none, I'll close. Oh, I'm sorry. >> Can I comment? Sorry. >> Yeah, sure. >> Cool. So, Jason Hill, Corpus Christi. Um, yes. So, this agenda item is really huge for me. Um, this is something I've been advocating for for the past two years. And I really want to thank city council and city staff for putting together the advisory committee and for making this a possibility. Um I I'm requesting that y'all approve this item. I know the public is super concerned about the health of the bay and I think this will answer those questions. Um I think what Spheros and Hazen have proposed are topnotch and innovative. I think people will write papers about how innovative this is. But just because it is innovative doesn't mean it's necessary. I think given the characteristics of the ship channel, everything that is proposed um is absolutely necessary and to have anything less would be um you know woefully inadequate. Um I also just want to thank the committee members who have participated. um they did an awesome job reviewing the materials, giving input, representing the organizations that um they were put on the board to represent. Also really uh want to give a huge shout out to Dr. Wetsz and Dr. Herdzka because they are about to put a considerable amount of effort into translating these water quality modeling results into ecological impacts. And I don't know if you've read any ecological impact studies before. They had one for um the Allison wastewater treatment plant into the Noasis Delta. There's like 14 studies. It's just an incredible amount of work and it's it's not very like, you know, A plus B equals C. It's just really indepth. And so I really appreciate them going through the effort of getting this information to their colleagues and really answering that question as to what the ecological impacts will be. Anyways, um yeah, that's it. Thanks. >> Thank you. Any other public comment? >> Julian Hernandez, Corpse Christie. Um coming to the party late. Sorry about that. Um, and this might have been talked about. So I think um I guess I I was looking for clarification on so doing the del it sounds like of course they're doing the study and everything else they were proceeding with that. Uh and if that is the the cost on that was in like 1 billion or something like that. um del that if if we are doing that cuz that's what the farfield model is for. Is that correct? Yeah. So if if we're proceeding with that and we have almost 700 million tied up in the wells. So that's 2 billion at probably at the end of it. Um and so I just wanted to to clarify that. So now we're we're I guess exceeding we're we're in it for two billion now is >> so sir you're you're allowed to make a statement but you're not allowed to ask a question. >> Right. Right. I just you know okay I guess rhetorically is that's what we're at. Uh that's what I'm understanding. So thank you. >> Yes sir. Thank you. Troy Cranford outside the city limits. Um, I want to kind of echo what Jason said. You know, I kind of had my doubts with some of this committee that when it first started out, but I watched the committee meetings. They did an excellent job. Excellent questions. Sparrows, I have full confidence in them. Um, you picked the right guys. So, that's my comment. Thanks. >> Thank you. Um, I'd just like to make one comment. You know, when we started this off, we had there was 19 people and we had some feedback in terms of how do you get 19 people to do anything and and be able to come out with a positive outcome. So, that's just testimony that um that we did the right thing. And I think the other thing is is that and as as you know, locally, statewide, and even nationally, everybody's watching us. So, I am glad that we were able to do this and and put the quality and the outcome into it. and I appreciate everybody that's worked uh diligently on the committee. So, and it's a good model in the future. I'm sure we'll be looking at doing other things the same way. Yes, sir. You did you have another comment? So, we have a we have a um a motion in a second. >> Yes, sir. You can call the vote if you like if there's no further discussion. >> Councilman, can chairman, can I just say one quick thing? So, the the committee meetings, there'll still be several more probably every second or third week. They are open to the community. Uh so p the general public can attend the committee meetings. Uh we had uh we had about half a dozen uh committee residents there last meeting. It is broadcast live on our YouTube channel. So if you can't make it and if you somebody talked about international or worldwide, people can watch this wherever live and it's recorded and you can watch the committee meetings uh uh on repeat or replay. So, the committee meetings are open to the public. There's still several more to uh to be happening. Uh Jordan will be presenting information as it's developed to the committee for feedback and and for the committee to say uh stay in tune with what's being developed. And so, it's not that he'll develop a report and show it to the committee weeks from now. He's going to show them along the way how his work's progressing, what he's doing, and and expect feedback from the members. So, >> thank you, Peter. So, please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Thank you, Nick. Um, item number 19 is a motion to authorize city staff to collaborate with CPS Energy to develop options for seawater desalination at the Barney Davis power plant. >> Motion. >> We have a motion and a second. Councilman Scott. >> Well, I just I'd like the presentation. >> You got it? >> Yeah. >> Huh? Well, I I'll go I'll just right cut to the chase. So, are we are we has has uh CPS um offered their intake permit? >> Yeah, if we could if we could go back to the presentation there. >> I want to know if they've offered their uh discharge permit and I want to know what they suggest regarding power uh and I want to know what they suggest regarding location of the plants. >> So, yeah, let's uh thank you councilman. Let's go through this this slide. Uh I jumped ahead a little bit, but uh so what CPS has stated, what they've informed the city manager and staff is that the a future seawater desalination plant would definitely require a new discharge permit. They are not willing to reopen their existing discharge permit. So the project would require a new discharge permit. Um CPS Energy has stated their preference that the the plant would be operated by a P3, a public private partnership. They've also informed us that the power agreement would not be with them, but it would be through a power provider as is standard. The city itself uh would enter into a long-term water supply agreement with that P3. Typically, that's a 30-year type agreement. And then additionally, there's a possibility of utilizing a public utility agency or a PUA to develop that project. We would need if if the city was one partner of the PUA, we would need another partner in that PUA as well. >> So, where does where does CPS come in? Well, they own the they own the property and they they own the plant and they're they're willing to allow a seawater desalination plant built at that location. But >> yeah, let me let me let me state. But so CPS is they wouldn't be involved. The only way they would be involved is to sell or lease the property. That's it. >> Got it. >> Would would it be a possibility of using the cooling ponds? >> No. >> Just good to know. They don't I spoke with Rudy Garza personally a few weeks ago. So >> he does not want to jeopardize the power plant. Totally get it. >> Yeah. Or the permits that exist. So he made it clear to me a couple of things in that meeting uh that Ryan and I attended. And one of them was that that he does not want in any way, shape or form to think we can discharge the brine into the cooling ponds and ultimately into that Oso Bay. Uh that's off the table. So he said uh this would have to be a new discharge into the Gulf. And the intake separate. >> The intake they they said we could use the intake. Yeah. It would have to be modified, you know, because right now it works for the power plant, but if you're taking in massive amounts of water, it have to be modified. >> It's a been >> the intake structure and maybe the permits themselves. >> So, they would there's a possibility that we would we could utilize their intake. They would they could lease us property inside the fence line. >> They would sell sell it sell or lease not to us even, but uh >> to the P3 project. >> Yeah. But then the power would not be inside the fence line power. It would be market rates. >> Correct. >> It's fascinating. >> Yeah. >> It' be inside the fence line, but the power would be as if it went outside the fence and came back in the fence. Right. >> Yeah. Basically, just for the lay person, we can't buy discounted power with CPS. That's something that they can't do by state certain state regulations, nor do they want to jeopardize their uh monopoly that they have right now in San Antonio. they're a monopoly provider. >> Uh they were allowed to be so under state legislation and they don't want to jeopardize that business concept. >> Okay. So um uh and it's P3 or some PUA. I get all that. Um but so it's really all about the location and do we have a sense about the location inside the plant? Did they say hey you we'll at least sell you that corner? >> Right. Well, it's not a corner, but it's that there's a big square track of land that's uh just south of the plant that's undeveloped that they do own. Uh, one thing they did bring to our attention as well that it looks like a pretty big piece of property there. There is wetlands on it >> and so you wouldn't have to you would not be able to build in the I don't think you could build in the wetlands and there would be some additional permitting potentially >> right. >> Yeah. From wetlands. So, that was another new revelation that we got from that meeting. >> Okay. So, with that in mind, what are we doing? So we're going to we're going to work this enable this just this just gets everybody in the same team to say okay we've talked about this also for >> I'm okay with this if it's a great location just saying that this policy advising group the city council the city council I shouldn't say the policy makers the city council are saying let staff you make sure you do uh put this in your work plan to work with CPS energy to develop a few business models of how a del facility could be uh constructed and how we could buy water from it in the in the future. And so that would be and and Rudy Garza, the CEO of CPS Energy in this month was to be taking a similar resolution to his board so that the CPS board of trustees uh also is endorsing the two sides to collaborate with each other and develop several business models on highway diesel facility could operate there at Barney Davis at the Barney Davis site. >> Got it. I appreciate you guys pointing out some of the headwinds, but but as I told somebody earlier today, leave no stone unturned. Right. Right. Yeah. No stone unturned. >> Just to highlight some of the benefits, it is a good location to the Gulf. And so there's a zone, I guess known as the green zone that the Texas Parks and Wildlife identify better areas along the Gulf. >> I'm curious where uh Harbor Island discharges because there's that that's not in the green zone. That's what's interesting to me is the Harbor N Harbor Island discharge area doesn't look like it's in the green zone, but hey, somebody brought the map, so I just wanted to comment on it. >> Okay, that's good. No problem. Yeah, so it is in a good discharge area. It also is closer to a distribution system, right? We have we have some southside infrastructure there. Uh we own property and and and ground storage tanks and we have pump stations there. >> Yeah. Don't we have a huge line that just dead ends? >> Correct. Not to say you could use it, but there is at least customers and trans there's a there's a pipeline system nearby and infrastructure that we own. Uh there is there is power infrastructure. You know, obviously A Texas has transformers and so that's a plus. Even though we won't buy even though the project won't buy power from CPS Energy, the infrastructure that A Texas >> uh either needs or will need is is is either there or easy to put in there. >> Interesting. Yes, sir. Okay. I can do that. >> Last question be Oh, sorry. >> You also have the intake structure and permits. So, you know, half the permitting or at least half the equation is somewhat solved. >> It's the easy part. But >> and then you have a willing partner, too. CPS Energy like like the NRA um are partners of this city. Uh we know their CEO, born and raised here, worked in the city and and we know CPS Energy. I know him from my years in San Antonio. It's a great it's a well wellrespected and recognized uh group. I'm a big fan of Rudy's. >> Yeah. All >> right. So, um would you talk to me afterwards about the navigation uh storage facility and where that water would go? Okay. That's not germaine to this item, but please, because I forgot I was supposed to respond to that. All right. >> Got it. Yes, sir. Mayor, thank you, >> Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um thank you guys for bringing this item up. I know we've talked about it for quite some time. Um, it's a project that has been recognized for a very long time as incredibly viable. So, I'm happy today that we are finally making some official movement on it. Um, and I think that while we acknowledge the reality of the situation, I appreciate that you bring up the highlights of the project because we're not starting from a blank canvas here. Another thing that I think is um potential to bring up is that we know there's a high potential in this site for a secondary major causeway project. So, while we're looking at um infrastructure for this, there's more projects coming right in the same area. So, thank you guys for bringing that forward. >> Councilman Hernas. >> Okay. Uh thank you, Mayor. Yes, I think there's a lot of synergies here with this particular project and I know we've talked many times about it, had meetings on it, uh discussed the opportunity for a PUA on many occasions, even in uh acquired the services of Carlos Rubenstein for that exact uh reason. Uh but maybe this could be Ryan could answer this question considering that that you know the the limitations and just so I give explanation CPS is in a restricted market because they kept they kept the the rights to uh sell electricity within the city utility right so it's different from the unregulated market that's outside of uh of San Antonio however considering >> uh uh considering the that were both government entities. Is there a legislative fix that could be put in place prior to this happening? >> Uh so Ryan Scbartic, director of intergovernmental relations. I'm not your electric market. If we ran a municipal electric company, um I might be more in tune with that. The realities I think that govern uh CPS's situation is not only that they're immunity, they're a municipal electric provider, but the three- tier system that exists in the electric market in Texas where you have clear separations by law of generation, distribution, and retail. So, you as your house, you buy from a ret. And unless you have a carved out market like an electric cooperative or um another municipal utility. So, um I was looking for >> I mean, we're technically a municipal utility. electric. We're not an electric one. And so that there is an important distinction there. Um I don't know to answer your question. I'd have to do some consultation with our lobby team who actually um have a long experience working in utility issues representing both municipal electric utilities and others about the possibility of a state law change. I think what I'd be careful there is what uh Rudy Garza expressed to us is that there are larger market dynamics that they as a company they >> I understand because they they want they're in a protected market and they want to maintain that. So they don't want to you know sell into a different market that might jeopardize their own status, >> right? Um, >> but like I said, we're another government entity that, you know, I'm I'm just want to make sure that we're not, you know, if there's an opportunity to save on on operational expense and energy is the biggest part of that. >> Sure. >> Uh, if we're inside the fence line, that might be an opportunity. But you, like I said, if it's not possible, it's it's just, you know, let's, you know, take take a look behind the curtain, see if there's an opportunity. >> Yeah. I think we would obviously you'd want to work hand inand stating the obvious but I know you know this but just for the benefit of the public you'd want to work handinhand with CPS it's their property it would be their power and >> and let me say I appreciate you know Rudy uh Rudy Garza the president of CPS >> a local >> corpus boy went to Miller High School uh for giving us the opportunity to to consider this and make this a possibility considering our situation. >> Sure. it it is uh you know very much a thank you on our part and I know we have some San Antonio media here uh that's kind of going to address that. So we truly appreciate San Antonio and CPS for their willingness to help us out in the situation that we're in to address some of our long-term water needs. >> Agreed. Rudy's former IGR director for the city of Corps. >> That is correct. >> And assistant city manager. So >> that's correct. So, >> you know, very much appreciated on our part. Um, you know, I think there's uh that to answer Councilman Scott's question. Yeah, you you can say good. >> Yeah, that's why uh Harbor Island has to go out and get separate permits because they're not fasttracked because they're not in the green area. These areas that are identified and we were provided this during public comment. these uh that shows some areas that are just off the coast of um of Noises County uh in the area of where where Barney Davis is that have been identified as for fasttrack locations for discharge of uh seawater desalination. >> Right. So this this uh I think Barney Davidson I believe that water line is a 42 inch water line. Nick, >> it is. And I I do want to remind everybody there is a current CIP project to extend that water line across the across the bay to provide backup redundancy for the island. So there is a current CIP project that is in design for that. >> Okay. If this does work, that could probably be modified to uh to maybe exchange change the water flow or >> so all of this allows us to proceed in uh hydraulic modeling and to understand how the water could be distributed throughout the system. >> And what do you envision the size of this facility to be if it's offshore offshore discharge? >> I I wouldn't comment on that yet. I I think there needs to be more work done. Uh certainly it could be a large facility. One thing to remember is you got to have somewhere to go with the water. Typically that part of town uses less water than the other than the other part of town. >> Well, like what's the capacity of the 42in pipeline? >> 42in pipeline could be uh maybe 50 MGD or something. >> 50 MGD. Yeah. So >> I mean I'm just at a minimum. Don't quote me on that. >> Based on based on our current infrastructure, we could we could probably get 50 MGD right off the bat. >> But you got to have somewhere to go with it. And then it's a matter of uh tanks and the system and pressure. That's the modeling that's needed. The the other part of that, >> but just on pipeline capacity, you just correct you have at least 50 and any future uh opportunities to grow out there, I mean, would be uh would also be possible. I just I like I said, I think this is a great location. I think there's some some good synergies based on infrastructure, in intake infrastructure, uh transmission. There's a lot of things that could work here and and so I will be supporting this this effort. Thank you, >> Councilman Betta. Oh, no. I'm sorry, Councilman. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, first of all, I want to thank CPS for helping us in time of need. I think this site should have been our number number one site years ago. Um Peter, you know, um thank you for for um doing this. I mean, I I know that every day somebody's calling or texting us for another water project and we want to hear all of them, right? Because we need water. But um I think this right here is is um a great project. I think we can do a lot with this. Um and uh um I just feel that um wish we we could fasttrack this project pretty quick, you know. Um but um I think everybody says Barney Davis site, even the environment people, I mean, they're they they love this site. Everybody loves the site. So, um I'm really excited to hear more about it. Um, and uh, you couldn't tell us how many MGDs it could it could provide, right? >> There's been studies, Councilman. I think it it could it's probably a minimum of 50 and probably 100. >> Yeah, there there's been a number of studies done and I've seen ranges in that. Um, >> 50 to 100 or even greater potentially. Yeah, we there's been several minor studies, if you will, you know, they haven't been exhausted, but that have evaluated this site and in the last couple of years, in fact. So, >> and I know for a fact that this is going to cost us a billion dollars. Um, but um okay, thank you guys. Appreciate it. >> Councilman Bada >> here. Um, u you know, I just want to make another comment. I mean, there's been a lot of people thanked and a lot of people patting themselves on the back. You know, this project goes back to it. It's another situation where it's been brought to the table, brought to the table over and over again. And part of the thing is is that when the work group put together 50 sites, this was basically not put put out there on there because number one, it was a private it was a private entity working with Talon Energy back then. uh once again the cost to uh discharge also was a concern and then the idea also was the demand you know because you remember you go back to the original inner harbor was only 10 MGD so that's one of the reasons this was off the table and then you know once again I guess the thing with Talon is it wasn't it wasn't um it just wasn't feasible to for us to be able to put all that effort because of all the challenges it just didn't fit at the time Um, and then and then I want to commend the mayor because Rudy Garza, who was also a Miller High School graduate, also I want to say from the uh St. Joseph's Catholic School Mafia, of which I'm a member, of which there's a lot of us that I'm I'm proud to say a lot of those people provided with success. I'm very low on that totem pole. But, uh, it was actually the mayor's relationship with Rudy where I remember she said, "Hey, we're going to re we're going to re uh I think didn't didn't we facilitate some some uh um uh some trips out there so that way we could look at it?" >> Yeah. >> When it was owned by Talon? >> Yeah. No, no, I think it was right afterward. >> Yeah. No, it was both. >> Uh, I went out when it was Talon owned. I haven't been out with CP. I think the mayor may have gone, but I didn't go when it was under the CPS leadership. I don't >> Yeah, you did. >> With Rudy? I don't. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. And then and then and then I the reason I know is >> I went when it was owned by Talon Energy. >> Well well I and I don't mean to contradict you. My cousin actually works for Rudy Christina. >> Okay. >> Who used to work for Philip 66 and and and for Sitco and you know she says hey your city manager is out here. Where are you? And uh what is it? So just just that's just >> Yeah, I know. I took the tour. That was when I was owned by Talon. >> See she works for >> No, it was February. Peter, you >> Anyway, don't worry about it. It's no big deal. I I don't want to get into a big thing. I just want to say that um and I know we're thanking everybody and I just want to it was through the mayor's leadership because it was off the table because everything was controversial. We're moving a different direct. All these other initiatives were coming up and you know I I know in particular as a mayor because of her relationship with Rudy. >> So I I I just want to be since since we're thanking people, we need to thank the uh the individuals that have been engaged and uh and even then I wasn't I wasn't for it. I didn't produce. I said, "Oh, man. We got another initiative." I even told my cousin, I said, "Jesus, you wouldn't believe how many people are always calling us." So, I was very skeptical. So, I'm glad you guys are bringing it back to the table and then at least exploring. I know it's a long-term project and I've been quoted in the press that I think it's a viable option and especially now because the demand has increased and you know once we as I've said before on the radio that you know we probably lost about $20 billion in economic expansion. you know, uh what is it? 10 billion if you ask EDC and then another 10 billion if you ask uh commercial realtors uh out along the along the region. And so I think this puts us in a real good position uh in particular because there there's other developments that are out there along the the southern area of the coastal bend versus uh the northern area of San Patricia County. So uh thanks for all the hard work and yeah, definitely I support this. Has a motion already been made? >> No. I move for approval. >> A second. I think >> it was it was made. >> Oh, then I'll second. >> I think I second it. Councilman Vaughn. >> Well, circumstances have certainly changed, Mr. Cenon, since all of that transpired. This is a good opportunity for the city and they have a new tool, the PUA. And I want to thank you because I know that you met with him a couple weeks ago at his request and that's what a city manager does and you've been trying to move these projects forward and I appreciate that. Thank you. And and I would like to add and I I have a number of staff helping me. A 42 inch capacity is 30 to 40 million gallons a day. I previously said 50. >> So I just want to correct that. >> That's right. >> All right. Well, I think we all agree and and yes, you were there. We were in a meeting with them. But you know, this started way many years ago. Many years ago. And and it would just wasn't the right time. And I always say, God knows what he does because Rudy wasn't there um at at the at the onset of looking at this facility. Um, and then he was and and um you know um I helped initiate that that connection with CPS and and and we met with Rudy a couple of times and you know here we are and and that's that that is what collaboration looks like and that's regional collaboration and that is for all of us to work together and make certain you know y'all everybody's running around doing a thousand things and so it doesn't matter how it gets here. Um but but it did get here and and I am you know I am happy that it did and I'm happy that I initiated that uh facilitation because this should have always been a part you know a piece of our of our um portfolio and so it's never too late to start. So this is another milestone for for us in our water portfolio. So thank you. We have a motion. We have a second. Please submit your vote. >> We need public comment. Mayor please. >> Oh would anybody like to make public comment on item number 19? run down. Jordan, >> just do it quickly. All right. So, uh, the question was before um, how much water you could get through a 50-inch pipe, not the 42. >> You state your name, sir. I'm sorry. >> Jordan Fernand, Round Rock, Texas. Uh, 50-in pipe can do 44 MGD at a safe velocity. You can get more MGD through it if you wanted to. That's my hydraulic professor uh in me right there. What I wanted to say is this this whole question of del on Oso Bay that was why I did uh the original project back in 2005 with the water development board was starting to investigate that. That's what got me into this whole process. And the model that you have in EFTC can be used to sim s uh simulate that uh configuration there as well. So you've got a tool at your disposal to do interesting stuff with. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you Jordan. Anyone else? Okay, we'll close public comment and please submit your vote. Oh, >> okay. The motion carries. Our next item is item number 20 and that is a resolution revising the city council meeting schedule for calendar year 2026. >> Yes, ma'am. The city council, Rebecca Wer, city secretary. The city council approved the 2026 meeting calendar by resolution on October the 21st of 25. So the city manager is requesting that the council adjust the meeting schedule to hold only two regular meetings in March and April. And the purpose of these changes is to give staff more time to address the water situation and to schedule workshops focused on what a level water one emergency would entail. So, uh, the proposal is the regular meetings on March the 31st and August the I'm sorry, April the 28th would be cancelled and replaced with council water planning workshops. And, uh, those are tenatively scheduled now from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. So, um, if the council is willing, we would amend the resolution would amend that schedule um, uh, in the way I just stated. >> I move for approval. >> Second. Uh, Councilwoman Paxton. I think personally I'm against this request. I think that if there's two meetings that we can pull off the agenda after not having meetings for three weeks, then we should use those meetings and be able to space out all of the content on them. So we have efficient meetings that run closer to a normal operating schedule because it's we we've got to get out of this crazy meeting schematic and organize our meetings in a way that makes sense. I'm all for needing workshops to discuss a level one potential emergency and anything to do with our water. We've been talking about needing special meetings for a year now, but those should be held on a different day. So I disagree. I don't think that we should be changing our meeting schedules for this. We just missed three weeks of meetings. I think call a workshop on another day. Continue to have very important council business on our meeting dates and make those commit to those being well organized. Um so that so that we can get through the business appropriately. Um it just to me I I I don't support pulling two meetings off in the next two months. They're still looking at the agenda for next week. There's uh there's a couple of items that I don't see on there that I know we've discussed putting on there. Peter, the DCP um and having a potential ordinance for um hospitals, carving carving out an exemption application for hospitals and and our emergency providers, such our dialysis centers, our senior centers. We talked about that being an item on the agenda to amend our DCP for that drought contingency plan. Um, >> another caveat to that would be I just found out our personal wells are are under there. That's a whole another discussion, but I'm saying that the generator item that we were looking at um >> that's on next week. >> The procurement is >> not the other portion of that discussion. >> Right. Yeah. That we got to we'll do that after the generator project's complete. I think they the staff talked to you about that. You're talking about the CDBG reprogramming. >> Yeah. So once the project's complete, if there's if there's excess money, then we'll go out for uh more social service work. >> There's some more work that needs to be done on that because of how that money was spent after the council's motion. >> Okay. >> And it needs to come back to council to be fixed. >> Yeah. It's on the agenda for next week, but I'll I'll have to work with you directly. the SAFA they after two meetings with you everything was in order but that's that's what I got yesterday. >> I saw that the generators on there is what I'm saying. Yes, the procurement is but not the other portion. >> Okay. All right. >> So I'm saying that I I I'm not in favor of cancing those two meetings. We have a lot of business to do. Let's just add additional. >> Yeah. >> Peter, maybe you I mean the So what's >> Well, hang on. Hang on. I mean you requested this. I did. >> And it wasn't because you have better, you know, nothing better to do. So, so you feel like it's balanced. You feel like it is it's okay to do or let's hear your >> Yeah. Right. So, the the reason this is on the agenda, and I appreciate Rebecca helping me put it on, is that we are we're we're past bringing projects to city council. We've spent about a year doing that for water supply. And all those projects now have to be uh continue to be brought on. Many of them are in progress. Some are complete, some are in design, some are under construction. But as you know, we're moving to this uh phase now in this in this significant drought of of getting ready if we hit a level one emergency, right? We've never been in one. The city I don't know if any I don't know if many cities in Texas have ever been in one, but if we get to the point where we have to declare a level one water emergency, we need to be ready for that. And we have no precedent to follow. There's no manual, there's no video, there's no this is how we did it the last time. So, we have to prepare that. and it's going to take several weeks, if not several months, and it's going to take the city council to be engaged. There's a lot of policy that has to be approved by city council. So, we're already working six days a week. We're formally working on Saturdays now. It's not just you, you know, come in if you want. There's about a team of 30 people uh that are working, including Saturdays, mandated by myself. And we need more time. And so in thinking about how do we look at our schedules and stop doing things we're doing so we can focus on this for the region. Uh we're looking at what can we not do that we used to be able to do in this interim basis until we get this developed and until people understand it. Uh and so one of the ideas that we had was how about consolidating from three council meetings to two per month. It's within the charter um rules. The charter says you need at least two council meetings. We would arrange the meetings to make that happen. Uh but it wouldn't be cancelling a meeting because we need to sit down with the council without a lot of interruption and focus just on what a level one water emergency is. You have to figure out are we going to do sir charges? We have to figure out are we going to curtail? What is that percentage? Councilwoman Paxton just brought up hospitals. There's a there's a whole list of special exceptions, new development, new water meters. is there's almost three dozen policy items that have to be discussed with this council and the community and we need time to develop and then time to talk to the council. This is serious business. So, this isn't a flippant ask. It's based on reality. It's based on we're working six days a week. There's a monumental task ahead of us to develop this to talk about it to take to get votes on policy and we're just trying to restructure how we we do the business. And so it's our recommendation to do it. If if the council doesn't think it's a good idea, then we'll work around it. But uh I I think we're going to get a better product and and better community understanding and engagement and communication. If we focus two meetings at least in the next two months on a workshop uh just on what is a level one emergency mean, we can set up some uh subsequent votes on things like cartailment numbers uh rate adjustments and so on. So >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. That's the genesis of it. Yeah. Thank you, ma'am. >> Uh, Councilman Hernandez, >> you know, I think I remember when we were doing the the council calendar, I was kind of suggesting to go to two meetings a month, every other every >> Yeah. And we supported that, Councilman. >> Didn't pass. >> I did. I supported that. I don't vote, but yeah. >> U However, we do have an opening on April 7th. We don't have a meeting that week. Is there a reason why we wouldn't want to use that particular date? >> Because yeah, it's we need time, councilman. So having a council meeting takes enormous amount of time just to sit through the meeting. We've been here now I don't know how many almost 12 hours. >> Well, I mean to to councilwoman Paxton's point, I mean it's already a quarter to 7. And if you reduce the number of of council meetings, we're going to be here, you know, on the next council meeting till what? Midnight. >> Yeah. Not necessarily. I mean, we have a we have a three-month look ahead. So, we have taken a lot of major policy items to this council. The next couple of months are a little lighter. Like next week's council meeting is is a very short agenda. Uh there's really not too many more significant things coming to the city council. The biggest things will be drought related. And so, um we we're going to manage the whole we have to really rethink about how we do everything to free up time because it's the same group of people doing everything and and we can't be burning people. I mean, that's why I suggested the once every other week council meeting so you can have a reprieve and be able to prepare properly, >> right, >> for that so you're you're not, you know, killing your yourself and your staff. I don't know how many times I told you to go home. >> Yeah. >> On, you know, to, you know, so you don't burn yourself out. >> Yeah. >> Well, I mean, if if we're going to do this, I mean, you you know, let's make this to where, you know, you're not having this every week. I know we're looking at three weeks out of three weeks out of a four-week month, but then, you know, then we'll have three straight weeks off. >> If you want to do once every other week, that's fine as well. I just we just we're trying to just have just two meetings per month and one workshop. So, we're really we're still the council's still convened and this still open to the public. Uh we think we we really need to just sit down with the council. Well, do you need do you need a a council meeting that is strictly just for these projects? >> I mean, instead of changing it to a workshop, why not just leave it as a council meeting and just focus on the things that you need so we can take action on the stuff that you're talking about? >> Well, if you want to do that, you can. I'm recommending just focusing on in a separate meeting without any other agenda. >> You put the schedules together. Uh I do. That's why I have this recommendation. If you have a council meeting that's just water, that's that's your guys's uh uh you know, his schedule, right? >> That's essentially what I'm recommending. So, >> well, I mean, just leave it as a council meeting. Bring all your water stuff. >> Councilman, he he's he's suggesting he's requesting what is written. >> I I understand what he's requesting, but I'm also suggesting back to him. You >> You're just using slightly different words, Councilman. That's fine. So, the the third meeting of the month would be a council meeting focused on the level one emergency, and it would be from 10 to 2. So you just want to have because I'm saying in a workshop you don't there's no action taken. >> Right. >> Right. >> Right. >> Uh and then you also limit public comment. So I I you know on those on those items so I I would rather keep it as a as a council meeting. Bring the things that you want to talk about that you would have talked about in workshop. uh and if we need to take action, you have the opportunity to and don't uh don't tie your hands to where we won't be able to take action because it's it's you know, we call it a workshop. So, >> you can do that if you uh you just have to add a couple hours potentially for public uh comment >> and that's fine. I mean, obviously we don't want to have not have public comment. >> We don't but it's still open to if we had two meetings, you would have public comment and then that third uh meeting would be just dedicated for the workshop. Okay, >> that's my recommendation. We you it's that obviously you all decide. So, >> I'm just telling you what how we see it and I we appreciate your your feedback and >> All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Vaughn. >> Um when I first heard this, I didn't want to do it and because I want to make sure that we you know, we have other things besides water and I want to make sure that the c that we get that and we work on that. >> But after listening, I what I'm reading is that you are your staff is time challenged. I think they are. I think you I don't realize I don't think we all realize how busy y'all are, >> right? >> And you can't take off on the weekend. We've got >> a water crisis. So, I know y'all are working really, really hard to do that, right? >> So, >> um and I understand why you don't want to do it out here as a council meeting because of the interruptions, >> right? >> Because it gets us completely off the subjects and that's what happens. So, I was not for doing it, but I am okay with doing it because I think that we have to listen to you. Yes, >> we are supposed to take your recommendations unless we have a ridiculous or some big reason not to. So, I'm going to support you in it. >> Yeah. >> Thank you, Councilman. >> Thank you. I agree. Councilman Scott. >> Oh, >> yeah. No, no. I was I was thinking about my brilliant statement I was going to make. >> Um it's really fascinating to me the number of people that have articulated, you know, council's not even concerned and oh, now they woke up. like, "No, we've been in panic mode since the day we were sworn in." And and with that in mind, I like I like the optics of, you know what, we're going to have a meeting. It's going to be just on water because that is clearly the most the highest priority, and then there's going to be water in the subsequent voting agendas right? >> That will come out of that which we discuss in in an exclusive environment. So, I like the idea. The reality is, you know, I'll go where and wherever you tell me. Uh, but I I like your idea, so I'll support it. Thank you, Councilman. >> Council member Boy. >> Um, you know, Peter, how long have you been doing this? >> Uh, 30 years. >> 30 years. Yes. You know, one of the the advice my wife gave me is sometimes you got to choose your battles. And you're the city manager, >> right? >> You're here to manage. And I think this is a case where we got to choose our battles. Um, if you feel and and and and you've expressed this that the best thing that you can do for your staff and managing this city right now is to do what you're proposing. I'm 100% behind it. >> Yeah. >> Because sometimes we just got to let you manage. Uh, you know, we we like to sometimes as a and I'm not going to, you know, as a council as a whole interject a lot, but right now we got to let you manage because this is a crisis and if your gut feeling of 30 years says this is what we need to do, I back you on it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Paxton, we have had maybe one, maybe two meetings, I will throw it for benefit of the doubt, where we have exited this building and stopped doing multi-million dollar business and could still see a glimpse of the light of day. I realize that this entire year has been just incredibly heavy with items, policies. Trust me, I don't We're all in that same boat. We We live it day night. There's never a break from it. We We get that. And I'm not minimizing the work that the staff here does. I think I think I'll take a little credit there to say that I do recognize often and I tell you guys how much I appreciate your hard work. I say that because I mean it. I'm saying that I think we as a body should give you guys the freedom that if if you say we need to have a workshop, which I think we should have been doing a long time ago. We're we're in this close to a potential curtailment and we have not all sat down as a team to look at it. That's a problem. We I I think we should have done it a lot sooner. I support that request. I do not see a way that we can functionally remove two council item two council days because as of now, like I said, there's been maybe two days that we've gotten out of here in decent time. That doesn't tell me that if we could, we would already have more efficient meetings that make more sense. If we can stack those meetings to where they're not as heavy and we get out sooner, that meets your goal, where staff has more time to work on other things. I know these meetings take a lot of planning. I've been on the staff side planning for council meetings. I understand that. >> But until we have some successful meetings, I don't think that it makes sense to pull two off of the docket. If we want to mix those in as a partial day with a short meeting, I think that makes sense. But until I can see, for me, until I see meetings that are efficient and make sense and we're not being told all over this side of the the state that we don't know how to run a meeting, I think that we need to to keep our meetings in place and focus on making them efficient so that it's not so burdensome on staff if that's what we're being told. Also, I we just got an email while we were sitting here that you're going to be doing these new weekly media updates. >> Peter, that's going to be a lot of time. You're the city manager. My thought, my expectation is your job is to run the operations. We have an entire department of media people. We have an entire department of water people. If if if the the reality is that you're saying that your time, which I know you you never stop working. I get that. >> Let them do the media then. But I think that it's not wise to cut off our meetings while they're still running like this. We're not even done with our agenda and it's 7:00. >> Yeah. >> And that's not I'm not faulting staff. I'm not faulting I'm I'm saying that's just the reality. And until the reality proves differently, we don't have the kind of agendas to just pull some off. So I think take a day that you say is going to be a light meeting and then designate some time to what we need to talk about maybe. But I don't I don't see a way that makes sense to pull meetings off. Take another day, take two half days, but it it doesn't make sense to me to pull those off. >> Okay? >> Or work them closer together. Councilman Bedo. >> Hey, what time you normally wake up? >> Pretty early. >> 4ish. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Hey, I'm with you. So, I obviously made the motion. >> Okay. Thank you, Councilman. >> I'll second. >> Councilwoman Vaughn, >> you know, it's really easy to sit up here and say we live in your world. We don't live in your world because he has a full-time job. We do this part-time. We may feel like we do it full-time at home. It's different. Y'all have to prepare for all these meetings to get the stuff to us. We asked for a number of things from you guys. So, I think y'all are I think you're tired and we don't need y'all to be tired. >> We need you to be focused. And I think that if you thought you had something that that we needed to vote on, you could call another meeting >> immediately. You could call that. It happens all the time. So, I'm going to support you. Like I said before, and I'm not trying to criticize anybody, but I just think that you guys have been working on this for a long time. We have given y'all a lot of water projects to go over. I can't even imagine the hours that y'all have spent and and been away from your own families. I know how I feel. Just like right now, I'd rather be home >> and I know you do this every day and your staff does, too. So, well, let's call for the vote. Okay. >> Thank you, Councilman. >> Well, we have a motion in a second. Um, yeah. We see that. Thank you. Would anyone like to make public comment on item number uh 20? Okay. There being no one, we'll close public comment. Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. Come on up. Julian Hernandez, Corpse Christie. Um, when I first started coming here, it was of course all the the tax hikes. Um, you know, I was concerned about my daughters and, you know, what they're having to pay and and and the fees that are coming to them. As as I come here and I hear more and more, you know, about the cost that I brought up earlier of of of the water that that we're now going to have to face um as a resident cuz I assume that's who the burden's going to be on. Uh, I applaud the staff up here. Um, but my daughters work 6 days a week cuz they have to to meet fees that are going up, to meet fees that are gas, to meet all these fees that this council puts together for them. And then I don't have sympathy for him. I mean, he's getting paid, is he not? You know, how long have we been in the crisis that we haven't started started then looking at these plans? you know h why are we doing it now you know when everything changed I thought it was real good because I could come after work and and say some comment and then that changed to noon and then now you're looking at getting rid of them so the slippery slope starts at getting rid of two of them well just I'm saying that's where it starts that's where you set the table and then you force it down somebody's face that's where it starts cuz we weren't supposed to go back and dile And I said it one time in the comments. This is how it starts. It's like, okay, well, we'll get rid of two. Uh, you know, yes, it takes time for people to get involved. And I was real depressed when I first started coming in here because this is our council. We elected you guys in here, but there's nobody out there. And I was part of that problem as well because I didn't come and I didn't know better. But of course now slowly getting into it, seeing this and then of course some of the pitfalls that I see. But with all due respect, you know, this stuff should have been planned on before. If you want to get rid of the council, y'all are going to make the decision to do it or not. If y'all are going to hike the fees, you're going to make the decision to do it or not. And we, the residents, still have to fork up. And we just, well, we're just working through the day without our kids. Let somebody else pick them up. let grandma and grandpa, you know, um, uh babysit but we don't have the luxury of taking off. Well, you know, those that are making, you know, just above minimum wage with these hotels that y'all are giving money to, they want to pay 14 bucks an hour to drive out to the island to work out there, you know, but where's the sympathy and all of that? No, just just raise the rates. We have an open checkbook. So I I I applaud you guys for listening to all of us that at least you know now we can come and we can public comment during at noon because most of us work but uh I I I don't think so that just limits our time. Thank you. >> Thank you sir. Uh was there anyone else? >> Okay with that we will um close public comment. We have a motion and a second. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Item number 20 uh 21, a resolution amending the city's federal and state legislative agendas reflecting the city's diversified water supply strategy. Mayor and Council Ryan Scbaric, uh, director of intergovernmental relations. Um, the resolution is fairly simple. It makes a one sentence amendment to the state and federal legislative agendas to more exactly describe the diversified water supply. >> We have a motion and a second. Uh, do we have anyone in the audience that would like to make public comment on item number 21? Okay, there being no one will close public comment. Um, please submit your vote. >> The motion carries. Item number 22 is a briefing on annual uh operations of Foresight Corps Christie Golf LLC and ordinance authorizing the third amendment to the lease agreement with Foresight Corpse Christie Golf LLC for the Gab Lozano and Oso Beach Golf Centers to extend the current term of the lease by 10 years to end in 2041 with two 5-year mutual renewals. >> Is that the group you were talking about earlier? >> Council, okay, >> hang on. Councilwoman Paxton, >> you have questions. >> Uh, hi Robert. Yeah, thank you. I was just curious, um, >> we're already in a lease that that um that is not expiring yet and we're adding another 10 years on. So, we're making it, it looks like 30 years lease. Could you >> from 2011? Yes, ma'am. And that's I'm going to discuss a little better in this presentation. >> Okay. So, >> so this ordinance uh amends the current lease agreement for foresight Corpus Christie LLC to manage and operate the Oso Beach Golf Course as well as the Gabe Lozano Senior Golf Center. On February 1st, 2011, Parks and Recreation entered a 10-year lease agreement with Foresight. The initial lease agreement expired on January 31st, 2021 and was followed by uh an extension term authorization upon written agreement with city manager approval. The current uh extended term ends in January on January 31st, 2031. The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to extend foresight's partnership with the city beyond the January 31st, 2031 in order to enhance and continue to deliver uh the world-class golf experience uh for Corpus Christi. The ordinance uh proposes to amend the initial lease from 10 years to 30 years. This table helps show the term history of the agreement and the proposed future timeline of the amendment lease agreement. The proposed lease amends the agreement that began on February 1st, 2011 to expire in 30 years or January 31st 2041 with option of two 5-year extension terms as reflected in the table. The lease will not exceed 40 years and not to exceed past January 31st, 201. The uh staff recommends approval to this amendment and lease agreement with foresight. And at this time, I would like to bring up Ed Miller to discuss annual operations and updates for our golf courses. >> Thank you, Robert. Um, I did, not to sound sarcastic, I did read the the packet. So, I saw that we were making the amendment. My question was more along the lines is the the why to the amendment. We're currently in a lease and the question in front of us is to amend the lease to go from the 10 to 30. So, I'm curious as to why the nature of the request. Is there going to be a big capital improvement? Are the fees changing? I I think you know we have some we have some improvements going on at the golf courses now. Last I guess a couple years ago about a year and a half ago we had the fire firefly open which was in partnership with with foresight as well as we have a bond uh project with a new um uh um clubhouse at OSO as well as some other major projects that are going on through the years and we want to make sure that there's a return on their investment as well. Okay. Council woman, can I take a stab at it? Well, so uh the partners that we have here from Foresight Golf um have have uh have years ago the city's golf operations were in pretty bad shape, right? Uh they have transformed these two venues. I mean, literally transformed them to where this city makes money off the leases. Uh because we're doing significant investments like the Firefly. uh not we but well we but they are as well as operators. Um and because there's a new clubhouse plan from voter approved bonds at the OSO course uh that's going to take a pretty significant business change uh because it's going to be a much bigger and better venue. Uh because there's continued planned improvements at the Gabe Lozano Golf Course. The operators want a little bit more assurance that they're going to be working for us for more than just 10 more years. And so the concept they brought to us is, can we extend the lease by 10 more years? So we'll have a 20-year period to know that we're going to be in business with you because we're about to put a lot of human capital, a lot of business time into your into our business and 10 years in this business is is is maybe not enough is what they were saying uh to be uh to recognize that they could get a return on investment or a return on the partnership. So from a business standpoint, obviously um a longer term is always better. >> And so that's the genesis of why we're here today. They they wanted a little bit more than 10 years uh to uh work with us uh because of these significant investments that they'll be putting in in terms of really a new business model. Uh you've been I'm sure you've been to the OSO golf course and that clubhouse is is less than stellar. And so with this brand new one that um the bond uh that the boat has approved in the last bond program, it's going to take a lot more effort from them as the operator to manage uh this capacity for special events and venues. And so that means they have to change their business model and they're not going to ramp up and and it takes time for years only to then have the the contract terminated. they probably would, but a better better business uh arrangement is where there's some certainty. If you're going to ramp up your business, you want >> you want to get uh you want to have some return on that investment. So, that's the gen genesis of it. We support it. >> So, a 25 Thank you for that. Thank you for that. That hits the nucleus of the question right? >> A 25-year lease for a municipal entity is a is considered a pretty long lease and and I think they're trending down. We're looking at 20 being the new 25 and even that 20 is often long. So I'm curious about what the trigger point was to make a recommendation for 30. If there is a specific point in the details, whether that's for one of the procurements, whether that's for one of the buildings, whether that's a staffing initiative, what was the particular trigger point to initiate a 30-year recommendation over something like a 20 or 25, which would be longer than a 10 and is considered a pretty long lease. 20 years is a long time, >> right? >> But 30. >> Yeah. So, the lease would have been 20, right? By 2031, it'll be a 20-year lease. By 2031, it'll be a 20-year lease. That's just a few years away. And instead of it being a 20 year, we would add 10 more years. Uh the current lease has these renewal options. So, if you just take those off, it's really a 10year. But probably a better person to answer would be the business owners. So I if somebody from foresight golf maybe could just add to uh the conversation that we're having here about why we think this is a good idea to add time to the contract you and they'll they'll be able to explain it perfectly. They did to me but Ed if you can talk about the investment that you have to make in human capital and other capital how you forego other operations and other um business opportunities because you're gonna invest time here. you want some some level of guarantee and tell us why 10 the remaining years in the lease which would be less around 10 is why that's not enough and why an additional 10 would be better. >> Well, thank you. Thank you, Peter and uh mayor, council members, it's uh it's a pleasure to be here with you today. Although I know it's very late, the last time we were kind of together, I think most of us, was at the uh the ribbon cutting ceremony for the Firefly Golf Course when we opened it the 1st of July in 2024. And the real reason that we wanted to be here uh now is for our annual re review presentation when we get to bring you all up to speed as to you know how the last year of operations has gone. And since the uh the Firefly is uh we've now had a complete year of operation. We've had a complete year of operation with the practice facility. Uh we have I have you know full year experience and have a great sense of what a great project that we did uh together. Uh we have uh you know we have really enjoyed uh stewarding uh golf here in Corpus Christi and hope that you've enjoyed our partnership as we uh we have come a really long way and I think you'll see that when I I go over the uh the annual recap and the slides that we've put together for that the the terminology the lease and this kind of comes from uh we are gracious that that uh about every year Peter uh and his key staff, uh, Robert, uh, parks direct director, uh, assistant city manager. They invite us, uh, for a, a lunch meeting and then we kind of talk about, uh, you know, the the the things that are out in the future, uh, what we're, uh, wanting to do to make improvements to the facilities and, you know, other things that can be done. And uh where this came about was at the end of the last meeting we were wrapping up and it was like well uh the term of our lease is kind of getting you know toward the end. If you're happy with us uh we are now I mean our first 10 years uh of operation of the golf courses here in the city of Corpus Christie was pretty much sweat equity where the economics weren't they weren't great. It was uh but it was a wonderful civic service opportunity and we had uh as a matter of fact Rudy Garza when we first took took over here in 2011. Rudy Garza was on the transition team that worked with us as we uh learned about the golf courses, you know, changed the employees and uh you know, so we had the pleasure of working with Rudy Garza when when he was with the city uh back in 2011. uh but the first uh you know 10 12 years uh it was it was an excellent effort and we we were able to come a long way with the product but but the economics were you know they were they weren't great uh and now that uh after we go through the uh the slides for this last year and see how uh golf has really blossomed here in Corpus Christi uh you know we said, you know, it'd be great if we could extend the lease term because uh you know, we we now really like being here. Uh we're going to make up for a lot of that sweat that we did in the in the previous years. So, you know, whatever term is available, we would we want to stay with you guys and we hope that you uh like what we've done with you and for you. And I'd love to go through the presentation and show you some of those uh details. Uh but as far as the uh uh you know the lease term, I mean it's kind of like whatever. Uh >> well, if I if I may, I'm sorry. And and please don't mistake my questions for a lack of acknowledgement for for your presence and your investment because I certainly do appreciate them. I just find 30 peculiar and the fact that we're amending a lease that goes back over 10 years ago. That's more my question point. So, if if we're sitting here in 2026 and we're saying you're looking at 5 years from the term of the lease being needing renewed or expiring and and that's not enough, I and I understand you're going to make a substantial investment. It makes sense. You want to know that you've got some stability there. I would think, you know, rather than backdating it till 2011 and calling it a 30-year lease till 31, start with 2026, call it a 40 lease, and then say not to exceed 50. You know what I mean? That's I I'm just curious on the back dating rather than say we've got a great partner here. We both believe in each other. The lease is going to be up in 5 years, but we want to know that we want to still be in this partnership for another 20 or 30. So, let's call it what it is and update it rather than go backwards. That's my question. >> Uh I I agree. I don't completely understand how the terms are structured with the city. Um, but uh >> I think that's probably >> Does that make sense? >> I think it's a it does and I and Miles if you have >> any information on that on on the reason for this. I think I believe it has some >> this has nothing to do with Miles. It's and Councilwoman, I'm not sure if we understand the the back thing. It's just we're adding 10 years is what it is. And you mentioned it's this five years, five years left, then the contract would expire in 2031. All this does is say let's add 10 more years so it expires in 2041 >> to the term, right? Because it's 5 years remaining. >> Sure. >> And they're looking for 20 year commitment. Yeah. >> So I'm saying rather than call it a 30-year that started in 2011, we tell them we want to be partners with them for 20 years. >> Right. I I just I don't know why we're back we're going back to amend an old lease and then saying putting parameters for 10. >> Yeah, >> we want to be in the you know what I mean? Start the lease now and add 20 years. >> All this is going to do is if in the contract there's a section term, right? Like every it just changes the end date of the term. >> Sure. >> What would have been 2031 to 2041. The prior terms have these renewals, these two options. So this isn't new. the two fiveyear blocks is I think we're over complicating it maybe in the in the presentation to the to the >> I I just had the simple question at the beginning why why are we backdating and calling it 30 that was my simple question from the beginning >> right I it's in the presentation I I I' I've tried to keep it simple in my and when I'm talking to the team which is we're adding 10 years to the contract period >> and it says lease shall not exceed 40 so does that mean after their two five years extension we can't renew even further >> we could go back for another type of lease agreement then. >> Okay. >> As well after >> I think it's great. The whole project's great. I I had some really I was confused why we're back why we're amending something rather than extending time with a partner that to work with. That was my point. >> That's good. That's all we're doing is what you wanted what you were saying. >> Motion to approve. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Councilman. Uh Roy. Councilman Roy. Um okay. before you go through your presentation, um I want to just firsthand talk about their organization and um I am a matter of fact when when we did the uh Firefly um ribbon cutting, I I I had no clue that later on I'd probably spend three to four days a week there, you between that and the Blue Heron. And you know, I will tell you one thing. I know every improvement that they're doing and that they've done, the atmosphere, the responsiveness, the willingness just to, you know, um to just listen to the families and the people that go there. It's it's tremendous. It's been a great addition and a piece for my family. My entire family uses your facilities and I have firsthanded had the opportunity to see the improvement and it's wonderful. You know, I was there, you guys are just doing the back parking lot there. Um, and the work's quick. I'm I'm always amazed at how fast they're doing things. I kept I I think, well, it can't be in the city because they're do doing it pretty quick. But, um, the work that they're doing and just the overall thing is kudos. I'm glad that we can formulate an add-on to their contract because I think it's well worth it. I appreciate what you guys do. I've never had I mean even my wife and I will go there sometimes because they have the best hamburgers in town and people don't know that. And then I had a hot dog the other day and I know it's food related. It's late and it was wonderful too. But I just want to give you guys kudos firsthand that I appreciate what you guys do and I've been able to experience it and will continue to use your facilities and um it's just A+ and I live on another golf course and that's the crazy thing about it is I'm over there all the time. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Councilman Scott. >> I'll be quick. What a blessing for you guys to be here. I I've um I was I played golf out there before foresight. I played golf out there with foresight. I never want to go back to pre- foresight. You guys are amazing. There is I never run into a golfer who ever has a bad experience. And what's fascinating to me is it's it's more than golf to you and your group. It's about the experience and you go out of your way and you're polite when people walk in and and if they think they've missed something, somebody pops up, hey, just want to make sure you're good, everything good? Can I help you? And then they strike a conversation and and the golf course is in great shape. Uh, and these improvements are great. Whatever I can do to keep you guys around as long as I play golf, that's my objective. So, thank you for what you do. Thank you for what you brought down here. I remember before and I think you do an outstanding job. Uh, yeah. So, I my deal is what do I need to give you so you don't leave me, right? That's that's kind of where I'm at. I'm I'm worried about me, not y'all, you know? So, uh, Mr. Pradi, welcome. >> Thank you. Um, madame mayor, city council, um, you were here that night and and espoused the notion of privatizing businesses generally within the Corpus Christie construct, but particularly golf. Um, and here we are 15 years later. We're dying to have you extend our relationship. And if y'all feel the same way about us, it couldn't possibly be a better descriptor, a better um what's the right word for it? Uh yeah, partnership here we are that we want to do this, keep doing this. Um and as a as a city son of Corpus Christi, I'm couldn't be more proud of the uh this Joei back in the day. >> Yeah. um invited us to the table and we we will continue to do everything we can to serve the city and the pe and the good people of Corpus Christie. >> Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. >> Councilman Hernandez, >> do you plan to be here in 15 years? >> It'll be close. >> I will. >> Just just I'm I'm making some humor there. But look, I understand that you'd like to have an extension. And I I go back to I prior to being on council, I used to work for the Coca-Cola Company. Our standard contracts were for for five years, and that included all capital investment, all that kind of stuff. Man, if I could get a seven-year contract, I was happy. If I got a 10-year contract, I was ecstatic. I never got anything more than a 10-year contract. Okay. And I appreciate your investment and the things that you do. uh with improving the service. I mean, when you got here, first got here, it was terrible. It's worse than our streets when I got here. So, I understand the amount of work and effort you guys put forward. But, I mean, you're you're asking us to put in basically an additional what 15 years to Well, actually, I saw it to 2015. Is that correct? >> There's two there's two uh >> 10 years plus two extension, >> right? So, an additional uh 20 years to 201, right? Um you know, I'm the reason I say that is you guys are doing great right now, right? But who's, you know, when your replacement comes in and we have issues, the having a normal, you know, 10-year contract or even, you know, fiveyear contracts, you have that opportunity to make sure you have those discussions about what can improved and keeps you on everybody on their toes. So I you know I'm hesitant to do anything beyond 10 years uh or you know if you're going to add five years to this additional contract um you know I can that'd be I mean well and acceptable I mean if I have guaranteed work for 10 years man it it you know just on a normal business process for you know what what we come across in in in my personal history business history man that's great I mean um so I like I said, I I'm I'm not saying you guys you guys are knocking it out of the park. I mean I mean just knocking it out of the park. No complaints whatsoever. >> It's a hole in one. >> Okay. He's using different analogy. I was trying to trying to keep it away from golf. Uh but the um I guess it still I guess you could say you had a long drive. But what I'm trying to say here is that uh you know I am just uncomfortable because I don't know what the situation's going to be like 10 years from now beyond 10 years from now. I'm not comfortable with more than 10 years. So I I mean just just on a just a regular business ba basis that that's what but go ahead and and provide your >> just and I I don't uh legal oversees the contracts and writes them sometimes and stuff but I I want to make sure that you understand and in those in those contracts and the agreements that we have uh at any point in time the city could you know if we have change in leadership what whatever the change might be we can get out of it as well as they can as well in that contract. Now, >> I don't know. You didn't include the contract in the in the agenda item. >> What was the question, Councilman? I'm sorry. Miles was stuck. Go ahead. >> The contract was not included in the agenda item. >> Um, okay. What? The contract's not attached to the system. >> The extension was. >> Yeah, the ordinance is. >> The ordinance is. >> Yeah. >> But the actual contract, I mean, with termination language wasn't in there. Now probably shame on me for not going and getting the the the actual contract to see you know what exactly we what you know the termination clauses and stuff like that and I know in in any government contract we have you know a certain amount of days that we can give them notification and get out of it but that's not good business practice. So, Councilman, um, if I might, the one of the key features, I would say the key feature in the lease agreement is if the if the golf operation makes money, call it cash flow, we split it, >> right? >> If the golf operation loses money, we get it, not the city. That was the that was the lynch pin back in 2011. um when we made the offer um we're very soon going to start construction on a new clubhouse at Oso Beach which is spectacular. It's a $10 million bond item. I'm I'm quite certain that this the council and the bond process will end up doing the same thing at Lozano um to sort of keep the parody in in the two golf properties. Um that process is probably five start to finish five six years from now before both of them have new clubouses. I I don't know how long that would be. Um by then we're at 2031 and we we're actually currently out to 2041 in the existing lease if I understand correctly. So this is literally 10 more years. It's not I know it looks like 25 years, but it's it's 10 more years added to the existing lease, which is not in your hand. I got that part, too. But, um, with the options that that came with the very first version of the lease, we're already out at 2041, and we're adding 10 more years to that. And that 10 years is is partly eaten up by learning this new clubhouse and making certain that the south that the Oso Beach has that. And we expect we're not asking you to, but we expect that the city will end up doing the same thing at Lozano. So there'll be two brand new significant investments u made that we need to have time to work with. And I'm going to be here until they tell me to go home. So, u anyway, that's what I had. >> Okay. So, just just so we're clear on this, you have a contract that it ends in 2031 with two 5year extensions on those right now and they want an additional 10 years on top of that. >> One 10 year or one five year one more five years. >> Okay. So, there's five there's five more years in there that I'm not accounting for. So, we currently have um a lease that runs through 2031, one more 5-year option >> to 2036. >> 2036 and then 10, but what we were styling it was just a 10-year extension to the original term, which is that going backwards things that uh Councilwoman Paxton was asking about. So, >> yeah, I understand the the >> it's either 2046 or 201. Uh it's easier to extend something than to create a whole new contract, right? I I I get it. >> That was the intent. >> The um >> So you have five years I mean five years lasting on your current contract with um roughly almost an automatic extension for another 5 years. >> We would hope. Yes. >> Right. So you have 10 years remaining >> as we sit as we stand right here right now. You have 10 years. >> Yes, sir. Um, and then you want to add another 10 years on top of that with two five years on top of that. >> Yes. >> Which is an additional 20 on top of the 10 that you already have. >> We're going there's another five-year option in there somewhere we're losing track of in the in the there was a chart, wasn't there? >> Yeah, we I think the I I think these last >> I don't want We don't want We did not come here to quibble about it. We came here to >> No, no. I for you to It's just It's just an extraordinary amount of time >> with you know, >> you know, I ask that we postpone this for until next week. Peter, I make a motion to postpone till next week. Do we get a little bit more clarity on this? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, we're here trying to explain it to everybody that it's it, you know, I don't want to, you know, shut this down in any way, but I want to be very clear as to what we're doing because it seems like we're adding an ex extraordinary amount of time on on contracts. >> Yeah. >> That are, you know, >> just it it >> we're adding 10 years to the contract. So, uh to the term. >> Well, no, you're adding more than that. >> You're adding like 20 years. >> No, to the >> We're adding 10 years. Yeah, it already has. >> So I I don't understand. >> Yeah, the term the term that's there. Where's that? Just a second. Councilman, can we put up the slideshow, please? >> AB control. >> Yeah, here we go. Let me see it on my screen here. >> It says the lease shall not exp exceed 40 years and shall and January 31st, 201. >> Okay. So the uh right now the term the initial lease see the second row initial lease with the term would end in 2031. Okay. So that's five more years from now. What this what this recommendation is is to add 10 more years and that so it goes from 2031 to 2041. And this is where councilwoman Paxton was talking about this is we probably shouldn't have presented it this way. Well, I'm talking about the last one where you have proposed lease with two uh ex with second extension, >> right? And those are in the the 10-year extension broken up into two five-year terms is consistent with the current lease. They already have that. They have that today. So, the lease today really if they exercise those if we exercise those two five-year extensions has a term legally to 2041. Okay. This adds 10 more years to legally the term would end in 2015. It's just poorly put together here. This this chart is not helpful. But that's that's the that's the inconclusion. It's adding 10 more years. The current contract has two 10-year extens two five-year extensions for 10 years on top of the termination of the term of 2031. >> Okay. You say 10 years extension, but then you have a date there of 201. >> Yeah, it's 10 years to the term. If you talk about current years left, that type of thing, current dates, it's 15 years because it's five more years between now and 2031. >> But just if you just think of it as a term, when the term ends, it it would end right now in 2031 plus 10 for the extension. So 2041 that's in the current contract and the request today is to add 10 more years to the overall term which would be 201 >> and that doesn't that doesn't you know that you're comfortable you're comfortable with that. >> Well so the it's the there's an option of not doing 10 years of that. So the uh the extensions broken into two five years. If it if something goes wrong with their business, we're obviously not going to recommend extending them. So it's really taken it from 31 to 41. And so that's that's 15 years from now. and uh given the investment that they're going to do in their business operations uh at the new OSO uh at the new OL at the new OSO uh >> well I understand the investment is in their business operations but we're the ones that are investing in the actual facility right this that's a bond project >> they are they have a proven track record to have a return on investment >> I I don't doubt that I as a matter of fact I' I'd said that they they are >> they're knocking it out of the park they're doing a really good job >> that's why we're recommending it >> okay yeah But that's I don't know what that's going to look like 15 years from now. >> Your time's up, Mr. Just as a reminder. Okay. Sorry. All right. Okay. We're moving on. Um where where's we have how many? We have one, two, three. We have five. We're five. Uh we probably need to >> All righty. Um I we need to see Can somebody call them? >> How many people did you present? >> Okay. So, basically, we are uh we're adding >> Mayor, can we can while y'all are wait, can we have them do their presentation? There's some news that we'd like to >> Oh, sure. I thought I thought y'all were done with it. I don't even know where we are. Okay. >> This is the main reason I came here. >> Uh you're familiar with with all this. Uh the uh ribbon cutting ceremony was was the uh was July 2024. Uh we've since had a complete uh year of operation in 2025. Uh not everyone is probably aware of what an incredible facility we now have. Whenever I talk about the practice range, I I I have to say state-of-the-art. We have golf properties in Houston, Austin, the Hill Country. Uh we've been to golf properties uh all over the country and nobody has a better practice facility uh or a a lighted uh executive course like the city of Corpus Christi does now. So it I mean it's it's just been u it's exceeded our expectations and uh as you can see how the uh I mean 2023 was the was the the rebuild year so all the numbers were pretty pretty suppressed but uh first year was 6 months of the Firefly in the practice range. I mean, it's just an upward upward growth curve. Uh to the point that between the three golf properties, we now are doing about 160,000 rounds of golf uh total, which uh we're we're getting near capacity uh at that level of golf, which is is a fabulous thing. the uh Firefly in 2025 did uh 51,000 sold 51,000 rounds of golf and and 1.4 million in green fees. Uh before we all did this project together uh between the executive course, the executive course did about 6,000 rounds and uh we charged about, you know, $12. So $65,000 a year in revenue for the executive course and the practice facility did about for the whole year did $260,000 worth of revenue. So, between the two of those, prior to doing this project, you know, the uh the revenue was about $315,000 uh post project uh between the range uh which uh 53 million golf balls uh were hit on the range uh in 2025. and the the almost 52,000 rounds of golf that were played on the Firefly. I mean, the total revenue was uh 2.358 uh million, and we all spent uh $4.4 million to do the whole project, remodel the golf courses, remodel the range, and light it. Uh so the return on investment is as good as anything that we've ever been part of and is likely going to you know pay back the the investment in short period of time. In addition uh these facilities have floated golf. It's like what rising tide uh floats all boats. The other two golf courses last year in 2025, they had their best years ever as well to the point where uh the the regulation course at Loausana was 55,000 rounds and then the Osa Beach Golf Course was over 57,000 rounds of golf. So between the three golf courses, um it's really I mean it's we're so happy to be uh part of that. Uh it's late. Uh we the schools have benefited greatly uh by the addition of the practice facility and the firefly. Uh we we entertained 23 schools. We have nine uh CCISD or 11 CCISD middle schools and six CCISD high schools. We have five nonCCISD high schools and one nonCCISD middle school. Uh and all of the golf teams are getting better uh as a result of being able to practice every every facet of golf. We have such interest from juniors in the game of golf uh and getting instruction uh at our facilities now that that we have over 200 uh juniors in our uh junior golf academy uh which is it's like a martial arts program or a dance program. It has a monthly subscription. and they get they get uh instruction that goes uh with it, you know, g guaranteed uh instruction that's part of it. And as a result uh I mean you know the high school coaches will tell you that the teams are doing better that the that the contestants are winning more uh and and a big part of that is the improved instruction and the facility. Uh in 2022 we had 5,644 junior rounds of golf. Between the two facilities, well, three facilities. Uh in 2025, we had 18,486 paid rounds and 4,165 complimentary junior rounds because juniors get to play free with a paid adult round. So if you bring one of your kids out, uh you know, the the well the the golf is free. Uh so it's just been a uh it's just been a it's been a wonderful thing and uh we thank you for uh making the investment to do it. Um the last part of our presentation has always been uh customer satisfaction and uh we have on this slide our our Google reviews. Uh nowadays Google review and ranking is really the way to go with customer satisfaction. When a customer plays a round with us, they get an email after after the round and we we ask them how they did and and we thank them for coming out and and if you want to leave us any comments or leave us a review, please do so. And we get pretty good participation uh in that area. Uh OSO Beach uh after several uh hundred reviews uh has a 4.4 four Google review ranking and the Lozana Golf Center with the Firefly and the Blue Heron Golf Course as we now call it has a 4.5 Google ranking. We only have one other golf course that has a higher Google ranking uh and that's 4.6. Uh in 2020 the Loausano Golf Cent's Google ranking was 4.0. So the new facilities and everything that's happened is uh greatly enhanced customer satisfaction there. And then I mean the comments that we get uh are excellent. Sometimes we get you know uh unhappy comments as we all do and we deal with we we respond to every review uh because we think it's it's important. So I know it's late. I don't want to go on anymore. And uh if you have any any questions on any of the golf operations, we would be happy to uh answer those for you. >> Thank you. >> Keep up the good work. >> Yeah. >> Fantastic. >> Thank you. >> There's most certainly never been this level of participation, right, >> in golf and Corvvis Cruz ever. >> No, that's that's that's very clear and we hear it. We we hear it everywhere. So >> are are because of participation, not because of some jacking up the rates nonsense, >> right? And I've also heard from the schools, but I'm glad you brought that up because this is a big part of their, you know, improving and and their team and, you know, practicing and all of that. It's I mean, none of them have I guess schools maybe have a what do they call them? Just they don't have a a place to actually play golf. a little bit of artificial turf, >> a little putting thing or whatever. Um, Councilman Scott, >> two things. What's What's the future? What's I guess three things. What's What's going on in golf like Texas wide? Is it is it up? Is it flat? Is it down? How how does that compare with our rounds? Two, what does tomorrow look like in municipal golf experiences? And then third, is there a place for simulator simulated golf uh in municipal uh golf courses? Uh since co uh golf has been on a pretty significant upswing everywhere and it uh I mean for decades we in the golf industry have been trying to convince the younger people to hey give golf a try and they would go golf my grandpa plays golf I don't want to play golf. Uh but then when >> it's frustrating, it's frustrating, right? >> When the restaurants and the movie theaters and the bars were closed and they could find they could they could go to the open space and drink beers or uh malted beverages with their friends, they were willing to pay the green fee. And it didn't take very long at all and they're going, "Oh my gosh, this is fun." Uh so it was a a revelation that that now with social media, you know, the the people that uh play golf and enjoy golf get on social media and it's just been a wave uh to the point where um >> courses, you know, the golf business prior to CO was pretty tough. >> I remember but u it's it's been much more fun. But what's happened as well and this is why municipal golf uh is so important uh is that the cost the barrier to entry to build a new golf course today is very high. I mean, you know, we we uh uh our most northern golf course, the Buckhorn Golf Course in Comfort, Texas. Uh we we built that golf course in 1999 and and all in it was, you know, $3 and a4 million and that included acquiring the land. Uh that land was $5,000 an acre. That land today is $50,000 an acre. Irrigation system uh was $600,000. that same irrigation system today is5 a half or$6 million. So to build a new golf course uh in 2026, you're looking at 15 to20 million >> and it's very difficult to get uh for people to be able to afford to play that because it's going to be a $100 or more golf course. >> But what's what's the future of municipal golf courses? What's is is there is there a are we going somewhere or is this what it is? And at some point we're going to have a maximum number of rounds. You just can't put, you know, there's a maximum number of people you can put on a golf course a day. Are we close to that? Is it uh we're close? We're probably 80% of the way there. uh and in and you know like this uh you know Corpus Christi uh it the way demand has grown and is now growing with these uh facilities I mean it it likely you could call for another golf product another golf course >> now and the facility we're building at OS so I haven't been out there in a while u you'll have we'll have other vents there it's it's a it's a mixeduse facility. I mean, is that kind of >> Yes. >> interesting twist on it that I don't play golf, but I can go to a function out there and >> abs people having a good time. Look at green grass. >> It it uh it will have a nice restaurant and bar and it will have a uh banquet facility uh for uh all types of events uh weddings, meetings. >> Uh >> okay. Well, that could be a kind of a twist on the existing facility is different use of the space. Yeah. >> So, um, Councilman, there's one other Sorry, it's too late for that. One other aspect of this. There's, um, in Corpus Christi, of course, there's a huge number of charitable organizations, some wonderful charities. They really have one choice if they want to have a golf tournament. That's Country Club on a Monday. >> Yeah. >> Right. That's it. With a new banquet facility uh, at OSO and I believe I still say eventually at Lozano. There's two new venues and what I think will happen is a the charities that are here and that are that have established themselves will add a golf tournament on a Thursday on a Wednesday on a well I'm not going to say Saturday because Saturdays are >> too high too hot but um and there's also going to be charities that that grow around a golf tournament. So when when we were in Laredo, we built we helped the city of Laredo build the Max down there and there was nothing like it. It was the mid-range golf course. You either have played the country club or you played a property called Casablanca. Um the Max filled in the middle there. And there were um what we were heading towards was uh teach charities how to hold a tournament. We'll help you understand. We're not going to run them for you, but we'll teach you how to do it and how to make that extra 15, 20, $30,000 a year for your charity. And I think that that'll be a huge thing. I also think that a new event space period without the golf. >> Yeah. >> Uh is hugely in demand >> and at the right time, we'll sit down with Brad Lomx and learn how to run a restaurant at OSO and see what we should do as far as food offerings and stuff. So the new clubhouse and Peter's been the biggest champion of it is is transformative for OSA. I mean it's 1963 was when they built the original clubhouse and um it's no it's no well I was going to say it's no worse for wear but it's way worse for wear. >> All right. Thank you. That's I got it. I appreciate it. >> Scott just that uh we're at 100% design on that clubhouse. Thank you. So that'll go through its procurement process and in the coming months it will uh it'll be back to you so you can see it. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um we have a motion in a second. All right. Uh, anyone in the audience? Would anyone like to make public comment on item number 22? Uh, >> 22. >> I think it was second table. >> No, there was already second. Come on. Come on. Hurry up. >> Oh, yeah. Come on. 752. >> Did we have >> Well, yeah. I I agree with Gil. Um, you know, the the facility there. I actually live down the street from there. I grew up there, Molina. Uh, right next >> Sir, can you state your name, please? >> Oh, Julian Hernandez, uh, Corpus Christie. Sorry about that. Um, uh, this location is actually right there. It used to be the old PGA Hall or whatever. Great location. But anyways, I used to go there and I used to dig out, this sounds bad, golf balls from the little ponds when I was a kid and I would sell them to the golfers. You know, that's what we would do to make money. But uh I am in the mindset of you know the sweat equity that these folks put in there they must have crack in their burgers or something cuz that thing is like this uh to the point where my sister's going her her aunt and then they're dragging my wife into and all sorts of stuff. But um that sweat equity that they initially put in there is the initiative that keeps them running and working good. And in my view, giving them giving a contract that long is where how we are the city is where we're at. When we extend contracts way too long that probably shouldn't when they build out the location across the street with housing and all the lights that they put for the Firefly, what is that going to do to the residents over there? I'm really glad that they build that section out over there, not not in in my area where, you know, because then we'd have the lights out. But we don't know what's going to happen in 15 years. Uh you know, um when you get to that point when when you don't have to work for it anymore, that's when the slippery slope starts. And um like Mr. Hernandez said, you know, to to to get that long of a contract, we've seen in past contracts that we're in now with the city of Corpse Christie and and some other stuff that I've, you know, kind of heard that maybe they weren't written correctly. Um he mentioned that there was no contract here uh for him to to view that and and maybe leave an out for us if we do end up, you know, um extending that long. But as he mentioned, he wanted to table it and, you know, give the opportunity uh to do that. And um like I said, we talked 40 minutes about that place that was on the agenda, but yet as Zenon said mentioned that trying to cut other stuff and maybe prioritize what's going on and we've talked about golf, you know, 45 minutes. um you know maybe reconstruct and all that maybe at you know now in five years you know maybe bring that up. So thank you. >> Thank you sir. Anyone else? >> Okay we'll close public comment. We have a motion in a second. Please submit your vote. >> And we got a motion and a second on the first one. >> So >> that was no second. We didn't get a second. >> Not on the table. >> No, it didn't. Okay, the motion carries. 61. >> Did Eric leave? When did Eric leave? Rebecca. >> Rebecca. Eric left. >> I don't know, ma'am. >> I don't either. >> He cleaned his desk. >> I'm just noticing that. Okay. 61. Okay. Um, next we're going to go to briefings and that is our briefing on updates to city waters supply dashboard and then we're going to go right into uh the water supply update. Thank you, mayor and councel. Nick Wkelman, chief operating officer, Corpus Christi Water. Tonight, I'd like to give you an update on our water supply dashboards and the new scenarios that we have developed. First, I'd like to give you uh some background. So, the the dashboard that we're utilizing today, that process was developed in April of last year. um city never had that before. It is a way for us to track the incoming new water supply projects we have and also chart that against demand. The primary reason it's utilized today is to help us identify when a level one water emergency may occur. A level one water emergency is when we are projected to be 180 days away from our supply not meeting our demand. Doesn't mean we're out of water, but it means we don't have enough water to meet the demand of all of our customers across all classes. Uh before I go to the next slide, the picture at the top right is uh the uh spillway emergency spillway at the choke choke canyon reservoir. Couple of additional slides just to put some uh geographic perspective to things. This is our newasis groundwater project. Uh the body of water at the top left is the Choke Canyon Reservoir. Then you have Lake Corpus Christi followed by it's in the pinkish color the western wellfield which is of course is near Blunter followed by the eastern wellfield which is along county road 73 and then the intake at the Owen Stevens water treatment plant. Also, just to keep keep you geographically in perspective, the Evangelene uh groundwater project is located in San Patricio County. The yellow in the uh center top part of the picture is the Evangeline Wellfield. You can see the city of Sinton just below it. The red dotted line is the Merry Roads pipeline which leads to the Owen Stevens water treatment plant. So I will show you the current dashboard but first I would like to review the assumptions that are in the current dashboard. So this baseline dry drought hydro hydraology. So what we estimated was a higher evaporation rate and we also estimated minor inflow events in July and September. And I will show you where those um where those assumptions have diverged a little bit. Current dashboard includes no curtailments from at the Lake Texana through the Lvaka Navad River Authority. It assumes the MRP is operating at schedule 4 approximately 72 million gallons a day without issue. It assumes groundwater supplies in the eastern wellfield at 10 million gallons a day. And also the model took into account that the western reservoirs which is Lake Corpus Christi and Choke Canyon would be taken to a point at approximately.1% capacity. This is that dashboard itself. And I I'll review the dashboard just so that we can better orient ourselves on the the bars and the lines and the different colors. So the top line is the estimated demand water supply demand and that includes both raw and treated water. At the very bottom in the orange is the groundwater supply. The lighter blue is the eastern supplies. And you can see on this chart it's uh fairly steady at that 72 million gallons a day. I do want to point out you'll see a dip in September 2026. That is just an allowance uh for a couple of weeks. Potentially it's a motor issue. potentially something along the pipeline. We tried to take that into consideration. And then of course on the very top that darker blue is the um the western supply. So that consists of Choke Canyon Reservoir and Lake Corpus Christi. This state had the projected uh date of the level one water emergency in November of 2026. one thing that I would like to to talk about and get into. So, we're going to talk about what has changed since this current dashboard. Things change in all of these projections daily. In fact, uh the some of these scenarios that I'm presenting to you have already changed. So, it's it's important just to understand the dynamic environment we're living in today. The changing conditions from the previous water supply dashboard. One are updates from the National Weather Service. We get updates from them weekly. We really missed our chances for rain in 2025 and so far in 2026. Additionally, the National Weather Service has said our our rainfall outlook for the next three months is almost nothing. This affects the inflow into the reservoirs. And and when I talk about that, this now is affecting Lake Texana as well as Lake Corpus Christi and Choke Canyon. The other additional thing I want to bring out is the severe um soil dryness. One of the things that we're looking at is how dry the soil is. And all of that being said, when we do get a rainfall event, those inflows into those reservoirs are severely diminished because the ground is taking all the water before it before it hits the reservoirs. We have an emerging concern about Lake Texana. Uh yesterday it was at 56% capacity. That is something that uh wasn't anticipated previously even though we have been tracking it. But when this dashboard was put together, the original assumptions didn't include that. The LNR drought contingency plan requires a 10% curtailment when the storage of that reservoir drops to below 50%. And it's an an additional 10% when it drops below 40%. The other thing that uh you know we were that is a change in condition is and and I know all of you saw it but uh Lake Corpus Christi is below 10%. The previous low for Lake Corpus Christi was 12.3%. So we've surpassed that in spades. One thing that we've seen and uh I have more specific slides in the next briefing, but we've seen significant decreases in uh water quality coming out of the reservoirs as the reservoir levels diminish. Because of all this being said, along with the other influences along the Newasis River, we have had limited operation in the eastern wellfield. Currently, we're averaging about last seven days, we're 4.3 million gallons a day over a 7-day period. The limitations are based on the operating pro protocol, the TCQ beds permit. I'll I'll go over I've got this chart. It's ahead of each one of the scenarios I'm going to show you. I'll go over it, but it this is just meant to highlight the different inputs that are provided for each of the five different scenarios. Of course, we just went through the current one, but I also have scenarios A, B, C, D, and E. I'll explain the differences in each. I would like to point out that we will build on each of those scenarios as we go through this as certain things happen as certain inputs happen so you can understand and see how this is all put together. The first item on this chart of course is that uh curtailment at Lake Texana. Again, it's 10% when it's below 50% reservoir capacity, and that's another 10% or 20% total at 40%. This all assumes the Merry Roads pipeline is operating at 72 million gallons a day. The consultants all thought that we were very conservative on uh evaporative um estimations. The original um um dashboard was at 90 90th percentile. We've decided to we're forced to look a little more extreme and now we're going to the 99th percentile of evaporation. As I said earlier, the current dashboard has minor in inflow events in July and September, which is consistent to what we saw the previous two years. So now we're looking at modeling this with no rainfall or no inflow throughout the year. The eastern wellfield it's it's a matter on whether we can produce the 10 million gallons a day receiving some special condition support from the TCQ or not. And then the other thing that is new to the dashboard is our demand reductions through reuse. Those were not included in the current dashboard. We have enough data today working with uh uh Valero, working with Flint Hills and then working with Ardura who is delivering that conveyance line from Oso to Greenwood. So the first scenario I will show you is basically it's the eastern wellfield receiving or producing 4 million gallons a day. It does not take into account the western wellfield or evangelene. And like I said we are going to build on this as we go through each of the scenarios. you if you look at the curve at the top you see the uh the the dots on the curve those are demand reductions built into the graph due to the wastewater effluent reuse the brown bars at the very bottom that is the eastern wellfield producing 4 million gallons a day and then of course the light blue lines are the um uh the eastern supplies, the MRP in the lower Colorado River, and the top lines are the western supplies. The date of that projected level one water emergency in this scenario would be May of 2026. Again, that doesn't assume evangelene. It doesn't assume the western wellfield and it does assume some very drastic circumstances. Scenario B is receiving 10 million gallons a day from the Eastern Wellfield starting April 1st. That's the most significant change. And I'll go to the dashboard. This is also the date of the level one water emergency is May of 2026. The biggest thing to note the difference in the dashboard is at the bottom. You can see those brown or dark orange. Um the production from the eastern wellfields is ramping up to 10 mgd. Scenario C. This is includes the fact that we would have obtained the Westernfield bed and banks permit by the end of May 2026, which was the original projection when we've started designing the wellfield. If you look at this, we have a little more variety for you. So, you can see the the darker orange lines at the very bottom of the chart is the eastern Wellfield. The lighter orange is the western wellfield coming online. The projected date of the level one water emergency in this scenario is October of 2026. So, one thing to note that I do want to point out, it has the western wellfield coming online by the end of April. That's 17 million gallons a day. But then we also have the Edward Shell water rights which is an additional 9 million gallons a day. That's why you see that jump starting in June. Scenario D takes into account a delay in that bed and banks permit for the Western. That's the biggest change in that scenario. So in this case, work continues on those on the western well field. Work continues to ensure that infrastructure is in place, those wells can operate. But what you'll see is all of that water coming online in July of 2026, which in this scenario is the date of um that we would receive the Bennett Banks permit for that Western field. The date of the level one water emergency remains October 20 26 in this situation. If we go to scenario E, the biggest component here is the Evangeline project. We alluded to that earlier in the meeting. So the Evangeline Wellfield is green. So, we've got the other wellfields coming online, the east, the eastern wellfield, the western wellfield, and then you've got the green evangeline coming online over time. If you take that into account, you can you can see fluctuations in the eastern supplies. That's the lower Colorado River and and Lake Texana. And then you c it's apparent to see a a complete um lack of dependence on the western supplies at that point. In this scenario there the date of the level one water emergency is it doesn't exist. This is this is how we avoid it. So, all that being said, I, you know, one visual I like that I've been trying to explain to everybody is when we have an impending hurricane uh coming into the region, there's multiple models that are provided to all of us as citizens. One is uh maybe a European model, one is, you know, model X and model Y. And they all have different dates. And as you move through the path and get get more information and move through time, things start to shape up and you can understand what's going to happen. This graphic here shows the potential of what could happen. We've got each of the scenarios listed there. Notice E, which is the blue on the right. We we stay away from the level one water emergency. Scenario D is October, C is October, and A and B are in May. These are the scenarios that we decided working with our consultants to show you. There's countless more that could be developed in many iterations along the way to come up with different dates. And like I said, conditions change every single day. And that that completes the presentation. So I'll I'll gladly stand by for questions. And >> Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Nick. It's clear that there was a lot of detail um thought put into that. Um I have a couple questions real quick. I noticed throughout everything we're the amount of water uh from Merry Roads is stated as 72 million gallons a day, but in everything so far that I've seen written, whether website or in our packets, we've pretty consistently called schedule 4 75 to 79 million gallons a day. And so that's my first baseline curiosity. I know that's not a huge discrepancy, but right now every drop counts. >> Uh yeah, thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. So, couple of things uh just to to to go back a little bit. So, when we first went to schedule 4 on the MRP, that was in March of last year was almost a year ago now. Uh we were operating consistently at 70 million gallons a day. Schedule 4 is certainly a range. It's a range of where those pumps can operate. Over time, we were able to ramp it up to 72 MGD. One thing I and I'm going to take this as an opportunity to remind council is due to the condition assessment, we do feel there are a number of restrictions within the pipeline and we can't shut the pipeline down to address it. That's one of the reasons for the pressure exceedances at the um at the at the lower pumping schedules and it's certainly contributing to uh additional head on the pumps. Uh that is preventing us to operate at the higher range. We're very comfortable with it operating at 72 MGD as well as LNR. >> Did something new happen? because I I'm pretty confident that in everything so far we all the all of the discussion has centered around Mary roads schedule 4 being at least 75. So 72 is a new figure. >> I don't we've been saying 70 we've initially said 70 and then I've been saying 72 for a good 8 to 10 months. I will go back and see where I find those citations and send them because that's >> again it's not a huge discrepancy but it it it counts here. So I'm curious about that. Um my next question throughout the scenarios I did notice um that Mary roads and I know that we're forecasting right now the variety of circumstances for best mid and worst case scenarios. So I recognize that fully. Um but we're pretty consistently presuming um a 20% cretailment in Mary roads. And um so I guess my next questions are one with the most recent statement from the governor where he's going to instruct that we do not be curtailed from that water supply. Um I presume that these would need to be re-evaluated based on that and that would look a little more like a forecast E also for the um instruction to expedite the TCQ permits on the Noasis River wells. I would imagine that those will also follow a little more like a schedule E. Would I be mistaken in those assumptions? So you're you're absolutely correct that there things happen every day that change each of these projections and uh they are uh they are accurate when we put they're put together and the modeler confirms that this is right and things things happen that evening or the next morning that changed them. So I I completely agree with you. Um, one thing that just a a side note to for all of us to remember. So that's 72 million gallons a day that we're pulling through the Mary roads. Currently it's about 40 million gallons a day from Lake Texana and the other 32 is coming from the lower Colorado River. We need to remember that that curtailment is on the water from Lake Texana. Now, the lower Colorado River in typically in the summer months, the LC, lower Colorado River Authority, does cut us back from that river historically in the summer months, July time frame. >> Well, I certainly want to appreciate the governor for recognizing the urgency of the need here and extending his um efforts to help us avoid curtailment as much as possible. Um, so I'm appreciative of that. Um, and I do understand that things change rapidly, especially right now. So that's why I wanted to reference should both of those provisions be enacted in as quickly as he seems to want them to be, we would, I imagine, resort to schedule E or I'm sorry, you have scenario E, it's called scenario E here and we would move that up along the timeline. I >> just trying to follow where on this chart looks like that and it looks to me like SK like um scenario E matches where we don't curtail through Merry Roads and we have the the Noasis River Wells fully online. We would of course have to alter whether or not Evangelene follows the schematic but everything else would be factual there with the governor's proclamation. Is that right? I would say that's a fair statement. Just yeah, just remember the big driver in schedule in uh scenario E is evangeline >> 100%. >> That's that's correct. And I would say that you know we would have to run a new scenario as as these conditions change. >> Thank you. That was going to be my next point. >> Yeah, that's right. >> Excuse me. Counciloman, can I just add a couple things to that? So you're right that schedule E would probably be the most uh would be the the result we would see. And so, uh, just one thing to consider. So, on the western Wellfield, the 17 million gallons, if we get that permit because of the governor's help, we still have a water quality management plan. And so, um, they have not approved exceptions to the management plan. TCQ hasn't yet. Um, so we're going to try to put the 17 in over a two-month period because we're still drilling some of the wells. But it could be that just like the Eastern Wellfield, we can't put the 17 in because of TDS uh issues. Okay. So yeah. >> So, we had and I can look on my calendar. >> It was two and a half weeks ago. >> We were in a call to update. We were it was very fresh information that there was even the thought process of more than one schematics, more than one >> right >> forecast which was news to me. Throughout that call what I emphasized was the question if we get that TCQ permit in hand we can start pumping in May. >> We can start if we get it if we we we're hoping we can start pumping in April or March even. >> But that's not the issue. Yeah. The issue I'm trying to bring up is that even if we had the when we get the permit, if we get it, it doesn't mean we can put the 17 million in because we have a we have a TCQ required management plan that goes along with this these permits that they give us. >> And that management plan consists of monitoring TDS levels in the river. And so, so west is actually going to dilute east and edelle is actually going to help all of those because as we go further away towards the west, the better the water quality and so that's why they need to be evaluated as an entire picture. >> We're going to right I'm just talking about the 17 million for right now because it's I don't want to over I don't want to complicate it. We just need to be the just let's take the western wellfield to maybe explain that to try to explain the 17. We have the capacity right now to put 10 million gallons in the river, >> right? We have we have eight wells that can do 10 million gallons, but because of the TCQ required management plan on salinities, >> we're only able to put in about 4 to 5 million. >> We would love to put 10 million in. we want to we have a a variance into TCQ >> to amend that management plan so we can put 10 in >> that same concept applies to the 17. >> Sure. So that's where I prefaced >> and I said with the governor's declaration where he is asking TCEQ to basically allow us to move up to 29 and change thousand acre foot >> a day. >> Yeah. >> That that releases that barrier. It it does not release the management plan barrier right now. The TDS monitoring. >> It tells us we can discharge into the river the, you know, the the 20 up to >> it's it's a two-part. Maybe explain it that way. It's a two-part deal. >> Yeah. >> So, we only have one part and you can't put it in the river without both. And we don't know that we have both. >> Yeah. We know we know working with the governor uh that the that the the getting the permit to discharge the water into the river. That is very that's a very likely scenario. TCQ is slower to move and they haven't moved yet on the eastern wellfield on giving us any type of variance on that management plan. >> So what I'm saying is we have a series of approvals that we need from TCQ. We acknowledge. >> Correct. Right. Right. >> That's so that's not the question. >> Yeah. What the governor is saying is he is instructing TCQ on our permits, the process, >> what we need to get water flowing to allow us to do that to avoid the curtailment. >> Yeah. Right. >> So that's not permit. That's not permits. It's the process. Get the waters flowing. >> So my question is what I'm trying to validate is your schematic says if we have all of that by May or if we have all of that by July. Those are the two numbers that you have given for the wells. >> Correct. >> And that's that's full-fledged. That's all that's what we can get from all of them. >> Yeah. If I if I could just add more detail. So there's there's four wells in the western wellfield that are fully equipped and ready to operate. We expect to have two more online by the end of the month of the first week in April. So those wells start coming online sequentially. I I just want to clarify that. >> So it's 10, 17, and nine. All of that online according to this schematic. If we readjust for no curtailment from Mary road sources and we readjust and we get those permits, you have it on here for May or July. Let's assume we get them May. Those two parameters in my understanding would match your scenario E. >> Yeah, we agree. So we remove evangelene because that's still the delta. We're not sure, >> right? We're not sure about evangeline, right? That's we talked about that, right? >> So that was my base question was with the governor's declaration, we could assume that those rules that are in schedule E are applicable and I understand you have to do a new one now with this with the governor's. >> Yeah, that's right. >> Okay. Thank you. So my next question is one to make that new chart so that we can see that two to give us an updated forecast based on the new information >> particularly the governor's actions. Which of these five are we saying we feel confident getting behind? We know one's worst case. We know one's best case. >> What are we confident on? >> And I understand that's probably going to be at minimum two. one with the governor's, one without, and evangelize the delta. But that's the information that I'd like to see from these charts. >> Yeah. And I and I I'm not dodging the question, but but I I really believe in the in the next week or two, we'll have more information to narrow this this down these scenarios down to maybe two or three. >> I I understand and I know that that things are changing, Nick. I really do. I really do. But we're real, you know, some of these are saying May and we're real close to that. So we got to know what we're dealing with that. So please just understand >> the scenarios, right? >> I get that. Totally get that. So an updated with the governors and what are we what are we feeling confident in getting behind? >> Yeah, we're going to get we're going to do several updates. Councilwoman, I would say based on what we know for the last couple of days, we're we're we're probably uh looking better for a C or D scenario. >> Yes, C, >> right? It's looking better cuz a couple of days ago we didn't have the commitment from the governor to help uh to uh or we didn't have the assurance from TCQ of waving. >> Yeah. >> Temporarily. >> Some of that information is coming in. So it's looking so scenario C or D is looking more probable, but it's not for certain >> and we still have the issue of management plans on TDS in the in the river. um the information on the uh Lvaka Navad River Authority where the wood the the their management plan calls for a 10% reduction. Uh we know the governor is helping there as well. We haven't said anything yet because it won't be um official until the LNR board meets tomorrow at 7:30 a.m. So, we'll be watching that meeting and we'll report to the council. If the board approves or agrees to do that, that will help us. That'll mean we'll we won't have to forego we won't have to forego 4 million gallons beginning in April, right? So that's good. Um and so the answer to your question, the the answer for your request is we'll get you we're going to be developing several models. We'll get you the one you're asking for and then we'll know more tomorrow with the LNR decision. We'll know more in the couple of days from with TCQ on our on our western Wellfield. And so we'll be updating a couple of graphs to show more real time. Hopefully, we get to a point later this week that option A and B aren't even probable anymore. Yeah. >> Right. >> But it's not it's not there yet. So, they're still on the table as a possibility, >> right? >> Okay. Is that is that answer the question? >> Yeah. Okay. I just wanted to make sure. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Uh Councilman Scott. >> Yeah. The bad news in all this is um most of the media has picked up a and just declared that's the truth. And so now look look for that all. That's why we tried to clarify it last Friday because it was never nobody ever said that this is the new scenario. >> Yeah. >> What we said is we're look I asked for them. I wanted to know what I asked Nick and team what give me some more scenarios because there's too many unknowns at this point. >> Gotcha. So yeah, >> I'm all right. I'm just that's that's what I understand everything I'm seeing. >> I think we record. Yes. >> Run out of water. They say it was at a city council meeting. They said run out of water in May. >> Yeah. I' I've already articulated to you guys how frustrated I am and how disappointed I was in uh the the difference between the old model and the new model and how much energy I felt like I spent with you all to understand the old model so that I could articulate it to the public and the variety of business interests that I encounter throughout my work life. Uh which I think is now wrong. Right. And and but that said, I understand your responses and it made sense to me like, you know, we modeled it based on 12% water, you know, and no one's ever thought that the lakes would go to 9%. I get that. So I don't want to rehash that here publicly. What I do want to do is just run through a couple of things and I think uh councilwoman's dead on. Uh so is C and D C and D is based on uh 10 MGD in the east and 17 in the west and nine in uh the Relle ERF water. >> That's correct. Okay. >> Right. So the right the the western wellfield bed and banks permit covers the 250 acres of the western wellfield and then when we close on the Ed Rochelle water rights it covers the 9 million gallons. >> Got it. And that you've got that coming on in July of 26 and C I guess. Yeah, right. July and D, right? C and D, they both kind of come on. >> Yeah. So in D there was a there's forecasted a delay in the permit. So essentially in D all of it comes on at the same time. >> Okay. And what you said Peter is that we we we this is the nuance that again frustrates me and and it's because I got a little brain. I I'll take that. >> But >> um I thought that when we got the the permit on the Western oil field, we'd have 17 plus 9. Now I'm here and and I understand it that's subject to the parameters that TCE TCEQ requires us to meet >> right on the water quality and the river. >> So we're asking for an uh a waiver an >> for an amendment to the management plan. >> Okay. >> An amendment. >> Are we asking that on the western? >> We're asking it for both the western and the eastern. Both. Okay. >> But they haven't processed them yet. In fact, they haven't even started working on them yet. >> I get it. That's that's I get it. Okay. >> The TCQ. >> Yeah, I get it. And I I think that's kind of what we're hearing from the governor's office is like, "Hey, help these guys out, these folks out because we need more water in river." And I just for my friends in the back, I get it. You know, putting a lot of high TDS water in the river is not not a good thing. >> Well, actually, you know, the >> Well, it helps with uh arsenic. >> The alternative is not having any river. >> That's my point. I was going to say you stole my thunder. But the alternative is I don't know what to do. If we don't put it in the river, then we run out of water. And I think that's that's a bad that's a bad thing for all of us. So, I just want to acknowledge that I understand putting higher TDS water in the river is not a something we would like to do, but it is either that or run out of water. Okay, got that. Okay. And you're asking for the waiver. Um, industry. So, the ERF is part of the And you have it coming on at the same time. Is are we drilling? I mean, when when they have to get a permit. >> So, the the >> Yeah. E ERF is so we haven't closed on the um we haven't closed on the water rights purchase, right? >> But part of that agreement is they would drill water wells. >> Got it. >> So the theory is we will get that nine subject to the permit. We're not waiting on >> right >> uh somebody to go drill well. >> So the city isn't drilling wells on ERF property because we don't have we haven't closed on the deal. But the understand is we'll close in time to get water flowing from them in July. >> ERF will be drilling the wells as part of the transaction. >> Totally missed. >> And ERF is monitoring the the manage. We don't have any control of those wells. So the story that was in one of the local >> I get it. >> News stations yesterday was 100% wrong. >> Right. >> Yeah. We don't we're not over there. It's not the city's well field. We don't touch the pumps. >> It's not ours. It will be one of those. But that was a bad article. >> Correct. Yes, sir. >> And I was going like, yeah. Uh because they're not our wells. I mean, I don't know what to tell you. We don't own We don't own the water rights. They're not our wells. Go talk to them. >> Correct. >> Um, okay. Moving on because I I know others want to talk. So, this is based on rainfall projections. >> Based on what? No rain the rest of the year. >> No rain. >> Okay. So, no rain. >> If we wake up and there's a little bit of rain, you know, in Lake Matthysse, that's that's in addition to this, >> right? Except has rain. Scenario scenario E has some has two rain events in E. I'm sorry. Well, I'm look I'll I'll if you get me through tonight believing that I got a chance. One in a million, you know, just tell me I got a chance on D. >> I I'll I'll figure the rest out tomorrow. So on on D, C and D, no rain. >> No rain for all the scenarios have no rain with the exception of E. >> E most optimistic. >> That's based on that's not just made up. The National Weather Service says the next three months it's going to be same same as usual, dry weather. And uh Formosa, do we have the 10,000 acre feet under contract? >> We do. So, it's under contract. We we we had it last year. It's a two-year contract. We have it again this year. Okay. >> We will be setting up a meeting with them to discuss renewing it for next year. >> Yeah, they're not using it. But where where that water comes into play is at the end of the year where when we fully exhaust our contractual amount with Lake Texana and we we've drawn down our our water rights from the Colorado. >> But if they cretail this 10% could we take part of our Famosa water to keep our our purchase our >> So you would use it sooner later in the year. >> But but LNR said they would be that would be curtailed too. >> Yeah. But you can't if they cut 10% in April, you can't back fill it with the uh formosa water. >> That's That's right. >> Why not? Why couldn't you? >> Cuz they told us you can't. They run the business. >> Nice to show. >> Really? >> That makes no sense to me. I own 10,000 acre feet and but you're telling me when I get to use it. >> But >> yeah, >> but what can happen is we pump more from the Colorado River to fill the gap. >> Yeah. >> But then we'll run out of that quicker at the end of the year. >> Okay, that makes sense to me. Thank you for that education. Uh and the western the western inflows look constant on D C and D is that so C and D western inflows are >> so >> you still think we have that at 9% we can still get that amount of water going forward? >> Am I looking you're look >> No, I'm I'm confused a little bit council. >> Well, it's it's me. Tell me which which color are the is the river water. >> Not not the well water but the lake water. >> The top bar, Nick. The top bar is >> Yeah, the top bar is the eastern. >> Yeah, those are the that's the western reservoirs uh Corpus Christie and Choke Canyon. >> Okay, got it. Okay. >> What was the question on them? >> Nope. No, not the fleet down, right? There's less and less and eventually they erupt. Is there, you know, somebody said that part of our problem is that land owners along the Noasis River, Noasis River are impounding more water than they were in a decade's past. You know, they they when the when the water there is rain, they're building tanks and ponds. Is that is there truth to that in the >> So, they they do have rights along the river and I'm I'm going to let Esaban explain their their rights as property owners along the river. So, uh, for the record, it's Ramos, assistant, uh, director of water supply management. Uh, to your question, on the upper part of the Noasis River Basin, you're talking about like the Freo River and talking about San Miguel, a lot of those land owners. There has been an uptake of kind of a parciation of large lands. you know, people move in and make little uh ranchettes and we've have seen additional empoundments being made to the number of of them is still in debate and whether that affects it really goes back to we're in a situation unprecedented situation with a drought. Okay. >> And that's where it's coming from. >> Okay, folks. I'm sorry I asked a lot of questions. I'm not cons really sure I'm any more smarter now than when I started. So, thank y'all. Councilman Roy, >> my my question is when you take in consideration what Flint Hills is doing and um >> Valero >> Valero did you subtract those numbers from your demand? I mean there's nothing in here that really talks about that and and can you refresh my memory? Is it 8 MGD between the two that's projected? So, so first councilman, it's a reduction in the demand. So, that top curve. Yeah. >> And if you look at the on any one of the dashboards, there's a like a red violet dot. It says reuse demand reduction. >> Okay. So, it is in there. >> It is it is in there. We've reduced the demand >> raw and treated. No. Okay. So, you did take that in consideration. I That's what I I wanted. That's my only question. >> And Valero is up to 8 MGD. Flynn Hills is up to 3 MGD. We're working with other entities, Siko. So there's potential there. >> So at the end of the day, 8311 >> 16 16 plus MGD potentially more. >> That's significant. >> Yes, it's huge. Yeah, those reuse contracts were a significant uh uh a significant achievement to combat this. Absolutely. I mean because those if I if I understand that those projects in terms of turnaround time are pretty quick, >> right? Things things are moving quicker and now we're able to start estimating when that reduction will start. Yeah. >> Um have you projected just the 16 alone? What would that how far is that pushing our date out? What what's the impact? >> Yeah. So the the current projection of the six oh of pushing the date back. >> Yes. >> Uh I we haven't run it just with the 16 by itself but we you can see where it does affect the demand requirements and the scenarios. In other words, that that top demand line would be much higher on the right and we we would fall into level one water emergency much sooner in all the scenarios without that. >> Okay. That was my only question. Thank you. >> Okay, I think that's all the questions, Nick. Thank you. >> Okay, so we uh there's been a lot of interest in these models. Obviously, we're going to we're going to refine a few more uh based on the council input tonight and then we'll have them on our website. Uh we'll speak to them periodically. Uh we we're updating the prior one model every other week, every two weeks. >> So, we'll keep these in front of us. Chief Wade is here who's our lead on on level one emergency protocol type stuff. So >> eventually we'll we'll we'll be recommending a model because that's when we're going that's when we're going to talk about level one emergencies and timelines and that type of thing. So these are management tools the guides for us and you >> and uh as we just said here momentarily or a few moments ago information coming in this week is probably going to be and and then probably the next step will be the evangeline >> right >> uh preliminary hearing. And so those are the two last drivers to see where are we going to end up. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So then you'll send I mean Peter, what's the best way for you to communicate this to us where it makes sense based on a very fluid situation? >> Yeah. >> What what would you say like like the dates for example the the the hearing? >> Um I'm not sure if I answer the question. Say it again. >> Like in other words, what would be what would be the best way for you all to communicate not just to us but to the public? Um here's here's the next the next significant change based on because that could be right two days from now then it could be a week later and you >> know >> I mean we can sit down with you if you'd like. We'll probably email and and text alert. >> Yeah, I just mean email again. >> Probably email scenarios. >> I just mean right email scenarios based on a significant >> change or event or whatever. >> Like tomorrow morning at 7:30 the LNR board meeting begins. Pat Bowski does his manager's report first thing up, >> right? >> So, we'll be watching it and we'll let you know if that board supports his 10% uh not doing the 10%, >> right? And so, I was just going to say for clarity, >> we should >> his his word I think he used direct, right? I think the governor used >> the governor appoints all those Yeah, the governor appoints all those board members, >> right? But I'm saying I think he said he was directing the LRA to not cretail, which means that's 10% that we we are currently putting into our models that we can pull out. Yeah, correct. >> 20 or 10. >> Well, I and and I I do want to clarify I and I don't know for sure, but I think the curtailment of 40% would still exist. >> Yeah, he said it would. Yeah. So, when we get to 40%, it would kick in. Part of it is it's hard to because the pressures in the Mar roads pipeline, taking out 4 million gallons is probably not engineeringly feasible or realistic. So he's going to wait that 20 at 40% we'll do 10% reduction or he was saying 20% reduction. >> He was saying 20%. >> Yeah. So what this scenario does is buy buys us a few months of more water. Right. Yeah. >> But it doesn't it doesn't alleviate curtailment that comes at 40%. >> And right now it's looking like 20% or about 8 million gallons. >> Okay. Okay. >> Take more Colorado, >> right? We back fill it with Colorado. >> Yeah. >> Then we ran out. >> Okay. Are we done? >> Yeah. So, we're good. So, we'll we are communicating with council continuously here on this and uh and because things are changing rapidly. >> Sometimes the media is reporting things ahead of us. So, that you you can trust that source if you'd like, but we're if there's something to tell you, we're going to tell you. >> Good. >> Okay. And sometimes we're purposely waiting. We may have information, >> but it may not be enough to tell you a a good a good report. Not a good report, but a report that's fact-based, right, or complete. So we may we may not tell you so we're not wasting your time to say oops that changed or now this is the final inconclusion. >> Well we understand and and thank you for saying that because we all now know y'all are on it. You are communicating what needs to be communicated when it needs to be communicated. >> Correct. Right. >> Okay. Thank you Peter. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> We have one more item on the agenda. Right. And that's Nick's water briefing. >> We have the water supply update. Yeah. Mhm. >> Okay. A lot of this we've talked about uh before, but I during the pres during this presentation, I will do my best to answer some of the questions that came up very early in the meeting and I and I'll do my best to point these out. Uh so what we're going to talk about today is the National Weather Service uh update, surface water supplies, evangeleneasis groundwater, our brackish groundwater project, wastewater reuse, and then our seawater desalination projects. This is from our briefing on Monday with the National Weather Service. Um one thing to note is that brown category at the top. We're we're starting to see what the National Weather Service is calling exceptional drought. Uh that has just poked up over the last couple of weeks where there are areas within Texas that are now classified as exceptional drought. You will see a lot of this the extreme drought certainly impacts our watershed. This is a new graphic that the National Weather Service uh working with the US Geological Survey uh put together for us. It can be a little hard to read but one it this graph shows depicts stream flow and when we talk about stream flow or inflow into the reservoirs uh and how critical is you can see the circles that are clear or are white that is where the stream flow is registered as zero and there you can see there are areas along the Noasis River uh to our west where the stream flow has been registered. Ed is zero. Additionally, there's areas uh north and northwest of Cho Canyon Reservoir where the stream flow is zero as well. Certainly, there is uh there are many dots on this graph where it's below normal and much below normal. All of this being said, it is certainly impacting the watersheds of the western reservoirs and Lake Texana. It's certainly impacting the flow of the Noasis River. Lake Tech Santa yesterday they were at 56% capacity. The the chart that's shown here LNR sends to sends to us weekly. This has the projected date of where they will below be below 50% at April 21st. That's if they get no rain or no inflow. They are projecting to be below 40% on June 16th. Those are some dates I just would like to to call out. That's what they're forecasting. And again, this is with no rain or no inflow. If they get a rain event, those dates change. If we look at our surface water supplies um in the west which is Lake Corpus Christie and Choke Canyon yesterday Lake Corpus Christi was 9.7% Choke Canyon was 8.1%. The pictures are of the Cho Canyon Reservoir where the pictures are taken from on top of the dam. You can see some uh some trees located there up on the bank. I I show the pictures just to show that area where those trees are should be completely underwater. There shouldn't be trees there. They shouldn't have been able to grow because they should have been underwater. Just shows the severity of the event. When the city and manager and I and Estaban went to Choke Canyon last week, it was incredible how dry everything was. It's certainly dramatic to say the least. the Noasis uh groundwater program, the eastern wellfield is complete. We have spent $18.2 million on it. The western well field again we've talked about the Ben & Banks permit. Wells 9, 10, 11, and 12 are complete and equipped and ready to operate. 13 and 14 will be equipped and ready to operate by the end of March, early April. 15 and 15 it is drilling is complete. We've pump test the well. We've collected our data. We've designed the pump and we're waiting the pumping equipment materials. 16 drilling is complete. We are we still need to conduct the test pumping and the water quality sampling and collect the information to design the permanent pump. 17 and 18, we're awaiting the production screens for delivery so we can finish the well. And well 19 we are drilling. One thing I want to point out is the average depth of the cemented casing is 515 ft for the western well field. So when we talk about the area wells, the area wells are approximately 250 ft deep. We are cased in cement to twice that at an average depth of 515 feet. CCW crews on the Western Wellfield and the Ed Rochelle property have installed 4.8 miles of PVC water line. And when I say the Ed Rochelle property is because our easement to get to the river goes through the Ed Rochelle property. The plan is for that full the full wellfield to be in operation May 2026. Current expenditures are approximately $21 million and we have received a 30 million grant for both of these projects. Uh one of the questions that I want to address uh from earlier today is arsenic and arsenic production from the wells. This is some of the historic data that we have from each of the wells. The the wells are they're repeated. Look at the dates. The dates are different. As you can see, many of the wells are non detect. The limit for arsenic is 001 mg per liter. And another thing to know, milligrams per liter is the same as parts per million. So you can see the only well that we have that exceeds that is well 4 that's at 011. I would like to point out that sometimes it's gets confusing sometimes in the um in the press they use terms as micrograms per liter. So it's magnitude different. So if you want the limit is 01 milligrams per liter and sometimes micrograms per liter is used and makes the number look extraordinarily big. The water quality in Lake Corpus Christi is degrading. This is the arsenic levels over time. You can see how they have steadily increased as this drought has gotten worse. And I'll uh we took it one step further. This chart shows the arsenic levels compared to the reservoir percentage in Lake Corpus Christi. And then we also plotted out to where the levels of arsenics would be in Lake Corpus Christi when it near 0% reservoir capacity. It could be as high as 018 mg per liter. The red line on this uh graph is the is the limit at 01. >> Yeah, those are some of the things that that we're we're dealing with today. And we've we've shared this data with our with our partners uh with Newasis County WCID number three as well. One thing that uh we talked about earlier is our uh well field monitoring program. The program is meant to assist well owners with periodic water level monitoring, assist well owners with water quality data sampling, which we will do at no charge. Review the well construction with the well owners. It's important to understand how deep their well is and what formations it targets. Does it have well screen that is placed at 50 foot at 250 foot to understand where it targets and what formations? For example, a well that is drilled and I'll be dramatic to 10 ft certainly is dependent upon rainfall to to replenish that very very shallow aquifer. Deeper wells like the wells we are drilling, they are not impacted by rainfall events. Again, like I said, we're caseed to 500 feet. Our wells target that lower Chico and upper Evangelene formation which is between 500 ft and 800 ft plus or minus. Um the data is reviewed with the well owners. Uh it's used to understand, track and monitor operating conditions. the impacts of the data will result in potentially CCW changing the way we operate the wellfields. The one thing to note and I and I do want to bring up and I know this has been passed out to you but as part of our permits the Corpus Christi aquifer storage and recovery conservation district regard required many uh special provisions on our permit. Uh the handout shows where I document this program and all of the other steps that we are doing including subsidance monitoring. The requirements of the district require a quarterly update at their board meetings to show water level data, water quality data, and any subsidance information and general project updates. The first update that I will be providing uh to the district will be later this month. The the one thing that that I won't be shy about is we are having issues. This is a voluntary program. We are having issues getting people to become members of the program. There certainly is a lot of chatter and recommendations to avoid contact with city staff. So, this has been a voluntary program from the start. We are trying to ramp up our our uh outreach efforts to try and get more people to join this program. All that being said, the phone number is 361-8261600. If anyone listening is interested to this free program, please feel free to reach out to us. >> Yeah, Nick. So, just kind of interrupt you for a moment. So, this is the good neighbor program then that Councilwoman Paxton was asking us about earlier. That's correct, Peter. Yeah, it it's actually more than that because it includes uh working with the neighbors, but also includes subsidance monitoring. Okay. >> Well monitoring. Those were conditions of the >> It was passed out. It's a four-page document passed out to the city council. So, is this on our website, Nick? Is it on the is it on your website where you have all the well monitoring stuff? >> It is not, but we will put it on the website on there. That document is not on the website right now. >> That's it. Council. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. So, that's a written document that we were talking about at 11:30 this morning. >> That's correct. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. Um re uh real quick, it's it's probably more uh relevant uh before I go on to the next slide. Another comment that was brought up was the um salinity at the river at the Owen Stevens intake. One of the comments was in January of 2025, the TDS at our intake at Owen Stevens, and this is all available online, was 360 mg per liter. That was a that admittedly is a low number and and we recorded it. We did have some beneficial rain that month. We actually had 1.2 inches of rain in the area. One thing that I would like to point out just to show the inconsistency of the river and sort of what we're dealing with. So January 2025 it was 360. February of 2024 well before we drilled any wells it was 968 at the intake. And we've got different measurements 858 718 556. All of this to say is that the river has many influences. Many things affect it. We can't control everything. We like we just can't. And it's it's a very dynamic situation. The one thing that I can state for sure about the river is one of the TCQ requirements is that we have to do an aquatic life monitoring uh uh study every year. The study that we have conducted showed that there was no harmful uh activity to the aquatic life in the river, which is great. It's certainly not surprising considering that the 27,000 TDS from the bay used to go up 23 miles along the river. So, it doesn't surprise me, but it's good to hear. The containerized uh brackish groundwater plant. So there's a lot of different portions to this project. We are we will need a uh a ground storage tank and a pump station at the western wellfield. There will be a 13-mi conveyance line to the Owen Stevens water treatment plant and of course the brackish groundwater treatment plant. A lot is going on in this project. Permitting meetings have occurred with TCQ and continue to occur. That includes permitting for the reverse osmosis treatment, our discharge options which include evaporative ponds, injection wells and and surface discharge. There's been extensive review of the water quality from the wells by Aquelia, our our uh provider for the brackish RORO treatments. They continue to confirm delivery constraints and supply logistics. We have le weekly meetings with their staff that brackish RORO treatment is at 90% design. Our the CCW team meets with them weekly and they have a very robust engineering team. We're happy that they're they're working with us. And then we we also have the U A power at Owen Stevens. One of the reasons the site was selected at Owen Stevens was because we had available power with A. So, we are working with them to make sure all that's in place. The other portion that CCW continues to work on is uh the ground storage tanks at Owen Stevens. Uh the connection to the clear well, which is where the the water will go and and uh and be mixed and then of course the concrete foundations for the equipment. the delivery schedule and again this is treated delivery schedule it would be 3.9 MGD in 11 months so we're looking at the January February time frame 9.2 million gallons a day in 14 months 14.6 six and the final build out is 21.3 MGD in 24 months. So that's uh 24 MGD of raw water. We've got a 85% recovery which gets us to 21.3 MGD evangelene project. I I feel like I've uh said this slide three times today, so we'll go to the next. Um the the we do have an administrative law judge which is selected which is great and again I want to just reiterate the groundwater conservation district manages that project. >> We are working diligently and trying to get them to schedule that hearing as soon as possible. When potential dates arrive the city of Corpus Christie always picks the first available date. Um, amendment one has been approved to Garnney. That is for the pre-order of long lead item materials today and and thank you council for your support. You approved amendment two which will allow for construction phase services. In fact, construction trailers to the site early to midappril. The other update that uh the city manager and I were made aware of last week is the HDPE pipe is being fabricated. It was being fabricated uh last week and I was told today that we may have 7,000 ft of that available by the end of the month. Um Garney has issued key subcontracts to key contractors and equipment suppliers as well. >> Um quick question. Are they I feel like do they contract out work here or they have it all under one umbrella? >> Garnney, >> they're the construction people. >> Right. Right. So Garnney is the construction manager at risk. One of the things that they are um um that they have some of the the the benefits they have. They do a lot of self-perform a lot of work and they also have multiple uh subcontracts like they'll have two drilling contractors working for them. They have an electrical control uh company that is working. They have uh SCADA working for them as well. And then uh other entities to do the access roads and the site work. >> Okay. Thank you. Mhm. Councilman Hernandez. >> Yeah. On the brackish water diesel, you didn't mention anything about any work on discharge of the of whatever brine or I don't even want to call it brine, but uh the discharge and what the have you made any inroads as to what's going to happen to it? >> Sure. Absolutely. And I would say the approach has remained consistent. We feel strongly that we'll start with evaporative ponds. If you go back to that schedule, that first onboarding of that 3.91 MGD, we have property at Owen Stevens or located across the highway from Owen Stevens where we will use evaporative ponds and then eventually and we're working with TCQ on this, but I could see us moving to a injection well and then potentially surface discharge. the the discharge uh the information that we've been given is it would be about uh I think it was about 8 or 9,000 TDS plus or minus >> uh well you would multiply whatever your TDS is coming in by four on average so >> that would that would map out or TDS coming in is about 1,600. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And where you have all three you're working with TCQ on all three avenues. >> That's correct. >> That work has begun. So that they're working with TCQ councilman on all three alternatives. We may use one or more of them in the process of onboarding the project. >> Like the evaporative ponds would be the easiest thing to start with. >> Well, with the evaporative ponds, I mean, obviously if it evaporates, you're going to just end up with a highly concentrated salt pond. Um, so I mean you're going to eventually have to do something with that as well. It's not you can't just do that forever. And um, also wanted to mention that uh, there was another company that saw that your efforts and then made an unsolicited um, proposal to reduce that cost by 20 million. Can you kind of talk to that? >> Absolutely, Councilman. Yes. So we were after the initial presentation we were informed that there were two companies that had alternate proposals. Uh I know of one of them. We received one um limited proposal from them. Uh after a technical review by uh Garver Engineering and CCW staff, it was clear the proposals weren't uh apples to apples. For for instance, one one big issue was the Aquelia included pre-treatment to deal with the the iron from the groundwater wells. Um the second proposing company didn't have any pre-treatment in included with it at all. There's certainly some financial differences in terms of the operating costs where Aquailia had a confirmed operating cost for for basically seven years. If you remember that the they'll actually start with their uh operational services as we start bringing on the water. So it's five full years at at at full capacity, but there's two at partial. So, they had confirmed um confirmed prices there and and the list sort of goes on from there. I did talk with the other company and we went through it all and they certainly understood and they appreciated the opportunity to discuss it with us and submit the proposal. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you for asking that. Yeah, absolutely. All that being said, it certainly uh provided us with uh um um excellent confidence in our approach to this project. When you look at uh wastewater reuse, uh again, there's a lot going on. This is uh the construction drawing here is at the OSO plant. The highlighted areas are new facilities uh that would be going on at OSO. So essentially I have to have a new pump station at OSO that is going to pump water from OSO to the Greenwood facility which would then make that water more available to more customers. Those customers would include uh Valero who essentially would take up to 8 million gallons a day. The other portion of our reuse project is the Flint Hills contract at Allison. Flint Hills is a raw water line that runs right next to the Allison wastewater plant and they own the parcel right next door. So they are um they are going to actually install some reverse osmosis treatment equipment to treat the effluent wastewater and then they will put it into their raw raw water line which is uh a great circumstance. It's a great situation for both them and us. We continue to not negotiate with other entities including Siko. The goal is to use to to reuse 16 MGD of wastewater. We've seen some other opportunities. We we hope to maybe make that 19. Uh I'm working on that. The team is working on that. So we hope to to leave no stone unturned in our harbor seawater desalination. Um staff is working with this Corpus Christie delale partners to prepare a contract. Uh additionally, and again we appreciate it. We're thankful that you approved our farfield modeling contract today. I said it earlier and I'll say it again. I'm very confident in in the team that's assembled and continue to be impressed with with their qualifications and what they can deliver. Another thing that I just want to keep on your radar is we do have an RFQ for an owner's representative. If the project is approved, we would be hiring a owner's representative for the city to assist with that project. And then again, if that uh if the contract is approved and we can move forward, we start the development of an operations and maintenance agreement contract that would go out. We would solicit qualifications for that. The Harbor Island Seawater Desalination Project, again, that's the Newasis River Authority Project. So, they have issued a formal RFQ for a development partner. They've received four responses. Uh we have been told by the NRA they anticipate to make a selection on their development partner by mid June. That's excellent news. Additionally, they've hired a uh lenwood an Andrews and Newman as well as HDR for um the design of various uh portions of the conveyance line and pumping stations. That's important because when we talk about seawater del where you want it to go is important and the conveyance is critical which is why it's it's uh it's good that we are supporting this project. We have a little bit of input into where that conveyance line will route. They have a draft TCQ intake permit that is going through the process at TCQ. Again, it's draft. I I'm not sure yet if there's going to be public comment on that or what the actual TCQ promise process is going to be on on seeing that through to completion, but we will update you as I know more from the Noasis River Authority. And I will stand by for questions. I appreciate the opportunity to go through that. It's it's it's a lot of information, but I certainly want to showcase the work that the the CCW team, >> our support staff, and and everyone at the city is really working to support all of us. >> Nick, we we you did a great job and we really appreciate all the work um that you have done and your team have done. I know it's it's a lot and we really appreciate it. We understand that you guys are doing everything that you can. So, um thank you. All right. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Someone waited the whole time, I think, to be for some of those answers to be answered that they had mentioned in the at public comment. I know you answered some of them. I'm not sure if they got them all. >> And if not, maybe there's a time that we can do that, Mr. Cone. But they we need to address them because they were in public comment. >> Yeah. Right. Excuse me. We got the TDS one. Um >> yeah, the the arsonic, the TPS at Owen Stevens, the mitigation plan. >> Yeah. >> Local wells, >> uh influence of the river and Selenia at ONS. And >> I think we answered them all. >> Okay. I'm going to send you some stuff that I've got, Nick, to your phone. Maybe you can overlook look at it and make sure that we've covered it. >> You got I will. Absolutely. Yeah. Absolutely. >> Nick, thank you very much. And there being no further business, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you.