[music] >> All right, and now open the regular city council meeting for Lubbock City Council for March 24th, 2026. The council will now recess in executive session in accordance with Texas Government Code sections 551.071 to consult with and seek the advice of the city's legal counsel, section 551.072 to discuss and purchase the purchase, exchange, or value of real property, and section 551.074 to discuss personnel matters, and section 551.087 to discuss economic development matters. City Council is recessing now at 12:04 p.m. All right. We're now reconvening from open session into open session from our executive session. We'll take up a work session for presentation of the city's information technology infrastructure and equipment, and I will call on our city manager, Mr. Atkinson, to begin this discussion. Thank you, Mayor City Council. Item 2.1, your work session item, is directly related to items 6.1.1 and 6.20 that are on the consent agenda. I'm sure we're all tired of hearing how things change and what happens when one thing in the market does something to the else, but that is what is going on right now with what have been to date some to me pretty well planned computer replacement schedules, server replacement schedules, different types of software that we have to buy, and we now know that that market does not work the way that those plans have been designed. So, we're going to have a real quick presentation. Ms. Jennifer Fresquez is going to come up. She has the uh quite famous double Chrises back there with her. Between the three of them, they have put together what I think is an excellent response to a situation that I wished we were not in, but we are. So, Jennifer, if you don't mind, walk us through that and we'll take any questions. Yes, sir. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. I just want to kind of speak to what I would just describe as market volatility with the technology sector right now. A lot of it is due to AI, just the massive influx of AI [clears throat] in the market and hyper-scale data centers. Those are those mass data centers where you've got tens of thousands of servers combined into one. That's created a shortage due to uh memory chips. Um So, the supply for this year and next year has pretty much been procured by the major AI companies. Um that's put a lot of pressure on raw materials and just in general the supply chain. Um long term, we're hearing through 2027, some experts are now saying the next 4 to 5 years we're going to kind of continue to see the squeeze. Um I've talked to lots of manufacturers, lots of resellers, my peers across the state, and the same thing I'm hearing kind of the same thing, and that's we're back into the pandemic era buying, COVID era market. So, it's impacted us um here considerably. One of the biggest things we've seen is our quote timelines. You know, last year we were able to get quotes valid for 30, 60, even 90 days. Um this year, we're seeing 10 to 15-day turnaround whenever you're trying to do make a big purchase like a couple million dollars server investment, that's very hard to do. Um and that's kind of bitten us. Um a lot of it is, you know, that's subject to um component verification. So, you know, what's slated for public sector market for servers and computers, a lot of those components and pieces of the servers and computers being taken um for the AI sector. So, what we, you know, a server we had our eye on isn't available like it used to be. Um an example where we've actually been bitten was a procurement that we did for 13, what I call physical servers, a one-to-one server. Um we were looking at components and pricing late last year, so November-December time frame. They were telling us about $90,000. Um some of the components became unavailable come January. So, we were having to go back and reassess, reevaluate. We were able to finally get a quote mid-February for a February 24th procurement, and the price had gone up to $130,000. For the same 13 servers. So, knowing that we had that type of increase, we kind of had to stop and reevaluate our plans for the next couple of years. We were planning on a major data center replacement for servers in next fiscal year. Um because of the pricing and because of the availability, we've moved those things up. Um So, we're bringing to you today some server server procurements, Mr. Atkinson said. Last month, the pricing was 1.7 million. Um this month, it's 2.1 million. If we wait till next week, April 1st, it'll go up to $2.6 million. We're trying to be as proactive as we can in such a volatile market. Um like I said, we're moving up the infrastructure replacement so that we can try to outpace the market, beat the pricing increases cuz we know it's only going to continue to increase. So, we're bringing forward to you the two purchases. Um we're continuing to monitor the industry closely. Um We're paying attention to the industry partners who are buying each other out and um merging because that makes a difference also. Um another purchase that we're bringing will that we will be bringing to you next month is for software to make these servers work. That is to get out of off of a platform that we're on now, um buy a product that was bought out, and their renewal went up 60%. So, we're moving off of that platform to avoid that increase, and that'll save us about half a million dollars. And then beyond that, we're just looking to get as much long-term pricing stability that we can get. Um we're looking for like 10-year pricing protection for this virtualization platform just so that we can try to stay ahead of things as best as possible. And that's kind of it. Do you guys have any questions? Other questions? So, uh I've got one you if you would go back to your last uh slide. So, when you talk about infrastructure replacement, you're talking about the servers themselves, right? >> Um All right, and uh have they like reached their end of useful life or Yes, they will. So, they will have next year reached [clears throat] their end of useful life. Um I mean, I I know people don't like to kick things down the road, but I mean, is there any any chance that the market will Is it only going to get worse or will it stabilize? Is this a kind of a glitch, a blip that may soften or >> I'm I was hopeful that it was, but I have >> [snorts] >> just been on the phone with people and in person with people from um industry like Dell, Lenovo, HP, their resellers, my peers, and I'm hearing it's not going to to stop, at least for the next couple of years. Because what's happened is these companies have bought all of the pieces and parts that you need for servers. So, there's just a major backlog of the equipment. So, the raw materials and the the components themselves. And then your savings that you project of $547,000, is that a one-time? Is it spread out over 5 years, 10 years? >> out over 5 years. >> 5 years. It's about 100,000, a little bit over 100,000 a year. Okay. All right. All right, any other questions? All right. All right, thank you. >> Okay, thanks. Mr. Atkinson, anything else you want to say on that? Any other thoughts? No, sir. Appreciate the time to do that. You know, we all heard during COVID there were going to be all these new chip factories built, and some of them were. Some of them were and and went into production, but with what's going on with AI, with the data storage industry, that has been consumed. So, demand has gone up and supply is not going up in an equivalent manner, and there's nothing at least in the near term that shows that that's going to even out. Um you asked about, you know, end of life, and it's a great question. All of those big servers were on a rotating replacement schedule so that we don't get them past where they will work. We have pushed the life on like desktop computers, things like that. We've had a huge um system-wide audit where those of us that have multiple devices were asked to pull down on those devices. Um the new rule is two. There are a few exceptions that will be necessary, but for most it will be two and only two. So, where we can hold on, not necessarily kick the can down the road, but this is not a critical piece, we're doing that. When it comes to all the back end, the the servers that make all of this function, we just we can't do that. I understand that. A lot of your software that drives, you know, where we do our data storage and data processing, a lot of the software that drives that, they won't even allow you to run it after that equipment hits a certain age. >> [snorts] >> They won't certify what you're doing, which puts us in other areas of risk. Well, if everybody would just quit making dancing cat videos with AI or whatever it may be, we could uh get this thing solved. But anyway, that's where we are. Uh we're not in control of that. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. All right. We'll now take up uh our ceremonial items. And today we have Becky Robertson here for executive director from Lubbock Impact, who was my choice to receive the benefits of the state of the city, and I'll be giving them a check here in a couple of weeks, I think, uh for a little over uh $15,000. So, uh uh it's a wonderful thing that we're able to do, and uh I really appreciate the work that she's doing at Lubbock Impact on 34th. And um Boston, she's going to lead our invocation, and then the mayor pro tem will lead us in our pledges. Please rise as you are able. So, as we bow to pray, uh I wanted to bring y'all um just a encouraging word um from Proverbs 2:1-11, just as a reminder of what the purpose is that we're here for, um to serve community. And so, um the scripture says, "My child, listen to what I say, and treasure my commands. Tune your ears to wisdom, and concentrate on understanding. Cry out for insight, and ask for understanding. Search for them as you would for silver. Seek them like hidden treasures. Then you will understand what it means to fear the Lord, and you will gain knowledge of God. For the Lord grants wisdom. From his mouth come knowledge and understanding. He grants a treasure of common sense to the honest. He is a shield to those who walk with integrity. He guards the paths of the just, and protects those who are faithful to him. Then you will understand what is right, just, and fair, and you will find the right way to go. For wisdom will enter your heart, and knowledge will fill you with joy. Wise choices will watch over you. Understanding will keep you safe. Dear heavenly Father, Lord, I just thank you for these men and women that um give their time to our city of Lubbock, and Lord, I just pray that you would grant them wisdom and understanding um as they guide and direct um for the citizens in this community. Lord, um may we always give you the honor and glory for the things that come from our city. In your name we pray. Amen. Amen. Thank you. Will join me in honoring our American and Texan flags. 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. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible. Thank you. Thank you from for those words from Proverbs. I think those are good words for all of us. Um I'll now call the meeting to order, and we will take up our citizen comments according to our council rules. Any citizen wishing to appear in person before a regular meeting of our city council uh may uh regarding any matter that's posted on our agenda for that day uh is invited to complete a sign-up form uh provided at the meeting no later than 2:00 on the day of the meeting, and uh we will call you up uh if you would give us your name and address when you come forward, you will have 3 minutes to make your comments, and a warning bell will sound when you have 30 seconds uh left to complete your uh comments. And today, I believe we have just one person wishing to speak during citizen comments, so I want to call up Shelton Liv- Lelo. Did I say that right? Lelo. Lelo. Okay. Lelo. Lelo. Okay. Thank you, Shelton. All right. Hey, how are you guys doing this today? Um I have to kind of have another meeting I have to go to, so I'll I won't be around for the later part of this. Uh but I just want to say that I oppose uh changing um for uh 7.5 uh it's got a case the zoning case for uh 3016- uh G the property at 9901 Upland Avenue. Uh it is again, it's it's our backyard. It's really small space. Um the the main thing that we're worried about is crime. Right? Like we have truly one of the safest neighborhoods in the city of Lubbock. By putting that there, it's going to have a spillover effect, right? Where, you know, people who target those businesses, they're going to come and and and try to and that spills over into the neighborhood. Uh one lady will speak here in a little bit. We raised our kids like it's the '90s. They were on the streets, we let them run wild. You can go look at Google Street View, and you could see the kids in the streets playing. Right? So, bringing that into our neighborhood is just going to cause a problem. Uh I know they're saying want to do a wall, it's another awning and stuff. But again, it's it's like 10 ft would be the back of the the the property into one of our neighbor's driveways. It it's just not appropriate for that area. So, again, thank you all for your Yeah. Uh you've asked my vote, and I gave it to you. I'm asking for you guys to vote no on this. Thank you. All right. I have no one else signed up. Uh so, that concludes our citizen comments for the day. I will now take up item uh 5.1 on our agenda, the minutes from our February 24th, 2026 regular city council meeting. Uh is there a motion to approve item 5.1? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Any additions or changes to the minutes? I see none. All in favor, let it be known by saying I. I. Any opposed say nay. Hear none. The motion is approved unanimously. We'll now take up item six, the consent agenda. There's not been any requests by any council member to pull any agenda items from the consent agenda, so I will entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda in its entirety. Uh is there such a motion? So moved. You have a second? Second. Have several seconds. All right. Any discussion? I see none. All in favor, let be known by saying I. I. Any opposed say nay. I hear none. That motion passes unanimously. We'll now move on to our regular agenda. We'll take up zoning case 774-D, a request of the uh UN2 Corporation for a zone change from light industrial district to heavy commercial district at 1129 Southeast Loop 289, located north of Southeast Loop 289, and southwest of East Slaton Road, Plan X Number One Addition, Lot Six. We'll have a public hearing on agenda item 7.1, and the purpose of the public hearing uh is to hear from the applicant and any members of the public wishing to speak to this item. The council may ask questions during the public hearing, but no discussion on the merits will be conducted by the council during the public hearing. I'll now call on our director of planning, uh Kristen Saeger, to provide a brief summary of the zoning case subject to the public hearing. Kristen. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Item 7.1 is zoning case 774-D. The applicant is UN2 Corporation, requesting a zone change from light industrial to heavy commercial. We sent out nine notifications, receiving no response. This property is located north of Loop 289, south of Slaton Highway. Here's an aerial view of the subject property. There is other commercial development surrounding the property with some additional vacant property to the south. Current zoning is light industrial. It is surrounded by light industrial. The future land use plan designates this property for commercial land uses. And here are some photos of the subject property with the existing gas station convenience station and the surrounding area. >> [snorts] >> The future land use plan designation is for commercial land uses, so the request for heavy commercial zoning is in conformance with this designation. The zone change is compatible with the zoning ordinance, and appropriate in this location. The subject property fronts Southeast Loop 289 with additional access from East Slaton Road. The loop is a freeway, and East Slaton Road is a minor arterial. Staff had no objection to the request, and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval with a unanimous vote, and I'd be pleased to answer any questions. Are there any questions? I see none. Thank you. All right. I will now open uh the public hearing at 2:24 on agenda item 7.1. Is there anyone here wishing to speak in favor of this zone case? 2:24 on agenda item 7.1. Is there anyone here wishing to speak in opposition to this zone case? I see none. So, I'll close the public hearing at 2:25. Uh is there a motion to approve agenda item 7.1? Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Have a motion and a second. Any discussion on item 7.1? I see none. All in favor, say I. I. Any opposed say nay. Hear [clears throat] none. That motion passes unanimously. We'll now move on to take up zoning case 3542, which encompasses agenda items 7.2 and 7.3, and we'll take up each agenda item relating to this zoning case separately. First, the council will take up agenda item 7.2, the zoning case 3542, which is a request for numerous zoning changes in council [clears throat] district 3 being proposed by staff, but does not include the properties listed in agenda item 7.3. But Miss Seger, will you provide a brief summary of the zoning case subject to the public hearing? Zoning case 3542 is a continuation of our zoning map analysis. This is district 3. We have a request for zone changes from SF2, HDR, and heavy commercial to office and auto urban commercial. We sent out 315 notifications, receiving two in favor and two in opposition, with the exception of those opposed in item 7.3. Again, this is just the background of why we are doing this. We have completed districts 1 and 2. I will update that timeline. We are switching districts 5 and 6. Here's an aerial view of the properties that were studied in district 3. There are three areas at 34th and University, 50th and Quaker, and 19th and Marsha Sharp. 50th and University, you have two properties that have existing commercial uses that are zoned high-density residential and low-density SF2. Staff is recommending those be rezoned to auto urban commercial. Future land use plan designates these properties for commercial land uses as well. At 19th and Marsha Sharp Freeway, you have heavy commercial on Marsha Sharp and 19th, some neighborhood commercial, and a majority high-density residential district. There are several properties that we are asking to rezone from heavy commercial to auto urban commercial and from high-density residential to office. There is also a few medical offices that are currently zoned heavy commercial or neighborhood commercial that we are also asking to rezone to office. >> [clears throat] >> The future land use plan designates the majority of this area for office land uses with a portion for commercial. And then at 34th and University, this is a parcel that was studied by the consultant. It is a parking lot that is zoned high-density residential district, but given that it serves a medical clinic, their recommendation was to leave it as its current high-density residential zoning. The future land use plan designates it for low-density residential land uses because it is adjacent to low-density residential land uses, um and that's another reason the high-density residential is appropriate. We had one response in favor from 4322 50th. They are not We are not asking to rezone this property. They're within the notification boundary for the shopping center you can see zoned SF2. 3621 22nd was also in favor. We are not asking to rezone their property. 3705 22nd and 3601 22nd Place were in opposition. We are not asking [clears throat] to rezone these properties. Staff recommended approval. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval by unanimous vote, and I'd be pleased to answer any questions. Are there any questions for Miss Seger? I see none. Thank you. So, I'll now [clears throat] open the public hearing on agenda item 7.2. Is there anyone here today wishing to speak in favor of agenda item 7.2? Is there anyone here today wishing to speak in opposition to agenda item 7.2? I see none, so I'll close the public hearing for items 7.2 at 2:27. Is there a motion to approve agenda item 7.2? So moved. Is there a second? I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? I see none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Hearing none, that motion passes unanimously. All right. We'll now take up item 7.3. Um that's all my Give all the description. You can go through it, okay, Miss Seger. >> Perfect. Item 7.3 are four properties that were part of zone case 3542, where we did receive written opposition from the property owner. They are located within the area at 22nd Street and Memphis Avenue. They are currently zoned high-density residential and neighborhood commercial. We are recommending they be rezoned to office. Current uses are medical offices and clinics. Just for a little bit of context, the high-density residential district allows medical office and clinics as a limited use. They cannot exceed 15,000 square feet. General office is also a limited use. It cannot exceed 3,500 square feet. Within the office district, which we are proposing, both of these uses are permitted by right. There are no restrictions on the gross floor area. As well as the neighborhood commercial district, they are permitted as well, um just because that is what part of it is currently zoned. Staff recommended approval. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial by a vote of 1 to 7. And then again, since we have written property owner opposition, it requires a supermajority of six out of seven votes from council in order to be approved. And I'd be pleased to answer any questions. Are there any questions? Uh Dr. Wilson. Miss Seger, can you talk a little bit about what was discussed with Planning and Zoning and why they voted to deny? So, the property owner was at the hearing, and he expressed concern about his property value, as well as the uh the end property that has a portion zoned neighborhood commercial, wanting to be able to retain the uses allowed within the neighborhood commercial district that would not be allowed in the office district. Mr. Glesheen. And to add to that, the uh property owner reached out to me as well and explained that uh right now they're using that as a drive-thru window for a pharmacy, and they'd like to continue to be able to do that. And so, the property owner uh explained that he doesn't want the zone uh zoning change right now and wants to be able to keep the current use. So, I think it's consistent with the the other type of kind of mixed office medical uses that are in the area. So, would a drive-thru not be permitted? Not in the office district, no. >> Okay. All right. So, that's his current use. He currently uses it. Okay. Any other questions? Mr. Collins. Would the drive-thru be grandfathered? It would become non-conforming if it were rezoned office, and it could continue in its current state. Okay. Do Does the rest of the buildings comply with um I noticed 15,000 square feet being the limit. It appears from the photograph it might be bigger than that. Does it comply with the requirements of HDR? I don't know, but again, it is non-conforming in its current state today since it was there prior to the adoption of the UDC. Okay, so so essentially any change made today doesn't really change anything about what this current owner and current occupancy uh can do. It would just be in the future. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Um so, Mr. Glesheen, did he um state that he was trying to protect his future interests rather than more than his present interests? Uh both. Uh the gentleman made a very principled um argument about wanting to maintain the present use of his zoning and not having the government change it over his objection, uh which I I certainly respected, and uh he's concerned about uh it becoming the commercial portion of it becoming non-conforming. And um the the the the owner as well is a um a manager and investor in several properties. So, this is a somebody who's I think a sophisticated land user who um will be able to uh make the appropriate zone changing in the future if he feels it's necessary for his land uses. All right, Mr. Rose. Uh Miss Seger, if we changed it right now, and then it's and then he sold the business or it changed hands, then it wouldn't you wouldn't be able to do that drive-thru anymore. Is that [clears throat] right or >> Only if the use were to cease for 1 year. For 1 year. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Any other questions? All right. Thank you. So, I'll now open the uh public hearing on uh this item. Is there anyone here wishing to speak in favor of this zone case? Is there anyone here wishing to speak in opposition to this zone case? All right. I'll close the hearing uh 2:34 on item 7.3. Again, note because of the percentage of opposition to this zoning case, it would require an affirmative vote of six council members to approve this change. So, is there a motion to approve agenda item 7.3? So moved. We have a motion. Is there a second? We have a motion. We have a second. Is there any discussion? Mr. Glesheen. I think this is almost identical to the situation in the Briercroft office, uh where we've got somebody who's specifically asked us to not change the zone. They've got a good reason for it and it's most appropriate to respect the the wishes of the landowner in this situation. Mr. Collins. Mayor, for clarity's sake, our vote today, an affirmative vote on this action would be to in fact actually make the change? Yes. Is that correct? That's correct. >> Which we would be having to override >> the against the owner's objection. An affirmative vote would be to make the change. >> the zoning and it'd be contrary to what the owners requested. >> Very good. Thank you. And because it's requires a supermajority because of the opposition and the PNC. Okay. Any other discussion? All right. I think we need to probably post the votes on this one so I can see. >> [snorts] >> All right, because it requires a supermajority. So if again, if you were in favor, you were in favor of changing the zoning, if not, leaving it a no vote is leaving it the way it is. All right. All right. Well, a rare case of unanimity here. So, >> [laughter] >> all right. It's a unanimous vote. So that uh motion is denied. I lost my my little thing here. There we go. All right. Okay. Now we're going to take up item 7.4, zone case 3553, a request of Parkhill for Baxter Trust, a zone change on low density senior single-family district to a medium-density residential district, neighborhood commercial district, and auto commercial district to low-density single-family district and auto commercial district located west of Indiana Avenue and south of 114th. Ms. Hager. Thank you, Mayor. Item 7.4, as you stated, zone case 3553, is a request [snorts] for a zone change from SF2, MDR, NC, and AC to SF2 and AC. We sent out 45 notifications, receiving 30 in favor, zero in opposition. Property is located south of 114th Street, west of Indiana Avenue. Here's the response map showing those who responded in favor. Here's an aerial view of the subject property. There is some vacant land to the south and east and north, um some developing residential to the southwest, and a commercial property on the corner of 114th and Memphis. Current zoning is a mix of NC, SF2, MDR, and AC. You'll see that the two properties that front 114th Street is where the auto urban commercial zoning is requested. The southern property is requested for low-density single-family SF2. Future land use plan designates this property for low-density residential land uses with a tiny portion for commercial. Here's some photos of the subject property and surrounding area. Here's the graphic provided by the applicant again showing the portions requested for commercial zoning as well as residential. Site plan provided by the applicant of their proposed development. The future land use map designation again is for residential and commercial land uses. While the majority of the auto urban commercial zoning is in the area designated for residential, it is appropriate in that location along 114th Street. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and compatible with the surrounding area. 114th Street is designated as a minor arterial. Staff had no objection to the request and the planning and zoning commission recommended approval with a unanimous vote with one recusal. And I'd be pleased to answer any questions. Are there any questions for Ms. Hager? I see none. All right, thank you. So now I'll open the public hearing on agenda item 7.4. Is there anyone here wishing to speak in favor of this zoning case today? Tarek Redwan, 4222 85th Street. I'm with Parkhill. I'm representing the developer today on this. So what triggered this rezone is we reshaped the playa in that area and got it approved through the city to be able to put more commercial along the arterial 114th Street. So basically to the south of that is going to be playa and then on to the north is going to be 114th. We wanted AC just to have a mixed use basically a pet store, junior retail store, restaurants, stuff like that. So we talked also to the neighbors around us and they were in favor of this zone change. So if you have any questions, I'll be more than happy to answer. So what you're having rezoned for SF2 behind it to the south of it, is that in the playa is that in the lake or the flood zone? Correct. >> Is it going to ever be developed or do you have any idea? No, it won't. The reason why it's being downgraded to the south of it is because of the old shape of the playa. It used to be part residential that was going to be MDR and then there's a little corner that was going to be AC. So now those two areas are part of the playa. So downgrading it to SF2 is appropriate, but it will never be developed. Right. Okay. All right. Mayor pro tem. And you will be putting a buffer in between to Am I understanding that correctly? The buffer is the playa itself. So the body of the playa is between the commercial and the residential to the south. Got you. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Any uh further questions? Thank you, Tarek. Thank you. All right. Anyone else wishing to speak in favor? Anyone here today wishing to speak in opposition? All right. Close the public hearing at 2:41. Is there a motion to approve item 7.4? So moved. Have a have a motion. We have a second. Jumped the gun there, Mr. Rose. Be good to get out of here today or something. >> [laughter] >> Any discussion? I see none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay. I hear none. All right. Okay, we'll take up item 7.5 now, zone case 3016-G, a request for a zone change from office district to neighborhood commercial district at 9901 Upland. All right. Ms. Hager. Thank you, Mayor. Item 7.5, zone case 3016-G, is a request of R2M Engineering LLC for a zone change from office to neighborhood commercial. We sent out 66 notifications, receiving zero in favor, 62 in opposition, 46 of which are from outside the 400-ft notification boundary. This property is located south of 98th Street, east of Upland Avenue. Here's the response map showing the responses within the 400-ft notification boundary. Here's an aerial view of the subject property. There is residential to the north and south with a vacant land to the east and west. Current zoning is office. There is neighborhood commercial zoning to the west, additional office zoning to the east, and low-density single-family to the north and south. Future land use plan designates this property for commercial land uses. Here's some photos of the subject property and surrounding area. Here's the graphic provided by the applicant again just outlining the area requested for the zone change. Here's some information from the EDC we thought might be helpful. There was a lot of discussion at the planning and zoning commission regarding the depth of the property, the size of it. And so if this property were to be rezoned neighborhood commercial, your front setback requirement is 25 ft if you locate parking between the building and front property line. If you don't, you have a 10-ft front setback. 15-ft side setback on the side if you're adjacent to a residential use, zero if you're adjacent to a non-residential use. A 20-ft rear setback requirement with either a landscape buffer yard consisting of a 10-ft width of ground cover with six canopy trees, 13 ornamental trees, and a 7-ft solid wood fence or a 7-ft solid masonry fence. 10% of the property must be landscaped and if a retail use were to go in, the parking would be one space for every 300 sq ft of gross floor area. The future land use map designation is for commercial land uses. The request for the zone change is consistent with this designation. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and compatible with the surrounding area. The location is along 98th Street, which is a principal arterial. Staff had no objection to the request. The planning and zoning commission recommended denial by unanimous vote. And I'd be pleased to answer any questions. Mr. Gushée. Can we go back to the map of adjacent land uses? The adjacent zoning or the aerial? Uh uh the previous slide, please. Uh-huh. And so this is a request to change to neighborhood commercial. Correct. And the purple that we see adjacent to this is already neighborhood commercial. >> Correct. Um a lot of the public comments I've received have been about traffic in in the area. I think it's fair to say that there's not going to be any more traffic on any of the cul-de-sacs in the neighborhood adjacent to it, right? But looking at 103rd and Rochester as the the through streets, is there Do we have any reason to think that there would be increased traffic to the to the commercial frontage on 98th through those streets? No. I mean, cuz that your traffic is going to be accessing the property from 98th. That cuz they'll have a solid screening fence to the rear. There'll be no access through the alley. There'd be no reason to access it from the neighborhood. And so there's not going to be any form of access uh through that fence. There's not going to be a gate or anything like that. So, there shouldn't be any change in traffic in the the alley that's to the north of 99th Street. Correct. Um and when when we say a solid screening fence, we mean solid. We do not allow a gate. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Rose. Thank you, Mayor. I think we asked this last time, but would Would you have to access that business by Rochester or is there a bridge across that? Um The drainage is not >> yeah. There'll be a bridge across >> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for Ms. Seger? Mr. Collins. Is with the What is the typical depth? What do you normally see in the depth of a lot that would be utilized for an office versus being utilized for something where the public is going to or a higher use like we have a neighborhood commercial? I mean, honestly, a longer thoroughfare like this, 200 to 300 is the norm. That is typically what we see for the depth of commercial. Um I looked at other properties around the city and they range from 150 to, you know, 350. Okay. And and and I think you put this up earlier, but what's the depth of this lot? About 221 ft. 220. Okay. Thank you. All right. Any other questions? Dr. Wilson. Ms. Seger, one of the concerns and questions that I've heard and from the conversation with planning and zoning, obviously regarding the depth of the property being used as something as like a retail store and delivery trucks trying to enter and exit off of a very narrow two-lane. Even though it's designated a principal arterial, this is not what Milwaukee looks like and or the large arterial streets. This is a very narrow position for a arterial road. And having to have a bridge across this very large drainage easement, I wonder could a 18-wheeler truck even access and or turn around on this property to unload or load things to go into a retail store, which is I think why it was originally designated more as an office type of zoning. And I think you know, in the area as Councilman Glashien pointed out, there's already neighborhood commercial. I think this was is just a cheaper lot to buy that then we're trying to change the zone on when there's available zoning already in this area that could be purchased for >> [clears throat] >> for something in that's a deeper lot already. Are there concern I mean, that I think that's my big concern and or question is Is that even a possibility on this single lot to be able to bring large trucks in and or turn things around and come across easement that's very large? I don't know. You know, given just the other areas of the city I looked at, I'm going to assume they can make it work because those other types of developments would have large trucks coming in, but I I cannot give you a definitive answer. Mayor Potem. Thank you. From experience, because near my home is a Dollar General, and I've often seen the 18-wheeler park in the middle of 34th Street, and that concerns me. If If we have the issue where near my neighborhood, I can only imagine to what this would happen for that neighborhood. So, I don't think that they would have the space and, you know, we'd have to stick them in the middle of the street, and I think that's dangerous in itself. So, I am going to vote against. Any other discussion or questions for Ms. Seger? I see none. Thank you. All right. Anyone here today wishing to speak I'm opening the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak in favor of this zoning change, please come forward. Good afternoon. My name is Bryson Muirhead, 1615 Westbrook Street. I'm here to represent the developer on this. I'd just like to quickly address the truck turn comments. Part of our civil civil engineering is designing a truck route that is fully encapsulated within the property. So, the truck turn is not an issue. It can navigate the site, no problem, entering and exiting from 98th Street exclusively. All right. Are there any other questions? For answers. All right. Anyone else wishing to speak in favor of this zoning case? Anyone wishing to speak in opposition, please come forward. And remember, please state your name and your address. My name is Dennis Ambler. I live at 702 99th Street. Good to see y'all again. I've I've discovered something I had no idea. This deal is to change the zoning all the way down at 98th Street, isn't it? I thought it was just changing for this this Dollar General, but according to this map, all that garden office space going down 98th will be changed. Is that correct? No, just that lot. Okay, cuz it was purple all the way down the street there, so. If you don't mind. Oh, shoot. So, it's just that piece that's outlined in blue. >> Okay. Since it was the same color, I had to ask. But anyway, uh I appreciate that. It's just the the whole neighborhood is against this, and we we presented a lot of petitions and stuff, and the opposition is kind of uh some of the things they've said we've not agreed with at all about traffic. And I've sold trucks for a long time, and 200 ft is not enough. 220 ft is not enough. But uh the there will be a traffic issue, and I know it's hard to see, but up there at at Upland [clears throat] and 98th, there's a right turn lane. There's no stop sign, so you have constant traffic. And it's a two-lane with a suicide lane. So, there's lots of traffic on 98th. And uh you know, that'll happen as we grow, but we'd just like to say, please leave it as office garden offices. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? Hi. My name is Becca Sanchez, and I spoke to Dr. Wilson several times about this and my concerns. I live at 7042 99th, one of the houses directly behind that lot. Um I'm opposed to this. The developer has stated they they keep saying they don't have we they haven't made any um they haven't made any intent on what they're going to build there, but that's a lie because I have in their letter, they directly say the owner intends to develop the site with a Dollar General. That lot is not big enough for a Dollar General. Um I'm a working mom with two boys. They're 11 and 8. They are out there right there where that black line is, they are out there every day playing basketball. Um this would be disruptive to our daily lives. My husband and I bought this or bought our home five or six years ago knowing that that space was office, and uh we would really love for it to stay office to protect our our way of life and our privacy. Um I really would not like to have delivery trucks in and out of there constantly in my backyard, basically. Um my windows are in our backyard, our bedroom windows, I'm sorry. So, I the noise disruption office space would be most likely an 8:00 to 5:00 operation. This will be 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. operation, and I just ask that y'all uphold the P&Z vote and vote against this change. So, thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? Hi, my name is Mandy Madden, and I live at 7034 101st Street. Um I live two streets away from where this proposed zone change from office to neighborhood commercial would take place. I strongly oppose this change for many reasons, including what Becca just said, but others that I want to focus on. Imagine creating this oasis in your backyard, and you walk out, and there is a Dollar General in your backyard, essentially. I don't think anyone really wants that. I know they talk about the fence. Yes, that is the green idea, but if you think about any Dollar Generals you've driven by, how many actually have a fence? From the beginning, our neighborhood has been a very tight-knit community. Everyone's talked about the '90s right now. Well, that's what our neighborhood is. Yesterday, I had four different kids ring on my ring my doorbell, ranges in ages 9 to 13, wanting to play outside with my kids. Often after school, our kids go outside, don't come back in until the sun goes down and the street lights come on. You remember those days. When you drive around our neighborhood, you will see children riding bikes, scooters in the streets and alleys, kids playing ball with friends and often leaving bikes, toys, and outside without concern. Parents feel comfortable allowing this level of freedom because traffic is minimal and the area is overwhelmingly residential. Increased commercial traffic, delivery vehicles, and unfamiliar visitors will directly threaten the sense of safety and and fundamentally change how families are able to live in and enjoy their neighborhood. With this change from office to neighborhood commercial, it would also open the floodgates to other large businesses to try and open along that stretch of 98th Street, meaning tons of semi-trucks and much more traffic. They are going to start working on widening Upland to four lanes soon. With this new construction, people will be cutting through our neighborhood even more to bypass the four-way [clears throat] stop and construction, just like they will to get to Dollar General. There are currently three Dollar Generals within 3 miles of our house, along with Walmart, Dollar Tree, and a gas station. There's zero demand for a Dollar General in our neighborhood. My final point, I called and spoke to two different general managers at two different Dollar Dollar General locations by our neighborhood. Each manager stated that they get an average of 10 to 14 semi-trucks deliveries a week during all hours of the day. Yes, Dollar General may only have two delivery trucks from their distribution center. However, there are many vendors, Coke, Dr. Pepper, Red Bull, Lay's, etc. Trucks that come and will deliver two to three times a week. They also informed me that sometimes when these trucks arrive after the store is closed, the trucks will park in the parking lot and sleep overnight in the Dollar General lot. This is our backyard. Circling back around to the living in the '90s, we want our children to run around our neighborhood as they have with no worries, bikes and scooters and balls all on the lawns. Please help us continue this '90s way of life '90s way of life in our neighborhood. Thank you for your support in opposing this zone change. Thank you, Sherry. What else wishing to speak in opposition? Good afternoon. I'm Deborah Hart, 7026 99th Street. And in addition to all of the great points that have been made by my neighbors, I just want to bring your attention to the inconsistency this would provide with the neighborhood. Um Garden office, that's what it was zoned as when my husband and I were house hunting. We had seen um a house in a different part of town. We went to look at it. It was uh former Parade of Homes home. It checked all the boxes. It was within our budget. We drove by to go see it. Directly in back of it, it was on a cul-de-sac, directly in back of it was a Sonic. Didn't even stop. That's what's going to happen to the marketability of our homes. If you have a Dollar General, if you have any type of neighborhood commercial, garden office is what was told to us when we purchased the property. And to change it now, besides ruining our quality of life, it's just not right. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? All right. I see no one coming forward, so we'll close the public hearing at 2:58. All right. Is there a motion to approve agenda item 7.5? So moved. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. Any I will now open it up for discussion. Any further discussion? Mayor pro tem. I just want to say this, that we appreciate all the businesses, whether it be Dollar General or Sonic or whatever. We're not trying to call them out, but at the same time, I think you're heard the expression from these folks about quality of life, and I just want to make sure that we learn from some examples for this, so it's not to pick on the businesses, but there's not I mean, if you have three Dollar Generals within 3 miles, that's a lot. So, I appreciate the feedback. I think it's always important to hear from our citizens, so thank y'all for coming out. Mr. Rose. Yeah, um I want to thank the neighborhood for coming out and um you know, uh speaking your mind and and getting the responses back. Um you know, we hear um these pretty much every council meeting and um kind of the same arguments about more traffic and things like that. Um it's when we build these neighborhoods and you know, uh I move in I've got an empty lot behind mine and you know, I'm waiting for the day they're going to decide to put a car wash in there and it, you know, it may be may be just that. Um but you notice that it's it's got it's got some neighborhood commercial already on the corner there, um some auto urban commercial, you know, so it's going to develop around there. Um you're not going to have, you know, no development without uh businesses and semi's coming in and out of there on the corners and stuff. It's just on this particular piece of property, it's it's a very narrow piece. Um so, I um am not going to support the the change over for it just because it's just such a narrow piece right there. Dr. Wilson. Um I as well want to thank all the neighbors for coming out and everybody who sent emails. It's been uh um a lot more support online and email-wise than what was able just to show up here at the meeting today. Um also evidenced by the amount of opposition that was sent to P&Z as well, showed up at P&Z. Um and you know, and I'm very pro-growth and just like Christy said, very pro uh commercial growth as well. And I just I think this particular lot with the way it was designed, with the big drainage easement, how it backs up, and how kind of the developer when they developed this entire neighborhood laid it out, it just doesn't work here and that's [clears throat] why office was originally uh chosen to put there just because of the depths of the lots and the proximity to the neighborhood. Um and with that, uh I just I'm going to support our neighbors on this one. I think there's great neighborhood commercial lots that are close there that will be developed with neighborhood commercial and that I would be pro and willing to support. I just these are just not the right ones for that. Thank you. All right. Um I I agree uh that seems like the current designation of this lot is the appropriate designation uh zoning designation for it given the condition of the lot. Um again, this is not a a vote against uh appropriate development in appropriate locations or against Dollar Generals uh development on other locations. I just can't see uh this area, especially since the rest of the short uh property or the narrow property or the lack depth depth along there are going to be offices as well. It just seems like that's appropriate to keep it that way. Uh I can't see the reason uh or uh benefit from changing it. Uh so, um I can't support it uh either. Any further comments? Again, thank you everybody for showing up. All right. Uh so, uh all in favor of item 7.5, please let it be known by saying I. I. Mr. Gushine, I think that was the only one I heard. And all opposed say nay. Nay. That favors 6 to 1. All right. Or 1 to 6, should I say? 1 to 6. All right. We'll now take up item 7.6, considering a resolution terminating Chapter 212 agreements related to property located south of 130th Street, which is future Loop 288, which will be cutting the ribbon on here pretty soon, and west of Frankfort. Um Ms. Seger. Thank you, Mayor. The three properties on this map were part of the 2016 involuntary annexation completed by the city. As part of that annexation, the city council at that time offered 20-year to 12 development agreements to property owners who did did not wish to be annexed. The requirement in those agreements prohibited the owners from changing their land. So, if it was vacant, you couldn't develop it. If it had an existing use, you couldn't change the use until that agreement expired. Um this owner is ready to develop, so he is asking council to terminate those agreements and annex the property, um which if he were to do without going through this process, you know, we would just have to stop work on the property and bring the properties to you. So, he's going about it the right way. And I'd be pleased to answer any questions. Any questions? All right. I see none. Thank you. We got one. Oh. Ms. Seger. Mhm. Mr. Collins. With this um in what we're doing today is is canceling this agreement. Are we Is the annexation occurring at the same time simultaneously? >> Yes. So, item 7.7 is the public hearing and first ordinance reading for the annexation. And if approved, you'll have the second reading for the annexation at your next meeting. What will the zoning be on this property as it's annexed? It will be SF2 because they have not applied for a zone change. Very good. Thank you. >> Mhm. Yeah, thank you. Uh Mr. Ms. Collins, I should have uh noted that this one is tied to 7.7. They are related. All right. Any other questions? I see none. All right. Is there a motion to approve item 7.6? So Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? I see none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. I hear none. The motion passes unanimously. Moving on to 7.7. Uh now we have to conduct a public hearing regarding a request for annexation uh of this property from Kurch Real Estate Holdings LLC and Richardson Real Estate LLC to annex this property into Lubbock's corporate limits. We've already had the staff briefing on this item. So, I will now open up the public hearing on item 7.7. Is there anyone wishing to speak on this request for annexation? I see no one coming forward to do that. So, I'll hold this close this public hearing at 3:05. I will now entertain a motion to approve item 7.7. So Second. Have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All right. I see none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. I hear none. That motion passes unanimously. All right. We'll take up item agenda uh agenda item 7.8 to consider a resolution authorizing publication of a notice of intention to issue electric light and power system revenue bonds up to $200 million to fund transmission projects to maintain operational compliance and improve system reliability. And Harvey, you were here already at the mic. Uh Chief Financial Officer for LBNL. To uh yes, keep us on track here. Okay. Uh Mr. Rose wants to get out of here. Uh to provide the staff briefing on this matter. >> [laughter] >> So, in honor of Mr. Rose, I'll proceed quickly here. So, um this is a resolution. Um back in 2018 when we did the initial work to interconnect with ERCOT, we knew that there on the western side of our service territory, we would eventually have to build a transmission a fairly large transmission loop around the west side. Um and we knew that eventually at some point uh congestion with it's going to be north it's going to be north-south traffic from the panhandle down to the Permian Basin would create congestion and reliability issues at some time in the future. That time in the future is now upon us. Um we are working our engineering staff is working with the regional planning group and ERCOT. They have determined that there will be a need for uh for a uh west for a west side transmission loop. This is designed to create continue to keep us in operational compliance with ERCOT as well as maintain system reliability. A side benefit of this is it does continue to increase capacity or growth capacity for load growth within the city of Lubbock as well. Um so, we are seeking to start that notice of intent. We would be uh for up to $200 million and we want to bring that before the city council for consideration and answer any questions that you might have. Are there any questions? So, these are expensive projects, right? Correct. This would be a cost share between us and and another utility we're working with. Much like we did with the 40W or the first set, we partnered with another utility and we shared those costs. This would be another cost sharing mechanism. Mr. Collins. Thank you, Mayor. So, if if is is this is authorized in in your planning I I believe I see that this uh this debt would be issued in '26. This issue would be Yeah, this debt would be issued sometime later this year. And so, all of the planning is completed. You're ready for construction? We are in the process of finishing We have the plant The initial planning and engineering has been done. It's before the regional planning group for evaluation. It's already been determined by ERCOT that they want to do this project. We're just getting the final specs and specifications from the regional planning group and part partnering with the other utility in terms of how we're going to cost share that. So, would you need to take down the full amount at at one time or would you be planning to take this down as needed? We would When you say take this down as needed, we would just take >> entirety of the bond. We would do the we do the entirety of the bond up front. Okay. Thank you. Are you wanting to ask what kind of a rate impact that's going to have, Mr. Collins? Would that be your Thank you, Mayor. I I guess I'm curious as you go through the project, what's the duration of this project? The duration of the project is going to be about 3 to 4 years. Yeah. And so, and and that just brought my question of why would we need all the money at one at one tranche when you've got a a 4-year payout? Because we do appropriate We have to appropriate funds. We have to appropriate funds in order to order the order the materials. So, a lot of this material needs to be ordered well ahead of time. Um because there is much like what you heard from um Jennifer Fresquez, there's there's cost there's cost issues about waiting. There's also lead times. So, lead time for electrical equipment cuz this is going to entail two substations. To get the transformers needed is sometimes up to a up to a two sometimes 3-year wait. So, there's a lot of equipment we need to we have to appropriate these funds, have the funds available, and be able to start executing on this fairly quickly. And I'm not arguing for argument's sake, but I look at this and think, "Okay, you have to have an ex you have to have a deposit to obtain these various components that you need for the two substations." And so, you you issue that tranche um and and then as you go through the the rest of the time I I mean, interest paid is not going to be equal to the interest earned while you're sitting on these dollars. And that's just the reason that I asked the question because as you've authorized or we have authorized this indebtedness, it is now then at your disposal. It just depends on when you take it down. Is We This project if if I think we're I think we're gauging the speed of I think your concern is the speed of the project and how long you're going to be sitting on the money. Typically, when you take out these funds, it's about it's it's a 3-year wait. So, usually on a bond, they make you use 85% of it for within 3-year period. So, you can't just sit on the money. Um and so, we're going to be using that money fairly quickly. The money The project is going to go out because eventually we're going to have interior work to do as well. But the use of those funds will go will go quicker than the 4 years. Well, I mean, we're going to be moving right along with that. A- And um I'm not sure if I'm getting to where you're going cuz I'm not sure cuz there's no there's not an advantage to waiting and doing in separate tranches because one thing about borrowing is it becomes fairly expensive to do each time you do it. There's set funds up front. So, it's cost-effective for us to do it up front. >> Okay. I'm going to I'm going to take your word for that, Harvey. I just I just envision a 4-year project, you're not going to expend all this money until at least some of it until the very end of the 4-year project is the reason I ask. Uh are we seeing a decrease in interest rates over time? And that's a I guess that's a that's a gamble that we're that we're looking at. And so, you you It is. And I That's again, that's just the thinking that I have as to why you might consider taking this down in separate um separate amounts as you might gain some traction with interest. You might not. Uh but just to issue the 200 million and then sit on it. And I know you Again, you've got to pay for materials, you've got to pay deposits, etc. etc. But you're not going to expend all of that money until the end of the 4-year period when the construction's complete. Most of that's going to be spent within the 3-year period. We'll probably have some of it left over. As I said, we'll We need to We need to expend about 85% of it in the first 3 years, which is probably which is what we'll do. Yeah. But to your But to your point, there will be leftover pieces of that. >> Well, I'm sure you've laid out a timeline of your expenditures and and uh you know, evaluations of of the project as it goes along. Yeah, understood. There's there And And I just put underneath it that this there is a sense of urgency with this project because um it's taken us a bit to get to this point. Um we are working with the regional planning group. And there is the the sense of urgency about congestion within our system is continuing to increase. So, there is a sense of urgency as soon as this is approved to get started on it right Well, I have no hesitancy at all about the project. I'm just asking about how it's going to be funded. Uh and then, you know, we can discuss further um the negotiations with the other um partner in the project. Uh thank you. You bet, sir. Uh Dr. Wilson. Uh Harvey, you know, when we talk about $200 million for for a a big transmission project like this, it's almost spoken about like $10 and somebody's going to get dinner somewhere. Mhm. Um that's a it's a very large amount of money. I mean, that was the entirety of one of our entire road bonds that our citizens voted on. Definitely understand the urgency and the need for the project. Have y'all done anything in like a public forward campaign? You know, because when we are coming into budget um fairly quickly. I know all of our departments are in budget right now. Trying to figure out a way how to communicate that to the citizens because when they just see, "Oh, they're just spending another $200 million, another $200 million tacked onto our debt, which is very large already as is." Have y'all all talking about how you're going to present that to the public so that they understand the need and the how quickly it needs to happen, the congestion on our system because we are going to take the heat for that essentially. Council is when you add on another $200 million to our debt. Well, one we're not borrowing $200 million. This is an up to $200 million. We don't know we have to create because we have to create some room in this um for a notice of intent. We are still in the negotiating process and determining who's going to share what pieces of it. There is a substation there are there are substations which are going to be a major expense of this in terms of who's going to share what. We need to we need to be able to do the notice of intent to be able to cover cover all contingencies and not come back to the city council for another borrowing. So, we're not borrowing $200 million. This is an up to. The second part to that is these costs as soon as we as soon as this is as soon as this project is it complete we're going to go before a full filing before the Public Utility Commission. This will be included in our transmission costs of service rates. Those rates are not paid by Lubbock citizens. They're not paid by taxes. They're not there's no burden to us locally. The advantage here is it's all the transmission systems around us that cross our system. So, effectively what you're doing is you're building a toll road a toll road. And that toll road means people from outside the city of Lubbock will bear that burden not the people within. So, so that becomes our message to our citizens is we can maintain system reliability, maintain and and increase capacity to the benefit of the citizens of the city of Lubbock while people from outside the system who cause the congestion and cross our system pay for it. So, that's our message. Right. So, and that's that was my question is do you have a public campaign going out and talking to people cuz looking at the agenda item today without knowledge of the project and what how you'll intend to do that and who funds it all of that history that you just provided are people going to know that? That's my question. Are you all going to get out there and teach them? >> what part of what Matt Rose and our team will be doing through public communication with that obviously that absolutely perfect. Thank you so But very good question. Thank you so much. And I thank you for that explanation because it's that is how we have to explain it to people. It benefits our citizens here by the availability from these transmission lines but it's also benefiting all the people around us and they're the ones paying for it. Absolutely. So, I like your toll road. That's just what I was thinking in my head toll road. It's a toll road through through here. Through our system. So, wonderful. Any other questions? I greatly appreciate Councilwoman's Wilson's Yeah, cuz everybody's the first question everybody >> communication is it's critical. going to have is what's this going to do to my rates? Yeah, so and and you've you've answered that question thank you. All right. Any other questions? I see none. All right. All right. Is there a motion to approve item 7.8? Is there a second? Motion and a second any discussion? I see none all in favor say I. I. Any opposed say nay. I hear none that motion passes unanimously. Thank you so much for your consideration. Thank you Harvey. All right. Well, now I'll take up item 7.9 to consider a resolution ordering a special election to fill the vacancy in the position of council member for district 4 Mr. Rose to be conducted June 27th, 2026 and authorizing and directing the mayor to execute an official order and notice of special election. So, now I will call on the city secretary Courtney Paz to provide a staff briefing on this matter. Ms. Paz. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, that is correct just as you read it. This is an as a result of Mr. Rose announcing that he was going to resign from Council. June 27th is the earliest day we could have the election. There's a provision in the law that we have to wait 30 days outside of a primary general runoff so or primary runoff and there is one late May so this would be the earliest date we could have it. If you all do adopt this date the filing period will begin following this meeting and your action and then would close on April 27th 5:00 p.m. That's a Monday. Early voting would be Let's see. Sorry, I printed my document here and now I can't read it. June 15th would be the first day and then June 23rd would be the second day the last day to early vote. This would just be within district 4. We're looking at a cost of approximately 70 to 90,000 just really depends on publication costs. County election is trying to keep our costs down as best as possible using a limited amount of workers and trying to maximize locations and hours effectively. I'd be pleased to answer any questions. I see no questions but I comment on it there's no way we could schedule this with our regular election coming up on May 2nd because of the calendars and the statutes and you know because I I went through everything with you trying to find a loophole but there was no way we could do this so we're constrained by statutes and this is the earliest we can have it so it may we encourage everybody to take advantage of the early voting if you're going to be on vacation late June so just note that for your calendar. We will miss Councilman Rose on our council. He's served well and we will we will deal with that at a later date but uh today is not your last day even though you want to get out of here real quick. So, okay now. All right. So, is there a motion to approve item 7.9? Are there any other questions for Ms. Paz? I see none. Okay. Is there a motion to approve 7.9? You can't second your own motion though. Is there a second? We have a motion and a second any discussion? I see none all in favor say I. I. Any opposed say nay. I hear none. All right. That motion passes unanimously and having exhausted all items on our agenda this meeting is adjourned.