JULY 29, 2025 >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. WELCOME TO CITY HALL AND TO OUR COUNCIL CHAMBERS. I GUESS I NEED TO DO THAT FIRST. I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. THIS MORNING OUR INVOCATION WILL BE GIVEN BY MONSIGNOR DOUGLAS COURVILLE WITH ST. PATRICK'S CATHOLIC CHURCH. MONSIGNOR. >> THANK YOU, MADAME MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOR GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE WITNESS TO THE VIRTUE OF CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY AND GOOD CITIZENSHIP. I APPRECIATE THAT. LET US RECALL THAT WE ARE IN THE HOLY PRESENCE OF GOD. BLESSED ARE YOU LORD GOD OF ALL CREATION, FOR IN YOUR GOODNESS YOU INSPIRE HUMANITY WITH THOUGHTS AND VISIONS, WITH HOPES AND DREAMS. WITH LIMITLESS POSSIBILITIES. WE THANK YOU FOR THE GIFT OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, FOR ITS PEOPLE, ITS CULTURE, ITS RICHNESS. WE THANK YOU FOR THE MAYOR AND THIS COUNCIL WHO VOLUNTEER AND SERVE THIS COMMUNITY SO WELL. WE ASK YOU TO BLESS THEM WITH WISDOM AND UNDERSTANDING, WITH COMPASSION AND MERCY, WITH TOLERANCE AND FORGIVENESS. WE ASK YOU TO INSPIRE THEM TO WORK TOGETHER CONTINUALLY FOR THE COMMON GOOD. BLESSED ARE YOU, LORD GOD OF ALL CREATION, NOW AND ALWAYS AND FOREVER AND EVER. AMEN. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MONSIGNOR. AND TODAY OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES AND TO THE TEXAS STATE FLAG WILL BE LED BY HALEY MORGAN, SHE IS PART OF THE GIFTED AND TALENTED PROGRAM AND SHE WANTS TO BE A U.S. MARINE WHEN SHE GROWS UP. >> PLEASE JOIN ME FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] PLEASE JOIN ME IN HONORING THE TEXAS FLAG. [HONORING THE TEXAS FLAG] >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. GREAT JOB. CITY SECRETARY, REBECCA HUERTA, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? [ROLL CALL] >> City Secretary: MAYOR AND COUNCIL, A QUORUM OF THE COUNCIL AND THE REQUIRED CHARTER OFFICERS ARE PRESENT TO CONDUCT THE MEETING. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. HUERTA. GOOD MORNING TO ALL. I WANT TO FIRST PROVIDE CLARIFICATION ON THE PROCESSES THAT WE WILL BE USING FOR THIS MEETING, WHICH ARE FAIRLY NEW, WHICH IS WHY I'M GOING TO REPEAT THEM AGAIN THIS WEEK. ON JUNE 10, 2025 THE CITY COUNCIL PASSED A MOTION MOVING THE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FROM NOON TO 5:30 P.M. DUE TO THIS CHANGE THE ORDER OF BUSINESS ON THE AGENDA WAS REVISED. AFTER OPENING THE MEETING, THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS WILL BE BOARD OR COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS, IF THERE ARE ANY, FOLLOWED BY THE CONSENT AGENDA. THIS MEANS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BEGIN VOTING ON ITEMS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. ON JULY 25, 2025 THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED ADDITIONAL CHANGES WHICH ARE SUMMARIZED BELOW. REGISTRATION IS NOT REQUIRED TO SPEAK ON A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM WHEN IT IS BEING CONSIDERED DURING THE MEETING. REGISTRATION TO SPEAK IS ONLY REQUIRED FOR THE 5:30 P.M. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT SESSION. SPEAKERS WILL SIGN UP ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE OR IN PERSON AT THE KIOSK LOCATED AT CITY HALL. SPEAKERS MAY COMMENT ON ANY AGENDA ITEM OR CITY-RELATED TOPIC AT THE 5:30 P.M. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT SESSION. THE DEADLINE TO SIGN UP IS 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY OF THE COUNCIL MEETING. SPEAKERS MAY ASK QUESTIONS DURING THEIR TIME WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND STAFF SHALL NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS DURING THAT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD . SO AT THIS TIME I'LL ASK CITY ATTORNEY MILES RISLEY TO PLEASE REVIEW THE COUNCIL MEETING RULES OF DECORUM. [RULES OF DECORUM] >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. RISLEY. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND THE CITY IN WHICH YOU LIVE BEFORE BEGINNING YOUR COMMENTS. CITIZEN COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES WHILE NON-RESIDENT COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO ONE MINUTE. A VISIBLE TIMER POSITIONED NEAR THE CITY SECRETARY'S DESK WILL HELP IN MANAGEMENT OF THAT ALLOTTED TIME. IF YOU HAVE A PETITION OR ANY RELEVANT INFORMATION, PLEASE PRESENT IT TO THE CITY SECRETARY BEFORE SPEAKING. AND BEFORE WE BEGIN TODAY'S MEETING, I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO ADDRESS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. THIS COUNCIL CHAMBER IS A PLACE OF PUBLIC BUSINESS. IT IS A FORUM FOR CIVIC DISCUSSION, DECISION MAKING, AND SERVICE TO THE PEOPLE OF CITY 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 SHOWING BLATANT DISREGARD FOR THE RULES THAT GOVERN OUR PROCEEDINGS. I HAVE BEEN MORE THAN PATIENT. I HAVE ALLOWED SPACE FOR DIFFERING VIEWPOINTS, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO WELCOME RESPECTFUL DISAGREEMENT. BUT I WILL NOT ALLOW THIS COUNCIL OR THE PUBLIC WE SERVE TO BE DISRESPECTED. SO WE'RE HERE TO DO THE PEOPLE'S WORK. NOW LET'S PROCEED IN THAT SPIRIT. WE MOVE ON TO SECTION H, WHICH IS CONSENT ITEMS 1 THROUGH 15. ARE THERE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO PULL ANY ITEMS 1 THROUGH 15? NO. 5. NO. 1. NO. 6. ANYTHING ELSE, COUNCIL MEMBERS? NO. 7. ANY REQUESTS FROM THE PUBLIC TO PULL ANY ITEMS 1 THROUGH 15? YES SIR. NO. 12. WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTIONS OF ITEMS 1, 2, 5, 6, AND 7. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> City Secretary: IT WAS 1, 5, 6, 7, AND 12. >> Mayor Guajardo: I'M SORRY. I SAID 2, DIDN'T I? >> Mayor Guajardo: YES. 1, 5, 6, 7, AND 12. THANK YOU FOR THE CORRECTION. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. ITEM NO. 1 IS APPROVAL OF THE JULY 22 MEETING MINUTES. MS. PAXSON. >> Paxson: THANK YOU, MAYOR. IF WE COULD GO BACK TO ITEM NO. 27 FROM THE LAST MEETING AND INCLUDE THE DIALOGUE WHERE A MOTION HAD BEEN MADE TO AMEND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, THAT WOULD ALL MY COMMENTS ON THAT FOR THE MINUTES. >> City Secretary: THERE WASN'T A SECOND ON THAT MOTION. THE MINUTES ARE ACTION MINUTES SO THERE WAS DISCUSSION REGARDING THAT. BUT SINCE THERE WASN'T A MOTION AND A SECOND AND ACTION ON IT, WE DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT VERBIAGE THERE. SO THAT'S WHY IT WASN'T INCLUDED, BUT I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT TODAY FORMALLY. >> Paxson: SO WE WOULDN'T INCLUDE THAT A MOTION WAS MADE, EVEN THOUGH IT DIED ON THE FLOOR? >> City Secretary: RIGHT. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ACTION TAKEN ON THAT. >> Paxson: EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS AN ABUNDANCE OF DIALOGUE? >> City Secretary: IT'S DIALOGUE, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ACTION. THEY'RE ACTION MINUTES SO WE FOCUS ON ACTION, NOT THE DIALOGUE OR DISCUSSION. >> Paxson: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 1. >> SO MOVE. >> SECOND. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> [CHORUS OF AYES] >> Mayor Guajardo: ANY OPPOSED SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES. THE NEXT ITEM PULLED WAS ITEM NO. 5. THAT IS AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE CORPUS CHRISTI CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BUDGET. WHO PULLED ITEM 5? COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS. >> Campos: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE ABOUT THE USAGE OF THE CC PALS TO WORK MORE CLOSELY WITH THE JUVENILE PROGRAM. I'M HOPING THAT Y'ALL WILL BE AMENABLE TO THAT. CAN YOU ELABORATE AS TO IF THAT IS POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD USE MORE OF THE CC PALS TO WORK TOGETHER IN MORE JUVENILE PROGRAMS SO THAT WE CAN DO CRIME PREVENTION. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS. DAVID BLACKMON, POLICE DEPARTMENT. GOOD MORNING. THAT IS WHAT THE PAL PROGRAM DOES. THE POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE FOCUSES ON. >> Campos: WHAT I HAVE BEEN, I GUESS INFORMED ABOUT, IS THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH ONE OF OUR RECREATION CENTERS, THE JOE GARZA CENTER, THAT THERE IS A COUPLE OF MONTHS WHERE THERE IS NO PROGRAMS INVOLVED IN THAT. AND I HAD MENTIONED THAT BEFORE AND I WAS HOPING THAT I WOULD GET, YOU KNOW, JUST MORE COOPERATION. I BELIEVE I ALSO MENTIONED IT TO MR. DODD. HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION AT ALL AS TO POSSIBLY WORKING TOGETHER TO TRY TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF PROGRAM DURING THOSE MONTHS? >> WE CAN WORK WITH PARKS AND SEE WHAT PROGRAMS THAT WE COULD PROVIDE OVER THERE. JUST A LITTLE OVERVIEW REAL QUICK. WE DO BASKETBALL. WE DO VOLLEYBALL. AT THE PAL CENTER, WHICH IS JUST RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD FROM BEN GARZA. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WE'RE GETTING FIELDS READY TO START BACK UP WITH BASEBALL. MANY YEARS AGO WE DID BASEBALL AND THEN WITH COVID, UNFORTUNATELY IT WENT AWAY. WE'RE GETTING THE FIELDS REFURBISHED AND WE'RE BRINGING 13 TO 1500 KIDS FOR BASEBALL AND NO KID PAYS FOR ANYTHING. UNIFORMS, REGISTRATION, IT IS ALL FREE. NOT UNLIKE THE VOLLEYBALL. WE'RE ALWAYS OPEN TO NEW PROGRAMS. LIKE I SAID, WE CURRENTLY DO OUR BASKETBALL PROGRAM AND VOLLEYBALL AT THE PAL CENTER. BUT WE'RE ALWAYS OPEN FOR SPACE AND SEEING WHAT NEW PROGRAMS. WE DO TAEKWONDO ALSO. >> Campos: WERE YOU AWARE THERE WAS A WINDOW WHERE THERE WAS NO PROGRAMS GOING ON AT THAT RECREATION CENTER? >> NO, MA'AM. I'M NOT AWARE WHAT PARKS WAS DOING DURING THE SUMMER. BUT IF THERE'S A VOID, WE ALWAYS LOOK TO FILL THAT VOID. >> Campos: OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO BE PUBLIC -- YOU KNOW BE INFORMATIVE WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT AND WITH THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE COOPERATION WITH THAT. BUT WITH THAT, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> Mayor Guajardo: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM PULLED WAS ITEM NO. 6. THIS IS AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY FISCAL YEAR 2026 AND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. WHO PULLED THIS ONE? COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON. >> Paxson: YES. I PULLED THIS BECAUSE I WANTED TO JUST GET CLARIFICATION FROM OUR CITY MANAGER, WHO I HAVE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO REALLY COMMEND AND APPRECIATE FOR THE WORK THAT HE WAS ABLE TO DO IN THE BACKGROUND. IT WAS TO LOCATE $250,000 IN FUNDS BUT I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE A VERY BROAD REACH. I KNOW WE APPROVED ON THE FIRST READING THE WAY IT WAS PREVIOUSLY LISTED. SO MY REASON FOR PULLING IT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN REVISIT AND APPROVE IT WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE POTENTIALLY HAVE MADE HERE. >> Zanoni: YEAH. DANIEL MCGINN HAS A PRESENTATION THAT SHOWS THE AMENDMENTS. AS YOU REFERENCED, COUNCILWOMAN AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, YOU MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO YOUR COLLEAGUES ON THE COUNCIL TO ADJUST THE FUNDING TO WHERE WE WOULD REDUCE THE $500,000 THAT WE HAD BUDGETED AND RECOMMENDED FOR THE GENERATOR TO $250,000. THE DIFFERENCE COULD BE MADE UP BY A CHECK DONATED TO THE CITY FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR DEMOLITION OF A WATER TOWER. THAT TOTALED $160,000 BUT THAT WOULD BE ENOUGH MONEY TO PLACE THE ORDER FOR THE GENERATOR TO PUT IT IN THE QUEUE. IT TAKES ABOUT A YEAR TO BE PRODUCED AND SHIPPED TO US. THE ADDITIONAL CHANGES YOU RECOMMENDED TO YOUR COLLEAGUES AND COUNCIL INCLUDED -- GO AHEAD DAN. >> THE PREVIOUS SCREEN, THERE'S A HANDOUT THAT IS THE UPDATED CDBG MATRIX. ON THAT WE SHOW THE REDUCTION TO THE 250 IN RED ON PAGE 1. AND THEN ON PAGE 2 WE HAVE WHERE THOSE DOLLARS WOULD BE INSERTED INTO THREE PROGRAMS THAT WERE RECOMMENDED NOT TO BE FUNDED. AND SO YOU CAN SEE THOSE THERE. 50K, 50K, AND 150K FOR THE HABITAT PROGRAM. THAT WAS THE OPTION ALTERNATIVE THAT WE DEVELOPED. >> Paxson: THANK YOU SO MUCH, DAN. IN ORDER TO APPROVE THIS, IS IT WRITTEN THAT IF WE APPROVED IT, THESE NEW PRESENTATION ITEMS WOULD GO INTO EFFECT? >> Zanoni: RIGHT. IF A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL SUPPORTS THESE AMENDMENTS, THEY WOULD GO INTO PLACE ON THE SECOND READING. >> Paxson: I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I DID WANT TO TAKE A MINUTE TO THANK YOU FOR THAT, PETER. THAT REALLY WAS SUBSTANTIAL WORK. THANK YOU. >> Zanoni: THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS. >> Campos: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE OR CLARIFY AND MAKE SURE THAT THE SALVATION ARMY PROGRAM WAS GOING TO BE KEPT IN WHOLE, RIGHT? JUST TO REITERATE. BECAUSE THEY ARE HERE AND I JUST WANTED TO LET THEM KNOW THAT WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE SALVATION ARMY. I KNOW, PERSONALLY, GROWING UP ON THE WEEKENDS THERE WERE SO MANY FAMILIES THAT WERE HELPED BY THE SALVATION ARMY. AND JUST VISITING THE PLACE YESTERDAY BROUGHT BACK A LOT OF MEMORIES BACK TO THAT OLD GYM. BUT, AGAIN, NO ORGANIZATION IS GOING TO BE PERFECT BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT JUST MEETING AND HEARING THE STORIES AND SEEING JUST, YOU KNOW, THE SUCCESS STORIES THAT SALVATION ARMY DOES PROVIDE, I JUST THOUGHT THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR US TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY'RE STILL VERY MUCH NEEDED. WE APPRECIATE YOU AND HOPEFULLY CONTINUE TO BE A GOOD PARTNERSHIP. BECAUSE AS WE WERE TOLD, IF THE COMMUNITY DOES NOT SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, THE SALVATION ARMY OR, YOU KNOW, WELL, THE SALVATION ARMY, THAT THEN THEY CAN ACTUALLY BE CLOSED DOWN. THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THEM. THEY'VE BEEN AROUND AT LEAST 98 OR -- I DON'T KNOW. MORE THAN 75 YEARS HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI, THAT'S FOR SURE. AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILMAN BARRERA. >> Barrera: PETER, EXPLAIN TO ME THIS WATER TOWER FUNDING OR SOMETHING? >> Zanoni: YEAH. IF YOU RECALL LAST COUNCIL MEETING, COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON ASKED ABOUT GRANTS IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. WHILE WE DID RESEARCH THOSE, THERE ARE NONE AVAILABLE. AS WE WERE DOING OUR WORK WITH THE FIRE CHIEF AND LOOKING AT PUBLIC SAFETY, WE RECALLED THAT WE RECEIVED A DONATION OF $160,000 FOR DEMOLITION OF A WATER TOWER THAT WAS PART OF A LAND SWAP, FIRE STATION NO. 3 ON MORGAN. WE KIND OF PIECED TOGETHER THE FACT THAT THE CHECK, THE DONATION WAS PUBLIC SAFETY RELATED. THE FACT THAT THE GENERATOR IS PUBLIC SAFETY RELATED. TODAY THERE'S NO BACKGROUND GENERATOR SO IF THE POWER GOES OUT THERE'S NO HEAT OR COOLING. AND SO WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD ALTERNATIVE TO A GRANT THAT AT THIS POINT DOES NOT EXIST FOR A GENERATOR. >> Barrera: SO SINCE -- I WISH I WOULD HAVE BEEN BRIEFED ON THIS. THIS REALLY FRUSTRATES ME WHEN I'M FINDING THIS OUT THE DAY OF THE COUNCIL MEETING. YOU KNOW, AND I'M SURE SOME OF THE NONPROFITS, IT'S JUST REALLY FRUSTRATING THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN VOILA! AND SO WHY WOULDN'T WE -- SO THOSE MONIES WOULDN'T BE -- I GUESS THAT'S A WHOLE THING. WE HAVE A PROCUREMENT PROCESS THAT'S VERY PUBLIC, OF WHICH IS VERY TRANSPARENT. AND THEN NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE FUNDS THAT JUST BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO FULFILL A REQUEST, THEN WE'RE GOING TO MOVE -- HOW MUCH IS IT? >> Zanoni: IT'S $160,000 IS THE VALUE. >> Barrera: WE'RE GOING TO MOVE $160,000 AT THE REQUEST OF A COUNCIL MEMBER VERSUS -- >> Zanoni: WE'RE NOT GOING TO MOVE IT. THE COUNCIL MEMBER ASKED AT THE COUNCIL MEETING FOR SOME OPTIONS, AND I PROVIDED AN OPTION. ONLY THE COUNCIL CAN DECIDE TO MOVE IT. I CAN'T. >> Barrera: SO WE DID THAT OPTION AT THE REQUEST OF A COUNCIL MEMBER. >> Zanoni: YES. CORRECT. >> Barrera: THAT'S THE THING. AND HERE THE OTHER EIGHT OF US WERE -- THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'M HEARING ABOUT IT. I MEAN, MY FIRST QUESTION WHEN I HEAR THAT IS LIKE, OKAY, WHY CAN'T WE APPROPRIATE THOSE MONIES ELSEWHERE? WHY AREN'T THERE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS -- WE'RE JUST LIMITING IT TO THIS PROCESS HERE. I MEAN -- ALL RIGHT. GOOD. SOMEBODY TURNED IT OFF. WHY WOULDN'T WE DO IT FOR CORPUS CHRISTI HOPE HOUSE? WHOSE RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT? >> [OFF MIC] >> Barrera: NO, NO, BUT OF THE $160,000, WE'RE REAPPROPRIATING $250,000. WHY ARE WE LEAVING CORPUS CHRISTI HOPE HOUSE OUTSIDE OF THIS? >> [OFF MIC] >> Barrera: I'M ASKING THE MANAGER. >> Zanoni: THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION LAST WEEK, COUNCILMAN, TO FUND THE CORPUS CHRISTI HOPE HOUSE. >> Barrera: I UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE MY INITIAL RECOMMENDATION WAS TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF. AND RIGHT NOW I'M BEING CAUGHT FLAT-FOOTED BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME TO FULLY FUND THAT GENERATOR. IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME AS AN AT-LARGE COUNCILMAN -- I PLAYED BASKETBALL AT BEN GARZA TOO. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WALKING DISTANCE FROM HERE. I JUST THINK THAT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. AND IT'S SOMEBODY THAT'S DOWNTOWN THAT OFTEN HAS TO FREQUENT THE HOMELESS AND TO SERVE THEM. I WANT TO HELP THE OTHERS TOO BUT I THINK THERE'S NO STAFF -- DAN, DID STAFF GO THROUGH THE SAME SIMILAR PROCESS OR HOW WAS THIS DETERMINED AS TO WHERE THE REMAINDER OF THE 250 WOULD GO? >> I MEAN, OUR RECOMMENDATION, WHAT WE PROPOSED LAST WEEK, WE WERE ASKED TO LOOK AT AN OPTION AND THE OPTION IDENTIFIED MOVING MONEY AND THEN FUNDING THOSE THREE THAT WERE IDENTIFIED. THE RISING TIDE AND THE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY APPLICATION. >> Barrera: SO ONCE AGAIN, IT'S NOT STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO THIS. >> Zanoni: IT'S AN OPTION THAT THE STAFF IS PRESENTING TO THE COUNCIL. WE MADE OUR RECOMMENDATION LAST WEEK, WHICH WAS THE ONE PRESENTED. THERE WAS DISCUSSION AT LENGTH AND THE COUNCIL LAST WEEK TO MOVE $250,000 TO DIFFERENT AGENCIES. THAT WAS MADE PUBLICLY. >> Barrera: I HEARD THAT DISCUSSION AND I WASN'T A PART OF IT AND THIS ENTIRE COUNCIL VOTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF. WITH THE IDEA THAT IT COULD COME BACK AND WITH THE IDEA THAT WE COULD BE BRIEFED. I HAVEN'T BEEN BRIEFED AND I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY ELSE HAS BEEN BRIEFED. I'M JUST KIND OF FRUSTRATED AT THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY. I TRY TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS. I GET ACCUSED OF HAVING PREFERENTIAL ACCESS TO COUNCIL MEMBERS -- I MEAN, TO STAFF PEOPLE. BUT, YOU KNOW, I TYPICALLY PICK UP THE PHONE AND I ENSURE THAT IT'S AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE. I'M JUST KIND OF FRUSTRATED WITH THIS. SO WAS THERE ANY -- JUST LIKE WE WENT THROUGH -- HOW LONG DID THE PROCESS TAKE WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS VETTING PROCESS TO GO THROUGH THE FUNDS? >> WE GOT APPLICATIONS, I THINK THEY WERE DUE JUNE. SO OF COURSE WE MET WITH THE APPLICANTS. SO THEY KNEW THEY WERE ELIGIBLE AND SUBMITTING GOOD APPLICATIONS. WE HAD A REVIEW PERIOD, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY THE MONTH OF JUNE WE SCORED AND KIND OF PRIORI OUR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL. WE HAD A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WHERE THOSE APPLICATIONS WERE OUT THERE FOR FOLKS TO KIND OF WEIGH IN ON. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE PRESENTED THOSE APPLICATIONS LAST WEEK OF WHAT WE FELT WAS THE HIGHEST PRIORITY. THEY'RE ALL GREAT PROJECTS, OBVIOUSLY, BUT WE HAVE LIMITED FUNDING AND THOSE WERE THE ONES WE FELT COULD DO THE MOST FOR THE COMMUNITY. >> Barrera: BUT THE LAST SEVEN DAYS DID NOT INCLUDE THAT PROCESS, IT WAS JUST -- I MEAN, HOW DID WE COME UP WITH THE OTHER 250? >> Zanoni: SO 250 -- >> Barrera: HOW DID WE COME TO THE PLACES WE'RE GOING TO PUT THEM? >> Zanoni: THERE'S TWO NUMBERS. 250 AND 160. THE 250 WAS ALLOCATED TO TWO DIFFERENT AGENCIES. RISING TIDE AND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. TO FILL THE 250 THAT WAS ORIGINALLY IN THE GENERATOR, WE HAVE AN OPTION TO USE $160,000 IN FIRE-RELATED MONIES. >> Barrera: I GOTCHA. THAT PART'S CLEAR. I'M JUST SAYING IN THE LAST WEEK DID WE DETERMINE A PROCESS TO VET THE REMAINING PROJECTS? >> Zanoni: NO. WE DIDN'T HAVE A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS BUT THE AGENDA MEMO WAS PUBLISHED FRIDAY AND AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC AND THE COUNCIL VIEWING. DAN -- WE PROBABLY DIDN'T BRIEF COUNCIL MEMBERS, IT SOUNDS LIKE. BUT THE INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE PUBLICLY, TRANSPARENT AS OF FRIDAY AT ABOUT 5:00. THE AGENDA POSTED INCLUDED THIS INFORMATION IN THE MEMO AND THE TABLES WERE INCLUDED. SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE AWARE. OBVIOUSLY, COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON WAS AWARE, AND A FEW OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS REACHED OUT TO ME WHO READ THE MEMO. THE GOAL LAST WEEK WAS TO LOOK FOR A GRANT, AND WE DID THAT. THE FIRE CHIEF WAS HERE, LOOKED FOR A GRANT. THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE $250,000 DIFFERENCE. THERE IS NO GRANT AVAILABLE TODAY. THERE MAY BE IN A YEAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO AS AN OPTION FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AND AT THE REQUEST OF A COUNCIL MEMBER, I DID WHAT I THOUGHT WAS RIGHT, WHICH WAS PROVIDE AN OPTION FOR THE FULL COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS MADE LAST WEEK. THIS IS AN OPTION, AN ALTERNATIVE OPTION REQUESTED BY A COUNCIL MEMBER AT THE COUNCIL MEETING TO CONSIDER BY THE FULL COUNCIL. >> Barrera: OKAY. SO ARE WE PROHIBITED FROM REARRANGING THE FUNDS FROM THE 160 AND DISBURSING IT BETWEEN THE REST OF THEM? >> Zanoni: YOU'RE NOT PROHIBITED. YOU CAN DO THAT. >> Barrera: CAN WE AT LEAST FUND THE $500,000? >> Zanoni: WE COULDN'T FIND $500,000. >> Barrera: NO, NO, NO. I'M JUST SAYING -- AND I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME HERE. WHY DO WE HAVE TO BREAK UP THE 250 AND JUST PUT UP -- I STILL THINK IT'S WRONG. BUT PUT THE 160 BETWEEN THE RISING TIDE PROGRAMS AND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY? >> Zanoni: YOU COULD DO THAT IF YOU WANTED TO. >> Barrera: I MEAN, WHY WOULD WE FALL SHORT? >> Zanoni: YOU CAN DO THAT. >> Barrera: THERE HASN'T BEEN A SECOND. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND -- >> SECOND. >> Barrera: WELL, THERE'S BEEN A SECOND. I STILL MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THAT WE PUT THE -- WE LEAVE THE 250 FOR THE GENERATOR AND REAPPROPRIATE THE OTHER FUNDS AS NECESSARY TO RISING TIDE AND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. EVEN THOUGH I STILL THINK IT'S WRONG. >> Zanoni: JUST SO WE CAN FOLLOW IT, ARE YOU SUGGESTING MAYBE 30, 30, AND 100? THAT WOULD BE 160. YOU DID 30 FOR RISING TIDE, SAFE AT HOME, RISING TIDE MINISTRIES, WAVE ACADEMY. YOU TELL US. >> Barrera: SO MOVED. >> Zanoni: $100,000 WOULD GO TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. I THINK WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE THAT'S HERE FROM HABITAT. >> Barrera: I GUESS THERE'S NO SECOND. >> Mayor Guajardo: I'LL SECOND THAT. COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN. >> [OFF MIC] >> Barrera: I HAD THE AMENDMENT. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN. >> City Secretary: THE FIRST AMENDMENT, MS. PAXSON YOU MADE TO INCLUDE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE INCLUDED HERE ORIGINALLY THAT WERE HANDED OUT. AND YOU SECONDED IT, RIGHT, MR. CANTU? HE'S WANTING TO AMEND THAT IN THE WAY HE DESCRIBED TO PUT $250,000 FOR THE GENERATOR. THAT WAS SECONDED BY MAYOR GUAJARDO. >> Zanoni: NO, COUNCILMAN BARRERA'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD LEAVE $500,000 IN THE GENERATOR BUT TAKE THE NEW $160,000 AND DIVIDE IT BY TWO AGENCIES, THREE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS. RISING TIDE MINISTRIES, SAFE AT HOME WOULD BE $30,000. RISING TIDE WAVE ACADEMY WOULD BE $30,000, ON THE BARRERA RECOMMENDATION. AND THEN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY WOULD BE $100,000. >> City Secretary: ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW. >> Mayor Guajardo: THAT'S ON THE FLOOR SO WE CAN DISCUSS. BECAUSE WE HAVE MULTIPLE COMMENTS. COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN. >> Vaughn: WELL, DON'T EVERYBODY FALL OUT OF THEIR CHAIR BUT I KIND OF AGREE WITH ROLAND ON THIS ONE. I'M HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THIS. TELL ME THAT GENERATOR, WHY DO YOU NEED THAT GENERATOR? >> WELL, THE BEN GARZA FACILITY RECENTLY HAD THE FLOORS DONE, THE BATHROOMS DONE, AND THE LOCKER ROOM FACILITY AND WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO US THIS LAST WINTER STORM FOR AN EMERGENCY SHELTER, SO WE HAD TO MOVE PEOPLE TO THE NATATORIUM. THE LOGISTICS IS NOT A GREAT SITUATION. THE BEN GARZA, IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT GENERATOR SO IT CAN MAINTAIN POWER THROUGHOUT ANY EMERGENCY EVENT. THE GEOGRAPHY AND LOCATION FOR THAT IS PERFECT AND IT'S CLOSE TO SOME OF THE RESOURCES THAT ARE NEEDED AND IT'S CLOSE TO A LOT OF FOLKS THAT ARE HERE IN THE DOWNTOWN AND UPTOWN AREA. >> Vaughn: AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY NEEDED. IF WE DO THIS LIKE WE'RE DOING IT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE MONEY FOR THAT GENERATOR, CORRECT? >> YEAH. WE WOULD BE SHORT. WE WOULD ONLY HAVE THE 410. THERE'S SOME CONTINGENCIES BUILT INTO THAT 500K SO THE TIME WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IT IS POSSIBLE THAT NUMBER MAY COME IN LOWER. >> Vaughn: BUT YOU DON'T KNOW. WE DO NEED THAT GENERATOR. THAT RESONATED WITH ME. WE CAN'T TAKE FUNDS AND NOT GET THAT GENERATOR. SO YOUR PROCESS, DO THEY COME TO YOU AND SAY THEY REQUEST MONEY? IS THAT HOW YOU DO IT? >> CORRECT. THEY SUBMIT APPLICATIONS WITH THE PROGRAMS AND KIND OF IDENTIFY THE ACTIVITIES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO. SOME OF THEM ARE PHYSICAL REPAIRS TO FACILITIES AND SOME OF THEM ARE PROGRAMS THEY OFFER TO THE PUBLIC. AND SO THEY SUBMIT AND THAT MATRIX HAS ALL THE FOLKS THAT DID APPLY. UNFORTUNATELY, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO FUND EVERYONE AND THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS AND PRIORITIZE WHAT WE FEEL IS THE MOST CRITICAL. >> Vaughn: DID RISING TIDE AND HABITAT REQUEST MONEY? >> CORRECT. >> Vaughn: THEY BOTH DID? HERE'S WHERE I HAVE A PROBLEM. YOU'RE GIVING $100,000 TO RISING TIDE, $100,000 -- 150 TO HABITAT. WE HAVE SO MANY NEEDS THAT NONE OF US GOT TO COMMENT ON. I MEAN, THERE'S ONE OUT IN FLOUR BLUFF, TIMMONS, THEY ACTUALLY FEED THE HUNGRY. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY REQUEST OR IF THEY EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT. THAT'S MY PROBLEM BECAUSE THE PROCESS IS THE ONES THAT YOU GAVE US THAT YOU FELT LIKE YOU NEEDED TO DO BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE TAKING AWAY FROM PETER TO PAUL. OR IS IT PAUL TO PETER? WHICHEVER. ANYWAY, I DON'T LIKE THIS PROCESS. I THINK WHATEVER THE PROCESS WAS WHERE THEY REQUESTED THE MONEY AND YOU FIGURED IT OUT, WHY ARE WE GIVING SO MUCH TO SOME AND NOT THE OTHERS? THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY ON THE TABLE RIGHT HERE AND $50,000 TWICE TO RISING STAR, WHY WOULDN'T YOU GIVE THAT OVER $50,000 TO ANOTHER ONE? >> WE'RE ONLY PERMITTED TO GIVE THOSE THAT APPLY AND NOT ALL OUR THIRD-PARTY WANT THESE FEDERALLY-FUNDED DOLLARS. >> Vaughn: DID YOU HAVE OTHERS THAT APPLIED THAT YOU DIDN'T GIVE TO? >> YES. THEY'RE ALL IN THE MATRIX. >> Vaughn: I'M GETTING SO CONFUSED BECAUSE WE CHANGED IT UP SO BADLY. >> THERE'S TWO OTHERS. THE HOPE HOUSE AND THEN MISSION 9-1-1 AS FAR AS CDBG GOES, THOSE WOULD BE THE ONLY TWO WITH THE CURRENT OPTION THAT WOULD NOT GET FUNDING. BUT HOPE HOUSE IS GETTING FUNDING THROUGH OUR ESG PROGRAM, SO THEY WOULD GET SOME DOLLARS THERE. MISSION 9-1-1 RECENTLY RECEIVED DOLLARS THROUGH THE STATE PROGRAM, THAT WAS A FEW MONTHS AGO NOW. AND SO WE HAVE, IN A WAY, FUNDED ALL THESE AGENCIES AT SOME LEVEL HERE IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS. >> Vaughn: I DON'T MIND FUNDING THESE BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO LEAVE THE MONEY IN THERE FOR THE $500,000 FOR THE GENERATOR. I THINK THAT HAS TO STAY IN THERE. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN. COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ. >> Hernandez: PETER, YOU MENTIONED THE $167,000 FROM THE WATER TOWER THAT WE -- AND I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE RACHAL FOUNDATION FOR DOING THAT. I KNOW YOU DIDN'T MENTION THEM AND THEY PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO BE MENTIONED. >> Zanoni: THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BE MENTIONED. >> Hernandez: I WANT TO THANK THEM ANYWAY. I DIDN'T KNOW YOU WERE TRYING TO GET THAT FUNDING, AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE ORDER LEAD TIME FOR THE GENERATOR AND HOW LONG THAT'S GOING TO BE? >> Zanoni: YEAH, I'VE BEEN TOLD THROUGH OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THAT IT WILL TAKE ABOUT A YEAR FOR THE GENERATOR TO COME IN. SO ONCE WE PLACE THE ORDER, IT TAKES ABOUT A YEAR FOR DELIVERY. >> Hernandez: WE CAN ACTUALLY ASSIGN MONEY FROM NEXT YEAR'S CDBG FUNDS TO COMPLETE THE PAYMENT FOR THAT? >> Zanoni: YOU COULD, CORRECT. COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN HAD THE STATEMENT A FEW MINUTES AGO, THE $410,000 THAT WOULD REMAIN IN THE BUDGET NOW INSTEAD OF $500,000 WOULD BE ENOUGH TO PLACE THE ORDER AND PAY FOR THE GENERATOR. THE DIFFERENCE IS FOR THE INSTALLATION AND ANY CONTINGENCIES. >> Hernandez: I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES YOU HAD MENTIONED WE WANT TO PUT MONEY INTO PRODUCTION, RIGHT, INSTEAD OF JUST SITTING THERE. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. >> Hernandez: THIS MONEY WOULD SIT THERE FOR A YEAR WHILE WE WAIT FOR THIS GENERATOR, IS THAT CORRECT? >> Zanoni: NO. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT FINANCE PART OF IT BUT ONCE WE PLACE THAT ORDER, THE MONEY ESSENTIALLY IS -- I DON'T KNOW IF WE PAY THEM -- >> Hernandez: IT'S ENCUMBERED BUT IT WOULDN'T PAY TO PURCHASE IT UNTIL WE RECEIVE THE -- >> Zanoni: I'M NOT 100% CERTAIN. THERE MAY BE A DOWN PAYMENT REQUIRED BUT I DON'T THINK WE PAY THEM ALL IN FULL. >> THERE'S SOME ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT WE DO, THE PAD SITE. >> Hernandez: JEFF IS BACK THERE. MAYBE HE CAN EXPLAIN TO US. I DON'T WANT TO SIT ON MONEY IF WE CAN PAY FOR IT NEXT YEAR WITH CDBG BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FROM NEXT YEAR IF IT'S NOT GOING TO GET HERE UNTIL NEXT YEAR. >> COUNCIL MEMBER, I'M NOT PREPARED WITH THE EXACT SPECIFICS BUT THERE IS TYPICALLY A DOWN PAYMENT TO SECURE THE ORDER. >> Hernandez: BUT NOT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT. >> CORRECT. >> Hernandez: THAT MONEY WOULD BE ENCUMBERED FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR BUT NOT ACTUALLY SPENT UNTIL WE RECEIVE THE GENERATOR. >> Edmonds: CORRECT. IF WE WERE ASSURED OF FUNDING, MAYBE THIS WOULD BE MORE OF A QUESTION FOR FINANCE. YOU COULD SPLIT THAT ACROSS FISCAL YEARS. BUT THE AMOUNT YOU NEED UP FRONT IS NOT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT. THAT IS CORRECT. >> Hernandez: FORGIVE ME, I'M TRYING TO SPLIT THE BABY HERE, SORT OF THING. AND TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE UTILIZE MONEY. OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LOT OF NEED IN THE COMMUNITY AND WE DON'T HAVE UNLIMITED RESOURCES AND THE AMOUNT OF THE GRANT IS LIMITED. AND I THANK COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON FOR WHAT SHE'S TRYING TO DO IN TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THE FUNDING FOR THESE ORGANIZATIONS. SO I KIND OF AGREE WITH WHAT SHE'S TRYING TO DO AND THEN UTILIZE THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO COVER THE REST OF THAT $410 MILLION? >> Zanoni: $410,000. >> Hernandez: I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE UTILIZING THIS CORRECTLY. >> JENNIFER JUST REMINDED ME, CDBG FUNDS ARE NOT GUARANTEED AT THIS POINT FOR NEXT YEAR. >> Hernandez: I GET THAT BUT HE'S MAKING UP THE DIFFERENCE WITH THE $167,000 THAT WE'RE SAVING BY NOT HAVING TO TEAR DOWN THAT WATER TOWER. WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, YOU SAID SOMETHING LAST WEEK ABOUT HABITAT FOR HUMANITY HAS NOT UTILIZED THEIR COMPLETE ALLOCATION FOR THIS YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT? YOU HAVE NUMBERS ON THAT? >> YEAH. WE DID HAVE A CHANCE TO MEET WITH THEIR DIRECTOR, BEN MOLINA YESTERDAY. YES, THEY HAVE SOME DOLLARS BUT THEY HAVE A HOME UNDER CONSTRUCTION. I THINK THERE WILL BE TWO, THREE OTHERS IN THE NEXT MONTH. THEY DO HAVE A PLAN TO SPEND DOWN WHAT THEY HAVE. >> Hernandez: THEY'LL HAVE SPENT IT BEFORE THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR? >> YEAH. THEY HAVE HOMES AND LOTS LINED UP THAT CAN BE BUILT ON. HE'S HERE TO SPEAK ON THAT. >> Mayor Guajardo: WE'RE GOING TO OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT IN JUST AN MINUTE. I WOULD LIKE TO GET EVERYBODY TAKEN CARE OF FIRST. >> Hernandez: PETER, WITH YOUR SUGGESTION WITH HOW YOU'VE SET THIS UP, YOU WOULD HAVE ENOUGH FUNDING WITH THAT $167,000 TO COVER THE -- >> Zanoni: WE WOULD HAVE ENOUGH FUNDING TO ORDER THE GENERATOR AND RECEIVE IT AND BETWEEN NOW AND A YEAR FROM NOW WE WOULD HAVE TO COME UP WITH, IF THERE'S ANY DIFFERENCE, THE ESTIMATE WAS $500,000, SO $90,000 WOULD BE SOUGHT THROUGH OTHER FUNDING. >> Hernandez: THE INSTALLATION WOULD BE ABOUT ABOUT $90,000? >> Zanoni: THERE'S INSTALLATION AND THAT CONTINGENCY IN THE $500,000 BUDGET. A YEAR, THIS WOULD GIVE THE STAFF AND COUNCIL A YEAR TO COME UP WITH THE DIFFERENCE. >> Hernandez: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON. >> Paxson: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANTED TO JUST SPEAK TO A COUPLE OF THINGS I HEARD ACROSS THIS DAIS. WE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS ITEM AT LENGTH LAST WEEK. AND I APPRECIATE DAN AND HIS STAFF AND MR. ZANONI BECAUSE WITH THE PACKET THAT WAS PROVIDED TO MYSELF, THIS ENTIRE COUNCIL, AND THE PUBLIC, THAT'S WHERE I PICKED UP THE PHONE AND I ASKED DAN AND I ASKED PETER WHAT CAN WE DO WITH THESE DOLLARS. THERE WAS FOUR APPLICANTS -- THERE WAS TWO OTHER APPLICANTS FOR THE CDBG FUNDING AND I WAS TOLD THAT UNDER THE PARAMETERS OF THIS FUNDING THEY DIDN'T QUALIFY FOR THIS SPECIFIC ROUND. THAT'S WHERE I SAID LET'S LOOK AT THOSE TWO THAT DO QUALIFY. THERE WAS A TOTAL OF THREE REQUESTS. THE PROGRAM FOR EXTREME REPAIR, THAT'S A WONDERFUL PROGRAM. I THINK THAT I'VE BEEN ASSURED THAT OUR PROGRAM THAT THE CITY DOES IS WELL UTILIZED. AND SO HAVING A PARTNER IN THE COMMUNITY WHO'S GOING TO TAKE THAT TORCH, CARRY IT FURTHER, HELP OUR COMMUNITY EVEN FURTHER, THAT IS WELL WORTHY TO INVEST IN, I BELIEVE. ALSO, THE OTHER TWO REQUESTS, THOSE ARE IMMEDIATE CONNECTIONS TO THE COMMUNITY. SO WORKING WITH STAFF, BASED ON THE INFORMATION WE WERE ALL PROVIDED, THAT'S WHERE I MADE THE QUESTION AND RECOMMENDATION TO EXERCISE THE FULL CAPACITY OF THESE FUNDINGS AND SHUFFLE THEM AROUND. I THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO ORDER A GENERATOR OF THIS MAGNITUDE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT'S ABOUT A 20% DEPOSIT REQUIRED UP FRONT. THANK YOU, MR. ZANONI, SAYING WE COULD FULFILL THAT REQUIREMENT AND WE WOULD HAVE TIME TO PAY THE REST OF IT. THAT'S WHERE THIS REQUEST WAS MADE FROM. THIS WAS NOT INFORMATION THAT WAS NOT SHARED WITH THE ENTIRE COUNCIL AND IT WAS DISCUSSED AT LENGTH LAST WEEK. SO THAT'S WHY THIS RECOMMENDATION IS TO HELP SHARE THOSE FUNDINGS ACROSS ALL ORGS THAT APPLIED. AND TO SPEAK TO THE GENERATOR, I AGREE. HAVING A GENERATOR FOR A MASS SHELTER FACILITY IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. 100%. AGAIN, THANK YOU, MR. ZANONI FOR LOOKING FOR ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SUPPLIES. HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT CAUSE US TO NOT BE ALLOWED TO USE THAT SHELTER. INFORMATION I RECEIVED FROM OUR CITY MANAGER IS THERE HASN'T BEEN A CONCERN IN THE PAST. WE HAVEN'T LOST POWER AT THAT FACILITY. THIS WOULD BE A BACKUP. SO THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S BEING PROACTIVE. WE'RE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO AVOID A PROBLEM IN THE FUTURE. BUT WE'RE NOT CURTAILED FROM UTILIZING THAT FACILITY WITHOUT IT. TO MR. HERNANDEZ'S POINT, THIS ALLOWS US TO USE THOSE FUNDS A LITTLE BIT WIDER SO THEY'RE NOT SITTING ENCUMBERED. I'M NOT SAYING THE GENERATOR ISN'T A PRIORITY, IT ABSOLUTELY IS, BUT BEING ABLE TO UTILIZE THOSE FUNDINGS IN THIS FISCAL YEAR GIVES US A BROADER REACH. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS. >> Campos: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY ALSO WHAT I HAD READ THAT WITH THE REDUCED FUNDING -- WELL, I GUESS IT IS -- FROM THE 500 TO THE 410. THAT WE WERE STILL GOING TO BE ON TARGET AS FAR AS BEING STILL ABLE TO ORDER THE GENERATOR, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. I THINK WE CAN DO ALL THESE THINGS AND PUT THE MONEY, YOU KNOW, TO WORK QUICKER AND, AGAIN, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY THAT AS LONG AS WE HAVE THE MONEY, IT'S GOING TO BE USED IMMEDIATELY RIGHT NOW. WE WILL BE ABLE TO ORDER THE GENERATOR AND WE WILL BE ABLE TO HELP, YOU KNOW, THESE TWO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. SHE HAD ASKED ME ALSO DID I HAVE ANOTHER ORGANIZATION. BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEY HAVE TO ALREADY BE PRE-APPROVED AND CDBG MONEY IS NOT EASY TO QUALIFY FOR. SO THAT'S THE OTHER ISSUE WITH THIS. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILMAN SCOTT. >> Scott: THE AGENDA ITEM IS -- THE MOTION IS TO MOVE IT DOWN TO 250 AND SPLIT THE FUND, THE REMAINING. AND THE MOTION TO AMEND GETS IT BACK TO 410. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. >> Scott: AND REDUCES THE OTHER. I SHARE MS. VAUGHN'S COMMENTS. I WANT TO GET THAT -- YOU KNOW, THIS THING ABOUT GENERATORS IS YOU NEVER NEED THEM UNTIL YOU NEED THEM AND WHEN YOU NEED THEM, YOU NEED THEM BADLY. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. >> Scott: I HAVE ZERO CONFIDENCE THAT WE'LL HAVE FEDERAL FUNDS CDBG, ESG, STUFF LIKE THAT IN THE COMING YEARS. WHICH MEANS IT WOULD DROP DOWN TO THE GENERAL FUND AND WE WOULD BE HAVING A CONVERSATION DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS NEXT YEAR, IF I'M RIGHT, ON CUTTING OTHER THINGS TO FUND THE GENERATOR. WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS 410 -- IF WE PUT 410, YOU CAN ORDER IT AND YOU CAN START PREPPING THE SITE. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. THE SITE'S ALREADY PREPPED SO WHEN WE DID A RECENT REMODEL WE PUT THE PAD IN AND CONDUIT IN. SO THE GENERATOR IS READY TO BE PLUGGED IN BUT THERE ARE COSTS THAT WILL BE INCURRED TO PLUG IT IN AND INSTALL IT. THAT'S THE $90,000 DIFFERENCE THAT WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH. >> Scott: I MISSED THE MEMO. IT'S MY FAULT. DON'T KNOW WHERE IT IS. STILL NOT SURE IN WHAT YOU SENT ME. IN MY LITTLE BRAIN IT DIDN'T JUMP OUT ENOUGH. I AM ALWAYS UNCOMFORTABLE SHUFFLING MONEY AROUND AT THE DAIS. BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON DID. I THINK IT'S A GOOD ALTERNATIVE, I JUST THINK IF WE CAN GET AT LEAST 410 IN THE GENERATOR, WE CAN CHECK THE BOX, DON'T HAVE TO SPEND AS MUCH ENERGY NEXT BUDGET CYCLE. I'M OKAY WITH THE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE MOTION. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I'M GOING TO QUIT NOW. 410. THAT'S THE NUMBER MARK'S LOOKING FOR. 410 IN THE GENERATOR. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN. >> Vaughn: OKAY. COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON, I SUPPORT YOUR IDEA AND I AM HAPPY TO VOTE FOR THESE RISING TIDE AND HABITAT. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THOSE ORGANIZATIONS. MY PROBLEM IS NOT GETTING THE GENERATOR AND HAVING THE FULL FUNDING. WE'RE GOING TO BE SHORT IN THE GENERAL FUND SO EVERY BIT OF MONEY COUNTS. $90,000 DOES COUNT. SO WE'RE SHORT $90,000. WHY CAN'T WE GO TO THE RISING STAR, THE HABITAT, SOME OF THOSE, AND MAKE UP THAT. JUST GIVE THEM -- TAKE 15 OFF OF THOSE TWO AND THE OTHER OFF THE BOTTOM. THAT'S JUST A SUGGESTION. THAT WAY -- >> Mayor Guajardo: REPEAT THAT. >> Vaughn: YOU HAVE ALL OF THESE ON HERE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE MONEY TO. GO AND CUT THEM DOWN A LITTLE BIT TO MAKE UP THE $90,000. AND THAT WAY YOU CAN DO ALL OF IT. YOU MAY NOT GET EVERY PENNY THAT YOU WANTED, BUT YOU'RE STILL GETTING A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY. >> Zanoni: COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN, THAT WAS THE COUNCILMAN BARRERA RECOMMENDATION. INSTEAD OF $50,000 TO THE SAFE HOME AT RISING -- >> Vaughn: WELL, YOU DIDN'T SAY IT VERY WELL. >> Barrera: YES, MA'AM. 30, 30 -- >> Zanoni: 30, 30, AND 100 WOULD BE THE ALTERNATE ONE. THAT'S THE SECOND MOTION. >> Vaughn: THAT WAY EVERYONE STILL GETS MONEY AND THE NEXT TIME IT COMES AROUND, WE CAN GET MORE MONEY. AND YOU HAVE THE GENERATOR. THE REASON YOU HAVE THAT BECAUSE IF THERE'S AN EMERGENCY THEY'RE GOING TO GO OVER THERE. WHEN THERE'S EMERGENCY, THE ELECTRICITY GOES OFF. WE NEED TO BE VERY CONSCIOUS OF THAT AND THAT IS MY BIG DEAL IN THIS IS THE GENERATOR. I THINK WE HAVE TO GET IT. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN. I'M GOING TO CHIME IN QUICKLY AND THEN WE HAVE COUNCILMAN ROY AND WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. YOU KNOW, IT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING MOVING FORWARD. BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM WILL BE RIGHT BACK IN THIS ROOM WHEN WE NEED THAT GENERATOR AND WE DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING FOR IT. SO I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT SOMETHING THAT SAYS WE CAN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS MUCH MONEY BECAUSE WE FOUND IT, THERE'S A CHECK LAYING AROUND OVER THERE FOR $160,000, WHICH I WOULD LOVE TO TAKE FOR ANIMAL CARE SERVICES, WHICH WE'RE IN DESPERATE NEED OF. I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO APPEASE AND FIND SOLUTIONS TO REQUEST FROM ANY COUNCIL MEMBER. BUT TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO ORDER A HALF MILLION DOLLAR, YOU KNOW, GENERATOR, ORIGINALLY, AND NOT KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO END UP PAYING FOR THAT, LIKE COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN SAID, WE HAVE DEFICITS AND WE ABSOLUTELY -- LISA, YOU KNOW THAT. WE ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT EVERYBODY. MISSION 9-1-1 DIDN'T GET A PENNY OF THIS. WHY? WE COULD HAVE ALL SAT HERE -- I KNOW IT'S ONLY WHO APPLIED. BUT WHAT THEY GOT BEFORE WAS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT. WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR TODAY IS RENOVATIONS TO A FACILITY THAT IS GOING TO HELP PEOPLE. SO WE CAN SIT UP HERE ALL DAY AND JUSTIFY, WELL LET'S CHOP IT UP THIS WAY, THAT WAY. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I TRUST WHAT STAFF IS SAYING. THEY LOOKED AT PROBABLY MANY OF THESE SCENARIOS OR MANY SCENARIOS TO SAY WE REALLY NEED THIS GENERATOR. WE'VE BEEN THERE. IT'S CALLED AMR DIDN'T HAVE ONE AND WE HAD TO MOVE EVERYONE WHERE? WE HAD TO FIGURE THAT OUT. SO WE MUST TAKE -- I WILL TAKE THE RECOMMENDATION. NOW, I LIKE THE CREATIVITY HERE WHERE EVERYBODY GETS -- OR WE MAKE IT UP. I DON'T WANT TO FUND SOMETHING AT 90%. AND WHEN AND IF WE NEED IT, I DON'T CARE IF IT'S A YEAR LEAD TIME. THAT'S HOW IT WORKS. WE'VE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS. WE'VE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF WHAT'S IMPORTANT. EVERYBODY IS GOING TO LOOK AT THE CITY TO SAY WHERE ARE YOU OPENING UP THE SHELTER? HOW IRRESPONSIBLE. YOU HAVE A BUILDING AND YOU DON'T HAVE A GENERATOR. THAT'S WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, TO FULLY FUND THIS GENERATOR. SO I SUPPORT MAKING CERTAIN FIRST AND FOREMOST THAT THAT GENERATOR IS FULLY FUNDED BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN THERE. WE LEARNED THE HARD WAY. >> Mayor Guajardo: AND WE MUST HAVE THIS GENERATOR PAID FOR BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO HELPING ORGANIZATIONS -- ALTHOUGH WE WANT TO AND WE'RE GOING TO, THAT'S A CREATIVE WAY, SO I APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENT. COUNCILMAN ROY? >> Roy: YOU KNOW, THINK MOST OF WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID, BUT AS THE DISTRICT ONE COUNCILMEMBER AND BEN GARZA, THAT AREA IS SO IMPORTANT, AND LISTENING TO PUBLIC COMMENT IN THE PAST AND ESPECIALLY AFTER THE FREEZE THAT WE DID HAVE AND SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAD WITH THAT FREEZE, IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT WE DO THE THINGS THAT WE NEED WITH BEN GARZA BECAUSE THE FACT IS, IS THAT WE'VE GOT A LOT OF FOOT TRAFFIC THAT WILL -- HAS THE ABILITY TO WALK TO THAT LOCATION. IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT IN THAT AREA. AND -- SO FOR ME, THAT'S THE HIGHEST PRIORITY. THAT'S THE HIGHEST PRIORITY THAT'S NEEDED IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROCURE THAT GENERATOR. YOU KNOW, IF STAFF FEELS LIKE THE 410 WILL GET US THERE, I UNDERSTAND THAT, I WOULD PREFER TO JUST MAKE IT CLEAN AND PROCURE THE GENERATOR AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT. WE HAVE A GIFT THAT WAS GIVEN TO US OF 167,000, AND WE CAN ALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I -- I JUST THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PREPARED. AND THAT IS A KEY AND VITAL PLACE. IN TERMS OF TRANSPORTATION, THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD BEFORE IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THAT WE COULD GET THE RIGHT CLOTHING AND ALL OF THE THINGS THAT ARE NEEDED DURING THAT TIME FRAME, I THINK THAT BEN GARZA IS JUST -- WE CAN'T DO WITHOUT THAT. AND IT WOULD BE SILLY, BECAUSE THE MOMENT WE DON'T DO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO -- AND I'M HOPING, PETER, THAT WE CAN GET THAT SOONER THAN IN A YEAR. I KNOW THAT IN THE PAST WHEN WE'VE PROCURED THINGS THAT SOMETIMES WE'VE BEEN ABLE DO SOMETHING TO GET IT A LITTLE BIT FASTER. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. >> Roy: AND SO I LOOK AT IT A YEAR FROM NOW THAT'S GOING TO PUT US IN THE SUMMER, BUT REALLY WHEN WE NEED THIS IS GOING TO BE WITHIN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, SO I'M HOPING YOU CAN DO SOMETHING TO GET IT PROCURED FASTER. THANK YOU. >> Zanoni: OKAY. COUNCILMA N CANTU? >> Cantu: HAVE YOU GOT BIDS ALREADY FOR THE GENERATOR? >> NO, SIR, NO. >> Cantu: WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR COST ESTIMATE FROM? >> WE HAVE AN ARCHITECT THAT'S DOING THE DESIGN NOW. >> Cantu: WHOWHO'S THAT? >> CHUCK ENASTES. >> Cantu: AND IT'S 750KW -- WHAT IS IT -- THE POWER IS 750. >> Zanoni: HOW POWERFUL WAS IT? DO YOU REMEMBER, JEFF? >> Edmonds: [OFF MIC] >> Zanoni: WE'LL HAVE TO GET YOU THAT, COUNCILMAN. >> Cantu: I T THINK IT'S 750. THAT'S PRETTY MASSIVE, I THINK THAT'S 100,000 SQUARE FOOT THAT COVERS, IS THAT SOMETHING Y'ALL KNOW ABOUT? I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT, I'M JUST ASKING. >> NO, TECHNICAL DETAILS -- >> Zanoni: DID THE ARCHITECT, HE SIZED IT FOR THE FACILITY. >> OH, YES. >> Zanoni: SO THE ARCHITECT SIZED IT FOR THE FACILITY. IT WOULD BE ENOUGH TO PUT THE HEATING ON AND IN THE SUMMERTIME, THE AC TO RUN IT, LIKE IF THERE'S A HURRICANE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, SO THERE'D BE HEATING. AND THEN ALL THE WATER HEATERS, KITCHEN EQUIPMENT, THAT TYPE OF THING. >> Cantu: SO THE WAY THAT COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON WANT DODD IT WAS TO ORDER THE GENERATOR, PAY THE 20% DOWN, WHATEVER YOU HAVE TO PAY DOWN, AND THEN WE COULD PAY THE REST OF IT NEXT YEAR RIGHT? >> Zanoni: THE WAY COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON, THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAD WAS OF THE 500,000, WE COULD COME UP WITH 410,000, THAT WOULD BE ENOUGH TO ORDER THE GENERATOR ENTIRELY, WE CAN PAY FOR IT, ORDER IT. THE 90,000-DOLLAR DIFFERENCE TO INSTALL IT AND CONTINGENCY MONEY BUILT INTO THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE FOUND AT SOME POINT. WE DON'T HAVE THE 90,000. SO THE OTHER OPTION SAYS -- >> Cantu: SO WE AS A COUNCIL DON'T WANT DO THAT, CORRECT, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR IT, RIGHT? >> Zanoni: THAT'S WHAT SOME DISCUSSION HAS BEEN, YES. >> Cantu: JUST REMEMBER THAT, GUYS. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. THAT'S ALL OF THE COMMENTS FOR COUNCIL. NOW I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 6? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, LISA GVMENTDERDIS, I LIVE IN DISTRICT 2, RISING TIDE'S MINISTRY IS IN DISTRICT 4. AND I CANNOT IMAGINE THE VOLUME OF INFORMATION YOU ALL GO THROUGH A WEEK. REALLY, SINCERELY, WE PRAY FOR Y'ALL BECAUSE WOW. WOW. WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF ANY HELP THAT WE GET, AND WE ARE MAKING AN IMPACT IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND I COULD GIVE YOU NUMBERS AND STATISTICS AND ALL THAT, BUT I'LL TELL YOU A STORY ABOUT A LIFE THAT WAS IMPACTED. SO WE MET CARL ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO. THE BIGGEST, BADDEST MENACE IN FLOUR BLUFF. CARL IS NOT HIS REAL NAME. AND HE AND I CONNECTED. AND ONE DAY WE WERE TALKING AND I SAID, HERE, TAKE A WALK WITH ME. I WAS WATCHING SOMEBODY OVER IN THE DISTANCE ACTING A FOOL. AND THE SITUATION RESOLVED, SO I SAID, OKAY, LET'S GO BACK. HE SAID, WHAT WAS THAT? AND I SAID, WELL, I WAS WATCHING HIM, THAT WOMAN GOT TO HER CAR. AND HE SAID, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO WRAI BREAK HIS LEG FOR YOU? I'LL BREAK HIS LEG FOR YOU. NOBODY'S EVER OFFERED THAT TO ME BEFORE. AND I SAID, THANK YOU SO MUCH, REALLY, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE OFFER, BUT, PLEASE, PLEASE NO. HE WENT AWAY, DID SOME TIME IN PRISON, HE CAME BACK AND SAID HE NEEDED TO GET HIS ID. WE ASSISTED HIM WITH THAT. SOMETIME LATER HE CAME BACK, TOLD ME HE HAD GOTTEN MARRIED. AND THEN IN DECEMBER OF THIS YEAR, HE CAME TO US AND SAID, -- HE'S IN HIS 40s. FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HIS LIFE, HE HAS AN ON-THE-BOOKS JOB. FOR THOSE WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND, HE'S ACTUALLY HAVING TAXES PAID OUT AND HE'LL PAY TAXES ON THAT MONEY, THE FIRST TIME IN HIS LIFE. BUT HE NEEDED CLOTHING, THE RIGHT CLOTHING TO GO TO WORK AND HE NEEDED NONSLIP SHOES. WE WERE ABLE TO GO TO OUR RESALE SHOP AND PULL THE ITEMS THAT HE NEEDED. AND THE ONES THAT WE LACKED, OUR TEAM SAID MEET US OVER AT WALMART AND WE'LL PURCHASE THE ONES THAT YOU DON'T HAVE. HE CAME BACK IN JUNE, HE'S STILL WORKING. I MEAN, THAT IS AMAZING TO ME. THIS IS ONE PERSON THAT IS IMPACTING LOTS OF LIVES BECAUSE HE'S NOT BREAKING INTO Y'ALL'S CARS, HE'S NOT BREAKING INTO YOUR HOUSES, HE'S NOT DEALING DRUGS TO YOUR KIDS, OR ANYBODY ELSE'S KIDS. THAT'S A LIFE CHANGE BY THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING AT RISING TIDES MINISTRY. THERE'S LOTS OF STORIES BUT THAT'S ONE THAT REALLY STANDS OUT TO ME. SOMEBODY FROM TIMMONS AND SAID, IS THAT CARL? WOW, HE IS. THE BIGGEST THING, WHILE HE WAS IN JAIL, HE WAS SAVED. SO HE HAS QUIT DRINKING, DRUGGING, ALL OF THOSE THINGS. SO IT TOOK ALL OF US TOGETHER MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN HIS LIFE. I'M NOT SAYING IT WAS JUST US, BUT EVERYBODY WORKING TOGETHER, AND THAT'S WHAT WE DO. IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT RISING TIDES MINISTRY. IT'S ABOUT ALL OF US DOING WHAT WE CAN TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. AND WE ARE SO VERY GRATEFUL TO YOU ALL. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MRS. GERDIS. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS ADRINA REYES, I'M A FORMER TEACHER WITH CCISD AND NOW THE PROGRAM SPECIALIST AT RISING TIDES MINISTRY. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF OUR SAFE AT HOME PROGRAM. I'M HONORED AND DEEPLY GRATEFUL FOR THE AWARDS IN THE PAST. THROUGH YOUR INVESTMENTS WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO INSTALL GRAB BARS ON -- IN MANY HOMES FOR LOW-INCOME ELDERLY RESIDENTS. WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO BUILD WHEELCHAIR RAMPS, CONVERT TUBS TO SHOWERS FOR THOSE WHO USE WHEELCHAIRS AND ARE NO LONGER ABLE TO SAFELY STEP OVER THE TUB RAIL. THESE AREN'T JUST CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THEY'RE LIFE-CHANGING MODIFICATIONS THAT RESTORE DIGNITY, SAFETY AND INDEPENDENCE. ONE PARTICULAR HOME IS OF AN 89-YEAR-OLD WOMAN WHO WAS THE SOLE CAREGIVER OF HER 78-YEAR-OLD HUSBAND WHO WAS IN A WHEELCHAIR, DOUBLE AMPUTEE. HE HAD DIALYSIS THREE TIMES A WEEK, THEY HAD TO GO UP AND DOWN THE PORCH STAIRS EVERY -- THREE TIMES A WEEK, WHICH WAS, YOU KNOW, A LOT FOR BOTH OF THEM. THEIR TUB WAS RUSTED, THEIR FLOOR ROTTING AND THEIR COMMODE DETERIORATING. AND SO SHE HAD TO RESORT TO BATHING HIM IN THE KITCHEN SINK -- OR NOT IN THE KITCHEN SINK, BUT AT THE KITCHEN SINK. STORIES LIKE THOSE AND MANY OTHERS ARE WHY WE DO THIS AND WHY WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR ANY FUNDING THAT YOU GRANT US. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK Y YOU. >> BOOED AFTERNOON, BEN MOLINA RECOVERING POLITICIAN. INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN THIS CONSIDERATION. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY IS VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE SUPPORT THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING, AND I KNOW THAT THE CITY HAS ITS OWN CRITICAL REPAIR PROGRAM. ONE OF THE CAPABILITIES THAT WE HAVE IS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF GOVERNMENT, SO WITH THE MONEY THAT WE DO HAVE, WE'RE ABLE TO IMPROVE THE LIVING CONDITIONS OF OUR MOST VULNERABLE POPULATION, SO WE'RE IMPROVING THE LIVING AREAS OF OUR SENIOR CITIZENS, THOSE WITH ADA ISSUES, AND SO WE'RE MAKING THAT INVESTMENT TO THE COMMUNITY. A COLLEAGUE OF MINE IN THE NONPROFIT WORLD SAYS NO MONEY, NO MISSION. I LIKE TO SAY 'MO MONEY, 'MO MISSION. SO WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF WHAT YOU ALL ARE CONSIDERING TODAY, AND KNOW THAT WE'LL DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERY DOLLAR IS ACCOUNTED FOR AND SPENT WISELY. SO THANK YOU ALL. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. MOLINA. ANYONE ELSE? >> MARILYNNA GARZA, DISTRICT ONE. THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING TO DO WHAT ONE OF MY MENTORS TAUGHT ME WHEN MANAGING MONEY. SHE TOLD ME, AND SHE'S -- HER SKILL IS SHE CAN TURN A DOLLAR BILL INTO $100, YOU KNOW, AND I HOPE THAT ONE DAY I CAN GENERATE THAT KIND OF SKILL, TOO, BUT ONE OF THE LESSONS SHE TAUGHT ME WAS THAT -- SHE'S LIKE, YOU WANT TO MAKE YOUR MONEY WORK FOR YOU. YOU WANT TO PUT IT INTO ACTION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW. SO EVERY DOLLAR TO A NONPROFIT LIKE THE ONES THAT CAME UP RIGHT BEFORE ME MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE, REDUCES CRIME, IMPROVES QUALITY OF LIFE FOR EVERYONE. NOBODY WANTS TO SEE PEOPLE STRUGGLING TO COME TO TAKE A SHOWER, LIKE SOMETHING THAT WE TAKE FOR GRANTED THAT ONE DAY WE MAY FACE THAT DIFFICULTY AND WE NEED HELP FROM SOCIAL PROGRAMS TO HELP US OUT. AND WE NEED TO ADEQUATELY FUND THAT AND SET THAT PRINCIPLE, SET THAT BENCHMARK THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. I WAS ALSO ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT CRIED FOR THAT GENERATOR. WE NEED THAT GENERATOR AT BEN GARZA. BUT WE CAN ALSO WORK WITH OTHER LEVERS OF GOVERNANCE AND GOVERNMENT. WE'RE HAVING LEGISLATIVE SESSION RIGHT NOW TALKING ABOUT EMERGENCY FUNDING FOR FLOODING, AND WE HAVE TWO REPRESENTATIVES WHO, I THINK, WOULD LOVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COLLABORATE WITH US AND FIND US SOME OF THAT MISSING MONEY THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED NEXT SEASON. SO THERE ARE SMART WAYS WE CAN DO THIS, WE CAN EITHER PUT THE RISK -- WHAT ARE WE WILLING TO PUT THE RISK FOR? WE CAN DO HIGH-RISK BUSINESS DEALS FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO PROJECTS FOR THE PEOPLE, WE'RE NOT WILLING TO TAKE THAT RISK? SO LET YOUR VOTE BE WHAT DETERMINES WHAT KIND OF RISK YOU'RE WILLING TO TAKE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT CAN'T COME UP HERE AND SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. THEY'RE TOO BUSY TRYING TO GET THOSE DAY-TO-DAY THINGS THAT WE TAKE FOR GRANTED, LIKE GETTING IN AND OUT OF A CAR, GETTING IN AND OUT OF OUR KITCHEN, THOSE THINGS FOR GRANTED. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK Y YOU. >> MICHAEL MILLER, DISTRICT 2. JUST TO EXPAND ON WHAT COUNCILMAN CANTU WAS TALKING ABOUT, HE HAD REACHED OUT TO ME AND ASKED ME ABOUT GENERATOR COSTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, AND I RECENTLY PRICED A GENERATOR FOR A PUBLIC CENTER. 750WK, CUMMINS, REALLY NICE WITH THE TRANSFER SWITCH AND EVERYTHING. THAT UNIT WAS ABOUT $269,000. IT SERVICES 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF FACILITY, PLUS ABOUT 22 ACRES OF SITE, SO BEN GARZA GYM, I BELIEVE, IS 12,100 SQUARE FEET, SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE, SO I IMAGINE IT'S A MUCH SMALLER GENERATOR. SO YOU SHOULD HAVE PLENTY OF MONEY AT FOUR $110,000 TO GET THAT DONE, ESPECIALLY IF THE BUILDING'S ALREADY BEEN PREPPED AND THE PAD IS INSTALLED AND EVERYTHING ELSE. THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> HI, I'M ROBIN COX, DISTRICT 3. I HADN'T PLANNED ON SPEAKING ON THIS, BUT AFTER I HEARD THEM TALK ABOUT RISING MINISTRIES, I OWN A LOT OF PROPERTY IN FLOUR BLUFF THAT I INHERITED FROM MY FATHER AND MOST OF IT IS LOW-INCOME PROPERTY. AND I SEE WHAT RISING TIDE DOES FOR THESE PEOPLE. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL THINK, OH, THEY'RE ON DRUGS. IT'S NOT THE CHILDREN'S FAULT WHO NEED CLOTHES, IT'S NOT THEIR FAULT WHO NEED SCHOOL SUPPLIES. IMAGINE STARTING SCHOOL WITH NO SHOES, WITH DIRTY CLOTHES. IT'S EMBARRASSING ON THAT FIRST DAY. I REMEMBER THE FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL AND I WENT TO A PRIVATE SCHOOL AND WE WORE A UNIFORM, BUT I WANTED A NICE, NEW UNIFORM, NICE SHOES. IMAGINE NOT EVEN HAVING THOSE SHOES. I'VE BEEN ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS FENCE. I LIVED IN NEW BRAUNFELS WAS MARRIED AND HAD A NICE HOME WITH A POOL. I FOUND MYSELF ONE DAY DIVORCED WITH NOTHING. I WAS LUCKY THAT I COULD COME HOME AND MY FATHER HELPED ME WHEN I WENT BACK TO SCHOOL. WE ALL DON'T HAVE THAT. SOME OF US FIND OURSELVES WITH NOTHING AND WE FIND OURSELVES LIVING IN THESE APARTMENTS. AND I KNOW A LOT OF YOU SITTING UP THERE SAID, I'M MAKING SACRIFICES, TOO, DECIDING IF YOU WANT THE BLUE NEW LOUIE OR THE BROWN NEW LOUIE IS NOT A SACRIFICE. IT'S KNOWING CAN I BUY MY KIDS MEDICATION OR THEIR SHOES, AND THAT'S WHAT RISING TIDE MINISTRIES DOES. I HAD THE JOY OF MEETING HER AT CHICK-FIL-A ONE DAY, AND I TOLD HER WE WOULD GO BY AND I HAVEN'T YET, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO DONATE CLOTHES, ANYTHING WE HAVE. SO IF Y'ALL CAN FIND ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WILL HELP THEM, THERE ARE KIDS STARTING SCHOOL IN A FEW WEEKS THAT DON'T HAVE SHOES OR A DECENT PAIR OF CLOTHES. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE OF, YOU KNOW, AMENDMENTS HERE AN% THERE, WHAT YOU JUST MENTIONED, MRS. COX, IS EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING. THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT MADE THAT IS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF EVERYTHING, MAKING CERTAIN WE GET THE GENERATOR FOR THE SAME REASONS AND THE SAME PEOPLE, AND MAKING CERTAIN THAT OUR MINISTRIES ARE BEING FUNDED TO SOME DEGREE. AND I KNOW THAT'S VERY MUCH APPRECIATED, SO WE APPRECIATE ALL THE TESTIMONY, BUT I CAN TELL YOU, THIS COUNCIL ABSOLUTELY CARES ABOUT THE STORY THAT -- THE PEOPLE AFFECTED BY MANY DIFFERENT THINGS IN LIFE. SO WITH THAT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER. >> City Secretary: THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, MAYOR. YEAH, THE MOTION TO AMEND. >> Mayor Guajardo: YES, WITH THE AMENDMENT. >> City Secretary: IT'S THE 30,000 30,100,000. 30,000 AND 100,000. >> Mayor Guajardo: PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR VOTE. >> City Secretary: IT WAS MR. BARRERA'S SUGGESTION TO PROVIDE 30,000 FOR RISING TIDE MINISTRIES, SAFE AT HOME PROGRAM AND AN ADDITIONAL 30 FOR RISING TIDE MINISTRIES WAVE ACADEMY AND THEN HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. >> Mayor Guajardo: AND THEN THE GENERATOR IS FUNDED FULLY. >> City Secretary: CORRECT, YES MA'AM. THAT'S THE OTHER IMPORTANT PART. >> Mayor Guajardo: AND THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THAT. >> City Secretary: SO THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD VOTE ON FIRST, AND THEN AFTER THAT, DEPENDING ON THE RESULT, WE CAN VOTE ON MRS. PAXSON'S AMENDMENT. SO IF WE COULD VOTE ON THAT ONE FIRST, MR. BARRERA'S AMENDMENT. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. >> City Secretary: AND WE CAN DO A VOICE VOTE FOR THAT. >> Mayor Guajardo: ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. (AYES.) >> Mayor Guajardo: ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO. (NO. >> City Secretary: WHO VOTED NO, RAISE YOUR HAND, PLEASE, FOR THE RECORD. >> Mayor Guajardo: THE MOTION CARRIES. >> City Secretary: YES. SO THEN WE JUST NEED TO VOTE ON THE ORDINANCE AS AMENDED AND I DO HAVE THAT ON THE SCREEN. >> Barrera: I MOVE FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. >> SECOND. >> Mayor Guajardo: ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE (AYE. >> Mayor Guajardo: ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO -- DO YOU WANT US TO VOTE HERE. >> City Secretary: YES, I HAVE THAT ONE, MA'AM. . >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. THROUGH, MRS. HUERTA. THE NEXT ITEM PULLED WAS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF AMMUNITION FOR GT DISTRIBUTORS FOR THE CORPUS CHRISTI POLICE DEPARTMENT. WHO PULLED THIS ITEM, COUNCILMEMBERS? >> I'M SORRY, WHICH NUMBER IS THAT? >> Mayor Guajardo: ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. >> [OFF MIC. >> Mayor Guajardo: YOU DID? OKAY. YOUR QUESTION OR COMMENT, COUNCILWOMAN? . >> Campos: I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH USING $80,000 FOR THE PURCHASE OF AMMUNITION FROM THE CRIME CONTROL, SO I WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS ONE, SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT. I DON'T THINK -- I DON'T FEEL THAT $80,000 SHOULD BE USED FROM THE CRIME CONTROL MONEY, SO THAT'S MY ONLY STATEMENT. >> Chief Markle: MIKE MARKLE, POLICE DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> Barrera: MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> Vaughn: SECOND. >> Mayor Guajardo: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES. AND THE LAST ITEM PULLED, I BELIEVE, BY MR. HAIL, WAS ITEM NUMBER 12. THAT IS A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN ASSET PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ROCKPORT TO PURCHASE THE ASSETS OF ROCKPORT NATURAL GAS UTILITY SYSTEM. YOU WANT TO COME UP, MR. HALE? >> JASON HALE, CORPUS CHRISTI. I UNDERSTAND IT THIS IS OUTSIDE THE GAS DEPARTMENT WHICH IS TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO PEOPLE IN CORPUS CHRISTI. I BELIEVE THIS WARRANTS FURTHER DISCUSSION. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WOULD BE A NET BENEFIT FOR THE CITY. YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO CHARGE PEOPLE IN ROCKPORT A PREMIUM AND THEN USE THAT TO OFFSET BILLS FOR PEOPLE IN CORPUS? ALSO WILL THIS PURCHASE HELP US FIX LEAKS FASTER? THIS IS A LARGE EXPENSE, OVER $5 MILLION, I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON IMPROVING OUR SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS BEFORE SPENDING MILLIONS ON A PROJECT THAT IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THE CITY GAS DEPARTMENT. THAT'S IT. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. HALE. COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS? >> Campos: OH, MY LIGHT WAS JUST ON. >> Mayor Guajardo: OH, OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 12? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, RACHEL CABIER LOW, DISTRICT ONE. AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT IS INVOLVED IN THE DAY-TO-DAY STUFF THAT'S HAPPENING HERE, I FIND IT EXTREMELY PROBLEMATIC THAT WE ARE CUTTING COMMUNITY SERVICES, THERE'S A $7 MILLION DEFICIT SHORTFALL COMING TO OUR BUDGET, AND YET WE ARE TRYING -- WE CANNOT TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN ASSETS, WATER GARDENS, AMERICAN BANK CENTER, WE CAN'T EVEN NAME IT, JUST TO NAME A FEW, AND YET HERE WE ARE BUYING ANOTHER MUNICIPALITIES GAS DEPARTMENT, WHEN WE ARE NOT EVEN RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN ASSETS. I'M NOT SURE THE PEOPLE OF ROCKPORT KNOW THIS. I KNOW THAT THEIR MEDIA HAD NO IDEA, SO I'M HOPING THAT THEY WILL STEP IN, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS AN ENDEAVOR UNTIL WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHERE ALL OF OUR MONEY IS GOING, WE CAN GET A BETTER CONTROL ON SPENDING FROM THIS CITY STAFF AND CITY MANAGER, I THINK THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE TABLED UNTIL WE CAN GET A BETTER HANDLE ON OUR BUDGET. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MRS. CABALLERO. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER -- OH, I'M SORRY. COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON, I DIDN'T SEE YOUR LIGHT. >> Paxson: PETER, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND WAS THIS WAS GOING TO ACTUALLY YIELD BENEFITS TO OUR NEIGHBOR COMMUNITY AND IN THE LONG RUN, IT WAS BENEFICIAL TO OUR CITY, SO THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING AT THE PRESENTATION OF THIS ITEM. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. >> Paxson: I DO UNDERSTAND IT'S A LOT OF MONEY, BUT I THINK FROM THE PRESENTATION, IT WAS A LONG-TERM -- COULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE TO THAT. AND ALSO TO THE INFORMATION HOW DOES THIS JIVE WITH OUR MISSION STATEMENT. >> Zanoni: RIGHT. SO THE CITY OF ROCKPORT VOTED, THE COMMUNITY -- DID THEY VOTE, BILL, ON THIS, RIGHT? IS THAT A "YES," BILL? >> YES. >> Zanoni: SO THE CITY OF ROCKPORT RESIDENTS IN A REFERENDUM VOTED TO SELL THEIR GAS SYSTEM SO THE COMMUNITY WANTED THIS BY A MAJORITY. THEY PUT THEIR GAS SYSTEM OUT FOR BID, SEVERAL BIDDERS BID INCLUDING THE CITY. ROCKPORT AND THE REGION KNOWS WE'RE A STRONG SUPPLIER OF GAS. WE'RE THE ONLY ONE HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI, SO THEY APPRECIATED US BIDDING. THIS WILL BE PAID FOR EXCLUSIVELY BY GAS REVENUES. THIS WON'T IMPACT THE GENERAL FUND, THE WATER FUND, ANY OTHER FUND. SO THE GAS SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY WILL FRONT THE MONEY. OVER TIME, THE GAS SALES IN ROCKPORT WILL HELP TO PAY FOR THIS, AND IN THE END, IT WILL BE A NET BENEFIT TO THE FINANCIAL PROFORMA OF THE CITY'S GAS DEPARTMENT, BENEFITING REGIONAL CUSTOMERS. >> Paxson: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Zanoni: YOU'RE WELCOME. COUNCILMA N CANTU? >> Cantu: HOW'S THE PIPING AND EVERYTHING FOR THE GAS LINE CONDITIONS? >> THE CITY OF ROCKPORT'S GAS SYSTEM, OF COURSE, IS NOT IN AS GOOD OF SHAPE AS OURS, BUT BECAUSE WE'RE UNIQUE AND WE HAVE OUR OWN CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, THOSE COSTS TO GET THAT SYSTEM BACK TO OUR STANDARDS ARE BUILT INTO THAT PRO FORMA THAT WE PROVIDED FOR Y'ALL AND SO WE'LL STILL HAVE A NET BENEFIT EVEN WITH ALL THE REPLACEMENT PROJECTS. >> Cantu: SO AFTER THIS PURCHASE, HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU THINK WE'RE GOING TO SPEND ON FIXING THOSE GAS LINES? >> WELL, WE HAVE BUILT INTO OUR BUDGET TO SPEND AROUND THREE TO 400,000 A YEAR ON -- BUT THAT'S BUILT INTO OUR CURRENT OPERATING COSTS. BUT OUR GRAND PLAN ON THIS IS TO SUBMIT THAT SYSTEM FOR A GRANT. THE DOT AND FMSA HAVE A REPLACEMENT GRANT THAT THEY'LL QUALIFY FOR. WE GOT FOUR AND A HALF MILLION LAST YEAR FOR IT, AND THAT FOUR AND A HALF MILLION REPLACES PRETTY MUCH OUR MAIN AREA OF HIGH RISK, WHICH IT STILL IS -- THAT AREA IS STILL A PRETTY GOOD SYSTEM, SO WE'RE BEING VERY PROACTIVE REPLACING THAT PART OF OUR SYSTEM, AND THEN REALLY AFTER THAT, WE DON'T HAVE MUCH ELSE -- ANY AREAS THAT WE NEED TO REPLACE. SO THE FOLLOWING YEAR WE'LL BE SUBMITTING THAT GRANT FOR THE ROCKPORT SYSTEM. >> Cantu: WAS THERE LIKE A REPORT OR SOMETHING DONE TO SEE THE CONDITION OF THOSE PIPES AND EVERYTHING LIKE BEFORE WE CONSIDER BUYING IT? >> YEAH, SO THE CITY OF ROCKPORT THEY SUBMIT A -- THEY CALL IT A DISTRO BEUTION INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT PLAN TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION. THEIR REQUIREMENT ON THAT DIM PLAN, AT OUR COST IT WOULD BE ABOUT PROBABLY $50,000 WORTH OF WORK A YEAR TO DO THEIR REPLACEMENT THROUGH THAT PLAN. BUT WE -- THE GAS DEPARTMENT'S VERY PROACTIVE, SO WE WOULD LIKE TO BE VERY PROACTIVE WITH THAT SYSTEM IN THE FIRST FIVE YEARS SO THAT WE CAN GET IT UP TO PAR. BUT ON THE FLIP SIDE, THERE'S A PRETTY GOOD CHANCE THAT WE'LL HAVE GRANT FUNDING, 100% MATCH, TO TAKE CARE OF ALL THOSE OBLIGATIONS. >> Cantu: HOW MANY GAS CUSTOMERS DO WE HAVE OVER THERE? >> WHAT'S THAT? >> Cantu: HOW MANY GAS CUST CUSTOMERS? >> IT'S ABOUT 4600 ACTIVE GAS CUSTOMERS. >> Cantu: OKAY. >> SO THERE'S ABOUT 5400-METERS, AND THEN -- SO SOME CUSTOMERS HAVE MULTIPLE METERS AND SOME ARE INACTIVE. >> Cantu: APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. COUNCILWO MAN -- DID YOU -- YEAH? COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS? >> Campos: OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO -- BILL, JUST TO REALLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY IN THE LONG RUN -- IT WILL HELP OUR CUSTOMERS AS WELL IN THE LONG RUN. I MEAN, I KNOW IT IS AN INITIAL INVESTMENT FOR US, FOR THE CITY, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, IT WILL HELP OUR -- OUR CUSTOMERS BECAUSE WE WILL BE, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY MAKING -- I MEAN, I BELIEVE WE WILL BE MAKING A POTENTIAL REVENUE OF 3200 IS WHAT YOU HAD PRESENTED. SO, YEAH, WHEN I -- YOU KNOW, WHEN I HEARD YOUR PROGRAM, I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS A WIN/WIN FOR ALL OF US, SO I'M HOPING TO, YOU KNOW, RECEIVE SOME POSITIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE -- ALSO THE CUSTOMERS AT ROCKPORT. BECAUSE THEY DID WANT A PUBLIC UTILITY, NOT A PRIVATE COMPANY, TO OVERSEE THEIR GAS DEPARTMENT. SO I'M PLEASED ABOUT THAT, THAT WE ARE A PUBLIC ENTITY AND THAT WE WOULD BE USING, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC FUNDS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE. SO I SUPPORT THIS PROGRAM. >> AND SO JUST SO Y'ALL KNOW, YOU KNOW, ROCKPORT DID LEAVE A LOT OF MONEY ON THE TABLE TO ACCEPT OUR BID. WE WERE THE SECOND LOWEST OUT OF SEVEN BIDS. AND THEY DID THAT BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT WE WOULD BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE SYSTEM, AND WE PRESENTED A PLAN THAT PROVIDED THAT OPTION TO WHERE WE CAN COME IN AND IMPROVE THEIR SYSTEM, MAYBE IN THE FUTURE EVEN HELP THEM WITH THE RATES, ESPECIALLY IF WE GET THE GRANT, SO THAT WE CAN -- WE CAN TAKE CARE OF THEIR CUSTOMERS LIKE WE TAKE CARE OF OUR CUSTOMERS. >> Campos: UH-HUH. THANK YOU, BILL. COUNCILWO MAN VAUGHN, THIS IS . >> Vaughn: THIS IS ONE OF THOSE TIMES WHERE YOU'RE HELPING YOUR NEIGHBORS. I DON'T GIVE PRAISE VERY EASILY, I THINK YOUR DEPARTMENT, I HAVE TRUST IN YOURS, IS ONE OF THE BEST ONE RUN IN THE CITY. SO I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN YOU, I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT PROJECT. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> Mayor Guajardo: IT'S A GOOD NEWS PROJECT. I THINK YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR QUITE A WHILE, HAVEN'T YOU? >> YES, A COUPLE YEARS. >> Mayor Guajardo: YEAH, THAT'S A LONG TIME. SO THANK YOU FOR THE WORK. I MEAN, I KNOW THIS IS REALLY -- HAVING VISION, WHAT HAVING VISION FOR THE FUTURE LOOKS LIKE. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK AND THE TEAM. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO INCLUDE ITEM NUMBER 12. >> City Secretary: PUBLIC COMMENT. >> Mayor Guajardo: YEAH, WE DID ACTUALLY. YEAH, WE ALREADY DID HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. RIGHT, BECAUSE JASON -- WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> [OFF MIC] >> Cantu: IT WAS JUST THE ONE PULLED ITEM. WE DIDN'T ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. >> Barrera: RACHEL SPOKE. MRS. CABA LLERO SPOKE. >> [OFF MIC] >> Mayor Guajardo: PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, SIR. OKAY. LET'S SEE. IT'S 1:00. SO TODAY WE HAVE MULTIPLE EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS. SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS GO AHEAD AND BREAK FOR LUNCH. THE COUNCIL'S GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ON ITEMS 22 THROUGH 25, PER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071 AND 551.072. WE WILL RETURN. [CITY COUNCIL IN EXECUTIVE SESSION] [EXECUTIVE SESSION] [EXECUTIVE SESSION] [EXECUTIVE SESSION] [EXECUTIVE SESSION] [EXECUTIVE SESSION] MAIRPZ OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. WELCOME BACK. WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE OUR MEETING, AND DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY $THING TO SAY. >> [OFF MIC] >> Mayor Guajardo: PRESS YOUR LIGHT THERE. >> I DID. >> Mayor Guajardo: THERE YOU GO. >> Scott: MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER, OUR DECEMBER ANYTHING KNEE TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO SETTLE THE CASE OF JOSHUA ORTIZ VERSUS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, AND ROSS MURRAY INDIVIDUALLY IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED ONE $150,000. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? >> Barrera: SECOND. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. >> City Secretary: PUBLIC CO COMMENT, MAYOR, I GUESS. >> Mayor Guajardo: I'M SO SORRY. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. THERE BEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR VOTE. OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. SO NOW WE WILL PICK UP WHERE WE LEFT OFF, WE ARE ON SECTION K, INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEMS, ITEM NUMBER 16. MOTION -- WE HAVE A MOTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT NUMBER 5 TO THE DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT WITH KIEWIT INFRASTRUCTURE SOUTH COOF WEST LAKE, TEXAS, TO CONTINUE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT TO A 60% DESIGN AND DEVELOP A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE PROPOSAL FOR THE INNER HARBOR WATER TREATMENT CAMPUS PROJECT. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, BRETT VAN HAZEL. I'M WITH THE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICES WITH THE INNER HARBOR WATER TREATMENT CAMPUS. >> Mayor Guajardo: YOU HAVE A COMMENT? >> WELL, ACTUALLY, COUNCILMAN CANTU? >> Cantu: REAL QUICK, MAYOR. ON THIS AGENDA ITEM, IS THERE ANY WAY WE COULD HAVE A TOTAL OF THREE TIMES TO TALK ON THIS ITEM? IT'S A BIG ITEM. I MEAN, IT'S A BIG DECISION, AND I THINK WE NEED MORE TIME TO DISCUSS, IF YOU DON'T MIND -- >> Mayor Guajardo: THREE TIMES. ARE WE ABLE TO MAKE -- >> City Secretary: YEAH, YOU CAN EXTEND A DATE, IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR DEBATE. >> Mayor Guajardo: DEBATE. >> City Secretary: YEAH, SO HE'S SAYING MORE TIMES TO TALK. THAT'S DEBATE, DISCUSSION. IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT, OR IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO DO THAT. >> Mayor Guajardo: IT'S A THREE -- >> City Secretary: NO, IT WOULD BE A MOTION TO EXTEND DEBATE, I GUESS IS WHAT IT WOULD BE. >> Cantu: IF I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT FEELS IT, THEN I'M OKAY WITH IT. BUT DO OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS WANT TO -- >> Mayor Guajardo: YOU'RE AT FIVE, OR YOU WANT TO GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT OR NO? >> Cantu: FIVE AND FIVE AND FIVE RIGHT? >> City Secretary: SO YOU WANT TO -- >> Mayor Guajardo: LET ME HEAR FROM SOME OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS. >> Scott: I THINK IT'S A BIG ISSUE, IF WE NEED TO SPEND MORE TIME TALKING ABOUT IT, I'M ALL RIGHT WITH THAT. >> Student: SO WAS IT TWO TIMES FOR 10 MINUTES. >> Mayor Guajardo: IT'S FIVE MINUTES PER -- >> City Secretary: SO IT'S THREE TIMES AT FIVE MINUTES. >> Mayor Guajardo: SO WE'RE GOING TO DO THREE AT FIVE. THA >> City Secretary: THAT'S FINE. >> OKAY. SO WE'LL DO A QUICK PROJECT UPDATE, AND THEN WE'LL JUMP INTO THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT ITEM. SO WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON THE DEMONSTRATION PLANT. AS OF LAST FRIDAY, WE'RE ABOUT 20% COMPLETE. SOME OF THE MAJOR ITEMS WE'RE WORKING ON ARE THE DISCHARGE WATERLINE, SIDE PREP AND WE HAVE A LOT OF THE EQUIPMENT ALREADY ON THE INGLESIDE. LAST WEEK WE DID RECEIVE A LETTER FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, HUD, NOTIFYING US THAT THE COMPLAINANTS AGAINST THIS PROJECT HAVE WITHDRAWN THEIR COMPLAINTS, SO HUD IS GOING TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE THIS ITEM OUT. AND REALLY THAT IMPACTS OUR MOVEMENT WITH TWDB AND MOVING TOWARDS CONSTRUCTION, SO NOW THAT THAT COMPLAINT HAS BEEN LIFTED, IT ALLOWS US TO CONTINUE IN THAT EFFORT. AND THEN I ADDED A LITTLE CONTRACT SPEND UPDATE WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE SHARED LAST WEEK. WE'RE AT 29.5 MILLION SPENT TO DATE AND WE HAVE WITH PHASE 1A AND THE FOUR AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN EXECUTED AS PART OF PHASE 1B FOR KIEWIT, WE HAVE 46.6 MILLION ENCUMBERED. OKAY. SO WE'LL JUMP INTO THE AMENDMENT. SO, YOU KNOW, THIS ITEM TODAY CONSIDERS APPROVAL TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT WITH KIEWIT ON A COST REIMBURSABLE BASIS FOR US TO PROCEED WITH OUR DESIGN EFFORTS. WE'VE BRI ESTABLISHED A $50 MILLION NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT, AND THEN AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE CURRENTLY AT 10% DESIGN, SO THIS IS GOING TO ALLOW US TO CONTINUE TO A 60% DESIGN, AND THEN DEVELOP A GUARANTEE MAXIMUM PRICE THAT WOULD BE BROUGHT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL. SO A LITTLE BACKGROUND, LAST YEAR WE EXECUTED THE AGREEMENT WITH KIEWIT, THERE WERE THREE PHASES WITH PHASE 1 BEING BROKEN UP INTO TWO PARTS. SO IN THE PHASE 1 EFFORT, WE'RE DOING DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AS ONE OF THE PRIMARY DELIVERABLES AT SET INTERVALS. WE HAVE A 10%, WHICH WE'VE ALREADY ACHIEVED, AND WE ACHIEVED THAT THROUGH THE BASIS OF DESIGN AND WE PRESENTED A COST MODEL. WE'RE ALSO TAKING IT TO A 30% DESIGN WITH A COST MODEL UPDATE, AND THEN WE'LL DEVELOP A 60% DESIGN DOCUMENT WITH A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE. SO THAT WAS ALL CONCEIVED AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT AS PART OF PHASE 1. WITH OUR JUNE 24, '25 ADJUSTMENT TO THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED LAST YEAR, WE ARE ALL BRINGING ALL FUTURE AMENDMENT REQUESTS TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION, SO THIS IS THE FIRST OF THOSE AMENDMENTS. SO THIS AMENDMENT, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF IS TO ISSUE AN AMENDMENT, AGAIN, TO KIEWIT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 50 MILLION ON A COST REIMBURSABLE BASIS. WE'LL HAVE TWO MAJOR DESIGN DELIVERABLES. AGAIN, IT WILL BE A 30% DESIGN WITH A COST MODEL UPDATE, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A 60% DESIGN WITH A GUARANTEE MAXIMUM PRICE. THE TIMELINE WITH THIS AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED WOULD HAVE THE DESIGN COMPLETING IN SEPTEMBER. WE WOULD ALSO HAVE THE COST MODEL UPDATE IN SEPTEMBER, THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL. THEN WE WILL HAVE THE 60% DESIGN STARTING IN SEPTEMBER, CONTINUING THROUGH NOVEMBER, AND KIEWIT WOULD ALSO SUBMIT A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE FOR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION, AND THEN STAFF WOULD BRING THIS BACK TO CITY COUNCIL IN DECEMBER FOR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION. ALTERNATIVELY, IF COUNCIL CHOOSES NOT TO PROCEED WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE AMENDMENT, WE DO HAVE ALTERNATE NUMBER 1, WHICH WOULD ALLOW US TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT WITH KIEWIT TO GO FROM A 10% DESIGN TO A 30% DESIGN AND A COST MODEL UPDATE, AND THEN STAFF WOULD BRING BACK A NEW AMENDMENT TO COUNCIL FOR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION TO TAKE US FROM 30% TO 60% AND A GUARANTEE MAXIMUM PRICE. SO THE 30% DESIGN AMENDMENT ALTERNATE WOULD BE -- VALUE WOULD BE BETWEEN 20 AND 25 MILLION, NOT TO EXCEED. IT WOULD STILL BE ON A COST REIMBURSABLE BASIS, AND THEN WHEN WE COME BACK TO GO FROM 30 TO 60%, WE WOULD BRING AN AMENDMENT WITH A NOT TO EXCEED VALUE BETWEEN 25 AND 30 MILLION, AND IF WE DO DECIDE TO GO DOWN THIS ROUTE, THE COMBINATION OF BOTH THIS ALTERNATE NUMBER 1 AND THE FUTURE AMENDMENT REQUEST TO GO FROM 30% TO 60% WOULD NOT EXCEED 50 MILLION. SO THE VALUE WOULD NOT EXCEED WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY RECOMMENDING TO TAKE US FROM 10 TO 60%. THE TIMELINE FOR THIS EFFORT IS SIMILAR TO LAST. WE WOULD ACTUALLY COME BACK IN SEPTEMBER AND AT THAT TIME WE WOULD NOT ONLY PRESENT THE COST MODEL UPDATE, BUT WE WOULD BRING AN ITEM FOR AN AMENDMENT TO TAKE US FROM 30% TO 60%. SO THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED IN SEPTEMBER, AND THEN WE WOULD CONTINUE WITH THE 60% DESIGN AND THE GUARANTEE MAXIMUM PRICE DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN WE WOULD COME BACK AT THE END OF THE YEAR IN DECEMBER TO PRESENT THE GMP TO COUNCIL. ALTERNATE NUMBER 2, IF COUNCIL CHOOSES NOT TO PROCEED WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDED AMENDMENT AS WRITTEN OR ALTERNATE NUMBER 1 AND WE CHOOSE TO PURSUE NO FURTHER DESIGN EFFORTS, THERE WILL BE SOME ADDITIONAL STEPS THE CITY HAS TO TAKE IN PREPARATION FOR THAT, SO FIRST AND FOREMOST, THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO ISSUE A NOTICE OF INTENT TO TERMINATE WITH KIEWIT AND FREESE & NICHOLS. WE WOULD HAVE TO ESTABLISH ALL THE WORK EFFORTS THAT WE WANT THEM TO COMPLETE, ALL THE ONES WE WANT THEM TO STOP IMMEDIATELY AND THEN ONCE THOSE ITEMS ARE COMPLETE, WE WILL GET FINAL INVOICING FROM ALL PARTIES AND THEN WE WILL RECONCILE THAT AND WE'LL KNOW WHAT OUR TOTAL SPENT TO DATE IS. RIGHT NOW, THAT'S ANTICIPATED TO BE APPROXIMATELY 40 MILLION. THAT NUMBER COULD GO UP OR DOWN, IT DEPENDS ON THE FINAL INVOICING FROM ALL PARTIES THAT ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON THE PROJECT. SECOND, WE DO HAVE SOME FINANCIAL LIABILITIES TIED TO THE SWIFT LOAN WE RECEIVED FROM THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. WE DO KNOW THAT THE TOTAL INTEREST THAT WILL BE OWED FOR THE LOANS WITHDRAWN TO DATE WILL BE 72.5 MILLION. THAT WILL HAVE TO BE PAID. AND THEN THE PRINCIPLE SPENT TO DATE GOES BACK TO WHAT I WAS JUST MENTIONING, RIGHT NOW WE'RE ASSUMING 40 MILLION, BUT THE NUMBER COULD GO UP AND DOWN ONCE WE GET ALL THE FINAL NUMBERS FROM FREESE & NICHOLS AND KIEWIT. WE DO HAVE THE VOLUNTARY DROUGHT SURCHARGE EXEMPTION FEE THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY RECEIVING FROM LARGE VOLUME USERS. IT'S 31 CENTS PER 1,000-GALLONS, SO WE WOULD NEED TO GO EVALUATE IF WE HAVE OTHER PROJECTS WHERE THIS FEE COULD BE APPLIED TO, AND IF THERE ARE NO PROJECTS THAT WE COULD APPLY THAT FEE TO, WE WOULD NEED TO GO BACK AND WORK WITH THE LARGE VOLUME USERS AND DISCUSS THE AGREEMENT THAT'S ALREADY IN PLACE. WE ALSO HAVE THE IRS SPEND-DOWN REQUIREMENTS. WE MADE COMMITMENTS ON SPENDING A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY IN A SET AMOUNT OF TIME, SO IF WE'RE UNABLE TO ACHIEVE THAT, WE MIGHT HAVE TO RECLASSIFY SOME OF THE BONDS, AND THERE MAY BE SOME FINANCIAL PENALTIES. WE HAVE TO EVALUATE THAT WITH THE IRS. AND THEN ALSO WE HAVE TO PUT A NOTIFICATION OUT TO THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF OUR INTENT TO CANCEL THE PROJECT AND NO LONGER UTILIZE THE BONDS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED, THE LOW-INTEREST BONDS. THOSE ARE THE THREE OPTIONS. WE HAVE THE AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED, AND THEN WE HAVE ALTERNATE NUMBER 1 AND NUMBER 2. I STAND BY FOR QUESTIONS. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. THANK YOU, BRETT. COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON? >> Paxson: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I KNOW -- >> I CAN BARELY HEAR YOU, MA'AM. >> Paxson: SORRY ABOUT THAT. WE'VE BEEN RECEIVING THESE WEEKLY WATER UPDATES FROM THE WATER DEPARTMENT ON PRETTY MUCH ALL OF OUR MAJOR SOURCES THAT WE'VE BEEN EVALUATING. ONE OF THE THINGS WE ASKED FOR IN THERE WAS EXPLANATION ON WHAT WE HAVE EXPENSED TO DATE ON THE PROJECT, AND SO AS OF THIS PRESENTATION, IT'S LISTING ROUGHLY 21 MILLION AS HAVING BEEN SPENT TO DATE ON THE PROJECT, BUT YOUR PRESENTATION LISTS A LITTLE OVER 47 MILLION. COULD YOU EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCY THERE OVER JUST TWO PRESENTATIONS ON ONE DAY? HAZE. >> RIGHT SO THE NUMBER YOU'RE SEEING SPENT TO DATE ON YOUR WEEKLY UPDATES IS WHAT WE'VE DONE IN PHASE 1 WITH FREEZE AND NICKELS AND KIEWIT. THE TOTAL SPENT TO DATE INCLUDES ALL THE MONEY SPENT WITH FREESE & NICHOLS PREVIOUSLY, SO THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR YEARS, SO WE HAVE ISSUED MULTIPLE TASK ORDERS OVER THE YEARS FOR PERMITS, FOR DESIGN EFFORTS, FOR SOLICITATION. SO WE'VE HAD MONEY SPENT WITH FREESE & NICHOLS OVER THE YEARS, SO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING THERE IS TOTAL COMMITMENTS TO DATE. >> Paxson: SO PERHAPS YOU CAN HELP ME WITH THIS, PETER. I GUESS I'M HAVING A HARD TIME RECONCILING IF THE QUESTION WAS WHAT HAVE WE SPENT TO DATE ON THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT, AND NOW I'M BEING TOLD THAT THAT'S LESS THAN HALF OF WHAT WE'VE -- I'M CONFUSED AS TO -- DO YOU UNDERSTAND? >> Zanoni: YEAH, IT WOULD BE THE DATE RANGE. SO IF YOU WANTED TO KNOW -- I THINK THE ANSWER IS THE LONGEST PERIOD OF TIME, WHICH WOULD BE FROM WHEN WE BEGAN THIS SIX, SEVEN YEARS AGO, THAT DURATION OF TIME. THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE MEMO FROM DREW -- OR IS THAT -- >> SO THE MEMO REPRESENTS FROM DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR TO CURRENT. >> Zanoni: EXCUSE ME. SO WHAT BRETT'S TELLING US IS WHAT HAS BEEN SPENT FROM A POINT IN TIME, TELL US THE DATE RANGE, BRETT. >> IS JASON -- IN HERE. >> Zanoni: 2018, 2019. >> Paxson: SO, DREW. >> Molly: YES? >> Paxson: THANK YOU. WHEN YOU HAD -- WHEN WE HAD DISCUSSED ABOUT THE PROCUREMENT, THE WHOLE TOPIC OF IT WAS THE TRANSPARENCY. ONE OF THE CONSISTENT THEMES THAT WERE DISCUSSED FROM THE DAIS WAS THE SENSE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TO TELL ANYONE, WHAT HAVE WE SPENT, WITH WHOM, ON WHAT? WHAT HAS BEEN PROCURED? WE WERE BEING TOLD BY A NUMBER OF SOURCES FOR A PROJECT WE HAVEN'T GIVEN FINAL APPROVAL TO. FROM THAT MEETING, SOMETHING THAT WAS A TAKEAWAY WAS IF THERE'S MORE INFORMATION ON THE FINANCIAL SIDE, ASK. TELL US WHAT YOU WANT. YOU AND I HAD A CONVERSATION AND I SAID I WOULD LIKE ALL THE DETAILED INFORMATION. EVERYTHING WE HAVE PURCHASED TO DATE. YOU MADE A COMMENT THAT IF YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE TO GO SEARCH FOR, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THE TREES IN THE FOREST, THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE. AND I SAID I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALL OF THE PURCHASES. YOU MADE A TABLE. IT WAS A TWO-PAGE TABLE THAT YOU STARTED INCLUDING IN THE WATER PRESENTATIONS. IT WAS HARD TO READ BUT IT WAS THERE. IT WAS VERY LUMP SUM BUT IT WAS THERE. MY ISSUE RIGHT NOW IS WE'VE COME TO THIS DAY AND IT'S CLEARLY A BIG PART OF THE PROCESS AND I CAN'T HELP BUT FEEL IN MY SEVEN MONTHS OF BEING HERE WHERE I HAVE COME AND TRIED TO GET INFORMATION, HERE I AM AGAIN WITH A $26 MILLION DISCREPANCY OF INFORMATION BEING PRESENTED. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT TRYING TO SOUND ACCUSATORY BUT I AM A LITTLE FRUSTRATED. YOU KNOW, THIS IS A LITTLE REMINISCENT TO ME OF CAN WE HAVE A FAR FIELD? NO, IT'S NOT NECESSARY. ACTUALLY, WE WERE ALREADY DOING IT. IT FEELS THE SAME TO ME. AND, AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE ACCUSATIONS BUT I AM FRUSTRATED. I AM FRUSTRATED BECAUSE, DREW, I TOLD YOU LET ME TELL YOU WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR WITH THAT MOTION. IT WASN'T TO KILL A PROJECT, IT WAS BECAUSE I WANTED TO KNOW WHERE THE MONEY WAS GOING AND HOW MUCH OF IT. AND SO YOU HAVE BEEN SENDING US A TOTAL EVERY WEEK. THIS IS QUITE A SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT TOTAL. THIS MORE THAN DOUBLES THAT TOTAL. SO FORGIVE ME IF THAT'S A LITTLE ALARMING. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT RATIONALE? >> Molly: SO YOU AND I EXCHANGED SOME COMMUNICATION AND YOU HAD EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN HAVING MORE INFORMATION. AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'VE DONE -- AND WE PUT THIS IN THE MEMO THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS -- THAT INFORMATION. SO CLEARLY THAT HAS NOT MET THE EXPECTATIONS THAT YOU HAVE. WE ARE ABSOLUTELY AVAILABLE AND WILLING TO PUT THIS IN WHATEVER FORMAT THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS BROKEN DOWN BY MONTH. WE HAVE THIS BROKEN DOWN BY DIFFERENT PHASES. I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE LEVEL OF DETAIL YOU WERE LOOKING FOR BUT IF THAT IS NOT THE LEVEL OF DETAIL YOU WANT OR IF YOU WANT MORE DETAIL, WE ARE HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND PUT IT IN A FORMAT. WHATEVER FORMAT YOU WANT, WE'RE ABSOLUTELY WILLING TO DO THAT. >> Paxson: I APPRECIATE THAT BUT I'M A LITTLE PAST THE FORMATTING. I'M AT THE POINT OF $21 MILLION, WHICH HAS BEEN A CONSISTENT MESSAGE FOR WEEKS, TO NOW $47 MILLION AND CHANGE. WHEN THE QUESTION -- THE DATA FOR BOTH SETS IS SUPPOSED TO BE TOTAL COLLECTIVE EXPENDITURES ON THIS PROJECT. THAT'S MY ISSUE. FORMATTING TO ME, THAT SHIP HAS SAILED A LITTLE BIT FOR THIS DISCUSSION. AND I DON'T THINK I'M -- I DON'T THINK I'M BEING UNREASONABLE POINTING OUT THIS DISCREPANCY. BECAUSE I'VE BEEN GOING ALONG THIS WHOLE TIME SAYING IT'S ONLY BEEN 18 OR $20 MILLION AND NOW IT'S 47 AND CHANGE. THAT'S A LOT. AND IF I ASKED WHAT WAS COLLECTIVE AND NOW I'M BEING TOLD, MY UNDERSTANDING THERE IS QUITE DIFFERENT. I'M FRUSTRATED. I'LL LET YOU KNOW THAT OUT OF THE GATE. I'M FRUSTRATED. I AM DISAPPOINTED THAT THE LEADERSHIP, WHETHER WE WEAR A BADGE THAT SAYS CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS OR ANY OTHER ORGANIZATION, HAS ALLOWED THIS TOPIC TO BECOME SO POLITICAL AND DIVISIVE. I HAVE JUST UNDER A MINUTE LEFT SO I'M GOING TO TAKE THE MOMENT TO SAY THAT. THIS SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE BEEN ABOUT FINDING WATER AND NOT CAUSING DIVISION. THAT REEDER ITS HEAD IN A HUGE FORCE YESTERDAY AND I HOPE THAT THAT CAN BE PUT TO REST BECAUSE WE NEED TO BE STANDING HERE TALKING ABOUT WATER. I SHOULDN'T BE HERE ASKING WHY IS THERE OVER DOUBLE, WHEN I'VE BEEN ASKING THE SAME QUESTIONS. THAT, TO ME, IS THE NUCLEUS OF THE WHOLE ISSUE. IT NEEDS TO GET BACK TO JUST WATER. >> Mayor Guajardo: ANYONE ELSE? COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN. >> Vaughn: I'LL GO. SO TO HER POINT -- SHE'S A LITTLE EMOTIONAL BECAUSE SHE'S HAD A REALLY ROUGH WEEKEND, A ROUGH WEEK. I THINK WHAT'S GOING ON HERE AND IT SHOULD BE ABOUT WATER. THAT'S WHAT IT SHOULD BE ABOUT. IT'S RETRIBUTION POLITICS AND THAT'S WHEN SOMEONE -- REPAYING SOMEONE FOR WRONGDOING OFTEN INVOLVING PUNISHMENT OR REVENGE. THAT IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE. I KNOW I WAS ATTACKED AND THREATENED BY CERTAIN PEOPLE AND IN THE CHAMBER, I SPENT A WHOLE WEEKEND FIELDING CALLS A LITTLE WHILE BACK. NOW THEY HAVE TURNED THEIR ATTENTION TO TWO COUNCIL PEOPLE HERE AND SHAME ON YOU, CHAMBER FOR DOING THAT. YOU CERTAINLY NEED NEW LEADERSHIP, THERE'S NO DOUBT. THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. YOU SHOULDN'T BE CALLING OUT SPECIFIC COUNCIL MEMBERS. THAT'S WRONG. YOU ASK YOURSELF WHY IS THERE SO MUCH HATE? IT'S PURE MEANNESS. I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE IT. WHEN YOU START TURNING ON PEOPLE AND TRYING TO MAKE THEM LOSE THEIR JOBS AND MAKING UP STUFF ABOUT THEM, THAT'S DONE IN THIRD-WORLD COUNTRIES. WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THAT HERE. THAT'S JUST WRONG. SO I WANT TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS BUT I WOULD CHALLENGE ALL OF US UP HERE TODAY THAT WE SHOULD BE BETTER THAN THIS. AND JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE MEMBERS WHO DISAGREE DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE ARE ARGUMENTATIVE. IT MEANS WE DISAGREE WITH YOU AND WE HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DO THAT. BUT I CHALLENGE OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO RISE ABOVE THE POLITICS, DO YOUR JOB REPRESENTING THE CITIZENS, THE BUSINESSES, BE PROFESSIONAL, AND LET'S MOVE ON WITH WHATEVER IS DECIDED IS DECIDED. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET MAD AT EACH OTHER AND WE'RE GOING TO DO THE BEST DECISION THAT WE CAN DO WITHOUT ARGUING WHEN WE WALK OUT OF HERE. BECAUSE WE NEED WATER. NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND THEN I'LL COME BACK. WHAT ARE OUR CONTINGENCIES? >> YOU MEAN BUILT INTO THE CONTRACT? SO WE HAVE -- I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE REFERRING BACK TO THE COST MODEL UPDATE? RIGHT NOW IN THE LAST UPDATE WE'RE SHOWING $45 MILLION IN CONTINGENCIES. >> Vaughn: OKAY. MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE PRICE. IT HAS BEEN FROM THE GET-GO AND I'VE TOLD Y'ALL THAT. I FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE -- SOME PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO AGREE WITH THIS IN THE AUDIENCE, THAT'S OKAY. I'M NOT HAVING A LOT OF PROBLEM WITH YOU BEING SAFE. YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THEM ALL OVER THE WORLD. BUT THE PRICE, THAT IS JUST $1.2 BILLION. WE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO BE PAYING MORE FOR OUR GALLON OF WATER THAN ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD AT THE PRICE WE'RE GETTING FOR 30 MGD. I WISH KIEWIT WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THE PRICE AND LOWER IT. IT'S TOO HIGH. AND I FEEL LIKE IT'S A FIRE SALE BECAUSE THEY KNOW WE'RE IN EMERGENCY MODE -- WHICH WE DO HAVE OTHER PROJECTS OUT THERE. IT'S NOT JUST THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE DESAL, BECAUSE WE DON'T ANYMORE. I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO CONSIDER THIS BECAUSE I'M STILL HAVING TROUBLE. THAT PRICE IS TOO HIGH AND IT OUGHT TO COME DOWN. AND I DON'T KNOW WHO NEGOTIATED THIS BUT I DON'T THINK A VERY GOOD JOB WAS DONE. I THINK THEY SAW SUCKER ON OUR HEAD. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A GOVERNMENT PROJECT THAT'S BEEN DONE ON TIME AND UNDER BUDGET. IT'S GOING TO BE OVER BUDGET. THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK WITH ALL KINDS OF CHANGE ORDERS AND IT'S GOING TO GO UP. AND IF Y'ALL THINK IT'S NOT, YOU'RE CRAZY. I HAVE NEVER SEEN ONE -- WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT HERE. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A PRIVATE ENTITY THAT THEY HAVE TO WATCH EVERY PENNY THAT THEY SPEND. IT'S TAX DOLLARS AND WE SHOULD BE DOING THAT SO I HAVE A BIG CONCERN. I'M GOING TO LISTEN TO THE REST OF THE PRESENTATIONS AND THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS BUT THAT'S STILL A CONCERN FOR ME. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILMAN CANTU. >> Cantu: I THINK I'M DISAPPOINTED WITH THE LEADERSHIP ON THIS. I THINK LIKE THE COUNCILWOMAN SAID IT WAS A LOT OF POLITICS ON THIS DESAL PROJECT AND STILL TO THIS DAY WE GOT THREATENED OVER THE WEEKEND. WE GOT PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT RECALLS AND GOT PEOPLE THREATENING PEOPLE'S JOBS. I MEAN, IT'S PRETTY SICK. I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED WITH THAT. SOMETHING FUNNY OUT THERE, DAVID? SOMETHING FUNNY? >> [OFF MIC] >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY, GUYS. WE'RE GOING TO -- I MADE A POINT THIS MORNING -- COUNCILMAN, I MADE A POINT THIS MORNING THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BREAK DECORUM. >> Cantu: THAT DIDN'T STOP HIM. >> Mayor Guajardo: I DIDN'T HEAR HIM. BOTH SIDES, PLEASE, BE CORDIAL. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMAN. >> Cantu: AND THEN THE CHAMBER GETTING INVOLVED IN THIS DIDN'T REALLY HELP YOU GUYS. I MEAN, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE UNITED AND THEY STARTED SENDING TEXT MESSAGES OUT LAST MINUTE JUST BETWEEN WITH ME AND PAXTON. I MEAN, IT'S NOT FAIR. IT'S NOT RIGHT. AND NOT ONE TIME HAS THE CHAMBERS REACHED OUT TO ME AND ASKED ME WHAT WAS MY POSITION ON THIS INNER HARBOR. YOU, DREW, I HAVEN'T TALKED TO YOU SINCE WHEN? IT'S BEEN A WHILE. IT'S BEEN A WHILE THAT I HAVE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THIS PROJECT. I'M JUST DISAPPOINTED WITH IT HOW IT CAME OUT. LIKE, HOW ALL THIS HAPPENED. IT JUST MAKES ME SICK THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEND $1.2 BILLION FOR 30 TRILLION GALLONS PER DAY. $1.2BILLION. THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY A LOT OF MONEY. AND THAT DOESN'T STOP THERE. I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE CHANGE ORDERS WHEN IT DOES HAPPEN -- IF IT DOES HAPPEN. IT'S A LOT OF MONEY. AND MY JOB IN MY DISTRICT IS TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE IN DISTRICT 3 AND THAT'S THE MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE. YOU AND I COULD PROBABLY AFFORD OUR WATER BILLS BUT THERE'S PEOPLE LIVING RIGHT NOW PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK OR ON A FIXED INCOME OF $900 A MONTH, SENIORS. THEY'RE EITHER GOING TO PAY THEIR WATER BILL OR PAY THEIR MEDICATIONS. PAY THEIR ELECTRICITY OR MEDICATIONS. IT'S EXPENSIVE. YOU KNOW, WHAT'S AN AMOUNT THAT'S GOING TO GO UP 200% OF THE WATER BILL? IS THAT WHAT YOU GUYS TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME? WHAT'S A PERCENTAGE IT'S GOING TO GO UP TO? >> Molly: LAST WEEK WHEN WE WERE DOING THE COST MODEL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A 28% INCREASE IN RATES AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN INCREASE IN $11.38 FOR A 6,000 GALLON RESIDENTIAL USER. AND OF COURSE THAT IS ALSO GOING TO BE APPLICABLE TO ALL OF OUR RATE CLASSIFICATIONS. IT'S NOT JUST THE RESIDENT, IT'S THE COMMERCIAL USER, IT'S THE LARGE-VOLUME USER. SO EVERYBODY WILL HAVE A RAISE IN WATER RATES AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT. >> Cantu: AND YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN SAYING TO THE MEDIA AND TO OTHER PLACES, IT'S LIKE 900-SOMETHING MILLION DOLLARS FOR THIS PROJECT BUT THE REALITY IS IT'S $1.2 BILLION. A LITTLE UNDER $1.2 BILLION. I JUST -- IT'S GOING TO BE HARD FOR THIS DECISION. I JUST -- QUESTIONS, A LOT OF CONCERNS. AND THIS QUESTION IS TO YOU, PETER, JUST -- I WANT TO CLEAR IT UP. I HAD SOME TEXT MESSAGES AND THEY WANTED ME TO ASK THIS QUESTION. AND I WANT TO ASK THIS QUESTION. DOES THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI GIVE MONEY TO THE CHAMBERS? >> Zanoni: WE DON'T -- >> Cantu: IF WE DO, WE NEED TO STOP. >> Zanoni: WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPONSORSHIP. WE'RE NOT A MEMBER. >> Cantu: I DON'T WANT TO GIVE NO MONEY TO THEM. THEY'RE GOING AGAINST US COUNCIL MEMBERS WITH THEIR MONEY. IF WE ARE GIVING THEM OUR MONEY, THEY ARE USING OUR MONEY TO GO AGAINST US. IT'S RIDICULOUS. AND THEY'RE NOT UNITED. THEY HAVE A POLITICAL AGENDA AND, YOU KNOW, SCREW THE SMALL BUSINESSES. THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE SMALL BUSINESSES. >> Mayor Guajardo: DREW, COULD YOU TALK TO US ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR WATER RATES WITH AND WITHOUT DESALINATION PROJECT. >> Molly: SO LAST WEEK WE HAD A PRESENTATION WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT THE COSTS ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING LIKE OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. AND WE PRESENTED ON THAT. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS -- >> Mayor Guajardo: EXCUSE ME. I'M GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU. CAN YOU GET IT? YOU CAN KEEP TALKING. AND I WANT EVERYBODY TO SEE THAT SLIDE. YOU KNOW, THE SLIDE -- THAT'S THE ONE. SO MAYBE GIVE IT TO THEM BACK THERE TO THE MEDIA PEOPLE. ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD. >> Molly: SO AS WE'RE WORKING TO GET THE SLIDE SHOWN SO EVERYBODY CAN SEE IT, THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT WE TALKED LAST WEEK AND WE HAVE AN UPWARD PRESSURE ON RATES AS NOT JUST A NEW WATER SUPPLY PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO ADD ABOUT $11.38 TO THE TYPICAL RESIDENT. I WANT TO BE REAL CLEAR ON THAT. THAT'S NOT JUST THE RESIDENT THAT'S PAYING FOR THIS NEW WATER SUPPLY, IT'S OTHER RATEPAYERS AS WELL. BUT THE REALITY IS THAT A PREPONDERANCE OF OUR WATER RATES ARE BASICALLY TO PAY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE TODAY. SO WE HAVE ESSENTIALLY A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT HAS TO BE MAINTAINED. SO I'M TALKING ABOUT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH WATER MAIN REPLACEMENTS. DAM INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. YOU KNOW, INFRASTRUCTURE ASSOCIATED WITH THE O.N. STEVENS WATER TREATMENT PLANT. IN FACT, TODAY IS A GREAT EXAMPLE. WE PASSED $100 MILLION WORTH OF INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO IMPROVE THE ABILITY TO DELIVER CHLORINE. >> Mayor Guajardo: WE PASSED THAT ITEM TODAY WITHOUT ANYONE ASKING ANY QUESTIONS? >> CORRECT. >> Mayor Guajardo: $100 MILLION. I'M JUST MAKING THAT POINT NOT AGAINST ANYONE BUT BECAUSE IT IS PART OF -- ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO SAY THIS AGAIN. ANYBODY LAUGHING, ANYBODY WANT TO BREAK DECORUM, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ALLOWED. I'M JUST LETTING EVERYBODY KNOW BECAUSE MAYBE SOME OF Y'ALL -- WELL, WE'LL HEAR IT AT 5:30 BUT I'M REITERATING MYSELF. GO AHEAD. DO WE HAVE IT? BUT, ANYWAY, WE'VE GOT CIP PROJECTS THAT OUR RATES ARE GOING UP. IT IS NOT -- I WANT TO SEE THAT GRAPH BECAUSE IT'S A VERY CLEAR -- THERE IT IS. TALK THROUGH THIS. >> Molly: AS YOU CAN SEE THE BLUE LINE IS BASICALLY OUR BASE COST. SO THAT STAYS RELATIVELY FLAT. THAT'S THE COST TO BASICALLY OPERATE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT'S ELECTRICAL AND CHEMICAL COST AND LABOR TO RUN OUR FACILITIES. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS AS WE TALK ABOUT RATES IS THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR DEPARTMENT DOES A PRETTY GOOD JOB IN TERMS OF JUST KEEPING THOSE COSTS, THOSE COSTS BELOW THE CPI. THE THING THAT YOU SEE AS WE MOVE OUT IN THE OUT-YEARS, YOU CAN SEE THE ORANGE, WHICH IS OUR CIP COST. THIS IS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE COMMITMENTS TO ENSURING THAT WE MAINTAIN THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE. AND THEN THE GREEN IS THE INNER HARBOR. SO THAT'S THE NEW WATER SUPPLY. AND I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR FROM THIS THAT YOU CAN SEE. AND WE DO HAVE -- I'VE GOT ANOTHER SLIDE IN FRONT OF ME SINCE WE LAST PRESENTED THIS -- WITH ACTUAL PERCENTAGES. SO IN 2028 THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT OR THE NEW WATER SUPPLY PROJECT REPRESENTS ABOUT 8% OF THE OVERALL COST ASSOCIATED WITH OUR 2028 FORECASTED RATE MODEL. AND THE CIP PROGRAM IS ABOUT 27%. AND THEN IT JUST KIND OF GOES OUT FROM THERE. YOU CAN SEE AS WE GO OUT INTO 2030 AND BEYOND, THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS NEW WATER SUPPLY STAYS RELATIVELY FLAT AND CONSISTENT OVER THE 30 YEARS. I WILL SAY THAT WE ARE DOING EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO KEEP THESE RATES AS LOW AS WE CAN. WE'RE GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT LATER ABOUT OUR WATER SUPPLY UPDATE BUT ONE THING THAT'S REALLY CLEAR IS WE'RE BRINGING ON THE FASTEST WATER THAT WE CAN BRING ON TODAY WITH SOME OF THE WELLS THAT WE'RE DRILLING. WE HAVE A VERY LOW COST ASSOCIATED WITH PROVIDING SOME RAW WATER INTO OUR SYSTEM TODAY THAT IS NOT ONLY PAID FOR BY THE STATE -- SO THAT HELPS THE RATEPAYER. WE WERE FORTUNATE TO GET SOME GRANT MONEY. BUT PUTTING IN GROUNDWATER WELLS AND THE WAY WE'RE ABLE TO DO IT IS VERY LOW COST. AGAIN, I WOULD JUST REITERATE THE FACT THAT NOBODY WANTS TO SEE RATES INCREASE. WE'RE BEING AS TRANSPARENT AS WE CAN IN TERMS OF SHOWING WHAT THOSE RATE INCREASES LOOK LIKE OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, DREW. COUNCILMAN SCOTT. >> Scott: YOU GUYS ARE GOOD AT PUSHING YOUR BUTTON AND UNPUSHING YOUR BUTTON, NEXT THING YOU KNOW I'M IN THE FRONT OF THE LINE. TALK TO US ABOUT THE GMP AND COST OVERRUNS AND CHANGE ORDERS. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO US. WE DON'T WANT TO -- NUMBER ONE, I DON'T WANT TO PAY $1.2 BILLION BUT I SURE AS HECK DON'T WANT TO PAY 1.3, 1.4. TALK TO ME ABOUT THAT. >> WITH THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE, KIEWIT IS GUARANTEEING THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THE PROJECT FOR NO MORE THAN THAT COST. IF THERE'S ANY DESIGN OMISSION, DESIGN ERRORS, ANYTHING ATTRIBUTABLE TO SOMETHING KIEWIT HAS DONE OR NOT DONE, THEY HAVE TO COVER ALL THOSE COSTS AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE. IF THERE'S ANY, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S ANY SAVINGS OR UNSPENT CONTINGENCY, THAT ALL COMES BACK TO THE CITY. IF THERE'S ANY SAVINGS, YOU KNOW, IF WE GO THROUGH A TRADITIONAL GMP FORMAT, IF THERE'S SAVINGS ON PARTICULAR WORK ITEMS, WE'LL BE GETTING THAT BACK. WE'LL BE WORKING WITH KIEWIT ON THAT BUT IF THERE'S DESIGN ERRORS OR ISSUES FOUND ON SITE THERE WOULDN'T BE CHANGE ORDERS. KIEWIT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COVERING THOSE COST. >> Scott: THE PROCESS IS WE EVENTUALLY GET TO A GMP, IF WE AGREE TO IT, THAT'S THE MOST WE'LL PAY. >> UNLESS WE CHANGE THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT OR WE ADD SCOPE ITEMS OR IF WE CHANGE SOMETHING IN THE AGREEMENT, THEN THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO BEAR THOSE COSTS BUT OTHERWISE KIEWIT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE COSTS. >> Scott: TELL ME THE OFF RAMP. THE NORMAL PROCESS FOR PROGRESSIVE DESIGN-BUILD, THE OFF RAMPS -- FULLY DESIGNED? BECAUSE MY POINT IS IF WE WALK NOW WE HAVE A 10% DESIGN PROJECT IN WILLOW, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 120 AND $150 MILLION. BUT AT WHAT POINT CAN WE HAVE SOMETHING -- WORST-CASE SCENARIO YOU PUT IT ON THE SHELF AND WAIT A DAY OR WE JUST GO OUT FOR BIDS. TELL ME HOW THAT WORKS. >> SO IN OUR EXISTING CONTRACT WITH KIEWIT, WE HAVE ACTUALLY SIGNED A CONTRACT WITH THE DESIGN ENGINEER, WITH KIEWIT ENGINEERING SO THAT AT THE 60% GMP, IF WE OFF RAMP AT THAT POINT, WE HAVE A 60% DESIGN. WE WOULD NOT HAVE KIEWIT CONSTRUCTION BUILD IT BUT WE WOULD HAVE KIEWIT COMPLETE THE DESIGN AND THEN WE WOULD BUILD IT OUT ON THE STREET FOR A LOW-BID PRICE. >> Scott: IF WE GET TO 60%, WE STILL HAVE TO SPEND SOME MONEY TO FINISH THE DESIGN. IF WE DIDN'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE KIEWIT GMP. THERE WOULD AT LEAST BE A POINT WHERE WE COULD FINISH THE DESIGN, BID IT OUT, SHELVE IT. IS THAT A BIG JUMP FROM 60% TO 100%? >> NO, THE MAJORITY OF EFFORT IS TYPICALLY BETWEEN THAT 10 AND 60 BUT YOU DO HAVE A LOT OF WORK THAT GOES INTO THE 60 TO THE 100%. SO THERE IS SOME COST THERE. >> Scott: CAN SOMEBODY WALK ME THROUGH THE FINANCIAL IMPACT -- THAT MAY BE HEATHER, MAY BE YOU GUYS ON TERMINATING THE CONTRACT, YOU KNOW, AT THIS POINT. DID YOU CALL IT ALTERNATIVE 3? I THINK I WANT THE PUBLIC TO HEAR. JUST FOR THE RECORD, SOME OF US DIDN'T SIGN THAT AGREEMENT THAT GOT US TO THIS POINT BUT THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT. I WOULD LIKE SOMEBODY TO TALK THROUGH THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF US SAYING NO. >> HEATHER HURLBERT, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. SO AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THIS CITY HAS ISSUED OVER $200 MILLION IN DEBT IN BONDS. SO AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, FUNDING CANNOT BE USED FOR ANOTHER PROJECT AT ANOTHER LOCATION. AND SO THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS WITH TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. AND SO THAT MONEY MUST BE USED FOR THIS PROJECT. THOSE ARE 30-YEAR BONDS AND SO YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO PAY BACK THOSE BONDS UNTIL YEAR 10 WHEN THOSE BONDS ARE CALLABLE. WE WOULD HAVE TO CONTINUE PAYING INTEREST ON THOSE BONDS. THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT, A LITTLE OVER $70 MILLION, WOULD BE PAID TO OUR BONDHOLDERS ALONG WITH PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS, WHICH WOULD COME FROM THE MONEY WE WOULD HAVE ON HAND, TO BE ABLE TO PAY THAT THROUGH YEAR TEN. AT YEAR TEN THOSE BONDS CAN BE CALLED OR REFUNDED. AT THAT POINT INTEREST WOULD STOP BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO REPAY BACK BASICALLY 100% OF THAT PRINCIPAL BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE PROJECT, BASICALLY, THAT WE WERE GIVEN THE MONEY FOR. SO THERE IS THAT. NOW, I CAN'T SPEAK TO ANY TYPE OF PENALTIES FOR CANCELING THE CONTRACTS WE HAVE WITH FREESE AND NICHOLS OR WITH KIEWIT, BUT JUST ON THE BOND FINANCING SIDE THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL COST THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO INCUR WITHOUT AN ASSET OR A WATER SOURCE AT THE END. IN ADDITION, I.R.S. DOES REQUIRE -- WHAT'S CALLED SPEND-DOWN REQUIREMENTS. SO WHEN WE ISSUE DEBT -- AND THIS IS FOR ALL OF OUR DEBT -- WE SAY THAT WE REASONABLY EXPECT TO SPEND THAT DEBT WITHIN -- THE MAJORITY WITHIN THREE YEARS TO MAINTAIN OUR TAX-EXEMPT STATUS. IF THIS WAS NOT BEING SPENT OVER THAT PERIOD OF TIME, WE WOULD HAVE TO WORK TO RECLASSIFY THOSE BONDS FROM TAX EXEMPT TO TAXABLE, WHICH A LOT OF TIMES WHEN THAT HAPPENS THE ISSUER ACTUALLY TAKES ON THAT BURDEN INSTEAD OF PASSING THAT ON TO THE BONDHOLDERS. BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH OUR BONDHOLDERS AND TELL THEM THEIR INVESTMENT THEY INVESTED IN IS NO LONGER TAX EXEMPT. IT IS TAXABLE. A LOT OF TIMES THEY WOULD WORK OUT AN AGREEMENT WITH THE I.R.S. >> Scott: THE ISSUER IS? >> WE ISSUED BONDS. TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOUGHT OUR BONDS WITH MONEY THEY ISSUED ON THE STATE LEVEL. AND SO ACTUALLY WE HAVE TWO SETS OF BONDHOLDERS. IT'S NOT JUST US, NOT JUST PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT OUR BONDS -- ACTUALLY TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOUGHT OURS DEBATE BUT YOU HAVE BONDHOLDERS AT THE STATE OF TEXAS. >> Scott: I'M GOING TO MAKE THIS UP. LET'S SAY IT GOES TAXABLE AT 8%. IT'S 3% NOW, GOES TO 8%. WHO WOULD WE HAVE TO WRITE A CHECK TO, IF THAT HAPPENED? I GUESS THAT HAPPENS IF YOU'RE AUDITED, ALTHOUGH WE WOULD RECOGNIZE WE HAD VIOLATED -- >> EXACTLY. A LOT OF TIMES WHAT YOU DO IS WORK OUT A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE I.R.S. SO THE ISSUER WOULD PAY THAT DIFFERENCE, INSTEAD OF PASSING THAT ON TO YOUR BONDHOLDERS. >> Scott: WE PAY THAT TO THE I.R.S.? IF IT'S 3% AND WENT TO 6%, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE $72 MILLION IN INTEREST PAYMENTS WOULD GO TO 144 OR DOES IT NOT WORK THAT WAY? >> I CAN'T SPEAK EXACTLY HOW IT WOULD WORK. IT'S NOT DOLLAR PER DOLLAR BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES YOU'RE DOING A SETTLEMENT. >> Scott: IF YOU COULD RUN SOME NUMBERS, YOU NEED TO KNOW THE IMPLICATIONS OR THE RESULTS OF OUR ACTIONS. THAT AND THAT. OKAY. I GUESS THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. 30% IDA. OH, SO YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT -- YOU SAID $40 MILLION AND THEN YOU SAID IT COULD BE AS HIGH AS $80 MILLION THAT WE HAVE TO PAY OUT, IF WE STOPPED TODAY? >> NO. RIGHT NOW $40 MILLION WOULD BE THE TOTAL OWED. BUT WE DON'T KNOW YET BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T WORKED THROUGH, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN FINAL BILLING THROUGH JULY AND THERE'S OTHER COMMITMENTS THAT KIEWIT HAS MADE TO VENDORS THAT WE'VE GOT TO RECONCILE THOSE COMMITMENTS AND UNDERSTAND THOSE COSTS AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK. >> Scott: YOU SAID ANOTHER 40 BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> NO. RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST $40 MILLION. THAT'S THE PRINCIPAL THAT WE'RE ESTIMATING. >> Scott: THE FINANCIAL HIT WOULD BE 72.5 AND 40 OR $112.5 MILLION? >> 72.4 PLUS THE 40. >> Scott: GOT IT. FIRST OF ALL, YOU ARE NOT ALONE IN THE ABUSE. IT'S BEEN REALLY INTERESTING THE CONVERSATIONS I HAVE HAD WITH PHONE CALLS ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE THINK OF ME IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS. I ALWAYS JOKE, HEY, MY WIFE CALLED ME AN IDIOT WHEN I LEFT THE ROOM. I'M USED TO PEOPLE BEATING ME UP BUT YOU'RE NOT ALONE. IT'S BEEN A DIFFICULT COUPLE OF WEEKS. BUT WHAT I'VE HEARD IS INDUSTRY NEEDS TO PAY MORE. AND I THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE THE NEW INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENTS THAT ARE COMING ON BOARD IN THE MID 30s AND APPLY THAT TO THE WATER RATE. MY WISH IS THAT WE MOVE FORWARD, WHETHER IT'S 30% OR 60%. WE HAVE A LONG CONVERSATION ABOUT ALLOCATING INDUSTRY'S PAYMENTS THAT WE HAVEN'T ALLOTTED TO YET. AND PAY DOWN THE COST OF THE RATEPAYER. THAT'S MARK'S WISH IS THAT WE NOT STOP TODAY. I REALLY DON'T WANT TO OWE THE STATE $112 MILLION FOR A 10% DESIGN. WHETHER THIS GETS THE GMP AND YOU HAVE MARK'S VOTE, I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT. IF IT'S HIGHER TOMORROW THAN IT WAS TODAY, THAT IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM FOR ME. I THINK THIS IS A TIME FOR US TO BE ASPIRATIONAL. I THINK THE FOLKS THAT DID MARY RHODES PIPELINE WAS BRUTAL. I WAS A YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WHEN THAT ALL HAPPENED AND IT WAS A BRUTAL EXPERIENCE. AND THEY DID IT. BETWEEN THE CITY, THE PORT, AND THE RIVER AUTHORITY, THEY DID. IT IS CRAZY EXPENSIVE AND PEOPLE REMEMBER THESE ACTIONS FOR DECADES TO COME. >> Mayor Guajardo: I WOULD ADD TO THAT THAT I HAVE AN E-MAIL SITTING IN YOUR INBOX SINCE FRIDAY SAYING EXACTLY WHAT COUNCILMAN SCOTT JUST MENTIONED. YOU SENT US -- WE WERE SENT A -- KIND OF A LITTLE RUNDOWN OF WHAT THE FUND MONIES LOOK LIKE THAT ARE COMING FROM -- WAS IT THREE OR FOUR -- >> Zanoni: THREE BIG INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS. THREE. >> Mayor Guajardo: THREE OF THEM. AND MY SUGGESTION WAS EXACTLY WHAT THE COUNCILMAN JUST SAID. SO I THINK THAT'S -- IT'S RIGHTFUL. I DON'T THINK THOSE COMPANIES -- I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ISSUE WITH IT. BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK CAN BE DISCUSSED, PUTTING THOSE MONIES TOWARDS THIS PROJECT TO RELIEVE THE RATEPAYER. WERE YOU GOING TO SAY SOMETHING? >> Zanoni: WHY DON'T WE HAVE HEATHER -- WE DID RESPOND TO YOUR E-MAIL, MAYOR. WE'LL GIVE A QUICK SUMMARY OF WHAT COUNCILMAN SCOTT AND YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT SO THE FULL COUNCIL IS AWARE. THESE ARE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENTS THAT WERE NEGOTIATED SEPARATELY BUT, GO AHEAD. >> SO WE DO HAVE THREE INDUSTRIES THAT ARE IN SAN PAT. WE ENTERED INTO AGREEMENTS WITH THEM IN 2015, 2016, 2019. THEY ARE CHENIERE, GULF COAST VENTURES, AND [INDISCERNIBLE]. WE ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM TO DEFER ANY TYPE OF PAYMENTS FOR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENTS UNTIL TAX YEAR '31 OR FISCAL YEAR '32. THOSE WILL BE COMING ON. THOSE ARE LARGE, LARGE INVESTMENTS AND SO AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, BASED OFF OF OUR CURRENT TAX RATE AND ESTIMATED VALUES, IT WILL BE BRINGING IN ANOTHER $50 MILLION A YEAR ANNUALLY INTO THE GENERAL FUND THROUGH THE PILOT OR PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES THAT IS THROUGH OUR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENTS. AND SO WE HAVE BEEN EXPLORING HOW THAT FUNDING, YOU KNOW, ALL OR PART OF IT COULD BE USED TO OFFSET THESE COSTS OR BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE COST OF THE DESAL. SO WE ARE WORKING WITH OUR BOND COUNSEL, WORKING WITH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR BECAUSE THE UTILITIES ARE DESIGNED TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES THROUGH THEIR RATES. AND SO THIS WOULD BE ANOTHER SOURCE OF FUNDING THAT IS NOT BEING GENERATED THROUGH THE OPERATIONS OF THE RATES OR A FEE SPECIFICALLY TIED TO THE UTILITY. AND SO WE ARE LOOKING AT SOME OPTIONS, WORKING WITH SOME OTHER UTILITIES ACROSS THE STATE TO SEE HOW POSSIBLY THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH SOME OF THESE THINGS AND WE HOPE TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION BACK TO COUNCIL WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS. >> Zanoni: AND THAT NUMBER WAS 50 5-0? >> $50 MILLION, YES. IT RAMPS UP OVER THREE YEARS AND I THINK IN 2035 IT WILL BE AT 100% OF WHAT WOULD BE OWED THROUGH THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENT. >> Mayor Guajardo: GREAT. THANK YOU, HEATHER. COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ. >> Hernandez: THANK YOU, MAYOR. OKAY. WELL, LIKE COUNCILMAN SCOTT SAID, UNFORTUNATELY WE LOOK LIKE WE'RE PUNCHING BAGS HERE BECAUSE WE GET ALL SORTS OF NASTY COMMENTS ACCUSATIONS. IT HAPPENS. I THINK I'VE BECOME CALLOUS TO IT BUT IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THAT'S THE CASE. I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. AND THIS IS A QUESTION -- BECAUSE YOU HAD MENTIONED AND HEATHER HAD MENTIONED THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD IN TERMS OF HAVING TO BE SPECIFIC -- PROJECT-SPECIFIC. ARE YOU TELLING ME THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD WOULD BE SO RIGID THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE PLAN THAT COULD BE UTILIZED. IT'S IN THE PLAN SUCH AS YOUR GROUNDWATER PROJECTS ALONG THE NUECES RIVER, THAT WE COULDN'T REPURPOSE IT FOR THAT. IS IT SO RIGID THAT THEY WOULD COST US MONEY? >> Molly: I HAVE TALKED TO THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. WHEN WE APPLY FOR THESE PROJECTS THEY'RE PROJECT-SPECIFIC. WHEN WE APPLY FOR THEM, WE COMPETE AGAINST OTHER CITIES IN TEXAS. AND SO THERE'S AN EXPECTATION THAT THESE MONIES THAT, IF WE'RE FORTUNATE TO RECEIVE THESE MONIES, THESE MONIES ARE APPROPRIATED OR DESIGNATED BY THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD FOR THESE SPECIFIC PROJECTS. AND SO IN SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I'VE HAD WITH TWDB, THEIR TAKE IS THAT IF THIS PROJECT WERE TO CHANGE, THE MONEY THAT HASN'T BEEN SOLD IN BONDS THAT MS. HURLBERT WAS TALKING ABOUT, THOSE MONIES WOULD GO BACK TO THE STATE AND WE WOULD BASICALLY GET BACK INTO A COMPETITION TO COMPETE FOR THESE LOW-INTEREST FUNDS. >> Hernandez: I'M REFERRING TO THE FUNDING, THE MONEY WE'VE ALREADY BORROWED, THE 220-SOME MILLION DOLLARS THAT WE HAVE BORROWED ALREADY THAT WE HAVE NOT SPENT. THAT THEY WOULD BE SO RIGID AS TO NOT CONSIDER A MODIFICATION, YOU KNOW, WHEN CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE. THE DOUBLING OF A COST OF A PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT MAKES IT -- THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THEM AND BORROW MORE MONEY. IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR US TO REPURPOSE IT AS OPPOSED TO GOING AND ASKING FOR MORE MONEY, CORRECT? >> Molly: WELL, I CAN TELL YOU I HAVE ASKED THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD THE QUESTION ABOUT BONDS THAT HAVE BEEN SOLD AND THE QUESTION ABOUT HOW TO TAKE MONEY THAT HASN'T BEEN SOLD BUT THAT'S BEEN DESIGNATED FOR A SPECIFIC PROJECT. WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD IS THAT IT IS VERY, VERY UNLIKELY THAT YOU WOULD EVER TAKE MONEY THAT HAS BEEN SOLD BY A BOND INTO BONDS AND REPURPOSE THAT FOR OTHER USES. AND I THINK HEATHER COULD PROBABLY EXPLAIN THAT BETTER. >> SO ON THE BONDS THAT WE'VE ALREADY ISSUED, THOSE WERE ISSUED FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE FOR A SPECIFIC PROJECT. THAT'S NOT A TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD THING, NECESSARILY, THAT IS WITHIN OUR BOND LANGUAGE. WE ISSUE TO OUR BONDHOLDERS FOR SPECIFIC THINGS, SPECIFIC AMOUNTS. SO IT'S NOT AS EASY AS JUST SAYING I'M GOING TO TAKE IT OVER HERE AND PUT IT OVER HERE. IT WAS ISSUED SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT PROJECT. >> Hernandez: YOU'RE SAYING IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO MODIFY IT? >> I WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO BOND COUNSEL ON THAT BUT YOU DON'T NORMALLY MODIFY YOUR BOND LANGUAGE AFTER YOU SELL YOUR BONDS NO. >> Hernandez: SO WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THE OFF RAMPS THAT YOU DISCUSSED WERE NOT REALISTIC IF YOU CAN'T REDO ANYTHING. I MEAN, YOU HAVE OFF RAMPS DESIGNED INTO THE CONTRACT BUT YOU'RE SAYING FINANCIALLY WE HAVE NO OFF RAMP. >> Molly: YOU CAN DO AN OFF RAMP IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE PRICE AND YOU DON'T LIKE THE CONTRACTOR. SO IF YOU GET TO 60% AND THE PRICE IS NOT WHAT IS DESIRABLE, YOU CAN OFF RAMP AND YOU CAN HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE FINISH OUT THE DESIGN -- >> Hernandez: BUT YOU'RE EVEN FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD WITH MONEY YOU'VE ALREADY SPENT THAT YOU HAVE TO PAY BACK, RIGHT? >> Molly: CLEARLY IT'S NOT DESIRABLE. >> Hernandez: IT'S CLEARLY NOT BENEFICIAL. >> Molly: I THINK WHAT IT DOES IS IT OFFERS LESS DESIRABLE OPTIONS BUT YOU HAVE OPTIONS. THERE IS AN OPTION AT 60% WHERE YOU COULD OFF RAMP AND GO TO A HARD BID, DESIGN IT, GO TO A HARD BID, AND HAVE A HARD BID. LIKE WE TYPICALLY DO DESIGN, BID, BUILD PROJECTS ARE PROJECTS THAT THE CITY DOES LOTS OF. >> Hernandez: YES. I THINK WE HAVE A HISTORY OF THOSE PROJECTS BEING DOUBLED IN COST. OKAY. I WANTED TO ALSO TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, I SAW WHAT COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON HAD MENTIONED ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE COST IN YOUR PRESENTATION HERE OF HOW MUCH WE SPENT VERSUS YOUR ALTERNATIVE WATER MEMO THAT HAS A DIFFERENT AMOUNT. AND I GET YOUR EXPLANATION BUT THAT IS A LITTLE DISHEARTENING THAT WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT NUMBERS. THAT WE GET THIS MEMO EVERY MONTH OR EVERY WEEK AND IT HAS A DIFFERENT NUMBER THAN THIS PRESENTATION AS TO HOW MUCH MONEY WE HAVE SPENT AND HOW MUCH IS ENCUMBERED. >> COUNCILMAN, WHAT WE ARE PUTTING IN THE WEEKLY MEMO IS WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE THE ASK, WHICH IS TO REPORT HOW MUCH MONEY WAS BEING SPENT BY KIEWIT AND FREESE AND NICHOLS THROUGH THE PHASE 1, PHASE 2, PHASE 3. AND THAT'S HOW WE PRESENTED IT. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DIDN'T MEET THE MARK AND WE CAN MODIFY THAT AND PROVIDE MORE UPDATE. BUT THAT IS WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE THE ASK AND THAT'S WHAT WE PROVIDED. TODAY, THE NUMBER WE'RE PROVIDING IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE TOTAL COMMITMENTS TO DATE. >> Hernandez: OKAY. IN THE PRESENTATION YOU HAD GIVEN TO US PREVIOUSLY ABOUT SOME OTHER ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS, THOSE INITIAL COST PER 1,000 GALLONS WERE ROUGHLY HALF OF WHAT YOU PRESENTED WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. SO I THINK WE DO HAVE ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE EASIER TO DO AT HALF THE COST OR ROUGHLY CLOSE TO HALF THE COST OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS. >> Campos: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I THINK EVERYBODY HERE ON THE DAIS AND OUT HERE IN THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHERE MY STANCE HAS BEEN AND HAS BEEN CONSISTENT. BUT I WILL SAY THAT I HAVE ALSO BEEN RECEIVING E-MAILS BUT THE E-MAILS AND CALLS I HAVE BEEN RECEIVING ARE TO CONTINUE TO SAY NO TO THIS PROJECT. AND I KEEP -- I JUST RECENTLY JUST RECEIVED A TEXT REGARDING THE TCEQ WASTEWATER PERMIT THAT THEY JUST CHECKED NOW AND IT'S STILL NOT COMPLETE. SO, AGAIN, WE CONTINUE TO PROCEED AS IF WE HAVE EVERYTHING DONE, AND WE DON'T. I THINK THIS IS A TIME FOR THE OFF RAMP. YOU KNOW, I WAS LISTENING TO -- I DON'T KNOW. WE'RE AT $220 MILLION OR $46 MILLION. BUT THE POINT BEING -- AND THE OTHER ISSUE OR THE OTHER STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE ON THAT 380 AGREEMENT, ON THAT $55 MILLION, CAN YOU IMAGINE HAD THERE NOT BEEN A 380 AGREEMENT, HOW MUCH MORE TAXES WOULD HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FOR OUR COFFERS AND FOR THE WATER. BECAUSE THAT'S THE OTHER THING THAT HAPPENS. WE HAVE THIS DROUGHT EXEMPTION THAT CONTINUES TO LET INDUSTRY GO ON AS IF THERE IS NO DROUGHT GOING ON. THEY JUST USE, USE, USE, USE AND UNTIL WE GET IT THAT WE'RE ALL IN IT TOGETHER, THEN IT'S NEVER GOING TO STOP. SO I WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT OTHER PROJECTS, WHICH IT LOOKS LIKE AT LEAST TO SOME OF MY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, THEY HAVE INTRODUCED, AND THANK GOODNESS WE HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN SOME EMERGENCY WATER WELLS. WE ALSO JUST CAME FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION AND ANOTHER OPTION. SO, AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS OUR OFF RAMP. I THINK THIS IS A TIME TO STOP NOW AND THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, EITHER WE HAVE TO PAY THE 220 -- I MEAN, OR 1 POINT WHATEVER, $2 BILLION, IT JUST KEEPS GROWING. FOR ME IT'S VERY SIMPLE AND FOR ME I'M LOOKING OUT FOR THE WATER RATEPAYER. I REALLY AM. AND I AM LOOKING OUT FOR OUR HILLCREST NEIGHBORS THAT WE KEEP GOING AND DESTROYING THEIR LIVELIHOOD AND PRETENDING AS IF THEY DON'T EXIST AGAIN. THIS IS UNCONSCIONABLE. BUT, AGAIN, I WILL CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE AND TO CONTINUE TO SAY THIS IS STILL NOT EQUITABLE. WE HAVE PEOPLE SITTING HERE. WHEN IT IS AGAIN -- LAST TIME I THINK IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST PUBLIC ONE. THE FIRST PUBLIC DESALINATION PLANT. AND THERE'S A REASON WHY IT'S NOT DONE. BECAUSE IT'S THE MOST COSTLIEST WAY TO GET WATER. SO, AGAIN, WE JUST NEED TO STOP HERE. I'M READY TO EITHER VOTE NO OR TABLE. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON. >> Paxson: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE RATE MODELING FOR THE FIVE YEARS, THE SLIDE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP. >> Molly: RIGHT. >> Paxson: YEAH. THE ONE PREVIOUS. SO OUR BASE FORECAST HERE ADJUSTS VERY MINIMALLY OVER THOSE FIVE YEARS. IT DOES ADJUST BUT ALMOST NEGLIGIBLE. THE CIP AND WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACTS OF THE INNER HARBOR TREATMENT PLANT ARE THE DRIVERS FOR THE CHANGE. I BELIEVE ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES, WHEN WE PRESENTED LAST TIME, ASKED FOR INFORMATION ON A BREAKDOWN IN THAT CIP EXPENDITURE LIST OF WHICH HAD ALREADY GONE TO OR IS EARMARKED TO GO TO THIS TREATMENT PLANT. >> SO YOUR COLLEAGUE ASKED FOR A BREAKDOWN OF THE INFORMATION. THEY WERE IN THE OFFICE LAST WEEK AND WE GAVE THE BREAKDOWN. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT. >> Paxson: WHAT PERCENTAGE OF WHAT IS CLASSIFIED AS CIP HAS BEEN, WILL BE, AND IS EARMARKED TOWARDS INNER HARBOR? >> Molly: OKAY. SO BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE IN THE RATE MODEL WE HAVE TODAY, APPROXIMATELY -- IN 2028, 27% OF THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH OUR EXPENDITURES WILL BE BASED ON -- WILL BE ON THE CIP. WILL BE CIP EXPENDITURES. 8% WILL BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS NEW WATER SUPPLY. AND THE BALANCE OF THAT WILL BE BASE COST. THOSE ARE THE COSTS THAT IT COSTS US TO RUN THE BUSINESS OF WHAT WE DO. RUN THE UTILITY. RUN THE WATER DEPARTMENT. >> Paxson: SO 8% OF ORANGE IS INNER HARBOR. 100% OF GREEN IS INNER HARBOR. >> COUNCILWOMAN, WHAT DREW IS TELLING YOU, THE ORANGE REPRESENTS ALL CIP. THE GREEN IS ONLY DESAL. SO THERE'S NOTHING IN THE ORANGE IS DESALINATION. THAT'S NOT INNER HARBOR AT ALL. >> Paxson: NOTHING IN THAT LIST? >> Molly: THAT IS CORRECT. >> THAT REPRESENTS THE DEBT SERVICE AND THE OPERATING COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE RATE. >> SO THAT REPRESENTS $11.38 THAT WAS SHOWN. >> Paxson: THIS MUST HAVE BEEN A GOOD QUESTION. SUDDENLY EVERYBODY WANTED TO COME TO THE PODIUM. >> COUNCILWOMAN, I PROBABLY NEED TO APOLOGIZE. THAT SLIDE WAS MY BRAIN CHILD AND PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT TOO SIMPLE. WE WANTED TO SEGREGATE INNER HARBOR FROM EVERYTHING. ORANGE IS ACTUALLY OVERSIMPLIFIED. WE CALL IT CIP THERE BUT IT'S ALSO ALL OF THE INCREASE IN OPERATIONS FOR THE EXISTING SYSTEM. SO BLUE, WE CALL IT BASE BUT THAT'S JUST WHAT YOU'RE PAYING TODAY. THAT'S NOT BASE FOREVER, IT'S JUST WHAT YOU'RE PAYING TODAY RELATIVE TO CIP. BUT THE ORANGE ALSO INCLUDES INCREASES IN OPERATIONS OVER TIME. >> Paxson: AND SO THERE IS ZERO OPERATIONS, ZERO MAINTENANCE, ZERO CONSTRUCTION, ZERO CONVEYANCE, ZERO PROCUREMENTS, NOTHING RELATED TO INNER HARBOR IN CIP AS PRESENTED? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> Paxson: EVERYTHING IS IN THE GREEN? >> IT'S IN THE GREEN. >> Paxson: THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. I WOULD LIKE, ON THAT NOTE, WE DO APPROVE $100 MILLION FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE O.N. STEVENS TODAY. AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY. AS SOMEONE WHO HAS STUDIED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, AND LEADERSHIP FOR YEARS, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE INVEST IN CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE. AND I MADE A PROMISE TO DO THAT AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE DOING. I DON'T REGRET ■THAT. I'M NOT AFRAID OF THAT. THAT WAS $100 MILLION WELL SPENT. WE ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IF WE JEOPARDIZE THAT LOCATION SO I APPRECIATE Y'ALL PUTTING THAT ON THERE BUT I WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT AND WHY WE INVESTED IN THAT. THERE ISN'T ANOTHER O.N. STEVENS RIGHT NOW SO IT IS VERY CRITICAL THAT WE SUPPORT THAT PROJECT. TODAY WE HEARD A LOT OF INCREDIBLY PROMISING PROJECTS THAT ARE AT THE TABLE. STARTING IN FEBRUARY/MARCH WE ASKED EVERYONE TO COME TOGETHER AND LOOK AT THE OPTIONS. WE ASKED THE HARD QUESTIONS, WE STAYED UNTIL WAY TOO LATE TO TALK ABOUT THE HARD QUESTIONS AND THIS IS WHERE WE ARE TODAY. WE HAD A PRESENTATION EARLIER -- AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HEAR A LOT ABOUT IT LATER THE SAME INFORMATION. GREAT PROJECTS. TO ME, AS SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN HERE FOR SEVEN MONTHS, THE INFORMATION THAT I HAVE AT THIS POINT, IT'S NOT 100% THERE FOR ME. I SHARE THE CONCERNS OF SOME OF MY COUNCIL MEMBERS. I AM INCREDIBLY CONCERNED ABOUT $1.2 BILLION. I MADE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT. WHEN I WAS ASKED WHAT IS MY TAKE ON INNER HARBOR, I SAID IT'S GOT TO BE THERE ENVIRONMENTALLY AND IT'S NOT TO BE THERE FOR THE RATEPAYER. RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT THERE FOR THE RATEPAYER, THAT'S MY PROBLEM. WHEN WE CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT IT AND THERE'S THESE BIG INCONSISTENCY, WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND FIND WHERE IS THE DIFFERENCE HERE. I'M STRUGGLING WITH WHY WE HAVE TO KEEP CONNECTING THOSE DOTS. TO ME, AS THIS PERSON WHO HAS BEEN HERE SEVEN MONTHS AND EAGERLY AND EARNESTLY LOOKING FOR THE BEST SOLUTION FOR WATER, WE NEED MORE INFO. I'M TIRED OF EVERYONE SAYING THAT. WE HAVE STUDIED IT AD NAUSEAM, WE HAVE ASKED ABOUT IT AD NAUSEAM, THIS IS A BIG DECISION THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT US FOR DECADES AND WE'RE THE ONES WHO HAVE TO MAKE IT. IF WE NEED THAT INFORMATION, WE SHOULD BE AFFORDED THE ABILITY TO ASK IT. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE CONVERSATION OF COURSE ON THE FACT THAT IT'S ABOUT WATER. SO WHATEVER HAPPENS AT THE END OF THIS VOTE TODAY, IT IS NOT ANY PARTICULAR CAMPUS, ANY PARTICULAR PROJECT -- AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH DESALINATION. I THINK MOST OF OUR TOPICS ARE DESALINATION. ALMOST ANY OF THE PROJECTS. BUT THAT'S OUR GOAL. AND THE INFORMATION Y'ALL HELPED PRESENT TODAY SHOWED US THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT WATER OPPORTUNITY AND WE CANNOT FORGET WE NEED TO SECURE IT BEFORE DECEMBER OF 2026. THAT'S THE TAKEAWAY. THAT'S THE POINT. >> Mayor Guajardo: BEFORE I MOVE ON, I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY SOMETHING BY READING AN E-MAIL I RECEIVED THIS MORNING, TO SHARE WITH THE PUBLIC. THE COUNCIL HAS SEEN IT, I HOPE. AND THIS IS TO CLARIFY A PARTICULAR TOPIC THAT CONTINUES TO COME UP. DEAR MAYOR GUAJARDO, I'M WRITING TO CLARIFY THE LIMITATIONS SURROUNDING THE USE OF STATE WATER IMPLEMENTATION FUND FOR TEXAS, OR SWIFT FUNDS, AWARDED TO THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI FOR THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT. ALL SWIFT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE APPROVED BY THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD IS PROJECT-SPECIFIC. IN THIS CASE, THE FUNDS AWARDED TO THE CITY ARE EXPLICITLY DESIGNATED FOR THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT UNDER STATE LAW AND TWDB POLICY. THE AGENCY HAS LIMITED DISCRETION TO REALLOCATE PREVIOUSLY-COMMITTED FUNDS TO A DIFFERENT PROJECT, EVEN IF THAT PROJECT IS ALSO WATER RELATED. THE TWDB'S PROCESS FOR EVALUATING AND APPROVING PROJECTS INCLUDING RIGOROUS FINANCIAL VETTING AND TECHNICAL REVIEW IS CONSIDERED A NATIONAL MODEL. BECAUSE OF THIS STRONG REPUTATION, BOND INVESTORS ARE CONFIDENT IN THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD-BACKED PROJECTS AND CONSISTENTLY SUPPORT THEM. ANY CHANGE IN THE USE OF AWARDED FUNDS, PARTICULARLY A SHIFT FROM ONE APPROVED PROJECT TO ANOTHER WOULD LIKELY TRIGGER A FULL REEVALUATION PROCESS. THIS WOULD REQUIRE REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD, THE BOND REVIEW BOARD, AND THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. THESE ADDITIONAL STEPS INTRODUCE UNCERTAINTY AND POTENTIAL DELAYS ALTERING THE INTENDED USE OF THE FUNDS COULD COMPROMISE THE TRUST OF BOND INVESTORS AND JEOPARDIZE FUTURE FINANCING OPPORTUNITIES FOR BOTH THE CITY AND OTHER APPLICANTS STATEWIDE. STABILITY AND CONSISTENCY ARE CRITICAL IN MAINTAINING INVEST CONFIDENCE AND TWDB'S LIMITED DISCRETION IS DESIGNED TO UPHOLD THAT STANDARD. FOR THESE REASONS, REPURPOSING SWIFT FUNDS AWARDED TO THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT IS NOT FEASIBLE AND DISCOURAGED. PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO REACH OUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR WOULD LIKE FURTHER INFORMATION. SINCERELY, SENATOR JUAN CHUY HINOJOSA. I WANTED TO SHARE THAT LETTER BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT TOPIC. AND SO I WANTED THE PUBLIC TO HEAR THAT. FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, WE APPRECIATE HIM AND THE WORK HE'S DONE FOR THIS PROJECT. I ALSO WANT, DREW, AT SOME POINT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM GARVER. I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT -- AND I DO REALIZE THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS -- THERE ARE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT THEY WERE ELECTED THIS PAST ELECTION. THEY STARTED JANUARY OF THIS YEAR. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR MANY YEARS. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT I ALSO HAVE TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE SAYING I UNDERSTAND, IT'S AN EXPENSIVE PROJECT, YES. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT IT ISN'T. WELL, IT COULD GO UP. WELL, THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING THIS PROGRESSIVE DESIGN-BUILD. THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T GO WITH THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, DESIGN-BID-BUILD. BECAUSE WE ARE ABLE TO GUIDE THOSE EXPENSES. FROM CONTINUING TO GO UP WE ARE PART OF THAT PROCESS. BUT MY QUESTION IS AS COMPARED TO WHAT? THIS IS THE PROJECT THAT IS THE CLOSEST TO BEING FINISHED, THE CLOSEST TO BEING ACCOMPLISHED. WE CAN DRILL WELLS ALL DAY. WE'VE GOT SOME THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT WITH WELLS. AND IF YOU'RE NOT AWARE, JUST GO PULL UP CODY HARRIS AND GO LOOK AT THE BILLS THAT GUY IS ABOUT TO THROW IN FRONT OF THE GOVERNOR, AND WORK TOWARDS MAKING THE GOVERNOR'S CALL INCLUDE THOSE BILLS. THEY HAVE EVERYTHING TO DO WITH CROSSING BOUNDARIES OF WATER FROM ONE COUNTY TO THE NEXT AND HOW MUCH YOU CAN TAKE. AND I PROMISE YOU A LOT OF PEOPLE SITTING IN THIS ROOM WILL BE RIGHT HERE SAYING Y'ALL BETTER STOP DRILLING THOSE WELLS BECAUSE YOU'RE MESSING UP SOMEBODY ELSE'S BACKYARD. THERE'S NO PERFECT PROCESS HERE. AND THIS PROCESS START A LONG TIME AGO. I RESPECT MY COLLEAGUES. I TOTALLY RESPECT YOUR STANCE ON IT, BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO PUT MYSELF IN YOUR POSITION. IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. AND I HAVE VOICED THAT TO MOST OF YOU. BUT WHAT IS THE SOLUTION? WHAT IS THE SOLUTION? LET'S NOT DO DESAL, LET'S DO WHAT INSTEAD OF RUNNING OUT OF WATER? SMALL BUSINESSES ARE EVERYTHING. I WAS ONE. BUT THEY'RE ALL GOING TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS IF WE DON'T PROVIDE A TRUE VISION -- I KNOW IT'S EXPENSIVE AND I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT. AND, YES, RATES ARE GOING TO GO UP. BUT WE AREN'T THE ONLY ONES. THE ENTIRE STATE OF TEXAS IS DEALING WITH THIS. SO, AGAIN, I KNOW THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT -- IT'S A DIFFICULT SUBJECT. IT IS A DIFFICULT POSITION FOR ALL OF US TO BE IN IF YOU HAVE BEEN HERE IN WHATEVER STAGE OF THIS PROCESS. BUT I APPRECIATE THIS DIALOGUE THAT WE'RE HAVING. COUNCILMAN BARRERA. >> Barrera: THANK YOU, MAYOR. YOU KNOW, WITH REGARD TO THE STATEMENTS MADE TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL, I'VE BEEN CALLED AN INDUSTRY SELLOUT, A LIAR. LAST WEEK I WAS CALLED A DOG. LAST WEEK -- WHAT IS IT? A CAREER POLITICIAN, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS MY SEVENTH YEAR -- I GUESS YOU COULD SAY THAT'S A CAREER POLITICIAN. WHICH IS OKAY. I DON'T MIND. IN FACT, I THINK A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO IT WAS RUMORED THAT I WAS GOING TO BE INDICTED. I GOT A BUNCH OF HATEFUL TEXTS. YOU'RE NEXT. I READ THE INDICTMENT. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT CAME ABOUT. SO, YOU KNOW, THOSE THINGS ARE SAID. AND I SIGNED UP FOR THAT SO I DON'T MIND. I JUST WANT TO CLEAR THE AIR FOR MY FRIENDS AT THE UNITED CHAMBER, THIS IS WHAT WAS SENT OUT. I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 3. TOMORROW CITY COUNCIL WILL TAKE THE NEXT STEP IN BUILDING THE INNER HARBOR FACILITY WHICH WILL HELP SECURE CORPUS CHRISTI'S LONG-TERM WATER FUTURE. THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT VOTES OUR CITY HAS FACED. PLEASE CALL YOUR COUNCILMAN AND TELL HIM YOU SUPPORT THE INNER HARBOR DESAL FACILITY AND VOTE YES TO THIS CRUCIAL PROJECT. NOW, I WISH THAT THE HATE TEXTS THAT I GOT WERE LIKE THAT BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S THE THING. I THINK THAT'S A POSITIVE THING AND I HAVE GOTTEN TONS OF E-MAILS. VOTE NO, VOTE YES. WE SUPPORT YOU. YOU HEAR THEM ALL OVER THE PLACE. I HOPE THE CHAMBER IS NOT MISCHARACTERIZED BECAUSE THEY'RE MAKING A STATEMENT OF WHAT THEIR MEMBERSHIP SUPPORTS AND THEY'RE URGING THE COUNCIL MEMBER TO MOVE FORWARD TO SUPPORT THAT SAME THING. NOW, SOMETHING WAS SAID ABOUT PEOPLE ON A FIXED INCOME. IF SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW -- I THINK IN MY HOUSE WE ONLY USE ABOUT 3,000 GALLONS. THERE'S ONLY THREE OF US AND ONE OF US IS MY 92-YEAR-OLD MOTHER. HOW MUCH WOULD MY BILL GO UP? WHAT'S THE BASE? THE BASE IS 2,000 GALLONS? >> RIGHT. WHAT IS IT? >> Barrera: YEAH. BUT THERE'S A RATE SPECIFICALLY FOR SOMEBODY -- IT'S CALCULATED BASED ON THE AVERAGE USER. >> NO. THIS WOULD BE APPLIED TO THE WATER RATE. EVERY USER, REGARDLESS IF YOU ARE LARGE VOLUME OR IF YOU'RE GRANDMA, PAYS PER THOUSAND GALLONS A SET RATE. SO THAT IMPACT IS $11.38 DIVIDED BY 6. SO GIVE ME ONE SECOND. 11.38 -- $1.89. A THOUSAND GALLONS WOULD BE $1.89. >> Barrera: I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S CLEAR. NOW, I MAY BE OVER SIMPLISTIC ON SOMETHING BUT THE NUMBERS THAT WE'VE BEEN RECEIVING ON A WEEKLY BASIS IS -- I MEAN, THE THING IS THE NUMBERS I SAW THROUGH JUNE WAS $21 MILLION. RIGHT? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S NOT -- AND THE NUMBERS THAT YOU HAVE ARE PROJECT UP TO DATE OR WHAT WE HAVE BUILT OUT THROUGH PART OF JULY. THAT'S 29.5. I THINK THAT'S -- I'M ASKING IF THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. >> SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WHAT I'VE GIVEN YOU GUYS, THE $21 MILLION IS FREESE AND NICHOLS' $3.5 MILLION FROM DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR THROUGH JUNE. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE 17 FOR KIEWIT FROM DECEMBER TO JUNE. AND THEN THE ADDITIONAL MONIES TO TAKE IT TO THE 29 IS ABOUT $8.5 MILLION THAT WE'VE PAID FREESE AND NICHOLS FOR PRIOR EFFORTS. >> Barrera: OKAY. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. AND THEN TOTAL ENCUMBERED, THAT'S THROUGH THIS PROCESS, IS $47 MILLION. >> FOR KIEWIT, FOR ALL OF PHASE 1 TO DATE. >> Barrera: THAT'S WHAT I ALWAYS THOUGHT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE CAME TO THAT. SO ANOTHER THING IS -- I MEAN, THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE OFF RAMP, WE WERE TOLD IF WE OFF RAMP, THE OFF RAMP IS NOT NECESSARILY SAYING WE'RE GOING TO ABANDON THE PROJECT. THE OFF RAMP WAS WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT ANOTHER SOLUTION TO CONTINUE DESALINATION. DESALINIZATION. I HATE WHEN PEOPLE SAY THAT. YOU KNOW, OTHER COMMENTS WERE YOU NEVER CALL ME. I MEAN, MY STAFF -- THE STAFF LIAISON FOR ME, I GET AN E-MAIL OR A TEXT THAT SAYS THE WATER -- CCW WANTS TO MEET WITH YOU AND THESE TIMES ARE AVAILABLE. FRIDAY THIS TIME, SATURDAY, EVEN SUNDAY AND ON >> Barrera: AM I THE ONLY ONE THAT'S GETTING THAT? >> NO, IT'S OFFERED TO ALL THE COUNCILMEMBERS WHENEVER WE DO MEETINGS AHEAD OF COUNCIL OR PRESENTATION. >> Barrera: BECAUSE I'VE BEEN TO THREE OF THEM. EVERY ONE OF THOSE THREE MEETINGS HAVE BEEN OFFERED TO EVERY COUNCILMEMBER. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> Barrera: SO THERE'S NO EXCLUSIVITY THERE. GOOD GOOD GOOD. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT, EVERY COUNCILMEMBER HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE BRIEF. NOW, THEY CAN ELECT NOT TO. I'M JUST CURE ROWTION, WHO DID YOU MEET WITH ON THIS LAST ONE? >> FOR TODAY, I MET WITH YOURSELF, I MET WITH -- I'M LOSING MY MIND HERE, COUNCILMAN ROY AND THE MAYOR. >> Barrera: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YEAH, MARK, WHERE WERE YOU? >> Scott: I WAS OUT OF TOWN. >> Barrera: OKAY. SO ANOTHER THING HAS BEEN THE GOVERNMENT -- THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T MANAGE THIS. THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T MANAGE THIS. AND SO KIEWIT DOES A LOT OF PRIVATE SECTOR STUFF. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS, DOES KIEWIT HAVE A DIFFERENT SET OF RULES FOR PRIVATE SECTOR VERSUS PUBLIC SECTOR? >> NO. I MEAN, THEY'RE GOING TO DO THEIR ABSOLUTE BEST WORKING WITH US AND ANY PARTNER. I MEAN, THEY'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THE BEST QUALITY. >> Barrera: AND FULL DISCLOSURE, MY SON USED TO WORK FOR SHELL. WORKED ON TWO OFFSHORE RIGS OF WHICH THEY WERE BOTH KIEWIT ONES. WE USED TO JOKE ABOUT PERDIDO, SAID IT WAS LOST. AND THAT WAS THE THING HE SAID, VERY EFFICIENT, THAT'S THE WHOLE THING. BECAUSE HE WOULD SAY THE FURTHER BEHIND THEY GET, THE MORE REVENUE THAT WE LOSE. AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I JUST WANT TO -- I WANT TO BRING UP. SO WE DON'T SEE ANYTHING THERE. WHAT -- ANY IDEA -- I MEAN, HAVE WE TALKED TO OUR FINANCIAL ADVISERS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN -- TO OUR BOND RATING? WE'VE IMPROVED OUR BOND RATING, WHAT, THREE TIMES IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS? >> Zanoni: THAT'S CORRECT. GENERAL AND REVENUE BONDS HAVE INCREASED THREE TIMES IN THE LAST SIX YEARS. INCREASED. >> Barrera: HAVE WE LOOKED AT THAT? >> Hulbert: WE CAN'T SPEAK EXACTLY TO WHAT THE RATING AGENCIES DO, BUT PART OF IT IS WHAT MANAGEMENT'S WILLINGNESS TO MAKE DECISIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE UTILITY, SO THAT DOES PLAY INTO OUR RATING. IN ADDITION, IT COULD NOT ONLY AFFECT OUR BOND RATING, BUT IT ALSO COULD AFFECT BOND RATINGS OF OTHER ENTITIES THAT RECEIVE WATER FROM US. SO OUR FINANCIAL ADVISER IS ADVISING FINANCIAL ADVISER FOR OTHER CITIES IN THE AREA, AND SO PART OF THEIR DISCLOSURE THAT THEY PROVIDE TO THE RATING AGENCIES IS THE FACT THAT THEY ARE DEPENDING UPON OUR PROJECT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE WATER TOO. AND SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS A ELE TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT THAT COULD AFFECTS OUR BOS. >> Barrera: OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO IN YOUR COST ASSOCIATED, DID YOU INCLUDE THE COST OF EASEMENTS AND AEP SUBSTATION OR ANY REAL ESTATE THAT WE'VE ALREADY ENCUMBERED THAT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO GET RID OF. >> THE AEP, WE'VE COMMITTED 3.5 MILLION TO DATE. RIGHT NOW I WOULD SAY THAT'S IN THE 40 MILLION. WE HAVE NOT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE SPENT SOME MONEY ON THAT WITH CONSULTANTS, BUT WE HAVE NOT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. >> Barrera: OKAY. LET'S SEE. YOU KNOW, YESTERDAY I HAD A VERY PLEASANT CONVERSATION -- I HOPE I HAVE ENOUGH TIME, WITH COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHN. SHE DID SAY I WAS BEING A BUTT THOUGH. (LAUGHING) BUT HER BIGGEST CONCERN IS COST, AND I'M GOING TO COME BACK IN ANOTHER FIVE MINUTES JUST TO ASK, WHAT CAN WE DO TO EASE HER CONCERNS? I WANT YOU TO REALLY THINK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE THING THEY I'M GOING TO ADDRESS BECAUSE SHE TOLD ME, SHE'S GOOD WITH THE SCIENCE. SHE'S AS GOOD AS SHE'S GOING TO GET, LET'S JUST SAY THAT. I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR HER. SO WHAT I'M GOING -- I WANT TO ASK IS THAT WHAT CAN WE DO TO EASE HER FRAME OF MIND SO THAT WAY SHE'S COMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE BEING GOOD STEWARDS OF THIS $1.89 THAT IT'S GOING TO COST PER $1,000. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. COUNCILMAN CANTU, WE HAVE A MINUTE. YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL -- WE'VE GOT -- EXCUSE ME GO INTO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK. WE CAN START WITH YOU. OKAY. SO GENTLEMEN, I'M GOING TO ASK Y'ALL TO HOLD OFF SO OUR 5:30 GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT WE HANDLE SIGNATURE MATTERS HANDLING TAXPAYER DOLLARS MAKING IT IMPERATIVE WE UPHOLD THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF DECORUM. OUR CORE PURPOSE IS TRANSPARENCY AND INCLUSIVENESS GUIDE OUR ACTIONS. OUR POLICY WHICH HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 30 YEARS. PUBLIC COMMENT SERVES AS ONE AVENUE OF COMMUNICATION. IT'S NOT THE SOLE METHOD, YOU CAN REACH US BY PHONE, E-MAIL OR SCHEDULING AN IN-PERSON APPOINTMENT. WITH THAT, LET'S PROCEED TO OUR PUBLIC COMMENT KEEPING IN MIND THE IMPORTANCE OF DECORUM. BEFORE WE BEGIN TODAY'S MEETING I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO ADDRESS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. THE COUNCIL CHAMBER IS A PLACE OF PUBLIC BUSINESS, DECISION-MAKING 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 SHOWING PLAY TANT DISRESPECT FOR THE RULES THATG GOVERN OUR PROCEEDINGS. I'VE BEEN MORE THAN PATIENT, I WILL CONTINUE TO WELCOME RESPECTFUL DISAGREEMENT, BUT I WILL NOT ALLOW THIS COUNCIL OR THE PUBLIC WE SERVE TO BE DISRESPECTED. SO WE'RE HERE DO THE PEOPLE'S WORK NOW, LET'S PROCEED TO DOING THAT IN GOOD SPIRIT. SO WITH THAT, WE DO HAVE -- IS IT THREE HOURS, REBECCA? >> City Secretary: ABOUT 55 PEOPLE SIGNED UP, MA'AM, SO IT'S ABOUT ALMOST THREE HOURS IN PUBLIC COMMENT IF EVERYBODY GOES FOR THREE MINUTES. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND WE WILL START WITH MR. CHRIS HAMILTON. >> HELLO AGAIN, EVERYBODY. CHRIS HAMILTON, DISTRICT 2, CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. MAYOR, COUNCIL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DID YOU KNOW THAT 70 TO 90% OF GROUNDWATER ENDS UP IN THE OCEAN? 70 TO 90% OF IT. THAT'S WHY RAINFALL ALONE ISN'T RECHARGING OUR AQUIFERS, RESERVOIRS AND LAKES. WE'RE EXTRACTING IT FASTER THAN NATURE CAN RESTORE IT. MOST OF IT'S LOST DOWNSTREAM. WHAT'S THE SOLUTION? DESALINATION. THE TWO MAIN OBJECTIONS? BRINE DISCHARGE AND COST. AND RIGHTFULLY SO, THOSE ARE THE CONCERNS WE'VE STUDIED THE MOST AND WE'VE ADDRESSED THEM. BRINE HANDLED, ENGINEERING SCIENCE HAVE RESOLVED THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE EVERY PERMIT FROM THE TCEQ, THE EPA AND THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. NO ONE GETS THOSE WITHOUT PROOF. WE HAVE THEM. COST YES. IT'S SIGNIFICANT. BUT WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IS ALWAYS EXPENSIVE. HOW MUCH WAS THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE? DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER? AND COSTS ARE ONLY GOING UP. CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS LABOR, THEY WON'T BE CHEAPER NEXT YEAR, NOR THE YEAR AFTER. AND OUR NEED FOR WATER ISN'T GOING AWAY. IN FACT, IT'S INCREASING. COMMITTING TO THIS KIND OF PROJECT TAKES COURAGE, AND I APPRECIATE THE CAREFUL DISCUSSION, LIVELY DISCUSSION AT TIMES, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NET EFFECT ON THE RESIDENTIAL RATEPAYER, IT'S REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TO SECURE THE RELIABLE INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THE BEST PART, IN 30 YEARS, IT'S PAID OFF. WE OWN IT. WE OWN THE ASSET. IT'S OURS. AND IT'S DROUGHT-PROOF. I URGE THIS COUNCIL, HAVE THE COURAGE TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD. LET CORPUS CHRISTI LEAD, GROW AND SECURE ITS FUTURE WITH WATER. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. HAMILTON. ELIDA VASQUEZ. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS ELIDA VASQUEZ, I LIVE IN CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS. I ASK YOU TO VOTE NO AGAINST SPENDING AN ADDITIONAL 50 MILLION FOR THE DESIGN OF THE INNER HARBOR DESAL PLANT. ONE, BECAUSE WE ARE IN A $7 MILLION DEFICIT, AND TWO, BECAUSE THIS PLANT IS NOT NECESSARY. IT IS INEFFICIENT AND WILL ONLY SERVE TO POLLUTE THE BAY EVEN MORE. WHILE WE ARE STILL DEALING WITH THE DAMAGE THAT HAS BEEN DEALT BY OIL SPILLS AND OTHER INDUSTRIAL WASTE. DESALINATION HAS THE POTENTIAL TO INCREASE FOSSIL FUEL DEPENDENCE. INCREASE GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND EXACERBATE CLIMATE CHANGE IF RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES ARE NOT USED FOR FRESH WATER PRODUCTION. DESALINATION INTAKES ARE A HUGE THREAT TO MARINE LIFE. THE CONTROL BOARD ESTIMATES PLANTS USED IN CALIFORNIA KILL 70 BILLION FISH LARVAE AND OTHER MARINE LIFE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. BRINE WASTE ALSO POSES A THREAT TO MARINE LIFE AND WATER QUALITY AS IT CONTAINS DANGEROUSLY HIGH CONCENTRATIONS OF SALT AND OTHER MINERALS. BRINE WASTE CAN ACCUMULATE IN AND AROUND DISPOSAL AREAS SMOTHERING BOTTOM-DWELLING SPECIES. THE AVERAGE PRICE PER ACRE FOOT OF DESALINATED WATER IS TWO TO FOUR TIMES MORE EXPENSIVE THAN OTHER WATER SOURCES. OCEAN DESALINATION IS NOT EFFICIENT. IT REQUIRES ROUGHLY 2-GALLONS OF OCEAN WATER FOR EVERY GALLON OF FRESH WATER PRODUCED. ALSO WITH AS MUCH MONEY AS THEY'VE BEEN GIVEN, THEY ONLY HAVE A 10% DESIGN? THIS MEANS ONE LARGE DESALINATION FACILITY IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PROBLEMS. DESALINATION'S ENERGY INTENSIVE PROCESS IS A MONEY FUNNEL ENVIRONMENTALLY HARMFUL AND IT IS NOT THE SOLUTION FOR CORPUS CHRISTI. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MRS. VASQUEZ. ROBERT LANDEG. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, MAYOR. ROBERT LANDEG, DISTRICT FIVE, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS. SO LOTS OF DISCUSSION ON COST TODAY. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. THE PROJECT IS SUPER EXPENSIVE. WHAT I WANT TO DRAW EMPHASIS, TOO, THOUGH, IS THE COST IF WE DON'T DO THIS. ALMOST EVERYBODY I KNOW, MY FRIENDS, NEIGHBORS, PEOPLE I GO TO CHURCH WITH, PEOPLE I RUN INTO AT H-E-B, ARE PART OF THE INDUSTRY THAT IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF THIS ECONOMY. IF WE DO NOT DO SOMETHING, ALL OF THAT IS AT STAKE. THERE IS A FREIGHT TRAIN HEADED TOWARDS US CALLED CURTAILMENT AND IT'S VERY, VERY REAL. WE SEEM TO BE CONTENT, AT LEAST SOME OF US, TO JUST CONTINUE TO WATCH THAT HAPPEN. AS A PROFESSIONAL, I'M -- I WORK IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT. I HAVE ABOUT 20 YEARS' EXPERIENCE IN THAT. AND SO I KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT. I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN DESAL OR THE CITY ISSUES, THERE'S AN OLD PROJECT MANAGEMENT ADAGE THAT SAYS CHEAP, FAST AND GOOD, PICK 2. SO CHEAP, FAST AND GOOD. WE NEED GOOD. THIS PLANT HAS GOT TO WORK, WE'VE GOT TO BUILD IT SAFELY, IT'S GOT TO BE ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE. SO GOOD IS NOT AN OPTION. IT HAS TO BE GOOD. THAT LEAVES US WITH CHEAP AND FAST. THE TIME TO BUILD THIS CHEAPLY WAS FIVE, 10 YEARS AGO WHEN THIS WAS TALKED ABOUT FOR DECADES. AND WE DID NOTHING AND SAT ON IT FOREVER AND WATCHED THE FREIGHT TRAIN JUST COME A LITTLE BIT CLOSER. I GET IT THAT IT'S EXPENSIVE. $1.2BILLION, THAT'S A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TAXPAYER FUNDS. THE DECISION IN FRONT OF US, THOUGH, RIGHT NOW IS TO WHETHER TO CONTINUE TO PROGRESS OR NOT. YOU'RE NOT DECIDING ON 1.2 BILLION. IT'S THE 50 MILLION, WE INVESTED ANOTHER HUNDRED MILLION INTO THE OWENS STEVENS, AND THAT'S A GOOD INVESTMENT, WE'VE GOT TO DO THAT. BUT THAT 50 MILLION IN FRONT OF US NOW, WE'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME AND BE ABLE TO SEE WITH THAT 50 MILLION CONTINUE TO PROGRESS THIS. YES, CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR THE OTHER PROBLEMS, EVEN 30 MGD, THAT'S NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE WHOLE THING. WE NEED ALL OF THE SOLUTIONS, WE HAVE TO HAVE ALL OF THEM. THIS CURTAILMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, WILL COME IF WE DON'T SOLVE THIS IS VERY REAL. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SLOWDOWNS, POSSIBLE SHUTDOWNS, FUTURE INVESTMENTS KUTD, PEOPLE MOVING AWAY FROM HERE, YOUR HOME VALUES FALLING, PEOPLE STOP GOING OUT TO EAT, PEOPLE STOP GOING TO RESTAURANTS, PEOPLE STOP SHOPPING. THAT IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF OUR ECONOMY. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO PLAY A GAME WITH THAT. THIS FREIGHT TRAIN IS HEADED TOWARDS US. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DO THAT. SO COST IS IMPORTANT, BUT LET'S NOT LOSE FOCUS OF THE COST IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. LANDEG. KERRY MEYER. >> GOOD EVENING, CITY COUNCIL. KERRY MEYER, DISTRICT ONE. AGENDA ITEM 16, THERE'S AN OLD SAYING IF YOU FIND YOURSELF IN A HOLE, STOP DIGGING. VOTE FOR ALTERNATE 2 TODAY AND CUT YOUR LOSSES. GET OUT. BEGIN THE PROCESS OF WALKING AWAY. IF DESAL WERE EASY AND A GOOD DEAL FOR THE RATEPAYERS, IF IT WERE AFFORDABLE AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SAFE, IF THAT WERE TRUE, WHY AREN'T THERE DESALINATION PLANTS ALL UP AND DOWN THE COAST? WHY ARE WE THE GUINEA PIGS? THIS INNER HARBOR PLANT HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN EXPERIMENT BASED ON MODELING, MODELING PREPARED BY SCIENTISTS PAID BY THE PEOPLE WHO WANT THIS PLANT TO HAPPEN AND WANT IT TO WORK. THIS PLANT IS NOT BEING PUSHED BY THE PEOPLE. THE INDIVIDUAL RATEPAYERS, YET WE'RE THE ONES HAVING TO PAY FOR IT. THIS WATER CRISIS STARTED WHEN OUR CITY COUNCIL AGREED TO SELL OUR CITIZENS WATER TO PLANTS LIKE EXXON SABEK, BACK BEFORE THEY BROKE GROUND EVEN, NOW THAT PLANT IS ONE OF THE LARGEST VOLUME USERS IN THIS AREA AND MORE PLANTEDS FOLLOWED. -- PLANTS FOLLOWED. WE'VE HAD DROUGHTS BEFORE, WE'VE GOT THROUGH THEM AND IT RAINED AGAIN. TODAY WE'RE IN STAGE III BECAUSE OUR COUNCIL BACK THEN OVEREXTENDED OUR WATER SUPPLY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT NEW GIANT INDUSTRIAL USER, PLUS OTHERS. I'M A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, I OWN A NATURE TOURISM COMPANY THAT RELIES ON A HEALTHY BAY FILLED WITH FISH AND BIRDS AND DOLPHINS. IF MY CUSTOMERS COULDN'T SWIM OR KAYAK IN THE BAY, MY BUSINESS WOULD CLOSE. HOW MANY TOURISM-BASED BUSINESSES WOULD BE AFFECTED IF OUR BAY IS AFFECTED? I LIVE AND WORK ON NORTH BEACH. I GOT HERE TODAY BY DRIVING ON THE BRAND-NEW $1.3 MILLION HARBOR BRIDGE. IT TOOK A HUGE INVESTMENT BY THE STATE AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO BUILD THAT. WE CAN LOOK AT IT NOW AND STAND IN AWE AT WHAT YOU CAN BUILD WITH $1.3 BILLION. NOW THE INNER HARBOR PLANT IS ESTIMATED TO COST ALMOST THE SAME AS THE ENTIRE HARBOR BRIDGE. AND THE STATE AND THE FEDS AREN'T POE POE A BONIING UP FOR DESAL, OTHER THAN THE LOANS. NOW WE HAVE ALTERNATE WATER RESOURCES AND THE PROPOSED HIGH LAND HARBOR PLANT THAT WILL PIPE THE BRINE OUT INTO THE GULF WHICH IS WAY BETTER FOR THE BAY. GETTING BACK TO THE HOLE THAT WE'RE IN, THIS COUNCIL DIDN'T DIG THIS HOLE. THAT WAS ANOTHER COUNCIL YEARS AGO. THEY DUG THIS HOLE. I'M ASKING YOU STOP DIGGING. VOTE FOR ALTERNATE 2 TODAY AND START TURNING THE TIDE TOWARDS A BETTER PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MRS. MEYER. SARAH TINDLE, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE BRAD BART L SON, ADAM RIOS, ELAINA MARTINEZ. . >> GOOD AFTERNOON, SARAH TINDLE DISTRICT 2. I'M HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT THE INNER HARBOR DESALINATION PLANT REPRESENTING THE CORPUS CHRISTI REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. SINCE 2010 -- I KNOW YOU'RE TIRED OF HEARING THIS NUMBER, $57 BILLION OF NEW INVESTMENTS HAS FOUND ITS WAY TO OUR CORNER OF THIS WORLD. THIS REPRESENTS DOZENS OF COMPANIES SPENDING ALL THAT CAPITAL WHILE EMPLOYING THOUSANDS OF OUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS WHICH IS A FANTASTIC TRACK RECORD FOR ANY REGION AND IT'S ONE THAT WE SHOULD BE PROUD OF. OVER THAT SAME PERIOD OF TIME, OUR AIR QUALITY HAS DRASTICALLY IMPROVED. WE'RE ONE OF THE VERY FEW INDUSTRIALIZED AREAS IN AMERICA STILL IN ATTAINMENT. THIS IS DUE TO OUR LOCAL LEGACY INDUSTRY KEEPING OUR AIR SAFE AND OUR BEACHES AND BAYS CONTINUE TO SUPPORT WORLD CLASS FISHING, SAILING AND WIND SURFING, WHILE PROVIDING THE BEST QUALITY SHRIMP AND RESTOYSTERS TO OUR RESTAURANTS. A GOOD OUR CEO MIKE CULBERTSON HAS BEEN PART OF THE GROUP THAT REPRESENTS INDUSTRY, THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND SAN PATRICIO WATER FOR ABOUT 10 YEARS NOW, STUDYING NEW WATER SOURCES FOR OUR AREA. THE FINDINGS OF THAT GROUP AND THE MANY EXPERTS WHO HAVE STUDIED THIS ISSUE SINCE HAVE SUPPORTED SEAWATER DESALINATION AS THE BEST SOLUTION FOR OUR AREA. TODAY, YOU, OUR CIVIC LEADERS, WILL TAKE ANOTHER STEP ON THIS ROAD TO PROGRESS TO ENABLE OUR REGION TO CONTINUE TO WELCOME NEW INVESTMENTS WHILE AT THE SAME TIME KEEPING THE SPARKLING CITY BY THE SEA THE CROWN JEWEL OF TEXAS THROUGH YOUR PERSISTENCE, DILIGENCE AND THE CAREFUL CONSIDERATION THAT YOU HAVE MADE OF THIS DECISION THROUGHOUT THE DECADE-LONG PROCESS OF BRINGING THIS PROJECT TO FRUITION. ALL THESE COMPANIES OVER OUR LONG HISTORIES OF A CITY WHO HAVE INVESTED HERE BELIEVED ENOUGH IN OUR FUTURE TO INVEST THEMSELVES IN OUR REGION. ALL THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE MOVED HERE WITH THEIR FAMILIES TO WORK IN OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES BELIEVED IN OUR FUTURE, AND THAT'S WHY THEY MOVED HERE AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE. AGAIN, IT IS NOW TIME FOR US TO INVEST IN OURSELVES WITH A DROUGHT-FREE SECURE WATER SOURCE THAT SETS US UP FOR SUCCESS NOW AND FOR DECADES TO COME. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MRS. TINDLE. BRAD BARTLESON. >> PRESENTATION FOR YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. >> I JUST WANT TO SAY, YOU FOLKS ARE VERY INTELLIGENT. I'M VERY IMPRESSED WITH -- AS I'VE GOTTEN TO KNOW AND HEAR YOU FOLKS. SO GLAD TO HAVE YOU ON BOARD. I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR REEVALUATION. >> City Secretary: CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY, SIR. >> I'M SORRY, BRAD BARTLESON, DISTRICT 5. HAPPY TO BE THERE. I DON'T HAVE ANY FINANCIAL OR BUSINESS INTERESTS. WHAT'S INTRIGUED ME THAT FROM A PHYSIC STANDPOINT, FROM A BUSINESS STANDPOINT, I COULDN'T MAKE THIS THING MAKE SENSE. THERE WAS A REPORT OUT RESEPTEMBERLY THAT OUR DEBT RATING -- RECENTLY THAT OUR DEBT RATING WOULD DROP FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS AFTER DOING THIS. IT WILL ELIMINATE SPENDING FOR BETTER OPTIONS. ONE OF THE THINGS I STARTED LOOKING AT IS WHY DIDN'T WE DO THIS WITH FRESH WATER OPTIONS WHERE THEY'RE LESS ENERGY INTENSE, LESS EXPENSIVE AND THEY CAN BE DONE SOONER. I SEE A LOT OF FEAR-DRIVEN THINGS TO THIS SOLUTION, AND NOW IT'S, BY GOLLY, IF WE DON'T DO THIS NOW, WE'RE GOING TO BE LEFT WITH NOTHING. BUT THERE ARE OPTIONS THAT WE CAN DO QUICKER. I'LL SPEAK LESS TODAY, I DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO GO INTO THE SLIDES ON ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING. I THINK THEY'RE RATHER INADEQUATE FROM A SCIENCE STANDPOINT, AND REALLY DEPRESSED ABOUT SEEING HOW HILLCREST COMMUNITY HAS BEEN HANDLED THROUGHOUT THIS. JUST QUICKLY, THIS MODEL TO ME OF THE SHIPPING CHANNEL ONLY IS LIKE A BLENDER. I THINK IT'S NOT A BIG SCIENCE CHALLENGE TO MIX THOSE UP. THE BIG CHALLENGE IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT GOES INTO THE BAY. I'M ALSO DISAPPOINTED THEY WOULDN'T SHARE THEIR [INDISCERNIBLE] EQUATIONS, THE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS, IN ANY SCIENCE PROJECTS I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH, YOU DISCLOSE THAT TO SHOW THAT YOU'VE DONE WHAT YOU NEEDED TO DO. THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE HERE. I DIDN'T EXPECT THEM TO RELEASE THEIR CODE. THAT'S TYPICALLY PROTECTED, BUT THIS IS COMMONLY DONE. ON THE FAR FIELD ASSESSMENTS, AGAIN, THESE AREN'T -- THESE ARE DONE WITH DIFFERENT INPUTS. WE NEEDED OUR CONDITIONS PUT IN. LOOKING AT THOSE OTHER STUDIES, WE DID UNCOVER AT TIMES NUECES BAY BEING 14 PPT DIFFERENT THAN CORPUS CHRISTI. YOU MIX THAT TOGETHER WITH COLD WATER, GO DOWN THE CHANNEL, WHAT'S IT GOING TO DO? IT'S GOING TO STRATIFY AND WE SEE STRATIFICATION MODELING THAT WAS DONE BACK THEN. WE SHOULD DO THAT HERE AS WELL. I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER. I'M JUST SAYING, THAT'S GOOD SCIENCE TO DO THAT. JUST A LITTLE QUICK THING I DID AT HOME WAS LOOK AT STRATIFICATION TESTING WITH THE SALINITIES EXPECTED AND YOU SEE THE BLUE LAYER AND WE SEE THE DENSER LAYER SITTING ON THE G BOTTOM. THAT WENT FOR THREE DAYS WITHOUT DIFFUSING. WE HAVE SOME GREATER CONDITIONS, AS I MENTIONED, POTENTIALLY HERE. AND THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE THAT WAS DONE BEFORE WE SHOULD BE MODELING THE EFFECT ON THE ENTIRE BAY. SO WE'VE GOT UNANSWERED QUESTIONS, MODEL CONDITIONS, WHAT HAPPENS IN THE BAY. I'LL ALSO SAY THAT THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP ABOUT THE UPTIME OF SEAWATER RO IN CALIFORNIA, FOR EXAMPLE. SO AS WE LOOK AT THIS 30 MILLION-GALLONS PER DAY, IT COULD BE A LOT LESS. THANK YOU. MR. BARTL ESON, THANK YOU. ADAM RIOS. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, ADAM RIOS, CORPUS CHRISTI. THE BENEFITS OF SIGNING UP YESTERDAY MORNING, FIRST 10 PEOPLE. I WANTED TO TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT AN ARTICLE THAT HAD COME OUT AND WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO KIND OF DO YOUR RESEARCH, ESPECIALLY LOCAL MEDIA. THIS WAS KIND OF THE HEADLINE, CORPUS CHRISTI THIRD MOST BORING CITY. THAT WAS PUT OUT BY THIS FINANCEBUZZ.COM AND LOCAL MEDIA DECIDED TO RUN WITH THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY REALIZE WHAT THEY WERE GETTING THEMSELVES INTO WITH FINANCE BUZZ. CRITICS HAVE ACTUALLY QUESTIONED THE LEGITIMACY OF THE SIDE HUSTLE THAT FINANCE BUZZ OFFERS BECAUSE THEY PROMOTE AND ARE PRIMARILY DESTINED TO FUNNEL PEOPLE AND USERS TO PARTNER BUSINESSES THAT THEY PROFIT FROM, RATHER THAN PROVIDING GENUINE LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES. THERE'S A COMPANY CALLED ADFONTES MEDIA THAT IS ACTUALLY A COMPANY THAT RATES NEWS SOURCES RAISED ON BIAS AND RELIABILITY AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS IF YOU'RE GOING TO FOLLOW FINANCE BUZZ OR ANYTHING THAT THEY OFFER INFORMATION-WISE, TO EXERCISE CAUTION AND CRITICAL THINKING WHEN EVALUATING ANY CLAIMS MADE BY FINANCEBUZZ.COM. I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT AND I STARTED TO THINK, I DON'T KNOW HOW BORING THE CITY IS. I LIVED IN HAWAII, I LIVED IN AUSTIN A LONG TIME, I DECIDED TO MAKE CORPUS HOME AGAIN AND I HAVEN'T LOOKED BACK SENSE. I WAS AT THE HOUSE OF ROCK'S 20TH ANNIVERSARY YESTERDAY, IT WAS PACKED. IT WAS NICE TO SEE KAYCE LANE CELEBRATING 20 YEARS CONTINUING TO THRIVE DOWNTOWN. ALSO HE'S NEVER ASKED THE CITY TO SUBSIDIZE HIS SHOWS, JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. WE HAVE ART WALK COMING UP, WHICH IS ALWAYS A FANTASTIC OPPORTUNITY, OVER 15,000 ATTENDEES ON AVERAGE ARE GOING TO FILL OUR DOWNTOWN AND SUPPORT LOCALLY OWNED AND OPERATED BUSINESSES. AND COMBINED WITH THE COMMUNITY WORKING WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT, IF YOU'VE NEVER NOTICED THIS, IT'S ACTUALLY A VERY SAFE FAMILY ENVIRONMENT. NOT A LOT OF BAD THINGS HAPPEN AT THAT THING, AND I DARE YOU TO SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT GOING TO DIRTY SIXTH IN AUSTIN. THAT'S WHAT IT'S REFERRED TO, BY THE WAY, IF YOU DON'T KNOW. LIKE 10, 15 YEARS AGO, EVERYBODY IN THE SERVICE INDUSTRY, REFERRED TO IT, IT'S THE DIRTY SIXTH. I DON'T THINK YOU'LL GET THE SAME QUALITY THAT YOU'LL GET WITH ANY OF OUR IMMENSE RESOURCES AND AMENITIES. AND THAT LED ME TO SOMETHING THAT I WAS SHARING YESTERDAY, THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE HADN'T HEARD ABOUT. AND, OF COURSE, NOBODY ON OUR LOCAL MEDIA DECIDED TO PICK IT UP. THE HEADLINE READ THIS COASTAL TEXAS TOWN IS KNOWN AS THE SPARKLING CITY BY THE SEA, AND IT'S EASY TO SEE WHY. AND THAT WAS -- THAT CAME OUT FROM SOUTHERN LIVING. AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE REPUTATION OF SOUTHERN LIVING. IT'S AS QUALITY AS YOU CAN GET. I HAD A WRITEUP IN THERE ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO AND IT WITH US THE HIGHLIGHT FOR ME AS A CHEF. WOW, I WAS IN SOUTHERN LIVING, THAT'S INCREDIBLE. WHAT THEY USED BESIDES THE 100 MILES OF COASTLINE THAT WE HAVE MUSEUMS VENUES CULTURAL ACTIVITIES AND FOOD AND BEVERAGE. ANYWAY, PROUD TO LIVE HERE. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, PLSSMR. RIOS. ELAINA MARTINEZ? THEN WE'LL HAVE JASMIN EVANS, MICHAEL MILLER, SANDRA MEYER AND JESUS HUONG. >> ELAINA MARTINEZ, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS. WHAT SHE IS HANDING OUT THERE IS THE TIMELINE AND THE RESULT OF MY PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST ABOUT THE PEER REVIEW FROM OUR CITY AUDITOR. SO THE TIMELINE STARTS IN SEPTEMBER WHEN THE CITY AUDITOR WAS INFORMED THAT A PEER REVIEW WAS GOING TO TAKE PLACE. AND ENDS LAST WEEK WHEN I RECEIVED -- FINALLY RECEIVED THE PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST. WHAT I REQUESTED WAS ALL COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE CITY AUDITOR AND THE PEER REVIEWERS BECAUSE THE CITY AUDITOR HAS BEEN CLAIMING IN AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT HE HAS BEEN REQUESTED MORE TIME BY THE PEER REVIEWERS BASED ON RESEARCH AND QUESTIONS. HOWEVER, THOSE REQUESTS WOULD HAVE FALLEN INTO THE TIMELINE THAT I REQUESTED THOSE COMMUNICATIONS. AND THERE ARE ZERO E-MAILS IN HERE FROM THE PEER REVIEWERS ASKING FOR MORE TIME. THE MOST RECENT E-MAIL IS FROM JANUARY OF 2025 TELLING HIM THE DRAFT REPORT IS COMPLETE AND THEY ARE WAITING ON HIS RESPONSE. SO WHY IN APRIL AND MAY IS THE CITY AUDITOR SAYING THEY NEED MORE TIME, NOT THAT HE NEEDS MORE TIME? ALSO I -- IF YOU NOTICE ON THE ACTUAL PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST, IT SAYS THAT I WAIVED ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION, MEANING YOU CAN REDACT WHATEVER YOU WANT, JUST SEND ME THE RESULTS. SO WHY DID THE CITY THEN SUBMIT IT TO KEN PAXTON'S OFFICE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION FURTHER DELAYING IT BY THREE MONTHS? WHAT IS IN THE PEER REVIEW THAT WE ARE NOT SEEING? IT SHOULD BE A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD AT THIS POINT IN TIME. IT IS STANDARD PROCEDURE FOR AN AUDITOR TO REQUEST MANAGEMENT RESPONSE FROM THEIR AUDITEE, WHICH IS WHAT A PEER REVIEW IS. BECAUSE THERE'S NOBODY HERE THAT CAN AUDIT THE AUDITOR, SO WE GET INDEPENDENT AUDITORS TO DO SO. WHY HASN'T HE RESPONDED TO THEM? WHY IS HE TELLING US THEY'RE ASKING FOR MORE TIME? AND WHY, IF THEY'RE ASKING FOR MORE TIME, ARE THOSE E-MAILS NOT IN THIS PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST? I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT TO Y'ALL'S ATTENTION. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC WAS AWARE, AND I REALLY, REALLY HOPE, BY THE WAY, THAT WE GET TO SEE WHAT'S IN THAT PEER REVIEW. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. MR. ZANONI, MILES, EITHER ONE, CAN WE PLEASE TAKE CARE OF THAT, OR STRAIGHTEN THAT OUT, OR AT LEAST CLARIFY IT? >> Risley: I BELIEVE THAT SHE'S GOTTEN THE RESPONSE FROM -- THAT SHE REQUESTED. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. SO WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE A BIG, LONG DISCUSSION HERE. >> Risley: SHE RECEIVED THE RELEASABLE INFORMATION. >> Mayor Guajardo: I'M SORRY? >> Risley: SHE RECEIVED THE INFORMATION THAT WAS RELEASABLE AT THE TIME. >> Mayor Guajardo: IF MORE HAS COME -- I WANT TO AT LEAST CLARIFY WITH HER, NOT IN THIS MOMENT, BUT Y'ALL NEED TO CLARIFY WITHER WHAT SHE IS STATING HERE. SO, YES, THANK YOU. >> Risley: WE RIL WE WILL -- I'LL HAVE ONE OF MY PERSONNEL REACH OUT TO HER AND GET WITH HER AND FIND OUT WHAT ELSE SHE WANTS. >> Mayor Guajardo: RIGHT. BASED ON HER STATEMENTS. YEAH. THANK YOU. JASMIN EVANS. IS JASMIN HERE? JASMIN EVANS? OKAY. MICHAEL MILLER? AND THEN SANDRA MEYER, JESUS HONG. >> MICHAEL MILLER, DISTRICT 2. I SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR 16 AND 18, BUT I'M ONLY GOING TO BE SPEAKING ON 18. I'LL SPEAK ON 16 WITH THE ITEM. ON ITEM 18, I JUST WANTED TO SHOW MY SUPPORT FOR THE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN CORPUS CHRISTI AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY TO SUPPORT THIS $150,000 FOR THE HOUSING STUDY. I THINK IT'S A GREAT STUDY. IT'S GOING TO HELP SUPPORT SOME EFFORTS THAT MYSELF AND FORMER COUNCILMAN KLEIN AND SOME OTHERS, BART BRASELTON IN THE COMMUNITY THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON TO COME UP WITH SOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING SOLUTIONS FOR THE CITY AND THE DATA FROM THAT STUDY IS GOING TO GREATLY HELP OUR EFFORTS AS WELL AS ALL OF THE DEVELOPERS IN TOWN FOR PROVIDING THE HOUSING THAT IS NEEDED, YOU KNOW, FOR ALL RATE CLA CLASSES OR ALL SOCIOECONOMIC CLASSES FROM DOWN HERE AT THE ZERO INCOME ALL THE WAY UP TO MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR. SO I JUST WANTED TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR THAT. AND I APPRECIATE IT AND I'LL SEE Y'ALL ON ITEM 16. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. SANDRA MEYER. >> HI, I'M SANDRA MEYER WITH CORPUS CHRISTI. I'M GOING TO TRY TO MAKE THIS FAST. I FEEL VERY HONORED TO BE HERE WITH A COMMUNITY THAT EVERYBODY IS SO PASSIONATE. I, AS A PROUD MEMBER OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, I'M TRULY SORRY THAT SOME OF Y'ALL HAVE FELT LIKE YOU'VE BEEN ABUSED OR NOT. YOU READ WHAT THE LETTER -- OR E-MAIL THAT I GOT. I MOVED HERE FROM COLORADO SPRINGS WHERE THERE HAS -- THEY HAVE WATER ISSUES ALL THE TIME. THERE IS SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CONTROL OVER THE WATER. YOU BUY A PIECE OF PROPERTY, THE QUESTION THERE IS NOT DO YOU HAVE MINERAL RIGHTS, IT'S WHAT ARE YOUR WATER RIGHTS? DO YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A HORSE THERE? ARE YOU ABLE TO DRILL 150-FOOT 200-FOOT. I MEAN, THERE'S SO MUCH CONTROL. I TRULY BELIEVE, ALSO COMING FROM COLLEGE STATION, WHERE THE CITY IS TRYING TO PROTECT THE WATER IN THEIR AQUIFER AND THE UNIVERSITY, AND MY DAD IN BURLESON COUNTY HAD TO SELL SOME OF THIS WATER RIGHTS FOR SAN ANTONIO. I REALLY -- DESAL MAY NOT BE PERFECT, BUT THE CITY OWNING IT IS GOING TO BE HUGE DOWN THE ROAD. AND EVERYBODY CAN COMPLAIN TO Y'ALL, CAN SHARE THEIR CONCERNS, BUT IF IT'S A PRIVATE COMPANY OWNING IT, SAY LIKE SEVEN SEAS, ARE PEOPLE REALLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO-E PRESS THEIR CONCERNS GOING DOWN THE ROAD? AND SO THAT'S MY THOUGHTS. THANK YOU. . >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MRS. MEYER. JESUS HUONG. . >> JESUS HUONG, DISTRICT 4. THE DESALINATION FACILITY IS A RUSHED, RECKLESS INVESTMENT DISGUISED AS A SLEUTIONZ FOR OUR WATER CRISIS. YOU CONTINUE TO MISLEAD YOURSELVES AND THE PUBLIC WITH THE PROMISE OF WATER THAT WE KNOW THAT WILL ONLY GO TO HEAVY INDUSTRY AND NOT RESIDENTS. EVEN IF THE WATER DOES GO TO RESIDENTS, IT WILL BE COMPROMISED WITH TOXINS AND WILL SLOWLY KILL OUR BAYS AND OUR E ECOSYSTEM. CORPUS CHRISTI RELIES ON ECO TOURISM AND WE WILL BE SACRIFICING THAT IF WE GO THROUGH THIS. OUR TIME TO FIND A SOLUTION IS FLEETING BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE SHOULD NOT TAKE THE TIME TO CONSIDER OUR OPTIONS MAKING RASH DECISIONS WE WILL REGRET DOWN THE LINE. IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO STEER US IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, TO MAKE THE CORRECT DECISION. YOU NEED TO STOP THINKING ABOUT SHORT-TERM SOLUTIONS AND START THINKING IN THE LONG TERM. THIS DESAL PLANT WILL NOT BE A VIABLE SOLUTION IN THE LONG TERM. IT WILL BE THE DRUG THAT WILL SLOWLY KILL OUR DESCENDANTS BUT WE'LL HAVE TO RELY ON. AND I CAN GUARANTEE YOU CORPUS CHRISTI WILL BE A CASE STUDY 50, 60 YEARS DOWN THE LINE ON WHATNOT TO DO IN AT WATER CRISIS ( YOU NEED TO ASK YOURSELVES WHEN YOU SIT IN THESE CHAIRS IN THIS POSITION OF POWER, WHAT TYPE OF CORPUS CHRISTI DO I WANT TO LIVE IN, TO GROW OLD IN, TO SEE MY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN GROW UP IN? YOUR ANSWER SHOULD ALWAYS BE A PROSPEROUS CORPUS CHRISTI THAT SEEKS TO UPLIFT RATHER THAN STRIKE DOWN. WE ARE IN YOUR HANDS, AND RIGHT NOW YOU ARE SUFFOCATING US. YOU ARE SUFFOCATING US. TOUCHING ON A POINT MADE EARLIER ABOUT DRILLING AND BUILDING IN PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS, THE ISSUE WITH THAT STATEMENT IS THAT THIS CITY GOVERNMENT KEEPS CHOOSING THE SAME BACKYARD TO TARGET FOR ITS PROJECTS. THAT BACKYARD BEING THE HILLCREST COMMUNITY. A PREDOMINANTLY BLACK COMMUNITY. IT HAPPENED WITH THE HARBOR BRIDGE AND IT'S HAPPENING NOW WITH THE DESALINATION FACILITY. AND IT'S BECOMING EVER -- IT'S BECOMING INCREASINGLY EVIDENT THAT THERE'S NO CONSISTENCY OR PROPER COMMUNICATION BETWEEN CITY COUNCIL, BETWEEN CC WATER, BETWEEN KIEWIT, FREESE & NICHOLS. SINCE THE CONCEPTION OF THIS PLAN, IT HAS BEEN MUDDLED WITH DISCREPANCIES AND THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION. PLEASE CONSIDER YOUR OPTIONS, THINK WISELY, THINK IN THE LONG TERM. OUR DESCENDANTS WILL RELY ON IT. THANK YOU AND VOTE AGAINST ITEM 16. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. HUONG. ALEX FLUKE. ALEX FLUKE? MELISSA ZAMORA? AND THEN WE'LL HAVE SUZIE SALDAÑA, MARILYNNA GARZA, DAVID LOWE AND ARTURO LIMA. >> MELISSA ZAMORA, CORPUS CHRISTI, DISTRICT 2, ALWAYS SO MUCH TO SAY AND LITTLE TIME. BUT I WILL ALSO MACHINE SHUN SINCE I'VE HEARD IT, PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY YOUNG PEOPLE, ARE ALREADY MOVING AWAY FROM HERE IN DROVES. THEY'RE NOT HAPPY WITH THE WAY THAT THE CITY HAS INVESTED, THEY DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A TOXIC WASTE ZONE. THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ARE LASER FOCUSED ON INDUSTRIAL JOBS, AND I'M GOING TO GET TO HOPEFULLY IF I HAVE ENOUGH TIME ON HOW I'M NOT AGAINST INDUSTRIAL WORKERS, THAT IT'S MORE OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CONTROLLING THEM. OWENS STEVENS WATER PLANT, WHY IS THIS THE ONLY ONE? I JUST LEARNED THAT FROM THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AND THAT OTHER -- HAD MORE THAN ONE WATER TREATMENT PLANT, THAT'S JUST QUESTIONABLE OF WHY WE ONLY HAVE ONE. THE FAULTY INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE A TOP PLY ORTY, SO THANK YOU FOR MENTIONING THAT. PART OF THAT LOW-HANGING FRUIT OF LARGE-SCALE RAINWATER HARVESTING, WASTEWATER REUSE, GRAY WATER REUSE, THE ATMOSPHERIC CATCHMENT I THOUGHT WAS A GOOD IDEA, MAYBE WORTH LOOKING INTO. CURTAILING INDUSTRY USE IS ALSO A VIABLE OPTION. BUT THE STATE LOAN GIVEN FOR THE DESALINATION FALLS ON THE BACKS OF RESIDENTS IS NOT FAIR. THE MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME FOR CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS IS 33,000 TO 66,000, AND THAT'S IF YOU HAVE LIKE -- YOU'RE ABLE TO GET TO A HIGHER PAYING JOB WHICH MOST PEOPLE DON'T HAVE. CITGO ALONE MAKES 305 MILLION IN ONE YEAR, UP TO 8.9 BILLION IN OTHER YEARS. FLINT HILLS 2.5 BILLION. SO THE NOTION OF, WELL, EVERYONE IS GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE HIGHER WATER RATES IS NOT EQUITABLE WHEN WE LOOK AT BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRIES TO A SIMPLE RESIDENT. AND I KNOW SOME OF Y'ALL UNDERSTAND THAT. HOW CAN YOU COMPARE US TO BILLIONAIRE COMPANIES? THIS IS A CLASSIC CASE OF THE GOOD OLD BOYS. I KNOW WE'RE IN TEXAS, RIGHT? I WAS BORN AND RAISED HERE, I WAS EDUCATED HERE, I CAN SEE THE IMBALANCE. AND IT MAKES ME NOT WANT TO LIVE HERE ANYMORE, RIGHT, WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE, YOU DON'T LIKE IT, WELL THEN GET OUT. BUT I LOVE IT, I WANT TO DEFEND IT, WANT TO BE HERE, I WANT IT TO BE BEAUTIFUL, I HAVE CHILDREN HERE. I WISH WE COULD ALL COME TOGETHER AND JUST MAKE IT THE BEST WE CAN. TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S ENOUGH WATER TO CONTINUE BUSINESS AS USUAL IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, AND THEN MORE AND MORE AND MORE UNTIL WHEN? HOW MANY INDUSTRIES IS IT GOING TO TAKE? WE'RE ALREADY IN THE CAN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF DEBT, BUT WE'RE -- WE HAVE ALL THESE INDUSTRY, WE HAVE THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, WE'VE GOT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, WE SHOULD BE BOOMING AND WE SHOULD HAVE ALL THE MONEY AND LIKE A SURPLUS, THOUGH, RIGHT? SO WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THE AVERAGE CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENT? OF COURSE, THE HEAVY WATER VOLUME USERS, PRIMARILY OIL, GAS, PLASTIC INDUSTRIES ARE PAYING INTO THIS, BECAUSE IT'S THEIR INVESTMENT TO SECURE THEIR PROFITS, WHICH ONCE AGAIN ARE NOT BENEFITING ANYONE BUT THEM AND THE POLITICIANS THEY HAVE IN THEIR POCKETS. I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT IVMENTD DAS NEXT TIME. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MRS. ZAMORA. SUZIE SALDAÑA. >> SUZIE LUNA SALDAÑA, CORPUS CHRISTI. I'M GOING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT A LITTLE BIT. I KNOW Y'ALL ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE HOUSING COMMUNITY, YOU DO NOT CONTROL IT EXCEPT FOR ONE PERSON ON OUR COUNCIL, WHICH IS OUR MAYOR. THIS CAME TO ME BECAUSE SOMEBODY CALLED ME, THERE WERE 25 PEOPLE AT THIS GATHERING, AND THEY GAVE ME THIS LETTER TO GIVE AWAY AND TOLD ME, CAN YOU GET SOME PEOPLE TO HEAR IT. I THINK YOU AS COUNCILPEOPLE, ESPECIALLY YOU MAYOR, YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THIS, BECAUSE THIS CAME FROM THE HEART. WE ARE TENANTS OF THE CORPUS CHRISTI HOUSING AUTHORITY. WE ARE WRITING TO YOU WITH HEAVY HEARTS. MANY OF US ARE AFRAID TO GIVE OUR NAMES BECAUSE OF FEAR OF GETTING IN TROUBLE OR BEING EVICTED. BUT WE FEEL THAT LIKE WE MUST SPEAK UP, WE BELIEVE THE CEO, GARY UPSHAW IS UP NOT HELPING FAMILIES THE WAY THAT HE SHOULD. WE HEAR OF THE STORIES ABOUT THE BIG PAYCHECKS AND THE DEALS WITH THE NEWS WHILE WE ARE STRUGGLING. SOME OF US ARE BEGGING FOR FANS TO STAY COOL, SHOES FOR OUR KIDS, OR JUST SIMPLE CLEANING SUPPLIES. THAT'S NOT FAIR. WE SAW NEWS STORIES THAT SAY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY'S MAKING DEALS THAT HURT THE CITY AND GIVE BIG TAX BREAKS. WE LIVE HERE, WE FEEL FORGOTTEN, OUR HOMES ARE FULL OF MOLD AND RATS. YOU ARE OUR VOICE ON THE BOARD, YOU SPEAK FOR US, SO WE ARE ASKING THAT YOU MAKE SURE A VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE IN THE CEO IS NEEDED. WE NEED LEADERS WHO CARE MORE ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAN ABOUT MONEY. WE WANT TO LIVE IN SAFE, CLEAN HOUSES, WE WANT TO BE HEARD, AND THIS IS HOW WE'RE ASKING YOU TO MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU FOR READING THIS. WE'RE COUNTING ON YOU. THE REASON I'M BRINGING THIS UP IS BECAUSE THERE'S STILL TWO PEOPLE IN THAT HOUSING AUTHORITY THAT WERE THERE WHEN ALL THIS F FIASCO HAPPENED WITH THE CEO. IT'S TIME TO REMOVE THEM. YOU HAVE THE POWER. YOU HAVE THE POWER TO REMOVE THOSE, JUST LIKE WHEN ANY OTHER ASSIGNMENT COMES OVER HERE AND YOU DECIDE TO REMOVE THOSE APPOINTMENTS, YOU HAVE THE POWER TO DO THAT. THESE PEOPLE ARE ASKING FOR HELP. THEY'RE HURTING AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR HELP. AND IT MAKES THE HEADLINES AND THAT'S GOOD FOR ONE OR TWO MINUTES, BUT THEY HAVE TO STAY THERE. THEIR GRASS IS HIGH, THEY DON'T HAVE FANS, IT IS HOT. I TOOK A DRIVE AROUND THERE, AND IF YOU JUST GO IN AND OUT, YOU CAN TELL WHAT'S GOING ON. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THOSE PEOPLE GET A BREAK AND THAT PEOPLE DON'T GET FORGOTTEN. YOU'VE GOT THREE GOOD PEOPLE ON THAT COUNCIL THAT YOU APPOINTED. MAKE THEM WORK FOR THIS. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. SALDAÑA. MARILYNNA GARZA. THEN WE'LL HAVE DAVID LOWE AND ARTURO LIMA. >> MARILYNNA GARZA, DISTRICT ONE. I'M COMMENTING TODAY, AGAIN, ON PUBLIC COMMENT. THE ONLY OPTION THAT THE PUBLIC CURRENTLY HAS TO SPEAK TO COUNCIL AND TO SPEAK TO THE PUBLIC BEFORE THINGS ARE VOTED ON, MOTIONS ARE MADE IS IF WE'RE SHOWING UP AT THE AGENDA ITEM. TODAY USUALLY YOU GUYS SEE ME PARKED THERE, CAMPED OUT, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, AND I'M HAVING TO GO BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE I'M PREPARING FOR A BACK-TO-SCHOOL BASH. SO THAT'S NOT HELPING ME THAT I HAVE TO COME BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY THAT I'M GOING TO BE HEARD BEFORE THE AGENDA ITEM IS WHEN I SIT AND WAIT FOR THE AGENDA ITEM. AND I HAD TO WAIT -- THERE'S NO TIME THAT YOU GUYS TELL ME HOW LONG LUNCH IS GOING TO BE OR HOW LONG EXECUTIVE SESSION'S GOING TO BE. I GOT BACK HERE LATE, AND IN THIS PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW IS INTERRUPTING A VERY IMPORTANT DISCUSSION THAT WE WERE HAVING ABOUT DESALINATION. AND LET ME JUST PAINT TO YOU MY OPINION AND THE GENERAL OPINION THAT A LOT OF THE PUBLIC HAS, THAT IT'S SO FUNNY THE TIMING ON THE CHANGE TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT WHEN ALL OF THE ANTIDESAL PEOPLE STARTED COMING AND MAKING COMMENT. AND IT STARTED CLOGGING UP THE TIME AND CLOGGING UP BUSINESS, RIGHT? SO THE TIMING ON THAT LOOKED REALLY BAD. AND NOW THE ONLY TIME THAT I CAN MAKE A GENERAL COMMENT IS AT 5:30. AND JUST THE TIMING OF ALL THIS, LIKE EXECUTIVE -- LET ME JUST TODAY, JUST ALONE, EXECUTIVE SESSION TOOK A WHILE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN LUNCH WAS BEING HELD, AND THEN THE NEXT ITEM THAT WAS TALKED WAS ABOUT DESALINATION, AN HOUR BEFORE -- HOUR AND A HALF BEFORE WE KNEW THAT 5:30 PUBLIC COMMENT WAS GOING ON. SO ALL THE CONVERSATION WE WERE HAVING BEFORE THIS IS PROBABLY ALL FOR FORGOTTEN BECAUSE WE'RE LISTENING TO THE PUBLIC NOW. THIS COULD BE SOLVED IF YOU MOVED IT BACK TO WHERE YOU HAD IT BEFORE. I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE MEANING WELL, BUT THIS LOOKS REALLY, REALLY, REALLY BAD. I SHOULD BE OUT SORTING CLOTHES, GETTING HELP FOR PEOPLE FOR TOMORROW, AND INSTEAD I'M HERE CAMPED OUT. GAMING TO HAVE TO BE HERE LATER BECAUSE THERE IS AN AGENDA ITEM BEING PULLED ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS LOOKS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE TRYING TO INTIMIDATE PEOPLE WHO DON'T AGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY BECAUSE IF IT WAS ALL PRO DESAL AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PEOPLE UP HERE MAKING THOSE COMMENTS, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AND CHANGED UP THE WAY IT IS. AND YOU'RE CHANGING IT UP RIGHT HERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THESE DELIBERATIONS. IT DOESN'T SCREAM TRANSPARENCY, IT DOESN'T SCREAM THAT YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM US. THIS IS OUR ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO YOU GUYS. I'VE MADE THE HEADWAY THAT I HAVE MADE IN THE COMMUNITY BY MAKING PUBLIC COMMENT, NOT E-MAILING YOU GUYS AND NOT HAVING THESE BACK DOOR MEETINGS WITH YOU GUYS. IT'S WHEN I COME UP HERE AND MAKE THESE COMMENTS. SO I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO MAKE THESE COMMENTS AND I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO HOPE THAT YOU GUYS DO THE RIGHT THING AND HEAR THE PUBLIC. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MRS. GARZA. DAVID LOW. >> Zanoni: AND MAYOR, WHILE DAVID'S COMING UP, MRS. GARZA, WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO NOT CONSIDER ITEM 17, JUST SO YOU DON'T WASTE TIME. WE'RE GOING TO PULL THAT FROM THE AGENDA, I THOUGHT I'D GIVE YOU A HEAD'S UP. >> DAVID LOBE, DISTRICT 2, CORPUS CHRISTI. I WANT TO START BY SAYING I FOLLOWED UP WITH THE YOUNG WOMAN WHO SPOKE BEFORE ME LAST WEEK AS SHE WAS ADDRESSING THE COLLEGE ISSUE. EECH EACH OF YOU HAVE MY CELL NUMBER, (361)807-0704. THE CORE PART OF MY JOB IS INCORPORATING COMMUNITY FEEDBACK INTO THE POLICY DIRECTION OF THE COLLEGE. IT HELPS TO HEAR FROM A WIDE VARIETY OF VOICES FROM THAT EFFORT, EVEN AND ESPECIALLY IF IT'S SOMETHING I DON'T WANT TO HEAR. SO I WANT YOU TO KNOW HER CONCERNS WERE HEARD AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. I HAVE SIGNS UP AT MY PROPERTIES TODAY STATING SUPPORT FOR MOVING FORWARD ON INNER HARBOR. THANK YOU TO THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE REACHED OUT OR RESPONDED. I'VE URGED OTHERS. WE WANT YOU TO KNOW WE'RE YOUR PARTNER AND WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND YOUR DECISION TO KEEP THIS PROJECT MOVING. WE UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO WORK ON PRICE AND HOW IT IMPACTS RAISE PAYERS BECAUSE WE ARE RATEPAYERS OURSELF. WE WILL HELP FIND THE MONEY. YOUR STAFF HAS ALREADY BEGUN WORKING ON THESE CONCERNS BY WORKING ON THE CAPITAL BUDGET. WE'RE ALL FOR GREATER TRANSPARENCY AND HAVE USED YOUR CALL, THOSE OF YOU WHO SUPPORT MORE WATER -- THOSE OF US WHO SUPPORT MORE WATER OFTEN FEEL LIKE THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL POLICY DISCUSSION GOING ON IN PRIVATE AND WE ONLY FIND OUT ABOUT IT WHEN THERE'S A CRISIS. THERE ARE CONCERNING STORIES OF COUNCILMEMBERS NEGOTIATING DEALS ON THEIR OWN IN DIRECT CONTRAVENTION OF THE CHARTER. OUR MOVEMENT GREW OUT OF FEAR THAT YOU WOULD INTERPRET THE PEOPLE WHO YELL AND CUSS AT YOU EVERY WEEK AS INDICATIVE OF THE PUBLIC'S OVERVIEW. WE ARE IN A DROUGHT AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PUBLIC WASN'TS RELIABLE WATER. THEY SUPPORT INNER HARBOR BECAUSE IT'S ACHIEVABLE. NOT EXACTLY SHOCKING. I THINK INNER HARBOR DOES OR WILL CHECK ALL THOSE BOXES, ESPECIALLY WHEN COMPARED TO REALISTIC TIMELINES AND FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS ON OTHER PROJECTS. I HOPE YOU'RE GETTING THAT TODAY FROM YOUR THIRD-PARTY INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT. AS YOU SAW TWO WEEKS AGO, THERE ARE HUGE RISKS TO PLOWING FORWARD ON AN UNVETTED PROJECT WITHOUT PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. PAST COUNCIL DECISIONS TO BE ON THIS PATH WERE INFORMED BY THE MERITS AND RISKS OF ALL THE OTHER PROJECTS, INCLUDING THIS ONE. WHEN THE JOBS OF 100,000 OF OUR NEIGHBORS ARE AT STAKE, IT'S BETTER TO OVERSHOOT BY HAVING TOO MANY DEALS THAN NOT ENOUGH. WHATEVER DEALS YOU DON'T DO ARE HERE FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL OR ONE 10 OR 20 YEARS FROM NOW. IT'S TIME TO PUT THE PEDAL TO THE METAL AND GET THIS MOVING. MAKE SURE YOUR STAFF KNOWS TO PRIORITIZE INNER HARBOR AND GET IT DONE AND GIVE THEM THE RESOURCES TO WORK ON THE OTHER DEALS WITH MERIT. HAVE THEM DUE YOUR DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE YOU RISK YOUR REPUTATION ON THEM. WE'RE HERE TO BE A PARTNER TO ALL OF YOU, IF YOU WILL ACCEPT IT. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. LOBE. ARTURO LIMA. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME'S AR TOURRA LIMA, I LIVE IN DISTRICT 4 AND I'M URGING YOU TO VOTE NO ON ITEM 16 WHICH AUTHORIZES ANOTHER $50 MILLION TO CONTINUE PLANNING THE DESALINATION PLANT. WE'RE BEING ASKED TO THROW ANOTHER 50 MILLION INTO PLANNING BEFORE THE CITY HAS EVEN PROVEN THAT THIS PROJECT IS SAFE, NECESSARY OR PHYSICALLY RESPONSIBLE. MEANWHILE, WE'RE ALREADY LOOKING AT A TOTAL OF $1.2 BILLION TO BUILD THIS PLANT. ONCE THE PLANT IS BUILT, WE'LL BE LOOKING AT -- WE'LL BE ON THE HOOK FOR 68 MILLION EVERY YEAR ON DEBT PAYMENTS, PLUS ANOTHER 32 MILLION ANNUALLY FOR MAINTENANCE. THAT'S 100 MILLION EVERY SINGLE YEAR FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS OR MORE. OVER A DECADE, THAT'S ANOTHER BILLION DOLLARS, JUST TO KEEP IT RUNNING, AND FOR WHAT? FOR A WATER SOURCE THAT'S NOT EVEN GUARANTEED TO BE RELIABLE OR SAFE. LET'S TALK ABOUT PFAS, FOREVER CHEMICALS, THIS PLANT WILL TAKE IN SEAWATER CONTAMINATED WITH INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS AND FILTER IT IN A PROCESS THAT'S STILL BEING STUDIED FOR IT'S LONG-TERM HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. AND THEN THAT WATER WILL GO INTO OUR DRINKING SUPPLY. WE'RE TAKING IN ASTRONOMICAL DEBT FOR A RISKY, HIGH-RISK SYSTEM, THAT COULD BE CONTAMINATING US IN THE PROCESS. AND WHO BENEFITS? CERTAINLY NOT THE AVERAGE RESIDENT. WE'VE SACRIFICED AND CONSERVED, AND NOW WE'RE BEING ASKED TO FOOT THE BILL FOR A BILLION DOLLAR EXPERIMENT. THIS ISN'T ABOUT WATER SECURITY, IT'S ABOUT FINANCIAL RECKLESSNESS, ABOUT LOCKING US INTO A 30-YEAR BURDEN FOR A SYSTEM THAT'S FRAGILE, POLLUTING AND WILDLY EXPENSIVE. THIS IS NOT A DROUGHT-PROOF SUPPLY, IT'S A PROFIT GAMBLE. WE DESERVE DUE DILIGENCE, REAL COMMUNITY INPUT AND AN HONEST LOOK AT THE ALTERNATIVES. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. LIMA. LISA GERDIS. >> City Secretary: I THINK SHE SPOKE, MAYOR, ON ITEM 6. AND THE SAME FOR MRS. REYES ALSO SPOKE ON ITEM 6. SHE SPOKE WHEN THE ITEM WAS CONSIDERED. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. MARK MÜNSTER. >> MARK MÜNSTER, CORPUS CHRISTI. I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL. REFLECTING IN -- AFTER THE LAST MEETING LAST WEEK, JUST THINKING ABOUT HOW IT WAS TWO NEW PROCEDURES FOR EACH OF THE TWO MEETINGS FOR THE HILLCREST ITEMS, REZONING ITEMS WERE ON THE AGENDA, AND I THINK THAT MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR HILLCREST RESIDENTS, AND THERE WERE STILL A LOT HERE, TO BE HERE AND TO KNOW LIKE WHAT THE PROCEDURE WAS. EVEN UNTIL TODAY, PEOPLE WERE SAYING THAT YOU HAVE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ITEM AND THERE'S STILL A LOT OF CONFUSION ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT. SO, YEAH, THE TIMING WAS REALLY FRUSTRATING AND ESPECIALLY TODAY AS WELL. I MEAN, NOT EVERYONE'S -- I'M LUCKY I'M SELF-EMPLOYED, I DON'T HAVE A BOSS AND I'M ABLE TO BE HERE ALL DAY TODAY, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THAT PRIVILEGE TO BE ABLE TO STICK AROUND AND TO TALK ON THE AGENDA ITEM. I'M SAVING EVERYTHING ELSE FOR THE ITEM. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. MÜNSTER. AMANDA GUERRA? AMANDA GUERRA? GILBERT AGUIRRE? >> HELLO. GILBERT AGUIRRE, DISTRICT ONE AND 3. I GUESS I'VE HEARD EVERYONE TALK ABOUT THE EFFECTS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT, AND I ASK MYSELF THESE QUESTIONS WHEN I'M HERE. AND I'M A BUSINESSMAN, I OWN BUSINESSES, I DO CONSTRUCTION. AND IF I WERE TO HANDLE MY BIDS THE WAY Y'ALL HANDLE YOUR BIDS, I WOULD NOT BE IN BUSINESS. AND SO I ASK MYSELF, WHY ARE WE GOING TO A COMPANY THAT MAKES OIL RIGS TO MAKE A DESAL PLANT? AND THE BIGGEST IN THE WORLD WHEN THERE'S AT LEAST -- I LOOKED IT UP -- 10 COMPANIES OF WHICH ONE IN FRANCE HAS OVER 250 OF THESE THAT THEY'VE MADE. SO U IF I GO TO A CONTRACTOR THAT'S NEVER DONE A TUB AND I GET THIS GUY'S LEARNING VERSUS A GUY THAT DOES IT EVERY DAY, IT'S GOING TO COST MORE MONEY BECAUSE HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE'S DOING. HE'S GOING TO KEEP GOING TO HOME DEPOT BUYING MORE STUFF, HE'S GOING TO BUY THE WRONG STUFF, HE'S GOING TO END UP COSTING ME MORE MONEY. BUT I'M GOING TO GO AND SPEND $50 MILLION FOR SOMEONE TO GIVE ME A BID? I DO SO MANY BIDS, WHEN I GO TO THE PERSON, IT'S ACTUALLY ACCURATE. HERE I HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING HERE -- THEY'RE ALL GONE, BY THE WAY, EVERYONE LEFT. BUT THEY DON'T HAVE THEIR PAPER, THE GRAPHS ARE JUST A BUNCH OF DOODLES I CAN MAKE IN PHOTOSHOP IN FIVE MINUTES, THEY DON'T CLARIFY ANYTHING, BUT RIGHT AWAY, SOME PEOPLE ARE TO DEFEND THEM, COME LATER, WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT, THAT'S NOT HOW THE REAL WORLD WORKS. IT'S NOT. AND IT'S OUR ENVIRONMENT, IT'S OUR MONEY THAT YOU'RE SPENDING. SO I MEAN, I'M AGAINST THE DESAL. I MEAN, I KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT OTHER OPTIONS AND THEN DRILLING UNDER THE RIVER. WHEN YOU DRILL UNDER A RIVER, YOU REMOVE THE AQUIFER. IT FILLS UP WITH SALT WATER. NOW INSTEAD OF PUSHING WATER INTO THE OCEAN, IT'S COMING BACKWARDS. SO I WAS LIKE, OKAY, THEY'RE ONLY DRILLING MAYBE TO CALALLEN, THEN I FIND OUT 666, IN OTHER WORDS, ALL THE WAY TO THE DAM IT'S GOING TO BE SALT WATER NOW. I'M NOT A GENOUS, I DON'T WORK FOR KIEWIT, BUT MY MIND STILL WORKS. I CAN STILL DO RESEARCH AND I'M SURE YOU GUYS CAN, TOO. OKAY. THANK YOU. . >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. AGUIRRE. THANK YOU, NO CLAPPING BACK IN THE BACK. I KNOW, I SEE. REVEREND WILLIAMS? >> HENRY WILLIAMS, CORPUS CHRISTI, DISTRICT ONE. I AM A -- I'M A THIRD-GENERATION CORPUS CHRISTIANS, AND MOST OF US, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE -- YOU KNOW, YOU'VE HEARD ME BEFORE. I'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE. I WANT TO SPEAK WITH YOU WITH REGARD TO THE MORAL NATURE OF PRACTICALLY ALL THAT WE DEAL WITH. THE -- AND I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO VOTE NO TO ITEM 16. YOU KNOW, WHEN IT OCCURRED TO ME, THIS MATTER OF DROUGHT, OKAY, AND MY QUESTION IS THAT WE OF CORPUS CHRISTI, WHY ARE WE HAVING A DROUGHT? IT IS GOD WHO PROVIDES WATER. IT IS GOD WHO CREATED WATER. OKAY. BBIBLICALLY, GOD BLESSES US WITH RAIN. IF WE HAVE NOT BEEN RECEIVING THE RAIN THAT WE NEED, THEN WHAT WE MUST DO IS EXAMINE OUR LIVES AND THE LIVES OF OUR COMMUNITY. THERE MAY BE AN AREA THAT'S IN CORPUS CHRISTI THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED, YOU KNOW, SUCH AS THE CARE OF THE POOR, THE NEEDY, THE HOMELESS. AND BIBLICALLY, GOD BLESSES US WHEN WE'RE PROPERLY ALIGNED WITH HIS MORAL WAYS. HE WILL GIVE WATER, AND HE WILL GIVE RAIN. I WOULD LIKE TO READ TO YOU FROM DEUTERONOMY 11:13 AND FOLLOWING. AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS THAT IF HE SHALL HARKEN DILIGENTLY WITHIN MY COMMANDMENTS, WHICH I COMMAND YOU THIS DAY TO LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD, TO SERVE HIM WITH ALL YOUR HEART, WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, THAT I WILL GIVE YOU THE RAIN TO YOUR LAND. IN HIS NEW SEASON, THE FIRST RAIN, THE LATTER RAIN, THAT THOU MUST GATHER IN THY CORN, THIGH OIL. THY OIL. AND I WILL SEND GRASS IN THY FIELDS FOR LIKE CATTLE. TAKE HEED TO YOURSELVES THAT YOUR HEART BE NOT DECEIVED AND TURN ASIDE AND SERVE OTHER GODS. WE ARE SERVING THE GODS OF INTELLECTUALISM. YOU KNOW, WE'RE SERVING THE FALSE GODS THAT ARE COMING TO OUR MIDST AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS -- >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. WILLIAMS. >> -- THAT ARE FALSE SOLUTIONS. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. WILLIAMS. >> AND GOD BLESS YOU ALL AND Y'ALL ARE IN MY PRAYERS AND THE PRAYERS OF ALL OF OUR PEOPLE. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, SIR. BISHOP CE RICHARDSON. >> BISHOP CE RICHARDSON PREDISTRICT 2. I CAME BEFORE THE COUNCIL FOR TWO REASONS. FIRST I'D LIKE TO SAY TO OUR HONORABLE PAULETTE, TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND TO OUR CITY MANAGER, THANK YOU FOR BUILDING THE NEW PAVILION AND THE AC DILWORTH PARK. IT'S A WONDERFUL PAVILION AND THANK Y'ALL FOR RESURFACING THE BASKETBALL COURT. THE CITIZENS IN OUR COMMUNITY, THEY LOVE IT. IT LOOKS GREAT. AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, THIS SATURDAY MORNING AT 10:00 WE WILL HAVE A BLESSING AND DEDICATION OF THE NEW PAVILION, AND I'D LIKE TO INVITE ALL OF YOU TO COME. SECONDLY, ON SATURDAY, AUGUST THE NINTH, I WILL BE SPONSORING THE CITYWIDE WE WILL BE PRAYING FOR THE SAFETY OF ALL OF OUR YOUNG PEOPLE. WE'RE PRAYING FOR A SAFE, PRODUCTIVE SCHOOL YEAR. WE'RE PRAYING FROM PRE-K TO COLLEGE. WE WILL HAVE SUPERINTENDENT KIMBERLY MOORE FROM WEST OSO. ALEX UPSHAW HAWKINS FROM CCISD AND THEY WILL BE ADDRESSING WHAT TO EXPECT THIS SCHOOL YEAR. WE ALSO HAVE THE CORPUS CHRISTI POLICE DEPARTMENT. THEY WILL BE SHARING SCHOOL SAFETY. AND WE'LL HAVE PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT AND LEADERSHIP SUCCESS AND THEN WE'LL HAVE PASTORS FROM ALL AROUND THE CITY. THEY'LL BE PRAYING FOR ALL OF OUR STUDENTS, OUR PARENTS, OUR TEACHERS, OUR COLLEGE PROFESSORS, OUR COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY, PARENTS AND GUARDIANS ADMINISTRATORS STAFF, AND ALL SCHOOL PERSONNEL AND IT WILL BE FROM 10:00 TO 12:00, TWO HOURS. AND THEN WE'LL SERVE A SNACK LUNCH TO ALL THAT DESIRE. AND I WAS WONDERING IF THE CITY WOULD BE OPEN TO MAKING THE CITYWIDE PRAYER RALLY AN OFFICIAL FUNCTION OF OUR CITY THAT EVERY YEAR BEFORE SCHOOL STARTS WE'LL PRAY FOR THE YOUNG PEOPLE, THE TEACHERS AND EVERYTHING. WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THE TRAGEDIES IN OUR SCHOOLS THAT WE SEE OTHER PLACES. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE THAT NOWHERE BUT CERTAINLY WE DON'T WANT IT HERE. BUT WE'RE GOING TO PRAY THAT GOD WOULD COVER EVERYBODY AND EVERYBODY WOULD BE SAFE. YOU CAN'T GET ENOUGH PRAYER. THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THIS TIME. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, BISHOP RICHARDSON. KYLE HOSACK. >> KYLE HOSACK, DISTRICT 5. I SPEAK TODAY AS A FATHER, AS A CITIZEN OF THIS COMMUNITY, AND AS AN ADVOCATE FOR ALL PARENTS WHO HAVE BEEN FAILED BY THE VERY SYSTEM MEANT TO PROTECT THEM. FOR OVER A YEAR I'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET HELP AND INFORMATION FROM THE CORPUS CHRISTI POLICE DEPARTMENT AND I'VE BEEN IGNORED EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. I REACHED OUT TO CCPD LEADERSHIP, CHIEF OF POLICE, MIKE MARKLE, AND COPIED THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THIS E-MAIL AND NO ONE HAS RESPONDED. AFTER MORE THAN A YEAR OF CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE D.A.'S OFFICE, I SAT DOWN WITH THEM AND THEY CLEARLY STATED THAT THE NUECES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DOES NOT DIRECT CCPD'S DECISIONS NOR MAINTAIN ANY POLICY ABOUT ENFORCING THE PENAL CODE. THIS CONTRADICTS WHAT I WAS TOLD LAST YEAR BY CHIEF PALMER AND STEVE SWITZ. YES, I HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND WHEN BOTH SIDES CONTRADICT EACH OTHER I'M WONDERING WHICH VERSION CCPD IS FOLLOWING. I HAVE SPOKEN DIRECTLY WITH OFFICERS WITH INTERNAL AFFAIRS. I HAVE BODY CAM FOOTAGE, AUDIO, VIDEO RECORDINGS, AND EACH OF THE OFFICERS I DEAL WITH SAYS THE SAME THING. EITHER WE DON'T ENFORCE THAT OR WE HAVE A VERBAL DIRECTIVE FROM THE CHIEF OF POLICE NOT TO ENFORCE THAT PENAL CODE. THE LAW THEY'RE REFERRING TO IS TEXAS PENAL CODE 2503, INTERFERENCE WITH CHILD CUSTODY. IT'S DESIGNED TO GIVE THE PARENT THE LEGAL BACKING THEY NEED WHEN THE PARENT REFUSES TO TURN OVER THEIR CHILD FOR POSSESSION. THIS MAKES IT A FELONY. I HAVE SUBMITTED SEVERAL OPEN RECORDS REQUESTS FOR THESE POLICIES AND EACH TIME I'M TOLD NO POLICY EXISTS. OVER THE PAST DECADE, AFTER THOUSANDS OF REPORTS AND INCIDENTS, THE OPEN RECORDS REQUEST PRODUCED ONLY 400 REPORTS FROM 2015 TO 2025 OF CUSTODIAN INTERFERENCE, OF THOSE 400, ONLY 14 OF THOSE WERE EVER FILED WITH THE D.A.'S OFFICE. THAT'S A PROSECUTION RATE OF 3%. THAT IS ONLY REFLECTIVE OF PARENTS WHO DIDN'T BACK DOWN AND WERE ONLY ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY GET AN INCIDENT OR OFFENSE REPORT TO START WITH. IT'S NOT ENFORCEMENT, IT'S A WILLFUL AND INTENTIONAL ABANDONMENT. IF PARENTS ARE DENIED THEIR PARENTING TIME AND GO TO CCPD FOR HELP ENFORCING VALID COURT ORDERS, THEY ARE TOLD TO GO BACK TO COURT. THEY ARE DISCOURAGED, THEY ARE DISMISSED, AND THEY JUST GIVE UP. I'M NOT ASKING FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT, I'M ASKING FOR THE LAW TO BE FOLLOWED BY THE POLICE OFFICERS SWORN TO UPHOLD IT. I'M ASKING THIS COUNCIL TO PUT PRESSURE ON CCPD LEADERSHIP TO EXPLAIN THEIR VERBAL POLICIES AND STOP IGNORING FELONY VIOLATIONS. WHEN POLICE CAN IGNORE THE LAW, WE LOSE FAITH IN THE SYSTEM. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. HOSACK. CAN SOMEBODY SPEAK WITH MR. HOSACK? >> [OFF MIC] >> Mayor Guajardo: ALL RIGHT. WELL, THEY'RE GOING TO SPEAK WITH YOU, MR. HOSACK. MAGGIE PEACOCK. >> OKAY. MAGGIE PEACOCK, DISTRICT 2. AS MANY OF Y'ALL HAVE ALREADY ASSUMED, I'M HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST DESALINATION AND FOR Y'ALL TO VOTE NO ON ITEM 16. DESAL IS A FALSE SOLUTION. TO RECAP ONCE AGAIN WHAT Y'ALL HAVE HEARD FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS COUNTLESS TIMES, IF Y'ALL WERE TO BUILD THIS HILLCREST DESALINATION PLANT, THE WATER WOULD BE FOR HEAVY POLLUTERS AND NOT FOR PEOPLE. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE RUN OUT OF WATER AND ALL OF THE WATER THAT IS PRODUCED FROM DESALINATION IS PRIVATIZED AND PRIORITIZED TOWARDS INDUSTRY, WHAT HAPPENS TO US? Y'ALL ARE PROMISING WATER TO SO MANY INDUSTRIES BEFORE WE EVEN HAVE WATER FOR PEOPLE. AND IT'S RIDICULOUS. THE ANSWER TO ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS IS CURTAILMENT OF INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS AND TO PRIORITIZE THE PEOPLE. SECOND, DESALINATION THREATENS ECOTOURISM. THIRD PFOS. Y'ALL ARE IGNORING THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF CORPUS CHRISTIANS. IT'S ENVIRONMENTALLY RACIST. THE COST IS INSANE. AND YEAH. Y'ALL HAVE HEARD ALL OF THAT MANY TIMES BEFORE. WITH ALL OF THIS BEING SAID, MYSELF AND SOME FRIENDS HAVE BEEN TALKING WITH OUR NEIGHBORS, OUR FAMILY, OUR CO-WORKERS ABOUT THE CITY BUDGET AND HOW Y'ALL ARE SPENDING OUR MONEY AND WHAT Y'ALL ARE PRIORITIZING. PEOPLE ARE NOT ONLY UNFULFILLED, THEY ARE FRUSTRATED AND THEY ARE STRUGGLING. THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS WE HAVE BEEN DOING SOME EXERCISES AND ACTIVITIES AND PRACTICES WITH FELLOW COMMUNITY MEMBERS UTILIZING IMAGINATION AND DREAMING AND WRITING AND DRAWING OF THE CITY THAT WE WISH TO SEE. AND I'M GOING TO STATE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE DISCUSSED WHILE TALKING WITH OUR NEIGHBORS. BIKE LANES, YOUTH PROGRAMS. MORE EQUITABLE PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEMS. CITY-RUN COMPOST, LOW-BARRIER SHELTERS LIBRARIES REPARATIONS, MORE COMMUNITY GARDENS AND FARMERS MARKETS. WHEN PEOPLE USE THEIR IMAGINATION THEY ARE NOT IMAGINING MORE INDUSTRY AND PRIVATIZED WATER. COMMUNITY MEMBERS WANT QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAMS. DESALINATION IS NOT THAT. PEOPLE WANT TO PRIORITIZE DATA-BASED SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS CRIME IN OUR COMMUNITIES INCLUDING DE-ESCALATION, ACCOUNTABILITY PROCESSES. THEY WANT ENVIRONMENTALLY-FRIENDLY INFRASTRUCTURE PRACTICES. SPENDING OVER A BILLION DOLLARS ON THE WORLD'S MOST EXPENSIVE DESALINATION PLANT IS NOT THAT. PEOPLE WANT DEMOCRACY AND TRANSPARENCY. THIS IS NOT WHAT Y'ALL ARE DOING. CITIZENS WILL NOT PAY FOR INDUSTRY INVESTMENTS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT. AND ALSO IF Y'ALL WANT PEOPLE TO STOP BEING MEAN TO YOU, Y'ALL SHOULD STOP BEING A BULLY OF A COUNCIL. LIKE, Y'ALL ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH DECORUM THAN THE ACTUAL MATERIAL CONDITIONS AND CONCERNS OF PEOPLE Y'ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO SERVE. AND IT'S B.S. SO -- >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. PEACOCK. TONY REYES. TONY REYES? AND THEN SCOTT, RACHEL, JASON, AND JOSHUA. >> HELLO. I AM ZOE GRIME, A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 2 AND I'M GOING TO KEEP THINGS SIMPLE TODAY SINCE THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY PEOPLE WHO TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE AND IN GREAT DETAIL. I AM AGAINST THE DESALINATION AND I AM JUST CONSTANTLY DISAPPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL IN FRONT OF ME. I WISH I COULD BE A PROUD CITIZEN OF CORPUS CHRISTI BUT TIME AND TIME AGAIN CHOICES HAVE BEEN MADE TO BENEFIT HEAVY INDUSTRY INSTEAD OF THE PEOPLE WITHIN THE CITY. REDISTRICTING HILLCREST INTO INDUSTRY ZONE IS NOT BENEFITING PEOPLE, IT IS PUTTING SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES AND FAMILIES IN HEAVILY-POLLUTED AREAS. IT IS NOT BENEFITING THE PEOPLE TO BUILD THIS DESALINATION PLANT WHEN MOST OF THE WATER IS PROMISED TO HEAVY INDUSTRY AND WHEN THE WATER IS GOING TO BE HEAVILY POLLUTED AFTER BEING DESALINATED. IF YOU TRULY WANTED TO REPRESENT THE VOTERS AND NOT YOUR DONORS, YOU WOULD BE FIRMLY AGAINST THIS PROJECT. IT'S JUST RIDICULOUS TO IMAGINE SPENDING OUR TAXPAYER MONEY TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT HAS VERY FEW BENEFITS TO THE ACTUAL PEOPLE LIVING IN THE CITY. NOTHING IS BEING DONE. THE DROUGHT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE. AND DESALINATION ISN'T GOING TO BE DONE TOMORROW. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE DONE NEXT MONTH OR NEXT YEAR. BUT MY NEIGHBORS NEEDED WATER YESTERDAY. WE NEED SHORT-TERM SOLUTIONS IF WE'RE GOING TO PURSUE SOMETHING THAT TAKES SO LONG. WE NEED TO BE RESPONSIBLE WITH OUR SOURCES OF WATER SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE MORE PROBLEMS LATER DOWN THE LINE. AND I JUST DON'T FEEL LIKE THE COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING THE ACTUAL NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE IN FRONT OF THE NEEDS OF THE INDUSTRIES THAT THEY ARE REPRESENTING. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. GRIME. SCOTT CORLISS. >> MY NAME IS SCOTT CORLISS. I'M IN DISTRICT 4 AND I JUST WANTED TO OBVIOUSLY -- I SAY OBVIOUSLY, IT'S NOT OBVIOUS BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH A DIVISIVE CAMPAIGN ON THIS DESALINATION PROJECT. THEY CLAIM THAT THERE'S FEAR MONGERING GOING ON BUT I HAVE HEARD NOTHING BUT NEGATIVITY TOWARDS DESALINATION THAT'S ALREADY BEING DONE ALL OVER THIS WORLD. IT'S BEEN DONE IN ISRAEL, IT'S BEEN DONE IN AREAS OF THIS COUNTRY THAT HAS BEEN PROVEN TRUE. I ALSO HEAR THINGS SUCH AS WHY DON'T WE DRILL MORE WELLS? WELL, THERE IS GOING TO BE A CONSERVATION ACT IN THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT'S GOING TO LIMIT US FROM BEING ABLE TO DRAW MORE WATER FROM THE GROUND BECAUSE IT IS PROHIBITIVE TO OTHER COMMUNITIES. AND WE WILL SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCE OF IT. AND I HEAR THINGS ABOUT COST. YES. THIS IS A TREMENDOUS COST. IT IS TREMENDOUS. IT'S OVERWHELMING TO KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE SPENDING 1.2, $1.4 BILLION FOR A WATER SOURCE. AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE'VE HAD TO WAIT SO LONG TO TRY AND DO IT. BUT THE CANS BEEN KICKED DOWN THE ROAD SINCE THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE WAS BUILT. IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED SINCE 1993. I MYSELF HAVE VISITED VARIOUS DESAL PLANTS AND RECENTLY VISITED THE ONE IN TAMPA, FLORIDA. FOLKS, THIS IS A RELIABLE SOURCE FOR YOUR WATER. IT IS A RELIABLE SOURCE FOR YOUR WATER. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAVEN'T DONE IT BEFORE. IT'S BEEN EXPENSIVE. NOW IT'S EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE. IF WE TRY TO GO SOURCING OUR WATER IN THE GROUND, WE'RE GOING TO FIND OURSELVES BACK IN THIS POSITION IN EIGHT TO TEN YEARS BECAUSE OF LAWS THAT WILL COME DOWN THE PIKE. I IMPLORE YOU TO PLEASE, PLEASE PASS THIS. LET IT GO FORWARD BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT THIS CITY NEEDS AND IT NEEDS TO MOVE FORWARD NOW BECAUSE WE WASTE ANYMORE TIME, WE'RE GOING TO BE IN A WORST BOX IN A FEW MORE YEARS. I PROMISE YOU. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. CORLISS. RACHEL CABALLERO. >> RACHEL CABALLERO, DISTRICT 1. FIRST OF ALL, I BELIEVE WE ARE ALL HERE DOING THE PEOPLE'S WORK. MOST OF US ARE NOT GETTING PAID. MOST OF US ARE NOT GETTING KICKBACKS. WE'RE ALL HERE BECAUSE WE'RE FIGHTING FOR SOMETHING THAT WE BELIEVE IN. AND, YOU KNOW, THE LAUGHING, THE MOCKING, YOU KNOW, IT'S DECORUM ON BOTH SIDES HERE. AND THAT NEEDS TO COME TO THE ATTENTION OF EVERYONE. AND IT'S INFURIATING THAT WE KEEP GOING AFTER THE YOUNGER GENERATION AND THE PEOPLE TAKING TIME OUT OF THEIR DAYS BECAUSE THEY COME HERE TO TELL US WHAT THEIR OPINIONS ARE IN THESE MATTERS. AS FAR AS THE 100 MILLION-DOLLAR AGING AND WHY PEOPLE ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT, THAT'S YOUR JOB IS TO REPAIR AND MAINTAIN INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT'S WHY WE'RE NOT ASKING THE QUESTIONS ON THAT $100 MILLION PROJECT. THIS IS COMMON SENSE. COMMON SENSE. THIS $1.2 BILLION EXPERIMENTAL DESAL PLANT THAT YOU GUYS HAVE REFUSED TO LET THE COMMUNITY KNOW -- AND THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS. YOU GUYS DON'T EVEN HAVE THE DISCHARGE PERMIT YET. THERE IS NO DISCHARGE PERMIT AS OF FIVE MINUTES AGO WHEN I JUST CHECKED. IT'S PENDING. YOU GUYS ARE BURNING THROUGH CASH WITH NO PERMITS. BURNING THROUGH CASH WITH NO PERMITS. NOT A HAMMER HAS BEEN LIFTED. THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD, WE WANT TO KEEP HIDING BEHIND THAT LOAN. OKAY. BROOK POP, THE ONE THAT GAVE YOU GUYS THE LOAN IS NOW THE TCEQ CHAIR. SHE GOT APPOINTED THERE. SO OF COURSE SHE'S GOING TO SEND OUT LETTERS SAYING, HEY, THIS IS A GREAT IDEA. WE'RE GONNA PUNISH YOU IF YOU DON'T USE THIS MONEY THE WAY WE TELL YOU. THEY ARE A PART OF THE WATER HEIST TOO. YOU ALL HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GUIDE THE COST OF THIS EXPERIMENT. THAT IS A FLAT-OUT LIE. THIS ALL STARTED AT $227 MILLION AND WE'RE NOW AT $1.2 BILLION. AND AS OF TODAY, THE NUMBERS ARE STILL BEING QUESTIONED BECAUSE DIFFERENT SETS OF NUMBERS ARE BEING SUPPLIED TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE, DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS IF WE GET INFORMATION AT ALL. ALL WE'RE HEARING IS EXCUSES. WE WANT MORE OPTIONS. WE WANT CHEAPER OPTIONS. WE WANT FASTER OPTIONS AND WE WANT AN OPTION THAT ISN'T GOING TO KILL OUR ENVIRONMENT AND OUR ABILITY TO AFFORD TO LIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY. THIS ISN'T AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOWN THAT WE WANT -- THIS IS OUR COMMUNITY FIRST. THIS IS OUR COMMUNITY FIRST AND WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO LIVE HERE AND DO THE THINGS THAT WE ENJOY DOING, LIKE FISHING AND SITTING OUT NEXT TO THE BAY. MY TOWN, OUR FUTURE IS BEING FUNDED AND RUN BY GULF COAST GROWTH VENTURES. EXXON SABIC. AND PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT. THIS IS A HEIST. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. CABALLERO. JASON HALE. >> JASON HALE, CORPUS CHRISTI. THANK YOU, MAYOR. GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBERS. TEN YEARS AGO THE CITY OF FLINT WAS GOING THROUGH A WATER CRISIS. 12 PEOPLE DIED FROM A DISEASE OUTBREAK. THOUSANDS OF RESIDENTS AND CHILDREN ARE EXPOSED TO HIGH LEVELS OF LEAD AND HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WERE SPENT ON FIXING THE PROBLEM. ALL BECAUSE RESOURCE MANAGERS MADE THE WRONG DECISION. PERSONALLY IT SHOOK ME BECAUSE I USED TO LIVE IN FLINT AND THAT COULD HAPPEN TO ME. I SAW ONE OF MY EX-ROOMMATES ON THE NEWS PROTESTING FLINT'S HANDLING OF THE CRISIS. WHAT SHOOK ME THE MOST IS I NEVER THOUGHT THE PEOPLE WE TRUSTED TO GET THESE DECISIONS RIGHT COULD SCREW UP SO BADLY. BUT WHAT I LEARNED THAT ELECTED OFFICIALS CAN GET IT WRONG AND IT CAN AFFECT ME. IT CAN AFFECT MY FAMILY. IT CAN AFFECT MY COMMUNITY. AND THAT'S WHY I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS PROJECT SO CLOSELY. BECAUSE WHAT I ULTIMATELY LEARNED IS THAT IT'S UP TO RESIDENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RIGHT DECISIONS ARE MADE WHEN IT COMES TO OUR WATER. THAT'S WHY I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR THIS CITY TO PRODUCE ALL THE MODELING DATA FOR THIS PROJECT. BECAUSE WITHOUT THAT DATA, RESIDENTS ARE UNABLE TO MAKE SURE THIS PROJECT WILL NOT CREATE A WATER CRISIS OF ITS OWN. IF THE CITY GETS THIS WRONG, NO ONE IS GOING TO BAIL US OUT. THE TCEQ ISN'T GOING TO MAKE US WHOLE. NEITHER IS FREESE AND NICHOLS AND NEITHER IS THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. IT IS UP TO US TO GET THIS RIGHT BECAUSE EVERY UNFORESEEN COST DUE TO POOR DESIGN WILL ULTIMATELY BE BORN BY WORKING FAMILIES IN THE COASTAL BEND. YET, THE CITY CONTINUES TO GATEKEEP VITAL INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THIS PLAN DOES NOT BACKFIRE. THREE YEARS AGO, TxDOT HIRED INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS TO REVIEW THE HARBOR BRIDGE'S DESIGN. THEY FOUND FLAWS THAT WERE HIGHLY PROBLEMATIC AND WOULD CREATE SAFETY CONCERNS SO THEY HIRED A NEW ENGINEERING FIRM AND THEY FIXED IT. I BELIEVE WE NEED AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THIS DESIGN BECAUSE GETTING THIS WRONG EXPOSES OUR RESERVOIRS TO FASTER DRAWDOWNS WHEN WE NEED THEM THE MOST. THE DATA I'M REQUESTING SHOULD BE THE BARE MINIMUM, NOT A LUXURY. YOU SAY TRUST US, I SAY SHOW US THE RECEIPTS. GIVE US THE DATA. RIGHT NOW COUNCIL MEMBERS AND RESIDENTS LACK SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT THIS PROJECT WILL PERFORM AS DESCRIBED. SO I URGE COUNCIL TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE CITY'S DESIGN HAS BEEN PERFORMED AND ALL DATA HAS BEEN RELEASED. THESE ARE OUR DOLLARS. THIS IS OUR WATER. PLEASE DON'T DENY US OUR RIGHT TO DUE DILIGENCE. IT'S UNFAIR AND IT'S UNJUST. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. HALE. JOSHUA FREDERICK. >> JOSHUA FREDERICK, CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. I HAVE TO BE REAL CAREFUL. I GOT ACCUSED OF NOT TAKING THIS SERIOUSLY FROM TIME TO TIME BECAUSE OF MY JOVIAL NATURE. I STAND FIRM AGAINST THE DESALINATION PLANTS AND ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO PURSUE THEM FURTHER. FIRST OF ALL, THURSDAY AT 6:00 THERE IS A SCHOOL SUPPLY DRIVE HAPPENING AT THE HOUSE OF ROCK. I KNOW QUITE A FEW OF YOU WENT TO THE 20-YEAR ANNIVERSARY. THAT WAS AWESOME OF YOU. IF YOU CAN MAKE IT BACK THERE, THEY HAVE A TRIBUTE TO AC/DC COVER BAND CALLED THE MIGHTY UNCLEAN. LAST YEAR THEY WERE ABLE TO GET 300 POUNDS OF SCHOOL SUPPLIES AND 150 BACKPACKS TO CCISD STUDENTS. I PERSONALLY THIS YEAR HAVE COLLECTED 120 POUNDS OF SCHOOL SUPPLIES JUST FROM MYSELF AND FROM PRICE CATCH, WHICH IS BUTCH POOL AND CARLOS OUT THERE ON AGNES. THEY WERE ABLE TO HELP ME OUT WITH THAT. SO I HOPE SOME OF YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DONATE TO THAT, EVEN IF YOU DON'T CARE FOR THE HARD ROCK MUSIC THAT WILL BE PLAYING. ALTHOUGH I KNOW A FEW OF YOU RECOGNIZED THE OZZY QUOTES LAST WEEK SO I HOPE A FEW OF YOU ARE SHAKING YOUR HEADS TO IT AS WELL. THERE'S A FEW OTHER THINGS -- A BILLION OTHER THINGS REALLY TO ADDRESS. THE ONE THAT'S STICKING IN MY CRAW RIGHT NOW IS TWO WEEKS AGO WE CHANGED OVER THE PUBLIC COMMENT TO THIS 5:30. I STOOD AGAINST IT THEN AND I DO NOW. THERE WAS A THING HAPPENING OUTSIDE THOSE DOORS WHERE I DON'T WANT TO ACCUSE THE POLICE BUT THE SECURITY OFFICERS WEREN'T ALLOWING PEOPLE IN HERE WITH BEVERAGES OR FOOD. YES, IT IS A STATED POLICY ON THE OUTSIDE OF THAT DOOR, I AGREE. BUT IF THAT IS A POLICY THAT IS GOING TO BE ENFORCED, I THINK IT SHOULD BE ENFORCED ACROSS THE WHOLE BOARD. AS I COUNT THE WATER BOTTLES BEHIND THE DAIS THERE, I WOULD CALL THAT UNFAIR. I'M HERE WITH YOU GUYS TOO. 12 HOURS IN SOMETIMES. I NEED MY CAFFEINE. I DON'T DENY IT. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO ENFORCE THE RULES FOR US, IT SHOULD BE ENFORCED FOR Y'ALL AS WELL. I THINK THAT'S ONLY FAIR. NO RULES FOR THEE BUT NOT FOR ME. THIS LAST ONE IS SUPER DUMB BUT IT BOTHERS ME BECAUSE I AM OUTSIDE A LOT. I RECENTLY PICKED UP A NEW PROPERTY TO TAKE CARE OF AND THERE WAS JUST A CLUMP OF BALLOONS AND I WENT LOOKING AND I'M PRETTY SURE OUR CITY HAS SAID THAT'S NOT OKAY. GOING WAY BACK TO AN OLD ORDINANCE, THE INTENTIONAL RELEASE OF BALLOONS IS NOT ALLOWED. TEXAS PASSED A STATE LAW SAYING THAT MYLAR BALLOONS SPECIFICALLY ARE NOT ALLOWED. I HOPE WE CAN TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REMIND OUR CITIZENS THAT IT'S ALL BALLOONS IN CORPUS CHRISTI THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BE INTENTIONALLY RELEASED. JUST TO REMIND THEM FOR ME. IT BOTHERS ME. SUCH AN INTENTIONALLY. INTENTIONAL LITTERING. FLOAT AWAY AND BE SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROBLEM. THAT'S REALLY DUMB. THAT'S ABOUT ALL I GOT FOR Y'ALL NOW. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. FREDERICK. ALBERTO. >> ALBERT SARTUCCI, I LIVE IN DISTRICT 3. OWNER OF HARD LIFE BAIT AND TACKLE WITH 200,000 SUBS AND GROWING. WE ARE KEEPING TRACK OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN CORPUS CHRISTI. I'VE GOT SEVERAL QUESTIONS AND THE GROWING VOTE FOR ITEM 6 TO DENY IT. THE REASON, THE GRAPHS TODAY SHOW -- WELL, LET ME BACKTRACK. THE GRAPHS TODAY, DO THEY INCLUDE ALL THE SHUT DOWNS AND LAWSUITS THAT WILL HAPPEN WITH THIS DESAL PLANT ONCE IT'S UP AND RUNNING? Y'ALL ARE PROMISING WATER TO THESE HIGH-INDUSTRY USERS. HOW MUCH ARE THEY GOING TO SUE US FOR WHEN THAT DESAL PLANT IS NOT UP AND RUNNING FOR THAT DAY, FOR THAT WEEK, FOR THAT MONTH? BECAUSE LIKE THE CONTAMINATION SPILLED THAT HAPPENED TWO WEEKS AGO, WILL THAT SHUT THE DESAL PLANT DOWN? MORE THAN LIKELY. FEAR OF CONTAMINATION. CONTAMINATION, ONCE IT GETS INTO THAT, Y'ALL DON'T HAVE A PRICE ON WHAT IT TAKES TO CLEAN IT OR REPLACE IT. HOW MUCH IS THAT GOING TO COST US? HOW MUCH ARE THEY GOING TO SUE US FOR AT THAT TIME BECAUSE WE'RE ON THE HOOK PROVIDING THAT WATER TO THEM FOR THAT TIME PERIOD. THERE'S ALREADY CONTAMINATIONS IN THE WATER RIGHT NOW. I KNOW THIS. I'M A FISHERMAN. I HAVE BEEN HERE 40 YEARS FISHING THESE WATERS. I HAVE SEEN MYSELF, THE CONTAMINATIONS THAT SIT ON THE BOTTOM OF THE WATER AND THAT'S WHY Y'ALL WANT TO PUT THE INTAKE AT? Y'ALL ARE NOT DOING YOUR HOMEWORK. YOU'RE SUCKING THAT CONTAMINATION INTO A WATER SYSTEM AND Y'ALL ARE SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO CONNECT THAT WATER SYSTEM INTO OUR MAIN WATER SUPPLY. YOU'RE GOING TO POLLUTE THE WHOLE CITY'S WATER SUPPLY. THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT Y'ALL PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT Y'ALL ARE DOING BECAUSE Y'ALL ARE ABOUT TO CONTAMINATE THE WHOLE CITY AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO SET US UP FOR FAILURE BECAUSE IF WE CANNOT SUPPLY THOSE BUSINESSES WITH THE WATER THAT IS NEEDED FOR THEM TO FUNCTION EVERY SINGLE DAY, THEY WILL SUE US. I GUARANTEE IT. NO BUSINESS -- LOOK AT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH BOB HALL PIER. IT'S A PIER. IF IT'S NOT UP AND RUNNING BY THE DATE THAT IS SET, THEY'RE GOING TO BE SUED FOR $10,000 A DAY FOR A FISHING PIER. THESE ARE MULTIBILLION DOLLAR OPERATIONS AND IF THEY CEASE TO FUNCTION THAT DAY, THAT HOUR, THAT MINUTE, THAT WEEK, THAT MONTH, THEY ARE GOING TO WANT THEIR MONEY. AND THEY'RE GOING TO COME RIGHT AFTER US BECAUSE WE ARE THE ONES PROMISING THEM THAT WATER THROUGH A DESAL PLANT THAT IS IN A HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE POSITION AND A POLLUTED AREA. I DID SECURITY IN THE BAY TOO OR IN THAT CHARTER AREA, IN THE CHANNEL WHEN I GOT OUT OF THE MARINE CORPS. I HAVE SEEN THE POLLUTION MYSELF. YOU CAN'T TELL ME IT DOESN'T EXIST. IT IS THERE AND IF Y'ALL DON'T LISTEN, YOU'RE GOING TO POLLUTE US ALL AND IT'S ON Y'ALL. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. ROBERT DESHAZO. RAUL MARTINEZ. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS RAUL MARTINEZ. I'M FROM DISTRICT 1. I KNOW THERE'S A FLASH POINT TOPIC GOING ON SO THIS IS ALMOST SEEMS TRITE. I'M A RESIDENT OF NORTHWEST CORPUS CHRISTI NEAR VIOLET AND I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT PARAKEETS. I APPRECIATE Y'ALL LISTENING TO MY MESSAGE, BY THE WAY. I FIRST CAME TO CORPUS CHRISTI TO TAKE A JOB ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO AND I'VE COME TO LOVE AND APPRECIATE THE CITY. WE KNOW THAT CORPUS CHRISTI HAS A LOT TO OFFER, THANKS TO A THRIVING ECONOMY, ITS MIXTURE OF CULTURES, AND ITS MILD CLIMATE. ANOTHER IMPORTANT DRAW IS THE CITY'S PROXIMITY TO THE GULF COAST, WHICH IS IMPORTANT FOR TOURISM AND RECREATION AS WELL AS FOR ITS ECONOMIC IMPACT. FOCUSING FOR A MOMENT ON TOURISM AND RECREATION. AND I'M QUOTING THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI GOVERNMENT FACEBOOK PAGE. CORPUS CHRISTI HAS BEEN CROWNED BIRDIEST CITY IN AMERICA FOR OVER A DECADE. OUR COASTAL BEND IS HOME TO OVER 500 BIRD SPECIES. UNQUOTE. SO, AS WE ALL KNOW, THE DIVERSITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI'S BIRD SPECIES IS ONE OF THE MANY NOTABLE DISTINCTIONS FOR WHICH CORPUS CHRISTI IS KNOWN. WELL, I REALIZE THAT THE CITY FACES MANY CHALLENGES OF VARYING DEGREES OF GRAVITY, I WOULD LIKE TO RAISE AWARENESS ON A PROBLEM THAT I THINK IS STILL LOW ON OUR COLLECTIVE RADAR BUT COULD HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO PRESENT A MORE SERIOUS IMPACT IN THE NOT TOO DISTANT FUTURE. THAT ISSUE IS THE GROWING POPULATION OF PARAKEETS. ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO, I WAS AMAZED TO STUMBLE UPON A SINGLE NEST OF PARAKEETS HIGH UP IN A PALM IN THE CALALLEN AREA. HOWEVER, SINCE THAT DAY, THESE AGGRESSIVE, NON-NATIVE BIRDS HAVE BECOME MUCH MORE PREVALENT. AT LEAST FOUR DAYS OUT OF THE WEEK I LIKE TO PLAY DISK GOLF AT WEST GUTH PARK AND I NOTICE THE PARAKEET POPULATION IS GROWING. I ALSO NOTICE THAT THE PARAKEETS ARE AGGRESSIVE AND THE FLOCKS WILL ATTACK OTHER NATIVE BIRDS. I DON'T HAVE ANY HARD EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT MY OBSERVATIONS BUT IT SEEMS THAT PARAKEETS ARE SLOWLY BECOMING THE DOMINANT SPECIES IN NORTHWEST CORPUS CHRISTI. IF THIS IS TRUE, I FEEL THAT IT COULD ENDANGER THE DIVERSITY OF THE BIRD POPULATION FOR WHICH CORPUS CHRISTI IS KNOWN. I GUESS I'D LIKE TO CALL ON THE CITY TO AT LEAST BRIEFLY STUDY THE SITUATION TO DETERMINE IF THERE IS POTENTIAL FOR CONCERN. OR PERHAPS CAN CITY CAN CALL ON THE ESTEEMED TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS TO CONDUCT THEIR OWN STUDY. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THERE'S NOT A CAUSE FOR CONCERN, THAT IS IF IT IS DEEMED THAT THERE IS MINIMAL POTENTIAL FOR A SERIOUS SHIFT IN THE LOCAL BIRD POPULATION, I THINK A STUDY OF THE IMPACT OF THESE PARAKEETS WOULD STILL BE INFORMATIVE AND WOULD BE A GREAT INTEREST ACADEMICALLY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. MARTINEZ. CHLOE TORRES. THEN WE'LL HAVE MADILYNN CHAPMAN, ROBIN COX, AND ISABEL ARAIZA. >> HI. CHLOE TORRES, DISTRICT 2. I ACTUALLY CAME TO SPEAK ABOUT A CONCERN THAT I HAVE REGARDING HOW CONSTITUENTS CAN GET IN TOUCH WITH THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO OVER THE WEEKEND MANY PEOPLE HAD MOBILIZATIONS ABOUT THE DESAL VOTE TODAY. AND PART OF THE WORK THAT I DO IS ABOUT CONNECTING, EMPOWERING COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO SPEAK WITH Y'ALL. AND I RECEIVED INTEL FROM DIFFERENT COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT THEY WERE NOT RECEIVING ANY OF THE E-MAILS THAT WE WERE SENDING, WHICH OBVIOUSLY IS A HUGE CONCERN FOR US. SO I GOT INTO CONTACT -- I WANT TO GIVE A HUGE KUDOS TO DENISE, WHO IS ONE OF THE CONSTITUENT COORDINATORS, BECAUSE SHE LET ME KNOW THAT THE I.T. DEPARTMENT WAS HOLDING THE E-MAILS IN QUARANTINE. SHE SAID THIS IS VERY COMMON THAT THEY DO THIS. SO WHEN I ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY WAY I COULD SPEAK TO THE I.T. DEPARTMENT TO SEE HOW WE COULD GET THESE E-MAILS OUT OF QUARANTINE, DO THEY JUST NOT EXIST ANYMORE -- I'M TALKING ABOUT OVER 100 E-MAILS THAT ARE JUST SITTING THERE. AND SHE SAID THAT THE I.T. DEPARTMENT DOES NOT SPEAK WITH THE PUBLIC. SO SHE WOULD HAVE TO ACT AS AN INTERMEDIARY. I'M JUST WONDERING, YOU KNOW, WHAT POLICY EXISTS THAT -- LIKE, WHAT IS THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT AN E-MAIL GOES INTO QUARANTINE OR IT GOES DIRECTLY TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER. I THINK THAT WE ENCOUNTERED THE SAME PROBLEM EARLIER THIS YEAR, AGAIN WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO GET MANY CONSTITUENTS TO CONTACT THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS, PROBABLY YES ABOUT DESAL ON THE DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN. AND THE SAME ISSUE AROSE AND WE NEVER GOT CONFIRMATION FROM THE CITY. SO THAT WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTING AND I WOULD ASK COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT ACTUALLY HEARING FROM THEIR CONSTITUENTS, EVEN THOSE WHO DON'T AGREE WITH THEM, TO TAKE SERIOUSLY WHAT THIS MEANS IN TERMS OF PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO CONTACT YOU. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR TODAY. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. TORRES. AND IF WE CAN HAVE -- IF YOU'LL HOLD ON JUST A SECOND. WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHERE PETER IS BUT WE DO NEED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE THAT MS. TORRES WAS TALKING ABOUT. YOU CAN RELAY THAT, MILES? >> Risley: YEAH. WE'LL PASS IT ON TO I.T. >> Mayor Guajardo: MADILYNN CHAPMAN. IS MADILYNN CHAPMAN WITH US? ROBIN COX. >> HI. I'M ROBIN COX FROM DISTRICT 3. AND MANY OF YOU SAID YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THE RESEARCH ON THE DESAL AND THAT IT'S TOTALLY SAFE AND YOU'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT, JUST THE COST. WELL, A LONG TIME AGO THERE WAS ANOTHER COMPANY THAT KEPT SAYING THAT. IF YOU SMOKE TEN PACKS OF CIGARETTES -- THREE PACKS A DAY, IT'S NOT GOING TO CAUSE CANCER. PHILLIP MOORE WAS DOING THAT SAME RESEARCH AND LATER ON THEY HAD TO RECANT THAT. SO I WOULD BE REALLY CAREFUL ABOUT WHO IS DOING THE RESEARCH THAT SAYS IT'S BEING SAFE. OVER THE WEEKEND MY BOYFRIEND AND I SAT DOWN AND DID SIMPLE GOOGLE SEARCHES AND SIMPLE RESEARCH IF THIS IS SAFE. IF YOU PULL UP A YOUTUBE VIDEO, THERE'S A VIDEO IN AUSTRALIA OF A DESAL PLANT. THERE ARE DEAD FISH ALL OVER THE WATER. I'M SURE SOME OF YOU ARE OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THE OLD COMMERCIAL THAT SHOWED AN INDIAN WALKING DOWN THE BEACH WITH ALL THE POLLUTION CRYING. WE ARE GOING TO LOOK LIKE THAT. I AM BY NO MEANS A HARD-CORE ENVIRONMENTALIST. I UNDERSTAND WE NEED INDUSTRY BUT NOT AT THE SAKE OF POLLUTING OUR WATER, PUTTING FISHERMEN, TOURISM OUT OF BUSINESS. OF SOME OF THE STUFF WE LOOKED AT, HERE'S SOME RESEARCH WE DID. BRINE ALSO CONTAINS CHEMICALS USED DURING DESALINATION PROCESS CHLORINE COPPER AND ANTI-FOAMING AGENTS. THESE CAN BE TOXIC FOR MARINE SPECIES AND MAY EVEN POSE RISK TO HUMANS AND CONTAMINATE SEAFOOD. I'M SURE ALL OF YOU LIKE TO EAT SEAFOOD. WATER INTAKE SYSTEMS CAN KILL FISH AND LARVA EGGS. IN CALIFORNIA IT ESTIMATES THAT THE DESAL PLANTS CAN DESTROY TENS OF MILLIONS OF FISH LARVA ALONG THE COAST. THAT WILL HAPPEN HERE. IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT, YOU CAN DO THE RESEARCH YOURSELF AND I HAVE ALL THE THINGS TO BACK IT UP. LIKE JASON WAS SAYING, WE NEVER THOUGHT SOMETHING LIKE FLINT HILLS COULD HAPPEN HERE. THERE WAS ANOTHER MOVIE, CIVIL ACTION, AND IT WASN'T ABOUT DESAL BUT IT WAS ABOUT POLLUTING OUR WATER AND PEOPLE GETTING LEUKEMIA AND OTHER ILLNESSES FROM IT. I KNOW MANY OF YOU WANT TO BE FAMOUS FOR HAVING THE FIRST DESAL PLANT AND YOU'RE TELLING ME ABOUT ALL THE OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE THIS, AND COUNTRIES. MY MOM USED TO SAY BECAUSE THE COOL KIDS ARE DOING IT, YOU NEED TO DO IT TOO? BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR. MAYBE YOU WANT TO BE FAMOUS, HAVE A MOVIE MADE AFTER YOU. IF YOU'RE HOPING J LO WOULD PLAY YOU, YOU COULD GET SOMEBODY LIKE KATHY BATES. THIS DESAL PLANT COULD TURN VERY BADLY. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. COX. ISABEL ARAIZA. >> I'LL SPEAK TO ITEM 16 WHEN IT HAPPENS. I'M NOT DOING IT NOW. ISABEL ARAIZA, DISTRICT 2, CO-FOUNDER FOR THE GREATER GOOD. I JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WHY I THINK WE'RE HAVING A WATER CRISIS. YOU KNOW, A FEW YEARS AGO I WAS INVITED TO A MEETING AT THE PORT WITH THE COASTAL ALLIANCE TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. WE MET WITH JEFF POLLACK AND THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT ALL THESE, LIKE, INTEREST GROUPS. ONE NAME I REMEMBER WAS PROJECT FALCON. AFTER OUR MEETING, I HAD TALKED TO ERROL SUMMERLAND AND I WAS LIKE WHAT'S UP WITH ALL THESE NAMES? THEY SAID THERE WERE 36 CORPORATIONS THAT WERE INTERESTED IN COMING HERE. HE MADE MENTION THAT THEY TEND TO KEEP THESE CODE NAMES SO THAT IN BUSINESS INTEREST. AND SO THEY DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO REVEAL WHO THEY ARE UNTIL THE PERMITS ARE SUBMITTED. AND THAT'S REALLY PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHO'S COMING HERE. AND AS THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR WATER, IN ORDER TO PLAN FOR THE FUTURE, WE NEED TO KNOW WHO'S INTERESTED. AND SO I BLAME THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS BECAUSE THEY ENGAGE IN THESE NEGOTIATIONS AND RECRUITMENT OF HIGH-VOLUME HEAVY-POLLUTING INDUSTRIES TO COME INTO OUR AREA. I THINK WE'RE BETTER THAN THAT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S ALL WE HAVE TO BE. AND THEN WE CAN'T PLAN AND THEN WE'RE IN A CRISIS AND WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE CHASING MORE WATER AND NOT REALLY HAVING AN EFFECTIVE LONG-TERM PLAN. I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A MORATORIUM ON THE RECRUITMENT OF HIGH-VOLUME WATER USERS. I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A REAL DROUGHT -- WE NEED TO END THE DROUGHT EXEMPTION PROGRAM FOR HIGH-VOLUME WATER USERS AND IT HAS TO END TODAY. AND NOT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. WE DIDN'T HAVE A DROUGHT EXEMPTION FOR INDUSTRY BEFORE 2018. WE CAN RETURN BACK TO THAT. I ALSO THINK THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO HAVE OVERSIGHT OF INDUSTRY. YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO SUBMIT THEIR DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLANS OR THEIR CONSERVATION PLANS TO THE CITY. THEY HAVE TO JUST SUBMIT THEM TO TCEQ. AND I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THAT. I THINK WE NEED TO NOT TRUST THEM, YOU KNOW, ESTEBAN RAMOS AND COUNCILMAN BARRERA OWNED UP TO THEM USING 80% OF OUR WATER ONCE. GULF COAST VENTURES AND STEEL DYNAMICS CAME ONLINE. I THINK THEY NEED OVERSIGHT. I THINK WE NEED RECEIPTS AND I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE SOMEBODY ACTUALLY VA VALIDATING THEIR CLAIMS. I ALSO WANT TO SAY I THINK ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE'RE IN THIS MANUFACTURED WATER CRISIS STEMS FROM POLICIES THAT ACTUALLY CENTER THE INTEREST OF CORPORATIONS AND PROFITEERS INSTEAD OF PEOPLE. I THINK WE'VE GOT TO REALLY STOP AND THINK ABOUT THE WAY THAT WE DO BUSINESS -- I MEAN, TRY TO PROVIDE SERVICES, BECAUSE IT'S NOT WORKING. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. ARAIZA. MS. HUERTA. >> City Secretary: NEXT WE HAVE VIRTUAL PUBLIC COMMENT. BRITNEY YOUNG. MS. YOUNG, ARE YOU STILL ONLINE? >> YES, I AM. MY NAME IS BRITNEY YOUNG. I'M A RESIDENT OF CORPUS CHRISTI WITH RESIDENCE IN DISTRICT 3. I'M URGING YOU TO VOTE NO ON AGENDA ITEM 16. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS COUNCIL IS AVERSE TO FINDING ALTERNATIVE WATER SOLUTIONS TO OUR WATER CRISIS. THE RESIDENTS OF CORPUS CHRISTI DID NOT CREATE. OTHER CITIES OUR SIZE AND LARGER HAVE FOUND ALTERNATIVE, COST-EFFECTIVE WATER SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS THEIR WATER SHORTAGE BUT SOMEHOW WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING HOW WE CAN ADOPT THOSE SOLUTIONS FOR OUR OWN CITY. NOW, $1.2 BILLION DESAL PLANT, YOU'VE CONFIRMED IT YOURSELF THAT THIS PLANT IS EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE. I'VE LISTENED TO DISCUSSION ON AGENDA ITEM 16 TODAY AND I WATCHED A GROUP OF PEOPLE COME TO THE PODIUM TOGETHER WHO COULD NOT CLEARLY ANSWER SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS' QUESTIONS REGARDING THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PLANT. THE CONFUSION, THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY, AND THE ARROGANCE TO KEEP PUSHING FORWARD IS A LARGE RED FLAG TO ME AND IT SHOULD BE TO YOU. IT IS A CLEAR SIGNAL THAT THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO GET OFF THIS ROLLER COASTER. I HEARD A FEW COUNCIL MEMBERS ALSO SAY THAT THEY WOULD RATHER PAY $1.2 BILLION THAN 1.4 OR $1.6 BILLION. LIKE, ARE YOU LISTENING TO YOURSELVES SPEAK? HOW CAN YOU RATIONALIZE $1.2 BILLION FOR A PLANT THAT IS NOT GOING TO PRODUCE ENOUGH WATER FOR WATER RATEPAYERS, SMALL BUSINESSES, AND THE INDUSTRIES YOU'VE OVERSOLD OUR WATER TO. BECAUSE, LET'S BE HONEST, IT IS FOR THOSE INDUSTRIES, IT IS NOT FOR THE RESIDENTS OF CORPUS CHRISTI. THE RESIDENTS OF CORPUS CHRISTI DID NOT GET US INTO THIS WATER CHRIST. INSTEAD, DECADES OF GREED AND SENSELESS LEADERSHIP HAS GOTTEN US INTO THIS WATER CRISIS WE ARE IN NOW. THE PLANT IS NOT A DONE DEAL. WE DO NOT HAVE ALL THE PERMITS YET SO, PLEASE, LET'S STOP PRETENDING THAT A $1.2 BILLION, BILLION-DOLLAR PLANT IS OUR ONLY SOLUTION. PLEASE TAKE OFF WHATEVER SHACKLES ARE BINDING YOU TO VOTE YES AND VOTE NO ON AGENDA ITEM 16. PLEASE STAND UP FOR YOUR COMMUNITY ONCE AND FOR ALL. THANK YOU. >> City Secretary: THANK YOU, MS. YOUNG. CHRISTINA ENGLISH. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> City Secretary: YES, WE CAN. THERE'S SOME FEEDBACK, THOUGH. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE GOT YOUR TV ON OR SOMETHING ELSE. >> SORRY ABOUT THAT. SO CHRISTINA ENGLISH, CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS. PLEASE VOTE NO ON ITEM 16. ALSO, A QUOTE FROM NAOMI SCHULMAN. NICE PEOPLE MADE THE BEST NAZIS. THEY GOT ALONG, REFUSED TO MAKE WAVES. LOOKED FOR OTHER THINGS WHEN THINGS GOT UGLY. FOCUSED ON HAPPIER THINGS THAN POLITICS. THEY TURNED THEIR HEADS AS THEIR NEIGHBORS WERE DRAGGED AWAY. YOU KNOW WHO WEREN'T NICE PEOPLE? THE RESISTERS. RECENTLY I WATCHED THE MAYOR TRYING TO COME UP WITH UNNECESSARY RULES TO OVERCOMPLICATE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PROCESS. SO MUCH SO THAT DURING THE DISCUSSION THE MAYOR WAS WILLING TO CREATE ADDITIONAL WORK FOR CITY STAFF JUST TO MAKE THE PROCESS MORE DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTERS. I REGRET THAT OUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS ARE SO DISTASTEFUL. THE FIRST TIME I CAME TO CITY COUNCIL I SAT AND LISTENED TO PASTOR JUSTIN LOVE SPEAK UNINTERRUPTED ABOUT HOW I AND MEMBERS OF MY COMMUNITY ARE ABOMINATIONS TO GOD AND A DANGER TO CHILDREN. HATE SPEECH SPEWED BY A PASTOR IN THESE CHAMBERS. NOT ONLY WAS HE NOT INTERRUPTED, NOT ONLY WAS HE THANKED BY THE MAYOR FOR HIS COMMENT, BUT THAT COMMENT, ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS OF SIMILAR TONE PROMPTED ZERO ACTION BY THIS COUNCIL. HE WAS NOT ADMONISHED AND NO NEW AGENDA ITEMS WERE CREATED. IT'S ONLY WHEN THE DELICATE EARS OF THIS MAYOR ARE SUBJECTED TO A SWEAR WORD THAT ACTION HAS TO BE TAKEN. NOW WHEN CITIZENS COME EXPRESSING CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THE CORPUS CHRISTI POLICE DEPARTMENT, WHICH THIS COUNCIL OVERSEES AND WHICH ACTIONS ARE OUR CITY BUSINESS. THEY ARE COLLABORATING WITH A POLICE STATE THAT IS KIDNAPPING, DEPORTING BOTH CITIZENS AND NON-CITIZENS OF ALL LEGAL STATUSES TO FOREIGN DEATH CAMPS. THIS MAYOR AND CITY ATTORNEY DEFER TO FASCISM. THEY FOLD IMMEDIATELY. UNWILLING TO HEAR ABOUT ATROCITIES HAPPENING ALL AROUND THEM. THEY HIDE. THEY COWER. THEY STAY SILENT AND DEMAND THAT WE DO TOO. THEY CRY OVER SWEAR WORDS AND DECORUM BUT LACK ANY DECENCY OR CIVILITY WHEN IT COMES TO DEALING WITH THEIR CONSTITUENTS. THE FAMILY WILL BE ASHAMED OF THEIR ROLE IN THIS. THEIR STORIES WON'T BE TOLD BECAUSE THEY ARE UGLY. I WONDER WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE FOR THE MAYOR, COUNCIL PEOPLE, MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF WHO BREAK DECORUM. I HAVE SEEN ATROCIOUS BEHAVIOR ON THIS DAIS BY PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE PROFESSIONALS. THE COUNCIL COMPLAINS ABOUT TIME BUT THEN WASTES IT COMING UP WITH WAYS TO PUNISH LAYPEOPLE. WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE SUSPICIOUS OF LEADERS WHO SEEK TO RESTRICT RATHER THAN EXPAND FREEDOM. FASCISM WILL COME FOR YOU TOO. THANK YOU. >> City Secretary: THANK YOU, MS. ENGLISH. NEXT WE HAVE ELI McKAY. >> HI. CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> City Secretary: YES, WE CAN ELI. >> ELI McKAY, BEAUTIFUL UPTOWN DISTRICT 1. THE ONLY THING WORSE THAN AN INSATIABLE THIRST IS INSATIABLE GREED. HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI, DECISION MAKERS HAVE BOTH. WHEN I MOVED TO CORPUS 14 YEARS AGO I THOUGHT I WAS MOVING TO A PLACE THAT HAD A FOCUS ON TOURISM, WATER SPORTS, AND MAYBE PROMOTING AN OUTDOOR LIFESTYLE. BUT A LOT HAS CHANGED IN THE 14 YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE. I'M GLAD I WAS ABLE TO EXPERIENCE THE WATER'S EDGE AT NORTH BEACH AND THE MARINA BEFORE ITS VIEW WAS PLAGUED WITH INDUSTRY. VOTE NO ON 16 TODAY AND YOU WILL BE REMEMBERED, RESPECTED, AND MAYBE EVEN RE-ELECTED. YOU WILL SHOW YOUR STRENGTH AND YOUR CARE FOR THE COMMUNITY. VOTE YES AND YOU WILL HOLD THE KARMA OF THE CONTINUED ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM OF A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS HAD ENOUGH. MORE AND MORE COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE PAYING ATTENTION. GETTING INFORMED AND EVEN MORE, GETTING INVOLVED. THIS IS A MOMENT WHERE YOU HOLD THE KEY TO SHIFT OUR PARADIGM FROM DESTRUCTION AND GREED TO PROGRESS AND HOPE. AS Y'ALL KNOW, I WATCH EVERY MEETING IN ITS ENTIRETY. WHETHER I WANT TO OR NOT, I DO BECAUSE I CARE. SOME OF YOU TEND TO FORGET YOU'RE NOT ONLY BEING WATCHED, YOU'RE BEING RECORDED. WHEN I WATCH, I'M PROUD OF MY NEIGHBORS WHO SPEAK PASSIONATELY ABOUT THEIR ISSUES. OFTENTIMES I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE MENTAL HEALTH OF A COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO SPEW FAR-RIGHT CONSPIRACY THEORIES. OUR COUNCILMAN STROKES THEIR EGO, BELITTLING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO SPEAK UP. WE WILL NOT TOLERATE THIS BEHAVIOR ANYMORE. ANOTHER POINT OF FRUSTRATION FOR ME IS THE BLATANT, UNPROFESSIONALISM FROM MULTIPLE COUNCILMEN WHO CASUALLY AND REPEATEDLY JOKE ABOUT AND MENTION ALCOHOL. THAT TOPIC ON THE DAIS IS NEVER ACCEPTABLE. EVER. I DON'T THINK THAT I'M THE ONLY CONSTITUENT WHO BELIEVES THAT IF YOU IMBIBE, YOU ARE UNFIT TO SERVE. IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM, PLEASE GET HELP BEFORE IT IMPACTS YOUR CARE IN ORDER TO DEMAND THE PUBLIC TO DO BETTER, YOU HAVE TO BE BETTER FIRST. AND I HOPE THAT I CAN SEE THAT. SO IN CORPUS CHRISTI, WE MAY HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS BUT THEY'RE PERPETUATED BY A MINORITY OF THE COMMUNITY WHO SEES THEMSELVES AS DECISION MAKERS DUE TO THEIR LAST NAME OR INCOME BRACKET. CLASSISM IS CHOKING CORPUS CHRISTI AND SOME OF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A MOUTHPIECE FOR THE RICH, MAKING SURE THEY KEEP THEIR TRUST FUND REIMBURSEMENT AND NOW A TIRZ IN LONDON IS BEING DISCUSSED, A VERY AFFLUENT AREA. IF MORE PEOPLE UNDERSTOOD THESE IMBALANCES AND HOW THE RICH PROFIT FROM THESE PROGRAMS, THEY WOULD BE FILLING THE CHAMBERS AND STREETS DEMANDING THE INEQUITABLE POLICIES CHANGE. I SAY ALL OF THIS OUT OF LOVE TO OUR COMMUNITY -- >> City Secretary: THANK YOU, MS. McKAY. THANK YOU. THERE'S ONE OTHER PERSON ONLINE. I JUST DON'T HAVE THE NAME OF THAT PERSON. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ONLINE? OKAY. HEARING NONE, MAYOR, THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS COMPLETE. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, REBECCA. >> City Secretary: MAYOR, I'M SORRY. THERE'S A FEW MORE PEOPLE. I MISSED THOSE. SO IT WOULD BE JACKIE HANEY. LAUREN CARGILL. OH, THERE SHE IS. >> JACKIE HANEY. I AM THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR THE COASTAL BEND HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION. I WORK HERE BUT I DON'T LIVE HERE. THE COASTAL BEND HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN SUPPORTING AND DOING BUSINESS IN THE COASTAL BEND FOR OVER 75 YEARS. OUR MEMBERS REPRESENT MOST OF THE NEW-HOME CONSTRUCTION AND EMPLOY THOUSANDS OF INDIVIDUALS, ADDING HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO THE TAX YEAR WHILE GENERATING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ANNUALLY TO THE CORPUS CHRISTI AREA. WE CANNOT HAVE OR CONTINUE TO BUILD WITHOUT WATER. WE ASK THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PLEASE APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO CONTINUE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT OF THE INNER HARBOR WATER TREATMENT CAMPUS. THE COASTAL BEND HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION HAS PREVIOUSLY SUPPORTED ALL THE INVESTIGATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATIONS OF ALL FORMS OF OUR WATER SUPPLY. THE CURRENT DROUGHT HAS DAMAGED THE COMMUNITIES ECONOMICALLY AND HAS REDUCED THE ABILITY FOR EVERYDAY PEOPLE TO AFFORD AND MAINTAIN THEIR HOMES. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MS. HANEY. WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE, REBECCA? WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE? >> City Secretary: WE'RE CHECKING TO MAKE SURE THAT PERSON ONLINE IS STILL THERE. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST? >> THIS IS DANIEL THORNTON. >> City Secretary: MAYOR, I'M SORRY. MR. THORNTON DIDN'T ANSWER BUT HE IS ONLINE. IS IT OKAY IF WE TAKE HIS PUBLIC COMMENT? >> Mayor Guajardo: ABSOLUTELY. >> City Secretary: GO AHEAD, MR. THORNTON. >> OKAY. YEAH, DANIEL THORNTON. I'M THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY CHAIR FOR NUECES COUNTY. I LIVE OUT HERE IN DISTRICT 1. AFTER LISTENING TO EVERYTHING THAT I'VE HEARD, IT STILL SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A TON OF QUESTIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THIS WHOLE DESAL THING, PRICE, THINGS LIKE THAT. AND I REALLY FEEL LIKE THAT WE SHOULD BE VOTING NO ON THIS AND PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL LIKE CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS HAD A PROBLEM WITH WATER, IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE INDUSTRY HAS A WATER CRISIS PROBLEM SO THEY SHOULD BE TRYING TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM. THERE'S LOTS OF WAYS WE CAN DO THAT. TAX CREDITS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S KIND OF LIKE THEIR PROBLEM AND THEY HAVE CREATED A PROBLEM FOR US. IT'S ALMOST LIKE SOMEONE BROKE IN YOUR HOUSE, STOLE ALL YOUR FOOD, AND SHOWED UP THE NEXT DAY AND SAID IT'S TIME TO COOK ME BREAKFAST. THAT DOESN'T MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE TO ME. I THINK WE SHOULD REALLY FOCUS ON -- I DON'T THINK DESAL ITSELF IS AN ISSUE. I DO BELIEVE WE NEED TO LOOK AT WAYS IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THAT AND FIGURE OUT WAYS OF GETTING RID OF THAT BRINE IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I JUST THINK THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE PUNISHING OUR CITIZENS FOR A PROBLEM THAT IS CREATED BY SOMETHING ELSE. ALL RIGHT. THANKS. >> City Secretary: THANK YOU, MR. THORNTON. GOING BACK TO IN-PERSON, NON-RESIDENT. LAUREN CARGILL. I CALLED HER BEFORE. HOW ABOUT CHRIS CUELLAR. >> MAYOR, COUNCIL, STAFF, THANK YOU. UNFORTUNATELY, NO ONE REPRESENTS ME. I LIVE OUT IN NUECES COUNTY. >> City Secretary: CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY, SIR? >> CHRISTOPHER CUELLAR, NORTHWEST OUTSIDE OF CALALLEN. I LIVE ON SAVIOR DRIVE, FORMERLY KNOWN AS 73. THAT'S WHERE ALL THE WATER WELLS ARE GOING. AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU THAT I'M ROOTING FOR ALL OF Y'ALL. I'M ROOTING FOR ALL OF US. WE'RE ALL IN THIS SITUATION AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO EXCLUDE CITY RESIDENTS TO COUNTY RESIDENTS AND HAVE ANY KIND OF DIFFERENCE IN OUTCOME. THE -- ONE OF THE THINGS I'M GOING TO ASK IS THAT WE REALLY UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS OF THE GROUNDWATER SITUATION. IT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR YOU TO PUMP. I THINK YOUR PAPERWORK SAYS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 11 MILLION USABLE GALLONS PER DAY OFF THE EIGHT WELLS YOU'RE PUTTING ON COUNTY ROAD 73. [TIMER] YOU'LL NEED TO PRODUCE TWICE THAT TO GET THAT. SO THE REST OF IT GOES STRAIGHT OUT TO THE BAY. AND THEN WE DEPLETE THE RESOURCES. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, MR. CUELLAR. >> City Secretary: MAYOR, NOW THAT CONCLUDES THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. CAN WE HAVE -- I GUESS THEY'RE COMING BACK, DREW AND BRETT? I'M SURE THEY'RE ON THE WAY. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO PICK UP WHERE WE LEFT OFF, WHICH IS ITEM NO. 16 UNDER SECTION K. INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEMS. AND WE HAD COUNCILMAN CANTU AND THEN COUNCILMAN ROY THAT WERE UP TO ASK QUESTIONS. SO WE WILL START WITH COUNCILMAN CANTU. >> Cantu: THANK YOU, MAYOR. FIRST QUESTION I HAVE IS ON THE WEBSITE FOR TCEQ, THE WASTEWATER PERMIT SHOWS PENDING. WHAT DOES IT SHOW PENDING FOR? >> Molly: I WAS ALERTED TO THAT AND FRANKLY WHILE WE WERE LISTENING TO PUBLIC COMMENT, WE LOOKED IT UP AND IT DOESN'T HAVE PENDING ON THE WEBSITE THAT WE SEE. >> Cantu: WHAT DOES IT SAY ON YOUR SIDE? >> [OFF MIC] >> Cantu: ACTIVE? >> Molly: YEP. IT SAYS "ACTIVE." THAT'S CORRECT. >> Cantu: FOR THE WASTEWATER PERMIT? >> Zanoni: THE DISCHARGE? >> Molly: TCEQ, CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. IT'S GOT THE CN NUMBER, INNER HARBOR PLANT. >> Zanoni: WE DO HAVE -- THE VIEWERS MAY BE LOOKING AT THE OTHER PERMIT SITE, THE LA QUINTA. THE DISCHARGE PERMIT HAS NOT BEEN ISSUED. >> Molly: CORRECT. THE LA QUINTA HAS NOT. >> Zanoni: IT COULD BE SOMEBODY IS LOOKING AT THE LA QUINTA SITE. WE PUT FOUR PERMITS IN SIX YEARS AGO. TWO AT INNER HARBOR, TWO AT LA QUINTA. AT LA QUINTA WE WERE AWARDED THE INTAKE PERMIT, RIGHT? >> Molly: IT WAS AWARDED. >> Zanoni: FOR LA QUINTA, THE DISCHARGE IS STILL PROCESSING. >> Cantu: MY SECOND QUESTION WOULD BE HOW MUCH MONEY HAVE WE GOT TOTAL FROM THE STATE? >> Molly: HOW MUCH MONEY DO WE HAVE TOTAL FROM THE STATE? >> Cantu: THAT WE HAVE IN OUR BANK ACCOUNT. >> Molly: WE HAVE CLOSED ON $232 MILLION OF BONDS FROM THE STATE. WE HAVE $525 MILLION THAT HAVE BEEN DEDICATED TO THE PROJECT FROM THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. >> Cantu: AND WE WERE SUPPOSED TO SIGN IN NOVEMBER 500 AND SOMETHING MILLION, RIGHT? >> Molly: WELL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CLOSE ON ADDITIONAL FUNDS AS PROJECT EXPENDITURES OCCUR. >> Cantu: SO I HAVE SPOKEN TO SOMEBODY FROM THE BOARD, THE WATER BOARD. AND THEY TOLD ME, ONE, WE DON'T HAVE TO SIGN IN NOVEMBER. WE COULD POSTPONE IT FOR ANOTHER YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF, I BELIEVE IT WAS. TWO, WE COULD REDIRECT THE FUNDS TO ANOTHER PROJECT OF DESAL. WE CAN'T DIRECT THE FUNDS FOR ANOTHER WATER WELL PROJECT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT WE COULD DIRECT THE FUNDS FOR ANOTHER DESAL PLANT. AND I KEEP ON HEARING YOU GUYS SAYING WE CAN'T DO IT. AND I KEEP ON HEARING MY COLLEAGUES, YOU KNOW, NAME DROPPING AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE UPSET IF WE DO THIS. OR THEY'RE GOING TO BE UPSET TO DO THAT. SENATORS, THE GOVERNOR. YOU KNOW, I REALLY DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO TURN THEIR BACK ON US. CORPUS CHRISTI NEEDS WATER, YOU KNOW, AND I'M JUST -- I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY TOLD ME SOMETHING AND THEN THEY TOLD YOU GUYS SOMETHING. SO I KNOW THAT WE SENT OUT A LETTER TO THE WATER BOARD LAST WEEK AND WE ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS TO BE IN WRITING. THAT'S WHAT THEY ASKED US TO DO. AND SO WE SENT OUT THE LETTER AND I BELIEVE WE GAVE THEM A DEADLINE OF AUGUST 12. SO I DON'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS UNTIL WE GET THAT ANSWER BACK. AND I WOULD LIKE TO DO A MOTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST, JUST TO SEE WHAT THAT LETTER SAYS AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE FUNDS, HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO COST, YOU KNOW, STUFF LIKE THAT. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HURT THE PROJECT WAITING ANOTHER 30 DAYS OR SO. WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK ABOUT THAT? >> JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU SAY POSTPONE, DO YOU MEAN PENCILS DOWN ON EVERYTHING UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST? >> Cantu: UNTIL WE GET THE ANSWERS BACK FROM THE WATER BOARD TELLING US WHAT WE ASKED. I THINK IT WAS A HANDFUL OF QUESTIONS AND WE JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO AND WHAT WE CAN'T DO. >> YEAH, THERE WILL DEFINITELY BE A COST BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO EXTEND RENTAL. WE HAVE THE EQUIPMENT. WE'LL PUSH THAT OUT SO WE'LL HAVE SOME MONEY OWED FOR THAT. WE CAN'T GUARANTEE KIEWIT'S GOING TO KEEP STAFF ON THIS JOB. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SIT IDLE FOR 30 DAYS SO THEY'RE GOING TO SEND THEM TO OTHER PROJECTS, SAME WITH FREESE AND NICHOLS, POTENTIALLY. THERE'S NO GUARANTEE WE GET THEM BACK. WE'LL LOSE SOME OF THAT CONTINUITY AND WE MIGHT HAVE TO DO REWORK. WE'RE GOING TO BE LESS EFFICIENT BUT THERE'S DEFINITELY COST ASSOCIATED WITH IT AND YOU'RE LOSING KEY PERSONNEL, POTENTIALLY. >> Cantu: SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE WILL DELAY THE PROJECT MORE AND IT'S GOING TO COST US MORE MONEY? >> I'M SAYING THAT ANY DELAYS AT ANY DECISION POINT -- AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS AT PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS. IF WE DELAY DECISIONS, WE DELAY THE PROJECT. WE'RE PUSHING EVERYTHING TO THE RIGHT. >> Cantu: GOT IT. HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU THINK IT WILL COST US TO POSTPONE UNTIL THE END OF AUGUST, BALLPARK? >> I DON'T KNOW. I KNOW IT WILL BE GREATER THAN $3 MILLION. EVERY MONTH WE'RE LOSING $3 MILLION. IF YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE OTHER COST, IT COULD BE BETWEEN $5 MILLION AND $10 MILLION. >> Cantu: MAYBE KIEWIT CAN COME BACK IN 30 DAYS AND BRING US A DIFFERENT NUMBER. >> DOUBTFUL. THEY WON'T BE ANY SMARTER ON DESIGN IF WE PUT THE PENCILS DOWN. >> Cantu: SO IT WOULD BE THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY? >> IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROGRESS ON DESIGN, WE WON'T BE ANY SMARTER. WE CAN'T PRODUCE A BETTER NUMBER. >> Cantu: OKAY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT WENT FROM $200 MILLION, 1.2. I MEAN, THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY. AND I WANT TO KNOW OUR OPTIONS AND I HONESTLY DON'T TRUST WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING ABOUT THE MONEYS THAT -- WHAT WE COULD USE THIS MONEYS FOR. AND, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE COME FROM. YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN PLAYING POLITICS ON THIS DEAL FOR A WHILE SO I JUST WANT TO GET OUR FACTS STRAIGHT AND FIGURE THIS OUT, YOU KNOW. I THINK THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO -- THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT THE WATER BOARD CAN DO, WHAT THEY CAN DO FOR US. I HARDLY DOUBT THEY'RE GOING TO SAY SORRY, CLOSE OUR DOOR ON US AND WHATEVER THE CASE IS. I KNOW THE STATE WILL HELP US. AND I CONFIRMED IT, JUST NEED TO PUT IT IN WRITING. THAT'S IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Zanoni: COUNCILMAN, CAN I JUST MAKE SURE -- >> [OFF MIC] >> Cantu: POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST. >> Zanoni: THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING IN AUGUST, COUNCILMAN? ON THAT LETTER, WE DIDN'T SEND IT. OKAY. >> [OFF MIC] >> Zanoni: THAT'S FINE. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. AUGUST 12th IS WHEN YOU'RE EXPECTING AN ANSWER, YOU SAID? >> [OFF MIC] >> Zanoni: OKAY. AND THEN THAT LAST COUNCIL MEETING IN AUGUST IS -- I'M TRYING TO PULL UP MY CALENDAR HERE. WHAT IS IT? THE 26th WOULD BE THE -- THE MOTION WOULD BE FOR THE 26th. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILMAN ROY. >> Roy: DID HE MAKE A MOTION? >> Mayor Guajardo: OH, THERE IS A MOTION. YOU'RE RIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND TO POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST -- DO YOU KNOW WHAT? LET'S GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN. SO A LETTER WAS WRITTEN BY HOW MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS? >> [OFF MIC] >> Mayor Guajardo: NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. A LETTER WAS WRITTEN. COUNCILMAN, SINCE YOU WERE SPEAKING. A LETTER WAS WRITTEN -- LET ME TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON. CAN YOU FLIP THE -- ALL RIGHT. SO A LETTER WAS WRITTEN SO THAT THE REST OF YOUR COLLEAGUES KNOW -- I DON'T KNOW. I JUST MEAN ALL OF US. >> Cantu: CORRECT. THERE WERE LETTERS SENT OUT TO THE WATER BOARD. >> Mayor Guajardo: FROM WHO? >> Cantu: MYSELF, COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN, HERNANDEZ, AND WHO ELSE? CAMPOS. AND WE'RE JUST ASKING THE QUESTIONS OF WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THIS LOAN. YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE SAY NO TO THIS PROJECT. WHAT HAPPENS IF WE POSTPONE IT? WHAT HAPPENS IF THE PROJECT DIES CAN WE PUT IT ON ANOTHER DESAL PLANT, ANOTHER LOCATION? CAN WE BUY ANOTHER DESAL LOCATION? DIFFERENT QUESTIONS. JUST, YOU KNOW. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. OKAY. >> Cantu: TRUTHFULLY, MAYOR, ALL WE GET IS WE CAN'T DO IT. WE CAN'T. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN GETTING FROM STAFF. >> Mayor Guajardo: ALL THE QUESTIONS YOU JUST ASKED HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. NOW, IT'S YOUR PREROGATIVE IF YOU'RE NOT BELIEVING IT, BUT THEY'VE BEEN ANSWERED. AND SO THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS MOTION BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING LET'S PUSH BACK TO SEE WHAT MIGHT COME BACK AT THE COST OF THE RATEPAYER. THERE JUST SEEMS TO BE -- EVERYTHING THAT IS BEING TOLD, IT COMES BACK WITH THERE'S NO REAL JUSTIFICATION FOR NOT BELIEVING IT WHEN YOU HAVE A COMPANY THAT'S WORLDWIDE, THIS IS WHAT THEY DO. THIS IS WHAT THEY DO. I'M GOING TO GO BACK. WHAT DOES IT COST -- JASON IF YOU WILL COME UP. ALL OF YOU. NO, NO, WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER BECAUSE WE KEEP REPEATING WHAT IS IT GOING TO COST? SO I'M EITHER GOING CRAZY BECAUSE -- I'M SORRY, WHO IS THAT? SO RIGHT HERE, THIS THIRD ROW, MARK AND MAGGIE AND CHLOE BECAUSE I KNOW YOUR NAMES NOW, I'M GIVING YOU A WARNING RIGHT NOW, SO I'M GOING TO BE REAL CLEAR WITH Y'ALL. ONE MORE AND WE'RE GOING TO BE ESCORTED OUT. THIS IS A MEETING, YOU'RE DISRUPTING IT. IT'S SUPER IMMATURE. DON'T BREAK DECORE RUM ANY LONGER PLEASE. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR TIME HERE. WHAT EXACTLY DOES THIS ENTAIL IN PUSHING IT BACK 30 DAYS? I UNDERSTAND YOU WANT TO WAIT FOR THE RESPONSE, SO I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT. >> SO IF WE MOVE FORWARD IN PUTTING THE PROJECT ON HOLD I WILL SEND PRESENTATIONS OUT TO KIEWIT AND FREESE AND NICHOLS AND TELL THEM TO STOP ALL WORK ON THE JOB. >> Mayor Guajardo: SO THAT HAS TO HAPPEN. >> RIGHT. I NEED TO TELL THEM TO STOP BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY'RE SPENDING MONEY. IF WE'RE SAYING PENCILS DOWN, DON'T DO ANY MORE WORK, I NEED TO NOTIFY THEM TO STOP EVERYTHING AND ALSO TELL THEM THAT THERE'S NO INTENT OF US PAYING THEM FOR THIS DOWNTIME. AND THEN THEY NEED TO MAKE A DECISION BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT JUST GOING TO LET PERSONNEL SIT IDLY BY HOPING AT A LATER DATE THE PROJECT CONTINUES SO THEY'RE GOING TO REASSIGN RESOURCES TO OTHER JOBS. THEY HAVE NO SHORTAGE OF WORK AND THEY NEED RESOURCES AT OTHER PROJECTS. THEY'RE GOING TO SEND THEM TO OTHER PROJECTS. AND THEN IF BY CHANCE WE COME BACK AND THE PROJECT IS APPROVED TO CONTINUE, THEY'LL RECOMMIT RESOURCES, BUT IT MAIN BE THE SAME ONES THAT WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY. >> Mayor Guajardo: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? >> I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, JOE MAY GO TO ANOTHER PROTON. JOE IS CURRENTLY THE HEAD OF THIS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION EFFORT RIGHT NOW. HE COULD DISAPPEAR TO ANOTHER PROJECT AND THEY'LL BRING SOMEBODY ELSE ON THAT HAS THE SAME QUALIFICATIONS BUT NOT WITH THE EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE HE'S GAINED BEING ON THIS. THEY'LL BE ABLE TO COME IN AND EXECUTE THE LEARN BUT THEY'LL HAVE TO COME BACK AND LEARN AND HAVE TO REWORK SO WE WILL BE A LITTLE LESS EFFICIENT AND WE'LL START BACK UP. BUT THAT COULD GO BACK TO THE LOWEST ENGINEER IN PROJECT. SAME THING WITH FREESE AND NICHOLS. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LET THEIR ENGINEERS WAIT AROUND HOPING WE GET THIS PROJECT MOVING SO THEY'RE GOING TO REALLOCATE THEIR RESOURCES APPROPRIATELY. IF WE'RE LUCKY ENOUGH TO GET THEM BACK, GREAT, BUT THERE'S NO GUARANTEE. NOT TO MENTION THE COMMITMENTS THEY MADE TO VENDORS. IF WE PUT ANYBODY ON HOLD OR EXTEND RENTALS OUT, THAT COSTS MONEY. WE HAVE EXPOSURE AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT EXPOSURE WILL BE UNTIL WE UNDERSTAND THE LENGTH OF THAT DOWNTIME. BUT THERE'S DEFINITELY SCHEDULE DELAYS AND THERE'S COST DELAYS. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. AND WHOEVER YOU'RE TALKING TO, CALM, CAN'T GET -- COUNCILMAN, CAN'T GET THAT TO YOU SOONER? >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> Mayor Guajardo: I KNOW, BUT CAN'T GET IT TOOK SOONER IN WRITING. >> I WAS HOPING TODAY. >> Mayor Guajardo: LET ME MOVE ON. COUNCILMAN ROY. >> Roy: THAT MOTION KIND OF PUTS A SLANT ON THINGS. I WANT TO CHANGE UP A BIT IN TERMS OF WHAT I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT. YOU KNOW, DREW, I THINK YOU AND I HAD A CONVERSATION MANY, MANY MONTHS AGO, AND IN THAT CONVERSATION I THINK FREESE AND NICHOLS AND KIEWIT WAS THERE AND MY RECOMMENDATION TO YOU, WHAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION I MADE TO YOU? DO YOU REMEMBER? THIS IS A TIME WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE COMMUNICATION. ACTUALLY, I THINK WE HAD COUNCIL -- >> IT WAS A COUPLE OF US, I REMEMBER THAT. >> Roy: VAUGHAN WAS THERE AND ERIK WAS THERE FOR A FEW MINUTES, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAD MENTIONED, I SAID YOU KNOW, IS GREAT TO HAVE OUTSIDE LIAISONS AND TALKING TO THE PEOPLE AND EVERYTHING, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE HAVE TO DO A GOOD JOB MAKING SURE THAT COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS WHAT WE'RE DOING. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT CONVERSATION? >> I DO, YES. ROADWAY AND MAKING SURE THAT WE SPEND THE TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS BRIEFED. NOT EVERYBODY HAS THE SAME AVERAGE OF BEING ON COUNCIL FOR A CERTAIN TIME. WE HAVE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS COMING ON AND THEY'RE TRYING TO GRASP THE INFORMATION. AND WE'RE HERE TODAY, AND I HATE TO SAY THIS BECAUSE WHEN I MADE THE RECOMMENDATION IT WAS ALMOST LIKE I DON'T THINK ANYONE BELIEVED ME. THERE WAS A SMIRK AND EVERYBODY JUST KIND OF SMILED AT ME AND WANTED TO PAT ME ON MY HEAD, WHICH HAPPENS FREQUENTLY. BUT WE'RE HERE NOW. WE ARE HERE RIGHT NOW. AND I WILL TELL YOU THIS, I'VE ALWAYS BEEN A PROPONENT OF SUPPORTING ANY TYPE OF WATER. YOU KNOW, WE NEED WATER. THIS ISN'T A CORPUS CHRISTI ISSUE, THIS IS A STATEWIDE ISSUE. GALVESTON IS SUFFERING. YOU KNOW, OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE, THE VALLEY IS SUFFERING, EVERYBODY IS SUFFERING. EVERYBODY IS TRYING TO FIND WATER AUSTIN EVERYBODY. BUT NOW WE'RE HERE. WE'VE PUT MONEY INTO THIS. I HEARD SOMEBODY EARLIER SAY IF YOU'RE IN A HOLE JUST STOP DIGGING. I GUESS DOES THAT MEAN YOU JUST LET YOURSELF GET BURIED. I DON'T KNOW. BUT WE'RE AT THIS POINT RIGHT NOW. BUT I WILL TELL YOU THIS, THAT I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT WHETHER WE LOOK AT HARBOR ISLAND OR SOME OTHER DESAL, IF WE CANNOT BACK THIS PROGRAM RIGHT NOW AND CANNOT GO FORWARD WITH THE INNER HARBOR, THE JAVIER WILL BE SOME OTHER DESAL SOMEPLACE ELSE. IF WE WERE SITTING HERE AND LET'S TAKE KIEWIT OUT OF THE EQUATION. SEVEN SEAS IS HERE AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A COST --A COST THAT'S LESS THAN ANY OTHER COST. WE HAVE AN ISSUE BECAUSE WE'RE OFF THE TRACK RIGHT NOW. AND PART OF THAT IS THAT WE MUST TAKE A LOOK -- THE WAY THE MODEL WAS DESIGNED AND EVERYONE WAS BRIEFED HERE, WE WERE TOLD AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS ON THE DESIGN BUILD THAT IT'S -- I'VE SAID THIS MULTIPLE TIMES, THAT IT'S GOING TO COME OUT, WE'RE GOING TO GET A COST, IT'S GOING TO BE HIRE HIGHER AND AS WE GET CLOSETORY THE END OF THE DESIGN IT SHOULD TAPER DOWN. AND THAT REQUIRES TRUST. THAT REQUIRES TRUST ON EVERYBODY'S PART. AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT NOW. FOR WHATEVER REASON THAT TRUST ISN'T THERE. SO WE EITHER HAVE TO FACE THE REALITY THAT WE HAVE TO START CUTTING COSTS NOW AND REALLY LOOKING AT IT NOW BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT. I KNOW THAT IN THE PRESENTATION TODAY, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAD WAS AN ALTERNATIVE, AND I'M GOING TO ASK THAT HOPEFULLY MAYBE WE'LL TAKE A HEAVY LOOK AT THIS ALTERNATIVE THAT WE AGREE TO THAT 25 MILLION INSTEAD OF THE 50, WHICH WILL GIVE US TIME BECAUSE IF WE STOP WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OBLIGATIONS. WE COULD HAVE LAWSUITS. WE COULD HAVE ALL KINDS OF THINGS CREEP UP BECAUSE OF THIS. I BELIEVE THAT THE COUNCIL THAT WANTS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, LET'S GET THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. LET'S GET BACK ON TRACK AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COMMUNICATING. I KNOW THAT YOUR STAFF HAS MADE BRIEFINGS AVAILABLE. I THINK YOU SAID THAT MYSELF AND WHO WAS THE OTHER ONE, COUNCIL MEMBER -- I DON'T REMEMBER. THERE'S ONLY A COUPLE OF US THAT CHOSE TO ATTEND THIS LAST BRIEFING. YOU KNOW, WE CAN CHERRY PICK ON WHAT WE WANT TO ATTEND. I TRY TO ATTEND EVERY MEETING BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT I BRIEF AND TALK TO AND I'M WELL VERSED IN TERMS OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH MY CONSTITUENTS AND I CAN GIVE THEM AN HONEST UPDATE. THANK YOU, RACHEL, I APPRECIATE YOU ROLLING YOUR EYES. BUT WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE WE'RE OFF THE TRACKS RIGHT NOW. AND SO I'D LIKE SERIOUSLY FOR MY COUNCIL TO LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY -- [BUZZER] -- OF THAT OTHER ALTERNATIVE. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: AND I'D LIKE TO JUST REMIND COUNCILMAN, THE QUESTIONS YOU'RE ASKING WERE ADDRESSED FROM THE SENATOR IN WRITING. >> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]. >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY ONE THING MAYOR. AND COUNCILMAN, I WANTED TO ADDRESS SOMETHING YOU SAID EARLIER. YOU AND I HAVE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS TOPIC. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT. AND YOU SHARED WITH ME THAT YOU HAD A CONVERSATION JUST LIKE YOU SAID. YOU TALKED TO SOMEBODY AT THE BOARD AND SHARED WITH ME SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS. AND I ASKED YOU IF YOU COULD SHARE WITH ME WHO YOU WERE TALKING TO, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S CONFIDENTIALITY THERE, THAT'S FINE. UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU HAD THAT QUESTION, I REACHED OUT TO THE BOARD AND I TALKED TO THE DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR OF THE BOARD, THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND I ASKED THEM THE QUESTION, I ASKED THEM THE QUESTION THAT YOU ASKED ME. I WAS PRETTY SURE I KNEW WHAT THE ANSWER WAS, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HEARD IT DIRECTLY FROM THAT PERSON. AND SO AT THE END OF THE DAY I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THOSE ANSWERS TO YOU. YOU KNOW, THE ANSWER THAT I GOT WAS THE ANSWER THAT I SHARED EARLIER, WHICH IS BONDS THAT ARE SOLD VERY DIFFICULT TO MOVE ONCE THEY'RE SOLD. MONEY THAT'S BEEN ALLOCATED FOR THE PROJECT, THAT MONEY WE HAVEN'T SOLD BONDS FOR THAT MONEY, SO WE CAN GULF THAT MONEY BACK TO THE STATE AND GO BACK AND COMPETE FOR FUNDING ON A DIFFERENT PROJECT. I WILL SAY THAT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES IS THAT WHEN YOU GIVE MONEY BACK IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT HARDER TO GET -- TO GET ANOTHER AWARD BECAUSE THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS PUT THAT MONEY INTO AN ACCOUNT THAT IS SET ASIDE FOR THIS PROJECT. THAT IS WHAT THE DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR TOLD ME THAT. AND I UNDERSTAND IF YOU NEED TO SEE IT IN WRITING, THAT'S --G THAT YOU NEED. BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT YOU AND I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS. WE TALK, WE DO TALK. MAYBE WE NEED TO TALK MORE FREQUENTLY. YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE CONFIDENCE, YOU CALLED ME SEVERAL TIMES. YOU'VE ASKED SOME REALLY GOOD QUESTIONS. QUESTIONS ABOUT WATER SECURITY, WHICH I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. I APPRECIATE WHEN YOU CALL ME AND YOU ASK ME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS IF WE HAVE SOMETHING GO AWRY AT THE ONE AND ONLY WATER TREATMENT PLANT THAT WE HAVE. THAT'S A CONCERN THAT ALL OF US HAVE. SO THOSE KINDS OF CONVERSATIONS I WANT TO KEEP THAT OPEN, I WANT TO KEEP YOU FEELING CONFIDENT THAT YOU CAN CALL ME ANY TIME AND ASK THOSE KINDS OF QUESTIONS. IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME. IT'S IMPORTANT TO OUR STAFF. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET YOU THE ANSWERS YOU NEED AND THAT'S WHY WHEN YOU ASK THAT QUESTION I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE MENTIONED IT ON THE RADIO BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT PROMPTED ME TO ASK YOU THAT QUESTION. AND WHEN YOU ASKED ME THAT QUESTION I WANT TO GET YOU THE ANSWERS. AND WE'RE DOING THE BEST WE CAN. WE WANT TO GET YOU THE ANSWERS. >> COUNCILMAN VAUGHAN. >> VAUGHAN: I SENT THE LETTER AND THE REASON I SENT IT IS BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY REASONS WHY IT ISN'T S AND ISN'T. WE'VE HEARD IT FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE. WE HEARD IT FROM CHUY HINOJOSA. SO I WANT TO THANK SENATOR HINOJOSA FOR SPENDING TWO AND A HALF HOURS WITH THE TEXAS WATER BOARD AND GETTING US INFORMATION. SO WHEN I ASKED THE LETTER I ASKED ABOUT ACCESS TO ADDITIONAL FUNDING, FINANCING, BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY. I ASKED ABOUT THE REPAYMENT TERMS, THE OPTIONS, THE SUBSIDIES, FLEXIBILITY TO REDIRECT THE FUNDING AND ADDITIONAL SUPPORT MECHANISMS LIKE GRANTS, WHATEVER, FOR US TO GET THE INFORMATION. THAT IS REALLY PROBABLY SOMETHING WE SHOULD HAVE ALREADY HAD, THAT THE KHAN SHOULD HAVE ALREADY HAD. I'M GLAD TO SAY SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS SIGNED UP ON THAT WITH ME. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. AND CHANGE IN PROJECTS ISN'T GOING TO BE EASY IF THEY WERE TO DO THAT, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE. IN THIS CASE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A MARINE DESAL PROJECT WITH THE 200 PLUS MILLION, BUT THE 500 PLUS MILLION BONDS HAVEN'T BEEN ISSUED SO THERE'S MORE FLEXIBILITY THERE. I'M NOT SAYING WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, BUT I THINK YOU HAVE TO HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION. AND I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THIS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE IS SO CONCERNED ABOUT DESAL RIGHT NOW. I AM TOO, BUT THIS DESAL PROJECT IS NOT GOING TO GET US WATER RIGHT NOW. AND I THINK THE PUBLIC IS FORGETTING THAT. WE'RE IN STAGE 3, RIGHT, STAGE 3, SO WE CAN'T WATER OUR LAWNS, WE CAN'T -- TO ME THE BIGGEST ISSUE RIGHT NOW IS GETTING US WATER. FOR 2026 TO ME EVANGEL LEAN LOOKS REALLY GOOD. IT MAY, MAY NOT. 24MGD'S. 202011 I'M HOPING WE'LL BE DOING REUSE, THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE ALREADY BEEN DONE. 2028 AND BOND IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE DESAL AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION. DESAL IS THE FUTURE. SOME OF YOU DON'T LIKE IT SOMEWHERE, BUT DESAL IS THE FUTURE. WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE IT. BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR FOCUS IS ON GETTING WATER RIGHT NOW AND I THINK YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THAT WITH THE RIVER WATER AND SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECTS, BUT THAT IS THE FOCUS. DESAL IS NOT GETTING US OUT OF WHAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW. I WANT TO ASK YOU THIS, STAGE 3, CHOKE CANYON HAS TO BE HOW FULL BEFORE YOU GET OUT OF STAGE 3? >> I BELIEVE 50% WE HAVE TO GET TO, IS THAT RIGHT? THE COMBINED CAPACITY HAS TO BE BACK UP TO 50. WE'RE AT 15 TODAY. >> VAUGHAN: WE HAVE A WAYS TO GO. WE NEED TO BE PRAYING FOR A TROPICAL DEPRESSION, WHATEVER. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO TALK TO YOU -- AND THERE ARE OTHER ALTERNATIVES. HARBOR ISLAND WILL HAVE A DESAL, THE GULF OF AMERICA. THERE ARE OTHER ALTERNATIVES, BUT I'M NOT SAYING THIS ISN'T A GOOD ONE. MARK, SOMETHING YOU BROUGHT UP ON THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, I WAS INTERESTED IN THAT, BUT LET ME ASK YOU THIS AND I THINK YOU CAN ANSWER IT. WHAT WAS THE INITIAL PURPOSE FOR THIS MONEY AND WHAT WAS IT SUPPOSED TO BE USED FOR ON THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT? THEY'RE SAYING WE'VE GOT 58 MILLION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? >> HEATHER WILL ANSWER THAT. >> SO THOSE WERE -- SO WHEN THE THREE COMPANIES CAME TO START LOOKING AT COMING TO CORPUS CHRISTI OR ACTUALLY SAN PAT COUNTY, THE REGIONAL EDC, THE CITY, ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM TO DEFER ANY TYPE OF TAX PAYMENTS THROUGH OUR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT UNTIL 2032. AND SO IN 2032 THOSE -- THE INITIAL PERIOD OF TIME WHERE THEY WERE NOT HAVING TO PAY DOES EXPIRE SO STARTING IN 2032 THE FULL VALUE OF THOSE --T HAVE BEEN BUILT WILL BE COMING ON AND WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENT TERMS. SO THAT IS THEY PAY 100% OF THE TAXES THAT WOULD PAY IN THE CITY LIMITS ON THE LAND, AND 74.5% ON IMPROVEMENTS. >> VAUGHAN: AND I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT. WAS THERE A PURPOSE -- >> YES, COUNCILWOMAN, IT WOULD GO TO THE GENERAL FUND. SO TODAY WE HAVE PROBABLY UP TO 70 APRIL DISTRICT AGREEMENTS. ALL THAT MONEY COMES TO THE GENERAL FUND. >> VAUGHAN: THAT'S MY QUESTION. >> FOR BASIC SERVICES, POLICE FIRE STREETS. >> VAUGHAN: WERE WE GOING TO USE ANY OF IT FOR THE CONSENT DECREE? >> NO, BECAUSE AS PETER SAID THOSE ARE PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES SO IT'S GENERAL FUND. NO. >> VAUGHAN: OKAY. SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH USING THAT MONEY, BUT IF WE HAVE SO MANY ISSUES IN THE CITY RIGHT NOW, TO ME THE WATER DEPARTMENT SHOULD STAND ON ITS OWN, DESAL SHOULD STAND ON ITS OWN. IT WASN'T PURPOSE FOR ANYTHING OBVIOUSLY, BUT IN THE GENERAL FUND WE'RE ALREADY SHORT. BUT THIS ISN'T GOING TO COME TO 2032 ANYWAY SO IT'S REALLY A NON-ISSUE. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN. >> SO EXACTLY WHEN IS THE GET OFF THE RAMP PURPOSE? EITHER -- RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT 10% AND YOU'RE GIVING US THE DOOMSDAY SCENARIO. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO WAIT UNTIL IT'S 60% TO ACTUALLY GET OFF. SO AGAIN, I THINK IT'S A LOT OF FEAR-MONGERING THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING TO US BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THESE PEOPLE ARE BUSINESS PEOPLE. LET ME TELL YOU, IF FOR SOME REASON, YOU KNOW, FREESE AND NICHOLS AND KIEWIT HAVE TO RESHUFFLE THEIR STAFF, WELL, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO. THEY'RE BUSINESS PEOPLE AND HAVE TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND TOO, IF WE ARE LOOKING AT -- AGAIN, I'M STILL -- TO BE CLEAR, I AM NOT SUPPORTING DESALINATION, BUT SOME OF MY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE AND THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING INTO ANOTHER LOCATION. AND SO AS A MATTER OF FACT, YOU KNOW, IT'S LOOKING EVEN BETTER, THE MORE THAT I HEAR ABOUT IT, BUT IN THE MEANTIME I THINK THAT WE NEED TO CALM DOWN. I ALSO THINK THAT THE WASTEWATER PERMIT THAT WAS BROUGHT UP, DREW, YOU STATED THAT IT IS IN FACT ONLINE, BUT AS MUCH AS I -- I WANT TO BELIEVE YOU, UNTIL I ACTUALLY SEE IT. SO YOU KIND OF REFERENCE ON YOUR PHONE, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR SOMEBODY TO BRING IT UP SO THAT THE PUBLIC COULD SEE IT. SO IF YOU COULD DO THAT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. THE OTHER ISSUE I DID, YOU KNOW, WAS THINKING THAT I WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND YOU KNOW, I WAS THINKING SHOULD I SUPPORT THE TABLING? MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO JUST VOTE AGAINST THIS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE THE VOTES. SO JUST SPEAKING, YOU KNOW, JUST LOUDLY AND PUBLICLY. SO THAT IS MY DILEMMA. BUT DEFINITELY I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO STOP NOW WHILE WE CAN. LET'S LOOK AND REVIEW WHAT THE WATER BOARD HAS TO OFFER OFFER, AND I REFUSE TO BELIEVE LIKE MY COUNCILMAN CANTU SAID THAT THEY'RE JUST GOING TO LEAVE US OUT DRY. NO, I'M SURE WE CAN COME UP WITH SOME LOANS BECAUSE AGAIN, THEY'RE IN THE BUSINESS OF MAKING MONEY AS WELL, BUT WE'RE IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING WATER FOR OUR 500,000 CONSTITUENTS. AND IT'S STILL A DISSERVICE WHEN PEOPLE COME AND MAKE THEIR -- YOU KNOW, THEY TAKE THEIR TIME TO COME HERE AND WE ONLY GIVE THEM A MINUTE. I'M STILL -- THAT JUST BREAKS MY HEART WHEN I SEE THAT, BUT OKAY. YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT AGAIN, I THINK IT'S ONLY -- IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HEAR FROM EVERYBODY, AND A LOT OF THE OTHER 500,000 CUSTOMERS DON'T LIVE HERE IN THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. >> IF I MAY, COUNCILWOMAN, JUST SO YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE PRESENTING TODAY ARE THREE OPTIONS RIGHT? WE HAVE WHAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDS TO TAKE US TO 60%. WE HAVE AN ALTERNATE NUMBER ONE THAT TAKES US TO 30. AND THEN THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE IS TO PURSUE NEITHER. AND IT'S NOT FEAR-MONGERING. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO PROVIDE YOU WITH THE FACTS OF THE SITUATION. IF WE CHOOSE TO NOT PURSUE THIS PROJECT, THESE ARE REAL SITUATIONS AND ISSUES WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH. IT'S NOT FEAR-MONGERING, IT WILL WHAT WILL ACTUALLY HAPPEN. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GIVE THAT INFORMATION TO YOU SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THE CONSEQUENCES OF DOING SO. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILMAN SCOTT. SCOTT SCOTT>> SCOTT: CAN WE GEY OF THAT INFORMATION THAT Y'ALL GOT FROM THE WATER BOARD? >> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]. >> SCOTT: GOT IT. YOU WERE ASKING THE QUESTION. I THOUGHT YOU WERE MAKING A STATEMENT. CAN WE GET A COPY OF THE LETTER, THE QUESTIONS BEING ASKED? [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC] >> SCOTT: MAN, I LEARNED A COUPLE OF THINGS TODAY. ONE, YOU CAN TAKE PICTURES OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS WITH YOUR CAMERA, AND TWO, IT'S OKAY TO START YOUR OWN CONVERSATIONS OUTSIDE THE BODY. AND IT'S DIFFERENT, THAT'S DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, WHEN SOMEBODY REACHED OUT TO ME TWO MONTHS AGO AND SAID, I'VE GOT THIS GREAT GROUNDWATER IDEA I SAID YOU'VE GOT TO TALK TO DREW AND I PUT YOU IN CONVERSATION WITH THEM. I THINK THAT WAS APPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR. I THINK THIS BODY OPERATES DIFFERENTLY SO I GUESS I'LL TAKE THAT ON. I THINK WE HAVE SENATOR HINOJOSA'S COMMENTS, BUT THAT WILL BE FASCINATING TO SEE IF THE WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD SAYS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. MAN, THAT REALLY -- I'M JUST WOW. SO QUESTIONS. WE HAVE STOPPED THE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT, DEMONSTRATION PLANT? >> YEAH, WE PUT EVERYTHING ON HOLD. >> WHAT HAPPENS TO THE BOND RATING IF WE TERMINATE TODAY? DOES IT AFFECT OUR BOND RATING? WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT OF TERMINATING? >> IT WOULD MOST LIKELY FALL OUT -- ONCE WE GO UP FOR BOND RATINGS, THERE WOULD BE A QUESTION SINCE THE COUNCIL DOES NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS ON WHETHER OR NOT THE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS BEING MADE BY THE COUNCIL SUPPORT THE HEALTH AND THE PROSPERITY OF BASICALLY THE UTILITY. ARE THERE DECISIONS BEING MADE THAT IS IN SUPPORT OF THAT. >> SCOTT: GOT IT. AND OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR TOLD US THAT. >> YES. >> SCOTT: YOU'RE NOT JUST MAKING THAT UP? >> NO. PART IT IS BASED OFF OF MANAGEMENT DECISIONS AND THE ABILITY TO SET RATES, SECURE WATER SUPPLIES APPROPRIATELY AND THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES. SO WHILE WE ARE DOING OTHER THINGS TO SECURE WATER SUPPLIES THAT COULD REFLECT NEGATIVELY. I'M NOT SAYING IT'S RIGHT THERE. IT COULD AFFECT NEGATIVELY IF THIS PROJECT DOES NOT MOVE FORWARD OR A LIKE PROJECT TO SECURE FUTURE WATER RIGHTS. >> SCOTT: THANK YOU. JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. THIS IS ONLY FULLY PERMITTED PROJECT THAT WE'RE UNDERTAKING NOW. HEY, IF WE DO HAVE TO PAY BACK ALL THAT DEBT, HEATHER, IS IT PAID BY INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS OR INSIDE AND OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS? >> NO IT WOULD ONLY BE INSIDE CITY LIMITS CUSTOMERS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE AN ASSET SO IT BASICALLY TURNS INTO AN OPERATING EXPENSE WHICH WOULD ONLY BE ATTRIBUTABLE TO INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. >> SO IF WE TERMINATE TODAY OR I GUESS EVEN 30%, THAT -- AND WE HAVE TO PAY THAT BACK, WHICH I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO, ONLY CORPUS CHRISTIANS WOULD PAY THAT BACK. >> EXACTLY. >> SOMEBODY TALKED ABOUT CARL BAD BUILT ANYTHING ELSE. THEY DID BUILD THE CARL BAD PLANT FOR BETTER OR WORSE. I GET THE COMMENT ABOUT 30%. I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING IS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW WE GET OUT, IF WE CAN GET IT OUT. I HEAR YOU TALKING ABOUT $10 MILLION AND THAT'S PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH ABOUT IF WE SET 30 DAYS. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULDN'T AT LEAST GO TO 30%. BECAUSE IF IT'S 25 MILLION TO GO TO 30% WE MIGHT LOSE 10 MILLION, MY WORDS. IT WOULD SEEM TO ME YOU WANT TO KEEP THE THING GOING WHILE YOU GET THE ANSWERS FROM TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. I DO THINK THAT -- I DON'T THINK THE STATE WILL COME TO OUR AID BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, YEAH, WE DID. WE PUT UP $750 MILLION, WE LET YOU BORROW 200. WE FRONTED THE DEBT. WE HELPED YOU. IT'S NOT OUR FAULT YOU CHOSE TO GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. MAYBE THAT'S WRONG AND JUST MY PERCEPTION. I STILL THINK IT'S A GOOD PROJECT. I THINK IT'S FULLY PERMITTED. I THINK WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. AND WHEN YOU GET TO 60% AT LEAST YOU HAVE AN ASSET. THAT ASSET WOULD BE A FULLY DESIGNED, WHEN YOU FINISH DOESN'T PROJECT THAT YOU HAVE ON THE SHELF I THINK THAT'S VALUE. I THINK TODAY TO PROVIDES NO VALUE AND GREAT RISK WITH OUR PARTNERS IN WATER DEVELOPMENT. AND THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON. >> PAXSON: THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE MAIN POINTS FOR ME. I'VE SAID KIND OF SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THIS JOURNEY IS WHEN WE STARTED UP HERE THE NARRATIVE WAS VERY MUCH IF YOU DON'T DO INNER HARBOR THE GOVERNOR, OUR SENATORS, OUR HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES, AUSTIN AND TEXAS WILL REFUSE TO DO BUSINESS WITH YOU GOING FORWARD. I HAD NEVER HEARD THAT OUT OF ANYONE'S MOUTH, NOR COULD I SEE THAT IN A WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM ANYONE. WHAT I DID SEE WAS EXTREME SUPPORT FROM THE STATE, AND WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM SENATOR ADAM HINOJOSA, THE OTHER HINOJOSA HERE, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. WHAT I DID HEAR WAS SUPPORT FOR CORPUS TO WALK IN ITS CAPACITY AS A REGIONAL LEADER AND SUPPLIER. WHAT I SAW WAS CORPUS SOLVED THE PROBLEM AND WE WANT TO HELP TO ME, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M SEEING HERE, SO AS THE NARRATIVE HAS CONTINUED TO BE INNER HARBOR, YES OR NO, NOT SO MUCH AS HOW DO WE PREVENT DECEMBER '26 RUNNING OUT OF WATER. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYONE ON THE DAIS, I SIMPLY CAN'T, BUT I DON'T THINK I'M ALONE. FOR ME MY FOCUS HAS GOT TO BE HOW DO I GET WATER BEFORE WE RUN OUT? AND HOW DO I NOT GET WATER IN SUCH A WAY THAT MY COMMUNITY CANNOT AFFORD IT? I WAS CURIOUS IN MY CAMPAIGN TRAIL BECAUSE DESAL WAS A HUGE TOPIC. I WAS VERY CURIOUS WHAT DID MY DISTRICT THINK. AND I WAS OUT MILES THROUGH THE OSO AREA, THE FLOUR BLUFF AREA, EVERY PART OF MY DISTRICT I TRANSPARENTLY TOLD THEM WHERE I STOOD ON INNER HARBOR. AND WHAT I HEARD WAS WE WANT YOU TO MAKE A RESPONSIBLE DECISION, THAT'S IT. AND IN THE DAYS LEADING UP TO TODAY'S MEETING, THAT'S THE INFORMATION I RECEIVED FROM MY CONSTITUENTS. WE MAY OR MAY NOT AGREE WITH YOUR VOTE ON TUESDAY, BUT WE KNOW YOU WILL VOTE FOR THE BEST DECISION OF THIS TOWN. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT HERE. I'VE IMPLORE THE CITY LEADERSHIP TO DEMONSTRATE AN EQUAL INTEREST IN FINDING WATER SOLUTIONS FOR THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE WITH EQUAL ENTHUSIASM AS HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT. I COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR WORKS ON THE WELLS AND THE EFFLUENT WATER WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO GIVE TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS. I THINK WE'VE REACHED A BIG MILESTONE RECENTLY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. BUT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS I DON'T SEE THE SAME ENERGY. THAT CONCERNS ME. LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER ROY SAID A MOMENT AGO, IT DOESN'T BUILD THE BIG PICTURE THAT ALL THINGS ARE BEING CONSIDERED EQUALLY AND THIS IS A BASKET I CAN PUT ALL THE EGGS IN. WE NEED WATER TODAY, WE NEED WATER TOMORROW. WE NEED TO SHOW AUSTIN AND THE STATE THAT WE'RE PROACTIVE, EVEN IF INNER HARBOR CAME ONLINE TODAY, THAT WOULD NOT SOLVE THE DROUGHT. IT SIMPLY WOULDN'T, IT'S NOT ENOUGH. SO WE HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE TO KEEP ENOUGH WATER FOR TODAY, TOMORROW AND THE VISION FOR THIS TOWN. THE STATE NEEDS US TO. OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS US TO. THESE ARE HARD DECISIONS. NO DECISION YOU MAKE TODAY IS GOING TO BE EASY. SOMEBODY'S GOING TO BE UPSET BY IT. ALL WE CAN DO IS TAKE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN OR NOT TO THIS POINT AND MAKE THE BEST DECISION WE CAN. I'M SAYING I DON'T KNOW A CONTRACT WHERE I DON'T KNOW, HAVE SOME KIND OF ACCIDENT AND NOW I'M IN THE HOSPITAL FOR 30 DAYS AND I CAN'T SIGN THE CONTRACT AND THAT CONTRACTOR IS ALL RIGHT, COOL, I'LL BE BACK, THAT'S COOL. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. WE'VE GOT THESE GREAT PROJECTS WE HAVE JUST NOW TODAY GOTTEN UPDATED INFORMATION ON AND APPARENTLY A LETTER HAS BEEN SENT THAT IS GOING TO GIVE US MORE INFORMATION. SO WE'RE SAYING HOLD ON, PUMP THE BRAKES. LET'S GET ALL OUR DUCKS IN A ROW. THAT'S WHAT'S BEING SAID. BUT WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED IS THIS NARRATIVE THAT NOW WE'RE JEOPARDIZING ALL THE WATER SUPPLY AND IT'S NOT A REALITY, IT'S SIMPLY NOT. I THINK THIS COUNCIL VERY MUCH WANTS TO PROVIDE WATER AND I'M LOOKING AT YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE THE ONE AT THE PODIUM BUT I'M SPEAKING TO THE ENTIRE TOPIC SO DON'T TAKE IT PERSONALLY, DREW. BUT THAT'S WHERE IT IS TO ME. SO A POSTPONE IS SIMPLY THAT. WE'VE GOT GREAT PRODUCTS, LET'S TALK THAT NARRATIVE THROUGH, LET'S SEE WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE BECAUSE 1.2 BILLION FOR 30 MILLION GALLONS IS HONESTLY THE HARDEST MATH TO ACCEPT OF ANY OF THE PROJECTS. WE COULD DO TWO OR THREE FOR THIS PRICE. [BUZZER]. >> COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHAN. >> COUNCILMAN SCOTT, I TAKE EXCEPTION TO YOU SAYING THAT PEOPLE GOT THE INFORMATION ON THEIR OWN. YOU BET I DID, I'M NOT A ROBOT. I DON'T DISACCEPT WHAT PEOPLE TELL ME. AND HAD I GOT THIS INFORMATION BEFORE FROM STAFF, WHICH I WISH I HAD, I WOULDN'T HAVE HAD TO DO THAT. I WAS NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND NOT DO IT AND NOT KNOW. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I BET YOU'VE NEVER DONE THAT. IT'S OKAY. IT'S NOT A QUESTION FOR YOU. >> IS THAT RHETORICAL. >> NO, IT'S JUST A STATEMENT. WE'LL TALK LATER. I WOULD SAY THIS THOUGH WITH YOUR MOTION, COUNCILMAN CANTU. I DO NOT THINK THEY SHOULD STOP WORK. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH POSTPONING IT, BUT I THINK THEY NEED TO CONTINUE TO WORK. WE ARE NOT SAYING -- WE NEED THE INFORMATION. I SENT THIS IN GOOD FAITH BECAUSE I TRULY WANT THE INFORMATION TO MAKE SURE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $1.2 BILLION, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A DESAL PLANT THAT I THINK IS INNER HARBOR AND HARBOR ISLAND ARE BOTH SUPPORTED BY THE STATE, AND IT'S GOING TO BE AND WE'VE BEEN DEFINITELY TOLD THAT BY SOME OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES AS WELL WHATEVER WE DO IS SUPPORTED BY THE STATE. SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A POSTPONEMENT, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD STOP WORKING. >> SO ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 30%? GO AHEAD. >> VAUGHAN: NO, YOU'RE PAYING THE MONTHLY FOR SOMETHING BECAUSE THEY'RE CONTINUING THEIR PROJECTS FOR THE PILOT PROGRAM, RIGHT? I MEAN, WHAT ARE THEY DOING? >> SO THEY'RE WORKING ON THE DEMONSTRATION PLANT, GUIDANCE AMENDMENT FOR THE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, BUT THAT ENDS JULY 31st. AFTER THAT I DON'T HAVE A VEHICLE TO CONTINUE PAYING KIEWIT FOR DESIGN EFFORTS. >> WHAT WOULD BE THE 30-DAY PRICE TO KEEP EVERYBODY WORKING? OF KIEWIT AND FREESE AND NICHOLS. WE NEED AN ESTIMATE. >> IT PROBABLY WOULD BE, I DON'T KNOW, SIX TO SEVEN MILLION. FREESE AND NICHOLS, THEIR CONTRACT GOES -- >> WHAT'S THE PRICE FOR KIEWIT TO HELP THE COUNCILWOMAN OUT. >> GIVE ME A NUMBER. >> 22 [INDISCERNIBLE]. >> THEY'RE SAYING 10 MILLION FOR THE MONTH. >> 10 MILLION FOR 30 DAYS? >> IT'S A LOT OF DESIGN EFFORT AND IT'S -- >> Mayor Guajardo: GUYS. I'M GOING TO REMIND EVERYONE PLEASE. >> YOU'RE ASKING FOR AN ESTIMATE. IT'S COST REIMBURSIBLE. THEY'RE GOING TO SUBMIT ALL THE SUPPORT BACKUP TO JUSTIFY THE HOURS SO WE'LL PAY THEM WHAT WAS ACTUALLY WORKED. IT'S NOT A LUMP SUM AND WE'LL PAY THEM 10. WE'LL VALIDATE ALL THE COSTS. >> IS THAT IS RIGHT OF THE MONEY BECAUSE YOU'RE PAYING THEM MONTHLY. >> THEY BILL MONTHLY, THAT'S CORRECT. >> SO COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHAN IT WOULD BE IF YOU HAVE TO EXPAND UPON YOUR IDEA IS THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO AUTHORIZE UP TO $10 MILLION TIME AND MATERIAL MEN MEANING IT'S NOT LUMP SUM BUT BASED ON INVOICES THAT COME IN. THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE MAXIMUM. IT MAY NOT BE 10 MILLION, BUT IF YOU WANTED TO KEEP THEM WORKING THROUGH THE END OF AUGUST, THAT WOULD BE THE MOTION THAT WE WOULD NEED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY THEM. HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PAY THEM. >> VAUGHAN: I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE CONSENSUS UP HERE. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. >> MAYOR, NOT TO INTERJECT, BUT IF WE CAN PUT THE ITEM ON THE SCREEN, WE DO HAVE THE -- >> THE DISCHARGE PERMIT FOR INNER HARBOR, DREW? >> YES, SIR. THIS IS WHAT WE JUST PULLED IT UP OFF THE ACTIVE WEBSITE. THIS IS WHAT IT SAYS. SO I'M NOT SURE -- >> SO IT EXISTS. >> THE STATUS OF ACTIVE, THE UPPER RIGHT BOX. >> CORRECT, STATUS ACTIVE, YES SIR. >> THAT MEANS IT'S AN ACTIVE APPROVED PERMIT? >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. >> IT WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 18th. >> OKAY. THAT WAS COUNCILMAN CAMPOS ASKED FOR THAT. THIS CAME RIGHT OFF THE TCEQ WEBSITE? >> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: DREW, WHEN ARE WE GOING TO SEE THE DWARFER? >> THAT'S ITEM NUMBER 20 SO WE COULD PRESENT THAT. >> Mayor Guajardo: I THINK WE SHOULD. WE HAVE A COUPLE MORE, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE IT NOW. COUNCILMAN BARRERA. >> TYPICALLY IF I HAVE AN INITIATIVE OR AN IDEA OR SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO DO, I MEAN, I JUST -- I PRESENT IT TO STAFF AND THEN IF IT GAINS ANY MOMENTUM. I'VE BEEN FRIENDS WITH THE SENATOR FOR 25 YEARS, SENATOR CHUY HINOJOSA. I SERVED ON THE BOARD AND I COULD OBVIOUSLY CALL THEM. BUT ANY TIME WE INTERJECT IT INTO SOME TYPE OF POLICY WE'VE COMMENTED FOR STAFF AND IT'S SHARED WITH THE ENTIRE COUNCIL. SO I JUST KIND OF -- RIGHT NOW WE'RE TALKING TRANSPARENCY AND I JUST FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE THAT I HAVEN'T BEEN SHARED WITH THAT TRANSPARENCY. AND I UNDERSTAND IF WE WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS I JUST -- YOU KNOW, WE PUT A THREE-SIGNATURE MEMO SO EASILY AND I THINK AT THAT TIME WE COULD JUST NOTIFY THE REST OF THE COUNCIL THAT WE'RE GOING TO ENGAGE IN THIS. SO I JUST FEEL REAL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT. I JUST -- I ALWAYS SAY, DO YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON'T MIND BLOCKING, BUT I'VE GOT TO KNOW THE PLAY. AND I TELEGRAPH MY URGES. SO LET'S ASSUME THAT THE RESPONSE COMES TOMORROW. HOW SOON CAN WE HAVE A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING? >> I THINK IT'S THREE DAYS TO POST THE MEETING, COUNCILMAN. SO IF IT CAME IN TOMORROW, YOU COULD HAVE A MEETING SATURDAY OR NEXT WEEK SOME TIME. >> THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT WHEN THE IDEA CAME UP FOR 50,000-DOLLAR AMENDMENT OR SOMETHING, NORMAL DEALS THAT WE COME TO THAT. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT THE MINUTE IT COMES IN, YOU KNOW, I'D BE WILLING TO SIGN A THREE-SIGNATURE MEMO TO GET IT ON SOMEWHERE. >> YOU WILL HAVE TO STALK TO THE SENATORS. WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT'S COMING IN. >> OKAY, I UNDERSTAND THAT. ALL I'M SAYING IS WE WANT TO GIVE THEM A MONTH. HERE'S THE THING. RUDY MADRID COMES IN HERE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE WANT TO PUSH STAFF BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE THEY'RE DRAGGING THEIR FEET BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW WE HAVE SOME INFORMATION THAT WE'RE ENTITLED TO. I WANT US TO HAVE IT. I THOUGHT SENATOR JUAN HINOJOSA WHO IS THE VICE-CHAIR OF FINANCE, WELL RESPECTED, WOULD CARRY SOME CREDIBILITY. AND IF WE DON'T, WE DON'T. BUT YOU KNOW, HERE'S MY FRUSTRATION. IT'S LIKE WHAT'S IT GOING TO BE NEXT TIME? I REMEMBER SAYING YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET YOUR PERMITS. I REMEMBER SOMEBODY SAYING THEY'VE MISCALCULATED. THERE WILL BE SLUDGE DUMPING DUG INTO THE BAY. NOW WHAT IS IT, WE'RE GOING TO POISON THE BAY. NOW IT'S P PHOS THAT WE'RE GOING TO POISON OUR LINES AND WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT. WHEN ARE WE GOING TO DO A FAIRFIELD STUDY? ALL THE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED? WHAT'S THE NEXT ONE. I MEAN, WHAT'S THE NEXT ONE? THAT'S THE WHOLE THING. I UNDERSTAND IT'S A TOUGH DECISION, IT'S A TOUGH DECISION, BUT YOU KNOW, WE JUST SAID BASED ON $1.2 BILLION, IT'S 1.89 PER THOUSAND DOLLARS TO THE RATEPAYER. OUR A THOUSAND GALLONS. FOR A THOUSAND GALLONS IT'S $1.89 TO THE RATEPAYER AND THAT'S AT $1.2 BILLION. COULD SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN AGAIN. I GUESS COUNCILMAN FOR HIS BENEFIT, WE TALKED LAST MEETING ABOUT HOW WE WENT FROM 220 MILLION ALL THE WAY UP TO 1.2 BILLION. JASON? >> YES, SIR, I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION. COUNCILMAN, I'M SORRY YOU MISSED THAT EXPLANATION LAST WEEK. SO THE PROGRESS, I GUESS OR PROGRESSION OF THE COST ESTIMATE FOR THE PROJECT STARTED AT THE 222 MILLION. THAT NUMBER WAS PUT TOGETHER IN 2019. THE COST ESTIMATE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL IN 2024 WAS 757 FOR THE KIEWIT COST AT 10% FOR CONSTRUCTION IS JUST UNDER A BILLION, TOTAL COST 1.2 BILLION. SO THE BASIS FOR THE 2019 NUMBER WAS A 20MGD FACILITY AND LAST WEEK WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT SOME BENCHMARKING WE DO AGAINST HARD BIT BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF US WOULD AGREE THAT A HARD BID PROJECT SHOWS YOU WHAT THE MARKET WILL ACTUALLY BEAR, WHAT SOMETHING IS REALLY GOING TO COST. SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT HARD BID PROJECTS BETWEEN 2019 AND 2024, PARTICULARLY HERE LOCALLY BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON ECONOMICALLY LOCALLY, YOU BID A PROJECT LESS COMPLEX WATER TREATMENT PROJECT THAT OWEN STEVENS IN 2021 IT BID JUST OVER 50 MILLION. YOU REBID THAT TWO YEARS LATER AND IT WAS $88 MILLION. SO WHAT WE SAW JUST IN THAT TIME PERIOD OF TWO YEARS WAS ALMOST AN 80% INCREASE ON WHAT THE MARKET BROUGHT TO YOU COMPETITIVELY FOR A HARD BID. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A FIVE-YEAR DURATION BETWEEN THE 222 MILLION AND THE 757. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT AT LEAST 80-PLUS PERCENT ON THAT TWO YEARS. THIS ISN'T HOW WE BUILT THE MODEL, BUT THESE ARE SOME MARKET DYNAMICS THAT ARE GOING ON. IF YOU DO THAT 80% AND THAT WAS JUST TWO YEARS, BUT YOU ADD THE 50% CAPACITY, IT'S GOING FROM 20 MGD TO 30, YOU MAKE IT 50% BIGGER, YOU ACTUALLY GET TO 675 MILLION. AND THE 222 NEVER HAD THE IMPROVEMENTS AT NAVIGATION. SO I'M JUST TELLING YOU HOW YOU GET TO THAT 757 PRETTY QUICKLY RIGHT? THE 757 THAT WAS PRESENTED IN 2024, 30 MGD BASIS, SAME BASIS YOU'RE LOOKING AT TODAY, BUT WAS BASED ON A SCOPE OF WORK AND I WON'T GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THAT CONE YOU HAVE SEEN, BUT THE CLASSIFICATION FOR THE ESTIMATE IS A CLASS FIVE IS WHAT IT'S CALLED. SO THAT COULD GO PLUS 100% MINUS 50% IN THE RANGE. I APOLOGIZED LAST WEEK. I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS MY TEAM DID PRETTY POORLY WAS SETTING THAT AS A TARGET, A POINT IN SPACE, WHEN REALLY IT IS A RANGE. SO WHEN WE DELIVERED WAS 157. WHAT WE SUBMITTED TO THE SWIFT OF THE 757, BUT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD FOR CLASS FIVE IS THAT RANGE. WE ARE NOW WORKING WITH WOULD YOU TEAM AND THE KIEWIT TEAM, GOT TO SPOKEN% DESIGN. JUST IN THE TIME BETWEEN GETTING KEY PIT ON BOARD AND 10% DESIGN, THE ACTUAL ROUGH ORDER OF MAGNITUDE COST STARTED AT 1 PIO 2 FOR CONSTRUCTION, NOW IT'S LESS THAN A BILLION FOR CONSTRUCTION. WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION BETWEEN ZERO AND 10% BUT IT'S VERY EASY TO SHOW THE PROGRESSION BETWEEN 272, 157 AND 1.2 BILLION IF YOU GO SCOPE TO SCOPE BECAUSE THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE KNOW NOW AT 10% DESIGN THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW WHEN TALKING ABOUT THE 757. BUT I WILL TELL YOU WHEN YOU DO THE INDUSTRY RANGE, THE 1.2 BILLION IS IN THE RANGE. AND IF YOU TAKE IT BACK, THE 222 MILLION IS STILL IN THE RANGE. AND IT'S AN APPARENT CONTRIBUTION RIGHT? WE'VE I THINK HIGHLIGHTED SOME APPARENT CONTRIBUTIONS TODAY. I REALLY APPRECIATE A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED BECAUSE THE PURSUIT OF UNDERSTANDING, THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR UNDERSTANDING ACTUALLY SHOWS THIS MOTIVATION AND THIS INVESTMENT THAT YOU WANT TO GET TO THE TRUTH AND I WANT TO COMMEND YOU ON THAT. SO WHERE THERE IS AN APPARENT CONTRIBUTION WE NEED TO SEEK TO UNDERSTAND. SO I HOPE THAT HELPS ON THAT PROGRESSION GETTING FROM THE 222 TO THE 1.2. AND WE'VE GOT A SCOPE BUILT YOU WILL AND A BREAKDOWN ON ALL THAT THAT WE'VE PUT TOGETHER IF THAT HELPS. >> THANK YOU, JASON. CAN YOU ANSWER THAT? HOW LARGE IS TEAM ARE WE USING RIGHT NOW FOR KIEWIT? >> I'VE HEARD DIFFERENT NUMBERS ON THE KIEWIT SIDE, BUT FOR ENGINEERING IT'S IN THE HUNDREDS. >> ALL RIGHT. SO WE'VE GOT IN EXCESS OF HUNDREDS OF ENGINEERS WORKING ON THIS. >> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HERE'S JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS. A LOT HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT THE OFF RAMP. THE OFF RAMP WAS REALLY TO SAY OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO ABANDON THE PROGRESSIVE DESIGN BUILD AND GO FOR A HARD BID. SO THAT WAS MADE VERY CLEAR IN -- WHAT'S LEAF LIEN'S LAST NAME? >> CLARK. >> HE MADE IT CLEAR. I MET WITH HIM THREE TIMES AND ACTUALLY I MET WITH HIM ONCE AT LENGTH, I HAD MORE QUESTIONS, WENT BACK TO HIM AND THEN, WHAT IS IT, THEN HE CAME AND PRESENTED TO US. I THINK THAT'S BEEN MADE VERY CLEAR TO US. I HAVE THAT BOOK SITTING IN MY OFFICE. A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT TO CLARIFY. NUMBER ONE, ALL THOSE NEW PROJECTS, NONE OF THEM ARE FULLY PERMITTED. OURS ARE FULLY PERMITTED. >> CORRECT. >> THE OTHER THING IS THAT THE LETTER APPROVING THE DISCHARGE PERMIT IS ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. >> RIGHT. SOMEBODY JUST SENT ME A COPY SO WE CAN PUT THIS UP ON THE SCREEN AS WELL. I'LL PRINT IT OUT. WE HAVE A LETTER THAT TCEQ SENT US THAT WAS DATED MARCH 25S THE RECEIPT OF THE DISCHARGE PERMIT, TCEQ LETTER. THERE IT IS. >> AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SAY PEOPLE ARE MOVING HERE. I MEAN, MAYBE IT'S JUST -- THIS IS ANECDOTAL. I TOOK COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHAN, I WAS EXCITED ABOUT THE YOUNG KIDS AT DAWSON, PARTICULARLY ALL THE FEMALES AND SOME THAT HAD MOVED BACK TO CORPUS CHRISTI THAT DECIDED TO MAKE THEIR HOME HERE AND IT'S BECAUSE OF THE EXPANSION OF THE ECONOMY. SAME THING. [INDISCERNIBLE] HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF YOUNG TEXT IN THERE. I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE NEED TO -- OUR ECONOMY IS EXPANDING SAND ARE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING HERE. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN ROY. >> ROY: I WAS HOPING COUNCILMAN CANTU COULD BE HERE BECAUSE I WANTED TO ADDRESS HIS MOTION. I'M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND ADMONISH OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS. IF YOU'RE UNCOMFORTABLE AND, YOU KNOW, YOU FEEL LIKE YOU DON'T GET THE ANSWERS THAT YOU NEED AND YOU PUT FORTH COMMUNICATION TRYING TO SEEK THAT CLARIFICATION, THEN IT IS WHAT IT IS MY METHOD MAY BE DIFFERENT, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY ONE THING I'VE LEARNED ABOUT THIS COUNCIL HERE JUST LIKE WITH THE $50,000, RIGHT, IS THAT IF THEY'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK INTO IT AND SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO TAKE A STEP BACK TO GO FORWARD. AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE CASE HERE. AND SO I WANT TO REACH OUT TO EACH COUNCIL MEMBER AND ASK THEM, I THINK THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH A SOLUTION HERE. I THINK I'VE LISTENED TO EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER AND I THINK WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. WE COULD ALWAYS STOP THIS PROCESS. YOU KNOW, IF THE LETTER COMES BACK AND THERE'S SOMETHING THERE THAT DOESN'T REPRESENT WELL THAT COUNCIL DOESN'T AGREE WITH, IT'S EASY TO STOP A PROCESS, AM I RIGHT? THERE'S NOTHING PROHIBITING COUNCIL FROM SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO SHUT THIS DOWN. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, AND AGAIN, I KNOW THERE'S A MOTION AND -- I DON'T KNOW -- DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW TO TABLE THIS, RIGHT, AND BASICALLY SHUT IT DOWN TO AUGUST. WHAT I'M GOING TO ASK, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING A JOB, WE HAVE 100 PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING THEIR JOBS, WE HAVE CITY STAFF THAT ARE ENGAGED THAT WE GO AHEAD -- THIS LETTER COULD COME IN IN TWO OR THREE DAYS. IT COULD COME IN IN A WEEK, BUT I SAY LET'S STAND FAST, AGREE WITH THE LOWER AMOUNT, CONTINGENT ON THAT LETTER. IF THAT LETTER COMES IN AND THERE'S SOMETHING THERE THAT MAKES THIS COUNCIL UNCOMFORTABLE, THEN IT IS OUR DUTY. WE HAVE TO REACT. AND SO I'M GOING TO ASK ERIC CANTU WHEN HE DOES COME BACK, IF HE COULD MODIFY HIS MOTION TO THE MOTION THAT I'M MAKING. >> WHICH IS? >> ROY: WHICH IS BASICALLY GOING WITH THE ALTERNATIVE AND PUT SOME KIND OF CLAUSE IN THERE THAT WE'RE WAITING ON THAT LETTER AND THAT COUNCIL HAS THE ABILITY TO TAKE ACTION AS SOON AS THAT LETTER COMES IN. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> WOULD IT BE TO CONTINUE THE FUNDING, COUNCILMAN ROY? >> ROY: TAKING ■THE FUNDING AND IF THAT LETTER COMES IN, THEN COUNCIL CAN TAKE FURTHER ACTION. >> Mayor Guajardo: BUT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FUNDING TO 30% OR FUNDING THE MONTH? AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW, PARDON ME, IF THAT'S AN OPTION WITH THESE COMPANIES, WITH THE CONTRACTS. >> ROY: WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE EASIEST THING TO CONTINUE IS WITH THE 30% BECAUSE IT'S A NUMBER. IT'S A NUMBER. IT'S BASICALLY SAYING YOU WILL HAVE THE MONEY TO CONTINUE TO DO THE JOB, BUT IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMES BACK THAT SAYS THERE'S A BETTER ALTERNATIVE -- THERE'S ONE THING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A LETTER COME IN AND GIVE US OPTIONS, BUT THERE'S ALSO A PLAN IN -- YOU'VE GOT TO PUT A PLAN IN PLACE TO SAY WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO NOW THAT WE HAVE THIS INFORMATION. MA OKAY, MAYBE THERE IS A BETTER SOLUTION OUT THERE BUT IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME TO COME UP WITH A VIABLE SOLUTION IF YOU'RE SAYING ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'LL SHIFT AND MOVE THIS TO THE INNER HARBOR OR SOME OTHER LOCATION. I DON'T KNOW. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS LET'S CONTINUE WHEN THAT LETTER COMES IN, GIVE COUNCIL THE ABILITY TO MAKE -- TO TAKE ACTION ON THAT AND GO WITH THE LOWER AMOUNT BECAUSE THEN WE'RE NOT COMMITTING THOSE FUNDS. AND WE DON'T KNOW, IT COULD TAKE TWO WEEKS, IT COULD TAKE THREE DAYS. WE COULD HAVE IT TOMORROW. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. I DON'T THINK IT DOES ANYBODY ANY GOOD TO SHUT IT DOWN. >> Mayor Guajardo: NOW, BASED ON HIS SUGGESTION, IS THAT A POSSIBILITY? WITH OUR CONTRACTORS? THAT'S MY POINT. I DON'T WANT TO BE BREACHING A CONTRACT. >> NO, THE ANSWER IS YES, WE CAN EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT THAT TAKES US THROUGH THE END OF AUGUST AND WE COME BACK AND WE DO ANOTHER PRESENTATION FOR -- >> Mayor Guajardo: RIGHT. BUT WHAT HE'S SAYING IS WE TAKE IT TO 30% WITH A CAVEAT THAT SAYS ONCE THE LETTER COMES BACK -- >> WE CAN TERMINATE AT ANY POINT IN THIS PROCESS. THE CONTRACT GIVES US THAT ABILITY. >> Mayor Guajardo: THEN THAT'S POSSIBLE. SO COUNCILMAN -- >> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]. KY I MAKE THAT MOTION THEN? >> THE MOTION TO POSTPONE IS ABOVE A MOTION TO AMEND. YOU CAN AMEND HIS, BUT HE'S -- HE WANT TO POSTPONE THE WHOLE THING UNTIL AUGUST 26. YOU'RE WANTING TO GO WITH ALTERNATIVE NUMBER ONE CONTINGENT. THAT'S DIFFERENT. >> SO WHAT I'M ASKING IS FOR HIM TO PULL HIS MOTION. >> RIGHT, IF HE WILL WITHDRAW. ARE YOU WILLING TO WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION TO POSTPONE? >> IF IT VOTES DOWN, IT VOTES DOWN. >> RIGHT. >> WE'LL GO BACK AND ENTERTAIN YOUR MOTION. >> WHAT IS YOUR MOTION? >> TO BASICALLY CONTINUE WITH THE LESSER MODEL, WHICH IS THE 30% -- >> I'M GOING TO KEEP MY MOTION AS IS. >> Mayor Guajardo: SO YOURS DOESN'T -- >> HE'S GOING TO KEEP HIS MOTION SO WE HAVE TO VOTE. >> Mayor Guajardo: AND THAT IS TO POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST 26TH. SO ONCE THE -- [MULTIPLE VOICES] >> WHAT IF WE CONSIDERED. >> Mayor Guajardo: HANG ON GUYS. [OFF MIC CONVERSATIONS]. >> Mayor Guajardo: SO THE WORKING PART OF IT, THERE WOULD BE NO WORK. >> RIGHT. IF WE'RE SAYING POSTPONE I'M GOING TO ISSUE NOTICES TO BOTH COMPANIES TO TELL THEM TO STOP WORK. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. SO WE THE COUNCIL -- OR YOU ALL CONSIDER WHAT COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHAN WAS TALKING ABOUT IS TAKE TO TO 30 DAYS. >> RIGHT. AUTHORIZE $10 MILLION. >> Mayor Guajardo: AUTHORIZE $10 MILLION. AND IF THE LETTER COMES BACK THREE DAYS FROM NOW AND WE DON'T AGREE -- >> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]. >> Mayor Guajardo: SO THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY WAY WORK WOULD STOP. ARE Y'ALL AMENABLE THAT, 30 DAYS? >> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]. >> YOU CAN AMEND IT. YOU CAN AMEND THAT BECAUSE YOU CAN SAY IT'S A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO AUGUST 26TH AND AUTHORIZING UP TO -- [MULTIPLE VOICES] >> YOU DON'T WANT TO AMEND IT. >> IF KIEWIT IS NOT WORKING I DON'T HAVE A NEED FOR FREESE TO CONTINUE WORKING. SO I'M GOING TO STOP EVERYTHING TO CUT THE COST DOWN. SO WE'RE GOING TO ISSUE STOP WORK NOTICES TO BOTH COMPANIES. IF KIEWIT IS NOT WORKING THERE'S NO REASON FOR FREESE TO BE THERE BECAUSE THEY'RE AN OWNER AGENT REVIEWING KIEWIT'S WORK SO THERE WOULD BE NOTHING FOR THEM TO DO. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. SO THERE'S THAT. WELL, WE'VE GOT TO OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT RIGHT NOW -- SO I'M JUST MAKING CERTAIN NO ONE'S AMENABLE TO 30 DAYS. >> I'M NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. [LAUGHTER]. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT WHILE EVERYBODY'S THINKING ABOUT THIS. ALL RIGHT. JUST FORM A LINE THERE IN THE MIDDLE. >> I'M FROM CORPUS CHRISTI. YOU HAVE A HARD DECISION ON YOUR HANDS, BUT I WANT YOU TO THINK OF ONE THING. YOU HAVE A PUBLIC OF THINGS TO CONSIDER. ONE, WE LIVE IN A DISTRICT. TWO, WE NEED WATER NOW. WE DON'T NEED IT LATER. I AGREE WITH YOU WHOLEHEARTEDLY. WE NEED IT NOW. DESAL IS SOMETHING THAT I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF IT. IT'S A LONG-TERM DECISION THAT'S COMING UP. WHAT YOUR DECISION IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE MADE, IT HAS TO BE MADE ON YOUR OWN CONSCIENCE. WHAT YOU THINK WE NEED AND WHAT WE NEED IS WATER. YOU HAVE A VERY HARD DECISION TO MAKE. I DON'T AGREE WITH SOME OF YOU ABOUT TRANSPARENCY BECAUSE I KNOW SOME OF YOU AND I KNOW YOU'RE NOT TRANSPARENT. SO THAT BEING SET ASIDE, I KNOW SOME OF YOU ARE HONEST AND YOU CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE. YOU CARE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. BUT OUR ISSUE IS GET WATER NOW. DON'T STOP IT. AND DON'T STOP WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO US IN 30 YEARS WHEN WE HAVE NO WATER. WE HAVE TO HAVE WATER. DESAL IS AN ANSWER TO GET WATER, BUT IT HAS TO BE DONE WHEN IT'S PROPER AND YOU HAVE SOME GOOD COMPROMISES ON YOUR HANDS. THINK ABOUT IT AND VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE. >> MEDIA, DISTRICT 5, GOOD EVENING CITY COUNCILMEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR READING OUR EMAIL AND WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS. FOR THOSE OF US WHO USUALLY DON'T GO OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO VOTE NO ON ITEM 16. PLEASE STOP THE SPENDING ON DESAL. SOME LEADERS HAVE NOT BEEN TRANSPARENT ABOUT THE DESALINATION PLANT. THE MODELING AND THE COST. I FEEL IT'S BEEN MISMANAGED AND POORLY COMMUNICATED WITH US THE RESIDENTS AND EVEN WITH YOURSELVES THE CITY COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M REALLY WORRIED ABOUT THE INCREASE TO OUR RESIDENTIAL WATER RATES AND WASTEWATER. NOT ONLY FOR MY PERSONAL BUDGET, BUT FOR MY ELDERLY PARENTS' BUDGET AND FOR MY SMALL BUSINESS -- AND FOR SMALL BUSINESS RATEPAYERS. WHY DO WE HAVE TO FOOT THE BILL FOR THIS PROJECT THAT SERVES PRIVATE INDUSTRY MORE THAN THE PUBLIC. I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS DESAL PLANT IS NOT FOR RESIDENTS, BUT FOR THE NEEDS OF INDUSTRY AND INDUSTRIES EXPANSION, NOT FOR THE LONG-TERM WELL-BEING OF OUR CITY. I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS UNCHECKED INDUSTRIAL GROWTH WILL BE AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR COMMUNITY'S HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT. I'M DEEPLY WORRIED ABOUT THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH IN THE HISTORICALLY BLACK HILLCREST COMMUNITY. I'M CONCERNED THAT THE COST OF THE INNER HARBOR HAS BALLOONED TO 1.2 BILLION FROM 757 MILLION. IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE FOR THE AMOUNT OF WATER TO BE PRODUCED AT ONLY 30 MGD. AND WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER COSTS, DEBT SERVICE, OPERATING MAINTENANCE COSTS? HOW MUCH ENERGY WILL THIS PLANT USE? COSTS ARE JUST TOO HIGH. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT CITY COUNCILMEMBERS NOT BEING ABLE TO GET THE MODELING REPORT FROM KIEWIT'S ENGINEERS GHD SAYING THAT IT'S PROPRIETARY. THAT JUST DOESN'T SIT WELL WITH ME. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ON THE BAY, HOW IT WOULD THREATEN MARINE LIFE, FISHING AND THE COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS. I'M HOPEFUL TO SEE THE WATER FUNDS MOVE TO ANOTHER WATER PROJECT THAT DISCHARGES THE BRINE FROM THE GULF. IT WOULD BE GREAT TO SEE THE RESPONSE IN WRITING FROM THE TEXAS WATER BOARD HOW TO ALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS TO ANOTHER PROJECT. WE DO NOT APPRECIATE THE SCARE TACTICS JUST LIKE YOURSELVES. I STAND WITH THE LOCAL SCIENTISTS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS FISHING FAMILIES AND CITIZENS WHO ARE DEMANDING BETTER. THIS PROJECT SERIOUSLY RAISES ENVIRONMENTAL, FINANCIAL AND ETHICAL CONCERNS. COUNCIL MEMBERS, I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO VOTE NO ON ITEM 16 AND TO MAKE YOUR DECISION BECAUSED ON THE FULL SCOPE OF THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO YOU AND ON THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN WITHHELD FROM YOU FROM OUR CITY LEADERS BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN YOUR CONSTITUENTS ASK WHY YOU VOTED THE WAY YOU DID, YOU'RE ONLY HONEST ANSWER WOULD BE THAT YOU MADE YOUR VOTE BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WAS GIVEN OR NOT GIVEN. WE NEED YOUR BOLD LEADERSHIP THAT PRIORITIZES THE HEALTH, AFFORDABILITY AND FUTURE OF THE COMMUNITY. I URGE YOU TO NOT MOVE FORWARD ON ITEM 16, PLEASE. >> DESAL IS NOT MY AREA OF EXPERTISE. BUT IN COMING TO THESE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, ONE THING HAS STUCK OUT TO ME AND THAT IS THAT THE PEOPLE COME AND THEY ARE PASSIONATE AND THEY TRY TO MAKE THEIR VOICES HEARD AND THEY CONSTANTLY CONSTANTLY CONSTANTLY FEEL IGNORED. WHETHER THAT'S BECAUSE OF ECONOMIC REASONS. WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REASONS, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE THEY LIVE IN HILLCREST OR THEY STAND FOR THE PEOPLE OF HILLCREST, PEOPLE DO NOT FEEL HEARD ON THIS ISSUE. AND WHILE I'M SITTING HERE LISTENING -- AND I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 8:30 THIS MORNING BECAUSE I WENT TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING THIS MORNING. WHILE I'M SITTING HERE LISTENING, I CAN'T HELP BUT THINK OF PHRASES LIKE CART BEFORE THE HORSE, COUNTING CHICKENS BEFORE THEY HATCH. WE'RE DOING WORK ON THINGS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN FULLY APPROVED YET. AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY. ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS A COMMENT THAT COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN SAID EARLIER. WHY IS THERE SO MUCH HATE BEING DIRECTED TOWARDS SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS? I THINK WE ALL KNOW THE ANSWER AND THAT IS MONEY. SOMEBODY'S BOTTOM LINE IS THREATENED BY THE LACK OF DESAL AND SO THEY'RE DIRECTING THAT HATE. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 4 AND I'M A LITTLE SAD THAT COUNCILWOMAN PAXSON ISN'T HERE. I KNOW Y'ALL GET UP TO GET SNACKS AND WATER AND ALL THAT BUT I WANT TO LET HER KNOW THAT I WAS VERY UPSET TO GET THAT TEXT MESSAGE LAST NIGHT. I DON'T KNOW HOW THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE GOT MY INFORMATION, I'VE NEVER INTERACTED WITH THEM. BUT SUDDENLY THEY'RE TELLING ME WHAT TO TELL MY CITY COUNCILPERSON? IT WAS -- I WAS HORRIFIED. AND I AM SO SORRY FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO ARE BEING ATTACKED ON THIS. BECAUSE SOMEBODY'S BOTTOM LINE IS THREATENED. YOU KNOW, ALSO, I THINK SOME OF Y'ALL NEED TO LOOK UP THE SUNK COST FALLACY, WHICH IS THE MONEY THAT'S ALREADY BEEN SPENT IS GONE AND YOU CAN'T GET IT BACK. SO WHY ARE WE GOING TO SPEND ANOTHER $1.2 BILLION ON SOMETHING TO SAVE $100 MILLION? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> BECKY MUELLER AND I RESIDE IN DISTRICT 4. I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT CONSERVATION. WITHIN WHERE I LIVE, THERE ARE FIVE QUICK QUACK CAR WASHES I CAN GET TO WITHIN FIVE MINUTES. THERE'S ONE AT AIRLINE AND ALAMEDA. THERE'S ONE GOING IN AT RODD FIELD AND -- I FORGOT THE NAME OF THE STREET. ONE BEHIND SPOHN. THERE'S ONE AT AIRLINE. THERE'S OTHERS. BUT THAT'S REALLY NOT WHAT I CAME TO TALK ABOUT BUT WE GOT TO TALK ABOUT CONSERVATION AT SOME POINT, WHETHER WE DO DESAL OR NOT. INITIALLY, I WAS A DESAL PERSON. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE DESAL IF IT WAS GOING FAR ENOUGH OUT WHERE WE WEREN'T DRINKING IT AND YOU WEREN'T DISPLACING PEOPLE IN HILLCREST AND PERHAPS KILLING PEOPLE IN HILLCREST. I'M OPPOSED TO THIS PARTICULAR DESAL THING. BUT EVERY NOW AND THEN I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK BACK AT YOUR HISTORY AND SAY OUT LOUD WHAT YOUR HISTORY IS. EARLIER TODAY WE DID SOMETHING WITH ROCKPORT GAS. WE BOUGHT THAT SYSTEM AND THAT'S OKAY. I'M FOR THAT BECAUSE I THINK GAS SHOULD BE A PUBLIC UTILITY. BUT LET ME TAKE YOU BACK SOME YEARS. I MAY BE THE OLDEST PERSON IN THIS ROOM BUT I REMEMBER WHEN THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI WANTED TO SELL THE GAS DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. PUBLIC COMMENT RAISED CANE ABOUT THAT. WE CAME UNGLUED ABOUT THAT. WE NOW HAVE A VERY VALUABLE GAS DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. THE DIFFERENCE IS Y'ALL LISTENED THEN TO WHAT WE HAD TO SAY. YOU HAVE NEVER LISTENED TO THE COMMENTS ABOUT HILLCREST. YOU HAVE NEVER TAKEN ANY OF THOSE COMMENTS SERIOUSLY. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT JOBS ON NORTH BEACH. I HAVE TALKED ABOUT JOBS ON NORTH BEACH. I'VE TALKED ABOUT HOTEL/MOTEL TAX. ALL THAT IS IMPORTANT. YOU DON'T LISTEN! YOU HAVE YOUR PRECONCEIVED IDEAS AND JUST LIKE THE GAS DEPARTMENT THAT'S SUCCESSFUL HERE NOW, I HOPE WE CAN KILL THIS DESAL AND LOOK AT A DESAL THAT IS HUMANE AND GOES OUT SOMEWHERE WHERE THE BRINE CAN BE DISTRIBUTED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> HI. GOOD EVENING. DARCY SNYDER, DISTRICT 2. I WORK FOR INDUSTRY. FOR THE PAST 12, 13 YEARS I HAVE BEEN A PART OF THE CONVERSATIONS ON WATER SUPPLY BECAUSE IT IS SO CRITICAL. BACK IN 2014/2015, I WAS NOT A FAN OF SEAWATER DESAL. I WASN'T IN THAT CAMP BUT WE SAW THE PROJECTIONS. WE SAW THE REGION IN AND CORPUS CHRISTI'S PROJECTIONS. I ALMOST LAUGHED AT THEM. THAT DEMAND IS NOT COMING HERE BUT THAT DEMAND CAME HERE. OVER THE PAST DECADE WE HAVE CONTINUED TO TALK ABOUT WATER SUPPLY. AND I HEARD EARLIER THAT THE REASON WE HAVEN'T MOVED ON WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS IS GREED. AND I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT. THAT'S NOT IT. IT IS THE FACT THAT EVERY TWO YEARS WE HAVE A NEW COUNCIL, BASICALLY. WE HAVE SOME OF YOU THAT ARE ABLE TO RETURN BUT THEN WE GET SOME NEW MEMBERS AND HAVE TO REEDUCATE. YOU WANT TO DO YOUR OWN DUE DILIGENCE, AND RIGHTFULLY SO. YOU WANT TO STUDY IT AND MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THE FACTS. SO FOR THE PAST DECADE WE HAVEN'T MOVED ON ANY WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS AND WE'RE STILL IN THE SAME PLACE. AND WE'RE AT A CRITICAL STAGE. AND THERE WAS AN INDIVIDUAL EARLIER THAT SAID THE TRAIN IS -- IT'S GOING. IT IS GOING AND YOU HAVE TO CURTAIL INDUSTRY, YOU'RE LOSING LOTS OF JOBS. AND THEN WE'VE GOT ALL OF OUR BUSINESS PARTNERS. IT'S THAT DOMINO EFFECT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE. IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE TAKE LIGHTLY. IT'S NOT, COUNCILWOMAN CAMPOS, WE ARE TRYING TO CONSERVE. WE ARE WORKING WATER CONSERVATION PROJECTS. WE ARE DOING WHAT WE CAN -- >> Mayor Guajardo: WE CAN'T ADDRESS A COUNCILPERSON BY NAME. >> I APOLOGIZE. SHE WAS SHAKING HER HEAD AT ME. SO I DO WANT YOU TO KNOW. IT IS CRITICAL. IT IS SERIOUS. THE TIME TO ACT IS NOW. WE'VE KICKED THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND SO I HOPE YOU WILL TAKE SOME ACTION. IT HAS BEEN STUDIED. IT HAS BEEN RESTUDIED. IT IS THE ONLY PROJECT WE HAVE ALL THE PERMITS FOR. I MEAN, WE NEED TO GET MOVING ON SOME OF THESE WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS. WE CAN'T SIT HERE FOR ANOTHER DECADE AND NOT DO ANYTHING. THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL AND MAYOR. JENNY CROSS, UNITED CORPUS CHRISTI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 602 NORTH STAPLES. LET ME BEGIN BY THANKING YOU AND PAST COUNCILS THAT HAVE WORKED FOR OVER A DECADE TO GET US TO THIS CRITICAL JUNCTURE TO BRING DESALINATION TO CORPUS CHRISTI AND THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES. I WILL CREDIT THIS COUNCIL FOR BEING THOUGHTFUL STEWARDS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS. IT IS NOT ALWAYS AN EASY TASK. AS YOU CONSIDER YOUR VOTE ON THIS ISSUE TODAY, PLEASE REMEMBER NOTHING GETS CHEAPER OVER TIME AND THE COST OF DOING NOTHING FAR OUTWEIGHS THE COST OF BUILDING THIS PROJECT. SO PLEASE SUPPORT AMENDMENT NO. 5. ENSURE THAT WE STAY ON TRACK TO MAKE INFORMED CONSTRUCTION DECISIONS LATER THIS YEAR. WE REMAIN COMPLIANT WITH STATE AND FEDERAL BOND REQUIREMENTS AND WE PRESERVE ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF LOW-INTEREST FINANCING FROM THE STATE TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT. THE CHAMBER POSITION HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN SUPPORT OF ALL WATER PROJECTS IN ORDER TO SECURE AND DROUGHT PROOF OUR WATER SUPPLY. THE TRUTH IS THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT IS CURRENTLY THE ONLY FULLY PERMITTED, FULLY-VETTED DESALINATION PROJECT AND WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. NOW IS THE TIME TO MAKE THE COURAGEOUS DECISION AND LEAD OUR COMMUNITY TO WATER-SECURE FUTURE. SO PLEASE VOTE YES ON THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS MICHELLE VILLAREAL AND I AM A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND COME FROM GENERATIONS OF CORPUS CHRISTIANS. I GREW UP HERE. I WENT TO SCHOOL HERE. I STARTED MY PROFESSIONAL CAREER HERE AND I'M RAISING MY FAMILY IN THIS COMMUNITY. TODAY I AM ■REPRESENTING MY COMPANY, A GLOBAL LEADER -- A LEADER IN THE GLOBAL CHEMICAL INDUSTRY AND I WORK AT OUR CORPUS CHRISTI FACILITY. OUR PRODUCTS ARE THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF EVERYDAY ITEMS WHICH INCLUDE FOOD PACKAGING, MEDICAL SUPPLIES, AND HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES. THE CORPUS CHRISTI FACILITY EMPLOYS APPROXIMATELY 400 FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES AND CONTRACTORS AND ALMOST 300 OF THOSE EMPLOYEES LIVE AND RAISE THEIR FAMILIES IN THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. WATER PLAYS A CRITICAL ROLE IN LYB'S OPERATIONS AND WHILE THE FACILITY RECYCLES AND CONSERVES WATER DAILY IT REMAINS IMPERATIVE THAT THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI WORK TO IMPROVE THE RELIABILITY OF THE REGION'S WATER RESOURCES. BECAUSE OF THE COASTAL BEND'S ONGOING DROUGHT CONDITIONS, CORPUS CHRISTI NEEDS A DEPENDABLE AND DROUGHT-RESISTANT WATER SUPPLY THAT WILL SUPPORT RESIDENTS BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES ALIKE. THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI'S INNER HARBOR DESALINATION PLANT IS A REGIONAL AND SUSTAINABLE WATER SUPPLY THAT WILL ENHANCE OUR COMMUNITIES AND ECONOMIC GROWTH FOR BOTH CURRENT AND FUTURE GENERATIONS. LYB SUPPORTS THE CITY'S PROPOSED INNER HARBOR DESALINATION PLANT. INVESTING IN THE DESALINATION PLANT IS NOT JUST ABOUT SECURING OUR WATER SUPPLY, IT IS ABOUT SAFEGUARDING THE ECONOMIC PROSPERITY AND FUTURE GROWTH OF OUR GREAT CITY. THIS PROJECT HELPS PROTECT JOBS AND ATTRACT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY IS CONNECTED TO OUR WATER SUPPLY AND ENSURING A RELIABLE SOURCE OF WATER CREATES A PROSPEROUS FUTURE FOR ALL RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES IN CORPUS CHRISTI. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> KERRY VIS, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL, AND STAFF. I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF ITEM 16. FLINT HILLS RESOURCES OPERATES TWO REFINERIES IN CORPUS CHRISTI THAT PROCESS TEXAS CRUDE TO PRODUCE FUELS AND OTHER PRODUCTS PEOPLE IN TEXAS DEPEND ON EVERY DAY. WE ARE PROUD TO BE A LEADING LOCAL EMPLOYER WITH AROUND 1,000 FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES AND HUNDREDS OF CONTRACTORS. LIKE MANY OF MY CO-WORKERS, I'M FROM HERE. I CARE ABOUT THE PLACE I'VE ALWAYS CALLED HOME AND I SUPPORT THE CONTINUED ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY INVESTMENT IN CORPUS CHRISTI. FOR FLINT HILLS RESOURCES AND MANY OTHER INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES IN THE COASTAL BEND, RELIABLE WATER SOURCES ARE VITAL TO OUR OPERATIONS AND OUR ABILITY TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE. WE ALSO RECOGNIZE THE ADEQUACY OF OUR WATER SUPPLY IS A CRITICAL CHALLENGE IN SOUTH TEXAS. WE'RE A REGION THAT EXPERIENCES PERIODS OF DROUGHT, MAKING WATER SCARSTY A CONCERN. FOR THE COASTAL BEND TO CONTINUE TO THRIVE, WE MUST HAVE A DIVERSE PORTFOLIO OF RELIABLE AND DROUGHT RESISTANT SOURCES OF WATER. FOR THESE REASONS, FLINT HILLS RESOURCES SUPPORTS THE PROPOSED CONTRACT AMENDMENT AND DESALINATION WHILE EXPLORING OTHER WAYS TO IMPROVE THE RELIABILITY OF THE REGION'S WATER SUPPLY. THE CITY'S PROPOSED INNER HARBOR TREATMENT CAMPUS OFFERS AN INNOVATIVE SOLUTION TO MEET THE COASTAL BEND'S WATER RESOURCE NEEDS. COST COMPETITIVENESS ALSO REMAINS IMPORTANT. PROJECTS LIKE DESALINATION ARE COMPLEX AND REQUIRE EFFICIENT EXECUTION AND STREAMLINED DECISION MAKING TO HELP KEEP COSTS DOWN. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT THAT THE CITY ESTABLISH A COST OF SERVICE MODEL THAT PROVIDES GREATER TRANSPARENCY WITH RESPECT TO WATER RATES, PROMOTES CONSERVATION, AND TREATS ALL RATEPAYERS FAIRLY. EARLIER THIS YEAR WE SENT OUT A COMMUNITY REPORT TO OUR NEARBY NEIGHBORS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT, I PROVIDED COPIES HERE TODAY. THIS REPORT HIGHLIGHTS OUR ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY PERFORMANCE, COMMUNITY PARTNERS, AND MAJOR PROJECTS AT OUR CORPUS CHRISTI SITES. I WOULD SPECIFICALLY LIKE TO POINT OUT TO PAGE 8 AT THE WATER INTAKE INTENSITY CHART. OUR INVESTMENTS HAVE ALLOWED US TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF WATER NEEDED FOR EVERY GALLON OF PRODUCTS WE PRODUCE AND WE CONTINUE TO EVALUATE VARIOUS PROJECTS THAT WILL HELP FURTHER MINIMIZE OUR WATER NEEDS WHILE DIVERSIFYING OUR WATER RESOURCES. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. >> GOOD EVENING. DANIEL PENA, DISTRICT 1. HILLCREST. NUMBER ONE, OBJECTION TO PUTTING IT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S NO REASON FOR IT. I MEAN, THERE'S JUST NOT A REASON FOR IT. IT'S NEVER BEEN THE INNER HARBOR. I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU KEEP CALLING IT THAT. I'M GOING TO THROW SOME NUMBERS AT YOU, FIRST AND FOREMOST. THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE, 100 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. WHAT YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT WAS HOW LONG WAS IT OFFLINE? WHEN DID YOU FIND OUT ABOUT IT AND HOW MANY DAYS -- OR LET'S SAY IT'S MONTHS. WE DON'T KNOW THAT. WHAT DOES IT PRODUCE IN A DAY? WHY ARE WE IN THIS CRISIS? I THINK YOU SHOULD INVESTIGATE THAT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET HERE OVERNIGHT. I MEAN, THIS THING HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A LITTLE WHILE. TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO, MAYBE TWO, WE SIGNED THE CONTRACT WITH COLORADO RIVER TO GET THAT WATER BECAUSE WE HAD ALREADY EXPELLED THE ALLOTMENT THAT WE HAD FROM LAKE TEXANA. SO NOW YOU START TAKING IT FROM COLORADO BUT GUESS WHAT. YOU CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE THE PIPE BROKE, IF YOU BELIEVE THAT. SO RECENTLY YOUR STAFF SAID THAT THE PIPELINE WAS BROKEN. THAT'S WHY WE WEREN'T GETTING THE WATER THAT WE NEEDED. THAT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, VERY SMALL THING THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE LOOKED INTO. I KNOW WE'RE TRYING TO GO FORWARD AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU TO VOTE NO, YOU KNOW. SIMPLE AS THAT. BECAUSE IT'S LIKE YOU GUYS ALL HAVE THE SAME CONCERN. YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE INFORMATION. EVERY TIME I GUESS YOU COULD REWIND ANY ONE OF THE MEETINGS THAT YOU HAVE AND I ALWAYS HEAR THE SAME THING. WE'LL GET THE INFORMATION FOR YOU. IF IT'S THAT IMPORTANT, YOU SHOULD HAVE THAT IN YOUR HAND. YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS THING FORWARD AND BACKWARDS. AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE STAFF, WHO'S PROVIDING YOU THIS INFORMATION. THEY SHOULD KNOW EVERY QUESTION. THEY SHOULD HAVE AN ANSWER FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT YOU ASK THEM WITHOUT HAVING TO GO AND LOOK IT UP. ARE WE ONLINE? WHY ARE YOU LOOKING ONLINE TO SEE IF YOU HAVE A PERMIT OR NOT? WHY WOULD THAT EVEN -- DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT. YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A DOUBT. THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU NEED TO LOOK AT. THERE WAS A COUPLE OTHER THINGS I WANTED TO TOUCH ON. I KNOW THAT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, $25 MILLION, THAT'S WHAT THIS THING IS SCHEDULED FOR. IF THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE RUNS AT 100%, GUESS WHAT. THAT $25 MILLION IS COMING FROM THERE OR MORE. OR MORE. I DON'T KNOW THAT FIGURE BECAUSE THEY NEVER MADE IT PUBLIC. YOU GUYS NEED TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS BECAUSE 35 MILLION GALLONS IS NOT GOING TO COST US $1.2 BILLION. QUESTION THE SOURCE. WHY ARE WE OUT OF WATER. HOW LONG WAS IT OUT? HOW LONG WAS THAT PIPELINE BUSTED? >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS LEAH ORTIZ AND I LIVE IN CORPUS CHRISTI IN DISTRICT 2. I WOULD LIKE TO STATE MY OPINION ON THE EXPANSION OF THE BUDGET TO NEARLY $100 MILLION FOR THE DESALINATION PLANT. I'M AGAINST DESALINATION TO BEGIN WITH. HOWEVER THE EXPANSION OF THIS BUDGET IS UNBELIEVABLE. EVEN A NUMBER LIKE $100 MILLION IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE HUMAN BRAIN TO WRAP ITS HEAD AROUND. THE TOURISM INDUSTRY BRINGS ABOUT $50 MILLION TO THE STATE. APPROVING THIS BILL WOULD MEAN IMAGINING THAT ALL MONETARY VALUE FROM THE TOURISM INDUSTRY HAS BEEN HALTED AND STILL BE IN DEBT ANOTHER $50 MILLION. CAN CORPUS REALLY AFFORD THIS? RIGHT NOW THE WATER DEPARTMENT IS SAYING THAT CONSTRUCTING THE PLANT WOULD COST BETWEEN 1.2 AND $1.8 BILLION. WHILE WE ARE GETTING MONEY FROM THE STATE, THAT MONEY ISN'T A GIFT, IT'S A LOANS. LOANS HAVE TO BE PAID BACK WITH INTEREST. ACCORDING TO LAST WEEK'S PRESENTATION, EVERY YEAR THE CITY WILL BE SPENDING ADDITIONAL $100 MILLION WITH $68 MILLION GOING TO SERVICE THE DEBT AND $32 MILLION GOING TOWARDS OPERATING THE PLANT. IN ADDITION TO A NEARLY $2 BILLION TO BUILD THE DESALINATION PLANT, YOUR OPERATING PRICE TAG SHOWS WE'LL BE SPENDING $1 BILLION ON A DESALINATION PLANT FOR INDUSTRY EVERY TEN YEARS. THAT'S HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS NOT SPENT ON INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PEOPLE. HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS NOT SPENT ON REPAIRING OUR LEAKY PIPES. HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS NOT IMPROVING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PEOPLE. FOR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF HOUSEHOLDS IN THE COASTAL BEND. HOW ON EARTH WOULD WE BE ABLE TO PAY THIS? WHO WOULD PAY THIS? TO MY KNOWLEDGE YOU DO NOT WANT TO MAKE AN INDUSTRY THAT NEEDS US TO PAY FOR IT. WHILE THEY HAND OUT A TREE SAPLING ONCE A YEAR AND CALLING IT HELPING THE COMMUNITY ARE BUILDING VALUED BETWEEN 11 AND $13 BILLION, WHY AREN'T THEY PAYING FOR IT? ALSO, I WANT TO STATE THAT I'VE COME TO MEETINGS FOR AROUND TWO YEARS AND I HAVE NOTICED A CONTINGENCY WITH EVERYONE WHO COMES UP TO THE STAGE AND SAYS THEY WANT A DESALINATION PLANT. MOST OF THE TIME THEY HAVE A LOGO ON THEIR SHIRT. THANK YOU. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS LENA ORTIZ AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT 2. I'M HERE TO TELL YOU TO VOTE NO OR TABLE ITEM 16, THE DESALINATION LOAN, BECAUSE THE COST OF PLANNING FOR DESAL COMPARED TO THE COST OF SOCIAL SERVICES IS UNACCEPTABLE. YOU HAVE SPENT SO MUCH TIME AND ENERGY ON A DESALINATION PLANT FOR HEAVY INDUSTRY THAT WE ARE FACING A BUDGET SHORTFALL. YOU HAVE NO IMAGINATION OR ENERGY FOR HOW TO ADDRESS REAL QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES FOR OUR COMMUNITY. YOU ZEROED OUT THE HOMELESS SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND REDUCED SOLID WASTE SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY AND YOU HAVE HIRED UNQUALIFIED PEOPLE TO RUN ANIMAL CARE SERVICES. A CALLER TIMES ARTICLE REVEALED THAT ACS WAS DUMPING ANIMAL CARCASSES IN THE LANDFILL. FOR A COMMUNITY OF MORE THAN 300,000 PEOPLE YOU HAVE BARELY SPENT $5 MILLION ON HEALTH SERVICES. ACCORDING TO THE CALLER TIMES, AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS WENT FROM 67% IN 2015 TO NEARLY 79% IN 2024. IN 2023 OUR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT RATES ARE ALMOST TRIPLE THAT OF THE NATIONAL AND STATE AVERAGE. OUR HOURS OF OPERATION FOR OUR LIBRARIES ARE ABYSMAL AS ARE THE RESOURCES DEDICATED TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION. WE ONLY HAVE FOUR RECREATION CENTERS THAT HAVE LIMITED OPERATIONS. SO MUCH OF YOUR TIME AND ENERGY HAS BEEN DEDICATED TO SERVING MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS THAT YOU FAIL TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY. WHEN YOU PROMISE THE WATER AWAY AS PORT COMMISSIONER AND NOW CHAIR OF THE PORT STATED IN 2023, WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE PEOPLE WHEN YOU FAIL TO PROVIDE THESE INDUSTRIES? WILL THEY SUE US WHEN THEY DON'T LIKE THE INCREASE IN THEIR WATER RATES? A NEWS REPORT SAID THAT LAWSUIT COST US $500,000 BUT HOW MUCH DID THAT COST US IN TERMS OF PUBLIC SERVICE IS DENIED. ARE WE HERE BECAUSE WE CAN'T SATISFY THE GREED OF THESE INDUSTRIES? WE NEED TO STOP CATERING TO THE INDUSTRY AND ACTUALLY CATER TO OUR COMMUNITY, THE PEOPLE YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE SERVING. I ATTENDED UCLA AND WHEN THE FIRES WERE HAPPENING I RELOCATED TEMPORARILY TO HUNTINGTON BEACH. WE STILL HAD CLASS ONLINE SO MY FRIEND SUGGESTED WE MEET UP AT THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. WE SPENT ALL DAY THERE DOING CLASSES AND ASSIGNMENTS AND IT WAS GREAT. THEY SOLD COFFEE AND SANDWICHES. 3:00 P.M. ROLLS AROUND AND KIDS FROM ELEMENTARY TO HIGH SCHOOL ROLL IN. THERE WERE WALKING PATHS IN THE BACK THAT FAMILIES EXPLORED TOGETHER AND MY FRIEND TOLD ME GOING TO THE LIBRARY AFTER SCHOOL WAS THE THING TO DO. IT WAS A SAFE SPACE TO GET YOUR WORK DONE. THERE WAS FOOD THERE AND ADULTS TO WATCH OVER YOU. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU PRIORITIZE PUBLIC SPACES. THEY'RE USED AND VALUED. THIS IS SOMETHING I DON'T SEE HERE BUT I WISH I DID. REDIRECT YOUR ATTENTION AND PRIORITIES AND WE COULD HAVE SAFE SPACES THAT IMPROVE EDUCATION AND OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. SO SAY NO TO THE DESAL LOAN. THANK YOU. >> ISABEL ARAIZA, DISTRICT 2. BECAUSE OF ITS IMPACT ON HOUSEHOLD BUDGETS, YOU SHOULD EITHER TABLE OR VOTE NO ON PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL $50 MILLION FOR DRAFTING A DESALINATION PLANT. LAST YEAR THE CITY CLAIMED THE COST WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE 200% INCREASE IN HOUSEHOLD WATER BILLS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. THE INCREASED COST ONLY REFERENCED COST OF OTHER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND MONEY IN THE DROUGHT EXEMPTION FUND. OTHER FACTORS WILL INFLUENCE THE RATES. FOR EXAMPLE, FLINT HILLS AND VALERO SUED THE CITY CITING THEIR INCREASED WATER RATES. WHAT ABOUT POPULATION GROWTH OR DECLINE OR INFLATION OR THE COST OF ELECTRICITY? WERE THOSE FACTORS CONSIDERED? WE SAW THE PILOT DESAL COST BALLOON. LAST WEEK COUNCILMAN ROY HIMSELF SAID HE COULDN'T BELIEVE HOW MUCH MAINTENANCE FOR HOMES AND CARS HAD CHANGED. WHEN WE FACTOR IN THE COST OF MAINTENANCE FOR THE PLANT AND UPGRADES TO OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, I FEAR THE IMPACT OF RESIDENTIAL WATER RATES IS GOING TO BE MUCH HIGHER THAN CLAIMED. PAXSON'S CONCERN ABOUT THE IMPACT ON WATER RATES FOR HOUSEHOLDS IS WARRANTED. RIGHT NOW WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THE CITY'S ENTIRE MODEL I WORRY A 200% INCREASE TO WATER RATES IS AN UNDERESTIMATE BUT THAT WILL STRAIN A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF OUR COMMUNITY AND OTHER COMMUNITIES WE SERVE. THE MOST RECENT DATA FROM THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY REPORTED THAT 37% OF HOUSEHOLDS IN CORPUS LIVE ON LESS THAN $50,000 A YEAR AND ABOUT 25% LIVE ON LESS THAN $35,000. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE OTHER SIX COUNTIES, 27.4% OF SAN PATRICIO COUNTY, 32.3% OF BEE COUNTY. 35.4% OF KLEBERG HOUSEHOLDS LIVE OFF OF LESS THAN $35,000 A YEAR. I FEAR WE'RE GOING TO CAUSE SEVERE HARDSHIPS FOR US AND FOR A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF OUR REGION. LAST WEEK THE CITY MANAGER TALKED ABOUT HOW THE CITY FAILED TO ALLOT THE ADEQUATE FUNDS FOR UPKEEP OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND NOW WE'RE PLAYING CATCH UP. OUR ALREADY HIGH UTILITY BILLS AND WATER BILLS ARE A RESULT OF NEGLECT. YOU'RE ASKING ALL DEPARTMENTS TO CUT BACK TO DO MORE WITH LESS. UNDERFUNDING MAINTENANCE AND DEPARTMENTS IN THIS CITY IS A NORM. IF OUR HISTORY AND CURRENT SITUATION IS A GUIDE THEN I FULLY EXPECT THE SAME THING TO HAPPEN WITH THE DESALINATION PLANT AND THE IMPACT WILL BE DEVASTATING TO THE HOUSEHOLDS. THERE ARE A LOT OF OUTSIDE CONTRACTORS LICKING THEIR CHOPS TO ACCESS THIS DESAL MONEY. WE TALKED TO PEOPLE WHO FLEW IN FROM HOUSTON, CALIFORNIA, ARIZONA, NEVADA, AND FLORIDA WHEN Y'ALL HOSTED THE WATER SUMMIT FOR DESAL THIS SPRING. WHEN THEY ARE DONE PROFITING OFF THE DESALINATION SCAM, WHEN THEY HAVE FULFILLED THEIR CONTRACTS, THEY'LL BE GONE. THE CORPORATIONS' HEADS WHO WANT THIS WATER DON'T LIVE HERE. THEY WON'T BE AFFECTED. THESE PEOPLE ARE OPPORTUNISTIC OUTSIDERS COMING DOWN TO CORPUS TO MAKE A QUICK BUCK AND IN THE MEANTIME WE THE LOCAL RESIDENTS AND THE SMALL LOCAL BUSINESSES WILL BE LEFT WITH THE OUTRAGEOUS WATER BILLS. WITH THIS DEBT, ITS INTEREST AND THE MAINTENANCE COST LIKE A NOOSE AROUND OUR ENTIRE REGION'S NECK. VOTE NO. . >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JENNIFER AND I'M FROM DISTRICT 2. ENOLI APOLOGIZE ABOUT MY FACE BECAUSE I'M TIRED. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON 16, THE INNER HARBOR DESAL PLANT. I'M A WOMAN OF THE PEOPLE SO I DON'T REALLY DO TOO MUCH BUSINESS. I'M MORE OF A COMMUNITY ADVOCATE. I DON'T REALLY EVEN GET TO COME TO THE MEETINGS BECAUSE I'M ALWAYS AT WORK AND I JUST WATCH THE VIDEOS ON YOUTUBE AND EAT MY SNACKS AND LOOK AT THE SHADY COMMENTS ON YOUTUBE. SO THIS IS DIFFERENT. I DON'T LIKE IT. I'M TIRED ALREADY. I DON'T KNOW HOW Y'ALL DO IT EVERY WEEK BUT ANYWAY, I NOTICED THAT OFTEN IN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WE TALK ABOUT THE CITY IS TO RUN LIKE A BUSINESS. I DO HAVE COLLEAGUES ALL OVER THAT HELP GUIDE ME SO ONE OF THE THINGS -- LET'S JUST TALK BUSINESS. SO IN BUSINESS, THERE IS A COMMONLY-USED BUSINESS PROCESS CALLED SIX SIGMA AND THEY USE DATA TO ELIMINATE WASTE AND REDUCE VARIATION AND ENSURE PROCESS EFFICIENCY. IF WE WERE TO APPLY THOSE SAME PRINCIPLES TO THIS PROJECT THE RED FLAGS WOULD BE UNDENIABLE. SPENDING $50 MILLION MORE ON A PROJECT THAT'S NOW PROJECTED TO COST $1.2 BILLION, MORE THAN DOUBLE THE EARLY ESTIMATES, SHOWS A PROCESS COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL. THIS ISN'T CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT. IT'S SCOPE CREEP AND FISCAL INEFFICIENCY. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY DATA DUE TO THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STUFF. SO SIX SIGMA WOULD CALL THIS A DEFECT IN PLANNING AND BUDGETING. THE PROCESS LACKS TRANSPARENCY AND THE RISKS ARE HIGH, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVEN'T EVEN GUARANTEED A LONG-TERM SUSTAINABLE WATER DEMAND THAT JUSTIFIES THE COST TO DEFINE, TO MEASURE, TO ANALYZE, IMPROVE, AND CONTROL. THIS PLANT DOES NOT ADDRESS THE ROOT CAUSE OF OUR WATER NEEDS. INSTEAD IT'S A RUSHED SOLUTION THAT BENEFITS A SMALL NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL USERS, NOT THE EVERYDAY RESIDENTS FOOTING THE BILL. AS STEWARDS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS I URGE YOU TO CONTROL THE PROCESS AND STOP THE WASTE. RECLAIM YOUR AUTHORITY. ASK FOR DATA-DRIVEN ALTERNATIVES. PLEASE SHOW US THE DATA FROM THE KIEWIT STUDY. AND DO NOT APPROVE ADDITIONAL $50 MILLION. LET'S LEAD WITH FACTS NOT FEAR AND REJECT FALSE SOLUTIONS LIKE THE INNER HARBOR DESAL PLANT. IF YOU ARE UNSURE OF THE VOTE, I ASK YOU THAT YOU PLEASE TABLE THE VOTE. PEOPLE CAN SEE WHO IS RUN BY MONEY AND WHO RUNS BY PRINCIPLES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS BEATRICE ALVARADO, I LIVE IN DISTRICT 1. I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON ITEM 16 OR POSTPONE IT. COUNCIL MEMBERS YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED, AS MY COLLEAGUE CHLOE MENTIONED EARLIER TODAY, YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED CALLS AND E-MAILS FROM YOUR CONSTITUENTS TO DO THE SAME. IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THOSE E-MAILS WERE BLOCKED FROM YOUR INBOX UNTIL WE CALLED CITY STAFF TO RELEASE THEM TO YOU. I ASK HOW CAN WE TRUST YOU. ONLY A PROFIT-DRIVEN BUSINESS WOULD STIFLE THE VOICES OF RESIDENTS TRYING TO REACH YOU TO KEEP THEIR WATER RATES FROM SKYROCKETING. YOU'RE NOT A PRIVATE BUSINESS AND YOU'RE AN ELECTED BODY OF RESIDENTS JUST LIKE US. A LOT OF US HAVE BEEN OPPOSED TO THE INNER HARBOR DESAL PLANT BETTER KNOWN AS THE HILLCREST DESAL PLANT SINCE WE LEARNED IT WAS BEING USED TO LURE MORE LARGE-VOLUME INDUSTRIAL WATER USERS TO THE AREA. OTHERS WENT ALONG WITH THE $700 MILLION PRICE TAG AND ARE NOW BACKTRACKING. $1.2BILLION FOR A PLANT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO CONVERT INNER HARBOR SHIP CHANNEL WATER INTO DRINKING WATER IS IRRESPONSIBLE AT BEST. IT'S FULL OF PFOS AND GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE. IT'S BEEN THE DUMPING GROUND FOR REFINERY ROW FOR DECADES. YOU SAY THAT DESALINATION PLANTS, REVERSE OSMOSIS FILTRATION SYSTEM WILL BE ENOUGH TO FILTER OUT THE PFOS BUT HOW CAN WE TRUST YOU? CLIMATE CHANGE IS HERE AND YOU'RE DOING NOTHING TO PROTECT THE MOST VULNERABLE. STOP BLAMING ANTI-DESAL ADVOCATES AND PAST COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR YOUR MISTAKES. YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY EARLIER THIS YEAR TO ADOPT A DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN THAT COULD HAVE ALLOTTED A LOT LESS WATER TO INDUSTRY. AND YOU COULD HAVE ENDED THE DROUGHT EXEMPTION FOR INDUSTRY AND YOU DIDN'T. YOU OVERSOLD OUR WATER TO EXXON AND FRIENDS AND NOW YOU'RE SCRAMBLING BECAUSE YOU'RE DEPLETING OUR RESERVOIRS. PLEASE TAKE DESAL OUT OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET. CUT THEM OFF. STOP RUNNING THE WATER DEPARTMENT LIKE A BUSINESS. THESE ARE THE CONSEQUENCES. REAL PEOPLE ARE AT RISK OF LOSING ACCESS TO WATER BECAUSE OF YOU. PLEASE VOTE NO ON ITEM 16 OR TABLE. THANKS. >> HI. ERIC VON WADE, DISTRICT -- I DON'T KNOW. 2. WHAT ARE YOU? ERIC CANTU IS MY REPRESENTATIVE. I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS AND ALL YOUR ATTENTION. I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A LONG MEETING. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ONE. I THINK IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE RECOGNIZE WE NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT WHERE WE ARE, HOW WE GOT HERE IS IMPORTANT BUT NOT AS IMPORTANT AS WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW AND WHAT WE HAVE TO DO. THERE'S SOME VERY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED. THE THINGS THAT CAUSE ME TO HAVE PAUSE ABOUT DESALINATION. BUT I HAVE BEEN FOR IT SINCE THIS COUNCIL WAS HERE. I HAVE SUPPORTED DESAL BACK IN 1995 AND WE DIDN'T GO WITH IT THEN BECAUSE WE THOUGHT IT WAS TOO EXPENSIVE. IT'S REALLY EXPENSIVE NOW COMPARED TO THAT. I AM NOT THRILLED ABOUT SOME THINGS THAT CONCERN ME. THE COST AND HOW MUCH WE'RE GETTING, MILLIONS OF GALLONS PER DAY. THERE'S A COMPARABLE MODEL THAT SEEMS TO BE GETTING MORE WATER FOR THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY. BUT I WOULD URGE YOU TO LOOK AT IT THIS WAY. IF WE DON'T SECURE A DEPENDABLE AND RELIABLE WATER SOURCE VERY SOON, SOMEONE ELSE WILL. AND THEN WE WILL WORRY BECAUSE INDUSTRY THAT BUYS THE WATER FROM US NOW, I THINK PEOPLE ARE FORGETTING THAT'S OUR CROP. WE'RE SELLING 50% OF OUR WATER TO INDUSTRY WHO PAYS FOR IT. WHO PAYS FOR IT DEARLY. IF WE LET THAT GO SOMEWHERE ELSE, THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI IS ON THE PRECIPICE OF HAVING A SERIOUS ISSUE. WE HAVE A BEAUTIFUL BRIDGE THAT HAS OPENED UP ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES FOR US. WE HAVE BOB HALL PIER AND IT FEEDS INTO THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNTY, CORPUS CHRISTI. WE HAVE SOMETHINGS THAT ARE ON THE CUSP OF FINALLY REALIZING OUR POTENTIAL BUT IF WE LET THIS ISSUE GO, IF WE CONTINUE TO DIVIDE, DEBATE, IF THIS GOES ON ANOTHER TWO YEARS WE ARE LOOKING AT THE LOSS OF REVENUE THAT I THINK IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING WE WILL MARK AS ONE OF THE MOST DEVASTATING ASPECTS THAT'S EVER HAPPENED IN THIS CITY. THE BRIDGE THAT WE HAVE IS MONUMENTAL BUT IT IS NOT GOING TO DO US THE SERVICE THAT IT CAN IF WE CONTINUE TO STILL STAY STAGNANT. I'M NOT SAYING THEY'RE NOT LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS. $400,000 A DAY IS NOT A SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY. WE HAVE ISSUES WHEN IT COMES TO A FAR-FIELD STUDY. IF IT WERE ME, I WOULD FIND A WAY TO KEEP MOVING FORWARD AND ANSWER THESE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND THEN HAVE A VOTE, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT OR BREAK IT. BUT IF WE HAVE TO RETURN THESE MONIES, BONDS, WE'LL SUFFER. OUR RATING WILL SUFFER. IT'S A SLIM CHANCE THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO APPLY THIS TO SOMETHING ELSE BUT THAT NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED. AND IF WE DON'T MOVE FORWARD, WE ARE MAKING A MISTAKE AS A CITY. I APPRECIATE EVERY POSITION ALL OF YOU COME FROM BECAUSE YOU ALL BRING A VALID AND INTELLIGENT PERSPECTIVE AND I THINK THIS HAS BEEN ILLUSTRATED BY WHAT WE HAVE SEEN LATELY. DREW MOLLY HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB OF GETTING THE WORD OUT. PETER ZANONI HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB OF MAKING HIMSELF AVAILABLE. WHETHER THEY LIKE THE QUESTIONS OR NOT, THEY PUT THEMSELVES TO THE FIRE. I KNOW BECAUSE I HAVE ASKED THEM THE QUESTIONS. BUT WE MUST NOT FORGET -- IT DOESN'T MATTER AT THIS POINT HOW WE GOT HERE. IF WE DON'T SOLVE THIS PROBLEM THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI WILL LITERALLY DRY UP AND BLOW AWAY BECAUSE THE WATER THAT WE WANT TO GET FROM THE GROUND IS LIMITED. AND THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE WITH A STRAW IN THAT THAN WE HAVE EVER HAD BEFORE. PLEASE MOVE FORWARD BUT PLEASE DON'T BE AFRAID TO ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE ANSWERED. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. >> MICHAEL MILLER, ALSO KNOWN AS THE AMBASSADOR OF TRUTH. I'M NOT GOING TO PRETEND TO KNOW HOW ANYONE IS GOING TO VOTE TODAY. I KNOW HOW I WOULD VOTE BUT YOU ALL WERE ELECTED TO SERVE YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND I'M NOT GOING TO PRETEND I KNOW HOW THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL FEELS. HERE'S WHAT I KNOW. THIS IS $1.2 BILLION FOR LESS THAN A THIRD OF OUR DAILY DEMAND. BEYOND THAT IT'S ONLY BEEN TRIED TWICE IN THE U.S. AT THIS SIZE AND BOTH HAVE HAD A MYRIAD OF ISSUES. BEYOND THAT, WE ARE DRAWING SOURCE WATER FROM A SHIP CHANNEL SURROUNDED BY MILLIONS OF GALLONS OF PETROCHEMICALS THAT DO LEAK INTO OUR SOURCE BODY OF WATER. BEYOND THAT WE ARE DISPERSING THE WASTE BY-PRODUCT A THOUSAND FEET FROM OUR INTAKE. I CAN'T THINK OF ANY MORE NEGATIVES SO HERE'S A POSITIVE. IT'S PERMITTED AND IT ACTS AS A SECOND TREATMENT PLANT. IF YOU CAN'T SEE HOW THE NEGATIVES OUTWEIGH THE POSITIVES, I CAN'T HELP YOU BUT WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS? EVANGELINE IS READY FOR CONSUMPTION OUT OF THE GROUND. THERE'S 51 MILLION-ACRE FEET OF WATER UNDER SAN PATRICIO COUNTY. THAT EQUATES TO 292 TO 877 YEARS OF WATER SUPPLY. I'LL ADD THAT THESE FIGURES COME DIRECTLY FROM THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. WHAT'S THE PRICE? $4.75 PER THOUSAND. I SAY WE DO AN EVANGELINE DEAL, WORK ON THE WELLS, WHICH I SHARED WITH DREW OVER BREAKFAST. I HIGHLIGHTED SOME RISKS WITH DREW AND BRETT. I LOOK FORWARD TO THEIR RESPONSE AS TO MY QUESTIONS, REQUIRED DISCUSSION WITH COUNCIL. I'M CONFIDENT THAT DESAL WILL BECOME A PART OF OUR PORTFOLIO BUT AN UNSCALABLE PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A MINIMUM OF THREE YEARS TO COMPLETE FOR $1.2 BILLION WHERE THE CITIZENS ARE ON THE HOOK, DESPITE BEING THE REGIONAL WATER SUPPLIER FOR 200,000 WATER CUSTOMERS, THAT'S A NO FROM ME. THERE'S AN OPTION TO TABLE BUT IF YOU'RE A NO OR YES TODAY, YOU'LL BE A NO OR A YES TWO WEEKS. WHO WANTS TO DEAL WITH THIS ABUSE FOR ANOTHER MONTH? I BELIEVE IN YOU BUT IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE $100 MILLION IN SUNK COST, I WOULD SUGGEST TAKING LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE NUMEROUS CO CONSULTANTS THAT LED US DOWN THIS PATH. AS I SAID, I BELIEVE IN YOU BUT IT'S TIME TO LET THIS GO. THANK YOU. >> Scott: ROBIN, I'M SCARED OF YOU. BUT HAVE YOU ALREADY SPOKEN ON WATER BEFORE? >> I DIDN'T SAY HOW TO VOTE. >> Scott: IT DOESN'T MATTER. IF YOU SPOKE ON THE WATER ISSUE DURING YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE A SECOND BITE AT THE APPLE. >> I THINK YOU'RE JUST SCARED OF ME MARK. >> Scott: I AM. I'M VERY SCARED OF YOU. IF WE DID IT WITH YOU, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO OPEN IT UP. >> I WILL E-MAIL YOU PRIVATELY. >> Scott: THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> GOOD EVENING. JIM KLEIN. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 2 HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AS A RESIDENT OF CORPUS CHRISTI BUT ALSO AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE COASTAL BEND SIERRA CLUB HERE, PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN 18 DIFFERENT COUNTIES IN AND AROUND CORPUS CHRISTI. I SAID THIS A NUMBER OF TIMES IN THE PAST OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS BUT SOME OF YOU MAY NOT HAVE HEARD THIS ALREADY. LET ME JUST SAY THIS AGAIN. BACK IN 2019, THE ENGINEER WHO DESIGNED THE GROUNDWATER DESAL PLANT FOR EL PASO, ELSA CURBING, CAME TO CORPUS CHRISTI AND TALKED TO ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS AND SHE SAID SOMETHING THAT STUCK WITH ME EVER SENSE. THE SCIENCE BEHIND DESALINATION IS SOUND BUT IT IS BY FAR THE MOST EXPENSIVE WAY TO MAKE WATER. YOU SHOULD TRY EVERYTHING ELSE BEFORE YOU DO THAT. AND THE $1.2 BILLION UNDERSCORES THAT. IT IS HUGELY EXPENSIVE TO MAKE WATER THIS WAY. NOW ARE THERE OTHER THINGS WE COULD BE DOING? YES, THERE ARE. I TALKED ABOUT THESE IN THE PAST AS WELL WITH MINIMAL EFFECT. CC WATER IS ENGAGED IN A REUSE PROGRAM. WE SHOULD BE WELL UNDERWAY IN UNDERSTANDING THE FEASIBILITY OF THAT POSSIBLE WATER SOURCE. YOU'VE HAD PEOPLE COME UP HERE AND TALK ABOUT RAINWATER CAPTURE ON A MASSIVE SCALE. RETIRED ENGINEER TALKING ABOUT THAT. YOU COULD LOOK AT REDUCING THE EVAPORATION RATE. THAT'S THE FASTEST WAY TO GET A WATER SUPPLY HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI. REDUCE THE RIDICULOUS EVAPORATION RATE IN THE RESERVOIRS. THAT'S BEING DONE IN CALIFORNIA AND NEW JERSEY. YOU SAW PRESENTATIONS TO THAT EFFECT BACK IN MARCH ALREADY AS WELL. SO WE COULD BE DOING THAT. THAT'S A FASTER WATER SOURCE THAN ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN SIMPLY CONSERVATION. WE LOOK AT GROUNDWATER SOURCES. WE HAVE AT LEAST FOUR DIFFERENT GROUNDWATER SOURCE PROJECTS IN THE WORKS. ALL THESE ARE FAR CHEAPER THAN DESALINATION SEAWATER DESALINATION. UNDERGROUND WATER STORAGE. THE CITY MANAGER HAS SAID THIS TWO YEARS AGO IN CITY COUNCIL MEETING THAT THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF STORING WATER BELOW THE AIRPORT. THAT IS GEOLOGICALLY FEASIBLE TO STORE WATER BELOW GROUND WHERE YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE EVAPORATION RATE. I HAVE HEARD NOTHING ABOUT THAT SINCE THAT COMMENT WAS MADE BY THE CITY MANAGER. ALL THESE OPTIONS WE COULD LOOK AT, OR THIS ONE IS FARFETCHED. I SAW A PRESENTATION TO OUR SIERRA CLUB ABOUT PULLING WATER OUT OF THE AIR. AND THE ONLY HESITATION I HAD, THE ONLY PAUSE IT GAVE ME WAS THE PRICE. IT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT $9 PER THOUSAND GALLONS. BUT AS THE PRICE OF DESALINATION RISES, THAT $9 PER THOUSAND GALLONS STARTS TO LOOK MORE AND MORE ATTRACTIVE. ALL THESE OTHER OPTIONS, WE HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, THE SIERRA CLUB DOES. THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT PFOS, THOSE WHO DID THE FAR-FIELD MODEL ARE NOT ALLOWING US TO CHECK THEIR HOMEWORK IS GIVING US A GREAT DEAL OF CONCERN AS WELL. I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO VOTE NO. ONE LAST THING AS WELL. YES, THE DISCHARGE PERMIT HAS BEEN ISSUED. THERE'S A CIVIL SUIT UP IN AUSTIN RIGHT NOW CHALLENGING THAT. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR PRO TEM, COUNCIL, BOB PAULSON DISTRICT 4. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COASTAL BEND INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION. I CAN SEE THE CLOCK, GOOD. I'M HERE TODAY SUPPORTING THE PASSAGE OF ITEM 16 OR SOMETHING SIMILAR TO IT SUCH AS OPTION 1 THAT WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER OR SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT EVEN. TO KEEP THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT MOVING FORWARD. BECAUSE I THINK IT NEEDS TO KEEP MOVING FORWARD AND IT'S APPROPRIATE THAT IT CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD, GIVEN THE PROJECT PROCUREMENT METHOD THAT THE CITY'S USING, THE PROGRESSIVE DESIGN-BUILD, AND WHERE WE ARE IN THAT PROCESS AT THIS TIME. A LOT IS AT STAKE. CERTAINLY A WATER SUPPLY FOR SURE. 33,000 ACRE FEET PER YEAR OF TRULY DROUGHT-PROOF HIGH-QUALITY WATER. BUT ALSO IT'S ABOUT WHAT WE SHOW TO OURSELVES AND TO OTHERS ABOUT OUR ABILITY TO DELIVER A PROJECT OF THIS MAGNITUDE AND IMPORTANCE TO OURSELVES AND TO OTHERS. WHEN I THINK ABOUT THIS PROJECT, I THINK WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE JOURNEY. THE WHOLE MIDDLE OF THE JOURNEY. I HOPE WE'RE PAST THE MIDDLE POINT OF THE WHOLE JOURNEY. COULD HAVE MAYBE BEEN TWO JOURNEYS ALREADY. WE'VE BEEN AT THIS A LONG TIME. BUT WHEN WE'RE CONSIDERING THE ACTUAL DESIGN DETAIL AND THE COST OF THE PLANT ITSELF, WE'RE ONLY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE JOURNEY. NOW I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THE COST ESTIMATED THAT WAS PRESENTED LAST WEEK WAS AROUND BEFORE IT WAS PRESENTED. WHEN IT WAS COMPLETED BEFORE WHAT I'M SURE WERE MULTIPLE REVIEWS AND STAFF MAKING ITS WAY TO THE COUNCIL MEETING. BUT TO ME, WATCHING THAT WEEK, THAT NUMBER IS PRECISELY ONE WEEK OLD AND IT'S BASED ON ONLY A 10% DESIGN. IS EARLY DAYS. WE ARE EARLY IN THE JOURNEY. I READ THE MEMO. I LISTENED TO THE PRESENTATION. AND AT THE END OF THAT, I HAD 100 QUESTIONS. PROBABLY LIKE YOU. PROBABLY LIKE A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE, THAT'S WHAT YOU GET WITH A 10% COST ESTIMATE. WHAT WE SHOULD DO NOW IS TAKE THE TIME TO UNDERSTAND THE ESTIMATE, CHALLENGE THE PROJECT TEAM TO GET THAT NUMBER AS LOW AS IT CAN REASONABLY BE DRIVEN AND THEN DRIVE RELENTLESSLY FORWARD TO SUCCEED AT THIS PROJECT AND ADD THE DROUGHT-PROOF WATER SUPPLY TO THIS SYSTEM THAT WE NEED. I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN RISE TO THE OCCASION. WE CAN MEET THE CHALLENGE. AND AT THE END OF THE JOURNEY, DELIVER A SUCCESSFUL PROJECT THAT WILL BENEFIT US ALL LONG INTO THE FUTURE. MOSTLY, WE JUST NEED THE WILL TO MAKE IT SO. I ASK THAT YOU PASS THIS ITEM, GIVE THE PROCESS A CHANCE TO WORK, AND THAT WE KEEP MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU. >> PLEASE REMEMBER HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE COME UP THAT AREN'T HERE TODAY BUT TO THE COMMISSION PLANNING MEETINGS THAT CAME UP FOR THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD AND SHOWED UP HERE. AND WHAT WILL YOU SACRIFICE FOR WATER SECURITY OR ECONOMIC GROWTH? BECAUSE THE HILLCREST NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACT ON PEOPLE'S WATER RATES, GOING UP SIGNIFICANTLY OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS THROUGH THE COST OF LIVING CRISIS WE ARE IN RIGHT NOW. PEOPLE THAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LIVE PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK, THAT ARE CONCERNED ABOUT TAKING CARE OF THEIR FAMILIES AND NOT JUST THAT CONCERN, BECAUSE WHAT HAS GONE UP MORE? THE PROFITS THESE COMPANIES ARE MAKING OR A LIVABLE WAGE THAT REGULAR PEOPLE MAKE TO LIVE? SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT WHEN OF COURSE THE RATES ARE GOING UP FOR EVERYONE BUT WHO ACTUALLY HAS ACCESS TO MORE MONEY TO PAY THOSE RATES? AND SOMETHING THAT ON THIS COUNCIL IT'S BEEN SAID BY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WE'RE IN THIS SITUATION BECAUSE OUR WATER'S BEEN OVERSOLD. AND HOW CAN YOU TRUST THESE GUYS WITH THE AMOUNT OF MISCOMMUNICATION AND MISMANAGEMENT AND CONFUSION ADDS SO MANY MEANINGS OVER THE PAST YEARS? JUST MISCOMMUNICATION. HOW CAN YOU TRUST THIS? SOMETHING THAT MAKES ME MAD IS WHEN THE -- OUR LOANS FROM THE STATE ARE LOW INTEREST, 3.5%, WHATEVER, AND IT'S SAID THAT THE DIFFERENCE OF SAY 5% TO 3%, THAT 2.5% OF -- THAT DIFFERENCE OF HAVING A LOW-INTEREST LOAN OR A HIGHER ONE IS SAVINGS -- THAT'S SOLD AS SAVINGS. LIKE, HOW MUCH WE'RE SAVING. SEEING HOW MUCH THE DEBT SERVICES AND ANNUALLY -- LIKE, THAT'S RIDICULOUS TO CALL THAT SAVINGS ABOUT WHAT THE INTEREST WOULD BE. I'M TRYING TO MAKE SENSE HERE. DON'T REPEAT THE CYCLE THAT GOT US HERE OF OVERSELLING OUR WATER AND THEN BEING IN A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE TO FIND A SOLUTION AND THEN YOU CONTINUE TO SELL OUR WATER AWAY. OF COURSE, WHAT PEOPLE SAY AND A LOT OF THEM ARE REPRESENTING COMPANIES THAT WILL PROFIT AND THE SAME COMPANIES THAT ARE POLLUTING OUR AIR AND AFFECTING PEOPLE'S HEALTH AND THE WORLD. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JOBS, THERE'S OF COURSE POSITIVES THAT THEY'LL SAY BUT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE STACK OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND FINANCIAL CONCERNS, THE ONGOING FINANCIAL COST POLLUTION INDUSTRIAL EXPANSION, BEING SUED BY THESE COMPANIES WHEN WE TRIED TO RAISE THEIR RATES. THE PEOPLE LIVING IN THE HILLCREST NEIGHBORHOOD, THE IMPACT ON TOURISM. I JUST STARTED LIVING IN NORTH BEACH AND SEEING THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE OUT THERE EVERY DAY SWIMMING IN THE WATER, I WOULDN'T SWIM IN THERE BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE DO GO, NOT JUST TOURISTS, BUT PEOPLE WHO LIVE NEAR THE INNER HARBOR AND CHENIERE, THIS WATER IS NOT FOR US. MY GRANDPARENTS, SO MANY PEOPLE I TALKED TO THAT AREN'T ABLE TO COME HERE ARE AGAINST DESAL. YEAH, I HAVE SAID A LOT. >> CHLOE TORRES, DISTRICT 2. I'M URGING YOU ALL TO VOTE NO ON ITEM 16 OR TO POSTPONE. YEAH, JUST ECHOING WHAT WE HAVE BEEN SAYING FROM THE BEGINNING WHICH ALWAYS LEADS PEOPLE WHO ARE VERY MARRIED TO THE IDEA OF THIS POLITICAL ECONOMY, THAT BREEDS INEQUALITY AND EXPLOITATION AND EXTRACTION AND WILL ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS CRUSH WORKING-CLASS PEOPLE. WHAT WE HAVE MAINTAINED FROM THE BEGINNING IS THAT THE REASON WE ARE IN THIS CRISIS IS BECAUSE OUR PRECIOUS NATURAL RESOURCES THAT WERE ORIGINALLY STEWARD BY THE NATIVE PEOPLES OF THIS LAND. THERE WAS A BALANCE THERE THAT WAS DISRUPTED BY COLONIALIZATION, SO I FIND IT VERY TELLING WHEN SOMEBODY COMES UP HERE TO SAY THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK TO ISRAEL, WHO IS COMMITTING A GENOCIDE ON AN INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN GAZA. THAT WE SHOULD LOOK TO THEM TO BE WATER LEADERS. COLONIZERS SEE COLONIZERS AND THEY SEE COMPANIONS. I'M WEARING THIS BUTTON TODAY BECAUSE MY MENTOR, EDDIE CANALES TAUGHT ME ABOUT THE PRECIOUSNESS OF WATER. HE PASSED AWAY FROM STAGE 4 CANCER LAST YEAR AND HE TAUGHT ME ABOUT THE PRECIOUSNESS OF WATER BECAUSE HE WOULD GO OUT AND LEAVE BARRELS OF WATER FOR MIGRANTS WHO WERE STRANDED. HE ALSO TAUGHT ME TO UNDERSTAND THE CRISIS OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND HOW IT IS CONNECTED TO DISPLACING PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD. SO WHAT WE SEE IN HILLCREST IS A MICROCOSM FOR WHAT HAPPENS ON A GLOBAL STAGE. AGAIN, THE ROOT CAUSE IS BECAUSE LEADERS COLLUDE WITH CORPORATIONS TO SUCK OUR RESOURCES DRY SO THOSE CORPORATIONS CAN PROFIT. YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO STOP THAT CYCLE. I GUESS WITH THE REMAINING PART OF MY TIME, I WONDER IF THE SAME COUNCIL WHO SMEARS US AS PAID ACTIVISTS THINK THE SAME THING OF THE FLINT HILLS RESOURCES POLOS, I HAVE NEVER SEEN A PUBLIC COMMENT ONLY AT THEIR OPEN HOUSES WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO SELL US ON THEIR NEW PROJECT. I WILL SAY THAT I HAVE SPENT ALL OF MY EARLY 20s DEDICATED TO ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES IN THE CITY, AND THAT IS BECAUSE WHEN WE HAD A FULL-ON WATER BAN BECAUSE VALERO SPILLED AN EMULSIFYING AGENT INTO OUR WATER AND DISALLOWED US TO USE THAT. I MET THEM AT MUTUAL AID DISTRIBUTION. THEY WERE PASSING OUT WATER BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT THE LOCAL STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WERE NOT GOING TO ACT WITH ENOUGH URGENCY TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR ELDERLY AND DISABLED COMMUNITY MEMBERS COULD ACTUALLY ACCESS WATER. SO THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT I MET AND I IMMEDIATELY SAW THEIR VALUES. THEY HAVE BUILT ME UP. THEY HAVE INSPIRED ME. THAT'S WHY I STICK WITH THEM NOT BECAUSE I GET A PAYCHECK. THANK YOU. VOTE NO. >> CONNOR RICE, DISTRICT 2. I'M EQUALLY OPPOSING THIS PROJECT AS IT STANDS. I'M GOING TO TOUCH ON TWO THINGS. FIRST THE COST. OBVIOUSLY, I MAY BE ONE OF THE ONLY ONES IN HERE. MY BIRTH YEAR STARTS WITH A 2. I WAS BORN IN THE 21st CENTURY. I WILL LIKELY SEE THE 22nd CENTURY, FINGERS CROSSED. DURING ALL OF MY WORKING YEARS I WILL BE PAYING ON THIS DEBT. THROUGH MY WORKING LIFE I WILL BE PAYING ON THIS DEBT. LET'S BE CLEAR THAT -- NO OFFENSE -- BUT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WORKING ON THIS PROJECT WON'T BE WORKING ANYMORE. HOPEFULLY YOU'RE IN YOUR RETIREMENT -- I WISH YOU WELL IN YOUR RETIREMENT. BUT MY GENERATION WILL BE PAYING THE COST OF THIS. SO DON'T JUST THINK OF THIS AS A COST TO YOU IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS, IT'S THE NEXT 30 YEARS OF US WHO WILL BE PAYING THIS COST THAT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR. I HAVEN'T SEEN A PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF 30 UP HERE ASKING FOR DEBT. BECAUSE MY PARENTS TAUGHT ME THAT'S NOT GOOD SO LET'S NOT DO THAT. IN REGARDS TO THE SCIENCE, OBVIOUSLY I'M NOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER NOR DO I WANT TO BE ONE BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT -- I'M SURE JOHN WEBER HAS SENT Y'ALL THE E-MAILS. THE CORPUS CHRISTI WATER DEPARTMENT HAS E-MAILS FROM THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI THAT SHOWS THAT THEIR FAR-FIELD MODELING IS DETRIMENTAL AND IS HARMFUL AND SHOWS THAT ON OUR CITY'S PROJECT. SO WHY HAS OUR CITY NOT ADDRESSED THAT. IF DREW HAS E-MAILS FROM KENT BRITON AT THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI THAT SAYS OUR FAR-FIELD MODELING WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE CITY'S PROJECT BUT WE DON'T ADDRESS THAT. AND THEY DIDN'T RELEASE THEIR MODELING, THANK GOODNESS BECAUSE THAT WOULD PROBABLY HURT OUR PROJECT EVEN MORE. IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT FAR-FIELD MODELING, LET'S TALK ABOUT FAR-FIELD MODELING. I THINK COUNCILMEMBER BARRERA MENTIONED THIS WASN'T FAR-FIELD MODELING, IT WAS MID-FIELD MODELING. FOR ONE, I FIND IT PROBLEMATIC THAT WE CAN'T EVEN GET OUR DEFINITIONS STRAIGHT THAT WE'RE FAR-FIELD MODELING OR MID-FIELD MODELING. IF THE PORT DID FAR-FIELD MODELING AND THEY SAID THERE'S NO DETRIMENTAL IMPACT, THEY TALKED -- THE CITY DIDN'T SAY THAT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T MODEL THE BAY. WE ONLY MODELED TO THE MOUTH OF HARBOR. SO YOU CAN'T EVEN COMPARE NOTES TO THE TWO BECAUSE WE DIDN'T EVEN DO FULL FAR-FIELD MODELING. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SCIENCE -- AND WE HAVE A FAR-FIELD MODELING -- AND I TRUST THE PORT'S FAR-FIELD MODELING CONSULTANT -- THAT IT IS DETRIMENTAL AND WE WILL NOT MEET TCEQ STANDARDS AND THEN YOU TAKE THE DEBT WE'RE ALSO GOING INTO, THIS HURTS THE RESIDENTS OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND THE NEXT GENERATION WHO WILL BE STUCK PAYING FOR THIS. I'M A PRODUCT OF TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS, PROUD OF IT. I KNOW I COULDN'T TURN IN ANY MATH HOMEWORK -- WE HAD TO SHOW OUR WORK TO GET CREDIT. AT LEAST OUR CITY STAFF WOULD HAVE TO DO THE SAME. >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO PAUSE THE PROJECT UNTIL AUGUST 26th. AND WE HAD SAID, BRETT, PAUSING IT IS GOING TO COST ROUGHLY -- >> I'M GOING TO SAY BETWEEN $5 MILLION AND $10 MILLION. WE HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO LOOK AT THAT. >> Mayor Guajardo: SO IF WE CONTINUED WORKING -- WE'RE GOING TO PAY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. >> THAT'S TRUE. YEAH. IF WE CHOOSE TO BE CONTINUE, THERE'S COSTS EITHER WAY. CONTINUING OR IF WE STOP AND START BACK UP, WE'RE GOING TO END UP PAYING. >> Zanoni: I TALKED TO BRETT BACK THERE. BRETT EXPLAINED THE PILOT PROGRAM, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE MOST OF THE EXPENDITURES ARE GOING TO HAPPEN OVER THE NEXT 30 DAYS. THE PILOT, THE DEMONSTRATION AMENDMENT, IF YOU WILL, HAS BEEN APPROVED THROUGH NOVEMBER. THAT WAS PRIOR TO TAKING AMENDMENTS TO COUNCIL. SO YOU'RE RENTING EQUIPMENT, YOU'RE RENTING GENERATORS, YOU'RE RENTING THE FILTRATION SYSTEM. YOU'RE GOING TO PAY THAT FOR ABOUT A MONTH WITH NO WORK ON IT TO CONNECT IT TO CONTINUE TO PUT IT TOGETHER, TO GET IT READY TO START UP. >> RIGHT. >> Zanoni: WHILE YOU WON'T BE SPENDING MONEY ON LABOR AND ENGINEERING SERVICES AND OTHER SERVICES, UNLESS YOU CANCEL THAT, YOU'RE GOING TO PAY FOR THAT RENTAL EQUIPMENT FOR THE DEMONSTRATION PLANT. IF WE CONTINUE AT THE END OF THE MONTH THEN YOU'LL PUT PEOPLE BACK ON THE PROJECT AND GET IT READY TO START UP. >> ALL THOSE COSTS WILL BE EXTENDED BECAUSE WE'RE EXTENDING THE RENTAL PERIOD. >> Zanoni: JUST TO ELABORATE ON THAT SO THE COUNCIL KNOWS. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILMAN ROY. >> Roy: I ASKED THIS QUESTION BEFORE AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE. CAN I AMEND -- WE HAVE A VOTE IN A SECOND FROM ERIC. CAN I AMEND THAT TO ASK TO GO TO OUR ALTERNATE PLAN NO. 2 UNTIL THE LETTER COMES BACK? >> City Secretary: HIS MOTION IS TO POSTPONE FOR 30 DAYS. SO YOUR AMENDMENT ISN'T GERMANE TO THAT. THAT'S WHY I WAS SAYING THAT HAS TO GO -- IT'S HIGHER IN THE ORDER OF MOTIONS. SO THE MOTION TO POSTPONE IS FIRST. AND THEN WE COULD LOOK AT YOUR AMENDMENT. THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT DOING -- ALLOWING FOR FUNDING FOR 30 DAYS. THAT WOULD BE A GERMANE AMENDMENT TO THAT BUT TO OFFER SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WOULD NOT BE AN ORDER. >> Roy: CAN I AMEND IT FOR 30 DAYS THEN? >> Mayor Guajardo: OR UP TO? >> Roy: PENDING THE LETTER. >> City Secretary: AMEND IT TO WHAT? AMEND HIS MOTION TO POSTPONE TO WHAT? TO ALLOW FOR THE FUNDING? >> Roy: FUNDING FOR 30 DAYS. >> City Secretary: OKAY. I THINK LEGAL HAD SOME PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR THAT. MILES HAD IT. MR. RISLEY HAD IT. >> YEAH. SO WE WERE THINKING JUST THE MOTION AUTHORIZING THE AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO -- FOR THE $10 MILLION. BUT YOU'RE ACTUALLY SAYING AMENDING HIS MOTION TO POSTPONE. IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. MOTION -- BUT -- >> City Secretary: HE WANTS TO POSTPONE. >> YOUR MOTION IS TO POSTPONE THE ACTION ON THIS TO AUTHORIZE AMENDMENT 5 BUT CONTINUE $10 MILLION IN FUNDING IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. >> Mayor Guajardo: UP TO. >> UP TO $10 MILLION IN FUNDING. SO YOU'RE NOT REALLY AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT BUT YOU ARE AUTHORIZING FUNDING FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR 30 DAYS. >> Roy: WHILE WAITING FOR THE LETTER. IS THAT APPROPRIATE? >> Zanoni: I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES AND REBECCA WILL HAVE TO CHIME IN FROM A PARLIAMENTARIAN STANDPOINT. >> City Secretary: A MOTION TO POSTPONE IS AMENDABLE. IF IT'S FOR 30 DAYS THAT WE'RE PAUSING, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITHIN THE 30 DAYS, THAT'S AMENDABLE. >> Mayor Guajardo: I WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW I DID HAVE A PHONE CALL WITH SENATOR HINOJOSA AND HE DID SAY HE WOULD EXPEDITE THE LETTER AND GET IT TO US EVEN AS EARLY AS THE END OF THIS WEEK AND THAT WAY THIS COUNCIL CAN LOOK AT THE CONTENT OF THAT LETTER AND THEN MAKE A DECISION WE MOVE FORWARD OR WE DON'T. BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING 30 DAYS. WE'RE REALLY -- WE COULD BE TALKING ABOUT A FEW DAYS. >> Cantu: [OFF MIC] >> Mayor Guajardo: HE'S AMENDING YOUR MOTION. >> Cantu: [OFF MIC] >> Mayor Guajardo: WELL, WE'RE TRYING TO GET CLEAR WHAT THE AMENDMENT IS. CAN HE DO THAT? >> City Secretary: YOU CAN AMEND A MOTION TO POSTPONE. YES, YOU CAN. >> Roy: DO YOU HAVE THE VERBIAGE THAT I WANT? >> City Secretary: WE'RE TRYING TO COBBLE THAT TOGETHER. SIR, I SAID WHAT HE WANTED TO DO WAS DO THE 30%. GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION. YOU CAN'T DO THAT. >> Roy: I UNDERSTAND. >> City Secretary: SO THAT'S WHAT I SAID NO. BUT HE CAN AMEND YOUR MOTION TO POSTPONE, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A 30-DAY TIMEFRAME, IT CAN BE AMENDED WHAT HAPPENS IN THE 30 DAYS. >> YEAH. SO BASICALLY YOUR MOTION TO POSTPONE THE AUTHORIZATION OF AMENDMENT 5 BUT YOU'RE AUTHORIZING $10 MILLION TO BE ADDED TO AMENDMENT 4 IS REALLY -- UP TO $10 MILLION. TO BE ADDED TO THE CURRENT CONTRACT VALUE. YEAH. >> Mayor Guajardo: YEAH. IT'S NOT 30 DAYS. IT'S UP TO. >> SO, YEAH. SO MOTION TO POSTPONE WITH THE AUTHORIZATION TO ADD $10 MILLION TO THE CURRENT CONTRACT. >> City Secretary: YEAH. THE TIME-FRAME HE GAVE IS 30 DAYS. IF IT COMES IN SOONER, CONTINGENT UPON RECEIPT OF THE LETTER AND IF THE LETTER COMES IN EARLIER, IS THAT THE INTENT? >> Roy: YES. >> City Secretary: CONTINGENT UPON RECEIPT OF THE LETTER. >> WE COULD BRING IT BACK AUGUST 12th OR 26th. >> City Secretary: IF THE LETTER COMES IN SOONER. >> OR A SPECIAL MEETING. YOU COULD CALL A SPECIAL MEETING IN THREE DAYS. >> Zanoni: BRING IT BACK ON THE 8th -- >> Mayor Guajardo: NEXT WEEK. >> SECOND. >> Zanoni: OR THE 5th. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ. >> Hernandez: THANK YOU, MAYOR. YOU KNOW, I WASN'T GOING TO SAY ANYTHING MORE ON THIS BUT BECAUSE I THINK MY POSITION IS WELL KNOWN. THIS WHOLE THING WITH THE PROGRESSIVE DESIGN-BUILD IS EXACTLY WHAT I TOLD -- I HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH DREW THAT OUR COST WAS GOING TO DOUBLE. AND YOU COULD HAVE SET YOUR WATCH TO IT AND SURE ENOUGH, IT DOUBLED. WE WERE NEVER TOLD ABOUT THE PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SWIFT LOANS PRIOR TO THIS WHEN WE WERE VOTING ON THEM. NEVER ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH IT SO I FEEL LIKE THAT WE WERE NOT GIVEN CORRECT INFORMATION. OH, YEAH, WE HAVE AN OFF RAMP AT THIS POINT AND THIS POINT. BY THE WAY, YOU WILL LOSE A LOT OF MONEY AND YOU WILL PAY PENALTIES APT AND THE IRS WILL HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. THAT WAS NEVER EXPRESSED WHEN WE WERE VOTING TO MAKE THOSE LOANS. I DON'T RECALL THAT BEING THE CASE. >> I THOUGHT WE HAD. >> HERNANDEZ: I DON'T RECALL HEARING THAT. BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT WE DO HAVE OTHER OPTIONS. THIS IS NOT OUR ONLY OPTION. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE OPTIONS BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN FULLY RUN DOWN AND THERE'S SOME CAVEATS TO THEM, SO I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO IT. WE'RE WAITING FOR RESPONSES FROM A FEW ORGANIZATIONS THAT WILL GET TO US BY SEPTEMBER. AND I WANT TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT AGAINST HOW INDUSTRY, I THINK FLINT HILLS, VALERO, LION DELL, ARE IMPORTANT PARTS OF OUR COMMUNITY, THEY'RE IMPORTANT PARTS OF OUR STATE. I'VE HEARD ROGER TALK ABOUT HOW WE PROVIDE JET FUEL TO DFW, AUSTIN, SAN ANTONIO. YOU KNOW, SO IT'S NOT -- WE DON'T JUST AFFECT OURSELVES AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO AT LEAST TRY TO PROVIDE THE WATER THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD FOR INDUSTRIES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN HERE FOR A LONG TIME AND THEY'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. SO MY COMMITMENT TO THEM IS I'M GOING TO FIND WATER EVEN IF IT'S NOT THIS PROJECT. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE GROUNDWATER PROJECTS, WASTEWATER REUSE OPTIONS, EVEN SEA WATER DESAL AS AN OPTION. BUT I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE DEMO PLANT. IT WAS ONE OF THE CONTRACTS, LAST CONTRACTS WE SIGNED BEFORE THE END OF, WHAT IS IT, BEFORE THE END OF JULY OR WAS IT BEFORE THE END OF JUNE? AND IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE 11 TO $12 MILLION. IS THAT NOT ABLE TO PROCEED EVEN THOUGH WE'VE ALREADY SPENT OR GOING TO SPEND THAT $12 MILLION, UP TO 12 MILLION? >> SO COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THAT PART OF YOUR MOTION. RIGHT NOW WHAT WAS STATED WAS SO CONTRACTUALLY YES. WE HAVE THE TIME TO DO IT, WE HAVE THE MONEY ALREADY ESTABLISHED, WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK ON IT. IF WE CONTINUE AS NOTED WHERE WE'RE SAYING NO MORE WORK UNTIL WE GET THE LETTER -- >> YOU SAID YOU WOULD HAVE TO STOP DOING EVERYTHING WITH THAT DEMONSTRATION PLANT WHEN WE'VE ALREADY SAID WE HAVE A CONTRACT TO PAY FOR IT. >> IF I'M BEING TOLD TO STOP ALL WORK I'M GOING TO STOP ALL WORK. >> HE DIDN'T SAY TO STOP ALL WORK. HE SAID TO HOLD OFF THE DECISION ON THIS THING UNTIL FOR 30 DAYS. YOU'VE ALREADY PAID FOR THAT DEMO PLANT. >> WELL, WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT -- >> HERNANDEZ: WE'VE ALREADY AGREED TO PAY FOR THAT BECAUSE WE'VE EXCLUDED IT FOR ONE WHEN WE TOOK BACK THE AUTHORITY ON THE AMENDMENTS CORRECT? >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> HERNANDEZ: SO WHY WOULD YOU LOSE OR HAVE TO STOP SOMETHING WE'RE ALREADY PAYING FOR JUST BECAUSE OF A DELAY ON A DECISION FOR THE -- FOR THE AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE? >> IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO PURSUE DESIGN IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MAKE SENSE TO CONTINUE THE EFFORTS ON THE DEMONSTRATION PLANT. THE WHOLE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT SUNG COSTS AND STOP THE BLEEDING SO I WOULD SAY IF WE STOP THE BLEEDING WE STOP WORKING ON THE DEMONSTRATION PLANT. IF THE COUNCIL'S DECISION IS NOT TO CONTINUE. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IN MY OPINION TO CONTINUE WORKING ON SOMETHING THAT -- >> HERNANDEZ: WE'VE ALREADY PAID FOR OR WE'VE ALREADY ASSIGNED MONEY TO IT. >> WE'VE ASSIGNED THE FUNDS BUT WE HAVEN'T COMMITTED ALL THE FUNDS ON THAT AMENDMENT. >> HERNANDEZ: I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW WE'VE ALREADY SIGNED A CONTRACT, WE'VE ALREADY ASSIGNED MONEY TO AN ENCUMBERED FUNDING FOR IT, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO STOP IT BECAUSE OF A DELAY ON A DECISION. IF THAT'S YOUR CHOICE, THAT'S YOUR CHOICE. I'LL LET IT GO. OKAY. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMAN SCOTT. >> SCOTT: IF ANYBODY IS WATCHING OUT THERE, I THINK THE GRAND PLAN OUGHT TO BE THE WAY TO GET WATER BETWEEN NOW AND DESAL IS YOU DO THE WELL FIELD. AND I SUSPECT WE FEEL GOOD ABOUT WHERE WE'RE AT ON THE WELL FIELD AT 5:00 TODAY SUBJECT TO SOME MAIL THAT MAY COME IN AND WE HAVE THAT PERMIT TO GET US THREE YEARS. THE ONLY PROJECT ON OUR PLATE THAT'S FULLY PERMITTED IS THE INNER HARBOR. NOW, YOU ARE THE SMART GUYS AND YOU SAY THAT IF WE CONTINUE THIS PATH BASED ON THE TIMING, WHICH SOUNDS LIKE IT MAY CHANGE A LITTLE, BUT WE WOULD HAVE DESAL ONLINE IN THE SUMMER OR EARLY FALL OF 2028 AND THAT WOULD BE BEFORE WE LOST OUR PERMIT FOR RIVER WATER. SO THERE IS A PLAN. AND YOU ALL BE IMPLEMENTING THAT PLAN, WHICH IS TO GET US WELL WATER WITH THIS PERMIT INTO THE RIVER THAT GETS US THROUGH TO DESAL AND DESAL IS FULLY PERMITTED, AND BUILD THE DESAL AND IT COMES ON ABOUT THE TIME THAT THE STATE OF TEXAS SAYS HEY, WE'RE REALLY KIND OF GETTING TIRED OF YOU PUTTING THAT WATER IN. ALTHOUGH I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE A CONVERSATION IF IT REALLY ISN'T AS BAD AS THAT FIRST WELL WAS. BUT THERE IS A PLAN. THERE IS A PLAN. WE CAN DO OTHER THINGS, BUT INNER HARBOR IS THE ONLY PROJECT THAT'S FULLY PERMITTED AND -- BUT IF WE NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION I LIKE THE COMPROMISE TO KEEP PAYING YOU GUYS FOR ANOTHER 30 DAYS UP TO 30 DAYS SUBJECT TO THE DOCUMENT THAT COMES IN AND WE HAVE TO SPECIAL MEETING IF WE NEED TO AND HAVE INFORMATION BASED ON THAT REPORT. SO I JUST WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THERE IS A PLAN, WE'RE IMPLEMENTING A PLAN. WE DON'T RUN OUT OF WATER AND WE BRING ON A NEW WATER SUPPLY. AND THEN IF WE WANT WE TURN AROUND AND DESAL NATE THE RIVER WATER WHICH GETS US ANOTHER 30-PLUS MILLION, I DON'T KNOW, 30 MILLION GALLONS A DAY, WHICH MEANS WE COULD WITH A WAKE UP IN FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AND HAVE 50, 50 SOMETHING, 60 MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF NEW WATER SUPPLY. SO THERE'S A PLAN. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO IT, BUT THERE IS A PLAN IN PLACE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN WORKING ON, THE COUNCIL HAVE BEEN MEETING ON. I GUESS IT'S FULLY PERMITTED ON BOTH SIDES I THINK AS OF 5:00 TODAY THE RIVER WATER IS PERMITTED SOMETHING TO GETTING SOMETHING IN THE MAIL. I DIDN'T WANT ANYBODY TO LEAVE TODAY THINKING THAT WE DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET FROM HERE TO THERE SO I CALLED IT TODAY'S WATER AND TOMORROW'S TOMORROW AND NEXT WEEK'S WATER, WHICH WILL BE 27, 28, 29, COULD BE SOME OF THESE OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT PERMITTED, BUT COULD BE. I DIDN'T WANT THE PUBLIC TO THINK WE DON'T HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE TO GET US FROM HERE TO THERE AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO KEEP FUNDING THIS PROGRAM WHILE WE WAIT FOR THE LETTER, WHILE WE WAIT FOR THE LETTER FROM THE STATE. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU COUNCILMAN. ONE THING I JUST WANT TO MAKE CLEAR OR BE CORRECTED ON IS I HEAR THE COMMENT OF WE HAVE OTHER OPTIONS. WE HAVE OTHER OPTIONS THAT STILL NEED TO BE VETTED. WE HAVE OTHER OPTIONS THAT HAVE NO PERMITS. WE HAVE OTHER OPTIONS THAT HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF WORK TO DO. THE ONE THAT WAS MENTIONED TODAY BY COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION IS -- WE HAVE NO IDEA WHERE IT IS IN THE TIMELINE. IT WAS BROUGHT FORTH LAST THURSDAY AND YOU CERTAINLY CAN'T MAKE A DECISION ON SOMETHING THAT IS EXTREMELY RAW. THERE'S NOTHING READY ABOUT IT. ACTUALLY, THERE'S A LOT OF CHALLENGES WITH IT THAT WE CAN OVERCOME POSSIBLY, BUT IT WILL TAKE TIME, JUST LIKE ALL OF THESE HAVE. SO I WISH SOMEONE WOULD STAND UP AND SAY YOU HAVE OTHER OPTIONS, COUNCIL, NOT LITERALLY, BUT I'M SAYING IS ACTUALLY I DO WANT THAT. MY POINT IS WE HAVE LOOKED FOR THOSE. THERE ISN'T ANYTHING. YOU GUYS HAVE DONE AN AMAZING JOB IN BRINGING ON AN ADDITIONAL, WHAT IS IT, IS THAT 25, 35, 45 MGD? >> WITH THE RIVER WELL PROJECT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WE'VE GOT FIVE -- >> Mayor Guajardo: I'M ALSO INCLUDING THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. >> AND THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE, WE'VE INCREASED THAT FLOW FROM 32 MGD TO 75. >> Mayor Guajardo: SO WE'VE DONE QUITE A BIT. IT DOESN'T SAVE US, BUT JUST LIKE SOMEONE SAID NO, DESAL DOESN'T SAVE US TODAY EITHER, BUT TOMORROW IS GOING TO BE TODAY REAL QUICK. AND THIS PROJECT, YOU KNOW, AS HAS BEEN SPOKEN, IS MOVING. I MEAN, IT IS READY. IT HAS EVERYTHING AND IT HAS TAKEN YEARS UPON YEARS TO GET TO THIS POINT. SO ANYWAY, I SAY THAT BECAUSE I DO SUPPORT -- I UNDERSTAND MY COLLEAGUES AND I THINK, I HOPE THIS IS A GOOD HALFWAY POINT. WE'RE NOT FUNDING A FULL MONTH. THE SENATOR JUST TOLD ME HE CAN PROBABLY GET THIS LETTER BY THE END OF THE WEEK. WE CAN CALL A SPECIAL MEETING SO WE'RE TALKING WITHIN SEVEN DAYS. WE CAN BE RIGHT HERE BACK AT THIS DAIS SAYING ALL RIGHT, LET'S CUT OUR LOSSES OR LET'S MOVE FORWARD. APPROXIMATE BUT WE KEEP MOVING. AND I THINK IN THE END I THINK I IT'S ULTIMATELY WANT TO DO, THEN THIS WORKS HOPEFULLY. YEAH. WHAT'S THAT? >> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]. >> COUNCILMAN CANTU? >> I'VE GOT A QUESTION, DREW. SO THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO COST US $1.2 BILLION. WE HAVE $757 MILLION GUARANTEED FROM THE LOANS? >> YES. >> SO THAT'S LEFT OVER ALMOST $400 MILLION? >> RIGHT. >> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MAYOR, BUT DIDN'T THIS COUNCIL SAY ON THIS GENERATOR DEAL THAT WE JUST HAD AN ARGUMENT ABOUT THAT WE HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE MONIES? LIKE WE DON'T HAVE FUNDING FOR THIS. WE DON'T HAVE NO OTHER FUNDING FOR THIS $1.2 BILLION BUT WE'VE GOT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A GENERATOR? IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE DOING THIS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE REST OF THE MONEY. LIKE WHERE'S THE MONEY AT, DREW? HOW -- HOW ARE WE BEING -- WE'VE GOT TO BE RESPONSIBLE, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT WE SAID EARLIER, WE'VE GOT TO BE RESPONSIBLE. >> TO CLARIFY, ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDING WOULD BE FUNDED THROUGH REVENUE BONDS. LIKE EVERY OTHER CIP PROJECT THAT THE UTILITY, WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY THE RATE. >> CANTU: THE RATEPAYERS ARE PAYING FOR IT. I JUST CAN'T WRAP MY HEAD AROUND IT. LIKE IF YOU GUYS WOULD HAVE COME WITH 757, LET'S DO IT, YOU KNOW, BUT $1.2 BILLION FOR 30 MILLION GALLONS A DAY? I JUST -- I JUST CAN'T WRAP THAT AROUND MY HEAD. I JUST -- AND IT DOESN'T FIX THE PROBLEM TODAY. WE NEED WATER TODAY. WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT OF WATER IN DECEMBER OF NEXT YEAR IF THERE'S NO RAIN! WHAT ARE WE DOING TODAY? >> Mayor Guajardo: OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON, BUT LET'S ANSWER HIS QUESTION. WHAT ARE WE DOING TODAY? >> WHAT ARE WE DOING TODAY? WE'RE PUTTING GROUNDWATER, WE'RE DRILLING WELLS AM WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT IN ABOUT 10 MINUTES. >> CANTU: GOOD. 30 DAYS WON'T KILL IT. 30 DAYS WON'T KILL THIS PROJECT. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. >> WE ARE DRILLING WELLS TODAY. WE'RE GOING TO TALK MORE ABOUT THAT PROGRAM. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT. AS COUNCILMAN SCOTT JUST SAID THE PLAN IS WE HAVE A PLAN, WE'RE GOING TO DRILL THESE GROUNDWATER WELLS, IT WAS DONE IN THE '70S, IT WAS DONE IN THE '80S, IT WAS DONE IN THE '90S, SO WE'RE REPEATING WHAT HISTORY HAS DONE AND THE PLAN IS WE'RE GOING TO DRILL THESE WELLS AND PUT WATER IN THE RIVER AND EVERY GALLON OF WATER THAT WE PUT IN THE RIVER IS ONE LESS GALLON THAT WE'RE HAVING TO RELEASE FROM LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI. >> CANTU: SO 30 DAYS OF PAUSE ISN'T GOING TO HURT US. >> YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION ON THIS AND COUNCILMAN LOOK I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU, THERE ARE RESOURCES THAT HAVE BEEN DEDICATED TO THIS PROJECT. AND THERE IS A LOT OF WORK GOING ON IN TEXAS AND AROUND THE COUNTRY. SO THESE RESOURCES ARE SCARCE. IN FACT, WE HAVE IN THE CONTRACT, IT'S LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. WHEN WE WROTE THIS CONTRACT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF ANY OF THESE FOLKS THAT WE HAVE THE BEST OF THE BEST, THAT WE HAVE FOR THIS PROJECT FROM KIEWIT, IF WE GO ANYWHERE BUT THIS PROJECT THEY'RE GOING TO PAY US LIQUIDATED DAMAGES BECAUSE WE WANT TO KEEP THEM. WELL, ONCE WE MAKE THIS DECISION TO DELAY, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, THOSE FOLKS CAN BE RELEASED AND THEY CAN GO WORK ON OTHER PROJECTS. NOW, WE MAY GET THEM BACK, BUT THERE'S NO GUARANTEE WE'LL GET THEM BACK BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF WORK GOING ON. THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER PROJECTS. >> CANTU: I'M SURE IF THIS COUNCIL APPROVED $1.2 BILLION I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GO AWAY. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GO AWAY, DREW. THAT'S A SCARE TACTIC. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GO AWAY. $1.2 BILLION IS A LOT OF MONEY, IT'S A LOT OF MONEY. >> I AGREE. >> IT'S A LOT OF MONEY. >> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]. >> WHO IS ON HERE? >> MAYOR, CAN WE PLEASE SPEAK TO THE PROCESS? >> Mayor Guajardo: WE'RE GOING TO. THE COUNCILMAN HAS THE FLOOR. >> CANTU: OKAY. LET'S GET THIS OVER WITH. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILMAN, I WANT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. NOW I THINK YOUR WRONG, THE TEXAS TEXAS LEGISLATURE IS IN SESSION RIGHT NOW ALLOCATING MORE MONEY TO THE WATER FUND AND I THINK THAT -- >> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]. >> Mayor Guajardo: THAT'S NOT -- OKAY. COUNCILMAN, YOU -- OKAY. WE'RE GOOD, WE'RE GOOD. WE'RE GOOD. ENOUGH. DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT, COUNCILMAN? >> THEY'RE GOING TO -- >> I KNOW. WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND. >> THIS IS ON YOUR AMENDMENT, RIGHT, THE AMENDMENT PROPOSED BY MR. ROY? >> ARE YOU PUTTING IT ON THE -- >> WHAT IS THIS MOTION? >> WELL -- SO, YOU HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST 26TH. NOW WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED BY MRG THAT TIME PERIOD, TO AUTHORIZE UP TO 10 MILLION FOR -- I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO USE TIME AND MATERIALS DURING THAT TIME PERIOD UPON RECEIPT OF THE LETTER FROM THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. >> IS THIS LIKE [ INAUDIBLE ]? >> RIGHT. SHE WANTED TO KNOW -- GO AHEAD. >> I'M SORRY. >> IF THIS -- WE TALKED. IF THIS FAILS, THE COUNCILMAN'S MOTION -- DO WE GO BACK TO THE COUNCILMAN'S ORIGINAL MOTION? >> YES. >> BECAUSE THIS IS AN AMENDMENT. >> WE'RE JUST AMENDING HIS MOTION. IF IT DOESN'T PASS, YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> RIGHT. >> YES, MA'AM. >> OKAY. ARE YOU GOING TO PUT IT UP ON THIS? >> OKAY. THE MOTION FAILS. SO IT GOES BACK TO THE ORIGINAL, WHICH IS POSTPONING THE PROJECT UNTIL AUGUST 26TH. >> CAN WE TAKE A VOICE VOTE? I APOLOGIZE. >> YEAH. IT'S LOCKED. THE SYSTEM LOCKED. >> WE'RE NOT ABLE TO GO IN AND DISPLAY THE VOTE, BUT WE CAN TAKE THE VOTE -- DO A VOICE VOTE. >> OKAY. SO IT'S TO POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUS. >> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO. >> PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE A NO. OKAY. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON. I'M GOING TO RECESS THE COUNCIL MEETING TO HOLD A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION. COUNCILMEMBER ROY, THE PRESIDENT OF THE CORPORATION, WILL PRESIDE OVER THE MEETING. [ GAVEL ] >> WHICH ONE? >> WE'RE GOING TO RESCHEDULE IT. >> OKAY. I APPRECIATE IT. >> GO AHEAD. >> OKAY. I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER, CORPUS CHRISTI HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION. WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> PRESIDENT ROY. >> PRESENT. >> VICE PRESIDENT ROLAND. >> OKAY. HE'S NOT HERE. OH, THERE HE IS. HE IS HERE. BOARD MEMBER CAMPOS. PAXON. >> HERE. >> SCOTT. OKAY. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT. >> OKAY. THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM IS PUBLIC COMMENT. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT? HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? >> NO, SIR. >> SEEING THAT THERE'S NONE, I'LL GO AHEAD TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS APPROVE OF THE MINUTES, JUNE 17TH, 2025. I WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER 5, WHICH IS A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER TO SOLICIT PROPOSALS FROM QUALIFIED FIRMS TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 150,000, ENTER INTO A COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE CORPUS CHRISTI HOUSING AUTHORITY. SO, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT, WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER 6, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF COSTA ONE AND COSTA TWO APARTMENTS TO HKSK CORPORATION, OR ITS PERMITTED ASSIGNEDS. >> MOTION. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. JUST A MOMENT. BOARD MEMBER HERNANDEZ. >> THIS IS A QUESTION FOR JENNIFER. JENNIFER, THANK YOU. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION AROUND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND REMOVING PROJECTS OFF THE TAX ROLLS FOR, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY FOR REASONS. WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW MANY PROJECTS WERE THROUGHOUT THE CITY, NOT JUST FROM THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, BUT ALSO FROM THE CITY, OR FROM 9% HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAMS THAT ARE EITHER DISCOUNTED OR OFF THE TAX ROLLS ALTOGETHER. WERE YOU ABLE TO COMPLETE THAT? >> JENNIFER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. I HAVE NOT COMPLETED IT. I HAVE NOT TOUCHED BASE WITH ANYBODY AT THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT TO GET THE LIST ON THE OTHER EXEMPTIONS WHERE THEY MIGHT BE OUTSTANDING. BUT I BELIEVE IT'S THE . . . ABOUT 30. OF THE LIST THAT I'VE COMPLETED SO FAR. >> OKAY. I KNOW WE'RE SENSITIVE TO PROJECTS THAT ARE DISCOUNTED OR OFF THE TAX ROLLS, THAT OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE -- THE REST OF THE CITIZENS HAVE TO MAKE UP. WHEN CAN YOU GET THAT INFORMATION BACK TO US? IT COULD BE A REGULAR AGENDA ITEM FOR COUNCIL. >> I . . . CAN I HAVE 30 DAYS? >> OKAY. I APPRECIATE THAT. AND THEN HOW MUCH OF THE VALUE OF THESE PARTICULAR PROPERTIES, COSTA TERAGON ONE AND TWO, HOW MUCH ARE THEY DISCOUNTED FROM WHAT THEIR VALUE IS? >> THEY'RE FULLY TAX-EXEMPT. >> FULLY TAX-EXEMPT. >> YEAH. >> THESE HAVE NEVER BEEN ON THE TAX ROLLS. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> RIGHT. >> YES. THEY ARE FULLY TAX-EXEMPT. >> OKAY. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY ALWAYS POINTING FINGERS. I UNDERSTAND THERE'S FINGERS POINTING AT US AS WELL. >> YES. IF I CAN ADD A COUPLE OF POINTS, THESE HAVE NEVER BEEN ON THE TAX ROLLS. AND ALSO, THESE ARE 100% AT 60% AREA MEDIAN INCOME. THE DEVELOPER, OR THE OWNER, I DID SOME ANALYSIS. AND THE RENT SUBSIDY IS EQUAL TO ABOUT $1.8 MILLION A YEAR IS WHAT'S BEING SUBSIDIZED. SO IT'S 4.5 TIMES MORE THAN WHAT THE TAXES PAID WOULD BE. SO, THE INVESTMENT OF THE TAX ABATEMENT IS -- WE'RE GETTING 4.5 TIMES THAT IN REDUCED REPRESENT FOR PEOPLE AT OR BELOW 60%. IT LOOKS LIKE PEOPLE ARE SAVING ANYWHERE BETWEEN $260 A MONTH AND $645 A MONTH DEPENDING ON ONE BEDROOM TO THREE BEDROOMS. THIS IS SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS FOR THESE FAMILIES. AND THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE WHAT THEY'RE SAVING ON UTILITIES. >> OKAY. I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING THAT THERE'S NONE, DID WE HAVE A MOTION? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. >> BLESS YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. SEEING THAT THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. >> RECONVENING THE COUNCIL MEETING, WE ARE ON SECTION N BRIEFINGS, STATISTICS BRIEFING. WE'RE GOING TO PUSH THAT BACK TO THE NEXT MEETING. AND MOVE ON TO OUR CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND UPDATE ON CITY OPERATIONS. >> YES. WE HAVE TWO ITEMS. THE FIRST ONE IS THE WATER SUPPLY UPDATE FROM DREW. >> YES, SIR. THANK YOU, PETER. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. A SLIDE DECK THAT'S GETTING READY TO COME UP HERE IN A SECOND. LOAD IT. >> OKAY. SO, AS I TYPICALLY DO EVERY WEEK, AND AS I PRESENT THIS EVERY WEEK AND ALSO AS WE HAVE A MEMO THAT GOES OUT EVERY WEEK, THIS IS A QUICK SNAPSHOT OF HOW WE'RE LOOKING IN TERMS OF OUR WATER SUPPLIES. NO SURPRISE IN TERMS OF HOW THE EASTERN WATER SUPPLY IS. WE ARE DOING VERY WELL AT LAKE TECH SANNA, 97% FULL. WE GOT AN OFFER FOR AN INTERRUPTIBLE WATER SOURCE OF 4500-ACRE FEET. IN THE LAST COUPLE DAYS, WE WERE OFFERED 3,000-ACRE FEET. THAT CAN GO UP TO 12,000-ACRE FEET FOR THE YEAR. SO AS THE HAV RESERVOIR REMAINS FULL, WE HAVE AN EXPECTATION WE WOULD BE ABLE TO RECEIVE THE FULL ALLOTMENT OF THE 12,000 ACRE FEET OF WATER. THE WESTERN SUPPLY IS A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT SITUATION. AS YOU CAN SEE, CHOKE CANYON IS AT ITS ALL-TIME LOW OF 13.1%. YOU CAN SEE THAT DISPLAY GRAPHICALLY UP ON THE FAR UPPER RIGHT OF YOUR SCREEN. LAKE CORPUS CHRISTI IS NOT AT AN ALL-TIME LOW, BUT PRETTY CLOSE, 19.9%. COMBINED CAPACITY IS AT 15%. OUR WATER SUPPLY DASHBOARD THAT WE UPDATE EVERY TWO WEEKS CONTINUES TO SHOW THAT WE HAVE A PROJECTION. AND AGAIN, I'LL SAY THIS, A PROJECTION OF DECEMBER OF 2026. THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD BE 180 DAYS OF NOT RUNNING OUT OF WATER. IT WOULD BE 180 DAYS OF NOT BEING ABLE TO MEET DEMAND. THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR CONTINGENCY PLAN WOULD BE THE DATE WE WOULD GO INTO A LEVEL ONE WATER EMERGENCY. WE ARE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO AVOID SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENING. THAT IS A PROJECTION BASED ON EXTREMELY DIRE FORECAST FOR RAINFALL. IT IS BASED ON EXTREMELY LIMITED AMOUNT OF RAINFALL. IF WE COULD JUST GET EVEN AVERAGE RAINFALL WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PUSH THAT DATE OUT. ANOTHER THING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE IS THAT THE GROUNDWATER WORK THAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS SOMETHING THAT HELPS PUSH THAT DATE, THAT DECEMBER 2026 DATE OUT. SO THE MORE GROUNDWATER THAT WE'RE ABLE TO ADD, THE FURTHER OUT WE'RE ABLE TO PUSH THAT PROJECTED LEVEL ONE WATER EMERGENCY. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO DO HERE IS I WANT TO INTRODUCE DAN OLSEN WITH GARVER. DAN WAS TASKED A COUPLE MONTHS AGO BY OUR COUNCIL TO LOOK AT SEVERAL DIFFERENT WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES THAT MANY OF YOU KNOW ALL ABOUT. BUT THIS WAS AN ASSESSMENT THAT AN INDEPENDENT PARTY, DAN OLSEN AND HIS TEAM DID TO LOOK AT THE EV RANCH, AND SOUTH TEXAS. THAT WORK WAS CONCLUDED IN MAY. WE HAD PLANNED ON BEING HERE EARLIER IN JUNE, EXCEPT WE HAD SOME CHALLENGES GETTING SOME OF THE DATA FROM ONE OF THE WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS. AND SO THAT HAS GOTTEN PUSHED BACK. I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO DAN AND LET HIM RUN THROUGH THESE SLIDES. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. DAN OLSON WITH GARVER, TASKED WITH ASSESSING DIFFERENT GROUNDWATER ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE TO THE CITY AS AN ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLY. SO, TODAY'S PRESENTATION WILL INFORM THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT KEY FINDINGS FROM THAT GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT. I'LL DO A BRIEF INTRODUCTION, DEFINE WHAT THOSE FOUR DIFFERENT GROUNDWATER PROJECTS ARE THAT WE EVALUATED, AND THEN CULMINATE IN A COMPARISON OF THOSE ACROSS A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT METRICS THAT WE LOOKED AT, AFTER WHICH WE CAN HAVE Q&A. STARTING WITH THAT INTRODUCTION -- SO THE CITY RETAINED GARVER TO EVALUATE MULTIPLE PROJECT OPPORTUNITIES TO INTEGRATE TREATED GROUNDWATER INTO THE WATER SYSTEM. THIS BEGAN APRIL 22ND, WHEN WE RECEIVED NOTICE TO PROCEED. WE HAD A LITTLE LESS THAN SIX WEEKS TO PRODUCE AN EVALUATION REPORT THAT WE SUBMITTED ON TIME ON MAY 30TH. THAT REPORT ONLY INCLUDED THREE OF THE FOUR PROJECT ALTERNATIVES THAT WE ORIGINALLY TASKED WITH DOING. THAT WAS THE EV RANCH, EVANGELINE, AND K NUECES. WE REACHED OUT TO THE WATER AUTHORITY TO OBTAIN THAT INFORMATION, BUT IT DID NOT COME IN TIME TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT INITIAL REPORT. AND SO IT WAS NOT INCLUDED. ON JUNE 20TH, WE DID RECEIVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF INFORMATION FROM SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY. ITIT WAS MARKED AS CONFIDENTIAL. IT AMOUNTED TO SOME INFORMATION INCLUDING CONTRACT INFORMATION FOR THE PROJECT THAT SEVEN SEAS WATER IS DOING FOR SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY. A SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER PROJECT, AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE SMALLER. WE'RE EVALUATING THAT INFORMATION. WE STILL DON'T HAVE INFORMATION ON THE LARGER PROJECT THAT WAS PROPOSED TO THE CITY AT A PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETING OF 30 MGB, TEN TIMES LARGER. FOR ALL PROJECTS, THE EVALUATIONS WERE WA BASED ON CO, IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE, THOUSAHOWTHAT AGREEMENT OR PROJS STRUCTURED, RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT, WATER QUALITY THAT WOULD BE PROVIDED, AS WELL AS OTHER FACTORS. SO WE'LL GO THROUGH THESE FOUR. DREW MENTIONED THESE. AND WE'LL GO ONE BY ONE, BEGINNING WITH THE EV RANCH PROJECT OPPORTUNITY. SO, THE EV RANCH PROJECT IS PROPOSED TO BE STRUCTURED AS A TAKE OR PAY WATER AGREEMENT. THE RANCH IS LOCATED TO THE WEST, SOUTHWEST OF KINGSVILLE. THIS IS A 100,000-ACRE RANCH. THE DEVELOPERS PLANNED TO DEVELOP A BRACKISH DESALINATION FACILITY AND CONNECT INTO THE EXISTING SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY PIPELINE. THEY PLAN TO DEVELOP A WELL FIELD ON THAT 100,000-ACRE RANCH. THEY'VE DETERMINED THAT THOSE WELLS ARE PROBABLY BRACKISH. THEY HAVE NOT DRILLED TEST WELLS YET. BUT BASED ON EXISTING HISTORICAL DATA, IT'S LIKELY THAT THOSE WELLS ARE BRACKISH. THEY PLAN TO BUILD A TREATMENT PLANT ON THE RANCH AND THEN BUILD A NEW 46-MILE PIPELINE TO DELIVER THE WATER TO A CONNECTION POINT ON THE EXISTING SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY PIPELINE. THE PLAN THAT WAS PROPOSED IN MARCH AT THE WATER SUPPLY WORKSHOP INCLUDED PROVIDING 7,000 ACRE FEET OF WATER, LEAVING 25,000 ACRE FEET VARIABLE TO CORPUS CHRISTI. AND THAT WOULD BE DELIVERED TO THE OWEN STEVENS WATER TREATMENT PLANT THROUGH THAT PIPELINE. THEY PLAN TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE HIGHER ELEVATION OF THE RANCH RELATIVE TO CORPUS CHRISTI. AND SO THIS WOULD REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY NEEDED TO PUMP THE WATER, BECAUSE THEY'RE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF GRAFT. -- OF GRAVITY. THAT'S AN ADVANTAGE. IT'S STRUCTURED AS A TAKE OR PAY WATER PURCHASE AGREEMENT. THIS WOULD PROVIDE UP TO 22 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY OF WATER TO THE CITY, BASED ON WHAT THEY HAD PROPOSED BACK IN MARCH. NOW, THIS IS BEFORE A LOT OF THE DETAILS ABOUT THE STWA PROJECT CAME ABOUT. SO THEIR PLAN TO MAKE USE OF THAT PIPELINE MAY BE A LITTLE BIT IN QUESTION. AND AGAIN, THIS INFORMATION GOES BACK TO MARCH. BACK THEN THEY ESTIMATED -- THE DEVELOPERS ESTIMATED THE COST OF THAT WATER TO THE CITY WOULD BE $6.64 PER THOUSAND GALLONS. THAT'S IN YEAR ONE. WE EXPECT THAT OVER TIME THERE WOULD BE ESCALATIONS TO THAT COST, WHICH WE'VE ESTIMATED ACROSS ALL PROJECTS THAT OVER TIME THERE WOULD BE A 3% ANNUAL INCREASE IN OPERATING COST. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE USING IS THE AVERAGE, THE LONG-TERM AVERAGE OF THE CPI. SO, THAT INITIAL ANNUAL COST TO THE CITY WOULD BE $59 MILLION. AS A TAKE OR PAY WATER PURCHASE AGREEMENT, THE CITY WOULD NOT OWN ANY OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, WOULD NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DESIGNING AND CONSTRUCTING IT. THEY WOULD BE LEASING THE WATER AT A CERTAIN DELIVERY POINT. ONE OF THE RISKS OF THIS PROJECT IN OUR EVALUATION IS THAT THEY HAVE NOT DRILLED ANY TEST WELLS. AND THERE ARE NO PERMITS OBTAINED. IN TERMS OF A RISK OF THE PROJECT BEING VIABLE AND IN TERMS OF THE SCHEDULE, THIS IS A BIT OF A DOWNSIDE TO THIS PROJECT. AND CONSEQUENTLY, WATER QUALITY HAS NOT BEEN CONFIRMED. I MENTIONED THEY PLAN TO USE THE EXISTING PIPELINE. IN THE PRESENTATION PROVIDED IN MARCH, THEY SHOWED PHOTOGRAPHS OF PLASTIC PIPELINES RUNNING OVER LAND. THERE'S SOME CONCERN ABOUT THAT AS A RISK TO THE LONG-TERM RELIABILITY OF THIS PROJECT. WE'RE ESTIMATING THAT IMPLEMENTATION WOULD TAKE 40 TO 48 MONTHS BEFORE THIS COULD BE DEVELOPED, BUT THERE ARE STILL A LOT OF QUESTION MARKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FEASIBILITY REPORT THAT HAS NOT BEEN DONE YET, AND THE PERMITTING. SO AS I MENTIONED, THE FEASIBILITY STUDY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED YET. SO THAT'S THE EVANGELINE PROJECT OPPORTUNITY. NEXT EVANGELINE. THE EVANGELINE PROJECT THAT WAS PROPOSED IN MARCH RELIES ON THE USE OF THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. BUT IT NEEDS TO BE STATED THAT THAT PIPELINE CAN TAKE APPROXIMATELY 12 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY OF FLOW. TO TAKE THE FULL 24 OR 25 MGD BEING OFFERED WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PIPELINE CAPACITY IN THE FORM OF MOST LIKELY A PARALLEL CONVEYANCE OR TRANSMISSION LINE TO GET THE WATER DOWN TO THE CITY SYSTEM. THE PROJECT WOULD BE LOCATED TO THE NORTH OF SINTON, MAKING THAT INITIAL DELIVERY OF WATER CONVENIENT, SO TO SPEAK. AND WHAT THEIR OFFER IS IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM EV RANCH. THEY'RE OFFERING TO SELL THE RIGHTS TO THE GROUNDWATER UNDER A 22,789-ACRE PROPERTY. WE EXPECT THAT THIS IS PROVIDE UP TO 25.4 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. THERE'S AN ASTERISK THAT I'LL GO OVER IN A SECOND. THEY'RE ONLY PROPOSING TO SELL THE RIGHTS TO THE WATER. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DESIGN OR CONSTRUCT OR IMPLEMENT OR OPERATE SAID FACILITY. SO THE CITY WOULD STILL GET TO OWN AND OPERATE THESE. THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN SAN PATRICO, WHERE THE DISTRICT HAS JURISDICTION. THEY ALLOW A WITHDRAWAL RATE OF UP TO 1.25-ACRE FEET PER YEAR PER SURFACE ACRE. AND SO I NEED TO SAY THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE ALLOWING CURRENTLY. THAT CAN CHANGE OVER TIME BASED ON WHATEVER THE MODELED MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE GROUNDWATER IS. AND THEY CAN CHANGE THAT NUMBER. SO, ONE OF THE RISKS WE IDENTIFIED WITH THIS PROJECT IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT IN THE FUTURE, THAT WITHDRAWAL RATE COULD BE CURTAILED OR LOWERED. SO THE CITY COULD END UP PAYING FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF WATER RIGHTS THAT THEY EXPECT TO YIELD A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF WATER AND THEN IT NOT YIELD THAT FULL AMOUNT OF WATER ULTIMATELY. THEY'VE OBTAINED A PRODUCTION PERMIT, BUT A TRANSPORT PERMIT IS STILL NEEDED. THIS IS REQUIRED TO TAKE THE WATER OUTSIDE OF SAN PATRICO COUNTY AND THE JURISDICTION, INTO NUECES COUNTY, WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY'S DEMAND RESIDES. WHILE A SMALL AMOUNT OF THAT WATER COULD STAY WITHIN SAN PATRICO COUNTY, A TRANSPORT PERMIT WOULD BE NEED FOR THE A MAJORITY OF THE WATER. THE PERMIT COULD BE CONTESTED. I'M NOT A WATER RIGHTS LAWYER. THE CITY HAS RETAINED COUNSEL FOR THAT. HE HAS MENTIONED THAT THERE'S HIGH POSSIBILITY OF THAT PERMIT BEING CONTESTED. THAT'S A PROJECT RISK THAT EXISTS. THE WATER QUALITY IS GOOD UP THERE. IT MEETS MOST REGULATORY PARAMETERS. REALLY THE VAST MAJORITY. IT DOES MEET THE TCEQ'S LIMIT ON TDS. IT DOES NOT MEET EPA'S SECONDARY LIMIT. SO, TCEQ'S LIMIT IS 1,000 MILLIGRAMS. EPA HAS A SECONDARY LIMIT, IT'S NOT REQUIRED, BUT IT'S HIGHLY DESIRED THAT THEY GET BELOW 500 MILLIGRAMS. THEIRS IS IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO. THEY HAVE TWO TEST WELLS THAT ARE IN THE 700 TO 800 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER RANGE. AND THE SECOND TEST WELL DID HAVE AN EXCEEDENCE FOR ARSENIC, ABOVE THE MCL IN A SAMPLE FROM THAT SECOND TEST WELL. BUT, THAT FIRST 12 MGD CAN BE INTEGRATED INTO THE PIPELINE, WHICH IS AN ATTRACTIVE OPPORTUNITY TO GET WATER QUICKLY. THEY'RE OFFERING THE FULL GROUNDWATER RIGHTS FOR THAT ALMOST 23,000-ACRE PROPERTY FOR AN AMOUNT OF $200 MILLION. BUT THE CITY IS CURRENTLY ENGAGED IN A PROCESS OF NEGOTIATING THAT PRICE. SO THAT'S NOT A FIRM, FIXED PRICE. IT IS THE NUMBER THAT IS USED IN OUR COST COMPARISON FOR LACK OF ANY OTHER NUMBER AS YET. NEXT, WE'LL GO THROUGH THE NUECES DESALINATION PROJECT. THERE'S TWO PARTS TO THIS. THIS IS WHAT I WILL REFER TO AS THE CITY'S PROJECT. THE CITY IS DEVELOPING THIS ON THEIR OWN. THERE'S NOT A THIRD PARTY SELLING THE WATER OR THE RIGHTS OR WHATNOT. THE PLAN IS THAT GROUNDWATER WOULD BE DEVELOPED FROM TWO DIFFERENT WELL FIELDS. LOOKING AT THIS MAP, THERE IS AN EAST WELL FIELD RIGHT HERE THAT HAS EIGHT WELLS AND IS PLANNED TO PRODUCE BETWEEN 10 AND 13 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. PHASE 1A IS TO PUT THAT DIRECTLY INTO THE RIVER, AS HAS BEEN SPOKEN ABOUT EARLIER IN THIS MEETING. THE CITY PURCHASED A 250-ACRE PROPERTY WHERE THE WEST WELL FIELD IS ANTICIPATED TO BE DEVELOPED AND DRINKING IS BEGINNING ON THAT WEST WELL FIELD. AND PHASE 1B ALSO WOULD PUT THAT FLOW INTO THE RIVER. ALL OF PHASE 1 IS AUGMENTING THE SURFACE WATER IN NUECES RIVER. THESE ARE BRACKISH SUPPLIES, BUT THEY'RE LIGHTLY BRACKISH. THE WEST WELL FIELD IS IN THE 1500 TO 2,000 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER, THE EAST WELL FIELD IS ON AVERAGE ABOUT 3,000 TO 3500 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER OF TDS. PHASE 2A WOULD BE TO PUT IN CONVEYANCE, OR TRANSMISSION PIPELINES AND THEN DESALINATION THROUGH REVERSE OSMOSIS AT A PIECE OF LAND LOCATED WITHIN THE CURRENT PROPERTY OF STEVENS WATER TREATMENT PLANT TO BE ABLE TO DESALINATE AND PUT THAT WATER DIRECTLY INTO THE DRINKING WATER SYSTEM. PHASE 2B WOULD BE TO EXTEND THAT CONVEYANCE TO THE WEST WELL,FIELD, CAPTURE ADDITIONAL FLOW AND BRINGING TO AN EXPANDED SYSTEM TO CAPTURE UP TO 24 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY OR MORE OF TREATED GROUNDWATER THAT COULD BE PUT INTO THE CITY'S SYSTEM. THE CITY WOULD OWN ALL THE ASSETS. WEWE'D BE ABLE TO MAKE USE OF EIGHT ALREADY-DRILLED WELLS. AND ADDITIONAL WELLS THAT ARE BEING DRILLED IN THE WEST WELLFIELD THAT THE CITY COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. I MENTIONED 24 MILLION GALLONS COULD BE HARNESSED AND TREATED AND PUT INTO THE CCW SYSTEM. WATER QUALITY TESTING HAS ALREADY BEEN PERFORMED ON THE WELLS THAT HAVE BEEN DRILLED, SO WE DO KNOW THE WATER QUALITY OF THE WELLS THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY DRILLED. AND THAT TDS RANGES -- NOW I'M SHOWING THE FULL RANGE OF BOTH WELLFIELDS. THAT'S ABOVE THE LIMIT FOR TDS. IT WOULD REQUIRE REVERSE OSMOSIS TREATMENT. BUT, A BIG ADVANTAGE HERE IS THE CITY ALREADY OWNS THE GROUNDWATER RIGHTS. NO TRANSPORT PERMIT WOULD BE NEEDED. IT'S ALL WITHIN NUECES COUNTY AND WOULD STAY WITHIN NUECES COUNTY. AND THE PLAN FOR DISPOSAL OF THE BRINE FROM THE REVERSE OSMOSIS TREATMENT SYSTEM IS PLANNED TO BE DISPOSED VIA DEEP WELL INJECTION AND A SITE HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE VICINITY OF STEVENS WHERE THAT BRINE COULD BE DISPOSED OF VIA DEEP WELL. FINALLY, THE SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY PROJECT OPPORTUNITY. SO, FROM WHAT WE KNOW OF THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED FOR THE PROJECT BETWEEN SEVEN SEAS WATER AND SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY, WE BELIEVE THIS PROJECT WOULD LIKELY BE STRUCTURED AS A TAKE OR PAY WATER PURCHASE AGREEMENT SIMILAR TO THE AGREEMENT THAT ALREADY EXISTS BETWEEN STWA AND SEVEN SEAS WATER. AND SO WE EXPECT THAT THE DEVELOPER OF THAT LARGER PROJECT WOULD ALSO BE THE SAME ENTITY, WHICH IS SEVEN SEAS WATER, STWA USA LLC. AND THE LOCATION IS EXPECTED TO BE IN THE SAME LOCATION AS THAT CURRENT PROJECT NEAR DRISCOLL, TEXAS. WE ANTICIPATE WE'LL BE A TAKE OR PAY AGREEMENT OVER A 30-YEAR TERM. AND AT A PRIOR MEETING, STWA HAS PROPOSED A 30 MILLION-GALLON PER DAY FACILITY AND OFFERED TO MAKE 28 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY AVAILABLE TO THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF WATER. HOWEVER, NO TEST WELL HAS BEEN DRILLED TO DATE, SO WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO VERIFY THE HYDROGEOLOGICAL VIABILITY OF THIS PROJECT YET, NOR THE WATER QUALITY. SO, THEY HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S ABOUT TEN TIMES SMALLER. AND THEY HAVE A HYDROGEOLOGICAL STUDY THAT HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY CAN WITHDRAW 2 TO 3 MILLIOY SUSTAINABLY, BUT NO STUDY HAS BEEN SHARED WITH US THAT SHOWS THAT THEY COULD SUSTAINABLY WITHDRAW 30 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY FROM THE SITE THAT THEY HAVE, WHICH IS ABOUT 170 ACRES. SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER THAN THE RANCH IN EVANGELINE OR THE CITY'S PROPERTY. BASED ON THE INFORMATION THEY'VE SHARED AND SOME ADDITIONAL ESTIMATION, WE EXPECT THAT THIS WOULD COST AT LEAST $6.50 PER THOUSAND GALLONS INITIALLY. AND AGAIN, WITH ANNUAL INCREASES INDEXED TO CPI, WHICH FOR THE PURPOSES OF OUR EVALUATION ACROSS ALL PROJECTS WAS THE SAME, WHICH IS A 3% ANNUAL INCREASE ON THE OpEx COST YEAR OVER YEAR ON THE 30-YEAR PERIOD. WE ANTICIPATE THE PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE EV RANCH PROJECT OF AROUND 40 TO 48 MONTHS. AGAIN, BIG QUESTION MARK HERE UNTIL WE KNOW THAT THEY HAVE PERMITS AND THAT THERE'S VIABILITY FOR THE PROJECT. OKAY. SO, FINALLY WE TOOK ALL THAT WE COULD LEARN ABOUT THESE PROJECTS IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, ABOUT 45 DAYS, AND TRIED TO BOIL THEM DOWN TO SOMETHING WHERE WE HAD AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON. AND SO WE LOOKED AT THIS ACROSS A VARIETY OF METRICS. I'M SHOWING SOME DIFFERENT SCENARIOS HERE. AND I'M GOING TO WALK THROUGH EACH METRIC ONE BY ONE. ULTIMATELY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THOSE, IT APPEARS TO US THAT THE NUECES RIVER WELLS PROJECT IS THE BEST VALUE GROUNDWATER DEVELOPMENT OPTION FOR CORPUS CHRISTI. BUT WE'LL WALK THROUGH THAT. SO, THE SCENARIOS YOU'LL NOTE HERE ARE NOT EXACTLY THE SAME VOLUME OR CAPACITY SHOWN IN EACH OF THOSE. SOME THERE WAS 22 AND 28. BUT WE REALLY WANTED TO DO AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON. WE MADE MINOR SCALE-UPS OR DOWNS SO THEY WOULD FIT WITHIN 12 OR 24 MGD SCENARIO FOR THE NUECES RIVER WELLS AND THE EVANGELINE PROJECTS AND THE TWO LARGER PROJECTS WE SCALED TO 24 MILLIOO THAT AS YOU SEE COST, YOU'RE SEEING AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON AS BEST AS WE COULD. THERE'S DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PROJECTS. SO, THE FIRST A WATER RIGHTS PR. AND SO WE NOTE HERE AND WHAT WAS INITIALLY OFFERED FOR THE FULL GROUNDWATER RIGHTS OF 200 MILLION. AND THEN LATER THEY CAME WITH AN OFFER OF BEING ABLE TO DO HALF OF THAT FOR HALF OF THE FLOW. AND THAT IS WHAT IT IS. CAPITAL COST -- SO THESE EACH HAVE VERY DIFFERENT CAPITAL COST DEPENDING ON THE DISTANCE THAT THEY ARE AWAY AND HOW MUCH CONVEYANCE IS NEEDED, HOW MUCH TREATMENT IS NEEDED FOR EACH OF THESE PROJECTS. I WILL NOTE THAT EVEN THOUGH BOTH THE EV RANCH AND THE SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY PROJECTS ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE TAKE OR PAY AGREEMENTS, OR WATER LEASING AGREEMENTS, THERE'S NEVERTHELESS STILL A SMALL CAPITAL COST THAT THE CITY WOULD INCUR IN ORDER TO UPGRADE THE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE OF YOUR EXISTING SYSTEM IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO INTEGRATE THAT FLOW INTO YOUR SYSTEM. SO THERE IS SOME CAPITAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT FOR CONVEYANCE AND CONNECTIONS. HERE WE LIST THE INITIAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST. AND SO YOU'LL SEE THAT WHILE THE EVANGELINE PROJECT, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS A HIGHER CAPITAL COST, IT HAS A LOWER ANNUAL OPERATING COST BECAUSE THAT WATER IS FRESHER. IT'S NOT AS S SALINE. THERE'S LESS TREATMENT NEEDED. SO IT HAS A LOWER OPERATING COST. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE EV RANCH AND THE SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY PROJECTS, ALL OF THE COST OF THAT WATER PURCHASE WAS PUT INTO THIS OpEx COLUMN BECAUSE THAT'S AN ANNUAL COST THE CITY WOULD BE PAYING FOR THAT WATER. SO THAT'S -- I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT'S WHERE THAT COST RESIDES. NEXT, WE WANTED TO LOOK AT TOTALING WHAT THE FULL COST WOULD BE OVER A 30-YEAR PERIOD. TAKING THE INITIAL CAPITAL COST, PLUS WATER RIGHTS PURCHASE IF APPLICABLE IS THAT UP FRONT, PLUS 30 YEARS OF ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS AND WHAT'S THAT ALL IN OVER THAT 30-YEAR PERIOD. YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT DIVERGENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PROJECTS WHERE THE CITY WOULD OWN AND OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THAT INFRASTRUCTURE VERSUS THE ONES WHERE THE CITY IS SIMPLY PURCHASING WATER. AND THAT'S BECAUSE OF THOSE ANNUAL INCREASES INDEXED TO CPI THAT WE ANTICIPATED AT 3% PER YEAR. ANOTHER DIFFERENCE IS WHAT THE CITY OWNS AT THE END OF THAT 30-YEAR PERIOD. AND SO THIS IS THE INITIAL VALUE OF THE ASSETS OWNED BY CCW. THIS DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ANY DEPRECIATION. BUT IT'S MEANT TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE CITY OWNS AN ASSET AT THE END OF THAT 30-YEAR PERIOD FOR THE TOP FOUR SCENARIOS, FOR THE EV RANCH AND THE SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY PROJECTS. THEY WOULD ONLY OWN THE MINOR INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY IN ORDER TO INTEGRATE THE WATER INTO THE SYSTEM. OKAY. SO, WITH THESE BEING SO DIFFERENT, AND WANTING TO COMPARE THEM ON AN APPLES TO APPLES BASIS, WE WANTED TO BOIL IT DOWN TO A DOLLARS PER THOUSAND GALLONS METRIC THAT'S BEEN USED ALL THROUGHOUT TODAY TO TALK ABOUT DIFFERENT PROJECTS. AND SO WE DID THAT. AND SO THAT'S TAKING ALL OF THE UP FRONT CapEx AND ANY WATER RIGHTS PURCHASE UP FRONT AND AMORTIZING THAT OVER 30 YEARS DEBT SERVICE AND HAVING AN ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT, PLUS WHATEVER THE ANNUAL OPERATING COST IS, BEEN DIVIDING IT OVER THE FULL AMOUNT OF FLOW THAT WOULD BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY. FOR THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS, THAT INITIAL TOG COST OF WATER N YEAR ONE IS FROM $4 UP TO AROUND $7 PER THOUSAND GALLONS. WHAT'S INTERESTING IS AS YOU EXTRAPOLATE THAT OUT INTO YEAR 30 YOU SEE A MUCH WIDER DIVERGENCE. SO, BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THAT ANNUAL INCREASE ON THE TWO PROJECTS WHERE YOU'RE PURCHASING THE WATER, THE ENTIRE COST IS SUBJECT TO THE ANNUAL INCREASE. BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW NOW. THAT CAUSES THAT TOTAL COST IN YEAR 30 TO BECOME QUITE LARGE FOR THE PROJECTS WHERE THE CITY IS OWNING AND CONSTRUCTING AND OPERATING THOSE AND LOCKING IN THAT CAPITAL COST AND LOCKING IN THAT DEBT SERVICE UP FRONT. THAT PAYMENT IS STAYING THE SAME. SO THAT ANNUAL INCREASE INDEXED TO CPI IS ONLY BEING APPLIED TO THE OpEx FOR THE 30 YEARS AFTER THAT INITIAL UPFRONT PAYMENT. NOW, I THINK IT ALSO NEEDS TO BE SAID THAT FOR THOSE OTHER PROJECTS WHERE THERE'S A SEPARATE ENTITY THAT'S CARRYING THE CAPITAL, THE COST OF THAT CAPITAL, THEY'RE DOING SO AND THERE'S A COST TO THAT CAPITAL BUT THEY'RE STILL PASSING ON THE COST OF CAPITAL TO THE CITY WITHIN THAT RATE. AND BECAUSE THE FULL WATER RATE IS SUBJECT TO THAT ANNUAL INCREASE. AGAIN, IT STARTS TO RUN AWAY FROM THE OTHER ONES AS YOU GET FURTHER AND FURTHER DOWN THE LINE. SO YOU HAVE THAT COMPOUNDING ANNUAL COST OF THAT INCREASE. LASTLY, JUST TO SORT OF CLEAN THIS UP, I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO SHOW IT WITH THE FOUR SCENARIOS THAT ARE ALL 24 MGD. JUST SO THAT IT'S LESS BUSY AND LESS TO LOOK AT. BUT THESE ARE REALLY THE COMPARISON OF THE FOUR DIFFERENT PROJECTS. SO, AGAIN, I MENTIONED TIMELINE FOR A COUPLE OF THEM. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUECES RIVER WELLS PROJECT, THE CITY PROJECT, AGAIN, WELLS ARE BEING DRILLED NOW. WATER IS GOING INTO THE RIVER NOW. SO THE TIMELINE ON PHASE ONE IS IMMEDIATE. PHASE 1A AND 1B IS IMMEDIATE. THE TIME IT TAKES TO IMPLEMENT ALL OF THAT CONVEYANCE, OBTAIN EASEMENTS, GET AN INJECTION WELL PERMIT, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT AND START UP AND COMMISSION A REVERSE OSMOSIS TREATMENT PLANT, PUTS THE BRACKISH WATER FACILITY FOR THE NUECES RIVER WELLS PROJECT INTO APPROXIMATELY MIDDLE OF 2028. SO, THE FINISH LINE FOR THAT TREATED WATER THAT WOULD GO DIRECTLY INTO THE DRINKING WATER SYSTEM IS A VERY SIMILAR FINISH LINE AS INNER HARBOR. FOR THE EVANGELINE PROJECT, THERE'S, AGAIN, THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THAT FIRST 12 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY QUICKLY BECAUSE OF THE CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE, BUT THE REALITY IS THERE'S A HUGE QUESTION MARK RELATED TO THE TRANSPORT PERMIT THAT COULD BE AS LITTLE AS SIX MONTHS. IT COULD BE AS LONG AS TWO YEARS. IT COULD BE LONGER DEPENDING ON HOW IT'S CONTESTED. THAT'S NOT ME SAYING THAT. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE CITY'S COUNSEL ON WATER RIGHTS, JASON HILL. SO THERE'S SOME QUESTION MARKS AROUND THAT. BUT IN THE 24 MILLION-GALLON PER DAY SCENARIO FOR EVANGELINE WHERE THERE IS A PARALLEL CONVEYANCE LINE, PARALLELLING THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE, BECAUSE NOT ALL 24 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY CAN GET INTO THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE AT ITS CURRENT CAPACITY. FOR THAT, THE TIMELINE IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE CITY'S PROJECT IN THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY FASTER THAN MIDDLE OF 2028. SO IT'S NOT AN IMMEDIATE QUICK FIX. AND ONE LAST THING I'LL MENTION IS THE CITY'S PROJECT HAS A $30 MILLION GRANT FROM THE STATE THAT WE JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT. I'M REPRESENTING HERE WHAT WAS IN OUR REPORT FROM MAY. SO THESE NUMBERS ACTUALLY DON'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT $30 MILLION THAT MAKES THE CITY'S PROJECT A LITTLE BIT LESS, $30 MILLION LESS COST TO THE CITY THAN WHAT'S PRESENTED HERE. I THINK THAT'S EVERYTHING. I WOULD OPEN IT UP TO ANY Q&A. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ. >> OKAY. JUST SOME QUESTIONS. YOU HAD MENTIONED THERE WERE SOME CAPACITY ISSUES WITH THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE ASSOCIATED WITH BRINGING IN GR A GROUNDWATR PROJECT. THERE WAS A STUDY ON THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE DONE IN 2011 THAT STATED THAT THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE WAS ABLE TO HAVE A CAPACITY OF 112 ACRE FEET A YEAR RIGHT? WHICH ROUGHLY EQUATES TO ABOUT 100 MILLION GALLONS. IS THAT NUMBER INCORRECT? >> NICK, DIRECTOR OF WATER SYSTEMS. SO, THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE, THE INFRASTRUCTURE RIGHT NOW IS PROVIDING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF WATER, WHICH IS 70 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE AT LAKE TEXANA, AT BLOOMINGTON, AND WOODSBORO. SO IF YOU LOOK AT, THEORETICALLY, THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT CAN BE PUMPED THROUGH THE PIPELINE IS DIFFERENT THAN THE INFRASTRUCTURE AVAILABLE. >> OKAY. SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT THE INITIAL DESIGN FOR THE 112 MILLION ACRE FEET A YEAR WAS INCORRECT? >> NOPE. >> WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? [ LAUGHING ] >> BECAUSE, IF I DO THE MATH ON THE 112 ACRE FEET A YEAR, THAT'S JUST SHY OF 100 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. >> I'M SAYING THE ORIGINAL DESIGN FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH -- NOT JUST THE PIPE, COUNCILMAN, IT'S THE PUMPING STATIONS AND THE BALANCING TANKS. THAT IS NOT DESIGNED FOR 100 MILLION GALLONS A DAY AND NEVER WAS. >> OKAY. SO, WHAT IS IT THAT NEEDS -- IF THE PIPE ITSELF CAN WITHSTAND IT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADD MORE PUMPS? IS IT DIFFERENT SECTIONS? IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE NOT GETTING THE FULL PICTURE. >> YEAH. I CAN GIVE YOU SOME OF THAT PICTURE. SO, IT'S SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE REDESIGN, RIGHT? IT'S MASSIVE DESIGN AT THE LAKE TEXANA PUMP STATION. AND THINK ABOUT THOSE -- THAT PIPING IS SIGNIFICANTLY DEEP AS IT TAKES WATER FROM THE LAKE -- FROM LAKE TEXANA ITSELF. YOU'VE GOT SIGNIFICANT REDESIGN AND UPGRADES OF BOTH OF THE PUMP STATIONS TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL PUMPING EQUIPMENT, ADDITIONAL HEADER PIPING, AND ADDITIONAL POWER. SO, WE'VE GOT -- THOSE PUMP STATIONS, ALL OF YOU KNOW THIS. WE DID MAKE POWER INCREASES JUST THIS YEAR TO ACCOMMODATE THE SPARE PUMPS THAT ARE GOING IN. BUT WE'RE GOING TO NEED ADDITIONAL PUMPS AND ADDITIONAL POWER TO THOSE STATIONS AS WELL. SO ALL OF THAT WAS IDENTIFIED IN OUR MOST RECENT CONDITION ASSESSMENT. BUT THEN ALSO WE NEED TO REMEMBER THAT THAT CONDITION ASSESSMENT, WE TOOK A REALLY CLOSE LOOK AT THE PRESSURES, THE OPERATING PRESSURES OF THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. AND WE FOUND THAT AT CERTAIN PUMPING SCHEDULES, THE ACTUAL PUMPING PRESSURES EXCEEDED THE RATING OF THE PIPE ITSELF. AND WE ALLEVIATED SOME OF THAT BY PUMPING AT A HIGHER SCHEDULE, SCHEDULE FOUR. AND WHEN YOU -- THAT'S ALL GOING TO HAVE TO BE RESTUDIED. ALL OF THAT WAS DONE AT A MAXIMUM SCHEDULE FOUR OR 70 MILLION GALLONS A DAY PUMPING CAPACITY. WHERE IT GETS REALLY COMPLICATED IS YES, WE CAN ADD 12 MILLION GALLONS A DAY INTO THE PIPELINE. BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT'S GOOD AT SCHEDULE FOUR. IF WE HAVE EVER HAVE TO GO BACK TO SCHEDULE THREE, WE START SEEING THOSE PRESSURE EXCEEDENCES AGAIN. AND THEY'RE AT A LITTLE HIGHER MAGNITUDE THAN WHAT WE HAD BEFORE, BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL VOLUME OF WATER INTRODUCED TO THE PIPELINE. >> OKAY. SO IF I CAN DECIPHER WHAT YOU SAID, THAT THERE IS THE CAPACITY WITHIN THE PIPELINE, . IT'S JUST THE WAY THE PUMPS ARE DESIGNED FOR HOW IT'S SET UP CURRENTLY, YOU CAN'T GO BEYOND 70 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. >> WELL, LET ME FURTHER CLARIFY. YOU KNOW, PIPE HAS A LIFESPAN, TOO. WE DID THE CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE AT 25 YEARS FOR PHASE ONE. THAT PIPE IS NOT IN THE SAME CONDITION IT WAS WHEN IT WAS INSTALLED. AND WE KNOW THAT FROM THE AMOUNT OF FAILURES AND BREAKS THAT WE'VE HAD ON THE PIPELINE AND THE LEAKS WE'VE HAD TO ADDRESS, JOINT FAILURES, AND THE PERT IPERTINENCE FAILURES. YOU'D BE PUTTING MORE STRAIN ON THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. WE DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE SET UP. THAT ALONE IS A BEING DESIGN PROJECT. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT SIZE WET WELLS, REDO THE BALANCING TANK ANALYSIS, AND ON AND ON. IT'S A CASCADE OF DESIGN EVENTS. >> OKAY. BUT YOU ARE SAYING THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET IT TO A HIGHER VOLUME. MAYBE ADDED AT DIFFERENT PLACES, MAYBE AFTER THE WOODSBORO PUMPING STATION TO ADD THE ADDITIONAL -- MY MATH, 20 SOME MILLION GALLONS A DAY. >> WELL, ADDING 12 AT THE DREADSON LOCATION WILL INCREASE THE PRESSURES ALONG THE PIPELINE, JUST THE 12. SO WE WILL BE SEEING THOSE INCREASED PRESSURES AT VARIOUS POINTS ALONG THE PIPELINE. >> BEFORE OR AFTER THE DRESSING CUTOFF? OBVIOUSLY YOU'VE GOT WATER GOING TO THE WATER DISTRICT AND STEEL DYNAMICS. >> YEAH. SO AFTER STEEL DYNAMICS AND SAN PAT TAKE OFF, WE STILL SEE INCREASED PRESSURES. WE HAD HDR MODEL THAT AS PART OF OUR CONDITION ASSESSMENT. >> OKAY. SO I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE LEAVING SOME CAPACITY OFF OF THERE. >> IT'S A BIG DESIGN PROJECT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE WITH INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AT MULTIPLE LOCATIONS. AND ADDITIONALLY, WITH THE PRESSURE EXCEEDENCES WE IDENTIFIED AREAS WHERE WE THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS DEBRIS -- POSSIBLY DEBRIS IN THE LINE. AND AT THAT POINT, WE WANTED TO INSTALL PARALLEL PIPING. THE UNFORTUNATE THING IS YOU CAN'T TAKE THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE DOWN TO INVESTIGATE THAT. >> OKAY. THE OTHER THING IS ON -- AND THIS IS FOR GARVER. THE QUESTION ON SOME OF THE CALCULATIONS YOU DID. I KNOW IT'S A NAPKIN MATH KIND OF ESTIMATE. I THINK I'LL WAIT FOR SOME OF THE PRESENTATIONS, OR SOME OF THE INFORMATION FROM THE ACTUAL ORGANIZATIONS. AND WE HAVEN'T FINISHED NEGONEGOTIATING WITH EVANGELINEN TERMS OF THEIR WATER COST. WE HAVEN'T FINISHED NEGOTIATED WITH SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY ON WHAT THAT COULD LOOK LIKE. MAYBE IT COULD BE A JOINT OWNERSHIP OF THIS. IF YOUR HANGUP IS NOT OWNING ASSETS, THAT COULD BE NEGOTIATED. DON'T CLOSE THE DOOR ON ANY KIND OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH REGARDS TO THAT PROJECT. SO, SIMILAR TO SOME OTHER PROJECTS THAT I'VE BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILWOMAN PAXON. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. LOTS OF GREAT INFORMATION. I KNOW WE REFERENCED THAT IN A POINT A LITTLE EARLIER THIS EVENING, BUT THIS PUTS IT OUT IN A REALLY USER-FRIENDLY TABLE. SO THANK YOU FOR DOING THE WORK ON THAT. MOST OF MY QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED IN THE LAST QUESTION. HOWEVER, I STILL DON'T SEE THIS PRESENTATION LISTED ON -- AND THIS IS PROBABLY MORE FOR DREW. I DON'T SEE THE PRESENTATION LISTED ONLINE UNDER THE AGENDA ITEM FOR TODAY FOR THIS SPECIFIC ITEM? >> WE'LL MAKE SURE IT'S OUT. WE'LL PUT IT OUT SO EVERYBODY CAN SEE IT. YOU BET. >> IS THAT PROBABLY BY LUNCHTIME TOMORROW? >> WE'LL DO IT FIRST THING IN THE MORNING. WE COULD PROBABLY DO IT RIGHT NOW. WE CAN SEND AN EMAIL TO THE TEAM TO GET IT LOADED UP THERE. >> I APPRECIATE IT. I THINK THIS IS REALLY GREAT INFORMATION. SO, THAT WAS MY BIG THING. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMAN SCOTT. >> SO, WE STARTED THE PERMITTING PROCESS ON THE CITY WELLS? HAS THAT PERMIT -- SOMEBODY SAID SUMMER OF '28. IS THAT THE DESAL -- >> THAT'S THE DESAL WORK. >> OKAY. >> YEAH, THAT'S TREATING THE WATER AND PUTTING IT DIRECTLY INTO THE DRINKING WATER SYSTEM. RIGHT NOW THE WATER IS BEING PUT INTO THE RIVER AND THEN SOME OF THAT WATER IS ABLE TO BE WITHDRAWN INTO THE OWEN STEVENS WATER TREATMENT PLANT. >> HAVE YOU FILED FOR THE PERMIT? WHEN DO WE START THAT? BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING YOU THINK '28, SUMMER OF '28 WHEN THAT'S -- >> CAN I JUST ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE PERMIT TO BE ABLE TO PUT THE WATER IN, OR THE INJECTION WELL PERMIT? >> INJECTION WELL. >> WE'RE WORKING WITH TCEQ ON THAT RIGHT NOW. >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. BUT YOU'RE STILL -- >> IF I COULD ADD ONE MORE THING ABOUT THE PERMIT. SO, THE WATER WELLS ARE PRODUCING IN THE RIVER AS PART OF THE BANKS PERMIT. IF WE MOVE TO PHASE TWO, PHASE 2A AND PHASE 2B, THE WATER WELLS ALSO WILL THEN HAVE TO BE PERMITTED THROUGH TCEQ. SO WE HAVE TO GET -- BECAUSE THAT'S A NEW WATER SUPPLY FOR THE CITY. SO THERE'S NEW WATER SUPPLY PERMITTING WITH TCEQ. >> I GUESS WHAT MADE ME THINK ABOUT IT WAS, HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO PERMIT AND HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO BUILT THE FACILITY? IT'S GOT TO BE A PRETTY FAST OPERATION RIGHT? BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING SUMMER OF '28 IT COULD BE ONLINE. >> SO, WITH REGARDS TO THE PERMITTING, GETTING PERMITS FOR NEW WATER WELLS IS NOT TREMENDOUSLY -- IT'S NOT A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME. THE INJECTION WELL PERMIT DEPENDS ON WHETHER THEY ARE GOING TO PERMIT IT UNDER THE GENERAL PERMIT FOR CLASS ONE WELLS, SINCE THIS IS NON-HAZARDOUS AND IT'S FOR DRINKING WATER. IT'LL BE VERY QUICK. IF IT HAS TO BE PERMITTED AS CLASS FOUR OR FIVE, WHICH WE DON'T THINK, IT'S LONGER. IT'S NOT AN EXCEEDINGLY LONG PERIOD OF TIME. THAT'S NOT THE CRITICAL PATH ITEM ON THIS. THE CRITPAL PATH ITEM ON THAT PROJECT IS POWER. FLATLY, IT'S GETTING ENOUGH POWER TO THE SITE. >> ALL RIGHT. >> AND THAT'S TRUE OF THE EVANGELINE PROJECT, THE BIGGEST QUESTION MARK WITH EVANGELINE IS BEING ABLE TO GET ENOUGH POWER TO THE SITE TO DEVELOP THE WELL,FIELD THAT'S CURRENTLY -- >> AND THE TRANSPORT PERMIT. >> YEAH, THAT'S ALSO A VERY BIG QUESTION MARK. >> IS SOMEBODY GOING TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON CODY HILL'S BILLS THAT HE'S INTRODUCED THIS WEEK AND ITS IMPACT ON GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS' ABILITY TO . . . IS HE NEXT, RIGHT AFTER THIS? OKAY. THAT'S FINE. [ LAUGHING ] >> YEAH. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. AND SO YOU'RE THINKING IF WE GET THE TRANSPORT PERMIT AGREEMENT, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, IT'S SUMMER OF '28 ALSO FOR THE EVANGELINE? >> YEAH, AT THE SOONEST. THE REALITY IS IT JUST DEPENDS HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET THAT THATTRANSPORT PERMIT. THERE'S A FAIRLY GOOD LIKELIHOOD IT WILL BE CONTESTED, WHICH MEANS THE CITY COULD END UP WITH A PERMIT FOR LESS THAN THE 25 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY, OR IT COULD JUST BE A PROTRACTED PERIOD OF TRYING TO OBTAIN THAT TRANSPORT PERMIT. IS THAT FAIR? >> YEAH. >> AND IF WE'RE GOING TO DO MORE GROUND WELLS, WHY WOULDN'T WE SEEK A GROUND WELL LOCATION IN NUECES COUNTY? THAT'S WHAT SOUTH TEXAS -- WOULE OPEN TO CONVERSATIONS WITH OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE BIG CHUNKS OF LAND THAT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN US DRI -- DRILLING ON THEIR PROPERTY? LET'S BE OPEN TO THAT. >> I WOULD SAY YES. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALL NEED TO RECOGNIZE IS THAT -- RYAN'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS IN A LITTLE BIT. BUT GROUNDWATER IS NOT NECESSARILY RISK-FREE. THERE ARE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH GETTING GROUNDWATER. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE RISKS OF NOT GETTING A TRANSPORT PERMIT. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE RISKS OF GOING TO A DIFFERENT COUNTY WITH A DIFFERENT DISTRICT. AND RURAL COMMUNITIES IN THOSE PARTS OF THE COUNTY HAVING AN ISSUE WITH THAT WATER COMING ACROSS A DISTRICT TO A PLACE LIKE THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. SO, THERE ARE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. WE KNOW THAT PERMITS TAKE TIME. AND WE'VE SEEN THAT FIRST-HAND WITH THE PERMITS THAT WE HAVE ACHIEVED ON THE INNER HARBOR PROJECT. SO, I THINK IT'S EASY FOR SOME OF US TO TRY TO PREDICT HOW LONG THESE PERMITS ARE GOING TO TAKE, BUT IT'S HARD TO PREDICT. WE OFTENTIMES SAY IT TAKES LONGER THAN WHAT IS ORIGINALLY ANTICIPATED. AND EACH ONE OF THESE PROJECTS HAS A PERMIT THAT WE HAVE TO GET. >> RIGHT. AND SO NONE OF THESE ARE COMING ON BEFORE SUMMER OF '28. IS THAT YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION? >> WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT IT INTERNALLY. I THINK IT'S A TALL TASK. >> TO GET ON -- >> BEFORE -- I WOULD SAY JUNE OF 2028. >> GOT IT. >> I THINK THE EVANGELINE -- AT LEAST THE 12 MGD, IF WE'RE FORTUNATE AND WE G GET A TRANSPT PERMIT RELATIVELY QUICKLY. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT'S GOING TO TAKE. AND IT'S NOT CONTESTED. WE'VE GOT POWER THAT WE HAVE TO GET OUT THERE. THERE'S POWER THAT HAS TO BE RUN. THAT POWER IS A BIG, CRITICAL PATH ITEM FOR ANY PROJECT. >> YEAH. >> YOU'VE GOT WELLS THAT YOU HAVE TO DRILL. IT TAKES MONTHS AND MONTHS TO DRILL THESE WELLS. THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT YOU HAVE TO PUT IN IS SIGNIFICANT. PIPING, YOU HAVE TO BURY IT. WE WANT TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. WE WANT TO PUT TELEMETRY SO WE CAN RUN THESE FACILITIES. WE DON'T WANT TO PUT THIS IN HAPHAZARDLY WHERE YOU'RE HAVING TO DO A TON OF MANUAL WORK TO OPERATE THESE WELLFIELDS. AND THE OTHER PART IS WE HAVE TO TIE IT INTO THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. AND THAT'S A DELICATE SURGICAL PROCEDURE, BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T IMPACT ANY OF WHAT MARY RHODES PIPELINE IS DOING. >> SO WHAT WOULD BE -- DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE ON 12 MGD FROM EVANGELINE? >> YOU KNOW, WE'VE POW WOWED THIS OUT AND WE THINK IT'S 28. >> GOT IT. >> WE THINK IT'S '28. >> 12 OR 24, IT'S '28. >> IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 24, IT'S GOING TO BE EVERY BIT OF '28 BECAUSE AT LEAST THE REPORTS THAT WE'VE GOT AND THE ANALYSIS THAT NICK HAS TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE PRESSURES ASSOCIATED, WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT A PARALLEL PIPELINE IN. THAT'S BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE SEEN, WE'VE LOOKED AT, HDR HAS LOOKED AT THAT. THEY'VE ADVISED A PARALLEL PIPELINE TO GET THE FULL 24 DOWN TO OWEN STEVENS. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMAN PERERA. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I GUESS A COUPLE OF THINGS. SO, COULD YOU PUT BACK UP THE DRASTIC -- GRAPHIC THAT HAD THE PRICE SCHEDULE AND COMPARISON AT 24 MGD? OKAY. SO, A COUPLE THINGS. SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY -- AND THE NUECES RIVER WELLS. SO, IF WE'RE PUMPING OUT 24 MGD AND WE'RE GOING TO BE -- IT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH BRACKISH WATER RO, HOW MUCH WATER ARE WE PULLING OUT OF THE RIVER? >> WELL, OUT OF THE GROUND. >> OF THE GROUND. >> THESE COSTS ARE FOR 24 MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF TREATED WATER. SO IT'S ABOUT -- IT WOULD BE ABOUT 15% HIGHER FOR THE NUECES RIVER WELLS PROJECT, WE'RE ANTICIPATING CONSERVATIVELY AN 85% RECOVERY RATE. EVANGELINE, AGAIN, WOULD BE POTENTIALLY AN EVEN HIGHER RECOVERY RATE BECAUSE IT HAS LESS -- >> SO FOR THE NUECES RIVER -- SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY 36 IS WHAT WE'RE PULLING OUT, OF THE WELLS? >> 15 -- 1-5. >> I'M FIGURING -- ABOUT 27. >> 27 MILLION GALLONS. >> SAME THING WITH SOUTH TEXAS WATER AUTHORITY, 27. >> WE DON'T KNOW THE WATER QUALITY FOR THE STW WELLS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THAT INFORMATION. >> OKAY. AND I'M JUST CURIOUS. HAVE WE THOUGHT ABOUT CALCULATING -- YOU DON'T HAVE T. HAVE WE THOUGHT ABOUT CALCULATING THE COST OF 24 MGD WITH THE DESAL FACILITY JUST SO THAT WAY WE CAN HAVE -- IS THERE A WAY TO DO THAT? >> DON'T WANT TO SAY YES OR NO. >> ALL RIGHT. >> IT IS A DIFFICULT THING, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DESIGN. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR KEYWOOD IF THEY CAN GET SOME NUMBER. >> IF WE COULD FIND THAT OUT. AND THE OTHER THING, DREW -- SO, YOU KNOW, ALL DAY LONG -- I HEARD JASON CONKLIN SAY THAT SINCE THEY BEGAN THE DESIGN, THE CONSTRUCTION COST HAS ALREADY COME DOWN 200 MILLION. YES? YOU'RE SAYING THAT AFFIRMATIVE? >> WE'VE -- >> TAKE DOWN THIS -- THE GRAPHIC NOW SO WE CAN JUST LOOK AT DREW. OR ME. I LOOK SURPRISINGLY FRESH. [ LAUGHING ] >> I MOISTURIZE. [ LAUGHING ] >> SO, YEAH. JASON CONKLIN, I HEARD HIM SAY THAT SINCE IT BEGAN THE PRICE HAS GONE DOWN 200 MILLION. >> RIGHT. >> SO, I KNOW WE'VE -- THEY CAME AND MADE A PRESENTATION. SO, IS THERE A WAY WHEN YOU FIGURE OUT THIS CALCULATION THAT I HAD SUGGESTED, THAT IF WE GET DOWN TO 1.1 BILLION, DOWN TO 1 BILLION, YOU TELL ME RIGHT NOW 1.2 BILLION IT'S $1.89 PER THOUSAND GALLONS. THAT'S THE RATE IMPACT BUT NOT THE COST. I'D LIKE TO SEE BOTH. >> THE COST WAS A LITTLE BIT OVER $9. >> YEAH. >> BUT I DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT ON ME. >> THAT'S FOR 36 MGD, A LITTLE BIT OVER $9. >> 30. >> 30 MGD, AND WHAT IS IT, 1.89. I'D LIKE TO SEE A HYPOTHETICAL FOR, YOU KNOW, 1.1 BILLION AND 1 BILLION. IF IT GOES BELOW THAT I'M SURE WE'LL BALANCE THAT OUT. ALL THIS OTHER STUFF -- I HATE TO MAKE MORE WORK FOR YOU. BUT I JUST -- I HOPE IT HELPS MY COLLEAGUES LOOK AT -- WE ALL TALK ABOUT PEOPLE ON A FIXED INCOME OR WHATEVER. I'M JUST HOPING THAT IT HELPS MY COLLEAGUES TO MAKE A DECISION SO THAT WAY THEY KNOW. BECAUSE WHEN YOU HEAR $1.2 BILLION, BASED ON THE AWASSUMPTIONS THAT STWA GAVE US, OVER 30 YEARS, $3 BILLION. I THINK EVANGELINE LOOKS GOOD, IT'S JUST WE'VE GOT A LOT OF HURDLES TO COVER VERSUS THE PERMITS. I GO BACK TO DESALINATION. WE'RE FULLY PERMITTED. SOMEBODY MADE A COMMENT, YOU KNOW. AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT HE KEPT IT CLEAN. WHAT IS IT. THAT YOU DIDN'T KNOW THE INFORMATION. YOU KNEW THAT WE HAD THE PERMIT. YOU KNEW THAT WE HAD THE DISCHARGE PERMIT. SOMEBODY DISPUTED IT. IT WAS LIKE, LET ME CONFIRM. SO WE CONFIRMED RIGHT AWAY. WE KNEW WE HAD THAT PERMIT. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS HIM, BUT SOMEBODY ELSE SAID THAT. BUT -- NO >> Barrera: BUT ANYWAY, MY DEAL IS I JUST WANT TO COMPARE THE COST BECAUSE THAT WAS, AS I SAID, THE VERY PLEASANT CONVERSATION I HAD WITH COUNCILMEMBER VAUGHN. SHE TOLD ME THAT WAS HER BIGGEST CONCERN. I WANT TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN. I'M GOING TO CALL HER TOMORROW AND DO A LAUNDRY LIST AND SIT WITH HER AND FOLLOW HER AROUND AND SAY, OKAY, TELL ME ABOUT THIS. TELL ME ABOUT THIS. IF I CAN GET ALL THIS ANSWERED FOR YOU, I WANT YOU TO FEEL AS COMFORTABLE AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF A VERY IMPORTANT DECISION. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Guajardo: COUNCILWOMAN VAUGHN. >> Vaughn: I DON'T HAVE ANY CONVERSATION. THAT WAS A GREAT PRESENTATION. I THINK WE WOULD ALL LIKE A COPY OF THAT AND I DO HAVE A QUESTION WITH YOU. REALLY A COMMENT, JUST SO IT'S OUT IN THE FRONT. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE RIVER WELLS. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THEY ARE TEMPORARY. THIS IS FOR AN EMERGENCY AND WE CAN USE THEM AND YOU CAN TURN THEM OFF WHEN YOU NEED TO SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE RURAL AREAS. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT OUT FRONT. >> Molly: I'LL SAY IT ON THE RECORD, EVERY ONE OF THESE GROUND PROJECTS IS GOING TO HAVE SOME RISK, IF YOU GO TO SINTON WE'RE GOING TO HAVE RISK. IF WE GO TO DRISCOLL, 30 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY, THERE ARE FOLKS WHO ARE GOING TO HAVE RISK. I THINK WHAT'S IMPERATIVE WE LOOK AT ALL THESE PROJECTS FOR THE RISKS THEY PRESENT. I CAN TELL YOU FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE HAVE ACTIVE MONITORING WELLS ON THE GROUNDWATER WELLS WE DRILL TO DATE, WE MONITOR THAT. WE HAVE A WELL DESIGN THAT'S BEEN PERFORMED BY A HYDROGEOLOGIST THAT'S WELL RESPECTED IN THE INDUSTRY. THOSE ARE ALL THE KINDS OF THINGS WE NEED TO DO BUT I WILL TELL YOU GROUNDWATER HAS SOME RISKS. >> Vaughn: AND I KNOW THAT. I KNOW THAT BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE RURAL AREAS AS I WAS FROM THE GET-GO AND THAT IS NUECES COUNTY THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. I APPRECIATE THAT. I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE HAVE EVANGELINE IN THE AUDIENCE, HE'S BEEN SITTING HERE ALL DAY LONG FOR QUESTIONS. CAN WE BRING HIM UP? >> Mayor Guajardo: SURE. >> Vaughn: LYLE. I WOULDN'T HAVE STAYED ALL DAY BUT HE DID. >> Mayor Guajardo: I THINK HE WANTED TO LISTEN IN ON THE CONVERSATION. >> Vaughn: HE DID. INTRODUCE YOURSELF. >> MY NAME IS LYLE LARSON. >> Vaughn: I KNOW. THANK YOU FOR BEING SO PATIENT AND STAYING. I'M THINKING SOME OF US HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU. I'LL HIT YOU WITH ONE. THE TRANSPORT PERMIT. >> YOUR MOST DIFFICULT PERMIT TO GET IS YOUR PRODUCTION PERMITS. THEY'RE ALREADY OBTAINED. A TRANSFER PERMIT IS JUST A FORMALITY AN ALL OF THE GROUNDWATER TRANSPORT PROJECTS, THE MORE DIFFICULT ASPECT IS PROVING UP THE HYDROGEOLOGY SO THEY CAN EQUATE HOW MUCH WATER YOU CAN EXTRACT FROM THE GROUND. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PREOCCUPATION ON THE TRANSPORT PERMIT. THAT IS NOT AN ISSUE. THE VISTA RIDGE PROJECT, THEY HAD TO GO THROUGH EXTENSIVE TESTING ON THE WATER, DETERMINE HOW MUCH WAS AVAILABLE. BUT THE TRANSFER PERMIT, THAT WASN'T THE ISSUE. I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE THEY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ANOTHER DISTRICT BUT WE'VE TALKED TO SAN PAT COUNTY'S LAWYER IN AUSTIN. THEY INDICATED THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE. >> Vaughn: OKAY. >> Mayor Guajardo: YEAH, CAN WE -- >> Vaughn: Y'ALL WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? >> I WANT TO ADD A COMMENT, LYLE. SO ESTEBAN AND I WERE AT THE LAST SAN PAT GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION MEETING AND ONE THING THAT THEIR DIRECTOR TOLD US IS THEY WOULD ADD SPECIAL PROVISIONS TO TRANSPORT PERMITS. POTENTIALLY LIMITING THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT WE CAN MOVE. >> AND THE PORT ITSELF HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO THAT. SO THERE IS GOING TO BE CONTROVERSY AND QUESTIONS IN REGARD TO TRANSFER PERMIT. AND EVERYBODY LIKES TO SAY IT'S EASY BUT, AGAIN, THERE'S ALREADY QUESTIONS COMING FROM THE BOARD. THERE'S ALREADY QUESTIONS COMING FROM THE LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT SO THERE'S A LOT OF UNKNOWNS THAT WE'VE STARTED TO DELVE INTO. SO IT'S NOT A SIMPLE PROCESS, AS PEOPLE LIKE TO STATE. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY, ALL THIS TRANSPARENCY AND UP FRONT. >> Vaughn: AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT. >> YEAH. I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY YOU HAVE HEARD THAT SINCE THE GET-GO THAT THAT WAS AN ISSUE. SURE. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO CONTEST IT. THERE'S PEOPLE ON THE BOARD AND ALL ACROSS THE STATE IN GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS YOU HAVE PEOPLE VERY PAROCHIAL. THEY WANT TO PROTECT THEIR WATER. BUT THAT'S NOT THEIR WATER, IT'S THE LANDOWNERS' WATER. THE PEOPLE THAT OWN THE LAND, THE WATER UNDERNEATH IT, JUST LIKE THE OIL, IS OWNED BY THEM. THE GROUNDWATER DISTRICT FOLKS ARE JUST SUPPOSED TO LOOK AND MODEL THE WATER THAT'S GOING TO BE AVAILABLE. SO THERE'S A LOT OF OVERREACH AND MOST OF THEM HAVE BEEN SLAPPED DOWN THROUGH STATE LAW CASES. AND SO I DON'T SEE THAT AS AN ISSUE. AND I'VE SEEN THAT SINCE I GOT INVOLVED ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO, THAT'S THE BOOGEYMAN THAT STAFF KEEPS THROWING UP. THAT'S WHY WE WENT DIRECTLY TO THE LAWYER IN AUSTIN TO ASK HIM. I WOULD ASK YOUR STAFF TO TALK TO GREG ELLIS ABOUT IT DIRECTLY INSTEAD OF HAVING CONJECTURE THAT THE BOARD MIGHT HAVE SOME ISSUES. YES. THERE WILL BE BOARD MEMBERS THAT WILL OPPOSE IT BUT THE LAW STATES CLEARLY THAT THEY HAVE TO RELEASE THAT. THAT'S NOT THEIR WATER. IF WE'RE IN RUSSIA, MAYBE SO, BUT NOT IN TEXAS. THE WELDER FAMILY OWNS THIS WATER. I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING Y'ALL ARE DOING TODAY. I SERVED ON A CITY COUNCIL FOR FOUR YEARS AND COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR 12 YEARS. STATE REP FOR 12 YEARS. AND SITTING HERE FOR 11 HOURS, I'M EXPERIENCING JOMO. THE JOY OF MISSING OUT. BECAUSE THIS IS -- WHAT Y'ALL WENT THROUGH AND THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE ACROSS THE STATE IN WATER, I'M A BIG PROPONENT OF SEAWATER DESAL. NOBODY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS KNOWS AS MUCH ABOUT SEAWATER DESAL THAN I DO. I'VE GONE ALL OVER THE WORLD. I APPRECIATE Y'ALL LOOKING AT IT. AND THE EXPERIENCE YOU'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW, A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE DEALT WITH THIS TWO YEARS AGO. AND I'VE GONE TO PERTH AND BEEN TO MELBOURNE, TAMPA BAY, BEEN TO THE ONE IN SAN DIEGO THREE TIMES, SANTA BARBARA. THE SOCIAL LICENSE THAT Y'ALL NEEDED TO ACQUIRE THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD AGREE TO IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BOUGHT TWO YEARS AGO. Y'ALL ARE TRYING TO BUY IT AFTER THE FACT AND THAT'S A PROBLEM. IT COSTS YOU A LOT MORE MONEY. IF WE WOULD HAVE KNOWN THE OPPOSITION, YOU PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BUILT BARNEY DAVIS. YOU WOULDN'T HAVE BUILT INNER HARBOR BECAUSE YOU COULD HAVE TAKEN THAT WATER TO THE GULF. BUT IT'S LESSONS LEARNED. WE'RE SO FAR INTO THIS PROJECT, THAT PROJECT, THAT'S WHAT THEY DO IN ISRAEL. THAT'S WHAT THEY DO IN AUSTRALIA. THEY DON'T PUT IT IN A BAY SYSTEM. THE ONE PERTH HAS IS RELEASED IN A SOUND. VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONE WE HAVE IN CORPUS BUT WORLDWIDE, THEY GO OUT IN THE OCEAN AND THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING HERE. BUT Y'ALL ARE $146 MILLION INTO THIS PROJECT -- >> Vaughn: WE DON'T WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT. >> I'M JUST SAYING BUT THE CHALLENGES -- MARK, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IT. THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE STATEWIDE IS BEING REPLICATED RIGHT HERE IN CORPUS. Y'ALL ARE ON SURFACE WATER AND WE HAVE A LOT OF COMPRESSION ON OUR SURFACE WATER RIGHT NOW. WE'RE OVERPRESCRIBED. IT'S NOT A DROUGHT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DECATTLE MODEL OVER THE LAST 100 YEARS, WE'RE LOSING ONE INCH OF RAINFALL PER DECADE STATEWIDE. AND SO IT'S NOT AN ANOMALY RIGHT NOW THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH. THIS IS THE WAY IT'S GOING TO BE. SO YOUR INVENTORY IN THE LAKES ARE FALLEN. YOU CAN SEE THE CANOPY OF VEGETATION IS CHANGING AND IT GOES FROM I-35 WEST DOWN IN SOUTH TEXAS. SO ALL OF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO SUSTAIN ITSELF. I MEAN, WE GET A HURRICANE, STARTS EVAPORATING THE NEXT DAY AND YOU'RE GOING TO BE BACK IN THE SAME SITUATION YOU'RE IN. I LOVE THE SUSTAINABLE SOURCES. SEAWATER DESAL, GROUNDWATER. THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED TO FOCUS ON. AND I WOULD OWN IT INSTEAD OF LEASING THE WATER. IF YOU CAN. I WOULDN'T BE INVOLVED IN EVANGELINE RIGHT NOW IF THEY'RE TRYING TO LEASE THE DEAL TO YOU. AND I TOLD PETER AND DREW THAT IF YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO OWN THIS ASSET, WHAT THE GARVER GENTLEMAN DIDN'T SAY IS YEAR 31. YOU OWN THE WATER. YOU OWE NOTHING ON IT. THAT'S GENERATIONAL IMPACT. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED TO PUT YOURSELF IN A SITUATION. THE BIGGEST ISSUE WITH SEAWATER DESAL AND BRACKISH DESAL, WE HAVEN'T GONE 30 YEARS TO SEE WHAT THE PLANT CONDITION IS GOING TO BE LIKE. HIGHLY CORROSIVE MATERIAL. WE ALREADY KNOW BY HAVING TO REPLACE THE FILTERS IN THE BRACKISH DESAL PLANT IN BROWNSVILLE, IT'S EVERY TEN YEARS. AND THEY'VE DONE EVERYTHING THEY COULD TO INSULATE THEMSELVES FROM THAT. I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE A GROUP DOWN IN TWO OR THREE WEEKS TO LOOK AT THAT. I THINK Y'ALL NEED TO BUILD YOUR OWN BRACKISH GROUNDWATER FIELD SOMETIME OR IN THE FUTURE. DON'T LET SOMEBODY ELSE BUILD IT. DO IT YOURSELF. YOU KNOW, AND I THINK IF BROWNSVILLE IS DOING IT, WE GOT 41 OF THEM IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. Y'ALL NEED TO ADD THAT TO THE LIST. THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY I'D DO DIFFERENT ON THE SEAWATER DESAL, LET THE PRIVATE SECTOR BUILD IT. THAT'S HOW THEY'RE ALL DONE. IN ISRAEL, I TALKED TO A GUY NAMED JOE ADAME, HE WAS YOUR FORMER MAYOR ABOUT 10 OR 11 YEARS AGO. AND I WENT TO ISRAEL AFTER THAT AND I TOLD HIM, YEAH, THIS CITY IN TEXAS, CORPUS CHRISTI IS GOING TO BUILD THEIR OWN. THEY ALL STARTED LAUGHING. THEY GO, THEY'RE WILLING TO TAKE ALL THAT RISK? AND THE RISK OF DESIGNING IT, DEVELOPING IT, AND RUNNING IT, DO THEY REALIZE WHAT THEY'RE GETTING INTO? AND WHEN HE SAID THAT -- AND ALL THE OTHER PLANTS I WENT WERE DONE BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND THEN IT WAS CO-OPERATED BY THE COMMUNITY. SO GET SOMEBODY TO BUILD IT. Y'ALL CO-OPERATE IT AND THEN THEY HAND YOU THE ASSET IN 30 YEARS. IT'S A WHOLE LOT LESS RISK ASSOCIATED WITH IT. AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE GET TO THAT POINT. >> Vaughn: OKAY. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU ONE MORE QUICK QUESTION BECAUSE THERE'S SEVERAL OTHERS. THE QUALITY AND THE QUANTITY. I MET WITH DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES YESTERDAY AND THE THING THAT I HEARD FROM TWO DIFFERENT ONES WAS THEY HAD LOOKED AT IT. IT WAS THE QUALITY ONE SAID AND THE OTHER QUANTITY. WHEN THEY SAID THAT WE KNEW THEY DIDN'T WANT THE PROJECT TO GO THROUGH HERE BECAUSE THEY FELT IT WAS GOING TO BE A COMPETITION WITH DESAL BUT IT'S NOT. TELL ME ABOUT YOUR WATER. >> EVANGELINE? >> Vaughn: YES, EVANGELINE. >> IT MEETS THE DRINKING WATER STANDARD. THEY ARE CHLORINATED IN SINTON. YOU'LL OWN THAT WATER FOR 100 YEARS. IF YOU LOOK AT WELLFIELDS. THE BOOGEYMAN IS THEY'RE GOING TO DO CURTAILMENTS. YES, EVERY GROUNDWATER DISTRICT, IF YOU HAVE HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE THAT IS REDUCED AROUND THESE WELLHEADS THEN YOU CAN MANAGE IT YOURSELF AND CURTAIL SOME OF THE PUMPING. IF YOU GOT A LOT OF SURFACE WATER, THEN YOU MANAGE THAT FIELD BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO OWN IT. BUT I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT HAPPENING BECAUSE AFTER 40 YEARS THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY ISSUES WITH THAT. YOU'VE GOT A PRETTY SOPHISTICATED ANALYSIS WHERE THEY GAVE YOU 28,486-ACRE FEET OF WATER THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GENERATE 25.5 MILLION GALLONS OF WATER OUT OF. THE COST, AGAIN, THE GARVER GENTLEMAN, THE COST WE HAD AT $400 MILLION TAKING IT TO THE DRESSEN PIPELINE. THAT WAS A PAPE-DAWSON ASSESSMENT. YOU'RE PAYING TO THE WATER. THEY REDUCE THE WATER TO YOU, THE FAMILY DID, AND ED AND BRUCE, OF $30 MILLION. WE HAVE A COST OF 436. THEY HAVE A COST A LITTLE BIT NORTH OF 6 OR $7. I THINK YOU NEED TO RECONCILE THOSE NUMBERS. NOT CERTAIN HOW THEY GOT THAT. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE SAME CAPX AND ALL THE REST OF IT. YEAH, YOU PROBABLY OUGHT TO LOOK AT THAT. BUT THE ONLY PROBLEMS, AGAIN, THE WELLS THAT YOU'RE DRILLING, BE CONCERNED ABOUT SUBSIDENCE. I TOLD DREW YOU NEED TO GO TO THE HARRIS/GALVESTON SUBSIDENS DISTRICT, ALSO YOU WILL HAVE TO MITIGATE THE ISSUES OF DEGRADATION OF WATER IN THAT RIVER. I APPRECIATE WHAT HE'S DOING BUT BE CAREFUL NOT TO GET TOO GREEDY WITH THAT BECAUSE THERE COULD BE LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES THAT WE COULD NEVER WORK OURSELVES OUT OF. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. >> THANK Y'ALL. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. >> Mayor Guajardo: DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR HIM? COUNCILMAN HERNANDEZ. >> Hernandez: I KNOW HER DID THAT EVALUATION TWO YEARS AGO, AN UPDATED EVALUATION? >> Molly: YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MIXING? >> Hernandez: NO, FOR THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. >> Molly: YEAH, I THINK IT WAS ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. >> Hernandez: WHO WAS THE ENGINEER THAT DID THAT? >> Molly: JERRY SNEAD. >> Hernandez: IS THERE DOCUMENTATION ON IT? IS THERE A REPORT? >> YEAH. EXCUSE ME, SIR. NICK WINKLEMANN -- >> CHECK ME LIKE THAT. >> YES, COUNCILMAN. SO THE REPORT WAS COMPLETED A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN A YEAR AGO. IT'S IN DRAFT FORM. AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY IT'S IN DRAFT FORM IS WE'VE ADDED A LOT OF ANALYSIS INCLUDING THIS ADDITIONAL STUDY THAT WE'VE DONE. SO WE KEEP ADDING TO IT AND IT'S GROWING. >> Hernandez: WHEN WILL A FINAL REPORT BE COMPLETE THAT WE CAN SEE? >> WE'VE GOTTEN WHAT I'LL CALL THE FINAL DRAFT. IT WAS LAST MONTH SO WE'RE REVIEWING IT RIGHT NOW. SHOULD BE IN THE NEAR-TERM. >> Hernandez: OKAY. SO GIVE ME -- >> WITHIN A MONTH. >> Hernandez: OKAY. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING IT. LYLE, REAL QUICK. OBVIOUSLY YOU'VE GOT TO PUT POWER OUT THERE, POWER THE PUMPS AND THEN TIMING. >> WELL, JOHN MICHAEL, HE'S AN ENGINEER HERE IN THIS COMMUNITY. THEY'VE LOOKED AT IT. THEY'VE WORKED WITH PAPE-DAWSON. THEY'VE GIVEN YOU A PRETTY GOOD CURSORY REVIEW ON HOW LONG THEY BELIEVE -- >> Hernandez: FROM HANSON? >> YEAH. AND HE'S INDICATED A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH YOUR ABILITY TO GET SOME OF THE COMPONENTS. THERE IS A HUGE DEMAND FOR SOME OF THE ELECTRIC STUFF AND THERE'S A THREE TO FOUR-MONTH LATENT PERIOD BEFORE THEY CAN ACTUALLY DELIVER IT. SO I WOULD GET BACK WITH JOHN MICHAEL AND THE FOLKS WITH PAPE-DAWSON TO TRY TO GET THAT REPORT UPDATED. BUT THEY HAD IT AS OF JANUARY OF THIS YEAR I SAW A SOMEWHAT CURRENT REPORT. THEY COULD MOVE THAT WATER. THEY COULD DRILL TWO WELLS AT A TIME. THEY COULD GET THAT FIRST 12.5 MILLION GALLONS INTO THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. NOW THIS IS BEARING THE PIPE, TAKING IT TO THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. THE FIRST 12.5 MILLION GALLONS, SOMEWHERE IN THE SIX TO NINE-MONTH PERIOD. AND I WOULD, AGAIN, GO BACK TO THE SAME GENTLEMAN AND ASK HIM IF THEY COULD DO IT. THAT WAS HAVING A LOCAL CONTRACTOR HERE. I THINK IT WAS BAY CORPORATION DOING A LOT OF THE WORK HERE. AND THEN YOU COULD -- THEY HAD ENGAGED GARNEY I THINK THE FIRST TIME THEY HAD TALKED TO Y'ALL. BUT THERE'S NO REASON TO BRING GARNEY DOWN HERE IF YOU'VE GOT A CONTRACTOR THAT CAN DO IT LOCALLY. THEY CAN EXPEDITE IT. NOW TAKING IT ALL THE WAY TO THE SOUTH TO DRESSEN IS GOING TO BE MORE EXPENSIVE. THAT'S IN A $350 MILLION RANGE IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST AND THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. THAT'S MORE ALONG THE LINES OF 28 MONTHS TO TAKE IN THAT SECOND 12.5 MILLION GALLONS. BUT I WOULD -- STAFF HAS THE PAPE-DAWSON ENGINEERING REPORT. THEY DIDN'T REALLY TALK ABOUT IT IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT THEY HAVE ALL THIS INFORMATION ALREADY. >> Hernandez: OKAY. I CAN REACH OUT TO JOHN MICHAEL. JOHN MICHAEL, I THINK WAS ON THE GROUND FLOOR OF -- >> YES. >> Hernandez: OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MARY RHODES PIPELINE. SO HE MIGHT BE -- >> I SAW THE BLENDING STUDY, THE 2009 BLENDING STUDY AND, YEAH, IT SAYS 100 MILLION GALLONS CAN BE PUT IN IT. AND UP TO 50% OF THE WATER -- >> Hernandez: SHOULD BE GROUNDWATER. >> CAN BE BLENDED BACK IN AND BROUGHT IN. I DON'T KNOW, UNLESS SOMETHING HAS CHANGED, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONDITION OF THE PIPE AND THE PUMP STATION COULD CHANGE THAT, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL ALLUDED TO. >> Hernandez: WE'LL GET THAT INFORMATION WHEN WE GET THE FINAL REPORT FROM HDR AND I GUESS JOHN MICHAEL CAN GIVE HIS EVALUATION ON IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. >> SURE. SURE. ABSOLUTELY. >> Scott: HEY, LYLE. BY THE WAY, BIG FAN. FOLLOWED YOU FOREVER. I FEEL LIKE I'M IN THE PRESENCE OF GREATNESS. I'M REALLY -- >> THAT'S OVERSTATED. >> Scott: I'M BUD BUTTERING YOU UP FOR THE REST OF OUR CONVERSATION. I ASSUME THAT PERMIT IS EASY TO GET. >> THAT WAS SOMETHING DREW BROUGHT UP. HE SAID WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT A TITLE ON THE LAND. WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT A CLEAR TITLE. SO THEY'VE AGREED TO PAY FOR A CLEAR TITLE, GOING TO NORTHPORT TITLE COMPANY. >> Scott: NORTH SHORE. THEY DO A TERRIBLE JOB. THEY'RE A COMPETITOR OF MINE. NO. >> OUT OF HONDO, THEY HAVE PROBABLY DONE 70 OR 80. >> Scott: THAT'S SOMETHING YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO PROVIDE. >> WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT AND WE'RE GOING TO GET THE TRANSFER PERMIT. >> Scott: AWESOME. >> THAT WAS SOMETHING I THINK ESTEBAN, I THINK HE PISSED SOMEBODY OFF OVER THERE SO WE'RE GOING TO GO DO IT. I THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE. AND THAT SHOULD BE THE ANSWER IS WE SHOULD GO GET IT AND WE SHOULD GET THE TITLE, GIVE IT TO YOU, THEN YOU HAVE NO RISK. >> Scott: YEAH, I WOULDN'T BE INTERESTED UNLESS YOU GUYS PROVIDE FEE SIMPLE AND THE PERMIT. >> WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT. >> Scott: I STILL THINK YOU HAVE TO DISCOUNT SOME EXTENT THE FUTURE ACTIONS OF THE GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT. I'M NOT AS SMART AS YOU BUT I THINK THAT THE TIME HAS COME WHERE IT'S GOING TO GET HARDER TO MOVE WATER ACROSS COUNTIES AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF SOME OF REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS' BILLS. I THINK HE'S GOING TO RUN UP AGAINST THE WEST TEXAS GUYS WHO ARE GOING TO SAY WATER IS OIL AND I OWN IT AND I CAN DO WHAT THE HECK I WANT. I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF OPPOSITION IN THE FUTURE. THAT'S MY TAKE. >> IT'S IN 16 REGIONS, WE FIGHT EACH OTHER FIERCELY ON THESE PLANNING DISTRICT LINES. WE'RE THE ONLY STATE THAT HAS ABDICATED OUR ROLE IN MANAGING IT AS A RESOURCE FOR THE WHOLE STATE. EVERY ONE OF OUR REGIONS WE PUT OUR PLANS IN, SOMETIMES THEY'RE COUNTER TO OUR NEIGHBOR'S AND SO IT'S BEEN GROWING ORGANICALLY BY OUR STATE. I HAVE BEEN A BIG PROPONENT OF CHANGING THE STRUCTURE ON HOW WE DO OUR PLANNING. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE FIGHTING EACH OTHER TOO MUCH. Y'ALL ARE FIGHTING EACH OTHER BETWEEN COUNTIES WITHIN THE SAME PLANNING DISTRICT. >> Scott: RIGHT. I'M ON THE REGIONAL WATER PLANNING GROUP. IT'S BEEN A FUN EXPERIENCE. >> YOU'RE RIGHT. I MEAN, I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE HISTORY. 3,000 YEARS AGO THE PERSIANS HAD THE SAME PROBLEM Y'ALL HAD. THEY HAD A POPULATION GOING AND CONQUERING NATIONS. THEY HAD TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MOVE WATER INTO THESE POPULATIONS. THEY'RE FIGHTING THE FARMERS IN THE RURAL AREAS. THEY DEVELOPED VERY ELABORATE AQUEDUCT SYSTEMS, TOOK THE WATER INTO THE POPULATION CENTERS. AND HISTORY STILL REPEATS ITSELF RIGHT NOW. IN TEXAS WE'RE GOING TO FIGHT EACH OTHER FOR EVERY DROP OF WATER. >> Scott: MY POINT, I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH TO BE AN EXPERT BUT IT JUST SEEMS TO ME IT'S GOING TO BE HARDER TO MOVE WATER. >> IT WILL SO GET IT NOW. ONCE YOU GOT IT GRANDFATHERED -- AND IF Y'ALL DON'T TAKE EVANGELINE, TRUST ME SOMEBODY'S GOING TO GET IT AND THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO GET IT BECAUSE THIS IS GOLD. I MEAN, THERE'S -- YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, IF YOU PASS ON IT, SOMEBODY ELSE WILL BRING IT IN TO CORPUS CHRISTI. >> Scott: I THOUGHT OUR CONCEPT IS WE'RE GOING TO LET THE PRIVATE SECTOR BUILD THE DESAL FACILITY. WE'RE JUST GOING TO LOOK OVER THE SHOULDER TO MAKE SURE THEY DON'T USE CRAPPY MATERIALS BECAUSE IN 20 YEARS -- TAMPA RAN INTO THAT. THEY LET SOMEBODY ELSE BUILD IT. THE LIFE CYCLE OF ALL THAT EQUIPMENT WAS 20 YEARS. YOU LET THE PRIVATE SECTOR BUILD IT BUT YOU'RE AT THE TABLE WITH THEM AND YOU HIRE A PROJECT CONSULTANT TO HANDLE YOUR POSITION TO MAKE SURE THEY'VE GOT THE RIGHT PARTS. >> WELL, THERE'S A HUGE DESIGN FLAW IN TAMPA AND IT CREATED A CHILLING EFFECT IN SEAWATER DESAL ALL ACROSS THE NATION FOR DECADES BECAUSE OF THAT PROBLEM. I WOULD HAND IT BACK TO KIEWIT AND SAY Y'ALL BUILD IT. Y'ALL TAKE ALL OF THE RISK. WE'LL BUY THE WATER FROM YOU PER THOUSAND GALLONS. TELL US WHAT YOUR RATE IS. >> Scott: I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT. >> Mayor Guajardo: GUYS, WE'RE GOING TO GO ON. IT'S 11:07. >> Scott: I WANT TO GET THAT OUT THERE. >> THIS IS CHEAP. YOU CAN BUY ME SOME GATORADE. >> Mayor Guajardo: THEY'RE TALKING TO YOU ABOUT EVANGELINE. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON. DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MR. LARSON? OKAY. GO AHEAD. >> Paxson: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I THINK WE ACTUALLY MET. >> DREW INTRODUCED US. >> Paxson: YES. I LOVED THE SPIRIT THEN. I'M REFRESHED BY THE COMMENTARY THIS EVENING. I LIKE THAT CONCEPT. SOUNDS A LITTLE LIKE OUR HARBOR ISLAND PROJECT. BUT THAT WAS A SIDE NOTE. MY QUESTION FOR YOU -- AND YOU MAY HAVE SAID THIS IN CONVERSATION BUT I COULD HAVE MISSED IT. WE'RE TOLD SUMMER OF '28. IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT COULD BE THE TIMELINE FOR THE FULL 24 MILLION GALLONS? >> YES. THAT'S -- I MEAN, PAPE-DAWSON -- PULL THE STUDY OUT. THEY'LL SHOW YOU THE TIMELINE. THEY'VE GOT IMPEDIMENTS BUILT IN AND BOTH GETTING THE MATERIALS AND DESIGN. BUT SIX TO NINE MONTHS -- JOHN MICHAEL CAN UPDATE Y'ALL TOMORROW AS FAR AS HOW FAST THEY CAN MOVE THE FIRST 12.5 MILLION GALLONS INTO THE SYSTEM. THE OTHER ONE IS MORE COMPLICATED BECAUSE OF ISSUES ON PRESSURE IN THE TIMELINE, THE REST OF IT. THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE IT SOUTH AND I THINK THERE'S CUSTOMERS WAITING IN SAN PAT COUNTY FOR THAT OTHER 12.5 MILLION. SO THEY'RE SAYING 28 MONTHS TOTAL TO DO ALL 24 MILLION GALLONS, SIX TO NINE ON THE FIRST 12.5. >> Paxson: OKAY. AND THAT'S PRESUMING, LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER SCOTT JUST SAID, IF WE CAN GET THE FEE SIMPLE TITLE, THE PERMITS. IF YOU HAD TO BALLPARK, WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE TO GETTING THOSE TYPES OF THINGS ONLINE. I THINK WE'RE VERY EXCITED. >> AS SOON AS THEY HAVE A CONTRACT, THEY'LL GET THE TITLE POLICY. THEY GOT TO HAVE A CONTRACT. THEY'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH -- BOTH TITLE COMPANIES HAVE ALREADY PUT TOGETHER WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. IT'S A VERY EXPENSIVE TITLE POLICY. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT $170 MILLION. SO THEY'RE GOING TO PAY FOR IT THOUGH. AND THEN THEY'LL APPLY FOR THE TRANSFER PERMIT AND THEY'VE GOT REAL GOOD LAWYERS THAT CAN SIT DOWN WITH A VERY COMPETENT LAWYER THAT SAN PAT COUNTY HAS, GREG ELLIS HAS IN AUSTIN. THEY'LL FIGURE OUT THE TRANSFER PERMIT PRETTY QUICKLY. I MEAN, BY LAW THEY HAVE TO GIVE IT TO THEM. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD HAVE A CHOICE OR THEY'LL BE SUED. IT'S THAT EASY. >> Paxson: PERFECT. THAT'S WHAT I HOPED TO HEAR. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HANGING WITH US THROUGH THE ENTIRE DAY AND BEING HERE FOR QUESTIONS THIS EVENING. >> THAT WAS PAINFUL. I CAN'T IMAGINE DOING IT. >> Paxson: WE'RE STILL AN HOUR EARLY FROM OUR WORST EVENING. >> RYAN, HE'S AWESOME. >> Mayor Guajardo: HE SURE IS. RYAN, GET UP HERE. WE'RE READY. >> I CAN'T BELIEVE HE'S DOING THIS STUFF. HE'S A GOOD ONE. >> Mayor Guajardo: RYAN. YEAH, THANK YOU. RYAN, YOU CAN COME ON UP. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO THE LAST ITEM, WHICH IS -- >> Zanoni: RYAN IS GOING TO DO A QUICK UPDATE ON THE COAST GUARD. >> MY UPDATE'S ALWAYS QUICK. I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT IS. JUST 40 SLIDES, COUNCILMAN CANTU. 40. YEAH. RYAN SKROBARCZYK, DIRECTOR OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS. NO, THERE'S NOT 40 SLIDES. A GOOD NEWS ITEM HERE, JUST WANT TO UPDATE THE COUNCIL. CONGRATULATIONS TO THE CITY FOR BEING DESIGNATED THE FIRST U.S. COAST GUARD CITY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. THIS WAS A DESIGNATION THAT WAS BROUGHT TO US ORIGINALLY BY CONGRESSMAN CLOUD'S OFFICE. AND THEY NOTIFIED US, OBVIOUSLY THIS PROGRAM EXISTS AND THERE WASN'T ANOTHER CITY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT HAD THIS DESIGNATION. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES US TO PUT TOGETHER AN APPLICATION AND GO TO THE U.S. COMMANDANT AND GET APPROVAL. THERE WERE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO THANK. THERE'S SEVERAL PEOPLE ON STAFF, SARAH ANDERSON HAS DONE A LOT OF WORK WITH THE EVENTS THAT ARE COMING UP . SO WE WANT TO THANK THEM. THE IMPORTANT PARTNERSHIPS THAT WE HAVE THAT ARE LISTED THERE ON THAT SLIDE. A COUPLE OF EVENTS THAT ARE COMING UP ON AUGUST 8. COUNCIL WAS INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN A CEREMONY AT CCIA. IT'S GOING TO TAKE PLACE AT VALANT HALL, THE COAST CARD HANGAR. WE ARE EXPECTING REAR ADMIRAL WILL WATSON TO BE THE KEYNOTE SPEAKER AND RECOGNIZE THE DESIGNATION ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD. THERE'S A NUMBER OF COMMUNITY PARTNERS THAT ARE GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT EVENT. I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE THOSE WHO HAVE RECEIVED THAT INVITATION, MAKE SURE YOU COMPLETE THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO CHECK IN THROUGH SECURITY IN ORDER TO GAIN ACCESS. BUT WE DO WANT TO CELEBRATE WITH THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY, SO AN EXCITING EVENT ON AUGUST 10 IN COORDINATION WITH THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION AT WHATABURGER FIELD WITH THE HOOKS. THE -- WE'RE GOING TO DO A COMMUNITY-WIDE EVENT. THERE'S ACTUALLY THE CHAMBER IS PROVIDING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SOME OF THE SPONSORS THAT THEY'VE OBTAINED, A CUSTOM JERSEY GIVEAWAY FOR THE FIRST THOUSAND GUESTS THAT WALK THROUGH THE DOOR. SO ALL OF THE COAST GUARD MEMBERS ARE GOING TO BE THERE WITH THEIR FAMILIES. IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY PURCHASED WITH THE MORALE FUND TO CELEBRATE THE COAST GUARD BIRTHDAY, AND WE INVITE THE COMMUNITY TO PARTICIPATE. THERE WILL BE A LOT OF ASPECTS THAT FEATURE THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD AT THIS EVENT AND WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD SEVERAL DONORS DONATE THEIR SUITES, INCLUDING A NUMBER OF ENTITIES. AND WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THOSE SUITE TICKETS TO SOME OF THE COAST GUARD MEMBERS, WHICH THEY'LL RAFFLE OFF FOR THEIR ATTENDEES. WITH THAT, THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. WE HOPE YOU CAN JOIN US AT THOSE EVENTS. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU, RYAN. WE APPRECIATE YOU VERY MUCH. IT WAS A BEAUTIFUL, PERFECT PRESENTATION. >> YES. >> Mayor Guajardo: WE APPRECIATE YOU. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> Mayor Guajardo: THANK YOU. THERE BEING NO -- >> City Secretary: MAYOR, JUST I NEED TO CLARIFY. ON ITEM 16, THE INNER HARBOR ITEM THAT WE HAD. WHEN I ASKED -- THERE WAS A MOTION TO POSTPONE. WE DID A VOICE VOTE. THE MAYOR SAID NO. BUT THEN WHEN I ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION ON WHO VOTED NO, RAISE YOUR HAND. SHE DIDN'T RAISE YOUR HAND. RIGHT NOW OUR RECORDS SHOW SHE VOTED FOR THE POSTPONEMENT. JUST TO CLARIFY, IF THERE'S KNOX, THE MAYOR MEANT TO VOTE NO RIGHT? MEANT TO VOTE NO. SO THE VOTE WOULD BE 5-4. IS THERE AN OBJECTION FOR ME CHANGING THAT? THAT WAS HER INTENT. YOU CAN SPEAK TO THAT, MAYOR. I MEAN, ALL HER COMMENTS WERE THAT SHE WAS AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT SO, FOR THE RECORD, SHOWING THAT SHE WAS AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT. >> Mayor Guajardo: THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. [MEETING ADJOURNED]