Heat. Heat. N. [Music] [Music] [Music] Okay. Good morning everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to order. welcome you to City Hall and to our beautiful council chambers. Uh this morning our invocation will be given by Pastor Rob Bailey with Southside Community Church. Pastor, >> let us pray. Our father, we thank you for the privilege of living in this beautiful city. We don't take that for granted. We thank you for the rain recently and pray that you would send more to fill our reservoirs. Uh we thank you for our law enforcement officers and firefighters and first responders. keep them safe as they protect us. We thank you for the city staff that work so hard behind the scenes to make things run smoothly. And today we want to pray for our mayor and city council members. These roles are not for the faint of heart. We thank you for their courage to step up and lead us. So we pray today that you would give them great wisdom as they listen, as they deliberate, and as they make decisions. For we pray this in Christ's name. Amen. >> Amen. Thank you, pastor. And our pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States and to the Texas state flag will be given by Girl Scout troop, excuse me, 4064. Ladies, please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, for liberty and justice for all. Please join me in honor of Texas flag. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible. >> Thank you, girls. >> Miss Wera, would you please call the role? >> Mayor Plet Wardo, >> present. >> Council members Roland Beretta >> here. >> Sylvia Campos >> here. >> Eric Anu >> here. >> Gilnandez >> here. >> Kayn Paxton >> here. >> Ever Roy >> here. >> Mark Scott >> here. >> Carolyn Von here. >> City manager Peter Zenon >> present. City Attorney Miles Rizley, Mayor and Council, a quorum of the council and the required charter officers are present to conduct the meeting. >> Thank you, Miss Wortha. And before we begin today's meeting, I want to take a moment to address an important issue. Uh this council chambers is a place of public business, a forum for civic discussion, 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 violations of decorum. We are here to do the people's work. So, let's proceed in that spirit. If you want to speak on a specific agenda item during its discussion, there's no need to sign up beforehand. I will ask for public comment when the council considers the item. So, at that time, you may come up to the podium and speak. I'll ask city attorney Miles Ry to please review the city council meeting rules of decorum. These rules will also be displayed on the television screens above. All citizens must be courteous, polite, and respectful of one another, including the city council and city staff. The mayor and council members shall be referred to by title and/or title surname. All remarks must be addressed to the mayor and city council and not to the council members as individuals. Citizens are only permitted to speak on city related subject matter. Speaking on any non city related matter is prohibited. Loud, boisterous, profane, or obscene language or behavior is not allowed. Citizens must refrain from any disturbing noise, demonstration, or other act disrupting to the city council business. >> Thank you, Mr. Risley. So, please state your name and the city in which you live in 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 manage that aotted time. And if you have a petition or relevant information, please present it to the city secretary before speaking. So, at this time, we're going to move on to section F, which are which is our city manager's comments and update on city operations. Mr. Zenon. >> Okay. Great. Thank you, mayor, and good morning, mayor, and members of the community. Uh, I want to highlight a couple items that are on today's agenda. today uh will be here till this evening and uh we have a pretty lengthy city council agenda and we have executive sessions as well but um I just want to make sure the council and the community doesn't lose sight of at least four things that are pretty significant uh in today's agenda. And so I want to begin with highlighting two of the items on today's agenda and we're going to put up a PowerPoint that has some pictures as well. Uh that includes the replacement of two of our aged fire stations, fire station number eight and fire station number 10. Both of these are located in our inner city district, city council district 3. Uh this is a significant milestone because we made a promise to our community years ago to replace half of our fire stations. Uh we have 18 fire stations and nine of them are at least 50 years old and some some older than that. Uh they don't provide the best facilities for our firefighters and in turn we can provide better response to the community uh when we have more modern facilities. So each of these fire stations have a construction budget of 12.5 million and from bond 2024 and each has a $2 million design uh budget as well. And that was from bond 2022. And so in bond 2022 the voters approved the design of these of these facilities. And then in 24, the construction money uh was included with our new philosophy that Councilman Hernandez has championed, which is put the design in one one bond program and then it's fully designed and then you have a better understanding of what the construction costs are and then the voters can consider that in a subsequent bond program. So let's talk a little bit about the fire stations and uh we're going to hit this next slide so you can see fire station 8. Uh this is the new design of what it will look like. Uh it's located at 4645. The current one in uh 454 4645 Castor. The current one which is not shown here was built in 1955. So it's over 70 years old. I just drove by it the other day and it's not the prettiest site. Right, Chief? So we're glad that this new station uh will be coming just down the road at 4909 Castor, which is a 2.4 acre piece of property uh that the city acquired. The fire station will be a little over 13,000 square ft and it will uh provide updated uh uh uh drive-through apparatus bays. There'll be 10 uh uh living quarters for our firefighters, lockers, a captain's office, a go a gas operated kitchen, a break room, an exercise room, laundry room, showers, and restrooms for our firefighters. Many of these amenities they do not have today. You can see the picture here on the upper top left there. And on Castorus, if you drive all the way to the end of Castorus, there's a beautiful Catholic church that has a has a mission style. Right, Councilman Ber? And so the architect uh in both of these fire stations kind of surveyed the area where the fire stations are and tried to highlight what that area uh has as architecture. And so you can see the design here somewhat mirrors that beautiful church right at the end of Castor and SP. The next fire station is fire station 10. This is on Horn Road, Horn and um Greenwood. And if we turn to the next slide, you'll see the picture of the new fire station. And this one, just like the prior one, will have those brand new drive-through apparatus bays. There'll be 10 uh living areas or bedrooms for the firefighters. Uh they'll have a captain's office, a nice kitchen, a break room. You can see the kitchen there. Uh the architect is kind of saving us dollars by kind of replicating some of the design features. So this kitchen is similar to the one we just saw. It's also similar to the one that's at fire station 3 on Morgan. Um this one here, you can see the architectural style on this one. It's somewhat in that neighborhood in Greenwood. And so it represents some of the home building architecture that was prominent in the day in the 60s and 70s when the Greenwood uh subdivision was being being built out by the city. Uh so a unique look uh for the firefighters and it's fitting uh for that neighborhood as well. So two beautiful fire stations. This complements the first one that we completed on Morgan that was recently ribbon cut and the firefighters are using it today. It's a beautiful facility on Morgan close to cross town. That one replaced the old fire station 3 that was also well in excess of 50 years old. So, let's turn next to another highlight of this agenda. We're going to go to the next slide. And we have this um may not seem like a big deal to some, but a brand new playground uh equipment uh for uh Oak Park playground, which is in city council district 1, Councilman Royy's district. Uh currently, there is no playground structure in this park. Uh this project includes the installation of a picket playground structure for ages 2 to 5 years old. You can see some of it here. Um there'll be new curbing and an added uh fall zone around the playground, a rubberized surface, so if children do fall, uh they'll be safe. Uh there'll also be, we talked about this this morning, but there'll be a nice 40x 44 ft shade structure that'll cover uh the playground so the children can enjoy the outdoors without having too much sun exposure. And there'll be accessible sidewalk improvements that will be constructed to ensure the connection of the playground uh uh to ensure connection of the playground to the park. And also ADA requirements are included in this park. This one is funded by our federal government. So we're glad we do get community development block grant funds and uh the federal government's grant to us, our entitlement grant of 320,000 uh will help uh pay for this installation of this playground equipment. Construction is expected to start next month and it'll be done by January uh for the kids to enjoy uh and what is a a pretty unique park in our near north side neighborhood u and one that'll get a lot as well. That's a picture of the location of the park there surrounded by many residential homes. Okay. And then the final thing to highlight is uh in this next slide we'll see it here but this is just as significant uh with its own story. This is today city council will consider leasing a portion of our airport property to the Texan uh which is a convenience store, restaurant, gas station. We see them in our community. Uh the the owners it's a it's a it's a a single uh business owner and uh they have several in Victoria. They've made their way into Corpus Christi. Uh there's one in Portland as well. Uh there's a beautiful one on Padre Island uh over there I think in uh in Porto Ranis. Uh but we'll this will be the I think the first one in our community and it's at the airport and it's important to highlight because this will be the first commercial development outside of the airport on our airport property ever. So it's a big milestone and it's a good product. Uh there'll be a convenience store. Uh there'll be a restaurant. There'll be ample parking and many gas pumps uh for people to gas up on their way out or refueling a vehicle if they have a a rental vehicle. Uh it'll offer a place for uh employees and others to uh to go to as well if they're trying to uh use up some time in between uh their jobs or in between their flight. So, we're glad the Texan is coming here. Our new airport director will talk more about it with the city council. Uh but this is an important lease and it can begin. I think the the development of our airport property that we have uh I think their master plan includes development uh items to include hotels >> uh for traveling public and employees that fly in and out of our airport um and other other amenities as well like restaurants. So this is a great first start uh for our airport and we're glad that the Texan uh will be uh considering coming here. You can see in the picture here, it's a little bit hard to see, but on that top picture, um when you drive into the airport, it'll be uh right on your right as you come in International Drive. So, uh mayor and council, that concludes just a quick highlight. Uh we know that our council meetings can can go long and there's a lot of material that we present, a lot of material that the community presents. Uh but one takeaway for today is that we have four tremendous assets for our community. This is all great news. uh improving this community both for our our employees, our public safety, uh responses to our community, uh our playgrounds, and then economic development at our airport. So, I'll turn it back over to you, Mayor. >> That's right, Peter. Thank you so much for highlighting those. Um sometimes they don't get the attention they need and and today is milestone milestone items. So, across the board, thank you for highlighting those. >> Okay, we're going to move on to section G and that is our board and uh committee appointments. >> Yes, ma'am. We have one board today for your consideration. It's the Coastal Ben Council of Governments. There's one vacancy for a regular member and city manager is recommending the new appointment of Dan McInn. Uh we do need public comment prior to um proceeding with the appointment. Okay. Is there any public comment uh for item number two? Okay. There being none, we'll close that. And do we have a I'll entertain a motion. >> We have a motion in a second. All in favor say I. I. >> Any oppose say no. >> The motion carries. We'll move on to section I, consent agendum. I I'm sorry, consent agenda items 3 through 14. Do we have any council request to pull an item? 3 through 14. >> 10 and 11. >> Okay. 10 and 11. Um, okay. Do we have any requests from the public to pull any items 3 through 14? Okay. Okay, I'll entertain a motion to approve consent agenda with the exception of items 10 and 11. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. All in favor say I. >> Any oppose say no. >> The motion carries. Um items 10 and 11 are the ones we just went over, the the uh fire station rebuilds. Councilwoman Paxton, hold on. Go ahead. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I was just curious. It appears as though we're recommending for the second lowest bidder on both items 10 and 11. And they coincidentally are the same um vendor for both projects. And so I was just curious if you could kind of explain that. >> Uh, well, so the first check we make is did a bidder submit an administratively responsive bid? And we had that in in both cases. And then the the second test we look at is has the bidder adequately demonstrated their responsibilities. Meaning have they uh do they have a resume with projects of similar scale and complexity. And the low bidder in both of those cases did not pass that test. So we declared them nonresponsive. >> They didn't I'm sorry they didn't um submit administrative demonstrate that they had uh completed similar projects >> in the past. >> Okay. >> And that's on both projects. The first the lowest bidder >> that that is on both. And then uh the the number two bidder is same on on both of those projects. uh and uh we were reasonably satisfied that uh that they had done a good bit of public work of uh similar larger scale. >> Okay. And I know we had the um tabulation sheet in here as far as uh Oh, the broke out the breakdown. There it is. Okay. No, it just kind of um caught my attention that we were recommending away from this the lowest bidder on both fire stations and then that it was the same bidder in both instances that that is being recommended. >> It's not super uncommon that that that happens. Uh a lot of times, uh contractors will kind of take a hail mary at at a project, but uh we look at this as a risk mitigation strategy. Um you know, and they have an opportunity to protest. They're notified 10 days before it goes to council that we're not recommending award to the low bidder and uh they can protest that. They elected not to protest. >> Okay. All right. Thank you for clarifying, >> Council Councilwoman Vaughn. >> So, I toured the big fire station on Morgan today. It's absolutely gorgeous. It's just beautiful. But I did notice something. Do y'all um do y'all have a contract for the filters? They really need cleaning. Just noticed it. If you look up in the deal, the air filter. >> Yeah. So, there is Brandon Wade, fire chief. There is a um um what what money for that with asset management. Okay. >> And they deal with it. So, it's a constant thing that we're dealing with. The AC folks have been out there as we're trying to correct some uh small issues that we're having with it. So, it's just a matter of the replacement cycle and then them submitting uh a work order. So, we'll look into that if >> I was just curious because you can see it and I know that at home we all have to do that because it it makes operate more efficiently. And the other question I was going to ask is, so you said you had to have two million for a design for each of these stations, and I know everybody likes pretty, but can you not just use the same design every time so you don't have to pay that 2 million every time to design? Because these two that you're doing were pretty close in square footage. >> Yeah. Let me clarify that. That wasn't uh two million that was spent on design. And that was 2 million that was budgeted in bond 22 >> for design and upfront costs. >> Yeah. >> And this is one on on eight is where we had to acquire land. There was you might remember there was some imminent domain and once we started the imminent domain proceedings, we were able to reach a negotiated uh agreement on that. But uh any of the money that's not used for those upfront costs can be used for construction. >> Okay. I'm just saying that, you know, in the future because we still have what, eight more to go. If we if we would be careful about what we spend, not saying that you guys aren't, I mean, and have the same design, they don't have to be all different, which these are actually beautiful how they designed them. And I like what they did, but I'm just saying in the future, maybe we make them the same so we can save money. >> So, we do try to do that. And you see that with um eight and 10 with just small differences in elevation or maybe it's flipped, but a lot of it is based on the property we have. So it has to fit. And then some of them like station three was totally different because that's one of our rescue stations and we built in specific stuff for that and that was housing more companies uh there. Same thing as we're going to look at station 9 that has a possibility of housing another um one of our specialty groups where we may need a little bit more room to put that and and I'll give an example if we have one of our hazardous materials teams they've got extra trailers they've got u a lot more monitoring equipment so we may have to design that one just a little bit different so we do try to um accomplish that just like we did with station 8 and station 10 similar designs but we're also bound by the And um that >> and I and I get that but ma'am pretty close. I mean can't be that many var variations in doing it. Yeah >> for sure. So we we do try to to take advantage of that when we can even working with the uh the contractor the engineering firm that is designing it of not trying to reinvent the wheel and that's what when we look at who um do we have designing it. It helps to have a company that has designed fire stations across the state, across the country, and are well known >> because they can cut down because they're not trying to figure it out as they go through. So, that's some of the things when you see the contracts awarded to companies uh for that. We're looking to reduce the cost at possible. >> Okay. And your doors are absolutely beautiful. The ones in the back, it's so nice not to see a roll down. I'm hoping those are in the design for all of them. >> They're in the design. And it's kind of what the fire service is moving to because fire stations are hard on overhead doors and they break all the time. >> Sure. >> So these doors, while they cost a little bit more upfront, >> they're heavier duty. There's less tension on it and they're opening the the slide doors, you know, biffold doors that open. So open those. >> It's a beautiful station. >> Thank you. And again, it's the support from the city council, the mayor, and the city management office to do that. And our firefighters are definitely very, very appreciative of it. and same things as we move forward with these. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I'm going to piggyback on that because that was going to be my comment. So, I appreciate that, Councilwoman. Um and and Chief Wade, I don't think this is really in it's not necessarily in your purview more than it is in probably our city manager and engineering. So, I I I feel the same. I think that continuity when people drive around and they see a fire station, it looks the same. And I can't imagine that using the exact same footprint for all of our fire stations, whether you add three 4,000 square feet based on what you're saying or shrink it down >> a couple thousand square feet, which save uh taxpayer dollars quite a bit because you're using it's no different than CCISTD. I think they use the same for all of their schools. I don't know. Our substations, are we doing the same, Peter? >> Our substations um >> I mean, are they looking to to footprint, right? They're similar and the fire the fire stations are too like the picture of the kitchen and the the interior is pretty much the same. >> Yes. >> So, there's a lot of savings there. The outside is is the only thing that's really a little >> right. Some of the elevation again, what we're going to try to do here locally is is put on the elevation on the outside some reflection as much as we can for that local community so they feel like a little bit that it's theirs and and there's wiggle room to be able to do that. Um but also when we're designing these fire stations, we have to think about 40 years, 50 years ahead and there's times where we say, "Well, just shrink it smaller." Well, then as the city grows or uh new buildings get developed, something gets torn down and developed and you may need to move your resources around such as the ladder trucks or where medic units are or where your battalion chiefs, you have to have flexibility in the planning of a station because we're going to be there for probably another 50 years in in that firehouse. So we try to take a comprehensive approach where we're looking at all things, not trying to build a Taj Mahal like you may see in in some communities that just have one fire station. Sure, they can build eight bays and >> make it a castle. So we're trying to be very reasonable with the designing, with the engineering, but also meet the needs of now and into the future. So we're not trying to add on to something. >> Well, I I think station three on Morgan is beautiful. It's absolutely beautiful. I think anyone across the city would appreciate that that design everywhere. But anyway, my point, Peter, is I think moving forward, I don't know how in stone it is to to do different designs, is is to really look at one footprint and see if that is, you know, that has to have an impact on on our dollars. But anyway, that's that's uh just my piece on on that design. >> Okay. >> Councilman Wright, >> uh I just had one question. Do you remember, and this might be a Jeff question, who designed station 3? I mean, who uh built station 3? >> The contractor. >> Yeah, >> that was Weaver and Jacobs. >> Okay. All right. I I couldn't remember and I just wondered I was just wondering if um what's the probability that, you know, somebody that built one before, is it necessarily easier or more cost-effective? >> I they they did bid. They just didn't have a low bid. >> I didn't know which one, but I couldn't remember. Yeah. Thank you. >> Yeah. And they're bidding on other projects of ours. >> That's it. Thank you, >> Councilman Hernandez. >> Thank you, Mayor. Just uh out of curiosity, what's the cost per square foot on both of these projects? >> Do some math real quick. If you if you got your calculator handy, what are we? 13,000 square feet, chief. And >> yeah, I think one was um 12 and one was I'm sorry, I don't have my calculator with me. So, >> okay. Probably for future building and construction. Peter have uh cost per square foot on the project. >> Yeah. And we can get you that in a follow-up memo, Councilman. >> Okay. Um can you you know this is a building with a garage, right? Is it is for a fire station? I understand that there's some additional uh ventilation requirements and kind of stuff like that, but is it I mean I'm I'm asking this question not not because of the you know you eliminated a contractor u for not being responsive but I'm just curious as to what's special about the building that would make him not eligible. Well, so that particular company what we were able to surmise was out the company that was uh DQed uh the >> Well, there's two that two different companies that were uh considered non-responsive, right? They're not the same company. >> Okay. Well, we had 7B Development and Construction on one and uh >> the other one was Arning Companies. >> Okay. Um, >> so I'm just curious as to, you know, what was special about these particular buildings that eliminated the non-responsive ones that didn't have the similar uh capabilities. >> Uh, well, the the I I believe it was the Arning uh seemed to be more of a fabricator. They they were like a metal fabricator. It didn't seem like they've >> uh >> so they've never constructed a building. Um, they did not demonstrate that that was really their strike zone. >> Okay. What about the other one? 7B or something like that. 7B development. >> Uh, I I could get some information on the specifics on that. I don't have it with me. But, uh, what uh happens with the bid is not just your bid tab that you submit your itemized proposal. You submit a statement of experience and you list out projects that are similar in nature uh to be considered. Uh and uh it's almost like you're applying for a job. You want to show that you've got relevant experience. We want contractors that have relevant experience doing government contracts with similar type of construction. Uh and neither one of those companies demonstrated that to our satisfaction. So 7B Development Construction never built a building. >> I'm just curious. I mean, what is unique about this particular building that I mean that they would not be eligible for? >> So my understanding with like 7B was that they built car washes and some other small like doughnut shops and stuff like this. And if I can go back to the the history of dealing with fire station construction companies that hadn't built that before because we look at it and we go it's just a garage with a building. Well, it's a interesting commercial slash residential being used 24/7 365. So having dealt with contractors that hadn't built a fire station before, plus the communications equipments, the different ACs um and what have you, it it was a nightmare. And then when you went and you pulled a contractor that had built um buildings that were maybe a little more complex than just maybe a car wash, uh it was night and day when the project got done in the quality of work. So I think that's what engineering has to look at when they're looking at a fire station cuz one would think, well, it's a garage and a building. It doesn't work that way. When it comes into alerting, you know, equipment that goes into it, the communication stuff, building out the uh and installing the ACs, it's just it has to be robust and meet the demands of 247 operations. And uh being on the other end of a poor contractor was disastrous for the city, for the department, and the operations of the facility when it came time to try to get warranty work, get things done. while you still have to operate in the facility because it's a big deal when we close the fire station down if something is done wrong and we've already moved in. So, I think that's where engineering has helped us trying to look at who's doing the bid, what's their background, what projects have they done before and and do they meet the needs of it. >> Okay. And you've and this is a company that's outside of the state that is a you know from Colorado and you're comfortable with using an out ofstate contractor. Uh we had an administrative hearing with them and uh we're convinced that they have the capability to do the job. Uh they had the two individuals who were going to be assigned uh to be here locally uh in that administrative hearing. Uh so they they satisfied any concerns that we had. >> Okay. So for future reference, when you're not going to select the lower bid, you know, you're just expecting us to trust you to say these people don't know what they're doing. Well, there's a significant amount of taxpayer dollars. I I would like a better explanation as to why you're choosing to do something else because car washes to me are pretty complicated and they have to be, you know, waterproof in a lot of senses, right? So, I'm not I'm not going to disparage somebody's experience in terms of what they do um in terms of construction. So, I want I just want to make sure we have a very clear understanding of why the low bidder wasn't um was deemed non-responsive and why they were deemed non-responsive because we're we're going to be spending almost what um threequarters of a million dollars uh extra because we we didn't go with the low bidder, maybe more. What's the total amount? >> Councilman, we can do one-on-one briefings with the council on these. in the in the both briefing memos uh there is a small paragraph that talks about uh that they they failed to demonstrate sufficient experience >> right I've read that >> which requires a satisfactory completion of as a prime contractor for at least five similar projects that's one of the requirements we put in >> um based on wanting you know quality work and the fire stations are pretty complex you have health and safety issues too carbon dioxide emissions um a whole bunch so uh What we said when we put the RFP out based on best practice input is that they have to have done at least five buildings of similar size as a prime and and sometimes the biders don't meet those requirements and and Jeff met with both both firms had an administrative hearing where it's a and we'll have to give you more information. I'm just summarizing. >> I'm just saying you know we're we're we're >> this is more money being spent. We have lots of needs. Uh so I want to make sure that we are clearly understanding on why somebody was not selected. >> Yeah. >> And you know >> well so uh I would also say you know we follow very strictly chapter 41 of the code of ordinances and city council in chapter 41 delegates to me that authority to make these decisions. So um we uh >> well we're still we're still approving the decision. >> Correct. So guess what? This is a recommendation. council can reject this recommendation and you could direct me toward the low bidder. Now, what I would say is that uh we had administrative hearings with these firms. We sent them a notification that we were not recommending award to them and neither one of these elected to protest. They could have been here today and tried to make their case to you. They're not here. Yeah. I I tend to find that when somebody protests, they tend to be in the in the doghouse from that point on. So they tend not to protest. Um, so it's it's up to me to make sure I look at the the details and I want to make sure that we have great explanation instead of like a four sentence paragraph saying that they did not have similar experience and didn't say why when I see this cattle the cattle mount only has you only demonstrate one fire building. >> All right. We can try and put some more information for you going forward. Okay. I mean, this is not the first time we've had some issues with not going with the the the lower bidder, but I want to just make sure we're clear because ultimately we're on the hook for all this stuff, right? So, when we approve it, we're still accountable for, you know, not going with the lowest bidder. So, please provide more information. Thank you, >> Councilman Beda. >> Here, thank you, Mayor. Uh, is this this is this only requires one reading? >> Yeah, it's a capital project. Yeah, it's within budget. >> Okay. Okay, great. Um well, first off, I just want to bring up some other things that Peter and your presentation that that you probably brought out. You know, both of these um number one, uh the one on Castor actually replaced some blight that had been there for decades. I mean decades. And it was an issue with regard to a safety issue. I think there had been a fire. There were homeless people that were there and it made it very difficult. I know police were out there frequently because of the challenges it placed for the neighborhood. So, I mean, it's it was a a great win for the for the for the neighborhood and I know that the citizens in that area are really really excited about it. Um, you know, we'd get I'd get calls on a regular basis of of challenges with homeless out there and this is now that the the property was leveled when we raised the property when the fire was out there. In fact, we had a challenge I think when we were uh when it was being demolished. They found some homeless people in there at that time. So, uh what is it? I think this is an excellent project. It's just for move move from district two to district three. >> So, I was uh when that property became available and I want to also commend city staff on negotiating the price of the property. Once they found out we wanted it, the price, you know, like tripled and so Chief Wade, I mean, and and our real estate and our team really did a good job with that. So great, great. I think it's a great project over overall reduces blight. And then uh what is it? So that's another one. Uh the other one uh on Horn Road also that we're moving that that's part of the and it's next to the armory and I think some of the architecture looks like the armory. So I I don't know. It just could be wishful thinking on my part. But I think the other good thing is that that's going to allow us because we're moving it where the ball fields were. So that's going to allow us to to to improve those ball fields further. So both of these strong community projects, it's not just um that I understand the the the the fiduciary concerns, but you know, this is a this is a big win for uh the entire community and both neighborhoods. Um, you know, as I said, I played ball at those fields out there and so I've got a close attachment to them. I know there's a couple other people to speak, but I wanted to make the motion to approve this. Uh, so so we can move forward with that. But, uh, thank you very much and thank you for all the work cuz this has been um I could tell you since I've been engaged, seven years in the making. you know, when I first got on the council, um, you know, Johnny took me out to the, uh, to fire station number 10 to give me an example of the living conditions that the firefighters had and some of the things that they had to rig to make things work, you know, and uh, what is it? It's a testament and I think our firefighters deserve this. So, great work. Thank you, >> uh, Councilwoman Fawn. >> Well, it's not just a metal building. I mean, I certainly saw that this morning. There are things that the fire station needs that are unique. And I know that. I see that. And um I was curious, the one that built the one on Morgan, did he bid on this one? >> Yes, >> he did. >> He didn't have a low bid. >> He didn't have a little bit. I bet not because that's a really nice one. But I will say I trust you to do that. This is what you do all the time. You're not going to give a a job to someone that you don't think can do it. And that is your job to do it. And the council has to put some trust and faith in that. So, thank you, >> Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I want to start by saying my original question and and the reason I asked to to talk about these items is not because I don't support and endorse the project. I I certainly, you know, have always said that um I'm very interested in supporting um improvements for our men and women in the fire department and the police department. You know, I several years back, I went and looked at the fire stations in my district and I talked to the guys and I went through the stations and I looked at the things that they're in day in day out. And first thing that came to my mind was, gosh, I wish we as a community community could step up and say, you know, I've got a can of paint. I've got, you know, something I could come in and help, but I know the system is much more complicated than that usually. So, I do support the items. It's just um to what council member Hernandez was saying is when we leave this room where we have to make these decisions, it's you know we get the questions was oh both items said no to the low bidder and both items ended up being the same contractor and well how do you explain that? And so we have to, you know, that was why I asked is because it it's a lot easier for us to to have that kind of solid information and to say we're doing that due diligence so that when we do support you because we know we do. Um we we we can stand on some good facts and data and you've presented that. You always do, Jeeoff. I appreciate that. >> But it's probably be better if there's more questions. I'd be happy to meet with anybody individually and go over with more detail. There's probably things that we don't necessarily want to put in the agenda memo about these kind of decisions. >> We can, you know, Councilwoman Paxton and Hernandez, uh, we we'll get a memo that can list um what we can say, you know, without disparaging a company. We've been accused of that before. So, >> that lists some of the projects that they listed. You'll it'll be pretty evident, but we'll get you that by tomorrow because you're right, the community uh will ask you. We're on radio shows. They ask there. So, and it's and we know Councilman Hernandez, it's a consistent message that he's talked to us about uh over the years here. So, we'll get you a memo by the whole council a memo by tomorrow uh that says why we didn't pick the lowest bidder um so it would be more clear to you. >> I appreciate that. I think for this one you you were able to answer those um but just in the future like you said without disparaging any other company because I not curious about that. It's just more like what does the administrative differences actually entail? How does that fit to this project? Just so we have talking points. That's that's the big thing. Um but I did want to take a second while I agree with the sentiments that perhaps if we have kind of a uniform look, it can save us a little bit on design and things like that. I agree and and and I like that we would have a a more uniform look. But I don't want to miss on the fact that we have such a diverse, beautiful city. You know, on the island, our fire station actually has a big, beautiful stucco shell and and things like that. And and while that's a small thing when we're talking about millions and millions of dollars, I don't want to lose the fact because the the day-to-day of our community, they see those things and it what it does is it tells them that we take into consideration their unique footprint and we fit the community. We are part of the community. So, I don't want to lose that in there. So, I just wanted to put that out there. Thank you, >> Councilman Scott. >> Hey, Jeff Chief. Thank you very much. Uh, I think you did a great job. Uh, and I just want to thank you for your work. Uh, your explanations made sense to me. I'm good to go there. Uh, I'm a little disappointed Weaver and Jacobs didn't get a chance. I look, they were third lower, a couple hundred thousand short or higher than the others. Maybe they'll sharpen their pencils next time because I do think >> we've got another project for them this in the pip. >> They do great work and they're, you know, they're quero Victoria area. They're good people. Um, and I I would just want to tell you I like diversity in design and I support the concept to design in relationship with the surrounding area. Thanks. >> Uh, Councilman Kum. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, >> oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> It's okay. Um, Chief, station number 10 is it's a pretty busy station, right? It's the busiest station in Corpus. is one of the top three busiest stations. Yes. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> I had the chance to go to station 10 and station 8 um a few weeks ago and it was um pretty bad shape. >> Um I mean it was it was terrible. Um so I'm really glad these stations are getting rebuilt and um um I get the pricing what Gil was saying. Um it's pretty expensive, but um you can't put a price on public um um service, you know, and I think um public safety, I think it's a good project. Both of them are overdone, overdue, and I think all the stations needs to get re redone soon. But um I support it. Thank you guys for everything you do. And um do do you know how long it's going to take for station 10 and 8 to be completed? it. >> You want to cover? >> They're projecting a 12 months. >> 12 months. >> 12 months. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> That's generally what you'll look at as well for fire stations when they're being built around different cities. You kind of look for uh if it unless it's something really complex like building, you know, some places where they build the castle with eight bays, generally a 12-month timeline barring anything, you know, crazy happening weatherwise and stuff. Yes. >> Got it. Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Eight bays. And then >> who builds eight bays? >> Yeah. >> Do they? >> That's what it's with some places they only have one fire station and and in in their community they make everything is at one. >> And and just to follow up with that as you said, you know, they get beat up and we have to look at it as this is a facility that's 24/7 365 >> always being used. It doesn't shut down in the evening where things get arrest. The doors are always moving and opening especially at stations like that. I I don't think they ever stop moving. They should be named like the sleepless nights or something. Uh it's just they're so busy and the stations get used and and we thank you for the support that you give us. And just as I was reminded um with the design that we did with eight and 10 because they were similar, we saved approximately $200,000 in the second design. So as they designed eights and we used similar floor plan uh and just kind of changed the elevation, it was a savings of about $200,000 with it. So I I think that goes a long way for us. And uh again, we we just appreciate the support for it. Uh and and then the last thing is we talked about we're fortunate that engineering is is able to look at bids to where they can really see um was somebody necessarily qualified to build it because going back in my past history in another place um it's we're we're blessed to have people in different companies apply cuz through experience if you don't have that relationship with contractors and they want to do work here. I I've seen it where it was one contractor that didn't fit the bill and and that was it though. It was one bid and when they got denied and reopened it, that same contractor that really didn't meet the requirements was the only one to bid the second time at a much higher price that cost the taxpayers even more dollars. And it was a struggle through the entire construction and warranty phase of it. So, we're blessed to be able to really look at the bids that come in and try to uh select one that'll meet the needs for the city of Corpus Christie. So, thank you all very much for that. >> Thank you, Chief Wade. I think these are the this is a very good news good news items. Again, thanks for highlighting them, Peter. And I think I I certainly appreciate the um the questions. Um, but I also appreciate the work done behind everything you mentioned, Jeff, which is we want and and you, sir, we want to make sure we build what we need, not something that's going to fall apart, something that's not going to be to par. As you say, this is a 247 operation. So, it has to be done right and and you all are out there protecting this community 24/7 and the expectation is exactly that. So, this is what you need and so we're we're very happy to support that. So, we have a motion. We have a second. If everyone please submit their vote. >> Mayor, was that for 10 and 11 or just >> Oh, I'm sorry. And I didn't That was He said 10 and 11. And do we have public comment on 10 item 10 or and 11? Public comment. Rachel Cavayto D1 here as president of the Corpus Christie taxpayers. I am extremely in shock that we would not know the square footage of what a construction build is going to be. Even home buying, when you go look at homes to buy, you look at the price per square footage. So, as much as I appreciate the hard work that staff is doing, that is a that's a no-brainer. And I applaud Mr. Councilman Hnes for requesting that that be added going forward to uh new build projects. Um, I'd like to, um, squash the aggressive rhetoric of certain council people saying that if we question the financial stability or the financial expenses of projects that we are not in support of, in this case, the fire department. I am a avid supporter of the fire department. I know that many of you are supporters of fire, but we have to be fiscally responsible. So, be being able to save having cookie cutter maybe um stations where if firefighters transfer from one station to another, their accommodations are the same makes a lot of sense. And we're saving taxpayer dollars, stepping away from new architects, new design, new uh you know, plans. Each property will have its its its quirks, but going to an outofstate contractor who guess what community, they have an office in San Antonio, Texas. Shocker. Um the this revenue for this buildout, the t the the the revenue is not going to stay in Corpus Christi and it's not going to stay in Texas. Um these are going to a construction company in Colorado. I I I can't wrap my head around this, guys. I can't. We had a senator that said that more than 99% of Texas businesses are small businesses. So, we're talking in the state of Texas alone. I'm not even talking about Corpus Christie. And remember, you guys could use your buddies over at the Chamber of Commerce to find good construction companies to offer, you know, the bid process to, but we we didn't do that, did we? So, we have to get away from whatever it is that's happening right now. I personally have been able to figure out that there's no money in maintaining anything. There's no ma money in maintaining our streets. There's no ma money in maintaining um firehouses and uh different the stuff for the police department. But guess where there is money? New builds. And so that's why we're seeing that with this city manager and and city staff. At some point, we're going to have to to look at the big picture of that. But I I'm really disappointed that staff was not able to find a local company, and I would suggest that maybe it go out for one more attempt at a rebid to see if we can find somebody local. I mean, you guys keep patting yourselves on the back about supporting local businesses, and we don't see that here. >> Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else? Okay, we'll close public comment. Please submit your vote. The motion carries. So we'll move on to section K, which is public hearings. Item 15 and 16. Item 15 is zoning case number ZN8823, Corpus Project LLC located in district 4. Oops. PowerPoint's coming up here real quick. Uh, Mike Dice, Development Services. I'll go ahead and get started. Uh, before you today is zoning case ZN8823, Corpus Project LLC. There we go. The property is in district 4 with a request to reszone subject property from RS6 single family uh six district to the RM1 multif family and CN1 neighborhood commercial. Uh the subject property in total is 9.7 uh 9.87 acres and the property is not platted. So, the proposed use is to allow for mixeduse commercial and residential development uh with a CN1 uh off of Glenn Oak Drive and a multif family duplexes in the remainder of the 7.7 acres. The property is part of the Flower Bluff ADP adopted in June of 21. Uh as you'll see on the map, to the north is vacant water uh zoned RS6 and RM1. To the south is vacant transportation Laguna Shores and property zones CR1 and CN1. Uh to the east is some transportation uh vacant zone CR1. And finally to the west is low density residential vacant zoned RS6. As we do for all the uh zoning cases uh we mailed out uh 25 notices within the 100 uh sorry the 200 foot buffer. Five notices were mailed outside. We did receive eight notices of opposition within the 200 foot buffer. Some of those comments were uh runoff and backfill of imperous surfaces and storm water drainage uh heavily focused on interfering with natural habitat, wetlands, and wildlife. The land is a natural wetland that protects migratory birds bobcats coyotes deer etc. Multif family will destroy natural habitat. The traffic is already bad. selling homes impacts flooding FEMA and EPA. And finally, uh they would support single family homes but not apartments due to increase in traffic and road is flooded before in high rain. A lot more runoff and pollution if apartments and parking lots were built. uh redhead pond across the street of this development would negatively impact wildlife. Increase in property taxes for elderly and disabled, traffic concerns, uh commercial business hours affecting wildlife that depends on pond for refuge. Uh and finally, increase in traffic construction debris and impact wildlife and Redhead Pond, which is protected under Texas Parks and Wildlife. So, this is the zoning and future land use map. Uh on this slide you'll see uh the different land uses within the vicinity of the site. Uh and then on the left you'll see uh the enlarge for the surrounding areas. Uh unless it's not indicate if it's not indicated it's RS6, but you'll see CN1 to the south and RM1 to the north. So staff reviewed the subject property background information and concluded that the proposed zoning is consistent with the Corvis Christie comprehensive plan. however, is partially inconsistent with the future land use of designation of highdensity residential. Uh the requested districts are compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby properties. Planning Commission staff recommend approval for the RM1 multif family and CN1 neighborhood district. That's all that I have. >> Okay. Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, thank you for the presentation, Mike. Um, I had, uh, talked to some of our community groups in, uh, that area after seeing the packet and seeing the responses that came back from the community. Um, and I think the gist of the concern was, like you stated, some interest in the runoff. And it's my understanding that if done properly, some of that fresh water or rain runoff could actually be beneficial to the duck ponds there. Um, but there's also some concern from the community about the um commercial portion of the property. And so, um, I was, uh, curious. I see that there's a representative of the project here today. If perhaps they could speak a little bit to to that outreach and what has been communicated or or or how to how they see us moving forward with those letters of opposition. Good morning. >> Good morning. Uh Ken Brown from San Antonio uh representing the applicant. Uh we we have had meetings with the Flower Bluff Citizens Council. Uh we did show up at uh at planning and zoning uh and there were a number of the abuing property owners there. Uh most of their concerns were environmental. Uh I think they've seen this property as open space or a buffer, you know, uh or a green space. Uh and people don't like change. Uh a lot of a lot of the issues that they brought up were platting issues, runoff, uh water, waste water, sewer, that sort of stuff. Uh as far as the commercial, uh we did provide uh to the citizens council at least uh a layout. Um and I think we have we're proposing about 20,000 square feet uh along uh the the frontage there. Um which is probably five or six users uh in a in a strip sort of center. Uh and it's it's neighborhood services um uh insurance uh stuff like that. It it is it is to uh service that immediate area and that immediate area only because the traffic there isn't sufficient traffic for high volume sort of retail. So we did convey and provide a site plan and provide those numbers to the the council. I think thank you for that clarification and um my understanding is is very similar is that the citizens council you know they're not in opposition to this they're you know they that you were able to discuss that with them and so right >> they seem to be okay I think what the opposition is coming from is those actual um >> abuing property >> ab budding property neighbors >> and and I I think nobody likes change uh you know but we want to fit in there fit in there with the the schools in the area with with with what's going on there. Uh single family is allowed. We're proposing 26 duplexes. U so I don't think that's a lot of of uh traffic, but that will be addressed at the platting stage and we'll do a traffic impact analysis. I I think that the fact that um you know what my understanding is the property owner actually intends to build you know his own house his own house and so to me and I think to a lot of other people that that's the strongest indicator that he has great interest in making sure that this entire project blends into the community positively. Um and I'm I'm grateful for that interest because where it may appear that a lot of people maybe don't want change. I think what we're dealing with is a neighborhood that's very proud of their area, would like to keep a lot of um the themes or the culture that's present and it's important to them that new projects blend into that and and amplify or positively impact that and and I think that this project ultimately will. I think I personally believe that the opposition letters are more because of uncertainty that perhaps they would need to know what does the future of the commercial designation look like. I for me I I have no reason to doubt that it's going to be businesses that complement that area. But you know this isn't facing the Laguna shores which is the development plan. That would be more congruent. But you're you're super close to it. You're neighboring some other similars. So to me I think um it would be very beneficial to actually um reach across the table and make connection with those abuing properties um so that we could answer any of those questions. I know in the past there's been projects where developers have actually come and done a little informal meeting um and allowed those abuing properties to come and ask their questions and they can kind of answer their concerns and then the whole situation turns around. It's very positive and I think that the um citizens council would probably be incredibly favorable to helping with those efforts >> and and we we will commit to do that. Um we we are at the discretionary approval stage with without this approval there is none of that. So yeah, >> but we are in the platting process right now and then we will go to design and we will stay in contact with the council and the neighbors and show them what we we are uh proposing and take their input. >> I really appreciate that. For me, I think that this is a good project and I would like it to pass today because this is reading one. That way you have those asurances that you need and for me as the district member, it would be very important and I appreciate that you've committed to talking to those residents. So, I would love ideally to see this pass today at first reading for you to be able to go have those conversations for us to give you time to do that and bring it back maybe on November 18th. I know our you know, you start getting into the holidays, but I want to give you some time to be able to do that effectively. So, if if if that works for everybody's schedule, ideally for me, that would be what it would look like from today because I want to support this. I think it's a good project. I do. >> Okay, it sounds good. Okay, Council Hernandez. >> Thank you. >> And Mike Dice, maybe you could uh make sure I'm seeing this right. The area highlighted in red is for RM1 and um I guess the area in blue is CN1 or is am I seeing that incorrectly? >> Which map are you on? The future land use map. >> Yeah, zoning and future land use map. >> Okay, we have it on the screen. I'm sorry, what was your question? >> Okay, so the we're talking about the area highlighted in red, >> correct? >> Correct. You said >> 28 lots, >> right? And it says it's it's this is for um zone CN1. >> CN1 is to the south. If it's not actually labeled, it's RS6. We just do that to make sure that the map is somewhat readable. >> No, I'm just saying what part is RM1 and which part is is CN one. Um, so the front facing along Glenn Oak, >> uh, >> to the north, that will be a carve out of CN1. Everything else to the south and to the east is the RM1. So the duplexes will enter from Laguna Shores and the commercial will only face Glenn Oak. >> So why ask for RM1 and not RSTF? >> Well, it's based on the applicant's request. RM1 allows for the duplexes, which is the the >> I understand that, but I mean that it could be changed once you zone it, right, to a multi- complex um highdensity development. >> Yoda, >> good afternoon, Councilman. So, the RSTF district is built on the same premise as single family, meaning you will have individual platted lots. In this case, RM1 provides the flexibility of having one large lot with multiple duplexes upon it built similar to an apartment complex. >> Okay. So, the intent is to rent these, not necessarily sell >> you can have condo sales uh much like we do on the island on several projects. It gives design flexibility is is the idea behind RM1. >> Okay. So you're not going to plat these individually. They're going to be one large plat for multiple corrects. >> Okay. >> And I can see there's a a drainage concern here. Uh >> yes. Uh we've already started preliminary discussions on the plat which would require a storm water quality management plan that affects any runoff. You have to have a balanced schedule of runoff, meaning you cannot increase any drainage that isn't through natural flow onto the system. So any drainage that exists today must be maintained on site. >> Okay. What is Glenn Oak? Is that a C CN I mean a C1 collector? >> C1 collector. Yes, sir. >> Is it uh does it have uh bar ditches or is it uh >> Today is bar ditches. So part of the plotting process is you may have to make improvements especially to drainage. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Councilwoman Vaughn, >> he kind of covered some of the questions I was going to ask, but 26 duplexes, that just seems like a lot of duplexes. Is there a need out there for that that y'all are seeing? >> Well, what we do with staff is to take into account the different styles of development. More common than not, you're going to see traditional apartment complexes, three stories tall, 300 units. This is more in line with what we call the missing middle, meaning you're going to have smaller units, usually types of young professionals, seniors, empty nesters that are looking something closer to a single family residence without having a single family residence and they can >> Okay. I don't know exactly where the area is. So, are there homes around this area now? Yes, ma'am. There are homes homes. >> And are these going to be nice duplexes going medium? Do you know? >> Uh, well, I would say nice is subjective. I would say, you know, staff were always going to promote uh development that is consistent with the neighborhood. That's always come up with our favorite industrialized housing where we have shipping container homes. There are >> codes that apply that say you have to look like the houses around you. So similarly, we're have >> and that's why I'm asking because you know you want nice things out there for Flower Bluff because they're up and coming and they're trying to build their area. So, I want to make sure that whatever's going out there is going to be nice and it's not going to be I mean, we don't know how much the rent is. So, that doesn't tell me anything because I don't know that. That would tell me a lot if I knew that. But, um just want to make sure it's and you had some opposing. So, they were opposing for >> some of it. The majority was the question of drainage and impact to Redhead Pond to the north. Others are increased to traffic. So, let's say hypothetical this were to stay single family. You can in fact have more single family, six units, seven units an acre creating another street which would actually increase runoff. Having duplexes on one large lot allows more storm water management on site. >> So are we going to take care of the drainage? Make sure there's not. The reason I say that is they've done that out in our area ever. They've done that where they would build something on this side and the drainage on the other side was absolutely horrible because they didn't think it through and they didn't fix the drainage and they've lived with it for decades. So, are we looking at that? >> So, what our codes today require as part of what's called a storm water quality management plan is any water that is currently maintained on site, it must stay that way. You're not allowed to just discharge runoff into the system. >> Yeah, I know they're not allowed to do it. We just want to make sure that doesn't happen. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I think that kind of to Councilwoman Vaughn's question, for me personally in the district, I think that this does supply a need that's out there. We've got a lot of young families. We have, look at the school district is is just growing astronomically. And I think based on some conversations I've had that this actually presents a unique situation where there's a little bit more um pedestrian traffic to the school thing we've looked at especially coming off of their bond efforts and the the improvements that they're going to be doing to that district. So, I do think that the housing component of this project is is very important. And um I I'll just go back to I think that's why it's so important for there to be contact made with with the abuing neighbors to answer their concerns because I do believe the answers are there. I think that I think that ultimately we're we would all get on the same page. It's just got to have that communication piece. So, I'd like to make a motion to approve it today and then um what's a good date? Perhaps giving them some time. November 18th. Is that where >> 18th of November? >> Because I was looking at our calendar there. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. We have a motion in a second. I'm gonna go ahead and open public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to make comment on item number 15? >> Mayor, who seconded? I'm sorry we missed it. >> Mark's got. >> Okay. Thank >> anyone in the in the audience. >> Okay. We'll close public comment. Um please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Moving on to item number 16, we have zoning case number ZN8853, Eduardo Gonzalez, located in district 3. >> All right, the PowerPoint is coming up. This is uh again Mike Dice, development services. This is zoning case 88 uh Zen 8853. There we go. Uh, this property is located in district 3 with a request to reszone from the subject property from RS6 single family to the CN1 SP neighborhood commercial with a special permit. The subject property is22 acres uh and it property is currently being replatted went to planning commission on 91725. Purpose of the request is to allow for vehicle sales. The property does face uh castoras and is part of the Bayside development plan which was adopted in December of 24. Subject parcel is currently zoned RS6. To the north is vacant medium density residential zoned RS6 and O office neighborhood. Uh to the south low density residential and public semi-public zoned RS6. To the east is medium density residential and public semi-public O and R six. And finally to the west is low density residential zoned RS6. So with the zoning cases we sent out uh 14 notices mailed with inside the 200T buffer. Uh four mailed outside to schools within one mile. Zero notices received in opposition and zero in favor. So staff re uh reviewed the subject properties background information and concluded that the zoning is consistent with the city of Corpus Christie guiding documents uh like the comprehensive plan and area development plan. However, is inconsistent with the future land use map designation of medium density residential. Although the future land use map does not designate commercial zoning, the applicant is requesting a less intense commercial zoning to accommodate the surrounding neighborhood and the proposed reszoning is uh compatible with present zoning and conforming uh to those nearby. Planning commission and staff recommend approval to the CN1 SP neighborhood commercial with a special permit. And I stand by for any questions. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion in a second. I'm going to open public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to make comment on item number 16? Okay, there being no one, we'll close public comment. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Moving on to section L, individual consideration items 17 and 18. Item number 17 is an ordinance authorizing execution of a 40-year lease agreement with Glugos the third LLC DBA the Texan Stores. >> Good afternoon, mayor and counselors. Um requesting your authorization for this agreement with the Delo LLC for a Texan store at the airport. And with that, this is for the Texas Shore lease agreement. Um, for this, this will be a 40-year lease with a additional 10-year uh extension. It's for 8 acres at the Corpus Christie International Airport. Initial terms of the 40-year, it'll give a essentially an overall estimated revenue generation of about $160,000, a little over that you add it all up. Um, it'd also be going through fair market rate adjustments every 5 years. The Texan store is a one-stop shop um providing fresh fruit in the restaurants. Also, they're known for their clean restrooms and the additional amenities and also their overall customer service. So, what you'll have is you have a concession uh um store, convenience store with a restaurant and also the fuel stations. Uh the lease location is right there on the corner as you enter the airport. It'll be on the frontage road on the right hand side as you enter the airport. And this is the initial design concept for it. You have a building which is approximately 12,000 square ft for the convenience store with the restaurant. They'll have 32 pumps and there'll be 196 parking spots available. Another uh description of it on the property and that is it. And I'm for any open for any questions. >> Councilman Cantou, >> couple questions. Um, have you talked to the small businesses inside the airport, the convenience store and the restaurant? I will have to defer that to uh my uh deputy. >> Good afternoon. Jeremy Vartson, assistant aviation director at Corpus Christie International Airport. Um, initially, so this RFP went out before us when Kevin was here. But I do do know that conversation had happened uh with Tailwinds, our concession air when the RFP went out. That's the only thing I'm really concerned about is is about the restaurant and and the convenience store. I know the restaurant put some money in it and stuff and um they need all the support they can get because there the traffic going through the airport. It's it's pretty tough, you know. Um, I really didn't even know about this project to be honest with you till now. Um, is there a history behind this? Why they want to put it right there in the corner? Is it I mean, I don't understand. I don't I don't see the traffic the business being there. I know there's a cavina store right down the street on Clarkwood, but is there enough business to abstain this this place? >> Yeah. Um, that's a good question, Councilman. So when when they first brought this proposal to us, they had two proformas, kind of a lower level and a higher level. And then they did a traffic analysis study to see really how much traffic coming through. Of course, we got the rental cars out there and people that aren't from Corpus as they get out there, they look to get gas. There's no gas. >> Yeah. >> Um so there there is a lot of traffic. There's over a thousand people that do work at the airport and then all the passengers that come in and out. So there's a lot of frequency that comes by the you know the entrance at the airport. But in doing that proforma, they chose to go with the higher volume pumps um because they do see the traffic flow going through there. >> Okay. And so this will have a restaurant, diesel pumps, regular gas, clean bathrooms. Um and like our airports had clean bathrooms too. But um that's the only thing I'm concerned about is is the small um small businesses there. Is this only one reading or two readings? >> It'll go two readings. >> Two readings. We can get you more information about the second reading in terms of how >> Yes. I'm just concerned about what their thoughts are and they're worried about this convenience store being there in the corner. Um I know they can't take in drinks into the airport, but snacks and food and stuff like that. I just um I'm just concerned about those two businesses. Um there's two of them in there, right? in the airport. >> So the concessions is with Tailwinds who runs both the retail and the food. Yes, >> we'll reach out and have discussion. We'll also monitor the activity, see if we see a a drop off on the concessions program. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Councilman Scott. >> Is this is this is this first is this the Texans first in Corpus Christie? >> I think so. >> I think so. They have uh they have property and they and they re they reszone uh for another spot up on 37 uh near um you know the refineries up there, but they haven't uh their plan is later on I think next year to break ground. >> I've had strange occurrences to be in their Portland store dove hunting thing last couple of weeks. That's a that's a beautiful store. It's extraordinarily clean. It's it's it's spacious and I don't know if it's the same footprint that they're going to do here, but it it's a it's a really positive unique operation. So, I think I think it's great. Yeah, I share the same concerns and you guys have worked that out. I just I just wanted to thank the Texan folks because I I think they uh they've got an outstanding product and it's great to have them in Corpus Christie. Councilwoman Devon, >> I too believe the same thing about his concerns about the concessions there in the airport. I mean, it's so important for people when they're traveling to have them in there and we don't want to let them be affected. But I also realize how important it is to have fuel close to the airport and all the big cities that you go to, they've got them because if you rent a car, you want to be able to fill up because normally you're in a rush and you forget to do it before you get there. So, I understand that. So, I would just like to see what they have to say. The concession people. >> Yeah, we'll get you. We'll provide that in the in the memo if we can and if not, we'll present it next week. >> And you do have beautiful stores >> at the second read. >> Councilman Roy. >> Um, my question is it's 196 parking spaces. >> Let me get that number. 196 parking spaces. >> I'm 196 >> 196. And the building itself is what's the square footage on the building? >> 12,000 square feet. >> 12,000 square feet. 196 parking spaces. And you're charging monthly rent of 4,353. >> Yes. For the square footage, that comes out to 15 cents a square foot for the property. >> And that's a heck of a deal. >> Um the fair market value right now for the property is going at 20 cents. um they're doing a $10 million investment for that facility coming in and then we're also getting the land lease, but we're also getting a fuel flowage fee along with that. >> Where where did you come up with the fair market value of 20 cents? >> Um that's through our previous appraisal that we had for property for the airport. >> I look at a lot of commercial appraisals every day. Um can we get a copy of that? >> Yes, you can, Cman. >> All right. Yeah, we had an appraisal done under Kevin uh as we uh look to do this type of project on the facility so that we would know what to charge for rent. But we'll get you a copy of that appraisal. >> Okay, that's all I have. Thank you, >> Councilman Hernandez. >> Uh thank you, Mayor. Sorry, my page shut down on me. Um okay, this is, you know, I'm concerned on the traffic here because it it becomes a ghost town. uh you know once it gets into the evenings and I'm not you know I'm concerned that okay what if this fails what happens so for this we looked at the numbers and everything and they did their proforma you're looking about for each pump they have to do on a daily basis and each pump about 32 vehicles which is about 15 gallons depending on size and that's a small size vehicle so based on their proforma they're looking at that they have a a business model that'll be successful out there. And that's what we're going by. They have expertise in this area as we've seen. They've been opening the stores and we're relying on their expertise in this and opening these doors. >> Okay. And considering the amount of parking they have, is there any concerns that they might use this as a in order to supplement income if it doesn't work out as a airport parking? >> They would have to come into an operating agreement with us if they were to do that and we'll be monitoring that. have that restriction on the on the uh lease agreement. >> Currently uh the restriction is that it's for the the fueling service, the restaurant or what they have on there right now. There's nothing about availability of doing parking. Any type additional agreement they would have to come to us for that agreement. >> Okay. But is there anything that excludes it? >> Um I'll have to get back to you on that counselor. >> Okay. I want you to be very, you know, if it's not in the agreement, >> it states that you can operate for these items and everything, but it doesn't say you cannot do parking. So, but it does give them specific restrictions of what they can do at the uh >> I would recommend uh that you make that very clear that it can't be competing against you in parking. >> That's 196 parking spots. Is that correct? >> Yes. I'll take a look at that. We'll make sure u most know that you're in the lease for this specific business and they know they can't do that, but I'll make sure that we uh um bring it to their attention that if they want to do that, they have to come into an operating agreement with us. >> Okay. I like I've been through contracts before and if you don't specify it, there's nothing that prevents you from doing it. You need to be, you know, you got to think a little bit beyond. Um, >> we'll ensure it. >> Okay. I'm concerned about the location and the size. Um, the Perform is only they have to sell 15 gallons a day. No, that's uh based on if you look at each of the pumps has to do 32 um pumpings and each of that break it down it's about 15 gallons per that pump um per operation. So when you get it's it's about 450,000 gallons a month when you get all 32 pumps going over the 24-hour period. There's that amount each day. So it breaks down to 32 operations per pump at 15 gallons per day. Okay. All right. Thanks, >> Councilwoman Paxton. Thank you, Mayor. Um, we've had several ask about the business concern, so I won't belabor that point. Um, do they have at any of their store models the capacity or do we have a way that we could have um an incentive for electric vehicle stations potentially? because I do we have the data on how far out the next charging station is for something like that? >> I can follow up with you, but we do have plans for electrical stations at the airport. >> At the airport. Okay. Okay. So, that's that need will be covered. Okay. And then um just out of curiosity with uh believe it or not, a lot of people have reached out and have asked, "What about a BIE?" Nothing against Texan. I love Texan. Mine is on Highway 361 and they actually are doing so good. They're expanding after only three years of operation. And so it's I love the store. I love the brand. But I was just curious so that I could answer some of that. And that might be a question, Peter, for city staff. >> Jeremy could probably tell us, but we had an open solicitation. And I don't know, did they apply? Did U. Bies apply? Do you know? >> Uh, no sir, they didn't. So when we did the open solicitation, it was just the Texan and it was really as part of the master plan. It was proposed to have the gas station on the corner with the hotel on the other side and the hotel here said we we won't come until we get a gas station. So this this is really just step one of this big phased out project to build our whole um non-eronautical portion of the airport. >> Have we done anything EDC wise to um try to court that that brand, the BIES brand? >> Um I'm not I don't think so, Councilwoman. We can check. I can check between the EDC and the city's economic development department. We'll see if we've done anything >> if we can look into that. I think that would be a great amend. Again, I love the text and I do, but that was the number one thing that I had everyone reach out to me. >> Okay, we'll find out for you. >> And then um I I share some of the questions that council member Roy brought up when I saw that amount, especially like I said knowing that the one that's closer to my district that I go to all the time, they've been there three years and they're already expanding. So, I thought that that rental value was a little bit low. And it says on here um that it's a five-year term for that amount. Excuse me. So, what we do is we go through the fair market value for the rental rate and it'll go up by 3% uh 3%. Um, we also look at the fair market value at the end of the lease over the 40-year, but every 5 years it'll go up by 3%. >> For that, and then also we get the um the the value off the fuel flowage fee, which is an additional funding. when they did the um when they did the market appraisal report to to to determine that rate, was the um was that fuel amount taken into consideration or was that a standalone item or because you said it was usually 20 cents and we're opting for 15? >> So on that it was the fair market value of the land lease. Um, so we uh went with 15% in in the negotiations and it's based on also their capital investment of that $10 million. And what was agreed upon was the 15 cents per square foot on the land lease. And then it was the just the usual when you do a service like this, the revenue flow through their what they're providing. And that was the um 2 1.5 cents starting out for the fuel flowage going up to half a cent um over each 5 years. >> Okay. So it had also to do with their capital expenses. >> Um all right. That was my question. Thank you. >> Council Beda. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, so I I you know I remember Kevin visiting with me about this uh maybe a year after he'd come in and I thought it was great. The other things that he was looking at. I think a couple of positive things are number one um when you're going out first thing in the morning to for an early flight the lighting is horrible. I mean you just kind of as you come around the corner and I think this is going to be great on that spot that it's going to just increase the exposure and make it a lot more safe. Um, so I I I I think that was one of the things that uh and then like we said, I think having a hotel, um, what is it? Uh, the more expansion that we have, even though we're in a lot of controversy right now, but you know, uh, what is it? Um, I think having that and the convenience for the the the people that work for the airlines, you know, uh, what is it? And then having a place to eat. So, what are the hours of operation of the restaurant going to be? Is it going to be late enough so that way somebody comes in late? like let's say for example um airport staff not airport staff but airline staff >> um I'm not sure the hours of the actual restaurant it is a 24/7 operation >> I know yeah I figured as such you know I just curious I mean just for now and you know crawlalk run um and so the fuel flowage fee I mean that's just based on the performer that they gave us >> yes >> okay so it could be greater because you know >> it could be greater >> yeah so you know you have a thousand employees at the airport and then plus LNF distributors I don't know how many employees that they have on a regular basis, plus that whole industrial area there. So, I I think that's the thing. It's it's it's it's convenient for as you're uh uh as you're coming by. And then I'm surprised that it's only $10 million, you know, that uh that that the capital investment is going to be. I would think I I don't know any better, but I would think that it would be in excess of that. Have we figured out what the Avalorum would be on based on the improvements? >> Um we'll have to defer to the airport. But if we all figure that out, the Avalar and property tax revenue will get >> Yeah. Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. >> We'll have to look at that. >> Okay. Yeah. I mean, I just think that, you know, in the future we look at that because we're looking at anytime we have some type of economic development project, we're just looking at that. I mean, here's the other thing. What about sales tax? >> That too. Yeah. That'll increase >> sales. Yeah. So, see, I think this is obviously a great opportunity and you and the Coast Guard's out there. FedEx is out there, right? >> You know, are you counting that as far as the airport employees? >> Okay. So that's a thousand that's out there. So I think I think you know within itself it's a community in itself and I think I mean you know there's there's a lot of places when it's close by a major employer and somebody's selling tacos and that's the first place they go. >> Yeah. There's not much out there right now and it's a it there is traffic. You know it's a high traffic corridor but not much out there. >> I mean the I still want to call it strike. In fact the other day I called it a maverick market. I'm digressing that the one that we have there on 37 and uh it's before your time and way before you guys time. But anyway, there's a convenience store there that you if you go pump gas in the morning, man, there's that taco place, the the food that they have inside the stripes is just packed. So if if you're by major employers and they're grabbing a snack and those people aren't the ones that are going to eat in the airport, that's basically for for our passengers. So I think it's a great project. I know that it would it's been a couple of years in the making, you know, so keep up the great work and I I won't jump the gun and make the motion on this one, but because there's two more people have to speak. The other one just personal to me. Thank you, >> Councilman Roy. Um, Peter, the only other thing I I was thinking about after I asked for the lease um um um excuse me, the appraisal is that there's other facilities on campus that lease also, >> right? >> Correct. >> Can you just give me an overview of what they pay? >> Yes, we can get you that. >> Okay. I mean, um it's a little different situation. and most of the sea stores that I've been involved in um they purchase you know I mean they purchase the land and that and um so I haven't seen that many leases it's not typical but I still would like to compare so if I could get an idea because I know that there's um other leases there's FedEx there's the Driscoll uh there's a Driscoll operation where they fly doctors the I'm assuming some of the uh the the the the private >> Yeah, there's private jet >> companies and that I'm sure they lease also just to have a comparison. I I still my gut feeling tells me that's a little low. >> Okay, we'll get you that. Yes, sir. >> Council woman, >> I'm just curious. We own all that land out there, right? Friends you're talking about. >> That's correct. Right. >> So 196 parking spaces. Why would you need 190 cents parking? 96. There is no way you're ever going to fill those. >> It was based on their model for their facilities for each of their locations. >> Okay. And and my thought just is we we have all that land. So, we want to be able to lease other land. So, to me, that's just a waste for 196 park, but that's his project. >> We'll find out. We'll get you that answer as well. >> Uh this thing, because it's a real estate transaction, that would be for longer than five years. It's a lease. We there's a 30-day provision before the second reading. >> Just as an FYI. So, it won't be next week. It'll be about 30 days from now we'll bring this back. We'll have all this all this information for you. >> And 40-year lease. Is that normal? Is that what you usually do? >> Um, it's Yeah, it's Yeah, it's pretty pretty normal. We don't, you know, we're not in the business of leasing too many convenience stores, but our leases range from 25 to 40 years. >> I I'm going to support it today, but I have a lot of questions, but I'm going to support the first one. and then hopefully we'll get some answers. Thank you. >> Yeah. And then hopefully we can get the BIES, excuse me, the Texan folks were supposed to be here today. Uh but they need to be here for that next meeting as well. So they were scheduled to come, but they had a conflict. So they really should be here to represent their product. >> Councilwoman Comples. >> Okay. Well, I'm excited about this project. Uh, I'm glad that uh my fellow council members are really scrutinizing and asking really good questions, but um but I I feel good about it. I feel uh that they're, you know, showing some some faith uh in our city and investment in our city and it's been going on for a while. Uh the airport is is showing some wonderful um just projects in the you know in the future. I mean I was just there last week for our first flight you know to Denver and um I'm just excited about what's going on and and I hope that the citizens of Corpus Christie uh will see this as a positive u thing in our city and I'm I'm excited. So that's all I'm I'm going to be supporting it. Thank you, Councilwoman. Okay, so we are going to I'm going to go ahead and open uh public comment. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to make comment on item number 17? Rachel Cavedo D1. Um one, I'm concerned that we are giving a $10 million tax incentive to a successful business. Um, also the lease amount is um over the course of the 40 um the lease amount is we have restaurants paying $5,000 a month in rent and yet we have this huge monstrosity of a building that's only going to be paying 4,000 and it's only going to be re-evaluated every 5 years as for a 3% uh increase and 3% isn't even cover inflation just by the way FYI. So, I'm getting really exhausted coming here and seeing that the contracts, every it feels like every contract is being made in favor of the vendors. It's never in favor of the community because a 40-year contract doesn't leave us a whole lot of room to negotiate if there is something nefarious happening with the product. Did we not reach out to Stripes? And actually, I'd like to ask gentlemen here, who was the hotel year that said um that they wouldn't come without a gas station. >> Mhm. >> I was before my time. >> Um >> Okay. So, that's >> objection, mayor. >> That's a bit of a conflict. >> Commenters are not are supposed to be making representations and discussions to the city council and they're not supposed to turn around and start talking people. >> Point taken. So I don't understand why hotel years are being talked to considering the uh drama that we currently have with the current hotel year who uh forged federal documents. So city staff shouldn't be talking directly to hotel years. Um they should follow the same protocols as everyone else. Um, I do happen to know that there's one of these in Port A and even the blue collar guys can't afford the food prices at the Texan there and they don't like the food either. So, something did I I'm I'm hoping we talked to Stripes. I'm not sure if we did. Um, but something doesn't seem right here. So, I'm going to investigate. Thank you. >> Anyone else? Okay, we are closing. I'm closing public comment and I think we have a motion and a second. So, please submit your vote. >> Mayor, we don't have a motion in this. We do not. Yeah. No, ma'am. >> Oh, okay. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second now. Sorry. Thank you. Please submit your vote. >> Two readings, right? >> Yes. >> Yes. Two readings and it'll be about 30 days before we bring the second reading back per the charter because it's a real estate transaction. So, we'll have all those and we can even uh we'll do some one-on-one briefings with the council as well if anyone wants them. >> Okay. Okay, the motion carries. Item number 18 is an ordinance amending the roadway master plan map of mobility CC, a transportation element of the comprehensive plan of the city of Corpus Christi to remove a section of Fred's Folly Drive. Oh, I'm sorry. This was um requested by city council members Roland Betta, Mark Scott, and Everett Roy. Mr. Betta. Yeah. >> Okay. So um first off I just want to reiterate my frustration with three signature memos but this was the only uh means which was necessary. Um what is it? I know uh my good friend all the way to the left uh what is it made sure to bring that up and uh what is it and I appreciate him doing so but you know the way this works administratively there was no other opportunity to bring it up uh because uh I guess the the developer asked for an amendment and once it goes to planning commission at that point and it was denied then at that point it stops. So I talked with city staff u you know Mr. Alara and he basically stated that this was the probably the the cleanest form to be able to bring it up. So, what I'd like to start out with is is and that's what it is. I just wanted to give it the opportunity so that way the council could review it. I know there's somebody here representing the developer, but I'd like city staff to come up um and and at least explain the timeline of how we got to this point and uh what what the developer is requesting and then how that deviates from the master uh the uh master plan map for the mobility national mobility plan. Okay. Thank you so much. >> No, not a problem. Good afternoon, mayor and council. My name is Rene Couture. I'm the assistant director of public works and um I'm here in Ernie's absence. So um just for some background um on this particular exhibit that we have have here on the screen it kind of gives context and um provides some illustration to um some of what what I'll say. So on this map it basically outlines you know our master plan in and off the Rodfield and Yorktown corridor. Ourel streets are highlighted in red on the map and um highlighted in green are your collector streets. Um the properties that um had come to public works back in September of 2024 um are shown in blue and in pink. The Aaliy Point development is shown in blue. Um on the left in pink is a Yorktown Village development. Um both properties approached us with an amendment request to delete um a segment of Fred's Folly um which goes through their property. I'll show you um a little bit better on another slide, but um Fred's Folly's proposed as a C1 collector, 60 foot rideway dedication required. Um and due to the alignment and um some of the construction requirements that would be required, they asked for an amendment to the master plan that was taken to planning commission in December of 2024. planning commission um denied the amendment request and um asked to maintain the integrity of the master plan um and they decided to maintain that simply because they're trying to maintain connectivity for the schools that were being built by CCISD. And on this particular screen, you'll see those schools highlighted south of Yorktown, u the elementary school that opened up in 2024 in the teal color, and then the orange color is the middle school that opened up in 2025. So, this particular slide um better highlights the uh both properties, their proposed developments there. Um it shows the alignment overlaid over both of the properties uh indicating, you know, some of the issues that they had brought to us. But as far as the construction requirements that would be required um in addition to the dedication of the rightway, there was a drainage crossing there at the north across the ditch uh to connect Fred's Folly that exists to this section and there would be a signal required at Yorktown. Um this particular slide is information that we had when we went to planning commission that showed the boundaries for the elementary school which would only extend to the ditch section. And this school opened up like I said in 2024. In 2025 um the middle school opened and this information became privy to us after planning commission but is one of the reasons they supported the request to maintain the alignment because as you can see for the middle school the boundary not only extends north of the ditch but north to the near the other collector uh Brook Road. So we did receive options from the Zali point developer right in which they had asked us to um first you know removed the alignment which planning commission denied. Another option was to reroute uh the alignment and this still meets the intent of the plan but this would reroute Fred's folly around their development. It would put a little bit more um constraints on the abiding property owner but it would meet the intent of the um master plan. And then one other option they presented and both developers did this in all fairness, they asked to put the roadway on each other's respective properties. Um but in any case, like I said, our our our stance is to maintain the master plan and that's what we um we supported after the planning commission um amendment uh hearing. We still stand by and support that. >> Okay. And just one other thing I and I appreciate all the work that you did. Thank you so much. You know, I know one of the things that we talked about is maintaining the integrity. I just didn't want to I hate to contradict staff. Um, and now did we have public safety look at this with regard to and was there um any type of traffic impact analysis? >> There's not a traffic impalis um required at this particular because it's not a a site development type of analysis. This is a very high level uh more qualitative than kind of quantitative you know data that goes in behind this but um Chief Wade is here if he wants to speak towards public safety. >> We did have public safety look at it. So the fire department looked at it and and has has uh expressed some opinions. So chief is here to talk about those. >> So Brandon Wade fire chief. So there's no requirements by us by fire code saying it has to be in there. But for us and public safety, when we look at if the master plan has the roadway in there, which allows us um other options and access back into neighborhoods, we're always that's going to help, you know, fire department, EMS get into, get out of with those options. So, for our stance, when we look at it, uh we support keeping the master plan as is because it allows us access to and from back in those neighborhoods. >> Okay. Um, and then I' I'd like to invite the developers representative to come up and then kind of um discuss the the the options that that that uh I guess that were presented or that that the developer is amanable to. >> Good afternoon, uh, council. My name is Terra Sona. We represent the developer on this. So, we've been working with our with our client for a little over a year and we presented this to public works and traffic and everything was going going forward and then it was it was put to a stop. So, they've been dealing with it a little bit over a year. The there will still be access for the fire department and and the departments to utilize whatever is developed on both sides. So there'll still be access to that and there is an alternative pathway on Oso Parkway which is in the master plan for them for the connectivity of the schools and the and the streets which are are a concern. Another thing to bring up when we were discussing with public works is removing the one bridge that needs to be built on the north to connect Fresley is about 1.5 million dollars of taxpayers money that could be avoided because we do have connectivity about half a mile down the road on Oso Parkway. So, and then one other thing that was brought up when we were presenting this to public works and and the departments is it also produces about $40 million of taxable income to the city on this development that's been on hold for the past year. So, those are a couple facts for y'all to consider. So, I know it been brought up. So, I'm here to field questions. Oh, one I'm sorry, one last thing and I'll then I'll answer the question and uh public works and traffic were on board previously before getting denied to to remove it. So, >> Councilman Kentu, >> who's the owner of the property next door? >> Do you know? I I don't know off the top of my head. Does anybody know who's the other owner by chance? The one in the in the pink box? >> I'm not sure of his name, but it's a Yorktown Village. >> Have they came forward and complain about the project also? >> Um, no, not since um after planning commission and he is correct. At planning commission, as I stated, we did provide >> because majority of that street is going to be on his property, right? Uh yes, a majority of >> I remember I remember getting a phone call from him. Yes. He was very upset. I think his name was um my not mistaken. >> It sounds familiar, but yes, I I don't remember. >> He was very upset about that. That was he was going to lose all that property. Okay. I just want to make sure. Thank you, >> Councilman Scott. >> Wait on it. Wait on it. My my my Labrador. Um, so I get I get I get police, fire, and EMS want as many streets as possible. I And that's that's a Mark Scott statement, but I get it. But I thought it was interesting that between Simmeron, I guess I'll ask city staff. Between Simmeron and Rodfield, there's not a We We talked about this. I'm cheating. We talked about this yesterday. So because because I I get I get the concept is we got these squares and we're going to cut a square in the middle and that's going to provide this connectivity and we need to keep with the master plan because that's what the master plan does. But I think did think it was interesting that there's precedent to not put that middle street in because I guess there was in the master plan to put the street in between Simmeron and Rod Field that was eliminated I guess when Delmare purchased the property and developed. >> Correct. So, so there is some history that that you don't have to have a street, you know, in between major intersections and and uh so I had a couple a couple interesting thoughts on this one. You know, we we've talked about saving money. I and if we don't put this in, then I I think you think it's less than $1.4 million, and I certainly have no idea, but there is taxpayer dollars that will be allocated to the bridge uh if we if we do this. Uh and so we save some money if we don't that now I think that my killies here heal in all this is that once you extend Oso Parkway uh well then you do have you have access Oso Parkway have which by the way we'll love for cycling um and you have Rodfield um and then I guess you'd have Yorktown and on the other side would be what what's that slow right so you'd have that so I don't I don't I don't see the need savings Uh I I was I was told that public works and traffic at one time at least was supportive. Um what I don't understand is that there's these three options and I don't know who came up with the options. >> Um I guess the engineer representing a valid point that um >> so could you talk me through these three options? Is that something that that you guys did? >> So the in the talks with public work traffic we presented you know you just don't present one option. So different options ideal for both parties that own that would develop this that would provide taxable property income for the city would be to eliminate. Now if the city said said no, there was two other options. We moved forward with completely removing uh the the street from the master plan when traffic and public works were on board after we presented they went with option one and we were all going forward with planning commission. I believe both property owners were on board. Everything was a go and then there was a halt put to it. >> Okay. And then option two and three came from subsequent >> they they they were presented all at the same time. Got it. >> All at the same time and the best path forward because of the connectivity on the other side of Oso Parkway and what you just discussed was to remove it from the master plan. I also think it's interesting that if you did put this street through on the other side of the ditch are a number of houses that have uh driveways that empty on to Fred's Folly, which is going to be really interesting. I I'm not sure I' I'd want that if I would had a house. >> Also, it it's also a culde-sac right now that has a beautiful uh sidewalk path that connects the entire neighborhoods of uh Greystone Park and Grace Graceand Park. So you have I want to say probably about two miles of walkway and bike way right now that would be hindered if you if you did this. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So So I'm not I'm not angry at staff. I I get it. But sometimes I just don't think you need it. I just don't I mean I >> I think people want to live in places where there's not, you know, a lot of access. You know, you want to have a a house where if your dog gets loose, you're not worried. You know, you can chase him down before he gets to a major interse. >> Yeah. Kids want to play outside or you're you're walking. And anyhow, I I I'm okay with eliminating it and that's why I signed the document. And if it helps us get 40 million in development, then that's a good thing. I I did think that the that what' you say, Yorktown Partners, I thought they wanted something. They they want some kind of street, right? that to that you can >> Yorktown Village, that's the development shown in pink. Um, yes, they like I said, they were on board, of course, with the removal. They were on board with relocating it. You know, at the end of the day, I don't think either developer um you know, wanted the road necessarily just because they were looking at impacts >> develop land and the way it exists now. God dog it that makes oneif of it, I guess, or 1/4 of it really non undevelopable, >> you know, the way it the way it it's currently in the plan. Um so any I'm okay with eliminating it. >> Okay, >> Councilwoman Vaughn. >> Okay. So, if we don't eliminate it, it's going to cost the taxpayers more money. Correct? >> Yes, ma'am. >> If we don't eliminate it, if we keep it, it'll cost taxpayer money. Is that what you're saying? >> Yeah. Tell me which one. >> Yes, that's what I'm asking. >> Yeah. Um, the city would uh this contributions from the developer to build the road, the city ultimately would pay, you know, would port a good portion of the construction cost. We know how much? >> Uh Renee, do we know the estimated cost? >> Estimate. >> Well, ju just I guess um keep in mind that the master plan inherently it requires collaboration between the city and the developer. Yeah. >> You know, so we have streets on here that are C1 collectors. That is a developer's responsibility to build regardless. Anything that's an oversized street, that's where the city would participate, but there would have to be a fund to help in that participation. In this particular case, I don't have an estimate. There was never an estimate provided to us with regards to the drainage crossing. What we do have is an agreement from 2009. We found the ordinance in which the developer to the north who built Fred's Folly, they deposited their share into an account um because the way it works for oversized drainage connections, anything above 15 feet, um the city participates in that oversized. the developer share in anything up to 15 feet for the bottom width of a ditch. So we have half of the money that the developer put in in 2009. So this particular developer would be responsible for that other half to make up that 15 foot for that cost. The city would put in the rest, but that's understood in a master plan that you may have streets that would cross drainage um c that would require drainage crossings. you have streets that may be oversized because of the capacity, but at that time the city makes a decision and this is where we're at is do we want the roadway there because like I said in a lot of our streets on the plan they do require collaboration and cost sharing between the city and the developer. >> Okay. And sometimes you can change plans. They're not set in stone. Um you made a statement public works and traffic were on board at one time. What happened? >> Uh council member got involved and put a halt to it. >> No, excuse me. I'll I'll answer that question. Oh, sorry. Yeah, I would disregard >> She was looking at me. I apologize. >> Okay. No, no worries. I would disregard that answer, but so uh Ernie who's in a conference today and the three signators were aware of that, but we wanted to bring it forward anyway. As he um as he learned more about this project and ultimately had to make recommendations, uh he got more information is is the bottom line. So, he got input from the fire chief. He got input from the school districts. >> Who is he? >> He is Ernie. Ernesto Deligaro. Yeah. So, as Ernesto worked through the planning commission and then to get to city council or not, uh he um he got more information. He probably should have had it way back here, but as he progressed forward to points in time, he got input from the fire chief and input from the school districts and looked at the map, talked to the traffic team and basically changed his recommendation. >> Correct. Um we had limited information when this first came in in September. when we took it to planning commission in December said uh we didn't have any information about the connectivity that came to light after in 2025. So when we presented and this is where where this exhibit I don't know if it can be displayed where it came into play where as far as the schools and the connectivity all we had information on was the elementary school that was in place and the school boundary only extended up to the debt section um planning commission I don't know if they were aware of information and why they asked for it to be maintained on the plan but subsequently we obtained information that was published because we like to go off of um actual data right And um the what was published indicated that the schools on boundaries would extend further north and that was the reason for maintaining the support that planning commission um and their recommendation they had provided and why it looked like we switched. Was it switched? It was limited information that we had at the time. >> And why would we not have gotten more information before we made that? >> Well, we can't control when the school publishes their information or you know when things up. >> So I'm about truth and transparency. So I can't ignore what he said. So, did a council member get involved? Is that the reason that it was changed? >> No. And and I can absolutely say that plays no part in what we do in public works? I mean, our team looks we we have conversations internally. We look at the data in front of us that's presented. And at the time, we only had information where we're looking at connectivity as um you know, something that's uh you know, as importance. We only had information on the middle school and as far No, sorry, the elementary school information on the middle school wasn't published to the public until um in 2025. >> So is the answer no council member got involved? >> No council member got involved. >> Council me, excuse me, a council member a council member did educate us and did get involved. However, Ernie is the public works director and has to give the ultimate opinion on this and recommendation and um and so and that's what he that's what he did and and he got better information as time progressed. I'm glad you asked the question, Councilwoman, uh because I don't want the community or the developer or the council to think the city manager stopped it or a council member stopped it. It was a set of professionals in public works who analyzed the information, got better information as time progressed and did change their opinion and their recommendation, but that's because they got better information. >> Correct. >> And so they're here then so and so that's what led them to their conclusion and ultimate recommendation. >> And I appreciate you telling me a council member got involved. >> Yeah. >> Because that's the truth. They got involved and when he comes up here and says that >> Yeah. >> we should answer that. >> Yeah. A council >> I don't care who we are, >> right? >> If we get involved. So, thank you for clarifying. A council member did get involved. >> I was involved with the council member >> uh analyzing the site, looking at how wide the roadway is at Fred Folly, I guess, south of Yorktown and uh and and being educated from a council member who knows the area who has not >> and that's not unusual >> and it's there's nothing wrong with that and who's known it for decades, you know, and is and is a good advocate for good traffic circulation. But >> more so than say myself who doesn't live out there or public works director who doesn't live out there >> because the district councilman, they know their area and I don't fault any for anybody for that. I just want us to always be transparent and tell the truth. >> Yeah. And thank you for bringing that up. >> Yes. And and I don't know where I'm at on this because I'm about saving money and if we don't need it, >> you know, so I'm not sure that we do. I haven't been convinced either way. Thank you, >> Councilman Hernandez. >> Okay. Um, and uh, this is this has been kind of an odyssey that I look back it's probably about three four years that I've been looking at this particular location. I think it was before Aale, Alex Aale owned the property. But, uh, I've taken the city manager out to that location at least twice, maybe three times. I've taken the public works director out there uh, when he first came on board. I took Chief Wade out there uh when he first came on board last year and it was one of the things where I was concerned about the mobility because who knows when um Ozo Parkway is going to get built. There's a you know and and then there's not no guarantees that Slow Road will actually connect into it because there's private property there of an individual owner that may not allow or may not have any development for that street to be built. So what effectively have happen is you have one entrance into those neighborhoods which is uh specifically slow road and then if you look at the elementary school there uh cold elementary try to get into that neighborhood at 3:00 in the afternoon it creates some challenges uh for emergency vehicles to get in there. So, you know, I can and I, you know, I the Councilman Scott gave the example about the giving up of the easement of Bronx because Delmare didn't want to build it, but there was more than one way to get into those neighborhoods. You could either go through airline or you could go through Simmeron. In this case, there's only one way to get in. Okay? So, you know, for safety purposes, you want to make sure you have at least two ways to get in there in case something happens on one side. Also, in terms of mobility, you have um and you have two fire stations that you can get to this fire station 17 and I believe fire station 4 that's on Rodfield, but they would still have to go through one entrance. So, I want to make sure that we have the mobility for this area. And I understand Councilman Scott doesn't live in this area and doesn't really have concern for the residents in those areas, but that but we need to have the mobility for those folks there. Now, I understand uh the developers don't want to pay for this, and I get it. And I have a relationship with Alex Dailyaly. He he actually coached my son in in youth soccer 15 years ago. His son and my son are the same age. Caro and my son are the same age. So, I've known him for a long time. I It has nothing to do with the developer or who wants to pay for this, but this is for the safety of those residents. I' I've been, you know, on this for more than four years. I've seen the development out there where you have, you know, a lot not a lot of mobility and everybody had is fed onto a single road. It's important for the safety and mobility of that area to make sure that we have this road and I'm against uh removing it. I am the district representative and I don't want to have this road removed. Thank you, >> Councilman Betta. >> Here. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Uh first off, uh I just uh in defense of my good buddy to my left, the other one. Um what is it? U he's an atlarge councilman ran at large. What is it? Uh yeah. So I'm sure that that So I think it's completely out of line to make make those kind of comments and it's just political theater. Um the the but the thing is is I want to I I I just want to ask where do we go from here? because the developer and and mind you this council member got involved. So that's obviously how it got here. So yeah. So um where do we go from here to be able for them because now by the at least where I'm concerned is that we the the developer presented some options and Peter I'm looking at you. the developer presented some options and I'm sure your staff could help the staff could help and uh at that time it's my understanding that uh because staff didn't have all the information then it went to planning commission based on the recommendation they were following through with the recommendation that staff had made then it went to planning commission and died so now how do we get the other options on the table so that way the council can make an informed decision >> yeah unfortunately I can't ask I don't know if it's Deeus or or Renee, but that um >> because here here if I may develop if I may >> and and because you're looking at a $40 million development on one side, >> right? >> And once again, I bring up to how much adorum does that create? We talk about having money for streets. We talk about having money for you, you know, that goes directly to our bottom line. And I understand the concern was safety. So, there were some options presented with regard to the safety. And if this council votes no, I'm okay with that. I don't have a problem with it. It's just that now what we've done is that the interest payments on that property, all right, are very expensive to a developer that has has is a proven developer, you know, and and then on in in essence, the longer we wait or kick that can down the road, the longer it takes for us to collect that ad valorum. Okay? So that's revenue that we lose. Now I know we have to look at it from all factor but we have to expedite that. So how do how do we get it back to a point where the developer was making these recommendations? >> Well, we did we provided that opportunity after planning commission um we had um correspondence conversations with both developers um asking them to try to come to a resolution on an alignment that would work. And unfortunately um we were never able to get to one resolution but the options um were again presented to both developers to try to work out a solution um and you know obviously it just comes down to cost and whether or not and in this stage of the process right it's just really um do we want the roadway on the master plan or not once they move into that I call it the next phase you know the city does offer mitigation for any um for construction costs, you know, but it's on the developer. It's their responsibility to demonstrate if the costs are disproportionate to their development. And at that point, there can be mitigation discussed between council and city management as far as you know, if costs were to be offset offset and how much that would be. But in this part, it's just really focused on do we want the roadway, do we want the connectivity? And then once we answer that question, the next phase would be then determining. But but the developer did re did offer was it the developer that offered the the alternatives or was it city staff? Okay. Yes. >> So so at that point I guess I have to ask the developer >> um do we have the opport are are is the developer open to those options? >> We have to take it back to to our to our client to look look at that. At this point we were moving forward with the removal of it sir. >> Okay. All right. And then so if u this is my last chance to speak. So if I were to want to move this forward um what is it then? If I were want to move this forward, what would I have to vote to? Because there's there's not it's just it's just to amend it to remove the the the red the road from the uh uh from from the master plan. Is that it? Is it that simple? Yes, Councilman. If you if the council if the majority of the council says to remove that street or road from the major uh transportation plan, then it would be removed. Right now it's uh yeah, right now it's in the plan and so the devel it's in that's a council approved plan and so the developer is required to build it. So to remove it or to change it would take a council action. >> Okay. And the only reason is that because the the the the the master plan as written really really contradicts the what the developer is is request is wanting to do to be able to provide a $40 million development, not counting the development on the other side. >> Correct. >> Okay. Well, then for now, I'll I'll I'll make that motion to amend it as uh amending the roadway master plan of mobility corpus Christi uh um uh transportation element of the comprehensive plan to remove sections of Fred Folly Drive >> and I know there's others speak. Thank you. >> Okay, Councilman Scott. >> Awesome, Gil. Hey, Markes. Yeah. Um that was wow. Um a couple thoughts. One, yeah, let me just reiterate there is no way to get from Yorktown to get back into that neighborhood between Simmeron and Rodfield. End of story. So there is some precedent that we don't do that. Um, I would love to go I would ask what the Fred's Folly folks would think about and and extending that because all of their uh driveways empty onto Fred's Folly. Uh, which so I'm I think not not extending that is is a safety issue to them is is a positive issue to them. Also, it's just fascinating to me that if we that we if you're going to do it, why would you do Fred's Folly? And I I can't find it now. It's up on your map. Why wouldn't you move it over to the next street over so at least it's more of a straight shot? I don't I don't understand that. I I I think there are Can you come back up and put that map up because I I can't I was looking at Google Earth here. So, that's just bizarre to me that we have a plan that that takes off of whatever that is, a fifth of developable property. why you wouldn't at least attempt to connect into whatever that next street over or the second street to the left if that's if that's the god-given plan that we need that connection that connectivity I do think there ought to be a conversation between both developers you know I think they both have a should have a say so in this if I am okay with eliminating Fred's folly extension between Yorktown and uh la lo pahas or lo auroros A royos if that's I don't know what street that is. Um so I'm okay with that. If there has to be a street it would seem to me you would want to run it down in down between those two properties. I don't know the Yorktown folks but I would I would ask that. So my thought is if there if we want to eliminate it I'm good with that. If we if we have to keep it, we ought to at least table this for 30 days and allow opportunity to visit with the developers to come up with a better solution that one that eliminates 1/3 of developable property. Uh keeping in mind that I mean I know you say it's 1.4 million and I think when we talked yesterday you were thinking four or $500,000 total cost, but the developers are going to put in 50,000 a piece. So, what I'm told is that the previous developer put 50 in. The new guy is going to have to put 50 in. That's $100,000. But the bridge is somewhere between she says we think four three or 400 and you say a million4. The difference, whatever it is, if it's a dollar, it's it's it's taxpayers dollars. So, I I'm I'm all for eliminating saves some money. I think there's still access and and I'm a little offended that people don't think I care about that neighborhood. I'm okay with putting this off if we want to have a conversation uh Mr. Betta with the adjoining property owners to see if there's a solution we can all appreciate. >> Well, here I'll withdraw my motion if it goes in that direction. >> Okay. Council Hernandez. >> Okay. I want to clear up a few things. Um this was turned down by the planning commission correct? >> Oh, sorry. >> This is voted down by the planning commission. >> Correct. So, normally when you have something that's voted down by the planning commission, it comes to uh city council, you have to have a supermajority to overrule the the the planning commission. Correct. >> Uh legal provided clarification on that that since planning commission voted no, it's not an amendment to the master plan. So, that's why it wasn't brought to council. >> Okay. But since this was brought up separately to circumvent the planning commission's uh vote, how does it still require a supermajority to vote to overturn what the planning commission recommended? >> Miles says no because it's not a zoning change. >> It only applies to zoning that you require a supermajority if the if the plan commission votes it votes it down. >> Rebecca I I'd have to look. I don't know. >> Okay. >> I thought we were looking this up because I know I brought it up to uh Ernie when I met with him last week about it. >> We did. >> I thought Buck was supposed to be look at this. >> Buck provided a response saying no, it wasn't required. >> That it's not required. So if we want to circumvent planning commission, we just need to do three signatur signature memo. >> The well I think what you're not going to get is a staff is a positive staff recommendation at that point. But the zoning for purposes of zoning the zoning ordinance itself the the does require supermajority for z certain types of zoning changes that lack the that are being opposed by a certain percentage or lack a approval by the planning commission. The in this case because it does it's not a zoning change per se then no supermajority is required. You just don't have a positive staff recommendation. All right. Can we can we verify that and and have something in writing to uh to confirm that? >> Okay. >> Yes, we can. >> Also, um humor aside, there's no ordinance attached to this uh request. Do we need an ordinance so we can actually read the ordinance to vote on? There is one attached. >> Yeah, there is. >> Maybe I didn't see it. I'll leave it there. Um, also I did uh meet with the Munoz engineering. I met with actually uh Mr. Munoz the and talked about some of the other options uh to where we could tee it off. The reason it had to be on Fred's Folly is because Fred's Folly is built to a C1 collector. Both uh Las Bahas and Boomerang are not they're built to local standards which is a 28 20 28 foot curb to curb as opposed to the C1 collector which is Fred's Folly. It's a much wider road similar to how Fred's Folly was built on the other side of Yorktown. So it doesn't make sense to put those onto local roads but it should be put on the C1 collector as it was originally designed. >> Right. And councilman that goes to Councilman Scott's, you know, question about can we just move it over to the left a little bit, >> right? And that's that's why I wanted to bring that up. >> Yeah. The road the width and Rene can help, but you probably have them, Councilman, but the width of the road is much wider both on each side of that that undeveloped property because it was contemplated that this would be a a major roadway. >> Correct. Now, I don't know why that didn't line up on the other side of Yorktown. You know, I can't do anything about it. Everything's built out the way it was. That was done well before any of us were on council. >> Correct. >> Okay. So, in in meeting with uh Ram Munoz about this in terms of of how it was designed, it didn't I mean the the master plan shows a there's a road and a recommendation. It doesn't have to be built exactly like that. It can be adjusted and and manu maneuvered. And there was a if you pull up option I believe option two on on the presentation is what I had talked to him about possibly doing have kind of Elling it off there and maybe splitting the uh on the property between the two developers for the C1 collector. Now, I don't think it's exactly on that line specifically, but if the, you know, if it's something that they could share in the expense on. Now, I'd always anticipated that the bridge would have to be a bond project, and it was something I was going to recommend as one of the the bond projects for district 5, but that is something that is needed for that mobility. So, like I said, I recommend that we keep this road there. we can adjust how it's designed and how it looks so it doesn't, you know, affect like Councilman Scott taking off a fifth of of one of the um developers properties. We can square that off, but ultimately we still need that road for mobility and then putting it over uh straight onto Las Bahas. Again, I said it's they're two local roads, but La Bahas goes right into Fred's Folly. So, it's it you know, it it doesn't make a whole lot of sense there. Um, I would love to that this would have been designed differently. I mean, if we could have, you know, maybe somebody in development services or planning could have kind of caught this on the front side. I'm not blaming anybody, okay? It's just, you know, we have to deal with what we have. We only have one way in in uh into this neighborhood. I want to make sure that we have safety in position and try to work with what we have. Fred's father, he's a C1 collector. It's a C1 collector on the other side. Uh, it is what it is. It's not lined up. If you look at where OSO Parkway is, it's not lined up either. Uh we've got there's a lot of things that we have to try and work through. So, let's let's see if we can come together, work with the developers on both sides of on both sides of this street and and figure out how to make it work. But ultimately, we need to make sure that for the long run, we have mobility for everybody that's in those neighborhoods. Thank you, >> Councilman. Can you >> Roland? I don't want to ever hear any more lip about my memos again. Um, does the owners of the property have to pay for the traffic light? >> They would in this case. Um, Yorktown is proposed to have a signal at Fred's Folly. this development came in afterwards, but um like I said earlier, you know, where we're at and under our purview, it's really does the road need to be maintained? Now, the developer, I guess they have the right per se if they demonstrate costs and disproportionality in those costs to then maybe ask or petition to the city, but for what I'm, you know, what we oversee and what we do, we're just really focused on the roadway. >> How much do you think it's going to cost them to do all this work? >> I don't know. I don't have that number. Um there's, you know, an estimate I think provided in the roadway master plan that chose 400k for signal. Um but I'm not sure what that >> entailed. It may not have just accounted for. I know the cost can be lower if you're just putting in one pole. >> I really want to sit down with um the owner next door and get his feedback because I remember him calling me about it and he was really upset about it and um >> we have no estimates to go off of. >> Yeah. Yeah. And he's a big taxpayer for Northeast County. They have a lot of properties and a lot of land and stuff and I want to hear his side and stuff like that and I really would like to make a motion to table this for 30 days if it's possible. >> Second, >> but um >> Okay. >> Yeah, we have a motion and a second to table. Councilwoman Vaughn, >> you know, we accommodate developers all the time. Cordon, I guess the name that comes in here, we accommodate more, but he deserves the same respect as we do the others. And it's very rare that I agree with Mark, but I do today. But hey, may not be a long bunch of them, but today I agree with you. I think we need to give them the opportunity to come up with some of their options because it doesn't sound to me like we're any of us are sold on the options. So, I'd support your tableabling it. >> Yeah. Okay. We have a motion um motion and a second to table. Let's see. Did do we need to do public comment if we're tableing? We do. Okay, come and go ahead and open public comment on item number 18 if anybody would like to make comment. Okay, I'll close public comment and please submit your vote on tableabling the item for 30 days. Okay, the motion carries. Okay, so we are going it is 152. Uh we're going to break for lunch. Uh when we return, we will have uh one item left, which is an update on water supply projects. Uh so the council will go into executive session on items 20 through 22 per Texas government code sections 551.071 and 551.072. We will be back. Okay, welcome back. We are back from lunch and are going to address our last item on the agenda, which is item number 19, an update on our water supply projects. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. Nick Winklman, interim chief operating officer, Corpus Christie Water. Today, I'll I'll give you an update on each of our water supply projects, but I will definitely start with some key slides from the National Weather Service. As you know, we have a briefing with them once a week, and we want to share a couple of their slides with all of you this week. First slide shows the uh 7-day stream flow uh going into our reserv reservoirs within our basin. As you can see in the arrow points to it, but we're in that uh maroon reddish area for our um our our watershed and the stream flows are very below normal and the National Weather Service certainly reminds us of that every week. that has an impact because that is what's providing any inflow into our reservoir systems. Additionally, I've got uh their their chart that shows soil moisture. The soil moisture in our area of Texas and within our wershed is extremely low. And how does this impact us if there is any precipitation? Basically, it's harder for the water to make it to the reservoirs to benefit us. Little bit of historical data from the National Weather Service. Um the graph on the left of the screen that is from the National Weather Service. This is uh normal rainfall uh within our area. I do want to point out this is for the city of Corpus Christi, but this is normal rainfall from 1981 to 2010. As you can see, the the big month typically historically for us has been in September. Um you can certainly see the the bar chart how high that is. I do want to um also point out that October is usually a higher rainfall month and once you get past October, we re historically we really don't see anything until the May or June time frame and that that is exactly what the state climatologist told us about a month ago when we met with him. Uh I wanted to also point out that uh um sort of the the September totals uh for the last uh four years are on the right and then also annual rainfall totals to date. Uh in 2025 we've seen 16.1 in of rainfall. And the the point here is a normal rainfall year isn't what we need. We need abnormal rainfall. We need extra extraordinary rainfall to make a dent in this drought. When you look at the the 3 to four week uh temperature and precipitation outlook, uh falls right in with what the state climatologist was telling us. A little warmer than normal weather and certainly drier uh or drier than normal below normal precipitation. With that, I'll get into the updates of our uh water supply projects. The first one we'll talk about today is the newasis groundwater project. Uh so, as you recall, we have two well fields. The first is the eastern wellfield. These are the properties along County Road 73 that the city owns. We've drilled eight wells. Um and we are currently discharging up to 8 MGD. Uh if you recall from our our last week's conversation, we modified well one. Well one had the highest total dissolved solids of any of the wells. So we essentially sealed off the lower portion of the well to improve water quality. That work has been done. Uh the pump has been reinstalled and we actually started pumping it. We pumped it for a couple hours yesterday. So, we'll have some better data on that as the week goes on. Uh, the current expenditures for the well field is $15.7 million. Um, the long-term sustainable pumping that our hydrogeeologist has estimated is 11 MGD is 10 to 11 MGD. The western wellfield will require an additional Benab Banks permit. The work is ongoing in support of that. We have Corollo engineers working on uh additional studies along the river and to do our homework along with aquatic life monitoring as well so that we provide as complete a submittal package as possible for the TCQ because this will be bed and banks permit number two. Um in that western well and and I do want to stop for a minute again wells are ordered sequentially. So well 9ine is the first well in the western well field. We don't have nine wells there. It's just well nine total overall. So well 9ine has been drilled. Uh we've test pumped the well, took water quality samples and designed the permanent pump. The permanent pumping equipment has been ordered and uh uh we'll have it in in approximately 3 weeks or so. Well number 10 uh has been drilled. The pump testing is complete and we're in the process of designing the permanent pumping assembly. Uh well number 11, the drilling is complete. We have not test pumped it yet or taken any water quality samples. That work will be done over the next one to two weeks and we are currently drilling well 12. Now, additionally, you can see the um we have started work on the the water line in the interior of the wellfield. Uh there's a picture there uh to to the right of the text. You can see the CCW crews currently installing the water line. Uh that picture was taken yesterday, so it's it's pretty updated, fresh off the press picture. Um the hydrogeeologist has estimated sustainable pumping at 17 MGD. I would like to point out that we're getting more data every day as we test more of these wells. Uh initially the thought is short-term pumping we can increase uh you know for the next couple of years maybe up to 24 MGD out of that well field. So there's just just some differences there. Those numbers will be uh dialed in and uh continually to be reviewed as we drill additional wells and conduct the test pumping. The current expenditures on the western wellfield is $5.8 million. And then as a additional U reminder, we did receive $30 million of grant funding from the state of Texas and our staff is currently working with the Texas Water Development Board who is administrating that grant. U the pictures on the right again you have CCW crews installing new water line in the western wellfield. Uh the picture on the top is the main discharge on the eastern wellfield. And then the picture on the bottom is one of the uh single sight wells. That's well four and that's it's adjacent to the river. Next project is the evangelene groundwater project. The project is for 22,789 acres of groundwater rights. Uh there is an earnest earnest money an option period that would provide the city a 120day inspection/due diligence period that allows us to review uh surface rights, allows us to review easements of pipelines throughout the wellfield, allows us to determine exact well locations, to determine road locations and waterline locations. The seller has 180 days uh to deliver the required permits. Those permits include all the all the permits. Those are production permits, uh drilling permits and transport permits. Those permits are required to be nonappealable as per the negotiated contract. And the seller has stated that they would begin working on securing those permits as soon as the contract has been signed. Additionally, the seller is to provide clean and inddeasible title to the groundwater water rights and also the conveyance of existing groundwater wells and pertinances. There's two two wells test wells that they drilled previously as part of their due diligence portion of the project and those would convey to the city and additionally assignment of surface use agreements. One thing I want to point out is uh council previously approved a number of contracts and one of those was with PE Dawson engineers. They are working together with uh Hansen and Interra. Uh that work is in process. So our due diligence period has already begun. That pre-engineering phase has already begun and a lot of work is continues to be ongoing with staff. The next slide shows our uh consider considerations for project implementation and I guess I led into it but staff is working with PAS Hansen and intera uh and HDR and we are engaged in pre-engineering. uh the HDR component is they've completed the condition assessment of the Mary roads pipeline and they are providing uh analysis and commentary on the connection point for the Mary roads pipeline. Uh as I stated the permits are to be required. Uh the property survey is forthcoming. We hope to have that at by the end of the day today. Um there will be another component will be TCQ approval. These are new water supplies going into a conveyance line. So PE Dawson will be working with TCQ to obtain their approval on the well locations and the well design. Uh permanent power is needed for each well and for the new pump station that will be required. staff and the papew we've been working with AE who will be the power provider. Uh the connection point to the MRP has been confirmed. We had a workshop last week uh with all of the engineering firms and we have uh confirmed the connection point. The MRP easements, and I'm not shy about this, they're all very complicated. They're all very different. Um, now that we know the connection point to the MRP, those easements will have to be reviewed and we'll have to work with the land owners to better understand any requirements that may have been written in the easements. Uh, infrastructure will be required. That will consist of water wells, water lines, access roads, the electrical infrastructure and also a pump station. the pump station and ground storage tank will accumulate all the water that's pumped from the ground and then that will uh deliver that water to the city through the Mary roads pipeline. Uh the we have been working with other entities in the area uh most namely the city of Cinton. We've drafted an interlocal agreement. We've met with them in person to review that agreement. Uh that agre agreement uh focuses primarily on an interconnection between the city of Cinton and and this new evangelene Wellfield. We've also uh met with other entities including the St. Paul Water Supply Corporation. The next project I'd like to talk about is the Harbor Island Seawater Desalination Plant. This this project is being managed by the Noasis River Authority. Uh they the the the total production for this plant for phase one is 100 million gallons a day. They have uh issued an RFQ, advertised an RFQ for the conveyance line as part of the project and we were informed just yesterday that in two to three weeks they will issue an RFQ for a P3 partnership. There are required permits as part of this project. There's a TCQ intake permit. Uh that draft is expected um by the end of October. There's a TCQ discharge permit. We've also been informed that draft is expected by the end of October. And there are three uh US Army Corps of Engineers permits, including construction on Harbor Island, which they've received a draft of that permit. It's in hand. uh the boar under the island and then structures for the diversion and the intake that's out in the Gulf. Next week on October 21st, we will be bringing the option fee for council to consider. This is a one-time nonrefundable option fee uh to reserve the water and also provides with the city and CCW an opportunity to take part and participate and provide input into the design of the NRA conveyance line which will then in turn facilitate the most efficient approach for the city to install its water line to deliver the water to the city. the water price purchase agreement. Uh I've shown options for 30, 40, and 50 million gallons a day. The project, as we know, this is a big project. It's a 100 million gallon a day uh seawater desalination plant. Uh there's a lot of things that have taken place and a lot of things that have that still need to be determined. the there's a the NRA has signed a 50-year lease agreement with an extension with the Port of Corpus Christi. That lease agreement is for the 30 acres on Harbor Island. The the picture on the right in the yellow circle depicts where Harbor Island is located at. It's part of this agreement between the NRA and the port. The port is responsible for all permits. And in the previous slide, I I uh updated you on the status of each of those permits as we've been informed. A water supply contract will be negotiated uh with the city once construction costs are confirmed. What the NRA has stated is that price would be $10 to $15 per thousand gallons, but they cannot commit to the price because construction costs have not yet been decided or determined, excuse me. Uh again, CCW as part of the option fee would be able to provide input into the conveyance line and this conveyance line for city purposes would be a new capital project that would have to be designed. Uh the intake structure for uh the the plant would be 1.3 miles southeast of San Jose Island. San Jose Island is the the nearest barrier island. The effluent diffuser would be located 1.8 miles southeast of San Jose Island. These lines would be installed in a tunnel that would be bored under the islands and under the Gulf power. The power situation has not yet been determined. The NRA is currently working with power providers to provide transmission level power to the site. Again, we met with them yesterday and they are actively working on that process as well. Our next uh water supply project is uh water reuse or can be reclaimed water. CCW continues to meet with multiple entities regarding the use of effluent water from multiple wastewater treatment plants. We've had multiple meetings over the last week and those those discussions are proceeding and once we've got a uh more details and a more defined term sheet, we will update city council regarding those uh agreements. We've also uh we've been looking at the conveyance uh of effluent water from Oso to potentially Greenwood. As you remember, the OSO wastewater treatment plant is the largest within the city. It has the most effluent water available. The key with OSO is to get that effluent water to a place where it can be utilized. And then there is another capital project uh that Garver is working on. They are nearing completion of a technical memo that discusses uh aquafer storage and recovery. The city previously embarked on a a large investigative project for aquafer storage and recovery that involved a potential uh area around the Corpus Christie airport. Uh so that will be addressed in the Garverte memo as will direct portable reuse and the treatment of that to make the effluent water portable and then different conven uh conveyance options uh specifically centered around uh our wastewater treatment plants again to get that effluent water to a location where it can be better utilized. CC Polymers, they own a they have a seawater desalination plant located on the ship channel. That plant uh is, we've been told, anywhere from 90 to 95% complete. It's never been in operation. And we are reviewing the feasibility for the acquisition of that plant. However, it's important to note that the plant is owned by three entities and we need all of those entities to be in agreement before we move forward with uh further negotiations. We've engaged CDM Smith. They've provided a preliminary technical memo on the property uh that has given us some costs and timeline information and they've also looked into some of the permitting challenges as well. The chart on the right of this slide was developed by CDM Smith and as you can see the the per the chart the plant can be upgraded it's feasible to upgrade the plant to 31.5 MGD about 31 MGD CC polymers has stated they require 7 MGD for their for a fully operational plant so that would mean that would leave 24 MGD long-term for the city if the upgrades and and permitting challenges could be uh addressed. Improvements would be need would be needed for the site uh to deliver portable water into our portable water system. Uh the equipment itself uh it is primarily installed under a canopy. It's been out in the weather. Uh we know the environment here is very harsh and it of course the condition is uh is aged and we don't know its current condition. If the three entities that own CC Polymer would be interested in the sale of that equipment and that plant, the CCW would recommend a very detailed condition assessment of the complete plant. that would investigate the current condition of the electrical, the pumping, the piping, all of the processes and the equipment to better understand um the its actual conditions so that the city can make an educated decision. As I stated earlier, there would be upgrades needed to increase capacity and permit and permit revisions would be required. If the plant would be a deliver start to deliver portable water, uh then TCQ approval would be required. Uh that it's basically a new water treatment plant and TCQ would absolutely have to approve that. uh negotiations uh would be uh on beha would be with CC polymer representatives but again they are representing three different entities that have to be in agreement and then there is additional work to be done to connect any water delivered from that plant into our distribution system if it's portable water if it's raw water then the water either needs to go to Owen Stevens or it's got to go directly to a raw water customer. The South Texas Water Authority, as as you know, they've uh adjusted their plan with a target of phase one to be 13 million gallons a day with 3 million gallons a day for South Texas Water and its customers. That would make 10 million gallons a day available for sale to the city. They've also stated there would be an option to add more water in additional 10 million gallon a day increments. To date, we are uh continuing with theou that was signed. We've received um some good data. We've received some water quality data that we were allowed to analyze. uh we've received we have not received some of the uh test pumping production reports and we're we're still working with STWA. I do want to mention I've got it at the bottom of the slide. STWA has requested a current discussions focus on the extension of their water purchase contract with the city. That contract is set to expire December 31st, 2025. and we've had some very good meetings with them and uh hope to bring a contract extension back to con back to council for review and approval in the near future. It's just a summary of our of our current water supply projects. Again, uh the the newasis groundwater project it's shown as 28 MGD. uh that is using the sustainable pumping numbers that the hydrogeeologist has provided 11 MGD from the east 17 MGD from the western well field um the goal we believe because of the encouraging test pumping data we've received from the west that shortterm we can we can ramp that up a little bit. Um the eastern wellfield is is basically complete. the western wellfield. We are targeting May of 2026 for full completion. As a reminder, we do need uh a bed and banks permit uh to discharge into the Noasis River. Vangelene Lagona, we're in uh very active negotiations with with them and working very hard to bring a contract back to council next week for review and approval. The target of that is a partial delivery into the Mary roads pipeline November 2026. I would estimate possibly 12 MGD plus or minus in November 2026 and then another year for the full full 24 MGD. Uh it's important to note that Pate Dawson is our engineer of record on that and as part of their phase one uh scope of work, they will be delivering um a more detailed timeline in time frame and they will also be delivering us a detailed construction budget. Effluent reuse totals 10 to 16 MGD. Again, we're working with multiple entities. I I do believe that we can bring some of that online in 2026, but all depends on uh how quick we can move forward with some of these agreements. The NRA Harbor Island, that's a 50 MGD total total reservation fee. Uh we will discuss that at council next week on October 21st. And then again, we have South Texas Water Authority and also CC Polymer. With that, mayor and council, I stand by for questions. >> Excuse me. Uh, Councilman Scott, >> thanks. Um, so on the U CC polymers, the operation of the desalination, the discharge requires that the plant be operational. Is that correct? Because they use the fluent. how the how the permit is currently written, the the discharge uh has to combined with the the operations of the plant. Uh we would rely heavily on CDM Smith to help us navigate through those permits. Please keep in mind that the existing permits they have uh you know the focus was industrial water. It was for that plant. So so our consultants will have to do a deep dive and review into those permits. Is there some point of conversation with the entities that we kind of I assume you want some asurances that the plant would be operational because I guess unless you modify the permit you can't run the del discharge unless the plant's operation operating the the CC polymer has told us their plans their intent is to get the plant to be operational uh but uh to date uh we don't have any timelines. At one time they said maybe in in two to three years uh but we don't have any firm information on that. So I I would expect uh some heavy detail permitting work to be associated if we move forward with that project. >> Got it. And and if you expand the if you expand the facility, it would require permit uh amendments. Uh right. You have to go back to TCEQ and get per >> get the permits changed. >> Right. So there is the permits there is some expansion. They actually they we can add some treatment equipment and we can expand uh under their current permit and that would be to um I I think it's uh I think it's about 15 MGD. No. Yeah, it's a Oh, it it's about 23 MGD. >> Oh, so you could go up to 23 MGD without any permit amendments, >> we think. Again, I'm I'm going to rely heavily on our Yeah. >> So, South Texas Water Authority, what were the total dissolved solids on the water? >> Then that didn't we get that? Did they provide that when they gave us the test sample data? >> They they did. And uh it escapes me councilman, but I want to say it was around that uh thousand MGD mark or or thousand TDS mark. >> So I guess let me ask it this way. So our our MAG, right? I'm learning this as I go, so be kind. So our MAG is based on portable water. >> Like so county mag, which is whatever 1.025 per 100 acres or something. >> It's it's the >> you can make it up. I'll never remember. Yeah, the mag is six 6,000 acre feet. So that original mag was developed on um freshwater. >> Got it. >> Right. Our our wells are constructed to target brackish water. >> STWA's wells would be drilled to target brackish water. That's why I was getting >> the the consensus among uh all the professionals that the mag needs to be revised >> because uh during this current drought situation people are targeting water that you know previously no one thought would be of benefit. So so the mag is artificially low in other words. >> Got it. And there's going to be some conversation about about trying to make a adjustments to the mag. >> Those are ongoing. >> Got it. >> Yeah. CCW is working on that. Yeah. >> On the on So, we're talking to South Texas Water Authority and I'm I think the world of them uh about extending the current contract just from my just for me. What do What do we charge them now? What do we charge South Texas? If you don't know, you can tell me later on. >> Right. I can get that. I can >> I was just trying to work through what we think >> those rates are wholesale water rates and uh they would have been shown in our in our rate slides. I >> That's all right. Yeah. My point was I somehow was thinking through what what they're buying, how much are they paying us today and how much we can extrapolate what they're going to pay 7C's tomorrow if they if they move to the D. I just think that's an interesting conversation because they have other customers, the smaller communities around them that are going to be paying that new rate and I wonder if they know what the difference is in the new rate and the current rate, right? And I can't answer that question. >> I know that was rhetorical. I feel very proud that I actually got that out. Uh the last thing I have to ask is um so why May 26 I'm finishing the the Western somehow I thought we were going to get that done a lot sooner. That's just wrong. >> So that that was the uh the estimate that uh we put together as a team. Uh when you look at project like this uh permanent power is a big factor. M so working with our partners at NEC the west so the western wellfield will be powered by electric power the eastern wellfield was powered by natural gas >> right >> uh it's powered by natural gas for a number of reasons there was natural gas available and then two we worked with our our great gas department and they were able to run extend the gas lines up to the well field >> um gas gas is great but a but a more sustainable option is electric power for water well pumps and we've worked with NEC so they they've told us we'll have partial power by the end of the year. >> Interesting. >> So we'll have maybe seven wells operational by then. I'll I'll have to keep you updated, >> but then the full build out because they they've got to upgrade transmission lines >> is is in May. So the the wells may be finished but they may not be operational because we're waiting on power which I I I didn't think about but I assume that happens often. >> Now the caveat to that is depending upon the situation and if we have the conveyance line to the river completely installed then you talk about uh temporary diesel generator power >> because that's what we did. Didn't we do that on the eastern wellfields while we waited for the gas to be connected? the the gas. Uh we worked pretty seamlessly with CC Gas and we got that delivered. I >> somebody over there that works nice. >> Yeah, absolutely. No, they're a great team and I will tell you we throughout the course of this we've had had the natural gas generators. We've had some issues with that and we've brought in temporary dieselators to keep the wells running. >> Got it. Uh my last question I think uh the bed and bed and banks permit has that been for the western field has that been filed? >> Walk me through that timeline. >> Yeah, so it hasn't been filed and the reason it hasn't been filed is because we know there's going to be a lot of questions uh from the governing entity from TCQ, right? We've got one Ben and Banks permit talking about discharging a lot more water in the river. They're going to want to understand how the second permit and the discharge from the eastern wellfield what that total impact is going to be. So it's not as simple. >> Yeah. >> So we we've engaged Corollo engineers. They're doing some further analysis and they're preparing technical information that we can do as a as a support to that application. >> It does beg the question, what happens if we drill all these wells and we don't get a permit? you going to sell water to me at a discount? I mean, really, seriously, right? We're drilling the wells and we we assume that they understand our position. And by the way, these are intermittent wells, right? That's >> that's that's correct. So, so let's just back up a little bit. So, our well projects, we will operate them on an intermittent basis. It's designed to be utilized uh during times of significant drought. Now, the city did this in the 80s and 90s. Uh but but once we came out of the drought in the 80s and 90s, uh those wells were on private property. We're paying lease agreements with the land owner. It was a financially prudent decision to to not uh maintain the wells. That was the decision at the time. Now, because the wells are drilled on city-owned property, CCW will maintain and operate that asset as as a permanent asset. Doesn't mean we would run them every day, especially when we're not in a period of drought. >> And and uh the the the TDS's are much better. Is that a right way to say? They're better in the western than they are in the eastern. >> Sure. The eastern wellfield, the average is about 33 3,500 TDS. In the western wellfield, the wells we've tested to date have been between 1650 and 1700. >> Wow. Is it general assumption that the further up the river you go, the less tedious it is or further away from the coast? >> Generally both of that to be correct. Uh we do know you know approximately 10 years ago uh in Tara did some work for the city and uh that that work that they did uh showed that uh the western wellfield was a a pretty decent location for staying within Noasis County. >> All right. So 33ish 35ish on the eastern. I already forgot so I'm asking again. >> No western it's 1,600ish. What? >> Oh yeah. Yeah. So the uh the western wellfield 6600700 we've seen them come in 1650 1680 and the eastern we're at 3300. >> Got it. >> Pretty solid 3,300. >> Thanks. Thanks for the update. >> Councilwoman, >> what is going on with South Texas Water? You we didn't have much of an update on that. When's the last time y'all talked to them? >> We talked with them. Uh that was about a week and a half ago. We met with them and like I said that was regarding uh their contract extension with us. >> Uh they have stated they needed to get us some additional information uh as part of that. Uh that was provided uh towards the end of last week. So the goal is to meet with them once again this week. >> So are they having problems finding land? I mean do we know what the problem is? Because we've not heard anything. I'm just it's just kind of odd. I yeah I I can't comment if there is a problem if there isn't a problem. What I can comment is um >> they've asked us to focus on their contract with us and and >> so they're they're going to want it extended then. >> Well, they they want to they want to renew the contract, right? We're working with them to make sure we get it renewed, right? So that they have water. The current contract expires December 31st. >> Okay. And one other comment, you can all laugh if you want to, but it is very clear that we we do not get very much water in our watershed, Choke Canyon or the lake and we haven't for a decade. So, do we think maybe we need to look for another area to put a watershed? I'm serious as I can be because it clearly rains up around Falf Furious and uh Victoria up in that area. I mean, we have to think for the future. I just think it's something we should look at because we're not getting it there. >> No, it's it's uh uh I can honestly say the call with the National Weather Service every week is the most depressing call I I'm on all week long. >> That was just a terrible place to put it. So, I'm serious when I say this. I hope we do look at it. >> You You know, I think that the design of that system is >> Give me my eye here. Come on, somebody say yes, you're right. >> I'm with her. >> Thank you. Yes, >> the design of that system is based on a a tropical event every so often, every x number of years to replenish the system. Uh, and we we just haven't had that. >> Okay. No, we have not. Thank you. Uh, Nick, I I just wanted to ask in in your um weekly memos on the updates of all of our projects, I've had a lot of people ask me, and I think it's a good idea though to maybe include a section that is a supply and demand outlook so that we can see on a weekly basis what the supply and demand looks like. And I really think that it's just providing a clear picture and transparency on how we're managing that. I I completely agree with you and I know we are uh uh I've been working with the city manager and we're working with Corollo engineers to provide a better outlook of these new supplies and when they actually come online and and we want to do a specific briefing of council for that. But I do agree it'd be good to have that in the weekly memo so that we can update it >> on a weekly basis >> because people also want to and there's also the deficit, right? People want to know what is the deficit. We went from I mean 50 now it's 60 and and I get it I'd rather be more conservative but if it's 60 um you know then what the plan right what what is essentially the plan of of addressing that deficit right in the time frame that we have which is a year. >> Yes. I I completely agree. Yeah. >> Wonderful. Thank you. >> We will add we'll add that. >> Wonderful. Thank you Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you mayor. Um, thank you Nick for a very robust um, presentation. I appreciate all this information. It's very helpful. Um, I wanted to kind of circle back with these estimates on that well field. >> Um, taking into consideration the efforts that we have. If we're saying we're anticipating May for all of those to be drilled, when are we looking at um best estimate to be harvesting that water that we're anticipating? And that may be a difficult but just like your best estimate, >> right? So, uh what I can tell you right now is is because of the delivery of permanent power, I'm hoping to have seven wells online by the end of the calendar year. Right. So, uh >> that's at that I'm sorry, western side, right? That's on the western side. And then uh the the goal is fully complete and operational May of 2026. >> Okay. >> And and again, as we continue to work with uh NEC, that that uh um that time frame may change. Uh we have monthly meetings with them so they can update us on transformer delivery. They've been a really good partner. and then uh what CCW's goal is and then of course Weissinger uh is our drilling contractor. We all we are working together to ensure that the other pieces of that puzzle are in and ready to go by the time power arrives. >> Awesome. And then um I know that there's been some discussion if we go back a little a little while in this project that if we were to take um the full capacity out for a short term that's you know actually quite a lot of water. Whereas if we are looking at this being sustained for a few years that's where we're looking at I think 17 million gallons. Is it is it still within our capacity to reach that higher level or higher amount of water while we're getting these other things online in the very near future like evangelene and things where we could take that extra 10 million? >> Yeah, my my opinion today and and I I do want to so my degree is in geological engineering focusing on groundwater but I am not a hydrogeeologist. Uh but so there's a difference there. Uh but we do have uh Steve Young as our hydrogeeologist and he will be presenting next week to council. My opinion is is well Steve Young has said 17 MGD long-term sustainable pumping. With the results we've seen from the wells we've tested already. I think that short-term number is around 24 MGD from the west and then you have 10 to 11 from the east. >> Okay. Thank you for that. Um, so we're saying eight months and we'll have seven of the wells by summer of next year. So add another five months to that. We'll have that full capacity, whatever that ends up to be and we'll we'll know more about that next week on um evangeline. I know that's an action item next week if everything goes as we hope in the ideal and I know there's always going to be little challenges and we've been you the team has been doing a phenomenal job representing us and and mitigating those but if everything goes as planned and no major snags when are we do you think we would anticipate getting at least maybe that first portion I know we're looking at 12 24 but maybe 12 >> I can say the target is November of 2026 six for a partial delivery from Evangelene. So there's there's a lot of factors there. Again, we talked about power, we talked about infrastructure. Uh permits are a big part of this contract. So that's critical as well. >> Okay. Thank you. And then um for me, something that I've been talking about for a long time to just kind of incorporate all of these pieces and being sensitive to timing um now that we have some pretty good I would call these really good estimates on delivery times. um where how do we look for our efforts to maybe adding a second tier in our DCP as to as far as saying okay now we're drawing our our predominant water supply from here our secondary our third so in actuality our supply versus demand we're at 86% or we're at 90% and we're taking a very small portion from that original reliance on the um Lake Corpus Christie supply and and I don't know if we can fully change that but maybe if we add another tier that gives us a little bit more um authority or or maneuvering about drawing those stages looking at our realistic supplies where we at on that whole >> so remember level one water emergency which is the step after stage three that's when our when we are 180 days from our supply meeting our demand as we bring on more water more supplies eyes essentially that that will push that that date out, right? Because we're bringing on more water to make up from the uh uh the western the zero in the west, so to speak. >> Yeah. And I appreciate that. what I'm what I'm um being cognizant of is um foresight or think getting ahead of the curve because right now the only thing that's out there because we're all in this sphere very busy just working making these um decisions you guys are doing the operations to make this actually work but what's being amplified is um we're on the verge of curtailment now the city isn't releasing what is cailment going to look like for you tomorrow. Those types of things when we are actively pushing that clock, stopping the clock if you will, not stopping, but you know, delaying the clock and and this to me is an important piece of being able to calculate that and having something some wiggle room to do something about it. >> Yeah, it it absolutely is, Councilwoman. And um I mentioned previously, but we do have Corollo looking at the impact of these new water supplies. Uh but you know in our um just to uh uh tamper some of it a little bit. There's a lot of you know and in my presentation I call it considerations for the project. There's a lot that has to go into that and you brought that up. We're actively looking to mitigate those things so that we can move forward and bring it on. So, we want to do our best to provide uh the best data uh both to the council and the community and all of our customers. And it's, as we know, we're going to have to continue to keep it updated. You know, it sort of goes back to the mayor's point of having sort of a better outlook in those weekly memos. I think >> I think that you know these updates are very helpful and this is good information and from what I see is we're continuing to tr continuing to track along this this narrative and I don't see us really taking big steps backwards if any at all. We're just continue to do better. >> Um so perhaps this is something that we can make some kind of a good release. I know we we talk about it weekly in here and we hear we hear it every week, but I don't think that's the same narrative being shared. And I and I think that perhaps it's it's very dense. It's hard for for people to really put into a linear progression line, whereas we've done that well here. So maybe we can speak to that. >> Yeah, next week Nick's going to speak to it with some graphs as well that can make it easier uh to dispel this notion that we're going to run out of water. It's easy easy to say that that we're going to run out of water. Uh but next week with the updated dashboard using 2025's water use uh usage line instead of the 2024 one, we may be able to push back this uh this date of November 2026 >> until actually early 2027. >> So that'll be one thing we can show. And then we have to have the conversation that you and I have had that is that if say it does rain and we do get some water in the western reservoirs and we bring on these top three projects bring in about 60 million gallons of water. Um can we re-evaluate the drought contingency plan to relax some of the water restrictions >> uh because most of our water is not coming from the west anymore. It's coming from all these other sources. And if it seems abundant enough, there's a chance we could revisit that drought contingency plan to relax some of the restrictions. >> Precisely. >> Yeah. So, we just have to change the narrative a little bit. We're not in trouble. The headlines continue to say that yes, we long-term um can forecast supply and demand, but as we bring these projects on, the wells alone, the the newis wells, I saw it yesterday. Uh when you add in 28 million gallons, it makes an tremendous difference on that that uh that date. when we look at supply and demand. So, next week we'll be we'll begin that conversation and then probably one more meeting before we perfect uh the graphs that the community can get a better handle on this. >> Wonderful. And and I know we talked way back, but is it still something that we can do to add if you're looking at the dashboard and the number that's shared often is lake levels have reached 12. Well, did you know we're also pretty robustly supplied in in the eastern >> right? >> You know, Mary roads is coming from a very strong not to negate the 12, but to to show the full story, >> right? Exactly. >> Maybe we can include that. >> Yes, we can. >> Thank you, >> Councilman Hernandez. on your um Ben Banks permit on the wells you you have it said sustainable pumping for approximately 17 million gallons a day. We don't have a permit for that, right? >> That cor that's correct. That number is from the hydrogeeologist. >> Okay. >> And it's it's looking at the the actual data from the wells, the aquifer data. >> What does that equate to on a per acre basis? >> I Yeah, I haven't figured that out. Can you do it similar to how uh the groundwater conservation district in San Patrio has it to how does that convert over to you know acre foot per acre of land or you know however that we want apples to apples across um you know because I'm I'm I'm assuming that we're going to eventually get a noises groundwater control or groundwater conservation district and so if we want to be within the rules of something like that what would you model it after what San Patricio is doing. Does uh the difference in our mag versus the one in San Patricio make a difference? >> Yeah. So, you're you're you hit it on the head. I the the mag needs to be uh redefined to account for brackish groundwater and then those numbers would be determined by the by the mag. >> Okay. Steve, you be able to tell us that next week? I I don't want to speak for Steve, but I think he would absolutely agree that the MAG in Noasis County needs to be redefined. >> Okay. And who who officially states what that MAG is? >> Yeah, it's the Texas Water Development Board. >> Texas Water Development Board or it's not TCQ, it's Texas Water Development Board. >> So, it would be the uh what do you call them? The water master. >> No, Texas. >> Okay. So, the board actually has to approve it. >> Yes. >> Yeah. The water master is TCQ. >> That's right. Okay. So, who's going to apply for that? >> So, we've we've already uh uh petitioned to increase to account for that the mag will account for the production in our wells. >> Okay. So, you know, you're talking different levels and different depths of water, right? Where you get that water from. Uh, so you're going to have different mags for each one of those or you just is it combined for the entire thing or >> I'm not sure how they'll they'll look at it. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So there's a lot of unanswered questions with regards to the wells that are in the noise in Noises County. >> There there there's a lot of answers, but there's a lot of a lot of work to do when you talk about a mag for an entire county, right? It's not a it's not a simple thing to do. So got to have your data. You've got to support it. So who who commissions that I mean to do a study for the entire county? So what we've engaged with in terara our hydrogeeologist to report uh the data from our wells and make a request but then the the county I'm going to rely on esaban how does from a regulatory from uh Ramos water resource manager uh for regulatory uh question we have talked with our hydrogeeologist Steve Young and Tara to discuss this matter with the GMA the the ma the uh there's it gets kind of complicated. There's different like groups. There is a groundwater uh GMA 16 groundwater management area and those that individual that group then requests changes to the MAG and that MAG is changed at TWWDB. That makes sense. So I'm just I'm just saying how do you get from point A to point B >> starting at the beginning where we talk with our geo the hydraologist. He then works with the the GMA. >> Okay. But he's only doing our area of what we're looking at not for the is he doing or is he doing the whole county? >> He's doing the whole county. He's he's doing the analysis for the uh the g the the model of available groundwater that we're we're drilling into. >> Okay. All right. So I guess we'll have to hold off until next week until he can answer some questions directly for >> and he may not have at that moment in time because again TWWDB >> maybe he can prep them so know what kind of questions we're going to ask. >> Okay. The second part of this is uh on the wastewater reuse. I noticed that you only have the information about what the work Garver is doing. I thought we we moved we're probably not going to do, you know, uh direct reuse and look at more of industrial use as opposed to direct or indirect reuse. >> Right. So, there's there's multiple projects going on. We've got the initial Garver work. They owe us a tech memo on that and and that that was they were initiated to do that and we'll have that tech memo this morning. I was told probably later this week. And then there's discussions with Ardura and that's related to uh a conveyance line. >> Okay. >> More than likely that'll be from conveyance line leading from Oso. The OSO was >> also going towards Greenwood. >> Correct. Yes. >> Okay. So I I mean speed is of the essence here, right? So, uh, obviously using it for industrial purposes, wastewater reuse for industrial purposes doesn't need to go through all the hoops through TCQ that you would need to for direct or indirect wastewater reuse, right? >> We Yes, we completely agree. And that's why we're talking specifically to entities that will use the water directly. >> Okay. So, I think you know and Peter, that should be the priority, right? That >> that is Councilman. Yeah, that's the top priority. If we can if we can avoid some of the the TCQ hoops that always take time, >> right? >> Uh and go to, you know, industrial reuse, we can make those deals relatively quickly and take that potable water, portable water that they use off the >> off the board and save us water. >> Absolutely. It's about 15 million gallons is the estimate that would become fresh. >> Okay. So, I know I know Garver's doing work, but I think their focus is on direct and indirect reuse. Right. >> Right. So I don't want to discount the work that CCW is doing talking to specific entities and then the work we're doing along with Ardura for focus on that. >> We should be scaling back the work that we're doing with Garver. >> Yes. >> We're not going to do potable reuse or what direct use >> and then >> we're talking with two companies here in town, >> right? And then I don't know if if this you know if we'll if we'll sell all of that but at some point maybe look reopen ASR because you know the airport's not that far from Greenwood. >> Correct. that would be the next step. So if if we built a uh a reservoir inground reservoir maybe in Greenwood that would be beneficial when you have enough water you would then pump it into the ASR golf field potentially at the Corpus Christie airport. >> Okay. So uh maybe you know have some more reference to that as you know in the next report. >> I can do that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And a couple of things just to share information. And so the STWA TDS was 1,800 and then uh um the STWA is paying the raw water rate uh and then also so their average raw water and treated is $3.13 average. I just wanted to share that. >> Thank you, Councilman Roy. >> Thank you for the presentation. I just had a couple things I wanted to ask. Number one, um I I noticed that um that the council, you know, as you know, we as far as the inner harbor goes, they voted not to continue the contract with um Qitt. I think we got an actual notification from Peter that that take that took place. >> Yeah. >> Right. Mhm. >> But however, the last thing that I recall, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that we were going to possibly look at Axiona and can you tell me from our last council meeting what has been done to reach out to them and see where we're at if or if anything. Um, can you can you because I noticed it wasn't on the water supply projects update. Right. >> Right. So we we did have that workshop. Uh the the uh our our takeaways from that was to terminate the the contract with Kiwit. Uh before that workshop, we did talk to Axiona. Uh they had said that they were interested in it and and that's where we're at today. >> And during the workshop, we actually had several comments that uh council members talked about what are the alternatives. Right. during we went through we went through a number of alternatives absolutely and council talked about them >> including which was Axiona and the possibility of there was even I think they were here and part of the conversation was and I I don't know if this is was this afterwards but somebody said that there's a possibility that they thought they could come in a little bit less the bottom line is I think the public because I've still had a lot of people ask me about this is council I mean not council but is city staff ruling this the inner harbor dead. Are you still working on it? >> I'm going to jump in here and Peter you probably should have jumped in. So we have had conversations you and I because desalination is still on the table and and the reason it is is because of what you just said and Peter just told me the day before because not only one person on this dis gets to make that decision. You can vote it no. You can nod your head and vote it no and that's okay. But the reason I say this is because we spoke, Councilman Hernandez asked for staff to send a letter again to ask for monies to be see if we can move them over again >> and we'll go through those motions. That's fine. >> But Peter, it is a little bit disingenuous that that y'all have taken Del off. >> If Del's going to die, then let five people kill it if that's what the case is or more. But multiple people said to you and to staff, "We'd like to consider this option or we'd like this option." Or there were multiple people >> looked up. >> And so, so I'm sorry to take your time. I'm sorry, but it it it it just it infuriates me a little bit that that we're not listening to what was said in council to your point, Councilman Roy. So, yes, it is coming back. and our back to the conversation. You said that letter is going out to the state and after that letter comes back to the state, then we can do it because we need their their their um their answer to that question, which again is going to probably come back as what it has multiple times and then we're going to put DEAL back on the agenda in November. >> Yeah. So, thank you for bringing that up, Councilman Roy. So, we >> Well, can I you know, go ahead. >> I just want this is important. I and yours say this too, but I summarized from the workshop that um we were going to terminate the Keywick contract, >> right? >> And from my listening and taking notes, there was no clear consensus to bring back a vote immediately. The uh the council didn't object to sending a letter to TCQ uh excuse me, Texas Water Development Board to see can we repurpose the monies for Evangeline of the Groundwater, I mean project. And so that's what we that's what we're doing. Until we hear back from them, I wouldn't recommend bringing a vote back on other projects because the money could if they say yes then we have to we would use the money for evangeline. So, my point in asking the question, I I know I had >> the mayor interject, >> but my question is I've had people ask me what did we officially do as a council in terms of where we're at with the inner harbor, >> right? >> And so, I just wanted to make sure that there's some type of clarification there because >> if we're going to proceed, >> I think, you know, with looking at Axiona or looking at whatever the alternative is, then that's one thing. >> If we're not proceeding, I think that the >> Yeah. the people deserve to know that because like I said, I still get a lot of people that ask me that, right, on a daily basis. The other thing um that I have we've talked about and we're not talking about here with the water supply project update is Barney Davis and and so I I've been talking a lot about Barney Davis and seeing what it is we can do with Barney Davis, right? >> And it's not on here either. So, um I I just want to make sure that when we do these updates and I had an actual organization ask me this and I briefed them yesterday because he was saying, "Okay, well, where are we at with this project?" And went down through the list. I just think from a communication standpoint, we need to let the people know. >> Um and and so the other thing was Barney Davis. So, if we're still working on Barney Davis, that's a possibility. If we could include that in future presentations, that would be great. >> Yeah. >> If we are or not continuing with the inner harbor or whatever the sentiments are on that, I think we just need to let people know. If it's coming back to the council and somebody's going to put it on the agenda, then I guess we need to know that, too. That's all I'm trying to do is keep the communication and keep people out there. I don't want to mislead them to think that we're working on something and then we don't communicate that and six six weeks um you know two months go by and um we haven't done anything. So >> it could be about two months before we get the answer from the water development board. So if we we put the letter in yesterday >> so I I think that just in our briefing Yeah. Yeah, even if we just had something there that basically said >> that when it came to the inner harbor, we sent that letter out, the last council function was and it could be 6 weeks before we hear back at that point in time. Yeah. >> Okay, we'll put that in. So, unless council and I know the mayor's talked to me about let's bring it back on November 1, but other council members have said no, don't bring it back. So, I'm a little conflicted. I don't know what to do. >> Well, I mean, the decision has to be made here and you you you shouldn't be conflicted, >> but I think I get I'm going to interrupt you for a moment, mayor, because I think the other thing is is that we need to bring it back when we have the appropriate amount of information. >> Okay. Well, that's that's the direction I'm working under, but some folks want me to bring it back November one. >> Thank you. >> So, I don't want to put it on if the half the more than half the council doesn't want it on >> and so I do need direction. You know, >> I just think again, I've had a lot of constituents ask me questions about it and they deserve to have some kind of answer. >> Okay. And >> I think the answer right now >> at some point in time it needs to be >> either laid to rest >> or we need to tell them what our path forward is. >> The path forward is we're going to the letter was sent to T Texas Water Development Board on can we repurpose the Swift loan for two other projects or one of one or two and until we hear back I would wait to take a any action on it. So I would say 60 days at a minimum. Uh then the council hopefully by then we'll get the water development board answer on repurposing and if it's a yes then we repurpose. If it's a no we can bring back the >> I mean I wasn't my biggest thing is just to make sure we communicate with the people. >> Yeah that's part of it right now. Hopefully people are listening and then we'll put it in our memos and we'll have Nick start updating this in a second. >> Thank you Peter. Yeah. >> Councilwoman Compos. >> Thank you mayor. Well, I thought that our main purpose here was to bring water the quickest project here. I mean, you know, I we've been desalination is yes, you know, on the table because I see it here from from different um entities, but that's not our number one um project that will get us the fastest water. So I I I don't agree with with um what some of my well the mayor is is stating about uh bringing it back for one. Okay. Um the other is um as far as other projects are concerned I've also and I I I have um communicated with you Peter about even the floating panels you know whatever little water we do have you know what are we doing about that um that has been brought up and we have not had an update and it's not on here either. So let me just go on down my list. >> I I would like to comment on that though. I mean yes councilwoman you brought that out. I've directed staff to reach out to the various entities, Texas, Texas Parks Department, right? The general land office. We've got a deal with uh potentially the Army Corps of Engineers. We're waiting to hear back from the Texas Parks Department. Uh we've got a number of phone calls into them. Uh the General Land Office has said that it's um uh that they wouldn't basically they wouldn't have a say. it wouldn't be part of their uh jurisdiction. So, that's interesting. You know, I'm waiting to compile some data to to share with you. Okay. Just because it's not in the memo or not in this doesn't mean we're not working on it. Um good. Our staff is committed and and diligently working on all of these projects, managing both the water and wastewater system and and trying to do it all for the the community that they live in. So all that just because it's in here doesn't mean we're not working on it. >> Well, and I appreciate that. But um I also want to be clear to the community that you know I think that's what got us into trouble is that we got stuck like on desalination on this one particular uh project instead of trying to figure out ways to get water faster to us. Um so I think you know we we need to just redirect ourselves make sure that we are focused on getting us you know the the fastest water possible the safest um and also I've been asking about you know what is our our ultimate goal like what like like you you said mayor supply and demand you know I'm looking at right now at the graph and you know we've using 108 let's say 109 um mgd um as of u I don't know what the latest that I see here on on your um raw water usage. So, you know, I I think we I'm I'm glad that we're coming back hopefully next week and we're going to adjust what I think um you know now worldwide and you know just air uh w with the recent you know Wall Street Journal u um issue you know that came out um the whole focus on that whole reporting was on industries use not on residential. Although whatever we're doing right now does encompass both all all customers. We're taking care of our commercial. We're taking care of our industrial and of course we're taking care of our residential. But it doesn't seem to come across. So I'm glad that we're discussing that. I'm glad that we've got some some uh projects that look very, you know, um positive. I'm I really am hopeful and I feel like we're I think we're getting, you know, a better understanding. I hope that we you as now, you know, the interim water director and I hope that we communicate this well to our city manager that our number one issue here is to bring water right and to get it here as fast as possible. But we also need to make sure that we know not to overextend, not to over buy, not to over, you know, because we need to take care of who our customers are now. So, um, I think, you know, um, like I said last week, we're looking at maybe 130 MGD and and if we just if we complete with these just three projects, uh, that we're looking at, we're going to exceed that. So again uh I just want to reassure our public that we are taking care of them and and that includes you know all of us all all the customers here. So again, I hope that um we can come back and look at like uh our uh councilwoman uh Vaughn said, you know, not looking at the reservoirs now. We need to look at somewhere else that we can, you know, get our water and save it because, you know, wherever we're at, it's it's going to, you know, evaporate unless we have a way to conserve it. I mean, we we're going to have to look at water as if it's not, you know, uh we just can't get it out of the air, although I hear we can now. Uh but anyway, uh again, thank you, uh thank you, Nick, for doing a good job. Really, uh and for taking on this tremendous job. I I applaud you and I I thank, you know, the water department for every everything that y'all are doing. So, that's all. Uh, Councilwoman Paxton. >> Thank you, Mayor. There's a term from my previous industry days, 86. It's been taken off the menu. I think some of us sitting here need to realize that that project ostensively has been taken off the menu. And yes, I I appreciate that you recognize that I have freedom to nod and disagree because I do. >> Yes. Peter Zenoni as the city manager is charged with taking action based on the majority leadership of this body. That's five plus. And I was at that meeting just like anyone else was here. And if you play the tapes back, which maybe need to happen, the majority did not say to move forward with options one, two, three, or four. It landed on option five, which was we're done with this. And that's where we saw that letter come back. And I'm I'm frustrated right now because what I don't like is when we continue to come back to something that we have moved past. We have done all of these actions, put all of this effort, put all of this time, energy, finances into preventing curtailment. And if that's not the pallet of this council right now, it needs to let it needs to just be let alone. Let alone. There's a difference between multiple and majority. You may have had three. You may have had four. Go back and count it. That said, maybe we'll consider Axiona or whatever it's called. But they did not say that is what we want to do. They did say Mr. Zenoni, go ahead and cancel that contract. And that is what he did. That is in his role as city manager and he needs to be allowed to be city manager. So, I appreciate you saying that and I do think you read the room correctly and in fact, probably because this is such a a heightened sensitivity item, you took all but a little bit of a poll at the end and said, "What do we want to do?" And that's where that came from. So, I appreciate that. I think we need to be cognizant, mayor, you particularly, because you are the mayor, you need to be cognizant of how we're going to lead the the people forward and make sure that we are leading them with confidence and not taking them backwards into things that that are going to bring back up confusion, uncertainty, and those types of things. And I apologize, but I'm getting all the phone calls and text messages and emails, and I'm seeing the people are very confused and upset because they don't know. They're waiting for us to take decisive, positive, effective action. And I think that's what we're trying to do. And I do not want us to pull anyone backwards. So yes, we're all entitled to our own opinions. And I've just said mine. And I do think the ma that the city manager followed the majority. And another note is the media keeps saying that because we said no to this one project which wasn't slated to even bring us water till 28 that that's why we're now facing curtailment and that's not reality. It needs to be stated saying no to inner harbor is not what is causing the concern for curtailment. It's inaccurate public statements. all of our actions to get us increased water between now and 180 days which are the wells evangeling all of these projects that's what's preventing curtailment yes or no to inner harbor was not that delta and we need to step forward publicly and say that so that the public knows that we're taking action everybody up here cares about this community and we need all of us to step forward together and say, "We are going to not let you run out of water." Tell that to Wall Street Journal. Tell that to Dallas. Tell that to whoever. We're not going to let us run out of water. >> Thank you. Well, >> come on. >> Okay, I'm gonna let you go and then I'm gonna go ahead and respond to the unneeded comments. >> Councilman Roy. So, I don't know if you were referring to my comments and and here's my thing and and Rebecca, can you go back? Can you actually go back? I think you have the ability to go back and pull what we voted on and that actual what we voted on that day >> because what we voted on that day was if I understand it and the people that have asked me because I don't again I'm I don't have a when I say I don't have a dog in this fight. I just want to make sure that we clarify this for the people that have asked me what are we doing? What's the future? Have we taken this completely off the board? Are we considering something else? But if you go back and you look at what we voted on, we voted on cancelling the contract with Qitt. We did not vote on killing the Inner Harbor. >> Exactly. Right. >> And so that's my only clarification. I'm not saying I'm for it against it or what not, but I am going back to what we voted on. And if we have to bring it back as a council and be more specific, I think we should because at the same time we're sitting there and we're talking about um information as far as well the sentiments of this particular group of council members or that we either voted up or we voted down. And that's the only thing I'm asking. I I don't want it to be confusing because I've had people and if I find myself stammering trying to understand well actually this is what we did but we didn't do this. Am I am I correct Peter? Can you comment? Can somebody go back and recall what we voted? >> Yeah, I can comment councilman. So one there were no votes because it was a workshop and so I listened carefully because >> we didn't vote during the work. We don't vote during a workshop. >> There was no vote during the workshop. So the nine members expressed opinions and we I I asked that in the beginning to say we need to hear from you so we know how to progress forward. Peter, my question is before we talk about the workshop, go back to the vote. What did we vote on? >> Well, the vote, the prior vote with the Keywick contract was to amend it to add more money to keep it going. Yes or no? That was a no vote 63, >> right? >> Yeah. No to fund it, >> but it wasn't to kill the inner harbor harbor property. >> No, it wasn't. It was just on Kiwit's contract. >> That's my only point. I'm not trying to to bring up anything. That was my only point is I think we need to go back and clarify that if we're going to kill the inner harbor, we need to to to make that vote and decision. >> Um, if we're going to keep forward and look at other options, then we need to do that, >> right? >> But it's just that like I said, I've got people asking me and all I want to do is clarify it and I think I have that >> that's all. >> Yeah. So the what we're working on right now is getting the answer over the next two months or so from the water development board repurpose and then we'll go from there as far as an up or down vote goes on do we do anything else in >> but don't kill the messenger. That's all I'm saying is I >> not I'm trying to get it clear so the messenger keeps walking you know. >> I appreciate it. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you Councilman. And so, so to your comments, you know, I it's it's very sad that you think that Peter is supposed to guess on what what he's supposed to do and take silent uh silent calls on on on who who thinks what. You don't know what what conversations he may have had with other council members. And so, at the end of the day, let's let's just get away from that because that puts you in in a difficult position. And and at the end of the day, it's exactly like the councilman just said. No one has ever said, "We're done with Del. You have the opportunity. It's coming back. I will put it back on the agenda. I don't need five people or four people or three people. I get enough people of the public who feel completely opposite of what maybe the majority of this council feels." And that's just how it is. You've got people for it. You've got people against it. Right now, we have funding for it. So, we need to decide whether that letter went out or not. This council must decide, are we sending that money back or not? And I guarantee you, I don't know this for a fact, but I'm going to find out in the next week that the governor's office is waiting to see what we're going to do. They are if it's been real quiet. I promise you they are waiting and so we need to decide. That decision has not been made. It has not been made. >> Since you're speaking directly to me, >> it's not been I'm not speaking directly to you. It's not been made. And so what the decision that was made was to to to you know terminate Kiw and that's what happened. But the conversation that was just had was considering different options. If the majority of this council wants to completely kill DAL and move on, so be it. I completely respect the process, but that has not been done and that's all I'm saying. And we've had this conversation and and and it is, you know, about desalination is not right. It's not for the immediate need. It is not. I I don't know anybody that's saying that. I don't think anybody on this council is saying that. Do you sell? Well, I mean, this council's not. And so, so we're saying immediate need is how do we how do we how do we close a gap, a deficit of 16 million gallons a day before November of 26. And we're working on that every single day. And personally I think it's a little bit more because we have some risks with some of these projects that we are being we're tell we are told of those risks over week after week sometimes and we continue to keep those those numbers in our perfect little plan and if those numbers don't work out for whatever one of those risks that that takes us off of our timeline we are in trouble. So, I personally think, you know, we need more than that, but but that's a whole different story. Um, I just wanted to make that clear and and uh actually just echo what council member uh Roy just said. >> Mayor, do you need the mo do you need the motion or are you clear? Because it was on an amendment that that was the the language. So on September the 2nd, it said motion on amendment number five to the the design bill contract with Kiwit Infrastructure South Co of Westlake, Texas for design development to a 60% design for the inner harbor water treatment campus project on a cost reimburseable basis. So, it just gave the amounts and then uh the vote on that it wasn't amended. Um it was just that actual item and the vote was 63. I can find it. Hold on. Sorry, I'm not used to looking at it on here. What? >> There it is. So, and then so there was a motion and a second and the motion failed and it was 63. Um, but the mayor and Scott voted I and then the rest of the council voted no. >> Okay, Professor Julie, >> thank you for clarifying. >> Councilman Scott, >> hey, sorry, didn't know here. Hey, uh, look, I never said that um, curtailment's not the priority. I'm addressing this to you because I I get the sense you were addressing all of us, including me. In fact, the day I was sworn in, I talked about today's water, tomorrow's water, and next week's water, and you have to work on all those. So, I'm I'm I'm really comfortable that I've had a focus on avoiding curtailment. In fact, I've advocated more wells to some objection amongst people on the dis and in the community. So I'm I'm comfortable that my my focus has been partially on curtailment but also you know hopefully we have an answer that we don't worry about curtailment you know and I think that we've all we talked about the term intermittent right on the wellfield that's a word I'm going to use a lot um in fact you should pay me because I don't usually use that word. Uh so I'm comfortable at least that Mark Scott is is uh working hard to avoid curtailment. Uh again, I if it were me, I'd hire try to hire another well uh man uh driller and get this done faster. And I would look for other property along the river to see if we couldn't drill more wells faster to have an intermittent solution that avoids curtailment. I don't remember being part of a council poll uh uh and I certainly lost that vote. Um I mean the 63 vote, but Peter, I like your path. I think that's the answer. I mean, I think there's a different conversation to be had if the Texas Water Development goes, "Oh, yeah, you can move that water." Well, well, then that that's one answer. If the if they come back go, "Okay, no, you can't move that water." Then we either have to um I don't know what the word would be. You know, we're just going to have to eat it or we have a conversation about a different path on the Inner Harbor with the permits we have. So, I I get that. The re What's funny about all this is after our plethora of three council member signature memos, it could probably come back anyhow, even if we said we don't want it to come back. So, I think that's that's open. But my point was I I think that's the right answer. I don't I didn't hear it before >> uh and I don't know that I like it, but I think that's the right answer. Okay. Getting getting the answer back from Texas Water Development Board. And um and again I I I've talked about today's water, tomorrow's water, next week's water, and it's kind of all of it and you're addressing that. And I know that as of today, Inner Harbor is not part of that. I don't like that, but I I think you're working to do today, tomorrow, and next week water projects. And I want to thank you for that, >> Councilman Kent. I think this council made it very clear that we didn't want the project Inner Arbor because of the price tag. I think we voted it down some time ago and we're still here talking about it. My opinion, I think we should bring it back to the council next week and let's get it over and done with and is voted up or down next week. Let's get it out of the way because this project is not going to save our asses. It's not like it's it's not going to save us. We need to find water today, tomorrow, you know? I just I just don't understand it. What's the whole purpose of pushing the Inner Harbor project? It's too expensive. People can't afford it, you know. And with due respect, Roland, I don't want to argue with you. I really don't want to argue with you, but but do I respect, you know, you said in the radio show today, you know, I'm I'm I'm saying this and saying that about QID and they're denied it and you know, I'm talking out of my you know what. No, I'm not. A matter of fact, in a week or two, I will bring you the recordings and you could hear it yourself. You could hear it yourself what they said. that clearly said elected officials, past elected officials are making money off this deal. Plain and simple. That's what screwed up this project is hungry people, selfserving politicians. Period. That is why this deal got screwed up. I want DEL. We We need it. That's another water source. great water source, but the location is not a good location. And only for 30 million gallons a day, we need more water than that to grow Corpus Christi. It It just doesn't make sense, you know? And I just don't understand why everybody wants this project so badly. It just it just smells ugly, man. Harbor Island, I think Harbor Island is going to happen. Harvard Island is going to happen with us or without us. I think the state's going to back it up. It's going to be a big project. The Porter Corpus Christiey's behind it. I mean, I think I think it's going to be a great project. And why not pay a little bit of money for an insurance policy just to say, "Hey, they won't mess with our customers. Here's a million, five or whatever. Give them 30 million gallons of of water. Yeah, we don't know the price yet, but let's pay a little insurance policy so they won't come after our customers. We don't even have contracts for our customers. We want to build a $1.2 billion plant for the inner harbor, but we have no contracts. They could get up and go somewhere else. And we're stuck with 1.2 billion plus. I mean, make that makes sense. How I mean, I don't understand it. And all these people on Facebook and in the news and always talking down on different projects. We're trying to get We're trying to get projects that you, mayor, and the past council did not get for years. All y'all cared about was the Inner Harbor project. That's all y'all cared about. And that's the truth. And you were against the Inner Harbor project at one time when it was cheap, $300 million or something like that. Now it's at $1.2 billion. And you want us to say yes to that. You said no to that back then, but you want to say yes to $1.2 2 billion plus. Especially when the contractor says there might be some, you know, people making money off this deal. It's sickening. And yes, I was against it point nine years ago until I did my due diligence >> and I it's No, no, it's okay. And Councilman and nobody interrupts you. Stop. Stop. Please. You know what? We're going to move on. Councilwoman Vaughn. >> Okay. It's really hard for Mr. Cone to sit in that seat and listen to nine of us. We all know that. >> It's not fair. >> You're talking to me. It's not fair. >> It's real hard for Mr. Cone to sit in there and try and read our minds. So, I can see how he would take that it was over with with a 63 vote to get rid of Keywit. And I think a lot of the public felt the same way when we voted down Kiwit. They're thinking we voted down the project. That's basically what we did that day for Kiwit to get rid of them. But I think that we do have the immediate need. Sylvia, you're right. And I think we are focusing on that right now. I know I've focused on it since I got on here in January. That's been my main thing. I've done hardly anything but that. And I think that's what the public wants us to see because curtailment, like Kayn said, it has nothing to do with the del. But here's the problem. You have people sitting up here on this council that go on radio shows and run their mouth and do nothing but pit each other against each other because you're criticizing every project we've got. You're telling things that aren't true. You're scaring the public. It is wrong. We're running out of water. We're running out of water. Eric lied. That's not true. I was sitting in the room. Eric told the truth. That was a true statement that Eric made. That was not a lie. And maybe you need to find that out before you call a person a liar. Um, but it seems like there's been a reunion of naysayers on the radios and all they want to do is just criticize everything. This city cannot move forward unless we have leaders that are going to work together. I'm willing to do that. I think we need to quit pointing fingers and we need to start working together for the good of this city. And industry is at fault as well because they criticize stuff. They're mad. They're like a bunch of titty babies because they didn't get their del. And it has to stop. You're still getting water. We're not looking at curtailment right now. We've looked at lots of sources of water and it's you need to come together and quit complaining. I think you've just been spoiled. So, I'm sorry, but I'm I'm just tired of it because we're destroying our city. If we don't get it together, our city's not going to make it. in this Wall Street Journal thing. I I was asked for several interviews. I was asked for an interview to go on TV on South Texas politics just like Mark. I refused to do it. I didn't want our city I didn't want to be in the limelight and put our city in the limelight all over the n the state of Texas. Why would we do that? We're harming ourselves when we do it. We're not helping it. And all these interviews that you do with the Wall Street Journal and different papers, stop it. We don't need that. We're just focusing on us and we shouldn't be doing that. We should be focused on moving the city forward, getting us water, and bringing us back together. This needs to stop. Thanks, >> Councilman Hernandez. U I apologize to you, Mayor. I just I'm just Okay. >> Okay. I wanted to uh circle this back to groundwater. Um, now I I said a I want to I want to be clear because there's I used a few acronyms like uh you know we used GMA >> MAG and I don't know if everybody understands what that is, right? So I mean we are in GMA 16 or groundwater management area 16. uh a MAG is um I just think we need to make sure that we're you know we we understand what these acronyms mean you know like our Corpus Christi ASR uh conservation district will aquifer storage recovery you know there there there's certain acronyms that we're we're using that may maybe we understand what they are but not everybody does agree >> so let's make sure that we you know when we come with Steve Young that we do a little bit of pre-work before he speaks so we understand some of these some of this. >> Yeah, we're meeting with them Friday, Councilman. >> Okay. Well, >> I I mean, I went and looked at it and and and so I just want to make sure that we're on this we're speaking the same language. Okay. >> And that we understand >> uh you know, the terminology cuz I mean, how many people understand what an acre foot of water is? >> No. Right. >> Right. So, apples to apples, oranges to oranges. So, we're all speaking the same language and we all understand what we're saying. Um, with regards to uh, you know, everything that's happened, I ask that you focus on the water that you can get us the quickest, >> the the Evangeline and the wastewater reuse for industrial purposes. >> If we can focus on those, we can avoid curtailment and we can focus on the longer term issues, whether it be some form of Visal, uh, Harbor Island, Barney Davis, you know, whatever that may be. We we can work on those, you know, but we need to make sure that we don't go into cretailment because I don't want to affect industry and I don't want to affect people and I want to get people to water their lawns again, >> right? And it so let's focus on the on the lowhanging fruit. Let's, you know, I understand that there's some, you know, things that we fight about and that's okay. You know, I'm on the radio, too. Uh but I I I want to make sure that we're all going in the same direction to avoid curtailment. And that's what I'm asking you to focus on, the lowhanging fruit to get us at water so we can because then we can fight on what's for the future for another day. But we need to we need to work together to avoid curtailment. Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. And Councilman, um, thank you. And I think I I have to commend though because that they have been doing that and they have been very innovative. you and your staff and and you know, Drew Prior, Peter, everybody has been everyone's laser focused and and this council is too, but you know, you got you got to keep your eye on the ball moving forward because moving forward is going to be here before we know it. I mean, just as it is today. So, anyway, thank you for your comments, uh, Councilwoman Compost, and then we're going to go ahead and um, adjourn and then we'll have 30 minutes before public comment. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Okay, so back to the basics. That's what I wanted. And thank you. Uh back to groundwater, but even before groundwater, can we go back to conservation? When are we going to discuss or update a conservation plan? Because that is a lowhanging fruit and we can address a lot of things and um and safe water for everyone. So, when are we going to have that discussion? >> Sure, Councilwoman. So, uh, I've I've worked with staff to, uh, to focus on updating the conservation plan. We are working on that and, uh, I'm going to let What are we thinking, Estimon, for a draft probably in the next month? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, we we've done a lot of work so far and and again, I I guess I want to reiterate, just because it's not in this presentation doesn't mean we're not working on it. >> Okay. Okay. because I mean I I get emails and suggestions all the time of what we can do to conserve not just residents but but industry and commercial. So um I'm excited and I want uh the people to participate in in the discussion and to make sure that we incorporate some of those ideas. So again, we're thinking when November. >> So we're hoping to have a an updated draft to review in approximately a month. >> So and I'll I'll keep everybody updated on that. >> Okay. >> Conservation plan, Nick. >> The conservation plan. >> We do want to get robust community engagement. >> That's what I'm hoping for. >> So it probably two two months before it's completed. But >> though, correct. We'd like to have an initial draft and then we would we would set up engagement, you know, for >> I would do it the >> I would do the opposite. I wouldn't I would do the opposite. I would I would get suggestions from the public, >> try to incorporate those into your plan and then bring it back to council. >> That's what we're going to do. >> Okay. >> We'll map that out. >> Yeah. >> We still have to talk, you know, we're focused, like Hernandez said, on getting water right now, >> right? Right. >> We are freeing up time in these next two months to two to three months to get organized to redo. We do have a a conservation plan. It's on our website. >> Right. >> We do need to encourage the community to revisit it and look at it. And we're going to be getting some media and media releases out and some social media to remind people go to the it's there today, but getting the community re-engaged and giving us new ideas. That's what's going to happen in these coming months. >> Okay. >> Yes, Councilwoman. >> All right. >> Okay. >> Okay. And I'm going to back that up because the last thing and I know y'all are pulled in a thousand directions, but we've been talking about this conservation plan for years years and and I I know and and so I'm going to suggest Peter if if we can't because we can't we don't have the capacity because we are in a situation where we're looking for water now, we're looking for water in the next, you know, five years plus, then bring someone on contractually to to work on this conver conservation plan because That conservation plan is going to be a part of the next 12 months. It really is. >> It really is. I know a Steon knows that and I know y'all are pulled in a thousand directions, but Sylvia, we it's a lowhanging fruit. It is community engagement in in in helping in in for us not going into curtailment. And it's going to be needed. Like it is going to be needed. It really is. When you do the math, it's going to be needed. So I would say I mean I don't know bring someone on to say hey we don't have the capacity work on the conservation plan or I don't know how you could do it but >> yeah mayor so we we have brought staff had brought someone on ahead of me becoming interim so that that is we brought an independent person on so now as the city manager said we're ready for that input the input from the community so it's it's important and we want to move forward >> but we just want to see something a real plan that can actually make an impact Did you have one last thing, sir? >> Oh, just >> No, I I think I'm okay. Thank you. I I appreciate that and and thank you for acknowledging and thank you, Peter. Um that we do need input first from the community so that we can incorporate all these ideas into you know a really robust productive you know conservation plan for the future. >> Thank you Sylvia. Okay, there being no further business this meeting is adjourned. Oh, the meeting's not adjourned. >> Recess. That's right. We're recessing for >> about 25 minutes. No. Waiting for a fifth. Rebecca, didn't do we need a quorum to >> Okay. All right, then. Uh, I'm going to reconvene uh the city council meeting. The mayor is a few minutes late and asked me to move along and respect everybody's time. She also asked me to read uh right read read the the the script as we like to say. It says, "While we handle significant matters concerning taxpayer dollars, making it imperative that we uphold the highest standards of the quorum and adherence to our policies." Oh, I'm going to finish and turn it over to you, Mr. Pro Tim. Um, our core principles of openness, transparency, and inclusiveness guide our actions, and we aim to achieve them while respecting our city council policy, which has been in place for 30 years. Public comment serves as one avenue for communication, but is not the sole method. You may also reach out to council members by phone, email, or by scheduling in-person appointments. I'd also like to take a moment to reemphasize an important matter. These council chambers, this council chamber is a place of public business, a form of civic discussion, decision-making, and service to the people of Corpus Christi. It's not a stage for personal tax disruptions or vulgar vulgarity. Violations of the quorum will not be tolerated. Additionally, I want to assure everyone that from time to time council members may step away from the dis for brief periods. Please know that there are televisions with audio on available available in the back room ensuring members remain fully engaged and attentive to the discussions out here even if they are not physically seated at the dis. We'll ask our city attorney to review the council meeting rules of decorum. These rules will also be displayed on the television screens for our audience's reference. All citizens must be courteous, polite, and respectful of one another, including the city council and city staff. The mayor and council members shall be referred to by title and or title surname. All remarks must be addressed to the mayor and city council and not to the council members as individuals. Citizens are only permitted to speak on city related subject matter. Speaking on any non city related matter is prohibited. Loud, boisterous, profane or obscene language or behavior is not allowed. Citizens must refrain from any disturbing noise, demonstration, or other act disrupting to the city council business. >> All right. So, we'll ask each person to state your name and the city with which you live before beginning your comments. Citizens comments are limited to three minutes. Uh while non-resident comments are limited to one minute. Uh visible timer will be positioned near the city secretary's desk to help you manage your allotted time. Residents of Corpus Christi will be given priority in speaking over non-residents. If you have a petition or relevant information, please present it to the city secretary before speaking. It is important to note that uh I was your mayor pro Tim until yesterday. Mr. Betta is your current mayor pro Tim and we turn it over to him. Thank you, Council Member Scott. All right, Mr. William Almager. Mr. William Almager. Okay. Jose Perez Jr. >> Thank you. Okay. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Jose Pres Jr. from District 3. Water conservation should have been implemented decades ago by enforcing industrial reuse of water through means of closed loop filtration system, saving millions of gallons of water per day. Instead, now here we are up to our ankles in a water crisis. We do not want to drink treated sewage water. Waste water is defined as sewage. Hospitals, veterary clinics, funeral homes, and slaughter houses also use the sewer systems where strong chemicals and all sorts of contaminants go down the drain. Funeral homes discharge inbalming fluids containing formaldahhide, methanol, phenol, and bodily fluids which are only partially removed during wastewater treatment. Veterary clinics flush things like antibiotics, steroids, anesthetics hormones dewormers animal waste, disinfectants, and chemotherapy drugs. These can increase the risk of breast and prostate cancers. These substances can also remain through treatment processes leading to toxic discharges and cause antibioticresistant bacteria in our water. Local and state regulations provide general oversight, but most facilities wastewater is not individually monitored. Currently, we are without a chief of operations officer over the water department. Corpus Christi has a history of water safety issues, including over a dozen cancer-causing chemicals, plus multiple E.coli coli detections. Our aging pipes, infrastructure, and the old electrical system make contamination more likely. Even advanced treatment cannot fully remove pharmaceutical residues, hepatitis viruses or other medical contaminants. Residents are rightfully alarmed at the idea of consuming what many call toilet water. Even when dis when water when waste water is highly treated the chlorination process can produce chemical byproducts such as trihalomethanes and halo acidic acids both of which are linked to bladder and colarctal cancer according to EPA and world health organization data. That is not a risk residents should ever have to accept in their drinking water. The city's plan to partner with the GF Coast Authority raises serious red flags. Both the GCA and the city have faced environmental violations. The city has been sued and the GCA has also faced enforcement actions. Keep in mind the GCA has never turned waste water into drinking water before. This is experimental. Without a chief of operations officer who will oversee these pilot projects for water safety. These are not minor issues. They show a pattern of lapses that put public health at risk. The city has in the past given our drinking water to industries for use and are only now considering giving recycled water to industries. Human health and safety must come first. Why should industries be given drinking water to waste and residents given waste water to drink? We urge this council to reconsider this pilot project for the sake of our drinking water. Thank you. >> Oh um thank you Mr. P. Um we that's reserved for the end now. >> Yeah, it's reserved for the end. >> I'm just Okay. Let me see if I did this right. >> All right. >> There you go. >> Okay. Uh I want to address this and I'll let Mr. Zone also say this is that we have kind of given direction for us to use wastewater reuse uh for industrial purposes not for drinking indirect or direct. >> That's correct. >> And so Peter if you can expound on that. >> Yeah sure. So, at one point we were looking at uh uh numerous options for waste water to include direct potable use, indirect potable use, putting it in the Oasis River, treating it with our other water, but at this point, we're moving forward with direct industrial use. Uh Mr. Pettis, so we won't be there's no what you described at the podium here a few moments ago won't be taking place in our city. Councilman Hernandez. Yes, sir. >> Thank you, Mr. Pettis. Thank you. Much appreciated, Miss Sandra Meyer. up so fast. Sandra Meyer currently in Flower Bluff. Thank y'all each of you for being here tonight for our uh public comment. I have sincerely appreciated the city's attempt to be very transparent and to bring problems to our attention, but I'm concerned with all this water stuff that the peerreview report that came out for the auditors has gotten overlooked. And so it came out originally in May, if I remember right, on the date. It hit the newspaper on September 25th, 2025. Could y'all please bring this before the city council to let this issue to be discussed? The peer reviewers said for some reason that they really felt the recommendations needed to be addressed to city council and I'm assuming that's because he reports directly to y'all. I don't know what happened last year or during the peer review that they did not want it taken to the um audit committee first. So, I'm not trying to say there's anything wrong with what this audit committee is doing, but the peer reviewer suggestion did say twice on item number two that it need the um auditor needed to explain to the city council that how they were going to be uh taking classes for the ethical principles. Then that person also needs to provide the city council with a detailed plan of action on how the city auditor is going to address this peerreview finding to sure ensure that the ethical culture is fostered is after the September 9th meeting. I am not so convinced that the city auditor has truly addressed the findings in the report. And so I really other meetings, you know, with the even the hotel audit, the thing with the city manager and the pecard that came before city council or a public hearing within like two weeks. The hotel one was three weeks because the del. So, if y'all could please put this on the agenda. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Meyer. Bradley Bartlesson. >> Representation again. >> Good evening to y'all. [Music] I'm Brad Bartles, District 5 Corpus. Making clear why we're in this fix is central to getting out of it. Leadership directs towards a goal of 10% industry use. Our data indicated cutting back on new sales to industry. Um yet our leadershipship chose to increase that to today's 60% as well. Our data and projections displayed reduced residential use and reduced forecasts all the way out to 2080. All this while we drained our reservoirs to support that industry use and we put the Merry Roads pipeline improvements in second seat while claiming the inner harbor was the answer. This slide shows the largest industrial users of our water and order that are GF Coast Ventures, Valero, Lionell, Flint Hills, and Sitco. Cost benefit analysis should be used to make decisions not only on water resource projects, but also who we sell water to. shown here. Golf Course Ventures is the largest consumer at 13.5 MGD yet provided only 55 jobs or four jobs per MGD and it is owned in large part by SABIC, a Saudi conglomerate. So the profits and the high-paying man management jobs aren't here. The rest on the list are legacy companies providing a healthy number of jobs per MGD. Although Lionell is owned in large part by a Russian oligarch and Sitco is owned by Venezuela, these factors of jobs per MGD and where the profits are flowing need due consideration in water sales. And what of Bootstrap Energy now 1102 McKenzie using 600 homes worth of water and not making its due payments. The Harbor Island Del is one that meets the rudimentary tests as it discharges effluent offshore has limited contamination risks. It looks to have a good partner in NRA. There are questions that good partners answer such as who is the design build partner. And how will the cost of 178 miles of pipeline be shared when Corpus Christi needs very little of that? Since we have surface and groundwater to meet the current and near future needs, pointing new industry water needs onto des seawater desalination would be a good strategy for the future. This would place higher investment cost and the operating cost of water seawater desalination where the water will be used that is industry. Note that evangeline the city wells 7C's Driscoll projects and our reuse pro project can provide three times the water at a lower cost than in our harbor. We don't have to spend anything as well on saving our evaporation via solar floating solar. So these are ways that we can deliver the water we need for a lot better expenditure. Thank you. >> Thank you Mr. Barlson. Susie Salana went this way. >> Susie Luna Salana, Corpus Christie, Texas. Uh, you know what? You all are playing pingpong. And you know who you're playing it with? With your staff. They are taking so much abuse from you all on both sides of the table and you are going to end up losing one of the best things that Corpus Christie has, which is our city manager. Our city manager has to be judged by all of his work, not just two issues that you have before you. You have to look at the term long term that he's done and the wonderful things he's been able to accomplish here in Corpus Christi that no other city manager has been able to do. I agree very much with uh Mayor uh Vaughn, I'm sorry, mistake there. Uh I agree with her and what she's saying. I agree that we have to look at things and we have to look at things the way they are right now. My advice to you is quit abusing your staff. Quit throwing them out to the wolves because some of you say one thing and others say another thing. You know the the harbor island, the water, every issue, you confuse them. You tell them to do one thing and then you ask them to do another. They don't know who to listen to. They're going having to make decisions based on what they think you said. You want something done. Like somebody said, "Put it to a vote." Right off the bed. Put it to a vote. Yes or no. And stop confusing staff because I would hate to see our city lose out on something very good, which is our city manager. We ought to be proud of what he is, what he's been able to accomplish in corpus in spite of everything he's gone through. And as far as the water is concerned, you guys know I favor DAM very much. Have always said and never apologize for it because we're eventually going to need it. So think about what's going on and what you have voted on. Make it clear. Don't confuse people. Don't confuse staff because you're putting it in a very awkward position and I'm going to show you how awkward it is this week. >> Thank you, Miss Alana. Adam Rios. >> Uh, good evening, Adam Rios, Corpus Christi. Uh, coming to you with some positive energy today. I want to talk about a few kids here in town. Uh, if I may, I want to talk to you about this kid, Santiago. Uh, when I met him about a year and a half ago, Casey from House of Rock came to me and he said, "I have this kid. All he does is like make pizzas and skate. That's just what he wants to do." Uh, long story short, I saw some video footage of him and we decided to meet and in hopes of me sponsoring him. Uh, he ended up calling me and said, "Hey, I'm going to arrive about 30 minutes late. I hope you don't mind. I've got to get my grandmother to her appointment." That was all I needed to hear. I was like, "You're a team rider. you're going to take your grandmother to an appointment. You don't mind being late for this? No problem. That speaks uh volumes about who he is. I want to tell you about this kid, Apollo, uh who is a new rider on my team. When I was at the summer lecture series last year at the Antonio Garcia Center, um this kid was like, "Hey, I skate. I just don't have a skateboard." I gave him a board and over the course of this last year, he rode the heck out of that thing to where he beat it up so badly. Like, I'm I'm surprised my board could take that much abuse. Uh but he got super creative and was creating his own videos. And so he is now a part of the team. And his mother was really thankful to me because it I don't want to get too deep into it, but she kind of couldn't afford certain amenities with skateboarding. I said, "That's okay. I got you. Don't worry about it." I want to tell you about Laya and Lily. Uh Laya uh is a she is in the uh age 10 girls expert category and in Houston this last weekend uh she took third place overall. She got the number three plate. Lily, who is in the eight and intermediate bracket, which includes boys and girls, finished with the number 10 plate. Uh she was the only girl to actually finish in the top 10. And I say this because we should be really proud of these kids because they've managed to do that well at state without having a BMX practice park yet. Uh we do plan on meeting next week. Uh we plan on having a really positive in input by the BMX community in hopes of uh getting back on track with Selenus BMX park. I want to thank council members who who reached out and uh said they'd like to be involved and uh so we hope to move forward with that. I've also got a meeting next week with someone uh from the uh sports commission at Visit Corpus Christi. I guess if you you scream loud enough and somebody's going to hear it at some point. Uh but we are going to talk about the future of alternative sports and what that can do economically. And finally, I wanted to shed some light. Uh it was really exciting to hear about the TUR number two and the possibility of the Billish uh park skate park. We saw that on Facebook today. Uh the Stoke Brokers Association, as those kids have called themselves, and the community at large is feeling really really positive about where we are moving together as a community. And that's why I do what I do. Pony Boy Skate Company. Like I I say it all the time, we strive to create a brand with unifying principles and properties in a way that can take roots within the community. And I love the fact that uh I have uh great respectful relationships with each of you on council and a lot of people behind me. So just stay tuned. Just getting started. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Rios. Richard Sam, >> ladies and gentlemen, uh, Richard Sam. I've been here I'm a retired civil engineer, but I don't I'm not representing anybody governmental or anybody else. I'm just here as an individual. And uh before my I have to state uh my recommendation before my three minutes is up. But the basic recommendation is uh the naval air station. Why can't we use that as an option of putting a salonation plant? I mean it might take 10 years but uh um and I'll show you a little bit of my background that would indicate that uh well it's 19697 I was here as a naval a not as an aviator naval flight flight officer learning um navigation this was before GPS but uh um we use celestial and we there was even a planetarium out there that we could shoot the stars or learn navigational stars. Anyway, I joined a squadron in in the Pacific and there were nine of nine P3. You've seen the P3s coming to the base now and then. And we um we searched for uh Soviet submarines. And I think that we actually um um shortened the the the Cold War because of our actions. There was one thing that an anomaly that we noticed. They call it the yellow brick road between Japan down the Philippine Sea into the Straits of Mala. It was a yellow brick road, but it was actually a big oick that all the tankers were dumping their stuff out onto the um water and causing a sheen. And when I saw that, I said, "Well, I got to get into maybe align myself with some people that can attack that kind of problem." and I got a degree from uh Stanford University in environmental engineering and uh basically um went back to work for the Navy and at that time even President Nixon he um established the Environmental Protection Agency and the Navy had to conform to all these regulations just like everybody else and then we looked into the best technology to handle basically oil water separation and it was here in Corpus Christi and I joined joined that company and we um sold separators all around the world, even some to clean up the harbor. Uh at that time, this is 1970. Um the people were just dumping the the refiner was just dumping oil into the harbor there and um it thankfully it's all cleaned up to a higher degree now. But uh it just kind of just general background. Um, the Navy has always been very important to me, but um, I was out there um, a couple weeks ago and it's kind of barren. It's not like what I remembered in 1970. It seems like there's uh, room for a desalination plant. >> Thank you, Mr. Sam. Isabella Risa. Um, Isabelle Isa, uh, District 2. Um, I actually wasn't going to come today because I have a lot on my plate. Um, but I was listening to y'all's meeting while I was getting stuff done and I was like, I I have to be here. Um, I just wanted to say one that um, it's been disingenuous to say that you're trying to get water to stop curtailment because the community has been in curtailment curtailment since uh, March of 2024. We were in drought stage 2. Uh, December 2024, we were in drought stage three. So, citizens have not been able to use their water the way they regularly use water. You're trying to stop curtailment for industry. Um, and so that's different. Um, and I think a lot of us have to just kind of accept the fact that though we elected you, you're actually working for industry, the vast majority of you all, because you would not be pursuing all this water if it wasn't to try to cater to these high volume water users. Mike Pusley said that we need more water because the industries that are going to be coming need at least 10 million gallons of water a day. and you guys have been racing for water and we haven't even talked about how this manic pursuit of water is actually going to impact our rate fees. Um I also wanted to say that pursuing desalination is not moving forward, it's actually backward because you're still catering to heavy industry. That um industrial growth plan from Sanpac County was troubling. Um it said that they were looking at 127 square miles for heavy industrial growth. I don't think people actually want that. Um I think that that would actually kill our region and I think the expansion that has happened actually demonstrates that it is negative for our community because our population has not grown. Um there were young people that had come earlier um when they were hopeful talking about a sustainability plan um where if you had a real effort in sustainability, you would have um for every $1 you invested, you could have a $6 return on that investment. And we're not doing that. In fact, we had council members that actually fought that. Um I also want to say that the Corpus Christie Regional Economic Development Corporation is probably one of our problems. Um I went back and looked at their 990 form. um they had $650,000 worth of dues in 2023 and they had $1.2 million of government contributions um to their nonprofit. And because they're a nonprofit, we don't get to see what they're actually doing. And really, when you look at them, they just sound like a lobbying group. Um I also want to say that if you look at um our uh council members campaign donations, you will actually see that a lot of the investors that are in their directory, they're actually directly connected. can see them in their campaign donations. So, we really need to center the people who actually live in Corpus, who live within the boundaries that you're supposed to serve because those industries paid a lot to not be members and so I don't think we should be catering to them. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Sisa. Eric Fonade, Mayor Von, District 2, Corpus Christie. Thank you all, council and city manager. Appreciate your time and attention. The council we need is the council we have. I stress to you that we are not looking just for enough water to take care of our current needs, but we need water to grow. We need all the water plans that we're looking at as well as a sustainable water plan that we can control. We live in a bubble in Corpus Christi where oftentimes the things that are affecting the rest of the country take time to filter down to us. Styles and fashions will hit McAllen two years before they hit Corpus Christi. It's because we have a market that is unique, but we're no longer a sleepy fishing village. We're not just that sparkling city by the sea. We are the crown jewel of the Texas coast. And if we don't take the bull by the horns in this situation, we're going to find ourselves in a scenario in which we have catered to the fears of halftruths. We are the Gungaden of the Redard Kipling in this situation. We're carrying water to the soldiers on the front line. This thought of cutting back our refinery sales. We have set ourselves since the 1960s as having a district in which our refineries can operate. Building new refineries is not cost-effective for this country, nor is it the solution for this city when we lose the sale of that water. They are a resident in one big body just like every other resident. I have curtailed my water use, dehydrated myself too much the other day, but still we must look towards growth not just barely meeting the needs that we have now. And to look at simply just the jobs that they provide for us currently and employment is far sight shortsighted. We have all of the support, all of the supply, all of the jobs that are affected by the jobs that we have at the refineries. Not to mention an average I saw recently of $120,000 a year. That money gets put back into this economy because the people that work there live here. They have families. They're the ones that buy cars, boats that send their kids to college. They're the ones that ensure that we have donations for Little League. And if you look at the donations in addition to what the refineries provide for us, it is a figure that is staggering over the last 20 years. We cannot afford to turn our back on this and play us against them. They are us. We are them. This is the city of Corpus Christi. This is the council that can stand tall and find common ground to save face and do what's necessary to move forward. If we're for desalination, then let's prove we're for desalination and find a plan that can move forward faster than 2028 and provide the 30 million gallons in addition to all the rest that we're going to need because that's not enough. Water is more expensive. San Antonio, I think, would give their right lung in order to get the prices that we're looking at with the proposal that we have. No one else is going to pick up what Kiwit has done so far. And no other one is going to employ as many people from this area as the ones that we have. We can't go back in time. We can only move forward. And we've had the decision made for us. Let's move forward. Secure water. And let's stop losing money on businesses that are afraid to commit to Corpus Christie because we won't commit to the plan of our previous council. and stand on the shoulder bravely of those who built this city. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. Von White. Justin Bronol, Justin Brono, Matthew Morales Pñena, Matthew Morales Pena, Rachel Gometo. [Applause] Rachel Cavayto D1. Um, wow. It's a shame that we have scared our community so much that they're afraid to drink water and they pass out at their job. That's really, really horrible. Um, I want to say something about uh the comment that uh Councilwoman Vaughn made earlier about the national hit pieces that our community has been receiving. It is disgusting the behavior of some of these council members that are reaching out to national news me outlets to disparage our community. You guys are gross. Um there we used to have a saying for a past mayor uh no means no Nlda and now we're going to have to change that to no means no on the inner harbor diesel. Um many of you are costing yourselves your reelection. So please continue your with your distorted behavior. Um the sheet that you were just handed right now is actually a fact. Um those were that was the vote for the Inner Harbor desalination plant. It was 6-3. The community spoke against it 7 to 1. It's almost like I don't know the same thing, the same kind of uh lack of support there was for Proposition A back in 2023. And here we have the same people advocating for the same ridiculous projects that were advocating for Prop A in 2023. I mean, you can't make this stuff up. And when you've had certain individuals on the campaign trail saying that they have a direct line to Governor Abbott, it doesn't surprise me that he's trying to stick his nose in to Corpus Christie business. We can handle business on our own. We don't need any assistance from the governor. Um, we also don't need uh for the friends of Brooke Pop, who was part of the Texas Water Development Board and has now been promoted to the chair of TCEQ to continue on with their nefarious behavior and trying to help uh the minority council members here. A lot of the council member, a lot of the community members are in support of the the Noises uh River Water Authority uh project at Harbor Island. As long as the intake and the discharge is taken out to the Gulf far enough, we're going to support that. We're going to support our council council people that support that. Um because we are rational and we understand that you guys need to sell water to industry because we also know that none of these projects that have were discussed earlier are going to take the community out of drought restrictions. So where have all of y'all been trying to find a way to get the community out of drought restrictions? Why hasn't any of you Why haven't any of you been able to convince industry to come to the table with cash and participate in providing water? Come on, guys. Thank you, Miss Cameo. Jason Hail. Uh, Jason Hill, Corpus Christie. Hi, council members. Uh, today we're going to talk about drought and um make a case for better drought planning and preparedness. Uh, basically the first thing I wanted to know like a couple weeks ago, last week was how common or rare is the current drought we're in right now to kind of like understand, you know, like is this something we should expect more of in the future? And if so, how does that affect water supplies moving forward? Um so this is a 72-month uh standardized precipitation index chart. Basically this shows how much our rainfall has deviated from normal over the past six years. And it shows that um our watershed is in between being somewhere of like a very dry or extremely dry. And so if you look at this chart explaining SPI numbers, basically that means you could expect to see a drought like this um two to five times a century, which to me is kind of surprising because I feel like this is kind of like been the most significant drought that we've ever dealt with. So it seems like it'd be more rare than that, but I don't know. Um so then I kept looking into it and I found this paper from our state climatologist, uh Dr. Neielson Gammon. Uh it's titled the unprecedented drought challenges for Texas water resources in a changing climate. It's really good. I highly recommend u anyone that's interested to check it out. Uh the key points are that um water stakeholders should prepare for future droughts that will be unlike past droughts and that uh information available from climate projections usually don't align with the details needed for water planning. And so um basically kind of need to bridge that gap in order to uh plan better for drought in the future. So this is how much uh rain has changed in the past century for our wershed. It's been kind of neutral. And then the second chart is how much temperature has changed every decade since the 70s. And so here in Noasis County, uh apparently it's gotten.7 degrees uh hotter every decade, which is kind of crazy. Uh so this chart is soil moisture and how it's going to go down in the future because temperatures are projected to keep going up. And then this second chart on the right, this is the interesting one. This is um basically an exercise to see how reliable your reservoirs are um for future droughts. So red is uh droughts for the first half of the century and blue is for the second half of the century and then the lines is um different demand scenarios. And so that second chart at the bottom shows the reliability. Anyways, uh you know I don't want us to be known as a city that doesn't have a reliable water supply. So, I think something like this could be kind of cool. Something we could do with water planning groups and the Council of Governments. >> Thank you, Mr. Hail. Robin Cox. >> Hi, I'm Robin Cox, District 3, and I had several calls this morning about a radio show where several council members were basically trashing other council members. I think it's pretty sad, too, like Rachel said, when y'all look for other places to discredit the people you work with. I don't know if any of you have played sports. Looking at some of you, I'm going to say no. So, when you play sports, you're going to play with people that you don't like. And your weakest link is going to be the best person on your team. And you got to learn. And you never trash the other people that you're playing with or work with. So, you know, I'd be careful when you start looking at other places to trash people because unless some of your backgrounds are pretty clean and as far as like she said, NDA, I remember some pretty bad water boils under that administration. So, I'd be very careful on who I grouped with. You know, in the words of Martin Luther King, why must a brother bring another brother down just to rise himself to the top? I think so many of you are smelling blood in the water and looking more to the mayor's race. on which one of you can be next instead of working on the problem we have now which is water and as far as being for del I think we all need water I'm for del I'm for my health more and I'm for the environment more and for the fishing guide so like Rachel said we're for it as long as it's shipped out and we can be safe our water bills are already so costly I keep thinking I may have to get another job at Bass Pro Shop I keep putting my application in but they keep telling me that they've decided not to come here or I don't know what happened to so many false campaign promises, but then I put it in at Costco and and they said they're not coming either. So, I don't know what's happening, but I hear some of the people get up and speak and everyone knows I have a good friendship with one council member here and I'm quickly forming another one with another council member, but neither one of them pay me a dime. I I listen to them and I talk to them because I care about this city. It's not to get a hit piece done on another one of y'all. And I want this city to prosper, no matter who the mayor is. And I think one of the things that I like the most right now, we've got Democrats and Republicans working very strongly together on the del. And you know what that spells? When Democrats and Republicans work together, it spells trouble for the rest of y'all because we're piping mad right now. We've got water bills we can't pay. We wonder where water's coming from. when this problem started, not with this council, with a council back. So, stop trying to attack each other and work together. It's it's embarrassing to all of you. And if you're reaching out to um other people to write something on, be very careful, like I said, because somebody could go Harper Valley PTA on each and every one of y'all. So, let's all try and work together for the greater good. Thank you. >> Thank you, Hannah Harelson. Hi, city council. My name is Hannah Harelson, resident of Corpus. Congratulations, Corpus Christi. The very last unobstructed view of Corpus Christi Bay from Ocean Drive has officially been ruined at Swatner Park. Roughly 25 towering and unsightly light poles now stand in between all Corpus Christians who visit Swatner Park daily to enjoy the the gorgeous view that was once panoramically perfect at arguably the most beautiful park on the bayfront. 25 new light poles at the cost of $76,000. I have lived in Corpus for over three years now. When people ask me if I like it here, my immediate answer is yes, followed with I get to walk my dogs at the bay every day. My husband and I chose our house because of its proximity to the bay, specifically Swantner Park. I constantly get from others that live here. I would love to be in the Bay Area and live closer to the water. The bay is the city's biggest asset. It is a blessing. This lighting project seems to have had no forethought by city planning, no consideration for what a park actually is. Parks are synonymous with beauty. The goal should be to keep them beautiful. Call me old-fashioned, but statuesque LED light poles that emit harsh and unnatural lighting do not translate to beauty. It's the exact opposite. I'm a millennial. My generation and Gen Z are starve for beauty. Whether it's the architecture of a building or the preservation of city parks. Check out Tik Tok or Instagram and videos go viral begging for architecture of the past, specifically for park benches and street lamps that don't look straight out of a communist country. Architecture is a reflection of the culture. My gener my generation wants to look at things that are are beautiful. We want a beautiful society. We want to live in beautiful places, ones that don't feel dystopian. To walk to our parks and see beauty, not our precious tax dollars blocking our view. These lights are truly these these lights truly disgust me because of the lack of thought and respect for preserving what is good and beautiful. I've been to other coastal communities in the US. The last thing they do is stick Walmart parking lot lights in between their citizens and their best asset, the water. Why is Corpus Christi acting different? If safety is a true concern, lowprofile natural colored lighting that blends into its surroundings is an option. I've seen it and I've seen it done beautifully. This is a complete lack of care and planning and consideration for our city. God blessed us through his beauty and nature. It should be ours to enjoy. It's up to us and you, city council, to preserve it. City council, please consider correcting this grave mistake. Take ownership of this lack of forethought by taking these lights down to restore what Swatner Park was just two weeks ago. Everyone I've spoken with on my walks did not want this. We would all much rather have that $76,000 go toward fixing all the potholes we have to drive over on South Alama to get to HB. Thank you for your time. City Council's consideration would be greatly appreciated. >> Thank you, Miss Harlson. Christina English. Christina English, District 1. My comment today pertains to the councilapp appointed library board. A few months ago, the community came together by the thousands to stand up for democracy and speak out against fascism. There was a counterprotest that day in the form of a three to six vehicle Trump train. The small number of people participating was actually really encouraging. Good people absolutely outnumber fascists in this community. What was upsetting was that our library board chair Pat Craig was in it >> protesting freedom and democracy. >> Ma'am, I'm sorry. Can you hold on one sec? >> My time. >> Yes. Objection. Mayor >> 222 is where I'm at. >> Rebecca, >> can you hold the time, please? >> Yes. Commentator mentioned an individual name. It's a public official and I'm saying they're it's in their capacity as a public official and I'm not allowed to direct them direct to talk to them directly I believe but I can say I can talk about things things that they've done if individual names cannot be mentioned. >> Okay, I just won't mention them. We know who the library board chair is. What was upsetting was that our library board chair, who will not be named, was in it protesting freedom and democracy and standing in support of the most anti-academic and anti-intellectual administration this country has ever suffered. This prompted me to check their social media and boy is it a doozy. Library board chair posted on Facebook in support of banning Anne Frank's diary, the graphic adaptation. The post claimed that the graphic novel based on the diary of a young girl added LGBTQ spice to the story. The post implied that Anne Frank's story was being changed, her memory somehow diminished by the woke left trying to querify everything. It also implied that the inclusion of LGBTQ themes were damaging to young readers because a 12-year-old could never understand the feelings of another 12-year-old. The passage in question. Thursday, January 6th, 1944. Unconsciously, I had these feelings even before I came here. Once, when I was spending the night at Jackie's, I could no longer restrain my curiosity about her body, which she'd always hidden from me and which I'd never seen. I asked her whether as proof of our friendship, we could touch each other's breasts. Jackie refused. I had also a terrible desire to kiss her, which I did. Every time I see a female nude such as the Venus in my art history book, I go into ecstasy. Sometimes I find them so exquisite I have to struggle to hold back my tears. If only I had a girlfriend. This is taken directly from Anne's handwritten diary. I'm here today to let the council, my community, and the library board know that the chair was wrong. It's my understanding that the chair is an educated person capable of research. She either intentionally posted harmful misinformation or took no care in determining the factuality of the of the post. Either way, we cannot have such careless behavior from the people we place in these important positions. Library board appointments are coming, and I'm asking you to please put thought into the people you choose for those important positions. And thanks to the chair uh for putting me on that passage. A 12-year-old me would have really benefited from reading it, but at least I'm able to share it here today. and I'm thankful for that. >> Thank you, Miss English. Henry Williams, Henry Williams, District 1. you know, to the mayor, to the council, city manager, uh, city secretary, you know, let me say that um, I conduct a prayer meeting the third Thursday of each month. And we have been doing this now for the past 29 years. And we have we have seen in our city the quality of life increase continually and we're dealing with the problems that we deal with in our city. They are a reflection upon how we deal with these problems are a reflection upon ourselves. And we must remember who we are as a people corpus Christians. We are the body of Christ. And whether you sit there or whether you sit back here, it's important that we conduct ourselves respectfully and properly toward each other. What is most important for me in attending the uh the public speaking meetings? Um it's important well the Bible says that life and death is in the power of the tongue. The words that we speak can either build or they can pull down. And we must be people who speak words of building and words of life. If we will come together, no matter what the problem happens to be, we can solve these problems and cause our city to live up to the meaning of its name the body of Christ, you know, and that's who we are. We are the body of Christ and we we must begin indeed to be that both among each other in our city, our state, and throughout this nation. There will be a prayer meeting this Thursday at the police department, the fifth floor auditorium. And we've been doing this for many years. And I would invite you all and for you who are if prayer is a part of your life, come and pray for our city, for our state, for our nation. Thank you. >> Thank you, Reverend Williams. Eli Mccay. [Applause] My name is Eli Mccay and I live in beautiful Uptown District 1, but most importantly on the land of the Kurangqua and the Leapon Apache peoples. I do appreciate the city manager's highlights on the good news items on the agenda presented first thing today. With so much negativity in the world, it's nice to hear about positive things happening right here in our own neighborhoods in District 1, especially the playground in Oak Park is much overdue um and needed. So, that's just one of the parks that I'm excited to see how access to more amenities at the parks impact the Westside and North Side neighborhoods. A focus on social infrastructure is crucial for both quality of life and crime prevention. Cities that prioritize social infrastructure have been shown to have lower crime rates. And these are easy things that cities can do such as improving lighting in parks, maybe not on Ocean Drive, maybe in the north side or the west side. Uh planting trees, keeping vacant lots clear of tall weeds, and ensuring that property owners correctly maintain broken windows or boarded up buildings. With the federal government crumbling before our eyes and failing us more and more every day and our state government embracing division and sending a message to millions of Texans that they are no longer welcome here, it is all the more imperative for us to have leadership at the local level who will stand against fascist or authoritarian tactics. You, as an elected official, even here at the local level, are in a historic moment in time. History will remember those who stand firm, who think critically and honor the oath that they took to uphold both the federal and state constitutions. Those who do not fall in line with wannabe dictators will be celebrated by future generations. There is a brainwashing tactic commonly used by cults that is being used every day by national and state leadership and I have seen it recently from at least two people on this dis and it needs to be called out. This tactic is tactic is called the elucory truth effect. It is where false information is repeated repeatedly presented, manipulating people's beliefs and overwhelming their capacity for critical thinking. Thank you to those of you who continue to think critically and resist fear-mongering and lies. I have mentioned here before that we are living in a time of prophecy and indigenous peoples have known that this moment was coming for hundreds of years. Those who are paying attention will not be surprised by the changes that will come and those who are not will no longer be relevant leaders in our society. The choice is really yours. And lastly, just based on a comment that was made last week, uh I would say anyone who snickers at the idea of open contact but not at grown men demonstrating at public comment, praying to their skydaddy, should pay more attention and expand their worldview, educate themselves. >> Thank you, Miss McKay. Lonnie Langingham. >> Hello, Mayor, City Council, City Manager Pizzaone. I need to apologize. I know you have a lot on your plate with Del and the Homewood Suites. >> Can you state your name and city? >> I'm sorry. >> Lonnie Lanningham, uh, District 1. Uh, need to apologize. This topic is something that's going to become revalent in 2026. And let me just read this what I've got here. I was born in Corpus Christi, graduated from Ray High School 71. In 1976, I attended my first city council meeting. Mayor Jason Lubie was presiding. I subsequently attended 20 to 30 city council meetings in the 70s, 80s, 90s, and 2000s. I came to these chambers to get an education in city government. I consider myself an analytical and reanalytical type of guy who can analyze and reanalyze every topic, the cause and effect of each situation. 45 years ago, I took psychology 101 at Delmare College in the 70s. I studied Sigman Freud, Pavlov, Skinner, the rest of the psychoanalyst. I'm not crazy. I am not delusional. I'm here to talk about terrestrials, extraterrestrials. >> Mayor, objection. That's not a matter related to city business and not the matter that this commentator signed up for public comment on. >> Mr. Langham, if you can just stick to your uh topic here of detail. >> Okay. Uh if I want to talk about extraterrestrials, I have to specifically put that. >> Well, it is B city related. Your any comments must be city related. >> I'm sorry. Can >> I'm sorry. Can y'all please keep it down so Mr. Langingham can continue? Go ahead, sir. >> My journey began in October, November of last year, 2024. I noticed the silver orbs flying over New Jersey. Further investigation turned up more interesting facts. >> Mayor, objection. Again, the commentator signed up for a specific city comment related to desalination. I ask that the commentator be um >> I'll sign up next week for extraterrestrial. How's that? Cuz it's an important between now and 2026. There will be open contact. >> Mayor, >> I've been studying this for a year. Mr. >> I'm not delusional. >> No, no, we're not saying you are, Mr. Lingham. What we're saying is you signed up for del. So that's what the expectation is. And any comment at public comment must be related to the city. Absolutely. >> And and mayor, I remind um the yourself, the council, and all public here today that we do have city council policies that have been approved by this governing body. And one of those city council policies, item K, specifically states that public comments must be presented related to city matters. >> Right. When open contact happens, it's going to be very city appropriate. Ma'am, >> I know you haven't studied it, but I have. >> Mr. Langingham, let's you want to move on? You want to talk about del or you okay? >> No, you don't want to hear my comments on del. >> Okay, sir. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you for your hard work. >> Thank you, sir. Jerry Sinclair. Oh, that's WebEx. >> Mayor, I understand we uh don't have anyone on WebEx. Okay. But we do have um one individual who is not a resident who signed up to speak in person. >> Mr. J. >> That's you. Okay. Well, this is JJ. Mr. J. >> Good afternoon, Jay. Address, none of your business. Thank you. Okay. So, I came to talk about freedom of speech, but your decorum really threw me off. So the decorum violates your first amendment rights. Uh any person out here can singly target any every one of y'all and personally confront y'all however they want. They're just not allowed to threaten you and they're not allowed to defame you. You're a liar. With that said, Government Code section 5510 551.007 public testimony is very clear and ambiguous. A government body shall allow each member of the public who desires to address the body regarding an item on the agenda for open meeting to address the body regarding the item. You'll notice the law does not say each geographic resident under the government body's authority. If you stop me at one minute, you violate my 14th amendment rights. I hope you do not stop me. Texas law places restrictions on government bodies ability to limit public comments to citizens of the respected geographic area of the government body. Additionally, government bodies cannot discriminate between citizens and non-citizen members when allowing public comments. Allowing more time for a resident to speak other than me violates my 14th amendment rights. >> Mr. J, >> I'm glad we're getting an education. Yes ma'am. >> Mr. J, the timer just went off. >> I have three minutes. Would you not like to give me my three minutes? >> I think you Mr. I mean, Rebecca, >> was it three? I mean, one minute. >> No, ma'am. >> You're from a >> criminal trespassing right now. >> Well, Mr. J, because you're you don't live in Corpus Christie according to >> my 14th amendment right. >> Can you advise us, please? >> Yes. Again, there are city council policies that are in place and if it is a non-resident speaking in public forum, the time limit is one minute. >> I don't care about your public rules for the constitution. So, if you'd like to arrest me or criminal trespass me, go for it. If not, treat me like every other citizen here. I already saw your cops arrest a doctor for saying what you wanted to say. Complete BS. Now, may I finish my or am I being criminal trespassing my 14th? >> No, Mr. J, we have the rules of decorum and so it's a minute. I know, sir. >> I know, but we're we >> pardon me. >> Yeah, sir. Yeah, we're done. Okay, this meeting is adjourned.