VII) Consider and Possible Action

[23) Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding a Council-directed investigation into the relationship between the former mayor, Travis Mitchell, and American Structurepoint, Inc., conducted by PNT Law Firm.]

RESOLVE THIS AND PUT THIS TO BED. ALL RIGHT. UP NEXT, WE HAVE AGENDA ITEM 23. RECEIVE A REPORT AND HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING A COUNCIL DIRECTED INVESTIGATION INTO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FORMER MAYOR, TRAVIS MITCHELL, AND AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT COMMA, INC. CONDUCTED BY PNT LAW FIRM ITEM PRESENTER AMY ALCORN READ. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL AMY ALCORN, CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE RECORD. THIS ITEM IS BROUGHT AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL. OH THIS THINGS MOVING. SORRY. AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL, WE HIRED A LAW FIRM, PNC LAW FIRM, TO DO AN INVESTIGATION. CHRIS PEEL AND RACHEL TIBA TIBA TIBA. I DID NOT PRONOUNCE THAT WRONG RIGHT HERE FROM LAW FIRM TO PRESENT THE ITEM. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR. MAYOR PRO TEM, COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITIZENS OF KYLE. MY NAME IS CHRIS PEEL.

I'M AN ATTORNEY OUT OF AUSTIN. AS MISS ALCORN REED SAID, THE COUNCIL HERE HIRED MY FIRM, PA LAW FIRM, TO DO THIS INVESTIGATION VERY QUICKLY. BACKGROUND ON MY FIRM. I'VE BEEN AN ATTORNEY HERE IN CENTRAL TEXAS SINCE 1999, SPENT ABOUT SIX YEARS WORKING FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BOTH HERE AND IN WASHINGTON, DC, MOVED BACK TO PRIVATE PRACTICE.

SINCE THAT TIME, I FOCUSED MY PRACTICE AND MY FIRM'S PRACTICE ON DOING INTERNAL

[01:20:01]

INVESTIGATIONS. WE DO CORPORATE LITIGATION. WE DO CORPORATE ADVICE. I ALSO DO WHITE COLLAR DEFENSE AND WORK ON BEHALF OF COMPANIES WHO ARE DEALING WITH FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND STATE GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS. SO HAVE KIND OF WELL-ROUNDED EXPERIENCE. MISS THIBAULT, WHO IS WITH ME HERE, ALSO HAS EXPERIENCE WORKING FOR INTERNATIONAL NGOS, HAS WORKED AS GENERAL COUNSEL FOR A LARGE ORGANIZATION AS WELL. SO BETWEEN HER AND I AND THE OTHER ATTORNEYS, MY FIRM, WE FELT QUALIFIED TO DO THE INVESTIGATION. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TRUST AND HAVING US DO IT. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO JUMP IN AND SORT OF OUTLINE WHAT WE FOUND. I KNOW THAT I THINK THIS PRESENTATION AND OUR OUR FULL REPORT HAS ALREADY BEEN PUBLICLY AVAILABLE. SO I APOLOGIZE IF SOME OF YOU HEARD ALL OF THIS BEFORE, BUT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. BEFORE I BREAK THINGS. OKAY, SO LET'S SEE HERE. LET'S GET GOING HERE. OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT REAL QUICKLY HERE. WE WERE ASKED TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER FORMER MAYOR MITCHELL'S RELATIONSHIP WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT VIOLATED ANY LAWS OR ETHICS CODES. AT THE TOP END. I WANT TO TELL YOU WHAT OUR FINDINGS WERE. WE DID NOT FIND ANY VIOLATIONS OF TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OR THE TEXAS PENAL CODE. WE DID NOT FIND ANY INDICATION THAT THE CITY'S CONTRACT AWARDS TO STRUCTURE POINT WERE IMPROPERLY INFLUENCED BY MITCHELL. AND WE DID FIND THAT CERTAIN CHARTER AND ETHICS CODES, PROVISIONS REGARDING DISCLOSURE WERE VIOLATED IN THE SECOND HALF OF 2025. AND I'M GOING TO GO INTO GREATER DETAIL ON ALL OF THESE POINTS HERE. FIRST, I WANT TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW WHAT WE DID IN THE COURSE OF OUR INVESTIGATION SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE DID AND DID NOT DO. FIRST, WE INTERVIEWED ABOUT 20 PEOPLE ACTUALLY NOT ABOUT WE INTERVIEWED 20 PEOPLE THERE. THEY ALL ARE. YOU WILL RECOGNIZE MOST OF THE NAMES.

MOST OF ALMOST ALL OF THEM ARE CURRENT OR FORMER CITY EMPLOYEES OR CURRENT OR FORMER CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. THERE WERE, I THINK, AS YOU'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS EARLIER TONIGHT. THREE, THERE WERE TECHNICALLY FOUR PEOPLE WHO REFUSED TO TO SIT WITH US FOR AN INTERVIEW. THREE OF THEM BEAR HEIZER, SPENCER KEENE AND ROBERT RIZZO, WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT THEY WERE WELL AWARE OF OUR DESIRE TO TALK TO THEM. WE MADE SOME EXTRAORDINARY EFFORTS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY KNEW ABOUT THAT. WE DIDN'T WANT ANYONE TO CLAIM THAT I. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU WANTED TO TALK TO US. SO WE REACHED OUT BY EMAIL, PHONE, SOCIAL MEDIA, AND WE EVENTUALLY HAD OUR REQUEST FOR AN INTERVIEW HAND DELIVERED BY PROCESS SERVER. SO WE'RE QUITE CONFIDENT THAT EACH OF THE INDIVIDUALS AT LEAST KNEW THAT WE WANTED TO SPEAK WITH THEM. AND THEIR DECISION NOT TO SPEAK WITH US WAS, WAS A CONSCIOUS DECISION, WASN'T JUST A THE PRODUCT OF MISTAKE OR FAILURE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THEM. MR. MITCHELL, FORMER MAYOR TRAVIS MITCHELL ALSO DECLINED TO SPEAK TO US. WE DID COMMUNICATE WITH HIS ATTORNEY BRIEFLY, HIS ATTORNEY, ON A PHONE CALL TO ME, AND MISS THIBEAULT DID DENY ANY CLAIMS OF WRONGDOING ON BEHALF OF MR. MITCHELL INCLUDED, THAT THERE WAS DENIED THERE WAS ANY OVERLAP BETWEEN HIS EMPLOYMENT WITH THE CITY OF KYLE AND AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. AND I SHOULD HAVE SAID EARLY ON, ASP IS OUR OUR, OUR OUR ABBREVIATION FOR AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. SO IF YOU SEE THAT IN THE SLIDES, THAT'S WHAT IT IS. AS I SAID, MR. MITCHELL REFUSED AN INTERVIEW. HE ALSO REFUSED TO RESPOND TO SOME SIMPLE WRITTEN QUESTIONS THAT WE PROPOSED. OBVIOUSLY, WE WANTED AN INTERVIEW. THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO SIT DOWN AND TALK WITH SOME PERSON AND GET THEIR RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS, CONCERNS.

BUT WE WOULD HAVE WE AS A AS A SECOND STEP, WE WOULD HAVE AT LEAST LIKED SOME ANSWERS TO SOME WRITTEN QUESTIONS. WE DIDN'T GET THEM AND THEY WERE FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD. WHEN DID YOU INTERVIEW WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT? WHEN WERE YOU NEGOTIATING FOR A JOB WITH THEM? WHEN DID YOU GET A JOB OFFER? WE DIDN'T GET AN ANSWER TO ANY OF THOSE QUESTIONS FROM MR. MITCHELL. SIMILARLY, AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT REFUSED TO PROVIDE A REPRESENTATIVE FOR AN INTERVIEW. THEY, TOO HAD AN ATTORNEY THAT WE COMMUNICATED WITH. THEY TO DECLINED TO RESPOND TO ANY OF OUR WRITTEN QUESTIONS, WHICH WERE, AGAIN, FAIRLY SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD. WHEN DID YOU OFFER MR. MITCHELL A JOB? WHEN DID HE ACCEPT THE JOB? THE ATTORNEY FOR ASP DID, IN A SHORT EMAIL, PROVIDE FOR SOME VERY BASIC CONFIRMATION OF A FEW FACTS, WHICH IS THAT, AT LEAST AT THE TIME OF HIS EMAIL, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S CHANGED NOW, BUT MR. MITCHELL WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT, AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AT SOME POINT IN THE SUMMER WHEN WE GOT THIS EMAIL, HIS FIRST DAY OF WORK WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT WAS DECEMBER 16TH OF 2025, AND THAT HE IS NOT A SHAREHOLDER IN AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. THAT POINT'S IMPORTANT WHEN YOU'RE EVALUATING WHETHER OR NOT CERTAIN CODES OR PROVISIONS WERE VIOLATED, BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY IS AN OWNER OF A COMPANY, IT'S DIFFERENT THAN JUST BEING AN EMPLOYEE FOR SOME OF THE APPLICABLE CODES AND PROVISIONS, MATERIALS. WE REVIEWED QUITE A BIT OF MATERIALS, AND I'LL TRY TO KIND OF SKIM OVER THE TOP AND NOT BORE EVERYBODY READING EVERY PAGE OR EVERY WORD ON THIS PAGE.

[01:25:05]

BUT WE REVIEWED THE CONTRACTS BETWEEN CITY OF KYLE AND AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT THAT WERE APPROVED BETWEEN JUNE OF 25 AND JANUARY 26TH. WE REVIEWED THE MAY 22ND MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. MR. MITCHELL'S RESIGNATION LETTER FROM THE SUMMER OF 25. THERE WERE A SMALL AMOUNT OF SOME TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN MR. MITCHELL AND CITY ATTORNEY. ALCORN READ ABOUT HIS JOB OPPORTUNITY WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. THOSE WERE APPROXIMATELY NOVEMBER OF 25. WE DID LOOK AT OTHER FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REPORTS THAT MR. MITCHELL HAD FILED PREVIOUSLY WHEN HE WAS A. WITH THE CITY AS A AS MAYOR OR COUNCIL MEMBER, WE REVIEWED A LITTLE OVER 4000 EMAILS THAT WE GATHERED FROM THE CITY'S EMAIL SERVER USING SEARCH TERMS THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE DESIGNED TO TO GATHER DOCUMENTS THAT POTENTIALLY COULD BE RELEVANT. FRANKLY, VERY, VERY FEW OF THEM WERE.

BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DIDN'T LEAVE SOMETHING THAT WAS, AT LEAST WITHIN THE CITY'S POSSESSION, UNREVIEWED. I WILL NOTE THAT OBVIOUSLY WE WERE NOT ABLE I SHOULDN'T SAY. OBVIOUSLY, WE WERE UNABLE TO GATHER ANY EMAILS FROM MR. MITCHELL HIMSELF OR FROM AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT, AS WE ARE SIMPLY, YOU KNOW, HIRED TO BE INVESTIGATORS HERE. WE DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO ISSUE A SUBPOENA FOR RECORDS OR FOR A DEPOSITION. LIKE, IF ANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN LITIGATION YOU MIGHT BE FAMILIAR WITH. BUT WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT IN LITIGATION WITH EITHER OF THESE PARTIES AT THIS MOMENT. SO WE COULDN'T ISSUE ANY SUBPOENAS OR, OR DEPOSITION NOTICES. AND, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE POWERS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, SO WE CANNOT ISSUE GRAND JURY SUBPOENAS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE CAN'T WE CAN'T FORCE THINGS. REALLY. WHEN YOU'RE DOING AN INVESTIGATION LIKE THIS, YOU RELY UPON PEOPLE'S COOPERATION. WE ALSO REVIEWED, AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE, CITY COUNCIL'S VIDEOS, AGENDAS AND MINUTES FOR MANY OF THE MEETINGS IN 2025 AND INTO MARCH OF 26. WE WATCHED TOURS, BOARD VIDEOS, THE TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARD. WE WATCHED SOME OF THE VIDEOS FOR SOME OF THOSE MEETINGS. WE LOOKED AT TRAVIS MITCHELL'S CAMPAIGN DONATION DISCLOSURE FORMS FOR ABOUT EIGHT YEARS. WE LOOKED AT RECUSAL FORMS THAT HE HAD SUBMITTED PREVIOUSLY. WE DID SOME WESTLAW BACKGROUND REPORTS ON HIM PRIOR COMPANY MITCHELL MOTORSPORTS THAT HE OWNED, AND AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. WE LOOKED AT THE RFQ PROCESS FOR KOHLERS CROSSING ROUNDABOUTS AT MARKETPLACE AND KYLE CROSSING. SO THIS WAS BASICALLY THE PROCESS BY THE RFP PROCESS AND LOOKED AT BOTH THE DOCUMENTS AND TALKED TO SOME OF THE CITY EMPLOYEES WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS. WE LOOKED AT DOCUMENTATION REGARDING OTHER ETHICS COMPLAINTS THAT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY FILED AGAINST TRAVIS MITCHELL. WE REVIEWED AND LISTENED TO A RECORDING OF A MEETING BETWEEN CURRENT MAYOR YVONNE FLORES CAHILL AND FORMER MAYOR TRAVIS MITCHELL THAT HAPPENED ON DECEMBER 22ND, 2025. THAT WAS HIS LAST DAY AS MAYOR.

CITY OF KYLE. WE LOOKED AT SOME FACEBOOK PAGE. WE'VE LABELED THEM CITY OF KYLE FACEBOOK PAGES, BUT THERE ARE VARIOUS FACEBOOK PAGES. AS I THINK MANY OF YOU ARE AWARE THAT FOCUS ON CITY OF KYLE, POLITICAL OR SOCIAL COMMUNITY ISSUES. THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ALLEGATIONS ON THOSE, AND WE DID LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE AND WE LOOKED AT AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINTS WEBSITE. SO THAT IS WHAT WE LOOKED AT, WHO WE TALKED TO AND WHO WE WERE UNABLE TO TALK TO AND THINGS WE DID NOT LOOK AT HERE. NOW, AS I SAID EARLIER, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO LOOK AT COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTLY BETWEEN MAYOR MITCHELL AND AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT, UNLESS, OF COURSE, IF IF THEY HAD BEEN ON THE CITY SERVER THROUGH HIS CITY EMAIL, THEN WE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THEM. BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY POWER TO LOOK AT HIS PRIVATE GMAIL OR WHATEVER PRIVATE EMAIL HE MIGHT USE. SIMILARLY, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO SEARCH THROUGH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINTS, DOCUMENTS, OR EMAILS. OUR FACTUAL FINDINGS. I'M GOING TO START OFF WITH WHAT WE DIDN'T FIND, AND THEN WE'LL TURN TO WHAT WE DID FIND. AGAIN, WE DID NOT FIND FROM WHAT WE HAVE THE EVIDENCE WE HAVE, WE DID NOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF LONG TERM ETHICAL VIOLATIONS BY TRAVIS MITCHELL. AND BY THAT, I MEAN, THE ISSUES THAT WE FOUND WERE REALLY FOCUSED IN THE LATTER HALF OF 2025. OBVIOUSLY, THERE HAVE BEEN ALLEGATIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT TRAVIS MITCHELL THAT STRETCHED BACK FURTHER. SOME PEOPLE HAVE THEM STRETCHING BACK FURTHER, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY ANY INDICATION THAT THAT THAT THAT EXISTED. WE HAD PLENTY OF WITNESSES WHO POINTED TO PRIOR ALLEGATIONS OF CORRUPTION ABOUT TRAVIS MITCHELL, FOR EXAMPLE. IT'S COMMON, COLLOQUIALLY CALLED THE TRIAL OF KYLE THAT OCCURRED. I THINK MANY OF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT, BUT WE NOTED THAT THOSE PRIOR ALLEGATIONS DID NOT RESULT IN ANY FINDINGS OR ACTION BY THE CITY. AND SO WE DIDN'T USE THOSE TO SORT OF BOOTSTRAP OR INFLUENCE OUR EVALUATION OF THE FACTS THAT WE FOUND. WE, WE, WE STARTED WITH A CLEAN SLATE. THERE'S A LOT OF RUMOR, A LOT OF CHATTER ON SOCIAL MEDIA FOR OUR STANDARDS

[01:30:04]

THAT WE'RE EMPLOYING WHEN WE DO INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, PEOPLE'S COMMENTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA ARE JUST THAT WE DON'T GIVE THEM MUCH WEIGHT. WE MIGHT USE THEM AS A SPRINGBOARD TO GO FIND SOMEBODY WHO CLAIMS TO KNOW SOMETHING, BUT WE WANT TO SIT DOWN WITH SOMEONE FACE TO FACE TO AN INTERVIEW. WE'D WANT TO DOCUMENT, YOU KNOW, ANONYMOUS ALLEGATIONS ON SOCIAL MEDIA ARE NOT GOING TO CUT IT. AS FAR AS US MAKING A FACTUAL FINDING. AND THAT'S WHAT WE NOTE IN THAT BOTTOM BULLET POINT THERE. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY INFLUENCE THAT THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS TO AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT WERE IMPROPERLY INFLUENCED BY TRAVIS MITCHELL.

AND BY THAT WE MEAN THAT AS WE LOOKED THROUGH IT, WHILE SOME OF THE WITNESSES HAD SUSPICIONS AND CONCERNS REGARDING MR. MITCHELL AND HIS RELATIONSHIP TO AICP, AND GENERALLY THE TOPIC OF ROUNDABOUTS, WE COULDN'T FIND ANY WITNESS THAT COULD POINT TO SPECIFIC EVIDENCE OF IMPROPER INFLUENCE, WHERE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, MAYOR MITCHELL PUT HIS THUMB ON THE SCALE AND PUSH SOMETHING IN FAVOR OF AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT IN AN IMPROPER WAY. THE ONLY THING THAT WE KEPT HEARING ABOUT WAS, WELL, HE'S NOW EMPLOYED WITH AICP, WHICH IS TRUE, BUT YOU WOULD NEED SOME EVIDENCE THAT THAT THERE WAS SOME IMPROPER INFLUENCE BACK AT THE TIME THAT SOME OF THOSE CONTRACTS WERE ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, ENGAGED IN BETWEEN CITY OF KYLE AND AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR, IS HOW FAR BACK COULD WE TRACK? WE KNOW THE END. WE KNOW HE ENDS UP WORKING FOR AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. BUT WHERE'S THE BEGINNING OF THAT IS THE REAL KEY. WE HAD SOME WITNESSES WHO CLAIMED THAT MAYOR MITCHELL PUSHED THE CITY TO USE AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. BUT WHEN WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT MEETING MINUTES, VIDEOS OF THOSE MEETINGS AND INTERVIEWS, IT OFTEN SEEMS THAT THE RECOLLECTION OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MEETING DIDN'T MATCH UP WITH WHAT WE ACTUALLY SAW IN THE VIDEOS. MOST OF THE TIME, WHAT WE SAW ALL THE TIME THAT WE SAW THAT AICP WAS EITHER SELECTED BY AN OUTSIDE CONTRACTOR, PRIMARILY LOCHNER, OR AFTER A FULL RFQ PROCESS THAT WAS CONDUCTED BY THE CITY EMPLOYEES. AND WE TALKED TO ALL THE CITY EMPLOYEES, AND WE SPECIFICALLY THAT'S THE NEXT BULLET HERE. WE ASKED THIS PANEL MEMBERS, WERE YOU INFLUENCED? WERE YOU PUSHED? DID MAYOR MITCHELL COME AND PULL YOU ASIDE, TALK TO YOU IN ANY WAY, TRY AND INFLUENCE YOUR EVALUATION OF THE COMPANIES THAT WERE UP IN THIS GOING THROUGH THIS RFQ PROCESS AND TO A PERSON, ALL OF THEM SAID, NO, THAT HAD NOT OCCURRED. NOW, WHAT WE DID FIND, I'M GOING TO START OFF WITH THE TIMELINE, BECAUSE THE TIMELINE REALLY IS KIND OF KEY TO UNDERSTAND HERE. BEFORE I GET TO THE FINDINGS.

SO IN MAY OF 2022, AICP WAS CHOSEN BY GENERAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT LOCHNER AS A SUBCONTRACTOR IN THE BEEBE ROAD PROJECT. SO I HEARD COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY ASKED EARLIER, YOU KNOW, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE, THE COUNCIL CHOSE, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT ONE OF THE CONTRACTORS CHOSE? AND I THINK THAT'S THE DISTINCTION HE WAS GETTING AT, WAS THAT SOME IN SOME INSTANCES, THE SELECTION OF AICP WAS NOT MADE REALLY BY THE CITY AT ALL. THEY WERE RELYING UPON THE EXPERTISE OF LOCHNER, WHO SAID THAT THIS IS THE THE ENGINEERING FIRM YOU SHOULD USE. BUT AT OTHER INSTANCES IT WAS THE CITY MAKING THIS ELECTION. SO WE ALSO LOOKED AT THAT SEPTEMBER OF 2023, THERE WAS ANOTHER THERE WAS AN RFQ PROCESS THAT RESULTED IN A VIRTUAL TIE BETWEEN AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT AND ONE OTHER FIRM WITHIN OUT OF. I THINK IT WAS OUT OF 100 POINTS THAT WERE WITHIN ONE POINT OF EACH OTHER. I THINK, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE HAD A 91 AND ONE HAD A 92, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND BY OUR INTERVIEWS WITH THE FOLKS THAT RUN THESE RFQ PROCESSES FOR THE CITY, EVERYBODY CONSIDER THAT MORE OR LESS A VIRTUAL TIE. AND OF THAT TIE OUT OF THAT TIE, THEN CITY MANAGER MR. LANGLEY SUGGESTED THAT AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT BE USED, AND THE TOURIST BOARD VOTED TO APPROVE THAT AGAIN.

ANOTHER MOMENT WHEN AICP WAS SELECTED WAS APRIL OF 2025. WE HAD ANOTHER RFQ PROCESS AND THE STAFF PANEL THERE. THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS TO USE AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT TO DESIGN ROUNDABOUTS, COLAS AND MARKETPLACE COW CROSSING. I WILL SAY AS AN ASIDE, WE WERE ALL FAIRLY IMPRESSED WITH THE CITY'S RFQ PROCESS. THE CITY EMPLOYEES THAT YOU ALL HAVE WORKING HERE SEEMED VERY DEDICATED TO DOING IT CORRECTLY. YOU HAD SOME GOOD PRACTICES NOT HAVING THE SAME PEOPLE ON THAT RFQ PROCESS EVERY TIME, SO THAT IT ROTATES A LITTLE BIT, AND THAT KEEPS ANYONE FROM DEVELOPING OUTSIZED INFLUENCE ON THE ON THE RESULTS OF YOUR RFQ PROCESS. SO WE WANTED TO COMMEND THE CITY ON THAT. IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE ANYTHING WAS BROKEN IN THEIR. NOW WE MOVE INTO THE SECOND HALF OF 2025. YOU NOTICE THAT AT THIS POINT, THE ASP, ASP CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN ALREADY SELECTED VIA RFQ PROCESS OR LOCHNER. JULY 15TH,

[01:35:03]

2025, IS WHEN MAYOR MITCHELL ANNOUNCED THAT HE WAS GOING TO RESIGN EARLY. THAT TRIGGERED AN ELECTION IN NOVEMBER. AS YOU ALL ARE WELL AWARE, WE SPOKE TO VARIOUS WITNESSES THAT IN THIS TIME FRAME IN JULY, MR. MITCHELL WAS MENTIONING THAT HE ALREADY HAD A JOB LINED UP WITH A COMPANY NAMED KINDER MORGAN, WHICH IS A VERY LARGE COMPANY. SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF THEM BEFORE, BUT THERE WAS NO NO MENTION OF AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. AT THIS POINT, AT LEAST WE HAVE NO INDICATION OF IT. IN AUGUST THERE WAS A TASK ORDER. NOW, THAT IS NOT THE SAME AS A NEW CONTRACT, BECAUSE THE ASP HAD ALREADY BEEN APPROVED ON THIS PROJECT, BUT A TASK ORDER FOR THE BB ROAD PROJECT CAME UP AS A CONSENT ORDER. THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT. IT WAS EVERYONE VOTED IN FAVOR. I BELIEVE MITCHELL DEFINITELY VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE CONSENT ORDER. WE HAVE NO IDEA. IT'S IN THEORY POSSIBLE THAT HE WAS ALREADY TALKING TO AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OF THAT. AND THEREFORE WE STICK WITH WHAT WE HAVE SOME EVIDENCE OF. SO AT THIS POINT, ALL WE KNOW IS THAT HE WAS TALKING WITH KINDER MORGAN SOMETIME IN SEPTEMBER. APPARENTLY, THE JOB OFFER FROM KINDER MORGAN FALLS THROUGH. WHETHER IT'S A JOB OFFER, A JOB OPPORTUNITY, WE'RE NOT CLEAR.

BUT THE WITNESSES WHO HAD HEARD HIM TALKING ABOUT KINDER MORGAN ALSO SAID, HEY, BY ABOUT SEPTEMBER, HE WASN'T TALKING ABOUT THAT ANYMORE. AND IT SEEMED FAIRLY CLEAR TO THEM THAT THAT WAS NOT WHERE HE WAS GOING TO GO. SEPTEMBER 16TH, THERE IS A COUNCIL MEETING AT A COUNCIL MEETING. COUNCIL APPROVES DESIGN CONTRACT FOR COLAS CROSSING WITH A FIVE ZERO VOTE. BUT MAYOR MITCHELL WAS NOT PRESENT. HE DOESN'T VOTE OR DISCUSS AT THAT VOTE THAT MEETING. EXCUSE ME. OCTOBER 21ST, THERE'S ANOTHER COUNCIL MEETING AND TWO AMENDMENTS TO TASK ORDER SEVEN THAT WOULD AFFECT AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT ARE APPROVED 6 TO 0. MAYOR MITCHELL IS HOW SHOULD I SAY THIS? HE'S AT THE MEETING. BUT BECAUSE OF RULES OF THE COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED. HE WAS NOT ON CAMERA AND THEREFORE HE WAS MARKED ABSENT. THAT IS Y'ALL'S INTERNAL RULES, I GUESS, ABOUT VIDEO ATTENDANCE. AND HE DOES NOT DISCUSS OR VOTE ON THAT VOTE. OCTOBER 29TH TO 31ST, 2025. THERE IS A TML OR TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE CONFERENCE. SO WE'RE TALKING MAYBE, YOU KNOW, 8 OR 9 DAYS AFTER THAT COUNCIL MEETING, HE SPOKE TO ONE OF OUR WITNESSES AT THAT CONFERENCE, AND HE MENTIONED TO THAT WITNESS THAT HE HAD INTERVIEWED WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT AT THAT POINT. SO THIS IS OUR FIRST SORT OF HARD DATA POINT OF WHEN WE KNOW THAT, AT LEAST BY THIS POINT, HE WAS TALKING TO AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT ABOUT SOME POTENTIAL EMPLOYMENT. WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF DETAILS. HE SAID HE INTERVIEWED DID HE HAVE A JOB OFFER? WERE THEY THINKING ABOUT IT? WE DON'T KNOW. BUT IT HAD PROGRESSED TO AN INTERVIEW. AT LEAST THAT'S HOW HE CHARACTERIZED IT WITH THIS WITNESS. AGAIN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO NAIL DOWN, BASED UPON WHAT WE HAVE, EXACTLY HOW FAR IN ADVANCE OF OF THAT, HIS DISCLOSURE OF THAT ON OCTOBER 29TH TO 31ST. HOW FAR IN ADVANCE THAT THAT INTERVIEW TOOK PLACE A DAY A WEEK? WE DON'T KNOW. WE'RE TRYING. WE ARE KIND OF INFERRING THAT HE'S INTERVIEWING WITH AICP SOMETIME AFTER THE KINDER MORGAN JOB FALLS THROUGH, WHICH MAKES SOME SENSE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF DIRECT EVIDENCE ON THAT.

NOVEMBER 4TH, 2025 IS ELECTION DAY. IT RESULTS IN A RUNOFF, AS SEVERAL OF YOU ARE VERY AWARE OF. AND NOVEMBER 6TH, AFTER MR. MITCHELL REACHES OUT TO CITY ATTORNEY ALCORN REED, HE. HE CALLS HER AND SAYS, I'M TAKING A JOB WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. CITY ATTORNEY ALCORN REED SENDS HIM A LINK FOR THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST FORMS, AND IT'S UNCLEAR IF HE HAS A FORMAL OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT AT THAT POINT FOR AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT, BUT HE CLEARLY BELIEVES THAT HE'S GOING TO BE WORKING FOR THEM DECEMBER 2ND. A LITTLE LESS THAN A MONTH LATER, IT'S HIS FINAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THERE IS NO ASP BUSINESS ON THE AGENDA. DECEMBER 16TH IS THE FIRST DAY HE TAKES EMPLOYMENT WITH ASP, AND DECEMBER 22ND IS HIS LAST DAY AS MAYOR. AND THAT'S THE DAY HE HAD A MEETING WITH INCOMING MAYOR FLORES KALE. OUR TAKEAWAY FROM THE TIMELINE IS THE EVIDENCE SEEMS CONSISTENT THAT MITCHELL WAS SET TO GO TO WORK FOR KINDER MORGAN DURING AUGUST 15TH MEETING WHERE ASP CONTRACT WAS VOTED ON. SO WE DON'T THINK IT'S LIKELY THAT AT LEAST WE DON'T HAVE EVIDENCE TO FOR US TO FIND, IT'S LIKELY THAT THERE WAS SORT OF ANY SORT OF IMPROPER INFLUENCE BY AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT, OFFERING HIM A JOB OR NEGOTIATING FOR A JOB OR DANGLING A JOB IN FRONT OF HIM. BUT IT DOES SEEM THAT THE KINDER MORGAN JOB FOR MITCHELL FALLS THROUGH BY THAT BY SOMETIME IN SEPTEMBER AND AT SOME TIME PRIOR TO THE OCTOBER 29TH TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE CONFERENCE, HE HAS INTERVIEWED WITH WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT, IT'S UNCLEAR IF HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. WHAT. IT'S UNCLEAR WHAT HIS RELATIONSHIP WAS WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE

[01:40:07]

POINT DURING THOSE SEPTEMBER 16TH AND OCTOBER 21ST COUNCIL MEETINGS. IT'S POSSIBLE HE HAD ABSOLUTELY NO DISCUSSION WITH THEM ABOUT EMPLOYMENT. IT'S POSSIBLE HE HAD AN INTERVIEW.

IT'S POSSIBLE HE HAD A JOB OFFER. WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO NAIL IT DOWN ANY MORE THAN THAT OBVIOUSLY WOULD HAVE BEEN WONDERFUL FOR HIM OR AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT TO SIT DOWN. THEY COULD THEY COULD TELL US THE ANSWER TO THAT. BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT. WE FIND IT LIKELY THAT HE HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT HE DID NOT DISCLOSE. AND I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THIS IS OUR PRIMARY FINDINGS ARE ISSUES OF DISCLOSURE. THESE ARE NOT WE DID NOT HAVE EVIDENCE INDICATING THAT, HEY, THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT WAS OBTAINED BY STRUCTURE POINT BY OFFERING SOMETHING TO TO MAYOR MITCHELL. WHAT WE DO THINK IS THAT THE EVIDENCE WE DO HAVE INDICATES HE HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AT SOME POINT, AND HE REFUSED. HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE IT. IMPORTANTLY, THE RECORDED MEETING WHERE HE IT WAS JUST HIM AND THE INCOMING MAYOR, FLORES KALE. HE HE SAID THAT HE WAS AWARE THAT PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WOULD ATTACK HIM FOR TAKING THE STRUCTURE POINT JOB. HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THERE CAME A POINT WHERE HE TOLD AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT TO STOP NEGOTIATIONS UNTIL AFTER THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. THAT WAS IMPORTANT, AND WE FOUND THAT SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THAT INDICATED TO US THAT HE UNDERSTOOD THAT AT SOME POINT, WHEN YOU START TALKING WITH A POTENTIAL EMPLOYER, A POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ARISES THE NEXT BULLET POINT. HE ALSO SAYS DURING THAT THAT CONVERSATION THAT HE, QUOTE, SKIPPED OUT ON VOTES BECAUSE HE DID NOT WANT TO, QUOTE, BREAK THE RULES. THAT WAS ALSO A STRONG PIECE OF EVIDENCE, IN OUR OPINION, THAT HE KNEW HE HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THAT THAT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED. OUR OPINION IS THAT HE ADDRESSED IT IN A WAY THAT WAS INSUFFICIENT. UNDER YOUR RULES, YOUR ETHICS AND RULES AND CHARTER. HE ALSO MADE A POINT THAT HE DID NOT GIVE AICP WORK IN EXCHANGE FOR A JOB.

SO WHERE DOES THAT LEAD US? WE FOUND TWO PRIMARY VIOLATIONS UNDER SECTION 12.2 OF THE CITY CHARTER, WHICH IS ENTITLED ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS AND CITY CODE OF ETHICS 2-171, WHICH IS THE IMPROPER ECONOMIC BENEFIT. WITH REGARDS TO THE FIRST ONE BROUGHT US UP HERE SO THAT I CAN. THIS IS I'M JUST READING FROM OUR REPORT. SO THIS IS A COPY THAT EVERYBODY HAS. BUT THE ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS SAYS THAT NO OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY SHALL ACCEPT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY A GIFT, FAVOR OR PRIVILEGE EXCEEDING ANY NOMINAL VALUE OR EMPLOYMENT FROM ANY UTILITY, CORPORATION, PERSON OR ENTITY. HAVING OR SEEKING A FRANCHISE OR CONTRACT WITH OR DOING BUSINESS WITH THE CITY. AND IN OUR MIND, IT SEEMS CLEAR AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT AT ALL TIMES, YOU KNOW, FROM JULY TO DECEMBER OF 2025 DID HAVE CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY, AND SOMEWHERE IN THERE, MAYOR MITCHELL WAS NEGOTIATING FOR, AND AT SOME POINT ACCEPTED EMPLOYMENT. AND THEY HAD CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY, AND HE DID NOT DISCLOSE IT. THE SECOND THE CITY CODE OF ETHICS, 2-171 IMPROPER ECONOMIC BENEFIT. IT'S THE BASIC SAME THING. THE RULE SAYS TO AVOID THE APPEARANCE AND RISK OF IMPROPRIETY, CITY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE SHALL NOT TAKE ANY OFFICIAL ACTION THAT HE KNOWS IS LIKELY TO AFFECT THE ECONOMIC INTERESTS OF THE OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE OUTSIDE EMPLOYER OF THE OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE, AND A BUSINESS OR A BUSINESS ENTITY FROM WHOM, WITHIN THE LAST 12 MONTHS, THE CITY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OR HIS OR HER SPOUSE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY SOLICITED AN OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT, RECEIVED AND HAD NOT REJECTED AN OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT OR ACCEPTED AN OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT. SO NOW THIS SECTION 2-171 HAS TWO PARTS TO IT, WHICH IS THAT'S PART A SAYING. HERE'S WHAT CAUSES A CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR YOU. PART B IS ESSENTIALLY SETS FORTH WHAT YOU SHOULD DO IN THAT SITUATION. CITY OR CITY OFFICER EMPLOYEE WHOSE CONDUCT WOULD OTHERWISE VIOLATE SECTION A MUST RECUSE HIMSELF OR HERSELF FROM THE TIME THAT THE CONFLICT IS OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED. HE OR SHE, HE OR SHE SHALL REFRAIN FROM FURTHER PARTICIPATION IN THE MATTER PROMPTLY FILED WITH THE CITY SECRETARY A DISCLOSURE STATING THE NATURE OF THE CONFLICT AND BRING THE CONFLICT TO THE ATTENTION OF HIS OR HER SUPERVISOR, WHO WILL THEN HAVE NECESSARY COULD ASSIGN RESPONSIBILITY. THAT'S OBVIOUSLY TALKING ABOUT SORT OF LOWER RANKING EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE CITY STRUCTURE, AND A MEMBER OF A BOARD OR COMMISSIONER SHALL PROMPTLY DISCLOSE THE CONFLICT TO OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THIS IS WHERE WE REALLY FOUND FELT THAT MAYOR MITCHELL MADE THE MISTAKE INSTEAD OF SIMPLY SKIPPING VOTES. OKAY. THAT'S GOOD. HE'S NOT PARTICIPATING IN VOTES. BUT

[01:45:04]

THE WAY YOUR RULES ARE SET UP, IT SEEMS VERY CLEAR THAT THE PURPOSE IS TO ALLOW ALL OF YOU ON THE COUNCIL AND YOU IN THE IN THE COMMUNITY, TO KNOW THAT HE HAS THAT CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND YOU CAN FACTOR THAT INTO ANY WHICH WAY YOU WANT TO DEAL WITH WITH UPCOMING VOTES ON ON NEW WORK OR, OR EXTENSIONS OF CURRENT WORK WITH CONTRACTORS. AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY DIDN'T GET WAS THE DISCLOSURE AND THE ABILITY TO KNOW, OKAY, IT TO BE CLEAR, FOR MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, IT'S NOT AGAINST THE LAW FOR MEMBERS OF YOUR COUNCIL TO HAVE OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT. I THINK ALMOST ALL OF THEM DO, BUT IT'S DISCLOSED, IT'S KNOWN. AND IF IF A MATTER WERE TO COME UP THAT, YOU KNOW, INVOLVED, I HATE TO PICK ON YOU.

COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY, BUT IF IT INVOLVED HIS OUTSIDE EMPLOYER, EVERYONE HE KNOWS WHO'S OUTSIDE EMPLOYER IS YOU MAKE THE DISCLOSURE, YOU RECUSE AND YOU DON'T PARTICIPATE. AND THAT'S WHAT DIDN'T HAPPEN HERE. ASP OBVIOUSLY TAKES TWO TO GIVE AND GIVE AND ACCEPT A GIFT. SO ASP ALSO WOULD HAVE VIOLATED THE CITY CHARTER. SECTION 12.02 ON ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS. WE'LL NOTE THERE'S BEEN SOME CONVERSATION THIS EVENING. I'VE HEARD SOME COMMENTS ABOUT VOIDING CONTRACTS, JUST TO BE CLEAR. AND I THINK CITY ATTORNEY ALCORN REED STATED THIS ALREADY, BUT A VIOLATION OF 12.02 DOES NOT MAKE THE CONTRACT VOID. IT MAKES IT.

VOIDABLE AND I, WE DID NOT STEP FURTHER THAN THAT. IF THE CITY COUNCIL HAS FURTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THAT PROCESS WORKS AND WHETHER THAT'S ADVISABLE. WE DID NOT OFFER ANY OPINION OR WORK PRODUCT ON THAT. THAT WOULD FALL INTO THE REALM OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, WHO CAN CAPABLY ADVISE THE COUNCIL ON THAT. AGAIN, I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR WE DID NOT FIND VIOLATIONS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT. TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 171, WHICH IS A SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN BUSINESS ENTITY. I TOLD YOU AT THE VERY BEGINNING IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT WE FOUND OUT THAT MR. MITCHELL WAS NOT A SHAREHOLDER IN ASP. IF HE HAD BEEN A SHAREHOLDER IN ASP, POTENTIALLY THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN GOVERNMENT CODE. 171 COULD HAVE BECOME AN ISSUE OR. 176 I UNDERSTAND THAT'S A CONFLICT DISCLOSURE, BUT AS YOU WORK YOUR WAY THROUGH THE LANGUAGE OF 176, WHAT HE DID MANAGES TO NOT VIOLATE GOVERNMENT CODE. 176 BUT DID VIOLATE YOUR CITY CHARTER, WHICH IS NOT UNCOMMON BECAUSE CITY CHARTERS OFTEN COME CLOSE BUT DON'T EXACTLY TRACK THE SAME LANGUAGE AS 176 FROM THE GOVERNMENT CODE. WE DID NOT FIND ANY OTHER CITY CHARTER CODE OF ETHICS PROVISIONS THAT WE BELIEVE WERE VIOLATED, AND WE DID NOT BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO FIND A VIOLATION OF TEXAS PENAL CODE, SECTION 3902 OR 3906. ALTHOUGH OBVIOUSLY I SHOULD NOTE THAT WE ARE NOT YOUR PROSECUTING AUTHORITY HERE IN HAYS COUNTY, AND IT'S ALWAYS YOUR LOCAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY WHO WOULD MAKE ANY FINAL DECISION ON THINGS LIKE THAT. SO. WITH THAT, I'M DONE. I'M HAPPY TO FIELD QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS. HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO PRODUCE THIS STUDY? I, I SHOULD HAVE HAD MY DATES READY. I BELIEVE WE STARTED DOING INTERVIEWS IN LATE JUNE OR NO. MAY IN MAY. OKAY, OKAY. IT STARTED IN MAY. WE DID INTERVIEWS MAY, JUNE AND INTO JULY, I THINK. AND THEN WE WE REPORTED SORT OF OUR PROGRESS AT THAT POINT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO, TO YOU, WE WERE THEN INSTRUCTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT YOU WANTED A WRITTEN REPORT THAT YOU PLAN TO MAKE PUBLIC, WHICH I UNDERSTAND HAS BEEN MADE PUBLIC. I BLESS YOU. AND WE THEN GOT TO WORK ON THE REPORT. THE REPORT PROBABLY TOOK TO GET TO A A PRETTY GOOD DRAFT FORM. IT TOOK ABOUT ANOTHER MONTH TOWARDS THE END OF AUGUST, AND THEN WE'VE BEEN WAITING TO GET ON. WE NEEDED TO GET WE HAD TO WORK OUT OUR BILLING WITH YOU. WE NEEDED TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO OUR OUR ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT TO COVER THE EXTRA WORK THAT COVERED THE WRITTEN REPORT. AND THEN WE'VE BEEN WAITING TO GET ON CALENDAR WITH YOU TO COME MAKE THIS PRESENTATION. CAN YOU TELL US HOW MUCH THAT BILLING WAS? YEAH, WE THE BILLING TOTAL ON OUR WORK WAS A TOTAL OF $150,000. WE DID AGREE TO CAP OUR WORK. WE ACTUALLY WENT IN EXCESS OF THAT. BUT WORKING WITH CITY ATTORNEY ALCORN REED, SHE ASKED THAT WE CAP THAT WHICH WE HAVE.

AND SO I BELIEVE THAT THE CITY IS CLOSE TO HAVING PAID US IN FULL. I THINK THERE'S A SMALL 2 OR $3000 BILL THAT IS THE LAST ONE LAGGING IN HERE. BUT THERE WILL BE NO MORE BILLS BEYOND

[01:50:02]

THAT. YOU KNOW, WE TONIGHT IS INCLUDED. THERE'S WE'RE FAR IN EXCESS OF 150 NOW, BUT THAT'S THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I DO HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. SO IF TRAVIS MITCHELL WAS RECEIVING PAYMENTS FROM AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT, WOULD YOUR INVESTIGATION HAVE UNCOVERED THAT WHILE HE WAS WHILE HE WAS MAYOR? YEAH. AT ANY TIME. YEAH. WE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO UNCOVER THAT UNLESS HE UNLESS IT WAS IN ANY OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE REVIEWED OR ONE OF THE WITNESSES ACTUALLY SAID, I FOR WHATEVER REASON, I WAS LOOKING OVER HIS SHOULDER WHEN HE WAS LOOKING AT HIS BANK ACCOUNT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. WE DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS TO HIS BANKING RECORDS. HE DIDN'T PRODUCE THEM TO US. WE SIMILARLY, WE DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS TO AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT'S BANKING RECORDS. THEY DID NOT AGREE TO WORK WITH US ON THIS INVESTIGATION. SO IS IT POSSIBLE? IT'S POSSIBLE. WE JUST DON'T KNOW AND DON'T HAVE EVIDENCE. OKAY. ANOTHER QUESTION. DURING THIS INVESTIGATION, DID YOU OR YOUR TEAM HEAR THE TERM ROUNDABOUT FIRST POLICY? WE DID HEAR SOME PEOPLE MENTION A ROUNDABOUT FIRST POLICY. IT'S UNCLEAR, I THINK DIFFERENT. I THINK THAT MEANT DIFFERENT THINGS TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. I THINK SOME PEOPLE BELIEVED THERE WAS LIKE A WRITTEN POLICY SOMEWHERE THAT SAID THE CITY WILL ALWAYS DO ROUNDABOUTS. AND THEN I THINK OTHERS SAID, NO. THAT WAS JUST A SORT OF A GENERAL MINDSET. YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING TO DO ROUNDABOUTS WHEREVER WE CAN. DID YOU GUYS HAPPEN TO UNCOVER WHERE THAT POLICY OR THE NAME CAME FROM? NO, WE DON'T HAVE A CLEAR FEELING ON ON WHERE WHO COINED THAT PHRASE OR WHO WHO IT CAME UP WITH THAT WE DIDN'T UNCOVER THAT. OKAY. BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CITY CREATED A LOT OF THE INTERSECTIONS ACCORDING TO THIS ROUNDABOUT FIRST POLICY. BUT IF YOU'RE STATING FOR THE RECORD THAT THERE'S REALLY NO POLICY THAT STATES THAT ROUNDABOUTS HAVE TO COME FIRST IN DECISIONS. I MEAN, DID YOU FIND ANY OF THAT? YEAH. WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT DETERMINING THE THE CITY'S POLICY WITH REGARD TO ROUNDABOUTS WAS NECESSARILY DIRECTLY WITHIN THE SCOPE OF OUR INVESTIGATION. WE TRIED TO STAY FOCUSED ON, YOU KNOW, ISSUES OF POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR CORRUPTION BETWEEN MAYOR MITCHELL AND STRUCTURE POINT. SO I DON'T WANT TO OFFER A BLANKET OPINION ON THAT. I CAN SAY I DON'T BELIEVE WE EVER SAW A WRITTEN POLICY CALLED ROUNDABOUTS FIRST. YEAH. NOT NOT CALLED THAT. OKAY. YEAH. NO, I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A ROUNDABOUT ORDINANCE, BUT I WAS GENUINELY CURIOUS WHERE THIS TERM ROUNDABOUT FIRST CAME FROM BECAUSE IT HAPPENED AFTER, OF COURSE, MY FIRST TERM WAS DONE. AND SO MAYBE I CAN ASK STAFF WHERE, IF THEY KNOW WHERE THAT LIKE WHERE, WHERE DID YOU GUYS HEAR THAT POLICY OR THAT NAME? I'M GENUINELY CURIOUS WHERE IT DERIVED. I BELIEVE IT WAS IN ADOPTED AS PART OF OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES. I'M LOOKING AT IT RIGHT. IT'S SINCE BEEN CHANGED, BUT AT THE TIME IT HAD, THE ORDINANCE HAD TALKED ABOUT A PREFERRED INTERSECTION DESIGN OF COLLECTOR STREETS AND MAJOR ROADWAYS, MAJOR THOROUGHFARE STREETS OR ARTERIAL STREETS. AND IT WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON AUGUST, AUGUST 3RD, 2021. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, I WAS ON THE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME. IT WAS NOT CALLED THE ROUNDABOUT FIRST. IT WAS JUST AN ORDINANCE FOR THE ROUNDABOUTS AND HOW HOW WE WOULD PROCEED AS A CITY. SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE I'VE HEARD THAT BEFORE, BUT IT WAS NOTHING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WHENEVER WE APPROVED THAT. SO I WAS CURIOUS IF YOU GUYS HAD KIND OF FIGURED OUT WHERE THAT DERIVED. NO, I MEAN, WE CERTAINLY HEARD IT DURING OUR INTERVIEWS. DIFFERENT PEOPLE WOULD MENTION IT, BUT WE WASN'T THE ORIGIN OF WHO COINED THE TERM. NO ONE. NO ONE HAS STEPPED UP TO CLAIM IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COUNCIL REMEMBER I NOTICED WHEN GOING THROUGH CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS THAT BOTH ROBERT RIZZO AND BEAR HISER HAD RECEIVED CONSIDERABLE CASH DONATIONS TO THEIR CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAST YEAR. AND SO DO YOU CONSIDER THAT JUST TO BE KIND OF QUESTIONABLE IN YOUR MIND AS AN INVESTIGATOR, THAT THAT THEY THEN WOUND UP NOT COMMUNICATING WITH YOU GUYS? YOU'RE SAYING THEY GOT CASH DONATIONS FROM AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT OR JUST CASH FROM CASH? CANFIELD, WHO IS AN EXECUTIVE WITH AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT? WELL, IN FAIRNESS, WE DID NOT THEY WEREN'T REALLY THE SCOPE OF OUR INVESTIGATION. SO WE DIDN'T INVESTIGATE THEIR CAMPAIGN DONATIONS. SO I THINK IT'D BE A LITTLE BIT OUT OF OUT OF SORTS FOR ME TO OFFER OPINIONS ON THEM HAVING NOT DONE A FULL INVESTIGATION. OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE ANY DIRECTION THAT YOU GUYS. YOU'RE GOOD. YEAH. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TRUST. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND OBVIOUSLY, CITY ATTORNEY ALCORN KNOWS WHERE WE ARE. IF YOU HAVE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT ANY OF OUR WORK, WE APPRECIATE THAT. AMY, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU GUYS NEED FROM US? FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I BELIEVE I HAVE DIRECTION TO GET WITH OUR ETHICS ATTORNEY AND

[01:55:04]

KIND OF PUT OUR HEADS TOGETHER AND SEE IF WE CAN GIVE YOU A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDANCE ON HOW TO HANDLE THAT CHARTER PROVISION AND THAT CODE PROVISION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

WELL, I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRICE OF THIS, WHICH WAS $150,000. THANK YOU. BUT, YOU KNOW, IN ESSENCE, IF WE CAN FIND THAT THAT WAS A VIOLATION AND WE HAVE THE 311,000 THAT WE ARE, YOU KNOW, IS UP IN QUESTION RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE THE INFORMATION TO SUPPORT THE FACT THAT WE COULD ULTIMATELY NOT PAY THAT OR PUT THAT ON HOLD.

SO. WELL, YEAH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO THINK SO, BUT I DO. WELL, THAT THAT WORK WOULD NEED TO BE DONE REGARDLESS. IT'S KIND OF THE ARGUMENT AGAINST THAT STATEMENT. WHAT DO YOU MEAN THE WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. THAT THAT WORK ON ON BEEBE ROAD WOULD NEED TO BE DONE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT WAS AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT ENGINEERING FIRM GOING GOING BACK TO WHAT IT IS, THE 311,000 COVERS. IT'S LITERALLY JUST CONSULTATION, LIKE TELLING US WHERE WE SHOULD STOP BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. IT WASN'T LIKE PHYSICAL WORK OR SCHEMATICS OR ENGINEERING. IT WAS CONSULTATION INFORMATION AT OUR REQUEST. I WAS AT OUR REQUEST.

I DIDN'T JUST GO DO IT RIGHT. I, I AGREE WITH THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT WAS DONE. I DON'T KNOW WHO APPROVED IT, WHICH IS WHY I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA TO DO SOME INVESTIGATION INTO THAT. I BELIEVE COUNCIL APPROVED THAT. OKAY. ANY OTHER. YEAH. MOVING ON. WE UP NEXT. WE

[27) (First Reading) Consider approval of an Ordinance, pursuant to City Council direction provided on September 15, 2026, (1) amending the City’s water and wastewater rates for customers located outside the City limits effective for water usage and wastewater service provided beginning in December 2026, (2) establishing rates for each outside-City customer class at either 1.3 times the corresponding inside-City rates under Option 1 or 1.2 times the corresponding inside-City rates under Option 2, (3) amending the City's FY 2026-27 Schedule of Rates, Fines, Fees & Charges, in accordance with rates as determined by the City Council upon first reading of this Ordinance, and (4) amending the Code of Ordinances Chapter 50, Sections No. 50-23 and 50-24 previously establishing the water and wastewater service rates for outside-City customers. Public Hearing ]

HAVE LET ME SEE AGENDA ITEM WAS THAT 2327 CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION PROVIDED ON SEPTEMBER 15TH, 2026 TO AMEND THE CITY'S WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES FOR CUSTOMERS LOCATED OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. EFFECTIVE FOR WATER USAGE AND WASTEWATER SERVICE PROVIDED BEGINNING IN DECEMBER 2026. ESTABLISHING RATES FOR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS CLASS AT EITHER 1.3 THE TIMES THE CORRESPONDING INSIDE CITY RATES UNDER OPTION 1 OR 1.2 TIMES THE CORRESPONDING INSIDE CITY RATES UNDER OPTION TWO. AMENDING THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR 2026 2027 SCHEDULE OF RATES, FINES, FEES AND CHARGES IN ACCORDANCE WITH RATES AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. UPON FIRST READING OF THIS ORDINANCE AND AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. CHAPTER 50 SECTION SECTIONS NUMBER 50-23 AND 50-24. PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHING THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE RATES FOR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. THIS DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. SHOULD I OPEN THAT UP FIRST? MAYOR, I'LL GO TO THE PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT. PRESENT THE INFORMATION AND THEN Y'ALL CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL RIGHT. SOUNDS GOOD. SO, MAYOR, MAYOR, PRO TEM COUNCIL MEMBERS, FOR THE RECORD, I'M PERVEZ MOHITE, CITY'S INTERIM CITY MANAGER AND DIRECTOR OF FINANCE. SO HERE'S A QUICK REVIEW OF WHAT I'M GOING TO SHARE WITH YOU TONIGHT. I'M GOING TO GO OVER CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION TO ME, GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT OUR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. WE'LL GO OVER THE ANALYSIS AND REVIEW IMPACT OF THE TWO OPTIONS THAT YOU ALL REQUESTED ME TO BRING BACK. OPTION ONE IS OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS RATES TO BE SET AT 30% ABOVE ICL. OPTION TWO, WHEREBY THE OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS RATES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES TO BE SET AT 20% ABOVE INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. AND THEN I WILL SUMMARIZE FOR YOU THE COMPARISON OF OPTIONS ONE AND TWO. NUMBER SIX IS VERY IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND. WE STILL HAVE MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT GROUP CUSTOMERS WHO ARE PETITIONERS BEFORE PUC THAT HAVE FILED A RATE APPEAL. SO I'M GOING TO GO OVER WHAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO CONSIDER REGARDING THAT CUSTOMER CLASS. AND THEN I'LL GO OVER THE NEXT STEPS. AND MAYOR, THEN WE'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND THE REASON I ADDED A PUBLIC HEARING TO THIS AGENDA ITEM IS BECAUSE THE CITY HAS ALREADY ADOPTED THE BUDGET. WE'VE ALREADY ADOPTED THE WATER AND SEWER RATES. SO ANY CHANGE IN THAT, I THINK, IS PRUDENT ON US TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AS PART OF THAT PROCESS. AND THEN FINALLY, AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING, COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER ON FIRST READING THE ORDINANCE TO AMEND OUTSIDE CITY, LIMIT CUSTOMER RATES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE. SO LET'S START WITH CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION, GIVEN TO THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER ON SEPTEMBER 15TH, 2026. SO ON SEPTEMBER 15TH,

[02:00:08]

2026, UNDER AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 17, THE CITY COUNCIL VERY SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO BRING OPTIONS FORWARD FOR THE APPROPRIATE RESOLUTION AND OR ORDINANCE NECESSARY TO AMEND THE CITY OF KYLE'S OUTSIDE CITY WATER RATES, ESTABLISHING SUCH RATES AT NO MORE THAN 30% OR 20% ABOVE THE CORRESPONDING INSIDE CITY WATER RATES. ONE THING I DO WANT TO CALL TO YOUR ATTENTION IS THAT THE DIRECTION ONLY COVERED WATER RATES. THE DISCUSSION I'M GOING TO SHARE WITH YOU TONIGHT AND THE ANALYSIS, IT WILL COVER BOTH WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES. I BELIEVE COUNCIL INTENDED THAT, BUT IT WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY WORDED SUCH IN YOUR MOTION. AND Y'ALL CAN CORRECT ME IF THAT'S NOT THE COUNCIL'S INTENT. SO HERE'S SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT OUR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS. SO IN THIS TABLE. THE REMAINING OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS WE HAVE FOR WATER ACCOUNTS 1129 AND FOR WASTEWATER ACCOUNTS, 2089 CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS. AND THE REASON I CALL IT REMAINING BECAUSE IF YOU'LL RECALL, WE'VE ALREADY COUNCIL HAS ALREADY DECIDED AND APPROVED HOW TO TREAT THE SIX CREEKS CUSTOMERS. THEY HAVE BECOME INSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. SO WHEN YOU SUBTRACT THE SIX CREEKS CUSTOMERS, WHAT'S REMAINING IS 1129 ON THE WATER SIDE AND 2089 ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE. WHEN YOU ADD UP SIX CREEKS AND ALL ARE INSIDE CITY LIMIT ACCOUNTS, WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 16,021 ACCOUNTS ON THE WATER UTILITY SIDE, AND 19,885 UTILITY ACCOUNTS ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE. SO I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THIS WITH YOU AS A BACKDROP OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WHEN IT COMES TO OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. SO WHATEVER COUNCIL DECIDES TONIGHT. THE RATE CHANGE WILL BE EFFECTIVE WITH THE WATER USAGE AND WASTEWATER SERVICES RECEIVED BY OUR OUTSIDE CITY. LIMIT CUSTOMERS FOR THE MONTH OF DECEMBER 2026. AND TO TAKE IT ONE STEP FURTHER SO THERE'S NO CONFUSION FOR THAT USAGE PERIOD. THE METERS WILL BE READ FROM DECEMBER 5TH, 2026 TO JANUARY 5TH, 2027. THIS IS THE EXACT BILLING PERIOD THAT THESE RATES WILL GO INTO EFFECT IF COUNCIL APPROVES THAT CHANGE TONIGHT. THE BILLS WILL BE PREPARED AND SENT OUT TO OUR CUSTOMERS ON JANUARY 28TH, 2027, AND THAT BILL WILL BECOME DUE BY FEBRUARY 15TH, 2027. SO THAT JUST GIVES YOU A TIME FRAME OF WHEN THE CUSTOMERS CAN EXPECT A CHANGE IN THE RATES AND WHEN THAT BILL WILL BE DUE. I ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE COUNCIL AND OUR OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS UNDERSTAND THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO CONDUCT COST OF SERVICE, STUDY BASED RECONCILIATIONS AND TRUE UPS. SO BY THAT I MEAN THE CITY WILL CONDUCT COST OF SERVICE STUDIES EVERY 3 TO 5 YEARS. THE STUDY RESULTS WILL BE PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION. THE COST OF SERVICE STUDY WILL BE UTILIZED AS THE BASIS TO RECONCILE AND TRUE UP RATE ADJUSTMENTS. IF IT IS NECESSARY. THE NEXT COST OF SERVICE AND RATE STUDY IS PLANNED FOR THE MARCH APRIL OF 2028. IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU SET THE RATES BASED ON A MULTIPLIER, WE WILL TRUE UP THAT BASED ON COST OF SERVICE STUDY EVERY 3 TO 5 YEARS. MOST CITIES DO COST OF SERVICE STUDIES ANYWHERE BETWEEN 3 AND

[02:05:08]

5 YEARS FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES. SO OPTION ONE, THIS IS WHERE COUNCIL DIRECTED ME TO COME BACK WITH WHAT IS THE IMPACT OR THE ANALYSIS BASED IMPACT RESULTS.

IF WE WERE TO CHANGE THE OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMER LIMIT. WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES. TO NOT EXCEED MORE THAN 30% OF SIMILAR RATES FOR INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. SO THAT'S OPTION ONE. SO WE WERE TO CHANGE THE RATES TODAY FOR OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS TO NOT EXCEED 30% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. SO THE WAY THIS TABLE IS SET UP IS THE FIRST LINE IS TO SHOW YOU THE MONTHLY MINIMUM CHARGE THAT THE CITY CHARGES OUR WATER AND SEWER CUSTOMERS. SO THIS IS JUST FOR WATER. THIS TABLE JUST SHOWS YOU THE WATER CHANGES THAT WILL OCCUR IF YOU WERE TO SELECT OPTION ONE. SO MONTHLY MINIMUM CHARGE TODAY FOR OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS IS $92.31 EVERY MONTH. IT'S A FIXED MONTHLY CHARGE THAT IF COUNCIL WAS TO CHANGE THE RATES TO 30%, NOT TO EXCEED 30% OF INSIDE CITY, LIMIT CUSTOMERS, THAT MINIMUM CHARGE WILL DROP DOWN TO $65.90, OR A REDUCTION OF $26.41 EACH MONTH. THAT'S A REDUCTION OF 28.6% FOR THE VOLUME CHARGE. THE CITY HAS EIGHT RATE BLOCKS, AND THIS IS TO ENCOURAGE CONSERVATION. SO FOR EACH RATE BLOCK, YOU WILL NOTICE WHAT THE CURRENT OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT RATES ARE FOR ONE GALLON TO 4000 GALLONS, FOR EXAMPLE, IS $12.21 PER 1000 GALLONS. IF WE WERE TO CHANGE RATES NOT TO EXCEED 130% OR 30% ABOVE INSIDE CITY LIMITS, IT'S GOING TO DROP TO $9.15 PER 1000 GALLONS, OR A REDUCTION OF $3.06 THROUGHOUT THE EIGHT RATE BLOCKS. YOU WILL SEE IT'S AN AVERAGE OF ABOUT 25% RATE REDUCTION. IF THE COUNCIL WAS TO CONSIDER OPTION ONE AND OPTION ONE, HERE AGAIN IS THAT THE RATES FOR OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS WILL NOT EXCEED 30% ABOVE INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. SO THIS IS JUST FOR WATER ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE UNDER OPTION ONE. THE MINIMUM MONTHLY CHARGE TODAY IS $39.54 A MONTH. THAT WOULD REDUCE DOWN TO $31.50, OR A REDUCTION OF $8.04, A 20% REDUCTION IN THEIR MONTHLY MINIMUM CHARGE ON THE VOLUME CHARGE FOR WASTEWATER. WE DO NOT HAVE RATE BLOCKS AS A SINGLE BLOCK. THE CURRENT RATE IS $7.24 PER 1000 GALLONS. THAT WILL CHANGE OR REDUCE TO $5.64, A REDUCTION OF $1.60. HERE, AGAIN, IS A 22% REDUCTION IN THE VOLUME CHARGE UNDER OPTION ONE. SO WHAT IS THE REVENUE IMPACT OF THE CITY'S WATER UTILITY? IF COUNCIL WAS TO CONSIDER REDUCING OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS TO NOT EXCEED MORE THAN 30% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS? SO THE WAY THIS RATE TABLE IS SET UP IS I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU FOR WATER, WASTEWATER AND TOTAL. WHAT IS THE CURRENT TOTAL REVENUE AT EXISTING RATES TODAY? WHAT'S IN THE BUDGET? WHAT WILL IT BE? THIS IS ESTIMATED AT 130% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS.

AND WHAT IS THE NET DECREASE AND THE PERCENTAGE DECREASE. SO IF COUNCIL WAS TO ADOPT TONIGHT ON FIRST READING OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT, CUSTOMER RATES WILL NOT EXCEED MORE THAN 30% OR 130% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. YOU CAN USE. IT MEANS THE SAME THING. SO FOR WATER REVENUES

[02:10:03]

FOR OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS AT EXISTING RATES, WE HAD ESTIMATED $5,083,634 AT 130% OPTION, ONE THAT WILL REDUCE DOWN TO $3,712,244, OR A REDUCTION OF IN ROUND NUMBERS, 1.4 MILLION OR 27%. ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE. SAME OPTION ONE WE HAD BASED ON CURRENT REVENUES, OUR CURRENT RATES. WE HAD ESTIMATED A COLLECTION REVENUE COLLECTION OF $1.8 MILLION. THAT WILL REDUCE DOWN TO 1.5, OR A NET REDUCTION OF 369,000 OR 20%. SO WHEN YOU COMBINE THE BOTH WATER AND SEWER RATES, REVENUES AT EXISTING RATES, OUR CURRENT RATES THAT ARE BUDGETED, WE HAD ESTIMATED COLLECTING $6.9 MILLION UNDER OPTION ONE THAT WILL CHANGE OR REDUCE DOWN TO 5.2 MILLION, OR A DIFFERENCE OF $1.7 MILLION COMBINED, OR 25% FOR THE CITY'S WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY. SO NOW LET'S LOOK AT OPTION TWO. THE CHARGE GIVEN TO ME WAS TO COME BACK WITH TWO OPTIONS FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER. THE FIRST WAS 30% NOT TO EXCEED 30% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT RATES. AND OPTION TWO WAS TO COME BACK WITH AN OPTION THAT DOES NOT EXCEED 20% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. SO YOU'LL SEE THIS EXACT SAME FORMAT, BUT THE ONLY CHANGE IS I'M CHANGING IT FROM 30% TO 20%. SO LOOKING AT WATER. IT IS SET UP THE SAME WAY. SO THE FIRST LINE HERE IS MINIMUM MONTHLY CHARGE. THE CURRENT OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS MINIMUM MONTHLY CHARGE IS $92.31 FOR WATER AT 120%. IT WILL DROP DOWN TO $60.83, OR $31.48. REDUCTION OR DECREASE. THAT'S A 34% DECREASE IN THEIR MONTHLY CHARGE. AND SIMILARLY, ON THE EIGHT BLOCKS FOR WATER CONSUMPTION, IT CHANGES BY OR DOWN TO 120% OF INSIDE CITY. SO I'LL JUST USE THE FIRST LINE, WHICH IS FROM ONE GALLON TO 4000 GALLONS. IT GOES FROM $12.21 PER 1000 GALLONS TO $8.45, OR A REDUCTION OF $3.76, OR 30.8%. SO FOR ALL THE EIGHT RATE BLOCKS ARE OUTSIDE, CITY, CUSTOMERS WILL SEE A REDUCTION ON THE AVERAGE ABOUT 31% ON THE RATE BLOCKS AND 34% ON THE MINIMUM CHARGE. SO THAT'S ON THE WATER SIDE. ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE, FOR OPTION TWO, THE MINIMUM MONTHLY CHARGE WILL GO FROM $39.54, WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE CHARGING THEM TODAY TO $29.08, A REDUCTION OF $10.46, OR 26.5%. AND THEN ON WASTEWATER SIDE, WE DO NOT HAVE RATE BLOCKS. SO THE VOLUME CHARGE WILL REDUCE FROM $7.24, $7.24 PER 1000 GALLONS TO $5.21, A REDUCTION OF $2.03, OR 28%.

SO WHAT IS THE REVENUE IMPACT OF OPTION TWO? SAME FORMAT AS I SHARED WITH YOU FOR OPTION ONE, WATER REVENUES THAT WE BUDGETED BASED ON CURRENT EXISTING RATES IS 5,083,634. THAT WILL REDUCE DOWN TO 3,426,687, OR A REDUCTION OF 1.7 MILLION, OR 32.6%, ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE.

IT WILL GO FROM 1.8 MILLION TO 1.4 MILLION IN ROUND NUMBERS, OR A DIFFERENCE OF 482,000, OR A 26% REDUCTION. WHEN YOU COMBINE THE BOTH WATER REVENUES AND WASTEWATER REVENUES, THE CITY'S WATER AND WASTEWATER FUND WILL SEE A REDUCTION OF $2.1 MILLION COMBINED. SO NOW

[02:15:13]

I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU BOTH OPTION ONE AND OPTION TWO, SIDE BY SIDE. WELL, I DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH ROOM TO PUT THEM SIDE BY SIDE. SO THERE ARE ONE BELOW THE OTHER. SO THE FIRST TABLE EXACT SAME THING. I JUST WENT OVER. OPTION ONE. IF COUNCIL WAS TO CONSIDER NOT TO EXCEED 30% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS, IF WE SET THE RATES FOR OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS AT A RATE THAT WOULD NOT EXCEED 30% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS, IT WOULD REDUCE. I'LL JUST GO OVER THE THE HIGHLIGHTED YELLOW COLUMN FOR WATER. IT'LL BE $1.4 MILLION REDUCTION FOR WASTEWATER. IT'LL BE 369,000 FOR A COMBINED REDUCTION OF 1.7.

THE. THE TABLE RIGHT BELOW IT IS. IF YOU WERE TO CONSIDER NOT TO EXCEED 20%. OPTION 220% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS. THAT'S A REDUCTION FOR THE WATER UTILITY 1.7 MILLION FOR WASTEWATER. ABOUT 482,000 COMBINED. 2.1 THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OPTION ONE AND OPTION TWO IS ABOUT $400,000. SO AS I MENTIONED EARLIER IN THE OPENING THAT WE HAVE A GROUP OF CUSTOMERS, MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT CUSTOMERS FROM ANTHEM, MUD, FROM CROSSWIND MUD, AND I BELIEVE LASALLE. SO THOSE THREE MUD CUSTOMERS HAVE FILED A RATE APPEAL BEFORE THE TEXAS PUC PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. SO WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM A LITTLE, A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.

SO FOR FOR THE MUD GROUP, IT'S MY RECOMMENDATION THAT WE FOLLOW THESE FOUR STEPS FOR CITY COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION. FIRST. YOU DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER OR INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO SCHEDULE A MEETING WITH THE DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES OF THIS MUD GROUP TO COMMUNICATE AND REVIEW THE CITY COUNCIL'S DECISION REGARDING WATER WASTEWATER RATES FOR CUSTOMERS OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. SO WHATEVER YOU ALL DECIDE, I NEED TO SIT DOWN WITH THIS GROUP OF CUSTOMERS AND SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH THEM. THAT'S STEP ONE. HOPEFULLY THEY ARE WATCHING THIS PRESENTATION OR THEY'RE IN THE AUDIENCE. NUMBER TWO, WE NEED TO HAVE A LEGAL DOCUMENT OF SOME SORT WHERE THEY WILL AGREE TO ENTER WITH THE CITY. SOMETHING SIMILAR TO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT WE DID WITH SIX CREEKS CUSTOMERS AND THE SIX CREEKS DEVELOPER.

SO HERE IN STEP NUMBER TWO, YOU, THE COUNCIL WILL DIRECT THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO REQUEST THE MUD GROUP TO EXECUTE A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ACCEPTING THE WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, ALONG WITH OTHER PROVISIONS. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL. SO WHATEVER WE AGREE IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, IT WILL ALL COME BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL. STEP NUMBER THREE, UPON CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND EXECUTION BY ALL PARTIES, THE CITY WILL IMPLEMENT THE APPROVED WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES FOR THE MUD GROUP. THE TARGET DATE FOR CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AT YOUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. NOVEMBER 17TH, 2026. SO WHATEVER COUNCIL DECIDES TONIGHT BETWEEN OPTION ONE. OPTION TWO OR SOMETHING DIFFERENT, WE WILL SIT DOWN WITH THE MUD GROUP, GO OVER THOSE VERY CLEARLY, MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND IT. WE WILL CONVERT THAT DISCUSSION INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PRIMARILY PROTECTS BOTH THE MUD GROUP AND THE CITY BY. AND THE PROVISIONS TO INCLUDE IN IT WOULD INCLUDE EXACTLY WHICH MONTH WE'RE COVERING, WHEN THE RATES WILL CHANGE, WHAT THOSE RATES WILL BE, AND FOR THEM TO AGREE THAT THEY WILL WITHDRAW THEIR PETITION FROM THE TEXAS PUBLIC

[02:20:06]

UTILITY COMMISSION APPEALING THE RATES. CITY'S WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES. SO THAT'S FOR THE MUD GROUP, PETITIONERS, FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. OUR NEXT STEPS WILL BE TODAY IS OCTOBER 20TH.

SO CITY COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING OPTIONS PRESENTED BY THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE RATES FOR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. ON FIRST READING, COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO APPROVE OPTION ONE AT 130% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT RATES, OR OPTION TWO, WHICH IS AT 120%, NOT TO EXCEED 120% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT RATES. NOVEMBER 17TH.

THIS IS YOUR NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING. I WILL BRING BACK THE SAME ORDINANCE FOR CITY COUNCIL'S SECOND READING TO AMEND WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES FOR CITY CUSTOMERS. AND HOPEFULLY, LIKE I SAID, FOR THE MUD GROUP, I WILL ALSO BRING BACK THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON THAT SAME DAY. SO EVERYBODY IS TAKEN CARE OF BY NOVEMBER 17TH. DECEMBER. THIS IS THE RATE CHANGE WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE WITH THE WATER USAGE AND WASTEWATER SERVICES RECEIVED FOR THE MONTH OF DECEMBER. THE METER READS DATES AGAIN DECEMBER 5TH, 2026 TO JANUARY 5TH, 2027. THE BILLS WILL GO OUT JANUARY 28TH 2027. THESE BILLS WILL BECOME DUE ON FEBRUARY 15TH, 2027. THEN IN JANUARY, THE CITY'S BUDGET ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, I'M GOING TO REQUEST HER TO BRING FORWARD A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL TO REDUCE THE ESTIMATED REVENUES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY FUNDS, AND TO REFLECT THE RATE CHANGE FOR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. SO WE FORMALLY ADOPT AND AMEND THE BUDGET. BUDGET INCLUDES THE RATES AND FEES SCHEDULE, SO THAT WILL BE ALL TAKEN CARE OF.

SO WITH THAT MAYOR, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, YOU CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK? OKAY.

SEEING NONE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK? YEAH, I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT.

YOU CAN COME UP. OKAY. JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. OH, JUST STATE MY NAME.

CAROL DUGGINS. I JUST HAD A QUESTION. IT'S MR. MOHIT. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET YOUR NAME RIGHT. I KNOW THAT YOU MENTIONED SIX CREEKS, AND THEY WERE EXCLUDED FROM, I GUESS, THE CALCULATION. DOES THAT HELP THE CITY IN REGARDS TO THE THE OVERALL BUDGET? BECAUSE IF THEY GO WITH 30% REDUCTION OR 20% REDUCTION FOR THE ETJ AREA, DOES THAT CUSHION THAT ADDITIONAL AMOUNT THAT DOES THAT HURT US? I GUESS ETJ CASE, BECAUSE SIX CREEKS WAS TAKEN OUT AND THEY'RE NOW INSTEAD, THEY ARE RECEIVING IN CITY RATES VERSUS OUTER CITY RATES BECAUSE THAT WAS MORE REVENUE. SIX CREEKS AND ETJ. SO NOW THE REVENUE HAS REDUCED.

DOES THAT HURT US? OKAY. BEFORE HE ANSWERS, COULD YOU JUST KIND OF ASK US AND THEN CLOSE THE HEARING AND THEN I'LL LET HIM ANSWER IF THAT'S OKAY? OKAY. SO JUST IF YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE. MY CONCERN IS I'M, I JUST AND I, AND I, AND I APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I HAVEN'T EATEN ALL DAY. I LITERALLY HAVEN'T. AND SO I AM TRYING TO BRING MY THOUGHTS TOGETHER IN REGARDS TO EVERYTHING MR. MOHIT SAID. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE GREAT WORK THAT YOU HAVE DONE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IN REGARDS TO THAT. I'M JUST TRYING TO.

WELL, I'LL START WITH THIS. WILL THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER 20% REDUCTION? THAT WAS ORIGINALLY IN THE CHARTER. THAT'S NUMBER ONE. WE CAN ANSWER. WE'RE JUST THIS IS LIKE A HEARING LIKE, OH, WE JUST I DON'T KNOW. IT'S JUST LIKE, GO AHEAD AND ASK THE QUESTIONS AND THEN WE CAN ADDRESS THEM. OKAY, GREAT. OKAY, GREAT. WOULD NUMBER ONE, WOULD CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER THE 20% REDUCTION VERSUS THE 30%? WE'LL TAKE THE 30%. YOU KNOW, BUT IF WE COULD

[02:25:02]

GET THE 20% REDUCTION, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THE PART THAT I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN EARLIER WAS THE DIFFERENCE. THE THE REDUCTION IN THE REVENUE THAT THE CITY WOULD RECEIVE IF IT WAS REDUCED FROM 20% OR 30%. THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING WITH THAT. AND THAT'S REALLY MY, MY BIG QUESTION. I HAD SOME OTHERS, BUT I'M SO TIRED THAT I'M SO TIRED THAT I CAN'T EVEN EXPLAIN MYSELF. OKAY. WELL, OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK? SET YOUR NAME. SAY YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. THEY'RE HANDING OUT FOOD. THAT WAS VERY KIND, MAYOR.

COUNCIL. THANKS AGAIN. MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS WE'RE DISCUSSING 1.3, 1.2. I WOULD POINT BACK TO WHAT THE CITY CODE SAYS RIGHT NOW. CITY CODE RIGHT NOW SAYS 1.2 FOR VOLUMETRIC OR FOR THE MINIMUM SORRY, THE MINIMUM VOLUMETRIC WAS REMOVED IN MARCH AT SOME POINT IN TIME, WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL, WITHOUT YOUR NOTICE. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT 1.2 IS WHAT'S IN CITY CODE. NOW FOR BOTH VOLUMETRIC AND FOR MINIMUM. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE? STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. HELLO. MY NAME IS KYLE LAVELLE. I'M JUST MORE INTERESTED IN. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS, BUT A TIMELINE FOR IF THE ETJ RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE CITY. I'D ALSO LIKE TO SEE THE INFORMATION REGARDING A TIMELINE. HOW LONG WILL THE RATE CHANGES BE IN EFFECT FOR THE CITIZENS THAT ARE IN THE ETJ? AND ALSO JUST ANY SORT OF DATA OR REPORT THAT SHOWS THE ACTUAL COST PER HOMEOWNER BASED OFF OF THE TOTAL OF THESE RATES? AND YOU KNOW, HOW EQUITABLE IS IT BASED OFF OF WHETHER YOU'RE IN THE ETJ OR NOT. SO YEAH, THAT'S IT. THANKS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE ONE MORE. IF YOU WANT TO STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. HELLO, MADAM MAYOR. I'M TERRY MEEK, A LONG TIME RESIDENT HERE. JUST GOT A CURIOUS QUESTION. FOR EDUCATION. FOR MYSELF. 30 YEARS IN CORPORATE WORLD, DOING PURCHASING. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REVENUE HERE. IS THAT NET NET REVENUE OR IS THAT GROSS REVENUE? AND HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO THE COST OF SERVICES? SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REDUCTION OF REVENUE TO THE CITY, WHAT IS THE REAL COST OF THE CITY COMPARED TO WHAT THE COST OF THAT DELIVERY IS? THAT'S WHAT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT.

I WAS TRYING TO SAY I'M SORRY. YEAH. I MEAN, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT REVENUE, THAT DOESN'T MEAN SQUAT TO ME. THAT JUST MEANS WE'RE REDUCING REVENUE INPUT INCOME, RIGHT? WHAT'S THE COST THAT WE'RE OUTPUTTING? OKAY, THAT'S MY POINT. ANYBODY ELSE BEFORE I CLOSE THE HEARING? YEAH. I KNOW WE WON'T GET ONE EITHER. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE HEARING. I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU. MOHIT. DO YOU DO YOU REMEMBER THEM ALL BECAUSE I WROTE A FEW OF THEM DOWN. BUT I THINK SO, MAYOR. SO SO I THINK THE FIRST ONE WAS THAT THE REVENUE BECAUSE THAT THAT'S WHAT MISS DUGGAN WAS TRYING TO GO FOR AS WELL AS MR. MEEK. AND I DO WANT TO STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT THIS THIS IS NOT GENERAL FUND MONEY. SO THE WATER AND THE WASTEWATER HAS HAVE THEIR OWN FUNDS. AND THOSE UTILITIES ARE BILLED TO THE WATER UTILITIES AND THROUGH THEM. AND SO IT DOESN'T COME OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND. IT COMES OUT OF ITS OWN WATER AND WASTEWATER FUND. AND THEY HAVE TO THE UTILITY HAS TO COVER ITS OWN EXPENSES. OKAY. YES. SO THAT'S WHEN THEY DID THE I THINK WE DID REF TELUS REPORT AGAIN THIS YEAR. AND THAT'S WHAT THEY USED LAST YEAR. THAT'S WHERE THEY GOT THEIR THEIR INFORMATION FROM. SO BUT THAT INFORMATION IS PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF KYLE TO THE COMPANY.

OKAY. GO AHEAD, MR. MURRAY. SO LET ME START WITH THIS SCHEDULE. I THINK THIS SCHEDULE WILL ANSWER MOST OF OUR QUESTIONS I WAS ASKED THIS EVENING. SO THE SECOND COLUMN WHERE IT SAYS CURRENT REVENUES. THIS IS THE ACTUAL REVENUES CALCULATED BASED ON THE CITY'S COST OF SERVICE STUDY. THAT CITY HIRED A THIRD PARTY INDEPENDENT CONSULTING FIRM, REF FINANCIAL

[02:30:08]

MANAGEMENT, THAT DID THE COST OF SERVICE STUDY BASED ON THEIR STUDY, IT WAS ESTIMATED THAT THE CITY FOR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS FOR WATER, IT WILL BE $5.1 MILLION. I'M JUST GOING TO ROUND THESE NUMBERS. OKAY, 5.1 MILLION. AND FOR WASTEWATER, IT WILL BE 1.9 MILLION FOR A COMBINED TOTAL OF $7 MILLION. THAT'S BASED ON COST OF SERVICE. IT WAS NOT A BALLPARK ESTIMATE.

IT WAS NOT BASED ON NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS BASED TIMES, RATES, TIMES, VOLUME, ETC. IT WAS BASED ON COST OF SERVICE, ACTUAL DELIVERY OF WATER AND WASTEWATER TO OUR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. THE SECOND COLUMN IS BASICALLY A MATHEMATICAL CALCULATION OF IF YOU WERE TO LIMIT THE WATER RATES TO 130%, NOT TO EXCEED 130% OF INSIDE CITY LIMIT CUSTOMERS, WHAT WOULD BE THE REDUCTION FROM THE COST OF SERVICE REVENUES? SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE YELLOW COLUMN UNDER OPTION ONE, IT'S $1.7 MILLION REDUCTION BASED ON COST OF SERVICE TO THE WATER AND WASTEWATER FUND. SAME THING FOR THE TABLE BELOW IT UNDER OPTION TWO, THE NET IMPACT IS 2.2 MILLION $2.1 MILLION. SO I BELIEVE THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION OF IS THIS JUST A BALLPARK ESTIMATE OF REVENUE, OR IS IT ACTUALLY BASED ON COST OF SERVICE? AND THE ANSWER IS YES, IT IS BASED ON COST OF SERVICE. SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE FOR THE COST OF SERVICE. SO THE CURRENT REVENUES IS THAT HOW MUCH MONEY WE HAVE TO MAKE IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE COST OF SERVICE. YES. SO IF WE WERE TO REDUCE IT. WHO MAKES UP FOR THIS SHORTFALL? I BELIEVE HER FIRST PART OF THE ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS, IF YOU GAVE AWAY THE REDUCTION TO SIX CREEK CUSTOMERS, DOES IT IMPACT THE REST OF US IN OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS? ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO PICK UP THAT TAB? AND THE ANSWER IS NO. SO WHO PICKS IT UP? THAT'S GOING TO COME FROM THE FUND BALANCE OF THE WATER UTILITY AND THE WASTEWATER UTILITY. SO THE UTILITY WILL ABSORB THAT REDUCTION. WHICHEVER OPTION YOU PICK. AND IN THE NEXT UPDATE CYCLE WE WILL DO ANOTHER COST OF SERVICE. AND WE WILL TRUE UP AT THAT POINT. BUT FOR THIS REMAINDER OF THIS FISCAL YEAR AND NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WE WILL SET THE RATES AT WHERE THEY ARE EITHER 130% OR 120%, WHICHEVER COUNCIL DECIDES. SO THE OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS WILL NOT HAVE TO ABSORB FOR EITHER SIX CREEKS OR ANY OTHER CHANGES YOU DO FOR OTHER OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS.

IT WILL COME FROM THE FUND BALANCE. OKAY. THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE A SURPLUS. WE HAVE A SLIGHT SURPLUS AT THIS POINT, BUT WE GOT TO BE CAREFUL BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF WATER WORK WE GOT TO DO. BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS EVERYBODY THAT'S ALREADY PAID WATER UTILITY USERS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE, THEY HAVE CREATED A SURPLUS IN THIS FUND. AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE EXCESS MONEY FROM IN THE MEANTIME. YES. ALL RIGHT.

FOR THIS YEAR. AND THEN AFTER THIS YEAR, WE WILL REBALANCE IT LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING TO JUGGLE IT, MAKE MAKE SURE IT'S ALL RIGHT, AND THEN WE'LL LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS AFTER THAT.

YES. BECAUSE YOU WILL SEE LATER ON ON THE AGENDA, WE'RE ISSUING DEBT FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT IN 2028. SO THE SURPLUS THAT WE ABSORBED RIGHT HERE WILL BE DIMINISHED BY THAT AMOUNT. AND IT WILL ALSO BE ABSORBED BY THE COST INCREASE FOR THE NEW DEBT WE WILL BE ISSUING. OKAY. SO NOW IS THE IDEAL TIME IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO DO IT NOW. YEAH. IF YOU WERE TO ASK ME WHICH OPTION WOULD I RECOMMEND? I HOPE YOU DON'T. IT'S A POLICY DECISION. I'M TIRED OF THE POLICY DECISIONS. WE NEED SOME ADVICE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? THERE WAS ONE OTHER QUESTION.

YES, THAT WAS ASKED. WHAT IS THE TIMELINE OR TIME FRAME? RIGHT. SO WHATEVER COUNCIL DECIDES TONIGHT WILL BE IN EFFECT FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS FISCAL YEAR, AT LEAST THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH. AND THEN IN THE NEXT BUDGET, WE WILL DISCUSS WHAT THE RATES

[02:35:01]

OUGHT TO BE OR SHOULD BE, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT, WE WILL HAVE LOOKED AT CHANGING THE METHODOLOGY BY WHICH WE CALCULATE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMER RATES. I HAD DISCUSSED THAT DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS WITH YOU. ALL THAT I'M LOOKING AT DIFFERENT METHODOLOGIES FOR OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. WE'LL LOOK AT THAT. WE WILL EVEN LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF NOT HAVING AN OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMER CLASS. SO THOSE ARE ALL UP IN THE AIR. WE WILL EVALUATE ALL OF THOSE OPTIONS AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IN FY 2028. SO WHATEVER YOU DECIDE FOR SURE, UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30TH, IT WILL STAY THE SAME. OKAY. AND SO TO ANSWER LIKE, HOW LONG WILL THESE RATE CHANGES BE? IT'S JUST GOING TO BE, I MEAN, WE PROBABLY MAKE THESE EVERY YEAR OR YOU SAID 2028. THAT WILL BE THE NEXT TIME THE RATES WILL CHANGE. OKAY. AND I THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION AND YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED IT, BUT HE WAS ASKING ABOUT NET REVENUE OR GROSS REVENUE. SO THESE ARE GROSS REVENUES TO ME. NET REVENUES IS GROSS REVENUES MINUS EXPENDITURES IS NET REVENUE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I THINK I THINK WE ANSWERED MOST OF THE COUNCILMEMBER. I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT IT POTENTIALLY BEING RETROACTIVE BECAUSE WHEN I BROUGHT THIS ITEM FORWARD, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAD ASKED ME WAS WHEN I WOULD LIKE IT EFFECTIVE BY AND THE DISCUSSION WAS OCTOBER. SO IS THAT A POSSIBILITY? NO, NO. THE REASON WHY IS WE'RE ALL ALREADY IN THE MIDST OF THAT. FOR ME TO CHANGE THAT MANY ACCOUNTS, IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE CHANGED MANUALLY EACH ONE OF THOSE ACCOUNTS. OKAY, SO THAT WILL TAKE TIME. I HAVE TO HAVE THE SECOND READING DONE BEFORE I CAN CHANGE ANYTHING. THE SECOND READING DOESN'T HAPPEN UNTIL NOVEMBER 7TH 17. OKAY, SO THERE'S SOME LOGISTICAL REQUIREMENTS. NOT THE ANSWER IS HOPING FOR, BUT I APPRECIATE THE HONESTY AND EXPLAINING IT LIKE THAT. SO THANK YOU.

DECEMBER WILL BE THE FIRST MONTH WE CAN LOOK AT IT CLEANLY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IF WE HAVE NO MORE QUESTIONS, DO WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER MEDINA AND THEN I'LL GO TO COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY. OKAY. SO I WON'T ASK YOU THE QUESTION BETWEEN OPTION ONE AND OPTION TWO. WHAT I'LL ASK IS SOMETIMES YOU LIKE TO GIVE US THIRD HIDDEN OPTIONS. WOULD THERE HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENT OPTION IF WE HADN'T HAVE SAID SPECIFICALLY JUST THE 1.2, 1.3 THAT YOU WOULD HAVE SUGGESTED OR RECOMMENDED? YEAH. WHAT'S YOUR EASTER EGG? YEAH. FOR FOR POLICY DECISION, THERE ARE ALWAYS OPTIONS FOR YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO BETWEEN THESE TWO OPTIONS, KNOWING WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THE FISCAL POSITION OF BOTH UTILITIES AND THE DEBT, WE'RE GOING TO ISSUE VERY SHORTLY. IF I HAD TO PICK BETWEEN THESE TWO, I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND OPTION ONE. I KNOW OUR RESIDENTS DON'T WANT THAT, BUT FOR THE STABILITY, LONG TERM STABILITY OF THE WATER UTILITY FUND, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ONLY A DIFFERENCE OF $400,000, I WOULD RECOMMEND OPTION ONE, BUT IT'S IT'S A STRICTLY A POLICY DECISION ON Y'ALL'S PART. AND YOU HAD ANSWERED MOST OF MY OTHER QUESTIONS. THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE LIKE WHEN WE HAD THE DISCUSSION WITH SIX CREEKS, WE ALREADY KNEW THAT DISCUSSION WAS COMING. SO THAT WAS FACTORED INTO THE BUDGET WHEN WE APPROVED IT, KNOWING THAT WE HAD SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS COMING, WERE THERE ANY KIND OF CONTINGENCIES BUILT INTO THE WASTEWATER BUDGET THAT MIGHT HELP ANY OF THIS, OR IS THIS JUST COMPLETELY GOING TO BE FROM SCRATCH ONCE WE PASS, WHICHEVER WE PASS THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR, SIX CREEKS, WE KNEW IT WAS VERY SPECIFIC TO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND WHAT THE CITY HAD AGREED WITH THE SIX CREEKS DEVELOPER. SO I HAD EMBEDDED THAT IN THE BUDGET ESTIMATES. BUT FOR THIS GROUP OF CUSTOMERS, I DID NOT, BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW WHEN THIS SETTLEMENT WOULD HAPPEN OR COUNCIL WOULD CONSIDER RATE CHANGE. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THAT'S WHY I'M SUGGESTING THAT IN JANUARY, WE BRING BACK A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO CLEAN IT ALL UP. GOT IT RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER MCKINNEY. I GOT A I GOT A A FEW QUESTIONS. SO YOU SAID THAT THESE ESTIMATES WERE BASED OFF OF THE, THE COST OF SERVICE COST OF SERVICE STUDY THAT WAS DESIGNED FOR THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR. CORRECT. SO THE WAY THE COST OF SERVICE WORKS, AT LEAST OUR MODEL IS WE UPDATE THE MODEL EVERY YEAR WITH THE PROPOSED BUDGET. IN TERMS OF THE REVENUE

[02:40:04]

REQUIREMENTS, WHAT ARE THE EXPENDITURES OF THE UTILITY OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, DEBT SERVICE, WATER SUPPLY, WASTEWATER TREATMENT, THOSE THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. OKAY.

HOW DO THESE ESTIMATES COMPARE TO OUR ACTUAL REVENUES OVER THE LAST FISCAL YEAR? IT'S ABOUT.

THE SAME RATIO THAT THE RATE INCREASES WERE DONE FOR OCL CUSTOMERS. OKAY. SO SO THE CURRENT REVENUES THAT WE'RE BASING EVERYTHING OFF OF NOW, YOU'D SAY THAT THOSE ARE PRETTY FAIR AND ACCURATE REFLECTIONS OF WHAT OUR OUR ACTUAL REVENUES ARE. WELL, WE HAVEN'T COLLECTED ANY REVENUES SO FAR THIS FISCAL YEAR. WE BARELY MID MID MONTH FOR OCTOBER. RIGHT. I'M, I'M JUST SAYING, COMPARED WITH OUR PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR. WELL, THEY'RE BASED ON THAT 70% INCREASE, 77% INCREASE ON THE WATER SIDE AND 30% INCREASE ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE. RIGHT. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHERE OUR BASELINE IS. YOUR BASELINE IS IF YOU WERE TO ADJUST THE RATES BY 130% OR 120%, YELLOW COLUMN IS WHAT IS GOING TO MATERIALIZE AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. I'M ALMOST GETTING THE ANSWER I'M ASKING FOR. I THINK IT'S HARD FOR HIM TO SAY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT. THERE'S NO COMPARISON. SINCE WE HAVEN'T HAD THE BILLS YET FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR. TO COMPARE IT TO LAST FISCAL YEAR, I WAS JUST ASKING HOW MUCH OUR REVENUES WERE FROM THE LAST FISCAL YEAR. I FIGURED WE WOULD HAVE. OKAY, SO DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH OUR REVENUES WERE FOR THE LAST FISCAL YEAR? I DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I CAN HAVE ANDY LOOK IT UP. WHAT OUR ACTUAL REVENUES WERE FOR FOR US OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. BUT OUR REVENUES ARE NOT DIVIDED ON THE I'M SORRY. YEAH, IT'S NOT ON THE FUN SUMMARY BY INSIDE OUTSIDE. YEAH. WE'LL HAVE TO. OKAY, OKAY. SEND THAT OUT AS A SEPARATE REPORT.

OKAY. AND SINCE WE'RE DRAWING ON OUR STRATEGIC RESERVES. WITH EITHER ONE OF THESE, I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER HOW MUCH WE'RE DRAWING DOWN BASED OFF OF THE SIX CREEKS AS WELL. JUST KIND OF DOING THE MATH IN MY HEAD. THAT WAS A DIFFERENCE. IF WE WERE COMPARING THE SAME NUMBERS HERE OF ABOUT TWO AND A HALF. DOES THAT DOES THAT SOUND FAIR? THE TWO AND A HALF WAS A YEAR OLD INFORMATION THAT EVERYBODY WAS USING AND CONTINUED TO USE. OH, I WAS JUST GOING OFF OF THE THE NUMBER OF WATER ACCOUNTS THAT THOUSAND AND 12 AND JUST KIND OF DOING ROUGH MATH IN MY HEAD. SO. LOOKING AT OUR OVERALL WATER FUND, WE'D BE LOOKING AT A DRAW DOWN OF ANYWHERE FROM 4.1 TO 3.7 MILLION. IF YOU WERE TO ADD A SIX CREEKS, YEAH, IT WOULD BE A VERY CLOSE ESTIMATE. YES. RIGHT. WELL, I KNOW WE WE DISCUSSED HOLDING OFF ON, ON RAISING WATER RATES, THINGS LIKE THAT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION AT LEAST. BUT ON THIS SAME AGENDA, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF DEBT AND PROJECTS AND THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO PAY FOR. AND THAT RESERVE WAS SET UP TO HELP STABILIZE AND BALANCE OVER TIME, HOW THOSE BILLS WERE REFLECTED.

LOOKING FORWARD AND LOOKING AHEAD, HOW DO YOU SEE THIS IMPACTING WATER RATES IN GENERAL, AND THEN WATER RATES FOR THE IN CITY CUSTOMERS AS WELL? SO I'LL ANSWER THAT QUESTION IN TWO PARTS. ONE, I HAVE NOT, AS YOUR INTERIM CITY MANAGER, HAVE REALLY SPENT TIME ON THE COST STRUCTURE OF OUR WATER UTILITY AND WASTEWATER UTILITY. WE DID THE BUDGET IN LESS THAN FOUR MONTHS, THREE MONTHS. SO I REALLY HADN'T HAD TIME TO DELVE INTO THE DETAILS OF THE COST STRUCTURE OF WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY. THAT'S ONE THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THIS YEAR. SO COST STRUCTURE IS GOING TO GET IN IN ALIGNMENT. SO MEANING IN OTHER WORDS, IS GOING TO COME DOWN. THAT'S ONE. WE'RE GOING TO ADD NEW DEBT. SO IT WILL HAVE SOME ROOM TO ABSORB SOME OF THAT DEBT PAYMENTS THAT WE'RE ADDING. WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT STAFFING

[02:45:01]

REDUNDANCY. ALL OF THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE ON THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SIDE. THAT STILL REQUIRES TIME. WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT RESERVATION FEE OPTIONS. AND I BELIEVE AMBER AND MIKE MURPHY, THEY'RE ALL WORKING TIRELESSLY TO BRING THAT OPTION BEFORE YOU. AND IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN SOMETIME THIS FALL. IS THAT RIGHT? SO THAT'S GOING TO GIVE US ANOTHER SOURCE OF NEW REVENUE FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER FUND. AND THEN ON TOP OF IT, IF YOU OVERLAY THAT ON TOP OF THAT, IS TO REEXAMINE HOW WE CALCULATE WATER AND SEWER RATES FOR OUR INSIDE VERSUS OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS. SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS COMBINED TOGETHER, I THINK, WILL GIVE US ENOUGH. TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX TO MANAGE THE COST INCREASES THAT WE SEE COMING IN 28, 29, AND 30. WE CANNOT STOP THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION. WE CANNOT STOP LOOKING AT NEW WATER SUPPLY SOURCES. BUT WE CAN LOOK AT AND REEXAMINE HOW WE FORECAST OUR WATER SUPPLY NEEDS. AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW AS I SPEAK. SO THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS IN PLAY, AND WE'LL BE IN PLAY FOR THE REST OF THIS FISCAL YEAR THAT WILL HELP US MANAGE THE COST STRUCTURE. AND THEN, AS I SAID, DO WE REALLY NEED INSIDE CITY RATES AND OUTSIDE CITY RATES IN KYLE, TEXAS? YEAH. WHEN YOU HAVE AN INSIDE CITY CUSTOMER ACROSS THE STREET FROM AN OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMER, HOW MUCH SENSE DOES THAT MAKE? NOW, IF YOU WERE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, OR AUSTIN, TEXAS, OR DALLAS, TEXAS, WHERE YOU SERVICE AREA WAS 400MI■!S PLUS, IT MAKES SENSE WHEN OUR SERVICE AREA IS ONLY 19MI■!S AND OUTSIDE INSIDE IS ACROSS THE STREET. TO ME, PERVEZ MOHAMMED PERSONALLY DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, AND WE WILL EXAMINE THAT VERY CLOSELY. IF WE NEED TO HAVE THAT CLASS SEPARATION. SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS WILL. COUNCIL MEMBER TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE HOW WE MANAGE THE COST STRUCTURE OF THE UTILITY. THE REVENUE SIDE OF THE EQUATION? I THINK THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF OPTIONS. THE OPTIONS IS ON THE COST SIDE OF THE EQUATION, AND WE HAVE TO EXAMINE THAT AND WE WILL DO THAT THIS YEAR REGARDLESS OF WHO THE CITY MANAGER IS, HAS TO DO WITH OUR GROWTH. AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AS WE ARE EVOLVING AS A CITY.

DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO HAVE THESE DIVISIONS OF INSIDE, OUTSIDE? AND THIS HELPS THE FORECAST. WE MAY HAVE TO DECREASE SOME HERE AND INCREASE, BUT IT'S IT'S TO BE ABLE TO CONTROL ACROSS THE BOARD BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY, LIKE YOU SAID, 15 MILES RADIUS. AND WE'VE GOT LIKE PROBABLY SO MANY DIFFERENT WATER RATES. DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. IT WOULD SIMPLIFY IT. IT WILL MAKE IT A LOT EASIER TO CALCULATE COST OF SERVICE. AND IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT EASIER TO EXPLAIN WHY MY NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE STREET GETS 30% LOWER THAN MYSELF. IT MADE MORE SENSE IN 2005, WHEN WE ONLY HAD LIKE 23,000 PEOPLE HERE. NOW WE'RE PUSHING 73.

I'VE HEARD ARGUMENTS FOR BOTH SIDES, AND THERE'S YEAH, THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME LOGIC TO, TO EITHER OPTION THERE. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEMS WITH, WITH SHARING SOME RELIEF WITH THE REMAINING OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS CUSTOMERS. THEY KIND OF, IN MY OPINION, GOT UNFAIRLY LUMPED IN WITH WITH SIX CREEKS WHO IN ALL REALITY, THEY WERE, YOU KNOW, THE BIGGEST ABUSERS OF, OF THE WATER SOURCES, YOU KNOW, HAD PEOPLE THAT WERE AVERAGING OVER 16,000 GALLONS A MONTH. AND, YOU KNOW, WHILE BEING LESS THAN 10% OF OUR CUSTOMERS ACCOUNTED FOR MORE THAN 30% OF OUR SURGE USAGE. ACTUALLY, WE'RE HAVING TO RESHIFT OUR, OUR PRESSURE PLANES TO ACCOMMODATE THE AMOUNT OF UTILIZATION. THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF THOSE COSTS WERE DERIVED FROM THAT WENT INTO THAT COST OF SERVICE STUDY. SO. YEAH, THIS IS THIS IS JUST BEING FAIR TO THE PEOPLE WHO GOT KIND OF LUMPED IN WITH OTHER PEOPLE. ALL RIGHT. SO DOES ANYBODY HAVE A SUGGESTION BETWEEN THE 1.2 AND THE 1.3? I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD. COUNCIL MEMBER I HONESTLY, SINCE WE STILL HAVE IT ON OUR BOOKS AS A SPECIFIC CODE, I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO OUR 1.2 AND FIGURE THINGS OUT FROM THERE. I JUST I HAVE CONCERNS WHEN WE ARE NOT DOING A SPECIFIC HEARING TO SPECIFICALLY ALTER THOSE CODES AND THE AMOUNT OF NOTICE, THEN THAT'S GOING OUT TO ALL OF OUR RATEPAYERS WHEN WE'RE JUST CHANGING IT VIA THE BUDGET. SO

[02:50:03]

THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION. ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS? NOW'S THE TIME TO TALK ABOUT IT.

WE'RE JUST GOING TO MOVE FORWARD. YEAH. OKAY. IS THAT A MOTION. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO REDUCE THE RATES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER TO, FOR OUT OF FOR ETJ CUSTOMERS TO 1.2% OVER THE INSIDE CITY CUSTOMER RATES. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER GARZA AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CLARIFY, BECAUSE I THINK THE WORDING ON THAT WAS CONFUSING. IT'S 1.2 TIMES THE INSIDE. YES, 1.2 TIMES. THANK YOU. OKAY. IS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO.

ALL RIGHT. I DO WANT TO. I DO WANT TO. OH, AND THANK YOU TO THE PEOPLE WHO FED HER. SHE'S.

THAT'S AN EXTRA SPECIAL TREAT. SHE CAN NOW GO HOME AND GO TO BED. YES. ALL RIGHT, IF I CAN.

GUYS, I WAS JUST INFORMED THAT AGENDA ITEMS 25 AND 26 HAVE ATTORNEYS THAT ARE HERE. AND SO THAT MEANS WE'RE PAYING THEM AS THEY SIT HERE. AND IF IT'S OKAY, CAN WE PULL THOSE ITEMS UP AND THEN GO BACK TO OUR REGULAR. ARE YOU GUYS OKAY WITH THAT? YEAH, LET'S DO IT. ALL RIGHT.

SAVING TAXPAYER DOLLARS HERE. WE GOT MISS LIBBY OUT THERE WAITING. YES. ALL RIGHT. SO

[25) Consider approval of a Resolution approving the City’s plan of finance pertaining to the contemplated issuance of obligations to be designated as “City of Kyle, Texas General Obligation Bonds, Series 2027” and “City of Kyle, Texas General Obligation Bonds, Taxable Series 2027A”; authorizing city staff and the City’s financial advisor and bond counsel to proceed with this plan of finance; and authorizing other matters related to the foregoing.]

WE'RE GOING TO DO AGENDA ITEM 25. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY'S PLAN OF FINANCE PERTAINING TO THE CONTEMPLATED ISSUANCE OF OBLIGATIONS TO BE DESIGNATED AS CITY OF KYLE. COMMA, TEXAS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS SERIES 2027 AND CITY OF KYLE. COMMA.

TEXAS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TAXABLE SERIES 2027. A AUTHORIZING CITY STAFF AND THE CITY FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND BOND COUNSEL TO PROCEED WITH THIS PLAN OF FINANCE AND AUTHORIZING OTHER MATTERS RELATED TO THE FOREGOING. SHOULD WE BRING THEM BOTH UP AT THE SAME TIME? IS THAT OKAY? NO. SEPARATELY. ALL RIGHT. SO IF YOU WANT TO COME UP, WELL, THE ITEM PRESENTERS MARK MCLEAN. BUT HELLO MAYOR COUNCIL. GOOD SEEING YOU ALL. MARK MCCLELLAN WITH SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS. STEPHANIE LEVY WITH NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT IS HERE ALSO TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE LEGAL ISSUES. WE'LL GO STRAIGHT TO THE. IS IT JUST THE ARROW? SO TODAY THIS FIRST ITEM IS GOING OVER THE AUTHORITY TO PROCEED WITH THE G.O. BONDS. WE GO THROUGH THE BACKGROUND, THE FINANCE PLAN AND THE 2027 G.O. BONDS. AS YOU'LL REMEMBER, IN NOVEMBER, WE HAD A $294 MILLION SUCCESSFUL BOND ELECTION FOR THE STREET PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. JANUARY 17TH, 2023.

WE SOLD $45 MILLION. WE HAD A FOLLOW ON ISSUE IN 2025 OF $38.9 MILLION, LEAVING $210 MILLION LEFT. VOTED, APPROVED AND UNISSUED. WE HAVE AUTHORIZED PROJECTS RIGHT NOW TOTALING ABOUT $70 MILLION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027. TAX RATE IMPACT ON THIS. AS WE WERE REVIEWING THIS WITH STAFF, WE THOUGHT, OKAY, WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE IMPACT? AND WE LOOKED AT BREAKING THE $70 MILLION INTO TWO SEPARATE ISSUES. THE FIRST WOULD BE $35 MILLION TO BE ISSUED IN LATE DECEMBER OR MIDDLE OF DECEMBER, WITH A CLOSING IN JANUARY. THE BONDS WOULD BE ISSUED SO THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE A PAYMENT IN FISCAL YEAR 27, WITH THE FIRST PAYMENT IN FISCAL YEAR 28. THE SECOND $35 MILLION BOND ISSUE WOULD BE ISSUED DURING THE SUMMER. SO AGAIN, NO PAYMENT IN THIS FISCAL YEAR WITH FIRST PAYMENT IN 2028. ALSO, WE WOULD ISSUE THAT WHEN AND IF WE NEEDED IT BASED UPON TIMING AND HOW THE CONSTRUCTION WAS GOING FORWARD. BUT WE WANTED TO BE SET UP AND PREPARED TO PROCEED IF THE MONEY IS NEEDED IN SUMMER OF 2027. IT'S ESTIMATED THAT IF WE PROCEED, THE TAX RATE FOR THE FIRST ISSUE WOULD BE ABOUT THREE AND A HALF CENTS INCREASE ON THE INS TAX RATE.

THAT ASSUMES A 2% TAXABLE VALUE GROWTH FOR 2028. FOR FISCAL YEAR 2028. THE TIMELINE IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS AUTHORIZED TO PROCEED, IS DECEMBER 15TH. WE WOULD BE BACK AT CITY

[02:55:07]

COUNCIL MEETING TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS ON JANUARY 13TH. IT'S ESTIMATED THAT WOULD BE WHEN WE WOULD CLOSE. FUNDS WOULD ACTUALLY BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY JULY OR AUGUST OF 2027. THE SECOND PHASE, IF IT'S NEEDED, WOULD BE ISSUED AND THAT WOULD BE CLOSED IN AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER OF 2027. AGAIN, BOTH BOND PAYMENTS WOULD OCCUR NOT UNTIL FISCAL YEAR 2028. SO THE SUMMER OF 2027, DURING BUDGET TIME, IS WE'D BE DETERMINING WHAT THE TAX RATE WOULD NEED TO BE, AND WE WOULD KNOW WHAT THE TAXABLE VALUES ARE. WE'D HAVE THE FINAL RESULTS, OF COURSE, OF THE SALE REQUESTED CITY COUNCIL ACTION. YOU HAVE TWO OPTIONS. THE FIRST IS TO APPROVE THE MOVING FORWARD RESOLUTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PLAN OF FINANCE. THAT WOULD GIVE SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT PERMISSION TO START PROCEEDING WITH THE OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND TO START WORKING WITH THE RATING AGENCIES AND MOVE TOWARDS THOSE SALES. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVE THE MOVING FORWARD RESOLUTION. ALL RIGHT. QUESTIONS. I HAVE A QUESTION. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, BECAUSE THE ECONOMY IS NOT IN A REAL GREAT PLACE RIGHT NOW. AND I KNOW THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE, BUT I WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MAKING THE RIGHT MOVE AT THE RIGHT TIME. SO AS OUR FINANCIAL CONSULTANT, WILL YOU JUST CONFIRM THAT IT'S PROBABLY A GOOD TIME TO DO THIS? YES, MAYOR, I WISH INTEREST RATES WERE COMING DOWN, OR IF YOU MIGHT REMEMBER WHERE THEY WERE 3 OR 4 YEARS AGO. THEY'RE NOT. THE RATES GO UP AND THEY GO DOWN. LONG TIME AGO MY BOSS TOLD ME YOU BORROW WHEN YOU NEED TO, AND VISITING WITH PERVEZ, THE OPTION WAS, OKAY, WE COULD DO ALL $70 MILLION, BUT IT MIGHT BE MORE PRUDENT. AND THAT'S THE PATH WE'RE MOVING FORWARD AND LESS RISKY. MAYOR, TO ISSUE JUST 35 MILLION IF WE CAN DELAY IF THE PROJECTS ARE DELAYED, THEN PERHAPS THAT THAT SECOND 35 MILLION CAN BE MOVED INTO A FUTURE YEAR. SO IT REALLY SEEMED THE IMMEDIATE NEED WOULD BE TO GET THE 35 MILLION. LET'S GET THAT MONEY, GET IT GOING. AND BY SEPARATING THEM, IT'S THE, WE BELIEVE, THE MOST PRUDENT WAY TO GO FORWARD.

OKAY. AND THESE ARE BONDS. NO, THESE ARE THE VOTED GEO BONDS GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND STREET BONDS FROM THE 2022 AUTHORIZATION. THIS IS OUR BENTON ROAD AND THIS IS OUR BB.

ALL RIGHT. OKAY. WITH THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 25. I HAVE A QUESTION. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. SECOND, HAVE A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY. GO AHEAD. COUNCIL MEMBER GARZA. I, SINCE OUR TAX BASE WENT DOWN THIS YEAR, WHAT HAPPENS IF IT CONTINUES TO GO DOWN? WELL THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE USE SUCH A LOW GROWTH RATE. AND 2% STILL IS GROWING. BUT IT'S MORE IN LINE WITH INFLATION. PROPERTY VALUES. AND SO IF IT GOES DOWN IN THAT THREE AND A HALF MAY TURN OUT TO BE THREE AND THREE QUARTERS OR PERHAPS FOUR, YOU WILL HAVE A TOTAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT. AND THE TAXABLE VALUE IS GOING TO DETERMINE WHAT THE TAX RATE NEEDS TO BE. SO IF THERE'S A DECLINE, THEN THAT TAX RATE MIGHT BE HIGHER THAN THREE AND A HALF CENTS. WE HAD MADE CERTAIN ASSUMPTIONS WHEN WE WERE ISSUING THIS BOND, ORIGINALLY, PUTTING IT OUT TO THE VOTERS THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE SO MUCH GROWTH OVER SO MANY YEARS. SO IF WE CONTINUE TO EITHER STAGNATE OR WE CONTINUE TO GO DOWN WITH OUR TAX BASE, HOW IS THAT GOING TO AFFECT THE PROJECTIONS ULTIMATELY, FOR THE AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT WE PAY AND WHAT OUR TAX RATE IS GOING TO BE FOR THE DEBT? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS AND THAT'S, AGAIN, ONE OF THE ATTEMPTS OF SPLITTING IT UP SO THAT WE DON'T HIT TOO MUCH PER BOND ISSUE ON THE TAX RATE. BUT ONE OF THE PROMISES THAT WE HAD AT THE TIME WAS 59.99. FOR THE TOTAL TAX RATE. WE'RE WELL BELOW THAT. SO THERE IS SOME ROOM IN THERE, BUT THERE MAY BE DECISIONS DOWN THE LINE ON. CAN WE GO ABOVE THAT. CAN WE STOP THE PROJECT. WHERE ARE WE. BUT THIS ONE WON'T TAKE THAT. WON'T THIS EVEN NEXT IF WE PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO THIS SUMMER, THAT WON'T BE THE CAUSE OF IT. OKAY, BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE DECISIONS DOWN THE ROAD IF GROWTH DOESN'T PICK UP. BECAUSE THERE WERE PROJECTIONS, WE USED 5% KIND OF ON AN ONGOING BASIS AND HAVE A REAL DECLINE. WE'VE TALKED ALSO BEFORE. SOME OF THE GROWTH IS HITTING WITHIN A TERM WHICH IS NOT BENEFITING THE CITY RIGHT AS A WHOLE. SO THOSE

[03:00:02]

ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT. AND EACH TIME WE DO A BOND ISSUE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS AND LOOK HOW THAT AFFECTS US GOING FORWARD. OKAY.

THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT. GOOD QUESTION. YEAH, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT FOR SURE, BECAUSE THAT DOES TAKE MONEY OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND. AND THE TRUTH IS, I JUST TALKED TO A DEVELOPER WHO SAYS THERE'S THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BRING APARTMENTS AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BRING THEM CURRENTLY BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A NEED ANYMORE. SO I DO WORRY ABOUT THE GROWTH AND SUSTAINING. I DO APPRECIATE THAT OUTLOOK ON IT, THOUGH, AS FAR AS WAYS THAT WE CAN TRY TO RECONFIGURE. AND EVEN IF THAT MEANS BRINGING IN SOME TOURS IN OR OTHER STRATEGIC WAYS TO, TO KIND OF REFILL THAT GENERAL FUND. SO THERE WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NOPE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE AYE. OPPOSED.

[26) Consider approval of a Resolution by the City Council of the City of Kyle, Texas authorizing and approving publication of notice of intention to issue certificates of obligation totaling approximately $130,200,000 for water and wastewater capital improvements program; complying with the requirements contained in Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12; and providing an effective date. ]

MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO. UP NEXT WE HAVE AGENDA ITEM 26. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KYLE, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 130,200,000 FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION RULE 15, C2-12 AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ITEM PRESENTER MARK MCLEAN. MCLEAN. MCLEAN. THAT'S RIGHT, CLOSE TO MARK MCKINNEY. I GET I GET COPIED ON HIS EMAILS BY ACCIDENT SOMETIMES. MARK MCLEAN WITH SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS, OF COURSE. STEPHANIE IS HERE WITH NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT. THIS IS DISCUSSED THE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY AND TODAY IS A FIRST LEGAL STEP TO MOVE FORWARD. SEPTEMBER 15TH 2026. SO THIS BUDGET YEAR, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT INCLUDED WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS TOTALING $43,350,000 FOR WATER, 86,850,000 FOR WASTEWATER. ON PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING RIGHT NOW. COMBINED $130,200,000. THESE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE FINANCED THROUGH THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, OF WHICH WILL BE SECURED BY AN AD VALOREM TAX AND A LIMITED PLEDGE OF THE UTILITY SYSTEM REVENUES. THE INTENT IS FOR THE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION TO BE PAID BE SELF-SUPPORTING OBLIGATIONS, WHICH MEANS NOT SUPPORTED BY TAXES PAYABLE FROM UTILITY SYSTEM REVENUES. AND WHEN COUNCIL AUTHORIZES THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION THROUGH THE BUDGET ADOPTION, THE ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE WILL BE PAID WITH UTILITY SYSTEM REVENUES. THE TIMELINE TO PROCEED IS TODAY, OCTOBER 20TH. CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS THE NOTICE OF INTENTION RESOLUTION IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $130,200,000 FOR UTILITY SYSTEM PURPOSES. THE CITY STAFF WILL POST NOTICE OF INTENTION, WILL PUBLISH IT, AND THE NEWSPAPER AND THE HAYS FREE PRESS TWO TIMES. AFTER THAT, YOU'LL HAVE THE AUTHORITY AS A CITY COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE THE SALE OF THE CEOS ON DECEMBER 15TH, WHICH WOULD COINCIDE WITH THE SALE OF THE GEO BONDS. AGAIN, JUST LIKE THE GEO BONDS WE DISCUSSED, FUNDS WILL BE IN CITY'S DEPOSITORY ON JANUARY 13TH, 2027. THE OPTIONS FOR THE COUNCIL'S APPROVED THE NOTICE OF INTENTION RESOLUTION OR DO NOT APPROVE MOVING WELL. THE NOTICE OF INTENTION RESOLUTION STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE APPROVE THE NOTICE OF INTENTION RESOLUTION, AND WE'RE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT MAY COME UP. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS? NO. THESE ARE CO BONDS. THESE ARE CEOS. YES, MA'AM. AND THE REASON FOR THIS IS BECAUSE IT'S JUST A NEED. LIKE WE JUST HAVE TO DO THIS. WE HAVE TO KEEP WITH OUR WATER AND OUR WASTEWATER. AND SO I'M OKAY DOING CO BONDS FOR THIS. WOULD I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 26. SECOND.

I GOT A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES, 6 TO 0. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE A GOOD

[29) Receive a report, hold a discussion, and provide staff feedback regarding the results of the intersection traffic analysis conducted at the six (6) priority intersections, including West Center Street at Old Stagecoach Road, Kohlers Crossing at Sanders, Kohlers Crossing at Benner, Windy Hill at Cherrywood, Lehman Road at Bunton Creek Road, and Goforth Road at Bunton Creek Road.]

NIGHT. APPRECIATE IT. ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK UP TO AGENDA ITEM 29. SO THE WAY WE HAVE THEM IN ORDER IS GOING TO BE 29 AND 32. AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK TO BEING REGULAR ORDER.

WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE A REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION AND PROVIDE STAFF FEEDBACK REGARDING THE RESULTS OF THE INTERSECTION TRAFFIC ANALYSIS CONDUCTED AT THE SIX PRIORITY INTERSECTIONS, INCLUDING WEST CENTER STREET AT OLD STAGECOACH ROAD, KOHLER'S CROSSING AT SANDERS, KOHLERS CROSSING AT BENNER, WINDY HILL AT CHERRYWOOD, LEHMAN ROAD AT BUTTON AND GOFORTH ROAD AT BUTTON CREEK ROAD. ITEM PRESENTER LEON BARBER. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

LEON BARBER, CITY ENGINEER. TONIGHT WITH ME IS STEVE SHARMA. HE IS WITH THE REGION RODRIGUEZ TRANSPORTATION GROUP AND HE WILL BE LEADING YOU ON THE ON THE PRESENTATION TONIGHT. THANK

[03:05:03]

YOU LEON. I HAVEN'T USED THIS SO I JUST HIT THE ARROW. YES. OKAY. LIKE LEON SAID, I'M STEVE SHARMA WITH RTG, NOT AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT. JUST TO BE CLEAR. SO THEY'RE A GOOD COMPANY THOUGH. GIVING YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THIS. I GUESS ON JULY 7TH OF THIS YEAR, THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO REEVALUATE RELOOK AT ALL THE ROUNDABOUTS.

JULY 21ST. CITY STAFF PRESENTED AN OVERVIEW OF THE INTERSECTIONS TO STUDY. AND THEN ON AUGUST 18TH, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE TASK ORDER NUMBER 260501 FOR US RTG TO STUDY 12 INTERSECTIONS. AND I REMEMBER THAT WAS A LONG NIGHT TOO. SO NEXT THIS IS ALL OF THE INTERSECTIONS, THE PURPLE ONES, ONE THROUGH SIX. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TODAY.

TONIGHT. THE OTHERS ARE LIGHT COLOR. WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE WORK WE'VE DONE THUS FAR? WE'VE COLLECTED ALL THE TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS AND ALL THE INTERSECTIONS. WE APPLIED GROWTH RATES BASED ON TXDOT METHODOLOGIES, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT HISTORICAL STUFF AND OTHER THINGS. BUT THAT WAY WE CAN PROJECT TO A DESIGN YEAR, HORIZON, YEAR, AND THAT'S HOW WE DO OUR ANALYSIS FOR 2030 AND 2050. AND THESE ARE THE SIX PRIORITY INTERSECTIONS, CENTER STREET AND OLD STAGECOACH, COACHELLA'S AND SANDERS COLORS AT BENNER, WINDY HILL AT CHERRYWOOD, LEHMAN AT BUNTON GO FORTH BUTTON AS WELL. AGAIN, THESE ARE THE SIX INTERSECTIONS.

THE OTHERS AREN'T THERE. SO. WE FOLLOWED THE TXDOT METHODOLOGY FOR INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATION. IT'S FOLLOWING THE THE FEDERAL PROCESS AS WELL AS THE TEXTILE PROCESS. LIKE I SAID, THE FIRST LEVEL IS A HIGH LEVEL CAPACITY ANALYSIS. ALL YOU'RE DOING IS LOOKING AT THE NUMBER OF LANES YOU HAVE VERSUS HOW MANY CARS YOU HAVE. IF YOU HAVE MORE CARS THAN LANES, THEN YOU GET A NUMBER OVER ONE, AND THAT MEANS THINGS AREN'T GOOD. THE NEXT THING IS A SAFETY ANALYSIS YOU'RE DOING. YOU'RE DOING TWO LEVELS OF SAFETY. YOU'RE DOING A PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS, AND THAT'S 2030 TO 2050. OVER THE LIFETIME OF THE ROADWAY. WE USE 2030 BECAUSE WE FIGURED THAT WOULD BE APPROXIMATE OPENING YEAR FOR SOME OF THESE PROJECTS. AND THEN WE DID OBTAIN ACTUAL CRASH DATA FROM THE TXDOT DATABASE. AND THERE WAS NOTHING CRAZY AT THOSE INTERSECTIONS. AS PART OF THE PROCESS, WE NOT ONLY LOOKED AT STOP SIGNS, SIGNALS, ROUNDABOUTS, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THINGS WE LOOKED AT AND WE'LL GO THROUGH IT REAL QUICK.

IT'S GETTING LATE, SO I FIGURED YOU DON'T NEED TO GO THROUGH ALL THE KINDS OF INTERSECTIONS.

THEN WE IDENTIFIED THE FATAL FLAWS, WHY WE COULDN'T IMPLEMENT SOME OF THOSE. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE PICTURES. AND THEN WE DID A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS USING SYNCHRO AND SIDRA. SIDRA IS USED FOR ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS. IT'S PRETTY WELL RECOMMENDED. IT'S A GOOD SOFTWARE FOR ROUNDABOUTS. AND I DID WANT TO STRESS THAT I HAVE BEEN OUT TO ALL THE SITES.

I LIKE TO GO SET UP THE CAMERAS WITH MY GUYS AND WATCH THE TRAFFIC FLOW. A MPM PEAK PERIOD DID IT FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS. SO VERY FAMILIAR WITH WHAT'S GOING ON. THESE ARE ALL THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF INTERSECTIONS. THERE'S, YOU KNOW, YOU GOT YOUR TRADITIONAL SIGNALS, A TWO WAY STOP, FOUR WAY STOP, DISPLACED LEFT ARE CUTS, MEDIAN U-TURNS, NOT JUST ONE KIND OF ROUNDABOUT, BUT MULTIPLE KINDS OF ROUNDABOUTS. SO OBVIOUSLY YOU GUYS ALL KNOW WHAT A TWO WAY STOP IS. YOU KNOW WHAT A ALWAYS STOP IS. AND FEEL FREE TO ASK ME IF IF I'M GOING TOO FAST. I'LL THIS IS A CONTINUOUS GREEN TEA. WE KIND OF PUT THIS UP BECAUSE WE DESIGNED THAT ONE AT 45 AND 1626. AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN TELL, BUT IT'S A GREEN TEA BECAUSE THAT NORTHBOUND 1626 TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP. IT JUST CONTINUES ON. THERE'S THE OTHER APPROACHES DO STOP, BUT THAT'S A CONTINUOUS MOVEMENT. YOU DON'T STOP WHERE THE ARROW IS.

THIS IS A CUT. AGAIN, I CAN GO INTO DETAILS, BUT YOU CAN'T GO THROUGH ON THE NORTHBOUND APPROACH. YOU HAVE TO TURN RIGHT. YOU TURN. IF YOU FOLLOW THE RED AROUND TO GO NORTH OR

[03:10:01]

THROUGH, YOU CAN'T GO THROUGH THE INTERSECTION. SO AND THE REASON WE'RE SHOWING YOU THIS IS LIKE THERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF ONE ON STATE HIGHWAY 16, BANDERA ROAD AT CEDAR TRAIL. IT TAKES UP A LOT OF RIGHT OF WAY. RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T DO SOME OF THESE THINGS. THIS IS A MEDIAN YOU TURN. YOU DON'T REALLY EVEN HAVE THESE IN TEXAS ANYMORE. THEY'RE NOT SAFE. SO THAT'S A PICTURE OF ONE FROM UTAH. THIS IS A DISPLACED LEFT TURN. AND THIS IS WHERE YOU MOVE THE CARS TO THE OTHER SIDE TO MAKE THE LEFT TURN. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FOLLOWING THE YELLOW ON THE LEFT SIDE, BUT AGAIN, IT'S TO SHOW YOU THE WIDTH NECESSARY. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT INTERSECTION, YOU CAN SEE HOW IT BUBBLES OUT THERE. AND IT'S JUST TO DEMONSTRATE HOW WIDE THE INTERSECTION IS. THIS IS A BOW TIE. I'VE ACTUALLY NEVER SEEN ONE OF THESE, AND APPARENTLY THEY'RE BUILDING ONE IN FULCHER, BUT IT'S A ROUNDABOUT ON EACH SIDE OF A MAJOR INTERSECTION BECAUSE I, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S A WAY TO MAKE IT SAFER, I GUESS. SO YOU DON'T GO THROUGH VERY, I DON'T KNOW, BE COMPLICATED. HERE'S A SPLIT INTERSECTION. YOU CAN SEE HOW WIDE THIS IS. YOU'VE GOT A CONTINUOUS. IT'S ONE WAY MOVEMENT ON THE SOUTH HALF OF THAT MOVEMENT. AND THEN THE NORTH HALF IS ANOTHER ONE WAY MOVEMENT. IT'S LIKE A ONE WAY PAIR IF Y'ALL HAVE EVER HEARD OF THEM. BUT AGAIN, IT'S A REALLY WIDE INTERSECTION. YOU DON'T SEE THESE. AND THEN ALL YOUR VARIATIONS OF ROUNDABOUTS. Y'ALL ARE VERY FAMILIAR WITH ROUNDABOUTS. THE ONE BY ONE ON THE LEFT, YOU'VE GOT A TWO BY TWO. THAT'S NOT REALLY A TWO BY TWO. AT 51ST STREET. THE BECAUSE THE FRONTAGE ROAD IS ONE WAY. SO THERE'S NO NORTHBOUND APPROACH. IT'S TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION, BUT THERE IS NO NORTHBOUND APPROACH.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL HAVE DRIVEN THAT, BUT IT'S IT'S INTERESTING. THEN THERE'S YOUR TWO BY ONE, WHICH IS TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH APPROACH ONE LANE IN THE EAST AND WEST APPROACH. NOW, IF YOU IF YOU ROTATE THAT PICTURE 90 DEGREES, THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD GET TWO LANES IN THE EAST AND WESTBOUND APPROACH ONE LANE IN THE NORTH AND SOUTH APPROACH. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? NO. SO WE'LL GET TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS FIRST. ONE CENTER STREET AT OLD STAGECOACH ROAD, WE'RE RECOMMENDING KEEPING THIS THING AROUND ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE THE PROCESS WAS WE LOOKED AT ALL THOSE VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS THAT WE JUST SHOWED YOU, AND IT'S HARD TO FIT THOSE WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY. IT GETS VERY CONFUSING. I MEAN, VERY EXPENSIVE. THERE'S A LOT TO DO. AND THEN WE STARTED LOOKING AT THE 2030, 2050, YOU KNOW, WE LOOKED AT THE THINGS THAT CAME THROUGH THERE OUT OF THE INITIAL SCREENING, AND A ROUNDABOUT AND A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SHOWED THE BEST THAT WERE POSSIBLE. SOME OF THE OTHERS, YOU KNOW, THEY WEREN'T REALISTIC TO BUILD THE EXISTING 2030 IS APPROACHING FAILURE.

IT'S LIKE LEVEL OF SERVICE D, WHICH, YOU KNOW, C, D, AND I THINK LEVEL OF SERVICE D IS WHAT THE CITY HERE WANTS TO SEE ABOVE. IT DOES FAIL AS IS IN 2050 WITH THE STOP SIGNS EVERYWHERE DOES NOT WORK. AND THEN WHEN WE ANALYZED THE OPERATIONS USING SYNCHRO AND SIDRA, THE ROUNDABOUTS IN THE THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION, THEY BOTH WERE VERY CLOSE TO EACH OTHER. AND WHEN I SAY VERY CLOSE, LIKE IN TRAFFIC MODELING, YOU LOOK AT THE ENTIRE INTERSECTION, SEE HOW LONG THE AVERAGE DELAY IS FOR VEHICLES THAT GET THROUGH THE INTERSECTION. AND IF THEY'RE WITHIN EIGHT TO 10S. TO ME, IT'S A TRAFFIC MODEL, SO IT'S PRETTY EQUAL. AND, AND I BELIEVE IN THE A M THE ROUNDABOUT WAS A LITTLE BIT BETTER IN THE P M IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION. IT'S IN THE TABLE, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY. I COULD HAVE IT SWITCHED. BUT THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SAFETY PART OF IT, ROUNDABOUTS GENERALLY ARE SAFER. AND IN THIS CASE THE ROUNDABOUT HAD A LOWER PREDICTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS. SO THAT'S WHY WE PICKED THE ROUNDABOUT IN THIS CASE. AND WE DIDN'T DRAW IT UP. THIS THIS WAS ALREADY DRAWN UP. SO WE'RE SAYING LEAVE IT ALONE. THIS WORKS FINE. AND 2050 IT'S GOOD. BASED ON GROWING THOSE EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS WE COLLECTED.

AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IS COLAS AT SANDERS. THIS ONE WE RECOMMENDED THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

AGAIN, WE HAVE THE DIAGRAM, ESPECIALLY AT SANDERS AND BENDERS THAT KIND OF SHOW YOU'RE GOING TO GET INTO PEOPLE'S HOUSES IF YOU TRY TO DO A DLT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

AGAIN, 2030, IT'S APPROACHING FAILURE, BUT NOT QUITE THERE IN 2050 DEFINITELY FAILS THE WAY

[03:15:08]

IT IS WITH THE STOP SIGNS. THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION OPERATES BETTER THAN THE ROUNDABOUT IN 2050. IT'S NO DOUBT IT OPERATES BETTER FROM A TRAFFIC OPERATIONS POINT OF VIEW. THE PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS THE CRASH ANALYSIS DOES SHOW THERE'S MORE CRASHES, THOUGH, AT A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION VERSUS A ROUNDABOUT, BUT THE OPERATIONS ARE BETTER. BUT SAFETY WISE IT'S. AND SO YOU'LL SAY, WHY DO WE RECOMMEND A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION? BECAUSE WHEN WE ANALYZE KOHLERS CROSSING, WE DIDN'T JUST LOOK AT SANDERS, AT COLAS. WE LOOKED AT THE ENTIRE. WE LOOKED AT 1626 TO 2770. SO WE ANALYZED THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR. WHEN YOU DO A CORRIDOR, YOU TRY TO TIME THOSE SIGNALS, WHAT THEY CALL PROGRESSION ANALYSIS. SO WHEN YOU GO FROM ONE SIGNAL TO THE NEXT, IT'S GREEN. AND THAT'S IF YOU INTRODUCE A ROUNDABOUT IN THERE THAT SCREWS UP THE PLATOON OF VEHICLES, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE FOLLOWING AROUND ONE AND A HALF, TWO SECOND HEADWAY OR, YOU KNOW, THE THE RULE OF TWO. AND IF YOU INTRODUCE A ROUNDABOUT IN THERE, IT'S NOT A CONTINUOUS FLOW. SO THAT THAT'S WHY WE RECOMMEND IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ALONG THE WHOLE CORRIDOR, ESPECIALLY WITH THIS INTERSECTION, IT WAS PRETTY NOTICEABLE. THE DIFFERENCE IN OPERATIONS BETWEEN THE SIGNAL AND THE ROUNDABOUT. DID YOU HAPPEN TO DO THAT DURING SCHOOL HOURS? THE. YES, YEAH I DID. WE COLLECTED COUNTS TWO WEEKS AFTER SCHOOL STARTED AND WE ONLY COLLECTED COUNTS TUESDAY, WEDNESDAYS AND THURSDAYS. AND WE COUNTED FOR TWO DAYS. SO WE DIDN'T JUST COLLECT ONE DAY'S WORTH OF COUNTS. WE COLLECTED TWO DAYS WORTH OF COUNTS FOR THREE HOURS IN THE MORNING AND THREE HOURS IN THE EVENING. BUT FOR THESE INTERSECTIONS, WE COUNTED 13 HOURS BECAUSE WE NEED. PART OF OUR DEAL WAS TO LOOK TO SEE IF THEY WARRANT A SIGNAL. AND WHEN YOU DO A SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS, YOU HAVE TO COUNT VEHICLES FOR 13 HOURS. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND SO THIS IS OUR DESIGN FOR THE INTERSECTION. IN ORDER TO GET THIS INTERSECTION TO OPERATE WELL IN 2050. BECAUSE WHEN WE INCREASE THE TRAFFIC VOLUMES, WHEN WE GREW THE 2030 VOLUMES TO 2050, WE HAD A REALLY HIGH RIGHT TURNING VOLUME FROM NORTHBOUND SANDERS TO EASTBOUND KOHLERS CROSSING. SO YOU NEED TO BUILD A IT'S APPROXIMATELY A 200 FOOT RIGHT TURN LANE. IN THE FUTURE, IT WORKS OKAY IN 2030 AS A SIGNAL, BUT AT SOME POINT YOU WOULD NEED TO CONSIDER A SIGNAL. I'M SORRY, A RIGHT TURN LANE OFF OF NORTHBOUND SANDERS. BENNER.

THIS SAME DEAL IT'S A ELIMINATED SOME OF THEM BECAUSE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY. THIS INTERSECTION APPROACHES FAILURE IN 2030. IT DID OKAY IN 2030 WITH THE TWO WAY STOP. NOT HORRIBLE, BUT IT WASN'T GOOD. ROUNDABOUT IN A SIGNAL. AGAIN, IT WAS VERY CLOSE. I KNOW LIKE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE SHOWS 26.3 FOR THE AM OR PM FOR A SIGNAL. AND THAT'S A LEVEL OF SERVICE DE, BUT THAT'S BY 0.6 SECONDS. THE ROUNDABOUT WAS LIKE 18 SECONDS. SO THE DIFFERENCE WAS EIGHT SECONDS ON THE WAY THEY FUNCTIONED. AND TO ME THAT'S A TRAFFIC MODEL THING. IT'S SO CLOSE. IT'S RELATIVE. SO BUT THE ROUNDABOUT DID FUNCTION BETTER, YOU KNOW, IN THE TRAFFIC MODEL. AND AGAIN, THE PREDICTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS DOES SHOW ROUNDABOUTS ARE SAFER. AND THAT'S THE WAY THE INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATION IS. IT'S BASED ON THE SAFETY PART, ON THE SAFETY PART THE PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS ROUNDABOUTS ALWAYS GREAT OUT BETTER TYPICALLY. AND AGAIN, I GO BACK TO WE LOOKED AT COLAS AS A CORRIDOR AND IT JUST WE SAID SANDERS OPERATED BETTER WITH THE INTERSECTION. SO THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE ONLY ONE YOU WOULD HAVE HAD A ROUNDABOUT AT. AND OTHERWISE YOU WOULD HAVE HAD YOUR PROGRESSION WOULD HAVE BEEN NOT THERE. IF YOU PUT IN A ROUNDABOUT RIGHT HERE. THAT'S THAT'S OUR OPINION. AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE IT'S WE'RE NOT SAYING TO ADD ANY CAPACITY. WE'RE JUST SAYING TO ADD A SIGNAL THAT KIND OF SHOWS YOU THE WAY IT IS 2050. THE NEXT ONE IS WINDY HILL AT CHERRYWOOD.

SAME DEAL. ELIMINATE SOME BASED ON THE RIGHT OF WAY, AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. IT'S. ONE OF THE APPROACHES IS APPROACHING FAILURE, NOT THE WHOLE THING. AND ON THIS ONE, A LOT OF THAT WESTBOUND TRAFFIC WAS BACKING UP FROM I-35 IN THE A M. AND THEN A LOT OF PEOPLE CUT THROUGH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY THE LEFT TURNERS, BECAUSE I, I THINK IT'S BECAUSE OF ALL

[03:20:05]

THE CONGESTION, SO THAT I REMEMBER. AND AGAIN, A ROUNDABOUT AND A CONTINUOUS GREEN T THEY OPERATED ABOUT EQUAL IN 2030 AND 2050. BUT THE ROUNDABOUT DOES SHOW SAFER, FEWER CRASHES THAN THE CONTINUOUS GREEN T AND. BUT RIGHT NOW THIS INTERSECTION DOES NOT MEET A SIGNAL WARRANT. YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE A MPPM PEAK, 13 HOUR COUNTS, IT DOES NOT. AND IT COULD CHANGE IF THAT LAND TO THE NORTH DEVELOPS AND I DON'T. KYLE'S DEVELOPING VERY QUICKLY BASED ON THOSE GROWTH RATES. THERE ARE FIVE 6%. SO THIS IS WHAT THE FLYING GREEN TEA WOULD LOOK LIKE. IF YOU SEE WESTBOUND WINDY HILL, THEY. THAT MOVEMENT TOWARDS I-35 WOULD NOT STOP. THEY'RE JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH THERE. AND NOW IF YOU WANT TO TURN LEFT FROM WESTBOUND WINDY HILL TO CHERRYWOOD, AT SOME POINT YOU WOULD PROBABLY PUT A SIGNAL. BUT RIGHT NOW YOU DON'T NEED TO. YOU WOULD JUST HAVE THEM OUT OF THE TRAFFIC STREAM AND JUST WAITING THERE UNTIL THEY COULD FIND A GAP AND THEN TURN LEFT.

SO THIS DOES NOT WARRANT A SIGNAL CURRENTLY. SO THAT'S THAT'S OUR OPINION. SO. WELL THE SIGNAL WARRANTS ARE NOT OUR OPINION. THAT'S WRITTEN FACT. THAT'S BASED ON I HATE TO INTERRUPT YOU, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT I'M SEEING HERE. YEAH. FOR AND YOU MAY NOT BE FAMILIAR ENOUGH WITH CITY OF KYLE, BUT OVER ON BY THE PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER, IS THIS SIMILAR TO LIKE WHAT WE PUT OVER THERE? I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER IS. YEAH. THIS THIS QUESTION IS MORE FOR MY STAFF THAN, THAN FOR YOU. YES.

GO AHEAD. MARKETPLACE. MARKETPLACE. YES. IT WILL BE A SIMILAR CONFIGURATION EXCEPT MARKETPLACE. RIGHT NOW IT'S A STOP SIGN CONTROLLED. IT'S NOT SIGNALIZED. IF IT WAS SIGNALIZED WOULD BE A CONTINUOUS GREEN T. OKAY. THANK YOU. MAKING SURE I WAS VISUALIZING IT RIGHT. I THINK A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THE GREEN TEA IS IF YOU'VE BEEN TO 45 AND 1626. YEAH. WHICH I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH, BUT IT'S LIKE RIGHT BEFORE YOU GET OFF INTO BUDA. YEAH, YOU CAN CONSISTENTLY GO, RIGHT. AND THEN THEY HAVE A STOPLIGHT IN FRONT TO GO LEFT. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS ULTIMATELY THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SAYING. BUT YOU'RE SAYING THE LIGHTS NOT WARRANTED AT THIS POINT, EVEN AT 2050. WILL IT BE WARRANTED? WELL, NOT IN 2050 BASED ON BUT THIS COULD ALL CHANGE. YOU'VE GOT ALL THAT GREEN LAND TO THE NORTH NORTH SIDE OF THAT. BUT I THINK IT'S GOING TO, I THINK, GROW OBVIOUSLY THE WAY INFORMATION.

OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I DO THINK YOU'LL NEED A SIGNAL THERE, EVEN THOUGH LIKE MY 2% A YEAR GROWTH RATE FROM 2030 TO 2050 DOESN'T SHOW IT. BUT YEAH, YOU KNOW WHAT I SAY, IT MIGHT BY 2050, IT WAS NOT IN 2030, SOMEWHERE IN YOUR, YOU KNOW WHAT, BETWEEN 2030 AND 2050, PROBABLY CLOSER TO 2040, I THINK BASED ON JUST THIS FLAT 2% GROWTH RATE, BUT THAT ALL SPIKES WHEN YOU GET A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT. LIKE THAT'S A LOT OF GREENLAND. AND, AND IF I COULD JUST ADD, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, BECAUSE AGAIN, IF YOU LOOK AT WINDY HILL AND CHERRYWOOD, THE MAJORITY OF YOUR TRAFFIC IS COMING FROM 35 INTO INDIAN PAINTBRUSH AND AMBERWOOD. SO MORE, MOST YOUR MAJORITY OF YOUR TRAFFIC IS COMING FROM THE INTERSTATES FOR PEOPLE GOING HOME OR EASTBOUND. EXACTLY. YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE FROM SHADOW GLEN, SHADOW CREEK COMING IN AND WANTING TO TURN RIGHT AT THAT STREET. THEY'RE GOING TO GO STRAIGHT TO 35. THE CITY'S INSTALLED THOSE SPEED HUMPS ALONG WHAT STREET IS IT, LOU? THERE WHEN YOU TURN LEFT FROM CHERRYWOOD, THEN YOU GO AROUND. WHAT IS THE NAME OF THAT STREET? BECAUSE SO MANY PEOPLE CUT THROUGH THERE. OH, IT'S NOT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT THROUGH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, BECAUSE I STAYED AT THE LA QUINTA. AND YOU CAN WIND YOUR WAY THROUGH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD BACK THERE. AND THERE'S SPEED BUMPS ALONG THERE AND IT TAKES YOU TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD, PRIVATE DRIVE. I DO THINK THAT'S WHY I GO. PEOPLE ARE CUTTING THROUGH THERE BASED ON WHAT I'VE SEEN. SO LET'S SEE.

SO THAT WAS WINDY HILL AND CHERRY. THIS IS OUT IN FRONT OF THE HIGH SCHOOL LAYMAN AND BUNTON CREEK. OH MY GOSH. I WENT OUT THERE FOR TWO STRAIGHT DAYS BECAUSE IT'S THE THAT SIGNAL IS THAT TEMPORARY SIGNAL YOU HAVE OUT THERE. YES. SINCE THERE'S NO LEFT ON WESTBOUND BUNTON AND I'M CALLING WESTBOUND TOWARDS I-35, THERE'S NO LEFT TURN LANE. SO YOU HAVE WHAT YOU CALL SPLIT PHASING WHERE ONE APPROACH GOES, THEN THE USUALLY, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE EASTBOUND AND WESTBOUND WOULD GO TOGETHER. BUT SINCE YOU DON'T HAVE A LEFT TURN LANE OFF OF WESTBOUND BUNTON TO THE SCHOOL THAT IT JUST IT'S IT JUST DOESN'T WORK. YOU GOT TO

[03:25:09]

HAVE A LEFT TURN LANE THERE BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT A HIGH ENOUGH TRAFFIC VOLUME. YOU NEED THAT IN THAT SPLIT PHASING IS NOT. AND THEY'RE DOING THE BEST THEY CAN BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO SPLIT PHASE IT WITHOUT THAT LEFT TURN LANE. SO YOU REALLY NEED A LEFT TURN LANE INTO THAT SCHOOL THERE. IT'S IF YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP A REGULAR INTERSECTION. AND THAT'S WHY WE SAY ON THIS ONE, TRADITIONAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL IS WHAT WE RECOMMEND. OBVIOUSLY CURRENTLY IT'S FAILING. I'VE GOT VIDEOS AND PICTURES AND IT'S YOU HAVE TO TELL US IT BACKS UP FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL ALL THE WAY TO THE OTHER ROUNDABOUT IN THE AFTERNOON. IT'S NOT THE OTHER ROUNDABOUT, IT'S THIS INTERSECTION THAT'S CAUSING IT TO BACK UP IN THERE. YEAH, IT WAS PRETTY WILD. AND WE DID COUNT PEDESTRIANS, BUT THE KIDS WERE ALL CROSSING EVERYWHERE.

AND THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING THAT. THERE YOU GO. THAT WAS MY ARGUMENT FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS.

I MEAN, WE COUNTED PEDESTRIANS, BUT OUR CAMERAS ARE POINTED TOWARDS CROSSWALKS WHERE WE COUNT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT OUR ACCOUNTS, IT'S NOT GOING TO SHOW THESE KIDS ARE DODGING TRAFFIC. GO OUT THERE. THE KIDS ARE JUST EVERYWHERE. SO I IT JUST WASN'T WORKING. AND SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, A ROUNDABOUT IN A TRAFFIC SIGNAL. THEY'RE GOING TO OPERATE SIMILARLY IN 2030. BUT WE THINK IN 2050, IF YOU PUT A SIGNAL OUT THERE, IT GIVES YOU A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY. WHEREAS THE ROUNDABOUTS KIND OF LOCKING YOU IN THERE. AND THE SIGNAL DOES WORK BETTER TOO. BUT I JUST THINK IT GIVES YOU A LITTLE MORE CHOICE. AND THEN THE ONE INTERESTING THING ABOUT THIS, I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE A CAPITAL CAPITAL PROJECT ON THE TO HAVE THAT FOURTH LEG OF THE INTERSECTION. BUT THE WAY WE UNDERSTAND IT, IT'S NOT EXACTLY SET ON THE TIME FRAME ON THAT. SO WHEN WE ANALYZE THIS THING, WE ANALYZED IT AS A T INTERSECTION BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT FOURTH LEG IS GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED. AND THEN IF I WERE TO HAVE ADDED THAT FOURTH LEG, I HAVE TO MAKE ASSUMPTIONS ON HOW MANY VEHICLES ARE GOING TO USE THAT. SO LIKE IN THE MORNING, IF YOU'RE GOING WESTBOUND ON BUNTON AND YOU TURN RIGHT IN THE MORNING, I WOULD HAVE TO PUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF VEHICLES COMING SOUTHBOUND IN THE AFTERNOON, BECAUSE IF YOU GO THAT WAY, YOU'RE MOST LIKELY GOING TO COME BACK IN THE EVENING FROM 35. AND BASED ON WHAT YOU ASSUME, IT CAN MAKE A ROUNDABOUT WORK OR NOT MAKE A ROUNDABOUT WORK. SO IT'S LIKE I DIDN'T WANT TO BE ACCUSED OF LIKE FIXING THE NUMBERS TOWARDS ONE THING OR THE OTHER. SO IT WAS ALL BASED ON WHAT WE GOT, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF ACTUAL DATA. AND SO AGAIN, THE PREDICTIVE TRACK, THE CRASH ROUNDABOUTS ALWAYS WIN ON THE PREDICTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS. AND I STILL THINK IN FRONT OF A HIGH SCHOOL, I DON'T KNOW IF HIGH SCHOOL KIDS WILL WALK ON A CROSSWALK, BUT TO ME, THEY CAN HIT THE BUTTON AND WALK ACROSS AFTER THEY GET THE WALK SYMBOL ON A ROUNDABOUT, YOU ARE GOING TO GO FROM ONE RAISED MEDIAN TO ANOTHER. AND THEY DO SHOW THAT THAT'S IT IS SAFER ON A ONE LANE, BUT IT'S IF. BUT THIS ONE WOULD BE A TWO LANE ROUNDABOUT. SO YOU'RE COUNTING ON THOSE VEHICLES TO STOP UNLESS YOU PUT IN A FLASHING LIGHT BEACON SYSTEM. AND I'VE SEEN THOSE ON ROUNDABOUTS. SO YOU COULD IMPLEMENT THINGS LIKE THAT ON A ROUNDABOUT. BUT FOR US THIS I THINK WOULD SOLVE YOUR PROBLEMS HERE PRETTY SOON. IF YOU COULD PUT IN THAT LEFT TURN LANE OFF OF WESTBOUND, THAT WOULD REALLY CLEAN UP THAT INTERSECTION. AND THEN BUT DON'T GET MAD AT ME BECAUSE USUALLY IF IT CLEANS UP, IT'S CALLED LATENT DEMAND. AND THAT'S WHAT TRAFFIC ENGINEERS ALWAYS GET OUT OF TROUBLE BECAUSE THEY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A CERTAIN DEMAND THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT USING THIS INTERSECTION BECAUSE IT'S SO MESSED UP THAT THEY'LL START USING IT AGAIN.

BUT YOU'LL AT LEAST HAVE THIS WORKING PRETTY WELL IF YOU PUT IN THAT LEFT TURN LANE OFF OF WESTBOUND, BUT IT'S ABOUT 250FT IN THE FUTURE. AT SOME POINT IN 2050 ON LAYMAN, YOU'RE GOING TO NEED A DUAL LEFT. I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC COMING OUT OF THAT SCHOOL TURNING LEFT, BUT YOU WOULD NEED TWO LANES ON BUNTON TO THE WEST OF LAYMAN. SO THAT WOULD THAT WOULD REALLY HELP AND ABUNDANT AND GO FORTH. THAT'S THE ROUNDABOUT. IT ACTUALLY FUNCTIONED. I STOOD AT THE GAS STATION AND WATCHED IN THE AM AND PM. IT'S NOT THE ROUNDABOUT THAT IT'S THE THE ONE BY THE HIGH SCHOOL THAT'S BACKING UP INTO THIS ONE. IN THE MORNING I SAW FIVE SIX CARS IN THE QUEUES, BUT IN THE AFTERNOON WHEN IT BACKS UP THROUGH HERE THAT THAT'S WHEN YOU NOTICE THE PROBLEM IN THIS ONE BECAUSE OF THE HIGH SCHOOL. THAT'S WHY BASED ON OUR NUMBERS AND EVERYTHING, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE ROUNDABOUT AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL. THEY WORK COMPARABLY.

[03:30:01]

BUT ON THIS ONE WE SAID JUST, YOU KNOW, THINGS BEING EQUAL, THE CRASH ANALYSIS AND PEOPLE ARE USED TO DRIVING THROUGH A ROUNDABOUT. AT THIS INTERSECTION. THERE IS A DRIVER FAMILIARITY WITH IT THAT IF IT'S NOT PART OF A CORRIDOR, IF IT'S JUST ONE RIGHT HERE WITH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE DID LOOK SLIGHTLY. I THINK THERE IS ANOTHER ONE. WELL, THERE'S ALWAYS ROUNDABOUTS NEAR ANOTHER ROUNDABOUT HERE IN TOWN, RIGHT. I MEAN, THERE'S GOING TO BE ONE CLOSE, BUT SINCE THIS ONE IS NOT PART OF LIKE A MAJOR CORRIDOR LIKE KOHLERS CROSSING YET, THIS ONE FUNCTIONS. AND I KNOW Y'ALL HAVEN'T DESIGNED. I THINK IT'S OKAY. I MEAN IT'S NOT OKAY. WE RECOMMEND IT. SO IT'S SO LET ME ASK YOU, BECAUSE THAT RUNABOUT'S ALREADY EXISTING. YEAH. AND IT WAS BUILT PROBABLY LESS THAN FIVE YEARS AGO. YEAH. AND IT NEEDS TO BE REBUILT. YEAH. SO WHAT CAN WE DO TO AVOID THAT IN THE FUTURE? I THERE'S YOU GUYS HAVE HAD 5% GROWTH FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS, RIGHT? OR NOT, NOT MORE THAN THAT. BUT THE NUMBERS WE SAW FROM 21 TO 26, YOU HAD 6% GROWTH. THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO. EVEN IF YOU HAD BUILT A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION HERE, YOU WOULD HAVE NEEDED TO WIDEN THAT INTERSECTION. BUT A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION, TO ME, ROUNDABOUTS ARE GREAT. THEY'RE SAFER. RIGHT? BUT IT'S DEPENDENT ON TRAFFIC VOLUMES. YOU GET TO A SATURATION POINT ON ROUNDABOUTS AT 800 TO 1200 VEHICLES PER LANE PER APPROACH, BUT IT'S ALSO BASED ON THE OPPOSING TRAFFIC, RIGHT? SO IF THEY CAN'T GET IF YOU GOT TOO HIGH OF A VOLUME COMING FROM ONE SIDE, THEN THE ADJACENT APPROACH CAN'T GET IN THE ROUNDABOUT. SO YOU NEED TO HAVE KIND OF EQUAL AMOUNTS OF TRAFFIC IN A ROUNDABOUT. A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION CAN CARRY MORE VEHICLES. AND THEN IT ALSO GIVES YOU A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY. YOU CAN ADD THAT LEFT TURN LANE OR THAT RIGHT TURN LANE WITHOUT HAVING TO REBUILD AN ENTIRE INTERSECTION. YEAH, I'M JUST CURIOUS HOW WE CAN SAVE TAXPAYER DOLLARS BY NOT HAVING TO REBUILD A ROUNDABOUT EVERY FIVE YEARS.

YEAH, IT'S IT'S SIGNIFICANT. YEAH. IT GOES BACK TO YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION OR COMMENT ABOUT HOW THE ROUNDABOUT, THESE ROUNDABOUTS WERE NOT SANCTIONED BY THE CITY. WE DIDN'T HAVE AN ACTUAL ORDINANCE ON HOW WIDE THEY ARE. WE LEARNED FROM BURLESON ON HOW WELL IT ADAPTS THERE. BUT IF YOU CAN REMEMBER IN 2021 THAT WAS A DEVELOPER BUILT ROUNDABOUT FROM THE DEVELOPER BROWN HOMES, AND IT WAS TOO SMALL AND THEY TRIED TO WIDEN IT AND THEY DID THEIR BEST TO TRY TO GET IT TO WHERE WE'RE AT. BUT IT IS VERY FUNKY ON HOW YOU MOVE IT AROUND. AND, AND I CAN TELL YOU THIS BECAUSE THE RANCH IS STILL BUILDING HOUSES OUT THERE. SO IT'S, IT'S GOING TO BE INTERESTING ON WHAT WE DO THERE. IF WE GOING TO HAVE TO REBUILD IT TO THE SPECS OF BURLESON. BUT THEN AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE IT FOUR LANES BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT. BUTTON ALL THE WAY DOWN IS TWO LANES ALL THE WAY ACROSS. YEAH. WELL MY CONCERN IS THE WHOLE BEEBE ROAD ONE TWO. THAT'S BRAND NEW. AND WE ALSO HAVE TO ASK THEM TO FIX THAT AS WELL. AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE SOLID ON THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO END UP PAYING A BUNCH MORE MONEY BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT DONE EFFICIENTLY. AND THE ONE ON BEEBE IS BRAND NEW. LIKE, YEAH, I KNOW, YEAH, WE HAVE OUR ORDINANCE AND WE HAVE OUR SPECIFICATIONS. SO JUST MOVING FORWARD, I MEAN, I, I GET THAT THEY'RE GENERALLY SAFER. AND MY OPINION IS AS LONG AS YOU BUILD IT BEFORE YOU BUILD THE SURROUNDING AREA, YOU'D BE OKAY.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, COLAS IS ALREADY BUILT OUT AS AN EXISTING LAYOUT. AND SO IT'S JUST HARDER TO MAKE IT FIT IN THAT AREA. YEAH. AGAIN, I GO BACK TO THAT PROGRESSION AND AS A TRAFFIC GUY, I WANT TO MOVE VEHICLES ON A CORRIDOR LIKE THAT, RIGHT? YOUR JOB IS TO GET VEHICLES FROM POINT A TO POINT B, AND THAT'S THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO DO IT ON THAT CORRIDOR. AND THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S LIKE THAT ON EVERY CORRIDOR, BUT THAT CORRIDOR MAKES SENSE. I I'M, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT CORRIDOR. YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT CORRIDOR. VERY CONCERNED. THE ACCIDENTS THAT THAT FOUR WAY STOP HAVE BEEN PRETTY DRAMATIC.

THE RESIDENTS ARE PREFERRING THE ROUNDABOUTS BECAUSE WE'RE USED TO THEM. THERE ARE PLENTY OF ROUNDABOUTS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE SEE HOW WELL THEY WORK. WE WOULD PREFER THE ROUNDABOUTS AT BOOBY AT BENNER AND AT SANDERS. THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO THAT ARE BEING CONSIDERED ANYWAY. BECAUSE THEY MOVE TRAFFIC FINE. THEY'RE SAFER. AND THAT IS OUR PRIMARY CONCERN. NOT EVEN THAT TRAFFIC JUST AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. OUR PRIMARY CONCERN IS THE SAFETY OF THOSE TWO INTERSECTIONS. AND RIGHT NOW THEY ARE NOT SAFE. THAT'S WHY WE I PUT UP THERE

[03:35:04]

THE SAFETY PART OF IT. I MEAN, IT'S IMPORTANT TO US. I WILL SAY, LIKE I DID, DRIVE DOWN BENNER AND SANDERS TO WHEN WE'RE OUT THERE COUNTING, I KNOW YOU HAVE ROUNDABOUTS OFF OF KOHLER TO THE BOTH SIDES. YEAH, THEY WORK REALLY WELL. THEY WORK. BUT THE VOLUMES ON THOSE LITTLE COLLECTOR ROADS ARE. I DIDN'T COUNT THOSE, BUT THEY'VE GOT TO BE 2% OF WHAT YOU HAVE ON COLAS. AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH THE ROUNDABOUT IS YOU CAN ONLY GET SO MANY CARS THROUGH THERE. WELL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A TWO LANE ROUNDABOUT THERE. YEAH. AND KOHLER IS GOING TO IT'S GOING TO BOOM. I MEAN BECAUSE I THINK TEX-DOT AT SOME POINT AT 1626 WHEN I, I WAS AGAIN, I WAS OUT THERE BY THE A C C COLLEGE COMING SOUTHBOUND ON 1626. IT BACKS UP FOR, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S GOT TO BE HALF A MILE. THE LIGHT DOES. YEAH. AND SO TEXTILE WILL COME IN THERE AND IMPROVE THAT. AND THEN NORTHBOUND THE LEFT ONTO KOHLER BACKS UP TO I THINK IT'S CROMWELL RIGHT. THE CREST OF THAT HILL. THEY WILL FIX THAT.

AND WHEN WE ANALYZE THIS WE LOOKED AT WHAT WE CALL MITIGATION DUAL LEFTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW OFF OF 1626 TO KELLER. THOSE ROUNDABOUTS ARE GOING TO YOU WILL. WE HAD SUCH A HARD TIME GETTING THE PEOPLE FROM YOUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO GET INTO THE ROUNDABOUT, BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT SUCH STEADY FLOW OF CARS CONTINUALLY ENTERING THE ROUNDABOUT FROM KOHLER'S. IT'S SUCH A HIGH VOLUME, GOING FROM 1626 TO 2770. YOU'RE. THOSE PEOPLE WILL HAVE A HARD TIME ENTERING THAT ROUNDABOUT, I'M SURE OF IT. THEY GOT TO HAVE A GAP TO GET IN THE ROUNDABOUT OR THEY'LL PULL IN THERE. AND THAT'S THE ONE THING YOU CAN PULL UP. SAFETY STUFF FOR TWO LANE ROUNDABOUTS VERSUS SINGLE LANE ROUNDABOUTS. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN THE SAFETY. IT'S PRETTY CLOSE. YEAH. YEAH. WELL IN THE REPORT THAT WE ORIGINALLY RECEIVED, IT SAID THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR ACCIDENTS IN THAT AREA IS DUE TO FAILING TO YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND THAT IS A ROUNDABOUT. IN GENERAL, YOU HAVE TO YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND SO IF THE ISSUE THERE IS ALREADY YOU'RE NOT YIELDING, THEN I CAN'T IMAGINE IT'S GOING TO GET BETTER WITH A ROUNDABOUT. WELL, THE SPEED IS VERY DIFFERENT WHEN YOU WHEN YOU'RE BLOWING THROUGH A STOP SIGN OR A STOP LIGHT AT 30 MILES AN HOUR, IT'S VERY DIFFERENT THAN NEGOTIATING BECAUSE THE ROUNDABOUTS ARE GOING 20 MILES AN HOUR. WHEN YOU GET INTO AN ACCIDENT. SO FATAL AND SEVERE CRASHES ARE SERIOUSLY REDUCED IN ROUNDABOUTS, INTERSECTIONS. YEAH. IT'S. DID YOU YOU GUYS DID CRASH ANALYSIS OR. NO, YOU DID. OKAY. AND WAS THERE THESE EXTREME ACCIDENTS? CURRENTLY THERE'S NOT. WE THERE HAVE BEEN IN THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF A MONTH AND A HALF BECAUSE SO WHEN WE STARTED VERY SERIOUS ACCIDENTS, WE LOOKED AT 2021 THROUGH WHEN I PULLED UP THE RECORDS, I THINK WE TEX-DOT HAD THE CRASH RECORDS UP UNTIL JULY, JUNE OR JULY BECAUSE WE STARTED IN AUGUST TO PULL IT UP. SO OBVIOUSLY WE IF YOU'RE SAYING IN THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF, WE WOULDN'T HAVE HAD THAT ACCESS, BUT I'VE GOT A NICE TABLE THAT HAS. WE DIDN'T PUT IT IN THE REPORT BECAUSE WE WERE JUST TRYING TO GET AN INTERIM THING DONE, BECAUSE WE KNEW YOU GUYS HAD A BUNCH OF CONSTRUCTION GOING ON. SO WE DIDN'T DO A FULL BLOWN FORMAL REPORT. IT WAS JUST HIGH LEVEL TO GET, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION. ALL RIGHT. WE APPRECIATE THAT. ALL RIGHT. I THINK LEON, IT'S ALL YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MAYOR AND COUNCIL. FEW COMMENTS. IT'S UNFORTUNATE WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS INFORMATION THREE YEARS AGO. WE COULD HAVE SAVED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. UNFORTUNATELY, SOME OF THESE ROADS ARE ALREADY AT 100% DESIGN AND TWO ARE ACTUALLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. BEFORE WE GO THROUGH THIS COUNCIL VOTE TO DECIDE WHICH DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO, I'D LIKE TO ASK LUCIEN TO YOU SOME POSSIBILITIES OF THERE'S SOME POSSIBILITIES. WE MIGHT HAVE A FEW SAVINGS ROAD PROJECTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, ESPECIALLY THE FOUR THAT WERE RECOMMENDED TO BE CHANGED. GOOD EVENING. I DO APOLOGIZE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A TABLE TO SHOW, BUT I DO LIKE TO GO THROUGH EACH ROUNDABOUT THAT ARE BEING RECOMMENDED TO CHANGE THE INTERSECTION TREATMENT AND TALK ABOUT THE COST IMPACT. SO FIRST OF ALL, I'M GOING TO KIND OF LUMP COLORS AT SANDERS AND BENNER TOGETHER. SO AS YOU UNDERSTAND THAT WE DO HAVE 100% DESIGN COMPLETE. WE DO HAVE POSSESSION OF ALL THE RIGHT OF WAYS BASED ON THE ROUNDABOUT CONFIGURATION. SO OUR ENGINEER RUN THROUGH THE ANALYSIS TO LOOK AT SWITCHING THAT TO A TRAFFIC SIGNAL. THEY RUN THROUGH ALL THE NUMBERS ON CONSTRUCTION RIGHT OF CONSTRUCTION. ALSO THE COST OF RIGHT OF WAY UTILITY THAT ARE

[03:40:01]

ALREADY INCLUDED IN THERE. THERE MAY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DESIGN COST THAT'S NEEDED TO SWITCH THE DESIGN. WE'RE LOOKING AT THOSE TOGETHER. IF WE WERE TO SWITCH TO A TRADITIONAL SIGNAL, IT'S ABOUT 1.2 MILLION OF SAVINGS THAT WE CAN ANTICIPATE. AT THIS POINT.

IT'S NOT A LARGE NUMBER BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY SPENT SO MUCH RESOURCES INTO THAT. SO I JUST DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT, AS LEON SAID, IF WE WOULD HAVE THIS NUMBER THREE YEARS AGO, THAT NUMBER WOULD GO UP A LOT MORE. BUT IT IS A IT'S A IT IS A LITTLE BIT OF SAVINGS FOR COLAS, WENDY HILL AND SHERRY WOOD. THIS IS ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE GOING TO FACE A LITTLE BIT CONSTRUCTION DELAYS. AND ALSO THERE'S ADDITIONAL DESIGN COSTS TO SWITCH IT TO A CONTINUOUS GREEN TEA. WE'RE GOING TO WORK THROUGH THAT WITH THE ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. AND THAT ONE UNFORTUNATELY WE'RE NOT GOING TO SEE SAVINGS. IT'S GOING TO BE AN ADDITIONAL COST AROUND 500,000. HOWEVER, WE WILL TRY TO MANAGE TO REDUCE THAT COST DURING THE CONSTRUCTION. NEXT ONE IS LAYMAN AND BENTON. THE. SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE ENGINEER ALREADY DRAWN KIND OF A HIGH LEVEL PROPOSED SIGNAL. OH, ONE QUICK THING. SORRY, I FORGOT TO ADD FOR COLOR SANDERS. WHEN OUR ENGINEER DID THE ESTIMATE, WE DID INCLUDE THAT DEDICATED RIGHT TURN LANE COMING FROM SANDERS ONTO KOHLER. SO IF BECAUSE WITH ANY ADDITIONAL LANE IT'S BEING BUILT, WE'RE ADDING THE COST. SO BACK TO LAYMAN ROAD AND BARTON CREEK. WHEN THE DESIGN ENGINEER DRAW UP THE HIGH LEVEL SCHEMATIC FOR THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION, WE'RE ACTUALLY SEEING A SIMILAR FOOTPRINT BECAUSE BARTON CREEK COME OFF AS A FIVE LANE CORRIDOR AND REDUCED TO FOUR.

BUT WE ARE PROVIDING DEDICATED RIGHT TURN LANE. DEDICATED THRU LANE, DEDICATED LEFT TURN LANE TO MITIGATE THAT TRAFFIC. AND THEN WE DON'T ANTICIPATE MUCH SAVINGS OVER THERE. THERE'S GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT COSTS, DESIGN COST. AND ALSO WE ARE WE ARE APPLYING A CONSTRUCTION INFLATION COST THERE. SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT BETWEEN 1.5 MILLION TO 2.5 MILLION ADDITIONAL COST TO SWITCH FOR THE LAYMAN ROAD. THE REASON FOR THE RANGE IS BECAUSE WE WITH MORE DETAILED DESIGN, WE ARE GOING TO RELOOK AT THE RIGHT OF WAY NEEDS.

THERE MIGHT BE RIGHT OF WAY THAT WE HAVEN'T CLOSED, THAT WE NO LONGER NEED WITH THE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS, WITH THE SIGNAL TREATMENT. SO. SO WAS THAT A TOTAL OF 2 MILLION ADDITIONAL COSTS? YES, ROUGHLY FROM THE ROUNDABOUT TO THE TRADITIONAL. YEAH, 1.5 TO 2, 2.5. AND IF I CAN ADD WHAT'S SO DISAPPOINTING ABOUT THAT, MR. MCKINNEY. WHEN WE FIRST LOOKED AT GETTING IT, WE HAD THE FUNDS TO GET A STREET LIGHT THERE. AND AT DAISY AND BUNTON AND EACH ONE OF THOSE AT THAT TIME WAS GOING TO BE $680,000 A PIECE. WELL, I THINK A LOT OF THIS COST CAME FROM BURYING THE UTILITIES, $680,000 A PIECE UNDER 1.5 MILLION FOR BOTH. WAS THAT WITH ANY CHANGES TO THE ROAD THEMSELVES? NO, THAT WAS ACTUALLY THE COST OF WHAT IT WAS GOING TO BE. THE LIGHTS THEMSELVES. WE WERE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE LIGHTS AT DAISY AND BUNTON TO PUSH THAT TRAFFIC THROUGH, AND THEN ALSO AT LAYMAN ABUNDANT TO WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE THAT ROUNDABOUT TO PUSH THE TRAFFIC THROUGH TO WHERE PEOPLE CAN GO LEFT TO LAY DOWN LAYMAN, THEY CAN CONTINUE TO GO STRAIGHT. THEY WOULD IN SYNC THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS AT DAISY, AND THEN THEY CAN HIT PHILOMENA, AND PHILOMENA WOULD BE ABLE TO DIVERT THE TRAFFIC ALL ONLY 35. IT WOULD BE JUST A STRAIGHT SHOT. WELL, I THINK A LARGE PART OF THIS COST IS RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION, BECAUSE WE'RE WIDENING THE ROAD TO. SO I BE FAIR, IT'S NOT AN EXACT APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON. I UNDERSTAND FOR CONSTRUCTION THAT NUMBER IS AROUND THE. YEAH. CORRECT AMOUNT LARGELY IS THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND UTILITIES CARRY A LOT OF COST ON THE OTHER CATEGORIES FOR ROAD BONDS. YEAH, THIS IS JUST FOR ONE INTERSECTION. NO.

I MEAN THE OVERALL INCREASES ARE DUE TO PLANNING FOR THE ROUNDABOUTS VERSUS PLANNING FOR, YOU KNOW, THE REPORT BECAUSE THE REPORT IN 2023 ACTUALLY HAD NUMBERS FOR 2020, WHICH KIND OF MADE THAT REPORT ALREADY THREE YEARS OLD. BUT AS WE SAW TODAY, LIKE OUR NUMBERS WERE UP UNTIL

[03:45:01]

JULY OF 2026. SO I'M NOT SURE WHY IN 2023, THEY USE 2020 NUMBERS. WHEN WE WERE ABLE TO OBTAIN A REPORT THAT RAN UP UNTIL JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, THREE MONTHS AGO. SO I THINK THIS TO ME, THIS REPORT, I FEEL LIKE AND THIS GOES OUT TO 2050 AS OPPOSED TO THE OTHER REPORT, I THINK IT WENT OUT TO LIKE 2040 SOMETHING, BUT THIS WILL LAST US A LITTLE BIT LONGER.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW. I, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE THE COST HAS ALREADY ADDED UP DUE TO THE ROUNDABOUT FIRST POLICY. AND THEN WHEN WE GAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, OKAY, WHAT IS TAKING THAT POLICY OUT? WHAT REALLY DOES THIS LOOK LIKE FOR OUR CITY'S FUTURE GROWTH? AND SO THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT NOW. ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND START OUR VOTING GOING DOWN, STARTING AT CENTER STREET. AND OLD STAGECOACH ROAD ROUNDABOUT IS GOING TO BE A ONE ONE BY ONE ROUNDABOUT. I FEEL LIKE THAT'S, THAT'S THE AREA THAT HAS LIKE THE LOOKS LIKE A STAR ALREADY, RIGHT? YEAH, ALMOST LIKE IT'S ALREADY BUILT FOR IT. SO MOTIONS I MAKE A MOTION TO PUT A ONE BY ONE ROUNDABOUT AT CENTER AND OLD STAGECOACH SECOND. OKAY. I GOT A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS AND A SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM TOBIAS.

DO WE HAVE ANY TALK ON THAT? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO. OOPS. WE GET THAT. PUT THAT BACK UP. MY MEMORY'S NOT THAT GOOD. IT ISN'T 1 A.M. YET.

NO, IT'S NOT 2:00 IN THE MORNING YET. THE NEXT TWO ARE COLORS CROSSING, IF THAT HELPS.

COLORS, COLORS. AND HEARD ME SAY A HANDFUL OF TIMES THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS ISN'T THE THING THAT I'M WILLING TO DIE ON. BUT HERE WE ARE. THIS IS THE HILL I'M WILLING TO DIE ON. ALL RIGHT, WELL, I HOPE NOBODY ELSE HAS TO DIE. I KNOW I'VE GOT A, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT I LOVE VERY DEARLY THAT GO THROUGH THESE INTERSECTIONS MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY, AND I AM NOT WILLING TO COMPROMISE THEIR SAFETY FOR ANYTHING. AMEN. COULD WE GO WITH THE COST OF REAL QUICK IF WE CAN, LEON, IF WE WERE TO DECIDE TO GO WITH KEEPING THE ROUNDABOUTS AT BRENNAN AND ALSO AT SANDERS, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE COST OF A SIGNAL LIGHT AND A ROUNDABOUT WAS 1.2 MILLION SAVINGS FOR THE SIGNAL LIGHT, I BELIEVE, HE SAID. WHAT'S THE COST OF A LIFE THAT'S. IT'S SO MUCH SAFER. AND THEY BACK UP THE THE TRAFFIC BACKS UP THERE ANYWAY. DURING SCHOOL TIMES, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST EVERYBODY'S USED TO THAT. THE FLOW WILL BE ABOUT THE SAME AS AT A LIGHT. IS THAT TRUE? WILL THE FLOW BE THE SAME WITH THE LIGHT VERSUS THE ROUNDABOUT? NO, NO NO. WHEN YOU'RE COMING OFF STAIRWAY, I MEAN OFF OF SANDERS AND YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO RIGHT, NO PROBLEM. VERY LITTLE TRAFFIC COMING THAT WAY. IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO THE TO SCHOOL. THEN YOU THE YOU'VE GOT THE ENTRANCE THERE AND IT'S THE, THE COLORS CROSSING TRAFFIC THAT HAS TO KIND OF WAIT ON YOU.

SO YOU ALREADY SAID THAT FAIRWAY TRAFFIC IS LESS THAN THE COLORS. I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. I THE TRAFFIC FLOW WILL INCREASE ON COLORS AND YOU WILL HAVE A HARDER TIME ENTERING THE ROUNDABOUT ON SANDERS. AND WITHOUT A DOUBT, I WONDER IN SOME PARTS OF THE DAY. BUT YOU ALREADY. DO YOU KNOW THE THE FOUR WAY BACKS UP THE LIGHTS GOING TO BACK UP. WE WISH THERE WERE DIFFERENT WAYS OF GETTING TO THOSE THREE SCHOOLS THAT ARE RIGHT THERE ALTOGETHER, BUT I WANT THE SAFEST. AND OF COURSE, FOR THE THE KIDS, THE THE PEDESTRIANS, YOU KNOW, WILL NEED SOME LIGHT CONTROL, SOME FLASHING SIGNALS, RED SIGNAL.

BUT I'M JUST NOT WILLING TO COMPROMISE THEIR SAFETY. YEAH. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PEDESTRIAN IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE BECAUSE THAT REPORT WAS NEVER DONE. SO WE CAN'T SAY, WELL, WE KNOW THOSE OF US WHO LIVE THERE KNOW WHAT'S THERE. LOOK, I DRIVE THIS ROAD EVERY DAY. MY DAUGHTER GOES TO HAYES HIGH SCHOOL. WE GO FROM THE EAST TO THE WEST. SO I UNDERSTAND. I DO UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE NEW DRIVERS THERE ALL THE TIME. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

UNLESS THERE'S OTHER DISCUSSION. I JUST HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT ENTIRE CORRIDOR THERE. THE TRAFFIC BEING ABLE TO GET OUT FROM THE LOWER VOLUME STREETS ONTO THE HIGHER VOLUME WAS A CONCERN I HAD BROUGHT UP DURING THE MEETING WHEN WE DISCUSSED IT. WE KNOW THAT THE TRAFFIC IS

[03:50:01]

GOING TO CONTINUE TO INCREASE. AND, YOU KNOW, I'M WORRIED TOO, ABOUT HAVING THOSE SAFER CROSSINGS THAN AT A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION VERSUS A ROUNDABOUT WHERE TRAFFIC IS MEANT TO KEEP RUNNING. SO THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS WITH THAT. WELL, EVEN IN THE REPORT THAT WE WERE GIVEN, I WILL I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT WE DID NOT GET THIS BEFORE LUNCHTIME TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE HAD MORE TIME TO REVIEW THIS REPORT. THE TWO BY TWO ROUNDABOUT IS STILL SIGNIFICANTLY, EVEN AT 2050, MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL IN THE REPORT THAT WE GOT. IS THAT DOES IT SAY EFFICIENT? BECAUSE I THOUGHT AT SOME POINT 2050 OF WHICH INTERSECTION? WELL, I'M LOOKING AT COLAS AND SANDERS OR COLAS AND BENDER, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU WERE SAYING. THE LOWER THE NUMBER, THE BETTER, RIGHT? OH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS CHART RIGHT HERE.

YES. SO THIS IS WHAT I THIS IS WHAT THE VOLUME TO CAPACITY. THIS IS A HIGH LEVEL ANALYSIS WHERE YOU LOOK AT ALL. THIS IS NOT A DETAILED ANALYSIS. WE LOOK AT AN ADP. THIS IS KIND OF A SCREENING PROCESS. AND THEN IN THE BACK OF THE REPORT I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT'S APPENDIX B OR C. WE HAVE THE SPECIFIC APPROACHES. AND YOU CAN PULL UP YOUR INTERSECTION IN THE AM AND PM. AND YOU'LL SEE THIS IS HOW BAD THE DELAY IS FOR WHETHER IT'S EASTBOUND OR WESTBOUND COLORS AT EACH INTERSECTION, AND IT'S BROKEN DOWN BY AM OR PM, AND THAT IS IN THE BACK. THIS THING, THIS IS THERE'S TWO PARTS OF THE INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATION. THIS IS WHAT THEY CALL THE CAPACITY ANALYSIS. THE CAPEX THIS WAS A SAFETY THE SPICE, THE THESE ACRONYMS. AND THEN YOU MOVE INTO THE DETAILED THE SYNCHRO ANALYSIS AND THE SIDRA ANALYSIS. THAT'S THE NEXT LEVEL, HIGH LEVEL. THEN YOU'RE GETTING INTO THIS. THAT'S AN ADT, AN AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC. AND THEN WE'RE GETTING INTO THE PEAK HOURS FOR THE APPENDIX B STUFF. IF I NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY THAT THE ROUNDABOUTS ARE SAFER. YEAH, GENERALLY FOR SURE.

I MEAN IT'S THERE. YEAH. THE AMOUNT OF CRASHES THAT ARE SEVERE AND FATAL ARE LESS ON THE ROUNDABOUT. YEAH. YOU CAN'T ARGUE THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING SLOWER IN THERE FOR SURE. RIGHT.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN ABOUT SOME OF THE RECENT STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE IN OTHER STATES THAT INDICATE THAT, PARTICULARLY FOR MULTI-LANE ROUNDABOUTS, YOU LOSE A LOT OF THE SAFETY AND SOME OF THOSE ROUNDABOUTS EVEN HAD MORE ACCIDENTS THAN YOUR TRADITIONAL INTERSECTION? THEY DO. AND IN EUROPE, THEY'VE INTRODUCED THESE THEY'RE ALMOST LIKE RAISED MEDIANS WITHIN THOSE TWO LANE ROUNDABOUTS. THEY'RE CALLED TURBO ROUNDABOUTS. YOU CAN GOOGLE IT AND YOU'LL SEE THAT THAT WAY IT DOES HELP THE SAFETY PART. AND YOU'RE RIGHT, THERE ARE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE FIRST INSTALLED AND THEY'RE TWO LANE ROUNDABOUTS AND YOU THERE ARE MORE CRASHES, BUT SPEAKING, THEY ARE LESS SEVERE CRASHES. BUT THE NUMBERS DO GO UP. BUT I MEAN, I'M JUST BEING HONEST WITH. THAT'S THE. AND I THINK ON ONE OF MY YOU. YOU'LL SEE IT ON. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH ONE IT IS, BUT THE TWO LANE ROUNDABOUT IN THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION WERE ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF CRASHES, BUT THE FATAL AND SEVERE CRASHES WERE LESS IN THE ROUNDABOUT. I MEAN, IT'S YES, THANK YOU. I GUESS FOR ME IT HAS TO DO WITH THE SPEED OF THE TRAFFIC THAT GOES DOWN THERE. I UNDERSTAND YOU, YOU CHOOSE. YOU KNOW, IDEAS ABOUT IT'S GOING TO SLOW TRAFFIC DOWN. BUT IF YOU'VE DRIVEN DOWN THAT ROAD, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S A CONCERT THAT GETS OUT OR WHATEVER, SOME OF THESE PEOPLE GO ABOUT 65, 70 MILES AN HOUR ON THAT ROAD. AND THEN THEY ESPECIALLY WHEN PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO PULL OUT OF THE. THE GOLF COURSE. AND ALSO THERE'S A DOCTOR'S OFFICE, PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, ARE A, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE TRYING TO JUST DODGE THAT TRAFFIC GOING OUT. SO A LOT OF IT WILL BE THE SPEED FACTOR THERE. IF WE WERE TO GO WITH A ROUNDABOUT, I WOULD SUGGEST LOWERING THAT SPEED LIMIT DOWN TO 35 MILES AN HOUR TO 40 BECAUSE I, BECAUSE I WOULD JUST MAKE THAT WHOLE STRETCH 35 MILES AN HOUR. IF YOU WANT TO PUT A ROUNDABOUT THERE, YOU'RE GOING TO SLOW THE HELL THESE PEOPLE DOWN. THAT'S THE WAY I LOOK AT IT. YEAH. YOU GOT A LOT OF SPEED DEMONS OUT THERE. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT CAUSES THESE CRASHES. PEOPLE AT INTERSECTIONS, AT ROUNDABOUTS. AND YOU SEE THE ACCIDENTS THAT YOU HEAR ALL THE TIME OR THAT YOU SEE IT'S SPEED, IT'S DRIVER BEHAVIOR. THAT'S ALL IT IS. YOU CAN I'VE, LIKE I'VE SAID BEFORE, I'VE NEVER SEEN A STOPLIGHT OR A ROUNDABOUT OR A SIGN. GO TO

[03:55:05]

TRIAL FOR KILLING SOMEBODY. I KNOW WE ALWAYS USE THAT TERM SOMEBODY'S LIFE, BUT PEOPLE WOULD SLOW THE HELL DOWN. WE WOULDN'T HAVE THESE PROBLEMS AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO WITH THESE AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO. AND SO, YOU KNOW, ON THAT END, YEAH, 35MPH ON THAT ROAD. WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THE CITY COULD DO? WOULD IT HAVE TO WARRANT YOU'D HAVE TO DO WARRANTS? I MEAN, THE TRAFFIC SPEED STUDY ON THAT ROAD. YEAH. USE THE 85TH PERCENTILE. YOU'D HAVE TO DO THAT STUDY ON IT. WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF WE CAN IF THAT QUALIFIES. RIGHT. NOT AT THIS TIME. WE DON'T. WELL, IF YOU IF YOU'VE GOT THE ROUNDABOUTS, IT SLOWS THEM DOWN ANYWAY. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET UP YOUR ROUNDABOUTS 60 MILES AN HOUR THAT WE SOMETIMES SEE.

YOU'D ONLY DO IT ONCE. YEAH. WELL, YEAH, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF LIKE, I THINK THE GOAL IS TO KEEP UP WITH THE GROWTH FOR ONE. AND EVENTUALLY THAT ROUNDABOUT WE'RE GOING TO OUTGROW BECAUSE THAT'S FOR LOW TRAFFIC AREAS, WHICH IS WHY IT WORKS INSIDE A NEIGHBORHOOD, EXCELLENT FOR NEIGHBORHOODS. EVEN IN OUR ORDINANCE, OUR FIRST ORDINANCE THAT WE CREATED, ALL OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN A NEIGHBORHOOD WAS SUGGESTED. IT WAS NOT FOR LIKE MAJOR THOROUGHFARES. THAT WAS NEVER THE GOAL OF THE ORDINANCE. AND SOME SOMEHOW IT GOT PUT INTO PEOPLE'S MINDS THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE ROUNDABOUTS AT EVERY INTERSECTION WITH THE QUOTE UNQUOTE ROUNDABOUT FIRST POLICY, AND NOW WE'RE CREATING AN ISSUE THAT WE GOT TO FIT THESE TWO LANE ROUNDABOUTS, WHICH I HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH LAND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE. IT'S GOING TO BE A MESS. WE HAVE BUSINESSES AND WE HAVE HOMEOWNERS. NOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE TAKING PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS. WE ALREADY HAVE THE YEAH WE DO. WE. YEAH, WE HAVE IT PROBABLY EVERYWHERE. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WAS A GOOD FIT. IT SITS THERE. THAT'S AN OPINION.

WELL, NO, IT FITS THERE. WE'VE ALREADY GOT ITS STRUCTURE. WE'VE GOT THE THE OKAY. THE UTILITIES. COUNCILMEMBER GOSA, I WANT TO KNOW ON THIS CORRIDOR WITH SUCH TRAFFIC FLOW, IF YOU'VE GOT THE ROUNDABOUTS INSTEAD OF TRAFFIC LIGHTS, HOW ARE YOUR EMERGENCY VEHICLES GETTING THROUGH THERE? IF THAT'S CLOGGED UP, SAME AS THEY DO NOW. SHE'S NOT ASKING YOU.

PLEASE LET HER ANSWER HER QUESTION. I KNOW IF YOU HAVE SIGNALS, THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES HAVE PREEMPTION ON A LOT OF THOSE SIGNALS. SO THEY DO GET PRIORITY ON THE NEWER SIGNALS.

THEY WOULD FIGURE OUT HOW TO, YOU KNOW, GO AS FAST AS THEY COULD IF IT WAS A ROUNDABOUT VERSUS BUT THERE IS SIGNAL PREEMPTION FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES ON THE NEWER SIGNALS.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL HAVE INSTALLED THOSE OR NOT. WE HAVE THOSE. YEAH. SO I MEAN, MY THOUGHT IS, IS IF THAT CORRIDOR IS CLOGGED UP, HOW DO YOU GET THAT PASS IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT SIGNAL PREEMPTION. YEAH, WE HAVE THAT PROBLEM NOW. OKAY. SO I THINK WE'RE DONE. IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE JUST MAKE A MOTION. WE CAN MOVE ON. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT AT COLORS CROSSING AND SANDERS AND CROSSING AT BANNERS, BOTH THAT WE USE ROUNDABOUTS. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS FOR BOTH SANDERS AND BENNER AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. HARRIS. YES. ZAPATA. OH.

ABSENT. FLORES. KEEL. NO. TOBIAS. WHAT THESE PEOPLE ARE CRYING FOR. YES. NO. MEDINA. NO.

MCKINNEY. YES. YES. MOTION FAILS. FOR LACK OF A OF A MAJORITY. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT DO WE WANT A TRAFFIC SIGNAL THERE? AND I HAVE A FUNNY FEELING THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO FAIL AS WELL. YEAH. I THINK WE KNOW WHERE WE STAND. OH WE DO. SO THERE'LL BE NO MOTION. MAKE A MOTION TO BRING THESE INTERSECTIONS BACK. ONCE WE HAVE A MAJORITY OR POTENTIAL MAJORITY, GET A NEW COUNCIL ON BOARD. SO THERE'S A MOTION. SOMEONE BRING A SECOND.

SECOND. OKAY. THERE IS A MOTION MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY TO BRING THIS BACK. ONCE THERE IS A MY MY MAJORITY COUNCIL, ALTHOUGH THERE IS A MAJORITY. SO THAT DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE THERE IS A MAJORITY PEOPLE HERE. YEAH. 17TH. YEP. YEP. I THINK DECEMBER 7TH IN DECEMBER. WELL YOU MIGHT HAVE A RUNOFF. SO JANUARY. YEAH. THAT RUNOFF WOULD BE IN DECEMBER. SO. BUT NO BECAUSE WAIT, WHAT IF WE HAVE A RUNOFF FOR DISTRICT THREE THREE. YEAH. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DECEMBER THE END. THAT WOULD BE IN JANUARY. YEAH. JANUARY. OH YEAH. SO I WOULD

[04:00:03]

JUST SAY BRING IT BACK MAYBE AFTER THE ELECTION FOR DISTRICT THREE. UNTIL THEN. YES. AND THAT'S JUST FOR THESE TWO. WE ALREADY GOT ONE TAKEN CARE OF. WE'RE IN AN IMPASSE FOR COLORS AND SANDERS. RIGHT. LET'S JUST MOVE ON. OKAY. WHAT IS THE MOTION? HOW ABOUT WE JUST SAY UNTIL DISTRICT TABLE THESE TWO UNTIL THE JANUARY 3RD MEETING? NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SAY JANUARY 3RD UNTIL DISTRICT THREE IS SEATED. SO WHO MADE THAT MOTION? I DID OKAY, WOULD YOU MIND SAYING UNTIL DISTRICT THREE IS SEATED? DO I NEED TO SAY IT ALL OVER AGAIN? DO WE UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE AT? YEAH. SECOND, TABLING UNTIL DISTRICT THREE IS SECOND. SOUNDS GOOD.

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6 TO 0. THAT'S FOR AGENDA. THAT'S FOR SANDERS AND BENTON. UP NEXT WE HAVE WENDY HILL A CHERRY CHERRY WOOD. AND THEY'RE SUGGESTING THE CONTINUOUS GREEN T, WHICH I LOVE THAT IDEA BECAUSE IT KEEPS TRAFFIC MOVING. SO WITH THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TO APPROVE THE CONTINUOUS GREEN T AT WENDY HILL AND CHERRY WOOD. SECOND. OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER. GOZA IS THERE ANY TALK? ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6 TO 0. UP NEXT WE HAVE LEMON ROAD AT BARTON CREEK ROUNDABOUT. TRADITIONAL.

THEY'RE SUGGESTING A TRADITIONAL LIGHT TRAFFIC. WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE LIGHT TRAFFIC AT LEMON AND BUTTON SECOND. ALL RIGHT. I'VE GOT A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MAYOR PRO TEM TOBIAS. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY YES. I AND I ALL OPPOSE. NAY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE MOTION PASSES, 5 TO 1. NEXT WE HAVE BUTTON CREEK AT GOFORTH ROAD. THEY'RE SUGGESTING A ROUNDABOUT. AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE A ROUNDABOUT AT BARTON CREEK ROAD AND AT GOFORTH SECOND. I GOT A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MEDINA. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES, SIX ZERO. ALL RIGHT. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. IT'S GETTING LATE. AND IN LIEU OF IT GETTING LATE, DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD FINISH ACTUAL COUNCIL BUSINESS FIRST? SINCE WE DID HAVE AN ITEM FROM LAST MEETING THAT GOT PUSHED. THAT HAS TO BE DISCUSSED TONIGHT. ALL RIGHT, SO THAT ONE WAS THE WATER ONE. YEAH. NUMBER 2828 I YEAH YEAH.

[28) (Tabled 10/5/2026) Consider and possible action to approve a Resolution to authorize the Interim City Manager to negotiate and execute an extension with the Nueces River Authority for the 2nd Option Fee payment deadline to April 30, 2027 and reassess participation at that time to include the following future Council considerations and action: Discontinuing the City’s participation in the project and: Declining to make the 2nd Option Fee payment of $273,763.00. Terminating the City's Option Contract with the Nueces River Authority. Authorizing the City Attorney to provide notice of termination and pursue repayment of the Option Fee paid in October 2025. ]

LET'S GO AHEAD. BRING IT. ALL RIGHT. AGENDA ITEM 28. CONSIDER AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN EXTENSION WITH THE NUECES RIVER AUTHORITY FOR THE SECOND OPTION FEE PAYMENT DEADLINE TO APRIL 30TH, 2027 AND REASSESS PARTICIPATION AT THAT TIME TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING FUTURE COUNCIL CONSIDERATIONS AND ACTIONS. I'M NOT GOING TO READ ALL THAT. IT'S ALREADY POSTED.

SO ITEM PRESENTER MIKE MURPHY. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR COUNCIL MIKE MURPHY, DIRECTOR OF WATER UTILITIES. SO WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT CURRENT STANDING OF OUR AGREEMENT WITH NUECES RIVER AUTHORITY FOR WATER DELIVERY. SO WHY ARE WE SEEKING A 10 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY? CURRENT FIRM WATER CAPACITY, WHICH IS OUR WATER WITH RESTRICTIONS, IS ABOUT 5.6 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY, EXCLUDING TEMPORARY LEASE AGREEMENTS. WITH OR WITHOUT THESE AGREEMENTS, THE CITY OF KYLE WOULD WOULD NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT CAPACITY TO MEET CURRENT PROJECTED DEMANDS BY 2029. R1C1D WATER SHOULD BE DELIVERED TO INCREASE FIRM WATER CAPACITY TO 7.6 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. THE 2025 WATER MASTER PLAN PROJECTS AVERAGE DAILY DEMAND OF ABOUT 10.5 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY BY 2033, AND 15.4 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY BY 2038. BASED ON CURRENT DEMAND PROJECTIONS, THE CITY COULD FACE SUPPLY DEFICIENCIES OF APPROXIMATELY 7.8 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY BY 2038. IF ADDITIONAL LONG TERM WATER SUPPLIES ARE NOT SECURED AND EXISTING LEASE AGREEMENTS ARE NOT RENEWED, SECURING APPROXIMATELY 10 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY PROVIDES THE CITY WITH LONG TERM WATER SUPPLY SOURCE THAT IS DROUGHT RESISTANT TO ADDRESS PROJECTED GROWTH, REDUCE RELIANCE ON SHORT TERM LEASE AGREEMENTS, AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY TO MEET FUTURE DEMANDS. HARBOR ISLAND DESAL PROJECT BACKGROUND THE NUECES RIVER AUTHORITY PARTNERED WITH IDE TECHNOLOGIES TO PURSUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 100 MILLION GALLON PER DAY SEAWATER DESALINATION PROJECT LOCATED ON HARBOR ISLAND IN ARANSAS PASS AREA NEAR CORPUS CHRISTI. THE PROJECT IS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED TO DELIVER POTABLE DRINKING WATER TO STAKEHOLDERS IN THE CENTRAL TEXAS REGION BY THE YEAR 2032. STAKEHOLDERS NEAREST TO THE CITY OF KYLE INCLUDE GREEN VALLEY, CRYSTAL CLEAR, S, U D AND COUNTY LINE SUDNRA ANTICIPATES THE ABILITY TO LOCK

[04:05:03]

A GUARANTEED PRICE PER THOUSAND GALLONS WITHIN THE NEXT 4 TO 6 MONTHS. ANTICIPATED COSTS AT THIS TIME IS APPROXIMATELY IN THE RANGE OF 10 TO $15 PER THOUSAND GALLONS. HARBOR ISLAND DESAL PROJECT BACKGROUND THE WATER DELIVERY PIPELINE IS INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT AND WILL BE BE FINANCED AND OWNED AND OPERATED BY NRE. THE DELIVERY POINT HAS NOT YET BEEN DETERMINED AND WILL BE ESTABLISHED AS PART OF THE PROJECT'S TRANSMISSION LINE SCOPE. ON OCTOBER 21ST, 2025, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO ACCEPT AN EXIT. I'M SORRY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO ACCEPT AND EXECUTE A RESERVATION FEE AND CONTRACT WITH THE NUECES RIVER AUTHORITY NRA FOR THE RESERVATION OF 11,201.44 ACRE FEET, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO APPROXIMATELY 10 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY PER THE CONTRACT. FIRST OF TWO REQUIRED PAYMENTS TO NRA AND THE AMOUNT OF $273,000 WAS MADE IN OCTOBER OF 25, THE SECOND PAYMENT OF 273,000 PLUS, YOU KNOW, IS DUE TO NRA ON OR BEFORE OCTOBER 31ST OF 2026. THERE ARE CONCERNS WITH THE HARBOR ISLAND PROJECT, THE OVERALL VIABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE OF THE PROJECT IS A CONCERN. TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST. NOT KNOWING WHAT THE EXACT COST IS GOING TO BE IS A CONCERN.

IDENTIFICATION OF THE AVAILABILITY OF PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES, FINANCING ASSUMPTIONS AND ASSOCIATED DEBT COSTS, FUTURE ANNUAL RESERVATION FEES AND FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS.

BEYOND THE INITIAL TWO OPTION FEE, PAYMENTS ARE UNCLEAR. TRANSMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DELIVERING TREATED WATER FROM APPROXIMATELY APPROXIMATELY 200 MILES TO THE CITY'S POINT OF CONNECTION. ADDITIONAL TREATMENT, OPERATIONAL MAINTENANCE AND COST NECESSARY TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH WATER QUALITY STANDARDS IS A CONCERN. AND THEN RECENT LEADERSHIP CHANGES AT THE NRA IS A CONCERN.

SO WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING ARE THE OPTIONS ARE AUTHORIZE THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN EXTENSION OF THE SECOND OPTION FEE PAYMENT FOR AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS ENDING ON APRIL 30TH, 2027. AUTHORIZE THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE PAYMENT OF THE SECOND OPTION FEE 200 OF $273,763 TO THE NUECES RIVER AUTHORITY, AND OPTION THREE IS TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE A REDUCTION IN THE CITY OF KYLE'S RESERVE CAPACITY FROM 10 MILLION TO 5 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY, WITH NO ADDITIONAL OPTION FEE PAYMENTS. OPTION NUMBER THREE IS PER NUECES RIVER AUTHORITY'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS HAS BEEN TAKEN OFF THE TABLE. SO OPTION FOUR DISCONTINUE THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE PROJECT, WHICH AND DECLINED TO MAKE THE SECOND OPTION FEE PAYMENT TERMINATE THE CITY'S OPTION CONTRACT WITH THE OASIS RIVER AUTHORITY AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE A NOTICE OF TERMINATION AND PURSUE REPAYMENT OF THE ORIGINAL OPTION FEE PAID IN OCTOBER OF 25. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME IS TO CONSIDER A AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN EXTENSION OF THE SECOND OPTION FEE PAYMENT DEADLINE TO TO APRIL 30TH, 2027 AND REASSESS PARTICIPATION AT THAT TIME TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING FUTURE COUNCIL CONSIDERATIONS AND POSSIBLE ACTIONS, WHICH IS DISCONTINUING THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE PROJECT. DECLINING TO MAKE THE SECOND OPTION FEE PAYMENT, TERMINATING THE CITY'S OPTION CONTRACT WITH THE OASIS RIVER AUTHORITY AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PURSUE REPAYMENT OF THE OPTION FEE PAID IN OCTOBER OF 2025. THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY. YEAH. WHEN THIS WAS KIND OF FIRST BROUGHT TO US A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO, I MEAN, IT WAS A RELATIVELY LOW RISK FOR POTENTIALLY BIG REWARD. AS TIME'S GONE ON OF MY CONFIDENCE IN THE ABILITY TO NRA TO DELIVER THIS HAS WANED DRAMATICALLY. WHEN THEY WERE HERE, I ASKED BLUNTLY, LIKE, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO PEOPLE WHO THINK YOU CAN'T DELIVER THIS? AND I DID NOT GET A SATISFACTORY ANSWER FROM THEM. SO I'M CERTAINLY OKAY WITH CONTINUING WITHOUT GIVING THEM MONEY, IF THEY'RE OKAY WITH THAT, AND MAYBE IF THEY CAN CONVINCE US OVER THE NEXT SIX MONTHS THAT THEY CAN DELIVER THIS, THIS PROJECT, THEN IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE. IF IT COMES TO FRUITION, IT IS ABSOLUTELY WORTHWHILE, BUT I AM I'M ALSO EQUALLY OKAY WITH NOT GIVING THEM ANY MONEY EVER AGAIN IF IT CAN'T BE DELIVERED. AND I THINK THAT'S THE STAFF'S

[04:10:02]

POSITION AND LEADERSHIP'S POSITION ALSO ON THIS PROJECT. THIS JUST GIVES US AN ADDITIONAL BASICALLY SIX MONTHS. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS. WE DID HAVE OUR FIRST STAKEHOLDER MEETING WITH NRA JUST YESTERDAY AND OR I'M SORRY, FRIDAY, AND WE GOT A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION FROM THEM, SUCH AS THE CONTRACT WITH I'D BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A CONSTRUCTION COST FOR THE DESAL PLANT. ALL OF THE PERMITS HAVE BEEN APPROVED, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IN THE WATER BUSINESS LONG ENOUGH. YOU KNOW, THE MOST DIFFICULT THING ON A LARGE WATER PROJECT IS THE PERMITTING FROM THE STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATORY AGENCIES. AND SO THEY HAVE COMPLETED ALL THAT. THEY GOT THEIR DISCHARGE PERMIT TO TAKE WATER THREE MILES OUT INTO THE GULF, WHICH IS THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS PREFERRED ROUTE TO DO THIS. AND THEN BY MARCH OF NEXT YEAR, WE WILL HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT THE COST PER THOUSAND GALLONS IS GOING TO BE. SO THERE ARE SOME BENEFITS TO IT AT NO COST TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER. HARRIS. YEAH, I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE COST FOR THE GETTING THE WATER TO US, WHAT OUR FINAL COST WILL BE, BECAUSE THAT HAS BEEN VERY UNCLEAR. AND THE DIESELS I'M FOR, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO DESAL SOMEWHERE SOMEHOW. MAYBE GRAHAM'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE DOING IT. BUT THE ONES THAT DO IT ON A LARGE SCALE ARE USING IT RIGHT THERE, LIKE SAN DIEGO. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT PIPING IT TO LONG DISTANCES LIKE THIS IS PROPOSING TO DO. WE CERTAINLY NEED A DIVERSE WATER PORTFOLIO. AND THAT'S WHY I VOTED TO MAKE THAT INITIAL PAYMENT. BUT I REALLY THINK IT TAKES A LOT MORE INVESTIGATION. IT COULD BE A HUGE COST TO THE CITY. AND BUT WE JUST DON'T KNOW THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY CAN PROMISE THAT UNTIL THE PLANT'S DONE. YEAH. AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE EXTENSION. THAT'S WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING THE EXTENSION SO WE CAN HAVE BETTER ANSWERS FROM THEM. AND AS SOON LIKE WE'RE GOING TO, WE'RE GOING TO START HAVING REGULAR MEETINGS WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS. THIS FIRST MEETING, LIKE I SAID, WAS THIS FRIDAY, AND WE HAD, I THINK AROUND 20 REPRESENTATIVES THERE THAT HAD QUESTIONS JUST LIKE COUNCIL, LIKE YOU GUYS ARE ASKING RIGHT NOW. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. DID DID THEY GIVE YOU THE PERMITS THAT THEY HAVE RECEIVED? LIKE, HAVE YOU SEEN THEM COPIES OF THEM? I'M SORRY, I COULDN'T HAVE YOU SEEN COPIES OF THE PERMITS TO TO ENSURE THAT THEY DO HAVE THE PERMITS? I HAVE NOT SEEN THE COPIES OF THE PERMITS, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN FALSIFY. RIGHT. BUT I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW I HAVE MY DRIVER'S LICENSE, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN I HAVE IT. SO THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE. BUT I CAN GET YOU, I CAN MAKE A I'M, I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO BE ON THE PHONE WITH NRA TOMORROW BASED ON THIS CONVERSATION AND MEETING TONIGHT. AND I'LL REQUEST THOSE PERMITS OR COPIES OF THOSE PERMITS. YES, THAT WOULD BE FANTASTIC. ALSO, DID YOU FIND OUT WHO ELSE HAS RENEWED THEIR CONTRACTS? OKAY. DO WE KNOW WHO ELSE HAS RENEWED IT? WE DO. NO, I JUST DON'T HAVE THEM ON THE TOP OF MY HEAD. BUT I'LL GET YOU THAT LIST ALSO.

OKAY? YEAH, BECAUSE I'M NOT COMFORTABLE GIVING THEM ANY MONEY UNTIL WE. IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE STABLE, 100% IN AGREEMENT ON THAT. OKAY. AND US GIVING PERES PERMISSION TO GO AND TRY TO NEGOTIATE, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE GOING TO ALLOW IT. RIGHT. IT'S JUST LIKE US GIVING THEM PERMISSION. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. AND WHEN WAS THIS? I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS THIS FRIDAY, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER BOARD MEETING BECAUSE THIS QUESTION CAME UP FROM SEVERAL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS WAS, COULD YOU GIVE US MORE TIME BEFORE WE MAKE OUR FINAL OPTION PAYMENT SO THAT TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL ARE ASKING TONIGHT. OKAY. BECAUSE LAST TIME I SPOKE TO THEM, THEY TOLD US THAT THEY WERE USING THE MONEY THAT WE PROVIDED. OTHER CITIES PROVIDED FOR THEIR OPERATIONS. SO TO PAY PEOPLE. RIGHT. AND I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. AND HE'S VERY CLEARLY SAID, YEAH, NO, THAT'S OKAY. AND THEY'RE OKAY DOING THAT. WE GET IT NOW. THEY DID.

THEY HAVE RECEIVED A $7 MILLION GRANT FROM THE FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS TO CONTINUE PAYING THE ORIGINAL DESIGN ENGINEER FOR THE FOR THE, THE TRANSMISSION LINE, WHICH IS LAM ENGINEERS.

AND I THINK WE EVEN MENTIONED THAT AT SOME POINT, OUR ENGINEER TO HELP US GET THE WATER TO THE CAL CITY LIMITS IS GOING TO BE PAID. DAWSON. OKAY. SO THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE WORKING IN TOWARDS THAT DIRECTION. SO THAT PROJECT IS GOING TO BE AT LEAST $1 BILLION AND THEY GOT 7 MILLION. SO MY QUESTION IS, ARE THEY GOING TO USE IT INITIALLY? YEAH. ARE THEY GOING TO. WELL, THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS A COUPLE YEARS. SO MY. AND IF THEY'RE USING INVESTMENTS FOR THEIR OPERATIONS, THAT'S A RED FLAG. BUT DO YOU KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO USE ANY OF THAT 7 MILLION FOR THEIR OPERATIONS. THE WORD THAT I GOT WAS THAT WAS GOING TOWARDS THEIR ENGINEERING CONTRACT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND I'M SURE YOU GUYS

[04:15:03]

ARE GOING TO COLLECT THEIR FINANCIALS TO ENSURE THAT THAT'S IN FACT, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BECAUSE I MAY VERY WELL BE, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PLANT ITSELF IS BEING BUILT, NOT BY NRA. NO, ONLY THE TRANSMISSION IS IS IN OUR A THE PLANT ITSELF IS THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI WORKING WITH THE COMPANY CALLED ID, WHICH IS A P3 CONTRACT. AND THEY'RE GOING TO THEY'RE GOING TO DESIGN, BUILD AND OPERATE AND BE THE WHOLESALER OF THAT WATER. AND THIS IS WHAT IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER WE HAD ONE GENTLEMAN HERE ON OUR WATER PALOOZA NIGHT WHERE HE EXPLAINED HOW THEY DO THAT. AND THEY, THEY BUILT OVER 400 OF THESE ACROSS THE WORLD. AND SO NRA HAS GREAT CONFIDENCE IN THEM. AND SO THEY'RE FINANCING THAT THAT I'M SORRY, THEY'RE FINANCING THAT. YES, THEY ARE NOT NRA, NOT NRA, BUT ID IS FINANCING THAT. AND ALSO THEY HAVE THAT WE FOUND OUT FRIDAY THAT THEY HAVE SECURED A 50 YEAR LEASE WITH THE 30 YEAR EXTENSION FOR THAT ISLAND TO BUILD A DESAL PLANT ON. ALL RIGHT. SO IF WE APPROVE THIS, IT'S ONLY GOING TO ALLOW MR. MOHIT TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN EXTENSION WITH THE NRA FOR THE SECOND OPTION FEE. SO MEANING WE'RE NOT PAYING ANY OF THIS. THAT'LL COME BACK TO COUNCIL IF WE'RE IF. CITY MANAGER PAVEZ IS SUCCESSFUL IN HIS NEGOTIATIONS, BECAUSE I HAVE EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT HE WILL BE, THEN NO, NO COST TO THE CITY. AND HE'LL GIVE US A SIX MONTH EXTENSION TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE CONCERNS. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT SAID, I'D LIKE TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 28. SECOND, GOT A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES, 6 TO 0. ALL RIGHT. WILL, WE TOOK THESE OUT OF ORDER. SO WE STILL HAVE AGENDA ITEM 22 AND 24. WE GOT TO GO TO. BUT I THINK WE MOVED UP AGENDA ITEM 29 AND 32. SO IT LOOKS LIKE 32 IS THE LAST ONE. WE NEED TO MOVE UP DISCUSSION

[32) Discussion and possible action regarding the transition from the Interim City Manager and establishment of a process and timeline for the selection and appointment of a permanent City Manager, including qualifications, eligibility, application, interview, evaluation, and appointment procedures.]

AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE TRANSITION FROM THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROCESS AND A TIMELINE FOR THE SELECTION AND APPOINTMENT OF A PERMANENT CITY MANAGER, INCLUDING QUALIFICATIONS, ELIGIBILITY, APPLICATION, INTERVIEW EVALUATION AND APPOINTMENT PROCEDURES. I'M PRESENTER MARK MCKINNEY. YES. THANK YOU. I THINK THERE'S A A LOT OF CONFUSION FROM THE COMMUNITY AS FAR AS WHAT THE TIMELINE LOOKS LIKE ON THIS. IF WE GO AND LOOK OUTSIDE OF, YOU KNOW, STAFF THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, WE'RE LOOKING AT A MINIMUM OF 3 TO 6 MONTHS TO FIND A FIRM TO DO A SEARCH, PROVIDE OPTIONS, AND THEN FOR US TO INTERVIEW AND HIRE SOMEBODY. SO I WANTED TO GET THE, THE BALL ROLLING AND THEN HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. MOHIT, HE TOLD ME THAT HE WAS READY TO STEP BACK INTO HIS OLD ROLE. AND SO I WAS LIKE, WELL, NOW IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S TIME TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION. SO I WOULD LIKE, FOR THE INTEREST OF FAIRNESS TO EVERYONE INVOLVED, FOR US TO HAVE A DISCUSSION IN EXECUTIVE ABOUT THIS BEFORE WE COME OUT AND MOVE FORWARD ON ANYTHING UNDER WHAT LEGALITY? I'M TALKING TO MARK MCKINNEY. I'M SORRY, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, SO WHY WOULD YOU ASK ME THAT? BECAUSE IF YOU'RE ASKING US TO GO IN THERE, I'M ASKING YOU WHY. WHAT QUALIFIES US TO HAVE A CONVERSATION IN THERE? YOU MUST HAVE A REASON. WELL, I THINK IT WOULD GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A VERY CANDID CONVERSATION ABOUT PROCESSES, AND THAT DOESN'T QUALIFY. NONE OF THAT QUALIFIES FOR EXECUTIVE AND AND ALLOW US TO NOT PANDER TO THE CAMERAS. NONE OF THAT QUALIFIES FOR A CONVERSATION IN EXECUTIVE. SO BUT WE CAN HAVE IT OUT HERE. THAT'S A THAT'S EVERYTHING THAT'S ON YOUR AGENDA IS TO BE OUT HERE. I MEAN, I LOOK AT THIS AND NOTHING SAYS WE HAVE THE. UNLESS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOMEONE'S JOB PERFORMANCE OR WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT CONTRACTS, LEGALITIES, ALL THAT NEEDS TO BE OUT HERE. SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND START. WITH YOUR ITEM, AMY, IS THERE A LEGAL REASON WHY WE COULD GO TO EXECUTIVE AND HAVE OUR CONVERSATION, DISCUSSION OF APPOINTMENT OR EMPLOYMENT OF A PERSONNEL MEMBER OF OUR PERSONNEL THAT'S APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL CAN BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION UNDER 551.07. FOUR OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. WAS THAT LEGAL ADVICE YOU GAVE HIM PRIOR TO THIS MEETING? I DON'T KNOW THAT I GOT INTO THE SECTIONS. NO, I DO BELIEVE WE JUST THAT HE AND I HAD A BRIEF CONVERSATION YESTERDAY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS DISCUSSION COULD BE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, AS IT GENERALLY DOES OCCUR THAT WAY WHEN WE APPOINT A CITY MANAGER.

[04:20:05]

OKAY. AS A REMINDER, YOU REPRESENT THE CITY OF KYLE, AND I PROVIDE THE SAME ADVICE TO YOU IF YOU ASK ME THAT QUESTION. WELL, THAT SHOULD BE OUT ON THE COUNCIL. SO I'M NOT COMFORTABLE GOING BACK INTO EXECUTIVE. IF OTHER PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO GO, WE CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

BUT I'M CONFUSED AS TO WHY I WOULD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO TALK ABOUT HIRING AND THE PROCESSES. I THINK OUR RESIDENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT OUR EXPECTATIONS ARE FOR THE NEW INCOMING CITY MANAGER. I, I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT PEOPLE WERE SAYING, WHICH IS THIS IS VERY PREMATURE. WE HAVE AT LEAST TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE GOING TO COME IF THINGS GO DIFFERENTLY, WE COULD HAVE UP TO FOUR. AND SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION ALL OVER AGAIN AS SOON AS WE HAVE FOUR PEOPLE SEATED. I WANT TO BE FAIR TO THEM. AND, I MEAN, WE CAN HAVE THE CONVERSATION NOW. IT COULD CHANGE AND THEN YOU CAN HAVE THE CONVERSATION LATER. ADDITIONALLY, MR. MOHIT'S CONTRACT IS FOR A YEAR. SO I'M NOT I'M NOT REALLY NOT SURE WHERE THIS IS COMING FROM. IT'S PROBABLY IT'S POLITICAL SEASON.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A POLITICAL ISSUE. NOT AT ALL. OKAY. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE WHY NOW? WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S OKAY TO ASK PERVEZ TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER, BUT WE HAD A CONVERSATION ONE ON ONE, AND HE SAID THAT HE WAS READY TO STEP BACK INTO HIS OLD ROLE.

I WOULD DEFINITELY HONOR MY CONTRACT COUNCIL MEMBER. SO THAT WAS IT WAS NEVER A MATTER OF IF I WAS UNHAPPY OR WANTED TO STEP BACK, I WOULD HAVE APPROACHED ENTIRE COUNCIL IN THAT MANNER. YEAH. MAY I ASK HOW THAT CONVERSATION GOT BROUGHT UP? COUNCILMEMBER MCKINNEY CAME TO MY OFFICE AND ASKED ME THAT QUESTION IF I WAS INTERESTED IN THE CITY MANAGER POSITION, OR IF I WAS GOING TO STEP BACK. AND I SAID TRUTHFULLY, YES, I WOULD LIKE TO BE THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND NOT CITY MANAGER. DID YOU MEAN RIGHT NOW? NO. OKAY.

BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE A VERY OPEN ENDED QUESTION. I DON'T THINK YOUR INTENT WAS EVER TO BE CITY MANAGER, WHICH IS WHY YOU LIVE IN LAKEWAY STILL. OOPS. I DIDN'T MEAN TO GIVE AWAY YOUR HOME, BUT THIS IS WHY YOU HAVEN'T MOVED TO KYLE. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF I WAS VERY HONEST WITH COUNCIL FROM THE GET GO. YEAH, WE KNEW YOU WERE GOING TO GO BACK, RIGHT. WHICH IS WHY YOUR CONTRACT WAS ONLY UNTIL MAY. THAT'S CORRECT. YOU KNOW, I'M I'M KIND OF TAKEN ABACK BY THIS BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WITH THE ELECTION BEING OUR NEXT MEETING AND THEN, I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER ONE PROBABLY IN JANUARY. IF IT GOES IF ANYTHING GOES TO A RUNOFF, LIKE I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE SOME RESPECT TO THE PEOPLE. WE COULD HAVE A WHOLE NEW MAYOR, AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT THAT THEY HAVE A SAY IN WHAT THEIR EXPECTATIONS FOR OUR FUTURE CITY MANAGER WILL LOOK LIKE. IF I COULD TAKE THIS A DIFFERENT WAY, IF YOU DON'T MIND, WHENEVER Y'ALL ARE DONE, GO AHEAD, MAYOR PRO TEM TOBY. OKAY, PEOPLE NEED TO GET OVER THIS ELECTION SCENARIO. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE CITY OF KYLE. WE HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY YEAR, OKAY? WE HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY YEAR. WE ALWAYS KEEP THROWING THIS IDEA OF HAVING THINGS POLITICAL. IT'S AGENDAS THAT ARE THERE. WE WE KNOW THE POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT GOING ON IN OUR COUNTRY AND OUR COMMUNITY. YOU GOT REPUBLICANS GOING AGAINST EACH OTHER. YOU GOT DEMOCRATS GOING AGAINST EACH OTHER. YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF CIVIC GROUPS THAT ARE VYING FOR THAT. SO LET'S PUT ALL THAT ASIDE. I DIDN'T KNOW MARK MCKINNEY WAS GOING TO I MEAN, I SAW THIS WAS ON THE AGENDA ITEM, AND I GOT A LOT OF PHONE CALLS OVER THIS ITEM, MR. MCKINNEY.

BUT I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS AGENDA ITEM ON MY OWN ALL SUMMER. OKAY. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I TOLD Y'ALL THAT NEXT YEAR IS GOING TO BE A VERY BIG YEAR, A LOT? I TOLD ALL Y'ALL, RIGHT? MARK MCKINNEY AND I NEVER TALKED ABOUT THIS AGENDA ITEM. I ACTUALLY JUST BROUGHT IT TO HIM TODAY. BUT THERE IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE A PROCESS. I TOLD YOU, ALL OF YOU, AFTER THE BUDGET WAS PASSED, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO START LOOKING AT THE PROCESS OF HOW WE ARE GOING TO GET A PERMANENT CITY MANAGER. NOW, I KNOW WE LIKE TO THROW THE POLITICAL SCENARIOS OUT THERE. IT'S ELECTION YEAR, IT'S ELECTION TIME, EARLY VOTING STARTED. WE HAVE THAT

[04:25:06]

EVERY SINGLE FREAKING YEAR. OKAY, SO WE NEED TO GET PAST THAT. WHAT I THINK, MR. MCKINNEY, YOU'RE BRINGING ON THIS WAS WE DO, IN A WAY, NEED TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS. NOT SAYING THAT WE HAVE TO VOTE ON ANYTHING TONIGHT, BUT WE NEED TO START PUTTING IT IN OUR HEAD DAIS THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO START LOOKING AT HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS PROCESS.

BECAUSE IF WE LOOK AT IT, WE'VE GOT ONE MORE MEETING IN NOVEMBER AND THE ELECTION'S OVER. AND THEN COMES DECEMBER. WE ALL KNOW EVERYTHING SLOWS DOWN IN DECEMBER. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT MAYBE HIRING A CONSULTANT COMPANY TO LOOK AT GETTING APPLICATIONS, DO A CITY STATEWIDE OR NATIONAL WIDE SEARCH LIKE WE DID WITH BRIAN LANGLEY? WHEN SCOTT SELLARS LEFT, WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THAT IN DECEMBER, AND WE NEEDED TO FINALIZE CONTRACTS BY THAT TIME BECAUSE BY JANUARY WE NEED TO GET ON THE BALL AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, BECAUSE, AGAIN, YOUR CONTRACT ENDS IN MAY, CORRECT, SIR? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO WE'VE GOT IN REALITY LESS THAN SIX MONTHS TO REALLY NAIL DOWN ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, EVEN IF YOU DECIDE TO STAY OR NOT. SO IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WE DO NEED TO START LOOKING AT CONSIDERATION ON THIS. IF EVERYBODY FEELS MORE COMFORTABLE WAITING FOR DECEMBER AFTER DECEMBER 13TH, I GUESS THAT'S WHEN MISS ZAPATA'S SEAT SHOULD BE UP AND RUNNING. WE CAN TAKE IT UP FROM THERE, BUT WE'RE ON THE CLOCK. LIKE I TOLD EVERYBODY BEFORE, WE'RE ON THE CLOCK. AS SOON AS THE BUDGET'S DONE, WE'RE ON THE CLOCK. ON EITHER FINDING A NEW CITY MANAGER, OR ARE WE GOING TO START LOOKING AT PROMOTING FROM WITHIN, OR WE'RE GOING TO HIRE A CONSULTANT COMPANY, OR ARE WE GOING TO RENEW CONTRACTS? I THINK IT IS BEST THAT, YOU KNOW, WE KEEP THAT IN MIND. AND AGAIN, TONIGHT WE COULD TABLE THIS ITEM. WE DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON IT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO NEED TO CONSIDER VERY, VERY SOON ON WHAT PLAN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE. I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO GET THIS MINDSET THAT JUST BECAUSE IT'S AN ELECTION YEAR, THAT EVERYTHING COMES TO A HALT. I GET IT THAT WE MIGHT HAVE SOME NEW PEOPLE ON BOARD, WHICH WE PROBABLY WILL, BECAUSE, DOCTOR HARRIS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, MA'AM. YOU WILL BE LEAVING THE DAIS BY IF UNLESS THERE'S A RUNOFF. BUT I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN IT COMES TO THIS SPECIFIC ITEM, I LOOKED AT IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY. I DIDN'T LOOK AT IT AS POLITICAL. I DIDN'T LOOK AT IT AS WE'RE TRYING TO FIRE YOU OR GET RID OF YOU OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT, TO ME, IT WAS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN IN THE BACK OF MY MIND. I KNEW WHEN WE WERE ABOUT READY TO GET DONE WITH OUR BUDGET. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I STAND ON IT. SO WE WANT TO JUST DISCUSS WHAT PROCEDURES OR ITEMS WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT. WE DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON ANYTHING BUT MARK MCKINNEY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IF THAT'S THE WAY YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS. OH, YOU'RE 100% RIGHT. I MEAN, WHEN WE WHEN WE ASKED PERVEZ TO STEP UP, THIS WAS THE TIMELINE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AND WE ALL AGREED UPON IN EXECUTIVE. SO WE AGREED TO TO BACKTRACK ON THAT IS ARGUABLY POLITICAL. YEAH. I DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE. I DON'T I DID NOT AGREE TO NOVEMBER. WE AGREED TO AFTER THE NEW YEAR AND AFTER THE ELECTION. RIGHT. WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A PERMANENT SOLUTION IN Q1 OF NEXT YEAR, WHICH THE TIMELINE IS YOU START IN OCTOBER IF YOU'RE GOING TO SEEK OUTSIDE ASSISTANCE SO THAT YOU HAVE THAT IN PLACE WHEN YOU MAKE THAT DECISION. THAT WAS THE CONVERSATION. YEAH. WELL, WE DON'T HAVE IT RECORDED, SO LUCKILY WE DO NOW. BUT MY RECOLLECTION AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT ANYBODY ELSE'S RECOLLECTION IS, WAS WE WERE GOING TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION TO START LOOKING FOR A NEW CITY MANAGER, BECAUSE I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD DO THIS. PRIOR TO HAVING FOUR NEW, POSSIBLY FOUR NEW SEATED PEOPLE. BUT WE KNOW FOR SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO. MANAGERS. EVERY ELECTION CYCLE IS NOT A NORMAL THING. THAT'S LOOK, I GET THAT. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, DO ARE WE GOING TO HAVE THIS SAME CONVERSATION IN JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH WHEN SOMEBODY ELSE IS ON HERE? WE PROBABLY ARE. OKAY. SO WHY ARE WE HAVING IT NOW? WHAT I'M JUST SAYING IS THAT ON THIS MAYOR IS THAT HE'S JUST BRINGING THIS AGENDA ITEM FORWARD. AND THAT'S HOW I'M VIEWING THIS AS, OKAY. SO WE JUST NEED TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION WHILE WE HAVE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE. WE ARE NOT MAKING ANY DECISIONS. IF WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH THE CONSULTING COMPANY, IT'S JUST TO START THE CONVERSATION. THEN

[04:30:02]

LET'S START THE THAT'S ALL IT IS. OKAY, START. LET'S TALK ABOUT IT. WHAT IS BECAUSE HE AUTOMATICALLY SAID HE WANTED TO GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO I WASN'T COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.

AND IF YOU'RE ASKING WHY THINGS LOOK A LITTLE PARTICULAR OR PECULIAR, IT'S BECAUSE YEAH, YOU AUTOMATICALLY SAID, LET'S GO TO EXECUTIVE. THAT IS NOT THE TRANSPARENT WAY TO COME OUT HERE AND TALK ABOUT A PROCESS. AND THEN RIGHT AWAY, AMY STARTS TALKING ABOUT WHY HE CAN'T. AND I ASKED HER TO LET HIM ANSWER. AND THEN AT THE END, AFTER HE ANSWERS, HE LOOKS AT HER AND SHE LOOKS AT HIM AND SHE GIVES A REASON. SO PLEASE DON'T TALK LIKE I'M CRAZY AND I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT'S GOING ON BECAUSE I'M ABSORBING ALL OF THIS INFORMATION. NOBODY'S SAYING YOU'RE CRAZY. WELL, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE, LET'S NOT MAKE IT POLITICAL. I AM UPSET ABOUT IT BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE IT WASN'T SO CUT AND DRY THE WAY MAYOR PRO TEM TOBIAS IS TRYING TO MAKE IT LOOK. IT'S THERE'S MORE TO IT. AND IF PEOPLE CAN'T SEE THAT, I'M SORRY, I, I SAW WHAT I SAW I SAW THE CONVERSATION INTO IT BECAUSE WHEN I ASKED AMY THEN IF SHE HAD TALKED WITH YOU, SHE SAID YES. SO I'M CURIOUS WHY THE SUGGESTION TO GO BACK INTO EXECUTIVE. I'M NOT A FAN OF EXECUTIVE TO BEGIN WITH. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO ASK ME IN THE MIDDLE OF A MEETING ON AN ITEM THAT'S NOT EVEN PRESENTED AS EXECUTIVE, TO GO BACK THERE AND TALK, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY. I THINK THAT'S FAIR. THAT'S NOT THAT'S FAIR TO THE COUNCIL.

THAT'S FAIR TO THE THE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE. IT'S FAIR TO THE PEOPLE WATCHING. WELL, SPECIFICALLY, WE HAVE SEVERAL OPTIONS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO US. WE CAN PUT AN RFP OUT FOR FIRMS TO TO DO A NATIONWIDE SEARCH. WE COULD HIRE A CONSULTANT TO DO A SEARCH FOR US. WE COULD TALK ABOUT PROMOTING FROM WITHIN. IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT PROMOTING FROM WITHIN, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT FROM THE DAIS, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT OUR CURRENT STAFF AND OUR CURRENT EMPLOYEES. AND I FEEL LIKE IT IS INAPPROPRIATE TO DISCUSS THAT OPENLY. THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA TO DISCUSS. HOW DOES THAT NOT FALL UNDER DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING TRANSITION FROM THE ICM AND ESTABLISHING OF A PROCESS AND TIMELINE FOR THE SELECTION AND APPOINTMENT OF A PERMANENT CITY MANAGER? BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING A SPECIFIC PERSON WITHIN THE CITY THAT NEEDS TO BE STATED ON THE ITEM, WELL, WE CAN TALK ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS, ELIGIBILITY, ELIGIBILITY, APPLICATION, INTERVIEW. YEAH, WE COULD DO ALL THAT RIGHT HERE. APPOINTMENT PROCEDURES. THAT'S NONE OF THAT QUALIFIES. THAT IS ALL WITHIN THE PURVIEW. AGREED. BEG TO DIFFER. YOU. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT A PROCESS IN EXECUTIVE ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO HIRE OUR INTERIM CITY MANAGER. ARE YOU SAYING THAT IS THAT QUESTION FOR ME OR FOR HIM? IT'S FOR HIM. OKAY. IF WE'RE DISCUSSING EXPENSES AND POSSIBLE CONTRACTS. NO, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTRACTS. AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO UNTIL WE TALK ABOUT THEM. WE'RE NOT GOING TO UNTIL WE HAVE AN EMPLOYEE THAT WE WANT TO HIRE OUT HERE, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IS EXPECTED, THAT WHAT WE WANT OUR NEXT CITY MANAGER'S CONTRACT TO LOOK LIKE. IT'S NOT SPECIFIC. SO WE CAN HAVE THAT OUT HERE. IF WE HIRE SOMEBODY AND WE WANT SPECIFIC THINGS IN THERE, WE CAN GO BACK AND TALK ABOUT THAT SPECIFIC CONTRACT. THERE'S NO REASON FOR A GENERALIZED CONTRACT TO BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE. IN FACT, I WOULD LOVE IT IF OUR RESIDENTS CAME UP AND GAVE US FEEDBACK ON WHAT THEY WANTED TO SEE IN THEIR CONTRACT. THEY'RE THE ONES PAYING FOR IT. SO IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE, LET'S TALK ABOUT IT. BUT I FEEL LIKE WE'RE JUST GOING TO DO THIS AGAIN IN JANUARY. WELL, I THINK OUT OF DUE RESPECT TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE, IT WAS THERE ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY SUGGESTIONS ABOUT HOW WE WOULD GO ABOUT GOING WITH ANY FORMS OF WRITING, THE QUALIFICATIONS AND ELIGIBILITY? I'M JUST TRYING TO REMEMBER HOW WE DID IT WHEN WE WERE LOOKING FOR THE CITY MANAGER BEFORE WE GOT BRIAN LANGLEY, WHAT KIND OF ADVICE WE WOULD GET, WHERE WE WOULD GO, AND IF WE FEEL LIKE IF WE NEED A TABLE, THIS ITEM, IF YOU ALL FEEL COMFORTABLE, WE TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL JANUARY, THEN WE'LL BE ON THE CLOCK IN JANUARY. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE A FEELING WITH THAT? ANYBODY OVER HERE WANT A TABLE INSIDE UNTIL AFTER THE JANUARY OR FEBRUARY? LET'S DO COUNCIL MEMBER MEDINA FEBRUARY. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. WHEN WE DID HIRE BRIAN LANGLEY AS A CITY MANAGER, WAS THAT THROUGH A CONSULTANT DIRECTLY OR THROUGH A HIRING AGENCY? HOW DID WE FIND THAT PERSON THROUGH AFYON? IT'S A THIRD PARTY. AND HOW LONG DID IT TAKE US TO FIND HIM? I THINK IT WAS LIKE 2 OR 3 MONTHS, 2 OR 3 MONTHS, AND WE HAD THAT CONTRACT BY THAT

[04:35:03]

JANUARY. I REMEMBER THAT. OKAY, JUST A QUESTION SINCE I WASN'T HERE FOR THAT COUNCIL MEMBER.

GOZA. SO WHENEVER I'VE HAD INVOLVEMENT WITH HEADHUNTERS, PLACEMENT AGENCIES, ETC. THEY WILL USUALLY COACH YOU THROUGH THAT. SO I MEAN, IF ANYTHING, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LIST OF POTENTIAL COMPANIES THAT WE CAN USE OUTSIDE OF AFYON AND HAVE THAT PRESENTED BACK TO US AND SEE WHAT THE TIMELINE IS, WHAT TYPE OF COACHING THEY MIGHT GIVE US IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THOSE QUALIFICATIONS, AND THEN WHAT THEIR COST FOR THAT IS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A ROBUST VIEW OF WHAT THOSE OPTIONS LOOK LIKE. THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD BE WILLING TO PUT FORWARD AS A VOTE TONIGHT, IS TO HAVE THOSE OPTIONS BROUGHT BACK TO US AT A LATER DATE. OKAY. WELL, I THINK SOME OF THAT ALSO INCLUDED A DISCUSSION WITH COUNCILMEMBER MCKINNEY ABOUT NOT HIRING OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF KYLE, JUST HIRING INTERNALLY. SO BUT IF IF IT'S WORTH DISCUSSING. YEAH, I THINK ME TOO, BUT I BUT THAT'S GOING TO BE CONTRARY TO GETTING. WE COULD DO BOTH. WE CAN BE UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE CAN HIRE WITHIN. BUT THEN IF YOU GUYS WANT TO HAVE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE TO HIRE A THIRD PARTY, THAT'S GOING TO COST MONEY AS WELL, I THINK AFYON WAS 20, 20 OR $30,000. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GUYS WANT THAT TO LOOK. I MEAN, FOR ME, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE OPTIONS, YOU KNOW, OR AT LEAST I FEEL LIKE IF WE'VE GOT INTERNAL, I WOULD RATHER HAVE THEM COME OUT OF AN ENTIRE POOL OF CANDIDATES FOR THE MOST EQUITABLE HIRING THAT WE CAN DO. OKAY. I MEAN, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I WE CAN GIVE DIRECTION TO DO THAT. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME DIRECTION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE IN JANUARY. AND WHEN WE COME JANUARY, WE GOT A BRAND NEW COUNCIL, WE CAN ADJUST IT, BUT AT LEAST IT KIND OF GIVES THE CONVERSATION. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST STARTING THE CONVERSATION. SO IF YOU FEEL THAT WE NEED TO TABLE THIS TILL JANUARY 5TH, WHEN EVERYBODY'S ALL SIGNED ON BOARD, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION, THEN MAYOR, IF YOU FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT LOOK ON THAT. I MEAN, IT'S IT'S JUST A CONVERSATION. I THINK I KNOW, I KNOW YOU'RE ASKING ME THE SAME QUESTION THAT YOU'VE ASKED ME BEFORE, BUT I THINK I'VE MADE IT VERY CLEAR WHAT I WANT TO DO. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO STOP THE CONVERSATION FROM HAPPENING. THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE A MAYOR THAT LET'S EVERYBODY BE WHO THEY ARE. OKAY? AND SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PAUSE IT, THAT'S FINE. IF YOU'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT IT, THEN I THINK WE NEED TO DO THAT. MY ONLY FEAR OF GIVING DIRECTION TO STAFF IS THEY HAVE LIMITED TIME. AND SO IF WE GIVE THEM DIRECTION TO DO SOMETHING AND IT'S NOT WHAT WE END UP DOING, WE'RE GOING TO WASTE THEIR TIME. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION. THAT'S ALL IT WAS TONIGHT. THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. YEAH. AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS. SO COUNCIL MEMBER GOZA WOULD LIKE TO DO. DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION ON THAT? I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO BRING BACK UP OPTIONS FOR HEADHUNTING AGENCIES, EXECUTIVE PLACEMENT AGENCIES FOR COUNCIL REVIEW, AS WELL AS TIMELINES THAT THEY WOULD NEED IN ORDER TO SECURE A PLACEMENT AND COST. SECOND. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER GOZA AND A SECOND BY MYSELF. ANY OTHER CONVERSATION? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE AYE. OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. BESIDES THAT, IS THERE ANY OTHER MOTION PASSES? SIX ZERO. IS THERE ANY OTHER CONVERSATION YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE? NOT AT THIS TIME. THAT

[22) Consider approval of a Resolution approving a request by Diamond Communications for a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Ch. 53A, Article II, Part D, Section 3 of the City of Kyle Code of Ordinances to allow a wireless telecommunication facility on property located at 19206 Marketplace Avenue. (CUP-26-0168) The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval on 9/8/2026. Public Hearing ]

WAS IT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AGENDA ITEM. WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO AGENDA ITEM 22.

CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST BY DIAMOND COMMUNICATIONS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CHAPTER FIVE THREE A ARTICLE TWO, PART D, SECTION THREE OF THE CITY OF KYLE. CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ALLOW WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 19206 MARKETPLACE AVENUE. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION VOTED FIVE ZERO TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL ON NINE EIGHT 2026, AND THIS DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL OPEN THAT AFTER YOU GET THE PRESENTATION. ALL RIGHT. SOUNDS GOOD. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCIL. TONIGHT I HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED CELL TOWER FOR YOU. THE APPLICANT SEEKS TO CONSTRUCT A 150 FOOT TALL MONOPOLE CELL TOWER ON CITY OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 19206 MARKETPLACE AVENUE. THE PROPERTY IS IN THE PLUM CREEK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND IS ZONED PLUM CREEK LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THE WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES ARE NOT EXPLICITLY LISTED AS A PERMITTED USE IN ANY ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE PLUM CREEK POD. HOWEVER, THERE IS A SECTION THAT ALLOWS USES NOT OTHERWISE LISTED TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS. THE CITY HAS EXECUTED A GROUND LEASE OPTION WITH DIAMOND COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CELL TOWER ON THIS PROPERTY. FOLLOWING

[04:40:03]

EXECUTION OF THE GROUND LEASE OPTION, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE USE WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED AND WOULD REQUIRE A CUP TO AUTHORIZE THE USE. THE PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO EXISTING WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS, THE CITY'S WATER STORAGE FACILITIES AND THE FUTURE SAINT DAVID'S HOSPITAL SITE. ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE UPRR RAILROAD TRACKS IS THE A C C HAYES CAMPUS. THERE ARE NOT ANY RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY THAT MAY POSE A RISK OR PROHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CELL TOWER AT THIS LOCATION. THE APPLICANT HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE PROPOSED TOWER WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH OR PROHIBIT THE HOSPITAL FROM ESTABLISHING A HELIPAD ON ITS PROPERTY, AND THEY WILL ALSO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PLUM CREEK LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, AS WELL AS THE CITY STANDARDS FOR WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES UNDER CHAPTER 53. THERE ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE FAA AND FCC REQUIREMENTS. HERE IS A SITE PLAN SHOWING WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE ON THE PROPERTY. THE OPTIONS TONIGHT ARE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED, APPROVE WITH MODIFICATIONS OR DENY THE REQUEST. STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PROPOSED PLANS AND BELIEVE A CELL TOWER IS APPROPRIATE AT THE PROPOSED LOCATION AND WITHIN THIS PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT. ALLOWING THE CELL TOWER TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON THIS SITE WILL IMPROVE CELL SERVICE IN THE AREA FOR RESIDENTS AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST. ALL RIGHT.

COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE PICTURE AND SHOW US WHERE IT'S AT? SORRY. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S MUCH NEEDED. WELL, I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TWO MORE WHEN I FIRST MY TURN FIRST BEGAN. I THOUGHT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE TWO MORE. WE DO HAVE SEVERAL GROUND LEASE OPTIONS WITH DIAMOND COMMUNICATIONS. THIS IS THE FIRST LOCATION THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT. ALL RIGHT, LET'S SEE. I COULD HAVE SWORN WE'D ALREADY VOTED ON THIS AND APPROVED IT FOR THE GROUND LEASE OPTION. YES, BUT IT WAS DETERMINED AFTER THAT POINT THAT THE USE ISN'T TECHNICALLY PERMITTED. AND SO WE'RE HERE WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. WE STILL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

OH YOU'RE RIGHT MAN. I WAS JUST SO EXCITED. ALL RIGHT. THIS ITEM HAS A PUBLIC HEARING, SO IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK, NOW'S YOUR TIME TO DO IT. OKAY. SEE NO ONE. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND I'M ALSO GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 22 SECOND. ALL RIGHT. I GOT A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY MCKINNEY.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED. ITEM PASSES SIX ZERO. ALL RIGHT. NOW I NEED TO GO

[24) Consider approval of a Resolution of the City of Kyle approving a Resolution by the Board of Directors of the Alliance Regional Water Authority (ARWA) authorizing the issuance of contract revenue bonds, Series 2026B, in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $12,070,000.00 for the City of Kyle, Texas in connection with the regional water supply contract project. ]

BACK AND FIGURE OUT WHERE WE WERE AT 2424. ALL RIGHT. HERE WE GO. I CAN TELL COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS HAS BEEN WAITING FOR THIS BECAUSE GRAHAM HAS BEEN WAITING FOR THIS WATER.

OKAY. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF KYLE APPROVING WEIGHT OF A RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ALLIANCE REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CONTRACT REVENUE BONDS SERIES 2026 B AND AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 12,070,000 FOR THE CITY OF KYLE, TEXAS. IN CONNECTION WITH THE REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT. PROJECT ITEM PRESENTER MIKE MURPHY. THANK YOU MAYOR. GOOD EVENING AGAIN. COUNCIL MEMBERS MIKE MURPHY, DIRECTOR OF WATER UTILITY. SO I'D LIKE TO JUST READ THIS IS APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE OUR ALLIANCE REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY FOR ISSUANCE OF A $12,070,000 CONTRACT REVENUE BOND SERIES OF 2026 B AND OUR GUEST GUEST SPEAKER TONIGHT REPRESENTING ARWA IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ALLIANCE REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY, GRAHAM MOORE. SO JUST A LITTLE HISTORY. THE CITY OF KYLE IS ONE OF THE PARTICIPATING SPONSOR ENTITIES IN THE ARWA SYSTEM. IN JANUARY OF 2008, THE CITY APPROVED AND EXECUTED A REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT WITH THE AUTHORITY FOR THE FINANCING, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS. THE CITY'S OVERALL AGREED UPON SHARE CONTRIBUTION IS 28.17%. AS FUNDING NEEDS ARISE, THE CITY OF KYLE REQUESTS THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE CONTRACT REVENUE BONDS TO COVER THE CITY'S SHARE OF CONTRIBUTIONS FOR FINANCING WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS. THESE BONDS TYPICALLY ARE TYPICALLY PAID BACK OVER A 30 YEAR PERIOD. ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE, PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST AMOUNTS DUE ARE PAID FROM THE CITY'S WATER UTILITY SYSTEM. UNDER OUR WATER RATE STRUCTURE. BONDS ISSUED BY ARWA FOR THE CITY OF KYLE IN THE PAST. THIS IS A LIST OF I WON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE, BUT THIS GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO TO THE. HAYS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES CONTRACT BEFORE IT BECAME. ARWA. SO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. AT THIS POINT, WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS AT THE END OF

[04:45:02]

THIS, BUT AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO GRAHAM, AND HE'S GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH HIS BOND PRESENTATION. YEAH GOOD TO SEE YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MIKE. EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL, JUST WITH ME. I HAVE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE THAT CAN HELP ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. IN ADDITION TO MYSELF. AGAIN, FOR THE RECORD, I'M GRAHAM MOORE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ALLIANCE REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY. WE HAVE JENNIFER RITTER, WHO IS OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR WITH SPECIALIZED PUBLIC FINANCE, AND CLAYTON CHANDLER, OUR BOND COUNSEL WITH MCCALL, PARKHURST AND HORTON. FIRST OF ALL, I WAS BEFORE YOU SEPTEMBER AND GAVE AN UPDATE AS TO WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE PROJECT. THERE'S BEEN NO SIGNIFICANT UPDATES SINCE THAT POINT IN TIME, BUT I DID WANT TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW ITEMS LEADING UP TO THIS BOND ISSUANCE, WHAT WE CALL THE PHASE 1C1D PROGRAM, OR THE CARRIZO EXPANSION PROGRAM, WILL ADD AN ADDITIONAL JUST SHY OF 2300 ACRE FEET OF WATER SUPPLY FOR THE CITY OF KYLE. WE'RE SCHEDULED TO HAVE THAT WATER BEGIN DELIVERY IN JANUARY OF 2029. THE PROJECT DOES REQUIRE ADDITIONAL DEBT FINANCING BY THE ALLIANCE WATER SPONSORS. JUST AS A REMINDER, WE HAVE SEVERAL DIFFERENT PROJECTS THAT ARE PARTIALLY FUNDED BY THIS ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUEST. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF THESE THAT ARE BEING LED BY OUR CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK OR SEYMOUR.

THOSE ARE THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION AND CLARIFICATION. THOSE COMBINED ARE WHAT WE CALL GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE NUMBER ONE. AND THEN OUR BOOSTER PUMP STATION EXPANSION, RAW WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH ARE COMBINED INTO OUR GUARANTEED MAX PRICE NUMBER TWO. AND THEN FINALLY, THE WATER TREATMENT SOLIDS HANDLING, WHICH IS WILL BE HANDLED AS GMP NUMBER THREE. OUTSIDE OF THOSE, WE HAVE THE WELL DRILLING, ACTUAL INSTALLATION OF THE SEVEN WELLS THEMSELVES, WHICH WILL BE DIRECTED BY ALLIANCE WATER DIRECTLY WITHOUT THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE SEYMOUR. THIS IS THE FUNDING SUMMARY OF ALL THOSE PROJECTS COMBINED. THIS IS THE TOTAL PROJECT COST, NOT ONLY CONSTRUCTION, BUT ALSO ALL THE SOFT COST OF ENGINEERING ACQUISITIONS, EVERYTHING RELATED TO THAT. AS A REMINDER, WE ARE PARTNERED IN SOME OF THESE PROJECTS WITH THE GUADALUPE-BLANCO RIVER AUTHORITY. THEY'VE GOT SEPARATE CONTRACTS WITH ENTITIES FOR THEIR SUPPLIES OF THE WATER. SO YOU SEE THE TOTAL COLUMN THERE IS. THE SECOND COLUMN IS THE TOTAL PROJECT COST. AND THE ALLIANCE WATER SHARE IS THE FINAL COLUMN ON THE RIGHT SIDE. THE DIFFERENCE IN COST THERE PICKED UP BY GBRA. AS A RESULT OF THIS, THE TOTAL RWA SHARE IS JUST SHY OF 164 MILLION. WE CURRENTLY HAVE FUNDING IN HAND OF ABOUT 121 MILLION, LEAVING THE CURRENT DEFICIT OF ABOUT 42,840,000. AS NOTED, THE CITY HAS A WATER SUPPLY AGREEMENT WITH ALLIANCE REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY AND THE OTHER SPONSORS AND PARTNERS IN THE REGION THAT SET OUT THE PERCENT SHARES THAT THE CITY PAYS OF PROJECT COSTS, AND IT'S ALSO EQUIVALENT TO THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT THE CITY RECEIVES. AND SO FOR CITY OF KYLE, THAT 42,840,000 TOTAL RESOLVES DOWN TO $12,070,000 OF NEED. AND THEN YOU SEE ON THIS SLIDE THAT THE REMAINING SPONSORS, WHAT THEIR SHARES OF THOSE COSTS ARE. OUR INTENT IS TO HAS BEEN TO SEEK FUNDING THROUGH THE STATE OF TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD, AND PARTICULARLY THE SWIFT PROGRAM. THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE USED DATING BACK TO 2015. IT'S THE LOWEST PRICE FINANCING WE CAN FIND. IT'S WE BORROW AT THE STATE'S CREDIT RATING, AND THEN THEY OFFER SUBSIDIES BELOW THAT RATE. SO IT'S CHEAPER THAN ANY FINANCING WE CAN GET, EITHER BY OURSELVES ON THE OPEN MARKET OR IN ANY OTHER WAY. SO IN THIS CASE, THE RATE IS LOCKED IN. AS OF LATE SEPTEMBER, THE WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD SOLD THE BONDS. AND FOR THE 30 YEAR NOTE, IT'S A 4.45% INTEREST RATE. UNFORTUNATELY, INTEREST RATES HAVE CLIMBED A BIT OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS. AND WE SEE THAT HERE IN THIS OVERALL TABLE. BUT IT'S STILL, AGAIN, A BETTER RATE THAN WE COULD GET VIA OTHER FINANCING MECHANISMS. ONE ITEM OF NOTE IS OUR BOARD PASSED OUR BUDGET IN AUGUST OF THIS YEAR. WE AT THAT TIME HAD ASSUMED A HIGHER DEBT LEVEL. AND SO BECAUSE WE'RE ABLE TO LOCK IN AT A LOWER AMOUNT OF DEBT TOTAL, WE'RE GOING TO REVISE OUR BUDGET AND DECREASE THE AMOUNT THAT WE NEED BACK FROM OUR SPONSORS IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR FOR DEBT SERVICE. AND SO WE'LL OUR BOARD WILL TAKE UP THAT ACTION AT ITS MEETING LATER THIS MONTH. AND SO WE'LL PASS ALONG THAT REDUCTION TO EACH OF THE SPONSORS AS WELL. FINALLY, WHILE WE'RE HERE TONIGHT, WE'RE SEEKING APPROVAL OF THIS FROM ALL THE COUNCILS AND BOARDS. EARLIER TONIGHT, BUDA AND SAN MARCOS COUNCILS APPROVED THEIR BOND RESOLUTIONS. CANYON REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY APPROVED THEIRS LAST NIGHT. WE HAVE A COUPLE ADDITIONAL SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT APPROVALS THAT WE NEED TO GET OVER THE NEXT TWO NIGHTS, AND THEN WE WILL COME BACK AND OUR BOARD WILL TAKE ACTION NEXT WEEK AT OUR MEETING ON OCTOBER 28TH. ASSUMING EVERYTHING PASSES, THEN WE WILL CLOSE ON THOSE LOANS BY DECEMBER 1ST, 2026 AND IN THE NEXT FISCAL. IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, WE WILL HAVE AN INTEREST ONLY PAYMENT THAT'S DUE IN AUGUST OF

[04:50:02]

2027. AGAIN, THAT'S THE ONE WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO REDUCE AS A RESULT OF OUR FINANCING NEEDS, LOWERING A LITTLE BIT. AND SO THE TWO OPTIONS, I THINK, THAT ARE PRESENTED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION OR TO NOT APPROVE THE RESOLUTION, I WOULD HIGHLY NOT RECOMMEND OPTION TWO IS THAT WE DO NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE PROJECTS. AND IN ORDER TO GET THE ADDITIONAL WATER SUPPLY AVAILABLE TO THE CITY OF KYLE. SO I'LL STAND BY FOR ANY QUESTIONS. AGAIN, WE ALSO HAVE OUR BOND COUNCIL AND FINANCIAL ADVISORS. IF THERE'S ANY OTHER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS WE CAN ANSWER. ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. LOOKING FOR A MOTION? I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE RESOLUTION FOR OUR.

BONDS IN 12 MILLION 712 MILLION, $70,000 FOR THE CITY OF KYLE. ALL RIGHT. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS AND A SECOND BY MYSELF. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES, SIX ZERO. I'D LIKE TO THANK DOCTOR HARRIS FOR YOUR SERVICE ON OUR BOARD OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE WORKING WITH YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THANK YOU ALL THIS EVENING. ALL RIGHT. THANK. WE HAVE TWO ITEMS LEFT. AND THESE SHOULD

[30) Discussion and possible action to direct staff to review Section 29-17 of the City of Kyle Code of Ordinances and bring back proposed amendments to address the regulation of all billboards within the city limits, including traditional static and electronic billboards, and to evaluate and reconcile the ordinance with the number and types of billboards currently existing within the city.]

HOPEFULLY BE PRETTY QUICK. SO AGENDA ITEM 30 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO REVIEW SECTION 29-17 OF THE CITY OF KYLE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND BRING BACK PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ADDRESS THE REGULATION OF ALL BILLBOARDS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, INCLUDING TRADITIONAL STATIC AND ELECTRONIC BILLBOARDS, AND TO EVALUATE AND RECONCILE THE ORDINANCE WITH THE NUMBER AND TYPES OF BILLBOARDS CURRENTLY EXISTING WITHIN THE CITY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAD AN ISSUE. WELL, WE'VE BEEN HAVING ISSUES WITH OUR ORDINANCE NOT MATCHING HOW MANY BILLBOARDS WE HAVE IN THE CITY OF KYLE. SO MY GOAL IS TO HAVE STAFF LOOK AT THIS. AND THEN I WANTED TO ALSO GIVE THEM THE FREEDOM TO BRING BACK ANY SUGGESTIONS THEY HAVE. AND SO REALLY THAT'S WHAT THIS ITEM IS ABOUT. ANY QUESTIONS? I'M ALL ON BOARD. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 30. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCKINNEY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OKAY. ALL OPPOSED?

[31) (Tabled 10/5/2026) Discussion and possible action to direct the Interim City Manager to have the City's Water Utilities Department prepare and present to the City Council, no later than January 2027, a Water Supply Weighted Portfolio Analysis evaluating alternative combinations of water supply strategies and identifying the portfolio mix that best meets the City's long-term water supply objectives. The analysis will evaluate the City's entire water supply portfolio, including surface water, groundwater, reclaimed water, indirect potable reuse (IPR), direct potable reuse (DPR), aquifer storage and recovery, conservation measures, desalination, and other planned water purchases. At a minimum, the weighted analysis shall assess supply reliability, drought resilience, capital investment requirements, regulatory compliance, operational risks, and most importantly, the affordability of potable drinking water for the residents of Kyle.]