City Council - Special Meeting

is fighting buffaloes up in West Yellowstone, Montana, and he will be participating remotely. And I will just ask you, is it okay for us to proceed if you were to get disconnected? Yes, sir. All right, so we're good. So that was just our only housekeeping. Next, our Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. flag will be led by Councilmember Dave Covington. Our Texas Pledge will be led by Director of Library Services Amanda Hairston. And then the invocation will be led by Councilmember Luke Potts. Please rise.

Please join me in the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,

On the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible.

Please bow with me. Heavenly Father, thank you so much for all the servants we have in this room. We are always willing to step up and be there for our community. We just ask that you bless our conversations tonight and help us to lead a great discussion about our community with respect to each other and to all those involved. And please bless our city. Please bless our city staff. Please bless our state. In your name we pray. Amen.

Amen. With that, we will call this meeting to order at 532. The first item to take action or in our meeting is our public comments. If anyone wishes to say anything positive, negative, or indifferent about the city, now is the time to do so. There being no one rushing the podium, we will close our public comments and go to item three. Consider an ordinance adopting Belton's strategic plan for fiscal year 2027. Mr. Listie.

We've discussed this item a number of times over the last several months. Chris, if you go ahead and put that slide up, please. Just very, very briefly, one slide to just kind of cover the summary of the six pillars of emphasis. You can see those there. They have served us well in the past and will going forward. A couple of changes that we've brought forward to the council as a result of council and management input. You can see those there. The wheat road analysis, economic development and tourism strategic plan as commitments going forward. Some analysis of high demand facility standards. And again, calling attention to the city and Bell County ILA on ETJ subdivisions. A number of initiatives for this next year. And we feel really, really good about the direction of the community and recommend approval of the ordinance. I'll be glad to answer any questions you might have.

All right. So we've had our public hearings on this. We've had a lot of discussions, a lot of meetings around that. We've helped form this over the years. So the chair would entertain a motion or discussion.

I really appreciate the work that's been done, and I would like to make a motion to approve the item as presented, item number three.

We have a motion and a second to adopt the ordinance for the Belton Strategic Plan for fiscal year 2027 through 2031. Any comments before we vote? There being no comments, all in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed? All right, passes unanimously. I gave it some Kentucky windage that time. Gave it a little bit of gap. So it's hard to. Michigan second. Michigan second. That's a. All right. Item four is consider an ordinance adopting the city of Belton fee and rate schedule for fiscal year 2027. Miss Casey.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. We've presented this to you three times now, I believe. We're here to answer any questions you may have. We took all the questions and comments from the prior meetings and made those changes that were suggested. And what you have to consider tonight is a complete fee and rate schedule with all the changes that you've requested. And I'll be glad to answer any questions or department heads are prepared to answer your questions as well.

Thank you, Amy. Again, we've had this on our agenda several times the last couple of weeks. So because of that, I chair would entertain a motion or comments about item four.

I will say when it comes to this fee schedule, I have a hard time with several of the increases. And I think it hits a lot of different people in our community. I can give multiple examples, but if you just take the increase in cost for when it comes to builders and development, it's a significant increase. And I understand increase in fees, you know, when they need to happen, if they're tied to a specific cost, um, and that cost gets increased. But, you know, if you take like the, you know, just an example of the, increase for plat reviews where it goes from $150 to $1,000. We're not all of a sudden spending six more hours on doing a plat review. It's just an increase in revenue. And I'm just not a big believer in that. So I'm currently not for the fee schedule. I think...

The increase that you're talking about, the specific one with flat reviews is not, we were not breakeven at $150. We were bleeding at $150. And I think we're still losing money, correct me if I'm wrong, at $1,000 fee there. Did anybody from staff hear from TABBA on this item? I know that they attended public hearings and I didn't know if Michael Smith with TABBA was here. He didn't speak at the public hearing, but I didn't know if you might've heard from him.

I did not. He shook my hand as I left the room and he said, good job. So that's the only thing I can report back to you.

Thank you. We did share twice with them. So we sent and then followed up just to make sure there was a comment or not a comment. Yeah.

So as we discussed the conversation with those developers, did they have comments about our fee schedule, positive, negative, neutral? So there was no specific concerns or issues that they brought up?

No, not at all. Okay. I think council maybe just inserted some opinion here, but I think it's more that they're used to seeing those fees in the area. It's kind of, again, a consistent. And so our increases, though an increase, certainly don't necessarily tip the scales of what they're used to doing business elsewhere.

I would just say constituents that I spoke to that are builders did have issues.

Any other comments or the chair would entertain a motion?

I make a motion to adopt the B&R schedule as presented.

Thank you.

We have motion and second to adopt the City of Belton fee and rate schedule for fiscal year 2027. The one comment I will make on a lot of the fees that we saw is there are a lot of fees. Over the years, Belton has always been very low on our fees. When we're low on our fees, what we're doing is whatever that fee is, the cost of that is being supported by ad valorem tax primarily because we don't really control fees. sales tax revenue other than through policy of trying to bring in things that are not just houses. Like so when we bring in businesses that bring in sales tax. But there are a lot of these things that we've just kept low and the Those that shoulder the burden of that cost is peanut buttered through taxes that we levy. And so I think what the staff has been doing for the last five years is finding those in-kind costs, like spending eight hours on a plat review that we're getting $150 to try to recover some of the fees. And there's a tension between the actual cost of doing it. which is probably $3,000, $4,000, $5,000 in some cases, and maybe $850,000 in other cases. I think that's the tension. And so we've gone through that. We've given a lot of comments on some of these specific ones. And some, I mean, just inspecting... sprinkler system or whatever it is, right? So I think that the staff is trying to get it as close to either the actual cost or as close as what the market is. And so in general, I think, and you guys can correct me, we're probably at or below what the market is and below our actual cost on most of these fees.

I know you have emotion on the table.

I appreciate staff's effort in trying to compare our rates to surrounding areas, especially for those that we're really, really undercharging for and trying to break even and really subsidizing that loss with that long tax. So I think we're on the right track. It's a cost to do that. And we were eating that in the past.

Well, our citizens were covering it, right?

Yeah, that's right.

So I just want to make a small correction. Our site plan review fee is not a flat $1,000. It's a tiered, you know, $5,000, $7,000. I'm sure that's what you were referring to. And I just wanted to make that clear.

And that was a response to staff comments about not having 1,000 for everybody. We dropped it to 500 for small plants, 750 and 1,000. So that was, I guess, technically a response to some of the comments we heard from you all earlier.

Just want to make sure that- Yeah, so we went to a tiered. And then in some cases when it's engineering that are outside costs, it's the actual cost of whatever that is. We're not making a profit on that.

That's correct.

Okay. And it's right. I mean, when we supplement anything in the city with taxes, especially property taxes, we need a good reason for it. And if it helps spur development, which generally lowers the taxes, the increase in the cost plus the increased revenue of more taxes pay for itself. So there's an economic development aspect to some of these fees, which again, I think ours is reasonable. Okay. Any other comments before we vote?

All right. I would just make one last comment. And that's the, you know, I agree. That's what staff has worked toward is, you know, having recouping the cost of a total service. I just don't feel like that has to be done on every service. I don't feel like every public service needs a fee and it needs to break even.

So the alternative is that that cost that we're supplementing, whatever the fee is, would be shouldered by property taxes. So the corollary is if you're not for that, you're for an increase in property taxes to pay for that.

Well, no, that's not correct.

Well, no, I mean, that's what it is. That's the only other level we have. If we have a fee here and a fee there and we want to go down here, we have to go up there. The only thing we can control, we can't change our sales tax revenue. We can change our property tax rate.

We can change all of the sales tax, property tax.

We can't change our sales tax rate. It's set by the state.

We can change how the allocation is of the sales tax.

Yeah, but that's a different conversation than fee and rate schedule. That's a different, that's a different.

You're exactly right. You brought it up and I was just clarifying that that can be changed.

But not for here. Not today.

Not today. That's correct. So today our choice is go up on fees or go up on property taxes.

I don't agree with that.

Well, that's fine. You don't have to agree with it. It doesn't make it right or wrong. But the fact is, if anything we change to lower revenue in one pot, we will have to increase revenue in another pot. And at this point in the game, the only thing we could do...

But these are new raises and fees. It's coming from... No, it's... I think they're new fees. They're not new. There are new fees. Yes, there are.

The new fees are to accommodate the in kind cost the city has had. They're not new costs. They've always been. These are all costs. These are not new costs. And so all we're doing is replacing the cost with a fee. Reasonable.

Reasonable.

So, I just want to make sure we're technically correct. I mean, opinion, we can vote one way or the other, but from a technical standpoint, it's shifting it from fees to property taxes.

And I disagree because we're here to set... You can disagree that two plus two equals four doesn't make it different. But there are reasons that we have had these lower fees in the past, and a lot of it is to... help builders, help developers to not have a question about what the cost was. That's correct.

And Temple Area Builders Association reviewed these fees.

I'm not interrupting you. I'd like to finish my point. And sometimes there does need to be a collective from the general fund to help with these fees to make it less volatile. So like, for example, the fee for the curb cuts and the taps, I forgot the exact term of that fee that Scott presented that got moved to a formula. You know, that changes to where it was a flat fee of $1,500. And now it's a formula that includes all cost and labor. So it's going from $1,500 to $1,500. What could end up being $5,000, you know, beforehand builders could plan for that expense. And now they don't know.

As a person who owns a construction company and as a person who does residential and commercial real estate development, I also shoulder the burdens of those costs. And when you go into a construction project, you don't know any of your costs. They're all variable. And you go in and look at the project, project by project, and you pay engineers out of your pocket to help you do that. So what we try to do is be transparent and work with Temple Area Builders Association so that they, as representatives of all the builders in the area, can give us feedback. And when we first rolled out, a lot of the costs that we pass on are unfunded mandates, are restrictions or guidelines or regulations in the area that add costs that are not fees. And that's been the biggest pushback is our over, in their opinion, probably over-regulation And so we gave this to the Temple Area Builders Association as well. And we did not get a negative comment from the organization that represents the individuals you're saying are having a problem. But we listened to them. And if they can't tell us, we just need to be clear. on where the costs are coming from and where the revenue comes from if we don't increase these fees. And that's all I'm trying to do is making sure we're clear. So I think we've discussed that enough.

So any other comments? All right.

All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. All right. Passes six to one. Item 5, ratify the increase in total property tax revenue as reported in the fiscal year 2027 annual budget for the city of Belton, Texas. I will say that last year's budgetary was $1,194,804, or 9.13% is an increase in revenue from last year. Mr. Rogers.

I see what you're reading.

Yes. Sorry. It's lots of words.

When adopting a budget that raises more total property tax revenue. This is what's in the budget. Local government code requires a separate vote of the governing body to ratify the property tax increase that's reflected in the budget. This vote separate and apart from the vote to adopt the tax rate and to adopt the budget. Staff recommends ratification of the increase in total property tax revenue and the FY27 annual budget.

All right. Again, we've gone through this multiple times. Any comments, questions, or the chair would entertain a motion?

Just one comment from an economic standpoint and outlook. I do think... It looks as though the Fed will be raising interest rates, especially during this upcoming fiscal year, looking at a quarter of a point and possibly two increases by the Fed. That may make development a little tougher in our area. And so a little concerned about temporary times coming in the future. A positive to that is that our cash will be earning more money. And right now, I think our tax pool is at 4 1⁄4 or 4 1⁄2, that could be pushing 5%, which could add an additional 100,000 to our coffers. Then we got with Mike a little earlier and talked about possibly delaying some transfers for capital projects or funding capital equipment. We've kind of done that quarterly. But that could also generate a possible $100,000 for us if we held those funds in the general fund a little longer. And so just trying to do some cash management. And the other way I really try to look at this is to be solution-oriented and try to come up with an idea or something that we might not have thought of. to be a little more creative in our budget. I think we will see higher rates. I think adjusting that interest earning number that we use for our budget, needing 5% instead of 4.25 or 4.5 would benefit us greatly. It provides a little relief there. And also just want us to be a little cautious moving forward as we think about adding positions or taking from road maintenance or some other things. It's going to be a tight

tighter next year let's say I you know my view on raising taxes period is that it should only be done when there's no other way we can do it and you know currently I want to say for me if I were to vote for a tax increase I want to be able to go to my constituents and say that we tried everything to not raise taxes But I don't feel like that's been done. I think there are multiple, as you mentioned, solutions that could help us not raise taxes. You know, when we're raising revenue by 9.13%, you know, $1.19 million, you know, A good chunk of that is burdened by our current citizens. That's not new property. I believe 7% of that 9% is actually current residents and not new property that's being taxed. And I think it's worth looking into other options. I don't think we have a revenue problem. I think we have a structure and a communication problem. I, you know, see if, you know, if you just look at one department, the BDC, where their current expenses are estimated to be 1.9 million this year, but they have over $11 million in cash in their account. You know, that's over a thousand percent reserves. And that doesn't include all of the millions and millions of dollars of land that they own. So I think it's worth asking the question, How could we help use that money for other things that the general fund is currently doing? And, you know, I really think, you know, as a type A, there's a lot of options for the BDC to help with a lot of the...

I'll just as a point of order, when we're talking about policy, we need to restrict our discussion about the current revenue being raised and not other policy decisions, because there's other governance and documents governing anything about economic development. That's a different discussion. We're not here to debate. economic development we're just here about the fiscal year 2027 annual budget if you want to make it a point that it's somewhere else but as we get into policy we need to post meetings about that kind of stuff and so we really need to limit our discussion about this year's budget not any structural problems that um you know the the home rule city or whatever it is you know hi this item is about the budget and i'm explaining You're going into policy decisions that have nothing to do. I'm explaining where my vote is going to come from.

And so I also believe that it's worth looking at our sales tax and our sales tax allocation. Because right now, there's about... Again, sales tax is not this discussion.

It is this discussion. It is not. It is a policy discussion. We're not here to grandstand. I'm not here to grandstand.

You are grandstanding. I'm explaining the position I have for my vote on this item. And I'm explaining to my constituents where I'm coming from when I vote on this.

Are your constituents sitting in this room?

Yes. Yes.

I see city staff.

And you live in Belton. I understand. And people up here live in Belton.

Well, I'm just saying.

And they're listening to this recording at some point.

That's what you call grandstanding. It's using an opportunity for this to grandstand about a topic that's not related directly to this.

I'm sorry. I want to finish what I'm saying.

I'm the chair. And I believe that.

You've got one minute.

I believe that. We can also look at the sales tax allocation because currently there's around $4 million a year going to the VEDC, which with only expenses of 1.2. So it's just the question of, should we look at how we allocate that to be used on more things that the general fund cover or property tax relief? Not to mention this year, we got $2.4 million from the Brazos River Authority. That $2.4 million has no restrictions legally on it. If we need to raise $1.19 million, that money can be used to cover that cost and not have to raise taxes. And so I don't believe, I believe there are many other options, but since I'm limited on time, I will just say that I don't believe we've gone through all those options and looked at them serious enough to say we need to raise taxes when there are other options not to. Thank you.

Anyone else? This item is not about the tax rate and it's not to adopt the budget. It's simply to ratify that the budget that's been proposed would raise more revenue. Okay. I make a motion to ratify the increase in total property tax revenues reported in the 2027 budget. Second.

We have a motion and a second to ratify that the budget being adopted is more than the budget from last year. Okay.

Any other comments or questions about the amount of money we're raising?

All right. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Those opposed?

No.

Okay. I will just say from a point of order, it's just a number higher than last year, not how it got there. So, understandable. it's it's no it's just it's just ratify it's just the number now we're going to get into the next parts which is more to what your comments had to say all three of these items six item six is consider an ordinance adopting the fiscal year 2027 annual budget for the city of belton mr rogers

In accordance to Section 8.05 of the City Charter, the City Manager proposed a fiscal year 2027 annual budget on August 11th. The budget was placed on file with the City Clerk at that time. Having held a public hearing and ratified the tax revenue increase today, the budget is ready to be adopted. As submitted, the budget includes total resources of $55,938,180 and expenditures of $52,866,100. Um, staff recommends proof.

Right. So again, we've seen this and heard this and have had inputs on the details of the expenses and the revenues. And I will say for the right that the staff has been very responsive to the request when it came to revenue or expenses and what we could do to get this as close to last year's tax rate as possible. But this is the budget portion, not the tax rate portion that will come in the next thing. So because we've gone through that again, the chair would entertain a motion or any comments.

Mayor, just to comment, inflation is real. This budget includes a 20% increase in health care. We also have to be concerned with wages, salaries, and employee benefits. There are no new positions in this year's budget. So I would make a motion that we consider it out in the fiscal year 2027 annual budget for the city of Belleau. Second.

We have a motion and a second to adopt the fiscal year 2027 annual budget for the city of Belton.

And maybe this needs to be a record book.

Yeah. Any comments or questions before we do a roll call?

The only thing I was going to add, too, is to John's point about economies, I don't know that our budget includes anywhere enough for fuel at any point in time based on where it's going. So I think there's going to be some stuff there later on in the year, too. So no matter which way you spend the budget. Yeah.

Any other right? Miss Casey, we'll do roll call.

Council member Booker.

I.

Council member O'Banion. I. Council member Pearson.

All right.

Council member Covington. All right. Council member pots.

No.

Mayor pro Tim Holmes. Mayor Lee.

All right. All right. Passes unanimously. Thank you very much. 6-1. I'm sorry. 6-1. Sorry. My brain is on autopilot. Item 7. Consider an ordinance adopting the 2026 ad valorem tax rate not to exceed .5619 per $100 of taxable value. Mr. Rogers.

On August the 11th, also City Council proposed an ad valorem tax rate of $56.19 per $100 taxable value. The proposed rate exceeds the total no new revenue rate by 8.2%. Public hearing was held on September 8th. Management recommends a tax rate of $56.19, which consists of debt service rate of $06.24 and maintenance and operation rate of $49.95.

All right. Again, we've discussed this. This is primarily a calculation based on what the budget is. And again, like my colleague here, John, had said was, you know, if we end up getting more revenues from, you know, interest rates or what Daniel said, more expenses. We don't know what that is, but this is a calculation based on the budget. So any comments, questions or the chair would entertain a motion.

I'll just make a quick comment that I, you know, in the past three or four years, we've really seen appraisals shoot through the roof and people have really burdened a big tax, you know, tax payment based on that. And so I think we should do everything we could to not raise taxes. And I think there are ways we could do no new revenue and be able to accomplish that.

And this tax rate would be a decrease in both the average and the median homestead taxpayers' tax bill.

Correct. Even at 5619, even.

Right. But that's just one little sliver of all the different people. And there's an extra $1.2 million that are going to be almost a 10% increase that's going to be burdened by our citizens, our constituents. Someone's paying that money.

I want to piggyback on Dave's question. I understood that to mean the average in the mean, but then it says in the packet a $100,000 home taxes go up. That's not correlating to me, right?

That's because the legislature makes me tell you that 100 different ways. Oh, it's the. The MNO that you're talking about there is based upon a flat $100,000 home.

Not the value of the home. Whether they went up in appraisals or down in appraisals, it's just our rate goes up. So therefore, the total number.

I can see where that's stuck.

It's just a math question. Just like the first one was just a math question. Did it go up? Yes or no? Okay. And this one is a math answer.

Yeah. Put aside where you get it from at this point. Okay. Some numbers I pulled, you know, the new personal property tax exemption that got state legislated this last year, or for this year, the $340,000, our insurance of $250,000 increased, the 911 center, the 87, the shelter of $60,000. So, I mean, we're looking at $737,000 of additional costs that none of which... sorry, additional costs or loss in revenue that we don't control. And that's before any of the additional DV exemptions or any additional pay adjustments that we know are coming down the road. Who knows what to do with fuel. At this point, I just drove by a station that was $6 a gallon in Belton. That's the first time I'd seen that this year. So, you know, I think I know our staff, and I'll say this before I say anything, has done a tremendous job at picking and pulling and cutting things out and we're adding no new staff. Um, we've said it before continually pushing that staff capital that we have compared to our neighbors around us. And, um, kudos to you guys for doing the job you do, um, at the slim level we have, and still the service we provide. And I do feel like we're doing, no matter which way it's worded in the packet, we're really taking care of the residents right now who need us the most. And I have some solace in that. My tax bill goes up at this rate. And so I'm right there with you. And But I think this is the hardest decision any of us make in a given year is citizens, quality, life, and it's a tussle. And I want everybody to know that.

The budget is the tension of how much to tax versus how much to give in services. And you increase services.

increase taxes yeah when you when you total that 737 and then couple that with what's new revenue i mean that's only a sliver of 171 000 that is kind of out of that 1.1 million that you know either got taken away from us or just added cost or um and so it's a it's a it's a hard fight so any other comments

I would just maybe just echo some of that. This is probably one of the most difficult and painful exercises to go through because I do believe all of us up here are trying so hard to support staff, to be creative, to understand what's in our control, what's not within our control. I think we have been very... good stewards with what we can control to have the minimum impact on our community, as well as trying to address what is outside of our control, which is a lot right now. I do want to add that I'm all for looking for ways to be creative with our solutions, but I will tell you that the things being discussed tonight were not options to us for this budget. Am I correct? That's correct. So I think that that's really important. for us to understand from staff that I'm understanding that, that I'm accurate when I say those options were not options this year. They may be next year. That's something to be discussed, and I'm sure it will be, and I'm sure we'll have some leaders in leading the path forward in those discussions, but those were not options for this year, and I think that the staff and the time that we've spent understanding processes, understanding what economic development even is, and the way that those work, I really appreciate the time that's gone into that. And it's just, it's very difficult. I think we've done the best that we can with, again, with what I've already said. I won't say it all again. So those are my comments.

Do we make the motion on the rate?

And with that, I'll make a motion on the rate, item seven as presented. I need to read it. Well, now I've done it. Special motion required. Second. Second.

We have a motion and a second to adopt the tax rate of $56.19 per 100. Any other comments or questions before we vote?

Just one note. Our exempt properties continue to increase, and that's a big, big burden on the city and the tax rate. I've looked at trying to delay Miller Heights and trying to earn a little more in interest, and I have waded through this budget. come up with solutions or alternatives. And also thinking about next year, just the health care increase alone of a proposed 20% increase. You know, we're behind in wages in some areas that really need attention. I think we've got a salary survey coming up. We've been so diligent with water and sewer rates. And I think we all really truly think of our neighbors and friends and folks in the community when we're deliberating this and it's difficult but i think a lot of this is not is out of our control and we have to keep the city running though we're truly so efficient um and i just think i don't feel good about the tax rate but i think it's appropriate we need to move forward with it

Yeah, I will say when I joined the council, we were 82, 83 cents per 100. We've gone from 82 or 83, also one of the highest in the regions to now being one of the lowest in the regions, if not the lowest. I think Harker Heights may win that this year. And so one of the things we've always said as we've gone down on the tax rate is that if we have to, we'll go up if we need to. From a secure your position, if you want to just keep doing the same rate year after year, it would be easier because you could always say, hey, we've always kept our tax rate the same. But as Luke mentioned, our appraisals have gone up significantly. And so we've come down appropriately. This year, appraisals went down. And so we're going up a little bit. And it's not just the appraisals. It's the additional tax exemption of real property, real property, I think. And then if you just look at our exemptions for just state mandated exemptions that we have no control over, we've shouldered that burden without honestly, without complaining, we've just done it. I'm a member of a state institution that was trashed a little bit this weekend on social media, and state law requires that no member institution of the state may say anything critical or anything about the political institution that made the comments. And so when we silence the populace, including anyone here, we are all entitled to our opinion. Every person here, we are all entitled to our opinion. But I think it's just very important for the integrity to be honest on both sides of things. And I think this council tries to do that. We don't always get it right. But I think this budget is as good a budget given what we have. And we will have to be creative next year. What do we do with health care? There's a big question. What do we do with economic development and the like? And thank goodness we're not having to approve a data center. That might solve all of our financial problems, but it may create other ones. So there's lots of solutions out there. And that's why we have a deliberative board that's in the public eye is so that we can talk about these things openly. It's not easy to do. And I appreciate everyone and their opinion as we go through this. Even though it may not sound like it, I do. I've been the one vote against many times, and I appreciate that. Any other comments before we vote? Is this also a roll call? All right. Ms. Casey.

Council Member Bucher.

Aye.

Council Member O'Banion. Aye.

Council Member Pearson.

Aye.

Council Member Covington. Aye. Council Member Potts.

Nay.

Mayor Pro Tem Holmes. Aye. Mayor Lee. Aye.

Aye. All right. That passes again. Vote of 6-1. And that concludes our council meeting at 6-10. We're adjourned.

Thank you all very much.

That was fun. It's not going to be a barrier. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. water consumer water consumer water consumer