City Council - Regular Meeting

Good morning, everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to order. This morning, our invocation will be given by Reverend Sharon Stewart with First United Methodist Church. Reverend?

Let us pray. Almighty and loving God, we thank you for this opportunity. And as we gather today, we ask that your guidance and wisdom will prevail. May the discussions we fill with insight and the decisions be aligned with your will. Bless our time together and help us to work in unity and purpose. May the words of my mouth and the meditation of our hearts be acceptable to you. Help us to feel your mighty presence today. Amen.

Amen. Thank you, Reverend. And this morning, our Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States and to the Texas state flag will be led by Bruno Narvaez. He is a senior at Veterans High School, National Honor Society member, and a student council member. Bruno?

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Please join me in honoring the Texas flag. Honor the Texas flag.

I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one indivisible.

Thank you, Bruno, and good luck in your studies. Thank you. Ms. Huerta, would you please call the roll? Mayor Paulette Guajardo.

Present. Council members Roland Barrera. Here. Sylvia Campos. Here. Eric Cantu. Here. Gil Hernandez. Here. Kaylin Paxson. Here. Everett Roy. Present. Mark Scott. Present. Carolyn Vaughn. Here. City Manager Peter Zanoni. Present. City Attorney Miles Risley. Here. Mayor and Council, a quorum of the Council and the required Charter Officers are present to conduct the meeting.

Thank you, Ms. Huerta. Next, we'll go to Section E, our city manager's comments and update on city operations. Mr. Zanoni.

Great. Thank you, Mayor and members of the council and the community. We do have two items today on the city manager's report. The first will be from Nick Winkleman, which will be an update on our water supply dashboard. This is our routine 30-day update. And you do know yesterday we had a press briefing where we shared this information with the community in advance of today's council meeting. So then following Nick, we do have a few words to say about Miles who is retiring. And so we'll have a small comment or two and some gifts provided to Miles. So we'll go through the water dashboard first and then I'll talk to Miles. Thank you.

Good morning, Mayor and Council. Nick Winkelmann, Chief Operating Officer, Corpus Christi Water. This is an update to our water supply dashboard. The previous update was given on June 23rd. First, I'd like to go over some of the historical information on the storage capacities of our Western Reservoir. The last time the Western Reservoirs, that includes Choke Canyon, Lake Corpus Christi, was at 50% was March of 2022. We were at 40% last July of 2023. 30% March of 2024. December 2025, we were at 20%. And July 28th, that's today, we're at 26.6% combined capacity. And as you know, the recent beneficial rain in the upper part of our watershed has been positively impacting Cho Canyon Reservoir. We have not seen an impact from those rains at Lake Corpus Christi as of yet. So the water supply dashboard working with our modeler Carollo has been updated. This has been updated utilizing inflows as of the end of the day July 26. So that's Sunday evening. The model was updated on Monday utilizing all of the information through Sunday. The other assumptions for this dashboard are that the Nueces groundwater program would continue to operate per the protocols established in the bed and banks permit. Effluent reuse continues with an offset of demand beginning this calendar year with amounts increasing through 2027. Alice Mathis and Beeville, their water demands are have been decreased, taking into account their new water supply projects. Other changes are the operation of the Mary Roads Pipeline. We met with the Lavaca Navidad River Authority on Friday. They requested a two day shutdown of the Mary Roads Pipeline to do maintenance and upgrade a surge valve located at the Edna Pump Station. So that has been taken into account into this product projection. Additionally, we have a four weeks of operating the mayor roads pipeline at schedule three. That's 55 million gallons a day. That's to accommodate the upgrades at the Woodsboro pump station. This was included in the last dashboard update as well. That includes plum installing and plumbing the spare pumping equipment. and also installing the spare variable frequency drive and other electrical upgrades and then 3 weeks of operating its schedule to which is 43 million gallons a day to accommodate the upgrades at the Bloomington pump station. The upgrades are the same as Woodsboro to permanently install the spare pump install the variable frequency drive and conduct the electrical upgrades. The comment I do want to make is future inflows projected into Lake Corpus Christi are not in this model because the water has, we haven't seen that inflow into Lake Corpus Christi as of yet. So the update for the level one water emergency is shown on this chart. And I apologize about the amount of data on the chart and the length of it, but that's good news. because the new projected date of level one water emergency is September of 2028. So that's a year later than the previous dashboard. So move from September 2027 to September 28. You can see on this chart we have, it's the same factors are shown. There is a change in how we depict wastewater effluent or wastewater reuse. And those are the pink vertical bars shown on the graph that is to account for the use of wastewater effluent in lieu of potable water. And to summarize, the estimated date for level one water emergency, that's when we're projected to be six months away from supply not meeting demand, has been updated to September 2028. I would like to state that in a couple of weeks or so when we have the full impact, positive inflows into Lake Corpus Christi, we would want to update this dashboard once again so that we can account for those positive impacts into Lake Corpus Christi. And with that, Mayor and Council, I stand by for any questions.

Thank you for the presentation, Nick. Councilman Cantu, you have some.

Thank you, Mayor. Nick, real quick. Alice, Mathis, and Bevo, you said that there's a reduction?

Right. They are bringing on their own water supply projects. And they are, you know, Mathis has investigated some existing wells. They're drilling two new wells.

And then... How much from our supply are they going to reduce? Like, how many MGDs per day... with those three cities that we're going to see relief from?

Sure. The early projections are about four to five MGD, Councilman. Per day? Per day, yeah. That's correct. That's good.

Thank you.

Nick, thank you so much for the presentation. Mr. Zanoni?

Okay, great. Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to do this one from here. This is to acknowledge Miles, who, as we know, is retiring. And so on behalf of the city organization, great pleasure to recognize and commend City Attorney Miles Risley as he's retiring from our city that he's made home for the past decade plus. Today is the last council meeting with Miles. So if you want to give him a hard time, TODAY IS A CHANCE. NOT THAT WE HAVEN'T IN THE PAST. SO MILES JOINED THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTIE OVER 12 YEARS AGO, WELL OVER A DECADE WITH THE CITY. AND THAT TRANSLATES TO PREPARING AND ADVISORING NUMEROUS CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYORS AND CITY LEADERSHIP ON CITY BUSINESS. AND I THINK WE ALL CAN AGREE THAT'S NO SMALL FEAT TO DO THAT. numerous clients, including the city council, and then the city administration. Any city attorney does, so it's a tough job, to say the least. During his career, he worked with four mayors, four city managers, and dozens of council members, assistant city managers, and department heads over that decade. His work is extremely commendable, but also includes a certain amount of time and investment and commitment that he's made to this organization and this community. That includes long days, long nights. It means working on holidays. It means working on weekends and countless hours away from his own family and his friends. And I can attest, no matter when I called up Miles, whether it was on Christmas Eve, on Christmas, on any holiday, any time of week, Miles would answer, and help us out to his best professional state that he could. So I want to personally recognize Miles for all the hard work and dedication over these 12 years and the support that he's given the team here in the city. I think we can say that every one of us goes to at least one person to get city business done, and Miles is one of those people that everybody works with here in the city, him and his team. He has provided great leadership to the departments and has provided his utmost professional self to help us get through many municipal issues, many policy issues for the city. There's a couple of highlights here that Miles, we asked him, how would you want us to remember you? There's a couple of bullets here. I don't know if these truly summarize all the work that he's done, but we want to highlight that Miles was critical in the EPA consent decree that we just went over here recently with city council. He was probably one of the leaders in advancing that forward that helped us put millions of dollars of investment in our wastewater system. It also shaved off years and millions that we might have had to have paid to the federal government because of Miles' commitment. He's adopted a strong litigation strategy and has rewarded our litigators and prosecutors in their willingness to fight for the city. That's an important part. And he's also served as the president of the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power. That's a municipal electric aggregator, and the city was a lead member in that back in the day. Miles has been here for a decade plus, so this is something earlier on, and he was a leader in that. So in total, Miles has approximately 32 years of experience in municipal government. 32, that's pretty good. He, prior to coming to Corpus Christi, he was a city attorney for the city of Wichita Falls and then the city of Victoria. And I forgot this, but he was also a U.S. Army intelligence officer. Get that, right, Miles? You'll have to tell us about that later. But he earned his undergraduate degree from West Texas State University and his law degree from the University of Texas. And so Miles' retirement will be effective this Sunday. That's August 2nd. And to replace Miles, we have been working with human resources on a recruiting process. We know that the city attorney serves both the city council and the city administration, and so city council will be involved in this recruitment process for sure. So at this time, we do have a couple of token gifts that we'd like to give Miles. We're going to ask him to come down here to the podium, and Revae's going to help. We've got some nice pictures up there, by the way, Miles. We have a nice little commemorative, what do you call this here?

I guess an award.

And we got a few more things. We got a nice sign for Miles. This is our traditional street sign, but we kind of jazzed it up a little bit. This is Miles, the jazzy type guy. And we have that plate too, is a plate there somewhere? We got a plate, too, from Alo Tile, which is, we know, a local, yeah. Did you have it, Revae? Oh. Okay, well, while Revae gets that.

Yeah, where's the cake? We're gonna congratulate Miles. Miles, good job.

We're gonna see if you have any comments.

Nothing too long.

Yeah.

I would like to say it's been a pleasure working with everybody up here and the city council, and when I can help city council members achieve their goals. It gives me a great amount of pleasure. Even when your goals are opposed to one another, if I can help you achieve what you're looking for, that's what we do. That's what we try to provide value for you. And when I say we, I'd say the most important thing that a city attorney does in a city this size is develop, retain, and supervise And sometimes remove subordinates, that is the other attorneys that assist you all and will be assisting you into the future because they are the institution for the city, the lower level employees that support me and support you. So those are the personnel that really make an impact, and what we can do to help those people provide their services effectively to y'all and the other city departments is the main reason that we're here.

Okay, good job, Miles. This is our nice plate that we got from Miles, some aloe tile. One of our local businesses that does a great job. This is the city manager's recognition plate, Miles, to you. Okay, that concludes our presentation here this morning. Mayor and members of the council.

Miles, thank you. We want to thank you. I know we have a few comments, but we want to thank you for your service to the city and to the multiple councils throughout your 12 years of service. I think everybody knows that it's legal. Legal departments are a big part of everything we do here. So, Councilman Kentu.

Miles, I just want to say thank you for all the services you've done for us for the past 12 years. I know at times we didn't see eye to eye on things, but Overall, you're a great guy, and I'm really surprised that you didn't use your hockey skills on us, man, because you used to play hockey, right? You told me you played hockey or something like that, no?

No?

That's what it was, something like that. I don't remember. But anyways, thank you for everything you did and done for the city, and you'll be missed, and... Just don't sue the city, please, when you leave. Representing clients, you know, because I know you're going to go work for yourself. But anyways, thank you so much. I appreciate it.

Councilman Barrera. Councilman Barrera. Sir, I'm sorry. Sir. Councilman Barrera.

um first off uh miles i just want to say uh i'm glad to say this to you hook them you know what is it i'm glad to see that somebody with such dignity professionalism and the hard work ethic uh goes along with the longhorn values and i just i appreciate you know how you've guided me over the last eight years sometimes i wanted to go in a different direction and But I know, like I said, with dignity and professionalism, which you shared, despite sometimes some of the challenges that we faced here with those that do not have dignity and professionalism, you've always been a class act. And, you know, one of the things I want to leave with is every time I called you, you would answer the phone and say, Councilman, how can I help you? So thank you for that. And good luck in your endeavors.

Councilman. Yeah. Councilman Hernandez.

Miss Miles, you know, thank you for all your years of service. It's been, you know, we've had our challenges working together, and we've had good times working together. So I appreciate that. And just a little inter-service rivalry. Army intelligence has always been an oxymoron for me. But the... But I appreciate the work we did, even when we didn't agree. We had those arguments, especially when we were talking about Roland. I wish you all the best of luck in the future and enjoy your retirement and traveling. I know you have plans to travel, so please enjoy it. And then also appreciate you being a constituent of District 5.

Councilwoman Vaughn.

Hang on. Can you press your light again? It would be weird not seeing you sitting over there. You're here the last time I was here, and you've been here forever, it seems like. I'm sorry that at times you've had to put up with some ugliness from the audience that was uncalled for, but you handled it with grace, and I wish you luck in your retirement. Thank you.

Councilwoman Paxson. Thank you.

Miles, what we do in this avenue is not easy often. And whether we all have a day that we agree or whether we have days or topics or issues that we don't, the constant is that this can be a very tough time. arena to choose for public service. And I have watched as you have handled some of the things this year that have come against this organization and in some ways come against personally individuals. And I appreciate that you stuck through those hard times and you served the city regardless. And so, again, whether we all agreed or disagreed, I appreciate that you took it into your career path to serve our beautiful city. So I wish you the best on your next chapter. Thank you.

Councilman Roy.

Well, Miles, I appreciate everything that you've done. I know at times it's been tough. You know... I appreciate answering my phone calls, weekends, Sundays, you know, whatever, evening time. And I wish you and your family the best in the future. And just know that the city of Corpus Christi appreciates your service. And I look forward to hearing about your next chapter in life. Thank you.

And Councilwoman Gumpels. Thank you. Miles, it said that with leadership, you know, what What actually matters is, you know, who you leave behind and how you leave your staff. And I do believe that you led with grace and that the staff that have worked with you will remember you with hopefully fond memories and that you will go on in your life in another chapter that will fulfill all your dreams, at least some of them anyway. So best of luck to you. And Councilman Scott.

Hey, Mayor. Thank you. I want to thank you for mentioning your staff. You've got a great team, and you built that, and I think you should have pride in what you've built in that department. I want to thank you for that. I, too, want to thank you for taking my calls whenever it was and asking how you could help. I appreciate you telling me what I needed to know, not what I wanted to know. And I think that's a gift, right? And so I want to thank you for your guidance in me over the years. And I wish you and your family the best of luck in the years to come.

Were you going to say something?

Thank you. And I will always be willing to take your calls 24-7 still.

Yeah, you say that now. Yeah. Good luck, Miles. Thank you. It's not an agenda item, sir, please. We're going to move on. It's 1159. Sir, I'm going to ask you to please stop being disruptive, sir, so we can move on with our meeting. I'm asking you to please stop being disruptive. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. All right. So we are going on. It's 12 o'clock noon, so it's time for public comment. And that was the end of yours, correct, Mr. Zanoni?

Yes, ma'am. That's the end of the city manager's report.

Okay. All right, so before we begin public comment, I want to remind everyone that the City Council has adopted rules of decorum to help ensure our meetings remain orderly, respectful, and productive. Copies of the rules of decorum are available at the City Secretary's office across the hall and are also available on the City's website. I ask everyone to please conduct themselves accordingly. We're here to do the people's work, and we would like to proceed in that spirit. Let's see here. So public comment... I'm sorry, should you have any questions to the change, please see our city secretary at the break if there's any questions regarding our public comment. When you come forward, if you'll please state your name and the city in which you reside before beginning your comments. In-person speakers will have up to three minutes. For callers and WebEx participants, Corpus Christi residents will have up to three minutes, and non-residents will have up to one minute. The timer located at the City Secretary's desk will help keep everyone within their allotted time. And if you have a petition or any other materials that you would like to give to the Council, if you'll please give them to Ms. Huerta first. She will distribute them before you begin speaking. So first on the list, we have Vidal Conde.

Good afternoon, City Council, and I hope you all had a good morning. The reason I'm here, my name is Vidal Conde, and I'm from District 1, which is Cal Allen. And the reason I'm here is to talk about the subsidence report, or subsidence report, subsidence report, some people say it differently. What's going on right now with the water wells being drilled in the Evangeline, the water wells being drilled at the west, I believe, Westfield water wells, It's concerning a lot of rural residents, residents that own livestock. It's concerning the livestock, wildlife. It's all going to be impacted eventually in the near future if we keep utilizing these rural wells. Rural wells and the aquifers are pretty much designed for rural residents, not for municipal consumption. And I don't know if you all have studied what's going on in Utah. But in Utah, there's a subsidence going on where the ground is collapsing from the overuse of drilling of water wells. So again, there's also the Sphero report that just came out. And again, as I mentioned in my last meeting, it's not wise that we go towards the inner harbor. There's a lot of loose ends. There's a lot of idiosyncrasies there. And I say this respectfully. I propose that we seek somewhere closer to the Gulf. like Barney M. Davis. And I know there's an issue with the permitting. There's going to say, well, it's going to take us another five years of permitting. It will not. Trust me. If you reach out to Governor Abbott, state or federal government, they will expedite those permits. They will expedite those wetland permits. They'll expedite the Corps of Engineers permits. And then we need to make a deal with Barney M. Davis to secure a piece of land that will belong to the city of Corpus Christi, to the citizens. We cannot be utilizing a piece of property that it belongs to another municipality. And we can do that through eminent domain, or we can do it through a direct purchase. And then at that point, since the refineries are utilizing approximately 60% of our water, and the refineries have Department of Defense contracts with the military, this could be deemed as a threat to national security. Perhaps we should go to the federal government and ask them to fund the construction of our desal plant. We already know H2O is out of that, Barnium Davis, Barnium Davis has a footprint. It's close to the Gulf of Mexico. There's plenty of water. All water around is contaminated, but there's less contaminants out in the Gulf of Mexico, Gulf of America, whatever is more politically correct for everyone here. But I say this humbly, that we cannot keep drilling into our aquifers. They will eventually... The Earth is like a sponge, and when that sponge dries out, it starts to collapse, it gets brittle. And the obsidians report states that within the next three or four years, if we keep going at 30, 40 million gallons per day for these aquifers, it's going to have an impact all the way into Corpus Christi, where you're going to have collapse of the ground and infrastructure. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Conde. Mr. Miguez? Mr. Miguez? Marilena Garza?

Marielena Garza, District 1. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Tomorrow morning, every one of us will wake up with a roof over our heads, Lord willing. And tonight, hundreds of our neighbors won't have the same security. That should haunt us. Homelessness is not a budget category. It is not a pie chart. It's not a talking point. It is a human being with a name and a family and a story. For me, those names are Carmen Villarreal and Joshua Bright. I found them all in the Monte. And if you don't know what the Monte is, the brush, both of them were loved. Both of them had families praying. They would come home. Both were fighting to make their way back. They didn't need someone to look down on them. They needed someone to leave a light on and build a path that they could actually follow. And by the way, they both made it out. And I'd like to take all the community partners that made that possible. However, The normal is currently we leave people out to survive on the margins, and we read their names at the annual homeless person's memorial. And we've accepted that as normal for far too long, and I refuse to accept it any longer. Because no one dreams of growing up to die alone in a tent, and no parent raises a child hoping that one day they'll call the monte home. And no city that prides itself on its namesake should be satisfied managing homelessness instead of reducing it. If we truly believe every life has value, then our budget should reflect it. I'm asking this council to restore a dedicated homelessness department with the authority to coordinate a citywide strategy. This would also allow the council to establish a homelessness advisory board to assist the department with reducing homelessness. That's something you didn't have before. And I'm asking you to invest in a full-time administrative assistant position to assist Amanda so she can spend less time buried in paperwork and more time bringing grant dollars, partnerships, and solutions to Corpus Christi. We cannot arrest our way out of homelessness. We cannot ignore our way out of homelessness. And we certainly cannot budget our way out of homelessness by pretending someone else will pick up the tab. History will not remember the size of this budget. History will remember what you chose to value. Years from now, I hope we can say that this council had the courage to stop reacting to homelessness and began ending it. No more lost souls in the monte. No more names added to a memorial that never should have been there. Let's build a Corpus Christi where the pathway home is easier to find than the pathway to the streets.

Thank you. Stephen Klepper.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Steve Klepper, District 2. I'm here to talk a little bit about agenda item number 9 on water rate restructuring and increasing the water rates. When I looked at the material, I said, man, there's a lot of nice charts, a lot of pretty graphs, a lot of data. But it missed the mark on what I've been looking for on every presentation on the water rates here. And I've mentioned it numerous times, three or four times at public comment. The main goal, and what I'm saying, the main goal of a water rate cost of service study is to make sure to look to see if the total revenues by rate class are approximately the same as the cost to provide service to that rate class. And I've never seen it. Now, I'm sure you've got it, or you may not, but the rate consultant does. It's the first thing that you should do before a rate study, or as part of the rate study before rate redesign. As an example, Maybe this is the slides that I used in this council chamber in 1996 when I was assistant to city manager Bill Hiddings on the water rate redesign to finance the Mary Roads Pipeline. Rebecca, maybe you could get the SkyCam, I think it's called. Which way?

Yeah, move it over just a little bit in between the two devices. Yeah, there you go.

Very good.

Yes, sir.

I would appreciate it if you could zoom in on that. Because that's, is that not the right place?

Well, that's good. Now they're doing it right now.

Okay, very good. That is one example of what I'm talking about. And all that, and that's one of many charts that we used. By the way, I didn't personally develop the data. I managed the project as assistant to city manager Bill Hennings. We had a rate consultant and a CPA looking at the data and pulling the data, and I coordinated it all. The data on that isn't particularly important. That's before we had raw water pass through, all the rates that we have, because we used the restructure. But the purpose there, you can see one bar is the actual revenues, the dark chart is the actual revenues, and the white bar is the cost per the model. And in all of those cases, they're pretty close. There we're looking at ICL, OCL. The main point is we look to see, to validate, and see where the problems were, and then from there you do rate redesign. There's one, you had bar charts, tables, all these different things. Therefore, we're listing in terms of the cost and then the revenues. For each class, you see what the discrepancies are. The data in that isn't, remember, important. It's the approach and the information. What it is is transparency. I advocate more transparency in the whole water rate design. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mr. Klepper. Bradley Bartleson.

Good afternoon, y'all. Hockey's played in Minnesota. Numbers matter. Brad Bartleson, Corpus Christi. For Max H2O, we learned that economy of scale is 100 MGD for publicly owned, 150 for private. Their cap set X was 10 million per MGD. Inner Harbor is three times that. God's time-tested surface water at $1,000 can't be beat. And industry needs to produce their own water. Our reservoir levels have come far and yet we have a long way to get to safety. How will we not only use it but protect it? I've shown that evaporation dominates reservoir water consumption, that had we implemented 29% evap control on Lake Corpus Christi alone, we'd have had 74% instead of 7% in May. We're now at 36 and a half combined or 400,000 acre feet. We now have options. If we continue drawing 30 MGD and had no evaporation, we'd have 11 years to empty, but that's not reality. If we cut off the wells and don't do Evangeline, we have 5.9 years, but that's not reality. If we add in gross evaporation, no rain, we go down to 1.4 years. If we include average rain, we get to 3.2. And if we add in EVAP control, we get to 3.7 years, gaining 17 MGD. Our financial position isn't strong. We're $2 billion in debt, most of which is supported by utility and water obligations. As I presented last week, this is a bad time for debt burden. It's time for free water for EVAP control on Lake Corpus Christi. Yes, Peter, we do own the lake bottoms. We get 17 MGD for free, which is 55% of Inner Harbor. Recreation and fishery is improved, everyone wins. Cost benefit analysis is the approved method for city governments to evaluate large project options. This brings numbers instead of opinions that can join us together. Floating solar coming in free to us soars far above all other options. As presented before, we have to do more of these $1,000 surface water options to take advantage of, including storm water, which we already pay for. Shown in pink on this map, drought-resistant streams running underneath the Mary Roads Pipeline that can give us more of that dollar per thousand God-given water. Convince yourself, go look at the 40-year drought maps. Inner Harbor lessons learned, environmentally wrong. Two, the capacity was insufficient. The cost is non-competitive. Citizens became educated, won't bear the water burden. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bartleson. Jason Fallowell.

Boy, y'all in trouble again. Let me know when I have the floor. Thank you. You fucked up again. You let him fuck up again. That's terrible. 557.007, what's that? Agenda items. What is the E? E is an agenda item. That's an official agenda item in which I was allowed to speak, and you didn't fucking let me. Guess what? Lawsuit again, your name will be on it. Do you understand me? Look at me when I'm talking to you. Show some respect. You work for me. You're not going to show me any respect. Well, fuck her. All right. So I came here to talk about something else, but you ruined it for me. You can look at me and not the chief. He's a tyrant piece of shit, too. Pay attention to me. All right.

Mr. Folliwell. I'm talking. Do not interrupt me. I'm entering a public meeting. You're being disruptive. You will. You are. Well, you're being disruptive. I had the floor and offensive.

I had the floor. You do not. Do you understand me? You work for me.

Mr. Falwell, finish your comments, sir. Finish your comments, please.

All right, we're done, Mr. Falwell. Thank you. No, we are, this is, sir, sir, we have decorum and you're being disruptive.

You can talk, sir. Sir, you can talk. You have a right, sir. You have a right to talk. You're being disruptive. You're being disruptive. Finish your comment, sir. Finish your comment, sir, because you're using your time. Finish your comments.

He's...

Mr. Falwell, Mr. Falwell, finish. I'm trying to ask you to finish. Please stop and finish. If you just want to come up and offend, then please finish.

Good God. All of y'all broke the quorum. The quorum is for everybody. It does not go to one way. It's for everybody. If y'all clapped in a quorum public meeting, y'all violate that meeting.

She allowed it. She broke the quorum. Will you do anything about it, Chief Myrtle?

No. OK, Myrtle. See, you won't do it. And you laugh because it's true. If y'all don't know the rights, hire a better attorney than Mr. . And what did I come here to talk about? Well, since you took all my time away, We have Officer Emmanuel Martinez still works for the city, was actually doing a run for the city. He beat a guy in January, no, April this year. The guy was going to work, beat the shit out of him, nothing happened. We appreciate Chief Merkel for doing nothing about it, piece of shit. We have another one, Martinez, who allegedly was fired, but nobody ever talked about it. He's not going to be prosecuted. And you have Officer Sanchez, who's a woman who watched the whole thing and didn't think about it. What are we doing about it?

Thank you. Goodbye. Thank you. Diana de Hoyos. Diana de Hoyos. Susie Luna Saldana.

Hard act to follow.

Susilina Saldana District 2, I come before you because I am very much in favor of due process and the way that it should be done. What happened lately is that you have not allowed due process to be done. When you talk in the mayor's hearing, trial, whatever you want to call it, you allow Doug Allison to use discovery of videos that he had already done himself. You allowed that to happen. You allowed cut and paste manipulating of the videos. issues there and you allowed it to happen and that is wrong. You allowed cut and paste of testimony to happen and that is wrong. You allow it to be called fraud and fraud and fraud when different agencies have proven that it is not fraud. that nothing illegal was done. You have tons and tons of information to tell you, but you keep allowing for the word fraud to be used when it is not legal to be using it. You create a perception there about fraud. If you're going to do something to it legally, do it right, If you are going to come out, and I'm going to read you this because I don't want to get this wrong. As elected officials, I ask that you hold everyone to the same standards of fairness, accuracy, and honest representation of facts, not on repeated allegations that have not been supported by the proper legal authorities. I encourage this council to ensure that the future discussions are based on completed facts, due process, respect, and legal conclusions that have been reached. The reason I read it is because I want to make sure that you understand it, that you understand you have to be legal. Do what you have to do, but do it in a legal way. Do not set up your own agendas as is very clear to the people now. I respect every one of you, but I want you to do it right because every time you call fraud, every time you scream it, every time you say it, you are the ones that are violating the law and you're allowing Doug Ellison by his client, Ajiv David, and Rachel Caballero to do these things. And it is wrong for you to be doing it. The people of Corpus Christi are watching. You need to make yourself do the right thing because I know that you are good and honorable people. And good and honorable people do the right thing because that's the way people should remember you rather than what's going on right now.

Christina McKay.

I'd ask for my money back on that. Christina McKay, Corpus Christi. Thinking mostly today about the Inner Harbor, the Grant, the far-field modeling, all of that. I'm concerned about the fact that local scientists seem to be suddenly unwilling, unable, To review this information it's that suspect to me, I personally believe that experts in our area are being silenced probably by an outgoing governor, maybe by a nipple baby slum Lord. I really speaking of which I wish David lobe would invest $20,000 in the vacant. rundown, derelict buildings that disrespect and devalue my neighborhood and other cherished neighborhoods in Corpus Christi. I went to several of the far-field model committee meetings in person, and something that you don't see on camera is the way that people act when they're not on camera. And David Loeb made faces and laughed at people and made fun of people and bloviated. And he was so disgraceful. It was disgusting. And he has his hands in so much in this city. And I wish you all would stop putting him in a position to do that, starting with this $20,000. You were right when you discussed this issue last time. No matter how much the mayor lies to the people of Corpus Christi, this is not a $120 million grant for Corpus Christi. Corpus Christi may be eligible for a small fraction of that grant. It's like saying that you are getting a job offer for the entire payroll of a company. when there's 200 employees. It's ridiculous. It's so stupid. We know that that would also increase future building expenses that would eat up that grant. It's a dumb idea. We also know that this grant is meant for approved projects, which the desal plant in Hillcrest is not. My neighbors in Hillcrest do not have $20,000 to influence their government or to push their interests. They have prayers and they have you. And I really hope that it'll be enough.

Eli McCain.

It's nice to see everybody this afternoon. Everyone will get a copy, including the city manager and city attorney. As you all know, my name is Eli McKay, and I live on the historic north side in District 1. Yoji part of District 1. I'm here today speaking on behalf of the Coastal Action Network Coalition again. As most of you probably know, two of our six organizations, For the Greater Good and Texas Campaign for the Environment, were the primary partners in the successful petition drive to put the proposal for the Fair Water Amendment on the November ballot. The fair water amendment or FWA as we called it to the corpus Christi city charger if approved by voters would end the drought surcharge exemption for large volume water users and actually require those users to pay drought surcharges after the exemption is repealed. My primary purpose for speaking here today is accolades. To acknowledge the hard work of Rebecca Huerta, Stephanie Box, and the entire city secretary staff who were incredibly professional, went above and beyond with communication as they undertook the effort to validate the nearly 13,000 signatures that we brought to them that day. So thank you so much to the city secretary's office for all of that, as well as everything that you do for our city to keep us going. So also with the fair water amendment on the executive session today and scheduled for a council vote August 11th, I additionally wanted to take this opportunity To share a copy of an important member memorandum with the city council city manager city attorney and city secretary's office this memo that you just received is a memo from attorney renee hicks. Who was commissioned by the fair water amendment committee to lay out the city's legal obligations and constraints, now that the petition has been validated. So I think that you'll find this memo very informative for your discussion and executive session today, as well as for your vote in two weeks. I hope that it's helpful. And I know you have a long day ahead of you, so I will give the rest of my time, and thank you so much for your time.

Thank you, Ms. McKay. Joseph Gore.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Council, Joseph, Gore, District 5. I'm here to express my support and defense of our Mayor, Paulette Wajardo. I have watched all these proceedings, hearings, and meetings, and I have to say that and your character and service has gone from somewhat neutral to extremely positive, and you should hold your head high. I have always listened to someone when they tell you who they are, but the real proof is when they show you who they are. There are several council members here publicly claiming Christianity as their faith. Some even conclude that they are here of evangelical Christians. What a joke. An evangelical Christian who dismisses the clear instruction provided in the Bible, the infallible word of God. It was written for situations exactly like this. The Bible instructs that there must be two to three witnesses at least who are held accountable for making any accusation about a crime or a sin whose punishment for false testimony would be the same for them as the punishment is for the accused. But we have no witnesses at all. The petitioner isn't even a witness, just an accuser with no proof. The commandment, you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor, is a very serious commandment that some of you don't seem to hold in a high regard. That is the first step in proving there was a crime at all. Oh, that's right. It's not about crime anymore. It's about malfeasance, which merely means that we do not like you, we cannot control you, so we're going to punish you. The Bible even declares that you are not supposed to participate in a corrupt process or pervert justice in any way when judging your brother, nor are you to idly stand by and allow it to happen. Yet here we are. Just because you are provided a channel through a flawed organization created by man that gives you the ability to oppress and hurt your brother, you are not permitted to do so. You are required as a Christian to hold yourself to a higher standard than a normal person. You can't say you were just doing your job. Clearly, the crime and fraud and malfeasance is being perpetuated by the radicals who call themselves Christian and conservative. You can't be a solution to the problem when you are the problem. Which brings me to the charter amendments. Never in my life have I ever heard of someone who considered themselves a Christian conservative Republican wanting to increase the cost and size of government. You all bring shame upon those of us who have always considered themselves Christian conservative Republican. The light at the end of the tunnel here is that there is a very dark and evil side to this council, and I have recognized it. And the mayor, you are not part of it. Like the old saying saying, birds of a feather flock together. The Bible says light cannot walk with darkness. They have clearly drawn the line between us. God will judge them at some point in the future, and the voters will this fall. God bless you, Mayor O'Hardo. Thank you for your time. Appreciate it.

Thank you, Mr. Gorm. Rachel Caballero.

Thank you guys for being here. Perjury is a crime and it's illegal. The city charter exists, so we have guidelines to make sure that people, elected officials, city staff, that we understand how the city wants to be run. We're following the city charter, and I'm grateful for that, extremely grateful for that. And we're also listening to 2,705 people's desire to want to expose the people that are perjuring themselves, to expose the people that are stealing taxpayer dollars. So I appreciate the opportunity. I got to get this in here as quickly as possible. It is of my understanding that the three scientists have stepped out of the far field model due to pressures from the old guard. And I will say it here behind this dice, it's David Loeb. And I don't know if the community is paying attention, but it's the same names. It's always the same names that are involved in attorney licenses being suspended because they stole their clients money. It's the same names that we have issues with that are trying to contribute $20,000. We were not allowed as a community to crowdfund a far field study. So this should not be allowed the $20,000 later on in this, on this agenda. Um, We have the beach permit increase of 60 it's at 67%. Can we give our community a break for the love of all that is holy? The parks and rec department is the second most expensive department on the city budget outside of public safety. We leave public safety alone. That's our community. We support them, but this is absolutely ridiculous. Nothing has happened at the beaches to require more maintenance. They provide minimal maintenance as it is. And quite frankly, 67% increase is ridiculous. You want to go from 12 to 14? Okay. Let's, you know, inflation, but that's, this is an overreach. And I will mention, not mention any names because I already know who's at the head of this. This is a constant money grab from this city manager, constant money grab, and it has to come to an end. Um, I also am very appreciative that we are finally discussing the Bass Pro Shop situation that Mayor Paulette Guajardo, Mike Pusley, Dan Suckley, and Roland Barretta, same names again, my goodness. So I appreciate what the five are doing in support of this community. ask that we, on the drought contingency plan, that we allow our neighbors to protect their biggest asset in their lives, which is their home, to be able to water their lawns and water their foundations. But I also request that we put a stop point for allowing data centers to use water. Thank you.

Isabel Ariza. Isabel Ariza. Jared Suarez.

Jairus what is district 2. I got something to say and I know I'm going to get a lot of backlash and it's a very unpopular opinion and that's just that is my opinion. I understand why the increases for the water sewage and other things are rising and it's because we are so far in debt that we gotta make hard decisions. I'm not saying it's right, I'm not saying I like it, but I understand about the rates going higher. And it needs to for the fact that we're $3.1 billion in debt, yet how are we gonna pay that? Like I said last time, it's gonna be 86 years if that's the only thing we're doing to pay off, not including everything else. What people need to know is if the Inner Harbor was approved, Our rates will go up to $25 plus. So between $4 or $5 compared to $25, $30 maybe, yeah, I'll take this little increase. And I know it's a hard call. It's a hard decision. I know you don't want your constituents to pay any more because of the economy and how things are. I support you for the fact that we gotta take care of this debt and the only way to do it is by these small little prices that are increasing. As far as the beach permit, I'm not sure that was a smart move to raise. We gotta be smart about this, yet at the same time, we cannot punish people for enjoying something that's what God gave us, the beach, the sand. So I don't think that should be increased, but I know there's other ways. And you can think past councils for putting us as far in debt. And I know a lot of things that the mayor has pushed and projects she wanted to do, which caused us to go into further debt. So for the fab five, I asked, I thank y'all for defending us for making the hard call that nobody likes to make. And for the unfab four, I hope there's a conversion of heart to get rid of this corruption. We need to do the right thing and not play politics, especially with election coming around, making empty promises like Bass Pro Shops that was used last time and is now being thrown around again. I think we need to be honest, we need to be transparent, and we need to think above all for the constituents. What's the best thing for us? And... Pray your rosary daily and go to the Latin Mass on the corner of Caroline and Golihar. Thank you.

Maria Rosa Suarez.

where he saw this issue too. Many business owners don't know that under Texas law and the federal Durbin act, businesses are not allowed to charge a surcharge when someone pays with a debit card. A debit card is like treated like cash. The problem is that some payment processing companies set up these surcharge surcharge programs and if they charge and if they charge customers for using a debit card, the business not the processing company can be the one that gets in trouble with fines up to $500 per violation. Here's an example. If 100 customers each spend $75 and 3.5% surcharge is added, that's about $262.50 collected in extra fees, not including taxes and tips from just 100 sales. Imagine that happened every day at businesses across our city and state. The processing companies make multi-millions in a year. but our local businesses take the legal risk. I'm asking the city of Corpus Christi to help educate business owners, a simple notice through the city's Economic Development Office, business outreach programs, or Chamber of Commerce to help prevent constantly mistakes and protect both businesses and customers. With utility bills continuing to increase, every dollar matters. for families and small businesses. Helping people avoid unnecessary fees is a great way to help a city can make a big difference. Thank you for your time. I pray the rosary.

Thank you, Maria. Scott Parasa.

Good afternoon, Scott Barraza, Norrises County. I'm still waiting on that written mitigation plan. I've been asking since February. I haven't seen anything. It's like you don't care or have a single concern about any rural well owners. Had that been the case, there'd be a written plan by now. Nick, anytime I ask on the written mitigation plan, he always references that data collection program, the Good Neighbor program when asked about it. So let me talk about that since the AG finally ruled against Miles and his request trying to keep it from me. I now have all that data. I have all the information on the participants and the testing results. I shared it on my Facebook page. If anyone wanted to go look at it, it's there. So that Good Neighbor data collection program, 74 wells were tested from 66 property owners. They tested for E. coli and coliform, TDS, arsenic, and uranium, among other things, in static water level testing. There is no mention in that report about well construction reviews like what has been advertised has been done, so I don't know if that's been done. So the E. coli and coliform was only completed on nine wells. It stopped in January of 26. The TDS, arsenic, uranium, and other quality tests were performed consistently. You're to be commended on that. That is great. Now the static water level testing was done on 17 wells. It stopped in April. Why? That's very important baseline information for well owners that choose to work for the city, with the city, and it is not being done. Another way to evaluate this or look at this testing is out of those 74 wells, 65 wells or 88% were not tested for the E. coli or coliform. 57 wells were not static water level tested or it comes out to 77% of the well screen. Does this fulfill the requirements of the permit special conditions? How is this a good neighbor program that works? It's a huge chunk of participants that are not getting anything close as to what was advertised for the test being offered. When the testing criteria is written but not fully implemented, what does that suggest? Lack of care and thoroughness? Perhaps. And yet there's still no written well mitigation plan. Why not? It's clear based on the handling of the testing that without one that's written, it will change depending on who's administering it. Not fully performing all of the baseline tests for well owners does not equip them to accurately and fairly determine who is responsible for any well issues that come up. Perhaps that's your goal since you're the beneficiary here. And once again, us rural well owners get the shaft, proving once again, they cannot depend upon the city. If you can't even carry through with the data collection program, how will the well mitigation plan be ran? Especially if nothing is written. The city has proven it does not care about rural residents. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. President. Melissa Zamora.

Hello, Melissa Zamora of District 2. Sorry, I didn't make it last week. Some things came up. Grateful for this opportunity. Sad to see the amount of disrespect earlier and just like how that man is treated different than some other brown women that I've seen being taken out by the cops in here by saying like one bad word and not telling the mayor to shut up. why do you treat certain people a certain way and others differently? So today, most of my comments, or that was for last week, we're gonna be focused on item 10 of last week, but now it's four, with the crime control and prevention. But before I segue into that, I did wanna mention that on item 21, from the voices of the Coastal Bend on their unrestricted donation offer, You don't have to take it just because they're offering it. Again, why do you choose to take their money versus others who have offered it in the past? I saw that they were a 501c6, and since I'm learning what a lot of that still is. I looked it up, and it says that a 501c6 is a tax-exempt nonprofit organization defined by the IRS tax-exempt guidance as a business league, chamber of commerce, or trade association. These groups exist to promote the common business interests of their members rather than the general public. That was in the definition of a 501c6. Wow. They have more freedom, again, continuing with this off of the IRS website, they have more freedom than 501 groups to lobby for laws that help them and their specific industries. That's not okay with the general public. They are not my voice. I am from the Coastal Bend. I am tired of getting their text messages. I don't know how they got my number. I don't appreciate that. As far as crime prevention goes, and why a lot of our funding is going towards policing versus the actual prevention itself, this all ties into what our economy is based on. Research has shown that people who live near industrial areas and neighborhoods that are around ugly factories have more crime rates. Maybe if we started transitioning to a cleaner, healthier means of economy, then maybe the crime would go down. There's so much more as far as like putting in for the libraries, skill sharing, meetups, trash cleanups, composting, glass recycling, developing jobs with this as well. One last thing, I finished this book. I urge you all to read it from The Serviceberry. In these urgent times of impending climate catastrophe, we need to move quickly to the decarbonized economy that is essential to life as we know it. A fellow tribal member captured my thoughts when she wrote, if the economy requires people to consume more resources than the earth can replenish just to keep the whole thing from collapsing, isn't it time for a new economy? Thank you. Thank you.

Christopher Braglia? Christopher Braglia? Mariam Ghedda Rashidi? Miriam or Fatima Guerra-Rashidi. Okay. Jasmine Evans.

Jasmine Evans, District 5. As many people have already said, it really is a shame that the practices of this city and some members of this council have desecrated the namesake of this beautiful city, reflected across a budget that invests in industry and policing over the health and livelihood of our families. selling out our land and water, the body of Christ piece by piece till there's nothing left, the very blood of this community tainted by those who claim to be of Christ, the very church located in the neighborhood that you seem to continually erase and ignore, you invite to these chambers to bless this space, and it's just very performative and shameful, and we deserve so, so much better. The cost of the far-field model seemed outrageous to this council, and like people have pointed out, it seems very unfair that the community can't pull together to fund things that will take care of our community to make sure that there's regulations and checks in place, Like someone pointed out, an organization that is by definition from the IRS, not representative of the community, but of that organization's own personal interest, you're taking money from them or you seem to entertain it. It is not fair. The project has not been approved, not by council, and definitely not by the people of the Coastal Bend. We deserve libraries with doors open to the public that pays for it. We deserve well-funded and accessible houseless services. We deserve increased communal input in the budget and water rates and other city-related matters. We deserve a public safety budget that doesn't equate over policing, surveillance, and violence. We deserve the Fair Water Amendment and no desal in Hillcrest or the Bay. And we deserve elementary schools that aren't across the street from data centers and ammonia plants. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Evans. Amanda Guerra? Amanda Guerra? Jessica Villarreal? Jessica, oh, sorry.

Good afternoon. My name is Jessica Villarreal, District 2. The people that talk about shame, it's basically you bring shame to yourself because of the actions that are being taken. I stand here today to speak for the hardworking families of Corpus Christi, Texas, who are hitting a breaking point. Look at all our bills. Our water rates are literally skyrocketing. And our tax, their burden, they keep climbing. We're being forced to pay more and more while the city locals do less and less. It's a shame, really. The citizens of every day are really tired. This isn't just a budget issue. It's a fundamental breakdown of accountability. The responsibility for this misconduct falls directly on city leadership. It is time for a drastic change in direction and that starts at the top.

We need to fire the city council as well as our city manager.

The votes are coming in in November. The people that choose not to run, good for them. They will be voted out. That being said, the special interests and the bureaucratic in article one, section 27, our Texas constitute guarantees us the right to protection, to petition, Our government, for the redress of grievance, today we are exercising that right. We are drawing a line in the sand. It's time to roll back these punishing raids, remove the leadership that has failed us and continuously keeps failing us. Taking back control of the city for the citizens who built it. and I'd like to just let my time run out.

Thank you, Ms. Villarreal. Amanda Gomez? My time needs to run out, ma'am. Oh, you want to hold the time? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Pardon?

Do I need to stand up there so that the time can run out?

That's probably best. Thank you, Ms. Vandia. Amanda Gomez.

Good afternoon, everyone. Amanda Gomez, resident of District 5. I'm here today to ask the council to support the proposal being made by the Planning and Economic Development Department. to support Mother Teresa Shelter through the distribution of ESG and CDBG funding. I am the Director of Mission Advancement of Mother Teresa Shelter and Catholic Charities of Corpus Christi. I was here a few weeks ago, a little early, and I was sharing about the services we offer at the shelter for the unhoused community here in Corpus Christi. 52,000 meals each year, 6,900 showers, and 2,500 laundry cycles. all essential services that each of us would find very difficult to live without. I also mentioned last time how Mother Teresa Shelter serves as a pathway of hope towards housing stabilization, and that is what I want to share about with you all today. After a meal and a refreshing shower, our clients have full access to our on-site case manager who helps address the obstacles that our unhoused brothers and sisters face, Retrieving identification documentation is one of the most common. A photo ID, birth certificate, social security card, those are all part of the first step before someone can even think about developing or obtaining housing. And we assist easily 100 individuals each year in this capacity. From identification documents, our case managers support individuals in the housing application process We offer direct referrals to within the continuum of care network and outside of that. We interview eligible candidates also for another program that we have, our Mother Teresa Transitional Housing, which is kind of down the street from the shelter on Mistina. This is a men's transitional housing program that has 24 private rooms, communal space living, where residents can live up to 24 months as they ready themselves for a more stable housing situation. And I mentioned last time that homelessness, it's a very complex issue. Take any number of reasons why someone may be out on the street, and in a unique way, Mother Teresa Shelter, we meet every person right where they are. But we also accompany each person. So yes, with the immediate needs, meals, but document retrieval, like I said, helping fill out housing applications and group counseling even, just to remain hopeful for those times when things just cannot happen soon enough. That's what I mean by a pathway of hope towards housing stabilization. So I ask the council once again to consider this proposal agenda item number 16 for the distribution of ESG and CDBG funds for Mother Teresa Shelter. And also I wanted to invite you all, if you are interested in touring the facility, I would love to have you introduce you to some of our unhoused community and go from there. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Gomez. Zuri Reyes. Yes.

District 1, Suri Reyes. Hi, good morning Mayor and members of the council. I'm here today because I'd like to speak on the homelessness issue as previously discussed twice earlier in this meeting. Studies show that the most recent count of the homeless population in the city has nearly doubled from about 600 to over 1,000 in just one year. That's an 88% increase. I care about this issue a lot, although I'm new to Corpus, I've been here less than a year, but I can already tell that this definitely needs attention. This isn't something I've seen from the sidelines. I try to help whenever I can, even if that's just stopping to listen or converse for a few minutes. Before I go on, I want to be clear. I'm not blaming homeless individuals, but we should admit that some take advantage of the resources, such as certain benefits or shelter space, leaving those who truly need help with nothing. They're the ones who suffer most when resources are stretched thin. I think the city needs to take a closer look at who's getting help and whether the help is actually reaching the people who need it most. On top of that, most shelters don't feel safe. I've heard about volunteers being rude, disrespectful, and even abusive. Shelter conditions aren't good enough for safety, hygiene, and health. Many people in these shelters may be dealing with mental health or behavioral issues, and they can be a danger to others. That keeps a lot of people on the streets who would rather be in a shelter if it were safe. Then again, there's the weather. We are in Corpus. It is well known that the heat here is brutal. People risk dehydration and heat stroke just trying to get through the day. If the city doesn't take this seriously, we're going to see a very real and very sad outcome. If we don't act now, lives could be lost. That sounds harsh, but it's the truth. It has most likely happened already, and it will happen more often if nothing changes. This is a crisis for the people on the streets, for public safety, for the city's image, and for every resident who sees it happening. Briefly, I'd like to speak on two more points, one being road and construction debris along highways and busy intersections. Trash doesn't get picked up fast enough. This is a safety issue, and it doesn't look good for the city. Also, most of our parks don't have enough picnic tables or play area for kids. The ones that I've seen are in areas that don't feel great either, which is probably why people don't go. I'd like the Parks Department to check out what's missing and where new parks could go. I know that's a lot for one comment period, but these are things people talk about every day. I'm asking the council to look into these issues and let the public know what's being done. Thank you.

Thank you. Henry Williams.

Henry Williams, District 1. Hillcrest neighborhood. You know, Mayor, I think first of all, I would like to again commend you for the prayer gathering at Cole Park on July 8th. The results have been, you know, very significant. We prayed for water and for rain, and we have received it. And Mr. Mr. Risley, the city attorney, I would like to thank him, you know, for his years of service. And also for Police Chief Markle, Assistant Chief David Blackmon. You know, for many years we've had the prayer at the police station, and we've seen constructive changes, you know, in our city over those years. THE CITY AGENDA. I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO SAY NO TO ITEM NUMBER 21. HAVING TO DO WITH THE, THE VOICES OF COASTAL BEING ENERGY, THE 501C6 ORGANIZATION OF DOING FUNDING. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU WOULD VOTE NO TO THAT ITEM. Item number 26, having to do with the Fall Field Study. I would like for you to also, in the Fall Field Study, whoever is doing that study, that you would factor in the 1,200 tankers that go in and out. of the ship channel each year. And with 1,200 tankers going in and out of the ship channel, the refuse, okay, should there be an inner harbor desalination, it would carry the waste into the bay. And the bay is not such that it can expel the waste. Therefore, our bay, the iconic symbol of our city, would be contaminated. And I ask that you would reflect upon this, indeed, while giving a push to the Anaheim desalination. It would be destructive both to our environment and it would be destructive also to the Hillcrest neighborhood. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Reverend. Sue Heskett? Sue Heskett. Melody Cooper.

Melody Cooper, District 5. I made it abundantly clear what a sham the removal proceedings are, so I will turn to the charter amendments. These came out of left field but had obviously been cleverly premeditated. Yes, the charter should be amended, but now? When we have no public input and the election is in three months, shouldn't the new council deal with this with public input since the charter is, in effect, our constitution? But let's review these proposals. Increase your terms from two to four years. Witnessing the action of this council, absolutely not. Increasing term limits so you can serve longer, again, no. Increasing council members' salaries from $6,000 to $30,000 and the mayor's to $37,500. Really? I served seven terms as a public servant and not because I needed a job. And a two-cent property tax increase for streets when we have to repay millions for Inner Harbor, still have to fix our water crisis, just had our water rates raised, and are spending God knows what. on these removal proceedings. Really? And isn't funding streets something you do in the budget process? Or are you just punting this to the voters? Street improvements are typically the subject of a bond election. But wait, our bond rating is shot because of your inaction on the water crisis, so forget that. And the icing on the cake, increasing the number of registered voters required for a petition for removal and increasing the number of council votes for removal from a majority to two-thirds or from the current magic number five votes to six. You have the audacity to proceed with removal under the current rules but want to make it harder for you to be removed. If the six-vote rule were effective now, you couldn't remove her, could you? And everyone, please remember that if Mayor Waharno is removed, she cannot run again in November. And that is the whole point of this charade of a removal action. So to recap, you want longer terms, more terms, raises to raise our taxes, and make it harder for you to suffer the torment through which you're putting our mayor. That really takes, excuse my language, balls. I feel like I'm living in a communist state, and maybe that's exactly where we're headed. I am repulsed that these chambers in which I have served have been turned into a kangaroo courtroom. But it's not too late to say, since the election is so near and this issue so divisive, let's let the voters decide who is mayor. If even one of you five broke from the five, moved to stop this political charade and voted no on removal, you would be a hero. Our city is torn apart and polarized relationships, ruined people, upset, depressed, and confused. Think about it. We could end this in three months. Thank you. Mayor will Harto for all you have done and continue to do. God bless you.

Thank you, miss Cooper, Michael Miller, and then we'll have Jason Hale.

Michael Miller, District 2, and I'm glad to follow Melody because I agree with her. Not about letting the voters decide about who's going to be mayor, that's part of it, but also about letting the voters decide on item number 21. First of all, the last year has been incredibly rough on all of you, whether you're of the four or of the five. Let's see, we've got, whether it was Rachel, Sean, Ajit, Jason Followell, Robin, Mark, Chloe, Brad, Blanca, Aaron, Jason, Tito, Adrian, Wayne, Sharon, Melody, David, Susie, or even me. You've all had your fair share of tomatoes thrown at you guys, but I just wanted to thank you all because through it all over the past year and a half, every time I've gone to turn on my sink, water's come out. Every time I've gone to flush the toilet, everything's gone down the drain. Um, There has been no catastrophes, and so you should all be proud of you, especially staff and Peter. Everything worked. Now we have a huge wall of water heading towards our reservoirs right now. We don't know how much water it's going to yield, but it's definitely going to give us at least two years to slow down, take a deep breath, and reevaluate all of our projects. This gives us a little time. I would suggest you guys use it to direct staff to do a little more research, get all the projects organized, do a reevaluation of everything, put them all together, put them on a silver platter for the next council to consider. Eric Cantu asked, you know, we should put the desal plant on the ballot. and peter made it perfectly clear that that was not going to be a possibility because we didn't have the general obligation bond capacity to be able to go for that but this is a way to put it on the ballot is you know ask everybody where they stand on the inner harbor desal plant and then let the next council decide because that gives the power to the people to make the decision on this project um also takes a lot of stress off you guys but um i appreciate the offer for from voices from Coastal Bend Energy or whatever it's called. But now is not the time. Let's let the next council make this decision. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miller. Jason Hale. Yeah, Councilman Cantu.

Hey, Michael, real quick, just to let you guys know, I was talking about putting it on the ballot, and at first they said no, and then we got some confirmation that it's a possibility we can. So I'm going to talk about that today. All right, thanks.

Thank you, Mayor. Good afternoon, council members, Jason Hale, Corpus Christi. Today, I wanted to talk about the need for an independent review for the city's far field model for the Inner Harbor. But first, I want to thank CCW and city staff for making the modeling files available to the public. I got a copy of it a couple of weeks ago, and it's been really cool to look at the results, the inputs, and see the way everything was set up. It's like literally all I did for the past two weeks. Anyways, yesterday the city manager announced that the SRAs program and the local scientists won't be able to facilitate independent reviews of the Farfield model. That was a bummer because I think it would be a big benefit to the city to get the model double checked. I recently reread the June 2nd letter from Dr. Hertzka and Dr. Wetz and the 11 other scientists who signed on to the letter. And I still think all of their recommendations are spot on and worth looking into. Personally, I'm concerned that the model may be overestimating vertical mixing because of the way the desalination plant outfalls were set up in the model. Basically, it was done crudely and in a way that masks the affluence concentrations in the ship channel. And that could be, you know, understating potential dissolved oxygen issues. I think the main reason for this is because Spheros and Hazen and Sawyer don't have experience with modeling desalination plants that have actually been built and validated by real world field measurements. That's not to say that they didn't do really good work. I think the nuts and bolts are there and we just need an expert to look over it and say whether or not it looks good. I think if there was a problem, it'd be a pretty easy fix. Just change a couple of things, rerun the model. And I think the cost of the independent review would be relatively affordable, maybe like $5,000 or $10,000. And as a side benefit, an expert would be able to give feedback on the diffuser design, which is really important. Right now, the diffuser is designed to be located three feet above the bank of the ship channel, which is really close, and could impair dilutions by starving the diffuser of ambient water for dilution, which could result in higher fluent concentrations and more potential for dissolved oxygen issues. All of which could be easily fixed by using the proper spacing or adding more diffuser ports if you need more dilution. We figured out that stuff first before building the plant rather than later after you built it and when making modifications would be more expensive. So I included a list of references, my handout. Please look into it if you have a chance.

Thanks.

Thank you, Mr. Hale. Ms. Huerta, that concludes our in-person public comment. Ms. Huerta, do we have a WebEx?

We had one individual, Mr. Zertuche, but he's not online, and I don't see him in the audience. So that would conclude the public comment period, Mayor.

Okay. Did we miss... Now that, well, yeah, so the list is complete. Okay, so that concludes our public comment. And we are gonna move on to section I, our consent agenda, items three through 15. Do we have any requests from the council to pull any items for discussion? Items three through 15, I'm sorry. Item number four. 12. Item number 715. So far we have 7. Or I'm sorry. Number 9 and number 8. Number 10. So yeah, so we have 7, 8, 9, 10. No, let's start with four. We have 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 15. Okay, I will entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda with the exception of those that I just called out.

So moved.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Item number... Oh, did you want to put your vote in? Okay. Councilman Scott, yes. So the first item pulled was item number four, an ordinance approving the Corpus Christi crime control and prevention district budget. Who pulled four? Councilman Campos, your question or comment?

Okay, thank you. I did. I've been supporting it for years, even though I've had some some critiques over it. But I decided that I will not be supporting it this year. And let me tell you, just the more that I hear about the homelessness and what we can do and what our needs are, I know that we have right now an Officer Brown, but there's an additional need for a 24-hour homeless officer that I myself see. I also want to make sure that, and you know, like, People have said that these are moral documents, the budgets are moral documents. I want to make sure that we are taking care of our homeless. And as you know, the budget is stretched beyond. I mean, it is, you know, we're trying to do all the things that we'd like to do or come to our dais. And homelessness for me is one that, we need to make sure that we fund. One of the other things that I know is needed, and we have all received a request, is a full-time worker to update the HMF, the Homelessness Management Information System, that's also been lacking for years. And I know that a lot of the issues that come up through the police forces has to do with either mental health or substance abuse, and of course, that includes homelessness. So for that reason, I will be voting no on this. So I just wanted you to hear my explanation

and for the audience to hear it as well so yes ma'am okay we have a motion in a second please submit your vote we did Yeah, this is consent, so wasn't this the meeting that it was going to, right? So public comment on all the agenda items was going to the right thing.

All consent agenda items.

I'm sorry, consent agenda items was going to the public comment. Remember, we explained that. Yes, thank you, ma'am. Thank you, ma'am. Please submit your vote.

account councilman paxton before we vote i want to again raise that i don't believe that this policy on public comment meets the definition and intentions behind allowing commentary before action is taken i firmly believe that the twelve o'clock public comment is the avenue for individuals to come and be able to raise concerns about things that are city related but not necessarily agenda having the opportunity to speak on the agenda is an important process that I do not believe we should deviate from. So I would like to allow the public to continue to speak at public comment. If I need to make a motion, I can do that.

So this was a conversation that we had and discussed, and I disagree. I think that their public comment at noon, and we established that between multiple conversations with the city secretary, that it actually is, it is an opportunity, and we're not taking away an opportunity, we're just moving that over. But I'm happy to discuss that with you in the spirit of time and the fact that I've already, if you will, made that call, but we're, because you and I have not discussed that since you made the comment last week. So I'm happy to discuss that with you.

I don't believe the policy was discussed with us, and I did raise objections to this last week, and I even asked for a copy of that. Thank you, Rebecca, for sending that policy over. But I, again, have to maintain that I do believe that we are reducing access to speak on our public action by doing this. And if I need to make a motion before this board to change that, I'm willing to do that. I've spoken once. I see there's another request to speak. I'll save that for next.

Councilman Hernandez.

Maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to get across here, but From what I understand, when you pull an item from the consent agenda, it becomes an individual item. And when that becomes an individual item, they shouldn't be allowed to have public comment on the individually considered item. Since we pulled it off to make it an individual consideration item, we should allow for the public comment on it. So I understand your position on consent agenda, but once it's pulled, it becomes an individual item. So it should be allowed for public comment.

May I say something? I'm sorry, I've been uninterrupting. Go ahead.

Well, no, that was what I was going to say, and I would agree with Councilman Paxson that if we need to make a motion here right now to allow for these pulled consent items to be considered individual items to be discussed or allowed for public comment, then I would agree to that as well.

Okay. I just wanted to point out to the council that the consent agenda, they're routine, non-controversial items for the most part. So individual consideration items, those are big policy items that involve a lot of discussion. Those are placed in another part of the agenda. But the consent agenda, For the most part, that's what they are. So we wouldn't give them, in my opinion, the same amount of weight, right? So they're important, and the public does have an opportunity to speak on them. I mean, I'm saying they're routine non-controversial, but the public may want to talk about them. They can do that. We didn't remove the opportunity for them to do that. They can do that at the noon time, the noon time frame. But during, and they can still speak on individual consideration items further on in the agenda. So it was a meeting efficiency idea. As you all know, our meetings tend to be very long. So it's just a way to streamline that without infringing in, without infringing on the public's right. That was the concept behind that. So I just wanted to say that for your consideration.

Thank you, Rebecca. Councilman Scott.

I just want to talk about the agenda item, but I concur with you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you so much. I just want to thank my appointee for his time on the Crime Control and Prevention District. I thought he did a yeoman's job, and I've talked to him a number of times. He's very impressed with how the entity operates, and I support his input. I checked with him before the vote today, and he was supportive of the budget item, and so I'll be supportive.

Councilman Bonetta?

She'd already spoken once.

I think you're waiting for a... I'm sorry. She'd already made comment. Oh, I'm sorry.

Is it appropriate to discuss the parliamentary procedure for the process? Because it's not an agenda item. My question would be for anybody that's smarter than me, which is the whole room, but Specifically the city secretary the city attorney It isn't specifically posted on the agenda as a discussion item Okay, the city attorney just recently he'll comment okay, okay, well I'll comment anyway, I just wanted to make sure that I Think the only reason that I If unless it was predetermined that the item was going to be pulled, I think that the public having some level of understanding of how our budget works, that if they thought it was in consent agenda, that they would probably speak so during noon anyway. And so I think that's that's the item they would speak during noon at the noontime to be able to have their voice heard on the consent agenda item. Or they could ask a council member. They could speak to them and then ask them to pull it. If that for. for that specificity. And I don't see that any of that is done here. I think we give our public an opportunity, often a lot of opportunity to speak. Thank you.

Councilman Vaughn.

Well, I am, it aggravates me because people come down here, they get three minutes of public comment. Three minutes. That may sound like a lot of time, but it's not when there's a lot of issues discussed. And I understand the timing of You want to sit up here all day and listen to public comments. Some don't. I don't have a problem with it. But I think that if they make the trip down here and they want to speak on the agenda item, they should be allowed to speak on the agenda item. If we have to sit here for another hour, then we should do that. I've never seen it done any differently and why we're changing it now. And you may sit and say, well, the agenda item, they're not as important, the consent. Yeah, they are. They're all important. So as for me, I think they should get to do that.

Well, I appreciate y'all's comments, but again, that's not what anyone is saying, number one. Number two, it's continuing to give the opportunity, just moving it up, but it is what it is. We're spending a lot of time on something that's pretty simple. If you want to make your motion, that's your right.

Mr. Risley? You opined that we could have this discussion. The policies were brought up, so it was posted publicly. I can make a motion to, a simple motion as we would to table something or pull something forward, et cetera, through housekeeping, if you will. I can make a motion in this format to allow individuals to speak on consent items.

Well, I think your question, the question was originally to Rebecca.

I'm sorry. She punted it to you. I didn't mean to.

I gave my opinion that it's not posted. So I just said if he had any objection, he would say.

And that's right. And I did not have any objection to what she was saying.

Okay. Thank you. Then I make a motion that if someone would like to speak on a consent item that is polled, or at the beginning of the consent agenda that they be allowed to speak.

All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say no.

No.

Three nos. Motion carries. So does that have to be effective today? Being that the verbiage is not in, we had taken it out. Miles?

Essentially, the way I interpret that is that it was overruling your determination that the three-minute limit applied, that the discussion could occur again for this particular day. It's not a change for all the rules for the rest of time. So given that it was not clarified otherwise, I'm going to assume that that was the case. Okay.

No, we can, okay, we'll talk offline, Rebecca. Okay, so Ms. Luna, did you want to make comment? No, you didn't. And this is on item number four.

The only thing I wanted to tell you is that we need our officers really badly. And I understand where this campus is coming from. I just want you to know that we need them. They're absolutely essential. And we need to keep the money on our officers. The way things are going, especially in my street, I want to have more officers there. That was my only intent to tell you because I know the budget of crime control, I know that they spare no expense, but the bodies that are there are what we need. I thank you for your time.

Anyone else? Okay, we're going to close that public comment. Next item pulled is item number seven, and that is... I need a book on it, Mayor. Sorry, please. Well, I have it. Oh, we did vote, I guess we just didn't register it. I mean, my vote's there.

We'll restart the vote, yeah. That must have been an issue.

Okay, the motion carries. Next item pulled was item number seven. That is a zoning case number ZN9194, Miller Street Holdings. Who pulled this one? I did. Your question or comment?

Mayor, thank you. It was only to vote no on the item. That's all. No questions.

I'll entertain a motion.

So moved.

Second. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Next item would be number eight, ordinance reappointing Jacqueline Deliano-Chapa as presiding judge for a two-year term of office. Who pulled this item? Councilman Hernandez, your question or comment?

Yes, I voted against this last week, so I pulled it to vote it again this week. I vote against it this week. Thank you. I'll entertain a motion. I move for approval. Second.

We have a motion and a second. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Item number nine is the ordinance amending Corpus Christi Code section 55-50 regarding water rates. Who pulled item number nine? Councilman Vaughn, your question or comment?

You know, when Mr. Klepper came up here and he gave that chart, that was a really good chart. Why have we not stand for residents?

Absolutely. So the chart itself is a foundation of the water rate setting, as Mr. Klepper said. It's foundational to the cost of service. The chart is not in the presentation. It was shared previously with this body. And then, of course, it's in our annual water rate study report that NUGEN does to wrap up the entire process.

We should put it out there for the citizens to see. And the other reason, St. Nick, I pulled it is because I want the public to understand why we're raising the rates. We tried to explain it last week. It's because of past projects that were done. It was because of the agreed order of projects that had to be done. And it's because when we got on the council, we had a proposed perceived water crisis. We had to put six new projects on, diversify the water. It has absolutely nothing to do with a grant for 100 and something million dollars, nothing. That grant has to do with only Inner Harbor desal and they report it on the news, someone says it, they never challenge it and the news should challenge that because it sends a message to the citizens that's not true. I make a motion for approval, thank you.

Councilman Paxson.

Nick, the slide that Mr. Klepper brought The distinction that stuck out to me was something I have been looking for, and I'm so glad that he brought it up. Basically, what he's doing there is each rate class, what they're looking at is how do we justify the revenue per expense for each rate class. His chart depicted a lot more, shall you say, levelness between those two measures in each of those categories. If I pulled a use versus revenue report for our current rate proposals and our current usage volumes per class, it's way different.

showed was prior years actuals versus a new proposed rate. That's not how we set rates. We present future, the proposed budget, and the revenue requirements for that. So when we showed the slide of the revenues and how each class of the total pays in, how much the percentage for each class, that represents the cost of service. When the rate is billed, we assign costs to all of those areas, residential, commercial, large volume, wholesale. And then based on those expenditures in those classes, we have to generate revenues that equal one for one. So the revenue chart is basically a cost of service charge.

Mr. Klepper has some additional information. If I could ask him to come clarify that. Because this is really important to me. This was something that I was really looking for. Between the last time we read this and now, the amount of public input I've received is just crazy.

Can I say something?

Yes, please do.

And I had an email with Camille, and I have the greatest respect for Camille. I know him. I've worked with him. Camille says it. It's true. Except what he just said. And what I heard, what my chart was, was... actual cost per the model and actual revenues. It wasn't new rates. It was based upon the previous year's audited financials. So, and that's where we were, because we had a friendly email thing going on every now and then. I knew you misunderstood. So I am, I want to know where Where's that chart that you said was presented? I've been looking for it, and I even asked you for it. I haven't seen it. And I miss a lot of things, no doubt about it. So you're telling me you have, running through the model, I know you're the rate consultant there, and I'm sure you've got it somewhere. You've got, this is the actual cost of services by customer category. There's a lot more information, too, I'd like to see. And this is the actual revenue. So matching revenues. with the actual model cost.

Revenue is being directed. We can sit down, Mr. Klepper, if you'd like, Mayor and Council.

Well, I'd like to see that information. If Mr. Camille says that slide exists, could we see that right now before we move forward? Because there's a big discrepancy here.

We'll check with Andy to see if we have it.

Yeah, Andy McCarney, Principal with NUGEN. So I think Mr. Klepper is a little bit mistaken. So when we do a cost-of-service study, some of you might remember the term the cash basis of revenue requirement determination. So what we're doing is using a prospective rate year to set the rates. So we're using the proposed budget and any known immeasurable changes that are to occur in 2027, and that's what we design rates for because rates will be going into effect on January 1st. So we do not look back except for the contract customers and compare actuals to the budget for two years ago, like I spoke about last week with the, I think in response to maybe Mr. Scott or Mr. Roy's question about why do we do this true up? That's the only time Corpus Christi Water does a true up. So it's not really part of the rate setting process. If we were using a historical test year, like you do with the utility bases where you have a rate base and other items, you would start with actuals and then make known and measurable changes. But that's not the methodology that we're using that the majority of municipally owned water and wastewater utilities use. And we do have a comparison based on the cost of service. In our model, and I believe it's been in prior rate study reports, there's even a graph. It's green and black showing the cost of service by class for residential, commercial, irrigation, and large volume compared to their cost of service to show the discrepancies. If you remember, I've talked about over this, this is the fourth year of doing the study. We've been trying to get the commercial as well as a residential to their their class based cost of service because they have been over recovering over the years and so this year we got large volume finally as close to their cost of service as possible like to the tune of eighty eight hundred and forty eight dollars I know I just looked it up the residential Inside is still a little bit over recovery. Commercial is a lot closer to their actual cost of service. So that's the whole point of a class-based cost of service and rate study is to drive all the customer classes as close to their cost of service as possible. Now, for example, the large volume we got within 8850, there's not one rate element that could have been adjusted because they would have gone from an $8,800 over-recovery to a major under-recovery by changing that rate one penny on the volumetric rate. So that's how many levers we're having to pull at one time to try to get classes. And if you remember, it was either during the budget workshop or last week where I said cost of service is a snapshot at one particular point in time using a year. So we look at some historical years and then try to do an average. I think this year we were using finally a three-year average. It was hard to use 2020 and 2021 because of the pandemic. We saw a lot of shifts in usage between residential and commercial. And so that's why we did not utilize those years for Corpus Christi Water, as well as for other of our municipally owned water utility clients.

And you're saying in the residential class, they're still overshooting from trying to get to that true cost.

Yes, and next year we're going to try to get that even closer.

But we're increasing?

Yes, we're still increasing. Everybody's bills are going up, all customer classes.

But if we were already trying to bring that toggle down, why are we going up again?

Because the rate structure, because you're setting the volumetric for outside equal to inside, the outside is still, I think, under-recovering somewhat. So we're trying to The outside city limit residential customers. So it's very complex. Ms. Paxton, it just is. And so we're trying to get it done over time.

Okay.

Okay. And we do have a graph rate revenue generated by customer class, but that's the whole point of the cost of service study. You have to do it over time. So there were, larger over-recover, so we're reducing it. We finally got commercial.

Can the AV control put the camera, the eye in the sky? Camille, you may have to move that forward a little bit. Nope. Yeah, move it towards the dais a little bit. Okay.

So this is the side I spoke about where we showed what's the recovery of the revenues per class. So based on the just like Andy spoke based on the expenditures per class we recover one for one. So the cost you know if we take residential based on the budget and allocation of the costs for residential class twenty six point nine percent of the budget operating budget is assigned to that class. we recover 26.9% out of the revenue to pay for that. So it's a one for one, basically. So that's why we showed it. And we had in previous years, we had when it was bar chart board next to each other, we just, the question was, can we see it by revenue class? So that's what we presented to council. That's by revenue class, but it's a one for one. Yes, there's always, you'll never get to a 0.00% recovery. There's always going to be fluctuation because you're talking about, at that point, tens, hundreds of a cent differences. And if you move it by one cent, you're going to over-recover here, under-recover here. So there's always going to be a small percentage thing. What you're looking for is not to have 50% over-recovery here, 50% thing. If it's 1% overall between the two, that's just... you will never get to the exact 0.00%. Okay.

Are you still on, Councilwoman? Yes. So with this chart, we're to assume what is embedded in this description is that these totals are also equal to the cost per class.

Yes, ma'am.

That's the assumption behind this chart.

Yes, because it's a cost of service. So the revenue that we recover has to be the cost of service for that class.

Thank you. Councilman Hernandez.

Okay, I appreciate the comments, but I think you're trying to overcomplicate what's being asked for, right? You know, you can look historically. And you can use actuals, you know, historical cost and then cost recovery based on class. I think, what, you have nine classes, right? Eight classes and then raw water wholesale customers. So, I mean, you can, I don't even know if you need to do that for that one, but you can, I mean, it's only eight of them, right? So if you do them in that sense, what your cost recovery is and what your cost is for that customer class, or if you look at it on a projected basis, what your projected costs and then what your estimated revenue comes in from what your rate structure is. We're not asking for anything complicated. What he provided was very simple. It's just for us to have a visual description of what the costs are and then what's a recovery from that customer class. It's not that difficult. We don't need to overcomplicate it. It's just a simple, on the projection side or on the historical side. Nothing complicated about it, okay? Secondly, I want to agree with Councilman Vaughn on the description of what these rates are for, right? We had the presentation on what that rate structure or the increases are designed for, and you put it in a little pie chart, okay? The project with the desale project is coming off of the capital improvement plan, right?

Councilman's it's currently not on inner harbor is currently not in the capital.

Okay, so for the 27 26 27 budget Inner harbor is not going to be on there. Correct. If you you know not accepting a grant doesn't affect what the rates are going to be That's correct. It's correct because it's not a project that's in our capital improvement plan. That's correct so I want to make sure that's very clear that not accepting a grant is for a project that we're not doing doesn't affect the rates.

You're correct.

Pretty simple. Okay, so I want to make sure that the basis of most of this increase is our increased operational cost and past debt service. And then we have some projection, I guess, what is it, 37% of what is for projected cost for future water sources? Right, 36%. That we're actually doing? So I just want to be very clear here. It's for past expenditures on debt that we accumulated, because our debt service increased, and then also increased operational costs. That's what it's based on. Very clear. Is that correct?

Yeah. Just one point to add on to that. So the wastewater operational costs did not increase over last year. And then the water operational costs. I was talking about water. We do have some, the operational costs are increasing. We do have some additions because of the new water supply projects. But I agree with you, Councilman.

What I was referring to is this graph right here.

Yeah.

This is the chart you talked about.

That's slide number six. Right. 36% is for new water.

operating expenditures, prior CIP project issuance, and debt service from the past.

Right. That totals, that's 64%, Councilman. Right. Is the prior debt service coverage, the prior approved CIP in the operating is 64%. Okay. I don't want to complicate this.

It has nothing to do with any grant recovery or anything like that. It just has to do with this particular, this is what it is.

Right. Okay. We have it on the screen.

Okay. So I just want to clarify that, emphasize what Councilwoman Vaughn had mentioned, and to be very clear as to what it's for. And you agree with what I just said? I did. Okay. Thank you.

Councilwoman Campos.

Thank you. Again, I'd like to just agree with Councilman Hernandez about just maybe it's being overcomplicated when it doesn't have to be. So I just, the pie charts are one thing, but I think also just having the graphs as comparison right then and there, it's just simpler to see. So I hope that that comes across.

It does, Councilwoman. Yeah, it does.

All right. Thank you.

I move for approval. Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. This is item number nine. Please submit your vote. Oh, we didn't. You're right. Thank you. Yeah. Well, is there anyone who would like to make public comment on item number nine? Okay, there being no one, please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Item number 10 is an ordinance amending Corpus Christi Code section 55-100 regarding wastewater rates. Who pulled that one? I'm sorry?

I move for approval.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. Would anyone like to make public comment on item number 10, wastewater rates? Okay, there being no one, we'll close that public comment. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you. The next item pulled would be item number 12, and that is a resolution authorizing a license agreement with Nueces County Tax Assessor Collector to allow designated city fleet personnel to be deputized by the Nueces County Tax Assessor Collector. Who pulled item number 12? Councilman Vaughn?

I'm just curious. I see on here it was to save time. Is that the reason you did it? It's to save time.

Juan Rivera, Director of Asset Management. Councilwoman, yes, it is to save time, and that's the reason why we did it. It's efficiency. So what we're looking is for an opportunity to get this approved and take it over to the county commissioner's office to reduce the time that my staff has to dedicate to this task. We receive the renewal through the mail individually, 30 to 40 per week for our 2200 vehicles. And my staff has to inform the department, inform accounts payable, wait a few weeks until accounts payable generates a check. Then we have to attach each check to each individual renewal, take it over to the county office, process it as a bulk item individually with each check attached to it, and then come back weeks later once the registration is printed. pick up and take back. The new process will allow us to have to deputize agents in the department that will do this during that week and can print those stickers the same day that they process the registration. The other part is we will be able to also pay for that service in bulk using our credit card and then funding it through our account, which is already being funded through fleet.

Any chance of abuse?

There is a possibility, however, I will tell you this. I think we have great people in fleet and a great manager who's going to oversee this process. I'm also going to ask the county to come out and inspect how we're doing business so there's no opportunity for abuse. That process is audited on a weekly basis.

Okay, so that's my concern is abuse. Okay, thank you.

I'll entertain a motion, or I'm sorry, is there anyone in the public that would like to make comment on item number 12? Okay, there being no one, we'll close public comment, and I'll entertain a motion.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Councilman Pax.

I'm sorry. I was preparing for 15.

I had pulled. Okay. Yeah. Our last item pulled is item number 15. Councilwoman Paxson. You know what? Let me say what it is. It's an ordinance amending section 10-86A, the code of ordinances by increasing the beach parking permit fee from $12 to $20.

Mr. Zanoni, I understand that... we share responsibility with Port Aransas, the county, and then us being the third partner to maintain the beaches. And according to that statute, we are allowed to charge a reasonable fee to maintain the beaches. What I'm not seeing through any of that legislation, any of the documents, is a requirement at this time to elevate those. I realize that the three parties had discussion earlier in the year, I believe it may have started last year, talking about the potential of making this change.

Correct.

But there's not actually anything requiring a change at this time.

That's correct. So the three entities, that's the fee and there's a presentation most likely by the staff, but the fee Hasn't been adjusted in how many years Jonathan 22 in 22 years. And so the 2 entities and the city have met as you said multiple times to assess increasing it. In order to increase it all 3 entities need to be an agreement with the rate. So Jonathan and team can talk about how we came to the $20 per permit fee. If you'd like.

I realize that we're looking at other coastal cities. I believe South Padre is $50 for an annual pass. South Padre is $100. Maybe Galveston is $50. I had those reversed. I apologize. For an annual pass. And I think that that gave credence to perhaps the recommendation for that $20, if I'm not mistaken.

Yeah, so Jonathan Atwood, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation. I do want to add that the GLO did mention it was probably time for us to increase our fees. based on the fees that have increased across the state of Texas, across the coastline. So it is up to us to come forward with that request and submit this to the GLO, but through numerous conversations with them, they understand we've been low for a very long time, and they've tracked our numbers, and it was a recommendation they provided as well.

We're looking too good compared to the other beaches. That's what it is, really. The number 20, who instituted or initiated that number?

So that was a discussion between the city of Port Aransas, Nueces County, and ourselves, coming up with an idea of what would be a correct fee increase. That would not be astronomical. There's no way we could go up to $50 or $100 like the other entities. That would still cover our expenses for each of the entities involved. And the number settled on was $20 based off of looking at our own books, Port Aransas looking at theirs, county looking at theirs, and coming to an agreement that was a reasonable amount since it has not been increased in 22 years, since 2004?

I think I know the answer, but just to hear it, there are provisions for local residents versus visiting guests. What does the legislation say on our authority to create two fees or a difference of fees?

So discussions with the GLO, We're very unique geographically. We all share basically one long stretch of beach. That's part of the reason we have this ILA. The recommendation they provided was to stick with a single annual permit and not try to separate this up into a local or a visitor or a day use fee or something like that, but to maintain what we have and increase to $20 basically.

Did they prohibit it?

They did not prohibit it.

Is there any such prohibition that you're aware of?

Not that I am aware of. Now, I will say they make the final decision. Once we pass this, we'll submit to them. If they decide that what we submitted to them is not applicable, then they could come back and say, no, this doesn't work.

Sure. Representing District 4, which is largely impacted by the beach and its goings-ons, I think there's a lot of people who wouldn't really feel an impact going from 12 to 20. But I think there's a very large voice that really feels ownership and their residents here with the beach. And I think that the city of Corpus Christi and its residents have gone through quite a unique last 18 months. And I think that we see that a lot of different fees are increasing. So my interest would be, potentially carving out for locals. And I haven't spoken to anyone in Port Aransas or Nueces. I don't have an issue with that applying to all three jurisdictions. But my interest would be to look at a rate for residents and then potentially that rate for that visitor.

Okay, I understand.

If we could perhaps...

You know, and we've had discussions with the local Surfrider Foundation chapter. We've had discussions with the Water Shore Advisory Board and a number of other people. One of the things mentioned was possibly doing a free beach day. That's something we're going to look at as well, once a year, similar to the free fishing day that Parks and Wildlife does. So there were a number of things that came up through discussion, and I think we can continue the discussion with GLO about future opportunities. But we're also in a time crunch to try to get this completed by the end of the year as well. So I want to keep that in mind.

By the end of the year, so we have almost five or six months.

So the GLO will need approximately 90 days to do their process. And so they're requesting that we have something in their hands by mid-August so they can go through their process and ultimately provide us a response before we have to start the next calendar year's permit sales.

Okay, 10-4, thank you.

And if I can, Mayor Jonathan, who of the other two entities besides us, have they approved the $20 already?

So everything was approved through the ILA that was approved here in February and then went through Port Aransas and the county as well about the same time. The other entities are, Port Aransas County will be amending their ordinance, which is basically the beach management plan. They have to do this amendment and send it to the state. Right.

The question is, did they increase the fee already? They haven't increased. They haven't approved it yet?

They are approving it based off of today's meeting, basically. We'll all be doing it together. Okay.

Councilwoman Vaughn. Okay, so to me, $12 to $20 is a big jump. I know you haven't had a fee in, what, 22 years? I get that. Is it $20 a year? Yes. Okay. So for some people, people on the island probably won't bother them, but a lot of people use the beach. So there are a lot of people, $20 is a lot of money. Families that take their, that's the only free thing they can go to, and that's a natural resource. I hate even charging anything, but I understand that you have to take care of the beach. Can you not... Just charge the tourist.

No. GLO says it needs to be basically a flat permit. If we're going to be charging one person, we're charging everybody.

So that's in the rules?

That's what they have provided us as a recommendation. I believe that's in their rules as well.

Per state code or something? Do we know that for sure?

I can confirm that, but that's what they told me. I did not pull that specific statute out so I could provide that, but yes.

And what bothers me is you're on a timeline. And so I wish that we would come maybe earlier so that you're not rushed. for a decision and trying to get it done. And I get that because you have to wait on the others too. But I just, I have a, it's such a big jump from $12 to 20. And maybe that's not much. Maybe some people don't care, but some people do. I just, find out if you will find out that answer for me on can tourists just be charged.

Okay, I can find that out.

All right, thanks. Councilman Scott.

uh so yeah so i would be interested in so if we raise the 20 and puerto ransas says no they don't codify it does that mean the deal's off yes okay well that's my point is it because that's what we don't want is somebody going oh i can get it for 15 in puerto ransas and so i'll go spend my tax dollars down there i get the 22 years i think that's interesting that we haven't done it so whoever made a pass at this thank you for not waiting 30 years to raise the rate, because it is a big jump, but after 22 years. Now, tell me why 20. I mean, is that based on this conversation we just had on water and wastewater and the cost of services? I mean, walk me through that.

Correct. I mean, so we started with a conversation with Port Aransas and the county, and I think everyone was looking at the cost of inflation and the pressure on their funds and what they're currently using to pay for beach maintenance. And 20 was an agreeable number based off of what we feel we need to collect to maintain services at the beach currently. Cost of inflation over the past 22 years since the last increase. And future plans. So some of this money can go towards beach renourishment. And we know that we need those projects as well. And so the number settled on was $20. So is the budget...

Is it budgeted to have a net at the end of the year? And you're saying you might use the funds for something else? Or is this all we decided it's going to cost? It used to cost us $10 to clean the beach or maintain services. Now it's $20, and that's why we have to charge. We want to charge $20.

We need to charge $20 to maintain the services that we provide right now.

Okay. I appreciate that. I like the idea of a free beach day. I think that's interesting. I think there would be some interest in that, but I certainly understand it. It's the cost of services, and I appreciate that you guys didn't wait another five years or whatever to bring this to us. I'd be a little concerned about a different fee schedule that I have to prove that I'm a citizen, and so that's one fee. I show up and I don't have a corporate address. I just think that would add to the cost of services to collect the fee structure. I think now it seems pretty simple. Nobody asks any questions. You show up, hey, I want to go to the beach. They charge $20. You get your tag, put it on your window and go. So I appreciate the work you've been doing on this. Thank you.

Councilman Hernandez.

Okay, so we're talking about increases, but in terms of the fees, but what are our current costs right now?

So our current costs right now, so we currently collect about $1.5 million from our permits, and we budget $1.5 million in expenditures every year, okay, or for the past year.

Well, it's not our only source of money for beach maintenance, right?

Correct. So we also get funding from the state hot tax. Shot fund, state hot tax, correct. With the current budget that we're looking at this year, we will have a deficit in the state hot tax fund because we have been offsetting the cost of our operations with state hot tax for a couple of years now.

So what's the revenue that we get from state hot tax? I don't have it up. I've got our budget up, but I've got the beach fees of $1.5 million projected. Is that going to be the actuals? Is that what we're estimating to be the actuals?

For this year? Well, we anticipated in 2024, 1.5, and we only received 1.49. Correct. Based off of permit sales for that year. Actual permit sales. Are we on track to make the 1.5?

We are on track for this year to make the 1.5. Okay. So in looking at just the combined totals and... Forgive me if I'm wrong, Peter, but I remember something about creating the enterprise fund for this. Is this part of that process?

I think we did something in this new budget on that.

So we're creating a special revenue fund this year.

Special revenue fund, okay.

Right, the 27 budget that was provided to you today.

So this is actually going to be moved into that special revenue fund as opposed to being just part of our permits that go into the general fund.

Correct, and part of that is because all dollars collected through permits have to stay at the beach. They can only be utilized at the beach, and this was something we discussed with the GLO about finding a correct way to separate those funds and show it accordingly.

Okay, are we going to be transferring the state hot tax fund into the special revenue fund as well? I just want to see it all in one place because right now it's not all in one place, so it's hard to say what we're doing. That's why I'm asking the question.

Well, I can let Peter weigh in, but state hot tax will need to be separated from the permits revenue collected. That's part of the reason we're setting up special revenue fund for permits. Now, what we may take and what we're looking at doing is shifting some of the beach rescue personnel and some of those other expenses that are currently hitting our state hot tax fund into this revenue fund.

So you also consider lifeguards as part of the beach maintenance?

Yes, beach rescue is also considered as applicable use for the permits, as well as all operations on the beach.

Okay, and so this is, you're going to have, when you do this for the budget presentation, make sure you pull out all the information from the general fund and what we're actually paying for personnel, cost associated with it. That way we see it all in one place, so we can see the revenues also from the state hot tax, as well as this fund here. I just, it... I just want to make sure we're not overcharging people for, you know, for maintenance that needs to be done. And, you know, looking at it, we just talked about this with water and wastewater to make sure that whatever we need is what we're actually charging. So, okay. So, all right.

And I will say, I think we've waited about as long as we can wait, you know, to do this increase.

Well, I mean, the increase is $1.1 million based on what you have here, based on projected revenues from last year. to what you're doing here, that's $1.1 million. It's a lot of lifeguards.

Total, plus the 16% that we give to the county. And then we're also planning on projects like re-nourishment that we're trying to put something in our pocket to be able to pay for that.

As I recall, the GLO helps with re-nourishment, right? They do, but many of these... Well, I know they do it on North Beach. I don't know about our South Padres.

Correct. They will help out in the Gulf Beach. We're still going through that process. There's permitting involved and things like that that we have to have in line before we can go request those funds for that nourishment.

Okay. So there's some... Make sure you spell out very clear for us in the budget process. Thanks, sir.

Councilman Paxson.

So this is what you said. We're trying to increase so that we have funding for bigger projects, which is maintenance, but... through a long-term lens, not just the daily maintenance and upkeep of the beach, basically.

This would cover daily maintenance and upkeep of the beach. The goal is that we would hopefully sell more permits and continue to increase permit sales as we go, which will hopefully maybe put a little bit of funding in the special revenue fund, which will go back to the special revenue fund at the end of the year if it's not spent. Does that make sense? So then we have that funding to be able to utilize whether it's for beach nourishment projects or other capital projects in the future.

We love the beach. It's part of who we are. It's part of our culture. I am 150% for protecting it and preserving it. But I don't believe we should be levying an additional tax to look at long-term projects on our open Texas beach. That's my issue here. So if we can maintain operations at the current $12, And I understand we haven't done anything in a long time. Costs go up. I totally get that. But as far as creating another fund out of this that we could go do things with.

And I want to clarify, we're not creating another fund. What we've done is separated the beach permit revenue from the general fund. Sure. So that we can clearly track it. And we can also show the GLO that all dollars collected from this permit are spent at the beach for beach operations.

But the definition there, all revenue from this would be spent for beach operations. That definition is not just taking out the trash, grading the surface, expense for lifeguards, personnel. It's going to also be added now long-term sustaining projects such as beach re-nourishment, such as projects, et cetera.

In the GLO... or in the state guide for how the funds can be used. Those are additional items that could be spent towards.

You're correct. They're permissible. Yes. But what it's up to us to decide is if that is a definition that we want to associate an additional cost to the people that want to go use the beach. That's up to us to try to determine. Right now, any of that is going to have to come out. like a CIP budget, whatever, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Are we putting this back on a fee is today's question.

What we're asking for right now will cover the operations that we have.

So my question is, I have two suggestion questions. You may not have the answer right now, and that's fine. One, a potential rebate system, where if you have a driver's license that says you live in the city of Corpus Christi, maybe Port Aransas, whatever it is,

Don't mean to interrupt. Mike Dyson, I'm Assistant City Manager. Just to make sure that was brought up by Councilwoman Vaughn, that is explicitly not allowed under Section 3115, local government should not impose a beach user fee, which discriminates on the basis of residence.

Okay, then that answers that question. Thank you, Mike. Then the next question would be the issue of going from 12 to 20. rather than 12 to 14 or something along those lines. Because this has gone from no change for a very long time, I think you said 22 years, to now jumping a pretty significant change here. This is over, this is almost doubling essentially. So what I would actually like to do is determine if we could talk to our partners and see if there's pallet to do a reduction in that jump to something like a 14 And you said you've confirmed there's no, there's no, here's my confusion. You said TCEQ recommended doing one fee for everyone, but I'm sorry. So sorry, wrong one. But now you're saying that it's, it's just not allowed.

Well, and that's probably the basis of their recommendation. So they gave Jonathan and his group a list of things that they would like to see. That's part of our beach management plan that we have ready to go. Uh, and again, this was part of the original discussion, the Adelaide that we brought to council, uh, in the spring, uh, to have that. So we've had those discussions with port a, the county, uh, and the GLO to make sure that this is consistent across the board with everyone. And again, one of those primary goals is to make sure, as you stated, the open beaches, these re-nourishment projects that are going to become consistent maintenance, not necessarily wants in a capital improvement project list. These need to be done in a consistent basis so we can have those beaches open. As they start to recede into the dunes, that's where the state can close off those beaches. I totally understand the renourishment.

I totally get it. I get the text if there's a bollard put out. I totally understand.

We do as well. We're the ones that do it.

But this is still an issue. It's a big jump. What I'd like to do, if the council is agreeable, I'd like... to get feedback from those other entities before we approve $20 and see if we can go from 12 to 14. And I, and I'm looking at y'all by default. So I'm going to turn back this direction.

So let's have either Michael or Jonathan talk about the, you've had a lot of conversations with the two other governing entities. They want a higher rate. Right.

The agreement to the ILA was the rate that they all agreed to. Yeah. So the 12 to 20 that we approved back, that y'all approved back.

We can go back and ask them. Yeah. We're probably going to.

If we go back and ask them, we will not be able to increase this by the end of the year, which means we will end up with.

Well, you said you have to have it by mid-August. So we could take action on the 11th.

Well, I can tell you the GLO emailed me last week and said, if I don't have something to them here in the next couple of weeks, it's not going to make it by the end of the year.

At worst case, we don't make a change.

Okay. Well, then there will be a budget cut because we have a deficit in shot this year that we will not be able to cover. So there will be a decrease in services provided.

So you need this to be by the middle of August or no? Because that's what was said earlier.

So the timeline for GLO is... The main thing is that they have to have 90 days of public comment. So for us to have those things in line for permit ordering, the accounting, getting that out to the merchants that sell them, again, working with the three entities on how that will be executed that's part of this greater timeline and again the $20 as Councilman Scott was pointing out we talked about we can't have a fee that is more than what our expenses are and then the overtime from that 2004 timeline we're actually under what the inflation rate was so it's not it's not a grab it's just a but if I may

Beaches are expensive we know that we know that re nourishing and things like that so there's not really if we're going to define that in our use there isn't an upper threshold we can continue to to basically spend and justify that cost so the 90 days. Is if we want to roll this out in January. Perhaps we roll it out for spring break maybe we don't do it in January.

If I remember correctly, the GLO is annual, so we would have to shoot for a January one. So if it's not this year, it would be next year.

It could be 2028. Right. I want to do this right. I want to be very conscientious about our locals. And if, if they, they have to, we have to have top consideration for what the impact is on our local groups here. I mean, Any given day, if you go out to Padre, there's no parking in the public parking. It is jam packed. So if I wanted to take my kids, $20 may not be something I have in my pocket to take my kids to the beach. Where am I gonna go? What am I gonna do? Go park three blocks away and go walk in this heat? Lord, we don't want someone, there's almost no visibility on the road either. It's so narrow. We have to think about the whole group. And I think a 12 to 20 jump is quite substantial. So if we can take action on this on the 11th, talk to our partners, see if 14's a number, that's what I'm interested in. Is that absolutely out of the question? Is that what we're saying?

At this point, we've had those discussions going on two years now, and $20 is really where it stands to do cost recovery, match that inflation rate as well, and make sure that we protect the beach from north to south.

Mr. Zanoni, for operations... Not not those other items was 14 evaluated.

I think many prices were evaluated with the team. So as I said it's at least in the last year and maybe two as he said the three entities through different representatives like Heather Holbert initially started this and then Michael Dice. and parks has been consistent. They've had numerous dialogues. There was an item that came to council for an agreement first. Correct. So there's been a lot of conversation in the past two years. Prices have gone up. Our costs have gone up to maintain the beach and lifeguards in last year's budget. With the help of Chief Wade, we've increased the qualifications for our lifeguards. In other words, the certification and the training and pay as well to be competitive with Port Aransas as an example. So I think the price can be justified. We're maybe not doing the best job today showing the cost, but that's coming in the budget. One other note is Port Aransas initially wanted to get out of this altogether because they wanted to charge a higher fee themselves. They didn't want to wait for the three-party agreement. We're able to keep them in. Everybody has to be in with the GLO. So we can go back and ask, but the detriment, the risk is we could lose another whole year if we can't get everything done in time. Okay. Okay, so.

Councilman Cantu, or I'm sorry, Councilman Roy first.

So, Peter, The funds that we raise in our area, does it go into one pot and then the three split it? How does that work?

Yeah, that's how it works, and Jonathan will give you the detail.

Yeah, so previously it was split up by linear feet or miles of beach, and so that was the old ILA. And so it all went into one pot and then was divvied up accordingly by linear feet of beach. In February, we approved a new ILA, which was a keep what you sell. So Port A will sell X number of permits, and they will keep the revenue from that. Same with us. We will sell X number of permits and keep the revenue from that. And then we both agreed to give the county 16% to maintain their beaches because they sell a small number of permits. They don't really have the ability to sell permits like we do.

So basically, the dollar amount, the reason why we're trying to keep it, consistent throughout the three areas is that because if, hypothetically, if Port A was at 14 and we were at 20, then people may opt just to go to their beaches. That's the mindset behind that, right? That's correct. Yeah, I was thinking about something kind of a little bit similar on the lines of what that we were just talking about in terms of tiering it, but I was thinking more in terms of if you're at 12 now, but before I go into that, why do we wait so long? Why do we wait so long to increase the fee?

Ma's opinion? because no one wanted to do it because it's going to be difficult.

Well, that plus councilman, it takes the three entities to collaborate, and that's taken two years just to get to today. So you've got Port Aransas, their city manager, their council, the county, the commissioners, the state park, what's it called, the county's park system. So it's a lot of collaboration. It's a lot of going to their meetings, sitting down. Everybody's not in the same location, so even just getting to get together takes time.

And working with the GLO as well.

And working with the state, which is another layer of time.

See, my suggestion was I was looking at this for maybe going to 12 to 16 for the 27-28 time frame and then going 16 to 20, kind of doing a two-step. But then you'd have to go back and get everybody's buy-in on that. And they're okay. They're ready to push the button at 20.

Yes, sir.

Mm-hmm. Yeah. Okay, that's all the questions I have. Thank you.

Councilman Cantu.

Thank you, Mayor. How much are we short if we don't approve this for the budget?

So I believe the shot was, last look, about $400,000 in deficit. And so what we're looking to do is relieving the shot fund with additional revenue and beach permits so we can maintain the same level of services.

So we're going to be short $400,000? Yes. I get the fact that people think $20 is not a lot of money for most of us in here. Me personally, I do know a lot of families that, single mothers that make less than $20,000 a year and have four or five kids and they go to the beach all the time because it's more or less free to enjoy time with their families, memories you know they don't have the luxury to go to the state aquarium and spend 400 bucks in one day i went to the state aquarium with me my girlfriend and i think we paid like 150 bucks for both of us you know it's pretty expensive um and the beach belongs to all of us i think it's it's it's beautiful we have a beautiful beach and i think it's just um a place that a lot of families that we don't consider a lot in these chambers, um, enjoy it. And that's all they could really afford. Um, and it's sad, but it's a truth. I think 25% of families out there right now are making less than $20,000 a year. Um, And I'm with Councilman Roy. I mean, we waited so long to do this, and the increase is just so high. It's a lot of money for certain people, and I think some of these council members here are out of touch with the reality of what families are going through today. Tickets. How much is our revenue with tickets do we have when people don't have a beach permit? Are we are we unfortunate or we're not unfortunate?

So, yes. And over the past year, we have stepped up our enforcement of those beach permits and decided we have gone through a phase of transitioning from paper.

tickets to electronic yes sir um so i don't have that number directly in front of me but i got something i can get for you is that something that ccpd does or somebody just on the beach we have four beach enforcement officers that patrol throughout the week on various schedules got it um okay that's all the questions i have right now i just wanted to um voice my concerns and um

Yeah, and I would like to note that we also have, I mean, several free parking areas along the beach. We've got a map on our website that says where those parking spaces, those areas are. Windward Parking Lot is one of the primary ones right there along the seawall. There's many areas along the county beaches that are free as well, and they're spread variously from here through to Port A.

Okay. I just feel like the beach is just... It just should be off limits. I don't think we should be charging so much money to enjoy our beach. That's one thing in life that we can enjoy and not worry about things and not worry about pain and having our kids go out there and play and make memories. And I get it, $20 is not a lot of money for people in these chambers, but in the outside world, I just know so many families, like, $20 would kill them. It's just, imagine making $300 a week and having four kids. I mean, it's tough. It really is. But okay, thank you.

Councilman Hernandez.

Okay.

some advice is it please have what your expenses are before you ask for an increase okay I looked at the state hot tax fund I'm looking at the budget right now I have it in front of me your projections are to have an ending fund balance from two million at the beginning of the year to a hundred thousand this year I mean at the end of this year okay so obviously there's a shortfall because you have the occupancy tax generating 4.2 million, but your expenditures are 6.3 million. Okay, so if you would have explained that you're spending more than you're making, and you need to make more revenue to compensate for not getting, for actually having only $100,000 projected, but you said you had a negative 400,000.

When we ran the math to set up for this year, As we're also running the numbers for this increase, we're looking at having a negative $400,000, which is why we will shift some of the personnel from the shop fund into the beach permits.

Well, it says here that your Gulf Beach Lifeguards, or you called them something different. Beach Rescue, yes. Gulf Beach Lifeguards Beach Rescue. The cost is $1.9 million? Correct. Not to mention the McGee Beach Lifeguards. Correct. You also have park enforcement, maintenance for Gulf Beach, McGee Beach, and North Beach, totaling $6.3 million, and your revenues are $4.3 million. Okay, that's just from the state hot tax. If you would have couched it that way, that you need funding to compensate for the revenues that you don't have and the lack of a budget, I mean the lack of the reserve balance, This would have been a lot easier discussion. Okay. Okay? So, you know, any time that you bring a cost increase, I look at what your costs are or what your projected costs are. So I want to make sure that we're looking at this from a very, you know, business standpoint. If you don't have money coming in, it's hard to provide the services or keep people employed as lifeguards. Correct. Okay, so just, you know, this is why I said when you come to us back with the budget, You need to show us exactly how much revenue you got coming in for all the beaches and how much your expenditures are because this $20, I mean, you just say, well, we're going to $20, but you don't explain why. Okay, so you need to have the explanation. You know, I can extrapolate it, okay, but I need you to do that, right? I need you to provide us that back rep so we can justify to the public that, Okay, the reason we have to do this is because we don't have enough money to cover our expenses. This is why. This is what would cost for, you know, I just mentioned, Gulf Beach lifeguards, $1.9 million. It's a lot of money, but you've got to have lifeguards. So I want to make sure that, you know, and I don't want to do your job for you, okay? You've got to make sure you tell us exactly what you need and why. Yes, sir. Okay? Thank you. Yes, sir.

Council Member Hernandez, that's very good advice. I think that would have helped a lot if you could do it. Maybe it's in your presentation. If it is, I don't want to see it now. Actually, if you want to show it, you can. I didn't mean it like that. The only thing I was going to point out, I think based on buying power, $20 today is a better deal than $10 22 years ago. I think if you do the CPI, you go, God, it's actually less... than it was 22 years ago at $10. And it's either that or we can't provide the services that we, or unless we cut elsewhere, but we need this to be able to continue to provide the services. But I think Council Member Hernandez gives good advice. That would have been really smooth to go. And if you do need to go over it again, if you have that in your presentation, that's okay too.

Sorry, Councilman. No, it's not necessarily in the presentation, but we did have this item at Council in February with a 7-2 vote, so we did have that information then, and we thought it would be an easy request based on that vote, so that I'll take fall for it.

I think, actually, who takes the hit are our visitors, because, you know, if you're a Corpus Christian and you're going multiple times, I mean, I get it's $10 more, but it's really that visitor who came a year ago and paid $10 and comes back and But the good news is, okay, you can go to South Padre and pay $100, or you can go to Galveston. I love my Galveston friends, but I don't want to go to that beach, and that's $50. And it's not like you would leave Corpus and go to Nueces County beaches or Port Aransas because they're all the same. So I get it. Okay. Well, thank you. I'm good.

Councilman Bonetta.

How much does it cost to get into Lake Corpus Christi State Park?

I think Corpus Christi, that's worse. Four dollars.

Four dollars each. CCW. Yeah. That's managed by CCW. We'll try to get that answer for you. Any idea how much it costs to get into Mustang Island?

Mustang Island, I think, is $90 as well. Don't quote me on that. I need to confirm that.

But that's the last number I checked. $70 a year. $70 a year? Okay. Yeah, and it's like, I think it's like $10 for each time you go in. Yes, for each day that you go in. For each day that you go in. Correct.

Yeah, Rockport Beach is $40 for an annual permit and I believe $7 a day. You're saying what? Rockport Beach is $40 for an annual pass and $7 a day. And then McGee Beach?

McGee Beach is free. North Beach? Free. Okay. So I know we're trying to deal with a lot of anecdotal information with regard to And I know sometimes we're reluctant to raise fees, and I think that's the challenge, is that you have public policy that, or those that make the policy are reluctant to raise a fee any time. And as I've always said, we're subject to the same levels of inflation just as any other organization is, and I think the fact that we've held it for so many years is, you know, and the fact that how much time have you spent on this? How much time has the three organizations spent on this? Four, really, if you count the JLO.

Yeah, I mean, like Mr. Dice said, I think discussion started at least two years ago, but we've been heavy at it for about a year.

So, obviously, you've done your due diligence, and this was a consent agenda item, and, you know, I just think a lot of times a lot of this dialogue can be taking place once the agenda comes out. But I obviously support it. You know, I support it. I think when we talked about raising the fees for using some of the facilities that I think, and I pointed out to you that when my daughter got married 12 years ago, 11 years ago, it was the same price to rent the facility as it was the last year. So, you know, we just need to be conscientious of that and look at it from a perspective or at least in a consistent level so that way, you don't have this huge, what seems like a big jump, even though it's less in today's dollars than what it was so many years ago. And I think, I used to live on the beach, and I think it was $8 when I was in high school, and that was, dare I say, 1982. So anyway, obviously support.

Councilwoman Vaughn.

Kaylin, I didn't know you had kids. You said, when I take my kids to the beach. I'm sorry, that was just a joke. Okay. We're saying, what kids? Do y'all have any bathrooms that you have to maintain?

Yes, so we maintain the bathrooms at the windward parking lot. We also have porta-potties spaced across the beach through our entire 7.8.

Okay, just curious. Mr. Sinoni, I just have one criticism. We can't do these things at the 11th hour. You know, so to me, if we're rushed because he says, and I get it, you need the vote now, you've been waiting on other entities too, I get it. But from now on, I would like it to where we don't have to rush it. We have a little time left, maybe a couple weeks.

Okay, understood. We did bring the ILA back in February, but that didn't have the rate in it, right? It did. It had the rate? Okay, so back in February, we announced the $20. Today is just the vote. That's why it's not.

Okay, but you know we're not going to remember that. That was back in February. You're going to have to read.

Probably should have done some one-on-one.

We get a lot of stuff up here, man.

Yeah.

But I'm not going to criticize you for your presentation. I know it was hard, but thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah. All righty. So we're going to, well, we need open public comment. Those who are in the audience that would like to make comment on 15, just come down here.

One thing I don't trust is a guy speaking fast with a time budget with taxpayer money at stake. They said, you know, 90-day public comment. I stay pretty focused on what's happening here. I don't see anything about public comment for the beach rates going up. It's the beach. God-given. If he didn't want us to have the beach, he would have made a cliff. But we have a beach. So why are we being paid so much to enjoy a natural resource? And I get cleaning it. I got it. But has anybody thought about advertising to get a coalition of volunteers, environmentalists? Hey, come on, let's do this and clean up the beach. Wouldn't that save us some money? Why don't we ask for volunteers? A lot of people online are saying how this is ridiculous. And you have one guy who said he's for it. But. To $20, I say cap it at $15. Gas prices are going up. Groceries are growing up. My wife goes to H-E-B. Walmart gets just a handful of groceries. $80. Where did that come from? Taxes are rising. Now we've got the water rates and sewage rates going up, which I understand. But really, and they were saying without any hard things, well, it's suggested. So if it's suggested, and technically we don't have to listen to that, we can make our own. So I just want to say that, again, I don't trust a guy fast-talking with taxpayer money is at stake with a time limit. I don't think it's fair. And for the free parking... There's not much for accessible, especially someone who has to have a wheelchair ramp. What about accessibility? It's jam-packed for the free parking, but forget the disabled. Forget those who at least want to enjoy the beach, you know, not staying locked up in their home. Hey, let's go to the beach. Oh, sorry, can't get your wheelchair out. It's too packed. Oh, I don't got 20 bucks to go for the parking. I think more things need to be considered. There wasn't even a hard fact paper graph to show what's what and i think transparency i think the people want to see penny for penny you spend this much let's see it for sure was it actually spent because i think we would have had enough if money laundering wasn't happening thank you anyone else

name, right? My name is Lisa Yanez. I live in Ms. Paxton's area. So over the last 25 years of living by this beach, I haven't seen anything better. Have you guys? Have you seen anything, any improvements that we haven't paid for? So you want to raise how much that is going to cost for us to go to the beach. We paid for a pier to get built that we have to pay to walk on it. I mean, he was talking about the lifeguards. Where? Where are they? I understand in South Padre and in Galveston, about every 50 yards, there's a tower where the lifeguards are to watch the beach. I've never seen one here. I see the officer's patrol. I've never seen a lifeguard. I don't know what improvements are being done to our beaches. There used to be, over at Bob Hall Pier, there used to be a slab of cement where people could park without a permit. That doesn't exist anymore. There used to be covered benches that used to exist to protect people from the sun. It doesn't exist anymore. So where do you want our money going? I don't see it. I see our beaches getting worse. The bathrooms? You can use a port-a-potty, sure. The bathrooms are locked. Always locked. I don't understand. And then the mess on the beaches? I've gone out with the environmentalists to clean the beaches. I've never seen city workers clean the beaches. I just don't understand. More and more money coming out of our pockets, and it doesn't seem like anybody's doing anything for it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Mayor. I'm a little nervous. I view the beach more or less as a type of entertainment. And when I go to other places, oftentimes they do have a charge, a daily charge And in addition, they give you the choice of an annual charge, such as an amusement park. And I haven't heard anything this morning or this afternoon that says what is hampering us from having both the annual and the daily charge. The only additional fee I could maybe see is printing additional stickers or a daily pass. And so I would like to suggest keeping the annual fee at $12 and having maybe a daily fee of $5. Because people that come from the outside or just don't often visit the beach, you're still going to get $5 a day from them. If they come four days in a row from outside, that's $20 right there. That's what I have to say, and thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you. Anyone else? It will close public comment on item number 15. We do have a motion and a second. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Okay, so the council, it is 2.37. The council will go into executive session on items 28 through 30 per Texas government code sections 551.071 and 551.072. We will return. Okay, good afternoon everyone. We're gonna go ahead and resume our meeting. And we are on section K, and that is public hearings, items 16 and 17. So we'll go to item 16, that is an ordinance adopting the city fiscal year 2027 and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, program year 2026 annual action plan for the Community Development Block Grant budget in the amount of $3,703,414, the emergency solutions grant budget in the amount of $232,640, and the home investment partnership program budget in the amount of $3,507,376.36 for a total of $7,443,430.36 annual HUD funding. That was long-winded.

Jennifer?

Good afternoon. I'm Jennifer Buxton with Planning and Economic Development. This is the annual plan that we submit to HUD for Community Development Block Grant, Home Investment Partnerships Program, and the Emergency Solutions Grant. We're required to submit a couple of plans. Every five years, we submit a new consolidated plan that sets priorities, goals, and objectives for the federal funds. Our current consolidated plan is for FY24 through 28. Every year we're required to submit an annual action plan and this that we're presenting today is the fourth of five years. The annual action plan covers 3 different funding sources the community development block grant which is for low to moderate income persons supports development activities to build stronger and more resilient communities. Emergency solutions grant which supports the homeless community and those at risk of homelessness and the home investment partnerships program which is solely affordable housing for low income households. The timeline for the annual action plan, we had public input meetings on March 4th and March 5th. We released the NOFA's on April 1st. We held a technical workshop on April 9th. Applications were due to the city on May 1st. There was a public comment period from June 21st through July 27th. We're here today for the first reading in the public hearing. There'll be a second reading and adoption on August 11th, and we're required to submit to HUD on August 16th. We're recommending quite a few projects this year. They include our minor home repair grant program for about 38 homes, five code enforcement officers, Two different public facilities projects, which includes about a million dollars into CDBG-eligible census tracts citywide and Lavratama Library ADA bathrooms design and construction. Five to 10 neighborhood cleanups. Corpus Christi Hope House for some renovations at their facility. Mother Teresa Shelter for some rehabilitation at their men's transitional housing facility. five FTEs for program administration, six FTEs for program delivery. That's on the CDBG side. For the emergency solutions grant, we're recommending Corpus Christi Hope House, the Salvation Army, Mother Teresa, and the little bit of admin that we're able to claim on that grant. And for the home program, What we would like to do is go back out for applications for rehabilitation of about 500 units of affordable housing for units that are at risk and that are aging that need to be brought up to standards. Single family rehabilitation, that's another city program where homes are either rehabilitated or they're demolished and reconstructed if the condition is severe. so bad that they can't rehab them, Habitat for Humanity for their land acquisition and new construction program, and then program administration. And I'm a standby for any questions.

Councilman Paxson. Thank you.

Jennifer, thank you so much for your presentation. Is my understanding correct that basically the department that's going to administer all three of these different charges, collectively 100% of their cost or their salaries, if you will, is maintained in these funds? The general fund does not pay for those staff members at all?

No. The assistant director of the department that oversees this is 65% grant funded and 35% general funded because that position, all of the work is not grant eligible. So there.

The majority of the positions are 100% funded.

All of the positions except for the assistant director are 100% grant funded from CDBG, home, ESG, and home ARP. Right. It's just that one position.

Okay. Okay.

And at the bottom of the matrix for the CDBG section, those are the other applicants?

Yes. Well, no. Yes. There's only one applicant for CDBG that we're not recommending this year. That was the Merced Housing Texas Navigation Point Apartments. And then we listed... three other applicants that applied last year that did not request this year and are not receiving funding. We usually list at least one year going back so we can see what we did last year versus this year.

Okay.

But lines 10, 11, and 12, there are no applications for those this year. Fabulous.

I appreciate it. And I really love that there is so much focus on these three tranches going very directly into funding

high use applications and that means a lot to me i mean my hat's off to you thank you for that thank you councilman scott i just want to council members this used to be oh my it was just a god-awful experience uh through no no applicants fall to their own it just wasn't a smooth staff process that became overly politicized john you may remember some of that but Thank you for what you've done. Thank you for the process that you all have created. Thank you for the way you work with the applicants. Thank you for spreading magic dust and making this, you know, of all the things we have. I mean, I think they're great causes, but I think you guys deserve a lot of credit to how smooth it goes. And, Peter, I want to thank you and your staff for that. I'm okay with the recommendation. I just want to point out what a great process you guys have created. Thanks.

Yeah, thank you, Councilman.

Can I just add, I just want to highlight, because Jennifer did say it, but it was combined. So there is a million dollars in sidewalks in this recommendation. I know several council members have been advocating for that, including Compost and Paxson in my one-on-one meetings with her. So this budget for the first time, and really our budget in general for the first time, now has a dedicated, at least for one year, source of money for sidewalks, $1 million to be used citywide. and we'll come up with an approach of how that's done. The sidewalks do have to be in eligible areas, census track, HUD census track eligible areas, but I think we have those in each of our five districts. Okay, so that's just an important note that finally compost, Councilwoman Compost, we have some sidewalks. Okay?

Okay, thank you, Peter. I'm gonna open public comment. Is there anyone in the audience?

Oh, Councilwoman Vaughn, sorry about that. Just curious, sidewalks. $1 million seems like a lot of money. What's that going to cover, realistically?

You know, is Ernesto here?

He's in the back.

I'm sure he just heard and is coming out right now. He's coming out right now. I'm just curious. Yeah, we've done a pilot program, so we know per linear section how much it costs. And so, Erin, he's going to tell us the answer. Ernesto?

I'm going to pull this up.

Good morning mayor council Ernie de la Garza interim assistant city manager director public works, and I get my list up real quick apologize Okay, go ahead question

I was just wondering how much that's going to cover for sidewalks, a million dollars, realistically.

So we are three projects in from our pilot. If you recall, we started our sidewalk pilot. And then from that sidewalk pilot, we do plan to give you all a presentation of the outcome. I'm showing you the metrics. And so we're looking at about $80 a square foot. But it's really just a matter of the ability to do the work in-house. The challenge is more so the design than it is the work itself. If we were to go in and give this to a consultant for some of these older neighborhoods, it would be a huge challenge. We are quite frankly doing design build. And so we have the standard detail. We have our construction crews. And then we have Manuel Hernandez, who's key because he's a surveyor and a construction expert. And so what he does is he gets with the foreman, boots on the ground. And per every house, they're pretty much fixing the problem by saying, this is a slope you need. These are the type of ramps you need, so on and so forth. And so we're going to bring all of that information to you all at budget time. so that you can see those metrics and see how it's more cost effective to do it in-house than it is to have a designer and a contractor come, and then we still have to do our TDLR at the end. That's another challenge because we've never had that process where we bring TDLR for in-house work, so that's another puzzle that we're trying to solve right now with the current work. But the long answer and the short answer is we can do it in-house. We have the skill set to do it in-house, and it's cheaper.

And so you're telling me we're not going to have to pay anything for a design. I mean, who in the heck needs to design a sidewalk? I mean, seriously, it's just a sidewalk.

It actually is.

Oh, don't tell me it's complicated, Ernie. Please don't tell me that. I'm sorry, ma'am.

It's just a sidewalk. It is very complicated when you have tree branches and tree trunks. You have landscape. You have old concrete that's beat up, old neighborhoods. Then you're tying into private property driveways and everyone is in different shape. It is very complicated for an engineer to design. It's easy for us to do it in-house because we just tell our own workforce what to do.

Okay. Can't wait to see how much that covers.

Yeah. We will show you, and then we also have the pictures of everything that you need.

All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am.

Ernie, so a couple of things. So we're allocating money before we know what the program looks like or is costing?

For this program? Yeah.

I mean, it sounds like that's what we're doing.

So from what I understand, we have a million dollars to do in-house work, sidewalk. What we have to do next is go pick the locations based on the tracks and the rules of the CD.

But we don't know how much, to Councilwoman's point. We don't know. We know it's $80. Do we have a program? That says, this is how much it's going to cost, this is how much sidewalks we're going to reconstruct with this money.

I can get you that information, yes.

These are the district, yeah, but it seems like that should be, we're allocating money, so this money was going to go somewhere. That's my next question. So hang on, though. I do want to know, because typically there's a program with all of the details in it.

Correct.

and then you allocate money to it, and I'm for sidewalks, believe me, but I think that today we're saying, take a million dollars, and I'd like to know who would have gotten that million dollars, and let's allocate it to sidewalks, which there's a need, but we're not hearing about this full-blown program for the sidewalks, and maybe you have it, I don't know, but it's not here today, so I'm just curious, we're gonna, If we pass this item, a million dollars gets put away for sidewalks, but the program details are coming?

Correct, yes.

And when are they coming?

Budget, budget. During the budget? During the budget, yes, ma'am.

You're going to tell us about the program?

I'm going to tell you about the program, the cost, and what I could do with that money, yes.

And is this sustainable after the million dollars is gone?

That's gonna be part of the presentation. So when we first, if you recall, when we first initiated the pilot program, I didn't have budget to do that. And so now, originally before this money came available, I was gonna present to you the pilot results and then explain to you all what the cost was and then if you wanted to fund it as a program moving forward, this is what it costs and this is what you can get for that money.

All right, well, we need to keep that in mind. It's not sustainable, and that's not on you. No, you're correct. This money came out, I don't know who found it, and that's great, but this is every year, right, that this comes before us?

Yeah, this is it, right.

Okay, so every year, we're gonna take this mill, or we don't know.

No, we don't know.

So where would this money, Jennifer, thank you, Ernie, where would this money be going if not for this program this year?

Can I, I wanna address two things. And that question is one of them. But first, I understand that the timing is a little, we're doing this and then we're doing the general fund budget. I want to refer everybody to the timeline. We have to submit this to HUD on August, in the middle of August. And then HUD will release our grants on October 1st, which will then get us in line with the city budget. If for some reason city council does not decide to move forward with the sidewalk program, We will come back, we can reprogram this, or we can try and just do the million, whatever comes out of those budget conversations. But to move this forward in a timely manner, we'd like to be ready to go on October 1st, so that if council decides to move forward with what's being proposed by Public Works, that we're ready to go. If not, we'll reprogram. As for what this money would have gone to, we would have put some of it into minor home repair, and we would have put some of it into city facilities like parks.

Okay, that's good to know. Minor repair program.

It is. However, the minor home repair program, between the minor home repair program and the single family rehab program, we've maximized our staff this year with what we've put in there. So if we had put more money in minor home repair, it would not have been a more significant amount because between the two, we've got more money in single family repair this year too. We're hitting our staff limit.

Right.

Okay.

But again, next year, this comes back around.

It will come back. This funding. Yes, ma'am. This will come back around.

Okay. All right.

Thank you.

Yes.

Councilman Hernandez. Oh, there you go. All right.

Okay. I understand that we would have to ask for this every year from the block grants, right? The sidewalk money, right?

In order to continue to fund it, yes, we would have to put it in the annual action plan every year.

Okay, I don't see that. I almost look at that as minor home repair as well because it's usually in front of somebody's house, right? Right, so I don't see that necessarily as a negative from minor home repair. The other side of this is that, and I agree with Ernie, that this needs to be an in-house program because you can maximize that million dollars. And this has to do with government procurement and the state law, all right? We would have to go hire an architect, we'd have to go hire an engineer, and then we would hire a contractor. We can't just go hire a contractor. By having this as an in-house program, we can utilize our own staff to avoid all that and avoid the timeframe that it takes so we can actually spend that money properly.

And I'm not laughing at you, I promise, but Ernie and I just went rounds about this in the staff room in the back. Federal procurement and Davis-Bacon are most likely going to still apply They're just going to apply to our internal processes.

Exactly. Last time I checked, all our employees at the city are U.S. citizens, right?

Yeah. If he has to buy... We're using American concrete, right? Yeah. As far as we know. If he has to source materials that will still be subject to federal procurement, we're still going to have to verify city wages that they're Davis-Bacon wages. We're still going to have to do an environmental review on every little bit of sidewalk that he wants to do. However... by not having to procure for a contractor, we, one, save time, and two, probably save money.

We'll save a lot of money. So just for the explanation of it, having an in-house program saves a lot of money with regards to all the professional services you would be required if you contracted it out. So I agree with it being an in-house project.

Now, I'm not making the promises that that's what he's going to be able to end up at the end of the day. Well, I don't know.

He can say it himself. Would we be able to do more if we did it in-house versus contracting it? All right. Thank you.

Council Member Kempis.

Thank you. Very, very, very grateful for this because, I mean, as long as I've been attending city council meetings, I've been asking for sidewalk relief, you know, for our constituents. So, yes, this is a beginning, and I'm so glad that Ernie and his team were able to at least initiate a program that we now have an idea as to what the costs and how much we'll be able to get. So I applaud your team for allowing this to be spent on the sidewalk. So again, thank you very much. And hopefully the residents will see some relief soon. Thank you.

Okay, Jennifer, thank you. I'm gonna go ahead and open public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to make comment on item number 16? Just go ahead and come on up.

Mm-hmm.

Okay. Um, my name is Deborah Swaga and I'm district five and mayor and council members. We're just here on behalf of Corpus Christi Hope House. We are here just to tell you, thank you for the support throughout the years. And then also, um, to be recommended for this new funding, uh, the ESG and CDBG funds. Uh, this allows us to help the homeless to, um, you know, funds that are needed for the improvement to improve the living conditions and quality of life for our residents and clients. So basically thank y'all for taking the time. You know, we, Network with Catholic Charities, Salvation Army. I just wanted to put a phrase with the name of Hope House. I don't think that y'all ever been out to come visit us. We'd love for y'all to come do a tour. So whenever y'all are available, please come out. Thank you. And thank y'all again.

Thank you for being here. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, I'm going to go ahead and close public comment, and please submit your vote. Item number 17 is zoning case number ZN9187, MVR Construction Company, located in District 3. Okay, we have a motion and a second. This is a rezoning of a property at or near 5040 Rockford Drive from RS6 to RS6 slash PUD. Let's see, I'm going to go ahead. Councilman Paxson.

Thank you. I was just curious. I noticed that the deviations they're asking for do shrink those lot sizes and going from what we would normally put in a five acres 33 to 28. I am very excited to see development on the west side. I think this is but I would love to hear more. I don't know if there's something that's already been submitted. I don't know if maybe the developer is here and forgive me if he is and I'm not trying to skip over him by not recognizing him, but I would like to know a little bit about the project, like what he's bringing, because I want to feel confident that if we're going down to smaller spaces, that there's a really good benefit that's coming to this neighborhood for that. And again, I'm happy that it's here. I'm very happy we're doing something on the west side, but I'm curious about that.

So I can speak to that. So there has been an increase on demand for more affordable housing, the smaller lots, you know, the lower price ranges, maybe under that $200,000, where a lot of the stuff that's being constructed right now is $280,000 and well above. So this is a trend that we're seeing, and it actually supports Senate Bill 15 that was recently passed. We haven't put that into the Unified Development Code yet, but we're working on that text amendment that supports those 3,000 square foot lots. And there's even jurisdictions that have gone down even smaller than 3,000 square feet. 3,000 square feet is probably what we'd be looking at, and we've had some requests and interest for 35,000 square feet and 4,000 square feet. So there's definitely interest. This is just the first one that this came across, and because we haven't amended the UDC yet, we had to bring this forward as a PUD because that zoning doesn't exist today.

Okay, I see. Thank you for that explanation very much. Appreciate it.

Okay, we have motion and a second. Is there anyone in the public that would like to make comment on item number 17? Okay, there being no one, we'll close public comment. Please submit your votes. Okay, the motion carries. We're going to go to section L, individual consideration items 18 through 25. Item number 18 is an ordinance ordering a general election to be held on November 3rd, 2026 in the city of Corpus Christi for the election of mayor and eight council members.

I move for approval. Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there anyone in the public that would like to make comment on item number 18? Okay, there being no one, we'll close public comment. Please submit your vote. The motion carries. Item number 19 is an ordinance ordering a special election to be held on November the 3rd of 2026 in the city of Corpus Christi on the question of continuing the Corpus Christi Crime Control and Prevention District and associated sales tax for 10 years.

I move for approval. Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. I'm going to ask for public comment. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to make public comment on item number 19? There being no one, we close public comment. Please submit your vote. Okay, the motion carries. Item number 20 is a discussion and possible action on an ordinance placing city charter amendments on the ballot for the November 3rd, 2026. The ballot for the November 3rd, 2026. As requested by Council Members Carolyn Vaughn, Kaylin Paxson, and Gil Hernandez. Okay, Councilman Hernandez. Go ahead.

Okay. I want to make sure everybody understands that this came from a 2020... Charter Commission that we have been kind of pushing off for the last six years. For whatever reason, whether it was COVID or water crisis or other things that have come up during the time frames that we had the opportunity to put this on the election. So I thought, since this is my last term as a council member, that I'd go ahead and get this through. I understand that, you know, everybody's a little hesitant to go to four-year terms or address some of the other issues that are on here. But these all, with the exception of the two-cent property tax for streets, which is a discussion that, Buck, I'll let you kind of get into with Peter. These were all recommendations or variation thereof from the Charter Commission. Didn't necessarily agree with everything, but made something a little bit more palatable. I remember the discussion of going to all single-member districts, which was the recommendation of the Charter Commission, was not exactly fully accepted, considering that you would only vote for two, every person in the city could only vote for two council members. By maintaining the existing structure of three at large, a single-member district and the mayor, every citizen can vote for five council members. The other aspect with the federal minimum wage, the recommendation from the charter commission was to double the pay for both the council members and the mayor, but it was still a stagnant number. The amount really back then when this was put in place back in the 1980s was around the federal minimum wage at the time, which I think was close to $2.05 or something like that per hour. This would just tie it to something that will make its own increases. The federal minimum wage, the federal minimum wage right now is, I believe, $7.25 an hour. I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing to pay your council members minimum wage. And the rest of them are also still recommendations. The difference on the petition required, it only takes five people to put on a petition for removal process That's the lowest amount so what we looked at was for the amount that you would have to do a petition for to get on the ballot is 0.5 percent of the total people voted in that previous election so that was what we You know what came up with to make it a little bit more have a little more robustness to it the that the recommendation from the Charter Commission was to eliminate that altogether. I didn't think it should be eliminated, but to make it again more palatable, have something associated with it and still have in conjunction with what the Charter Commission had intended. Everything else, the two-thirds portion of it was also recommended by the Charter Commission. That is pretty much the gist of it. Now, I understand this is ultimately not something that we are voting on personally. This is just put to the voters for them to vote on. The two cents one, and I'll just kind of cover it briefly, was part of the two plus two plus two initiative that was done back, I believe, when you were on council back in 2008, a long time ago. We were never able to get those last two cents because of the state law change where it limited us to the no new revenue tax rate of 3.5%, so it didn't give us the opportunity to take that final two cents. Now, since it was a long time ago and voted on a long time ago, most voters don't remember it, it was important that I think we should allow them to reconsider that last two cents, whether they want to include it for streets, and it would be solely for streets. Nothing else can't be used for the regular general fund. Just like the other four cents would be specifically for streets. Nothing else. So it'd have a guaranteed revenue source for street repair. Now the problem where we got into trouble was that we were not doing preventative maintenance. This guarantees a funding source that can't be moved to something else to cover up a budget gap somewhere else. It's strictly for streets. So I want to give the voters the opportunity to say whether they want that the final two cents that they voted on back in 2018 or not. So this was a discussion with myself and some staff to include that as part of this effort. There may be some of these items that you don't want to put on the agenda, on the ballot, but I think we have the opportunity to pick and choose which ones do go on the ballot at the very least to have the discussion on it.

Right.

Thank you.

Last council meeting, Councilman Cantu asked for individual votes on all 10 items. Right.

So, Buck Bryce, Deputy City Attorney. To that effect, I broke down all the individual items into seven propositions. The first proposition, it's really... All the change to the council terms are kind of intertwined in that once you change to four years, then you've got the constitutional requirements, and so they're all kind of intermingled. So the language is just to amend the city charter, restructure the electoral system by establishing the four-year staggered terms, staggering the at-large term members of the mayor with the single district council members, conforming the term limit provisions to establish three consecutive four terms, DESIGNATING AT LARGE MEMBER PLACES ONE, TWO, AND THREE, AND AS REQUIRED BY TEXAS CONSTITUTION, REQUIRING ELECTIONS TO BE DECIDED BY MAJORITY VOTE, REQUIRING SPECIAL ELECTIONS TO FILL AN UNEXPIRED TERM MORE THAN 12 MONTHS, AND MAKING FOUR-YEAR OFFICE HOLDERS SUBJECT TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL RESIGNED TO RUN REQUIREMENTS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT PROPOSITION.

Okay, I signed this three-person memo because I was asked to, not because I'm for all of this, but I was asked to do it, and I will always do that. Why don't you explain to us what the terms are now?

Okay, so under the current council terms, they're two-year terms.

Okay, how long can they stay? How many years?

Let's see, I've got that here.

Is it eight years? Eight to 12? Let me make sure you...

It's currently, the term limit is four two-year terms.

Four two-year terms, so that's eight years. And then you can come back and run for mayor?

That's correct.

Okay, for how many years?

So the combination is six two-year terms if it's combined.

Okay, okay. 12 years. 12 years in all, and this, what we're asking here is 12, is it more or less? It's 12. It's 12, it's the same, it's no different, it's just staggered terms. So that you don't have the same, a turnover, a brand new council every time, correct?

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Councilman Bonita.

Well, first off, I think when the lawsuit was filed back in the 80s, Part of the thing was adequate representation as a minority. And I just think it's important that we keep the at-large system. This is one reason I don't support it. I know that, and I'm a perfect example. I won the most precincts. I did. Okay, if you'll hear me out. No, no, no, I won the most precincts. Thank you. I'm using that as an example. And I won every Latino district, every Latino precinct. I did. I mean, we looked up the demographics. And I came in third place. And that's one of the reasons that it was justified to be able to work from that perspective. So I think it's a good system because now... And then besides that, any individual can vote for... a majority of the council, three at large, the mayor, and their district councilman. And that's a very specific to the city of Corpus Christi. There's not many other, I know of no other community that has the ability where they have the opportunity to vote for a majority of the council. So I know I conveyed this during that time of the committee. And I think it's important that this be reviewed simply because of that. And that's one reason, it took a year before It took a whole year. And I'm not saying, you know, you got the most votes. I'm not trying to take that away from you. And so I'm not. I'm just using that as an example because the West Side and District 5, which is predominantly Hispanic, I did very strong. And so I think that's something to consider, and that was the purpose of the lawsuit back in the 80s, is to ensure adequate representation of minority voters. Now, I know DEI is not a a politically correct item now, but it's something that I've always supported, obviously, being involved in all the advocacy groups that I've been in. So, and that's fine. I think if the community wants something different, though, I think there should be a committee to review that. I think it's very, very, you know, we were, and the item with the regard to the beach permits. We said, Hey, why are you bringing this up to ahead of us? All of a sudden now we've got to look at it, you know, and we, we only have X amount of time. And right now we're saying, okay, well the, we're going to vote today. And then the second reading will be next, next week or the next meeting. And so here we are now, this is something very important to make adequate representation to all our voters. And I just think it's important. Now I would agree that the resigned to run, you know, I would agree with that. I think that's very important. Um, I think when it was switched to six years, Mark, were you on the council when it was switched to sit out for six years? And that was at that time. So I think obviously it was made up to sit out because at that time there was I think there was no limit. You know, and so you set out one term ahead of one term and then you had to come back. So now we're wanting to extend that. And I think that requires a conversation in which the community should be engaged. With regard to salary, I would say that we probably, in Mike's situation, I say we because it's my team and the funds that we have, or that I have, I just donate it to charity. You know, so and I don't think that if you if you paid me another nine thousand dollars, it's not going to make me it's not going to justify me utilizing it for I don't know, for other purposes or take less time away from what I do now. I do agree. I have seen council members and I'm not counting this body. I'm counting over the eight years. And before that, that, you know, didn't go to more than three or four meetings a month. never answer their phone. I think back in the day before we had emails and cell phones and text messages, you know, there, there was a different time. So I don't, I mean, I'd be fine if you, you cut away or you just paid us, you know, $50 a meeting, you know, uh, because that way, whatever it is that you intend, I know some credit unions and I'm just using it as an example, they pay you based on a meeting, you know? So I think just to arbitrarily come up with some item and it's the same thing. I think, uh, Um, so I think increasing pay is obviously I don't support it. Um, and with regard to the removal process, I would agree, you know, in my opinion, everybody, okay, I guess I'll have to wait again. Man, five minutes went quick on that one. Are you sure? Three minutes, three minutes. That was three.

Wasn't it three? Okay, I'll come back. Okay, thank you, Councilman. So I am going to give my two cents. I won't go down the line, each line. I'm glad you did, for the most part. Pardon my hoarse voice, but... i don't think that um i don't councilman hernandez you mentioned we i don't know who picked out these amendments i don't know if you got with council members i don't know if you got with staff but i think this is a very very important um topic and and i think it should be done in a very thorough and transparent way and inclusive the way it was done in 2020. I don't think we should be picking amendments and recommendations from a group of people back in 2020 and using them today in 2026. I think that we should do what was done back then and every person on this council, I think that's what it was, appointed, we create that charter review committee, let them do their due diligence, come back to us as a body, and then we move forward as a body what amendments we think should move forward if if that be the case so for me um i'm not supporting this and for multiple reasons some that have been stated um but mainly because i don't think there was a process i think um it was not with ill intent but i think that um these things were chosen again i don't know who you talk to or who you talk referring to uh when you say we and so that's it certainly wasn't me and And a couple of these, for obvious reasons, I think it's disingenuous, you know, that they're being put on. When the very, what is it, the very amendment, not amendment, but the very, what do we call them? The proposition, I guess, yeah, is being used today against me. And that is disingenuous, I think. But let's change it for later to not put someone through that. So anyhow, with that, I just, all to say, I should say that this isn't something I'm gonna support, but overall mainly because there was no process. This was brought to us on a three-signature memo. These amendments were chosen by I don't know how many members of this council or staff was involved, and I think there is a process for that that is better, and that is the body creating the committee as was done in 2020.

Councilwoman Campos. Thank you. Okay, well this didn't just come out of the air. There was an actual committee in 2020. And I do believe that there was some good intention on these propositions. I actually do agree with the increase of the two-year to four-year terms because I being one of the new ones earlier, you're barely getting your feet wet in the first two years. So again, I do support that. As far as creating council members at large places, one, two, three, I actually would prefer to see single districts instead of having at large so that we would have council members advocating for each district instead of having the three at large. But okay, I don't know if we'll be able to change that. The other would be the minimum, raising the minimum wage. You know, these seats are basically going, they're being propped as going to the highest bidder. one of the candidates that is running for this district two seat has already raised $65,000. This is not even, we're not even finished. I mean, this is just the beginning. And when you put up this kind of money, then that means that it's not always representing the people that you're gonna be representing. You're being propped, I think, to represent certain influencers or certain industries. So I think having at least a minimum wage planted or started, you at least start to have at least different kinds of people running for office. So I've always advocated for that. I didn't have, I didn't do my searches regarding the other cities, but I believe most of them get a lot more money than what we're receiving. As a matter of fact, I have my my grandkids when I took them to McDonald's, and they said, Grandma, you know, McDonald's pays more than you get paid, $6,000 a year. So, yeah, that is true. Okay, and as far as the two-cent property tax, what would we be, how much would we be receiving on that two-cent tax? Okay. Approximately. I think I heard six million.

I don't know the math on that. Yeah, I think you're correct, Councilwoman. It's about six million annually.

Okay, and as opposed to when we had the street fee, which was double that.

That was $12 million annually.

It was $12 million annually. Correct. So I don't know, I mean, you know, $6 million is way better than zero, right, on residential streets. But if I had a choice, I would prefer to have it as a residential fee because at the end of, you know, maybe five years, ten years, you would do away with it, you would review it. as opposed to having the property tax. It never goes away. So those are my thoughts on this so far, but I think it's time that we review these charter amendments, and I think that's one thing that we're gonna be able to let the voters decide is which ones do they approve or not approve. At least we would be able to have something to hear from the residents knowing where they stand on a lot of these issues. So anyway, I want to hear what the rest of the council members have to say. Thank you.

Councilman Roy.

Councilman Roy.

Thank you. So I was on the original council. Matter of fact, I was one that really pushed to have the committee formed and put together back then and I was actually disappointed because after we went through this period and Oscar Martinez, I don't know if everybody knew Oscar, he was the assistant city manager back in the day, he was my representative and they did a lot of work and then we just, we sat on it, we didn't do anything and it was really disappointing because whether you agree with all of these points or one or two of the points, we definitely need to have some type of reform. My biggest problem is, and I said this back then in 2018, my biggest problem is that right now, if you wanna come up and you wanna serve this council, right? You have to either have the means to be able to do that because what they pay us right now, you cannot raise a family on or an individual. And so it eliminates a group of people out there from coming forward and serving. And I don't think that I've never thought that that was appropriate. And, you know, I heard in public comment and a couple things in the last couple weeks of people saying, you know, we have families. I have bills. I work. I work another job, you know, in order to sustain my family. I have kids that go to college. I have all the things that everybody else has, and I dedicate time to do this job. If you want to compare us, and I've been doing this lately too a lot, if you want to compare us to the county and you look at the county commissioners, nobody says anything in terms of what a county commissioner makes or the county judge makes. And they make significantly more money than what we make. They can raise a family and they can sustain. They have a retirement program. So in terms of, you know, equality, if you go and you look historically at what makes up this council, there is a group of people that can never come up here and sit in a seat because they can't afford to do it. And that needs to change. Now, with all that being said, I think this council needs to appoint and go back through that process of selecting an individual to represent us and come back and vet these because it's so important. The two cents, in my opinion, that's a no-brainer. I'm for that. But I think that we need that group to go back and shore up and look at that work that was done in its totality and then go forward and make those recommendations. But we need to do something. I just particularly don't know what combination and what we need to do. So that's my take. Thank you.

Councilwoman Vaughn. Well, the committee that did this is probably one of the best committees that we had ever put together, for sure. And all their work was for nothing. It was for nothing. And they had a lot of good things in there. I don't care what we do. If you want to take it to the next council, I'm completely fine with that. Some of these things in here, we've been screaming about the number of people that can remove somebody. If you don't want to put that, that's fine. As far as the pay goes, I have a different take on this. I don't think. I think that you do it as a service, as a community service. That's what I think council is. So many other things, and I think we've gotten out of that. So as long as you get your pay right now, it covers pretty much, not so much anymore, but your fuel. But I'm different than some. They think they should get a bigger paycheck. I'm fine with not doing that. left the county, and I was getting a really good paycheck, but it wasn't worth it. So I really am fine. I'm concerned about the two cent because, unfortunately, it got rid of the user fee, and that was a pool of money that we knew we could count on, and we don't have it anymore. And so that harms our streets. It really does. So I was fine with putting that on there for the voters to say, you want it or you don't want it. It's up to you. You're going to scream if we don't fix the streets, so if you want to help, there it is. And there's other monies to fix the streets, but not as much as we've had before, for sure. So if you guys want to take it and give it to the next council, I'm completely fine with that. This right here does not affect anyone running this time. It doesn't affect anybody. It wouldn't go into effect the next time, but I'm really fine with it. It doesn't make any difference to me one way or the other. Thanks. Councilman Scott.

Council, maybe it was the... Maybe it was the June 2nd meeting when we were making decisions at 2 a.m., but somebody called me the next day and was chewing me out for a vote that I had given. I said, dude, you're paying me $3 an hour. Pay me more, I'll give you a better decision. So that's my joke when it comes to the pay rate. But I will tell you that I have a philosophical objection to this conversation because I do think it's time to review the charter amendments. But I think it's time to establish a community process to get engagement. I think it's a little bit of a reach. I don't know anything about the 2020. I wasn't engaged in that process. And that was a lifetime ago. The world's changed. Corpus Christi has changed. I think this body has changed. And so my philosophical objection is to come together on July the 28th and decide... what we think is best based on a combination of what we think is best and a group that came together in 2020. I do think we could put another group together and use 2020 as a starting point. You could have a charter election, I guess, next November or, you know, I guess that's the midterm, what that would be. So, I mean, I think we could do that. I am concerned about what I perceive to be this body's perception and some public trust issues for maybe we don't deserve it, but I think it's present, and I think it affects what we present to the public. I was a fan of the street user fee. I bled over that. I remember those meetings. That was a hard deal. We did it. I think it was making a difference. I don't think the two cent makes, I think that kicks the can down the road. I mean, it's better than nothing. I think Sylvia, you made that comment. But it gets us halfway there. And I remember there was some comment that we were going to be able to catch up in, like, I don't remember what, 12 years, and now it's, like, forever, and $6 million will make it half of forever, my words. So my point is I think this $0.02 tax increase doesn't adequately fund what we believe, the citizens believe, needs to be funded towards street maintenance. So those are my comments. I don't support any of these. I do support creating a charter commission. That's not something that I would have thought of, and so I appreciate whoever came up with that idea. Good for you. I wish I'd have thought like that, but I do think the public needs to weigh in. We need a committee. They need to have public hearings. We need to look at what's going on in the rest of the state and then come back. after extensive public conversation and present something in the future. So that's my position.

Councilwoman Paxson. Thank you.