City Council - Regular Meeting

order. First of all, we'll start with Chaplain Moore, who's going to make her second visit up here, and we're going to do our prayer and pledges.

Please join me in our pledges.

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

Please join me in prayer. Lord Jesus, you invite us to be still and know that you are God. You are exalted among the nations. You are our refuge and strength. You are with us. Lord, forgive us for the ways we fall short and help us to glorify you. You are worthy of praise. Today we lift before you our city and all who call it home. Thank you for the blessings you have given us for our families, neighborhoods, schools, businesses, churches, and the many people who work each day to make this community strong. We pray for those entrusted with leadership, our mayor, our city council, city staff, public servants, police officers, firefighters, and all who bear responsibility for the welfare of our citizens. Grant them wisdom to make good decisions, protection from evil intent, courage to do what is right, humility to listen well, and integrity to serve faithfully. We lift up the business before this meeting today May the efforts of these leaders contribute to the flourishing of our city and the welfare of its people. And finally, we humbly ask that you empower our city of San Angelo to be a place where neighbors care for one another, where truth and kindness abound, where all people have the opportunity to thrive. We pray these things in the name of Jesus. Amen.

All right, we have one proclamation this morning for Safe Kids Week. If there's anybody here to represent Safe Kids Week, come up here and stand with us.

We'll get your turn at the front.

Children are our most precious resource and their safety is a top priority. Unintentional injuries are a leading cause of death and disability among children. Many of these injuries are preventable through education awareness and safe environments. By joining together and providing children and caregivers with vital safety information and resources, we can help prevent injuries. Safe Kids Week encourages partnerships to ensure children have a safe, stable and nurturing environment. Safe Kids Week is an opportunity for all those in San Angelo to come together for the cause of preventing childhood injury and death. Safe Kids San Angelo works every day to help parents and caregivers prevent unnecessary childhood injuries and fatalities. and unites firefighters, first responders, medical professionals, hospitals, pediatricians, police officers, parents, and other committed citizens. Therefore, I, Tom Thompson, the Mayor of the City of San Angelo, Texas, on behalf of City Council, do hereby proclaim June 1st through June 7th, 2026, as Safe Kids Week in San Angelo, Texas, and call upon the residents of San Angelo to join with me and urge all citizens to support efforts to protect our children by learning about and teaching other citizens ways to keep kids safe. Somebody wants to say some words. Thank you.

Safe Kids San Angelo, led by Shannon Community Center, is dedicated to protecting kids from preventable injuries, the number one cause of death to children in the United States. Safe Kids works to keep kids safe at home, at school, at play, and on the way. We educate families, raise awareness, and create safer environments. With community-wide partners, Safe Kids works to reduce traffic injuries, drownings, sleep-related deaths, falls, burns, poisonings, and more. Since 1995, Safe Kids St. Angelo has been dedicated to keeping our kids safe, and we thank Mayor Thompson, the City of St. Angelo, and our City Council for recognizing the importance of protecting our kids from unintentional injury. Thank you.

At this time, we'll move in the public comment. Members of the public may raise issues or concerns not listed on the regular agenda during this time. To participate, please sign in with the city clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. Speakers will be called in order they signed in. When speaking, citizens must speak from the podium and address all comments to the dais. Begin by stating your name and address or single member district number and limit your remarks to three minutes or less. Heather, first public comment.

Ali Devereux.

Ms. Devereux.

Good morning. For general comment today, I just wanted to urge you all to coordinate with the County Commissioner's Court so that these meetings are not overlapping. There's going to be a lot coming down the pipeline, and we would like to be able to be involved with all of it. And it's just not in our best interest to have the public spread out where you have to pick and choose over which meeting you attend. I would urge you to coordinate with the County Commissioner's Court on that. Thank you.

Thank you, Allie. Ginger Moore. Ms. Ginger.

Good morning, City Council, and thank you for all you do. I also, Allie and I have talked right before, because I have to go to comment here. Then I'm going to run to Commissioner's Court and hopefully make it back in time for the water in the afternoon if you're still here by the time I get done. We need to figure out some way of having separate time frames for these meetings because I cannot be at both. The other thing that I want to speak about is the data centers in general. And I understand that you have some control over this data center, but I am upset with Governor Abbott. I'm upset with our Senator Perry and our Representative Darby, our Texas Railroad Commissioners who have oversight on our cot, our environmental people. What's the name of that? You something. Anyway, the environmental people also have some say over data centers. When they discovered that the city of San Angelo was having a data center possibly, then all of a sudden we've got five more popping up around the county. I am not, I believe that you can make some money from this, but I do know that the first year you will not make any money, and we will have some of the problems that come in without the funding yet. It will take a while to get your funding. Also, the 1KW equates to 700,000 homes, which I have an issue with. But not only for us, but for our surrounding areas. The people of San Angelo and the county are not for data centers. And it's not going to get any better because people are very upset. I was at another meeting last night, and our county commissioner spoke. And he's trying to put a moratorium on them. I'm just suggesting that we take a hard look at what the people want because your people are going to tell you, most of them, that they don't want the center because of the noise. And I know I've been to 15 meetings on this already. I know the noise is trying to be settled. The water is trying to be settled. But the electricity, even though it's not coming from our city source, it is a Texas source. And that is a lot of electricity. And if you multiply it by the number and they're going to the drought cities and counties. Why are they doing that? None of this makes sense, and I'm just trying to give another perspective on it. I do appreciate you trying to save San Angelo's money, and I understand that. I'm just saying please listen to the people because most of the people in San Angelo that I've heard I'm not in favor of it. And so just take that into consideration. And y'all have a blessed day. I'm going to the county.

Tell them we said hi. Next.

Spencer Matthews.

Spencer.

Hi, Spencer Matthews. I'm in Karen's district. I also have a business downtown. I'm a third generation St. Angeloan. And when I was in Dallas, I went to SMU. I worked for Hitachi Consulting. During that time, I designed these smart cities, these 15-minute cities. I had, I know how these were designed. I worked in these teams to design these centers. I understand the CBDCs have studied those that direct hard evidence for those. I've worked on these teams. I understand this probably better than anybody in this room. And I'm telling you that the financial models that they're presenting to you do not work. We will never find the money that you think that we're going to find. And the water that you're risking of our city in the desert is a very, very big concern. In my 20 years of political activism, I've never seen a broader, faster-growing movement in my entire life. I'm warning you that if you don't take consideration of that and start listening, if Lane Carter in the commissioner's court right now is not listening to this in the county, if... Karen brought me to Travis Griffith. I love the guy, but he's not listening. I told him the flock cameras will be tied to these AI centers. I told him how it was going to play out. This was a year and a half ago before this all came up. We're still doing it. Because they think that they're okay and they keep pandering and they think they can negotiate with these people that are out of town, that they're trying to promise us these big monies. They're not going to deliver. I promise you. We can't be cowards to our budgets and our money. I was living in Dallas during COVID. I came back because I wanted a safe city. I wanted a safe community and relying on our community to solve our problems. If we need fire trucks, take it to the community. We'll find a way to get the fire trucks. But we cannot risk our water. And I'm telling you, this is a warning. If you go forward with this and you do not stop this now and stop promoting this and keeping it going, because it might not happen, I'm telling you, this army that's forming that Ali has is coming for you. And they will end your careers, and they probably won't let you back in the community. If you risk their water, they will go after you. I'm telling you, this is the fastest rebellion I have ever seen. And it's coming. You better stop it now.

Next.

Jamal Schumpert.

Jamal.

Jamal Schumpert, SMD3. Man, I'm kind of at a loss of words. I wasn't expecting public comment to be the way it was. It hasn't been that way since I've been coming. I would say, guys, look at your vision again. I don't think they like it. They're rejecting it. But I was coming up here to talk to you guys about the Northside needing a gym. Their Northside Recreation Gym flooded out pretty, pretty bad last year during the flood. And I saw here we was looking at a feasibility study for a huge competition gym. I was just wondering, we're prioritizing Would we just not want to develop the north side? Because I drive around over there when I substitute Lakeview of Lakeview Heroes Drive. They have plenty of flat land where you just clean it off, maybe talk to some of the farmers, landowners, and they have plenty of open lots. It'd be an easier development, better on your pipes, sewer. They're really more primed to be developed in the Southwest area. I just was curious. They're more into their community. If you put a gym out there with seats, they would fill the seats up. They support their youth. I don't understand why we wouldn't go and put a gym there, even a smaller $5 million gym. I mean, it would cost us nothing. We'd pay it off in a year if we bonded our property taxes or sales tax. I just don't understand the vision and where it's headed. But also on the consent agenda, because...

This isn't the time for consent agenda comments.

Oh, so it's changed again.

No, it's exactly how it's been, Jamal.

One time I came here, you told me I had to do it, all consent agenda and this public comment. This isn't the place to discuss it. I'll discuss it with Ms. Stastny. And I guess to continue my public comment about you guys' vision, THERE'S SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES IN THE NORTH SIDE. AND I THINK MAYBE IT'S AN INCOME ISSUE. I SEE ON THAT WHERE YOU HAVE SOCIOECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHICS ON THAT FEASIBILITY STUDY. IN WORDS OF SOMEONE WHO IS IN ECONOMICS AND ALL THE THINGS, THAT MEANS THE MONEY AND THE RACE AND THE MAKEUP AND THE AGE, ALL THOSE DISCRIMINATORY STATISTICS THAT OUR GOVERNMENT, YOU KNOW, SELECTS. I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE AWAY FROM the higher socioeconomic serving all of those. We serve them quite a bit by lashing regulations and doing quite a bit of other things. But thank you for your time. I'll be back for public comment, I mean for consent.

Thank you, Jamal. Does that conclude public comment? Yes. All right, now we'll move into the consent agenda, and I will move from my left to the right. Joe, do you have anything you'd like to pull on the consent agenda? No. Harry? No. Patrick?

No, sir.

Karen? Mary? Mary wants to pull M and N. So I'll look for a motion on all items excluding M and N. I have a first from Harry Thomas, a second from Joe Self. Is there any public comment on any of those other items?

Jamal Schumacher?

Jamal Strumper, SMD 3. On item G. It's discussing the 3,000 square foot lots. I've seen on some of the stuff, you didn't include the density of the small lots. I think that would be high density. And I actually don't think it's a good idea, given our sewer issues out here, and maybe even some of the quakes we have. You're going to be connecting a lot more homes a lot more individual homes to that sewer. And given our history with not cleaning out our sewer, my even personal history and understanding, that's the smell that we smell within the town, not on the river. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING I THINK WE SHOULD GO INTO. HAVING US BE SO CLOSE TO EACH OTHER. IN TEXAS, THIS IS A LAND OF OPEN SPACE. WE'RE NOT REALLY, WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO HAVE A HOME RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER LIKE THAT IN THE CITY. AND I'M WORRIED THAT THIS IS EXPANDING BECAUSE OF THE DATA CENTER. I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD USE OF YOUR LAND. AFTER YOU LOOK OVER TIME, PEOPLE WON'T WANT TO BUY THOSE 3,000 SQUARE FOOT LOCKS WITH LIKE 300,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME. I MEAN, 3,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME, 2,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME WITH, YOU KNOW, $300,000 GIVEN THE INFLATION IN OUR HOUSING. AND THE WHIFF. THE WHIFF. WHY ARE WE LOWERING OUR STREETS when the state is actually trying to expand our streets for data centers to come in. Why are we making those BIFs lower? That's going to cause a problem when the state comes in and they want to widen their street, and they're going to have to spend that extra money. That's also our tax money. That's our state tax money. Not only will our state tax money go for that, but our property tax money goes for you expanding that road out there, as well as probably sales tax if you decide to do some creative financing. That's an issue. I don't know why we would do that, but going back through our planning commission and zoning board of adjustments, it's because our developers can't afford to make it the way we put it. They put it years ago that way. Why do we want to go change it? I mean, it's just 10 foot on some of them. They can't afford 10 extra feet. I mean, you've been giving them variances anyway, so now you ain't got to give them variances. So I understand the game. I wish you would stop. Like, these people don't understand how this stuff is happening. But next time, next election cycle, I won't be quiet, Tom. I don't have to run. But I guess I'll start back on the other stuff. But you really shouldn't have went after those kids. You shouldn't have. You should have protected kids and the elderly. This is for public comment. I'm sorry. Thank you.

Awesome. Do we have any more public comment?

No.

All right. With all of that, I will go through and say, Kenan, let's take a vote on all items except M&N. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? When none opposed, item passes 6-0. We'll move into item M, second reading of an ordinance to adopt data center regulations for wastewater discharge in the San Angelo Code of Ordinances by amending Chapter 11 Utilities, Article 11.02, Water and Sewer Systems, Division 3, Sewer Service, Part 3, Discharge in the Sewer Systems, Section 11.02.122, prohibited discharges by adding subsection D, data center discharges. John Kaufman, you're on.

Good morning, Mayor, Council. My name is John Kaufman. I'm the Director of Water Utilities for the City of San Angelo. Is there a specific question I can address or would you just like me to summarize?

No, Mary will have a specific question.

I'll take the question. Good morning, John. Would you be kind enough to review the substance of items M and N for the public and also share with us what you can, give us a summary of how regulatory bodies impact what we can do and cannot do regarding those two things?

Well, first of all, water utilities is regulated under Chapter 11 of the city ordinances. And with respect to any type of wastewater or industrial discharge, we can require any industrial customer to perform industrial pretreatment before they discharge any wastewater to the city's wastewater system. We do that to make sure that there are no adverse contaminants that go into the wastewater and that we can adequately treat the wastewater in accordance with TCEQ requirements. So we're regulated by TCEQ as far as our wastewater discharges are concerned, and we're allowed under our ordinance to require pretreatment, which TCEQ also allows us to do, retreat treatment. So with the ordinance that's being proposed under M concerning wastewater discharges, we would require any future potential data center located just within the city that we would be able to require them to do industrial pretreatment if necessary. At this point in time, we don't anticipate that being necessary, but if it were to become necessary, we could require that at any time. And the amount of water that they discharge and the quality of that discharge would be highly regulated and determined by the Director of Water Utilities either myself or someone in the future. So that's how we would handle it. The only contaminant that we would anticipate for a particular data center that we would prescribe that would be located within the city would be propylene glycol. It's a food-grade coolant. It's used in food products, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics. But it does come with a high BOD, biochemical oxidation demand. And we would regulate the discharges to make sure that that BOD wouldn't upset the wastewater treatment system processes. So we could require them to store some of that and then release it on a time basis so that it wouldn't overwhelm the wastewater treatment plant.

Thank you for that. Are there any other regulatory bodies that have oversight in addition to TCEQ? And how confident are you that TCEQ would meet with us in a prompt and timely manner if there was any sort of crisis?

Well, TCEQ responds very quickly to violations of their rules and regulations, so I don't think that would be a problem. EPA is another agency that has oversight over TCEQ in terms of illegal discharges. Nobody would be allowed to discharge wastewater into a septic system or onto the ground. That wouldn't be allowed. That's against the Clean Water Act, for example. And if we wanted to, to our choice, if we wanted to, we could take that treated wastewater and reuse it in the future back to a data center if we wanted to, if it existed. So those are the main agencies that I can think of that have oversight in terms of environmental regulations. for a data center regarding water and wastewater.

If members of the community wanted to contact those agencies, how would they best do that?

Both of them have websites that you can contact various people on, heads of various departments and so forth. They can also seek, communication through their county officials, local elected officials, congressmen, senators, for example, if it's the EPA. But normally, it's just call them on the phone. If it's TCEQ, just call them on the phone. There's a local TCEQ office here in town, as I recall.

John, one other question. There's a lot of numbers and stuff that go back and forth that, you know, usage, allowability and all of that. The first reading that you gave last week or last meeting, that's what they are allowed. That's not what the emergent is proposing that they use, but that is like the

You're speaking of resolution N? Okay.

Well, they all kind of roll together. No, we need to keep those separate because I want to read M. Okay.

I'm happy to address that when we get to N. Okay.

Okay, so let's, we need, absolutely, on M. Yes, sir.

Are any other facilities required to treat their discharge before they? In the city? Yes, sir.

Absolutely.

Okay. And we regulate that? TCEQ regulates that? I mean, it's a normal thing.

Yeah, we normally regulate it ourselves to make sure that we don't have an upset at the wastewater plant. TCEQ regulates us to make sure that our wastewater discharge, that after treatment, meets their requirements for our permits. Cool. So it has to do that.

Any more questions on him? If all this is complete, I'll look for a motion. I've got a first from Karen and a second from Mary. Is there any public comment? It's now the time for item N. Allie Devereaux.

Who did the second?

TCEQ's budget was cut by roughly one-third since 2010, even as the number of industrial facilities in the state has rapidly increased and the population has increased by 10 million people. They are functioning with this last budget while data center development is exploding across the state, and the reduction in budget coincides with a growing case backlog. Cases and violations are sitting on their desks for years, and in its annual enforcement policy report.

Ma'am, is this about water discharge ordinance? Excuse me? This is the water discharge ordinance that we're speaking about. Is that what you're talking about?

That is.

TCEQ?

Correct.

Okay.

Are you taking my time, or?

No, we'll give you your time. Okay.

I want to make sure we're on the agenda.

Are you not seeing the theme here, or?

Please continue with your comments.

So the cases and violations are sitting on TCEQ's desk for years, okay? In its annual enforcement policy report, they said that nearly a third of complaints are never investigated and they have steered away from enforcing new complaints because their priority has become reducing the backlog. This is leaving communities across the state without any recourse or relief from industries causing environmental harm. There is no functional enforcement agency for your proposed regulations. TCEQ is underfunded, understaffed, and failing to enforce the regulations they have. And they do absolutely nothing until a formal complaint is filed and a violation is reported. And you say you're going to be testing for PFAS. The state and the EPA have no established enforceable regulations for that. There are over 14,000 PFAS compounds and the EPA only has regulations in place for two of those. And how are you going to test for that? Which ones? How often is periodically? If you're going to draft formal regulations, we need them to be more specific. These chemicals are absolutely abundantly used in this industry and the semiconductors themselves and in the cooling loops, and currently companies are not required to record the amount of PFAS chemicals they are using or discharging into the community that the data centers are housed on. We want to know how they're treating their wastewater. What will they do with the contaminants they remove from the 10 million gallons of wastewater that they will be permitted to produce annually? Where will that waste go? We want to know these things before you approve these regulations. There is more to this than water and glycol, and we were only told at the first reading that it would be tested periodically for common contaminants by the city. And with a total lack of transparency on this project from the very beginning, do you expect that we trust you to test the water? Please table this until we have these questions answered and the EPA and the TCEQ can step up and show that they're willing and able to do what they were created to do, which is protect public health and the environment by reducing and preventing pollution and ensuring clean air and water for its citizens.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any more public comment on this item?

Ginger Moore had signed up, but I believe she left.

Ginger left. All right. With that, we've got a first and a second. I'll say all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Well, none opposed. Item? You're opposed? Item passes five to one. Okay, we'll go into item N, second reading of an ordinance to adopt Dana Center regulations for water use in the San Angelo Corps of Ordinances by amending Chapter 11 Utilities, Article 11.02, Water and Sewer Systems, Division 2, Water Service, by adding Section 11.02.043, Data Center. John Coffin, you're on again.

Yeah, John Coffin, Director of Water Utilities for the City of San Angelo. This particular proposed ordinance, amendment to Chapter 11, would require any potential future data center to use no more than eight gallons per square foot of data center area footage, square footage, and be allowed to replenish no more than 6% of that total water per year and only be allowed to recycle that entire cooling water once every three years. In an analysis that we completed recently, that we presented last time, of water demand by data centers under this particular ordinance, the amount that they would use would be .26% of the total metered water usage in the city per year. That's not very much water. That's prescribed that they would have to have a recirculating cooling system. It would not be evaporative cooling. That wouldn't be allowed. The amount of water they would use is not very much. In fact, in the hierarchy of the largest water users in the city, they would be down near the bottom by quite a bit. So that's basically, in a nutshell, what the ordinance prescribes. It doesn't allow a data center to come in and tell us how much water they need and we would just give it to them. No, we tell them, this is how much water we're going to let you have. You figure out the rest.

With that, I'll open it up to questions. Mary, you had a question?

Thank you, John. I'm just trying to, because there is a Obviously, this is a highly publicized topic and all, but I just want to make sure that the people understand that the numbers that were given at our last meeting for the first reading, that that's the most, that is the top that they could use. They cannot go over that.

That's a maximum potential. In the example we proposed using Skybox and Emergent, assuming a maximum of nine buildings, each building 400,000 square feet. That came out to be 0.26% of the total muted water usage in the city per year.

That's the main thing that I was wanting clarification on. Do we have any, I'm not sure that we would, why we'd have cause to have this, but if there has been like an average use on some of their other facilities, if they come anywhere close to using that amount?

The only data center information that I have firsthand knowledge of, based on my conversations with my colleagues at the City of Abilene is that they're seeing comparable usage, and the daily usage that they're, excuse me, the monthly usage they're seeing is very small, in that the recirculating cooling systems are quite functional, and it's not a problem in terms of water supply.

And all this is metered, I mean, technically.

Oh, it's all metered. It's all metered. And the other thing I wanted to point out is in this particular agenda item is that we made two amendments. to it. The First Amendment is that all cooling water has to be separately metered from other water usage, okay, and that the Council would be informed within five business days if there's ever an exceedance of the limits that we would set on a data center for their water usage.

That helps me, John. Thank you very much.

You bet.

Any other questions for John on item N? With that, I'll look for a motion. Mary? We take the motions first, then we do the public comment.

Every time.

Is there any other questions for John?

I have one quick question. OK, for John. John, do we regulate Shannon Hospital on how much water they can use?

The hospitals? Yes. I don't have the data in front of me, but Shannon.

But do we regulate how much they can use?

Do we regulate how much they use?

Yeah.

Not at all.

OK.

None whatsoever.

Okay. Okay, I'm still looking for, is there a motion for item N? I'll make a motion to table. So we'll need a second to table, if you want to table.

I'll second that.

All right, so we've got a first and a second on that. Now, public comment?

Allie Devereaux?

I don't know when we jumped to 400,000 square feet per building, but that's new. So I don't know. Yep, it is. So on water usage, many of you are still out there advocating for this data center and saying that this facility will use no more water than a car wash. And that is patently false information based on what we were told in the last city council meeting, where it became known that the amount of water this one data center will use is about twice as much as all of SAISD and almost as much water as ASU, which is a university with 12,000 students, football, baseball, soccer fields, 350 acres of ground, 60 academic buildings, on-campus housing. It will be allowed to use twice as much as all of our city parks, which includes the sports complex, golf course, river stage. And this is not the only data center in the pipeline. So functionally with this ordinance, y'all are saying we could expand our parks and recreation and build more universities or have data centers. I think it's an irresponsible use of your public voice to say that questioning whether or not this is a good use of our water resources is based on fear and misinformation. 95% of the groundwater districts in Texas estimate that their future water needs are unsustainable based on today's use and conditions. Twin Buttes is at 9%. And Tom, you're still out there saying that the water issue is closed. No big deal. It is a big deal when we consider that we could either be choosing to build a new university or some more parks, but the water footprint of these data centers extend far beyond the cooling loop system. 90 to 95% of that water usage is extending out to the power generation component. This data center would use about as much power as 1 million homes. The water to generate such a massive amount of power will have to come from somewhere in Texas. And we all understand that Texas as a whole is on the verge of a water crisis. The Texas Water Development Board has stated that we are expected to have a shortfall that will cost us $174 billion to avert a severe water crisis. and that doesn't include any data for projected future use from data centers. This should tell us that the state as a whole does not have the water resources to support this data center gold rush and that the state itself is helping to create this problem through its billions of dollars in tax incentives targeted at data center development. We cannot create water with more money. Importing and exporting water through interbasin water transfers and multimillion dollar pipelines will treat every last drop as a commodity to be bought and sold to the highest bidder. I'm going to suggest that before you pass this ordinance on water usage, that you assemble a community meeting to find out if we want to use any of our water resources for data center development.

All right. So we have a first and a second to table. Brandon, I need you to be real clear on this. So if the item passes to table, it will table. If it does not pass the table, there can be an option for another motion to pass it. All right. So we have a motion, a first and a second, by Karen and Patrick to table this. So we'll take a vote. By person, all in favor to table this, say aye.

Aye.

OK. I'm a nay. I'm a nay. Nay. Nay. So we just. So it's a tie. So it fails to pass. OK. So the motion fails to pass. All right. So we'll go back through. I'll make a, so it could be the same way the other way.

Yeah.

So just to make sure this is clear, I'll make a motion to approve as presented. Second. Second. There won't be any more public comment on that.

So we got a first. If it ends in a tie, we need to look at how that might affect the second reading, so do we want to take a quick recess and let me look at our charter and see how that is addressed? Because it won't pass, and this is the second reading, so.

Okay, so no, I guess we have to table because we're one person short.

Mm-hmm.

All right, so we tabled this point. It didn't pass, so it failed.

Well, I mean, you have to take another motion, but. Motion, okay.

Because that motion failed, so you have to do it again.

So which one are we doing, for the pass to approve as presented?

Well, you can make that motion, yeah, and take a vote on it. I'm asking for just a minute to look at something, though. Why don't you look at something?

We'll do a recess for five minutes. Yes. All right. So at this point, we're going to move into recess for five minutes and wait on legal.

Obviously, these are second readings. But they are closely, one can't exist without the other, is what I'm getting at. Even though the first item, M, has been, huh? We've already voted on that. I know, but I'm asking, can that be, it can't? You can't go back and reconsider all of these? Okay.

So we're at a five minute recess. Heather, will you start a five minute clock, please? Just so we can put a little pressure on Brandon.

we're going to bring this back to meeting and we'll have a statement from brandon dyson our legal attorney on what happens in this situation uh thanks mayor so when an ordinance fails there's a six month time period um per our our code that you'd have to wait uh before you reconsider it unless um four members of city council vote to to reconsider it at a future meeting. So essentially, you'd have to have another meeting, vote to reconsider it, and then place it on a later meeting. So my suggestion would be to, if you wanted the seventh council member here to be able to vote on this, to table it and push it to another meeting. Otherwise, that six-month period is going to go back.

Because if we didn't come to a conclusion on this, it would move forward without any regulation at all.

That's right. Yeah. I mean, it wouldn't be no governance over this at all.

Right. Right. So at this point, we had a tie still made. We're going to table this item.

Well, I think you have to make another motion because the first motion failed.

Motion to table. Yeah. All right. So I'll make a motion on, excuse me, on item N. I will make a motion to table. Can I get a second?

Quick question on that. Can we make a motion to just move it to the table until the next meeting, like have an actual time on it?

That's what's coming anyway. OK. It'll be there.

I second.

I've got a first and a second from Patrick on the motion to table. All right. So we'll take a vote. All those in favor of tabling items say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Item is tabled.

Did you vote against it? No, I didn't vote against it. I voted on clarification. Are we tabling until the next meeting? Yes, sir. OK. I didn't hear that portion of it. OK.

This will be tabled until the next meeting. All that's clear? Item is tabled 6-0. All right. Now we're moving to the regular agenda. Comments regarding items on the regular agenda may be made by the public when each item is discussed as outlined above. To participate, please sign in with the city clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. Speakers will be called in order they signed in. Comments are limited to less than three minutes. Applicants, proponents, and appellants are exempt from the time limit above and instead must limit their remarks to less than five minutes. Item B, Coastal Development Corporation 2025 Annual Report. Presentation made by Economic Director Ryan Gaddy. Ryan, you're on.

Good morning, Mayor, City Council members. My name is Ryan Gaddy. I am the Economic Development Director, and we are excited this morning to be sharing with you the 2025 Annual Report for the City of San Angelo Economic Development Corporation. I want to first of all express my appreciation to Andy Markey. Andy is the President and CEO of Media Advantage, and she and her team were instrumental in creating the report and presenting it to us in a digital format. So I think you'll be excited to see what she has prepared for us. I also want to make sure we acknowledge the efforts and the ongoing guidance that the COSA DC Board of Directors provides to us. Finally, I'd be somewhat remiss if I didn't mention the staff that existed in 2025, Michael Dane, Bob Schneeman, and Nora Navarez. With that, we'll queue up the presentation, and afterwards we'll address any questions that you might have. Hello, I am Ryan Gaddy, and on behalf of the City of San Angelo Economic Development Corporation, I want to thank you for joining us for this year's Economic Development Report. Our 2025 story is a story of growth. Not just growth on paper, but growth you can see across San Angelo. You can see it in new training pathways, in construction progress, in rail and industrial opportunities, in local businesses taking their next step, and in community partners working together when challenges arise.

The mission of the City of San Angelo Economic Development Corporation, known as COSA DC, is to grow San Angelo's economy through proactive business attraction, retention, and workforce development. That mission comes to life through the leadership of the COSA DC Board of Directors, the daily work of economic development staff, the San Angelo Chamber of Commerce, city departments, education and workforce partners, and the businesses that continue to invest in our community. Economic development is rarely the work of one organization. It is the result of strong partnerships, shared priorities, and a community that understands the value of preparing for the future. Growth requires readiness. It requires land, infrastructure, transportation access, utilities, and sites that can move from possibility to project. At the San Angelo Business and Industrial Park, 2025 brought continued momentum. Approximately 36 acres moved under contract with ATI Group, representing a $2.3 million project. COSA DC also negotiated the sale of 5.5 acres to the Texas A&M University System for facilities supporting Texas A&M Forest Service wildfire response operations, with the contract process continuing. Another 8.5 acres was negotiated for sale to DLH Real Estate, also with the contract process continuing. Park Hill Engineering began design work on Phase 2.3 infrastructure, the finish out of Phase 2, helping position the park for future industrial opportunities. Construction progress also helped tell the story of land growth in action. The Lone Star Trucking Project shows 2025 construction progress as the project moves toward completion. It is another visible example of momentum in San Angelo's industrial and logistics sector. The rail port also advanced as a major logistics and industrial opportunity. COSA DC negotiated a transaction involving approximately 250 acres from the city to COSA DC, with a concurrent sale from COSA DC to South Plains La Mesa Railroad. The transaction supports expansion of the existing rail port and the potential development of a rail served industrial park. Work completed in 2025 also positioned the property for action in early 2026. A preliminary plat application and rezoning request were submitted and approved in February 2026, with final closing on the property sale pending. Texas Australia Rock Company relocated to the existing rail port, reinforcing the value of rail served industrial capacity in San Angelo. These projects are about more than acreage. They are about preparing the ground for the next generation of industry. Supporting existing businesses remained a central part of COSA DC's work in 2025. Through business retention and expansion efforts, COSA DC helped local companies respond to opportunity, overcome challenges, and plan for growth. One example was True Lightning Protection. The board approved a $300,000 BREP project to support the company as it purchased and improved a facility for the growth of its specialized lightning protection manufacturing operations. The project reflects the purpose of BREP, helping San Angelo companies stay here, grow here, and continue creating local value. The technology tower story and expansion of local business VGI Technology and Snyder IT gave San Angelo another strong before-and-after moment. A property that once represented unused potential has been repositioned through a $10 million transformation into modern technology and office space. With interior work completed in 2025, the project moved closer to full activation in 2026. Technology Tower shows that San Angelo is building places where technology companies, professional services, and growing teams can see themselves staying, hiring, and expanding. Business support also means responding when unexpected challenges affect local employers. Following the July 4th flooding, COSA DC's role expanded from growth support to recovery support. The board approved $1 million in flood recovery assistance for eligible companies in qualifying NAICS codes, giving impacted businesses another tool to stabilize operations and continue serving the community. COSA DC also worked alongside FEMA, the SBA, the ASU Small Business Development Center, and other partners to connect affected businesses with available resources. Staff and partner teams personally visited 22 businesses throughout the impacted areas to listen, document needs, and guide owners toward assistance. They also helped to relocate two manufacturing operations into safer, flood-protected area. This is what business support looks like in practice, helping companies expand when opportunity is present and standing beside them when challenges arise. San Angelo's growth story also belongs to entrepreneurs. The 2025 San Angelo Business Plan Competition celebrated local business owners who are building, expanding, and bringing new services to the community. Barron's Body Shop earned first place and a $50,000 cash prize. With more than 30 years of Body Shop experience, Richard Barron and his family are expanding their business and bringing state-of-the-art equipment to San Angelo. Rooted Wellness Clinic, owned and operated by Dr. Melissa Jones, earned second place and a $30,000 grant. The clinic plans to expand access to non-invasive therapies and add a medical-grade hyperbaric oxygen chamber. Mad Messi, founded by U.S. veteran and entrepreneur James Pettit, earned third place and $20,000. After beginning as a food truck serving Goodfellow Air Force Base, Mad Messi grew into downtown San Angelo and then expanded to a second permanent location inside Sunset Mall. the business factory incubator continued to support the broader small business ecosystem. Since 2003, the program has helped entrepreneurs in San Angelo and the Concho Valley by providing a professional working environment, networking benefits, office suites with furnishings and utilities, conference room access, and training through the ASU Small Business Development Center. Over 22 years, the business factory has assisted more than 118 businesses and successfully graduated 14 companies. In 2025, the incubator was full with no vacancy and welcomed one new client, RDZ Smart Homes. Together, the Business Plan Competition and the Business Factory show how San Angelo invests in local ideas and helps entrepreneurs turn those ideas into jobs, services, and community value. As local businesses grow, the need for skilled people grows with them. That is why workforce development remained one of the most important parts of San Angelo's 2025 economic development story. In 2025, San Angelo took an important step forward in building the talent pipeline through the Skyline Aviation and Howard College collaboration. The Aviation Maintenance School welcomed its inaugural class in September 2025, opening a new pathway into high-demand technical careers. This work also supports the broader aviation ecosystem. Skyline continues to collaborate with ASU Pilot Training, through the provision of instructors, aircraft, and maintenance services. Together, these partnerships help connect education to employment and give students a stronger path into careers that support aviation, logistics, maintenance, and the industries of tomorrow. Economic development is also community development. In 2025, COSA DC supported housing, recovery, quality of life, and long-term planning efforts that strengthened the foundation for growth. The board approved $200,000 in affordable housing funds, in addition to the annual allocation, for Galilee to renovate an existing multi-family housing project. The Board also approved $1 million in assistance for affordable housing-eligible homes affected by the July 4th flooding. Combined with business flood recovery support, these actions represent $2 million in flood-related assistance approved to help businesses, homes, and neighborhoods recover from a major community event. COSA DC also approved the use of space in the Business Resource Center to accommodate the SBA Disaster Response Team and other flood response organizations needing temporary space. The organization also received the final 2024 Housing Study Update, including additional analysis of the July 4 flood disaster and its impact on affordable housing. Community investments also moved forward. The Kirby Park Splash Pad was completed, with unused funds returned to COSA DC. The Board approved $75,000 in Goodfellow Air Force Base support through the Chamber Contract, beginning in 2026. It also approved $50,000 for Santa Fe and Downtown River Parks project design. and $255,000 for the Northeast Sector Development Plan to support connectivity and infrastructure planning. These projects reflect a larger truth. A strong economy depends on strong places, strong neighborhoods, and a strong quality of life. None of this work happens alone. COSA DC's 2025 progress was made possible through the City of San Angelo, the San Angelo Chamber of Commerce, the San Angelo Regional Manufacturers Alliance, the ASU Small Business Development Center, Howard College, Angelo State University, Downtown San Angelo, Concho Valley Workforce Solutions, Goodfellow Air Force Base, local employers, small businesses, and community partners across the region. Each partner plays a role in building the talent, infrastructure, business climate, and community support that help San Angelo compete and grow. As San Angelo looks ahead, 2025 becomes a foundation for the next phase of growth. Growth on the horizon includes new industrial prospects, infrastructure planning, workforce pipeline expansions, upcoming developments, the next steps for the rail port, continued industrial park phase planning, the northeast sector development plan, technology opportunities, and continued alignment around aviation, logistics, defense, manufacturing, and business support. The work ahead is about staying ready. Ready for the companies already here. Ready for the companies looking at San Angelo. And ready for the people who will power the next chapter of our economy.

As we close the 2025 report, one message stands out. Growth is not just measured in numbers. It is measured in opportunity, investment, and the future we are building together for San Angelo. Thank you to our board, staff, partners, businesses, educators, and community members who helped move San Angelo forward in 2025. This is growth in action, and this is only the beginning of what comes next.

Absolutely, Ryan. A lot of people don't understand the breadth and the width of the things that we develop and try to develop in economic development. And I'll steal this one from Mike Looney. I mean, you try to build a cluster where we are not dependent upon only one leg or one portion of our economic development efforts. We'll release some data and some information here in the future, but I just want to commend all of you for staying on point, continuing to look at any opportunity to help bring economic development to San Angelo. There's a point in time that our wants and needs exceed what we have to pay for, and economic development helps us level that out and lower the burden on the taxpayer. And I just can't commend you, and Andy, I will say personally, that's a wonderful video if you help compile that in your group, you know. my accolades for a job well done. And with that, we'll open it up to the council. If anybody has any comments.

Thank you, Ryan. Thank you. I can guarantee you this will help citizens understand that process and understand the partnerships and how broad San Angelo's economy is. But I'll echo what the mayor said, and that is I always got to look for opportunities because our tax base is not great enough to fulfill the needs of the citizens. So we'll continue to do that. I appreciate COSA DC. I appreciate this presentation. Certainly understand that it takes a lot of people to make this machine run. Thank you.

Patrick.

Morning, y'all. What are your goals for this next year coming up? Like what's your ideas of how to expand it even farther?

Well, we've recently hired a replacement for Ms. Navarez, who is Samuel Helm, and we are transitioning that position to be more economic development focused as opposed to administrative. So Samuel is working with a new staff member at the Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Group, Andrew Killingsworth, And they're going to focus on BREP, you know, business retention and expansion. And what that means is that we are going to start reaching out to the community businesses to understand if there's a need for them to expand, to grow their investment in the community, to add jobs. And then we're also going to, whenever we meet with them, we're going to find out if they have any businesses that they're familiar with that might be interested in either relocating to San Angelo. So we're going to look at the horizontal and vertical aspect of each business to determine if there's some opportunities there. You know, Michael Looney at the Chamber gets a lot of interest in San Angelo, and we plan to help him in that regard to kind of make sure that everybody's requests are addressed. Perfect.

Thank you. Yeah, I think BREP's a big deal from what I've studied for growing cities and everything. It's to get those businesses, but then keep them, help them to expand. I think that's one of your fast ways to grow economic development, even outside of getting some other companies in. So I think that's great. Sounds like you're doing a good job. I know you haven't been in there a long time, so you're already well on your way to improving it. So I'm glad to hear that.

Thank you. Thank you.

I just want to thank you, David, Brian,

Great. Thank you all.

All right. This is a non-action item. Thank you all very much. Appreciate the presentation.

One public comment.

Public comment?

From Jamal Schoompert.

Jamal, you have a public comment on this?

Oh, Jamal Shumpert, SMD3. Yeah, that was a nice, much nicer presentation than y'all have had in the past. And last year's was better than the past as well. I think she's been doing a pretty good job explaining what y'all are doing. i've noticed quite a bit of our assets we put a lot of money into the start and then we put money into in the past to keep updating and now we're continuing to put a lot of more money in to updating it that'll that'll be an issue i think maybe if we step back from updating a lot of those things and focus more on the business retention and expansion part like you said specifically mr mantoo's idea to uh the business competition program. I think there should be a lot more money in there and a lot more rounds, maybe six rounds instead of expanding maybe the pipe program for, you know, those developers, maybe expanding for the retail business instead of maybe the real estate and other industrial commercial businesses. I think that's probably where we failed in economic development. And those are your citizens. your indirect everyday small business citizens who you've, I mean, helped, but not enough. As you can see, there's plenty of for sale signs going out, whether it was a food place there or if it was a balloon gift shop. They're going out of business. They need those type of ideas and opportunities to come to them. But without expanding that program, like Mr. Mantoo said, it's going to kind of be hard. And I mean, putting real effort into it. We put quite a bit of effort into getting the infrastructure. And I think the infrastructure is solid. I don't think we need to do any more infrastructure in that industrial commercial space right now. We could take probably three to five years, especially since self-driving is going to be a thing in Texas. They're going to be testing out on our roads. Imagine how that's going to affect the rail port in this industry. Do you think they'll pay the government to use the rail system? Or do they just pay for their own diesels they're self-driving, which they just pay for maintenance for? So those are the issues that are going to come in that data center business and what we got all connected in that cluster of industrial commercial space. I wish the airport would have done much better, but we have to bring more excitement here. or maybe a local casino that can bring people in, or an agreement with a casino to go to their town to use it. But that airport is being underutilized, and it's taking more and more money. Thank you.

Thank you, Jamal. Any more public comment? No. All right, we're going to move to item C. Consider awarding HGAC contract FS-12-23 to Seidens Martin Emergency Group for the purchase of a 100-foot Pierce Enforcer mid-mount aerial platform in the amount of $2,351,312, sourced from General and Intergovernmental Fund Balance and authorized in the City Manager to negotiate and execute all related documents. Presentation made by Fire Chief Brody.

Good morning, Council, Mayor. Thank you, Tom. Patrick Brody, Fire Chief. Normally, this item would be on consent agenda, but we needed to pair it up with a budget amendment. So here we are with the presentation. I don't really have a presentation for you, but I'm happy to answer any questions that you all may have. So it's a purchase of a 100-foot aerial platform to replace the ladder truck at Central Fire Station, which is right at 16 years old now.

So I'll start it off, Patrick. How long does it usually take you, once you get in line and order a ladder truck or a platform, how long does it usually take to get that? I think there's a backstory here of how these things have fallen together in your favor.

One of the questions is why and why now. So life expectancy on a ladder truck is approximately 15 years. NFPA sets that standard for us. We're at 16 years. with the current production schedule with all manufacturers. It doesn't matter which one you pick, Chevy, Ford, Dodge. They're all the same. You're looking anywhere for a custom-built truck, 42 to 48 months. That puts that truck at approximately 20 years old before we can get a replacement if we purchased it today. So if you want to talk about is this a good deal and why are we doing this now, that's the biggest reason we're doing this now, because we have an opportunity for a stock truck that do not come around very often with a delivery of approximately 12 months. Yeah, huge difference.

So I was looking at the three-page, all the items that are included and everything in there. I mean, does that fit? I can't imagine anything that you'd want that's not included on that list, but does it have the mix you need to make it work?

So every jurisdiction is a little bit different on what their needs are. So one of my big punch list items for this truck, number one, it had to be a platform, safer for our firefighters to operate, safer for victims to be removed from upward levels. Number two, it needed to be 100 foot so we can protect some of these buildings in our city. It had to have a tank on it, and it had to have a pump. Those were the big ticket items. So I start going through all the other specs, some things that we wouldn't have mind having, such as an intake on the officer side of the truck. It makes it easier to fill from a fire hydrant to fill the tank. We can work with those things. I have to have enough 5-inch hose so when we do pull from a fire hydrant, our standard is 1,000 feet. This one was right at 800. That's okay. We can work with that as well. We have other trucks that we can augment that supply with. But as far as the nuts and bolts and the deal breaker items, they were all in these specs. So it's comfortable moving forward with this stock unit.

OK, awesome. So what do you do with the old one, and what is the purpose of how you either keep it or spin it?

So anytime we go to replace a vehicle, it traditionally goes from front line to reserve. And we can get another 10 to 15 years out of that reserve status because it's no longer getting beat up day in and day out running front line. And then once it spends a period of time at reserve, then we look at selling it. So the question is, why wouldn't we sell this truck? Since it's 16 years old, we might get a decent dollar amount for it. We traditionally get beat up at auction on our vehicles. Our last ladder truck sold for $2,500. The aluminum alone on that ladder was worth more than $2,500. There is still life in this truck. It needs a break. It needs to come off the front line. We're looking about $50,000 for an engine overhaul. It's called an in-frame overhaul. The previous ladder truck we sold, we had about $120,000 worth of repairs to bring it up to the standard for it to continue being a reserve, and it was 25 years old. So the decision was to sell that one. This one, absolute best financial decision, put a little bit of money in it, get at least 10 more years out of it.

Awesome. With that, I'll open it up to council. Anybody have any questions? Patrick, do you have a question?

Chief, I know I've talked to you about it before. How much have lighter trucks gone up in the last five years?

Oh, it's unbelievable. Of course, we did have that one year that was the anomaly whenever supply chain issues, the cost of aluminum skyrocket. We saw about an 18% increase in one year. Traditionally, we're anywhere from 5% to 7% increase, but then supply and demand. is what's ultimately driving these prices up. That demand is incredibly high, that these wait times, three to four years, four to five years wait times on these trucks, they've actually come down, believe it or not, has driven those prices up. This price actually had a little bit of a shock because it came in less than what I was anticipating. About six months ago, I pulled a preliminary quote and just a best guess estimate. It was about $2.5 million. So we're coming in about $150,000 less than what I was actually anticipating, not anticipating any kind of inflation. And so I'm happy with the price. But again, Chevy Ford Dodge, no matter who you're looking at, you're looking at anywhere from $2 to $2.5 million for a vehicle this size and the capabilities that this has.

And there's no reason to think that the demand and supply will inverse in the next few years.

It is getting better. But as far as the price coming down, aluminum is about to go up huge in the future. With lithium ion batteries, they're converting those over to aluminum ion batteries. The price of aluminum is about to skyrocket. That's me speculating. But I'm buying aluminum stock market, so if that tells you anything.

So if we tried to get a couple more years out of this, then we're still looking at a four-year purchase price and probably even more money if it wasn't?

Well, the big deal on this purchase is that it's immediately available. Stock platforms do not come available very often. And if I don't move forward with this one now, it may be two years before I have an option for a stock truck, or it may be three years. Well, then I go to a custom build. Number one, I'm going to pay more money for it. We are going to pay more money for a custom build. Plus, we start putting that inflation on there at least 5%, maybe 7% next year with a 42% to 48% month lead time on it. So it's a great time. Save a little bit of money and absolutely reduce our lead time because that truck needs to be replaced yesterday.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

Any further questions? With no further questions, I'll look for a motion.

Motion to approve.

I have a first from Karen Hesse-Smith, and I have a second from who? Harry Thomas. Any public comment on this, Heather? No public comment. We'll take a vote. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Item passes 6-0.

Thank you, counsel.

Thank you, Patrick. Now we'll move to item D, consider tax increment reinvestment zone funding for the following proposed projects in the south zone, 11 North Chadburn A, 11 North Chadburn B, 7 North Chadburn A, 7 North Chadburn B, 7 North Chadburn C, 30 South Chadburn, 305 West Tuig, 415 West Beauregard, 5 West Concho for a cumulative amount of $858,652. Presentation made by Planning and Development Services Director, Aaron Benoit.

Thank you, Mayor, City Council. Aaron Vannoy, Planning and Development Services Director. So as you see, we have a number of items here that we are going to be discussing. At this moment, I would like to see if we can discuss all of the items except for number 30, South Cadburn, and 415, West Beauregard, the reason being those are asking for fire suppression systems. And at this time, I don't know, I'd like to take these others as a group and then bring those two back to see and Councilman Self to see if he needs to recuse himself from those two items or not. He may choose not to, but I just want to give that opportunity now before we get into the discussion, the long discussion of that. So, we could take these other items, then we would discuss the 30 south chapter 14.

That's a perfectly good plan. Let's take those. Let's hold those two that you haven't checked, Mark. We're going to discuss all the others.

Okay. Very good. So, I will go through those. I'll skip those slides. When I come to them, then we'll come back to those as well. SO THIS IS THE SOUTH TIERS FUNDING. YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF ITEMS THERE THAT HAVE REQUESTED FUNDING. THE BIG THING THAT I WANT TO SAY IS THAT KUDOS TO THOSE THAT HAVE HAD THE FORESIGHT TO CREATE THE TIERS DISTRICTS. and those that have worked on the investments and the property taxes and those things to make this a very viable solution for small businesses in our south and north tiers. So I'm very excited that we have the funding that we have available, and I think kudos to those that had the foresight to bring this forward. we'll start with the 11 property and so it is and so looking at 11 north uh chadman there's a b and c so they are actual separate addresses now their proposal is going through and actually doing a facade reconstruction some of the awning reconstruction and then what they call is egress and firewalls so you'll see in just a moment the structure But they're actually planning on separating that so if they have different business occupancies, they would actually have a firewall separating them, making them, while it's in one building, it really is three separate buildings, thus three separate addresses. So Suite A is a proposed project of $220,000. Their match is $120,000 with their funding request of $100,000. You can see here on North Chadbourne on the map, this is 11 right here, and this is 7 right here. So again, you'll see for 11, you have A and B. Right here, they're planning on putting in a firewall. So if this occupancy is a higher risk than this occupancy, they actually have the fire separation between the two, which allows them more flexibility of what types of businesses they can rent those out to. So, again, while these buildings are connected and we see that all through downtown, this really will stand alone as its own business and own building, and the idea with the firewall, if there's something that happens here, it's contained. And so I say that because our policies don't necessarily address that specifically. We have in the past done separate addresses as separate funding, and so I may bring a policy item to address this specifically for you all in the future to consider. But I just wanted you all to understand what their project is going to be. You can see here on the right, this is going to be the proposed finished process. They have gone through the DHRC process and gotten those approved. Again, B is going to be the same thing with the storefront, the windows door, awning reconstruction, painting, and the firewalls. Same budget on finishing out that space. And again, you can see the finished products here, A and B. Seven is very similar. It's a building just to the south. Again, they're cutting that into three suites instead of two suites. Again, their project there, the total cost is $200,000 with a proposed match of $100,000, and their funding request is $100,000. Again, storefront, windows, doors, awning, reconstruction, painting, and egress creating the firewalls. Here you can see the building, one of our iconic buildings in downtown that's been used for storage for many, many years. Now they're getting ready to do something more with it. You can see the awning reconstruction there, the front facade changes there. And of course, as the project with Chadburn Street goes through there and the streetscape, that's going to be a very desirable and looked after building again. They're making this to where you have three different suites so that they can operate independently. If somebody wanted to rent two of them, they could do that as well. So a very innovative idea to get this large of a building to get back onto being a productive building in our downtown. So that is A. Again, B is very similar. Same cost, same reconstruction. And then C, the same finishing out that third suite as well. So on to 305 West Tuig. They have a project here for exterior paint and new window installation. They've had some weatherization stuff that they're wanting to redo and get some energy efficient windows for their building. They have a project cost of just over $58,000. Their proposed match is $14,663. And so their funding request is just under $44,000. Right here on the corner of Coenheim and West Tuig, You can see the building, but they've had, as you can see, some weatherization kind of rot and things like that. They want to come back and fix that and make that a good weather-tight. They're going to come in and make sure that they've got good energy-efficient windows and things like that, which is part of the TEERS program is making that building a long-term building, continue to do the energy efficiency. This project has gone before DHRC and has been approved. Okay, let me talk about Five West Concho. Five West Concho is right next to the Angry Cactus. They're looking at an expansion. They have received an approval for $75,000 over the last couple of cycles, but they have not been able to get started with the project. What they have determined is that they actually want to take care of the sidewalk that's in front of their business there along there, along the East Concho there on the south side. It's got a lot of Really dangerous sidewalk, actually.

It's like a motorcycle track.

It's pretty rough, yes, sir. And they recognize that it would be good to wrap around that stuff that's coming from Chadburn and follow the city design and keep that going in front. And so they've come forward. Instead of really asking for an extension, let's go back in front of the tiers board and ask for that facade renovation. And you all have seen some of the demolition that they've already done. It actually looks amazing. And now they're going to come back, put the new windows in, redo, replicate the stone facade coming across and then be able to keep that project moving forward and the sidewalk. So their request was $100,000 on about a, and I want to say it's either $800 to a million dollar project to finish out that whole section. And so their match is pretty significant. Those items, and we'll come back to these in just a moment, did go before the Excuse me, the tiers board in May, they did recommend full funding for those. And so if you take the $200,000 out of that, that's going to make that $643,989 out of an assignment of $1.7 million. So you'll see we'll still have about 1.1 or just under 1.1 left. And then we can discuss the other two in just a moment. So with that, Mayor, I'll be happy to answer any questions on those items except for 30 and 415.

So I want to start out, well, number one, nice job, Aaron, and my compliments to the tiers board for bringing this forward. We've got the funds to move in. If we don't use them, in my opinion, they're sitting there wasted not doing what they're capable of moving forward with. On 5 West Concho, does that repair of the sidewalk, Is that far enough? Are they just repairing what's in front of their store? Do we need to go from all the way from Beauregard further back?

to the west i think that's the ultimate goal of the city for this project through tiers funding this will satisfy that section in front of five west concho i think that's a discussion with the director of operations uh patrick ferrick i know that he does have some safe street plans for that area and i do think that might be a potential for us to look at that of how do we repair that entire sidewalk system in those areas that are critical for us. But I wouldn't tie it with this discussion today with this tiers project. Okay, cool.

You answered my question. With that, I'll let up to the dais. Any questions from the dais? Mary?

Karen?

Patrick? Harry and Joe? All that. So we'll take a motion on all of those items, excluding 30 South Chadburn and 415 West Beauregard for the total of $643,989. Do I have a motion?

Motion to approve.

I have a first from Karen.

Second.

I have a second from Joe Self. Is there any public comment on this, Ms. Heather? With no public comment, we'll take a vote. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Those specifically indicated items pass 6-0. Now we'll move on to 305, or the 415 and the other one. I will recuse myself. Yeah.

Thank you, Mayor. Again, City Council, this is the South Tiers District funding cycle. We have two properties here that are asking for fire sprinkler and safety systems. 30 South Chadbourne, as you know, it's one of our taller buildings, and they are getting started on the first and second floor, and they're actually looking at adding some potential residential in there. but what they're coming forward with is a fire sprinkler system, and it's really the base system to get those two floors going, but it's being designed so it can be built out for future floors as they move up into the building. So the proposed project is $220,000. The proposed match is $140,000, so the funding request is $100,000. It's there on the corner of East Beauregard and South Chadman, a very prominent building, very beautiful building, in my opinion. It's got a lot of great architecture, the trust building. But they are looking at these first two floors of providing a fire suppression system in there so they can start utilizing those floors. And then over time, they will be able to add to that system and go further to the top of the building. 415 West Beauregard is one of our older downtown hotels. They have apparently a new owner and they are wanting to renovate and bring it up to some new specs and standards. And so they're going through and they're actually adding on an outdoor walkway an enclosed walkway for those outdoor rooms, but they're also adding the fire sprinkler system and fire alarm upgrades to the main building. The proposed project is $300,000. The proposed match that qualifies is $75,000 and the funding request is $100,000. Again, right down here at one of our major intersections at Abe and West Beauregard and We do know that they have a new owner but they are looking to upgrade that fire sprinkler system and their alarm which we've, talking with our fire marshal team and our building inspection team, it is desperately needed for them to continue to move forward so that they can continue to renovate that and become a viable spot for our downtown visitors. With that, I'll take any questions you have on these two items, but that would be an additional $200,000 out of the south fund, which is roughly just under 1.1. That will leave us around $800,000 to $850,000 left in the south tiers funds for a second cycle this year.

Aaron, do you know off the top of your head, I think you just said on south, with available funds on your north and south after you award these?

After we award these in the south, it's about $800,000 to $850,000. I will have to look at the north, but I think the north will be when we get to that item next, but I will have that number for you next for sure. Okay, cool.

All right. With that, any questions from the DICE?

Yes, sir. Aaron, on the 415 West Beauregard, is that hotel being operated as a hotel today?

I don't think it is today at this very moment, but that is their goal. And that's why they're coming forward with the funding so they can go back to being a hotel operations for really short-term rental of hotel activities. Thank you.

And real quick, on that one, We've changed the way to fund over three-story buildings. So on that one, do they know about that? Have they looked into that? And it's just too cost prohibitive currently to go above floor two?

That's correct. And they also are looking at secondary egress. How do they get secondary egress from the second floors if the elevator's out of operation? How do you do that? So there's some other complicating things there. But they are aware that the multi-floor funding would be available.

Perfect.

Thank you.

All right, with that, I'll look for a motion. Motion. I have a first from Karen. Second. A second from Harry Thomas. Any public comment on 30 South Chapman or 415 West Beauregard? No public comment. We'll take a vote. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Item passes 6-0. All right, with Councilman Self back in, we will move to consider tax increment reinvestment zone funding for North Zone Project Loaded Cake, located at 1313 North Bryant in the mountain for $100,000. Presentation by Planning and Development Services Director, Aaron Vannoy. Aaron, you're on.

Thank you again, Mayor. This is for the north district of the tiers of the north zone. We had one application at this time. We have some others that are pending, but this one has come forward today. They have a project here at 1313 North Bryant where they actually want to build in their outdoor patio at a local restaurant. And so that way it's going to be an all-weather kind of area so that they can have some more floor space, if you will, for their patrons. The proposed project cost $118,500. The proposed match, which in the north is only 25%, is down at the 17,000, or actually is only 10% and down at the 17,000 number that qualifies, and their funding request is $100,000. But they're looking at new windows, facade updating, lighting, painting, and striping of the parking lot. So it's right here at the corner of Bryant and West 14th. the Taqueria Jalisco. Francisco was very instrumental. He's the owner of this and owns a few other restaurants in town. Very prides himself as bringing in the taquerias into town. But they're looking at enclosing this area here that used to be an old service station. That was the drive under. He's got some patio tables out there now. But again, in our region, the three season turns into a long summer season and he would He has customers that want to come, but there's just not enough indoor space here. So he's looking at window installation and solid walls on either side that he'll have a steel wall and painted black as well as the air conditioning and things. Then he's going to come in and redo the parking lot area so that it's striped and ready to go to allow more patrons to park. With that, the staff's recommendation is full funding at 1313 North Bryant for a cumulative total of 100,000. The tiers board recommend approval with a six vote on six zero vote on May the 13th and we had right at 3.4 million in the north and so we'll end up being about 3.2 to 3.3. We have enough to afford that. I believe so. Yes, sir. Gotcha.

All that. So with that, I'll open up to the dais. Any questions? Patrick, is this in your district? I'll let you lead.

I don't have too many questions. I think they're one of the few businesses that has been able to go into that building and stay for quite a while now. So anything we can do to help them continue to do that, I'm all for. They've done a good job and they've kept it up.

Any other questions from the dais? With that, Patrick, you want to lead with your motion? I move to approve. I'll approve from Patrick. As I've eaten there a lot, I'm going to second that motion. Get the al pastor. Second. Any public comment? With no public comment, we'll take a vote. All those in favor of item E say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Item passed is 6-0. Now we'll move into public hearing for the 2027 through 2031 Capital Improvement Plan, otherwise known as the CIP, for the City of San Angelo presentation made by Finance Director Jonathan Flores.

Good morning, Mayor, Council.

Is this your first CIP presentation?

This is my first CIP presentation, yes, sir.

Before we start, I want to make sure you define somewhere through here, and I'm sure you will, but for those watching, why we have to have the CIP and how things move forward from that on. So talk about the menu versus the meal.

Yeah, absolutely. So we do the CIP every year and really this establishes a list of projects that staff can then go out and start the process of designing, start the process of procurement, start the process of starting to find the funding. So that's really the initial step of once we adopt the CIP, and today's just a public hearing, but once the CIP is adopted, staff can then go out and pursue those opportunities and those projects. It also allows us to start financial planning. The CIP is a five-year plan. So over the next five years, we have projects lined out that we can then take for grant opportunities. We can start building into our annual budget. We can look for debt opportunities as well. And then it's just an important communication tool to the city as well. It just gives us the opportunity to tell the community, hey, this is what we're working on over the next five years. This is what's important to the city when it comes to water supply, roads, the airport, whatever kind of construction projects as well. This first slide that I wanted to go over with you guys is just kind of what's included in the CIP in general. It's projects above $100,000. It's going to be within the next five years. So we have plans that obviously go past those five years, but we limit the scope here. That kind of helps us with the financial piece of it as well. And then these are improvements that have a useful greater life than two years. Over the last couple years as well, we've also included major maintenance items as well and some plans as well. If you look through the CIP, there's items for the fire truck that we heard about this morning that we're purchasing. There's some updates to the water plan and other items like that as well. So this does include more than just actual capital improvement type items. As far as the timeline for the plan itself, we begin this development of the plan every January. Every January we open up our system for departments to enter new projects, old projects, ongoing projects, those kinds of items. And in February those projects are due to the finance department. in march we kind of go through a review of those projects with city management we review the projects for um reasonability um projects that are active where are they currently at are they updated correctly those kinds of items and then in april we deliver the very first draft to you guys uh per city charter we're supposed to provide that to you guys by april Beginning today and ongoing until we adopt the plan, we have a public survey opened right now tentatively scheduled to close June 10th. So this gives the opportunity for the public to go in, view the CIP. They can click a form link at the end of the CIP and give us any feedback they'd like to give us on any of the projects or any future projects. And we'll be providing that to you guys ahead of the adoption of the plan. And then finally we're where we're at in June. This is the public hearing of the plan This is a little different this year. Normally we have this public hearing during a strategic planning session But because our planning sessions happened at the beginning of the year We're bringing it to you during a regular City Council meeting and then the adoption which is tentatively scheduled for next meeting as well so that's kind of the lay of the land on the capital improvement plan and Now we have about 129 projects, total projects totaling $1.1 billion. Now these projects are in different phases. We have 40 active projects at 236 million. We have 17 planned projects at 105 million. These planned projects are projects that we have a financial plan for. We have either a grant opportunity coming up, we have a debt issued or we're going to issue debt or we have it built into our operating budget as well. And then we have 72 proposed projects of $761 million. So these are the items if the plan is approved that we would look for grant opportunities and the upcoming budget cycle we'd look for excess revenue if possible. And then if needed we could package some of these items for a debt issuance as well.

um like i said there's there shouldn't be any action today this is just a public hearing we invite the input if there's any direction uh we'd appreciate it jonathan great presentation i think something that a lot of people need to go and take a look at if you're looking at home please go online and take a look at this i mean when when your total projects are 1.1 billion that's a lot of money how do you prioritize which ones move forward

Yeah, sure. So a lot of times these projects rely on different plans. For instance, a lot of the airport projects themselves rely on the airport master plan. City staff uses things like the thoroughfare plan, other staff studies, and then priorities just through the department. This kind of really does give us the opportunity to look at these projects over the next five years as well. And as projects are coming up, we can kind of reprioritize them as well.

I have a question. This might go to you, Shane, or maybe Patrick. All of our water needs in this CIP, like the water plan, I know we talked one time about maybe an additional water line to move to get over to kind of the airport areas. All of that included in here because just with water, my personal note is about $400 million.

Correct. That is correct. Our water needs are included within this next five years where we're talking about expanding capacity to the south, water capacity to the south, and the southern lake around the other side of Lake Nazareth, the airport in that area, extending additional water there. Also looking at future elevated storage in the southern part of town as well. help correct some pressure issues. So we have taken into account all of those things through there, as well as also addressing our aged infrastructure as well. A lot of the old cast iron, a lot of the old AC lines that we have in the ground that need to be replaced, we've taken into account all of that.

So where I'll go with that on the next question is, if something becomes available that we don't have in the CIP but grant funding becomes available, much like a Senate bill that's coming out that's going to take some money out of the rainy day fund and move it forward, if we find something that has fallen outside the scope of our CIP, how difficult is it to amend our CIP to move it in?

It's not. We just bring it back to the City Council to amend it, and we can, I believe it's one reading? It's one reading.

It's adopted by resolution, so it'll just be one reading to amend it.

And we hate to handcuff ourselves moving forward, and I have had questions about that And I thank y'all for answering that because there are people watching at home that have asked about the CIP specifically and pursuing grants. I mean, there's some things going on the river project and there may be some different avenues of resource or money streams that come in. We just have to be able to, that the public understands this is, there is some flexibility here and we can amend this. And I appreciate that. With that, I'll open it up to the dais for any questions. Harry, it looks like you're on a roll.

Well, why not? Absolutely. I'm with you. You and I. You and I, Harry. I mean, we're all in the same boat right now. Jonathan, as I look at the background information on this, I've got several of these things that are saying design only. Under this slide you've got up here, does that come under the plan projects?

Yes, sir, yeah. If they're listed in the project status column as planned, that is what's in here in the planned projects. A lot of those designed only are part of that planned category, yes, sir. We've paid for the design already or we're in the middle of the design and we have a funding source identified for the construction portion of the project. Thank you. Yes, sir.

Mary, any questions? Ms. Kearing? Patrick? All right. With that, this is a non-action item. So is there any public comment on this non-action item? All right. With no public comment on that, thank you very much, Jonathan. Great presentation. Glad you kept it under five minutes. With that, we'll move into closed session. Executive Session under the provision of Government Code Title V, Open Government Ethics, Subtitle A, Open Government Chapter 551, Open Meetings, Subchapter D, Exceptions to Requirements that Meetings be Open under the following sections. A, Section 551-072, Deliberations about Real Property Regarding 1, 2702 Red Bluff Camp, Red Bluff Ramp Road. Number 2, 4.047 Acres, Abstract A, 1755S0002, Survey W.M. Nevels, Number 3, 34 West Terrace Parking Lot. Item B, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney Regarding Board Member Appointment and Eligibility Requirements. Item C, Section 551.071, Consultation with Attorney Regarding Texas Local Government Code Chapter 380 and Texas Tax Code Chapter 312. section 551074 personal matters to deliberate the appointment employment and duties of the city manager with that we'll move into closed session at 10 20. We're gonna call this meeting back to order at 1.18 p.m. We're going to come out of executive session with nothing further to discuss. Anything else that somebody'd like to bring up on a future agenda? Harry? Karen? Patrick? I do wanna bring up something we talked about on the tiers, the streets on Concho, the sidewalks. about maybe looking at using some tiers funds, if needed, to be adjusted or rotated around so we could protect that or improve that. It's where the trees are. I know I hate to say I don't like a tree, Karen, but down on Concho Street, they have torn up some sidewalk. But I've literally seen people trip over that. As wild as this sounds, I think there's some things we need to do for public safety. And that's on- Before they got the angry cactus. Yes, before they got the angry cactus. I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED TO DISCUSS. WITH THAT, I'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING. I HAVE A FIRST FROM HARRY AND A SECOND FROM JOE SELF. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NONE OPPOSED.