[00:00:03]
IT'S 11, IS STAFF READY FOR ME TO START? OKAY, GREAT.
IT IS TUESDAY, APRIL 20TH, 2021.
THIS IS THE, UH, SPECIAL CALL MEETING OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL.
UH, THIS MEETING IS BEING HELD VIRTUALLY.
UH, I THINK THAT, UM, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER KELLY WAS HAVING SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, KITCHEN, UM, MAKE THAT'S NOVEMBER, UM, UH, POOL, UH, IS GOING TO BE JOINING US.
I THINK LIKE A 12, UH, 30, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER IS OVER AT THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT WITH THE, UH, AND THE CONSERVATION AND THE CONSERVATION, UH, FOR A PROPOSAL THAT THEY'RE DEALING WITH.
UH, SO THAT GETS IT TO, TO, UH, WE THAT ARE HERE.
UM, COLLEAGUES WE HAVE, UH, IN FRONT OF US PULLED ITEMS, UH, AND THEN WE HAVE TWO BRIEFINGS, THE BRIEFING CONCERNING, UM, THE TASK FORCE OR WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS ON, UH, PUBLIC SAFETY WILL BEGIN AT TWO O'CLOCK AND RUN THREE HOURS.
UM, THESE ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF OUR TASK FORCE.
UH, OBVIOUSLY NOT THE, THE CITY RECOMMENDATIONS OR OUR CONCLUSIONS AT THIS POINT.
AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON THESE YET.
THOSE THINGS WOULD ALL FOLLOW.
UH, BUT THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S MEETING IS TO RECEIVE.
AND CERTAINLY IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY TO ANSWER THEM, ASKING THEM AND GETTING THEM ANSWERED, GIVEN THE HARD STOP AT FIVE, WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT.
WE HAVE A POLL ITEMS, WHICH IS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO START.
UH, AND THEN WE HAVE A BRIEFING BETWEEN PULLED ITEMS AND STARTING THERE ON THE, UH, ON MAY, UH, REPORT BACK OR, UH, OR HOMELESSNESS, UH, OFFICER ABOUT THE SUMMIT.
UH, IT'S A REAL HIGH LEVEL OF PRESENTATION JUST TO KIND OF HEAR WHAT THAT IS, UH, AND, UH, DEPENDING ON TIME ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, UH, UH, THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS THAT GET ANSWERED ON ONE-ON-ONES WITH DIANA RATHER THAN DURING THE WORK SESSION, BUT LET'S SEE ON TIMING, WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN WITH THE POLLED,
[A. Pre-Selected Agenda Items]
UH, ITEMS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT, UH, THE FIRST TWO ITEMS THAT WERE PROPOSED BY COUNSELOR REPORT, AND I THINK ITEMS THREE AND FOUR ARE GOING TO BE POSTPONED, UH, BY STAFF THIS WEEK.IS THAT CORRECT? LET ME CONFIRM THAT MIRROR.
UH, I HAVE THIS NUMBER FIVE AND SIX ALSO PULLED BY COUNSELOR OR POLAR.
SHE'S ASKED TO BE PRESENT WHEN WE DISCUSS THOSE.
UH, SO, UH, UH, WHEN SHE'S WITH US BEFORE TWO O'CLOCK, UH, WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL RAISE THOSE ISSUES SO THAT SHE HAS A CHANCE TO BE HERE.
THAT GETS US TO A COUNCIL MEMBER.
SHE'S NOT GOING TO BE, MAYBE IT'S JUST A MOMENT OR TWO BEFORE SHE JOINS US TO OUR KITCHEN, UH, ON ITEM THREE AND FOUR.
SO DEPENDING ON WHEN WE GET TO THAT, I JUST SIT AND WAIT FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT IF WE HAVE A TIME ISSUE, I CAN ASK SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS AND, AND I THOUGHT IT WAS, UM, THREE THAT WAS GOING TO BE POSTPONED.
I'M NOT SURE AS CERTAIN ABOUT ITEM FOUR, SO, OKAY.
WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT HERE IN JUST A MOMENT.
AND WHEN THE MANAGERS READY TO BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT IN SCRAM FOR, UM, AND, UH, COUNSEL POLAR INDICATED THAT HE WANTED TO BE HERE FOR THE SECOND GROUP, DIDN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE HERE FOR THE FIRST TWO.
UM, THE, UH, COUNSELOR ITEM NUMBER 39 WAS PULLED BY A COUNCIL MEMBER, HARPER, MADISON.
THIS WAS THE, THE LU ISSUE WE ARE BROUGHT DOWN.
OR WERE YOU JUST ASKING, UM, BY WHAT MY CONCERN IS, OR DID YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND JUMP INTO THE IDEA? LET'S JUMP INTO THAT A NEW POPE.
UM, SO LIKE YOU ALREADY LAID OUT, THIS IS THE FEE IN LIEU ITEM.
AND SO, UM, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
DID, UM, DID YOU CONFIRM ALREADY THAT THE STAFF THAT WOULD NEED TO BE PRESENT ARE HERE? IT'S ASKED THE MANAGER, WE HAVE STAFF PRESENT HERE TO SPEAK TO ADAM 39.
[00:05:01]
LIKE THEY ARE HERE.YOU HAVE ERICA LEEK AND JARED REST OF THEM.
MAY I APPROACH? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
SO, UM, I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT? THERE'S A BIT OF AN ECHO SOMEWHERE.
IF YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING AND YOU COULD TURN OFF YOUR MIC, THAT'D BE GREAT.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD FROM A NUMBER OF OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVOCATES.
UM, I KNOW IT'S NOT JUST MY OFFICE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE FOR US TO STRIKE THAT FIRST, BE IT RESOLVED IN THIS ITEM.
UH, IT, IT, WE ARE UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT I TEND TO AGREE WITH THEM, THAT IT COULD JEOPARDIZE FUNDING FOR HOMELESSNESS.
SO, UM, WE DON'T WANT TO JEOPARDIZE OUR ABILITY TO, EXCUSE ME, EXCUSE ME, MAYOR.
I'M GOING TO PAUSE MYSELF FOR JUST A SECOND.
AND CAN YOU MUTE YOUR SELF? OH, SORRY.
DO YOU MIND, UM, GOING TO THE, UH, TO COUNCIL MEMBER TOBA SO SHE CAN LEAVE THE ITEM I NEED, I NEED A MOMENT.
UM, KEVIN OCTOBER, DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT YOUR, YOUR ITEM HERE? I GUESS I'D RATHER HEAR THE QUESTIONS FIRST, BUT I'M CERTAINLY HAPPY TO LAY IT OUT.
I THINK WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT IT AT OUR LAST MEETING.
UM, AND I WROTE A PRETTY LENGTHY MESSAGE BOARD POST, REALLY LAYING OUT THE INTENT HERE.
SO LET ME JUST START WHERE THE MAYOR PRO TEM ENDED BY SAYING THE WHOLE PURPOSE.
YOU KNOW, THE, THE PASSAGE THAT WE WOULD BE REPEALING, WE WOULD BE INITIATING AN AMENDMENT.
SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK PROBABLY ALL OF US KNOW, BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH MENTIONING FOR THE PUBLIC THAT WHEN WE INITIATE A CODE AMENDMENT, IT GOES THROUGH A PRETTY EXTENSIVE PUBLIC PROCESS.
IT GOES BACK TO OUR PLANNING COMMISSION WHO CONSIDERS IT THERE'S PUBLIC TESTIMONY THERE.
THEN THEY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, IT COMES TO US AND WE HAVE CONVERSATION AND PUBLIC TESTIMONY ABOUT IT AS WELL.
SO BY PASSING THE RESOLUTION, IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE CHANGE.
IT JUST STARTS THE PROCESS OF HAVING THAT CONVERSATION, THE PASSAGE THAT WE WOULD BE AMENDING, UM, THAT WE WOULD BE INITIATING EITHER A RE A REPEAL OR AN OR AN AMENDING OF IS THE PASSAGE THAT TALKS ABOUT, UM, THE, IT TALKS ABOUT PROJECTS THAT ARE REQUESTING AN EXCEPTION TO FAR.
AND SO, AGAIN, I'LL, I'LL START WHERE THE MAYOR PRO TEM ENDED.
SHE MADE A, A COMMENT, UM, FROM A STAKEHOLDER RE REPEATED A COMMENT FROM A STAKEHOLDER THAT IT COULD JEOPARDIZE OUR FUNDING FOR HOMELESSNESS.
I WOULD SAY JUST THE OPPOSITE IF WE ARE, ARE, UM, DEPENDING ON WHAT WE DECIDE TO DO AFTER HAVING, UH, A POLICY CONVERSATION.
IF WE AMEND THAT, THAT PASSAGE, IT COULD GENERATE MORE MONEY FOR HOMELESSNESS, UM, BECAUSE THROUGH OUR DENSITY BONUS, OUR DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS FEES ARE ALL DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.
AND NOW ALSO FOR HOUSING VOUCHERS.
SO, UM, I REGARD BOTH OF THE DIRECTIVES IN THIS AS REALLY MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE CAPTURING AS MUCH COMMUNITY BENEFIT AS POSSIBLE AND MAKING SURE THAT WHEN WE HAVE DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN, UM, THAT IT'S, THAT IT'S PROGRESSING WITH MORE UPDATED FEES.
I DO THINK THERE'S A CONVERSATION TO HAVE, AND WE MAY NOT ALL AGREE ON WHETHER OR NOT PROJECTS SHOULD EXCEED THE CAP OF FAR, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S A CONVERSATION THAT, THAT WE ARE MAKING SPACE TO HAVE IN A MORE DELIBERATIVE FASHION WITH, UM, THE PASSAGE OF THE FIRST DIRECTIVE.
AND I'LL JUST, I'LL JUST NOTE AGAIN, WHAT I NOTED IN THE MESSAGE BOARD POST, WHICH IS THAT THE FEES HAVE NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2014.
AND I, UM, BELIEVE THAT THAT WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE RECOMMENDATIONS TO UPDATE THEM ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
AND THAT'S PROBABLY A CHANGE THAT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST WE MAKE TO THE RESOLUTION TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IN PASSING THIS, WE'RE ALSO ASKING STAFF, WE'RE DIRECTING STAFF TO UPDATE THOSE FEES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
AND SO, SO THAT WE'RE REALLY KEEPING UP WITH THE MARKET AND NOT, AND NOT USING SEVEN-YEAR-OLD FEES, UH, FOR OUR DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
I DON'T REGARD THAT AS, AS BEING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY IN TERMS OF CAPTURING AS MUCH BENEFIT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS POSSIBLE, WHICH AGAIN, IT'S DESIGNATED FOR HOMELESSNESS.
AND THEN OF COURSE THE OTHER, THE OTHER CHANGE THAT THIS WOULD AFFECT IS TO CAPTURE SOME, IS TO CHANGE THE FEE, WHICH IS CURRENTLY SET AT ZERO, UM, TO AN ACTUAL FEE FOR NON-COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT
[00:10:01]
HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, UM, FOR AS LONG AS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT A DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.I REMEMBER THAT CONVERSATION HAPPENING IN SOME OF THE LIKE SMALL GROUP SESSIONS, UM, THAT WERE TAKING PLACE AS PART OF PART OF THE COMMUNITY PROCESS LEADING INTO THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY PROGRAM AND THE DOWNTOWN PLAN.
I REMEMBER SITTING AROUND THE TABLE AND, YOU KNOW, HAMMERING THAT OUT WITH OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS AT THE TIME.
AND, AND I DON'T, YOU KNOW, NOT ALL OF US AGREED THAT THAT FEE SHOULD BE SET AT ZERO.
AND I THINK AT THIS POINT, WE'RE REALLY IN A PLACE AS A CITY WHERE, WHERE WE CAN, UH, CHANGE THAT FEE AS PER OUR CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDATION TO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ZERO.
RAISE ANY ISSUES OR CONCERNS I DID.
AND I APPRECIATE COUNCIL MEMBER.
TO-GO LAYING THAT OUT AND I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE WITH THE CHOKING.
UM, UH, SO, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T HIGHLIGHT ALREADY, UH, WHAT THE CAUSE FOR CONCERN WAS.
AND, YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO SAY THAT I AGREE WITH THE CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED, UM, FOR ESSENTIALLY A MORE HOLISTIC REVISION, NOT, NOT, UM, ANY ARGUMENT THAT REVISION NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE, BUT I THINK A MORE HOLISTIC REVISION OF THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM COULD, UM, TAKE PLACE AS WELL AS FRANKLY, OUR CITYWIDE, UM, DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS. SO I'D REALLY LIKE TO GAUGE FROM MY COLLEAGUES, THE INTEREST IN OUR COUNCILS, UM, MOVING FORWARD WITH RECALIBRATING THE IN LIEU FEES, UH, FOR THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM TO MAXIMIZE OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DOLLARS ON THURSDAY, BUT TO STRIKE THE FIRST BE IT RESOLVED THE, UM, AND BRINGING FORWARD, UM, ANOTHER RESOLUTION AT A FUTURE DATE TO INITIATE A COMPREHENSIVE REVISION OF OUR CITY-WIDE AND OUR DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS. I ALSO WANT SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF STAFF HERE.
DO YOU WANT TO ASK THEM IN A MOMENT, COUNSELOR, SORRY, MARY, I WANT, I WANT TO EXPRESS THAT, YOU KNOW, UPDATING OUR, OUR FEES TO REFLECT MARKET CONDITIONS, MAKE SENSE TO ME.
UM, AND, AND, UM, WHATEVER PROCESS WE WANT TO GO THROUGH TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE REGULARLY MAKING SURE THAT OUR FEES KEEP UP WITH MARKET CONDITIONS.
I THINK THAT THAT MAKES GOOD SENSE.
UM, SO THAT WE ARE GENERATING THE BEST REVENUE WE CAN.
SO WE DON'T SET A FEE TOO LOW AND, AND DON'T CAPTURE THE, THE VALUE THAT WE NEED.
AND ALSO DON'T SET A FEE THAT IS SO HIGH THAT WE DON'T GET THE DEVELOPMENT AND THEN ALSO RECEIVE LESS THAN THE FEE.
AND SO I SUPPORT HAVING, HAVING GOOD AND CALIBRATED FEES, UH, BUT WITH THE ISSUE RELATED TO START INITIATING THE CODE AMENDMENT, I I'LL RESTATE WHAT I SAID.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, DURING THE LAST WORK SESSION, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE RECEIVED, UM, REPORTS FROM OUR STAFF AND FROM THE COMMUNITY TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THAT WE COULD BE DOING A LOT BETTER WITH YOUR DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS, BY ALLOWING MORE DENSITY AND CAPTURING MORE ON-SITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WORKFORCE HOUSING FEES, AND, UH, KICKING OFF THE YEAR HERE FOR US TO JUST REVISE THE CODE AS IT RELATES TO JUST THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS.
PART OF THE CODE, WHEN ACTUALLY THERE WERE SO MANY PARTS OF THE CITY WHERE WE'VE RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO UPDATE THOSE CORRIDORS AND THOSE PARTS OF THE CODE TO CAPTURE FEES AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, I WOULD RATHER ACTUALLY FIX THOSE CORRIDORS AND IN ALL OF THOSE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS, AS OPPOSED TO JUST PICKING THIS ONE.
UM, SO WE'VE GOT A LETTER FROM PLANNING.
OUR COMMUNITY IS A LETTER FROM THE AUSTIN HOUSING COALITION LETTERS FROM OTHERS, UH, RESTATING THAT, THAT FACT.
AND SO, UM, MY, MY GOAL WOULD BE FOR US TO, TO NOT DELVE JUST INTO ONE PROGRAM, BUT FIND A WAY FOR US TO ACTUALLY MAXIMIZE THAT ON-SITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND FEES, UM, AND, AND HOUSING UNITS, BECAUSE WE NEED THOSE AS WELL FOR ALL OF THAT TO WORK, UM, IN A, IN A BIGGER WAY.
SO, SO I, I APPRECIATE WHAT THE MAYOR PRO TEM HAS RAISED HERE AND I'M INTERESTED IN AND WHERE THE, WHERE THE DIAS SITS ON THAT ISSUE AS WE'RE A KITCHEN AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS.
UM, I, I AGREE, UH, COUNCILMAN COSARA, THAT IS TIME TO BRING BACK THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, PARTICULARLY THE ASPECTS, UH, RELATED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS. AND SO IT'S REALLY TIME FOR US TO GET BACK ON TRACK BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY, UM, MANY NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT AS PART OF THAT PROCESS.
I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD HOLD US UP THOUGH.
I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO COUNCIL MEMBER TO-GO FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
I PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
UM, UH, BUT ALSO TO VERY QUICKLY,
[00:15:02]
UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OTHER ASPECTS THAT WE NEED TO DO TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS BOTH TO CALIBRATION FOR DENSITY AND OTHER ASPECTS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, THAT WE, UM, HAVE TALKED ABOUT.AND MANY OF WHICH WERE AGREED UPON BY THE COUNCIL, UH, IN PREVIOUS EFFORTS AROUND THE ATLANTA DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO I WOULD JUST SAY THAT RIGHT NOW, I DON'T WANT US TO SLOW DOWN A PROCESS TO, TO GET TO, UH, THE, THE BEST THAT WE CAN FOR AFFORDABILITY.
UM, BUT I DO WANT TO RATHER, I WANT TO PROCEED HERE WITH WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER TOA IS SUGGESTING, UM, AND ALSO SPEED UP OUR OTHER PROCESSES AS THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCIL MEMBER COSAR ARE HIGHLIGHTING THE NEED FOR COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS.
UM, I COULD ALSO BE ON BOARD WITH LOOKING AT DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS, UM, FIRST OF ALL, IN DOWNTOWN CURRENTLY, BUT IF THERE IS ANOTHER PROCESS FOR DOING, UM, MORE OF A CITY-WIDE BASIS IN OTHER LOCATIONS, I COULD BE ON BOARD WITH THAT AS WELL.
UM, ONE OF MY MAIN CONCERNS STILL, UM, IS THAT I THINK OUR UPDATED METRICS, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME, THE ASSUMPTIONS AND METRICS OF THE LAST CALIBRATION WAS, WAS DONE IN LIGHT OF THE LDC REWRITE, NOT THE CODE WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
AND SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF DOING THIS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M HAVING NUMBERS IN FRONT OF ME THAT ARE ACCURATE TO OUR CURRENT SITUATION TODAY.
UM, SO I WOULD WANT TO BE CONFIDENT IN DOING THAT.
AND SO THE, UM, THE DEADLINE OF DOING SOMETHING AT THE VERY NEXT MEETING MAY 6TH IS SOMETHING THAT I, I JUST, UM, I DON'T QUITE KNOW HOW THAT WORKS.
UM, MAYBE STAFF CAN ENLIGHTEN ME ON THAT A LITTLE BIT, UH, BUT ALSO THE, THE REPEALING OF SECTION V6, I THINK WE'D REALLY NEED TO HAVE ALL OUR DUCKS IN A ROW BEFORE WE, UM, TOY WITH COUNCIL'S ABILITY TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS.
I THINK IT'S PRUDENT FOR US AS A COUNCIL TO RETAIN, UM, OUR ABILITY TO LET PEOPLE COME TO US AND SAY, I THINK I'VE GOT A GOOD WIN FOR US.
I WANT TO PROVIDE MORE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
I WANT COUNCIL TO TELL ME IF THIS PROPOSAL WORKS FOR THEM.
AND SO I THINK THAT IS A FLEXIBILITY THAT I WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN NO MATTER WHAT WE DO.
UM, BUT I THINK IF WE CAN GET THE ASSUMPTIONS OF THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE WORKING OFF OF APPLIED TO THIS PARTICULAR, SAY FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THIS CORRECTLY WITH, WITH UPDATED INFORMATION.
SO MAYBE STAFF CAN SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THE MAY SIX DEADLINE.
IF THE MEMBERS THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH WOULD BE REFLECTIVE OF, OF THIS CODE, UM, AND WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS ARE ON THAT.
THAT'S SURE ERIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PER HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
SO IF, IF THE COUNCIL DESIRES FULLY RECALIBRATED A DENSITY BONUS FEES BASED ON SORT OF NEW ASSUMPTIONS WHERE WE NEED TO COLLECT NEW, UM, ECONOMIC DATA, I THINK, UM, AUGUST IS PROBABLY A REASONABLE TIMEFRAME.
IF WE WANTED TO USE THE ECONOMIC DATA THAT WAS COLLECTED BY ECO NORTHWEST MAINLY IN 2019, BUT BASICALLY TRY TO, EXCUSE ME, TRANSLATE THOSE FEES FROM THE PROPOSED CODE TO THE CURRENT CODE, THEN JUNE WOULD LIKELY BE FEASIBLE.
AND I, I WOULD HOPE JUST AS A MATTER OF PROCESS, MAYBE WE COULD JUST HAVE AN UPDATE TO THOSE NUMBERS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW INTENSE THAT IS GIVEN THAT THE ASSUMPTIONS MIGHT BE QUITE DIFFERENT.
AND SO I WOULD, I WOULD WANT TO KNOW, UM, I WOULD WANT TO BE CONFIDENT THAT THE NUMBERS THAT WE ALL HAVE TO WORK OFF OF ARE REFLECTIVE OF, OF THE CODE THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY OPERATING UNDER.
UM, I, I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR NOW, BUT MAYBE IF OTHER PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS, UM, I MIGHT JUMP BACK IN IF SOMETHING POPS OUT.
MY QUESTION IS FOR ERIC ELITE, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A SENSE, YOU SAID IT WOULD BE JUNE BEFORE WE, YOU WOULD HAVE A PROPOSAL ON THE FEE SCHEDULE BASED ON BEFORE IT, SO CAN YOU TALK US THROUGH WHY IT WOULD TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER IF, IF THE PROPOSAL IS TO USE THE FEES THAT WERE RECOMMENDED IN THE REPORT? SO THE, THE FEES THAT WERE RECOMMENDED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ARE SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE REGULATIONS AND MAPPING IN THE PROPOSED, UH, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND BECAUSE OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CURRENT CODE AND THE PROPOSED CODE,
[00:20:01]
WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND, AND BASICALLY SORT OF TRANSLATE AND REMAP THE PROPOSED FEES BASED ON TODAY'S CURRENT CODE RATHER THAN THE PROPOSED CODE.SO IT'S NOT A ONE FOR ONE JUST BEING ABLE TO REPLACE NUMBERS IN A WAY THAT WOULD BE, UM, REFLECTIVE OF THE WORK THAT WAS COMPLETED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
DOES THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION? YES, IT DOES.
AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION IS, DO WE HAVE A SENSE OF HOW MANY ZONING CASES OR WE HAVE IN THE PIPELINE FROM NOW AND THROUGH AUGUST THAT WOULD, THAT ARE LOOKING OR THINKING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM? THIS IS JERRY
UM, THE ONLY CASES THAT GO BEFORE THE COSTAL ARE THOSE THAT EXCEED THE CAP.
OTHER THAN THAT, THEY ARE ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE APPROVED.
UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY WE HAVE IN THE PIPELINE RIGHT NOW.
UM, I COULD GET BACK TO YOU WITH THAT NUMBER OR HAVE IT AVAILABLE BY THURSDAY.
IF YOU LIKE IT, IT'S NOT A GREAT NUMBER, BUT I'D HAVE TO CHECK.
IT'S PROBABLY AROUND A HALF DOZEN OR SO, THAT ARE ADMINISTRATIVE.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY PENDING THAT REQUIRE CONSOLE APPROVAL.
LIKE THE THREE THAT Y'ALL HAD THAT THE LAST MEETING.
COUNCIL MEMBER, MEMBER KITCHEN.
UM, MR. LEEK, I KNOW YOU SPENT SOME TIME WORKING WITH MY STAFF ABOUT THE FEES AND TALKING ABOUT THEM YESTERDAY.
AND IS IT ACCURATE TO SAY THAT JUST LOOKING AT THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX AND BY THE WAY, I MISSPOKE EARLIER.
I THINK I SAID THAT FIGURES CAME FROM 2014 AND ACTUALLY THE FIGURES THAT WE'RE USING FOR OUR DENSITY BONUS FEES ARE ACTUALLY BASED ON 2013 NUMBERS.
SO THEY'RE ACTUALLY EIGHT YEARS OLD AT THIS POINT.
IS IT ACCURATE TO SAY THAT JUST BY IF WE USE SOMETHING REALLY BASIC, LIKE A CALCULATION USING THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX THAT WE WOULD END UP AT THE SAME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE, UM, ECO NORTHWEST FOLKS RECOMMENDED? UM, SO WE DISCUSSED INFLATION RATHER THAN US CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.
SO I WOULD NEED TO LOOK INTO THAT.
GET, LANDS US AT NEARLY THE SAME RECOMMENDATION THAT ECO NORTHWEST, UM, PUT FORWARD AS THERE IT'S WHEN, WHEN WE DID SOME QUICK CALCULATIONS, IT WAS, IT WAS SIMILAR.
SO I GUESS I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF, UM, I FULLY SUPPORT LOOKING AT OUR OTHER DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS ON BOARD FOR THAT DID A RESOLUTION NOW YEARS AGO, UM, ASKING FOR THE STAFF TO LOOK AT ALL THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS AND COME BACK TO US WITH THOSE NUMBERS.
SO HE COULD SEE WHAT WAS WORKING, WHAT WAS NOT WORKING.
UM, WE HAD, I THINK ANOTHER RESOLUTION THAT MAYBE THE MAYOR YOU DID, UM, WE HAVE, WE HAVE NOW ASKED FOR THIS TO BE RECALIBRATE.
I MEAN, AT SOME POINT WE'VE GOT TO STOP JUST ASKING FOR MORE RECALIBRATIONS AND MORE ANALYSIS AND ACTUALLY GET SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT'S A LITTLE MORE REFLECTIVE OF THE MARKET CONDITIONS.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FEES THAT WERE RECOMMENDED.
WE ALSO ADD TO THAT, THE RECOMMENDATION THAT OUR STAFF, UM, ENGAGE ECO NORTHWEST TO DO THAT UPDATE AND THAT WE ADOPT A POLICY OF, OF RECALIBRATING THOSE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, WHICH ALLOWS US TO REALLY LOOK AT, REALLY LOOK AT THEM MORE FREQUENTLY AND ADJUST THEM AS NECESSARY.
I THINK THAT THAT'S REALLY THE RIGHT THING TO DO FOR REALLY THE RIGHT THING TO DO, UM, FOR OUR COMMUNITY IS TO GET SOMETHING IS TO GET SOMETHING THAT'S MORE REFLECTIVE OF MARKET CONDITIONS RIGHT NOW, AS WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SEEING ALL KINDS OF DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, WHICH IS WONDERFUL.
WE ARE GOING TO LOSE THE OPPORTUNITY, REALLY CAPTURE, UM, A MORE REFLECTIVE COMMUNITY BENEFIT IF WE DON'T, IF WE DON'T DECIDE TO MAKE A CHANGE, YOU KNOW, WE DELAYED ALL THAT EARLIER WORK FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH HAS TAKEN FAR LONGER THAN WAS ENVISIONED.
UM, I JUST WOULD REALLY SUGGEST THAT WE GET THIS PIECE.
WE GET THIS, EVEN IF IT'S JUST AN INTERIM FEE AND WE COMMIT TO CONTINUING TO WORK ON THE OTHER, OR RE-ENGAGING THE WORK ON, ON THE OTHER DENSITY BONUS FEES.
AND I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE, AGAIN, I THINK THAT THIS IS, THIS IS REALLY THE WAY THAT, UM, ONE OF THE FEW TOOLS WE HAVE IN OUR TOOLBOX FOR GENERATING MONEY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE'VE TRIED AND EXPLORED LINKAGE FEES.
I HOPE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AGAIN.
AT SOME POINT WE ALL KNOW WE CAN'T USE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING, BUT WE HAVE OUR DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS, BUT THEY ONLY REALLY WORK EFFECTIVELY IF WE UPDATE THEM.
SO I'M REALLY KEEN ON, ON MOVING THAT FORWARD, UM, AND NOT LETTING THE PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD, REALLY GETTING THE DENSITY BONUS
[00:25:01]
AMENDMENTS UNDERWAY, COUNCIL MEMBER LS.I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS ONE POINT YOU RAISED ABOUT WANTING TO RETAIN, WANTING TO RETAIN THE FLEXIBILITY FOR THE COUNCIL TO ALLOW FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE REQUESTING EXCEPTIONS TO FAR TO COME AND PRESENT THEIR CASE BEFORE COUNCIL AND BE HEARD.
AND IF THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS SUPPORT THAT THE COUNCIL CAN, CAN GIVE THE GO AHEAD.
UM, THAT WOULD, THAT IS ALLOWED UNDER, THAT WOULD CERTAINLY BE POSSIBLE UNDER WHAT WE ARE CONTEMPLATING FOR THURSDAY BECAUSE THE AMENDMENT, THE RESOLUTION INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO REPEAL OR AMEND.
AND SO IT COULD CERTAINLY AMEND IT ALLOWING, CONTINUING TO ALLOW THOSE FAR EXCEPTIONS TO COME TO COUNCIL, BUT IT WOULD AT LEAST HAPPEN AFTER THE POLICY CONVERSATION THAT WAS, THAT WAS DESCRIBED AS BEING NECESSARY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT PROJECTS EXCEEDING THE CAP, UM, PER FAR SHOULD BE REQUIRED.
ONE, WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA UNDER WHICH COUNCILS SHOULD, SHOULD GRANT EXCEPTIONS TO THE FAR? AND IF THE COUNCIL DECIDES THAT THEY WANT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THIS FLEXIBILITY, WHAT WOULD BE, WHAT WOULD BE THE, THE RIGHT FEE? SHOULD IT BE THE SAME AS THE REST OF THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM AS IT IS CURRENTLY? OR SHOULD IT BE A HIGHER, HIGHER LEVEL, UH, CALCULATION.
SO THAT, THAT FLEXIBILITY THAT I BELIEVE I HEARD YOU REQUESTING, UM, IS CERTAINLY IN THE RESOLUTION MAYOR PRO TEM.
CAN'T HEAR YOU IF YOU'RE TALKING, HEY GUYS, SORRY.
SOMETIMES GET THAT NEW BUTTON STICKS ON ME.
UM, THANK YOU FOR COMING BACK AROUND.
SO COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS ASKED SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO ASK WHEN I, UM, LET YOU KNOW EARLIER I'VE HAD SOME QUESTIONS.
UM, SO, UH, MY QUESTIONS TO MY QUESTIONS STILL REMAIN.
SO TO ENSURE THAT WE MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF, UH, FEES THAT WE CAN LEVERAGE OUT OF THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, WOULD STAFF RECOMMEND THAT WE APPLIED THE PROPOSED FEES FROM THE LBC REWRITE OR TO RECALIBRATE THE LEASE TO THE CURRENT CODE AND CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS? I'M NOT SURE THAT I WOULD WANT TO GUESS ON THAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, UH, OBVIOUSLY COVID HAS HAD AN IMPACT, ESPECIALLY ON COMMERCIAL SPACE.
UM, AND WE WOULD WANT TO, WE WOULD REALLY WANT TO LOOK BACK INTO THE DATA OF, YOU KNOW, ARE, ARE THE PRICES FOR COMMERCIAL SPACE GOING UP DOWN, UM, SAME FOR RESIDENTIAL SPACE.
SO, SO I WOULD NOT WANT TO, I WOULDN'T WANT TO GUESS ABOUT THAT.
SO I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE MARKET, THAT YOU CAN'T DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD APPLY THE PROPOSED FEES FROM THE MVC REBRANDED OR THE CURRENT CODE AND CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS, BECAUSE THE LADDER IS, UM, FLUID.
SO, SO IF, IF COUNSEL WOULD LIKE THE FEES TO BE REFLECTIVE OF CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS, I THINK WE NEED TO GO BACK AND DO THAT WORK BECAUSE IT IS, IT IS CERTAINLY POSSIBLE THAT WHAT WAS PROPOSED AS PART OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS, IS NO LONGER CORRECT, UM, FOR ESPECIALLY, UM, THE COMMERCIAL SPACE.
CAN YOU ALSO TELL ME WHAT STEPS BE ABLE TO COMPLETE THAT RECALIBRATION, UM, THAT REFLECTS THE CURRENT CODE AND MARKET CONDITIONS IN TIME FOR THAT, UM, FOR A FYI 22 FEE SCHEDULE ADOPTION, UM, IF IT'S ADAPTED IN AUGUST, UM, AND APOLOGIES, I DON'T HAPPEN TO KNOW THAT OFFHAND BE ADOPTED WITH THE BUDGET.
SO YES, THAT TIMEFRAME SEEMS TO BE CIVIL.
AND THEN, UH, ONE LAST QUESTION.
SO DURING THE, AT LEAST THE STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT THE FEES BE RECALIBRATED EVERY THREE YEARS TO ENSURE THAT WE CAPTURE AN ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF DATA.
UM, DOES STAFF STILL AGREE THAT THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE INTERVAL FOR, UM, FOR RECALIBRATION? WHAT I HAVE HEARD FROM CONSULTANTS ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS IS, IS THAT YOU MIGHT ONLY WANT TO CONSIDER DOING THE UPDATES APPROXIMATELY EVERY THREE YEARS.
UM, FOR TWO REASONS, ONE IS TO BE ABLE TO CAPTURE SOME OF THAT MARKETS DATA, AND DEPENDING ON HOW MANY NEW DEVELOPMENTS WE GET EVERY YEAR, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE MIGHT NOT HAVE MUCH DATA WITHIN A YEAR, BUT THEN THE SECOND REASON IS ACTUALLY TO PROVIDE PREDICTABILITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
[00:30:01]
COMMUNITY.SO IF THE FEES ARE CHANGED EVERY YEAR, IT'S, IT MAKES IT HARDER FOR THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TO KNOW WHAT THE FEES WOULD BE AS THEY ARE DEVELOPING THEIR, UM, PERFORMANCE FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENTS.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN.
UM, I THINK SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES KIND OF ALLUDED TO THIS, BUT, UM, THIS IS JUST A QUESTION THAT DOESN'T, UH, CHANGE MY DESIRE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE, UH, CALIBRATION WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER TOBO HAS SUGGESTED, BUT HERE'S MY QUESTION.
SO I AM HEARING THAT, UM, AS PART OF THE, UM, AS PART OF NEW FEES FOR THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS, THERE ARE OTHER RELATED KINDS OF CHANGES THAT WERE PROPOSED, UM, AS PART OF THE LDC, UH, REWRITE.
UM, I WOULD JUST ASK THAT, THAT LIST OF WHAT THOSE WERE BE SHARED WITH US.
SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE DAY BEFORE.
UM, AND, UH, IS THAT A YES? UM, YES.
UM, I APOLOGIZE THAT I MISSED SOME OF THE CONVERSATION I NEEDED TO GO OVER TO THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT TO, UM, SPEAK TO THEM.
THERE LAUNCHED A TRAVIS COUNTY CIVILIAN CLIMATE CORP TODAY MODELED OFF OF OUR HLC.
UM, I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, I SUPPORT US MOVING FORWARD WITH AN INCREASE IN THE FEES, UM, AT THIS TIME AS COUNCIL MEMBER TOVO SUGGESTED, AND I'M PROUD TO CO-SPONSOR THIS ITEM.
I ALSO AGREE WITH
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT COMING UP IN THE FUTURE WITH THAT SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT COMING IN.
NO, WE NEED TO GET THE FEEDS, UH, CORRECT.
SO THAT, YOU KNOW, EIGHT YEARS QUITE A WHILE, OR YOU'RE NOT, WE WILL STILL DEBATING THAT SELLING A HOUSE FOR 350,000 OUTRAGES BACK THEN, YOU KNOW, WHEN I FIRST GOT ON THE BOARD ON THE COUNCIL, SO, YOU KNOW, WE WE'VE BEEN HAVING A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS AND, AND, AND TRYING TO GET AS MUCH RESOURCES AS WE CAN FOR OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND THIS IS JUST A STUDY TO SEE EXACTLY WHERE WE HAD.
AND I'M SUPPORTING THAT, UH, CATHERINE, OUR POOL, I GUESS, MEMBER HOUSE I'M ON BOARD WITH COUNCIL MEMBER TERROR'S DIRECTION AS WELL.
UM, UH, UM, MS. LEE, CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHAT SOME OF THE MAIN DIFFERENCES ARE BETWEEN THE 2019 ASSUMPTIONS FOR THOSE METRICS AND THE CODE WE CURRENTLY HAVE? WHAT WOULD BE JUST SOME OF THE HIGH LEVEL, BIG DIFFERENCES THAT STAFF WOULD JUST WANT TO LOOK AT TO MAKE SURE THE NUMBERS ARE ACCURATE? UM, TWO THAT I WOULD THINK OF OFF HAND, UM, INCLUDE HAVING THAT PROPOSED PARKING MAXIMUM, UH, IN DOWNTOWN, WHICH HAD AN IMPACT, UM, POTENTIALLY ON SALES PRICES AND, AND, UH, PERHAPS TO SOME EXTENT RENTAL PRICES FOR, UH, RESIDENTIAL.
SO SINCE THE CURRENT CODE DOESN'T HAVE THAT, UM, THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE FEES.
AND THEN THE, THE OTHER, SOME OF THE OTHER WORK THAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO IS, UM, IS TO ACTUALLY SORT OF RE REMAP THE PROPOSED THE AREAS THAT CURRENTLY, UM, HAVE ONE SET OF FEES AS PART OF THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM AND IN THE PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, THE FEES WERE PROPOSED BASED ON DIFFERENT GEOGRAPHIES.
SO WE'D NEED TO LOOK AT THE, KIND OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THOSE TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT, WHICH ARE THE RIGHT, WHICH ARE THE BEST FEES FOR, FOR DIFFERENT GEOGRAPHIES.
UM, SO THOSE ARE, THAT'S SOME OF THE WORK THAT WE'D NEED TO DO, UM, AS PART OF THE SORT OF TRANSLATION PROCESS.
AND WERE THERE ANY, UM, ASSUMPTIONS IN THERE ABOUT FAR
[00:35:01]
OR HEIGHT OR SOME OF THAT CONVERSATION? CAUSE I KNOW MOST PARTS OF TOWN IT'S, IT'S A HIGH THRESHOLD AND THEN YOU GET INTO THE DENSITY BONUSES AND IT BECOMES FAR, UM, WAS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN ANY OF THOSE, FOR THE REWRITE VERSUS THE CURRENT CODES? UM, THERE'S THERE ARE SOME DIFFERENCES IN, ESPECIALLY IN, IN SORT OF DIFFERENT PARTS OF DOWNTOWN.UM, SO, SO THERE ARE VARIANCES THERE.
AND I JUST, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, I DO SUPPORT UPDATING THESE FEES.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DATA THAT WE'RE USING IS AS UP-TO-DATE AS IT CAN BE.
SO I THINK IN THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, IT SEEMS LIKE MOST OF THE DYNASTIES THAT THEY'VE, THEY SUPPORT, UM, MOVING FORWARD AND RECALIBRATING THESE FEES AND JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT IT AND KIND OF SOLID DATA TO MAKE SURE WE'RE BACKING THESE, THESE APPROVALS UP.
IF I MAY REAL QUICK, I WAS ABLE TO GET AN ANSWER TO A CUSTOMER PRENTICE ONE TEST THIS QUESTION EARLIER THROUGH OUR SEVEN CASES THAT ARE CURRENTLY PENDING, UM, AND THE, UH, DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS REVIEW PROCESS, UH, NONE OF THEM WOULD REQUIRE THE APPROVAL OF CONSOLE.
THEY'RE ALL ADMINISTRATIVE, THANK YOU, JAKE.
THAT, AND YOU KNOW, I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE A WAY FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH UPDATING THE FEES FOR THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM? UM, AND THEN, AND THEN WORKING ON UPDATING CITYWIDE, OUR BONUS PROGRAMS BY THAT AUGUST TIMEFRAME, CAN WE DO BOTH OR IF STAFF CAN SPEAK TO THIS, UM, DOES ONE PRECLUDE THE OTHER, UH, ONE DOES THAT PRECLUDE THE OTHER, BUT, UM, JUST NOTE THAT THAT TAKING CODE CHANGES FOR THE PROCESS, UM, IT DOES REQUIRE STAFF TIME.
AND SO IF THEY'RE DONE TO GATHER, YOU CAN SORT OF CONSOLIDATE ALL OF THAT, UH, STAFF TIME, UH, IN, IN ONE GO ROUND.
UM, IF THEY'RE TAKING SEPARATELY, THEN, THEN YOU'RE GOING THROUGH A SEPARATE PROCESSES.
NOW I THINK ME, I ACTUALLY PREFER IT TO BE SEPARATE.
I THINK IT ALLOWS ME AS A NEW COUNCIL MEMBER TO REALLY HONE IN ON THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY PROGRAM IN OF ITSELF, AND THEN SEPARATELY TAKE UP THE REST OF OUR DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS. UM, AND, AND SO I JUST WANT TO REITERATE MY SUPPORT FOR MOVING FORWARD ON THE, ON THIS RECALIBRATION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO ON TO THE NEXT POLL ITEM, THEN LET'S GO BACK UP TO THE, TO THE TOP.
UM, MANAGER IS STAFF PULLING ITEMS THREE AND FOUR ARE POSTPONING BROTHER.
WE ARE NOT MAYOR COUNCIL, AND WE WOULD PREFER TO SEE ALL FOUR OF THESE ITEMS GO FORWARD.
UM, BUT WE DO RECOGNIZE THE PRIDE AND NUMBER THREE, THERE MAY BE A NEED FOR CONTINUED CONVERSATION WITH THE BOARD.
AND SO IF THERE WERE ANY ITEMS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE POSTPONED BY COUNCIL, UH, ITEM THREE WOULD BE, UH, UNDER THE OTHER ONES WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEE GO FORWARD TODAY.
COUNSELOR, YOU WANT TO ADDRESS TOO MANY? THREE, FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX.
AND, UM, THANKS TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR THAT INPUT.
I DO THINK, UM, I WAS ADVISED THAT STAFF, UM, WAS GOING TO POSTPONE ITEMS THREE.
NOW WE CAN, OH, A PHONE I'M ON MY PHONE TECHNOLOGY HERE AND A CALL WAS COMING IN AND THAT MUST'VE TAKEN AWAY.
TOP OF THE LIST AGAIN, UH, ITEM THREE, THE ABLE BYLAWS, UH, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT ON THAT.
SO I'D LIKE TO CONFIRM THAT WITH DIRECTOR AFT, UM, AND IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT CONCURRENT SPEND STAFF ON MY UNDERSTANDING IS, DID WANT TO POSTPONE THAT.
I'M ASSUMING YOU GUYS CAN STILL HEAR ME.
ITEM FOUR IS THE ABLE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION THAT CAN MOVE FORWARD.
ITEM FIVE, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS
[00:40:01]
ARE STILL OUTSTANDING WITH REGARD TO MINUTES OF THE ABL BOARD.I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY ADDRESS THOSE AND GET THEM NAILED DOWN TODAY.
THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN LOAN OF 2.6 MILLION.
THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME VOTES THAT WERE TAKEN THAT NEED TO BE, UM, QUESTION ABOUT SOME VOTES THAT WERE TAKEN THAT NEED TO BE, UM, A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION THERE THAT NEEDS TO BE LAID TO REST.
AND THEN ITEM SIX, UH, CAN ALSO MOVE FORWARD.
THAT'S THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEBT SERVICE OF A DEBT SERVICE FUND FOR ABLE AND THE TRANSFER OF THE 2.6 MILLION INTO THAT FUND.
SO WHAT WE NEED HERE TO CONFIRM WITH DIRECTOR YAS ON THREE, AND THEN, UM, LET'S DO THAT.
AND THEN I'LL, I'LL SPEAK TO FIVE JUST BECAUSE WITHOUT SHE'S JUST GOING TO BE MOVED OVER.
UM, BUT THAT, THAT'S WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM HER AS WELL, IS THAT THAT'S THE DESIRE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD.
THEN POSTPONING ITEM THREE WOULD BE FINE, BUT WE CAN WAIT AND HOPEFULLY SHE'LL GET MOVED OVER SHORTLY.
WHILE WE'RE WAIT FOR HER TO MOVE OVER.
UH, DID YOU MARCH, YOU'RE SAYING FOUR OR FIVE AND SIX YOU'RE OKAY.
WITH THOSE MOVING FORWARD, THERE WERE JUST SOME ISSUES YOU WANTED TO RAISE.
WELL, ITEM FIVE STILL HAS A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION SURROUNDING SOME NOTES THAT WERE TAKEN AT THE APRIL BOARD MEETING.
UM, UH, BUT LET ME GO AHEAD AND TALK ABOUT THAT JUST A WEE BIT.
W I THINK WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TODAY, BUT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO AIR OUT A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENED.
SO ON ITEM FIVE, UH, CONSIDERING THE HOTEL HAS SEVERAL OVERDUE DEBTS, IT MAY BE PRUDENT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSED LOAN.
THE SEVERAL CONCERNS ABOUT, UH, THAT I HAVE THOUGH HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING AT ABLE OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, WITH THE APPROVAL OF CERTAIN CONTRACTS TO HARNEY PARTNERS, A PORTION OF THESE MONIES WOULD POTENTIALLY BE USED TO PAY.
SO I'D FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE KNOWING THAT THOSE QUESTIONS ARE CLEARED UP BEFORE WE VOTE ON SPECIFICALLY ITEM FIVE, BUT I'M, AND I'M OPEN TO HEARING FROM STAFF AND MY COLLEAGUES ABOUT ITEM FIVE.
THERE'S SOME, SOME CONCERNS ABOUT PEOPLE VOTING ON ISSUES THAT WOULD BENEFIT THEM AND RECUSALS THAT, UH, POTENTIALLY OUGHT TO BEEN OCCURRING AS DIRECTORS.
I AM ON, CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, WE CAN.
AND I ALSO HAVE TWO STAFF MEMBERS WITH ME TO SUPPORT WITH ANY OF THE QUESTIONS.
SO WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ALL OF THEM.
UM, WE'LL START WITH NUMBER ITEM, NUMBER THREE, WE ARE IN AGREEANCE TO AMEND THE CONTRACT, TO HAVE THE, UH, COUNSEL FOR THE AMENDMENT OF, UM, THE AGREEMENT THAT HAS IS SO WE'RE GOOD WITH THE LANGUAGE AND AMENDMENT THAT THE BOARD OF ABLE ACTUALLY APPROVED.
ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING, THERE WAS AN ASK TO AMEND IT FURTHER BY HAVING A, ANY EXTENSIONS TO THE CONTRACT, COME TO COUNCIL, WHICH IS NOT IN THE CURRENT AMENDMENT.
UH, AND IF SO, THE ONLY WE'RE OKAY.
POSTPONING DYNAM, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GO TO THE APRIL BOARD BACK AND GET UP FOR THEM TO APPROVE THAT EX THAT AMENDMENT.
SO IF THE AMENDMENT, THE CURRENT AMENDMENT THAT YOU'RE ASKING THIS COUNCIL MEMBER TO ADD THE EXTENSION LANGUAGE, THEN WE'RE OKAY WITH POSTPONING NUMBER THREE.
AND SPECIFICALLY THE LANGUAGE CHANGES WOULD NOT ONLY ALLOW COUNCIL TO REVIEW ALL THE NEW MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS LIKE IT SAYS NOW, BUT ANY EXTENSIONS WOULD ALSO GET TO BE REVIEWED.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S THE BEST PRACTICES AND THAT IS WHAT, UM, THE POSTPONEMENT WOULD, UH, GIVE US THAT OPPORTUNITY.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US TO HAVE THAT IN THE, IN THE BINDERS.
SO WE'LL POSTPONE THAT AND GO BACK TO THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL.
COME BACK WITH, FOR YOU NOW, UM, ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UM, WHAT SPECIFIC DO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION? THIS, THIS WAS JUST THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, RIGHT? WELL, THE ITEM CAN MOVE ON THURSDAY IF THAT'S THE WILL OF MY COLLEAGUES.
UM, AND THIS IS THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION FOR ABEL.
I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS HERE, BUT I DID WANT TO PULL IT, MAKE SURE IT'S NOT CONNECTED TO THE BYLAWS AND THEREFORE NEEDS SOME CHANGES.
SO IF YOU CAN CONFIRM THAT DIRECTORY AFTER THEN, I THINK WE COULD, UM, BARRING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM MY COLLEAGUES.
WE COULD PROBABLY MOVE FORWARD ON ITEM FOUR.
UM, IS THERE SOMETHING IN THIS ITEM THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THE BYLAWS CHANGES IN THROUGH? I HAVE TRACY, UM, ALSO OUR, UM, CHIEF OF INTERNAL, EXTERNAL AFFAIRS.
IF TRACY CAN COME ON, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT SHE NEEDS TO ADD, CAUSE THERE'S NO CONNECTION BETWEEN THEM THEN TRACY, IS THERE A CONNECTION CONNECTION? THERE, THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN ITEMS THREE AND FOUR.
THEY'RE GOOD WRITTEN STANDALONE.
WENT BACK TO NUMBER THREE, UH, BECAUSE WE PASS THROUGH THAT.
DOES ANYBODY WANT THIS ITEM TO COME UP? IN OTHER WORDS, NOT WANTING THE POSTPONEMENT FOR THE AMENDMENT.
I JUST WANT TO CLEAR UP ANY CONFUSION AND GET SPECIFIC WITH THIS QUESTION.
[00:45:01]
DO THE BYLAWS OR ARTICLES CONTEMPLATE, UM, THE PRESIDENT AND THE PAID PRESIDENT OF ABL SITTING ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.IF I MAY SPEAK THEM, THEY DO NOT.
THE, UM, AS IS CONSISTENT WITH CITY CODE, A, UH, BOARD MEMBER CANNOT BE COMPENSATED.
SO AS A PAID PRESIDENT, HE IS NOT CURRENTLY, IT WOULD NOT BE IN THE FUTURE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
THERE'S NO CHANGE BEING SUGGESTED THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT.
AGAIN, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, DOES ANYBODY WANT THAT ITEM? IN OTHER WORDS, COUNSELOR, PO'S INDICATED A DESIRE TO POSTPONE THAT I HAVE AN ORDER TO MAKE THE AMENDMENT, UH, IS ANYBODY WHO NEED THAT TO PUMP THIS WEEK.
AND ALSO AS WE THINK ABOUT THREE COMING BACK, WE SHOULD ALSO THINK ABOUT THIS OTHER THING.
UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO RAISE THAT SO THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE DON'T MISS IT JUST DIDN'T WANT US TO AMEND IT.
IF GUYS WERE IMPOSED THE ONLY ONE THAT WANTED TO AMEND IT, I KNOW SHE'S NOT, BUT IN OUR CONVERSATIONS HERE.
SO, UH, THE PUBLIC THEN HAS NOTICED, AND WE APPRECIATE STAFF.
WE WON'T, UH, CONSIDER ITEM NUMBER THREE THIS WEEK.
UH, FURTHER QUESTIONS ON ITEM, NUMBER FOUR.
THOUGHTS ON THAT COUNCIL TOBA.
YEAH, I'LL JUST NOTE THAT ON ITEMS THREE, FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX.
I AM ALSO WORKING THROUGH, UM, SOME QUESTIONS, COUNCIL MEMBER POOL.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MAY BE ASKING THE SAME QUESTION, SO MAYBE WE CAN CONNECT AND SEE WHAT WE'VE GOTTEN ANSWERS TO, BUT WE'VE, WE'VE ALSO BEEN HEARING FROM UNITE HERE AND, AND ARE TRYING TO WORK WITH THEM AS WELL TO SEE HOW THIS IS ADDRESSED.
AND LET ME JUST GENERALLY SAY I'M, I'M NOT YET UNDERSTANDING WHY, WHY THE, UM, SORRY MY ALARM IS GOING OFF.
I GUESS THAT MEANS IT'S TIME FOR LUNCH.
UM, I'M NOT YET UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE UTILITY IS OF SWITCHING TO, TO THE MODEL THAT THEY'RE SUGGESTING.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, BY THURSDAY, I'M GOING TO HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS AND POSSIBLY SOME OTHER SUGGESTIONS HERE.
ANYTHING YOU KNOW ABOUT AHEAD OF TIME.
YOU CAN DAYLIGHT THOSE AND BE ON THE MESSAGE BOARD OR SOMETHING TO THE DEGREE THAT YOU CAN, THAT'D BE HELPFUL.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR, FIVE OR SIX COUNSELOR WERE ALTERED? I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT WE WILL EITHER BE SUBMITTING OR HAVE SUBMITTED A FEW QUESTIONS AND I'LL WANT THOSE ANSWER BEFORE I CAN.
AND ANYTHING ELSE ON ITEMS THREE, WHICH WILL BE POSTPONED FOUR OR FIVE OR SIX? YES.
YOU HAVE TO REFLECT THIS, RIGHT.
DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR CATHERINE? THANK YOU.
I JUST ALSO WANTED TO SAY, YOU KNOW, HAVING HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY, WITH HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE CONCERNS REGARDING THE LOAN IS CONCERNING.
AND SO I DO THINK IT'D BE WORTH US CONSIDERING POSTPONING ITEM NUMBER FIVE, TO ALLOW FOR MORE CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE, THE AIRPORT.
UM, AND I KNOW THOSE ARE TAKING PLACE AND BOTH PARTIES ARE COMMITTED TO HAVING, UH, MORE DIALOGUE.
AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME WE CAN GET TO HOPEFULLY A GOOD PLACE.
AND SO JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR POSTPONING ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
THE STAFF WANT TO ADDRESS WHY IT IS IT STAFF WAS OF THE BELIEF THAT FIVE AND 60 TO MOVE BOARD NOW.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO NUMBER FIVE SPECIFICALLY, UM, AND I'LL HAVE TRACY AND ALSO ADD TO IT.
SO, UM, ITEM FIVE IS A LOAN, UM, AND BIG PORTION OR A PORTION OF THAT LOAN WILL PAY FOR FEES THAT WERE DEFERRED THROUGH 2020, INCLUDING THE FRANCHISE OF THE HOTEL THAT HAD BEEN SERVING THE HOTEL, UM, ATTORNEY FEES.
AND, UM, THERE'S A LIST OF OTHER ITEMS THAT I CAN GIVE YOU A LOOK INTO THAT.
AND THOSE ARE HAVE BEEN POST-MEAL FOR 12 MONTHS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO PAY ON THOSE INVOICES AS PART OF THAT LOAN.
UM, I DON'T THINK POSTPONING THE LOAN WOULD CHANGE THAT OTHER THAN IT WOULD DELAY AND CREATE MORE HARDSHIP FOR SOME OF THE FOLKS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PAID FOR THOSE 12 MONTHS.
AND TRACY, IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING, JACKIE, THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
AND WE DID STRUCTURE, OR WE WORKED WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT AND DID STRUCTURE THIS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION AND THE ABL CORPORATION TO MAKE SURE THAT IT ADDRESSED JUST THOSE ITEMS RELATED TO COVID AND, UH, TO HELP BRIDGE THEM THROUGH THE ECONOMIC IMPACT.
[00:50:01]
UM, THE HOTEL IS NOW OPERATING AT A BREAKEVEN POINT.SO, UM, THIS IS REALLY JUST TO ACCOUNT FOR, UM, THE COVID IMPACTS.
CAN YOU REACH OUT TO A COUNSELOR REFERRED TO HIS OFFICE AND SEE IF YOU CAN ADDRESS HER CONCERNS? ABSOLUTELY
I HAVEN'T GOTTEN A CHANCE TO DIG SO DEEPLY THE ITEM.
UM, BUT THE GENERAL CONCERN THAT'S BEEN RAISED IS THAT, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY WHILE THIS IS A PRIVATELY RUN HOTEL, UM, ABEL IS A CREATURE OF THE CITY.
AND AS WE LOW AND PUBLIC DOLLARS AT A LOWER INTEREST RATE, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ACHIEVING THE MAXIMUM COMMUNITY BENEFIT THAT WE CAN GET.
AND AS WE'VE SEEN TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THIS COUNCIL HAS BEEN REALLY DEDICATED TOWARDS MAKING SURE THAT WHEN WE PROVIDE GRANTS OR LOW INTEREST LOANS, UM, AS WE DID AT THE HILTON HOTEL TO KEEP WORKERS ON PAYROLL, THAT WE REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT THE MOST GET THE BEST DEAL THEY CAN GET.
AND WE'VE HEARD CONCERNS FROM THE UNION.
THAT IS IT, YOU KNOW, THE PHRASE THE BIG FRANCHISE COMPANY GETS TAKEN CARE OF OR THE ATTORNEY'S FEES GET TAKEN CARE OF, BUT HAS THERE BEEN A MEETING OF THE MINDS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WORKING FOLKS AT THE HOTEL ARE GOING TO BE BETTER OFF BECAUSE OF OUR ACTIONS TODAY? AND I'VE HEARD THAT THERE'S BEEN ONE MEETING, BUT I WOULD ALSO, IF IT'S NOT, IF, IF IT'S WAITING A COUPLE OF WEEKS WHILE THERE'S MORE CONVERSATION TO BE HAD TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE MOST OUT OF THIS LOAN FOR THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT THE MOST, I WOULD SUPPORT IF, IF, IF THE FACT THAT WE CAN PAY SOME OF THESE BILLS STILL AND IT'S, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DEFAULT ON ANYTHING.
UM, I WOULD BE FINE WITH A POSTPONEMENT, SO THAT REALLY THE HOTEL NOT EVEN ABLE, BUT THE HOTEL OPERATOR PROSPERA COULD SIT DOWN WITH THE UNION AND, AND SEE SOME OF THOSE ISSUES CAN BE WORKED OUT, UM, BETWEEN THEM TO SAY, LOOK, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE PROVIDING SOME LOW INTEREST LOANS TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE, HOW IS THAT, HOW DOES THAT TAKE CARE OF NOT JUST FOR SOME OF THE BILLS FOR THE FOLKS, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, AT THE TOP OF THE FOOD CHAIN, BUT ALSO FOR, FOR EVERYBODY.
AND SO JUST IF BUYING THOSE COUPLE OF WEEKS COULD FACILITATE A COUPLE OF MEETINGS BETWEEN PROSPERITY AND THOSE UNION FOLKS, AND EVERYBODY COULD COME BACK AND SAY, A PLAN HAS BEEN WORKED OUT ON HOW THIS EXTENSION OF SOME PUBLIC CREDIT CAN HELP EVERYONE.
I THINK THAT THEN IT MIGHT BE EASIER RATHER THAN HAVING TO HAMMER THIS OUT ON THE DAYAS.
UM, GIVEN THAT WE HAVE SO MUCH GOING ON, WE JUST ALWAYS LOOK FOR ISSUES TO BE WORKED OUT RATHER THAN US HAVING TO WORK THEM OUT ON THE DIOCESE IN TWO DAYS TIME.
SO, WELL, I'D BE HAPPY TO WORK ON SOME OF THESE ISSUES.
AND LIKE YOU MENTIONED, HAVING THE AIRPORT REACHED OUT TO COUNCIL MEMBER FRIENDS'S OFFICE WHERE THIS HOTEL IS LOCATED, THAT'S ALL GOOD.
BUT THE MORE THAT I CAN SORT OF GET WORKED OUT BETWEEN PARTIES TO TRY AND GET THE BEST AND FIERCE DEAL THE BETTER.
AND THAT IS SETTING ASIDE ALSO THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BYLAWS AND THE RECUSALS, ET CETERA, WHICH ARE STILL PENDING QUESTIONS IN MY MIND AS WELL.
THAT'S A HELPFUL IDENTIFICATION ISSUES.
YEAH, I'M ESSENTIALLY IN THE SAME PLACE THAT WE NEED TO, UM, GET A BETTER HANDLE ON ALL OF THE, AS, AS GREG TERM LAND CREATURES OF COUNCIL, UM, THE DIFFERENT ENTITIES LIKE ABEL AND THE DOWNTOWN, UH, CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THAT WE KNOW WHAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE, WHAT THE FINANCIAL STATUS THAT IS AND, UM, WHAT THE STABILIZATION PLANS WILL BE FOR THESE, UH, REALLY VALUABLE ASSETS FOR THE CITY, ESPECIALLY COMING OUT OF THE PANDEMIC.
SO I FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE KNOWING THAT ALL THE QUESTIONS ARE CLEARED OUT MYSELF.
AND SO IT SOUNDS LIKE GENERALLY WE SHOULD PROBABLY, MAYBE MAYOR LET'S, LET'S ASK, UM, THE DICE, UH, ARE WE DELAYING OR MOVING FORWARD WITH ITEM FIVE? I'M NOT SURE WE KNOW ENOUGH YET TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT ONE YET OVER THE NEXT WEEK.
SO YEAH, I, WHAT I'D LIKE TO, WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY IS, IS MAYBE IF WE CAN GET IT RESOLVED BY MAY 20, UM, OUR NEXT MEETING, THIS IS, LET'S SEE, MAY 22ND.
AND THEN THE MAY MEETING, MAYBE ONE OF THE MAIN MEETINGS WE CAN MOVE THESE FORWARD AND THEN ITEM SIX, UM, THAT'S THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEBT SERVICE FOR ABEL AND THE TRANSFER OF THE LOAN? THE 2.6 MILLION, UM, IT IS ON THIS ITEM IS NOT RELATED TO THE LOAN AND IT CAN SIMPLY MOVE FORWARD.
UM, THIS, THE WAY STAFF DESCRIBED IT, UH, THE AMOUNTS ARE SO CLOSE.
THEY SEEM TO HAVE A RELATIONSHIP.
SO COULD, UH, DIRECTORY AFT OR MAYBE MS. THOMPSON, UM, KIND OF SEPARATE THOSE OUT AND EXPLAIN THAT EVEN THOUGH THE AMOUNTS ARE
[00:55:01]
VERY SIMILAR, THEY ARE INDEED SEPARATE ISSUES.SO THERE ARE, UM, UNDER THE BOND INDENTURE FOR THE ABL DEBT, THERE IS A GRANT AGREEMENT WHICH OBLIGATES THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION TO, UM, TRANSFER FUNDS.
IF THERE'S A DEFICIENCY IN THE BOND RESERVE ACCOUNT, AND THIS IS A MCCANN, THIS IS A ADMINISTRATIVE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SUBORDINATE RESERVE FUND IN THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION THAT ALLOWS US TO PUT MONEY INTO THAT ACCOUNT AND THEREFORE COULD BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO ABL COMPLIANT WITH, UM, THE WAY THE TREASURY OF THE CITY OF BOSTON WANTS IT TO BE ESTABLISHED.
SO THIS IS REALLY AN ADMINISTRATIVE, UM, ESTABLISHMENT OF A SUBORDINATE RESERVE FUND FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION.
AND IT'S RELATED TO THE BOND INDENTURE FOR ABL, THAT'S A COMPLETELY SEPARATE TRANSACTION.
IT'S JUST COINCIDENTALLY IT'S COMING IN THE SAME MONTH.
AND COINCIDENTALLY, THE AMOUNT IN THAT FUND WOULD BE IS 2.6 MILLION PLUS SOME CHANGE, BUT THAT IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THE LOAN AGREEMENT, WHICH ALSO HAS A, A LOAN AMOUNT OF 2.6 MILLION.
SO WE APOLOGIZE FOR ANY CONFUSION, BUT THEY ARE SEPARATE ITEMS AND NOT, NOT CONNECTED.
THEY ARE CONNECTED TO ABEL THE HOTEL, BUT THEY'RE NOT CONNECTED IN IT, IN THEIR PURPOSE.
SO I, I THINK UNLESS THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS WE MIGHT, UM, LET'S LET ITEM SIX MOVE, AND THEN I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF THINGS TO CLOSE WITH ON THIS ONE.
UM, AS WE MOVE FORWARD, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE SCHEDULE A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF AT AUDIT AND FINANCE ON THE FINANCIAL STATE AND STABILIZATION PLAN FOR THE HOTEL, AND THEN ESTABLISH A REGULAR REPORTING FRAMEWORK FOR AVA LIKE WE'RE DOING WITH THE OTHER ENTITIES, UM, AT THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE ITEM NUMBER THREE IS PROBABLY GOING TO GET POSTPONED WITHOUT REGARD OR PREJUDICE TO ANYONE'S ABILITY TO BRING ANY KIND OF AMENDMENTS THEY WANT.
IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, UM, OR IN FIVE AND SIX ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD.
AND AGAIN, WITHOUT LIMITATION ON AMENDMENTS AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION, UH, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO POSTPONE ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THURSDAY.
ANYTHING ELSE ON THESE BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE, KATHY? YEAH.
AND JUST ASK IF I JUST WANT TO ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION FROM OUR STAFF, HAVE YOU SENT US A MEMO THAT EXPLAINS WHY, WHY YOU'RE MOVING TO A SYSTEM OF HAVING A COMPENSATED PRESIDENT? I GUESS I'M WONDERING WHY SOME OF THESE ENTITIES OF, YOU KNOW, AS SEVERAL OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID, WE, WE HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES WITH THESE ENTITIES THAT ARE AFFILIATED WITH THE CITY.
IN SOME CASES, THE STAFF ARE SUPPORTING THESE ENTITIES, UM, AND HAVE BEEN, I THINK, ACES LAND WHERE THAT'S HAPPENED, ABEL IS ANOTHER.
AND SO I'M WONDERING WHY, WHY AT A TIME OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, WE'RE SEEING TWO SUCH ENTITIES MOVE FROM MOVE FROM TAKING ON MORE, MORE, UM, FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS WITH THE HIRING OF A PRESIDENT THAT JUST DOESN'T SEEM THAT DOESN'T SEEM LOGICAL TO ME.
AND IT, IT DOESN'T SEEM THE BEST WAY TO SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, THE MOST, UM, MOST OF THE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE, ARE AT THE LOWER END OF THAT WAGE SPECTRUM.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION ABOUT WHY THAT, WHY THAT'S HAPPENING OR BEYOND WHAT'S IN THE BACKUP.
SO COUNCILMAN PROBABLY PLEASED TO PROVIDE TO YOU DETAILED INFORMATION.
WE DID HAVE A, UH, COUNCIL ACTION ITEM IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR WHERE THE NEW BOARD OF DIRECTORS WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
UM, AND, BUT LET ME ANSWER SPECIFICALLY YOUR QUESTION.
AND THAT IS, UM, WHEN I ARRIVED AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN NINE MONTHS AGO AND TOOK A LOOK AT THE ORGANIZATION FOR APRIL, FROM BOARD OF DIRECTORS STANDPOINT, MOST OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS HAVE EITHER RESIGNED.
WE WERE NO LONGER WORKING AT THE CITY ARE NO LONGER ABLE TO SERVE AS, UM, BOARD MEMBERS, UM, DUE TO THEIR TERM EXPLORATIONS.
AND SO WE WERE VERY THOUGHTFUL IN DETERMINING WHAT WE THOUGHT THE BEST COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD WOULD BE.
AND THAT INCLUDES TWO CHIEF OFFICERS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION, AS WELL AS ONE OF OUR PROJECT MANAGERS FOR CONSTRUCTION.
SO WE MADE SURE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION WAS WELL-REPRESENTED ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AT SOME OF THE LEVELS WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENT.
WE ALSO, UM, THOUGHT IT WOULD BE IN THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST, AS WELL AS THE APRIL CORPORATION'S BEST INTEREST TO HAVE TWO QUALIFIED BUSINESS CITIZENS, PRIVATE CITIZENS FROM THE CITY OF BOSTON SERVE ON THAT BOARD.
SO THAT'S HOW WE DECIDED ABOUT THE BOARDS, BUT THE THOUGHT PROCESS IN, UH, CHOOSING TO HAVE A PAID PRESIDENT OF PRIVATE SECTOR PAID PRESIDENT FOR A NOMINAL FEE, A FLAT FEE IS BECAUSE THERE ARE CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION SLASH SLASH CITY OF BOSTON WITH THE, UM, ABEL, UM, CORPORATION.
AND THAT CREATES AN INHERENT CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
[01:00:01]
I'LL, I'LL USE MYSELF.IF TRACY THOMPSON WERE THE PRESIDENT OF ABEL SIGNING, A LOAN AGREEMENT MADE PAYABLE TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR WHOM I AM A CHIEF OFFICER.
SO WE SINCE, AND THE OTHER REASON IS MR. OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT, MR. MILLIGAN IS A VERY EXPERIENCED, UH, RESTRUCTURE, UM, PROFESSIONAL THAT WE WANTED TO CONTINUE TO ENGAGE AS THE PRESIDENT, AND HE CAN'T BE COMPENSATED AND ALSO BE A BOARD MEMBER.
SO WHAT WE TRIED TO DO IS BALANCE ALL OF THOSE THINGS TO REALLY HAVE HIGH LEVEL, UM, EXECUTIVES FROM THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT SERVE ON THE BOARD, BUT HAVE AN INDEPENDENT, UH, PLUG AND PLAY IF WE NEEDED TO PRESIDENT TO SIGN CONTRACTS ON BEHALF OF ABLE TO AVOID THE CONFLICT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.
CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE FEE IS? AND I APOLOGIZE, I HAVEN'T COME ACROSS IT IN THE, IN THE BACKUP THOUGH, MAYBE IT IS THERE.
IT IS A FLAT 5,000 PER MONTH, AND HE ENDED UP PRESIDENT'S DUTIES INCLUDE MANAGING THE BOARD MEETINGS, MEANING ACTING AS A MANAGER OF THE BOARD MEETINGS, CALLING THE AGENDA ITEMS, CALLING FOR THE BOAT WITHOUT VOTING, UH, MYSELF AND, UH, MANAGING THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FOR THE HOTEL, MANAGING ALL THE OPERATING EXPENSES AND SIGNING ALL THE CONTRACTS.
THERE ARE LIMITATIONS TO WHAT THE PRESIDENT CAN APPROVE BY HIMSELF, HIM OR HERSELF.
UH, IT TAKES, UH, ABEL BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR HIM TO BE OFF THE LIMITATION ON THE AUTHORITY.
SO THAT'S BASICALLY $60,000 A YEAR.
CAN YOU, UM, AND I'LL ASK FOR THIS, I THINK IN THE BACKUP, UM, JUST AGAIN, TRYING TO, TRYING TO ASSURE THAT WE HAVE STANDARD PRACTICES ACROSS THESE KINDS OF ENTITIES.
THIS IS CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN, THAN THE AMOUNT BEING PAID TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE ACE BOARD, WHICH I KNOW HAS, HAS CREATED, UM, A FAIR NUMBER OF PUBLIC QUESTIONS, FRANKLY.
AND SO I'D BE INTERESTED TO KNOW HOW YOU DETERMINED THAT RATE, AND I ASSUME YOU DID