Dec 20, 2021 Special City Council

MAYOR PRO TEM.

IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN CALL THE SPEAKERS FOR YOU.

UM, ACTUALLY THERE WAS A, THERE WAS A REQUEST THAT CAME IN AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT I WAS TAKING THINGS UP IN THE APPROPRIATE ORDER.

SO JUST A MOMENT.

THEY'RE ALWAYS SUPER AND WELL-DOCUMENTED.

SO I, I BELIEVE WHAT I NEED TO DO AT THIS PERIOD IN TIME IS RECOGNIZED COUNCIL MEMBER TOVO FOR THE INTRODUCTION, UM, OF, UH, OF AN ITEM.

UH, THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER, KATHY TOVO.

AND I HAVE, I HAVE THE GREAT HONOR OF, OF KICKING OFF A REALLY SPECIAL PRESENTATION TODAY FOR, UH, ONE OF OUR, OUR REALLY FABULOUS STAFF MEMBERS DO SEDOWSKY AND I BELIEVE STEVE IS, IS ONLINE FOR THIS PRESENTATION AS WELL.

SO GOOD MORNING, STEVE.

WE'RE REALLY HAPPY TO BE HERE TODAY TO HONOR YOU, UM, ALL OF THIS, ALL OF US ON THE DAYAS VIRTUAL AND, AND REAL, UM, HAVE WORKED WITH STEVE IN A VARIETY OF CAPACITIES.

I'VE KNOWN, I'VE KNOWN WHO STEVE SADOWSKY WAS LONGER THAN I'VE SAT ON THE DIOCESE BECAUSE IN THE DAYS BEFORE I WAS ON COUNCIL, I USED TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME IN THE AUSTIN HISTORY READING ROOM, RESEARCHING DIFFERENT HISTORIC HOUSES FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER.

AND IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT TIME I WENT TO THE HISTORY CENTER.

STEVE SEDOWSKY WAS ALWAYS THERE IN THE READING ROOM, DOING RESEARCH, WHETHER IT WAS DURING A WORKDAY OR IN THE, IN THE HOURS AFTER WORK.

STEVE WAS THERE RESEARCHING CASES, UM, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WHENEVER OUR CASES HIT THE DIOCESE, UM, THAT INVOLVE HISTORIC ELEMENTS.

AND FOR A LOT OF MY TIME ON THE DIET, STEVE HAS, HAS BEEN THE ONLY STAFF MEMBER IN THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE THAT HAS CHANGED IN RECENT YEARS.

UM, STEVE WAS HONORED RECENTLY BY PRESERVATION AUSTIN WITH A LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD, WHICH IS A WELL-DESERVED HONOR, UH, MAYOR PRO TEM.

AND I WERE BOTH AT THAT EVENT AND HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR THE CONVERSATION.

UM, AND STEVE IT'S, UM, JUST A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH YOU.

I APPRECIATE YOU WORK.

YOU HAVE BEEN A TIRELESS ADVOCATE FOR HISTORIC AUSTIN, AND IT IS, UM, REALLY VERY FUN NOW TO WELCOME, UH, YOUR COLLEAGUE, JERRY .

WHO'S GOING TO SAY A FEW WORDS AND THEN THE MAYOR IS GOING TO READ A PROCLAMATION.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER.

UM, I'M JERRY RESTAURANT WITH THE HOUSING PLAIN DEPARTMENT.

UM, STEVE I'D LIKE TO, UM, REITERATE A FEW THINGS THAT A CUSTOMER METOVA JUST SAID.

UM, A LOT OF US WHO WORK HERE AT THE CITY, UM, ASIDE FROM DEALING WITH, UM, OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS, AS WELL AS, UM, THIS ISN'T GERO, WE DEAL WITH ADVOCACY GROUPS, UM, EACH DEPARTMENT, OR ALMOST ALL DEPARTMENTS HAVE ONE OF THEM, OR MORE THAN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL SIDE PARKS FOUNDATION FOR THE PARKSIDE AND THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION WORLD.

WE HAVE PRESERVATION AUSTIN AND AS COUNCIL MEMBER TOBO SAID, UH, THEY RECENTLY AWARDED STEVE A LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.

UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO STRESS, UM, HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS, THESE ADVOCACY GROUPS, UM, THEIR JOB, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A PASSION FOR WHATEVER TOPIC THEY'RE, THEY'RE, UM, INTERESTED IN AND IT'S THEIR JOB TO PUSH THE CITY STAFF, UM, TO TRY TO FURTHER THEIR GOALS.

UM, THAT MEANS THAT WE ARE NOT ALWAYS 100% IN AGREEMENT.

UM, THAT IS FINE.

THAT IS THEIR JOB IS TO PUSH US AND IT IS OUR JOB TO LISTEN TO THEM.

AND SOMETIMES WE AGREE, SOMETIMES WE DISAGREE.

UM, HOWEVER, FOR AN MSQ GROUP LIKE PRESERVATION AUSTIN TOO, EVEN THOUGH THEY, AND STEVE

[00:05:01]

HAS SOMETIMES BEEN AT LOGGERHEADS OVER A PARTICULAR ISSUE, UH, THE FACT THAT THEY GRANTED HIM A LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD, I THINK REALLY SPEAKS TO STEVE'S CHARACTER.

AND THE FACT THAT HIS HEART AND SOUL WAS TRULY IN A HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND EVERYTHING HE DID.

UM, I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT BEING A HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER IN A CITY AS FAST GROWING AS AUSTIN, UM, I THINK FOR STEVE'S ENTIRE 21 YEARS CITY CAREER, WE'VE EITHER BEEN AT THE TOP OR CERTAINLY IN THE TOP FIVE OF THE FASTEST GROWING CITIES IN THE NATION.

UM, WITH THAT GROWTH COMES DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE WITH DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE COMES PRESSURE FOR DEMOLITIONS, AND IT WAS STEVE'S JOB TO, UM, REVIEW THOSE DEMOLITIONS AND DECIDE WHEN, UM, A BUILDING SHOULD NOT BE DEMOLISHED BECAUSE IT'S TOO IMPORTANT TO THE STORY OF THE CITY TO BE DEMOLISHED.

UM, STEVE HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY OVER THE YEARS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT STORY IS NOT JUST A SINGLE SIDED STORY OF THE WEALTHY AND GENDERED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT INCLUDES EVERYBODY'S HISTORY.

UM, NOT JUST THOSE WHO TRADITIONALLY HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED IN HIS FIELD, UM, DURING MY CAREER AT THE CITY, I'M A CITY PLANNER.

SO MY JOB, UM, MY EDUCATION, MY WORK EXPERIENCE IS ALL ABOUT THE FUTURE.

HOW CAN WE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE OF AUSTIN? UM, I FIND IT SOMEWHAT IRONIC THAT THE TWO EMPLOYEES WHO I HAVE LEARNED THE MOST FROM HERE, BETTY BAKER AND STEVE SADOWSKY WERE BOTH THESE CITIES, HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICERS.

SO I WOULD ANTICIPATE IN MY CAREER THAT, OH, I THERE'D BE A, A, A PLANNER.

UM, THAT WOULD BE THE, UM, THE PERSON THAT I WOULD LEARN THE MOST FROM.

IN FACT IT HAS BEEN STEVE AND BETTY WHO HAVE TAUGHT ME THE MOST, UM, WITH REGARD TO, IT'S NOT ALWAYS ABOUT THE FUTURE.

SOMETIMES IT'S ABOUT THE PAST AS WELL, AND WE NEED TO BALANCE, UM, ONE IMPORTANT THING THAT STEVE TAUGHT ME.

HE SAYS THIS A LOT IS THAT THE CITY IS NOT A MUSEUM IS NOT HIS DESIRE TO TURN THESE HISTORIC BUILDINGS ALL INTO MUSEUMS THAT, UM, UM, WE'D GO VISIT THE ADOPTIVE REUSE IS AN IMPORTANT TOOL IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

AND WHEN WE SAVE A BUILDING, THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT NEEDS TO STAY EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.

WE CAN BOTH PRESERVE THE BUILDING AND MAKE IT USEFUL AND ECONOMICALLY VIABLE FOR, UM, THE OWNER AS WELL.

AND I THINK THAT, UM, WE CAN SEE THAT ALONG FOR EXAMPLE, CONGRESS AVENUE, THE SIXTH STREET, THE RAMON BLOCK, UH, THE JUDGES' HILL NEIGHBORHOOD, WHERE WE HAVE TAKEN BUILDINGS THAT WERE ONE-TIME USE FOR SOMETHING, CHANGED THEM INTO SOMETHING ELSE.

AND YET WE STILL HAVE THE BENEFIT OF BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THOSE, UM, THOSE BEAUTIFUL BUILDINGS.

SO STEVE, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY ON BEHALF OF THE, UM, UH, ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND THE EMPLOYEES OF THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AS WELL AS THE, UM, I BELIEVE FOUR ITERATIONS OF THE PLANE DEPARTMENT THAT YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH OVER THE PAST 21 YEARS, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR GREAT SERVICE, THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY FOR BEING A GREAT FRIEND TO MANY OF US, UM, WE'LL MISS YOU HERE AT THE CITY, BUT, UH, THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU HAVE DONE THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER, AND THANK YOU, MR. .

I BELIEVE, UH, MAYOR ADLER HAS SOMETHING HE'D LIKE TO BRING FORWARD AS WELL.

I WOULD, UH, WE'D ALL HAVE THE, UH, OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, STO STEVE, A CITY OF AUSTIN, DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD.

BE IT KNOWN THAT FOR HIS EXTENSIVE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN STEVE'S IS DESERVING OF RECOGNITION.

STEVE'S HAS SERVED.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS.

IT'S PUBLIC SERVICE AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN CORRESPONDS WITH A PERIOD OF UNPRECEDENTED GROWTH DURING WHICH TIME THE STARK PRESERVATION OFFICE HAS BEEN INUNDATED WITH DEMOLITION PERMITS AND APPLICATIONS FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION.

IN ADDITION TO PERSONALLY PREPARE, YOU'RE REVIEWING HUNDREDS OF APPLICATIONS FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK STATUS.

STEVE HAS PRESENTED THESE CASES TO THE LAB MARKET PLANNING COMMISSIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL OFTEN STAY LATE INTO THE NIGHT TO DO SO COMMISSIONERS MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND POLICYMAKERS RESPECT STEVE, WHO AS WELL RESEARCH POSITIONS AND FOR PRESENTING HIS RECOMMENDATIONS WITH CONVICTION, UNFLAPPABLE, DEMEANOR, AND ALREADY SMILE, WHETHER VOLUNTEERING IS TIED OFF TO LEAD HOME TOURS OR SUCCESSFULLY ADVOCATING FOR A NAME CHANGED TO HIGHLIGHT JACOB FONTAINE, FORMERLY ENSLAVED VERSUS WHO BEGAN THE FIRST AFRICAN AMERICAN NEWSPAPER IN AUSTIN AT THE HOPS IN TEXAS STEVE'S HAS PLAYED A VITAL ROLE IN PROTECTING AUSTIN'S HISTORIC FABRIC AND HEARING THE STORIES OF DIVERSE AUSTINITES THE CITY COUNCIL COMBATED, STEVE SADOWSKY, UH, FOR THE ROLE FOR PLAY A VITAL ROLE IN PROTECTING AUSTIN'S HISTORIC FABRIC AND SHARING THE STORY

[00:10:01]

OF DIVERSE AUSTINITES THE CITY COUNCIL KABAD STEVE'S ASCII ART, HIS PUBLIC SERVICE, AND THE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS HE HAS MADE TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO THE BROADER COMMUNITY WITH THIS DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD, AND THEN DECLARES TO SEPARATE 20TH OF THE YEAR 2021.

THAT WAS STEVE'S THE DUSKY DAY IN AUSTIN, TEXAS SIDE BY ME AS MAYOR, THE CITY OF AUSTIN, I'LL BE HALF OF THE BAYER PRO TAB AND MY OTHER COLLEAGUES OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

STEVE.

CONGRATULATIONS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR INCREDIBLE SERVICE TO THE CITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I SEE A BOX, BUT NOT A FACE.

MR. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE A FEW WORDS? I WOULD.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR, AND, UH, I'M OVERWHELMED.

UH, THIS IS ALWAYS BEEN A CHECK THAT I'VE, IT'S A DREAM JOB OF MINE TO WORK IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN AUSTIN.

AND, UH, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I, I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS RECOGNITION.

UM, BUT MORE THAN THAT, I, I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT THAT I'VE RECEIVED FROM, UH, MY FELLOW STAFF, UH, MANAGERS, TROY HARDEN, JERRY RUSS TALIBAN ARE ELIZABETH FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND FROM THE CITY COUNCIL.

IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT YOU GET A CITY COUNCIL AND CITY GOVERNMENT THAT SUPPORTS HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM THE WAY THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS, WHICH HAS MADE MY WORK SO MUCH EASIER.

UH, BUT I APPRECIATE THE TRUST THAT YOU ALL HAVE PUT IN ME TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS.

I THINK HISTORIC PRESERVATION AS, AS, AS HAS BEEN STATED TODAY IS A SERIES OF COMPROMISES.

I'VE TRIED THROUGHOUT MY CAREER TO RESPECT, UH, PERSONS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE AND LISTEN TO THEIR ARGUMENTS, LISTEN TO THEIR, WHAT THEY WANT TO ACCOMPLISH, AND THEN WORK VERY HARD TO TRY TO ACCOMPLISH A LITTLE BIT OF EACH, UH, SO THAT EVERYBODY WALKS AWAY FROM, UH, A DEAL DEALING SATISFIED THAT THEIR VOICES WERE HEARD AND THAT THEIR VOICES WERE HEARD IS, IS REALLY THE NEXT STEP FOR PRESERVATION WE'VE, UH, AS, AS MOST CITIES HAVE IN THE PAST, UH, HAVE REALLY PAID, I THINK, A LITTLE TOO MUCH ATTENTION SINCE THE BIG MOVERS AND SHAKERS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND, UH, COMMEMORATING THEIR LIVES WHEN THIS IS NOT, UH, THIS IS NOT A CITY, UH, WEALTHY WHITE PEOPLE, UH, AS COMMUNITIES OF COLOR HAD MOVED INTO THE CITY AFTER THE END OF THE CIVIL WAR, WE HAD A FRIEDMAN AND TO YOU AND ESTABLISH COMMUNITIES OF THEIR OWN, UH, WE'VE HAD HISPANIC AMERICANS MOVE INTO THE CITY AND ESTABLISH COMMUNITY COMMUNITIES OF BERRA.

AND IT IS TIME THAT WE START BEING MUCH MORE INCLUSIVE AND MAKING SURE THEIR VOICES ARE RENDERED AND THE DECISIONS THAT WE MAY, UH, AND, UH, I LOOK FORWARD TO HOPEFULLY STILL BEING A PART OF THOSE DECISIONS, UH, EVEN IF NOT ACTIVELY, BUT, UH, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT WE HAVE TO BE AS INCLUSIVE AS WE POSSIBLY CAN.

EVERYTHING IS EVERY CITIZEN OF AUSTIN DESERVES A VOICE TO SPEAK TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAKE THEIR POSITIONS KNOWN.

A BIG PART OF THAT IS RECOGNIZING THEIR HERITAGE.

SO I HOPE THAT THE FUTURE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONTINUES IN A MUCH MORE EQUITABLE MANNER.

UH, AND, UH, I LOOK FORWARD TO, UH, TO THE FUTURE WITH PRESERVATION BEING, UH, AN IMPORTANT PROGRAM FOR US TOO.

SO AGAIN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I ALSO, LIKE I SAID, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE, UH, JUST THE TRUST AND FAITH THAT CITY GOVERNMENT HAS PUT IN ME AND, UH, HELPING TO DEVISE POLICIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COUNCIL.

[00:15:02]

AND, UH, I KNOW WE MENTIONED BARRY BAKER.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO MENTION, UH, SOME OTHERS WHO WERE JUST AS IMPORTANT PEOPLE LIKE JIM CHRISTIANSON INFO.

RIGHT.

UH, AND I CAN'T REMEMBER HIS FIRST NAME AND I'M VERY SORRY.

OUR QUAKE ALEXANDER, UH, PEOPLE LIKE JULIAN REED WHO WERE ALSO, UH, QUIETER, BUT JUST AS INFLUENTIAL IN PUSHING THE INTEREST THAT HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN WAYS THAT MOST PEOPLE COULDN'T RECOGNIZE, BUT IN WAYS THAT WERE VERY, VERY, AND, UH, VERY IMPORTANT IN GETTING THE MESSAGE ACROSS TO THE DECISION-MAKERS.

SO THANK YOU ALL SO VERY MUCH.

I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR FAITH IN ME.

AND, UH, I, I, I'VE NEVER BEEN PROUDER THAN TO TELL PEOPLE WHAT MY JOB IS.

SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. TEDESCHI, BOTH FOR YOUR, UH, INSPIRATIONAL COMMENTARY AND FOR YOUR SERVICE.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOU VERY MUCH COLLEAGUES.

UM, ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, SEEING NONE? UM, LIKE I SAID EARLIER, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP SPEAKERS BEFORE WE DISCUSS TODAY'S ITEM.

UM, WE HAVE TWO IN-PERSON SPEAKERS AND TWO REMOTE SPEAKERS.

EVERYONE WILL GET TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK.

SO WE'LL HEAR FROM OUR IN-PERSON SPEAKERS FIRST, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT APPEARS AS THOUGH MR. BUNCH.

GOOD MORNING.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK.

I HAVE, UH, AN EXHIBIT THAT WAS SENT IN.

I I'D LIKE ON DISPLAY BEFORE MY TIME STARTS.

I'M BILL BUNCH.

I'M A LAWYER.

I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT FIVE.

UM, I SENT TO YOU ALL OF Y'ALL A LETTER, A SIGNED BY ME AND TWO OTHER ATTORNEYS SAYING THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS BOTH, UH, ILLEGAL UNDER TEXAS TAX CODE, SECTION THREE 11, AND ALSO, UH, GROSSLY OFFENSIVE TO YOUR OWN VALUES AS COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

UM, THIS IS A MASSIVE TRANSFER OF WEALTH TO THE RICHEST, UH, MOST PROFITABLE DEVELOPERS IN AUSTIN.

UM, AND IT REQUIRES FOR YOU AS THIS QUOTE SAYS TO MAKE THE BIGGEST LYING WHOPPER OF A FINDING AND PUT IT RIGHT IN CITY CODE AND DECLARE THAT THIS PROPERTY WOULD NOT DEVELOP IN THE REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE, UH, WITHOUT HANDING THE DEVELOPERS, UH, $278 MILLION IN TAX GIVEAWAYS.

UM, THERE'S NOT A PERSON IN THE CITY THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT, OR THEY CAN SEE THE CRANES IN THE SKYLINE, UH, THAT WOULD EVER MAKE ANY SORT OF CONCLUSION.

UH, THERE'S REALLY ONLY ONE ANSWER TO THIS.

I ASK THAT YOU VOTE NO ON IT, UH, IN GOOD CONSCIENCE IN FAIRNESS, AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW, UH, IT'S ALSO HIGHLY OFFENSIVE THAT YOU'RE TAKING THIS UP AND HOLIDAYS.

UM, WHEN NOBODY'S PAYING ATTENTION ON A RUSH RUSH BASIS WITH SLIPSHOD AND NO SUPPORT, THE MAIN REPORT YOU'RE YOU'RE RELYING ON FROM FIVE AND A HALF YEARS AGO SAYS THE PROJECT COSTS ARE ONLY A HUNDRED MILLION AND NOW IT'S 278 MILLION.

YOU SAY YOU HAVE A PROJECT PLAN.

IT'S A ONE PAGE LIST OF BUCKETS OF PROJECTS.

THERE'S NO PLAN THERE.

THERE'S NOTHING THERE.

IT'S, IT'S ALL VAPOR.

UM, AND THEN YOU'RE CUTTING OFF SPEAKERS TO TWO MINUTES.

THIS IS CALLED PUBLIC INPUT ON SOMETHING, THIS MONUMENTAL FOR THE FEATURE THAT'S GOING TO LOCK IN THIS MONEY FOR 20, 30 YEARS.

UM, THERE'S THREE WORDS FOR THIS DEAL, STINK STANK STUNK.

THE ACADEMIC LITERATURE AND ECONOMIC LITERATURE HAS MANY, MANY REPORTS ABOUT THE ABUSES OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ZONES.

THANK YOU, MR. BUNCH.

UM, MEGAN MATTSON, DOES IT APPEARS THAT MS. MATTSON IS HERE IN WHICH CASE CLERK WE CAN MOVE OVER TO THE REMOTE SPEAKERS.

I BELIEVE THE FIRST IS LORRAINE ATHERTON, A MAYOR PRETENDED SHE HAS NOT CALLED IN.

WE CAN MOVE TO THE NEXT SPEAKER, FRED LEWIS.

GOOD MORNING.

UH, I'M ASKING YOU TO EITHER DELAY OR VOTE, NO, ON THIS, THE LITERATURE,

[00:20:01]

AND THE TYPES OF ABUSES ARE EXACTLY LIKE IN THIS CASE, WEAK BINDINGS, BOOMING CITY WITH NO REAL NEED FOR THIS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AREA THAT WILL BE DEVELOPED.

ANYWAY, AS BILL SAID, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO FIND THAT THE AGREED DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT OCCUR WITHOUT THE PUBLIC INVESTMENT AND THE REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE.

THE DEVELOPMENT'S ALREADY OCCURRING IN THAT AREA.

AND IN THE REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE, IT WILL OCCUR.

YOU ARE BASICALLY SAYING $300 MILLION IN INFRASTRUCTURE IS BETTER SPENT HERE ON A, THAT'S GOING TO BE WORTH $7 BILLION THEN ON FLOODING.

AND THE OTHER NEEDS TO THE OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS, YOU HAVE 200 PAGES OF STUFF, BUT THERE'S ONLY ONE PAGE THAT REALLY MATTERS RELATED TO THE LEGAL FINDINGS REQUIRED BY LAW.

IT'S ONE PARAGRAPH IT'S CONCLUSORY IT'S BASED ON OUTDATED DATA.

AND IT ALSO SAYS CLEARLY THAT MOST, IF NOT, ALL OF THE INCREASED VALUATION WILL BE FROM UP.

AND SO YOUR OWN DATA, YOUR OWN PLAN IS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT, AND YOU REALLY ARE SUBJECT SUBJECTING YOURSELF TO THE PROSPECT OF PROPERTY, TAXPAYER STANDING LITIGATION.

LASTLY, THERE IS NO REASON TO DO THIS AT THE END OF THE YEAR.

THIS REPORT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE CONDUCTED IN JUNE OF 2016.

THE REPORT WAS FINISHED SEPTEMBER 24TH.

YOU COULD HAVE DONE THIS WHEN YOU WOULD RECEIVE PUBLIC THOUGHT AND INPUT ON SUCH A MOMENTOUS DECISION, $300 MILLION BASED ON THIS ANALYSIS IS THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. LEWIS, UM, DID MISS ATHERTON DIAL-IN SHE DID NOT.

DISCUSSION WE'LL, UH, UH, MAYOR ADLER, IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM TWO, WHICH I THINK IS THE ONE THAT IT HAS ALL THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA I HAD TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR.

SO I THINK WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD AND SHOULD THEY CALL BACK IN WE'LL REVISIT ALLOWING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

SO THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN TODAY'S MEETING, UM, TO OUR SPEAKERS.

SO TODAY WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP ITEMS ONE AND THREE AND TWO AND FOUR, BUT ITEMS THREE AND FOUR, BOTH NEED TO BE TAKEN UP AS A PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, IN WHICH CASE I THINK I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE'LL TAKE ITEMS ONE AND THREE.

AND THEN DEPENDING UPON THE OUTCOME OF, OF THAT

[Items 2 - 4]

SO TAKE UP ITEMS TWO AND FOUR AND THEN ITEMS ONE AND THREE IS WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.

YES, I WOULD.

I WOULD, I WOULD MOVE TO PASS ITEM TWO WITH THE DIRECTION THAT I'VE POSTED ON THE BOARD, UH, AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AID ON ITEMS THREE AND FOUR.

BOTH FOR THE, UH, FUNCTIONING OF THAT PART OF OUR CITY.

SO MAYOR ADLER MAKES THE MOTION.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS SECONDS.

THE MOTION MAY EITHER.

THANK YOU COLLEAGUES.

UH, AGAIN, UH, THIS IS THE CONTINUATION, THE CONVERSATION I THINK WE'VE HAD IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT MEETINGS AND TACKLING THIS IS NOT TO REALLY DECIDE TODAY WHETHER OR NOT TO DO A TOURS.

I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE, AS THE SPEAKERS HAVE SAID A REALLY FULL CONVERSATION ON THIS, NOT ONLY WITH THEIR COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO FOR US, UH, TO HAVE, UH, HAVE A WORK SESSION, UH, BUT BY INITIATING THIS, UH, ACTION, UH, THIS CALENDAR YEAR, WE HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY OR THE ABILITY TO, UH, UH, INITIATE THE, THE DATE ON WHICH THE, BUT FOR ANALYSIS AND VALUE CAN BE CAPTURED, UH, CAN CERTAIN PAY THIS SIDE, UH, IN, UH, NEXT YEAR OR EVEN NEXT YEAR, UH, WHETHER OR NOT THEY DO UTTERS AT ALL.

AND IF SO, WHAT THAT TERMS SHOULD LOOK LIKE OR INCLUDE OR NOT INCLUDE, WE HIT AT THAT POINT, DISCUSS THE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED BY THE SPEAKERS TODAY.

UH, YOU KNOW, IN MY VIEW, WHAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND BETTER AS THE LAW SURROUNDING THE SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE LAND, THAT'S DOUBTED THEY GUIDE TO DEVELOP ON THE SOUTH WATERFRONT, BUT UNLESS WE PUT IT A GRID SYSTEM OF ROADS, IT'S ALL QUITE A DEVELOPED THE WAY THAT IT, THAT IT BEST SHOULD, UH,

[00:25:01]

UH, BUT ALSO WITH RESPECT TO THE ADLER TAX VALUE THAT COULD BE GENERATED, UH, THAT WE COULD SPEND ALL OVER ALL OVER THE CITY, UH, ITEM NUMBER TWO, UH, IS, OR THAT HAS THE LARGEST GEOGRAPHIC AREA.

WE COULD CERTAINLY DECIDE LATER, UH, THAT WE NEEDED ORDER TO EXCLUDE PART OF THE AREAS OF SNOOPY POD OR ANY ACTUALLY, WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION TODAY, BUT BY ADOPTING NUMBER TWO, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO INCLUDE IT IF WE ULTIMATELY DECIDE TO DO THAT.

UH, AND THAT I'VE ALSO ADDED LANGUAGE THAT SPEAKS TO, UH, UH, UH, ALSO ASKING STAFF TO COME BACK AND TELL US HOW TO INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, AS A PRIORITY IN THE, IN THE TERMS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO THAT.

UH, UH, BUT WE DON'T KNOW THAT EITHER BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THE GREENFIELD AND FOBS STAFF YET.

SO I WOULD URGE PASSAGE OF ITEM NUMBER TWO, OR THE DIRECTION, UH, TO TAKE HER BACK AND ACTUALLY DO THE WORK AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING TO HEAR THE DISCUSSION, BUT ALSO FOR US TO GET EDUCATED AS WELL.

AS I UNDERSTAND IT, ITEM TWO AND ONE ARE THE SAME WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TWO BEING A BROADER GEOGRAPHIC AREA, MAYOR COUNCIL KIMBALL, LAVARUS DEPUTY CFO, YOU'RE CORRECT.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COLLEAGUES? I REMEMBER TOVA UM, YEAH, AND I'M GOING TO NEED THE STAFF'S ASSISTANCE WITH THIS.

SO AT OUR LAST MEETING, I CIRCULATED AN AMENDMENT REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

UM, AND AS I INDICATED AT THAT TIME, I PLAN TO AMEND THE PROJECT LIST TO INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN THAT TIER.

AND I AGREE, AND I'M ABOUT TO MAKE ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT WE SAID A DATE, CERTAIN FOR HAVING THE MORE SUBSTANTIAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT A LOT OF THESE ELEMENTS, SO THAT WE CAN REALLY, UM, WORK THROUGH THEM.

BUT I AM AMONG OTHER THINGS WOULD LIKE TO, WOULD LIKE TO AMEND IT TO INCLUDE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PIECE.

SO COLLEAGUES, THIS WAS CIRCULATED AGAIN AT OUR LAST MEETING AND I'VE ASKED KATIE POWERS TO CIRCULATE IT AGAIN.

IT WOULD HAVE THE IMPACT OF AMENDING THE TIER ONE PROJECTS LIST ON PAGE 1 28 TO INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IT ALSO PROVIDED DIRECTION THAT THE MANAGER SHOULD WORK WITH AUSTIN WATER TO RELU THE PRELIMINARY FINANCING PLAN TO DETERMINE IF IT SHOULD INCLUDE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS RELATED TO THE DISTRICT WIDE WATER MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK.

UM, SO STAFF IS THAT, UH, IS THAT A PR GERMANE TO THESE? UM, SO THE MOTION THAT IS ON THE TABLE, IN FACT, IF YOU WOULD MAYBE AS A BACKUP, UM, MS. ALVEREZ, IF YOU COULD WALK US THROUGH THE FOUR ITEMS AND HOW THEY ARE DISTINCT FROM ONE ANOTHER,

[1. Approve an ordinance creating the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone No. 19 for the South-Central Waterfront to be located within the area bounded on the west by South 1st Street from Lady Bird Lake south to Bouldin Creek, on the south by Bouldin Creek from South 1st Street east to Riverside Drive, on the east by the Ann and Roy Butler Hike and Bike Trail from Riverside Drive north to Lady Bird Lake, and on the north by Lady Bird Lake from South 1st Street east to the Ann and Roy Butler Hike and Bike Trail between Lady Bird Lake and Riverside Drive, and excludes the area bounded to the west by South 1st Street between Riverside Drive and Barton Springs Road, bounded to the east by Barton Springs Road between South 1st Street and Riverside Drive, and bounded to the north by Riverside Drive between South 1st Street and Barton Springs Road; and establishing a Board of Directors for the zone, and related matters.]

COUNCILOR TOVO.

THE FIRST ITEM IS ONE THAT EXCLUDES THE AREA KNOWN AS THE ISERVER SOUTH SNOOPY POD.

THE ITEM TWO INCLUDES THAT AREA IN THE TOURIST ZONE.

UM, SO IT WOULD ADJUST THE OVERALL LONG-TERM CAPTURE VALUE FOR THIS ZONE ACCORDINGLY, AND THEN ITEMS THREE AND FOUR CORRESPOND TO ITEMS ONE AND TWO WITH THE GEOGRAPHIC CORRECT AREA.

SO, UM, COLLEAGUES, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE APPROVAL OF MY AMENDMENT, WHICH WOULD ADD AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS THE, AS A PRO AS A PROJECT WITHIN THE PRELIMINARY, WITHIN THE, UM, TIER ONE PROJECTS, COUNCIL MEMBER TOVO MAKES THE MOTION.

IT LOOKS LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER, KITCHEN SECONDS.

THAT MOTION FOR THE DISCUSSION, YES, MAY HAVE HAD 10.

SO OUR, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD SOME GOOD CONVERSATIONS AND I'VE GOT ANOTHER AMENDMENT I WANT TO TALK THROUGH WITH THE STAFF AND THEN MAKE THAT ALSO RESPONDS TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE'VE HEARD, BUT I'VE BEEN, UM, INVOLVED IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL VISION PLAN FOR A VERY LONG TIME.

AND ONE OF THE KEY COMPONENTS TO MAKE THIS WORK IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BEING BUILT IN THIS AREA, MUCH OF IT MIGHT END UP BEING ON PUBLIC LAND, BUT WE ALSO EXPECT THAT THERE WILL BE, UH, PARTICIPATION FROM THOSE WHO ARE BUILDING HOUSING IN THIS AREA.

AND SO OUR COLLEAGUES ARE, ARE, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO HAVE COME HERE TODAY OR HAVE WRITTEN, WHO HAVE SAID THIS AREA IS DEVELOPING.

THIS AREA WILL DEVELOP, UM, IN THE FUTURE, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DEVELOPS CORRECTLY AND IN A WAY THAT ALL OF AUSTIN CAN BENEFIT.

AND THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE SOUTH

[00:30:01]

CENTRAL WATERFRONT PLAN.

IT WAS THE INTENT OF THE TOWN LAKE CORRIDOR PLAN, MANY, YOU KNOW, A DECADE OR SO BEFORE THAT, UM, THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY.

WE NEED TO GET THESE DETAILS RIGHT, TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT, UM, THIS FRAMEWORK REALLY DOES SUPPORT THOSE PUBLIC BENEFITS AND KEY AMONG THEM IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AND I BELIEVE THAT OUR PROJECT LIST HAS TO STATE, IT HAS TO ARTICULATE IT VERY CLEARLY.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN THE PROJECT PLAN TODAY.

UM, AND WE'LL NOT SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD IF WE CAN'T INCLUDE IT AS A PRIORITY PROJECT, MAYOR ADLER, COUNCILMEMBER KITCHEN.

HOW ABOUT TO SUPPORT THE, UH, UH, AMENDMENT? BECAUSE I THINK THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE WANT TO HAVE IN THE TERS DISTRICT.

I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH TO GO, WHETHER IT SHOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THAT IS BY INCLUDING IT IN THE TIER ONE.

I JUST DON'T KNOW YET, UH, WHICH IS, UH, I THINK, UH, A REAL IMPORTANT PART OF THE CONVERSATION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE WITH OUR STAFF AND WITH OUR, UH, COMMUNITY, UH, NEXT YEAR, WHERE WE ACTUALLY ARE ABLE TO LAY EVERYTHING OUT AND FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY TO DO THIS, OR EVEN TO DO THIS TERMS THAT, UH, AT ALL, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT TODAY WITH THE UNDERSTANDING AND EXPECTATION, UH, THAT WE'LL LAY OUT ALL THE DIFFERENT WAYS TO INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, SO THAT WHEN WE'RE ACTUALLY MAKING REAL DECISIONS WITH RESPECT TO WHAT ARE THE FINAL DECISIONS WITH RESPECT TO, UH, THE FINAL PLAN, UH, WE'LL HOW B I'LL BE AT THAT POINT.

CONSIDERING WHAT I THINK IS THE, IS THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT.

I HOPE THAT COLLECTIVELY WE DO THAT, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN, THEN COUNCIL MEMBER TOBA.

UM, I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT, UH, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, UH, IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO, TO FINALLY SUPPORT THIS TOURS.

UM, AND, UH, AND A FINAL PROJECT PLAN, AFFORDABLE HOUSING HAS TO BE A KEY COMPONENT.

UM, THIS REALLY HAS TO BE AN AREA AND A LIST OF PROJECTS THAT THE WHOLE CITY BENEFITS FROM IT.

I BILL I SUPPORT, UM, WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID ABOUT THE FACT THAT I AGREE THIS AREA IS GOING TO DEVELOP, BUT IT NEEDS TO DEVELOP IN A WAY THAT'S FOR THE WHOLE CITY.

UM, AND WE'VE SEEN TOO MUCH DEVELOPMENT OCCURRING IN OUR CITY THAT DOESN'T BENEFIT EVERYONE.

AND SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO MAKE SURE IT'S BENEFITS IN A WAY THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE WHOLE CITY.

AND, UH, FOR ME, UH, FUNDAMENTAL TO THAT IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND FUNDAMENTAL ALSO IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN PLACES IN OUR CITY WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT JUST PUSHED OUT OF BEING ABLE TO LIVE IN THESE, IN THESE AREAS.

SO I LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING FURTHER DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT.

I'VE GOT SOME OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT I'M GOING TO WAIT UNTIL ALL THE AMENDMENTS ARE ON THE TABLE.

AND THEN I HAVE SOME, UH, SOME OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL MEMBER TOVA.

UH, THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, UM, STAFF, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND? SO MAYOR YOU HAD INITIALLY SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS WE SET THE INCREMENT, UM, BENEFIT AT 0%, AND I'M WONDERING IF THAT'S NOT THE BEST PATH FORWARD TODAY, GIVEN THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AND WE'RE GOING TO WORK THROUGH AND HAVE MORE TIME TO ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HAVE RAISED.

UM, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS MYSELF.

I THINK IT SENDS A BETTER SIGNAL IF WE SET THE INCREMENT, UM, CONTRIBUTION AT 0% MR. VAN, YOU KNOW, OR, UM, IF THERE'S SOMEBODY ELSE APPROPRIATE ON YOUR STAFF, COULD YOU ADDRESS THAT AS I UNDERSTAND THAT IS, UH, A MATTER THAT WE CAN VERY EASILY AMEND WHEN WE COME BACK AND HAVE THE FULLER CONVERSATION, IS THAT CORRECT? UM, YOU CAN CERTAINLY AMEND, UH, THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AS YOU MOVE TOWARDS A FINAL PLAN.

THE, THE LANGUAGE IN STATE STATUTE IS THAT THE FINAL PLAN SHOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN.

SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE A CONSIDERATION AND SETTING A VALUE CAPTURE AT 0% IS WHAT DOES A FINAL PLAN LOOK LIKE? THAT'S SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THAT.

AND LEILA IS ON THE LINE AND THERE'S ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION OR, UH, ABOUT THAT LEGAL REQUIREMENT AS FAR.

SO I DO SEE A CHALLENGE WITH, IF WE DECIDED TODAY TO SET THAT AT ZERO, UM, AND I WOULD, AND BY, UM, I BELIEVE THAT I AM GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE COME BACK IN FEBRUARY AT OUR FEBRUARY MEETING RATHER THAN OUR JANUARY MEETING, BUT, BUT SCHEDULE IT HERE TODAY FOR OUR FEBRUARY MEETING TO COME BACK AND HAVE THAT FULLER CONVERSATION.

I'M LOOKING TO CHECK WHAT THAT DATE IS.

OR THE COUNCIL TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE PROS AND CONS OF DOING UTTERS AND OTHER ELEMENTS THAT ARE, COULD BE PART OF A TOURIST PLAYHEAD, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION.

THAT'S PART OF MY DIRECTION, KATHY.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU SAW THAT IN THE MOTION.

I DID NOT MAYOR WOULD YOU? UH, YES.

IT SAYS THE MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO SET A WORK SESSION BEFORE THE END OF FEBRUARY, 2022

[00:35:03]

I HAVE TO DO ONE AT ALL OR NOT THE APPROPRIATE GEOGRAPHIC AREA IF ONE WERE DONE AND HOW BEST TO PUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS A PRIORITY FOR THE TOURISTS.

MY APOLOGIES, I DID SEE THAT DIRECTION.

I DID OVERLOOK THAT YOU WERE SCHEDULING A WORK SESSION.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE A WORK SESSION AND WE SHOULD BE SCHEDULED FOR ACTION SO THAT WE CAN MAKE ANY CHANGES THAT WE NEED TO, OR THAT WE'VE DECIDED ON.

UM, I THOUGHT YOU HAD SAID I MISUNDERSTOOD AND THOUGHT YOU HAD OFFERED DIRECTION TO BRING IT BACK DOWN TO ZERO, BECAUSE I WORKED, AS I FIGURED WE COULD JUST DO THE AMANDA, YOU HAVE THAT NUMBER.

IF WE WANTED TO DO THAT, WHEN WE WERE TOGETHER, WHEN WE HAD A CHANCE TO ACTUALLY DISCUSS WHAT THAT MEANS OR WHAT THE IMPACTS OF THAT ARE.

THAT TO ME MADE BEST SENSE, UM, AT OUR LAST CONVERSATION, BUT THEN I THOUGHT MORE AND MORE ABOUT THE IDEA THAT YOU HAD OFFERED OF SETTING IT AT ZERO.

AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT MIGHT REALLY GET US ACROSS THE FINISH LINE TODAY HERE, UM, AND REALLY, UH, ACCOUNT FOR SOME OF THE, THE REALLY LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM MEMBERS OF OUR PUBLIC.

IF WE SET IT, UH, AS A BASELINE AT ZERO, AND THEN HAVE THAT FULLER CONVERSATION, KNOWING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IT VERY EARLY IN THE YEAR AND CAN MAKE THOSE AMENDMENTS QUITE QUICKLY, UM, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE.

UM, MS. FIRESIDE, DID YOU HAVE COMMENTARY ON WHETHER, WHETHER THAT WOULD IMPACT OUR ESTABLISHMENT OF IT TODAY? UM, ACCORDING TO THE STATUTE, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE THE ORDINANCE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY AND BEGIN SETTING UP A TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE FUND BY SETTING IT AT ZERO.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S AN EMPTY FUND.

MS. FIRESIDE, IT'S DIFFICULT TO HEAR YOU.

SORRY.

IS THAT BETTER? YES.

UM, SO THE CHALLENGE IS THAT THE STATUTE REQUIRES THAT THE TAX INCREMENT FUND BE SET UP IMMEDIATELY UPON PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE.

IT WILL BE AN EMPTY FUND, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ALL WILL BE TALKING ABOUT AND POSSIBLY CONSIDERING IN THE NEW YEAR, MS. OH, I'M SORRY.

I DIDN'T MEAN TO, WE MAY NEED TO BE NOTICE BECAUSE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ALSO INCLUDE THAT THE FINAL PLAN BE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN.

IT MAY BE THAT WHEN WE'RE COMING BACK FOR THAT SECOND HEARING, THAT THERE MAY BE, NEED TO BE NOTICED AND AN OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE'VE DONE BEFORE FOR AMENDING TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONES.

I SEE.

AND MAYBE YOU CAN REMIND US OF WHAT THAT IS, UM, IN TERMS OF, OF SETTING UP THE FUND, WE HAVE A SECOND STREET TURN THAT HAS A ZERO IS ALSO SET AT ZERO.

SO I ASSUME THAT THAT'S, BUT THAT IS NOT LEGALLY CHALLENGING TO SET IT AT ZERO.

SINCE WE DID THAT WITH THE SECOND STREET TAX INCREMENTS, FUNDUS IS VERY DIFFERENT AND THERE ARE FUNDS THAT GO IN TO THAT, BUT IN A DIFFERENT MECHANISM AND IT'S NOT BEING USED TOBACCO BONDS.

WELL, I KNOW THE FUNDS THAT GO INTO IT AS OUR GENERAL FUND DOLLARS, BUT ARE YOU SAYING, I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO DETERMINE IS, IS THERE A LEGAL CHALLENGE? IS THERE A LEGAL TO OUR SETTING IT AT ZERO TODAY? I THINK THE COMPLICATIONS CAN BE ADDRESSED IF NEED BE BY RE NOTICING GREAT MINT.

AND THAT WOULD ALSO INCLUDE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SINCE THAT'S NOT IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN.

YOU SAY IT'S NOT IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, BUT IF MY AMENDMENT JUST PASSED, WHICH IT DID, IT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAN.

IF THAT'S YOUR IMPACT, YOUR, YOUR AMENDMENT STATES THE FINAL PLAN, BUT YES, IF WE ADD IT TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AND THE FINAL PLAN, THEN I, IT SOUNDS FROM YOUR CONVERSATIONS, LIKE YOU WOULD LIKE THIS TO LOOK DIFFERENT THAN STAFF IS INITIALLY PROPOSED AND THE BEST WAY TO ADDRESS ANY LEGAL CONCERNS ABOUT THAT WOULD SIMPLY BE TO RE NOTICE SO THAT WE HAVE ALL THOSE PIECES CLEARLY NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC, YOUR TARGET, WHERE WE DO THE FINAL VOTE NEXT YEAR.

I'M TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU TAKE YOUR NEXT VOTE NEXT YEAR.

YES.

TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN IN ADDITION TO THE FINAL PLAN, BUT CERTAINLY TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN THAT WE'RE VOTING ON TODAY.

AND MS. FIRESIDE, THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT.

COLLEAGUES.

I WOULD LIKE TO, I WOULD LIKE TO REISSUE MY AMENDMENT.

I INTENDED TO ADD AFFORDABLE HOUSING

[00:40:01]

COUNCILMAN COUNCILMEMBER.

KITCHEN.

SO, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER TOBO AND EVERYONE, I THINK I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT IN PART SEVEN TO SET THE, UH, SET THE AMOUNT AT 0%, THAT IS THAT PART OF YOUR AMENDMENT ALSO COUNCIL MEMBER TOBO I WANTED TO GET, UM, I WANTED TO HEAR SOME FEEDBACK ABOUT IT, BUT THAT I AM PREPARED TO MAKE THAT MOTION.

I, MY FEEDBACK IS I THINK THAT THAT'S THE MOST PRUDENT COURSE RIGHT NOW.

UM, MS. FIRESIDE IS SAYING, UM, AND I APPRECIATE THAT, UM, CLARIFICATION.

SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE CAN'T, WE CAN LEGALLY DO THAT UNDER THAT WILL TO, UH, NOTICE IN A CERTAIN WAY, WHEN WE COME BACK TO CONSIDER, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE FIGURE MIGHT BE WOULD PREFER.

AND I WOULD SUPPORT AN AMENDMENT AT 0%, IF THAT'S WHAT YOUR INTENT IS, COUNCIL MEMBER TOBA.

SO WHERE WE'RE AT IS WE HAD, UM, TWO AMENDMENTS, BUT MAY RATHER, IT SOUNDED AS THOUGH YOU ACCEPTED COUNCIL MEMBER TURBO'S AMENDMENT TO YOUR MOTION.

IN WHICH CASE, THE ADDITION NOW IS THE Z IS SETTING THE RATE AT 0%.

SO THOSE ARE THE TWO MOTIONS, YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION WITH THE ADDITION OF COUNCIL MEMBER TABOS, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT, AND THEN SEPARATELY THE MOTION, UM, TO SET THE RATE AT 0%, CORRECT THE TWO MOTIONS ON THE TABLE, CORRECT.

AND JUST, UM, NOT TO COMPLICATE THINGS FURTHER, BUT MS. FIRESIDE, I'M LOOKING AT MY AMENDMENT SHEET AND IT DOES CLEARLY STATE THAT WE'RE AMENDING THE TIER ONE PROJECTS LIST ON THE PRELIMINARY PROJECT AND FINANCING PLAN.

SO I THINK THAT'S, I BELIEVE I'VE CAPTURED THE REQUESTS THAT THE PLAN WE'RE VOTING ON TODAY INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT I NEED, I NEED TO BE REALLY CLEAR ABOUT THAT BEFORE WE TAKE OUR FINAL VOTE.

AND THEN IT ASKS THAT THE MANAGER SHALL ADD AND REVISE THE TIER ONE PROJECT COSTS PRIOR TO RETURNING TO COUNCIL AND TO THE BOARD WITH THE FINAL PLAN.

SO WE EXPECT FOR IT TO BE IN BOTH, BOTH THE PLAN WE'RE VOTING ON TODAY, AS WELL AS THE FINAL PLAN.

IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH? YES, I THINK THAT'S CLEAR.

OKAY, GREAT.

AND THEN YES, UM, MAYOR PRO TEM, IF THAT AMENDMENT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED WITHOUT A VOTE THEN THAN THE ONE I WOULD LIKE TO VOTE ON, UM, IS THE, IS SETTING THE RATE AT ZERO.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

IT LOOKS LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER FUNDUS, AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR.

COUNSEL IN THE, IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2020 BUDGET? THAT IS WHEN YOU UPDATED THE TIF FINANCIAL POLICY AND WITHIN THAT POLICY, IT STATES ANY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT THAT IS PART OF A TIF PROJECT PLAN MUST PROVIDE FOR AT LEAST 20% OF THE UNITS TO BE AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS EARNING AT, OR BELOW 60% OF MEDIAN, FAMILY INCOME FOR RENTAL HOUSING AND 80% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME FOR OWNERSHIP HOUSING FOR AT LEAST THE DURATION OF THE TIF PROJECT PLAN.

I JUST WANTED TO GO BACK REALLY QUICKLY TO THE COMMENTS THAT ED BENZINO KNOW SHARED WITH US WHEN HE TALKED ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF WHATEVER WE SET, UM, IS CLOSE OR NEAR TO NEAR THE FINAL PLAN.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION IF THAT IS IN REGARDS TO WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON TODAY.

UM, IF THAT NEEDS TO KICK IN NOW, OR IF THAT IS IN REGARDS TO WHAT OUR FINAL VOTE WILL BE WHENEVER AFTER WE HAVE THE WORK DEDICATED WORK SESSION AND COMMUNITY INPUT ON THE SUBJECT.

SO COUNCIL MEMBER , I THINK THE WAY TO ADDRESS THIS IS WE'LL NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHERE YOU ALL LAND TODAY.

AND IF WE FEEL THAT IT IS THERE'S A LEGAL RISK, THAT IT'S NOT CLEAR, THEN WE WOULD READ OUT US AS AN AMENDED TO BASICALLY HAVE AN AMENDED PLAN THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE ITEMS SO THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AND THE FINAL PLAN WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR IS THE IDEA IS THAT THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT'S IN THE PLAN.

AND SO AS YOU'RE ADDING THINGS AND YOU'RE ADOPTING THAT, WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN YOU'RE HAVING YOUR FINAL CONVERSATIONS, UM, IN FEBRUARY THAT EVERYTHING LINES UP AND THAT WE'VE GIVEN THE CORRECT NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC.

OKAY, THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR.

UM, I HAD A QUESTION GOING BACK TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IF I MIGHT.

UM, SO MR. VINO OR MISSILE ALAVAREZ, UM, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT OUR TERS TIFF POLICY IS WITH RESPECT TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING

[00:45:01]

HOW DOES THIS PROPOSED, UM, TERS SATISFY OUR POLICY AS, AS WAS SUBMITTED IN THE ORIGINAL PRELIMINARY PLAN? IT DOES NOT.

UH, IT DOES NOT INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, BECAUSE AS IN PREVIOUS, UM, TOURS IS WE'VE TYPICALLY HAD A DEVELOPMENT PARTNER WHERE THERE WAS A, A PLAN IN PLACE THAT, UH, SUCH AS THE MILLER DEVELOPMENT THAT GAVE US ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, EXPECTATIONS AND, UM, SPECIFICS IN THIS CASE, WE DO NOT.

SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE HANDLED EITHER THROUGH THE EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENTS, KERING IN THE TOURS OR, UM, THROUGH ANOTHER MECHANISM OUTSIDE OF THE TOURIST.

SO THANK YOU.

UM, I JUST WANT TO SIGNAL THAT I'M, YOU KNOW, UNCOMFORTABLE WITH HOW THIS WAS PRESENTED WITHOUT SATISFYING OUR POLICY, UM, THAT WE RECENTLY ADOPTED.

UM, AND I APPRECIATE COUNCIL MEMBER AMENDMENT THAT PROVIDES ONE MECHANISM, BUT AS WE'RE MOVING FROM TO THE NEXT SET OF DISCUSSIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE ON THIS, UM, I THINK WE NEED, WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE CAN BEST ACCOMPLISH THAT GOAL.

UM, I'M, I'M REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH JUST HAVING SET A POLICY AND THEN ALREADY IMMEDIATELY HAVING A TERM THAT WE COULD HAVE ANTICIPATED, UM, VIOLATE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, AND THERE MAY BE GOOD, THERE MAY BE WAYS TO DO IT WHERE IT'S NOT COMING FROM THE TIF MONEY, BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE SATISFIED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.

UM, BUT I THINK A LOT OF THE CONVERSATION TODAY IS POINTING TO THAT THIS IS NOT FULLY BAKED YET.

UM, AND THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS TO GO FROM THE PRELIMINARY TO THE FINAL PLAN.

AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE'RE STRUGGLING, WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH HERE TODAY.

UM, AND I AM, I ALSO WANT TO COMMENT ON THE, THE 0%.

UM, DID I UNDERSTAND THAT UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, LILA, THAT YOU THINK THERE IS A RISK IF WE WERE TO GO TO 0% THAT THANK YOU, MISS ALL OF OURS, UM, THAT IF WE WERE TO GO TO 0%, THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR FOR THE FINAL PLAN.

UM, IS THAT WHAT YOU SUGGESTED OR DID YOU, SO IT SEEMED LIKE YOU SUGGESTED THAT FIRST, AND THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE A MIDDLE WAY WHERE WE COULD PLAN TO DO AN AMENDMENT TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, WHICH WOULD THEN ALLOW US TO BE IN ALIGN AS WE GET, UM, FURTHER CONCRETE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW WE WANT THE FINAL PLAN TO BE THAT CORRECT.

I THINK THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS YES TO BOTH.

UM, UH, IF, IF YOU JUST SET IT AT ZERO FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAN WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING ELSE, THERE WOULD BE A CONCERN THAT THE FINAL PLAN WOULDN'T LINE UP AND PEOPLE WOULDN'T HAVE NOTICE OF WHAT THE FINAL PLAN WAS GOING TO HAVE.

SO THE SOLUTION TO THAT IS IF WE NEED TO AMEND THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AND RE NOTICE AS AN AMENDED PLAN FOR YOUR FEBRUARY DISCUSSION, WE CAN DO THAT SO THAT EVERYTHING IS LINED UP AND THE COMMUNITY HAS THE APPROPRIATE NOTICE.

THE START OF THE YEAR, MAYBE YOU DON'T GET TO TAKE ANYTHING.

SO THEN WHAT WE WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE ACCOMPLISHING TODAY IS SIMPLY TO SET A BASELINE FOR THE TAX CALCULATIONS.

WELL, YOU WOULD BE DOING THAT, BUT YOU WOULD ALSO BE MAKING THE LEGALLY REQUIRED FINDINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY THE STATUTE, UH, THAT WERE DISCUSSED BY SOME OF THE SPEAKERS AND THAT ARE STATED WITHIN THE ORDINANCE AND REFLECTED IN THE PLAN.

AND WE'RE READY TO SET THE TAX RATE AT ZERO AND THEN CHANGE IT, SAY IN FEBRUARY TO THE 46% THAT STAFF HAD INITIALLY SUGGESTED WHAT HAPPENS TO THE TAX RECEIPTS FOR NEXT YEAR ZERO, OR ARE THEY AT THE MOMENT? OKAY.

SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WHETHER THERE IS A CONSEQUENCE FOR THE TAX RECEIPTS THAT WOULD COME IN BY SETTING IT TO ZERO.

SHOULD WE WANT TO PROCEED WITH THE TOURS? I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO ASK THAT QUESTION, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE IF IT'S ZERO AT

[00:50:01]

OR, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW AT WHAT POINT DURING THE YEAR, YOU, YOU CAN CHANGE THAT PERCENTAGE AND ACTUALLY TAKE SOME OF THAT TAX REVENUE AND PUT IT TOWARDS THE TOURS.

THE MAJOR AD EDITOR, KIM MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT BETTER THAN I CAN, THE, THE MAJOR ACTION.

AND THAT IMPACTS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS, IS JUST SETTING THAT BASE CAPTURE VALUE BY SETTING, BY TAKING ACTION, BY SETTING THE BASE CAPTURE VALUE TODAY, THAT GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO COLLECT ON IT, WHETHER IT'S 0% OR 46%, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT BASE CAPTURE VALUE SET NOW.

AND AT WHAT POINT DO WE HAVE TO DETERMINE THE PERCENTAGE TO BE ABLE TO TAKE IN REVENUE FROM NEXT YEAR? IT WOULD IT BEFORE THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, I THINK IT WOULD BE IDEAL.

WE WOULDN'T WANT TO BE ABLE TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT IN THE BUDGET PROCESS.

SO THAT'S MORE OF AN ACCOUNTING YES.

PROCESS.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COLLEAGUES, COUNCIL MEMBER, KITCHEN, AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER KELLY, UH, JUST A QUICK QUESTION ON THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING IT.

SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY, COUNCIL MEMBER TABOS AMENDMENT WILL ESTABLISH, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS PART OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN.

AND THEN THAT COMBINED WITH THE MAYOR'S DIRECTION ALLOWS US TO DISCUSS, UM, HOW IT FITS INTO THE FINANCING PLAN.

UH, AND SO MY QUESTION IS THIS, WOULD THAT NOT GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLY WITH THE POLICY THAT WE HAD SET FOR, FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING? I COULDN'T TELL FROM WHAT, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTRA WAS ASKING IN COUNCIL MORALE TO, I APPRECIATE YOU LOOKING INTO AND MAKING US ALL AWARE AND REMINDING US OF THE POLICY THAT WE HAD, UM, ADOPTED, BUT THE COMBINATION OF COUNCIL MEMBER, TOWS AMENDMENT IN THE MAYOR'S DIRECTION, WOULD THAT NOT ALLOW, GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS AND ALIGN THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE, IN THE FINAL PLAN AND FINANCING PLAN WITH OUR POLICY.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT FOR, WE'RE NOT BY TAKING THIS ACTION TODAY.

WE'RE NOT INCLUDING THE POSSIBILITY OF COMPLYING WITH, UM, THE POLICY WE SET BEFORE.

MAY I SEE? YEAH, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, RIGHT? THE TWEAK TOVO AMENDMENT AND THE DIRECTION WE HAVE, WE HAVE A WHITEBOARD, WE COULD DO WHATEVER WE WANTED AS WE MEANT THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, THE PAGE HERE.

SO THAT SOUNDS GREAT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M WANTING TO DO.

AND THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD FROM.

UM, WELL, YOU ALL WERE SAYING IS BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, WE DID SET THAT POLICY AROUND PORTABILITY AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE PATH TO COMPLY WITH IT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DO BASED ON THE AMENDMENTS AND DIRECTIONS.

SO THANK YOU.

I LOOK LIKE YOU WANTED TO ELABORATE ON THAT.

I CERTAINLY THINK THAT'S ONE POSSIBILITY.

COUNSEL, I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT IF, IF THAT'S A BODY, YOU DECIDE TO SET THE CAPTURE RATE AT 0% FOR NOW, WE WOULD NEED TO ALSO AMEND THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, UH, TO ELIMINATE THE ESTIMATED COST AND BONDED INDEBTEDNESS ACCORDINGLY.

UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE, UM, THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, DEPENDING ON WHICH VERSION YOU'RE LOOKING AT, THERE'S A BONDED AND DEBTOR OR A SECTION THAT TO A 99 OR 95.5 MILLION OR 103.7 MILLION, IF IT A 0% CAPTURE RATE THAT WOULD DROP TO ZERO.

SO, UH, WE JUST REQUEST THAT IN YOUR, UM, IN YOUR MOTION THAT YOU NOTE TO, TO EDIT THE PRELIMINARY PLAN ACCORDINGLY, UM, AS BECAUSE OF THE EFFECTS OF THE 0% CAPTURE RATE MAYOR ADLER, OH, I'M SORRY.

IT WAS COUNCIL MEMBER KELLY, AND THEN MIRROR.

I HAVE QUESTIONS THAT ARE SEPARATE FROM THIS TOPIC.

SO IF ME OR ADLER HAS A QUESTION RELATED TO THIS CP GUSHERS, THANK YOU.

JUST, I JUST WANT TO PATIENTS THAT ARE CLEAR, AND THEN I THINK CATHERINE TOBO, CAUSE WE'RE KITCHEN, BOTH ASK THIS QUESTION.

IF WE GO TO 0% IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, NOW, A STAFF, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM WHAT I'M HEARING IS PLEASE SPARE.

IF I'M HEARING IT CORRECTLY AT THAT WE COULD NOTICE, AND AMANDA, THE PRELIMINARY PLAN THE NEXT YEAR TO BRING IT UP, WE'RE UP TO 46%.

IF WE WANTED TO THAT WAY, THE FINAL PLAN, IF WE DID A FINAL PLAN, UH, COULD BE AT THE 46% AND THEN THE FINAL PLAN WOULD BE IN ACCORD WITH THE AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAN.

AND THAT, THAT WOULD STILL ENABLE US TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ACTING THIS FISCAL MAY ACT IN THIS CALENDAR YEAR, AS OPPOSED TO WAITING TILL NEXT YEAR, WE STILL GET THAT ADVANTAGE.

SHOULD WE ELECT TO TAKE IT? IS THAT CORRECT? UH, MAYOR ADVAN, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER.

[00:55:01]

I THINK BETWEEN NOW AND THAT POINT I'D WANT TO CHECK IN WITH LEGAL.

UM, ANOTHER POSSIBILITY IS, IS THAT COUNCIL MIGHT NEED TO FIRST ADOPT THE FINAL PLAN THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN.

AND THEN ANYTIME IN THE FUTURE, YOU CAN AMEND THAT FINAL PLAN THAT YOU'VE ADOPTED BY GOING THROUGH A PROCESS OF A PUBLIC HEARING, NOTICE, ADDING PROJECTS, CHANGING THE PERCENT, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

UM, IT'S POSSIBLE WE COULD DO IT THE WAY YOU TALKED ABOUT AS WELL, JUST STRAIGHT UP AMENDING THE PRELIMINARY PLAN PRIOR TO THE FINAL PLAN.

I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE.

WE'D WANT TO LOOK THROUGH THE STATUTE AND SEE HOW THAT WOULD WORK, BUT CERTAINLY WE COULD DO IT.

WE COULD ADOPT THE FINAL PLAN FIRST AND THEN AMEND THE FINAL PLAN SO WE CAN GET YOU THERE.

SO THAT AS LONG AS THERE'S A PATH, THEN YES, SIR.

UH, WE COULD DO LEGALLY THEN.

NOT ONLY WOULD I SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER COBOS PUBLISHED AMENDMENT, WHICH HAD THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ALSO THE QUESTION FOR STAFF BOB BACKWARD WITH WATER, BUT I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT AMENDING GOING TO 0% AND, AND AMENDING THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AND FINANCE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH THAT TO BE ZERO.

AND WHICH CASE WOULD THAT COUNCIL MEMBER KELLY? THANK YOU.

UM, I'M JUST WONDERING IF STAFF COULD MAYBE EXPLAIN WHAT COMMUNITY INPUT MECHANISMS ARE OR WILL BE IN PLACE FOR THOSE LIVING IN AND AROUND THE PROJECT SITE, IF THAT HAS BEEN DETERMINED YET I'M NOT CERTAIN WHICH STAFF MEMBER WOULD SPEAK TO THAT.

I SEE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ON THE LINE AND HOUSING ON THE LINE, AND I'M HAPPY TO START WITH THAT.

AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION CORRECTLY.

UM, ALTHOUGH I WASN'T DIRECTLY INVOLVED WITH IT.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AS PART OF CREATING THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATER FRONT FRAMEWORK, THERE WAS EXTENSIVE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT DONE BY AT THE TIME, THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT.

SO THERE WAS A LOT OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT THAT WENT INTO THE PLAN IN REGARDS TO CREATION OF THE TOURERS GIVEN, UM, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL DIRECTION ON THIS JUST CAME IN OCTOBER, THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ABOUT THE TOURISM, ALTHOUGH THERE IS A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT TO HOLD UP TO NOTICE AND HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN MET, UM, AS WE MOVE FORWARD FROM THE PRELIMINARY PLAN TO ADOPTING A FINAL PLAN.

UM, I THINK WE WOULD, UH, MAYBE LOOK TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR STAFF FROM THE AUSTIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ABOUT, UH, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT THAT THEY MIGHT WANT TO DO AS PART OF, UH, MOVING TOWARDS THAT FINAL, UH, PROJECT PLAN.

AND I'M ON MY PHONE.

I WAS HAVING TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, SO I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE WITH GETTING ME UN-MUTED.

UM, I WANT TO VOTE FOR THIS ITEM TODAY, BUT I WANT TO DO SO WITH A LITTLE BIT OF HESITATION, JUST BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE COULD HAVE HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE PUBLIC INPUT.

UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THOUGH, AFTER THIS DISCUSSION THAT WE WILL BRING THIS ITEM BACK TO COUNCIL, UM, AND THERE WILL POSSIBLY BE READ NOTICED, SO I FEEL COMFORTABLE VOTING, BUT AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE FRUSTRATING TO, TO HEAR FROM THE COMMUNITY.

THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE THEIR INPUT HAS BEEN HEARD.

AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO A BETTER JOB AS A COUNCIL OF ENSURING THAT WE'RE ABLE TO LISTEN TO PEOPLE'S NEEDS AND GIVE THEM ENOUGH TIME.

I MEAN, IT IS A HOLIDAY WEEK, SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES.

AND SO, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER FUNDUS.

FEES AND THINGS THAT WE HAVE.

I ALSO WANTED TO SHARE THAT SIMILARLY, I'LL BE SUPPORTING TODAY'S ITEM MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PRELIMINARY PRAN PLAN AS AMENDED.

YOU KNOW, I DO THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT WE EMPHASIZE TO THE PUBLIC, THAT THIS IS, WE'RE STILL AT A PRELIMINARY JUNCTURE OF CREATING THE TOURERS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT TO CREATE THE TOURS IS STILL ON THE TABLE.

WE'LL BE HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS IN THE COMING MONTHS AND WE INVITE THE COMMUNITY TO ENGAGE, SPEAK UP, LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL, CREATING A TOURIST IN THIS AREA.

UH, I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL AND STAFF.

I KNOW OVER NEARLY SIX YEARS, THIS HAS BEEN A TOPIC OF CONVERSATION ON, UH, ON CREATING THE VISION FOR THE THEORY.

AND SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT CONTINUED CONVERSATION AND KNOW THAT WE ARE STILL IN A PRELIMINARY STATE RIGHT NOW, UM, AND LOOK FORWARD TO DIGGING IN ON THE DETAILS COUNCIL MEMBER, KITCHEN.

UM, I TOO WILL SUPPORT IT TODAY WITH ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT, UM, WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US.

AND WHEN WE HAVE FURTHER CONVERSATION, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'LL WANT TO SEE IS THE DETAILS OF THE PROJECTS AND HOW THEY RELATE TO WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED OTHERWISE WITH THE IMPACT

[01:00:01]

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE INVESTING OUR TAX DOLLARS IN OR PROJECTS THAT ARE TRULY DIRECTED TOWARDS A PUBLIC BENEFIT FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY.

AND SO WE, I WOULD WANT TO SEE MORE DETAIL IN THE FINAL PLAN IN TERMS OF HOW THESE PROJECTS, HOWEVER, WHATEVER PROJECTS WE FINALLY AGREE UPON, DO THAT COUNCIL MEMBER EVENT AREA, UM, MAYOR ADLER, DOES HE RAN AT COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER, UM, THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR, THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS.

I AM GOING TO, UH, SUPPORT THIS.

UH, UH, SO I WANT TO JUST REMIND, UH, THE COUNCIL AND THE DEVELOPERS THAT ARE GOING TO COME IN, IS THAT WHERE WE'RE IN DESPERATE NEED OF WORKFORCE HOUSING, ESPECIALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

YOU'RE GOING TO NEED YOUR WORKERS TO BE AROUND THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE COMING FROM OUT OF TOWN INTO THE CITY.

UH, IT'S JUST, UH, IT'S VERY HARD.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WHAT'S HAPPENING DOWNTOWN RIGHT NOW, WHERE THERE ARE A LOT OF, UH, UH, WORK WANTING OR CREATE ONE, IT FINDS ALL OVER IT THEY'RE HIRED, THEY JUST CAN'T GET ENOUGH PEOPLE.

AND, UM, SO, UH, I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING IT BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET SOME AFFORDABILITY OUT OF THAT, OUT OF THIS PROJECT.

SO DO I UNDERSTAND THE MAYOR PRO TEM WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW? IF THERE ARE NO OBJECTION AND DOES THE BASEBALL SHOULD INCLUDE OBVIOUSLY MODEL DIRECTION, BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF THAT, BUT ALSO COUNCIL MEMBER TOW BOWS AMENDMENTS ONE AND TWO, AS WELL AS HER THIRD AMENDMENT, WHICH IS TO, TO TAKE IT TO, UH, UH, 0%, UH, AND MAKE THE CORRESPONDING CHANGES TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN TO ELIMINATE FINANCE PLAN.

THAT'S THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT.

I DIDN'T GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK MY COLLEAGUES WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS ANY OBJECTION TO ADD IN THOSE ITEMS, BUT THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD THE MOTION WAS, UM, YOU MOVED THAT WE TAKE ITEM TWO WITH YOUR DIRECTION.

UM, NOW WITH THE ADDITION OF COUNCIL MEMBER TEBOW'S DIRECTION AND THEN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEMS THREE AND FOUR, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE MOTION CORRECTLY? UM, I BELIEVE, I THINK IT'S TURBOS HAS TO AMEND AS THREE AMENDMENTS CORRECTION.

I MIGHT HAVE WANTED IT TO SHE'S HANDED OUT THE AMENDMENT THREE IS TO GO TO 0% TO MAKE A CORRESPONDING CHANGES IN THE FINANCE PLAN AT THE PRELIMINARY PLAN.

THAT'S WHAT I HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR, AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS.

I WANTED TO MOVE MY DIRECTION THAT I POSTED ON THE MESSAGE BOARD.

AND OBVIOUSLY THIS WOULD BE SLIGHTLY MODIFIED GIVEN THE REST OF THE DIRECTION, UM, IN TERMS OF, BUT I DID LEAVE THE TIMING OPEN, BUT I THINK THESE ELEMENTS ARE STILL IMPORTANT.

UM, SHOULD WE BE TRUE WANTING TO MOVE FORWARD? AND I KNEW THAT I WOULD WANT TO UNDERSTAND THEM, UM, YOU KNOW, AT THE NEXT STAGE.

UM, SO THE DIRECTION IS, UM, THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO PROVIDE COUNCIL WITH CLEARLY DEFINED ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY STAFF.

AND IT SHOULD BE, I GUESS, THE AEDC WITH RESPECT TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TOURS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY ASSOCIATED RELATED FINANCING OR REGULATORY TOOLS THAT NEED TO BE IDENTIFIED TO FULFILL THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT VISION IN RELATION TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING PARKS, GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, AND FINANCING.

UM, THE COUNCIL RECOGNIZES THAT THE VALUE OF THE POTENTIAL SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT TOURIST GOES BEYOND THE FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND INCLUDES IMPROVED GOVERNANCE, MONITORING AND OVERSIGHT STRUCTURES AND MECHANISMS TO ACHIEVE THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT VISION.

ACCORDINGLY THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO OUTLINE A TIMELINE AND PROCESS FOR BUILDING ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAN TO CREATE THE COMPREHENSIVE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE TOUR'S REQUIRED BY STATUTE.

THE PROCESS SHOULD INCLUDE REGULAR OPPORTUNITIES FOR COUNCIL BRIEFINGS INPUT FOR THE PUBLIC, AS WELL AS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ACTORS COMMITTED TO ACHIEVE THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT VISION AND SHOULD INVOLVE INTERDISCIPLINARY PARTICIPATION OF THE CITY DEPARTMENTS AND THE ADC.

SO I PUT FORWARD THAT DIRECTION FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION AND THEN AFTER WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF THAT, I'VE GOT SOME OTHER MAYOR ADLER.

SO, UM, THE MOTION, UH, BY, UH, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER IS SECONDED BY MAYOR ADLER, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, UM, MR. VAN NINO.

SO STAFF WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE CLARITY ABOUT THE FEBRUARY WORK SESSION.

I BELIEVE THE WAY IT'S POSTED ON THE MAYOR'S MOTION SHEET IS TO SIMPLY SCHEDULE A WORK SESSION BEFORE THE END OF FEBRUARY TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION ON ALL THESE ITEMS AND MOVE US TOWARDS A

[01:05:01]

FINAL FINANCING PLAN.

SOMEWHERE IN THIS CONVERSATION, I THINK WAS ALSO DISCUSSED ABOUT HAVING ACTION AT THAT FEBRUARY WORK SESSION.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE CLARITY IS, IS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR US TO COME BACK WITH IN FEBRUARY IS SIMPLY A WORK SESSION ON THESE TOPICS.

ARE THERE SPECIFIC ACTIONS THAT COUNCIL ALSO WOULD LIKE TO TAKE AT THAT WORK SESSION? MAY RATHER, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE RIGHT NOW SCHEDULE THE WORK SESSION, AGGREGATE PC BY SEXISM.

THEY TAKE WHERE THEY'D WANT TO WORK SESSION.

AND I THINK OBVIOUSLY AS SOON AS WE THINK WE'RE READY, WE CAN SET IT FOR ACTION.

UH, AT COUNCIL MEETING AND PUBLIC CON COMBAT, UH, AT A, AT A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING THE COUNSELOR TOBO I HAD JUMPED THE SETTING OF THE WORK SESSION IN FEBRUARY THINKING THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER WE NEEDED WORK, WORK SESSIONS, OR WHETHER WE WERE READY TO, TO BRING IT TO THE COUNCIL FOR A VOTE.

BUT I JOINED YOU AND GETTING THIS QUESTION ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, AND THE ISSUES ARE RESOLVED AS EARLY AS WE CAN NEXT YEAR COUNCIL MEMBER TOVA.

SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE SET AT 4, 2, 3, AND THAT WAY WE HAVE AN OPTION OF BRINGING IT BACK ON TO 17 AND, UH, PERHAPS LEILA CAN REMIND US WHAT THE LEAD TIME IS FOR SETTING IT FOR NOTICE, IF WE'RE GOING TO NOTICE, NEED TO NOTICE IT AGAIN FOR ANY CHANGES TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, IS THAT A MONTH PROCESS? IS THAT A COUPLE OF WEEKS? WHAT'S THE, WHAT TIMEFRAME SHOULD WE GIVE STAFF? I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT WHEN WE'RE READY TO MAKE THOSE AMENDMENTS, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO IS AT THE FIRST AVAILABLE CHANCE.

SURE.

THAT COUNCIL HAVE HEARD THE, THE NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO BE IN THE NEWSPAPER FOR SEVEN DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING.

HOWEVER, IT DOES TAKE SOME TIME TO GET THAT NOTICE INTO THE NEWSPAPER.

SO GIVING STAFF AT LEAST A COUPLE OF WEEKS WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.

I'M SORRY, FEBRUARY 15TH.

THERE WAS A SIREN GOING BY, BUT I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY A COUPLE OF WEEKS, SO PERHAPS ON TWO, THREE, WE CAN DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THREE, TWO TO COME BACK FOR ACTION.

ON THREE, TWO AT THE COUNCIL MEETING, I'M SORRY, I'M SAYING TWO, THREE, BUT IT'S REALLY, THE WORK SESSION WOULD BE ON TWO, ONE ON FEBRUARY.

ONE WOULD BE OUR WORK SESSION.

AND THEN AT THAT POINT WE COULD DECIDE WHETHER WE WANTED TO SCHEDULE ANOTHER WORK SESSION ON FEBRUARY 17TH.

UM, WITH ACTION POTENTIALLY ON MARCH 2ND.

THANK YOU FOR THAT FRAMEWORK.

UM, I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR OUR CITY STAFF.

UH, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT, THE DRAFT INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE AUSTIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IS A PART OF WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY, OR WAS THAT JUST BACKUP INFORMATION.

THIS RELATES TO THE DIRECTION THAT'S ON THE TABLE FOR A VOTE THAT WAS SIMPLY BACKUP INFORMATION.

UM, IT'S, THERE'S NO ACTION REQUIRED ON THAT AT THIS POINT.

SO THAT DOESN'T BECOME AN ATTACHMENT THAT DOESN'T BECOME AN EXHIBIT IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAN THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY.

NO.

UM, THANK YOU.

WELL, I'M CERTAINLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE DIRECTION AND I THOUGHT THE INTER LOCAL, THE DRAFT INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE AEDC IS MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I DO THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE, UM, THE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION THAT YOU'VE DIRECTED WITH YOUR, WITH YOUR LANGUAGE COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER.

UM, WE DON'T NEED TO, I KNOW WE HAVE A SHORT TIMEFRAME HERE TODAY.

I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WELL, THE COMMENT, THE CONVERSATION ABOUT OUR BEING OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY FOR TIPS FOR TERESA'S.

SO IF IT'S A MATTER OF SETTING OF INCOME LEVEL, THAT WOULD SEEM TO BE IN THE FUTURE, BUT WHAT, WHAT IS THE ELEMENT? THE ELEMENT THAT WE ARE OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH WITH REGARD TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I'M LOOKING OVER THE STAFF MEMO FROM LAST DECEMBER AND JUST NOT UNDERSTANDING BASED ON THE INFORMATION IN THERE, WHY ADDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHY WE WOULD BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE ACTUALLY.

UM, SO WE SKIPPED OVER COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS A FEW COMMENTS AGO.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE COUNCIL MEMBER ELYSSA.

WE'LL LET YOU GO AHEAD AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT ADDITIONAL LENS QUESTION.

COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER TOBA? UM, SO IT COMES ON BOARD OF OUR, I THINK YOUR QUESTION WAS DIRECTED AT ME.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

I WAS FOLLOWING THE CONVERSATION AS WELL.

SO I THINK IT KIND OF NATURALLY, UM, WORKED IN THAT WAY INTO WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER TOBO WAS TALKING ABOUT.

BUT I DID JUST WANT TO MENTION, UM, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS MOVING FORWARD TODAY, JUST GIVEN THE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS AND DIRECTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THIS.

WE CERTAINLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC HAS MORE TIME TO PROVIDE INPUT AND TO CLUE US IN ON SOME OF THEIR THOUGHTS ABOUT THIS, THIS, UM, THIS PLAN PRELIMINARY PLAN AND THE FINAL PLAN MOVING FORWARD.

BUT SINCE WE ARE LEAVING THE DOOR OPEN TO HAVING THESE DISCUSSION QUESTIONS, UM, IN, IN EARLY NEXT YEAR, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF US GETTING THIS STARTED RIGHT NOW AND THEN, UM, MAKING ANY ADJUSTMENTS, SHOULD WE CHOOSE TO DO THOSE IN THE FUTURE

[01:10:05]

UM, SO THE TOURIST POLICY SAYS ANY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT THAT IS PART OF A TIF PROJECT PLAN MUST PROVIDE FOR AT LEAST 20% OF THE UNITS TO BE AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS EARNING AT OR BELOW 60% OF MEDIAN, FAMILY INCOME FOR RENTAL HOUSING AND 80% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME FOR OWNERSHIP HOUSING FOR AT LEAST THE DURATION OF THE TIF PROJECT PLAN.

UM, SO THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE FUNDING FOR IT HAS TO COME OUT OF THE TIF, BUT IT DOES MEAN THAT HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE IN THE TIF ARE SUPPOSED TO ACHIEVE THE 20%, WHICH IS IN LINE WITH THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT VISION PLAN, BUT WAS NOT IN LINE WITH THE PROPOSAL THAT CAME FORWARD TO US.

AND SO I WAS NOT SAYING THAT PUTTING YOURS VIOLATED THAT, I THINK PUTTING YOUR AMENDMENT IN ALLOWS US TO GET CLOSER TO THAT.

AND I WAS EXPRESSING THAT I WAS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH US NOT MEETING THE POLICY AS WE HAD LAID OUT.

THANKS FOR THAT.

UM, THANKS FOR THAT EXPLORATION.

I MEAN, EXPLANATION, I THINK THE 20% AS IT'S CURRENTLY IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL VISION PLAN IS 20% OF THE HOUSING TOTAL, BUT I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THAT IS, UH, THAT IS, UH, THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING OF ALL HOUSING.

WELL, I DON'T KNOW.

I MEAN, IT'S, I THINK THAT'S A CONVERSATION WE CAN HAVE IN FEBRUARY, WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THAT OF 20% OF THE HOUSING ACROSS THE SOUTH CENTRAL AREA AND PROJECTS, UM, IS AFFORDABLE AT THAT LEVEL THEN THAN IT WOULD SEEM TO ME TO BE IN COMPLIANCE.

I THINK THERE'S A WAY THAT IT CAN BE, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE IN THE FINAL PLAN APPROPRIATELY.

AND THERE'S AMBIGUITY AS TO WHETHER IT HAS TO BE PAID FOR OUT OF THE TIFF.

THERE'S AMBIGUITY ABOUT WHETHER IT IS ONE EVERY, EVERY RESIDENTIAL POWER OR IF IT'S ACROSS, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO GET CLARIFIED.

AND THE INITIAL PLAN HAD NOTHING YEAH.

ABOUT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO IT WAS CLEARLY NOT MEETING IT.

AND I THINK THAT THE DOCUMENT THEY GAVE US, YOU KNOW, INDICATED THAT AS WELL.

OKAY, GOOD.

PLAN THAT WE HAVE ALL OF THAT INPUT, IF THAT IS THE DIRECTION THAT WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AND ESTABLISHING THIS.

THANKS FOR THE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION.

I LOOK FORWARD TO MAKING SURE THAT WE NAIL THAT DOWN IN FEBRUARY.

UM, I DID WANT TO JUST QUICKLY ADDRESS, SO YOU, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT A STEP.

I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT TO ESTABLISH IT TODAY AND GET THAT BASELINE.

I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE HAD WITH OUR PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE LEGIT REALLY LEGITIMATE CONCERNS THAT WE NEED TO RESOLVE.

I CERTAINLY AM NOT GOING TO SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF, OF A PERCENT RATE OF CONTRIBUTION WITHOUT REALLY WELL UNDERSTANDING HOW THOSE PUBLIC BENEFITS ARE GOING TO ACCRUE TO THIS, TO THIS VISION PLAN AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO ACHIEVE THOSE FOR ME.

I ALSO WANT TO UNDERSTAND TO WHAT EXTENT THE REGULATING PLAN IS REALLY CRITICAL TO MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN ESTABLISH THOSE COMMUNITY BENEFITS, THOSE OPEN SPACES, THE ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC, THE STREET VIEW.

SO I WOULD JUST REMIND STAFF THAT THE OTHER PART OF MY RESOLUTION DID TALK ABOUT LAYING OUT A TIMELINE, A REAL CONCRETE TIMELINE FOR THAT REGULATING PLAN.

AND SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET AN UPDATE ABOUT THAT WELL BEFORE FEBRUARY, SO THAT WE CAN REALLY GO INTO THAT CONVERSATION, THAT WORK SESSION, UNDERSTANDING HOW THOSE TWO ELEMENTS GO TOGETHER.

COUNCIL MEMBER KELLY, YOU ASKED EARLIER ABOUT PUBLIC INPUT.

AND I THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT CONVERSATION IN SOME WAYS THIS CONVERSATION HAS GONE ON SO LONG THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, I THINK LOST TRACK OF SOME OF THOSE ELEMENTS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, BUT I DO WANT TO JUST CALL MY COLLEAGUES ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT WE DO HAVE A WATERFRONT, UM, UH, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD THAT HAS BEEN FOLLOWING THIS ISSUE NOW FOR GOSH, I DON'T KNOW, YEARS, UM, POSSIBLY SINCE 2016, I HAD ESTABLISHED THAT BE A RESOLUTION.

AND I THINK IT WAS BACK IN 2016.

AND THAT INCLUDES DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES FROM JUST THE AREAS YOU MENTIONED, YOU WANTED TO KNOW WHAT KIND OF PUBLIC INPUT THERE IS IN TERMS OF NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS OF AREAS SURROUNDING THERE.

UM, AND THE ADVISORY BOARD DOES INCLUDE REPRESENT A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE BOLDEN CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AS WELL AS, UM, THE SOUTH CENTRAL SOUTH RIVER CITY CITIZENS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AS WELL.

IN ADDITION TO SOMEBODY FROM THE TRAILS FOUNDATION PLANNING COMMISSION AND SOME OTHER APPOINTED POSITIONS OF FOLKS WHO SERVE ON OTHER BOARDS, BUT IT DOES INCLUDE VERY INTENTIONALLY THE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT, UM, TO PROVIDE SOME OF THAT FEEDBACK.

BUT I AGREE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE'RE, AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH REALLY ESTABLISHING A FINAL PRELIMINARY PLAN, UM, OR AN AMENDED PRELIMINARY

[01:15:01]

SO ALL OF THOSE QUESTIONS FOR ME ARE STILL ON THE TABLE, WHETHER THIS IS THE MECHANISM WE WANT TO USE TO ACHIEVE THOSE PUBLIC BENEFITS.

AND IF SO, WHAT THAT LEVEL OF CONTRIBUTION SHOULD BE OF OUR, OF OUR, UM, TAX DOLLARS AND WHAT ARE THOSE, WHAT ARE GOING TO BE THE PRIORITY ELEMENTS IN THAT, IN THAT PROJECT PLAN, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR.

SO I'M GOING TO ASSUME THAT MY DIRECTION, THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS TO MY DIRECTION, UM, THAT I HEARD.

UM, SO I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER TOVO THAT TO SOME DEGREE, MY DIRECTION ADDRESSES THE NEED TO HAVE THE REGULATING PLAN BECAUSE IT'S ONE OF THOSE ASSOCIATED REGULATORY TOOLS THAT NEEDS TO BE IN PLACE FOR THE SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TERRORS.

UM, AND I WANT TO UNDERSCORE, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT IF WE WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, UM, MORE FULLY WITH THIS, UM, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THE INTERDISCIPLINARY WORKINGS OF THE DEPARTMENTS AND THE EDC, UM, COMING TOGETHER, UM, BECAUSE IT'S ULTIMATELY THAT COMBINATION AND WHERE WE GO FORWARD THAT IS PROVIDING THE GOVERNANCE ELEMENTS OF THE TERMS, WHICH WOULD IN MY VIEW, INCLUDE THE REGULATING PLAN, ET CETERA, THAT IS GOING TO ALLOW US TO CAPTURE THE PUBLIC BENEFITS ABOVE AND BEYOND JUST THE FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION.

THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE CORRALLING 30, SOME DIFFERENT PROPERTIES, UM, ET CETERA.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS, BUT THE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE, UM, THE ABILITY FOR ADC TO PLAY, THE ROLE THAT WE, UM, YOU KNOW, LAUNCHED THEM FOR, I THINK IS ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT.

UM, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS TODAY, BUT I WANNA, UM, WANT TO JUST FORESHADOW A COUPLE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE.

ONE IS IF WE SET THIS AT 0%, THERE'S NO FUNDING FOR THE ADC TO DO ITS WORK, TO DO THE ANALYSIS THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.

UM, NOW THAT MAY GET FIXED BY FEBRUARY MARCH.

AND SO I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S A, A MAJOR PROBLEM AS LONG AS WE WERE ADDRESSING THAT EARLIER IN THE NEW YEAR, BUT I JUST WANT TO FLAG THAT THAT IS WE SET IT AT 0%.

THERE'S NO FUNDING FINDING MECHANISM FOR THAT.

NOW WE CAN ALWAYS TAKE THAT OUT OF GENERAL FUND.

IT'S STILL OUR MONEY.

IT'S NOT LIKE THE MONEY DISAPPEARS.

UM, BUT I JUST WANT TO FLAG THAT, UM, AS AN ISSUE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO ADDRESS AND PERHAPS NEGOTIATE WITH ADC IN TERMS OF THEIR WORK.

UM, THE OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT I AM STILL REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE SNOOPY PUD BEING IN THERE WITH A BASELINE OF 2021, AS OPPOSED TO 2022.

THAT'S A SHIFT FROM 12 MILLION UP TO, I DON'T KNOW, A COUPLE OF HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS.

UM, AND I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE, BUT FOR ANALYSIS FOR THAT, FOR THAT SITUATION, I AM COMFORTABLE THAT THERE WILL BE SOME INCREMENT ALL INCREASE TO THAT PROPERTY VALUE FROM 22 ON IF WE ESTABLISH THE TERMS. UM, BUT I'M NOT REALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT BASELINE.

UM, THAT IS STILL SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DETERMINE AND WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT LEGALLY, UM, WHETHER THAT IS APPROPRIATE AS PART OF OUR LARGER CONVERSATIONS.

UM, AS I SEE AND HEARING, AND I'M GOING TO TAKE MY COLLEAGUES AT THEIR WORD IF WE ARE SETTING THIS UP SO THAT WE'RE LEAVING OUR OPTIONS OPEN, I'M OKAY WITH LEAVING THE OPTION OPEN, BUT I'M NOT REALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT AS THE WAY FORWARD.

AND I THINK THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE RESOLVED.

THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO SIGNAL IS THAT, UM, GOING DOWN TO ZERO IN MY VIEW DOES NOT GIVE US LICENSE TO GO ABOVE 46%, UNLESS WE CAN ESTABLISH THAT THERE'S A SLIGHTLY HIGHER NUMBER.

THAT IS THE, BUT FOR, OR I DON'T KNOW WHICH DIRECTION, BUT UNLESS WE CAN, CAN REALLY ESTABLISH THE, BUT FOR ANALYSIS TO GO WITH THAT.

UM, I THINK IT'S CLEAR AS HAS BEEN STATED THAT THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN SOME DEVELOPMENT, UM, IN THIS AREA AND WE REALLY HAVE TO BE CAPTURING THAT, BUT FOR, AND I THINK WE GET ON A SLIPPERY SLOPE WITH THESE, AND TERS UNDER A SITUATION OF REVENUE CAPS.

UM, IF WE'RE NOT REALLY, REALLY FOCUSED IN ON THAT, BUT FOR ANALYSIS IN THE CLEAREST WAY POSSIBLE.

UM, SO I WANTED TO JUST FLAG THOSE TWO ISSUES FOR MY COLLEAGUES.

UM, MOVING FORWARD THAT THOSE REMAIN OPEN QUESTIONS FOR ME, UM, AS WE, AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND JUST, YOU KNOW, TO ALSO NOTICE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE PAYING THE ADC, UM, TO DO THE WORK THAT WE'RE ASKING THEM TO DO.

CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THREE AND FOUR EXCEPT DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER TOVA THAT WAS ITEMS TWO, THREE, AND THEN DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR.

SO TO YOUR POINT, IT SOUNDED AS THOUGH WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO INCLUDING YOUR DIRECTION.

SO I BELIEVE WHERE WE'RE AT IS MAYOR ADLER'S MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD.

ITEM NUMBER TWO,

[01:20:01]

AM I CORRECT IN THAT THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS OKAY.

WITH THAT? I THINK WE MIGHT ACTUALLY BE READY TO VOTE.

UM, SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MAYOR'S DIRECTION, UM, INCLUDING COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNCIL MEMBER, TEBOW'S CONTRIBUTION AND COUNCIL MEMBER ALTERS CONTRIBUTION, UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE UNANIMOUS VIRTUAL OR UNANIMOUS ON THE DICE.

SO, UM, THE VOTE IS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 6, 7, 8, 9 OF US.

UM, THAT'S COUNCIL MEMBERS, CATHAR AND POOL.