Economic Development Committee, chaired by Mayor Pro Tem Martha Castax Tatum.

Her vice chair is Councilmember Fred Flickinger is he is here, as is my Vice Chair, Mario Castillo.

We're also joined by Councilmember Twila Carter, Vice Mayor Pro Tem Amy Peck, staff from Mayor Pro Tem's office, Councilmember Julian Ramirez, staff from District G, Mary Nana Huffman, and Councilmember Abby Kamen.

We also have Letitia Plummer staff on virtually and we all have Councilmember Tiffany Thomas who in the chamber as well.

So we have a very full agenda today.

I am going to let the public speakers for each item come up after the item instead of waiting until the whole end of the meeting.

So we'll start with the monthly financial report.

So we'll be joined by Melissa Dubowski, Director of the Finance Department and Will Jones, Deputy City Controller.

Good morning.

You can hear me now, right?

Good morning.

Good morning, Madam Chair, Council members and staff.

I'm here today to present the monthly financial report for the period ending October 31st, 2025.

And the general fund, the controller's office is projecting an ending fund balance of $336.8 million or 13.2 percent of expenditures less debt service and pay as you go for FY26.

This is $17.5 million lower than the projection of the Finance Department.

The difference is due to a lower revenue projection than the Finance Department.

Based on our current projections, the fund balance will be approximately $145.8 million above the city's target of holding, 7.5 percent of total expenditures excluding debt service and pay as you go in reserve.

The FY26 beginning fund balance is $67.4 million higher than the FY25 ending uh ending fund balance reported in the June 30 monthly financial report.

The increase is due to year-end adjustments to revenues and expenditures that will not be final until the FY25 annual comprehensive financial report is published.

Intergovernmental increase by $4.9 million due to higher than anticipated charity care program reimbursements.

We have increased our expenditure projection by $4.2 million from the September report with uh significant changes as follows.

An increase of $3.3 million in City Council due to prior year rollover allocation, an increase of 0.6 million in bearers departments uh to uh due to prior year unspent city council funds.

We are projecting no changes in our enterprise funds from last month uh for the commercial paper and bonds.

The city's practice has been to maintain no more than 20 percent of the total outstanding debt for each type of debt in a variable rate structure, which is in line with the rating agencies of 25 percent.

From time to from time to time, the city's enterprise credits have exceeded this threshold on an interim basis as they have an undertaken large capital improvement projects or major expansions.

And thank you very much.

That concludes my report.

Thank you, Director.

Good morning.

This is the four plus eight financial report for the period ending October 31st, 2025.

Fiscal year 26 projections are based on four months of actual results and eight months of projections.

The variance from the prior month projection is primarily due to a $52.6 million decrease in property tax to reflect the tax rate that was adopted earlier this year.

We're also projecting a $4.9 million increase in intergovernmental due to higher than anticipated charity care program reimbursement, as well as a $2 million increase in miscellaneous and other revenue due to higher than anticipated reimbursement from Center Point.

For sales tax, we're not making any changes this month.

But just to give you an update, the sales tax receipts for the month of September were $78.1 million, which is about $1.2 percent higher than the same period last year.

To meet the current estimate of $902 million, the remaining periods need to come in 2.6 percent below the prior year.

On the expenditure side, our projection is six million higher than the adopted budget and 4 million higher than the prior month, primarily due to the following.

The $3.3 million increase in City Council to reflect prior year underutilization of council district service funds that will be rolled over, as well as $555,000 increase in various department for various unspent City Council funds from the prior year, as well as a $250,000 increase for the finance department's budget estimate for comprehensive cost of service fee study.

With those changes, we're currently projecting the ending fund balance to be $354 million, which is about $19 million lower than the prior month and represents 13.9 percent of expenditures, not including debt service and pay as you go.

The total fund balance is $163 million above the target of holding 7.5 percent.

We're not projecting any forecast changes to the enterprise special revenue or other funds for this month.

That concludes my report.

Thank you.

So the biggest change there is you you've now incorporated the tax rate, which we had to lower by $52.6 million.

I'll repeat that $52.6 million lower because we kept the tax rate flat.

On the um on the council district service funds, since that, you know, I don't get them, so I know that there's rollovers because of projects.

So that's all that is, right?

It's just it's just projects that are ongoing that has have to be spent, correct?

Correct.

Yeah, and it's pretty standard every year, whatever is unspent for April forward.

Right.

And talk to me a little bit about the cost of fee service.

Sure.

So we have a citywide um citywide fee schedule that's on the city's website.

And as you know, there's several hundred um fees on the citywide fee schedule.

Um we haven't done a comprehensive citywide um fee study review since I want to say it was about 2015 or 2016, over 10 years.

Um so um because of limit and limited staffing, we're going to be looking for a third party to um help us engage to review all those hundreds of fees, cost of service study.

But this is kind of an ongoing thing that we consistently do over there.

There's like they take a certain number of fees each year and analyze those and I know that some fees haven't been changed since like 1994 and stuff.

So many haven't been changed in a while.

We do have a financial policy that says we're supposed to review them on a rotating basis, but this will help us get caught up with the ones that we haven't um been able to keep up with over the last couple of years.

Thank you.

Councilmember Kamen.

Thank you.

Uh welcome back, Director.

It's good to have you.

Um Because I have you in the seat and we're taking up amendments uh following this.

Uh, is there any update on the status of when we will get a proposal for um reviewing and amending the financial policies of the city?

That's supposed to be done every two years, and we're right.

We're in the window for this fiscal year needs to be looked at.

I know we made a presentation earlier this year in September.

Right.

And there were a few there were a few sections we were still looking at to get the final updates in.

So I'm hoping in the next month or so.

Okay.

Yeah.

Are we still within the compliance window for those updates?

Because again, by ordinance, it requires every two years that they be reviewed.

Right.

So the way we usually look at it is it's within the every two years, but within the since when the same fiscal year.

Um that's what we have looked at it in the past.

Like, for example, I think the time before we did them in August when we brought them back, it was two years later, but in November, so it was two years later, but still the same fiscal year.

So I would say, so we're still in the window of compliance.

Yes.

And is there any update?

I know I keep harping on it about changing when our fiscal year actually starts, because again, we are ha we're doing it in the summer.

We don't have actuals, we have projections and pretty much have other entities do it based on the actual, so we don't have to come back and rework those numbers.

There's nothing nothing additional at this point.

We're not we're not recommending to change at this point, but I mean it's something that we have talked about and continue to talk about.

Okay.

Final question: what would it take?

Because we could just by ordinance change the fiscal year, but obviously there's systems needs, there's timing, there's calendaring.

What would departments need in order to do this so that we can have a much more accurate uh budget that is taken up by this body?

I know that the county changed their fiscal year a couple years ago.

When they did that, they had uh something they called a short fiscal year.

Um I think they, when they adopted their budget, if I can remember correctly, they basically had a short fiscal year budget, and then they had another full fiscal year.

So they would have to be an interim year while a transition was made.

We would have to certainly make changes to our system of record SAP.

In addition, I know that would affect financial reporting.

I mean, it would be a lot of technological changes as well as you know, business business process changes as well.

Thank you very much.

Councilmember Flickenter.

Thank you, Chair.

And thank you, Director.

The $2 million increase from reimbursement or center point.

Can you give me a little more background on that?

Sure.

So it's my understanding that we have uh rate cases ongoing with Center Point, and maybe Deputy Controller Jones remembers more about this than I do.

Um but when we go through the rate cases with Center Point, Center Point reimburses us the cost for our legal fees.

Um so this $2 million is center point reimbursing us for the legal fees that we accrued related to the rate case.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um the other one, we have talked about fees that haven't changed for decades.

Is there a CPI component in those fees or are they exactly the same dollar amount that they were 20 years ago?

Many of the fees increase by CPI.

Some fees are set by the State, and we can't increase those ones by CPI.

Um but our fees also go through what we call a cost of service study, so that we set our fees based on the cost that it um that we incur to provide a service.

Um so even though some um some fees may be increasing by the CPI, the cost of service of performing those services may have changed over time.

So it doesn't necessarily reflect it, although you would think it would be somewhat somewhat, yes.

Thank you.

Yeah, it's a mixed bag on that.

Um Councilmember Ramirez.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you both for the presentations.

And you both touch on um increase in expenditure due to rollovers from the uh district councilmember service funds, and you both have it identified as $3.3 million.

Just uh clarification, because I at large just don't get that, obviously.

Um so does the $3.3 million, and I understand it is broken down into various various projects, have to be identified to particular projects in order to get rolled over?

Yes.

And um down below that there is an additional bullet point of uh 0.6 million uh will in in your report.

I think it is 555,000 in your report, various departments to reflect unspent City Council funds.

Are those district service funds as well or funds that have been transferred for other purposes to the various departments for the council identified they want to do something within the department?

All right.

And so this bumps up expenditures for for this current fiscal year and reduces, I guess, expenditures for the last fiscal year by those ones.

So the way it works is last year it just rolled to the fund balance.

And so this year we are just pulling it from the fund balance.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Castillo.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you both for the presentation.

On the expenditure detail with the increase for GSD and ARA security services, SARK and libraries, um were there just a high number of incidents that weren't anticipated that required the additional 1.5 million.

Yes.

So um I guess I can speak particularly to the BARC because that's a new one that I think we typically haven't increased security for BARC in the past, but there was an incident with a member of the public and the city employee.

Um so ARA had requested um you know additional security out there.

So yes, just uh, you know, due to due to some increased um incidents at the facility.

Got it.

Thank you.

Councilmember Kamen.

Thank you.

Um Deputy Director, one question I we were referring, we were talking back about the September meeting.

We talked about financial policies, and you had also given a presentation on financial preparedness for natural disasters, uh, assessing the city's economic vulnerabilities, reviewing the disaster reserve funding policies and options and strategies to make us more financially prepared.

In that you had compared other cities in terms of what they put into their reserves and things of that nature.

Do you recall that?

I do.

And what just generally summarizing, do you believe that Houston should be including more or strengthening our budget stabilization fund?

Yeah, I mean, absolutely.

From that study, we did see that we were behind some of our peers and we were behind kind of the GFOA recommended amounts that we should be putting in reserve.

So yeah, absolutely.

If we have the ability to, we should be putting more.

And with other cities, how frequently are are they, I guess, if they draw down what are their requirements for uh replenishing, so to speak?

Um I think it varies from what I can remember.

I think some cities is like two years.

Uh so they are somewhat similar to us just because of the timing of the you know, getting reimbursed from the Feds.

And so it takes takes some time.

Um I don't recall all of the cities, but uh there were definitely some that were kind of in line with our strategy.

But those cities have a lot more in their reserves, correct?

Yeah.

So they can fall back on more if needed.

Yeah, proportionally they do.

Thank you.

What is the GFOA recommended rainy day fund?

Um if you would like me to say it.

You don't want to interrupt.

Um Best Practice recommends at least 16.7 percent or more two months fund balance reserve levels.

Um we require currently we require roughly half the minimum recommendation.

Um our reserve depth is insufficient compared to peers and GFOA standards, and I am trying to find the other standards, but basically we are far below the requirement.

And that's the in the budget stabilization, but not the overall um reserves.

Correct.

Okay.

Yeah, and we were looking at our minimum and what we put in the reserve, which was still below seven and a half percent plus.

I remember the seven and a half percent being lower.

Right.

And then a subset of that is also the budget stabilization fund is also lower.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

I don't see any other council members in the queue, so we will move along unless we have any public speakers about the monthly financial report.

One speaker, Doug, come on up.

Doug Smith.

Representing the West Side, coming up.

Two minutes, Doug.

I'll make this quick because I don't have that much to talk about.

Um question on the $52 million of uh property taxes that we are not going to be receiving.

Excuse me.

Uh was that because of your budget amendment that didn't get passed, or is this actually because valuations are down?

This is this is would have been a year when we could have, by both the local imposed uh revenue cap and the state cap, we could have raised the taxes 1.4 cents, Melissa?

One point about 1.4 cents, which would have brought in an additional 52.6 million.

So because we kept the tax rate flat, valuations were such that this would have been one of the years when we could have raised it.

We kept the val we kept the uh tax rate flat, so we are basically I mean the residents are keeping that $52.6 million.

I don't want everybody to say they are not, but but the city is not getting that money.

Okay.

And it was So we had to re we had to adjust our budget.

It was a budget was budgeted in the budget we passed in June, that $53 million was budgeted in.

So that's all I was concerned about.

Okay, fine.

On page uh what is it?

Page nine.

This is something I brought up before, and I can't remember the answer to it if there is a quick answer.

And that is under DDSRF, the two accounts, there is projected to be a half billion dollars at the end of the year.

And as I have said before, with everything that needs to be done uh related to DDSRF, why is there such a large balance?

And I think we've I I can't remember the answer.

And I just I I see it every month, and it really and Vice Mayor Pro Tem uh Peck has been on that um from the jump, and we had a presentation, I want to say two or three months ago that really went into more depth about that very thing.

So I am happy to send you that link, and it's there's a more in-depth discussion about the fund balance in the DDSRF.

Okay, I missed that.

And then finally on page 13, the uh voter authorized obligations.

This is just an informational question for me.

Uh there's a category called public safety, and there's either there's around $700 million of issued or uh approved uh debt for that $700 million.

What is public safety?

What what does that refer to?

In the those voter authorized bonds, it's usually the uh buildings and and capital expenditures.

Uh yeah.

Okay.

I think it will police and fire.

So that's well, oh no, no, it is.

I mean it is, but having to do with public safety.

Um Director, is that correct?

I mean, with the voter authorized bonds are for basically vertical construction and improvements for the public safety departments.

That's all.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you very much, Doug.

And next we will move on to upcoming financial transactions.

And this discussion will include a um what is a rather large uh important financing uh discussion for the GRB expansion.

So Melissa Dubowski.

Yes, thank you.

Okay, so thank you for um starting that off, Chair.

Um I did, you know, typically when I come up here and talk about upcoming financial transactions or fairly vanilla, refunding for savings, you know, nothing too out of the ordinary.

Um the transaction we're going to talk about today after we talk about the um disclosure policies is definitely not vanilla.

It's transformational, right?

It's a transformational project for the city, and so the financing um is complex.

The team really had to put their thinking caps on, real group effort between our outside financial advisors, Houston First, um, City Finance Department, City Controller's Office, um, and then we have a host of external consultants, the underwriting team.

So it is going to be a little bit more of a complex presentation than I usually make, um, but um I think it will be a good robust conversation.

So thank you for leading us off, Chair.

Um so before we get to that, we're gonna talk about the financial disclosure policies, which are part of our city's financial policies, um, stating that we need to provide a written disclosure policy that needs to be updated periodically.

So this is in our financial policies section K, which says that at least every two years the finance working group shall develop and update a written disclosure policy consistent with Federal Securities Law and the City's continuing disclosure undertakings with respect to the city's outstanding debt.

Um on the next slide, we do have a financial disclosure policy that's been in place for some time.

The finance working group meets um every two weeks on Monday and talks about all of our upcoming transactions and also discusses um policies that pertain to debt financing for the city.

Um on slide four, you see a little bit more about um about the policies.

Uh we need to ensure that our financial disclosures are fair and accurate and comply with all laws.

Uh we need to satisfy in a timely manner all of our contractual obligations pertaining to disclosure undertakings related to debt.

And we also want to promote promote best practices related to financial disclosures.

Um we have uh a document that the finance working group, um it's kind of an internal policy uh that we look at and we review.

Um it lays out the roles and responsibilities of everything that needs to be done and who needs to complete all those.

So on slide five.

All these procedures that are in our policy uh pertain to all of our debt offerings.

Um that covers all the credits for the city.

So we have the general obligation credit, the airport combined utility system, and the CNE convention entertainment credit.

Um the policies lay out procedures for uh reviewing and updating any of our disclosures prior to filing with our uh regulating governing body, which is we call it Emma, the electronic municipal market access website.

Um we prepare our offering documents and uh make filings on Emma and um Mr.

Vernon Lewis in the controller's office is responsible for making those filings on behalf of the city.

Uh so we work very collaboratively with the controller's office on all those filings.

Um our policies are a living document as regulations change regularly, we keep an eye.

Um and we do review uh our policies and we've determined that in the last two years there's been no um changes in um federal law or policy that would necessitate us changing our internal policies at this time.

So um that concludes my update on the disclosure policies.

So moving on to slide six, we'll jump into the financing for the Houston First and Convention Entertainment Credit.

So as I mentioned, this has really been a collaborative effort with the finance working group team.

There are several different several different things we've looked at as part of this process.

Like I mentioned, it's it's very transformational.

Definitely a lot of creative thinking and re-envisioning of how we finance our projects pertaining to the convention entertainment credit went into where we are today.

We know we have financing challenges, right?

We have the revenue that is going to be and has been coming into Houston First pertaining to the state law change.

Um we call them PFC revenues, but this is the state incremental hot uh following the legislative bill that was passed, not this last session, but the session before.

But we know that the timing of that revenue, since it's incremental, we have to wait for the growth to come.

Um and while we have received, I think around $4 million this fiscal year, that amount is going to continue to grow over time.

Um the timing of that revenue as it comes in at this point in time today is not sufficient to pay what the debt service would be on a billion dollar expansion of the GRB.

So we can't just look at only that revenue, although it will be a source and be used to help finance the project.

We have to look holistically at the revenues of Houston First to put together a financing plan in place that meets the immediate needs for the expansion of the GRB.

In terms of the financing tools, we've looked at the master bond ordinance for the convention entertainment credit, and um really are going to be opening up and modernizing that ordinance, which will come to City Council for approval.

We're gonna be creating multiple lien levels, which we have in place for the airport credit and the combined utility system credit right now.

And we're gonna be sort of using that same strategy and approach to creating multiple lien levels with various additional bonds tests for the convention entertainment credit.

We're gonna be including additional revenues as pledged revenues for um for this project, um, including expansion of the hot pledge as well as pledging additional parking revenue for the bonds.

We're also looking at other bond structuring tools that I'm not gonna get into too much detail on, but looking at capitalized interest and capital appreciation bonds as well.

So all of that together, the overall plan of finance shows basically allows for some of that revenue growth and ramp up of those PFCs over time.

So let me see.

Could you go back to slide seven?

Yes, that's good.

Thank you.

Okay.

So this slide shows you where the uh different uh the PFCs, these that's the state incremental hot in the colored lines, shows a few scenarios of a low medium and high scenario for growth of those PFC revenues.

As you see right now, as I mentioned, we start around, we're around four million dollars a year, and you see that those revenues really ramping up over time in those scenarios.

Do you see the debt service that's needed for the total amount we need for the project of about 1.1 billion uh those bonds are needed today to modernize and expand the GRB.

And you see sort of how those revenues grow over time.

At this point in time, you know, is not sufficient to pay off those bonds.

But we're not just looking at the PFCs.

We also have to look at the other revenues of Houston First, the hotel occupancy tax that we already have, the pledge parking, as well as other uh revenues of Houston First.

So if you go to slide eight, um, as I mentioned, we're gonna be looking to restructure the existing senior lien bonds to create new capacity for um issuance of additional debt.

Um when we when we look at those existing senior lien bonds, the current um additional bonds test for those bonds is a 1.35 times coverage ratio.

We're gonna be also creating two um new lien levels.

Uh the first lien, which is going to be part of the supplemental ordinance, and the coverage ratio there is going to be 1.25 times, and for the second lien ordinance, the coverage ratio will be lower since the bonds get paid on parity in the flow of funds.

That additional bonds test is a little bit lower at 1.1 times.

And this is something that we're going to be having conversations with the rating agencies.

We've already had conversations with the Attorney General's office, because like I mentioned, this is um this is definitely a large change to our master bond ordinance.

Describe what the bond test requirement.

Sure.

So when I talk about the 1.35 times, um that's our current um coverage ratio.

So for that 1.35 times test, it looks at the best 12 months out of the last 18 months of revenues for those hot taxes.

And you have to have, when you calculate the test, it's a ratio of the revenues to the debt service.

So as we look at the different lien levels, when we talk about the 1.25 times and the 1.1 times, it's a a lower percentage of revenue to debt outstanding based on where the bond payments will fall in the flow of funds.

So this is it's definitely standard.

When you look at other credits where we have different lien levels, the farther down you go in the lien level, the lower the additional bonds test is.

So it kind of they're different numbers.

It's it's you know, diff looking at different time periods, but it sort of follows the same pattern or thought process of lean different lien levels that we have currently already in place for the airport and for the combined utility system.

Um as I mentioned, we're going to include pledged revenue enhancements by looking at um pledging additional parking revenue that's not currently pledged, as well as looking at um expanding the pledge of the of the hot from the 5.65% all the way up to the 7%.

Um as I mentioned, we're going to include capital appreciation bonds and capitalized interest.

So these are these are financing tools that we've used in other credits of the city, namely the airport credit, where and in fact we're using them really right now with the airport where you need the debt financing in place to build the project, but the project is not going to be operational for some, you know, in the airport's case, a number of years in this case, more short term.

But until you have revenue coming in associated with your new facility, you don't want to get yourself in a position where you're paying off debt service before the facility is open.

So those types of tools allow us for the facility to open, revenue to come in, and then those debt service payments become due.

It's important to note that the new PFC revenues that are coming in are not going to be pledged to debt service at this point in time for this transaction, because like I mentioned right now, it's only coming in about $4 million a year, projected to grow over time.

And so really pledging those revenues, you don't get a lot of bang for your buck.

Um but as those revenues grow over time, um, you know, if in a future financing phase, that would be something that we want to kind of hold back as um in our reserves in order to pledge uh for a future issuance.

Now it's not to say that we can't use those PFZs to pay debt service.

We certainly will, if needed as those revenues come in.

Um, but it will take time for those revenues to grow.

Are they set aside the $4 million or are we using them for operation?

I mean, uh is it set aside for this purpose or pay requirements?

Okay.

Okay.

So we're just kind of pay-going that money.

Okay, got it.

Got it.

And I would note, and I think that um Mr.

Heckman and and Mr.

Wilson can probably talk more to it.

I know they're up next.

But when the law passed, the law was very clear that as soon as you start receiving those incremental revenues, you need to start spending them on a project.

I think the timeline was within three years or five years, uh within three years.

Um that was part of the legislation that passed, is once that revenue starts flowing, you do need to use it towards this project.

So moving on to slide nine, um, this will give you a snapshot a little bit what I was talking about with the old bond test and the new bonds test.

The blue line and the green line, you see this is the uh projection for the pledged uh hot revenue at 7 percent in the blue line and the pledge at the current uh the current pledge level of 5.65 percent.

And as you can see, those amount of revenues that are projected to come in, and this is in a conservative uh growth case.

The team has looked at several different growth growth cases.

This is the most conservative view that we're looking at right now, um, which is about a uh 2.4 percent growth.

So what you see here is that the amount of pledge projected pledge revenue coming in is more than sufficient to pay what the debt service will be, which is represented by the gray bar.

When you start looking at the additional bonds test, the additional bonds test is at the time you issue the debt, the point in time, like I mentioned with the existing the old bond test, the the purple dashed line, you have to look at the best 12 months out of your most recent 18 months at this point in time.

And when you look and project that forward, you can see that that additional bonds test is not sufficient to meet the coverage ratio once you get out in time.

And so that's where we're looking at the blue dashed line of increasing the pledged revenue so that we can meet those additional bonds tests.

Even though when you look at the growth projection of the actual revenue coming in is much higher over time, but when you issue the debt, you have to look at what is your current best 12 out of 18 months.

So this is kind of a visual representation of the projections that we see based on based on where we see the debt service going and where we see the growth of the actual revenues coming in.

So colleagues, when I was briefed on this, this this basically, and she just said it.

I mean, we we have to pledge it because of the the debt test, the difference in the 5.65 and the seven, but we're not going to use it.

You can see by the chart, we're not gonna we're not gonna have to use it, we just have to pledge it.

Okay, so moving on to slide 10.

Some other considerations.

I mentioned a restructuring of the senior lien existing debt service.

So part of the restructuring of the existing debt service, and there's a graphical format of it on the next slide, but we will be extending the average maturity of the existing debt by about 8.7 years to create the goal is to create an overall, as you saw in the previous side, overall level debt service profile so that we don't have a big spike up in debt service.

So in order to create that level debt service over time, we do need to do some restructuring to move the principal.

There is some disavings associated with that, which is estimated at approximately six million dollars over the life of the bonds.

I already mentioned a couple times, but we're going to be looking at maximizing pledge revenues to create additional bonding capacity, and that will allow us to maintain the ability to pledge the PFC revenue in the future when they've risen to higher levels.

So on slide 11, this is a uh a graphical representation of uh what I talked about with the restructuring in order to unlock this capacity for new debt.

Um, there is going to be a restructuring component to this transaction, which I mentioned will be just savings of about six million dollars.

So on the next slide, um slide 12.

This gives you the overall snapshot of the transaction that's going to be coming to City Council for approval.

The new money piece of the transaction is estimated about uh 1.186 billion dollars for the GRB expansion.

The source of the of the pledged revenue is going to be the hot is what's pledged, and the parking is what what's pledged.

The PFCs are there and available for the project, as we talked about, as uh Mr.

Wilson mentioned, while it's not formally a pledge as part of this transaction.

The refunding component of the transaction, like I mentioned, is about 230 million dollars, uh, which is which is necessary as part of the transaction to get us in the place where we have that level debt service over time.

Based on the current market conditions, we're estimating the true interest cost to be about 5.5% for the transaction.

You can see what I was uh mentioning with the refunding component, the extension of the existing life of the debt existing today by about um 8.7 years, and that's $6 million to savings.

We are anticipating to bring the transaction to council for approval rate here coming up in early January.

The average life of the bonds of the whole transaction will be around 18 years, and the average annual debt service will be around 100.6 106.8 million.

Um I think you get a good view of it though on slide nine.

You can see for the first few years from now until about FY29, the debt service will be right around $50 million and we'll start to ramp up after that.

And that concludes my presentation.

Director, this is a very large and complicated and very big number.

And can you just give me a little uh or all of us an understanding of the number of people and organizations involved and who was involved in the working group and in bringing this together?

I know it was the best and brightest really coming up with this with this this whole scenario.

So talk to us about some of the people involved.

Sure.

Like I mentioned, the the finance working group, uh we meet every other week on Mondays to talk about all of our transactions.

But um with this transaction in particular, there have been weekly meetings for months leading up to this point, uh, working group sessions to get to get this financing ready to present to the body.

Um so that group is represented by the finance department, the city controller's office is also just as involved as the finance department.

Uh we always work with our um our partners and our other enterprise funds.

In this case, it's with Houston First and their team at Houston First.

Um the legal department is heavily involved, especially with this transaction as we look at modernizing the ordinance and changing the master bond ordinance and creating lien levels.

We engage external bond council and disclosure council to help us liais with the attorney general's office at the state level and get our disclosure documents in order for the investor community as well as meetings with rating agencies.

Then of course we have our outside banking team.

So the underwriting syndicate, the team actually went through uh quite a competitive process where we shortlisted a group of investment banks to give proposals about this transaction specifically because it is so different.

So we went through this RFP process, the finance working group selected a banking team, and that banking team really worked collaboratively with Houston First, our outside financial advisors, Masterson advisors to put together this plan of finance.

So it's definitely a big group effort.

Who is the banking team?

Who was selected?

What entities?

Yeah, so um Ramirez, um Ramirez has been in our um underwriting pool for years.

They've done a fantastic job for us.

They came with some really innovative ideas as well as JP Morgan.

So there are two.

We're actually having two leads.

We call it a lead left and a lead right because the transaction is so complex.

So really we have two um two lead banks that are bouncing ideas off each other and collaborating.

And then we have a team underneath them as well.

And the bond council?

The bond council external bond council is um Adrian Patterson.

Um he's been um very involved with convention entertainment credit um for years historically, so he's a lot of institutional knowledge.

Great.

Yes.

And I know Masterson who advises us.

And a lot of things was heavily involved.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, any questions on the transaction from my colleagues or the upcoming bond.

Okay, you did a great job explaining it.

Before we go to public discussion of this item, I would I want the Houston First team to go through the first part of their presentation before they get to their budget, which has to do with the expansion.

And then we'll take public comments on from anybody wanting to talk about the financing or anything to do with the GRB expansion.

So welcome.

Houston First, we have Michael Heckman and Frank Wilson, who is CFO from Houston First.

Madam Chair, um thank you very much.

Uh Council members, great to see you all uh this morning.

Um great presentation there by uh Director Duvowski of just the care and sophistication and really team-oriented collaborative efforts that really went into the last number of months.

I think that you can see from that detailed presentation the work that did go into it.

Uh we presented to council previously on giving an overview of the economic impact of this project.

Um Director Dabowski mentioned it's a transformational project.

What we're weighing here is is merely phase one of that.

Um multiple steps along the way over the next 15-20 years that really will be great uh not only for creating value for our community, but creating great places uh and great gathering spots for for our community as well.

Um our team has been working um diligently on the construction um closely with our board.

Our board has been approving um in segments for such a large project uh so that we can have um budget um uh budget surety.

Uh very dynamic market out there right now with tariffs and other things that are that are going on when you have a project of this magnitude uh is being able to lock it down and and work through it in a very um uh expeditious but um but also careful and responsible manner.

So our board has been approving um chunks of funding uh we present to our board as uh uh particularly with Heinz, our our developer, and what is going to go into each one.

So our our board has had a um uh uh intimate involvement and approval on every um step that we've had along the way.

Um what we want to give this morning is a little bit uh at the chair's request is is a breakdown of of where we are today.

So we'll go go ahead and go to the to the next slide.

Uh looking at looking at a very large project, um uh it is gonna be roughly 1.1 billion dollars of the financing that we are going to market with.

Um we will be able to live within that for the project budget.

Um and uh uh to date our board has approved roughly $750 million of spending authority.

We have not spent all that money, but that is a spending authority that our board has approved to date.

As with everything that we do at Houston First, ever since our creation, we have had a corporate um diversity supplier program policy.

It is 30 percent, and we have exceeded it every year since our existence starting in 2011.

This mega project will be no different.

We will have uh a we have a 30 percent in our contracts with our uh with our program um team leaders.

Uh a minimum of a 30 percent uh MWBE participation rate.

I am proud to tell you this morning uh that we are currently exceeding that.

We are at 30.7 percent with a hundred and nearly sixty-seven million dollars contracted with MWBE firms today.

Okay, that is real money.

We have had a great program from our outreach.

Um we have heard from a number of your offices as well for outreach and offering to help and and get into the community.

Uh it has been robust from the response that we have seen.

Uh looking right now at the numbers here from the total contractors and consultants that we have, which is 83 currently on the project, and 36 of them are MWDBE firms.

So we're very proud of this.

We will exceed this 30 percent number at the conclusion of the project.

And if you just think about a 900 million dollar, roughly, that will be for the construction fund roughly.

That's that's that's going to be more than 300 million dollars invested into our um um minority firms.

So we're very, very proud of that.

In addition, uh safety is uh of utmost priority for us for this project.

Um uh we have invested in what is called the construction career collaborative program, C3.

Houston first paid for this for additional um training and certification for every worker that that walks on our job site.

So that is OSHA 10 certification uh for every worker and then OSHA 30 for for managers and supervisors.

So uh looking at what that has has brought so far as of December 5th, which we're now past this, I'm sure it's over 90,000 now, 90,000 safely worked uh man hours on on the project.

So again, we will continue to update this body on how we're doing on each one of these categories.

Um but for for today we're very pleased with with with where we are so far.

On the next slide, you can see um uh what our credit uh capacity has been to get us started uh as we've been working on the bond funding.

We have uh $375 million of credit capacity through a tax exempt subnote borrowing program.

Um to date we have spent a little over $161 million uh through that that credit facility.

Um I'll let Frank talk a little bit more about this, but once we are able to, if the if the council approves moving forward, the um the bond financing then would take out this this credit capacity.

Is that right, Frank?

That this would no longer be in existence then.

Correct.

And they will be they will be closed.

They will be refunded and closed.

Great.

So you can see the breakdown from the land that was uh required for for purchase uh for the for the expansion, um construction of roughly at about 70, 70 million dollars, our services, uh professional service as well, architectural and engineering, et cetera.

So a little over a little over 160 million dollars so far that has been has been spent.

Um I'm happy to say uh if you go to the next slide, you'll see a picture.

We are uh ahead of schedule.

Uh I would say that this is in stark contrast to other cities around uh the country that are that are either contemplating or working on um uh convention center expansions.

Uh we did benefit from really great weather over the summer, um, and so we were able to make really good headway uh with that.

And you'll see another another picture, the wider picture.

This is from the Toyota Center view.

Uh you can see the the um uh the full footprint there that we really will continue to uh really will continue to um uh accelerate in in the days and months that are ahead.

You will see a couple of big steps that you'll see up coming.

Um the rustic uh will be closed at the end of the year.

Uh we're reaching a new lease agreement with that firm uh to relocate to a nearby uh tract of land.

Uh so we're very happy to be able to keep them uh in uh uh in the footprint of the convention campus, and then we'll have the transition with with the the um uh what's commonly known as the Hilton Garage, but that is the uh the South uh Avenida South Parking Garage, which uh we're currently constructing uh the the garage that will replace that that will open in then August of um of next summer.

So before we move on to the the rest of our annual budget, Madam Chair, would you want me to stop there for the questions?

We'll take some colleagues' questions and then we'll hear from public on the this is strictly on the financing or the update on the GRB expansion.

Councilmember Cayman.

Oh, and I do want to welcome Councilmember Martinez has been here and Councilmember, we have just been joined by Councilmember Willie Davis.

My turn.

Thank you.

Um to the entire Houston First team, thank you.

Um I know this is a multi-year effort doesn't begin to cut the description of what this is.

And I have always said rather than having the cruise ship, we need the spaceship, right?

The my questions relate to twofold.

One, sustainability and worker safety, and two pains.

We had heard early on that some and this is an issue throughout the city, right?

During construction, a sidewalk gets blocked, but there is no proper detour.

Or it's a mid-block and and someone has to bolt across the street.

This is such a long-term project.

What are we doing to coordinate better to make sure that residents are not impacted?

They're going to be impacted, but to the minimus level.

Yeah.

So we have spent a great deal of time on this.

I want to I want to recognize Councilmember Martinez for his leadership in his district there of ensuring that we're that we're hearing any feedback that maybe we wouldn't be hearing directly and getting the information and and um uh detours or other information out as quickly as we can because it is not just this project, which is on a pretty pretty compact area, it's really four square blocks.

The tech stot um construction has started in earnest, as I am sure as you all have have seen.

It is how they interact one another together, right?

So we have tried to put that information together in one place the best we can.

All of this information is posted on our website.

We push it out, uh, particularly when there was that we were uh demolishing the ramp to the GRB and the Polk Street pedestrian and bikeway had to be relocated.

We relocated that to Rust Street, that is now back open because we have got the uh the ramp that's that's been demolished.

Uh so we have really been proactive in the best manner that we can uh with our partners, the downtown district, with uh the Rockets and and Toyota Center, Discovery Green, everyone that is sort of in our in our neighborhood, and then uh working with our our um uh our other partners to be able to get the the information out the best that we can.

And I appreciate that.

Um I think in Councilmember, you know exactly what I'm talking about, because it happens all over the city, right?

It's just making sure that the sidewalks, if there is a closure, that it's not a mid block, that we've let people know, go to the next block.

And again, that's on public works too.

That's on all of us to make sure that that coordination is happening, because it's gonna get more complicated to put it lightly.

Um in terms of worker safety, thank you for sharing the OSHA and things of that nature, the inclusion of MW, B, D, E.

Um, the what do we have minimum pay requirements?

What are our minimum pay requirements and benefits for contractors and things like that?

No, I would have to go uh check to see what our contracts state for that, but I not to my knowledge that we have got minimum pay requirements.

Okay.

I I'd be um interested in getting that information as well.

And if I could go back in queue, I would appreciate it.

Thank you.

Sure.

Councilmember Martinez.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, and I don't know if this is a question necessarily for you all or for the finance department, but uh we talked about the debt services uh compared to other cities, the way we've been able to structure it.

What's the what is the difference and why did we choose this this uh debt structure?

Yeah.

So uh if you if you look at some so some other cities, um Dallas has been working on their convention center, they're gonna build a new convention center, amongst many other things.

They have been talking about it for years.

They basically had their funding in place in around 2021 or so.

Um they have now had to go back to the drawing board, and I think it's you know a lot of things that have impacted them up there, but we're now hearing they won't be open uh early as till 2031.

Um if you look at, say, Austin, Austin's now torn their convention center down.

They started that process with their city uh with a proposal to do something with their convention center 10 years ago.

So that will be a 14-year process uh for Austin.

Um, we're gonna we have approached this in a very different way.

Um we have approached this in a phase component so that we won't lose a single day of convention business.

We will build uh the new GRB South.

We will eventually then connect it and tear down uh the southern wall of the existing GRB building, which will give us then the uh um the large space that we will have with that contiguous footprint that I have testified in front of this body.

But there's a break in the action there.

What'd you say?

There's a break in the action.

There will be a like a four-year break before you do that.

Well, that would be then fa no, that will happen when we connect the buildings, but then phase two will be sometime down the road.

I would say maybe in the early thirty thirties, we will need to synchronize that for the phase two of the existing legacy building from the modernization and and refacing of it to the east side.

We're going to have to synchronize that somewhat with the way that Text Dot will be doing their construction then on the east side of the of the building.

But Councilmember, yeah, we we have come at it in a very different way than than other cities have.

And then uh just to clarify, so this is Senate Bill uh 1057.

Um it was stated by our finance director that uh the revenue is supposed to come from uh as soon as we get it, we are supposed to start spending uh for this uh through the hot tax.

How are we how we are planning to pay for Lelin uh um two-way?

Yes, Leland Leland will be in the is in the project budget.

That will be as as part of the what what I call that $900 million construction fund.

Um so when we talk about what this is intended for, we talked about it for the GRB expansion.

Uh just just to clarify, uh we're including leaning as part of the GRB expansion.

Yes.

Okay.

Um then uh the last one I just kind of just to speak to some of the the construction pains essentially.

Uh just want to say uh appreciate the the work that y'all are doing to keep my office and my team uh um abreast of any detours.

There's not as many anymore to your point, right?

It's a very compact zone where the construction project is located.

I have had some conversations.

I have had some conversations with uh let's pause just one second.

We have got an issue.

Um, do you go on to the market or we are trying to mute?

Okay.

I think we got it under control.

Perfect.

Um to just uh g bring some more clarity to my colleagues as well as those in the audience.

Um there are a lot more projects that are happening, and I would say uh the majority of the pain is really coming from the Textot expansion.

Umtown driving in and out.

Um but we will also see public works uh working on and Metro working on some streets and actually currently doing some overlays as well.

Um the goal has always been to uh try and funnel that into one location which uh Houston First has put on their landing page.

But uh after further discussions with TechStot, um it's it sounds like they have their own landing page that they want to keep separate.

Um so I just want to make sure that as a full body, um, whenever there are questions and comments about uh detours uh that we can work to ensure that the community understands where these landing pages are to understand construction updates, uh, but also detours.

So again, just want to say thank you for continuing to work with my team uh to ensure to ensure that you know that we're informing folks about the interesting.

If I could add something, Councilmember, real quickly to that too.

We have gotten a lot of calls from different folks um in the in the community, folks we know, some residents asking why something is a certain way.

And and we have gone back and researched, and it's not it's not been us, it's been TechSot.

So we have tried to answer those questions the best we can.

But much of that is is the Text Dot work that is that is currently currently ongoing.

Yeah, Councilmember Martinez and I were at a meeting last week.

There were a lot of concerns about detours and whatnot, and the TechSOP was there taking a lot of notes.

So hopefully some of that will be resolved.

Um Councilmember Flickinger.

Thank you, Chair.

Appreciate the presentation today and also the briefing last week.

Um just to kind of put a spotlight on it.

There is a couple of timing issues.

One of them is gonna be great to our benefit, and the other one is gonna be a bit negative.

Um you have already mentioned the fact that uh Austin and Dallas are going to be uh compromised quite a bit as being able to hold these, so we're gonna gain business from that.

Anybody looking to come to Texas?

Um the comment previously about disk savings goes to the interest rates that we are having to refinance the bonds at.

Is that correct?

No.

Councilmember, what is actually happening is um interest rates are more favorable than when those bonds were originally issued.

However, um in order to shape um our debt stack annually, we need to make room for some some new money uh, but we want to do it in such a way that um we extend, we're actually extending the average life of the existing bonds that are being refunded.

So that's creating the disavings that we are extending it beyond what was originally planned for the final maturity.

Okay.

So essentially it's just additional interest because of the length of the term?

Correct.

Linking lengthening of the term, exactly.

Okay.

Terrific.

Thank you.

Councilmember Ramirez.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Uh Michael, Frank, thank you for the uh uh presentation.

In our meeting last week, you highlighted the importance of being able to hire an outside project manager in contrast to some of the other cities' experiences.

Can you can you touch on that a little bit?

And if memory serves, you you or someone mentioned that because of the issues in in Dallas, for instance, they have referred a number of uh conventions to Houston.

Can you can you speak to those two things?

Sure.

So because of the structure of Houston First, as you all are are well aware over the years, we uh try to do things as as close to private sector speed and efficiency as we are able to do.

We are using public money uh to be able to do that.

That is why we are reportable to our publicly appointed board.

That is why we are reportable here to Council.

Our our budget is approved by Council every year.

Uh we give presentations like this.

And so what we have sort of looked at it as is that we have for this project public oversight and a private delivery model.

What do I mean by that?

Is that we have we have hired one of the best firms in the country or the world, real estate firms in Heinz, um locally based here, to really bring their expertise that if they were building this project, how would they apply their expertise, their best practices, the things that that they that they would do, how they try to make sure that they are saving money on behalf of us, their clients if it's a fee for service for Heinz.

And that's given us a tremendous amount of comfort.

Um that we know that we have got the best of the best giving us advice uh and being able to work through any of these very complicated issues with our construction firm, with our architects.

Um it has given us a lot of comfort to be able to work through this this process so that we can stay uh on budget and on time.

One of the things that Heinz, when we were interviewing our developers, one of the comments that they kept making to us throughout their interview was that they believed that their number one job working on our behalf was to de-risk the project.

We dug deeper into that to see what does what does that mean?

I you know, you think, well, we've got to make sure the building looks right and it is everything else.

That there's with a project of this magnitude, you have you have schedule risk, you have tremendous budget risk, you have safety risk, you have other things that go into play.

And so, Councilmember, we have a great uh great degree of confidence and comfort with um uh with Heinz working on our behalf.

They have no equity interest in this.

This is a fee for service to be able to do that.

What that has allowed us to do is have schedule surety uh so that we don't keep leaking and leaking and leaking in into the future like others have.

Uh in fact, um uh Dallas has contacted us and I'm sure has contacted others as well because of the delays with with getting their convention center open, they have asked us for our availability to relocate their entire 2029 convention calendar, which has to be very difficult uh to be able to do.

But we will have a brand new building open at that point to be able to do that.

So they're finishing on time is not just a box to check.

There is an economic benefit for us being on time and on budget.

Thank you.

Councilmember Kamen.

Thank you.

Um is related to labor and workforce standards, there's a few other things that I will be asking, and I am happy to submit them, but I just want to share some of them so that y'all are aware.

Um just the whole complete picture of workforce standards from water and heat breaks to prevailing wage to member that my I I am recalling now that this is a prevailing wage job.

So we will get you all the information that you asked for, but that that's the same thing.

Perfect apprenticeship utilization percentages, all that.

Again, it is the standard questions, but I just want to uh make sure we we have access to that information as well.

And then uh I always ask all this.

Uh beautiful picture at the front of the presentation, right, with that amazing roof park uh and green roof.

There's been some uh renderings with solar on top.

Where are we in terms of sustainability components that will be incorporated into the design of the expansion?

Yeah, I think if you look at the materials that we are using that, you know, the first time you and I talked about this, gosh, it's now at least been a couple of years ago, maybe longer, um that we committed to that and we are following through on that.

Our goal is to is to have this building as uh a lead gold status, which for a building of this size is is not easy to do.

Um, but but using the type of materials that we are using with the with the timber that we will be using on the on the inside um with the green space and other things that we will be doing, we are very committed to make to making sure that it is really uh environmentally responsible building in the way that we put it together, because you you build these for you know 50 years or more.

And in terms of green roof and solar ready, um, are those still planned for we still we still continue to plan to have to have those as a piece of the of the project, yes.

Okay.

We're not quite to firming all of that up, but yes, they continues to be in the plans.

Okay.

I'm gonna keep pushing y'all and holding all to that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh just curious about the rustic.

How does that work?

That they obviously knew this was coming.

There's they're going to a spot nearby.

Do we have to pay them or a how or how does that work?

Yeah, so uh the land that the that they that they sit on is uh owned by us, so they're uh they're a lessee of of of ours.

Um and so we went uh to them.

There was a provision in their agreement for at some point in the future when when this was entered into, maybe in 2017, wherever the beginning of their lease was, that understanding that that may happen sometime in the future.

And so then we acquired uh we acquired land um near the convention campus and we're and we're um uh find a mutual agreeable um uh new lease term for them as to what that will look like.

Um and our board has approved us um uh building the new building for them, and we're entering into uh what hopefully soon a uh a new lease agreement for them.

Got it.

Thank you very much.

Um we will have no other questions from colleagues, so uh we'll move to public speakers for the GRB, the financing of the GRB and other questions about the GRB expansion.

Um first was Dominic Mazoch.

Good morning.

Um things about this.

I know the things will be probably be uh dealt with with like parking and hot and that sort of thing.

But you know, that building does belong to to the city to Houston, which are the people all the people that say Houston own that building.

And I think that this whole thing, now some of this came about before y'all came into office.

I get I get that.

Uh and even if we got this money, I think this thing should have been sent before the voters.

Do we want this?

Do we want this then then too?

Also, too.

Has there been an environmental impact study on this?

I know there's no federal funds, but I has it been an impact.

Oh, okay, okay.

Sorry, I'm sorry.

No, has because you know, with the East Anna'cause c cutting off the East End, you're taking up property.

And then too, they're talking about money from po for parking.

Wait a minute.

Uh why do we have the green and purple line?

Shouldn't we be encouraging people not to drive and to use transit or two plus?

Which brings another issue.

Now it looks like it could be uh conflict of interest.

But the chair of Metro, Elizabeth Elizabeth Brock, I'm not saying she she's doing it, but she's the chair of Metro, and also she's on the board of first Houston.

And now we've got this thing about uh with parking.

Now she could be innocent as everything, but I think there needs to be some separation there, which brings up another issue, which isn't which the council is gonna have to start dealing with, I think.

When the mayor puts up somebody for these important positions like Metro, instead of him just saying something and you'll approve it and put the person in.

I think there needs to be some process where these people are vented like the U.S.

Senate does, with say Supreme Court justices or uh that that sort of thing.

But uh I really I really think and two, San Antonio.

San Antonio just voted I don't know if it was for against, but the whole their city voted on their convention center and new sports area.

Thank you, Mr.

Masoch.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Okay, thank you.

I really appreciate your coming.

Next, Lisa Hunt.

I just want to ask a clarifying question.

If I speak now, is this my only time to speak for the whole um meeting?

You can speak after every every thing.

But we're trying to keep it kind of orderly for people who just wanted to speak on one topic that they could leave or whatever.

I'm Lisa Hunt, I'm a resident of the East End.

Um I want to first begin by saying the reason that Houston First has been able to act so expeditiously is that they did not do a wholesome and fulsome um public engagement process the way that Austin, San Antonio, and Dallas did.

If you don't have to answer to your public, you can go very quickly.

And that's one of the big uh differences between democracy and the public sector.

Transportation and accountability are themes of today's meeting.

Houston First Corporation has a dismal record of both.

An agency that spends millions of public dollars annually has a board that has typically met quarterly and offers a fig leaf of public engagement on projects which will transform the lives of residents for years by decimating their transportation.

It's barely held to account.

The expansion of the George R.

Brown lacks a master plan, other than pretty pictures, a detailed assessment of transportation impacts, not only for the surrounding streets, but for the impacted communities on the other side of the freeway, and a fully disclosed economic forecast.

We never received the full Humden report.

You only received the executive summary, I believe.

The construction has been rushed to accommodate FIFA and the Republican National Convention, and the Houston First Board has yet to complete the full budget for the project.

The communication on timelines and construction lax coordination with Texas and the city and going to Houston First's website is hardly a way of communicating out with commuters.

You're being asked to abandon six streets in downtown Houston.

One, a major connector with only verbal assurance that 0.5% of the 1.9 hot tax will be dedicated that is dedicated to the GRB expansion will be used to replace these lost assets.

The MOU that the council adopted at the first GRC vote on the closure has no written commitment to pay for a two-way Leland.

We respect the that intention has been made publicly verbally, but it is not in writing.

We understand that it's been outsourced to Walter P.

Moore, but yet but again, there's no communication on the timeline or who the project is.

Thank you, Ms.

Hunt.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Now we'll bring back CEO of Houston First, Michael Hetman, and Frank Wilson, CFO, for to talk about the annual operating and capital budget of Houston First.

Thank you again, Madam Chair.

Switching to our our annual budget just a little bit of a background of how we got here today through our governance process.

And then it ultimately goes to our board for for ultimate uh approval.

Um both steps of the way there were uh passed unanimously by our our finance committee and then and then by our board, and then ultimately we come here to council um for uh presentation uh and consideration um of our of our budget.

Um we take very seriously uh our role um uh for this community.

Uh the ability to be able to uh promote the city, talk about the city that we all love all over the world is truly an honor uh for myself, for Frank, for all of our colleagues uh that work within Houston First, they take enormous pride in uh in what they are able to do on on behalf of this community.

Uh and as I've said before, um when we are successful, our community is successful.

And I think that goes to the next page, which is our mission.

Everything we do is laser focused on on our mission, which is to create value and enhance economic prosperity by promoting the Houston region.

Um that's that's a very concise uh but very powerful uh mission on behalf of this community.

And we have many things that uh that fall under under that umbrella from convention sales to leisure to major events to TV and film projects, and then of course um the stewardship of of the facilities that we're entrusted with by by the city.

Um the next the next page uh I won't go deep into this, but we do have long-term strategic pillars, uh transformational leadership, destination development, and revenue diversification.

And then on the right, uh we show this to our board uh every year.

Uh we show this to council every year.

Uh these are our value drivers of the way that we seek to uh execute as a management team uh against the priorities that that we that we put forward.

Um this year was a very strong year.

Uh we had the record year of all record years last year.

Uh that is a very high bar to continue to jump over.

Uh we also saw a bump last year from uh Hurricane Barrel uh and then the thousands of of uh uh of linesmen that were that were in.

People were were driven into into hotel rooms, which gave us a bump of hotel occupancy tax.

Uh but we did see uh 54 million visitors last year.

Uh we believe our hot tax will come in just under uh that record year that we had uh in 2024 this year.

Um you can go to the next slide, please.

There's um also some macroeconomic headwinds um that all cities in the U.S.

were facing.

Tariff uncertainty, we saw leisure travelers start to tap the brakes a little bit.

Uh we saw short-term corporate meetings uh not materialized like we had seen in in previous years.

Um of that has abated somewhat, but some of those uncertainties um remain.

Despite all of that, um uh the forecast that Frank's gonna tell you about here of how we're gonna finish up 2025 is an excellent um is an excellent financial performance.

Um we will be outperforming our budget for I believe the fourth consecutive year uh through driving our revenues and then smart management of of our expenses.

Um so I'm very proud of our management team is the way they executed.

Uh and that's any any organization's job when there are obstacles, how do you manage around them and still deliver uh what you're trying to do for for your mission and for the bottom line.

So I'm gonna have Frank um Wilson uh ask him to uh uh to give you an overview as to how we will uh forecast to finish this year.

Thanks, Michael.

Madam Chair and Council members, uh we expect to finish uh the year uh with growth total revenues of about 250 million dollars.

Um should we achieve that will exceed budget by about 3.8 million.

Um then on an expense side, um our expenses are gonna be well managed.

Uh we expect to finish with uh total expenses of 240 million below budget by about 4.5 million, and uh expect to have revenues in excess of expenses of about 10.2 million.

It may seem like a lot, however, that's our pay-go to pay for our capital.

Um our budget uh is heavily um geared towards operating and and maintaining um buildings that are quite old, including the George R.

Brown Convention Center that's about 32 years old, 33 years old.

And so uh for the third year in a row, we expect to finance our capital on a pay-go basis.

A big driver in our revenues uh our operating revenues, um about 134 million dollars of our revenues are operating, um, and is led by 110 million of uh venue revenues, an almost uh 10 million dollar variance to budget.

Um what's the the driver behind all that, Michael kind of um alluded to it is uh we we will have 250 events at the GRB this year and uh in excess of approximately 950,000 attendees.

So meetings are back.

Um other strong revenue drivers were food and beverage, and that kind of goes hand in hand with the busier um convention calendar.

Uh we expect to uh have FMB revenues of about 34 million dollars, and that will exceed budget by uh 3.7 million.

Um the other big major revenue that I want to highlight is our our parking.

Uh that's uh that's a big piece of our budget.

Uh just uh it's 22 million dollars, and it we expect it to exceed budget by 1.3 million this year.

Um notable is that in in-person parking is back.

Uh we in the theater district parking garage, uh we have over 2,900 monthly parkers, and that exceeds our uh pre-pandemic numbers.

Uh with that, I'll turn it back over to Michael.

Oh, next slide.

The next slide um uh gives you an idea of some of our revenue trends.

Um I've I've I've shown uh bars that reflect actual 2024 uh gross revenues uh and then the forecast of 400 uh 200 2025 forecast and then the proposed 2026 budget.

What's interesting about is how steady these are and how growth is moving into a more economic uh a normal economic cycle.

Um what was interesting when I've come to you before with these trends is that um we saw growth rates of uh from 21 to 22 exceed of our revenues exceeding 50 percent, and then from 22 to 23, exceeding 17 percent, 23 to 24, about two percent year over year.

But what we are expecting and what's reflected on this slide is about three to three point three percent revenue growth year over year.

So that's a very steady, very strong um um growth rate uh that that you can see for our budget.

So for the next uh the next slide, uh each of you have copies of these, so I won't go through every single one.

But uh each year we we we highlight um some of our strategic uh corporate priorities that we have.

So I'm gonna highlight a few of those for you today.

Clearly next year is a big event year.

Uh FIFA World Cup, uh, you've been hearing a lot of the excitement about that in the last several days.

Uh we've also got the Major League Baseball World Baseball Classic that will be here in March, I believe 11 games that will be at Dyke and Parks, a big international audience there as well.

We've got the NCAA South Regionals, um, and then we've got a big event uh that we'll be announcing soon with about 65,000 attendees that will be uh in February.

So we'll be announcing that shortly uh here, but very excited about about that event on top of our strong convention calendar that we have for uh for next year.

Um clearly staying on time on budget with the GRB construction um is is a high level priority um for us uh as well as now um uh making sure that we can sell into that building.

Okay, we have predictability on the date, we know what the layout of the building is gonna be.

So our sales team is currently selling into that building.

We are hosting this week, right now, uh International Association of Exhibitions and Exhibitors, and as a big industry event.

We have presentation after presentation after presentation uh this week with clients that are in town showing them the new building, selling into it, and the the response rate that we have gotten has been exceptional.

Uh the type of groups that possibly we've never booked before, the type of value of groups that we are able to book, and then that layering effect that we talked about when we when we presented on the economic impact of being able to host multiple groups at um uh at one time.

Uh on the next slide, uh Mexico continues to be um uh a high priority for us.

Um of our international visitors come from the Mexican market, even as much of an international city as Houston is.

That doesn't mean that we are not engaged in uh in Asia.

That doesn't mean we're not engaged in Europe and other places, but Mexico um uh has a high pension to travel here, they have high value visitors, they have family connections here, so that will that will always be uh a priority for us with our in-market engagements there, the investments that we're making um as well.

The TV and film um uh commission falls under our umbrella.

Uh we were so thrilled to be able to see the legislation passed at the state that gives us a 10-year time horizon on the that incentive.

Uh Houston First this year uh put out a 400,000 local incentive as well, where certain spending um uh criteria and other criteria were reached.

We have seen a huge pickup from that.

We have that in our budget um again next year.

Um that is an industry now that continues to need to be built out with workforce development, with bricks and mortar for production studios and other things.

So we will be working with a number of stakeholders throughout the community uh to be able to do that.

And then we'll be finishing uh uh on the TV and film, we'll be finishing a five-year uh strategic plan that we'll be unveiling next year.

So we're very excited about that.

And then finally, um we'll be working on a 10-year destination development plan for aspirationally where where do we want to be as a destination?

How do how can we grow?

How do we fill in uh our gaps of opportunities that we have?

And and what's listed on that final bullet point is about the public and private partnership opportunities.

When we identify what these what what these this roadmap can potentially be, the public sector will not be able to do it on its own.

It will take it will take private engagement, private investment, and we will look forward to to being able to do that.

So next year, we want to accomplish a lot.

That's just that's just some highlights.

Uh we want to take every advantage of having folks in our market that have likely never been to Houston before for the the World Cup, the media that will be here.

We have a strong engagement plan uh put together for that.

So uh we're very much looking forward to uh to next year.

And I'm gonna turn it over to Frank that's gonna describe our budget that will support those those priorities.

Thanks, Michael.

Um, this slide is uh the next slide, please, is um designed to kind of give a thumbnail but also some assumptions and market conditions.

Uh we anticipate uh or budgeting proposed budget of 258.5 million of revenues.

Uh as I mentioned earlier, it's about 3.1 percent growth over this year forecast.

Uh expenses, total expenses of about 257 million, uh, with a uh excess of revenues over expenses of about 1.5 million.

Um importantly, on this slide is the $19.2 million.

That's our CapEx.

That's what we're gonna spend on maintaining buildings, and it includes about $4.8 million that we're gonna spend on Hilton upgrades.

Um the right side is where the market conditions are itemized.

Um the key here is we don't anticipate a recession, uh, but modest revenue growth.

We also expect less inflation and lower interest rates.

Hopefully we will hear from the Fit today or tomorrow about what they're gonna do about um interest rates.

And then after that three months at the beginning of August, the Hilton Parkers will go over to the garage, which will be completed in the expansion building.

We also expect leisure travel growth to continue, but modestly driven by upper middle and upper income travelers and major events.

Michael made mention of them.

I am looking forward to March Madness.

That's coming back.

But we also expect business travel to continue modest growth and as well as modest growth in average daily rate at hotels and corporate meeting demand continuing to happen going forward.

The next slide gives you a little more detail on the budget.

I mentioned the 258 million of revenues.

That's an increase of 2,000 of $8.3 million over 2025 forecast.

Total expenses of about $257 million reflect an increase of about 7% over the 2025 forecasts.

Much of this is driven by two factors.

The major events, the more busier the building, the more genitorial, the more security.

All of these expenses increase along they're highly correlated to the busyness of the calendar for next year.

We are also budgeting revenues to exceed expenses by 1.5.

I mentioned that.

A big part of significant revenue growth is expected to come from hot.

We are budgeting 117 million for that.

Then on the next slide, this is some things that these are contractual obligations that we have to the city as a part of the interlocal agreement for the 2026.

We will spend approximately 22 million dollars on hot.

Next slide, please.

Next year we will spend to the city $22.4 million of hot and then promotion protocol, traffic administration, annex garage, and hobby center.

These are remittances to the city.

On the right side are our contractual agreement to stakeholders, including Discovery Green, Hobby Center, and the Buffalo Bayou Partnership.

This totals, these contractual obligations total about $28 million.

And I will turn back over to Michael.

Great.

Thank you, Frank.

This slide just shows a little bit of maybe what's not always apparent in our budget, you know, obligations that we uh pick up on on behalf of the city.

Um I will I will say that the visitor economy is extraordinarily important to to our community and the hundreds of thousands of people in hospitality uh that are that are employed.

We look to grow that um again next year, uh I think in 24 we had roughly $16 billion in spending from visitors here to the market.

Um every year we face uh a big challenge on how do we make sure that we properly balance investing as much as we can in sales, marketing, and promotion, while also being great stewards for the facilities that we have been that we have been entrusted with by the city.

I think once again this year we have found that right balance that will maximize our ROI on behalf of this community and back to the city.

Madam Chair, that is our presentation.

Thank you very much for both presentations, Mr.

Heckman and Mr.

Wilson.

I do not see any council members in the queue.

So you did a good job explaining your budget.

Colleagues, we this is number eight on tomorrow's agenda.

So certainly if you have any additional questions, reach out to Houston first.

Thank you very much for your presentation.

And uh do we have any speakers on the operating and budget that what was just presented by these gentlemen?

I don't have any signed up, but if there's anyone here present that would like to speak on that.

Okay.

Not seeing anyone, so we will move ahead to agenda item four.

And this again is our second meeting.

Um we we had to postpone the last one that was scheduled for uh the administration asked us to postpone that because they had something else on the 419 emancipation going on that same day in time.

So we are moving with our second, and this is really why we are joined together with economic development on the three CIP amendments brought forth from our colleagues.

We're not gonna have presentations by departments.

We have done that already.

We're going to have each council member lay out their arguments for for their amendments.

And then I would like to take I think we do have a quorum, or we did, but I think we do.

That we would like to see this advanced for full council consideration.

So we will start with Councilmember Ramirez with his with his transparency amendment.

And I think it's up on the screen, but he also passed out a printed copy.

So the floor is yours.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

And in the interest of time, I'm not going to delve too much into the motivation for the amendments.

I I addressed that when I introduced them last July and I addressed them in an earlier committee meeting a couple months ago.

Here we are again.

So I have shaped, molded the amendments after visiting with a number of folks and want to go over what some of those changes are.

In Amendment 101.

We have changed the threshold amount of the delay cancellation redesign or removal removal or alteration in scope that will trigger the reporting from 5 percent or more than 50,000 to 10 percent or more than 100,000, not including contractual contingencies.

That change was made after uh consultation with the Chair, Councilmember Alcorn, uh as well as uh meeting with Director of Public Works, Randy Mackai, and uh Stephen David, uh one of the mayor's top deputies.

And so we appreciate the the cooperation and the feedback that we have received throughout this process, and that change is a direct result of that feedback that we received.

Umsection B of 101 was was added, I believe.

It says alternatively, the administration may maintain online an updated report in searchable format.

Again, this was uh an addition that resulted from the conversation that we have had with Director Mackai and Stephen David.

Um Director Mackai referred to the website that Public Works currently has and uh expressed the view that uh they would be able to do this online.

Um and Stephen David uh also spoke to this as well.

So we want to give the administration the option to do it online.

Umsection C sending a report to each council member uh of a notice of intent to proceed.

We have been told they are already doing this, so this merely codifies that practice and makes it official, if you will.

Umendment 102 adds uh the last sentence, the filing of a written objection alone shall not stop the delay, cancellation, redesign, or alteration in scope.

So the project won't just be stopped in its track by uh an objection of council members.

And this was added uh in response to a conversation with uh with uh Casey Christman of the Houston Contractors Association.

Again, the intent of this proposal is not to slow down any work uh but to give council members more information uh during the process so that they can serve their constituents more uh effectively.

In addition, I've added the language at the beginning of this one, subject to Article 7, Section 3 of the City Charter, three or more members of council.

So that is a reference to Prop A that was passed by the voters to indicate that uh the intent is not to do anything inconsistent with Prop A, but uh to follow along and meet the requirements of Prop A.

Um Amendment 103 changes public hearing to public meeting to increase the flexibility.

A public meeting could be a meeting such as this one, it could be um uh it could be meeting out in the community, just something that is open to the public that is sponsored by one or more council members uh that would allow members of the public to weigh in on what's going on and also allow the administration the opportunity to uh provide information about what's going on as well.

I have not added, but but we would be willing to add a time frame under which this would be implemented.

And that is dependent, I think, on how this progresses, when it would ultimately be passed, if it is passed, and feedback from public works.

If they are not able to do this right now, then uh I believe from conversations with Director Mackai, uh they are moving toward the point where they could do this.

So I would not be averse to adding uh you know a time frame under which they would be required to comply with this.

So I have outlined a number of changes, all of which were a result of uh conversations with uh folks in this process.

So I appreciate the cooperation of uh Director Mackai, Stephen David, the rest of the administration.

Um I have spoken to a number of folks out in the community.

There are a number of uh constituents who are supporting this.

I appreciate all the expressions of support for these.

I know a number of them are here.

Many more have weighed in in via email.

I have also appreciated the support from um engineers and folks in the business who have told me that uh they believe this is a good idea and and one that should be put forward.

So just in closing, um this is an effort to make council members more effective by providing them with the information they need about changes so that they can represent their constituents more effectively.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your work on this.

Questions from Councilmember Kamen.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Councilmember Ramirez.

Uh, you and I have worked on this, and I appreciate you taking early on uh the taking this task on when we came to and said, hey, here is what we are thinking, and you really champion this and ran with it.

So I want to thank you for that.

Um do you believe that this amendment, for example, in a hypothetical would provide council with sufficient notice when the scope of a construction project has changed or a completed project has changed, and we are now going back to either further modify it or expend over a hundred thousand dollars to change that.

And there's multiple scenarios I can think about in different districts where council members uh still have not been receiving the inquiries and question responses to the questions that they have asked when it relates to specifically the financial expenditures or potential costs of alterations uh to recently completed projects.

Well, the language under 101A uh sub-1 does include the word removal.

So uh by its language, it would, I think, apply uh to that sort of uh project.

And under your new um edition of B subsection B, would that have to be maintained monthly?

At least monthly.

Um Director Mackai expressed as expressed a preference that you know one day maybe it'll it will be essentially in in real time.

He didn't use that that language, but um there is the potential in the future, I think, to to have it uh comply with even more frequently.

Okay.

And I appreciate um all of our stakeholders, the engagement, because we do want work at the city to continue moving.

We want infrastructure and safety for our city.

Uh this is not intended to inhibit, but again, we are not getting all the answers to questions that we are raising, especially when it comes to the costs of certain projects, the analysis or when things are happening.

I will say under subsection C, um speaking as a district council member, we the notice of intent to proceed is not sufficient notice.

We are getting it within a day or two at times of when the project is starting.

Uh we are not getting the notice to proceed uh with sufficient notice.

Again, I know that public works is doing everything that they can right now.

This isn't um, you know, in any way a shame thing, it's a from a district perspective, we're sometimes even getting it a few days after it started right now.

Uh so I would just ask that council consider that because if that's the only does subsection C circumvent A or B, I guess is my question.

Like does that, does subsection C.

Is that all they would need to do?

It's an addition.

Yeah.

Okay.

It's not an either-or thing.

Okay.

That would be additional.

And then lastly, um, may I continue or thank you.

Okay.

Um point oh three prior to initiating the procurement of goods or services related to the installation.

Um referring back to 1.01.

Is there a requirement that notice be provided prior to that procurement process as well?

Or are we getting it after all of this is signed, sealed, and delivered?

I don't think it creates an additional notice requirement.

Uh I think the way it is intended is as a result of what council members learn under 101 or from some other source than under 103, they can hold a public meeting.

Okay.

And I think my question just and we can talk offline, but again, in terms of the timing of all this, if we're only getting it if we're getting information after procurement has occurred, that then prohibits our ability to have that meeting or engage prior to this being a done deal, and then we've just we've therefore expended additional dollars, right?

And some of the concerns that I think informed this amendment, though I certainly don't want to speak for you.

I know for me were the um potential for unnecessary expenditures and trying to save money for the City of Houston right now.

So as we bring it to the full council, I don't know if there will be another opportunity to amend, but I just would want to nail down um I I fully support this item.

I want to be clear about that, but making sure that council is getting information before it's too late.

Yeah, there's always opportunities to amend when it comes to full council.

Councilmember Thomas.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um I appreciate the uh a genesis, and especially when this was initially uh submitted.

I just have a few clarifying questions on one point zero one and then also to 1.02.

So the construction projects from a district perspective takes an incredible amount of time to get to the finish line.

Um for context, we have on the agenda an Astrid Village, a drainage project, a SWAT, six million dollars was we initiated in fiscal twenty-three.

We are now approaching fiscal, we are in fiscal twenty-six.

And so I think there should be some language around where these projects generate from.

Are we talking CIP, SWAT, third party, text dot, HGAC, Federal, Citywide Sidewalk, because the our projects happen in multiple ways, and the general public, they have no idea.

And my I think it would contribute to some miscommunication, um, particularly around three members of council holding a public hearing in the midst of a construction project that is probably taking us two years to get on the line.

And I understand that every council member in F will not be me and will not be proactive and will not host these meetings and do all of this work, but I'm just imagining three council members hosting a public meeting about a project that is active for years, and it interrupts either a process or it creates distrust and mistrust and miscommunication.

Uh I've seen that happen in F where we split projects in half and created half knots and half-nots, and then the north side of BriMetal is like, what about us, the South side?

And so now we move forward, we don't split projects in half because we learned that lesson.

So I think there needs to be some clarification in terms of where these projects live.

Majority of the notices to proceed um are funded by CDSF.

So council offices are initiating these sidewalk projects, ADA, panel replacement, speed cushions, and so we received the notices.

Residents are already a part of that because they frontloaded, they made the requests that they're included in that project.

Um so if you get a notice that we're having a sidewalk reconstruction project in F, then what?

Do you just want the notice or what is there what's when that has probably been requested by someone in order for us to do?

And then the the other piece that I I I that I'm I'm really just concerned around is just posting this meeting and interrupting a construction project that takes forever.

And I I'll close with this.

My fiscal 25, we added a generator to the A-Leaf Neighborhood Center.

We're through permitting, we're through all of that, but it won't be completed until 2027, right?

And so this is the amount of time you have construction delays, you have ordering delays, you have all these types of things that they're nuanced with these projects, and I think there should be some consideration around that.

Perhaps maybe including the member of one of the three to be a part of the three in order to make that happen so it's not outside of the member where the project is happening in a district.

Okay, there's a lot in there.

I will try to address as much of that as possible.

So the this is meant really to address change.

I understand projects take a long time, and the fact that a project is ongoing for a long time does not necessarily mean that there's been some sort of change.

Right.

And with regard to 103 public meeting, the idea here here is not to stop the project while we have a public meeting.

The project would continue.

The language in there does not say that that we have to hold up the project in order to hold the public meeting.

That is really informational for the public and and for the council member.

Um as far as what it would apply to by its language, it applies to projects using city revenue.

Um I am open to more clarification and adding more detail than that if there is a desire for council members to add that kind of language, you know, uh getting into text dot funds or funds from Metro or HCAC or whatever.

That's how my CIPs are funded.

Most of them are, you know, text dot money that come through the city, and then they qualify for CIP because we received the funding.

So but they'll show up as a CIP on the, you know, on the agenda.

That's what it looks like.

And so there's not necessarily like a trigger to say.

Yeah.

And we have not we have not defined city revenue.

Okay.

I'm happy to tackle that and uh uh receive input from council members on on what should be included in that.

Sure.

Helpful.

Thank you.

Very helpful.

And I think you know, there's a general concern from everyone that we don't want to unintentionally delay something that that the that's been happening.

Um Councilmember Carter.

Thank you, Chair.

Um thank you, Councilmember Thomas, you brought up some really good points, some of the questions I had.

Um I understand, uh Councilmember Ramirez, what what you are trying to do, you're looking for transparency.

Having worked in construction, the feasibility on the back side of this is very cumbersome.

Um when you look at content, you know, even number one uh on your 101A to provide reports at least monthly.

At least monthly, like monthly, weekly, what does that really mean?

Like what do you what do you know, kind of define that at least?

The other on the contingencies, when you are looking at a hundred thousand dollar contingency or ten percent, is that regarding the entire project?

Because, you know, at the the bottom line of a completed project, you may be over here and under there, and so your bottom line is is within budget.

Um then, you know, uh how as far as the enforcement of, you know, I you're trying to provide information to the general public so that there's transparency.

This seems like a heavy lift.

And I'm sure I'm I'm not sure, I guess, what the bottom line is since there can be no delay, or it's stated in 102, no delay, cancellation, redesign.

Um what are we what are we doing?

What are we actually doing?

And again, with with full respect to your work on it, I just I think that it's you know, the delays on the cost, you know, when you're ready for structural steel, it's been ordered moons ago, right?

And when it's time to lay that down, you can't just say, hey, wait a minute, and you know, hang hang on, we've got concerns, and then I know this comes from, you know, primarily kind of redesign or let's things that have been done, but I just I think what the intention is is good, but I think the outcome will be not aligned with the intention.

Right.

And if I could address that, um you you spoke to the cumbersomeness of it, um and and I would refer you to the language in 102 that was added that says the filing of a written objection alone shall not stop the delay, cancellation, redesign, or alteration in scope.

So the work can continue.

This this doesn't stop that.

Um also mentioned um contingencies and and the language in the amendment speaks to contractual contingency.

So whatever is written in that particular contract, however that is defined uh controls, you know, just because there has has have been some cost overruns, um and and that is um contemplated in in the contract will not necessarily trigger that.

And now as far as what monthly means, I mean it means monthly, or or or more frequently than that, if uh public works chooses to do that.

Yeah.

So it's this information is currently available through public works.

Okay.

No.

Uh, let me let me clarify.

Some of it may be, is all of it currently available?

I I I don't believe that to be the case.

Councilmember Davis.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um a few things I I like to get a clarification understanding.

One of them was Councilmember um Carter addressed uh in the question about the report at least monthly.

I I don't have real clarification on that.

I respect and admirable the transparency of of of what you are trying to do.

But I think um one particular case, and Councilmember Thomas clarified a lot of information about how these funding tracks roll into these um district projects.

Um, for instance, I had some constituents who called from District G on a project that has been going on for several years, and the process I spoke to Councilmember Tom uh Mayor Huffman about it, because they were concerned about it.

And the problem was that the company went bankrupt.

That was in the process, the company went bankrupt, and so the the stoppage of the project was due to the fact that the company went bankrupt, and so they were proceeding with trying to find who would pick up that project, and then they have to go through the necessarily process.

With that being said, I don't know, I don't know if many constituents in the community even know all of the information, especially in the line of engineering and those type of areas.

I don't think they really have much um experience on that.

So to hold up a project to inform the public, um that's that's kind of a very thin aspect.

My second point is on 102, you mentioned three or more members of council may object to the delay of the councilation with redesign or alteration by filing a written objection with the Secretary.

To me, that would take a lot of detailed information in regards to if it's a project in a certain district as to that.

I don't know.

I mean, I I get the gist of what you're trying to, but I think the purpose is my concern.

What is the purpose?

You say transparency.

So what's the purpose?

Because it's going to take a lot of delay just trying to go through people to get the proper information.

Who gets the information, the time frame they get it, and then how long is that going to take to proceed with the project.

And and and thank you for that, Councilmember.

Um again, uh this is not intended to uh cause delay, and and that is set out in the amendments.

The work is going to continue.

And and yes, you know, things happen that that cause delays in construction or in a project.

This isn't going to change that.

And this um uh contemplates that.

In 101A, the last sentence is the report shall include the reason for an estimated length of any delay.

So in in in that situation in District G, and uh and I'm I'm somewhat familiar with that with that project.

The reason for the delay is the company went went bankrupt.

And and we don't have anybody available to do the work at this time.

You know, it it's as simple as that.

But but that information can be very helpful to the district council member and and the constituents to understand that.

People see things not being done and they want to know why.

So this is part of the part of the reason behind this is to give them a lot of the same thing.

Yeah, and I concur with the definitely to know what's going on.

But I but that would be, of course, the the district council person in conjunction with public works should have that information and provide it directly to their constituents.

That's all I was learning to.

I agree that they should have access to this information.

And I don't think they always do.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Castillo.

Thank you, Chair, and uh thank you, Councilmember Ramirez, for your your work on this.

Um I do support you know what you're trying to do here.

And and I just want to clarify a couple things as we have this discussion around the horseshoe.

Um you're really talking about projects that not necessarily have been in the works for many years and may have been delayed for some reason or trying to delay a project that has gone through numerous steps.

You're talking about a project that's either completed and then is quickly being redesigned or removed, or a project that has been designed and is now being paused to get redesigned and and being able to get information out to the public and to the district council member.

I think it includes both of those.

Okay.

Um and I I think that's important because we have had some projects um that have been quickly expedited and community members want information, and that information has come after the fact.

And so this is about getting them information on the front end about why that's happening or how much it costs or where that money is coming from that's paying for it.

Is that correct?

Yes, I think that's part of it.

Okay.

So then on 1.02, with three members of council objecting to the delay.

So the the written objection filed with the city secretary, that alone won't stop anything from happening.

Correct.

That that just gives uh three members the opportunity to bring it to the full council, and the full council can hear it out.

And if companies gone bankrupt, then uh the full council can say we completely understand uh the reason for the delay, you know, no problem.

That's if they have an issue with the company going bankrupt.

Like that, I mean, that's the same.

It's just an example.

Right.

Right.

And and there could be any number of additional examples, you know, legitimate reasons.

So we'll let council decide.

And and I think from the perspective of making sure especially district council members have information up front is really important.

Uh, because again, we get the emails, we get the calls, people want to know.

And if we're saying, well, we're we're waiting to hear back, we're waiting to hear back, you know, and then that the work is being done, uh they're looking to us for that for that information.

So I do appreciate helping us being able to have that on the front end as these things happen.

And thank you for your work on this as well.

Vice Mayor Po Tempett.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, and thank you, Councilmember, for your work on these items.

Um for 1.01, um for those of us who were staffers many years ago, we used to have a program.

It was the CIP management system.

It was the CIPMS, and it was basically the program that public works used where they put in all of the information on every single project in everyone's district, and it was done, it was updated constantly.

You know, as anything happened, the engineers or the um people doing the construction, they would go and input everything.

And then over the years, that system kind of went away with building Houston Forward and all of the other programs that the city has.

So I think it's reasonable if we just bring back something like that where things are just constantly updated.

I mean, that's a program that when we ask Public Works a question for an update, they would look at that system and consult it.

So I think that it's reasonable that we can implement something like that again where we could just see at any moment in time, you know, what is happening rather than you know, public works recreating something for every every month and sending things to people.

I think if it was just in a system like that, we could easily look and be updated um in real time.

Um for 1.02, um, you know, I think having three or more council members object to something, you know, we can already do that with Prop A.

We could put forward, you know, an ordinance that basically says this project need, you know, shall move forward or you know or a delay or whatever the case may be, we can already do that with Prop A.

So I think that this is just kind of codifying that and making sure that there's an you know, here's the avenue for pursuing that.

So I don't think it really changes anything necessarily with our current system other than highlighting a specific mechanism for putting it on the agenda.

Um and then 1.03, you know, there are some times where um public works isn't planning on holding a meeting for a project, and at our request they do hold meetings.

Um but I think that this just shows that you know, if we ask for that meeting that they absolutely have to have it, you know, sometimes they may not necessarily want to have the meeting, and I get that.

Um but it could add up to a lot of meetings, but I think it just makes sure that when we ask for that meeting, they have to say yes to it.

So I'm in favor of all of the items.

Um I think that there's there's way to ways to accomplish that first one specifically.

And and thank you for the for the comments, uh, Councilmember Peck, and and for sharing your you know your experiences.

You've you've been around here, this is your second term, and I know the first term was difficult at times, and so uh appreciate having the benefit of your experiences.

Uh on 103, I do want to point out that it does not compel the administration to come forward and provide information.

Um, but uh certainly if one or more council members wants to have a public meeting on a project, um hopefully that will trigger the administration to also participate and uh provide information uh so that the public can hear and and offer comment.

And you know, to your point about uh CIPMS, I've I've heard about that as well.

Uh and I think there's there's a way to accomplish all of this.

Um in that they're not inconsistent.

So but I appreciate your comments and support.

Councilmember Heyman.

Yeah, very quickly, just to emphasize what my district colleagues have said in terms of this information should already be available.

I won't speak for every district.

Some of us are not getting this information.

Um we've had we've read in the news about changes uh to projects or the removal of infrastructure that was recently put in to the cost of sometimes ten times more than the cost of what it took to put in.

And in a time when we are being called upon to be fiscally responsible, which is our duty, um, we're not always getting the information before it starts, for example, not to put uh councilmember Castillo on the spot.

Um, but there was a discussion last week as it pertains to another project in the district uh in his district.

That was uh a federal grant that the city had to put money towards, but there's still outstanding questions unless Councilmember Castillo, since that time you've received all of those answers.

But I know construction has already begun as to whether or not we have to reimburse for that federal grant, what how much it's going to cost uh to install new uh infrastructure in place of that.

So there's a lot of outstanding questions, even though construction has already gone begun and the department knew well in advance that that work was going to take place.

So there are instances when, and I will speak for district C, we have not been notified.

There have been costs that we have asked questions on and have not received timely information on, and that's again not to point fingers.

It could be as simple as system fixes, but this is about ensuring that as a city and as at least for district council members, we are get being given sufficient notice to changes in scope that, for example, councilmember Thomas, when we've worked on different SWAT projects.

Okay, that we approve that.

If the scope changed or there was a modification, I would expect to be alerted to that prior to that being finalized or it being secured.

And that's I think what come this part of this comes down to and why it's important.

Councilmember Thomas.

Thank you.

Um that goes back to my point that this should be more tail uh narrowly focused.

Um, if it's CDSF projects that have been completely funded, then yes, then there should be a restriction and a certain type of trigger to go back because council members have directed their funds.

If this we we you know, it just can't be the blanket.

I think CDSF is definitely there should be a level of uh uh communication because you work so hard to go through the vetting process to identify these projects to actually get them on your books to do that.

So, yes, I'm in agreement, but I think it goes back to my original request.

We need to really drill this down.

Um and then I just want to highlight, let's just go to Bissinet.

That's a $28 million project.

The the city puts in $7 million of matching funds.

It's seven miles, three districts.

The OCR was submitted in 2024, right?

Early out the gate.

And so then when does this meeting happen, right?

Is it at the OCR portion when the design and all the concepts are done, when the community engagement is done for over 18 months?

When does that meeting happen at 1.03?

I would be shocked and appalled if there was a meeting to interrupt Bisonet out the blue.

And then because public communication is important, and human nature is.

Although on the on print it says the the project will not stall, public works will stall because they're waiting.

There's three council members that have posted a meeting to say we want to hear what the people have to say.

People, that's just human nature.

They're gonna stall up.

And so I that I think if we can get this to the full council that has a more guidance around which projects that informs council members on what tools they have.

I'm very clear, I won't be here forever.

But public, I don't depend on public works to host any infrastructure meeting in District F.

We run the traps on that.

We bring it out, we host it, we bring the updates, we blow up the maps, we say this is what's happening, this is what you can expect.

Now, I don't know who comes behind me.

So I think that we should have tools on the books for whoever every council member to leverage to communicate with the public as they need to.

But I think when you have these types of designs, you gotta also start at the OCR process.

This does not inform if this is already at a council action, right?

So we have to think about all the work that goes before this even comes up to start so we can have uh uh cohesive communication.

If three council members hosted a community meeting with the project that was already on the street, you're gonna create even more confusion.

Even more, and they're already confused, and you can communicate for 12 months straight.

And they still don't know.

They just know that there's construction happening, the project has stopped, and then now there's a meeting, it's posted on the agenda, and everyone's on high alert.

So I think we just have to deal with like the realities of what's of how we really do this and the the ripple effects of what this means.

And, you know, are we going to weaken the trust of government or our office is actually getting this done?

I think so I would support if this was CDSF related, because if I had a hundred thousand dollar project that I put my money on the street and it was interrupted, I would right, someone needs to talk to me about that.

So if this was that related, then yes.

But just all projects, I can I I can't support that in in the whole.

Well, again, it it refers to city revenue, which includes CDSF funds.

Um regarding the meeting, um, you know, it speaks to one or more council members holding the public meeting at which the administration may provide.

Um so the the uh honest right there is on the council member to have the meeting.

We're not requiring the administration to have the meeting.

We are acting to hold the meeting, and um hopefully the administration will uh be there to provide information.

Um again, you know, on city revenue, we can we can uh adjust that.

The the vote that uh hopefully will occur in this committee is to advance it.

Right and and to keep um uh to keep talking about it and to make additional changes if council members feel that they are needed.

I I do not agree that um merely filing an objection is gonna make public works stop what they're doing in their tracks.

I uh I I don't think that's gonna happen at all.

Okay, you guys, this is exactly how this is supposed to play out.

All this feedback is great.

And I'd like to now go to the public.

Any speakers that are signed up to speak on the transparency ordinances before we do take a vote, start with Ruben Garza.

We do have a number, so try to keep it brief, maximum two minutes.

Understood council member, thank you.

For sure.

One, all right, cool.

Uh hi everyone, my name is Ruben Garza.

I am a local conversation leader for a group called Strong Towns Houston.

We are the Houston chapter of a national nonprofit strong towns, and we have previously have indicated our support and are still in support of the transparency ordinance.

And we previously have indicated our support and are still in support of the transparency ordinance.

And it sounds like everyone here on this committee seems to agree that some level of transparency is required.

So that way we can promote a more productive use of city funds.

It sounds like uh there's a lot of concern here about potential delays, but I think as Councilmember Ramirez has pointed out, if there's a change to a project, it goes on a report.

There's no indication, there appears to be no indication from the written text, and I understand some implications, but that can be discussed later on.

But there will not be a holding up of a project.

This is a simple reporting requirement that should be given to the city at large and to the resident constituents who can voice their concerns about any uh proposed cancellation delays or any sort of interruptions, as uh Councilmember Kamen is pointing out earlier, particularly on uh and Councilmember Castillo were pointing out, particularly on completed projects that are subject to revision.

That is important because it it's at that stage where residents have the most concern, where there's reliable infrastructure that's been in place for years, months, however long, that all of a sudden gets ripped out in the middle of the night.

That is the most important point in to make sure that residents uh have the most communication and the most feedback and the most information from the city itself.

I understand there are some district council members who have great relations with the city and the administration to get this information and communicate to their constituents, but not all of us are lucky to have district council members like that.

Uh that's nothing to anyone on this panel.

Let me be very clear.

Some council members are left in the dark, some council members uh don't receive information in a timely manner or receive it at the very last minute and can't respond accordingly.

This creates an institutionalized process for transparency in the City of Houston, which is why it's needed and why it needs to get to the full co uh council.

Thank you.

Ruben, thank you very much for your comments.

Next, Lisa Hunt to be followed by Felix Kapoor.

Go ahead.

Okay.

Um I want to commend uh Councilmember Ramirez for bringing forth these uh transparency amendments.

I think transparency and accountability within city government of Houston is incredibly important.

And I think it's particularly important around the issue of infrastructure in the CIP projects.

In terms of where the sources of income are and the length of time of these projects, I agree that our um we wisely draw on multiple sources.

Um I'm wondering if the public works might not be able to maintain within the tool that um councilmember Peck is referring to additional columns that might indicate um what are the sources of funding for a particular project and when was it instigated?

That way you'd have a history before you.

I think that the other reason that this um these transparency amendments are important is a balance of power and accountability.

I think in our strong mayor form of government in this area of uh public works and economic development, because public works projects are economic development.

Um the council has a critical role in that.

And I think your uh input is sometimes included, but also not always.

And so I think that this transparency ordinance provides a vehicle for the council to exercise a check and balance on um local government and allow citizens to know how their money is being spent.

I think it's about stewardship and accountability.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Council member Kamen.

Yeah, uh point of order, point of inquiry.

Um I know we're uh very shortly about to lose quorum, and I think that um a lot of council members are eager to at least vote these out so that they can come to the full body.

I want to be very respectful of public comment.

But could there could we all those several more speakers?

But what yeah, we can go ahead and vote on um we still want to hear, but again, I want to make sure that all the amendments have an opportunity to come to the full body so that we can have further engagement on it as well.

I am in agreement with that, and we can go ahead and um pause public comment.

We are gonna get back to you.

And this vote is just to in with that show a show that this spot this body is in favor of advancing these measures to the full count for full council consideration.

So we'll take up this uh Ramirez first, CIP amendment 101.

He's already laid it out.

Um may I have a motion.

Second.

Have a motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Opposed, no.

Measure pair.

Passes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Next, we'll have Councilmember Kamen briefly lay out her amendment and take the same vote.

Yes.

Colleagues, is Council this amendment uh improves and strengthens the budget stabilization fund to increase the amount and uh require replenishment within 365 days uh as discussed.

I would move uh for a vote.

Second.

All in favor say aye.

Any discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Opposed no.

Motion carries.

And then council member Peck.

Thank you, Chair.

Um every year I offer a CIP amendment to change the way we evaluate which projects get funded.

The current process is flawed and inherently leaves certain areas behind.

The city uses a worse first approach to determine CIP projects through the DDSRF.

And I support this method and do not at all want to move away from data-driven decision making.

Um shifting away from the data invites too much subjectivity, and there is a good reason why we moved away, why we moved to the system in the first place.

However, the way we define and prioritize worse first is not working as intended.

Right now, the most critical projects are put on a list where they must compete against um all the other projects for the limited resources.

And as a result, the very worst projects, often the most expensive ones, never move forward.

Why spend 100 million dollars on the most severely flooded area when you can spend $50 million on a project where flooding is slightly less severe?

From a fiscal perspective, that choice is understandable, but it still leaves the 100 million dollar project unattended to.

The funding formula also results in certain parts of Houston receiving disproportionate shares of projects while others consistently lose out.

We need to take a hard look at the formula to ensure fairness.

So funding is more evenly distributed across the city, and so that our most severely impacted areas finally get the attention that they deserve.

Additionally, we should build a mechanism into the process that keeps projects moving forward.

This would help avoid situations where funds sit unused while urgent needs are unmet.

If a project cannot advance its designated fiscal advance in its designated fiscal year, there should be other shovel ready projects ready to go.

Re-examining the process can help us achieve this continued continuity and can't speak and prevent unnecessary delays.

So this um CIP amendment basically just um determines or creates a working group to determine the spare way of moving forward.

Any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Opposed no.

Motion carries.

Great.

All three of these will be um advanced to the full council consideration, or this this body desires that they be moved forward for the full for full council consideration.

Real I hate to rush those last two.

I really apologize, but understand we had a very lengthy meeting.

And now we'll continue with public comment.

Um next, Felix Kapoor.

Don't see him.

Oh, yes.

I do see you.

There you are.

Uh Council members and staff, hello, good afternoon.

Um here to speak on Councilmember Ramirez's uh I guess now CIP amendment with once were budget amendments.

Um I wonder, Councilmember Ramirez, one question I have for you that you can like take offline is what do you think of uh Councilmember Thomas's idea of including the actual district member uh or district counselor in that sort of three-body scenario.

Um then uh the other piece was I do understand there are concerns on different parts of what's being presented, but I do think there are very strong pieces that like either council member Ramirez can take out or um other that people seem to have consensus on after hearing all discuss, such as like, you know, being frank, Councilmember Kaman, like you had no choice in what happened on Shepherd with that project being stopped.

So something like this could have really, really helped you on on that project, or like some of the bike lanes that have been removed much against public uh public want, all because of kind of like whoever is close to the mayor's ear, is what it feels like from the outside.

Also um the fact that each council district might get reports um with more detailed information that they can then share with their constituency or that they can then make better decisions on uh as well as um maybe in this this whole prop A committee is terrible.

It goes against the city charter.

We're basically breaking the law.

Like if we can write in here, maybe that if the three council members get together, it by it can bypass the committee and just go straight to council because that is essentially what the letter of the law should said, and that's what the voters voted on.

And right now the mayor has instituted a council for that to go to before it comes to city council, and I think that really impedes the progress and continues to limit the power of council um as individuals and really just continues to push forward a strong mayor system.

Um it was really concerning that what council member came in had said, and I guess alluded to what was happening in District H too that like some of this information isn't even getting to council people.

So y'all are feeling the calls, but not really doing anything, having any of the information to like give to your constituency.

And last point, if I may, um Yeah.

Actually, I just made my last point.

Thank you, Felix.

Really appreciate your comments.

Next speaker is Icra Tariq.

She's not.

She was going to be virtual.

Icra Tariq.

Uh she's not.

Okay.

Next, Jack Valensky, I do see you here.

To be followed by Alice.

Just have Alice down, sorry.

The clock is fixed.

The clock is fixed, yes.

Sometimes things work.

So Montrose or Boulevard improvements, Montrose Safe Street routes, Wad Drive, Bike Lane, CATS Crosswalk, Westheimer Repavement, West Alabama Reconstruction, Montrose Pride Crosswalk.

Some of these we had public meetings with, and we made suggestions.

Some of them were just done.

But the real problem is that the mayor has a Sharpie and changes things.

That we have the input.

None of the suggestions that we have been given to the TURS, Montrose Church over uh the last year, year and a half, nothing was done.

It was just whatever the mayor wants, that's what happens.

We need to have a system where we have public meetings, number one, we have input.

Then it comes back to us what happened.

We should be able to talk about that.

We should in the middle of the project have something changed.

Montrose Boulevard cost a year and an extra million dollars at least.

And we got a much poorer project than what we had asked for in the first place.

Community engagement is so important.

The the um things are happening with Metro, which is coming from the mayor.

We know it's coming from the mayor.

There's no public engagement.

That's absolutely ridiculous.

Why did we redo Texas Avenue when no buses go along Texas Avenue for Metro?

Why did Metro pay for that?

I'd still like to know where Metro is getting that money to do all these projects, because Metro is supposed to be doing transportation, not repaving streets for the city.

If we need money, we need to raise taxes, we need to figure out how to do it.

We shouldn't be stealing money from other agencies.

But to get back to this, we need to have more transparency.

Thank you for taking this up.

I know it's really difficult, but thank you for the input that you allowed us to give you, uh, council member.

But we need to have a system where it's not just the mayor that uses a Sharpie.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jack.

Really appreciate your comments.

Next, Alice.

Sorry.

I should know your last name.

You come a lot.

It just wasn't put down.

But state your name and go ahead.

Hi, my name's Alice Liu.

Um I'm I'm here also in support of Councilmember Ramirez's proposal.

Um over the past two years, under the current city administration, transparency, cooperation, and accountability between city departments and the public have taken a major hit.

Um my organization has been has relied on a close relationship with public works for four years to understand their needs and how best to advocate for better infrastructure.

But because of departmental restructuring and a shift in the willingness to collaborate under the Woodmire administration, it's been very hard for us to get information that we used to get easily about the status of projects, works, and finances.

Um the CAP amendments, we're hoping will allow both City Council and the public to better exercise our rights to understand infrastructure and how our tax dollars are being spent.

And once again, the goal is to address our current baseline, which is frequent and unexpected delays, and not necessarily to further delay projects.

In Houston, as a person before us uh before me just spoke on, there's such a low level of trust between residents and city government.

And the information requested in these amendments should really be the baseline.

Um I would particularly emphasize my support for 1.01 B so that the information in this report, it's available to the public and not just to council.

Um it's eliminating that extra step.

And then lastly, along the lines of transparency, I wanted to make some specific requests about information.

It's been very hard for us to get from the Department of Drainage.

Number one, the project tractor on Build Houston Forward website.

This used to be the main way the public could view past and current flood projects.

That's been under construction for most of this year.

Um, the flood risk portion of the stormwater master plan.

Um we know it's been completed for uh almost a year now, but it's been stalled for public release.

Um if I could just finish real quick.

Um without this information, communities are unable to understand how the master plan will impact their neighborhoods.

Also to address Councilmember Peck's amendment.

The stormwater master plan is what public works has been saying will do exactly the goal of revamping the CIP process so that it's more equitable, it's more efficient, um, and it's not up to sort of political whims.

So I also have a question for Peck.

Is your amendment taking into account that the stormwater master plan has already been under development?

There's already been a lot of really great work putting put into it that I would love for council to get back get behind that existing process instead of creating a whole nother committee.

Um thank you so much.

Vice Mayor Pro Tempet.

Um thank you for that question.

Yes, absolutely.

We should use any and all available data to determine um how projects get funded and which projects get funded.

And in fact, la I think it was this last CIP process or two CIP processes ago, I didn't put forward this amendment because they were doing the stormwater plan.

And so I think that we you know it's important that we have that data, but then how do we execute that data and actually put it into which projects get funded?

Because I think it's going to show a lot of the projects that all of us have been advocating for for years and years, saying this project you know, this area floods again and again, and now we have data to support that, but then it's still a matter of then how do we get that project moving forward um to get it funded and executed.

So yeah, we absolutely need to take into account that um data.

Yeah, I I think so um you know the stormwater master plan, it's divided into two sections.

The first section is the flood risk, which is really just the data.

The second section is vulnerability, which is supposed to be putting together that data to actually influence project selection.

Maybe there's another piece that city council can have more of a uh of input in.

Overall, I really I agree with the concern.

CIP is a huge concern for us.

I just want to make sure that the work that's being done already isn't lost.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um next, Tanya Hughes, Tanya Hughes virtual.

We don't see her online.

Next, Kevin Strickland.

Uh, thank you all for hang hanging in there for my words of wisdom.

Um this process is a little bit frustrating, I'll be honest with you.

Um, the I'm gonna go off script.

I feel like the discussion that's happening has drifted way away from the intent of the transparency ordinance.

So there's a couple of things happening.

Y'all are um there's a lot of need for the perfect being the enemy of the good.

I wish there had been this level of deliberation around the scooter ban before y'all voted unanimously to pass it.

Uh, because this the transparency ordinance is so much more important.

Um if Councilmember Thomas was still here, I would like her to know that the call is coming from inside the House.

The reason the transparency ordinance exists is because the mayor has unilateral power to spend what he wants, when he wants, how he wants on infrastructure projects.

We know Houston has a strong mayor form of government.

It is the strongest form of government in the U.S.

The transparency ordinance is intended to reform that.

So I will remind you.

This is a low bar for what we're doing.

This is not a high bar.

It is a low bar that the public should be expected to know about these projects.

Second, I'm shocked that City Council is not more um concerned about the amount of waste that's happening.

So to my earlier point about the number of projects that the mayor has paused, canceled, radically changed.

I sent y'all a list.

It's a long list that all came from the mayor's office.

So let me give you some pointers about the amount of money that cost.

Telephone Road, 489,000 for the redesign, Montrose Boulevard, 400,000.

Houston Avenue, 100,000, a million to remove it.

West Alabama, 90,000, Shepherd Durham, phase two, 203,000 for the redesign.

Washington Avenue, $6 million to repave a road that had not been programmed.

Montrose safe routes to school.

No engagement after the community explained to them that we needed that sort of project.

Thank you, Kevin.

And that's been sent to all of us, correct?

So you've sent that to the a list of that.

Yes.

And it's an incomplete list.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Because we don't have transparency.

So that's the whole intent is to get eyes on this.

Thank you.

We appreciate your your comments.

Thank you very much.

I feel like you'll probably get them again at the next public session.

That's fine.

We also have Laura Gallier had had signed up to speak on, I believe the Cayman amendment.

She is not here.

Does anybody else in the in the pub in the audience would like to comment on any of these items?

Any and all items.

Okay.

Thank you, colleagues.

I know it was long.

We it had originally intended to to divide these up, but the administration asked us to delay this meeting because of the 419 emancipation conflict.

So I apologize for the length of the meeting, but I think it was a really good ex uh discussion, um, at least on one of the the amendments.

Um before we adjourn the next BFA meeting will be Tuesday, January 6th at 10 a.m.

We will be um bringing up the open space ordinance, which has to do with parks funding.

Um so look forward to your attendance uh attendance there.

Um this meeting is adjourned.

Thank you.