 Alright folks, thanks for showing up this evening. We have a busy night ahead of us, so we're going to start out quickly and early. So first on the agenda is Mr. Thompson from the San Antonio Water System. He's going to be talking to us about the Mr. Ridge Pipeline. Good evening. Thank you all for inviting me here tonight. Again, my name is Derek Thompson and I am the Director of Water Resources at SOS. And before I start out, how many people have heard of the Mr. Ridge Pipeline Pipeline? I wonder how many are there? It's really well heard about. So why aren't we doing the project? Why aren't we contemplating the project? Well, back in the early 90's, there was a lawsuit that was filed on behalf of protecting the dangerous species that melted sand off the screen. And that lawsuit put an effect on the creation of the ever-talkable water system, which began to limit the amount of water that could be used to set it in the chopper. Because of that limit, or cap, on the ever-talkable water system, we knew that before, San Antonio would have to diversify its water supply chain. In the other words, there's not enough permits in the ever-talkable water system to meet the needs of San Antonio Water Board. So we started planning for a diversified portfolio of supplies. So back in 1998, we took the first step towards that plan. And we started looking at various options across South Central Texas. We looked at the degrees along. We looked at ASR with the Dragon Cycle Projects, River Basin Projects in Colorado, and also in the lower hand. As we moved forward, we refined what we were going after. We developed several projects. As we moved forward, we rebuilt the largest direct recycling water program in the country, which has capacity of 39,000. We actually take from our tree to plants. In the southern portion of the county, we cut them back into our system, or a separate system, not the football system. But we provide large golf courses, corporations for Mexican fermentation, and also for Indian recruiting processes. So that reduced the demand for the football side, which we were providing them to offer. We also developed the third largest offer storage impairment project in the country, most located in the southern area of the county. And y'all heard about the ASR offer storage impairment project. It has been a godsend as far as projects for us. It is we take excess permits from the upwards. So in years that we have adequate rainfall, we have excess supply over a million. We take that, we freeze water out of the adverse, and we shake it down to southern area of the county, and we store it into the careers of our people. Then in dry times, which is what we have right now, we actually freeze that image, and we send it back to town. And it still, for the most part, retains its average quality. So it's very little frequent that we need to make the water fit for our customers. So that was the second. We also developed supplies or projects that we offered in the northern area of the county. And all of that, they filled that need in the northern portion of our search area. We also developed another project in the southern area of the county, in the Carrizo. It's just more of where we have our storage answers. So at the Carrizo water, at the Carrizo aquifer, we freeze it at roughly 10,000 acre feet of water to save back for our customers. We do that during dry times, just like we do right now. We use that in the Carrizo, which is stored in the area of Carrizo and soon back to town. We also produce and tune it out to water in the northern area of the county. We also developed a project in Gonzalez County, also in the Carrizo, that we offered it to the groundwater district of Gonzalez County to freeze roughly 12,000 acre feet of water. We got into a partnership agreement with Shirt Scheme, we've got a corporation to use excess capacity to type in our data and build to bring water into San Antonio that saves us about $80 million dollars into our partnership. So that water is online. We're trying to wrap up the construction of that project where we are receiving water. Time may have since been a fourth year of drought. We also started construction on our brackish diesel project in southern area of the county. That's producing water out of the Wilcox, the lower Wilcox hopper. So we have actually three different supplies in southern area of the county that we can kind of use as a hub bringing water into the county. We're also developing a water resource simulation pipeline which takes water from that ASR, that hub in southern area of the county and we're piping it around to the western side essentially when we see a tremendous amount of growth. So those are all the projects that we started, that we have completed, that are so many diversifying our need of the others. So the next step, we know San Antonio is growing. We're anticipating about $20,000 versus per year in our service area. Some people say that's too low, which is why we want to make sure that we have adequate supplies that not just barely meet our needs, but take us ahead. This is one of the best project that comes online. Back in 2009, in our water management plan, we identified a potential supply that would actually go out for bids. We would actually send out proposals asking people to bring those projects, those proposed projects that were adequate and met their needs. We received nine proposals back in 2011, review those proposals, we began to get the three finalists, and the Miss Ridge Consortium, which is made up of Avondale, which is a Spanish corporation, and also Bluewater, which owns the water rights in San Boston. So the project is out of Burleson County, and it's 50,000 acre feet, so it is larger than any other project we've ever developed. So this project, 50,000 acre feet, is part of the discriminated groundwater addition, which is a huge plus. We've had issues in the past developing our own supplies. It's all scary. We also looked at developing supplies to most of the county. They're all covered by groundwater additions. And there's a critical development for any permits. So this project already comes with permits. The 30-year production and transportation permits, they have to be renewed to all permits where our conditions have to be renewed. These are long-lived. This project was then put in effect, or put in our 2012 water management plan, as a supply that will fill the needs in the plan in 2018. So we were going to bring it a little sooner than originally anticipated. When we began the negotiations with Mr. Ridge, which were actually posted onto the public meetings, there was over seven meetings that were held in which our executive management and support members negotiated with the Mr. Ridge consortium. In front of the media, in front of anybody that's willing to come and support our meeting. They walked down the project. All risk is transferred over to those entities to the mayor responsible for building the well-built, very small building pipeline on the structure that is needed to produce the water and then transport the water to the mayor county. And in your handout, if you don't have a handout, I'll have a few more. But there is a map that shows, there's a map in front of the lower right that shows the general layout of the pipeline going from Burleson County. It's based in seven counties, in Burleson, America. The project was high-end in Northern Perry County, in the Stone Oak area. And then we will actually develop infrastructure from the Stone Oak south of downtown. So, based in the core of our city, we'll be providing water for this project. Now, this project is not cheap. We live in the water park projects. They're about the right amount of cheap. Our raggedy cell project is roughly $1,200 to $3,000 a day per foot. Most cities consider it expensive relative to the Edwin Locker. The Edwards is very cheap. It's right under the ground, under a feet. It's roughly $300 to $5,000 a day per foot. They give you dry restrictions around two inches. This water, with bed service, is roughly $800 to $44 million. So, it is twice as much as what we're spending on our raggedy cell project. So, they're very cheap. The project, $1,800 to $2,000, is actually for the capital cost. And the purchase of the water, plus the ocean, which is roughly $175 annually, and then another $175 debt of liquid cost. So, it's a total cost of project, roughly, between $22 and $2,400 a foot. So, again, it is expensive. But that price is locked in for a few years. So, if you put my gas, today, at $2.85 a gallon, and you've got it locked in for 30 years, that's a pretty good deal. That's basically what this is. Locking in this project at today's prices for roughly $22 to $2,000. This project has not been approved by City Council. It has been approved by our board. We had some minor contract provisions last week that were approved. This goes to City Council on the 30th of October. The contract is online at our website. So, you can download it, go through it. All our water management plans are online as well. We also have some minor reports that have been produced for City Council for City Council. And it has all the water costs and all the projects that are interested in all the projects and so forth. So, we're thinking it's there for you to review and choose to be back. So, right now, originally I had mentioned that the project would be online as far as our planning goes by 2018. Well, that has slipped a little bit because of the negotiations and the time when we look at this project online in 2020. Now, again, it is not cheap. We are looking at the roughly 60% increase in rates for the average customer. And that is, we didn't get it to 2020 or in 2020 when we actually take delivery of the water. So, now we understand that not everybody uses a lot of water and we want to make sure that they're not buried in the room in the cost of this project. So, right now, we actually have a great supply chain committee that is meeting which has made up this point in City Council. And we're looking at our rate structures. How do we charge individuals? Let's go. So, we want to make sure that we have a live flowing rate that is in effect for those that don't use a lot of water. We don't want to place the burden on those individuals. For the ones that use the water, it can be. And there's been comments that we are getting away from our conservation ethic. That, you know, we are leaders in conservation across the country. We are well ahead of any other city that I'm aware of. That is not the case. We're still refocusing our conservation efforts to be more impactful to peak demand or peak usage. So, driving down the summer demand patterns with individuals, water and logs and so forth when the stress on the alcohol right now is the greatest. So, that is not the case. We are pushing forward. So, over the last three years, during drought, we've seen our demand. Actually, the cabinet, our gallows per person today dropped off into the mid-month 20s, which, you know, Austin kind of touts itself as a very friendly city to the environment and they're not even close to what we're doing right now. So, that effort is, it will continue to move forward. That's the second presentation to it. So, that is, that kind of covers the bulk of the project. I'm going to be happy to answer any questions. I have two questions. The first one is, how does the Carrizo aquifer compare to the Edwards aquifer in size? And my second question is, I see your pipeline is going right past Austin. And it's Austin involved in many of this project. Okay, the first question, the Carrizo aquifer runs from, it runs southwest to northeast and it basically runs from Mexico up through Louisiana, Arkansas. It is a huge aquifer. It is not like the Edwards in the fact that it's very flashy. You know, you watch the Natives, they give you the aquifer level every day. And they could go, if you have a big rain, it could go up 10 feet. You can watch it drop to two feet a day during peak axes in the summer months. So, it's not flashy like that. It's more of a stable aquifer. Austin, they have decided to conserve more. Conserve their way out of the drops. They have one source of water that's in Colorado. So, that lake system provides water to Austin and they're roughly at 30% in their supplies. So, we have... Yes, sir. I'm sorry, we have the limit questions after yours because we've got a full schedule. I'll be happy to answer any questions outside if you want to. Okay. Since you're dealing with commercial sources, can you say a little bit about what saws would be if they go bankrupt? Some other way to fail to follow through on their side of the... There is a person place, but if you have to go with that consortium fails, you managed to do it at the opportunity to take over the infrastructure within some place. Thank you. Again, I'll be happy to answer your question. Sure. We've got the next portion on the agenda that's going to take quite a bit of time as well. Four of the five candidates running for District 2 in November. Just a couple weeks from the work. Basically, right now, the voting is on. So, we have our current Councilman, Keith Toney, president, Alan Borg, Nintendo Pentecost, and Peter O'Dark. So, I've posted one question to each of these gentlemen and asked that they respond to it individually, of course, and then after each one of them has been able to respond to the single question that will open up four questions from the audience. So, the question I came up with, what is the pressing challenge facing Mankey Park neighborhood today, and how would they respond to that challenge? So, we'll start off with the Councilman. Thank you. It's a pleasure to be back here with you. From my standpoint, the pressing question for Mankey Park right now is whether or not the city will be allowed to impose a 30% rule on you for this historic designation to even, and I understand that the city explains as to the other ball rolling, so to speak. 30% is 30%, and it's not 51% of that ability. And that's a problem for me as the Councilperson. And I, from my standpoint, that's one of the more pressing issues. The most pressing issue I see right now, and I'm here to pledge to you tonight that my vote will never be for that. As a matter of fact, I've initiated a CCR so that we can stop this thing. And then beyond the CCR, we, the CCR is an initiative step, and I have signatures required for that. That's very much a lie. But beyond that, we go up to the CCR. This doesn't happen not just to Mankey Park, but to no one else in this city again. 51% is 51%, 30 is 30, and the 20 shall be. It just doesn't make sense to me. Okay, hi everybody. Go through it again. You can ask questions after everybody. If I can, you can answer the question. Thank you. And thank you all for coming out tonight. Again, I'm telling you, this is the most pressing issue. You're going to run through the neighborhood of Ohio. You will see all the signs and you'll talk to the people that are very, feel very strongly about this issue. And I would say that you need to possibly rethink 30% for the future because the way the process has been done is definitely not transparent. It's not, I think we could look at it in a more Austin-like method. Going back to sitting over, limiting it to 45 days instead of the two-year period for them to get the application completed. I think 45 days is reasonable and I also think a one-year kind of whole period before another application is submitted is also a good idea in order to have people not be bombarded constantly with attempts to think of that historic history. I would also think that it should be more on the public forum opposed to a petition-based situation because you can kind of kind of plan and decently do the petition without all of your neighbors being aware of the situations going on. I think that would make things more transparent in the future and allow things to go forward in a much movement fashion. Can you even, you're talking about Macintosh, spoke about it in that, well, I'm going to indicate right after it became a historic history. If I was a politician at the time, I would not be a favor of that initiative. But what I can say is that since that has occurred, and it is a historic history, I think it has helped spur development and folks coming in because it made the name for being invisible and I think it was beneficial. So that's what I'm saying to you guys in the process now, but I think the process should remain the same as it had always been and however other districts became a historic issue, still remain that same sort of criteria for development in the historic district. But, you know, this is an internal matter to Macintosh and I think whatever decision comes out of it, I think we go forward and think about some other issues in the neighborhood that we can make sure that development happens and what you would like to do. Thank you. My name is Samuel Gardner and born and raised in San Antonio. These young men have said pretty much all they have to be saying about the historic role of the district in the 51st century. For me, I believe there's a totally different situation when we talk about district 2, but the most part that's all you hear about is the east side. Now, in the last election in 2013, California out in the north east side, they told me they felt like they were the stepchildren of district 2. And so for me, my thing is, the biggest issue is making sure resources are coming throughout the entire district, making sure that when we identify district 2, it's not just about the east side or east point or specific areas needed in those areas, but making partners a part of district 2. There's other parts of district 2 that no one would ever know but we never spoke up about. As a council person, I want to be all inclusive. I want to ensure that it's just not an issue when we're talking about the historic needs or when we're talking about the street or infrastructure needs, but anytime we're talking about district 2, we're talking about all parts of district 2. So for me, a major concern is including all parts of district 2 but just in general, we're all one big family and we can come back together and figure out how to do that. So just that connectivity to the district and being a part of the district. Thank you. I have a question for Councilman Tony. I can't remember the words that you used but as you were talking initially, you were talking about 30% of the 50% I think. I'm going to paraphrase it because I can't remember what you said. You say you're going to stop this thing and I want to understand a little bit more what you meant about that. Do you mean getting more clarification on the 30% and how that works? That's what I want to understand is what you meant with the words that you said. Exactly, because not just the 30% but the fact that it looks like the city is giving those who are pro-historic time and time again to reach their magic numbers. When if you're not you get one shot but you can go I'm here and I'm here and I'm here so they have different milestones for you and I think I said the last time I was here whether Manning Park wants to be used to work or not just up to Manning Park residents that's fine. The issue I have is that 30% can decide not the process moves forward I just don't think that's fair and then I will fight that. Okay so what is the CCR or is that what you meant the CR is? That 30% goes away that number goes away and it will be trauma of 51%. So you're saying that 51% of the people should petition even before the city decides whether this is good and it comes to the people with discussion. That's right but ultimately you're right you keyed on it it comes to the people with discussion but 30% should not drive the process. So you would have a 51% of all the people who own property in the district to say we want to even start thinking about it. We want to do it diplomatically and we want to do it democratically and we want to do it that way and we want to do it that way. That brings the question of if 51% say let's do it why do you go through the charade of talking about it? We're not going to talk about it. We're going to leave it up to you. So then the process is trying to talk to 51% out of it? Right now 30% are driving. Right now 30% are driving. I think some people here have a problem with that. I certainly do but we just swept it so it is very difficult. I think there are other issues other than the historic in Main Street Park and one of the things I want to ask each of you is about development. I heard some discussion about development. We have a neighborhood plan we have the first neighborhood plan that the city ever had it's been updated time after time. A lot of neighbors spent a lot of time updating this plan but yet we have people come to us and even though our neighborhood plan says there's no commercial development in this area this should only stay residential. We have people come and want to develop that and we went through the NCD process and so I'm wondering what good does this neighborhood plan does us coming together as a group do if someone petitions the city and gets overrun a.k.a. Broadway, a.k.a. gosh the number current entry, a number I'm asking everybody okay tell us what is our neighborhood plan and what does the NCD do for us and would you support it if we come into a zoning or an issue we stand on our side because we have council people who sat on the other side of the table. I'll stand on the side of the people and I always have and I always will now just like you're saying in light of new evidence you get new evidence you have to think new about the issue and we'll do that but I do stand on the side of the folks and I've done that but you're talking basically about zoning I'm talking about zoning you're talking about zoning and I know that that can be a hero but it really can be and look at each one individually in each case individually however, however by and large you want to follow every rule of thought and we will approve that so we try to do it as far as your neighborhood plan is concerned I think that everything that is currently zoning residential should be residential but any things that are commercial or on outskirts you may have to think about buffer zones because there's going to be a lot of heavy commercial growth on Broadway and you may have some vacancy issues in those areas because if you need areas in between heavy commercial time back to residential so in your corners I wouldn't say necessarily to be up for grab but you as a community may agree that I wouldn't want to live behind a power washer or a water burger this may be okay for a law this may be okay for some other kind of mixed use situation so I think we have to look on the side of growth in maintaining the character of the neighborhood but also do what makes sense as far as cities if you live in another city you know that on your corners they tend to be more commercial and when you work into the central areas of the block it's going to be residential just about every case unless it's a major thoroughfare that's the city council person I'm going to consider I would like to know that people are active and have both what they want and what they see on the paper that's great but I also think that it should be case by case it should be just car park however it exists today and change but my feeling is that as things come up and if it's a business if it's something that they're engaging with you folks to say hey this is the idea what we want to do is this something y'all can support is this something they cannot support and come to some sort of agreement with these people if you care and if not then it will come to the city council to decide on these issues but I think there should be some opening for to say hey I'm not an urban or city planner I don't know I can't predict the future of what San Antonio will look like what we want to do is at least keep it open to say that I don't have some businesses in different places because even in my neighborhood I would like to support businesses in my neighborhood I'd like to be able to walk out by doing my go to a professional and so I think that that would be the case for some people here and I don't want the most vocal people to always carry away and say okay this can't be here because I'm the loudest person and my neighbors and my friends they take what happens in this neighborhood I'm just asking that everyone look at our neighborhood plan that's been filed with the city and somebody to follow the neighborhood plan it says no commercial development here don't develop commercial here I'm looking I would consider the neighborhood plan as a city council person the city council person I would be elected by the people it doesn't matter if I'm a city planner urban planner whatever type I can have outside of that position I would elect to represent you and if you say that this is what you want that's what I'm gonna fight for that's what I'm gonna stand for at the end of the day it's not about what I can do what I think is best is about going back to the people, whatever the people say is best. And so I'm never going to be on the other side of the table for the people. And that's many parts that sunrise eastward, anybody in this group, whoever I'm representing, it's always going to be about what your inches are, not mine or anyone outside of this group. So to answer your question, yes ma'am, whatever the plan is that this organization, this group, this community, this name group came up with, that's what I thought we were going to do, because that's what I'm likely to do, to serve the people, to serve the people in the community. So yes, and yes, and yes to your question. Thank you. Time's your burden. Time's your burden. Time's your burden. More time's your burden. I have a concern about the 51%, because if you wait until 51% for people to start dialoguing, it's even more of a done deal than 30%. It's, I think that intuitively that sounds good, but in reality that will encourage less dialog than we've even carried in the past. Maybe we can keep dialoguing earlier, isn't very interesting, or we can carry it to other parties and hope what others might have. Thank you. Any other questions for the panel? I guess for everyone, just to make this a little bit more broad. How do you, Council candidates, how do you feel about the historic ordinance as a tool for neighborhoods maintaining their neighborhood quality? And when I say that, I want to understand that we have the historic process and we have the neighborhood conservation districts. Each is a tool. There's two staff people behind it. One of them has about 16 people behind it. The one that has two people behind it, which is the NCD, the neighborhood conservation district, it's got holes all over it. You can see them all over our neighborhood. Historic doesn't. That's a stronger tool. I want to know how you feel about neighborhood historic designation as a strong tool for neighborhoods to be able to have. It is a strong tool, and it's up to how neighborhoods use it. It's ultimately your call, how you use it, and you're right. The NCD has holes in it. It has lots of holes in it. Historic designation is something to hand. That's your call. That is absolutely your call. You've heard that somebody thinks that it would be a good idea here. And so if you think it's a good idea, that's fine. That's fine. I think that on both sides, the rhetoric has gotten ramped up just a little, a little much. Some people were saying, we can't paint our houses the color we want. I don't know if that's true or not, but if that's, I don't think that's true. I think that's a little too much. And so on both sides, I think that the rhetoric has gotten out of hand. But if it's something that you really want to get back to dialogue, have your dialogue, that's fine. I don't think that there's an issue, not with me, with whether or not you're historic or not. But then it is if that's what you want, that's fine. As long as you have clear understanding of what it does, what it doesn't do, protections it provides, protections it doesn't provide. And that's your call. So in the MCD, on the other hand, I hear your point on that from what I know. It's like it's just cheese. And they have plenty of folks to fix it and why that's happened. The other thing that can be used properly, the main thing is that it's not an economic barrier to growth. You want people to be able to move into the neighborhood to where it's not a King William type situation where there are so many illustrations and so much overhead costs that you're hindering growth in the community. And that's really what I'm looking to prevent. I like the behavior of protecting the quality of the current quality of the neighborhood, but I also want to have a lot of people to move in without so many barriers. I think a historic designation, it's good in theory, but in terms of my experience, it does push up the cost of automating your home. The time it takes to plan a permanent process, it does make it more. And I'm concerned about other members in the community that may not be the folks who are outspoken or who don't have the means that they've been living in the neighborhood for years. Maybe they're on a fix. Maybe they don't have the means to go through that whole process of increased costs. And I think we're talking about fair at times. Just thinking specifically to the question, based on what you're saying, as far as one group having two members and the other group having 16, as a council person, and if those are council appointed positions or at the city level, they make those decisions, I believe that we have to look at that organization to see how can we strengthen it. We're going to use that as a tool whether it's going to work for or against. Just two people in the department can't run that department effectively and efficiently. So the first thing I would do is look at that portion of it to see how we can improve it. And if we can't improve it going in a different direction in terms of making sure we meet the needs that that department or that organization is doing. Outside of that, at the end of the day, and I think one of the aspects of this is the other way to say it, the conversation should always be going. Because we always want to improve our day because we always want to keep the quality of life high. We want to improve the quality of life. And it shouldn't be a re-active type of situation. We're waiting to something goes wrong, or something the bookie man's about to come scare us out of our homes. We always continue to talk to you and always continue to look for the resources to make sure the good things are there and we improve the things that need help, then we'll be okay. But I agree that the conversation shouldn't start when there's an issue. We should always be talking about it. And that comes from having a connection to the representative and having a connection in your community. And that's something that I want to remember and I will remember as a council person. We've been changing gears here a little bit. We've been asking this question for over 20 years whenever we've had a council and mayor candidates come to speak to us. So it's a two-part question. I'm starting with Mr. Darden. And the first part of the question is, what's the last book you read? And the second part of the question is, what's your favorite book? The first book I'm currently reading right now is Resident Leader. I'm a student out of the league for the leadership of the P&E program. So I'm currently reading that right now. My favorite movie is Memento, probably never heard of it. Okay, well yeah. Next to the movie, I watched it in college. I've watched it probably once or twice a month. It's a favorite. Thank you for the question. The last book I read was The Master of Arboretum. I think it's a part of it. And my favorite movie is Dogville. What was the movie? Dogville. Dogville. The last book that I read was Delivery Happiness by Tony Shae. He's the creator of the Amazon. I mean, I'm not sorry. I'm part of the Amazon. It's Apple's. And he talks about all the customer service things. We went there from there. Now we grew in their company. And now we grew a bunch of companies that didn't really find happiness in it until he was able to do it his way and keep it his way. So it's a culture. It's about a proper culture and developing culture for your organization. And then Park Road. The last book I read was Wolne. And I don't just embrace Lincoln for the obvious reason. Because Lincoln was really a masterful politician behind the scenes and people don't know that it wasn't official. He was a typical Illinois politician and we'll leave that alone. He was a typical Illinois politician and my favorite movie is Pat. Thank you. You're welcome. Going beyond Manky Park and even beyond District 2 now, each of you tell us what you think the two or three major issues facing the city council in the next term will be. Let's start again. Just obviously we're talking about what knows all the inside information, but based on things that we hear in the media, things that we talk about in our community, obviously the safety of the police officers and even the fire department, we have the light rail, that was a big thing. I've heard some people on the outside of our community saying they're going to try and do some campaigns to get something similar if not that same thing back, whether it be on the ballot or referendum or even talks to get that back in, but even without that, our transportation, we need better transportation on communities. Everyone has a drive apart, everyone doesn't have that little transportation. We're talking to people who want to get across town and have a good relationship. We've got to make sure our transportation is good. We're going to be able to get up to the park. The issue I think that's going to be a focal point in the future is looking at downtown development in terms of new buildings going out, those buildings that are there now currently making and who goes through their own areas and they're dilapidated. So I think things of that nature are going to be something that needs to be looked at. Looking at growth in these areas, not just out of the periphery in terms of making these places much more livable in terms of what sort of many institutions and things that are in this area. And I'm going to get a public transportation. I'm out here taking a 9, 14, 10, pretty much every day. I ride my bike, I put my bike on the bus, my son goes to St. Peter's up in Alamo Heights. So we're going on the bus daily and I see the type of people that are on the bus and whenever there's something about buses, it just gets going down because no one, the average person does the same. But that's one thing I have done and I've done it. When I was a lieutenant, people looked at me like I'm crazy. It was a conversation start, but it shouldn't be that way. It should be a bus with a normal way of life. New Yorker from New Yorker came here about 10 years ago and everyone takes the bus. Millionaires, four people, everyone. So, you know, I'd like to see that here. It's a big funding. And then for the other second time, it's a center city development as well. But I see in San Antonio, I haven't seen the many of the major cities that are still major cities and it's properties inside the city being less valuable than properties on the outskirts around the loop. So that's one of the things that definitely needs to be addressed because they're talking about raising property taxes. In a lot of occasions, there's a lot of unused properties or underused properties that could definitely use some spurring from the city to get development downtown and bring people downtown. We're growing at a little higher rate I think than what you're projecting at 20,000. I'm seeing 6.5%, which is about 250 people a day. So that's about 90,000 people are coming to San Antonio every year. Now, do we want them in San Antonio or do we want them in the city to run for those flores? I think we want a lot of them in San Antonio because the infrastructure is already here and it's going to be cheaper to grow as we grow in areas where we already have infrastructure as opposed to building further out and sprawling out and it's definitely going to be better for the environment as well. Well, Mr. Dark, which I've shown, he's actually right. And Paul, first of all, let me establish that because General City Council is not even a crystal ball, so I want to know exactly what it will be. I can tell you right now, for here and now, we can't afford to go grow as much as we love our public service and I'm the brother of a retired cop and it makes me interested in that conversation, but we can't afford to go grow, but we want to be fair to that, so that's going to be tough enough to crack. For one segment, not the other. Ones at the table, one isn't. You read the paper, you should know which one is there, which one isn't. The next thing is going to be growth. Again, I agree Mr. Worker, you know, we're so woefully small that people are coming here, they're coming, they're bringing their vehicles, they're bringing their children, they're bringing their families, but not one of them is they're bringing a drop of water with them. They're not. And we have to understand that for years we've said we want alternative water sources other than the cables, so now we're doing that. DeSal and we're doing it in our conservation efforts being great, but water is going to be the driving force because this is what happens. It's like dominoes that fall and these dominoes have fallen. Now that I haven't been privy to, our companies that want to come here, they want to set up shop and they want to hire 6,700 people or more. But the first thing they say is what about new water problem? They know. Even internationally they don't. They know. It was just a jumping to Japan and you get hit to companies out of 15 or 20 that we're talking to. Council contingent that went here. I didn't know that this time we'll go next time. And we want to get some jobs here too. But beyond that, it's water. They ask about the water. They know. They know they know that. We've got two way over here. Only because of water. Not because of workforce, not because of anything else. Water. Water is an issue. So we have to have whether it's the pipeline. Listen, I'm just saying we have to have an alternative source of water. So that's number one. Number two will be our public service and making sure that they have a good package but a package that's sustainable for the city. I'm overcomment, just with all of you sitting around the back of the development. What y'all mean by development. What that means. I'm dealing with that on my street right now about the commercial and not following a master plan. So I really don't understand what when you say who wants to support development in your neighborhood. What that means. What does that mean to me as a person that lives in my apartment and that if there is development in my neighborhood yeah, I'd like a restaurant. Who wants to go to a restaurant? Look down on my street. So I just don't understand what y'all are, what you mean when you say developers. Because we can build so many more houses. What does that tell me? Do I have a little change? I'm not sure if I mentioned that. Residential development my background is in architecture. So if you look at the way the cities were developed thousands of years, the corners of the main affairs, if you look at whatever's connected to Broadway that's typically commercial and a little bit on the new brothel side but not as much. In the center of the street especially on a small residential street there's not going to be any commercial development and no commercial businesses. There's not enough traffic going through those areas. There's a number of reasons why you wouldn't do that. So maybe I didn't say this but the main thing is that the houses, when people are redoing their quality work it builds into the character that's already there. It can't be as old as the house is next to it if it's being built right now. So they're going to use the materials of our time to play against the materials that are used in the area depending on the style that they're using for the architecture of the building. But that's the main thing that I would like to see in all of our development. Not necessarily just in Mickey Parker. There's a ton of old homes and different heights and the areas in between that we're going to have to make the same decisions on. And I just want a more transparent process so that we don't have to have these two year or three year long struggles and we can just grow as a community and rebuild the city, rebuild the downtown area. Well, what I'm saying is that I'm talking about in terms of housing stock. So if you have, you know, there are major plots and things like that, that we get some real support for development of residential, maybe one family, two families at most. Because we don't want to over develop you know. And yes, restaurants would be great but I have a nursing home at the corner of my my studio and every single day and it draws my parents. But I think the thing about it is when you have, you know, these historic destinations it makes it hard for development to say I'm going to build an unit here because it just made my costs go up by 20% or a percent. Well, from what I know is okay, I have to take out one of the windows and scrape them and put them back together. I personally can't go and buy a wood Marvin window for a thousand bucks. So those are the kind of things. So you're telling me that you build cheaply in a historic destination. Prove me wrong. I'll listen. Okay, and then you know, even sometimes historic destination doesn't taste as subjective. So you're going to disagree on what that place looks like. I think no matter what. I mean their new house is in it. And we're building King William. But you know probably check all the questions. Nobody said that. Nobody said that. Yeah. I'll address your real question. I'll address your real comment. Your real comment is about the coffee house. It is about what you all mean about development. I didn't say development, first of all, but I'll address your question. I didn't say it because I know better. I've been here. But I'll tell you that for development, for me, it's not my cup. It really isn't. Whether you're talking commercial development. Now that's the first thing I have to do. I don't know what to mean about commercial residential development, but I would do that. That's probably mentioned before. And let's say commercial residential development. If you want residential development, again, to Mr. Warwick's point, as long as it coincides with the community and what we have now, if you have a problem with it, then I have a problem. You don't, I don't. And I think that, that the area lies well now, let's go to commercial residential development on the street. I think I mentioned before, case by case basis. Now, just old Hartley, old Clark say, we're going to allow someone to put a whatever up in the middle of your block that just doesn't pass the common sense test. But back to case by case, if there are mid-game factors that need to be corrected and fixed based on those mid-game factors, which we've gone around and around about, then there may be exceptions made. Not for whatever, certainly not for that. You all already struggle through having a car wash there, and I know you've got a little buffer there, but that car wash is right there. I know that's a struggle for you. Parking is a struggle for you. Which is why, case by case again, the city tries to mitigate that by doing a parking study, which I think you're aware of, a parking study for you, that there would be a parking study done to ensure that disruption to new residents is mitigated. And that whomever does and I'm talking commercial development, whomever engages in that commercial development would have to meet city standards before they get an old car. You may talk about making sure that the residential development is consistent and appropriate. Do you think that the current mechanism that the city has in place, given RNCB as the teeth, to make sure that the residential development is consistent and appropriate? Or do you think something should be done to give it to you? I think you can always improve anything. In my time on the city council since August 14th, which only seems about 10 years old, I've found that there are many things that the city needs to shore up in more detail. You can almost say that crossed the board, unfortunately, that perhaps it does need to have a little more pressure behind it, a little more power, a little more muscle to get things done because you're going to get some developers that don't trust. You're going to slide it in under the pile and you have to be very careful and very diligent about it. Because you don't have to miss the work as an architect, but you don't have to be an architect to look and say, that doesn't fit here. It's Spanish colonial, it's this, it's that, it doesn't fit here. It's New Age, you get a New Age that's made out of corrugated steel and chicken wire and you want to have a fit and you should, you'll look and see that and hopefully the city would have a team, but I think they probably need to shore it up. I don't believe the city should have a team, people should have a team. And just like this young lady that gets there about the master plan, while we're talking about all these other things that are already established in the master plan, you should always go back to the master plan. So, notice the the city should have a team, I mean people should have a team and the city should be. That leaves us to self-police. This is what I mean by this. Being specific, the city shouldn't do anything against what you want to do. That being as specific as possible. I'm not saying if we want to fix that problem, I don't know if not everybody is going to say kill me tonight. But if we already stop and we want nice streets, then we go back to streets. That's the city saying yes you should, but it's not the city coming in and saying no you should not do that and that's what's happening. People are coming in and doing things that should not be done by our plan and the city is doing nothing. And going back to the master plan, we've already worked on the master plan. We should always go back to the master plan, but it didn't work. And I'm saying if the city comes to the project, that's going to be the second one. Because the people have already agreed with it more. And so it's my job as a certain leader to make sure that happens. And if you want to change it, then we can talk about that too, as you said. You can always have a conversation about it. You should not go ahead. How often is the national plan updated? Every five years. It's not just two people sitting in a room. It's a bunch of committees working on it. We're having this conversation this evening, but we're not the entire neighborhood and we can't even pretend to be half of it. A lot of us are owners that don't live in the neighborhood as well, so there are different things that we need to take into account. Again, I want a more transparent process. I want something that's going to bring everybody into the room so we can really have a conversation about this. And I don't think it's currently in place, and I think something like that should be in place. I've got one simple question that doesn't require a response. For a four-minuteer out there, please tell me with a show of hands how many have actually looked at the Mankey Park plan and spent more than 30 minutes. Okay, thank you. We don't have our selection for next year's board of directors of the neighborhood selection. Remember meeting. The bylaws call for is that a nominated committee is selected in September meeting. It was September meeting. It's just a circle over here. What we do is we pick seven candidates to serve on the board for the following year. We're going to announce this next week. Anybody can nominate someone to serve other than the ones that are nominated by the nominating committee. The nominees that have been presented by the nominating committee are Gabriel Shelton and if you're here, raise your hand. Gabriel and Booth are both the co-op, so they will serve a second year on the board. The other members nominated are Susan McMaster, who lives on Queen Anne, Stacy Underwood, who lives on Hellenor, Tony Westbridge, who owns a property on Clemson, and Paul Jeon, who lives on Clemson. Those are the nominating committees and members and be sure to show up for next month's selection. Do you need a second? I had a question. I've asked repeatedly for a listing of the members that can vote and the members that can join the board and I have yet to receive that list. My intentions is that way I can campaign for my board position with the members that can vote and also look for candidates that I would like to consider additions to the board in addition to what the selection committee has done and I've yet to receive. Tony, I answered your email and what I said was out of respect for the privacy of our members, we have never distributed our membership list to anybody outside of the board and the two neighborhood newsletter editors. I understand that, but I brought my problem up the house that says I can't have a listing of the members. Tony, would you like to take a few minutes and campaign before everybody stands sitting here this evening? No, we do that next month. That's typically done the night of the election. That's what's been done in years past. Any other questions? Thanks for coming. Thanks for your time. Appreciate all your questions.