 on behalf of the youth of the east side. We are witnessing a rapid change in our community and I am scared. Our people are being pushed out. The homies population is increasing. The violence is getting worse. Our rent is going up and the land that was donated to our community was sold illegally to big developers behind closed doors. I am upset because you are prioritizing development without providing the community real resources to be sustainable. Our wages are increasing so we can't afford the expense of food, coffee, beer, and housing you are bringing to our community. It seems like you are creating these bases and incentives to attract outsiders with money instead of helping your own community. The Hastry Bridge is a historic landmark on the east side and it is a place that our people have been going to for years. People fundraise and fought to protect that bridge and I need you to respect their effort. We want the land to be something that will benefit the community and the youth of the east side. Give us a skate park, not condos. A place where we can feel at home and not be judged or followed because of the stereotypes people have about us. I hope you take our needs into consideration. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Ms. Wilson. Gerardo, Maideen. Okay. Is Alex here? Okay. We'll move on now to council comment. We'll start with councilman Saldana. I'm sorry? I know you had nine minutes. That's a maximum allowed. So if a council member wants to recognize you, you can go ahead and speak. We'll start with councilman Saldana. Thank you, mayor. I appreciate how many yield to councilman Hall. And thank you, councilman and Nettie, just a couple more minutes. Thank you so very much. The one thing that I wanted to make certain was on the table is the fact that when the city deeded the land so that it could be a part of the brewery, they also gave a licensing agreement so that the city would allow tables, chairs, umbrellas to be placed on the Hay Street Bridge and that people would be able to eat their food, drink their beer, the licensing agreement. When the federal government learned, and guess who told them, that this was a part of what the city had planned, the federal government told the city of San Antonio, should you commercialize the bridge in any way, be prepared to return the $2.9 million that we gave to restore the bridge. Make certain that you understand that's a part of your decision as well. Thank you, Ms. Hinton. And so, first of all, let me just say thank you to everybody that has come forth and spoken on this issue. This is an issue that has been ongoing for many years. We've seen documents and discussion dating as far back as 2002. And then we had another iteration in 2012. And so, and most of us on council have not been involved in any of those decisions. And so, but what we're trying to do here today is do our best to number one, recognize that there have been wrongs that were done and decisions that were made that many of us on council now might not have made those same decisions. But we have a new council and a mayor who are interested in doing what we can to right any wrong that may have been done. And so, I'm hoping, and I've heard a lot of comments back today that we have not listened and that we have broken the trust. Our goal today is to let you know that we are listening. And I think taking up this issue today in the manner that we are taking it up hopefully says in part that we are. And that part of the aim today is to bridge and rebuild that trust and start anew with a reset. But to do that, we had to make tough decisions. And part of those tough decisions, number one, was to look at where are we right now and how can we move forward based on where we are. And from my understandings from our attorneys that there is a property owner that is not the city and that property owner has entitlements and rights to build. And so, at least for me coming in trying to help solve the issue, I've got to start from that perspective recognizing that there have been issues in the past. But at the same time, I've got a existing reality that I have to deal with in order to be able to resolve the issue. And so recognizing the fact that there is a property owner that is not the city, I had approached that property owner and see what we could do to even be at the table. So I want to first thank Mitch for being open to sitting at the table with me to at least look at the potential of the city doing something so that it could regain that property and put that property ownership back in the city's hands. And so, we had several discussions there and where we are today was very different from where we started because there was a lot of back and forth. And so at the end of the day, what I was trying to do was come up with something that took us from where we are but also created the notion what I call value to value. I wanted to be able to let counsel know that, well, first of all, we've got a piece of property that over time has been in an area that has increased in values. And so we've got to look at that. We've got to look at the fact that his entitlements were based on rules that were different than what they are now. And so basically I was trying to see if I could lift those same rules and structures that were in place back then into a new piece of property and looking particularly at the value to value proposition based on appraisals. And so we got appraisals on both properties. We use the same appraiser on both properties. And that appraiser was an independent appraiser and a certified appraiser apart from the city. And so I feel confident that the value and the appraisal, the valuations that were provided by that appraiser were accurate and reflective of the true value of the properties. One was 1.6 and the other was 1.5. So the difference is slight there. So I understand the concerns. We might understand that the original purchase price for that piece of property was 295,000. Those are not the values that are in that location today. And so in order to even start this whole process, I had to begin with a property owner and figure out how we could at least come to the table and we've done that. From there it's been conversation after conversation. I tell folks that there's been six groups that I've had to work with in order to be able to be where we are today. Number one, the property owner. Number two, the Hay Street Restoration Group. Number three, Dignity Hill Neighborhood Association. Number four, the Denver Heights Neighborhood Association. Number five, I've got to work with council to be able to get something that they could support. And number six, it's got to be something that the community as a whole can support. That's a lot of folks. That's a lot of stakeholders. That's a lot of interests. And not all of them are gonna be the exact same thing. And so to come up with a resolution and a compromise requires just that compromise. And I heard somebody say that when you work to develop a compromise, it's very difficult to have complete 100% consensus. I think Liz said that. And so I think it's clear, clear here today that we don't have 100% consensus. And there are very few issues where we have 100% consensus, particularly when it's controversial. So our goal then is to do what we can to get the highest level of consensus that we can to solve an issue. And in this particular case, right or wrong. And I think we've gotten to a point today where that conversation is happening and that resolution can happen as well. I wanna say thank you to the Hays Street Restoration Group, particularly to Nettie Hinton, to Gary Houston, and the late Doug Steadman. You all, from the get-go, from 2002, this is your project, Nettie. You've been certain to let us know that. And so I appreciate all the effort that you have given to this issue and to your community to make sure that it stays at the forefront. And working with the Esperanza Group to help push. And they've done a great job of that. Graciela, Yanneth, Amy Cassely, who is a very good friend of mine and a close colleague of mine who is away in New York right now in bereavement. And so I wanna recognize her work and the value that I have in her as another attorney who has dedicated her life and her mission in life to lots of great causes for free. She, from my understanding, is doing this work and has been doing this work over these seven or eight years pro bono. And so that says a lot about Amy. That says a lot about this cause that she stands for. And so I wanna certainly recognize that today. And so to all those folks who are part of the Restoration Group, thank you for continuing to advocate, continuing to push, even when sometimes it doesn't seem like folks are listening. I wanna say on behalf of myself and this council that we appreciate your advocacy and all those who came to advocate today as well. To Dignity, particularly to Liz and to Nicholas, if he's still here. And all those folks that I personally met and I know Lori and Eric met and Andy as well. We appreciate your advocacy. And we know that, and of course we know that there was a division within the group in years past, but the neighborhood associate had supported the project previously. And we're still looking at some sort of economic development on this piece of property. Dignity has advocated for Ella Austin and doing something better for Ella than where they are currently located. Dignity has advocated for affordable housing on this location and affordable housing just in general. And so we wanna say I appreciate that advocacy. And they've also been concerned that an additional park, two streets away from a larger park and funding that is short on the larger park could cause issues in with this particular location just in general. So they are advocates for more money for parks. And when we do have park space that we make sure that we do what is right and utilize them and provide those parks and those communities with the sufficient funding to be able to do that. So part of their hesitancy and I wanna recognize that today was that another park may not necessarily get the attention that those parks deserve. And so particularly when we have so many other parks that have many needs. So I wanna recognize Dignity and their advocacy and some of those issues that they cited as well. Ms. Green and Aubrey Lewis from Denver Heights. Thank you all for being open to meeting so many times as well. We did take into consideration your number one issue which we heard up front, which was the height and limiting to five stories. And so that from our early on discussions was front and center. And so hopefully that helps on that particular issue. But I also wanna do, I wanted to also say thank you Denver Heights, Aubrey and his team, his leadership team and Maria for advocating again for Ella. And I'm hoping Councilwoman Andrew Sullivan is in the chambers today that there have been several and I'll add my name to this list that Ella Austin is in a city facility that needs a lot of work. And so if we can't do the work there at that location, let's support Ella Austin somewhere. And I appreciate Denver Heights, I appreciate Dignity advocating for Ella Austin and a location for Ella Austin. Perhaps if not on this area, not on the exchange property but somewhere else. And they also advocated for SAGE, they also advocated for the NAACP. So I talked a little bit about the swap and so that's part of the issue that we had the first cross to hurdle to get to where we are. And so that's not a perfect solution, but it's the solution that's on the table and the solution that gets us to the table and the solution that will at least begin the discussion from the property being back in the city's hands. So then the second issue has been, what do we do with the property 803 and 815 once it's back in the city's hands? And there was again a wide variety of perspectives. We had one side that wanted to remain open to economic development, affordable housing, structures, that kind of thing. We had the other side that once solely dedicated to a park. The original language that we put in the ordinance was kind of right in the middle. But we heard loud and clear that that was not sufficient. And so I will be making a motion here in a second that goes to that extreme of placing the land back into a public park in the city's hands number one, but as a designated public park and whatever community discussions happen from there start from that basis of a public park. And I'll tell you two reasons for doing that. And again, going from a middle position to one that recognizes and designates as a park. Number one, and I appreciate the mayor for reminding me of this and then the entire council for also reminding is that we have a history here and part of that history has been litigation and we wanna do whatever we can to just stop the fighting and get as close as we can to staying out of the courts and resolving the issue once and for all. And so the best way that we can do that and looking at what has been the issue is number one ownership, which we're solving today. But the second issue is a park. And if we have something other than a park and discussion that might lead to something other than a park, then we open ourselves up to further battles, further division within the community. And so that position would not solve this issue. And so the language that we're gonna come up with here in a second will be solving that issue and getting to the designation of a park and then recognizing all the history and so forth that goes along with it. The second piece of that of why we're going to the side of designated as a park is to recognize and Graciela has made this point and I appreciate that, recognize the history that's here, the hard work that has been on this piece of property by Nettie and Mr. Steadman and Gary and others and all the history that has happened before. And we can't neglect that and put aside that history. And so where we start from here today should be a recognition of that history. And a couple of the things that Graciela sent me that I would like to submit into the record tell part of that history. Number one in 2006, and this is when I was on council the first time around and this is by a grant application by Tom Wendorf who has been long since gone from city of San Antonio and oversaw what was the name of the division at TCI Public Works and so Public Works is no longer Public Works is now TCI. But this grant application was pretty detailed about the community conversations that happened and pretty detailed about a park and detailed about what should go into that park and recognition of the depot and folks that work there and so forth. And even though we didn't get this grant it still is a recognition of work that was done and community work that was done and advocacy that was done back then. And so part of moving today to do a park instead of something right in the middle recognizes this. She also gave me the 2007 ordinance from council that recognizes the donation of land from the Budco Company. And I would like to know it's part of the record but I'm gonna submit that as part of the record as well. And then she gave me some information about the history of the bridge and some of the history of the work that's been done written by Doug Steadman who has passed away. And so all of this is important history. We talk a lot about history here on this council and how important it is to continue to recognize that and value that. And I'd like to do that today and hopefully our decision today although not a perfect one on many different levels I do think it's resolves and recognizes a lot that should be recognized today. And so then my final statement is I just wanna say thank you to mayor and council for entrusting me number one and just to sit in this position for the time that I have. And then number two to take on this particular issue I've tried to solve lots of controversial issues during my five months on council. And this is one of those that frankly I saw and wanted to be able to help resolve. And particularly focus in on the next council member to make sure that that council member has the I guess smoothest opportunity without controversy as a starting point. And my goal during this time period has been to resolve as many of those controversial issues that have been out there outstanding for a lot of years that have been several of them and to get those resolved so that when she starts next Thursday that she has the best opportunity for success and non-controversy as possible. So thank you mayor and council for all of that. And Eric and Andy you guys have been there every step of the way and I appreciate that when the city manager shows up to a meeting and when the city attorney shows up to a meeting that means something. And that means that they're invested, they're interested, they're working hard to solve an issue with the community but they're also making sure that their resolution is in line with council and the mayor and all those issues that they're supporting. And so I wanna thank Eric and Andy for all of that. And then I, councilwoman Gonzalez is often said particularly on this particular issue that there is no hero in today's decision because it's been a constant of issues. And so I appreciate that point and that perspective. But if there was a hero, the one person that I would like to recognize and say thank you to is Lori. Lori has been a strong advocate, a strong hard worker on this particular issue. We've not always been on the same side but we figured out how to get on the same side. I never really had the real opportunity to work really closely to Lori before. This has been that opportunity and I've enjoyed working with you Lori, I respect you, I respect your ethic. We've been texting, emailing, sometimes 1130 at night, I remember one time we were emailing and texting, 1130, 12 o'clock at night and I didn't realize all her other stuff but she was presenting on the scooters the very next day and dealing with all those issues the very next day. But that just shows how hard our staff works to get things done, to address the issues that council raises. And so certainly I wanna thank you Lori for everything you've done on this particular issue and all the support that you've given me and council on this issue. Something I said about Eric and others way back when is that the good folks get the hard issues and this was a hard issue and you've had some others but I certainly know that this was a hard issue and I think you got it because number one you had experience with it but number two you're a hard worker and you were gonna help me and help council figure out how to get this done and so I wanna say thank you for that. Let me just say one larger comment about affordable housing and I should have said it earlier but I'm gonna say it now. When I was interviewed for this position and just coming in there were kind of three issues that really stood out. Scooters were at the top of the list, the equity budget and bonds and so forth that this council has prioritized and this mayor has prioritized but the third issue and really it was the first one has been affordable housing and so every council has a theme and things that they're focused in on and I will tell the community that from an outsider coming in the number one issue that this council has been focused in on has been affordable housing. It's not been without its hiccups and this council is trying to solve those hiccups but what I wanna say to you all is that affordable housing is the key issue for this council and it will continue to be so. So I don't want anything dealing with this vote to downgrade that. We had a piece of property, have a piece of property that's been dedicated to affordable housing. We're taking half of that to resolve a bigger issue, a big issue. The other half is still gonna be dedicated to affordable housing either on the property itself or the proceeds going to affordable housing but at the same time I wanna also recognize the fact that affordable housing is a huge issue here in San Antonio and I looked at everything that we're doing a Lori sent me a list of everything that we're doing affordable housing in district two. There are hundreds, I wanna say thousands of units that have been built for affordable housing and are planned to be built for affordable housing in district two and that's just district two. I'm sure there's same numbers all across the city. So know that affordable housing is and will continue to be an issue for this council and solving all the issues related to affordable housing. We're not gonna solve affordable housing with a 1.7 acre piece of property or a four acre piece of property. And there are lots of other properties as Liz has mentioned that are open and available for affordable housing and so there are opportunities that we can continue to push for affordable housing in district two and the near east side of district two and I trust Jada and others in this council will look for every opportunity to continue to do that. What we're doing today and we got lots of different issues that we're prioritizing but in this one instance we are prioritizing an issue that's been around for two decades and we'll continue to take on that affordable housing issue in other areas but today's priority is to resolve that issue, right that wrong and make sure that we rebuild and regain and restart that process of gaining the trust with our community and in particular district two. So with that mayor I'm gonna make a motion based on the ordinance that has been listed with the following change to section two E and so section two E will now read and I think they're gonna put it on the screen. The future use of 803 and 815 North Cherry will be as a public park dedicated to the historic Hay Street Bridge which stands as significant reminder of 18th century wrought iron engineering of the railroad industry and at the San Antonio's who worked on the railroads many of whom were African American or Mexican American any improvements to the park will include at minimum drinking water, restroom facilities, trees and or shade structures, picnic areas and information about the bridge. City staff and the district two city council office will seek input from community partners to include residents of Hay Street Bridge to include this is the word a little bit wrong am I gonna correct it here to include the Hay Street Bridge restoration group Dignity neighborhood and other stakeholders and surrounding neighborhoods to develop the parks design which will consider how to protect the view of the bridge and from the bridge as it relates to 803 and 815 North Cherry a funding plan for both capital and operations will be developed and identified on or before December 31st, 2019. The process will be done in accordance with the city's public participation principles and so mayor that's my motion. Okay there's a motion and a second for approval of item 23 as amended by Councilman Hall. Councilman Saldana. Thank you mayor and this is my last official council meeting that we're actually conducting business in and there was a part of me that was hoping that it was gonna be all happiness hugs and handshakes but I was wrong. So I recognize that we're past the lunch hour so I wanna make sure that folks know that because this is my last council meeting I'm not trying to be long-winded but I am trying to just make sure that you all understand what's in my head as a policymaker standing a little bit on the outside of district two trying to make a decision for the entire district areas impacted residents people who are coming in here from areas that are not specifically the east side and that's how I come at this because I don't represent the area but obviously this is a stake in the ground that represents more than just the east side this is an iconic bridge that is recognized by whether you look at a news station or you watch a commercial everybody's eyes seem to be pinned on the hasty bridge and it's for good reason but before I make those comments I think it's important for us to recognize that we are only here talking about this bridge because there are people with power and the question of power has come up a lot who has power who gets to deal the decisions within the city and the only reason we're making a decision on this that we're talking about hasty bridge is because of the hasty bridge restoration group to be led by Nettie Hinton and of course the folks from whether it's Graciela, Amy Castley, Yanneth Flores these are folks who have been leading efforts of people to talk about this issue and they've made headlines because this has touched a nerve in the entire city and let me also recognize that this is mostly a group of women who have been pounding the streets drumming the narrative and the beat that we should care about hasty bridge and it should be something that everybody weighs in on and that's why I'm glad I have the opportunity to weigh in as a council representative in district four on the southwest side talking about an issue on the east side with the permission of our council person in district two who's been very open unlike other situations where sometimes it's hey, this is my council district I take the lead, you follow my lead on this. Councilman Hall has been much to the contrary open to our input and our feedback on this and I want to just say that when you come to city hall as a council representative you don't get to come in with a clean slate. You have to come into city hall with all of the baggage and the bad decisions that this institution has made and if you were to average and add up all of the decisions made about and to the east side they would come up short with respect to a question that has come up here which is this question of justice. Has proper justice been delivered to district two? Has the equality of resources and attention and time been paid it's due to the east side and it is not it comes up short. We as a city council have to come into this institution and it's not just the east side we have to come into this institution where we know there's this idea that you can't fight city hall and I don't know a better example of what this restoration group has done for the last seven years going through lawsuit and lawsuit and press conference and rally what they've done but fight city hall at every step of the turn and the question is can you fight city hall and it comes down to who has power and again we're only here because the folks that are most powerful that have raised voices that have organized and have got community members together have raised the consciousness of this city council and look here's the question there's two in my head on this issue and on this vote. Does this deal land swap included correct an injustice that was done in 2012? And the question of applying one injustice to clean up another injustice doesn't make sense in my head and it shouldn't in yours either. So here's the question about trust that keeps coming back because I know that the East side has struggled with this and trust is a fragile thing. It's easy to lose and it's incredibly hard to gain back. We will vote on this today and we will not get the community's trust back. That takes much more time than the vote that we're gonna take here today. It really sort of hurts me to say this but this is part of my atonement for a decision that I was part of. I have atonement to pay for my name being on a decision in 2012 that really started this whole thing and nobody else on the council can blame at their feet as much as I can because I'm the only one still here on the city council whose name is on the decision in 2012 to go into this deal. And the idea back then I'm gonna own it because it was wrong was that we wanted to believe that the East side needed more investment and the proper way to do that was to try to get some folks to invest in the East side. And I know that sometimes you get exactly what you ask for and we've seen the development and we've seen how quickly the speed and the velocity of that has impacted people to the point that they're coming here telling us that my neighborhood is no longer looking the way it did because I've grown up here for 30, 40, 50 years, 60 years and something is happening and changing. And I have to ask forgiveness for not seeing past the several years of development that would occur here. So I wanna point something out that Asiko Gomez pointed out and you're wise beyond your years, Asiko, I don't know how old you are but you said you can't give something back that was ours to begin with and we're trying to clean up a mess that is not going to be truly justice in anyone's mind. We're trying to take back this land that was originally the city of San Antonio as we made a mistake in giving it a way to begin with but now we're stuck in this position where we've got to chew on and swallow this bitter pill that the person who owns it is not in my eyes the kind of actor that I would ever consider to be good faith in his willingness to wanna see the best for the East Side community. That's not who we're dealing with here and that person owns the land. And so again, does the land swap correct the injustice and I don't think it does but the second question I have is does it at the very least achieve the goals of the folks who've been fighting the longest for this and the goal was from what I heard and I'm always tempted to call up members of the restoration group but I won't do that because you don't need to be on record here. I think this is the goal that I heard was we want this land to be open and public and we want the view shed protected and the language that Art has or Councilman Hall has laid out is tighter than the language that you read a week ago. This is not a discussion of whether this is going to be a park and whether this is gonna be left up to the community. He clearly laid that out. There's no more debate. This is going to be public open land. This is going to be public open land and that's what we were trying to achieve here. There's this popular notion about the restoration group and the people behind it that you're never gonna make them happy and that's not our goal. We don't want to make you happy because I would be disappointed if the activists and the voices and the folks who come up here with signs who find a reason to come to fight City Hall. I would be dissatisfied if you were happy because you make this process as difficult and as tension filled and as hurtful as it might be to us to have to hear about how we're disingenuous. We need to hear those things so I don't need you to be satisfied. I need you to have the urgency to continue to work. I need you to have an urgency to continue to fight especially cause I'm on my way out. Continue to fight the rest of this council and continue to fight City Hall but remember we're here because of you. We're here because you decided that this was an issue worth fighting for and Nettie Hinton's and the legacies of this bridge of Mr. Steadman's and Mr. Houston's legacy is not gonna fall on deaf ears here. We're trying our best to clean up this mess. It won't be clean. We won't get everybody's trust back but that's not the point of this vote. And I know and I recognize that people are hurting that there is this hurt in the community and we feel it and we see it in the voices in the eyes of these young people who come up here. So let me just finally end up with this which is that the best advice that I was given about coming into elected office. Asiko remember this cause you'll be up here soon is that the most comfortable pillow you can sleep on at night is a clean conscience. And I have been trying to sleep on that decision in 2012 but the more and more that I know about it the more and more that I'm educated about it it makes it so hard to sleep on that decision. So I ask forgiveness for being part of that and we're trying in some way to regain the trust that we have lost and it takes twice as long to rebuild bridges that you've burned but we're gonna try to do it piece by piece here. And so with that thank you to Nettie. You've been a real shining lighthouse on the East side. It's gonna be a real gap in my life to not see you as often from this point but I know I'm gonna see you in the community whether it's at the friendly spot or fighting your next fight. And with that mayor I know that there's a lot of folks who wanna weigh in on this but again let me pay my respects to the women who have led this organization who have led the movement of people and are trying to give power back to the same people. Thank you mayor. Thank you councilman Saldania. Councilman Palayas. Thank you very much. The first thing I wanna point out is Art Hall was brought on as the council member for district two and Art you would have done a perfectly satisfactory job if you would have been a caretaker of that seat and just made sure that things didn't fall between the cracks. Instead you decided to not be the caretaker and you undertook what is clearly a very difficult and prickly issue and that's bold. And I think you've gone above and beyond what was expected of you. I know a lot of folks who I admire very much who I think would have done a satisfactory job, a good enough job but to you good enough wasn't good enough and that's why I'm so happy that we chose you to be on the seat. I will tell you that I think the reason that we finally reached a resolution on this is because Art you're also an accomplished and admirable mediator. As evidenced by the fact that Art brought together all the stakeholders and frequently touched base with the stakeholders and really had a good feel for what everybody wanted and what everybody needed which are often times two different things, right? And the one thing that it comes to mind is watching you go through this process Art is an old saying that was taught to me by a very old lawyer that said to accomplish the perfect a little imperfection helps, right? And in this case, this is not perfect, right? And we all know that true leadership is leadership that recognizes that perfection often time impedes the good, right? And in this instance, I look at this resolution and from every single angle it's good. But for me the most important reason that it's good is because it finally resolves and settles a dispute. That in and of itself is good. And that wasn't easy Art. And I know how much hair you've lost over this. And I think that unfortunately when the history books are written, the words Art Hall did it, may not be written in that history book, but you did it Art. And I do think that you deserve a plaque on this bridge if that's okay. I do wanna, you know, Graciela, I know that you're here and you've spoken to us a lot. Can I ask you some questions? Come on up. I haven't been really involved in this and you and I haven't had a chance to talk about it, but I'm assuming I'm correct when I say that you speak for the Hayes Bridge Restoration Group. I'm part of the Hayes Street Bridge Restoration Group and the Hayes Street Bridge Community Coalition. Okay, all right. And as one of the plaintiffs in the Hayes Street Restoration Group versus City of San Antonio lawsuit, I went through and I looked at the petition and what y'all were asking for in that was that we honor the original spirit of the memorandum which is to make this a park accessible to the public. Am I right? I'm sorry, am I right? Okay, so that being said, I think you heard today a motion on the floor and a second to make this a park accessible to everybody in San Antonio and I think that satisfies exactly what you were asking. Am I right in assuming that as well? We were asking for that and we also, what was not part of the MOU but had been part of the conversations were also the saving of the view of the bridge because anything that's more than six feet off the ground is gonna cover the view. And I get it, I'm with you on that. So just to make sure you and I are on the same page, for the purposes of the lawsuit, you were asking for the spirit of the memorandum which is a park to be honored and today we're doing that. Now, and I just wanna make sure you and I are on the same page before I vote yes on this, that's exactly what we're doing today, right? As of 9.30 this morning when we got that piece of paper, yes. And that pretty much resolves the dispute between us, right? As it relates to the park, not as it relates to all the other issues that the community raised. And I get that and that's not the part that's in the lawsuit though, right? All the other issues are other issues, right? I think we're never gonna be satisfied if and that was my last part of resolve that the city council members don't continue to just have these other sort of deals and always continue to make the wealthy wealthier, right? I get it, but none of that was in the petition. The only thing in the petition was let's keep this a park, right? Correct. Okay, well, so having done that, do you have any reason to believe that we should continue this lawsuit? We have said we're not gonna, unless something changes and who knows what's gonna happen with a new council person. That's why we wanted the language to be more direct and clear because in 2007, we thought it was clear and it didn't take place. So we feel that the language is a little stronger and we just hope and honor for those of the council members that are still with us in the next year or so, continue not only just to make it a park, but then figure out ways to find funding, which we didn't incorporate. We were also gonna raise money, but again, Doug Steadman, who was one of the leaders in raising money is gone, right? Yes, ma'am. And Nettie is not running around up and down that bridge like she used to, but she, and people want to help raise money, but we also want that the city continue to be a partner in this very much community spirit because again, everybody that did all this work has done it for free. And I appreciate that and that's really admirable. And so, before I move on to the next topic, I just wanna make sure we're in agreement. This pretty much resolves the dispute that is pending in court, right? I'm not a lawyer, but I think we, if it becomes a public park, we shouldn't be going back to challenge the contempt. I agree. Thank you so much. Can we also agree also that Art did a lot of good work here and that he really does deserve our gratitude? I like Art. I'm not sure that we're happy about the process because I think by the time we were invited to participate in the conversation, 90%, 95% had already been resolved with Mitch Meyer and we think again, look at it from the perspective of the community, right? We won the lawsuit in 2014. We won again with the Texas Supreme Court on March 15th and on March 15th, a lot of you as council members are saying, okay, let's figure something out. And then before you knew it, the resolution, the solution was to take care of Mitch Meyer. Reading the ordinance is insulting. That's why when I spoke was to kind of tell the real history because again, that ordinance is all about taking care of Mitch Meyer. So you and I just spent a few minutes talking about how we've resolved the dispute and how we're getting very, very close to exactly what it is you guys want, but yet you still feel insulted. I want one day, and I think Councilman Saldana said it, the city breached the contract and I wish that language was in there, right? And I said that and because you don't do that, it makes people crazy. Okay, okay. It dishonors and you just continue to tell a lie, right? And I did ask for language also because the Office of Historic Preservation has a history of the Hay Street Bridge and it's not all there. And again, my timeline, you can use it and that'll tell the real story and maybe you can incorporate that because the Office of Historic Preservation, history, you know, somebody should tell the truth. Thank you. Well listen, I do want to tell you, I really admire the engagement. I think you've changed a lot of hearts and minds up here. When I first came on Council, to be honest with you, I really didn't care. It's not on my district, it's not on my bridge. Nobody in my constituents have ever talked to me about Hay Street Bridge, but considering the work that he's done and the heavy lifting and just, again, resolving the dispute, that's what I cared about the most and to see all of you come together and finally, you know, accepting a compromise that is admittedly imperfect, I think really helps the community begin healing. And so to me, that's just my way of saying thanks, Graciela, I appreciate your hard work. Well, and again, we want to have you all recognize that Woodlong Lake doesn't belong to District 7, Hemisphere Park doesn't belong to District 1, Harbor Berger Park doesn't belong just to the North Siders. All of these are public lands paid for by the community, so we want you all to accept all of these in all parts of the city, because we travel and we have families all over the city. Right, so thank you, Graciela, for your hard work. Lastly, I know I'm standing in the way of lunch and so I do want to tell you the other thing that I admired a lot was seeing all those kids here. I think that was really powerful and I was so impressed with how articulate they are. I've got a 13-year-old and I'm going to go home and tell him about how he really needs to pick up his game. And because really how amazing it is that we're teaching these kids the power of public engagement and I want to thank whoever brought them. I will tell you though that we're getting emails and word from parents who had no idea that their kids were going to be brought down here to hold protest signs, especially protest signs with some obscenities on them and those, if we did bring other people's children to do what their parents didn't think they were going to do, Yeneth, you use the right word, seem better, Gwen sign, somebody really needs to be a little more honest with parents, assuming that's true. If it's not true, well then don't worry about it. Thanks, Mayor. Thank you, Councilman Plyes, Councilman Trevino. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. And I too just want to echo a lot of the sentiments that have already been said. And first I'll just simply start off by thanking Councilman Hall. This is a difficult subject and I wasn't quite there and he heard me out and I just want to thank him for alleviating a lot of my concerns. He was patient and I especially appreciate the part of acknowledging the affordable housing component, which is so, so important for our community and speaking of our community, I think what we saw today was folks coming up to ask us to recognize and respect not just them, but the values that they bring. This is about our shared values as a city and how we can grow together, how we can heal and hopefully find this as an opportunity, as an opportunity to help shape better policy in the future, better engagement. The entire time I was listening to the community, I was thinking about the last couple of weeks that have been very, very unique for me. You know, I saw Natty Hinton, it seemed like for an entire week in a row, every single day, it's true, right? And then I found myself sitting at a memorial for Mark Richter and you came in and you sat right next to me. And the first thing I thought was, my God, this lady, I mean, she really cares about this community. And a lot of the things that were said about Mark Richter and that I said as well was about what he values, how much he cared about the community. And that really meant so much more knowing that there was people like you in the audience because it wasn't falling on deaf ears, it was how so many good people surround you, how many people may someday be in a place like that listening about who you were made me think a lot. I think that's what's being expressed today and I hope we can emphasize our values as a community, as a city council, as we heard a lot of the kids express, you are respected, you are heard, and we do acknowledge your values. So I wanna thank you, Annie, I mean, I really enjoy seeing you, I run into you, whether it's a symphony event, an arts event, memorial like that, or just simply crossing the street. It's always a pleasure to see you. And so as it relates to this particular vote today, I appreciate that we included language about a park and I think what I heard Graciela pointing out was of course, there's all these other issues. Again, I would put that in the category of our value. The fact is, it's not just a park, it's what it's adjacent to, the history that it brings, where it's actually located. And so what's really important is how we get there. Because this is just one step of that process and we're acknowledging that. I wanna thank Councilman Hall for, he's really worked hard to get that language in there and I just wanna say, I think that's exactly what we're saying today. And we recognize that there's a lot more work to do. I'll tell you, you'll have my commitment to work on that, to make sure that we're acknowledging this holistically. It's not just a park, it's about the bridge itself, about the history, about the community and how we can use this as a great opportunity to demonstrate everyone coming together, righting a wrong, acknowledging that sometimes you know, sometimes City Council gets it wrong and sometimes we're gonna find ways to try to make it right. Is everybody gonna be happy? Probably not. But we can at least acknowledge the values, our community values. We can at least acknowledge that we're all trying to improve our community in one way or another. So thank you, Councilman Hall. Thank you to our city manager, Walsh, Andy Sugovia and yes, Lori Houston for all your hard work and I can tell you that I, as someone who works day in, day out as a partner, Lori Houston is very committed to making sure that we're tackling these issues head on. She provides, her and her staff have provided a lot of support for us as a council. And I thank you to all the folks that came out today, the restoration group, Esperanza Center, all the kids. I look forward to supporting this and taking a step towards that healing and again, acknowledging and recognizing the pain, but allowing us to move forward today. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilman Trevino, Councilman Brockhouse. Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of quick notes and you know, same thing with my colleague from District 4, Ray and I, departing at the same time and I would not thought that my last vote would be in concert and in complete agreement with Ray. I thought it would be you, Clay. But no, I think Councilman Saldana hit the nail on the head here and really stole some of my notes here, Councilmember. So I'm gonna just kind of piggyback on what Ray mentioned and just add a little bit into consensus. And when I was listening to a lot of folks talking and I've been consistently, you know, against this entire process from the beginning, I felt it should have been public land, the city made a series of mistakes and it never should have gotten to this point and it should have ended a long, long time ago. And, you know, I've stood on that ground pretty solid. Councilman Shaw, you've done everything you could to find a consensus and I appreciate your hard work. So my comments are not a reflection of your lack of effort. It's just a reflection of another, which seems to be controversial vote from a lame duck, you know, lame duck council. We've seen these types of things come through before that are rushed so that you can get a vote in before the next council seated so that they don't have to handle the controversy. Well, you ran for city council. Welcome to controversy. I mean, I think the councilman elect is more than capable of handling much more public participation on it. I've seen, I voted for her to take the seat. Sorry councilman Shaw. You know, and I knew, I like, I think the council, the member could have handled it. Councilman elect could have done the work. So the rush to me to make a lot of sense. Again, another lame duck vote reminds me of barge deals and other things that are done quickly so people can have less accountability next when they're seated in the next council. So I don't get it, I don't understand it, but at the end of the day, it's hard to build consensus or hard to find consensus when it's built on corruption. So at the end of the day, the neighborhood was victim of a corrupt decision, insider deals, backroom deals, former Mayor Hardberger with Eugene Seymour. I mean, you can go right down the line. Practically money laundering. You know, it's pretty simple, straightforward process what happened here. Somebody on the inside got taken care of and the neighborhood lost. So, and when the neighborhood lost, we're sitting here like we're doing something great for them when it should have just never happened in the first place. So the neighborhood has already had a net negative no matter what. And that's probably what upsets me the most. And maybe it's my last chance to talk on council. It's letting me go a little freewheel, but I'm just sorry for that, that that happened. And my vote will be a no today period, not in a reflection of not the hard work of council member Shaw. It's a no in a reflection that this was corrupt from the beginning. And it never should have happened. The city should have conceded a long time ago, never filed those lawsuits, never lost all the way up to the Supreme Court. And they should have honored what was best in right about what the community wanted. And what we are witnessing here today, I'll be honest with you, it's about a park, sure. And it's about a hasty bridge. But what you're seeing is a community clinging to its life. That's what you're seeing. And everything, and now it's Denver Heights. Nobody said much when it was Dignity Hills. We got concerned a little bit was Mankey Park and we're pumping tens of millions of dollars into gentrified areas. And we're now, we're moving down into Denver Heights. Denver Heights is now screaming. I mean, at what point are we gonna say, we have to be very careful with the life that these people have built that is now going away in the name of growth in the decade of downtown or whatever the heck we've called it over the last 10 years. People are losing their homes. And what you're seeing is, all the way down to the young folks now saying it. And they're screaming stop. You know, at some point we have to worry about the hypocrisy of saying you're for affordable housing and then you turn around and you destroy neighborhoods by pumping tens of millions of dollars in development pockets. And here you go. So you can't have, you can't have it both ways. There's a middle ground, I get it. I don't think this is the middle ground. Mr. Meyer knew he bought into a litigated property. I'm sorry he did it, but he bought into a litigated property. I don't know, Mr. Meyer ain't spoken to him, but if you didn't care enough to come talk to all the council members, I'll just sell it like it is. You bought into a litigated property and now you are getting a pretty sweetheart deal to move on down the street. Maybe not in the primary you want it to be, but it's a pretty good deal, the same deal that Eugene Seymour got because he's best friends with Phil Hardberger. I mean, you don't have to put two and two together. It's pretty simple. So I think at the end of the day, you know, I'm gonna vote no in honor of what it should have been from the beginning. Thank you for the hard work. Thank you, Nettie, Grasiela and everybody. You've done the hard work. And I know a councilwoman like Sullivan would knock this out of the park just the same. So you get to come in a little on a clean ride. I'm pretty sure I'm gonna be like a 10-1 on this one, but hey, what's new? What a way to close it out, right? So I'm very appreciative. When I see the neighborhood coming up and the young folks and you're standing there and Asiko, you and council member, Saltania is on point. You're probably gonna be up here someday. So fantastic words. I sent you a note because I thought that don't lose your path. Here's a key point for you, Asiko, and anybody else who's still here. Don't lose your passion because you lose a vote. Don't do that. I've lost many of them up here and I keep going every day and I'll keep going straight up until 115 today or whenever it ends for me. It's blessed. So don't lose your passion when you lose a vote. Please, the community cannot stop that. It don't give up just because it does go your way. If you've changed the dialogue a little bit. So just because you don't win a vote doesn't mean you didn't change a policy. It didn't mean it's not a little better or it's a little different because you fought for it. So you fought, you may lose the vote overall but you're gonna get your park. All right, and I hope we protect the view shed and all the things that matter most. So you've done a heck of a job to get here and I'm honored to throw my no vote down on this today for the hard work and the years you've done. Thank you for your time and your energy and I really appreciate it and those who didn't stay as well. Thank you, council member Shaw. I do appreciate what you're attempting to do here. It was good work but you've inherited a mess. You did the best you could but thank you for your hard work as well. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, councilman Brockhouse. Councilman Courage. I saw you, council member Shaw, didn't I? I'm sorry, council member Hall. That sounds the exact same way to me. Councilman Courage. Thank you, mayor. I wanna lend my congratulations to councilman Hall for the hard work that he put in and I know you did work with the stakeholders. You worked with the community. You listened to what they had to say and I think that's very important. I think what we saw earlier here today also was very special when so many young people stood up, went to that microphone, spoke from their heart, spoke on what they believed or what they felt and I think that's always special, always important but it was always also disheartening to me and concerning and I think it's because I don't think many of those young people were as well informed as they should be or could be and I think that's a matter of not having the right kind of engagement that they should have had and that the entire community should have had. I was a teacher for 27 years and I taught facts and I taught truth. Truth is prior decisions did not respect the best interest of the community and that's how we got to where we were today on the bridge but the reality is doing some of the things that people were advocating like taking the land from the current landowner or tying it up in court, you know that would have cost you and I thousands, tens of thousands, maybe a million dollars or so to try and resolve that situation and that would have taken a lot of money away from so many other important programs and services that we have in our community and so I could not see becoming more engaged in those kinds of activities. The land swap proposed will save you and our community money and the land being swapped house city buildings. It wasn't scheduled to become affordable housing but now with this swap there are great potentials that it may become affordable housing and let me tell you I'm a strong advocate for affordable housing people who know me know that I am and I'll continue to be and we'll fight for affordable housing in all parts of our community but today this is about living up to an understanding that the community had about having a park 8803 Cherry and that's what we're here to do today and that's what I'm here to vote for, to right a wrong and to go ahead and understand and live up to the community's expectations. The concerns about gentrification and affordable housing and people's voices being heard and respected those are real and this council and this city government needs to meet those problems and live up to the community's expectations. It's unfortunate though that so many of the young people who have left won't hear that from us, did not know that that was our intention and that's what we want to do and so I regret that they left thinking that this government was not for them or for the community. So I hope those of you who brought them out will help them understand what we're doing today and that we are gonna build that park and that we do want to listen to them and that we do want affordable housing and that we don't want gentrification to take their homes. So remember to do the second part of the lesson after this is over. Thank you. Thank you councilman courage, councilwoman Gonzalez. Thank you, Lori, I have a few questions regarding the presentation. So you met a presentation regarding some funding for the future use of 803 and 813 or cherry? No, the presentation we talked about the funding that's being appropriated today is the $600,000 that will be used to clean up 223 South Cherry. So we need about 250 for the environmental remediation and about 250 for the demolition of the structure and then we have about 100,000 for the replanting and survey and other expenses. So that's the funding that council is appropriating. Today in this agreement and so the amendment that councilman hall made regarding the future of a public park that funding is yet to be identified. So staff will be working on developing a funding plan to look at both the capital budget for what it would cost to build a park as well as the operations and maintenance budget for what it would cost to operate and maintain the park. So one of the things that I know about district two similar to district five is that we are a very walkable community at least near West side and I mean sorry near East side but that our neighborhood was designed on a grid network. So within a square mile is a park, a church, a school. And so I know there are already 49 parks in district two. So this would make 50 parks in district two. And the issue of funding and the maintenance of our parks is of great concern. And so I have some concerns about the continued funding and operation of making this area a park. That has yet to be identified. Correct. And right now we are looking at funding sources to include using the inner city tours as a potential funding source but that will be vetted and it'll return to city council. And so I am familiar with the tours. The East side tours are tours 11. And then who would be the person going before the tours board for funding? Would it be the city? City would. Would. Okay. And I know that the tours board has sufficient funding for parks improvement if they wanna do that but I think that's all to be determined. Yes. Okay. Thank you, Lori. That's I think all the questions I have for you and just sort of the question that always arises is that continued maintenance of funding of our existing parks because we do have many of them. I know that district one I think has the most parks because it includes downtown and downtown originally had all of the city. I know that district two has 49 parks. District five has 29 parks. So we have a very robust park department and I think that there's wonderful things we can do but I think that's always gonna be a question is how we continue to maintain and operate our parks. And that's the amendment that we have before us today that councilman hall presented was parks and then which stands as a significant reminder of 18th century wrought iron engineering of the railroad industry and of San Antonio's who worked on the railroad many of whom were African-American or a Mexican-American. So I think that this perhaps could be a very unique project that we could look forward to funding in some future date but I think that's always gonna be the question is how we find funding to do projects like this one. And I also think it's important just as we're going through the public engagement process is that we are elected council members based on our community and I know that I know best what's right for my community. I spend more time than any other person discussing issues among all my council district. I spend more time than other people, other council members in my own district and I listened to my constituents and what they requested me and that's why we always will defer to the council member especially when it comes to something like a park or a small acreage of land. In fact, I'm sorry, Lori, I'm gonna call you up one more time just to clarify the amount of land that we're talking about which I think is 2.1 acres. The 803 and 815 North Cherry Street, the property that the city will be getting in return for the other property is 1.69 acres. The sign shop property is 3.92 acres but we will be exchanging two acres of that with the property owner. So the footprint that we are talking about for a public space or a public park is about two acres. It's 1.69 acres. So fairly small and thank you, Lori. And that's really just some comments that I wanna make regarding the space. It will be fairly small and therefore should be very inclusive of the people who live there. And while I appreciate that my council member, Saldania, made his apology for why he voted a certain way, I feel confident that he did it at the urging of the council member who was there at the time which I think was councilwoman Taylor and she at that time had a vision for her community and what it should look like and I'm sure she made those decisions with the input of the community. And so I'm making my decision today based on the recommendation from councilman Hall who is a council member of the community who knows best what's right for his community based on all of the input and all of the communication that he had with everybody to come up with a good decision. As council members, we take very seriously the responsibility of representing our community and I believe very confidently that the members that are here today and all those that have served before have done so always with the best interest of what their community asked for. So I make no apologies for decisions I make on this council, especially if it has been the ask of the council member who lives there because they are the elected member of their community. They represent their community and I get very concerned when I hear other people who don't live in areas having the idea that they come before this council representing the areas when they do not. So I think this could be a very exciting project. I think it could be very unique. I'm familiar with the Haste Street Bridge project or rather the Haste Street Bridge because we do commute over it very often on bicycles. It's one of the routes we use to travel through the neighborhoods, connecting over and then ultimately to Salado Creek to ride along the creekways. I think that the example that Ms. Nettie Houston gave about using railcars or having that kind of story could be very unique and I would look forward to hearing what the community develops in this space. But I do know that Councilman Hall has done his very best to represent the desire and the interests of the neighborhood. And one thing that I believe whenever we have important decisions to make on this council, I pray. And when we were deciding who should be our city manager, I prayed that we made a good decision and Councilman Hall came before us. And when I very first decided that I wanted to be on this council, I would pray for a good insight and I got a call from Councilman Hall about something completely unrelated. But when we got together for lunch and I tell him, he said, no, I wanted to talk to you about a separate issue. And I said, oh, I thought you were calling to talk to me about the council. And he says, no, no, I was not. But here I think there have been some very important decisions that have come before us on this council and have always trusted our hall to make a very wise decision. And so it is with that that I support this motion before us today, the motion that suggests that the future land use of this property will be used as a public park dedicated to the historic Hay Street Bridge, which stands as a significant reminder of 18th century wrought iron engineering of the railroad industry and of San Antonians who worked on the railroads, many of whom were African American or Mexican American. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilman Gonzalez, Councilman Sandoval. Thank you, Mayor. And first, we'll all go through the thank yous. Thank you to everyone who gave up some of their time to be here today and the people who have given up a lot of their time to work on this issue. As usual, gracias. Anything that's controversial here you are. I don't know how you have the energy for it, but thank you for all of your participation and hard work. And of course, thank you to the city staff that's been working on this. And of course, to Councilman Hall, I told you a few days ago this was a big deal. And in the words of Joe Biden, I do think this is a BFD where we are today. So I have just some comments I wanna share. I also listened to just about all the testimony that we had from the youngsters here today and the not so youngsters. And I was not there when the restoration group was formed, but thank you for forming it. And I wasn't there when you made that agreement with the city, but it sounds like it was, there was a lot of hope and promise in that. And I also wasn't here when the other decision was made to transfer that land. And I don't live in district two. But what I have seen is the power of the bridge, of that restoration, the pride that it's brought not just to the people who live in that area or who have lived in that area, but to all of San Antonio. I met a young woman who took a photograph of the bridge and she really taught me how people come to San Antonio just to see that view. People come from all over San Antonio to enjoy that view and that if something were to be built, blocking that view, we would lose that. So I submitted with Councilman Shaw a CCR on protecting views. And part of the reason, it wasn't without controversy, but part of the reason I submitted that was because in this era of rapid growth that we're experiencing in our city, I was not ready for us to let go of some of those visual icons because I believe they are what define our city. And if, and growth will happen, but if we let all of them go, then we grow so much that we're no longer who we were before. And I do want us to hold on to some of that. It'll come at a cost, I know it does, in some way their trade-offs, right? For, sometimes I've told stories about living in the Bay Area, but anyone who had a view of the Golden Gate Bridge from their apartment, you best be sure, they paid a lot more for that bridge. And that's, we might see some of that happen around that area is the prices aren't gonna be any lower to rent in the east side if you have a view of the historic bridge. And the truth is the view is worth it, right? So in terms of trading land, I put more value on the land that we're getting back than the land that we're trading. And that is why I'm going to be supporting today's motion is I think it's so important to have that back that I'm willing to do this trade. Some of us on council, Councilman Saldana and I in the past had turned to Councilman Shaw and to the previous city manager about finding a way to get this land back. And it didn't seem like it was going to be possible until you came on board Councilman Hall, until the Supreme Court decided not to hear that decision. And then there was some momentum to do something about it. So I'm gonna seize on that momentum and vote for and support this transaction. Now I do have some questions about that transaction that I'd like to discuss with staff. I wanna make sure we're clear and for the people who are watching, if we were to vote no, what would happen? Or what do you think would happen? If we were to vote no, we would not have a property exchange. And Mitch Meyer, who is 803 North Cherry LLC, could start the permitting process to start construction. Okay, say he chooses not to, or he doesn't build, how long can he hold that land for? He owns the property, so he can hold it forever. Is there another way, for those of us who have said, hey, we shouldn't have ever given that land away or sold that land, is there another way to bring that land back into public ownership? I'm gonna defer to our city attorney, Andy Segovia. Council, one of the other options that we would have to reacquire the land is to use our eminent domain, if we're gonna put it to a public use, however we would have to pay the owner market value for the property, we were gonna do that. Okay, so this is effectively doing that in a, not public, not eminent domain, it's effectively paying him market value, in a sense. Yes, okay. Okay, yes. Okay, so even if we did eminent domain which could be contested by the property owner, is that true? Correct, it's a process and you start, and that's the under the law you have to pay market value. Obviously there's, when cities exercise that, there's sometimes our disputes as to what market value is, and yes, it could be contested. Okay, so if it were contested, there's a possibility we would not be able to procure the land, or secure it for public use. Can I ask a little bit about how we chose the property that we're trading? In discussions with the developer Mitch Meyer, he was open to a swap if we found a property in the same area. The city of San Antonio looked at our inventory and the only property in this area that you can build on is the Cherry Street law that we've identified in this transaction. And the operations that were in there relocated in December of 2018, so the lot was available as well. Okay, and there's some language in here about the environmental that needs to be done. What type of environmental work needs to be done on that property? I'm going to ask my real estate manager, Pete Allen, needs to speak specifically to that issue. Thank you. There is some environmental soil work that needs to be done and remediated along with this business work within the building itself. And I see we're putting aside $600,000 to do that and the planning. How much will the environmental work cost? I apologize, I think you asked this question already, right? We're estimating between $250,000 and $300,000 for that environmental work, plus another $250,000 to $300,000 for demolition and the survey and plat work. So if the environmental work were to cost more, would that, what would happen in that case? We've done an estimate with our TCI environmental team and with our external consultant to come up with that plan and we're ready to engage that plan as soon as the vote moves forward. Okay, it was $260,000, right? And our estimate came in at $260,000 and so if we were to go forward with that, we can start immediately and that's $260,000 and we feel comfortable with the $600,000 appropriation that'll pay for the three items, which are the replatting, the environmental remediation and the demolition of the existing structure. Okay, all right, thank you, Laurie. So I think I'm gonna agree with Councilman Saldana and Councilman Hall and Councilman Trevino and say that this is an effort to take us back to where we should have been to leave the land in public use and I'm glad to see that the public participation principles are referenced in the resolution. I know that we're not there yet in terms of fully implementing them in every council decision but I'm glad to see they're referenced. I think they're a start. I wrote that CCR with four more recommendations and a supplemental memo and I am looking forward to us implementing all of those actions but we also need to decide to which council actions they apply and I think it's clear from today's discussion that it's not just about the property at North Cherry but it's about how we convey property and how the public becomes aware of it and whether or not they have a voice in it. You know, when I speak to the residents of District 7, none of them ask me about Hey Street Bridge. I have to be honest, I apologize. Except for Mario Bravo, nobody asked me about the Hey Street Bridge but what they do ask me about is development in the city and how they can have a voice in making sure they have a voice in shaping the future of the city so I think what we do here does sort of set a standard for what we do in other parts of the city. And I mean the truth is part of the reason we came up with that CCR was what was happening with the Hey Street Bridge is it was so contentious and it was such a break of trust that all I could ask myself was how can we try to avoid the situation ever happening again in the future and the principles alone don't do it. It's gonna take a lot of work to rebuild that trust but that is an effort to do that. There was someone who came up earlier, Yeneth, right? Who, you told me this earlier about calling Mr. Myers Bluff and I think somebody else said it today. I wanna see this land become a park before we lose any more people and we've lost Mr. Steadman and I don't know how long it would take us to get that land back if we didn't approve today's agreement and that's not a risk that I want to take if I have a chance to get it back now for the community. So I know the way this was carried out wasn't exactly perfect but in the end I think we're in a better place and I have to tell you that the intentions of Councilman Hall, if I can guess at what they were, were to correct this situation and our intentions are, at least my intentions are to make things better between us, the restoration group and the broader community when it comes to building public trust and I think this is a step in doing that. So those are my comments and thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilman Sandoval, Councilman Viagran. I'd like to thank Ms. Nettie for coming up here and your diligence, your commitment and your fight for your community but our entire city. Thank you for telling your story. Thank you because that lives in the annals of our history so I appreciate you and I appreciate your fight and your vigor. I want to thank everyone who's been here who's been engaged and involved and active in this endeavor here and I will say to I think specifically Eric right now, I'm, this is a bittersweet moment specifically because of the sign shop. That is where my dad spent 20 years working for the city of San Antonio to so see that go. I wish I could enshrine that forever but we know that change does come and change happens. So that's why it's a little bit bittersweet here with all of this. Thank you, Councilmember Hall for your work, your diligence and always for all of the work that he's done, he's always thinking of the other person first, always thinking of the other first on this and I look forward to working with Councilwoman Elect, Sullivan on this issue as we move forward to make sure it is truly embodying what all members of the community want to see. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Villa-Gron, Councilman Perry. Thank you, sir. Just real quickly, you know, what a tangled web, right? Goes back for years and trying to untangle a knot or a web like this is not easy and I just wanted to say again, thanks to Councilman Hall for working this diligently to come up with a compromise. There are some things that bothered me about today. I agree with Councilman Courage in his comments and another comment that was made that one of the parties will never be happy. That's confusing to me, especially when they've been brought in to try to accommodate appease, come up with consensus, that kind of thing, but to hear those kind of comments, that's disappointing to me. But hey, if that's the way it is, that's the way it is. A lot of work's been put into this and I thank the city staff for doing that as well. Is this a perfect solution? I don't think we could get to a perfect solution but I think people should recognize the hard work of multiple organizations that have gone into this to make a recommendation and bring it to Council to vote on. Again, I think this is the best of all worlds at this point in time. What happened in the past happened in the past. This is something trying to do to correct it. Is this the right time to do it? Could be, might not be, but this is where we're at today. And this is what's been worked out. So I, again, in my position here, I agree with Councilwoman Gonzalez that we all work to represent our own district and we should know what's best for our district but there's a caveat on that, that we should be working together and know what's going on in the rest of the city and work together as a team. That's what we should be doing, not just representing our district but representing the city of San Antonio as well. So with that, I'll support this motion and we'll go from here but trying to untangle these knots and these webs is not an easy proposition. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Councilman Perry, Councilman Hall. And no real additional major comments but I did want to say one additional thank you to Pete Alanis. He does a lot of our real estate transactions that Council members we really don't see and does a lot of behind the scenes work. So Pete, thank you for all your work on this, on the praises and everything real estate. So thank you. Thank you, man. Thank you, Councilman Hall. I'll be supporting the motion today and I have some comments, I'll be brief but hopefully to the point. I've sat up here on this dais for the last six years and I woke up today hopeful that a very long and ugly chapter for the city's history will finally come to an end. I still remain hopeful about that and I want to appreciate and thank my outgoing colleague, Councilman Saldana for his words. I think they ring true in every sense and he described it as a moment of atonement and I agree with that. In fact, that's the reason why we're doing this in the first place is that many people in our community have been saying the same things over and over and over again since we've been here and yet we find ourselves in this place. There are some things that can't be undone and some things that can and the two overarching questions about today are what do we do first to overcome an injustice in our community and two, how do we make sure that that never happens again? As I was preparing to come in today, I had a thought that was just searing across my mind all morning and so I wrote it down and it said that the arrogance of a bureaucracy lies not in people with bad intentions making bad decisions. It's a people with the best of intentions making no decision at all. Today I'm glad to have a colleague who is leaving, Councilman Hall, who has decided to urge us to action in a way that we answer the first question very well. What are we doing to overcome an injustice? Today you heard an amendment offered that makes sure that as this land comes back to the public, it will be a park. It will be a park that recognizes a history that does justice to the memory of those people who walked across and that ensures that the next generation of San Antonians will understand that piece of land remains a part of our history and our heritage and part of our future. So I'll be supportive for that reason. The second question though, how do we make sure that another haystreet never happens again? We've talked a lot about public participation and I heard very clearly the young lady who came up here. Wanda Pérez I think was her name, Ms. Toscano. She said that you guys should be listening to us. Your job is to listen to us. And she said, do your job. It's not enough just to be up here and listen, but people have to see action. And again, that's why I'm glad to have a city staff, a manager, colleagues who have chosen to act today. But how do we make sure that Haystreet Bridge doesn't reverberate for another council term or another generation? And I've made very clear to my colleagues and to our city manager that we will, henceforth, learn from Haystreet Bridge and make sure that the people's land remains the people's property so long as they are calling the shots. So we have to make sure that we develop a process of public participation that ensures that any conveyance of public property comes with healthy, robust, and comprehensive public input. That's my commitment as your mayor to make sure that we solidify that process. I think only when that happens will we do justice for the entire two decades of Haystreet Bridge and the controversy it's become. And it is unfortunate that this bridge has become a symbol of why people's trust in government has waned in local government. But I hope as a result of this action and the subsequent actions of this council and the future council, we will finally show that that bridge can live as a memory of those people who fought hard to ensure that its government serves its people. So thank you very much, everyone for coming out. I also agree with Councilman Saldana. It is very important for those of you who are here speaking that you don't get satisfied. You keep us true to the work that we ought to be doing. And there's an important role in that as we move forward into the future. So with that, we do have a motion and a second for approval of item number 23 as amended by Councilman Hall. Please vote. Motion carries. Okay, we're gonna move now to the remaining items on our agenda that were pulled for individual consideration. I will note that council has a budget session today that was previously scheduled for one o'clock. We will take that up right around two, a little after. So after we're done with this A session agenda, we're gonna break for about 15 to 20 minutes and then move on to the budget session. But we'll move now to item number 28. Yes, sir. Item number 28 is approving the following ordinances related to the Linear Creekway Development Project. Funding for the acquisitions of these properties for the Linear Creekways Development Project is available in the Proposition to Parks, Development and Expansion Venue Project Fund, included in fiscal year 2019 through 2024 Capital Improvement Program. Item A is the ordinance approving the acquisition through negotiation or condemnation of approximately 19.511 acres in NCB 18589, located along French Creek and District 7 for the Linear Creekway Development Project. A 2015 Proposition to Sales Tax Initiative funded project, property being in the city of San Antonio Burr County, Texas, declaring the French Creek Greenway Project to be public project for public use, declaring public necessity for the acquisition of privately owned rail property and authorizing the city attorney and or his designee to file imminent domain proceedings. The estimated fair market value of this land acquisition is $13,700. Item B is the ordinance approving the acquisition through negotiation or condemnation of approximately