Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[Legislative Affairs Committee]

[00:00:04]

ALL RIGHT.

IT IS 4:01 PM, MAY 24TH, 2021.

AND WELCOME TO THE, UH, CINDY GARLAND, TEXAS LEGISLATURE, LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEETING AND CHAIRMAN ROBERT JOHN SMITH WITH ME IS, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, BJ WILLIAMS, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, RICH JOB, AND OUR CITY ATTORNEY, BRAD NEIGHBOR, AND OUR, UM, WHAT WOULD I EVEN CALL YOU PERSON THAT, THAT MAKES US ALL WORK AND KEEPS IT ALL TOGETHER FOR US COMMITTEE LIAISON STAFF COORDINATOR, LEGISLATIVE FIRST COORDINATOR.

OKAY.

I LIKE THAT.

I LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS COORDINATOR, LAURA DELEGATE, UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

HAS EVERYBODY HAD THE CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES AND GANACHE AND EMOTION RULE? SECOND WAS CHAIR.

ALRIGHT.

WE'VE GOT A MOTION APPROVED BY COUNCIL ROBIN SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE, AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT.

THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

MOVING ON TO ITEM, AGENDA, ITEM TWO, A PUBLIC INPUT CHECKING THE PARTICIPANTS LIST.

AND I HAVE NOBODY IN ATTENDANCE TODAY, BUT IF SOMEBODY JUMPS IN AND WANTS TO SPEAK, WE'LL GIVE THEM THEIR THREE MINUTES.

UM, MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, UH, SECTION EIGHT BILLS UPDATE.

AND I WANT TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW I'VE GOT A FIVE 15 HARD STOP.

SO HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE OUT OF HERE BY THEN.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, THREE A MR. NEIGHBOR.

WHAT DO YOU GOT FOR US, SIR? UM, W W W WELL, MAKE YOUR HARD STOP WITH ABOUT AN HOUR TO SPARE.

UM, THERE'S A LOT GOING ON, NOT A LOT TO REPORT BECAUSE IT'S BECOME WHERE IT'S AT STAGE IN THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WHERE IT'S COMING IN, VISIBLE TO US.

WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON.

UM, UH, ON, I THINK YOU SAW THE MESSAGE THIS MORNING ON THE VETERANS, UH, UH, HOUSING BILL.

UM, UH, I RAN DOWN THERE REAL QUICK LAST WEEK, AS YOU ALL KNOW, AND, AND TESTIFY, WHICH WAS A BIG DENOUEMENT, UH, BECAUSE WHEN I GOT DOWN THERE, UH, IT WAS EVIDENCE THAT THE COMMITTEE REALLY DIDN'T WANT ANY TESTIMONY.

THEY JUST WANTED SOMEBODY TO BE SITTING IN THE SEAT AND WE OWED THAT TO, UH, SENATOR JOHNSON, OUR SENATE SPONSOR, UH, TO GO SAY, HI, MY NAME IS BLAH I'M WITH, UH, CITY GARLIC.

UH, WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AND THAT, THAT WAS VIRTUALLY IT.

UM, WHILE I WAS DOWN THERE, WE WORKED ON A COUPLE OF, UM, ENERGY BUILDS, UH, SPENT SOME TIME WITH RAY, UM, THE, THE BILLS THAT ARE, UM, PRETTY DEMANDING NOW, OR THOSE THAT, THAT HAVE BEEN FOR AWHILE.

UM, THE SECURITIZATION BILL IS STILL UP IN THE AIR.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ROLLED IT BACK IN THE SB THREE, UH, ERA, OR IF THEY TOOK IT OUT AND WENT WITH, UH, YOU REMEMBER THE PATTY VERSION? I THINK IT WAS FOUR 49, 92 OR 42, 29.

I CAN'T REMEMBER, UM, SECURITIZATION, WHICH IS THAT LEARNED SIGN TO PARTICIPANTS IN THE ELECTRIC MARKET, UM, WHO, UH, MAY NEED THAT MONEY TO TIDE THEM OVER FROM THE LOSSES FROM HER STORM.

OKAY.

SOUNDS SIMPLE ENOUGH.

IT HASN'T BEEN, UM, THE VERSION THAT WE THOUGHT THAT THE LEGISLATURE WAS GOING TO SETTLE ON, UM, WAS LARGER, A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY, UH, OR CONSIDERABLY MORE MONEY, MORE INCLUSIVE.

THAT'S THE LAST MINUTE WHEN ALL THIS IS SUPPOSED TO GO BACK TO THE COMMITTEE CONFERENCE, THAT'S WHERE SENATE AND HOUSE GET TOGETHER AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE FINAL VERSION IS GONNA BE.

UH, SENATOR HANCOCK THREW IN, HE HAD ANOTHER VERSION, WHICH WAS A WHOLE LOT LESS MONEY.

UM, AND IT WAS ESSENTIALLY BORROWING RATHER THAN FROM THE RAINY DAY FUND BORROWING FROM THE, UH, CONGESTION REVENUE RIGHTS FUND, WHICH AS YOU KNOW, IT'S AN ASPECT OF TRADING IN THE ELECTRIC MARKET.

YOU HAVE TO KIND OF PAY, UH, WHEN THERE'S A HIGHER DEMAND TO GET THROUGH ON A TRANSMISSION LINE, YOU HAVE TO PAY TO THAT.

AND THERE'S A FUN CREATIVE FROM THAT.

SO, UH, SENATOR HANCOCK WAS SUGGESTING AS IS SCARY SIGN WITH JUST THAT MONEY.

UH, AND YOU'D HAVE TO BORROW IT AT TWO AND A HALF PERCENT OVER SOME INDEX THAT WE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHERE IT'S WHAT'S, THE INDEX HAD TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT.

SO ESSENTIALLY BE BORROWING THE STATE'S MONEY

[00:05:01]

AND, AND CREATE AND PROFIT FOR WHICH WOULD BE REALLY NICE, I GUESS, BUT IT WASN'T VERY MUCH MONEY.

AND THE BILL, UM, IS VIRGIN WITH BILL CUTOUT, THE, UM, UH, THE RETAIL ELECTRIC PROVIDERS, THE REPS DOING THAT WAS A REAL CONCERN TO US BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONE TO, AS BEST WE CAN TELL.

THERE'S STILL A LOT OF EXPOSURE OUT THERE, UH, IN THE ELECTRIC MARKET AND, AND THE REPS, OR, UH, ONE OF THE MOST EXPOSED, UM, IF THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO GET THESE SECURITIZATION FUND LOANS, UH, THEY COULD GO BELLY UP, THEY GO BELLY UP AT IMPACT SIZE BECAUSE THERE WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH.

UM, OR THERE WOULD BE MORE UPLIFT OF THE, THE, IF THEY WALKED AWAY AND SAID, I'M NOT PAYING MY BUILDER OR A GOD, UH, THAT CREATES A BIGGER HOLE, YOU KNOW, FUND AND ALL THAT GETS UPLIFTED TO THE SURVIVORS AND COULD COST, UH, GDP AND L PARISH MORE.

AND SO WE OBJECTED TO THAT BILL.

UH, I SAT IN A VERY SIMPLE LETTER THROUGH RAY, UH, TO SENATOR SCHWERTNER.

UH, WE DID WITH MOST OF THE OTHER, UM, UH, PLAYERS IN THE ELECTRIC MARKET SAYING THIS BILL DOESN'T GO FAR ENOUGH, EVEN THOUGH WE AS GP AND ALL DON'T NECESSARILY NEED THE MONEY.

UM, WE'VE BECAUSE OF GOOD MANAGEMENT AND GOOD PLANNING WHERE WE'RE ABLE TO MAKE IT THROUGH WITHOUT BEING SKINNY, LIKE TOO MUCH.

UM, BUT IF WE LET THESE OTHERS FAIL, IT IS GOING TO BE HURTFUL TO OUR RATE PAYERS.

PLEASE DON'T DO IT.

THAT'S THE LAST I'VE HEARD OF IT UNTIL THE DAY.

AND NOW I'VE SEEN, UM, I THINK THERE WERE 22 AMENDMENTS TO SB THREE AND, UH, FOR THE LIVE TO ME, UM, I CAN'T QUITE FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS.

IT'S A WARRANT.

NOW, THESE AMENDMENTS MEAN X GO BACK TO HOUSE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, FIGURE IT OUT FROM THERE.

I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO SURVIVE HOW TO PUT ALL THE, I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING.

IT WAS NECESSARILY FATAL TO US.

UM, BUT, UM, UNTIL I SIT DOWN ON HIM AND SCOURED THROUGH HIS 23 AMENDMENTS AND THEN GET SOME SENSE OF WHAT THE HOUSEMATE CONCURRENT, UH, REALLY WON'T KNOW ON, UM, UH, HB 1869, UH, THAT FINALLY CAME OUT THAT'S THE CEO'S BILL CAME OUT SAYING IT WAS SOME CHANGES CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, UH, OUR CONCERN THERE, THE SENATE VERSION, UM, WAS IT AWFUL? IT INCLUDED THAT LIST OF, UM, UH, DEDICATED INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND THAT SORT OF THING, UM, INCLUDED OUR REQUESTS FOR LANDFILLS, UM, INCLUDED OUR REQUESTS, THAT WE BE ABLE TO FUND EQUIPMENT OUT OF IT, LIKE HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR FIRE TRUCKS, UH, AS BEST I CAN TELL THE ONLY THINGS THAT REALLY DIDN'T GET THROWN IN THERE AND THINGS LIKE CONVENTION CENTERS AND LIBRARIES, AND, UM, SOME OTHER FACILITIES LIKE TO HAVE THE, UM, THE THING AND OUR INITIAL CONCERN WAS THE EFFECTIVE DATE PROVISION.

IF YOU'LL RECALL, UH, WHAT WE'RE REALLY, REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT IT'S IN THE INITIAL STAGES THAT BILL IS THAT IT WOULD PASS AND SAY, YOU HAVE TO MOVE ON ANY DEATHS THAT CONSTITUTES IS KIND OF, NON-VOTER APPROVED THAT OVER TO YOUR O AND M SIDE AND RECOGNIZE IT OVER THERE, WHICH WOULD HAVE CAUSED AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT ON OUR REVENUE CAP CALCULATIONS COME AUGUST, SEPTEMBER.

I THINK I'LL GIVE US SOME CREDIT AND OUR OREGON, UH, ALONG WITH, UH, THE URGING, UH THERE'S UH, I THINK THEY FINALLY GOT THE MESSAGE SAID, WE CAN'T DO THIS THIS IMMEDIATELY.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ALLOW SOME TIME FOR THE EXISTING DEBT, UM, UH, TO BE, UH, OR RATHER IT IT'S A FORWARD LOOKING BILL.

AND, UH, AS WE ISSUED AS KIND OF DAD IN THE FUTURE, WE MAY HAVE TO, DEPENDING ON WHAT IT'S FOR, UM, RECOGNIZE IT FOR REVENUE CAP CALCULATION PURPOSES, BUT NOT IMMEDIATELY.

OF COURSE WE

[00:10:01]

NEVER, UH, ISSUED ANY OF THAT DEBT.

AND WITH THE IDEA THAT IT WOULD GO AGAINST OUR REVENUE CAP CALCULATIONS WOULD BE MUCH MORE CAUTIOUS IN THE FUTURE.

THAT SAID, I THINK THE, UH, EXCLUSIONS, UM, ARE GOING TO BE BROAD ENOUGH THAT IF WE'RE REAL CAUTIOUS IN OUR USE OF THAT KIND OF DEBT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO RUN INTO A KIND OF PROBLEMS. WE ANTICIPATE A ROOM FIRST SAW THE BILL, UM, LAST TIME.

AND THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU'VE SEEN ON TV.

THERE WAS SOME SORT OF, UM, JOSH HALL GOING ON BETWEEN SENATE AND HOUSE, AND WE'RE NOT SURE OF ALL THE INTRICACIES OF IT.

UH, IT HAPPENS AND I ALMOST WANT TO SAY IT HAPPENS EVERY LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

SOMETIMES IT'S TOO HARD ADVANTAGE BECAUSE THE LONGER THEY TAKE THE MORE BILLS, TIME OUT, MOST OF THE BILLS OF LIGHT AND LAST COUPLE OF SESSIONS THAT BAD, GOOD, LET THEM TIME OUT THEIR DEAD CAR, UH, CONTEND WITH AGAIN, AND THE COUPLE OF YEARS, I THINK SOME OF WHAT IS SLOW THINGS DOWN, OF COURSE, THE MAJOR THINGS IT GETS, THE NEWS MEDIA ATTENTION, THE HEARTBEAT BILL, UH, CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE BIGGEST ONES.

UH, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENS, THIS MORE OF A, OF A STORY OF, UM, WHY WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROCESS.

UM, AND, AND SPEAKING OF THAT, UH, SB 10, WE STILL DON'T KNOW THAT'S, UH, I CALL IT THE SILENCE AS A PRE-BUILD TAXPAYER-FUNDED LOCKING, UH, STILL UP IN THE AIR.

IF THE VERSION THAT WE THOUGHT WAS GOING TO BE, OR IT HADN'T BEEN VOTED OUT, UH, ON THE SENATE SIDE STAYS TRUE AND THEY DON'T ATTACH AMENDMENTS TO IT, OR WE'LL BE OKAY.

UM, I SAW TODAY FIVE OR SIX VARIOUS SO-CALLED AMENDMENTS, WHICH THEY AMENDMENTS AREN'T REALLY AMENDMENTS TO, UH, TO THE VERSION THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING FLOATED AROUND.

IT'S A COMPLETE REWRITE AND IT GOES BACK TO START AND SAYS, NO CITIES, YOU CAN'T GO DOWN THERE AND LOBBY AT ALL.

OKAY.

WE'LL HAVE TO SAY, I THINK THAT IT'S COMING UP PER VOTE TONIGHT.

OKAY.

GOING BACK TO THIS EXAMPLE, I MEAN, THIS HAS TO DO WITH CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY, WHY WE SHOULD BE INVOLVED.

UM, NOW W WE HAVEN'T BEEN INVOLVED IN A CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY DEBATE.

THE POLICY ISSUE WE'VE LEFT TO OTHERS.

UM, BUT WE SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN, WELL, IF WE DO THIS, WHAT HAPPENS OVER HERE? BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT, UH, BEING THE ENFORCEMENT AGENT, UH, BEING THE ONES WHO HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE LAW OR PUT IT INTO A FACT, UM, WE, WE OFTENTIMES KNOW THE NUANCES BETTER THAN MOST FOLKS DOWN IN AUSTIN WHO ARE TRYING TO PUT, PUT THEM TOGETHER.

AND THAT HAPPENED WAS CONSTITUTIONAL.

OKAY, BILL, I THINK IT'S ALREADY BEEN VOTED OUT AND IT'S ON ITS WAY TO THE GOVERNOR.

UM, LAST I HEARD, AND THIS IS AS COUPLE OF HOURS AGO.

UM, THEY PROHIBITED SHARING IN MEETINGS.

OKAY.

UH, CARRYING WEAPONS IN MEETINGS HAS BEEN A CONCERN TO US, BUT, UH, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ON A, KIND OF A LOCAL OPTION BASIS.

IF YOU WANT TO PUT UP SIGNS THAT SAY NO HANDGUNS AND MEETINGS, THEN CITIES CAN DO THAT.

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO MOVE, THERE'S BEEN A TRADITION IN GARLAND, THEN YOU DON'T POST THE SIGNS AND ON YOU GO, WELL, IT IS PART OF THE REWRITE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY.

I'VE BEEN TOLD.

I'VE DROPPED THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF INTERLINKING PIECES TO THESE STATUTES.

AND WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD WAS THEY'VE, THEY'VE DROPPED THE PROVISIONS THAT ALLOW AN OPT IN, IN OTHER WORDS, UH, A WAY TO, UH, I SHOULD HAVE SAID OPT OUT TO, UH, TO ALLOW FOLKS TO CARRY HANGUPS IN INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS.

AND SO NO HANDGUNS IN GOVERNMENTAL IMMEDIATE AND SAY, WELL, THAT'S FINE.

NO PROBLEM THERE, UH, THING ON YOUR POLITICAL VIEWS, PERHAPS THE PROBLEM IS I WALKED OUT ALL WRAPPINGS IN GOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS, AND I HAVEN'T SEEN THE EXACT LANGUAGE.

I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO PULL IT UP.

I'M TOLD IT PROHIBITS POLICE OFFICERS,

[00:15:01]

OKAY.

WEAPONS INTO MEETING HELL, I DON'T THINK THEY INTENDED TO.

UH, AND SO WE MAY SEE THAT BILL AFTER ALL THIS EFFORT TO KICK BACK BY THE GOVERNOR BECAUSE OF THAT.

AND, UM, IT'S GOING TO BE SOMEWHAT EMBARRASSING IF THAT OLD'S TRUE.

UH, BUT I THINK IT ILLUSTRATES MY POINT THAT HAVE WE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS IN A MEANINGFUL WAY, UH, INSTEAD OF BEING CONSTANTLY SUSPECTED OF, UH, UNDERMINING WHATEVER THE EFFORT IS, BUT THE PART OF THE RESOURCE AND PART OF THE, WELL, IF WE CHANGE THIS AND YOU NEED TO CHANGE THIS, OR, OR DON'T CHANGE THAT SECTION BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO AFFECT IT OVER HERE, THEN WE CAN BE, IF WE'RE PART OF THAT PROCESS, WE CAN MAKE THINGS BETTER DOWN THERE AND MAKE BETTER LEGISLATION.

IT MAY NOT BE BETTER, UH, POLITICAL POLICY.

UM, BUT THE END RESULT OF WHATEVER THEY DECIDE ON, WE THINK WE CAN MAKE A BETTER END PRODUCT FOR PEOPLE OF HIS STATE.

UM, WITH THAT LITTLE SPEECH MR. CHAIRMAN, OR PASS IT ON TO YOU TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMITTEE CAN, I REMEMBER SHE HAD ANYTHING FROM MR. NEIGHBOR, JUST, JUST TO, JUST TO QUESTION, THERE WERE SOME OF YOUR, YOUR WISDOM.

I WAS IN A DISCUSSION WITH A COUPLE OF PEOPLE'S PAST WEEK OVER THERE THAT THEY'VE CARRIED BILL.

AND THE QUESTION CAME, CAME UP TWO THINGS, AND I'VE, I'VE READ THEM BOTH A NUMBER OF TIMES, BOTH THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION AND THE US CONSTITUTION.

AND WE KEPT, WE JUST KEPT GOING AROUND AND ROUND LIKE THE TIGER AND THE BUTTER.

UM, YOU KNOW, WHERE IS DEBATABLE, WHERE IN EITHER ONE OF THOSE DOCUMENTS, THERE'S THIS LEGISLATION REST HAD HAD, WE DIDN'T SAY THAT WE HAD, WE HAD SOME FUN DISCUSSIONS ON THAT DEEP WORK IN THE STUDENT AS RISK.

AND MY SECOND SITUATION IS I WAS SHOCKING TO A, A, A LIBRARIAN WHO WORKS IN ANOTHER, ANOTHER CITY AND WHO HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, ABOUT, UM, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS.

AND LET'S SAY IF, IF LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES CAN'T MAKE ORDINANCE A ROLE, YOU SAID, SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT, UH, DAB OR WAS STRICT.

UM, SHE EXPRESSED A CONCERN THAT, YOU KNOW, LET'S TAKE A, OF LIKE A LIBRARY AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT, HOW COULD, HOW COULD SOMEBODY IN A LIBRARY WHO'S RUNNING A LIBRARY AT A CITY? WHAT OPTIONS DO THEY HAVE TO BE SURE THAT, THAT THEIR PATRONS ARE PROTECTED? I DIDN'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

I WAS JUST THROWING IT BACK TO YOU CAUSE HE CAME UP IN DISCUSSION AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS CONCERNED THAT, THAT, THAT SHEET THAT SHE HAD, THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TURNING STAFF FOLKS INTO CLAYS THAT POLICE OFFICERS AND, AND PUT THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF SOME THINGS THAT REALLY FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT, THEY SHOULD NOT BE THROWN INTO THE MIDST OF IT.

ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? WELL, FIRST QUESTION IS KIND OF BEYOND THE PALE OF WHAT WE DEBATE HERE.

UM, INTERESTING THAT, WHICH BEING CALLED CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY, UH, IN TEXAS.

NOW THAT'S A TERM THAT, UH, IS USED FOR THIS SORT OF LEGISLATION ALL ACROSS THE UNITED STATES.

UM, IN TEXAS, IT'S CLEARLY WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION THAT THE LEGISLATURE CAN REGULATE.

THE, UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING OF A FIREARM HAS BEEN SINCE I THINK, 1878 OF LIKE THAT.

UH, AS FAR AS THE SECOND PART, WE DID NOT HAVE, WE HAVE LONG AGO, SEVERAL SECTIONS AGO, I SHOULD SAY, UH, LAWSUIT ABILITY TO REGULATE.

UM, THEY'LL AWFUL CARRYING OF FIREARMS AND IN PUBLIC BUILDINGS, UM, WITH VERY NARROW EXCEPTIONS, UH, COURTROOMS, UH, POLICE STATION.

UM, I'M TRYING TO THINK OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, UM, AND, AND MEETINGS OF A COVER MENTAL ENTITY, IF THE SIGNS ARE POSTED.

UM, BUT THAT'S LONG BEEN TAKEN AWAY AND THEN STRENGTHENED OVER TIME.

UH, SO FOR EXAMPLE, WITH THE LIBRARY, UM, THE, THE CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY BUILDINGS COMING OUT TO SESSION, ISN'T GOING TO IMPACT

[00:20:01]

THAT IT IT'S BEEN THAT WAY, UH, FOR SEVERAL YEARS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THOSE WHO ARE INCLINED TO CARRY, ASSUMING THEY'RE OTHERWISE LAWFULLY DOING IT, UH, UH, FIREARM IN PUBLIC, THEY COULD GO INTO A PUBLIC LIBRARY TO DO SO.

AND, AND, AND YEAH, AND LIKE, LIKE I SAID, THAT WAS HER CONCERN.

YOU'VE GOT TO CONSTITUENTS BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO THIS, RIGHT? SAYING, YOU KNOW, FOLKS, YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO CARRY OTHER FOLKS HAVE A RIGHT TO NOT HAVE IT AROUND THEM.

SO SHE WAS CONCERNED THE CONVERSATION WHERE SHE WAS CONCERNED, SOMEBODY WALKS INTO THE LIBRARY WITH AN OPEN CARROT SIDA ON AND THEIR FOLKS IN THERE THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT AUTOMATICALLY CAST FEAR IN THEM.

SO WHAT DOES, WHAT DOES, AND I, I DON'T ASK YOU THIS TO RESOLVE IT TODAY ON THIS DISCUSSION THAT I STILL WITHOUT, BECAUSE SHE SAID IT TO ME, BUT WHAT IS THE PERSON RIGHT TO CARRY? YOU KNOW, WHAT IS IT, WHEN, AND WHERE DOES IT SPILL OVER INTO SOMEBODY ELSE'S RIGHT.

NOT TO BE AROUND A FIREARM.

SO DOES, DOES A PERSON'S RIGHT TO CARRY A SUPERSEDE SOMEBODY'S RIGHT.

TO SAY, I DON'T WANT A GUN AROUND MY FAMILY.

SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE DISCUSSION THAT SHE, THAT SHE BROUGHT UP WELL, AND I THINK HAVING WATCHED A LOT OF THE LEGISLATURE, THEY'RE SAYING THAT THERE IS NO SUCH RIGHT.

IN A PUBLIC SPACE, NOT TO BE AROUND IT, UH, BASED ON YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT, RIGHT.

TO BEAR ARMS. AND SO THAT'S, I UNDERSTAND, BUT THAT'S A, I'M TELEGRAPHING, THE LEGISLATURE'S ARGUMENTS AND, UH, AND THAT'S, UH, THAT'S WHERE IT'S AT.

AND IT'S VERY MUCH APPEARS TO BE OF A PURE PARTY LINE VOTE AT THIS POINT.

YEAH.

OKAY.

GO AHEAD.

SURE.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

RICH, DID YOU HAVE ANY, ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS YOU WANT TO BRING UP ON CURRENT BILLS? UM, I MEAN, NOT, I MEAN, THE KIND OF IN MY MIND, THE CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY USED IS WHAT IT IS.

LEGISLATURE'S NOT GONNA LISTEN TO US ANYWAY AND THEY'RE GOING TO DO WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO, AND WE'LL JUST HAVE TO MANAGE IT AS BEST WE CAN.

AND THE, THE KNOCK ON EFFECTS IF PEOPLE DON'T, I MEAN, MY HOPE IS THAT ULTIMATELY IT WILL BE SOMETHING KIND OF A NOTHING BURGER, BUT, UM, IN TERMS OF IMPACT, UH, OTHER THAN, OF COURSE, MAKING PEOPLE REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE.

I MEAN, AS WE KNOW, FROM HAVING PEOPLE SHOW UP AT COUNCIL MEETINGS AND WONDERING WHETHER THEY'RE CARRYING OR WHATNOT, UM, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS ON 1869.

UM, SO BRAD, SO THEY STRIPPED OUT WHEN HE LEFT THE HOUSE, IT HAD BEEN BRACKETED REALLY JUST TO APPLY, THINK TO SAN ANTONIO.

AND SO NOW, NOW THAT'S BEEN COMPLETELY STRIPPED OUT.

THERE WERE, UH, I THINK AT ONE TIME, LIKE FIVE DIFFERENT BRACKETS.

UM, AND AS LAURA IDENTIFIED, UH, AFTER OUR LAST MEETING, WE WERE INCLUDED ONE OF THOSE BRACKETS AND ONE OF THOSE BRACKETS, CAUSE IT WOULD HAVE, UH, I DON'T THINK IT WAS KNOWN TO CALL COUNTY AT THE TIME, BUT IT WOULD COVER COLOR AND COUNTY AND WE'RE IN COLLIN COUNTY OF GARLAND.

AND SO IT WOULD'VE INCLUDED US AND THE BRACKETS WOULD HAVE CARVED US COMPLETELY OUT OF THE BILL, BUT WE KNEW, WE WERE TOLD AND WE KNEW FOR HOMAGE TO A CERTAIN AGE.

THEY WERE, WHEN IT GOT OVER TO THE SENATE SIDE, THEY WERE GOING TO STRIP OUT ALL THE BRACKETS AND THEY DID.

AND SO THE VERSION THAT CAME OUT IS LOVABLE.

UM, AND EVEN WITH THE, WE HAD A BETTER WRITTEN EFFECTIVE DATE, UH, PROVISION, BUT SENATE SAID THAT WAS TOO MUCH.

AND, UH, UH, TY SENT IT TO SENT ME THE VERSION THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE THE FINAL VERSION.

UH, LATER THIS AFTERNOON, TML HAD LOOKED AT IT AND I LOOKED AT IT AGAIN.

WE'RE GOING TO DO, UH, WE DON'T NEED THE PRACTICE.

I THINK EVERYBODY'S SAYING THE CITY MANAGER AND MATT WATSON HAVE TOLD US AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO USE CO2, I THINK WE'LL BE OKAY.

BUT IT WOULD BAR YOU KNOW, TO EXTENT THAT WE HAVE THINGS LIKE COST OVERRUNS ON HOW DOES IT AFFECT BOND PROJECTS.

IN OTHER WORDS, WE'VE APPROVED THIS BOND PROJECT, AND NOW WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THE, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE ANIMAL SHELTER IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT.

I DON'T THINK WE ISSUED CEO'S FOR THAT, BUT WE WERE, OR MAYBE WE DID, WE WERE 4 MILLION OVER WHAT THE BOND NUMBER HAD BEEN IF IT'S BEEN VOTER APPROVED.

ARE WE OKAY? YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ALL OF THE YEAH.

IT'S VOTER APPROVED.

SO IT WOULD TAKE IT OUT OF THE CONTROL OF 1869.

IT WOULDN'T BE UNDER 1869.

I THINK YOUR QUESTION IS, DO WE EVER USE INTERIM FUNDING?

[00:25:02]

NO ONE, NO, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION.

THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION.

MY QUESTION IS THAT WE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE BOND PROGRAM SAID, YOU KNOW, 12.9 MILLION FOR THE, FOR THE ANIMAL SHELTER AND IT COMES BACK AT 17 MILLION.

AND TYPICALLY WE ISSUE CEO'S TO COVER THAT DIFFERENTIAL.

IT'S NOT PART OF IT.

I DON'T THINK IT'S EVER PART OF A GEO IT'S NEVER ROLLED IN.

SO WHAT, ALTHOUGH THE, THE, THE PROJECT WAS APPROVED IS A VOTER APPROVED PROJECT, BUT THAT'S NOT THE VOTER APPROVED PRICING.

AND SO MY CAUSE I THINK THAT'LL, YOU KNOW, THAT COULD IMPACT US GOING FORWARD WITH IMPLEMENTING PARTS OF THE BOND PROGRAM WHEN WE RUN IT.

I MEAN, I CAN ALREADY SEE, YOU KNOW, RECODE AND PARK IS THE EXAMPLE OF THAT AQUATICS MASTER PLAN HAD $21 MILLION IN IT, IN THE AQUATICS MASTER PLAN TO EXECUTE IT.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE MORE LIKE 26, 27 MILLION, INCLUDING 2.8 MILLION FOR A, UH, REGIONAL SPLASH PAD AT RECODE.

AND SO I GUESS, WOULD WE HAVE TO, IT WOULD CHANGE HOW WE DO THINGS, I GUESS WHAT HE WOULD, WE HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS AGAIN, OR WOULD WE HAVE TO JUST, YOU KNOW, ISSUE A WHOLE BUNCH OF PERSPECTIVE COS OR SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, AUGUST 31ST OR DOES IT NOT APPLY AT ALL TO THEM? YEAH.

UM, I DON'T REMEMBER HOW PARKS PLUG INTO THEIR, I KNOW LIBRARY WERE A MAJOR CONTENTION, SO LET'S SAY LET'S USE YOUR EXAMPLE AND SAY THAT WE HAVE $30 MILLION FOR A NEW LIBRARY, BUT THE PROJECTIONS ARE, IT'S GOING TO ACTUALLY COST US 40, WHICH IS A HORRIBLE OVERRUN.

UM, BUT WE NEED THE MONEY TO FINISH IT.

ALL THE VOTERS APPROVED 30, UH, LIBRARIES NOT INCLUDED IN 1869, WHERE DO YOU GET THE OTHER $10 MILLION? AND THAT'S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.

I AGREE.

UH, YOU KNOW, YEAH.

SO IT COULD BE A POTENTIAL PROBLEM.

UH, YEAH, THE PROPONENTS 1869 SAY, HEY, YOU HAVE AN ELECTION EVERY YEAR ASK YOU PEOPLE.

AND TO SOME EXTENT THAT'S NOT A TOTALLY FLIPPING ANSWER BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, WHEN, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO A BOND ELECTION, UH, IT HAS TO BE SPECIFICALLY WORDED.

I'M NOT BOND LAWYER.

SO I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WORKS ON AT C, UH, BUT IT OCCURS TO ME THAT THERE'S A SOMEWHAT LESSER STANDARD FOR BOND PROPOSITIONS.

EXCUSE ME, IT'S NOT A BOND PROPOSITION FOR A, A DEBT PROPOSITION UNDER 1869.

AND WHAT WE HAVE AS FAR AS, UH, UH, ISSUING DEBT AS A BOND HAS YET TO BE SEEN.

BUT I THINK YOUR POINT'S WELL TAKEN THAT WE COULD RUN INTO INSTANCES WHERE WE HAVE, UH, VOTER APPROVED DEBT, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO GO FOR FORWARD.

AND THEN WHAT DO WE DO? HEY BRENDA, SURE.

UH, ON TOPIC, UH, I NOTICED THAT THE, THE SENATE VERSION HAS A SECTION FOR SELF-SUPPORTING DEBT.

AND SO WHAT I WOULD, WHAT I WOULD QUESTION IS IF WE HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THE REC PERFORMANCE FUND OR THE ANIMAL SHELTER ADOPTION FEES THAT WE CAN SHOW OUR REVENUE STREAMS, CAN WE APPLY THOSE TO SUBSECTIONS OF THE DEBT THAT'S REQUIRED TO FINISH THE PROJECT? YOU PERHAPS THAT'S WHAT, UH, WELL, WILL YOU LOOK FOR A WAY TO WIRE AROUND? AND IT COULD.

OKAY.

JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE, UM, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE THINKING OF FROM SELF SUPPORTING WHATEVER THEY SAY.

YEAH.

AND I WAS JUST THINKING TO RICH'S POINT, IF YOU HAVE A SMALL OVERRUN, BUT YOU CAN MAKE IT UP FOR, IN THE REC PERFORMANCE FUND YOU'RE SELF-SUPPORTING CONGRATULATIONS.

YES, YES.

BUT THEN YOU AND I MET MAYBE JUST AN ACCOUNTING PROBLEM, BUT YOU CERTAINLY END UP LIKE, OKAY, NOW YOU HAVE TO ACCOUNT ON ALL THE REVENUES THAT COME IN HERE ARE PLEDGED TO THAT DEBT.

YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.

WE, WE MAKE MATT WATSON'S LIFE.

BUT, UH, BUT I THINK THE PRACTICAL UPSHOT OF THIS IS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A WHOLE LOT LESS, UH, ITEMIZATION AND BOND PROGRAMS GOING FORWARD.

I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE LARGE BUCKETS, UH, BECAUSE THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE AT DESIGNATED INFRASTRUCTURE AND I'M LOOKING AT THE, THE HOUSE.

LET'S SEE, I THINK I'M LOOKING AT THE LATEST, BUT THEY'VE GOT A SECTION FOR DESIGNATED

[00:30:01]

INFRASTRUCTURE MEANS OF FACILITY EQUIPMENT RIGHTS AWAY OR LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES OF STREETS, ROADS, HIGHWAYS, BRIDGES, SIDEWALKS, PARKS, LANDFILLS, OR AIRPORTS.

I THINK WE'RE PRETTY COVERED HERE EARLY, BUT BASICALLY WHAT YOU DO IS YOU JUST, IT BECOMES, INSTEAD OF MORE TRANSPARENCY, THE LEGISLATURE'S GUARANTEED THAT THERE ARE MORE SHELL GAMES.

I THINK THAT'S, YEAH.

I THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE ACCOMPLISHED.

THIS IS I'M READING IT RIGHT NOW.

IT'S, IT'S TALKS ABOUT A DEBT THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED IN AN ELECTION, BUT IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT THE DEBT THAT IS ISSUED FOR RENOVATING IMPROVING OR EQUIPPING EXISTING BUILDINGS OR FACILITIES.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S EXISTING, WHAT'S AN EXISTING BUILDING, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO BUILD THIS CONCRETE 10 BY 10 HUT, AND NOW I'M GOING TO ISSUE ANOTHER $15 MILLION IN DEBT TO IMPROVE AND EXPAND IT TO A MUCH BETTER ANIMAL SHELTER THAN A HUNDRED SQUARE FOOT.

YOU KNOW, CINDER BLOCK BUILDING, I GUESS.

I DON'T KNOW.

MAYBE THERE ARE WAYS AROUND IT WAYS TO MAKE THE LEGISLATURE MATTER AT US IF POSSIBLE, I GUESS PROBABLY NOT POSSIBLE DO IT MORE IN 1869.

I DON'T, I DON'T.

AND I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ON THE, ON THE OTHERS REALLY.

I'M GOING TO GUESS.

WE JUST GET TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS ON THE, I HAVE A FEELING THAT THE ELECTRIC BILLS ARE GOING TO BE LIKE, OKAY, THAT ALL COMES OUT AT THE VERY END, SAID, IT'S ALL JUST GOING TO BE IN THE, SOMEONE'S GOING TO STRIKE SOME COMPROMISE ABOUT HOW TO DEAL THIS DEAL WITH THIS.

AND THEN THEY'RE JUST GONNA START, UM, POURING INGREDIENTS INTO THE SOUP.

AND TWO, WE COME OUT WITH, UM, WHEN I WAS DOWN THERE LAST WEEK, UH, AND WALKING OFF WITH RAY, UH, WE GOT STOPPED AND TOLD THAT, UH, THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR WAS GOING TO HAVE A PRESS CONFERENCE.

UH, NEITHER RYAN, OR I FELT LIKE OUR NATIVES WERE UP TO WALKING DOWN, LISTENING TO THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, BUT HE WAS GOING TO HAVE A PRESS CONFERENCE AND, AND TEAR APART ALL OF THE LEGISLATION THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED ON THE WEATHER EVENT BACK IN FEBRUARY AND THE ELECTRIC MARKET AND COME OUT, BUT CHAMPION, UM, UH, SATELLITE JUST SLICING, NEVER WENT TO ANSWER ALL THESE QUESTIONS AND BE, UH, REALLY AWESOME.

UM, AND THEN I NEVER EARNED ANYTHING MORE, BUT I DON'T THINK HE GOT A TRACTION ON THAT.

HE, THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, BECAUSE THAT THESE OTHER BILLS ARE STILL WORKING THEIR WAY THROUGH THAT.

I THINK WE HAVE THEM PRETTY WELL TAKEN CARE OF IF, IF OUR AMENDMENTS STAY IN PLACE.

UM, THE ONLY ONE THAT WAS HANGING OUT THROUGH THAT, WE'RE NOT REALLY SURE WHEN WE'LL CALL THE HEB BILL THAT WAS ON, UH, WHAT WAS IT? I WATCHED IT SUNDAY AND THAT THE HOUSE WAS IN SEARCH AND DESTROY MODE ON THAT KIND OF THING.

UH, THEY, THEY, THE, THE FEELING THAT I GOT AND I WATCHED THE HOUSE ALL DAY SUNDAY, IT WAS ABOUT A 12 HOUR RUN FROM NOON TO MIDNIGHT AND EVERYTHING.

EVERY TIME ANYTHING WOULD COME UP ABOUT INCREASING ANY FORM OF CAPACITY AT ALL, IT WAS OBVIOUS THAT THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY WANTED TO PROTECT THE MARKET MORE THAN THEY WANTED TO PROTECT THE CONSUMER.

THAT'S MY OPINION.

AND I WATCHED THE SAME CAST OF CHARACTERS GET UP AND REPEATEDLY SHOOT DOWN AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD HAVE PROVIDED FOR ANY SORT OF CAPACITY GROWTH.

SO WHATEVER IT IS, I DON'T THINK IT'LL MAKE IT THROUGH THE HOUSE.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, ONE OF MY, ONE OF MY FRIENDS IN THE LEGISLATURE IS IN THE INDUSTRY AND, UH, IS THE BIGGEST PROPONENT OF KEEPING IT AS IS.

SO BETWEEN PATTY AND PATTERSON, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING ANYWHERE, RIGHT.

THEY WON'T EVEN ALLOW A STUDY TO BE PERFORMED THAT COULD COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT WE NEED.

STANDBY CAPACITY.

I, THAT THAT HAPPENED, THAT HAPPENED.

SO I THINK THAT'S DEAD IN THE WATER AT LEAST IN THE HOUSE.

YEP.

YEP.

WELL, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR OUR MEETING TODAY, OR WE MAY HAVE TO REGROUP HERE.

UM, MAYBE THE NEXT WEEK, DEPENDING ON DEVELOPMENTS, OF COURSE WE'RE FROM THE CLOCK OUT, BUT WE'LL SEE.

YEAH.

UM, THE, UH, I

[00:35:01]

KNOW THE SENATE HAS GOT 300 PLUS LOCAL BILLS THAT ARE GOING TO BE PROCESSED THIS WEEK AND GO OVER TO THE HOUSE.

UH, 1558 IS INCLUDED IN THAT, BUT LOTS AND LOTS OF MUD CREATIONS AND DIFFERENT DISTRICTS FOR THIS AND THAT.

AND I WOULD BE SHOCKED IF THAT THEY LET THAT DROP.

SO I'M HOPING THAT ALL GETS TAKEN UP TOGETHER.

UM, IT'S GOING TO BE A BUSY COUPLE OF DAYS.

AND, UH, UH, AS YOU SAID, I THINK WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE INFLUENCES IS PRETTY MUCH ENDED BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS IN THE BACKROOMS NOW AND, AND GETTING TURNED THROUGH THEIR, THEIR LEGISLATIVE SAUSAGE MAKING.

SO, UM, I HAVE WATCHED MORE HOUSE AND SENATE FEEDS THAN I EVER THOUGHT I WOULD IN MY LIFETIME THIS YEAR.

BUT, UH, I, I THINK I'VE GOT A BETTER FEEL FOR HOW THEY'RE OPERATING AND IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH 10,000 BILLS IN 140 DAYS, MAYBE THIS IS AS GOOD AS IT GETS.

SO I DON'T, I DON'T, I WANT TO GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT OF CREDIT.

I MEAN, I, I KNOW HOW MUCH TIME WE SPEND ON ONE BILL OR ONE LITTLE BIT ORDINANCE, LET ALONE, YOU KNOW, 10,000.

SO I DON'T WANT TO, I DON'T WANT TO DISPARAGE THEM FOR THAT.

SO DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER LEGISLATIVE UPDATES QUESTIONS, GENERAL CONVERSATION.

OKAY.

WE'RE GOING TO PLAY IT BY EAR ON FUTURE MEETINGS.

UH LET'S WAIT, SEE WHAT HAPPENS ON THE 31ST, UH, SEE WHAT SPECIAL SESSIONS GET QUEUED UP AND THEN I'LL COMMUNICATE WITH EVERYBODY.

AND, UH, WE'LL, WE'LL SEE IF WE HAVE A ROLE IN, IN WHAT'S TO COME SOUND GOOD.

SOUNDS GOOD.

ALL RIGHT.

WELL, IF THIS DOESN'T UP BEING OUR LAST MEETING, I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE, BUT IF IT DOES, UH, APPRECIATE THE HELL OUT OF ALL OF YOU, YOU YOU'VE ALL PUT YOUR HEARTS AND SOULS INTO THIS, AND I KNOW YOU'VE DONE THE BEST YOU CAN FOR THE CITY AND, UH, WHETHER WHETHER ANYBODY ELSE SEES IT OR APPRECIATES IT OR NOT.

I SEE IT.

AND I APPRECIATE IT.

AND I KNOW THE AMOUNT OF EFFORT YOU'VE ALL PUT INTO IT.

SO, UH, SINCERELY, SINCERELY, THANK YOU.

EVERY ONE OF YOU FOR ALL OF ALL THAT YOU PUT INTO THIS, UH, WITH THAT SAID IT IS 4:38 PM.

AND THIS MEETING OF THE LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE IS ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU ALL.

THANK YOU, SIR.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Speech-to-Text.