Loading...
2025 05 08 CC WS MinutesMINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN May 8, 2025 The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in a Work Session on Thursday, May 8, 2025, at 4:00 P.M. in the Council Chamber of Baytown City Hall, 2401 Market Street, Baytown, Texas, with the following in attendance: Laura Alvarado Council Member Sarah Graham Council Member Kenrick Griffith Council Member James Franco Council Member Jacob Powell Mayor Pro Tern Mike Lester Council Member Charles Johnson Mayor Jason Reynolds City Manager Scott Lemond City Attorney Angela Jackson City Clerk John Stringer Sergeant at Arms Mayor Charles Johnson convened the May 8, 2025 City Council Work Session with a quorum present at 4:05 P.M. All members were present with the exception of Council Member Sarah Graham and Council Member James Franco. 1. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mayor Charles Johnson announced no citizens signed up to speak. 2. DISCUSSIONS a. Receive and discuss an updated draft of the ethics ordinance including the complaint process and creation of an Ethics Board. Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt summarized the ethics discussion at the April 24, 2025 Work Session and provided the Code of Ethics ordinance draft and continued a presentation detailing the Code of Ethics and Ethics Board Ordinances. (Exhibit A) Council Member Sarah Graham entered the City Council Work Session meeting at 4:07 P.M. Council Member Mike Lester referenced exhibit A and stated, "On the creation, it says, "The advisory board shall assist and advise the city council and or the city manager." 1 thought in our discussions, we removed city employees. So, why would the Ethics Commission need to consult with the city manager?" City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 2of15 Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt, referenced exhibit A and responded, "This is still from the original, no updates have been made." Council Member Kenrick Griffith, stated, "I like the idea of having alternates, but I would like to see all districts represented fully with two alternates just in case maybe there's a councilman from that district who has ethics complaint, maybe that alternate could fill in for that specific district to prevent any kind of biases. Perhaps seven members with two alternates." Council Member Laura Alvarado, stated, "In the past, it was five because it was mainly clergy. We didn't have that many clergy back then as we do now. Right now, I'm indifferent. I mean, it could be some of us get to choose the regular members and some of us get to choose the alternates and that makes it the seven. I'm okay keeping it this way with the five and then the two alternates. But I'm open to doing one per council if that's what the majority wants." Council Member Sarah Graham, stated, "I don't know that it needs to be district -specific, although I support that on other boards. When we're looking at the ineligibility requirements where there's a lot of requirements that will prevent them from serving. Since we want to have this board established fairly quickly, my only reservations is, is each district going to have people that are eligible?" Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "We have a hard time finding people for committees now. Now with it being an Ethics Board, I don't know that making it district -specific would be to our advantage. I like the idea of it being an odd number. I think three is too small. 1 think five is a perfect number for that. When people submit applications, we collectively go over them and decide on who those five would be. I do agree when we start looking at the nine requirements that would prohibit someone, we may not get enough qualified people in order to get the board started. We did say we want to do this as soon as possible." Mayor Pro Tern Jacob Powell, commented, "I like the five I think in this case, smaller is better just because I think we will have challenges in finding enough people." Council Member Kenrick Griffith, stated, "If we are trying to make sure that we get this committee filled, then I don't think it would be a good idea to have any kind of specific stipulations." Council Member Laura Alvarado, stated, "If we want a clergy, then that could be one of our appointments, if they apply. We can take that into consideration. I agree because even on some of the committees, we're having difficulties in making quorum and it's blocking from the process moving forward. So, I like it at five with two alternates, and keeping them at large. I like the idea of just us as a consensus making the decision on who we will be selecting." Council Member Mike Lester, stated, "I agree with the five at large. I don't think it's necessary to have two alternatives. I mean, five folks, this is pretty important committee. Anybody that we nominate that has accepted the challenge, they're going to make sure they're there. And again, regardless of unless really unforeseen circumstances, but I would imagine the five individuals that we would approve to be on this committee would make every effort to be at any and all meetings City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 3 of 15 because they know the importance of it. We would just make nominations as a board and vote on it as a board till we get to five. I agree with my colleague that if we get too many on there, it's going to get difficult. It's hard enough to fill regular committees. This is going to be a pretty high - profile committee. Hopefully, it will not be seldom used, but when it is, that there's going to be a lot of pressure all around. So, the folks that we put on this committee are going to have to be pretty stalwart individuals. Because they're going to take pressure from all sides. I've heard comments, "Well, the citizens deserve to have a citizens committee to make decisions." Well, they do. There are seven of us up here. We were elected by all 85,000 participants, if you will, in this city. So, those constituents expect us to make these type decisions. Ultimately this is going to come to us. Creating this committee filters some of it. I don't have any problems with it, but I also don't have any problems with making decisions on this as well because that's our responsibility at the end of the day. I agree with five, I'm not worried about alternates. Again, whoever we put on this committee, they're going to stand up and they're going to move mountains to be at those meetings." Council Member Laura Alvarado, stated, "This is the first time we're doing this in a while. It's been years since we've had one. We may not get everything right. But there's a window of opportunity. I know a lot of cities who have existing ethic boards and have had them for a long time are now going back and doing amendments. Therefore, that window is open, yes, we want to get it right the first time, but we may not. We won't know until whatever day comes that it needs to be put into action." Council Member Sarah Graham referenced exhibit A and stated, "It says that three positions serve two-year terms. This was pulled off of the previous existing conditions, correct? The Ethics Board that we looked at, Laura and 1, it was the same people that have been on there for 20 years. It hadn't changed." Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt provided clarification and stated, "In the original one because it was the Ministerial Alliance, when they first appointed, I think they set it up because three of them would serve two years and two would serve the three years. Then, I think it was like some of our other boards, then those individuals just kind of carried over. The draft does place a limit on how many times they can serve." Council Member Sarah Graham referenced exhibit A and stated, "What I want clarified is did we have it established in the past for the Ethics Committee that three members serve two-year terms and two members serve three-year terms subsequent terms three years? It also says no member shall serve more than five consecutive years or be appointed for more than two full terms. I'm asking if that's how that was previously." Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt referenced exhibit A and stated, `The number one was previous, and number four where it says it's limited to the five years or the two full terms, that is new." Council Member Sarah Graham referenced exhibit A and requested clarification on where number four originated from. City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 4 of 15 Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt clarified that the information came from other municipalities ethics ordinance, and was inserted as a suggestion for council to discuss. Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt brought the discussion back to the amount of board members for the Ethics Committee. Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "I think you got a consensus on five, and I believe we have majority consensus on no alternates. How do y'all feel about that?" Four council members were against alternates and two were for alternates. Mayor Charles Johnson wanted clarification on how to decide which members of the committee get the three-year terms and which member gets the two-year terms. Council Member James Franco entered the City Council Work Session meeting at 4:26 F.M. Council Member Mike Lester provided clarification and stated, "The way it's been done in the past, after all five are selected, their names are basically drawn out of the hat. First two out of the hat get three years, the next ones get two, or vice versa." Mayor Charles Johnson informed Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt the decision on how the staggered terms will be picked. Mayor Pro Tern Jacob Powell, stated, "As far as a term limit, 1 would match what we as council have for term limits. We're four or three-year terms, I believe, per charter." Council Member Sarah Graham agreed with Mayor Pro Tern Jacob Powell. Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt referenced exhibit A and turned it to council to discuss the eligibility of the committee members. Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "What do we look at now to verify someone being a resident." Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt deferred the question to the City Clerk Angela Jackson. City Clerk Angela Jackson, stated, "We use a GIS system, verify the address and then look at their ID as well. That's all we have to go on. However, we indicate on the application as well that what you're saying is true and accurate." Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "Can we also maybe take it a step further because someone may move and not change their address on their driver's license? Could we require a bill in their name of some sort? Or if they don't have a bill in their name, maybe property tax records showing that they own the property or that there's a house there?" City Council Work Session Minutes May S, 2025 Page 5 of 15 Assistant City Manger Carol Flynt deferred the question to either the City Attorney Scott Lemond or the City Clerk Angela Jackson. City Clerk Angela Jackson, stated, "It is difficult to prove residency." Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "We're having an issue with that now. How long are we going to say that they have to have been a resident of the city? That's something to look at. Do you want someone moving in here after a week applying to be on the Ethics Board?" Mayor Pro Tern Jacob Powell, stated, "I think we would have control of that as the body that's doing the nominating and the appointing. Ultimately, we'll vote on whether or not we appoint them. I think if the seven of us think they haven't lived here long enough or we question their residency, I think we just wouldn't appoint. I'd be hesitant to try to put so much in this when we already can appoint or not appoint anyone." Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "That's true, but we would want to be consistent on it. To be consistence, have something on paper saying you must be a resident of the City of Baytown for a certain amount of time." Council Member Laura Alvarado, commented, "We don't do that for any of the other boards. If we want consistency, then we don't add that on there." Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "We could add it to the other boards also. I didn't know that was something that wasn't looked at." Council Member James Franco, stated, "When we're looking at our appointees, we usually want to call and interview them. We kind of know them and have an idea. The voters have voted us in to do that vetting for them. I would hope that we are doing our due diligence to do that. I think we are putting way too much into it. I get where you're going and I understand." Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "Well, if that's the case, we need to be sure that we're vetting the applications. If we're going to do this, we need to be sure that we're vetting, that each of us are calling these applicants, looking at these applications to be sure that this is something we want. I don't want the city clerk to be inundated with applications of people that we're not going to approve. That's just more work on them. We just need to do our part in making sure that we're consistent and we're vetting, especially for the Ethics Committee." Council Member Sarah Graham, requested clarification and stated, "What is an official of a political party? Do we mean someone that holds any position at all? For example, secretary of a party here in Baytown chapter? Would that be considered an official?" Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt responded yes to Council Member Sarah Graham's question. Council Member Kenrick Griffith referenced exhibit A and stated, "If somebody donates $50 to your campaign, according to this, would that disqualify them?" City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 6of15 Council Member James Franco, stated, "Yes, and I'm going to play devil's advocate. I could go after somebody politically and then donate. I mean, that's trying to prevent someone trying to destroy somebody's campaign by dragging them through the mud when it's not real. I'm not saying that it would happen, but you're trying to prevent some of that." Council Member Kenrick Griffith, commented, "It may be pretty difficult for it to happen with the way we have the code of conduct set up." Council Member Laura Alvarado, stated, "Should we add verbaige about someone not being related to any City of Baytown officials. I'd like to have that." Council Member Sarah Graham, commented, "I like that idea. When we say related, you have to be really, really specific." Council Member Laura Alvarado, clarified, "First -level relation. We already have that as part of our legal standard." City Attorney provided guidance and stated, "We do have a standard already that is in the ethics section and the disclosure sections. We could copy the standard, and that would be, I believe, within two positions of affiliation, blood or through marriage. Don't quote me on that, but that's what I think our current rule is. I will add that the rule that we follow is the state rule." Council Member Laura Alvarado, commented, "I will add the first relationship verbiage." Council Member Mike Lester requested clarification on exhibit A. Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt provided clarification. Council Member Mike Lester, referenced exhibit A and stated, "Why are we putting the super majority of two-thirds for removal versus simple majority? Is that a standard in ethics things that you found? I just thought that was odd that we would have such an onus." Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt clarified that not all ethics ordinances have this section. However, council can decide if they want super majority of simple majority of a vote. Council Member Mike Lester, stated, "I'm not for or against it. I was just kind of why are we putting this significant onus on us? Very seldom do we require ourselves to do that, and normally, I believe that it's statutory." Council Member Sarah Graham questioned if the super majority is due to the vote being related to an ethics issue. Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt responded, "I was going to say this is the one thing that could potentially go sideways and have influence. That could be the thought behind it." City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 7of15 Council Member James Franco, commented, "We don't have to have super majority to put them on there." Council Member Mike Lester, stated, "That's true. I can understand the sensitivity to removing members of the committee, but again, if it gets to us and it gets on the agenda, again, ultimately that issue comes to us in the end. So, why would we put an onus on ourselves to be so tough to remove a member of the committee?" Council Member Sarah Graham, stated, "I think what you're saying just leads back to originally when we were on the Boards and Commission ad hoc. It takes us in circles with this Ethics Committee, I know that we need it, and that's where we're at now. But at the end of the day, we're the ones putting them on the board. Now we can take them off the board." Council Member Mike Lester, commented, "At the end of the day, we make the final decision." Council Member Sarah Graham, commented, "We can remove them when we want to remove them." Council Member Mike Lester, stated, "I completely support and feel that we should have a strong ethics policy and ordinance. I'm going along with the committee because that's the touchy-feely good side of it. Ultimately, from the start of a complaint, it's going to end up in our laps for a final decision. No matter what committees we have out in front of us. As indicated even in the process we're going through, we can accept those recommendations, we can reject those recommendations, and we can make up our own recommendations. Ultimately, it comes to us. Let's make sure the ethics rules are strong and fair so that we all comply. I've heard a comment, "Well, you wouldn't want to have to make a ruling against one of your colleagues." At the end of the day, if I need to do that, I will do that. Hopefully, I've got the ethics and moral caliber of myself to make those decisions. Again, I'm not opposed to any of this. I think we should have a very strong ethics policy and requirements that allow people to make complaints. I support that. But we don't need to make it so onus on ourselves. Again, we put them on the board, why can't we pull them off the board with the majority rule? If the will of consensus of majority is to stay with two-thirds, I'm okay with that. But it's why would we do that to ourselves?" Council Member Sarah Graham, commented, "1 agree. I don't think it's super majority my opinion on that is it's not needed." Council Member Laura Alvarado, clarified with council if everyone is in agreement to use majority vote for the removal of a committee member on the Ethics Commission. City Attorney Scott Lemond, stated, "'I'll double-check the enabling legislation. I don't recall that being in there, but before we adopt anything, I'll make sure that I do a deep dive." Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt, commented, "We will bring back the ordinance with all of your feedback for June 12th. We'll get that out to you ahead of time. Make sure y'all have time to review that for the meeting." City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 8 of 15 Mayor Charles Johnson expressed his gratitude to Assistant City Manager Carol Flynt for the time and effort she has put towards all the ethics presentations and information. b. Receive and discuss an update on the ExxonMobii Baytown Events Center. Assistant City Manager Brant Gary provided a presentation to detailing the status of the ExxonMobil Events Center. (Exhibit B) Council Member Mike Lester referenced exhibit B and stated, "Whether we put 20 million aside and we get interest off of that 20 million to subsidize this operation or not, it still requires a subsidy, so I just want to make it clear. This is where we get beat up by our constituents. Nobody ever said it was going to lose money. We're already talking about putting $20 million aside, drawing interest off that to cover the subsidy cost. So, we are going to subsidize this. I'm going to just keep standing on that because that's where we get beat up. That's the issue that we made a decision recently on that we weren't going to subsidize things to any great extent, just because we got 20 million bucks over here. That's drawing $1 million interest that we can slide over to this thing, well, it's not costing us money, it's costing us. There is a subsidy there that's just being paid for by the reserves that we could be, as one of my colleagues has indicated, could be used for other things. So, let's just be clear that it's a subsidized operation. Where the money comes from is not relevant to me." Council Member Sarah Graham, commented, "I agree and I'm glad that's being stated. However, as we all know, when it comes to complex economics, if this is done the right way and fiscally responsible in getting the community involved in which direction this goes, this could drive a lot of economic boosts. I know that comment can be taken and used in several ways with other projects, but it's extremely complex. That 20 million could be used somewhere else. We've gone back and forth about using this money. I appreciate you mentioning that, but to compare that we could have used it on something else is not fair, in my opinion at this moment." Council Member Mike Lester, stated, "Yes, and again, I agree this is a great idea. I'm absolutely for this project. I just want to make it clear, and I'll continue to make it clear as we go through, that it's being subsidized. Again, where that subsidy comes from is not relevant for me. We've got 20 million, we could spend the whole 75 million and build a much larger, much bigger, much nicer facility, and not have that reserve. I appreciate staff looking at ways to have some reserves that will cover the subsidy cost. I got that, but I'm going to make it clear as we go through that this is going to be subsidized, and it's coming from that 20 million. I'm good with that, but I'm just going to make it clear that it is costing us." Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, stated, "I do want to point out though that all of these activities, the construction, the operations, and the generation of the interest income would occur within a special recreation fund. It would not touch or be any way, shape or form connected to the general fund. As we're going through, we may make changes on the services provided or our costs. We're going to have to look at the other end of what we're charging and our revenue as well. The big advantage, is that we're going to have as we move forward is we're going to be designing with operations in mind. There are several examples out there, but we want to build something that can City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 9 of 15 be operated for what we're looking at, and not a huge subsidy or something that is not going to deliver what's been promised. Another opportunity in the future could be consideration of bringing a venue tax proposition to the voters. That would be a 2% add -on to the current hot tax rate, and that would be paid by visitors to the city that would stay at a hotel. It's something that we could bring to the voters for construction and operation of a facility similar to this. So, that's something that we can definitely look at for the future." Council Member Sarah Graham, stated, "To be clear, those kind of add-ons to visitors or tourism are seen in a lot of cities, even in Texas. That is not meant to go towards our citizenry, it's meant to be for visitors." Assistant City Manager Brant Gary responded yes to Council Member Sarah Graham's comment. City Manager Jason Reynolds, clarified, "I do need to clarify one thing that was said in the comments because 1 don't want it to be misused online or just through discussion. It was stated that the 20 million could be used somewhere else. It can be used somewhere else within the project of the Baytown ExxonMobil Event Center. It cannot be used anywhere else within the city. It can be used for an adjacent building or an accoutrement to the event center, but it cannot be used for just some random infrastructure or anything else within the city." Council Member Mike Lester appreciated the clarification from the City Manager. Council Member Sarah Graham, stated, "With the library, I know that most people are assuming the reason we're incorporating the library is because of the location, but is it true that we were also going to need to redo the library anyways?" City Manager Jason Reynolds, stated, "There is a long-term plan to look at how we can reutilize the library. There're discussions on what will happen with it. It is a very large building, and it does need to be refurbished. That is something that have been in discussions but I would say it is not an active action plan. This gave it a little bit more life to be considered." Council Member Sarah Graham requested if there have been any numbers to rehabilitate the Library. City Manager Jason Reynolds, stated, "1 don't know off the top of my head, but, 1 believe the roof alone was $1 million." Council Member Sarah Graham, stated, "The reason that's important to me is because that would be a cost that the city would need to incur eventually anyways. So, if there's a way to incorporate the library, that's important, in my opinion. If there is something that has to be fixed on that building." Mayor Charles Johnson referenced exhibit B and stated, "What are we looking at on life expectancy between the two materials? Would it be around the same?" City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 10 of 15 Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, stated, "I can't speak from any position of authority on that, but I would assume that we would build them to have a similar lifespan." Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "You're looking at different materials being used. 1 think it would help the public if they understood that if there was a life expectancy difference, what it would be? And also, the maintenance, and the upkeep of each building. That's some information I think, that would be beneficial to us." Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, stated, "When I mentioned earlier the idea of designing for operations. Those are the kind of things that are going to be flushed out as part of that process. So, do we want to design something that is going to have a huge maintenance burden? Absolutely not. We want something that's durable, that's flexible, and that meets the needs that we've established. We certainly will take things like that into account as we move forward." Council Member James Franco, commented, "The life expect should be about the same, roughly in my experience, and the maintenance will be a whole lot higher than the brick and mortar, a whole lot more." Council Member Laura Alvarado, stated, "As we look at building this out, because I know sometimes there's comments that, we should have thought about this before we built it, or we should have thought about extra space before we built it. The number one thing that each of the facilities have told us is that they never have enough space. I want us to keep that in mind as well, because we could come up with a design and then, we end up getting bigger tournaments than we expected or different types of usage for the event space. We want it to be great and we want to invite as much as we can to utilize it. But I also want our citizens to understand that we're building according to the feasibility study. According to the funds that we have in hand, could we do something better? There's always going to be that opportunity that we do something better." City Manager Jason Reynolds referenced exhibit B and stated, "It's important to note, I've been asked often about community input and that the city is not listening to the citizens, nor taking any kind of recommendation from the citizens, and that we are just moving along without any kind of input, and it's what we say and what we say only. That's a majority of what I hear often. It's a very small sector of the city that keeps saying that same thing to me. What I will say we have not done a good job at is talking about all the history that's led up to this point for community engagement. So, if you look at the 2018 Recreation Study it actually proposes this event center. It's a little bit smaller in that recommendation, but it's also mentioned in the comprehensive 2020 plan. It's mentioned in the Parks Master plan, which was adopted in 2021. It's a version of it and like goals, it's not the exact same thing. I want to be very clear, it's not the exact same thing, but the vision of this type of facility is mentioned in multiple adopted plans by the city council that has been working for quite a few years now to get to this point. Mind you, there was a pause with COVID in there, and the last parks plan, which was adopted in 2021, has a vision around a community facility. This started in 2022 with the ExxonMobil agreement. So, all of that is contiguous. I've been operating with this body's vision for quite some time. You all know, seven years is not a long time in government years. I say all that to say that this has been large community pieces that have put these plans together to get to this point. When we start doing a community outreach, we hope City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 11 of 15 to do study groups because there's no point in reinventing the wheel. You do study groups of like how the bond committee works, where they say, hey, these studies were already done, they've already been adopted by council. Are they still relevant or are they not relevant? And if they are, we'll move forward and if anything needs to be added, then we move forward. It can't just be carte blanche start over because that would reset everything that's been going on for the past seven years. We probably need to do a better job of branding all of that, but that's a lot to say when you involve nuances and context that have to be really put out there and look at four or five plans over the past seven years that have been looked at." Mayor Charles Johnson, commented, "We not only got input from residents of Baytown, but it was some people from close surrounding areas that set in on a few of those meetings. So, to hear what you're saying about not reinventing a wheel but I would hope that we can, if we have information on some of those individuals, contact them and ask them if they'd be interested in continuing giving input, to see if there's still something that's needed in the form of what we envision then. You're right, we probably do need to do a better job of letting people know that these things are taking place or have taken place. When you showed the study to me in your office, I was shocked to see that it was still around. I'm glad that you all have taken that into consideration." Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, commented, "I'd be remiss if I didn't say that the residents of this community have the biggest advocates, through Parks and Recreation Director Clifford Hatch and his parks team." Council Member Kenrick Griffith, stated, "I appreciate your point and Mr. Reynolds' point of bringing up the study in 2018. However, 2020, COVID was an extraordinary event, and it will be interesting, as you say, to bring back those people and see where they're at as far as since that study, a lot has happened in that short period of time." Council Member Laura Alvarado referenced a study done in 1990 by the American Institute of Architects Regional Urban Design and Assistance Team and stated, "We've evolved as a city, and if we don't have a multipurpose venue when we're now much bigger, there's a lot more sports. It goes beyond that, and we're not here to make that decision because we're not there yet. That's what the feasibility study will do. Therefore, I'm not going to make any judgements as to what's needed or what's not, because we haven't gotten into the feasibility study. For us to pick apart, like the year it started and the year it didn't and what happened, and maybe not a lot of people gave input and things have changed. Absolutely, things have changed and we continue to do assessments and that's what the feasibility study will do is reassess, get stakeholder feedback and get us to what we need as of right now. It's not going to happen overnight and we will have amendments. We may have additions that we need to make, just as many other multipurpose facilities are doing that have found that they need bigger space. But we'll get there when we get there. I think we're just listening to the process right now, and so I don't think it would be worthy of our time to sit here and judge what is needed and what is not." Council Member James Franco, stated, "On the vetting of the Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR), are you going to vet them on a point system or how are you planning to vet them?" City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 12 of 15 Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, stated, "I haven't determined that yet. It'll take a few weeks for us to come up with the documents, but that'll be part of that, and we'll have that evaluation criteria set up." Council Member James Franco, stated, "I would like to see their financials, their history with projects of this magnitude, and their local recommendations. Because we don't want to get into a situation we had before where we didn't have a financially sound contractor." Mayor Charles Johnson, stated, "If we didn't do the Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR), what was the other option? I'm asking this question so that the general public would know the difference and the benefits of going this route." Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, stated, "There are a few other different project delivery methods. I think the traditional bid process is obviously always available, but it doesn't present us the safeguards and the guaranteed maximum price that we would have. Because the contractor necessarily wouldn't share the risk as they would in this scenario." Assistant City Manager Brant Gary brought Public Works and Engineering Director Frank Simoneaux to discuss the other delivery methods. Public Works and Engineering Director Frank Simoneaux, stated, "The other option is design bid - build, which you hire an architect, they design the whole thing, produce final plans. You put that out to bid and contractors bid on it. You generally select the lowest qualified bidder, and then the contractor builds it. The problem with that is you're not picking the best contractor. You're picking the contractor with the minimum qualifications, who's the lowest price, and you get into a lot of issues when you don't have the best contractor. With CMAR, you can pick the contractor based on qualifications and negotiate the price. We did use this on the public safety facility, and I think it turned out very well. We hired an architect, and they did about 30% design, and then we put out request for qualifications for a CMAR and selected based on the qualifications. That project is about a $70 million project, had very few change orders, and the quality of work was very good. It was probably the project with the least problems for that amount of money. I have a lot more problems with smaller projects that are just a low bidder and you can't pick the contractor. With a low bid, you take what you can get. There is another method, design build, which is similar to a CMAR, where you hire the team of the architect and the contractor together. Unfortunately, the City of Baytown cannot use that method. It's state law that you have to have a population of 100,000 or more to use that. Another method that follows the general design bid -build where you don't pick the absolute lowest bidder; you can do something called competitive sealed proposals. The City of Baytown basically goes through the design process, and put it out to bid, but instead of just looking at the low bid, you can consider other factors." Council Member James Franco, stated, "My experience, a little different with those has also been the GMP, which is the gross maximum profit, which that's a terrible way to go because they just keep charging you. When someone has the low bidder, they make up their money on change orders. And that is 100% going to happen. CMAR is where a lot of people are going because they're not City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 13of15 trying to knock anybody on staff, but the professionals are, that's their specialty. It makes your job a little bit easier where you're not having to babysit contractors who do not know what they're doing." Public Works and Engineering Director Frank Simoneaux, stated, "Another advantage is during that process, the contractor is hired basically at about 30% design. So, the contractor can have input on the design because the architects don't always know what's the best way to construct. So, you get the team together where the contractor is giving input on the design, while it's being designed. Therefore, you get a better product and a more constructible product." Council Member Mike Lester, commented, "Guaranteed Maximum price. Are we going to get that at the beginning of it, the middle of it, or at the end of it?" Public Works and Engineering Director Frank Simoneaux, stated, "If I remember right, it's generally about 60% design. You have to design enough of the project that the contractor knows what he's going to build." Council Member Mike Lester, stated, "You know where I'm going with that? With the hotel, we got our guaranteed maximum price, what, six months, after it was built. And the price kept going up every time we had a meeting. After it was all said and done, then we get a guaranteed maximum price." Assistant City Manager Brant Gary wrapped up the presentation and turned it over to council for any more questions or comments. Council Member Sarah Graham expressed her appreciation to Assistant City Manger Brant Gary and stated, "Do you happen to have a timeline on when the environmental study is coming back on what is even buildable at the location that we chose?" Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, stated, "I think we're a couple weeks out of it. Once we get that, we can certainly share that." Council Member Sarah Graham requested if Assistant City Manager Brant Gary had an estimate on the completion of the feasibility study. Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, stated, "I don't know that we would necessarily have another feasibility study, but I think that design and that pro forma would probably get to what it is you're asking about." Council Member Sarah Graham requested clarification on the interlocal agreement that was signed with Lee College for a feasibility study. City Manager Jason Reynolds clarified the feasibility study was just for the Lee College building. City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 14of15 Council Member Sarah Graham appreciated the clarification and stated, "I'm trying to create some kind of estimated timeline with, if the environmental study comes back and we start getting the community engaged in updating the pro forma. Could you give me any kind of timeline on any of the things that you've discussed today?" Assistant City Manager Brant Gary, stated, "I think we're a couple weeks out on the Geotech and the results there. I'm just going to say three to four weeks. Going through that, the notices would probably be another month or two to receive and evaluate. Once that team's on, then we pick up on the design phase and move forward there. I don't know how we would end up right there, but I can certainly, as we start to move through the process and get the team in place, we can help on the next steps there. But, I'd say we're probably a couple months out from really identifying that team." Council Member Sarah Graham, stated, "I've heard several times that we're going to speak with citizens and community members and get more input. Do we have any specific ways we're going to do that?" City Manager Jason Reynolds informed council that it will be done through study groups and stated, "Council will dictate how that's set up. What we have to be careful with, as any entity, is you open a door to say, Hey, what does everybody want? Then it could be like just this plethora, like, here's the general ideas that have been studied over the past decade plus of what they want. Here are possible options that can go, do these look good, do these not look good? It's going to have to be facilitated well. You could overwhelm everything that you need to consider and it could balloon into this massive cost." Council Member Sarah Graham, stated, "I've been welcoming a lot of it. There's a lot of people that are very interested in what is going on. I was excited that this was on the work session agenda tonight, so that people can really see exactly where we're at. It's the beginning, but we're going to have people that are going to ask us how they get involved and what that looks like." City Manager Jason Reynolds informed council they will get the information for any study groups for this project. C. Discuss possible future options for development, management and operations of the hotel and Bayland Island area. City Attorney Scott Lemond stated this agenda item will be discussed in executive session. At 5:34 P.M., Mayor Charles Johnson recessed and convened into an Executive Session. 1). Recess into and conduct an Executive Session pursuant to Section(s) 551.071 and/or 551.090 of the Texas Government Code to seek the advice of the City's attorneys and/or to deliberate regarding economic development negotiations. City Council Work Session Minutes May 8, 2025 Page 15of15 At 6:24 P.M., Mayor Charles Johnson reconvened the meeting and announced that in accordance with Section 551.102 of the Texas Government Code, no action was taken in the Executive Session. 3. ADJOURN With there being no further business to discuss, Mayor Charles Johnson adjourned the May 8, 2025, City Council Work Session at 6:24 P.M. VOTOW,y City oftown Ln fV O N n o� R, Ln 0 � � � � | ! R . . . . 2 T m x w m r14 O C14 � � � rb 0 k f k ] ; �0 CL� . k a # §k}g&0 c ¥- $ |� 42- a. § 2 2oil, �§ ���E-a§K � ® � 2 � g # , . ^ r-L 2 ®k\ o �§. $■2: �§§ § 779■ U � # Ln r%l 0 � � � � � .. >..- ■ �t22a. & §_a c §2' � i k # � ■ rkJ2t|� Q ff`fff | & 13 - c| 2 B)£ � FL �) o - |�}a 0 � ,..... b . � 2 & ■ � - � |Af °R! _ § ° 2 e�. m m � ° ) 2 ) k ) a. \ il N O N r- c-1 Ql r 3 W n m m O m ' T LL m m r m w m` a v � o Q r c� �aa Sro 3 c) U °0 ir c Ov m° o E Q m �m ,CL c� CL A