[0:19] Heat. Heat.
[0:24] Hey, hey, hey.
[0:54] Heat. Heat.
[1:33] Hey,
[1:40] hey, hey.
[3:27] Hey, let's go.
[4:54] Heat. Heat.
[6:25] Heat. Heat.
[6:45] Heat. Heat.
[7:15] » [music]
[7:36] » Are
[10:36] Hallelujah.
[11:00] » [music]
[11:44] [music]
[12:30] » Hey.
[12:40] Hey.
[13:04] » [music]
[13:25] » Heat. Hey, Heat.
[14:28] Hallelujah.
[14:37] [music]
[14:53] Good evening everyone. Uh with the time
being 7:00 p.m., we're going to call
[14:57] this regularly scheduled council meeting
to order. Uh the date is September 3rd,
[15:02] 2026.
Uh our invocation tonight will be led by
[15:06] Council Member Scott Salter. Our
American pledge led by Councilman Martin
[15:11] Veila and our Texas pledge by Councilman
Richard Gerve. Please rise.
[15:21] Please bow your heads.
Heavenly Father, we ask for your
[15:25] protection over our community, over our
state, and over our nation. We ask that
[15:29] you guide us in our decisions, and may
they please you in all things that we
[15:33] do. In the 25th
anniversary of 911, we ask for your
[15:39] guidance for all of our world leaders to
make sure they are making decisions that
[15:44] are in the best interest of all. Guide
us in the decisions that we will make
[15:48] tonight during this council meeting and
watch all over watch over all of our
[15:51] first responders. Amen.
>> Join the pledge of allegiance
[15:57] to the flag of the United States of
America and to the republic for which it
[16:02] stands. One nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice
[16:07] for all. [clears throat]
>> Texas
[16:12] to thee, Texas, one state under God, one
and indivisible.
[16:23] » Okay, thank you. Uh, first item, we will
have a public hearing. Uh the public
[16:28] hearing is to receive comment on the
proposed tax rate of.70635
[16:34] per $100 evaluation for the fiscal year
2026 through 2027. So with the time
[16:41] being 701, I will open up the floor for
the public hearing. If you would like to
[16:46] come forward, please come to the podium.
State your name and address.
[16:53] Again,
[17:01] we have before us on the floor is a
public hearing. The public hearing is to
[17:04] receive comment on the proposed tax rate
of.70635
[17:08] cents per $100 evaluation for the fiscal
year 2026 through 2027 for the city of
[17:13] Alvin. If you would like to be heard,
please come forward. Come to the podium.
[17:17] Say your name and address.
>> Tim Klene. I live at 280 East Adu. I
[17:21] signed up for the public uh comment
section, but
[17:23] » that's a separate if you'd like to
that's a separate section if you'd like
[17:26] to. But
>> the tax rate was one of the things.
[17:28] Would you like to comment on that? Now
>> have at it.
[17:30] » Okay. First and foremost, thank you for
y'all's service, be it police officers,
[17:34] city employees, or councilman. Uh uh if
you review the city website, it mentions
[17:39] the decrease in the tax rate over the
years. And uh I appreciative of that. Uh
[17:44] I do believe on this time around there's
been a lack of information about what
[17:48] this tax uh increase would be going for
and uh I think uh that anytime there's
[17:54] an increase. I like to vote and I don't
see my opportunity to vote yes or no, up
[18:00] or down. I tried to keep an eye on the
paper to see if it would list out what
[18:04] we were in need of in the city of Alvin
and why we needed this tax rate. I might
[18:08] have missed it, but I feel like there's
been a communication uh breakdown on
[18:12] this one, and I'd love to vote on every
tax rate. I know that some are below the
[18:17] uh limit that requires that, but as a
citizen of Alvin, I'd like to vote on
[18:22] all those. Thank you for your time.
[18:33] » Is there anyone else who would like to
come forward?
[18:37] We've got someone coming in
[18:45] again. We've got a public hearing to
discuss the public tax rate. For those
[18:48] who who just joined us, we've got a
public hearing that's open. If you would
[18:51] like to comment on the proposed tax
rate, uh please come forward and do so,
[18:55] sir.
[19:01] Okay. Going once, going twice. All
right. There being no other folks coming
[19:06] forward, we will close the the session
at 7:04 p.m. And uh sir, our our CFO is
[19:12] is in the crowd as as we're a city
manager. We've got if you guys questions
[19:15] and we'd be they'd be happy to I can't
Where did you go? There you are.
[19:20] [laughter] We'll be happy to answer any
questions you do have before the end of
[19:22] the night. Um next we'll move forward
for for public comment. Um
[19:28] [clears throat] Mr. Klein, would you
like to come back?
[19:37] Thank you. I I had put all my thoughts
together uh all at one time uh uh simply
[19:42] because I thought they wrapped together
well. Uh recently, I guess the last year
[19:46] and a half, I've been able to attend
four four or five city council meetings
[19:50] and uh just kind of trying to observe
what's going on in the city, trying to
[19:54] understand it. I've lived on Adoo Street
there for 29 years and uh over the years
[20:00] I've uh had a couple of small issues and
the city's been very responsive. But I
[20:04] came to one meeting and it was y'all
were discussing the AI and I think
[20:08] Representative Daiser you mentioned that
uh you said something that got my
[20:12] attention that was that uh you do your
research and that we can trust you
[20:19] and uh for me it's uh trust with
verification
[20:23] and I'm having some lack of verification
in a few areas for instance uh the
[20:29] quality water that's coming out of my
pipe has been the same for 29 years and
[20:33] about 10 years ago, I quit calling the
city of Alvin to say, "Hey, I've got a
[20:37] lot of debris in my pipe." Because they
would open up the fire hydrant and flush
[20:40] it, and then my screens on my faucets
would clog up and such. And I hired a
[20:45] plumber and cut my lines open and made
sure that my copper and my PVC lines
[20:49] didn't have debris in them. And so, uh,
uh, for me, as I pay a higher water bill
[20:54] each year, I kind of look to see, has
have things gotten any better? And it
[20:57] looks to me like that higher water bill
I'm having to pay is just to keep what
[21:01] I'm getting, which is water with a lot
of debris in it. And uh if you were to
[21:07] say to me, hey, that falls back to you,
Tim. Yeah, it is partially my
[21:11] responsibility. That's why I have
filters on things and such like that.
[21:13] But I'll be brief. Uh my other issue is
crime and safety living on East Adu. Uh
[21:19] in the past a number of times the city
has set up the speed limit signs the uh
[21:24] police officers have and they've ramped
up the amount of uh of uh patrols they
[21:28] do because people treat ADU street as a
racetrack. They turn off a Gordon Street
[21:32] and they're up to 45 50 miles an hour by
the time they get to the bridge. And uh
[21:36] this summer it was extremely high and I
got to witness my neighbors 11year-old
[21:41] head towards the street for a ball with
a truck coming 40 miles an hour from
[21:44] Gordon Street. So I thought you know
what it's worth coming down here. in the
[21:47] past when I've come uh one other time I
spoke what I spoke about y'all were all
[21:51] over and I was very appreciative of that
the police department got all over the
[21:54] issue at the park which is my other
issue dealing with a high level of
[21:58] mental instability and homelessness on
that end of East Ad Street the park and
[22:03] then the church that gives out free food
and then the church on house street that
[22:07] lets them sleep on the front sidewalk on
a regular basis when I'm outside I'm
[22:11] being approached by mentally unstable
people and people who are living out of
[22:15] their backpack and neither Neither one
of those issues are easy. If they were
[22:18] easy, y'all would have solved them a
long time ago. But as my representative
[22:23] representatives here, I am asking you to
consider what you can do because that
[22:27] part of town is being pounded. We've got
the bio, we've got the park, we got the
[22:31] church giving out free food. We got the
church letting them people sleep on
[22:34] sidewalks. And so those are my issues
and uh I'm thankful that I can come
[22:38] before you and uh uh mention them. Thank
you.
[22:41] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[22:47] Amy, will you get his number?
Um, next we have uh David Corland.
[22:55] David, you like to come forward, please?
[23:04] » Mayor Adami, members of the council, my
name is David Carlin. I'm 24 years old.
[23:10] I'm married with three wonderful
children. I'm a disabled veteran and I
[23:14] hold a degree in political science.
I am new to the city of Alvin and so are
[23:20] 3,000 of my neighbors who have arrived
since 2020.
[23:24] I've been told that this is a reason to
stay quiet.
[23:29] I see it differently. I believe it is
the patriotic duty of every American,
[23:33] young and old, to a new city or not, to
be involved in the political process we
[23:37] hold dear to our hearts.
Being an American citizen who believes
[23:42] in our constitutional rights, in good
financial management, and in making the
[23:46] lives of those around us better is not
bound to any one city.
[23:52] So over the summer, I pulled that belief
or I put that belief to work. I reviewed
[23:57] every budget the city has posted since
2006,
[24:00] every audited financial report since
1997, 237 ordinances and resolutions,
[24:06] about 320 sets of council minutes, 27
council packets, the city charter, both
[24:11] charter review reports, the election
register back to 1980, and every flood
[24:16] insurance claim ever filed in this zip
code. Before I begin, Mayor,
[24:22] you and I both follow Christ, I assume.
So let me start there. I forgive you for
[24:29] what was said about my family this week
and I ask your forgiveness for anything
[24:32] I have said that has come across as a
personal attack to you and it was not
[24:36] meant to be.
[24:40] As brothers in Christ, we should be
working to advance the kingdom of God
[24:43] rather than attacking each other
personally in public the way so many
[24:47] politicians do. And I hope we can be
reconciled.
[24:50] That being said, I have significant
concerns about the trajectory of this
[24:53] city and the burden it is placing on
taxpayers. I will be raising children
[24:58] here for what looks to be 15 more years.
So, I have a real stake in the
[25:02] well-being of this city. In the last
three years, Alvin's debt has rose
[25:07] 36.8%.
The water and sewer minimum rose 38.3%
[25:12] across four ordinances bearing your
signature. The tax levy rose 23% while
[25:18] you advertised the rate cut.
The share of your budget allocated to
[25:23] paying debt rose 67%. And while all of
that was happening, the general fund
[25:28] reserve went down from 10.5 million to a
projected 8.2 million. Now, on the July
[25:35] 2023 variance,
I would like to propose an amendment.
[25:44] Any requests for a sex offender
residency variance would require notice
[25:47] to the school district and to every
household within 1,000 ft, a posted
[25:52] public hearing at least two weeks before
the vote, and a written finding by the
[25:56] council explaining why the exception is
justified, and five votes of the seven
[26:00] council members rather than a bare
majority decided by a tiebreak. A rule
[26:04] written to protect children should not
be set aside on a three to three vote
[26:08] with the school and the parents in the
affected area never formally notified.
[26:12] Thank you and I hope we can work
together.
[26:15] » Thank you, sir. Next, we will move to
the consent agenda. Uh, starting over
[26:21] here, Councilman, uh, council member, do
you have anything you'd like to remove
[26:24] since consent agenda?
>> No, mayor.
[26:26] » No, mayor.
>> You don't? Okay.
[26:28] » No mayor.
>> No.
[26:29] » Nope. No mayor. Then we will entertain a
motion for the consent agenda.
[26:33] » Mayor, I move to approve the consent
agenda as published.
[26:36] » Second.
>> Thank you. Please vote.
[26:42] Motion passes unanimously. Items
approved on the consent agenda are the
[26:47] August 11th, 2026 city council workshop
meeting minutes. Item B, August 2026
[26:52] city council [clears throat] workshop
meeting minutes. Item C, August 20th
[26:55] city council meeting minutes. Item D,
resolution 26R28, approving the 2027
[26:59] interlocal agreement for emergency
services with Brazoria County Emergency
[27:03] Services District number three.
Authorize the mayor to execute the
[27:06] agreement and setting forth other
matters related there too. Item E,
[27:09] consider terminating the janitorial
services provider contract with Marson
[27:13] South LLC pursuant to section 2.01 of
the current contract and authorizes city
[27:18] manager to take all necessary actions
related there too. Item F, resolution
[27:22] 26R29, awarding bid 2603, janitorial
services provider contract to American
[27:28] janitorial service services for
janitorial services at city-owned
[27:32] buildings and park restrooms for initial
term of 12 months uh beginning October
[27:36] 1st, 2026 with an option to renew for up
to three additional one-year terms with
[27:40] a base annual contract amount of
$233,892
[27:45] authorizing the city manager to execute
the contract and setting forth other
[27:48] matters related there too. Item G,
resolution 26R30, approving the
[27:52] interlocal cooperation contract between
the city of Alvin and the University of
[27:56] Texas at Austin for participation in the
regional security operations center
[28:00] program authorizing the city manager to
execute the agreement and setting forth
[28:03] other matters related there too. Mayor,
>> thank you Dixie. Moving on to other
[28:08] business, we have first item A, consider
resolution 26R31,
[28:13] approving addendum number five to the
contract for refuse collection and
[28:16] disposal services between the city of
Alvin and Texas Pride disposal,
[28:20] authorizing the mayor to execute the
addendum and setting forth other matters
[28:23] related thereto.
[28:29] » Good evening, mayor, council. Um
before you tonight is a uh proposal to
[28:36] um
amend our current uh contract with Texas
[28:41] Pride. Um this is a contractual
um option in in our current contract
[28:49] with them. Um, it's based on a CPI
blended rate between the an annual CPI
[28:56] 12-month average um of the surrounding
area as well as um the opportunity for
[29:04] adjustments based on cost to dispose of
the trash. So, um, what Texas, um, Pride
[29:10] has proposed is a little over 6%
increase to to our trash, um, bill. Um,
[29:21] the city is has been made aware of that.
We have included that in our current
[29:26] budget and at this time we are not um,
planning to go pass that cost on to the
[29:32] citizens. Um so the city will be using
um reserve funds to kind of offset that
[29:39] that increase. Um
we are entering the final year of the
[29:45] contract. Um we're having internal
discussions now as far as what what
[29:51] steps we'll
take after this. But uh for now before
[29:56] you the 6% is being proposed and I'll be
happy to answer any questions. I know
[30:02] Texas Pride has a representative here if
y'all have any questions for her as
[30:06] well.
>> I have some questions.
[30:09] » Okay.
>> Okay. So, um I see that the 6% increase
[30:14] is based on a combination of three
things. The CPIU, the fuel adjustment,
[30:19] and then a 3.6% increase cited as a
requested operating adjustment pursuant
[30:26] to section 11 number four. So, I looked
at section 114.
[30:31] Um, and so I'm just wondering, uh,
because from the letter from Republic
[30:36] Pride disposal,
um, it just generally states that
[30:41] the cost to use the landfill would be
going up. And so I'm just wondering
[30:47] where the 3.6% figure actually what
that's actually based on uh, numbers
[30:53] [clears throat] wise. Um and like the
difference between the initial landfill
[30:57] and the subsequent landfill like I need
to know more about that.
[31:02] » Okay. Um I would assume that that three
3.6%
[31:07] uh increase on the disposal is a a pass
on fee from the landfill to Texas Pride.
[31:14] » Right. But I would Right. But I I'd like
to understand what it's actually being.
[31:20] » Mike, can we have Texas Pride answer
these questions please?
[31:23] » Happy to do it.
>> Thank you.
[31:24] » Hello everybody. Amy or No. Yes. So the
increase from Republic is not in the
[31:30] actual increase is not in
>> Can you step up to the mic so people can
[31:33] listen on?
>> Sure. Can you hear me now better?
[31:35] » I just want to make sure the video can
pick you up.
[31:37] » So the actual increase was higher than
what we were asking for for the city of
[31:41] Alvin. We did not have them explicitly
state that because it wasn't I know all
[31:47] of this goes into public records and
it's not something I wanted to share
[31:50] what the total increase was. So we only
passed on a portion of the total.
[31:56] » But is it because you're not able to use
the same landfills?
[31:59] » No, no, no, no. It's just it's take it.
So,
[32:02] » so then that's where I have a problem
because section 114 says in the event
[32:07] the contractor is unable to use the
initial landfill or any subsequent
[32:11] landfill,
>> then you can increase the cost. You can
[32:16] ask us for an increase based on the
difference that you're going to have to
[32:19] pay by [clears throat] not being able to
go to the initial landfill and having to
[32:22] go to the second landfill, right? So,
okay, I can't go there anymore. I have
[32:26] to go here. There's a difference in
cost. It's going to cost more money.
[32:29] That makes sense to me, but that's not
what's happening here. And so I'm going
[32:32] to say that we should not pay the 3.6%
increase because it's not supported by
[32:38] the contract that we have and right now
that given the fact that it's going to
[32:44] cost an extra $225,000 from our reserves
and we're voting on the budget today. I
[32:50] don't think we can afford that. So my
position is that we vote no.
[32:56] » Okay. Can I do I have a second? Okay.
I'm just saying that I looked
[33:01] » Sure. No, I understand what you're
saying. So, we base this
[33:04] » doesn't apply to the contract that we
have. Okay.
[33:07] » And we really can't afford it right now.
>> I completely understand where you're
[33:10] coming from. So, just to give you a
little bit of clarification, the
[33:13] landfill that we use for the city of
Alvin is routed that way because of
[33:18] where you are in relation to that
landfill. If we don't get this increase
[33:24] and we are forced to haul to another
landfill, just I just need everybody to
[33:28] understand we use what is most efficient
to the city of Alvin to collect
[33:33] everything in a timely manner and that
if there's ever special halls or
[33:37] anything that needs to happen unique, we
get there quicker and we can get back on
[33:41] route. So on heavy days after storms,
after spring break, and all the kids are
[33:46] at home, spring clean, all of those
heavier days that that you know about or
[33:51] you don't, when my truck is full and I
leave the city of Alvin to go to a
[33:57] different landfill that is 50 miles away
versus 20 miles away, it eats away at
[34:03] the time that I'm in the city collecting
the trash.
[34:06] » Right? I understand that. But what what
I'm simply pointing out is that section
[34:10] 114 which is cited in the packet for
this agenda item does not apply to the
[34:15] situation that exists. Right? And so
because of that I think we need to maybe
[34:21] table this and look at it a little bit
further before we can decide what that
[34:24] number should be because I saw the
number that Republic
[34:28] » put in the packet which was about 6% and
so randomly saying well we're just going
[34:34] to ask you for 3.6 six and not really
tell you exactly why or what those
[34:38] numbers are based on. That doesn't work
for me. So, because it's not fitting
[34:43] with the contract that we have, I'm
going to have to say no. But I'm not
[34:47] opposed to revisiting it or amending the
lang or doing something that's going to
[34:53] help us make it right for both parties.
So, I'm just saying as it's written
[34:57] today, I have to vote no. That's it.
>> Okay.
[35:00] » Okay. I appreciate that. I'm going agree
with council member Daiser because as a
[35:04] part of doing business and writing
contracts, I think you and your attorney
[35:08] should have considered that from the
original contract just because you your
[35:14] company has to use an additional
landfill because you're full on heavy
[35:17] days, which aren't so often. I mean,
thank God we haven't had a huge storm in
[35:21] a very long time and please God don't
give us another one. But if you know
[35:26] that's an opportunity, that's a that's a
possibility to do that. you should have
[35:29] incorporated that into the original
contract. I'm not comfortable with
[35:33] giving an increase based on
what you just said right here. I
[35:39] understand the fuel. I get that. But the
fuel went down.
[35:42] » So that's I get I get that. Um so I
agree with that. But I'm
[35:47] » the contract spec specifically says if
you're unable to use that landfill and
[35:52] right now which land you using?
>> Republic
[35:54] » which is which location? Uh, it depends
on the day and what we're hauling.
[35:59] » Okay. So, you're still able to use it,
right?
[36:02] » Yes.
>> Okay.
[36:04] » To me, it I mean, I'm not an attorney,
but that doesn't constitute a raise in
[36:08] that in my in my opinion.
>> Okay. I I'll respect that.
[36:12] » Yeah, I agree.
>> I I don't think we should table it
[36:15] honestly because we are in our last year
of the contract and if they want to make
[36:22] that adjustment, they can do that when
they bring their new contract. But as
[36:26] far as right now, the way it's written
and the situation we're in, I don't
[36:30] think that adjustment should be made,
period. I don't think we should table
[36:32] it. It doesn't matter what the real
number was from Republic for what she
[36:36] didn't disclose. I mean, I I really
don't understand why you wouldn't want
[36:39] to put that out there because at the end
of the day, we vote on it to pay for
[36:43] that. That's using our taxpayers money.
That's public record, but they should be
[36:46] able to see that. So, if they have
questions, like Mr. Carlin just brought
[36:50] up some transparency here. If they have
a question of why we increased whatever
[36:54] we increase, they should be able to say,
"Oh, that's a huge number. I get it
[36:57] now."
>> And we're going to use the city's taking
[36:59] a taking the side of using reserves
>> to offset that cost. So, we don't pass
[37:04] that cost on to the city to the
citizens. Okay.
[37:07] » But in reality, we do because that's
their money already.
[37:10] » Sure.
>> So, I I think we should vote on it
[37:12] tonight.
>> And I would encourage you all to vote
[37:15] no.
>> And only only allow the fuel what's in
[37:18] contract,
>> right? So, I'm not opposed to the first
[37:21] two increases, the 2.8 for the
>> No, I get that. That's part of the
[37:25] contract and I get that CPI
[clears throat] understand, but as far
[37:27] as the other part, I don't think we
should do that.
[37:30] » Yeah.
>> I don't think we should table. I think
[37:31] should we vote on it now because at the
end of the day, we're passing a budget
[37:35] tonight. We need to he needs to know and
he needs to know what he's working with
[37:40] » and we need to know what we're working
with,
[37:41] » right?
>> So, we need to vote on it tonight in my
[37:44] opinion. Mayor,
>> I was just simply saying I agree. I I
[37:49] wish there would have been discussion
beforehand if we knew the ask didn't
[37:53] match the contract. Then we could have
discussed this, you know, at an earlier
[37:56] point before we're voting on it today.
>> I would have loved that. I submitted
[38:00] this uh several months ago. So I I just
I failed, I guess, on that and and
[38:05] following through with
>> No, just on y'all's end. So if you were
[38:07] submitting under different terms to say,
"Hey, we're staying at the same place,
[38:10] but here's the reason we want to raise
the cost." And we could have already had
[38:13] this discussion or told you what the
numbers should be if we agreed or
[38:17] didn't. Okay.
>> All right.
[38:21] » Any other questions?
>> No.
[38:22] » No. Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[38:27] » Any more questions?
>> A motion.
[38:30] » Well, Mark, how we need to push this if
we're not going to
[38:35] » Someone needs to make a motion to amend
the resolution to if you're if if what
[38:41] you're planning on doing is raising it
by the first two or the 2.8 8 minus
[38:46] the.357
whatever that comes to
[38:49] » 44 2.443
>> 2.443
[38:53] Yeah.
[39:03] Mayor move to amend resolution 26R31
approving
[39:08] addendum number five to the contract for
refused collection disposal services
[39:12] between the city of Alvin and Texas
private disposal. Is that why I need to
[39:16] put that in there?
>> Yes.
[39:18] » At the rate of 2.443
[39:23] authorizing the mayor to execute the
addendum and setting forth others
[39:26] matters other matters related there too.
Y'all put me on the spot on that.
[39:30] » Second.
>> Thank you. Please vote. I'm not always
[39:32] like that. I promise.
[39:36] » Motion passes unanimously.
>> Thank you. Item B, consider ordinance
[39:41] 26R granting consent to the addition of
approximately 128.5284
[39:46] acres of land situated within the
corporate city limits of Alvin to Brazor
[39:50] County Municipal Utility District number
51, making findings of fact, providing a
[39:55] severility clause, providing for an
effective date, and providing for other
[39:58] matters related there too. Mayor, city
council. Um, this is ordinance 26R.
[40:05] Um, it has to do with adding 128 acres
to MUD 51. On January 17th, 2019, the
[40:14] city council adopted Ordinance 19B,
consenting to the creation of Brazoria
[40:19] County MUD 51. In 2024, the city also
approved the addition of approximately
[40:25] 107 acres to the mud. This was for
originally the benefit of Lando
[40:31] Development. Uh later on, Lando
transferred their interest to Beaser
[40:35] Homes. Uh Beaser Homes is now the
developer um for that 107 acres.
[40:41] This ordinance um grants the city
specific written consent to the addition
[40:47] of property to Brazoria County Municipal
Utility District number 51. Uh it's an
[40:53] addition of 128 acres and it'll be for
the benefit of KB Homes.
[41:00] Uh the this preserves the conditions
contained in ordinance 19B and any prior
[41:05] agreements between the city and the
district. Staff recommends approval of
[41:09] ordinance 26R.
And if you have any questions, I'll try
[41:13] to answer them.
[41:19] » If there's [clears throat] no questions,
we'll entertain a motion.
[41:23] Mayor move to approve ordinance 26R
granting consent to the addition of
[41:26] approximately approximately 128.528584
acres of land situated within the
[41:33] corporate districts limits of the city
of Alvin to Missouri county municipal
[41:37] district number 51 making find making
findings of fact providing a
[41:42] severability clause providing for an
effective date and providing for other
[41:46] matters related there too
>> second thank you please vote that was
[41:51] Motion passes unanimously.
>> Uh, next is item C. Consider resolution
[41:58] 26R32 approving amendment number one to
the utility services contract between
[42:03] the city of Alvin, Texas, Beaser Homes
Texas LP, KB Home, Lonear, Inc., and
[42:10] Brazorian County Municipal Utility
District number 51. Adding KB Home,
[42:14] Lonear, Inc. and its approximately
128.53 acre track to the existing
[42:20] utility services contract upon closing
on the property and authorize the mayor
[42:24] to sign the agreement upon legal review.
>> Mayor and city council, this is just a
[42:29] followup to the annexation of that 128
acres into MUD 51. Uh the existing
[42:35] utility services contract was originally
entered into in 2021 between the city
[42:40] and Lando development on behalf of MUD
51. In 2023, Lando assigned its
[42:46] development rights and responsibilities
to Beaser Homes. And now with the
[42:53] addition of the
128 acres, KB Homes will be added as a
[42:59] developer under that agreement.
And this is a condition procedent to KB
[43:06] Homes purchasing that property. If they
do not end up purchasing the property by
[43:11] December 31st, 2026, the amendment will
automatically terminate
[43:23] » question. No motion.
Mayor, I move to approve resolution
[43:29] 26R32
approving amendment number one to the
[43:33] utility services contract between the
city of Alvin, Texas, Beer Homes, Texas
[43:37] LP, KB Homes, Lonear, Inc. and Brazor
County Municipal District Utility
[43:44] District number 51 adding KB Homes
Lonear Inc. and it's approximate 128.53
[43:52] acre track to the existing utility
service contract upon closing on the
[43:57] property and authorize the mayor to sign
the agreement upon legal review.
[44:02] » Second.
>> Thank you. Please vote.
[44:06] » Motion passes unanimously.
>> Thank you. Uh next item D. Consider
[44:10] resolution 26R33
approving a lift station force main
[44:15] oversized cost participation agreement
with Pori County Municipal Utility
[44:20] District 51 and KB Home Lonear Inc. and
authorized the mayor to sign the
[44:25] agreement upon legal review.
Mayor, City Council, on November 20th,
[44:30] 2025, the city entered into an
oversizing agreement with MUD 51 and
[44:35] Beaser Homes. Under this um amendment to
the agreement, KB Homes will step in and
[44:43] pay the city's allocated share. The
original price of the lift station was
[44:48] to be 2,152,850.
[44:52] The city's projected allocation share
was estimated at $1,172
[44:57] 6 $65740.
KB Homes will take over that um
[45:04] obligation depending on at the time that
they take over the obligation, how the
[45:09] city has paid it, whether it's been
through um cash or grant of impact fees,
[45:16] whatever it's going to be, KB Homes will
pay back the city.
[45:21] » So, has any of this been paid already?
>> I don't know yet. I know they have done
[45:26] some construction. Uh at the time when I
asked that we didn't know if the city
[45:31] had actually paid any money or granted
any of the um
[45:36] » they give credits for the um
>> impact. We we haven't we haven't paid
[45:41] anything.
>> So KB Homes is stepping into the shoes
[45:44] of the city and taking over the
obligation to pay this money back.
[45:47] » That's correct.
>> So um in the event that happens as
[45:51] planned, how does that affect our
budget? Does it does it go into like a
[45:55] special fund or is it like where the
impact fee money would sit or can you
[46:01] explain?
>> Yeah, we have we have a se separate
[46:02] impact fee fund uh particularly
designated for impact fee funds. So, uh
[46:08] » the money we received from KB Homes
would go there.
[46:11] » It would it would go there until it's
time to pay.
[46:13] » Okay.
[46:18] » Good morning. Mayor move to approve
resolution 26R33 approving a lift
[46:22] station force main oversized cost
participation agreement with Brazoria
[46:25] County Municipal Utility District 51 and
KB Home Loanar, Inc. and authorize the
[46:30] mayor to sign the agreement upon legal
review.
[46:32] » Second.
>> Thank you. Please vote.
[46:36] » Motion passes unanimously.
>> You uh moving on to item E. Consider
[46:41] resolution 26R34 approving the proposed
collective bargaining labor agreement
[46:47] between the city of Alvin, Texas, and
the Alvin Police Officers Association,
[46:51] authorizing the mayor to execute the
agreement and setting forth other
[46:54] matters related there too.
>> Yes. Good evening, Baron Council. Um
[46:58] before I start this
uh agenda item, I would just like to
[47:02] first uh thank Sergeant Cade and John
Gear K. Did I say that right? Uh we had
[47:12] about five meetings and the meetings
were very professionally done. Um
[47:17] might not agreed on everything but uh
everything was done professionally and
[47:22] and in good good faith. So I just want
to start that off. Uh
[47:29] I think I forgot the
[47:37] All right.
[47:42] Okay, we we concluded negotiations on
August 27th
[47:48] and tonight I want to provide uh just a
high level brief recap of the
[47:54] proposed changes to the to the
agreement.
[47:58] Uh the current agreement was approved by
council September 18, 2025 and it covers
[48:05] one year, one fiscal year from October
to September 30th and includes two
[48:11] additional
uh fiscal years of Evergreen.
[48:18] the the proposed
uh agreement
[48:23] uh would be a one-year contract starting
October 1st through uh September 30th,
[48:29] 2027 and it maintaining the 2-year
evergreen
[48:34] uh time frame.
[48:40] Okay. article 9 uh you're going to see
in your in your packets at the end of
[48:46] the the CBA there are two two pay scales
uh pay scale two is the one proposed by
[48:52] the association and pay scale one
uh proposed by the city's bargaining
[49:00] bargaining team uh elements of the pay
scale that was proposed by the
[49:05] association would include a 3% increase
between all steps
[49:10] on the anniversary date or pro promotion
date. uh the current
[49:16] uh CBA the steps are they range from
anywhere from 1.17
[49:23] to 3.3%
[49:26] and so uh both the association and and
city staff uh felt that there was this
[49:32] was time to at least clean that up to
where all of the steps between all the
[49:36] percentages between the steps are uh are
are uniform and so uh the association's
[49:43] pay scale
3% between the steps and the city's pay
[49:48] scale
two 2 and a2%.
[49:55] Okay. Uh but this what this slide is
going is showing is
[50:01] the percentage increase
from the beginning of
[50:10] the contract
to and the ending
[50:16] uh
salary per hour at the end of the
[50:19] contract. And so
the how the contract is on October you
[50:26] shift to another uh pay scale and then
on your anniversary date you move a
[50:31] step. So this is not intended to reflect
the percentage of increase but only the
[50:37] percentage change between the uh hourly
pay from the time the contract starts
[50:45] until the end of the of of the fiscal
year. And so we provided two examples
[50:50] for for a three-year officer. Uh I mean
you you can kind of just kind of peruse
[50:55] peruse through that. And we did an
example for a a six-year officer as well
[51:01] corporal and for all ranks.
And I'll pause to see if you have any
[51:06] any any questions on on that.
You talked about the that it was a
[51:12] uniform percent increase from step to
step.
[51:18] » Yes.
>> Previously we saw
[51:21] » um a step scale that was had multiple
different
[51:27] » Yes.
>> percentages all the way through that
[51:30] process. So what is that percentage from
step one between step one and two, two
[51:38] and three, three and four? What is that
percentage?
[51:40] » So that would that would be these. So 3%
from for the pay scale that the
[51:45] association is proposing and two and a
half from what the what the city is
[51:49] proposing.
>> And what you stated is that now it's
[51:52] uniform we corrected it. This is now
fixed.
[51:55] » Yes.
>> What we has been attempted to do years
[51:58] past.
>> Yes.
[51:59] » This is corrected.
>> Yes. That that that part be corrected.
[52:02] » Okay. Have we corrected the overlap on a
senior officer to sergeant?
[52:06] » We have not corrected that. What about a
senior sergeant to lieutenant and so
[52:10] forth?
>> Uh I don't think we corrected any of
[52:13] that. That was definitely too costly.
>> Oh yeah, it's brought up every every
[52:16] every year. It's just too costly to uh
to correct all of that.
[52:22] » That to me that hinders us dramatically,
especially with this year we promoted
[52:27] how many supervisors? A good handful. it
to me
[52:34] ju just being my background it takes a
lot for a senior officer who's topped
[52:38] out it you don't have anything to
incentivize them to promote like why am
[52:43] I going to promote to sergeant and get a
minimal p pay pay raise when I can stay
[52:48] as an officer or or or back and forth
because I know they go to the next step
[52:52] up
>> right okay yeah that's what I'm about to
[52:53] say
>> to me that's that's hard for an officer
[52:56] to sit there and say why am I going to
lose my seniority as an officer has been
[53:00] here 10 20 years. I'm out on day shift
with week well we all have the same days
[53:04] off but didn't go to the bottom sergeant
and have last pick on their shift and
[53:10] you know that to me that's just hard to
incentivize senior officers to promote.
[53:14] » Yes sir. I'm I don't debate you on that
at all. Not debating you on that at all
[53:20] but it is brought up and and you know
every every renewal year. So the APOA
[53:25] proposal on the pay scale the 3%
increase between steps was the 2.5 our
[53:31] first counter or only counter.
[53:36] » Can we discuss that?
>> Yeah. Yeah. We discuss discuss
[53:40] everything. Uh
I want to know how much the city
[53:46] compromised with APOA. That's what I'm
asking.
[53:48] » Yeah.
>> Um
[53:50] » Sergeant K, do you know that answer? I
can't
[53:53] » Sergeant answer.
>> What was the city's first counter
[53:57] » to the 3%.
>> Oh, I I can't I can answer that.
[54:02] » Okay.
>> Okay. Sergeant, you can come on up if
[54:05] you want to. Uh
>> I'll wait. [laughter]
[54:07] » Please come up here, Sergeant. We'd love
for you to be up here.
[54:10] » Yeah. So, so how how how we how we
prepared the budget this year due to the
[54:19] the uh lack of funds.
>> Yes. Uh the initial proposal from the
[54:26] city was to provide everybody 3%
starting October 1.
[54:32] » Okay.
So, so we just kept with that that same
[54:36] amount of funding and uh that was that
was our proposal. So, I guess that that
[54:41] would be the counter, but that wasn't a
counter to the 3% that was a counter to
[54:46] their their initial proposal.
>> And what was their initial proposal?
[54:51] » Uh
2 million.
[54:54] » Yeah. It it it would have brought cost
two million.
[54:56] » What was their initial? We counted with
3%. What was their what increase were
[55:01] they asking for?
>> [sighs]
[55:04] » Sorry, do you know that answer?
>> I can't remember.
[55:09] [clears throat]
[55:11] » So, the initial proposal uh from APOA
varied between the ranks simply because
[55:16] the the what we presented to y'all at
the budget workshop and doing the market
[55:20] median survey. And so um our initial
proposal was to we presented the the
[55:26] difference in the pay scales and the
deficiencies in the the ranks and the
[55:30] percentages that they were underpaid and
then we proposed bringing all those up
[55:34] to market median. That was our initial
proposal
[55:37] » and it was in their their presentation
that they
[55:39] » I remember that I just can't remember.
>> I believe for a captain's rank uh the
[55:42] market median survey showed they they
were roughly 22% under market median and
[55:47] so our proposal was to bring everybody
up to that market median over a
[55:50] three-year contract
>> over three years.
[55:55] » Yes, sir. That that was the initial
proposal.
[55:59] So, you didn't ask like not this last
contract, the year before, the contract
[56:03] before where we did $5 across the board
and $6 for Sergeant to try to fix that
[56:09] gap. We didn't ask for that. Y'all
didn't ask for that this time. Y'all did
[56:12] more of a percentage to bring it up to
the medium. Basically,
[56:16] » I don't think it was a dollar amount.
>> It was It wasn't a dollar amount. And as
[56:20] I explained in the budget workshop, if
you do a dollar amount to to across the
[56:24] board, and that's why we have the
compression and the pay scales because a
[56:28] dollar amount to a younger officer
making $30 an hour, a dollar amount
[56:32] significantly larger percentage to him
than it is a topped out captain making
[56:37] top out pay.
>> And so if you do a percentage across the
[56:40] board, um, you know, an even
[clears throat] percentage, then what
[56:43] that did is that's significantly more to
a topped out captain than it is to a
[56:47] starting officer. And so that's why we
did the market median survey because we
[56:50] felt it would bring every position,
every step within the department up to
[56:55] market median. We knew that we were not
going to be at the top of the market
[56:59] median, but we were hoping to get
everybody to that middle of the road um
[57:02] area. And so that's that was our initial
proposal which was presented to you on
[57:07] the budget show.
>> Yeah. I have their their initial Okay.
[57:12] » You want to see it?
>> Can I?
[57:13] » Yes, sir.
A lot's happened since then. Sorry.
[57:18] Sorry, I can't remember those numbers.
>> I got you.
[57:31] » I'd like to see us, not during this
bargain agreement everything, but on the
[57:35] next one, at least try to do something
multi-year out instead of doing one
[57:40] thing every year. Yes. Well, we normally
do three years, but because we couldn't
[57:43] come they couldn't come to an agreement
last year.
[57:45] » Why not go to a six year? I mean, I I
don't It doesn't have to be a threeear,
[57:48] two-year, whatever. I'm just saying I
know we know what they're asking for on
[57:52] everything. It'd be easier for us to
budget out something over a longer term
[57:57] to do something than doing a whole, you
know,
[58:00] » Absolutely.
>> huge chunk at one time.
[58:02] » Absolutely. And uh
>> yeah,
[58:05] » so these things are uh
>> I don't think that's in the best
[58:08] interest of the city or the APOA,
honestly. I and that's what I was about
[58:11] to say. I mean, they have some new uh I
was just surprised of some new
[58:14] legislation that might be coming and
impacting cities that especially with
[58:20] all of the, you know, the property tax
relief that
[58:23] » to do it one year every year
>> until everything comes down in Austin. I
[58:26] I wish we could do three years, but I
mean
[58:30] I I just I just don't feel comfortable
with uh what's going on in Austin at
[58:35] this time.
[58:39] So I have a question. Do how how much I
mean I know nobody has a crystal ball
[58:44] but how much do we think this will help
with retention? Um I know we have
[58:49] significant amount of overtime as well
since it should help with retention.
[58:53] Will it also in turn help with overtime?
How much overtime we have?
[58:58] » Yes. Well, currently they're they're
fully staffed. So we did uh reduce their
[59:02] the overtime budget to to reflect that.
Okay. Uh,
[59:08] but whether they stay or not, I mean,
you just it's kind of their I don't want
[59:13] to guarantee that that they're going to
hopefully they will, but I want to
[59:18] guarantee.
Okay. So, uh,
[59:23] so that so like I said, that's not
that's just the increase or the change
[59:28] in their hourly pay from the time the
contract starts until the end end of the
[59:32] of the fiscal year.
[59:37] Another thing that that they proposed
and that uh we agreed to was uh a f
[59:42] physical fitness comp time. And that
gives them the opportunity to earn comp
[59:47] time uh by score by particular score on
a physical uh eva fitness evaluation.
[59:56] And so we we we agreed to that. if you
have any specific questions. I mean,
[1:00:01] Sarge is here or or uh
>> So, just to touch on the uh I'm sorry,
[1:00:07] just to touch on the physical fitness
part, it it's currently in our
[1:00:10] » SEG, can you go up here, please? Thank
you, sir.
[1:00:16] » Ju just to touch on the uh physical
fitness uh part. It's in our current
[1:00:20] contract as it stands now, but it what
it does is you have to do a 2,000 meter
[1:00:26] row. And so what we asked the city's
team to do is at least consider going to
[1:00:30] what DPS's standards are. And so you
have the option between choosing between
[1:00:34] a 2,000 meter row, a 4m minute row, or a
um 400
[1:00:42] 500 meter row for time. And so it's
DPS's standards. It's what they use. And
[1:00:47] we just ask that we adopt the same
standards that DPS has used. And so it
[1:00:50] just gives you three different options.
Again, it's in the contract right now as
[1:00:53] a 2000 meter that was in there. So it's
it's not costing anything to the city.
[1:00:57] It's just a different awarding um
allowing us to go to the DPS standard.
[1:01:04] » But the the comp time just to um touch
on that, what what is it? And so say an
[1:01:11] officer meets the the physical agilities
or the standard and is able to earn comp
[1:01:16] time
>> to
[1:01:19] » and it's and it expires at the end of
the end of the year.
[1:01:22] » End of the year. So use it or lose it.
>> Yeah. Okay. And and is to supplement um
[1:01:27] additional training or additional
um um
[1:01:36] » time for for physical fitness or what
what is the purpose?
[1:01:40] » I I think so it's additional it's
encouraging our officers to participate
[1:01:45] in a physical fitness um and it's
compensating them for doing so. It's
[1:01:49] four hours.
>> And so it's you have to the first um
[1:01:53] » I think it's 90% you have to Lieutenant
Eller is it 90% for the first one? 90%
[1:01:58] for the first one. The next one is 70
>> 70
[1:02:00] » 70%. Yes, sir.
>> And so you get time based on where you
[1:02:03] qualify within that. So you have to row
over the 70% to get the
[1:02:06] » Yeah, I've got that part in order. But
it's four hours I guess. Or how many
[1:02:09] hours?
>> 40 hours, right?
[1:02:12] » 40 40 for 90, I think. 24
>> 24
[1:02:18] » I think it's 24
between 70 and 89% or an approval of 40
[1:02:23] hours if you get 90% or above.
>> Got it.
[1:02:30] » That's enough.
>> We got it right there.
[1:02:36] But
another thing that's uh we're adding um
[1:02:42] or that we agreed to and this is to
incentivize experienced officers uh was
[1:02:49] that if an applicant with two two plus
years of experience moved to if if we
[1:02:56] hired them uh they would move to the uh
the step that corresponds to their uh
[1:03:02] total number of police experience.
So we agreed to that. Uh also with that
[1:03:09] uh the association proposed
uh if an applicant comes from an agency
[1:03:15] with
at least 30 sworn officers
[1:03:20] um
or yeah at least 30 sworn officer chief
[1:03:26] would chief would uh get the final say
so on their where they would land and so
[1:03:32] we felt that from the city's perspective
we felt that since our officers
[1:03:36] are more trained. We get more training
here. And uh with 60 a place with 60
[1:03:43] sworn officers, they have more
experience in uh and so we felt that
[1:03:48] changing that to 60 sworn officer,
police officers. [snorts] Uh
[1:03:55] anything less than the 60 sworn sworn
officers, chief would have to uh
[1:04:01] get the final say. So on the I guess the
step that they end up
[1:04:06] » that's their right of storage.
>> Yes sir.
[1:04:09] » That sure would have helped when we were
11 officers short.
[1:04:14] » Yeah. Okay. So uh any more any more
questions? I think that's probably it.
[1:04:20] I'm going ask have Sergeant and uh Mr.
Kerr if they want to say anything. But
[1:04:25] so the impact on the on the budget is
this. Uh
[1:04:30] if you approve pay scale, the city's pay
scale, no pretty no change on the
[1:04:35] budget. Uh if you approve the APOA,
uh it's a 2808 80,000
[1:04:42] change to the budget that that you
currently have. And so that that's
[1:04:46] that's pretty much the ask on tonight.
And so with that, um I'm going allow
[1:04:51] Sergeant to have words or what he wants
to do.
[1:04:58] Uh, mayor mayor council, thank you for
allowing me to speak to you all this
[1:05:03] evening. It's greatly appreciated. Uh,
for those of you that don't know me in
[1:05:08] the crowd, many of you do. I'm Aaron
Concincaid. I'm the uh, president for
[1:05:11] the Alvin Police Officer Association and
Chief Bargaining Officer. Um, before
[1:05:17] discussing the two pay proposals before
y'all tonight, I first want to reiterate
[1:05:21] what Mr. Roland said and thank him and
his team, entire team um for everything
[1:05:26] they've put forth in in bargaining with
us this year. Since negotiations began
[1:05:31] on July 9th, we've spent a considerable
amount of time at the bargaining table.
[1:05:35] As you well know, while we have not
always agreed, the discussions have
[1:05:39] remained professional and we generally
appreciate the time and effort and
[1:05:43] consideration that Mr. Roland and his
entire team have put uh into this
[1:05:47] process. I also want to make something
very clear. The APO rec recognizes that
[1:05:53] our civilian employees and our other
city employees work hard and are very
[1:05:57] deserving of a competitive compensation.
Our position has never been that police
[1:06:03] officers are the only employees who
deserve a raise. Our responsible our
[1:06:07] responsibility at the bargaining table,
however, is to represent the police
[1:06:11] officers covered by our collective
bargaining agreement and address the
[1:06:15] spec specific compensation and retention
issues facing our department.
[1:06:21] Prior to negotiations, the APOA
conducted an extensive salary survey uh
[1:06:25] surveying agencies within the market
area of Alvin that we all compete with
[1:06:30] for police officers. That analysis
identified several significant concerns.
[1:06:35] We found that a majority of our ranks
are below the market median with some
[1:06:40] supervisory ranks significantly below
the market median. We documented
[1:06:44] substantial employee attrition and the
considerable financial cost associated
[1:06:48] with recruiting, hiring, equipping, and
training officers only to lose
[1:06:53] experienced personnel to surrounding
agencies.
[1:06:56] We also identified a fundamental problem
within our existing step system. As Mr.
[1:07:02] and discussed the percentage increases
between the steps are inconsistent
[1:07:07] and in many cases the longer the officer
served within the department the smaller
[1:07:11] the percentage the raise was in the step
program.
[1:07:15] We did not simply identify these
problems and asked the city for more
[1:07:19] money. We presented a proposed solution
which we talked about earlier. At the
[1:07:23] beginning of the process, we were
advised that approximately a 3% police
[1:07:27] salary increase, roughly $27,000,
had already been placed in the proposed
[1:07:32] budget before collective bargaining even
began. Our initial comprehensive
[1:07:36] proposal, including compensation steps,
and benefits, was estimated by the city
[1:07:40] to cost approximately $2.1 million over
a three-year contract. We understood
[1:07:45] that was a significant request, so we
negotiated. We listened to the city's
[1:07:50] concerns, evaluated its proposals, spoke
with our membership, and moved
[1:07:55] substantially from where we began.
The city initially proposed a 3%
[1:08:00] increase while maintaining the existing
step structure. We respectfully declined
[1:08:05] because although it provided an
immediate raise, it did not correct the
[1:08:08] inequities within the step system or
meaningfully address the structural
[1:08:13] compensation issues we had identified.
The city subsequently proposed a 1%
[1:08:18] raise October 1st and restructuring the
steps to 2.5%.
[1:08:23] We absolutely recognized the city's
willingness to address the step problem.
[1:08:27] That was movement by the city and we
greatly appreciated it. However, when we
[1:08:32] analyzed the proposal, we discovered
that 33 out of our 62 members
[1:08:36] anniversary dates fell on or after June.
As a result, more than half of our
[1:08:42] membership would not receive that two
and a half percent increase on their
[1:08:45] anniversary dates until very late in the
fiscal year. The city would only fund
[1:08:50] many of those increases for
approximately four months or less during
[1:08:53] that budget year. Our analysis also
showed that the city's 1% 2 and a half%
[1:08:59] proposal would cost approximately
$22,000 less than roughly the $27,000
[1:09:05] that had already been budgeted for.
The APOA therefore presented what we
[1:09:10] believe is a reasonable compromise. A 3%
increase effective October 1st, 2026,
[1:09:16] combined with restructuring the step
plan so that each step represents a
[1:09:21] consistent 3% increase. The additional
cost implementing our proposed pay scale
[1:09:26] is approximately $280,000
above the approximately 27,000 already
[1:09:31] included in the proposed budget before
you tonight.
[1:09:35] I want to put that into perspective. We
began this process with a proposal the
[1:09:40] city estimated at approximately $2.1
million over three years. Today, we're
[1:09:45] asking for approximately $280,000 in
additional funding beyond what was
[1:09:50] already budgeted. That represents
significant movement by our association.
[1:09:55] We have attempted to bargain in good
faith. We've listened. We've
[1:09:59] compromised. and we have dramatically
reduced the financial impact of our
[1:10:03] proposal. At the same time, we believe a
compromise has to meaningfully address
[1:10:07] the problems that we brought before
y'all at the bargaining table. This is
[1:10:12] not simply about giving employees a
raise. It's about creating a
[1:10:16] compensation structure that makes sense.
It's about correcting a step system
[1:10:21] where an officer should not receive a
smaller percentage increase simply
[1:10:24] because he or she has more tenure. It's
about bringing positions that have
[1:10:29] fallen significantly below the market
closer to where they need to be. It's
[1:10:34] about recruitment. It's about retention.
And it's about protecting the city's
[1:10:39] investment in the experienced officers
that we already have. We also recognize
[1:10:43] council's responsibility to protect the
financial health of the city. We agree
[1:10:48] that Alvin should maintain a strong
reserve and based on the financial
[1:10:52] information we have reviewed, however,
the city's maintaining its required 25%
[1:10:56] reserve while also carrying
approximately 9.2 million in additional
[1:11:01] unassigned funds, resulting in reserves
of approximately 35.6%.
[1:11:06] We are not asking council to jeopardize
the city's reserves. We are asking
[1:11:10] council to consider whether investing an
additional 280,000 into correcting the
[1:11:14] police compensation structure, improving
retention, and protecting the city's
[1:11:18] investment in its officers is a
reasonable use of small portion of those
[1:11:22] available resources. Our membership
believes that it is, as you can well see
[1:11:27] that they're here tonight in in a large
number.
[1:11:31] There's another point I believe that is
important. Regardless of whether a new
[1:11:35] agreement is ultimately reached,
eligible officers have not that have not
[1:11:39] topped out remain entitled under our
existing uh contract
[1:11:45] to their applicable anniversary step
increases. In other words, a portion of
[1:11:50] these compensation costs already exist
under their under the current structure.
[1:11:56] So, just to kind of clarify things, in
in the city's agreement, the starting
[1:12:01] officer would get a 1% raise and then
the steps would move to 3% across the
[1:12:06] board.
[1:12:11] Our proposal takes the existing
obligation and creates a more
[1:12:14] consistent, equitable, and competitive
system going forward. Tonight, council
[1:12:19] has an opportunity to do more than
approve a raise. You have the
[1:12:23] opportunity to uh correct a structural
problem. You have an opportunity to tell
[1:12:28] our younger officers that Alvin intends
to remain competitive enough for them to
[1:12:32] build their careers here. You have the
opportunity to tell our experienced
[1:12:36] officers and supervisors that their
tenure, institutional knowledge, and
[1:12:40] commitment to this community have value
to each of you. and you have the
[1:12:44] opportunity to make an investment that
we believe will ultimately save the city
[1:12:47] money by reducing the tremendous cost
associated with the continued turnover,
[1:12:51] recruitment, training, and loss of
experience. The APOA has moved
[1:12:56] considerably from where we began July
9th. We believe our 3% increase and 3%
[1:13:01] step proposal represents a fair and
reasonable compromise between what a
[1:13:06] salary data demonstrates is needed and
what we recognize the city can
[1:13:10] reasonably afford.
We respectfully ask council tonight to
[1:13:14] support our proposal. Regardless of
council's decision, I want to again
[1:13:18] thank Mr. Roland and the city's
bargaining team for the time and effort
[1:13:22] that they have invest invested in this
process. Collective bargaining naturally
[1:13:26] involves disagreement, but disagreement
does not have to be mean disrespect.
[1:13:31] We appreciate their willingness to sit
across the table from us, listen to our
[1:13:35] concerns, and work towards a resolution.
We also appre appreciate each of you
[1:13:39] listening to us from both sides and
considering what is best not only for
[1:13:43] the officers but the city of Alvin as a
whole. Our officers are not asking to be
[1:13:47] paid the highest. They are asking for a
compensation structure that is fair,
[1:13:52] competitive, consistent, and
sustainable. We believe the 3% and 3%
[1:13:58] proposal accomplishes just that. On
behalf of the men and the women in this
[1:14:02] room and the Alvin Police Officers
Association, we say thank you.
[1:14:08] Thank you.
[1:14:13] » Okay. So, so with that, what what we
need is you all to vote on which pay
[1:14:17] scale to incorporate into the to the
CPA.
[1:14:26] » Mayor,
just before we vote, I just want to say
[1:14:30] I think $280,000 dip into our reserves.
although
[1:14:35] I know we don't want to is a very very
very small investment compared to the
[1:14:43] investment we've already put forth in
these officers and I believe that
[1:14:49] honestly I think we can do more I really
do but I know at this time we're voting
[1:14:54] on one or two and I believe that 280,000
is a very small price to pay for what
[1:15:00] we're getting out of the return on the
investment
[1:15:07] Yeah, I agree. I think that um you know
if we're having to dip into our reserves
[1:15:11] to pay costs to the waste disposal
company and you know the current budget
[1:15:17] as proposed includes things that are
expensive that I don't necessarily agree
[1:15:22] with. I'd much rather use money
from the reserves to pay our police
[1:15:28] officers. I mean,
>> that that's two separate funds.
[1:15:32] » No, I understand that. But it's all it's
all the city's money. It's all the tax
[1:15:36] money.
>> Not two separate funds, but two separate
[1:15:37] functions and two separate uh
>> No, not not uh like paying for zoning
[1:15:44] and paying for hike and bike trail and
all that kind of stuff. All that stuff
[1:15:47] comes out of the general fund and so
does payroll. No.
[1:15:51] » Yes. But not sanitation. That's what I'm
talking about.
[1:15:53] » Okay. Well, that's that's fine. But uh
Mr. Gibbs said that the plan to pay for
[1:16:00] the proposed increase earlier this
evening was to dip into reserves in the
[1:16:03] amount of $225,000. And that's simply
what I'm referring to. And so instead, I
[1:16:07] would prefer to use that money to pay
our police officers. Um, most
[1:16:11] definitely. So
>> what money? The sanitation.
[1:16:14] » I'm saying the amount of money.
>> Oh, the amount
[1:16:17] » that would otherwise be used to pay
anyone out of the reserves. Okay. I
[1:16:24] would rather use the money to pay our
police officers if that money too would
[1:16:29] be coming from reserves. So that's
simply the point I'm making. So I agree
[1:16:33] with Councilman Gerave.
>> I think what she's trying to say if
[1:16:37] we're going to pay anything in reserves,
we're going to use it for this.
[1:16:40] » Exactly.
>> What he's what city manager is trying to
[1:16:43] say. There's two different reserve
stashes. What he was trying to explain.
[1:16:46] » Yeah, that's that's all I was trying.
Mayor move to approve resolution 26R34
[1:16:52] approving the proposed collective
bargaining labor agreement between the
[1:16:54] city of Alvin, Texas and the Alvin
Police Officer Association APOA to
[1:16:58] include pay scale two. That's correct.
Right. Two, I'm sorry. Authorizing the
[1:17:04] mayor to execute the agreement and
setting forth other matters related
[1:17:06] there too.
>> Second.
[1:17:08] » Thank you. Please vote.
[1:17:12] » Motion passes unanimously.
>> Thank you.
[1:17:19] Item F,
consider ordinance 26s, adopting the
[1:17:24] annual budget for the city of Alvin,
Texas for fiscal year 2627, excluding
[1:17:29] the fire department and fire capital
budgets, directing the city secretary to
[1:17:32] post a copy of the budget on the city of
Alvin website and setting forth other
[1:17:37] provisions related there too.
[1:17:41] » Uh we've had several workshops. Uh so
tonight I don't have anything in
[1:17:48] particularly prepared just unless you
have questions
[1:17:53] for
[1:17:57] all mayor. I move to uh hold on. Yeah. I
move to approve ordinance 26s adopting
[1:18:03] the annual budget for the city of Alvin,
Texas for fiscal year 2627 excluding the
[1:18:08] fire department and fire capital budgets
directing the city secretary to post a
[1:18:13] copy of the budget on the city of Alvin
website and setting forth other
[1:18:16] provisions related there too.
>> Second.
[1:18:18] » Thank you. Please vote.
[1:18:23] » Motion passes with council member Kaiser
and Salter voting no.
[1:18:31] Item G, consider ordinance 26T, adopting
the fire department and fire capital
[1:18:38] budgets for city of Alvin, Texas for
fiscal year 2627, directing the city
[1:18:43] secretary to post a copy of the budgets
on the city of Alvin website and setting
[1:18:47] forth other provisions related there
too.
[1:18:49] » Mayor, I'd like to say that council
member Salter has filed an affidavit. He
[1:18:53] will be abstaining from this since he is
a volunteer firefighter.
[1:18:56] » Thank you.
Any
[1:19:00] questions or comments regarding item G?
[1:19:05] » Mayor, I move to approve ordinance.
>> I'm sorry. I'm sorry, council member.
[1:19:09] » Um, if if a member of a council has
recused themselves from the agenda, are
[1:19:15] they allowed to speak on it?
>> They shouldn't take part in any
[1:19:18] question.
[1:19:22] » Anybody else?
>> Any any questions or comments on this
[1:19:25] side of the table?
>> No.
[1:19:27] » All right. Mayor, I move to approve
ordinance 2016 adopting the fire
[1:19:31] department and fire capital budgets for
the city of Alvin, Texas for fiscal year
[1:19:35] 2627, directing the city secretary to
post a copy of the budgets of the city
[1:19:40] of Alvin website and setting forth other
provisions related there too.
[1:19:43] » Second.
>> Thank you. Please vote.
[1:19:49] » Motion passes with council member Salter
abstaining.
[1:19:52] » Thank you. Item H, consider ordinance
26U, adopting and levvening the ad
[1:19:57] balorum tax rate for the tax year 2026.
Uh, fiscal year 27 commencing October 1,
[1:20:04] 2026 and ending September 30th, 2027.
>> Yes. On this one, um, I just want to
[1:20:10] clarify that the public hearing
uh tax rate was 700 635.
[1:20:18] Uh,
the budget is not proposing that tax
[1:20:21] rate. The budget is proposing a 69 12
cent t tax rate.
[1:20:34] » Any questions or comments?
>> Yeah, I have comments. I'll try to be
[1:20:40] brief. Um,
Alvin already has one of the highest tax
[1:20:45] rates in Brazoria County. are members of
this community have one of the lower
[1:20:50] median average incomes of surrounding
communities. Um, I think that matters
[1:20:56] and because of that, knowing what I know
about the budget and the money that is
[1:21:01] being spent
um for the city um specifically things
[1:21:07] like the rec center operating at a
$600,000 loss and the animal uh adoption
[1:21:12] center operating um at about $450,000
uh loss. those kinds of things while
[1:21:19] they provide a value to the city that I
understand and I agree with that I think
[1:21:24] that there are ways that we can
meaningfully
[1:21:27] reduce the expenses from our city
budget. And I think that when we're
[1:21:32] asking taxpayers for more money um by
way of a tax increase or issuing
[1:21:37] certificates of obligation, increasing
the debt, then we really need to
[1:21:41] scrutinize all every single dollar
that's going out because every single
[1:21:44] dollar that's wasted by a government was
a dollar that was earned by a taxpayer.
[1:21:49] And so for that simple reason, um like I
said, knowing what I know about the
[1:21:55] money that's going out of the city's
budget every year, um I think we need to
[1:22:01] redo the way that we approach budget
season at the beginning of the year. Um
[1:22:06] I think and I'm going to ask that we
start televising the budget workshops
[1:22:09] like we do the meetings because I think
it's important for transparency. the
[1:22:13] public is they're they're talking about
it and they are saying we want
[1:22:18] transparency. We want to know what's
going on and we want to know where our
[1:22:21] money is being spent. And I think that
it's important for us to answer the call
[1:22:26] and say, "Okay, we're going to make
these things public and more trans in an
[1:22:30] effort to be more transparent." And so I
think that um
[1:22:35] because of the things that I've seen and
the discussions that we've had during
[1:22:39] the workshops, I'm uncomfortable
increasing the tax rate at all and I'm
[1:22:43] going to vote no and I encourage my
fellow council members to do the same.
[1:22:47] » I like to say I agree with with
televising the workshops or streaming or
[1:22:51] whatever you call it. I think it'd be a
great help to folks that are coming in
[1:22:55] the last minute. I like that idea.
Any
[1:23:06] other questions or comments?
[1:23:12] Mayor move to approve ordinance 26U to
adopt and levy adarm tax rate for tax
[1:23:18] year 2026 FY27 commencing October 1st
2026 and ending September 30th 2027 be
[1:23:26] adopted at a rate of
695 per $100 evaluation second.
[1:23:34] » Thank you. Please vote.
[1:23:38] Motion passes with Daiser and Salter
voting no.
[1:23:42] » Thank you. Um
next we will uh consider item I if any
[1:23:49] requests from individual council members
for any items to be placed on the
[1:23:52] upcoming agendas.
Member Davis.
[1:23:58] » Um I'd like to have the budget workshops
televised for the public um in the
[1:24:03] future and I want to discuss how we can
do that.
[1:24:07] Uh, I would like to recommend a
[clears throat] agenda item that's just
[1:24:11] a discussion of how council feels about
a flock camera system, not to take
[1:24:17] action on our contract or um, make any
current changes, just to have an open
[1:24:23] discussion with that the public can, you
know, speak their mind and allow them to
[1:24:28] hear where we stand on the software
system.
[1:24:31] » Thank you.
>> Nothing, mayor. No, sir. No, mayor.
[1:24:35] » No, mayor.
>> Thank you.
[1:24:38] » Okay, next we will move to reports from
the city manager.
[1:24:42] » Yes, mayor and council. The recreation
center will be open on Labor Day from
[1:24:45] 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. However, all
other non-emergency city offices will be
[1:24:50] closed for Labor Day. Uh, the next
coffee with the cops will be held at
[1:24:54] Texas Advantage Bank on Tuesday,
September 8th at 8 8:00 a.m. Uh, on
[1:25:00] Saturday, September 19th 19th from 10:00
a.m. to 2 p.m. the Hispanic Heritage
[1:25:05] Fiesta will be held in downtown Alvin.
Uh, there will be vendors and
[1:25:10] performances throughout the day. Uh,
Mayor Dammy will be delivering the Alvin
[1:25:14] State of the City address on Tuesday,
October 6 at 11:30 a.m. at Heights
[1:25:19] Baptist Church. And lastly, October 10th
from 8:00 a.m. to 1 p.m. is the Great
[1:25:25] Alvin Cleanup located on the ACC parking
lot 9. And that's all I have, Mayor.
[1:25:31] » Thank you, sir.
Okay. Next, we've got items of community
[1:25:35] interest. Uh, we'll start on the other
side. Councilman Gerve.
[1:25:39] » No, mayor.
>> No, mayor.
[1:25:40] » No, sir. I want to reiterate that
comment earlier about uh broadcasting
[1:25:45] the workshops. They're currently are
open. The [clears throat] public can't
[1:25:48] attend them and they're and they're
published in advance just like the
[1:25:50] council meeting is. So, they've always
been available, but additionally, it'd
[1:25:54] be nice to have them streamed. I just
want to clarify that.
[1:26:00] » Anything?
>> October 17th is the Alvin Volunteer Fire
[1:26:03] Department and Alvin EMS open house at
station 1 from 10 to 2. October 17th.
[1:26:12] Uh, Saturday, September 12th, Alvin
College is having a career connection
[1:26:16] fiesta from 9 to 12.
>> Awesome. Thank you. All right. Uh, next
[1:26:22] we will adjourn into executive session
under section 551.871 871 of the Texas
[1:26:29] government code which provides as
follows for deliberation regarding
[1:26:32] commercial or financial information that
the governmental body has received from
[1:26:35] a business prospect that the
governmental body seeks to have locate,
[1:26:39] stay or expand in or near the territory
of the governmental body and which the
[1:26:44] governmental body is conducting economic
development negotiations. So with the
[1:26:48] time being 8:12 p.m. we are going to
adjourn into executive session.
[1:27:05] Hold
[1:27:09] [music]
[1:27:17] [music]
on.
[1:27:22] [music]
[1:27:28] [music]
[1:27:39] » [music]
[1:27:49] [music]
[1:27:52] » I said
[1:28:00] » [music]
[1:28:22] [music]
[1:28:55] [music]
[1:29:06] [music]
[1:29:18] [music]
[1:29:25] [music]
[1:29:32] » I don't know what
[1:29:36] [music]
[1:29:44] [music]
[1:29:48] [music]
[1:29:59] » [music]
[1:30:10] [music]
[1:30:21] » Wow.
[1:30:27] Hallelujah. [music]
[1:30:58] Awesome.
[1:31:05] [music]
[1:31:17] [music]
[1:31:23] » [music]
[1:31:34] » I'm sorry.
[music]
[1:31:42] [music]
[1:31:50] » [music]
[1:31:55] [music]
[1:31:58] » I know.
[music]
[1:32:11] [music]
[1:32:36] It is 8:31. I'm sorry, it was not at
8:17 p.m. We are going to reconvene back
[1:32:41] into open session. There is no action
coming out of exe executive session.
[1:32:46] Therefore, in May 17, we are ajourned.