* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] GOOD MORNING. WELCOME TO THE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COUNCIL. COMMITTEE MEETING. COMMITTEE MEETING. EXCUSE ME. COUNCIL MEMBER COURAGE PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER TREVINO. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER ROCHA GARCIA. HERE, CITIZEN MEMBER SOTO AND CITIZEN MEMBER TREVINO CHAIR. WE HAVE A QUORUM. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE 17TH OF DECEMBER, LAST MEETING OF THE YEAR. UH, WE'VE GOT, UH, A PRETTY LENGTHY AGENDA. I THINK THERE'S A TOTAL OF 19 ITEMS. UH, BUT MANY OF THESE I KNOW OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK OVER AND MAYBE, UH, SEND ANY QUESTIONS, UH, TO OUR CITY STAFF. SO WE'VE GOT, UH, MANY OF THESE ON CONSENT, [1. 19-8777 Approval of the minutes from the Audit & Accountability Committee meeting on November 19, 2019] BUT LET'S GO AHEAD AND BEGIN WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 19TH AND NOVEMBER. APPROVE SECOND. OKAY. IT'S A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF, UH, NOVEMBER 19TH. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED. [CONSENT AGENDA] UH, WE HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA FIRST, AND IT CONSISTS OF PRES SOLICITATION, HIGH PROFILE ITEMS, UH, NUMBERS TWO THROUGH 10, AND THEN POST POSTS SOLICITATION, HIGH PROFILE ITEMS, NUMBERS 11 THROUGH 17. UH, THEN WE ALSO HAVE, UH, TWO ITEMS FOR, UH, INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. SO AT THIS TIME, UH, I HOPE THAT ALL OF THE MEMBERS, UH, HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. UNFORTUNATELY, TWO OF OUR CITIZEN REPRESENTATIVES, UH, MAY NOT MAKE IT. UH, I KNOW ONE HAS SAID SHE WOULDN'T BE HERE AND THE OTHER WAS KIND OF RUNNING LATE. SO OBVIOUSLY THOUGH WE DO HAVE A BOARD MAJORITY, SO WE HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT ANY MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO PULL FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ON ONE ITEM. OKAY. QUESTIONS? WELL, WELL, WHY DON'T WE PULL THAT ONE ITEM. I DON'T THINK IT'LL BE TOO HARD TO DO. ITEM, ITEM 16. ITEM 16. OKAY. ANY OTHER ITEMS? OKAY. THEN, UH, WITH THE, UH, WITH THE ITEM 16 BEING, UH, PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, UH, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ALL ITEM, ALL ITEMS, UH, TWO THROUGH 17, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM 16 ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA. DO I HEAR A MOTION? OKAY. MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OKAY. AND NONE OPPOSED. SO, UH, THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND GO INTO OUR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. [16. 19-9075 AU19-F06 Follow-up Audit of SAPD Detention Center] AND LET'S GO AHEAD AND START OFF WITH ITEM 16. AND, UH, THAT'S A FOLLOW-UP AUDIT ON SS A P D DETENTION CENTER. AND, UH, KEVIN, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE US A QUICK REVIEW ON THAT, OR DO YOU WANT TO JUST ASK JUST THE QUESTION? OKAY. LET THE COUNCILMAN BRING A QUESTION. THANK YOU, CHAIR. UM, KEVIN, ON THE, THE ITEM THAT I HAVE, IT TALKS ABOUT HOW THE DETENTION CENTER HAS IMPLEMENTED EFFECTIVE CONTROLS TO ENSURE MEDICAL EVALUATIONS ARE PERFORMED AND DOCUMENTED BY DETENTION CENTER AND OR MEDICAL STAFF. CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND AND OR MEDICAL STAFF, LIKE, DO WE EMPLOY MEDICAL STAFF? LIKE HOW DOES THAT WORK? OR MAYBE HELP MANY TOTAL EMPLOYEES? I WAS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. I'M GOING TO ASK FOR SOME HELP, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE, IF NOT EMPLOYED, THEY'RE ON CALL MEDICAL STAFF. I BELIEVE IT'S A, A PARTNERSHIP WITH UNIVERSITY, UH, HOSPITAL SYSTEM. AND SO IF ANYBODY, UH, ANY DETAINEE, IF THERE'S A, AN OBVIOUS INJURY OR THEY CLAIM TO HAVE AN INJURY OR AN ILLNESS, THEY'RE THEN EVALUATED BY MEDICAL STAFF, UH, EITHER ONSITE OR IN SOME CASES THEY'LL SEND THEM TO A MEDICAL FACILITY. AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT PARTNERSHIP IS WITH THE UNIVERSITY, UM, MEDICAL SYSTEM WITHIN SAN ANTONIO. DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES BY ANY CHANCE FOR THEM TO GET CHECKED? LIKE IF SOMEBODY SAYS I'M ILL? NO, MA'AM. SORRY. I DO NOT. IT'S OKAY. UM, AND THEN ALSO YOU IDENTIFIED TWO ACTION PLANS THAT HAD NOT BEEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED. DO YOU KNOW WHEN THEY WILL BE IMPLEMENTED? THEIR MANAGEMENT RESPONSE INDICATED, I BELIEVE THAT IT WILL BE DONE BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, SO WITHIN, WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS. AND THOSE WERE, UH, BOTH HAD TO DO WITH USE. ONE WAS WITH USER ACCESS TO ENSURE THAT, UH, ONLY PEOPLE THAT NEEDED ACCESS TO THEIR SYSTEM HAD ACCESS. AND WITH THE SHIFT, WITH THE, UH, DETENTION PROCESS AND MAGISTRATION WITH BEXAR COUNTY, THERE WERE STILL SEVERAL BEXAR COUNTY EMPLOYEES WHO HAD ACCESS TO THAT SYSTEM. SO THAT'S THE PRIMARILY PART OF THAT REVIEW TO MAKE SURE, IF THEY DO, THAT'S GREAT, BUT MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THEY NEED THE ACCESS. OKAY. GOOD. AND THEN THE, THE LAST ONE ON THIS IS, UM, THE LENGTH OF CUSTODY FOR ARRESTEES, UM, PRIOR TO THE TRANSFER IS EXCESSIVE. WHAT [00:05:01] DID THEY SAY THEY WERE GOING TO DO ABOUT THAT? OR HOW ARE THEY HANDLING THAT? WELL, THAT, PRIOR TO IN THE FIRST AUDIT, IT WAS EXCESSIVE. IT WAS OVER 18 HOURS. IT'S NOW, IT'S AVERAGING ABOUT SIX HOURS. OKAY. UH, WITHIN THE DETENTION CENTER BEFORE THEY'RE TRANSFERRED OR RELEASED. AND THAT SIX HOUR AVERAGE HAS BEEN CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT THIS YEAR. THAT WAS DOWN TO SIX HOURS IN JANUARY, AND IT'S BEEN CONSISTENT MONTH OVER MONTH WITH A PLUS OR MINUS, UH, SIX HOURS. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU, KEVIN. THANK YOU, CHAIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, THEN, UH, WE WOULD NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AUDIT. OKAY. OKAY. SECOND. OKAY, MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. UH, NONE OPPOSED. SO, ITEM 16 IS APPROVED. [18. 19-8990 Sale of Continental Hotel Property [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; John Jacks, Director, Center City Development & Operations] (Part 1 of 2)] NOW LET'S GO TO, UH, ITEM 18 POSTS SOLICITATION HIGH PROFILE BRIEFING. THIS IS REGARDING THE SALE OF THE, UH, CONTINENTAL HOTEL PROPERTY. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS VERONICA GARCIA. I'M THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR CENTER CITY DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT, AND I'M EXCITED TO TALK ABOUT THE SALE OF THE CONTINENTAL HOTEL PROPERTY. GOOD MORNING, BRIAN. GOOD MORNING. LET'S SEE NEXT. SO THE, UM, THIS FALL, THE CITY ISSUED A COMPETITIVE PROPOSAL FOR THE SALE AND REDEVELOPMENT OF OUR CITY OWNED BUILDING AND THE ADJACENT PARKING LOT LOCATED ON 1.08 ACRES AT 3 22 WEST COMMERCE. THIS R F P PROCESS PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DEVELOPERS TO DEMONSTRATE THEIR INTEREST IN REDEVELOPING THE PROPERTY FOR MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING TO MEET THE NEEDS OF DOWNTOWN LIVING, WHICH MAY INCLUDE FUTURE STUDENTS, FACULTY, AND STAFF OF UTSA'S EXPANDING DOWNTOWN CAMPUS. THE PROPERTY SALE WAS VALUED AT $4.7 MILLION, WHICH IS BASED ON A 2015 APPRAISAL OF THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. IT'S ALSO WITHIN THE MAIN MILITARY PLAZA HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND IT'S WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF ARIZONA GURA. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG WEST COMMERCE BETWEEN SOUTH LAREDO, AND IT'S ADJACENT TO THE SAN PEDRO CREEK CULTURE PARK. IT'S WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO PHASE ONE OF UTSA'S DOWNTOWN CAMPUS EXPANSION, WHICH IS EXPECTED TO ADD OVER 3000 FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENTS TO THE AREA WITHIN THE NEXT 10 YEARS. THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS A THREE STORY BRICK AND LIMESTONE BUILDING CONSTRUCTED IN 1896 AS A HOTEL IN 1984. IT WENT EXTENSIVE RENOVATIONS, WHICH TRANSFORMED THE INTERIOR INTO OFFICES AND LAB SPACE FOR THE CITY'S METROPOLITAN HEALTH DISTRICT. AND IT HAS BEEN VACANT SINCE METRO HEALTH RELOCATED IN 2016. THE R F P ASKED DEVELOPERS TO MAXIMIZE HOUSING DENSITY ON THE SITE, WHICH MAY HAVE INCLUDED INCOME RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE UNITS. WE ALSO WERE ANTICIPATED NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR, AND ASKED DEVELOPERS TO PROVIDE PARKING SOLUTIONS, WHICH MAY HAVE INCLUDED OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC PARKING ON THE SITE. IN TOTAL, THE INTERIOR IS ABOUT 39,600 SQUARE FEET. THE FINANCE AND AUDIT DEPARTMENTS CONDUCTED DUE DILIGENCE AND NOTIFIED ABOUT 190 VENDORS OF THE R F P SOLICITATION. 20 VENDORS ATTENDED TWO DIFFERENT PRE-SUBMIT CONFERENCES, WHICH WERE HELD ON SEPTEMBER 23RD, AND AGAIN ON OCTOBER 2ND, WE, THE CITY, RECEIVED A TOTAL OF ONE RESPONSE, WHICH MET ALL OF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN THE R F P. AND THE DUE DILIGENCE CONDUCTED BY FINANCE AND AUDIT RESULTED IN NO FINDINGS. THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE CONSISTED OF LORI HOUSTON, OUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, VERONICA MENDEZ FROM U T S A, PAOLA, SOPHIA FERNANDEZ FROM ABEL CITY, ANDREW OZUNA WITH BROADWAY BANK, MATT BROWN FROM CENTRAL SAN ANTONIO, AND CORINA GREEN FROM ZACHARY HOSPITALITY. THIS COMMITTEE MET ON DECEMBER 3RD THIS YEAR, AND BY CONSENSUS RECOMMENDS AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE SOLE RESPONSIVE BIDDER. THIS ITEM IS SCHEDULED FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ON JANUARY 16TH NEXT YEAR. UH, WE'RE VERY EXCITED. OUR, OUR DEPARTMENT WORKING WITH ALL THESE OTHER DEPARTMENTS HAS BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT FOR VARIOUS YEARS. SO WE'RE EXCITED, UM, TO WORK ON THE SALE OF THE PROJECT AND WELCOME ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. UH, THANK YOU, VERONICA. UH, IS THERE A SALES PRICE THAT'S BEEN DETERMINED YET? YES, THEY DID PROPOSE $4.7 MILLION, WHICH WAS THE MINIMUM. OKAY. UM, I HAVE A, A CONCERN AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE USING A FIVE YEAR OLD EVALUATION AT THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OF 4.7, YOU SAID 2015. 2015. WE'VE SEEN TREMENDOUS THINGS HAPPEN IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. MM-HMM. , I WOULD'VE ASSUMED PROPERTY VALUES WOULD'VE [00:10:02] GONE UP CONSIDERABLY IN THAT FIVE YEAR PERIOD. WHY WAS THERE NOT A, A MARKET VALUE, UH, ASSESSED BEFORE THIS PROPERTY WAS OFFERED? SO WE JUST WENT WITH THE PROPOSAL WE HAD ON STAFF, AND WE DID ISSUE AN R F I BACK IN 2015, AND WE WERE NOT GETTING, UM, THE INTEREST FOR THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL AT THE TIME. SO, UM, THAT'S WHY THIS TIME WE DID HAVE THAT MINIMUM VALUE. AND I THINK ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'VE SEEN KIND OF COME TO FRUITION ON THE SITE KIND OF TRUED UP THAT, UH, APPRAISAL THAT WE HAD. HOW MUCH MONEY HAS THE CITY, CITY PUT INTO THAT BUILDING OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS OR SO? I, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. WE CAN CERTAINLY GET THAT FOR YOU, UM, BASED ON ALL THE RENOVATIONS WE'VE DONE AT THE SITE. MM-HMM. . YEAH, I'M REALLY NOT VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THIS MYSELF. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE COMMITTEE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW, COUNCILMAN, WE, WE, WE HAVE FURTHER INSIGHT ONTO THE MARK WHY THEY DOES NOT MARKET VALUE. WELL, I'M GLAD FOR ANY OTHER INSIGHT. AND COUNCILMAN, I JUST WANNA MENTION THAT TYPICALLY WHEN WE, UH, LOOK AT MARKET VALUE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SELLING A PROPERTY AND FEE AND HAVING THE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS ALONG WITH ZONING, BUT, BUT NO OTHER REQUIREMENTS. IN THIS CASE, WE'RE PUTTING OUT AN R F P AND WE'RE PUTTING OUT WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND OTHER, OTHER DETERMINANT FACTORS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT A MARKET RATE PRICE FOR THE PROPERTY. MM-HMM. , I KNOW THAT YOU SAID MIXED USE IN HOUSING, RIGHT? WHAT KIND OF AFFORDABILITY FACTOR WAS RECOMMENDED OR ASKED FOR IN THE R F P? SO WE DIDN'T HAVE A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, BUT WE DID ASK DEVELOPERS TO CONSIDER AN OFFER BOTH A MIX OF MARKET RATE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND, UM, I DON'T THINK I CAN GO INTO DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL ITSELF, BUT THEY DID MEET THE REQUESTS THAT THEY INCLUDE A MIX OF INCOME UNITS. WELL, UH, I'LL DETER, AND WE ARE STILL, THIS DOESN'T GO TO COUNCIL UNTIL JANUARY 16TH, SO IT HAS A PRETTY QUICK TURNAROUND. SO WE WILL STILL BE NEGOTIATING WITH THE DEVELOPER ON THE TERMS. BUT, UM, BUT AS THE RAY AND ANDY POINTED OUT, UM, WE DO HAVE OUR, HAVE REQUESTS OR RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT THEY DO ON THE SITE. SO THAT IS REFLECTED IN THE SALE PRICE THAT WE RECEIVED, BECAUSE WE ARE ASKING THEM TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ALL OF THAT IN THEIR PROPOSAL. COUNCILMAN VINNO. THANK YOU, CHAIR. UM, AND I, I THINK, I THINK THE CHAIR IS ASKING, UH, FOR, FOR MORE INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT, WHAT THE, WHAT THE REQUEST WAS. SO AS YOU'RE, YOU'RE SAYING RIGHT NOW, YOU CAN'T ACTUALLY TELL US THE, WHAT THE PROPOSAL INCLUDED, WHAT, WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS, IS THAT CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO, I MEAN, THIS IS KIND OF THE, THE VERY THING I FIND PROBLEMATIC AND WHICH IS WHY WE, WE WENT THROUGH THAT WHOLE EXERCISE ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, HOW WE CAN GET MORE INFORMATION IN THE PROCESS. AND, AND I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT WHAT THIS AUDIT COMMITTEE SEES, AND THEN OF COURSE, WHAT IT DOESN'T SEE. AND HERE'S JUST A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF HOW WE, WE ARE REALLY NOT SEEING THIS, UH, WE'RE, SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, AND HERE'S, I GUESS A QUESTION FOR, FOR KEVIN OR, OR ANDY, IS, IS WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING REQUESTED OF THIS COMMITTEE IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE APPROVING? BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO IS JUST APPROVE THE PROCESS ITSELF. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S, THERE, THERE WAS SOME PREDETERMINED OR, OR INFORMATION THAT AT LEAST THAT PART OF THE PROCESS COULD BE REVEALED TO THIS AUDIT COMMITTEE. IS THAT CORRECT? SOMEBODY WANNA ANSWER THAT? YES. UH, YOU'RE RIGHT, COUNCILMAN THAT THE, UH, CHARGE OF THIS COMMITTEE IS TO LOOK AT THE PROCESS, UH, IN TERMS OF THE, UH, R F P AND, AND, AND IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE PROCESS AND, AND MAKING SURE IT IS A FAIR PROCESS AS OUTLINED IN THE, UH, CHARTER AND, UH, ORDINANCES THAT GOVERN THE PROCESS. UM, THAT'S WHAT THE CHARGE IS. BUT OBVIOUSLY, YES, YOU CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AS TO, UM, HOW THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED AND WHAT INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED OR NOT OBTAINED. AND, AND SO THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE TO ASK QUESTIONS ON THAT. OKAY. THEN I GOT, SO LET ME ASK THAT QUESTION. MM-HMM. , WHAT, WHAT WERE THE REQUIREMENTS? WHAT, WHAT WAS SURE, WHAT WAS ASKED AND HOW WAS THAT COMMUNICATED TO THE RESPONDENTS? SURE. SO WE DID COME, UH, FOR A PRES SOLICITATION TO THE SAME COMMITTEE AND BRIEFED THE OUTLINE OF WHAT THOSE REQUIREMENTS WERE. SO IT ASKED DEVELOPERS TO INCLUDE, UM, A MIXED INCOME PROJECT. WE DIDN'T SPECIFY ANY SPECIFIC AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY HAD TO MEET, BUT WE DID ASK THEM TO CONSIDER MIXED INCOME OPTIONS, BOTH MARKET RATE AND AFFORDABLE. SO IT'S UP TO THE DEVELOPERS TO PROPOSE WHAT THAT AFFORDABILITY MIX LOOKS LIKE. UM, WE ALSO ASKED THEM TO CONSIDER, UM, DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROJECT ON THE SITE. SO THAT MEANS GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, AND WE DID PROVIDE IDEAS OF WHAT THEY COULD DO, REFILL, YOU KNOW, COFFEE SHOPS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT WE DIDN'T SPECIFY WHAT THE RETAIL [00:15:01] HAD TO BE, JUST THAT THE GROUND FLOOR SHOULD CONSIDER RETAIL USES. SO TELL, LEMME, LET'S START, LET'S PART FOR A MINUTE ON THE, ON THE, UM, THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING. HOW DID YOU EVALUATE THAT? SO WE JUST ASKED THEM TO PROVIDE A RESPONSE, WHICH THIS BIDDER DID, AND THEY DID INCLUDE, UM, AN AFFORDABILITY MIX WITHIN THEIR PROPOSAL. AGAIN, I CAN'T GO INTO THE DETAILS OF WHAT THAT MIX WAS, BUT, UM, THAT WAS, WELL, WELL, THIS, SPEAKING TO THE PROCESS IS, I THINK THE QUESTION IS REALLY, UM, OH, WHY DIDN'T WE SAY THIS MANY AT 80%? OR THIS MANY AT 60%? WELL, HOW DO, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, I GUESS IT'S SOUNDING A LOT LIKE WE'RE, WE'RE, WE ONLY HAVE ONE RESPONDENT. SO AT, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD, THEY COULD SAY, WELL, WE, WE THREW IN ONE UNIT. AND IS IS THAT, IS THAT SOMEHOW AN ACCEPTABLE PART OF THE PROCESS? AND I GUESS I'M, I'M, I'M KIND OF CONFUSED IF WE DID NOT SET ANY KIND OF PARAMETERS, THEN, HOW WAS THIS EVALUATED? SO THE PROJECT, UM, THEY HAD TO PROPOSE THE MINIMUM SALE PRICE, WHICH THIS PROPOSAL DID INCLUDE. AND THE REASON FOR NOT OUTLINING SPECIFIC AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS 'CAUSE IT COULD AFFECT THE SALE PRICE. AND SO THIS PROPOSAL WAS IN, EVALUATED IN ITS ENTIRETY. SO THE PROPOSED SALE PRICE, ALONG WITH THE UNIT MIX, THE NUMBER OF UNITS AND THE AFFORDABILITY MIX THAT INCLUDED, WAS ALL EVALUATED IN TOTALITY BY THE COMMITTEE. SO, UM, THE POINT OF THE ROOFING IS TO SAY THAT THEY DID MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS THEY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL USES AT THE SITE. THEY PROPOSED, UM, A MIX OF AFFORDABILITY AT THE SITE. THEY DID INCLUDE, UH, RETAIL, GROUND FLOOR RETAIL ON THE SITE. THEY DID MEET THE REQUIREMENTS WHERE YOU ARE TO CONSIDER THE DESIGN OF THE SURROUNDINGS BUILDING, UM, PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AMENITIES, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA. SO ALL OF THAT WAS LOOKED AT AS WELL IN THE PROPOSAL. AND IT WAS OUTLINED IN THE R F P RE REMIND ME WHO WAS ON THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE? AGAIN? IT WAS LORI HOUSTON, IT WAS ALSO VERONICA MENDEZ FROM U T S A, PAOLA, SOPHIA FERNANDEZ. SHE'S AN ARCHITECT WITH ABEL CITY, A ANDREW OZUNA. HE IS THE VP OF COMMERCIAL LENDING AT BROADWAY BANK. MATT BROWN WITH CENTRO SAN ANTONIO IS HER C E O AND CORINA GREEN, SHE IS WITH DEVELOPMENT AT ZACHARY HOSPITALITY. AND THEN WE HAD SEVERAL ADVISORY MEMBERS, UM, ON THE PANEL AS WELL, INCLUDING MYSELF. UM, I GUESS, I GUESS WE'RE, WE'RE, I'M, I THINK I HAVE TO JOIN MY, MY CHAIR ON THIS. IT, IT, IT, IT, I FEEL A LITTLE STUCK IN KIND OF UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS IF, IF THERE'S ONE RESPONDENT AND MM-HMM. AND NO MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OR WELL, OR SENSE FOR WHAT THE EVALUATION IS, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE EVALUATION TEAM ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR? SURE. SO HOW, HOW DO WE, HOW DO WE JUDGE THIS PROCESS? RIGHT? SO WE LOOKED AT, UM, THE DEVELOPER DID HEDGE FOR RIDE PERFORMANCE. SO WE LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, DID IT LOOK LIKE A FEASIBLE PROJECT? THEY WERE ABLE TO PROPOSE A, UM, A P F C DEAL WHERE THEY COULD, THAT WAS AN OPTION. SO THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE LOOKED AT THAT AS PART OF THE PROFORMA. AND WE DID LOOK AT THE, UM, AFFORDABILITY MIX OFFERED BY THE DEVELOPER. AGAIN, I CAN'T DISCLOSE WHAT THAT MIX WAS, BUT THAT WAS CONSIDERED BY THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE. BUT YOU SAID, SO THEY'RE INCLUDING THE P F C MIX. I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN SAY WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE, BUT DEVELOPERS WERE ASKED TO CONSIDER THAT THAT WAS AN OPTION, THAT THEY COULD LOOK AT THAT, AND THEN THE CITY DID PROPOSE IN THE R F P THAT IF THE DEVELOPER WAS GONNA REQUEST ANY KIND OF CITY INCENTIVES, THAT THEY HAD TO INCLUDE THAT IN THEIR PROPOSAL AS WELL. I'M ONLY ASKING THAT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT IF YOU SAY THAT THERE ARE SOME STANDARDS THAT WE AND THE PFC HAVE YES. REGARDING THAT. AND SO AT LEAST THAT LETS US UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE SOME, THAT THERE IS AT AT LEAST SOME LEVEL OR INDICATION THAT, THAT THE MIX IS, IS, UH, IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE COULD SUPPORT. SURE. UH, WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT JUST BEING TECHNICALLY CORRECT, BUT WE'RE IN LINE WITH SOME OF OUR GOALS, UH, OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO, TO, UH, TO ACCOMPLISH WITH HOUSING. IF I MAY, COUNCILMAN, MAY, MAY I CHAIRMAN SPEAK. YEAH. UM, UNDER THE NEW, UH, PROCESS THAT, UH, WE'RE FOLLOWING TERMS OF DIVULGING, WHO IS GONNA, WHO WAS THE WINNER IN THIS, UH, PROCESS? THE COUNCIL WILL KNOW FRIDAY, I'M TOLD WHO THE PERSON IS. AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE'S STILL NEGOTIATIONS GOING ON. AND SO WHEN THAT, UH, ENTITY IS DIVULGED, YES, YOU, I THINK INPUT CAN BE PROVIDED AS TO FURTHER NEGOTIATIONS AND EXPECTATIONS OF COUNSEL. WELL, LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION. I'M SORRY, CHAIR. JUST ONE MORE QUESTION AHEAD. NO, ONE MORE QUESTION. GO AHEAD. NO PROBLEM. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, UM, [00:20:01] THIS COMMITTEE COULD SAY, COULD, COULD ALSO REQUEST THAT INSTEAD OF IT BEING A JANUARY 16TH, MAYBE IT'S ON THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEETING, JUST TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THIS. YES, YOU CAN DO THAT, COUNCILMAN. OKAY. SO I HAVE A QUESTION IF I MAY, BEFORE YOU MAKE ANY MOTION. OKAY. [Executive Session] UH, ANDY, IS IT, UH, POSSIBLE FOR US TO HAVE CLARITY IN AN EXECUTIVE SESSION WHERE THINGS CAN BE DISCUSSED THAT SHOULDN'T BE DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC SESSION, UH, IN TERMS OF THE DETAILS OF THE NEGOTIATION? YES. COUNCILMAN, WE CAN DO THAT. SO, YOU KNOW, I, I WOULD, YOU KNOW, ENTERTAIN IF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREE THAT MAYBE WE HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO GET A LITTLE MORE OF THE DETAIL, DETAIL FOR OUR UNDERSTANDING. OKAY. UH, YES, YOU CERTAINLY CAN DO THAT. THAT WOULD FALL UNDER THE REAL ESTATE EXEMPTION, UNDER THE, UH, TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. WELL, UH, I'D LIKE TO CALL AN EXECUTIVE MEETING. I THINK I HAVE, UH, AGREEMENT WITH THE, UH, OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO, UH, COULD WE GO AHEAD AND DO THAT? AND LET ME GO AHEAD AND, AND READ THIS STATEMENT. UH, THE TIME IS NOW 10:22 AM ON THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY GRANTED BY CHAPTER 5 5, 1 OF TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE V T C S, THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. AND THE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE WILL NOW RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, DISCUSS MATTERS PURSUANT TO TEXAS TO SECTION 5 51 0.071 CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY OVER FINANCIAL, UH, REAL ESTATE MATTERS. SO AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO ASK, UH, THE ROOM BE CLEARED, UH, EXCEPT FOR, UH, RELEVANT PERSONNEL AND, UH, THE CITY ATTORNEY. THANK YOU EVERYBODY. YEAH, THANK YOU. THE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE HAS COMPLETED ITS EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THE 17TH OF DECEMBER. IT IS NOW, UH, 10 39. UH, I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS AGENDA OF AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND THE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE, UH, OH, I'M SORRY. UH, WE ARE, WE HAVE RETURNED TO EXECUTIVE FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION AND NO ACTION WAS TAKEN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. [18. 19-8990 Sale of Continental Hotel Property [Lori Houston, Assistant City Manager; John Jacks, Director, Center City Development & Operations] (Part 2 of 2)] UH, AND SO NOW WE'RE READY TO CONTINUE WITH OUR NORMAL BUSINESS. AND I BELIEVE, UH, COUNCILWOMAN HAD A QUESTION SHE WANTED TO BRING UP. THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU, VERONICA, FOR THE PRESENTATION. SURE. I KNOW YOU ALREADY MENTIONED, UM, THE LIST AND WE HAVE THEM REFERENCED OF THE FOLKS WHO ARE ON THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE. CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE GETS PICKED? SURE. SO WE WANTED, UH, SEVERAL REPRESENTATIVES ON THE COMMITTEE THAT WOULD HAVE, UM, STAKEHOLDER INTEREST IN THE AREA. SO WE WERE SURE TO INCLUDE SOMEONE FROM U T S A. WE ALSO HAD THE C E O FROM CENTRAL SAN ANTONIO SINCE THE PROPERTY FALLS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES. AND WE INCLUDED, UM, AN ARCHITECT ON THE PANEL AS WELL AS, UM, SOMEONE FROM A VICE PRESIDENT OF A BANK TO HELP US ANALYZE THE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT. AND WE ALSO INCLUDED A STAKEHOLDER FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY. GREAT. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WAS CONSENSUS, UM, WITHIN THE COMMITTEE, AND I JUST, UM, CAN YOU HELP ME EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT OF THE PROCESS OF, UM, RECUSAL AND IF SOMEBODY FOR SOME REASON WOULD HAVE A, A, AN INTEREST, WHETHER IT BE NOW OR LATER ON HOW THAT'S HANDLED? SURE. WE DID HAVE ONE COMMITTEE MEMBER THAT DID DECIDE EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS TO RECUSE THEMSELF FROM THE COMMITTEE, UH, BECAUSE OF A POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST. UM, HE MIGHT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTNER ON THE PROJECT AT A LATER TIME. IT WASN'T NECESSARILY PART OF THIS PROPOSAL, BUT IT WAS CONTEMPLATED AS A FUTURE PARTNERSHIP. SO, UM, AFTER CONSULTING WITH OUR ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THAT INDIVIDUAL DID RECUSE HIMSELF. AND, UM, WE ALSO, UH, JUST ALSO TALKED TO ALL THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AT THE VERY START OF THE PROCESS, MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT'S CONDUCTED OUR PROCESS. THEY DO HAVE TO SIGN A CONFIDENTIALITY FORM, AND THEN THAT PROCESS IS MONITORED ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE, THE SOLICITATION REVIEW. GREAT. THANK YOU, VERONICA. THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS, CHAIR. THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN . THANK YOU, CHAIR. AND I'M JUST GONNA, UH, MOTION TO MOVE THIS TO FULL CITY COUNCIL FOR JANUARY 30TH. OKAY. OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR JANUARY 3RD. JANUARY 30TH. 30TH. THANK YOU. I SECOND. OKAY. AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR OF MOVING THIS TO COUNCIL, COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. MOTION OF THE JANUARY 30TH, SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AND NONE OPPOSED. CASE MOTIONS PASSED. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, [19. 19-9126 AU18-022 Audit of SAPD Body Worn Cameras] NOW WE'LL GO ON TO THE, UH, LAST ITEM THAT WE HAVE. IT'S A FINAL INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT. [00:25:01] IT'S ABOUT, UH, SAN ANTONIO POLICE DEPARTMENT BODY-WORN CAMERAS. AND SO, KEVIN, YES, SIR. UH, WE DID PERFORM AN AUDIT OF SS A P D, THE BODY-WORN CAMERA PROGRAM WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF THE AUDIT WAS TO DETERMINE IF THE, UH, BODY-WORN CAMERA INITIATIVE IS EFFECTIVE AND OPERATING AS INTENDED. AND JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, THE, UH, POLICE DEPARTMENT BEGAN PILOTING THE PROGRAM BACK IN 2014, AND THROUGH THE PILOTING AND, UH, SELECTING A VENDOR, THEY THEN DEPLOY THE, THE, UH, CAMERAS IN A PHASED IN APPROACH. AND BY MAY OF 2017, UH, ALL SS A P D OFFICERS, UH, THE DEPLOYMENT WAS COMPLETED. AND S A P D OFFICERS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED WITH BODY CAMERAS. UH, JUST AS SOME NUMBERS BACKGROUND, THERE'S OVER 2000 ACTIVE CAMERAS ASSIGNED TO S A P D OFFICERS, AND FOR THIS YEAR, THEY'LL BE WELL OVER HALF A MILLION HOURS OF BODY CAM FOOTAGE THAT'S GONNA BE RECORDED, UH, BY THESE OFFICERS. THE VIDEOS ARE STORED IN A CLOUD-BASED, UH, APPLICATION CALLED EVIDENCE.COM, WHICH GIVES THE, UH, S A P D UNLIMITED STORAGE CAPACITY. AND, AND IT'S REALLY A PRETTY ROBUST SYSTEM AS FAR AS AUDIT TRAILS, USER ACCESS, AND A LOT OF OTHER, UH, THINGS THAT THIS APPLICATION BRINGS TO THE, UH, TO THE, UH, TO THE PROCESS. UH, WITH, AS PART OF THE AUDIT, WE DID FIND THAT, UH, THE DEPLOYMENT IS EFFECTIVE, IT IS WORKING AS INTENDED. THERE IS, UM, TO THE POINT WE DID THIS AUDIT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY IN, IT WAS A VERY LONG AUDIT. IT WAS REALLY A COMPLEX AUDIT BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF DATA YOU THINK OF EVERY VIDEO THAT'S A DATA FILE, YOU THINK OF THE CAD SYSTEM WITH POLICE REPORTING AND DISPATCH RECORDS AS ADDITIONAL DATA FILES. AND SO IT WAS A COMPLEX AUDIT. FROM A DATA PERSPECTIVE, WE TOOK TWO POINTS WHERE WE LOOKED AT THE, THE BODY CAM VIDEO. ONE WAS BACK IN, UM, IN 2018. WE PICKED MARCH OF 20 18, 1 WEEK OF DATA AND VIDEO. THEN WE ALSO LOOKED AT APRIL, 2019. SO WE PICKED TWO WEEKS, UH, A YEAR APART, UH, TO LOOK AT THE USAGE OF THE CAMERA, AND THEN ALSO TO LOOK TO SEE IF WHAT CHANGES HAD BEEN DONE WITHIN THAT YEAR'S, UH, TIMEFRAME. AND WE LOOKED AT THINGS SUCH AS THE UPLOADING OF THE VIDEO, AND WE FOUND THAT 99.5% OF THE VIDEO IS UPLOADED WITHIN NINE DAYS. THE PROCEDURE, POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SAYS THAT IT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED WITHIN 14 DAYS. SO CLEARLY HITTING THAT ONE, THE EFFECTIVENESS OR THE USAGE OF THE, OF THE BODY CAMS. UH, BACK IN MARCH OF 2018, WE FOUND THAT 94.9% OF ALL COSTS FOR SERVICE, UH, HAD BODY CAM VIDEO ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. THAT NUMBER WENT UP A LITTLE BIT TO 96.3% IN APRIL OF 2019. SO AGAIN, THERE WAS A 95% WAS A PRETTY SOLID NUMBER, BUT IT'S CONTINUING TO IMPROVE AS THE, AS THE PROCESS CONTINUES, AND AS, UH, OFFICERS JUST GET, IT BECOMES TRULY PART OF THEIR DAY TO, TO PUT THAT BODY CAMERA ON. UH, ALSO, BETWEEN THOSE TWO TIMEFRAMES, THE QUALITY OF THE VIDEO ALSO INCLUDED. WHEN I SAY QUALITY, THAT'S IN TERMS OF, UH, IT BEING STARTED AT THE RIGHT TIME. IT'S NOT ENDING PREMATURELY WHEN THEY DO HAVE TO MUTE IT. AND THERE ARE LEGITIMATE REASONS TO MUTE OR TO TURN OFF THE VIDEO. IT NEEDS TO BE DOCUMENTED AS SUCH. AND THAT IS OCCURRING, UH, WITH MUCH MORE FREQUENCY. UH, MORE RECENTLY IN, IN THE ISSUES THAT WE LOOKED AT, UH, WE DID FIND A COUPLE OF AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT WITHIN THE PROCESS. UH, THE MAIN ONE, OR THE FIRST ONE BEING THE SUPERVISORY REVIEW OF THE BODY CAM VIDEO. UH, THERE IS A RULE OR POLICIES OUT THERE THAT AT LEAST ONCE A QUARTER, EVERY OFFICER SHOULD HAVE BODY CAM VIDEO, HIS VIDEO REVIEWED, UH, BY HIS SUPERVISOR OR SOMEONE IN THE COMMAND STAFF. AND WE FOUND THAT QUARTERLY COMPLIANCE OF THIS RULE WAS NOT CONSISTENT. UH, FOUND ISSUES WHERE SOME VIDEO WAS NOT BEING REVIEWED. THE LOGS OF THE VIDEO WERE NOT CONSISTENT IN MAINTAINING THE SAME INFORMATION, UH, REVIEWING OF THE WRONG QUARTER. UH, SO THAT COULD BE IMPROVED. WE ALSO THEN CONVERSELY FOUND SOME AREAS WHERE THE REVIEW WAS BEING DONE VERY WELL, AND THERE WAS DOCUMENTATION OF THE REVIEW, AND THERE WAS ALSO DOCUMENTATION OF, UH, CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE SUPERVISOR AND THE OFFICER OF WHAT THE, WHAT THE ISSUES WERE AND, AND THE CORRECTIVE ACTION, UH, THAT WAS TAKEN. BUT THE NON-COMPLIANCE RATE RANGE FROM 3.7% TO 7.4%. SO AGAIN, OVER 90% COMPLIANCE, BUT STILL THAT 7.4%. AND THE INCONSISTENCIES WE FOUND, UH, IS WE PUT THAT INTO THE REPORT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THAT PROCESS BE IMPROVED AND SUPERVISORS BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, UH, FOR ENSURING THAT THE, THE VIDEO IS REVIEWED OF THEIR, OF THEIR STAFF. THE OTHER ISSUE HAD TO DO WITH, UH, USER ACCESS CONTROLS. WE FOUND EXCESSIVE, UH, USERS ON THE SYSTEM. SOME OF THE USERS, UH, THAT WERE ON THE SYSTEM STILL HAD ACCESS, WERE NO LONGER EMPLOYEES. SO THAT JUST NEEDED TO BE CLEANED UP. UH, OTHER USERS, UH, 393 OR 3 83 OF THEM, THEY HAD NOT USED THE SYSTEM FOR OVER 90 DAYS. GENERALLY, THAT'S, THAT'S AN INDICATION. DO THEY REALLY NEED THE ACCESS? UH, THERE COULD BE CASES WHERE THEY NEED THE ACCESS, IT'S JUST THEY'RE OUT OR WHATEVER. BUT AGAIN, OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS IS TO TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE WHERE USERS HAVE NOT USED IT TO SEE IF THEY REALLY NEED THAT ACCESS. WE ALSO FOUND EXCESSIVE ADMINISTRATIVE PRIVILEGES, UH, TO THE, UH, WITH USERS. AND AGAIN, ADMINISTRATIVE [00:30:01] PRIVILEGES GENERALLY GIVE USERS SIGNIFICANT RIGHTS TO ADD USERS, TO DELETE USERS, TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO CONFIGURATION SETTINGS AND SUCH AS THAT. SO AGAIN, WITH THE EXCESSIVE ADMIN PRIVILEGES, UH, A RECOMMENDATION IS TO, FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, WORKING WITH I T SS D TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF, UM, USERS THAT HAD ACCESS TO THOSE PRIVILEGES. UH, AND ALSO IF IT WASN'T ADMIN PRIVILEGES THAT PEOPLE REALLY HAD ONLY WHAT THEY NEEDED AND NOT EXCESSIVE. AND THEN ONE LAST ONE WAS PASSWORD COMPLEX, UH, COMPLEXITY. UM, AGAIN, EVIDENCE.COM. AND WHAT WE LOOKED AT, THIS WAS A VERY GOOD SYSTEM, UH, VERY GOOD AUDIT TRAILS, VERY GOOD, UH, CONTROLS WITHIN THE SYSTEM. BUT ONE, UH, AREA WHERE IT WAS NOT IS THE ACTUAL PASSWORD TO LOG INTO THE SYSTEM. UH, IT DOES NOT MEET THE TYPICAL STANDARD PASSWORD REQUIREMENTS AND NOT THE CITY'S PASSWORD REQUIREMENTS. AGAIN, THIS IS A, A VENDOR ISSUE. AND SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO REQUEST THAT THE VENDOR AT THEIR NEXT RELEASE TO LOOK AT THAT AND JUST INCREASE THE COMPLEXITY, UH, OF THE PASSWORD. UH, AGAIN, THIS WAS A VERY LONG AUDIT, VERY COMPLEX AUDIT. WE WORKED WITH, UH, WITH THE CHIEF STAFF, UH, EXTENSIVELY IN THIS AUDIT. GOT GREAT SUPPORT FOR THEM. I THINK WE LEARNED A LOT ABOUT THAT SYSTEM AND THE DATA BEHIND IT. THEY LEARNED A LOT ABOUT THE DATA BEHIND THAT SYSTEM. SO IT WAS A GOOD, A GOOD PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH. THE CHIEF AND HIS STAFF HAVE ADDRESSED ALL THESE ISSUES, UH, WITH CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS, AND CERTAINLY HE'S AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE, OR I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE AUDIT. SO THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU KEVIN. WELCOME, CHIEF. HOW YOU DOING TODAY? YOU WARM IN HERE? I GOT MY LONG JOHNS ON. YES. GOOD. UH, COUNCILWOMAN HAD A QUESTION? YES. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS ACTUALLY. UM, SO THIS IS JUST IN GENERAL, UM, KEVIN, SO I WAS SURPRISED THAT MAYBE SOME OF OUR VENDORS OR MAYBE EVEN OUR SUBCONTRACTORS DO NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED PASSWORD REQUIREMENTS THAT WE DO. AND THAT'S JUST A, A HUGE CONCERN FOR ME IN GENERAL, NOT JUST FOR THIS, JUST IN GENERAL. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S, UM, ANY SORT, AND I, I, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WOULD BE THE PERSON TO ANSWER THIS, BUT I'M REALLY CONCERNED BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE CYBER ATTACKS THAT HAVE BEEN, UM, HITTING CITIES THAT MAYBE ARE SUBCONTRACTORS OR ANY OTHER PEOPLE MIGHT BE VULNERABLE WITHOUT THESE INCREASED PASSWORD, YOU KNOW, AND YES, GOOD POINT. BUT ALSO THAT, THAT PASSWORD INTO THE SYSTEM, THAT'S ONE LEVEL OF CONTROL. UH, IF I T S G WERE HERE, THEY'D BE TALKING ABOUT MULTIPLE LEVELS OF, OF USER ACCESS AND CONTROL. KEVIN, I'M BEHIND YOU AND CRAIG IS HERE. CRAIG, CAN YOU ANSWER ? THERE YOU ARE, SIR, GO AHEAD. I WANNA HEAR YOUR ANSWER. TELL ME WHEN IT'S, I LOVE IT. BUT, BUT THERE ARE MULTIPLE LAYERS OF SECURITY, AND THIS IS JUST ONE OF THOSE LAYERS. UH, THERE'S ALSO LAYERS WITHIN THIS APPLICATION. THEY HAVE TO BE IN THE APPLICATION FIRST THROUGH, UH, THE BODY CAM SYSTEM OR IN SOMETIMES JUST WINDOWS AUTHENTICATION TO GET TO THAT POINT. SO YOUR, YOUR POINT IS VERY VALID. WE'RE GONNA WORK WITH THE VENDOR AND ASK THE VENDOR TO IMPROVE THAT. UH, THERE'S PASSWORDS, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK OUR REQUIREMENTS ARE MINIMUM OF EIGHT CHARACTERS, UH, WITH SOME MULTIPLE CHARACTERS WITHIN THE, THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE VENDOR OF SIX, UH, CHARACTERS. SO THERE ARE SOME REQUIREMENTS JUST NOT AT THE LEVEL THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE. BUT I THINK THAT THE SHORT ANSWER IS THIS IS ONE LAYER IN THE SECURITY, UH, OF THIS SYSTEM. HAVE WE DONE AN AUDIT WITH THE OTHER VENDORS THOUGH? LIKE JUST IN GENERAL, EVERY VENDOR THAT THE CITY USE OR ANY, I CAN'T SPEAK TO EVERY, MOST OF THE TIMES WE DON'T. THIS ISN'T AN ISSUE. OKAY. I MEAN, THEY HAVE COMPLEX PASSWORDS THAT THEY MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS, OR AGAIN, EVERY SYSTEM IS DIFFERENT IN HOW WE ACCESS THAT SYSTEM. ALSO, IT MAY NOT BE A USER PASSWORD, IT COULD BE HARD CODED OR JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, SYSTEM TO SYSTEM COMMUNICATION. OKAY. BECAUSE I'M ASSUMING EVERYTHING THAT WE, UM, DEAL WITH SENSITIVE ISSUES, LIKE ANYTHING, FOR INSTANCE, HEALTH RELATED, HIPAA RELATED, WE, WE GOT THAT DOWN PAT. RIGHT. BUT I WAS JUST WONDERING ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE THAT MAYBE PEOPLE DON'T TRADITIONALLY DOES. IT'S SOMETHING WE LOOK AT WHEN WE DO THE AUDITS. OKAY. SO IF, IF IT, IF IT COMES UP AGAIN, YOU'LL HEAR ABOUT IT WITHIN AN AUDIT REPORT. WONDERFUL. OKAY. JUST CHECKING. I GET, OKAY. AND THEN THE SECOND, UM, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU HAVE FOR, UH, CHIEF, I, I, I'M HAPPY THAT WE HAVE THAT, UH, SUPERVISORS WILL REVIEW AT LEAST ONE VIDEO, UM, AND THAT THERE'S CRITERIA ESTABLISHED FOR A ME MEANINGFUL REVIEW CHIEF. HAS THAT BEEN DONE ALREADY? THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED FOR A MEANINGFUL REVIEW COUNSEL, AND I CAN ANSWER THAT, BUT I'M GONNA LET SERGEANT CHRIS LUTTON OKAY. UH, SPEAK TO THAT. HE'S A, UH, HE'S ASSIGNED TO, UH, PLANNING AND RESEARCH, UH, UNIT, AND, UH, SERGEANT LUTTON HAS DONE ALL OF THE HEAVY LIFTING FROM DAY ONE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BODY-WORN CAMERA PROGRAM. AND HE'S ALSO DONE ALL OF THE, THE, THE DOWN IN THE WEEDS STUFF AS FAR AS THE, UH, BODY-WORN CAMERA PROGRAM GOES. SO I WANNA LET, UH, I WANNA ASK CHRIS TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. THANK YOU TOO. YES, MA'AM. SO AFTER THE AUDIT WAS DONE, I WORKED WITH THE AUDITOR, UH, SUSAN VAN HUSER. UH, WE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS TO OUR COMMAND STAFF, AND ALL OF THOSE WENT INTO POLICY AT THE BEGINNING OF MONTH. OH, GREAT. OKAY. SO I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS ON THE MEANINGFUL RIGHT. [00:35:01] AND SO, WHICH TIES IN RIGHT TO THE THIRD RECOMMENDATION FROM THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE THAT, UH, SUPERVISORS PROVIDE A WRITTEN REASON WHY A VIDEO REVIEW IS NOT PERFORMED FOR SUBORDINATES IN ANY QUARTER. SO I'M ASSUMING THERE'S ALSO, UM, FROM WHAT YOU WORKED ON, THAT THERE'S SOME SORT OF, UM, I DON'T WANNA SAY REPRIMAND, BUT THERE'S SOME SORT OF, I DON'T KNOW, FOLLOW UP IF IT'S NOT DONE, OR IF IT'S NOT DONE SEVERAL TIMES. YES, MA'AM. THEY'LL, UH, IT'LL BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THEIR CHAIN OF COMMAND. UM, I TALKED WITH, AGAIN, SUSAN, I HAD HER IDENTIFY WHAT THEY BELIEVED WAS BEST PRACTICE FROM THE DOCUMENTS WE HAD PROVIDED TO 'EM. AND SO WE IMPLEMENTED THAT INTO OUR OVERALL PROCEDURE. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS, CHAIR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CHIEF. AND KRISTEN. YEAH. 1, 1, 1 OTHER THING JUST TO, IF I CAN ADD, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAD ASKED THE AUDITORS WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING, I THINK IT WAS THIS PARTICULAR AUDIT, WAS THAT WHEN YOU BRING VIOLATIONS, UH, TO POLICIES, BRING NAMES WITH THEM AS WELL. SO WE WILL BE ADDRESSING, UH, VIOLATIONS WITH THAT PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL AS OPPOSED TO JUST GETTING THE GENERAL INFORMATION THAT THERE WERE VIOLATIONS IN THE FUTURE. GREAT. THANK YOU, CHIEF. THANK YOU CHAIR. THANK YOU, CHAIRWOMAN. I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT, UH, I KNOW THESE, UH, BODY CAMERAS ARE SOMETHING THAT IT TAKES A WHILE FOR EVERYBODY TO ADAPT TO AND TO FULLY ADAPT. AND, UH, WE'VE SEEN INCREASES IN THEIR EFFECTIVENESS, THEIR USEFULNESS, UH, OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS ACCORDING TO THIS, UH, AUDIT. AND I'M APPRECIATIVE OF THAT. I DON'T EXPECT TO SEE A HUNDRED PERCENT, BUT WE HOPE TO CONTINUE TO SEE, UH, A GROWTH IN THE SUCCESS OF THESE AND THE USE OF THESE AND THE REVIEW OF THESE, YOU KNOW, FOR THE RECORD. OTHER THAN THAT, THOUGH, I, I THINK IT'S A PRETTY GOOD REVIEW. AND, UH, CHIEF, JUST GO FORWARD WITH THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, SO I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AUDIT. OKAY. IT'S BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO, UH, ACCEPT THE AUDIT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. OKAY. THERE'S, [Additional Item] UH, ONE OTHER ITEM THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF OUR ITEMS, HOWEVER, I NEGLECTED TO, UH, RECOGNIZE SOME PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS COMMITTEE, AND, UH, I WILL DO SO. HOPEFULLY IT WON'T TAKE MORE THAN A COUPLE OF MINUTES. UH, WE HAVE, UH, MS. ELLEN BURKEY, WHO I BELIEVE WANTED TO MAKE A CORRECTION TO THE MINUTES FROM A PREVIOUS MEETING, IF YOU'D LIKE TO DO THAT. MS. BURKEY, GO AHEAD. MS. BARKEY. GOOD MORNING CHAIRMAN. COURAGE AND AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE MEMBERS BEFORE COMPLIMENTING YOUR COMMITTEE'S. IMPORTANT ROLE IN PROMOTING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND POLICYMAKING BY CITY COUNCIL. I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A COUPLE OF CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 19 MEETING, AND IT HAS TO DO WITH CORRECTIONS TO THE OTHERS PRESENT THAT WERE NOT LISTED QUITE RIGHT OR NOT LISTED AT ALL. AND I'LL JUST GIVE YOU A COPY OF THAT. UM, AFTER I GET THROUGH SPEAKING, UM, THE, THE MAIN OMISSION WAS THE OMISSION OF COLLEEN WARING, WHO WAS PRESENT AND SPEAKING. AND, AND HER, UM, HER DESCRIPTOR WAS AS A VISTA RIDGE, AFFECTED LANDOWNER FROM MILO COUNTY, AND A RE RE A RETIRED DEPUTY CITY AUDITOR FROM AUSTIN, TEXAS. UM, FOR COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN PRESENT OR PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE, I AM A VISTA RIDGE COALITION RESOLUTION COALITION MEMBER. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ENDORSE WHAT STAN IS GONNA SAY AFTER I DO IN ADVANCE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO NOW JUST SAY A VERY FEW WORDS, UH, ABOUT TRANSPARENCY IN GOVERNMENT AND YOUR COMMITTEE'S ROLE IN THIS. UM, AND YOU HAVE DONE THIS VERY, VERY WELL BY ALLOWING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT DURING YOUR MEETINGS. AND THIS PRACTICE IS TOTALLY CONSISTENT WITH A RECENT LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS IN AUSTIN, WHICH BECAME LAW ON SEPTEMBER 1ST OF THIS YEAR. I AM SPEAKING OF HOUSE BILL 28 40, AUTHORED BY STATE REP CANALS. AMONG OTHER THINGS, HOUSE BILL 28 40 REQUIRES A GOVERNING BODY TO ALLOW PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE AND DURING ITS DELIBERATIONS, IN CONTRAST TO SOME TEXAS ENTITIES, WHICH WERE FORCING PEOPLE TO SIT THROUGH AN ENTIRE MEETING BEFORE BEING [00:40:01] ALLOWED TO SPEAK. AND I ENJOYED EVERY MINUTE OF THE DISCUSSION SO THAT I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU FOLKS TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO SPEAK UP WHILE URGING THIS COMMITTEE TO CONTINUE TO CONSIDER RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE VISTA RIDGE RESOLUTION AT UPCOMING MEETINGS. MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU ALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. PERKISS. AND YOUR POINTS ARE WELL TAKEN. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND REVIEW THOSE WITH OUR, UH, SECRETARY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CONSIDER MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO THOSE MINUTES AT A FUTURE, UH, MEETING. THANK YOU. UH, YES, MR. MITCHELL. UH, GOOD MORNING. AM I ON? YES. GOOD MORNING CHAIRMAN, COURAGE AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON BEHALF OF OUR VISTA RIDGE COALITION. UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE YOU ON SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS SINCE YOUR NOVEMBER 19TH MEETING AT WHICH YOU ALLOWED US TO SPEAK AT THAT, AT THAT TIME, WE REACHED BACK, YOU RECALL, TO THE 1992 CITY ORDINANCE NUMBER 75 6 86, WHICH ESTABLISHED SAWS SUBORDINATING THAT UTILITY TO THE CONTROL OF OUR ELECTED COUNCIL, FELLOW PRESENTERS, ELLEN BURKEY, COLLEEN WARING, AND NETTE KING SHARED OPTIONS FOR THE USE OF COUNCIL'S RESTORED POWERS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PLAN TO REVIEW THE MATTER WITH YOUR COMMITTEE, CITY STAFF, AND OTHERS. REACHING AGAIN INTO THE PAST, EVALUATING THE UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF VISTA RIDGE BY THE OCTOBER 20TH, 2014 COUNCIL. WE HAVE DEVELOPED A REFINED VIEW OF THE TWO ELEMENTS COMPETING FOR CONTROL OF THE VISTA RIDGE WATER SUPPLY PROJECT. MR. MITCHELL, I'M GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU. YES, SIR. AND I'LL ASK YOU TO EXCUSE MY INTERRUPTION. HOWEVER, WHAT YOU'RE MENTIONING TODAY IS NOT RELEVANT TO ANYTHING ON OUR AGENDA, UHHUH . UH, AND I WOULD PREFER ANYONE GIVING COMMENTS AS MS. BURKEY DID, RELEVANT TO THE MINUTES OF A MEETING, BUT YOU'RE GOING INTO OTHER TERRITORIES THAT YOU COULD SIMPLY MEET WITH ME OR OUR CITY ATTORNEY OR OTHER PEOPLE, RATHER THAN MAKING SUCH A FORMAL PRESENTATION BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. YES, SIR. SO, I'LL ASK YOU TO, UH, JUST DISCONTINUE AT THIS TIME. I SHALL PLEASE SEND FORWARD ANY, UH, WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION. I HAVE INFORMATION FOR YOUR REVIEW. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. AND I WOULD ASK EVERYBODY TO ALWAYS MAKE YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS RELATIVE TO OUR AGENDA ITEMS. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL. THANK YOU. AND, UH, TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT, . I. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.