Aug 02, 2016 City Council on 2016-08-02 1:00 PM

Also on Tuesday August the 2nd 2016 at 1 0 7 p.m. I apologize for the late start. Moving on to our first item on the agenda, citizens comments on consent agenda items. I see we have one card to speak on consent agenda item 4B. Brian Bentley if you'll come and state your name and address and your time will begin. Council my name is Brian Bentley 2528 Jamestown Lane, Dent on, Texas 76209. You'll have to excuse me I'm on a new medication and I have a very dry mouth. That's okay. Is the mic on? You might pull it. There you go . There you go. Thank you Brian. I'm gonna ask council to pull item 16902 off the consent agenda and I'm going to be specific on two reasons for that . I'm a member I got an email actually from the Denton Beekeepers Association because I have four beehives and then I noticed there's a change in this code according to dogs and the first problem is is the notice the public notice is not correct for the actual ordinance itself. The notice says it's going to be a 30 day change to 30 30 days but the ordinance is 30 business days. Well if it's 30 days on the notice but business days when I count up business days that ends up being about 42 plus days give or take holidays. So 42 days don't match 30 days in the notice and if if they really intended for 30 days in the notice then they should have posted it for 20 business days. So the notice is not correct on the amount of days that this change in the ordinance affects. The next thing is the definition. They're changing the definition of enclosures. When I read it I read it three or four times I'm college-educated I thought what in the world is this saying and then I thought well are they trying to say that you now have to have a fence inside of a fence like we do with swimming pools where you know your backyard fence is not good enough and now you've got to have a fence for the swimming pool. Couldn't understand that it doesn't say whether it has to have a roof and then I noticed it only refers to the only animal that is controlled by this enclosure is a dog and I'm like it says keep children out well keep dogs out that's what it says and I'm like well what about cats other animals what what's the purpose here why is this ordinance specific on just dogs only and then it says no adult can enter the enclosure and I'm like how in the world am I going to take care of the dog how am I going to clean the kennel what's so this definition is so vague you might know what you're talking about today about this definition but five years from now will people know what it was intended to say because it to me it says a bunch of mush so I've always been taught that people read on a ninth grade reading level that 's that's what our society reads on well therefore we need to keep the definition simple because if you want people to adhere to city ordinances the average citizen has to be able to understand what that ordinance means and what it says so what the definition is trying to say and what it should be rewritten to say is that electric wireless invisible fences are not permitted under this ordinance keep it simple that's all I have to say thank you thank you thank you okay moving on to agenda item number two which is request for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for August the second 2016 councilmember Gary I had previously sent a request to pull consent or doing are pulling consent agenda items right now yes yes I had previously sent a request to pull item C and item G and I realize now after hearing the speaker that I got that wrong I wanted to pull item B regarding the beekeeping ordinance and I'd like to pull item G as well and when you and when you say pull you mean to have those for individual consideration thank you no B and G yeah B is in boy the staff would also like to pull consent item for day as a dog okay we've had enough public input that that's going to force that issue to a public hearing and so we need to move that off based on notification also consent item 5c as in cat council heard that particular issue yesterday and we no longer need that on the agenda okay and then also on public hearing 6a is an apple the applicant has requested to move that to August 16 okay now is that an attorney can we do that sort of here or do we go out and open the I think it was a public hearing do we open it the continued public hearing and then continue it or how do we do that what's the process what we would need to do is pull up this item as it appears on the agenda in the open meeting the public hearing is open yes I don't know if there will be any speakers who might want to speak there could be and I would encourage that we allow them to speak if they are present but the applicant has requests that we continue this until the 16th so I would encourage that as well okay all right thank you yes customer was me hold on this is under our closed session work session item F and with the city attorney explain why this is under closed and not open yes ma'am I will be glad to address this we have posted this item as consultation with the city's attorneys and with particularity we've posted it to address ethics matters as they concern particularly provisions of the Denton City Charter it is my opinion that this is a proper posting that is properly discussed in closed session and that it meets the requirements of the open meetings act certainly it's the discretion of the council if you choose to waive attorney- client privilege anything that I might tell you but that's your prerogative I believe the posting is accurate thank you councilmember Gregory thank you mayor I was wondering I don 't want to pull it for individual consideration but but consent agenda item a if we could have someone on staff just highlight the the decision for refund ing from four point three five percent interest down to two point zero eight percent interest how much money we're going to be saving and the early payoff would you like for us to do that now sure okay like to call on Chuck Springer our director of finance thank you in terms of this refunding we're saving about three hundred and seventy thousand a year over about twelve years it goes out to about five point two million in terms of total savings and again with this we're also in addition to the savings from the lower interest rates on the refunding we're taking out the remainder of the existing revenue bonds of the city that are currently outstanding and by doing that we're freeing up some reserve funds we'll free up in the electric fund about five point nine million seven point five from the water utility and four point four million from the wastewater fund reserve funds and construction funds that are required to be cons required liabilities of the city that are freed up by the refunding of all the outstanding revenue bonds so the refinancing here is not an effort to extend our debt for an extended period of time to push out the application but simply to save money by refinancing at a lower interest rate. The debt is at the same term that it is now we're just we're refunding to the same term it matures at the same time it's just lower debt service payments each year during that term. Well thank you very much for the continued effort of your department to find ways to to refinance on a regular basis in a way that saves the taxpayers money and that fre es up some of our ratepayers money and that frees up some of those funds that are that are in the utilities departments. Thanks a lot. Yes, Councilmember Br iggs. Oh no not. Oh right. So back on the consent agenda item B the beekeeper ordinance so the gentleman spoke and he had a couple of suggestions on the 30 days 30 business days and a definition I don't I don't know if the definition was about dogs with or bees is there any way that that ordinance can be changed by the time we have meeting tonight so we can or if those do need to be corrected. Let us address that if we might I do have Stephanie Barry who has assisted in the drafting of the ordinance along with the police chief. Okay. And Stephanie if you would assume the microphone please ma'am and address those two points. I agree with Mr. Bentley that the original dangerous dog ordinance was a two-day time period two business days and that's what it said and that is just leaving business in there as a typo that absolutely needs to be taken out. We had a situation where a little boy that was ten years old was walking home from Woodrow Wilson he was attacked by a pit bull on the public street and the father of the little boy didn't get the the incident followed in time because it was an attack on a person state law also addresses that so we were able to address the attack of the little boy under state law had that been say that pit bull had gotten out and killed someone's dog while they were walking down the street there's not a provision if another animal kills another domestic animal while it's at large so a person had been walking their dog on a leash down the street near Woodrow Wilson Elementary School and that dog had killed the person's dog they would have been without remedy so in the situation of a person there's also a health and safety code provision but I actually think it would be clear I agree with them that the business needs to be removed and it should just be 30 days as far as the definition we are trying to address the the issue of invisible fences and and mr. Drake and I went back and forth about what that should say Plano and Irving also have a similar definition it's worded different they don't say invisible fences are illegal it just basically gets the message across that offense has to be physical and so I don't know whether you all think that's clear or not but the problem with invisible fences is of course it doesn't offer protection for your own animal for another animal coming in and attacking it but it also doesn't offer protection for say a small child or another animal going in to the area and sometimes it's hard to tell where the property lines are and for you know a child was cutting through an area whether there's an invisible fence but that is trying to address that issue so obviously we could change that definition if you all feel like that's unclear the bottom line on the definition is this this particular provision and this change to our ordinance is as a result of a situation that occurred in Ro bson Ranch and there was a dog that was killed by another dog that entered into an area that was not otherwise enclosed by physical enclosure it was only restra ined by an electronic enclosure resulting in the death of this dog so this is our attempt to address that particular provision certainly as it concerns the change in the days we can we can do with a struggle with Penn we can make that change so that change can be made tonight the enclosure definition is something that relates to the situation I've described with particularity and so that 's what we're trying to address but as far as the second part of it about the bees everything is okay and that part that's being added is that well I requested that it be pulled the whole thing yeah the whole thing because it's included in that item okay and I'm back to councilmember was nice question about the closed session there's a we've had a few emails requesting that the agenda item F be removed from closed and into open so I'm just clarifying here that council is an agreement that it stay enclosed is that what Councilmember was I'd recommend kind of a two-step two-part that if we feel a need to discuss enclosed and if there is an opportunity to move into open it's at council's pleasure I might just make a suggestion I do have and it is strictly legal advice that I want to give to the council with regard to this matter that's posted after providing that legal advice it may be that the council desires to bring forward an open work session and so if that does ens ue we could post a work session for a later council meeting but certainly councils call I will need to see a waiver of attorney-client privilege if you want this an open session I can't say if I would prefer this to be open or closed you know when I when I read it and it says discussing policy it appears that we ought to have that in an open session but I don't know why it's on here I don't know what it is that we're going to be discussing so always policy decisions need to be discussed in an open session decisions need to be made in an open session but it's also best to get our legal advice in the closed session so it's hard for me to say if I wanted in an open session or not I don't even know what we're talking about in here specifically what advice we're being given but if we have the option of coming back into open session and having a policy discussion after we get our advice I think that would be fine that works with that I mean is that I think you had cast it as coming back at a separate date but do closed session postings let's say for instance on this example if you give your legal advice and counsel wants to discuss that are we unable to go into open session today about that because of the the posting two things one I will need a waiver of attorney-client privilege because this is your privilege not mine to go into open session secondarily any discussion would need to be strictly within the parameters of the posting in order to meet the Open Meetings Act so we could not exceed if I can the cartilage of the of the posting itself and so that's all we could discuss we would not be able to go into wider latitude than what you see in this very posting that's why I suggest to you that after you receive your attorney briefing it may be that you want a more broad posting so that you have some latitude under the Open Meetings Act to discuss whatsoever you choose under a proper posting because otherwise you're going to be strictly constrained by this particular posting so all right so then my understanding is if this council decides to forego the closed posting and discuss in open session what your the legal advice you're wanting to give us you would need a waiver of privilege by all of us and four of you four of us okay and then we would be excluded from going beyond the posting as far as discussing if they were policy issues even in open session just going beyond the bounds of the posting even as it regarded policy correct you're still constrained by this posting all right okay there yes then on that also I would just like to say if we were to have an open session I would like to see what we're going to be discussing see some backup on it so I so I can be prepared rather than having to go search out my notebook with all of the ethics stuff and not having any idea of what's going to be discussed I think it would be fair for folks to know okay and I'm and I 'm open to having any discussion we want to have I just like to know what we're going to be talking about so I can be prepared for that discussion well I guess the question at hand then is do we proceed with the closed posting as it's presented simply under legal advice as explained by the city attorney is that yes councilmember here first of all I would like to acknowledge that attorney Burgess just use the word curtilage which is I have not heard in probably 15 years I'm very impressed with that use I've been practicing law for almost 40 so that's amazing the second thing is that I'm actually comfortable with a waiver in this situation just because I think we are going to be receiving legal advice regarding the ethics policy I understand that at the same time I think probably the public should know where the City Council stands in terms of what we can and can't do with an ethics ordinance because otherwise I don't know how they would know that if there's a way around I mean if there's a way to get that information out there without you giving us legal advice on this particular matter publicly then let's do that but I just don't see how the city how the city population would know about it if it wasn't held publicly that's my concern there's there's one other possibility you can hear my advice my legal advice to you this evening weigh it and then choose whether or not you want to come back in an open session and have me disclose that legal advice to the public so that's the other possibility may I pretend I'm sorry yeah not to recent application of that is when we went through several iterations of our gas drilling policies in which there were similar concerns public interest in understanding the context the legal context within which the city could act and so we met with our attorney to get the feedback and even had some real directives to our attorney saying these are the sorts of things we'd like to provide to the public thank you we even had a whole session on the legal framework of that so that they can understand so I I think that's a good point and I think we have avenues for that okay so then it's my understanding that we will proceed with the closed session for legal advice only and we'll post it for a later work session if the council so chooses to disclose that legal advice in the context of policy discussions then we have the latitude to do that is that my understanding all right okay yes councilman Wasney just clarification on the closed session I don't know not closed session consent agenda on the D the international energy conservation code that we're moving into a public hearing so just clarification I know we've got to post public hearings so that it won't be tonight it will be at a later date when it's posted just so the public is clear because I know we have several members of the public who do want to come in and speak on this item and why we have that scheduled I believe is for August 16th okay good August 16th thank you all right any other questions or clarification for the consent agenda or the agenda in general seeing none all right thank you moving on to agenda item three which is work session reports work session three a's receive report hold discussion give staff direction regarding nominations to the city boards and commissions thank you mayor our city secretary Jennifer Walters will be handling this item of course good evening mayor and council or it's not really evening yet is it all right we'll say afternoon it's better than saying good morning in your packets today or over the weekend you had a board and commissions nomination sheet we've had some additions to that so at your places today you have a sheet that says revision one in the right hand corner and unless you have a different way you'd like to do this I would suggest we maybe go board by board and see if anyone would like to add anyone else as we go along and I will attempt to read these names some of them I might not do so well on so if you're listening and I mess up your name I apologize ahead of time so for the airport advisory board we have excuse me councilmember Wasney is renominating our Weinstein councilmember Hawkins is renominating Martin is that manja manja manja like it looks councilmember Gregory is renominating Pete Lane and mayor Watts you have a nomination yes that will be forthcoming forth coming okay he's everywhere yeah we have lots of work to do in the shelter advisory committee mayor pro tem Broden yeah I have a nominee Naomi wood Naomi would okay thank you councilmember Briggs has nominated Jessica Jackson councilmember Gregory has renominated Nancy Kimmy and councilmember Bagg ierre has nominated Anne Sullivan community development advisory committee mayor pro tem rodent I'm nominating Kayla Stewart okay thank you councilmember Wasney is renominating Scott Roselle councilmember Gregory is renominating Val Morgan mayor Watts yeah I've reached out to the incumbent haven't heard back yet so I won't say forthcoming okay and there are two all positions which anyone can make a nomination yes well I noticed in our backup material that both of those were returning and willing to be renominate we put forward so my suggestion unless there's any others is I think I'd like them to continue serving if the pleasure of the council okay it's a Randy Skinner and Jody Vickers Nance thank you yes health and building standards councilmember Briggs has nominated David David M ullen moving up from an alternate position councilmember Wasney is nom inating Matthew Jen Dusa did I get that right councilmember Hawkins still looking okay and then councilmember Briggs is also nominated an alternate Curtis Millett and there's one other alternate position if anyone has a suggestion historic landmark Commission councilmember Briggs is renominating Daniel Bus sell close not even close mayor Watts okay and then there's an all position does anyone have anyone for the all position is that a returning there is Scott Campbell is historic landmark Commission is that way yes we're a historic landmark yeah Scott okay all right human services councilmember Briggs has ren ominated Pamela Barnes councilmember Hawkins probably the incumbent but we have a scheduled conversation to be had here and then we have two all positions councilmember Briggs has nominated Ryan Appleton and then there's one other all position no yeah I would put forth the name of Sam Ortiz all right yes I'm sorry they put him in and again just for the sake of with these all positions can we clarify it whether those are folks are there returning folks in those spots that are interested in continuing to serve I just hate to replace someone who's never had a conversation I haven't looked into the notebook it sounds like councilmember Briggs has that whole list yeah I I do but I have why I the names on here are Jane Upshaw and Hannah Garcia are they eligible for reappointment they are oh well I would I would rather leave them in and then okay well then that's gonna move my nomination to my seat okay so you want to take out Pamela if they do not allow yeah okay take out Pamela and we'll move Ryan to your spot so we still have the two all positions you want you want to just put those in the incumbent I would come but okay I hope Jane can read this when I get done library board councilmember Was ney is renominating Barbara Hallbert councilmember Hawkins is nominating Sarah Gamblin new and then mayor Watts parks recreation and beautification board councilmember Br iggs oh I'm sorry just had a question I didn't see Sarah Gamblin's application in here did I miss it or did everybody else see it did she come in City Hall and apply you know we've been getting a lot of them in I can't say for certain without digging around through my book but what we do councilmember Viguer re is that if we go through the nominations and they're not for some reason eligible then we'll let you know but most of the time there they're okay we research it before we finalize it thank you okay back to parks board council member Briggs I'm not quite ready okay councilmember Wasney has reappointed Maria Ren ner councilmember Hawkins is reappointed Paul Leslie and then councilmember Gregory not ready okay planning and zoning Commission councilmember Wasney has nominated Steve Sullivan councilmember Gregory has renominated Jim strange and councilmember but Gary has nominated Marjorie Ellis public art committee mayor pro tem rodent nominating Susan Vaughn Vaughn as in V Vaughn she has an application so I make sure I heard you right councilmember Briggs is nom inating Joe Duncan councilmember Roz what Rosny was knee is nominating Aaron clique councilmember Hawkins is renominating Frank Mayhew and Mayor Watts Jerry Peter obviously Jerry Peter she's your turn yes public utilities board councilmember Wasney is nominating Alan Bishop traffic safety Commission mayor pro tem rodent Daniel Krick is currently on that board and and I'm going to renominate him okay councilmember Briggs is nominating Cody Robinson councilmember but Gary is nominating Michael Hennan zoning board of adjustment councilmember break okay councilmember Briggs is nominating Amber Brighill councilmember Gregory are either of those two alternate positions eligible alternate yes Marshall Oh Marshall Sir it would love to move on let's move let's move Marshall into my spot please okay so then we'll probably have three alternate anybody have an alternate I have a suggestion Don Markey murky murky on murky okay he has an application and requested this position okay and that's as an alternate mm- hmm okay all right so what we'll do is um if chain can read my handwriting up hopefully she said she's going to be watching so she'll know she'll have it all written down but we will revise this and have this at your seats up in the council chambers and we get to that item then you can vote on these nominations and then if for some reason someone doesn't pass their initial qualifications we 'll let you know this will be on your agenda again on the August 16th where I know that all these blanks will be completed all righty any other questions on that agenda item seeing none thank you thank you Jennifer moving on to agenda item 3b receive report and hold discussion give staff direction regarding the community event center project Jessica Rogers our assistant to the manager be doing this particular item before we get started I wanted to ask everybody it seems in light of some things that have you know different correspondence will receive I know the last slide is for the I guess someone from the police department to address some concerns is there any problem with hearing that slide first just so that we can sort of have a context of that I mean I 've been asking for this for about five months I think and so if y'all would rather not do that we'll keep it in line and then also I think we had a request to speak as well is if I'm not is that correct yes and so that's okay with me I think we've been giving people is it three minutes or four minutes Jennifer and so council's pleasure whether that is before Jessica's presentation or at the end any any particular the presentation by the community market any particular thoughts on that I'd like it at the end okay okay okay any other thoughts Councilman Gregory what I asked for is thoughts and observations about the police department questions or concerns are the last slide in the presentation and given that there's been some discussion about that recently via email and all these kind of things if that was something that I mean I would like to hear that probably first just because I asked for but that I don't have a whole lot of heartburn if we don't but so I put it out there for some input okay we have one that would rather be sure okay then I'll just let the chief yeah and then you'll just yes that's right and then we'll skip right over his or his slide chief are you presenting okay did you want me to just present our statement of our position on it or did you want to ask me some questions well probably both I mean whatever you would have presented at that slide okay slide came up and then I 'm sure there may be some questions and things such as that yeah okay great well I don't really have a formal presentation to add to Jessica's slide or anything or any pictures I I'm sure the reason I'm up here is that we have voiced some concerns about the whole project being located on the exposition lot and let me say it up front that I'm not I'm not at all opposed to the community market thriving in Denton I just don't feel like the exposition lot is the best place for it and certainly the plan to go forward as an event center really complicates it for us on a number of fronts so to outline those and one is parking issues we're already obviously City Hall East generally is already feeling the impact of parking issues around the building DCTA I think is ridership has exploded to the point that you know it takes up almost the entire railroad lot railroad street lot and spills over into our lots down toward the east and also on to the exposition lot itself during the day I understand the ridership is low on Saturdays and so that alleviates some of that concern but parking is generally is all is always I think going to be a growing concern for a number of reasons we we still have 10,000 square feet with under the roof of the City Hall East that is designated for police facilities that's completely undeveloped so you know as we continue to grow through the years we're going to need more and more parking spaces and that's just a given with the city growth there's a lot of other future pending development surrounding us that we're not unsure of we have yet really to see the full impact of the rail yard project on parking and then there's another there's been some discussion concerning the variance there that was given on the D tip stipulations there's the the mini warehouse property that's to the immediate east of us don't know I know that's recently sold that could become another multi-use development the Austin Baker business building has been vacant and understand up for sale for for quite a while now so we're not sure really what all is going into there so I think parking and the second point which is sort of related is traffic congestion generally our concerns that are going to continue to get worse and around that neighborhood the traffic congestion I haven't really had the opportunity to detail this one and I want to say to I brought up these concerns a couple of times already once in the in the event consent the event center committee meeting in late May and then outlined them briefly in the council meeting that we hosted at the Police Department on June the second and the concerns today are relatively the same but they're a little bit different now touch that on the last one but the traffic congestion you know bringing crowds of people for any reason into the area again in an into a an area that is going to continue to develop is just going to compound that again and I know everybody all over the city is experiencing traffic congestion and issues and we're not even under construction right at the moment but you know for when you put that in terms of the business that we that we conduct there at the police station in terms of emergency vehicles coming and going not only our vehicles but EMS responding to the city jail for at time to time to our lobby from time to time the the traffic congestion right there on Hickory and the access and egress to City Hall East is already a little congested for a number of reasons when you think about going westbound on Hickory Street we have to cross two railroad tracks and in a red light at Belle Avenue with the DCTA traffic and other vehicles during the day and sometimes at night you gotta understand those DCTA buses stop at both railroad tracks if there's a train across there we could be delayed and completely blocked from from exiting that area for several minutes so sometimes just to go from the building to Belle Avenue can take several minutes itself so that leaves the alternatives of going out the north side which is frame Street to McKinney that that exit there is somewhat dangerous if especially during high traffic times on McKinney Street if you're trying to turn left or or to the west on McKinney so it's not always the best way to go either so then if you try to exit that area going eastbound on Hickory we have the the obstacle of getting around the county facility which is just six blocks down the road which means you have to go back out to McKinney or go around that on the Woodrow which takes some some time and then if you try to exit to the immediate south and go to Mulberry you have to navigate around Fred Moore Park or you have to then cross the railroad tracks again and hit another red light at Mulberry and Belle Avenue so the location itself of City Hall East presents a lot of navigation issues just coming and going and why is that important obviously we have to our officers have to come and go from the police department all day and all night long a number of times during the day and so oftentimes we 're responding directly from the police station we try to keep units in service all over the city all the time but there are also a lot of reasons why the officers are having to respond from that area. Building security is the third issue third major issue. Employee safety, fleet integrity, access to the jail I've already mentioned a little bit you know the police station is supposed to be a safe haven for people there are victims of crimes and witnesses who sometimes are reluctant to to even talk to the police much less come to the police station and inviting crowds of people into the neighborhood is going to inhibit that a little bit as well there's no there's no safe secure entrance anywhere around City Hall East for employees or the citizenry you know other there's other things that occur there child custody exchanges number of things that draw people into the police department where they can they would they would like it to be more of a private issue rather than something that's that's witnessed by a bunch of people or have people out milling around the street so you know we're in a congested area already and to address some of those concerns I did submit in the budget this time I this for this for next year a proposal to improve parking lot security surrounding the the the police department in particular the north or the what we call the back lot which is where all or the majority of our fleet vehicles are parked and stored and the patrol officers come and go many of our other about two-thirds of our employees during the day come and go from the backside and all the employees who work on there are about those same two-thirds parked their personal vehicles back there a lot of the time as well if you look at modern police departments that have been built or designed in the last 10 to 12 years you will generally see that employee and fleet parking lots are controlled and secured with some sort of fence and closure and gate and it's just a matter of modern -day security and then the last the last issue really is the idea of just engineering a place directly crossing the police department where mass gatherings can can occur and there's a number of reasons why why in the best case scenario a police department wouldn't be in a neighborhood where you where you have incorporated that into the neighborhood it's not that we're opposed to those things but it does it does you know concern us the issues of noise of crowds you know coming out into the street you know I'm not sure we fully address the idea of what kind of events might come to this location but there are you know the idea of amplified sound on that parking lot is a problem for us not only if we're conducting something in the training center but the 911 communication center is directly in the corner of City Hall East on the building that faces that side of the parking lot we've done a few few really rough tests on sound and coming from that location and you can hear it inside it depends on how loud it would be as to whether it would significantly interfere with anything but that that is still an issue again if events were to come in there where alcohol was served or consumed you know that certainly is an issue directly crossing the police station and I and I can't I'm not certainly not trying to take advantage of the recent events but you know say in Dallas and otherwise and in the scrutiny and violence and that's been directed toward police but and police stations but police and police stations have become targets so and there's no disputing that so just the idea of bringing in the potential of uncontrolled crowds for whatever the event might be directly crossing the police station is a concern for us so you know I think I think just you know let me I'll sum it up because I know this wasn't really planned as part of the presentation but you know I think I think we have found ourselves in the path of a lot of growth which is a great thing for the city but from my standpoint and looking out for my employees safety and well -being and the operations police department I have to concern myself with managing that growth and being able to make sure that we have not created a situation that's going to cause us problems because I understand you know the plan that I've heard mentioned many times is that as some departments vacate City Hall East that it will become the police courts facility and that we're probably going to be there realistically for 15 to 20 years now that may get interrupted because the the property may become more valuable for the city to sell it to a private entity and we move but you know we're we're being we're being surrounded now through through that growth and that's a good thing for the growth but it's a bad thing in terms of location the proximity to the police department and so I think we may just find ourselves that you know in a in a good good and bad scenario at the same time and and if we were to continue to lose control of parking lots and parking spaces and and building security and that sort of thing without further enhancements then I would probably be coming back to you suggesting that we'd start looking for an alternative location for the police department which would be in a very expensive endeavor so I'll stop there and be glad to ask ask her an answering question it cuts my mayor pro tem wrote thank you chief I appreciate your candidness with us and I know we've talked offline as well and I appreciate that and your last point is something I want to get on talk about a little bit more and when we worry about inviting crowds into that neighborhood and additional parking issues and additional traffic my particular kind of wish for that area is that that industrial space that's underutilized in some cases just plain vacant turns into a very vibrant area for redevelopment which means this is only getting worse in terms of those issues parking congestion traffic gobs of people I mean if it's successful that's what we want to see there's a lot of people walking into that area in and out so as we think about this long term and not just this because we're talking about really if we're just talking about the market we're talking about a few hours on Saturdays when most things are closed down there City Hall except for the police department's closed down no one's taking the train really on Saturday in the same way from commuters so it makes me wonder from a longer term perspective from the police department's perspective is the real issue here that the police department's in the wrong spot because I again to say we're gonna halt all development in that area because of these concerns concerns me as well has there been live conversations in the city thinking about a new spot for the police department because of these concerns no I have not been involved in those since I've been here for almost five years now we have discussed we have discussed building security number times and some other issues in the imp ending growth I have been asked many times about the railroad tracks and that is an issue and has been an issue since day one obviously but and but I have not been involved in any discussions about relocating the police department until now. Thanks. Councilmember Weisen. Is it true that you have an additional 10,000 square feet to expand and grow in that present location? Yes. And what is a monetary investment in the current police training facility to date? It's been a little over three and a half million dollars invested in the development and equipping of the training center. So we've invested a lot of money and time in this present facility. The landscape has changed in the last 12 months from the time this came to council. We didn't change it but it was changed for us and our officers are now targets. They are being murdered. Nobody wants to use that word but that's the hardcore truth. Our police stations are targets. I think long term an event center attracting large crowds, yes or no, would put officers at risk and put our police station at risk. Your job is to protect our men and women in uniform. Does that compromise their safety? That's one of the issues that if not the largest issue that we're concerned with is just the assemblage of crowds regardless of what reason in proximity to the police department. So my point is we didn't have a lot of this in the news and it wasn't happening a year ago. It is happening now and it has to be part of the conversation because it's a very real threat that law enforcement has right now and it has to be a part of our conversation as we move forward. >> Councilmember Hawkinson. >> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, chief. I know safety is definitely the number one concern but then I wanted to talk about parking a little bit and I know in June you had spoke a little bit about the training program that's going on there and how that is starting to grow. So can you speak a little bit about that and where I guess they're not customers but other police officers are coming in to train. Just that happens on the weekend or the number of people when it happens, that kind of thing. >> Yeah, essentially we're training thousands of people there over the course of the year and it's still growing. It's still really in its second complete year by the end of this year. We are conducting our own basic peace officer academy which runs twice a year so that takes up a lot of space there and we're having a growing number of people participating in that. We're able to conduct that and put our own folks through it for a big cost savings because we do charge other agencies to come to that. We also charge other agencies to attend other classes there and so we're in operation in the training facility. This right now is sort of a downtime during the summer but we're in operation there with anywhere from 50 to 200 people on any given day during the week, almost year round and then there are classes and events that occur on Saturdays. We do have a couple of classes that occur on Sundays also. But there are few and far between. There's a lot of meetings there, public meetings at night times throughout the week. So it's a very vibrant place itself and we're a big consumer of the parking around that area. Not only the exposition lot but both of our parking lots and all up and down on the on street parking as well. >> So is parking an issue already right now? >> Yes, sir, it is. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you for advocating for the people that work in your department. That's important and it's important for us to hear. When we had our first ad hoc council committee meeting on this back, I think it was December 11th, it seemed like the main discussion at that time was staff talking to us, you were there, talking to us about the parking issue and that you needed to have a minimum of 80 parking spots. And we heard an inventory of all of the parking in the area and the kind of events and the kind of growth that we're expecting to see. So we've gone from the plan from 80 spots to I think about 133. If this did not come to pass, the having the community market and the event center there, there might even be room for maybe 10 more parking spots. So from 133 to 143. Is that going to be enough parking for you? If you're talking about being there 10, 15 more years, is that going to be enough parking? For 10 or 15 years I would doubt it, to be honest with you. It's hard to predict again the impact of what's coming in around us anyway. We do have to rely on some of those spaces for our occup ancy certificate for the training center and that's mainly the handicap spots or the ones that can't go away. Any additional parking in the short run would certainly be appreciated and could accommodate what we're doing there on a daily basis, but I don't know how long that would last with the growth. When I heard your presentation, you were talking about item number two, which is basically the mobility issues of getting to and from the police station, dealing with the traffic on McKinney Street and the issue with the railroad track. It seems to me that all of that was saying this is probably not the best place for our police department. When I hear you talking about the whole security issue, the back parking lot, the fact that there's actually a through street that runs right through the middle of it, I'm thinking maybe this isn't the best place and while we 've invested some money in this, do we need to continue to invest money? What I hate to see is that we make a decision to move the community market and the event center to another location only to have the police department come back in a couple of months and say we really need to move. We've really got to move. That's the only choice that we have. Do you see a way forward to operate the police station where it is for the next 10 to 15 years, anticipating that there's going to be, most certainly there's going to be more development, whether it's apartments or more businesses or some other type of enterprise that goes on down there. Is that a viable location given all of the issues that you 've already pointed out? Without being able to look into the future any farther than I can, that's a real difficult question to answer. I think we were prepared to do that and make the best of it . But I think that idea hinges considerably on not enhancing or encouraging more parking issues and more traffic congestion as the years go by. I think the growth is coming that way anyway. Like I say, there's no telling what's going to happen between on Hickory or McKinney, especially Hickory Street. I mean McKinney doesn't really affect us so much, but what happens right there within about a two or three block area of the police station from Bell and really all the way down to the courthouse in the future, that could considerably change the traffic flow and all that. So to say in the absence of, I mean with just additional parking spaces, I don't know that that, I think that's a short-term answer at best for me to say that we could make it work. I think space-wise and existing potential parking immediately around the police station, if we could sort of plant a flag in that at our disposal indefinitely, and I think there would be, it would be a workable location. But if we're going to, if we encourage the growth to come and we start giving up real estate, then I can't make that, I mean I can't say that we could be able to stay there for indefinitely, for the 15 to 20 years as it might be planned . - Councilmember Wiseman pointed out the fact that we've already invested some money into that and that there's certainly more money that can be invested into that facility because there's room to grow. But I would just be concerned that that may not be the best place to grow. I don't think that anybody in the community is interested in asking Denton's Finest to just get by in the current location, you know, in one sense . You guys, the men and women of the police department, lay their lives on the line for us. We could do something in return. A couple of years ago, we had not had anything on our radar screen regarding the condition of our fire stations. We hadn't had any discussions in any bond elections and any long-term planning, and then we go on a tour and we see those. And very quickly, we figure out a way to put money in to start rebuilding some immediately and then have a bond election that the citizens overwhelmingly passed to upgrade all of our fire stations. All I'm saying is everything I'm hearing from you suggests that as we're doing a long-range facility plan that we're going to hear from in October, that we're going to have to look very carefully at the location for the police department. And that's probably barely in the posting. Because we're talking about the convention -- we're talking about developing a piece of property across from it and how it would impact the -- yeah, how it would impact the police department. But I really want to seriously hear, because I personally feel like that we were fairly deep into the process of planning this particular facility for the community market and for other events before we really got the full impact of the concerns that the police department had. Why that took a while is not the issue for discussion today . The issue is where do we go from here, how can we learn from that so that we can not get caught up short again. So to you and to our city management, I think we need to look very carefully at as to whether or not in the long run we need to think about a whole new police facility in a different location to address the concerns of safety, to address the concerns of growth, and to certainly allow that neighborhood around there to grow as we expect that it would be growing, as we would hope that it would be growing. So I learned some new information today with your speaking. So I was aware about the parking issues that had been brought up a year ago and kind of had been taken care of from what I understood. And then at the police training parking came up again. So I heard about some different issues today. And when I look at all of these, I still think as far as Councilmember Gregory says, if the market doesn't go here, these issues are still going to be here. These issues are going to remain. So I am also in that we may need to be looking at a different spot, but that's in the future. So we need to see what we can do now. For the parking, is it possible to make that area a designated lot only to allege some of those concerns of others parking in that? Would that help? That would help, yes. I mean, you know, there's, well, yes, that would help. Okay. I don't want to. All right. You're at your time. All right. So that's just my one question. I have a lot of other things going through my mind right now, but I just wanted to ask. Okay. Thanks. Yes. Councilmember Rood. A couple other questions. Again, I'm trying to get us into a solutions-oriented posture as we think about them. We made a decision as a body a year ago. We appointed a council committee to move this thing forward . The markets kind of had this in their sights for a while, so we're going to have to deal with that by the end of our discussion as to what we're doing, because I think we've made some commitments. So I'm trying to understand what we can alleviate through if this is going to exist as a site. Because if you remember back to the original discussion, I mean, this was, we were getting a -- If what is to exist as a site? You said what we need to alleviate to if this exists as a site. The exposition parking lot. Okay. Exists as a site as the presentation. As an event center. Okay. I got you. Yeah. So, you know, the great synergy about this project is we were kind of having a concern coming from -- or I guess it was transportation saying this parking lot needs improvement, and we knew a bunch of parking lots that needed improvement . We had a request from some folks looking for a spot to support the community market. We saw an opportunity to invest in something where you got two things at once. And as Councilmember Gregory and I think Jessica's presentation will show, I think the ultimate design went well above and beyond what anyone was asking for, which was 80 spots. So all that to say, if we were to -- I've heard some concerns relating to these other potential hypothetical types of events. Large gatherings of people. People with alcohol in their hands. Loud music. You know, at the advent of some of this conversation with the community, once that got out last year that we were expanding this beyond community market to an event center, a lot of those other entities, 35 Denton, Oktopia, some of these other spots, weren't terribly interested in that site. They'd prefer to be more directly downtown. So if there was a pulling back of the scope of this project so that it really was a few hours on a Saturday and that any other event could be approved by the police department or something like that, that we put decibel limits on anything that could come out of there in order to avoid any conflict with internal operations or your call center. Would doing some things like that bring more comfort to you and your team in terms of really having a real defined, predictable situation out there in terms of what we'd see on the ground that you wouldn't have to worry about in two months all of a sudden you've got a 10,000 person till two in the morning loud concert? You know, I'd like to be involved in those discussions if we can go there. You know, when the project was first presented to us, the money had been already approved by council and it was kind of presented as, you know, this is a council approved initiative and we're going forward with it as a temporary site for the community market until they find a better location that they can expand into with the vision that they have. And it's evolved over time into the event center and a lot of unknowns for us. And that kind of explains one of the reasons why parking issues were just one of the things that came up early on and that there's more now. So you know, I'd love to be involved in discussions about that if we can go there. A couple things, oh, I'm sorry, Councilmember Gary, I apologize. Chief Powell, thank you for presenting to us today. Actually, I really appreciate you bringing up some issues that I had not considered, for instance, victims coming there to make statements. You're right, there are a lot of custody trades at the police station, quite a few, and those are usually the worst type of custody cases that trade at the police station. One thing, as I'm thinking while you're speaking, the Children's Advocacy Center takes victim statements for children, correct? So we're not going to have any children victims going there , is that right? That would be the general rule, yes. They should be, if they're victims of sexual abuse or just abuse in the home, they're going to be interviewed in the police station. Okay, so I want to be sure, absolutely sure about that. And then regarding the training, I went through this presentation that Patty Hayworth made and it had a list of, I don't know if you had a chance to review it, but it had a list of all of the training dates. And I only saw one Saturday on there, so are there some other Saturday trainings that weren't in here? I mean, I realize this is not a comprehensive report and frankly, I had a lot of errors, so I'd like to hear from you. Yes, there was a number. I think I provided some information a few months ago in response to a question on that, so I don't know if you've had the opportunity to see that, but there are probably at least 12 or 13 conflicting events that occur right now as within the last year on Saturdays, during the time that the community market would be in operation. In addition to that, again, there's a number of things that occur there in the evenings and at night that could potentially be conflicted with the events outside the community market. And then the last thing I was going to just kind of mention , well, two things. First, I'm glad we're having this discussion because really the trend nationally is for commuter rail-oriented development. I think you see that in a lot of different cities and I mean, frankly, I don't think there's any getting around the fact that that area will be heavily and densely developed probably sooner than we think, regardless of what decisions we make here today. And so I just want to impress upon everybody that that is the trend nationally, that you go to these areas, there's a commuter station, and there's tons of development. So I very much appreciate Council Member Gregory's point that maybe, and Mayor Pro Tem's point that maybe this is a larger discussion that we have not posted for. So final note, I want to thank you for making it very clear to everybody that this is not really a discussion about are we in favor of the market or are we not in favor of the market. And likewise, it's definitely not a conversation about are we supporting the police or not supporting the police. I mean, I like to think that's a given, but just from very sincerely, I want to let you know that I support the police more than I can probably articulate well. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Chief, for coming and giving us your presentation and your candid communication. I appreciate that. I think there's some things that I'm going to try to say some things with as much professional candor as I can that I think are being asked among my colleagues, among some of the people in this room, and that is how did we get here? Mayor Pro Tem, you had mentioned that we voted on something a year ago and charged the Council Committee with sort of vetting this out. Well, I'll be truthful. I mean, the presentation that we're going to see in a few minutes, that was not anything that I had envisioned when I voted a year ago that we were going to have the vision of a $1.7 million overtime phased in event center across from the police station. You and I had a conversation about when I heard about the $ 80,000 spent on the consultant that I didn't remember us giving that charge and we hadn't as a council body, but that that was determined to be in the Council Committee, that subcommittee that we needed to have an architect to design this facility. Fair enough. But my concern was I hadn't heard about that, and so that's when I asked the question of the police, of the chief about what are the concerns here. So as far as this long-term discussion, yeah, we need to have that discussion, but we've got to look at some things right now. I mean, we've invested a lot of money. That has been identified as the Justice Center not only on the 2001 or 2002 space study, but it certainly has been that now. I don't know how we got to this place. There's no sense trying to figure, we need to figure that out to make sure we don't have some breakdown in communication or maybe we need to have more updates regularly on certain situations like this. But what I heard, and so you can correct me if I'm wrong, all right. What I heard was your biggest concern was, well, let me back up. When I first considered this issue, I said I couldn't spend that much money on just the community market. I couldn't justify spending a half a million dollars, no offense to the community market, but that was the solution. We've got the parking lot we're going to redo. We've got the space. This is very synergistic. We can provide a place for an important part of our community because they needed some additional space. So this is my question. It's like the biggest issue is this enlargement of it goes from a one Saturday a month or what is it, every Saturday, every Saturday week for nine months or 35 weeks. It goes from that to any day of the week. And I don't know the legalities of saying how do we take a public space and how do we limit it to one group but not the other based upon certain things. So eventually we'll have to have that conversation. So my question is this, if for instance that parking lot was transitioned to police department or justice center use only, all right, we did the improvements. We did the improvements. And is there an objection? And I would want you to maybe look at this, but is there a way we can accommodate both? I know there's been some concern about if only the community market is there, you know, one Saturday week for 35 weeks, that that will still disrupt training and offer a sort of a downward pressure on the full utilization of our training center. I would like to explore that because I cannot get my arms around converting that space to the full-fledged, full-blown event center that I see, you know, in the presentation. I mean, and we're going to go through the presentation, but I just, that's not what I had envisioned when I voted a year ago. Of course, everybody else has their own ideas about that. But I will tell you unequivocally that if this has been couched as a either or between the police department and the community market, I can tell you unequivocally from my perspective, that's not how I see it. That yes, we decided we would help take on this cause to find the community market a place where they could feel comfortable, where they could grow, where they could expand, where they could make sure that they provide the same attraction to where they are now. We didn't find the first choices. We don't know how this is going to work out, but I'm committed to continuing that. This isn't about, and if there's a way to do it here with some limitations, some major limitations, possibly. I just don't know the answers to those questions. But I hope that we can take this experience and dissect it a little bit to understand how are we having this particular conversation at this late stage in the game because, yeah, we got to find a solution now, but we also part of the goal is to make sure we don't put ourselves in this situation again because it's not fair to the police chief. It's not fair to management. It's not fair to staff. It's not fair to the community market. And I don't think it's because of anybody's fault. It's just unfortunately that's just where we are because of the reasons we need to discover. So if you could say this is what I want, let me see if I can sum it up and then you can tell me if I'm right or not, that you don't want to have large gatherings across from the police station with all the accompanying potential nuis ances, that you want to be able to have adequate parking now and in the foreseeable future specifically dedicated to justice center use albeit either the police department or the court system unless you want to narrow it down to the police department, and that you want counsel to be considerate as we look at the development of that area not to say shut it down but to make sure that we take into consideration all the factors that have been enumer ated here and will be enumerated in the future as these projects come forward. I don't hear you saying we don't want development. I don't hear you saying we can't live with development. I don't hear you saying you guys stop development. What you're specifically addressing it from my perspective and if I'm wrong somebody will probably most likely correct me, that the concern is this specific plan and its scope in that parking lot and some required additional purchases that are going to be required to make this into a realized vision. That seems to me what I'm hearing. Is that anywhere close or? Yes, I think that sums it up pretty well from our standpoint. We can't and don't intend to stand in the way of growth. I think that's going to happen. I would just like to see us manage that as best we can in the short run and the long run right in our own neighborhood. Okay. All right. Any other questions for the chief before we move on to our presentation? Thank you chief. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Thank you. Ms. Jessica. It's a great introduction. I will cover some of the questions that were brought up. I was making notes back there so I'll try and answer them as I can. And I was making changes on the fly so I apologize. All right, so today what I'm going to go over is just give you a brief overview of the Community Event Center project and give you a status update regarding the work of the council committee. And this came about as we sort of reached, I'm not going to call it a stopping place, but a good pause place with the committee that we could bring forward the work that we've done as well as mayor you had requested some additional information. So I'll try and cover a good portion of that but not keep us here too long. And then we've already gone over the Public Safety Training Center but if anything that I say brings something back up, I've kept the chief here so he can answer those questions. All right. So the Community Event Center was a priority item discussed as part of the current year's budget discussions. It was a product of the market requesting a permanent space at a city facility and involved into a broader project as part of those budget discussions. And the three major themes of those discussions and those are summarized in your backup in the sort of timeline document that I provided and those are adding additional parking for downtown events by improving the exposition lot, adding additional space for the community that could be used by festivals or other community groups beyond the market and providing a neighborhood amenity in a rapidly redeveloping area. Council discussion pointed to this being a catalyst project that would encourage more relocation and redevelopment in the area. As part of the budget discussions, Council approved $653, 000 for the Event Center project. $405,000 were in certificates of obligation and that was specifically for the parking lot reconstruction. $253,000 which was a combination of both Hot Funds and General Fund dollars were set aside for site amenities. And then I know there have been questions about how we got to $253,000 since that's kind of an odd number that actually came based on a memo that was provided by Denton Community Market last year as part of those budget discussions. They actually had requested about $268,000 and I believe that memo came about as Council kind of started discussing phasing in of the construction of certain items and so we asked them to provide what they wanted in phase one. Yes, Mayor. Oh no, no, I'm sorry. On the certificates of obligation for the demolition and reconstruction, do we have a timeline or do you have a slide on the timeline of that those issuances or that repair to the parking lot? Do we have any? I'm not sure. I thought they were already issued or nope. Brian's here. I'm sorry, yes. Now the COs have been issued. If we decided to not proceed with this, there's other facility improvements that we could make with those COs for other types of programs down the road. We have issued those COs as part of our bond program this year. For the parking lot demolition and reconstruction, which I believe that, okay. Thank you. We appreciate that. Thank you. Sorry, Jessica. Okay, are there any more questions on this? I think I read them. On the budget. I wanted to show you sort of a timeline evolution of the project. Like I mentioned, there's a very more comprehensive background document in your agenda backup, but this sort of just summarizes the highlights. We've been working on this sort of iteration of the project since late 2014 when the market came and expressed a desire for a permanent site following the bonds committee. And in late, or sorry, in 2015, the council discussed moving the project forward in earnest as part of those budget discussions. And the discussion changed from talking specifically about the market to becoming the community event center. By late 2015, the council committee was approved and the committee discussed numerous items that I'm going to detail sort of over the next few slides. But I would add that the committee has met frequently and has continued to sort of move the project forward since about December of 2015 through this summer. And the timeline of the project has been really important. We've been trying to meet having a phase one complete for the market by April 2017, and in our discussions with the market, that's become a bit of a challenge as we've kind of hit some roadblocks moving forward. So we'll discuss a little bit more detail about the project timeline later in the presentation. Council Member Gary had a question. Yes. Can you go back to the last slide, please? Sure. I'm new here. I'm trying to piece together the timeline of what happened. And I seem to recall that the original request was for the Civic Center, I think. And then the second request was for 300 McKinney Street. Is that right? There were multiple sites that were examined. Quaker Town Park, the Civic Center, the McKinney Street site were all considered as part of this. As late as, I believe, May of 2015 was when, I believe, Mark Nelson, at the time, who was still serving as the project manager over this, presented specifically about the McKinney site. And that was when it sort of changed from the McKinney site to the exposition site. And then, so was there ever a discussion about the Civic Center or the park area? Yes. There was? Yes. Okay. I'm sorry. I only watched the May 2015 video, so I didn't... I watched them all. I wasn't here either. You were. Thank you. Don't worry. I've got it. Any other questions about the timeline? Yes. Oh, yes. May I approach him? I'm sorry. I was just going to... I think it's a good question. And just to give you some historical background on that, too, because we had an extensive presentation by Emerson as part of that, looking at various sites. And the Parks Department raised a number of concerns about just the existing events in the Civic Center that would cause conflict with the market, given that it's every Saturday. And also some of the stress on the park, given some of the large events that are there as well. So I don't remember that date of part, but that's kind of all of what led to this site as what was initially their last choice and kind of the last thing the city kind of put its hands out and said, "Here's the final city site we can think of." And that's when all this discussion started happening. So the Council Committee is comprised of Mayor Pro Tem Rod en, who is the chair of the committee, along with Councilmembers Gregory and Begarry, formerly Councilmember Johnson, sat on the committee. At the direction of Council, the committee was created to facilitate the development of the event center and create any necessary policies to consider the naming of the center. And to date, the committee has had extensive discussions related to the project goals and what they want to accomplish by developing a full community event center. They've also looked at possible lease terms and return on investment with the community market, the design process, the project timeline, the impact of additional events and vehicles in the area. And upon request of the committee, the community market prepared a strategic plan that included a competitive market analysis and analysis of their operations, which was also included in your backup. One item that's kind of noted in the presentation is that the lease term that we had initially talked about was kind of put on pause. And that was done strategically because once we started moving forward with the project, we had discussions about how we were going to settle lease rate. And one idea that the committee discussed was on recuper ating some operations and maintenance costs related to the operation of the market on the site. And when we started trying to estimate what those O&M costs would be, we realized we couldn't make those estimates until we had a better understanding of what amenities were going to be on the site. Now that we sort of have a design concept, it is a very broad concept at this time, we can start going back to that and saying, okay, we expect this amount in landscaping and irrigation and those types of things, so we can better evaluate those. So I would expect those discussions to start back very soon . You'll also see return of investment noted up there. I highlighted that simply because that's addressed by the market in their strategic plan. Okay, one item that the committee has not discussed was something I'd called rental guidelines. And we have these documents for other sites that the city manages, particularly our parking lots that we rent out for festivals. And you think about the Williams Square lot or even the McK inney lot. The guidelines lay out what are the allowable activities on the site and provide for the short term lease rates. It would be a separate document from what we would negotiate with the community market. That would be a long term lease. But one thing that we can do through these rental guidelines is that we could look at restrictions for certain times and days of the week types of events. And as the chief was discussing whether or not we would be granting noise variances, whether or not we would have to get any specific department al approval for booking events. So that's just a consideration that the committee hasn't really discussed this. It came up sort of since our last committee meeting, but it 's something that we want to look at moving forward. And as the chief mentioned and maybe the mayor, maybe McKee ley getting some legal opinion on what we could regulate through that document as opposed to a lease agreement. All right, so if no one has any other questions, we'll move on to the fun part, the design process that we've been going through. I guess real quick, well, it's a legal question. I'll save it for later. Go ahead. Okay. Sorry. So the committee moved forward by engaging a design firm. And the firm that we selected was Pacheco Coke. And they're also the firm that is working on the Cedar Street or Old Central Fire Station lot and they have been working with both staff and the community market to create a design and a concept that would accommodate the needs of the city, primarily being the need for parking and the community market, which they provided their sort of list of items that they'd like to see that would enhance their operation. And the funding for that came from? The funding for the architect is being paid out of the $253 ,000 that was originally designated for site amenities. Mayor? Yes, I'm sorry. On that previous slide, it said external stakeholders. What's an example of that and how involved? We involved Sedna. We involved a few of downtown merchants. We involved some festival organizers in the community just to kind of ask them what they want to see at that site, how they would use that site, what their vision was for the area. And we had invited them to attend any of our design meetings. So at this point, they were involved in a way where they were going to possibly be using the site? When we met with them originally, they communicated that the site for them would serve probably not a lot more than parking because the market functions on Saturday mornings. And many of the events, they were talking about 35 Denton and Oktopia being some multi-day events, that they wouldn't be able to have something on Friday night, have to clean up their site. Then the market would operate on Saturday, and then they'd come back and set up again on Sunday. So they saw it as additional parking. But they liked the idea of having another space that smaller events could happen on, maybe Friday night events or Sunday events that they didn't see it fully incorporating into the larger scale events. I'm still just trying to understand how we got here. I know that's not the ultimate point, and I get that. It's how we move forward. But anyway. So thank you. All right. So this is concept A. The committee was presented with three concepts, and this was the unanimous selection of the committee. And the design includes 0.35 acres of green space and expands the parking count to 138. It's currently 80. This also includes a custom pavilion structure that's designed to provide protection for market operations in all weather conditions, which the market noted was a primary concern, specifically because they lost a number of market days in 2015 during the rain events. It also provides a covered parking structure when the market's not in operation and a covered outdoor facility that could be used by other city operations. The design also has a permanent restroom facility. That's what is right there. It doesn't look like a restroom, but it is. It looks like a rectangle. And that was another priority concern for the market. At this time, we haven't started parsing what elements of this design would be included in phase one. But that's definitely something that would be under consideration as we move forward in the design process. Quick question. Yes. You had mentioned, well, if you have it in an upcoming slide, just let me know. The acreage here was 3.35. So that means we've got a, this requires an additional purchase or no? No. This is completely on the site as it stands now. Thank you. Yes, Council Member Bray. We might, if you go back to that last slide, we might mention that the police department had representatives at these meetings and had commented that of the three concepts that we saw, that they found this to be the most acceptable because it allowed for the most parking spaces and it also allowed for a parking during the week under the shade structure and it would also provide for them to do some of their training under that structure if they needed to do training outdoors but out of the glare of the sun or the wetness of the rain. Yes. Okay. And the architect did provide this sort of additional layout look, particularly so we could address the market's growing needs. I believe, and Vicki, you can correct me if I'm wrong, you have about 80 vendors each Saturday now plus more, approximately 70 to 80 vendors. And so we wanted to make sure that we provided a space that could accommodate them growing in the future. So this layout just under the pavilion and in the green space could accommodate 144 vendors. Yes, Council Member Begher. Can you go back to the last slide? Yes. Okay, the second one, how many vendors, well, I guess the third picture, how many vendors are under pavilion and how many vendors are in green space? I think I missed that part of the committee meeting. I believe it's 48. Under the pavilion. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Do you want to go back? No, I just wanted to mention something because I think some of the concern I heard from the community as this was kind of made public, this discussion was, and folks started seeing some of these concepts. And just to be clear, the only money anyone has to play with for this construction is the, what was it, 253? Minus 80. Sure, yeah. And so understanding from a design perspective, the question was, do we design just for that irrespective of what might be going in later or do we kind of look at some ultimate possibilities so that when we make decisions on year one, understanding there may not be any further money being issued to this project, we were still able to kind of have that plan in place. But I just want to point out, the other real important value of ours was how can this be of value to the city even absent the community market or anyone else using it, which is why it kind of really started thinking, what are the multiple uses of shade structure and whatnot? So I just wanted to put that out there because that was of concern as people saw this. Like Councilmember Rhoads said, this was a master plan design and we specifically discussed that with the architect in that we wanted to go ahead and design to completion so that if there were utilities or any sort of underground work that needed to be done, we didn't have to come back and reconstruct that in a year, five years, whenever that was, and completely destroy work that had been put down. So that was a very intentional decision to design to completion. We also asked that the design reflect the industrial feel of the area and Joey actually back, excuse me, Councilmember Hawkins, back to your point on meeting with the outside organizations, that was one specific request that they had is they wanted this to be a sort of signature piece in that area and to really match the industrial feel of that neighborhood. And as I mentioned before, the design includes 138 parking spaces, the covered parking structure, flex parking for food trucks, the custom market pavilion, permanent restrooms, a welcome monument and space for 144 vendors. So as I mentioned, the timeline of this project was extraordinarily important to the committee and so we kind of put this slide up every time the committee meets and kind of to check where we are in the progress. And our goal was to have phase one complete by April 1st, 2017. As I noted in the AIS that this has been sort of a challenge as we've moved forward in this process and the market has indicated that it might be a little too close for comfort for them since where we are right now is we're still at the design development phase. We haven't moved forward within the construction document phase. We haven't moved forward into development review. And so they've indicated that they might be considering staying at the county site full time through 2017 and doing transitional markets at this site over the next year and then making the full permanent move in 2018. And of course, if they can address that more specifically, I would let them do that. But that's all I really have on the status update portion of the presentation. The next section, I'll be addressing some of the parking concerns. So if you have questions related to this section, I'd be happy to answer them now. >> Any questions? >> All right. So parking has sort of been the theme of this committee as a byproduct of sort of the early conversations like Council Member Gregory said at our very first meeting. We had a very fun conversation about parking and you'll see those slides again in just a second. We've been steadfast with both the architect and with the committee that we needed to maintain or expand the existing parking in that area and we did not want any design to create a disparate impact on city operations. However, the event center is not the only operation in the area that's increasing demand. And there are the multiple operations in close proximity, including City Hall East, the public safety training facility. The Union Rock Transit Center, now the rail yard development, including the East End Lofts at the rail yard. All sort of work in this dynamic environment now and they impact each other. There are a few other items that have come up as we've looked at parking, addressing the parking demand in the area. And those included the further expansion of the public safety training center at some time in the future. The relocation or possible relocation of customer service to the DOT Q facility. The finish out of Stoke and the restaurant retail component of the rail yard. I know that Stoke opened yesterday. So as people are moving in and Julie Glover was just talking about seeing everyone moving into the loft. So as we see that, we'll be able to more fully evaluate the impact of those items. All of these things, I'm just listing to let you know that we're aware of them and we're taking them into consideration when we do any kind of evaluation of parking in the area. And each of these has a different impact on demand and supply of parking. And they're sort of in a moving dynamic system in that we can't really evaluate the full impact until we see all of these operations going on at the same time. But we are going to, in the next few slides, look at some of the parking evaluations that we did in relation to the entire area as a whole. One specific item that I know council has asked questions about was the rail yard parking. And this is just a reminder, you've all been provided this information. They were granted a 25% variance due to offset parking demand that was created by the mixed uses in the site. The reduction was to 194 spaces. And that 40 spaces are designated for office use. And just to reiterate, they don't have a shared parking agreement with the city. So they don't have an agreement that says that they are going to use the exposition lot as their backup. >> Question on that. Help me understand the distance relative to, there's a building in between the rail yard apartments and the parking lot. I think it's that electrical supply place. >> Yeah, the dealer's electric, I believe it is. >> So would people park over there to walk over to their residence? I don't know. So I didn't know if it was adjacent to it. >> The next slide's an aerial image. >> Fantastic, thank you. Appreciate that. >> Can read your mind? >> Yes, great. >> This is actually a southward facing orientation, just to confuse you a little bit. The exposition lot is here on the left. This would be the dealer's electric. This is the rail yard lofts. So they would have access on this south, this is the south side of the property. So they would have a pretty, and our property line would go to right here. >> Where are the 194 spots? >> They're there, I've counted them by hand. >> They're just there in that, just along the linear, the parallel line of the property? >> Here. >> Okay. >> As well as parking here and this lot. >> Okay. >> Here. >> Okay. >> And there are some here. And the 194 did include marked on street spaces that are immediately in front of their building. >> So included in that are public parking places? >> Yes. >> Okay, is that common? I mean, I don't want to get off topic, so if I'm off topic, then rattle your. >> I'll let Amy handle that. >> Sure, thank you. There is a provision in the DDC that will allow you to count some on street parking spaces within the DTIP area. With this project, it's a very small number, I want to say less than ten. >> Okay. >> And just to help illustrate where those parking spaces are, the majority of them are covered parking spaces, which is why you can't really get a good visual of what's there. All of the white buildings, what looks like white to you, is covered spaces adjacent to the lofts. >> Okay, so those, I see the little offsets there on the roof. I got you, okay, all right, thank you. >> All right, I'll only do north only from here on out, so kind of flip your thinking. As Council Member Gregory mentioned, this is sort of a slide that was given to the council committee on our first meeting back in December. And what we did is we asked all of our City Hall East Apart ments to report how many staff members they have, how many fleet vehicles they have, and then their approximate daily visitors. So we kind of tried to narrow that down to at a given point in time. So we used a half hour period because that was the most narrow we could get from customer service. So in a given half hour period, there would be approximately a need for about 500 spaces if all operations were sort of at a high functioning capacity. We don't have many days that everything is going on at the same time, but this was to give the committee a realistic picture of what it could look like. Now again, like I mentioned before, there is the possibility that one of these operations wouldn't be located here anymore, so that would reduce that demand. We also looked at what's the count now? So what was the existing count at City Hall East? So we looked at, I called it the PD side, so I included all of the lots, including the private staff lot. We also looked at the HR side, so the railroad avenue lot and the on street parking on railroad avenue. And the street spaces on Hickory and on both sides of Hick ory at the time, it was prior to the rail yard development being completed, so we included those. And what we found was that there were 367 total spaces available for use. Excluding the exposition lot. With the current total, that current parking and exposition , we had about 447. And with the reconstructed lot, we'd have 505. So we would meet and most likely exceed our demand on most days for City Hall East. >> When I'm looking at this aerial. >> Yes. >> Is the PD side of City Hall East, is that that open parking spot right there? >> It included, this is the staff lot. And then there's also some fleet vehicles that get parked along here along the back of the building. There's park marked spaces here and then there are marked spaces in this lot. So I included all of those in the total. >> Okay, all right. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Another thing that we did is we looked at other possible parking locations. We looked at other city public lots, private and restricted lots, on street parking and alternative modes of transportation. All right, so starting now back with our northward facing maps. We counted city owned lot spaces. And we wanted to use, and you'll see it when I kind of do a more comprehensive map in a few slides. We use what I called sort of the downtown standard in that when we give people our downtown parking map, we use a quarter to half mile radius. So we tried to limit to that area to look at what would be a walkable distance for people to make their way over to the community event center . And one thing that we did intentionally do is we tried not to focus too much on shifting parking into the southeast St anton. We didn't want to create a burden on a neighborhood if we could avoid it. So you'll see that we do address some on street parking, but they're on wider streets. >> If you could just hang on that area just for a second. When I look at the big square parking lot that's the exp osition parking lot currently. >> Yes. >> And we've talked about expansion of growth in that area. It seems like you've got the storage units across the street from it. We got Austin Baker to the south of it. Is that the Atmos gas center there next to the storage? Is that Atmos? Okay, and what's that building directly across from Atmos? >> I believe it's a mechanical type of business. >> So really, that's the primary, I mean, other than the McKinney side of this area, McKinney Street, because then you start button up against the neighborhood. >> Right. >> Then you've got a neighborhood there and the cemetery is where, is it? >> Down. >> There it is, okay. All right. So that's really what we're talking about is those parcels. And of course you got Trinity down there, but who knows what's going to happen with that. >> Yeah. >> Okay, that's a good area. I appreciate that. >> Sure. >> So we found as we identified just over 1,100 city owned spaces using those plots. We also looked at private and restricted lots. And the reason we did that was we wanted to sort of use this mentality of the shared parking experience that we use in downtown and that there are many times that there are operations that are not going to be fully operating on Saturday morning when the market might be operating. So we wanted to look at lots that could be under consideration for possible maybe short term uses or maybe daily uses that the market could enter into some type of agreement with. So we looked at the rail yard parking lots, the downtown transit center lots. Some of the lots you see here are private business lots that typically don't have high volumes on weekends. So those were something that we could look at. This is actually the Patterson Appleton Art Center. Again, if there were some kind of conflicting event, we wouldn't want to encourage parking there. But if it was available on Saturday mornings, if they weren 't open until noon, that would be a place that parking could occur. And then these are actually two lots owned by the Methodist Church. We found about 537 spaces on those lots. We also looked at on street parking using a 24 foot space requirement as required by the DDC and using a 15 foot setback from all driveways and intersections. We also excluded roads like exposition where the DCTA buses often frequently go down because we didn't want to limit their ability to make it to the transit center and where you see it noted in red is where there's current no parking. Along Prairie, there's no parking on one side of the street near the cemetery. But we found an additional 500 parking spaces using that measurement. >> Councilmember Gregory. >> Yes. >> I may be about to steal your thunder, but will you mention also that we discussed the possibility of people parking at the Med Park station? >> Yes. Thank you. >> When you're talking about parking, so let's say hypoth etically that something winds up at that parking lot. You're saying these are all the places that people would be able to park to get there? >> Yes. >> So I see Crawford, I see Bradshaw, I see Southwood. I know those are residential areas. >> Yes. >> But, and Vicki can probably address this, but I don't know if, so you're saying people that are going to the market if it were there would be parking on the east side of Bell and then walking that far to. >> We tried to avoid just saying, well, everyone can just park in the neighborhood and that's sort of the solution because we didn't want to create a burden on Sedna and sort of that area. >> No, I understand that. >> So we were intentionally looking at what were wider streets that already might have marked spaces where on street parking is currently being utilized and particularly with like Prairie. They have the connection with the rail trail access. So it actually decreases the walking distance. >> Do we know the distance? Let's just say the Prairie for instance. Do we know the distance of that? >> Yes. In two slides. >> Got it. Go for it. Yep, sorry. Very, very good. >> So just summing it up, that's about almost 2200 spaces that would be available in that area. So put it all together, we calculated the distances and the walk times from each of those locations. Again, we wanted to use that same standard that we use in the downtown area. And what we found is that from any of these locations, for example, in Prairie Street, using the KD Trail would be less than a half mile walk, an eight minute walk from the KD Trail intersection at Pra irie to the event center site. >> Yes, Councilmember Hawkins. >> When you were compiling this data, you obviously were going around taking an inventory. I mean, you found that people were using these spots already to- >> Yes. >> Okay. >> People already park on these streets fairly frequently. >> Okay. >> Yes. And I will add that as someone who lives in this area, that they're being utilized now. >> Gotcha. >> Okay. >> So one of the other- >> I'm sorry, Mayor Pro Tem. >> And the other thing that I think is important to point out is the time of which the market meets. You go downtown at eight in the morning on Saturdays and it 's not as crowded as it is once you get to about noon on a Saturday. In terms of your parking situation and certainly around the area where the exposition site is. It's completely different than what you'd see, say, on a Monday morning. >> Sure. >> Which is exactly what our first bullet point is on this site, the offset parking demand. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> I'm sorry, Councilmember. >> I know it was outside of your picture. Thank you. I know it was outside of your picture, but with the courth ouses just at the end of Hickory and- >> Right here. >> Other courthouse. >> Over here. >> Other courthouse, yeah. >> Do you know how far the other courthouse parking lot is? Because they have tons of parking spaces and it is not utilized on a Saturday. >> No, we did not measure that. >> Okay. >> We can do that. >> But we don't know how far it is. >> No. >> Okay, thank you. >> Six, just a few blocks. So as Councilmember Roden said, we're seeing that there's really the possibility to take advantage of offset parking demand at these locations. The market operates at a time when maybe Hickory Street is not as busy as it normally is or the square isn't as busy as it normally is, so that there is the possibility of having those parking spaces available when the market operates. And as Councilmember Gregory mentioned, the proximity to the Union Brock Transit Center also opens up the ability for people to park at different stops along there, particularly Med Park, which has a significant number of parking spaces that aren 't fully utilized and then ride the train up. And this also has the added benefit of having the trail access, so it gives us access to different streets along the trail that are very walkable. It also leads into our bike plan and pedestrian improvements. People have access from other neighborhoods to this site that they wouldn't have. Excuse me, they have much more improved access at this site that they don't have at the current site because of the improvements in the area. And then also the trail connectivity with Carl Young Park is something that an added amenity at this site. Okay, since I won't be turning it back over to Chief Hal unless he has anything else to add, that sort of sums up my presentation, but I know that Mayor Pursem, you had mentioned that you might want to make some comments about the project in general. So I would give it to you if you- >> Well, there's two points. I mean, we've just opened up Stoke over there. And you think about our commitment to investing in small business development. Stoke is one angle of that with the tech development. Community market's been a small business incubator for the last several years. There's a synergy in having those kind of geographically located, even with the Stoke now having event space in it for use. And for use with mentors for small business development and what not. So I think there's that whole economic development part to this too that has not yet really been focused on as part of this discussion. Because we talk about a lot investing in these large companies. Here's a way to invest in the small companies in an area of town that could use that sort of geographical location. >> I just want to comment on that really good job with the committee compiling all that data, especially that parking space count data there. >> Not the committee. >> Sorry, Jessica. >> You walked every one of them. >> I walk them all the time, actually. >> It would take me and a committee to get that done. Maybe that's what I want to say. But good job, thank you. >> Well, that's like I said, all I have, that was when we were going to move into the public safety. If you have more general questions or anything. >> Councilmember Wasley. >> Is the farmer's market moving from the county location along with the community market? >> From everything I've heard, the answer would be no. That they're not moving, that the farmer's market is staying at Carroll. >> We want the community market to be successful. And I think that needs to be really emphasized because it is an important part of our community. The question is, how can we be smart about ensuring their success? Ensuring the safety of our police department. And so that's the quandary that I'm in. How do we satisfy both of those? And can I address the issue that Mayor Watts talked about, that we didn't have the committee? I know that the community market had an opportunity to speak. So you can certainly continue your comments. I just wanted to make sure that they understood that we haven't left them off. Yeah, go ahead, I'm sorry. >> But that's my quandary. How do we make it successful? How do we keep the police department safe? That's my quandary. Because we want a thriving, successful community market. I've been to them all over the country. And walkability is important. Parking is important. My question on the committee, and it may be something in terms of process moving forward, that we actually have some kind of really scheduled rhythm and flow of committee reports that come forward from council committees. And this could, it's not just this committee, it's all of our committees. Because some committees, they kind of rest on the back burner for a long time and there isn't anything to talk about. We have other committees that are red hot and lots to talk about. And I think it would really help in that communication to try to solve that problem as well. >> Great, Councilmember Begay? >> Second that, I think that's a good idea, maybe to just start it at the beginning of sessions. But okay, to your point, I just wanted to mention about the farmers market, the actual Denton County farmers market. >> And correct me if I'm wrong, maybe this is a question for community market. As I understand it, there's three or four vendors at the farmers market. We have about 40 or 80 vendors at the community market. And the difference between those two markets, as I understand it, is that the farmers market are not required to produce their own produce. They can go to the Dallas farmers market and then resale. And the Denton community market has a geographic restriction and they are required to make some portion. So it's truly to Mayor Pro Tem's point, it is actually really more of a maker space than the Denton farmers market, which is a resale space. So I think that's correct. >> That's my understanding as well. >> Any other questions before we hear from the community market? Thank you, Jessica, great presentation. Thank you so much. Well, well done. >> You and your committee. >> Thank you. >> If you'll just state your name and address and then your time will start. >> Where is the presentation? I'm Vicki Oppenheim. You want to get my address too, 600- >> Yeah, but we'll wait until you get your presentation set up to start your time. >> I'm Vicki Oppenheim, the executive director of the Dent on Community Market, and my home address is 600 Winfield Street here in Denton. Thank you very much for taking all this time to review the plans that are in process for the new community event center. We have been very involved with this process all along. We've attended all the meetings. We have provided reports as requested. It was not our first choice, I'll admit that. But over time, we've grown to really see the possibilities of this site. And as the market continues to gain accolades across the DF W Metroplex, we feel that it's really important to have a good site that we can grow in over time and continue our progress on all different levels. We, I just want to point out this, we were quite excited about this. We were listed first in the Dallas Observer Guide to Mark ets Across DFW. We didn't expect this, and we were very, very, very excited this year. Our number of vendors are higher than ever. We have 187 at this point. Last year, we ended at about 150. We have between 65 and 100 vendors per week, on average about 70 to 80. We have been gaining all sorts of awards, second best in Denton, all types of increases in number of visitors. Numbers of vendors, media presence. Even our success stories continue to grow over time. Juice Lab is our latest brick and mortar that started at the market last year. We have a long history of promoting and incubating businesses across the city. These are some of them. And this is not the entire list. This is just the list of brick and mortars and food truck up in there. I also want to point out, we just did a survey, 75 vendors responded. A lot of them have been at the market only for a short time . You can see that. Many are startups. And most of them view us as very important to their business. Very important for the development of their business, the success of their business. Also, we estimate from this survey, we generate about 788, 000 in sales revenue at the market on Saturdays only. This does not include other days of the week. There are many markets across the DFW Metroplex that are being developed. Many cities, Denton is not the only one by any means. Many cities are investing in their markets. They see the real positive impacts that markets have on cities. And we are just one of many in the Metroplex. And most of these that I've listed here are getting real structures with bathrooms and permanent facilities and even city staff. I also want to point out, at this point, our fees are among the highest in the Metroplex. We have done the best we can in generating revenues with fees. We've really come to the max at this point in being able to remain competitive. So I ask when you're thinking about these decisions that we really are an important part of the community. And I also want to point to all the supporters that have been here. We have our board of directors, if you could raise your hands, please. They've been very, very dedicated in helping me through this transition process that we're in. I also want to point out the supporters that came, if you can raise your hands. There have been some that had to leave for other reasons. But we just have a very dedicated and enthusiastic group of people who attend on a regular basis and also visitors who come from across the Metroplex and across Texas and even across the country. And I ask that you consider this in your decision making process. >> I have a question. >> Okay. >> And it seemed to come up in the presentation that- >> Okay. >> It was my understanding that part of the urgency was that the county was not going to renew whatever y'all have with them, a lease or agreement or whatever it is. And so it was reported that you all are able to stay there through the 2017 season, is that correct? >> Well, as of right now, it appears that way. We don't have an official approval. We've not yet applied. We've told them, we've informed them of our situation. We thought we'd be moving to this new site. And they said they believe we can get approval for another year, but it's not official until we go through the commissioner's court. There was reports even a couple years ago that they were saying we're getting too big for that site. >> I remember that. >> And we need to be leaving and looking at other sites. So it's this ongoing uncertainty of where we're going to be from year to year. And so we know no promises of any infrastructure investment by the county of any sort. >> Sure. Okay, Council Member Gary. >> One thing I wanted to note was that you do have a parking share agreement with DACU right now, correct? >> With the owner of the DACU lot, it was sold. >> Okay. >> And that is another issue that has come up. We had to get permission from the owner this year to be able to use that lot. >> They did not say forever. It could be that it comes to a point next year they may say we cannot even use it as vendor parking. We don't know that yet. >> Isn't that the city law? >> It's the same. >> Yeah. >> It's the same law. >> Okay, but does the city not have, so we don't have rights to lease, I thought we got leasing rights for that year round all day all night because that was part of the, so. >> I believe we did. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay, so that's- >> Okay, I just want to make sure I didn't miss something pretty important. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So maybe we'll call up on that. >> Okay, so for this year, that was the arrangement. >> And in the past, right? >> Yes, in the past, yes. >> Gotcha, okay. >> Okay. >> Fair enough. >> And then the other thing I wanted to note is two things. First of all, are there many people who are pedestrians and people who bike to the community market? >> Yes. >> Have you guys ever done a count of that? >> Not per se, I have to say. We do have regular customers that bike, walk. We do zip code surveys of people who will say I walked here from near UNT or from the neighborhood. I biked here. I'd have to say probably the majority do drive to the site from other zip codes, 76209. >> Sure. >> You know, other areas. And of course, 25% of our visitors are from outside of Dent on. >> Okay. >> And then the third thing I was going to mention was in one of your slides, you had the number of vendors. And Denton Community Market by a large number has more vendors than all of these other places. >> Yes. >> Wondering if there have been any discussions about rest ricting the number of vendors if you were to move to this community event center, given the concerns that I think are legitimate that the police department has raised. >> Yes, we're aware of that, that we can't have unending growth, you know, become 500 vendors. Of course, any one week, we don't have more than 100 vendors at this point. We're aware that we're going to have to look at different restrictions on categories perhaps or total number of vendors. In fact, in our strategic plan, we did outline that, that we're aware of that. >> Would the restriction bring you more into line with the other community markets or would it just be based on how many you have? >> It's probably based on space. >> Okay. >> You know, it's a balancing act. At what point do we restrict what we do as small business incubation and also creating a vibrant area for new ideas and so forth. And same, you know, on the other hand, we have limitations with infrastructure and the ability to accommodate those things. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? Yes, Mayor Pro Tem. >> Thanks, Vicki, for your presentation and for sticking with us throughout the year on this. I just want to say publicly, you know, I invited you all out to Southeast Dent and Neighborhood Association meetings to converse with them because part of my thought in this area is you have young kids growing up seeing two jails on either sides of them, an alternative school and cemetery. That's their hope. And seeing something that can involve children, that can inspire small businesses in the area. That's why this was so visionary, I think, of the potential here to spark a lot of that. Can you talk a bit about, I know you've had conversations with TW, just started a new, the only one of its kind in Texas, Center for Women's Entrepreneurship. And I know we're trying to draw them in in relationship to the Stokes project as well. What's been your conversations about partnerships with them ? >> Well, we already have a partnership. I mean, maybe it's not official, but it's somewhat official . We've had conversations with them. We, in our application processes here, asked people if they 're interested in receiving assistance from that center. And some people said yes. So I forwarded that list to the center and they're outre aching to those businesses to say, hey, how can we help you with whatever, DBAs, tax information, whatever is needed to help those businesses. Also, they've helped us in some ways already. They helped us with a, as the board can attest, we had a strategic plan meeting where Tina Mims came out and helped us on a Sunday afternoon, helped us formulate our strategic plan. And so we really have already developed that partnership and we hope to expand it. In fact, Erin Tran, who is now the secretary of the board, we've had a shift in leadership recently as Katie Trice had left. And now I'm president and Erin Tran is secretary. She is going to be doing training sessions that involve TW as well. And we're going to be doing some training sessions for our vendors. So already we're developing that. We don't know where it's going to go, but it's been very good so far. >> One last question, I guess, and it relates to the temporary or permanent nature of this space. And we've talked a bit about this. One of the nice things is you're kind of, if we go here, you're a pioneer in place making, similar to what the rail yard project is. I mean, that was a risk for them to go out to a place where there wasn't other sorts of development. And you guys would be taking a risk out here, in my mind, in hopes that it gives vision to otherwise sometimes vision less developers about the potential of a space. In the event you guys are here, a year, maybe two, we invest minimum up to the point that we're investing now in what we're doing. Amy gets a call, I don't know if she's still here, from somebody who is interested in acquiring a lot of the property around there, Trinity. And we've talked about this, about the potential of public private partnerships. And we're able to look at this and say, hey, when you're building this multi-use purpose project, can you put the market as part of this? Would that be something that you would see as, I want this space as permanent? Or would some possibility of something like that coming down the line, getting you something ultimately what you need, not necessarily on the city's back, but part of a partnership. Would that be something the market would see as a good path to go down? >> We're open to all sorts of partnerships. Many of the other markets, I mean, there are different models. There are public, private, there's a combination, a developer comes in and partners with the market and a city. They're all different combinations and permutations. We're open to ideas. Of course, all has to be reviewed by the board and our membership and so forth. But we're always open to new ideas. >> Thank you. Councilmember Briggs. >> I wanted to let you know that I am in support of our commitment to the community market. I think it's valuable for small business incubators, makers , and it's an investment in our citizens and our city. After learning this new information today, I do look forward to more discussion, addressing, and finding a solution on the concerns for today regarding this location. But I remain firm in our commitment to the community market . >> Thank you. I really appreciate that. I wanted to say, of course, we're a part of the community and the police are very important to the community. So in this whole process, we thought that these issues were being addressed. We hadn't, certainly there are issues we didn't know about. We didn't know about them. I thought that plan that was selected, Plan A, was really a win-win for everyone in terms of certainly had the more spaces than there are now. It had area, as I was, as mentioned in the meeting, covered area for training. I thought, well, this is a win-win for the police, a win- win for the market. They said even the food trucks could be used in the trainings because they said, oh, that'd be great. Then when we have trainings, food trucks can be there for our participants. So I saw this as a win-win and I just want to say that. >> Sure. >> Yes. >> Yes, Councilmember Gregory. >> Regarding the location, thank you, Mayor. It's not a location that you suggested, is it? >> Right. >> Well, was it a location that you suggested? >> No. >> It was a suggestion of a former council member, I think. The first one to have the brainstorm was Councilmember Eng elbrink. And at times, it's felt like we've been trying to cram our foot into a shoe that doesn't quite fit. Has that felt that way to you sometimes? >> Well, as I said, our first choice was the parking lot across from City Hall. And we've gone through so many different, we looked at the civic center. We looked at all different ideas and this was not our first choice. But then once we started looking at the possibilities, we thought, okay, we'll go along with this. There could be some really great things that happened for also the southeast Denton neighborhood. I attended meetings there and so as the process went along, we saw the possible benefits. But I mean, you're right in some ways. >> But then when you hear some of the things that Council member Rodin has said about the synergy and the value that it could bring to the neighborhood, this starts to feel like maybe a more comfortable. >> Yeah. >> And then when you hear some of the things that Mrs. Rogers shared with us about, well, it doesn't look like that it may be the best location in terms of parking. Well, indeed, there is a good bit of parking and in fact, maybe a bigger variety of ways to get to that location than a lot of other locations because of the mass transit that's available to transit center. So then it starts looking a little better, right? >> Yeah. >> And then you hear, well, maybe it's not going to be the best because of the concerns of the police department. So I guess my question is, it sounds like, am I leading the witness? >> Yes, you are. >> Objection, objection, objection, objection. >> So I'm gathering from some of the comments and some of the head nodding that's going on at the table. And it may be just that some people are tired. But that there's still an interest on the part of council to fulfill our commitment to be a partner with you. I guess my question is, are you still interested in being a partner with us? >> Of course. >> Of course. >> I mean, we seem a little flaky from time to time. >> Any other questions for Vicki? >> Well, I just, I don't know if it's a question. I want to make a comment to her. I just, I love the way that just from the roots up, you've just, this is just the entrepreneurial spirit of this event. I feel like I'm partly at fault with this. I mean, we flat out told you, you know, this is, and then new information comes to light or we learn new things. It reminds me of some of the convention center stuff. I know that's a dirty word to some people, but it just does . And I'm on the fence. I mean, I see that design. That's a beautiful design. I mean, that excites me when I see that. You know, and then thinking about being protected from the weather and possibilities with the police department. But it's just really hard for me to get over the fact that if they really are having concerns at this point. And I just publicly wanted to say how for I am with the community market and just we've got to find just maybe a different spot. I don't know what, I don't want to speak for everybody, but you've done such a great job. And I don't want this to seem in any way like you aren't deserving or something like that. It just, it's hard for me just to want to move forward with this when our police department, who I feel like when citizens live in a community, their main concern is to be safe. And they want to, in the police department, they want to recruit and work at a place where they feel comfortable. So I think that's where I'm torn. I mean, I love everything about this and the spirit of it, but just wanted to publicly say where I'm at with that. >> I understand. You know, board member who's not here, she's in France right now, she said to me, go with the flow. And I guess I'm sort of thinking about that in my mind. You know, we're open to ideas. But I guess I wanted to do this presentation. I just wanted to remind you of what we've done. And I guess many people would agree that we need some support in the long term. And we thought it was down this path. If it's not what the path, if that's not the end of the road, then we hope there's another road, I guess. >> Sure. Well, I can tell you, I think there are many roads. And just like you need to go with the flow, we do as well. So if somehow this isn't the place that needs to be because of the concerns that have been raised, then I think it's incumbent upon this council. Even if it means revisiting some things that we may have originally rejected. Because what I've heard in this conversation is a couple of things. One is the plan looks great. The problem is that's a plan. There's nothing permanent about that. The funding that is available is $400,000, which is to rep ave the parking lot, which we were going to do already. And now 170 something thousand for whatever on-site amenities, as was in the original presentation, like a stage and something like that. So, plan looks great, but we've been down this road with the police and fire training center many, many years ago, eight or nine years ago, where we planned for a $12 million facility. And because of economics and things that change, we don't have that. So I would hate to say this is what you're going to get, but we have no pathway to get there at this moment. So I hear two things. One is you're sort of still in a temporary location mode, even if you were to go to that site, there's no promises that it would be what it's going to be. And second, Mayor Pro Tem, I appreciate the note of vision and developers moving down there. This is just the business person in me, but also when vision is followed by a couple hundred thousand dollars a year in economic development incentives and $80,000 a year lease for the space that we have in the St oke Center, that sort of helps. It helps clear the vision a little bit. So I tell you what I am relieved about, that we're not under, seemingly, it hasn't beneficial yet. We're not under yet seemingly the same kind of pressure that we might have been under before. And that's nothing due to our, I mean apparently, we certainly, even if we were to keep moving forward, we still could make this time deadline. But to knowing that we've got a little time that if we need to move to a different plan. So I guess my question is this. Because it seems like you're sort of in a, we need a temporary spot that's more conducive for what we have now. >> Mm-hm. >> But we as a city aren't able to, at least at this moment , commit to a quote unquote permanent spot as far as the plan that you saw. Even if it was that location, if we said, yep, we're there. We've got to find the funding somewhere else and there's no guarantee of that. So then if that shaded area didn't occur. So then I think, well okay, so is this temporary kind of slash permanent spot availability without all these immediate amenities as presented in that plan, is there something that we have in that regard? So I struggle with putting it in this spot, not because of anything with the community market, but because of the concerns that have surfaced. And for whatever reason we got to this place, I don't know if an apology is necessary, but we need to figure out how we don't get here again with people who are important in our community, who rely upon decisions that we make. And that's really the biggest charge incumbent upon us, is not only finding, if it is the charge, it's finding a different place. Finding one, finding it quickly, finding something that may hurt us a little bit more. As a council, that well maybe we don't, we had our bite of the apple of choosing where we wanted to go ideally for us. Well maybe we need to compromise that a little bit and say, well maybe there's some things that if it's a two or three year time frame, do we have something we can use in that time frame that we might have rejected in the beginning? That's just how it works when you're negotiating and you make a mistake and you try to accommodate. So this posting was to give direction. So I think we need to, any other questions for Vicki while she's here? Just because I don't want her standing up here while we're having this discussion. >> Any board members want to come up and say anything? I just wanted to invite you up if there's anything you want to say at all, if you have an opportunity. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I just want to make sure I'm representing, okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. >> Thank you very much. Any other questions for Vicki? Yes, you have some member, Wosney. If we revisited some other locations in this city, because I remember this was not your first choice. If we revisited some other locations in this city, would you be open to that discussion? And what I'm hearing is yes. And can I throw something on the table as well? We've signed a lease with the old DATCU property. Has a lot of parking area. I mentioned the success of the community market because we always have to keep that in the front of our minds. It's not just about finding a spot. It's about continuing your success. That location, and I'm just going to say it, keeps you a lot closer to the synergy that you have in your current location there on Carroll. So that it's a hop skip. It remains close to the UNT people who come by bike. It's right close to residential neighborhoods. It has, so I'm just saying I think we have some positive alternatives to take a look at and to continue this discussion for long term success for the community market. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> If I'm reading it right that the council is still interested in committing to being a partner with the community market. >> Sure. >> Then maybe the best thing to do at this time would be to modify the charge given to the ad hoc committee. Because the ad hoc committee was really charged with coming up with a plan for the exposition center site. And maybe the charge needs to be modified to have this committee continue. Maybe with the same membership where somebody wants off, somebody else wants on. And be a liaison to the community market for any short term and then long term partnership that we can have with them. And then we can explore more. And I'm gathering that we haven't done any signs or signals that the majority of folks are wanting to look for an alternative to exposition. So I mean that's what I would kind of offer up so that we could move to some other issues on our agenda today. >> Yes, Mayor Pro Tem. >> I'd be forced sticking the course. I think we've gone down this course for a year and I don't think we've heard anything that can't be mitigated by some changes that we talked about. Restricting it to the market, looking at some noise variance issues that we wouldn't allow above. We still think there's a lot of synergy to what's happening in this area that makes this a really visionary spot for us . So I'd hate to throw that out at this point, but if there's four council members then I'm out bid. But one thing we could do is look at having a temporary look at this. We're talking in hypotheticals about our concern at this point. To be able to say let's set a date for the market to go out here on a time where it might happen. Kind of like the better block approach, but we can kind of do this all in house. Where we can kind of see what does it look like, what does it feel like, get real metrics on the ground as to what we 're concerned about. Measure those things, come back and look and see. Now of course this all would have to be done in conjunction with you guys if you have the ability to do it and probably have to be something in the fall when your season is closing out. But as a way to kind of say these are nice hypotheticals that we're concerned about. Let's get something on the ground and see what this looks like. Let's see what it feels like and let's see what we're worried about and measure that. That's the thought. >> Okay, well I'll go, I'm for Council Member Gregory's proposition simply for the fact that the community market is but a small part of this plan. Even though that's what sort of was the genesis of this community event center. It's blossomed into what we saw in plan A, which could be rented to, and we still haven't addressed the issue of who can include , who we cannot. So I'm for giving the committee a charge to go explore and research especially given the discussion we've had here today. Some alternative sites and both as a temporary nature and permanent, because the permanent who knows how long it would have taken to get to that place. I mean the shed itself said community market on it. So I understand about doing sort of like the better block, but this is an event center that has been the concept and the charge. So that's not limited to the community market. So I'm for moving in a direction that can find some alternative sites that continue to meet the goals and who knows, maybe even improve them. Maybe even improve them because if we go back and revisit sites that we might have rejected originally, it may be sites that are a better alternative for the community market. So I'll go on record to say I personally, and I'm not saying that's what your position is, I'm saying what you proposed is what I would concur with. >> Well, I guess if I may. >> Sure. >> Well, what the committee would need to know is, is it the direction of council to no longer pursue the exposition site? Or can that still be in the mix and can we look at something like what Councilmember Rodin suggested of doing a test pilot on a Saturday and getting a lot of input from the police department, have them monitoring it closely? Or is it the desire of council to simply move on from that site? We just need to know. >> I can only speak for myself. I would like to move on from that site. I'm sorry, Councilmember Geer. Yes, I'm sorry. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry, I thought I invited her to take, I apologize, Dickie. >> All right, I didn't know if there was another question. >> Yes. Councilmember Wasney. >> I'd like to move from this site as well. And the other, let me add in another big game changer that was not on the table last year, we just bought the property next door. So we haven't decided what to do with that space, the county building. And so that space as well, and whether it's short term, long term, maybe that's long term possibility for an event center. Which creates the park, the civic center, the event center, all right here in downtown, which is where it all happens. And it abundance the parking. So I think we have options now that we didn't have a year ago. But our key has to be, we want it to be successful. And I think it comes back to location, location, location. And I would be more comfortable looking down the road at another location that I think really spells success for the community market . >> I'll give the same direction that you had just stated there, so just to be short. >> Well, I mean, I'm just waiting for somebody else to. The three committee members, I believe that's Mayor Pro Tem , Council Member Gary, and Council Member Gregory, I mean, y'all recommended this or y'all basically saying we're still looking to moving forward on this site? >> The council recommended this site, so the committee was- >> Charged with developing this site. >> Okay, this plan, that's right. So I guess I'm just asking y'all to weigh in on the question on the floor. Yes, Council Member Gray. >> Yes. >> I would like the committee to take it back, but not necessarily get rid of this site completely, but take the event center out of it, like you mentioned, and make it just a lower event, just the market only. And keep that in the mix as we look at other options. >> Okay. >> Because I think the event center was the really big issue for the most part. Just to kind of keep that on the table in case nothing else pans out. >> Sure, sure. Okay. >> That would be my request. >> Mayor Pro Tem? >> Well, I think I've given my thoughts on this. >> So you would concur with Council Member Briggs? Okay. >> Okay, well, I'm in favor of the site with some restrictions that we talked about, decibel. I actually would like to see vendor restrictions as well if that's where the site was going to be. But it looks like we're in the other direction, so I'm sorry, am I missing count? >> It seems like the primary question is, does the committee go back with a charge to find alternative sites, including this site, with some modifications of it just being limited to the community market with whatever restrictions you're talking about? >> So what I'm struggling with is what sites are available. We don't know, as a committee, what sites are options for us. And without that going through the council first, I don't want to start talking about site A, B, or C, without it being absolutely firm here, that that's a site that is allowed to be a permanent spot. I mean, I think we might be getting it backwards a little bit. I don't want it to come out of the committee, I want it to come out of the council. >> Okay, all right. >> Well, I would like to look at other spots, if that's what you're asking. >> You're open to this spot with restrictions in other spots? >> Yeah, I'm open to other spots as well. Obviously, it's my preference because of a lot of the things that have already been mentioned. But at the same time, I'm very cognizant that this was the last choice of the market, and it was really a council suggestion to put it over there , so. >> Well, then I think what I'm hearing is that there are few people that just don't want it there at that site. But that the majority would be open to that site, but we ought to consider some other options. Council Member Wasney has mentioned an option of a site that we didn't have available to us when we were talking about this a year ago that we now own. So maybe the committee could do some exploring. With agreement, we could do what Mr. Roden said and maybe have a test Saturday over there without any kind of commitment. And then the committee could bring back a recommendation. And sharing, giving the council updates as far as other possibilities. >> Let me then make a suggestion, a request. Because I agree with Council Member Begarry that I think part of, well, I think if the committee were to meet and first of all identify some options. And bring those back to the council with the associated research. In other words, we're not doing a test. We're saying here are the options. Here's the option that we talked about last year. And then here's some other options given we've got a couple of new additions to city assets that may be in play. And so we're not going down the road too far. We're just having the committee identify some of those alternatives and bringing back not just a recommendation of one, but here they are that we identified. Here's the research that we found. Here are the pros and cons of each one of those. That could be done fairly quickly, probably within I would think 60 days, 60 to 90 days. Is that something that? Yeah. Jessica, could you do that in 60 or 90 days? Okay, all right. Because it's clear that those who wanted to move away from this site altogether are somewhat, the consensus is to still include it, but then provide some other options to give council a choice based upon some new research. Some new information and certainly we want to make sure we identify and continue to ensure that we don't have similar experiences that we did in this situation. So is that okay with council as far as the committee, the committee members? Is that something that you guys can agree to Mayor Pro Tem? >> Yeah, is there going to be, I think on the front end, I mean we know the spots that we all discussed a year ago. And council was pretty clear about saying no to some of those spots. So is there anything that we should hear from council that we should say this is off the table? I mean we heard one of their spots was Quaker Town Park. Should that be on the table? One of their spots was across the street. I'm just afraid we're going to get 90 days into this, come back and have the same conversation we had a year ago with no options available that we can get consensus on. With the same objections we heard from certain staff in different departments last time. So I don't want to waste everyone's time and I think not knowing the future of their possibility next year. Of being able to, in the event council rejects the site that we've been planning for a year, what's the option for them come the spring? So it's a pretty hefty task ahead of us and so I don't want to go into that, spend 60 days on when you come back and you guys have already put stuff off the table. >> Yes, members. >> Can we add into the committee for them to find a temporary spot for the community market? >> Yeah, but that still doesn't answer the question if there are spots that are off the table from the beginning. And we had pretty clear conversations about those a year ago. So I would just as a part of that committee would like to have that direction on the front end. >> Right. >> Rather than spending a lot of time on the back end. >> Go ahead. >> I'm just saying because it is, they may not get the county again and if they can't, I don't want to be responsible for them not opening. So I'm just saying is that possible to have that in the committee as a charge to find a spot that's temporary? Temporary, if not, that's fine. I mean, I'm just bringing that up. >> I can answer your question. I was the one, one of the ones that was concerned about across the street. I was one of the ones, I don't know if I was so concerned about Quaker Town and some of that. So I can tell you for me, if all of a sudden I'm changing the direction that I gave a year ago based upon new information, that also changes maybe what I was thinking a year ago as far as some of those alternatives. Number two, this distinction between temporary and permanent is very critical. It's very, very, very critical because this we could say it was a permanent location there across from the police department. But the amenities that were presented in the ultimate plan, that designates more of a permanent, I mean, there's no telling if or when that would even develop. So I think there has to be some understanding that what we choose may not ever get to be what the community market has envisioned. And so we may continually be looking for spots to open up that may meet that permanent criteria. Like you said, a developer may come in. We pitch that to them. Maybe make that part of their criteria. So as far as I'm concerned, I don't really know of anything that I can think of off the top of my head and outside of the city parking lot right out here in front of City Hall, which it's not even occupied on Saturday. That would be off the table from a place to give them some, not temporaries in a year, but if we're going to use the other side of the parking lot , the other side of the street on McKinney, the old tax office, that's going to be because we're going to build a facility there. Right now it's a parking lot. How far away are we from building a facility if we build one over there? I mean, I've heard five, six, seven years between design, bond funding, things such as that. So if this is the way I do business, if somehow I've made a mistake or something's happened that I have to take some responsibility for that causes somebody to experience something that they may not have anticipated or they relied upon. I think it's incumbent upon me to go that extra mile to ensure that number one, that doesn't happen again. And to ensure that I make sure that they're made whole to some degree. So I don't have that same kind of sense of what's on the table and what's off the table. We all had a reason for that a year ago. We all had a reason for deciding what we did today. So that's the answer to that question. It's a long-winded answer to say, no, I don't have those same feelings. I'd say everything's on the table as far as I'm concerned. Because if we have a list of options and we have the pros and cons of each one, then we can choose together with our partner which one will be the best win-win for all the people involved. Does that give you at least my direction? Okay, all right. Anybody disagree with that direction? >> Can I make sure I've got it straight? >> Council member Bagheri's got to disagree. Here she goes. >> You're going to have to count every single parking space in all of downtown. I'm joking. >> Yes. >> I think there's still some lacking of direction given that we've entered into design for that spot. I'm assuming we're saying put a pause on it, any further work on there. But keep in mind, part of the synergy was we bumped up a parking lot reconstruction that probably on its own, probably wouldn't have made budget priority last year, just from my perspective. Had that just been on the table, we heard of all sorts of parking lot issues. So does that go back into the pot for reconsideration, whether or not we're going to invest in that? What are we telling them in terms of doing with the parking lot, which we've started engaging on already? >> I think we can do what we've done for a year. We issued the bonds, we haven't made a decision. Nobody's screaming to get that money. It can toll right now the decision on that. If we come back, we certainly don't spend the money. We don't spend the money because if we decide that's the route to go, then we need to have it available. This has been a year process, we're talking 60 to 90 days. I think we're not going to have to worry about what to do with that money. It's there, we just can't spend it. Because we may need it. If we find an alternative site, it may be something that we could use that will help us improve some city asset and at the same time accomplish the same result, the same goal. Is that? >> Yep. >> Yep, okay. >> Okay, let me make sure that I understand what the direction is. So we'll go back with the committee and look at any number of sites, including sites that were eliminated in the previous process. Any additional sites that maybe weren't available last year and any other sites that maybe we have become aware of. Come back in 60 to 90 days to council with pros and cons related to those sites. >> And we also need to be aware that the community market has not made a deal yet with the county for next year. And that we may be on the hook for a super temporary site. >> And I'll add in consideration of temporary sites for 2017. >> Yes, Council Member Gary. >> And definitely an identification of all of the stakeholders for each site that would need to be a part of the decision making process. >> Okay. >> Okay, any other questions on that item? Fantastic, Jessica, thank you so much for a very thorough and great presentation. I appreciate that. And whenever we need parking counts. >> I'm your girl. >> You're the person. Let's take a eight minute break till four o'clock. >> I gave it to you so I don't have it. >> All right, wanted to reconvene this meeting of the Dent on City Council on August the 2nd, 2016 at 4.05. We will now move into closed session. Pursuant to Texas Government Code. Hold on. I'm just going to go by this. Pursuant to Texas Government Code Section 551.071, which is consultation with attorneys. Pursuant to Texas Government Code Section 551.086, which is certain public power utility competitive matters. Under section- >> Real estate. >> Real estate, where's that, right here? Under section 551.072 of the Texas Government Code regarding real property. >> We got one more, which is the personal matter on your- >> Yeah, that's the way. Right here. And then under Texas Government Code, section 551.074, which is deliberation regarding personnel matters. [BLANK_AUDIO] Good evening, everyone. I want to welcome everyone to this meeting of the Denton City Council on August the 2nd, 2016. It is 6.32. If you join me and stand with me if you're able to pledge allegiance to the American and the Texas flag. [BLANK_AUDIO] [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Are these where the- >> I'll get this where they are now. Okay. All right, we- Sure. My table's gone. Okay. I hid behind it. Now it's gone. We've got a couple of proclamations and presentations. One, the first one is the Sydney Allison Award from the Water Environmental Association of Texas, presented to PS Aurora for significant contributions to engineering, operation, and maintenance of wastewater collection and transportation. [BLANK_AUDIO] This is this one right here. Okay. All right. Well, I'm gonna present this to you and then I'm gonna say a few words and I'm gonna let you say a few words if that's okay. First of all, introduce yourself and any staff that you have here. >> I'm PS Aurora. I'm just a director in the Water Department. I don't see anybody here right now. >> All right. Well, this is an award, the Sydney L. Allison Award, which is presented to PS Aurora from the Water Environment Association of Texas for significant contributions for the engineering, operation, and maintenance of wastewater collection and transportation , April the 20th, 2016. I want to present this to you. Let's give PS a big round of applause. [APPLAUSE] Now, I'm gonna brag a little bit on PS because let's face it, wastewater collection is just not the thing that's on everybody's mind or that everybody thinks about, but that everybody uses. All right. And PS and his crew have done a tremendous job of making sure that our wastewater collection system, water system, are up to date, are quite frankly probably as advanced as any in the state for sure. In fact, PS, and correct me if I'm wrong, you're used as an expert on many of these EPA matters and his contribution to the city and some of the issues that we faced has just been outstanding and has certainly saved the city not only a lot of money but also really propelled us to the forefront of this kind of technology. So I want to thank you personally for that because I think it goes sometimes unsaid. You don't see these pipes. You don't see these systems. They're underground. But what you do for our community and what your staff does is so greatly appreciated. And so I want to thank you very much for that. Thank you. Would you like to say a few words? [APPLAUSE] If Justin is listening in home, I guess, the collection system manager. Our sewer system is about 525 miles. And if you were to put it end to end, it will go from Dent on and pass Kansas City. So it is a substantial asset. If you look at the cost, over $425 million. So it's a big asset that the city has a lot of investment in it. And until a few years back, they really wanted a good way to do a master plan level work for rehab of existing sewer lines. We could do capacity. We had good models. But prior to that, there was nothing. Since 2008, we've spent about four years putting together asset management program. And we used some software which was really a first because we used the first scraps model from VIRF. We were the first in the country to do that. We used a full asset management model. We were the first in the country to do that. Big cities, Cincinnati, Fort Worth, they bought it. They hadn't implemented it. We were the ones to implement it. So what has happened now since 2012, we have a fully functioning asset management program. And that has allowed us to have a full master plan. We know now what we need to do with every pipe in the city from manhole to manhole. Whether it is nothing to do because the pipe is good or there is something to be done, whatever it needs to be done . And as part of that, we have made numerous presentations. EPA sponsored conference in Austin, Texas Water. I went to Cincinnati last year in national conference. We have done two webinars on the program. We did one just two weeks back where we had over 375 people signed up, which are really 375 entities, which are cities and consulting companies around the country and outside the US who participated in the webinar. So I did that with one of our staff members, which was very well received. We got good comments and good questions out of that. So we continue to do that. We are going to Austin in two weeks and we're presenting two more papers. So we'll continue to do the work. Thank you. Well, absolutely. Well, P.S. and his staff are a great example of the employees that we have here at the city of Denton. Thank you so much for your service and the innovation that you've brought to our community. Thank you again. Thank you, P.S. You bet. OK, the next proclamation I have is for the participants in the Mayor's Summer Youth Program. So if you're a participant, if you will come on down and stand here beside me and we're going to give you a chance to introduce yourself. I'm very proud of this. Don't be shy now. Don't everybody hide. OK, come on. All right, we're going to go down the line. And if you would introduce yourself and where you worked this summer and what school you're from. My name is Oscar and I go to Billy Ryan High School. And I worked at Best Western. My name's Ali Pigman. I go to Billy Ryan as well. And I worked in Denton Parks and Rec. I'm Josefina Corona. I graduated from Billy Ryan and I work for the fire department. I'm Cheyenne and I go to Denton Ryan High School and I work at the community health clinic. My name is Noah Bernal. I graduated from Gaia High School and I work with Denton Television. My name is Juliana Robertson. I graduated from Billy Ryan and I work at City Hall. My name is Sierra Majors. I graduated from Billy Ryan and I work in the human resources. My name's Josefina Charter. I attend Billy Ryan and I work at animal services. My name is Jesse. I go to DHS and I work at United Way of Denton City. My name is Georgia Waters. I worked with Denton Community Improvement Services with my fellow intern Tyler who could not make it today. Well, this is just a small representation of those that were working in the program. I believe we had about, was it 30 or around 30? And this is the second year of the Mayor's Summer Youth Program, which is a partnership between the City of Denton, United Way, and the Chamber to find employment for youth in the summer. Our pilot year we had 11. So this year we had close to 30, almost triple that. So if you're here with one of these participants, if you could just raise your hand so we can recognize you as well. Thank you all. Thank you all for being here. Absolutely. Well, I'm going to read this proclamation, then we have one to give to each one of you. "Greetings, whereas in the summer of 2016, the City of Dent on, United Way of Denton County, Denton Chamber of Commerce, and Denton ISD continued their partnership to support the Mayor's Summer Youth Jobs Program. And whereas working a summer job as a young adult is a rite of passage that provides valuable experiences to prepare young people for their future careers. And whereas providing summer jobs to youth in the community is important in establishing professional and personal character for young people and developing the leaders of tomorrow. And whereas 30 students were placed in the jobs in the City of Denton organization and throughout the community, and whereas these students committed eight weeks of their time to performing jobs, learning about various career fields, and developing professional skills that will serve them as they enter adulthood. Now, therefore, I, Chris Watts, Mayor of the City of Denton , Texas, do hereby proclaim August 2nd, 2016 as the Mayor's Summer Youth Jobs Program Day in the City of Denton and ask all residents to honor the 2016 participants of the Mayor's Summer Youth Jobs Program for all their accomplishments and admirable representation of Denton. Thank you all very much." [Applause] And I just want to take a moment to thank Kayla Stewart, United Way, and Jessica Rogers with the City of Denton and the Chamber and DISD because they really worked hard this year. This was a resounding success that we just continue to build on it. And thank you so much, Gary. Thank you for your leadership with United Way. So thank you all very much. You're the heart and soul of this program and I really do appreciate that. So we've got a proclamation for each of you and we'll mail those who are not here their certificate as well. So thank you all very much for participating again. Good to see you again. Thank you. Thank you all. Did you have fun though? That's the key. You had fun. Good to see you. Thank you. Thank you. Good to see you again. You bet. Good to meet you. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Jessica. Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Good to see you again. Good to see you again. Thank you. Good to see you all very much. Thank you. Good to see you again. Good to see you again. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you again. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you again. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Good to see you all very much. Okay. We'll go on to agenda item number three, which is presentation from the members of the public. Are we going to play the intro to that? The Denton City Council has adopted rules of procedure, including a code of conduct, which applies to citizens as well as council members. These rules were enacted to promote an orderly process and to preserve decorum. Here is a brief review of the rules that apply to citizens' reports. Citizens will have four minutes to give a report. There will be an electronic beep when time has expired. If the remarks are not concluded by that time, the citizen will be asked to stop speaking. If the citizen does not cease and a second request is made, the mayor will request to have the citizen removed from the council chambers. Citizens are asked to not approach the dais. If a citizen has papers or other materials to hand out to the council, please let the city secretary know, and she will have a staff member distribute the materials to the council. The attorney general has ruled that council members may listen to citizens speak and may ask questions of citizens for clarification of the issue. Council members will not engage citizens in discussion of a topic, because to do so could potentially be a violation of the Open Meetings Act. When speaking to the council, citizens are to direct all remarks and questions to the council as a whole and not to any individual member. Citizens refrain from making abusive, personal, impertinent , profane or slanderous remarks. Anyone who violates this rule will immediately be removed from the council chambers. Citizens' adherence to these rules will help make an effective presentation and will preserve the order and decorum of our proceedings. Copies of the rules of procedure are available from the city secretary. We will move on to our agenda item 3C, which is an open mic . We just changed the rules on that, I believe, just recently . So, Madam City Attorney, if you wouldn't mind reading that, and then we'll proceed. Just want to get people familiar with the new process. Right, Mayor, this particular item relates to our open microphone. So for the interest of the citizens, I will read that so that we can all become familiar with it. It reads as follows. At the beginning of the regular meeting of the city council , up to two persons who have not registered to speak, as above described being prior registration process, may make comments to the open microphone procedure. Such persons shall have filed a blue card requesting to speak during this period prior to the calling of this agenda item. At the time the city council calls the open microphone comment period, a person may present himself or herself and make public comments regarding public business. Provided, however, such persons shall not be allowed to speak to items on the current agenda in light of other established procedures for taking such comments as specified in these rules. All right, thank you. We do have a speaker, Mr. William, is it William? Is it Frenkel? Yes, if you'll come on down. And I understand you're going to speak on the issue that we talked about in work session. So I'm going to make an exception just because this is a new rule. And for this one time at the beginning of the new rule, I'm going to go ahead and let you speak on something that is on the agenda because you filled out a blue card. I saw you sitting in there, so I wanted to give you that accommodation being the first time that we really implement this rule. All right. Well, thank you very much. Yes, sir, if you'll just state your name and address, your time will begin. Thank you. My name is William Frenkel and I live at 1304 West Hickory, 108. And I've lived in Denton for about 17 years and I've been involved with the market since the beginning. I went to meetings and helped put together fundraisers to get the market started and booked music as I began, volunteered there many ways, worked in four booths there at the market, one of which I'm the sole proprietor of this business. I'm currently not operating to further my studies and education to get towards a food manufacturing license, which I want to operate in Denton. And so I just wanted to thank you all for your continued support with the market and just ask you to fully recognize the value that the market brings to Denton in so many ways for us local residents and people abroad. I think it's other markets just can't compare when it comes to the quality and diversity of the products offered and it's an amazing thing. So I just want to thank you all very much for what you all do and really consider what it brings to the city as a whole. And I look forward to the new location. And I hope we can find something sooner than later. But I understand it's a lot of factors to it. So I hope we can find the best place for everyone. Great. All right. Thank you all very much. Thank you. You bet. And just want to encourage the citizens who want to apply for Open Mic to just continue to re-familiarize themselves with the new rules. So thank you very much. Appreciate that. We've got I think that concludes our public portion of the agenda, public presentation for members of the public. We go now to agenda item four, which is consent agenda. Councilmember Hawkins. Thank you, Mayor. I move approval of consent agenda items A, C, E, F, and H. We're going to be pulling letters B and G for individual consideration. And item D, I believe is pulled for August 16th. Yes, I believe that's correct. All right. We have a motion. Mayor Pro Tem Roden. Second. We have a motion and a second for approval of the consent agenda as enumerated by the motion. And we're pulling items B and G for individual consideration and D, I believe, was being pulled altogether. Is that correct? All right. All right. Let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries 7-0. We will now circle back around to those items that have been pulled from the consent agenda item for items of individual consideration. The first being agenda item 4B, which is considered option of ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending the provision of Chapter 6, annals of the Code of Ordinances, et cetera. Do we have a staff presentation? Actually, we're not -- no, we don't have a staff presentation, but we do have people here to answer questions. And we do have a comment card, so someone wishing to speak. So I think at this time I will take that public testimony. And then if there's any discussion on staff, with staff or the council, we'll proceed after that. So we do have a card for agenda item 4B. Mr. Brian Bentley, if you'll come down, state your name and address, and your time will begin. >> First, can I ask a question? Has anything changed since the work session? That's what I don't know what's happened since the work session. >> Well, I'm not sure. I think we're going to have some discussion on that. But what I would say is if you have comments, even if they 're the same in work session, go ahead and reiterate that, and then we'll have a discussion based upon that here shortly. >> All right. Great. Thank you. Council, my name's Brian Bentley. I live at 2528 Jamestown, Denton, Texas, 76209. I'm not going to repeat what I spoke about in work session. Actually some comments were made later in work session that I would like to comment on. And I'm going to have to paraphrase, because I don't have the actual ordinance up here in front of me, but we spoke about the definition earlier today. And in that definition, there's a phrase about agricultural use or non-agricultural use. I can't remember exactly how it's stated. But there's an exception to the definition rule in there. And the problem with that is that animals do not understand zoning classes. And they don't know where zoning boundaries are. And we have residential zoning that might back up to an agricultural use, just like it backs up to our gas wells. So that phrase in the definition is limiting. And I'm not sure that it really solves the problem and does anything good. So I still have problems with the way the whole thing was defined. Anita Burgess made comments about a dog-on-dog attack. And we got lots of lawyers in here. And I'm sure there's more up here. So y'all correct me if I'm wrong. But my understanding is that under state law, whether we like it or not, a dog is personal property. So if it's personal property and we have a dog-on-dog attack, that's a civil matter against two parties. And that's a civil case. So my question is, if you pass this ordinance, then it looks like to me the city is involving itself in civil matters between two other outside parties and the city's becoming a third party to the matter. So the lawyers can work on that question and figure that one out. The next comment that was made after I spoke, city attorney Stephanie Barry made it. And she told you that they copied the language for the definition from some other cities. Well, as I've stated before, I've already objected to the language used because, one, it's open to interpretation. Two, it's not written in the language that the general public can understand and at the level of reading level of the general public. And if you want the general public, the citizens of Denton, to understand your ordinances, you have to write them to where the average person can understand it. That's the only way they can comply with the ordinance. So but it also reminds me of the blind leading the blind. So we say, oh, well, that city did it, so we'll do it too. Well, what if they got it wrong? Let's stop. All I'm asking you to do is pull this from the agenda, stop , take a look at it, and consider what the definition is, how it impacts items. And so I'll stop there. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Council Member Begari. >> I have a motion to amend this ordinance that I'd like to make. >> Madam City Attorney. >> Prior to the motion, if I could comment that we did hand out a new ordinance and we did take to heart the comments that were made earlier today in the work session, we did make some amendments, we did not make others. The change that we did affect was related to the time during which the complaint needed to be filed and the objection was it related to business days and the suggestion was we change that to calendar days. We agreed with that and we've made that change, that change ordinance is before you and I passed it out earlier. We convened a discussion with regard to the definition and we do not concur with the speaker and so we stand on the definition that we set forth so no changes have been made in that respect. But we wanted to make sure that the council knew what ordinance was before them as you take a look at this and take a motion on it. >> Thank you. And we do have a couple of requests to speak so I will take , if you want me to, I'll take your motion and then we'll have the discussion with those who have requested to speak. Is that okay? >> [Inaudible] >> That's right. Yes. >> Okay. So the first amendment that I'd like to make is just to clarify section 4, item 4, item A4. This is the honey bees section and it reads neighbors must be notified that bees will be kept on your property, semicolon and, and what I'd like to amend this is to read immediate neighbors just to clarify which neighbors because I didn't see who constitutes neighbors. >> What was your immediate? >> Immediate. >> Immediate. >> Yeah. And the second amendment was to modify section 7 and to include a phrase immediately preceding this paragraph stating that with the exception of a violation of section 6-49 sub A sub 5 here and above any person found guilty, et cetera, et cetera. And what that would do is remove the honey bee registration form completion requirement from the $500 a day penalty. The penalty would attach to the other items but not to the registration portion. >> Okay. All right. >> Point of order. >> Yes. >> She might want to punch in the motion so that somebody could second it. >> Okay. Councilmember Gregory? >> Second. >> All right. We'll go into discussion. >> Councilmember Wasney? >> Just want to emphasize thank you for bringing to our attention the 30 business days that we have taken out so that it now reads 30 calendar days which is, you know, the way it should read. So again, thank you for having sharp eyes and bringing that to our attention. I appreciate that. Thank you. >> Councilmember Gregory? >> Thank you, Mayor. I would ask our city attorney to first of all just read the section in section 1 regarding the definition of enclosure. If you would read that first of all without any kind of interpretation. >> Yes, sir. Glad to do that. That provision relating to definitions reads as follows. Enclosure means a fenced area or structure that physically blocks the escape of an animal contained therein. Additionally, in non-rural zoning districts an enclosure must serve as a physical barrier to the entry of adults, children and dogs. >> So in a non-rural area does that mean that the enclosure , and I'm going to use the word fence, is constructed in such a way that it would not be easy for a dog to gain entry into the enclosure? >> Yes, sir. That would be accurate. Children or adults. >> It would not be easy for a child to gain entry. >> That would be our reading, yes, sir. >> Because people can climb over fences and things like that. Old people like me can't do that very well, but other people can. But it's serving as some type of physical barrier so that the dog inside is safe from people coming in and the people that might be inadvertently wandering in are safe from the dog that's inside. >> Yes, sir. >> Thanks. >> That all, Councilmember Gregory? >> That's it. >> Okay. Mayor Pro Tem. >> I'm trying to understand the consequences of the motion. So I guess I had a question for the motioner and perhaps our city attorney as to whether or not she and perhaps other staff concur with those changes prior to voting. So can you recite again what you added previous to Section 7 and what the result of that change is? >> I added with the exception of a violation of Section 6- 49A5 here and above. I think I got that right. And then the rest is the remaining part of the ordinance. And the effect would be that there couldn't be a penalty assessed for failure to register -- complete a registration form and submit it to the City of Denton. It's not that it wouldn't be illegal. It's still illegal. There wouldn't be up to $500 a day penalty attached to it. >> So what's the point of having an ordinance? I'm trying to understand this. If you have that as a provision of your ordinance yet there 's no penalty associated with it, what's the value of having that written in there? Are you saying you don't agree with having to have a registration? >> I have no problem with the registration. I, however, think that a lot of times people fail to register for reasons that are happenstance, for lack of a better word. And I'm not comfortable allowing a fine of up to $500 for something as simple as failure to register. >> I get it. The question then goes to the City Attorney, and is that a normal way? Do we typically write ordinances where we don't have any penalty provision associated with the particulars in that ordinance? And then the follow-up question would be, probably have a similar provision as it relates to registering backyard chickens. Does that also contain this? And if not, why aren't we being consistent? >> We typically don't carve out a provision with regard to the penalty provisions. What I typically see is that the penalty provisions apply to the entire ordinance in each part thereof. This is not even carving out the entire 6-49 as I heard the ordinance motioned. It rather carves out 6-49 and one small provision, which is the registration fee. So it's a very small carve-out on the penalty assessment under this ordinance. But nonetheless, it is a carve-out. I did have one issue. I see Stephanie Berry, and I've got to let her speak, and I have another issue, and she may address it. If you don't mind, let me call on Stephanie Berry with regard to this issue. >> Actually, I would have a suggestion about the honeybee registration. We have several offenses that are classy level, that are dismissable without a fee or fine, if they're corrected. One is, if you get your animal registered and bring it to court, there's a dismissal without a fee. If you don't have insurance with you and bring it to court, that's dismissable without a fee. So it could either be written in the penalty provision or in subsection five itself. Any violations for subsection five shall be dismissable without a fine if the registration is completed within 30 days. Something like that would be a suggestion. That way, you have some way to make sure they actually follow through with getting them registered. >> Yes, Councilmember Gary, you bet. It's kind of like bringing your driver's license or insurance or your animal registration to the court. You don't pay anything. >> I'll modify my motion to amend. Motion to amend as Ms. Berry indicated regarding the, what is, how did you call the provision? >> We could either write it in subsection five itself. Any violations for this subsection shall be dismissable without any finer costs with proof of registration. It might be the cleanest way to do it. >> Exactly, as she stated. Also still keeping the clarification of neighbors as being immediate neighbors. Thank you. >> Was there another issue, Madam City Attorney? >> I think with that correction, it would address my concern as well. >> Okay, all right. >> So I will hold my piece. >> Okay, Councilmember Gary, you've got signed up to request to speak. That was from your previous one, okay. Councilmember Gregory. >> As a seconder, I'm okay with the change in the amendment , but I do have a question as to why we register Bs anyhow. And that's more of a curiosity than it is anything else. Why do we do that? >> Let me call on Catherine Barnett. She's been working on the kind of the B part of this ordinance. When we were working with the Denton County Beekeepers, we talked about the registration process. And we went back and forth with it. But they were very happy with the registration. In case we ever do mosquito spraying, we can notify them. We can put them on the GIS map and notify them and let people know. And then if there's loose bees, we know where to look. >> What a great explanation. It's not to try to do something bad to people. It's to try to notify them to give them some heads up if we 're doing something. >> Yes, sir. >> That's great. Thank you. >> Thank you. One question I have on the amendment to subsection four about neighbors. You said immediate neighbors. I understand what that is. I mean, are you wanting just those adjacent to the property ? Or is there so many people, so many feet out from that? I guess if the idea was adjacent, I would think that that might be, but I don't know what your intent was with that particular term . >> Just to firm it up so you don't have to notify the whole neighborhood. I mean, I think it's really vague the way that it's written in terms of who consists of a neighbor and who you're required to notify. >> Okay, so to use the word immediate, what did you have in mind as far as who to contact? >> Next door, front, back. >> So adjacent? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Would you be okay with that, with that particular change adjacent? >> Yes, I'll make that change. >> Okay, all right, thank you. All right, any other questions on it? Is that change okay with the second as well? I guess that's a yes. Okay, all right, yes. >> Yes, Mayor, it is because I don't want people to have to be notifying the good Samaritan who is also our neighbor. >> Okay, okay, all right. >> It's just things we have. >> It's crickets out there. Instead of bees, it's crickets. Okay, so we've got a motion and a second with the associated amendments. Does staff have the amendments that have been requested or do we need to go back over? You got those? Okay. So let's vote on the board, please, for agenda item 4B. Motion carries 7-0. We'll go now to agenda item 4G, which was an item for individual consideration. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas granting a three year exception to Section 17-20 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas. With respect to sound levels and hours of operation for the North Texas State Fair and Rodeo held at 2217 North Carroll Boulevard. Do we have a? >> No, I'm sorry, Mayor, we don't have a staff presentation , but we do have Emerson-Varro to answer any questions that you may have on this item. >> Okay, Council Member Baguier. >> I pulled this from the consent agenda for individual consideration. The reason being, it's quite personal, it's just loud when they have the fair and I'm not comfortable granting a variance, or not a variance, an exception to go all the way till 11 PM for the noise variance. As I understand it, that's what's being requested here is exception to the noise ordinance on Sunday from 11 AM to 11 PM, not to exceed 70 decibels. So I'll move to strike that portion with the understanding that maybe we need to have a discussion, maybe not. >> Okay, so what you're wanting is to exclude Sunday or, I 'm sorry. >> The decibel. >> The decibels. >> The 70, not to exceed 70 decibels. >> Two things, the decibels and how late it is. because as I understand it, they're only asking for an exception for Sunday on the decibels, I think that's correct. >> Is that, I guess we need some clarification on that if we have staff. >> That is correct in their letter. They said that they would not exceed 70 decibels. >> Are they only asking for that exception on Sunday? >> They're asking for that exception for all days. >> Okay, yes, that's what I was saying. >> Okay. >> Yeah, Friday. So that means during the hours of operation on Monday through Thursday, it's till 10 from 10 to midnight. >> Till midnight. >> And Friday and Saturday is till 1 AM and then Sunday is 11. So they could, the request is to go above that, not to exceed 70 decibels any time they're in operation, is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> I have a question for him. >> Yes, Council Member McGarry. >> What is the normal, what are they asking to exceed? >> Most of the festivals along this line, which is how this would be classified, have asked for 70 decibels. That's been pretty much what the council has held the line at. >> And then without that exception, what would their deci bels be at? >> 65. >> Okay, and for most of the festivals, do they go until 1 AM or midnight? >> Typically not quite that late, typically midnight. >> Okay, thank you. >> Council Member Briggs. >> That was my question about the normal decibels. >> About the what, I'm sorry? >> The normal, what it is normally, and I think it's 65, is that what he said? >> Mayor Pro Tem? >> I guess to clarify as well, well two things, and this is a question for you, Emerson. One is, sorry, I didn't get called on. There's a time element to this too, beyond the decibel, right? I mean, so I guess to clarify, is 65 allowed 24 hours a day by law? >> No, it's typically till 10 o'clock at night. >> Right, okay, so they're asking for both a time and a decibel change. >> Yes, sir. >> Is this any departure from what they've asked the previous decade or whatever? >> They've asked for since 1995 and council has. >> And it's always been approved? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay, thank you. >> Council Member Hawkins? >> That was my question, so. >> I guess for me, it's an exception for three years. Have they come in three year increments or has it been yearly before? >> It's been three year increments. >> All right. Okay. >> Since, well, since. >> 2004, three year increments. >> Council Member Begarry? >> Okay, so I want to just clarify and maybe change, let me change up the motion. I'm really only concerned about the timing of it going till 1 AM, so I'll move to not have it exceed midnight on any night. I mean, it's very loud from my house. This is the reason why, because I can't sleep. >> Okay, so what you're saying is not to exceed 70 decibels is okay, but you're asking for the time limit of midnight, is that correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. Council Member Hawkins? >> And they've requested up till 1 AM since 2004. It's the very uniform request that they make? >> The request, that request goes back to 1995. >> '95, okay. Thank you. >> Council Member Briggs? >> Do they have to get any approval from the neighbors or surrounding? Do they have to, for this? Or is that something that we- >> No, ma'am. >> Ever send out to neighbors to, because I used to live there as well. So I'm just curious if it was something that they have to notify. >> Just council approval. >> Okay. Mayor Pro Tem? >> I guess my concern for my colleagues at this point is, perhaps if you have concerns on this moving forward, I think if the tradition's been over the last decade to allow this, this is coming up in a couple weeks, and my guess is they 've got scheduled performers. There's probably the assumption that council, like we have for the last decade, would move forward, even though we have the choice to change that. I would think there would be a bit of disruption this year in making that sort of a change this late in the game, without any signaling ahead of time that we had an intent to change that standing tradition. So that's just my thought as we move to vote on this thing. I won't be supporting this. >> Councilmember Briggs? >> May I speak to Councilmember Begheri? Would you be okay with the one year, and then we can reeval uate next year with this exception, as Councilmember Rodin says? >> I think that's fair. >> Okay. >> Okay, so are you saying that? >> So I will withdraw my motion to strike the time limit, and I will just ask that I'll move to make this a one year provision as it's written. >> Okay. Councilmember Wasney? >> When you plan events, you plan events years in advance. When you book venues to come and play at a state fair, you 're booking events one year, two year. I think it's the reason why they come in as for three year increments, so that it allows them to sign contracts with performers who come to the fair and I think we're tying their hands unnecessarily by trying to limit this to a one year. I understand the noise. I also understand the fair is an integral part of this city . When I come back to the event planning portion of it, that you can't sign contracts moving forward with any certainty if you only have a one year contract in terms of hours of operations. So I feel we should go back to the three year contract, which is what they've had to allow them to plan their venue and performers who come in and allow them to sign those contracts. >> Councilmember Hawkins? >> If the one year motion fails, what happens next? Are we able to vote on the original? Okay. >> Right, you can circle back on another motion if this one fails. >> Thank you. >> I do just have a question of clarification on the ordinance where it talks about changing the hours of operation from 10 PM till midnight to 1 AM and then to 11 on Friday, Saturday, Sunday. That's always been requested because that's where the 65 decibel cuts off is at 10. >> At 10 o'clock. >> Okay, so they've always asked for that. It's not like they've only been open till 10. >> The 70 cuts off at 10 o'clock. >> Okay, 70 cuts off at 10. Okay. Okay, we have a motion on the table. Do we have a second? We have a motion on the table. I'll call for a second one more time. Do we have a second? Okay, the motion on the table fails for a second. Chair would entertain any other discussion or motion? I don't see who's. >> Yeah, I don't want to clear it. >> Yeah. Council, Mayor Pro Tem? >> Mayor, I move approval of agenda item 4G. >> Councilmember Wasney? >> I second the motion. >> Okay, Councilmember Briggs? >> I'm going to vote for this this time, but is there any way that in three years, the council would be put in the same position if they did want to make a change? Is there something we can do to address the future? I mean, is there a discussion that can start taking place or? I mean, I'm just kind of throwing it out there because I don't want the same discussion to be in. And if there is an issue with the neighbors, for them, their concerns not to ever be addressed. >> Thank you. Councilmember Begari? >> Question for Mr. Vorall. Do you get complaints about the noise or is this really just me up here? >> Well, there are always a few complaints. I mean, it would be better to ask the chief about that. I don't receive those complaints, but I understand anecdot ally that there are always a few. >> Okay, thank you. >> Would you like for the chief to address that, Council member Begari? Okay, all right, thank you. Well, I think it's a good idea to help us maybe even in to understand what the nature of the complaints are, how many there are maybe after one this year, just a brief informal staff report of hey, we had this. So we'll have additional data, but I'm in favor of the current motion on the table as well. Any other questions before we take a vote? We've had a motion and a second on agenda item 4G. Let's vote on the board, please. Item carries 6 to 1. We'll go to agenda items 5, which are items for individual consideration. We'll go to agenda item 5A. And I do have an additional nomination there once, I'm sorry, go ahead, Howard. >> Well, I was going to ask Jennifer Walters, our city secretary, to handle this particular item. >> Well, Mayor and Council, you discussed this in your work session and the names that you provided were added to your nomination list. And as the mayor said, he has indicated that he does have another name he would like to add. >> Yes, would I do that at this time? >> Yes, please. >> All right, I believe it's to the Community Development Advisory Committee. So if you would verify this name so I just don't appoint the wrong person to the wrong committee. It's the current incumbent, Mary Beth Cottingham. >> Mm-hm. >> And she contacted me and she wishes to continue to serve . >> Thank you. I've made that note. And then any new individuals that you are going to be appro ving, I assume in the near future. Those people, if they have not submitted an application, we will ask them to do so. And then the approval will be on the basis of that they pass all of their preliminary requirements to serve on the board. >> Okay, any questions for the city secretary on this agenda item? Seeing none, Council Member Gregory. >> I move approval of the revised list with the conditions as explained by our secretary. >> Council Member Hawkins? >> I'll second. >> I'm sorry, yeah, we got a public speaker, so I apologize . Is it Sean? Is it Treat? I'm sorry, apologize. It was sitting up there, was it? Treat, okay, I'm sorry. Yes, come on down and state your name and address and your time. And we do have some other cards that we'll read into the record. >> Yes, thank you. >> John Treat, 3508 Pheasant Hollow here in Denton. Distinguished members of the Denton City Council, this past Saturday, Amber Briggle announced on her Facebook page while she was out of town on vacation that Councilperson Wasney intends to replace her as chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission. For several compelling reasons, I strongly urge my Denton neighbors and the elected members here on the City Council to renounce any attempts to prematurely replace Amber Briggle as chair of the PNZ. First and foremost, Amber has served on this commission with undeniable distinction for several years as a volunteer commissioner, then as vice chair. She has been an exemplary citizen servant, earning bipartisan respect and admiration for her willingness to listen, inform, advocate, and engage diverse Denton citizen groups and concerns. Amber has won the trust of her Denton neighbors and civic groups through her gregarious public advocacy on issues like bicycle accommodations, smart municipal growth, neighborhood protections, engaging civic organizations, advocating tree canopy and green space zoning, as well as her work with the Denton League of Women Voters. Her numerous civic awards and accomplishments are testament enough to her high esteem across diverse Denton communities, even beyond her district. Second, Amber's hard earned institutional knowledge and informed deliberation should not be so quickly dismissed because these crucial attributes for PNZ are not so easily replaced. It was the respect of her fellow commissioners and citizens , we should recall, that earned her unanimous bipartisan support when they elected her to positions of vice chair and chair of PNZ. Amber is a rare studious voice who listens first and then invites civil deliberation to far reaching decisions of the PNZ upon policies that impacts all Denton districts. That this influential voice belongs to a rare woman within what some Dentonites have derided as the City Council Boys Club, which actually prior to recent elections may have been true, but we're glad to see the mix up. But I would think it should still require our representatives to offer some very compelling reasons indeed for suddenly replacing such a qualified candidate with an untested novice. So third and finally, I wish to voice profound skepticism over the choice of Stephen Sullivan as the nominator replacement for this very key position within Denton city government. Not only has Sullivan failed to demonstrate any prior apt itude or interest in PNZ, much less show any active engagement with city council, he is the father of a highly controversial political lobbyist and president of Empower Texas, an extremist free market political action committee under numerous investigations by the Texas Ethics Commission and openly committed to dismantling local control by infilt rating municipal and state governance. This is not tinfoil hat mudslinging, but this is public record. I've included this in the comments that I sent you. Sullivan has publicly served as a treasurer for a Corinth mayoral candidate whose sparse campaign website touts basically misspelled promises that reek of this Empower Texas boilerplate for these candidates that they fund. So additionally, Stephen Sullivan is also listed in required Texas Ethics Commission filings as a confirmed donor to Empower Texas. Now, I want to make this point clear. None of this may formally disqualify Sullivan other existing conflict of interest regulations or violate current ethics guidelines, which Empower Texas has admitted is too vague to be enforceable on the group. Nor should political affiliations alone ever disqualify-- Sean, your time is up. Could you go ahead and wrap it up, please? One more sentence, sir. Okay. Yet, these available facts should be enough, I think, to give citizens and our representatives some cause for serious deliberation before offering up to Sullivan an unqualified appointment to a powerful position that does indeed champion and regulate important mechanisms of local control for the city of Denton. This is not a library. This is not a-- Yes, sir. Thank you. I appreciate it. I'm sorry. Your time is up. Thank you. We have two white cards which are indicating that you wish not to speak, but I will read your name into the record and any comments that are written on the card. Timothy Stoltzoff-- I'm sorry if I didn't pronounce that correctly-- at 3004 Pecan Tree Drive, the box is checked opposition with no other comments . Melissa Carr, 3508 Pleasant Hollow, I think, Denton, Texas. She's in support. I support keeping Amber Brighill on the PNZ and oppose Stephen Sullivan. So those are the only two cards that we have. I thank you all for your comments. We have a motion and a second on the board. Let's vote, please. Motion carries, 7-0. We'll move on to agenda items 5B, conduct the first two readings of an ordinance to annex an approximately 0.375 acres, generally located on the north side of Crawford Road. Thank you, Mayor. Amy Bissett, our Director of Development Services, will be handling this item. Thank you, Mayor and Councilmembers. This is a first reading of an annexation ordinance regarding a voluntary annexation. I'll get it pulled up here for you. The applicant is Ranchview Specialty Hospital. This will be the first of two readings of an ordinance to annex approximately 0.375 acres. The location is on the north side of Crawford Road, approximately 675 feet east of I-35W Crawford Road on ramp. The applicant is proposing a 45,000 square foot specialty hospital with future medical offices within phases. The property currently is on three tracts of land. Two of them are within the municipal boundaries and a third is in the ETJ. In order to facilitate continuity and consistent regulations, it's been mutually agreed upon to annex the property. This is a voluntary annexation. There is no action tonight. This is simply the first reading of the ordinance, which I will now read into the record. An ordinance of the City of Denton annexing approximately 0 .375 acres of land, generally located on the north side of Crawford Road, approximately 6 75 feet east of I-35W Crawford Road on ramp. More specifically described in Exhibit A and illustrated in Exhibit B, which area abuts and is adjacent to the city limits so as to include the property within the city limits. Granting to all the inhabitants of the property all the rights and privileges of other citizens and binding the inhabitants to all of the ordinances, resolutions, acts, and regulations of the city, providing for a correction to the city map to include the annex lands, providing for a severability clause, and providing an effective date. Again, there is no action required tonight. This is the first reading of the annexation ordinance. The second reading and potential adoption of the ordinance is scheduled for September 20th. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. Any questions for the staff? Council Member Gary? Notice was provided twice, I'm assuming. We've had public hearings on this previously. That's correct. Okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, green card, mailing, notice that you're going to be annexed to that part of notice. They're voluntarily annexed. Sorry. So they have asked to be annexed. I'm getting my flash across here. Okay. Any other questions for staff? I believe we do have a person wishing to speak on this. Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry. The next one. That's the next one. Huh? What? We are on 6B. Yeah. Oh, no. That's a public hearing. Never mind. I'm sorry, Amy. It's just been one of those days. Yeah. All right. 5B. So no actions needed. No one's here to speak on it. So we will now move on to our public hearings. The first public hearing is 6A because agenda item 5C was pulled because we considered that yesterday. Yes. Agenda item 6A is continue public hearing considered option of ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas regarding rezoning request for neighborhood residential three district to neighborhood residential six. And this is a continuation of a public hearing. So the public hearing is currently open. And if there's anyone who is -- it's my understanding the applicant wishes to continue this. But this is a public hearing. So if there's someone here wishing to speak on this agenda item, please come down and state your name and address and your time will begin. Agenda item 6A. Anybody wishing to speak on this continued public hearing? Seeing none, chair would entertain a motion to -- I believe the applicant's requested a continuation of this public hearing. Is that correct? Yes, sir, to August 16th is my understanding. Councilmember Hawkins? I move to continue this item until August 16th's meeting. Councilmember Gregory? Second. We have a motion and a second for continuation to August 16 th on agenda item 6A. Let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries 7-0. Item 6B is hold a public hearing considered option of a resolution regarding the proposed site for construction, expansion, and use of an electric power transmission distribution substation located in the southwest area of the city of Denton north of Farmer to Market Road 2449. Right. Brent Heath, our executive manager of energy delivery, will be making the staff presentation. And I will open the public hearing. Thank you, Mr. Martin, mayor, city council, good evening. Project being discussed tonight is for a new underwood substation that's located in southwest Denton off of I-35W and Farmer Market Road 2449 adjacent to Underwood Road. The executive summary for this CIP project that we have is similar to our other CIP projects. We have aging infrastructure and we have growth. You may have noticed a lot of growth in southwest Denton down in the John Payne and Crawford area there's country lakes north, country lakes west. There's a water booster station and that provides all the water to ropes and ranch and also the fire protection. Right now we have one substation that serves all of that. Underwood substation would help that. We have responsibility to respond to the growth in aging infrastructure that both affect reliability. We've had a public involvement process and we consider all practical options. Underwood substation is a budgeted CIP project that we have . It's located southwest Denton on this map. It's shown here in the southwest corner. It's project number 10. We hope to have this built and online by fiscal year 2020. We worked with power engineers, one of our engineering consultants to prepare a constraints map of where the substation site would be located to see what might be the best possible location. This is a map that power engineers prepared. This is the original map we took to an open house in December of 2013. There were several sites that kind of all overlapped around Far Market Road 2449 which is all west of 35W. This is Underwood Road right here. We looked at some type of a site somewhere in this property or possibly over on this adjacent property or over here. These were the five sites that we took to the open house. We immediately ruled out the dark blue site here because of the steep terrain that slopes off rapidly to the creek, the stream area. It has sharp terrain due to some environmental concerns and also physical accessibility of equipment. It's really primarily these four sites that we talked to the citizens in the open house in December of 2013. From that discussion we learned some interesting things. This next map will kind of zoom in here. Once again this is 35W and FM 2449. You'll notice the orange lines show the new proposed west loop 288 as presented on the city of Denton approved mobility plan. We're taking that into account. We also have some orange lines up here for a city approved MPC for Coal Ranch master plan community development. We have the same original orange site shown at the open house. We have the light blue site over here. We have a new proposed site called the green site north of the orange site as proposed by the property owner of this land as a preference. Each of these sites have pros and cons. There's no perfect site. I want to give you a few of the pros and cons for each of these sites. The green site is surrounded by three transmission lines. This transmission line here goes from our Denton west subst ation to Fort Worth substation. This line is an encore 138KV line and this line is a 138KV line from Denton west Artie Wells. So this potential property that was identified by the property owner has transmission lines all the way around it. Perfect location for our substation. However, there is some steep terrain. You may notice on the northeast corner of the property here there's a hill identified by the closed contour lines. So therefore we would have to build some retaining walls which would drive up the site preparation cost. The other site just south of that and adjacent is the orange site. One of the things about the orange site is it would be the easiest to construct. It also would have the lowest preparation cost because it is the smallest site. But it would set adjacent to the commercial development that may occur once 288 frontage is put in. And the property owner said that this was a site that they could not get behind because of the frontage for commercial development. The blue side option over here was the largest site and it would fit within the master plan community plan proposed by the city. However, it would have to reroute a transmission line around the west side and the north side to get around it. And so it would be physically the largest site we would have to procure. And it would potentially have the highest real estate cost due to the more land. And the property owner of this site has objected to this site as well. We kind of summarized all three of those into a matrix. Side by side here's a little same map to kind of give you a key index. The orange site, the green and the blue. The physical size of the substation would be either 4.1 for the orange or 6.5 acres within the transmission boundary for the green or 9.8 acres for the blue. The estimated cost to acquire the land, prepare the site, build the retaining walls is all within 800,000 delta here or 100,000 delta here. So they're all fairly tightly grouped. And the owner preference is based on the property owner saying that would be the preferred site, the green, if it had to go in this area. Not that they wanted a substation, but if it did, that would be the preferred site. So the public involvement steps that we've had is we had an open house in December 3rd, 2013 at the Civic Center. We've met with the landowners. We had a public hearing with the PUB on July the 25th. And we had a, tonight we're here with the City Council for the public hearing. So the recommendation based on the open house, the conversations with the landowners, the preliminary site studies, the PUB's public hearing recommendation that was unanimous is to go forward with the green substation site. With that, I'd like to, I'd be happy to answer any questions now or we can wait until after you hear from the public. And one thing I do want to add is after the public hearing and the council selects the site that would be your preference, we'll come back for a resolution with that after we work with legal and we get the site selected that y'all pick. Council Member Gregory, do you have questions for staff? Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Would you go back to the chart? I think that the chart answered my question that I was going to ask because my question had to do with given the fact that the green site was less expensive, probably less expensive to buy, did that offset the increased cost of construction? And it looks like it does to some extent. Yes. I think it does have a direct impact with that correlates. Okay, thank you. Council Member Hawkins. Yeah, just a question about the open house and the meetings . I'm sure there wasn't a large turnout because there wasn't a nearby neighborhood or something like that. Just the landowners were there. Am I assuming that correctly? That is correct. We didn't have a very large turnout. That was at the Civic Center. Okay. Thanks, Brent. You're welcome. Council Member Wasney. These are the two large landowners that we're talking about in this neighborhood. Yes, that is correct. The blue side is shown on the left-hand side in this area would be the Coal Ranch property, which would be from Underwood West, north of 2449, and they have some land also to the south of 2449. And over here would be the Hillwood property that goes all the way down into the Hunter Ranch inspiration-type development. So the green option is the Hillwood property. Yes, ma'am, that is correct. Thank you. And there's not been any preliminary discussion on pricing or anything like that with the owners? No, there has not. Okay. Okay, any other questions for staff? Seeing none, thank you. Okay, thank you. And this is a public hearing. We do have a card. This is the card I inadvertently tried to call, and I'm sure he didn't want to speak on the voluntary annexation. Craig S. – boy, you're going to have to help me with that. I'm just going to say Mr. Craig, come up – is it Skade? Okay, I'm sorry. I apologize for that. All right. Get a little jargon in there. It's Craig Scotty. Oh, yeah. Thank you. Thank you. State your name and address as you talk. Good evening, Council. My name is Craig Scotty. I represent Hillwood and Alliance and Petrus Property, the landowner for both the green and the orange sites. A few brief remarks here. Address 13600 Heritage Parkway, Fort Worth, 76177. Few remarks. We've been working with DME for the past two to three years . All cordial. We appreciate everything they've done. Like the gentleman said, we don't want a substation on our property, but of the two choices, we are a proponent of the green, nestled in infrastructure that's already there versus the orange site, which has a potential for development yield and economic value. The green site, from I guess the negative aspect of it, that it's there, is it leads to remainder tracks. I don't know if the offer will be to purchase the two remainder tracks next to it. Those are the small triangles that we can't put to use that 'd be still within the boundary. And then you've got zone for residential, the higher crest to the northeast. You've got residential lots that will look down on the substation, which is not a plus. But all in all, it is a good fit relative to the two sites. And we have not received any offers, but we'll continue to evaluate once we do and if we do. Any questions for the applicant? I guess when you talk about the remainder tracks, the triangles, are you talking about the ones that are where that blue line is, those two? What are you talking about? Yeah. So just outside the green to the east of the green site, the little triangle that's created, to the north of the green where the triangle's created, doesn't seem like much. We maximize economic yield and we consider those remainder tracks. I don't know if that would be part of the offer or not, but we'll consider that when the offer comes in. Thank you. Okay. Any questions? Any more questions? All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you for coming. This is a public hearing. Anybody wishing to speak on this item? No card is required. Anybody wishing to speak? I will now close the public hearing on agenda item 6B. Councilmember Gregory. So I'm a little confused on what is needed from council tonight. It says consider adopting a resolution. Do we have the resolution in the backup? So then the motion would be to, for staff to bring a resolution to us for a particular site? There is no resolution included. So if the council could indicate what route or site they choose, then we'll bring the resolution back. Okay. Councilmember Pro Tem. Thank you, Mayor. I make a motion recommending the green site and giving staff direction to bring back a resolution towards that end. Councilmember Gregory. Second. Got a question. I don't want to be too, just a question on the posting and what we're doing. It says consider adopting a resolution. That's really what we're doing. We're making a motion to adopt a resolution in the future, which is consider adopting. So it doesn't have to be present. We don't have to be adopting the resolution today in order for this to be a proper posting. Is that correct? I think this is a proper posting. It's direction. I think this is adequate for the direction. I believe that you all are going and selecting that green site. Mayor Pro Tem. I would just make a suggestion in the future. We've had issues where we have public hearings and then act on the ultimate site later on for some reason. We've done this with SUPs relating to substations in the past. I think in the future, if we could get a resolution at the time so that if public wanting to speak to it, they don't have to come back twice to do that. It just seems to add confusion. All right. Thank you. Because the resolution would be an item for individual consideration as it comes back to us. Is that correct? Yeah. Or we'll put it on consent agenda if it's going the right direction. Okay. All right. So we have a motion and a second on the board for approval of adopting or bringing forth a resolution in the future selecting, I believe, as the green site for agenda item 6B. So let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries 7-0. We are now to agenda item 7, which is concluding items. Council Member Gregory. A question for staff to give us a quick report back maybe via email. Now, it might have happened, something might have changed today because I've been here since 9 this morning. So 11 hours, lots of things could have changed out in the town of Denton. But for a number of days, a set of train cars have been sitting on railroad tracks, on the Union Pacific railroad tracks that are going parallel to M ingo Road, and they have been blocking Frame Street for several days. And I'm concerned about that in terms of convenience for our citizens. I'd like some information, especially, I thought that if they blocked tracks from a road for more than so many hours, that they could get a ticket. So I want to -- it may be gone by now and it may be a moot point, but still a question of when they're doing -- and I know that they've been doing repairs on all of those street crossings on the railroad, but that seems ridiculous for them to have been blocking that street for several days and creating issues for our first responders and for our citizens who depend on that particular route to get from place to place. >> We'll follow up with the information on that. >> Thank you. >> Councilmember Hawkins. >> Thank you, Mayor. Once again, I'm just speaking on the high speed Internet issue at the Good Sam, and I feel like we're getting closer possibly to a solution here. And I just want to encourage anybody in staff, if we can just -- I know we've lost some key members with the legal team retiring and that sort of thing , but they really are pretty desperate, I would use the word now, for some relief out there. This is just pretty much an infrastructure issue now, and just wanted to publicly say that. I thought that this was interesting. I have a friend in Rotary, and they live in a new development, and they were having some address issues with mapping, and I had never heard that before. I just assumed you get a new house built, something like that. It just automatically gets -- you get an address, you get mail, you get pizza to your house, whatever. And I don't need a real detailed informal staff report, but I was curious how that kind of works with the city being involved, or Tech's Dot, or the state, and possibly -- I think that this issue is resolved now, but just was curious about that. Okay. Thank you. Let us follow up on that. Okay. Councilmember Wasney. We revised item 4B several times. This is the DOG B ordinance. If you could email a final copy of that ordinance to all the council, that would be most helpful. Thank you. I'm glad to do that. And I've got one -- you know, I wanted to ask for council to bring back -- I mean, not council, for staff to bring back -- for an open session discussion. There's been some emails I've received and some discussion about, you know, the one site for the RDP, and so wanted to have a work session to see if there was a desire to have two. I mean, revisit that. I know it might need to be done on a timely basis, so I believe there was some interest of that. Okay. Thank you. Any other concluding items? Wow. It's not even 8 o'clock yet. All right. Seeing none, we will stand adjourned.