Sep 13, 2016 City Council on 2016-09-13 1:00 PM

It's Tuesday, September the 13th, 2016. It is 1.02 in the afternoon. We will move on down through our agenda items posted. Our first one is citizens comment on agenda items. I do have a white card that I'm going to read into the record. They didn't wish to speak, but wanted to read their comment . Oh, sorry, Sarah. It's from Ken Gold, 2512 Notches Trace Denton. It's regarding consent agenda item F, as in Frank. Please pull item F from the consent agenda so that there might be more discussion on a project of this size. Thank you, Ken Gold. Any other citizen comments on any agenda items? Don't see any cards, other cards. All right, we'll move on then to request for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for September the 13th, 2016. Yes, Council Member Geary. Wondering if we could move the third item to the top of the list today, if anybody has any objections . Work session item, yeah. OK, so that's item C, which is discussion of the budget. You're saying you'd like to sort of switch places with A, or you would just put C first and then go AB? C, AB. OK. Any objections to that? Yes, Council Member Wasney. I know that we have seniors in the audience who came for agenda work session A, and out of respect for them . I would like to stick to the schedule. OK. Any other council members want to weigh in on that? Yes, Ken. I agree with Councilwoman Wasney. All right. We'll go ahead and keep the same original schedule. OK, then any other consent clarifications? Yes, Council Member Walton. I had a comment on G. We don't need to pull it or anything. But I know that this has been a difficult item to work through. And I just really-- publicly, I wanted to thank Lee Allison and Mr. Davis for just working through it, sticking with it. And that's pretty much all I wanted to say on that. So good job, guys. I know that it was difficult. Thank you. All right. And legal. Don't forget legal. Sorry. Yes, go ahead. Thank you so much for that. I appreciate that. When you act on this, would you please make your motion consistent with the handout that's before you today? Thank you. OK. Yes, Council Member Briggs. I had sent an email over the weekend and realized that this is probably the better place to do it. And just for clarification, is this the correct place where I request to remove items from the agenda? I believe so. Yes. Is that correct, Madam City Attorney? Yes. Yes, go ahead. Well, fellow council members and mayor, at this time, I request that agenda items calling for consideration and action on the Denton Energy Center be removed from today's regularly scheduled city council meeting, Tuesday, September 13. These items are consent agenda item FID 161162, and individual consideration agenda items A, ID 16-1031, and B, ID 16-1032. In interest of this council, the citizens and rate payers it represents, and staff of the city, I believe no further action should be taken on the Denton Energy Center until completion of an independent audit and/or internal council ethics board review regarding the selection process of the consultant hired to independently review the renewable Denton Plan and Energy Center. Specific attention should be paid to circumstances of prior relationships with a selected consultant, the objectivity and professionalism in the evaluation of potential consultants, the scope of study to be performed as it relates to council direction, and the ultimate recommendation by city management to select Brattle Group. OK. Yes, Council Member Gregory. Thanks. I would be fine with us moving item F off of the consent agenda for individual consideration, but I think it would be more appropriate to take those items at the regular meeting. And if there is a motion to postpone or a motion to table, that that would be a more appropriate way to deal with it rather than a discussion here. It's posted for action at a regular meeting. One of the actions that we always have available to us is the action to table or the action to postpone or the action to deny. So we have a lot of actions available to us. And to simply take it off and do nothing seems inappropriate given the length of time that we've been working on these. But I would be fine with moving item F for individual consideration so that if there was a motion to table or to postpone, that could be made there. OK. Any other comments? Yes, Council Member Terry. I'm OK removing it and having a separate work session item or the ethics committee review it, and then having a work session item. OK. Council Member Hawkins. I'd like it to be moved to individual consideration, and then we'd definitely visit it as is tonight. OK. I think that's going to be the process. So appropriate motions when the time comes for those agenda items. All right. So F will be pulled for an item of individual consideration . Yes. Mayor staff is requesting that item D and closed session be pulled. We have that in open session, and there's no need in discussing that in closed session. Which one is that item? Item D. In closed session? Yeah. OK. All right. OK, anything else? Yes, Council Member Waschneid. Just to clarify, items F, A, and B could be postponed or tabled tonight-- Correct. --during our council meeting this evening. That's correct. Thank you. Or acted upon, whatever, however those-- I agree. Yes. Yep. Oh, I think he said we're pulling-- D as far as-- oh, D. Individual item for individual consideration. OK. OK. OK, any other items or clarification of any agenda items? OK, seeing none, we will move on to agenda item 3A, which is receive report, hold discussion, give staff direction regarding the limitation of municipal taxes on homesteads of disabled and elderly tax freeze. Thank you, Mayor. Chuck Springer, our director of finance, will handle this particular item. Oh, yes, I'm sorry. I have a handout. Would you mind if I pass it to the people in the audience and to staff in the back over there? Sure, if we could have someone on staff help pass this out there. Is that OK? This is for agenda item C, just so everybody knows. But I wanted people to have-- Sure, OK. Just in case they were interested. Thank you. Thank you. It's all the same. I separated it thinking I was going to hand it out. Did we get a handout? Yes, you're going to get a handout. OK. What if we don't want a handout? You don't have to have the handout at all. OK, great. Well, we're taking care of that right now. All right, Chuck, you want to proceed? In terms of the purpose of this work session, really just two items. I want to just present information on the over 65 and disabled tax limitation, as well as I've got some other general information on property tax exemptions, and then receive any direction from the city council if you choose to move forward on this item. This is just kind of a historical chart showing the exemptions the current year. I think I've showed this to the council before during our budget process. But it gives an idea of the total exemptions for 2016 by different categories. The two that would be considered here, the disabled person and the over 65 that are subject to the -- they can receive an exemption as well as be subject to the tax limitation. And I've just got a figure there. I'll go over that on the next page. Chuck, can I ask you just one quick question, if you wouldn't mind backing up to that? You have under the exemptions disabled persons and veterans . Are those two separate ones, or are they the same one? They're separate. There's a disabled person and a disabled veteran. The disabled person is an option of the city to set an exemption. This disabled veteran, depending on their percentage of disability, is set by state law. So that's kind of mandated by state law. OK, so then we don't have an exemption, is that correct for a disabled veteran as far as locally? Right, the disabled veterans process, actually it's controlled by the Federal Veterans Administration. And a certain veteran might receive a certain percentage of disability, and then that disability is provided to the appraisal district. And the disabled veteran then gets a certain percentage of an exemption. That's different from disabled persons, which is really determined by a finding under the Social Security provisions, as I understand it. So two different provisions under the tax code. OK, thank you. In terms of homestead exemptions, the city has a half percent, or $5,000, whichever is greater, that those who have homesteaded properties receive. In 2016, about 18,300 receive that homestead exemption. Just to give you some proportion, we have about 27,857 single family homes. So to receive that, you have to be an owner-occupant. In terms of the over 65 exemption, about 6,874 of the properties qualified in 2016. So about a third of the homesteaded properties are exemption currently for that is $50,000. We had 260 properties qualified for the disabled exemption, which is $10,000. I should mention, you can't qualify for both of those. If you're over 65 and disabled, you have to choose one or the other. So those are distinct, different, just for clarification. And historically, the over 65 exemption in Denton was raised from $25,000 in 2008 in 5,000 increments up to $50,000 in 2013, based on some discussion and some citizen request back in that time frame. Something else-- this isn't an exemption, but the council kind of asked some questions on this. There's another option under state law, deferral option, for those individuals who receive the either over 65 or disabled exemption, where you can defer the payment of your property taxes while you live in that home. You do incur an 8% annual interest expense, but those payments can be deferred or a portion of them until you no longer live in that property. Yes, Councilman Lawson. Just clarification that the 8% is 8% per year. Is that correct? Yes. And it's compounded. 8%, 8%, 8%. Yeah. Thank you. OK, so what is owed when they no longer live in the property? And by who or whom? Well, I mean, the taxes become due. And one of the things that the deferral option does is you cannot take action to collect that delinquent tax while during the deferral. If you remember, during our delinquent tax collections, a pretty significant proportion of our delinquent taxes outstanding are under deferral, so they can't be collected. So once that individual either sells the home or passes away or something like that, then the taxes can be collected. OK. So sometimes it's through an estate process, something like that. Or it may be during the selling process, when the new owner wants to buy it, when you buy a new home , usually you have to have the taxes cleared. So when they would sell the home, they would probably have to clear any unpaid taxes before the buyer could take kind of clean title. OK. Thank you. Councilmember McGarry. I'd just like to add my own experience having administered in a state with back taxes that were owed on a homestead. Typically, the city doesn't foreclose. They will wait until there's a probate administration. And at that time, when there's a probate administration, if there's a surviving spouse, they still can't sell the property for back taxes because of Texas law . So we're actually looking at both spouses having passed away and an administration being opened, in my experience, in Denton County. Councilmember Walsh. And from what I've seen, many seniors use the equity in their home to pay for nursing home costs after they no longer can stay in that home. And if there is a huge debt on the property, then those monies are greatly depreciated because it's a back tax. So old age is complicated, it's hard, and money is always an issue. But this discussion came up in 2008 during the over-65 exemption change. And there were some people who said, well, just defer your taxes. It's only 8% a year. Well, that 8% a year adds up quickly and eats up the equity in that home quickly. So it's problematic to just say, well, defer your taxes. It's why we only have 177 properties in the city that fall into that category. Chuck, real quick question. On the 8%, is it just 8% on that current levy, or is it 8% of the debt that is owed from the prior year? Do we know? I'm not positive. I think it's a cumulative 8% each year. That's what occurs with delinquent taxes. If your taxes go delinquent, the interest accumulates on the total amount outstanding. I would think it would be done the same way, but I'm not 100% sure. Thank you. OK. Just some other information. The tax limitation can be adopted by either city council action or an election if 5% of the registered voters submit a petition. Once the tax limitation is set, it's permanent and can't be rescinded, at least under current state law. I mean, that could change if state law changed, but once it's in place, it's permanent. Again, it just impacts homesteaded or owner occupied property. You have to qualify for that. I have a question. Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you, Mayor. On the first item, does this work similarly to how other referendums work where if the petitioners get the required amount of signatures, that it then comes to the council for an up or down vote? A down vote triggers the election, or does the number of signatures automatically trigger the election with or without a calling of election by the council? Right, with regard to the disabled and over 65, if a sufficient number of signatures are obtained, then the matter will-- the council will need to still call the election. In other words, you have to read the state law in tandem with the charter provisions as far as how this goes on the ballot. But it's essentially-- if the signatures are there, it would essentially be a requirement to call the election. So not like how the Frackman went down where we got the opportunity to put it into law at the time of accepting the signatures? Correct. In other words-- Correct. It works a little bit differently. The council could at this point in time, if they just chose to pass an ordinance and implement it-- That's helpful. --between now and the time the signatures are collected. Thanks. And again, the definition of a disabled is based on qualifications for disability insurance benefits under Social Security. The tax law in which the limitation is enacted sets a dollar amount limit on what is paid. This isn't a property value limit. It's an actual based on the dollar amount, and I'll give an example in another couple of slides. And the limitation is based on the actual tax paid after any exemptions are taken, such as the homestead over 65 or disabled exemption. The qualifying owner may pay less than the limitation. It sets a maximum. But if property values decline or tax rates decline or exemptions increase, they can always pay less. It's only the maximum. For those, it can be passed to their surviving spouse if it's a disabled exemption and the surviving spouse is disabled, or if it's an over 65 exemption and the surviving spouse is 55 or older, then the tax freeze passes. And the qualifying property owner can transfer their tax limitation to a new property in the same jurisdiction based on a proportional formula. When I spoke to the appraisal district, what they look at is the year in which you move properties. Let's say your tax limitation was $400, and without the limitation, you would have paid $500. So an 80% ratio. If you go to a new property, they look at the same ratio. So your limitation would be based on 80% of the taxes that would be due that year. So when a senior purchases a lot, and let's say there's not a house built on there yet, and then later a house is built on there, when does the over 65 rule attach to the lot or to the built out structure? You mean if they had sold their current house and just bought the lot and waited for it to be built and rented? Sure, yeah. I think once that it was completed, that the house was built, they would put that limitation on . Because I mean, you're going to have a limitation on the lot, but the yards are-- the taxable value of the lot times the tax rate would be below that limitation. OK. So it's once the improvement is built, then this would attach. That's what I believe. Madam City Attorney, do you have a presentation on that? Limitation applies to a homestead. So upon the declaration of the homeowners, the homeowners saying that that's their homestead, then it would attach. So if they hold on to the old property as homestead and built a new home, then it would apply to the old home once they make the declaration that it's the new homestead, then that transfer is effective. Does that answer your question? Yes. OK. All right. OK. And in terms of-- and I've got a slide in here, but it's just a kind of a rough estimate-- the impact of the limitation. Generally, it'll grow incrementally over time, but it's very difficult to have an accurate estimate of what that will be. It depends on how many over 65 are disabled or in your community, moving in and out of your community, growth in property values can impact it. There are several factors that impact it. So I'll give you kind of an example based on Louisville, but I want to give that caveat that it's very difficult to estimate. I just wanted to try to give a simple example here of how it would work. So the first year in which the tax limitation is enacted kind of sets the cap, as it were. So I've taken a $200,000 house, deducted the homestead and the over 65 exemption for a net taxable value of $145, 000. I put it at the proposed tax rate in the city manager's budget. It'd be about $993. So the second year, the limitation has been set in the first year. The second year, I just assumed a 3% increase in the property value. And you can see on that second year, the city tax would have been about 1,034, but due to the limitation, then the property owner would just pay the $992.89. Yes, Council Member Weissmeier. I just want to emphasize that year two is using a 3% increase in value and that currently we are seeing a much higher increase in value per year. I'm just using an estimate to give an idea. And to clarify again, if in year two, the city tax would have been less than $992.89, the individual would have paid that actual amount that's less. It's only a limitation on the top. If it's below that, they pay less. And this information was given to city council, I think, after the July meeting to try to estimate the impact. City of Louisville adopted the tax freeze limitation in 2004. We went back through DCAD records where we could find historical information and to show their difference in what the actual tax would have been without the freeze and with it and their change in revenue. You can see it stayed pretty flat from about 2008 through 2013. A lot of that was probably due to the recession and housing value stayed flat or went up. And then you can see it started to increase as housing values have increased. I just took the same data and changed it for the number of accounts in Denton in those years. So I took the revenue difference per account and then also adjusted for our tax rate that's a little bit higher, just to give you an idea. But again, it's very hard to estimate what this will be over time. There's a lot of factors that can impact it. So I'm trying to factor this in into the tax rate calculation. And as I understand it, a half cent tax rate is $450,000 or so of revenue, correct? Property tax revenues for the general fund, correct. This year. This year. So taking that 2015 number of $910,000 of loss in revenue, does that mean that we essentially lost one cent? No, this is just a projection based on Louisville. There's no limitation in place in Denton. I took the Louisville numbers and adjusted them for accounts and tax rate. So I think the assumption would be if Denton had adopted a tax freeze at the same time as Louisville, potentially here's the impact we could see. One of the reasons we picked Louisville is their average home value is very close to Denton's. So we picked that for comparison. But these are just-- I'm just taking Louisville and projecting it based on our numbers of exemptions and the tax rate. I understand your hypothetical. I'm going with you on your hypothetical. And so I'm just trying to do the mathematical part of it, which is what does this represent in a hypothetical situation with our tax rate. 910,000 would be roughly a penny from the tax rate on the current-- That's kind of what I was trying to calculate. And then the other thing, do we know what the projected increase of over 65 homeowners are in the city? Not really a projection. We can see historically how many accounts there were for over 65 and disabled. But I haven't seen any projections of the growth in terms of that. And again, these are just those that qualify for the homestead exemption. So this may not be everyone who's over 65 or disabled. You have to be an owner occupant. So it may not include all of the people within Denton who are over 65. Thank you. I had a few other questions. So I've had our GIS department try to pull out some information on the over 65 disabled exemption and the over 65 disabled that are deferring taxes just based on property values. And this is the assessed valuation before exemptions. So you can see the numbers there are based on anywhere from under 100,000. And we've got ranges up to 400,000 plus. Chuck, question on that. On the $100,000 to $200,000 range, that seems to be almost the less than 50% of the total. Do we have an idea how within that range it's sort of spread out? I mean, are most of them towards the end? I mean, do we have any-- The end of what? $100,000. We've probably got it in the spreadsheet. But I haven't opened it yet. OK, no problem. You're the one pushing for cemetery money. That's right, buddy. That's right. I get my priorities straight. Welcome to the city of Denton Improv, open mic, amateur night. I had another question to kind of go back and look at the average value of properties receiving the over-65 exemption. We went back to when we started increasing from 25,000 to 50,000 in 2008. So this just shows the average value. When you look at it, it's kind of very similar to what occurred in Louisville, where values stayed about the same until about 2014 and 2015 and started increasing during the recession. Yes, Councilmember Gregory. I did not understand that slide. I didn't understand the column low value and high value. That's just the low value of the individual homes, the lowest value and the highest value. And this is just the average value. Oh, OK. Thank you. So maybe I should have hidden those two for confusion and just put the average in there. So that's saying that in 2016, there's a home with the over-65 exemption that's on the assessed tax rolls for $1,329. OK. All right. I'll open it up to questions. Yes. Could you go back two slides, please? Here. One more. In the second graph, seniors are basically saying that, while real estate values were somewhat flat, taxes remained somewhat stable. And their argument right now is that home prices are escalating and escalating quickly. And if you look at the difference between 2013 and 2015, we jumped from 255 to 910. And that really emphasizes and gives credence to what seniors are saying that as values are going up, so are the property values in terms of tax bill. Let's have Mayor Pro Tem and then Councilmember Hawkins. And this is probably data that would have to be taken from the central appraising district. But do we get data in terms of the initial appraised value by category in this case over 65 homes? And then what's the resulting value post the adjusted after protests or whatnot by category like this? We don't normally get that kind of data. I think the appraisal district may have raw data that we can try to analyze for that. But we don't normally receive that. Or that's not something that comes through to our-- like our GIS department gets the tax rolls. And that's where they pulled that other information from. But they don't normally get that kind of initial appraisal and after protest. Because it seems like for all of our tax discussions, that becomes an item of interest. Because one way of getting relief from heightened appraisals is there is a-- there's a method, there's a process that you can go through and protest that. And I have no idea what the result is in terms of your average homeowner in town who takes advantage of it . Who is taking advantage of it versus not taking advantage of it? And for those who do take advantage of it in these various categories that we tend to look at, in this case for disabled and over 65, what does that do? Is that providing significant relief through that process or is that just a process? I don't know. That might be helpful data as we continue to have this conversation if we're able to extract that from the appraisal. >> That accounts for Hawkins. >> Do you have a follow up to that? >> I do have a follow up. Yes, you can go in and challenge your taxes. But the appraisal office only uses data from one year back. So you are still at the mercy of the real estate market as they're looking at home sale prices. So when you go in and challenge that tax, they're going to come back. And what is happening right now is the appraisal office says, gosh, sorry, according to the sales in your neighborhood of the past year, here they are. And of course, it's those past sales that show the increase in property value. So you may get a little bit shaved off. If you're lucky, there isn't going to be any significant decrease just because you go in and dispute your tax because they can't go back three years or five years. It has to be back one year only. >> Yes, Councilmember Hawkins. >> Chuck, I got a few questions here. Just to refresh my memory, what kind of debt that the city issues is pledged with property taxes? >> There's two kinds. There's general obligation debt, which is what you think of from a bond election, voter authorized debt. And then we issue certificates of obligation that have a dual pledge, property taxes plus mainly for the utility system. Now, administratively, all the certificates of obligation for like electric water and wastewater administratively are paid out of those utilities. But they do carry a property tax pledge. But probably what you're thinking more about is general obligation bonds where we go to the voters. And like we did in 2014, and those are strictly only a property tax pledge. It's the only pledge for the repayment of those. >> So if we were to implement a tax freeze, what are the implications to issuing debt, I mean, if any, with a tax freeze of over 65 or none? >> Well, I mean, in terms of how the rating agencies would look at it-- >> Sure, that or-- >> I mean, that's a, I guess, a limitation on the repayment , that pledge when you repay it. You have to take into account the bondholders would have to take into account the rating agencies that this is in place. So they would evaluate our ability to repay it and our taxation ability based on that limitation. I can't say specifically how it would impact us, because there's several other communities that have it and issue bonds and those type of things. So I don't know if there's a specific impact other than just the knowledge of that has to be disclosed. >> Well, something I'm trying to sort through is I've had a lot of emails, I think all of council has, and if we were to implement a tax freeze, does that mean people who are not eligible for that carry more of the tax burden in our city, or is it just lower the budget, ultimately our tax base, and we just have to deal with that? I'm trying to figure-- that's the ultimate question for me. >> Well, that's kind of dependent on-- >> That's why there's part of me that wants everybody to be able to vote on this. If somebody is not eligible for this, they should be able to vote and say whether they're for or against it. I've had emails from some people who are eligible for the tax freeze, who still they have families who live in town, you know, and I fully understand that they're under a fixed income, but they're still just working parents with their own struggles and that sort of thing. So that's what I'm trying to just really grasp. >> I mean, it will at some point have some type of impact in terms of-- even with the Louisville example, there's an impact to revenues with or without the tax limitation, but how that-- you know, it's really council decisions in terms of what their budget is set out, what amount of debt they issue, that type of thing. >> Okay. >> Councilmember Geary. >> Another question about the general obligation bonds. So this last round of bonds that were issued, as a part of that bond package, was the city supposed to have increased our ad valorem tax rate by 3 cents? Is that right? >> Well, what happens during those is we estimate the impact of that and disclose that kind of to the voters. So we send out and we had estimated the impact of that to be up to a 3 cent tax increase. Now, since that time, the debt service tax rate has not increased since the time of the election because we've had more growth than we anticipated during that. So it doesn't require us to-- what was kind of disclosed is what we thought the estimated maximum impact of that would be over the 6-year period by selling those bonds, how much the debt service tax rate might increase. >> Okay. So then taking that statement that you just made that I think I understand you to say that when we have bonds, it will potentially-- we have an estimate of how much it will increase our ad val orem rate. We didn't have to pay that because our appraisals went up by about that amount. So we didn't see it on our tax rate as an increase. >> And have not yet. >> Have not yet. >> We still have 3 more years to implement it. >> There's still time. So going forward, when we have new bond elections come up, if we have a category of the population that has a tax freeze, they can still vote to pass bonds, correct? >> Everybody would be-- >> Everybody can vote. >> -- eligible to vote. >> Okay. So that group of people wouldn't actually have to pay for the bonds because we're tacking it on as an additional part of our tax rate. >> If the implementation of the bond program requires you to increase taxes and you make the assumption that the individuals under their limitation, even if their value stays the same, they wouldn't pay at a higher tax rate because they have that dollar freeze. Unless their taxable value declined, then they might absorb some of that. But, you know, depending on those factors, generally speaking, an increase in the tax rate wouldn't impact those with the limitation as long as their property values didn't decrease. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So-- >> Yes. >> All right. So let me follow that up because I turned 65 February 15, 2017, in case anybody's wanting to know, February 15, 65. So that means that if this were to pass in an election in the spring, that whatever I'm paying on city taxes in 2017 is all I'll ever pay. >> That's the maximum. >> The maximum. So then if I wanted to get another senior center in my neighborhood and I had enough people my age who also wanted that, and Kevin helped me out with this, about how many-- what percentage of the voters are over 65 in a municipal election? Because you do all the data on that kind of stuff. >> I don't know the percentage, but I know the average age is about 63. >> 63. Okay. So almost half. So then what I-- I could get my-- all of my cohorts, we could vote for a senior center in every neighborhood, and we wouldn't have to pay any more taxes for it? >> As long as you qualify for the tax limitation, your dollar amount would be frozen. >> Huh. >> Cool. >> Yes. Council Member Hawkins. >> I'm concerned that the tax freeze, how permanent it is too, and still that's difficult for me to understand. I, you know, asked our city attorney yesterday too about that. I've never known of any other law or city ordinance that has permanent to it. I mean, but if you can explain a little bit about that, that would be good. >> Sure. This is-- this provision is actually embedded in the Texas Constitution in Article 8, Section 1BH, and that provision states that once implemented, and that would mean whether it's by election or by ordinance, our constitution provides that that election will be permanent, and so it would continue forward, and we could not undo it by ordinance, or it could not be undone by a subsequent election. So it would become permanent per our Texas Constitution. >> Okay. Just a follow-up to that, sorry. >> Sure. >> I don't know what happened the last time we changed the -- let me say this right. The taxable exemption to $50,000 now. What needs to happen if that-- if we were to raise the value of that, you know, to 55,000 or 60,000? >> That's by council action on an annual basis. You can set that exemption or change it on an annual basis. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Councilmember-- >> A couple of more questions on the deferral because this -- the term hit my radar screen I think bigger this year than ever before is we were talking about our delinquent tax attorneys and we were talking about the taxes that they couldn't collect, and I understood that that's some of what that is. So you'd said that there are 6,874 homes right now that have that 65 plus homesteading exemption. >> And I think that includes the disabled also. >> Okay. So about that. And there have been only 177 deferrals and deferrals, that 's for people over the age of 65. >> Or disabled. >> Or disabled. And those are folks who they've deferred their taxes, maybe they can't pay their taxes. And it means that just because they can't pay their taxes, they don't get kicked out of their home. It doesn't get foreclosed on them by the city for non-tax payment, is that correct? >> Yeah, that no action can be taken against them to, you know, force payment or to move toward-- put a tax lien on the property or foreclosure of the property while they qualify for that deferral. >> So-- and so of that, 177 deferrals out of 6,874 exempt ions, if my math is right, that's about 2.5%. >> So most people right now are-- well, you're the numbers guy, you could probably just guess and make it better than me using my calculator. >> One percent would be about 68. >> Right. >> Or 70. >> Right. >> 140. >> See, look at that mind working. I mean, and you're not even sweating. So the deferrals, do we know-- >> I suppose you wouldn't have a benefit of doing a defer ral if you still had a mortgage on your home. Because your mortgage company is paying the taxes generally , you know, when you make your mortgage payment, most people are paying principal and interest taxes and insurance. Not everybody, but a lot of folks are doing that. >> And even if you've, you know, paid enough down where you can, you know, you've got a loan where you can take over your own tax payments, usually the mortgage companies like to view that and make sure the taxes are paid. >> Yeah, they would-- because they have a stake in it. Do we have any kind of numbers, any kind of data, census data or any other data about how many folks 65 and older still have a mortgage that are homeowners? Do we know that? >> I haven't seen any data. >> I would sure like to see that because I know when I was -- when we were-- my wife and I were younger and our kids were at home, we were always kind of blown away at what our mortgage payment was compared to what our mothers were. In fact, and then they weren't because they had their homes paid off. So it was interesting. It was an interesting comparison of what we were having, what our out of pocket expenses were. >> We'll look and see if there's data. >> Mayor Pro Tem. >> Does all-- does all your analyses, are they assuming like the one where you can compare Lewisville with us, is that assuming the over 65 exemption that we already have in place is also in place at the time this freeze goes in? >> Well, I just took Lewisville's numbers and did that. I'm not sure if they're over 65 but I mean that would have an impact. >> Is the request and I guess I can only direct this perhaps to Council Member Wosley. Maybe she can speak on behalf of those bringing this forward or at least know the answer to this question. Is the request that we keep the over 65 exemption as is and then the council unilaterally adopt the over 65 tax freeze on top of that or is it one or the other? >> It's in addition to and I think one clarification. Seniors are not asking not to pay taxes. We pay our school taxes, they're frozen and frozen for a long time. So we don't hear the hue and cry about school taxes being frozen. We still pay our school taxes and it is the majority of our property tax bill. So when a vote comes and this is for some of the council members that talked about bond elections. Seniors are still paying their property taxes. It's not as if they get a free pass, they're still paying. They're just asking because they're on fixed incomes that they know year to year what those expenses are going to be so they can stay in their home. >> So I guess if the council were to take any action, which is I guess up to us to give direction on this one or the other today. I mean to me, I'd almost like to have that in a more comprehensive discussion of what the council's interest is doing in either maintaining the exemption as it currently is, reducing it, keeping it, adding the freeze. I mean to me, that sort of data to be able to see what the impact is if we applied the freeze with the current exemption. If we applied the freeze without the current exemption, in other words, if the council, which I assume we can undo an exemption that we put in place. Or something in between. I think that sort of an analysis, if we're being asked to look at this, I think we owe it to our citizens to have that comprehensive discussion to know what that long term impact is. That's what I hear is from folks on both sides of this issue, but certainly on folks under the age of 65 are asking what is the impact on me as the city continues to grow. And I think to be able to understand all of our options moving forward as we're trying to make a decision as to whether or not it makes sense for us to do this on our own, I would like to have that additional data to understand that. >> I believe we have the data. Staff came through with over 65 cost and I believe it was $2 million plus for the past year. I saw that in some backup material somewhere. The cost of the tax freeze, if we use the Louisville model, is $900,000 a year. We have a general fund of $110 million a year. So again, I come back to $900,000 a year to protect. We talk about seniors here, but we need to also talk about the disabled, because they would also be eligible for the tax freeze. So in answer to your question, we have the over 65, which is 2 million. The tax freeze would be an additional $900,000 each year based on Louisville. >> Okay, yes. >> I was on council when the senior tax homestead exemption was 25,000. And was lobbied right off the bat about increasing it. And I remember having discussions with folks. And in fact, one of the discussions I remember having was, if you guys on council will agree to increase the homestead exemption, then we won't go and do this petition to freeze our taxes. And that was one of the conversations I had with some of the folks lobbying me about it. And I thought, so I started trying to do the numbers back and forth and think about what's right, what's fair. Because here, you're talking about this year, $2 million. That's, council member Baguerre, I think 2 cents on the tax rate. We could lower the tax rate for everybody in the city by 2 cents. And still have the same amount of money and still be providing the same amount of services that we are now. I think that's right, or maybe a little bit more. But I was looking at it and thinking, well, $50,000 tax exemption, property tax exemption, for somebody that owns a house that's $100,000, they're getting half of that. They're only having to pay taxes on half the value of their home. But a person that owns a home that's $500,000, they're only getting about a 10% reduction. And to me, that sounded, there was a fairness in that in terms of ability to pay. because I was figuring, anybody who owns a home that's half a million dollars doesn't need that kind of exemption. They don't need as much exemption. They don't need to have their property exempted because they clearly have the means to pay for it if they have the means to buy a house that expensive. So I was comfortable with the moving it up. I feel like I've been, I was naive when I did it, because now they have the $50,000 and now they're going to go for the freeze anyway. Sort of feel flim flammed, but I'm a big boy. I should have figured that out from the beginning. So I agree with you though, Mr. Roden, that I have to reconsider all of those kinds of things. >> Council Member Gowdy. >> One of the reasons I wanted to start with agenda item C was because I wanted our guests to see just how difficult it is to cut anything from the budget. Last time we had a meeting, I stepped out to take a phone call. I was out for 10 minutes, maybe 15 minutes. And I came back and we had spent $152,000 on a cemetery study and $60,000 on a historical study, two consultants, $210,000 while I was making a phone call. So the idea that if we just cut these taxes, suddenly, magically, this group of people will decide that they want to cut spending all the time, it's not going to happen. That burden will be shifted. That's the nature of the situation that we have. So I am incredibly sympathetic to the tax burden that we're talking about. I won't get into details, but if somebody wants to talk with me later, I'm happy to go into details. I am very sympathetic to our tax burden. That's why I've been advocating for the effective tax rate, which is a tax freeze for everybody in the entire city. That's really the approach that we need to take combined with holding your elected officials accountable to actually cut spending. To just come in and say, well, we're going to cut taxes without cutting the spending, frankly, it's irresponsible. We have to cut spending first. So I can't get behind this proposal knowing what I know in this budget process that we are constantly spending and people here are not willing to cut spending. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for a tax cut. And then going forward, have people be able to vote for more taxes in the version of a bond, which is new taxes, and not pay for it. Patently unfair, I can't do it. >> Councilmember Hawkins. >> I think that this should go to an election. I think that the tax burden is shared by all people who live in the city of Denton. And I understand the school tax being frozen because typically a household that has a 65 or older exemption no longer has kids in school, so that one in theory makes sense to me. But I do feel like the burden will be put on the person who does not share this freeze. And I do think that it'll probably still pass, but I do feel like everybody should have the opportunity to vote on it in our city. So that's ultimately where I stand on it. I still think there are a lot of people struggling with property taxes who are not over 65. And the more and more I dove into this, that's just the bottom line where I landed. I feel it needs to go to an election. Thank you. Okay. Yes, Councilmember Walsh. >> Well, I'd like to remind council that over 200 cities across the state of Texas have already done this. Cities, counties, junior college taxing districts, and the sky hasn't fallen for them. I do want to direct some comments to Councilman Gregory. The same reason that in 2008, citizens came together, fair taxes for seniors and dentin. And I co-chaired that, so the conversations were with Kathleen Wasney and Alma Walker. Her argument then was that we wanted to allow every possibility for seniors to stay in their homes. The economy was crashing, banks were in trouble, the stock market was crashing. Young people were losing their jobs and moving home so that it was imperative that the city of Denton catch up with other cities around us. And our strongest argument was that this city had not touched and had not changed the over 65 exemption for over a decade. It was our mayor who was then a councilman who in this very room said, I think we need to do the right thing and I appreciate your support then for that over 65 exemption modification which took us from 25, 000 to 50,000. But it took five years to get there because we did 5,000 a year. But we hadn't touched it for years and years and years. And property values had gone up, taxes had gone up. So again, I come back to it was an effort to keep seniors in their own homes. The same argument holds true today. This is an attempt to keep seniors in their homes. Because the economy in North Texas, and you just saw that. Louisville list where we jumped from 255,000 to 910. North Texas is booming. It's great for North Texas, it's great for our economy, it's great for business. But it's terrifying for a senior who owns their own home. Because when they bought that home, they looked at the fixed income that they have. They looked at the cost that it would incur to carry that home. We have a 10% per year cap on value. But my concern and the concern for a lot of seniors is if we don't do something now. And we move out five years and let's just take that 10% a year, 50% increase in property value. So a senior on a fixed income is going to have to sell their house and move because they can't afford to pay the taxes. I've seen this happen across the country and in different communities where property value soared, seniors just had to leave. So the question that I've had is why now? And it's because of the boom. It's because of the boom. And it's exactly the same reason to allow seniors to stay in their own home. And this shouldn't evolve into a dispute between the old and the young. This is about good money management. And I come back to Councilwoman Baguerre's comments. It's about money management. Our revenues went up, what, 8.7% this year? If you take the combined salaries of our city manager and four assistant city managers, it's over a million dollars. Seniors across the city are asking for $900,000 per year for this tax freeze. We give tax incentives to a lot of big businesses that come to Denton. We don't need to make this a tug of war between business and seniors. But if a business is given a 25 year tax abatement, the roads still need to be fixed, schools still need to be built. Things still need to function in the city. But there was never any talk in this room when we were talking about tax abatements on who would pick up the slack. $900,000 a year. Our general fund is 110 million. I'm going to ask this council to do the right thing and to pass this tax freeze. 900,000 out of 110 million. We can do this. >> Councilmember Begari. >> I just had to make a point of clarification about the tax abatements. I don't vote for them as a matter of policy. I think when they've come up, I have not voted. Usually the vote is 6-1 on granting tax abatements, if I have my record straight. >> Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you. Councilmember Begari. >> In a lot of those economic development tax abatements are structured precisely to get the private industry to help pay for that infrastructure that's needed for that project. So I think we're sensitive to that question as to who's paying for it and they're actually adding to the economy. >> Mayor. >> But I- >> Go ahead. >> I had a question and that is, I just want to clarify the law and if we were to create a Venn diagram of every homestead 65 and older, we're not able to subdivide that according to any other additional category. Whether it be cost of home, geography in the city, or anything else, is this kind of an all or nothing approach within that category? >> Councilman, I believe so. We thought about that in our office and then actually called the tax amnesty on this and it's their opinion and our opinion that it's sort of an all or nothing. In other words, you couldn't set up categories and give the over 65 or disabled exemption to certain categories and not others. I think it's going to be an all or nothing. >> And do we have data on those 200 other Texas cities as to whether or not they also have the over 65 exemption in addition to the freeze and what level of exemption they have, do you know that? >> I haven't looked, but if you go to a website called Silver Haired Legislature. And under this hair color, there is gray hair. But there's a great website, Silver Haired Legislature. A lot of information on city by city, what they have. It talks about who helped get it passed or whether or not the government authority actually passed it on their own. >> And another question for you, if I may. >> Sure. >> You mentioned keeping seniors in their homes. Are we experiencing an epidemic indent in the seniors losing their homes on the basis or period? And if so, is it on the basis of property taxes or what's our foreclosure rate for seniors currently? I mean, if that's an issue, do we have data to substantiate that? >> I don't have data, but during the 2008 recession, we saw homes across the city and seniors just walked away. I know people and they just walked away because they just didn't have the money to withstand both the economic recession and the increase in just daily living costs. I come back to what's happening right now and my call to arms right now is that if we don't do something in 2016, and we continue to grow and increase at the rate that it looks like the North Texas boom is going to continue, that 50% is a very real number in terms of property valuation. And it will translate into the property taxes and yes, I have heard from dozens of homeowners who have said if they cannot get some kind of a tax freeze, they will have to sell their home because they can't. And let's talk about rate of inflation. It's 1% or less in terms of social security increases. I think we went for two years with no increase in social security. But when I go to the grocery store and buy groceries, gosh, things continue to spiral upward. So their income is fixed. I don't know how clear we have to be about that. It's fixed. If you stay in that home for 20 years, that retirement income is fixed. Those taxes continue to spiral. The cost of living continues to spiral. That's why when people say, well, why now? That's why we are trying to keep people in their homes. And I know there's been a lot of discussion, this is all about ropes and ranch. And I would ask that the city not let this spiral in that direction because over 75% of the seniors in Denton don't live at ropes and ranch. This is a senior population across all of Denton. We're talking about 6,000 homes and a few. That these seniors are begging for some tax relief. And if you take a fixed income and try to live on it for 20 or 30 years, and face it, people are living longer. They're living longer. So if you retire at 65, your chances of living another 20 years are great. We want to try to help those people stay in their homes. They're not asking for a free ride. They're still paying their school taxes, still paying their property taxes. They're just asking that that budget be fixed so they can stay in their house. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> Council member. >> What it's about, the whole thing is about individuals looking at their personal revenue and trying to protect it. And for us, looking at the city revenue. And the impact of this is that it would, as we've seen from the information, it would over time decrease the city's ability to have revenue to provide city services. Some people call providing city services spending. But when we spend, we're providing city services. And back, and I got on council in 2009, and that's when I was lobbied about this. I said, well, this is going to decrease city revenue. So what city services would you be willing to give up? Would you be willing to see decreased? And the answer was none. So if we continue to be asked to provide the same level of services, or even improve services, improve response time for ambulance, improve response time for fire department. And we're talking about doing that by adding several more stations and several more ambulance units around town. Every one of those comes with additional price tag to handle the growth of the city and to provide the services that people expect. So when we see revenue streams frozen while the cost of doing government business increasing, then either we have to decrease services or we have to ask someone else to pay for those services. And that's really what it comes down to. And that's why I think probably it would be better for this to go to a vote. Because then all the citizens could have a chance to weigh in and say, you know what, and there will be some 50 year olds and some 40 year olds that will say, the good Lord willing, I'll be 65 someday and I'll benefit from this. And I'll bear the burden of paying a little extra in my taxes, so that my taxes will freeze when I get to 65. Maybe that's what they'll say. Or I'm willing to see a decrease in my services. But that's all there is to it. I mean, when you get my age, you know there's a limit. If you have this much money, you're either going to have to go and get more money in order to increase what you want to do, or you're going to have to do with less. And I don't ever have many people coming and saying I want my response time from the police department to decrease. I don't mind if it takes three minutes longer for the ambulance to get to me. Nobody says that. Nobody says that. Everybody is asking for improved services in those areas. Everybody is asking for the streets to get fixed. Everybody benefits from those. You know, when you're talking about numbers, it's interesting because 25% of seniors don't own homes, which means that they live in apartments. Which means that if we're going to continue to keep our services the way they are, or improve services as a lot of people demand, then somebody else is going to pay for that. Other taxpayers, other property owners are going to pay for that. And the landlord is going to end up paying for it because rental property is not, I mean, if you have somebody that's 65 that lives in your rental house, do you get an exemption for that? >> No, it's only for homesteaded property, so you have to be owner occupied. >> So if I own a rental house and I'm 65, but my rental property, the taxes will go up on that, right? And so I would need to pass on my cost to my renter. And so those costs are going to be distributed to the ren ters and to the younger families who don't get those exemptions or who don't get those freezes. So it really is a situation of let our population, let our general population make that call, and they need to make it with the understanding. This may either, because it's going to impact revenue for the city, it means it's either going to impact me paying more to cover the cost, or it's going to mean that we may be getting fewer city services. So I'm fine with it going to the voters, and I'm fine with abiding with the decision of the voters. >> Councilmember Briggs. >> So I'm not convinced that an across the board tax freeze is the way to go. But I do respect the senior population and want to find relief for those on fixed income somehow. Is it possible, have we ever explored a sales tax relief program? I know they do that in other states where it's a local option sales tax point of purchase that's a discount, and that way it could go to ren ters, owners. Just thinking out of the box here is- >> Yeah, I'm not aware of anything under state law that allows us to differentiate between individuals or groups on the sales tax rate. There is a, the state has set a sales tax holiday during the back to school period, but that's set by the state. Now I know other states have more flexibility on their sales tax that we do, but I'm not aware of Texas having any of that flexibility. >> Is this Alaska and South Carolina that I looked at? I was just thinking about it. >> Okay. Well, I would also be in favor of increasing the exemption amount, but I would be in favor of it letting it go to the voters as well. So that's me. >> Any other comments? Yeah, you're right, Councilmember Wozni, I was on council when this happened, when we increased the exemption from 25 to 50. And we were so out of step with the other cities in the area. And we did it during a recession. We did it at a time when tax revenues were horribly down, much to the sake of staff. I remember it was difficult because we had a two to four million dollar budget deficit, I believe. And we did that. I've struggled with this. I have to say, I think for me, the exemption is the way to go because I think it targets more succinctly the seniors that are in the $100,000 to $200,000 range, which to me are the ones that could possibly be in the greatest jeopardy. But I know that the deferment is not the ideal option, because it does increase the liabilities of the estate. Or if they go into an assisted living program, then it certainly does dwindle the equity in that particular state. But if worse comes to worse, and there is the chance that that will happen, that someone is going to get foreclosed on because of their taxes, they do have that option. I do recall during the discussion back in 2008, the discussion of exemption freeze, what do we do? And it really wasn't, I didn't necessarily perceive it as a ultimatum type choice, but it was part of the conversation. And the thing that surprised me, which I will certainly advocate for, is I didn't know that we didn't increase the disability exemption at the same time we did the over 65 exemption. I thought those went in lockstep, but I learn now that the disability exemption is $10,000. And so if you happen to be over 65 or 65 and disabled, you get to choose between the higher of the two. But if you're under 65 and disabled, you got $10,000. So I'm certainly in favor of moving that to a level that would be even with the 65 or over exemption so that those who are disabled, which are a population that I certainly understand, would need some help in that area. And as seen by that, unfortunately, there's very few that, there's not that many disabled exemptions on homes, I believe. It's 200 and something, I believe. >> I think 260, I believe. So I certainly would say that's something that I would favor doing that immediately. If we're able to do that either this council year or start an incremental process next year. We're having this meeting today because there was a presentation before council a few weeks ago, I believe, that asked the council to give some direction by September the 13th. If we were going to vote unilaterally to provide that tax freeze at the council policy level, or if we were going to give the community an opportunity to gather the signatures and develop a petition that would meet the statutory requirements that would put it on the ballot in May, I believe, for all the community to vote on. And that's my preference. And certainly, if somehow that doesn't occur, if somehow that doesn't, either the petition isn't, fulfillments are not fulfilled, requirements are not fulfilled, or it doesn't pass, I'm certainly open to coming back and saying, look, let's look at this. Let's see if we can begin to look at the over 65 exemption. How much can we move it? I believe Flower Mound, appreciate Shirley sharing this, I believe Flower Mound has an exemption, over 65 exemption of $100,000 if I'm not mistaken, is that correct? Yeah. And I think part of that is seniors who've been in their homes for 20, 30, 40, I mean, we all know, well, I know people because I've been in here this time my whole life, who still live in the homes that they raise their children, that they might have even grown up in. And so we can only imagine a home from 50 or 60 years ago that was bought for maybe $10,000 what it may be today. And I think a higher exemption level to exempt them from property taxes in general is something that is worthy of a discussion. And I want to say something about the school tax freeze because not being 65 or older, I didn't even know that the school district's taxes had been frozen for quite some time. It was a legislative act from the state legislature. Because the state is the one that picks up those additional monies. If there's a shortage, and because of that, the state just provides, makes it up just like they do anywhere else if the per student allocation is not met as my- >> Right. >> Very limited understanding. So it sounds like to me that the direction of the council today is to not give direction to move forward with a tax freeze adopted by the council. But to provide the community an opportunity to fulfill the petition requirements and then to get that on the May ballot so the entire community can vote on that issue. Is that my understanding? Yes, Council Member Hawkins. I mean Mayor Pro Tem. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> Sorry, sorry about that. >> No, no, that's fine. It's quite the honor to be in the presence of that gentleman. I do concur. I think the disabled portion of this request is something we can act on sooner than later, perhaps. We could get some more direction on how that would occur. And I think that's a low hanging fruit to get that up to speed. Hearing you talk about, and that's why I'm prepared to continue this discussion. I mean, gosh, if people are losing their homes or about to in the next, then there's some policy implications well beyond just simply this question. That's what's for the good of our community that we need to continue to discuss. So that's why to me, part of this needs to be in a more comprehensive discussion. We've kind of been put into an either or situation by the folks who put us into this. But I feel no rush as a council. I mean, if there's issues to be addressed, if we want to continue to look at the exemption amount right now, and we want to have a continued discussion on that, because perhaps the folks who brought this to the table, I'm not necessarily advocating for this at this point, but if we did say, let's move that up to $100,000. My sense is across the board, that's going to be more impactful for more seniors than if we even froze. At least in the short term, certainly. So this either or that we're in is unfortunate, because it could be that more conversation looking at more of this data on foreclosure rates, more of this data on what's happening in appraisal districts with protests. How can we target these sorts of things? Perhaps even looking at more creative options that you bring to the table gets us out of this, what could be a controversial community discussion, and we just continue discussion saying, let's look at all of our options. If they want to start with a petition, let them start with it. But I think for us to say, no, we're going to continue to have this conversation, get some more data. And we spend time with things like this and look at that. Perhaps we can get more people at the table and come up with a better solution than just kind of forcing this into perhaps a controversial city vote. Where we're kind of pitting seniors against youngers, businesses against seniors, and all these sorts of things that maybe we don't need to happen, because maybe we can come up with a better solution. So that would be my signal to the folks who are looking for it is let's continue the conversation. If they want to go for the petition, go with it. But let us commit to continue the conversation and not wait for that to happen. >> I certainly, I don't have any issue with that. I think part of my, first of all, I don't have any issue with that. Moving forward in that discussion, if it was the will of the council to do something with the exemption amount. My concern is that because there's been questions raised today. What happens with the exemption amount if a freeze somewhere down the line is eventually petitioned and voted on by the community, which is allowed by state law. Very valid request. But those questions have come up because of do we do the exemptions and raise those up and what. And it's just this is the closest I believe, at least since I've been on council, that we've come to really seeing that issue play out into fruition as far as a petition being presented that meets the requirements and a vote being put on the ballot. So it's not so much that I want an either or, it's that whether there's a freeze in place, I think also would affect the discussion of additional exemptions at the over 65. If it doesn't, that's fine. So I'm all for continuing. I'm just saying we were asked to give some kind of direction today, at least for today. Doesn't mean, but my hunch is to meet certain time requirements for the gathering of the signatures and the submission of the petition to be able to get it on the May ballot. So it's probably more of a calendar issue than it is anything else. So that's the only reason I'm saying trying to give that direction as of today doesn't mean we won't give different direction a month or two from now. It may be that to meet those requirements that were asked of us may not be able to do that. So I'm all in favor of continuing to gather some data and to see if any what the foreclosure rate is on seniors due to property tax, either collection or that kind of struggle with paying their property taxes. So unless, Council Member Hawkins? >> No, I'm good, thank you. >> So to answer your question, I don't see anybody that's saying we're not open to continuing the discussion. But as far as at least what was asked of us, I'm just going by what was asked of us at the public hearing, at the citizens' comments on the meeting. So does that change your direction or what? >> Well, we get asked to meet deadlines on direction all the time by ourselves and staff. And a lot of times we say we need to continue this discussion. So in other words, I don't feel pressured by that deadline that was asked us. I've got a lot of citizens that would like decisions made today on a lot of things that we just haven't been able to get it across the finish line yet. >> I'm just trying to ascertain. >> So to answer your question, I think there's so many moving parts. I guess my point is, is if the council's signaling saying we hear you, we hear these concerns, we want to have a comprehensive conversation on this, and I have no idea. Perhaps those who have asked us this question initially, hearing that signal out council say, well, perhaps this discussion is moving in a direction that maybe takes putting this to the petition off the table. Because if we haven't had the comprehensive discussion of what we might do with the existing exemption, should this thing pass, well, if I'm a voter, I would want to know the implications of that. because that's going to impact all of the consequences of what this does. And if the council's talking at that in tandem, if there's this campaign for this vote, all that to say there's a lot of reason to have a comprehensive conversation, which is why I'm not necessarily comfortable with giving direction right now on this issue one way or the other. I just have a lot more data, a lot more conversation I'd like to have before we do that. >> Councilmember Wasney, then Councilmember McGarry. >> Well, I count one, two, three, four council members who have said they want to take it to a vote. >> Well, they've certainly indicated their direction, I believe, in that regard, yes. >> If I could clarify, when I said that what I meant was if the petition is successful, it should go to a vote. To follow those kinds of procedures, I'm not recommending that we as a council move to put it on the ballot. I think that that would simply be- >> That's what I was saying, that for petition and then put it on the ballot in May, I count one, two, three, five votes to petition and move it to a vote. The reason that petitioners ask for today is that the process is very cumbersome, very time consuming, and it takes a long time. And basically, the signatures have to be in at the city late December, early January. So we're already halfway through September for us to talk and talk and talk and talk and talk. The petitioners have to know that they have time to gather 5% of the registered voters in the city of Danton. Doesn't mean we can't have discussions. I'm just saying, I see five council members who have indicated that they're not willing to say, let's enact property tax freeze for seniors today. And that is a signal for the petition group to move forward with their petition to gather signatures and place this on the ballot in May of 2017. >> Any other comments? Council Member Gera, yes. >> I'm just putting a plug out there for the effective tax rate, which only requires three votes of us. We can freeze taxes for the entire city this year, next week when we vote on the budget, by having three people on this council vote. Right now we have two, myself and Councilwoman Briggs. So there is definitely an easier way to freeze taxes every year, and that's through the effective rate. >> For everyone. >> That's sort of off posting, but we'll take it. I'm kidding. I'm teasing. Yes, Councilmember Waston. >> And I will say, that's for one year. I come back to seniors and their fixed income and long term planning to stay in their home. >> Okay, any other? And honest, and Mayor Pro Tem, your sentiments are well taken. And I presume the people who were seeking that direction are here today. And so, however they take our comments and our words, they can move forward with what action they deem appropriate from those comments, absolutely. Did you, yes? >> So I would also like to continue that discussion too, thinking out of the box ways to help majority of the population with fixed income. But I wanted to clarify, we are going to discuss the disabled increase exemption at some point in the future. >> Yeah, certainly that's been brought up and then we can bring that up and including items to instruct staff to put us together a workshop on that, absolutely, yes. Do you have a, do you have the comments on this agenda item ? Agenda item 3A? Seeing none? Okay, thank you. We've been at it an hour and a half. Let's take a little five or ten minute break. Then we'll move on to agenda item 3B. >> All right, we're back in session, this is the meeting of the Dent City Council, Tuesday, September the 13th, 2016 at 2.42. We're moving through our work session agenda items. We're at work session report item 3B. Receive report and hold discussion, give staff direction regarding additional amendments to the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code. >> All right, Rodney Patterson, our building official, will be addressing this item. >> Mr. Mayor, city manager, Madam City Attorney, and members of council, my name is Rodney Patterson. I'm the building official for the city of Denton. We've had several discussions on the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code. As I let you all know, during our public hearing, there was an additional amendment that had come out of the North Central Texas Council of Governments. And I'm here to present that to you today for inclusion in our package that will be coming before you next week. So let's move forward here. >> Rodney, would those be the amendments that the gentleman from the, was it Dallas Builders Association or Home Builders Association had advocated for as well, are we talking about the same thing? >> That's correct. >> Okay, thank you. >> Basically, the objective is to provide information and receive direction on the adoption of the additional amendments to the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code as proposed by the North Central Texas Council of Governments. Basically, in an effort to prepare for the upcoming adoption, the statewide adoption of the energy code, local builders got together and they did several test projects. There were national home builders involved, D.R. Horton, History Maker, some others. But they did some test homes to see what issues they would have in trying to comply with the updated code. There were some major changes as we talked about, the three air changes per hour. That was the biggest issue that they found when they were trying to gain compliance, was meeting the envelope air leakage requirements. Some of them have indicated that even using foam, they weren't able to get some of those homes to meet the three air changes per hour requirement. So like it says here, testing determined that the envelope air leakage was the most difficult aspect of the code to comply with. So what they did was, they got together, they approached CO G to look at different ways that they could comply with the code. Under the residential portion of the energy code, there are two pathways. Basically, two alternatives for determining compliance. There's a prescriptive and then the performance based. Prescriptive is simply a list of items. If you tick all these boxes, then you meet the code. If you're at that level of compliance or better, then you meet the code. Under the performance based path, there are numerous alternatives that are available to you. You can use Energy Star, you can use the DOE's ResCheck, you can use the ERI path, you can use ResNet. There are several alternatives that are available to you. Under the prescriptive path, it's very rigid. So what they looked at first of all was how could they make the prescriptive path a little bit more flexible. North Central Texas Council of Governments worked with the Dallas Builders Association as well as other industry professionals to develop those alternatives. They submitted those alternatives to the Energy Systems Laboratory at Texas A&M University. Texas A&M analyzed those. They looked at the performance of those amendments versus the 2015 code. And they determined that they were at least as stringent as the 2015 code. That's the test, the litmus test that the legislature gave us was that Energy Systems Laboratory has to approve any amendments, alternatives, or anything of that nature and deemed that they're at least equivalent to the state mandated code, which is currently the 2015. Basically, these amendments are very, very strict. They're only applicable to a certain type of home. One and two family residents between 1,000 and 6,000 square feet. One and two family residences between two and six bedrooms. All duct work and mechanical equipment is located in the unconditioned attic. Typical wood framing in the walls and the roof. Assumes one of the following heating and cooling systems. All electric system with a heat pump for heating. A system with electric cooling and natural gas heating. All electric without a heat pump does not comply with the code based on this option. You either have to have a heat pump or you have to have gas for heat. >> And go ahead and explain the reason for that please. >> Basically, electrical resistance heat or heat strips use a lot more energy than a regular heat pump does. Most of your heat pumps are equipped with supplemental heating. For instance, heat pumps don't work real well when the temperature gets down around 35 to 32 degrees. So those heat strips augment the heat pump and help heat the house. But they're not the sole source of the heating for the house. If those electrical resistance heat strips are the sole source of heating for the house, then you do not get to use this alternative. Basically, here are the two options. The air leakage can be up to four air changes per hour, up from three. The wall insulation has to be R13 cavity with an R3 continuous insulation or foam board on the outside of the framing. The fenestration u factor, the u factor of windows or glass doors has to be 0.32 or less. Solar heat gain coefficient, 0.25 or less. The ceiling R value, R49 or greater. And just so you know, it will not do less than or greater than for some reason when you transfer it to here. But there is a less than or greater than sign there instead of just less than or there greater than. Basically, R49 again in the ceiling, that's an increase from R38. That's a substantial increase. That's almost a third additional insulation in the attic. The duct insulation value. You can use R8 duct, which is what's spec'd in the code, and you don't have to have a radiant barrier. If you choose to use R6 insulated duct, then you have to provide a radiant barrier on your roof decking. Any questions on that aspect? Okay, so you've got two columns there. It looks like that the only one that's really, you can sort of interchange between option one and two is maybe the duct insulation and the radiant barrier. In other words, they're all the same everywhere else, so you can change those as long as they have to go together. >> That's the only difference in option one and option two. >> Okay. >> It's still fairly rigid, but it gives them the flexibility at the area that they were having the most problems in compliance with, and that's the air changes per hour. Any questions before I move on? >> Yes. >> Thank you. On the ceiling value, what were you saying that it has to be equal to or greater than R49? >> R49. >> Equal to or greater than? Okay, thank you. >> Key points. The proposed amendment was reviewed by Energy Systems Laboratory as required by state law, and it was deemed to be at least as stringent as the 2015 IECC. It provides builders an additional prescriptive path to demonstrate compliance with the 2015 IECC. Basically, we're seeking direction as to whether or not to include this with our proposed amendments, which we've already presented to you on a couple of occasions. This would be in addition to those amendments. >> Okay, Council Member Briggs. >> I was unfortunate to miss that meeting that you proposed , the amendments to us. And I have a question. Is it, and I don't believe that we have a solar ready provision amendment in this as of now. >> No ma'am, we do not. >> But it's my understanding that it's possible to put an amendment in as a voluntary and not make it mandatory. Is that correct? >> Correct. If you make it voluntary, then basically you're just making a statement that we encourage people to comply with the solar ready provision. >> But it's not mandatory. >> It's not a mandatory requirement. >> Okay, and it is possible that if it's in the code that we could use an incentive maybe to the developer as a reduced permit, do people do that as well or no? >> There are a few cities that have adopted the solar ready provisions. I believe there are currently three in Texas the last time I looked. And there were a couple of others that were looking at it. So council knows there, some cities have delayed adopting the ordinance because of all the new amendments that have gone through COG. But the city didn't want to go ahead and push forward to meet the deadlines. We unfortunately did not meet the first deadline because of the public hearing request that we had to honor per state law. But we would like to at least meet the November 1st deadline for the commercial. And our proposal is that both the residential and the commercial become effective November 1st. >> Is it possible to go back in and add an amendment if council desires? >> Sure, we did have that public hearing and the direction of council at that time was to not add that amendment. >> So the voluntary amendment was proposed? >> I'm sorry, the mandatory amendment. >> Okay. >> I apologize. >> Yeah. Yes, Mayor Pro Tem. Were you finished, Council Member Boyce? >> Yeah, that's- >> I just wanted to get clarity. I guess I don't understand what it means to add a voluntary provision. Isn't technically anything above and beyond the code voluntary as it is? What does an amendment saying you can do this voluntarily, what weight does it have? If you're not tying it to an incentive, of course that would to something else, which I think would probably have to be adding some other layers to some degree. But I don't know if this is a question for you or you. I guess I don't understand what the request is to add a voluntary amendment. >> Well, there are cities that do the voluntary amendment just to, so when you're looking at the code, it just encourages you and says, okay, well, I mean, it's in there. Just that we prefer it or would encourage it one way or the other, but we're not going to make it mandatory that you have to do it. It's just a question I had. >> Okay, thanks. >> And it is done, so. >> Okay, thanks. >> Council Member Hawkins. >> Thank you. Rodney, I know on the committee on the environment, we originally visited this. And this is pretty technical, because I thought we were there and then David came up from the Dallas Builders Association, is that correct? >> Correct. >> Have you contacted him since to see what they had thought about that? Because I know that they had brought some things to light that they thought would work rather than the way we had presented it. >> Basically, he had proposed this amendment, which was part of that package that he had given us. And he and I have been talking about this, and he has asked several times when it was coming to council and when our full adoption was going to be on council, but that 's the extent of our conversation. >> Okay. And two, I really appreciate how much you've been working on this too, so thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Just to give some practical kind of example. And Rodney's thinking, no, he's going to talk about his du plexes. And I am, because I'm in the process of constructing some duplexes that have to conform to the 2012 energy code. And basically, what we wound up doing, if we just had the standard insulation in the ceiling of R 38 and we have two by six walls, standard insulation is at 13 or not 19? >> 19. >> 19, 19 in the walls. It meant that my windows had to have a solar heat gain coefficient of 18 and a U factor of 24, which I thought, well, not a problem. It's very difficult to find windows that meet that. In fact, you go to triple pane windows that are about $350, $400. So we were able to move the insulation up to R49 in the ce ilings, R21 in the walls, and we were able to get the windows back in some type of range appropriate for the development. So the big difference between just a bad insulation and having to foam the whole place, which I think that's what you were saying is that it was getting hard to meet the new 2015 energy code without having to do that if there weren't any trade offs or some other performance measures. Is that, was that my- >> Correct, and even in some instances with foam, they were not being able to meet the three air changes. >> The difference in price from the standard insulation package of R38 and R19 was $4,000. The difference between the insulation package I'm going with is about $3,200. So I really appreciate staff's willingness to look at these and COGS willingness to do this and the home builders because it is really a challenge as these continue to get ratcheted down to meet that code. Look, I'm for saving energy. I'm for making it, and this is an investment property, so the tenants will be the ones who get the benefit of the energy package. So I don't have an issue with that. But also, there is a true cost to doing this. And we've all talked about affordable housing and we've all talked about the price of construction and who ultimately bears that cost, so I really appreciate the work that's gone into trying to continue to find ways to meet the, not the spirit of the code, but the letter of the code as far as the transfers in ways that provide some flexibility because it's critical. In fact, when I looked at those requirements, I mean, the window requirements were less than the windows, about the windows that I had. So it's almost about the same. So I certainly can support that in that regard because I think it does provide some flexibility. And some cost savings that won't be passed on to ultimately the consumer, whether they be a residential homeowner or an investor, because these are only single family homes that this applies to. It's not multi-family. >> One and two families. >> Yeah, one and two families. Yes, I'm sorry. Yes, Council Member. >> This is just another way of achieving more energy conservation, more energy efficient homes than what is in the code now. The amendment does that. It gives another path, another avenue for the builder to do that. The homeowner still achieves and gets a more energy efficient home. They're going to pay a little bit more for it, but they're going to get a payback on it by reduced energy bills. So I'm certainly for this latest amendment that you're recommending. >> Okay. Any other comments, questions? Is it council's direction to move forward as this was presented and combined with the direction we had I guess last time we met in the public hearing? Which honestly, just to reconfirm, it didn't include any language about either mandatory or voluntary solar preparation in construction, just to make sure that you understood that. Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right, thank you, Rodney. Appreciate it. Appreciate your work on that. Okay, moving on to agenda item 3C, receive a report, hold discussion, give staff direction regarding the FY 2016-17 city manager's proposal budget, capital improvement program , and five year financial forecast. >> Thank you, Mayor. Chuck Springer, Director of Finance, will be handling this item. >> Thank you, Mr. Interim City Manager, Mayor and Council. Before we get started, I don't have a formal presentation, but in our question and answer memorandum of the September 13th, there had been some questions on kind of line item budget efforts. So I want to ask if our Director of Information Technology, Ms. Kraft, can come up and give a brief presentation on the open data portal and plans to include budgetary data along with key performance dashboards before I get started on discussion, if that's okay. Good afternoon. See if I can pull this up. Today I want to talk a little bit about our City of Denton open data and citizen engagement platform. One of the things I want to cover today is kind of give you a brief overview of what open data is and how What Works City's kind of helped us achieve our goal. Also want to talk about some statistics as far as what we 've seen on the City of Denton open data usage portal. And also some of the platforms we looked at such as Socrata and OpenGov. And also talk about performance management in our budget dashboard. So what is open data? Open data makes electronic records accessible and whole, apart, and public. The open data catalog is a web based tool that provides public access to data sets provided by government agencies. It's basically they provide the front door for users to find and navigate available data. So one of the things that What Works City's has helped us, while we had open data portal, they kind of took a look at our structure and kind of made some recommendations and they used a certain standard from the Sunlight Foundation to kind of help us through our open data initiative. One of the things that they key on and emphasize was ensuring open data is publicly available, searchable, accessible, fresh, machine readable, and automated. Some of the open data platforms that we've seen are going to vary widely based on functionality, scalability, and cost. Again, as we were looking at the different open data platforms, we looked at total cost of ownership versus the usage that we've seen historically. So here's a one year view of our open data usage on our open data portal. You can see here, September of last year, we were averaging around 300 users. Around this time, we're actually doubling our usage. We're seeing close to 600 users access our open data portal month. So there's 600 unique users accessing the web page about a thousand times. So people are definitely looking at the portal. So when we were looking at different platforms, we saw five different open data platforms overall. We try to focus on two platforms specifically. These were some of the platforms that we've seen a lot of the other work work cities use, which was OpenGov and Socr ata. So I want to talk a little bit about OpenGov. OpenGov is an open source data catalog, meaning we're not tied directly to that vendor. We can either develop it ourselves internally, hire developers. It gives us a little flexibility as far as what we're creating on the open data portal. One of the things with Socrata, it's a proprietary in nature. So their solution can only function with them. Both Socrata and OpenGov can give you the ability to search and browse by topic through data sets. And I'll give you a live demo of what an open data portal looks like so you can get a visual. Both of them provide visualizations with simple built in tools. One of the key differentiators between Socrata and OpenGov when we were looking at the different open data platforms. OpenGov provides comparison benchmarking. So for instance, if you wanted to compare the city of Dent on to the Texas state on homelessness, you can get a benchmark immediately one single pane of view . So it's constantly pulling information from the FBI, from the census borough, all in one portal. >> Yes, I'm sorry, Councilmember Begheri, I apologize. >> Can you go back to the last slide, please? >> Yes. >> When you say leverage open data network to access multiple localities around the world, how does that compare to benchmarking? >> So they give you a website where you can pull in open data. So we can potentially do it right now as long as we have the same type of format, we can put it in our open data portal. But it would be somewhere else you would have to go. Where OpenGov has it right there on a solution where you can see it by launching a different dashboards. Now I'll show a demo so you can kind of get a visual. >> Okay. [INAUDIBLE] >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Adamson attorney had a question. We want to make sure that we stay true to the posting. And so question about, this is in a budget presentation, so if we could, I'm sorry, go ahead. >> So this came about as a result of a train ride conversation between Councilmember Begheri and I last week. In which one of my budget requests as a supplemental package is listed is to spend, I think I put $100,000 to get a vendor or something to give us a platform. >> Okay, so is this the presentation to sort of get the back up for- >> So she wanted some more information on why did I, I kind of haven't pushed that and I wanted to kind of give her some perspective. >> Fair enough, there was a question so just wanted to make sure I understood the background. >> That's it, that's the time. >> I'm sorry. >> Good question. >> Yes. >> Sure thing. >> So Opengov, currently they have over 1200 municipalities on their platform where Socrata has around 300-300 customers. Again, Opengov is open source, so as a community adoption, there's multiple ways that people use that platform. Data.gov, for instance, they use it too. Where Socrata kind of limits you until 150 data sets on their platform. Opengov seems to have more readily available documentation that we were able to find when we were looking at this platform. They also have limited data sets. One of the things when we looked at total cost of ownership , Opengov versus Socrata, was price was a big factor, cost ranges for Opengov is anywhere from 12,000 to 45,000 a year. Where Socrata was around 55,000 to 100,000. And when we found out around the July time frame, Socrata laid off about a third of their staff. Their main focus is New York City, Chicago, a lot of the more bigger municipalities. So I want to show you a quick- >> Does that mean that based upon that information, they're sort of not- >> I think Opengov's probably more tailored for mid-tier markets, so instead of large municipalities. Here's a before picture on our open data portal and an after picture. I also want to step out and kind of show you what that portal looks like here in a second. But you can see here, while we had a lot of information there, it was really hard to find what you were looking for . Where this kind of is a little more seamless. So here's our open data portal. So you can see there's a search bar. You can browse by data sets, by organizations, by groups. You can make data requests. You can also register yourself if you wanted to kind of keep tabs whenever updates are updated to the portal, you would get automatically notified. They also have a thing, this is what I want to talk about, something that Opengov provides that we couldn't find Socr ata provide. They have a thing called Showcases. So I want to go ahead and click on this one. Kind of show you what it provides. This is pulling data from multiple sources, from the US Census Bureau, from different sources. So here's an example. If I want to see the unemployment rate for Denton, you can see Denton's unemployment rate is 3.6%. It ranks 11th in Texas compared to 4.8 in Texas. This is automatically, it comes with a subscription. We're not having to pull an info. This is one of the services they provide. You can see where the metadata came from, from where, what services. The publisher, the Bureau of Labor Statistics. You can kind of see it trending, Denton, according to Texas and the US. This automatically comes out right out of the box. You can see the highest unemployment rate in Texas. And then you see some more information here too. You also see some other indicators that could potentially point towards the unemployment rate here, such as population dependency, some other information there too. >> Come here. >> Yes, I'm sorry. >> So this is available right now? >> Yes. So if you go to data.cityofdenton.com, it's readily available for public consumption. So for instance, if I wanted to search, one of the things that we were putting on a portal was the budget. So I want to show you how easy it is to find a budget here. So I'm going to type in budget. Here's the data set for City of Denton operating budget. You can either explore it or download it. So if you preview, you're going to preview right there. So you'll see all the fiscal year 1516. >> What am I looking at here? >> This is the city budget line item. >> Is it a check? Is it a what is it? >> Line item detail budget. >> It's a what? >> I thought you said line item veto budget. Like what in the world? >> Sorry, my mind. Northern accent kicked in here. >> Excuse me. Stay on that just a moment. >> Okay, so I'll go ahead and download it so you can see what it looks like downloaded. >> Somebody could just explain. >> And let Chuck talk a second about those budget codes because. >> I let the finance guy talk about money. How about that? I talk open data. There you go. >> This is really out of the accounting system. If you're looking at like here. Here is certain types of revenues is what we're starting off with. The negatives are actually revenues. So you can see, I'm assuming this is the general fund. >> Probably expanding. >> I can make a bigger deal. I'll expand that one too. >> And different general fund revenues. You can see a lot of the items are zero. We may have line items in our accounting system that they don't have them. So like for example here, here's mixed beverage tax budget ed for 15, 16 at $313,500. And then when we go down to the positive numbers, is it just revenues? There's, here it is, I'll get some that have some numbers in them. Traffic operations and here's by line item what's budgeted. So you can see kind of salaries there, overtime, longevity, cell phone allowance, Medicare. So it's purely a line item budget. What we give to the council is kind of like in categories. >> Sure. >> Personnel, expenses, supplies and everything. This is every line item out of the accounting system, even those with zeros in them. >> Okay. >> And if that was printed out. >> It probably be. >> Hold on, I can tell you exactly. Wow, okay, it's still going. >> Change the tree ordinance first. >> Yeah. >> It's around 26,000 lines. >> Well. >> So. >> So it's, and it's probably 25 or 30 lines per page. I would imagine. >> Yeah, it would be a lot. >> Yeah. >> Okay, all right, good. >> So that kind of shows you a sample. It also shows you by different groups. So if you wanted to see any financial data sets, you would see it there too. So the next, excuse me. The next things I want to talk about is performance management dashboard. So we're developing a proof of concept of this, but the goal with the performance management dashboard is to be able to track progress. We want to be able to track all our different key performance indicators for strategic objectives for the next fiscal year. We want to be able to update data regularly and automatically recalculate KPIs as new data is added. We want to visualize changes in the KPIs over time to see if progress is trending in the right direction. We also want to group multiple measures into categories and specific focus areas. So for the performance management dashboard, we're going to focus it in on key focus areas, and we'll show you a sample of what that looks like too. The reason we're wanting to do that, we want to provide context. We want to promote transparency by making dashboards and goals public facing. We want to openly display the trend or progress of the KPIs over time. We also want to provide supplemental content such as narrative or additional data to paint a complete picture of the goal and current situation. So here's a picture, but I'll go ahead and show you. So this is a sample, this is just a dashboard, and I think for the proof of concept, you want to see what would it look like. We're working with OpenGov over the next couple months to put some narrative tied to it, right? So for instance, here's Key Focus Area 1. You can see our revenues versus what we budgeted. You can see the expenditures here. You can see it by quarter. One of the things we measure is customer service. You can see here the average seconds to answer call is 26. Our target is 60 seconds. Here's our customer service. >> Councilmember Gary had a question. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> Yeah, no. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> Okay. Here's our percentage for first call resolution for our customer service. Our target's 85 and we're at 93%. So one of the things we're going to work with OpenGov, we want them to provide narratives and kind of reasoning behind each of these objectives that we 're trying to meet. So here's HR. You can see our employee turnover for the quarter was 3%. On time employee reviews are 89%. Here's our website in Denton TV. Our goal is 1.4 million. We're at 1.3. You can see YouTube subscribers. So here's Key Focus Area 2. So again, this is a proof of concept. So some of these don't have true data in it. We're trying to develop the dashboard and see how we can automatically pull those from those different systems. And we're working with each of the departments on those. >> Councilmember Gary. >> So I really appreciate the focus on context because when we are drowning in data, it really doesn't mean anything until you can place it in some type of context. The ComTrollers old website, they're coming out with a new one. The old one had a mechanism where you could compare, for instance, revenue based debt to other cities of similar sizes. And you can just kind of hover over it. Is there a way to take our KFA tracking and compare it? I know other cities have different KFAs, but I mean, is there a way to compare it to similar sized cities or cities with similar tax bases or similar budgets so that we know we're ahead of the curve, behind the curve, just some type of context in the region, I guess we could say. >> I think we would have to do some research on that and see how we can automatically pull it from them too. >> That was my question going, that was kind of my first question as well when we were talking about the Socrata. It's not the Socratic method, but the Socrata. >> It may be. >> Versus OpenGov, are they able to pull something like that? Or can OpenGov facilitate that? >> I think OpenGov does some of that, so let me go back here. Here, we'll do. >> It lets you do some comparing contrasts. So if you wanted to compare Denton to. >> Louisville. >> All right. >> Why not? >> I don't think this came up. Let's see. So you can see here total population compared, percentage of state population, dependency ratio, foreign born, percent under 18, over 65. They have some key economic KPIs they measure too, unemployment rate, percent living in poverty, median household income. Some of the safety as far as homicides per 100,000 violent crimes. You can see some of the housing things they look at too, median rent and education. So if there are others that you were looking for, we can definitely get with OpenGov and see how we can compare in contrast. >> Okay, let's see, we've got Kaylee, Council Member Briggs , I'm sorry. Mayor Pro Tem, Council Member Briggs. >> So my question, you said dashboard and in our last Hom elessness Leadership Team, they were talking about a point in time count, which is a homeless population. And is that something that this could do, like do a live point in time count regarding the homelessness populations or does it bring that up in other cities? >> I'll go back here. Where was I? >> Yeah. >> Are you meaning like, one of the time like, is the homeless population different today than it was last week? >> Mm-hm. >> Point in time count that they do. >> Now, right. But in our discussion, in the meeting. >> Okay. >> I wasn't in the meeting. >> I know. >> I'm getting some paper rattling, some saber rattling. We need to try to get this to where it's, get to the budget discussion. So, I mean this, Council Member Pro Tem. >> I'll try to get this. >> Yeah, yeah. Where were. >> I mean, this is very helpful. >> Yeah. >> Because I think the conversation we had was, my interest in proposing line items in the budget for this year was, we've done so much work on our part. We've done a lot of work on getting our protective team and our private citizens involved in this. Our KFAs connected with deeper metrics that we can track. But for me it was, I want to leave this year without doing the next step, which is how do we forward this down the path? I've always joked with the mayor after seeing the mayor of Boston. >> I want it. >> He's got this tracker in his office on key things that the mayor is concerned with. And it's point in time, whatever he wants. It could be number of potholes that were built today, or whatever's on his agenda. He's able to go and see how's the city functioning according to the goals that I've set forth for the city. And I think the point is, and then the brings to the budget is that, the beauty of open data is once you, the key step is getting as much data as you can open in what they call machine readable. Which means anyone can write a script, can build out what's called an API, which is kind of a connection point to that data and bringing it forward into whatever format you want. And I think the step we've taken was we started opening up a lot of data, getting it in machine readable. That's the first time we've ever had that in a machine readable format other than PDFs that you have to download and look through. So that's a huge step. The budget question is, is this sufficient to moving forward? And I think we're going in some direction. My further budget question for you is, Socratic, and Socratic's just an example. I'm sure there's other things on that, kind of careful where the other. It builds a lot of that stuff in for city say that don't have programmers to be able to kind of put that stuff together. As we want to move forward on this, and we take kind of the lower cost option, which seems like it 's got a lot of what we need. Do we have, are we going to need at some point to start investing in programmers? Take $100,000 a year and get a programmer because to really get this stuff going, wow, you gotta have somebody coping this. I mean, the data's all there. You can create whatever comparison you want, assuming the data's there. >> I think right now, open data day was a good toe dip in the pool to see how long it would take. We were able to gather 15 data sets from the county and everywhere else. That was over two and a half weeks worth of people's time. So I think right now the open data initiative is split between four different people, myself included. So if you wanted to make that more of a core focus where we 're constantly doing that, I would agree so. >> Okay, so from the budget perspective, I guess you probably have a little bit more presentation, but I think the budget discussion is probably where we need to make sure we keep this. So that seems to be what's been raised now. We're ready to move on to the budget aspect of this discussion on do we want to continue to move forward. Unless you think there's something still in the presentation that we need to see, I certainly don't want to cut that off, per se. Okay, all right, okay. Thank you very much for that. >> Yeah, that's very exciting. >> Data.cityofdenton.com. >> I do have a question on that. >> Yes. >> Okay, because that's a different website than our regular website, right? Is that right? >> It is. It should blink off. >> Okay, there is a link on the regular website. >> Yes. >> Okay, I want to make sure. >> Okay. >> Yes, go ahead. >> So budget questions. >> Well, yeah, I think Chuck's going to come up and then as we go through, this is going to be one of the questions on what do we want in the budget, yes, go ahead. >> We already currently have this now. >> So it is in the budget? >> What she presented. >> No, I'm talking about your request of $100,000. >> Well, I guess the context for this discussion is I presented that I had had subsequent conversations with them where they were describing to me what they were able to do without an additional supplemental package. >> Okay. >> Which is what she presented. So the context of this was she was asking me, why aren't we heading in this direction? It seems like a good move. >> That's why I think her answer to that question is we can do this without any additional funding currently. >> So that's basically the bottom line here. >> That's the budget. That's the- >> Okay, so we don't really need to talk about any more money for this. >> Unless somebody thinks we need more. >> Okay, thank you. >> That's it. Okay, any questions? Okay. Yes, go ahead, Chuck. We've always been on the budget and we're back to your discussion of the budget. I want to go over a few things. And first, let me just kind of summarize what I'm going to go over and kind of steps because I know Councilman McGarry wants to go over her information. But I'll kind of summarize out of the AIS what I've heard from the council so far on the budget. Secondly, we gave the council an informal report based on the last meeting where they wanted to see an additional half cent tax cut, what would be recommended in terms of removing funding from the proposed budget. And then I'll turn it over to Councilmember Bagari. But with these discussions, I just want to bring up to the council that today's the 13th, the planned budget adoption is for the 20th. So it would be very helpful to staff to put together the agenda for the 20th to be able to have a recommended tax rate to come back with for the council to vote on as well as what's in the recommended budget for the council to consider on the 20th. So with that goal in mind, I'll go through a few things and open it up for council for discussion. In the AIS for today, I tried to summarize in a little table kind of what I've heard from the council. And again, this is a caveat to the best of my ability as to what I've seen is in conjunction of the council. In the general fund for 16-17, I've seen two changes recommended. One is to increase the parks foundation funding to 77,000 from what was proposed in the city manager's budget of 35, 000. And the second was for 60,000 in funding for historic preservation plan. I put that in as one time funding, not recurring funding, but one time funding out of 16-17. Because I think there were some discussions about also trying to find some grant funds that year to go along with that. In terms of additional expenditures in the current fiscal year, 15-16, and these are all one time. 200,000 to replace a portion of the emergency services grant funding. Breathing air compressors for fire, 45,000. Parking lot fencing for the police department, 90,000. And cemetery assessment of about 152,005. The only other change I've heard is to include a portion of the downtown sidewalk improvements in the TURS fund. And there'll be future consideration whether that 207,000 is out of the 15-16 budget funding or out of the TURS fund. >> Question. Make sure I understand this. You said in the last budget discussion we said, what would it look like if we went to a scent? And we had some things there. But what a question begins really is the cemetery assessment for parks one time, 152,590. That really has nothing to do with this current budget proposal we're talking about. You're saying we're going to pay that out of one time funds from this current budget we're in right now. >> Correct. >> So that's not part of the budget moving forward. >> Yeah, I mean I would strongly recommend financially any changes in the tax rate for 16-17. >> I would say that those be offset by recurring expenditures. So if we reduce the tax rate, we reduce recurring expenditures in 16-17 and going forward to offset that. >> And the only reason I bring that up is because on your list, it's on there, so it's not really applicable to this budget. So I just wanted to make sure I understood that in light of that. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Yeah, and that's a one time versus the recurring. I'd at least recommend we consider recurring. >> Okay, so I wanted to summarize those. Again, we had sent out an informal, I think on August 26th, for some package reductions to reduce it by another half cent, about 456,000. And then with that, I'll answer any more questions you have on anything in the budget and open it up for city council discussion. >> Council Member Hawkins. >> We have met for a couple Tuesdays, so I'm trying to remember on the downtown sidewalk improvements, that 207,000 out of the downtown turfs. Where did, I thought, help me remember what we had said when we left that meeting, but I thought we were trying to use some of the money from this year's budget to pay for part of that. And we were knocking around the idea where the additional money was going to come from. Am I remembering that correctly? >> Yeah, and let me go back over. I think the total's 452,000, as I remember. 145,000 was recommended in the city manager's budget to come from the traffic safety fund. The other 207,000 kind of one time funding from 1516 in the general fund, the current fiscal year. There was some discussion about paying for the 207 out of the TURS fund and going to the TURS board and having discussion with them. I think there was an initial meeting set up and then I couldn't get enough attendance. So what I had proposed in one of the responses to the council was to budget it both places. And then it leaves the flexibility and depending on the TUR S board decision, either it would be the 207 would be expended out of the TUR S fund. If that was the decision of the TURS board and the council or funded out of 1516. So kind of leaving it budgeted both places, but we'll expend it one or the other. But just giving council that flexibility since there probably couldn't be a decision by the TURS board and the council by the 20th. >> And there was money left over in this year's budget that we were, is that all used up now as moving forward or is it all spoken for? >> I would say pretty well, at least with these recommendations here that I included in the AIS. We've pretty well used up any excess revenues or what we're estimating to be below expenditures below budget in 1516. >> Thanks, Chuck. >> As I'm reviewing again the memo, exhibit one, you sent us out something that was the recommended additional half cent recommendations. That's where we, did I forget to bring the sheet of paper? I thought it was, okay, never mind. Thought it was in the back up. We're good, I'll find it. >> I've got it here if you'd like us to make copies or. >> Yeah, it'd be good. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Any other questions for Chuck on? >> I guess in the memorandum, I believe I was the one that asked for how did we arrive at the additional visitors for the water park based upon the wave pool. And it says that they're expecting up to 900 additional visitors. Is that 900 per month over the time that it's open? I'm glad I've got my glasses off. I can't see what's going on over there. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> That would be the total visitation per day. >> Okay. >> Of the water park. Not an additional 900, that would be the total visitation average. >> Okay. >> Right, no, wait, I'm getting. >> Yeah, well it says the average. >> Well, somebody just got the right answer. Come on up here. >> Yeah, yeah, somebody come on up. >> Leave me stranded up here. >> Are you trying for being a double base? >> Yeah, I got my best Barry White going today. Caroline Seward. >> Hi, the 900 people is the additional capacity that will be added with the addition of the wave pool. >> Is that per day, per month, per? >> That is how many the pool and the decking will hold per day at any given time, an additional 900 people. >> So that's what we're saying is we believe attendance will increase because of this. >> Correct. >> An additional 900 people per day or? >> Additional 200 people. >> 200, okay, but the capacity is 900. >> Correct. >> Okay, gotcha. >> All right. >> It'll take two of us to get there. >> Yes, thank you. There it is right there. Okay, I'm sorry I missed it. Okay, any other questions? I think we're waiting on copies or something. But yeah, any other questions for Chuck on at least this part of the budget discussion? because I know Council Member Gary has some things that she wants to discuss. We do have the copies coming. Any other questions for Chuck at this time? Okay, any council, so we'll open it up to the council for discussion of the budget. Yes, Council Member Gary. >> So last time we were here, a couple things. We discussed a potential additional half cent. >> Thank you. >> Tax rate reduction in light of the fact that we don't have enough votes for the effective rate. Sorry. Keep harping on that. >> There's the same as plug again. >> Harping on that. And Council Member Wasney stated that she wouldn't vote for any cuts to fire police. Taking into that, any, sorry, any non, I mean it's a cut to supplemental, so any supplemental cuts to fire police. So, and then Council Member Mayor Pro Tem Brodin stated that he'd like to see exactly where those cuts would occur. I requested some data from Mr. Langley. And I also gleaned some data from prior requests, and this is kind of how I came up with the 450. You're right that I was incorrect about the cemetery consult, and I forgot that that came out of one time data. So I'm short 150. >> Okay. >> So, how was that? Yes, Council Member, I mean Mayor Pro Tem, I'm sorry. >> I appreciate you coming through with this. This is helpful to see the specifics that you're recommending. A question on the, is the travel training, is that specific to council? Is that travel training for the entire city? >> It's all departments which would include council's budget of 30,000 per year. >> Had, when you got this data from the staff, was this, have they consulted with this, and is there a response on staff, and what that, the impact of that 50% training cut has on maintaining our quality staff over the course of the next year? >> So what I asked was what the actual spending was per department, and they provided me, I think it was on our backup, a graph of the actual amount of spending for training and travel. And what I found was that some departments went over their allocated amount, somewhat way under the allocated amount. So I kind of, I mean, I would have liked to use a scalpel, but I really couldn't given that scenario. So I did a 50% across the board, not knowing who would be using or not using based on what you gave me from last year's data. >> Mayor? >> Yes, I'm sorry, Council Member Hawkins. >> I too appreciate that you actually gave us something to look at, not just throughout an idea. So that is good. I know when we were voting on the lobbyist contract, I think it was a few weeks ago, you thought that possibly we were duplicating services, is that kind of where that came from? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right, and then I don't agree with this, but I wanted to just go through kind of where some of this came from. The Parks Foundation, the role that we just added, do you feel like that's not necessary? >> No, if you recall, Parks Foundation is currently budget ed for $35,000. And we had a discussion about increasing it up to $77,000, which would have been a $42,000 increase. And what I suggested was instead of $42,000, increase it by $35,000, so a deduction of 8,000. >> Okay. And you don't like Dalton's cemetery idea. >> I knew we were going to agree on something earlier today , so I thought it best to pick on him later on. >> Well, I'm still waiting on what you agreed on. >> I'm sorry, go ahead. >> No, I'll talk. >> And then, too, I just, on this economic development chamber contract, what is your reasoning there? >> Okay, so last time I think we had a discussion with Ms. Spisett and we talked about what exactly the economic development partnership, how the format of the partnership would change based on the consultant recommendations. And my position is, having read the consultant recommendations, that their workload will be less. I mean, that was pretty clear from the representation of the program that they gave us. They have a $240,000 budget. They match us by about 62,000 each year, and in kind and other matching. What I'm suggesting is that they up that by about 30%, so that's just about 80,000 each year, and we can reduce our donation to them by 20,000. And I think last time we were talking about, for instance, the small business clinic and all these other things. I don't really see our role as getting into what it is that they spend money on. That's for them to decide. >> Well, just my opinion, and I really do appreciate you doing this. I think a lot of the things that you're cutting are actually kind of, they're investments in our community. I still think that position with the Parks Foundation, we are stealing that position with the full amount that we had previously done. I know that we can't just go neglecting the cemeteries, and I know that that is an interesting thing to throw money at. But it's an eyesore in our city right now. >> Can I make one point about the cemeteries? >> Sure. >> So you guys may have read the newspaper, but Denton County recently, finally decided to clean up the pilot point historic cemetery, the African American cemetery. And they allocated a budget for it to clean up the whole entire cemetery for $10,000. That's just something to consider in terms of how much money we're spending on cemeteries. $10,000 cleans up the most degraded cemetery in the county. >> I think the consultant was more to bring back what was going to have to be done. I know we spend a lot of money on consultants, but so I don 't think it was apples to apples there. The economic development chamber contract, I really feel like that is just such an investment in our community. And I'll go back to the last time going through the small business development program myself. Maybe I shouldn't be speaking on it then, but anyway, I'll go back to I appreciate you doing this. I really do. I'd like to keep the tax decrease to a half cent. But anyway, thank you. >> I'll chime in. I'm sorry, go ahead. Go ahead. >> Well, I have a different list. >> Well, get out your pens. It's only three items to bring us to Chuck Springer's magic number of $456,000, which would shave an additional half penny off of the tax rate. Remember we had a discussion, and this is probably going back two months about the cost of replacing traffic signals . We're going to replace four traffic signals this year. Two are being paid from the bond election that we've had, so that's something we don't have to talk about. One is being paid out of extra money left over from the 2015-2016 budget. So my recommendation is to replace three, not four. That frees up $340,000 out of the 456. So that leaves $116,000 to try to find. So coming back to Councilwoman Bagheri's list of that $42, 000 for one of the lobbyists. So now we have $340,000 plus $42,000. So we're left with finding $74,787. And I recommend that travel training budget of $396,737 be reduced to $322,000. That gives us our $74,000. So that's three items. Easy math, and it brings us to the $456,000 to reduce the tax rate by another half penny. Traffic signal, one consultant reduced the travel budget to $322,000. Right now it's $396,000. We'd reduce it to $322,000. You come up with $456,000 and a reduction of another half penny. >> I guess the question I have is the traffic signal is a one time kind of cost. And so I think you're saying, so I thought what I was hearing you say Chuck is that in order for this to work in future budgets, it would need to be something that's sort of a reoccurring cost. Maybe I'm wrong, so if you could help. >> No. >> So I thought about that. And it's going to be a recurring cost year after year after year. The decision is, where do you move the money and where do you place a priority? I come back to, we're already replacing three out of the four. If we in fact want to reduce this tax rate by half a penny, there's $340,000 right there. So our revenue went up this year by 8.3%, is that correct? >> No, the property tax values went up. If you look at the general fund revenues, it's about 3.5 to 4% increase. I can figure the number of the total general fund revenues. Because recognize the general fund revenues, property tax is a portion of that. Sales tax is a portion. Franchise fees are a portion where we're transferring more over. So the total general fund revenue hasn't gone up by that amount. The property tax valuations city wide went up by that 8.3%. >> Well, I still come back to, we're replacing three out of the four. I just suggest, there's 340,000 right there. If you want to reduce this tax rate another half penny. Do little things to go with it. Remove one lobbyist and reduce travel 74,000. Still leaves us with a real fat budget for travel and training. Still leaves 322,000 for travel and training. >> Okay, Chuck, explain to me the- >> Recurring versus one time. >> Well, I mean, Council Member Wozniak said that the 300, she's thought about that. Well, next year if we were looking at doing four, then we only do three. Sort of using that, so has the goal or the forecast been that we're going to stay on this four? Replacing four, and I know they need to be replaced because they're very old. So help me understand if- >> Yeah. >> Speak to that please. >> There's two in the bond program per year during this six year bond program. >> Okay. >> And we historically have not done any others other than out of the bond program. So in this year's budget we were really looking for ways to begin building in the replacement of those into the operating budget. But we really weren't able to include that with the proposed half cent tax reduction as part of the budget on a recurring basis. So we were talking about one time money out of the traffic safety fund. And then one time money out of what's remaining in 15, 16. So that 340,000 is not part of the proposed budget in 16, 17. It's not an expense that's proposed in 16, 17, it was one time. I don't think we've really even had any discussions about future years if we would propose more than the two. I think we just saw it as a need that we would like to deal with. We wanted to make council aware of that. It's kind of another infrastructure like street maintenance that we feel like we've gotten a little bit behind. But we really weren't able to build that in as a recurring addition to the ones other than debt in the budget. >> Do you have a question? Okay. Yes, Mayor Pro Tem, sorry. >> So as I understand that infrastructure, we have identified, what was it, 20 some that are due for replacement? Is that correct? >> It was, I don't remember the number exactly, but that's close. >> Yeah, I think we had about over, I think it was about in the 30s that are 30 years or older. >> In terms of existing signals. >> And we have roughly, if I remember correctly, about 116 total. >> And from what I understand from getting nerdy with Howard and others on these items of infrastructures that, I mean I've seen parts of the bike plan held up because of a traffic signal that couldn't support bike paths crossing a major road. I've seen pedestrian accommodations held up because we didn 't have the proper infrastructure in place. On the square we need several of them replaced if not all of them. Is that not the case? And some of that is kind of impacting some of the cross signal anomalies that are out there. What else do you guys add to it? Don't you put in, when you put in a traffic signal, don't you automatically pair that with the sidewalk ADA accommodations around both sides of that intersection? >> Yes, the 340 would include all of that. It would include the signals that include ADA improvements, pedestrian, bicycle accommodations. So I think a number of council goals as it relates to fixing our traffic situation around town and improving pedestrian and bicycle accommodations, a lot of them at major intersections hinge on getting this infrastructure up to speed. We don't have a plan going forward of how we're replacing these 20s, so we're able to, in addition to the two in the bond program, get a two more out the door in some important places. So I wouldn't be in favor of cutting that just to get it to some magic number in this budget. It seems like a wise investment and I'd hate to be here a couple years from now realizing that we need to pay more money for that because we failed to invest in infrastructure when we had the opportunity to do so. So I'm of the mind we need to keep that in. >> Yes, Councilman Hawkins. >> Just to add to that, I feel like there almost needs to be an OCI rating with these traffic signals. I mean, because we would probably just be way behind and I feel like we're just kind of repeating some behaviors. So I'll go back to, I think this is our opportunity to change some behaviors right now rather than just cut the tax rate, so. >> And along with that, when you're talking about infrastructure, I think if we did an OCI rating on that, I try not to notice, but I can't help but notice when I'm driving down some of the streets and looking at some of just the light poles, but especially some of the other poles. Looking at those long arms on the light poles when it's windy, and we have some very windy days. And the metal fatigue that happens over time on those poles . And I think that if we neglect replacing those, what will end up happening is having some of those to simply fail. And maybe fail at an inopportune time when somebody's driving through an intersection. So I think that that would be maybe penny wise, but certainly pound foolish to when we have an opportunity to catch up on some maintenance and replacements of infrastructure to defer it further. We've seen at the national level what's happened when people are unwilling to continue to invest in the infrastructure and replace infrastructure. Bridges collapse. That's not going to happen here. But to simply return, I think it's $18 to the average home owner. I think people would rather have what's necessary to make this city a functioning city. >> Yes, you can. Councilmember Geary. >> I tend to agree with everybody here about infrastructure . That's why there was no inclusion of any infrastructure items on here. I thought that we could probably live without our brisket lunches or some traveling. Whatever it is that we eat. I don't eat lunch that much. Anyway, I thought maybe cutting some of those things as opposed to bridges and light poles might be the better route. So I'm very sensitive to your statement and I agree with you. >> That's twice. >> Go ahead, Kaylee. Councilmember Briggs, I'm sorry. >> Well, I would like to see the one cent as well. So an extra half a cent. And as far as this staff report goes, I was pretty much okay with most of it, except for the animal shelter staff, which would be 51,262. And I know that many of you disagree, but when I saw this, I thought it would be okay to wait until next year on most of these, except for that one. >> Okay, Councilmember Wozni. >> And staff included cutting the fire training captain. And I said at last council meeting, I wasn't willing to compromise on anything to do with the fire department or the police department, so that would be totally unacceptable for me. Animal shelter staff, they need more help out there. So the self-contained breathing apparatus for fire department, no, they need all the tools. So I still come back to my traffic light. We're not saying don't do it, we're just saying we're doing four. Let's do three instead of four, and we can get to that additional half penny reduction. >> I've got a couple comments. Chuck, I asked you to send me, and I'm trying to find it, but I think I've got the numbers at least. I asked you to send me some information, and that was when we started out with our original, do you have that by any chance? >> I think I can open up the spreadsheet and send you. >> Basically, I'd ask Chuck to send me when we were talking about the budget originally, with the 10% increase assumption that we floated around. Well, if we had a 10% increase assumption, a two cent reduction, then the tax rate would equate what, given that scenario of total property taxes collected. And then I wanted that compared to with the actual, which is a point something, I forgot what it was. And a half a cent, and then a one cent. In other words, we can talk about percentages and tax, but it's basically what kind of tax collection total value, total dollars are we looking for, either as compared to last year, what will meet the needs collectively of this policy making board. And is this it, Chuck? I just said Chuck, and I was thinking about my skit, so I'm sorry, Chuck. >> That's okay, Mayor. Let me try to get it a little bit bigger so everybody can see it. >> Yeah, so if you'll notice, and the first column is the original kind of thought of 10% growth, two cent tax reduction, total property tax revenue based upon those predictions was about 62 million. And you had one and a half cent, then you had 62.5. The actual value, so we've got now our actuals in. With the half cent, you're looking at about 62 million 400, 000, which is about 400,000 more than if we'd had the two cent reduction. And then if you went to the penny, it's actually below the two cent reduction. So first of all, I want to thank staff for coming back with a set of recommendations that I'm sure they knew up front. That not everybody would buy into, but this was the city manager's recommendation. If this was the direction, this is what they would recommend doing. So first of all, I really do appreciate that. I appreciate Council Member Begarry and Council Member Was ney to come forward with some examples and some ideas of how they would like to achieve this number. because really we're looking at, are we able to get somewhere down into the $62 million range? And I know it seems pennies, it doesn't seem like it's much , but I think it's more of a, I don't want to say it sends a message because some would say it sends a bad message. So when I looked at what Council Member Begarry had provided, when I looked at what staff had provided, understanding that Council Member Wasney would not be doing the fire training captain, nor the self-contained breathing apparatuses, and that Council Member Briggs was not wanting to, and I think Council Member Wasney as well, was not wanting to move off of the 51,000. Well, that left about 170,000 or something like that. I mean, I could live with the rest of those items on that list other than those three, just because I knew that that wouldn't be acceptable to you all, and so I understand that. And we've not heard any discussion from other Council Members about the other recommendations on that list. And so my question is for the travel and training. So staff provided, Council Member Begarry, sort of what the budget is, what some of the historical spending has been. I guess I'd like staff's weigh in, because I don't really have an issue if we wanted to look at that, to see if we wanted to reduce that, which would help probably get almost to that goal. I know that I traveled a lot in the beginning of my term, but sometimes the traveling bug wanes fairly quickly. So how does it compare to what, you know, it's travel and training? So what are we utilizing? I mean, how much are we actually spending historically on those items, or do we even have that number? Okay, so I'm sorry, say that one more time. Yeah. >> I was gonna say it looks like exhibit one. >> Okay, well. >> In our responses. >> Okay, gotcha. >> Attachment four. >> Yeah, I was gonna mention it's attachment four. >> All right. >> And I'm not sure if we have it up here that we could bring it up. >> Do you have it pulled up? >> I do, yeah. >> What's that number? >> So in 2014-15, the budget was for 328,000, give or take. The actual spending was 309,000. In 2015-16, the budget was 359, let's say 360, because it's rounded up. The actual spending was about 288. >> What page are you on? >> 11 and 14 of the memorandum of responses. >> Okay. So Council Member Gary, you had mentioned that it was budgeted, but if somehow, it may be correct me if I misheard you, that some use more, some use less. Is that reflected in the figures that he quoted? Is that what you're saying? Okay. Yeah, no, I can pull it up here. I just, so I guess I would ask staff, I mean, Mr. City Manager or just whoever wants to weigh in, is that something that's possible to see how that works? Of course, Council's gonna have to weigh in on that also. I just wanted to hear, is this is a travel, and our budget is included in that as well. Is that correct, the council travel budget in this figure? >> Brian, do you want to take a shot at that? >> I'll try it. Thank you, Chair. >> So I think that's something, the question is what's the impact of a reduction of that? It's something we need to go back and look at. This represents all the travel and training for all of our general fund employees. So there are some employees that are required to maintain licenses, certifications, different credentials that they have, and so there's certain training that's required for those individuals. So to make cuts to that could potentially impact that. I don't know that for sure. We have to go back and look at that to see. And it's a department, as you can see, there's different dollars in each department. And so we would have to go back in and look at that and have that conversation to get an accurate picture for you, depending on what you're looking at. >> So based upon this graph, or this report here, the FY 2015-16 year to date, and I'm assuming that means what we've actually spent up to this point, whenever this was generated. >> It's probably mid-August, I would assume. >> Okay, so we got a month left in this fiscal year. >> Yes, sir. >> We're at 287, 288 basically. And so then we're asking for a budget increase based upon actuals of over 100,000, but based upon last year's budget, about 10 or 11%. >> Right, and recall that there were also additional positions that were included in 16-17. So some of the new positions had training aspects associated with those new positions that are included in these 16-17 proposed figures. So it's not all same number of employees year to year. There are changes in employees that you have and changes in operations that may not be apparent in some of these numbers that you're looking at here. So that's again something we'd have to look at to see what we're having. I think the number I calculated before on a per FTE basis was just under $500 per FTE that's included for training and travel purposes across the general fund. >> That's what everybody, and some don't necessarily require those CLEs or those kind of things. That's just a sort of a per capita per se. >> Right, right, just per employee if you look at the total budget. >> Yeah. Well, I've said all along, I'm okay with the half cent. I would love to be able to get, not to put a hardship on anybody, but to see what is there. And so if we looked at the training budget, it won't get us to the penny, but it'd probably get us to a three quarter penny reduction with the training travel if we just even reduced it 100,000 from the budget. Which puts us almost what it was in actual of this last year. And then just took the recommendations from the city manager, Les, the fire safety captain, the animal shelter staff, and the self-contained breathing apparatus. I mean, those are only 15,000. We've got how many of those? There were three out of how many were there budget to budget for the self-care? >> I think there were eight. I think there were 5,000 apiece. So we left 25,000 in and took out 15 just kind of to balance the number. >> So, I mean, a penny's not a magical number for me. It's more of just, hey, if there's something we can look at and that doesn't seem, it's going to affect some critical process. And typically we'll have, I mean, I don't want to base it on this, but over the last few years we've had additional funds at the end of the year. That if something on this list was critical, there's nothing in here that would bust. But that's sort of where I stand on it. I'm not going to vote to kill something, but I just think it's just a good indication if we keep trying, we keep looking, and we've asked the city manager. So I've got a hands up all over the place, so I'm going to go to Council Member Hawkins. Council Member Gregory. So we're just going to go this way. And exclude me because I've said my piece. So can we start with Council Member Briggs? Yes, go ahead. >> So I also wanted to go back to Councilwoman McGarry's tax cut proposal. Looking at it, I don't think it's very unreasonable, and I wanted to offer up contingency funds as well. And I will promise to eat less. So I think that I'm willing to give up some things here too . And I don't think that 24,000 out of the chamber contract is that much considering we're taking back some of the work from that. >> Can I make a clarification of that? I believe that money comes from the DME budget. >> No, this is only, it's split. >> Okay, go ahead. >> The economic development budget is split up. It's $62,000 from the general fund and then the remainders are from the utility funds. So I'm suggesting reducing our- >> Gotcha, thank you. >> General fund and making them match, asking them to match that, okay. >> Okay, thank you. I appreciate that clarification. Yes, I'm sorry, trainer of chief. >> I'm okay with most of these. My concern is the training part of our employees. I want to make sure that that budget isn't cut too much because I do know that that's very critical for our employees. >> Okay. >> Mayor, I appreciate you going to a three quarter, trying to compromise somewhere in there. Leaving the plans examiner, just being honest, I'm concerned about that. With how fast our city is growing, I would really like, I feel like the boulder is starting to move in the city of Denton becoming more business friendly. I really do feel that way. I think that we're not there yet, but I just want to make sure that we send a consistent message with our budget and what we're actually trying to do with some of the subcomm ittees that have been formed with being business friendly. So that's just my concern there. I could live without it and I would hope if it was needed this year that we would recognize that quickly and get on that. >> Can I tell you why I thought about that? >> Yeah. >> And I've said this consistently over the last couple of years. And that is, I don't think it's any, it's not going to surprise anybody that I don't think that we use our development software. It's either incapable of really getting us where we need to be from a technological perspective on efficiency. Or we're not utilizing it to its full capacity. And I want us to really focus on that because if it's not, let's say it's not efficient either because of its development or because of our use of it, it's real easy to back fill that loss with people. I mean, if we got an issue and so that's my only, because I agree with you. >> Sure. >> I agree with you. And I know we added I think several positions last year in that department. So that's the only reason is if there were three or four or five and it just, but we are turning, I don't see that that would be, but I certainly understand your concern. >> Sure. >> And it's certainly something that I've had to think about. >> And you might be right. I've personally had difficulties using that software. So, and then two, just on the council contingency funds, it's a very small percentage, but I think we've had this discussion before. It's a way that a council member can make a pretty substantial impact to a kind of a grass roots event, a small event. So I would be, I mean, I wouldn't lose sleep over losing that, but I would hope that it would stay intact. Anyway, just my two cents on that or my 0.34 cents. >> It's a dollar. >> Sorry, but thank you. >> Well, I thought I'd heard earlier in our conversations that, as Senator McGarry said, I'm at the rollback rate. And if we don't go to the rollback rate, I'm voting against the tax rate. So, what I hear you say is that if we can slice off another half cent, if we can go from a half cent reduction in the tax rate to a full cent reduction in the tax rate, that you're voting for this tax rate and voting for the budget, is that what I'm hearing? >> Yeah, yes. >> Okay. >> Well, that was my exact same question because I'm wondering who we're negotiating with, who we're comprom ising with. Because you made a statement to the public that you were voting for the effective tax rate, so. >> I want to vote for the effective tax rate if we have three people, but we do not have three people. >> Okay, and what about you? Are you voting for the effective tax rate? When we get to that point next week, are you going to vote for the budget? It's important to me because last year I feel like we did some negotiating on things and then some folks we negotiated with didn't vote for the budget. And I felt like, well, why did I spend my time giving up some issues that I thought were important to fund, if at the end of the day it didn't win somebody's vote? And so, I'm trying to avoid that situation this year. I just want to make sure we're negotiating in good faith if I'm willing to make some additional cuts. I want to make sure that I know where people are going to go. >> I will, may I? >> Sure. >> I will not vote for the one cent. I'm at one half cent, sorry, half cent. I will vote for the one cent on the rate, the tax rate, sorry. Does that answer your question? >> Yeah, because I thought you said earlier that you were going to be voting for the effective rate. I'm just trying to get clarity as to where we're at with these public comments. Because a half cent seems pretty consistent through here, and every time something comes up, it's not going away. So that's where I stand right now. But if we can get to one cent, I would be happy and I would vote for it. >> Gotcha, thank you. Yeah, and I mean, I think the devil's in the details as to what people can get behind and what they can't in this. I think if I'm sitting in a department and tomorrow morning my department head comes and says, wow, council really feels the need to get down another half of a half cent for whatever reason. And so we're cutting half for our training capacity for next year. My eyes would roll if I'm in that department thinking, what end insight are we trying to achieve as a city organization ? I think your employees are your best asset that you've got to invest in. And I think it sends a wrong message for whatever political desires we're trying to accomplish here to cut that. That doesn't make sense to me. If we're going to cut something, I'd rather it be some thing. And then I'd want to really investigate why that was proposed in the first place, because it was important. I think when we say things like, well, I think we can take care of that next year. Well, then we're just back at the same conversation next year realizing what we realized this year. And that is we're being told we need to invest in these things. And so our desire is to put this off for another year. We're just, I won't be here, so you guys can negotiate with someone else. But you'll be able to have these same conversations. So I just don't feel the public clamoring for this. I think they've said time and time again when they go to the polls for bond issues and what their capacity is for increase in the tax rate. At least as it relates to the debt capacity that they see a lot of needs in this city. When I talk to folks in my neighborhood, it's about sidewalks, it's about street repair, it's about, it's things that they want to invest in. And I think we're at a point in time where we've got a healthy economy. There are certainly people who are struggling. But I think it's a time to invest. So I continue to think, I think we're just kind of penny pinching to no great end and to no great achievement when we've got things to invest in. So I'm going to continue to total line to say, let's just move forward with the half cent. >> And I think it's perfectly acceptable for a city, a county, a state, or a federal government to say, well, I can't afford everything right now. And it's okay to move something forward because that's what happens in a business environment. That's what happens within your home when you say, yeah, we 'd love a new car. But you know what? We'll postpone it till next year. I come back to that traffic signal, folks. I know you've heard it over and over and over. It's not as if we're saying no traffic signals. We're saying let's do three, not four. That's acceptable. And that is $340,000 that will come out of the extra money that was there in 2015, 2016, because we have two traffic signals from the bond and we have one from the traffic safety fund. So take that money and put it into what we want to do here, which is get us down to a one cent reduction in the tax rate. If we take a look at this travel and training, and I understand that travel and training is important. However, go down to those totals. Fiscal year, 15-16, and I believe that's over in about two weeks. October 1st, is that correct? Is that the end? Yeah, so we have two weeks left in the year. So we've spent 287,000, but we're budgeting over $110,000 more for the next year. And yeah, we're adding a few full time employees, but it's not $110,000 worth of travel and training. So I come back to, there's some funding there. I reduced my figure down to 322,000, which is 74,000 less than the 396. So there are some monies there that we can massage and get down to a one cent reduction. >> Yes, Council Member Gregory. >> Thank you. It's a good point about we can't do everything this year, but we're not, I don't think. Because I think that if you look at the supplemental package, Chuck, could you help me with this? When we look at all of the supplemental packages that were presented by the various departments in order to achieve goals of the council, in order to respond to citizen requests and things like that. How many millions of dollars were in the original supplemental package? Was it about 16 million? 17? >> I think the net cost in the general fund was about 14.2 million. >> And of that 14.2 million, the manager's budget recommended how many million? >> About 2.8 million. >> So I think that right there it's already saying we're not doing that. We're not trying to, we know that we can't do everything in one year. And some of those things that are quite frankly on that supplemental budget, supplemental request, have been there for years. And in fact, some of them have been there and they've just dropped off because it's like, yeah, it's never going to happen. So I think that we need to keep that in mind also as we're talking about a cent versus a half cent. >> Councilmember Geary. >> Well, I don't want to keep us here too long. So if I can go through the people who are in favor of a one cent and see where we can get some consensus. Is it possible to do that and just kind of check off? Okay, sorry. Sorry to exclude you. Council members Gregory, Rodan, I think Hawkins, I'm going to ignore you for a little while. Keely, lobbyists, are you willing to cut that? Yes or no? 42,000? Mayor Watts, 42,000? >> Well, let me make sure that I'm- >> You're going around. >> No, no, no, no. No, what I'm saying is my figures did not get us to the one cent. What I recommended did not get us to the one cent. It got us to about a three quarter cent. So I don't see the one cent as necessarily a magical number to try to achieve. I'm just looking at how can we continue to look at this and see if there's ways that we can provide some additional relief. So I want to reserve the balance of my comments for when, so I'm not saying I can commit or can't commit at least to a one cent at this time. I haven't proposed anything that would get us to a one cent tax reduction, quite honestly. >> So if I can summarize your proposal then was to eliminate a plans examiner. Is that right? >> Plans examiner, the self-contained, not the self-cont ained, the payment marking enhancement, the total impact to ED, and then also 100,000 off of the travel training budget. >> Okay. >> Which is about three. >> Sorry? >> 100,000 off the travel training budget. The plans examiner at basically 69.5. Pave and marking at 96 in essence and then the total impact of 6,500, which is about almost, it's not quite 250, 300,000. It's about another quarter of a cent. >> Well, I know you really like having programs and technological tools in place instead of having maybe staff time. So regarding that total impact ED 6,500, would you be willing to swap some of our contingency money from that or something from somewhere else to keep that program in place ? >> Sure. >> Because I think it's helpful. >> I mean, honestly, I remember I was here when we cut the contingency fee before when we had the budget. I understand other council members' positions on it. I don't, that's not something that I'm committed to. I mean, if that needs to do something different, and I've certainly enjoyed allocating what I've had to the organizations that I've had. That I've allocated it to, so I mean, I can do without that . I think Council Member Hawkins said, wouldn't lose any sleep over it. I don't know about the meals. I mean, I like the meals. >> So if I got it then, I think plans examiner, pavement markings, 6,500 from contingency and nothing from my proposed list. Is that right? Did I summarize you correctly? >> Well, your proposed list had the travel training on it. >> And what, I'm sorry, 100,000 from travel training and nothing else from this list. >> Well, I thought you said contingency. >> Yes, I just mentioned that. >> And then anything else? Yeah, I mean, not at this moment. >> I guess the interesting question is on the lobbyists, cuz I know I think you were trying to target a specific, a specific I think lobbying group that equated that amount or you just talking about taking it off of that in general? >> No, I'm talking about having TML two lobbyists in Austin and one lobbyist in DC maybe could be overkill. So we could have maybe one lobbyist in Austin instead of two sets of lobbyists in Austin. >> Well, that's what I'm saying, is that it might be the elimination of one of those. >> We've already voted for snappers group, so that would only leave local solutions. >> Yeah, which I can see and I can feel coming from this side of the room a couple pairs of eyes glaring at me and I won't say which ones. >> I can't see any of them. >> There's four sets of them. So I mean, I think that would be my last resort. I'd like to hear some other council comments. But and I know some see this as an effort in futility that we're pinching pennies, but I think this is a good exercise . I think it's a good exercise. >> I actually resent that statement that this is pinching pennies and an effort in futility because my family writes a check for $25,000 of taxes every year. It's pretty painful and that's my dad's retirement, so it's not an effort in futility at all. >> I'm not saying that, I'm just saying because I know how much I've spent. So those are my thoughts on it. Because then my comments after you are finished is we can take a consensus here. We can try to figure out where we're going, who's going to vote for what. That doesn't mean people somehow when they get in there. So what happened, but I'll go about that later. So those are my comments to your question. >> Okay, so I think that did get us to three quarters of a cent. >> Probably close to it. >> Okay. Council Member Wasney, are you okay with the mayor's proposed cuts? >> I am, I come back to that traffic light. I'm not getting any traction here, so I just still stand on that proposal. >> I think we only had three for the traffic light, sorry. >> So, but in terms of the lobbyists, focused advocacy is the big Austin lobbyist. And so keeping that intact and swinging free of that 42,000 , you know, I'm okay with that and I'm okay with the mayor's swinging free of the plans examiner, swinging free of the pavement marking. Let's keep that total impact at $6,500 well spent. And again, I thank council for hanging on to the fire training captain and the self-contained breathing apparatus. We just went through the anniversary of 9/11 and our fire department needs every tool they can get. >> Hold on, do you stay on the floor? >> No, I don't. >> Okay. >> Okay, so to be clear, what we're trying to do here, just right now in this exercise, per $200,000 home value, we're trying to save $9 per, right ? Is that what, the additional quarter cent? Cuz it's 18 per half, is that, am I doing? >> $4.50 would be a quarter cent. >> $4.50? >> So for $4.50 per $200,000 home value, we're not gonna have a plans examiner, which is needed, possibly, I feel, but maybe the software is too. We're gonna get rid of one of our lobbyists right now, where local control is under attack over and over again, down in Austin. >> Well, I don't know if that was part of her list, but. >> Well, are we? >> Cheating. >> One of the lobbyists, right? >> We don't have a consensus for the lobbyists. >> No, but I just wanted to clarify, what, $4.50, before we get too far down the road on that, so. >> And I gotta be, I really struggle with that line of argument. >> Okay. >> Because if that's the case, then why don't we raise the taxes two cents, which is only, or a cent, which is $19 additional on people to get all these other things. >> Because that's not what's in front of us right now. >> No, but it's the same rationale. If you're saying, why are we wanting to cut these for only $4, then the reverse of that is, well then why don't we add something for only $4. >> And I understand that, and originally I was for leaving the tax rate flat. I feel like this is really a time to get caught up on things. But it's just an, I'm all for going through this exercise and doing it. But I am trying to figure out what is the goal of this and what the impact is to a person who lives here in Denton. That's all I meant by it. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. >> Oh no, I know that, but I hear that a lot. I hear that when we talk about we're only raising utilities by dollar average per household on these rating. And of course, when you break anything down to that incremental level, it sounds very small. But it's more than just a dollar and cent issue. It's also about principle involved. It's about just the whole idea of how do we move through fiscal stewardship. And we can all have a different opinion on that. >> Sure. >> That analogy, it really doesn't do much for me. I mean, it doesn't sway me either way because I could say, well, gosh, forget lowering the taxes by a half cent. We could raise it a half cent. And everybody's only going to be paying an extra $19 a month. >> Sure. >> But if you look at probably, and I don't know if we have this figure. Of the property tax base, do we know how much of that is paid through residential and how much is everything but residential? In other words, commercial, business, industrial? Because we always reduce it down to the residential component. But you pay taxes on your business property and things such that. >> I sure do. >> And it's going to be more than a half a, well, I don't know how your appraisal values are, but mine certainly will be a lot more than that. >> Well, and being a tenant, you still pay triple nets and all that. >> So yeah, I mean, we can get into the philosophical conversations of this, but. >> I think that's where I was trying to go. I'm not trying to offend you or discount any conversation that's been happening. >> No, I'm not offended. I hope you don't hear me. I mean, I'm just saying, I hear that a lot when we talk about this. And it's just hard to break it down to that because it sounds so trivial. But I just don't think it is trivial. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> I think we can get to three fourths of a penny reduction . And you had some really sound suggestions, Mr. Mayor. And I'd urge council to take a long hard look at that and see if we can come to a consensus on the three quarters penny reduction. >> Yeah, if somebody could summarize for me what that is, because I'm not sure what that is. So I at least want to understand what we're talking about. I think, Council Member Gary, Howard, did you write the list down? >> I believe I did. >> Okay. >> Now, one thing changed on the list, but it was the plans examiner at the 69-412. It was the pavement marking program at 95-850. Now there was some question on the 6500. >> That's off. >> Okay. And then there was 100,000 from training and travel. >> Right. Okay. And there were those three. Council Member Gary, did you have anything different than that list? >> Only that you, I thought you had agreed to reduce city council contingency by 6500. >> Yeah. >> In addition to that. >> Yeah, not taking the whole thing. >> Right. >> Okay, just to make up for that. Okay, that's fine. Okay, and I don't know what that total is. >> Would you like me to play with the spreadsheet up here, Mayor, after last year? I'm kind of hesitant, but I'll gladly put one together if you'd like me to. >> No, I think Howard showed it's about 271,000 is what that amounts to. Which is a little over probably then a quarter. If a half a cent is 456,000. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I'm sorry, Brian, what'd you say? >> We can make that work the best in the district. That's what it comes to. [INAUDIBLE] >> Yeah, I think we can make that work also. >> Mayor Perkins, I'm sorry. >> Can I get some clarity on some things? What was actually the proposal on the contingency funds? >> I heard 6,500, but I don't know what that represents. >> A reduction of 6,500. >> Just of 6,500 out of the. >> So it would be $11,000 remaining in contingency funds. >> Can somebody give me some background on the pavement markings enhancement program? What was intended with that $95,000? >> Basically that's another crew. It's a two member crew that basically does the same thing as our current pavement marking crew. So it's adding two crew members. And so all the pavement markings that you see, all the stri ping, all the bike lanes, all the. Anyway. >> And I just hope we all understand what's getting cut here. I mean, when we talk about pedestrian accommodations, when we talk about bicycle accommodations, I've often come back to the staff and say this looks completely worn out trying to get across McKinney. And it's always come back to, well, we don't have additional funding. That's going to take more funding to do. So to me, that's a big pedestrian accommodation plus all other sorts of accommodations as it relates to striping. And frankly, striping makes your streets look better even when they're not in the best condition. So it's a, anyway, that's a value. I just want to make sure we know what we're cutting. Plans Eximiner, I agree with you. I don't think it's time to turn the dial back on where we 've been heading in terms of business friendliness to the city. Council contingency funds, all that money goes to non- profits in town. I mean, anything we're cutting from that, we're just cutting. We are making a decision to say those things that we tend to, and it's in little increments. But it's things to Fred Moore Daycare Center that needs help with something. It's an event that's going on where they don't have a lot of funding and they're asking for some help. It's MLK advisory board. It's things like that that are just good feeling stuff that really, those are the types of things that give the city a great reputation that they can put the city of Denton and help sponsor these sorts of things. So just to realize what we're cutting when we cut that. And again, I'll go back to we are sending a signal to our staff because we want to get another quarter of a cent that their training just needs to be cut for that. I'm just not okay with that. So I just want us all to be clear as we're penny pinching to get down to this magic number. What we're doing, and just ask the question, why are we doing this? I don't think that analysis is inaccurate because the opposite side is put to us. When people say, my property taxes, I have to pay more to say, here's what this amounts to in the final analysis. That's what the whole discussion is about. So I think it's important to look at it from the terms of what actually are we trying to save here. So those are my thoughts on this. >> Appreciate that. >> Yes, yes. >> These items that possibly might not make it, is there a way that we could revisit those items like six months from now or something like that? I mean, I know that you had talked about if we, especially with the plans examiner. Is there a way to get a gauge a quarter of the way through the year, halfway through the year, how we're doing? Maybe we could implement those positions or just throwing that out there. >> Good question. Who has an answer? >> Me. >> Can I take a stab at that one? >> Yes, you can. >> Did you have a follow up for that? >> We get a quarterly financial report. And if you really dig into that, but we could ask for kind of a staff summary in a nutshell, quarterly. When we get that report, and that would help us. But I believe staff really compiles those numbers, keeps close watch on them, and that's that quarterly financial report. So maybe to help us gauge that, because it's a book half an inch thick. We have a staff report that kind of sums up a few of the highlights perhaps. But I think that will kind of answer that question, and it 's a good question. >> And a couple things, I'd recommend if you do that, you do it about six months into the fiscal year with the way the sales tax falls. In the first quarter, we've really gotten one month of sales tax because of the accruals. And the second thing is, yes, you can do it mid year and make those adjustments. But realize, all you've done is locked in some expenditures that are reoccurring for the next year's budget. So you've kind of, in other words, you've locked those in. So when we go in next year and you say what's available, well, we've already made this decision by adding that. I just mentioned that. >> Sure. >> I have a prejudice where I like to do everything at the beginning of the fiscal year so you know. There's always a thing to say, well, let's fund it halfway through the fiscal year, but then you get into the next year and you kind of lock that in. But yes, yes, the answer is yes, we could. >> I have a process question. So we're going to have a hearing next week on adopting the tax rate and the budget, is my understanding, is that correct? >> We're going to have agenda items to adopt a tax rate and adopt a budget. >> That's right. >> So let's say, let's take the tax rate, for example, the agenda item for the tax rate. So a proposed tax rate will come forward from staff based upon discussion here. It'll be part of the ordinance. And so we'll take up that agenda item and we'll vote. Let's say for some odd reason that it does not receive five votes. >> It requires five. >> A budget just requires four, simple majority. The tax rate requires five under state law. >> So is it one bite at the apple? In other words, if you vote, just for discussion purposes, let's say you got a three quarter cent tax rate that's on the ordinance, the proposed ordinance. And the vote, you don't get five. So that vote fails. Are you able to then, if it's properly posted, take another vote at a different tax rate? Or does it, you get one shot at it, if it fails, it automatically goes to the effective rate. So that's my question, is what process is there if you get to the time of voting and you don't get five votes, what happens after that? >> I'll tell you my experience has been then you can propose a different tax rate. >> Somebody can propose something different. >> And the tax rate is out to five digits. So you can propose, as long as it's a different tax rate than that tax rate, you can propose a different tax rate and that would be a new consideration. But I'm gonna yield to the city attorney for. >> No, I think Chuck is right on that. In other words, if a motion is on the floor and it fails for whatever reason, I think the council, the mayor can entertain a motion, a different motion, setting a different rate. And I think you can continue on until such time as you either, you reach exhaustion. In other words, you can't reach agreement. >> So then in the posting itself, it doesn't have a specific, or has a rate limit, or it doesn't have a specific rate? >> The rate limitation that's passed this year, remember we came to the council. >> Yes. >> And we advertised for the public hearing. We advertised a rate limitation of the current tax rate, 0. 68975. So because that's what you've held your public hearings on, that's the maximum tax rate that can be considered. But you could adopt any rate at or below the current tax rate. >> So the posting won't say to adopt a tax rate of 0.68 blah, blah, blah, blah. Because then if you're locked into that, then you can't. So it's going to be broad enough to where we can do it. >> Correct. It will be broad enough that you'll have some latitude here. >> Okay. >> As long as it's below the published. >> Yeah. But there will be a proposed tax rate that you're going to vote on. We have to put that in the ordinance, the proposed tax rate . So we will have a proposed tax rate for you to vote on. >> Well, and the reason I even bring this up is because I think if we only had one shot at it, reverted to the effective rate, then that creates a different mindset. But if you have additional ones, as an example, if you really don't want to vote for the three quarter, but you think it was going to push you to the effective rate if you voted against it, bam, it's done. That's a different mindset than if you come and say, well, I can not approve this. And but we can talk about something else. So I just wanted to make sure that we had an understanding going into that vote what the opportunities were. Okay. Do you have a question? Yes. Go ahead. >> So I have these now. Sorry. So on the pavement markings enhancement program you brought up on the general fund supplement request, I don't see that exact same number 95,850. I think it's only half or part of 135,850. Is that what I'm seeing? >> Yeah. >> So there's something remaining? >> Well, no. With that supplemental request, we were proposing to do in- house with some things we're doing externally. So the total cost of those two personnel was 135,000. But we thought we would save, instead of contracting out some pavement marking, we would save about 40,000 by bringing that in-house. So that would offset what's in the budget now. In other words, the net cost of that would be an additional 95,000 because we would reduce some of what we're contracting out, the work that's being done, and we would do that in-house. I also want to mention with that the purchase of the equipment to do that. I think it's about 370,000 was going to be funded out of the traffic safety fund. We would have to buy the equipment to be able to do that. So that was planned to be purchased, that one-time purchase out of the traffic safety fund. So if we eliminate that program, we'll also reduce the expenditures in the traffic safety fund. Does that answer your question? >> Yes. >> Okay. So I assume that we would still get the work done and we would just be doing it ourself? >> Correct. >> Yes. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> But we reduce how much we had to pay an outside contract to do that. A lot of that work right now is done by an outside contract . We would reduce what we're paying that outside contractor. So that would kind of offset some of our additional personnel expense. >> I don't think that's exactly correct. What happens is if you reduce the amount of money you're spending on pavement and markings, then you're not going to eliminate getting work done, but you're going to get less done. So instead of doing 100% of what the original budget had, you're going to do 50% or 75% based on, because the money controls how much you get done. So the original request was for one amount. You all are not proposing to mark it out completely. You're just proposing to reduce it. >> No, we would eliminate that additional program completely. It's net cost of 95,000 in the general fund and the 375,000 in the traffic safety. So we would not budget that additional personnel and that additional crew. >> And that means that there would be less -- does that mean that there's no paving done or just no painting done or less painting done? >> Well, we would leave the contract amounts that's there, that 40,000, but it would mean that we would remain at this year's budget. So as costs go up, we're going to pave a little bit. And that Pave Me Market program was an expansion of what we 're doing. That wasn't just doing the same amount of work, but with that crew, we could have significantly expanded what we were doing as well as, you know, one of the coordinations we've done is we've received more street maintenance funding. You remember when we received more street maintenance funding, then we fell behind on doing the water lines and the wastewater lines underneath it. So to catch up with that, we added a crew to water and a crew to wastewater so we could keep up. Now one of the things we're running into is we can't get a contractor out there timely to stripe it. So this was kind of all part of that street maintenance where we needed an in-house crew so we could also go out and stripe that street quickly and get it going and be more efficient with controlling all of those processes. >> Go ahead. >> Let me come back to something you said. The 322,000 would now not be used out of the traffic safety fund, which frees up $322,000, correct? Correct. So couldn't you spend that on that traffic signal? Couldn't you? Because the traffic safety fund is very specific on what you can spend money on. Traffic signals is one of those special items. So you could take that 322, make that fourth traffic signal , free up that $340,000 that comes back to my point which almost gets us to that magical 456 that we're talking about. So you followed me on that, correct? >> But let me make one correction. 340,000 out of the '15-'16 budget is one-time use of fund balance. It's not recurring. So if we reduce the tax rate and don't do that in '15-'16, on a recurring basis, we've got a deficit. We've got a built-in deficit. So it's a one-time expenditure kind of-- it's a one-time expenditure out of your savings account versus your ongoing expenditures by reducing your tax rate. >> But I come back to the 322 would be freed up now and could be allocated towards that fourth traffic light. >> Correct. >> And I get it that you want to have recurring expenses. I come back to it would sure be nice to reduce this tax rate by a full penny. And that one traffic light gets us three quarters of the way there. >> I have a-- you said something I just want to make sure I understand for clarification from the pavement marking. So how much do we have budgeted for contractors? Refresh my memory. Do we know-- what are we spending now? Because apparently we don't have a crew now. Is that correct? >> A hundred and fifty thousand for contractors. I think about a hundred-- somewhere around a hundred and fifty thousand for contracting out of pavement marking. >> Okay. And I'm just hearing from this interim that we have-- we do have a crew. >> Yes. >> We have a crew. And so we have a crew and we have contracting. So what you were talking about when you were talking about the contracting crew was that sometimes you can't get them out there, right? >> As well as the type of equipment, the things we can do that 300 and some thousand was going to add some equipment that we don't have now. So it's a type of pavement marking that we have to contract out because we don't have the equipment to do it as well. >> This is my suggestion. Because you were spending a hundred and thirty thousand on contracting. >> Right. >> Or maybe a little more than that. >> A hundred and fifty? So why don't we just say, you know what, we're not going to budget-- we'll maybe budget fifty for contracting. We take the difference in that because that's a reoccurring expense. Contracting is a reoccurring expense. So you contract-- you take that down to maybe fifty thousand unless I'm working on a hundred and fifty thousand dollars. So you pull that off, reduce that to fifty thousand, which is if you run into a bind, you go ahead, you just trade them. We say, well, we'll take out a hundred thousand off of contracting for the striping. We'll put back in our own crew, which is under our control, which we can dispatch at any time with the proper equipment . And you've basically achieved the same result. You just cut the contracting time down. You are trying to build capacity, I understand, by adding the crew. But I'm simply saying if you've got a hundred and fifty thousand dollars worth of contracting labor, which is not at your beck and call, it's not-- I mean, you're subject to their schedules. You're subject to a lot of different things. The market fluctuations on pricing. I think you could get more bang from your buck, just like we added our own crew in sewer and solid waste, is why don 't we just trade those out? Why don't we have our own second crew? We've still got some contracting dollars that we can spend if we need to. And we maybe have not reduced it, reduced the capacity for work as much as we would have if we just cut out the new crew. In other words, you've got-- if you add the 95 and the 150 thousand dollars that was currently budgeted, you got 245 thousand. Not just now hearing your explanation. I would be fine with keeping the crew, reducing the contract amount, which would still put us where we are here . I mean, if you just change that, where is it? I think we've already reduced the contract amount sum in this by 40 thousand. But we still got 150. No, I said we had about 150 total before the reduction. In other words, we had about 150 thousand total by adding this crew, we thought we could reduce it by 40. So that's why the net cost of the crew was 93 thousand. Oh, that's why we were on the supplement. Okay. So we'd probably have to kind of eliminate all the contract. And I'm concerned they would have the ability to do everything. Okay. All right. Any other questions? So this is what we're looking at. And I know that there's not a consensus here. All right, I'm not even going to worry about counting heads . But this is the direction moving forward. And so that's why I asked the question about when we get to the vote, unless everybody wants to start saying this is okay and we all have direction. Staff knows what we got going and we move forward. But I've heard Councilmember, Mayor Pro Tem, you said that this isn't something that you could support. I have not heard from Councilmember Gregory. The look on his face, I'm not so sure that it's something that he could support either. I don't know about Councilmember Hawkins. So it may just be that we see it unless somebody wants to say something different. Yes, Councilmember Gary. >> I thought there was four for this. Am I wrong? >> But you need five. For the tax rate, you need five. Yes. >> Let me just be clear. I'm not interested in hijacking our tax rate for a half or a quarter cent. I mean, some others might have insinuated that when they were talking, if I don't get this, I'm going to vote for the effective tax rate. I'm not interested in that. That's not responsible governance in my opinion. So if at the end of the day, if it looks like the consensus of the city is to move in this direction, I want to fund the budget. I want to get us on the same page. So I may lose this argument. I will tell you and others why I think this is a bad idea to cut these sorts of things out. But at the end of the day, we need to move this thing forward. So just be clear about where I'll be next week. I'm not going to hold hostage that effective rate. >> Well, I don't know if anybody's really willing to do it. Yes. Did you? I haven't been looking this way. Go ahead. >> Can we have this conversation without calling people hostage takers, penny pinchers? And what was the other one? They all have a Middle Eastern tone to me, in my opinion. So can we just not do that? Thanks. Okay. Yes. Go ahead. >> I would agree also, I'm not going to vote against the tax rate if it's reducing the tax rate by three quarters of a cent. Because I'm not getting everything I want in the budget. So if that's your question. >> Well, I appreciate that input, yes. >> Okay. >> Don't know if that was my question, but no, that's good. >> Well, I thought that's when I was here. >> Yes. >> I want to go on record here and just say that I'm not trying to hijack anything. Sorry, Councilmember Begari. And you mentioned earlier political desires, that's not here either. I would like to try to cut spending and get a little relief for taxpayers, and that's why I'm here in the seat. So thank you. >> Yeah, and I certainly never said in these conversations that I would or would not vote for something. In fact, I think I've said in private and probably in public that I'm not going to move to the effective rate because I don't get what, I've simply just made suggestions and comments. So if it had been that everybody was at a half cent, I wouldn't have had any problem with that. So I'm going by what the discussion has been as we move forward. Yes. >> And if this tax rate then represents what we can do with the budget, then I'll be voting for the budget too that way, the same way. Because I think that we have to fund what we budget. And so, I was sort of invited out of the conversation, so I stayed out for that time period. We understand, and I think everybody understands that in doing these kinds of things, what we're doing is we're making, there have been some efforts to try to increase capacity, to increase services, not just to spend money, but to increase services. And so we're limiting how much we can increase those services. And if that's the desire of the majority, I'll work with the majority. >> Yes, Councilmember Wasney. >> Yeah, I don't want the public to go away from this conversation thinking that we're not spending money on sidewalks and streets and sidewalk and pavement markings. This budget is full of items being paid for out of the Traffic Safety Fund and they address all of those items. So I'd encourage council to go back in and take a look at everything that's marked Traffic Safety Fund . And I mean, it's sizable, it's huge, and it's all being spent on some of the things that we're talking about. We are spending monies on those things. Out of the general fund, out of the Traffic Safety Fund, and I'm satisfied that we're getting the job done. >> Okay, any other comments on this agenda item? >> Well, can I- >> I'd like to have- >> Yeah, can I summarize? >> Sure, sure. >> I'm not exactly sure at the end of the day where we ended up. >> Right there. >> Are we still right there? >> That's my understanding. >> Something's changed that I'm not, what's on the screen? >> Those four items. >> These four to be eliminated from where the budget's at right now. Because we made some changes from the proposed budget based on- >> Would not be added, that's correct. >> What I presented in the AIS, we'd have these four reductions. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> And can I clarify, please? >> What's these additional four reductions and a total tax rate reduction of 0.75 cents, an additional 0.25 cents over what was proposed by the manager? Is that- >> Well, I don't know if that's, I mean, I don't know if we eliminate this amount of money. Does that mean the tax, because based upon the memo, when we said, hey, could you bring back another half cent reduction? We had a total of $456,000 and some odd change that represented a half a cent. So half of that is, what is that, 278? >> 228. >> Yeah, so this is, it sounds like it's a little bit more than an additional quarter of a cent. So your question is, do we, good question. The question is, are we going with this number or is it simply just to get it to three quarters of a cent? That seems to me what your question is. Which is about another, it's a difference of about what, 15 , 20, $30,000 or something? >> But let me mention, we kind of had a balanced budget when we started and we've added like the Parks Foundation, Executive Director, and Historic Preservation Plan. >> So that wasn't included in your half cent reduction memo that went out? Well then we're not there. But I don't care, I'm not, I have to imagine- >> But I think it's very close, we had a little positive, but I'm saying, Mayor, it may not be more than three quarters of a cent. >> Okay, no, I'm just, yeah. >> I think this is what has been discussed. >> Okay. >> And so whatever that works out to be, unless there's some other discussion along that line. >> And I'll bring it back at three quarters of a cent and make the necessary adjustments. But I want to see exactly what tax rate that you want to have in the proposed tax rate. >> Okay, and then we're going to wrap this up. Yes. >> It was my end. >> Go ahead, I'm sorry. Look to, point it at her and look to Chief. Go ahead, Council Member Briggs. >> It was my understanding we were going to find the extra money in some couch cushions somewhere. >> We'll bring it back at three quarters of a cent with these changes or above if it's a little bit above three quarters of a cent. >> So my question is this what we're looking at right now, a three fourths of a penny reduction? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Or a little bit more depending on how the numbers come out. >> Okay, good, thank you. >> Okay, any other questions on this agenda item? Any more questions going once, twice, three times a lady? Okay, all right, we will now, this ends our work session. And we will now convene the closed session at 4.52 PM. [MUSIC] >> All right, I wanted to welcome everyone to this meeting, the Denton City Council. On Tuesday, September the 13th, 2016, it is 6.33. Mr. Abrey, please stand with us as we pledge allegiance to the flag, the US and Texas flag. [BLANK_AUDIO] >> All right, we're going to go on to our consent agenda item, or consent agenda, agenda item number one, Council Member Hawkins. >> Thank you, Mayor. I move approval of items A through J, but we will be pulling item F for individual consideration. And item G, we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and worked through, and we'll be replacing with the ordinance we received and