Apr 25, 2017 City Council on 2017-04-25 2:00 PM

[ Pause ] >> Good afternoon everyone. I wanted to welcome you to this meeting of the Denton City Council. We do have a quorum here. It is Tuesday, April the 25th, 2017. It is 2 p.m. Moving down through our work session reports. This actually this is the second, what is this, work second , fourth Tuesday here at 215 East McKinney Street. Work session number item 1A is receive report, hold discussion, and give staff direction regarding the Water Works Park wave pool project schedule and associated admission fees. >> Thank you Mayor. We want to give you an update today on how the construction of the wave pool is coming. And oops, oops, wait a minute now. Let me get this right. There we go. Talk about the wave pool project, its wave pool and con cession. And when we think it's going to open at this point and what we want to recommend or suggest for some of the fees out there as a result of it . Quick review. This project was approved by the voters in the November 4th CIP. As part of the budget process for 16-17, council approved some adjusted fees in the fee schedule last year, last fall. November 8th, council approved the contract for Schmalt Construction. And not to exceed $2.6 million to build this project. Project is a 13,308 square foot pool and a 1,425 square foot concession stand. Contractors out there working diligently. They added some additional staff. They're currently going six days. Let me catch up here. Six days a week out there. Construction has gone fairly well to date. The floor of the pool has been poured. I'm told by staff who was just out there that we anticipate that the caissons for the wave making equipment will be poured this week. The floor of the other mechanical room and the floor of the concession will be poured this week. Weather permitting, we say that a lot. May 1, we anticipate building, starting construction of the concession stand. As well as the wave pool equipment room. The water park opens for the sneak peek the weekend of May 2021. Then we're open for Memorial Day weekend. That's a three day year. We hope to have the wave pool equipment room completed by June 1. On June 3rd, we open daily through the end of the season. We've already talked to the contractor and put provisions in place that would allow us to open the rest of the water park when the wave pool is not completed on that opening day. June 6th, shade installation. The 16th, the complete concession stand. On the 20th of June, we fill the wave pool, approximately 300,000 gallons of water. Hopefully on June 20, we'll do final inspections. On the 23rd, we'll get our CO, take about a week to balance the water chemistry and get staff an opportunity to train in there. And then what we're shooting for right now, weather perm itting, is July 1st opening the wave pool and new concession stand. So because of those delays, we feel like we need to adjust our pricing for this year, or at least the portion of the year until the wave pool is open. What you see in front of you is the pricing for last year and the proposed pricing for this year. And the increases, what we're saying is that we would charge the 15, 16 daily admission prices until the wave pool opens, at which time then we'll revert to the 16, 17 daily admission prices. Excuse me. Where things get a little bit more complex, we have folks out there who have bought individual season passes for the water park already. So the first column you see there with numbers in it is the 15, 16 preseason price. Then you see what the regular season price was in 15 and 16 . The preseason price for 16, 17 and the regular season price for 16, 17. What we have done in the past is we would charge the pre season price until the water park opens, at which time you're now charging the regular season price. What we're proposing to do because the amenities that are out there now that are available to folks when the pool opens will be the same as they were last year . So we're proposing to go back to the 15, 16 preseason price , which is $65. The one significant change that we've made from last year to this year is we have eliminated the family pass. That's no longer available. So folks who, bear with me, I'm going to try to get through this. Folks who have preseason purchased one to three individual season passes. The price for those are $65. The preseason pass, if you buy four or more, is $55 per pass. What we propose to do is to refund. I'm going to change the page here. So if you've only purchased three passes, you have paid the preseason price, actually a little bit less than the preseason price from last year. If you've purchased four or more season passes, then we are proposing to refund you some of that money to get you back to the preseason price of last year of $200 . Council Member Briggs, you got a question? Do you have an idea of how many people have done this? To date, we have sold 206 individual season passes, which would mean when I get all the way through this, the refund that we're talking about at this point is in the neighborhood of $3,000. Okay. On the upside, at this point last year, we had sold $9,555. We had sales of $9,550. As of today, we've sold $24,785 of passes. So we would rebate to our customers who have preseason purchased passes, if they've bought four or more, we would rebate them, refund them actually to the $200 level. That gets them back to what a preseason pass was last year. They have the same amenities at the park now, right now that they had last year. The other option that we would put out there is if there's a family or group that just absolutely wants all of their money back, we'll take back their pass and we'll refund 100% of their money. Will you be sending all of the purchasers some type of a letter or email to that effect? Yes, sir. That's Miller Hawkins. I had a phone call already. So a family of six last year, they would get a family season pass and that was $200, is that correct? Yes, yes. Preseason, $225 if they bought it during the season. And so we are not doing the family season pass this year because people were abusing that. That's true. Whatever they were. So this year, right now with this structure, would it just be if they had a family of six, they'd be $50 if they went and bought them right now. So it'd be $300. Do I understand that correctly? What we're saying is they go get that pass for $200. Right now? Yes. For six people? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Is that because you're reverting to last year's pricing because of the same amenities? Yes, sir. Okay. Yes. So we're not doing the $55 per pass? If, it will be $55 per pass, but if they pre-buy now, it will be $200. We're going back to- For a family. For a family. See, okay. For a family, yes. In addition to that, the supplemental package that we received to operate this new amenity, the total increase in the parks and recreation budget for that was $608,076. Because the pool is going to open later than expected, there'll be a reduction in temp seasonal staff. That'll reduce to it. We will reduce 102,602 is what we anticipate. There'll also be some full-time staff savings. We'll hold off on hiring a rec coordinator. There'll be $4,987 savings there. And then there'll be a reduction in some operational costs as well of $66,540. All of those savings total $174,129. The net increase in operating costs with the delayed opening will be $433,947. That's the 608 minus the 174. As you might anticipate, there'll also be some reduction in forecasted revenues. We forecasted increased revenue as a result of the water, I 'm sorry, the wave pool would be $610,000 this fiscal year. We're going to forecast that that will be cut by 50% due to delay in opening and the reduction in fees. That'd be $305,000. If you subtract that additional revenue from the additional expenditures, we anticipate that the water park will, the water park will operate at a deficit of $128,947. We're going to recommend that that deficit be absorbed by the city so that we don't impact the DISD budget. If you'll recall the operating agreement that we have with the DISD, that we share any deficit in the combined operation of the natatorium and the water park. - Councilmember Gregory. - Thanks. In our contract with the contractor to do the work, did we have a completion date? - We did. - I'm sure that that completion date gave them some credit for bad weather days. - Yes, sir. - But if they did not meet the completion date and bad weather was not a factor, were there any penalties that they had to pay back to the city? According to the way the contract was-- - I would have to go back and look and see if there are liquidated damages in that contract. I don't have that answer. - Did, are the delays in the contractor's work due to inc lement weather or due to other factors at the-- - Well, I can't blame this solely on the contractor. There are a number of factors that play into it. Some of it's on us, on the department, for not understanding the length of time that some of the perm itting and planning process would take. Our design staff, the consultant who was designing this project for us, they had some medical difficulties halfway through the design process here. There have been some issues out on the ground with the contractor. Had to replace some dirt a couple of times, had some issues with a plumber who had a difficult time passing an inspection on one aspect of it. My point in saying all that is there's no one group that we can point fingers at and say, "You did it." It's one thing stacked on top of another. - Okay, thank you. - Next question, on the refund amount that you said that we 're refunding those who have currently bought tickets. - Yes, sir. - Amounts $3,000. - Yes, sir. - So what you're saying by this slide is that, I mean, that 's de minimis based upon these numbers. I mean, you got a $305,000. You're saying there's going to be a 50% reduction in that projected revenue. Is that because we're reducing the admission prices to get in on a daily basis? - Yes, sir. - Back to the pre-2000 or 2015-16 prices? - Yes, sir. And admissions as well, Mayor. There will be fewer people coming through the gate. - Right, okay. All right, okay. I just wanted to understand where that was coming from. - Yes, sir. - Yep, all right. I do have one other question. Do we know, like during this process, because this is a major thing that impacts the partnership with the school district, do we make them aware of this and then let them know, hey, this isn't going to affect it because we're going to absorb this? And if we do, do they do the same thing if something like that occurs, which I don't know if they've had any major construction projects at the natatorium. So we just haven't been in that situation with them. - We've not been in that situation. - And yes, we do make them aware of it. - Okay, thank you. Yes, Council Member Gary. - So are there things that we can, are there some lessons learned from this where we can say, okay, in the future, this is how we meet our expected? - Let's move to the next slide. - Okay. - Moving forward. We're going to shift the responsibility for the park's CIP projects over to facilities management, let them handle those projects, leverage their skill set and their expertise. That keeps all the projects across the city better aligned and allows my staff to focus on our core competencies. So. All right. So our next step with this will be that on the May 2 agenda , if this is acceptable to Council, on our May 2 agenda, there'll be a consent item asking you to approve these changes in fee structure on a temporary basis. In addition to that, there'll be an itemized list of discounts that we have offered in the past. We've had some BOGO days, we've had some Father's Day at the Civic Center pool, we've had a couple other, we've had several other marketing tools that we've used. We will bring all of those in an itemized list for Council approval on May 2. - Another question. - Yes. - The 2.6 million construction budget, are we on target for that? - Yes, ma'am. - Yes, go ahead. - So I am in favor of the fee reduction. Of course, you know, from the beginning, I was not in favor of the fee increase and still remain that way. But I know that this isn't the reason why we're reducing it . But I am in favor of that and also the refund. So thanks. - Yes, Council Member Lawson. - I'll be the elephant in the room. I'm not happy with the delay. I'm not happy with over $128,000 of lost revenue. So I applaud the CIP projects going to facilities management. And if I had to sort things out and read between the lines, I would say that's our city manager stepping in and trying to add accountability and efficiency to the system. So I just think that needs to be said. It's not okay to plan a project, set a budget, and then fall short of the whole thing. If planning helped delay with some permitting, I think planning is getting back on track. And that should help moving forward. It just means that something was broken to create these delays. I'm happy moving forward so that we can learn from that and just move on. But I do want to just register my disappointment, and I'm sure everybody involved in the project is disappointed. Of course, it was all over the newspaper today. So when government steps in and does a construction project , it's often the target that it's late over budget. So I'm happy to hear that at least we are within the budget parameters, and I'm happy to hear that. And I'm happy to hear that CIP projects will now fall under facilities. I also am in favor of the price suggestions that staff has brought forward, and I think that's a good plan. So thank you. Yeah, of course I'm disappointed. But at this point, just move forward with staff's recommended rate schedule. So thank you. Emerson, if you could go back to the sort of the main financial, the last financial slide that showed the breakdown, atom ization of the, if you wouldn't mind as we get just maybe some informal staff reports as we begin to get attendance figures on how close, because it may be that, I mean, this is what you're projecting is lost. It could be lower. It could be higher. Yes, sir. So, yeah, if you could just sort of keep us surprised as things move forward, that'd be great. We will. And this will come out of what fund? General fund. It'll come out of the, it's budgeted under parks, so there 's some left over in parks. Or is it coming out of the reserve balance, the fund balance? Just curious. I'll hand that one off to you. So this would be made up by other revenues in the overall general fund. All the expenditures and revenues were booked in the general fund. So for the overall city, it would be made up through that process. So the fund balance, I mean, what's, I mean, there's not a specific, there's not a specific account that says parks. Parks has a budget, has revenues and. No, sir, there's a specific expenditure budget. But for revenues, we budget all the park revenues. And then we have all of our other revenues, so sales tax, property taxes, franchise fees, all those things together. So this would be a reduction in the revenues that we'd plan for parks. Okay. So if there's no other changes, then it would. Whatever savings are somewhere else. Okay. Most likely there'll be some other offsets to that too. Just sort of all in the same pot. Yes, sir. Thank you. Council Member Garey. Along, I have two questions. Along those lines, with the agreement that we have with Denton ISD, how are we going to determine exactly what deficit is being absorbed by? The city. Are we just saying the entire deficit this year is absorbed by the city? That's not what we're saying. We're going to work off of this $128,000 number that we would absorb that portion of it. And we'll track it and hone that as best we can. So it could be more or less, basically. And then the other question, I guess, is really for legal. I'm surprised to learn that all of our contracts don't have a late completion clause for our contractors. So I'm wondering, is that not par for us? I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with this contract. We'll have to look into that. I can answer that a little bit. We've had this issue come up a couple of times in the last few weeks. And there has been many of the construction contracts where the liquidated damage clause has been moved away from. I am having conversations with our interim city attorney about adding that back in. Obviously, it's an incentive for a contractor to finish a project on time. And within the parameters of the contract, but not all the, in fact, I would say most of these CIP projects have not had that provision in there for some time. >> So, okay, I have another question. And when we put these projects out for bid, isn't that a part of our offer to the public that we have these provisions in our contract for liquidated damages? >> I would answer you that it should be, yes. >> I would say it should be as well. I mean, that was my assumption was that they all have a liquidated damages provision. >> There is some legal questions, I understand it, as to how they need to be worded, the enforceability of them. And legal staff is doing some research now in terms of exactly how it needs to be written to be enforceable and compliant with Texas state law. But I totally agree with you to the extent we can put it in . It certainly does provide an incentive for the contractors to come in on time and budget. >> Okay, so silver lining of this whole thing is that this council found out that all of our contracts don't have any type of late construction provision. So that's potentially going to be a huge savings going forward. So, there's that. >> Thank you. >> She blessed. >> Okay, so just to clarify, I think, didn't you have a question? I thought you had a question. >> To clarify, the methodology whereby we include some number that the school district is not responsible for in if there's an operational deficit, the sharing of that. Is it going to be this number or are you going to go through a very systematic tracking to where we get, this is a performer. You're going to come back with something that's more of an actual kind of calculation based upon some type of- >> It will actually be very easy to do because the water park is a separate standalone budget. So we have traditionally operated that budget at a small profit, if you will. So any deficit this year, we'll know we need to absorb. From the water park alone, if there's deficit at the nat atorium, we'll share in that like we've always done. >> So the funding arrangement for this partnership is that the city and the school district shares the cost of operating the nat atorium. The city operates the water park completely on our own and any profits from the water park, any revenues above expenses, goes to help pay for the operating cost of the natatorium. And it reduces our budgetary expenditures and the school district's budgetary expenditures towards the natatorium. >> Yes, sir. >> That was the original arrangement and that's still the arrangement. And whereas we anticipated that we were going to be reducing our cost and the district's cost to operating the natatorium, we're not going to be able to do that this year. We're anticipating we're not going to be able to do that this year. And always the case is if the water park does not make a profit, if we are in the red, it's at the city's expense and not at the school district's expense. That's always the case, isn't it? >> No. >> No, actually to simplify it, we have combined all the expenses and all the revenues from the two facilities and regardless of which operated at a profit or a loss. We've combined those numbers and the deficit has always been split equally from both sides of the operation between the school district and the city. >> So then what I heard you say was, whatever deficit the operations of the water park alone, excuse me, create if any, that's what you're going to assume. But yet, because then we will have taken some of the profits. I mean, like if you had a $50,000 profit average, we come up with a $150,000 deficit. All right, well, we're going to absorb the $150,000 deficit or are we going to say it's going to be $200,000? In other words, because really the deficit would be, if you have $150,000 in the red, whereas typically then you've got $200,000. I just want to make sure we have a clear understanding of what we're absorbing, what we're passing along. Does that make sense? >> Yeah, it makes a lot of sense and I don't have a good answer for you right at the moment. >> We don't have to have that now. >> Okay. >> Yep, as we move forward. Okay, all right. So it sounds like the direction is, bring us an ordinance, so this will not require a budget amendment? >> No, sir. >> Okay, all right. >> Thank you. >> Fantastic, thank you. Okay, so we've got agenda item 1B, receive a report and hold discussion, give staff direction regarding current notification practices and requirements for public hearings and public meetings. >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. The purpose of the item this afternoon is to brief the council on two different notification issues. One is development services and zoning related public hearing notifications. And also brief the council on efforts that the city is undertaking to standardize notifications across all of our public meetings that we hold. So to start with the zoning related public hearings, the Texas local government code has minimum standards for notifications for public hearings. A notice must be published in the newspaper 15 days before the hearing date. And a notice must be mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the subject property 10 days before the hearing date. And while it's not required by state law ordinance, the current city of Denton practice is to publish a notice in the record chronicle 17 days before the date of the public hearing to mail a notice to property owners within 200 feet of the subject property 12 days before the hearing and that's done now via certified mail. And then we also mail a courtesy notice to residents, so not just the owners but the residents of the property within 500 feet, 12 days prior to the hearing and that's done via regular mail. Staff also post a sign on the subject property 12 days prior to the public hearing. And for every project that has a public hearing requirement , we charge a notifications fee of $220. It's a flat fee no matter how many notifications you mail out. And so basically that covers the cost of the publishing of the notice, which is about $100 per notice. We do that twice, one for a PNZ meeting and one for a city council meeting. So planning staff has been reviewing the notification requirements internally and also had, I believe, two work sessions with the Planning and Doning Commission. And came up with a series of recommendations to improve the way that we notify residents and community members about these projects. So I'll just walk through those recommendations. And the first is to change the way that we mail the legally required notice to property owners from sending it via certified mail to regular mail. And the certified mail has the advantage of being able to track the delivery of the mail, but it has the disadvantage that if the postman brings a letter , a certified letter to you and you're not there to sign for it, they take it back to the post office. So you have to make a separate trip down to the post office to read that letter. And so we're recommending changing that to regular mail so it's easier access. We looked at, I think, 11 previous cases where we had certified mail. And about 13% of those came back to the city as returned to sender. So about 13% of people never got their notice, they never picked it up at the post office. The second recommendation is to change the letters that we mail to residents from a letter to a postcard. And again, the intent is to kind of reduce the barriers to getting the information. So is it easier when you get a postcard to flip it over and just see the information about the public hearing right there? The third recommendation is to enlarge the public hearing sign on the site. I think right now it's a little less than two feet, two by two. And so we're proposing to enlarge that to a four foot by 3. 5 foot sign and to require the applicant to post the sign on the property. So right now staff goes and posts the sign on the property and I think it's common practice in cities in this area that they require the applicant to post the sign. And most require an affidavit from the applicant that they posted the sign. The fourth and one of the biggest changes is to implement an electronic notification system for these notices and all notices across the city and those would be centralized on the city's website so that anyone can go at any time to the notices section and see all notices that the city's posted. Users also would be able to sign up to an email subscription so that when a notice is posted to the website , if you're signed up to receive notifications, you get an email directly to say this notice has been posted and it links to there. And the benefit of having it on the website is that you can also have links to site maps or other documentation for each of those cases. So for this we're talking about, yes, zoning related notices, but also DME open houses, informational notices, and really any notice for a public meeting, a neighborhood meeting, or what we would consider an informational notice at the city post. >> Yes, Councilman Washington. >> So the key in this era of digital, just everything, is to drive people to the website. Whether you are running a city, a county, a state, a federal government, a Facebook for a business, whatever it is, you want to drive traffic to the website. So I think a real key piece of all of this is whatever you mail out has to have information on an easy web address. And it can't just be go to cityofdenton.com because people are getting lost in our website. They are trying to find things, they can't find things. So I think to make all of this, because our goal is to put our citizens in the loop so they're not playing catch up, not just with notification, but with information about the project. And if that's our goal, is to disseminate that information, because every time people can answer their own questions by looking at the website, it's one less phone call to staff with a citizen trying to chase staff to say, what's going on? Give me the details. Where people, and so my recommendation with all public notices that there is a specific web address and not just cityofd enton.com. And it can't be this long because people need to be able to sit there and type it in and type it in easily. So it boom, it goes right to that centralized, OK, here's what's going on. Hopefully, they'll also take a look and say, oh, something 's going on in this part of town that I care about also. Because I think one of the basic fallacies of the 200, 500 is that only the people who are within that 200 or 500 care or are interested or are impacted by whatever happens with that project. It's often a whole section of the city that it's going to impact. It can be people who live on the other side of Denton who care about what happens in that part of Denton. And they have every right as citizens to be in the know. So I'm so happy to see this come forward. And thank you to staff for taking the time to study it. I've been talking about it the whole time I've been on council. And as a citizen for 10 years, receiving my own notices, they all fell short. And they all created phone calls because it didn't tell me anything. It had a little map without a description. And there was no web link that really took me to an easy centralized location that would pull up those maps, answer those questions. You may also want to put an FAQ, frequently asked questions , about that project. So people can read it and again, our goal is to get people to the website so they can gather as much information as possible about that project. Thank you. >> Councilmember Riggs. >> So a few questions. I know we haven't gone through all of them yet. But on switching from certified to regular mail, will the annexation still be sent certified? >> Yes. >> Okay. And the difference between the 500 feet and the 200 feet, one is regular, one is postcards. Will they have the same information on them? >> Yes, they'll have the same information. The letter, I think, will have a little bit more detailed information just by the nature. But the postcard will still have essentially the same information and a link to the website to go for more information. >> Okay. And on number five is that, I know that you haven't really got to that one yet, but is the fee charge, is that if a developer, somebody pulls an item and then starts the process all over again, is that the actual cost of notices? Does that have anything to do with it or is that different? I'll have to ask Manal to come in to that one. >> Thank you, Allison. Good afternoon. The item five that's reflected there, notification fee charged to applicants, the intent is to make sure we actually cover the cost that are associated with it. Right now we do not. And so this would mean that we would provide the mailing list to the applicant. They would send out the mailing notification and they would pay that fee. So we would not be assessing that $220 that we assess. And so the intent is to make sure that we give them the mailing list, they certified that they've sent it out and then they pay for it. Because we've run into instances where we've got thousands of mail outs that need to go out and it's cost prohibitive then. This is an option. This is what some communities do. It doesn't necessarily, and this is just a recommendation. >> Thank you. >> Yes, Councilmember Greg. >> It seems that of late that the notice that's in the newspaper looks different. I noticed it when I was trying to find the comics the other day. And it looks different because I think it does. Because now it appears that we're showing a map with the property that's being zoned differently. >> Am I right that the notice in the newspaper is now different than it has been? >> Yes. >> Can you go into a little more detail about what's different about it? >> Councilman Gregory, you're absolutely correct. We've added a map. >> I'd love to have that. You never hear that at home. >> Yeah, so we used to have just a verbiage of the project, the location. Now we have a map that's a little easier to identify more information on what the project is about. So we're trying to get as much information as possible out there, which means added cost to the publication. But we've added more information, is generally the case. >> I appreciate that. And I think that, and I should have gone back and checked to see. Because I know that as a person, if you're just living in the neighborhood and you're not dealing with NR3 versus NUM12, whatever it is, that wouldn't have clues to what the differences mean. So do we explain what the kind of zoning change that's being requested? Do we give enough? >> I don't know if we go into that specific, but obviously there will be and should be a website, a web link that hopefully can be further explained in the website that has more of that information. We don't explain, I guess is what I'm trying to answer is the actual NR. What it is, it's more or less what is being proposed versus each specific zoning district. >> I saw, I don't know if it was at Texas Municipal League Conference or National League of Cities Conference a couple of years ago where they were talking about. The way that we typically send out those legal notices about zoning changes. And it's almost as if we don't want people to know about it . As opposed to how other people would post things in the newspaper if they really wanted people to know about it. And how significantly different that would be. >> So I think it would be interesting to see maybe a sample of what the postcard would look like. Or maybe even some, as we're talking about this, some ideas for those of us relics who still use a newspaper to see, is there even other enhancements? I'm really pleased with the enhancements that we've had, but maybe there are even more. >> Sure. >> I'm real pleased with item number three, the size of the sign. I am sometimes disturbed by where the signs tend to be located. And I'm wondering if the applicant, do we give any directions to the applicant as to locating those larger signs in a spot close enough to the street that people actually drive on? So that they would see it. >> Yes, we'll have all that information, what the sign will look like, all the font sizes and all that good stuff. So that it's consistent and it's readable for passing by. >> Thank you. >> You going to number six? >> I was going to reiterate on number five. There are a couple of options there. One is, Manal mentioned is that you could put the responsibility for sending out the notices on the applicant and they can certify that they mailed them out. The other is that the council could revise the fee for the mailings to recover the actual cost of the mailing. And so I think we put both of those options in the backup for the council to fully recover the cost from notification . And then the last one, number six, the standardized notification procedures for all of the notifications that the city sends out. And DME has a similar notification process for public hearings in open houses that they use as directed by the council based on plannings. But other departments often have these kind of public meetings or neighborhood meetings that they hold. And so the intent is to try and give departments a template , a toolkit, to be able to say if you're having this type of meeting, here are the standard tools that you can use. Here are some options that you can deploy based on your particular goals of having that meeting. And that PCO, the Public Communications Office, can work on setting up templates for each of those, including flyers, door hangers, postcards, letters, but even things like the text for a robocall so that anytime a city of Denton department is holding a meeting, there's some expectation of what the outreach will be to notice people. And in your backup, we provided kind of a larger matrix of what those meetings would entail. As you can see, you have the meeting types, and we broke it down, public hearing, neighborhood meeting, construction and detour notices, which Community Affairs is rolling out that program now. And then we have other general informational notices like mosquito surveillance and response. Those type of things are regulatory notices that follow their own standards. And so the intent is that this is a toolkit that the entire city will use when you're executing these type of meetings. >> Councilmember Wisner. >> So we have two options on the applicant mails or the city mails. If the city mails, we bill the applicant, is that what we 're talking about, actual cost? See, I'm sorry, I don't want to turn this over to the applicant for a number of reasons. But primarily, it's government's job to notify its citizens about a government change, which is a zoning change or an application that's come into planning to build something. It's government's job to do that notification. And you bill the applicant for whatever that notification is. I do think we need to be a little bit careful so that there 's no sticker shock for somebody. And we're talking about the 200, 500 in terms of that's what the applicant would be paying for. And you could, I think, give the applicant notice ahead of time. This is what it's going to cost for, because I sit in those meetings and I look at the 200 and 500 foot circles. And often, there's nobody in there. It's just, you have three houses. And it's like, there's just something fundamentally wrong with saying, well, we've done our minimum notification, we've done our 200, 500, so we're done. Because the state says that's enough. And I look at the 200, 500 and it just, it drives me crazy because I know there are people outside that 500 foot circle who really want to know what's going to happen there. But they don't get noticed because we are doing the minimum . So I still think we need to really noodle and drill down a little bit on how can we best effectively notify. Because it may not be a one size fits all. And I don't know what the law is about one size fits all. But putting a project out where you've got three houses in that notification, to me falls short because you're not notifying that general area. But I don't know how to do that. I don't know what other cities do in situations like that. So all I'm saying is, I think we can do this better. I also know that we're going to start talking about small area plans in this city. And that can be a catalyst also for a notification system. Because the people within that overlay now can truly have the email notification list. They could also have their own city Facebook notification coming from the city. So that that small area has their own notification system within the small area plan. And I know that discussion is coming up in a week or two. And I look forward to that. But I just don't want to put this on the back of the applicant. I think it needs to be the responsibility of government to actually mail this out. I do support the giving up on the certified mail. I've seen it firsthand. It doesn't work, it's broken. And I'm sure that Denton Post Office will be very happy to not have to knock on out of ropes and ranch. You know, 1,500 doors sometimes with notifications. And again, the key is you can't put everything on a post card. You can't put everything on an 8.5 by 11 sheet. What you can do is notify them that there is a change that is coming that is possible. And to drive them to the website so that they can gather as much information as the city has at their disposal. The maps, the maps and the maps. Because the city often tries to squeeze a map on even an 8. 5 by 11. And it just doesn't fit. It doesn't, you can't read the streets. You don't know what it's trying to talk about. And so this is about looking at everything that we're doing as a city and just upping the, because it's been this way forever and we can do a better job. And if we're going to go to the effort of notifying, then let's do a good job at notifying. Let's do what we're supposed to do. And that's put at the disposal of our citizens all the information that they need. It will help elected officials. It will help planning staff. It will help different departments in the city if it's impacting something that they're doing. So I just know that I'm just happy that we're talking about this to raise the bar. >> Councilmember Hawkins. >> Thank you, Mayor. I think that these are all good recommended changes, except I also agree with five. I think that there's just going to be a lot of problems that are going to arise with having that be on the developer or applicant. Recovering the cost, we definitely should do that. And I think somehow if we can give them some sort of heads up how much that's going to be, that would be good. But I think that these are great, especially one, I didn't realize, if you have certified mail, of course someone has to sign for that. I don't know why I didn't realize that until you put it up there. So I'd like to move forward with this. Sticking with the 200 and the 500 feet with these changes, I'd like to see the results of that. I think if you go out much further, a public hearing is for anybody in our city limits. But I definitely want the impact of that decision on that public hearing to be really about that neighborhood and what they want in that neighborhood. So I think these are good jobs and I recommend except for five there. So thank you. Thank you, Mayor Carey. I'm actually curious as to DME's opinion about whether they would like to send the notices or if they would like somebody at the city to send the notices, because I feel like they're probably our largest customer of notifications. So I'm just I'm curious from their perspective. Good afternoon. Currently, we send the notices. Our notices are not for zoning changes usually in the zoning change, we would use standard zoning process. But our notices are according to ordinance that was passed for a process of site selection and route selection for transmission substations and transmission lines. And we followed that ordinance and send notices appropriately for that. But we we to change the times as far as what avenues are available to us to contact citizens. And we're finding next door apps, those kind of things, social media, beneficial and reached out to those. Tech related suggestion. I mean, I know a lot of services exist where they can send notices to your phone by text for various things. I get notices for everything, really. So I'm wondering if that's like potentially we could have people opt into that or automatically enroll them and then have them opt out if they're a customer of utilities here. So that might be another avenue. I'm OK with applicants being in charge of the notices. I feel like they have a really strong interest in notifying everybody because if they don't notify everybody, it could jeopardize their project. So for that reason, I'm OK with it, but if we go the other direction and keep it in house, that's fine as well. I I'm OK with either in house or out house, so to speak. I would just assume have both certified mail and regular mail. I mean, you know, in legal proceedings, very often that's how things are sent out because you're assured that, OK, you get a certified mail. If it comes back, how many times have we had people stand before us to say we didn't get a notice? And oftentimes, it's only been that certified mail record that we've had to either go back and verify or we go back and realize we don't have it. If you just have regular mail, you are opening yourself up to a lot of he said, she said. And how do you know that? The extra expense to send out regular mail as to certified mail that we're currently doing is minimal. I mean, it's of whatever stamps are now 50 cents or something like that. So if the applicant is going to be in charge of that or be charged for that, which I do agree with, they should be in charge or be charged with. Let me back up. Be charged, not in charge, be charged with whatever cost it takes to notify whether they send it out or we send it out. I'm I'm ambivalent to that, whichever way the council wants to go. That's fine with me. But I think I think we need to do both because it's going to be much harder to argue if you've got a certified mail that's been returned. But you also sent something to the same address. I mean, that's and the cost is minimal. And I just I know that in the legal profession, that's done quite often simply to ensure that we send it not only because people will intentionally refuse to pick up certified mail. And that's that that would be my recommendation on that one is just add to that the regular mail, especially since the developers are going to bear that cost, which 20 notices, that's 10 bucks. And there's just something to be said about documentation. So I think depending on the site, the cost is minimal. But the cost for the applicant would be for both the production and the mailing. And so it's more but you're correct. It's, you know, per letter, probably pretty minimal. Yeah. So everything else I'm OK with, however, the council goes on who's in charge of actually sending out the notices . Either way, you want to have as much documentation back up as you can. Yes, Council member. On that note, Councilman Gregory also brought up the fact of the sign and there were it was mentioned that there would be guidelines and things that they have to follow. Would it be the same on the notifications, like to make sure that the information was was on there? I think the intent is that we provide templates for them and they can switch out their information. So you'd have standard a standard sign that goes out. So it still is the city of Denton. Notice is just they would switch out their information. Well, I'm good with all of these. And either way, I'm OK with I do think we need to recover our cost because that's really important. And on the website, I think that's a great idea. Someone actually brought that up at my meeting last week. And I would I would just like to recommend that you have a tab for notifications or something that you can go directly to instead of searching. Things it might it might be easier, easier to find that way . And then somebody who may just be on the website that's not really looking for notifications will see it and just maybe kind of click on it for interest. Other than that, it's good. Because you in your presentation, you did have a matrix up earlier in the slides showing what the state requires and what the city is doing. There you go, because it was said that we're only doing the minimum and we're not. Because the state doesn't require the courtesy notice within five hundred feet. So that's something that we're doing above the minimum. And we certainly need to keep doing that. I think that at the time, and I don't know when we did it, that we switched from regular mail to certified mail. I think that was an effort to go above the minimum. I think that there was a thought that it cost more, it takes more effort. And the purpose is to raise the level of assurance on the part of the staff and the council that people are getting it. Your data is very interesting that the 13 percent don't get it. So, but I think the mayor's idea of both certified and regular is a good one. I'll tell you, my experience has been meeting with neighborhood groups on issues of zoning changes. And this was one particular one. I was in a neighborhood, a family's living room with four or five, maybe ten other families and several DME members. At the end of the meeting, they said, you know, I didn't know that this was proposed, this zoning change was proposed. It was a zoning change that was necessary in order to build a substation, a lot of people substation. And I said, well, everyone in this neighborhood got a letter. And well, yeah, but I don't always read all my mail. And the comment was made, the comment was actually made. The person said, you have four staff people, city staff people here in the meeting today. It might have been better had they just gone around and hand delivered those to every person's door. So I said, so I looked at the person and said, so what your standard is for notification is a hand delivered letter by a staff member to every person who's affected. And they said, well, that does sound like, when you put it that way, it sounds like a little much. And I said, yeah, it seems that way to me too. There's a certain amount of responsibility for people to open their mail or read it. And I know that a lot of people don't, and we get busy and we get stacks up. But I think it's important to know that we are doing more. And I'm really, really anxious about seeing the information about the sign and locating the sign because it just concerns me about where they're going to put it. >> And your concern is that it's visible from the street? >> It's as visible as possible that there's some thought going into putting it where it's located. I saw a sign that I would have only seen because I was walking in my neighborhood because it was on the end of a 50 foot dead end street. It was like, and we put that sign up. And it was probably because this subdivision was located in such that it was only located at the end of two dead end streets. I mean, it might not have been any better that we could have done. But it was like, wow, had it been bigger, and I'm thrilled about the bigger size, I think more people would have noticed it, so I'm glad about that. >> Yes. >> So back to the website and having drop dead easy access for citizens so they don't have to hunt. And make it all inclusive so they can kind of keep track on what's going on and when. Would you issue a press release please when that's live? So that our local news people can alert citizens to take a look at the website. This is up now, this is how it's going to work so that we can let the citizens. >> Sorry, this thing just goes off on its own. >> Blame the phone. So I appreciate a press release so that we kind of do a splash and let people know that it's there. On the standardization of the sign, this is so important. It was so bad ten years ago that signs went up that I was trying to read and the city had used washable magic marker on them. So when it rained, it ran and you just had a sign that no one could read. And we had to kind of ask for signs to be replaced. I'm not making this stuff up, I mean this really happened. The other thing that I just really don't want to see happen again, there was something that went on in one of our historic neighborhoods and notices. One of our staff members got on his bike and went door to door and tried to deliver notices to homes. But not all the homes got noticed because I heard from the people who did not. And to me it just screams inefficient use of staff time. It also screams that the city is inefficient and can't find a better way to notify people than to hop on a bike and go put notices in people's front doors. So just heads up, please don't do that again. We're a professional organization and we just need to raise that bar as well. Just wanted to add that, thank you. >> Anybody else? So a couple of things we need to give direction on as far as options. Number five, the one option is, does the city continue to send out the notices themselves and charge back the applicant for the actual cost? Or do we put the applicant in charge of that? So council direction on if the city maintains the sending of those notices and then charges back the applicant. >> I prefer that. >> Okay, all right. So I'm good with that. >> Yeah, I'm good with that. >> I think this, I need to clarify something. >> Just to clarify, as it relates to the local government notification procedure, we have to have record of that 200 foot notification. So that if there are any issues where there's any type of audit, we can prove up that we did based on the certified tax rules send out within the 200 foot notification. >> So the added notification slash certified notification is something we also need to consider, but we must maintain record of the 200 foot notification. >> Okay, yeah, we're gonna come to the, should it be regular certified or a combination of both? But on number five. >> Correct. >> The city or the applicant sending out whatever we need to keep record of. So you're saying that the applicant sends it out, we still have to have a record of it somewhere. >> Exactly, I just wanted to make that clear that we must maintain that component. >> It sounds like there's consensus is the city maintain that duty anyway. All right, and then on number one, regular mail versus regular mail slash certified mail. >> I like your idea of both. That's good. >> All right, were there any ones that I missed? We got the sign, we got the specific tab on the website with the press release. Yes. >> How are we gonna gather email addresses? What's the plan here? >> So there is a state updated section of the city's website where you can opt into public notices and we will promote that through our social media channels. We can promote it on the notices pages themselves to subscribe to these notices, sign up here, and on the signs, on the postcards, on the letters. >> So I think that's important so that the first time we're up and live and people go to that site on the web and they see the notices. That it's really easy, sign up or opt out for notifying and that's how we can and then it'll automatically go into people's email. Good, thank you. >> Any others on this? Yes, Council Member. >> Todd and Kathleen are gonna go door to door? Is that where we landed on that one? >> On a segue. >> Okay, thank you. >> Okay, all right, do you have sufficient direction? >> Yes. >> All right, fantastic. Moving on to the next agenda item which is 1C, receive a report, hold discussion, give staff direction, establishing an anonymous reporting mechanism as that relates to the duties of the city auditor. >> Good afternoon, the mayor and members of the council. I would like to discuss an anonymous reporting mechanism. As you know, currently the city does not have an anonymous reporting mechanism in place and according to the fraud directive, if an employee suspects fraud, they are to use their chain of command to inform people about the suspected fraud. And if a citizen should talk to an employee about this, and once again they have to go through their chain of command, okay? Now the most common method of detecting fraud, waste, and abuse is through tips. And it's shown that an organization that has a hotline has a greater chance of detecting fraud than organizations that do not. And in a survey put out by the Association of Local Government Auditors, when they were asked the question, do you have a fraud, waste, and abuse hotline? Of 92 respondents, about 64% said yes, they do have a hot line in place. And of 45 offices responding, about 27% said that they, or 44% rather, said that it's third party staff. Second place at 27% was in-house staff. So the city could be losing sources of information by not having an anonymous reporting mechanism. So then the question is, the alternatives are, should we continue not having an anonymous reporting mechanism? Or should we have one in-house that deal, takes in calls on fraud, waste, and abuse? Or should we have one that includes fraud, waste, and abuse , and includes ethics, compliance, and HR complaints? The third alternative would be, do we outsource this and once again determine, are we gonna do fraud, waste, and abuse? Are we gonna do fraud, waste, and abuse, and ethics, compliance, and HR complaints? >> Craig, could you make that full screen for the cameras? I'm not sure, that's just what I've been asked to tell you. >> Okay. >> I'm not sure exactly how to do that. All right, thank you, I apologize for the interruption. Okay, one of the important things that we have to look at when we look at an anonymous reporting mechanism is the sources of reporting or the methods of reporting. And so we want to have as many as we possibly can. And so you see there on this overhead, web-based, fax, email, toll-free 1-800 live operator series, US mail, and also by way of texting. [BLANK_AUDIO] Okay, now what I did here is a comparison study. I did informal bids to include in-house. And so you see the cost here. NavX Global is the largest outsourcer of hotlines. Lighthouse is second largest, and then there's Red Flag, and then we have in-house. The in-house fee, the $250 is for the phone line, a dedicated phone line for fraud, waste, and abuse. As we go down here, we've got fraud, waste, and abuse, all purpose. And so any source here can do them all or can just do fraud , waste, and abuse. You see here the customers that these sources have. You see the number of municipalities they have. Here you see the minimum length of the contract. NavX minimum is two years. The other two are one year. Feedback, okay, what I mean by feedback is this. We have the ability to talk with the reporter who is anonymous. And that is by way of codes or passwords. And so if we need more information, we can do that by way of this code or password. Or if the reporter wants a status on this particular item, they can communicate to us by way of this code or password. Case management, that deals with documentation, record keeping, and reporting. And so the outsources all have that. We don't have that capability in-house. The confidentiality, all of them have to be yes, otherwise it's not going to work. Multilingual, some of these have numerous different languages that they can get a translator on. You see the in-business, how long these outsources have been in business. They're all 24/7, 365. The reports, the incident reports or the monthly reports, all of them can be on demand. You see the allegations that each of them receive on an annual basis. And then you see the live operator on duty. And the outsources have that as yes, the in-house would be no on this. So that is the comparison study that I did. Okay, and I think that when we're talking about an honest reporting mechanism, I think that it's important to note that any of this information is submitted, submitted may be subject to the Public Information Act. And also as an employee, it would be important to read the Fraud Directive regarding protection from retaliation. The third bullet's important. Anybody, whether it's a citizen, a vendor, or an employee does not have to provide any personally ident ifiable information. It's anonymous. >> Yeah, can we get through the, he's just got to go. >> I just have a quick question on that one. >> Okay. >> So the information submitted is subject to the Public Information Act. >> Correct. >> Not the identifier who provided the information. >> If they don't give it, no, there would be no way that the Public Information Act could get to that person, the reporter, reporting the alleged fraud. >> So the information would be subject to Public Information Act. But if it's an anonymous tip, then it remains anonymous. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Council Member Briggs, go ahead. >> Okay, so the key point here is once again, tips are the number one way to catch fraud, waste, and abuse. And according to the report to the nation on occupational fraud, waste, and abuse put out by the Association of Certified Fraud Examin ers, an anonymous reporting mechanism is a cost effective way to lower fraud losses. So the direction I'm seeking is should the city implement an anonymous reporting mechanism? If so, should it be fraud, just fraud, waste, and abuse, or to include all improper or illegal activities? Should it be in house, or outsourced, and if outsourced, to whom? >> Council Member Gregory. >> Thank you, Mayor. Based on your experience and what you've read in the literature, a city this size would likely get about how many of these kinds of reports a year. >> Okay, one of the vendors did put out a benchmark study. And it's actually NavX Global who had the most allegations reported. So for all of the organizations reporting allegations to them, what they calculated was that it was about 1.2 reports per 100 employees. That's the median, 1.2 reports per 100 employees. >> Okay, along with that, if we're doing it either in house or >> [INAUDIBLE] >> Well, you're the one that started it. Or by outsourcing it. Who does the management of the complaint? Who follows up? Does the initial checks to see if there's any accuracy to this? >> Yeah, according to the fraud directive right now, those allegations would go to an investigation committee here at the city. And that investigation committee is made up of a member of legal, a member of HR, and internal audit. >> Okay, and based on your experience with this 1.2 complaints per 100 employees, how many of them turn out to be legitimate? And let me define legitimate. It could be that it's legitimate in that there indeed was fraud or waste or abuse. Or it could be legitimate in that it certainly was reasonable for the person making the call to have come to that conclusion. I mean, it might have ended up not being that, but based on what they saw, it certainly would have looked like that. So the percentage that are legitimate. >> That would be approximately 50%. >> Okay, and the other 50% are what? >> They're not credible. They could be just simply personal vendettas against somebody. What I've seen is that they may call and it may be a personal fraud. It's not a fraud of city resources. So that's what I've experienced. >> And then if 50% of them though are not, then what I'm hearing about the information, public information is that every few months or weeks the newspaper could contact the city and say, I want to see the list of the complaints. And if for example, John Doe is a supervisor who maybe is not very popular because he's had to come into a department and crack down on things. And he gets five or six complaints of fraud, waste or abuse . His name is going to show up and the newspaper or media would have access to that. But they would not necessarily have access to what the outcome of the investigation was? >> That depends. In my discussions with John Knight and the legal department , it would depend on the attorney general as to what, if we can redact any information. And it would depend on what the attorney general comes back to us with, whether we have permission to redact any of that particular information. So it's almost more of a legal question that you're asking me and I don't know if Jerry can chime in on this one or not. But don't get me wrong, I mean the purpose of my question is not, if somebody is cheating the city. I don't mind and it's clear that they are. And maybe they end up getting indicted. They go to the, Casey's referred to the police department. I think that information ought to be public. But if somebody is falsely accused and their name comes up several times because of, as you said, of indetta against them. I would be very much against those folks who are not har ming the city in any way and maybe trying to work hard to make the city work better. I would hate for them to have a blemish on their reputation simply because of this type of system. I would want to make sure that there's a way to protect those folks who don't deserve a blemish on their reputation . And I want to know how we can do that. >> Yeah, and I think also it would depend on what the reporter reports to us also. >> The reporter is going to report a story that sounds good , that sells newspapers. They're really wanting to sell newspapers. >> Right. >> And so it's not our responsibility, it's our responsibility. I think that we have a certain amount of responsibility to make sure that anybody who's engaged in fraud. >> I think he was talking about the reporter of the third party fraud. >> That's so. >> Yeah, and any allegation, the investigation committee will have to investigate. We've got to go after the facts here. >> Right. >> My question is with the outsourced head, the options that you gave us, have you had any experience with any of those companies? >> No, my experience has all been in house. >> Okay. >> That's my wife. >> I know that you've been in the internal audit position, working for other cities here in the state of Texas. And when I read all of your resume, there were some sizable amounts that you stated that were brought forward as, whether they were savings or, and what I'm trying to get to with this is cost versus result and that if it's a thousand or two a year for an outsource versus a savings of 30,000 or 50,000 or 100,000 that the cost for the service is very small compared to the savings. And that's all taxpayers dollar in there. So if you could talk just a little bit about cost, but you say that that was in house and so those savings were also found by using in house. And by in house, it means that phone line actually comes into your office, is that correct? >> That is correct. >> And you keep your door locked, is that correct? So that somebody can't come and does it have a code so that when you dial in, you have a code so that some other person can't come into your office and pick up and hit the button and listen. So it's protected in terms of security. It's a secure line. So even if we used an in house and it came into your office , which you have done in the past, I also come back to man hours and having, when it was in house previously and you were responsible for that, another question would be how many man hours a week would you say you spent listening to reports? So cost savings and then man hours if we keep it in house. >> Okay, well if we keep it in house, one of the items that popped up, and you have to understand that if somebody is embezzling funds , there's a cost to the city. There's a cost to everybody for fraud, okay? So one of the tips that came in eventually ended up to be a $2 million fraud. It could be going today yet, had we not gotten that tip. So you got $2 million there with it being in house. So that's a tremendous savings right there. When you look at what it could be saving, because fraud costs us all, okay? So as far as the man hours go, that depends on how many calls that came in on a monthly basis. I may have only gotten maybe one or two calls, maybe three calls a month to investigate. It didn't come out to that many hours. So as far as an estimate, that'd be difficult to say. Maybe 10, 15 hours a month maybe, possibly. >> So based on that, I definitely am in favor of a fraud abuse hotline. At this point, I'm not in favor of piling on the ethics and the other because the whole ethics thing is moving down the path of wherever it's going. And I say, let's let that be its own animal because it's li able to come forward with its own system. Right now, with a one man shop, we are really looking to zero in on fraud, waste, and abuse. And so if you personally feel, because you have had it in house over the past, and that's a system that you're familiar with, I'm real comfortable to keeping that in house as long as it 's a secure line and setup that somebody can't inadvertently come in and pull messages off that line. >> Let me, we've got four bullet items up here that you're seeking direction on. So let's just go through those one by one. Should the city implement an anonymous reporting mechanism? Seems like everybody's in agreement with that. If so, should it be just fraud, waste, abuse, or to include all improper illegal activities? I'm with Councilman Wasney. Fraud, waste, and abuse to begin with, I'm okay with. I mean, because we do have some other dynamics going with the ethics and HR has its own full set of criteria to deal with HR issues. So I'm okay with that. So I know Councilman Wasney is. >> Me too. >> I'm okay with that. I'm just not sure if a person calling in is going to be able to sort out what we would consider okay or not okay. >> Well, I think it's just, go ahead. >> Well, typically what we would do here is if a call came in that wasn't fraud, waste, and abuse, but it was something that needed attention, we would forward that matter to the respective department director so that it would be addressed. >> Okay. All right. >> Everybody okay with that? All right. So we're good with fraud, waste, and abuse. Should it be in-house or outsourced, which is a better word ? I'm okay with in-house. I mean, I did it based upon our population, or I mean, our number of employees. We're looking at, according to the average, 18 total. 50% is nine that would have some kind of merit, I guess. >> Yeah, if I could just mention one thing though about in- house. What I received from the IT department is currently right now, the caller ID cannot be disabled. So that is one issue that should be considered. >> Well, we can- >> And the IP address for any email or web-based input, it cannot be hidden. So I'm just throwing that out there. >> It's not anonymous then, yeah. >> Yeah. >> Go ahead. >> A follow-up question on what I was asking earlier, my line earlier about the issue of protecting innocent people that get falsely accused. Did you have a problem with that in your past experience? >> I have not had a problem like that in my past experience . >> All right. >> Okay, so going back to, I'm hearing the oohs and the ahs . So does that mean- >> Outsource. >> Outsource, okay. >> I like outsourcing because they have the reports as well and it frees up your time with the small shops. >> Okay, all right. Now if so, whom? >> So- >> This is under the bidding amount? >> Yeah, it's under the- >> So if you just pick somebody- >> Less than 5,000 bucks, I think it- >> Right, yes it is, it is. >> Do you have a recommendation? >> Yes, I do. >> What is your recommendation? >> Lighthouse. >> Could you go back to the chart, please? >> Sure. >> I was thinking Lighthouse too. >> Why do you feel so strongly about Lighthouse? >> [LAUGH] >> No, I don't have any stock in Lighthouse. >> You didn't just say that. >> No, why I like them is because of the way they responded , what they responded with, and the references they provided. That's why I like Lighthouse the best. >> All right. >> Lighthouse okay? >> I guess. >> That was the name of my band in high school. >> Never really liked Lighthouse that much. >> Was it really? >> Yes. >> And looking- >> Was it really your what? >> Looking at the chart, I had picked Lighthouse because they've been in business 14 years, and so they have longevity double than the other. So yeah, I'm happy with Lighthouse. >> Okay, all right, we good? >> Yes, sir. >> All right, fantastic. So you have a direction? >> I have my marching orders. >> Fantastic. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. That brings us to our agenda item two, which is concluding items. I have one, any concluding? Yes, Councilman Wasney. This goes back to our discussion about the wave pool and I call it the finish early clause or the finish late clause . If a contractor comes forward and finishes a job in budget and early, is there something that we, because in big construction companies, that is very standard. The other is if they're late, those penalties and to compare what is industry standard out there, i.e. other city governments. But I think it needs to be a council discussion and I think there needs to be a set policy made. So that we're not in this situation again where we're a little blindsided, not realizing that our contracts don't have this in it. So I think it's just a whole council. And part of that discussion, I'd like purchasing involved, the legal department involved, but also our internal auditor because one of his goals is policy and procedure and contract review and so bring Craig into that along with legal and with purchasing. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Great. Councilmember Riggs. >> I would like to request a council update on possible solar city installations and city limits or any other company that does solar rental. >> Help, you want an update on- >> Well, at one time, I was told that it wasn't allowed. And I've heard that maybe it is. And so I just, some information on if it is with the DME and how that would go about. Because I've had people interested and our committee on the environment doesn't meet for another month or so. >> So in essence, you're wanting to have an update or some type of work session on- >> No, Friday packet, just council it from- >> Different types of solar installation and are they allowed as far as net metering, whether it's rented, just sort of the different options and what does DME allow not allow? Okay, because I know we've had some questions on that as well. Was that it? Councilmember Hawkins? Yes, go ahead. >> On the fifth, I brought up the Jake break ordinance and we got a legal memo about it. So I would like to bring that up for a work session since we've kind of gotten some background. >> Is it Jake or Jack? >> I thought it was Jake. >> Is it Jake or Jack? Okay. I don't know, seriously. >> Did you guys not have a song called Jake Break? Your band Lighthouse? >> No, yeah, we had songs that were of the spiritual kind. >> So. >> Okay, and I have another. Sorry, I have one more. Lost my place now. When we were talking about the different voting locations, I mentioned that we could possibly collect data on election day or during early voting about where people would like to vote. And so we're in kind of voting time right now. I'm wondering if it's possible to get somebody out to conduct informal or maybe formal surveys on election day to see where people would like to vote. Just so we can start collecting some information as opposed to trying to, I don't know, I'd like to get information from people. >> What are you doing that day? Besides voting. >> Collecting information from people. >> Okay, anybody else? I've just got one and it may be a moot issue, but when we're talking about the wave pool, I know we haven't talked about the splash park in a while. And I know that was part of the bond program. Just would like, even if it's just an informal staff report on where are we with that? And because I thought it was going to be done this last summer and trying to understand what the schedule is. Okay, she looked like she wants, we'll catch it offline because we can. Any others? All right, is dinner ordered? Okay, all right, we will stand adjourned. It is 335. Thank you all.