Dec 05, 2017 City Council on 2017-12-05 12:00 PM

[ Silence ] [ Silence ] [ Silence ] [ Silence ] [ Silence ] [ Silence ] Good afternoon everyone. I wanted to welcome you to this meeting of the Denton City Council on Tuesday, December the 5th, 2017. It is 1201. We do have a quorum so I want to call this meeting to order . First item on the agenda is agenda item one, citizens comment on consent agenda items. See no blue cards. We'll move on to request for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for December the 5th, 2017. Mayor Pro Tem. If we could pull item F please. Pull item F. Are you wanting a staff presentation on that? No thank you. Okay. [ Silence ] Council Member Riggs. Would you like to pull J and K both having to do with aud iting services just so that the public is aware that we are taking steps? Go ahead Mr. City Manager. Yes. We will be, excuse me. Item J will be pulled this evening so there will be a further discussion on that in the future. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? I've got one and I think we've just, I think we've all received the information but just to clarify. On agenda item public hearing I believe it's agenda item D, what is that, 5D, 6D, 7D as in David. In our backup it stated I believe that a super majority may have been required because of the percentage of land that was being protested primarily by a single land owner and I think the City Manager has an update on that. Thank you Mayor. Yesterday the staff did receive a letter from Mr. Leon Hant who is the Assistant General Manager at Peterbilt withdraw ing their opposition and sending a response letter. I believe we received this today but I will get this to council. So they have formally withdrawn their opposition and stated they've worked everything out with the petitioner. Okay. So Mr. City Attorney given that, sorry about that, interrupting you. I'll try to talk a little bit longer so you can. Yeah. Merry Christmas everybody. Be sure and wash your hands real good because everybody's getting sick and we want to make sure that we don't spread that around. Okay. So on this because of course we received a notice of opposition and now we have a letter sort of rescinding that opposition and so I just want to make sure when we come to the vote that that has been reviewed and I may ask you specifically just for an on the record indication that that is exactly what's happened that opposition has been removed and they're in support so that then we are not required to have a super majority, is that correct? That is correct. Super majority will do. Alright. Thank you. I'll try to be a little bit more forth right when asking you the questions you covered very well. Any other clarifications? Alright. Okay. Then we'll move on to our next agenda item which are the work session reports. Give everybody a chance who obviously does not want to be in here to exit the building. Okay. Okay. So agenda item 3A receive report hold discussion give staff direction regarding the assessment and use of park land dedication and park development fees. Good afternoon mayor council members. My name is Laura Bar ons and I'm the assistant director for parks and recreation. Today I want to give you a brief overview of two programs that the parks department utilizes in the acquisition and funding of our park systems and that's the park dedication and park development programs. A little bit of background. Both of these programs were adopted by city ordinance in 1998. Park dedication is further reinforced by chapter 22 in our code of ordinances. Park dedication specifically is the allocation of land for park development and park development is funding for the improvement of that land. The intent is to provide recreational areas as part of the planning and development process. It applies to new residential subdivisions. It is for the formation of neighborhood and community parks benefiting the residents of those developments. It's to help keep pace with growth and the need that is associated with that growth and it also conveys the cost to the user which is important in terms of not being subsid ized by current citizens. Park dedication, the allocation for land is actually based on a formula. In the ordinance it specifically factors out 2.5 acres per 100 population at a minimum of 5 acres. It has a factor also for persons per housing unit at 2.8 for single family and 1.8 for multi residential families. The formula itself is a calculation where it takes the acre age, the number of units, the persons per unit divided by the population and that gives us the amount of land that is to be dedicated by that development. A little bit more about park dedication. It has a half mile . Raise our glass. Sorry. Cheers. Sorry about that. The park dedication must be within a half mile to a mile radius of the development and it allows for alternatives. There can be some things outside of our scope of influence or sphere of influence that could impact the dedication of land. It does allow for a fee in lieu of land dedication. It also does allow for building private parks which we have several . Normally those are part of a developed subdivision. Constructed parks. This means that the developer can actually construct the park themselves. It's not necessarily private. It would be conveyed back to the city. In both of those cases there's very specific criteria that those parks have to meet and then there can also be a combination of land and fee. Park dedication is imposed during the preliminary platting process and it's due prior to the release of the final plat . Quick question. On the private parks, I'll make sure I understand how this works. You came up with a park dedication acreage amount that's five acres because it's a big track of land and they wanted to develop that or they wanted to create a private park. Does that mean that that's not accessible to the general public if it's a private park? In most cases it is not. It's there for that, specifically for that development. Right now as the ordinance is written, the land that's being dedicated is for those residential developments within that half mile to mile radius. That's the intent of the land dedication itself. So it would fit that criteria. Okay. So then if, but if you were to aggregate all those park dedication, well I think that's the next one, the dedication fees. Development fee. All right. That answers my question. Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry. Council Member Duff. I'm just curious how this fits with Robeson Ranch, you know , since we're a totally gated community. And I think probably the answer to that is that we have plenty of dedicated land inside of Robeson. And typically it is not totally open to the public. Is that correct? Yes. And I'd have to go back to look at that specific development. And that's actually that I'll talk something about in terms of some of the complexities of park dedication and park development is tracking each development and going back to see whether land was development, whether fees in lieu of, and how that's applied per the, per the ordinance. Okay. Thank you. For park development, it is also formula based, a little bit different in the ordinance. Again, back in 1998, it assumes $208,000 for improvements to a five acre park. It has a fixed dwelling unit amount for single family at 29 1 and multi family at 198. And the actual calculation is the dwelling unit times the number of units. And that gives us the development fee assessment. It also has the half mile to mile radius parameters. Fund ing cannot be used for maintenance and operations. This is for improvements only. It's imposed at the application of the building permit and must be paid prior to the issuance of that permit. So on the park development, you said that's applied at plat ting. So if you already have a platted lot that was existed prior to the ordinance, then you're only paying park development fees. If you go to develop that, it sounds like it. Actually, the ordinance states that anything prior to, yes, anything prior to the ordinance does not apply. So if it was platted for dedication prior to the ordinance, it doesn 't apply. Development came afterwards, it would. Okay. Thank you. From the inception of the programs for both for both park dedication and park development, you'll see under total revenues allocated. This is what has been collected since 1998. Two million, a little over two million in park dedication with $442,000 spent, leaving a remaining balance of $1.5 almost $1.6 million in that fund. For park development, a little over $4 million has been collected with $1.3 spent with a little over $2.6 million remaining balance in that revenue. If Mr. McGregor has a question. Thank you, Mayor. I apologize that I didn't send this question ahead of time. And I understand you may not have the answer. But I would be curious to know about how many acres of park land have actually been donated since the policy went into effect. Okay, we can get you that information. So when we're reviewing both of these programs, some considerations to keep in mind. Again, this is we are currently operating under the original ordinance adopted in 1998. There have been no updates to it. We have the distance parameters of half a mile to a mile radius for both of them. This currently limits our use of funds. You can see that specifically in the park dedication . It also tends to drive our, you know, to drive what how we 're using that funds because we're looking specifically at parameters and not necessarily being able to use the need as our first priority. Even though we might identify need, we still have to go back and make sure that we're meeting these restricted parameters. So it tends to drive our planning. It also produces some administrative complexities. To your point, Councilmember Duff, we have to track these developments. Right now it's on an Excel spreadsheet. GIS is partnering with us and helping us map that so that information becomes a little bit more easily accessible to us and identifying the availability of funds. So if we identify a need, we can go back and look through this spreadsheet and also look at the map to see if there is any funding available through dedication or development. And then we also have to keep in mind sticking to the criteria for the use of those funds. Some additional considerations is there is a legal standard on this. There's a little bit of information in your backup . But back in 1984, I believe the Supreme Court rules specifically on the use of these funds and they established a standard called rough proportionality when we're assessing these funds or when a municipality or city assess es these funds. And that is defined as the connection between the imposed requirements on development. So what we're requiring the development to do and the projected use that is a result of that development. It's more restrictive than just your general nexus, which is a term that we're primarily familiar with when we're establishing a relationship between two factors or two elements. This has to show a direct correlation or direct connection between what we're imposing and the use or the extended use that it is projected to create. This requires municipalities to take an individual approach and our traditional uses of benchmarking, comparables, and national standards are not accepted as the foundation or basis for our method or formula when assessing our park dedication and development fees. So how do we do that? How do we get to that number? What we have to do is operationalize our city's current level of service. So it has to be individualized to our city. Mayor Pro Tem. I don't understand what operationalized means in that context. It's how we actually develop the methodology. So if we're talking about a current level of service, how do we assess that? So we're looking at actual population versus acreage. So we're putting factors to that assessment, to that method . And finally, I'm sorry. I'm just making sure nobody has had a question. Sorry. Finally, we actually need to look at considering including some additional information when we determine our park dedication and park development land assessment and fees. So that's the park type, the park usage, and the willingness to travel because even though we might have a direct impact to that half mile and mile radius, we also know that in some of our larger parks, those developments are having an impact on those. People are willing to travel . So we're looking at park type and again, the usage, what amenities do those parks have that are having people travel a little bit further outside of those radiuses and then also their willingness to travel to those areas. So by reviewing both programs, staff recommends a comprehensive review and update of the current ordinance based on all the information that we just went through and the considerations. We're recommending that that be done through a professional service contract, somebody that has expertise in this area who's able to survey our citizens, conduct some neighborhood meetings, and talk again about park usage, park amenities to help us determine those factors. Those factors would include an analysis as we've been discussing here, population, park acreage, park type, usage , and travel distances. Taking that information, a development of a new method of assessing park dedication and development fees based on the current level of service, which would not only ensure legal compliance, that rough proportionality standard, but this would also allow us to drive our decisions based on need rather than, you know, strict parameters under the current ordinance. The estimated cost of the survey is approximately $55,000 with four to five months of completion. Councilmember Briggs. So I'm in favor of the update. I think it's a good idea and give us some things to effectively and more efficiently, I think, focus our funding on. I am too. Thank you for bringing this to us. We certainly want to be in compliance so that this fits and we want it to be as flexible as possible. I was on the parks advisory board when we first did a voluntary dedication policy. I think it went four years and we had not a single developer to volunteer any land or any money. So, so we went with a mandatory dedication policy and and we've certainly I've noticed since then that we've run into some issues in terms of needing some flexibility. So I think it's a good idea to do. I think that the policy is still a good idea, but certainly after the history that we've had, it would be good to take all of that history all of the experience that we've had and put it into play to revise and improve the policy. So just for clarification, the half mile boundary that we currently have. Is that simply mandated by our ordinance or is that also a state? Is that also a state law? Is that just something we so we can change that? We can change that. That's mandated by the ordinance only. Okay. So the monies that have been accrued per that policy, if we change that policy to where we say, okay, either take the parameter, you know, the distance parameter off. Do those monies, are they still sort of segregated? And I'm going to use a word that I've become very familiar with and I want to thank the mayor pro tem for this. They 're sequestered. Are the funds sequestered for uses within that half mile that they were paid under that? In other words, are they vested in that old ordinance and we can't change that? There's an argument in favor of that interpretation. In favor of that we can't use it except for the ordinance in which they were paid. I mean, these exactions were made specific to the individual developers under the rules at the time and so there's an argument it may limit our ability to use those in a manner contrary to what the developer actually was told how they would be applied. And who would have standing to dispute that or to challenge that? Would it be just the developer per their specific exact amount? That would be one. Certainly individual lot owners who when a subdivision is fully built out but the parks missing, you know, they can try to create standing to challenge the city . Okay, good. Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, mayor pro tem. So would it be helpful for us to change the distance parameters at this time or is the idea to just wait until we get the full review back? Well, it would be ideal to wait until we get the full overview back because at that point we'll have a new methodology of assessing based on our current service levels. Okay, but what I'm hearing from the legal department is that we're really tied into location wise as far as the park dedication funds. That's correct. Is it both funds? There is a very strong argument in favor of that interpretation. Yes. That's a lawyer. Yes. Well, I mean, I guess I'm a little bit confused. I can see the value of doing the study going forward, but for the mon ies that exist right now, it seems like we're hemmed in and we have to use the parameters that we have. Well, in some of my conversations with legal too, it's because we've got that rough proportionality standard, we have to be able to show how increasing that now, that the distance parameter still correlates directly back to what we're imposing. And without that updated information, I think that might be , that could create a challenge. I think what they're looking for is going forward in trying to create a more flexible but consistent with the law, legal parameters to devise a flexible approach that would allow us to use those monies for possibly distances greater than half mile to a mile, especially in those situations like infill development where there's very little land available to create a park. And so I think what they're looking for is in the future and those funds will continue using them within the, under the current law that's embodied in Chapter 22. So it sounds like you're really asking for direction to start over. Correct. Putting a stake in the ground saying everything prior to this is under this old paradigm. Moving forward, we're going to be under a new paradigm. So when we start collecting fees under the new paradigm, they'll be segregated apart from the current one somehow, either electronically or actually physically. And we're just starting out a new path. Correct, yes. Yes, Councilmember right is the thought pattern behind this that there might be some differences on how it's allocated based on the park type. So if you've got a rec center it might be, you can like North Lakes money could be spent at North Lakes for developers from seven miles and Mac Park that's got baseball fields might be four miles and maybe a walking park might be just within that. It could begin to incorporate some of our larger parks, our park systems, our citywide parks and our regional parks. Well, part of this new look, I don't think we had this yet because you said you're working with GIS, but it'd be great if somehow when we develop the GIS map to say, here's how much money is in each one of these half mile radishes because I'm sure some of them probably overlap. And so it would really allow us a visual picture of saying okay well maybe we have, it might not we might not be as hemmed in as we think we are. It's just we don't have the data to really understand what could go where and is that something that's in the works of being. We actually have started to map that. Okay. And it's showing not all not only overlaps but gaps. Okay, good. Fantastic. How long do you think it'll take for that to be completed as far as the overlapping of the city with where all these funds go. With the mapping. Yeah. It's just a matter of coordinating again with our GIS folks and sitting down. Some of the challenges have been with some of these older developments. They were plotted or permitted under one name and the development name has changed so we're trying to go back and make sure that we have the precise location of that so that we can then pinpoint and map it, keeping in in line with the requirements. I think that'll be very helpful. Any other questions. Okay, thank you. I think you're. Yeah, I'm not going away. I'm just sort of hanging out up there. Yeah. Okay. A little bit longer. The next one is agenda item 3B receive a report and hold discussion give staff direction regarding the status and funding of the Bella athletic complex and the potential sale of city property on highway 77 adjacent to North Lakes . Okay, so shifting gears a little bit. Markson rag delivered a presentation back to you in September to you on the Bella athletic complex and just to give you a brief status update on that the construction documents have been uploaded into project docs and facilities has submitted for permits on the project. The bid specifications are under final review. There's just some minor language cleanups that have to be done to that, but we're anticipating having that over to purchasing materials management at the end of this week first of next week. Our goal is to get this out for advertising on December the 12th and the 19th at the minimum three weeks and then that would put us at bid opening on January the fourth and the ninth and coming back to you as early as February the 20th with a recommendation based on those bids. This is all fluid given the holidays we'd be able to probably give you a little bit more you know specific and firm dates on that, but we want to make sure that given the holidays if we don't get what we feel is an adequate response on this bid then we want to make sure that we would keep it keep it open to to capture all of the potential contractors that are out there so regarding that thinking back to our conversations there was one of the I had I was curious about splitting the project up because of the amount of money it was going to cost. Is that going to be reflected here and will that come back to us to let us know if it's worth the money to do the whole project or to split that. Yes that's actually reflected in the bid specifications so we have a base bid with several alternate bid options. Okay thanks. During that September meeting there was a request for information regarding the potential sell of some city property owned along Highway 77 just adjacent to the complex in North Lakes Park and using the proceeds from that cell as a potential source of funding for the athletic complex. So just to review that property and I'll show you a map in just a second but it was purchased in 2008 by Razor or from Razor Investments. The total property allocation in that purchase was about 20 .6 acres 14.7 of that was general municipal purpose land and 5.8 was municipal parkland. The purpose or the intent at that time was to acquire some land specifically for the Animal Care Adoption Center and of course the McNatt Center was built in 2012. Another intent was to expand North Lakes Park and then most recently was identified as the location for a second dog park area. Now here's the land that we're looking at in the original cell. All 20 acres is encompassed by these three units right here and that's actually four with this little piece right here. Of the 20 acres of the original 20.6 acres we have 4.4 acres that have been carved out for the Animal Adoption Center. We have 10.3 remaining acres that's general municipal purpose land and then we have the 5.9 municipal park track down here. So today specifically we're talking about the 10.3 general municipal purpose track that would be available. Within that track we have 9.6 acres that is zoned NRMU 12 and we have the cursor will come back 0.7 acres in this little triangular area of NR2. Some characteristics of this tract is that you have an unfinished curb cut right here with direct access to Highway 77. This is a trail that was installed this year with grant funding from TexDOT. And then we also have a water line that was installed major water line installed along Highway 77 and easement access to that water line runs the length of the property. Laura do you know how wide that curve cut that unfinished curb cut is? I don't know but I can get that information. Yeah because that's a TexDOT road so if you were going to whatever we did with it whether we kept it for municipal purposes or sold it for commercial development we're going to have to know how wide. If it's 12 feet or 15 feet it's probably going to be difficult. And you bring up another good point too there's currently access to this property from Highway 77 going into the Animal Adoption Center as you can see it stops here. The intent was to have that as the access point for the city's future use of this property. There wasn't an intent on our end to utilize that Highway 77 I'm sorry that curb cut that unfinished unfinished curb cut. So when evaluating this property a couple of considerations . The compatibility with surrounding land use in your backup you have an exhibit that lists the uses for NRMU 12 and NR2 and that will give you the zoning criteria and requirements for that property. Traffic access as we just spoke of there is the uncut curb which would require regardless either way whether it was us or somebody else would require approval by TexDOT eventually to access that that location and then we've got the trail that was installed that also runs through that property. Again it was a grant funded trail through TexDOT and we also have the issue of retaining easement there. I'm bringing three options to you today the first is to continue to explore the sale of the 10 acre general municipal purpose tract. In that continued exploration what we would look at in more detail is the impact on the grant funded trail the retain age of the waterline easement and we'd also need to identify an alternate location for the second dog park. Option two is to continue to explore a portion of that property. In that case we would need to look in more detail at the division of the property and then the same three factors as the first option the impact to the grant funded trail. The retainage of the waterline easement and identifying an alternative location for the dog park and then the third option is to retain the property and reserve a space for the second dog park as originally planned. I'll start I am in favor of option three I will say that for the past year a little over a year I've had people reaching out to me wondering about that second dog park and I've been continually telling them it's on its way and to start over to find a new location would be really disappointing for myself and a lot of constituents and citizens of Denton. Councilmember Husbeth and then Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you Mayor. Yeah, so I would hope that we can agree on more something towards option two. I think to have that property directly on 377 as a stated before when I made the request I mean it's a busy road. There's not a lot of retail in that area that area is growing quite a bit that still allows for the dog park on the backside. It still allows for the trail to be maintained. And you can even see kind of a cohesiveness on the backside with the dog park and access to the to the pound so maybe you go test drive the dog. See if you like him go play, you know see how well he plays with everybody else and then make a decision, he or she. So I think, but for me it really is to have that property fronting that that busy road. I mean there kind of is a for me a no brainer for us to to take advantage of the realize that the monetary need because, as we all know, the funding may be from other agencies may be stifled a bit until we get further down the road. So when we're so you're talking about funding projects where we had the source that may not happen for a bit. This is a good way to potentially especially with land values what they are, I just, I think that's the best of both worlds. Thank you. On the, the inner to is that the property that worked out on the swap, sometime ago with the. I think it was the south west corner of North Lake Park. Now this was all. If you could go to the mic, please. Thank you. That particular track was adjacent to the old YMCA property that we bought several years ago it's a little further south than you're okay. The reason that you've got this carve out here is that there was the razor family purchased , there was a little out parcel there that had a house on it. And so that they purchased that as a assemblage tracked you many years ago, so the zoning just carry that track. Yeah, I think I'm in favor of option three, keeping continuous land for for park and city development makes more sense than trying to sell off a little bit to do something else and then you got to figure out where you're going to buy other property for the dog park and we have been promising that second dog park for some time and I'd like to see that get on the table sometime soon. Pro Tem I apologize for taking a sequence. So, I thought I brought this up. When you said that's why you asked for this I thought I had asked for it so it just goes to show bunch of people asked to, to hear about this. I think the last meeting that we had the presentation was that we were short on funds for the dog park and so this was presented as a way for making up the shortfall of the funds and I don 't remember do you know what the shortfall is I don't remember. What we do. The, the current. We have a little over a $2 million shortfall, we have been identifying some additional funds within our current, you know, funding groups that could shrink that even further and specifically we're looking at some CIP funds that we've identified that could be reallocated for the project that would require us to go back and for approval from the CIP committee. But if we do that we can shrink our, our delta down to just a little over half a million dollars. So I really want the park as well and like Councilwoman Br iggs I get inquiries because I posted that it would be ready in six to nine months and that was six to nine months ago so I also really really want the park, but I'm worried about the shortfall, and I'm not really clear on why selling a point seven acre tract would prevent us from having a nine point six acre dog park. Is there something I'm not seeing that that would be an option under to to separate out separate out portions or divide portions of this larger area that we can still be able to have the dog park at that location because option to set identify a different spot for the dog park. Right, we would put it up. Yes, we would definitely have to , I mean it could be, depending on what what option, we are going to move forward with. If we're just dividing the land and we can push it down, you know, further down into this area. The, the current. The current plan is to connect to this roadway that's already built or the, you know, part of the parking lot, install the parking lot in this area and have the dog park here. So we would look at the different options when I'm saying, find an alternative spot could it could it go down further down further south on the same tract. If we go with option one in the potential of selling all of it, then we would definitely have to find an entirely new location. Okay, so with option to we could still have the dog park connected to the animal adoption center and the trails and all that stuff that would be part of looking into how to divide this property and ensuring that we still have enough for the dog park. Okay, well I'd be in favor of option to. Councilmember Gregory. Have we done an analysis of that property, the, the shaded property property in terms of you've done the analysis in terms of easements for the water line. Are there any other easements are there any drainage issues that that make part of it, or all of it, undevelopable. No, there, there aren't any drainage issues floodplain issues on this property, the easement. And then if we began to impact this trail what we would look, look for is a public access easement to preserve the trail. So, the municipal, the municipal park track 5.9 acres to the south what is that is that the tennis center. No, that 's actual parkland. Okay, parkland is hooked onto north. Okay. Yes, this this track is different it's, it's actual municipal park track. What's on it. Right now, part of the trail. You can see the trail extends through the park. So my cursor here. So, what. I mean, I'm not sure what. Obviously this is going to reveal some things that I haven 't probably visited too many dog parks, but 10 acres is a large dog park. So, I probably would be more inclined to go with option to but with the, with the idea that. And maybe I'm not sure about the designations of parkland, and to me it's. So, if the municipal park track 5.9 acres. Obviously that's not big enough I don't think to put like a bunch of ball fields on or something like or is it, is that the plan for that or what is the plan for that. No, that this was just going to be a continuation of North Lakes Park and have that trail amenity to it. So there isn 't there isn't a plan for. So, so the dog park and technically, if you wanted more space, could move into that space as well. Could it not. Not with the trail running through the five acres. So for a dog park and a minimum, a small park would be three acres, ideally it should be no less than five. And that doesn't include parking and oh no sure, I didn't mean that that would be the, the totality of the park I'm saying if, if you wanted more space. You could cross over that boundary line, you know have it in both places have it, some of it in the gray shaded area, some of it moving over there, which would then allow you that if you, you had somebody that wanted to come along and buy that frontage. You could do that and gosh if you had a trail there and you had a park system. That's sort of an amenity to whoever may, may be enjoying that as well and plus depending on what it is, you maybe could have some shared parking with that retail requirements so I think there's a way to accomplish this that that sort of maximizes the interest of everybody here, unless we thought we were going to use the municipal purposes track for something other than just a dog park like I mean we're, we've talked about, you know municipal facilities and our lack thereof and, but it doesn't seem like people are wanting to stay concentrated in the downtown area. So, I would struggle with, especially if you throw in that 5.9 acres. That is parkland and so if you have a little bit of the dog park on there an acre or two. And you're still preserving that trail amenity and that parkland it's just has a dual purpose so if that could be done I'm open to option to because I think it gets everybody, you know, it provides people with a dog park, and then it also maximizes the ability that if we're not going to use all that to sell off the most valuable part of it to help some with with the funding loss and I want to go back to the Bella complex. I'm in favor of we got to find a way to get that done, because that's been on the drawing board. And, and this is a lot of it's because let's make sure we get we get it done , but also, I know Dr Bella, and I think it would be wonderful for him to be able to see that work as it's completed so there's been many times and we wanted to really have something done. If we needed to do it , we look at, you know, the council can have an option of taking some of that shortfall out of the fund balance, depending on if we've had any extra revenue that's that's not been used in this last budget year but I just really want to say that because we need it. We need the facilities, I mean it's, I mean, we had a tournament I guess the other day or a couple weeks ago and then there were people everywhere in this town and all the restaurants and so not only is it an asset to our citizens in our community but it's also an economic development tool so just want to make sure I. We got to find a way to. I don't want to do that piecemeal. So, those are my thoughts on this particular item so I guess it fit more into option to. Council member Gregory did you have something. Oh, oh I'm sorry yes Council member husband. How big, because that number you threw out shocks me mean five acres. How big is the dog park we currently have how many do we have, and what are the sizes of those current. We have one. Okay, and it's a three acre park. We're quickly outgrowing it which is part of the need not only to have a dog park in a different location but to have that second dog park it can get crowded there. There is some separation between the different dogs for larger dogs and smaller dogs. So, that from our experience we know that three is a minimum will quickly outgrow it. So five is really ideal for us to start with. So, has there been any thought to two sets of three. To your point, if you're going to if we 're going to drive everyone to these two, why not look at two sets of three versus one giant set of five, because it serves more of the city and gives people three options, hopefully, dividing it up and then I understand is that are we saying, currently, is that three acres of dog park in a not including parking, or is that parking and dog park three acres, you know it doesn't include the parking. Okay, got it. Yeah, so I think, again, I too think that because I could see that as a great, I mean, because if I'm on the trail and then all of a sudden I walk into the dog park area, kind of as you know to kind of have that interaction and then I'm back on the trail back to where I'm going, that sort of thing I think those two go together. And then and I would kind of be for almost forcing our hand to have another one, identify another one and let's get that ball rolling to have. So that would put us at three across the city to kind of better serve the entire community. Just for clarification, you're saying three so you're taking you're saying add two additional three acre. No, because we currently only have one so this is the second dog park would only be two parks. Correct. So I'm saying, let's not make this dog park. Five acres. Keep it a little smaller one so we can fund it faster and get it done faster to so that we can put another three acre. Yes, dog park elsewhere in the city start, start that search to start searching for a third. Right. Right. Yeah, almost like loop 288 where we have that piece of property with a with a power lines are too low, something like that, but that, that's my thought and then the other thing that really. You'd have to, I'd have to understand if we're going to move forward with with option three is in home economics they told us when you're cutting the cookie dough not to cut in the center. So, why would we start in the center of this giant track so I that doesn't make any sense to me we need to start somewhere on the edges and to maximize the property, no matter what we do. Right. So under option to we can bring you back some additional options under that that give, you know, again looking at the factors that we need to consider in terms of retain a divisional impact on the trail and an alternate location whether that location is still at this site or somewhere else. Those are some different, some different things that we can bring back to you. I kind of lean towards option three, I could live with option two, but not if option two means that we sell a majority of that land. If we're talking about selling it for a retail space, you don't need but an acre or two. If you were going to do multifamily you don't need but maybe three acres and we've seen multifamily on some small properties, and I'm not sure that we could, when we sell it that we can make a decision. Except maybe through zoning as to what it could or could not be used for it could be used for multifamily or could be used for for retail and could be determined, a, if somebody wanted to buy it. And then what they wanted to request the zoning for what they had in mind. But I would not have that. It looks like a little over 10 acres in the, in the gray. Yes, I wouldn't want to get rid of more than sell off more than maybe two or three of those acres, because I want to maintain that trail. And a trail in order to have any value at all for the purposes of a trail needs to have some open space and green space around it, some space for us to be able to plant some trees. So, if we did go with option to I would I would be reluctant to spare too much land out of this. And we're looking for this land to fund the dog park or to fund the Vela Center I'm a little confused to help with the delta of the Vela athletic complex. Specifically, yes. And have we have we looked at other options for ways to to fill in that gap. And I guess we're assuming for sure that there's going to be a gap. Yes. And so, since September when we gave you the update, we've been looking at other alternative funding sources for that we've identified some through our CIP programs, about actually 1.75 million that could be reallocated from, you know, from different projects to the Vela athletic complex. That would just require the approval of the CIP committee. I think it would be before we go into definitely selling off a city asset. I would like to know a lot more details about about that what those what those funds. What we would be walking away from. What we can do for the council is come back with two or three different site plans for you to consider to show you the specific acreage, given the comments that have been discussed today how could we look at some things how could we look at the boundary mayor that you were talking about if we wanted to push it a little farther south, what would that look like how many acres, and what parcels could be freed up that we could then discuss if we wanted to market that property how would that look like. And I think at that point to we will have that information coming back on the Vela project and we'll be able to come back with a much more definitive conversation of here's the gap or how we can make it work. And then the options that are in front of you so we can take, I think this has been a good discussion for us to get some of the feedback from you of kind of how you view the property. And we can come back with some more specific options if that's what you'd like us to do. And can I, Brian, can I supplement that with with also because I, my understanding just from memory is, we've been the parks department is Robin Peter to pay Paul consistently. And so I'd like to include a document that kind of highlights funding kind of state of the union right because I hear you got Yeah, here we're talking about moving stuff around and I think at some point we need to start making tough decisions in input money versus taking money from one place and it put into another. And so I think it's, it's very important to me to see what projects were now kicking down the road. That's how we got, you know, that's how we get here with the soccer complex I think and just let's let's start making some decisions that input money into the program versus, you know, shifting. But I've just seen it just from memory there's been a lot of, hey, we can move this and do that and I'd rather just input some money into it and move forward. Yes, sir. We'll be glad to do that and bring it back to you . Mayor pro tem. I have a question about the track that's in between the two . There's three residential and are two tracks to the southern portion. Yeah, and then there's space right in the space so is that our municipal track as well. Yes, this is municipal park track, and that's a long rainy road. It's a long 77. Okay, so is that multifamily residential or it's regular single family residential do you know, I believe those are all single family homes, and then at NRM you 12. That's what we just rezoned I think. We're going to have a lot of bearings of what is over here so that is a multifamily that backs to rainy road correct. This this track is on Highway 77 this is on rainy. Sorry, this 12. The majority of it fronts 77. It's the, it's that. So if you keep going to the, I don't know where our bearings are but to the right, a little bit more. Yeah, that track is multifamily correct. That is what it's zoned yes. Okay, in our immune 12. I'm just trying to kind of figure out really looking at the entire track of asset that the city has and what our options would be from a really holistic standpoint. It seems like if we wanted to, we have some selling options , besides just the point seven acre track, and it seems like those NR two tracks are not necessarily. They're not very deep, it looks like so there may be some possibilities for selling off frontage that's not super, super deep track, but still getting some profit off of it for the park. I'm, I'm with Councilman Gregory that I don't want to see, you know more than three acres or so sold off. Like I really, I really think it should just be frontage that sold off because that's the most valuable part of it and then we can use the money. Yeah, definitely. Well, and I mean, what I don't want us to do is get trapped into because this exit where the exhibit one is in the NR two is that park, what is that is that. This is all North Lakes Park. Okay, so we're confining ourselves into this gray area and then this little track here. I don't believe there's ball fields on that side is there is just, this is all open, it's just all open space. We have plenty of room to do whatever we want to do. I mean if you want a five or six acre dog park, and you want to sell off five acres. That is very doable and I'm not saying sell off favorite I don't have a hard number because I don't know what's going to go there and plus we also have. We got five acres surrounding it and who knows how much acreage, it backs up there, because I think the part of the Vela flexes to the north. Yes, okay. So, there's a tremendous amount of flexibility here. My question on the only dog park we have, because I know that lake out there at Lake Forest, or is that Lake Forest. There's a lot and that's a city that's a city park, I did not know that actually but great fishing out there. The three acres that you said does not include the kind of trail and the land around the lake. No, so, so that's my point is, we have a dog park that we call three acres, but people are using all of that space out there that is the city space to walk their dog in and I mean, the park might be defined as some fencing or some, you know , segregation of different types of dog run area. So, I think option to depending on you know what's available and we're not going to be selling this off anytime soon I mean we got plenty of time. We're in the sort of strategic planning phase. And I'm not suggesting I'll just say this for me. I'm not suggesting to sell some of the frontage or whatever might be needed or worth something to someone, so that we can have additional funding. We've got to find the funding, whether we sell it or not we got to find the funding and we got to figure out how to do this in a way that is holistic, like you said, don't do it sort of in silos but how do we look at it comprehensively. I'm not worried about the space we don't have a space problem out there if we draw a line in the gray area and say we have to operate all within that well sure we sort of box ourselves in, but we've got 16 acres out there just what's on the on the screen and then if you go down to exhibit one you might have a couple of acres out there just even in that linear space, just not too deep into that that could be used as well. So we're going to find something that will meet the interest and nobody's going to feel like they got left out. Absolutely so we can, what we can do is come back to you with some site plans with some, you know, different options through some site plans, and then also we will have a better idea in the very near future on what the bids come back at and that's going to give us some more specific numbers in terms of funding. And what's still needed in what that what that cost is that we're still needing to identify to cover in that site plan development. I guess I would ask that you not limit yourself to the gray shaded area, or the 5.9 acres that if you need some space, and also I think Councilmember Hussbett has a has a valid observation and that is, you know, these are on both ends of the town north and south. This is pretty big. And you know to get to the north to get to the south can still be so maybe to begin to look at what where do we have some opportunities to do something else. And that would be, you know, not require as much because we have more of them. So I mean I like that idea as well. Okay, any other questions comments. I'll come back to that. I'll make a proposal to you soon then too. I guess cats don't use it very often. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. We're getting through these. That's great. Item 3C receive report hold discussion your staff direction regarding the use of tax increment. Good afternoon, Brian Langley Deputy City Manager I want to spend some time talking to you about the TIF funds. This is a continuation of discussion that we've had about the downtown to funds over the last several weeks. So our objective today is to talk about some recommendations that we've gotten from the TIF board as you recall we developed some different projects that were eligible for the TIF and we've been having a conversation about what projects we want to pursue we took these projects to the TIF board and they made some recommendations and we'd like to get some feedback from Council how you'd like to proceed. So there are four projects which have been recommended there for lighting sidewalks ADA ramps in the downtown area the total for those is about $1.5 million. The TIF board also recommended that no more than 33% of the fund balance should be spent so there's about $1.5 million in fund balance. There's also an increment that's coming in each year and I 'll show you some details here shortly, but they recommended no more than a third of the existing fund balance be spent in addition to what's coming in on an annual basis. So here's the downtown TIF area and the four projects that are being recommended. You can see they're all here, close to the square area the high traffic areas that we've seen in the downtown area and I'll show you in detail each one of these projects. Here's project a, you can see McKinney to the north oak to the south this is barley and board the recycle bookstore. The yellow areas or the sidewalk improvements that would be proposed, and each of these red dots represents where some additional lighting would be held and as we went through the conversations with the downtown stakeholders as we've talked about this lighting is an issue that's been brought up to us that some areas of downtown it's just dark, a little bit, some seems dangerous to some at certain parts of the day and so this is an area that some of us wanted to try to focus on. So the estimated total for these projects including the lighting and the sidewalks is $307,000. Now this, this is amount that we've looked at to try to have all the engineering the design components with it the construction with it we hope that you're not to exceed amounts. So you get into some of these older areas. Sometimes you can have challenges you can find things that you're not expecting to see. But at first blush without doing a full engineering design on these, these are the, these are the dollars that we think we'll need to complete the projects. Yes sir going through the sidewalk, these different projects. Are these all the same width, or are these all different widths like this one because you know these side. They say their sidewalks but some of it just is right. Some of them are missing sidewalks some of them are the wrong width. Some of them don't have the ADA ramps this is to try to make that same quarter as much as possible the same through that area at least have a good walkable path through that area. Some of these have they're not ADA accessible their steps, or some elevation changes and just to fix some of those are they food. Are these is this is this project, are all these projects based upon eight or 10 foot 1010 feet, 10 feet. Yes sir. Okay. So project B is going from McKinney to Parkway and some of the businesses that you're familiar with sleeping lizards Hercules muffler and radiator shop on Elm Street, you can see the sidewalk components here in the lighting areas. And then from McKinney back up to oak. You can see JT cl others is probably location you're familiar with is to try to improve the lighting and the sidewalks on those areas. So bigger project about $657,000 about 436 is related to the sidewalk improvements and 221 for the lighting. Could you go back to the last slide I just want to look at something. That's one. Yes sir , because when you look at these segments, and you look at just the total length. It's 307 and you go back to the slide we were just on. It seems like you're getting a heck of a lot more for $657, 000 so it may just be a slide presentation type thing but yeah I'm not sure if these are between Parkway and McKinney . So on these on the slide I can certainly get you that so you'd have the linear feet that's that's that's connected to it. Project C, which would be from Carol to Elm Street, and this is just a lighting project there's nothing. So this is just to kind of acquaint you with the Dixie Coney Island restaurant here JT closers back to first state bank that stretch of roadway would be just for the lighting that's an area that has a lot of lighting on it. That's 255,000. And then project D, same thing, going from Carol to Elm, just a lighting project another $255,000. And I do have some photos of these if you'd like to see I might be happy to show photos of these these stretches of roadway if you'd like to take a look at a couple of those, I'd be happy to show I don't necessarily I mean I'm pretty familiar with it. On the lights. Yes, do we, I mean what kind of light poles are those, hopefully they're not the. I mean because this is a. Some of this is historic registry district and so I mean what these aren't just our typical. These would be the same light poles is a question I received earlier in the week and this is the same light poles that we've put up on the Cedar Street area and the same ones that we put on the grand Hickory Street grand project also have some photos of those if you'd like to see them, but try to make that area kind of consistent and the look and feel that we've had. There's been a little bit of a hodgepodge over the years of what's been installed and so we're trying to make those more consistent. Do you have just a picture of the light post. I do. Yeah, just because I refresh my memory I'm not. Let me jump back to that. I had a feeling that might come up so. So this is an example of the light fixture that we would propose this is the Mellow Mushroom site something in that same area. Another intersection just gives you a little bit more up close view of how that looks. Are those like aggregate stone. I think so. There's other options of course if you want to do something . No, you need to be consistent I just. That's okay. Yeah. All right. Okay. Thank you. Yes, go ahead. That's different. That is on our street. This is down in the historical district which I think you 're referring to. That's a different type of pole, one that we haven't installed in the downtown area, we could, but it would be different in those other areas I mentioned to you on Hickory Street and Cedar Street. Do you know if there's a price difference on that. Yes, there is. These are more expensive. I don't know about how much but they're definitely more expensive. About $2,000 more purple. Well, I mean, yeah, I don't mind. I mean, when I do my properties I want to spend more money if it's going to be upgraded so I don't. Sorry I'm sorry I didn't mean to. Did you have a question on that other. I forgot I was even up. Okay, well I just wanted to give you guys a little bit of insight into the TIF process. So, when we discuss the options for spending down some of this money. It's not that we voted on 33% it's that we had several people that wanted 20% or less. And then I was on the high side at wanting a minimum of 50% of the funds spent although realistically I'd be happy with all that being spent. But that brought our average to 33%. So I just wanted to let everybody know how that process went down there. I think five of us there that day. What, what's the reasoning for for the smaller amount. I mean, I mean, if we have things we need to need to get done why don't we get them done. I'll tell you. Well, I think I can speak for those on the record anyway, the people who started out on that board really view that fund as a kind of a savings account. I've often heard of it referred to as like a college savings account or something like that. And what I try to do my good job I try to do a job, some type of job of telling them that, look, our expenses in terms of inflation for construction expenses are at 1% per year per month. So, the longer the money sits and doesn't do anything, the less it's worth in reality on the ground. But I think it's just kind of a, you know, a cultural thing they view that money is belonging to the tip and not to the city, and the city should spend their own money on improvements that's just, that's kind of the perspective. Yes, customer has been. So, thank you. So, I would be in favor of proposal D, combined with a ignoring the suggestion of 33%. The reason is, those two areas touch the square proper I think and kind of our needs. I provided pictures late or early, however you look at it, but the sidewalk going from the square towards the post office on Locus is abysmal. That's an understatement. It has to be, it needs to be done and so that I think A captures that. And then D is attractive to me because again I think we can utilize the parking lot, the Carroll Court's parking lot, a lot more. If you can park there and walk generally around the corner and now you have a straight walk to the square. I think it makes it more inviting and helps with our parking issue so if you're, you're new in town, and you come up for drive. You can park there with some wayfinding, and then walk into the square in addition to if we have conventions as those start coming to town now we're parking the buses there and kind of easing them into the square and kind of helping there and makes that a safer area. So that's kind of my approach, and then a third tier to that would be I highlighted that I think we should at least invest in paint to paint the crosswalks kind of the square proper, if you will just kind of to. I think you can get and there's a few sidewalks identified that should not add to the cost too much but I think cumulative. It has a large impact on the player so I'm happy to get printouts of those, those images. And I think that's a good way to draw your attention again as you're coming into town, the first thing you see for the community market is a wooden sign that looks like it's been in a hurricane. And I think that's a good way to save ourselves some headache with because the regular citizens will find place to park downtown but those new in town may park there and just kind of enjoy a walk and kind of tour some of those businesses on the way into the square. Thank you, Mayor I do have a just a few more slides I think may help us kind of determine the recommendations that you 'd like to make. The first that we developed for you the financial scenarios of how this could be done. This is similar to how you see some of the other funds beginning fund balance. What are the revenues is the increment that I mentioned to you how much is coming in to the tip downtown to fund on an annual basis and what we estimate that to be over the next few years. These are the current expenditures that we have out of this, the rail yard 380 agreement is one of those expenses which expires 2019 20. And reinvestment grant program. Right now the tip board like to spend some more time on that before they make a recommendation that's something that we need to do at some point in the future, but don't have a recommendation for you today. The cash funded projects I've listed these ABC and D, if you spent no more than the 33% for the fund balance as the tip board had recommended so this is scenario was the tip board recommendations, you'd have three room for about three projects where you could do the larger project and one smaller one. And then the following following year you could do another project to spend the funds in accordance with that. And then these are how the fund balances would look over the next few years scenario be would be if you want to do all of these projects in one year, or as council member mentioned if you want to do other projects that are not not listed here if you want to spend some additional dollars and some additional items. This is how the financials would work I would think you have you would have the flexibility to do that if that's what you wanted to do. So I wanted to give you that information so you could see that and kind of understand what you have really to work with. Well, sir, mean. I look at this as. When you build a house. When you finished. And you put all your big furniture in it . What do you still have. Now, my first house I built that's exactly what happened I bought all this big furniture. There was nothing on the walls. There was no accent paint no nothing. As you begin to put those things up, it begins to feel much more like a home it begins to take. So it's the little things it's the accessories that I'm going to say that really make a space in the end. So when I look at this project, we have great. We have some great developers downtown, who are putting in wonderful structures and amenities. And what we're lacking. And I think from the city's perspective or some of these accessories and I'm going to be truthful. I just assume look at using different light poles. I mean, if we're going to say that the city of Denton, the downtown is the crown jewel the city of Denton, then I don't know how many light posts are there, how many were in the all four projects do we do we have I don't have a count. I don't have a count off the top of my head. Maybe about 50. I'd have to add them up. Well, I'm not sure. So if let's say there's 50, that's an extra hundred thousand dollars that would really really I think make a huge difference in the look because we've got the businesses, we've got the people coming there it's that it's all the accessories it's the sidewalks it's the lighting it's the, you know, the, the crosswalk. I forgot how they did it but up there by North Texas Boulevard, how they put some kind of layman down some kind of material down to simulate brick or something that pavers. Yeah, it looks really great actually. If you did all four of those projects and you upgraded the lighting and lighting is makes a huge difference. I mean if you light up a structure at night you can make it look just , it's just for security, or you can really make it stand out like we did on the highway. We could have just had our regular normal lives. I think we need to step up the lighting, and most of that those other polls are down on the other side of Hickory. So , we've got a pretty big point of demarcation. We could really make it look so different for really considering a very small amount of money as to the, the aesthetic appearance you're going to get. And like Council member Duff said, we need it. I mean, yeah, could I do where you do the three and one the next year. Okay, but to me, I'm okay with doing them all at once simply because you're still building the fund balance up. And I think as you get that looking more aesthetically pleasing you provide more lighting for the parking. We get the new parking lot constructed over there that we 're tearing up that's sort of all in this same area, I believe. We almost have taken care of the west side of what we call the downtown area you know, Elm, Locust, well actually you 're going to do that side, but moving from Carroll eastward, you're talking about doing Hickory Street and Oak Street, right? Right. Okay. So you've done the two roads coming in and leaving the square so I don't have any heartburn with that. My only hesitation to do it all in one funding is if someone comes along with a project that wants to share a parking facility . That wouldn't be for several years and we're already seeing that the fund balance gets built back up but we're not going to pay cash for that anyway. If somebody wants us to participate with a parking structure, we're going to have to bond fund it, because we're not going to have the money. But I think this is what the downtown is missing. I think it's stepping it up to where this is sort of the icing on the cake. It provides more aesthetics but more importantly, it provides a tremendous amount of public safety. I mean I've tried to run down through there. There's no sidewalk down through there. I think it's just a parking, you know, it's a sort of a parallel parking spot. I mean there's really no sidewalk. So I don't have a problem with funding it all at once. There's not the votes for that. My second preference and probably my last preference, I would only have two, is that you just do the three projects in the beginning and you do the second project the next year and it'd be nice if you coordinated those to where if it's coming on the back end of one year and you can fund it on the front end of the next year, it's a seamless kind of, but we may not be able to because we're approaching, well actually we're on fiscal years. So, yeah, we're on fiscal year so that that probably that's probably very doable, and it wouldn't look like that you're doing it all together. Yeah, you can just looks like they 're all together just split up in two fiscal years, which would be the same as what you're talking about scenario whatever that was a I think. Yeah. So, those are my thoughts. Okay. Yes, customer. And then Council member Brian. Oh, customer. Okay. I'm probably going to forget that order but I'll try to write it down. Yeah. Okay, Briggs. Yes. So just a few and while we're talking about the lights we're doing lights on the Cedar lot, which ones are those going to be those are the aggregate rock type of lights that we had. Okay, well, on the new parking lot is that what you're referring to. Oh, I don't know the answer to that. Is it the same. It's the same as what we've done. I mean if we're talking about switching the lights going this way, we can certainly look at a change order because there's not that many of those. That's right. Yeah, that's. So I just want to make sure we're consistent there and not leave that out. I think this is great for walkability to get to the square, it's makes it a lot safer especially safer with the lights. That is a common thing I hear is that it's dark. I'm okay with all the projects or splitting it out like you said just whatever this council prefers to do. I do have a question about the reinvestment grant, because that is something we consciously decided to move over here so that those projects can continue to get funded. And I saw that there was nothing in 1718 so what does that mean for that program and will things still will people still be able to apply this point. There's existing fund balance I think there was about $100, 000 that was left in the fund balance that we used to have a separate fund for this. And so that will. The plan was to use that for 1718 and then come back for a plan for 1819 going forward. I think for the TIF board the questions are, what kind of process would you want to have what kind of application process does the amounts needs to change, and then what recommendations would they make back to the council but the money is there for 1718 for someone just looking at it and seeing that there was nothing there, and I know it was a big impact for our community and they wanted that to remain so I wanted to ask about it. Yes ma'am. Thank you. That's my Ryan, and then Councilmember death. Thank you. I'm in favor of going forward with all four projects if there was one we held off on it would probably be project see, because I think that the next item after those four would be the East Oak sidewalks and in lighting from, we've got the parking lot down here across from city hall, that trying to get to the square from there is not easy access what is see, I didn't see is the, the other end of oak, the lights on such you do all of oak in the same year if we were to add that project down the road. It's from Elm to Carol. Okay, all right. Right. Okay, good. Thanks. I mean in general I'm in favor of all four moving forward right now. Yeah, yeah, I mean, I'm in favor of all four and I think I think john has a has a point, you know I'd be okay with with delaying the see but I think we should do all four. Yes, go ahead and then we'll come over here. I like all four of the projects, I think I would prefer scenario, a because I'm not sure that we're going to get them all done in the same year anyway I think trying to do them all at once would create a lot of congestion, probably be better off staggering them. And by, by, by staggering them a little bit and not trying to just tear up all of downtown at one time. You're making it a little bit easier on the visitors downtown and the people who live there and have businesses there. And, and it spreads out the impact on the fund a little bit. Councilmember has been. Thank you. Can I get a print out of that. That slide that I email, is that possible. Mr. Hudson I have it here. Yeah, you could pull it up I'd be happy if you could because I mean I think here's my reservation with all four, and it's pretty simple, and be it less City Hall West that block and we're going to redo that at some point so I'm hesitant to put any money into that. Currently, until we know what we 're going to do with City Hall West, and I'm assuming when we read model City Hall West that front is going to get rem odeled. And so it doesn't. I struggle with doing that twice in a short time period. Giving that group something set that you hey don't touch the front of this because we just paid for it, but everything back, you have carte blanche to figure it out. That's. Could you put up there, the whatever project that that's in that's that's B. Okay, sorry the be yeah you toggle back to. Yeah, it's okay . I have an idea because it may be we could still move forward but just not do that. Exactly. At that point. That 's my point. Yeah, okay. That's one. Yes, sir. And city. So we're top left on one, the second picture to the right. Oh yeah that yes yes McKinney and Elm gotcha. Yeah. Okay. So that segment. And that's a very, I mean, it's very distinct to because there's nothing on either side. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. If we could go back. Thank you. Okay. Sorry. I apologize that customer has but I just needed to get your bearings. So this is, that's the ignore the bricks and the rusty sign behind it that says that's that direct people to the museum when they're their first time in town and that's, that's not good. In my opinion, so that I'd like to see that project folded in. And if we can go to, if we go down, I think that's counting. That's counting. They are doing. Okay, well, okay, because it matches our sign up front so I assumed. Okay, it was ours, we are, we're working with consumer needs on potentially relocating the storm sewer down I think it's mulberry to in order to allow them to put a fence and new signage along Carol Boulevard so he's got a similar idea to what you just brought up as well and so we 're trying to work with him to get that done. Okay. Excellent. And so if we can. So, you can advance to local street there. Oh no no let's go back because that's important to me. So, I don't know how well you can see it and I encourage everyone to drive to that pocket park, but if we don't absolutely get that done. I know there's something in the works are looking at it but man that is absolutely bad. I mean it's just it's just bad. There's a development that right next door that is very well maintained. And then our part of the equation is just, I mean it's, we've absolutely just let it go. And so, I would encourage us to make that a priority and that's just a kind of a graphic that I grabbed that I thought would be, but anyway and so now if we go to the next one. So this is, and this is the other part that is this very important to me so if you look at the third picture from the left. That's down what street is that that's a pecan. So, that I would ask us to include, because you have the power boxes on the back, you have three or four giant dump sters and that's right behind volume boards you have this giant, you have this nice, eloquent restaurant, and you walk down the street. And let's say you hang a left, and you can't that's not you can't use the back of that, that that sidewalk is grease there's a grease pit there. There's four or five john downstairs and so I would ask that we include pecan for sure. The pocket park, and there's some sidewalk little segment in what in in our initial project, whatever we're going to allocate funds for. So, I hear people saying all four projects, I don't advocate for that I, I would leave out. Like I said I identified A and D is touching the square proper and having the most immediate impact. And then, the pocket to A and D, I would add the pocket park pecan street, and some sidewalk segments. But, but again, if you if you go drive it, it is not in good shape. So, thank you. So, to try to narrow this down, what I'm hearing, except for your comments just now that it sounds like the rest of the council is for the four project and it's some kind of either all at once or some kind of staggered iteration is that, is that what I'm understanding. Councilmember Briggs. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Well, we had seen some images of what that future park might be and I was just going to have him speak to that on how much something would cost I think it was a spray kind of a spray kind of kid park. We've seen some initial initial concepts there they have not actually gone out to design but he the last time that I spoke with him on this it was somewhere in the $500,000 a million range. So it would take it would take most of the money in the, in the project account. I will say on that to the sidewalk in front of that that area is slated to be fixed. That's a big issue I know in that area, and I believe we putting up some side there and trying to help with some of the drainage just so it has a little bit better look as we kind of figure out what we might want to do with that site because I know it has been a little state of disrepair. Yes, may protein. Well, I just regarding the dumpsters on pecan street. So one of the things that we talked about at the tip meeting was the potential of purchasing. Well, lay back up. There's been discussions about what to do with the dump sters not just on pecan street but on a lot of the smaller alley streets, and it's a larger issue than just that street. What we talked about was that we would have to get trucks. If we were to put the dumpsters, one of the solutions is to put the put the dumpsters underground. And that could be something that could be done along all of the side streets which would then open it up for pedestrian bike mobility and people actually using the space, but that that project would be really. I don't remember the cost of it it was like one of the trucks was $150,000, and then you would have to actually coordinate the deliveries as well to . I don't know more than I'm familiar with in terms of getting rid of the dumpsters. I think we could, if that's something the council is interested in proceeding with we can come back with some more details about how that might be done and what are some options to consider to look at that particular area. Yeah, as far as that park. I mean, I'm gonna have, how big is that 15,000 square feet. Probably, if not that if not that small one. I'm going to have a real hard time spending $500,000 on 15,000 square feet. I mean if we need to put some saw down there put a couple benches put some nice lighting. I got it but right now we 've got to have sidewalks we got to have lighting, and we can put that on, and we'll still have some some money left I mean there'll still be some money left over but half a million dollars. I mean, look, half a million dollars was almost doing one whole segment, you know that $657,000 project. So I think if we were to, to be able to bid all these at once. So they 're going to get the economies of scale. I think from a purchasing perspective, then we can schedule them where you start them. There's no way you're going to do all those projects between now and the end of the next of this fiscal year. Because you're going to want to do some coordination, you 're going to have a lot of time, so you're going to be able to split it out. Like I said over two fiscal years. And so you finish up the three in August, or July or August and you're starting the other one and then you just you just can pay it out of the next, the next fiscal year. So that's what I'm hearing is, at least, is that is that is that more of a consensus as far as getting them done. Okay. Now I'm sorry, go ahead and let me clarify because I think your point is valid. My point is simply this. The dumpsters are on the street on pecan street, right. I'm just saying, if we clean that up, there's a grease pit on the sidewalk, where there is some balling board, I'm assuming, and taking that grease from that in the restaurant and dumping it in there and then it gets, it gets dumped from there. I promise you can look at the picture. It's crazy. And so that is what I'm saying. I mean, at least bare minimum, if we were to redo the sidewalk and make it look presentable, then I would think people would treat it with more care, and we handle it with more care and say, let's not put a grease pit where people are supposed to walk. I don't know whose idea that was, but it 100 years ago. Well, no, because they just redid it so somebody there was an opportunity to fix it. But anyway, that's my point is that the dumpsters above on the curb okay but if we can use the sidewalk and make the sidewalk presentable so that people don't treat it like it 's garbage. That would be fantastic. It sounds like the counts okay with this we could certainly bring back two or three options on the industrial park cost estimates give you some scopes to consider. As Mayor pro tem has just stated we have been speaking meeting with I know we had at least one meeting with a company that specializes in underground dumpster she's correct the initial investment in the, in the vehicles or what makes those expensive but it's about 30 to $35,000 a year per underground dumpster that that you actually install we have been talking about putting together, a trying to see if there's anyone else in that industry but be also putting together some kind of a plan for the council to consider and respond to it may be worth spending a few hundred thousand dollars to clean up some of these areas and so if you'd like us to put together plans and ideas on both of those concepts we're happy to do it. Well, and I think to when you say 35,000 a year you talk about, what do you mean for installation, they basically dig the pit. Because that also, and we're talking about the TIF and underground dumpsters, which also could be that technology, I think could go a long way and solving our multifamily recycle and our refuge for dumpsters above ground. I mean it's just, there's a lot of things that that's what I'm saying is, I want to be cost conscious as well. I mean nobody wants to be, you know, we all want to be cost conscious we all want to make sure that we're doing the best we can with our taxpayer dollars, but there comes a point where what you're getting for that additional expense far outweighs the additional expense and convenience, aesthetics, just your commitment to the overall look and feel of the community so like we did with the GIS, you know that's sort of that same principle with the gas insulated substation so direction. Obviously we have direction putting together some information on the pocket park, how can we get that looking much better instead of it being and there's no reason for it to look like that if it's only that big. And then how do we address the grease traps the sidewalks and the dumpsters not just on the calm but if there's any other of those that are. And as far as this, it's move forward, where the timing is such that it's split out over two fiscal years, but it's a seamless it's a seamless kind of. Well, if it's okay with the council what I'd like to try to do is to bid all of these at one time and come back with a phasing plan for you and try to get all this one time and we're going to try to get these done as quickly as we can. So if it has to go over two fiscal years we'll certainly do that. Yeah, yeah. Okay, and I think Gerard's point is a good one. And that is on that segment in front of city hall . Just do that we can sort of plug that in last or something so it gives the committee time to figure out what's going on and, and there's no sense in us doing something and having to tear it out if we don't have an idea of what we 're doing. Does that make sense. Yes, sir. Absolutely. Anybody else. Yes, that's all a question on the sidewalks will grants, will you guys look at any grants for these like COG grants or to kind of come in and maybe help with some of the funding. Absolutely. If we can find those will certainly try to utilize them. Absolutely. We'll get Julie Anderson involved and see if there's anything that we can find in that area. Thank you. I think this will make a huge difference in the areas in which it's implemented I think, and you know we had that public meeting on the tip. And all we heard about was, let's get some projects done that need to be done now lighting sidewalks parking lot we 're putting $800,000 or $900,000 in that parking lot so right here alone. We're looking at between that project in this project even though there's fun source of funds is different. That's $2 million. Yes, sir. Within a 12 month period. I do want to make just clear, we're going to have the updated lighting fixtures on these projects I mentioned, and the upgraded lighting fixtures on the parking lot over here on the fire station. Yeah, no that's. Just want to remember that. Yeah, yeah. I mean, again, that's a small, I mean, thank you. We will do that. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. Let's go ahead and take about a five minute break, and then we'll pick back up on agenda item number, whatever it was, four or C. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to call the next item. Let me get to the right page. I'm going to call the consent agenda item. Receive reports item. 3D. Receive report and hold discussion give staff direction regarding the credit collection policy of the city utility system. Good afternoon, Mayor, City Council, City Manager, I'm Tiffany Thompson, the customer service manager. Today I'm going to talk about our credit and collection policy. In November of 2010, based off of Council's direction, we did update our credit collection policies because of our own collectible debt and just overall ineffective credit and collection policies that we had in place. Over the last several years staff has watched the progress of those policy changes. In October of this year, the Public Utilities Board and Council did ask to see what the progress was on those policy changes and so last month, we came back before you and got direction on enhancements on the plus one program and executing a homelessness deposit waiver and Council has asked for further information specifically on deposits on new customers and then for existing customers so that's going to be the focus for today for the deposits. Tiffany real quick. Yes, sir. I'm going to talk about the certification on the homelessness waiver and that is a document that we still probably have to create that will come from one of our many nonprofit organizations who work with that population, where they can, so it's not, we're not basing that on our own judgment, we're basing it on the judgment of those who regularly work with that population are very familiar with their circumstances. Correct. That's correct. There's going to be a form letter created, much like the one for victims of family violence that will come from the agency that the person experiencing homelessness will work with, they will provide that to customer service, and then we will weigh the deposit based off of that. And we do have a timeline on when we're going to bring that back forth for ordinance revisions for Council to consider. And so in that, and I hate to keep you from me to start right but just for clarification first so if there is that waiver issued. Does that mean at no time during their customer experience with with city utilities. Is that the way it operates with the victims of domestic violence waiver. Okay, thank you. It's a two years that that would be on there so I want to clarify that's helpful. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Thank you. All right, I'm sorry. Absolutely. So for our new customers that's going to be the beginning of our presentation how we assess deposits. So deposit requirements are determined based off of online utility exchange we use them in order to help us make sure that we're compliant, ensuring that we're mitigating the situation. Is there an associated deposit that we should charge and if so what should that amount to be so for our green customers there's no deposit required at time of disconnection that's about 41% of our customers who don 't have a deposit on their account at time of connection. The yellow means that we're going to seek a one month average deposit at time of connection, and then the red we would seek a two month average deposit. Anytime we're asking for any deposits we do have those three options to waive the deposit the letter of credit co signer and then also if you would like to go on draft with their checking your credit card, we will waive the deposit for those situations as well on that Tiffany on those initial deposits are there are, are, is there ability to split those out, or those do all up front. We do give options to our customers to split that over three months if they need that. Okay, with that so we do have payment arrangement options for anytime we assess a deposit on the account. Okay, so yes, okay. And arrangements is also an option. If they don't have any waiver options that work for them. So for existing customers all of our new customers start out as an a credit rating regardless of the credit score that they had coming into the utility system so it's much like your report card at the beginning year at school, everyone starts off as a, and then as you establish your then that credit rating would go down depending on what has occurred on their, on their account. And so the feed that part of me the points that are associated with those different events are displayed up here and then those points are then converted to what our overall credit rating , pardon me customer rating is so, yes sir. Thank you. A couple of questions on this because on there is return check and NSF check if they set up as a draft and their account was declined on the draft. And then on the previous slide you said that's one of the ways to waive the deposit will that then put them in a different category. So if they were to come in and got a deposit way because they went on draft. And then whenever that payment went through and ultimately got returned for a certain reason, they would get the points, probably 200 or if it's an NSF also 200 points that would go towards that customer's account for their credit rating. And secondly, how long do the points stay on with them. Great question. It's a 12 months that they stay on there so after 12 months that event has happened then it'll roll off of the account so it 's very fluid we're consistently taking those off once they 've hit that 12 month period with them. So I have spoken to someone who said that they did not have several different late late payments I think said in a row and was still charged the deposit. And with that word, I would like to look at the account individually what happened because there would have to be some type of event for us to charge a deposit on the account any type of additional deposit on the account again if they're in that a through C rating, which is 88% of our customers, we're not going to ask for any additional deposit. It's once they hit that D rating which I'm going to get into in the next slide that we would seek the up to two month average on the deposit so specifically with that account what we would need to look at what went on with that account. And I'm also going to talk about the other scenario while we would charge deposits coming up and other slides so I would recommend that customer. We could go through exactly why that deposit was assessed on the account, but they shouldn't be charged a deposit just with without something occurring on the account. So, we would look to more than 600 points. Yes, sir. Over a 12 month period. So, we would look at D through F status that's when we're going to ensure that there is up to two months deposit on the account, we assess those deposits on a quarterly basis. The only time we don't assess those is during the summer months because there is a quarter that hits during that time. Historically speaking that's when most of our utility bills are the highest just due to the season so we do not add any additional deposits during that time customer service does consider 10 different factors before charging and deposit on the account some of those factors are, have they been paying on time over the last two months, are they working with a help agency for assistance. Are they a victim of family violence . And then also if they're working on a payment arrangement or deferment so we look at those different types of scenarios as well before we charge any type of deposit to make sure that's applicable. So first fiscal year 1617 we charged 864 additional deposits on accounts that's about 1.43% of our customer base. So I want to make sure I understand what that figure represents, because to me there's a difference between the initial deposit at the time of the creation of the account. And then if there's a deposit assessed because of these this point system. Because what I heard you say last time was that if you already have two months from your initial from when you turn the account on initially. It doesn't matter what how many points you get correct. You 're not going to get assessed an additional deposit. So, what I deduced from that is that people who are getting assessed additional deposits, either had a only a one month that they had to have coming forward, you know, at the creation of the new account, or they met the criteria where they didn't have to have a deposit at all. And so then somewhere within the passage of time, this point system thing created it sort of move them to a different category based upon the point system. So this 864. Is that including initial deposits for new accounts and assessment of additional deposits for point system violations I'm going to call them that almost a column or point system activities. Or is that 864 additional deposits post account creation additional 864 post account creation. Okay. Yes, sir. Okay. So the other scenario where we would require an additional deposit is at the time of disconnection of services. And so if the customer does not have that up to two month average on their account, then that's where we're going to seek the two month deposit. So at the time of disconnection, we're going to ask them to pay at least their past two balance, plus that deposit with that. And one of the questions that came up in November from Council was how many people are having to pay an additional deposit at time of disconnection. So, I think that 28.23% of our customers already have that up to two month average. We're not asking for anything additional at that time. The remaining 28.77% are the ones that we're asking to make sure that we have the up to two month average and the average of that for the multifamily is about $85. So that's $147.19 and all scenarios where we're charging a deposit we do work with customers and will allow payment arrangements with that but I did want to make sure that we were very clear that this is the other scenario where we were to require a deposit at time of disconnection. Great. You had a question. Yeah, on the previous slide. Just to go back to what the mayor was saying there was 864 deposits assessed that were not the original deposits these were mid count mid account. So does that mean the fees we collected from those was $340 ,000. Yes, I'm just for those 864 and we just took an average off of that 393. It can vary, and specifically with your multifamily could be much less like a two month deposit based off of an $87 bill. So you got 160 $170 and deposit and then for your all residential could go up to that 393, but we just took an average of that amount to provide so you got a good understanding of how much money we're talking about. Okay, so let's look at 393 64 is the average of those 864. Go to your next slide slide six. So what I'm hearing you say is, of that 864. The ones that are multifamily averaged. Okay, so this is the 2600 that are left that have deposits they that's the 864 is part of that. Because when I see this $84 and 147 for the average residential within the average for the ones. And this is a two month deposit these figures is this a one month deposit . Let me clarify that with Cindy that one month or two month on that says average deposit amount requested if we're requesting two months I'm assuming that 8479 is a two month . And the same with the residential, the average for the deposits that the 8479 would be one month. Okay, there. Yes . Okay. All right, because I was wanting to make sure I understood. No, no. Yeah, the math wasn't making sense to me. Okay. All right, go ahead. I'm sorry. So additional deposits at time of disconnect is when we're seeking the only other scenario where we would seek additional deposits from our customers on that. And so our debt reduction to compare it to from 0809 to 15 16 the commercial debt did reduce by 88.2% multifamily debt reduced by 23.6% and then residential debt reduce reduced by 53.1% and our credit and collection specials. Credit and collection specialist who spends the majority of their time with credit collections spends about 25% of their time on uncollectible debt that's your inactive accounts and then the rest of the percentage about 75% is spent on in our active collections with that and we reduce our accounts that ultimately go to collections by about 88 %. So there's a lot of efforts done in house to avoid these getting sent to collections with that but we just wanted to show you the differences before policy and then after policy implementation. Gregory has a question. Thank you. We had this original discussion to change our debt policies . And we've made tremendous gains in that area. We've made very good gains in residential. I'm curious as to what your read is on why we have not made more significant gains in multifamily uncollectible debt. Yeah, any notions as to why why we haven't made as big of an impact there. I think it's just the number of customers moving into those type of dwellings with that but specifically knowing their behaviors I don't I don't know if I would be able to answer that specifically with that but that may be something that we need to dive into a staff, as we continue to look at this progress. Well I think that that could be part of the explanation if we have significantly increased the number of multifamily units, then, then it might be harder to see a reduction because there's so many more. We went from 275.755 and uncollectible debt down to 210. So we there was some reduction, even though there was an increase in the number. So, okay, that's helpful. Thank you. Quick question. Do we at any point during the collection process. This may be a legal question. Does this ever issue a judgment. Do we ever get to the point of judgment, or do you have to go to JP court I mean I know sometimes you know if you owe something, there's been many times people get something filed the judgment or a bad debt on their during the deed records or something that my point being, I think, some of this is, if people don't pay, eventually most places will file some type of judgment or get some type of document that says you don't pay which then can reflect on people's credit report, which I mean I've had people come back and I've known people who've had people come back and say hey, didn't realize this showed up one make it whole. So do we when we say write it off. It just disappears and it's not worth the hassle it's not worth the cost to pursue any other type of remedy other than hey will you guys pay. Turn over collection agency they send letters they make phone calls. If you don't do anything. No harm no foul at least from from the check really wants to come up here. I want to make a clarification when we're talking about 180 days past due this is for accounting purposes in that we consider it bad debt. Under Texas state law we're not allowed to write off. So these customers we keep that on our file if they come back six or seven years later and sign up for service we say you still owe us funds. So we don't for accounting purposes we write off as what we think is uncollectible on our books but we don't forgive that debt per se, but we don't. That's the basis of our remedy we don 't seek any type of redress through the court system or through the filing of a judgment it's just not it's not cost effective is what we go through the collection process and go through a collection agency which again has a pretty good track record in terms of collections but we don't go beyond that okay. I'm just asking that judgment question. I mean I know that the city for instance if they mow a lawn, that's nobody's mode, they will put a lien on the building. If, if the payment is not made to the city and then that is extingu ished with the sale of the property. So that's a good question. So we don't have to go through that process to get a lien for utilities type things the only lien, we do have a lien and it's only on drainage accounts because there isn't anything to actually disconnect out in the field. We have accounts that have not paid on their drainage accounts and so we place a lien on those and we've gotten a couple of payments on those most recently but it's what four accounts, three, three, three accounts, but that's the only scenario we do a lien on. Yeah, I wanted to add and most of these go uncollectible when the customer leaves, so they've left the apartment they've left the house. These are upon discontinuation of service, as long as they're still in the house we can collect on that. So we really can't put a lien on a property once that individual has left the property. Well, plus they don't own it. Most of them don't own it so you're putting a lien on a property that is not owned by the debtor. Okay, then my other question was, well I had two other questions. One was really more of a comment I guess or an observation about the percentages. It seems like the system that DME or the utilities department has come up with has been really effective for commercial accounts and it's been somewhat effective for multifamily and I'm just looking at the percentage of uncollectible. So I'm wondering, and I say this, knowing that our multif amily accounts have increased considerably as have our residential accounts I think it's like 50% 9% customer base increase on both of those or that's across the board. Okay, but residential like multifamily increased more. Yes, I remember correctly. Yes, ma'am. So I mean I think they're actually good numbers but it's been most effective for the commercial side of things so that's my observation comment. And then my third statement was going to be a question about slide four on the points system. Okay, so as far as the accumulation of points. I'm assuming the very first thing you're going to get is the 50 points for late fee and then you're also going to get 150 for overdue interest at, you know, day 19 or whatever the billing cycle is so that's 150 points right off the bat. Then you're going to get a disconnect notice. And then after the disconnect notice isn't paid, then you 're going to get a disconnect non pay charge right. And at some point you could potentially get. Okay, this is my question, could you get a collection letter before you get a disconnect non pay. No collection letter is after the accounts been finaled and then could you but you could potentially get a return check or an NSF check. Yes, ma'am. And just for my own purposes, I thought NSF check would be a return check. It is it's just we have it segregated out just so we know the number of actual non sufficient funds versus just a return check sometimes checks return for various reasons if someone did account closed or the accounts frozen so we just keep track of various reasons. So with respect to that is it possible to for somebody to have 400 points if they if their check bounces for instance or would it only be 200 or 200. So, if they're if one check. Yeah, let's say the check comes back it bounces. Are they going to get a $200 ding on the points are they going to get a $400. It's one one event for whatever occurred so I think you're saying no man they wouldn't get double dinged. In essence for return check or NSF check. Well, I guess my only. This is my observation just based on how far we are in the presentation. It seems like the difference between 600 and 2000 points is a lot of things happening. And it would seem to me like there should be something a little bit more graduated just because looking at what could happen. A lot of things could lead you to 600 without you necessarily being a serial, you know, flagrant non payer, but to get to the 2000 level. I mean that's you had a lot of chances so I guess I just see something different between a D and an F rating. That's all. I think we covered this on getting a judgment. You know it 's first place it takes a lot of time. Generally you get a judgment against somebody and it's never collectible. That's been my experience. And I think almost almost if you do that is more on a matter of principle they're not going to get any money from it so it's just not cost effective. If you could go back to the slide with the points because I was going to share a similar sentiment to Mayor pro tem at the end but. And I think that's probably where I'm leaning is, I think we could adjust some of that. I really want to do this on a graduated scale because I don 't think that some of the concerns that have been raised as far as people are just getting either treated treated unfairly or they're not. I think you could work with the point system like overdue interest. What is the interest that we're missing out on a few cents. I mean so you could maybe adjust the point system because a D rating. I agree with the graduated sort of interval approach. What if you had a D rating. You have to have at least a one month average deposit. And if you already have a one month you're OK if you have a two month maybe you nothing happens. Because in one event let's say you hit a bad month. And you're just really in a tough place. You get a late fee right now. You get overdue interest. You may get a disconnect notice. So let's say you get a disconnect notice and your your your bills not paid because your check bounced. So in that one event you are either almost over the points or you're real close and if you just get disconnected you 're out. And so I think I think there's a way that we can massage some of this. That really tries to pinpoint what it is that because I'm still struggling with personally the people who are getting assessed additional deposits are people who in the beginning had something there. They're either credit score whatever you want to call that or they've got a letter of credit. Somehow they were able to avoid a deposit because of some type of criteria. So they started out either OK and then got into some trouble. And so that's why we're assessing the additional deposits. So that's where I sort of got confused last time was I've heard that there's a big huge problem with these additional deposits. But I did not know that the deposit is limited to a two month average at all time. In other words you don't start out with a two month and then if you get in trouble we're going to have more deposit . We're going to ask you for more deposit to equal more than two months. So those are my thoughts on this point system. I think we could do something here that would really have a good effect on you know somebody's in a D rating then maybe it's a one month average or something. And if they got two months they're OK and it lessens the problem and it doesn't all of a sudden make them you are a chronic you're at 2000. You've basically walked away from debt. You've defrauded us . You've lied to us. You've done this. You've done that. I don't know what the reasons are. You just can't pay. And at least it gives an opportunity to move through that rating system and try everything we can to give them the opportunity to get ahead because it may just be a one time event or even maybe two events. So as I'm looking at that I think there's some things we could play with there that it's probably beyond the scope of this meeting. But what I don't want to do is rush into a decision without really trying to narrowly tailor the solution to what the real problem is. And what I'm hearing the real problem is is that when people are assessed an additional deposit I'm not hearing the problem is the initial deposit. I mean we sounds like we've got a lot of opportunity to help with that. It's when they run into a bad spot we sort of compound it if they don't have it. But that's what's so that's what I've really did to the irony of that is is such a small percentage. I mean it's one point four three percent right of our customer base. Yes. Yes. Remember that. Yeah. Like all this information it does this go out to customers so they know what the rules are. It's in our city ordinance and whenever we do whenever they come into the utility system we explain why there's an either a no deposit or one month deposit or two month deposit with them and then they get this information. They're getting notified on their bill about the events and letting them know that a late payment hit or an event hit. Okay. And if you continue that then there could be an additional deposit. So they're notified every month on their bill. Okay. But all of this information they don't have all this information about you know what can happen later. We explain it to him at the time of connection of services and when they're on the phone with us. That's when we're letting them know about it. Thank you. Thank you Mayor. I'm in agreement too with the D rating might be better off as a one month. Is there any point for for long term customers in which the deposit is returned. I know with with Atmos after I think it's after two years they start giving you back your deposit. Yes. Absolutely. That's part of the collection process that was updated as well was making sure that we had proactive policy to refund deposits on the account because we did not have that previously. The deposit just stayed on the account. And so with the implementation of this ordinance and after 12 months after that customer has paid that deposit and they have good credit with us. We refund that deposit and we refunded almost 4000 deposits the previous year for that without the customer leaving the utility system. So we gave back those deposits. So we're also refunding deposits as well. Do we have any data on how many people who have been there for the 12 months they get their deposit back and then they end up going back to a dear. We have that specific but people tend to you know that behavior they tend to have it but to Mayor Watts point sometimes customer can get caught in that spot and potentially may need a deposit assess but that's not what we're seeing. Okay. So I'm just wondering how many people there they're good for their 12 months they get their deposit back and then they have a hiccup and they have to put up that two month deposit and they're thinking I had a deposit up. Why do I have to put up another one that we may want to look at extending that deposit held for maybe two years instead of 12 months. Okay. Sorry, we started going backwards. That's okay. I like it. All right, so potential deposit change impact after the conversation from Council's last meeting, there was discussion about what if we just did a one month deposit and what the impact of that would be. And so this is illustrating for fiscal year 15 and 16 and 16 and 17. It's broken out based off of our customer rating and the percentage of unpaid accounts that were left once the account has been applied to the deposit has been applied to the account. And so, Chuck did do an analysis on this and found that if we were to only collect a one month deposit that it would increase the unpaid amounts for fiscal year 1516 by 69.7% and then 78.5% for 1617. And so we wanted to make sure to bring that forth with the potential impact was if we went to a one month deposit. I'm sorry. Do we know what those dollar amounts are. In terms of those it was it went from about, and I think the first fiscal year about 250,000 to about 380,000 in terms of unpaid was 250 and went to about 380, I think it was a little bit more in 1617. So additional option that we staff wanted to provide to you today in addition to talking about the previously discussed options was to potentially maintain current deposit assessments, as they come into the utility system and as they progress and establish their behavior, we would go up to the two month deposit that we do now. Option two would be to charge the deposit again on a month one month average, and then if they, if we need to get additional deposits only do that in $50 increments instead of just the whole two month at once. Option three would be only to charge a one month deposit and no additional increases. And then option four is no changes to the deposit process. One of the best recommendations for Council's consideration today is to maintain that current assessment of deposits when connecting and establishing current behavior but not charging that deposit at time of disconnection. And then part of my PUB recommendation was not to charge the deposit, or not to change the deposit policy with that. And then, I'm sorry. We just wanted to reaffirm the direction that we had on the plus one program, we're going to be increasing funds by $25 ,000 to that program, changing the criteria to the contract and then also allowing funds to be allocated towards deposit payments, and then we're going to be executing that homelessness deposit waiver for those experiencing homelessness that are working with a help agency with that. And then we'll briefly discuss timeline and then I'll seek ultimate counsel direction. Tiffany, real quick question. Yes, sir. If you could go back to the options. Which one of these options, if one of them, was, is represented by Chuck's assessment of the impact. Is it option one, in other words, if it's just a one month average across the board, or because I don't really see that up here we got one month but then if it's an additional deposit it goes up to the two months. So what was this, do those numbers fit into any one of these options. So based off of that analysis and I'll let Chuck chime in if he if I don't hit it appropriately but the staff recommendation does incorporate Chuck's analysis, which is the one in the box over here on the very top one with that so that's keeping our process as customers come into the utility system new, and then remaining with as they establish tenure with us, charging the up to two month deposit if necessary, but at time of disconnection not seeking a deposit so the customer would only have to pay. What's passed through balance to get reconnected, we do not ask for a deposit at that time of disconnection. But what you were asking mayors my analysis is on the increase I was analyzing option three if we just went to a maximum one month across the board, what do we think the impact would be. Okay, and that's what my analysis it really looked at what 's occurring now, and I took the deposit that was on those accounts and D, E and F and cut it in half and so what what kind of past do what we had. If that had occurred so I was really analyzing option three in terms of just a one month deposit. Okay, all right. We'll go with customer very then customer. Just a question, I'm a little bit confused with some of the options there. Because when I'm seeing across the board I'm thinking. So you're saying charged deposits to people who have a great credit rating and no problems with utilities and clar ifying that we would maintain what we currently do now so we would do the initial credit scoring assessment. No green no deposit yellow the one month, and so forth so we would still not charge customers deposits, if they have that good credit rating and if I may follow up here. The mayor was talking and I think a couple of members were talking about the possibility of graduating from that CD and he from immediately going to two months deposit to maybe a month deposit. No, but we can definitely if that's the direction we can. So it sounds like a tiered system with that so it's a one against the D one month and then going forward the two months with that so that's definitely something we can consider. Thank you. So Chuck just so that I get an aggregate amount. So, your analysis for 2007 for this budget, whatever it was last year. If we went to just a one month deposit for people who were required to have a deposit based upon the current policy. The total of that retro active analysis, you said was about 300 something thousand dollars total or 100 and something here and then. Well I think it increased. It increased by about 70% so I think it went from about 240 to to 373 80. Okay, because right now we're just the accounts that I looked at the final that had a deposit so I was just looking at a limited range I just only looked at all those accounts that had a deposit to try to figure out what's the impact if we reduce the deposits. You didn't do a whole. If we just if we went back and get it and apply that one month deposit to every transaction, every account every not that didn't require account but substituted that 100 for the 200. You didn't do that you just took these D or E and F ranges or what I just took the accounts that closed out closed out with deposits on them. Okay, I only looked at the accounts that were final doubt for that year with deposits on them if we, and if we cut the deposit in half what we thought the impact. So, the actual impact if you looked at everything, other than closed accounts, most likely would maybe a little bit higher maybe probably okay. Okay. Okay. Yes, Council member Ryan. On the staff recommendation no additional deposits at the time of disconnect. Is that you'll charge the additional deposit after they've gotten or start building a deposit back up for them. So what we'll do is we'll let them reconnect with just the past two balance. And then whenever they go through that normal deposit assessment through the quarterly thing then we would probably seek the two month deposit on the account . So not at the time when they're hurting the most, but we can work with them whenever they get reassessed on the account so. Okay, yeah, I can. I can understand that I still go back to that 12 month period of after 12 months you're going to get your deposit back and then about 13 when you fall behind. And now you've got to put it back in again, we might want to look at that length of time that we hold those. Okay, I'm going to give you what I think, as far as if I were making the decision today this is, I'll just throw this out there. So if we'll go back to slide for I would say on slide for that on the D rating would be a month. And maybe on the E rating, a month and a half. And on the F rating a two month. I would look at on overdue interest, because overdue interest is, let's say I've got a bill that's $100, and I'm late. Overdue interest is that is assessed at that very first indication that I'm late I have not paid quote unquote by the due date. Is that correct overdue interest is when your next bill goes on the account so you're bringing a balance forward, and it's 1%. So that's not until you get a second bill on the account so if you pay it, you're okay but if it, if you've got a previous balance stated on your, on your bill together with current charges that's when you have the overdue interest, and it's 1%. Okay. So when I look at this. So I honestly. I really wouldn't even care about having points for the overdue interest, because it's so minimal. Because if it's showing up on the second bill. They're already in trouble. I mean, they're already get in. If you're talking 1%. I mean how much, how much additional interest do we receive as income over like our last budget did you anybody know that. Okay, all right. So I'm not saying we don't collect it, I'm just saying, or we don't assess it. I'm just saying, assessing 100 points for it seems a little. I mean because they're already. You got late fee, because that if that happens they're halfway to D. I mean I'm not sold on that particular one but I do think the graduated part for the D, E and F rating would be would be helpful because then if they have a two month deposit already. There's not going to be an additional deposit. Whereas if they have a month. There's not going to be an additional deposit if they're a D. And if they have a month, they're only going to get half a month, if they pop up to E and you know, E is pretty bad. I mean, E you're up to 2000. So you got to really do some, you got to, because this isn't a 12 month period. And this is a rolling 12 month period this isn't a calendar period. This is, yeah, for 12 months and then it's just as they come on they add up as they go off they subtract. And so, and for sure that and if the council wanted to go to one month, I just I just really want to do this in an incremental approach, because I'm not, I'm not quite so sure. You know, I know there are people are struggling, but I also know how hard customer service works to work with people. And I know how hard our nonprofits work to help people, I mean, with money that is not ours. I mean, it's not just the plus one program I mean there's people providing utility assistance out there that is just coming from their grant funding of their community so I want to find a way to help. There's been some discussion about not having a deposit required at all and I just I just can't I could not ever accept that just because I don't, except for the homeless and those victims of domestic violence which obviously there's circumstances that people get into their, you know, way beyond their control to a large degree. And that's my thoughts that doesn't mean that that's all I 'm going to do, but what I really want to communicate is my principle of an interval approach to really try to see, and we can revisit this in two, three, six months. And if this isn't helping much, because we really don't have I don't have an indication of all the people who are getting assessed deposits. What was their rating originally. So we need to get there. And, and I need to say this. There's been some discussion about our plus one rating with interfaith ministries, and that somehow that's a wasted amount of money or just money we're paying back to ourselves and all that those kind of things. I totally disagree with some of those notions, because those people who work in those organizations are much more situated, I don't, I'm gonna say qualified to understand how to communicate with individuals like that to understand I mean, you guys aren't doing that on an eight hour a day basis, you're trying to just deal with it as it comes. But these organizations, that's their mission is to help families and individuals in those times of need so I really give shout outs to the people who do that, and who work with people who are really struggling and and understand those pilots and have compassion. Just like I know customer service does, but they. That's what they do. So, I just needed to, I needed to get that out. Yes, go ahead, Mayor pro 10. I'm okay with finessing this somehow with like for instance taking off overdue interest, looking at the potential deposit change impact and those closed accounts on slide eight. It kind of seems to me that the problem really isn't the D ratings, because they are a small percentage of unpaid final bills. It seems like the problem really is more the ENF, particularly the F ratings but I'm wondering what counsel's opinion might be of just compressing that rating system. So that instead of, you know, a through F there's an A through E rating. And then we kind of split the D. Half of it goes to C, half of it goes to E. So you're looking at the highest D scores, becoming the new D. Be coming the low E's. Yeah, yeah low E's. So, I mean that that would be one approach it's not like the perfect approach or anything but it's just a thought because it really doesn't seem like the D people are the issue. Well and I like that because it's still that interval approach. You know, let's try something and see, let's see if it works or see, because I guess that's my question. I say see if it works. I'm not even quite sure what we're trying to, what the goal is here. I mean I know we want to make sure we are compassionate, and we provide people every opportunity to pay their bills. We're trying to collect money. But that's the other side of it and sometimes those seem sort of juxtaposed, they seem an opposite to each other and so some would say, don't ask for any deposits, which then raises our collection. And then if we are two owners on the collection process, then we get sort of criticized for the other side. So I think we're trying to, we're trying to balance these seemingly competing interests. And so I just like the interval approach when I'm doing that because it just it seems to work better. Councilmember Briggs. So on, it's keeping the payment behavior. I think that's where the issue is, and I'm in agreement that we need to finesse that system. That's when the issues arise when people are having trouble , and then we assess this and then it's just snowball, they never can catch up. And so, and are you saying. And so, I hear, I hear those words and I don't think I sometimes understand that so what I'm what I think I'm hearing you say is someone who does not have a deposit on hand, for whatever reason either they had a good a rating, or they had somebody sign a co signer or a letter of credit if someone is a co signer in a letter of credit. That's going to, we're going to chase a rabbit trail. Nevermind. So, what I'm hearing you say is when people get assessed at the time of trouble. We were calling it an additional deposit. But it's only additional if they only have $100 and we're asking for $100 more. If they don't have a deposit then we 're asking them for the whole deposit. I'm calling it an additional because it's also on top of the payment that is due, and whatever money they pay towards that goes to the deposit first and not the amount do right. Right. But what you're saying is when they get into trouble, it snowballs because we're asking for deposit, the monies that they're paying on their bill does not go towards the payment of the bill. It first goes to satisfy the deposit. So even if they pay the 200, say it's an average $200, they pay that they still have a past due balance. Right. And then, and then the scores the 100 points that 200 are still collecting. Yes, now that does start. Yes, that's correct. Yes. Which makes you go from like a D all the way to an F because you're still getting interest because you're not paying your payment and you're still getting late fees because you're still trying to catch up after. It may take you two months to pay your deposit off and then you have two more electric bills that you still need to pay because you've been. So I mean that that's where I'm where I see the issue. Yep. So, however, we get to that to fix that is where where I want to be. You're saying because they require the because now because of the payment history, and the lack of a deposit or sufficient deposit at the front end. They're being asked to pay to get them up to that two month average. And if they're already in a situation where they can't pay, they pay that, but then the bill still goes un paid. And then they still get another late fee, then it goes maybe to disconnection, then, and before you know it, what started out as somebody at 400 or 500 points, they're at 1500. Now, within probably just one billing because of our process. Just for clarification. So if a person. This is their payment. Now they, they're going to have a, and they've, they've racked up enough points that they now need to pay a deposit. And if they work out a payment plan with with customer service to pay it in $50 increments you're already doing that in some cases. So if they're playing it in 15 month $50 a month increments . They then still pay their outstanding utility bill with the other money, whenever they're set up on a payment arrangement, the amount of funds that we've said this is for your payment arrangement this is going to your balance, we're only going to take what the payment arrangement amount is so if it's $50 over three months, only 50 of that 's going to go to the deposit, and their other portions going to go towards their bill, but if they're showing if they're working on that arrangement with you and they're paying their $50 a month, three months to pay that balance of the things that they're doing. That balance of that they now have a deposit, and they're paying another, you know, a majority of their, their current, or all of their current utility bill. Are they still, are they still getting dinged with more points added to their payment arrangement. Okay, so, so they don't necessarily have to be paying that the entire deposit all at once. And if they miss that it doesn't necessarily mean that they are adding points to their, we're not adding points when they're put on a payment arrangement. Okay, thank you. All right, so if they're on a payment arrangement because of a delinquent past due bill, however much money is going to deposit however much is going to the final bill. They do not continue to accumulate points, even if during that payment arrangement, let's say they miss a payment in the payment arrangement. They miss a payment, his scenario was they're paying on time and amount of money is going to the payment arrangement, are they getting additional events on the account and the answer to that is no. If they miss a payment, then yes, and there is the points associated. So basically toll the accumulation of from the past behavior, but if there's future behavior, irrespective of that, okay. Yes, sir. Just want to make sure I understand. Yes, Councilmember Duff. When you look at somebody gets into the D category, I can, I can see some advantages of only hitting them, you know with one month. And, you know, because it, it will give them a wake up call . And maybe that will prevent them from going on and getting into the D or the E or the F. So, Councilmember Briggs would, you know, Mayor Pro Tem had mentioned, trying to adjust the D and E point system. I mean, maybe even looking at some of the actual points assessed per event but somehow dividing the current D, taking it out and only having A, B, C, D and E because then we're going to split. I mean, that's what I know. We're doing away with D but we're going to put some of those points, increase the range for C, increase how many points they can get for C without a deposit, an additional. Is that my understanding, Mayor Pro Tem? Yeah, so like for instance, C would then become 300 points to 750 points for instance and D would become 750 points to 2000 points. That's something along those lines. And then F would become E. And so, Mayor Pro Tem, on, let's just, let's assume for discussion that that's something that Council can, you know , have a consensus on, on the new D rating which would start at, let's say, your example was 750 to some range. Would you want to only ask for a, how much of a deposit would you want? I still think one month is okay and it's because of that slide A. Even the E ratings are not the main problem. The main problem is when you get into the above the 2000 points range. The E ratings only had, the year before they had 4% unpaid dollars and the year after they had 19% unpaid dollars. So really the bulk of all of our problems and collections are with the lowest grade rating. I do want to clarify that those are the unpaid amounts after application of the deposit. And D, E and F all had two months deposit. So realize that that's not them paying their final bill. That's applying that deposit and being enough to cover that final bill. So I think what that normally means is they're not too far behind by the time they get to that final bill where the deposit covers it. I just want to clarify for impact that that's what it is where the F you're seeing that two month deposit is applied to their bill but still about half. It's not enough because they've gotten so far behind. Well, I have you up here. So, for instance, with the unpaid final bills. Could we go to that slide? Slide 8. Slide 8. Thank you. On 2016-17 under category E there were, is that 1054 number the total number of E ratings or is it just the closed accounts? Like the 16-17 that's the total amount of closed accounts in that year that had an E rating. So what percentage of our customers are rated E or F? I think you said Tiffany did you say it was like 1.43% or something like that? Sorry, F is 4%. E is 4%. D is 3%. Okay. I'm still comfortable with the one month for the next to last and then during the two month for the worst rating. So what about the initial deposit? One of the recommendations is we got it, the two month deposit is sort of the benchmark. In other words, if you got good credit, good payment behavior, you don't ever get a deposit so you never have to have it. If you don't, on the front end it's a two month deposit average or and/or if you get into let's say the categories you're speaking of in category F, I think, you wanted it to go to the full two month whereas E was the one month. Is that? Yes, that's for the initial deposit is what you're talking about? Yes, I mean because one of the options is we just change the deposit to one month's rent, average one month's rent period. Whereas right now it's two. One bill. One bit? Not rent. Rent, I'm sorry. Yeah, see I'm getting confused. I'm thinking about all the deposits I've got to pay. I think the way that this has been brought to my attention is really in terms of people sending their bills and then all of a sudden they owe $600. So I think that's kind of where the issue is. I don't really know if the front end of things is where the issue is but I'm open to if there's a council consensus I'll go along with it on the front end. Well I like your approach. I mean, even the number that you put out as an example of splitting the group up. I think it 's a good interval approach. I think to Councilmember Briggs point, it's when these, it 's when people get in trouble and I would also be open to how do we make sure that we're not taking all the money that's paid and making it a deposit and then it's, in other words, if they can split up some of the deposits, some of its bill, so that, anyway, so I'm sorry Council member Briggs. On slide eight. One of the things I was looking at was, instead of the percentage of unpaid dollars, I was just looking at the percentage of accounts that didn't get paid. And when you look at it like that, again, F is certainly the worst, as you would hope it would be, because then it means your ratings are correct, your grading is correct, because in 2015-16, 59% of the people, that's 1,256 out of 2,110 left owing money. In 16-17, it was 898 out of 1,630. So I think that you don't only want to look at the amount of unpaid dollars, but those particular accounts, because you never can control when an account is going to end up owing a lot of money or a little money. But, so I think looking at that F is a significantly different kind of treatment. When we started talking about those mere initial deposits, it seems like that the recommendation was two months, because of the lag time, and that the two-month deposit meant that from the time that we didn't get a bill until the time that we didn't get another bill, and we're starting to do these notices until the time that we close out an account if we have to close, because somebody is just not paying at all. They could be in the utility company for quite a bit of money. Two and a half months is what they could be up to, and that's why we have the two-month average, because we're in a post-paid environment. So I would rather see that initial deposit for the folks with some significant credit problems to stay the way it is , unless they, of course, have these other options of a letter of credit or a co-signer. But I'm very comfortable with some modifications. I don't want to throw out this system, because for the most part, this system, this new system is working. It's reducing uncollectible debt, and I don't think that we ought to throw that out. And I think that we're putting in a lot of features that are there to assist people who have temporary problems. And I think that there's a lot of compassion in the system that we have. For those who suggest that there is none, I think that they're not looking at this objectively. For clarification on the slide, is the unpaid final bills, are those just the ones that the deposit wouldn't cover, or we sent out a bill to them? Do we know how many of these actually paid? For the deposit that didn't cover the entire bill. Okay. Do we have any numbers on of these, how many received a final bill and then paid it? As part of this file, if they paid on a final bill, in other words, it had different columns, and one of them was their deposit amount, what was due when they cut off, what did they pay after they received their final bill, and what was still overdue. So this included, if they had a final bill but they paid on it, they're in the paid final bill category. We took the deposit and netted that against their bill if they still owed some and they paid it, that's taken out. So this is kind of after they've received their final bill, before we've turned them over to collections, did they pay? Okay. I have a question. When someone has assessed an additional deposit on an existing account, when the account is originally set up, it's two months average of the previous 12 month usage, in other words, usage that they didn't do. A new customer, it's 12 months usage of that unit, that house, but when, so they now establish their account, they 're six, eight months in, and they get behind, and so this new, this additional deposit, whatever the amount is, is assessed. What is the two months based upon at that time? It's based off of their usage. Off of their usage. Yes, sir. Okay. So, that could go either way. That could be, you know , somebody might have been using a lot before they moved in and they're assessed that or if they don't get a deposit, and if they're assessed on their usage, it may be a smaller amount, or it could go the other way. If someone's got a lot of usage, a leak, or something that they're not aware of, then that amount could be much larger than what it would have been if it was based on their, not their use, but the previous account holder's use. And one of the, I talked about 10 factors that we look at prior to assessing an additional deposit. We want to make sure the deposit that we're going to assess is 53% more than what they currently have. So, if they have a deposit of $100 on their account and we reassess, we want to make sure that their usage is more than 53%. So, if it needed to increase by $30, we're not going to do that because it's not hitting that 53%. So, we're trying to make sure that we're not nickel and diamond people. Just an additional factor that we look at. Well, I'll just say, I mean, unless we all have some burning questions, and that's fine. I'm not trying to cut off discussion, but I've heard enough for me to sort of go with Mayor Pro Tem's sort of sentiment and recommendation of, you know, doing away with category D, splitting those numbers up, adding some to C and E, and then rearranging obviously the alphabet. And one month average for E, and then the two month for F. And I would just assume take out the 100 point assessment for interest. That doesn't sound like a whole lot, but that's 20% of that 600 points. And so, that's where I am on it. Yes, sir. I was trying to track with you and so I may be a little off . I just so generally starting. I'm good with that. Next revisit I'm not saying this time. I'm curious about the 200 points, I think, maybe, maybe it's 100 for the disconnect notice going out. Yeah, so that that's curious to me. So if I mail a check, and it doesn't get posted deposited whatever it's crossing in the mail that's that's a big headache to go back and reconcile that for and based on what staff has said those robo calls that a lot of payments come in, just organically about that time that notice goes out so I think it's, it's effective on its face versus being the 200 punitive points but that's that's just, I don't know what everyone's paying threshold for that is but can, can you either explain again , because one of my big hang ups was the initial deposit being based on somebody else's. Yes, so what were we with that, I just don't understand where we are. I think that's what's currently happening on the, when the account is initially set up is there looking at the past 12 months usage for whoever, like if I'm living in apartment one on one now and I open a new account, they're going to look at the previous tenant of one on one and see what that 12 month average or see what that monthly average is and ask for two months deposit if they if they're required to pay one. Now what I just heard was that if I've got the account going, and I'm paying, and all of a sudden I get into trouble. And let's say I don't have a deposit on file let's say that that deposit amount will then be calculated not on the previous tenants use when I initially open the account, but it will be based on let's say I'm eight months out. So that's a month's worth of monthly billing. And I think take an average of two months of that is that am I correct on that we're going to take an average of that . Yeah, so. So that's, I think that's how it is so. Yeah, no, if that's what's going to be going forward, I mean if I stand alone and that I do, but I just, I just have a problem with a total stranger deciding how much I have to pay for my deposit. So, what would be your, your suggestions or thoughts on on doing something different than that, I would say we have, what is the, what is the, we have this, I would average the either the deposits or the average bill for our customer base. So we have the data that we can then crunch down and say hey we have, we have 2 million users. Here's how much the average bill is. Here's how much we're going to charge you deposit to start with I mean, I think at least it's an educated approach versus just some stranger lived in his house before, and they kept their temperature at 40 degrees, and thus you have to pay $6 million to start your service, and you can't move in. So, either you agree with us, or you stay out until you know there's no, there's no. That's the problem right if we disagree, I can't move in. So, so if you let me move in while we argue, great. But if you're gonna hold me from getting my power turned on, then I don't want to be subject to to some stranger that I don't know I'd rather us, it's just easier to justify if someone came to me and said hey why are you doing this because the average bill of this data is this, do the math. So let me ask you on that. All right, so let's let's let's look at the data on that. So you've got a slide that shows what the average multifamily, and what the average residential deposit is. That was the $84 and the 147 I think it was. So that means a two month average is $170 for multifamily and almost 300 for residential. Now, you say that the average deposit overall system wide is what you're talking about. Let's take a is 390 something. Was that it average deposit was 390 something. Those are additional deposits. Okay, so let's go with what you're my my observation about why I mean you're saying it's, let's look at the average system wide, because you think you're being penalized from somebody's usage you have no control over their behavior. I totally get that. That could work in my favor. It could also work against me if the average is higher than that. So, I think that I could probably work with that somehow. Because, with this caveat. Because if somebody is requiring a deposit upfront, whether we're taking the average, or whether we're taking the previous use average sounds like they're going to be fairly close except we're splitting out with multifamily so we'd have to somehow make a make a some type of policy says multifamily but if they get into trouble. If they get into trouble. Then, we're going to base that on their use which sounds like, hey, I'm, if you're using it. Then two months requirement. It's your behavior. You're the one that's fully in control of that. I'm in agreement with that. The only concern I have, which it's not really that large of a concern but is a concern is if the, if the average is based upon system wide. And if they get into trouble if they don't get in trouble it's a new point. It's mute. If they get into trouble. Two things could happen one is it could be less. Their usage could be less than the average deposit. So we have to figure out how we you know if we just leave it the same. That's okay, or it could be more. So even if they have two months average which right now we 're saying, if you got two months average on file. You don't ever get an additional deposit period. Whereas you could have two months average on file. And if you get into trouble, based upon your usage, you may have you may have to increase that up. But if what you're saying is no, we're just going to base it on a, if you've paid a two month average, however we figure it at the front end. You've met your, you've met your, your threshold. And I think you're spot on. And I, the reason I like that is because that second conversation. I'm coming to you saying your usage has triggered you to have to pay more. It's not some anonymous person that lived there before you. It's not before they put the double pane windows in. You know it's it's there's a lot of things that we don't have control over that go to that first deposit. But if I have a static way that I assess that first deposit , and if I have to come back to you, one you've triggered something to make that happen. And two, your usage has caused you to have to pay more. That's, I'm good with, I'm good with, I'm great with that because it allows me to then get data from staff and say, if I were to get a phone call, I get the data from staff and sit down with that individual and say, okay, let's look at it. Here's your bill. Here's how much deposits you had. Here's the two months. Here's the point system. You can analyze that for yourself. Look at your past history and figure out where the points came from. Let us know if you disagree. But it's all, it's all in their control. And so that is what I embrace. So it sounded like it sounded like there was a consensus as far as at least Sarah's. I mean, I say there was I know you 're not necessarily for just without your amendment for what Sarah had proposed. I don't I didn't I don't think you were. No, no. Yeah, I'm comfortable with that. In addition, I just wanted to point out. I just wanted to get some clarification. So I'm comfortable with that. Okay, but I just I do hang up on that. But I, it's something to maybe look at in the future when we visit this again. I'd love to revisit it. I mean, better said, if there's a consensus for it, that's great. If not, I just wanted I just want to be clear that where I stand so that when I get phone calls, I can say, hey, go call the mayor and everybody else. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Thanks. Okay. And you're I think I got a sort of a nod from everybody, but I didn't quite know where you were. I'm just asking for clarification on this. That mean like instead of an average usage when someone moves in, they would have a set deposit because I think at one time we did in the city didn't have just a set deposit. It's like 200. We did it was a hundred and $50 set deposit right for residential and it just didn't capture the true usage. And that's why we base it off of priorities is because usually it's pretty spot on but I understand the concern with some people having concerns with that we don't necessarily hear a lot of pushback when we say that customers usually understand it. And we're definitely open to council wishes to change that. Yeah, thank you. You pretty much know where we are. I just, I understand what Mr. Hedges with the saying about about your deposit of persons deposit being dependent upon that stranger that lived in the residents before him. But to try to average it out. Now you're talking about not one stranger but maybe 5000 strangers or 50,000 strangers, they're all strangers, and they all have different usage. And, and then they have the other implication of if I'm running an efficiency apartment with 500 square feet. I'd rather my bill be based on efficiency apartments with 500 square feet, rather than, and that maybe I was on the first floor and has a north exposure, rather than three bedroom efficiency or three bedroom apartments that that are much larger that that that have West windows you know, all of a sudden. I mean, there's, there's no perfect way of assessing this. And it seems to me that using that particular unit. That history is as good as any, recognizing that it's not going to be perfect because you can't control for what the previous resident did in terms of where they set their thermostat. And that would be an interesting. That would be an interesting piece of data, which I think would probably has a past computer programmer probably would be that difficult is to just do a quick sampling of. Here's what we've charged on initial deposits based on prior usage. And after six months or 12 months of the current tenant. What's the, what's the delta on that difference. And so when we revisit this conversation, I think that would be a great piece of data to have, because then I mean that's your, that's the data, and if it's really skewed, or if it 's not really skewed, then, then we're able to see exactly what that impact is so that would be a good piece of data to have. I have some data to go to your point Castleman Gregory on the average deposits we did get kind of what the low is and the highest so for multifamily our lowest deposit was $23, and our highest was 668. So that goes to your point that you're making just then and how it can how it can vary and then for residential the low could be $28 and the high could be 1175. So we're splitting it down the middle and we're basing or basing off of usage to try to get as close as possible. Yeah, I'd like to see that sampling of those different categories multifamily residential that'd be an interesting . So, sounds like from what I'm hearing is the consensus is to move forward with Mayor pro tems suggestions and Mayor pro tem if you wouldn't mind just repeating those just so that we have a summary of what I'm sorry, Councilmember breaks. Well, so yes I am okay with what you were about to say but I also wanted to make sure that the, the additional no additional deposit at time to disconnect, I am for that as well. And I also just wanted to thank my fellow council members for participating in this discussion, because right now, there's a lot of representatives who are choosing profit over people, and I think that I just want to say thank you for this. It's good conversation to have. So, you're okay with Council Mayor pro tems suggestions and I may have wrote him you didn't include that no additional deposit time at disconnect or you sort of. Well, I may be beating this thing to death I can probably just say hey we got the consensus move on but I want to make sure that we have a very comprehensive discussion about this, the no additional deposit at the time of disconnect. That relates to the grading system though, because wouldn't they be in a certain grade at that point at the disconnect point. And it would take them longer to get there, because the points are higher. I'm just, I'm trying to figure out how that fits into the system that that's already there. So I guess that was on here as an option because in the first option everything stayed the same. Right. And so that was your answer to. Okay. So as far as the points, there could be a lot of different scenarios why customer would be disconnected and they may not be in that D rating, where they would have the deposit on there and so that's why to address an additional need and help customers out, because that is one thing that we hear from customers, you know, we're calling into to get reconnected and we're asking for that deposit so we see that as a win for customer experience, and also just trying to help them out a little bit with that so that's why we wanted to bring forth that additional, but they may not necessarily be hitting that credit rating to ask for the deposit but per ordinance in the policy it says automatic deposit once it's disconnected for non payment. When I thought and I thought what I heard you say on that is the deposits not requested it at the time of disconnect or reconnection, but it's you're not saying we 're not giving the deposit requirement that there's, you're going to be getting it in an incremental payment it's you 're just saying, we're not getting it all up front and I'm not seeking it at the time of disconnection, as we are right now. However, whenever they go through the reassessment, if they pull into our report, because that disconnect is going to probably put them into that credit rating will pardon me I 'm going to muddy the waters with that, because they were disconnected with our current policy and ordinance it says that it automatic two months deposit goes on there. So I do we want to wait that at time of disconnection, but assess it whenever they go through the assessment. I'm going to be true to my interval approach, and I'm going to just stick with, because it, because you can collect data on that. We can have this policy in place for six months or eight months, and you can collect data on. Okay. How many of them got to disconnect but did not trigger a department because we've changed some of the point criteria, or is that still happening, and is it still creating that same kind of problem, and then we can address that. I just like to have some data on it. I just like to have some data and at that time you can bring back the data of the different depositors. Okay. Okay, so I have direction so just implementation timeline for the plus one changes staff is currently working on that solicitation process now that extension is up in June so we 're going to be bringing back the competitive bid process for counsel to approve for the homelessness deposit waiver we're going to be coming back in January of 2018 with a consideration of ordinance revisions for that deposit waiver for the homelessness, and then for the deposit policy changes will bring back the ordinance rev isions for counsel to consider based off the discussion today. I'm sorry I don't think I don't think. Mayor pro tem. I don't think you ever really got around to summarizing. So I want to make sure. I just want to make sure that we're not doing this. I'm sorry. Okay, so, D rating would be split, and the C rating would become 301 points to 750 points. The new D rating would be 751 points to 2000 points and the new F, the new E rating would be greater than 2000 points, there would be no F rating. And then deposit. See, I'm torn with the deposit because some people won't have to pay the deposit with the system so I meant to deposit if they're in a rating is it just one month. I'm sorry one month for the one month for the next to last. E rating, E rating, no it would be derating, it would be derating. Yeah, so we're basically great inflating there's no such thing as F anymore. And then zero points for overd ue interest, just to confirm. Yeah, zero points for overdue interest. Okay. Great. Thank you all. Let's see what, let's see when did we break last time about 130. Yes, question. How long do we need to give ourselves for our discussion with the attorney. We need to make sure that we have time. Sure, well, five minute breaks not gonna kill us but how long is your presentation. Hopefully about 10 minutes. Okay, let's go ahead and let's go ahead and run through his presentation and then we'll. How long is the attorney. We had, we had planned two and a half to three hours. So, but of course you can speed that up. All right. So we'll be taking breaks and that presentation as well. No, yeah, that's, we'll have to get him to move forward. Okay, let me go ahead and call this then agenda item. 3E received porthole discussion and staff direction regarding citizen comment pilot program for section 3B. I'm going to let the stopwatch. Yeah, I need to I need to go. Because if they could take me now. That'd be. I'm surprised the steroids the steroids actually calm me down. Yes, Mayor, Council. I'm Aaron Lial city attorney. I'm coming back before you with a trial ordinance that I call the citizen comment pilot program ordinance that you directed me to bring back to you two months ago. And to give you a little background. I gave a presentation about two months ago regarding section 3B and some of the open meetings act issues that associated with section 3B and also present the legal concern I had with the council deliberating and taking action on section 3B items during that discussion. Council could engage in asking speakers questions or engaging in council discussion. My advice at the time was yes, but provided that the section to dash 29 which is your rules of procedure as set forth in the city code and the regular meeting agenda be amended to provide advanced notice to the general public. This way public will know in advance that you are planning to undertake some type of of deliberation or asking questions of the speakers. Just so everyone knows that the 3B items are your schedule citizen reports, not the open mic. At the end of the presentation, the consensus of the council directed me to bring back a temporary trial ordinance to include the following four points. One to allow the council discuss section 3B items to to allow the council to ask questions of each speaker. Three to allow the council to request section 3B items before the research and placed on a future council agenda. This third point was a suggestion by Councilmember Ryan so that we could make that request during this items rather than waiting to the concluding item section. And then four, modify the total time allotted for section 3 B items for a total of five minutes. Three of those minutes are allotted to the speaker's presentation. Two minutes are allotted to council discussion and asking questions. Now, the including your backup there is a series of documents. One is the the ordinance itself. And there's also a draft audio script of as revised to incorporate the changes in the that I laid down those four items in the ordinance, as well as the proposed changes to section three as it'll appear on your regular meeting agenda going forward. So, as I said, the ordinance includes these four items. I have given it a tentative effective date for 90 days to commence on January 1st, 2018. Of course, the council is free to and it's your discretion to increase the days or decrease it or to even change the actual start date. The ordinance would also temporarily override section 2-29 provisions. It also directs the city secretary to make necessary changes to section 3B that is already included in your backup as one of the exhibits. The video script also that is there at the beginning of the public comment section has also been revised to incorporate the changes in the ordinance. And finally, at the conclusion of this pilot program, the council can make changes can make these changes permanent. And before I go to the to the options, I wanted to point out. I had a suggestion provided to me by Councilmember Hutsmith with regard to the audio script that. Here's this. For some reason, the red line track changes are not showing up. Okay. And including your materials was. This script here is was including your materials in the backup. And as I have made, you know, the changes have been made consistent with the ordinance, including breaking out specific. A paragraph that's specific to the schedule citizen reports , which is section 3B as well as a provision that deals with the open mic citizen reports. This didn't exist previously. And in this trial ordinance, we put it in there to distinguish between the two. I substitute these two in lieu of what of what I struck struck out here. That paragraph that I struck out was the one that was causing the confusion from my members of the public. Hopefully, this will actually clarify that for the public. Now, the proposed changes that Councilmember Hutsmith proposed deal with this paragraph here with this mainly with the schedule citizens reports. And I'll bring that up. In lieu of that paragraph for schedule citizens reports, because we've already identified up towards the top that citizen speakers for schedule citizen reports have three minutes. It suggested that maybe we just reduce that to it's a temporary pilot program where additional council discussion or questions are allowed, but limited to two minutes. And the here in both face striking will and inserting may be this sentence allows the council or actually what direct s the council for anybody who violates the rules of decorum to have them immediately removed from the council chambers. Councilmember Hutsmith suggested that maybe that be discretionary with council rather than a mandate. And then also thank you in advance is to thanking the public for adhering to the rules of procedure, which are decorum rules . Either version, whichever council prefers is acceptable. So I'll be seeking direction on whether or not you want the revised version as Councilmember Hutsmith provided or the original version. Thank you. And the thought behind it was if the original wording was. It's absolutely thorough. It's absolutely going to be covered in some other areas. But my concern would be it says basically summarizing if your comments are noteworthy, council will note them. And so my concern is someone will take that the wrong way. And if when no one notes any changes, then, hey, I didn't say anything noteworthy. So no one's taking any action. So anyway, that was just to prevent hurt feelings. And I think it's a little because it's it's captured elsewhere. I didn't know that I separate the background material and the video. So the video just kind of shorts the same. Here's what's going on. Here's options. And then if they want to delve into the weeds, that's available as well. Thank you. Any other questions or comments regarding those changes? I'm OK with them. Anybody else? Councilman Ryan. I'm OK with them. I think on the narrative, it might be good to include just a separation of three B three C as we're describing them. So people understand the difference of the two and the narrative on the audio script or the actual what appears on the agenda. The red line edition you were showing a minute ago. OK. And the just say for not like on that second paragraph there for non scheduled open mic and then three C items. OK. Just make sure we're perfectly clear on which is which. Thank you. Any other comments? Any objections to that change? Looks like no objections. So we have our direction for you. That's that's part of the and then the options I guess is the next part. OK. Options of course. Those changes are being made today. And if council is OK with this with the ordinance and the other documents associated associated documents, I can bring back the ordinance next week for your review. The reason why we're doing a two step process is because two dash twenty nine requires the proposed ordinance amendment to be introduced at one meeting and then adopted at a subsequent meeting or the council can decide not to move forward with the ordinance or finally the council can postpone requests further information or changes. Councilman Briggs. Yeah, I'm OK. I think we should give it a shot. I'm good going forward. Let's do the top bullet point. Yes. I'd like to nominate Todd Howman to voice it. Actually pretty good. OK. Well, I didn't see any head nods, but I think you have direction for the first bullet point to make the changes today and approve the ordinance at next week's meeting. And that concludes my presentation. Very good. Thank you. I think we're going to take a short break before next item. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We're back at three thirty four and we're going to start off with item F receiver report hold discussion and receiver report. Well, two reports, I guess, from attorney Alan Bojorkwez. Regarding information related to ethics. I'm sorry if I ruined your last name. Related to ethics, common characteristics of municipal ethics ordinances and options for scheduling additional meetings to draft an ethics ordinance. Alan. Well, I just want to provide a short introduction for Alan Borquez. He is the attorney that we brought through the Charter Review Committee process to advise the committee on ethics issues. He's the one that we have mentioned to you a few weeks, weeks ago when we were discussing this issue. He's well versed in ethics issues and will be providing some information to you today on some training, some basic information about the ethics issues and then talking at the end of the presentation about options for how we look at the ordinance and how we craft that over a number of meetings. Talking about some scheduling issues. So with that, I'll introduce Alan and glad he's here. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you for having me. And thank you for engaging me to work on this project. I do a lot of work with municipalities and with ethics and in talking to your staff about the task that's ahead of you with the voters and the recent charter amendment. What we recommended was the first step in the process doing some training. And in some regards, this is no different than if you were completely redoing your development code or something else where perhaps with the benefit of some training at the front end you understand the parameters that most cities work within you understand the options that are available. You understand what your choices are going through it. And it is our hope that starting the process with some education, you'll have a lengthy process that can be shortened, and then the product that you have is one that you and the people have didn't can be proud of. And so I was asked to prepare two hours worth of materials, and I've done that. This will be the one and only time where most of our time together is going to be spent with me talking and you listening. And as a city attorney by trade I enjoy every moment of this. I know that when this part is done, the rest of it will be far more interactive and you'll be asking lots of questions , throwing out some options debating amongst yourselves what preferences you have, and giving me instructions on what to do with with your ordinance. So this is what I've laid out as a plan for the next two hours. And I'll move through this with some deliberation and quickly. Of course you can stop and ask questions. This is your project. This is your meeting. But when staff asked me to have two hours, that's what I've done. And so we get started. And this is I know everyone knows what led to this. I know what brought us to this point in Denton's history. But I thought it was important to go ahead and document it for the record, and the issues over the many years where you as a city council have tried to deal with the ethics issues that have come forward. And ultimately, you got the green light from the voters for the council to adopt an ordinance to provide policies procedures and standards. And to start here where for me was the beginning of your process, which was the charge from the city council to your charter committee, the Charter Review Committee met in this room I was here in March. At the time the discussion was whether or not to put an ethics ordinance of sorts, a code of conduct into the charter itself. And I discussed the pros and cons with that group at the time and offered my expert opinion that that would be a bad decision, that those sorts of things belong in an ordinance , not a charter. In part because the practicality of charter is only being able to be amended every two years. But there's some other aspects to it too. And ultimately your Charter Review Committee chose not to recommend there be substantive rules in your charter. Put forth a proposition that will require deleting some of the substantive rules and instead gave the city council a mandate to adopt a charter or ethics ordinance. You see what's often referred to as the letter from your Charter Review Committee. It doesn't just recommend you do something. We actually made some more specific recommendations about defining things like conflicts of interest, having a three- person panel independent from the council, reviewing ethics complaints, requiring training, and really kind of undersc oring the notion that "obstaining from voting is not enough." True abstention means you forego talking about these sorts of issues that give rise to conflicts. And then ultimately you have the final report from your Charter Review Committee and what ultimately resulted in there being the proposition. Proposition D, that Section 1404 and 1405 be repealed, which they were, basically mimics state law anyway. State law is still in effect in that regard to nepotism and conflict of interest. But then that the council go ahead and adopt an ordinance that has certain parameters consistent with what the Char ter Review Committee pointed out. And that passed by, you know, almost 90%, 87, I believe, 87 %. And quickly you went about the task of getting the process started to draft an ordinance. And that's what brings me here today. But I wanted to give you some perspective because I think it would help to get the focus off Denton just for a moment. These are some recent state headlines. Texas Legislature is talking about ethics reform, Texas ethics reform bills, FBI arresting almost all of one Texas town's leadership. Nationwide magazines like Governing talking about the corruption in South Texas, and those sorts of things. And I don't know if you can read it in the lower right hand corner, offering no real comment on this, but that's a headline from yesterday's paper. Austin American Statesman, where the mayor of Round Rock is facing an ethics inquiry about the dealings of his company that he works for and the city of Round Rock. So this is topical, and it's not just it's not just Denton having to deal with these issues. Looking at a few national stats again to give you perspective, a Pew Research Center survey in 2017 showed that Americans trust the government in DC to do right about 20%, about 20% trust the government DC according to that Pew study. Looking at the Gallup polls. These numbers are fairly consistent. If you look at the 2016, 2015, 2013 data, the percentages change only small, small amounts. The percentage of people who trust the American people 62%. That's that's not a very high vote of confidence in our neighbors, trusting our political leaders 48%, which as a staff member myself I feel good they trust staff more than they do the elected officials. I don't know why that is, but it's true. When it comes to our federal government's handling of international affairs. The trust factor is 52% domestic only 45. And then you see how Americans feel about their state governments, they trust the state 63% reported they do. But when you look at local government 70% is anybody shocked that they trust the people they see at the PTA meetings at the grocery store at Lions Club, more than they do state or Fed. It's not a shock to me, but the municipal governments where I spent my career. And so we go from that perspective point into the broader picture of what is ethics. You all may have your own guidelines you may have your own definitions you brought with you today. These are some common definitions that I found in the literature about government ethics ethics are a moral guide. We choose for our behavior. They are the rules we choose to follow when no one is looking. And I carry around the compass, our internal moral compass that guide us toward what's the right thing to do. When deciding what your ethics are. I want to challenge you to think about this fundamental question, who do you work for. Most of my comments today are directed toward the city council. Your code of ethics if you adopt it might be much broader than just the city council. But do you work for the organization, the city of Denton as an entity is that who your loyalty is. Well if you're a staff or you're planning and zoning is your loyalty to the administrators, the managers the department heads. What about employees. Is that who their first round of loyalty is to the person that gives them their annual evaluations. Or is the correct answer it's the elected officials the folks sitting at the big table today. You're the ones the voters put here. Therefore you're the ones we're supposed to be loyal to because you are representatives of the populace. And it's a representative democracy and we're here to serve democracy. Gosh many times during a city council meeting. I'm reminded that it's none of the above. I work for the citizens. They're the ones who pay my paycheck. And so that's where my loyalty belongs. It's not to the elected. It's not to staff. It's not to the entity. I took an oath to serve. To the citizens who fund the entire operation. Or do I have a duty to myself. I guarantee you your neighbors think you have a duty to those who live on your street. Whether you have a single member districts or you're one of the at-large council members. Your friends if your parents live in Denton they think you have an obligation to them. And what about the rest of your family. What about the folks you work for. I bet they think you show up at City Hall every day representing them in some capacity. Well do you? Well okay maybe it's all the above. Maybe you think that we at City of Denton represent all those folks. But what when they're in conflict. Which one is more important than the other. And when you read as I do about ethics and ethics in groups . Ethics in corporate structures. The modern thought is that there's not really a lot of bad people out there. There's probably no bad people at City Hall in Denton. But there's folks who face individual pressures. They face individual struggles. And they bring those struggles to work with them every day. And those struggles sometimes cause them to make bad decisions. Not bad people. Bad decision makers from time to time. And remembering who you serve. Why you got into this position in the first place is often going to help us. It also helps us to remind ourselves what our virtues are. Our values and our principles. Examples of virtues that I think Denton might want to hold dear. Probably each of you profess regularly that you hold these dear. Honesty. Independence. Competency. A commitment to doing your best. And patience. When you think about independence, can you be independent if you are negotiating your next job with somebody who's got a permit or a contract pending before the city? I think there's plenty of voters in town who would question your independence. They would question your patience if you are choosing to move quickly in deciding yes or no on something when the process is supposed to be more deliberate and more thoughtful. Maybe your values are to be efficient. Right? Government's supposed to work like a business. We hear that plenty of times. We're supposed to be effective. Ah, but we also have to be equitable. Is it fair to charge certain fees and certain deposits? Are the administrative fees that we charge fair and equitable depending on the classes of our citizens and what their socioeconomic backgrounds are? Or we're supposed to be inclusive. Inclusivity is a value. How often do we go above and beyond to include the different demographic groups here in the city of Denton in our decision making process or in the doling out of public goods? Well, for sure we want to be legal. I think that's a value. You hired a lawyer to stand before you today. You want to be transparent. I doubt any of you ran for election saying, "I don't like transparency. We need to shut off City Hall more quick. Close the windows. We're going into executive session." That's a tough sell. It always has been. It's particularly tough today. We want to be timely. There's pressure. Can't sit on things too long. Delay, delay, delay. When a permit, an application, a contract is submitted to City Hall and it says here, it's costing people money out there. We're going to be on budget. You have a budget. We've got to stick within it. Appropriations by law are supposed to be made in accordance with the budget. Can't forget politics. What's the good of all that other stuff if the voters hate it? So you look at those values. I think, does anyone disagree that those are great values for the city of Denton? All right. Which one's more important? I mean, self-serving to myself. If legal is the most important, what the heck with the budget? Spend money, money, money until you get that rock solid legal answer that you need. I don't care how many outside lawyers you have to hire. What about if being efficient is your value, but it comes into conflict with being timely? So I think we can all agree on is that all these values are important. You're thinking, duh. But sometimes you have to prioritize. And when push comes to shove, which one's the most important? Well, I think if we ask some of our friends with the press and with the media, they're going to say transparency. And some of them might rank transparency above legality or above efficiency because the right for people to know what 's going on at City Hall might be more important than saving a few dollars. And you may have to settle something. You may get popped with a judgment in court, but at least the voters knew what was going on. So I think well-intended people who are educated and care for a community can rank those sorts of things differently. And you're going to have to go through the process of ranking some of these sorts of things when it comes to choosing what goes into your ethics ordinance. Then again, the rubber hitting the road, refining it down a little bit further. What are your principles? Being fiscally sound, having public data readily available, giving citizens more access to meetings. It's easy to say in favor of transparency, but what does that mean in terms of policies? What does that mean in terms of procedures? Having copies of things sitting out and waiting for folks, posting things aggressively on the Internet and not having to require people file an open records request. We can go through and look at all your values, the virtues you hold dear, and refine them down into principles to achieve what you say you stand for so that you're able to actually walk the talk. Contracts being awarded on merits, employees being hired based on their skills, their experience, their education, and not based on who they're related to. It's these sorts of things that help achieve the organization that I think you're all going to agree you want to have. Maybe you think you already do have. We just need to work with our words. So what are the obstacles? If we all agree on these values, these principles and virtues, what gets in our way? Well, the first one is leadership myopia. We just don't see what's coming. We're not, we at the top of the chain, the department heads, the managers, the elect eds are not seeing what's on the horizon. We're missing those insights. We're busy paving streets. We're busy dispatching police and fire. We're busy trying to keep jobs and draw jobs. Oh my gosh, we didn't see it go in this direction. What about a lack of awareness among our staff, our board of adjustments, our commissions and boards? They just weren 't aware what the rules were. They weren't aware what the expectations are. It's amazing when I hear that with another client that I've worked with sometimes, the city of El Paso. I've been special counsel to their ethics commission. I walk into their new city hall, they got their values et ched in stone in the rotunda at city hall. And so occasionally we'll have a conversation about, well, we got paper people, but if y'all want to try to figure out what the city stands for, should we all step outside 30 feet and look up and around? Someone thought enough of that to carve it into stone. It means something. Oh gosh, when you see their meetings broadcast, you see their values and virtues being scrolled on the ticker tape at the bottom of the screen. Okay, does that help with employee awareness, volunteer awareness and remind people of where the organization's been and what we want it to look like now? Because the current culture is the biggest challenge. And I don't know that it's that case in Denton. I have no firsthand knowledge of that. But I know in other cities I've represented, I've known some cities that I've consulted with down in South Texas, yeah, culture is tough. There's a reason people used to get into politics, a reason they used to get into public service. And it wasn't to objectively serve some nameless, faceless citizen out there . It was to better their family, to better their position. They absolutely want to know where the rezoning is coming. Where is the road widening coming so we can go and invest in certain parts of town? That's the way it's done, right? Well, no, not here, not anymore. And lots of communities are trying to change that current culture. It takes time. It takes effort. And ethics ordinance is part of that. But I'll explain in a moment it's not the only step. Ethical illiteracy, some folks just don't know the terms. They don't know what we're talking about. That's the reason I was boring you with those slides you just went through. Giving you some words to use is going to be part of this process when it comes to drafting an ethics ordinance so that folks understand what things mean. I can't say I've ever met a single person who can't tell me exactly what they think a conflict of interest is. It means something to everyone. And in Texas, the courts used to decide on a case by case basis what a conflict of interest was. Does it smell good? I know it when I see it. And eventually the legislature said, "Nope, none of that. We're defining it by statute." And it means money. Do you have a certain threshold of financial interest? If so, then maybe you've got a conflict of interest. Well, what happens when every single member of the city council is members of the exact same civic group? What happens when every single member of a city council are either deacons or other leaders in the exact same church and that church is doing business with the city in real estate? Well, unless those deacons own stock in the church, there's no financial interest, no conflict of interest. And so defining what these words mean for us in Denton is going to be a step toward promoting ethical literacy. And then I come back to those personal needs, wants, and desires. All those voids everyone's carrying around with them, those empty holes just waiting to be filled. I don't give enough love at home, so I'm going to go look for it at City Hall. I don't make enough money, so I'm looking for every opportunity to jump ship and cash in on what I was doing at City Hall. I deserve respect, don't you all know? Do you know how educated I am, how hard I work? I need respect. I'm going to be making choices and decisions at City Hall designed to get me that respect that I so richly deserve. And again, it's those personal, individual needs or short comings that otherwise will, intentioned people, bring into city council meetings, P&Z meetings, or at their desk every day. And that's where the ethics experts say we need to pay our attention to. That's what we need to focus on. So what approach should you take in Denton? There's really three that I've been able to cobble together from all the literature, and I think this is pretty accurate. There's the compliance approach. We shall adopt rules. There shall be rules. There shall be oversight. There shall be adjudication. There shall be punishment. That is part of the story. I don't think it's the only part , but it's part of it. The next approach is the integrity approach. The fostering values, talking about values, being very aspirational in how people should conduct themselves. And frankly, I think that's what your previous ethics policy in Denton could be categorized. The resolution 2004-2006, I saw in the newspapers once somebody characterized that as being closer to the Boy Scout oath or law than it was to a code of conduct. Being a Boy Scout myself, yeah, I get the connection. I don 't think the resolution or policy was bad. It may not be enough, and that's a fair criticism, but I think it's part of this approach, because the ideal approach to those that are written on this topic is to do both. Set those lofty goals for your people. Talk about your values, your virtues, and your principles on a regular basis. And you also got to have some basic standards and a process and procedures for dealing with complaints. And so that's what I'm going to be recommending is a combination approach. An important point to point out, this is going to come up multiple times as we go through this process. I might be challenging you to look at a certain scenario and answer for yourselves so you can give me marching orders. Is this problem an ethical issue or is it a management issue? Because some folks out in the citizenry might think it's an ethical issue when you think it's all about your procurement policy and your purchasing manager. And we are avoiding or dealing with the potential for those sorts of conflicts through our purchasing rules and procedures. And we don't have to deal with it as an ethical matter. Same thing with human resources. It may be an HR issue, how this one supervisor dealt with the subordinate. It may not be an ethical issue. And it matters because where you see tension, once you adopt this kind of ordinance and then you have to implement it, is multiple parts of your organization either vying over jurisdiction, they want to have control over this dispute, or just lost. They're not sure. And you've got complaints filed with an ethics commission as your ethics commissioners want to go after it. But over here you have an HR department saying, no, no, no, that's my bailiwick. That's my wheelhouse. Or a city manager saying, that's my employee by charter. I have the responsibility and the authority to deal with this person. And so what do you do when different parts of the city are investigating or trying to rectify remedy the same scenario ? Well, you may come back to these sorts of things. It's painful when you have somebody who goes through the civil service system, has their hearings, is adjudicated in accordance with state law and city rules. They don't get the outcome they want. So now they go and file ethics complaints against the hearings officer and the civil service commissioners. Or more recently, I've had someone go through the Board of Adjustment, questioning a staff's determination on the height of a building. Did they get the answer from Board of Adjustment that they wanted? Did they file their lawsuit in 10 days, as state law says? Nope. Even though they were advised that was an option, they never appealed. So, boom, that goes away. Until they file ethics complaints against the planning director, the chair and vice chair of the Board of Adjust ment. And what they're really calling for is another shot at overturning staff's determination. They don't get that. Okay, now they want the planner fired and they want the council to throw off the chair of Board of Adjustment. So they're using one board or commission to attack another board or commission, even though state law and city ordin ances have provided for internal appeals and ways to get reconsideration. So parsing through these are important because one thing that I've observed, and I've observed this statewide, are ethics commissions becoming the city's complaint department . The Board of Ethics becoming this omnibus appellate body. You didn't get what you wanted from City Hall, file an ethics complaint. And that will be your second chance, third chance, fourth chance to get that remedy. And it's not really about behaving poorly, bad conduct, a lack of integrity. It's about, I didn't get my permit approved or darn it, my neighbor did get their permit approved. And it's a bad thing my neighbor's doing. So if City Hall approved the permit, City Hall must be bad. Okay, quick file an ethics complaint. And so this is not just some sort of theoretical academic exercise of parsing out who gets jurisdiction. There's going to be opportunities for overlap, which we can try to address when we draft your ethics ordinance. But I want you to be aware of where these sorts of conflicts come up. And I mentioned the city manager because I had to. This is a city manager form of government. This is a home rule city . And in your charter itself, it talks about the city manager 's role in appointing and removing employees. That's going to become important because if you choose to have an ethics ordinance that provides penalties, if you choose to have an ethics ordinance that has some sort of independent oversight body, then how are they going to avoid stepping on the city manager's toes? Well, there's ways to do that. We can craft that in there. But I want to plant that seed in your minds up front that we have to do this ordinance because the charter says so. We also have to respect the other provisions that are in your charter. We cannot have an ordinance that conflicts with your charter. And being mindful of the city manager's role in a city manager form of government is important. It's an area that a lot of ethics ordinances neglect to address, and I'll make sure that we don't step on that. So closing that segment of the training out, I ask you to choose integrity. And I think this training part is going to be an important part of your ordinance. But you know, think about knowing the law, which we're about to cover. Know your city's policies, which you have HR policies and you have purchasing policies. But we're going to talk about ethics policies in a little bit. And no professional norms, because I suspect everyone that works for you here at City Hall is part of some professional group that has its own code of ethics that comes to bear on how they conduct their business every day. And then I borrowed from a professor this lead. Is it legal ? Is it ethical? Is it acceptable? Is it defensible? And is it sensible? And that's a nice, simple little acronym. I like it when I ask you to carry it around for yourself. Because as we talk about state law, this is one of the areas of tension that previous counsel had and we had prior to the charter amendment. Mr. Leal can give you his version someday, but I'm going to , as a city attorney myself, I'm going to take some liberties and say, you know, the guidance, the role of a city attorney is to provide legal guidance and advocacy for the choices the clients make, the questions they ask. The purchasing laws, employment laws, election laws, open government laws, all of those can be characterized as ethics laws of one type or another. And your city attorney department will guide you through that. But as I've learned 21 years of being a municipal lawyer, just because it's legal doesn't make it ethical. Just because it's legal doesn't make it right. I think asking for my legal opinion is the beginning of an inquiry. It should not be the end. And bless you. I can look back over a career that I'm proud of and say there's lots of times that I advise clients that it's perfectly legal to do something. Here, here's the, I'll give you the email to cover yourself with. And they went off and did it and wow, did it blow up in their faces. Bad politics, bad policy, or just bad optics all the way around. Maybe bad ethics. And so I think we have to know the law. And if you adopt your own ordinance, you're going to be creating more laws that govern people's conduct. Something that was legal for them yesterday is going to become illegal for them tomorrow because you pass a new ordinance that says so. But let's try and convince each other and then those that work for you that something being legal is just the beginning of the inquiry. They may still want to consider doing something differently because of how this is going to appear. It can be absolutely legal, defensible in court, withstand any legal challenge, and cause you political points, cause you credibility, cause your neighbors, your business owners , your residents to wonder what's going on at City Hall. Oh, they were told it was legal. That's not enough. So launching into the Texas laws that cover this topic, and I'm just hitting the highlights, these are the things that are already on the books. You may want to mirror this. You may want to be a little bit more strict. But the first one that comes to mind is residing to run. This notion that if you're going to seek other office, then you have to step down from the office you currently have. And I noticed that my slide had one citation, but not the other. Three, section 19 of the Constitution is one. Article 16, section 65 is the second part. Article 16, section 65. Those are the two parts together that make up our resign to run rule here in Texas. And basically when it comes to local officers, if you've got more than a year remaining on a term that's at least three years, then you have to resign to run for other offices. Then there are certain things where you can't run for the legislature at all if you're holding certain paid state offices like Secretary of State, Attorney General, and judgeships. And so anyone who's concerned about that, look at those two sections of our Constitution and you'll see those provisions. Another one that comes up often is incompatibility. This one is difficult to give a good opinion on because it is common law. It's not in any statute. It's not in the Constitution. It's a judge-made doctrine for which there's lots of Attorney General opinions on. And I've tried to collect all of them that I can that apply to cities. But the concept is you can't be your own boss. So one of you may think that you're such a good doing a good job of being city council members. You want to be a city manager someday. Great. You can't appoint yourself to be city manager here and also sit on the city council. And believe me, I've got clients, particularly in smaller cities that have tried to do that. You also can't have conflicting loyalties, which is why our city manager can't also be on the school board. Why? Well, depending on where you are, cities and schools fight like crazy. And maybe you're in a different community where they get together and get along way too well. They're always contracting with each other in a local agreements, sharing ownership of parks and rec facilities. And gosh, sometimes I've got cities that are heavily regulating their schools and those facilities that are being built. So there's those are examples of when you can't hold two different positions at the same time because of conflicting duties or conflicting loyalties. And it's decided on a case by case basis. And it causes a lot of heartache. Now, in the end, it's not the city's problem. If one of your members has incompatibility, it's unique to that person. The entity doesn't get punished for that. But the problem is if you have an incompatible position by accepting that second job and someone challenges you in court, you're deemed have automatically resigned from the first job. So it's one of those things that before you took a position , you may want to get your own legal opinion to make sure it 's not incompatible. Lots of public disclosures. And I'll tell you that when it comes to most ethics laws for state officials, local officials, federal officials, it's about disclosures, disc losures, disclosures, telling the public what your interests are. In Texas, we have local government code 176 that requires conflicts disclosures regarding business and employment relationships when someone is seeking to do business with City Hall. There's what the form looks like, form CIS promulgated by the Texas Ethics Commission. If you've got a vendor, a proposed vendor has a business or a family relationship, then you have to fill out the form and they have to fill out the form. The other one is local government code 145, a personal financial statement. You're triggered here. A population over 100,000 has to do this form PFS. So most cities in Texas do not. Only the largest cities have to fill out this sort of form. Then we get into things, ethics laws, that are really crimes, crimes. The penal code. These are the things when the Texas Rangers come knock on your door. Has anyone ever had to deal with the Texas Rangers before? Don't raise your hand. Don't raise your hand. That's an intimidating group of people. It's not just the legend behind their office. When they show up in your office to ask you questions because they're investigating someone for one of these violations that I'm about to list for you, they are an intense, serious group of people. And they're the ones that handle the investigations for state officials and for certain local officials, including mayors and council members. Good old fashioned bribery. It's illegal. Taking money, asking for money, offering money to get someone to do something or not do something at City Hall. A decision, an opinion, a vote, a favor, sometimes inaction is what's being sought. And so of course, bribery is a crime in Texas. We can't do that. Coercion, a threat to expose or ridicule or harm someone. Again, trying to influence a public official to do something or not do something. It also applies to the coerc ion of a voter. Honorariums, it comes up often. Gifts. Texas Penal Code 36. 07. For most things, if it's 50 bucks or less, you're good. That's the state gift level. 50 bucks or less. It's something that a lot of cities try, choose to address when they do their own code of ethics. They lower that threshold to something less than $50. What I think is interesting is that second bullet from the bottom when it comes to transportation, lodging. It's okay if you're speaking at an event, which of course the legislators often are asked to speak at events and that 's how they justify getting paid for these sorts of things. When it comes to things like, I don't know, being invited to go to Arlington to sit in a skybox for a cowboy game where all the food and drink and the game is free. Well, it's legal in Texas as long as the host is with you. If you're going to Vegas because you're on a research trip and it's all expense paid, that's fine as long as the host is with you. There's not even a requirement to report that. Now, are your citizens going to think fondly of you if you take those sorts of trips, if you go have those sorts of meals and entertainment, and then your host gets selected for an exclusive franchise on trash hauling or something else? Well, maybe not. Maybe they won't think the same about you. So just because it's legal to take that trip in the scenario that I described doesn't mean that taking that trip is going to evoke the sort of confidence that you want your voters to have. So those might be the sorts of things that you want to address. The use of information is huge. Are you coming into contact with information you would not have had but for your position at City Hall? This is not generally available to the public, and you are using it so you, your friends, your family can benefit. I mentioned earlier the scenario of wanting to know where all the future rezoning is going to be. Where is the infrastructure going to go? Those sorts of things. Who's getting the economic development incentives to build a new shopping center, and how close can I get to them so I can piggyback off their marketing efforts? All those sorts of things are punishable as crimes if you use that for your benefit or the benefit of your family members. Abuse of office, one of the most broad of all the penal code provisions. You intend to obtain a benefit for someone that's not available to the general public. You're intending to harm or defraud somebody. Misusing government property, services, personnel, funds, all of those things. What I've seen increasingly just in my own area of Austin these days are city officials that are accused of using their city issued email account to run their own private businesses, side businesses. And people being investigated, people being prosecuted for those sorts of things. Now you think about what's an email cost? What's the cost of an auto signature? It's fairly de minimis. I don't know that the value of it really matters at all. But just the process of people using some of these things at City Hall for their own personal benefit and not at all for the public benefit are things that increasingly internal auditors are going after, and in some cases district attorneys are going after. I actually know a city planner of a small town that was prosecuted, indicted, cut a plea bargain because he accidentally returned an email for a personal business using his city email address. He wasn't even at work when he did it on his off time. He was using his own personal computer when he did it. But he had that other account on that personal machine, and he used that account, four years of his life and $40,000 to cop down to $1,000 misdemeanor and make it go away. More and more folks are looking at these sorts of things. It's not just making long distance phone calls from City Hall anymore. That's what it used to be. Now we all have cell phones and unlimited call plans. It's these other sorts of things people are doing, soliciting people at work to patronize your own personal private business. Oh my gosh, if anyone's in the business of selling cosmetics on the side, I have to recommend these days you not do that sort of thing at the office because increasingly the public, the media, and district attorney's offices are looking at those sorts of things using abuse of office as a grounds to do it. And then the big one, conflict of interest, which really is at its heart another disclosure requirement. This is the one I mentioned where the legislature has defined what a substantial interest is. Do you own 10% of the stock, $15,000 or more in fair market value? Do you get at least 10% of your income from it or do you own at least $2,500 worth of real estate? If something, a business or a piece of property comes forward and you as a council member have one of those interests, it triggers 171 local government code, which used to also be reflected in your charter. The first thing it requires you to do is declare through an affidavit, but then you also must abstain from deliber ations, which means no voting. It also means no talking. Well, how far does the talking go? Well, I can't talk at the dais. Can I talk at the coffee pot? Well, I don't know. You know, our recommendation to clients is normally if you 're the one with this conflict and you file this affidavit, why don't you go get a cup of coffee down the hall? Why don't you step outside and get some fresh air? Why don 't you do yourself a favor and extract yourself from that scene so you're not vulnerable to the kind of attacks where you're now having to pay a lawyer to define for you what deliberation means. But sometimes it's hard for clients to do that. One of the most frustrating things I have to deal with is when an individual member of the city council or P&Z will step off the dais when they have a conflict, but they will walk up to the podium and speak, "I'm here as a citizen. I'm not here as a council member." Ah, geez. I understand why they do that. I understand the distinction they're making in their head. That happens all the time. But what I've seen from the trenches is the accusations, the bad press, what the blogosphere does to those people, because increasingly the public does not recognize a city official's ability to take off one hat and put on another hat. The accusations are when you are a city official, you're a city official 24/7, 365, and you're not allowed to take yourself out of that role when advocating your personal interests, your business interests, your family's interests . And those are the accusations that come out, and you're going to be challenged with that when it comes to writing your own ethics ordinance, because there's going to be provisions in your code, perhaps, that address your ability to represent yourself before a city council or a P&Z meeting. To represent your spouse, to represent your mother or someone else. Those are choices you're going to have to make, but a lot of them comes down to this. Only when a majority of the city council has to file an aff idavit can you all participate in the discussion. The law recognizes that council should not be paralyzed. So if one or two of you, you have to file affidavits, you have to go take a break and let the rest of the council handle an issue, that's fine. But if all of you are filing, or a majority, a quorum of you are filing, well then filing is all you have to do. The public is now on notice of the conflict, and you move forward with your vote. The issues that often come up on conflict of interest are, you know, I'll take it to a small town scenario. You're in a big metropolitan area, I'll take it down to a small town area, though. What if the mayor were to own the only mechanics garage in town? And the next mechanics garage is 20 miles down the road. Is it really in the public's best interest to have vehicles hauled to and from the other town? Is it really in the public's interest, are you being efficient, are you being effective, are you being timely, to pay employees to ferry vehicles from your fleet up and down the highway? Or is it really the mayor's garage is the best deal in town ? So as long as the mayor files an affidavit, and goes and gets a cup of coffee, and therefore is not deliberating, and the rest of the council, knowing it's the mayor's garage, votes to give the mayor a one-year contract to service the city's fleet, is justice done? Is that a good and fair result for the city? Texas law, I would say thinks so. It allows for that scenario to occur and be perfectly legal. And for some of my small remote town clients, that's probably a good thing. Once you get into larger areas where there's more choices of vendors, it gets a little bit harder to justify that sort of scenario. And that's why some cities will lower those thresholds for what is a conflict of interest under their code of ordinances. And that's no doubt a challenge that you'll be asked to deal with and give me some instructions on. There's a separate conflict of interest provision just regarding plats. If you'll notice, the triggers all look very similar. So you're required to file an affidavit and abstain, specifically when one of these pieces of property comes before you for platting, replatting, plat amendment. Nepotism, the notion that we should not be bestowing patron age on our relatives. They should not be getting jobs at City Hall, just because they're familiar with the elected or the department heads. Now, under state law, if you have a city manager, and the city manager is responsible for all the hiring and firing, then council is buffered from that rule. And city manager is free to hire those relatives under state law can't hire the managers relatives can hire the the mayor and council's relatives they choose to do so. Yes, please. I'm sorry, I just want to make sure I get my head around when so looking at that last slide, for example , when you when you say owned or there's an interest in that sort of thing. Texas being kind of community property state. How does it handle spouses in that. So is it. So for example if own if it's my wife that owns 2000 and I own 500 is that good. Does the state see it as 2500 together or they see it as the official only. I think it would take a moment get this straight. Your spouse's conflicts in this regard, are yours also. And so you have the same level of conflict she has. If the two of you added up together hits the threshold with that trigger it. I honestly don't know. I've never had that scenario. Okay. My advice would be stay away from it. I think that would be the answer but I don't know. Okay, I can't say with certainty. Thank you. We, we did have that scenario. I did. And I don't know if it's so our city attorney at the time did some research because I was working part time for the University of North Texas, and my income with did not represent 10% of our family income. And then my wife started working also part time we were supervising student teachers, put both of those together, and it did indicate so I, I had not been refusing myself from some discussions on a lawsuit with the university. And then I did, because our income together did that so that was the advice of our attorney at that time. I don't know if that stands but that may help. The statutes not written that way. There's been some interpretations that would lump yours together particularly because it's a community property state and maybe they're not separated. I don't know. But I'd be concerned that yes that would be the answer, they'd be viewed as together. Sure. Again looking at the nepotism statute, it covers full time part time. Anyone that gets paid for their services City Hall. It does not apply to volunteers. So you could have scenarios where city council members, family members are serving on boards or commissions. That could be a good idea. If they're the right person for the job. It could be viewed by the public as more insider dealing self dealing that sort of thing. That was a very rapid run through of the state laws that are generally characterized as ethics laws. I gave you this slide to underscore my earlier statement that most of your professionals here at City Hall are going to be members of these other organizations where there's public works or planning or finance or whatnot. Some of these groups have their own code of ethics. Your staff's memberships in these groups is contingent on them abiding by these codes of ethics. And I want to make sure that neither you nor the public think that just because you don't have a code of ordinances and then that there are no ethics rules that apply to the behavior and conduct of those at City Hall. We have those and if you ever look at them they're really they're really quite good and they're all compiled if anyone's curious on the website Texas ethics dot com has all those ethics codes. So now we're starting to get into the more substantive part where I'm really going to be asking you to think about your upcoming ethics ordinance the drafts you want me to prepare for you and what they look like. And my methodology for either an overhaul of an ethics ordinance or for drafting one from scratch is this it's it 's lariat. I'll run through the fundamentals really quick. The first is leadership. I know a lot of folks are focused on the regulatory side we 'll get there, but you got to start with the leadership, the mayor, the council, the manager, the department heads set the tone for the rest of the organization. And if if having a City Hall with integrity is a priority, then that leadership is going to come from the top. And it'll be more than just lip service. It will be it will be leadership by example. I think that in the in the end the final analysis democracy is a process it's not a result. And if you want to have fair and impartiality and equity, then it's in the process. How do we process permits. How do we review contracts. How do we make hiring decisions firing decisions promotions. The allocation of staff to departments the allocation of resources to departments. That's boring. That ain't cool. People in the public do not get excited about administration. But if you want to achieve just results at City Hall, if you want to give the public confidence that the work you're doing is fair and just and ethical. Look at your policies, look at your procedures, look at the steps that you use to approve plats or building permits or licenses in the right of way or sign permits or anything, because it's in those details, those rules and procedures notification fees that you will find justice. The next is regulation, which is all people ever want to focus on regulate regulate regulate. We think the sons of gun are up to no good quick drops and rules. Let's put in some penalties and send the cops after them. I think that is part of the process. I think it's only part and it's a part that we're going to be addressing. But this is this is the rules. Where do you want to draw the line and what do you want to be the oversight, if any, and what do you want to be the punishment, if any. Those are all decisions that you're going to have to go through as you dropped what I hope is a broader ethical program, which rules are a part of. Next to leadership and administration. I think this is the next most important part instruction training training training. I challenge you to find a book on ethics for organizations that tells you punishment swift and sound is the key. None of the experts think that it's this, if you want to have an ethical organization you better talk about ethics, and not just when someone's hired at an orientation, not just in that new city council member training that people go to and then 90 days of being elected. It's an ongoing thing. When I when I was much younger and working on my degrees I worked for the city of Lubbock all the way through school, and a year and a half of that was in the trash department, and I learned more about public service and municipal government working in the trash department than any other job I've had since. And what I love were those quarterly safety meetings, where everyone where you drove the truck hung off the back of a truck worked at the landfill, or went downtown and cleaned up trash, you enter the quarterly safety meetings. That's how they justify the donuts and the tacos and the coffee. We weren't really talking about safety during those meetings, we were talking about organizational values, we were talking about priorities, we're talking about what it means to have clean trash trucks, what it means to hop off a trash truck and help someone who's elderly get the trash to their container. We were talking about having some pride. And I think about that example from 22 years ago, and I think about ethics. I don't have a single client I represent that has quarterly ethics meetings, where the departments get together, the crews get together and talk about what their values are, what's important, how do you handle those tough situations, how do you handle it when you do help someone pick up their trash, and she reaches in her purse to hand you a 20. I'm a city official I don't take tips. You know what do you do when you're when you're a police officer, and someone that's been received major economic incentives from your city wants to give all the police officers some free services, free services that are not available to the accounting department, or the utilities department, but we love our first responders so here's something for you. How do you deal with that instruction training conversations it can be formal, it can be informal in places like San Antonio which many people hold out is having the ideal ordinance. They've got a significant infrastructure for their ethics code. And part of it is they produced videos and video training for all new employees as part of their requirements, video training for new boards and commission members as part of their, their process. And that's something San Antonio chose, along with lots of other components. So, I think this part gets downplayed a lot. I won't beat the drum on it if it's annoying you, but I'll mention it once or twice more, because if truly what the voters want is a sense of confidence in the election, let them know about the training that's going on let them know that when someone gets appointed or elected or hired. They understand what the rules of the game are, and are occasionally that there's a refresher. Hi, thanks for the presentation. And then we have a requirement that you do the state training for ethics. When you're elected. And we require our board members to do that training as well. What have you seen and other cities in terms of training requirements for ethics for elected and appointed. The thing that I've seen that I like is when a city will have, you know, see that has an oversight group of some sort, ethics board ethics Commission, and those commission ers are obligated in addition to sitting around a table like this and investigating and adjudicating. They're also required once a year to go out and talk to the individual boards and commissions about the city's code of ethics and specific rules in that city, and how it applies to that board. And if each one of them takes a couple of boards like the Fourth of July committee over here in the parks and rec board over here. They've got a live human being coming to their meetings at least once a year, and talking specifically about the city's program, what the priorities from the mayor and the city manager are, and that that that connection. I think that's a great way to do it. It's got a level of formality, but it's not overly strict. I like that. You bet. Accountability I think once you've got the rules, you've got the, the examples from the top you've done your training, there needs to be some level of accountability the public needs to know that if someone's breaking the rules, something will happen. Now what is it does that mean someone loses their job. Perhaps, do they get a reprimand that they get just told, don't do that anymore that doesn't fly here we don't accept that. If that's the way you want to be, you need to go on to another employer or a volunteer, somewhere else. What is your system of accountability going to be, and the recommendations going to be if you don't have some sort of internal checks on that. There's going to be external checks on that it's going to be that visit from the Texas Rangers it's going to be the district attorney's office. It's going to be voters, you know, supporting challengers to change over city hall, because they're not seeing these things take effect. And so you can't have these norms and rules without some sort of expectation that when they're violated , something's going to happen. And the last one is transparency. So, last month, actually October, I turned 50 years old. And that's a big milestone for me. And sharing a bit of personal reflection for you I turned 50 my law firm turned 15, a lot of thought about how I've spent my years. And I was explaining to my team at the office one day that when I was little, I was my daughter's age, the big dilemma was do you want to be Luke Skywalker you want to be Han Solo. And I want to be Han Solo because he got the girl so that made it was the obvious choice not the hero, but an important part of the story. And I look around at 50 years old and realize I became Darth Vader. And how in the world did that happen. Not being an advocate of transparency. I use my powers to help cities have more closed door meetings to keep more documents away from the public. I was the lawyer that says, oh, you want to keep it away. Here's the way you keep it away. And I'm good at it. I know the rules of open meetings and open records, as well as any municipal lawyer does. But I've gotten to that point to where I think the public is demanding a lot more from us. And therefore, I'm quizzing my clients increasingly to ask yourselves, just because you have an exception to close this door. Is it the smart thing to do? Just because you have a legal reason to keep this document out of the public's hand. Is it in the city's best interest as a group? And it's I think it's rare for city attorneys to ask that sort of question. It's new for me to ask that sort of question. But when I'm talking about ethics, I've got to ask that question. And it's going to come up because I am amazed at the cities that I see their ethics code and everything is shrouded in secrecy. Their meetings are all closed, the deliberations are closed , and all the documents are confidential. How can that be? How did they how did they gel their ethics oversight functions with the Open Meetings Act and the Open Records Act? And there are there are ways to at least try to protect a little bit of confidentiality at certain stages in the process. And I'll be recommending it in part because I want to balance the pressures and the need to be transparent with the need to protect people's reputations. I still believe that people are innocent until proven guilty. And even though the Internet and social media is the way it is, I'm very, very cautious as a citizen and a democracy and as a lawyer about the government taking steps to soil someone's reputation. Without evidence, without there being a rule and evidence that the rule was broken and no good defense to breaking the rule. And so there's going to be tension between the pressure to be open and transparent and the need to somehow adjudicate and investigate ethics complaints. And it'd be wise for you to put some serious thought into that at the front end of this process. So in the end, whatever rules and procedures you adopt reflect what you think is in the best interest of the city of Denton. And you will have, of course, my support from a legal standpoint on the ultimate choices that you make. So that that's the lariat process, which takes us to the final substantive portion of today's training. And that is what municipal codes of ethics include. And there's lots of them out there. You may have already seen several of them. I know that lots of circles. San Antonio is held out as the gold standard. And it is it is a very good ethics ordinance. Frank Garza was city attorney when he wrote it. Andy Martin was city attorney when they were refined it. Martha Cepeda was acting city attorney who actually implemented it. Some of the greatest minds in my profession resided over that ordinance. Any one of them will tell you it is a monster. It is substantial. It involves a significant investment in time, money and human resources to make that ordinance function. And if that's where Denton is, then OK. But you're going to have to discuss some of these things because, remember, we have all these values that are competing and budget and HR and staffing and things are all going to come into play. So we'll be drawing from from probably San Antonio, but also there's others out there that we can borrow from, depending on what your preferences are. What are all the good ones have in common? Stuff like this. There's a policy statement at the very beginning. What are what are the big goals, values you're wanting to communicate to your people? Who's covered? What's the applicability? Do you really want this to apply just to the elected officials? I know the charter review process, there was some indication they wanted to apply to staff. OK, so it applies to electeds and employees. What about boards and commissions? What about volunteers who are not on a board or commission? What about your vendors? If I come back and consult with you on a different matter two years from now as outside counsel, am I going to be subject to your ethics code? Because some cities do. Contract engineers, contract architects, contract lawyers, financial advisors, all of them have to comply with your ethics code. It can go incredibly far. Are candidates going to be covered by this disclosure requirements beyond what's in state law? Those are all things that you're going to have to consider. Just that first question could take a considerable amount of time unless you know up front how broad you want this to be. Once you have rules in place, do you want some sort of oversight? That's a fundamental question. Do you want a board, a commission to be in place? And if so, what are their duties and roles? Some cities have a department that's dedicated to this, not just when there's complaints. They have a department with staff. They have an ethics officer. They have an accountability officer who reviews financial statements, issues advisory opinions, and conducts training all year long. Do you have an office for that person? Are you ready to fund the position and fund their staff? Or are you going to just have an individual? You're going to hire three or four lawyers in Denton County and put them on retainer on a rotating basis that whenever there's an ethics allegation, they're the ones that come in as a hearings officer. They preside over it. They issue an opinion, and then they go away until their name comes up again. There's lots of choices, or you could choose to have none. Here are the rules. For the elected, politics shall govern. The media shall police it. For staff, the city manager and HR takes care of it. No new infrastructure, no new positions. I think those are all fine answers depending on where you 're coming from. If you're going to have a board, what's the composition? Must they be residents? Must they be property owners? Must they be voters? Can they be felons? On and on and on. Some cities want very specific sorts of professions reflected on their ethics board, and I think your charter review commission mentioned some of that. What staffing are you ready to dedicate to this? If you have a board, who's the liaison? Who's the secretary? Who's the legal advisor? What is their budget? Are you going to require training? What does that look like? Are you producing your own video? You're commissioning it? You're doing it once a year? Every new employee? What's your training component? Advisory opinions and the weight of advisory opinions vary all over the spectrum. Are you going to be able to ask your city attorney for an advisory opinion before you do something? Must I disclose this? Should I disclose this? Can the city even enter into this contract with me being at City Hall? And if so, what's the effect of that? Is that an affirmative defense? You rely in good faith, in a timely manner, on the written advice of whoever gave you the advisory opinion. You later get accused of an ethical infraction. Boom. King's Act. Get out of jail free. Buy and go home. Some cities provide for that. Or maybe it's not the city attorney's office that does the advisory opinion. It's the ethics review board. It's one of those outside pool of lawyers that you've hired to be available whenever it comes up. Conflicts of interest. Conflicts of interest. Conflicts of interest. Is it going to be the 5, you know, 3%, 1%? Is it going to be $500? Is it going to be $1,000? Where do you want to draw the line? And what kind of things do you want to draw the line on? One of my favorite stories is I was the very first city attorney of the village of Wimberley, which is in Hayes County, just west of Austin, near San Marcos. A town that's been there for 2,000 years and became a city in 2000. You ever been there? It's cute. It's kitschy. Nothing but antique shops, jewelry stores, restaurants, Cy press Creek, Blanco River. It's a part of a valley that I didn't even know existed. And as soon as they became a city, they wanted an ethics ordinance. And I said, fine. I've been writing on ethics ordinances since I was at TML. I wrote a great paper on it back in '99. No problem. No, Mr. City Attorney, stay away. First of all, all you care about is the law. And second of all, we don't want to pay you. So they had their own ethics blue ribbon committee, someone from the school, someone from the university, someone from the local church, and they wrote their ethics ordinance. And a week before it went to city council and said, here, City Attorney, here's our product. Please bless it. So I get to go to the ethics blue ribbon committee meeting and say, I support what you're doing, but let me give you an example of how strict this ethics ordinance is. What you've written under conflict of interest is such that if you have a custodial service come clean City Hall at night, and that custodian's spouse has a mutual fund, and in that mutual fund is Dell stock, under this code, the city could never buy a Dell computer, even if it was low bid, even if it was the only one that met the specs. And I don't see how the public interest is served in having a rule that strict. So Wimberley Small, it's got a weekly newspaper, the next week's headline in the newspaper, City Attorney Opposes Eth ics Ordinance. Did I mention I'm the former city attorney of Wimberley? That was a two year job. Now, the good news is a month ago, they hired me to come back and explain their ethics ordinance, and now I've been hired to fix it. So you got to be careful. I understand the intentions. But remember, we're here to govern. We got stuff to do. Potholes are not going to fill themselves, and you can adopt rules that are so strict that the implications of them actually is contrary to effective, efficient, budget conscious governing, and you should watch out for that. Gifts, honoraria, travel, meals, those things I touched on in the state law section, you can be silent on those. You can adopt your own rules and be more strict on them. A common one to address is outside employment. Can your people moonlight? If so, what kind of jobs? What happens if someone offers them employment and that future employer has contracts pending before the city or has permits pending before the city? What about the revolving door? You tee up a deal, you get it approved by the council, you get the financing there, the bonds there, then you resign from Denton and go to work for that entity that just benefited from all that city action. There is no state revolving door clause. There is no state moonlighting clause. I think if you're deciding whether to vote against something or recommend against something based on some job you've teed up, maybe abuse of office is going to kick in. But there's a state revolving door clause for state employees. A two-year ban on working on the issues, the projects that you worked on when you were with the state. That does not apply to cities. And so if you want to have those sorts of rules for elect eds or for staff, then you need to adopt those in your ordinance. Sure. How is that enforced? How is it enforced? Yeah, an employee or an elected person that then goes to work for a vendor, they're no longer an elected official or they're no longer an employee. How is that enforced? Sometimes what I've seen in ethics ordinances is if that kind of transaction occurs, the ethics ordinance provides that that contract is voidable. Okay. Some will say, ethics ordinances will say that just because someone leaves the city's employee or their elected position does not remove them from the jurisdiction of the ethics board, we can still deliberate and send you a letter of reprimand or public censure or whatever. That may not have as much weight as it would when you were in-house City Hall. Most folks would not like to have that out there floating around them. It makes vendors ineligible for future contracts. If you do this and you're found to have done this, two-year ban on you seeking any more work from City Hall. And so those kind of rules, other cities have adopted them, if that's a priority for us, that's how they tend to be enforced. Thanks. Sure. The next one is representation of others. Can the mayor represent himself before the City Council on a zoning change? Can a city council member represent their spouse before planning and zoning on a zoning change or board of adjustment on a variance? One of the few cases we have as a lawyer to look to is out of the City of San Marcos where it's in their ethics code that if you're on a border commission, you can't receive payment to represent anyone else in front of any border commission. And at the time they had their chair of their planning and zoning commission was a lawyer who had a private client with a matter pending before a different board in San Mar cos. The city council, when they next convened, said, well, under our ordinance, he automatically vacated his position as chair of P&Z. I make a motion to approve Bob to be the new chairperson. And oddly enough, this fellow sued. Most of my clients can't find good people to get on P&Z and he was so desperate to stay on there, he brought a lawsuit. When I went to the Court of Appeals and the Court of Appe als said, first of all, there's no property interest in a position on a city border commission. And second of all, I found that those rules were in place when he was appointed. He had a choice, abide by the city's ethics rules or don't be on a city board. And so they upheld the City of San Marcos' decision. And so I think that that's great because the thought is there should not be the benefit of insider status. You shouldn't be able to leverage your position on one city border commission to make money on another. But most ethics policies I see are full of exceptions. Let's say you can't represent others in front of the board you're on or you can't represent others on something that you have deliberated on in the past. Or maybe you can't represent someone in an action against the city, in a legal proceeding or an administrative proceeding. They're all over the place on that. So your concern about people in City Hall leveraging their positions for outside gain or leveraging it for inside advantage is something worth talking about. Similar to improper influence, which is usually worded as thou shalt not promise that you shall use your position to influence someone this way or that way. A contract, a permit, a hiring decision. You should not sell that nor should you promise it. Abuse of information that can be as broad as the examples we've had before. Future contracts, future zoning decisions, future infrastructure decisions. There are cities that have rules about, you know, the open meetings thing. I know that Denton in the past has dealt with the issue of disclosing what was said in executive session. I know how the Freedom of Information Foundation and others feel about that. But yet today there are still cities actively deliberating, putting into their code of ethics thou shalt not ever discuss what was said in executive session. And they know about the concerns about First Amendment speech and that sort of thing. But they're doing it anyway. They may never punish someone for that, but they have that rule there nonetheless. Abuse of resources, money, equipment, staff, abuse of position. I've seen more in the last couple of years than I've seen ever before. Allegations of hindrance. Someone used their position at City Hall to stop somebody else at City Hall from doing what an ordinance, a policy or a contract required them to do. Whether that's council members leaning on staff or council members leaning on council members. Disclosures. That's a common one. We can easily spend your time coming up with more requirements for more people to file more paper. And if it achieves a goal, then I'm in favor of it. If it's just additional busy work for your municipal clerk, I hope you budget to give your municipal clerk more resources because there's a lot of effort involved in those paperwork exercises and then providing that paperwork to the public. Lobbyists are seldom covered. It's kind of a minority position in an ethics ordinance, but it's a fair one to discuss. Must people who get paid to advocate interests at City Hall disclose that they're getting paid to do so? Disclose who their clients are? Disclose what their projects are? I didn't include the headline, but it was in last week's paper in Austin where the new ethics rule, City of Austin, is adopted. I'd say eight of the 12 developer lawyers that I've dealt with in the last year all said, "We're not complying. We're not going to tell you who our clients are. We're not going to tell you how much our clients paid us, and you can 't make us." If I'm sitting back, "Well, this is good stuff because I don't represent Austin. Maybe it's a bad thing I should represent Austin." I don't know how it's going to play out. I don't know what the outcome of this is going to be. But you can have reasonable rules that require lobbyists to register, make certain disclosures to you, and you can have rules. How much can they spend on taking people out to dinner or influencing them? Can they meet with you offsite or must all meetings that people are being paid to conduct take place at City Hall? Those sorts of things. The last one is really campaign finance. You can decide whether you think lobbying and campaign finance fall under the guise of ethics or not. Those could easily be freestanding rules and ordinances that you adopt at some other point. Some cities roll them all into the same thing. A different level of disclosure or a different type of disclosure from lobbyists and from candidates. Most ethics ordinances deal with complaints. Can someone shoot an email? Can you complain by text? Can a complaint be verbal? Are you going to assist in being writing? Must you promulgate a form someone must fill out? If you fill out a form, who's going to be the guardian of the form ? Is that the municipal clerk? Well, are you going to make the city secretary help people fill out forms? I've seen that in ordinances where it's the city secretary's obligation to do so. I feel very sympathetic for the city staff in that standpoint being obligated by ordinance to help someone file a complaint against that staff member's boss. But sometimes that happens. Cities get into debates whether complaints should be sworn or not. I actually prefer that they would be, but I know I'm a lawyer, so that's just the world I'm used to being in. Some say requiring an affidavit is too much pressure on the complainant. We should make it easier for people to file complaints to tip us off that our people are misbehaving. I'm open, but I tend to come down the side of sworn affidav its. It's hard to marshal all of the resources it's going to take to review a complaint if the person won't even swear to the facts that are in the complaint. A statute of limitations. I like a year, two years is far more common. Is it two years from the date they did the thing or two years from the day you became aware that they did the thing? I've seen all of those. I'll recommend a statute of limitations, in part just to cut down on your workload, but also I think there should only be so long people have to at one for things, remember things, find things, documents, evidence, memories tend to fade after time. You may want to have a statute of limitations. What's the deal with investigations? Are you going to have an individual do it? Is it an employee? Is it going to be a board member? Is it going to be some outside party that conducts investigations? Will they have subpoena power to compel witnesses to demand documents coming before them? Some ethics rules do, some ethics rules don't. What about hearings? What's the hearings going to look like? How are they structured? Most of the time the individual boards are able to come up with their own rules of procedure. There will be an opening statement, closing statement. Will there be rebuttals? Do you get to cross examine each other's witnesses? Is the lawyer for the city the lawyer for the ethics board? Those sorts of things sometimes are made up ad hoc, case by case basis. Sometimes the ethics code provides for those sorts of things. An important thing I'm going to be asking you to consider whether you want to or not is is your code going to include some sort of pre-screening or preliminary function? Sometimes you've got an 11 member board of ethics, but a panel of three of them will do a pre-screening. No open meeting, no public discussion. They just look at it and say , gosh, if everything in here is true, does it add up to something? Yes, it adds up to something. We're referring it to the board of ethics for a full-blown hearing. Nope. Even if it 's true, there's no violation of our code here dismissed and the complainant is notified and everyone else is notified. Or is it going to be a hearings officer? Or oh my gosh, is it your city attorney's office that's going to have to pre- screen things? I've seen that and it's fine if you choose that route. As a lawyer, that's a tough position for me to be in as legal advisor and advocate to my client to be pre-screening to decide, yes, the complaint against the council member goes forward. No, it doesn't go forward. And so some ethics audiences will say automatically if the complaint's against the mayor or council, it goes to special counsel for review. What level of filtering do you want to have up front to help focus on the substantive allegations and filter out the chaff? Ex parte communications, I'm going to be asking you to strongly consider that. Lawyers are familiar with this rule . We live with it all the time. But once an ethics complaint is filed, who gets to talk to the oversight body or the personnel involved? Do you get to lobby? Do you get to meet behind closed doors ? Do you get to have individual members of the board of ethics out doing their own individual investigations and research? Or do you require all communications to take place at a properly posted meeting? Well, I've seen ethics. I've represented council members in some cities where the council member's been accused and I'm legal counsel for the council member. So I'm going there as defense lawyer and I'm reading the ethics ordinance and it says no ex parte communications. And where do I get my notice of a hearing? From the chair person of the board of ethics. And who's asking for more information? The chairperson of the board of ethics. And who's the witness is talking to? The chairperson for the board of ethics. And I'm like, I can't even contact the chairperson for the board of ethics. It says no ex parte communications. So I'm just going to go ahead and send my notices to the city attorney. I'm going to send my notices to the city secretary and hope they filter to the right person because no one's accusing me of ex parte communications, not in an ethics fight. That 's terrible. Well, what rules and process are you going to have? I wish we could have no ex parte communications for board of adjustments and other bodies at City Hall, but I haven't been very successful with that one. And then we get down to the rules, the procedures, which a lot of it is very lawyerly, doesn't have to be complicated. I think the rights is an important one because I think a lot of the times the rights of the accused get forgotten. The right of someone to defend themselves. Does the accused get to make a statement, put on evidence? Does the accused get to have a lawyer? Does the lawyer get to speak? I really like those. No, the accused can have a lawyer and the lawyer can be there to advise the accused, but the lawyer doesn't get to speak. The accused can speak, but not the lawyer. Okay, again, I'm a lawyer, so I'm kind of biased on just letting lawyers talk, even if they're a gas bag, hired gun, let them do their thing and move on. But some codes of ethics don't do that sort of thing. And then you get down to sanctions. What's the hammer? A letter of notification, an admonition, ooh, a reprimand. Does that matter? It would matter to me. I don't want it brought against me. But it may not matter to some others. Does the letter come from the Board of Ethics? Does it come from a staff member? Ooh, do these things get referred to the city council at some point and you're voting on letters of reprimand to members of your own board? That gets exciting. What about a Board of Ethics issuing a reprimand to an employee? Is the city manager going to be okay with that? I've never done business with your city manager. I know a lot of city managers that are very territorial about their staffs. They want, okay, you let me know and I will go deal with my people. Recommendation for censure, a stronger form of public reprimand. What about recommendation for removal? That some employee is going to be fired, that chairperson of the Parks and Rec Commission is going to be kicked off, that sort of thing. And here's some of the penalties that I was referring to earlier. Being deemed ineligible for appointment or employment or future contracting because you crossed the line on some future instance. Is your ordinance going to provide for reconsideration? Is your ordinance going to provide for an appeal? Again, being a lawyer, I like due process, giving people notice, a right to speak, and a chance for an appeal. Well, who's the appeal to? How dedicated is that going to be? How complicated is that appeal going to be? And finally , some ordinances actually have civil penalties that could be imposed and they refer to district court if you can't collect at City Hall. And some ethics ordinances will say it's within the power of the Board of Ethics to package up the entire file at the end of their proceedings and drop it off at a prosecutor's office because they want the person prosecuted for whatever was done. They think it's some sort of a state offense. And then there's others that have clear policy statements saying we don't intend anything about our process to be criminal in nature. We don't intend for it to be used for criminal prosecution and that's not how we're going to use it. Now, again, the Texas Rangers show up and they've got a sub poena from the DA's office. Well, then they get what they get. They do with it what they want to. And along those lines, something that I've learned is to ask you to put into your ordinance some sort of safety valve for when another entity is actually investigating. If the DA has taken the matter to a grand jury, do you really want your ethics board finding someone to be guilty of violating your code of ethics? I know ethics boards that do. And these are lawyers who sit on ethics boards who say our jurisdiction is just as good as the DA and the grand jury and the district court. If you found out that the city manager has put somebody on administrative leave, probation, demotion, the city manager has handled it, should it still go forward at the Board of Ethics also? Or is it just at least it's a basis for dismissal that the matter has been dealt with by another appropriate authority with jurisdiction? So to keep things from competing within City Hall or even within the county, I think that's something I'll be suggesting that you do. It's really up to you. For me, I think it's bad. Again, I don't like to interfere with proceedings that are before criminal place, criminal jurisdictions and agencies. I've known city planners who are architects that had complaints filed against them with the Texas Board of Architecture. They're trying to defend their architectural license for the same event that's being adjudicated before a Board of Ethics. And they're hoping the Board of Ethics will just ab ate it. Let me deal with my livelihood here and then I'll come back and deal with you later. And sometimes the boards will, sometimes they won't. I'm going to recommend that you at least put that process in there. And of course you can have a process for dismissals. What do you do about frivolous complaints? How do you define them? Does it depend on the context, the timing, the relationship between the complainant and the accused? Will there be penalties for baseless complaints? I've seen city ethics ordinances that say if you're found by the Board of Ethics to file a frivolous complaint, you 're now accountable to reimburse the accused for their legal fees. That's a good one. That makes people be kind of serious about filing complaints. I imagine enforcing that is very, very difficult. There is at least one city I know of that has in their ethics code that they reserve the right to file a civil action in district court against a complainant for abuse of process, a civil tort. But they actually file an ethics complaint at City Hall, not because they were concerned about an ethical infraction , but to harass someone or to punish someone and go after them in the civil court system. I think that's kind of a rare provision, but I had to put it in there. And of course there's many of them that will say if you have a sworn complaint, and we're later convinced that you perjured yourself, either in your testimony or in your complaint, then the city will be handing that over to a prosecutor asking them to prosecute you for perjury. So that's the end of the training portion. Thank you for getting through that with me. I hope you found it helpful to set the stage, the context for what comes next. At this point, however long we continue talking is completely up to you. I was hoping to get some feedback from you, maybe some instructions. I know that the city manager's office has prepared some possibilities for what our future meeting schedule is going to be. What I had proposed was we get through this training , we set the stage, and then I come back to you with a draft ordinance with lots of options in it, and we start the process of meeting to either clarify those options, rule out some options, reinsert things that I chose not to include, and start moving kind of from a cafeteria approach. But otherwise from now on, Mayor, the meeting is yours. How would you like to proceed? I think we got started about 330, so we'll deliberate another 15-20 minutes and take a break and then come back if we still have questions. Just so that we're okay. Floor 's open to initial feedback, instruction, and then schedule. Let's try to do these from the easiest to the most difficult. Schedule future meetings. Do we have a tentative idea of that? We do. We have three options. I just want to see if we can't get this out of the way first so we have more time for substantive discussions. Mayor and Council, these are the three options that we came up with in terms of the meeting days. These are the ones that were detailed in your AIS. There certainly could be others. We were trying to have an orderly process where you would get through the drafting of the ordinance and appro ving this in the March timeframe. That's certainly subject to whatever timeline you wanted to look at, but we wanted to give you something to react to. There are several special call meetings in this schedule that we have. We had to check with Alan to see what his availability was in the council schedule. So there's several special calls and some of these are Saturday meetings as well. So just some options for you to think about and some of this will depend on how many meetings that you have. Real quick question. Where in either one of these options is the public discussion introduced? You know, we really haven't proposed one particular day where that would occur. So it could be any of those that you could have. Okay. My initial feedback on this outside of the public issue is, you know, I probably lean towards B or C. A, right at the holidays, you've got two meetings, the 16th and the 7th and the 19th of December. I think B's option is you just take out one of those and you adjust that for a couple weeks. Yes. So I'm okay with that. Or C, I mean, we want this to be expeditious, but we don't want it to be hurried. I mean, in the sense of, unless we're spending three or four hours at each one of these meetings in either option A or B. And I got to tell you after three or four hours of talking about anything, I don't know if I'm... I'll ask Allen to correct me, but I think most of the sessions would be two to three hours. The Saturday sessions would be longer, four to six hours potentially. Is that correct? Holy crap. Two to May 1. Yeah, I'm going to tell you. Four to six hours talking about this. You know, I would... If that's correct. I would probably be pounding my head on the table. I'm trying to gauge your attention after an hour and a half . Yeah, yeah. You know, that was long considering all that you've done that led up to this and you have another meeting following this. It's your schedule. You know, I could send you a draft ordinance and y'all could say, this looks beautiful. Public hearing and adoption. It's going to be how much do you want to spend digging into the details. I think two hours should be the max for any meeting. But staff said for Saturday, since we're going to do that, we may want to invest a little bit more time. I am flexible . It may go quickly. You may be very happy with your early products. You may be in unison on your choices. Well, we only have one Saturday, it looks like, in the first two options. So, I mean, we've done retreats before and taken that long. So I'm probably okay with that. I just I thought several of them would be at that four to six hours. And so what it takes is what it takes. But I don 't think that's what... Council Member Briggs. I'm okay with... No, hold on. Council Member Hesbeth. Yeah. Yeah. He, yeah, I interrupted you the first time. So I'm going to keep all this... No worries. Thank you. So for me, I'm going to back up a bit because I wasn't here. That the week kind of the initial conversation. I would have preferred a citizen body . Sure. Take a swing at this. Right. For what it's worth. Okay. Thank you. Onward upward. I agree. B or C. Hindsight probably leaning more towards C. Some scheduling conflicts, I think, in there when you get to March. But I'd have to look at it to see where we fall and then evaluate the dates formally. For me, and also I may be on the outside looking in, but I don't want to a draft in advance because I think what that does is it again further excludes citizen input, kind of. I don't mean that succinctly, but I mean kind of. And so for someone to vote 80% for something, I think we, I think I would prefer a framework. Hey, here's the ingredients and let us kind of craft what that is and then start fixing it versus a wholesale accus ation that hey, he put it together. We didn't have any say so we voted 80% for this and we get some pre-baked cake mix that is not sensitive to what we need. I don't know that that's going to be the case, but that outside looking in, that side does come to mind. If he puts something together that based on his experience, it just, to me, it loses its uniqueness. And that could be, I could be absolutely wrong in that. That's just my thought. Okay. I'm sorry, Council Member Briggs. I'm okay with option B. Mayor Pro Tem. I'm okay with B. I think I would prefer C though just because it gives people more time to know that we're working on the ethics ordinance. Sometimes, I think if we go too fast, people miss it, and they didn't, you know, they don't feel like they had an opportunity to really know what was happening. So, I'm okay with either but I think I'd prefer C. I'm more interested in B. I'm not interested in the Wednesday meeting. I could do, we could do B with another Saturday meeting. I too would prefer that this be done by a group of citizens , but on the other hand, and I've made that recommendation but I'm fine to go with that. I'm doing it. And we have had some citizen input because we had input from the bond, not the bond committee, the Charter Review Committee. What I would like to see in option B, or a modification of option B if we had to add a meeting or, you know, down at the end, is, I think before that we would have a draft from you. I think it would be helpful to have a meeting, a public meeting where any citizen that wanted to come and speak to say, I think that you need to include this, I think that you don't need to include that. I think getting that input earlier rather than later might be helpful. Have you had experience with that? Is it better to get feedback from, you know, some input from citizens super early in the process or for them to simply react to the draft? I've seen both. You know, the draft that I would provide would have most of the main ingredients you commonly find in the better ordin ances with lots of clearly delineated choices, examples, and you'd have to choose this, no, not that, and we'd go about that way. I can certainly present more of an instrument that doesn't have the answers, it just has the questions. To me, it's a question of about timing. The schedule was prepared by city management staff using my availability dates and your dates. In part, my understanding was there was a sense of urgency that sooner is better than later. And so to me, if moving things along at a deliberate pace is a priority, then having the public respond to a draft is quicker than kind of crowdsourcing the drafting of a document. I've seen it go both ways. It's not that different than any other ordinance. I've also found that just because someone may not have commented before a draft is presented doesn't mean they don 't have a say. They still email and phone call and those emails and phone calls get sent to me, and I flagged them and say, okay, well, there's obviously a concern for this. I'll raise it as a question at our next meeting. And so I'm definitely in favor of public input, but how that input looks, how you facilitate it, and what kind of schedule we follow is completely up to the council. Follow up. Yeah, then. Yeah, to follow up on that I think maybe one of the things that we could do is have some type of a system where on our city website, there's a link. And, and if there are people that want to give input that may not be able to make any meeting that they could do that and that that information would go to somebody on staff or go directly to our consultant. I think that would be helpful. I would say it. I'll be interested to see what your what your notion of a better ordinances are a good ordinance in the draft. I'm a little bit concerned that you called San Antonio the gold standard because we had talked about San Antonio's ordinance once before and I read it. I'm not a lawyer, but it looked to me like that the accused was, you know, or somebody that had charges brought against him. There were objections on their part. And that concerns me about that ordinance. In addition to the how, how detailed, it was on a lot of the procedural issues. That that concerns me that that may be what you consider a gold standard, I want to make sure that anybody who's accused of something has an opportunity for the due process rights that are afforded to them by the federal Constitution. Oh, sure. And I'll say it again I think that the San Antonio ordinance is widely regarded as the gold standard. Okay, it's not something I would ever hold out as a model. I think that even some of the folks that worked on the ordinance would characterize it as being more criminal and punitive nature. And it's definitely bureaucratic and complicated, that's the word, which makes it difficult and expensive to administer. Right. And so I think it's thorough. I think it's very well worded, but it's definitely slanted more toward that prosecutorial style of writing. I would never say that's the model, but most people point to it in this industry. So in our backup, it has a timeline of the meetings and what would be discussed and on the timeline it's that number four meeting number four so I guess today's the fifth and so that's the first number four is the review in the public hearing. So that is the suggested time to bring in the public set in our backup. And so, in between now and then, if we did have a draft ordinance that could be put online maybe with comments ahead of time, and so we can involve them at the same time as we are discussing it in our next couple of meetings, was that was that the thought. It is and there's nothing carbon stone about that I was asked for some ideas about a process that would allow us to move this along at a steady pace. And that's what I came up with because if the city council is going to be the ones drafting this, and it's going to be the city council, providing the primary guidance on what choices are reflected in the document. Then, I would rather have something put together that looks like it's got some cohesion to it. Before we start solic iting public feedback that's normally the way regulations are made. And the city council is a representative body. It's not as though staff wrote this and dumped it on the city council. But if you want public hearings at every meeting, you're, you're allowed to do that. If you want every draft provided, it's online and solic iting public feedback. I have no objection to that. That's going to add a lot more to the process. That's okay with me. And I think the idea, if I can, I think the idea when that was initially contemplated was it's easier. I've been through this a couple of times as well and it's easier for the public to respond to something where there's context to it, to the situations, which I think Mr. Borquez is trying to get across. He's not trying to write the ordinance, but once, once the various sections are put together, the policy questions are there. It's much easier for all of you to spend your time debating the philosophical issues and rather than dealing with some of the technical requirements of the type of an ordinance. Our idea was to try to break this down into two or three different times where, you know, we might be able to go in with the first several sections of an ordinance, obtain some feedback, provide that feedback to the council, have you kick off the next meeting, kicking that around, and then get on with the next two or three different sections of the ordinance. So it was just a way to do it in an orderly fashion. If you want it done in a different way, that's fine too. We're happy to do it, but it's going to be much more useful, I think, to the council and the public to have the topics of discussion, the sections under consideration, the context to obtain their feedback. Thank you. I think I would prefer option C. Option A does not even meet with my schedule right now. I'd be all right with B, but I think with C, I'm not opposed to the Saturday, but thinking of a four to six hour meeting, I know how this body gets after four to six hours on the same Sunday. Why are you looking at me when you say that? We apologize for putting that up there. We'll keep it to two or three hours at the most. But again, it's just trying to according to everybody's schedules. We've heard you, it won't be four to six hours. Let me make this observation because we've got some B's, some C's. If we added one more meeting to B, we're literally only one meeting short of C. So Dalton had talked about, well, if we added another meeting. So it doesn't matter to me. I mean, I think, I'm not sure where the sense of urgency came from as far as that we got, but this is not something that I want to plow through and just because to me haste makes waste. And this is probably one of the most important things that this body in the last many years will have to craft. And I want to make sure that it's done in a way that encourages people to run, doesn't make everybody try to use it as a tool for harassment or revenge or some political. That's my beef against San Antonio. Every time there's an election, nearly every one of the candidates has an ethics complaint filed against them for lots of various reasons. So this is a very, very important ordinance that's going to last this, this city into many, many years of the future. So to take a couple of extra, you know, two or three weeks to do it. I'm okay with that because it provides more opportunity for the public. And I think it is. I don't know what you mean by draft. I mean, I understand what I think. I think what you thought it meant by draft. What I perceive your meeting draft is here's some basic outline components of these are the major questions that I, that you believe and you're recommending address these specific questions in an ordinance. And so you'll have sort of the basic, and then you'll have all the different iterations that at least you can think of and that doesn't limit it to them that we can have a choice of, and the public can have a choice of because if I don't know every option there is out there, I can guarantee you that people out in the public, they'll have their few that they have an interest in. And if we take up specific topics, it's a specific meetings , people aren't going to be interested in every, every subt opics some of them may be interested in the whole thing. So, I think we need to have some beginning structure I look at it as a building with a steel structure. We're going to fill in the, the elevations we're going to fill in the outside the facades, and then put on the ins ides. And that's where I want the public to have, you know, as much opportunity as they desire to, to weigh in. But if we start from zero. If people come to talk. I don't know if there's gonna be enough structure for them to even know I mean it's going to be so hodgepodge that it 's. And so, however we can develop that structure that that alleviates your fears of, we don't, because I know what you 're talking about that is, we've already decided on this, or this is what we're in, and it almost draws a boundary around it. It almost says here's the, here's the perimeters and the boundaries and I don't want to communicate that could communicate that message at all. So however we can work that out. I'm going to leave that up to you and your expertise based upon this input to help us craft something that our interests are, you know, public awareness and input availability of whatever it is to view that is that is viewable and timeliness that produces an efficient process, but not a hasty process . So, those are just my thoughts, my, my definition of a draft in this could otherwise be characterized as as a as a working document. It's a shell. It's got options it's got choices. I will keep Councilman Hudson's concerns in mind, in terms of not putting too much specificity, but it gives a framework within which to have this conversation, because we're actually moving toward a finished product and unknown product, which is a document. Yep. Okay. So, is option C okay, just as that's structured. I mean can we option C as far as the timing and the meetings. I mean if we have to miss it somebody's got to miss a meeting that they just got to miss a meeting, I mean, you know, we can work around that. There are no Saturdays. If we need to think we need to spend more time, we do need to begin to think about at what point. We could either either have public comment each one of these meetings, we could pick, you know, and I'm not saying we have to do that today but take a look at your backup and begin to think about the public portion of this. Where do we want it to begin. Yes, Mayor pro tem question for legal. So at our work sessions, we can't have public comment on items that are on the agenda. Correct, except for clarification. Yeah, the public comment section and work sessions is for items on consent agenda. That's right. Okay. So, would it be possible to alter that just for the purposes of the ethics work sessions. You have in the council rules of procedure if they're if a majority of the council wishes to dispense with the with the rules, then they can do so for specific for specific reason. Yes. Okay, that would be my suggestion is not in lieu of the Saturday meetings about that. Not in lieu of the Saturday meetings or the public meetings but to open up each of our work sessions to public comment, we can have a delineated time and a procedure for speakers to sign up and or something something. Yeah, no, no, I think that's, I think that's fine. Yes. Thank you. Well, if we decided to go with option see what I would suggest is maybe instead of the Wednesday meeting on the 17 th that we have that on the 13th. I thought that it was a good idea to have at least one Saturday meeting so that if there are people who simply don 't have are not able to attend a meeting and they would like to Saturday I think gives them a good. You're saying just substitute 117 for 113. Make that a Saturday on the third to 113. Yeah, right, and move it ahead of the okay. Yes. I think that's a holiday weekend so I don't know if that makes a difference. The 13th. I think so. Okay, yeah. So that wouldn't be a good weekend. Maybe the following or that that next Saturday would be the 17th 18th the 20th. If we change the 17th to the 20th on a Saturday. Oh, I'm sorry, what happened. Oh, sure. It's a Saturday. I do become the I'm kidding you. I'm kidding you. So, if that's an option. Yeah, yeah. And if not, we'll figure something else out, because I think you are right I think we do need to have a opportunity for that. And maybe an opportunity to have a longer deliberation. So, but I don't think that, I mean if we could finish it in fewer meetings, I would be okay with that. Well, I would too I just, I want that to be the public. And the council's option instead of saying we're under the gun, and we've got to get this done. Okay, any other comments on the date. The meetings. Yes, yes sir. Well quick, I'm going to, I'm going to be biased and say the embassy sweets opens, January 18, so if we do it after that we could keep it in the family and have it have it one of their breakout room, you don't have any stock or anything and not okay just checking. Home cooking taste. I'm teasing you, I'm teasing you obviously, given the context of the conversation. Yes. I like that idea but we probably would like those meetings broadcast live stream so that would prohibit us from doing. Okay, so direction on the option C and then if there's an option available for the 13th that's fine if not, we'll keep it like this and we'll just need to figure out the, the public portion. And let's make a commitment to count that on the 19th will have that figured out the public part, you know when how, and those kind of things because we got one two three we got seven or eight meetings there so we'll have plenty of opportunity. Okay, so we got, we got now we'll go back to, I'm sorry Mary protein. And the work session rules. Yeah, of course yes that's part of it yes, yeah, that. You need a break. Okay, let's take about a five minute break. Yep. Then we'll come back to the, and plus dinner, I believe is ready so you might be thinking about that I'm not sure you know how much more discussion we have on this it could go another 30 minutes another hour another 10 minutes so our meeting starts at 6 30. All right, let's take. All right, want to welcome you back to this meeting of the Denton City Council on Tuesday, December the fourth. It is 637 we are on work session agenda agenda item three. Yes, three F sort of wrapping up the discussion. A couple more points to talk about so welcome back. Thank you. Thank you Mayor Council. Part of what I prepared for today was just an opportunity for you to give me some initial feedback on what you would like to see me bring forward in terms of a working document , or a very rough draft. You gave me a little bit of feedback before the break in terms of not being too specific not being too close to done . And I got that. One thing I'll point out in terms of a question. I'm going to have a comprehensive ethics ordinance that covers everything thoroughly from the outset. And I put it to you because I think it's kind of rare to have ordinances that do that they usually start off fairly modest, simple straightforward, easy to administer easy to understand. And then over time they're reviewed okay every year we will review it every two years, as we get some experience with doing something, it gets expanded. And of course I can help you get to whichever result you want to. I know from having talked to the various attorneys for example in San Antonio, that what we see now wasn't always the ordinance, it was expanded, added to modified over time . And I don't know what didn't is ready for. And so I trust you to give me that sort of feedback and guidance as we go along. Otherwise, I'm going to assume comprehensive covering everyone on everything and leave it to you to rule that out as we go. The comprehensive sections that you talked about in your presentation. It seems to me without looking back at it, that it covers all of the bullet points that the Charter Review Committee had recommended to counsel, am I accurate in that you've seen yes all those issues were addressed, okay, one bullet or another, because I want to make sure that all of those issues are addressed for sure. Yes, sir. So if we were to start with the most comprehensive version, could we kind of fill, winnow it down I guess? Yes. That's my concern of starting with something less than a comprehensive version because I don't know what's not in there. And that's one reason why I at least provided the bullets. I wanted you to see at least some of the topics that were covered. You know, a great example is, are you wanting to get into campaign finance this time around? Are you wanting to get into lobbyists this time around? Do you want rules that apply to even volunteer advisory board members or just to employees and electeds? Those are the kind of choices you can make at the front end that defines how broad of a scope it has initially. And if you want it all, then I will bring forward some options for you on all the things that I've identified. Otherwise, you start with a more modest set of policies. It 's better than what you had, but not as complex as maybe something like San Antonio has. For me, the primary thought was -- oh, thank you. The primary thought was when we had this conversation as a body, we all hovered around what the review commission would look like, where do we pool those resources, what's their day job, that sort of thing. So I'm like, that's the kind of a key area I think we're going to have a lot of discussion about. And I know it seemed like there was some tension there as far as, hey, what's everyone's pain threshold? So I'd love to ask you to focus or provide additional information or a breadth of information about what you see as a means to source that body. Here's three, four, five, six different options. Here's how you -- here's their day job. Here's how they can -- because that's important, I think, that everyone hears that someone can hear it down the middle and has practice and expertise in that regard. But not that they're a salary -- it's not a salary position . Just when it comes up, where do we pull that from? So options for that body is important for me. And I was elated to hear you touch on the preview side of things because I think that is -- I mean, I think we need that across the board in a lot of different areas. But I was absolutely elated to hear you say that because I 'm in agreement with you that that's absolutely a must. So thank you. You bet. I would like to make sure that it covers, of course, elected body employees and boards and commissions. I am in favor of starting out with something larger and working our way to it because this is my first ethics ordinance to ever work on. So I'm not sure of what we would be leaving out or anything . So the more options and the more that I have to see to start from, the more comfortable I would feel personally. And I have a question on number six. It says appointments. City Council appoints members to the oversight board. Is this oversight board the board that we are discussing that -- is that the oversight board that sees the ethics ordinance? Sure. That's just the term that I use because there's so many other terms out there. Board of ethics, ethics commission, ethics review commission. Different cities call it something else. So I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. I'm not sure if that's the right word. The structure of the subjects in the A to Z, because in that process we're probably going to pair -- we're not going to say. We want Z of every subject that you've presented, which some you would recommend and some you would not recommend. Certainly. And I don't even know how you include everything that could possibly come up, but you've done this for a long time. Obviously you're well versed in this. You're an expert in this. So I think -- I feel confident you'll be able to take our feedback and craft something that not only meets the spirit of what we'd like, but would probably be something that we're -- we don't even -- you don't know what you don't know. Certainly. Whereas you do know. And I think what I'm hearing is broader is better. Let us and the public sort of narrow it down, and we'll probably wind up at a -- somewhere between modest and very comprehensive based upon our city and sort of what needs we have. Is that, Council, is that sort of how you hear it? Is that -- okay. All right. Great. Any other feedback at this point? Any other feedback? So then the next meeting is on the 19th, I think. Is that right? And so that will consist of -- what do we anticipate will be just in general -- can we talk about that? Because we're talking about schedule of days. Can we talk about the -- so your thought is that the next meeting should be basically -- what? What I conceived of is that you will be presented with a document for that meeting that's a skeletal outline of what the ordinance would look like with the most common subject matters included and a few options or editorial comments under each so that you can start going through the process of making those choices. Yes. Councilmember -- I mean Mayor Proctor. That's okay. Can we get the proposal well before the meeting or at least in our Friday packet or something? That was my plan, depending on what feedback I got today, to have you something for your packets. All right. Okay. All right. And so that would be available to the public through just a normal course of our agenda postings. All right. Okay. Any other feedback, questions? Very good. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you for your service to the Charter Committee. I appreciate the rave reviews about your presentation. And so thank you. I'm glad to have you on board helping us. Appreciate that. Thank you very much. Okay. Well, great. That concludes our work sessions. I do not see any closed sessions posted. We do not have any closed sessions. So we will now adjourn the work session portion of our City Council meeting at 4 -- I'm sorry, 547. And reconvene in the Council Chambers at 630 where we will begin our regularly scheduled meeting. Thank you. [ Applause ] [ Silence ] [ Silence ] [ Silence ] Good evening, everyone. I wanted to welcome you to this meeting of the Denton City Council on December 4, 2017. It's about 633. We'll go through our agenda. The first is Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas Flag. So please stand with me if you're able. [ Applause ] [ Silence ] [ Applause ] >> Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [ Applause ] Okay, we've got a proclamation for Police Appreciation Day. So all who want to come forward and celebrate with us, we have some police officers down here. We've got the Denton Citizens Police Academy. So we welcome you all to come down because we certainly appreciate and thank you for your service to our community. Huh? Yeah, I don't know. Well, I'm not even going to say it. I'm not going to say it. They're trying to get me to restrict this to simply Denton PD and -- oh, I'm sorry, that's right. That's okay, man. That's okay. That's not my idea. That's not my idea. I'm just teasing you. Okay, okay. Okay. Well, and you know what? I do want to take the time to have everybody introduce themselves and tell us what you do and for the officers here, sort of your rank and so forth. So we're going to -- we're going to start with you. Hello. I'm Hino, retired Denton Police Officer for 30 years, and I work for the Denton County Sheriff's Office. Hey, quite a caution. I'm Keith Smith. I'm an investigator with Internal Affairs with Denton Police Department, 30 years. Brandon Reiner, Denton PD in the Training Division, I have 18 years. Otis Hopkins, retired defense contractor, volunteer to support the community. And Mike Isch, she retired, and I help the police. I'm Alyssa Grissom, and I function as the Vice President of Communications for the CPAAA. I'm Wayne Grissom, I'm a police volunteer. I'm Peggy Perot, and my husband and I and Emma Perry were in the first class in '95, 1995. And we invite all of you from Denton to take the course. Denton Police Department is a great, great group of people. They work hard for us, and we have this party every year. It's just once a year. So donate if somebody asks you, and just not say no to them . And I'm Emma Perry. I'm with the CPAAA, and Peggy just introduced me. Kathy Massey, I'm a volunteer with this wonderful group who will have a great party this year. Y'all should come visit us. I'm Jim Perot. I'm retired from University of North Texas. When you hear about a party, this party starts at 6.30 in the morning, and it goes till midnight. So it's quite a party. I'm Vern Bassett, and I volunteer with the Police Academy, and I just do what I'm told. Hi, I'm Mary Beth Cottingham, and I'm a volunteer with Dent on Police Department. Debbie Ische, volunteer with the CPAAA. Clary Sluse, volunteer with the CPAAA. And Peggy and Jim and Emma started the whole party. So Rodney Schutz, volunteer with the Denton Police Department. I'm Susan Kieltsen. I'm the record supervisor, and I got 32 years with the Police Department. And I love these parties, they're awesome. Donna Golden, records, three and a half years. I'm Larry Luce. I'm a retired person, and I'm a volunteer for the Police Department. Hi, I'm Eddie Hilden. I'm a retired person and volunteer with the Police Department. Volunteer of a fought career, so welcome here. I'm glad to be home. I'm Bob Summers, personnel training, 44 years and some change. I'm Deputy Chief Roger White, and I'm just a rookie. I've only been here 33 years, so. My name is Eric Beckwith, and I work in investigations in the Crimes Against Children Unit, and I've been at Denton PD for 15 years. Detective Brandon Hoban, an investigator with Financial Cr imes, 21 years. I'm Chris Summit, I'm a lieutenant over criminal investigations, 22 years. Let's give them all another round of applause. Thank you all so much. Thank you so much for your service to our community. Thank you for the Denton Police Academy, Citizens Academy. I was sharing that my niece went through that program when she was in college. And she's now a police officer at the City of Plano. She would have been here, but I may or so, I can't do that. We just learned about that today in ethics. So it's with great honor and pride that I read this pro clamation. I want you to notice the tenure that we have here. I mean, obviously, these people love this community and they've served this community with their heart and with their lives, quite frankly. So thank you again for serving and helping us to be more safe. This is a proclamation by the mayor of the City of Denton, whereas the City of Denton's Police Department has 176 dedicated police officers, administrators and staff who daily serve our citizens. And whereas the upcoming holiday season will call for added efforts on the part of our police department that result in greater safety of our city . And whereas the Citizens Police Academy alumni has chosen the date of, put this on your calendars, December the 14th, 2017 to honor the police department with a day long reception of appreciation. Now therefore, I, Chris Watts, Mayor of the City of Denton, Texas, do hereby declare and proclaim December 14th, 2017 as Police Appreciation Day here in the City of Denton and urge my fellow citizens to show their support, appreciation to all the men and women in this community who have dedicated their lives to the field of law enforcement. And I need to, where is it going to be? Where is, at the police department in the training center. I've attended several of these. Come by. Number one, there's great food and there's great fellowship and conversation. And so come by and just let these men and women know that you really appreciate their service to our community. So thank you all very much again. And oh, sorry. And Dr. Perot is how I know him, so he's not going to appreciate this, but he was the director, he was the, was that the Dean of, Chair of the Computer Science Department when I was at UNT. So had some classes under him, very wonderful instructor. And thank you so much for your service to the students and your service to our community. Thank you. You bet. Thank you. a couple of times. Okay we'll move on to our next portion of the presentation, or I'm sorry, the agenda, which is agenda item three, presentation from members of the public. If we could review the procedures for addressing the city council. The Denton City Council has adopted rules of procedure, including a code of conduct, which applies to citizens as well as council members. These rules were enacted to promote an orderly process and to preserve decorum. Here is a brief review of the rules that apply to citizens reports. Citizens will have four minutes to give a report. There will be an electronic beep when time has expired. If the remarks are not concluded by that time, the citizen will be asked to stop speaking. If the citizen does not cease and a second request is made, the mayor will request to have the citizen removed from the council chambers. Citizens are asked to not approach the dais. If a citizen has papers or other materials to hand out to the council, please let the city secretary know and she will have a staff member distribute the materials to the council. The attorney general has ruled that council members may listen to citizens speak and may ask questions of citizens for clarification of the issue. Council members will not engage citizens in discussion of a topic because to do so could potentially be a violation of the open meetings act. When speaking to the council, citizens are to direct all remarks and questions to the council as a whole and not to any individual member. Please refrain from making abusive, personal, impertinent, profane or slanderous remarks. Anyone who violates this rule will immediately be removed from the council chambers. Citizens' adherence to these rules will help make an effective presentation and will preserve the order and decorum of our proceedings. Copies of the rules of procedure are available from the city secretary. Okay, our first speaker will be Mr. Robert Donnelly regarding city ethics. State your name and address and your time will begin. My name is Robert Donnelly. I live at 3900 Quail Creek Road, Denton, Texas. As you all start considering an ethics ordinance, I would ask that you please, please not confuse legal with ethical. Certainly you have to do everything legally, but you also should do things ethically. Last month, you all had to do what probably every government agency hates to do because it's the most important thing you do and that you had to take private property away from the citizens. In the first case, it was a foreclosure where the people that owned the property had passed away and you all had a lien. From what I saw of the council meeting, it was done quite well. Meetings were held. It took a year. Different departments met. Some council people I think met with families. You even got their church involved. I believe the mayor even said he tried to get hold of theirs through email and phone calls and letters. You hate to do it, but it had to be done and it was done right. That was a property where it was even a vacant property. In the second case, you posted an agenda on Friday morning for a special call session on Monday morning. There was no contact with the property owner, no information. It is an occupied piece of property. You're putting the property owner out of a place they've lived for 20 years. I'm sure both were legal, but only one was ethical. I don't know what to say, but the first case showed you know how you're supposed to do it. The second case I guess shows that yes, we do need an ordinance because you only do it some of the time. I don't know why one foreclosure gets a year and lots of meetings and an eminent domain gets 72 hours and it's done. I don't know. Only y'all can answer that. Please, just as you work towards this ordinance, understand that both may have been legal, but only one was done ethically and that you need to be ethical with all the residents of the city of Denton. Any questions? Thank you, Mr. Nuland. Appreciate that. Thank you. All right. This brings us to our portion of the agenda item 3C, which is commonly referred to as the open mic. It's limited to two speakers and they need to fill out a blue card prior to the calling of the agenda item and that has been done. It's also a four minute time limit, so we will proceed on with that agenda item. The first speaker is Mr. David Zoltner. If you'll come down and state your – oh, wait. Is that right? Yeah. Is that right? Did you want to talk open mic? That's where they put – no, no. Okay. If somebody mislabeled the card, I apologize. Thank you. So we only have one speaker, Mr. Willie Hutsbeth. If you'll come down and state your name and address. I might add the best speaker. Okay. Three things. There's only been two African American or black firefighters in this city – city's history. Still troubles me to this day. But I must say the presentation that was presented before Thanksgiving was the best I've seen and I think the most informative. I think I have hope now that we're going to find a solution to whatever the problem is having to do with more African American firefighters. Another thing I noticed is I learned during the presentation the Hispanic population has more people applying and getting to pass a certain point and they're treated worse than you're treating my race. Nothing needs to be done about that. The – Mr. Sanchez and I are putting our heads together to figure out what we can do to help that – move that process along and make sure it's fair and everybody gets treated equally in that situation. Secondly, the Confederate monument here in town is something that I've said to you before. You need to address. You're the city of Denton representative or you represent us. The statue is in the city of Denton. You cannot or you should not sit here and have not one comment about that. I'm not sure why you're not commenting. The comment I'm looking for that would help me is some kind of statement saying what you think about the Confederate monument on the square. Say something. It's offensive to me. It reminds me of how I was treated as a young man in Fort Worth, Texas. It reminds me of how I was treated when I moved here, came out of the Vietnam experience and attended college here and how I was treated here even in housing and other things and why I was treated that way. The only thing I can figure is the color of my skin, but I 'm not sure and I've learned that over the years to quit judging people on the basis of what I look at them or how they look and what I hear them say or any of that, certain things, but I've learned it. You need to say something as a council. What is your thoughts about that monument? Do you, well pro or con? You say that. You're pro for it being there or con. Say something. Thirdly, dealing with that monument. I want to make sure it's on record what I'm going to say to you. I want to make sure that you heard me say it before something happens. I've talked to the county and I'm going to talk to them again and I'm going to talk to you again as well. It's leaning. Since we've been measuring the lean, it has leaned even further from before Thanksgiving to now. One real small, it's a small measurement, but it's leaning toward the south appropriately enough. It's falling down to the south. Anyway, it's leaning. Who's responsible for that monument? No one's claiming the sidewalks. County says not their problem with the sidewalks. You said the sidewalks are not your problem. On record, I'm saying to you, it's leaning. Who's responsible for it? When it falls, then we'll go into what you will be responding when that happens, but it's starting to fall and you've been notified of it and you've done nothing. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Husband. We'll go on to a consent agenda. Agenda item four. Chair would entertain a motion on the consent agenda items. I believe we've got some that have been pulled as well. Council member Gregory. Okay. I think I have this right. I move approval of the consent agenda except for items F, J and K, which are being pulled. Okay. It's my understanding that item, I believe it's J, is just being pulled off the agenda altogether, so we're not going to be considering that for approval. Agenda item four J is not slated for action this evening. Okay. Mayor Pro Tem. Second. All right. We have a motion for approval of the consent agenda. Item save agenda item four F and agenda item four K, which will be considered under items for individual consideration. Let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries six zero. We will now take up agenda items for F and four K as items for individual consideration. Some of them, I'm not sure if they both have staff presentation or just ... Okay. We do have public comment. A card that's been filled out, so I'll call agenda item four F will be the first agenda item. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending chapter 18 of the code of ordinance to revise the speed limit along West University Drive from Bonnebrae Street to Locust Street or US 377 at the expedited request of the Texas Department of Transportation. I guess I have one question if there is a staff member here . What is it being revised from and to? Do we know the answer to that question? Okay. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. My name is Pre Tem Deshmukh. I'm the traffic engineer for the city and the current speed limit for that particular segment of 380 is 35 miles an hour and it's been revised to 40 miles an hour. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. We got a public speaker, Mr. Willie Hutsmith. If you'll come down and state your name and address, your time will begin for agenda item four F. Yes. My name is Willie Hutsmith. I live at 623 Newton. I'm not real clear as to which part of 377 that this is. I'm not sure before I make my comment. Tim, if you could maybe just share with us what the alignment is as far as the speed limit request modification. The alignment for US 380 is between Bonnie Bray, which is on the west side, to US 77. If you look at the map, US 77 comprises of one-way couplets , which is Elm Street and Locust. We're going all the way to Locust. Thank you. That clarifies it for me. I thought it was towards the south where there's more housing, but I know what you're talking about now, so I have no comment. Okay. Thank you, sir. All right. We have no more public comments or cards. Blue cards filled out to speak. Council Member Gregory. I move approval of item F. Council Member Hutsmith. Second. We have a motion and a second for agenda item four F. Let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries five one. We'll move on to agenda item 4K, item for individual consideration, considered option of an ordinance of the city manager to execute a professional services agreement for contract administration services, providing for the expenditure and funds thereof. Who pulled this one? I pulled it. Would you like a staff presentation on that? Well, I pulled it in an effort of transparency so that the citizens could see what we were doing in the meantime while we were searching for an auditor. Okay. Staff ready for just a brief presentation on that to share some of the factual background? Yes, sir. Mayor and Council Brian Langley, Deputy City Manager. The purpose of this item is to hire the firm of Crawford and Associates to do a contract administration audit. As you mentioned, the internal auditor left the city earlier, but there was an audit plan that was approved by the city council. This is to still advance that audit plan and to take care of one of the audits that we think are one of the more high profile audits where we would have a lot of value in the city to get the results from this. The purpose of this is to hire this firm, have them conduct the audit, bring those results back to the city council, and then have us implement the changes recommended. Okay. Thank you. Any questions? All right. Thank you. We do have a comment card wishing to speak. Mr. Willie Hutspeth on agenda item 4K. Thank you, Mayor. My name is Willie Hutspeth. I live in 623 Newton. My only concern about this item is that for several years we've been working, me and some of the other people who have been following the management and the activities of the city, we're very concerned that the auditor is someone that is going to truly perform an audit the way it should be done, which is without any interference by those who he or she is auditing. So my concern is that how is this person vetted? There was no interview. There was no, I'm not sure, none that I know of, that the same procedures that were performed when we got the auditor before were done. So who actually hired this person? Was it the city council who interviewed and then brought this person in? And again, my concern is we had lots of problems with the procedure that was taking place before they came. And we also have problems with what's happening in the city with the money and the things, the operation of the city and the way things are handled. I would just like to know how that person was interviewed and chosen other than a consent agenda. It seems like if you received a recommendation and now you 're putting it on this consent agenda area and nothing was really looked at to make sure it was the type of person that I think would be a good person for the job. So I guess I just would like to know how that was done if you can answer that. - Thank you. - Councilmember Briggs. - Can we have staff respond to that? - This is not an employee. It's a contract for services for a specific audit engagement. This is a firm that has a lot of municipal experience. We did not do any type of request for proposals for this particular service. We talked to some other cities in the area that had used Crawford and Associates, in particular the city of Carrollton. They've been very pleased with the results of this firm. And so we wanted to bring them in to perform this audit for us to give us a completely outside and independent opinion on contract administration. So that's how they were selected and how they're being brought forward for you for consideration. - Any other questions? All right, seeing none. Mayor Pro Tem. - Move for approval of item K. - Councilmember Hussbett. - Second. - All right, we have a motion and a second. Let's vote on the board, please. Agenda item 4K passes 6-0. Move on to agenda item five, items for individual consideration, consideration of the use of them in a domain. Agenda item 5A, considered option of an ordinance of the city of Denton, finding that a public use of necessity exists to acquire a permanent easement covering a 0.023 acre tract of land situated in the Eugene Puchowski survey. That's always difficult to say. - Good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers. I'm Brent Heath, Executive Manager for Energy Delivery. We're here tonight to discuss a tract of land on the Hick ory to Locust transmission line, the SPTT extract. The executive summary for our CFP program is that we do have a system growth and agent infrastructure problem that's been identified. We have responsibility to respond. We have a public involvement process to solicit citizen input, and we consider all practical options. As a brief reminder, we do have some external agencies that we also deal with, FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, NERC, the North American Reliability Corporation, Texas Reliability Entity, the Public Utility Commission of Texas, and ERCOT. Now specifically to this tract in question, this is a one- line system map of the electrical system in Denton. North is up in order to help orient yourself on this map. This would be the Interstate 35. This is the Merge 35W and 35E. The segment of transmission line that is in question is between the Hickory substation and Locust substation, and it's the section here along Stella Avenue, shown in the clouded blue. To give you a brief history of this project, we will be rebuilding an existing 69KV transmission line essentially in place along the south side of Stella Street. We sent a legal briefing to City Council back on September the 16th, 2016. We had the property appraised for this easement. The easement portion, a very small portion appraised at $12 ,980. We sent out an initial offer letter in that same appraised amount on May the 11th of this year. Then in December the 1st, we sent a final offer letter for the exact same appraisal amount. You may note there's a few months difference between the initial and final offer. That was due because we had a signed MOU that we thought was going to work through, but through a bank subordination, we determined we needed to deposit these funds into the registry of the court. The location map of where this project is at, once again the interstate, Interstate 35 and E, Stella Avenue and Avenue G. Zooming in just a little bit shows you the specific tract in question shown by the yellow box, the red portion, the parking lot on the south side of the street is the section of easement that we are acquiring. This is where I've been instructed by legal to stop, let you all discuss, and then upon receiving favorable motion by council, I will proceed and show the legal briefing for this property. - We do have a public comment wishing to speak, so we'll take council questions and then we'll move on to the public comment and then move on to the motion. Council Member Briggs. - Have all the other easements been acquired? This is the last part. - This is one of the segments on Stella. We did come to you in July and August for several other possible eminent domain. Some of those are proceeding, some of them are hitting some roadblocks, but we do try to give each of these options the best ability and chance of trying to clear without having to go to the special commissioner's court. This will not be the last one, it's just one of them here that we thought we had solved, but we didn't. - We did, thank you. - Uh-huh. - Okay, we have a blue card wishing to speak, Mr. Willie Hudspeth, which doesn't wish to speak. So I guess we take the motion first and as there, or does he still have staff presentation? You ready for the motion and then the displaying of the survey? - If it is a pleasure to counsel, yes. - Yes, thank you. Mayor Pro Tem. - Thank you, Mayor. I move that the City of Denton, after having made the offers required by state law, use the power of eminent domain if needed to acquire a permanent electric utility easement on a 0.023 acre tract of land, as situated in the Eugene Pyszals ki survey. Abstract number 996, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, and now being displayed on the overhead screen and being described in Exhibits A and B to the ordinance under consideration, all of which is for a valid public use, necessary to provide the expansion, construction, maintenance, operation, and improvement of electric transmission lines relating to the Hickory to Locust transmission line, a project to serve the public and the citizens of City of Denton, Texas. - Council Member Gregory. - Second. - We have a motion to second. Mr. City Attorney, has the survey been displayed sufficient time to take action on that motion? Any other staff presentation? - That is it. - All right, I see no questions. Let's vote on the board before we have a motion to second for agenda item 5A. Motion carries 6-0. Moving on to the next agenda item, agenda item 6, which are items for individual consideration. Agenda item 6A, consider approval of a resolution casting votes for membership to the board of directors of the Denton Central Prezl District and declare an effective date. We have a couple of speakers on this too as well. So once staff presentation concludes, we'll take public comment. Mayor Chuck Springer, the Director of Finance, will kind of summarize this process for the City Council. Every two years, the Denton Central Appraisal District Board is selected. Under state law, the taxing jurisdictions first have the ability to nominate individuals for the board. In your packet, there were seven individuals that were nominated for the board. The board is elected by the taxing jurisdictions. They have a proportional number of votes based on their tax levy. So the city this year, out of the total number of votes, has 191 votes. There were seven individuals nominated for the board. One of those individuals, Mr. Robert Gallagher, has indicated that he does not want to be appointed for the board. So therefore, the council can allocate their 191 votes to one of the remaining six individuals or split their votes amongst them. The highest five vote getters will be seated as the board of directors after all the taxing entities cast their votes. With that, I'll be able to hopefully answer any questions you may have on this process. >> Okay. Any questions? Council Member Briggs? >> Are there term limits for this? >> Under state law, I do not see any term limits. >> Do you know if all the names listed, say for Robert Gall agher who's withdrawn, had they all been serving on the board as it is? >> The current board, Mr. Gallagher served on the board, Mr . Hassett, Ms. Smith, Mr. Stafford, and Mr. Terry. So of the candidates listed on that page of the attachment, two, three, five, six, and seven are current board members. >> Okay. And under the jurisdiction, nominating jurisdiction, excuse me, I think I've got what a lot of people have going around. I see that the City of Denton, of course we had that discussion, I guess, earlier. So we can basically turn these votes, we can allocate these votes to whomever we want. Okay. All right. Any other questions for staff before we take public comment ? All right. Seeing none, we'll take public comment. Mr. Willie Hutsmith? >> I'm going to go to item 6A. >> Mayor and council, my name is Willie Hutsmith. I live at 623 Newton. Whomever you pick, my hope is that it's someone who is sensitive to the plight of many of us who own homes. I get it. You need to raise money to take care of the needs of the municipalities. But maybe I'm the only one, but these taxes are just unbelievable. And the people that they have out there, supposedly they call them the appraisal board. It is very obvious that they don't know what they're doing. They are following the lead of the administrators or the people who are being paid money to run the place. There's no balance with this board. The board, I think the responsibility of the board is to hire and to come up with policies for the people then to manage this area, manage the collection of the taxes. I have been talking to them for at least 12 years about my taxes. And they don't pay any attention -- well, I don't know whether they pay attention or not. But in five minutes they evaluate whether or not my taxes are appropriate or not. In five minutes. And they talk among each other. They very seldom look at the evidence that's presented. So my appeal to you is get somebody on that board that's sensitive to my plight, I guess, or citizens who are like me. We're paying too much taxes. It's too much. And it's not appropriate. It's not fair. It's just arbitrary. So whomever you pick. And then one thing that really troubles me also is you have people on the board whose board members of -- for sure it is school who benefits from getting more taxes. Now, something's not right with that. I think they need to be looked at a little bit differently, get somebody in that position who's going to be sensitive to the taxpaying public. Thank you. >> Councilmember, Mayor Pro Tem, we have one more public speaker. You want to wait until -- yeah, all right. Mr. George Pryor, excuse me, Pryor, if you'll come down and state your name and address, your time will begin. >> Good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers. Thank you for this opportunity to introduce myself. I'm George Pryor. I live at 957 Paca Tampo Drive, Frisco, Texas, 75034. I did serve for six years on the Denton County Appraisal Review Board. I am now running for appointment to the Board of Directors for the Denton Appraisal District. My experience is pretty much lifelong in the appraisal business. I've read thousands of appraisals. I know how to value property. I've been a mortgage -- I was a mortgage lender for many years and worked for a Texas corporation, since absorbed by City Court. I have some empathy for what my predecessor has presented. I'm hopeful that if I can be a member of the Board of Dire ctors, that I can have some influence on the selection process for those that serve on the app raisal review board. There's approximately 20, 21 members. I can't say that all are highly qualified, okay? The majority are, but we need to find a way to improve the selection process. I hope as a volunteer board member that I can have some influence in that direction. I don't know of any other board members that have served or are on the appraisal review board. I did for six years and then of course had to term off. My interest in volunteer work was really spurred by serving on Judge Shipman's grand jury, I'm trying to say, grand jury about two years ago. All the officers -- I guess my respect for officers of the law and for the legal system in the United States increased tremendously. It was always strong, but it increased tremendously. I thought even at that point, if I ever have an opportunity to volunteer my services that have an effect for the public, I would jump at it. This just presented itself a matter of a couple of months ago. I'm seeking your support, I'm seeking your vote. I think I would be a good fit. I thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember Pro Tem? Do we have any questions for the speaker? >> We have a question from Councilmember Gregory. >> A couple of questions. Thank you for coming tonight and speaking to us. So one of the jobs of the board of directors for the Denton County Appraisal District is to select or approve or recruit those that are serving -- >> Not yet. Okay. That's one of the reasons I'd like to be appointed. Their control was mostly budgetary. That's what the board of directors currently does. >> Yes. Yes. But they can also have impact, make recommendations. The selection process just has to come. This gentleman stated a lot of things are factual. The normal taxpayer gets a lot more than five minutes, though, I would say. The selection process has to be improved. It could be improved in a number of ways. >> To follow up with that, what criteria do you think would be a useful criteria in selecting people to serve on that? Just a couple of major points. >> Mr. Gregory, one of the problems is repeat for -- you know, two-year terms, three max, and some poor performers are continuously because their current member are approved for another two years. A lot of these members should not be approved, but there is no input from what I've been able to find out, allowed from the district or the chairman of the appraisal review board. They don't have any input. If you have a bad apple, it's very difficult to not get them approved to serve their next two-year term. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Well, looking through the list of potential nominees, I think it probably goes without saying just based on the numbers that certain people are going to be selected. I think Mr. Stafford is probably going to be selected. It looks like Mr. Tarr and Ms. Smith will probably be selected. So what I'd like to do is see some new people on the board and hopefully have an opportunity to bring different viewpoints to an organization that doesn 't have term limits. So that's my goal and my motion that I'm going to make. >> Are you making that now? >> I can wait if there are other comments. >> I've got a question at least. >> Sure. >> So staff handling this chart. When I look through here, it was really a question regarding Mr. Pryor. It says nominating jurisdiction is Denton County. Is that the Denton County Commissioner's Court? Okay. So they're the ones nominating Mr. Pryor. >> Any taxing jurisdiction in the county can nominate. So school districts, cities, Denton County can nominate. >> But when I see Denton County, we're talking about the County's Commissioner's Court. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Councilmember Maripur Tempigere. >> I'm going to nominate George Pryor. >> All right. Okay. And that's for all the votes for the Denton votes, is that correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. Councilmember Briggs. >> I will second. >> All right. We have a motion to second. Any discussion? Let's vote on the board. And carry 6-0. All right. We'll move on to agenda item 6B. Consider appointment of three members to the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number 1, Downtown TIF Board, and appoint a chairperson of the board. >> Mayor and Council, Brian Langley, Deputy City Manager, wanted to talk to you about the Downtown TIF Board appointments. Excuse me. The ordinance that was passed to create the Downtown TIF included some sections that indicated that the council would appoint board members and that they would also appoint the board chair. So the recommendations from the TIF Board have been included in your packet for both these positions and the chairperson. This is the slate of candidates that's been proposed. Melissa Linenberg, Alex Payne and John Lentz. We had members Hank Dickinson and Virgil Strange who were term limited and rolled off. And Melissa Linenberg has been recommended for the chair. So the purpose of this item is to get those nominations from the City Council. I'll be happy to answer any questions if you have them. >> We have questions and we do have a card filled out for public comment. Councilmember Hussbett, question? >> Yeah. Brian. >> I wasn't here for that meeting, but I have since not to be disruptive, but I've since reached out to Pat Smith and my ask is that staff would reach out to him. He had a question about kind of what it entails and such that a space would come available or someone's unable or just turned out. But anyway, he had questions about how that process worked. I know the proposed meeting dates, but if someone could just reach out and kind of address those questions and I can get you his contact. I hope you don't have it. But I would -- had I been able to be here, I would have tried to appoint him. But again, understanding the two names have already been brought forward. I don't want to disturb that, but I did want to ask to get him some information. Please. >> I'll be glad to do that. And if the council wants to act on these or consider different appointments, they can, okay. Any other questions for staff? Thank you. Mr. Hesbeth, wishing to speak? No? All right. Mr. Hesbeth is inclined to speak on this agenda item. We have no more cards. Councilmember Briggs? >> I motion to approve. >> Councilmember Ryan? >> I'll second. >> We have a motion and a second for agenda item 6B. Let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries 6-0. Agenda item 6C, consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton -- excuse me -- approving an agreement, an agreed amendment to Article 12 of the existing meet and confer between the City of Denton and the Denton Firefighters Association. >> Mayor and council, the purpose of this item is to discuss a potential agreement with the Fire Association and the Denton Firemen's Relief and Retirement Fund pension board. I want to go through a little bit of the background on this issue. The City of Denton operates two pension plans. The fire pension, which is commonly known as the Firemen's Relief and Retirement Fund, covers all the firefighters in the city. The other pension plan that we have is the Texas Municipal Retirement System or TMRS, and it covers all other employees, excluding our temporary employees. So as we've talked about in the past, TMRS had experienced some actuarial issues back in 2008. That caused the city contribution rate to increase, and that was done to improve the financial health of that fund, the TMRS fund. I do want to point out there was no increase in benefits that were offered to employees at that time. Really, the contributions were designed to reduce li abilities over time. The Fire Association took note of that increase in the TMRS plan in the 2010 timeframe. The city entered into negotiations in the meet-and-confirm process and agreed to match the TMRS rate that was going into the fire pension plan. But now the TMRS rate has began to decline, and that's really principally due to the growth of the workforce and some conservative actuarial assumptions that have been included in the TMRS plan. As an example of that, the long-term contribution rate for TMRS will be 10 percent versus the current contribution rate of approximately 17.4 percent. So by being tied to the TMRS rate, the fire pension plan will experience some funding challenges. The funding contribution will not be adequate to cover the level of benefits that are there, and as such, the rate needs to be calculated to achieve desired financial results over time, not just matching the TMRS rates. In other words, an actuarial study to calculate what is the rate required to achieve those financial results that we want to achieve over time in that plan. So as a result of these issues, the Fire Association and the pension board have requested that the city decouple the plans and provide a contribution rate to pay off liabilities over a 25-year closed amortization period. This is similar to a mortgage, that each year one-twenty-f ifth of that liability will be paid off, not extended out, and that's exactly the same as the TMRS model, that liability paid over 25 years. Staff agrees with that approach and agrees with this issue and recommend this approach as well. So to address these issues, we've been working with the pension board and the Firefighters Association to craft an agreement which would satisfy the interests of these two organizations as well as the City of Denton. So below are some key details of that agreement. First of all, as I've mentioned to you, the Fire Pension Board will adopt a funding policy which will achieve 100 percent funding ratio over a 25-year closed amortization period that I mentioned to you. The city will increase its contribution rate to 18.5 percent. No benefit enhancements will be approved by the board, and a conservative investment rate of return will be used to estimate income. Currently, that's 6.75 percent for the Fire Pension. The Fire Pension Board will also commission an actuarial report every two years. The first report will be for December 31, 2017, and that will be prepared early in 2018. The City Council will then be asked to formally approve that actuarial report, the assumptions and the contribution rate, which is a change from what you 've had in the past. You haven't been required to approve that report or even afforded the opportunity to do that. If the City Council has concerns with the actual report or any of the assumptions, we will agree to work with the pension board and try to resolve those issues and determine what are the appropriate corrections that need to be made. However, if the report is not approved by the City Council, the City contribution would revert to either the City contribution to the TMRS plan or the statutory minimum rate, which is 12 percent for Fire Pension plans. The term of this agreement is tied to the current meet and confer contract, which expires just about two years, September 30, 2019. The Fire Pension Board formally approved the proposed amendment or agreement, excuse me, on November 15th, and the Fire Association, through the rat ification process of all the membership, they approved this on November 18th. So in terms of next steps, if approved by the City Council tonight, contributions will increase to the Fire Pension Fund, effective with the next payroll cycle here in December. The board will commission that new actuarial study that I mentioned to you for the period ending December 31st, 2017. That's done every two years. In 2018, we'll bring that forward to the Council, discuss those contribution rates, the actuarial assumptions and all the details associated with it. And if there's any change that needs to be made into the contribution level for the Fire Pension Fund, that will be incorporated into the 2018-2019 budget process. And as I mentioned before, the meet and confer agreement expires on September 30th, 2019. So with that, I'll be happy to try to answer any questions that you may have on the proposed agreement that's before you tonight. - Excuse me, any questions for staff? Mayor Pro Tem. - Mr. Langley, so this agreement doesn't require any, it doesn't have any restrictions on firemen benefits or firefighter benefits. - No benefit increases could be made during the term of the agreement, which would expire at the end of the fiscal year 2019. - Okay, so when we get to 2019, we'll be either renegoti ating the meet and confer and/or this particular contribution level as well. And at that time, the Firefighters Association could determine that they wanna increase benefits if they did determine they wanted to increase benefits, what would that do in terms of our goal of meeting the actuarial table? - Well, we would have to look at that in terms of the act uarial assumptions and the report that we have to see what kind of context that would have. Normally increases in benefits would have an increase in cost, but the Fire Association by itself could not increase benefits. That would have to become a board issue that they would have to initiate. - Thank you. - Any other questions? Mr. Willie Hesbeth, President of the Card, would you like to speak, state your name and address, your time will begin. - My name is Willie Hesbeth, November 6, '23, Newton. You have an organization that is a civil service organization comparable to the police. Why then do we have a mix of races comparable to what the races are in this city? And in the police department, but then the fire department, there have been two people hired since the fire department came into existence. Am I the only one that has this question? Am I the only one that says, "Why?" Now you're talking about doing something to benefit them. Here's the problem with that, as I see it. I don't know how to discuss this subject without making it appear that I don't think the fire department does a good job and the people there do a good job. If we can, let's separate that from, then why don't you let some other races get into that area and also reap the benefits of what they're doing. Now you're the city council. You're here, can you put the time up there so I can know how long I have before I make my conclusion? You're the city council. You're going to make history. You're going to make history either way. Either you do something about this problem or you don't. You're making history. Answer the question for me. I know you're not going to, but I think I need to ask it in a way just for my own benefit. Why do we only have two people in the history of this department? I know now kind of why because of the presentation that was made to us in that work session. I know why it is. Councils before you made some decisions that put us in this position where we are right now. Now you need to make a decision to get us out of it. I am tired of being relegated to some second class job. My race is because of people who sit on the levels that you 're sitting on right now. Not only fire, look at your management staff in the park administration. Not one African American ever. The electrical department, how many are in that department? Not one ever. So my question is why? Why is that I wonder? Doesn't have anything to do with race, do you think? Thank you, sir. All right. Council Member Hussbett. I'm going to move approval. All right. Council Member Riggs. I will second. We have a motion and a couple. Council Member Hussbett, do you have a comment? Yes. I did want to speak to, I just want to say the chief's done a lot of great things as far as getting funds back to the city and enabling us to hire more police officers. I think it's just a credit to our city, the work they did during the hurricane relief. I really appreciate that organization being top notch and supporting our city and representing us well and allowing us to carry our name forward and allowing that reputation to draw people to our city. So I just wanted to say briefly that I appreciate what they do because I'm not running in any burning buildings. So that is a rare individual. So thank you. Thank you, Council Member. Mayor Pro Tem. Yeah, I just wanted to clarify that I won't be voting for this item and I'm happy that we're trying to close the deficiency that we have in the retirement plan. However, somewhere in our negotiation process, we lost the coupling of the idea that the city pays an increased amount up to 18%, I guess 18% is going to be our amount with the idea that the benefits will also be frozen. I think when we get to the renegotiation part in 2019, it's going to be very hard for city council to back away from the 18% contribution if the firefighters decide to increase their benefits. So that's going to set us up for a very difficult negotiation in 2019 and I was disappointed that that particular item had become decoupled during the negotiation process. So even though I do support closing the funding gap, I can 't support this particular agreement. Thank you. We have a motion. Council Member Briggs, did you second? Yes. Okay. We have a motion and a second for item 6D. Let's vote on the board, please. Oh, no, I'm sorry. 6C. Apologize. 6C. Okay. We've got the wrong caption up on the voting board. It says, at least mine says agenda item B. So do we need to reset that or? I know she's feverishly working on it. I think I'm running a fever. Is it hot in here to you? I guess I'm a little warm. You want to take us a hand vote? Mr. Ryan, I believe your phone has the cheers jingle on it as represented in the council meeting this afternoon. So. Background music. Mayor, I would tell a fishing story, but Mayor Pro Tem told me I could not. We're not going there. I tell you what, let's go ahead and just take a hand vote on this and then we'll get it squared away for the next agenda item. So we have a motion and a second for agenda item 6C. All in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. Let the record show that's five votes. All opposed, signify by raising your right hand. So that's five to one. Mayor Pro Tem was the lone dissenter on that motion. Thank you. Moving on to agenda item 6D, continue considered option of an ordinance authorizing a development agreement between the city of Denton and DW Carmel LLC. And we do have a couple of public cards wishing to speak on this one as well. Mayor, council members, before you tonight is a further consideration of an agreement. A prospective agreement with the villages of Carmel development regarding the paving of Edwards Road. Revisiting this matter was brought forth on November 7th and the agreement being that the city will take $400,000, receive $400,000 from the developer and the city would take over the responsibility of paving approximately 1,670 linear feet of Edwards Road frontage as it goes into Swisher Road as on the map on the screen. The terms of the agreement, $400,000 to the city. The city would do the work on the paving. It would be an asphalt section. The developer would do all the planning and dedications for the planning of the lots and we would move on and purchase the park property that was highlighted in that corner. Further the allocations on this, we're in a contract to purchase the 6.4 acres. This information was provided to you previously. Which shows that we are ahead in the transaction and look forward to any questions you all might have concerning this matter. Okay. The screen, I don't have the request to speak up so if you have any questions, just sort of get my attention somehow. Anybody have any questions for staff? No questions for staff? Okay. We do have a couple, thank you. We do have a couple of cards wishing to speak. I guess, Madam City Secretary, do we have a bell or something or something that can alert the time because I know it's kept electronically? I'm working on it. I think so. Okay. All right. We'll just move forward and that means I get to decide how much time you get because I'll keep the time. I've got my fancy little stopwatch here. You want to do it? Yeah. Well, let the city attorney do it. People might say I'm biased. Okay. Good. All right. Mr. Willie Husspeth, agenda item 6D. Wishing that you don't want to take your chances up here with no time limit. Okay. All right. All right. Then Rod Zylki, come down and state your name and address and your time will begin. Good evening, Mayor, council members and staff. My name is Rod Zylki with ZPS Consulting Engineers at 1111 Main Street in Grapevine, Texas. I've been the engineer on this project since its inception about four years ago and I'm here tonight to answer any questions. There is also a representative from the owner here tonight if you had any questions of him and I'd just like to take one brief moment to express some acknowledgement and appreciation to the staff and the many different departments within the city that worked on this project. For its size, in my experience, there was an inordinate amount of involvement. An example is the dedication of the six plus acre park. I didn't know there was that many city departments and that many staff members that needed to work together to make something like that happen and it was really a pleasure working it out and just wanted to acknowledge that. I do have one question because I know that part of the reason to come back was the first time we sort of needed some more information on the cost and things such as that so staff did a good job of putting together some additional items about, you know, we're buying some parkland and some of the pricing for that and for the dedication of I think it's post oak or? What arrangements have been made because I know we're estim ating it's $475,000. City pays the $400,000 and then I think it's the developer pays the $75,000. Is that the correct? I think it's the other way around. The other way around. Oh. I'm telling you it's hot in here. So anyway, my point is if it goes over, have you all made arrangements on how to handle that or is it just you guys pay the $75,000 and we pay whatever is the rest or is there cost sharing? The way I understand the agreement and the city manager probably understands it better than I do, the developer pays $400,000 and that's his liability. Yeah, okay. That's right. We recently asked the city engineer staff to go back through and cost out the project. They're comfortable with the bid is currently presented, the $475,000 construction project. The other thing I thought was important during our last meeting, the issue in terms of dedicating the right of way, there is a real value to that that we would normally have to acquire. Wanted to make sure that was pointed out to council. That was not done last time and I think confused the issue as well as purchasing the park track for below appraised value. So I think when you look at it at the end of the day, the city taxpayers are ahead of the game here and we're getting some nice amenities and avoiding having to acquire right of way. So at the end of the day, it works out to about $150,000 benefit to us. And that right of way is based upon the latest mobility plan and the desire for if that road gets extended to its full, I mean, its full build out, it's not a phased or a two lane. Okay. All right. Yeah. Okay. All right. Okay, good. That's helpful. I appreciate that. So basically the developers is topped out at four and the city picks up any of the costs after that. If there was an overrun, yeah, that's correct. Okay. Okay. Any other questions for staff? Seeing none. And I don't know who's asked to make a motion or second. So just sort of raise your hand. Yes. Council member Hudsbeth. I move approval. All right. Council member Ryan. I will second. All right. We have a motion and a second for agenda item six D. All in favor, please signify by raising your right hand. Motion carries unanimously six zero. Moving on to agenda items for public hearing. Agenda item seven A has been postponed, I believe, to February the sixth per the agenda. Yes, sir. We may be back up and running. Almost. Good. That's all right. Well, we can do it the old way. All right. Then we'll move on to agenda item seven B, which is hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas to re zone approximately seven point one four acres from a neighborhood residential in our two to a district resident to a district to a neighborhood residential district. I'm going to go ahead so I won't forget it and open the public hearing. So we'll just proceed with staff presentation and public comment as as wanted. All right. Good evening. This is case Z 1724. The request before you is to hold a public hearing and consider a request by Denton affordable housing to rezone approximately seven acres from a neighborhood residential to districts to neighborhood residential six. You can see here on the map, the property outlined in yellow is located on the south side of Audre Lane, about two hundred and sixty five feet east of Nottingham Drive. The property is comprised of several parcels that are currently undeveloped and unplatted. Just to give you a visual of what the zoning map would look like with this request on the left, we have our existing zoning map on the right is what would be proposed if this were to be rezoned to NR six. The DDC outlines two criteria for approval of a rezoning request. The first being that the rezoning conforms to the future land use map. The second being the facilitation of public infrastructure when a request does not conform to the future land use map. It does elaborate on some additional criteria that should be looked at. Just to summarize those for you, it's primarily dealing with the existing land use pattern. The facilitation of infrastructure extensions impacts to the city in terms of cost and environmental risk as well as the creation of isolated zoning districts and why the property couldn't be used in conformity with the future land use map. So to look at a few of those more extensively, the future land use map designates this as an area of low residential. So this area is intended to promote single family development of a density about one to four dwelling units per acre. This designation encourages a variety of housing styles and prices. It also encourages sensitivity to existing development patterns and existing neighborhoods. NR6 is not consistent with that future land use designation . It's more of a moderate density residential development. Districts that would be consistent would be NR2 through NR4 . And just to look at this general area on our future land use map, you can see the subject property and that surrounding it is all low density residential. As you expand outwards from there, we have areas in orange that are moderate residential. So that's where we encourage the higher density six to 12 units per acre. And you notice that those are located along more like arter ial roadways. So we have Mingo Road here to the north, and then we have the loop over here to the east. So those areas are just kind of a transition to protect that low density residential in between. Looking at the infrastructure available to the site, we have Audre Lane, which is a residential collector. Currently, it's partially improved, the north side having sidewalk curb, the south side not yet improved. So any of those perimeter street improvements would be assessed for this development at the time of platting. You can see also on the map water and sewer lines shown in blue and the lighter green. And those would be extended throughout this property for the development. Looking further at the compatibility of this request, the property is surrounded by NR2, NR3, and NR4, all lower density districts. It is important to point out that these subdivisions in many areas predate the current zoning regulations. So the density in some of them is more in the ballpark of four to four and a half units per acre, some of them a little bit higher or lower, but on average about four and a half units per acre. NR6, however, permits up to six units per acre. So that's a substantial increase in density that could occur on the property. It's outside the parameters of low density, as we've discussed, and NR6 would be isolated here. There's no connectivity, no adjacency for other NR6, and it also would introduce some new uses that don't currently exist in the area. More dense uses such as townhomes and duplexes would be permitted by right, whereas this area currently is traditional single-family detached housing. Real quick question on that. You said it allows for other uses, but it's, maybe it's a question for legal. If the council were so inclined to, let's say if you moved forward with NR6, with some restrictions on uses, such as if you're going to build residential, you build single-family homes. That's within the purview of the city council to do that, is that correct? Yes. I'm sorry. Go ahead. So notification was sent about the case. Total of about 95 notices were sent. We received one in favor that's shown in green on the map. One expressed some opinions about the case, but didn't say whether they were for or against. And with that, I can take any questions if you have any. I'll save them. I'll save them. Yeah. That's all. I'll save my questions. Any questions? Council member Gregory. Thank you, Mayor. Did the planning and zoning commission move to approve this request? Is that correct? I'm sorry. I forgot one slide for you. Yes. So with that, we are recommending denial of the request for the reasons that were outlined in the presentation. Incompatibility, inconsistency with the future land use map and the introduction of those new uses. P and Z did, however, recommend approval four to zero. When they recommended approval, did they put any limitations or conditions on that approval? No, sir. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? All right. Thank you. Appreciate it. Probably have some later on. We've got several cards wishing to speak, and we'll go through those first, but this is a public hearing, so you do not need to fill out a card in order to speak. What I'll do is I'll call out the first speaker and then the next speaker that will be on deck. Kim McKibbin will be our first speaker if you'll come forward. And then on deck will be, is it Kenneth Colber? And if you'll state your name and address, your time will begin. Good evening. My name's Kim McKibbin, 1306 West Hickory Street. I was in the planning and zoning meeting the other night. I saw all the things that were presented, and there were only four members there the other night. That is something I think is significant. I am in opposition to this simply because we have a land use map. We have a future land use map. And if we continue or allow nibbling away at that land use map, what is the use in having it? The requested rezoning, as was pointed out earlier, will create like a little island in the middle of other things. And more than likely, the adjacent property, which is currently undeveloped, would be then pushed to that other things. What's there in the surrounding communities would not match what the developer is proposing. And I think that that's a very valid thing to think about. They pushed very hard with the planning and zoning that they were going to provide affordable housing because no one can afford a house. And then their little houses that they're going to put up are going to be $250,000 a piece. Now, that's a lot of money for a very small house on a very small lot in a neighborhood where the houses will not match the other houses that are there. So I'm a little concerned about that. Basically I don't think that $250,000 for what they're proposing is affordable. And if I'm not mistaken, I had someone tell me that the NR6 also provides for a work and live thing, sort of zoning, which could be problematic for people in the surrounding area that aren't aware of those things. What I would ask you to do is to kind of stand your ground and let's look at the 2030 plan. Let's look at the future land use map. Someone who spoke the other night had some connection to the builders and things like that. There was one person I think that spoke from the surrounding community. So as we look at what's going to happen in our future and what truly is going to be affordable for some people, just because the city's providing some kind of funding for them to get into the houses doesn't mean that we need to change the zoning for that. There's other places that those things can be built. So if you are presented with what is affordable and what the cost of houses in Denton currently are, please take that information with a grain of salt. And once again, I'm asking you to please let's use the future land use plan or land use map or the FLM as it's being called. Let's look forward to what our 2030 plan is going to be. We do not yet know what the consultants are going to provide us as far as what our future zoning things will be. I know that they're going to reduce the numbers. So please take all those kinds of things into consideration as you move forward with this and other requests that are going to come before you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any questions? Council Member Hussbett. >> Thank you, Kim. So two really quick succinct questions. So one question, you talk about the empty lot, so I'm going to use the current neighborhood there. So staff represents that currently before the plan was issued, those lots exceed four houses that area developed, exceeds the four house per acre currently. So it would be the same as what's there if they do what they're proposed. If they propose their current situation is 4/7, staff just said the neighborhood existing is 4/4. But you're saying that's inconsistent? That's my question. >> I'm not real sure I understand what you're asking me. >> So I'm asking you how do you say it's inconsistent that there'll be more houses when staff says currently before it was evaluated that the established neighborhood on the other side of Audre Lane is 4.4, I may be saying it wrong, but she says it's 4.4 houses per acre currently as they count it. And this proposed development is 4/7. So you're talking about -- >> That's not what I understood. >> Well, maybe Haley can come back up and say it again. >> Certainly, you're correct. On the average of surrounding neighborhoods both to the north and south, existing condition is average about 4.5 units per acre, which isn't that far off from what is being proposed, but the proposed zoning would permit up to six units per acre. >> Given the same scenario, if that neighborhood established was to be built today, they would have to bump up to NR6 to be -- >> That is correct. Under current zoning. >> Okay. Thank you. So that's my question. So that's what it's going to be, but once you look at the presentation, you're going to see the difference. >> Okay. And then I have, if I may, because this question is valid, but I need -- just like I'm going to challenge them, I'm going to challenge you, you say it's not affordable based on what? So they're going to tell me it is affordable based on some number. You're saying 240,000 is not affordable. >> 250,000? >> Yeah, 250,000. You're saying it's not affordable. >> Lot size and square footage. >> Sure. But just the -- if you could help me, I'm just going to zero in on the number, right? Because I think we're tempted to operate in our own sphere and say that number doesn't jive. But it's panning out a bit. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and allow them to justify their number, but I'm going to ask you to do the same. If you say that 250,000 is not affordable, I'd ask -- my question is, what do you base that on? Based that on the income that they're targeting and the people that they say are going to be there, which was middle class teachers, workers in the general community, and also looking at the retail properties in other areas in Denton that would have that same square footage, I don't think that that's comparable. I mean, I know that property is going sky high in Denton, and maybe if it takes $250,000 to get in a little house, then that's what it's going to take. But I think that when they argue that it's affordable and they start to pull at heartstrings, please be aware that that is a relative term. >> Agreed. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Excuse me. Okay. The next speaker is Kenneth Colbert. >> Oh, okay. >> I'm sorry. I do that often. The next speaker will be Jerry Steiger. State your name and address, please. >> Kenneth Colbert. I live at 2512 Oak Park Drive, just off of Audra. I am opposed to this rezoning, primarily because the transition of the housing right across the street, just north of Audre Lane as it goes east and west, trying to remember the name of that development, but it was Robbie Hale development. Those houses there are considerably larger than what's being proposed here. The sizes of the lots also greatly larger. The access is on to, primarily on to Audre Lane, and an additional 33 lots in this small acreage would put a tremendous stress on the traffic on Aud re Lane, which is currently, every time we get a good solid rain, there will be water standing on Audre for two days to three days. The developer, as assured us, has shown us a plat, and that plat shows 33 acres, or 33 lots, and he's also used as an example in photos of a development that's going on currently north of University behind the Sonic. Those houses are 3500 square feet lots, a 10 foot setback, one and a half car aprons for their driveway, one car garage, of course, and narrow streets. Any emergency when there are cars parked on that street, I would wager that a fire truck would have a very difficult time getting in, if not unable. The developers have shown us a plat, which is a temporary or example, and there's nothing, once this is rezoned to NR6, there's nothing that will hold them to 33 lots in that plat. They can replat it, they can do whatever they wish, and it will be too late to do anything. I would encourage you to, if for no other reason, then to step back and take a better look at this whole process and see what we're getting. $250,000, I live in a house much larger than what they're proposing, and I would love to get $250,000 for my place. There are housing available elsewhere for the low income. There are many areas of the city that NR6 would fit very nicely, but the transition between the NR3, just on the other side of Audre Lane, to an NR6 is not in compliance with the 2030 plan. Please think of this and us. Thank you very much. Thank you. I received a note from Council Member Hussbuth, and he's correct. Typically what I try to do is go ahead, because the applicant, I believe, has more time to speak. Madam City Secretary? Okay. Which then lays out, at least to the Council, all the information that you all will be talking about. I apologize for that oversight. I'm going to give the developer an opportunity, as the applicant, which is our normal process to come and make a presentation, unless they want to just do it at some other point. I think it would be helpful for the Council to be able to really get an idea of what you're proposing, so as speakers come and talk, I apologize for that. I appreciate it, Council Member Hussbuth, for pointing that out to me. Thank you so much for that. Applicant, whoever your representative is. Jennifer, refresh my memory for the applicants, what the timing or the time constraints are or allocations for the applicant, please. Sure. Applicants and their agents get 10 minutes per speaker, or the total of 20 minutes for all speakers representing the applicant or less. Why did you emphasize that last part? Okay. All right. We are going to share our time and time to take a lead, and then I'll follow up. Okay. Okay. Sure. All right. Thank you. Just state your name and address. Jennifer, you will give a clock of 10 minutes. Yes. It will be up on the board there. Okay. You can take all of it, you can take less of it, and pass it on to your colleague. I believe we have a presentation. Do you have a flash drive? Yeah. Is it on the computer? Thank you all for your patience and for my oversight. Good evening, Mayor, Council. My name is Elliot Townsend. I'm the Vice President of Operations at KJE. We're an environmental and civil engineering firm, and we are the civil engineer on this project. We have designed the preliminary design, and we have also assisted Mr. Roger Yale, who is our applicant, with the rezoning application. Help me understand something, because I thought in the presentation the applicant was Denton Affordable Housing. If you could clarify that for me. Absolutely. Our client has the property under contract, active option contract, and they are in the process of purchasing this property from Denton Affordable Housing. They are going to proceed with the acquisition of this property upon confirmation of the zoning change, only because without the zoning change, this property does not make financial sense for them. Okay. Thank you very much for that clarification of just how we have two different names. Absolutely. I'm sorry to see you. This is the surrounding land use. As you can see, to the south we have vacant land, and to the southeast we also have some small rural residences here, and then of course immediately to the west we do have the Denton Church of Christ. To the north we do have the existing residential subdiv ision, and then over here, caddy corner to our proposed development, we do have what's zoned NRMU, our multifamily. These are apartments in the northwest corner of that intersection. This is the current zoning map with our development outlined in red. As you can see, some of the only properties, substantial properties between our proposed development and NRMU are the Denton Church of Christ and some other developments on the other side of Audra, and we also have NR6 near our property . This is our proposed site plan that our firm has engineered . We have developed this preliminary site plan to conform to NR6, and we have also sat down with city staff during a pre-development meeting in which H aley and all the team members assisted us with any preliminary comments they would have on this site plan. As you can see, it does represent 33 lots, and we have incorporated drainage easement as well as detention, and we've sized that according to what we think the storm water requirements will need so that way we can design our preliminary site plan around that requirement for detention. So we have taken storm water considerations in mind, and we 've also talked with city staff on the requirements for improving storm water on Audra to incorporate any of those concerns. Real quick, is that a stock pond or stock tank? As an existing stock tank, yes, sir. And so that will be removed according to all pertinent city codes and regulations, as well as if there's any ESAs or anything like that? Absolutely. Okay. And so what we've done here is we've, again, designed this according to NR6 requirements, and we've also designed it to conform to not only our client's needs financially, but it also matches the adjacent property design in terms of the subdivision. As city staff has acknowledged, and Councilman Hutspeth has as well, the density per acre on the adjacent subdivision is approximately 4.5 per acre. What we have designed here with 33 lots is 4.6, so we're talking about a tenth away from conforming to the actual design of the adjacent development . Real quick question on, I guess none of my questions are quick. What's the average width of these lots? The thrust of my question is because there's some concern, at least it's been expressed, go ahead, I'm sorry. What you'll see, and for example, if you look at lot three in the southwest corner, it's a much larger lot than, for example, lot 10. But what our client has already acknowledged through his architect is that we will meet the minimum setback requirements of 10 foot for the NR6. Similar to the subdivision that the gentleman brought up earlier on the north side of, off of Old North, our client will build to suit and meet the minimum requirements for each of those lots. The thrust of my question is, at least early on, has been, so that's one advantage of having people go ahead because we can ask you the questions directly. Because we've got several cars. But if you were, six units per acre, this is what, 33 acres ? Seven acres. Seven acres. So that's 42 lots, quote unquote, by right. My hunch is, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, because I understand that you want to try to maximize the opportunities for this development. Looking at this, I don't think you could, you probably physically and feasibly pursuant to city code and setbacks and things such as that, you could not get 42 lots, I don't even know if you could get 35 or 36 or 37, based upon minimum setbacks, lot widths, for single family homes. If they're single family homes. But that's going to be, I'm going to be honest with you, that's going to be an issue or a question that I'm going to have at the end of the presentation about what you guys are willing to do. Because I would agree with that, that to allow other uses than what you're proposing with us to promote passage of this, it's going to be very hard for me to agree to allow something else other than what you've advocated for to be there besides that. So the acknowledgement is to stay single family, you couldn 't do 35, I mean you probably even know the number. Well, our client, for what it's worth, our client asked us to maximize the amount of lots and this is what we got. Okay, all right. And this is all we're going to get out of the property. I appreciate that. Yes sir, absolutely. So that being the case, this is our preliminary site plan. Like I said, we met with city staff, we received pre- development meeting comments from fire, from utilities and everybody else and we've incorporated those comments into this preliminary site plan. This is something that our client put together, this is a pro forma for a home purchase and this does show the approximate purchase price of a home similar in nature around $240,000. With a down payment of $24,000 that leaves $216,000 to finance, which comes out to about $1,126.76 based on a 4.75% amortized finance rate for 30 years. Once you incorporate estimated taxes and insurance of $400 a month, you end up with a monthly mortgage payment of $1,526.76, which our client has determined to fall within that range of affordable housing. Well, I mean, and I appreciate that. I will tell you from my perspective, whether it's affordable housing or not, I mean, that's the marketplace and we certainly are working hard as a city to provide for more affordable housing, but I must say that the pro forma that you present , first of all, what's the square footage of the houses? Average. Of this one? Of these houses. We're talking about between 1,300 and 1,700 square feet. Okay. Well, just for your numbers, because if I see a number that I think might be a little off, it's hard for me not to say something. So on your taxes and insurance, if you're looking at a $240 ,000 assessed value, we have about a $2.50 per 100 valuation, you're looking at almost $ 6,000 in taxes and insurance per year is probably going to be close to 1,500 to 1,800. So that number is almost going to be probably $600 to $650. That doesn't matter to me. I'm just saying that it's hard when I see that because the affordable housing aspect of it, it's the market, you're going to build it, you're either going to get that price or you're not. But the number is probably going to be a little bit closer to 1,700 to $1,800 a month. Okay. And I know my client is going to have something to say about the affordable housing as well. Okay. Sure. You bet. This is the, if you would, architectural examples of the residences to be constructed in our client's proposed development. These are very similar. As a matter of fact, these are some of the residences from the development off of Old North, north of 380. So that being said, Roger, if you want to come up and say a few words as well. If there are any questions for us. Any questions for the current speaker? I do have our chief engineer here as well if you all have any technical questions. Sorry. I'll probably have some at the end of the presentation, but yeah, I don't want to monopolize it. Yes, sir. State your name and address. Your time will begin. Thank you. My name is Roger Yale. I'm a business address. It's 1417 East McKinney Street here in Denton. Be happy to answer questions in particular with regard to the insurance issue. Just find, or just insured one of these houses is about $8 50 per year. So I would dispute that. I think you are probably right on taxes. I've got some other proformance that I'll be happy to show you here that I plugged in the number $4,000 on taxes principally because I think there's an ability to argue that. I do believe that the two and a half percent rate is not out of round, but also I used a number of $4,000 in these proformance. Yes, sir. I do have a question on the insurance. Yes. Was that insurance as an owner occupied or as a rental? As a rental unit. Very different. I own rental property and I have owner occupied units and it's going to be about, anyway. So I appreciate that clarification because I think that's the difference. Can I have the overhead? Yes. If he could have the overhead, please. You all had a meeting yesterday at noon with the Denton Housing Authority and on page nine of that presentation, there was an area median income of $ 71,000. You also have the Economic Development Corporation publish es a document and here I have highlighted the median family income again based on city data as $68, 000 per year. What is affordable housing? Well, I went out to Housing and Urban Development and they say in the United States the term affordable housing is used to describe housing, rental or owner occupied that's affordable no matter what one's income is. They peg it at 30% of one's income is affordable housing. So using an example going back to the city's website and it 's pretty difficult to read but I plugged in a 30-year mortgage for a $240,000 house, person making $65,000 a year. Over on the right-hand side, they qualify for a mortgage under the affordable housing programs that Denton has. The monthly payment with a $16,000 down payment, I lowered that down payment, is $1,168 using my $4,000 number for taxes, that's $333 per month on taxes and $67 per month on insurance. That gets to $1,568. I ran the same example, changing it up with a little bit different down payment. It came to $1,589. I then come back to my affordable housing example. I take the $1,589 per month on a 12-month year is $19,068. The income of a $65,000 household gross times 30% is $19, 500. We're very close, if not underneath the standard for what's affordable housing in Denton as to this project. I'd be happy to stand for questions. Any questions for the presenter? Mr. Yale? May I add another thing? Yes, you have time, absolutely. Mayor, you had said you'd be hard pressed to add other items to this other than single family. Our goal is to build single family, okay? We have not asked for an overlay because frankly it never came to mind that we'd be doing duplexes or we'd be doing townhomes. If the resolution needs to get passed that those things are restricted from, we have no problem offering that up as amendment to the proposal because we simply don't intend to do it. It's easy to give away something you don't intend to use. We don't intend to use it. Our goal is to build 33 houses that people can live in. Thank you. You bet. Mr. Mayor, I have a question on the elevations that you showed the examples. Seemed like there was some combination of hardy board, cement fiber board and masonry. We have not decided, but the hardy plank is quite a probable use or brick. Maybe this is a question for staff. Is NR6, do we have a percentage requirement for residential structures in our zoning classifications or is there one in general with the city codes for, I'm just curious just to get an idea. It's not that it really factors into this except to understand exactly what's going to wind up being there if this gets approved. I'm not familiar with one, but I do know there is a requirement for 25% glass facing the street. Yes, yes. There is no minimum masonry requirement for single family. So, any high quality building material such as brick, stone , hardy board, any of that would be acceptable. No, but you're saying it could be all hardy board and no m asonry and that would still meet the requirement. Yes, sir. There's not a minimum percentage of masonry. For residential of any? For multi-family there's a 40% requirement. For single family there's not. There's not. That's interesting. Okay, good. Thank you. I appreciate that. Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry, excuse me, has a question I believe. Yes. It doesn't have to be answered now, but I think as we hear the residents and as I've heard in preparation for this meeting, brick is going to be or lack thereof is going to be a point of concern at least for some people that I've spoken with. I don't mean to put you on the spot. I'm just asking you to consider it as we listen to the citizens that would be in that area. Having looked at the area, the 90% of the neighborhood across Audre Lane and then back towards McKinney Drive is brick. That I've seen firsthand. That was just a note for you to consider. I understand the business side of the business, but just wanted to put that out there. Frankly, there's not a lot of cost differential between that. Roger Dulley is here and he was the builder and he can explain some of that. None of the veneer is structural. It's what's cosmetically appealing and what will sell. Yes, sir. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? No? All right. Thank you. Thank you all. We've been going for about an hour and 45 minutes and I'd like to take a break about between an hour and a half hour and 45 minutes. Let's go ahead and take about a five or eight minute break. I know it's going to take a while to get everybody back inside, but if you could really, and I'll probably be the worst defender, but if you could try to make it back there so we can start rolling back through it. I just wanted to find us a good breaking point. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. We're reconvening for agenda item seven B. We're in the public hearing portion of public comment and we've just heard from the applicant and two speakers will now move forward. Jerry Steger is up and then Prudent Sanchez will be on deck . Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. My name is Jerry Steger. I live at 2408 Whispering Oaks. I am not in the circumference of what was advertised regarding this particular one, but I do have some comments. If I could put the slide with the three houses up. The elevations? No, not the elevations. The photographs. These right here? Yes. Okay. I had the occasion on two different occasions to drive through this neighborhood and a number of concerns. If this is a ten foot setback, I drive a 2013 Ford F-150 crew cab. The back of my tailgate would cover the sidewalk. And also as I drove through that neighborhood, there was another pickup truck parked on one side of the road and I deliberately parked over on the wrong side of the road just to see how much room there was between trucks for particularly emergency vehicles. They would be very hard pressed to put a hook and ladder, any kind of a fire engine through that. With a ten foot setback, again I said my truck would hang over the sidewalk which would probably result in some sort of notice that I was in violation. The other comments that I have is that this is not a -- there's not continuity between our neighborhoods north of Audra all the way down to Pais ley and/or down to McKinney. All the houses on that north south corridor are brick and they're larger homes. This is a significantly congested area. This would stand out like a sore thumb. The reason I'm against an NR6, I am in favor of an NR4. But my concern is that there are a number of properties to the south and to the east of this that changing this to NR6 would set precedent for what future projects are going to come ahead south and east of this area. So this would be in relation to the larger Google map picture of this vacancy, this is a small northeast corner of what would be a much larger area. So by approving this to be NR6 and approving this highly congested area would be safety issues and I believe setting a precedent for what you're going to have to agree on in the future. And that's all the comments that I had. Okay, thank you. Appreciate that. Next speaker is Prudence Sanchez and then the speaker on deck will be John Withers. Thank you. My name is Prudence Sanchez. I live at 711 Jackson Street here in Denton. I am one of the associate executive directors of Denton Affordable Housing Corporation. And I'm here tonight to ask the council to vote in favor of this zoning change because we, Denton is growing and we do have the need for affordable housing. There's been apartments being built all over the city and I 'm not against apartments. I'm a landlord. I own some duplexes. I own single family dwellings. But there's a difference when you drive up to a house and it's your house. And I can attest as a landlord that there are people paying between $1,100 and $1,300 for a three bedroom rental and it's not theirs. They have no ownership right in it. One speaker spoke that there was only four people from the Planning and Zoning Commission that voted in favor. And one reason there was only four is because my husband is on the Planning and Zoning Commission and so therefore he recused himself. I'm in favor of this zoning change and earlier someone said , you know, don't let them pull your heartstrings. Well, you know, we do have to have heart and we do have to have that backed up by fact. Excuse me. And I was a I am a registered dental hygienist and I had the privilege of providing direct services to the children in our community. And I was really surprised and disappointed when I had to verify insurance and some of the teachers' children and the first responders' children qualified for CHIP, which is a program that comes under the Medicaid program that we have for low income. So the people who need this affordable housing, they're not the people that you think they are. They're families who work 40 hours a week sending their children to our schools and for people to say, oh, it's not going to match when there's homeless kids in our neighborhood, in our communities. When I've had the privilege and the awesome responsibility now that I am an attorney to represent children in that situation and their parents work and they don't have a home. And we're here saying that, you know, it's not going to match the neighborhood. You know, maybe somebody else somewhere else should do it. Nobody else is asking to build this kind of housing in our community. You know, maybe it would fit somewhere else, but nobody else is asking for it. So when is it going to happen? When we are growing like leaps and bounds? I have the privilege of working with young couples who work 40 hours a week just in conversation, not even talking about this issue, just saying, you know what, I don't think owning a home is on the radar for us. You know, and we're talking about good people who would want to still have their American dream, you know, a house that is maybe the only inheritance that they're going to leave to their descendants. And to say that, you know what, why don't you do that in that neighborhood? Why don't you just go live in some low income housing, some low income apartments? You know, it just doesn't cut it. We still have the American dream and I believe that. And as a staff member of Dendrofotable Housing Corporation, where we do assist in providing low income housing for people, I believe that this certainly fits with our mission and with the mission of our city and that we care for our residents and the people who work hard and the people who want a home for their kids that when they drive up, it's their house. Thank you. Thank you. Excuse me. Mr. Jonathan Withers is up next and on deck will be Nancy Carson. State your name and address and your time will begin. Good evening. John Withers. I live at 201 McCamey. I'm here to beat the drum of the affordable housing deal again. Active right now in the city of Denton, there's 48 houses currently listed under that $250,000 price point. I know it's difficult to think about $250,000 as an affordable house, but that's kind of where the precedent has been set. Through October of '17 this year, the median house list price in the city of Denton was $269,900. So we're obviously going to be well below that. Another deal that I want to emphasize is we're not doing a cookie cutter neighborhood like the DR Horton's or any of the big box guys. We're building them very specific to the lots, very specific to the purchaser's needs. So it's not going to be a one size fits all. It's going to be a very unique product that is going to be affordable even though that number doesn't really jive with us. Any questions for Mr. Withers? Thank you. Appreciate it. Nancy Carson is up and then on deck will be Mark Moffat. Go ahead. Hi, I'm Nancy Carson. I live at 2908 Oak Sugar. That's just across the Audre from the projects that we're talking about here. I don't really know how to do this. If I lay my paper here. Yes, ma'am. They'll be able to get the overhead and it'll show up on the ... There you go. Great. Yeah. Okay. What I have here is the streets in pink are only two lanes, one going one way and one the other. Most of them have no shoulders. Most of them could not be widened if the city had the money and wanted to do that. Could you maybe step a little bit ... Yeah, behind the mic so that ... Because we're being televised so I want to make sure that everybody can hear you. No, no. Thank you so much for that. You see all the streets here are lacking in the ability to carry a lot of traffic. We have recently had some additional properties added. You see the green here and the green here. Okay, first this is Audre. This is Mockingbird. It does turn to Four Lane there for just a little bit. This is East McKinney and this is ... Mingo. Mingo, yes. All right. I live here in this Bel Air North across the street. Well, I'm a little bit further over across a few streets from the property that we're talking about rezoning. You'll note the green here. This is Duplexes, one block long and there are 72 units there. I have a picture of some of what that looks like. We'll come back to it. You notice the green here, this is the Woodland Apartments that was just recently built. They're not even finished with one of them. I talked to a rental person today there. They have 148 units. They're extremely dense. They're two and three stories. That doesn't fit. I was in on all of the planning of this, as far as being here and listening to y'all and everything else. I see this affordable project that they're talking about could end up being the same way. They promise, they promise, they promise. Well, guess what? After everything was changed to suit them, their investors changed their mind and did things differently. I could see that happening here tonight with these people. I'm sure they're all nice people, but they're not the people with the money. They're not the buyers and their promises don't hold water. I think to call this affordable housing, we should all be rolling in the floor laughing. It's ridiculous. Affordable housing is not this. Yes, I want children to have a home. But let's give them something that's really affordable. Here in the black, we've got a large apartment right here. It's the Vib. 308 apartments. Could you maybe slide that up a little bit? I think you're referencing something. Yeah, there you go. Thank you. The Vib right here is 308 apartments. The Veranda is 322 apartments and they are all subsidized or can be for people who qualify for that. So, there are places out there for people to live lower income who need affordable housing. Thank you. That was time. Any questions for the speaker? For Ms. Carson? Seeing none, thank you very much. Okay. I believe that Mr. Moffitt is also part of the affordable housing board. So, if you said you wanted to speak last, if you want to, that's fine. Yeah. Okay. Yes, that's fine. My mistake. Bruce, is it wall? Well, I'm sorry. Thank you. If you'll state your name and address, your time will begin . Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and the council and staff for hearing my concerns and my wife's. My name is Bruce Whale and we're at 2708 Stockton Street. And so, I'm only four houses down from this proposed development and I am opposed to this. I am all for affordable housing as well, but I do believe you really need to look at the density issue with regard to what staff has recommended that this is just too dense. And to compare to our, you know, that we were kind of grandfathered in, our lot is 7,000 square feet, okay? And we have an 1,827 foot home on there. It's not worth 250,000 as far as I understand, you know, if you look it up on realtor.com type of thing. So, I just, you know, for purposes of our neighborhood, there's currently three bedroom, two bedroom homes around 1,500 to 1,800 square feet with brick veneer and an average home value of 175,000 to 250,000. The access, we're concerned about that too. Audra, just north south, then there's a university and McK inney Street connected by Mockingbird and Audra. So, in terms of emergencies and so forth, we need to think about that. You know, the train track is right there. If there's ever an emergency there, you need to think about how, you know, you can evacuate. If it's just one, this development is just one exit type of thing. We, as I mentioned, the staff has said that the, they recommend that this not happen. And the 2030 plan has been mentioned, so that's, you know, one of the arguments that have been made, you know, let's stick with the plan. If we make a change now, again, it's a precedent and so, you know, you're going to have to do this further. We are concerned about these homes. We also took a drive up to the north, old north section up there and they're very squeezed together type of thing. And they only have, you know, some of them we noticed the fence was four foot back on the backyard type of thing. You know, we didn't do the truck test, but, you know, it was very condensed. So, if they want to mirror this here, you know, I wish I had some pictures. I'm sorry, I don't have any visuals for you, but it's important that you take a look at this. You know, if the documents that show plats don't, you know, give you the picture. So, you know, in terms of affordability, you know, that's the other argument. So, you know, I can't speak to that. You know, a $250,000 home, I don't think is, you know, you 'd have to do the math, but the mortgage would be, you know, $1,500 a month plus the taxes and insurance. And I know we pay $1,500 a year in insurance and on our 1,8 27 square foot home. So, basically, those are our concerns. In conclusion, you know, we believe that for homes to be built on this land, we would recommend that it stay at NR2 or at the most, go to NR3, 4. Or if you have the ability to put some kind of restrictions on NR6, please consider that. Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate any questions? Seeing none, thank you. Oh, sure, sure. Go ahead. Yeah, real quick. Hey, Haley, real quick. I have a question. If you would please. No, no, for staff. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Sorry for the confusion. Help me as I'm kind of processing. What is it currently zoned? NR2. NR2. So, assuming we make the logical leap to NR4, let's say, something that's probably fairly easy. What by right goes there? NR4, so that's 20, 25 houses, is that? If that, seven acres? Yeah, four units per acre, roughly, would be permitted. Okay, and so what is that number again? At seven, that would be somewhere in the 20s, 24, 26 homes, probably, once you take in roadways and everything else. Yeah, so we're talking about eight, nine house difference, kind of. And then when you're talking by right, it could be, like you're saying, there's no requirement for brick, there's no requirement. Are there any other, what restrictions, I guess, generally come by right? I guess that's what I'm just kind of trying to evaluate, what could go there if we don't... With NR4? Yes. So it would be restricted to single family, the duplexes in town homes would be taken out of the picture. It would have to follow our single family design standards, so as I said that... Same setbacks, same... Yeah, pretty broad material ranges permitted. The setbacks would be generally the same, six to 10 feet on all sides. Okay, all right, thank you. Fairly comparable. Thank you. Well, while you're there, building line setback from the street, what's the footage? For NR6? For NR6. For NR6 is 10 feet. 10 feet from the property line in the front. Yes, sir. And NR4 is what? Sometimes 25 feet. Is that commercial? Am I getting them confused? I believe it's 20, I can confirm that if you think it's 20. That's fine. I just was curious. Okay, fantastic. All right, you have a question for staff? Yes. Okay, we've got only three cards left to speak and then of course, anybody can speak without a card, so I'd like to get the public through, so I apologize for that. I'm not trying to cut you off, because I have a thousand questions, but I wanted to try to get the public out, so I made a mistake in acknowledging Mr. Husband. I'm just kidding, Mr. Husband. Okay, we have a card wishing not to speak, which is a white card, so for future reference, if you want to register your opposition or support with comments, you can fill out a white card and that lets us know, because sometimes I'll call people who don't want to speak and then they feel like they got to be compelled to. So Barbara Rodman is in support, so if you filled out the wrong card, if Barbara is here, if she wants to speak, I want to give her the opportunity. So Barbara Rodman, 2102 Azalea Street is in support and we have two more blue cards, but this is a public hearing, so anyone who wishes to speak who has not spoken is free to come down and state your name and address and take four minutes. Mr. Barney Cosimo, if you'll come down and state your name and address, your time will begin. My name is Barney Cosimo. I live at 1107 Bolivar Street, which is a dense city, inner city neighborhood right off the square. We have a lot of traffic that goes up and down our street, so I know about density and traffic. I've traveled up and down Audre quite a bit. The street definitely needs to be widened, it's just one of those realities. And the zoning that we're requesting, let me say this, the building we're requesting doesn't affordably is selling this property. We did not have the capacity to develop it ourselves, but we're selling it to Mr. Yale and in hopes that he will do a good job of developing it. I went to look at some of his product on the north side of university and the houses are closer together and they have hardy panel, but I think they 're reasonably done. I don't know that we can do much better for that price point. Material, labor, land, infrastructure is all expensive. So we'd love to build $100,000 homes and house all the people in Denton, but that's just not a reality. So we're going to pass this off to somebody that has the potential at least to build some reasonably affordable units. Thank you. Any questions? Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. The last blue card is Mr. Mark Moffitt. If you'll come down and state your name and address. Good evening, Mayor, Council. Mr. Madras, the city manager for just a second, pretty please. Name and address. Mark Moffitt, 2708 Crater Lake Lane, Denton, Texas. Can we lower the pressure on the water fountain out there so it doesn't cover me? Please. It cooled you down, Mr. Moffitt. It just cooled you down. I thought the fire department showed up or something. I want to reference a couple of things on the overhead here real quick. I serve on the board of directors for the Denton Affordable Housing Corporation. Got on there a couple of years ago and I'm real excited about that. I'm very passionate about providing affordable housing for citizens within our community. This does provide a great opportunity for us to move forward on that, provide home ownership at an affordable rate here in Denton. But to address specifically the zoning issues that are at stake here, I want to talk about that. If you'll go ahead and pull up the overhead here on that. I want to refer to the zoning, excuse me, the staff analysis from zoning here that was presented at the zoning hearing. By the way, we did receive a unanimous decision from Planning and Zoning 4.0. They were in support of what we were doing here. I do want to point out here in staff's analysis of the area here, it does say here the proposed in our 6th district permits uses that are generally compatible with the existing land use pattern in this area. Staff acknowledges that this activity and this use is compatible with the area. The suggestion that it is not is not accurate here. Staff acknowledges that in their report here. Moving on to the next page here, staff talks about the development pattern in the area. I want to point out this sentence here, although the nearby subdivisions are currently zoned NR3 and NR4, much of the area was developed prior to the adoption of the current DDC and thus may slightly exceed current zoning limitations in some of the areas. I think that the gentleman from District 1 had discussed that earlier with one of the folks that had commented. The density in the area is between 3 and 5. They're saying that it's developed over that. We talk about 3.5 to 5.5. We're looking at 4.5. The average in the area is 4.5. Our development here, 33 units on the seven acres is 4.62. As mentioned earlier, we're at one-tenth of a unit over that. The distinction between low density housing and what we call moderate density housing was addressed during the zoning hearing. One of the gentlemen that spoke earlier here had a concern about that. The gentleman from District 1 brought up the issue of it's only eight or nine houses difference. The gentleman at that time did not have an objection to that. So I want to bring that forward there. Some of the issues that we've brought up about the property on the Old North Road. This is the Old North Park, Phase 1, which is off of Chebby Lane here. This is north-oriented going to the right of the screen. If you'll notice, this particular development was platted and built with a 50-foot right of way and it has a 30-foot wide street. The concrete paving is 30 feet wide. Over on Foxcroft, which is just north of there, it's a 30- foot right of way and a 30-foot street. What you'll find throughout all of these developments that are in the area here, you're going to find that the streets are all 30 feet wide. The assertion that fire is not going to be able to get down those streets, I'm sorry, I have to disagree with that. That is not accurate. That is not true. The neighborhood just to the south here has 30-foot right of way and 30-foot street. The one south of that has a 50-foot right of way, 30-foot street. The property just to the north that was developed there, it 's a 50-foot right of way with a 30-foot street. We're actually doing better than the property that's just immediately to the south. I think we had some comments here in objection to what we 're doing. We're actually doing better than what they've got in their own neighborhood. We're providing a 50-foot right of way with a 30-foot street. So I understand a lot of- Needn't wrap up the sentence to wrap up. This is something that council has been talking about for several years now is providing affordable housing and this is an opportunity to do that. I think the development fits the area and it's a good project. Council Member Briggs, you had a question? I'm going to follow up. We were having a conversation earlier. I talked to you about having how the affordable wording attached to this project is off-putting to me a little bit, serving on the homeless leadership team . What we talk about as affordable doesn't necessarily fit the $240,000 home you're talking about. For me, I'm removing that in my decision and just viewing it as a development, which is good. I live right off Old North and I pass that development every day. The people that live there maintain the property and really enjoy it. I have had some parking issue questions, people parking in front of other people's homes, but as far as that, that's the extent of the complaints that we get for that neighborhood. So my question to you, because you guys keep talking about it being affordable, it is my goal as a council member to put more single-family homes into Denton and this serves that. What programs do you guys offer? Because once you sell this land to the developer, you guys are out of it, right? Yes, ma'am. What do you do to guarantee that what you say is going to happen is going to happen and do you, as an affordable board, offer any programs to help people get into these homes that normally couldn't as far as assistance? Sure. So kind of a little background on this development here. We had an opportunity, we had folks approach us about du plex townhome type development. We had another individual approach us about multi-family. In our discussion on what we wanted to do in moving forward with this particular project, we did not feel that it was a good idea to put that in this neighborhood. From my personal perspective, if I saw that multi-family, if I saw that high density townhomes and duplexes and things like that that are highly likely to turn into rental units and things like that, if I were the folks just to the south here in the neighborhood, the folks spoke tonight, and I knew that that was what was being proposed, I'd be up here screaming. I would. I wouldn't want that in my neighborhood. I wouldn't want it. So we did not feel that that was an appropriate mix for this particular neighborhood. That's one of the reasons why we went with this particular opportunity is to provide the opportunity for folks to be able to buy a home on median wages in the area. With respect to your question, to answer your question specifically about how is this affordable? We have to keep in mind that affordable is a relative term. With that, what's affordable in Denton is different from what's affordable in Dallas. What's affordable in another state, another area, things like that. In order for us to continue to provide home ownership opportunities for individuals, for families that want to own a home, this particular project allows us to do that because it gets the overall cost of construction and delivery down to a point where the average median income can afford to pay the monthly payments. In our organization, we have programs that help people go through the process of moving away from being literally homeless all the way up through home ownership. There are programs, there are grants, assistance, things like that to help them along the way. There are educational processes in place, programs, all that kind of stuff. We have a lot of programs in our organization that we use to help people go from literally being on the streets to owning a home. The 250 thing, I realize that that gets people. Several years ago when I bought my home, I said there's no way in the world I'd ever live in a $250,000 home. Now, unfortunately, my tax bill shows that it's $250,000. It's gotten there and certainly I get that. The reality is that your average 40-hour-a-week working individual, the family, has two people working that are making $15 to $20 an hour. For them to go out in the open market, as Mr. Withers mentioned earlier, and buy a home in today's market, they have no chance whatsoever to compete with the investors that are snapping up everything under 250 in our town right now. That's the reality facing most of the people that are trying to just get in their first home. Did that answer your question? I hope it did. I thought I talked long enough. I may have to go to the water fountain again. Yeah. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Moffitt. Thank you. I'm sorry. I don't know if this speaker can answer it, but maybe the developer. I'm not sure. My question is, will there be any deed restrictions in terms of who can own the properties? Because you mentioned investors buying up properties. How do we know that investors won't buy up these properties ? Mr. Yawakia, comment. Yeah, and we are still in the public comment period, so I'm going to let him answer that question, but I want to make sure that there's not any public speakers. I don't think you can put a deed restriction on that, but the goal is single-family ownership by folks from Denton. Okay. Thank you all. Thank you. That's all the cards that I have, but this is a public hearing. And so anyone who wishes to speak on this item? Oh yeah. Okay. Are you also on the ... You filled the blue countdown for the other one, or was it for this one? I filled the countdown for the other one. That's what I saw. That's fantastic. All right. No, I'll pull you out of the other one. Thank you, Mr. Wilkman. Jamie, how do I turn this off right here? I just want to black it out. I'm just ... Oh. Oh. Good evening, Mayor, Council Members, and members of the public. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. I'm here to discuss the issue of the property. Okay. So it wouldn't make a difference what, whether it's stated in our two or went to enter six as to what the width of the streets are going to be. No sir. Okay. And then I've got a followup for the developer. If. If you had a two point six. Duplexes. And would limit you to five units instead of six per acre. Would that be an acceptable. Yes. We don't have a problem with that. That's. I was doing the math in my head. I mean, what you're telling us is four point six. That might give you one or two more possible at the most, but you would say that you couldn't do any duplexes. You couldn't do any. Any. Town homes on that. On that at all. That's correct. And. Clarification of something earlier with NR four. There is an ability to do, to do duplex in NR four. On those lots that are interior to the development. Okay. So. So this would be kind of a compromise that she would not have the duplex option that you would have an NR four, but you'd be allowed one more. Unit per acre than what you would be. If that was the way that it would be. Motioned in past. Excuse me. Correct. If we can get 33 units there, then it's economically feasible. Based on our numbers. That overlay that you're suggesting. Okay. Would be appropriate. And not, we would not be in opposition to that. Thank you. Okay. I have a question for clarification on that. When you say move it to five units per acre to allow for more homes, potentially if you'd get them on there. Well, the NR six allows six units per acre. They're saying 4.62, which works out to almost exactly 33. If you just call it five. That that gives you an option of. Up to two more lots on there. Yeah. And I think what I heard when this was brought up earlier was that you're not opposed to just simply saying as an overlay. You're limited to the lots that you presented on your site plan. That would be correct. I think there is a bit of consternation in terms of where, what detention has to be done. We may end up losing another lot for more detention. Okay. In the Northwest. So you're, so that. So you're okay with the 30. That was my only thought is. You're yours. Provides at least if there is an option and opportunity, which I don't think there is based upon what I understand about real estate development. You're not going to get many more lots in there. You might lose one based upon what you said about the 30. You're not going to get many more lots in there. And then you're going to lose one based upon what you said about the detention. So. That's my only thought about that is. If we, if we have an overlay that says you're restricted to . The lots as presented. During the ordinance presentation that was presented on the site plan. Provides a little bit more certainty. So that's. That'd be fine. Is that okay? Okay. All right. Can I have some clarity? Sure. I presume what. Councilman Ryan saying. Is that. You're not going to see 33. Meaning not worth stuck with the plan. If we find a different plan or there's a different. That we still stand at 33. You mean as far as if you reconfigure the plan. You're still limited to 33. And 33 lots. And that works for us. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. Any more comments. Okay. Mayor pro tem. I'm going to go ahead and start with a comment. I have a meeting where I give my standard speech about density and housing development in Denton. And I apologize to fellow council members because they've probably heard this speech. You're going to leave. Okay. Yeah. All right. Denton has a housing shortage. You can have a housing shortage because of increased demand or decreased supply. The way to remedy housing shortages is to increase supply. And that's the way to do it. So I'm going to start with a comment. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. When we have these projects come up in front of us and we talk about affordable housing. It's not just that this project might be affordable. Is that by adding 33 units. Of single family housing. You're freeing up 33 units that are lesser priced to go on the market and perhaps be available to people. So that's the supply part of the equation. When we restrict supply. We're not going to be able to do that. We're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So we're going to be able to do that. So when I look at this, and I didn't know, I mean, as I read the backup, it's like when I found out that the density is really the same as some of the neighborhoods that existed prior to, or just a little bit off, I mean, that's not even very minute, as to, that were developed before the plan. And if, depending on the drainage issues, they may even lose a lot or two, which means if they lose a lot or two, it's probably going to bring it down to what's really close in line with the rest of the neighborhood. So it's difficult for me to punish that development or somehow make it conform. Because if it was in our four, it would be different than most of the surrounding area. And that once you add roads and those kinds of things, you may be less than four units per acre. So this isn't anything, whenever we go different direction than either planning or zoning or staff, in no way does that mean we're not, we're criticizing their work, we're criticizing their analysis. It just means we're charged with this and looking at it. So I appreciate certainly the effort that staff puts into it. And I think they understand that that's not the case. There's no reason to be concerned about that. The streets, you've all pointed out something we've known for a long time that we do need to address. And that is our current residential subdivision rules and regs for the width of a street. The old streets in Denton, y'all know what I'm talking about. They're much wider. Now they may be too much, but I will tell you, the residential requirements for streets, these are criteria manual, 30 feet, you said 25 feet. The staff said 25 feet. Well, most of them are 30 and it's tight. So that's a conversation for another day, but that's something we need to look at because it is a concern and certainly in some of the older streets, you can't, that's why we've had to restrict parking on one side. Exits. Got a question for staff. I thought that pursuant to fire code or I'm not sure what code, that subdivisions are required to have two ingress/egress points or is that just ideal and it's not necessarily prescribed by code? There is a prescription within the fire code. I cannot remember what the number of units is that triggers two remote points of access. Maybe size of lot or something like that. Okay. But if that would have been something that the fire department had an issue with, when would that be addressed? Has that gone through the pre-development stages so that would be addressed? It sounds like the applicant may have a question for that. Council okay for me if the applicant hasn't answered that question or some input? It would be addressed at the time of platting. We just haven't reached that submittal process yet. Okay. At DRC it was addressed. There were two people from the fire department there and actually this product that we're doing this has an ingress/egress both on Audra. Okay. So that's been addressed. One of the fire marshals said we would like a second fire hydrant in there so we know what our maximum run is and we were able to work that out in terms of where that would go. Okay. Fantastic. Thank you. So there's been a lot of discussion about affordable housing and folks I got to tell you I've been investing in real estate in this town for 25 years and it's unprecedented what I've seen in the last three or four or five years. I mean houses that were bought for 80 to $100,000 just literally six or seven years ago are selling for 150 to $170,000 and those are three bedroom, 1, 000 square foot homes with one bath that's about 50 years old. So that part of the equation really isn't factoring into my decision making in this regard because it's so subjective. I mean yes we have some governmental criteria but what's affordable here is not affordable in San Francisco and the like. So I'm just going to tell you I'm going to be supporting this with the restrictions that the development is done. How many minutes is that Dalton? That was three minutes and that was taking out their questioning. Okay. You asked for me to do it. Wow. Okay. All right. So I just wanted to share with the people here my rationale . I didn't want you to go away wondering why I decided the way that I did so that if you have any questions about that later on you can ask me. Sarah? I like the idea of time limits for us honestly. That's out of posting. Yeah I know. It's out of posting. So thank you all again for participating. Great discussion and I just appreciate the community participation because that's what's key in these type of matters. Councilmember Briggs? So for clarification the overlay or the restriction is going to be maximum 33 units maybe less? Is that? Well maximum 33. 33 yeah. So that's what we're going to be putting the money on based upon the platting process and engineering but if they are able to squeeze one more on that restriction would prevent them from doing that is my understanding. Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? Mayor Pro Tem? I'm going to move for approval with the condition that if I 'm incorrect on this condition hopefully somebody will just jump in. So we're going to add an overlay district that will prohib it any attached multifamily units. Attached single family. Single family units sorry. And that would create a maximum of 33 units for this plat. Did I get that right? Yes except and maybe this is too technical but when we say attached units that means duplexes as well correct? Well there are two different classifications and I had listed both duplexes and attached single family. Okay so both attached multifamily and attached single family units. Attached single family which would be a town home and a du plex which would be a two unit. Can I make the recommendation? Yeah maybe you should make the motion. No why don't we just say it's restricted though use allowed is 33 houses 33 lots. Single family homes. Yeah okay so that the overlay I'll strike everything I just said motion for approval with modification that we're adding an overlay district that will allow only 33 homes on this particular plat single family homes maximum of 33. Mr. City Attorney based upon the discussion you've heard here this evening as far as council's desire for this particular motion and overlay district does that seem her motion in house where did seem to produce the result that it seems we're looking for? In my opinion it does. Okay thank you. All right Councilmember Ryan. I will second that motion. All right we have a motion and a second with an appropriate overlay district of maximum 33 homes as presented in the plat or the concept plan today by the applicant. Oh Councilmember Hudsworth. I have one thing Mr. Yale when we're done I'd ask for your contact information because I want to try to follow up and maybe we can set up a neighborhood meeting reading the tea leaves I want to try to make sure everyone is is kind of has a voice if you will and so I'll get that from you. Yeah if you could yeah. Prior to setting this up in October we had a meeting at the apartment building caddy corner from this project and we invited 172 or we sent out 172 pieces of mail we had 18 to 20 of the neighbors many of who are here that did in fact come and speak and when we get ready to apply we'll be happy to do that again. Yes sir no yeah I'd like to sit in and kind of. I understand. Yes sir thank you. Okay Councilmember Briggs. So with a maximum of 33 I just want to go on record say I will be supporting this but also the chibi the houses on chibi that have been developed have held up well and I am pretty proud of them being in my district and so I just wanted to say. We have a motion in a second with the appropriate overlay district as has been communicated on the record let's vote on the motion please. And carry 60 all right thank you all moving on to agenda item number 7 c hold a public hearing consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton Texas regarding an initial zoning classification of neighborhood residential 6 district on approximately 16.39 acres and we'll wait for those who would like to. Not sit in on the rest of this council meeting to exit. Okay I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing and we'll have public hearing for staff presentation and we do have some blue cards wishing speed for being a public hearing anyone's has the opportunity to speak. All right good evening this is case 1723 the cope edition. So the request before you is to hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance for an initial zoning of neighborhood residential 6 on approximately 16.39 acres the properties outlined here in yellow it's currently designated as our D5 X. You may remember on November 7th this case came before you and the request was denied subsequently on November 14th motion was made to reconsider and that's why we're here tonight. So the property as I've mentioned is located at the northeast corner of May Hill and Mills it was annexed into the city in 2013 and given the place holder designation of our D5 X. I wanted to point out that under this current designation the property could not be subdivided into lots of less than five acres which would mean a maximum of three lots could be generated out of the property under the current zoning. This proposed error I'm sorry the criteria for approval and for a rezoning case as we've mentioned before are that it conforms to the future land use map and that it facilitates the provision of infrastructure. In this case the future land use is moderate residential the requested in our sixth district fits comfortably within the designation of moderate residential which allows between four and twelve units per acre. As we've discussed this typically serves as a transition zone between lower density areas and either higher density or more commercialized areas and we see that here on our future land use map. Looking at the existing infrastructure as I mentioned the property is at the corner of May Hill and Mills. May Hill is a primary arterial currently under expansion Mills Road is a collector so it will have between 65 and 70 feet of right of way that will allow for two three lanes of traffic and sidewalks on either side of the road. Those perimeter street improvements on Mills will be assessed in the exact requirements determined at the time of platting. You can also see her on the map in the blue and green water and sewer are available in proximity to the property along May Hill and will have to be extended for this development. Notification was sent about the request we received one written response in opposition one in favor. I want to note that those properties that are noted here on the map in red and green are those that both fall within the 200 foot buffer around the property and are within the city limits of the city. Staff is recommending approval of this request because of its compatibility with the mixture of uses in this area. Its consistency with the goals of the Denton plan 2030 for moderate residential and that it will facilitate the provision of infrastructure along Mills Road. The planning and zoning commission also recommended approval of this request seven to zero. And with that I could stand for any questions. Excuse me. Council member Gregory. We had conversations when we were doing a bunch of the annexations that the original request for zoning from the RD-5 would not require the normal fees. Did that ever go into effect? I believe the standard fees apply to any rezoning request. They are. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any more questions for staff? All right. Will you do -- I'm sorry, Mayor Pro Tem, I thought you were reaching for your request to speak. Yes, I am. Thank you for reminding me. All right. I will not make the same mistake this time as I did the last time. So if the applicant wants to come down and make a presentation, certainly willing to do that. And the rules have been stated in the last one. So 10 minutes, I think, per speaker for a maximum of 20 minutes for those representing the applicant. Is that correct? Okay. Thank you. All right. State your name and address. Your time will begin. Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. My name is Mark Cope. I live at 4405 Canock Drive in McKinney, Texas. My brother Stephen Cope and I own a small family development company in the Metroplex. We were raised by two parents who had 13 children, if you can believe that, and taught us the value of community. And that has really affected our lives. So in our developments, they taught us hard work, they taught us mercy, they taught us fairness. So we always try and create a product that's not only beautiful but attainable for families, because we come from a big one. And obviously the success of the family unit is central to the success of society. Almost a year ago, we were presented with the opportunity to purchase the approximate 16-acre parcel at, as you see in the northeast corner, May Hill and Mills. And of course, whenever we buy, we have to consider our purchases carefully because they represent important and calculated risks we have to take on in the family business. Thus, during our option period, and before my brother and I did in fact purchase the land, we met with a large roomful of competent city planners, engineers, and public works professionals from the city of Denton. They made it very clear in the meeting that our various initial ideas for the parcel would not work, in part because the parcel was subject to the City Council's recently approved Ordinance 2015-026, which of course created the Denton 2030 plan, as we've heard about tonight, and its associated future land use map. Key Action 2 of that ordinance addressed the procedures for zoning decisions based on the new future land use map. Specifically, Principle 3 states, "Proposed developments that clearly support the implementation of the plan should be approved." The city staff helped us to see that to the west of our land is a business innovation district that includes mixed use sections, areas of high density, and also commercial activity. But to our east is a low density residential area. Accordingly, the future land use map created by city ordinance directs that our parcel be zoned as moderate residential, which is defined as 4 to 12 units per acre. Specifically, Key Action 19 states the purpose for this. It is to provide "transition and buffer between conflicting land use." Of course, the conflict that is identified by the city on the future land use map is the higher density developments to our west and the lower density developments to our east. We are the moderate residential buffer. The City of Denton also made it very clear in our meeting that although the ordinance gave us the defined right to apply for a zoning density of up to 12 units per acre, they were certain that the council would prefer the parcel be zoned in R6 rather than MU12. And so that's exactly what we did. Although this is not the correct time to discuss specifics that will come later before this body, we actually are working on a single family residential design concept that will be closer to approximately 5.25 units per acre given our total acreage, which is less than half the maximum density allowed by council's ordained plan for our site. This land currently holds a temporary zoning, as we just discussed, for newly annexed residential land. It is zoned with the correct permanent zoning. And we're asking for one of the lowest moderate ratings that the city ordinance identifies as the highest and best use for this buffer piece. We followed the city's ordained plan and relied upon the city's statements and ordinances to make critical investment decisions. And therefore, we'd be very grateful for the council's approbation today. Any questions for the applicant? Seeing none, thank you. Oh, go ahead. I've got six minutes. Yeah. I should just say when we met with, and if you'd like to, Stephen is my brother, if you'd like to come make comments with the remaining minutes, Stephen, I'm almost finished here. But when we met with the Planning and Zoning Committee, we had actually come, because we thought maybe we'd do duplexes there. And they said essentially that the codes just about forbid it, because you have to have a garage that faces front and sideways. And with the lot widths, it was virtually impossible to make it work. We didn't fight for two seconds. We're easy going guys, we're as easy as they come. We said, okay, well, forget that. What will work? And they said NR6 is the designation that works here. And we said, great, let's roll with it. And so we did. Happy to answer any questions. They talked about needing to improve mills and add the sidewalk. But I was told and assumed there'll be a large discussion and a whole other approval process as we bring a plat and discuss exactly what the city wants and how all of the issues will be resolved that come in that phase, but that this was primarily a meeting to discuss proper zoning. And so grateful for the opportunity to be here, really, really am. Thank you. All right. Anybody else from the applicant wish to speak? Okay. Thank you. Next speaker will be Bill Butler. Bill Butler, if you'll come state your name and address, your time will begin. The speaker that will be next will be Stephen Koch, but I think you've decided not to speak. Okay. So the next speaker will be George Carroll. Mayor Cashman and women, Bill Butler, 4923 Mills Road. Me along with my wife and her family own 40 acres adjacent to this property. We have our dreams of how we'd like to develop that property. And it would not be NR6, even if you approved it. We live, we feel that that corner is the gateway and sets the tone for what could be future development down Mills Road. And I feel like squeezing that many houses on that piece of property sets the wrong tone. I realize the need for affordable housing, but I think that this area, let me back up. If you go along Black Road and you see what's happened with the development from Lakeview on forward, you see a lot of nice large homes being developed on acreage lots. I'm not saying that that's what should be there, but I think NR6 is way too dense, especially when you've got a high school across the street. You've got already have traffic problems at the intersection. You're going to have, I believe, a divided street with the completion of Mayhill Road. So ingress and egress is going to require access across two lanes of traffic coming out on Mayhill. If you put ingress and egress only on Mills Road, that will put too much burden on that area. Plus, I don't believe there's really 16 acres there to develop. Finally, we've seen very little as far as specifics. We don't know setbacks. We haven't seen, we don't know square footages. We have very little information to even contest what should be there or not. So we would like to have more information. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Hussbeth. I have a question for you. Well, moreover, so before serving here, I served on planning and zoning. I just want to let you know that I absolutely understand the desire for more information. It's the most arduous part of serving on planning and zoning because you have to make a decision, does the zoning fit with every option that's allowed there? Right? So you've got to look at it holistically. Does everything in this column fit there? And if no, then you vote no. And then at the platting, you get to the details of what it 's going to be, what it looks like. So I just wanted to tell you- So the previous discussion was platting, was that the plat ting discussion? No. Well, they had a lot more detail. Yes. Well, they offered that up early by choice, but that's not required. It's kind of where I'm going. And so I just wanted to tell you, I understand because it's just natural. And I struggled with the same thing when I was on planning and zoning. But really, the charge is to look at it and see if everything listed in that column fits in comparison with the entire area, that sort of thing. And then that's kind of how you gauge. And then at platting, you get into some of the details and that sort of thing. So anyway, I wanted to let you know you're spot on. You should serve. So thank you. I have some real estate development background. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Excuse me. Next speaker will be Kenneth Stout. And after Kenneth will be David Shelton. All right. He'll state your name and address. Your time will begin. Thank you. My name is Kenneth Stout. And I lived out there on, my wife's lived on the place now since 1946. We're right on the rear corner, which is across the street from this, that y'all are offering. I don't know for sure whether y'all know about it. Cooper Creek runs pretty close to there. Cooper Creek washed out over on Fish Trap Road several years ago. It washed out for a couple of years. At the end of Mills Road on the east end of it, we have a two-lane, a one-lane bridge with three and $400,000 houses on it. It's a fact. Okay. We have Ashley Oaks got about 8,800 mobile homes out there with probably four families in each mobile home. The next problem that we have is we have the school district has Ryan High School out there. Those things are really clogged up early in the morning, late in the afternoons. You have many, many people on the road. We have an apex on May Hill, as you're getting off Mills, that's pretty hard to see over. And they try to drive about 80 miles an hour once they get past through the stop sign after they waited an hour or two down the road trying to get on the road. So I'm not totally against the development. I just think that you all need to know that the project that you all talked about just before this one, it dumps right down Cooper Creek Road too. All the Audrey Lane, all of that, even part of McKinney Street gets back in there and comes down by the federal underground building and runs down Cooper Creek. Now you all have about the same problem on the other side of McKinney Street, which is Pecan Creek. Half of Denton runs down through Pecan Creek. So we have a major problem out there that I'd like for you all to really take a look at and see if you can help us out. Now the water and sewer, we would enjoy that coming out there because we were in the city, we hadn't been in there many years, but we had no convenience to dial them at all. Now the 16 point something acres that they say is in there is not what's there. Half of that road still belongs and paid taxes of art by the farmers that owned it. When you take that into consideration, your houses may have to be lowered down in the amount of houses put on it. Because the commissioners years ago, the county commission ers said, the old farmers said, you give us half the road and the neighbor give half road, we'll build a road and maintain it for you. I'm talking about the commissioners back 50, 60 years ago. So now the city's come in and took over everything and then we have to fund all of the water, the sewer, the street and the drainage. So it kind of gets under our skin a little bit. So I wish you all would kind of consider a little bit about it. I would like to have water and sewer off of them. I'd like to know a little bit about whether the road's going to come mostly off of the part that's being developed or whether we're going to have to be chipped into it in order to get on the city water sewer. So we got a problem. And I appreciate y'all's consideration and I'll be more than happy to talk with anybody. But I tell you, Ashley Oaks, after it was built, the city council people several years ago approved the thing. On Mills Road, three quarters of the way down, it has washed the dirt out at least 10 foot wide and maybe 15 foot deep. And that's happening. So when y'all improve all the stuff up on Monk and Birdman in there, if you just look across where y'all's bridge washed out on Mingo Road, stayed out two or three years, you'll find out where all the water come from. It's just a simple fact. I certainly thank y'all for listening and I hope that you can be real wise in your decision you make. Thank you. I believe we have a question. Council Member Briggs. So you live within the city limits and do not have access to sewer and water? Oh, probably a million dollars, funds, if I have to repair, I mean, fix part of the road. We've got a two-lane pig trail out there is what we have. And I'm talking about what farmers talk about. They might not know how to run a computer, may not even ever want to learn how. But it's a fact that y'all are dumping a lot of stuff out on us and the people out in Lakeview Boulevard, which is going out further, those are four and $500,000 houses. Now you've got two more roads that may later on be built in there, which would come around and east end and maybe hook up to some of the other creek up the other way. But most people don't want to build roads across Clear Creek. It's got too wide a drainage area. So I can understand the DFW airport. I mean, the whole city down there wants a way to get to a s anger known up further north. But it's a major problem. We have a, I believe, Mayor Pro Tem, did you have a question or comment? Well, I have a question for staff. So I'm sorry. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Your comments. Yes, sir. Thank you. I'm sorry. I hit you. You want to you want to ask it now? If I can. Is that okay? Or just wait till then. We've got two more cards. Okay. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. David Shelton. And then up next will be Mr. Jimmy Brown. State your name and address and your time will begin. David Shelton, 5050 Mills Road. I'm just southeast of this property. That's what I'm worried about is the traffic that we have because we got a narrow little road there and it tees off. And we don't have with the expansion of Mayhill. I don't I don't think we're going to get a street light in there. So we're just going to have to be with the school and this addition. We're just going to have to be kind of waiting and waiting and waiting to get across Mayhill. And that's what really worries me is just all the traffic. So if we go the other way, we got what four or five miles to go back around to Trinity to get out. So that may be what we have to do. Thank you. Councilmember Gary, do you have a question? Oh, you're still up there for a request to speak. Yeah, that's right. Mr. Brown, speak and then this is a public hearing. So after this last blue card, anybody wants to come down and speak. If I forgot a card or something, you're certainly welcome to come down. Just state your name and address. Your time will begin. I'm Jimmy Brown. I live at 5811 Mills Road. I moved out there in 1972 and I drove to work and back every day on that go. But we got annexed and the city did fix us a pretty good road. Give credit where credit's due, but it ain't good enough to hold the traffic. That's 164 more cars if he builds 82 houses on that. And I understand they will all go into that addition off of Mills. Is that correct? Well, we'll have staff address that. Yes, we'll have staff answer that question when they come up for further questions. And I heard through the grapevine, but them grapevines get crooked sometimes, that Mills and Mayhill was not getting a traffic light. Would you check that out first? And because it's going to definitely need a traffic light because you've got the high school and about 60% of them come out the back way. And then they go, the ones that go east, go down to Trinity where there's a one-way bridge. And I like the idea for the addition. But address the traffic for us. That's the main thing is the traffic problem we're going to have and the runoff water. Other than that, we got no problem. We just got a big problem with the traffic and the runoff water. Thank you, sir. And I forgot that. They have privilege of being here speaking with you tonight . The last time I was before this council, '98, when they gave me my retirement papers. Fantastic, we've got a couple of questions for you, I think , Mr. Brown. Council Member Briggs. Mine is for staff. Okay. But I do want to address that because the last time this item came up, it was told to council that a light was not planned to go there at Mills and Mayhill. So three nights ago, three or four nights ago, I was coming back from downtown Denton and I came up Mayhill and turned down Mills and traffic was backed up, clumped to the high school come out. And I've got nothing against the development. I said I wasn't going to protest it or nothing, but the traffic, the traffic's going to -- and if we go back to the east, we've got to go back to 380 or go down to McKinney Street. And so either way you go, you're going to have a big, big traffic problem. Like I say, I moved out there in '72 to get out in the country, which the city come to me, I know they would, but no problem with that. But please help us with the traffic. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to take a break after your question. One of your neighbors said that it was a pig trail. It was when I moved out there. Which one is it? Goats. I happen to have goats and he raised pigs. That's a great answer. Thank you all. Thank you very much, Mr. Brown. And those are the last of the blue cards, so it's still -- public hearing is still open. But let's take about a five-minute break. It's about 9.50. So we'll come -- We have one more than one. Well we also have people that have said let's take a break and we'll come back and get you. Yeah, in five minutes. Yep. All right. We're reconvening this public hearing for agenda item 7C. We've gone through all the cards wishing to speak. It's a public hearing. Anybody wishing to speak, come down and state your name and address and your time will begin. I'm sorry if I missed it. You bet. My name is George Carroll. I live at 5200 Millard Road. Can you hear me? Yes. I am worried about the safety of the road. I have a trailer parked down for me and when I turn into my driveway, I have to listen to people screech because I'm turning. I'm 500 feet from their exit and most accidents happen half a mile from your house. So people, yeah, they don't see me. And those houses you're going to build are going to be rent als. Rent -- they're going to rent, not buy. And they're going to be -- the traffic is going to be enormous. And I move and can't handle it. Now, my two cents. I worked all my life for my property. I brought battles. I brought society. I am a Vietnam veteran. I like my acres. I mow it. I keep it. It's my dream. I've been 55 years of work and being a Vietnam vet is not nice. People don't like you. So I like my five acres. I like mowing it. Thank you. Thank you, sir. And thank you for your service to our country. All right. Anybody else wishing to speak? This is a public hearing. On this agenda item, anybody else wishing to speak? One more time. Anybody else wishing to speak? All right. We will close the public hearing on this agenda item. Councilmembers, questions? Councilmember Briggs? Well, I would like clarification on the intersection of May hill and Mills because I know that last time Mr. Estes said that there was not a plan light, but I've heard since then that there may be. My issue with this area is the traffic, and if you're on Mills after Mayhill's expanded, you're never going to be able to turn left, and we have the buses there, and they need to get to the kids on time. So I was just going to bring up the light at a different time, but if you have news for this item, I'd like to hear it. Yes, Councilmember Briggs, I did check with our city engineer, and he did confirm that there's lights planned for both. I knew about the one at Russell Newman, but there's also one planned for Mills, apparently. So those should be constructed in the next two or three years. So I just confirmed that with him about 10 minutes ago. Mayor Pro Tem? I have a couple questions for staff about Mills Road and some of the ETJ. So with respect to the presentation, there was a shaded out portion that was the ETJ that kind of is adjacent to one corner of the property, and I guess this might be a question for you and/or legal. With the new annexation laws, would these properties be able to be involuntarily annexed? I believe those properties are all under a non-annexation agreement that I want to say runs until 2020. So at that time, they would, or if they seek to develop before, then they would be asked to voluntarily annex into the city . If they were to seek to develop, but if they did not want to develop, if the owners did not want to develop, then could the non- annexation agreements be extended? Yeah, let's let legal tech stand. Yes, I mean, if you recall those annexation agreements, if this is one of the ones that the council extended last year, they go until August 2020. And if the council wished to extend it for whatever reasons , you could do so because you have up to 45 total years to extend those NAAs. So what about, okay, the reason I'm asking is because the 2030 plan calls for moderate density or moderate development in this area, but how realistic is the development of this area given the current state of the annexation laws? For those areas that are still in the ETJ that are not covered by NAAs, it'll be much more difficult for the city to perform invol untary annexations as opposed to the voluntary. The voluntary annexation process stayed the same. Sure. So involuntary annexations, depending on the population size, there's two different ways that the city would have to go through in order to annex them. Just in my opinion, after reviewing the bill that came into law, it'll be very, very difficult for the city to actually accomplish that. To accomplish an involuntary annexation. Yes, that is correct. Yeah. And then, okay, so that really helps me. Thank you very much, Aaron. The property that's just to the north, wait, is that north? Yeah. No, it's just to the west of the subject property. What is the zoning classification of that property? Are you referring to this parcel? Can you do this? Or, okay. I don't think I have a better map for you. The blue hatch marks are? Yeah, just go to the left a little bit, my left. I think it's a commercial property of some kind. It's adjacent to, it's bordering Mayhill. Yes, and I don't think I have the, let me confirm that real quick. It looks like three plots on one of the maps, on the Flum map. Yes, so these are separate parcels. It's a mixture. I believe there is some commercial uses here on Mayhill. And then there's some residential scattered in here. The majority of that is RD5X at this point. The areas on this map that are shown with the blue hatch mark are what's in the ETJ. And then the development that's a little bit further up on Mayhill that has Madison Road and it's kind of a newer development, what is that zoning by Holland? That is NR4. NR4, okay. So with the NR6 designation, is the applicant opposed to NR 4 or is that just something that staff suggested during the 6th designation? I believe with the density they're seeking to put on the property, NR6 is what would be required to get them to that five to five and a half units per acre that they discussed. And then the ingress and egress would be only on Mills Road ? Yes, the development code requires that if you have access to a lesser classification of street, in this case Mills being a collector and Mayhill being an arterial, that you take access off of that lesser classification. So I mean, that's kind of where I'm stuck is the Mills Road ingress and egress. I'm okay with developing the lot. Probably not okay with that level of density because I think in this instance the 2030 plan is wrong. I mean, I don't think that area is going to become moder ately developed unless there's voluntary annexations. There could be, but it doesn't seem to be in our near future. So really what we're left with is that Mills situation, which there's students going out of Ryan High School in the back way. I was Ryan High School and part of the I was telling the manager, I think one of the really hard things about being on council in the city that you grew up in is that you have a lot of memories of things. And I had a friend who had a car accident on Mills and May hill and then he became an opioid addict and now he's dead. So that's just kind of my thought process when I hear zoning requests. So with respect to Mills, would it be possible to override that and say we want to exit at Mayhill as opposed to Mills if we were to put conditions on it? There may be a variance procedure to deviate from that, but the strict code requirement would put them only having access to Mills. How wide is Mills? Currently, let's see if I have that number. Big enough for goats and pigs. Oh Mills was the pig trail? Yeah, it's big enough for goats and pigs. Yeah, I don't have the current width on there, but I know it is two lanes unimproved at this point. And so they would have to improve half of that. Yes, sir. Yeah, perimeter street improvements would be required. But they would only have to improve their portion that is adjacent to Mills Street. That's correct. Okay. All right. Let me ask you a question. I don't have the clarification. So what I'm hearing is a traffic concern from the public and I understand that. We've just heard about it a lot. So what I'm hearing from you is, okay, if that's in the ETJ , it's unlikely unless somehow they request voluntary annex ation. So a follow up question is, do our non annexation agreements, when they expire automatically, are they signing on to an agreeing to a voluntary annexation if those expire? Yes, part of the, and those agreements that you adopted last year have a voluntary consent annexation on the upon conclusion, unless you choose to extend them. So on the traffic issue, let's say it doesn't get developed , which means you're not going to have additional, I mean, somebody's talking about 40 acres and how they want to develop it. So anything you put on that road, whether it's in our four and our three, six, you're going to be generating traffic on Mills Road. And it seems like the primary concern is there's a lot of traffic from the school and from Ryan High School. And I understand that. So your concern about the ingress and egress off of Mills, is that because of the traffic or what? Yeah, my concern would be people essentially competing with the high school traffic to get in and out of their resid ences, both turning left and right, because it depends on if kids are going to school or coming back from school. So and I understand that. I guess I'm hard pressed to make decisions. I mean, I know that's the existing situation out there. I don't think that was necessarily of the city's making. I mean, that Ryan's been out there. I don't know for how long . How long has Ryan been out there? Long time and we've, how many? 25 years. And we're dealing with that issue on McKinney. So but you asked a question and I guess the applicant can answer it if there's a desire to have a lower density. And I mean, if you want that answer, we can we can at least pose that to them. I'm curious. But OK, if is there a and we'll give them some time to think about it. If we have any other questions from Council and Council have any other questions? Can I clarify the situation on Mills? Yes, you can. It's not just that there's traffic. There are people with learners permits and they're driving crazy. It's like really crazy. No, this particular spot is crazy traffic. OK. Any other questions from staff? If not, then there's a question on the floor for the applicant. As far as any possibility of a lower density, I don't think Mr. City attorney, if we if if that hypothetically speaking, if there was an agreement to that for a different zoning classification, are we able to do that at this time or does that have to go through the whole process again? I think below the N.R. 6, the it would depart from what PNZ was reviewed and then made based a recommendation on. My opinion would be that if we wanted to go further down zoning, we would have to kick it back to PNZ to start the review process as an N.R. for. OK. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Come on. Thank you, Mark. Well, thank you. The applicant is we're not opposed at all. You want to answer that? You'll do a better job answering it. Name is Steve Cope address or address. Yes, sir. Oh, yes. Eight twenty five Waters Creek Boulevard, Texas. I'm the older wiser brother. So that's true. Kidding. He's a smarter one. Hello. The question is maybe could we do rather than going back to PNZ like you mentioned, couldn't we just follow the previous applicant and do an overlay if we're willing to do that of like five point two five units per acre. We have a preliminary plat that we've already drawn up that has a lot of green space in it already. And we're sitting at five point two five. So we'd be happy to stay at that number or less and not exceed it if we can obtain approval tonight with that. How many how many actual lots does that represent right now that represents is it 86 86 lots on the 16 and a half acre tract. Okay. All right. So if it were actually four units per acre, it would be 60 about 68 to 70 homes, give or take. I just did the four times 16.5. It would and that would increase the home price and the lot price. Obviously, that's that by nature. So, all right. Well, that's helpful. So what you're saying is you've got 86 homes that if there was an overlay district to say, hey, we will. And so we'd be willing to limit it to a maximum of 86 single family homes as we did in the last one. It seems like there's been some concern about what else can go on there, especially with the lack of information as far as seeing the platter. But you're saying you're okay with a restriction to say single family homes. Yes. And I've got a copy of the plan if you'd like me to throw that up real quick. It's it's it's up to you. The council would like to see it. Council. I would like to see it. Okay, sure. Yeah. I'll bring that down. Certainly not a plat. But it is a concept plan. Sure. No, that's fine. I don't know how this thing works. So top of the screen is north. So Mills Road is down to the bottom. Yeah, running left and right on the screen. Mayhills rain north south. So this is this is a conceptual layout that we've been working on to really identify the utility infrastructure. And perimeter roadway improvements that we would need to do . Okay. All right. Okay. We have a couple of questions. Excuse me. Council member Briggs. You mentioned there was a lot of green space in this plan. Can you show me where that is? So right now we've got our property actually goes over to this line right here. So we've got this identified as a detention area, but we're not going to need all of that land area for detention. So some of it's just going to be some common open space for this for this subdivision, as well as the right away. We're dedicating a long Mills Road because that's not being improved right now. We'll all be part of a parkway for the for the roadway. Okay. Okay. Yes, sir. I just want to point out that we've spoken to a couple of builders or land developers. So, you know, we'll put in the lots and then create the community and sell that off to some really qualified builders. They wanted to take a couple lots for, you know, swimming pool and a park and things like that. So we don't know where that's going to be. This is very conceptual. So that would be the extra green space on top of the detention and the other items that Aaron mentioned. Okay. Okay. Seeing no more requests to speak. Thank you all very much. Thank you, gentlemen. Excuse me. I see no more requests to speak from council members. My colleagues, Councilmember Gregory, they were I move approval of the zoning change. I feel comfortable about this. I understand that the neighbors concerns about traffic. I think the fact that when Mayhill Road widens and when there's a signal light there, it's actually going to be easier to get on and off of Mayhill Road. I think also the fact that the city has acquired the rights to develop McKinney Street, East McKinney Street from Text Dot. We're moving that property along. And I think that that's going to take some pressure off of Mills also because people, students and faculty and parents have all learned about Mills Road and getting into Ryan High School the back way. But they're not going to need that anywhere near as much as they did before once McKinney is widened and when we have the sidewalks. If it's necessary that we put a restriction on the zoning to a maximum of 86 lots, I'll do that if that helps to make it pass. And that being the only use. Yes, yes, yes. All right. Okay, so if you could repeat your motion. I move that we approve the zoning change with a maximum of 86 homes. Single family. And no other uses allowed. And no other uses allowed. That's exactly what I meant. It's getting late though. Yeah, that's okay. Council Member Ryan. I will second it. I know on the other side of Mayhill we recently rezoned some area to community mixed use that is, this is going to be a kind of the buffer into that lighter use as you work your way along that way. Okay, all right. So we have a motion to for approval, restricting the number of single family homes to 86 homes on 86 lots, and no other uses allowed that reflect your motion. And we have a second Council Member Hudson. Yeah, is there a way for us to because I think I like the project, but I think Mr. Butler's and his neighbors are spot on. And I just don't know the traffic patterns as well on Mill Street. Is there a way for staff to kind of look at that? And because it may be some some directional things that may be because two years isn't close to me as far as the signal light. So I don't really hold that doesn't give me any comfort. I understand it'll take a while for the neighborhood to develop plan all that. It'll probably take. Yeah, but but just looking at it, you know, maybe maybe the lights be there. But even if it does be, I'd like to know those traffic patterns. And if it needs to be a left turn only because McKinney Street will be up and running out of the high school or right turn only because most of the traffic comes in into the school. So when they're leaving the school, if we force them right and kind of take that way, whatever, I just would ask that if staff could take a look at those patterns as this project progresses so that we can be sensitive to. The neighbors concerns because I think they are well based. Okay. All right. Okay, we have a motion in a second. See no more requests to speak. Let's vote on the board, please. But Councilmember Riggs, I do have a question. So what is permitted within right will be disregarded with this kind of overlay. Yes, restricted to single family homes. Okay. So the the amount of homes that they have, does it fall into. How many homes per acre, is it five point. 5.25. So it's less than six and it could be less than that if they get rid of a couple of years. Okay, thank you. Is there no way to change the ingress and egress with an overlay or some type of restriction. At this point, no, I only say that because we have not looked at me but the plan that he showed tonight was the first time we saw it we have not seen a preliminary plat. So once we look at that that's where we will look at the traffic patterns, ingress egress, there might be other development that's proposed by the time that comes in. So at that point we would have to look at at all that together . Okay. Thank you. Yeah, and I'll be truthful I don't know if I would want to come in off of my hill and to my hill. I mean that would be a. I mean you don't want people zooming down. Well, Mills is only 24 feet wide and that's where the school bus has come from so that's one of the reasons that I was considering. Sure, a different. Well, and I think that I think what Councilmember Hussbett has asked is, is there something we can do outside of those kind of things to see if we can mitigate that somewhat maybe it's even a right hand turn lane. At Mills and may I mean depending on the planning process and all that but okay. So we have motion to second. Any more discussion. All right, let's vote on the board please. Motion carries five to one. All right. Moving on to the next agenda item. We're going on to agenda item seven D, which is hold a public hearing considered option of an ordinance to rezone approximately 71.76 acres from industrial center employment to neighborhood residential mixed use. I will now open the public hearing as you're ready. So, in an effort to consolidate the information and present this in the most logical way possible. I've actually combined the presentations for the zoning and the SUP request to give you the full picture, all at once. So I'll go through one presentation and then we'll have two separate motions for one for the zoning one for the SUP. So there. Yes, I will. Yeah, let me go ahead and call it as well. Thank you. So I'm going to also open up agenda item 70, but we will consider them with separate motions and votes, but have the presentation combined hold a public hearing considered option of ordinance for specific use permit for 71.7 acres of land specifically to allow for multifamily residential use on approximately 32.6 acres and to allow for an outdoor recreation use on approximately 19.90 acres. Thank you very much. Appreciate that that's very efficient. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. So as you just stated, it is two separate requests. The first being the rezoning farm industrial center employment to neighborhood residential mixed use. The second being for a specific use permit that also has two components, one being a multifamily use on about 32 and a half acres and the other being outdoor recreation on approximately 20 acres. So the third is the zoning map. So we have the existing zoning map on the left. You can see the industrial center zoning and then the proposed NRMU there on the right. Earlier this evening the DDC outlines two criteria for approval for rezoning conformity with the future land use plan and the facilitation of infrastructure. When we do not meet that future land use, there are additional criteria to look at, such as the land use pattern potential impacts in terms of cost environmental infrastructure impacts, as well as the creation of an isolated zoning district. So looking at these in more detail now the future land use map designates the subject property and almost all of the properties surrounding that municipal airport as industrial commerce and the intent being to provide or provide an area where light and heavy industrial uses are permitted, as well as some supporting commercial uses that could complement those. After analysis of this we've decided that NRMU does not meet the intent of that future land use designation. I also want to point out that the property is within the boundaries of the West Park TERS. So not only does the future land use map call for industrial development here. We've also have this tax increment reinvestment zone that intended this area to be industrial development. The multif amily use that is proposed wouldn't be eligible for any of the incentives under that TERS. Looking at the infrastructure in the area, as I mentioned, it's joined by West Oak Street on the north, that is a primary arterial road. Currently unimproved, the mobility plan does call for that to eventually be a six lane divided roadway. Precision drive is also intended to extend up the western boundary of the property. Currently it dead ends here at the southwest corner of the property, just north of the Peterbilt facility. That will be a two lane undivided roadway upon its extension. Water and sewer are available in the general vicinity and would also have to be extended to the property. Looking at what's in the area right now, to the north, south, well basically all directions from it, we have different varieties of industrial development. There is a large portion of undeveloped land currently out to the west, but there are several large industrial users in this area, such as Peterbilt, Benny Keith, 84 Lumber. It's not until you cross over on 35 that you see more of the mixture of uses that would be permitted under the NRMU zoning. Staff is recommending denial of the zoning request because it's incompatible with the surrounding property and development pattern, inconsistent with the goals for the T URS and inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the Denton Plan 2030 for areas of industrial commerce. The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval of the zoning request four to three. And then just to keep rolling, we'll go ahead and look at the SUP so you can see what the intent is with this rez oning. So the Denton Development Code outlines several criteria for approval of a specific use permit. Just to summarize some of those, looking to see if the use would impede the normal and orderly development of the property, any nuisances potentially created, as well as parking, traffic generation problems, things of that nature , and just general compatibility in terms of architecture, landscaping, and site design. This is a snapshot of the site plan that's been proposed with this. You can see there are two primary uses, multif amily and outdoor recreation. I've kind of color coded that. So phase one of the multifam ilies, which you see in green, phase one would include a total of 189 units, 700 bedrooms, density of around 8.8 units per acre. And phase one does include a total of 21.4 acres. Say that one more time, 189 units and 700 bedrooms. Is that in the whole? That's what was shown on the site plan for phase one. It's a mixture of two, three, and four bedroom units. Well, if you've got less than 200 units and you're at 700 bedrooms, you're over three bedrooms per unit. I believe the majority are four bedroom, but there is a mixture. And then phase two is what's shown in red. That would also be multifamily, 100 units, 375 bedrooms total, a density of approximately the same thing, 8.9 units per acre. Phase two is smaller at 11.2 acres. What's shown in yellow is the second use that is proposed, the outdoor recreation. That's about a 20 acre portion of the property, and they're proposing at this point five ball fields on that area. The remainder of the property is the lake that you see there in white. That's about 15 acres. That is excluded from this request. There's no use associated with the lake at this time. It would just be a natural amenity of the land. And then what's outlined in blue is the final important component of the site plan, and that is riparian buffer ESA that's associated with that pond and the streams feeding into and out of it. And so the blue does represent that standard 50 foot buffer from the center line of the creek and from the edge of the pond. Okay, so when we're looking at that, there's a lot of phase two. It looks like they sort of take off the tail end of the pond. Is the white the existing pond footprint, or is it the, what is the existing pond footprint? Is it pretty much that ESA following sort of the blue out to the, what is that, the west? Yes, sir. It's roughly, this dotted line here. Okay. And then this would be the intended boundaries of the lake here in the center of the property. So the blue line represents the ESA? Yes, sir. That's the ESA boundary, which extends 50 feet out from either the edge of the pond or the center line of the creek, depending on what the feature is. But that doesn't mean that everything within the two boundaries of the blue line where the phase two is, that's already been taken into account as far as by allowing that ESA buffer, is there going to be an alternative ESA plan? There would have to be an alternative ESA plan to allow what is proposed on the site plan. Okay. All right. And do you know if in the ball fields, is that a phase three or would that be built during phase one, phase two? That would be a phase three. Okay, so there's no, okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Just to give you an idea of the type of product, these are some of the conceptual elevations. There were many more varieties of this included in your backup, but just to give you an idea of the type of product they're looking at. Notification was sent out for both of these cases. We received one response in favor. As you may have noticed at PNZ, we had also had one response in opposition. That response did represent 22% of the land area, which could have triggered a super majority here, but that written opposition was withdrawn yesterday and that letter, I believe, was provided to you. Staff is also recommending denial of the SUP request for the same reasons, inconsistency and incompatibility with the surrounding property, the goals of the TURS and the objectives of the Denton Plan 2030. PNZ did recommend approval of the SUP at a four to three vote with the following conditions. So if you do vote to approve this request, staff and PNZ have both recommended the following three conditions be placed on this. The provided site plan, landscape plan and elevations be considered conceptual. Full site plan submittal would then be required to ensure that each phase of the development independently as it comes in complies with all components of the DDC. The second condition would be that a full assessment of the environmentally sensitive area be conducted. And if that is field verified, then an alternative ESA plan would have to be approved before any development could occur within the boundaries of the ESA as it was shown on the site plan. The third condition would be that the development of the multifamily use be limited only to the 32.6 acres that were shown here tonight. And that the outdoor recreation be limited to the 19.9 acres shown. Additionally, the multifamily use should contain no more than the 289 units that were proposed and the density be calculated based only on the areas within phase one and two. So no density bonus, if you will, for including additional area of the property within that calculation. And with that , I can stand for any other questions. Could you go back to the I think you had a photo of the elevations. Yes, sir. So these really aren't what many would consider multifamily the sense of a large sort of attached apartment units are sort of these cottages that we have developments off of the highway. Yes, sir. I think it's behind Chuck E. Cheese or something like that. It's very similar to that. Yes, sir. And as far as this not. You said something about the tours that if this was multifamily that how does that affect the tours. My understanding is they would not be eligible to receive any of the benefits of the tours for their public improvements. Their tax money would still pay into the tours to fund other projects, but they would not be eligible to receive any of those incentives, if you will. Okay, so. Now you make sure I understood what you just said, because I'm not sure I did. And if there's a staff who has some additional information on that, I believe someone from economic development. Okay, yeah, yeah. Yes, thank you. So, it's my understanding that just generally with the tours there's a base value, any increase in value, whatever they agreed upon percentages some goes to the tours, and then some comes back to the city in the form of property tax revenue. That is correct. And, and this doesn't prevent the tip board from using the money that they might get from this project on other things they just can't use it on the multifamily. They could use it on other projects within the tours that benefit the tours, like industrial projects or including system wide public improvements, but this particular project could not be eligible multifamilies not eligible. So, when you say used on the turs because most of my understanding of this particular turs is it's primarily infrastructure. Yes, primarily wastewater water and streets . So, are you saying that the infrastructure around this development like precision road I believe is going to be extended. And then if there's any infrastructure that's installed pursuant to this development that's needed by this development, you're saying that TURS funds could not be used to specifically directly benefit this development but we're still that that increase in valuation is still going into the tours account and can be used for other infrastructure throughout this turs but the development around this project. Yes, it could even be used for precision. It could be used for precision. Okay. All right. So if we could have the map of the of the site plan with the roads, just so I get a clarification. So what would the, what would the turs be able to be. Let's go back to the map that shows where the precision road extension is that that one right there. So what would the turs be allowed to be used for, and what would it not be allowed to be used for it, if this gets approved. So it could be used for anything from the turs right used I believe for infrastructure sidewalks roads, water sewer those sorts of things, but it could not directly go to this project to give them money to do the project is how I understand it. Oh, well, that. Okay, I didn't think that I didn't think the turs was used for incentives anyway I thought it was primarily. I need to back up. So any of the infrastructure improvements the roads surrounding this development the sidewalks the water the sewer that could all be funded by Turz fund. I understand. They just can't use it to have an incentive of some kind or to build the ball fields or to dredge the lake or anything like that. Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate the clarification. Any other questions for staff. I think I what I would like to do is this is a. It's sort of a combined public hearing of seven D, and seven E. And we have cards filled out that some people have said 70 and some have said 70 and he. So if you want to speak on 70 and 70. I'm not going to say that you can't speak for your four minutes each on each one. I would just ask, just if you've got if you got comments on both of them if you could combine your comments and be as efficient as you, you can be on those that would be greatly appreciated but I know that some in the past have said well for combining them you only get one for its four minutes I believe for each one. I'm not going to do that because I've seen it happen and didn't necessarily agree with it so just ask for your cooperation this matter. All right, we're going to go ahead and let the applicant speak first to give us an idea of what the proposed project is and, and so, and we've already stated those rules 10 minutes per speaker total 20 minutes for speakers representing the applicant I think it's 10 minutes maximum for one speaker is that correct. Okay. Okay, if you just state your name and address your time will begin. Council thank you for for the opportunity to speak, and I'm not speaking very well and I'm sorry. We will be dividing our time up between several folks on our development team if that's okay. Yeah, you got 20 minutes total with no speaker having more than 10 so y'all decide to how you need to put that up. Thank you. Thank you. Again, my name is Lance bands out with a Hayes Barry white and bands out here in Denton 512 West Hickory. I represent the applicant landmark development. First off, before I forget I didn't want to thank Haley and Richard they've assisted us through this application and review process and have been, we appreciate their respons iveness and they've been very generous with their time and we appreciate that. I don't get the recommendations you want on these deals but we will try to address their, their concerns that they brought up in their staff presentation and address those head on and I think we probably frankly need to spend most of our time addressing the issue of the incompatibility of this use with the future land use plan. I think we do have some compelling reasons why this is, while it may be in on paper inconsistent with the plan that the site itself is unsuitable to its current zoning designation in in an industrial district and showing industrial on a future land use map. And in fact the property is uniquely suited to the type of development we're proposing. I don't know if you can really tell from the drawings we saw earlier but we do have our engineer I think here that I think will be able to clarify that that that will actually make this type of development though it may seem it may seem not a place at first glance but it fits very well on this site and and provides much needed one provides much needed student housing in the area that's fairly close to you and T but at the same time is does not encroach on existing residential neighborhoods and historic districts and my client has been in the market over the past several years and has been very sensitive to that issue. I know those, those cases have come up in the past and, and I think we've nothing else we've alleviated that concern is we don't have any existing residential or a historic development around the site so if I could introduce our development team first from razor investments I have Mr. Phil Baker and my client Jason Dornbos with landmark properties and Dan grant with Kim Lee Horn our, our civil engineer. I would like mayor to, if I may turn it over to Mr. Baker. He's more than anyone here tonight he's had a unique experience marketing property in this entire industrial area, and specifically trying to market and develop this particular site that he can give some unique insight to so if I may, I may turn it over to him at your pleasure. Yes, absolutely. Thank you. Good evening. Good evening mayor, Council. Philip Baker PO box 2424 Denton, Texas. I'm the vice president of the razor company which controls both razor investments the current owner of the subject site and its affiliate West Park Group. I've been the owner of the razor company for over 30 years the last 15 of which have involved responsibility for real estate management and sales. In addition to the subject property razor investments and West Park Group own hundreds of acres to the west, northwest, southwest of the subject property within the West Denton area. We have been working with the city on behalf of razor investments and West Park Group to express our support of the requested zoning change, not merely because we have an interest in the pending sales transaction, but also as the largest remaining landowner in the immediate vicinity, with an equal interest in maintaining land uses which are compatible to the anticipated future uses of our other remaining lands. In this department we have historically been of the mindset that the area south of university in West of IE interstate 35 corridor is generally industrial and warehousing. And we've had no interest in straying from that focus. After all, it is identified as such in the Denton 2030 plan . We have had sales of tracks to users such as the original Peterbilt Motor Company plan, the Tetra Pak plan and Anderson Merchandisers, and more recent sales to Target, Fastenal, Peerless Manufacturing, Winkle Foods, Peterbilt Motor Company expansion, 84 Lumber expansion, all point to development of this area as an industrial area with high quality users. This has always been our focus and continues to be so in general. There's generally a map which shows on the left, I guess it 's not showing, on the left, this is what it looked like 10 years ago. Western Boulevard wasn't in. There's virtually nobody but Tetra Pak and Pak are out there. On the right shows you our focus, getting Western in, in that corridor of establishing high quality industrial businesses for this town, which have involved Target and some of you know Winkle Foods more recently. However, but when other interested parties with extensive development experience actually evaluated the subject property we're talking about, we began to develop a different view of this site. After gaining development insight, development insight from several experienced parties, we came to understand why this site is uniquely situated as compared to other lands in the area and is not suitable for light industrial warehousing or other currently permitted uses. In 2007, IDI Grassley, one of the world's leading investors and developers in logistic warehouses and distribution parks in North America and Europe, evaluated acquiring all of our land south of US 380 and west of Interstate 35, about 900 acres. While IDI confirmed the existing industrial warehouse uses under the Denton Plan as the highest and best use for most of our lands, they concluded that the subject property would be best suited for multifamily and plan simply to sell it off that portion to a multifamily developer. And just for reference, this is what we were looking at in 2007. The area in red shows the multifamily subject site tonight, except for the north part of Oak Street there, this area right here. City planning staff at that time agreed with the proposed land uses under the IDI plan, including the multifamily for the subject prop. Because of the economic downturn and economic conditions in 2008, the sales transaction ultimately did not go through and zoning changes were not pursued at that time by us. More recently, Landmark approached us with an interest in the subject property. They, like IDI, identified the subject property as being most suitable for multifamily. However, before moving forward, we hired Kemley Horne, consulting engineers to give us their evaluation of the best land use for the site. Kemley Horne has significant expertise in industrial and other developments and assists major US corporations in performing site analysis for various commercial projects. Kemley Horne confirmed the analysis of both IDI and Land mark. They concluded that industrial and warehouse users would never be interested in the subject property because those users inherently need flat land suitable for large single buildings without topographical variations, flood plain areas, and drainage constraints. The subject property slopes significantly from the east and west boundaries to the center and from the north to the south with a 15 to 20 acre lake located in the middle. It is affected by an area-wide drainage channel running from the north to the south that essentially splits the track into two long, very narrow rectangular pieces and contains about 15 acres south of the lake dam, which would be in the floodway and in all likelihood can never be developed for any purpose other than green space. Natural features such as these are precisely those which a potential industrial or warehouse developer wants to avoid. We recognize that other uses beyond light industrial wareh ousing are permitted under the existing zoning classification, such as hotels, motels, indoor recreation, medical facilities. But development of these types of uses would have substantially the same issues and challenges in dealing with the natural features of the subject property. And because the subject property would not be located on a major roadway with high traffic volume, it would never support such uses as hotel, motels, entertainment centers, and restaurants in any case. Lakes, creeks, and floodplain areas can be utilized as attractive green space and recreation areas to enhance a vibrant residential community, but present nothing but obstacles to the needs of an industrial warehouse and other type users. Development of the subject property for any uses other than the multifamily would present site characteristic issues and/or would fail to meet threshold requirements as to their juxtaposition to major roadways. We certainly recognize the need for land uses on the subject property that will be compatible with the existing anticipated industrial warehouse uses for other lands in the area. We're confident that the proposed zoning change will work for the subject property and will not create any conflict with any industrial users concentrated to the west of it. The construction of precision drive on the west boundary line of the subject property, along with the drainage channel on the south boundary line, the Kansas City Southern Railway on the east boundary line, and Oak Street on the north, segregates the subject property in a manner that will give the site its own identity with physical boundaries that will make it distinctly separate and apart from the industrial areas to the west. While we respect and support the Denton 2030 plan and understand the city planning department simply following it as the basis for its current recommendation, the Denton 2030 plan is by its nature conceptual in providing general guidance for the future development in the city. It is a good starting point, and it is an important document, but it by no means tells the whole story in how the city should be developed in every instance. While a well thought out concept plan certainly provides the critical foundation to foster good development, it is just as critical for the city to recognize unique dynamics that apply to specific situations as actual development unfolds. We know from dealings with the city on prior development situations involving our lands that city staff often tends to be overly dogmatic in applying conceptual principles under the mobility plan, the ESA map, and the Denton 2030 plan, with insufficient analysis of particular development dynamics and constraints . While the pursuit of development within the city without these concept tools as a guiding force would be dangerous, ignoring or failing to properly analyze specific development constraints and opportunities for specific development situations could be just as detrimental. We need smart and sensible development decisions based on actual realities in the context of the intended goals and principles laid down under the concept tools. As highlighted in this discussion, an in-depth examination of the subject property by experienced development professionals clearly reveals that the existing permitted uses are not viable to this site, and a multifamily use provides the best opportunity for this site to contribute to the needs and the tax base of the community. We believe that the zoning change should be approved for the good of the area and the good of the city and respectfully request your approval. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Baker? Seeing none, thank you very much. Thank you, ma'am. I believe you've got some other speakers. Yes. We have, we brought Kimley Horne to address specific engine things dealing with the land and the development. Okay. And Jennifer, how much time is left for him? Eight minutes total out of the 20? Okay. I'll be quick. Sure. Just state your name and address. Mayor, Councilor, I appreciate it. My name is Jason Dornbos. I'm at 315 Akoni Street in Athens, Georgia. You know, at Landmark Properties, we're a national student housing development company. We're the largest private developer of student housing in the country. Our task is to find areas, university communities that are in, that there's a strong demand for additional housing to house students. Denton is a market where we actually developed the Republic back in 2011. And we've since that time been looking for another site to develop more housing just because we feel there's such a strong demand for the students. The university is growing and we're just seeing all the fundamentals that make this a market that really needs some additional housing. If you could refresh my memory on the Republic, which one is that? What's the cross-street? It's the one that you mentioned earlier. Oh, okay. Yeah, the little cottages out there. Okay. That's us. So, you know, this location I've been talking to Phil about for probably two years. It's a fantastic location, in our opinion, for student housing. It has great access to the university. It's right on the line where the buses are already serving. We've already been in discussions with the university bus line to add service to this site. And then, you know, as Lance mentioned earlier, we've been monitoring the other projects that have come forward. We've been looking with brokers at other sites and we feel that this site would have the least amount of negative impact on the existing single family neighborhoods in the community that you all are trying to protect. So we just felt like for a number of reasons this just made a lot of sense for this type of development, or we can do a large scale to really, you know, capture some of the demand that we see in this market. And another thing to mention just, you know, that this is a unique housing type. It's like you all mentioned, it's not that garden style, big box apartments. It's actually very attractive to a lot of students that want to live in a single family house, want to live in a town and they want to be able to drive up to their house. They want to usually have like a dog. They want to be able to walk their dog and go out there and throw the frisbee. And what we've seen and we've pulled our residents that a lot of the residents that are choosing to live in this type of property, this cottage style, you know, if this product didn't exist, they would be looking for a single family house. So, you know, we've seen in other communities where it's actually helped reduce the demand and kind of, I mean, actually in Athens, Georgia is a great example. A lot of the neighborhoods like Five Points has actually converted back to a true single family neighborhood from student housing because we developed a lot of cottages in that community. And there's a lot of young families and professors that now live there. And we've actually enacted a no more than two unrelated restriction as well to kind of enforce that. But, you know, appreciate your consideration. And if you have any additional questions for me as a developer, I'd be happy to answer. Any questions? We may have some later on, but any questions at this moment? Council Member Ryan. Thank you, Mayor. Based on the density of the number of bedrooms to the number of units, I'm assuming that this is a single room occupancy. Each bedroom? Yes, sir. Each room will have its own individual lease. It'll be limited to one person per bedroom. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Who's up next? Mayor, Council, Dan Grant, Kimley Horne, 13455 Noel Road, Dallas, Texas. I won't go over any more of what's been already presented. Staff has been extremely helpful. I want to reiterate that point and appreciate you listening to us today. Just wanted to state that we do, we have spent a lot of time studying this particular tract on behalf of the Razors within the context of the greater industrial park. We worked on and did the design for Western Boulevard for Jim Crystal. We've got a larger interest at heart serving the city of Denton, and we feel like this is the highest and best use for this piece of property. The environmental element, maintaining the lake, keeping it intact, reconfiguring it someday with the potential for great amenity use downstream of the existing dam is all in the best interest of the city. And we stand to answer your questions. Once they come from you and the public. Any questions? Councilmember Ryan? Thank you. You've got the outdoor sports facility on the south end. Can you explain why that became part of this concept? Yes, I can. Let me go to one of the slides Haley used. So, existing Razor Lake has a dam here on its southern edge . North is to the left on this exhibit. And runoff goes from the north to the south. And today it over tops a essentially a low part of the dam and works its way continuing to the south. This area down here has different environmentally sensitive areas that are shown in the blue, but then we also have some floodplain, and we also have effectively an area that is what's called a breach inundation area. It's not suitable for typical habitable development, but it 's a great use for open space and recreational fields, parking areas and things like that that don't have ins urable structures in them. So that's where this part of the plan matured from is what 's the best way to use this land. This is a good one. So is this open space, is this just for the residents? No, it is being designated today as simply open space with some plans for potential public use in the future. And then we have the, whatever that light shaded color is, to the right of the screen. It looks like there's some structures there. What is that? What you're seeing? Let me see if I can get the mouse in the right spot because what I see on my screen is a little different than what you're seeing. Right there. Yeah, it's all up and down right there. Today there are overhead DME power poles that run along the perimeter of the property. They run from the RD Wells subst ation to the west and head east towards the KCS and actually surround the perimeter of the property and work their way north. This is surface parking underneath those poles that would service the actual ball fields. That would service the ball fields, not the multifamily. Okay, gotcha. Fantastic. Thank you. All right. Any other questions? So does that conclude the applicant's presentation unless we have further questions later on in the presentation? Okay, thank you very much. All right, we do have one card, which is a white card wishing not to speak, but which is in support. Selwyn Razor, 400 West Oak Street, Denton, Texas. And we've got three cards here. Well, we got more than that. I thought I had. Oh, those were the seven DNEs. Y'all's were the combination seven DNEs. Okay, gotcha. All right. So this is a public hearing. We're going to call these cards Kim McKibbin. You've indicated seven D, but you can speak on seven D. I mean, it's all sort of related, but however you want to handle it. Yes. State your name and address and yes. Well, we can put the timer up there, but I'm going to let them self regulate. Yeah, if they don't want it, they don't just because it's up there doesn't mean you have to take that time. But if I'm just going to if that's what you need, that's what you need. My name is Kim McKibbin, 1306 West Hickory Street, and I have to applaud the creators of this. I have heard that you find the cheapest property and figure out the most expensive thing that you can put on it. And I think they found that. I don't think that there's any mistake that this is not multifamily. It is student housing. And once again, every opportunity I have to speak against SROs, I will do that. I do not think that they're good for the students or for the community. Now, in this case, the way that they've laid them out in these particular buildings, if they were to dedicate more of their spaces to two bedroom units rather than the four, I think that we could actually not only find a student housing alternative, but also some housing for some of the people that work at the university, which is also at a premium. So I think that that's something that if they were willing to look at that, that they're truly wanting to do something to assist the community, they can have they can have their cake and eat it too at this point. But they do need to look at the number of four unit one kitchen things, and they have the potential to do some of that without having to do a whole lot of loss of revenue in this case. That's number one. The other thing that that I have to say is that once again, this is SROs student housing put in an industrial area. I understand the explanation that they've given it, but how much do you want to do on the west side of the highway? This property owner indicated, I think I heard him say that they own most of the property to the west and to the north all the way up to 380. How much more of this can we expect as they continue to develop along these lines? I'm not saying it's a bad thing. It's just a question. So how much are you willing to give up of your industrial area for future growth of the university's student housing? Also, one of the things that you guys may not know about me , I'm a Texas Parks and Wildlife Master Naturalist 2010 class. I am very concerned about this environmentally sensitive area. I think that there's more to the drainage issues. I think phase one of this was very deliberately designed so it did not encroach on the environmentally sensitive area so they could begin the work, do what they needed to do, and then move forward later. I've seen more than once that the ESAs and projects that need to get done tend to just disappear. And I would like for this one not to disappear because I think if it does, there are going to be drainage issues farther down the line . So that's basically all I've got to say about this one. Your staff, once again, hit it with what they have to work with right now, but I think that these guys have really done their homework. And what I would ask is that you push them to increase the number of units that could be two bedrooms, one kitchen, that could actually be used for a family and not just student housing. Because they'd still get their money out of it. They might lose just a little bit. But Denton would gain some housing options for people who work at the university, just not students that go to the university. And we have to look down the road too. Ten years from now, are we going to still need this much student housing as the college goes more and more to telecommunicating to get the classes done? That's something that we have not really addressed as a city at this point. We know now that right now the university is growing and they need housing. But is that going to turn around? So that's all I've got. Okay. Mayor Pro Tem has a question. You know, I have a stop question and I pushed that again. Sorry. It's late. Okay. Any other questions for the speaker? Thank you. Next speaker is Sharon Herman. Well, 7E, which is the SUP. Oh, okay. So you're not wishing to speak on this item? Okay, that's fine. That's a public hearing as well. So no, you're good. Okay. Those are all the blue cards I have. This is a public hearing. Anybody wishing to speak on this item? Feel free to come down, state your name and address and your time will begin. Anybody wishing to speak? One more call. Anybody wishing to speak on this item? Seeing none. We will close the public hearing both on agenda item 7D and 7E. Mayor Pro Tem. Yeah, I have a question regarding the lake area. So on that slide, it says that the 15.3 acres is excluded from the request utilized by nearby well sites. What does that mean? I'm not sure of the full details, but I believe there are some agreements for the water in the lake to be utilized by the nearby gas wells. So it's not a wastewater site? No, ma'am. Okay, it's freshwater and they're pumping it out. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Councilmember Ryan. Thank you, Mayor. On an earlier presentation, we talked about 40% masonry on multifamily and based on the pictures on here, it didn't look like they meet that. Is that the case? Let's see if I can get to. I'm not sure of the exact numbers on these. At this point, we're intending for these to be conceptual so that we can make sure all of those requirements are met in the future. But I'm not sure what the exact numbers would work out to be on each of their individual buildings. So even if we do, because I think part of the recommendations were if it's approved to take the conceptual into account, but they would still have to meet our minimum 40%. Yes, sir. We would consider these conceptual elevations and then go through all the specifics of that with their site plan and building permits and metals. Okay. Councilmember Hesbitt. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Van Zandt, I have a question for you, if that's okay. So whomever, so I'm going to ask, I'm a little nervous about the lake. And so I kind of want to know what's going to be around it to protect it from people jumping in, people drowning, people throwing stuff in there, people, you know, that's a lot of people. And just water has that magnetic effect. So I'm curious about what the concept is there. But moreover, also you touched on it, whoever is best to speak to the analysis of the typography, because I just, I struggle getting there with, I mean, when you talk about this is absolutely not consistent with what's on that side of the highway. And so I just need to reconcile that. So just, I mean, just a hardcore, this is what the ground tells us versus, you know, the vested interest in moving forward type approach. I think you've got a couple, you've got a couple different questions there, Councilman. The first one was, what will the lake look like upon reconfiguration? And so I'm going to step back in the presentation a little bit. So I've got a graphic as an engineer, I like to speak off of pictures. So bear with me a moment. There we go, just one back. So what you're looking at is conceptual reconfiguration of the lake. It's something that will require time and work to permit to envision in the way that's described here. We are, we're working through a land use case with you today. And we haven't fully baked all of the ways we're going to deal with the areas around the lake. What I can tell you is, is the intent is for it to be an amenity for everyone that borders it. So whether it's the ball fields or the multifamily development, but keeping folks out of that lake is combination of things. It's the best practices today are things like signage. They are fencing, they are natural barriers, they're designated trails as opposed to just a, just to encourage people to walk immediately adjacent to the lake. Those are the ways to do it in the engineering and planning world today. And that's, those are next steps down the line that we'll work with staff to create. And then there's an operational side to it as well. And that'll be handled just like, I mean, these, the good, what you see, you know, right there by the lake, that clubhouse is where we will also have onsite property management, le asing, so we'll, and maintenance will all be located onsite. And then we have community, the good thing about having this as one project is there'll be community rules and regulations. And it's just like, I mean, we, we want these properties to show we have a vested interest in this looking nice. And if there is a problem with anyone doing anything in the lake, I mean, that is a problem that we address. The good thing about the type of leases we have is there's parental guarantees. First time there's an issue, we send the, that section highlighted home to the parent, and that usually addresses that problem immediately. If not, then we'll deal with it either through fines or evictions. But that's, that's something that we have a lot of experience dealing with any type of project that's at this scale. You're going to have a very institutional type owner and a very institutional type management company that's not going to let that kind of stuff happen. And then, so the flow of the land per se. Sure. Let me bring up a graphic that I put on the overhead screen that describes what's happening as we work, and we look our way across this property looking north. All right. Bear with me just a second. Forgive the glare. Hopefully this will start to show for us a bit. So on the left here. We're talking about industrial development industrial development likes to have a large footprint buildings and large, large truck courts across them, we lose approximately 30 feet in elevation as we work our way from the west to the east towards the lake to develop a piece of property that has a typical industrial footprint, we would have to chew up nearly 300 of the available 400 feet in almost a single tabletop fashion, meaning a building and parking and sit it on something that's already tilted multifamily development or multi building development respects the slope. And so that's what you see on the right. What we're seeing there is multiple buildings, as we work our way looking through the cross section down the slope to the lake, where we have less movement of dirt, more respect for the natural topography, we can place the, we can place the earth and place the buildings in a way that is more that maintains natural drainage patterns and reduces cut and fill. Does that answer your initial question. It does. But if you can just briefly, what am I looking at on the left again. So you have that. So this is that a 17 there to the left the colored shaded area there. So this is this is. I'm going to hand down a little bit. And also we can blow that up a little bit magnified. If we need to. Okay. What I'm trying to do is describe in this area right here if you were to take this rectangular footprint and drop it on the site right here. This is a 200,000 square foot industrial building. This is one fifth the size of the wind code that went in on Western Boulevard. A million square feet. So this is smaller. It's also a very odd shape for industrial use. So I'm using this as a comparison tool. If we drop that footprint in, and then we look at its cross section on the left, and we're looking north. This is where precision drive would sit along our western boundary. We then drop down and go into a parking area and all of that area right there is cut. We then have a single finished floor. Here's our industrial warehouse building. And then we'll have on the other side, because we have a fixed finished floor. All this area here is now fill. And then we slow back down to the lake. Two challenges here . One, we've incurred a lot of extra development expense, but more so. This is not the this a 200 foot wide building is not the pattern of industrial development that we are seeing in the current market in that current market has maybe, you know, folks have said we're in the north. You know, folks have said we're in the ninth inning. We've been in the ninth inning for a while. And that's what we're seeing in terms of current development today. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions. I've got just a couple but any comments. Well, first of all , I like that in this age of technology. We still can see handwritten things that have gotten us by for a long time. Thank you. Thank you. Because I would probably do do it in the same thing because I wouldn't know how to put that on a on a crap. So my question is about the lake. Because I think the lake is a great amenity and it's a double edged sword. For the industrial aspect. It's a deal killer. I mean, you know, to drain it and to try to develop on it's not going to happen. So, when I see the shaded areas, and I see that that's what you are. Go back to that shaded side plane if you would that shows the picture of the lake and white not sure I can switch it. Can you switch to the screen. Thank you. So this is indicating that there is a commitment, which could be codified I mean if you're saying because I think one of the conditions for the PNC was that at the picture we see is the one that gets developed. That that's my that was my understanding that in the phases with the green shaded with the number of units, not to exceed is that is that my understanding. Yes, that's about understand. Okay. So the lake is in white. Correct. Does that mean that there's a commitment to maintain that lake as a lake, and not just sort of a water source for revenue but it's, is it stocked. Is that lake, is that is that like deep enough to have fish in it or is it just a shallow. It's not shallow lake. It's deep. Okay. It has its own. It has a water well that helps replenish it. Okay, and it's southwest corner. It has. But to envision to realize this vision, the northern end of it to be transparent, there's going to need to be some reclamation. Of course, yeah, and so I'm talking about the area and why because I know that y'all are going to have to. I mean you've got a correct site plan for conceptual plan with units there. Correct. So you're going to do your grading in such a way that it works. That is correct. With the drainage and all that. So I guess it's a question for the applicant or for the developer. Do you have other properties that have that kind of water feature. Yeah, we have one in Tuscaloosa that does. And I mean it's a 40 foot deep lake is my understanding so it's, and they're going to we're going to in the future that damn is going to be strengthened so that that lake it will remain and we hope it remains that that's why we kind of designed the amenity area the pool looking over it to take advantage of the view and the natural features of that lake . So in the conditions that PNC place that was talking about maintaining as it's presented here is the lake part of those conditions as far as okay you're going to maintain a lake that looks conceptually like that as far as its shape and depth. In other words, there's not going to be any attempt to fill it some of it in. You're not going to use the dirt that you 're cutting out or if you haven't cut to, and I guess we have. Do we have city regulations I don't know I don't see Dr banks in here. We're actually be working, I like to call it the four party scheme. The city is one, but we also have TCQ right, which will help manage the water rights associated with the lake. This lake is already on TCQ radar screen. The dam was inspected back in 2015. So, we're as a as a landowner as a property owner cognizant of what this is the other two elements in play are FEMA in terms of the flood plain designation around the lake, which it does have one. And then, last but not least is the US Army Corps of Engineers, and they'll be the longest to deal with and navigate along with in city staff will watch this along the way. Well, and I will say that if you could show the map that shows the, the turds with the shaded area of the property right here. The reason why I'm leaning, this was a struggle for me, you know, originally, and then when I started reading the backup and and looking at the student housing and especially that it's cottage style not just this huge, just giant building and infrastructure, but it's on the edge. If this were smack dab in the middle, it would this would be a very different conversation. But it's on the edge. And so the and then it's got those natural barriers as you described them. And then the lake takes up what is that about a third of that property right and when you consider what's downstream of the damn you have an influence that takes a lot of that. So, I can understand how an industrial development they don 't, that's not what they, they're not attracted to the pond, they're not attracted to the water feature potential, it's the development that is being proposed or some type of other residential type of use. I'm trying to think if there's any other questions. The phasing. The ball fields are the last, which that gives me a little concern, because I think that's a great amenity. And so, if you built phase one, but somehow the market took a downturn and you get into it and you're like okay this isn't exactly what we thought it was. That means the rest of it doesn't get done is my understanding. Is that correct? That's fair. I mean the Jason if you want to. I would look at. I would look at. Don't get caught up in one phase one versus phases two and three sure two and three down the line because once we step into late. The four jurisdictional areas that I described earlier, the , the red and the yellow come into play. There's just a much longer lead time to navigate those processes in terms of years to get through, but this is about the use of the land we needed to clear this hurdle first, right, before we start stepping into the longer lead times associated with those other permitting agencies, and I hit what you wanted to touch. So whoever needs to come down and speak is certainly welcome to address first one of your comments about this would be a different story if it was somewhere else. Yeah, we're not going to let anything happen to that industrial park we have a big stake in it. And if this land physically look like target look like Wink o look like a target. Excuse me I said target pack our tetra pack. We wouldn't be here tonight. Sure, at all. Yeah. Yeah. And so what we're trying to do here is to make sense out of this land for not just does but this, the good of this community. It works for everybody that it works. Now, we don't, we don 't have any guarantees because we got a lot of agencies we 've got to deal with and we're subject to the mercy of the Army Corps of Engineers, FEMA, and ultimately the city. We can't guarantee anything but this is the plan. And, and one of the concerns that the party that initially objected to this was they just simply didn't understand it. They figured out that pack that that precision was going to go in, and there would be this natural separation, and things got different. And, and then in that process they saw what we were doing in the recreation and initially our thoughts were just conceptual and as we listening to our engineers, they said this is what is done in these areas not, not because I thought it but but they've done it elsewhere. And, and when we showed them this party, what our overall hope was for the area to explain what we were doing that we weren't trying to impact anything but we saw this is maybe the only possible thing that's going to go here. Sure. And otherwise we're going to have a piece of land that cows are going to run on for the next god knows how many years, and we'll keep giving you about $200 a year and property taxes. So, they got interested in it too and there's a currently existing soccer fields on precision Boulevard that is creating a headache that was somewhat known to me but I got enlightened a lot more. And, and, and that party got interested in our ball fields, and they saw maybe some possible synergies to be gained. And, and, well, there's no contractual agreements or anything. That party and not sir on the same page, we want, we want together what's good for that industrial park, and there is not any going to be any attempt to ever come back and visit you guys about this kind of thing in that industrial park. It isn't ever going to happen. Right. So, so there's, there 's some possibilities down the road we don't have any it's just conceptual now, but this party really like the idea, and, and they saw it as an opportunity to take something that's not on the tax rolls that's not a logistical nightmare for them. And with the construction of precision they saw a lot of issues go away. And, and also, they didn't need this from us, but they had they, they had our assurances that we were on board, because we sold them 100 acres of land back in 2014 for the future expansion of packers plan. And we, along with them. They have a presence in Denton, not us or anybody that I think wants to harm that and sure we're first on the list of that. So it was a mutual kind of discussion that was respectful and not adversarial in any way, and to do what's good for this community and that's what we hope we might have. Well, and that's what I've always liked about you Mr Baker, you speak it like it is and you speak with passion and you certainly, and none of my comments should be just construed as either negative or anything like that because you guys. That industrial park is very important to you guys and that 's why I said it's on the edge. And that's what makes it I think very attractive. One question I do have is precision. Okay, it's going to be two lane undivided is that required to be curb and gutter or is it just okay. Yes, it'll be, it'll be a, it'll be a collector roadway classified but it's 45 feet in width. Okay, two lanes so it 's what I call fat to lane road, 73 feet right away. Okay, great. No, I totally agree with what you're saying that this land I mean when I when I first read it. The 2030 plan is, as we saw in the last couple of situations was, it is a, you said it very eloquently in your in your comments, it is a conceptual guide is something that we want to look to at the first time, go around but yet there's going to be situations that we need to maybe make some some modifications. And to go to the point of, you know, we talked about housing, and that there may be a shortage of housing. And I understand about the SRO concerns. Most of those SRO concerns have been because they're building them smack dab in the middle of neighborhoods. This is out here. I'm sure that I think you said you'd already talked to somebody about a bus route or Texas or Yes, yeah. Yeah, and that doesn't surprise me because you 're going to have 1000s potential students out there. Well, that's, yeah, that's a that's a major. I mean, that's a major congregation of students that will need some transportation. They don't want those kids driving. They want to see them come. Yeah, no. Thank you so much for answering my questions. I don't have any more. Does the colleagues have any more questions. Now we need to vote on these separately for agenda item seven. Is it ENF or D and E, D and E. All right, seeing no more comments from Council Mayor Pro Tem Begari. Move for approval of item D. So clarification is this, I think, PNZ, did PNZ put conditions on the zoning or was it on the SUP. Or none. It was on the SUP. Okay, so no conditions on the zoning. All right, so we have a motion for approval. Councilmember Ryan. I will second. Okay, we have a motion for approval and a second. Let's vote on the board, please. For agenda item seven. Who hadn't voted. Okay, there we go. Motion carries four to one. Now moving on to agenda item seven, he chair would entertain a motion. Councilmember Ryan. Thank you, Mayor. I will move approval with the conditions recommended by planning and zoning. Okay. Councilmember Gary, did you withdraw that? No. Yeah, I'm sorry. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second for agenda item seven E. Let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries four to one. And I guess if we didn't clarify because of the letter from PACCAR withdrawing their opposition. That's why we did not have a need for a superma jority. Is that correct? That is correct. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. We're moving on to agenda item seven F. Jennifer, you need a break. You okay? You sure? I can't see. I'm gonna put my glass on. I can't read your body language. You're good? Okay. All right. I may need one. Now this is our last I believe our last public hearing. Oh no. Oh, turn the page. Well, okay. Yeah. All right. Seven F. Oh, yeah. Well, I appreciate you being here because I know you don't feel good. Hold a public hearing considered option of an ordinance to rezone approximately 7.5 acres from community mixed use to neighborhood residential. Sorry, Julie. I will go ahead and open the public hearing. Okay. Okay, so we have a similar situation where we have agenda item seven F and seven G are linked together. So we will make a presentation. We'll have presentation on combined. And then we'll have the public hearing comments. They can combine them or not. But we'll have to vote on them separately. That is correct. So this is two items in service of one project and we'll go over them at the same time in the same presentation. So the first item is for a rezoning. It's Z 17 eight and the request is to rezone the subject property from community mixed use general to neighborhood residential mixed use. The second request is for a specific use permit to allow multifamily development. Now that the applicant has made a request and how you in the order in which you consider these items. The current zoning of CMG permits multifamily development provided that it is a mixed use development and that commercial uses are constructed along the rights of way. So along any collectors avenues or materials. So that use is permitted with that mixed use component. However, they 're not proposing a mixed use component. They're proposing to move forward with just a multifamily use. So they're asking that you consider the specific use permit for the multifamily request first. So if that item fails, they wouldn't want to move forward with the zoning case. They would want to withdraw that because it's a it's a down zoning from the CMG to the NRMU. Let me get some comment from the council. I got asked that question for the meeting and the in order for the council to have jurisdiction to actually vote on or take action on the S.U.P. It has to have the jurisdiction under the zoning. So the zoning has to proceed the S.U.P. So that's where we are. OK. All right. So we'll go forward with the presentation. So the subject property is about seven and a half acres. It's located at the corner of Sherman and Point Setta in this location here. There was a lot of public interest regarding this request. So after the planning and zoning commission, staff went back and looked into see how the property got zoned as CMG in the first place. So this this subject property, as well as the general area, was once a part of a plan development. That was plan development 90. It was it was that ordinance was passed in 1985 and it included a mix of uses. There were single family uses to the south and included patio homes, a park, general retail, and then office uses, as well as multifamily and fourplexes . So if you'll just take a look at this map that was that was approved in association with that plan development and include the proposed loop to 88. So to 88 wasn't there at the time. The subject property is outlined in red. At that time, it was it was approved for a multifamily use at 18 dwelling units per acre. But as you may know, in 2002, the the development code was adopted and many of our plan developments became obsolete at that time. And this was one of them. So at that time, the property was rezoned to CMG. And we think it was probably in order to capture all of those uses that were proposed for this site because CMG does permit the retail, the office, as well as the multif amily uses with the mixed use components. So that's what we think is what happened at the time. So now we see on the left, you have the current zoning. So you see the pink and that's all that CMG and the subject property outlined in black. The proposed rezoning is to NRMU, which is the red. So this is the proposed zoning map. The criteria for approval for zoning and we're going to go over the zoning case first and then we'll we'll we'll tackle the SUP is the criteria for approvals in the development code. First is the proposed rezoning conformed to the future land use element of the dent plan 2030. And then second, does it facilitate the adequate provision of infrastructure? So first, we'll look at the future land use element of the dent plan. The area is designated as community mixed use. The intent of this future land use designation is to promote that mix of uses, the commercial, the service, as well as the moderate to high density residential uses. Staff has looked at the intent of this of this future land use designation as well as the NRMU district and is determined that that proposed district does meet the intent of community mixed use because it still does provide that mix of uses within the permitted uses. However, it does it does limit the scale of those uses, which we think is important in this area because of the adjacency of the residential. When we look at the public facilities, there is water and sewer available at the for the property located along point set up course impact fees if the development is approved would be assessed at the building permit stage. Sherman Drive is currently and a four lane and divided road . The mobility plan designates it as a primary arterial, which the ultimate section of primary arterial in the city of Denton are typically six lane divided roads. It is a text art road and if approved and if develop development moves forward. Additional right of way dedications or improvements may be required at the planning and development stage. Point set up is currently a two lane and divided road with parking on both sides. It will be extended toward loop 288 with a new development that is proposed adjacent to the adjacent to the existing single family neighborhoods that are located off the point set and we'll go over that in just a minute. The mobility plan designates point set up as a main street mixed use collector as a two lane and divided road with with parking on either side so it's built to what we typically see that type of roadway those conditions. And now we'll look at the, the development that's that's moving forward adjacent to to the existing residential areas so this is the harvest hill subdivision. It was the plat was approved by the planning and zoning Commission and I believe that that actually already started grading on the side and moving forward with the development . We've overlaid that with the aerial so you can see points that will will curve to the north and eventually tie into the loop 288 access road. In addition to the future land use element, and the, the public infrastructure. We also looked at the adjacent properties and how the current zoning and proposed zoning would fit within the character of that. So it currently has a zoning of CMG district. That's one of our commercial mixed use districts and has it has a lot of broad commercial uses embedded within it. It's typically what we see at on our arterial roadway so it 's something that we would typically see at the corner of loop to a insure loop 288 and Sherman drive, but it does permit some some quite intense commercial uses like vehicle repair, it permits motels big box retail auto sales quick vehicle servicing with no SUP required as well as drive through with no SUP requirements. Sorry, sorry to interrupt. I believe Councilmember Briggs has a question. Just on that with the CMG CMG. If we wouldn't be here going through this process, if any of those things wanted to go in correct, they would just be permitted by right. Correct. Okay. Yes, ma'am. Yeah. Thank you. And we but we typically do see CMG near to residential areas you know we're familiar with University Drive there's a lot of university that has CMG and Teasley. The difference with those and this property is that those typically the CMG backs up to residential. So you may have screening walls associated with the commercial development or landscape buffers associated with it things that would mitigate nuisances or potential nuis ances between the commercial development and and our residential areas. In this instance, because the CMG is across the street from from the residential neighborhood no buffers would be required so that residential would face any commercial development that would go on the site. The CMG also permits multifamily development is as I discussed earlier, it does have two limitations the first limitation being. It either needs to be a part of a mixed use development or obtain approval of an of an SUP from the city council, and is the first limitation the second limitation is that commercial uses are required on the ground floor. And it is adjacent to any arterial Avenue or collector so in this case, if, if multifamily developed on this side in accordance with the CMG requirements commercial uses would be required on points that and Sherman. By rezoning to NRM you the types of commercial development and the scale of the commercial development would be limited limited as to what it is now in our in our MU would provide a transition area a logical transition between those residential areas and the high intensity commercial development that we want to see at the corner of Sherman and loop 288. And it would also create a buffer for those neighborhoods from between the commercial development. So based upon the, the, the future land use element of the dent and plan 2030. And the, and the, the determination that NRM you would provide that transition area between the existing uses and the permitted uses on at the corner of loop 288 288 and Sherman staff recommends approval of their request. And planning and zoning also recommended approval of the request. Do you have any questions on the zoning any questions on the zoning will move on to the SCP. All right. So the specific use permit. The procedure for approval is in sub chapter six of the development code, essentially what it is it's a compatibility analysis between the uses the proposed use of multifamily and any existing uses, or any, any of the vacant land surrounding the subject property, if the subject property which had developed with that use, would that use impede the normal and orderly development of any vacant property. We also look at the parking the generation of traffic and access nuisance provision. And then we we look at what see what they're proposing to see if they're providing adequate landscaping and screening, and whether their buildings are architecturally compatible with the surrounding area. So this is the concept plan that was shown to the planning and zoning commission. What they're proposing is a traditional multifamily development with 150 units. The units are a combination of one two and three bedrooms. They're proposing stone accents and earth tone colors. If you may remember this project, it did come before you in February of this year, as this is is proposed to be a mixed income development. They did come to you asking for a resolution of support, which was granted in February of this year. And here's here is a rendering of what they're proposing, as well as the color palette. So for the planning and zoning commission there were quite a few neighborhood concerns. First, were was traffic on East Sherman Drive and points that a Boulevard. There were also concerns about on street parking on points that as well as loss of privacy due to the building heights, and then, and then the concern of affordable housing to address these concerns the applicant has revised the concept plan and he also met with the neighbors this last night I believe. So here's the revised concept plan, and we'll go over a couple of elements in that. First of all, they're proposing to remove the vehicular connection between the proposed multifamily and any future commercial development on the adjacent CMG. That is in order to potentially prevent any cut through traffic that may come through any commercial development that would that will eventually be developed at that corner to the neighborhood. They're proposing to set the buildings back 12 feet from the property line on points that to further to get them further away from those existing homes and potentially mute the effects of the height. A little bit decorative masonry wall is proposed. That's that brown line there, adjacent to the to the buildings, also with a continuous hedgerow and street trees along points that are removal of on street parking on the north side of points that it is intended in order to maintain more of a full width of the street for traveling and that and the corollary to that is no on street parking credits would be for for onsite parking would be allowed. So we've sort of kind of looked at at what the right away the typical right away is for a Main Street collector, what the setbacks are on the existing single family homes and then what their proposed setback would be so when you add all those up, it's going to be a three story development. So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development. So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development. So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development. So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development. So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development. So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development. So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development . So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development. So you can see that the multi family development is going to be a three story development. So you can see maybe how the sight lines would be affected by that additional setback. Staff also kind of played around with what the street could look like and kind of dreamed about how that street could be improved based upon if that on street parking was removed on the north side of points that are how that street could be reconfig ured. So we used the same 107 feet with the same edges, so the housing as well as the multi family. And then we removed that on street parking on the north side and changed that to a landscape median with the street tree to see how that could look and how that could additionally buffer that multi family development from the town home development. So when we analyze the request against the criteria for approval, first of all, the request is consistent with the Denton plan 2030. First of all, it's consistent with the goals and the intent of the community mixed use future land use element, it provides that moderate density housing. It also meets the goal of an expanded housing choice for Denton residents. The Denton plan talks about talks about not only expanded housing choice in location, but also in in cost. So this meets that that requirement. By, by approving an SEP the rezoning the SEP, the multi family development with we provide a physical buffer between the neighborhoods and any commercial development that will that will go in adjacent to loop to 88. And then provide some certainty as to what would go there and some consistency in the residential type of use. It would also allow the land uses to transition gradually from the low density residential to moderate densities and then on to the commercial development. So as landscaping and screening the use must meet all the DC requirements and that includes parking lot screening parking requirements lighting street trees and tree canopy, and then that muted color palettes consistent with the nearby residential areas. So the plan and zoning commission recommended approval of the request with two conditions. First that a full site plan submittal would be required in order to determine that they do meet those didn't development requirements. And then second that those exterior built building materials maintain that muted color palette. Staff recommended approval of the request because it is consistent with the Denton plan and it also provides an appropriate residential type of housing. It is consistent with the Denton plan and it also provides an appropriate residential type transition between the existing neighborhoods and come up future commercial development. But in response to the planning and zoning commission and the revised concept plan. We have five additional conditions for seven in total. First, a 12 foot setback along the point set up property line. A six foot decorative masonry wall to be constructed along points that with a continuous hedgerow and those street trees to soften those edges on street parking. We are recommending that they move forward with with removing that on the north side of points that to maintain as much of the width of the street as possible, that the project should not be eligible for any on street parking credits, and that the vehicular connections to any adjacent commercial would be removed. So with that, I'll stand for any questions and the applicants here. Any questions. So, would it would a gas station be permitted in the current zoning. We consider gas station or the gas stations are considered quick vehicle servicing and the debt and development code. Okay, so that falls into that. Okay, because I'm thinking of Bucky's in my mind right now so I'm just curious. Okay. Well, we wouldn't want that. So, on the connection. So, the, the entrance ingress egress is off point set up. Yes, so that's why there was the restriction to not connect because the fear of okay. And on the recommendations, both from PNC and staff recommendations of no on site parking on street parking on the east side. Everybody's okay with that. It's okay with that, I guess we'll be able to ask that question here in a few minutes, and they would be required to meet all didn't development code requirements for parking as well on site. Right, but, but there's. Right, but I'm talking about the off street, you know that removed the parking from the from the street okay. All right. Any other questions for staff for either the rez oning recipe. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right, applicant. Be the first to speak. Come down I believe you got 10 minutes total 20 minutes 10 minutes for one speaker and so you split it up as you need it, you don't necessarily have to take all the time if you don't need it. I appreciate that very important final caveat there. Ryan combs with palladium USA addresses 13455 Noel Road, Dallas, Texas, and we were here this bad this past February and so you know a little bit about us we're 140 year old privately owned company we're not emergent builder. We can sell our properties and really what we came to dent to do is we, we build class a developments that's what we do we build the nicest multifamily developments around the world, we were known we've got properties around North Texas that can be seen and brought counsel this past spring, and we getting this tax credit funding to be able to provide affordable housing you from where you sit, and having heard all of the discussions that you've had tonight, bringing affordable housing and actually putting it on the ground is a hard thing to do. We tax credit funding is a very very hard thing to do that that the city of Denton has not been able to get that it's not been competitive for that for a number of years. We now are our development palladium didn't is the very last development in all of Dallas Fort Worth that will get funded with this tax credit funding we're the very last one to get reached and so we don't know when this will come back again we don't know how much of this will be done so we so the good news is we we have we're able to leverage this great resource to bring a class a development , you know our development cost is over $170,000 a unit yard , we've got granite countertops and, and hard to get to the lower surfaces. I did want to mention some resident services because I heard that in the, in the work session yesterday. Here's a few of the resident services that we do at our properties that we would be doing here, health fair, things like dental flu shots and financing classes, income tax prep, kids tutoring after school programs, parenting fairs and parenting classes that have to do with online safety and these types of things are all things that we've done within the past year at our existing properties in the state of Dallas. So, really what this is has come down to is is we've been working on multifamily and CMG allows multifamily as a use and we've been working on that for a while. Really what this comes down to is removing that L six requirement that is on this corner that's all all commercial mixed use zoning designation right now and we've got 7.3 acres that we're looking at that that that could end up being a buffer between that commercial use, and the single family to the south of us the L six component requires that commercial would be on the bottom floor we want to take that off because that intensifies the use what we've heard from the neighbors. And really after planning and zoning, we got to work on what can we do to address these concerns several and met with a number of the neighbors last night I don't have any black eyes they were all very, very friendly. When I went and met with them, and, and we presented these these conditions and said what do you think about them and I think we got a very positive response. So what we, what we, what we heard is that there's a very tight knit neighborhood to our south, and the neighbors want to preserve the integrity of their neighborhood. Part of that is they don't want on street parking because some of that is used for the town homes that's in that's a directly across the street from our apartments would be and so we said okay, let, let's protect that let's let's commit to having all of our neighbors inside the development. Let's put a let's put a m asonry wall, and no pedestrian access so we don't we're not encouraging anybody to park there on the street, and then let's then let's landscape it to be very nice so the neighbors across the street are looking at it so we were trying to create a little bit of a barrier, but also something attractive to look at and it creates a buffer between this neighborhood to the south so the other thing is traffic and removing the access to the north that's going to end up being a commercial access this this point set is a collector road, and so we have the same issue here that was in one of the one of the discussions earlier and that I don't believe there's any access that's going to be allowed on the Sherman road all access for commercial or anything that happens on that 30 acres is going to have to come on to point set a road and so our use actually is a less intense use than you know all of these other commercial uses that are currently permitted there and so that's really what this comes down to is, is, is just basically just removing that L six component, and so we asked for yours for that approval tonight and certainly here to answer any questions you may have any questions. That's my breaks. Just to remind me, you were in agreement. This was the project that this did not do that didn't county housing authority you are just a private developer on your own so that this. You will go to the district and all with them. Yes, ma'am. Yeah, just to remind. Yes, that's a good good point I actually wrote that down to say that so I'm glad you brought it up. Anybody else question for them. All right. Thank you. Thank you. I'm Mike on behalf of the applicant, Lance fans at 512 West Hickory, just wanted to bring up a procedural matter. Mayor is a, as the city attorney mentioned, we have a, this is going to be two separate actions but we have a palladium my client filed on behalf of the current the rezoning application and the issue P application. It's one of those instances where we're actually requesting a down zoning. So kind of the worst case scenario for us would be if the downs on is approved and the issue P is denied. So if those can't be acted on together with least ask that the council, keep that in mind that sure we would, we would prefer that be in your mind at least one one project in one question I have for city attorney is, are we able to in the in the in the zoning vote. If there was a condition. Can you put a condition on that is conditioned upon the SUP passing. We have an alternative how we can fix that if it doesn't. I think we can do that. Okay. Yes, if not, we can always ask for a motion to reconsider. If somebody from someone who Victor, it's getting late I don't even know what I'm talking about. Someone who approved it can ask for motion reconsider and we could correct it but it would be my surprise if we're here, tying these together rezoning passed and SCP didn't and that would, I don't know if I've ever seen that but that's no guarantee but I think we've got a way to fix that if that somehow occurs. Okay. Thank you. You bet. Okay. Is that all the speakers for the applicant. Okay. All right. All right, we've got some blue cards. And then this is a public hearing, and I have opened the public hearing, some of you have indicated, both seven FNG so we're just going to do it like we did last time. The first speaker is Jen Mari golf. You'll come down and state your name and address your time will begin. And you were on seven F, but it's public hearing for seven F and D so yeah, and next to speak up will be Ryan combs. Oh, that's you. Okay. Thank you. My name is Jean Marie golf , and I live in and I'm really sorry. I live at 1301 Minton Boulevard, and thank you for hearing me, Mayor and council members. I've lived at my residence for 16 years, and I am concerned I actually own two homes in the neighborhood, and they're both appraising for, you know, in the neighborhood of 190, 000 over. And so, I knew that one day 16 years ago when I moved in that one day, something was going to be built on the property. I had hoped it would be homes similar to my own. But later, apparently the only one that the landowner approved of was for palladium. And so lesser of two evils I think is, I do think the NRM, NRM you is a better fit for the neighborhood. So I'm in favor of that. I don't want to McDonald's across the street from my home I don't want to gas station across the street from my home. I'm not a better option. We have met with him and with Ryan and, you know, he has made concessions. It does look. They look nice I visited one of their other properties. They do look nice they've made concessions they have on site resources that he talked about. And I would say that I am in favor, and I hope that you will approve both both measures. So, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The next. Excuse me. Next speaker is Rebecca, Rebecca Garcia. Just state your name and address your time will begin. My name is Rebecca Garcia, and I live at 1301 Manton Boule vard, and my house is right at the entrance. Last night, or the other, I guess it wasn't last night it was last night. We came to the zoning commission with our pitchforks and dogs and we were ready to fight, and we were not happy. We learned that we could have gotten a Buckeyes. Nobody hates McDonald's I would have probably liked to be no I would you know one of McDonald's. So once we figured out the zoning was good for us, we were happy. We were not happy for a three tiered apartment. I have a pool. They're going to see me in my bathing suit. So now I have to go to the gym but actually with all the you laugh it's not funny. I get Google Earth woman I'm on my way but everything that 's set up. It looks good. I challenged Ryan combs, and he met the challenge. He met with us last night. He, I know he made all the concessions he could. My friend and I G Marie we went to the place just like this in Aubrey, and we pretended that her mother wanted to live there and everything I know everything. He said it's there. The place was nice. It was kept up. So the only concern we have is the traffic because there's going to be a lot of traffic. Not quite like Ryan High School I taught there for well from the beginning to my end of my career and not only do the students drive bad as teachers wanting to get home. We'll run you all over. But anyway, the traffic is going to be a big big mess but I mean this, I think most of us is a total reversal and total agreement with everything so if you could pass both of them. We will be happy. Thank you. Thank you very much. Those are all the cards that I have but it's public here. Anybody wishing to speak. Yes, I think. Yeah, that's okay I knew you're going to be able to speak so just state your name and address. Sharon Herman and I live at 1305 man, which is right next door to them. And I want to thank you all for hearing us I know it's late . Bless your heart. I had no idea these were like this. So I give you all a lot of credit. I think Ryan to because he really stepped up for us making the changes like he did. I was one of the pitchfork bearers last week, big time. And I think the changes. I'm like G Marie we're not really thrilled with a three story. Anything going in there. I think the changes I think it's more acceptable and and if you can do the rezoning altogether that would be greatly appreciated. The only other suggestion I have is listening to all these things tonight. I hear two common themes traffic, which is going to be a nightmare even if they didn't put this in with harvest till going into the end of points that y'all have been to football Friday, you know, getting off the loop it's, you know, and now, now everybody's going to be making their U turns in points that are while everybody else is coming down the road. But that, but the traffic thing I think is the biggest thing. And I guess my question is is maybe as you go. Come on Mary you can hang in just a couple more minutes. Yeah, I saw you blink. Wow. Okay, I understand. And maybe as you're doing all these zoning things maybe I 'll need to maybe reconsider and reprioritize and maybe do your traffic studies and things like that and have those ducks in a row first, you know, and maybe they can kind of avoid a lot of these other things because maybe you'll have some kind of an idea of a future solution. But, thank you. Thank you. This is a public hearing anybody else wishing to speak, please come down state your name and address, and your time will begin. Anybody wishing to speak. Councilmember Briggs, you want to comment before I close the public here. Okay. One more time anybody wishing to speak. See no movement we will now close the public hearing Councilmember Briggs. I wanted to thank you for coming tonight and staying for our meeting and I was really glad to hear that you were in favor of this because as a district to rep, I was very concerned about the current zoning of CMG I went through the whole Buc-E's with the neighborhood and I just don't want that to happen and I think this is a much better buffer that we can get and so I wanted to thank you for coming down and speaking of support I know that was probably something you didn't think you were going to be doing a few days ago. And I wanted to thank the developer Mr. Combs for working with the neighborhood and coming up with these solutions. I know that it's not it's not perfect but it could be a lot worse. So, I just wanted to say that so I will be supporting tonight and I wasn't sure how this was going to go so thank you. Anybody else. I really want to thank everybody for their participation and especially this is really how the process works I mean you're not always going to come to agreements. I mean we've seen that in the last two we've had, but people try, and that's really all we can ask of the developers of the neighbors of any stakeholders is to listen to one another and try to come up with some solutions that will mitigate any of the concerns so thank you all for doing that. Thank the neighborhood for coming out during planning and zoning and letting your concerns be known because I think that's what allowed and invited the developers back to try to mitigate some of those so I appreciate everybody's cooperation, and I will try to not look as tired of moving forward from this point. Mayor pro tem. I'm going to move for approval of item F, and if I can just make a brief comment. I just want to thank the developer in particular, ever since the first time you came to City Hall , pretty much any requests, we have made of him has been. Above and beyond and done absolutely everything that we've asked and we ask a lot of things I mean I'm the first person to admit that. So I just want to thank you, everything I've heard tonight is consistent with our experience, dealing with you guys, leading up to this point. And I really want to thank the neighbors it's not often that people stay until midnight to voice support. So, that's, that's pretty cool. All right, we have a motion. Councilmember husband. Second. We have a motion and second for approval of agenda item F. There were no conditions or anything. Okay, second one okay as he's the one that has conditions okay. So is agenda item F. Let's vote on the board please. Passes 50. Councilmember breaks. From staff. Okay from staff. They weren't from. We have a motion. Mayor pro tem. Councilmember, that's good. Sure, I'll second. Yeah, I didn't see anybody. Oh, Councilmember Ryan. Okay, we're just. Okay, we got a motion to second. And the motion is to for the recommend including the recommendations from staff from staff and PNC also had a few to and PNC which includes the off no parking require no parking permitted on the what's, is that the east side of points north side of the road. I think there's seven, seven recommendations. The only question I have about the parking that does that go through. We can do that here without it going through traffic safe I mean we still have to do something different to remove the parking on that side is that correct. Is that the way it was officially or it's been a long time so I've done traffic safety commission but I think that you would need to come back and have that side of the road designated as a no parking, the ordinance, right, hoping that's the process that we follow. Yeah, okay. Okay, that's a condition upon him as part of the property to monitor and enforce. Thank you for that clarification so then I have a question for the applicant on that. Yes, yes. And staff or whoever can answer this. So, make sure I understand the condition is for the residents of the pall adium to be prohibited from parking on the street. And that that's not being included in your parking requirements, all of our required parking would need to be inside of our development. So, help me understand how that will be enforced on the street. Well, I don't know exactly how you enforce if they if there 's somebody parking there that lives in the community. However, what we've done is made it really really inconvenient. We've created no pedestrian access along points that I, and so all of the parking is back in the development. And so, I mean you would have to park on points that I walk all the way around, go through a vehicle gate, which you can't get through unless you're in a vehicle to get back into the apartments and so we've made it next to impossible for one of our residents to park on the street. Okay, so I want to make sure and I needed that explanation because what I'm hearing since it's not a city induced sort of parking restriction for that side of the road in general , that it's sort of a self policing and that there's no, I just want the neighborhood to understand that that doesn't mean that you're not going to have residents or visitors or guests whoever want to climb bushes or go through your car gates or what I don't know what it's going to look like but I appreciate the clarification. All right, so it's more of a voluntary kind of, and you've made it to where it's very difficult and very inconvenient for someone to do that. Okay, okay. All right. Thank you. So that could that is a good that could be a condition but it's sort of. We can put it on there but it's not really no parking on that side of the road the condition is what no no 10 no tenant or resident parking. I guess it yeah palladium 10 tenant or resident parking. That's how we'd word it. Okay. Yeah. All right. Thank you. I'm glad that we clarified that because that would have been. That would have been really a interesting situation. Yes. Councilmember Briggs, right. Well I just want to say also that if there continues to be an issue that we do have a traffic safety commission that we could come back and look at no parking on one side of the street in the future if something were to keep occurring, especially with the more development comes along so that that is another route to use in our city later on down the road. Yeah, I'm thinking and what I'm hearing is they don't want that they don't want that total restriction on that side. It's just more of a concession from the developer to discourage that as much as possible. Okay. Councilmember has with. Yeah, I would think the. I would ask that we craft that motion more to the structural component versus the parking component. So the wall with no access, no pedestrian access, etc, etc. More along that line versus speaking to the parking, because I mean that's people get real creative about parking, you know, and I would second with the mayor said because I already have devised a plan that if my friends live there. I'm going to park on the street, I'll jump in the car with them, and we'll drive in and park inside there so I mean, I don't, I don't want to get into the wording on parking in, because they're going to work around that, you know, so I think it needs to be more structural. That's, that's enforceable. Based on what what the developers willing to do, and then let the parking side just kind of work itself out. Okay, so I believe the applicant has stated that they are going to be installing the fence, and that there's going to be no pedestrian access to that side of the property. And I believe the statement was that even at the vehicular gate. People can't walk through that there's not going to be a. There's got to be some kind of pass through there for for pedestrian. There are measuring access at the at the clubhouse but not the vehicular gate is where, where the parking and all those types of things are and so all of our amenities are back. Back in the back we've got a 4000 square foot clubhouse a big pool playground all of these types of things are towards the back in the end so people are really going to be attracted to those things not out not out on the street or, or other places that's where all of that, all of the fun and all of the, all of those things are at. So I think we've. Okay, we've tried to cover it. Yeah, right. So, based upon his comments as far as the way they 're. Okay, so we've got a motion for approval from Councilmember Briggs incorporating the planning and zoning recommendations and staff recommendations with the modifications to the no parking to that that applies to the residents, it's not a. This is a true prohibition to parking on the north side. Councilmember Ryan has seconded it. So let's vote on the board please. Motion carries 50. We've been going for a little bit over an hour and 45 minutes so I'm going to, we're going to take a really really quick break I know we've got only got one left but you know, you just never know to to FC I don't even know to that. So, yeah, let's take a break. All right, we're back again on Wednesday. Is it Wednesday. No, December the sixth at 1220 am. Okay, great. All right, we're going to go on to agenda item H, which is hold a public hearing consider approval of an ordinance regarding a detailed plan for plan development 12 PD 12 district to depict a new or use car lot on approximately 7. 1 acres out of 34.4 acre track. I will now open the public hearing. I'm a senior planner with the city of Denton and presenting PDA 17 six car max. The request is to consider approval of a detailed plan for plan development 12 to depict a new or use car sales lot on approximately seven acres. I'm going to point out on this, on this map because this came up in the planning and zoning Commission so the request includes all of the area in yellow that's the entire parcel. However, the limits of the proposed development are only an approximately this red box. So this is a detailed plan it really is looking at a site plan and how that site is going to is proposed to be developed. And so, right now they're only proposing to develop in this general area, if that did expand to other parts of the lot, then they would have to come back and get additional approvals. So, with that said the property is located adjacent to I 35 that corridor right there it's south of state school road. So, approval criteria actually comes from our 1991 code. As I stated earlier in the evening, a lot of our PDs went away with our 2002 development code it doesn't actually include a PD provision. However, a few of those plan developments did remain and this is one of them. And so we look at we look at the 91 code and we look at the criteria for approval so first, does it comply with the general concept plan or development plan so is the use permitted in that in that plan is does it provide for a compatible arrangement of the buildings that would not adversely affect properties outside of the PD, does it provide for an adequate circulation of traffic and is it in substantial compliance with the city regulations. The appropriate property is located within a regional mixed use area, part dent and plan 2030. The intent of regional mixed use is to develop sites that serve as regional destination so it not only brings people throughout the city but but from outside of the city to that location. The proposed detail plan and the use do conform to this future land use element. As I said the current zoning is PD 12 district plan developments in the city of Denton when they were under the 91 code had a two step process first the concept plan which outlined the, which outlined the permitted uses within the district and the general concept plan outlined as well as the boundaries of the plan development and where those uses would go. The detail plan. The second part of the PD was got a little more specific where the buildings go where does the parking what kind of landscaping so the plan concept plan was approved in 87 for PD 12, and it did permit the use of newer use car sales lot in open. So the use is permitted per the PD. And then if we'll look at the map of the PD. So this is it's kind of hard to read, but this is the map of the plan development. The yellow is approximately the location of the subject property, and that is in the commercial services which does permit the use. So we'll look at the site plan and how it's all put together. First of all, they're proposing and approximately 7400 square foot building constructed with masonry materials. They do. They are proposing a driveway connection to the I 35 frontage road. The sales staging area, this area here is proposed to be screened with a six foot masonry wall. The proposed development would have to meet the didn't development code requirements for light and glaring glares they get closer to their building permit stage, and then public address speakers would be oriented toward the interior of the site that way to mitigate any noise, noise from adjacent properties. Just take it a couple of other elements of the site the display area for the vehicles we will be is proposed to be in this area, the employee and customer parking in this area and then here's here's the proposed building. They've also submitted a landscape plan so they are proposing street trees along I 35, as well as shrubbery. They are proposing to plant, plant trees in association with the development, and it would be 23% of that 7.1 acre lot would be under tree canopy at maturity. And they're also proposing to plant additional trees toward the rear of the side that's closer to where some residential areas are so they wanted to make sure that they got those trees in the back of the, of the site as well. Public notice was sent out regarding the request. We received three in opposition and two in favor. The planning and zoning commission recommended approval of the request and staff recommends approval of the request as it is consistent with the goals and objectives of the debt and plan 2030, and the proposed site plan landscape plan and elevations are in compliance with the concept plan, they're compatible with the adjacent property, they provide adequate circulation and they're in substantial compliance with the with the regulations and I'll stand for any questions and the applicant is here. Any questions for staff. Not seeing none. Thanks. And this is the only one we have to approve with this it's not a combined so if the applicants are here, welcome the applicant down to state your name and address and your time will begin I think you 've probably heard the rules as far as timing so yes. Good evening, or I guess good morning. This point. My name is john Thatcher address is 800 East 18th, Denver, Colorado . I'm with Centerpoint integrated solutions we are a development consultant for car max here with me today is jam Dixon from the car max real estate department. Local linear attorney Bill Dahlstrom, as well as representatives from our local engineering group done away engineering. We had a presentation for you. I think Julie did a great job with her overview of the project we don't really have too much to add to that so I think we'll just leave it at that. We're here to answer any questions you have and thank you for your consideration. Sure. Any questions for the applicant. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. This is a public hearing. Anybody else wishing to speak please come down state your name and address and your time will begin. Anybody wishing to speak. More time. All right, we will now close the public hearing on agenda item seven H. Mayor Potem. For approval of item seven H Councilmember husband second. Please motion carries four to one. Agenda item seven H hold a public hearing considered option of ordinance for an initial zoning of neighborhood residential mix use in our MU district on approximately six acres. All right. So this is the 1722 east side at Oakmont. So the request before us to consider an initial zoning of neighborhood residential mix use on approximately six acres , the subject property and it's kind of hard to imagine it. Because the road that it's adjacent to it is not show up in this in this aerial, but this is the future extension of 24 99 I think it's actually built, but you can't drive on it yet so it is adjacent to that future FM 2014 2499 it is south of Robinson Road. So under the current zoning it is RD five X it was annexed and it received that initial placeholder zoning designation . The applicant is now coming to propose an NRM use owning district. As we've stated the criteria for approval is first as it conform to the future land use element and then does it facilitate the adequate provision of public infrastructure. So, in this instance the, the, the proposed zoning district doesn't doesn't technically meet the, the future land use element, so the additional criteria for approval that are in sub chapter three of the Denton Development Code would apply. And so we'll go over those as we move forward with the development. So we'll first look at the Denton plan 2030 so the end, it is an in a low density residential future land use. This is intended for single family neighborhoods one to four dwelling units per acre. The proposed zoning doesn't technically conform to this low density residential, but as you'll see as we go through the presentation. It's unlikely that this property would develop with low density residential uses, it's about a six acre property and it's further constrained by some, some FEMA on the side, as well as its adjacency to what is what is a regional road lends itself to a more commercial uses so we'll look at that. So there are public facilities in the area they will have to have extension will have to extend those public facilities as they move forward with the development, as well as impact fees would be assessed at building permit. As I stated this is adjacent to the future FM 2499. It's a primary arterial so it is being developed as a six lane divided road. There is FEMA on the, on the east side of the property kind of covering that east boundary, as well as it there's an HO A open space lot between the subject property and the adjacent residential. So that that FEMA covers, covers this area. This is conceptual, but, but any development in that site would have to meet some engineering standards and would have to make sure that they comply with all didn't development code requirements. So, so in the letters of opposition. There's some people are saying that they were under the impression that there would not be any development behind their house is that what they're talking about that little buffer right there between the property and, and their back. So if I can find one, this might better better show it. So you can see that this strip right here is, I don't know how visible that is. That's actually a homeowners Association lot for that adjacent neighborhood. So, this request doesn't take in that property and so there is that separation, that narrow strip between the residential and the proposed commercial development. So that's the floodplain. I think that's, I'm sorry, go ahead. And so, so the houses at the other end of it do not have that type of buffer. They do not. So back to the floodplain now. Yeah. Part of the part, well, obviously part of the homeowners on land is in the A E slash a flood zone, and then part of the proposed subject property is in the floodplain as well so it's very possible that that buffer could be much larger than the homeowners Association, depending on the topography and things such as that. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. So we'll look at text up plans for 2499. So the, the subject property is the area in green here. There are noise attenuation walls. That are these approximate areas. And as you can, I don't know if you can see but these are the six lane divided road with a median in the middle. Currently the configuration only permits a ride in ride out for this property if they did want to change this configuration they would have to work with text dot as this is a text dot road. Also any access to 2499 would have to go through text up because because of it being that text dot road. Because my right. Just kind of looking at the map is there any other access besides 2499 to this property. No sir, it is, it is separated from those residential areas. So, any access into and out of the site would have to come from 24 99. Thank you. So when we look at the compatibility of the request in relationship to the adjacent properties. So, surrounding the subject property you have plan developments you've got PD 176 here, PD 111 in this area. And then this includes this this area as well. There's also some NR for adjacent and RD five X to the north. These are all developed with single family uses this this undeveloped property right here within the PD was designated for commercial development and so, although it hasn't it hasn't had a detail plan approved yet. It was set aside for commercial development within the concept plan of that plan development. The property to the north here has a gas well development on facility on it. And then here's the subject property. So, so when we look at this at this property, we see commercial uses are typically found along arterial roads. It provides adequate visibility as well as access. And so, so, you know, commercial uses are appropriate for this site because of that 2499 corridor. However, we want to be we want to be sensitive to the nearby residential areas because they are they are in close proximity. However, when we look at it in our M.U. is typically found near neighborhoods as it provides that day to day shopping. And that the development would have to comply with all environmentally sensitive area requirements all FEMA requirements tree preservation buffers would be required against from the subject property to any residential development adjacent to it. And then they would also have to comply with all tree canopy and lighting requirements. All of those are to sort of to increase compatibility with the adjacent properties. Public notification of the of the request was sent out out of 200 foot notices we've received five in opposition. The staff does recommend approval of the craft request for the for the following reasons. So although it's technically inconsistent with the future land use designation. It is consistent with the overall plan overall goals of the didn 't plan 2030 commercial development is appropriate in the location giving the frontage and the access provided by 24 99. And in our M.U. permits commercial uses with limitations on the development scale. So it would minimize conflicts with nearby residential neighborhoods. Staff also believes that due to the size and the environmental considerations on the site. It's unlikely to develop with a residential type you so we feel like a commercial use particularly the small scale commercial uses permitted in our M.U. would be appropriate in this location. The planning and zoning commission also recommended approval of the request. However they did recommend a mixed use residential protection overlay and that hotels and bars would not be permitted. I want to add one other additional item. So when they originally approached the city or submitted the application they submitted to to rezone to see him. However after a neighborhood meeting and discussions with staff staff felt like C.M.G. probably was a little too intense for the area. And so the applicant came back and said well we'll do the N .R.M.U. to reduce the scale and those permitted uses. So this one kind of went through a transformation in terms of what they originally applied for and then and then and then what what's moving forward today. So I'll stand for any questions and the applicants here any questions for staff. Seeing none. Thank you. And I have opened the public hearing so applicant feel free to come down and speak. Please. Greg Johnson 319 West Oak. I won't use all my time. I just want a couple points of clarification. Sorry for my voice. When the 2030 plan was done 24/9 it wasn't contemplated had 24/9 I've been contemplated and drawn. Obviously I don't think anybody would have speculated for single family residential butting up to it. So kind of put staff in a compromised position with the 2030 plan there. I just want to. A couple things up here for you guys to see . Just just to show that you can zoom out Billy. Wake up Billy. Now he's not going to do it. As you guys are well aware 24/9 six lanes divided which is what 2181 or Teasley is going to. If you look up and down up and down here you'll see NRMU and CMG pretty consistent up and down the two roads. Down here to the south. Trying here's Kroger. As you can see NRMU. So very very similar on the two roads. CMG was what was recommended to us initially by another staff member, which is what we submitted for after getting some feedback from some of the residents and talking with Julie after the neighborhood meeting. NRMU is what we felt like would be, you know, satisfy the concerns of the neighborhood and frankly the uses that will go on this site would fit with any either one. Next exhibit here if you could zoom out enough to see that to kind of give you a feel for some of the things that are in NRMU in this area. Here's our site. Here's Kroger 112,000 feet sprouts 50,000 Walmart neighborhood market 40,000. The Denton Public Library and fire station 27,000 square feet of the six acre site. There's only about roughly 1.9 acres. It's out of the floodplain that's developable. So you couldn't fit, you know, anything more than probably 15 to 20,000 feet. If that big of a building, I don't see that going there. And then lastly, in terms of because the biggest concern that we heard from the neighbors was how close could this thing be built to my house. Obviously with the with the the buffer on the east side, of course, there's no concern because the distance from the floodplain to the back of those fences is going to be probably three times the full length of their individual lots. And this site's heavily treed on the south side. Obviously all your building requirements would be in place setback requirements. This is just one that happens to be the Denton Public Library that was built after these houses were here. It's 41 feet. Current codes going to require us to be further than that. So we think we've done a good job of getting feedback and input from the staff. I won't I won't pull the site back up for you. But if you can kind of picture the site, the big triangle. You've got to pull it back up real quick, Julie, because I think there's one piece that would be beneficial. The one that where you showed the floodplain on the side there. And so if you look at the site here, it takes out built twenty four ninety nine. All this used to sheet drain all this land here sheet drained into this floodplain. When they built the road, they built a drainage system down the west side to about right here. And there's actually a bridge that's built here with box culverts underneath it. And through this property, they built a drainage channel to get it into this flood. So they actually built a channel with rock down into the channel. So that water actually now flows down the west side of twenty four ninety nine underneath the road through a drainage channel through the middle of our property. The reason that's important is because you can't see it here, but the topography is there's about a twenty foot ditch. It goes right through the middle of the property here where that drainage goes, basically separates this property into two pieces. This is so skinny up here. You can't do anything. A big ditch here and then it's heavily treed along the southern boundary. And so really what you're talking about is there's about one point seven acres or so right here that's usable. And where the text dot built the road, there's actually a concrete wall that starts about right here because of that drainage system they built underneath it. So you basically going to have a right in right out right here and no other access. This is the only place you can get in. So what we would expect is some sort of an office building or something right here. So while it looks like a big site, really not a whole lot of the usable. I'll stand for any questions. So you mentioned a heavily treed lot back here by these homes that don't really have the floodplain as a buffer. There's trees back there. Oh, yeah, there's tons of trees. In fact, the day after we owned it, we got a call from Community Improvement Services that one of these trees back here was leaning on a fence. And so my partner actually went out there Saturday morning and we found that many of the fences were actually tied to these trees back here. The mouse is not cooperating with me. But Keely, there's if you if you can't legally drive out there. But if you did drive out there, it's covered up with this line. But that's probably I mean, it's very, very, very thick with large oak trees all the way down this back border. So is your intention to leave that border there as a buffer ? Oh, yeah, I mean, because you can't build within that line anyway. They're right up against the fences. So you would leave all those trees. Now, we're going to have to whoever builds something here, you know, commercial use would have to separate that with appropriate fence. And that'll have to be addressed with the staff at the time because you'd like to not affect those trees. And many of them are right up against the fence with fences leaning on them. And the other thing, Keely, is Councilmember Briggs, there are there's a huge stand of trees, almost probably the back two thirds of this property is all covered in trees. So really, it doesn't you know, you would never disturb them. You can't build it anyway. So you're just going to build kind of works out great because this area right here is flat and there's really no trees in it. So you just leave all that all the way around it and just build up here. All right. Any other questions for them? Seen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Cast member, did you have a question? I did just have a follow up. So you said you had a neighborhood meeting or do you intend to continue those conversations? We had a neighborhood meeting. We sent out the notifications, you know, just to tell them that we were going to seek to zone the property. We don't have a user yet. But once we have a user or if somebody is going to buy the property or if we were going to build something for someone, then that they'd go through the whole process. Site planning and all that stuff. Well, it seemed the main concern was the nature and it looks like on both sides of buffer, nature buffer is going to continue to be there. So frankly, the concerns folks that were concerned about the nature, a couple of them that were in opposition had been mid led by the person that sold their homes. Right. And it was telling them that it was going to be park land or something back there. So that's unfortunate. Thanks. All right. This is a public hearing. Anybody else wishing to speak? Anybody else wishing to speak? Seeing none, we will close the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem. For approval of item I with the conditions delineated by the staff report. There were conditions, right? No hotels, no bars. No hotels, no bars. Yeah. All right. Council member husband. Second. We have a motion and a second for agenda item for seven. I let's vote on the board, please. Motion carries five zero concluding items. This is the night when we should not have too many conclud ing items. Did you take yours off? No, I didn't. I think you did with your mind. I can't. Yeah, it's my bad karma. Council member Briggs. So I just have a few today when we were talking about the park fees. It reminded me or I wouldn't like to review our park master plan. If that's something we we have just to kind of we do. You 're going to be seeing a proposal fairly soon to update that though. OK, so we were going to need to budget for an update on that. OK. All right. Also, there was a article in the paper about the storing radioactive material at a plant place on the Shady Oaks and that the hearing has been postponed. There were some comments in the paper about that , wondering if the city could do anything. And so just to kind of follow up if our residents are in danger or if there's something the city needs to do in regards to that hearing in Austin. And last, I'd like to give a shout out to help portrait denton. I volunteered there this past weekend and they are doing really great things in our community. They provide quality portraits to those in need for free. So it was it was just really great to participate in. And so I wanted to to say thank thank you to them for doing that for our community. Anybody else including Adams? Seeing none, we'll stand adjourned. Twelve fifty.