Aug 15, 2023 City Council on 2023-08-15 1:00 PM

August 15, 2023 City Council
Full Transcript

60590 words Download SRT Download VTT
             good afternoon welcome to this meeting of the Denton City Council it is 101 on
 Tuesday August 15 2023 we have a quorum so I'll call the meeting to order first
 thing is do we have any comments from citizens okay so no comments thank you
 one thing not listed on the agenda we need to give the city manager direction
 the issue is questions from council and they their timeliness and and how staff
 is to adjust or proceed with questions that don't come on on time some were
 received over the weekend Councilman back Mayor Pro Tem had some additional
 questions that came late Sunday night and Monday and and and okay Councilman
 McGee and so as a body we need to give staff direction round numbers that took
 up 30 40 hours to get all the questions out to do it twice and so I just we just
 need to have a agreement or we need to give direction as a body either we're
 going to they don't make it in by Sunday ask them live or we're going to say and
 in my my thought that's my preference because it frees up staff to work on
 Monday it doesn't require them to work over the weekend as much it just would
 be they're planning to be here anyway on Tuesday so they can just answer the
 questions so I think either we get them in early or we don't and that's fine but
 we need to give some direction and we need to be in my words not the staff's
 mindful of staff time that it takes to pull these together the different
 department heads and so if we get if we can just have an agreement on how to
 proceed that then will inform the city manager how she's to proceed or if we
 need to hire more people to a deal with this issue if we're not willing to are
 able to get them in early we just got to do something the current plan does not
 work so open the floor for discussion direction on how to deal with Council's
 issue of timing and questions not getting in on time and specifically to
 that if the questions don't get in on time on Sunday what does the city
 manager to do that's that's I'm trying to zero in on that obviously we're here
 hour early because we have an action-packed agenda but this is
 something we've got to address counselor Meltzer the objective of getting
 questions in in advance is so staff can be prepared you know and so that they
 can I those items can either not come up for discussion because they're already
 addressed or so they're not blindsided so I think it's either way a benefit for
 questions to get to staff I think the only question is whether the response
 can come back to council before and I mean I'd be interested in taking
 guidance from staff you know after a certain point I mean they're gonna have
 to be dealt with one way or the other I would think having the opportunity to
 work on them before you're actually in session would be a benefit but whether
 they can get back to us before session may be you know a question after a
 certain point and I'd be so personally willing to live with whatever they say
 the response framework is well I'm trying to empower them because the
 problem you have with that approach is if you leave it to them then they want
 to do what's right and then you get this versus if I send something in late
 they're empowered to say as a council you decided no we don't have we're not
 going to answer these so council direction lends support and weight to
 staff to have a take a position versus taking them one off and I want to help
 them out but you know I think it just takes away some of the ambiguity I take
 you you make a valid point on whether it's an answer or you know questions in
 early whether to answer or not if that's the decision matrix for you I that's that
 that point is well made where do you fall on that though you know sometimes
 the response is this will be addressed in session you know and and I find that
 a completely acceptable response whether it's you know for whatever reason staff
 chooses to present in session so you know is there a cutoff time you're
 saying I hear you're saying you kind of take the the onus of being responsive
 off of staff if they understand that we understand that there's expectation
 changes at a certain point well I think actually correct me if I'm wrong I think
 the expectation was by Sunday night that was correct so so I think it'd be
 perfectly reasonable for us to have an expectation that questions asked after
 Sunday night you know won't be that the responses won't be provided prior to the
 meeting I think that's perfectly reasonable okay anyone else
 councillor McGee mayor pro tem I am I concur with a council member Meltzer I
 had also assumed that questions that are not in by Sunday night would not be
 answered in time for the meeting and just to use myself as an example I asked a
 couple of questions and I put in the email no need to have these it was some
 general knowledge for myself about stuff going through on consent consent I
 wanted to make sure that staff understood that did not need to have
 these in time for the meeting but just wanted to go ahead and ask them so
 whenever they send email responses they were okay so that's what I included in
 my emails that were not sent by Sunday night just so staff would know so I'm
 agreeing anything not in by Sunday night might or might not get answered in time
 for for me okay mayor pro tem thank you mr. mayor yeah my understanding and
 recollection from the the retreat was the the Sunday timeline in particular was
 for consent items because we were trying to keep people from waiting there in the
 audience and in the hallway and and so that you know you need to get all those
 questions in so that we could just say you know pull or not pull and not have a
 discussion on those consent items that's what the timeliness of that was in terms
 of the the other items I agree with a counselor McGee and counselor Meltzer on
 the idea that you know if you can't can't get it in until the meeting itself
 you can't get into the meeting itself I mean the other alternative is I just
 reserve all my questions to the to the actual meetings and ask them in session
 and that gives staff no no time to prepare no no advance warning of the
 kinds of materials that I'd be interested in and and you know that's
 actually probably a worse situation well but let me I see you but I do want to
 clarify you may be alone in that understanding of only for consent agenda
 it is for the entire agenda that so you I don't is anyone else under that
 misunderstanding that you wanted question only for the consent yeah you're alone in
 that so it is for the entire agenda and so I you if I hear you right you're
 well I don't want to put words in your mouth so I too am leaning towards where
 counselor Meltzer counselor McGee is if they're not in by Sunday then they you
 just ask them live or that you send them and staff knows they're coming and are
 prepared for him live but the the process of typing them and so that
 everyone because the benefit is I get to see the questions asked and answered as
 well and it informed it may inform my decision that sort of thing so that's
 the benefit of getting getting them in advance as well as that your peers kind
 of understand but so I just need to get some direction from you on how you
 expect those to be handled that come in after Sunday across the entire agenda
 no I I agree that if they can't answer it in advance or you know what wish to
 follow a certain protocol there's no reason that they can't answer those in
 session okay anyone else can't councilman Holland could we put a number
 on that Sunday night at seven o'clock Sunday night at eight o'clock whatever
 preference is three in the afternoon but that suits me yeah but staff generally
 then gets it to the our city manager better said gets it to the department
 heads and to the department so then produce answers and get back but that
 that process actually takes place that evening trying to give grace to say
 Sunday evening still gives them time to do what they need to do councilman
 message you have yeah I did want to just add you know I remember I don't know if
 it existed before but to me you know this started under city manager Todd
 Howman just you know he really unveiled on me they've the value of getting the
 questions in before so the staff isn't blindsided but the idea of actually
 getting the answers before was like pure icing like lucky I mean really over
 delivery and you know we've become a we've become sort of spoiled you know
 it's it's I think it has great benefit because sometimes I don't then need to
 ask the question you know it's a satisfactorily resolved but you know
 that that to me the main point is is you knowing what we want to ask about so
 that you can be prepared okay so the majority that I've heard say in by
 Sunday if not by Sunday no need for it you know it's understood that answers
 may not come in advance and those would need to be asking the meeting any and so
 that's anything that you need to add city manager I just want to make sure
 first of all councilmember Meltzer gets him in on Saturday it's wonderful I'm
 just saying that because that really helps because what I do is we get them
 and then I wait till for Sunday evening because I don't want to interrupt other
 people's time off and then we get it out Sunday night or first thing Monday
 morning if you look at all the questions and then the other stuff that we have it
 takes them it took us about 40 hours to put all this together in two days so it
 is very labor-intensive and we want to get it back out to you to be honest
 because it lessens all the questions that are asked and the length of time
 staff are here and the length of time you have to wait and go through things
 so we want to get you the answers we don't want you to have to wait and then
 ask all your questions and that's why I kind of I'll be honest with you I push
 the staff I want these I want these answers back Monica I say Monica I want
 this out by such and such a time on Monday so you have time to review it
 because I know there's been a couple times we didn't give you ample time to
 review it that's not fair either so it would just be much appreciated we know
 there's gonna be special circumstances somebody's gonna ask you a question you
 got to get it out there that's not the problem it's just knowing it takes us a
 lot of time to pull this together to proof it to get it back out and the
 staff are trying to do their other jobs as well and it's just would be appreciate
 if you could get your questions in by Sunday 3 but if you have to stretch it
 till 6 I will hold off and get it out on at 6 okay very good that takes us our
 first work session item item a ID two three five nine I'm sorry oh yes is there
 anything on the consent that we need to pull so or yeah and if you expect a
 presentation thank you for that councillor McGee we're modifying the
 agenda a little better to give some clarity to this process
 councillor Meltzer yeah I don't know if it's already been caught in the revision
 but in the version I reviewed AO needs to be pulled as an individual item it's
 the nominations for the nominating committee okay anyone else okay got it
 Councilmember Watts yeah I'd sit in for staff I wanted to pull one of the names
 from the nomination list for the boards and commissions to vote independently
 name is David Zoltner for the ethics board okay and that is oh right yeah be
 okay consent be yes thank you all right yes so that's a pull we're pulling AO
 and and be no presentations needed just separate votes well AO maybe if there's
 a slide into the list of names and then be there's no presentation needed just
 separate vote okay thank you for that takes us back to our work session and
 it's item a ID two three five nine seven receive report hold discussion give
 staff direction regarding the fiscal year 2023 24 annual internal audit plan
 hello Mayor and Council I'm Madison Rorschach Denton City Auditor I'm going
 to present our proposed fiscal year 23 24 annual internal audit plan just as a
 quick refresher the City Auditor's Office is responsible for providing
 independent and objective reviews of city functions to strengthen public
 trust and promote continuous improvement throughout the city these reviews
 generally fall under one of three lines of services related to assurance
 consulting and investigations as shown in the figure in addition we provide
 support to the Board of Ethics and have administrative activities to support
 these services at the this time the office's largest focus is on providing
 assurance services which includes new audits audit follow-up reviews and then
 compliance reviews which will be new for the next fiscal year contingent on the
 compliance specialist position being funded as a reminder in 2022 the City
 Auditor's Office adopted a strategic plan with three strategies including
 strategy a perform high quality impactful audit projects strategy B
 provide valuable non-audit services and strategy C engaged in community members
 the audit plan is most directly related to strategy a and so I've got the
 current progress towards those goals presented on the slide for your
 reference and the full progress will be presented at the in October as part of
 the quarter fourth quarter sorry fourth quarter performance report next
 illustrated my proposed time budget for fiscal year 2324 I am to spend about 50
 percent of the department's time next year performing audit work including new
 audit projects and follow-up reviews as well as other audit related engagements
 this is a decrease percentage wise from last year but not in actual hours due to
 the addition of the compliance program altogether this budget dedicates about
 75% of the offices time to assurance services which is similar to the current
 fiscal year in addition it includes Board of Ethics time because I serve as
 the liaison for them as well as administrative work and then also
 include some time for potential investigations that come in through the
 fraud waste and abuse hotline and other consulting projects such as analysis
 requests that are submitted or requested by the City Manager's Office or a City
 Council so for this budget there are generally two areas where I'm
 requesting recommendations from counter sorry direction from Council so to set
 the stage for that this table visualizes the functional areas of the city that
 have received audit coverage in the last six years I stayed on the bottom of the
 slide one of the offices strategic goals and to is to ensure that about 90% of
 the city's functional areas are audited at least once during that time period
 and so this shows kind of historically where we've conducted audits throughout
 the city the ones highlighted in gray have not had an audit during the last
 six fiscal years six years which is when the office was started so with that
 information this table lists ten options for new audit projects to be performed
 next fiscal year further information about the proposed scope of each of
 these projects was included in your backup these options were based on the
 2023 risk assessment that my department conducted as well as discussions with
 city leadership and they're ranked based on a weighted risk score from 0 to 100
 with 100 being the highest as stated on the bottom of the slide the proposed
 time budget provides about 3800 hours to perform new audit projects the table
 also shows the projects and hours at the internal audit advisory committee
 recommended we perform next year as you can see they recommended that reduced
 scope options be developed and presented to the City Council for the community
 housing initiatives and park management and planning projects those reduced scope
 options were detailed in the plan addendum that was included in your backup
 and then finally for the first time we conducted a public survey that was
 intended to solicit residents prioritization of these projects between
 July 19th and August 4th we received about 45 we received 45 responses from
 that survey and then based on those we assigned a priority category based on
 those responses which is on the far right of the slide so I can answer any
 questions y'all have about the project options and then I also have like a
 survey tool that we can use if that if you would like to to get direction okay
 thank you and just to confirm I think I read them back up that it's of the list
 only airport operations didn't make the total number of hours is that I read
 that right that was based on the audit committee's recommendation okay yeah got
 it okay okay mayor for Tim thank you mr. mayor I'm gonna pick right back up on
 your question I saw the answer to the questions providing the backup but I
 guess I don't understand the the recommendation from the committee what
 more you the answer was more unique projects but I I don't understand can
 you can help me understand what their recommendation was and then I have a
 follow-up to that for you yeah so this all of these projects total to forty
 seven hundred hours and we only have thirty eight hundred to spend so they
 were trying to basically get the most number of projects on the list while
 still remaining in that budget so that's why they recommended the reduced scope
 options that are highlighted and then for airport they their recommendation was to
 not conduct it because there is an airport advisory committee essentially so
 they felt that it had adequate oversight for now that's your question yes it did
 now that was very clear that the I think I had not been aware that that the cap
 was the 3800 hours so you were somewhere between your proposed and their
 recommendation so in in light of that I guess my real question to you is as the
 professional in the in the area what do you feel like you can accomplish within
 your thirty eight hundred hours is is perhaps more germane than the advice
 from the IAC because you you know what you're doing more necessarily than
 than anybody else and in the department that's that's not meant to be
 pejorative it's meant to be used about your question so all of I believe all
 these projects are worthwhile we just only have thirty eight hundred hours for
 next year so probably if like if you don't pick airport operations it'll come
 up next year on the plan for us to potentially get picked then does that
 make sense yes so if you don't pick airport operations can you pick the rest
 of the nine into the I'm not adding up the hours but can you add can you get it
 into that's only what up five hundred hours so that's where he said 42 no see
 yeah so I think kill something else yeah I think I believe that it would cover
 down to public safety communications I'd have to pull out my calculator but if we
 just took basically the from the top highest risk or to the to wherever fits
 does that make sense yes like if we just went down the list and added the hours
 up I think we get down to public safety communications semi public safety and
 communication would get you to thirty eight hundred hours yes so anything
 above that including that would be on the audit plan based on the risk just
 the risk score is that make sense I think so I think I think I need to
 cogitate so I'll pass the baton for now before giving directions thank you okay
 Councilman Melton and Councilman Burke in general there's you know there's an
 abundance of good things to work on and your department seems to crank away at
 it very efficiently and your recommendations are almost invariably
 accepted and acted upon so you know I'm I'm kind of happy to follow and support
 it does make me want to ask the question though whether you think at a macro you
 know at a meta level is our capacity as big as it is this an adequate amount of
 capacity for an operation the size of the city I mean yeah I think long term I
 would like to hire one more auditor but I think but with this year's budget it
 wasn't really feasible to include that especially with the compliance
 specialist which will increase our capacity to do different kinds of work
 but will still be useful to the city so that might come next year I think you
 know we have a very large budget compared to other cities our size of
 population so I think we do need more staff eventually but we don't have it
 for next year thank you okay Councilman Burke
 cogitative method right now to get through this but the simplistic view that
 I'm recognizing here is is the weight it's risk score because I was looking
 through and in saying well critical and high and medium and low and you know how
 how how it's all of this gonna how we're gonna pull all of this off and then I
 recognize a rated risk score which I think is the only thing on there that
 gives me any kind of any kind of knowledge as to which one may be the
 highest risk vendor management apparently is a high risk and then it
 goes down the list of electric electric systems what would be what would what
 would make me think any differently other than the weighted risk score that
 you have there that would put any of the audit projects above one or the other I
 guess it's just really a matter of your priorities we weight financial risk the
 highest but that doesn't necessarily mean that y'all agree that's just how we
 consider it so if we rate weighted the these four different types of risk
 differently they might come out a little differently so that's kind of our way to
 to rank them just as like this is our recommendation I guess but there's a
 lot of different factors right and so you might be more interested in we need
 to address the operational risk or versus the financial risk okay well I
 would definitely I would want to be all of those things a vendor at electric
 and community and development it just all goes together for me and I would I
 wouldn't mind following the weighted risk score if there's any kind of
 direction or any question in that regard thank you okay anyone else but did not
 did not see that the the the committee's recommendation I thought it only left
 out airport and satisfy the 3800 year but now you're telling me that that
 calculations I read it wrong so so their recommendation where you see the blue
 the highlighted in that column was to reduce the scope of some of the projects
 as we originally conceived of them go and then and that would get to the 3800
 hours and we would do all of the projects except for airport for their
 recommendation yeah that's that's what I align with because it captured all and I
 take councilman bird's point the what I looked at the column that to inform my
 decision is the operational risk because that is just kind of at its core how it
 functions right uninterrupted unimpeded okay so that kind of guides my you know
 financial risk certainly but but the operational risk is what I keyed in on
 and their recommendation captured all the highs and criticals and so I was
 comfortable with that so that's that's my recommendation anyone else yes I'll
 just provide direction that I'm I'm okay with the the risk assessment as
 presented I guess it's it's sorted by way to risk if and I'm I'm actually in
 support of of either either the the CAO or the IC hours whatever the department
 feels it can it could get in so I'm okay I mean I know that's not direction but I
 guess that is I am supportive of staffs recommendation wherever that falls okay
 anyone else council member do you where do you you know for me as far as it's
 and when we look at the operational risk you know all of those things are falling
 under the critical high in medium anyway so if I say that I am in agreement with
 the recommendation you know which recommendation is that is that the
 financial or the operational or reputational or ethical or the weighted
 score which what do we what do we think that's the priority and right now the
 way that I'm looking at it is just through the weighted risk score is is
 what's putting is showing me you know what the priority is unless I just go
 with all the critical in the in the high and in the medium you know and where is
 that where does that fall in line I believe if I heard Madison correctly the
 if you the decision matrix just kind of pre kind of set out and other than
 itemizing it individually the audit department as a full investigation is
 that CAO hours the full hours they can get down and through park management no
 public safety communications I just did the math and so yeah basically the
 difference would be for I guess the CAO column we would get the park management
 right and then you'd get to and through park management right okay we get
 through animal services but we do smaller projects for two of those
 projects yes so the audit board recommendation you get one more but you
 get a narrowed look into the different departments listed with the otter's
 office you get through animal services at a full investigation and whatever's
 not captured would go to like in that example airport and non-vehicle would
 would bubble to the top next year that's fine okay okay anyone else
 councilman wants you yeah I might be the only ones a little confused so the
 direction that we're giving is based upon how we perceive it on you talked
 about mayor that your direction was what mine was the audit that I AAC hours and
 that carries us all the way down through animal services operations paired down
 where the blue highlights are okay and so all right that's what that's what I
 was trying to understand is the only different when you say it's it's it's a
 smaller range of audits under the IA IA AC it's really just three one is none
 which is airport operations and then the others are 300 hours 200 hours and then
 you're taking the 500 hours out of airport operations so the difference
 between the CAO and the IAC is one additional audit it's two actually
 but so well that's well the airport operation falls out with the IA AC is
 that correct correct and then everything else would be performed but the park and
 community housing would be reduced from what we originally presented right under
 the IAC right okay and staff your recommendation is it's more of we ranked
 it this way but it would get if we just went down the list and added it up we
 would get through park management okay good heavens I mean roll the dice I guess
 go yeah let me yield before sure sure that's what we get
 staff recommendation okay
 councilman hollow I do the staff recommendation as well and do the
 balance of the of the audits first first thing next year okay all right
 councilman Melzer yeah to be perfectly honest I had understood this as he would
 review the presentation before as sequential and then this is where he
 landed I didn't fully get even as make my comments that you were asked us to
 choose between the two columns so helpful discussion and I just for unless
 you've already got your four to me the question relevant question would be what
 would you not be doing if you did the advisory board you know what would you
 not be doing within community housing and within park management and planning
 that you would otherwise want to do under the staff recommendation if we went with that I
 would ask you to choose between these focus areas for those projects basically
 there's two options for community housing one would look at the shelter
 shelter management options and then for parks there's three options okay all right
 and that's helpful enough for me to be able to say I want to go with the staff
 recommendation rather than the advisory committee okay sorry advisory committee
 okay so that that carries so it'll be the staff on it but that's okay yep any
 other comments questions okay thank you yeah so I think the direction is to do
 basically all these through park management that's correct yeah cool yes
 and then there's one more piece to this nor that and this is just these are the
 follow-up reviews we're planning to do the ones highlighted in the red box the
 audit committee agreed with this recommendation so unless you have
 concerns about which ones we're going to follow up with next year that's good
 okay questions concerns about the follow-up review planning mayor potential
 I did have one and maybe you can just help me do we anticipate some of these
 involved increasing costs and projecting out increasing costs I mean to some
 degree all them involved increasing costs but some are more particular time
 sensitive is this based this recommendation based on the operational
 risk or or how was this basis because I could see there's there's a lot of like
 for instance energy portfolio was the one that jumped to mind and there's a
 lot of changes coming down the pike for this and and so push back another year
 so I believe that came out in 2021 so it's not it's just not really come up
 yet so a lot of this is based on when we issue a recommendation the department
 comes back and says we agree we'll get it done by doing XYZ by X date and so we
 try to come at go out to we'll come back after that date so that we don't have to
 do multiple follow-ups basically if that makes sense we can minimize the amount
 of follow-ups okay oh no okay that last comment helped okay I guess I'm okay but
 I would just you know and I know staff will do this just be mindful of large
 large changes that might require a course correction so but I'm okay as it
 stands down and a lot of the departments do they'll do something and they'll be
 like does this seem good in between we just don't do a formal report on it to
 counsel okay any other questions concerns about the follow-ups seeing
 none okay so we're all good with a yep perfect takes us to item B ID two three
 five nine six receive report hold discussion give staff direction regarding
 audit project zero zero five utility street cuts second follow-up review all
 right still Madison Rocha Denton City Auditor I'm gonna present our follow-up
 review findings as a reminder audit follow-up reviews are intended to
 provide information on what changes have been made in response to an issued
 audit this review is based on recommendations and management responses
 originally compiled in the utility street cuts audit which was issued in
 August of 2019 and initially followed up on in December of 2020 so I'll cover
 improvements made in both the initial and second follow-up review as part of
 this presentation in general we found that significant improvements have been
 made to utility cut standards and right away permit managed the right away
 permit management process since the original audit so to begin the original
 audit found that the ordinance that governed right-of-way construction and
 permitting processes had not been updated in over 50 years and lacked some
 provisions that could improve effectiveness an updated ordinance was
 adopted in November of 2019 and addressed many of these issues most
 notably the updated ordinance allows the city to penalize a permittee for
 violating the ordinance or the terms of the permit in addition it created a new
 fee structure that encourages permittees to complete their right away
 construction work on time this fee structure was implemented in January
 2021 and is routinely reviewed along with other development inspection fees
 these changes should aid the right away inspectors and enforcing permit
 requirements which are designed to protect not only the city's roadways but
 also its residents additionally the original audit found that enhancements to
 how right-of-way permits were tracked and managed could improve the efficiency
 of the public works inspections right away division which struggled to keep up
 with a large workload at the time of the original audit since the audit the
 public works inspections division has developed standard right-of-way
 inspection guidance which has been used as the number of white right-of-way
 inspectors increased facilitating consistency in addition inspection
 results are now being tracked in an automated permit management solution
 which allows for easier review and analysis of inspection results next the
 original audit found that improvements could be made to the practices used when
 restoring street cuts to further minimize their effects in particular we
 recommended that the city require contractors to seal the joints of each
 patch the city tests the street patches test that street patches adhere to ride
 quality standards and that if a street had been recently repaired and placed
 under a moratorium and not be cut without proper authorization in general
 we found these practices had generally been formalized and implemented
 specifically the streets division began sealing all street cuts that they
 restore which accounts for almost 90% of all utility street cut restorations this
 requirement was formalized in the 2021 update to the city's standard
 construction specifications as for ride quality the public works inspections
 division has purchased the equipment needed to perform that testing however
 a standard operating procedure on how to test street patches for ride quality was
 not developed until August of 2023 and then lastly the number of utility cuts
 made on streets should be minimized as much as possible since cuts introduce
 weaknesses in the pavement that can accelerate the deterioration of the
 street for this reason we recommended that the water utilities department
 which performs the most recent cuts there sorry which reforms the most cuts
 develop a method to notify the streets division when a cut was made especially
 on streets that had recently been repaired or reconstructed based on this
 review the public works department has identified a way to pull a report of all
 streets cut every six months or so so that the streets division can use this
 information when they're planning their maintenance activities so the new
 reporting process should help to reduce the risk that streets can the streets
 division cannot fully account for the impact of utility street cuts finally
 the original audit found that improvements were needed in the
 inspections process to ensure that the city's street restoration standards were
 being met in particular city utilities that cut into streets did not appear to
 be consistently using the required concrete flowable backfill and their
 utility trenches and were instead using a variety of materials including the
 material that they had excavated out of the ground similarly the original audit
 recommended that the city's public works inspection division perform inspections
 of all city street cut restorations to ensure that city utility crews were
 complying with these requirements based on the file reviews the city's utilities
 are still not using the flowable backfill material as originally required
 however they have begun consistently using an aggregate flexible base or flex
 base backfill material that is typically used when constructing large sections of
 roadway in addition they have purchased the compaction equipment necessary to
 prop necessary to properly use this material well this practice does not
 comply with the city's current standards it is a significant improvement from
 backfilling with excavated material according to public work staff external
 utilities are also currently allowed to use this flexible the flex base backfill
 upon request however this change in the standards has not been formally adopted
 for at least two years according to department staff this was an
 administrative oversight and they plan to include this change in the standards
 when they next update in them in January of 2024 based on a review of 60 right
 away permits 46 were issued for utility cuts made in asphalt or concrete of
 those only two or about 4% did not have evidence that a forms inspection was
 performed and both were issued for emergency repairs made by city of Denton
 utilities which indicates that forms inspections are generally being
 performed for all street cuts finally the original audit recommended that
 public works inspections begin inspecting street patches during the
 guarantee or warranty period since then the city has extended the warranty period
 from one to two years and has begun scheduling warranty inspections using
 the new automated permit management software which should help to ensure
 that city patches do not fail too quickly which would accelerate the
 deterioration of road so in summary we found that 11 of the 13 recommendations
 issued as part of the original utility street cuts audit are now implemented
 the two recommendations that are still in progress are listed on the slide
 based on a discussion with management a standard operating procedure for
 conducting ride quality testing has recently been developed and should be
 implemented soon in addition the city's construction standards will be updated
 in January 2024 to allow for the use of flexible sorry flex base backfill
 material instead of flowable backfill which is currently required this update
 will formalize current practices and ensure external utilities are not
 required to meet different standards than internal utilities so based on this
 information we plan to perform an informal follow-up review next fiscal
 year to complete this project so any questions okay thank you questions for
 staff member Tim thank you and I appreciate the the answer the backup that
 you're gonna get back to me or get back to us rather on the fiscal impacts on
 adoption and of these different materials and or versus backfill versus
 other methods so there's as I understand and this is a clarity question there's
 there's two permitted methods the the flex base and the flow whatever those
 are the two permitted they're gonna be in our manuals and so I guess my question
 the clarification on my backup question was do we anticipate that this is
 costing the city money through lack of adoption of either one of these
 preferred methods or is is it the case that the two of those are 90% of the
 cases and everything else is an edge case and therefore we're not really
 costing us wear and tear lifetime duty cycle money I don't think that they're
 between the two standards is a impact to the city cost-wise on maintenance of
 roads as long as they're done correctly the problem originally was that they
 were using not either of them right so that was a win so they weren't
 compacted correctly which caused the patches to fail this was years ago right
 so that's corrected now and now it's just a question of we need to have that
 in our standards to make sure that external utilities meet the same
 requirements that our internal utilities do so there's not a double standard
 basically okay but I guess just to tease out the one piece we you don't it's not
 staff's feel that this is this is a long-term ongoing problem that is causing
 early failure of roadways if if our guidance is followed in right if the
 construction standards are followed it shouldn't cause long-term early failure
 of the roadways okay and do we have an estimate for how much our standards are
 being I mean we have standards but then as you are often report in these or
 tell us in these reports we have to have the standard we have to monitor the
 standard and we have to document that we monitor the standard the sort of three
 legs of the stool do and it wasn't clear to me that that that was one of the
 things I think that you found we needed to work on was the documentation in the
 original audit yeah and they when we did the initial follow-up we found that this
 the patches are mostly being filled now with the flex base which is technically
 not the standard but is kind of the we are about to adopt it as the standard
 almost the almost 100% of the time okay and then the actual standard was done by
 the external utilities so they were meeting that it's just that there's a
 different standard that so we are meeting the current standard based on our
 review of documentation of those patches and we have the inspectors now to my
 understanding going and documenting yes that's that they're meeting those
 standards okay that that that answers my question appreciate thank you medicine
 okay any other counselor wants so to summarize just so I've got it clear
 before my question so we've got external utility patches and internal utility
 patches external being some contractor third-party contractor internal is our
 crew correct and under the external utilities the standard has been to use
 the flow flowable flowable backfill it's a concrete flowable yeah it's concrete
 basically all right and that's the standard just for the external or is
 that the standard per our code for both external and internal for our
 construction standards that is the standard no matter whether it's external
 internal correct okay and so then the flex base has come in because you're
 saying the external has always used the liquid concrete because that's the
 standard but our internals have used flex base primarily after identifying it
 and not putting that right there was an issue with what we were using and now
 they're using flex base okay so which is the better standard I mean you'd have to
 ask an engineer and according to our engineering department they're similar
 okay so this will come back to us I'm not going to belabor the question on
 this particular issue in the weeds so whether what standard we have is that
 going to come back to the council to talk about that because I thought it's
 great appreciate that my question becomes more on why are we choose why
 are we changing our standards we had them before for a reason and I don't
 those don't have to be answered today so is it is gonna come back to us at some
 point when we go to yeah I mean they don't need to be this is just an audit
 so I know I'm way past you know well I think we have some work to do to come
 back she's gonna do a follow-up audit okay so what we can do is in that
 follow-up audit talk about those questions and quality of the flex base
 in the flowable product which is more of a wet concrete you know porting right
 my understanding is that if a water line breaks again or something like that it's
 harder to get back through flowable because it's concrete so it's
 solidified whereas a normal road it would be that aggregate material anyway
 which is what the flex base is so I don't I can't tell you we can do that in
 the follow-up that's fine no no problem okay
 customer bird I also have a question in regards to the the roadway itself does
 it make a difference if it's a county road or city road state road how is all
 all of that comes into play well I can tell you that county roads they do their
 work they're not many times depending on where it is it's it's different we do
 you know curb and gutter and all that kind of stuff that is totally different
 text dot Becky I can't speak to that I don't yeah well we only looked at it's
 part of the audit at city roads yeah I but that's what we control so I don't
 know I don't know what the standard is for text otter or county roads or just
 thinking in terms of the emergency you know I'm just emergency break with the
 city hit it first or will we rely on the county to come through or rely on the
 state to come through first well we we have a great relationship with the
 county with the with the text dot and others so if there is a situation where
 there's some damage in a road we work with the partner whoever that is and
 work with him and if to be honest if it's a safety issue we're gonna go out
 there and do something immediately put something around it make sure that it's
 not someone's not driving over it but we usually let the party who owns the road
 do the work right yeah I think if there was a waterline break on under a county
 road that was our waterline we would certainly go fix it immediately I can't
 necessarily speak to how I think it gets repaired per our process I don't know
 necessarily who reviews that because it's a not our room any other questions
 you know okay thank you very much thank you that takes us to item C ID two three
 one four zero seven receive report whole discussion give staff direction
 regarding the preliminary FYI 2023 2024 proposed budget tax rate capital
 improvement program and five-year financial forecast good afternoon mayor
 council Cassie Ogden assistant city manager this is just a quick follow-up
 presentation from our August 5th budget workshop I'm here today really mainly to
 get direction on the tax rate before we move forward with another follow-up on
 September 12th and then public hearings on the 19th so you've seen most of this
 presentation again on the fifth but here are appraised value history so this year
 appraised values increased about 15 percent there's still 1.3 percent under
 review but our average taxable home value increased from three hundred and
 seven thousand to three hundred and forty four thousand so again we've had
 pretty strong a growth trend over the last couple of years I think our
 ten-year average is about nine percent increase in our appraised values so 15
 percent increase this year the in the city managers proposed budget that was
 presented on August 5th the proposed tax rate is the same as last year's with a
 no new revenue rate of 49 cents we did have the county look at our calculations
 for the voter approval rate and that changed from the last time you saw this
 so it was 63 cents it's gone down to 57 cents now is the voter approval rate so
 again we talked about this on the fifth but the tax rate discussion really the
 city managers proposed budget includes a tax rate of 56 cents you can see that
 the difference in a half cent decrease so 55 cents we would only be able to a
 fund we would fund 2.9 million so a little less than 3 million in
 supplementals compared to the no new revenue rate would be cutting the budget
 by 5.7 million dollars and a half cent tax rate increase on the other side so
 56 and a half cents would be the 4.9 plus an additional 1.2 in
 supplementals based on the discussion on the fifth we did add McKinney and
 Louisville as a comparison cities I did want to note Louisville their debt
 service rate portion of their tax rate the INS rate is only 12 cents compared
 to our 20 cents so significantly lower there for Louisville so again just to
 follow up this is what the average residential property owner would see as
 far as tax rate so their average tax bill would be 1,932 based on the 56
 cents that's proposed it'd be about $209 a year an increase based on that
 average taxable value increase general fund forecast again no changes since the
 last time you saw this so this is for FY 24 proposing a balanced budget with
 funding 4.9 million in supplementals and here's the proposed
 supplementals that were in the city managers budget I highlighted the roadway
 funding strategy the million dollars because I did hear some council
 discussion about what we should do with that so we are going to come back on the
 12th and give you some options whether we fund the roadway funding strategy at
 a million or there's some additional positions in animal services that we
 could fund as well as some other things that we'd like to discuss as an option
 but but this does keep the same tax rate so whether we fund the roadway funding
 strategy or some additional FTEs it would be at the same tax rate the 56
 cents and so just combined the overall tax well overall tax and utility impact
 for average residential customer you can see total of 251 dollars annually
 increasing based on our tax bill increase and then the wastewater
 increase the 11% that we're proposing for wastewater rates and with that I'm
 here to get direction on the tax rate this is really the the base of how we
 put the budget together so propose two options there's additional option but I
 left it off the screen I didn't think anyone would be supportive of increasing
 the tax rate but decreasing the tax rate and then maintaining the current tax
 rate so happy to answer any questions that you may have okay and before that I
 want to make sure thank you for the answers winning with respect to tax
 exempt properties which is not completely unique to individual cities
 and I don't know about the comparison cities I didn't evaluate it that
 closely but am I reading this right that 1.25 wait 12.52 million that's the the
 revenue that is captured kind of that would equate for the taxes of properties
 in the city of Denton yes okay got it okay any questions
 councilman Watts and then councilmember Meltzer so we are coming back next week
 with the one September 12 so I don't know if I I don't know if I've got an
 answer to the question which I think would be germane as far as our tax rate
 that I asked last time not it's not anybody's fault because I can't get a
 straight answer from anybody the the November ballot initiatives for
 reduction of property taxes because if for discussion sake because I've heard
 that they are going to be active for 2023 they're either anticipating sending
 the tax bills out with them or they're gonna reset so I don't know but I'm not
 sure why somebody can't give us a definitive answer not staff but I mean
 anybody but if it is effective on the 20 this year 2023 the primary thing that
 will affect us is the homestead exemption the ten cents on the school
 tax rate won't affect the city it'll affect right so have we calculated that if
 that is applicable this tax year what how that affects what we're looking at in
 other words how much revenue does that take off the tax rolls because I think
 our current exemption is what 40,000 for this for city is that I don't know what
 is it for the city well in any event it could be potentially double that and I
 think that's gonna probably add up to a few dollars so I think I mean I can give
 direction on a tax rate but I really want to have that information from
 somebody I mean I don't know if it's our legislative delegation I don't know if
 you call the Center Benton courts office down in Houston who spearheaded this for
 many years but it just seems like when you read news reports it's all over the
 place and if we have to add another $50,000 of an exemption to homestead
 properties based upon our tax rate which is what 56 what is that is that gonna be
 about $56 I'll be about $56 what would that be 50,000 or 60,000 if we applied
 our tax rate now that's about 300 bucks so that means each homestead property
 would take off $300 from our budget from our revenue so I don't know how many
 homestead properties there are but we've got fifty one thousand I think or how
 many I think we have a little over twenty one thousand homestead homestead
 properties exemptions okay so if you multiply that times three hundred twenty
 dollars that's a lot of money right I mean I don't know is it is it six hundred
 thousand is it so what I will say is that the the form that the state puts out
 the Comptroller form that we use to calculate the tax rate which takes into
 account all of these things has not changed so I do expect it to go into
 effect next year for us because based on that nothing has changed as far as the
 information that we have I appreciate that that's a great answer I sure would
 like to have something from the Comptroller's office an email saying
 definitively the reason we sent this out is because this homestead exemption will
 not apply except to two twenty twenty four property taxes because we're
 hearing something totally coming you can pull up news report after news report
 and I don't know which it is but if if it does apply this year it's a hit even
 when it applies next year it's gonna be a hit six million bucks so it just would
 be nice to find somebody in the state legislature or the state government that
 can give us and maybe we can reach out to the school district what is their
 thought I mean what is their do they think it's gonna be applied this year so
 I don't belabor it I just if we could find out something because we don't want
 to come up to frame voting on a budget and then having an understanding that
 somehow we're six million dollars short I'd rather know that definitively
 moving forward sure okay thank you okay councilman Melton yeah I've a few points
 if I may so this is as I recall is proposing a 12% increase correct in
 taxes so I don't really care that much that like we say the rates the same we
 know it's a 12% increase so be transparent about it but you're
 reflecting on slide 10 that you know you're sort of moderating that by saying
 but look you know utilities aren't going up by that much you know and kind of the
 total ask it works out to about six percent but my recollection of the
 utility conversation was that at least several members did not you're asking to
 look at water electric and solid waste increases to be spread over several
 years not just zeros and then spread right and so I don't know it was that
 like settled you know is that was this settled then or was that still not
 settled we're currently we're not proposing because we are still waiting
 on a cost of service study for both electric and solid waste so we're not
 proposing to raise the rates for next year pending that cost of service study
 because what that gives us is more information about how to adjust those
 rates so we can have the consultant look at giving us a phased approach over a
 five-year period versus you know one year increase so either way you know
 these these rates aren't really determined yet so then just looking at
 the the property tax piece you know my my own way of thinking about it there are
 a few pieces that are still moving one is that well first I'll say you know it
 makes intuitive it's intuitively compelling to me to have as a starting
 point the wage inflation rate for two reasons one is that it reflects the fact
 that personnel is far and away the biggest driver of our own expenses and
 it's a proxy for our residents ability increased ability to pay whereas their
 home valuations has no impact on that at all unless they're selling which case
 they may not be in debt in any way so wage inflation rate is kind of like a
 baseline for me but then as far as where to deviate from that for one thing it's
 we had an exchange that really struck me to the effect that not all master plans
 are funded I mean I would think that that would at least be a surface
 conscious discussion like you know what I assume when you pass a master plan it's
 because you intend to do that and then if you're not going to do it you have to
 talk about the fact that well things have changed or whatever but otherwise I
 would have assumed that the budget is put together with an eye to following
 whatever master plans have been agreed to so so that's a big moving piece the
 other question I have is about the the supplementals it seems to me that some
 of these are things that we already agreed to so you know that's why I kind
 of wonder like to what extent are they supplemental why are we still why do
 they have that status rather than budgeted for instance you know didn't
 didn't we already give direction in support of funding the ambassador
 program in which case why is that still hanging out there or something to decide
 no it's just that those are the costs that'll show up in this budget they are
 not in this budget was currently in it will be in the next budget 23 24 so we
 want to be real transparent to make sure that all these costs that you see here
 are not currently budgeted in our current budget okay but it leaves me a
 little question about what is the significance of calling something
 supplemental versus building it into your well actually I agree with you on
 that and I like that term of these are what did you term you use because it
 wasn't supplemental agreed items or something it was a word that was really
 much better not as supplemental these are things that need to go in to the
 budget like obviously or something but yeah I mean they've already we've
 already given direction to do it I think that's the case with merit increase too
 but maybe I'm wrong about that I mean we did the leveling the leveling but I
 guess merit increase is still theoretically still optional so I guess
 you know I wonder which others of these items have we actually already agreed to
 and they're not really supplemental there things that ought to be baked in so so
 my inclination is to look at wage inflation rate plus you know funding
 items directed by master plans let's we want to change our direction on those
 plus items that we've already agreed to fund and that would be kind of so you
 know see see where that comes out it's kind of how I'd be inclined to look at
 it that you know that would guide you to a dollar amount and from that you could
 back out a tax rate so I know that's a lot yeah we did provide information on
 the way about the wage inflation rate yes I understand it would not fund any
 of the so-called supplementals that's why I'm saying okay I still adjust from
 there you know and I can change the list to show you kind of what council's
 already agreed upon it would be really if you want to count master plans or I
 don't know if you count operational kind of studies that council adopted so the
 police staffing study that was one that was done in 2019 and we you know at the
 time council agreed to add about five positions to a year to police as well as
 the ambassador program but beyond that I think everything else you know our new
 maybe the Main Street or the economic development partnership contract
 increase and sets an existing contract but everything else I think would be in
 addition to right yeah so my inclination would be to set the rate to fund those
 things and then and then I don't know if we can look at these things more
 frequently than annually like can you look at sales tax quarterly and see if
 you're tracking ahead then you you know you apply it in priority order to your
 supplementals you know and I think that's I mean thanks to good conservative
 budgeting it's often the case that sales tech not always but often the sales tax
 comes in ahead of projection but that that would be my approach I'm glad we
 get another bite at the apple because I realize what I said doesn't give you you
 know a number it gives you a formula so I just just I think there's several
 things Merritt was already approved by council police's contract the ambassador
 program but I'm gonna I'll say this as this city continues to grow as we add
 staff and fire police solid waste these some of these other utilities you got to
 have the internal services to go along with it so HR audit library those kinds
 of things the expectation is that you have the staffing to actually do the
 work so I say that just as well you have three here that are what I call just do
 it's because you've already said it yeah there are things in here that are based
 on the growth based on adding staff from others that you see not here but you all
 were okay with from utilities like adding people to DME those things all
 those impact general fund well then that that's why I was asking like what does
 it mean to put something in supplementals like if that's really I think
 member template last time yeah if it's really like core function scaling to
 growth it should just be budgeted you know and because it's presenting it as
 supplemental suggests it's more optional than maybe it really is so thank you know
 I'm gonna get take that guidance if it's expressed that way you know okay
 anyone else thank you mr. Mary I'm gonna pick right up from there and I appreciate
 the the response to the my question the backup of that it where as I understand
 it all of the supplemental positions were or all the categories at least were
 growth related and so this is and I appreciate the response in the memo
 about delineating I think there was three of the items that were truly not
 growth related and and sort of so not not calling something growth and putting
 it into our budget is a de facto cut to our city services as the population
 grows so I mean it's the flip side of what the city manager just said but if
 we've agreed to a certain service level is more I think the question we are
 being asked and I know that we have to parse it in terms of last year's budget
 this year's budget but you know we if we can't cover those agreed upon service
 levels and if we've agreed upon and I concur with councillor Meltzer if we
 agreed upon a certain service level and then I really wish we would put those
 into the budget and and and so maybe you know I and I kind of alluded to this at
 the last budget discussion can we parse what was in last year's budget what is
 growth and what is what is truly new business in and put you know it you know
 even if we we put growth in new business into supplemental before historical
 continuity can we at least parse those in the way we did in the memo or a
 similar way so that we can really see as councillor Meltzer said this isn't
 really this isn't this is really our new budget our old budget was this is our
 new budget to maintain this level of service these are the new things and
 there was only like three new things or four new things so if we could do that I
 think that would help our discussion I know sometimes we have to make the big
 hard decision based on the finances of the year okay we're actually gonna cut
 services this year but so far staff has not had to force us to do that in years
 and years we've been able to manage our service output in a quality way and and
 I think it's gonna help our decision process to see you know growth versus
 true supplements so I appreciate the the backup in the in the dialogue okay any
 other questions for said that's what yeah I have a response to that and I
 appreciate the aspiration of this discussion but let's make sure we
 understand past councils passed what they wanted to pass we have to review
 every year based upon the current circumstances how we want to do our
 budget I have no problem with parsing out what's growth what supplemental the
 point is we still have to find the finances the money to pay for whatever
 we asked for so how we want to label it how we want to do that staff can figure
 out how to do that they've been doing budgets for years and years and years
 but to your comment councilmember Melzer about the wage inflation rate so just so
 that people understand that are listening to us because it is in our
 questions that if we started there correct me if I'm wrong by reading this
 answer that we would start with 4.8 million dollars less that's where we're
 starting from which basically wipes out all the quote-unquote
 supplementals but if we go along with the discussion of hey let's parse it out
 into different categories it even takes away the things that we've said we want
 so I understand why staff is doing this they're just simply saying here's last
 year's budget however you want to label it I really don't care but they're gonna
 have to tell us this is the additional money we're asking for and this is the
 money that we have available based upon the specific tax rate so as in the end
 it comes down to us making a decision on what she's asked us for which is the tax
 rate we can talk about labeling this one thing or another that's fine we still
 have to find the money to pay for it so I don't know about this whole thing of
 moving to the wage inflation rate I understand the principle and the
 aspiration of everybody if this is what people are getting basically in general
 then we need to hold ourselves to that standard if that's a policy that this
 City Council wants to adopt fair enough especially if you want to try it this
 year we basically got to start all over because now we have only a hundred
 thousand dollars left and that's not a I mean is this the only increase from
 last year's budget last year's budget not you know we're making our assumptions
 of two or three percent growth sales - I mean last year's budget and it's in the
 five-year forecast I know but our budget is increasing more than four point nine
 million dollars yeah is that is that not correct and part of it is what
 everybody's been discussing and that is reoccurring reoccurring you've got it you
 know do this contractual obligations increases in our contracts there's
 benefits there's personnel based on our comp and class study yeah it's huge I
 mean it's huge because of inflation and then contracts that we have to hire
 benefits supplies every every yes it's huge the increase has gone up a lot
 because of the cost of services and the cost of doing business the cost of
 paying employees the growth all based on growth so I would say if we're gonna
 follow the line of thought to where we separate out growth items to truly what
 is quote-unquote new then when we have that list of growth items we have to
 list each and every one of those budget if we're gonna do this we're gonna do
 it that way then we need to list how much did this applies I mean we can see
 the line yeah we can see the line item but but I'm talking about having it
 separated out where you're not lost in a five-year projection because if we do no
 supplementals our budget still increasing yes it is and and and just
 look at insurance just take insurance from 2023 at 3 million five hundred and
 seventy six six hundred seventy two four million the next year a little bit more
 for a little more next year but it goes up to five million in 2028 those are
 projected increases not necessarily the actual but from last year the last year
 our budget has increased from 2023 to the proposed 2024 including
 supplementals has increased 12 about third about eleven and a half million
 dollars eight and a half of those are the merit increase are the cost of
 living adjustments for employees that you will not see like that in the future
 because we did not do our due diligence as an organization to do this every two
 to three years that we didn't do one since 2016 which put us in the hole
 severely yes I I mean I hear what you all are saying I don't disagree with it
 but in the end we present it any way we want but we still have to figure out how
 much money do we have or do we not how much do we have it's how much are we
 gonna ask for because we're asking for this from every citizen property owner
 in the in the city and every person that comes and buys things here so it does
 matter but I guess sometimes we can get things so convoluted that it becomes
 less simple and so however you want to label it Paul is fine but we still got
 to figure out the tax rate and according to you where you want to start we've got
 to basically take away the supplemental page is that I mean that's what you said
 yeah are you that's I'm done yeah yeah yeah yeah I mean you're sort of stopping
 halfway through my thought process because it's working my way back up to
 how do we include it right in other words okay you haven't said that yet oh
 yeah no I did that's why I was talking about what are the items that we
 committed to that are part of master plans that are that are required by
 growth yeah and then we're starting to hear the commentary they're like yeah
 they're kind of in there but they but they weren't discussed that way you know
 my way of putting it is different than saying we're keeping the tax rate the
 same which is a pretty meaningless statement I mean it can be used
 politically to sound meaningful but the truth is the proposals to increase tax
 by 12 percent that's not necessarily a good thing or a bad thing if it's for
 things that must be done because we've already agreed to do them you know
 because they're urgent because they're important and you know we can have an
 adult conversation with the residents to say we're asking you to pay 12 percent
 more and here's why that's and and I'm trying to get to the here's why yeah
 that's basically it all right any other questions so for me I want to just kind
 of touch on a couple of things and thank you staff for your help I'd like to
 follow up if I could I have the print out here so for those that do not know
 city of Carrollton puts out a residential municipal municipal cost of
 services comparison between cities and I was watching Louisville's budget
 presentation this weekend shout out to Mayor TJ I'm gonna beat him in the pizza
 contest soon it's on the 23rd but yes I'm a municipal junkie but I say that
 because this is a separate city putting out a report and I found it compelling
 but my request is can you can you help me find the link or whatever so I can
 see the entire report just separate from this and then because I want to read
 more into kind of how that's that's built and then the other thing is so that we
 can clearly I've been talking about the budgeting tool but want to give those
 listening and if I could get some what we did I forget the resource that we put
 out but it was fantastic what we have kind of a screenshot of the website and
 a graphic that points people to kind of give them instructions arrows etc where
 to click to get to the budget and so I'd like to do something similar but also
 just verbally do people go to the city of Denton site discuss Denton where is it
 it's on the city of Denton if you go to departments under finance you can see
 the proposed budget the budgeting tool oh I'm sorry balancing act yes I don't
 know the exact link but I think if you search in the search function on our
 website it'll it'll pull up search balancing act yes okay great but if we
 can have like put together like an infographic for that then they'll make
 it easy to share and Ryan maybe you can help me with a post that'd be great
 because trying to drive more interaction that way and frankly I'd like to just
 the exercise we talked about today everyone can do those things and kind of
 drive that and have that discussion and then come back with the results that sort
 of thing so I think it's important to to dig into that further so thank you for
 that those councilbert
 you know what we're talking about are other cities and sometimes comparing
 ourselves to other cities and what they're having to you know what's
 driving them I'm always in the back of my mind I'm always thinking but are they
 at the same growth level that we are I'm talking about a city like Louisville I
 mean are they they are they been roomed out and do they grow any further do they
 put their their funding back into what they have to make it better while a city
 like ours is is new everything that's coming in is new you know how does that
 work for us when we're when we're connecting ourselves to you know a city
 like Carrollton or Louisville and and in other other communities that are
 essentially locked in how do we how do we justify all of that how do we give
 our citizens the opportunity to understand and know that we when we ask
 for more is because we need more we need more because it's it's it's new it's
 growth how do we do we do we have much trouble hearing back from citizens in
 that regard I want to say I think that's a fair question but I you have to look
 at it beyond just the individual data points right so for example we were full
 service city so whereas we take a direct hit and have to deal with DME and those
 things it's it's a blessing and it presents challenges that other cities
 don't have so you you you account for that the great thing about this is it's
 a city separate city to put it together so they don't have that natural kind of
 bent it's just a gin it's a separate city that kind of looked at other cities
 to compare but but you kind of but then you look at also you can dig deeper in
 the Louisville's budget and understand their commercial dropped off a bit this
 year right and whereas we are is picked up and so you you you look at that and
 that factors in so it's just a number of different data points and you know not
 listed here not close enough to us but City of Grapevine's at 26 cents around
 numbers Capel is 22 cents around numbers no debt so but they have they don't have
 curb and gutter right so you just kind of a you take a huge look at all the
 different data points and and you're trying to find a balance right to kind
 of inform how do how do one do things and then it's it's it's not it's not
 lost upon me that if I looked at the no offense Mac if I looked at the City of
 Louisville's legal budget a doubt they're spending as much as we are right
 what and you can look into that and and identify all the different things why
 that is it just is right and so those are things that we're spending that
 they're not spending and those those are right and I think it's fair to criticize
 how just internally how are we doing being fiscally responsible in all the
 different departments but there's a price to be paid for being first to the
 courthouse right or last at a courthouse or however we look at those things
 infrastructure wise are we keeping up you know and and how we balance a
 Louisville never lowered their rates that matters right lowered them and came
 back up and did all these different things so it's it's all fair but I to
 answer your questions in summary I think it's just not looking at a specific
 number I think that's problematic to look at a specific number but to look at
 kind of a whole look at a city where they're doing what's different and and
 really for me it's just what can we learn right I I was interested to learn
 about this report to now read it and see what what I can get out of it and just
 the importance of making sure that our you know our constituents know that when
 we say well we need to add more and this is why and with them comparing you know
 without the knowledge without the just a basic simple knowledge that oh well
 Louisville didn't do anything or such a such city didn't have to do all of that
 well they just have to understand what we're in a different type of growth
 pattern that they are so a lot a lot of educate a lot of education can go on
 there certainly the other thing I want to mention then we haven't really talked
 about this is I don't know you receive the report the survey on our utilities
 and the report came back I've never seen such a glowing report on the public's
 viewpoint of our our utilities so it's important that you know that because the
 citizens of this city believe that our utilities are doing a great job
 providing services and where they are right now I think of course we've talked
 about this about communicating these things better but these are things that
 the citizens really value is their water their sewer their solid waste their
 electricity and when you look at those things and you compare them to other
 cities we're right up there so I would say along the same lines with all the
 other departments we have the same kind of sort of respect from our citizens so
 I think telling the truth about what is needed and why is probably the best way
 to do it to our citizens so they do understand yeah and to pick up on that
 it is interesting to see because I've watched different cities and all at the
 comp and in comp studies it's just never ending right so it's this city okay they
 adjusted now everyone else has adjust and so it really has been interesting but
 rightfully so hard-earned money right but the other thing that I I look
 forward to us having a conversation we're starting it now but I think in the
 future years the city of Denton has to change from a neighborhood approach
 because of the growth to a regional approach you got to spend more to make
 that jump and then maintain it right just like he talked about the salary you
 got to spend now to make that jump and then we adjust so that that's gonna be
 interesting conversation for future councils is how do we go from a
 neighborhood Denia Recreation Center to a regional south of Denton rec center
 because it's gonna cost more but it's gonna serve more people and match up
 with the growth so it'll be a good conversation to have but but it's
 coming counselor McGee hey mr. mayor um hey
 Cassie on the slot on slide 9 can I just ask how you arrived at a million for the
 roadway funding strategy were you just trying to key in on a million is just a
 placeholder that was how much we could afford with maintaining the current tax
 rate after I included all of the other so that's so a million is the max okay
 so the other four to five well three to four is on us okay right thank you mr.
 mayor thank you and I think councilman watts you wanted to have we were that
 was kind of discussed whether to continue that am I right like the the
 the roadway funding strategy because of the amount I just wanted to put that
 back in front of people so that we know that that's a discussion point I think
 she'd said I think she'd said earlier that we're gonna take that up and just
 one real quick comment I think my question might have been a little I think
 I got a better question for the homestead does that homestead addition
 apply to city municipalities I'm sorry yeah sorry sorry sorry councilman well
 I don't have the floor sorry no go right ahead you're up here and then we'll go
 to councilman hollow I think I can answer that question briefly if we're
 talking about the homestead exemption that was passed and Senate bill 2 in the
 second session we are analyzing that bill right now but our current
 understanding is that the homestead exemption does not apply to cities only
 applies to school districts there is an appraisal cap that will come into effect
 next year that applies to all tax and jurisdictions and we'll have that
 analysis out this week in the Friday report apologize councilmember Holland
 sorry yeah can you repeat that real quick only school districts for the
 homestead exemption that was provisions that were within SB 2 okay yeah sorry
 yeah there are 18 cities listed on this on this list including us so where what's
 a similar city to Denton in that 17 we got to you we got two universities and a
 college we got a ton of federal federal land exempted we have an airport yeah
 that's a great great point we have we have a ton of services that at least the
 majority of these cities don't have I'm just wondering which one best best
 compares to us Dallas and for work I mean to be real frank with you it's Dallas
 for worth because Lewisville Carrollton Addison all those cities around us do not
 have what we have from the for airports things like that they contract some of
 their services for utilities Capel I mean you could go down the list farmers
 branch none of those so you're really looking at maybe well even Arlington we
 have a small airport McKinney has a small airport I believe Garland yeah
 Garland has theirs so when you look at there's not a lot you can say we're
 very when you use the equates sort of sign somebody's wrong answer so if you
 look at Garland look at Garland point seven one six if my eyes are not
 deceiving me yeah no yeah and I to pick up on that McKinney is is a good comp
 just because they do have an airport and they're looking at going to a a
 commercial airport they're looking at CEOs there they're building a new
 downtown they as far as City Hall they are now put it they just put out RFP for
 municipal buildings downtown they have a parking garage so a lot of similarities
 I don't know if they have a college they do have a homeless shelter so they have
 they have challenges with how to make sure their community is taken care of
 and challenges with other communities leveraging that resource in their area
 there are a lot of comparisons with McKinney and as far as not I don't know
 if they have a community college that sort of thing Frisco has UNT campus
 there so it's it's obviously that's a different animal Garland is a great
 point on the the the municipal component of things so again I think it's similar
 to what Councilman Bird pointed out it's it's kind of a you're not gonna find a
 one-for-one but what can we learn from different cities and and that fit our
 kind of keeping Denton understanding where Denton is are there things we can
 learn from other cities is what I take away more than a straight line
 comparison so any other questions okay thank you thank you
 no thank you you said you're coming back on the 12th I heard come back on the
 12th yeah I'm just following I know this is a question not a what what is what
 is staff need I'm asking I think you're proposing the 59 cents and if we want to
 56 cents and if so if there's anyone that has an assenting opinion that that's
 what you need to hear correct yes counselor how and that's maintaining the
 current stat of a tax rate thank you yeah yeah so those haven't in you know
 councilman Melzer yeah that's a 12% increase right that's okay just to be
 clear I mean you got to speak to people I take your point and you can and please
 by all means continue to say 12% but I will tell you you and I believe in
 effective communication I've got to speak to people in the language that
 they understand versus forcing them to understand differently and maybe people
 out there are like me and 12% do I carry the one do I move the decimals right I
 I believe it's important to me if maybe it's somebody wants to hear whole
 numbers this is going to add three bucks to your tax bill I think it's important
 to understand all variations of that not for someone to adopt a 12% 12 and a half
 percent increase mindset but to meet them where they are hey what what
 language how can I communicate this best to you I prefer whole numbers great it's
 hundreds of dollars I prefer percentages it's 1200 3% I prefer just a tax rate I
 can do the math myself okay the tax rate is this right all right I just some
 people just want to know are you raising that tax rate yes or no right and so
 it's just a matter of meeting people where they are versus trying to get
 people to get where I am and and and again that's maybe just because I'm a
 whole number type guy councilman Mansley yeah no no that points well taken and I
 appreciate staff laying out that they're not saying not to do it because we've
 aren't you know we've talked about the growth needs that and the prior
 commitments that drive it but yeah probably the simplest language that staff
 has provided is it's $209 increase on the average bill that that is is very
 down-to-earth you know what I object to what you sense in my keeping bring it up
 is I think it's it's not transparent to imply that that you know we're keeping
 things the same and and it's just evaluations went up we have nothing you
 know nothing we can do about that you know I'll tell you the evidence that
 people don't understand that is how much effort there is at the state level to
 try to control valuations valuations don't drive how much your tax bill is
 legislators drive that because you already know what the valuation is so
 that that's so I would I'm what I poke at is the sort of making it seem like
 we're not raising taxes but you know we are we are you know giving direction to
 do that and for very good reasons I'm just asking to be open about it and
 staff has given the very clear language to do that $209 increase on the average
 bill but but I my concern with that would be we don't know all scenarios and
 there may be a property scenario where they are not experiencing any increase
 so to say that everyone's getting an increase to some degree between zero
 and this is not if Tex dot comes and widens the road takes half your property
 which they're doing currently then that would decrease the amount of property
 ergo decreasing you may have made some money on the sale but then you also
 decrease your tax liability and so it's not universally true to say I I'm not
 comfortable saying for every parcel in the city of Denton this is a known fact
 because I just don't know every parcel in the city of Denton and so that's
 where I get a little nervous with the kind of that that approach to saying
 it's it's more transparent because just for me that requires me to have a level
 of understanding that I don't possess and I understand people give me grace by
 and large but I just that's why I think it's just meet people where they are but
 just to be clear from our perspective we want to be completely transparent and we
 do not want to make people think that they're getting oh you're not getting
 your taxes raised what we need to do is to say what are you getting for your tax
 dollars what we need to say is here's a chart of our utilities and where they've
 been and where they stand up against our competition what we need to do is to
 show the things that we're doing while we're adding more officers on the
 street because the population is growing what we need to do is show that we're
 trying to be preventative and proactive and keeping our downtown vibrant those
 are the things we need to be doing so that people see what they're getting for
 their tax dollars not that we're gonna cut your tax bill or we're we're gonna
 not raise your taxes because every year it's going to be impacted because it's
 exponentially growing as everything is growing so we have to do a great job of
 explaining what are you getting for your tax dollars and what I'd love to send
 the message to the state would be if my message would be at some point I should
 own my house you know at some point at some point you got to let me off the
 hook that would be my message councilman Holland what was this the
 illustration of the of the tax decrease the 56 cents was the was keeping it the
 same what was you showed it earlier of a tax decrease tax rams pardon me a half a
 cent tax rate decrease would be 2.9 million dollars of supplementals which
 would lower it to what 55 a little over 50 okay and what to to to council
 members melt Meltzer's well well made point what would that increase the
 average tax bill - I don't remember that off the top of my head but I can
 provide that on September 12th if you would like to see it it would be an
 increase yes yes it will still be an increase okay I just like if we're if
 we're gonna if we're gonna tell you know a 10% 10 to 12 percent increase is 2.09
 I'd like to know what a decrease is it's gonna be something thank you okay
 Councilmember gee and then Councilman watts is your point that if there's your point that to not
 to avoid saying a 12% increase we would have to drop the tax rate multiple cents
 three four cents but the end at the end of any discussion if if if my colleague
 says and that's a $209 increase that's always gonna that's always gonna be a
 gotcha you know well increase the tax rate 209% nothing wrong with that I'm
 just saying that that that's always gonna happen I'm just wondering what would
 happen at 55 sure thank you sir thank you council what this is very
 frustrating because councilmember I appreciate you bringing that you can say
 12% every time we talk about this from the very first budget presentation
 you have said the no new tax rate revenue is X here is the revenue we need
 for this here's what it is for each property taxpayer and I can tell you
 right now that you're using residential though right yes yeah well yeah so let
 the commercial people and other people who were looking at you know there's no
 way it goes up only two hundred nine dollars so I appreciate what you're
 saying but I get frustrated because when I hear you say that you know we want to
 be as transparent as possible I think we've been as transparent as possible so
 I think staff has been transparent in presenting the budget saying this is the
 no new tax rate this is the new tax rate this is what you're getting for your
 taxes so if people in the community still don't know that their tax rate
 bill may go up based upon the presentations they can see here from
 these slides I can tell them it's going up 12% all day long and they're not
 gonna understand it so I appreciate you saying it but I don't think if you're
 saying it because you think we're not being transparent I disagree with that
 I'm not saying that's what you're saying but based upon your comments that so it
 seems like and I think we've been very transparent that's why the state
 legislature passed the whole new tax no new tax rate revenue statement code and
 they're changing it all the time so I appreciate staff coming forward and
 laying out all the facts as they need to be for if people who are paying
 attention to understand that their tax rate bill their tax bill may go up
 doesn't mean it won't that it will but based upon the average or the mean or
 median however you're calculating it it's possible so I just needed to I just
 needed to say that okay anything else no we're all good all right thank you okay
 thank you very much no I'm good it's a it's good good conversations so so that
 takes us to item D ID 2 3 1 5 6 0 receive report hold discussion give
 staff direction regarding Denton municipal electrics proposed campus
 expansion capital improvement project mayor city council Tony Puente DME
 general manager appreciate your time this afternoon I'm gonna try to go through
 this as quickly as I can and make us painful and that's painful painless as
 possible we can accommodate you I will say I will say the right room I will say
 as soon as you get a chance go try some cookies in the back they're fantastic I
 probably gained five pounds just being back there so so just gonna go through a
 few slides with you I'm not gonna read all these the one item that I will
 mention as we have this this discussion please keep in the back of your mind
 conversations that we've had in closed session on some additional factors that
 we'd like for you to consider as you deliberate and and make a decision also
 want to mention that this project is part of our CIP that's being proposed
 already so it's already baked into our operating expenses by way of annual debt
 service and we'll talk a little bit about that as well and then finally just
 as a reminder that the debt that that's issued not just for this particular
 project if it's approved but any other project is considered self supporting
 debt so it's that debt is all paid by revenues of the electric utility so just
 briefly to kind of recap items that we've talked in the past currently DME
 has four buildings the oldest building being our field operations building built
 back in 1990 the the the youngest building and and is this 2015 building
 which is a modular building I really don't count that too much that's only
 expected to be there just for a very short period of time it's really this
 our system operations building built in 2012 so it's kind of layout for for what
 our current campus is this campus this currently encompass about 26 acres the
 pond that you that you see here encompasses about seven acres of those
 26 and then we do also have a substation here that encompasses about 9.8 acres we
 have about a little bit less than 10 acres about 9.7 acres where the
 majority of our of our campus is kind of laid out here in our in our Spencer
 property just a little more what's included in in in that facility so all
 of DME is included in this facility but we also have a number of covered
 parkings we certainly need more we have areas for to keep our inventory whether
 it be utility poles transformers we also have a small frankly inadequate linemen
 training area that's part of the proposal here the concept is to to
 rebuild that and expand that to really make it something that that we can be
 proud of and certainly as we have future generations of linemen to come into our
 utility could have the adequate training to provide the service that's needed to
 to our customers and so again on this slide you'll see the total number of
 acreage 26.8 acres about 9.7 of that is is currently usable so a little bit
 about our utilization so this is some information that that I worked with our
 facility folks as you know wanting Tom Graemer for his assistance so the
 currently currently we have about 175 employees we have 187 employees that are
 budgeted but 175 that kind of rotate through through our campus so based on
 on that number count and the square footage that we have we have at about an
 81 almost 82% utilization certainly there's spaces that aren't quite the
 recommended spaces the 125 foot type of spacing that is being recommended by by
 facilities but that's currently where we stand we do anticipate that you know as
 we continue to grow you see kind of our estimated headcount so in the next 20
 years we'll be at about 333 employees again that's kind of a rough estimate
 based on our growth pattern and where we anticipate to be and so certainly you
 know the current campus as it's currently configured and certainly will
 not meet our needs past really the next five years will be really out of space if
 we do if we do look at a remodel this is a wall-to-wall remodel of our current
 buildings we would in eight years we would be at 100% utilization all of this
 is kind of based on this 125 foot per employee type of calculation so we did
 did we did look at a potential renovation to the existing campus again
 we are limited to the current square footage of 33,402 square feet if we did
 a wall-to-wall renovation we'd be looking about 17 million dollars at five
 hundred and ten dollars a square foot three buildings that we currently have
 are out of code compliance and so we would have to bring all those buildings
 up to to code based on a recent facility assessment that we made I already
 mentioned that within eight years we'll be at a hundred percent utilization of
 of that of that renovated campus if that's what we decide to do again that
 does not address many of the other issues that we're trying to address is
 additional coverage parking better training facilities more inventory space
 and and a number of other items that that we would like to include the campus
 expansion we'd be looking at adding a little bit over 8,200 square feet to the
 overall campus it would mean that we would demolish or likely repurpose three
 of those buildings likely would be just one of those buildings that we would
 repurpose for for more of an inventory space than necessarily to office staff we
 estimate that the cost of adding that additional footage brand-new roughly the
 34,000 396 it's about 17 and a half million dollars so again same same bang
 for your buck and doing a new building versus renovating the existing building
 the big difference is that that gives us about 20 years of utilization of an
 expanded new building it also affords us the opportunity to co-locate customer
 service out of City Hall East East I believe East and and afford the city an
 opportunity to repurpose that for other public safety or or gone 510 5 million
 dollars and in our proposed CIP that is a plan or we propose the issue five
 million dollars next fiscal year that the exact dollar figure that we would
 come down from 75 million 30 years that is based on CEO projected that that four
 and a half million dollar already included in the 12% that that they 25 of
 life does not address all the other items that that we've used the rate
 increase again we if that if that happens we would be reducing the rate
 increase from 12% at that that concludes my I would also mention that we also
 have from your agenda and in the event that we need to go into that and have
 the the recommendation activity and have those things in hand and last of which
 I'll say it's just the construction car need and so this just can putting the
 right things in place to help our team give us a yes counselor Holland as
 opposed to the renovation do I assume that you would maintain the same current
 footprint essentially the same footprint that you've got now yeah I think I think
 that was an item that we had had a conversation in closed session I
 remember that yes sir so with that exception it so so all the work would
 be down something over here yeah yes sir so so we wouldn't tear anything down
 until we have a new structure in place I don't have to like not turn on the
 lights for three months or something only at your house no we'll keep your
 lights on thank you I appreciate that do you have an option that you prefer thank
 you anyone else Councilman Byrd okay Councilmember Meltzer yeah I just want to
 say that's a very persuasive analysis on the renovation versus the expansion you
 know essentially close to the same spending for buddy and it's not like
 your talk about you know situation where you where you're looking at preserving
 an architecturally worked out the funding where it's really not it's kind
 of amazing how much you can raise with an impact on the rate and I'll just
 remind you again I want to thank Tom for for his assistance it's really his
 numbers I'm just the one speaking them up here so thanks Tom yeah I didn't mean
 to give you any credit thank you thank you okay anyone else
 mayor pro tem then counselor McGee thank you mr. mayor so I think I mean I heard
 before so I'm just already I'm just gonna ask a couple questions because I
 think we we've reached the critical mass there the the for option one and I'm
 gonna try to be careful how I say this because we're an open session is it
 likely that the opportunities for option one as currently envisioned go away
 if we delay yes there's a possibility okay which would make it likely even
 more expensive to delay 100% okay and then just just for a point of education
 what what are we using the pond for it used to be the coolant pond for the
 Spencer plant but we don't own the Spencer plant but we own the pond yeah
 let me let me let me ask Terry Nolte because he's done some research into
 that although we may have a prospective buyer the water department for but but
 Terry the the proper term on the slide was lagoon it's a lagoon yes good catch
 mayor yeah actually mr. gay over there knows exactly what this lagoon is used
 for it's it's the the sludge that's generated at the Lake Louisville water
 treatment plant was stored in that lagoon that's what it's current what it
 was used for and is it currently being used for that no so Lake Louisville
 several years ago put in a sludge press and they no longer use the pond so it's
 sitting there as vacant space so to speak and I believe Stephen has a he's
 contacted us about a future use of that space for some additional cleanup
 technology on the water treatment side because he he's also constrained by the
 amount of real estate that's available for Lake Louisville and I know we want
 to stay on posting but that that is essentially to keep us on posting an
 additional synergy for the absolutely of that that property then then then I will
 add to the course of option one okay that's a counselor McGee I was something
 gonna say enthusiastic yes on option one because of the environmental impacts that
 we discussed and then closed so okay anyone else counselor watts yeah quick
 question oh well so you have a cost in here and I think so mr. city attorney
 refresh my memory so we have to be careful about I guess costs or I mean
 because I just got a couple I mean cost is presented here costs are okay to talk
 about okay costs are presented here okay all right so the original thought of how
 much this would cost overall with everything not going into what
 everything specifically entails is that a number that I mean I've heard a
 number but I think I heard it in closed session is that number my only question
 is of the you got forty one thousand six hundred twenty five square feet of the
 new expense of the campus expansion at five hundred and ten dollars a foot
 correct which is 17.5 me let's say and I'm not so sure construction costs are
 gonna I mean things go up things come down I mean I gotta just look at the
 real estate market but even it out at five years at your projection at six
 hundred eighty two dollars a foot all right if you multiply the forty one
 that's 28 million dollars I thought I'd heard and maybe I'm thinking of
 something else that the cost was considerably more than that when you take
 into other components so I'm trying to understand and I just I may ask this
 question in closed session if it's if it's I'm trying to see I'm trying I'm
 trying to walk either fine line or so can are we able to talk about costs
 outside of specifically stating what those costs represent no I think unless
 do you have a concern Tony I think Oscar yeah so I let me try to answer it this
 way so so so the our initial kind of internal assessment of what we needed
 was closer to 50 million dollars but I think as as we started to look at other
 considerations we felt that that may not be enough and so we did not want to be
 in a situation where we asked the council for 50 million dollars then came
 back and asked for another 10 or another 25 we think that the 75 million dollars
 will more than adequately address all the needs that we have certainly our goal
 would be that once we have a design we could certainly give council options on
 items that we could potentially pull back on and delay you know what one item
 that I'll mention is as much as we feel strongly the need for a a training area
 for our lineman that could be an area that we could postpone and do later but
 but certainly you know we'll try to pick out items within that estimate to include
 we've also made it a point to look at rooftop solar across our entire facility
 on everything that we have covered parking that we would certainly I think
 that would be a good one a good message for for our community I know you're I
 know you're smiling but but but I think at the end of the day I think when
 looking at rooftop solar with new construction I think that makes far more
 sense than when you retrofit an existing facility and so so I think I think those
 items are items that we can certainly come back to the council and if we want
 to pull back on the amount that we want to invest in a campus we can certainly
 do that so the rooftop solar is not included in the original conception
 plan in the original 50 in the campus expansion yeah it is not well okay so
 that's that's really and I'm just making an observation because I know in the
 capital improvement the capital budget it was like you said 75 million so you
 said it I didn't so if if we have the building at six hundred eighty two
 dollars a foot in five years that's 28 million so that's forty seven million
 dollars for all these other things you're talking about which is about
 almost one and a half one three quarters times the amount of the existing
 building so that's what I'm struggling with it's not it's not whether it's
 needed it's not it obviously is needed I'm trying to figure out how we got to
 70 million 75 million when I'm looking at even projecting the cost at even if
 you projected it at $900 a foot that's 30s that's about 36 to 37 million and so
 I'm trying to figure out how we're gonna spend almost double that in these other
 ancillary kind of and you don't have to answer that today that's that's my
 observation so I certainly can be on board with the staff recommendation of
 expansion I really question how we're gonna spend another 47 million dollars
 over 10 you but that's something to be decided by future councils but it just
 just seems a little yes that's just me so we would anticipate that sometime
 next year we would bring a design and then in the next budget cycle we will
 adjust that number to wherever it needs to be at that point based on council
 direction whether it's this council or future council okay all right so we're
 not we're not voting to approve we've already I think looked at the only
 thing that's the only thing that's in in the budget for next year is five
 million dollars for land acquisition design okay thank you thank you mayor
 thank you and I want to I do want to touch on something because I obviously
 we're having a conversation about the bond and and everyone knows my feelings
 there but you raise a good point the what is the value of the covered parking
 for the vehicles so so one just practically speaking it it extends the
 life of those vehicles but also when you're dealing with inclement weather and
 you have employees that are coming in and out of buildings to be able to go
 into a covered space area get those vehicles prepped and ready to go that's
 the the other advantage that you have but primarily it helps extend the life
 of the vehicles and the equipment that are stored underneath those covered
 areas got it so protects it from just elements right elements wear and tear
 that that sort of thing sir yeah got it so if we had right hypothetically if DME
 ran a after-school program for kids to come out and look and they had vans that
 are parked in the Civic Center parking lot sitting the heat all day if those
 were covered and in the shade it'd be they'd last longer and wouldn't be as
 hot for kids to get in and tour DME in the water and all that stuff probably
 wouldn't be as hot they'd still be hot but yeah there you go okay all right any
 other questions great thank you very much appreciate it that that takes us to
 item e ID 2 3 1 5 8 0 receive report hold discussion and give staff direction
 regarding the potential purchase of real property situated in the Jay Fisher
 survey abstract number 4 2 1 in the city of Denton
 there just real quickly I need to set the stage here you know we have said all
 along that the site that's currently there where the fire station is is when
 we presented this way back that it would meet the call radius which it does I
 want to be clear about that but then we were asked to look at another site and I
 asked Chief Hedges and Frank Dixon to go out and look at it and look at call call
 radius in future and I particularly wanted them to look at the growth of
 South Denton and to make sure that we're looking at those trends and growth and
 egress ingress and the ability to get to our residents and the growing businesses
 out there so today we're back with you to share with you the information that
 they have uncovered and just to get your feedback good afternoon mayor City
 Council Kenneth Hedges fire chief so I have really two parts this presentation
 someone kind of stop at a natural stopping point for discussions any
 questions on the potential land purchase and then there's a second component we'll
 discuss so are we talking about is possibly three acres that is located
 Teasley north of Ryan Road it's about three quarters mile south of the
 existing station six property and it's highlighted there on the map so I'm kind
 of going to this just a little bit I use this slide when we talked about station
 nine over two years ago and really kind of define on how far department measures
 success and that's actually measured in response time if you look at the bottom
 right the red arrow really kind of identifies what we're talking about a
 response time from the time that alarm is sent to the fire station and do have
 we have units arriving first on scene very important for us to measure this
 and then try to stay within industry standards in a PA 1710 which is a picture
 of the book there is a best practice recommendation so it is not absolute but
 that's the best guideline we have for response times then over the left the
 first bullet point really what talked about is a four minute response time so
 the best we can offer our citizens is to get our first arriving unit on scene
 within four minutes 90% the time the 90th percentile so when we talk about
 forming response time I have several graphic representations this one's
 actually gonna show you the current station six site which is right behind
 South Branch Library and really kind of want to point out is look out to the
 west where it really goes down Ryan Road these though Ryan Road and then down
 south the format response time the current location does not even touch
 Hickory Creek and Teasley and over to the east at no point can station six get
 reached 2499 within four minutes so everything's over four minutes I do want
 to preface this with the fact this is GIS based data do any give credit to my
 staff this is amazing they create these maps in-house we learned this through
 the accreditation so no longer do we have to ask GIS development maps well
 we're able to create this in-house so these maps are designed by current
 roadway speeds following all the traffic signals so what you see here is the
 bare minimum so we expect our response would actually be a greater pattern you
 see here running code 3 able to navigate through control intersections one thing
 after another so that is the current set if we
 propose to move fire station six to the land parcel we're talking about this
 today it would move to the south you see there my biggest point is look at Ryan
 Road expansion now you're going almost the full length around road to Country
 Club down to the south on Teasley you cover Hickory Creek really looking also
 at the East West corridor on future growth and they specifically look to the
 east on 2499 so now station six from this new site could reach all areas of 2499
 within our city limits within four minutes are less and then when I overlay
 these two so the dark shaded areas the current station six location and then
 you kind of see in the blue and then the other pink color is would be the nose
 new site there's very little variation to the north the biggest advantage would
 be to the south so you extend your four minute response time to the south and if
 you want to quantify this and we did pull this data is provided by Esri so
 this really kind of gets down to the numbers so we broke this down by site
 current location 32 32 Teasley future possible location is Teasley Hunter
 Creek and this is interesting how you can pull the demographics so this these
 two maps generated this information so currently we cover a little over 10,000
 population in four minute response time that's what we're talking about if we
 wish to move to Teasley Hunter Creek that 10,000 goes up by 5,000 to almost
 16,000 people we cover with it for a minute so that's a positive influence so
 a total of 5,700 you look at the at-risk population so households with people 65
 plus years or older you see that number there increased by 410 households with
 disabilities and they do pull this information from the US census as well so
 that's the increase of positive 306 and I added the commercial piece the very
 bottom number of businesses you'd be positive 58 and the number of employees
 1681 so in that difference column every one of those numbers are positive by
 moving just three-quarters of miles south this is actually a fit to print
 which would be very similar to station 6 is the distance from the residential to
 the next slide to show you so this station would be oriented really to the
 south so I compare it in the fire station does not meet that's respond
 Teasley Hunter or future growth will actually that location which that's
 beneficial now we have optical devices so preemption that are on our five goes
 out down body brain they're gonna turn on to university everybody knows how to
 stack as they turn their right blinker on going itself by Bray it will start
 capturing the lights on university so it knows here you can implement this
 technology that's already on that will require a textile approval we know how
 easy that is they use a little bit different so currently right now the
 neighborhood instrument at the edge of station 6 to the new site obviously those
 neighbors would actually be 240 feet away and our apparatus are designed per
 NFPA codes to project sample before you turn on to Teasley both are approximately
 the Teasley Hunter Creek set would provide on Rhine Road Hicker Creek and
 2499 this in the proposed bond project or I should bone zone identical design
 way to the exterior elevations so one design for two different fire state for
 one 25 million dollar contract instead two separate twelve point five on the
 build schedule instead of the per repurpose of station ever I'll lead with
 a question that road and then exit to go to make a left turn to go to Teasley go
 whichever direction you need to go is that here if you think you can see the
 cursor radish on the Hunters Creek take a left and then you're on to Teasley
 right there yeah a the reference at least until we get to a signal like one
 what do you recommend that still seems a little trick I would I think it'd be
 discussed frame of the controlled intersection and pre-alert light got it
 okay afternoon yeah exit straight on to Teasley as you do currently in station
 six I think the biggest challenge would be actually coordinate with text dot and
 there's already a curb cut right here in this location we existing so I see very
 little difference in the orientation north to south station versus flipping
 this and make as well so I see the benefit of hunter Christian existing okay
 also mr. mayor if I may yes did did we discuss another for the for the
 expansion of our further relocation of station six no sir okay I don't I think
 we talked about that in closed session but but I thought we talked about
 another another parcel of land I beg your pardon thank you yeah no and this
 may be it because that's the only thing I recall is the existing footprint and
 this option which and then giving credit to city manager and and staff for going
 and kicking the tires and giving it on even honest evaluation I appreciate that
 means a lot councilmember McGee the mayor Pro Tem thank mr. mayor chief so
 exit on Hunters Creek is there gonna be an access for possible rear entry on
 Teasley I think that tent would be the flow into the station out would actually
 be off of Hunters Creek since that is a city road easier to manipulate so we'd
 put a flow on the west side of this building into the back of the station
 and then flow out on response so we still use yes correct we'd everything
 will be contained within this and three acres is significant size for us to
 build this station with all the associated employee parking entrance
 ramps X ramps as well so what I'm getting that is that this is gonna
 eliminate back and in on hunters right yes okay every new station we will build
 from this point forward is my intent we will not back unity thank you chief okay
 councilman Pro Tem yeah this let me lead with a question of process are we going
 to deliberate direction at the end of both these items or how do you how do
 you want to run this do you want direction now do you want direction at
 the end do you want other discussion how do you I mean it's kind of two things
 and so how do you want to run this well no it's either you like the you like the
 new site or the existing site that's really the decision for us at any point
 when it comes right everything beyond that we're not ready to discuss at this
 phase it's really just a site discussion new or old new or existing and yeah
 that am I wrong at the end of the presentation as you have four different
 options and one option is going to be pursue negotiations on this parcel do
 diligence do not pursue delay so I appreciate that then it's actually
 exactly to my point and I'm really trying to follow your lead mr. mayor do
 you want to have that direction at the end or do you and keep this questions and
 direction just about this piece of property or or and the context would be
 you know how it fits into the larger scheme of of what council wants to do
 with this the library the existing building it's and any other comments how
 do you want to do this and I know I'm spending a lot of time I'm just trying
 to get to the how you want to run this should I bring up my questions now or at
 the end yeah no I think you should do now I take chiefs point to this four
 options but truly that's just spread out for because if you don't if you don't
 want to move you don't need to negotiate so you can condense those two if you
 don't want to do anything you don't need to go it's truly two two discussions
 that then has next steps associated with it but to answer your question yes all
 the questions now that's great yeah I appreciate think thank you for the
 clarity so and I guess the the first question is if we did move to the new
 site what what is the city intend to do with the old site that was the original
 option I can tell you from from my perspective is our goal to preserve the
 building that's there and use for flex space for staff in the future and the
 continue to use the parking lot that there which is still not it's not
 sufficient for current library patrons but it might might work just perfectly
 for a satellite site for staffing purposes we have some staff that need
 office space so we would not tear that building down we would use it okay that
 appreciate that and then I guess the other thing I just want to be mindful of
 and I want to be real careful how I say this because this is this is not a
 criticism and it is that and I won't mention any names on purpose just so
 that we're clear it's not a criticism the the proposal to look at this new
 property came around because an individual had it for sale and the in
 the individual was also on the bond committee and and so I feel like we're
 toes on the line about an ethical issue and I'm like and I understand we have to
 weigh stakeholder value taxpayer value but I guess I'm admonishing us to be
 very careful to avoid any sort of conflicts of interests or ethical
 concerns and be really open and outright and upfront and maybe extra so because I
 feel personally like we are right on the line of an ethical concern and maybe
 it doesn't cross and maybe I'm there's not three more of us that that have that
 likewise concern but I think numbers wise it does look to me like this
 property is better so I'm going to say that financially and from a from a
 taxpayer financial relationship this is this feels like a better option to move
 here but it does give me pause procedurally how we got to this property
 so you know my direction is yeah okay but let's be super careful how we do
 this in the future because I think this is right on the edge of being problematic
 thank you for your indulgence so but mr. city attorney or city manager well no
 no let's let's let's let's then just whatever you want to say I don't want to
 poison the pool but if you know to raise that concern is I think it warrants some
 level of response to either yeah it just wants a response well yeah there's
 probably some legal opinion involved in there right I don't think there's
 necessarily ethics issue at this point our ethics code does not apply to a bond
 advisory board we do have an ethics policy that relates to our boards of
 commissions it's very aspirational but doesn't have any teeth really to it
 either but all that said I'm not really the one that advises counsel or the or
 the ethics committee necessarily if there is a complaint so I don't want to
 step too far out there and get in front of the ethics committee if there was a
 complaint I just don't see it at this point so this is really it's a council
 discussion should that play into how council goes about discussing this
 certainly but I don't see at this point any kind of ethical violation as far as
 I can see okay anyone else councilman Meltzer it does raise the question in
 mind why are we doing this don't we usually do real estate in closed
 sessions and and then would it put us in a awkward situation if we have a public
 commitment to move that direction now the price can do whatever it does a good
 point and the fact that the bond member raised the issue publicly negates the
 fact that we the only thing I can't talk to you about in here is a price and the
 fact that you all as a body on that Saturday when we had our budget meeting
 talked about it as well it's now a public so the only thing I can't discuss
 with you is the price because but but I do need to be clear this was not we were
 not going down this road we were stuck on our site till we actually did our
 homework and did our due diligence and to be real frank with you it had to be
 pretty glaring of a difference to be bringing this before you because we were
 but I was so adamant that we had said this but I'm not going to sacrifice that
 for what needs to really be done for the for the community so our what we really
 needed to do and do the right thing was to bring this to you because it does
 serve our community better one thing I will prompt you to speak to as well is
 and correct me where I'm wrong but you it was it was councilmember Meltzer at
 owl that were concerned about the existing library and it the it would
 absolutely have to come down I mean without me are putting it on the site
 but there is a there is a possibility with how we'd have to orient the fire
 station so you can imagine if you tried to plop that down on the site where where
 the library is it's likely the library would have to come down or and for
 reuse we looked at it we would have to tear the concrete out and do some
 different piping underneath it which would not have to be done with just
 using it for office space so the good news is by moving to another site
 wherever it may be we're able to preserve that existing library which is
 valued around some quite a bit of money for for staff purposes in the future and
 maybe not staff purposes for other purposes that may may benefit the city
 yeah and I just think that's important to point out because you're it is like
 all things we do it's a balancing act right and so I appreciate you taking all
 those different components into consideration
 Councilman Meltzer and then we'll go to back to you chief sorry yeah I very much
 appreciate that explanation you know prior to that kind of sticky question
 my oh I'm sorry now looking for direction that you want to talk about
 this part all right never mind I'll hold my comments any other questions no
 comes from what okay chief so I have three more slides that are for actually
 need decision slides so this is a perfect provided by facilities they
 actually took existing station 8 footprint which what we're planning for
 station 6 is actually going to be a little bit larger on square footage as
 well and just saying it could we reconfigure the site at the South Branch
 Library a lot of information here I think what I want to focus on is what was
 provided on the second bullet point right now if this is converted to city
 building and admin functions it would require 45 parking spots I don't know I
 don't see Tom here so I don't know how many would be calculate at this point I
 just want to provide that information and then the third bullet point is really
 any use as a fire station because how we try to build fire change stations today
 is really for 50 to 60 year lifespan so if we actually repurposed the South
 Branch Library facility stated that we need a full underground survey of all
 utilities and see whether they have a lifespan for 50 plus more years after
 already being there 15 something or 28 years the core of the building as well
 so just moving the side around here's one option with it Ashley obviously
 probably you know not be agreeable is to demolish the current library place the
 fire station on that exact site with two different curb cuts one existing that
 would be expanded than a new one on to Teasley and this was just one of a flow
 pattern that was proposed as well libraries 21,000 square feet roughly we'd
 only need 5,000 for living space and then the other part of the station
 apparatus base and the flex base which is the sports that would have to be new
 at this direction travel you'd need to go north and you'd still be impacting with
 the bus traffic behind the school and the other little commercial strips are
 there as well so that's all I have until we get to the requested direction slot
 okay councilman Meltzer yeah the most persuasive slide is the is the vastly
 increased for minute response coverage maps that's very compelling that I just
 want to share an observation that you know that we're that if everybody wants
 and I'm and I'm supportive by the way and my direction is to initiate to
 diligence but or well I don't really care much between due diligence and
 negotiations I think they do go together as the mayor pointed out everybody wants
 a new building and I just gave direction you know for that with DME but that's
 you know senior center and and we got burgeoning staff here and everybody
 wants a new building but the the very encouraging thing is that I read in the
 responses that were provided for us before coming in I'm looking for the
 actual line but that there is a facilities master plan in progress due
 back soon right so yeah so I mean I'm comfortable just because of the
 persuasive persuasiveness of the impact on public safety which is the main thing
 when you look at fire department that you know we should be moving forward here
 but we clearly need to slow down a little see that comprehensive luck you
 know and kind of sort the simultaneous equations and you know some and you know
 wasn't Paul Meltzer at al you know as I was responding to the direction from the
 bond committee that 40 people selected by the council bright gauge people who
 were concerned about not reusing potentially very good building so so you
 know if we look at what can be reused what can't be reused how to repurpose
 where you know but just to look at it comprehensively I think that's really
 sorely needed so just a comment okay any other questions comments direction
 that's what thank you what a great presentation thank you and mayor pro tem
 I understand the how this sort of came up factually and I can understand kind of
 wondering what's happening I guess my take on it is you know when I look at
 the Ethics Code and obviously if one of us has an interest in any of that you
 know we have to recuse and so forth but in some ways based upon the public
 discussion of this I think this would have come to us anyway as far as this
 opportunity and I and I really appreciate madam city attorney your
 response to the closed session question because I really hadn't considered that
 but you're right I mean a lot of this has already been talked about in public
 and when I got to looking at this I mean public safety is the number one and that
 was a great graphic very compelling the next is how do we best use our finances
 efficiently so we were looking at and people have said hey let's build a new
 library for 48 million dollars it's 40,000 square feet okay whatever that
 cost is per foot projected so the building we currently have is 20,000
 square feet plus the fire how big is the fire station 36,000 6,000 feet the
 building itself including the bays and things such as that yes sir so 26,000
 square feet of space which would have been rebuilt if it stayed there and the
 20,000 square foot building would have been demolished so if we look at we're
 paying 40 or the proposal is to pay 48 million dollars for a 40,000 square foot
 building and we're gonna tear down a 20,000 square foot building which is
 what cut that in half cut that cost per footage in half is 24 million dollars so
 in essence whatever you know I mean so I think it's also financially prudent to
 say we're going to buy a piece of land that may save us from having to tear
 down a 20 a 24 million dollar facility that is only it's built in the 2000s I
 think so yeah we can we can so and I can appreciate the kind of sensitivity to it
 I really do and I think that having these open discussions we'll just have
 to deal with but in the end we make the decision and if somebody wants to price
 something outside of what we want to pay for it we can just simply say no I mean
 based upon that but I like the public safety component because it does provide
 a greater service to most of our citizens it also preserves a 24 million
 dollar that there's no way we can tear that down that would that would be so
 financially irresponsible just and then we have a fire station that we can
 repurpose for whatever if there's ever any time we need that facility to house
 additional ambulances or additional I mean so it's just it's just a win-win
 all the way around in my opinion. Okay anyone else Mayor Pro Tem? Oh and then
 Councilman Berg. Thank you Mr. Mayor. No I think the the information was
 compelling the cost savings of sister stations are compelling the additional
 reach is compelling there's a lot of compelling elements this is this is not
 a denigration I think we can simultaneously keep our mind on two
 different goals of the city and and it felt like we're you know okay yes this
 is this is potentially a better fiduciary or fiscal relationship and for
 the taxpayers I respect that cost savings all that I think we can still
 keep our eye and make sure that you know this is right on the line but for me it's
 right on the line maybe not maybe not for anyone else but it's something I feel
 that we can be mindful of as we go forward to you know we can keep our eye
 on two different balls at the same time so I gave direction earlier I'm not
 going to change that direction now I think this is a better play so you know
 I think hopefully that says something if I'm the one that has the concern yet I
 am moving forward with the direction I hopefully that sends a message
 Councilman Burke I am supporting the staff to initiate our due diligence and
 I generally tend to do that the one that is saying yes let's do it because any
 amount of time next year two years from now ten years from now the cost is just
 going to be unbearable but where will we be we'll be at the same place where we
 were so again if we can get our constituents to understand that this is
 what you get when you're in a city such as this and we've got to take care of
 everyone's needs as best possible and I'm hoping that our constituents could
 understand that we have to do this is because it's the right thing to do to
 take care of all the new homes and the new businesses and the new people that
 are coming in so as far as I'm concerned due diligence is always first it's the
 first thing that you have to think about if we wait another it continue to
 negotiate the negotiations are not going to get any less it's gonna be more if
 nothing else so due diligence let's do as much as we can as soon as we can thank
 you okay thank you anyone I'm counselor reggie do you have your four yes okay
 all right thank you very much appreciate it so we have one more thing for closed
 sessions I think it's it's one in the same 1a1b okay okay yeah is that what you
 heard God chief as well - really involves due diligence first and then you go into
 contract negotiations this is provided by real estate that kind of the flow so
 that's what we're really looking for - which is start negotiations yeah one two
 is combined yeah Councilman Holler and it will first anyone against that as he's
 laid it out okay completely unrelated does does
 Geyer High School fall in the the pink area or the blue area or does it fall in
 the area Geyer would actually fall in the format response time at the new
 proposed site it would cover thank you yeah got it thank you thanks chief okay
 that takes us to item F ID 2 3 2 2 1 receive report hold discussion give
 staff direction on pending City Council request mayor and council Jennifer rainy
 assistant to the city manager we have one request today we'll quickly speed
 through the instructions real fast and as you know the staff will introduce the
 request the council member will have up to two minutes to describe and justify
 their request since there was a significant amount of text in your
 response I'll let you dice that up into two minutes and then council members
 will have the opportunity to voice their priority level at high moderate or low
 and mayor pro tem we have your item request first yeah all right thank you
 mr. mayor so this is a too many pitch to have a work session discussion a medium
 priority to have to form a Charter Amendment Committee I'm not gonna belabor
 a lot all all the items because those were in except for two were it
 previously discussed as potential topics I think we have a lot of potential
 topics some that staff brought forward some that council brought forward some
 of the citizens have brought forward that we can review at the time of a
 work session but there's clearly a pent-up desire to have a Charter
 Amendment Committee from council from citizens and from staff to address
 various concerns and what ends up in the final product I think we can discuss at
 that time but I'd like to have that discussion okay so but I just need a
 process question before I there's obvious things identified put before us
 what is it that we're considering those things that are put before us or a
 blank slate just Charter Committee I don't know who answers that what I'm
 pitching is that would that help okay right so what I'm pitching is that we
 discuss these items that have been listed as well as any other items that
 council would like to bring up for that discussion okay all right anyone else
 council wants yeah and and I don't want to get stuck on the now is this a
 question or uses your time at my time okay you start me I'm watching I see the
 big I see the big screen I just didn't want to start you go yeah so I can
 support the work session and the only reason I'm not gonna banter about your
 your pitch about specific items because even if we said we're gonna have a
 blank slate all those items are gonna come back up the main thing I don't want
 to do is have a time frame like I think some of the staff back up or something
 said that well this is our timeline I think we need to have a work session
 about when do we want to have one what do we want to have in it and you can
 bring up whatever you want to bring up everybody can bring up whatever they
 want to bring up so I'm open to that to that conversation yeah okay got it well
 I normally don't do this but this is a it's kind of more sensitive so do you
 have a ranking of high medium low oh I think the request was medium medium so I
 mean I don't really know what that means sure when it comes back but I figure it
 comes back sometime this year next year and then we figure all that so yeah I'm
 okay with that got it I'm okay Councilman McGee Mr. Mayor mind if I ask a
 question no go ahead I just I'm not sure what the timeline was you that was
 referenced by mr. Watts yeah in the backup staff and put forward a that's
 what they were referring to I'll go ahead and go ahead I'm in favor of this
 medium program I appreciate this pitch this is a this is long overdue to clean
 some things up so I'm looking forward to having a work session and that's all
 being able to contribute our ideas into forming this committee I would also I
 guess when we have the work session we'll discuss if we move for we would
 discuss what the committee would look like but I do suggest us some changes
 from the bond committee so I'm a yes medium priority thank you anyone else
 Councilman Meltzer yes medium priority okay anyone else
 Councilor Holland no okay anyone else Councilman Burke I will say yes and
 making a medium priority okay and then for myself I am a yes for the reason
 that obviously full disclosure anything that's going to start division I'm not
 going to support but I hope we can all center around the urgency and need to
 address a charter that says and this is a this is a painful example it talks
 about the city manager and only uses he right that's egregious that's absolutely
 it's it's okay right but it's it needs to be updated so for that and other
 reasons that I hope we can all find synergy around common-sense adjustments
 versus anything that would be divisive and I'll say because this council is
 probably as diverse of it as it's ever been as constituted so to to then start
 tweaking things for maybes it gives me concern right let's let's we have a
 something that works and we have obvious issues to fix so thank you all right
 thanks okay that concludes that I will we'll take a break but I'm gonna read
 take us into close before the break so the City Council will now at 342 p.m.
 convene and close meeting to deliberate the closed meeting items set forth on
 the agenda which includes the following item a ID two three nine six five
 deliberation regarding personnel matters under Texas government code section five
 five one dot zero seven four item B ID two three nine six six deliberation
 regarding personnel matters on the Texas government code five five one dot zero
 seven four and then please note that we're gonna move F up it'll be the
 third thing we talked about and that's item F ID two three one five eight seven
 deliberation regarding certain public power utilities competitive matters and
 then we'll go down to item what is your item three on your list ID or item C ID
 two three one four five seven deliberation regarding real property and
 then we'll go to item D ID two three one five six seven deliberation regarding
 real property and then item E for the record is not required that was a
 placeholder just in case we had questions on that item so we'll have one
 two three four five items to discuss and so let's take a break it's 343 we'll be
 back at four to get started
 good evening and welcome to this meeting the Denton City Council today is Tuesday
 August 15th it is 638 p.m. forgive us for that we had got started an hour early
 because of how much we had to take on so thank you for your patience that way
 first thing on the agenda this evening are the pledges to the United States and
 Texas flag if you can stand with me if you're able
 okay thank you and then we have one proclamation today that's the national
 payroll payroll week if you're here for national payroll if you can come down
 meet me at the podium here and we'll do that presentation
 okay you want to introduce yourselves and tell us what we're recognizing hi
 I'm Donna Bush and payroll specialist the city of Denton and we're just here
 to do payroll Cindy Hartman payroll supervisor and we process the payroll
 for 2,200 city employees okay and what is that what is that total round numbers
 what is that so it's about 70% of our budget topping over 5 million pay cycle
 every every two weeks thank you very much I appreciate it well we have
 proclamation it reads a proclamation by the mayor of the city of Denton Texas to
 all whom these presents shall come greetings whereas the American Payroll
 Association honors nearly 150 million people who work in the United States and
 the payroll professionals who support the American system and whereas payroll
 professionals play a key role in maintaining the economic health of
 Denton by paying into unemployment insurance systems carrying out tax
 withholding reporting and deposits and whereas payroll departments
 collectively spend more than 2.4 trillion annually complying
 with a myriad of federal and state wage and tax laws and whereas payroll
 professionals meet regularly with federal and state tax officials to
 continue improving upon compliance even within the ever-changing government
 procedures I know a little bit about the government and red tape it's rough out
 there and so now therefore I Gerard Hutsworth mayor of the city of Denton
 Texas do hereby declare and proclaim the first full week of September to 2023 in
 which Labor Day falls as national payroll week in the city of Denton and
 asks us to celebrate all those who work in Denton Texas and those in the payroll
 profession if we give them a hand
 here with me
 just appreciate it and I have these copies for you all right thank y'all
 very much have a great evening
 okay that takes us to our presentations for members of the public if we can play
 the video please
 the Denton City Council has adopted rules of procedure including a code of
 conduct that applies to the public as well as council members these rules were
 enacted to promote an orderly process and to preserve decorum speakers will
 have four minutes to give a scheduled report and four minutes to give an open
 mic report a bell will ring when time has expired if the remarks are not
 concluded by that time the speaker will be asked to stop speaking if the speaker
 does not cease and a second request is made the mayor may request to have the
 speaker removed from the chamber speakers should not approach the dais if a
 speaker has materials for the council please notify the city secretary in
 advance for scheduled reports the council may initiate discussion or ask
 questions for non scheduled open mic reports the council may listen however
 because no notice of the subject of the open mic report has been provided to the
 public in advance the Texas Open Meetings Act prohibits discussion or
 decision by the council on non scheduled items as a result the council may only
 proceed as follows on non scheduled items propose to place the item on a
 future agenda make a statement of factual policy or a recitation of
 existing policy speakers are asked 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 the council rules of procedure may be immediately removed from the
 chamber thank you in advance copies of the rules of procedure are available
 from the city secretary great thank you the first speaker that we have two
 scheduled speakers first being Steven Dillenburg Steven Dillenburg okay our
 second scheduled speaker is Isabel Cano not real come if you can come on up and
 give your name and you'll have four minutes
 good evening mr. mayor city council members I'm here to read a letter that a
 friend of mine wrote after a visit to Denton like that okay dear Denton City
 Council I am a former Denton resident having lived there all through the 80s
 and I am also a graduate of a graduate of TWU 1983 I now reside in Washington
 State but take a trip to Texas every few years this past April I visited Denton
 for one week and noticed many changes for the better I thought you might be
 interested in my observations as seen through the eyes of a former resident
 and now as a teacher retiree I want you to know that as a former Denton resident
 I love Denton more than ever here are some positive changes that I have
 observed recycling wheelchair friendly sidewalk ramps Quaker town recognition
 with the informative Park sign and also the new name of Quaker Town Park
 interracial neighbor neighborhoods bicycle friendly streets with nice bike
 lanes Walker friendly sidewalks Confederate statue removed train public
 transportation revitalized town square timely response action when issues are
 reported working on solutions to help the homeless Saturday market senior
 services museums and lovely historical homes on display for the public some of
 these changes of course are not recent but still feel new to me coming back as
 a visitor and I noticed these positive changes more than ever I feel that the
 town council is forward-thinking progressive and I'm quite sure has a
 balanced and diverse representation I find Denton to be a friendly and very
 livable city with positive vibes when I was picked up by uber driver to be
 taken back to DFW Airport the driver told me that he was a 30-year Denton
 resident who didn't like Denton he loved Denton thank you for listening and I'll
 be back sincerely Janice Olson okay well thank you very much I appreciate that
 feedback thank you uh-huh thank you for being here that takes us to our
 unscheduled reports obviously had seven cards one won't we won't reach we own
 there's only seven spaces available I'll call those in order it's in order they
 were given to me Ned Woodbridge if you can come down and give your name you'll
 have four minutes thank you council okay sure they'll switch to that to the there
 you go oops thank you good evening I'm Ned Woodbridge 3596
 Hartley Field Road Den as a member of the steering committee of the Northeast
 and area plan I am unfortunately was out of town when for the meeting on August
 1st and want to make some comments on the area plan and what we should do we
 were told at the very outset this would be process would be a simply refinement
 of the 2040 comprehensive plan we were told that the purpose of the plan is and
 I quote from your website to create a community-based vision for the long-term
 success of each respective area the community has requested again and again
 that the city simply follow the Denton 2040 plan Denton 2040 plan so what does
 the 2040 plan actually say as to the rural fringe that we're talking about
 that Northeast Denton constitutes and I'm going to read it so unfortunately I
 have to lean over here as much of Denton is characterized as rural and
 agricultural land that possesses a character of Denton's past and natural
 environment that is cherished conservation development is recommended
 as the primary means of managing the interface of the developed and
 undeveloped land conservation development is an approach to the
 design of rural residential subdivisions which is highly suited to agricultural
 fringe areas where the retention of rural character and open space is
 desired now let me jump to the to the comments of what we should be doing in
 the direction of the city protect rural character and scenic open space in the
 city's edge to promote the achievement of the preferred growth concept land
 preservation plan in the flume promote conservation development in rural areas
 with permanent protected open space expand the network of project protected
 rural open space including flood plains stream corridors through open space
 conservation easements and through land dedications etc so then what does the
 the flume actually say on the map you see here I make finger on it you'll see
 that that for by and large the identified most of the areas are green
 which means rural areas only a very small portion of them along the 288 loop
 here that city and right here the city along FM 428 or as low residential so
 this is more akin to the first business-as-usual scenario so why is
 rural zoning critically important to the city this is this area of Northeast
 Denton was scored by cogs as the most ecologically important area not only in
 Denton but the entire 12 County cogs region this is a critical asset to be
 preserved there are many other areas on the west side of town that are far less
 ecologically important and available for the city to build out look there for the
 growth I'm out of time so I need to jump right to what the community wants and
 recommends we emphatically request that you change the direction given to city
 staff on August 1st that calls for denser development of Northeast Denton
 and the fund provides instead follow the vision statement approved by the
 steering committee based on community input and which is vastly different than
 the direction given stick to the dictates of the comprehensive plan thank
 you very much I appreciate it okay the rest is there yes sir I have that we
 have the copies thank you very much and the next speaker is Anne Beckman you can
 give your if you can give your name you'll have four minutes
 hello my name is Anne Beckman I'm a resident of Hartley Field Road for 23
 years now I have lost a lot of sleep since the last City Council meeting on
 August 1st on the Northeast Denton area plan in that meeting very quickly it
 seemed to me that some City Council members didn't care about community
 wishes and chose to ignore concerns that went against a certain agenda I saw a
 city consultant that was paid a lot of money in order to devise a biased and
 misleading presentation and then a hasty vote that led to majority of City
 Council choosing an option that is completely against the steering
 committee's vision statement for sustainability preservation of rural
 character and ecological conservation I left highly disappointed in my city and
 stress for the future of this area and all of Denton if this is how decisions
 are made I speak for not only me but for my parents and other people who have
 spent over 20 to 50 years here building their forever homes little by little
 creating a place that their children and grandchildren can enjoy it safely and
 have peace I speak for new families who have just recently purchased a home in
 the area in hopes to give their children the life that I had growing up here
 ruralness a quietness a stillness a piece that is unique to this area there
 is no other place like it in Denton I speak for the people who had bought
 homes here and then sold for fear of development because that is not what
 they envisioned for their life I speak for those that are considering moving
 from a place that they have called home for so long because their city is not
 protecting them if you go through with this development you will not only
 destroy crucial habitat for wildlife including bald eagles river otters and
 monarch butterflies to name a few you will also be destroying the peace of the
 residents in the area and reducing their quality of life immensely and you will
 rob all of Denton of the opportunity to have public green space a refuge away
 from the rest of the city in their busy lives a break from the traffic and the
 noise and environmental learning opportunities for themselves and for
 their children we all have a responsibility as humans to respect our
 planet and to know it personally by spending time in nature though each
 development makes that vital human and nature connection that much harder to
 attain but when we are able to experience it we realize that nature
 isn't just nice it's not just pretty but it's healing and it's a human right to
 have access to I urge you mayor and City Council to reevaluate your definition of
 the greater good and think quality over quantity think about the lives of people
 that already reside here think about the lives of people that would benefit from
 public green space maybe that includes you and your family and think about how
 you can better didn't not only how you can increase tax revenue and Orion and
 non-bond I encourage you to pause and not think about profits for a minute put
 yourselves in the shoes of the community and other communities as well as well as
 the wildlife species in these areas and think about the lives you will forcefully
 change with development to quote the late John Muir advocate for the
 preservation of wilderness and every walk with nature one receives far more
 than he seeks and now I will briefly mention the ecological implications in a
 presentation made by Kirby Marceau an ecologist from the area okay this map
 as well as most of the presentation was sourced from the city of Ditton's website
 the map shows the highly ecologically sensitive study area and habitat type
 the main thing I want to point out in this map is that much of the area
 according to the legend has not been assessed or assessment has expired the
 riparian habitat in this area is the land and vegetation that borders rivers
 and creeks it provides natural flood control prevents erosion cleans our
 drinking water and is crucial to federally endangered and threatened
 migratory bird species and the floodplain habitat is the land next to
 rivers or creeks that floods and storms it reduces pollution and lessens the
 impact of severe weather okay please do what didn't publicly promotes and
 protect these environments and species thank you very much for your time I
 appreciate it Bridget Marshall Bridget
 Bridget Marshall Marshall pardon me if you can give your name you'll have four
 minutes good evening my name is Bridget Marshall I live at 35 39 pine trail here
 in Denton the lack of integrity with the area plan process is extremely
 disappointing it has not been a refinement of the Denton 2040
 comprehensive plan as we were repeatedly told by the consultants and city staff
 instead it is an expensive attempt to circumvent the current zoning laws and
 the comprehensive plan for the benefit of investors and developers this is
 appalling this was even more blatantly apparent at the last joint steering
 committee meeting with the consultants proposed plan that did not incorporate
 the steering committee's vision statement which I will partially quote
 our vision for Northeast Denton is to maintain a sustainable community that
 prioritizes environmental preservation preservation of historic spaces healthy
 recreation and the role character of the area we are committed to providing rural
 housing two to five acre lots and development options that are consistent
 with the standards outlined in the 2040 comprehensive plan unquote the Northeast
 in area is a unique asset to the city of Denton that is unlike anywhere else in
 Denton it is worth protecting as a legacy for all Denton residents and
 future generations to enjoy NCT COG's regional ecosystem framework rates at
 the most sensitive and and in a 12-county region according to the
 opportunity Conservation Trust the city of Denton adopted the countywide
 Denton County greenbelt plan to implement appropriate strategies in our
 community to guide the preservation of green belts and the adjacent natural
 areas within the watersheds of our local lakes a key source of the city's
 drinking water the proposed balancing act area plan goes against the city's
 adopted greenbelt plan the community's wishes and the steering committee's
 vision statement the greenbelt plan states that preserving the natural areas
 also known as green belts and ESA's including floodplains creek streams
 riparian areas and wetlands is vital to having dependable clean drinking water
 for our communities farm animals and wildlife as water flows across the land
 these green belts help filter out pollutants before the water enters the
 creeks and lakes protecting the quality of water of our water supply lakes green
 belts are also an important buffer during flood events preserving open
 space including farm and ranch land is a key strategy to reduce flooding
 preserving green belts is a vital importance for the wide variety of
 wildlife that exists here intense development will negatively impact the
 wildlife corridors and habitats green belts also provide an excellent
 opportunity to enhance the quality of life for residents by providing parks
 and hiking biking and equestrian trails for recreation according to the
 opportunity conservation trust it is much more cost-effective to to protect
 green belts and string corridors up front now rather than restore them after
 they had been lost to development once they are gone they're gone forever we
 all should be looking at the northeast in area with a different lens it should
 be developed with a lighter footprint and not with multifamily higher density
 housing and retail centers which encourage urban sprawl it took
 visionaries to create the 843 acre Central Park in New York City in the
 1850s which coincidentally is about the same size as the former Carter wrench
 look at the kind of legacy they left for the residents for those future residents
 what kind of legacy do you want to leave for Denton's residents keep to the 2040
 comprehensive plan in plumb thank you that's good dr. Katherine Katherine and I
 don't want to mispronounce the last name L A N D D E C K there you go thank you
 I'm Katherine Landek and I live on Ferris Road I am an optimist I believe
 people are basically good I have always believed government especially local
 government serves the people I believe that if enough people spoke up the city
 staff and the City Council would listen the past eight months of the Northeast
 Denton area plan process have made me doubt these things the people of Denton
 have spoken clearly and loudly about what they want for this area we wear red
 shirts today to represent the red dots we use to show you what we did not want
 we represent every district in the city and the ETJ your actions two weeks ago
 were evidence that your priorities are with large out-of-town investors and
 developers rather than the people you swore to serve on May 30th the Northeast
 Denton area plan steering committee a committee of volunteers chosen by the
 consultant and city staff and approved by you voted to give shy Bruce the
 consultant hired by the city to develop the area plan direction with the
 following vision statement our vision for Northeast Denton is to maintain a
 sustainable community that prioritizes environmental preservation preservation
 of historic spaces healthy recreation and the rural character of the area we
 are committed to providing rural housing 2 to 5 acre lots and development
 options that are consistent with the standards outlined in the 2040
 comprehensive plan to quote the community vision statement in the Denton
 comprehensive plan regarding the rural fringe in which Northeast Denton sits
 quote in our rural fringe areas of the city and the extraterritorial
 jurisdiction we see conservation development which retains rural
 character protects open space and greenways that's in the vision statement
 our vision continues our vision recognizes the special and sensitive
 environmental realities of Northeast Denton including the invaluable green
 belt and crucial watershed it recognizes the historic significance of Hartley
 Field and aims to preserve and highlight the airfield it recognizes the way
 Northeast Denton is valued by people across Denton as a rural natural space
 free of traffic and available for recreation such as biking walking
 horseback riding and enjoyment of quiet nature the Northeast Denton is a special
 place for all of Denton to enjoy that's the vision statement that the committee
 that you all appointed came up with the direction you gave the consultant as she
 designs the area plan is the opposite of this vision instead you have provided a
 runaround of the rezoning process and are drastically changing the nature of
 any area in this area that the city controls shy roost the consultant who
 presented those options to you completely ignored the vision statement
 and instead in a boldly biased style presented you with the developers dream
 plan by listening to the wishes of land investors and developers instead of the
 people of Denton you are agreeing with roost who has said zoning doesn't matter
 and that the city's job is to make sure developers make money I would argue that
 the job of the city of Denton and the sworn duty of the members of the City
 Council is to listen to the people of Denton we have an opportunity here in
 Northeast Denton we have a space that is rural yet close environmentally
 sensitive yet accessible we have a chance to create a legacy for future
 generations of North Texans to enjoy restore the faith of the people of
 Denton in the process and in you pause the area plan process long enough to
 explore options besides more expensive houses more apartments more traffic let
 us explore instead clean air clean water trees and nature don't make fools of the
 optimists and believers join us and dream big so we can do things together
 thank you very much
 Larry white you can come down give your name you have four minutes
 my name is Larry white I live at 3217 Deerfield Drive in Denton first of all I
 want to acknowledge and thank every one of you for the time and effort that you
 put into your jobs I've come to realize over the last year how much time you put
 into this and I know that just the part that we're talking about takes up an
 enormous part of your time and we're just a little bit of that effort so
 regardless what happens I want to thank you for the job that you're doing here
 please understand that I have a whole list of things that I was going to talk
 to you guys about it's all been said but I want you to look out over this sea
 red over here every one of us believes the same thing and we keep showing up
 time after time after time we are not going away we are going to make a
 difference in here when you people ran for election the last time you swore to
 us you were going to listen to your constituents you are not doing that we
 are going to hold you accountable it doesn't take more than a few hundred
 votes to sway elections on each council race we have more than enough people to
 take care of that if you're not going to listen to what your consistent
 constituents are telling you we have the votes we have the money to contribute to
 get the people elected that you're going to do the job and quit listening to
 these developers and making money for them we are tired of this at the very
 end of the good session on August 1st one of the comments made was these are
 old people they're not going to be here when the time counts they're going to be
 gone that may or not may not be true we're not fighting for us we're fighting
 for our children we're fighting for our grandchildren and for your children and
 grandchildren please listen to us if you don't we'll find people who are going to
 do that look at everybody out here we've been here over and over and over again
 we are not going away thank you thank you
 okay Christine break if you can come down and give your name you'll have four
 minutes sure though if we can get the overhead please thank you all right I
 hope everybody can see that well my name is Christine Bray I learned this morning
 that I did not have any red items of clothing that fit me anymore I had
 outgrown them between the last time I tried them on but I wanted to talk a
 little bit about the dynamics that are pushing development into Northeast end
 so first up it's been a decades-long economic program in Texas to bring in
 growth to bring in growth from other states it's not Denton's fault that we
 are growing in population that is a state issue it's just the water we're
 swimming in so as you can see Texas population has roughly doubled since the
 80s that has to go somewhere right DFW population has also done the same thing
 it's approaching about 7 million 8 million people right now sorry 7 million
 people when we talk about losing rural character this is a little bit what it
 looks like this is a satellite scan of DFW in 1985 you can see Denton up in
 that north east or northwest corner and here's what it looked like in 2022 1985
 2022 we have lost a lot of rural spaces in that time there is also an ongoing
 housing crisis as unfortunately this is a little bit blurry but there was more
 housing built from 1950 to 1959 than there was from 2010 to 2020 when the
 nation had nearly double as many people my generation is having a hard time
 finding housing I know so many people who move out of here because there's not
 space to start a family because they can no longer afford rent our city is losing
 its artists right people who may want to work 30 hours a week and then make art
 that they love with another 20 but they can't afford to do that anymore so one
 thing that cities have done in order to slow rent growth and the environmental
 destruction of their rural spaces is to get rid of suburban style zoning
 suburban style zoning is a style of zoning that requires large houses on
 large lots that take up lots of space so Minneapolis abolished suburban style
 zoning and its rent growth since 2017 has been just 1% compared with 31% in
 the u.s. overall that reflects somewhere around Dennis growth this has been a
 massive success in terms of people being able to stay in the neighborhoods in the
 homes that they grew up in unfortunately our zoning does not allow any sort of
 rural village concept I think which is what the planning planners were talking
 about right we don't have any zoning that enables that that is not really
 something that you can do under our current setting code Europe is doing it
 we aren't here's what it looks like in den right priced out is rents or
 advocates fear housing stability and prices so how do we keep our rural areas
 rural while still accounting for the growth and population that is coming
 from state policy top-down right nothing we can do about it here's an image of
 Denton that black line is the loop I have blocked out in red all of the areas
 where it is illegal to build apartments my neighborhood is that area right north
 of UNT and my neighborhood is an excellent place for the students who
 want to come to UNT we have 40,000 students at UNT and they all want to live
 right by it but it is illegal to build the kind of housing that they might use
 and that is why we are seeing sprawl out towards our rural areas because it is
 not legal to build for the people who are coming in our downtown core the
 places where we already have cement we don't need to put cement down to house
 people we can do it in the areas that are blotted out in red in the inner loop
 right unfortunately our zoning does not allow us which is why we are seeing this
 push towards the edges so in conclusion if we want to save our rural space we
 have to allow dense housing and we should allow it in the places where it
 is needed thank you
 okay that takes us to our consent agenda I'll take a motion but for items B and A
 oh mayor pro tem I move approval except for items of the consent agenda
 accepting items B and AO okay councilmember McGee I will second motion
 by mayor pro tem second by councilmember McGee any questions discussion seeing
 none let's fold on the screen that passes 7-0 takes us to item B which is ID 23066
 consider nomination appointees of the city of Denton boards commissions and
 committees board of ethics etc my question is do I need to have to because
 it's a slate right yeah and there's and then so I need to do vote on a slate and
 then if anyone's a separate vote probably the cleanest way to do it yeah
 okay so councilman watch you you pull this I see you the movement I'm just
 gonna ask that you respect that that process and what is the process the
 process is we'll vote on all but the the okay ethics board that's the that's the
 motion before us right and then we'll take up that one individually thank you
 so mayor pro tem okay so I just want to be careful I'll motion to approve the
 item B but let me know but I need to a motion yeah but for the but for the ethics board okay
 that one that vote has been pulled okay I move approval of the nomination list
 for the various boards and commissions but for the ethics board council mount
 sir actually I'm just taking a quick look to see if there's only there there
 are two nominees related to Board of Ethics is that what you wanted to know
 so the name so it's Dave Zoltner's is the vote that's separate so if you want
 to amend your motion to say that appointment then that'll give you an
 opportunity second thank you for that I appreciate the clarification so just so
 I understand you want to make an exception just for the nomination of
 Dave Zoltner and everything else as described that is correct okay then then
 I move approval of all the nominations as presented in consent item B except
 for the nomination of Dave Zoltner councilman Meltzer I second okay we
 have motion and second any discussion
 councilman Holland state your point of order check that name please check the
 Dave dr. Dave Zoltner dr. David David yeah I beg your pardon thank you uh-huh
 thank you motion by mayor pro temp second by councilman meltzer any other
 discussion this photo on screen
 that passes 7-0 takes us to councilman Watts for a motion no I I don't have we
 got a separate vote on that right that's right yeah we're to the motion oh got it
 we got to do in the partner an affirmative right I'm tracking with you
 yeah I just wanted to give you the floor that was your request I didn't need to
 comment yeah mayor pro temp I move approval of the nomination of dr. David
 Zoltner to the Board of Ethics councilman McGee second okay motion by
 mayor pro temp second by council McGee discussion I do because I want to be
 transparent I'm not going to support this and here's the reason why in 2019
 and these are factual correct dr. Zoltner was on the ethics board and was
 resigned then he was reappointed at some point and on let me get the date so that
 I have it factually correct bear with me just don't want to get this wrong so
 that was an August 2019 the resignation or no was removed better said was
 removed for from the board 2019 then in an email that was sent to me and forwarded
 to all the other council members this was dated January 13th of this year that
 you all would have received it and it was another resignation from the Board
 of Ethics and so with that there's there's a concern that and amongst the
 other statements that I won't quote that said that basically said he doesn't
 support the ethics ordinance as written and so it's hard for me to place
 someone on a board that says they disagree with the fundamental practice
 of that board so that is why I'm not going to support this nomination I I do
 want to note my concerns over the mold the removal the resignation and I think
 there's been a couple of resonations I don't have the second one so forgive me
 for not being having that specific date to provide but that those are my
 concerns that's why I can't support this nomination any other discussion seeing
 none let's vote on the screen and that passes five to two takes us to our first
 public hearing I do believe mr. mayor oh a oh pardon me yeah takes us to a oh
 oh that's because I have to do that twice got it
 this is ID 2 3 1 4 2 4 consider appointing a nominating committee to
 recommend appointees to serve on the Economic Development Partnership Board
 all right good evening Wayne Emerson director of Economic Development today's
 objectives we're going to appoint a nominating committee to recommend
 nominees to serve on the Economic Development Partnership Board or the
 EDP the the ordinance establishing the EDP board requires the City Council to
 appoint three people to serve on the EDP be nominating committee the nominating
 committee then solicits nominations contacts nominees confirms
 eligibility and willingness to serve and presents a slate of appointees for the
 City Council's consideration the nominating committee consists of two
 City Council members one member of the Denton Chamber of Commerce the Denton
 Chamber has already nominated Jill Jester for your consideration and for
 clarification nominating committee members are qualified to serve on the
 EDP board so for your consideration City Council please select and appoint two
 council members along with the chamber representative Jill Jester to the
 nominating committee who currently serves on it currently or lasts for fiscal year
 23 was yourself and councilmember bird okay so I would put those yes yeah I
 would put those three as listed that's my motion mayor pro tem yes the the same
 the same slot the same makeup of the board so that's Jill Jester
 counseling bird myself counselor watts wait yeah are you were you making a
 motion so you need to ask for a second yeah yes but there's people in line to
 speak so I was gonna address that I'll get the second either along the way well
 that that is why I withdrew because I didn't realize that we were not going
 straight to a motion all right I made the motion yeah I thought you were
 through because you didn't want to speak or didn't want a second which is that's
 what I read into that and so I went to the next person that was on their
 screen counselor what just as a point of order are we waiting for a second yes
 there will need to be a second before we vote but I'm fine with taking comments
 it's fine it'll come or won't but I'm not trying to be churlish okay there's
 okay there's okay Robert's Rules of Order and then I hope that we're
 following them right well I'm certain we're okay it's not that big of a deal
 but it to to keep the peace is there a second I'll second thank you very much
 now we have a motion and a second we okay yes sir okay
 counselor watts well and it was just really more clarification because I was
 reading the the question and answers and I think it was a question you had mayor
 pro tem about AO or a comment in fact let me and so I just wanted to
 understand what you were what you were asking there because I couldn't quite
 get it but in in the handout that we got you had stated in AO your question was
 can this item be in consent blah blah it's my understanding that other than
 board member Jill gesture the council's positions haven't been nominated
 correct is that not required to be an individual consideration that's process
 matter and then you said if advanced nominations are being requested then I
 nominate Paul Meltzer and Brian Beck and in parentheses you have one EDP board
 member and one non-member so was that referring to what we're doing here
 tonight as far as the two members is that is that what that was referring to
 mr. mayor yes good yeah that I we had a confusing process okay if they wanted
 advanced nominations like we do for boards and commissions I was throwing to
 out if we were going to do nominations from the dais then which the mayor just
 did then then I'm I'm happy to to entertain that process and okay I just
 thank you I appreciate that thank you that was all mayor okay thank you you
 you're here to speak mayor pro tem all right you you don't wish to speak there
 you go okay any other comments questions seeing none we have a motion by myself
 second by a councilman watts let's vote on the screen
 that passes 7-0 takes us to our public hearings first is item a a ESA
 2 2 0 0 0 hold public hearing consider adoption of ordinance of the city of
 Denton Texas approving an alternative environmentally sensitive area plan for
 a site general located south of us 380 approximately 1,650 feet west of
 intersection of us 380 and Northwestern Boulevard in the city of Denton mayor
 I'm sorry mayor forgot to alert you I'm gonna recuse myself I filled out the
 proper forms with legal it's not because of any of the enumerated conflict of
 interest it's just the potential of a future business relationship with the
 consultant so I just wanted to recuse myself I don't think I was quite
 required to by the board about the ethics code but I want to do that in all
 abundance of caution okay yeah for this item for just this item only that's
 perfect okay thank you and okay got it so let the record reflect that councilman
 watts has recused himself I'll open the public hearing and turn it over to mayor
 council members Christy Upton and I will be presenting alternative ESA plan for
 date and crossing phase three the sites is a approximately can you adjust a
 microphone for me please and thank you sure so this is a site that has some
 wetlands that are located within and adjacent to a floodplain approval of
 this project are herbaceous in nature they mitigate is to excavate the wetland
 material to them and they will be at a growth of that wetland and hope to and
 not hope to the goal is to achieve 60 there were notifications that were made
 commend approval of this thank you mr. mayor I understand it well we're
 essentially playing channel way correct and what's the condition of the new
 percated wetland code does not regulate how the hydrology affects these
 environmentally sensitive areas so that is an answer to the waterway by other
 than remaining on the land that's generally I think it's a it's a good
 plan educate me if we have the knowledge and that is do we do expect this to dry
 out and I mean it's dry right now because of these in terrible temperatures but we
 put it this way for some period of time and as they have been then and they were
 identified years ago so planning for and so we should expect okay we have the
 applicant I am happy to be here with you this is when I'm finished with my
 presentation I do want to just talk about a little bit what this project is
 intended to do and some of the positive things that will come from it we are
 from it is within proximity to to the Peterbilt plant today element of this
 site is to consolidate that are in Denton today that are current store new
 Peterbilt cabs that are coming off of the line so roughly 180 Peterbilt cabs
 come off the line daily and those are then and stacked and then transported by
 active transportation service to Peterbilt this particular site is kind of
 in the middle of an industrial area that will also fairly right off of I-35W I do
 want to go a little bit into the site characteristics but I will be brief and
 this is currently zoned light industrial and there's a significant as you can see
 here the majority of there are a handful that are just to the wedding the removal
 and relocation of those small little wetland areas this site also has
 significant encumbrance of gas wells and pipelines on site as a lie zoning and
 what it is surround of the site overall is 65% our impervious surface of the
 site and we're only proposing a 15,000 square foot building approximately on you
 know a 60 plus acre site stored there's no idling no manufacturing they'll
 simply be stacked and then transported out of the site at the appropriate our
 alternative ESA plan we are proposing to remove and relocate point one nine
 acres and to expand into a location identified in purple here that is point
 three three six acres as we covered it is closer to the creek and we also
 worked very hard with city staff to identify an area where we could do some
 refine excavating and depressions that minimize the impact overall and so the
 the funny shape is to really avoid existing trees and try to minimize the
 impact of what's taking place inside the floodplain area this is a public hearing
 so we did mail a letter to our surrounding property owners we didn't
 host a neighborhood meeting given the location but we did mail a letter and
 invite inquiries and I received two phone calls one of which was a property owner
 to the north of us who was hoping we were making some changes that would
 alleviate some of the floodplain impact on their existing site the other had a
 number of questions but never disclosed if they were a neighbor or the nature of
 those questions but we did make ourselves available to the neighborhood
 and that is all I have I'm gonna invite Justin up here to say a few words and
 then I'm happy to answer any questions thank you okay good evening I just want
 to say that I appreciate this opportunity to allow active to grow
 along with Peterbilt thank you okay thank you and is it is it so about 187 a
 day is that still with their own on pace for yes that's outstanding it's good
 stuff okay questions for the applicant or this is a public hearing so anyone
 that wants to speak and come down and speak and just fill out a card
 afterwards so any speakers seeing none I'll close a public hearing I'll take a
 motion of questions from staff mayor pro tem I'm gonna move approval I think that
 the staff and the applicant have done a good job of trying to mitigate harms and
 I really appreciate that in especially in this industrial area so I appreciate
 the efforts that they went to so I move approval counselor McGee since the only
 truck driver on council couldn't move approval for this I guess I will have to
 second okay motion by mayor pretend pet back second by counselor McGee any other
 discussion that's photo screen and that passes six zero thank you takes us to
 item B CA two three zero zero zero one a hold a public hearing consider adoption
 of ordinance of the city of Denton Texas regarding a comprehensive plan amendment
 on approximately 24 acres from Business Center future land use designation to
 moderate residential future land use approximately 250 feet north of Russell
 Newman Boulevard in the city of Denton and I will open the public hearing and
 for those we have a speaker that I'm going to lead with for those that aren't
 aware I am aware we received an email from one of the P&Z commissioners
 having concern wanting to revisit this prod this project that was brought
 forward so I'm gonna defer to him Commissioner Villarreal if you can come
 up and give your name I want to give you an opportunity to update us on what we
 need to know or what what you would yeah just what you need us to know thank you
 mayor my name is Jordan Villarreal 5500 Delray Drive Denton 76208 on the
 planning and zoning Commissioner for place for I submitted my motion to
 reconsider the three items related to the project early on Monday August 14th
 less than five days since the planning and zoning vote on these items I was
 told by city staff this afternoon that I should come today to convey my motion
 when I was reviewing material for the Mayhill Road multifamily project I had
 some concerns about several items including one the city's own financial
 tool indicating it would be a net loss for the city upwards of eight million
 dollars the impact on green spaces adherence to the city's 2040
 comprehensive plan and the potential security issues for a high density use
 near a federal facility like FEMA I was conflicted at the time but reluctantly
 voted I the more I thought back on these concerns the more I believe I had made
 the wrong decision as it had not even been one week since the vote I contact
 the staff and asked him to reconsider this item I humbly request the council
 remand this back to PNZ and allow us to vote on the reconsideration of the
 pre-agenda items related to this project we owe it to the city and to all
 Dentonites to do our due diligence thank you for this time got it yeah and and I
 wanted to for those of a track along and for you to know Commissioner Villarreal
 the reason to move forward when it was posted and noticed but I think it's
 important that we hear these things and have those addressed and almost expedite
 this conversation versus the process if you don't know would be for it to be go
 back to PNZ it would have to then be a meeting there to decide if it is
 remanded back then if the answer is yes you have to re-notice again have that
 again so you're talking at least a month maybe month and a half before that can
 be heard versus we can take it up today and make a decision today and and so it
 almost expedites your concerns by by in reality it expedites your concerns
 instead of waiting a month to get to a resolution that would still have to come
 to this body we can take it up right now and so just trying to move this faster
 get a decision get a resolution to the applicant faster is the goal so that
 being said open the floor for but but I do want to confirm that these are things
 that were known when PNZ took them up just upon further deliberation thought
 that yes after further deliberation consideration listening to the
 community okay listening to community after you voted that's right okay got it
 and so any questions here at the dais for Commissioner Villarreal Councilman
 Meltzer yeah actually requested to speak before I heard the questions for mr.
 Villarreal I have a question for council just is that actually the process I mean
 if there's a request for reconsideration doesn't that suggest that they have to
 go through that process before it comes back to us
 admittedly a very unique situation which I don't think we've dealt with before as
 a City Council and there's no rules specifically on it so just looking at
 general principles generally yes PNZ has the ability to reconsider however
 council also has the ability and has jurisdiction over a case once PNZ makes
 a recommendation which wrap we're in this unique scenario where there's a
 council meeting before the subsequent PNZ meeting where they would have to
 take up the PNZ consideration under Robert rules that be considered an
 intervening event where you lose authority if something like this happens
 where council actually takes up the matter and votes on it they would lose
 the authority to go back and short due process after hearing the
 reconsideration if you would entertain a motion at this time mayor I would move
 to postpone this item as considered reconsideration heard the matter if they
 choose I noted but I'm not gonna take them before that we take up motions so
 if you have other thoughts or but I'm gonna let other people speak and then
 we'll come I'll come back to you know I'm clear thank you mayor one or my wish
 is to have this item reconsider so we can have that conversation and see what
 the PNZ comes to you after another conversation I would have voted opposite
 of so I'm clear we're we're gonna I have not accepted the the motion you still
 have the floor okay thank you miss me right I I wish someone on the floor I
 think probably to weigh in on the parliamentary procedure if he would
 please I guess to educate you on the parliamentary procedure yeah if you're
 and if we're not going to then I feel compelled to appeal back along with me
 and councilman Meltzer correct me what I'm I'm I'm just a bit confused as what
 is it a hole as to why you are set this but I do other than what I see there you
 know in a more simplistic this until about 1 p.m. or noon today okay once
 again right is planning the zoning commissioners to motion for
 reconsideration okay I'd be eligible to scene to ensure that y'all have a full
 outlook as to why these couple motions here Commission really well so as I
 understand the reason you want reservations about you didn't get a
 chance to void so heard this past week yes before I I know it's not I guess
 madam city manager I know it's not always the case but it's just one
 usually we usually we try to have a gap so there's commissioner being here before
 us is that right he did he did do an email I believe to staff if I'm not
 mistaken or a phone call better to do this publicly let him share what his
 concerns were so everyone can hear that if I may one more question certainly so
 this body voted to take for the applicant so do any any speculative time
 if we don't know it's okay I'm just on the dates we have a council meet or we
 would make we would make notice to go to a subsequent job sometime in October I
 don't know if we'd make this up being in September delay at PNC we we had
 postponed one meets are tied together okay so again it was just an unusual set
 us thank you Scott thank you mr. mayor thank you I'm going to try to be as
 Hillary how you talk about hullabaloo down here for this hullabaloo you
 stated there the issues in your mind and I respect the process of we've got
 motions for reconsideration the problem is this got set on the council agenda on
 friday at five o'clock on monday afternoon once the city council it's I
 mean we had to we had to publish this did we not for public hearing okay so I
 understand it I understand wanting to reconsider what you decided I guess I'm
 just a little disappointed that instead of coming in here and saying hey this
 is an unusual circuit it's unusual I don't think PNC has ever had a motion
 reconsider which doesn't mean you can't do it it's not okay they weren't
 already posted on the so you're familiar with that you're familiar with the
 motion to reconsider and and it's timing and all that and you're familiar
 that once y'all decide something it can get posted on a city council agenda so I
 don't I mean if we're talking about this coming back literally in two months to
 council is what I just heard and so I'm not going to support a motion to the
 latest but I will respect the council's choice in that if that's what the
 council wants to do I think that we need to find a way this is scar tissue that I
 always refer to we need to change our rules that if there's going to be a
 motion to reconsider by the planning and zoning commission we can respect
 that but if it gets posted on a council agenda before that motion to reconsider
 is made I don't think it should be recognized that's not our rule right now
 however if we really wanted to go by the rule of the code and Mac you can correct
 me if I'm wrong because you said this is sort of an intervening act so you're
 right you filed a valid motion to reconsider so on the next PNC meeting it
 could be heard unless now that it's posted on the council agenda and we take
 it up and we make a final decision on it well then the issue becomes moot is that
 correct so we could follow the process but I think the mayor has been
 accommodating to give this council an opportunity to make a decision on your
 request and I know you didn't want to be down here but I'm glad you are here I'm
 glad you decided to come down here and share with us your thoughts I wish you
 didn't perceive it as a hullabaloo situation this is part of the process so
 those are all my comments I will not be supporting a motion to move it to
 postpone this especially if it's going to take two months given the factual
 circumstances simply because if we can we have the mr. city attorney do we have
 the right based upon all the code even the motion reconsider to hear this
 because it was posted on our agenda correct you have jurisdiction once PNC
 made the recommendation it was too thank you mayor that's it if I may comment on
 that certainly so I find it interesting that the main concern today is the
 delay if there was a reconsideration no matter if it was posted or not there
 would have been a same amount of days in between there would have been the same
 delay whether or not it was posted and on council's agenda or if I submitted
 this reconsideration and have not been posted on council's agenda there would
 still be that delay because we would still have to retake the consideration
 up and then we would still have to have that second vote yeah no no no I do
 want you to respond but but I Commissioner Villarreal I will take just
 a little bit of a different look at it and I'm surprised that this body is is
 gonna make a motion to send it back down because here's you know when it goes
 back down it's coming right back up so why don't we make a decision today that
 that's what I don't understand I don't understand the delay to get direction
 from a body that we can either choose to accept or not every week every meeting
 we have every recommendation you have we have the authority and the decision
 making authority to just say okay yes we agree and that's what staff and that's
 everything and so why not instead of making a motion to send it back down to
 the ladies people for two months how about we as elected officials put on our
 big boy pants and make a decision you know it just let's make a decision today
 and either we tell them no or we tell them yes and you can advocate and you
 have your resolution today that's what I'm not making the connection with why
 the desire for the delay not not that there is a delay but then furthermore
 I'll just say this I take no issue with with what you've said thus far but for
 the two things you said of transparency and something that's great but the the
 issue then the other thing is because those aren't accounted for and those are
 your use as possible and again I don't understand why this body is gonna
 entertain gonna decide anyway we need to make a decision today that's the most
 efficient way notice or multiple meetings or any get the motion well that
 truncates discussion not uncomfortable speaking and look into that further
 provide some council members potentially in the implications that would be that
 is correct because of who's requesting it in that relationship or you know
 legal memo reclosed I don't there that says I was concerned and the the city
 manager mentioned consider I just and I haven't heard why so afterwards
 including the city's own fighter to show you we're gonna lose has to the
 city's 2040 comprehensive plan and finally the boat someone whoever was in
 that meeting with FEMA if you may or may not have come out in the presentation I
 don't know you can speak to that so if you can give your name and then had a
 private FEMA reached up and had a two-hour meeting with FEMA and discussed
 security concern behind so we had a very extensive meetings matter of fact there
 was a member of FEMA here also so we've gone through the due process and we've
 been working on this project over a year we've done our yes so we've done a bit
 have we're not not required to have we feel like I understand the concern there
 was some maybe not and brought up a concern considering the amount of money
 and time that these projects take and yes thank you mayor process as we go
 along this is an usual procedure but it you know the fact that that creates a
 little room to do something that isn't really the process I don't think that
 should govern I'm absolutely conscious of the impact called meetings to move
 things along faster I imagine PNC has that as well I also don't feel it's up
 to council to decide why a commissioner moves for reconsideration that's a tool
 available to commissioners we've heard that it's been twice and Commissioner
 Real's term so it's for PNC to vote whether they want I will second and I'll
 hold for discussion I didn't hear a motion but am I so if you'd like me to
 restate I would map it to yes so postpone items BC and D the process of
 reconsideration by PNC has concluded and and incidentally that in no way cuts
 off the opportunity to do special-call meetings to get this whole thing moving
 faster okay councilmember McGee I will I'll second the motion and I'll hold for
 discussion okay discussion councilor Watts your city attorney I mean what I
 heard councilmember Meltzer says that we're doing something outside of our
 process I disagree with that I mean we can recognize the motion to reconsider
 with the Planning and Zoning Commission which is not this body is that correct I
 mean we can say he wants a motion to reconsider but we have that came after
 we I'm gonna just try to put it in jurisdictional terms sure where we we
 obtained jurisdiction for that from the posting on the agenda so there's nothing
 that says a motion to reconsider from the Planning and Zoning Commission
 means that those items automatically get pulled from the City Council agenda I
 mean this has never happened before right all right but I don't know if I
 agree with the assessment that somehow we're trying a different process because
 if we really follow the process the City Council posted an agenda it was posted
 for public hearing we are here moving through the agenda somebody placed a
 motion to reconsider with the Planning and Zoning Commission a commissioner on
 Monday afternoon or Monday morning the day before the meeting three days after
 our legally required posting so unfortunately you do have sort of a
 hierarchy of jurisdictional of jurisdictions so we can still say hey
 you can put it on a motion reconsider on Planning and Zoning but we still also
 have the right to hear it here on City Council so if you want to make a motion
 to postpone I totally get it and if the council votes to do that I respect that
 that that's the process but just because he filed or a motion reconsider was
 filed does not mean that that removes the jurisdiction of this City Council
 once we have a posted agenda as required by law for a public meeting that we
 posted to the public I think probably two weeks ago or at least 14 days ago is
 it 14 days for a public hearing notification okay so what's the scar
 tissue let's make sure moving forward we don't bring something to the City
 Council from P&Z until after that motion to reconsider of time period has expired
 because there is a difference between having a motion to reconsider before the
 jurisdictional limits of the council are enacted and become effective and a
 motion to reconsider without it and you've been entrusted by this body just
 to call meeting lever that we have I mean we meet two Tuesdays a month that
 gives if we have to do something like this I'm happy to support this motion so
 before anything we do and other folks brought this forward and that's I look
 forward for that looking forward to what this means this means councils set the
 take up something and sets the precedent that it meant and I think this this this
 protect that public as not foreclose us from having a thank you mr. Mayor I just
 want to make it remind us that there are many and for whatever reason and while
 we're more information we need this go back this is an element of the process
 where sometimes it you've done that before for recognize that we have we're
 with anything out of ordinary we be the action if this to this or not that is
 the piece of information that we need to make our decision so I don't think it's
 out of the ordinary thank you mr. mayor okay all right we have a motion to
 postpone by councilmember Meltzer seconded by councilmember McGee so to
 vote and the affirmative is to postpone let's vote on the screen
 that motion fails for three I'll call the other items since they were
 referenced item B CA 2 3 0 0 1 a hold a public hearing consider adoption of
 ordinance of the city of Denton Texas regarding a comprehensive plan amendment
 of approximately 24 acres from business center future land use development to
 moderate residential future land use and I'll open that public hearing I'll also
 call item C Z 2 3 0 0 0 6 a hold a public hearing consider adoption of
 ordinance of the city of Denton Texas regarding a change in zoning district and
 use classifications from L light industrial Li district to residential
 7 our 7 district approximately 24 acres and I'll open that public hearing so all
 three are before us now staff you have one presentation or okay got it good
 evening Julie Wyatt principal planner with the city of Denton and I'm
 presenting Mayhill multifamily project it is all one presentation there are
 three requests sir proposal is for a multifamily development it does have
 three requests associated with it a comprehensive plan amendment a zoning a
 rezoning request and then a specific use permit because all of these requests
 build upon each other interrelated I'll just have one presentation and I'll try
 to be brief in that presentation so the subject property is a 24 acre site on
 the west side of Mayhill it includes two subject tracks a 17 acre tract on the
 north of the site and then a secondary tract of seven acres but that is just
 half of a tract it's leaving a remainder seven acre parcel adjacent to Russell
 Newman the site also has two environmentally sensitive areas there's a
 riparian buffer and a water related habitat shown on the map on your screen
 so first the comprehensive plan amendment on the existing the existing
 future land use map is designates the property is business center that's
 intended for employment uses and also supporting commercial uses it does not
 allow single standalone residential uses within that future land use map the
 proposed modification is to change that to moderate residential that would allow
 for residential uses on the property up to 12 dwelling units per acre we did
 analyze the comprehensive plan amendment that proposal with those overall goals
 with the comprehensive plan and it was consistent with with our goals for land
 use as well as the community vision statement and also our housing goals to
 provide additional housing and a variety of housing types within the city we also
 looked at the trends and that's one of the criterion for approval for a
 comprehensive plan amendment the subject property is located on that loop 288
 Mayhill corridor several decades ago the city anticipated there would be more
 employment or industrial type uses in this area since then however most of our
 industrial development really has moved toward our northwest side of town so
 along that I 35 corridor we're seeing that more that industrial development go
 in that direction there's also a little piece of industrial development they're
 on 380 just northeast of the subject property and since that time the loop
 has has developed really is that commercial corridor with those high
 density residential uses in those and those retail and service uses and so
 this request to moderate density residential is just consistent with that
 trend that's been going on and we also looked at the site conditions related to
 the property regarding whether it could develop as within that business center
 designation and things like access and property size environmental features
 particularly that east are running diagonally through that northern tract
 would make a development of industrial type uses somewhat challenging for this
 property so for those reasons staff recommends approval of the
 comprehensive plan amendment I'll be happy to answer pause here and answer
 questions or I could just keep going with the with the rezoning any questions
 for staff at this point mayor pro tem thank you mr. mayor so one of the things
 that in in the in the request to change in a lot of this material was was a
 provided in in all all the items so for you know forgive me and let me know if
 I'm if I'm in the wrong item but I believe the mayor called them all so I
 hope I'm not out of order to to address all and what and one of those is we have
 our financial tool that in commission really real alluded to this in his
 concerns that says this is going to cost you know where's a lot of developments
 we fact we saw one earlier where the financial tool was used that says and
 there was a there's a positive impact on the city can you explain a little bit
 about the the negative impacts for the financial tool and and why go into a
 little more detail why you think well why staff thinks this is justified
 compared to the you know you know similar item we saw earlier today sure
 so that finally that fiscal impact tool is something that the staff with
 information from the applicant puts those inputs in and it looks at things
 like property taxes and sales tax and and employment base and yes that fiscal
 impact tool did indicate that there would be an an eight million dollar
 negative result related to it but it is just one factor that we look at when we
 look at projects because we do have projects that come that wouldn't
 necessarily make money for the for the city but it would meet those other
 criteria associated with the rezoning and so for that matter while that's an
 important metric it is we look at we looked at kind of all of those criteria
 and that's how we analyze these these projects and so they wouldn't always
 necessarily be in that positive column on that fiscal impact I guess I don't
 have I don't have a good feel so do we have a good feel for I don't remember
 one that that had a negative impact before I know our financial tool is new
 new ish do we have prior negative ones before we have and they are often
 related to some residential type uses because those types of uses don't often
 make money for the for a city and so that's why we have had a couple I know
 personally I had a rezoning for a property in on the north side of town
 that was in that negative range and it is just related to that residential use
 versus maybe some other types of uses okay and if you might mr. mayor have
 another question sure okay so one of the things that through there is a is the
 we talked about the two uses on site and and I and it's my understanding that the
 developer plans to expand one of these is beyond or at least retain beyond what
 they're required not expand in the tree code and so we have the additional ESA
 but is it's it's my understanding and in general this is a this is sort of a
 continuous piece of canopy parcels you know sort of over by the shelter across
 288 through this area at the DMV along through into the the drainage as we head
 eastwards is there it feels like we're continuing to fragment what would be
 more of a natural corridor can you or somebody describe a little bit about why
 we think you know additional fragmentation is is either not going to
 happen or why it's justified sure so you are correct there there are those two
 eases and they're related if you can see on your screen it's a riparian buffer
 and that water related habitat as proposed in and it might make more sense
 when we get to the SUP but I can go ahead and start start addressing that now so
 as because it does have an SUP associated with this request they would
 have to develop as they are proposing if they're gonna want to develop that use
 and so I'll just I'll just skip ahead to that that site plan so you'll see here
 we've got that ESA it's it's in that bubbled area that's kind of got that
 hatch mark it's a little lighter color so they are proposing to not impact that
 ESA that that ESA would would remain intact and would actually extend north
 to the adjacent property on there actually they do have a perimeter fence
 but that perimeter fence would not cross that ESA to make sure you've got that
 continuity that that that that fence would would end at that point and go to
 other parts and so we are we don't anticipate a fragmentation of that ESA
 because it is remaining exactly the way it is today and would connect to that
 adjacent ESA to the north okay but can you can you address that that broader
 concern of its if its role and impact in regionally in terms of the the
 environmental impacts and our sort of new element of our comprehensive plan in
 which we are talking about preferred patterns of preservation I want to make
 sure that we don't just nod and smile with this new component of our comp plan
 sure so yes our preferred land preservation map within our comprehensive
 plan really looks at those ESA areas as well as our floodplain area to make sure
 that we're protecting those and that we are looking at those a little harder
 when we have a project come in and so when we have a project come in you know
 for example if they were proposing impacts to that ESA that's where it
 would be a little more challenging because right now they are staying
 outside of the of the limits of that ESA so that they are not impacting within
 the the boundary of that of that preferred land preservation that that
 that stays intact do we have a broader map other way I mean or I can go to our
 interactive maps if you like you can you can plug in 32 17 Deerfield Drive that'll
 put you between that that's the nearest property what we're talking about is
 between Mayhill and loop 288 as a corridor it's thinking yeah no worries I'm
 looking at it 32 you have 32 17 Deerfield Drive that'll get you close on
 the north side I don't south of there yeah I think yeah I'm looking at Google
 Maps that because that's that remnant church I think maybe I'm wrong no you're
 right okay no I think this will work that's good thank you so sorry wrong
 wrong that's a speech that was a speaker before it's Holland drive sorry hey hey
 you hadn't been recognized a speaker so you know there there's the development
 to the west south south of the shelter and there's sort of that their area
 extending across the corridor and yes I recognize that 288 and Mayhill provide
 significant fragmentation but overall you still more maintaining sort of this
 pattern of land preservation that allows for these green space corridors that
 provide value to the community and biological function in the community to
 to sort of have a continuous throw so that you know we're you know there
 there's an opportunity for for you know the development of future wildlife
 corridors or anything else where we're looking at a network effect and so even
 though we have these big these big roads passing through providing fairly you
 know substantial fragmentation if we're then developing to the to the maximum
 extent on those lands and then you don't then it you may you exacerbate the the
 challenges that you've provided to this this pattern and so I guess it is I
 understand that we're being asked to to to you know make a decision on this
 parcel alone but you have to put in larger context along with the comp plan
 I think is that not correct correct absolutely okay in any other succinct
 questions other than statements yes sir if I might I just want to make sure that
 we're just keep keep in context that when staffs making recommendation they're
 looking at the criteria for recommendation and a couple of these
 elements that are mentioned although it's it's understand what we're trying
 to do staff doesn't have that luxury of you know because we have it on the
 preferred preservation plan that's not a regulatory document just like the future
 land use map is not a regulatory document so staffs making reckon
 recommendation on the elements in which we have that authority to do so just
 want to make sure we temper that certainly yes no thank you for that and
 so again do we any other questions that that's what I'm trying to get to not
 statements at this face okay all right all right so we'll just go over to the
 zoning case and I promise I won't be I won't be repetitive excuse me so the
 existing zoning on the property is light industrial district that allows
 commercial uses light industrial uses low-impact manufacturing warehousing it
 is consistent with that existing future land use map it's also consistent to
 that with the Li to them to the south however it could create impacts to those
 residential residentially zoned properties and neighborhoods to the
 north you've got our four to the north of the subject property located right
 here they are proposing our seven district that allows for a variety of
 housing types including single-family all the way to multifamily with an
 approved specific use permit this is consistent with the proposed future land
 use map I mean it would potentially create that bridge that transitional
 area between the r4 and the residential neighborhoods to the north and the light
 industrial that has centered along Russell Newman we also look at impacts to
 surrounding the surrounding area with any rezoning on that are seven we don't
 anticipate any negative impacts to their residential properties to the north and
 we also don't anticipate any impacts to the property to the south as any
 development to the property the South would have to follow all of our
 development and landscaping and buffering requirements therefore for
 these reasons staff recommends approval of the rezoning request and I will be
 happy to answer any questions regarding this or move on to their requested SUP
 let's just move on yeah all right and finally the specific use permit so they
 are proposing 281 multifamily dwellings in a variety of types they have two
 typical garden style apartment buildings on the west side and on the south side
 and then the the horizontal multifamily cottages we've been seeing quite a few
 of those throughout the site you could see on on your screen that there those
 buildings are arranged in a compact grid type pattern with the with the
 pedestrian trails throughout the site also sort of hugging that ESA or moving
 around that ESA and kind of a u-shape pattern and then they do have proposed
 common areas if you if you notice on the aerial there's quite a quite a bit of
 mature trees on the west side of the property so we we worked with them and
 they are preserving those those trees along the west side of the property
 between the West property line and the and and the that West building in the
 parking area they're also putting that ESA area along with their retention pond
 in a common area lot there's also dog park and other amenities so meeting our
 minimum open space requirements so staff recommends approval of the request is we
 don't anticipate negative impacts with the surrounding property it complies
 with the criteria for approval but as with all SUPs we have conditions that we
 are proposing I won't read these to you but they are our kind of our typical
 SUP conditions and that it allows staff to to approve minor changes five percent
 increase in the number of dwelling units or associated parking some minor changes
 to maybe building placement or plant selection anything more major than
 something like that would have to go back to to council for for approval we
 are also proposing that they provide two pedestrian gates to Mayhill to connect
 to that public sidewalk that their tree preservation because they are preserving
 that treed area on the west side that it can't go below 25 percent of the onsite
 inches our code allows developments to go down to 20 percent we wanted to put
 that threshold in there to make sure that that tree stand stays as much as
 possible and then we also because the ESA is an important part of this site
 and that approval of the SUP would not constitute any approval for impacts to
 that ESA so they could not do any grading or clearing any of that activity
 within the ESA if they did want to do that they would have to come back for
 approval of an alternative ESA plan so with that staff recommends approval of
 that SUP public outreach was sent out I received one in favor it's the property
 to the south of the site staff recommends approval of all three requests
 with those conditions on the SUP it also did go to the planning and zoning
 Commission last week they also recommended approval six to zero with
 staffs conditions on that SUP I will be happy to answer any questions and the
 applicant is here with a little more detailed presentation okay so let me get
 there sorry any questions for staff my screens come back up bear with me
 Councilor Watts yeah just just to make sure I heard discreet so there's 24
 acres here yes sir and was it 281 units okay that's eight units per acre am I
 as based on at least the 24 divided by 281 divided by 24 is yeah yeah it's so
 which is fairly low density when it comes to multifamily and also because
 they're providing some horizontal structures which they could have you
 know decided to do something different so yeah I've heard a lot about this
 financial impact study so I want to make sure I understood what you said earlier
 and that is if if we use that as a major determining factor in most of our
 residential developments all right our single-family that's it single family
 typically does not quote unquote pay for itself over time based upon all those
 things I mean I mean it probably every project is different right residential
 is one of those that often doesn't get to that no positive number no no I
 understand that and so that's not the only criteria in fact if we look at
 this eight million dollars sounds like a heck of a lot of money it does it's
 spread out over 40 years which is $200,000 a year and I've asked for I mean
 apparently we proved this approved this so I want to see the formula on how this
 is calculated later on somewhere down the line because these are all
 assumptions that we make and this is a I think I calculated based upon what the
 city I'm sorry mayor it's not a question I just need to get this out and I'll be
 quiet the tax revenue was estimated at 13 million and some odd dollars a year I
 mean over the 40 years that's about three hundred fifty thousand dollars a
 year at our current tax rate at our current tax rate that would be almost a
 sixty fifty to sixty million dollar assessed value project price to get that
 so I think we need to make sure that if we're gonna if we're gonna all of a
 sudden decide we're deciding projects on that financial statement or on that you
 know financial impact statement number one we didn't even include the utilities
 and that is just general fund but it shows it shows utility revenue and so if
 we're gonna start doing that I think for those who don't want growth and then
 that's what it will achieve because most it'll all be industrial it'll all be you
 know other kinds of commercial because residential I can guarantee you does not
 do it so I just wanted to make sure that we put that piece of information in
 context 40 years is a long time and a lot of things change so thank you
 Councilman Burke I guess I'm going along with the quality of life piece here I
 know that there are a lot of there's a lot of things happening here and I do
 understand that our city is behind on units that's needed there are people
 that want to move into spaces where there's no space I am understanding that
 there is a big pushback on multifamily facilities here because there are some
 people that just don't want an apartment complex next to their house but by my
 question right now and what I didn't get or feel from this particular project is
 this a is this a family-oriented project or is this for for professionals or is a
 student driven how how are we looking at this project applicant is here and he
 may be better that'll be nice to answer that sorry because we have students we
 have parents with children we have single professionals and I know that we
 were directing some housing towards that area I personally would appreciate it if
 we're gonna put a multifamily a multiplex here in the city that it gives
 opportunities for children to live in or under a roof can can you all come up and
 and give me some more information about that yeah you can come on up and you can
 just do your let's just go to the presentation yeah yeah go ahead and get
 started there's some other questions in queue but it'll just be good to have you
 up here and between the two of y'all you can field all the questions I just feel
 like when I drive down the road and I see a large facility coming up that I
 know that there's some kids that have a roof over their head right absolutely
 absolutely give your name and then yes I think you have 20 minutes and they'll
 set the timer okay good evening Thomas Fletcher with Kim Lee Horn 61 61 Parkway
 Frisco Texas good evening mayor and council members I appreciate the
 opportunity I will try and address the questions that I've heard one second can
 we reset that timer for 20 minutes no it's 20 minutes right if there's all
 right yeah for the applicant if you could help we'll get it go ahead all
 right good evening Thomas Fletcher I have a brief presentation for you and
 hopefully one of the things I want to do tonight is try and answer some of the
 questions and then also the concerns I've had from Commissioner Villarreal
 just kind of touching base on your question initially as that way you can
 kind of think about it this isn't it's not marketed towards student housing it
 is more family oriented just to give you an idea within the SUP there's 55% one
 bedroom 38% two bedroom and about 8% or seven and a half percent that are three
 bedroom as as it was mentioned here's the location of the site you can kind of
 see there's residential that's to the north there's residential that's to the
 both the east and west you have a little bit of industrial to the south as Julie
 had mentioned in her presentation the reason or part of the request for
 support of the comprehensive plan amendment is because that industrial
 corridor is really moved to the I-35 380 corridor whereas the loop 288 area has
 really been more of a retail commercial living center type area and in our
 requests supports that really want to talk about kind of project process and
 how we've gotten here because this is a because it includes the comprehensive
 plan amendment the zoning and the SUP we have gone through a lot of different
 processes and a lot of applications before we've gotten to this point
 we've gone out and done a tree survey because of the high density or the
 amount of trees on the side it was important for us to go out and do an
 assessment of the trees tag all of the trees survey all the trees understand
 where they're located understand what type of trees the health of the trees so
 that as we develop this plan we could design our plan around those trees
 meeting the preservation requirements and then also incorporating that into
 the design we also did the ESA assessment that was approved by the city
 in January of 2023 as it was mentioned there's riparian buffer and water
 habitat we are proposing to preserve a hundred percent of that ESA we're not
 proposing any impact to that ESA obviously we'll have to go through the
 construction plan process to show that as we design it we're not providing any
 impacts but we've developed the site plan around that ESA so that we can
 incorporate it and make that a advantage or a you know a complement to the
 overall development whereas if you look at industrial development typically what
 you're seeing is building rooftop parking you're not seeing a lot of tree
 preservation you're not seeing a lot of of those natural features that get
 incorporated into a site we did have a neighborhood meeting on June 19th we did
 have some neighbors surrounding neighbors attend that we didn't hear any
 concerns for them we were able to answer all their questions with regard to the
 project and and we got positive feedback from that there was an in-person meeting
 with FEMA on August 7th as you had heard earlier that was a good meeting there
 was good discussion there was open dialogue about their concerns and some
 of the things that we could do to address those concerns with lighting it
 was even the the offer was made by the developer to allow FEMA to place
 security cameras that would look into that open space area if there was
 concerns there for you know for security purposes we are in the process of
 working on our downstream assessment so that's our next step in the process the
 site plan there really when we're looking at this the there's R4 to the
 north of us but there is an approved SUP on that R4 for townhomes so when we
 looked at the layout with the cottages and with the multifamily we really tried
 to use the garden style multifamily buildings to buffer the surrounding
 light industrial uses and then use the cottages to kind of transition into the
 residential to the north where those townhomes have an approved preliminary
 plot I know that that project hasn't moved forward with construction plans
 but it does have an approved SUP and preliminary plot there are two
 multifamily buildings there's 129 proposed cottages went through the
 different unit counts for the different bedroom sizes there will be a clubhouse
 and pool it is a nice resort style pool there will be a lot of amenities for
 this development there's internal trails there's significant number of trails
 those trails are going through those treed areas so that the residents in
 this community will feel a sense of community that they'll get to enjoy
 those trees those open spaces the ESA's so we did feel like that was important
 to incorporate that into the development it will be gated with the exception that
 the perimeter fencing will stop at the ESA but the entries into the community
 will be gated controlled controlled access and the retention pond will be a
 water quality pond that will hold water so it will be an amenity to the
 development as well so that's adding another environmental aspect to the
 project adjacent to that adjacent to that ESA so meeting the city of Denton's
 water quality requirements we've incorporated a wet pond or retention pond
 so that prior to any discharges into that ESA that riparian buffer that will
 go through that water quality process so that that water is treated prior to
 discharge again here's the overall layout you can see the the open space
 that is incorporated within the development there's a lot of green
 space there will be foundational plantings as if it was a you know with
 typical single-family detached in addition to the trees that are being
 planted there's also going to be shrubs ground covers flowers those types of
 things as well there there is a there's on the garden style multifamily there's
 a three-story building and there's a two three split there is quite a bit of
 topography on the site so another benefit of multifamily in the cottages
 is it allows you to design and develop around the topography whereas that's a
 little more challenging with light industrial so the two three split split
 will have two floors on the high side three floors on the bottom side so it's
 it's going to create some really nice natural characteristic to the overall
 layout of the development there's a difference you can see here on the top
 is the the two-story and on the bottom that's the same building where you have
 the three-story and we're using a variety of materials as well to kind of
 accent those those buildings and create a real nice high quality look for the
 development here are some of the renderings of the cottages here's the
 resort style pool also showing the landscaping it would also have the fence
 along May Hill and the access gates as city staff recommended in their
 conditions so just kind of going back through the impact on environmental
 obviously the proposed development for this residential use is going to have
 less impact than an industrial development would we're able to
 incorporate those riparian areas those trees into the development into the
 community and and and preserve those with the surrounding residential uses
 the future town homes to the north the existing residential the future
 residential to the east we do feel like it is compatible with the surrounding
 uses that was one of the the comments and then there was the question about
 security adjacent our meeting with FEMA we talked about ways lighting the walkways
 security cameras it was even mentioned that having sprinklers with spray heads
 that shoot a good distance if to kind of keep people moving and not kind of
 congregating in that back area was also a suggestion that was made so there was
 just open dialogue with FEMA about ways that we can incorporate elements into
 the design to potentially help address any any security issues that's really
 the presentation I have and I would be happy to stand for any questions I think
 Lee was going to may want to speak on one of the items as well did you want to
 do that now yeah we'll have we'll have that certainly councilman Burke for
 being helpful so what I didn't hear was something in regards to some type of
 child activity I know that we do a lot of dog parks but do we ever do anything
 in regards to children parks and basketball courts and pickleball and and
 something like that that would probably keep our kids more safer if we would
 have that kind of thing at home rather than having them to walk down the street
 around the corner to to the next you know what I'm talking about so are you
 all thinking along the lines of the in care of kids they may live there yeah
 and I think the first of all the with the community being gated it provides
 that sense of security and protection for families and kids the clubhouse with
 the pool their outdoor areas there's being bag toss areas this community this
 community would have a dog park there is an area that we have designated for a
 dog park there the trails would be open and available I'm not sure I don't
 believe and I would let Lee speak to it is regarding any specific type of play
 equipment that has been specified for the development thank you miss Burr for
 asking those questions if you notice on our site plan we have intentionally left
 some open spaces outside and if you look at I can't really point on this but if
 you look next to the first multifamily building there's some open spaces there
 open spaces just to the south of that and then just to the north of that
 there's some open spaces and we had considered a playground not pickleball
 or basketball but those are some things that we've talked about we didn't show
 them on our site plan but in internally with our property management group those
 are some things we have considered and we'll definitely consider it now that
 you brought it up up the street and around a corner yeah now you know it
 would be a way for a mom to have to walk her child to go in place somewhere
 absolutely so if you want what please keep that in mind I don't know what kind
 of change but we've left open space for those kind of things intentionally so
 we'll we'll absolutely get something please do that and I think that's any
 other questions for me while I'm here we did talk a little bit about the
 financial impact I heard that brought up I'm not sure where the 8 million dollar
 number exactly came from so I probably need to understand where that came from
 but owning a considerable amount of multifamily and didn't and owning a
 considerable amount of industrial and didn't I can I can tell you I can run
 the numbers very quickly and tell you that the property tax alone on the
 multifamily the value will be more than the industrial now we're not taking in
 consideration some other things some you know we'll only create about only I say
 we'll create about ten jobs with this multifamily project on site management
 on site porters on site maintenance because that's why this project takes
 about the size so there will be jobs created here but I know the value of
 what will be on the ground will be approximately 65 million dollars for
 this particular project you go take a value of 200,000 square foot industrial
 building that's about 20 million dollars about a hundred dollars a foot so the
 property value alone that's not taking an inventory tax so I want to be clear
 I'm not running the whole picture here but just the property value and school
 taxes alone will be much more within a multifamily development rather than
 industrial okay all right we have a few questions to you mayor Pro Tem questions
 yes Lee who owns the property to the south do you guys on that I know that's
 not a consideration but yes yes the the partnership group owns that and the
 reason we chose to leave it Li is because it faced Russell Newman Boulevard
 and we just thought that would be a good transition you know offer Russell
 Newman to transition to the large buildings and then step it down as it
 goes across the side now I appreciate that I guess I'm trying to weigh that
 the concerns I I know that you know I'm seen as the big tree-hugging boogie
 monster on this one but but the the issue is I I would have loved to have
 seen you move have a concept site plan to the south that actually three stories
 four stories higher densities that make it pencil even easier and yet maintain
 that through corridor to the north and along with the ESA changes and and so
 develop that in a concert that actually increases the density provides for more
 units it is it is going into the so my question is yeah thank you mr. mayor for
 cautioning me but my question you Lee is is what would you consider a plan in
 which you moved some of this to the south and at a higher density so the
 issue with that so you know you try to guess you know when you when you try to
 get these projects approved you really try to think through go okay what's
 what's how do we get this project successfully zoned right because we know
 you know we spend about two hundred twenty five thousand dollars to get to
 this point with all of our studies and those things so you know we try to guess
 right well how does this overall plan work how do we get these transitions and
 so in our mind I'm not answering your question directly but I will in in our
 mind is we go okay we already have a thoroughfare street here so let's try to
 keep that consistent with lab and all across the street with the rust with the
 old Russell Newman building that's the furniture store and and having the
 stoplight basically given a hard corner there at Russell Newman and Mayhill so
 as we thought through it we thought with that commercial corridor there we should
 leave that to be an industrial or it could be office or it could be and in
 discussing with FEMA you know one question they asked us if we were going
 to leave that so they could maybe purchase that in the future or relocate
 something that they have on site and expand their existing building so when
 we're going through the process that be honest with you that wasn't even a
 thought we were trying to think how do we make this a transitional site and we
 were trying to intentionally leave that so I actually hadn't thought about it
 the only the only one thing that I can think that could be a little bit of an
 issue if you know you expanded a public road through there it loses some of the
 security of our site and we all know y'all seen budgets what public roads
 cost today so a lot of times it can be cost-prohibitive to develop a site in
 today's world that's if you notice that's why we did cluster the density as
 much as we could to the middle to try to preserve as much as possible so I don't
 know if I answered your question or not but that's that was our mindset of how we
 got there no you addressed my question I appreciate that I guess I'll just say
 for you and any of your cohort out there you know I know about anybody else but I
 clearly value the diminishing resources of the green space and trees and yet I
 will you know vote to reduce parking vote to increase density vote to all
 kinds of things that will make it pencil in order to not have a resource that can
 never come back go away and I would do respect that obviously you know I think
 we think about that as we go through these things and I appreciate that the
 that is one reason we did want to go to residential rather than industrial
 because it would have had a much greater impact on those resources than the
 residential because we were able to split that back building and make that
 the retaining wall and build that in the building to be able to leave that tree
 stand behind FEMA that's and that's a much more expensive construction because
 now I got to build a head wall all the way through there so we did take that
 into consideration and really try to design our site plan as it flowed across
 the site to do those things and I hope I hope that's recognized it's kind of hard
 to explain on a flat piece of paper but when we're looking at it three
 dimension in the CAD you can see I appreciate that thank you thank you
 customer McGee thank you mayor and Mayor Pro Tem I appreciate I appreciate those
 cotton those thoughts and sentiments at the end though so just a couple quick
 questions traffic studying yes it's been completed and approved by the city did
 you reached out to the area schools to make sure that can absorb the impact we
 have not reached out to any school ISDs in that area are you is that something
 you're going to be going to be doing absolutely I can reach out the
 superintendent I serve on a few boards with him and see what team he would like
 us to to meet with I appreciate that I am I appreciate your due diligence and
 and the public means and meeting with FEMA going to step in step and in the
 right direction above and beyond you've done that for every project since I've
 been on council so I thank you for your commitment to the community thank you
 mayor alright counselor Meltzer yeah not not a question I will say I have a
 question for staff I will say I appreciate the the whole effort to
 provide housing while keeping it as green as possible within that site my
 question for staff is in that economic impact calculation does it first of all
 preface it by saying I've heard for years that that residential is you know
 negative to city government but is that only looking at property tax or does it
 take into account that when new people come in they buy things and they
 generate sales tax too so our fiscal impact tool is a is a pretty big machine
 that has the inputs and it does take into account sales tax capture because
 of those employees so it does try to take in account I probably can't account
 for every variable but it but it does look at that okay understood thank you
 okay any other questions mayor can I mention one thing before we close here
 certainly you know these planners have to go through and deal with developers
 on a day-to-day basis and there's a lot of hard conversations that have to go
 into these projects as we're laying them out working through all this and Julie
 this project's been going on a while and I just want to give her thank you
 because she has gone through you know with the ESA with the traffic and with
 the trees she has gone above and beyond and had every hard come or as many hard
 conversations as we could think of before we got here so I just like to
 compliment her on how she handled this project and how she prepared for it it
 was probably one of the better presentations I've ever seen in a very
 complicated project so I think it'd be appropriate for everybody say thank you
 because I think yeah that's good thank you very much I appreciate the the
 comment and it's well overseas thank you very much I appreciate that and I
 appreciate you saying so and I don't see any other questions this is a public
 hearing anyone is welcome to speak just if you've not obviously I don't have any
 blue cards so you can fill out a blue blue card after you spoke but please
 it's public hearing by all means anyone's welcome to speak seeing no
 sudden movements I'll close the public hearing for all three I'll take we'll
 have to vote individually I'll just say I think most of the questions have been
 asked and answered I do want to understand one thing though that housing
 that the houses to the north the the map says r4 I mean those are really then it
 looks more like r7 on the ground am I I just want to make sure I understand what
 I'm looking at
 yeah and I know it says r4 there but if you go back to the to the earlier slide
 you see the the picture yeah those that's r4 I think it is a combination of
 r4 and there's a little bit of r6 on the north side if you can go back to the
 picture because that's right by the street yes sir yes so but even if you
 come down that it there all look like they're spaced the same my eyes are just
 playing tricks on me well it was developed under a previous code and I
 don't know specifically on this project but if y'all recall the 2002 code had a
 maximum density and not a minimum lot size that could be why those densities
 are a little different and that might be why those lots look smaller yeah that
 may be something in the future we want to because we're saying you know we we
 want to sync up what's on the ground with what's coming and that's not
 intuitive to say there was a change at some point right but that yeah I'd be
 shocked if that's r4 on the ground yeah as we understand right so I think it's
 important to note because we're talking to our seven next to our seven with
 green space between it that's different than our four to the north our seven to
 the south you know it just it presents different absolutely yes so okay thank
 you Councilor Watts so we're taking these individually yes okay so we're on
 item item B yes all right yeah I'll make a motion to approve and I think staff had
 some recommendations did y'all have some recommending I thought you said you had
 some but you weren't gonna okay just okay as presented by staff make a
 motion as presented by staff okay Councilor McGee second okay motion by
 Councilmember Watts second by Councilmember McGee this is item B alone
 comments mayor pro tem thank you mr. mayor I appreciate this and to the
 people watching the developer and Lee and I appreciate that I heard the
 concerns I respect that y'all doing your part and and I don't know how the vote
 is gonna go but I think on this first one you know I got to stick to my
 principles of holding to the sort of you know what we put in the plan the
 objections that I raised I'm gonna tell you right now I'm getting a sense that
 from the questions it's not gonna go my way and that is not a dig against you as
 a developer or anything it is just that I'm trying to follow what I think is the
 right course of action for the city of Denton so I appreciate that thank you
 everyone for indulging me all right any other comments seeing none this vote on
 the screen that passes 6-1 takes us to item C I'll take a motion Councilor
 Watts so move Councilor McGee second any discussion seeing none this vote on the
 screen that pass is 7-0 takes us to item D Councilor Watts so move on item D for
 approval thank you is there a second that was me Councilor McGee so all right
 motion by Councilor Watts second by Councilor McGee let him catch up there
 we go any other discussion let's vote on the screen
 Councilor Burke you you good oh no worries just want to make sure it's all
 good that passes 7-0 good luck with your project thank you thank you everyone for
 the good conversation important takes us to item E Z 2 3 0 0 0 7 B hold a public
 hearing and consider adoption of ordinance of the city of Denton Texas
 regarding a change in the zoning district and use classifications from
 residential to district to mix use it district on approximately 1.73 acres
 good evening mayor and members of council Sean Jacobson associate planner
 here to present a request for rezoning from a residential to district to a
 mixed-use neighborhood zoning district 1.73 acres this request is consistent
 with the future land use designation for the property and does forward the goals
 of our comprehensive plan there have been significant changes in the area
 around this property that warn of rezoning this request for a zoning
 change does align with all of our approval criteria for a zoning change
 standard public notification resulted in three responses two in favor one in
 opposition the one response in opposition was for a property that made
 up more than 20 percent of the 200-foot buffer and that does trigger the
 supermajority requirement and all those letters were provided in your backup
 for your review with that planning and zoning Commission and staff recommend
 approval and I'll be happy to stand for any questions all right questions for
 staff mayor Pro Tem thank you I appreciate that mr. I don't have a so
 much heartburn with the actual project but the question that is sent in to
 staff is in general we when we have a designation a future land use map a
 future land use designation of neighborhood mixed use that is a
 certain kind and style of density of commercial retail and neighborhood all
 mixed together to provide that sort of you know neighborhood with amenities
 and services versus a straight-up residential designation and my concern
 is if we and when we're doing our development planning and in order to not
 pontificate as I can already feel the mayor so thank you for thinking that at
 me mr. mayor but then my question is how does it affect our planning if only one
 type of a mixed-use zone goes into that zone how does that impact our planning
 if only residential goes into a mixed-use or if only retail goes into a
 mixed-use how does we we're actually seeing this in razor ranch where we're
 getting a lot more residential than the retail that was initially envisioned so
 how does that affect our goals and plans on those sites of designations thank you
 for that question and that's a great question I will say that the MN zoning
 actually does and that's all we can bring before you right now is simply that
 zoning change and that zoning district does actually allow for a range of uses
 both residential and commercial and so to your point we don't know necessarily
 how this will develop the developer may have an intent but the zoning that's
 being requested does actually allow for a range of uses to be developed on this
 property which could be any mix of things I will also note that while it
 does call for a mix of uses a residential use and a mix of residential uses is
 expected to be primary within that future land use designation explanation
 but again and then zoning allows for that range of uses and I think that
 really is consistent with the future land use map to have a zoning district
 that does allow a range of uses just as the future land use district calls for
 okay yeah I appreciate that I'm not sure exactly this is not a dig exactly it
 just is my I guess my question but I because I don't really have a heartburn
 with this one particular development I'll just leave it there but I will I
 will encourage us if we're gonna plan for a zone that we we try to achieve
 that zone is rather than let it wobble a lot but thank you okay
 councillor McGee thank mr. mayor I would like to ask you without giving the
 person's name speak to the person speak about the person who voiced the letter
 in opposition yeah absolutely I mean do you remember off top your head you need
 me to read the comment no no the neighbor was concerned that there was
 not a plan provided for the property and upon receiving that response the
 developer reached out to the neighbor and provided the concept plan that they
 had submitted when they saw her request thanks John thank you thank you Sean
 I'll just say I have a hard time with this one just and so I can only get on
 board if there's a if there's a stipulation that it's not gonna be
 multifamily I just we have it's surrounded by for rent cottage homes
 single-family homes there's just not around there there's just the I just
 think it's too detached on a main thoroughfare I take mayor Pro Tem's
 point that when I envisioned Bonnie Bray and it being expanded and there's no
 retail now if you're telling me there's some retail at the bottom I can probably
 get on board with reconsidering my approach to that because now I see our
 families at Northlake parks and instead of going all the way to raise a ranch
 they're coming straight across the street and buying from 7-eleven buying
 from you know howdy duty not to give anybody any plugs it's something like
 that that now they're not driving all now they're not driving we're taking
 traffic away from raise a ranch we're serving a community apartment complex to
 the north the high school you know those sort of things if it plugs into the to
 the need of that area kind of that needs analysis in my mind so I just want to be
 full fully transparent I'll hang up and listen but that's that that's the the
 barrier I'm having a hard time getting across so I'm fine with the MN I take
 it that it's just straight zoning but for me if the motion doesn't have a
 prohibition on multifamily straight up then then I'm gonna have a hard time
 getting there so any other questions for staff I'll open the public hearing this
 is a public hearing anyone can speak just need to speak and fill out a card
 afterwards but counselor Watts okay any public speakers anyone care to speak no
 sudden movements I'll close a public hearing I'll take a motion or comment
 council what yeah just a couple questions so I understand your concerns
 mayor on the PD this right behind the station 5 access now they're under
 construction I believe yes sir and what is that the PD if I'm
 remember correctly that is going to be single sorry behind I want to make sure
 I'm talking about the right property yes it's yes right it's sort of almost
 is behind doesn't quite wrap around station 5 it's right there it looks
 like they're building some type of multifamily just because of the density
 of the the rough-in plumbing and foundations and things that yes I believe
 that to be the case okay all right what can I if can I orient with you sure to
 the are we talking about to the east no it's on the east of Bonnie Bray is right
 behind it's north of the fire station number 5 yeah on the east side of Bonnie
 Bray and yeah going heading east and north yeah okay yeah yeah yeah those
 those are cottage homes though yeah I don't know are they I mean I yeah I
 don't know that's why I asked but that's okay I mean there's something going in
 there that's either like you said cottage homes or some type of residential
 component yes so I guess and this is this is where you know we've had this
 discussion before and it does make it complicated but I know that when we talk
 about coming before for straight say straight zoning I know mayor you
 mentioned that if it doesn't have some condition on it that you're gonna
 struggle to support it so my question becomes to the city attorney because I
 know PD has been sort of used in the pet or actually PD light or something like
 that has been used to try to provide some type of overlay capability so and
 and this coming before us is a straight rezoning do we have the ability to put
 in those kinds of conditions with sort of how we've determined the straight
 zoning cases would would go I mean because there's sometimes some confusion
 about that I mean because they don't present concept plans anymore which they
 used to which is okay that's what we decided at least that I mean they do but
 it's not necessarily they're not held to it so help me understand that yeah I
 mean you just have to help me because I wasn't as closely involved on the PD
 light but this is a straight zoning you can't add a condition to a straight
 zoning so we'd have to do this or change it to a PD light if you wanted to add
 some conditions to it where I'm trying to look up and I'm trying to stay with
 you is what that process involves whether that can be done on the fly or
 whether we need to do some additional reposting in order to allow the council
 the ability to do that that's the part I'm trying to track right now I'll let
 you know when I find out okay and mayor if I could just follow up on that sure
 so you said that a concept plan was submitted to the neighbor who expressed
 opposition that does trigger the super majority yes okay did I miss that in the
 backup do we do we have the concept plan in the backup no because we're not held
 to that we generally have not okay that and I don't disagree with that are you
 able to share with us at least your observation of what was submitted and
 the only reason I say this understanding nobody's held to it there's nothing that
 but I think it's just I mean unless somebody's really telling somebody a
 bill of goods trying to sell them a bill of goods that they've told him in at
 least in good faith what may be out there was it was it and it's in a big
 site so you're not gonna get a whole lot on here I mean unless you go four or
 five stories if it's multifamily yeah so if you'll note at the property just to
 the south of that is also I'm sorry it's not also a zoned MN and that is owned by
 the same property owner as the property that is requesting and so the proposal
 is for those two sites okay to be developed together which was part of the
 reason staff as looking at this looked at and said we have him in here a minor
 addition of this okay so MN is already there yes so we could technically say
 no to this but they could still take the rest of the MN and put whatever is
 allowed under that zoning classification yes okay thank you appreciate thank you
 mayor thank you good questions council councilman Meltzer
 thank you I'm just trying to get a clear fix on where this is and see if I'm
 mistaken this is this is at Windsor and Monty
 Bray yes sir and it shows
 that's like more or less opposite where the fire station is yes sir okay yes
 I think it is isn't there a whole lot of multifamily on the west side of Bonnie
 Bray south of Windsor between Windsor and University yes there has been a
 significant amount of multifamily development in that area because I you
 know I'm looking at that well I guess it's the comprehensive plan is showing
 green you know along there I don't know how that happened let's say but I mean in
 terms of whether it fits or not I guess I'm having a little bit of cognitive
 dissonance between two things one is this is shown as all green along there
 but it looks like all multifamily to me when I drive on it and the second thing
 is the idea that it you know if you forget about that the idea that wouldn't
 fit I mean it seems it seems like it exactly fits at least what I see yeah
 when staff was analyzing this our consideration was that this is an area
 where we've had significant multifamily development in an area where we're going
 to have expanded pedestrian capacity with the widening Bonnie Bray that would
 really enable access for all those similar uses to get down to Razor Ranch
 and that is kind of the pattern of development as you can see up to about
 where the high school is it does still leave me a little bit wondering well
 while I'm like square on that how did that all that end up happening with the
 west side of Bonnie Bray you know being coded as agricultural is that what the
 green is the east side of the west side the west side I'm sorry the west side is
 that is the park yeah yeah no no no no west side where is this upside down sorry
 I say that west side pink that's that is a neighborhood mixed use yeah south of
 Windsor right which is it's just yeah it's just a neighboring area so it's not
 directly germane other than it goes to like you know is consistent with the
 surrounding area but it's you know it's green on this map yes looks like it to
 me anyway when I drive by there so yeah that's actually a function of just the
 fact that in the future land use map colors bleed over a little bit to the
 side we make the boundaries a little bit fuzzy and so we see that so when you
 look at a property if you may have a small amount of it that bleeds over what
 we're looking at what is the majority of that designation this is a coloring
 issue Wow okay all right I can deal with that but in any
 event thank you you've confirmed my perception that this is an area that's
 pretty solid multifamily right nearby well thanks I have a question Sean can
 you pull up the Google Maps because I disagree with that assessment
 multifamily by name certainly exactly yeah it's it there's no apartments
 there none so you're you what come on pull up Google Maps that'll help you
 there there there because I was at the ribbon cutting for all those things
 there's single-family homes for rent and that's the difference right it's you
 pointed out the exact opposite of what you were trying to do is there's no
 apartments there they're all across the street further to the south it's
 surrounded by single-family for rent and it may not be updated but all but
 there's no multifamily traditional apartments in that area but for on I-35
 they're not there they would be built behind so immaculate conceptions on the
 corner and and then you would have those those spaces the green spaces
 underneath the church are all for rent there's a villages raise a ranch or
 something like that and their full service home cottages for rent there's
 no multifamily as proposed in that area so thank you it didn't pull up on there
 I have it on mine people can look at it on our I just didn't want to I just
 didn't want people to think that I misrepresented something it's spot-on
 with with there's no apartments there so just wanted to clarify that for the
 record and mayor will note that the applicant is here if we have specific
 questions you'd like sure so any any do we have any other questions for staff
 okay then this is a public hearing if no just answer the council member was this
 question about there is a PD overlay that was recently adopted which allows
 council to make amendments in this type of situation where there's a straight
 zoning request to address compatibility or other concerns and you could move to
 have that PD overlay done right now at the time one caveat to that has to be
 less intense which I believe taking away multifamily would be less intense than
 these what was notified for this which is the MN district so all that to say yes
 the City Council can make a condition on this request you'd have to change it to
 a request a motion to approve a PD overlay on the property for the
 underlying use without multifamily okay can I follow up on that mayor yes sir
 okay I don't know what you meant when you said if it's less than ten what was
 that less intense so we gave notice to the whole world less intense less intense
 okay yeah so I think this happened once before before we had this where we were
 going to try to approve something that wasn't asked for in other words there's
 MN zoning request and if we say hey you've got to you know we're gonna prove
 it for PD that the applicant now I'm not sure that the applicant would do this
 but that the applicant could say hey I don't accept that and it would either
 fail or it would be a super majority I remember one time I don't know who it
 was I can't remember who it was he used to be a planner a long time ago and he
 came down and he we went to change something he slapped of his written notice
 of we reject that and on the podium and so we had to so is that is that what
 your understanding is if we change it that the applicant has an opportunity to
 reject that and it requires something different you're not aware of that no
 there's nothing like that in the code that sticks to this new concept of okay
 so that probably got changed out of their council of their own will desire
 wanted to hear from the applicant to know what their thoughts are okay that'd
 be up to the council but you're you're in charge of this you can dictate the
 zoning at this point okay okay and I want to say I want to thank staff before
 I recognize the next speaker I want to thank staff that is that is helpful to
 understand that Jason property very helpful but but just real quick that I
 didn't point out and I'm looking at it on the map I mean we've all received
 emails about Windsor and Bonnie Bray that intersection that four-way stop I
 know there's a signal like coming at some point but my goodness to get out of
 a multifamily on that corner just add that in your mind and it I would need
 yeah I just can't I mean and I take and thank you Councilmember Watts for
 bringing up the point that you can't add a stipulation on there I take that point
 and that's important and I'm okay with all the other uses but if I'm not okay
 with all the uses then then that guides my my decision and and so I thank you
 for that that insight Councilmember Meltzer that's it okay mayor pro tem it
 doesn't like me tonight I I I would like some clarification because I had some
 confusion I thought that we passed a new PD change where there was base zoning PD
 and then full normal complex PD and base zoning PD was for instance the parcel
 just to the south might be PDMN which means it's MN plus we had some
 restrictions and I I swear I thought we talked about that in DCRC am I just
 losing it so I don't actually have a you know I'm not asking for that but if the
 rest of council needs a tool where they want base zoning plus I thought we had a
 tool for base zoning plus that is what Mack was referencing earlier that's the
 PD overlay where you can have a base zoning district with whatever
 restrictions are needed for compatibility purposes okay I appreciate
 that I just wanted to float that for those councillors that wanted to
 consider that I'm not asking for that okay so if there's no other questions no
 public comments one more time anyone it's a public comment want to speak think
 I closed it already maybe I didn't but it was closed already and now that I
 think about it because I acknowledge you okay I'll take a motion mayor yes sir I
 think we heard that the applicant is here is that right is there applicant
 did the applicant wish to speak because well yeah so I didn't the public hearing
 so I don't know okay we will come as an applicant I'm assuming they can talk but
 that was that queue for the public comment does anyone wish to speak that
 right in that window was was what I was going for but come on down you got what
 20 minutes yep okay so we will reopen the public hearing on item E and we can
 set the timer yeah well thank you my name is Jose Carrillo I'm representing
 Frank the owner of the property initially I didn't really have anything
 to add to what Sean presented earlier but I guess the biggest concern for Mr.
 hud spit is having mixed use at that intersection of Windsor and Bonnie Bray
 I do want to highlight that we are just rezoning 1.7 acres that are not adjacent
 to that intersection there are ways north of that intersection the property
 that's at the corner is currently makes use or mn so just keeping that in mind
 the property already on the corner is the current zoning does allow for that
 type of use I know there are apartment use along the Bonnie Bray further to the
 north there's town homes just north of razor ranch so there there's there's
 pretty compatible land uses in the area and as Sean mentioned Bonnie Bray is I
 don't think they've actively started construction but they've they actually
 acquired the right away they need so they're pretty close to increasing the
 capacity on Bonnie Bray and there's any other questions well so yeah I'll take
 the opportunity and please for the record no I didn't know who owned the
 property to the south and I made my statement and you know so it stands
 alone like I understand the subject property and just focusing on that gave
 me heartburn even not knowing who owns other parts so I spoke before I knew so
 a hundred percent clear but my question is do you see that the same you see town
 homes and multifamily apartment style as the same it same use same traffic same
 well we function on the ground we did have to do a trip generation for for
 that site that we are rezoning and basically it was such low impact that we
 didn't have to provide a full traffic impact analysis so as far as seeing the
 compatible more town homes and multifamily I have no comment to that
 okay so I understand I'll just I'll just note though I take your point that you
 don't see those the same I take your point that you don't have to do the trip
 count my question was though on the ground see cuz that that I after your
 projects in the ground I won't there'll be someone that sends an email right that
 says how did you let this go through and so I'm just asking forward-looking
 because and that's a different P&Z has a look at just the zoning that's that's
 what they're tasked with as a council obviously you know we have to look at all
 of it so looking at all of it I'm asking you and your expert opinion on the
 ground like use case an apartment complex versus town homes you can't get
 as many units if you're talking town homes on that space so in my mind it's
 less traffic it's a different use case than multifamily but I'm asking you if
 I'm wrong because I trust your opinion so the special case with this subject
 property is that we are heavily encumbered with the property to the west
 has an existing gas well on it and basically the city has a 500 feet
 clearance zone of any building so it does encompass a big portion of our
 property that we cannot develop we can't have buildings on so with this property
 because of that requirement we we can't fully build out what based on the what
 zoning allows got it okay thank you but thank you that's that's that's good
 information I appreciate that any other questions for the for the applicant okay
 thank you very much I appreciate it great insight thank you okay any other
 comments it's open it's a public hearing anyone can speak seeing none so no
 sudden movements I'll close a public hearing I'll take a motion Mayor Pro Tem
 I move approval Councilman Bird motion by Mayor Pro Tem Bec second by Councilman
 Bird any other discussion seeing none let's vote on the screen and that passes
 four to three oh oh there you go I forgot about that it so that fails takes
 us to our next item item for individual consideration 6a ID 2 3 2 7 4 consider
 approval of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton Texas
 placing a proposal on the September 26 2000 oh yeah on the 2 September 26 2023
 City Council public meeting agenda to adopt the 2023 tax rate that will exceed
 the lower exceed the lower of the no new revenue tax rate or the voter approval
 tax rate good evening mayor City Council Cassie Ogden assistant city manager this
 item is for the max tax rate so it's the published rate that City Council may
 approve for fi 24 so this doesn't prohibit you from approving a different
 tax rate it's just publishing the maximum that you can approve so just a
 quick review the appraised values came in about 15 percent higher than the
 previous year average taxable home value increased from 307,000 to 344,000 so our
 no new revenue rate is 40 a little over 49 cents per hundred dollar valuation
 our voter approval rate is 57 cents per hundred dollars evaluation fi 24 our
 proposed rate and the city manager's proposed budget that you saw on August
 5th is a little over 56 cents so keeping the same tax rate as the current fiscal
 year the published max tax rate in the resolution is 56 and a half cents this
 is just giving us flexibility during the budget process in case anything changes
 between now and budget adoption this has been our standard standard practice for
 several years is to publish to give us a little bit higher than what we're
 proposing the tax rate to be and so with that the public hearings on the tax rate
 and the budget are scheduled for September 19th in addition we have
 another budget follow-up work session scheduled for September 12th and as we
 discussed earlier balancing act will be up and we'll provide council with updates
 based on the feedback that we received from citizen comments and with that I'll
 take any questions councilmember Meltzer
 yeah thank you I think it's I'm accustomed to this procedure I think it's
 potentially confusing to some people who plug in what is the purpose of having a
 vote that just sets the maximum rather than just have the vote when we do on
 what the tax rate will be just in case anything changes in our tax calculations
 we did receive our certified calculation from the county but sometimes the
 comptroller puts out addendums to the tax rate calculation sheets that's
 happened to us a couple of years ago and so we we try to add some buffer just in
 case that happens so if we if we if we didn't do this and something changed
 coming down from you know another governmental body with that prevent us
 from responding appropriately later I'm not a difficulty with it I just don't
 want people to be confused like they voted on a tax rate it was a very high
 number you know so we're doing a special legal thing but I'm not just not a
 hundred percent clear what we get out of it um I just I think it gives you
 flexibility just in case there's not any more confusion later on that you know
 council adopted or publish a tax rate that was higher than or lower than what
 they actually adopted I think that's the main reason okay thanks okay any other
 questions for staff seeing none oh council watch yeah just real quick for
 clarification we're gonna have another vote yes with the budget to set the
 actual tax rate this is just something prescribed by law that we have to you
 know so we're not voting on the tax rate we're gonna be charging we're gonna have
 that vote since September something like 26 okay thank you okay any other
 questions seeing none Councilman Melzer yes I move approval Councilman McGee
 second motion by Councilman Melzer second by Councilmember McGee
 discussion seeing none let's vote on the screen
 net pass is 7-0 takes us to item B ID 2 3 1 4 9 0 consider adoption of the
 ordinance of the City of Denton Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation
 authorizing the city manager to execute a contract with Oscar Renda contracting
 that's correct yeah good evening council Cole tanker city with capital projects
 and I'll be presenting this construction contract with Oscar Renda
 construction for another I-35 utility project the project overview is the
 project's gonna go from the merge or the split of the I-35 East and West up to
 University Drive and just past it a little bit US 380 as you can see here
 we're gonna be moving some water lines and wastewater lines and these are the
 actual locations of those lines that are going to be proposed to be moved this is
 all in support of the widening of the I-35 textile and this is a hundred
 percent reimbursable project will be the project will consist of about 10,000
 linear feet of pipe that will be moved between both water and wastewater and
 abandonments and it like I said it'll go from the split up to 380 we had a this
 is an invitation for bid and we had three potential bidders from the
 pre-qualified list that was approved before but we only had two that actually
 bid on this project which was Oscar Renda contracting ink and Mountain
 Cascade Oscar Renda came at the lowest bid at just over 17 million dollars the
 project schedule this project was the design was completed in May and it's
 been rushed a little bit because of the text dot and public utility board was
 yesterday and it was approved and today will be canceled and we'll do a partial
 notice to proceed quick right after this if it's approved and then we'll move
 into the actual notice of pre proceed sometime in September and we estimate
 this project we put a very short time frame of 180 days and we estimate this
 project to be final completion second quarter in 2024 we recommend the
 approval of this contract with Oscar under contracting at just over 17
 million with a five percent contingency bringing the not to exceed amount over
 18 million do you have any questions okay questions for staff any questions
 seeing none and this is all in prep for the widening i-35 all those things tied
 together just moving utilities I'm tracking right yeah I got it okay
 councilman Holland mr. mayor I'd move them the acceptance of the contract to
 Oscar Renda okay mayor pro tem I second the item okay we have a motion and a
 second before we vote I do have coal right that's right yes I have a gift you
 give me elephant you give me an elephant last time sir I rubbed it okay I want to
 make sure it's on my desk yeah I don't want to take it yeah did you have an
 afro last time you before there you go that's what threw me off oh well that
 doesn't that doesn't help me you have a different shirt on that's what it was
 that's what threw me off okay you may have been out of town that may be that's
 right yes yeah well very good okay let's vote on the screen
 thank you and that passes you thank you very much yeah they gave you a tough one
 man that uh 35 especially at the split that that widening project is gonna be
 unbearable I mean it's gonna be it'll be great once it's done but getting there
 thank you okay gets us to item C that's ID two three one five two four consider
 adoption of ordinance of the city of Denton Texas at home rule municipal
 corporation authorizing the city manage X due to contract with Sunday
 construction and that the whole last conversation is going to be really weird
 when it's trying to translate it in Spanish so as they're following along
 and like what in the world go ahead good evening I'm Robin Davis the project
 manager with capital projects and I'm here to get your approval to get Bonnie
 Bray phase 3 under construction so the project overview this is the final phase
 in the body brace south project the corridor from 35 over to 35 w vintage
 area so with this one goes from 35 15 15 over to Rose Lawn it will widen from a
 two-lane rural section to a four-lane urban we do have some minimal utility
 relocation with this project and we also have five foot sidewalks or ten foot
 side path on either side of the road for the complete length of the project so we
 received competitive sealed proposals for this project on May 24th we had three
 proposals that were received and we did perform the evaluation required for the
 CSP process and the scoring criteria for the evaluation process are listed below
 and it just so happens that pricing was one of those criteria so not only was
 sent the low bidder but they also scored the highest on the other other criteria
 as well the project schedule for this is once it's awarded tonight if that
 happens then we will issue a notice to proceed we will host a virtual community
 pre-construction meeting and actually that's going to move out a week due to
 the holiday that's coming up so we'll actually probably start construction on
 September 11th and then we have in the car in the project we offered a 24-month
 substantial completion timeline and a 30-month final completion timeline so we
 expect to reach substantial completion where the roadway is operating as planned
 in September 2025 and with that the city recommends approving the contract was
 sent for a little over 40 million okay thank you and a real quick question are
 we we're communicating with UNT because that's right around football season yeah
 they actually have a betterment in this project that they're funding okay got it
 they have a betterment in this project that they're funding it was it was an
 alternate that was placed in the bid documents for a empty duct bank that they
 they perceive for their future baseball complex that's going to go across the
 street so they're paying for the entirety of the cost of that project so
 they don't have to tear up our brand-new road in a few years to install a duct
 bank to get all their communications across the street and then we're using
 trip grant money yes we did we did request grant trip funds to be used on
 the section from 1515 to Willowood there's actually several DCTA stops in
 that section and so it it met all of the criteria to qualify for the trip funding
 so we will receive it's reimbursable we have to spend it first but we we do have
 five million to use of our trip funds for the improvements it's not just
 sidewalks it's also a roadway oh great good good yes
 Councilor Watts oh I'm sorry Mayor Pro Temp and then Councilor Watts thank you
 am I wrong is the backup different than this presentation yes I was not aware of
 this new template for the presentation so the presentation that's in the backup
 material is a little different than this one and and I don't I want to be
 careful here and set the stage I don't really have any issues but could I see
 the slide with the comparisons again because I didn't I didn't I didn't get a
 chance to fully review that sure it's me that one yeah let me blow that up real
 quick on the no that I'm good thank thank you for showing me that Councilor
 Watts yeah mayor I think after hearing a comment I recused myself on a
 development agreement that the city had with part of this project so I'm gonna
 recuse myself on this as well and if I could get legal to draft it this just it
 just came to my mind so I'm gonna step out and let you guys continue the
 deliberation okay okay got it all right any other questions
 seeing none I'll take a motion Councilor Holland I was hoping that would be
 finished by September 2nd but I guess it won't be nonetheless I will move that
 it be approved you should have to recuse as many games as you go to I was
 thinking the same I was thinking the same thing keep that to yourself sir
 makes it easier for you to park well we did finish North Texas Boulevard you can
 always go in the back way yeah
 Council member I second okay motion by Council member Holland second by
 Council member discussion I'm assuming Chris doesn't want to speak because he's
 not here and sorry but anyway let's vote on the screen that passes six to zero
 with one recuse thank you very much appreciate it takes us to item D ID 2
 3 1 5 6 3 consider adoption of ordinance of the city of Denton Texas amending
 schedules of the fees for public works inspection contained in ordinance number
 2 0 1 3 2 5 2 3 2 good evening mayor and City Council West McBride public works
 and sections manager this year the Texas legislature passed House Bill 3492 which
 prohibits us from charging our fees based upon the cost of construction and
 also specified that those fees are to be an hourly based based on the estimate
 actual time of our employees from those services currently we have two fees to
 with ordinances that set fees for public works inspections the first one was set
 in 2013 and our fee was set at 3.5 percent of the total cost of
 construction which is now something that we were not allowed to do it also set
 our overtime inspection fees and our original right away inspection fees for
 right away permits the second ordinance accompanied the right away construction
 management ordinance and set some additional fees in there the new
 ordinance we're proposing would bring us in line with what the House Bill 34 92
 specifies it establishes a inspection fee at an hourly rate it also kind of
 cleans up and brings in some of the fees that were in two ordinances into this
 one including the right away inspection fees and it also updates our fees
 according to the fee study that we had done this year by matrix insulting
 currently
 currently we have the 3.5 and the overtime inspection free of $135 the new
 fees are according to matrix that was established at these rates and also for
 the right away inspection fees they will some of them also were going up a few of
 them actually were going down and I'll stand for any questions okay thank you
 very much mayor pro tem thank you mr. mayor I asked this in the in the
 questions for backup but and I'm okay with setting initial rates to kind of
 do the best we can to kind of get back to where we were with the old method but
 I think it's gonna be really important for us to do our oversight if you show
 us the same project with the old rates and the new rates and and that way we we
 can you know show us for real on a real project that it's gonna be it's gonna
 give us the needs of the department yeah so we actually pulled some preparation
 for this we pulled some of our older projects that have already accepted it
 that we had some time assumptions already in there so what we're seeing is
 if we can if we can add it there you go there you go can we zoom for some of our
 large larger projects we are actually coming in a little bit under some of our
 subdivisions our residential subdivisions others that we're seeing
 there's not very much change in it a lot of it goes in that our time we see a
 little bit of increase on some of the commercial jobs because they take just
 as much time as the residential but they already paid a little bit less in fee so
 like lane rail yard that we just sent an acceptance letter on the off-site they
 completed it in 40 days and it only went up from 458 dollars that they paid and
 with the 3.5 up to 848 okay and so I love this thank you so much for preparing
 this is exactly what I want you know some real-world projects where we see
 the difference and it looks like it is actually a mix of them especially that
 Providence Square was really different but so that's not saving anybody or at
 least not saving them any money so thank you legislature so I this is the kind of
 number I need to see thank you so much okay any other questions I'll take a
 motion
 mayor pro tem I move approval of these new rates
 councilman Watts Sam okay motion by mayor pro tem second by councilman Watts
 any other discussion before we do that last time you presented to us that you
 have a beard I've had a beard for quite a few years but yeah but when you
 presented to us last I have not presented I just want to make sure for I
 stood up again
 don't take it you're here for
 welcome so what we do is we have a little token of our appreciation so you
 always remember us and remember your first time presenting to us so thank you
 very much yes yeah no where's where's home for you where you I was born and
 raised here in Denton outstanding good actually McBride's music upon on the
 shot yes sir yeah that was one of my cousins outstanding man yeah good that's
 fantastic good I do not remember a name I was always around Larry I was not
 around his daughter he has a great memory I don't know anything I knew
 about Larry's kids was he kept telling us he had to go up on prices at the pawn
 shop to pay for their college he was one of my pals okay let's thank you very
 much let's vote on the screen right it all runs together that passes 7-0 thank
 you that takes us to our last item ID 2 3 1 5 6 6 consider adoption of ordinance
 of the City of Denton sit ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton
 Texas calling an election to be held November 7 2023 within the city within
 said city on the question of issuance of 309 million five hundred ninety thousand
 dollars in ad valorem tax-supported bonds for streets drainage parks public
 safety affordable housing making provision for the car conduct of the
 mayor I need a minute I'm trying to find my presentation
 I think yeah there was some I found it sorry about that
 Cassie Arden assistant city manager here for the calling of the bond item so on
 April 4th council established the special citizens bond advisory committee
 which was 40 people the committee met a total of seven times between May and
 July and provided a recommendation for council consideration we've had two work
 sessions in July and August to review the committee's recommendations you can
 see the list of projects we talked about the council gave direction to increase
 the funding amount for the South Branch Library from what this the special
 citizens bond committee recommended as well as including Roodell as part of the
 Roodell Mingo quiet zone project and then the committee did recommend 2% of
 vertical construction projects so which is a little over three million dollars
 the resolution or I'm sorry the ordinance before you tonight includes
 five propositions so proposition A is for streets and that includes one
 project the Roodell Mingo quiet zone prop B is drainage and flood control
 proposition C is the park system 148 million dollars and then proposition D
 is public safety with fire stations number five six include and including
 the animal services expansion proposition E is affordable housing for
 15 with a total of three hundred nine million five hundred ninety thousand
 dollars and with that take any questions so I have questions my math is rough but
 City Hall West we're allocated 17 million eight hundred seventy six
 thousand dollars and staff proposed it will have maybe 15 to 20 offices out of
 that yes so that would be if we have 15 offices my math says that's 1 million
 one hundred ninety two thousand dollars per office could you double check me I'm
 right I ran it a couple of times and then 20 offices that cost would be eight
 hundred ninety three thousand dollars eight hundred and thirty three the eight
 hundred eight hundred thirty three dollars per office yes and so I just I
 don't understand that and so I want people to understand why I'm saying no
 and and it's in entire context because when you look at that in that context
 and then if you look at line item 12 it's a question I ask about city
 facilities we address City Hall East that's been renovated with the police
 headquarter then the service center has been renovated the police substations
 new the DME campus is proposed new and then City Hall at 1 million dollar City
 Hall West at 1 million dollars per office is being proposed south branch
 library new senior center fire stations animal services are renovated the only
 the only building that's not being addressed it has no plan and has the
 most employees is this building and we're at 107 percent capacity is that
 right yes that's correct I did just want to clarify on City Hall West okay yeah
 it's only 5,000 square feet of that facility that we're proposing to use
 for office space the majority of the building renovation will be for the
 theater and the event space correct and so the theater is not helping us with
 with office space yeah 5,000 square feet will go to providing additional
 administrative space for the areas that are currently over capacity or
 occupancy right but I it's and so for me do we have a planned use for that
 theater space like is it like community use yeah yeah I mean it just we don't
 have a plan we don't know who's gonna we don't we don't have anyone that's gonna
 operate it right the direction that we worked with in November was that it
 would be run by the city so parks and rec would run it and it'd be available
 for rentals for any type of community activity right and so I'm just
 responding to the conversation that the per square foot cost and I'll run that
 math while other people are talking but it matters not it's gonna be
 astronomical so I really don't have to people understand what they're doing it's
 just 5,000 square feet by 17 million dollars is not a good number per square
 foot when we have a City Hall with no plan with at a 107 percent capacity so I
 can't get on board with a million dollars per office that just makes I mean
 if we have a problem people spoke on a on a library for 50 million that's at
 least 40,000 square feet so it's eight times and people had a hard time with
 that so yeah I just I think it's so irresponsible I I'm making a final plea
 to I know councilmember bird was supportive in the work session I'll put
 forward the number I'm looking for someone to two other people to get on
 board with at least what what what DME is doing and so I have notes that I'm
 gonna touch on from today from our conversation today the parallels that I
 identified from there were zero and all I'm asking for from my peers is to let
 the voters decide that's all I'm asking for not asking for action other than to
 let the voters decide and here's what DME identified and they got unanimous
 support DME I unified covered parking for the vehicles imagine if we had
 covered parking vans for our kids that are going to summer camps and now those
 vans are parked out you'll see them those listening drive by Civic Center
 and you'll see the vans that we ride the summer kids in sitting out in elements
 versus in a parking garage then DME is at eighty one point six percent the city
 hall is at 100% DME has a plan that was approved by this body this body will not
 the majority of this body will not allow the voters to vote on a new meeting
 spaces for council code issues at DME this building has code issues construction
 costs going up this building has will have the same problem this DME is backed
 by tax dollars that didn't give anyone any that it's it's the rate but
 ultimately it's backed by tax dollars no complaints but complaints here when it
 came to address in the 107 percent in this building the DME pointed out it
 requires a rate increase this will require potentially a tax increase same
 thing all backed by the same tax dollars but I can't get four people to say this
 is important enough to send to the voters then it goes to security concerns for
 DME security concerns here go back and look at the old pictures City Hall
 didn't have used to have a gate around it City Hall hadn't had people break into
 it City Hall didn't have a metal detector so it's obvious security issues
 but then talked about synergy DME talked about synergy that's what we're trying
 to address as well they proposed 75 million I'm asking just to let the
 voters vote on 50 million they said they have it they have to design it next year
 I'm asking for the same this of putting it on the bond would allow the city
 manager to then go and and price a design for to address the the over over
 capacity issues we have talked about vehicles talked about yeah I mean it's
 it's it's plain and clear we have to do something and I I'm asking for the
 voters to have a say so I don't know why this body is is a majority of this body
 won't at least let the voters have a say so if it doesn't pass then great that
 you have nothing to worry about but at least you let the voters here and we
 have a plan for the one building that doesn't have a plan where there's major
 employees it's just an embarrassment for me and that we can't take care of our
 staff better 90% of the people in the United States the older people in the
 United States I think that's the stat I was reading have diabetes diabetes
 issues and we have we've talked about insurance costs going up everyone's
 trying to stay healthy and our offering here at the City Hall is microwave
 dinners it's just unbelievable I'm looking for four people two others to
 say you know what that's right we shouldn't spend vote to spend a million
 dollars on office and ignore the City Hall needs for more office we just we
 shouldn't do that I've had a epiphany and I thought better of it we'll see
 councillor Watts thank you yeah I may address your your comments maybe later
 on but a couple of things on City Hall West that's assuming if we stick to the
 plan of providing community space and all these kind of things it was decided
 five years ago which a lot of things have changed so I mean the bond isn't
 the bond does not restrict us to 5,000 square feet of office space that can be
 a separate council decision as that project comes forward that's correct we
 brought we hired a consultant five years ago you did have the committee right
 which they talked about potential uses and then there wasn't really a decision
 out of that about a year and a half ago the city contracted with architecture
 architect sis to come in and look at the plans and we brought back in November
 here's potential uses of those buildings which is what we were working off for
 the bond program but again it doesn't lock you into that if you want to change
 our mind on the programming I'm not sure how much additional office space that is
 something we can look at because we did have some constraints with the building
 since it's historical yeah okay yeah my major concerns is not so much with the
 projects and I'll comment on the City Hall comments here later my concern is
 with the bond with the bond ballot language and the grouping and primarily
 first of all is looking through the ordinance and we've got the art component
 which is two percent of I think was it vertical construction construction but
 that I guess that doesn't have to appear as a sec as a separate item or is it
 included in each one it's included and proposition C and D and it is called out
 the amount is called out in each proposition that it's included in the
 amount specific for public art but it's not in the ballot language it's in the
 narrative of the ordinance ordinance correct and that's one thing I want to
 ask bond council at some point is about the language on the ballot because my
 big concern and not concern I shouldn't say that I mean I have my comments are
 in no way in opposition to the projects or the cost of the projects mine is
 concerned on the groupings because and the primary one is the park system
 improvements because that includes the library which is 50 million it includes
 the senior center which is I forgot what 46 or 48 what is that 46 and City Hall
 West I think those are just very different and and I know that there's
 been a concern that well if there's too many propositions that the voters you
 know are either gonna get confused or there's gonna be a greater chance that
 they fail I take a different a different approach and that is to me it's more
 transparent and it's it's not creating that cognitive dissonance it's it's
 reducing it to its minimum impact of hey I want to vote for this but I really
 don't want to vote for this and so I'm sort of stuck and so that was one of the
 questions for the bond council is I don't think these groupings are what is
 that there's no other opportunity to do it differently but I don't know what
 would be allowed if we split out like City Hall West the library and the
 senior center and do different I may could agree to the library and senior
 center maybe being together but I it's gonna be very difficult for me to vote
 when these are all lumped together like that so and plus the public art
 component is not in the language and I know that the legislature struggled with
 this they wanted to almost at one point include all of it in the in the in the
 the ballot language I mean to really put in a lot of detail so that that's really
 my concern I'll go ahead and address the the main City Hall issue or request as I
 said earlier when I looked at the bond committee and mayor I understand my
 thought is and you're right comparing it to the to the DME DME is not being taken
 to the voters we can make that decision on our own as we could with that my
 concern is I mean I know it said well let's give the voters a chance if the
 voters vote against it then so be it and that's all good well now we can't do
 anything for three years because of the legislature so I think there's a path
 forward that can get that done and can get it done probably quicker without
 that risk so and I'm more than willing to look at the same process and the same
 type of financing that DME has looked at and that has brought forward to us so
 I'm not opposed to the idea and I'm not opposed to even some funding I just it's
 difficult for me to do it with when nobody on the bond committee that we all
 pointed so and that's just me I mean if it if it gets on the ballot there's no
 heartburn for me my biggest concern is the groupings because I think it doesn't
 give the voters necessarily an opportunity to really parse out what
 they're wanting to do and I know that's not a popular opinion I know that's not
 something that you know it's that and it's not a not a you know anything to
 write I know staff would rather probably not have that and I understand why and
 and that's okay that's just my own personal thought and I think I've been
 consistent with that thought all the way through the deliberation so those are
 just my comments I mean I'm not saying I'm not sure what I'm saying except
 putting that out there for the rest of the council members to consider thank
 you mayor yeah mayor Pro Tem. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Councilor Watts I really
 appreciate you bringing forth a lot of those items I share with you some of
 those those concerns and and I I think we do have the opportunity you'll recall
 that you know I we just had a huge what was the word we had a huge hullabaloo
 over green space and last time I I voted against the the adding green space to be
 consistent for the reasons that you brought up and that Cassie brought up is
 there's if we if we put it on and it's in its bails we can't address it but if
 if we address it in next year's budget we can be smart and and dedicated and
 put it in in ways that that match things and at the same time I want to be
 consistent with what we brought to the bond committee you know which you know
 that wasn't and this was and they voted this down that said I think we have an
 opportunity to address these spaces to address green spaces to address office
 spaces I'm really glad that Christine brought up the idea that that you know
 we're gonna renovate this building with with the idea of getting it in use again
 after years and years and years of neglect and potentially at some point
 get it back on the tax rolls which is the long-term goal but we could use it
 for office space we could use the South Side Library's office space for this
 morning's discussion there's there's an opportunity to play musical chairs with
 some of our buildings that keep those buildings in service would don't require
 us to build or marginally renovate and and stay truer to the will that we saw
 coming out of the bond committee and and you know being and being consistent so I
 really appreciate council watts bringing up a lot of those points I agree with
 him hopefully the the sky doesn't fall when we hear that that council watts
 and I are in pretty good agreement on that it's the right first sign of the
 apocalypse I do have and I would like to to ask could could staff or counsel you
 know partly we've heard a little bit of it in prior discussions but could you
 briefly summarize what again why why we put it in these particular categories
 and why we are aggregating them together as opposed to say having four of type B
 or four of type D or there may not be that many projects within those but you
 know what what is the pros and cons of and I think counselor watts touched on
 confusion but if if someone could address what our limitations are here in
 this public session so I'm gonna ask Greg Shaker to come up and kind of
 address your questions and then also comes over what
 hi Greg Shaker with McCall Parkerson Horton bond council for the city and I
 apologize for my voice I got the allergy thing going on and it's gone down into
 my into my chest the groupings I'm comfortable that each project in each
 group is part of the same purpose parks which you're addressing is a very broad
 purpose there's all kinds of types of projects that fits under that category
 that being said there's no reason you can you can't parse out each project into
 a separate bond proposition there's no limit on that but the approach I think
 that was taken was to combine all the projects that fit under the same general
 purpose in the same bond proposition and ballot language I'm comfortable that was
 in the what's in the ordinance conforms to state law but there's no reason you
 can't add language to it if if y'all wanted public art called out in the in
 the ballot language itself we can certainly do that to you so American
 have a follow-up sure so just to make sure I understood what you said I mean
 clearly as it's presented it conforms but if we wanted to split a couple out
 and have them as their own single bond proposition could do that and or if we
 wanted to add to each of the ballot language just the component of public
 art because there is a come I guess and maybe you can't answer this but or maybe
 you can the amount of money that's listed in each of the ballot languages
 that that's including the public art component is that correct it is okay
 total amount includes the public art component the smaller number for public
 art later in the proposition basically limits the use of that bond proposition
 to that amount for public art okay okay for that purpose okay thank you thank
 you mayor councilman Beck you have more thank you mr. I appreciate that yeah no
 III is I understand and please correct me these categories are ones either that
 we inherit from state legislature or from the Attorney General's office so you
 know we any any proposal has to go into one of these categories is that correct
 I would say that these categories are have been developed over the years like
 what type of project fits into the broader category like parks or public
 safety the most recent statutory changes really more strictly enforce the idea
 that you can only have a single purpose in each bond proposition but it can be
 the bond proposition can be a general purpose like parks and so how we
 approach these using parks as an example we say it's for the approval of
 improvements to parks which include the active adult center the the whole list
 that we have in there okay I appreciate that and then I guess my mine sort of
 last was comp question is in in general you know by having a common purpose does
 does that improve or are confused voter understanding do you know lots of
 discussion both both ways so I think especially when you get into the
 election consultants you know they have probably stronger opinions about that
 but like I said I've heard the argument argue for both sides so I appreciate
 that thank you miss city manager Greg I'm concerned too I'm just gonna be honest
 with you if you're grouping everything under park systems a park is different
 from a recreation center it's different from a library and it's different from a
 City Hall West you can say that all of them center around park staff are gonna
 use the building but that that is not accurate I'm just being honest with you
 that is a park is an outside facility period a recreation center is an inside
 facility a library is an inside facility librarians park staff aren't in a
 library so when you label a bond item as a park or park systems we are confusing
 the we're confusing the community honestly and coming from parks and
 recreation I'm telling you that will confuse our community members because
 they'll think everything's in a park and a park is an outside facility not an
 inside facility I definitely understand that there's case law in Texas that says
 differently a park is very very broad park and rec is a kind of the category
 you use so but you know many cities split out cultural facilities from parks
 to like event space or libraries they put it under like a cultural bond
 proposition but like I said earlier I'm comfortable that all the projects in
 that category fit under that category under state law that doesn't mean it's
 not as you know your point is it might be confusing I'm concerned is confusing
 and I I've been involved without how many bonds and we usually weren't so
 specific we were if it was a library a park a recreation center was called
 quality of life a quality of life bond that had the specifics underneath it
 which was a recreation center a parks trails whatever it's called quality of
 life public safety but not a park system which leads people to think it's a part
 of a park system a library is not part of a park system and neither is a senior
 center neither is a City Hall West so I understand you're quoting case law but
 having worked in other cities like the city of Austin we didn't get so
 specific as to the topic as it was as to make sure those groupings made sense
 under what would be considered public safety quality of life environmental
 is whatever that roads drainage things like that so I'm just concerned we're
 going to confuse our voters and there's not there's not a need to call out
 specific projects under bond proposition but I understood that y'all wanted to do
 that in this particular instance so okay
 councilman Melter yeah let me continue the shaking of the roof here yeah I
 think councilmember Watts is spot-on a number of points first of all City Hall
 West has been kicking around empty for a long time and it really makes sense to
 get to get that addressed and I'm glad we finally biting the bullet to put it on
 the bond proposition because it just wasn't getting done and then we learned
 over the course of preparing for our meeting today that there is a facility
 master plan being developed and this is not in contradiction even slightly with
 the mayor's concerns that it's it's very much in agreement with the concerns
 that that needs to be addressed so it's both true that bond committee didn't was
 not persuaded by we know what was presented for for City Hall and it's true
 that there's a big need and I think that the methodical way to do it
 comprehensively to take into account the fact that some buildings are going to be
 are going to be made redundant potentially or as a course of this so
 that we can rethink these spaces you know I think that's just a more
 reasonable way to do it and avoids the potential problem of having the general
 public react the same way the bond committee did and say no and then you're
 stuck for three years so I think that all makes good sense I'm also very I take
 very much to heart that very common sensical point that the things that are
 in the so-called park system proposition are commonly won't be understood as park
 system I'm intrigued by the idea of just rather than break it all out into eight
 pieces that is some merit but the idea of calling that all quality of life so
 if streets drainage and flood control quality of life public safety affordable
 housing has some appeal although just thinking out loud a little bit here if
 City Hall West ends up going back to office space which is what it was you
 know then are you stuck because it got passed under quality of life so you know
 so maybe that needs to get that that needs to get pulled out like I'm very
 happy with the idea pretty broad categories and quality of life is broad
 enough that it makes you need to read what's in it but if City Hall West
 doesn't fit in that I mean I'm inclined to make a motion let's offer a motion
 unless mayor you don't want us to do that yet
 no as long as you understand it's not gonna foreclose conversation and that
 sort of thing yeah nor would sickening it right I mean we have to die like after
 that I never know I have to check and see if
 I get corrected well let me take a shot at it so I'd like to move approval of
 the motion excuse me approval of the proposal but renaming proposition C
 quality of life and segregating out from call proposition C City Hall West as an
 independent item anything in there I can't do bond council just to clarify
 the renovation of City Hall West is under the parks category because it's
 gonna be renovated into event space and administrative space for the parks and
 rec department that's why it was put under there okay so I understand
 understanding that I'm you know I'm asking you to kind of respond to the
 deliberation it says hey looking at our comprehensively at our space needs and
 our closed indoor space needs you know that that that may those purposes may
 look different when we look at all of our space needs comprehensively that's
 so so that would be a reason to pull it out of that it is I would not the the
 term quality of life is used by a lot of cities but that's more of a gets
 marketing advertising it's a communication term but if you look at
 their bond propositions that the purpose is parks or cultural facilities like
 libraries event centers typically fall under a cultural facilities purpose
 quality of life is not legally not a real thing leaves it doesn't fit for a
 public purpose for by lecture you can certainly communicate into the voters
 you can call a quality of life projects as most many many cities do okay I was
 responding to you know what I heard up here so mayor thanks for indulging me
 letting me kind of feel my way through this I alternatively would it be
 acceptable to segregate proposition C into park system and public and another
 item called public buildings public buildings is too general yeah I'm not
 sure what to do that so I'm withdrawing my motion till we kind of maybe need to
 talk about this and sort it out I do I am consistent I do recognize that park
 system is not revealing enough your earlier suggestion of splitting out the
 renovation of City Hall West into a separate proposition from see that that
 would be fine oh it's so-called the rest park system is all you could just that
 proposition would be for city hall west okay there we go so if you'd like me to
 mayor I'm going to restate the motion and so I move approval of the of the
 proposal however I would segregate out of proposition C renovation of City Hall
 West into a separate item still leaving the remainder to be called proposition
 C park system and the other thing I think has been discussed yet that I would point out in
 using part measure C as the example when you have that list of projects in there
 and down the road cost very you know from one to another you especially since
 we've called out all the projects in that in that bond proposition you do have
 to construct those projects but you can vary from the cost that you have up on
 there you can allocate between the projects that are all within the same
 proposition you can't do that if you're if they're in separate propositions just
 want to make sure you're all we're aware of the one advantage one of the
 advantages of a broader proposition can I just clarify your because public art is
 currently included in proposition C so the park system proposition would you
 want to include some portion of public art in the City Hall West proposition
 yes my intention would have been that the 2% of vertical construction goes
 goes with it and and you know I don't know I'm just since you give me like 30
 seconds more floor I'm not a hundred percent sure I'm right I hear what you're
 saying about the benefits of being able to reallocate between is there something
 else that isn't quality of life and that isn't park system that would express
 what this collective is because I don't think anybody outside of I don't know
 some specialist thinks City Hall West is in a park it's wouldn't so I'm content
 with the idea of the benefits of being able to reallocate but I'm I'm responding
 to the desire to not see misleading to the public you know most cities try to
 do that through the communications to the voters before the election on the
 particular projects one thing that we can do would be to put specific projects
 in the ballot language as well there's no restriction on undoing that typically
 we draft the ballot language to be concise but there's no limit on the
 length and so the ballot language when the voters are in the booth checking it
 off could list out all the projects under that particular measure could could
 could it be called park park system and something that would evoke buildings
 like does it have to be just two words and then and also you know do the more
 granular ballot language that lists some of the projects we could call it parks
 and recreation facilities and then the category but that would preclude us from
 then redeveloping City Hall West for use as other office space if it's not parks
 and recreation it would it's the limiting factor all right then I'm gonna
 stick with the motion as expressed and and yes to respond to Cassie's question
 the City Hall West component has meant to include the related 2% of vertical
 construction for public art so that's the motion I wonder if anyone paid
 attention to all that no but somebody did I mean it's like eight different
 iterations I can't I have I'm making notes why I'm not gonna vote for it so
 happy to restate if you want no it's it's fine so is that everything for you
 okay is there a second let's just get that out of the way so that I don't get
 yelled at somebody mayor Pro Tem yeah I'm gonna restate it cuz cuz I want to
 make sure I know what I'm about to second and that is if I'm understanding
 that is that you're you're leaving the proposal you you're proposing to leave
 it as is but split the item the project see and remove City Hall West into its
 own C2 with all the concurrent budget of that project including a public art into
 sort of us a second with whatever name is suitable for that proposal and did
 you were you including the the list of projects or not because that was also
 floated I frankly didn't have the impression that that had to be part of
 the motion that's with that but I'm supportive of I did talk about that and
 and if it helps for that to be part of the motion yes I did intend that we would
 also be more granular in listing the projects in the bow language okay you
 second all that I think so okay Councilman Holler thought you forgot
 about me explain to me again I guess because all this makes very very good
 sense to me explain to me again why these can't be in single voting issues
 why can't we have 13 I grouped them in 13 what could be more clear you know if
 you want to vote for the Oakland drainage you vote for it if you want to
 vote for affordable housing you vote for it if you want to vote for the the the
 historic City Hall you vote for it if you like a like a buffet why like why
 won't that work that's that's allowed you can list each project as a separate
 bond proposition exactly it's exactly what I'm saying and it couldn't be more
 clear yeah you're voting on each particular project yes I think some
 would argue there's voter fatigue well rather rather than grouping these things
 in together into some vague thing that that it's a park it's a building we
 don't know what in the world it is you just do a smorgasbord and choose the
 ones you want and and reject the ones you don't it does limit us when projects
 come in either higher most of the time higher than what we projected so for
 instance for the 20 next 2014 bond program the bond oversight committee has
 removed several of the projects because as we got to the end of the program we
 weren't able to complete the projects so the money was reallocated to other
 projects within those same propositions because they had kind of the same use so
 for instance roadways if you if you did each project individually you would not
 have that capability you would have to do the project and then if the project
 came over budget we would have to issue CEOs to complete it I heard you I don't
 understand that if if if item if item one is a dollar and item two is is a
 dollar an item three is a dollar and you vote for it then that then they then
 they ought to end up costing three bucks so sometimes you know things happen
 because this is a six-year bond program and I don't have a crystal ball about
 what's gonna happen for instance on quiet zones if the railroad if we have
 complications with the railroad let's say and we're not able to complete the
 project in the way that we thought originally it was scoped and designed we
 are limited now with what we can do with that funding because there's no other
 projects that we can use it on why why then in that example would you just not
 issue the bond you could do that I'm just saying now that voters have voted
 on something you're not gonna issue the bond and then you're having to explain
 why you're not doing that it becomes very cumbersome as far as communication
 back to the but that sounds like the same thing you know only only you're
 being you're being crystal clear as to what you're what the voters are voting on
 it's one way to go I'm it's not staff recommendation okay I'm very appreciative
 of Councilman's Watts clarity and and and then the mayor makes a good point
 about the historic City Hall perhaps the historic City Hall ought to be sold to a
 private developer and let let he she do something with it thank you mr. man okay
 Councilman watch you is that yeah you get just real quick yeah just to yeah I'm
 not for selling City Hall West so and Cassie I hear your explanation about the
 flexibility within a bond program and I get that I've been on council a while
 and I think if we really looked back historically most of our bond programs
 we've had to supplement with CEOs so and and then that giving and taking of
 different monies it does have to come back to the City Council through the
 bond oversight committee but yet in the end let's take Bonnie Bray and let's
 take some of these others that we've had to augment with CEOs so that's just the
 nature of the beast I don't know if I'm for splitting them all out because I
 think when you have the drainage projects for like getting things out of
 the floodplain I think that's a very consistent grouping for me it was just
 simply though that one item C was so large and C even with the motion that's
 on the table on the floor if we just put out City Hall that park system still has
 parks and trails in it there's a component there that is still that it
 sort of gets so my big push was to separate out it I had my preference if
 it my aspiration is just simply say City Hall West the library and the senior
 center would be their separate propositions understanding that if
 there wasn't enough money passed which there's typically not we would come
 back with CEOs to augment that if needed as we've done in the past so I get the
 need for the flexibility but even with that flexibility and past bond programs
 we still have to come in and backstop with with some CEO so and it's it's not
 I mean it's nothing and I'm not gonna have a big fight over this it's just I
 think that that's what would bring real clarity to the voters understanding
 there's some risk to understanding there's some risk but I think that would
 provide them with the biggest ticket items and they could say yes yes yes so
 and then those are my and I know those are those are my final comments I'm not
 gonna unless I'm making a different motion or something so I appreciate
 appreciate that yeah before before I recognize you probably and I just want
 I'm summarizing my notes here so that I can get out of the way first I need to
 know how many square feet is South Branch Library 40,000 proposed 40,000
 40,000 for 50 million right yeah that's right it was adjusted 48 and I'm a round
 down okay Councilman Melzer why do math yeah I would actually not at all object
 to withdrawing my motion substituting what you're just suggested I mean I was
 just looking for what would be clear and not give up something valuable but you
 know I take your point based on your experience with it that that's not a big
 give up we managed to do that so yeah give me a sign would you like me to do
 that I mean yeah because I'm no but no I have no objection we so then I mean
 or do you want to draw my motion you make yours I'm gonna speak so you
 withdrawn your motion well I'm looking for a little bit of I know indication
 from I know it's been a long time right like you've been all over the place with
 yeah cuz I'm trying to solve a problem but I'm gonna draw my motion okay okay
 good then y'all can talk amongst yourselves well hopefully we'll have
 something that they can move forward with I just want to have a clear record
 really quick everything I've heard I haven't I still don't have a clear
 answer on City Hall West right we're saying depending on I guess where it's
 placed is what's gonna be we had it placed in parks and then staff came up
 and said it could be all these different things but it couldn't have been all
 those things based on legal counsel unless it's placed differently so as
 proposed that answer was wrong and so I'm just saying there we have no idea
 what City Hall West is gonna be so I'm gonna switch the numbers it's a million
 dollars per office but hey we don't know if it's gonna be that many offices but
 there's more offices it's somewhere around seven hundred thousand dollars
 per office that we're getting ready to vote for round numbers but let's go
 specific 5,000 square feet that's three thousand five hundred seventy four
 dollars per square foot versus a library with people had a hard time with ninety
 nine hundred sixty dollars per square foot a library that people were upset
 about for forty eight million nine hundred sixty dollars per square foot a
 building that will not relieve any staff pressure it'll just move staff three
 thousand five hundred seventy four dollars per square foot no matter what
 you do with it shocking then the comment was made well that three thousand five
 hundred seventy four purse first per square foot is worth it because nothing's
 getting done but not to worry city staff at City Hall that's over packed we'll
 get something done with City Hall it won't be like the other one like we've
 kicked the can down the road somehow we're gonna and then we talked about a
 facility master plan being done as the pending item well that's interesting we
 have a facility report in hand right now that's being ignored it had the
 priorities of the buildings and we're ignoring that so we have a study in hand
 that we're ignoring and then I cannot leave a record clear and I challenge
 anybody to dispute these numbers they I'm openly challenging anyone that spoke
 and said the city the bond committee didn't support this you give me the data
 tonight I'll make a note of it and here it is that the bond committee had six
 meetings on the fifth meeting next to last meeting 37 percent were in support
 but no p3 for a city facility meetings meeting facility 10 percent were in
 support with a p3 7% were unsure that's a total of 53 percent in some support
 majority in support and there was a clear line item that said no absolutely
 lot under no circumstances 47 percent so the majority of the council of the bond
 committee one day before it was finalized 53 percent so I don't want to
 hear that there were no support for it and it wasn't the priority of the
 council of that committee and these numbers are in your backup they're all
 over the place they're undisputed then you'll say 63 percent were for the max
 of 300 million so 53 percent city city meeting space focused 67 percent for the
 max which were short of so there's a gap there of they were okay with another
 30 million 67 percent so the majority of the bond committee supported some
 action to address the 170 percent 107 percent capacity of City Hall and we do
 nothing so but we spend 1 million dollars per office or three thousand five
 hundred seventy four dollars per square foot and we're absolutely good with that
 we have a report in hand that's not that important we need another report in hand
 that maybe will move the needle and we'll get that done I just don't believe
 it I believe the voters should be heard and I believe it was a it was a council
 priority not only was it a bond committee for priority at the fifth
 meeting it was a council priority in 2022 so council priority and we can't
 even get it on a ballot that's interesting what a difference a year
 makes and I'll just say this the argument about CEOs in budgeting that's
 not this that's not this staff right if you look at everything that was
 identified was previous bonds when we weren't doing the math right 2019 is on
 pace and we even have to slow it down because we're doing too good so the new
 staff new direction spot-on no deficits previous sins of previous bond
 committees we're covering those up and somehow that's a penalty so I just
 there's nothing that no matter how this this is proposed I'm not okay with a
 million dollars per office I'm not okay with two thousand no three thousand more
 dollars per square foot than the library we had a problem with a hard pass and
 and and and and it's it's to the staff that is here at City Hall my sincere
 apologies man I I don't know what to do I will keep at it but it I would think
 it earns it the information before us warrants it going to the voters because
 it gets us out of this cycle of these people on this dais saying making the
 universal decision because if we have and this is why I'm so passionate about
 it because if we put it to the voters then the citizens could say it is a
 priority to us the staff has an opportunity to negotiate with their
 neighbor with their other fellow dip nights and say hey come on do me a solid
 we need this and rally and have a grassroots support show up in November
 and make it happen and and have a great place or at least a plan in place and
 measure city and resident support I don't know that's what I want to measure
 I want to measure city support but we're willing to put a City Hall West on the
 ballot by itself and if it doesn't pass it's the same problem right so I don't
 know why we're willing to risk something it has and it has no plan it's it's 15
 offices it's 20 offices it may be more than that it may be community space we
 don't know has no plan so but we know this it's 5,000 square feet at 17
 million dollars three thousand five hundred and seventy four dollars per
 square foot Councilman Watts yeah thank you mayor I'm gonna make a motion to let
 me pull up the ordinance okay here it is I'm gonna make a motion to approve the
 ordinance with a couple of modifications in city of Denton proposition C I don't
 know how it would show up on the the ballot as far as its structure but I'd
 like to just have a separate proposition for make the motion to have a separate
 proposition for the library for the senior center and for City Hall West I
 would like if if we can able to calculate it and the language is fine if
 they're split out but I'd like to have somewhere in there that says that amount
 that's being proposed includes X amount of dollars for public art because I
 think the total package just so that they understand instead of having to do
 the math so that's my motion and thank you
 any concerns legal wise no just a clarification though that each each of
 the the library the senior center in the city always are each a separate
 proposition okay okay councilman Meltzer I second okay discussion
 Councilman Holler so then would that be ABCDE and then the adult would be F F
 South Branch would be G historic City Hall would be something else is that
 right so there'd be 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 okay okay all right any other questions
 all right let's vote on the screen and that passes five to two that takes us to
 concluding items I'll be out Thursday and Friday I'm taking my other son to
 Texas A&M so I will be out of the office but Frank and Christine will be here I
 think Cassie may be out on some much-needed time off okay who's gonna be
 okay got it okay council member I just want to say hello to everyone and just
 let you all know that I received a full hip replacement on last Tuesday and I'm
 gonna pat myself on the back for lasting this long and we'll just keep our fingers
 crossed that I make it to the car so just want to make sure that you all knew
 that in thank you for your support yes Councilman Holler congratulations to
 council member bird on her on her single hip get back to me when you haven't
 second one done I would like to invite everyone but particularly my colleagues
 on the council to come to Denton High School on Sunday September 10th at 5 p.m.
 we will be putting 3,000 flags in front of Denton High School commemorating the
 attack on New York City each flag has the name of a victim we've done this for
 a number of years it's a very moving thing we put them out in in military
 precision it's it's very very impressive and I would love to have all of you come
 out and help us wrap that up Sunday September 10th at 5 o'clock it'll be up
 on September 11th and then we'll take it down at the end of the day what time
 5 5 a.m. yeah no no 5 p.m. on Sunday got it a September 11th is on a Monday got
 it okay thank you councilman bird did you already spoke you're good
 okay mayor pretend I'll be brief thank you mr. mayor I'll remind everyone of
 the dog days coming up on November 9th and I will also sorry September night
 thank you for the corrections September 9th and also on that same day the League
 of Women Voters is having their kickoff meeting so I encourage people to show up
 to that as well okay just there there's parade Saturday rodeo starts Friday so
 please attend that things around Kroger be really busy so patience if you're
 driving down care Boulevard around University and let's get out of here it
 is 1054 will conclude tonight's meeting

        
Back to Meeting