Jun 11, 2019 City Council on 2019-06-11 3:00 PM

Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to this meeting of the Dent City Council on Tuesday, June 11, 2019. It is 3.02 p.m. Call this meeting to order. We do have a quorum. Our first item on the agenda is citizen comments on consent agenda items. Do we have any citizen comments? I see no cards. All right. Thank you. Second agenda item two is request for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda. Request of clarification for items listed on the agenda. Just as a heads up, because we do have those city-initiated public hearings for those zoning requests or zoning changes, we'll have a little bit different procedure, but we'll go into that more during the meeting. So no request for clarifications? All right. Move on to then agenda item work session reports. Agenda item 3A, receive report, hold discussion, and give staff direction regarding the role of city council committees, membership to subcommittees and other groups, and the associated committee nomination process. Good afternoon, mayor and council. I'm Rachel Wood, chief of staff. The purpose of today's presentation is to discuss the role of city council committees, discuss the relationship of individual city council committees to the full city council, review the list of current city council committees, and then discuss the 2019 council committee appointment process. So the city council rules of procedure allow for the creation of committees via resolution. Council committees typically consist of three city council members. Those appointments are made by the mayor and approved by the full city council. And the presiding officer or the chair of each committee is typically named by the committee itself after the committee membership has been determined. So city council members are intended to vet policy items or potential projects prior to that information being brought to the full city council for consideration. Committees do not speak on behalf of the entire city council or the community, and an endorsement from one specific city council committee does not result in an automatic endorsement from the full city council. So we have what we call eight standing city council committees. With the exception of the agenda committee, these all have three city council members as a part of the committee. The agenda committee per the city council rules of procedure is comprised of the mayor, mayor pro tem, and the city manager. We also have eight what we call external committee members, committees that council members are a part of. Some of these have external members as well as city council members. Some of them require city council membership, and some of them make it optional to have an elected official or community member be a part of the membership. We also have ad hoc city council committees as well as community committees of which city council members are a part of. So committee appointments are reviewed annually. That's what we're starting the process this week, and then we'll be making appointments at the June 18th city council meeting. Committee members serve at the pleasure of the full city council until their successors are appointed by the mayor and then approved by the city council. And individual city council members are asked to identify which specific committees you would like to be a part of. So we included in the backup materials those committees that have already been indicated, and we're asking to have that list finalized by June 13th so we can include that information in the June 18th city council packet. On June 18th we're going to request that city council approve the appointments for the 2019 year. With that, I will answer any questions that you have. I've got a couple. Okay. And this is on page one of the, what is this? This is the preferences, and this is just on the council subcommittees. I don't see council member Armitter on the 2019 preference/choice. And also, council member Hussbeth, I see you as on just the agenda committee. I just, it's not a complaint or, it's just trying to make sure that I understand that. Yes. Okay. So I had just taken some time and sent it after, I think the deadline was 5 p.m. on whatever day of the week to be on the agenda. And I had sent mine in later that evening, but I had sent it in, my preferences. We did receive your preferences. Yeah. They weren't included in the packet per your request. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Because of the timing. Thanks. Okay. So what, I mean, what preferences did you indicate? Oh, so is this an appropriate time to mention? Absolutely. My preferences were, I would like to remain, actually, if we could, I want to make, I want to go and look at what I wrote to make sure I'm being, I'm consistent with what I said. Sure. I actually have your email. Oh, thank you. Okay. All right. And, okay, go ahead. So what we received from you is Committee on the Environment, Audit Finance Committee, Immobility, and then you said you would like to step down from the CVB committee. Yeah. And I'm happy. And so those other committees, as I understand it, there aren't necessarily openings, so I'm happy to be on, really, any committees that I'm on now if it turns out there aren't openings on those others. Okay. So if you could get to staff, just so we can have your names in here on which committees that you think you might stay on if there's not an opening, which one if there is an opening, because right now we don't have you anywhere in here, so it's hard to know exactly what we need to do. So if you could maybe provide those, or staff, rescind that out, rescind this out, but if you could maybe confer with Council Member Armitage to say, okay, your statement was, if there's not any openings, I'll be glad to stay on the ones that I'm on now. Just want to have an understanding of where that all falls out for the June 18th meeting. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I think I made that clear in that email, so if you need to incorporate that email into some... Sure. We'll send out a revised list. We just included what we've received to date as a part of the agenda packet for today, but you won't be asked to approve anything until June 18th, and we'll have a finalized list included with the agenda that goes out this Friday. Okay. So I'm just going to go over these individually, just so we can have some comment. Agenda committee is set just by charter audit finance committee, Ryan Watson, Meltzer, and Heshaw are wanting to change that, I mean, I'm okay with that. Committee on Citizen Engagement, we have Council Member Briggs, apparently there's two slots open there, so people can decide. I mean, you don't have to decide today, just get those to her, to staff, before the agenda is posted at the end of the week. Committee on the Environment, there are four preferences with only, I believe, three slots. Anybody? Council Member Ryan? Yeah. I had spoken with Council Member Davis ahead of time and said I would be willing to drop off if you want to take my place, so... Okay. I just didn't know if he'd put his name down. I just sent mine in and put me back on the same things I was on before. Okay. The report committee, we have one, I've chosen to remove myself from that committee, so we have an opening there, if somebody is interested in that, just let staff know. Council Appointee Performance Review Committee, we can keep the names there. We sort of haven't really activated that because of the way that we do performance reviews now, so, but, I mean, we're not terminating the committee, so if we need to, at least it's still valid. Hotel Occupancy Tax and Sponsorship Committee, I know Council Member Hussbeth, Mayor Pro Tem, you were on that, but you've decided you want to do something different than that. Yes, sir. Okay. Go ahead. On that one, Mayor, I got added into that and for reasons that I would have to recuse myself on anything dealing with hotel occupancy, I would prefer not to be on that. Okay. All right. So that means we'll have a slot there. Mayor, if I may, just as a quick reminder, the reason that we had that addition was we have to have at least two members of the Hotel Occupancy Tax Committee serve on the CVB Advisory Committee, so we would just need to know who would want to serve on both. I'm willing to do that. That sounds like I'm not feeling what I was willing to do. Because you've been on the committee. You've been on the Hotel Occupancy Tax Committee. Yes. Yeah. All right. So would, do you want to, is that the one you wanted to get off? No. I'm fine being on it. I was just about to say that if, because I had mentioned I'm fine stepping down from CVB to do something else, but if my being on the Hot Funds and Sponsorship Committee requires me being on CVB, I'm fine continuing on that. I enjoyed being on it and I just thought to make time for other things and give someone else a shot. I appreciate that. Council Member Davis, would you mind serving as the second Council Liaison for the Visitor Commission, Visitor Bureau? For CVB, yeah. Make me that. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. So Mobility Committee, there's three slots for. I added my name there only because as the DCTA appointee, I thought that'd be important. However, I'm not necessarily dying to get on the Mobility Committee. The thing that we would have to understand, though, is that as I would come to give updates, we would have to post that as a regular council meeting because there would be four Council Members present, which logistically that's not an issue. So I'm okay with sort of standing down on that if the Mobility Committee wanted to stay as it is currently, I believe, comprised and then I could just do whatever those regular interval updates are. I'm okay with that. I mean, Mario, do you have a, I mean, is that something that staff is okay with or, because I know you and I had talked about that or yes, yes, yes, yes, oh, okay, sorry, yeah, come on, yeah, yeah, yeah, no, because you and I had talked about that issue of if I give updates, we'd have to post it as a council meeting should I be on the Mobility Committee. If it's just because I'm on the DCTA board, I probably would prefer just to give updates and then just handle those postings as appropriate or as per state law, unless there's some other reason that I'm not really aware of at this time. Correct. With the committee being a three and then again, if we added a fourth, it'd be a quorum issue with the council. So like for today, for today, we had mobility and so we had Nicole Brecker, staff member from DCTA, give the presentation or give the update and in the past, we've had the DCTA board appointee do the presentation or just an update, it's just sitting at the table and just providing an update of what's going on with DCTA business and upcoming activities and initiatives. In the past, it's also been staff is just who's available. So is there an issue, Mr. City Attorney, on if I'm giving updates just simply to post it as a regular council meeting, is there any unintended consequences that we would need to be aware of other than all the council members could attend if they so desired? I mean, is there something else I'm missing? No, if other council members wanted to attend in addition to yourself to that meeting, I mean, we would do a just general posting that more than a quorum of council would be present. So we've got you covered on that. Okay. The current, I'm sorry, council member, go ahead. Go ahead. I was about to change the subject. Oh, okay. Sure. Unless, is there somebody who's on the current mobility committee that just doesn't want to serve anymore that or, because if you do, that's okay. If you don't, then I'll go ahead and step in, but if not, then I'm okay with just giving the updates. I'm only a year into any of the things I'm doing, so I'm not tired of any of them yet. Okay, good. You know, my general approach is if there's something nobody else wants to do, I have capacity to add. Right. But I'm fine with caring what I've got. Okay. How about the two, council member Ryan, council member Briggs? Well, as the RTC representative for the area, I feel like I need to remain on that. Good. Right. Also on the Dallas regional mobility committee. Wonderful. Yep. All right. And I think those are probably more important. I mean, I can give those updates periodically, so we'll just do it like that. We'll just post it as needed when I give the update or we'll have somebody else give the update. But we'll update. Correct. And we'll be sure to, if that's the case, that we'll have, just after the minutes are approved, the DCTA item can be updated, can be at the very top of the agenda. That way we can not hold people over if necessary. Okay. Sure. Yeah. Okay. And I'm happy to remain on the committee on citizens engagement. Okay. All right. So that means -- So you can count me down for that. Got it. If nobody on the audit and finance committee or committee on the environment wanted to try something new, those were two I was interested in, I'm happy to remain on that. Okay. So that means, it sounds like we've got an opening for committee on citizen engagement so far, because we have Councilmember Briggs and Councilmember Armitage are there, and on the council airport committee, we've got Councilmember Ryan and Councilmember Davis and we have an opening there. It seems like all the others, we've been able to sort of talk through -- Correct. And you were able to, I mean, get those notes in, unless we need -- okay, good. Okay. Yes, Councilmember Hussbett. You're getting off light, Councilmember Hussbett. I know it. I see the mayor can appoint, I guess, by chart, the mayor can appoint, so I just might exercise my authority. That's fair. Go ahead. I'm sorry. I'm just giving you a hard time. No, no. It's good. So can you -- is it by charter? Thank you for the explanation on what is required by that additional information, but is that by charter, these requirements? So it says, for example, convention and visitors bureau advisory board must be three elected officials. The majority of those, it's through the enabling legislation that created the committee or board. Okay. And do we have background as to why? Because full disclosure, I have a concern with -- I'd rather have extra citizens on those boards because of the potential for -- you have a board of citizens, and then you have a one, two, three, four councilpersons -- three, rather -- you have three councilpersons, one councilperson, and it could tend to guide the conversation or maybe put a lid on the conversation if -- but for the councilperson being there, maybe it's a more lively discussion. But whatever that is, I just -- kind of that guidance and kind of those -- the meshing, I'm just curious what the -- what you read on the -- when it was established, what they were trying -- what was trying to be accomplished versus certainly now with technology advances, with communication advancements. I think we've progressed a bit, and so I'm just -- I'm curious to understand what was the targeted goal for those? Well, we would have to go back and listen to the minutes and reread the agenda materials to be certain, but we did do research regarding which ones require versus which committees allow for. So that's included as an attachment to the agenda materials. For example, CVB advisory board requires that it be three elected officials. However, the regional transportation council says it may be elected officials, but it could also, to your point, be community members as well. So we're happy to do that research and get it back to you. Yeah, I would just be curious to see what -- I mean, because obviously a lot has changed since then, and I think a lot of that is accomplished if it's just between the different civic activities, social media stuff, just different events. I think a lot of that is accomplished, and I think it just for -- and I may be alone, so I don't know that I can give that direction by myself, but that I just want to kind of have a clear record that I think we could add another business owner, we could add another citizen that's passionate about those things and maybe have a different discussion versus the council person's there and I don't want to be candid while he or she is in the room. Okay. All right. So when you bring this back, we'll have the preference choice filled in, and just so that I can see -- I mean, I haven't -- I know there was some discussion about an e-mail that Councilmember Armitage said about preferences and timing, and so I just like to see that just so I understand what's happening and what those preferences were and why, you know, they weren't up here, but just for my own benefit. Councilmember Briggs. So a question for Councilmember Hatsbeth. On the -- any of the -- are you going to stay on the economic development? I just didn't see your name, so I'm just curious if -- how that goes right there on the economic development, so Davis is there and Hatsbeth, and then there's a separate appointment process. How are we going to do -- would we do that? Well, yeah, I think that's a whole different nomination process. I think somebody's nominated from council and from the EDP or the chamber to form a nominating committee, and then they bring their recommendations forward, which then if Councilmember Davis has a preference, I would think that Councilmember Hatsbeth would go ahead and relinquish that. If he wants to relinquish that, then that'll be known to the nominating committee, and I think that -- I forgot about that process. Yeah. Yeah, we tried to notate with these little boxes where it says separate appointment processes, those that -- we wanted to list them all here just because there was some confusion when we were developing the presentation, what is and is not necessarily considered a council committee, but we do have a few that have specific appointment processes that are outside of the typical process that we use. Okay. Councilmember Ryan. And I noticed -- I know it says it's separate appointment process, but on the DCTA, since I have a long history with -- going back to when it was the city bus service, I wouldn't mind serving as alternate on that. We'll be bringing that back as a separate agenda item. Okay. All right. Any other questions, comments? Fantastic. Wonderful. It seems like we got most of that settled out. Great. Thank you. All right. Agenda item 3b, receive a report, hold discussion regarding the solid waste fiscal year 2019 through '20 operating and capital budget. Good afternoon, mayor and members of the council. My name's Ethan Cox. I'm the director of public works for the city of Dunton. My pleasure to be presenting the fiscal year '19-'20 solid waste budget to you. As you may be aware, Brian Berner is now the director of solid waste, but he's been sunning in Hawaii for the last two weeks, so I let him feel good about things for a couple weeks and kind of work him back into the flow, so he'll be in front of you next week for another item. This will be a joint presentation between myself and Nick Vinson. He's the budget manager for the city of Benton. So without further ado, we'll dive right in. At a high level, we'd like to give you a little bit of an overview of the solid waste and recycling department. I think most everyone understands the services we provide, its collection, its recycling reuse disposal, as well as education and outreach. I think our philosophy, our approach, our purpose is something that we've really tried to articulate over the last year, so if you come out to our facility, you'll see pictures on the wall that say the big picture, and it basically breaks down our mission, our values, as well as some of our expectations that we have for our staff and how we deliver service. At a very high level, we want to make sure we're providing exceptional value to our community. Denton's a very diverse community with a variety of needs, and so we want to make sure we balance sustainability, financial performance, operational excellence, as well as providing excellent customer service. A few of the goals and accomplishments, I'm not going to go through these one by one. I'll just kind of give you a couple of high-level thoughts on here. Probably one of the biggest things that we did in the last year is we went through a fairly significant management reorganization, and part of that was changing the culture of our work environment, improving it for our employees. I think we've made a tremendous amount of progress. Our employee surveys are bearing that out. I think we have an exceptional group of people out there working for us. One of the other things that we really tried to address was improving safety in our training. Safety culture is one of those things that's critical for solid waste. It's one of the most dangerous industries in North America. For those efforts, we did appoint a safety and training coordinator, and we've basically seen the most significant year-over-year improvement in our safety record, and we're recognized by the Texas chapter of the Solid Waste Association of North America, so a lot of progress made a very short amount of time on that. One of the other things that I'll highlight, too, is we've really tried to bring some issues to counsel in terms of what we call case analyses. You've seen a lot of those kind of happen at a policy level. We've also been doing the same type of assessment at an operational level. One of the things that we took a look at last year was the type of equipment that we're using. We replaced one of our compactors at the landfill. It's about a million dollar purchase, but it netted us about eight additional years of landfill life, which is worth far more than a million dollars. I think we're going to continue to take a look at those things, but that was one of the big ones that we really saw in the last year. In terms of goals for fiscal year '19-'20, I'll just highlight a couple of these. Probably the biggest one is we do need some new system software to manage our scale house operations, which is essentially the entry point into the landfill. I call it the nerve center for the landfill, as well as improving our routing and asset management operations. We did have two audits by Weaver and Tidwell over the last two years. We've implemented all of the recommendations from those audits in terms of financial controls that relate to personnel, policies, processes. The one thing that we are unable to fix right now because of our system limitations is having the proper controls in the system that has an appropriate audit trail. We put that as a high priority and something that you'll see in the supplemental package in a few slides. One of the other things that I want to highlight, as you're going to see in a couple of months, is we do have an old subtitled E landfill in the town of Crossroads. We did a minor repair to that about three or four years ago. It still needs some major repair work done to it. So Brian and the Parks Department are going to be bringing back a recommendation to you next month regarding the full-scale repair, as well as a really neat concept with the Parks Department. So we're looking forward to that. In terms of cost containment strategies, I think we have made quite a bit of progress on this front in the Solid Waste Budget. I'll highlight that in a moment. For the year ahead, one of the things that we're really going to be trying to focus on is resource management, and underneath that umbrella, we put staffing, we put equipment, we put our assets, and most of all we put the landfill airspace. And so we are basically implementing processes and standard operating procedures to handle all of that. One of the things that we implemented this year is a dispatch operation to better direct and provide kind of a central point of contact for our routing operations. In terms of equipment and vehicles, we have downsized our fleet fairly significantly. This year we eliminated additional light duty vehicles. We've really right-sized a lot of our pieces of heavy equipment. You've seen a lot of those things as they've come through the agenda. We're going to continue that effort. And from a capital planning standpoint, our goal is really to align our capital needs with long-range plans. We are in a fast-growth environment. The landfill is a regional landfill as it stands right now, and so we don't get impacted just by what happens in the city of Dunton. We get impacted by what happens in the region, and so we want to make sure we're out ahead of those plans as much as we can be. Business improvements. A couple of these things I've already mentioned, but a couple of things I want to highlight on this slide. In terms of checks and balances for budget and CIP, when the city manager came in, basically centralized the finance department for all the planning that goes into our budgets, and I really appreciate the relationship we have with the budget office. Solid waste isn't the most complex budget, but there are a lot of variables, some market conditions that aren't necessarily present in some of the other budgets, and I think we have a really strong working relationship with the budget office, and I think a lot of really hard work went into this, and I appreciate their efforts. I mentioned the dispatch operation. If we can couple that with the new software package that I mentioned a while ago, I think we will see some additional gains and efficiencies, but certainly step up our service delivery for our residential and commercial collections as well. Before we dive into the budget, there's two or three slides that I want to get into. We will be asking, or I'll be asking for a little bit of council direction and feedback on a couple of these. A few things that goes into building the solid waste budget. I mentioned solid waste is a little bit unique from the other utilities and services because we do have market competition for our services. That relates to recycling for commercial entities. They have a freedom of choice. They can choose someone else. For residential, we're kind of the only show in town. For landfill services, we talked to council a few months ago about kind of the outlook for regional landfills. We are seeing one of the largest landfills in the region will be closing its doors in the next two years, and that's about 1.6 million tons of waste annually that's going to need to find a home. There are ramifications and impacts on us as it relates to that kind of regional outlook. We've also talked about the recycling market. We mentioned before that we are fairly insulated financially as it relates to where the market is right now. If the market doesn't shore up in four or five years, that will be something we'll have to take a look at as well. In terms of budget and rate strategy, I don't want to spend too much time on that, but we have laid out a rate strategy that we'll be bringing back to council in a couple of months. This is kind of the general direction that we've tried to seek on the rate strategy. Lastly, I want to take kind of just a minute to talk about policy guidance. You know, in my two years in Solid Waste, essentially when we started there, there were a number of programs, a number of things that we asked council to take a look at as we kind of did a top to bottom inventory of the department. Some very challenging decisions that council was faced with, but I think just kind of taking inventory this week, we look back at the budget we walked into a couple of years ago and when we looked at '19-'20, what we were projecting for a budget, it was $47 million. The budget we're putting forward to you today is $39 million, and so that's about an $8 million swing from where we were two years ago. It's really enabled us to do the 12% rate reduction for residential as well as stave off rate increases for commercial as well as the landfill. So significant amount of work and I know it's been a lot of challenging decisions for council. We appreciate the support as we've kind of worked through this. To that end, the one that we've looked at most recently is the residential, what we call additional services. So this is anything above and beyond the refuse and recycling services. We talked to council on May 21st, provided a little bit of an overview and some recommendations. What we tried to do with this slide is put together what we took as council direction from that and give you a couple of things to kind of get an early preview on. We're not going to be talking about rates today, but we wanted to get this in front of you and get some additional feedback so we can fold that into what we bring back to you in a month or so. So I'm going to go through these at a very high level, but if you have questions, comments, certainly entertain those. First one we have up here is yard waste. A couple of the things that you see in terms of the recommendations and direction we received is switching from kind of a bundled service into a subscription service, eliminating the plastic bags and instead having basically an opt-in rate of $10 a month if you want to do the craft bags, which are basically the paper bags you get at Home Depot, they're compostable. Or doing a yard cart, which would require a purchase of the cart as well as 50 cents per month. This would be kind of an opt-in and opt-out program that allows us to route vehicles. Did you say $10 a month? No, no, no, $1 a month. $1. Okay. All right. So, just so that I'm clear, yard waste is basically grass and leaves. Grass clippings, leaves, small brush that can be fitting to either a craft bag or the cart. Okay. It's not the tree limbs that are cut up into whatever sections? That's correct. Got you. All right. Okay. Yeah, so that's a good segue into the next one. So a couple of the things that we tried to reevaluate with brush, that is an unscheduled collection currently. We would propose switching that to a scheduled collection. The over four-cubic yard charge was $7 per cubic yard. We talked about the story of the $900 charge for a resident. We would propose switching that to an hourly rate. One quick note on this rate, this is full cost recovery, and so there is some play there for council if we wanted to adjust that up or down. Bulky waste, the biggest change there is changing the limits. Right now it's four items per year. We'd be taking that down to two items per week. So you do get more bang for your buck in terms of more items to set out. And then we also are dropping the charge from $7 per item to $5 for anything over two. We don't have bulky waste collection for commercial currently. It's also not bundled into the commercial rate. We are taking council's direction in reducing that. If we don't bundle it, we would recommend a cost recovery trip fee as well as a per item fee. I mean, that's sort of what I brought up about people who dump couches and chairs at dumpsters that aren't theirs and this is some service that people could pay for, you know, because they're taking advantage of it for the $20 trip fee or whatever. This is what you're talking about. Yes, it is. That's correct. Okay. Great. Electronics and appliances, this is another. We're switching to full cost recovery. For this and home chemical collection, we had three or four different pieces of council feedback. So if we need to tweak this, we can. So electronics and appliances currently is $20 per item. Full cost recovery is $40 per item. We also heard direction that we should look at adjusting the frequency. Right now, that happens weekly. We can move that to monthly. We can move it to biweekly. It's just a matter of economies of scale and getting some efficiencies there. Okay. Councilmember Hatsbeth. Yeah. Going back to brush, do you have a kind of a cost associated with that schedule collection per resident or do you have a feel for what that would cost? And the reason I ask is because is there an opportunity to say have it scheduled where they get a dumpster brought out almost like a construction site type dumpster? And so now it's not our city employees loading up branches, the injury concerns. It's them loading their own branches, et cetera, into this container. When we just come by and pick it up, I don't know what that cost is. Conceptually, that's certainly possible. Yeah. I mean, if I understand what you're saying, you're talking about like a rollaway dumpster? Yes. An open top? It's going to cost a lot more than that. I mean, an open top delivery is I mean, depending on the I think it's a couple hundred bucks or something like that. It's fairly significant. I think it depends on the size of the job. And typically, what we'll do, Mr. Hespeth, is if a customer calls into customer service, if they can give us some decent ideas of volumes, I mean, something like what happened with the storm debris through the recent event. Now, we did all that free of charge, but we did exactly what you're talking about. There's so much volume there, it wasn't efficient for us to go out with the clock trucks. We went and set roll offs to deal with the really, really big jobs. I don't know that we see that happening too often just in the normal course of everyday collection, but it's certainly something that we can entertain if someone has that much volume. If I may? Yeah, sure. I'd like to see that, Matt, because I would like to see, so average, let's say larger than average, pickup, employee time to drive there, either claw or clean it up afterwards, you know. So claw is going to grab most of it, just going to have a little bit to pick up. What that cost is associated with free labor, the homeowner putting it there, tree service putting it there themselves, and then we just come by and pick it up, and look at that. And there may be some discounting, but with that discounting, we then don't have our employees dealing with branches, et cetera, et cetera. I'd just like to see how close those numbers are. No, I think it's a good point. I think one of the things, aside from delivery and the rental of the container, one of the biggest costs for roll off services disposal, you're paying a per ton rate. Because this is feedstock for our composting operation, you wouldn't have that cost associated with it, so we can kind of run a scenario where at this certain volume that makes financial sense for us to do that. So let me just, and I don't disagree with that, but I know what's going to happen. The same thing that happens at our commercial dumpsters for where people set things out, except people are going to see an open top sitting on the street, and before you know it, unless they literally load it up in one day and they come pick it up in one day, it's a magnet. I mean, so we need to factor that in, too, because if it's contaminated, then we can't use it for composting, and it does have to go into the landfill. So that's, anyway. Point well made. I think there is, I'm going to eyeball Brian over there and make sure he keeps me honest. There is some regulation that's been passed at the state level regarding roll off containers that they have to be tarped. Now, I'm not saying that's going to negate people from illegally dumping, but they're going to have to disconnect the tarp to put it in there, and the tarping is really a responsibility for whoever is renting the container. Oh, so it has to be tarped while it's sitting on the ground. Exactly right. Not just while it's being transported. Right. Okay. Good. Okay, we got everybody's hand up, so what we're going to do is we're just going to start over here, come around the corner. So I have quite a bit of comments. I let everybody speak, so I'll just kind of go over my two and then go through. So I did post this, and it was the first time that the rate payers had seen it, and I have over 100 comments of people that are very unhappy with it. It is a very big change from the last 10 years, and we haven't really gotten any citizen feedback on any of this, and so I was looking for that. I'm concerned with the last two here, we're taking the two items that would cause the most environmental concern on illegal dumping, dumping in rivers, leaving out in the field, appliances with freon, and just home chemical collection. We're making them more expensive, and we're making them more difficult. Those are the two things that I'm pretty dissatisfied here with on this option. I would like to know what is the difference between, so like a fence picket or fence panel, would that be bulky waste or would that be, how would that be counted? I'm just kind of curious, this is on a different topic, but. Okay. Fencing, tile, stone, things of that nature, technically construction debris, and so much like we were talking about with the brush discussion, volume matters in a lot of cases, and so if it's one fence panel, I think we can accommodate that as a bulky item. I think when we were here last time, we showed an accumulation where it was multiple fence panels. That should be scheduled with a roll-off container or delivered to the landfill. We should not be processing that with a standard collection truck. So on the electronics, say so, if it's an older TV that wouldn't be counted as one item of bulky waste, it would be completely separate? Well, we would treat it as, we can treat it as bulky waste. I think the electronics and appliances, part of this is a special diversion, and so whenever a customer calls in and says I have a television I want to dispose of, okay, you can do two routes on this. You can schedule it as a bulky item and it's individual when it goes that way. If it needs to be diverted or processed special handling, then that's when it requires the special collection. Does that make sense? Okay, so yeah, we're going to keep going on. So my other, just one more comment, is that I just wanted to let you know that the most comments I received back, that it's confusing, for one, about the how much you need to have and how much you don't, and for us in our neighborhoods with lots of trees and lots of leaves, there may be several, a few months out of the year where it's going to be over the amount allowed and it's going to be up to $100 more maybe a month, per se, with that. And also, everything is just going to go in the green cart. Say we had a storm roll through and I drove by and I saw maybe four houses and there's just a pile of sticks maybe like this that are out of the curb and at this point can go and be turned into, you know, mulch or dirt, but if we do it this way, it's going to go into the green bin and just be landfilled. So that's my main concern. So a couple of kind of follow-up, so when you say confusing, which, I think I heard you say it was about the volume limits, is it about the yard waste, the brush, is there a particular one that? What's bulky, what's not, why, you know, what do we do when we schedule collection, and it's $10 extra now for you to come pick up a few things of paint, but you're only going to do it a month, every month, I mean, once a month instead, or I could just chunk it in my trash bin and it can, you know, go into the landfill, which would be much easier. So it's just the, I can get more in depth on all the comments. Those are just the ones that I was going through that I heard. I think just kind of a note on this, this is very high level and it doesn't have all the context that we'll build into it whenever we bring it back on the ordinance. I think what we talked to Council about last meeting, or May 21st, was frequency rates, restrictions, and so as we put this together, definitions is something that we definitely want to look at to address your comment on the bulky waste. We will be going through and addressing that in our Chapter 24 ordinance as well as our rate ordinance. I think that needs a refresh. It hasn't been touched since 2002. In regards to I think the, what was it, the HCC, the $10 collection, the other thing that is important is we do still maintain our drop-off program that's at the location. We've also looked at providing collection events as opposed to the door side collection. So we can certainly implement Council feedback on this. This is by no means a finished product. This is why we wanted to get it in front of you today, to kind of take that feedback and get direction. >> I'll follow up about that. >> Real quick. >> The drop-off, do you pay $10 if you drop it off there too? >> No, the $10 is for the collection service. >> It's for the gas? Or? >> It's, so cost recovery, if we were to do cost recovery on this, it's about 200-and-some-odd dollars per collection when we break out the cost. So there is a, there is much like the trip fee for bulky waste, it is cost recovery for running that collection route. If it's dropped off, then we would waive that fee. >> Thank you, Mayor. A couple of things, one, adding the, having the yard waste on subscription service I think is going to be extremely confusing, extremely hard to manage. If there's craft bags, how does the driver know if they subscribed or not type of a situation? >> I don't mind if we said craft bags or cart and you have to pay $20 for the cart. That part is fine, that subscription service, it would be very confusing and would look like it's a rate increase since it's already included. >> I think what we would do to that point, Councilmember Ryan, is it will require a great deal of communication and education. There's a couple of different ways that we can approach this is we can go ahead and start basically identifying the houses that are opting in, start tagging those houses, letting them know that this change is coming, allowing them an opportunity to opt in or opt out. The other thing, too, is really what the subscription service allows us to do on that opt in and opt out is build an efficient route, drop pins in a map, things of that nature. >> Well, and I can say if there's a subscription service to it, I mean, I put my carts out once a month basically, so I might put them out twice a month and my yard waste would end up in my green bin, which I really don't want to do, but I think that's going to be what you're going to see throughout town is more yard waste will end up just going in the green bin because of it. On the, I understand this is a very high level, but on the $75 per hour on the brush pickup, is that with the claw truck or is that, you know, if you've got two guys that are -- >> They're on the truck. >> So how many do they, how many cubic yards can they normally pick up? I mean, is that, that looks like it's 11 would be the comparison. Is that -- >> It's really not a factoring in the cubic yards. This is for an hour of labor plus an hour of the truck. It's based on the cost of service model. When you fully load all this into an hour of that time. >> The reason I ask that is you've got this guy that's got 10 yards and this one that's got 20, but the truck was a little more efficient, you know, his first stop of the morning, he had plenty of room in the bed, he didn't have to take time smashing it down, that type of thing. So the guy with the 10 gets charged for just as much time as the guy with 20 does would be what I would be concerned about. >> One of the things that we've taken a look at is we can break this into smaller increments versus an hour, it increases the administrative requirement to track your time more precisely for these drivers and equipment, but that's certainly something we can take a look at. >> Okay. And then the last one I want to speak on is the bulky waste. My concern with two items per week is if I've got eight items, I'm going to call you every week and have you make a trip to my house every week so that I don't get charged, two items out each week. So I think four per year was too low, but I think maybe we need to look at a number of items per month, a number of items per year or quarter or something like that, that we don't end up encouraging people to require that we make more trips out to their house. >> I think some good points have been made so far. I wanted to say I have received a number of emails with people having concerns about the fees and the subscription service. One thing that I like up here is I like that there's a choice of craft bags and yard cart and that there's no plastic bags allowed. I really like that. I'm wary about any fee for any method of either landfill diversion or directing items to the landfill that need to go in the landfill. In reference to the concerns expressed earlier about illegal dumping of various objects in private bins, I feel that if someone has a choice between paying a fee or dumping something for free in a private bin, that they would choose the latter. As one of my concerns about charging fees, as for the last two, electronics and home chemical collection, the cost for electronics is really high. For many, it is prohibitively high already. And for home chemical collection, as Councilmember Briggs mentioned, it's going to go and end up going, for people who don't want to pay the $10, it's going to go into our water, into our landfill. So I believe that if there are things that we really don't want to be illegally dumped or to go in our water stream, that we need to make those things available for free for the customer and to budget accordingly. >> Seems to me like you've got a couple things going on at the same time, an operation strategy and a financial strategy, and I get the operation side completely that if we're just collecting things in an inefficient way and we can more intelligently group them up and so on to contain costs, that makes sense to me, on the financial strategy side, what is the objective? Is it that these costs are not now being recovered and that's why you want to kind of target them at the users? >> I think it's about encouraging equity and improving the cost recovery is really what we've taken a look at on the May 21st meeting, is in some cases these services are being bundled into the residential rate, so it's really a policy decision for Council. Do you want to continue to bundle, which is fine, we continue to proceed exactly as we have in the past, or do you want to take a look at some of these services and taking a different service model approach. So that's really the high level view of what we're trying to accomplish. >> My reaction in looking at the list is that these are things that most people will have to deal with at some time, and there might be a very small subset at any given time, but it's sort of everybody eventually. So I just think kind of philosophically and like kind of how we want the City of Denton to look to our residents, it makes more sense to me to say all these things that everybody eventually deals with are bundled into the rate. But what I don't know is in order to recover our costs, if you look at the totality of all this activity, are we saying we need to increase the rate to cover it, and by how much if we did that alternative strategy? So I would be interested in knowing that. Is there a consequence to making the other choice? >> I think what we would want to do is over the next two or three years try to drive some efficiencies out of residential so we avoid a rate increase is really what you would try to accomplish. Can that be done without making these changes? It remains to be seen. I think if we want to look at further reducing residential rates, it may require some of these decisions to be made. This doesn't happen in a vacuum. We have an additional slide coming up in just a moment that could change this a little bit. But I think the idea is really about adjusting equity is if I'm not using this service at all, say for instance I mulch my yard waste, I don't have a large wooded lot, I'm paying $5 in excess a month for a service that I'm not utilizing and I don't intend to utilize. We do get some feedback from residents that feels everyone kind of has their own approach to these programs, their own feelings about them. We do have a lot of customers that get an extreme amount of utility out of this but there's also a variety of customers that may not get that amount of utility out of it. So just trying to find that balancing act between what's appropriate for everyone. Council Member Davis. So like the others, I have kind of a couple things I'd like to touch on. I'll try to go from top to bottom. I agree one of the best things on this slide is the no plastic bags allowed in the yard waste. I'd like to point out though, I've talked to some people who live in other towns who use the subscription service and to me a subscription service means the kind of equity that you're talking about. If you're somebody who doesn't live in a house that produces a bunch of leaves every year and you have a service tacked on that's bundled or a rate that is based on having to conduct service for other places where there's lots of trees, lots of tree cover or a big yard to mow and they don't mulch the clippings or whatever. You know to me it's not fair that that person pays what a higher rate to cover the cost that it takes to process everybody else's leaves. So we all kind of know the houses in our neighborhoods that every fall put out a whole bunch of craft bags in the houses in our neighborhoods that don't. I feel like the people who are taking advantage of the service ought to pay a de minimis fee honestly for the service. If this comes to be I'll probably take advantage of it myself and I know some neighbors who won't, who would rather not pay the fee for something that they don't use. An extra cart, that's something that people get to choose. Do you buy the cart and do you have the added trouble of rolling it out every hour after you use it or do you not pay for it and you do your once a year your big leaf collection or whatever. Like I said I've talked to people who live in places with the subscription service and it's not any more onerous in my opinion than what we have now which is either you bag it up and put it out or it goes in the green cart anyway. To me this is a better option than you know if you've got your one craft bag a year then you're not somebody who needs to do the service. If you've got more then you're somebody who needs to do the service. On the brush I think it's possible that we could build in a mechanism on the operational side that just like when we had the big storms and the tornado, Solid Waste made the decision to run some extra routes, they did some extra pickups. At a staff level a decision could be made that you know what today's the day we let you do six cubic yards because there's been a weather event as opposed to you know somebody's not out there with a tape measure for every one of these routes measuring the bundles and making sure they're under four cubic yards. So I'd like to see something built in where we have that flexibility that there's a weather event you know this sector of town got hit pretty hard, we're not going to be out there charging $75 an hour for a little bit of extra brush one collection out of the year. On the home chemical collection I was a little bit surprised to see this and the increase in electronics because one of the things we talked about the most, I'll focus on home chemical collection, so that's a three quarter of a million dollar concierge service that we offer right now that you call up and you schedule it and somebody's going to show up one of the least efficient ways we do collection right now they're going to show up whenever you schedule it for and take your couple cans of paint or whatever. I think what we talked about last time was not so much cost recovery in the fee you know that it would cost you $10 which frankly if we run the same number of collections as we did last year $10 a collection is not an enormous cost recovery, it doesn't touch that three quarter of a million, but the efficiency side of it so you could still for instance you could kind of do a hybrid you'd still schedule your collection but all the collections are on Fridays you know you could still schedule your collection we say thank you Mrs. Jones for scheduling your collection I'm not going to be out there tomorrow morning because that's highly inefficient but I'll be there on Friday we could save quite a bit of money by doing you know or even we pick up on the third Thursdays please set your stuff out on the third Thursdays without charging for the collection so that's kind of what I'd like to see is more efficiency on the operational side with the home chemical collection and not the introduction of the fee. The electronic appliances I'd like to see some numbers on how much cost recovery we're really doing by upping it $20 an item but the same the same idea if kind of a hybrid scheduled service that we have you on the list we're going to come to your house but it's not going to be until next Friday or whatever I think we could save a significant amount of money that way. I'm confused I thought we talked about all this back in May some of it I mean we talked about the cost three quarters of a million dollars $750,000 per home chemical electric so we lowered solid waste rates 12 cents or 12% I believe was it last year yes sir raise them back up and we'll give everybody this for free so my point being I think it frustrates me when I hear that if somebody has to call to get a monthly collection on home chemical collection instead of just showing up take the include the fee or don't include the fee that somehow that's going to motivate people to go out throw it in their green bin or throw it in the river well I can tell you people who are conscious about the environment are not going to do that they're going to say okay when do I need to do this and people who don't care about the environment it doesn't matter if you give it for free and you show up at their house every day they're going to they're going to go dump it somewhere else so let's just make sure what we're talking about here because this is I mean this kind of Armageddon approach that if we do something that the city is going to become some toxic waste dump I just don't see that happening you do have people who are going to illegally dump no matter what you do now for those who haven't had dumpsters for those who don't have dumpsters that they have people come dump stuff beside them you don't understand the problem I mean it doesn't matter whether it's free or not people are just going to do what they want to do to get rid of their stuff and if it means throwing it in your dumpster I mean I walked in one time and my whole dumpster was full of fence panels and they weren't my fence panels guess who pays for that I pay for that I pay to have that special dump come in and do it so your commercial a lot of your commercial entities are subsidizing me a lot of these features anyway because we have to do it if a couch shows up at our dumpster or three pieces of furniture who do you think pays for that we do it would be like if I came out and dumped three pieces of furniture on any one of y'all's yard that's sitting here today just dumped it you would have to find a way to dispose of it and what we're trying to do here is find a way to achieve a couple of objectives and that is to make some operational efficiencies that's probably one of the things that has made the most sense to me is let's make sure that we understand the operational efficiencies and the savings we can get from those and then what the fee items are because when you really break this down I look at brush you're still getting it's it's on a schedule collection now correct it's unscheduled right now it's unscheduled right now so you just drive around the city and as you see it yes I just can't imagine that people are going to think that if I have to pick up the phone and make a phone call and maybe do a little bit more planning on what I'm going to do my work I mean so we can raise the rates I don't have any issue doing that I mean we can provide all the service people want but we also hear from this dais how we want to cut fees and how we want to make things as cheap as possible but then when it's the things that you don't want to be as cheap as possible somehow we've got to make a change there so I'm okay with changing some of these but let's come on let's not start talking about how everybody's going to start dumping in the river how everybody's going to start making the city of Dent in one big trash heap when people are doing that now and I like to give the citizens a little bit more credit that they're probably a little bit more conscientious than that and if home chemical collection I don't care if it's ten dollar collection fee but we're spending seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year as what you said councilmember Melcer that some people may never use that in five years some people may never use it and we're all subsidizing it so that's really the philosophical discussion here we can all talk about the numbers we can all talk about schedule or unscheduled but it really comes down to the philosophical discussion of do we all pay for a few to have some additional services that they may need occasionally or do we somehow try to find the best way rationally and reasonably based upon data to parse that out to where it's a little bit more equitable I really don't care where we land but let's make sure that we are talking what we're really talking about here because electronic appliances we have to dispose of those in a special way somebody puts a refrigerator out there we've got to take it to the landfill if it hasn't already been the Freon released we have to evacuate the Freon and then we have to dispose of it I don't know how many of you have had to pay to have somebody come pick stuff up but $20 or $30 or $35 to have somebody come pick up a couple of couches or a couple of appliances it's going to cost you double or triple that if you have somebody come haul it off to the landfill so let's try to keep the discussion at a rational reasonable basis to where we're talking about hey do we just want to keep the rates or raise them to where everybody sort of has an opportunity to have the most convenience that they can and if not we're trying to figure this out but the rhetoric of that everybody's going to somehow become some polluter I think is really really just a little bit overboard Councilmember Briggs. So if you are a family and you have a $10 fee right you can say well I can call and I can schedule come pick up my paint which one are you talking about I'm talking just the paints because people have lots of paint right or chemicals right they want the chemicals to be handled safely right so I'm not saying they're necessarily just going to throw them in the creek behind their house but they're going to put them in the landfill which is going to be an irresponsible way to handle that so help me okay in the green bin okay so what you're saying is that a family who's conscious enough to call to schedule a home chemical collection they got four cans of paint they painted a couple rooms they got them sitting in their garage right all right they got them sitting in their garage until they can come and be picked up either scheduled or unscheduled on fixed income with a $400 utility bill so you're so you're saying okay so you're saying that that family instead of doing that will take those cans put them in the green bin and they'll go to the landfill and also I want to go back to the rate cut that we went over I guess was a year ago or two years ago that was my understanding that that was because of the projects that were was stopped the waste the bad projects it was not supposed to be an actual service interference it wasn't supposed to be well we're going to have to change everything if we make this rate cut or I wouldn't have approved it I thought it was something we were doing correct you're correct yeah so I mean we did it too early without actually seeing the case but I was told and I was under the impression that we could do this and no future no service would be disrupted and so when I I'm I'm just a little confused well you were sitting on you know several hundred thousand if not a couple million dollars that we couldn't justify and because the pro forma is that the council approved the last few years are so badly off on the revenue projections so when we when we did discontinue those services we gave essentially gave the money back to the ratepayers we've not been through a cost of service analysis yet this was prior to starting to work our way through all of these these programs at Blue Ridge but essentially what this was was we need to know what our cost of service is every few years so we've chosen to do that and demonstrate to the council of the monthly fee that comes in this is how it's currently a portion I think what Ethan has been talking about for the last month or two is now that we've got that information and we've got a set point you've got certain programs here that are either not heavily used around the community or you've got some folks that you know the Yardwation brush brush collection for instance that in some instances are being abused by contractors that sort of thing and and so where are we going to draw that line but that was the rate cut last year was simply giving back to our tech our ratepayers how much had been over collected based on bad pro formas this presentation that we've been going through methodically over the last year has been to show you what our cost of service is identifying inefficiencies and delivering that service to our residents and just giving you ideas to to chew on in terms of how we could move forward he has told you numerous times we can take one of these suggestions all of them or none of them and and simply move forward but I think I think the the strategy is Councilmember Meltzer had asked earlier was we are always looking to control costs in the future and I'm not sure that when the last time the Council had been through this comprehensive of a of analysis of the services we provide are but it's probably been many many years so that's the only point in this we can we can essentially set up the rate structure anyway this Council likes I'm sorry one thing at a fun level solid waste is very healthy and I think really what this discussion is about is here's what these services cost is how should the cost be recovered and by whom and I think that's just kind of rewind back to the rate decrease I don't want that to get confused with what we're trying to do well and I and I would step in and say there's a second part to this if you recall we you know it was clear that we were over collecting on the commercial side and so we've been spending the last several months kind of trying to figure out what that's going to look like in terms of right size in the commercial services and what our actual costs are to so we're not overcharging either our residents or our commercial businesses so we're continuing to work our way through that but this is really just policy direction for our five-year budget how we're going to do business we don't we can we can certainly ease into one or two of these in the next year and then continue evaluating over a couple of years but you know it doesn't have to be all or nothing right now is my point you have choices so I just want to state you know what what my approach has been to this cost problem and the the environmental issues and that that has been that I have consistently voted against putting more money into the landfill expansion in that permitting process which I realized started before I was on council I'm not trying to open up that discussion here that's not the posted topic but just to say that you know that in spite of that that the council has has voted to you know invest in expanding the landfill and that's money that could have gone to diverting from the landfill in in my view and that's you know it's a that's part of the situation that we're in now and I would I would encourage anybody who hasn't yet to go go visit the landfill and to look and to see these items electronics to go here you know from our from our water department and other departments how we have chemicals vitamins you know we've got antibiotics and things and you know some of these are visible because they don't get absolved dissolved by the body and others are just are invisible but you know we we do have a landfill that has these items in it and you know I consider it both fiscally and environmentally responsible to do what we can to divert from the landfill so that is how I've consistently voted but I realize it's inconsistent with the investment in the landfill expansion. Councilmember Meltzer then councilmember Briggs. Mr. City Manager you mentioned that you know you have some clear situations where there's like abuse in the yard waste is a commercial kind of crossing the streams is is that true across these categories or is you know is that sort of a unique thing about yard waste and I'm you know where I'm coming from is I doubt you might correct me but I doubt that that kind of thing is as much in evidence for like the you know the electronics and the home chemical but maybe I'm wrong no I don't I don't think you're wrong you know we've certainly Ethan demonstrated it visually to you and the last workshop where we talked about yard waste brush bulky waste I think the issue with that is people have very different definitions some folks just don't know you know especially they have a you know so and clearly what he runs into a lot of times and was sharing some stories with you or folks that have their yards cleaned up they get a price from the landscape company and they're paid they pay them for disposal then they take off and put it out at the curb so that sort of thing is going on there needs to be some control that situation but I do think listening to you all of you today we probably can come back to you on the at least the bottom two on more of a schedule service on a monthly basis or a quarterly basis and give you an interim type solution this has not really been about the money for us so much as it's been about the efficiency in terms of those top three or four I don't doubt that some of the scenarios council member Ryan throughout he's obviously more devious than I am I would occur you know it's the yard waste but we can we can certainly come up with some middle grounds for you and alter a couple of these I think there's been some interesting suggestions today and look ten or forty dollars on a night it's not going to move the needle it's really about how do we use our staff appropriately and and keep people there's also we've also seen folks the ones that we do want to you know divert out of that landfill they're going to cooperate either in no matter what we do so we can certainly schedule routes and bring you something back I just don't have any issue a lot of good ideas today those top two or three those are issues for us they're big time suckers there there's safety problems some safety issues the yard waste and brush are big issues in terms of you know we might go over there with a grapple truck and a crew but they're not always finding just yard waste in there sometimes there's metal objects sometimes there's things so these are serious issues can we look at the the way that we're you know potentially proposing to fund this sure we can get we can come back and give you a couple more ideas to kick around based on the feedback we received today so on this list I want to go down so my suggestion would be to kind of ease in to it because it's a lot of change and I'm not in a complete agreement with some of them but I do like the no plastic bags and I like the craft bags I think maybe we can make that conversion over to craft bags and the my one request would be though before we start saying scheduled collections that we get the software in to to do our our routes we make that more efficient and then we also get an application where we can order that service on the internet or through our phone through an app or else our customer service agents are just going to be crazy 130,000 people I mean we're not talking about how many people we need to hire to get those phone calls to schedule that service I mean unless we can you know find another way to do it more efficiently and then we could start start doing that maybe the schedule collection the electronics appliance I'd rather keep it the $20 an item and then you know how I feel about I mean if we do the I'd rather keep the HTC bundled if we could do different you know weekly or every you know whatever we need to do there for that so that that's my and I just want to go back to the first thing we said was to reduce costs without compromising service so I just want to keep the whole thing about service and what our residents and our ratepayers have expected and what what they you know want and a few of the emails said raise my rate adult you know a 50 cents I want the service to continue and I know that's not how everybody feels but I'm just saying if you have somebody who has you know a large TV and they set it out and it's going to sit there and CIS is going to give them a ticket but they can't afford the $40 for the city to come pick it out what are you going to do so I mean I just I just want you guys to think about that as well I think he's tried to accommodate that kind of a situation anyway with at least giving a couple of items you know free service it's it's not the cost it's the scheduling and so we can go back through and revise several of these to see if we were kind of triangulating I think we're going to know we've we've hit the right point when none of you are happy so you know but we can we can certainly try to find a middle ground I think those top two are ones that we still want to kind of stick strong on and get and get some you know get some history for you I like your idea about you know the routing software because it's going to be have to be paired strongly with the communication strong communication program but we'll take another shot at this and get back to you I like all the feedback it's obviously if you're this passionate about it all of you we know what we're going to hear in the public I'm also not too concerned about customer service getting overwhelmed I think that they are really good about you know directing people in the right way that we just need to give them a very clear program to administer and for what you know spending eight years in customer service they get these calls now yeah and I think trying to clean up and better define what our services are and are not I think it will provide them all the ammunition they need and I appreciate the discussion I think this that was the reason why we wanted to put it in front of you today so we're not having this discussion with rates breathing down our neck and we have to set the budget we wanted to get a kind of a head start on it so we'll circle back with another revision of this for you to consider later on and I want to back up something Ethan says and kind of take the emotion out of this a little bit I think it's reasonable for all of you to know what you're paying for and really at the end of the day that's all this exercise has been about is what are you paying for so how we get there we can get there in different ways but it's a cost problem and it's just simply you we need to be able to articulate to you what people get for their service and why how we reach that point I think we're we're getting close yeah I guess my biggest hang up is that subscription service on the yard waste that right now that's probably all the items up there that are currently bundled in our main area to convert that into a subscription service just doesn't didn't make sense otherwise the argument of well only the people who are going to be using it are now going to be paying for it well you've got bundled brush and bundled bulky waste that people aren't using so that argument doesn't really hold true and I think that if we had to raise the overall rate by 25 cents or 50 cents in order to cover that in order to avoid the craft bags of the cart you mean I mean yeah in order to avoid that dollar or 50 cents and have people actually have to subscribe because that's just going to create an issue well I moved from this part of town to this part of town and I didn't put that on the new house and now I've set up my yard waste and it's not getting picked up and those types of things or somebody that moves in that's not used to you know how do we know so is it is the objection that there's any kind of a fee it's but giving folks the choice of either craft bags or yard carts okay it's just yeah I'm fine with that it's it's the added fee it's it's using a subscription service of making them have to add something else to what they're doing that if it's it's already included in their normal service that they can set up craft bags if we if we develop a program that will pick up the yard waste but it has to be in one of those two methods you're okay that'll yeah I see okay one of the things that we could consider and we would have to take a look at this but you know right now the subscription service is basically an opt-in if you're not going to use the service do we want to provide an opt-out where you do get 50 cents or a dollar rate relief per month we would have to run the numbers on that and take a look at it the reason why I want to kind of hone in on the subscription side the biggest efficiency gain of all these that we can take a look at is driving up and down every street looking for yard waste and if if we don't do that the routing software anything that we put toward it it's not going to matter it's about dropping a pen and a map and going to a particular address to to service it and so I just want to be up front with that so when you come back what I would like to see is let's put some data to this let's put some cost data to this not that we're saying hey it's all about cost but if we're all talking about transparency full transparency if we leave it the way let's say we all say we're just going to leave it the way it is and by doing that we want to make sure that you all understand that it's an extra one and a half million dollars a year that are added to the rate that everybody I don't know what that number is but that's really I mean because I don't know how we're going to be able to make those decisions that's just one piece of data that's important in that decision is this it here this is it okay now what you would pay on a service rate the one thing that I don't have in here right now is essentially a pie chart that breaks down your monthly rate for each of these services no this is what it costs now this is what I'm saying is if you were to implement either what what was on the screen or a variation of what the where is it so that when we're making a decision we're okay yeah instead of just going we like this because philosophically it sounds nice and people aren't going to throw it in the green card or they're not going to they're going to move from sometime I mean we can think of all kinds of extreme hypotheticals but what we're really trying to figure out is how do we provide the most reasonable the most cost-effective the most convenient service for anything that we do in the city in this case solid waste and what's the cost that it's going to be because we've argued over five dollar fees before and I'm just simply saying if we know the cost of what we're you know associated with it then we're able to figure out okay you know if home clinical collection is seven hundred sixty thousand and implementing this is only going to save you a hundred thousand dollars right well I go through the effort it's it's pretty it's pretty clear what that choice is I mean and it's not that it's all about the money but it does provide some other kind of factor that it's like okay we have to weigh it eventually so I think that's an important component because that's what I didn't see is if this were implemented this is what we believe the efficiencies will be or if we didn't do any of the additional fees we didn't change any of the additional fees but we changed the operational side the efficiency side that might equate to X amount of dollars and put that together it's just I mean it's just really just a data it's just data right that's all it is yes and to that point also and if we did the the yard waste brush if that decreased and people stopped doing that how that would affect our dino dirt or mulch because it's all you know cyclical I mean it goes back in and I didn't see I haven't seen the benefit included in in any of this as well so and I did ask for a a list of the collections the home chemical collections curbside do you have that number in the monthly data I do I'm just curious so over here on this is the kind of month by month since January 2018 so total numbers and then we have the averages here at the bottom is that per month those are averages per month yeah for HCC and appliance electronics those are actuals with your total summed here and then comparison to the other services to kind of give you an activity level that's a lot more than eight a week I thought so well understand what we presented last time was the average daily collection is what we presented so when you aggregate that over 20 collection days in a month it does increase to what you're seeing here thank you thank you for this it's very helpful any questions yes yeah just I agree with the I think we do have to pair back the emotional side of things just because for example if I take holistically what I've heard today it's easier to not recycle than to recycle so no one's going to recycle right if you if you just if you take it straight line right it's easier to take everything and throw it in the green bin and be done with it then to parse it out and either parse it out poorly or parse it out well that's still more effort than just to chunk it all in the green bin so we believe our citizens are just geared to the lowest common denominator then they're just going to take it all throw it in the green bin but somehow that's not the case so I don't think that straight line evaluation is it and because if they if it was it would produce itself we'd have a whole bunch of empty blue cards that's not the case so pair out take out that emotion side of things and look at it realistically and I think when I'm evaluating this decision it's efficiencies it's what am I willing to do to get rid of the plastic bags because that's key to me and and I I don't think that's garnered enough attention in this conversation and so for me I think whatever you bring back I'm gonna spotlight that because I think there's value in in not having plastic bags get circulated the other thing I I really do look forward to the numbers on the on the brush collection because I think I could take your same employees and take that same dumpster method and say hey even if it is contaminated I'm going to take those same branches and I'm going to offer it to someone I'm going to use your labor because you're putting that you can go down May Hill now and there's there's a mountain of stuff waiting on you and so I'm going to use their labor that they use to put it on the curb put it in a bin we'll take it back and then parse through it in our facility in a safe environment versus on the street you know and still I think I come out ahead and and I think and so I'm just trying to take your concerns and come up with solutions is kind of my approach to it and I think the city manager raises a good point when we're talking about commercial use of yard waste etc. I'd love to see something where we and initiate a fee for commercial uses if there's a commercial use associated with your residence or whatever that is and you we come pick up there there's a fee as a homeowner there's no fee so now what I'm doing is saying the tree the tree cutter is now saying to the homeowner hey you call and schedule it because it's free if I haul this off it's going to cost me money and so all day long I think you maybe will begin if we can we can incentivize those commercial industries to say to the homeowner I'll come cut your trees but you have to call the city of Denton to pick it up because they'll do it for you for free and so maybe there's a way to incentivize people to be more transparent on on that process and so those are things I'd like to see come back or when you come back and and lastly if I could leave you Mr. City Manager one thing so the home show Smitty's floor was there and they have a carpet that is made of recycled plastics I'd love to know more about that one it's stain resistant if it feels great that I mean the swath they have you know she says it doesn't stain but I'd love to see if there's some way we can incentivize our residents or you know kind of she said it comes in multiple colors so I just want to know more about that and maybe there's a way for us to help that along or incentivize our you know as a use as we're talking about what to do with plastics whatever we can do to kind of highlight somewhere for that to go or whatever niche industry is using that maybe we can partner with them and I just want to explore that further to see what our options are great appreciate it so well we're not done yet we're about halfway through the world's most exciting budget presentation I tell you what then let's take let's take a five-minute break let's take a five-minute break we'll come back yep welcome everybody back to this meeting of the Denton City Council Tuesday June 11th 2019 it's 435 we're on our work session item 3b we're gonna call it 3b2 we've just been through 3b1 and now we're on the other part of the presentation I'm a believer that the sequels are always better so okay all right let's let's see if that holds true so mayor members of the City Council Ethan Cox director of public works we are in the middle of our budget presentation for solid waste and recycling we do have one more piece of policy guidance that we're looking for some direction from council on doesn't have a huge ramification to this year's budget I'll explain why in a moment but it will have a very large ramification on rate setting and what we bring back to the council in a couple of months and so we've kind of skirted around this issue we talked about our landfill operation in the past I mentioned earlier it is being used regionally we are a county seat a lot of the local haulers in the area do frequent our facility I know we've heard from council different opinions on this should be only for dentists City of Denton use I haven't heard much opposition on the other side of that but we don't really have a policy in place or contracts in place right now and so I wanted to bring this forward for council kind of get a little bit of direction so that we make sure that we have kind of an idea of where to go so wholesale customers there are a couple different rates at our landfill that we utilize one is what we call the gate rate which is basically forty four dollars a time and then we have basically a bulk or a wholesale rate that provides a discounted rate to larger haulers and that's twenty four fifty dollars twenty four fifty a time we increase that from twenty three dollars twenty four fifty last year as part of our rate setting strategy the reason why we're bringing this to you today is landfills by and large are a big fixed cost operation what that means is your expenses are essentially the same whether you're taking five hundred tons a day or fifteen hundred tons a day what you'll typically see with landfill operations is they'll accept as much waste as they can before they have to add additional expense and that's where you kind of reach efficiency I'm not sitting here saying that that's what we're proposing but that's really kind of the idea that you're going to have to grapple with today so I mentioned in a previous conversation that regionally we're seeing fewer landfills in the region the biggest of which is the DFW landfill is going to be closing in two years and so we're already starting to see commercial haulers contact us and say will you guys entertain a put or pay agreement or a contract for to accept our waste I'm not sure if that drum beats going to continue to grow louder but it might and so we wanted to get some policy direction because right now we really don't have a policy that guides how to deal with these types of negotiations so real quickly let me run through what's on the slide so we've received two proposals from haulers and didn't county servicing areas like just in crime pilot point to bring additional waste to our facility basically four hundred eighty seven tons per day it would represent about three point one million dollars in net revenue because we are running a fixed cost operation it reduces your cost of service per ton from fifty four dollars down to thirty six dollars I'll get into more of the financial details in just a moment I mentioned put or pay contracts let me give you an idea of what those are put or pay contract is basically locking in a set volume of revenue and waste to be received at a facility so for instance if I enter into a put or pay agreement with a landfill and I say I'm going to bring you a hundred tons of waste a day if I bring that landfill fifty tons of waste I'm still paying for a hundred tons of waste it's a revenue guarantee if I go over I'm paying a penalty for bringing you excess waste beyond what I was contracted so that's kind of the nuts and bolts of how those work a lot of landfills utilize these types of agreements that utilize the additional revenue again to spread their cost and in some cases if they're over recovering costs they use it to subsidize programs or services so where we are currently is we accept about nine hundred and twelve tons per day at our landfill between twenty five and thirty percent of that is what we would consider outside city of Denver waste our landfill life currently is at the year twenty thirty six if we had no wholesale at our facility we'd be at about five hundred sixty five tons a day we would gain five years of landfill life however it would be a net loss in revenue about two point one million dollars to require rate increases across the board to float that the cumulative net impact across the landfill life would be forty seven million dollars in lost revenue you flip this to the other end of the equation which is we have one large wholesaler that we do business with today you tack on the two that we have proposals from you get to about fourteen hundred tons per day you lose five years of landfill life but you gain cumulatively about thirty four million dollars in revenue over that period of time scenario in terms of cost recovery so we've mentioned in previous conversations that commercial is essentially subsidizing through that cost of service study but the landfills was residential rate payers that's a policy decision in terms of subsidization what we want to present to you down here is the landfill if you pursue that would be cost recovery within about a year would require no further subsidization and allows you a little bit more license from a funding standpoint to deal with commercial residential rates indoor fund programs so from a staff's perspective we see pros and cons of both sides of this equation I think what it comes down to for us the reason why we're seeking direction is this is the city's asset how do we choose to use it I will say this it will set precedent for how we deal with offers of this similar fashion coming forward one of the things that we could explore and take a look at is enter into negotiations with three of the most prevalent wholesale haulers and then bring those back individually for council consideration so you can kind of see what what kind of offers on the table so at that I'm going to stop talking in field council direction to see if you want us to entertain negotiations it's a little hard to respond probably for the same reason that you know you find a little troubling because it's it's not it's not fully costed you're looking at in terms of marginal cost but not the full cost because when you when you shorten the landfill life it means it's sooner that you're gonna have to like acquire other landfill right so really every ton we put in is utilizing some unit of that of the asset right and and if it's and if it's moving us toward filling up the asset then it's moving us toward acquiring another chunk of landfill for future so right so we don't really we don't really see here and I don't know how hard it'd be to figure it out you know what the full true cost is of using up the asset this way Brian do you recall off the top of your head the Greenfield cost the weave if you respond you'll need to come to the I want to say it was in the eleven million dollar range for Greenfield I just want to double check that we'd have to go back and look at that number but eleven million is a good ballpark estimate of what a Greenfield villain would be eleven million and by the way and this is only the financial side right we haven't talked yet about just resource utilization environmental impact and so on but but just staying on the financial side eleven million is what is buys you what buys us buys us basically initial property and the permit process assuming that you're in a Greenfield and you have no complaints or contestants to the permit so and then although you know then you're sort of taking land out of other uses right that's another kind of conversation so then you know what's I guess you've got to spread that then over the ton capacity right or like our current landfill I don't know if you're saying that was eleven million I suspect it was more than that but you know and then to make it ready you know what's the cost per ton of having the landfill asset not not just the cost to process it I think I think what we would be looking at is the assumptions we would we would project out to the the end of landfill live now understand the landfill life that we're putting on here does not contemplate the the permit expansion that we have in the pipeline right now but essentially what you'd be looking at is that eleven million dollars you apply inflation to it so whenever that year does come up you basically finance it with debt and that goes toward future ratepayers so you really wouldn't be asking your current ratepayers to put the burden on it but you can do kind of a kind of a time value of money appropriation to this and get a decent idea okay well I would want to see that what's the true cost of using up landfill that because otherwise we can we can we can respond to this you know thank you councilmember Meltzer I think that's a useful thing to think about is you know next steps after our landfill life concludes and then I'd also like to see what these projections look like with the proposed expansion that we're already in the permitting process for because I think that changes things a little bit that that kind of goes to my question then I may have a follow-up depending on your answer you know we're talking to these these haulers and there's a major landfill that's going to close and not be available to them what are there other options I mean where else does this go if this I don't think anybody wants to see an increase in waste from any stream but if it's not coming to Denton where is it going other regional landfills in some cases they may go to a transfer station get placed on long haul trailers put on a train or a truck and hauled to a landfill in a further flung region I can provide council with the map that we have for regional landfills right now there's three MSW class landfills like us in Denton County right now two years from now there's going to be two by the time we get to the end of life on our landfill we will be the only one and so I think it's a regional wide problem and this is why we wanted to introduce this conversation is we don't have to play ball with outside haulers there's a financial consequence to that but there there will be also consequences on hauling further distances emissions things of that that we have to consider as well that kind of gets to my mind I guess the broader point I'm trying to make is beyond the kind of nutshell you've given us here there's kind of a larger conversation to be had I mean trash has to go someplace waste has to go someplace we can reduce ourselves to you know education and recycling all the kind of things we can reduce our waste to a degree but for the foreseeable future it's going to go someplace I'd like to bring those two conversations alongside one another I've asked already about reduced waste or a no waste plan for the city and looking at the financial impact of that I'd like to have these I think the two conversations go together because the landfill life we've got up there is not only affected by our our permit that's in process but it's also affected by what we can do on the on the education side and on the planning side but I mean at the same time I don't know that there's a way that we're going to be able to reduce and educate our way out of this landfill having a definite life to it and if there's a revenue stream to be had there at a responsible cost I'm open to dealing with the wholesale customers I think that's a conversation worth having I just like to have all the data before we go one way or the other I'm good with the current I would like to actually increase the fee again for the wholesalers I don't I think that the rate the gate rate is more expensive right and so if somebody has something they live in the city or their resident they're going to pay more at the gate than an outsider coming in and I would I'd just like to even that up a little bit I would still want to I know that we were taking incremental but I still think it's pretty low and especially if we have this asset that everybody else does not have we should be able to capitalize on that a little bit more and so that's I'd like to stay at that and so when you say here that the current if we did the wholesale it would end at 2031 and is that without the permit of over 200 200 feet that's without and typically if you engage in a putter pay agreement especially with as volatile as the market is right now with the the biggest landfill going away we wouldn't encourage any type of long-term agreement we want to see where the market takes us and be opportunistic with it so I think if we say we want to stick with the current the one thing that I will say to you all today is we do not currently have a contract with the hauler that's bringing the lion's share of that to us today so if gas prices diesel prices drop 50 cents a gallon tomorrow it may be more advantageous for them to go to a different facility and so I want to make sure that if we have direction that we want to stay with current we wouldn't encourage us to kind of go contract with the existing holler that we're we're getting business with does that make sense yeah yeah just for consistency so do you know where the trash so the outside cities like where Argyle and Pollock Point where did do all the surrounding cities right now do is all that stuff come to the city of Denton no it doesn't so it's a right now a lot of it goes to Lewisville which is the the DFW landfill that's going to be closing in two years some of it will go to other facilities in Fort Worth and that surrounding area did you have a couple you wanted to throw it there is a smaller facility up near whitesboro about half our capacity right now that takes some of the smaller cities especially up towards the northeast section but again a lot of the smaller cities you know sangers crumbs that material is captured and does come to our facility thank you as I recall from the discussion last year when we raised the rate from from 23 to 2450 correct that's right that the issue was we didn't know what the others were charging because everybody has their kind of sealed bid so to speak and as I look up here and I see our cost is $36 per ton I think that the 2450 is still I mean if we didn't lose anybody so far if you've got Lewisville is going to shut down it's going to be a supply and demand and if we go up a little too much and we lose some we can always you know bring it back to council to do a budget amendment or do a great reduction to bring it back down a little bit if we needed to but I'm strongly believe that if we're if our cost is 36 at 2450 is too well the 36 is only contemplated if we take in this additional volume right here so right now we're at $54 a ton understand that if we lose the existing wholesaler we go to eyeballing you Tina so keep me honest we would go to like $65 a ton if we lose that so that's kind of the impact of the fixed cost operation is you have less customers to spread the cost over in what's our gate rate right now it's $44 44 so our gate rate is between those two right now but our and I think part of that's why you see the landfill under recovering right now and being subsidized is because of those dynamics that we're talking about the the gay rate is lower than our cost of service yes I was going to suggest you know something like what has been just said by councilmember Briggs and Ryan that I support the the current scenario with raising the raising the cost the question is how much and I like the idea of and I know it's a gamble but having a get as close up to the cost of service as possible I would ideally love to say no wholesale and just cut it off but the you know the net impact I mean that's just that that's hard to ignore so I have a hard time with that but at least I'd like to see us raise the rate it you know and I don't know if someone has a magic number you know if we so currently it's fifty four dollars a time and that under that that's our cost of service now it's a point in time our debt service is falling off and so the the cost per ton will start going down landfill is projected to break even in about ten years I believe give or take and so whatever we do above and beyond the current scenario would expedite that break even scenario so I think what we would be talking about in terms of finding that kind of magic rate is it would need to be a negotiation between the city and one of these three outside haulers to try to get as close to the current scenario as we possibly can so we really can't speculate on what that rate is today what I can say is we would not go below the twenty four fifty that we're currently at oh yeah yeah yeah and and you know in a way I mean this is you know as councilmember Briggs said where our landfill is it's a everybody wants wants to dump in it now and so I would love to see you know how how much we can take advantage of that with the current people we're using without opening it up to more and eventually event you know in the hope of eventually eventually shutting it down okay we have not just really a comment I mean we just spent a whole hour and a half before talking about residential cost of service and how we're trying to you know get that better and then we see that it's fifty four dollars a ton but wholesale is just twenty four dollars a ton and where it's pretty far it's a pretty big difference but we're not I mean we're hesitant because we don't want to like lose them but I feel like there's still opportunity there that if we're asking our ratepayers to kind of come up and pay your fair share then we should definitely consider that for the wholesalers in our outside cities I mean at least a little bit I don't think you'll have any argument from staff on that point I mean that that was one of the first things that we talked about when I got to solid waste I think the wild card here is the market is if we say it's going to be fifty four dollars a ton and down the road is thirty dollars a ton then we lose the business and I think that's really the risk that you have going from the current scenario to the no wholesale scenario but you only lose it till the other landfills get filled and then potentially but and then you could just really cross recover then you could start making money right and that's that's the wild card of the markets is where does it land well and I would just remind two points here remember we found this deal when we pulled back the curtains on the rate structure last year because in the past staff have been allowed to set this rate and this this generates two to three million dollars a year if my memory serves about is that about right it's two point one two point one million dollars a year so that if that goes away that money will have to be spread around across the rate base at this point so I think that was the point was sort of being very careful in terms of ratcheting it up incrementally here and it don't makes you know but your point is where we're going council member Braves is trying to get some some logic on paper combined with the strategy rather than some of these deals here so if we don't if if we want to sit back and do a quick analysis as council member Meltzer asked us to do and just say you know what is the cost to us of you know stabilizing the fund for doing a short-term deal and in terms of the loss of the landfill life we can certainly do that one way or another we're still at risk with this other deal that was put in place because there was no agreement they can walk any time and so there could be a time when the other landfill shut down and we become a more affordable alternative but in the interim it's how many rate increases are we willing to risk on our rate base until that happens there's no question that would happen so then could we do one of the contracts with one of the people who came to us with a better cost of service and then losing that other one would not really be I think that's the position or the bargaining power that we have right now and the reason why we wanted to have this conversation is we could certainly go negotiate with one if we negotiate with all three then we get to pick the best deal that works for us and I think if staff had a recommendation it would be just that is allow us to open the conversation with these folks and then we'll bring them back one by one along with some scenarios of what this does both short-term and long-term I do reiterate that's exactly the point is risk mitigation for the fund if you went down that path so if they did walk you're not as at risk and it's just a matter that we need to get you comfortable with it this will be bring we'll get it forward with a little bit more backup data yes so quick quick factual question these contracts you know about how long are they with these are these contracts in the business that would be negotiated okay it could be so anywhere from if you were to give a range I mean it would be more likely be more than annual do you want to speak to kind of the industry standard yeah if we could if we could stick with the industry standard because if we're going to enter into negotiations I don't necessarily know if I want specific terms or kind of perceptions or strategies enunciated in open session you can go year to year but normally when you use these type of agreements they're anywhere from three to five years three to five and five years on the outside and that's usually you're guaranteeing a price or guaranteeing an escalator and by five years a lot of your variables have changed significantly so you do want to go back in and renegotiate that base price okay well thank you that that's very helpful but you know that that that plays a big role in figuring out you know what you can do being able to lock in rates in a certain way or avoid rate increase once you've got that three to five-year agreement I just want to see if I can make a point maybe a little too dramatically but just you know what I was trying to say before that I don't think registered all these deals might be terrible they might be good but they might be terrible if we take into account the fact that we're using up a resource we'll never get back that's the point so unless you fully value the fact that we will never get that space back you don't know if this is a good deal or a bad deal so I think what I've heard is that we're open to open negotiations bring those back one by one for counsel to evaluate with the attempt to kind of land at our current scenario from a volume standpoint this has been probably one of the most fascinating work sessions I've been involved in in a long time I'm gonna be putting that on my performance review thank you mayor I'm not saying it's necessarily attributed to the presentation I'm saying it's I just find it just so fascinating that in the same conversation we've talked about how we don't want to expand the landfill which if I look up here if we do if we keep it the way it is it's 2036 all right is when is when technically let's say something happens and we don't get approved or something happens and the council says we're not gonna expand the landfill 2036 we don't have anywhere to take our trash whatever trash is at that time based upon recycling you know zero waste these kind of things but yet we're here today having the conversation how can we maximize financially the idea that we will be the only type one landfill is that the right is it type one or what is that the correct nomenclature 2036 type one landfill well somebody's closing in two years there's one other in Louisville yeah and how do we maximize that you know so that we're not asking the ratepayers to pay two point one million dollars a year you know to cover the fixed cost component that these new that these new businesses are so I think the the the data that's been asked for is good data I think that yes we need to understand what is that what is a year of landfill loss cost I mean when I looked up here and I saw so what I mean Councilmember Meltzer as well I'm yeah it's like well this is great but we've lost five years I don't know what that cost is in addition we also have though a permit that's pending and that if we get approval and this council will be able to decide if they ever want to use it or not and to what height limitation or not it's not guaranteed it's not something that's just it's an option so each policymaking body moving forward can make that decision based upon the facts at that time but it's just interesting that what what I'm hearing is which is not a bad scenario is that we're going to have a resource we're gonna have an asset this is just pure supply and demand principle I mean we talk about housing why housing is so expensive it's because we have more demand than we have supplies no different here you're gonna have less opportunity to dump trash locally when you start talking about putting it on a train and shipping it off are you kidding you know how much you could charge to have somebody just be able to drive it down ten or fifteen twenty miles down the road instead of having it hauled off in a train or a barge or however they do it so I like the idea of the additional data what are the costs but I think we need to factor into also some assumption on the landfill permit that if we if it's approved some even just very hyper conservative expansion even if it's only five years or ten years because in two years to 2036 you're going to be able to name your price I mean quite honestly so that means we can name our price but if we're in a situation where we don't have anywhere to take the trash that means somebody's going to be naming their price for us with us so I just think we so I really this is good because we've got to look at this very holistically and very comprehensively we're not just looking at a snapshot of is it new business current business we're looking at a whole strategic plan for the next 15 20 30 years on what are we going to do with our refuge and if we don't have one what it's going to cost us and what's it going to cost rate payers if we do have one how can we maximize the ability and the asset so that we can use other people's refuse not to necessarily denigrate the life span of our landfill but how do we balance the subsidy that we get because that's what I'm seeing here yes I mean what I'm seeing is undercurrent we're really getting two point one million dollars of revenue that outside haulers are providing cost recovery that we as the citizens residents and commercial users in the city that are not having to pay right so this is just I mean this is a it's just a I mean outside of the not to say outside of the environmental concerns as they're not important because they are important but it all works together because we shut it down for environmental reasons we got to go pay it's just about cost it's just what are we willing to pay so I think this is a good conversation it's been quite fascinating to see the different kind of scenario sort of almost bifurcated but this is all one big picture the none of these decisions are happening in a vacuum I mean these all these decisions are are integrated and tied together and that's how we need to approach it because if not that's when we'll make a mistake that's when we'll make a mistake financially environmentally is we somehow bifurcate these instead of looking at totality of our solid waste business so I like the idea of we've got some of the other contracts that we can enter into short term and that we could almost substitute if we don't like if we could raise it on the other haulers and they decide to leave we have a contract that we can fall back on that will fill that gap and then you can bring back to us what what appetite does this council have for I don't want to say new business scenario but I mean it may be that you can raise it on the current haulers get a contract with the ones that don't have a contract increase that revenue and then you can say hey these guys are offering us this much what do y'all want to do it's our decision it's just it's a financial decision it's a it's an overall strategic decision based upon what does it cost per year each year we lose landfill we've got to be able to put a cost to that I mean and once you have that then you know it once you have that data the decision pretty much drives itself based upon those other factors we'll have that ready as we come back to council yes because remember that mr. man I want to thank you for your comments but especially want to point out that's exactly that holistic view is exactly why now is the time to talk about a comprehensive waste reduction strategy this is exactly the time at the point in time in the market factors to talk about reducing our waste from top down whether it's food diversion or other things and then as our our contracts come up with recyclers and that kind of thing to look at all like I said comprehensive waste reduction strategy and how we manage this landfill space sure okay yeah I want to second that call for zero waste strategy that's extremely important it saves our resource saves us money and I want to reiterate just to respond you know to what the mayor said I know it might sound hypocritical while on the one hand I'm saying that I want that I wish we had not voted so early for this expansion and I still don't see why we had to invest for such a you know far far down the road expansion but I am what I'm doing is real is I'm saying that I wish we weren't in this position I wish we hadn't hadn't put in for the expansion but now that we have I'm going to work work with my colleagues and try to figure out what is the best and most cost-effective scenario so that's what I was trying to do just be realistic and and work with what we have instead of just you know boycotting and you know leaving the room every time the landfill comes up so anyway just wanted to make that clear so we've already been the most fascinating presentation we haven't even gotten to the budget yet so it can only get better from here I do want to have one last slide before I hand it off to mr. Nick Vincent we do have supplemental packages built into this year's budget so I think Nick will kind of go into the year-over-year or the annual cost of this I think most of these are going to be equipment related again trying to right-size our fleet we've got a couple of things that I can stand for questions on up here the two things that I do want to point out we mentioned the software early on I think that's critically important to close some of the holes that we have in our processes for financial assurance then on the North Lakes recycling drop-off that is a site that is currently going to be removed because of construction of parks facility we do have a new location very close to that area in the North Lakes area so this would be a capital investment here also improving site security site access we do see some illegal dumping and things of that so we want to try to head that off with with some of the installation that we would put to the new site aside from that I'll stand real quickly if you have any questions on any of these So I was going to ask about the North Lakes recycling drop-off and what that in what that was for and so it is going to be removed but I'm glad to hear it's going to be another location do we have is it going to be on the park property in that same area or it's in the same area I don't know the actual name of the part but it's where most of the soccer and football games are kind of off of Bonnie Bray Road and so it's we can we can bring that back to councils we start getting the design and everything firmed up and kind of give you a work session on what it looks like we wanted to make sure we got the funding approved first and then we'll bring back some of the particulars with it well I appreciate you bringing that back and not completely getting rid of it sure thank you thank you sir first there's a there's a local security company that was at the home show that could probably provide cameras and and for what it's worth when that goes out for RFP or if the city manager purchases outright just for what that's worth right now what I'd like to see when making an evaluation on the equipment what I could use some help with is understanding what we currently have what you're proposing bless you and then kind of what that what the result is what is it changing with the benefit analysis type thing at a very you know higher than high level just you know so I ran through a few of these and you kind of tell me if this is what you're looking for so on the roll-off that is actually what a roll-off truck is that is to deal with construction we've seen a huge uptick in construction business with all the activity here so that's basically to take on new business for the rest of these the waste handler dozer what that is is basically buying a larger piece of equipment that's more capable for the landfill so it's replacing a smaller piece of equipment so it is a replacement but it's upgrading to a new piece of equipment likewise on the mini rear loaders right now our supervisors and crew leaders they're basically out in the route with our drivers if they see a collection that got missed they're having to dispatch a big truck back over to come and get it what we're going to do is switch these mini reloaders in for light duty equipment that way the supervisor crew leader when they see a missed pickup they just address it and we don't have to redispatch a truck over so those are the types of things you'll see in the supplementals if it's just a like for like replacement it won't hit this list in those cases well no but I think exactly I think what you touched on but the latter part so for example in using your last example mini reloader currently we are dispatching trucks when we see something with this addition supervisors can provide a little bit more detail and context behind it just kind of just an overview of that functionality because then if we get to this or that I want to opt for something that has an impact so let's say we're we're debating between the mini rear loader and the waste handler dozer well I'm assuming the waste handler dozer touches more does more more impactful so I would lean that way right regardless of the price point it's there's more value add here you know so just kind of that analysis would certainly or better said functionality from you would help me do the analysis okay I'm Ryan thank you that's a good question so on that you answered that if there was a pickup missed that a larger truck would go out but having these smaller ones we would send those out instead so do we are we gonna need to if eventually we move to scheduled and pick up and actually so they're more than likely will not be anything missed as frequently as it is now we say miss we're talking about refuse and recycling is really what these are designed to handle and so we go through I think six thousand five thousand collections a day with our larger trucks and so what happens now is if someone's cart gets missed or they set it out late and want to same-day pickup we're having to pull that truck in you know two neighborhoods over what this enables us to do is basically the supervisor crew leader they're more nimble they can they don't have to break off of a route to go address it does that make sense and so it doesn't necessarily address those ancillary or additional services it's really geared toward the recycling and refuse the cart service can you give us just a real quick breakdown of what's included in that North Lakes recycling drop-off is that site work is that additional dumpsters and equipment like can you tell us what it's kind of a big number that is that is construction cost and so you do have basically the laying a pad that will support our trucks the containers aren't really factored in here I think we have a fairly decent inventory of containers it's construction constructing a gate a fence you also have to account for windblown litter so there is some wind fencing that goes over the top of it and then you have security lighting all that that requires electricity so there is some additional work beyond just laying the pad there for the containers to reside on because my message is a little off topic but my point is something else needed on the list what is the status of the recycling drop-off area on the property that was formerly the cupboard is that a city operation and you know does that go away and it is something to replace that it's basically in limbo right now and I know that's not a great answer but it's it's basically the property owner has decided that they want to keep it there for the time being in the event that they decide they no longer want that then I think that's a topic that we would need to bring back to council is do we acquire a new location do we fold that into the other drop-offs what do we do and so staff's approach for right or wrong has been to let this ride and to continue with the service for as long as the property owners okay with it all right I got a question I got sorry I was gonna escape this is the worst for a presentation I'm just kidding I'm teasing yeah I tease it so help me just understand number one what I'm looking at here so that I'm gonna sort of share what I think I'm looking at and then you can correct me where I might be in it so this is the supplemental package summary for solid waste which means you've got a base budget that you're already accounted for yes based upon the current rates or whatever you might project would need to be increased based upon that so the supplemental packages these are the things these are the options these are the components that we would like to potentially be considered as a supplemental funding package for the solid waste department right and that's why you've got them ranked yes one through nine that you know if we were to say we're going to fund all 2.6 million of the supplemental package then all of those get funded as we look at all the other supplemental packages which probably total what between ballpark the departments 10 15 million and yeah I think general fund just for context is around eight or ten million remember all the utility funds sort of stand on their own so these this supplemental package is sort of built in there when we get to the next slide you'll see we've built it into the ongoing five-year budget and it does not necessitate a rate increase okay so this is different than necessarily when we're looking at the general fund budget as far as yes okay every fund stands on its own okay so then help me understand so what what I'm hurt what I heard you say Mr. C manager is in the next slide we're going to see that hey we can fund all this 2.6 million with whatever you're going to show on the next slide so on the 1.160 million that the waste handler dozer which is going to be funded with debt service help me understand why would that be included I mean it's a one-time cost on paper but the funding is through debt service which means you only have a debt service amount that's that's in the budget yes on a yearly basis so right from from either an accounting perspective or just a presentation perspective help me understand why that's included at that level when it's being funded somewhere else just just for transparency purposes this is the total asking okay yeah just transparency and Nick will take you through the debt service line item which is something that we've been trying to manage and reduce over the next several years all right fantastic okay it's a good segue so the reoccurring cost of 430,000 can also be sustained through the current rate the reoccurring cost yes because some of these are just the one-time cost which is the initial upfront but the reoccurring is that every every year we have to account for that much money and to the city manager's point what will you'll see when you look at the budget as we do have diminishing debt service in the out years and so we're introducing things in but we're also dropping things off like I mentioned with some of the equipment we're eliminating a smaller piece of equipment our debt service is already going down so it's not necessarily a one-to-one but yeah we can certainly sustain that I'll let Nick kind of walk you through that piece okay thank you very much thank you thank you yeah I thought your comments were going to be on the same slide do you mind if I go back absolutely so this is kind of a procedural question about where if anywhere in the budget process this would fit but as I listen to comments over the course of the last couple of months I think you're going to hear there's that though that there's consensus around at least looking at commercial recycling and I don't know what costs that would ultimately drive but I wonder if there ought to be you know I mean hasn't been vetted yet hasn't really been discussed but at what point the budget process do you say put a placeholder you know what we have we've approached at this point is should the council decide to move forward with the commercial recycling program it will cert it's why we held off on a commercial rate reduction strategy it's very aggressive if in fact that is placed into the budget it will probably it will it will slow down any commercial rate reduction that we do so we've got the money we think built into the budget but we'll be able to give you some kind of an idea as far as what that might cost depending on how it ends up for that reason alone we've sort of backed down the rate reduction strategy at least one year so you have it you have that ability and we know how to monetize that and how to plan for it it's not something that can get off the ground immediately but we'd be able to build it in years two through five of the budget okay so we'll be able to have that conversation yes we'll get to that great thank you yes councilmember Marmotor and since you brought that up sorry I assume that the same is the case for the upcoming food waste discussion if these are once proformers are put together for these programs if council decides they want to integrate those types of programs in there the food waste very well could it could have an impact on residential rates certainly it would on commercial rates depending on where that program goes commercial recycling certainly would so we would we would place we've got we've got some ideas in terms of how we would start reducing rates on the commercial side that would be sort of a placeholder to take a look at those programs if the council think it's worth it and then we would we would need to get back together and say okay we plan on returning this is an example talking point only you know five million dollars to the on the commercial side over the next five years perhaps that you know all goes away or it's only a million or two over five years it once we add those services but it gives us the ability to run what if scenarios should the council decide to go that way it would be very similar discussion to what you've seen with the business case analysis and what you all just went through with the residential services is here's what the program cost here's what we can reasonably recover in terms of revenue there's the delta if it requires subsidization then who pays the bill in essence would be the discussion thank you good afternoon mayor city council members my name is nick vinson the city's budget manager i'll walk you through the financial portion of proposed budget presentation if you have any questions feel free to stop me throughout the presentation otherwise i'll get it through this i'll get through it as quick as possible thank you all right so some of the major assumptions that are included in the five-year forecast we are proposing the way that to change the way that the operating reserve is currently calculating the solid waste fund i'll review that with you in further detail at next slide also the current five-year forecast does not include any residential rate increases ethan did preview some residential services with you earlier none of those been included in the five-year forecast we are also not including any wholesale rate increases currently there's something you discussed earlier so if we receive that direction we'll add that in later a couple major capital items we are planning to issue five million dollars in bonds in fy 2022 for the development of the lance landfall sale we do have one cell after that that we plan to cash fund but that is out there in 2028 we also do plan to issue one million dollars in bonds in 2020 for renovations to the administration building so as i mentioned we are proposing to change the way that the operating reserve is currently calculating solid waste fund i'm currently it has three components you can see here in this column and there's an operating component a rental fund component a vehicle fund replacement component all of these are currently combined and they do total 11.1 million dollars moving forward to increase transparency and be consistent with the water and wastewater utility we are proposing to create two stinkly identifiable reserves one being operating one via being vehicle replacement so the operating have 10.1 million and vehicle replacement have 1 million so what's what's with the decrease i mean you currently have four million vehicle replacement and you're sort of folding that into operations and then just populating the vehicle replacement with a million dollars what we do and i'll show you that to you on the five-year forecast we can kind of see the movement between the two and why we're doing that okay so this is the five-year forecast and you can see the adopted budget here in this column we did have planned use of reserves of 350 000 we do intend to draw down reserves a little bit more about 550 000 moving into the proposed budget column we do have total resources of 38.4 million and this does include three million dollars in reserve usage and so as you move down the page you can see we have 38.4 million dollars in expenses this does include the supplemental packages that ethan had mentioned to you just shortly ago the difference in the number is that several those items are debt funded and the debt service hits the fund starting in year 2021 and carries forward so as you see this amount that is carried forward this is the debt service for those supplemental packages mayor as you move down here the reserves are itemized so you can see the operating reserve and you can see the vehicle replacement with the drawdown we are proposing the current proposed budget we have transitioned a portion of the vehicle replacement reserve about 2.9 million towards operating to sustain the operating reserve within the limits of the reserve requirements so in essence we're funding the supplemental package with reserve funds as you can see in each of the next five years we're exceeding our working capital targets nick if you could just point out the debt service i know ethan kind of you know pointed out some of the cost savings in the program elimination but this is where you're saying it you can see our debt service in 18 was 9.5 million by not issuing debt and trying to in continuing to look at our programs by the time we get out to years 2023 and 2024 that number is about three million dollars less this is how we're able right now to achieve keeping residential rates flat over the next four or five years so the impacts of those decisions aren't readily obvious until you start looking at how we've started building the budget a little bit differently and relying less on debt at this point while still maintaining our operating reserves anything that in this this is this contemplates no change in service so if there were new programs added we just need to go back in and see what how that moves the needle on some of these areas and but that has really been you're gonna see you saw exactly the same scenario occurring in water and wastewater budgets as well so did the debt service projections for after 2022 so 2023 and 2024 does that include debt for the the bonds mentioned here i know they haven't been voted yes yes those have been built into those assumptions okay and okay yeah and into the city manager's point you can see the debt service it does go from 8.5 million down to 6.2 million one of the main focuses in solid waste is continuing to cash fund collection vehicles you can see in the vehicle replacement fund reserve and the amount that we are cash funding does increase from 2 million to 3.3 million over this time period that transition from debt funding to cash funding does enable the debt service payment to go down you could tell the follow-up question and would those be and i know that's a decision down the line but would they be revenue the idea that they'd be revenue bonds coming from yes so the vehicles in the proposed budget you can see here we'd fund two million dollars from the operating budget so this is rate revenue the remainder of the vehicle purchases will be used using co's so bonds we're able to get the rate payers and taxpayers a much better interest rate using co's and revenue bonds yeah and those are and i always get co in the in the geo mixed up at the ones that the uh the public they're both they're they're both essentially property tax uh based with the solid waste fund just makes the debt service payment got it thanks yeah just for clarification because i want to make sure i heard which so this five-year forecast is built in with the no rate increase but the current service level provided the current service level provided um so we did we did not make we did not anticipate any significant changes in terms of revenue on the residential side most of those programs are not huge revenue makers their efficiency then on the commercial side um we we had intended on a modest uh commercial decrease in years two through five that would be that would be where there'd be some additional capacity built in if you wanted to add services we just have to have that discussion but it anticipates no changes in in commercial services or residential so just so if we decided to um hold off on some of the things we saw earlier i mean that's not affecting what we're we're looking at now no if we monetize some of the inefficiencies with the vehicles and that sort of thing there's there's moderate decreases in revenue or moderate increases in expenses anyway that we wouldn't be able to reduce um but no it wouldn't move the needle in a meaningful way the only thing that you've talked about today that would have a significant impact here since we haven't been able to cost out the new services is just if you did you decided to put in a uh and and do a put or pay agreement we haven't factored anything like that in and that would have a big make a big difference on this pro forma in a positive fashion thank you it's council member mr i apologize for not totally getting this uh i'll ask your patients in uh re-explaining a bit either either right uh i get two parts i get that uh your proposal is to draw down reserves to cover the supplementals and i get that we're using less debt and so that and that we're you know cash funding expenses that might otherwise have been debt are those related is there some way that by using less debt we have we have created more reserves that we're now that we don't want to spend on the supplementals or those just two unrelated ideas i think they're i think they're well everything's interrelated um i i think what the more accurate question is once we started peeling back the uh it started started um not issuing the debt that had been contemplated back in 15 and 16 that significantly started changing the pro forma and the debt service reducing it quite a bit allowing us to to maintain rates at where they are the the bottom line is we're trying not to issue any debt unless it's absolutely necessary right now choosing to to use operating uh funds to do that so this budget has been put together um just as a status quo budget funding the supplementals many of which uh either service or efficiency based but it doesn't contemplate new large contracts or new services added to commercial but do we have more reserves than we thought we'd have or we just think we can safely operate at a lower reserve level well we have in the past i think the answer to the question is that we are it's taken us two years to identify what reserves were there because there have been um quite a bit of money built up in co's that had been issued but not spent and so as we started cleaning that up uh pulling each of the programs apart uh you know updating the rate analysis the rate fees the rates and fees that you adopted last uh fall and then getting a little bit more uh history on how we were performing we come into this budget with a much higher level of confidence um in terms of taking out all those costs and where we actually stand but in each of these years um we are meeting or exceeding our fund balance policy and that's really the bottom line is you want you know 65 days of uh cash on the high end and we're in we're exceeding that each year simply because we're dropping our debt payment yeah okay and but part of the big picture is also we have more reserves than we might have realized because of past debt not being deployed yes yeah okay thank you before i recognize council member martin we we got a 6 30 meeting we've got one agenda item we've got one agenda item left and we also have a closed session and dinner's ready so i just want to let everybody know that we we got to make sure that we get things wrapped up uh by 6 30 yes just real quickly if you if you could speak to or someone could speak to those um co's that hadn't been it turned out hadn't been spent what what they were for initially when they were uh taken out real quickly because i mean you could do that with a with a white paper as well i just want to make sure we don't get way off i think there's about 19 million dollars that we repurposed in the solid waste capital plan uh some of which was some of the the policy decisions that you all made regarding like landfill mining some of it it was really less apparent to us what it actually was for is you know i wouldn't say it was just a bucket there but it was being deployed in some areas but and not others and so i think really what we try to do is blow the budget apart our first year together rebuild it brick by brick and anything that didn't have uh solid uh backing behind it in terms of business case or operational purpose we reallocated that to what our actual needs were wow and so that was all from was it all was it from past solid waste decisions or was it from kind of utility spread around no it's it was solid waste solid waste okay yeah i mean just to give you a very simple just a simple example if we planned uh to issue 10 million dollars a year in co debt and built that into the five-year program you would see a very different program picture today and so all we've done is stripped all that back use what was on the books and making sure that we're meeting all of our needs over the next five years matched up with the cip program and this is where we find ourselves today in pretty good shape yeah and that's a great i mean great use of that just very very interesting to know looking backwards yes sir yeah no go ahead oh okay um i'll keep moving along here let me know if any more questions and this is a detailed revenue side for the solid waste department and you can see the revenues by different service categories and so you can see residential uh front load roll off landfill i do want to point out you can see the reserve usage here of three million dollars so total resource is a 38.4 million it's a detailed expense side for the solid waste department um you can see expenses by category so personal services materials and supplies closure and post closure debt service for a total of 38.4 million this is the five-year capital plan so in the proposed budget we are proposing a total of 5.7 million dollars of projects and this is a combination of 3.2 million dollars in co's and 2.5 million dollars in revenue funding it's the position summary for the solid waste department you can see in the adopted budget we have 122.5 positions if the supplemental package that ethan explained to you is approved it would take our ft total to 123.5 and that concludes the presentation any questions comments appreciate it thank you very much thank you let's take five or ten and get something to eat and then we'll come back and do agenda item 3c real quickly welcome back to this meeting of the dent city council on tuesday june the 11th 2019 we're to our work session report agenda item 3c receive report hold discussion provide staff direction regarding the impact of hb 1631 on the city of dentons operations of photographic traffic signal enforcement system thank you mayor and council i am prepared to review the slides that we previously went over last week because we did have a few council members absent however i can skip right to the new new information if that's the way you want to go new information yes sir so we're just bringing back a few bits of information that are based off some council questions that we had when we presented this topic last week just to give you an update on the cameras themselves related to the red light red light program all the cameras in the city of athens our city of denton have been disconnected from power the signage has been removed that all occurred as of last friday we've spoken with red flex our vendor for the red light camera program and they intend to remove all the internal equipment so the camera that is actually within the casing by the end of this week june 14th the casing and the poles themselves their plan is to remove those within 60 days of our termination of their contract which is on your agenda item for later on this evening and then once those poles and casings are removed the ground will be left in its original condition so the city expects it to saw to be put in and you would not know that there was once a red light camera there at that location we did speak with red flex to see if they would consider allowing the city to remove and temporarily store uh those uh poles and casings so that we would get them out of the right away faster uh they were agreeable to that and so we are going to uh if that is the direction that this council wants to go we can enter into a small agreement with them to provide that service in house and then they can just pick up the casings and poles at a light at a later date but it would remove them from the right of way a lot faster than 60 days if we went that route council have any direction on that agreeable yeah the sooner the better my only concern with doing that would be if they have an obligation to return the ground to original condition that we make sure that you know once the pole is gone it's a little harder to keep track of where the pole used to be so um just that we have a real tight process of making sure that inventory of intersections is indeed returned to the right condition if we've got their poles in a warehouse someplace absolutely and we would bring a contract uh forward for council approval that could speak to to that particular condition uh so we would have something to hold them to the fire on that one uh council did have some questions on the financials just to give a brief overview of how the financials worked uh so any gross revenues of the citations coming in uh would first we'd have to take away and take out uh the costs of the program including uh a part-time police department employee and the payments to red flex to run the program once those program costs are taken out of those gross revenues uh the resulting net revenue is split with the state of texas right down the middle 50 50 for fiscal year 18 uh we collected the city share was 520,000 515 and through the first six months of the current fiscal year uh we collected 321,000 just a little over 321,000 in terms of net revenue that went into uh our fund council also had questions about outstanding citations so we spoke primarily to the zero to 90 day age of citations where there are roughly about 4,700 citations out there within that were issued within the last 90 days as of april 30th we have a lot more than that that go beyond that time frame uh from 120 days all the way back to 2006 uh most of those i think staff can confidently say we will not see that revenue those will not be collected if we issued a citation in you know 2010 and they haven't paid right now we don't see anything that we're going to do that will make them pay uh going forward in the future but council did request that information so it is available so the reason we're here for you today is to uh discuss how to approach uh outstanding citations we did get some information on some peer cities and what they're doing it's split about 50 50 you do have some cities including fort worth garland and irving who are ending collection they are not going to collect on outstanding citations other cities duncanville grand prairie and plana with one little caveat they're going to continue to try to collect on outstanding citations so of course no more can be issued after june 2nd but anything that was previously issued and had not yet been collected those three cities are going to try to collect that revenue so if we make the decision as a as a policy of council makes that policy decision to try to collect revenue our approach would be to enter into some sort of contract with redflex to continue some limited services providing for payments so people can still pay their citation through redflex general customer services something as simple as i have a question about my ticket who do i call the processes that they would call redflex and then coordinating appeals redflex has stated to us that say a agreement going forward for these services the first month would be 75 percent of what we would normally pay them the second month would be 50 percent and the third month and any ongoing months would be at 25 percent of what we currently paid them under the contract the reason for that is is they expect a sharp decline in the amount of calls and sharp decline in the amount of collections so they recognize that they would not be doing as much work there was a question about our historical collection rate historically our collection rate is about 60 percent and the city can reasonably expect this collection rate to drop significantly because there is pretty broad knowledge about the law going into effect that has ended red light camera programs so if we did hypothetically enter into a three-month contract with redflex we would need to sustain a collection rate of 25 percent of those zero to 90 time frame citations in order to just break even on the costs we're paying redflex the further out we go it's hard to say whether collections would would support that we don't know what we'll collect in terms of in that collection rate but that cost would be fixed and the collections as time goes on we can reasonably assume that those collections would just slowly go down at the very least so if council desires to just dismiss and waive existing citations this can be accomplished if directed we will by terminating the contract with redflex tonight we would cease any and all relationship with that firm redflex would direct any inquiries back to the city we would receive a final report from redflex that includes all available data so that data would belong to us and so we could go back and and and run any trends or any analysis that we would need to and the city would set up a phone line with an outgoing message for any inquiries that that come in we can expect at least initially a high level of inquiries including those related to refunds for any previously paid tickets so as part of our approach if we go this route we would put a lot of information online push a lot of information out through social media to to answer these specific few questions that most people are going to have crossing their minds do i have to pay if i have an outstanding ticket if i did pay do i get a refund and what is my what actions do i take now which frankly would be none okay you ready for questions yep i'm ready on the data that you said that is owed to us is that if so if we um vote tonight to discontinue that contract will they still be obligated to give us the data that um they got or can they say no the contracts they are obligated to give us that under the the termination clauses in the current contract okay good thank you yeah when you talk about continuing collections uh you're not talking about dunning letters and things right it's just it's just literally having the mechanism so that if somebody chooses to pay a ticket that they already have there's a way for them to do it correct that's what you mean by collections yes sir it's accepting payment okay thank you this this is not my my my comment but just based on what has just been said but wouldn't it also involve as i recall a collection agency that red flex would contract with as well so if if we continued collections if we if we went on any other path that didn't involve just waiving or dismissing all existing tickets part of that would be for any outstanding tickets they would eventually end up with a a third party collections firm that that red flex country red flex contracts with um beyond that there is no other mechanism to try to drive collections uh to try to drive people to pay on their ticket uh the scoff law law uh withholding registration has not uh it's not been practiced in denton county for a couple of years but even then house bill 1631 has ended that practice across the state uh so beyond collections uh and taking a hit to your credit score potentially there's not much that's going to incentivize people to pay if they haven't already and um now i'm sorry now doesn't the law um maybe i'm wrong misunderstood that uh guarantee that it won't affect your your uh credit rating if you have outstanding debt for an unpaid red camera ticket yes you are correct i misspoke on that thank you um it will go to collections so they will call you uh but you're right that there is a state law that that speaks to that and they do not allow that to impact your credit yeah um and so uh kind of factoring all these these things together um i am for uh not collecting and i will say uh you know we're going to have problems either way uh that on the one hand if we um if we if we are encounter challenges that uh by ending collection then we'll get you know and i've seen some of this already people saying well i paid mine and now you know why aren't people paying so we get that um and then if we decide to collect then why are you collecting on a law uh on a practice that is now uh uh invalid and you know at the state level um and they're both difficult questions to answer but of those two i would much rather answer that uh the first question and to say it's not going to be satisfying to the person my heart goes out to those people who have you know who have paid their ticket um but at the very least we can say to them uh this that uh as soon as this practice was uh abolished by the state we then met and decided to stop collecting uh so it's not an arbitrary uh this uh point at which we would have stopped collecting and we can trace it to a decision made by the state not not by ourselves so that's that is why you know in addition for the reasons i mentioned last time we discussed this that i am for uh just ceasing collection no collection no refund that's where i am um i mean it's it's not enforceable the county's not enforcing it it'd be silly i mean it's just but if you've paid it i mean i don't think that you're entitled to a refund the law has not get money to affect when okay so yeah that's where i am i mean no sense going through all that trouble but um any objections to that i'm sure it'll pass i don't happen to agree i think it's blatantly unfair to people who paid uh i don't i don't see any rationale for dunning people and chasing them to the ends of the earth but if people want to pay uh because they follow the instructions they were given just like all the other people did i don't see why you're cut off the ability for them to pay uh something that they you know legally got uh so that that's right people oh i don't i don't necessarily disagree with that but i i just think that that that's i mean we're going to spend a lot of time a lot of bureaucracy and who knows what that collection rate is going to be it's not being enforced now i mean when i saw the numbers about how many people haven't paid it's in the millions i mean goes on so i i don't disagree with your position i just to me i that's just my choice councilmember davis i'm in the same boat i think red flex uh and the rate that they have offered us but even even kind of incrementally decreasing they think they made it an easy decision for me i think our collection rate is going to be abysmal after everything that's gone out i don't think we're going to meet 25 collection rate so hypothetically we're leaving some money on the table in actuality i don't think we are i think that's just money we burn up trying to collect any any other so correct no collections no refunds that's just that is the consensus of count consensus of council is that any objection to that other than your state objection councilmember melton yep okay okay we have our direction yes city attorney wants to weigh in based on the consensus of council wanting to no collection no refund going forward we have modified the letter that is included in your backup for tonight's item for determination which would provide that information to red flex that all the tickets they have in their possession which are the majority of them to discontinue them which they will do and then we will also ask for them written confirmation that that has been done and so that we're including that in the letter based on your consensus decision right now so that red flex will give us that information and so we can start preparing for a post-reflex world where we start getting the inquiries from citizens the you know police cmo city attorney's office city secretary will all have those letters that show so they can give to to the public that may want that for their own records so just it just as an aside so once this gets terminated as it is then that means red light enforcement would be done by patrol officers or traffic or something like that that's which is a totally different animal correct you get citation it's a criminal offense if you don't show up you get a warrant for your arrest if you don't so all different set of rules all different set of rules goes back to the way it was long before that yes sir all right there was one more yes uh earlier ryan had presented about the storing of red flex's equipment for there's a temporary agreement is that something the council wishes to for staff to start drafting that agreement to present to you next week or the following week will we be if we incur any temporary storage charges will we be reimbursed or we just going to eat that for the convenience i believe and i don't want to speak for red flex but i believe we would be eating the costs of removing them but it would accomplish the removal faster yes council member david you know you might you all might remember i kind of flippantly said last time let's throw a trash bag over the thing and wait for red flux to come get them i i don't know that i'm in favor of spending a large sum of money to remove the poles that are non-functioning i mean it's mostly aesthetic or maybe a little bit of a pr issue people not knowing that the boxes aren't working not still taking their picture if there's some real utility to it and the cost is not negligible then i'd be in favor of something like that but if we're spending a lot of uh city employee time or even having to incur you know renting space to to put these things someplace i would not be in favor of that i'd rather just let them fulfill their contractual obligation and take them down council member reeks yeah i'm kind of along those same lines depending on how much staff time it would take and how much it would cost us the place to store them and if we because they are supposed to to make the ground right if if they do take them down and we are storing them i just still i have a hard time thinking they're going to come and get their equipment if it's already taken down and we've taken care of it for them um unless that's not an uh you know an issue we'll talk about that into the agreement but based on the information i've received from traffic it's it's a de minimis expense it can be worked in as a work order despite their poles and the casings will just be stored at our service center and so um it's just provides just a faster removal of the equipment so that way there is no reminder there is no question of the public whether they work or not work and red flex is coming to remove the expensive camera part yes we will not do that we will not remove any any poles or casings or any type of the equipment that's housing the electronics until they that's removed because that's what they want back all right so i would i'm okay with leaving it to the discretion of staff to understand that if they get into it start removing and it's just this exorbitant cost i think they understand the sentiment of council that hey let's do it if it's reasonable but council member uh ryan well i would prefer that we not strictly because of a liability issue that could if something was damaged in the process of taking it down they could continue an argument with red flex down the road that oh you damaged us now you owe me back this much money because i'm just afraid that they're going to see the contract ending and try and collect more money from us i have to let our city attorney chime in but we wouldn't before doing this we would have a contract with them that would include an identification so we can provide some coverage for that all right will we see that contract or yes all right okay any other questions comments fantastic thank you council thank you very much appreciate it all right we will now convene the closed session we'll go into executive session at 557 we'll convene the executive session to 557 we will p.m on tuesday june the 11th 2019 we will consider the following items consultation with attorneys under texas government code section 551.071 deliberations regarding real property under texas government code section 551.072 and deliberations regarding certain public power utilities competitive matters under texas government code section 551.086 good evening oh whoa good evening everyone welcome to this meeting of the dent city council on tuesday june the 11th 2019 it's about 6 35 pm we will we are going into now our special called session let me get back to the agenda here which is a different agenda so we're just going to move right into our agenda items our first agenda item is the consent agenda council member ryan to approval the consent agenda we have a motion do we have council member davis second we have a motion and second for the consent agenda item uh let's vote on the board please the consent agenda passes seven zero we'll move now to our items for individual consideration agenda item 2a is considered option of an ordinance directing the publication of notice of intention to issue 10 million 110 thousand dollars in principal amount of certificates of obligation of the city of dentin for general government and technology services projects and providing an effective date good evening mayor and members of council i'll address items a and b in this presentation and be happy to answer any questions before we issue any certificates of obligation debt we're required to 31 days in advance of having an ordinance approving the sale of the debt issue a notice of intention to sell the debt to the public so that's what this item before you is in regards to a notice will be published with the didn't record chronicle following the meeting the audit and finance committee have previously approved most of the projects listed in the notice of intention we've moved we've are bringing forward today two additional projects one for parking facilities for an additional million dollars in general government and three million dollars for water projects that we'll detail later we're able to bring those forward because market conditions have improved to the point that we can have the same debt service in general government and we're able to consider the water projects as we move forward total co-funded projects that we're looking looking to issue are 10 million dollars in projects and 110,000 dollars in issuance costs and 20.61 million dollars in utilities water wastewater and electric including 220,000 dollars in issuance costs here's a list of our general fund our general government and technology services projects most of these you've seen before are included in the general fund budget the fy 18 19 budget with the exception of the municipal parking facilities the municipal parking facilities is the item that we've added for one million dollars based on the marketing conditions and our being able to keep a consistent net service passing this notice of intention does not tie us to issuing that or moving forward with that issuance next month but it does give us the option to issue the debt next month mayor pro tem you had a question you want to save it for the end of the presentation do you want to ask it i must have pushed the button oh okay all right okay learning how this works let me see got it okay all right here are the two additional water projects that we're proposing to include in the debt issuance in total the budget included nine million dollars in co issuance for water projects as we began the fiscal year we had enough cash reserves to not issue that debt and cash fund the projects the nine million dollars that we had anticipated these two projects we've gotten our initial bids back from from our proposals and they've come in over budget so this three million dollars impossible issuance gives us some room to work with as the projects move forward both of them are related to the lake lewisville plant one for solids handling and one for an upgrade phase two that we've planned for a few years here's a list of our wastewater projects these are all included in the 1819 budget to move forward with co issuance and you've seen them before totally 9.8 million dollars all funded from the wastewater fund we have 7.59 million dollars in electric projects included in the notice of intention these are all transmission related projects that again we included in the 1819 budget and were approved by the audit and finance committee our next steps after this notice of intention would be 31 days from now we would come back our app following the 31 day notice come back on july 16th with our parameters for sale for the certificates of obligations and also our general obligations that issuance that would then be issued on the 18th with our close date targeted for august 15th of this year any questions yes councilmember melzer and then councilmember robert you made a couple of references to the projects having been approved by audit finance which i which i sit on i don't call it quite that way but maybe you can straight me out i believe these are all projects that council has seen and that audit and finance agreed with the notion of issuing the debt correct uh related to projects that we've already seen as a full finance approved uh recommended moving forward with the notice of intentions outside of the municipal facilities for a million dollars and the three million dollars for water i think so thanks for clarifying sure councilmember robert yeah um can you review uh why uh you know the decision is to why seo bonds as opposed to geo bonds or revenue bonds i don't revenue bonds that would be paid for by the rates um but kind of just to explain sure that uh the thought process behind it and then who pays for it when they when when the impact would would would start showing up uh to the taxpayer sure so with our utilities with the electric water and wastewater uh debted co's that we're proposing uh in this notice of intention we we have a practice of issuing co's for those debts for the utilities for a simple for the simple purpose of saving on interest rates by issuing co's we're able to save interest rates versus revenue funded debt and that's because they are co's are backed by property taxes but we pay those co's off with revenues that we see we receive from each other funds so it's just a mechanism for us to have lower interest rates on the general government side if something wasn't in a bond program we have to issue co's for for any any debt related to those projects so those are if an emergency thing comes up if a big project comes up between bond bond programs we would issue debt for it but also for kind of routine uh debt issuances vehicle replacement facility maintenance or the two that you see here that you're that we have just just about every year and those are short-term debt not 20-year debt as we move forward and and so the difference it's in the rate of interest and also the duration of the debt yes yeah and and what's it and what's the difference in interest between the co and g and right you know it keeps falling when we were looking at issuing geo uh debt last week at the council meeting we pulled that item our co rate has come down to what the geo was so typically there's a few points between them but um we're in this market right now where they they keep falling well so that was just since the last correct uh-huh thanks council member briggs sure so the actual um vote will come back to us at a different day oh there's my right on july 16th we'll come back okay great thank you and also um we're issuing co's for revenues in lieu of revenue bonds because the delta of the interest rate from revenue bonds to co's is is going into the street maintenance fund the utilities are still paying the same amount as if it had been revenue bonds but that delta of savings we're using to offset or to pay for uh revenue into our street maintenance fund is that correct exactly okay yes all right any other questions oh i'm sorry so another question well yeah just that it's going to be in the in the newspaper yes and do we put anything on our website about that um i'm not we can i'm not sure that we do uh as a course of action so just generally the dent record chronicle is the that's our publication okay thank you any other questions council member ryan move approval item two a council member brief i'll second we have a motion and second for agenda item 2a let's vote on the board please agenda item 2a carries unanimously said zero agenda item 2b consider adoption of an ordinance directing the publication of notice of intention to issue 20 million six hundred ten thousand in principal amount of certificates of obligation the city of denton for wastewater for water work system wastewater system and electric system projects you're gonna do this on my memory i the the previous presentation covered both items a and b oh okay yes so there's no additional there's no questions okay all right any questions council member brian move approval of item 2b council member breaks i will second we have a motion to second for agenda item 2b let's vote on the board please agenda item 2b carries seven zero agenda item 2c consider an adoption of an ordinance by the city of denton texas authorizing the city manager to terminate a contract with red flex traffic systems usa mayor council you were briefed on this in work session but i'm happy to answer any questions you might have on this issue council member breaks um so there were you mentioned a phone number earlier and so will that be how will the the residents if they need to know information or have questions what number would would they call or is it just something on the on the website or sure we're actually we're going to post it on our website uh and that'll be a link to the home page we'll also have it pushed out through our social media channel channels uh we will also distribute a frequently asked questions at faq that will answer some of the most common questions particularly the ones that that you council have expressed yourselves uh but the number for people to call is 9 4 0 3 4 9 7 9 7 7 okay thank you council member breaks i motion to approve council member melzer second we have a motion to second for agenda item 2c let's vote on the board please agenda item 2c carries unanimously seven zero agenda item 2d consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of dentin the texas home world rural municipal corporation authorizing the city manager to execute a contract with bean electrical inc for traffic signal construction services for the city of dentin good evening mr mayor uh thank you for the opportunity to present this evening uh talk about the contract for installing or constructing signals an rfp was sent out for soliciting services and contract for traffic signal construction it was sent out approximately to about 80 suppliers firms that actually specialize in these types of services staff received one proposal from bean electric to conduct these services these services will be carried out at approximately we currently have a list of about 11 intersections designed for four intersections has been completed and we can start construction immediately these four construct four intersections are oak jago oak fry belmingo and bell at sherman these are the ones in green dots we will begin construction as soon as the contract is executed it's currently the approximate cost for construction at these locations is 1.4 million dollars the next set of intersections currently under design they're about seven four of them are nearing construction all along mckinney and rest of them will follow the total cost for that set of intersections is about 2.4 million dollars and uh and so um ultimately we want to move forward with awarding the contract for a three-year term uh in an amount not to exceed amount of five million dollars the remaining 1.2 million dollars that we have um we're currently identifying intersections that we want to move forward with uh depending on the age of the intersection and then we'll consider design and uh replace it using using this particular contract any questions council member breaks and so the this is just specifically for the traffic signals but we saw a list of intersections is that um just traffic signals only or are there upgraded pedestrian um items that we need to do as well and will that coordinate um with this with this contract so uh at that particular intersection the entire existing signal will be upgraded anything that has to do with pedestrian pedestrian crossing ada um uh button push buttons ramps everything will be upgraded at that intersection as part of this contract okay thank you that's my barometer a couple things so first i wanted to say that you know that a number of these intersections are intersections where uh constituents and i represent citywide have um have asked me you know why don't we have uh a protected left here etc and you know y'all have gone out and um study those intersections and so i think it's important that people understand you know i don't know if they're they all came from from that but um but this really is in response to kind of express need from the community just wondering if you could speak briefly to both uh you know i don't expect you to go item by item but kind of what um what roughly kind of percentage of these are are involved kind of adding say you know protected left and how much of it involves you know better timing or better control of the lights you know more adjustability so um once we upgrade the equipment the equipment currently on all of these intersections is very outdated we're talking about 25 30 years old and we don't have the capabilities that we currently have with the new equipment to change timing to monitor it to control it and upgrade it off-site we really have to go there sometimes it's difficult to get the spare parts for some of the equipment so what we're essentially doing is once we upgrade the equipment then the next step is signal timing analyzing monitoring and there will help us better the traffic congestion and flow of traffic within those intersections okay so so you say that's the case for all all of all right excellent thanks council member ryan so i'm assuming that the the funds for this will be coming from different pots of money so i don't see it on the list but we we spoke briefly about it in mobility this morning that heritage trace at university is is another one that would come in under this contract correct so yes funds are coming from bond there are different pots of money bond funded some of them are bond funded some of them are traffic safety funded from previous years and yes there is a little bit of cushion the 1.2 million dollar that we are remaining we can definitely accommodate intersections that we talked this morning about heritage trail at university council member davis your previous response answered part of my question but uh my other question is do we have an idea why we received only one bid when we sent out to so many firms is there an issue with our our project is there an issue with the rfp or what do we think i think the market is very competitive what we've seen in the last three years and this is an extremely specialized area a lot of electronic equipment very uh little or very less amount of firms that are about two or three in the metroplex that are really specialized and work most of the signals the other thing is there was a lot of work out there especially tech stop building a ton of highway projects and all the signals associated with them so in the past we've only had one or two firms consistently bid for these types of services so it's not uncommon for the region and given the competition it is it's not uncommon councilman breaks so yeah earlier mobility we did talk about removing old traffic signals as well and this could probably fall under that but it just brings up a question because we're going to be replacing some it's going to be a lot of older traffic signals do they uh where do they go yeah they're not recycled they're scrapped it goes to scrap the metal and is that something that the contractor will take care of correct they dispose off the scrap thank you i believe those are all the councilmembers do you have another question councilmember breaks oh i i move to approve councilmember ryan i'm second we have a motion to second for agenda item 2d oh councilmember hudspeth yes sir just just a quick not a question just a comment so just wanted to uh highlight what councilmember davis touched on and as future conversations come up with bids cost uh responses to bids i would just want to put a bookmark here uh and for those following along um at home watching this online the fact that we sent out 80 and receive 80 180 suppliers we've contacted yeah and and one responded without any additional requirements constraints etc so my concern is that additional constraints could jeopardize this process quite a bit so just wanted to put a bookmark here for future conversations thank you all right we do have a motion and a second for agenda item 2d let's vote on the board please agenda item 2d passes unanimously seven zero we go to agenda item 2e consider nominations appointments to the city boards commissions and committees councilmember melzer i believe we have those nominations in our backup so unless there's any questions for staff councilmember melzer yeah i think there's only one uh i i move approval of my nominee susan seaborne to the position of zoning board of adjustment alternate she's uh smart very tough-minded glad she's willing to serve councilmember riggs i will second all right we have a motion and a second for the nomination presented let's vote on the board please motion carries unanimously seven zero for agenda item 2e agenda item 2f consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of denton authorizing the execution of a contract of sale between the city of denton as buyer and alleyway real estate ltd as seller for the purchase of 0.361 acre tract more or less being situated in the east puchowski survey abstract 996 mayor council members before you tonight for your consideration is a contract of sale for that tracked out on 1302 west oak street at the northwest corner of west oak street and fry street the appraised value was 397 390 000 and the agreement is for that amount all right any questions or yeah basically it's whether or not y'all want to purchase it okay council member davis is there an intended use i mean i know in the back of materials there's kind of some discussion on the agenda information sheet about potential uses but is there a readily identifiable project or is this just kind of sticking in our hip pocket and for a rainy day it's my understanding that we're we're uh the idea is to book this for a future municipal use maybe assemble it with some other property in the area okay well it's no no secret that i'm not going to be supporting this especially when i calculated the price per foot it's about 24 dollars a foot uh for this so i'll be voting in opposition to this purchase uh council member hudspeth yes sir so uh my answer to to council member davis's question and it was discussed in the work session would be parking is what i see and i see multi-level and i see uh even a semicircle option that would allow us to have valet parking to service the fry street area so i anticipate using this property to better serve those businesses in that area and uh give people hiding spaces from students that would consume all the parking and also i hope by proxy uh benefit those businesses there and kind of uh buoy them as we especially when you're talking about the entire stretch of hickory street being under development i think there is an opportunity to really better serve those businesses there if we were to act if we find the right scenario to move fast sooner than later i think as that entire street is being developed and reconstructed there's some opportunities so that's what i envision there is it's multi-level parking with with a alfonso concierge service or valet service that's what i see council member ryan thank you man yeah i think it's i too will not be supporting this um i mean we're looking at minimal number of parking spaces for the cost uh i mean basically even putting in ground parking is almost as expensive as for as small as this area is is what the cost of a parking garage is per space and council's decision not to move forward with negotiations on hickory street and remove more parking places from there than what would have uh actually then what we'll actually create with this just does not make sense to me so i'll be voting against this council member davis do you have a follow-up question or okay council member davis and then council member armeter so i i don't know that i would have a problem with this attached to a more defined project or um my issue right now is you know to drive by this piece of property pretty often market forces hasn't put anything on that corner in a while and i don't know that it's in the city's best interest to pull an overpriced piece of property off the market for some undefined not yet set up uh not yet funded future project um i think maybe we need to look to some other you know unused pieces of property what we do with them before we add something else to our our inventory that doesn't have a funds earmarked for a shovel ready project all we need is a piece of land to do it on council member armeter um so i'm going to be voting for this based on our our past discussions about the um the need for certain kinds of uh uh protected bike lanes uh and the impacts that that would have on the uh the local businesses and their parking needs as council member hudspeth said you've got so much parking that's taken up by students that there's it's you've got you know people in the neighborhoods in the area who are complaining about so much parking uh on their street that they can't see coming out of their driveway you know that said i really i feel for um uh you know council member davis who's relatively new who i know that if i were in your shoes i wouldn't feel ready to uh you know uh but then again you know uh here and now is not necessarily the time to rehearse the complicated discussions and all of the negotiation going back to the um our discussions last year starting last year about bike lanes um so uh you know i i support this um because it's a a piece of real estate that when we decide how to use it for parking and i understand there's no commitment in this vote now but that's what it was discussed um uh we'll be able to make a big impact and if for whatever reason the city decides not to do that then you can sell it uh so it it's unfortunate that now we don't have the time to go into that but i would encourage anyone who or anyone who's watching at home who is wondering what is this about to go and watch them there are a number of work sessions so maybe we could in an up in the friday report put online a kind of little history of this with a link to those work sessions uh for anyone who wants to see uh councilman briggs um so i'm going to be supporting it i'm in a motion uh to approve um it we did it came out of conversations with all the um the businesses on on fry street i do believe that um eventually the interesting the parking that we could do there and the creative ways that we could get more more parking there will benefit them and again it is land banking and if for some reason it doesn't work out then there's we are not forced to to hold on to it councilmember belter i think councilmember briggs just made all the points i was about to land banking the businesses are so clear that this is essential for that area uh for them to have a parking solution it was very tricky to ultimately find a resolution for both the business community and the cyclists here to get bakery street worked out but this is uh you know an issue that remains councilmember davis so sometimes you ask a question even if you know the answer because not everyone playing along at home has the benefit of knowing where to do the research so thank you for recapping where some of that information could be found for those who are following along at home my objections remain uh when we talk about walkability we talk about bikeability the answer is uh not replacing one for one every single parking spot that's available for small businesses at city expense so um we we're talking about businesses that i think make available a lot of foot traffic uh they they profit quite a bit from a lot of bike traffic and when we talk about the conversation a little bit further to the east on oak street and hickory street i don't see this project and the number of parking spaces um i mean for one how we're going to manage these parking spaces when already we have free street parking that fills up immediately and that's what creates the problem for the folks down further on oak street i also don't um again i don't know that this is the best use of the city's funds to alleviate that problem so although i was not on the council during some of the negotiations with local businesses and what's acceptable to them and the changes on hickory street i don't think this is a fiscally fiscally responsible way to address our parking situation i think what we do in that neck of the woods is encourage more walkability and bikeability and that means exactly what i'm talking about tonight which is you don't have to provide a parking spot for every potential customer at every particular business parking minimums all those kind of things don't actually do much to alleviate your parking problems they induce further parking problems and in this case induce them at city expense so i'm going to i'm going to comment i wasn't going to say much councillor breeze did you have another comment you've got a you're requested to speak but you're also as a movement right right well and again i i appreciate all those comments again it's land banking land is getting harder to find and more expensive in the city and so if we have the opportunity from my standpoint um to do it at a reasonable cost um i know that the mayor mentioned that it wasn't but there's a lot of other things that we could do a future park parks i mean there's there's many other things that we could do but if we don't have it we can't so that that's why i will still be voting yes yeah i mean i can i can count the votes but i have been here for the whole discussion there's no question about that we are paying the highest market price for this small piece of land on the corner the notion that we can put a parking garage on 0.36 acres of land the cost with that would be outrageous number two there's some discussion about would it not be parking for the whole public so if you just did surface parking anybody done any analysis on how many parking spots you can get on that piece of land if it's just surface have we yes we've done an analysis based on our current criteria and guidelines approximately 25 spaces will be okay possible so to me it's the principle i mean three hundred ninety thousand dollars is three hundred ninety thousand dollars there's no question about it that's not chicken feed it's also not 3.9 million dollars to me it's the simply the fact that we're paying the highest and not division for it we do not have a policy of land banking too many things and uh to make that a park on a corner across from the university i don't think that would we already have a park that we're going to be looking at this just down the road on on oak street so we've made accommodations for the additional parking that was going to be taken for the bike lanes we spent a couple of work sessions doing that so i appreciate everybody's opinion about who's going to be supporting it but i i don't think that council member davis's should be so summarily dismissed because the notion that we're going to solve a problem parking problem with 23 parking spaces that we don't even know if it's going to be is it going to be for everybody is it going to be free is it going to be just for the businesses who's going to police that who's going to pay for that we spent a lot of time resolving the parking issue on hickory street and the bike lanes this is not going to be part of that solution i'll make a prediction that in a year or two this still will be sitting there vacant which is fine and if we want to land bank it but i'm not in the the business of land banking without it truly a measurable and identifiable use as we have with fire stations police substations parks those kind of things that we we have a real vision for that so i wasn't going to say anything but i i had to respond to some of those comments council member ryan and then council member husband thank you mayor i just want to point out with it you mentioned a moment ago the cost per square foot but most people don't necessarily understand that but they do understand cost for an acre and so with 0.361 for 390,000 that works out to one acre of land at this price would be one million seventy eight thousand six hundred and twenty eight dollars which is way overpriced for any land in that area council member husband thank you pre-time i have a question please sir so is it physically possible to put a parking garage there and all that piece of property i do have a graphic i can show you how it's laid out and then we can talk about follow me and be sure and associate the cost with that be sure and say what it is per space and how many spaces you get let's start with typically let's start with so my question is and then there can be follow-up questions my question is is it physically possible to parking garage there so currently as it stands for a parking garage sorry about that we will have to have a circular motion for someone to ascend up the area and descend in the same space it is a very narrow space any parking available any driving aisle will take off most of the parking that you see on one side we've not analyzed it we i cannot fully address your question but at the same time given the amount of space here and our requirements we won't get that many spaces typically it costs about twenty thousand dollars a space for a parking garage versus five thousand dollars for a lot parking lot right and so let me ask you this so let's say basically if i follow you it's one lane of park one side of parking the other side would be driving circulation yeah and at some point you have like a peak level when you come back down right correct right and so does how long do parking garages last like how long does that structure stand before it needs to be you know what's the time on a cement structure i'll have to guess for that but i i don't have an idea sure typically a long time yeah 30 30 plus years right and how long is you and t going to be there do you think they're leaving anytime soon i i don't know sorry yeah so i so my point is this uh absolutely and i and i respect and contrary i do respect your your question and respectfully my answer is i think the market i'm trying to draw to those businesses drive cars and the market that walks to those businesses i don't know that they have the same amount of money in their pocket you know it's just when parents visit and they want to go someplace to eat i don't know that they're comfortable parking on fry street if it's easy to park on fry street or if it's advantageous and i look at those businesses that have continued to turn uh next just down from uh the bars there and i think what is the issue the issue to me is that the it's not the right proper clientele absolutely the walkable clientele has some money but there's deficiencies and when that campus is activated and those sort of things so when i look at just how to better serve that area i see again a parking garage that has parking spaces and the opportunity which is unique to denton for someone to pull into a half u-circle drop their car off with with the valet attendant and go shopping to their heart's content and then come back and i think that will draw the type of businesses that will stick and stay in that area and serve that area well that's that's my vision and then i would just say we have lots of plans for lots of piece of property and we come back and we say well that plan has changed so i don't take solace and our comfort in having a explicit plan because we're not one we can't encumber future councils and two those plans absolutely have to be flexible and so uh under that i i don't see that this is any different from any other plan we have and so again i don't dismiss your question i just answer it and again i don't know that that satisfies that answer satisfactory and that's okay i just i just wanted to at least take your question at face value and give you my thoughts on it and what i've said in a work session just to kind of memorialize that and understand that still may be be found wanting and that's okay so thank you real quick question because i think this is the first time we've seen any either schematic or any discussion on a configuration of a parking garage on that lot so i want to make sure i understood what you just said so what we're looking at here is a outline of a surface lot configuration correct is that correct all right so then i think what i heard you say was on a parking garage because of the configuration of the lot and the the limitations of the lot size that you would really be able to only park really on one side of the garage the other would be for ingress egress so if if i if i take that then if i look at what is on the surface it looks like you've got about one two three four five six seven about eight spots on one side if it was a surface lot and eight i mean so in a parking garage you're looking at probably eight to ten spots maybe per level once you take into the consideration of the driving circle and so the surface lot is 24 spaces is that what you have in 25 yeah 25 okay so all right so then if you had a parking garage which i'm not opposed to a parking garage i'm looking at the cost i mean you're looking at if you've got eight or nine spaces per level then you're going to have to have at least three levels to equal the amount of spaces that you almost would have on a surface lot and if you've got 27 spaces at twenty thousand dollars of space somebody else can do the math so i appreciate that that approach but if we're going to get that detailed then i want to make sure i understand what that really looks like as well because then you'd have to really go high if you wanted to get any kind of number above and beyond what the surface lot is so yeah we could keep going on i appreciate the spirited discussion i mean it's good we've had it before and and i really wasn't going to comment because we've had it before but hearing some of the comments i just felt compelled to do so councilmember barmiter you're up yeah so i'll just say briefly i mean i agree with it at least you know from where i'm standing now a parking garage to me doesn't seem realistic but it is possible but again we're deciding on that today i wanted to ask because somebody had mentioned earlier that the the parking spots displaced had been worked out in the bike plan and it was my understanding that is what was what we settled on for the bike lands on hickory it was my understanding that they had not all been uh answered for but if you could uh i think what we are adding along um avenue a and mulberry accounts or balances or even exceeds the one a number of spaces that were taken out on hickory okay okay so that so those so we're adding so with mulberry if i could i just want to make sure we stay on topic on the agenda item because i mean that i mean since we're not we don't have a specific plan for this lot then to continue with parking spaces and parking discussion i think it it gives us real close to the boundary of well for me okay maybe but you know for me that i mean this is a deciding factor because it was my understanding that we had not yet uh compensated for those parking spots but you're saying we have by the so this would in fact we have more than compensated correct councilmember briggs yeah so um going back to the economic development aspect of it when the reason why i'm going ahead and continuing this we we did have that discussion and it was that the businesses reached out and i also have constituents who say they drive by and they want to go and they want to sit they want to try this business but they have no place to park and so it was an extra added addition for parking there to support those businesses as in the downtown area has with other other lots so we we did have that conversation all right everybody wrapped up real real quickly real quickly and by how many um does the um uh the uh uh current bike solution minus any parking concerns there by how many does it exceed the number of displaced spots so there were how many displaced and how many compensated for i don't have the right exact numbers on top of my head um but um we are pretty close almost equal or to one or two spaces more depending on how we lay out our um loading areas if the loading areas are present then the parking spaces may go up and down so they are compensated i might this might result in me uh changing my vote not changing how i was going to vote uh with this this new understanding so thank you council member husband and pretend real quick please thank you hickory street's going to be on the construction going to carol next two years correct next two years hickory street's under construction yes so there are city attorney most now we're going way off topic let's bring it back into discussion on this particular piece of property this so hickory street mr city attorney so hickory street directly affects this area and you're telling me that's off topic wait the council has started to go beyond the the the actual posting of purchasing the property what we would what i'm now observing on this council is debate going back and forth trying to justify whether to purchase or not to purchase uh we're we're now talking about bike lanes we're talking about a conceptual parking garage and now and then the construction on hickory street all of that if you type back to what the scope of this of this caption is it's whether or not to buy this property so succinctly me talking about construction on hickory street in this direct area affects does not i can't talk about construction within one block of this piece of property we're going to purchase yes or no the again that the answer would be no because right now you're debating of the property whether to purchase it or not there is not a plan for this property or anything yet how the construction relates to the actual purchase of the property i haven't seen any type of of uh fact factual link between the two okay i'll follow up with you so thank you it's okay okay uh council member davis very briefly speaking to the economic development in this area the newest businesses in that area the sterling development that is there that project went in and those tenants within with full knowledge of what the parking situation is there and what the economics are over there and what the target audience is over there with respect to some of the older tenants in that area i prosecute intoxication crimes i prosecute a number of intoxication crimes and assaults that happen in that area i don't want more people driving to fry street on the weekends in the evenings i want more of them taking their ubers on at night and on the weekends with regard to the daytime businesses the folks that you know the coffee shop and the bookstores and that kind of stuff again these are these are small businesses that i'm not unaware of their issues and i'm not unsympathetic to their issues but the economics of that area it is not going to be the next razor ranch with an anchor with a big draw it's not going to be the next the small businesses that go in and that in those spots are always going to cater to students and their organs going to better cater to uh foot traffic yeah yeah okay all right um okay we're gonna we're gonna uh close the debate unless there's any pressing questions all right council member briggs i move to approve council member husbeth second all right we have a motion and a second for agenda item two f uh let's vote on the board please motion fails four to three for agenda item two f we will now move on to you know what let's take about a five minute break because we've got a long public hearing in front of us let's take a break right quick and then we'll come back and we'll start the uh public hearing portion welcome everybody back to this meeting the denton city council on june 11 2019 it is 7 30 we're going to move now to our public hearing portion of the agenda agenda items three uh just a couple of housekeeping announcements agenda item three a is being postponed to the july 16th 2019 council meeting um agenda item three b is being postponed and definitely will be brought back at a later at at a later time agenda item three c is also being postponed to the july 16th 2019 council meeting so no action is required so we don't need to call those items is that correct that is correct we'll probably will we read need to repost the ones that are for the july 16th meeting or no do we know if we're going to need to repost them or is it just be the you sent out a new notice of publication okay fantastic all right so that brings us to agenda items 3d through 3y so we're going to have a little bit different uh process uh here these 22 items are part of the city's effort to update the city the city's development code on april 23rd 2019 the city council approved an ordinance adopting the new denton development code which included a zoning district transition chart the the chart illustrates how existing districts were renamed consolidated consolidated and ultimately reduced from 23 to 16 zoning districts the purpose of the city initiated zoning changes will be considered and that will address non-conforming uses and structures and provides consistency within the city's comprehensive plan so this is how we're sort of going to handle this i will open the public hearing for agenda items 3d through 3y and then we'll invite staff to come make their presentations and then after staff's presentations we'll call anybody in the public that wishes to speak to come up and address the council on if you have a particular agenda item that you'd like to address on that one or if you just wanted to address the council in general on these issues and then following the public comment i will close the public hearing for agenda items 3d and 3y at that time we will have to consider each agenda item separately we'll have to call it separately to vote on it separately so each agenda item 3d through 3y will be voted on separately i think that covers it if i stray in the process then somebody will correct me and we'll move through this as efficiently and productively as we can and appreciate everybody being here that is going to be giving a public comment so now i will open the public hearing for agenda items on the council agenda agenda items 3d as in david through agenda items 3y and we'll now invite staff presentation on those agenda items and after staff presentation and questions if any by the council we will then take public comment great thank you mayor members of council ron mongito principal planner with the development services department i'm excited to be here this is the first of a series of city initiate zoning changes the first one as you see in this list is obviously tonight second one was scheduled for july 23rd which will be bringing another group of areas to you all and tentatively we're looking at an august 6 third group from the particular area of us 377 teasley and the neighborhood university compatibility areas throughout the city so the 22 areas that we're going to be looking at is shown here on this exhibit starting from area one which is in the southern portion of this exhibit along lakeview boulevard making our way north along i-35 through all the way up to fort worth drive and bernard which is area 24 the first group makes up of approximately 139 parcels again along i-35 and other corridors within the subject area so by way of presenting um just for a quick background the planning zoning commission i presented one area by each area by themselves i think that it took a little bit longer so what i'm going to try to do today or to this evening is to present it in groups by vicinity so the first areas in vicinity is going to be areas one through four and you see those here illustrated as outlined in yellow the first one here is part of the bill out of four dealership area two as you make your way north along i-35 is on the north side area three is just to the south and east of state school road and then we have area four here which is the ecard hunday pre-owned dealership what staff is proposing as part of the city initiated rezoning uh change is to zone the properties that you see here outlined in black in red to hc highway corridor hc does allow for automotive sales or leasing by right in the hc it also fronts i-35 while the other one is mr which is the smaller site here it is consistent with the surrounding areas the mr that is as it is curly mn and surrounded by mr so what staff is proposing is to zone that to mr again to be consistent with the surrounding zoning and the surrounding environment staff has received two responses for area two in favor and also two responses in favor for area three the next area that we're going to look at is areas five and six area five is along the i-35e corridor encompasses a number of businesses restaurants chewies bone daddies bj's and the like the area six in question or in in the subject six is the shoreline apartments and that is just west of unicorn lake boulevard and north of shoreline i want to point out that the area that is in dashed in yellow shaded here is not part of the consideration after notices were sent out the property owner contacted staff and the property owner asked that their property be not included in the city initiative rezoning therefore we are not considering that and it will be not part of the ordinance if it is to be approved the city is or the staff is proposing a city initiated zoning change for area five to hc again highway corridor where the majority of the existing uses is permitted by right under the hc and again it it is fronting i-35 and that's why we are proposing hc the mr similar to area four is currently mn per the transition chart we are proposing that it go to mr to be consistent again with the surrounding zoning both mn and mr allows for multifamily so there would be no subject change there per se but the zoning would be consistent with the surrounding area and surrounding zoning no public hearing notices was received for these two areas area seven is the area that you see here north of i-35 it is the ridge at north texas apartments as well as the pace crossing apartments the current zoning of those property is currently mn what staff is proposing as part of area seven is to go to an mr zoning and again as you can see per the transition chart the surrounding area all around the subject area is mr so we are proposing something consistent and as stated earlier with area six area seven mn and mr does allow for multifamily by right and there would be no changes as far as status area eight is in this area or this vicinity but again per our earlier item it is not being considered at this time and it will be brought back at a later time no public hearing notices was received for these uh for this area seven area ron just a moment councilmember armature i'm showing you have a request to speak is that correct yeah just a real quick real quick question um in the one what was that i think area six uh the one property that the yellow dotted one yes it was exempted um if that property gets bought in the future and it you know to the new property owner would be um uh would would be would fall under that that zoning it per the trans excuse me for interrupting per the transition chart it is going to go to an mn zoning and it's not shown on this exhibit but um it is per the transition chart will transition to an mn zoning district that one property that one property yes yeah and then if they wanted to change it they would they could come in they could just go through the process correct yes so there's a process for that it's not that they're not allowed to yes yeah and that's important that how flexible it is thank you that's correct mayor oh yes councilmember i had a question about that same slide um because i see that there's a single-family neighborhood down there um right right down and so that is changing so um is the it's a vacant property part of it is yeah i believe is the johns um if i can it's part of the johnston um i'm sorry yes johnson inc um business okay so that that is all one parcel or the empty parcel still will need to be i believe that's all one parcel let me go back except for this parcel here it looks like it's a separate parcel and not part of that and the ownership may be johnson i i can double check okay well i just want to make sure that that um whatever was going to butt up to that neighborhood it looks like it's part of the johnston um part okay um but what it was and what it's going to be are pretty similar as far as so with the neighborhoods not going to get right i don't think they're going to be relocating in fact i think they may be looking at additional parking so that kind of creates that the buffer for that buffer or at least the vacant piece of that parcel is still subject to potentially parking okay thank you yes okay um moving on to areas 10 through 15 this area is north of i-35 and east and west of teasley lane as you can see from this existing use list there's a number of uses on within this vicinity i'm not going to read all of it but there's apartments there's gas stations there's restaurants what staff is proposing again looking at north by 35 is a sc suburban corridor zoning district along the area that fronts dallas drive and teasley lane those that are fronting and access through i-35 is proposed to go to hc um again to be consistent with surrounding area and also to um accommodate the um the uses that are there today staff has received one response and that is in favor for area 10 area 13 is just south of i-35 that area it consists of 17.6 acres 76 acres 12 parcels consisting of a number of different uses including multiple professional offices a gas station at the corner of teasley and i-35 and a motel as well staff is proposing that area 13 go to a suburban corridor sc zoning district and the reason is it's it's not as intense as the hc and one reason is because what we want to do is protect the existing neighborhood to the south we still wanted to provide the area with the appropriate and suitable zoning district but still protecting the neighborhood to the south staff has received two responses in favor for area 13 moving on to area 16 through 18 this is off of london dairy uh boulevard sorry london dairy lane and sam bass boulevard area 16 um is in obviously this general vicinity that consists of a number of offices and other non-residential uses where area 17 and 18 consists mainly of multi-family or apartments uh within those two areas staff is proposing area 16 to be zone sc suburban corridor uh consistent with the surrounding uh zoning to the north and sits between an sc and a pf which is the mcmath middle school and the south lakes um park regional park while area 17 and 18 is proposed to go to an mn zoning district excuse me where medical office and multi-family dwellings are permitted in the mn by right um again consistent with the surrounding area surrounding zoning as you can see this is already mn and so surrounding mn uh this would make sense that this is also mn it is currently a an apartment multi-family dwelling and again would be permitted under the mn area 17 similarly consists of multi-family would be permitted under the mn as well no responses of from public notices was received 19 and 20 this area is north of i-35 the center place drive is located here if you're familiar with this there's there's a bank to the east uh johnny carino's and chuck-e-cheese is in this general area uh you uh the uh cube smart self-storage um excuse me is in this area and then u-hall is in this particular area here what staff is proposing is to zone these properties to an hc highway corridor again main reason is that it fronts primarily along i-35e the majority of the uses that are there today would be permitted by right under the hc and again consistent with the surrounding area not only to the north i'm sorry along the i-way but also to the south it is already proposed i'm sorry it is already zoned hc per the transition chart no public hearing notices were received for these two areas last last area our vicinity is areas 21 through 24 this area consists of properties that are fronting i-35e as well as fort worth drive this also has a number of uses as you can see by the list here one important note for this area we are not including this part that's shown here and similar to the earlier one of area five the property owner after notices were sent out and the staff report was published staff contacted the property owner the property owner contacted staff and requested that their property not be included as part of the considerations for area 24 therefore it will not be part of the consideration and will be reflected in the ordinance again if it is approved staff is recommending that areas 21 and 23 be zoned sc which is suburban corridor again along fort worth drive which is one of the major corridors that lead into the city's downtown and then hc for areas 22 and 24 which are more situated along i-35 and again majority of the uses that are there currently are permitted by hc by right staff has received two responses for area 21 in favor and one response in favor for area 23 planning zoning commission recommended approval six zero on may 29th of the request staff also recommends approval as stated and presented in this presentation wanted to make note that notices were sent out part of the public hearing process newspaper and website notices were published 310 public i'm sorry property owner mailings were sent out to property owners and properties within 200 feet of subject site 1061 curtsy postcards were mailed out and after um after a couple weeks staff has received as of this afternoon 10 responses in favor and no response in opposition that concludes my presentation i'll be happy to answer any questions any questions for staff at this point okay thank you so this is a public hearing uh i do have a blue card i want to end kelsey if you'll come stick oh is that okay just come down state your name and address your time will begin and kelsey 206 ridgecrest circle and i'm speaking in favor of the zoning change on fort worth drive and looks like the staff's done a great job thank you all thank you very much thank you this is a public hearing anybody wishing to speak please come down state your name and address and your time will begin on any one of the agenda items agenda items 3d through 3y anybody wishing to speak one more call all right we will now close the public hearing and it's my understanding mr city attorney that i need to go through these uh individual items call the the uh items and then ask for action is that correct that's correct okay all right so we'll go ahead and start with agenda item 3d agenda item 3d is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 1.88 acres of land generally located on the southeast corner of shady shores road and lake view boulevard council member ryan i move approval council member armature second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3d let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero and also i believe that the the full uh post agenda posting caption is is displayed on the screen as each one of these agenda items comes forward so we're moving on to agenda item 3e which is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 35.61 acres of land generally located south of pockress page road and north of i-35e council member ryan move approval we have a motion council member davis second we have a second for agenda i have a motion and a second for agenda item 3e let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3e excuse me next item is agenda item 3f which is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 74.13 acres of land generally located east of state school road and south of i-35e council member ryan move approval council member briggs second we have a motion and second for agenda item 3f let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3f agenda item 3g is a zoning change and change in zoning district excuse me and use classification for approximately 0.8 acres of land generally located north of pockress page road and north of i-35e council member ryan move approval council member briggs second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3g let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3g next agenda item is agenda item 3h which is a zoning change a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 36.5 acres of land generally located west of state school road and south of i-35e council member ryan move approval council member briggs second we have a motion and a second for agenda item three what am i on h yes h uh let's vote on the board please agenda item 3h passes unanimously seven zero agenda item 3i is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 7.3 acres of land generally located west of unicorn lake boulevard and north of shoreline shoreline drive council member armature i move approval council member davis second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3i let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3i agenda item 3j is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 30.88 acres of land generally located north of i-35e and approximately 900 feet north of brinker road council member ryan move approval council member davis second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3j let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3j agenda item 3k is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 25.18 acres of land generally located south of dallas drive and east of teasley lane council member davis move approval council member ryan second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3k let's vote on the board please agenda item 3k passes unanimously seven zero agenda item 3l is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 3.49 acres of land generally located north of i-35e and approximately 1200 feet east of teasley lane council member ryan move approval council member armature second we have a motion and second for agenda item 3l let's vote on the board please please excuse me motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3l agenda item 3m is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 9.63 acres of land generally on the northeast corner of i-35 and teasley lane council member davis move approval council member briggs second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3m let's vote on the board please motion carries unanimously excuse me seven zero for agenda item 3m agenda item 3n is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 17.76 acres of land generally located south of i-35e between teasley lane and woodbrook street council member ryan move approval council member davis second have a motion and second for agenda item 3n let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3n agenda item 3o is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 6.29 acres of land generally located on the northwest corner of i-35e and teasley lane council member armater i so move council member ryan second we have a motion and second for agenda item 3o let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3o agenda item 3p is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 5.89 acres of land generally located south of dallas drive and west of teasley lane council member melzer i move approval council member davis second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3p let's vote on the board please agenda item 3p passes unanimously seven zero agenda item 3q is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 4.75 acres of land generally located west of teasley lane and on the north and south sides of london dairy lane council member melzer i move approval council member armater i second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3q let's vote on the board please agenda item 3q passes unanimously seven zero agenda item 3r is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 6.86 acres of land generally located approximately 800 feet west of teasley lane and on the north and south sides of london dairy lane councilmember melzer move approval council member davis second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3r let's vote on the board please motion carries for agenda item 3r unanimously seven zero agenda item 3s is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 9.24 acres of land generally located on the northeast corner of sandbass boulevard in london dairy lane council member davis move approval council member ryan second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3s let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3s agenda item 3t is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 7.17 acres of land generally located north of i-35e and on the west and east side of center place drive council member ryan move approval council member davis second let's vote on the board please agenda item 3t passes unanimously seven zero agenda item 3u is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 10.08 acres of land generally located on the north side of i-35e and on the west and east sides of meadow street council member davis move approval council member melzer second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3u let's vote on the board please agenda item 3u passes unanimously seven zero agenda item 3v as in victor is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 23.16 acres of land generally located north of i-35e and east of fort worth drive council member ryan move approval council member melzer second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3v as in victor let's vote on the board please agenda item 3v passes unanimously seven zero agenda item 3w is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 4.10 acres of land generally located on the northeast corner of i-35e and fort worth drive sweet council member hudspeth move approval of item w council member melzer second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3w let's vote on the board please oh motion carries seven zero for agenda item 3w agenda item 3x is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 23.95 acres of land generally located west of fort worth drive and north of lindsey street council member davis move approval council member hudspeth second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 3x let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero before we go to agenda item 3y i i wanted i should have mentioned this at the beginning but first of all i want to just thank staff for all their hard work in getting the new development code passed the transition table and now bringing these city initiated zonings to sort of clean up the map and and you know put people in conformance and and just doing the right thing so i appreciate all the hard work i know it's not been easy it's been very tedious but you guys have done a stellar job so thank you so much for that i think it's really going to benefit our city and appreciate all your hard work in that regard agenda item 3y is a change in zoning district and use classification for approximately 8.32 acres of land generally located on the northwest corner of i-35e and fort worth drive council member ryan i want to second your thank you and move approval council member melzer second to all of the above all right we have a motion and a second let's vote on the board please three y passage unanimously seven zero mayor pro tem i will get i will get that all straight referring to you as mayor pro tem so please accept my humble apologies for that you know you were elected by this body so i've just i've got to get my mind right so please accept my my apologies for that thank you okay uh that uh concludes i believe the public hearing portion of our agenda is that correct and our last remaining agenda item uh is concluding items council member briggs so i um don't have any items for staff but i want to take my time to acknowledge the passing of our community of a community member um elida tamiz um i'm gonna get emotional she uh came to us many times and uh spoke to us from the heart and she was very passionate about this community um i was lucky enough to know her and she will be missed thank you thank you council member breaks i appreciate that council member armature i too um in fact i can hardly believe she's gone i can still hear her voice um so she will be here in spirit for a long time i will miss elida always um and i wanted to mention just a shout out for the we have the juneteenth uh celebration coming up friday and saturday especially the parade on saturday and there's a a really neat book that you can pick up for just ten dollars at the mlk rec center that's a uh his juneteenth history of of denton and some profiles of uh local local celebrities and um different people in the community and their stories it's just a really wonderful book um and uh secondly i want to put in a request um for a a staff report just kind of updating uh council uh on the meeting that was had with some um uh staff from the parks department um and also our new assistant city manager had a conference call with non-toxic neighborhoods and it was really interesting um so if just a brief summary on kind of what was discussed and who they are would be would be really neat okay council member davis on our consent agenda tonight we had a utility pole item and that reminded me of a conversation the council had some time ago about stub poles and we also have a a either a report or a work session item coming up on a utility pole leasing debt uh maybe we could have those conversations together i'd like to see kind of an update on where we are with stub poles it's one of those things that once you've seen one and know what it is about and how it got there you can't help but see more of them so i'd like kind of an update on where those are at and what our plan is for removing those or getting the last couple less ease over to the big poles thank you mayor pro tem yeah just to follow up on the juneteenth event and on uh that saturday that saturday 1 p.m there's going to be a proclamation the mayor is going to read and and commissioner ender yeats regarding uh fred moore a dedication of a plaque and then also uh fred moore's family will be there to accept and be recognized that sort of thing so it'll be it's another uh highlight of that event great thank you any other concluding items if not we'll stand adjourned at 8 0 5 p.m on june the 11th 2019