WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:09.240
 Good afternoon. Welcome to the Special Citizens Bond Advisory Committee meeting

00:00:09.240 --> 00:00:18.920
 on Thursday June 27th. It's 6 o' 2 p.m. First item on the agenda is consideration

00:00:18.920 --> 00:00:24.960
 of approval of the meeting minutes from June 13th.

00:00:24.960 --> 00:00:35.240
 Has anyone had a chance to look at those? Okay, thank you.

00:00:35.240 --> 00:00:42.480
 Do you get that Ms. Teresa? Okay, great. Any other comments? I'll entertain a

00:00:42.480 --> 00:00:46.960
 motion for approval as minutes as amended. I'll move to approve the minutes as amended.

00:00:46.960 --> 00:00:57.120
 Second. Thank you, Susie. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. All right.

00:00:57.120 --> 00:01:11.720
 Motion carries. We'll move on to street lights. Mr. Estes. Good evening. Todd Estes,

00:01:11.720 --> 00:01:16.600
 City Engineer. We're continuing the conversation we had on the 13th where we

00:01:16.600 --> 00:01:20.440
 talked about roadways and Proposition 2 and now we're also talking about the

00:01:20.440 --> 00:01:24.800
 item that was left over which was sidewalks and then street lights as an

00:01:24.800 --> 00:01:30.240
 potential add-on to that Proposition 2 commitment. So sidewalks and street lights,

00:01:30.240 --> 00:01:34.040
 just to give you a brief overview where we're talking about in that priority

00:01:34.040 --> 00:01:38.560
 scale what we had looked at earlier summarizing the actual funds funding

00:01:38.560 --> 00:01:42.840
 amounts where staff is put together and prioritized. Sidewalks was right square

00:01:42.840 --> 00:01:47.160
 in the middle is about number four in line with the other items and then

00:01:47.160 --> 00:01:52.320
 street lighting down here. As with the other items we are always looking for

00:01:52.320 --> 00:01:56.840
 ways to take taxpayer dollars that would come into this program, both of these

00:01:56.840 --> 00:02:01.840
 programs, and try to stretch them through other grant funding sources or some

00:02:01.840 --> 00:02:05.360
 other resources that might be available to us through other entities and we'll

00:02:05.360 --> 00:02:10.680
 talk about that a little bit tonight as we get into those. So just to give you a

00:02:10.680 --> 00:02:15.400
 quick overview what you see in green this is a map of the city of Denton. The

00:02:15.400 --> 00:02:20.360
 green lines are where we have sidewalks today. Now this is not an evaluation of

00:02:20.360 --> 00:02:24.440
 their current status if they're in need of repair or if they need a leveling

00:02:24.440 --> 00:02:32.000
 this is just where we have sidewalks today. So one of the things that we had

00:02:32.000 --> 00:02:37.080
 left over from the 2012 and 2014 especially the 2014 bond was a segment

00:02:37.080 --> 00:02:41.480
 in that bond for sidewalks. That two million dollars has been pretty well

00:02:41.480 --> 00:02:47.240
 spent. We have two projects left over that have lumped several areas such as

00:02:47.240 --> 00:02:51.360
 what you see here where we took missing sidewalk segments then identified years

00:02:51.360 --> 00:02:57.080
 ago and part of the plan. We've designed those elements. We have a 2018 we call

00:02:57.080 --> 00:03:00.120
 it the 2018 sidewalk we designed the elements that needed to go into

00:03:00.120 --> 00:03:04.320
 construction. We have about what was it a half a million pre-tax that we could

00:03:04.320 --> 00:03:10.240
 put towards this construction effort but still needed a half man left for the 2018

00:03:10.240 --> 00:03:13.640
 sidewalk. You got to pay attention tonight.

00:03:13.640 --> 00:03:20.840
 So we have 300,000 that are in the construction on that 2018 sidewalk

00:03:20.840 --> 00:03:25.120
 segment but it's still about 700,000 on that that is left to be made up and then

00:03:25.120 --> 00:03:28.960
 another two million that's already been designed or nearing completion design

00:03:28.960 --> 00:03:33.280
 for 2019 sidewalks. We would have wanted to have gone construction this year and

00:03:33.280 --> 00:03:37.280
 that's still needing funding. So we've already exhausted the two million

00:03:37.280 --> 00:03:41.760
 dollars in funding plus some grant funds that were already put into the program

00:03:41.760 --> 00:03:49.700
 as well and now we're looking to go further. So what we are proposing with

00:03:49.700 --> 00:03:55.640
 the 2019 bond program is about 12 million dollars in sidewalk funding. Now

00:03:55.640 --> 00:04:01.240
 we anticipate being able to stretch that to 18 or 19 million on the safe side

00:04:01.240 --> 00:04:05.680
 through safe routes to school funding, through grant funding and alternative

00:04:05.680 --> 00:04:09.320
 was not alternative I would say that's wrong active transportation funds and

00:04:09.320 --> 00:04:13.960
 those are several grant funding sources that the state provides on an annual

00:04:13.960 --> 00:04:19.720
 basis. Now the trouble with those funding sources is that we are in the mix with a

00:04:19.720 --> 00:04:23.840
 variety of other cities. Every other city in the state of Texas can also apply and

00:04:23.840 --> 00:04:28.960
 there is a limited amount of funding every year. Now we do submit projects into

00:04:28.960 --> 00:04:34.120
 that on an annual basis to try to stretch those dollars as far as we can. So

00:04:34.120 --> 00:04:38.160
 one of the avenues that we're focused on are those safe routes to school programs.

00:04:38.160 --> 00:04:42.880
 That's a set of funding that we can also go after. You can see we've

00:04:42.880 --> 00:04:48.440
 broken the city into several areas and it's kind of a heat map that you look at

00:04:48.440 --> 00:04:52.880
 here. The black being the actual grounds of a school mostly you see these

00:04:52.880 --> 00:04:56.800
 centered around the elementary schools and the middle schools. We don't have

00:04:56.800 --> 00:05:00.720
 them around the high schools primarily because they're very hard to get safe

00:05:00.720 --> 00:05:04.480
 routes to school funding for the high schools as they tend to have a lot more

00:05:04.480 --> 00:05:08.560
 students that already drive to the school. But one of the other reasons that

00:05:08.560 --> 00:05:11.720
 we also look at this from a heat map scenario where we're looking more

00:05:11.720 --> 00:05:15.160
 radius and you'll see over on the side where we're talking about the radius

00:05:15.160 --> 00:05:18.600
 within a quarter mile of a school, half mile of school. One of the reasons we look at

00:05:18.600 --> 00:05:22.360
 it this way is as we work with the school district the school district also

00:05:22.360 --> 00:05:27.640
 defines a route to school and their transportation program by a two mile

00:05:27.640 --> 00:05:31.760
 radius. So if you live within a two mile radius you're not eligible to be bused

00:05:31.760 --> 00:05:37.000
 to school. Outside that two mile radius you can take a bus they do have those

00:05:37.000 --> 00:05:41.480
 routes set aside for you. So as we start looking at our sidewalk

00:05:41.480 --> 00:05:45.680
 infrastructure and what potential funding sources are out there beyond what

00:05:45.680 --> 00:05:50.800
 the city would put into a bond program or an annual program we would be looking

00:05:50.800 --> 00:05:55.000
 to stretch these dollars into those programs sponsored by the state. They

00:05:55.000 --> 00:05:59.560
 fund a safe routes to school funding source where we would identify those

00:05:59.560 --> 00:06:05.320
 school pro those schools within an area that have missing components. So our

00:06:05.320 --> 00:06:08.640
 first target would be that quarter mile area and the reason we look at the

00:06:08.640 --> 00:06:13.920
 quarter mile area first so it's a radius around the school it really doesn't tie

00:06:13.920 --> 00:06:18.520
 into the cost because there's an actual distance of sidewalk within each of

00:06:18.520 --> 00:06:22.560
 those areas that has to be filled and some of those areas have more sidewalks

00:06:22.560 --> 00:06:27.160
 need to be filled than others but within that quarter mile of each school we're

00:06:27.160 --> 00:06:31.520
 looking at how do you really bring that the kids that are closest to the schools

00:06:31.520 --> 00:06:34.680
 themselves are the ones who are most likely to walk the further you get

00:06:34.680 --> 00:06:37.960
 they're less likely the further you get away from even that they're less likely

00:06:37.960 --> 00:06:42.640
 they're most likely being dropped off by parents in a car or they're some other

00:06:42.640 --> 00:06:47.560
 mode of transportation may be bringing them their carpooling maybe another way

00:06:47.560 --> 00:06:51.480
 they're getting there so that quarter mile becomes our first target it's also

00:06:51.480 --> 00:06:56.280
 a way that we start looking at how do we break this into more or less bite-size

00:06:56.280 --> 00:06:59.840
 chunks instead of you see down at the bottom if we were to go to the one mile

00:06:59.840 --> 00:07:04.740
 radius right from the get-go which is this very light yellow around the

00:07:04.740 --> 00:07:09.040
 outside of these rings we went to the one one mile radius we'd be looking at

00:07:09.040 --> 00:07:17.200
 almost 280 million dollars in funds to fill in those gaps so that's larger than

00:07:17.200 --> 00:07:22.640
 the bond we're actually asking for at this moment to give you an idea of where

00:07:22.640 --> 00:07:27.000
 the state tends to go on the Safe Routes to School program I think this year they

00:07:27.000 --> 00:07:33.640
 had eight million set aside for Safe Routes to School I think that's right so

00:07:33.640 --> 00:07:38.320
 they had about eight million dollars available across the state to go into

00:07:38.320 --> 00:07:41.400
 Safe Routes to School program some years it's higher some years it's lower it

00:07:41.400 --> 00:07:46.040
 depends on where their revenues land on an annual basis so when you start

00:07:46.040 --> 00:07:50.760
 competing against other cities for the same funding source it's a limit to

00:07:50.760 --> 00:07:56.040
 what you're actually going to get what you could get you know these all will go

00:07:56.040 --> 00:08:00.200
 down the pathway of the city or whatever entity actually gets these grants that

00:08:00.200 --> 00:08:04.560
 you put in 20% of the funding amount and they matched up to 80% beyond that so

00:08:04.560 --> 00:08:11.840
 it's a one to four trade-off on the cost that there's just not that much funding

00:08:11.840 --> 00:08:16.840
 to go around so what helps us get there is to have a plan not just a plan for

00:08:16.840 --> 00:08:20.960
 how we're gonna get all of our missing components in but a physical designed

00:08:20.960 --> 00:08:27.760
 plan to show that group of the folks that actually evaluate who gets the Safe

00:08:27.760 --> 00:08:31.000
 Routes to School funding that we actually are ready to go tomorrow we're

00:08:31.000 --> 00:08:36.320
 shovel ready we're ready to go and part of our program that we're proposing for

00:08:36.320 --> 00:08:41.420
 this 2019 bond would be two million dollars roughly annually a component of

00:08:41.420 --> 00:08:46.120
 that would go into design each year for the following year's construction that

00:08:46.120 --> 00:08:49.680
 way we're always ahead of the game we're ready for construction in the following

00:08:49.680 --> 00:08:53.080
 year and it allows us to get into that mixture on the Safe Routes to School

00:08:53.080 --> 00:08:57.400
 funding during the application time period they can see we're ready to go it

00:08:57.400 --> 00:09:01.640
 truly is shovel ready it also gets us in line with those active transportation

00:09:01.640 --> 00:09:05.520
 funds and some other routes that we could potentially go down such as CDBG

00:09:05.520 --> 00:09:09.520
 funding if we can partner and show we have that plan put together ahead of

00:09:09.520 --> 00:09:13.560
 time they're a lot more willing to say yes that seems like a good option let's

00:09:13.560 --> 00:09:19.140
 put that money there so where we're recommending right now is that we would

00:09:19.140 --> 00:09:23.640
 push for the quarter mile radius with this bond program and in get all those

00:09:23.640 --> 00:09:27.960
 infill missing sidewalks complete within that quarter mile so just to give you an

00:09:27.960 --> 00:09:32.440
 idea of what that might look like we've zoomed in just a little bit around

00:09:32.440 --> 00:09:36.400
 Evers Park Elementary and Strickland these are the areas where we have

00:09:36.400 --> 00:09:40.120
 missing sidewalk segments that would really get us to that Safe Routes to

00:09:40.120 --> 00:09:43.960
 School program that would fill in those gaps how do you get those kids to the

00:09:43.960 --> 00:09:49.360
 school so these red lines would be an example of where those missing gaps need

00:09:49.360 --> 00:09:53.320
 to be filled when it comes to just this area you see a little bit of Jennings as

00:09:53.320 --> 00:09:58.320
 well over on the on the east side of that drawing that's about three miles of

00:09:58.320 --> 00:10:02.800
 sidewalk that gets added into the program and generally runs about two

00:10:02.800 --> 00:10:06.880
 million dollars for that particular piece of construction including the

00:10:06.880 --> 00:10:10.800
 design of it all the other factors that might go into what you need for that

00:10:10.800 --> 00:10:19.800
 sidewalk I know there have been some questions about variability and pricing

00:10:19.800 --> 00:10:24.100
 why does this seem to not be as equitable as say streets you know per

00:10:24.100 --> 00:10:28.160
 lane mile well one of the reasons that you're going to see a high variety of

00:10:28.160 --> 00:10:33.640
 pricing on sidewalks is some sidewalks are not as clean cut to put in the

00:10:33.640 --> 00:10:37.520
 ground as others so if you look at a segment this is just an example where we

00:10:37.520 --> 00:10:41.520
 have put in this missing piece of sidewalk here recently it's a long loop

00:10:41.520 --> 00:10:46.600
 288 you've got the a train and the pedestrian crossing over loop 288 if

00:10:46.600 --> 00:10:49.640
 you're McAllister's fan you'll recognize McAllister's hanging out over here on

00:10:49.640 --> 00:10:55.280
 the corner this had no real problems for us from a construction standpoint we

00:10:55.280 --> 00:10:59.480
 didn't have to relocate utilities we didn't have to acquire right away there

00:10:59.480 --> 00:11:03.300
 was really no constriction there we just had to go put form boards down put

00:11:03.300 --> 00:11:08.760
 concrete in the ground quite literally and then we're done so very easy to do

00:11:08.760 --> 00:11:13.200
 from a standpoint of all the upfront work before you ever get to construction

00:11:13.200 --> 00:11:21.400
 and kept the cost down about 400 linear foot of sidewalk like it was five foot

00:11:21.400 --> 00:11:29.020
 sidewalk $28,000 to complete that stretch now in comparison here's where

00:11:29.020 --> 00:11:34.440
 this gets a little hairy on the pricing when we're talking about sidewalks so

00:11:34.440 --> 00:11:39.200
 the concrete elementary school you see it down here circled in yellow some of

00:11:39.200 --> 00:11:42.120
 the missing segments that absolutely are part of that safe for us to school

00:11:42.120 --> 00:11:46.760
 program is Swisher Road getting these homes and the kids that lived out in

00:11:46.760 --> 00:11:51.320
 these neighborhoods down to pecan Creek Elementary School there is a significant

00:11:51.320 --> 00:11:56.440
 challenge when we're doing this project this is a zoomed-up area of this area in

00:11:56.440 --> 00:12:00.880
 red see the homes are very close to the road you there's a fence right along

00:12:00.880 --> 00:12:06.160
 this roadway segment here there are no curb and gutter there are utilities in

00:12:06.160 --> 00:12:09.760
 the area and we'll flip a view and you'll see a street view here in just a

00:12:09.760 --> 00:12:13.960
 second but we still have to fit a five foot sidewalk in here at a minimum at

00:12:13.960 --> 00:12:19.760
 least on one side so the challenge is that presents to us is this is the

00:12:19.760 --> 00:12:26.080
 street view of that same segment of road a virtual wall of trees and overgrowth

00:12:26.080 --> 00:12:30.000
 the fence is immediately behind this along with power lines that would have

00:12:30.000 --> 00:12:34.700
 to be either moved or you potentially come over to the other side of Swisher

00:12:34.700 --> 00:12:38.240
 Road but now I've got to figure out how do I not let the kids cross through a

00:12:38.240 --> 00:12:42.720
 drainage way especially when it's wet and muddy during adverse climate times

00:12:42.720 --> 00:12:46.880
 of the year or do I move the whole road anyway you look at I'm probably getting

00:12:46.880 --> 00:12:50.600
 right away for sure getting into some easements I'm having to relocate some

00:12:50.600 --> 00:12:54.920
 heavy utilities maybe creating new utilities in the form of stormwater

00:12:54.920 --> 00:13:00.000
 infrastructure that's going to elevate the crop the cost greatly so just this

00:13:00.000 --> 00:13:03.940
 piece right here without doing any of the road could potentially for the same

00:13:03.940 --> 00:13:09.080
 400 feet run us almost four times as much so it's at least three times as

00:13:09.080 --> 00:13:12.600
 much if it becomes evident that we really just need to shift the whole road

00:13:12.600 --> 00:13:17.600
 over it gets infinitely larger and the cost so that's where the variability

00:13:17.600 --> 00:13:21.200
 comes in when we're talking about pricing of these sidewalk elements not

00:13:21.200 --> 00:13:27.120
 everything's as easy as just putting a sidewalk now so one of the ways that we

00:13:27.120 --> 00:13:32.360
 are really putting into our plan going forward of making sure that we get this

00:13:32.360 --> 00:13:37.120
 done is would in a timely manner is is spent on the 12 million dollars over six

00:13:37.120 --> 00:13:41.800
 years we would target those segments of sidewalk first that really don't have any

00:13:41.800 --> 00:13:45.220
 challenges there's not a right away issue there's not a lot of relocation so

00:13:45.220 --> 00:13:50.440
 that gets out of the box first and then in the meantime as we hit successive

00:13:50.440 --> 00:13:54.080
 years we're absolutely going to be working through those more challenging

00:13:54.080 --> 00:13:57.880
 segments of town to get that safe routes of school program the active

00:13:57.880 --> 00:14:04.340
 transportation elements in the different funding sources that we are looking to

00:14:04.340 --> 00:14:07.520
 bring online to stretch those dollars even further you know we're asking for

00:14:07.520 --> 00:14:12.560
 12 million but that quarter mile segment really is 18.7 by our budget

00:14:12.560 --> 00:14:17.040
 estimation at this point how do we get there well we're absolutely planning on

00:14:17.040 --> 00:14:22.120
 going after that active transportation money the safe routes of school money to

00:14:22.120 --> 00:14:25.720
 get us there now I'd love to be able to get even further like we can with the

00:14:25.720 --> 00:14:29.200
 roadways but again we're competing against so many other cities to get that

00:14:29.200 --> 00:14:34.360
 same dollar amount now active transportation it has an advantage that

00:14:34.360 --> 00:14:38.120
 safe routes of school does not safe routes of school is purely to get people

00:14:38.120 --> 00:14:48.560
 to the schools they do prioritize the elementary schools first yes ma'am yes

00:14:48.560 --> 00:14:53.440
 and then the active transportation grants that's where we could actually

00:14:53.440 --> 00:14:57.400
 get some of that money that would tie in the parks or trails networks because

00:14:57.400 --> 00:15:01.800
 that is a little bit more broad in what we can apply it towards and then your

00:15:01.800 --> 00:15:05.360
 CDBG grants can be used in more than neighborhood settings for other

00:15:05.360 --> 00:15:11.220
 issuances of that that sidewalk component so any questions so far on

00:15:11.220 --> 00:15:26.740
 sidewalks yes as we get closer to destinations like schools the closer we

00:15:26.740 --> 00:15:30.680
 get we would do a pedestrian survey to make sure we understand how many folks

00:15:30.680 --> 00:15:34.440
 are actually coming to the destination we would go to an eight foot or a ten

00:15:34.440 --> 00:15:39.000
 foot potentially even a 12 foot if we ascertain that there's also bicycling

00:15:39.000 --> 00:15:43.200
 traffic along with that pedestrian traffic so the destinations really

00:15:43.200 --> 00:15:47.960
 become the way we figure out how wide a sidewalk do you really need and we gauge

00:15:47.960 --> 00:15:58.520
 that by doing a survey count of how many people are coming and going yes yes ma'am

00:15:58.520 --> 00:16:04.840
 there's sidewalks with alternatives permeable sidewalks I know you're annoyed

00:16:04.840 --> 00:16:10.000
 all I ever do is talk about permeable lots of several of the cities have to

00:16:10.000 --> 00:16:17.080
 cost-wise it's it's more efficacious do we have any permeable sidewalks here I

00:16:17.080 --> 00:16:21.280
 know we do parking lots but have we tried that at all not currently but it's

00:16:21.280 --> 00:16:25.520
 an it absolutely is something that we look at it's it's definitely a little

00:16:25.520 --> 00:16:30.320
 it's a little bit more challenging to try to maintain over the long term is to

00:16:30.320 --> 00:16:33.360
 make it effective you have to make sure somebody does come and power wash it

00:16:33.360 --> 00:16:38.200
 periodically long stretches just mean we have more time and money annually that

00:16:38.200 --> 00:16:44.040
 goes into that it's something that we do look at when we start working into these

00:16:44.040 --> 00:16:47.360
 these types of projects that we're talking about right now where we're in

00:16:47.360 --> 00:16:51.160
 filling sidewalks where they don't exist a lot of them are not in existence

00:16:51.160 --> 00:16:55.300
 because they were probably very large trees or some other types of impediments

00:16:55.300 --> 00:16:59.440
 that in the way that if I had an impervious or I had a pervious type of

00:16:59.440 --> 00:17:03.920
 pavement there might be beneficial to what was a concern at the time when I

00:17:03.920 --> 00:17:07.400
 might have had to have cut through some roots to go around it or take a tree

00:17:07.400 --> 00:17:11.400
 down that absolutely becomes something that is a viable option and we're not

00:17:11.400 --> 00:17:14.920
 opposed to doing that we just want to make sure we do it in the right way at

00:17:14.920 --> 00:17:27.600
 the right time and we would absolutely consider where's the best place to put

00:17:27.600 --> 00:17:35.600
 those we're not averse to that yes ma'am I noticed you were have sidewalks on

00:17:35.600 --> 00:17:45.600
 Lester Davis school is that not a high school it's yep right there it's a high

00:17:45.600 --> 00:17:47.640
 school

00:17:47.640 --> 00:18:00.320
 and I think at some point someone had even brought up that Denton High School

00:18:00.320 --> 00:18:03.040
 will be changed at the current Denton High School will be changing facilities

00:18:03.040 --> 00:18:06.760
 we're working with the school district on those things we meet with them monthly

00:18:06.760 --> 00:18:10.360
 to understand what their growth plans are what's going to happen and right now

00:18:10.360 --> 00:18:14.200
 what we don't know is what they plan to do with the old Calhoun and the old

00:18:14.200 --> 00:18:17.560
 Newton razor when they finally start making adjustments and even those are

00:18:17.560 --> 00:18:22.560
 two to five years out so this really is the best alternative as we go forward

00:18:22.560 --> 00:18:27.520
 but it's going to change as the school district continues to evolve as well

00:18:30.520 --> 00:18:35.600
 isn't the new codes or this current city codes that sidewalks be built when a

00:18:35.600 --> 00:18:41.080
 property is developed so there should be no future situation I mean as this

00:18:41.080 --> 00:18:46.600
 eventually so it's taking care of over 20 30 50 years they'll be sidewalks being

00:18:46.600 --> 00:18:50.920
 put in by developers we have both I mean sidewalks are definitely being put in by

00:18:50.920 --> 00:18:56.360
 developers now there are instances where you have a whole stretch of roadway that

00:18:56.360 --> 00:19:00.480
 has no sidewalk maybe on the perimeter of a development so we typically take

00:19:00.480 --> 00:19:04.620
 an escrow account we get the money from them up front so that when we get ready

00:19:04.620 --> 00:19:08.600
 to go build the sidewalk we can do it all together at one time or other times

00:19:08.600 --> 00:19:12.200
 we go ahead and put the dollars into it to do that connection now especially if

00:19:12.200 --> 00:19:17.040
 it's a small segment the challenge we get into is we absolutely don't want to

00:19:17.040 --> 00:19:23.360
 leave someone with a visual disability or physical disability stranded so they

00:19:23.360 --> 00:19:26.800
 get off expecting I got somewhere to go and then they get stranded somewhere so

00:19:26.800 --> 00:19:30.080
 you've got that piece of sidewalk that's hanging out there and they got nowhere

00:19:30.080 --> 00:19:35.080
 to go so that it's a constant battle on both sides of just how do we actually do

00:19:35.080 --> 00:19:44.480
 this the most effective way just to make sure I understood maybe I misheard the

00:19:44.480 --> 00:19:49.000
 numbers you said the state currently only allocates eight million dollars per

00:19:49.000 --> 00:19:52.520
 year for safe depends on the year that's what they had been using this I think it

00:19:52.520 --> 00:19:57.080
 was this last year it was eight million and so so we're hoping to get a total of

00:19:57.080 --> 00:20:01.720
 about six million between that funding and the city over the life of the

00:20:01.720 --> 00:20:06.680
 program okay yes okay not in one year yeah yeah but over over the life of the

00:20:06.680 --> 00:20:12.720
 program yes okay and that value changes I mean I've seen it as high as 25 30

00:20:12.720 --> 00:20:16.400
 million dollars and it can come down lower than eight it just really depends

00:20:16.400 --> 00:20:20.360
 on what the state's available funding is okay

00:20:21.080 --> 00:20:31.420
 all right for again street lighting any other sidewalk questions okay yes sir

00:20:31.420 --> 00:20:35.640
 McKinney's a major East West thoroughfare that a lot of people yes sir

00:20:35.640 --> 00:20:41.800
 where where do we stand on addressing that is that outside of this scope or is

00:20:41.800 --> 00:20:45.520
 that being addressed by existing projects there it's being addressed in a

00:20:45.520 --> 00:20:50.560
 multiple fronts it's outside of what we're proposing here but what we are

00:20:50.560 --> 00:20:54.840
 doing is we are designing up to 30% where all those improvements along

00:20:54.840 --> 00:20:59.240
 McKinney from Luke 288 all the way to Carol would be you've seen some of that

00:20:59.240 --> 00:21:03.360
 get infilled as we have some annual dollars available through CEOs or other

00:21:03.360 --> 00:21:07.560
 amounts supplemental amounts in the budget process but as we go forward

00:21:07.560 --> 00:21:11.360
 where we're looking to go is to leverage North Central Texas Council of

00:21:11.360 --> 00:21:15.440
 Government dollars some of the various funding sources they have to get all of

00:21:15.440 --> 00:21:20.040
 McKinney done at one time so part of the issue that the Council of Governments has

00:21:20.040 --> 00:21:25.640
 is if you don't come to them with some kind of plan and and for them a plan is

00:21:25.640 --> 00:21:29.400
 no longer hey we'd really like to go do this this makes sense it really is I

00:21:29.400 --> 00:21:32.140
 got to have some drawings I got to have some information that says you've

00:21:32.140 --> 00:21:35.400
 thought through this you know what the right-of-way takes gonna be if there is

00:21:35.400 --> 00:21:39.800
 one you know how much material it's gonna be what is the real cost here then

00:21:39.800 --> 00:21:42.840
 yes they're absolutely willing to sit down and talk to us about how do we

00:21:42.840 --> 00:21:47.280
 partner to make that happen and that that is something we're actively engaged

00:21:47.280 --> 00:21:55.260
 in right now what's the rule regarding easements for sidewalks and what

00:21:55.260 --> 00:21:59.200
 percentage are we talking about that would require right-of-way acquisition

00:21:59.200 --> 00:22:03.120
 versus the easements I don't have a number for you on that one we can look

00:22:03.120 --> 00:22:09.480
 into that one it's not that difficult to do with our current GIS database but a

00:22:09.480 --> 00:22:14.760
 lot of times it just depends on how willing and how much area we really need

00:22:14.760 --> 00:22:18.200
 how willing a property owner is to go down the easement versus right-of-way

00:22:18.200 --> 00:22:24.520
 pathway or if I just need a couple of feet I might not be worth it going and

00:22:24.520 --> 00:22:28.200
 getting right-of-way it might be better to just grab the easement until we

00:22:28.200 --> 00:22:31.280
 actually know what kind of right-of-way we might need in the future for

00:22:31.280 --> 00:22:37.400
 transportation purposes all around if we need another 10 or 15 feet that might

00:22:37.400 --> 00:22:40.480
 be a time we want to get right-of-way because it's typically right up on the

00:22:40.480 --> 00:22:44.640
 back of the curve or the roadway in that case but it's going to be highly variable

00:22:44.640 --> 00:22:49.240
 depending on where we are and how much right-of-way we currently have

00:22:58.560 --> 00:23:17.280
 you're gonna get my favorite engineering answer it depends so there are a lot of

00:23:17.280 --> 00:23:22.840
 things we're trying to weigh the balance of for instance here was it late last

00:23:22.840 --> 00:23:29.720
 year early this year we did is it Miller and oak so at Miller and oak there is a

00:23:29.720 --> 00:23:34.400
 corner where the city has an obligation to maintain a handicap spot for a

00:23:34.400 --> 00:23:40.440
 property owner there's an actual ordinance for that yeah so when we went

00:23:40.440 --> 00:23:45.560
 back to reconstruct oak we didn't address that particular scenario so we

00:23:45.560 --> 00:23:51.120
 came back in last year and addressed a proper handicap spot with all movements

00:23:51.120 --> 00:23:55.560
 allowable for the person who has a disability but the thing that became

00:23:55.560 --> 00:23:58.560
 apparent was as soon as we started putting in handicap ramps and making it

00:23:58.560 --> 00:24:02.320
 fully accessible as we didn't have a sidewalk that could go anywhere so you

00:24:02.320 --> 00:24:06.640
 have a public accessible spot that couldn't go anywhere but to one house so

00:24:06.640 --> 00:24:10.440
 we then added the sidewalks along that length to tie them back in somewhere so

00:24:10.440 --> 00:24:16.040
 that's our prime focus is going to be can I get a person safely to where they

00:24:16.040 --> 00:24:20.120
 need to go especially a person with disabilities or some kind of physical

00:24:20.120 --> 00:24:25.160
 challenge it then the second is going to be is doesn't make sense at this point

00:24:25.160 --> 00:24:28.160
 to go through that pathway especially when you get in the areas of oak and

00:24:28.160 --> 00:24:34.000
 hickory some of the older parts of the downtown area the right away is very odd

00:24:34.000 --> 00:24:37.520
 because some places they've given up enough right away for us to put

00:24:37.520 --> 00:24:41.400
 sidewalks in immediately some places they haven't so the timing may be an

00:24:41.400 --> 00:24:45.480
 issue is it can take anywhere from six months to a year to acquire right away

00:24:45.480 --> 00:24:49.640
 depending on where we're going with the actual roadway and other needs and

00:24:49.640 --> 00:24:54.680
 impacts there's just a lot of elements that go into figuring that part out

00:24:54.680 --> 00:25:06.440
 it's absolutely it's even part of what you're looking at here so as we start

00:25:06.440 --> 00:25:09.480
 looking at some of the schools in the area we're already gonna start to bridge

00:25:09.480 --> 00:25:31.320
 that gap yes any other questions on sidewalks all right street lighting so

00:25:31.320 --> 00:25:35.320
 as we talk about street lights one of the things that I want to make sure you

00:25:35.320 --> 00:25:38.320
 all are aware of is that when we're building major roadways right now

00:25:38.320 --> 00:25:42.760
 whether it's in the 2019 bond or if it's a bonnie bray or a mayhill we're already

00:25:42.760 --> 00:25:48.960
 building street lights with those roads so that is a internal policy that when

00:25:48.960 --> 00:25:52.680
 we build these new roads we're putting in the street lights to go with the

00:25:52.680 --> 00:25:56.640
 infrastructure now that leaves us with a lot of roads that really fall into two

00:25:56.640 --> 00:26:02.160
 categories older roads that potentially we're not going to be touching for quite

00:26:02.160 --> 00:26:06.600
 a while or roads that have recently been reconstructed but didn't have

00:26:06.600 --> 00:26:12.200
 didn't have streetlights in them like University Drive or 2499 those roads

00:26:12.200 --> 00:26:18.240
 somebody's not going to touch for the next 30 to 50 years we hope hopefully

00:26:18.240 --> 00:26:21.960
 nobody's getting into those again so those are absolutely prime corridor

00:26:21.960 --> 00:26:27.080
 areas where you get near TWU or over closer to where North Texas comes up

00:26:27.080 --> 00:26:31.720
 along Bonnie Bray people are gonna cross you see students cross or even staff

00:26:31.720 --> 00:26:36.440
 members at times or just me if I don't want to wait to get over to the corner

00:26:36.440 --> 00:26:42.400
 cross mid-block in between a corner so they cross wherever it's convenient and

00:26:42.400 --> 00:26:46.160
 there are advantages to that when you're a pedestrian you got long stretches or

00:26:46.160 --> 00:26:49.200
 roadway between the intersections and there's a median in front of you it's

00:26:49.200 --> 00:26:54.040
 infinitely easier to just look at one line of cars this way get to the median

00:26:54.040 --> 00:26:58.280
 wait and look for the other line that's absolutely one of the things that runs

00:26:58.280 --> 00:27:03.160
 through their mind the other thing that makes that much more attractive is when

00:27:03.160 --> 00:27:06.200
 you get to an intersection is why does any of the intersections on University

00:27:06.200 --> 00:27:10.440
 Drive it's a very long stretch that's virtually unprotected at a signal so

00:27:10.440 --> 00:27:15.680
 you're hoping that the guy turning right or left at the time doesn't just miss

00:27:15.680 --> 00:27:21.000
 you in either a sea of cars or a sea of poles I mean there's a variety of things

00:27:21.000 --> 00:27:24.040
 out there so the mid-block crossing is absolutely where you see a lot of

00:27:24.040 --> 00:27:28.280
 pedestrians say I would rather go over there and cross where I know I've got

00:27:28.280 --> 00:27:32.920
 some safety and protections and I can see a lot further so that presents a

00:27:32.920 --> 00:27:36.960
 challenge at night especially when you drive a corridor like University Drive

00:27:36.960 --> 00:27:41.440
 a little bit higher speeds the roadway was definitely designed to travel for

00:27:41.440 --> 00:27:45.880
 more cars to travel from here to there quickly but you have pedestrians and

00:27:45.880 --> 00:27:50.260
 cyclists who also traverse that area as well so one of the things that's a

00:27:50.260 --> 00:27:54.580
 challenge for us is how do you get that that street lighting infrastructure into

00:27:54.580 --> 00:27:58.600
 a place that's not going to be touched again for a very long term that's what

00:27:58.600 --> 00:28:02.560
 we're asking for in this bond package is we go address those corridors those

00:28:02.560 --> 00:28:06.680
 prime corridors where we know we're gonna have similar scenarios and nothing

00:28:06.680 --> 00:28:10.160
 realistically is gonna happen on those roadways that will allow us to go back

00:28:10.160 --> 00:28:15.360
 in and put in streetlights you've got roadways where you know where we know

00:28:15.360 --> 00:28:18.000
 we're going to be going back and reconstructing them in the next 10 to

00:28:18.000 --> 00:28:23.000
 15 years they'll have streetlights flip them on those projects as they get

00:28:23.000 --> 00:28:26.720
 proposed you'll have other programs that we're currently developing internally

00:28:26.720 --> 00:28:31.120
 working either through grant fund sources or with DME to provide some sort of

00:28:31.120 --> 00:28:35.920
 annual budget for streetlights where we can infill on those collector roadways

00:28:35.920 --> 00:28:39.320
 or neighborhood streets where there is a safety concern and that becomes a

00:28:39.320 --> 00:28:44.760
 smaller budget item that we can handle one off each year these are clearly

00:28:44.760 --> 00:28:49.400
 defined projects that have constraints that we just need to go knock out at one

00:28:49.400 --> 00:28:54.260
 time so that's where we're looking at the University Drive project FM 24 99 FM

00:28:54.260 --> 00:29:01.100
 21 81 and us 377 those projects would be our prime candidates any or all of them

00:29:01.100 --> 00:29:05.760
 to try to get those streetlights in immediately and make sure we provide the

00:29:05.760 --> 00:29:13.880
 safest corridor possible just to give you a brief idea this was the one I was

00:29:13.880 --> 00:29:18.800
 supposed to talk about about DME another funding sorry I got out of sequence so

00:29:18.800 --> 00:29:22.720
 this is just an example area of some of those roadways that we would be looking

00:29:22.720 --> 00:29:26.840
 for alternative funding sources beyond the bond to actually fund streetlights

00:29:26.840 --> 00:29:33.600
 in those areas just an example not meant to be all-inclusive of any kind so one

00:29:33.600 --> 00:29:38.160
 of the things that we're targeting for these streetlights programs is these are

00:29:38.160 --> 00:29:42.280
 not Denton streets but they are very resemblance of some of Denton streets so

00:29:42.280 --> 00:29:46.400
 this roadway over here just to give you an idea of the difference between what's

00:29:46.400 --> 00:29:51.240
 currently happening today so we have a lot of sodium halide lamps we have a lot

00:29:51.240 --> 00:29:55.720
 of our metal halide our sodium high pressure sodium lamps that are hung up

00:29:55.720 --> 00:30:00.880
 on the sides of utility poles or variety of other places there that amber color

00:30:00.880 --> 00:30:05.780
 and part of what happens in that amber color this is a well-lit corridor under

00:30:05.780 --> 00:30:11.400
 that old fixture style it's very hard to see striping colors it's hard to see

00:30:11.400 --> 00:30:15.600
 signs you get a lot more cast-off shadows so it's just hard to see other

00:30:15.600 --> 00:30:20.580
 obstacles in your way whereas where this street was redone with LED lights a much

00:30:20.580 --> 00:30:25.640
 more white or blue light I can now see actual yellow I can see white I can see

00:30:25.640 --> 00:30:33.640
 signs a lot of the shadows have disappeared yes absolutely this is

00:30:33.640 --> 00:30:36.880
 similar to what University Drive looks like today if you're driving down the

00:30:36.880 --> 00:30:41.720
 stretches or don't have businesses right up next to it it's very dark it's hard

00:30:41.720 --> 00:30:44.760
 if you can tell there's actually a sign right there and if you'll notice there's

00:30:44.760 --> 00:30:48.620
 a bike lane here you would not be able to see a cyclist or pedestrian trying to

00:30:48.620 --> 00:30:52.940
 come across at any time in that corridor whereas what we're proposing would look

00:30:52.940 --> 00:30:57.080
 much more like this where we would put in all those missing street lights and

00:30:57.080 --> 00:31:00.880
 then convert it over to LED so you would be able to see I mean you could clearly

00:31:00.880 --> 00:31:06.200
 see a cyclist running along this this path over this way you could also see a

00:31:06.200 --> 00:31:10.720
 pedestrian that might be crossing at the mid-block so just an example of where

00:31:10.720 --> 00:31:20.200
 we're trying to go with this program before we get there yes yes ma'am

00:31:23.920 --> 00:31:38.360
 run that by me one more time I make sure I understand the biggest challenge with

00:31:38.360 --> 00:31:43.880
 solar right now is just one with street lights is what kind of street light are

00:31:43.880 --> 00:31:48.320
 we putting up because if it's a pedestrian level lighting and you have a

00:31:48.320 --> 00:31:52.840
 significant amount of trees within the area they're going to be a challenge for

00:31:52.840 --> 00:31:59.480
 collecting that energy plus it can be troublesome on the maintenance side it's

00:31:59.480 --> 00:32:03.600
 not as just from the same point that it one goes out I've got to replace a power

00:32:03.600 --> 00:32:09.560
 unit I'll give you an example we put solar powered signs out on the curve at

00:32:09.560 --> 00:32:15.160
 Hickory Creek where we had the accident here not too long ago those solar powered

00:32:15.160 --> 00:32:20.080
 signs we go out one night and found that none of them were working we come back

00:32:20.080 --> 00:32:22.440
 the next day we find out the reason they're not working is somebody had

00:32:22.440 --> 00:32:28.040
 chopped off all of these solar powered panels and taking the equipment off so

00:32:28.040 --> 00:32:32.200
 we've since replaced all that but depending on the height of where the

00:32:32.200 --> 00:32:36.240
 infrastructure sits that could be a problem I don't know for sure the cost

00:32:36.240 --> 00:32:39.520
 differential and I wouldn't be able to tell you the return on investment but

00:32:39.520 --> 00:32:42.360
 it's something that we look at consistently because as we see the

00:32:42.360 --> 00:32:46.980
 technologies improve much like LED when you came from metal halide or high

00:32:46.980 --> 00:32:50.280
 pressure sodium to LED that the cost differential is just continues to

00:32:50.280 --> 00:32:54.600
 decrease it might be something that in the very near future absolutely is what

00:32:54.600 --> 00:33:05.320
 you see on everyone. Yes ma'am. Do you think you might want to budget in for cameras now that we know

00:33:05.320 --> 00:33:12.240
 that people love to steal lighting? The Queen has to understand. I understand well

00:33:12.240 --> 00:33:16.040
 we we actually do put strip and we put cameras at each of our intersections

00:33:16.040 --> 00:33:20.720
 they're part of our traffic system so that we can monitor actively how much

00:33:20.720 --> 00:33:25.440
 traffic is stopped now we don't store that information we have talked about

00:33:25.440 --> 00:33:29.440
 doing that it's not that difficult to put something up but once you have a

00:33:29.440 --> 00:33:33.720
 system that's pretty well interconnected which is part of what DME is looking at

00:33:33.720 --> 00:33:36.840
 when we put these street lights up is that we have a smart system that

00:33:36.840 --> 00:33:40.480
 basically tells us when one goes out we know we can immediately go see what's

00:33:40.480 --> 00:33:46.040
 going on we also know better to then to have them seven or eight feet above the

00:33:46.040 --> 00:33:48.880
 ground where you can stand on the bed of a pickup and actually do whatever it is

00:33:48.880 --> 00:33:54.160
 they did to get it off and it's not easy to get it off for a lot of these

00:33:54.160 --> 00:33:57.240
 street light poles they're going to be 30 feet in the air so it's going to be

00:33:57.240 --> 00:34:07.360
 very difficult for folks to get to. I'm just like did you call the police like

00:34:07.360 --> 00:34:11.360
 oh my god that's a major

00:34:11.360 --> 00:34:20.200
 any other questions on street lighting?

00:34:20.200 --> 00:34:24.600
 are you proposing putting the street lights in the center of the median on

00:34:24.600 --> 00:34:28.320
 these roads like in those pictures or on the sides and then secondly are the

00:34:28.320 --> 00:34:32.280
 street lights going to be pretty basic or is the city of Denton interested in

00:34:32.280 --> 00:34:39.360
 actually incorporating a look and having a style of street lights? So let me answer

00:34:39.360 --> 00:34:42.600
 those two questions the first one I'll answer with my favorite engineers

00:34:42.600 --> 00:34:47.560
 question it depends absolutely depends on how much of a median you have it

00:34:47.560 --> 00:34:51.000
 depends on where we are at an intersection we're not going to put a

00:34:51.000 --> 00:34:54.600
 street light in the median you're gonna put it on the corners and usually be

00:34:54.600 --> 00:34:58.640
 tied to the traffic signal when you put it in the median it is especially an

00:34:58.640 --> 00:35:01.640
 intersection it becomes a target and when they end up getting knocked down

00:35:01.640 --> 00:35:05.720
 more often than they stay up but once you go down the pathway to go down the

00:35:05.720 --> 00:35:09.680
 side so I take a university drive there are segments where the median is wide

00:35:09.680 --> 00:35:13.760
 enough we could run a street light a string of street lights right down the

00:35:13.760 --> 00:35:17.560
 median and have it cover head off the middle there are other segments where

00:35:17.560 --> 00:35:22.400
 it's better to go down the sides because there's just not that much median the

00:35:22.400 --> 00:35:25.760
 other concern that we have with street lights is as you're starting to work

00:35:25.760 --> 00:35:31.400
 with them you when they back up to a neighborhood it's easier to direct

00:35:31.400 --> 00:35:37.720
 an LED light from the outside in than it is from the inside out so it tends to

00:35:37.720 --> 00:35:41.120
 work better when we put it on the outside because I can shield the homes

00:35:41.120 --> 00:35:45.800
 behind it and then guide all the light out towards the street whereas if I'm in

00:35:45.800 --> 00:35:49.400
 the middle of the street it's a little harder right it's just a little harder

00:35:49.400 --> 00:35:55.680
 you can do that and we do but you just have to balance the two the other answer

00:35:55.680 --> 00:36:01.200
 is DME is currently working with us and we'll be bringing to council with those

00:36:01.200 --> 00:36:05.040
 pole standards look like and they have a variety they're weighing that in the

00:36:05.040 --> 00:36:10.920
 balance of both cost appeal you know the aesthetics appeal what it's what's gonna

00:36:10.920 --> 00:36:14.440
 look like on the outside how easy is it to maintain and that maintenance is

00:36:14.440 --> 00:36:17.240
 everything from I've talked to maintenance crews where they talk about

00:36:17.240 --> 00:36:22.160
 how the the actual street light pole itself is put together has a huge impact

00:36:22.160 --> 00:36:26.360
 on how many people have to be there what they have to do to work it and it becomes

00:36:26.360 --> 00:36:29.800
 a cumbersome nightmare depending on which pole you buy and you thought oh

00:36:29.800 --> 00:36:34.280
 that looks great but then we have to go fix it it's like oh man that takes a lot

00:36:34.280 --> 00:36:38.320
 of work and effort to get there so we're balancing that and we'll be coming to

00:36:38.320 --> 00:36:42.600
 council later this year here's what we're proposing

00:36:42.600 --> 00:36:54.600
 which which one are you referring to

00:37:00.360 --> 00:37:09.120
 they are in priority order what's out there now versus what's gonna be under

00:37:09.120 --> 00:37:12.120
 construction for the next several years I mean that's really how we prioritize

00:37:12.120 --> 00:37:19.080
 those University Drive is active and wide open we got a lot of students that

00:37:19.080 --> 00:37:25.840
 do cross back and forth so that was number one 2499 it's open people are

00:37:25.840 --> 00:37:29.000
 flying down it at all hours of the night so that was another one and you have a

00:37:29.000 --> 00:37:33.040
 lot of homes in that area along with schools in that corridor and then you

00:37:33.040 --> 00:37:37.480
 get in 2181 and 377 they're both active construction zones they're almost

00:37:37.480 --> 00:37:43.720
 interchangeable either way 2181 tends to be quite a bit darker through segments

00:37:43.720 --> 00:37:47.800
 just because of the way it's set up 377 tends to have a little bit more light

00:37:47.800 --> 00:37:51.680
 because it is it does have a quite a few more businesses over that stretch of

00:37:51.680 --> 00:38:05.920
 where they put the the roadway improvements that's the active

00:38:05.920 --> 00:38:13.480
 construction area which will bring it all the way up to the interstate the

00:38:13.480 --> 00:38:28.480
 interstate by 35 we could it would just increase the number so it'd be a larger

00:38:28.480 --> 00:38:36.480
 expense just going further north I mean we can absolutely incorporate that it's

00:38:36.480 --> 00:38:40.920
 just a choice of how much further do you go we were already pushing the five to

00:38:40.920 --> 00:38:44.040
 fifteen million dollar estimates if you want to go further we can absolutely

00:38:44.040 --> 00:38:47.000
 evaluate further

00:38:47.000 --> 00:39:06.600
 from the bond proposed where we were looking at these roadways already built

00:39:06.600 --> 00:39:11.720
 out this these are the top four they're really in our minds ranked there is

00:39:11.720 --> 00:39:17.120
 there an overall street lighting plan yes there is but it really incorporates a

00:39:17.120 --> 00:39:23.120
 lot more streets that are in the works as we go forward so future bond programs

00:39:23.120 --> 00:39:26.400
 as we improve other arterial roadways and collector streets they would be

00:39:26.400 --> 00:39:30.000
 incorporated into those roadways because we do know that in the next 10 to 15

00:39:30.000 --> 00:39:44.360
 years we'll be tackling those roadways as well yes it actually goes past 35 it

00:39:44.360 --> 00:39:52.080
 goes western western western so it was all the way to Western and then all the

00:39:52.080 --> 00:39:55.880
 way over to 35 to Luke 28 on the east side of town and just a little bit past

00:39:55.880 --> 00:40:04.160
 it I think it's the Mayhill I believe it gets right up there to Mayhill it may go

00:40:04.160 --> 00:40:11.000
 past that a little bit yes ma'am

00:40:11.000 --> 00:40:23.440
 not currently we will be looking into that but because these were all you'll

00:40:23.440 --> 00:40:29.400
 notice they're all state-funded projects there's not typically those were things

00:40:29.400 --> 00:40:33.840
 that would have been asks at the time the construction was being done

00:40:33.840 --> 00:40:39.000
 sometimes I had text I will put those in as long as you're willing to maintain

00:40:39.000 --> 00:40:44.000
 them other times they like especially when it's often interstate they're not

00:40:44.000 --> 00:40:47.080
 as willing to fund it themselves you're like sure we'll build it if you'll put

00:40:47.080 --> 00:40:49.840
 up the money for it

00:40:53.440 --> 00:40:54.440
 Yes, ma'am.

00:40:54.440 --> 00:41:02.200
 I'm sure we'll get into this later but we know the tax rate repercussions of 12.5 million.

00:41:02.200 --> 00:41:09.400
 Do we know the tax rate repercussions of 5 million added to the bond? David?

00:41:09.400 --> 00:41:15.720
 Out of the top of my head I don't I don't think it would be too much as far as

00:41:15.720 --> 00:41:21.040
 talking a cent or laughing less than a cent obviously so I don't know the exact

00:41:21.040 --> 00:41:24.080
 amount that's definitely something we can come back with and talk about

00:41:24.080 --> 00:41:28.520
 increments of 5, 10, 15, 20 going up.

00:41:28.520 --> 00:41:34.400
 All right any other questions? Street lights. Yes ma'am.

00:41:34.400 --> 00:41:45.400
 I want to come back to the PowerPoint from our first meeting and it says staff recommended city bond funding for street lighting this evening.

00:41:45.400 --> 00:41:50.400
 Which one? Well that was because we we didn't when the original

00:41:50.400 --> 00:41:54.960
 recommendation to council that did not include was not included in the 210

00:41:54.960 --> 00:41:59.520
 million dollars and that was something that if anybody if you all recommended

00:41:59.520 --> 00:42:03.680
 in council agreed to elevate the funding beyond the 210 million dollars which we

00:42:03.680 --> 00:42:08.040
 would take to get any of these street light projects off the ground then that

00:42:08.040 --> 00:42:12.480
 number would go up but it was there as an optional item because it was not

00:42:12.480 --> 00:42:21.240
 included in the 210 million dollar recommendation. Any other questions?

00:42:21.240 --> 00:42:28.760
 I would just add to that as we go through the recommendations and we put those in front of everyone I think especially as we've gone through these

00:42:28.760 --> 00:42:32.080
 meetings and we've seen everything and in future meetings as we start to go

00:42:32.080 --> 00:42:35.480
 through prioritization that'll be where as you all as a committee start talking

00:42:35.480 --> 00:42:39.760
 through where those projects lie whether they go above that line below that line

00:42:39.760 --> 00:42:43.960
 start having those conversations of is it worth going above the 210 is 210 the

00:42:43.960 --> 00:42:47.840
 number so those I think all that goes together so this is not saying this is

00:42:47.840 --> 00:42:55.520
 what it has to be I think this is just a starting point for the conversation all

00:42:55.520 --> 00:43:17.520
 right any other questions? So moving on to public art.

00:43:17.520 --> 00:43:25.440
 I do not have a new presentation for this for this item

00:43:25.440 --> 00:43:29.200
 this was more just an opportunity to bring this item back for discussion as

00:43:29.200 --> 00:43:35.600
 we had the discussion last last week the committee sounded like you just wanted

00:43:35.600 --> 00:43:38.960
 to go back and think through your options and then have this discussion

00:43:38.960 --> 00:43:41.680
 definitely can answer any additional questions or if you'd like me to go back

00:43:41.680 --> 00:43:46.880
 to the presentation I can or I can just kind of skip to the options page and open

00:43:46.880 --> 00:43:52.040
 it up for any discussion. We had a couple people miss that presentation do y'all

00:43:52.040 --> 00:44:06.960
 want to go through it again or do you feel good okay correct yes well it's

00:44:06.960 --> 00:44:11.480
 just high level as far as the options that are that are that's before the

00:44:11.480 --> 00:44:15.940
 committee with the charge asked the committee to consider public art

00:44:15.940 --> 00:44:21.840
 funding at 2% or less in the current policy has those funds tied to vertical

00:44:21.840 --> 00:44:25.280
 construction so that would only apply to the public safety facilities

00:44:25.280 --> 00:44:29.800
 proposition and come out to about nine hundred thousand dollars the policy

00:44:29.800 --> 00:44:36.600
 itself stipulates between two and four percent and we you can't have a

00:44:36.600 --> 00:44:40.480
 standalone proposition for that nine hundred thousand dollars that would open

00:44:40.480 --> 00:44:44.680
 those funds up to be used for things outside of public safety or outside of

00:44:44.680 --> 00:44:49.560
 streets in that proposition but it would be voted on separately it would be a

00:44:49.560 --> 00:45:00.920
 public art piece to be voted on. So is there any thoughts on sticking with just

00:45:00.920 --> 00:45:04.440
 option one which is the current policy?

00:45:04.440 --> 00:45:19.520
 Well we have to choose between two and four. Right yeah I think I think coming

00:45:19.520 --> 00:45:23.600
 down with the percentage that you want to move forward with the charge was to

00:45:23.600 --> 00:45:28.080
 consider two percent but obviously the policy allows for that two to four. So I

00:45:28.080 --> 00:45:32.880
 guess that's the first question do we want to stick with two percent? I think

00:45:32.880 --> 00:45:37.080
 that's what we ought to do historically and we don't need to tack on a lot of

00:45:37.080 --> 00:45:46.640
 additional expense to this bond. Okay so I want to make a motion to that effect.

00:45:49.520 --> 00:46:12.400
 Are we allowed to vote without it being on the agenda? It's really not a final action it's it is just a

00:46:12.400 --> 00:46:15.920
 direction that we're moving forward until we get to where we have a final

00:46:15.920 --> 00:46:22.220
 vote. It's not it could be changed at any point in time. Yeah and they correct me if

00:46:22.220 --> 00:46:25.400
 I'm wrong but David the reason we're bringing this up now is if we're going to

00:46:25.400 --> 00:46:31.160
 go to option two there has to be some lead time to prepare that. Correct so if

00:46:31.160 --> 00:46:34.840
 we wanted option two and change the policy we need some lead time so if if

00:46:34.840 --> 00:46:37.840
 the direction we're hearing is to include it we can just have that as a

00:46:37.840 --> 00:46:41.440
 placeholder put it in in our proposals moving forward when we actually come to

00:46:41.440 --> 00:46:44.160
 make the recommendation we'll have it included at that point that's when

00:46:44.160 --> 00:46:48.720
 action will be taken. So it's just a consensus to go with option one and keep

00:46:48.720 --> 00:46:56.480
 it at two percent or less. I don't think that I don't think two percent or I don't

00:46:56.480 --> 00:47:01.820
 think the or less is an option because the current policy says two to four percent.

00:47:01.820 --> 00:47:16.640
 But the council would have to change the policy if you went less than two percent.

00:47:16.640 --> 00:47:21.320
 So there there's a the policy is two to four percent the actual verbiage in the

00:47:21.320 --> 00:47:24.800
 charge at two percent or less but you're right to go below two would have to

00:47:24.800 --> 00:47:27.960
 change the policy so to stay within the policy we would just stick with the two

00:47:27.960 --> 00:47:35.280
 percent and that would hit both the charge and the policy. So Tim do I

00:47:35.280 --> 00:47:40.600
 understand you're making a motion? I move that we that we do the part public art

00:47:40.600 --> 00:47:52.120
 at two percent. Do we need to stipulate that this time whether we want to

00:47:52.120 --> 00:47:56.800
 include it within the public safety initiative or to consider it as a

00:47:56.800 --> 00:48:01.440
 separate standalone proposition or is that something that we should tackle?

00:48:01.440 --> 00:48:09.800
 As I read it the third bullet under option one presents two different

00:48:09.800 --> 00:48:13.840
 scenarios. The current policy allows for the standalone proposition so if that's

00:48:13.840 --> 00:48:18.000
 something you all would like to go forward with it'd be if you want to have

00:48:18.000 --> 00:48:21.640
 that discussion now to give consensus to go forward because right now our options

00:48:21.640 --> 00:48:30.800
 are we roll it in with the other public safety. Right. Yeah I just think that we

00:48:30.800 --> 00:48:37.640
 have a public art committee that meets regularly I believe and allowing for

00:48:37.640 --> 00:48:44.000
 some flexibility of those funds to be used in areas where the citizens on

00:48:44.000 --> 00:48:48.320
 those committees feel it will have the greatest impact both to people's

00:48:48.320 --> 00:48:51.760
 enjoyment as well as to potential economic development and that sort of

00:48:51.760 --> 00:48:56.800
 thing might have some benefit and I really do trust the citizens of Denton

00:48:56.800 --> 00:49:02.720
 that love art or seemingly do to be able to pass a potential alternative or

00:49:02.720 --> 00:49:08.200
 separate state standalone bond proposition. I think you run a serious

00:49:08.200 --> 00:49:14.440
 risk of a standalone proposition on public art failing. It's too easy to vote

00:49:14.440 --> 00:49:20.920
 against. So I think that the data we had was we only had one nearby city who had

00:49:20.920 --> 00:49:27.400
 tried that. So Allen did have set the standalone proposition public art and it

00:49:27.400 --> 00:49:31.720
 passed that was we took a look that was the only one we could see that was a

00:49:31.720 --> 00:49:35.080
 similar kind of standalone proposition just for that public art piece that was

00:49:35.080 --> 00:49:40.240
 kind of associated with a percentage and say here's a lot of money that was the

00:49:40.240 --> 00:49:44.520
 only one that we found that was like that but you know didn't find it to the

00:49:44.520 --> 00:49:49.360
 contrary where they went forward with it and voted against either. And what

00:49:49.360 --> 00:49:55.160
 it could turn into and you know it's the law of unintended consequences. It

00:49:55.160 --> 00:50:02.080
 becomes a referendum on public art and it takes public art out of any future bond

00:50:02.080 --> 00:50:16.600
 packages. You can put it on a standalone and it fails. So just just so I'm clear

00:50:16.600 --> 00:50:22.440
 and I understand if it's within the public safety proposition does it have

00:50:22.440 --> 00:50:29.080
 to be on the grounds of public safety vertical building areas? Correct it does

00:50:29.080 --> 00:50:33.280
 but it doesn't have to be in necessarily what's involved in this bond package you

00:50:33.280 --> 00:50:37.240
 know the stuff station the fire station aid or the police station itself but it

00:50:37.240 --> 00:50:41.920
 has to be in a public safety facility. So it could be on the grounds of other fire

00:50:41.920 --> 00:50:44.920
 stations for instance? Correct.

00:50:59.080 --> 00:51:03.200
 Is it let me ask this is it possible that we could ask the council to amend

00:51:03.200 --> 00:51:09.800
 the policy so that the money could be included within one of the bond

00:51:09.800 --> 00:51:16.120
 propositions but have the flexibility to be used elsewhere? No that that's just

00:51:16.120 --> 00:51:19.960
 state law with propositions it has to any money that's in that proposition has

00:51:19.960 --> 00:51:29.040
 to be spent within the proposition. So can you go back to the option slide David?

00:51:29.040 --> 00:51:35.160
 So I think what I was my thought was first let's ask the question or answer

00:51:35.160 --> 00:51:40.080
 the question are we comfortable with just going with 2% and then the second

00:51:40.080 --> 00:51:46.720
 question is all right assuming 2% do you want to go with option one or option two?

00:51:46.720 --> 00:51:53.900
 Does that sound logical? The way I read this slide option I think I think more

00:51:53.900 --> 00:51:57.920
 like option A or B within option one. I think you probably mean this option or

00:51:57.920 --> 00:52:04.360
 this option right? Okay. Standalone proposition or the so what's the

00:52:04.360 --> 00:52:09.840
 different to me it's standalone is the same as option two right? No the

00:52:09.840 --> 00:52:13.040
 standalone is allowed in the current policy so you wouldn't have them in the

00:52:13.040 --> 00:52:23.680
 policy. Okay my bad so the first question that is do we want to go to 2% of public

00:52:23.680 --> 00:52:27.280
 safety facilities approximately nine thousand nine hundred thousand dollars?

00:52:27.280 --> 00:52:32.760
 And I think that's what my motion is. And that's what Peggy seconded. So that's

00:52:32.760 --> 00:52:43.880
 the that's the motion before us. Is there any other discussion? Okay seeing none

00:52:43.880 --> 00:52:52.040
 all in favor of going with 2% of public safety facilities approximately nine

00:52:52.040 --> 00:52:58.680
 hundred thousand dollars signify by raising your hand. And Theresa can you

00:52:58.680 --> 00:53:14.800
 get us a count please. Okay and all opposed same sign right.

00:53:18.440 --> 00:53:31.800
 So what was the vote Theresa? I thought there was four. Raise your hands again.

00:53:31.800 --> 00:53:41.520
 They're asking for us to raise their hands again. One two three okay so the

00:53:41.520 --> 00:53:47.040
 motion carries eleven to four to two percent of public safety facilities with

00:53:47.040 --> 00:53:56.480
 approximately nine hundred thousand dollars for a public guard okay. We will

00:53:56.480 --> 00:53:59.240
 include that in everything moving forward that you see that. Again this is

00:53:59.240 --> 00:54:04.520
 not the final decision this is just direction for consideration in the final

00:54:04.520 --> 00:54:09.960
 package of recommendations to the council.

00:54:11.600 --> 00:54:23.720
 All right. I have a couple more. They're not long presentations but we're gonna

00:54:23.720 --> 00:54:27.920
 get into calendar schedule and then we'll also just talk through kind of

00:54:27.920 --> 00:54:31.920
 open it up for questions moving forward that we can respond to on anything we

00:54:31.920 --> 00:54:38.600
 have we have outstanding right now. So perfect.

00:54:38.600 --> 00:54:48.760
 Okay so moving on to questions David. Well the purpose of this item was just

00:54:48.760 --> 00:54:53.480
 to touch base with the committee ask you we've tried to address questions that

00:54:53.480 --> 00:54:56.680
 come up within presentations I'm sure there are additional questions that have

00:54:56.680 --> 00:55:01.720
 not been addressed in the in the presentations themselves. Did it provide

00:55:01.720 --> 00:55:06.320
 one memo here with some questions from public safety facilities involving the

00:55:06.320 --> 00:55:10.280
 public safety facility some parking along with that so we can answer questions

00:55:10.280 --> 00:55:14.640
 regarding that try to be thorough with it with the chiefs there but wanted to

00:55:14.640 --> 00:55:18.320
 give this as an opportunity for any follow-up that you would like at the

00:55:18.320 --> 00:55:26.520
 next meeting for us to discuss. And you can continue to email me questions along

00:55:26.520 --> 00:55:30.920
 the way that we can include but wanted to touch base with everyone and ensure

00:55:30.920 --> 00:55:34.200
 that we're getting your questions answered with the presentations before

00:55:34.200 --> 00:55:37.880
 we head in as you'll see on the schedule before we head into start talking about

00:55:37.880 --> 00:55:41.600
 prioritization and get to that point for the committee to really talk through the

00:55:41.600 --> 00:55:46.760
 projects ensure that we've we've answered your questions up this far. So

00:55:46.760 --> 00:55:51.000
 has everyone had an opportunity to review this memorandum? Yes. Is there any

00:55:51.000 --> 00:55:55.260
 outstanding questions for what's been presented?

00:55:55.260 --> 00:56:05.360
 Hey asked me to ask this question while she was gone. She was concerned that when

00:56:05.360 --> 00:56:14.520
 we build the ancillary facility and improve the current facilities will

00:56:14.520 --> 00:56:28.160
 there be backup or redundancy in emergency services? Safe rooms in both

00:56:28.160 --> 00:56:32.960
 places since we found out we don't have any.

00:56:37.880 --> 00:56:47.240
 Safe rooms as in shelters or from the well? During an actual emergency like for a

00:56:47.240 --> 00:56:53.960
 tornado or something like that we now know that there's not a shelter room a

00:56:53.960 --> 00:57:03.080
 safe room in the police department and would there be one in both places when

00:57:03.080 --> 00:57:13.880
 we build it? Yes. And will there be backup communication? Yes, of course yes.

00:57:13.880 --> 00:57:17.440
 Yes, there will be safe rooms in both and there'll be a procedure in place for

00:57:17.440 --> 00:57:25.320
 communication. Thank you. Any other questions?

00:57:25.320 --> 00:57:28.600
 I guess I don't know when to ask that question then. So let me go ahead and ask the question.

00:57:28.600 --> 00:57:38.000
 Sure. Basically I would like to find out if staff could put together what it would

00:57:38.000 --> 00:57:42.840
 cost to have East McKinney Street considered in this bond package. I know

00:57:42.840 --> 00:57:46.160
 the state already had their schematic design. The state already had an amount they

00:57:46.160 --> 00:57:50.360
 expected it to cost and they even had an amount allocated for it. So I'm not

00:57:50.360 --> 00:57:54.200
 asking the city to go out and get a bunch of new numbers together. I'm saying

00:57:54.200 --> 00:57:58.760
 you could maybe use that as a reference. But is there any way that that could be

00:57:58.760 --> 00:58:02.840
 something to consider when we come back two weeks from now I guess if we're not

00:58:02.840 --> 00:58:10.880
 going to meet next week? Yes, we can. We can we can bring back a number. And is it

00:58:10.880 --> 00:58:15.800
 true that the state did allocate money and gave that to the city when the city took over a portion?

00:58:15.800 --> 00:58:28.240
 Yes, they did provide money. That money was is currently being used to do the

00:58:28.240 --> 00:58:34.040
 improvements on the west side of the loop. East side of the loop 288 going out

00:58:34.040 --> 00:58:40.200
 towards the lake. So it's out towards Ryan High School. It mostly covers that

00:58:40.200 --> 00:58:46.600
 distance. The 18 million that was set aside 10 plus years ago would have done

00:58:46.600 --> 00:58:51.880
 the job for quite a bit more, at least over to Woodrow, if it had been acted

00:58:51.880 --> 00:58:56.400
 upon in that original first year or two time frame and it wasn't. The

00:58:56.400 --> 00:59:01.080
 construction inflation rate has just eroded the capability there. Plus there

00:59:01.080 --> 00:59:05.600
 are significant right-of-way challenges once you get inside the loop. It's a

00:59:05.600 --> 00:59:09.960
 very arduous task to go down that pathway. We can absolutely get you the

00:59:09.960 --> 00:59:14.880
 price of what that would cost, our cost estimates for the entire project. That's

00:59:14.880 --> 00:59:18.080
 not a difficult thing. We've already been going down the pathway of design, so we

00:59:18.080 --> 00:59:21.760
 we have a ballpark where that's going to be and I just have to go get that and

00:59:21.760 --> 00:59:27.040
 bring that back. It will not be 18 million. It would be significantly higher

00:59:27.040 --> 00:59:31.000
 than that. So that's where our challenge has been, is where do we focus the

00:59:31.000 --> 00:59:35.680
 dollars that we currently have? We do have to use it or lose it. The time frame

00:59:35.680 --> 00:59:40.800
 was, I believe, last year, about this time of year. We did get an extension from the

00:59:40.800 --> 00:59:44.520
 Council of Governments, pending their agreement that we would be allowed to

00:59:44.520 --> 00:59:48.720
 retain those dollars, was that we get this project that we currently have

00:59:48.720 --> 00:59:52.760
 planned under construction before the end of this calendar year. We've already

00:59:52.760 --> 00:59:57.400
 started construction, so we've met that deadline. So we are absolutely trying to

00:59:57.400 --> 01:00:02.040
 take that money as far as we can, but just in today's dollars, it does not go

01:00:02.040 --> 01:00:06.480
 as far as it would have 10 years ago. So can you explain where it's been used again because it

01:00:06.480 --> 01:00:15.960
 didn't sound like East McKinney? It's on McKinney, East of the Loop. From Loop 288, way past Ryan.

01:00:15.960 --> 01:00:20.000
 You know, it actually goes all the way up to Grissom Road, which is very near,

01:00:20.000 --> 01:00:30.040
 was that Lakeview? That section of East McKinney, that's still state. No, that's ours.

01:00:30.040 --> 01:00:38.320
 We took the entire East McKinney? Yes. That was part of the agreement to use the money as we

01:00:38.320 --> 01:00:47.120
 had to take the entire stretch of that roadway over. We can't give you a number.

01:00:47.120 --> 01:00:57.880
 Well, I'd like to know, because it's a very busy road. And the next question is, does the committee get any access to traffic counts, to get an idea of, like, these

01:00:57.880 --> 01:01:05.160
 projects specifically, traffic counts on what they are now? We have that information. We can provide it, yes.

01:01:05.160 --> 01:01:13.240
 And that East McKinney in there? We have, I think we did that already with the current McKinney project.

01:01:13.240 --> 01:01:20.160
 We had done an entire corridor analysis for the entire length of McKinney. I think, for me, that would

01:01:20.160 --> 01:01:27.040
 help me determine and prioritize as well. Right now they're prioritized based on how much money

01:01:27.040 --> 01:01:34.040
 we're going to get from other people. So that really needs to be the biggest reason.

01:01:34.040 --> 01:01:39.960
 It's twofold. It is both of those things. One of the things that you actually see is we did the traffic studies on those corridors.

01:01:39.960 --> 01:01:46.480
 That's part of why it becomes a regional connector and the monies are being put into the project from our partners.

01:01:46.480 --> 01:01:53.160
 If they didn't have that volume and capacity as well as safety impacts, we wouldn't have even been considered.

01:01:53.160 --> 01:02:00.760
 And as far as East McKinney, do you think there's regional mobility money?

01:02:00.760 --> 01:02:05.960
 That's the difficult part where we would be getting money would be through other grants.

01:02:05.960 --> 01:02:12.960
 The connectivity that they're looking for is from a state road or a state facility to another state facility.

01:02:12.960 --> 01:02:20.560
 If we could get McKinney all the way over to, say, 35. Right. And originally the project was to go to Woodrow, right?

01:02:20.560 --> 01:02:27.160
 It was to stop at Woodrow. The reason COGS even going down this pathway with us at this point with McKinney

01:02:27.160 --> 01:02:33.120
 as we develop plans is because we connected it all the way over to Elm and Locust, which is still a state facility.

01:02:33.120 --> 01:02:42.360
 Problem is, it will not be a state facility for too much longer because when the state reconstructs Elm and Locust, they will turn that over to the city.

01:02:42.360 --> 01:02:45.960
 So we're trying to make it as regional an impact as we can.

01:02:45.960 --> 01:02:51.920
 The vast majority of those dollars will come from things like air quality funds, federal dollars,

01:02:51.920 --> 01:02:57.120
 some other funding sources that are out there that most likely will not be tied to those state funds.

01:02:57.120 --> 01:03:04.280
 That'd be a lot more federal dollars. When do they plan to do that? McKinney?

01:03:04.280 --> 01:03:08.440
 Now, Locust is the default. Oh, we have to get our utilities out of the way first.

01:03:08.440 --> 01:03:10.440
 So we're focusing south of the square first.

01:03:10.440 --> 01:03:16.440
 That's the PEC4 project that they are relocating franchise utilities right now.

01:03:16.440 --> 01:03:22.720
 We'll focus on that. Then we'll be going north on Locust and relocating utilities going all the way up University Drive.

01:03:22.720 --> 01:03:30.120
 Soon as we've completed relocating utilities, then the state will come in and start a Locust on Eagle and go all the way north up to University Drive.

01:03:30.120 --> 01:03:35.000
 And then by that time, we have to have all of Eagle or all of Elm Street, all of those utilities out of the way.

01:03:35.000 --> 01:03:38.760
 So they can turn around and come back south the other way.

01:03:38.760 --> 01:03:51.440
 So it's realistically there. They won't start on their construction until next summer for the roadway piece and then the following summer for Elm.

01:03:51.440 --> 01:03:59.360
 Is the city doing the intersection of Hopson and Country Club and the Shell Station and Fort Worth Drive?

01:03:59.360 --> 01:04:02.080
 That's the state. That's the state. Yes.

01:04:02.080 --> 01:04:08.360
 And that's another piece that goes with the Hickory Creek project is the state is also interested in improving

01:04:08.360 --> 01:04:27.840
 1830, which would go from Hickory Creek all the way up to 377 as a four lane divided facility.

01:04:27.840 --> 01:04:33.600
 I just wanted to add a little more context. Todd is very diplomatic, but the fact of the matter is on McKinney,

01:04:33.600 --> 01:04:40.640
 he and I went down to Cog last year, 18 months ago, and they were about ready to pull the funding on McKinney.

01:04:40.640 --> 01:04:45.920
 And they basically said, we're not interested in investing in Denton anymore because you've had Mayhill,

01:04:45.920 --> 01:04:53.280
 Kenny, you haven't spent a dime. And so we basically went there and gave them our word that if they would hold the funding forward,

01:04:53.280 --> 01:04:57.800
 we would meet the deadlines on McKinney. We would get Mayhill completed.

01:04:57.800 --> 01:05:02.680
 They persuaded them to kick another 14 million dollars into that project.

01:05:02.680 --> 01:05:08.720
 The idea is we can get a design on the road for McKinney from the loop back to Woodrow.

01:05:08.720 --> 01:05:11.520
 It's possible we can sew together some other funding sources.

01:05:11.520 --> 01:05:20.560
 So it's not on this list because we feel like if we can leverage state or federal funding and lessen the impact on our taxpayers,

01:05:20.560 --> 01:05:24.120
 but get the design on the street, that that's that's our preferred route.

01:05:24.120 --> 01:05:30.160
 Any any chance we get to leverage state and federal money and take off the backs of our taxpayers, that's that's our priority.

01:05:30.160 --> 01:05:36.200
 I get what you're saying, but we went down and ate a lot of crow and they they made us whole on Mayhill.

01:05:36.200 --> 01:05:38.800
 And we've been able to pull off McKinney where we are.

01:05:38.800 --> 01:05:49.520
 So I think by the idea is if we can meet those time frames, we should be able to get back from Luke 288 to Woodrow and see if we can't persuade them to throw some more dollars into the mix.

01:05:49.520 --> 01:05:57.480
 But we had a group that had just basically turned their back on additional funding for us for a while because we were making all these plans and promises and not spending their money.

01:05:57.480 --> 01:06:03.000
 So he's been very generous about it, but that that's really the fact why you don't see McKinney in there.

01:06:03.000 --> 01:06:06.280
 We totally agree it needs sidewalks and needs to be widened.

01:06:06.280 --> 01:06:14.320
 But it's just a recurring theme that we've tried to turn around since he's been here in terms of putting these plans in place and executing on those timelines.

01:06:14.320 --> 01:06:24.160
 I guess Mike, I completely but if it was in there and if there was some money that you all could figure out how much needed to be allocated,

01:06:24.160 --> 01:06:28.520
 then that's something you could also go to them and say, we've gotten this much free from the voters.

01:06:28.520 --> 01:06:31.280
 If you could kick in the difference, I see you want to do the other way around.

01:06:31.280 --> 01:06:33.040
 But there's two ways to go about it.

01:06:33.040 --> 01:06:34.480
 I don't see why you couldn't try it.

01:06:34.480 --> 01:06:43.840
 Well, I think I think once we have a design finished, which is still going to cost us several million dollars by the time we're done, we can use that to go out and leverage some additional dollars.

01:06:43.840 --> 01:06:48.520
 We've got plans already going in the hopper now in Hickory Creek, Bonnie Bray.

01:06:48.520 --> 01:06:54.200
 We know where our local roads are, and that's really what people care about, is they want their roads fixed locally.

01:06:54.200 --> 01:06:58.320
 We can certainly move some dollars around.

01:06:58.320 --> 01:07:06.240
 If you wanted to give us matching dollars, if we could leverage some COG funds, perhaps we'd make some other tradeoffs in the local road program.

01:07:06.240 --> 01:07:11.520
 We'd reduce it from 70 to 60 or something like that and see what we could do on some of the other roads.

01:07:11.520 --> 01:07:18.080
 But I think the big difference with this bond package is every one of those major projects up there, they're ready to go now.

01:07:18.080 --> 01:07:24.360
 And that's totally different from every other bond package we've passed, where just give us the money and then we'll figure it out.

01:07:24.360 --> 01:07:28.920
 So they're out designing a year or two ahead of time, so we're not losing that purchasing power.

01:07:28.920 --> 01:07:31.720
 >> Thank you.

01:07:31.720 --> 01:07:32.440
 >> Okay. >> Thank you.

01:07:32.440 --> 01:07:36.760
 >> All right, last topic is schedule.

01:07:45.840 --> 01:07:52.880
 I've got a slightly different schedule here from what is in the memo, as it's somewhat of a fluid process.

01:07:52.880 --> 01:07:57.520
 The biggest change from what you see in the memo first is just, is when we're going to go to council.

01:07:57.520 --> 01:08:02.720
 When we're planning on going to council with any bond recommendation from the committee,

01:08:02.720 --> 01:08:05.640
 we're now planning on August 1st to be the date that we go to council.

01:08:05.640 --> 01:08:07.480
 That'll also be the date that we have our budget workshop.

01:08:07.480 --> 01:08:12.320
 So the entire meeting will be devoted to our budget workshop for our operating funds,

01:08:12.320 --> 01:08:16.480
 and then for the bond proposition from the recommendation from the committee.

01:08:16.480 --> 01:08:23.080
 What it, by pushing it to the first, the difference from your memo, and this kind of goes back to our original timeframe.

01:08:23.080 --> 01:08:28.400
 It does open up that July 25th date as a date that the committee can meet.

01:08:28.400 --> 01:08:33.840
 So our thoughts moving forward would be, obviously we have next week off for the fourth.

01:08:33.840 --> 01:08:40.920
 And when we come back on the 11th, that will really be focused on trying to get some project prioritization with the group,

01:08:40.920 --> 01:08:44.040
 have that discussion of where you rank the projects.

01:08:44.040 --> 01:08:50.360
 Prior to that meeting, we're going to have another finance task team meeting where that should lead the way

01:08:50.360 --> 01:08:56.920
 into a discussion on what targets the committee as a whole wants to shoot for, for total bond package,

01:08:56.920 --> 01:09:03.920
 and a lot of the other variables that go along with that, which should facilitate the project prioritization discussion.

01:09:03.920 --> 01:09:09.320
 We can obviously also, we'll have staff here, we can follow up with any questions at that meeting.

01:09:09.320 --> 01:09:14.360
 And then I think based on how that meeting goes, we'll see how July 18th goes

01:09:14.360 --> 01:09:21.720
 and then see what the need would be for the July 25th meeting based on how the 18th goes probably.

01:09:21.720 --> 01:09:28.200
 And then ultimately, either the 18th or 25th is when the committee would take action on the propositions themselves.

01:09:28.200 --> 01:09:35.640
 We will, for July 11th and 18th, we will include in the agendas an opportunity for public comment

01:09:35.640 --> 01:09:39.960
 and invite that public comment, push that out so that the residents know they can come

01:09:39.960 --> 01:09:45.360
 and have their time to make, to say anything they like regarding the program.

01:09:45.360 --> 01:09:49.000
 I will say that that is just one piece of the public outreach that will happen.

01:09:49.000 --> 01:09:54.480
 Obviously, as we get to these other dates down here, you know, between August 1st and August 19th,

01:09:54.480 --> 01:09:56.760
 we could definitely have some community meetings.

01:09:56.760 --> 01:10:02.360
 Throughout the process, throughout the fall, we'll be interacting with the public, pushing information out as much

01:10:02.360 --> 01:10:06.160
 as we can and inviting the public to come give their comments on the program.

01:10:06.160 --> 01:10:09.360
 But definitely want to include that in the committee process as well.

01:10:09.360 --> 01:10:13.080
 So if anyone would like to come speak to the committee, they can.

01:10:13.080 --> 01:10:15.800
 >> Great. Sure.

01:10:15.800 --> 01:10:22.720
 >> Something that I don't see here that I would really like to see is the report

01:10:22.720 --> 01:10:26.720
 from the Finance Committee about what this is going to do,

01:10:26.720 --> 01:10:29.360
 what different possibilities would do to the tax rate.

01:10:29.360 --> 01:10:33.360
 I mean, I received the presentation --

01:10:33.360 --> 01:10:33.920
 >> Yeah.

01:10:33.920 --> 01:10:35.240
 >> -- just this afternoon.

01:10:35.240 --> 01:10:35.720
 >> Yes.

01:10:35.720 --> 01:10:36.560
 >> I can't read it yet.

01:10:36.560 --> 01:10:37.520
 >> Yes.

01:10:37.520 --> 01:10:42.160
 >> But how all -- what the Finance Committee has been doing is going to factor into --

01:10:42.160 --> 01:10:43.040
 >> Of course.

01:10:43.040 --> 01:10:43.720
 >> -- decisions.

01:10:43.720 --> 01:10:44.720
 When will that happen?

01:10:44.720 --> 01:10:45.960
 >> Patty, that's what he was alluding to.

01:10:45.960 --> 01:10:48.440
 We're meeting again on July 11th.

01:10:48.440 --> 01:10:49.200
 >> Yeah.

01:10:49.200 --> 01:10:50.400
 >> And we're bringing --

01:10:50.400 --> 01:10:51.120
 >> Bringing that --

01:10:51.120 --> 01:10:51.960
 >> -- recommendation --

01:10:51.960 --> 01:10:52.360
 >> Right.

01:10:52.360 --> 01:10:55.800
 >> -- at the July 11th meeting.

01:10:55.800 --> 01:10:58.600
 >> Or 18th.

01:10:58.600 --> 01:11:00.520
 >> Depends on how much progress --

01:11:00.520 --> 01:11:02.440
 >> Yeah, depends on my 18th, yeah.

01:11:02.440 --> 01:11:03.480
 >> Hopefully.

01:11:03.480 --> 01:11:04.360
 >> Hopefully.

01:11:04.360 --> 01:11:06.720
 >> Fingers crossed.

01:11:06.720 --> 01:11:08.160
 Yes, well --

01:11:08.160 --> 01:11:16.960
 >> So I just want to be clear that email that I received from you,

01:11:16.960 --> 01:11:23.800
 you were stating that there's a finance group that's meeting early.

01:11:23.800 --> 01:11:30.640
 So are the finance groups that's meeting early before this meeting,

01:11:30.640 --> 01:11:39.760
 are they making decisions about what's going to happen for the meetings at 6 o'clock?

01:11:39.760 --> 01:11:40.360
 >> No.

01:11:40.360 --> 01:11:43.280
 >> What is this meeting for?

01:11:43.280 --> 01:11:50.240
 >> So this is the meeting that we approved at the very first meeting to look at all the variables

01:11:50.240 --> 01:11:57.560
 of assessed value versus tax rate versus how much funding we should consider.

01:11:57.560 --> 01:11:59.600
 So we met a couple of times.

01:11:59.600 --> 01:12:01.640
 We met this earlier today.

01:12:01.640 --> 01:12:02.720
 That was public.

01:12:02.720 --> 01:12:04.560
 Anyone could have come to that.

01:12:04.560 --> 01:12:07.240
 And we're meeting again on the 11th.

01:12:07.240 --> 01:12:14.040
 Okay, we gave the staff some direction that they're going to bring back some proposals

01:12:14.040 --> 01:12:21.160
 for us that are further refined for us to consider and then we're going to bring a full recommendation

01:12:21.160 --> 01:12:24.360
 to the entire committee for approval.

01:12:24.360 --> 01:12:25.960
 >> This is the task force, right?

01:12:25.960 --> 01:12:26.600
 >> Yes.

01:12:26.600 --> 01:12:29.160
 >> Made up of the people sitting next to you.

01:12:29.160 --> 01:12:36.520
 >> So Randy, Tim, Eric, Janet, Susan, John, myself.

01:12:36.520 --> 01:12:41.840
 >> So anyone that outside of you -- I see that there's veterans here.

01:12:41.840 --> 01:12:48.760
 I'm picking up that you all have been in previous committees such as this before.

01:12:48.760 --> 01:12:52.520
 So, you know, veterans, what have you.

01:12:52.520 --> 01:12:58.640
 But I'm trying to be -- making sure that I thought the first meeting was about all

01:12:58.640 --> 01:13:01.240
 of everyone that's in the committee.

01:13:01.240 --> 01:13:06.560
 We were trying to make decisions together and not anything outside.

01:13:06.560 --> 01:13:09.760
 >> And we're not making any decisions outside.

01:13:09.760 --> 01:13:11.640
 >> Okay, you sure?

01:13:11.640 --> 01:13:12.920
 >> Yeah, very positive.

01:13:12.920 --> 01:13:17.640
 >> The meetings are recorded so you should be able to go to the second half of the meeting today.

01:13:17.640 --> 01:13:17.840
 >> Right.

01:13:17.840 --> 01:13:19.600
 >> So they're just on the same page as --

01:13:19.600 --> 01:13:21.480
 >> But that record chronicle was here earlier.

01:13:21.480 --> 01:13:24.120
 They were here.

01:13:24.120 --> 01:13:27.440
 Anyone in this room is welcome to attend that meeting.

01:13:27.440 --> 01:13:27.800
 >> Okay.

01:13:27.800 --> 01:13:31.640
 >> And I remember you saying you didn't want to be involved.

01:13:31.640 --> 01:13:39.000
 >> No, I mean, I was saying that we voted for everyone to be voting together.

01:13:39.000 --> 01:13:39.640
 >> Right.

01:13:39.640 --> 01:13:40.560
 >> As a committee.

01:13:40.560 --> 01:13:41.080
 >> We are.

01:13:41.080 --> 01:13:44.200
 >> That's what we voted for, the first meeting.

01:13:44.200 --> 01:13:46.320
 So we were all supposed to be clear on that.

01:13:46.320 --> 01:13:48.200
 >> And then we voted to establish the committee.

01:13:48.200 --> 01:13:56.920
 >> And that will come back to everyone in the room to decide based on some recommendations

01:13:56.920 --> 01:14:00.920
 that will come forward, but everybody in the room could decide, no, we don't want to go

01:14:00.920 --> 01:14:03.280
 with that recommendation, we want to go with this one.

01:14:03.280 --> 01:14:06.320
 And so there'll be various scenarios.

01:14:06.320 --> 01:14:10.800
 We're just going to bring back one that is -- well, after we've had these meetings,

01:14:10.800 --> 01:14:13.600
 we think is the one we want to recommend to the committee.

01:14:13.600 --> 01:14:17.960
 But the committee will ultimately decide what is going to happen.

01:14:17.960 --> 01:14:18.640
 >> Okay.

01:14:18.640 --> 01:14:23.080
 >> And the focus is on the finance part of this, not, I mean --

01:14:23.080 --> 01:14:27.880
 >> It's on the growth rate and how the growth rate impacts what tax rate

01:14:27.880 --> 01:14:30.480
 and different scenarios come to pass.

01:14:30.480 --> 01:14:32.520
 >> The discussion we had about subcodes.

01:14:32.520 --> 01:14:33.520
 >> Correct.

01:14:33.520 --> 01:14:35.360
 >> Right, right.

01:14:35.360 --> 01:14:37.680
 >> So there is actually kind of lots of subcodes.

01:14:37.680 --> 01:14:38.720
 >> That's what I was saying.

01:14:38.720 --> 01:14:43.880
 But the committee is not making any decisions.

01:14:43.880 --> 01:14:47.960
 The committee will make recommendations to the committee as a whole.

01:14:47.960 --> 01:14:51.560
 >> And we're bringing three options.

01:14:51.560 --> 01:14:54.680
 We gave very specific direction to David today.

01:14:54.680 --> 01:14:58.120
 He's bringing back three options for us to consider.

01:14:58.120 --> 01:15:02.760
 We're going to vet those options and bring all three with a recommendation

01:15:02.760 --> 01:15:05.440
 of which one we think is best.

01:15:05.440 --> 01:15:09.720
 But that's, there's nothing, we're going to say this is it.

01:15:09.720 --> 01:15:11.680
 We're not going to, you know, there's no further discussion.

01:15:11.680 --> 01:15:13.240
 That's not going to happen.

01:15:13.240 --> 01:15:14.720
 Apparently, exactly.

01:15:14.720 --> 01:15:18.760
 >> Okay. Just, you know --

01:15:18.760 --> 01:15:23.320
 >> We're taking, if you took the presentation right here,

01:15:23.320 --> 01:15:27.720
 there was what, 20 different scenarios we went through today?

01:15:27.720 --> 01:15:29.080
 >> It felt like that.

01:15:29.080 --> 01:15:29.760
 >> Right?

01:15:29.760 --> 01:15:30.840
 >> Yeah.

01:15:30.840 --> 01:15:34.840
 >> About 20, and we narrowed it down to essentially three.

01:15:34.840 --> 01:15:36.240
 >> Yeah.

01:15:36.240 --> 01:15:42.480
 >> And again, those meetings are open.

01:15:42.480 --> 01:15:43.920
 They're just open committee meetings

01:15:43.920 --> 01:15:45.600
 so anyone can attend those meetings.

01:15:45.600 --> 01:15:47.600
 >> Okay.

01:15:47.600 --> 01:15:52.960
 >> Yeah, everyone's welcome to come next on July 11th at 4 p.m.

01:15:52.960 --> 01:15:53.880
 >> Yes.

01:15:53.880 --> 01:15:55.160
 >> All right.

01:15:55.160 --> 01:16:01.040
 Any other questions, comments, concerns?

01:16:01.040 --> 01:16:02.360
 All right.

01:16:02.360 --> 01:16:06.160
 Colby, can you make a motion for us to adjourn?

01:16:06.160 --> 01:16:09.360
 >> Yeah, yeah, make a motion to adjourn.

01:16:09.360 --> 01:16:10.800
 >> Second.

01:16:10.800 --> 01:16:11.280
 >> All right.

01:16:11.280 --> 01:16:12.000
 >> All right.

01:16:12.000 --> 01:16:13.160
 >> 715.

01:16:13.160 --> 01:16:13.800
 >> Thank you, everyone.