2. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on this agenda for public hearing and individual consideration.

[A. ID 26-1434 Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the FY 2026-27 City Manager’s Proposed Budget. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 30 minutes]]

AVAILABLE. WORK SESSION REPORTS, AGENDA A I'D 26-1434. RECEIVE A REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION AND GIVE STAFF DIRECTION REGARDING THE FY 2020 627 CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET. AND BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT PART OF THE BUDGET DISCUSSION IS GOING TO BE THE CPC ALLOCATION, AND WE. AND WE REALLY NEED TO. EVERYTHING ALL RIGHT? OKAY. AND YOU MADE ME LOSE MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT. WE. THEY REALLY NEED WE NEED TO COME TO A DECISION TODAY. AND SO I'M NOT TRYING TO COMPRESS THE CONVERSATION OR THE DIALOG. I MEAN, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THAT WE REALLY VET IT. AND IF WE NEED TO, THEN WE'LL COME BACK AFTER OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING IF WE DON'T FINISH. BUT THEY REALLY NEED DIRECTION TODAY ON EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT ON THE BUDGET. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AMY CASSEY CHIEF STRATEGIC OFFICER AND HERE TODAY TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN UPDATE ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2627 BUDGET. SO HERE IS AN OVERVIEW OF TODAY'S DISCUSSION. WE'RE GOING TO START WITH A FEW REMAINING COUNCIL ACTION ITEMS. THEN MOVE INTO THE COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS. AFTER THAT, WE'LL COVER PROPOSED RATE CHANGES FOR EMS AND ELECTRIC. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE WITH A QUICK OVERVIEW OF NEXT STEPS. THIS SLIDE SUMMARIZES THE ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION FOLLOWING THE BUDGET WORKSHOP AND THE SUBSEQUENT WORK SESSIONS. THE TWO EMS LIEUTENANT POSITIONS REMAIN RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING AND ARE REQUIRED COMPONENTS OF THE EMS WHOLE BLOOD PROGRAM, WHICH YOU WILL SEE A LITTLE BIT LATER IN TODAY'S PRESENTATION. WE'VE ADDED A PLACEHOLDER FOR ADDITIONAL SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS AND DOWNTOWN CLEANING. WE ALSO WANT TO CLARIFY FIRE COMPENSATION. THE PROPOSED BUDGET DOES INCLUDE AN AMOUNT SLIGHTLY ABOVE MARKET TO MOVE THE FIRE CIVIL SERVICE PERSONNEL AN ADDITIONAL PERCENT.

THE TOTAL IS 313,621 EACH ADDITIONAL PERCENTAGE BEYOND THAT IS $423,662. AS A REMINDER, WE CURRENTLY HAVE ABOUT $796,000 AVAILABLE FOR COUNCIL PRIORITIES. AND WITH THAT,

WE'LL OPEN TO DISCUSSION. >> OKAY, COUNCIL, ANY COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? YES. COUNCILMEMBER

HOLLAND. >> TELL ME DOWNTOWN CLEANING WHAT WHAT IS THAT GOING TO? IS $80,000 ENOUGH TO TO DO THAT? AND I BRING THAT UP SPECIFICALLY. I WAS ON THE SQUARE, OUR FRONT DOOR AT THE NORTH TEXAS STATE FAIR PARADE, AND I WAS ABSOLUTELY EMBARRASSED AT HOW FILTHY OUR DOWNTOWN SQUARE WAS. AND WE HAD A WE HAD A GREAT PROGRAM FOR A LONG TIME. WELL, FOR A YEAR, FOR TWO YEARS, THE AMBASSADOR PROGRAM AND A PREVIOUS COUNCIL DECIDED TO DO AWAY WITH THAT. I WAS EMBARRASSED WITH WITH THE WAY OUR SQUARE LOOKS. SO I'M

CONCERNED IF $80,000 IS ENOUGH TO KEEP OUR FRONT DOOR TIDY. >> IF I COULD. OH, GO AHEAD,

I'M SORRY. >> MY APOLOGIES. THERE'S A LAG OUTSIDE, SO I WAS A LITTLE

BEHIND. >> WHERE DID YOU GET IN HERE? >> I'M JIM BASHAM, I'M THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION, AND THE QUESTION WAS.

>> THE QUESTION WAS, IS $80,000 ENOUGH TO KEEP THE DOWNTOWN SQUARE CLEAN? AND AND AND IF

[00:10:04]

IT'S OUR FRONT PORCH, IS OUR FRONT PORCH IN ORDER. >> $80,000 IS GOING TO GET YOU ABOUT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY SEEING. SO IT'S THREE DAYS A WEEK, IT'S QUARTERLY POWER WASHING, AND IT'S THAT REDUCED RIGHT DIRECTLY AROUND THE SQUARE.

IT'S THE SIDEWALKS AND IT'S GRAFFITI ABATEMENT AS NEEDED. WE CURRENTLY SUPPLEMENT IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. SO WE COME IN AND IF WE GET A THREE, ONE, ONE REQUEST OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE'LL GO AND RESPOND AND CLEAN THAT. BUT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL OF THE PARKING SPACES. IT DOESN'T INCLUDE 5 TO 7 DAYS A WEEK. IT IS SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN THE AMBASSADOR

PROGRAM. >> OKAY. AND I AND I APPRECIATE THAT AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE REPORT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH. IF IF THIS IS WHAT WE WERE GETTING THE MORNING OF THE NORTH TEXAS FAIR AND RODEO PARADE, THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. THERE WERE PILES OF GARBAGE. SIX, EIGHT INCHES HIGH, SEVERAL PILES OF GARBAGE THAT THAT THAT GOT PICKED UP RIGHT ON THE SPOT JUST MINUTES BEFORE THE PARADE STARTED. AND AS WE'RE LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO PUT THIS GARBAGE WALKING AROUND THE SQUARE, THERE'S THERE'S LOTS OF PLACES ON THE SIDEWALKS.

IT WAS IT WAS NOT GOOD. AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN THAT'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY. MAYOR. I'M

SORRY. SURE. >> AND LET ME, IF I COULD, JUST TO GIVE YOU A SORT OF PREVIEW, I DID PUT IN A. IT'LL SHOW UP IN THE NEXT AGENDA WORK SESSION, A TWO MINUTE PITCH TO TALK ABOUT LOOKING AT THE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN TOURS TO SEE IF THERE'S THE ABILITY TO MAKE AMENDMENTS TO IT AS FAR AS WHAT THAT MONEY CAN BE SPENT FOR. AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I MADE THAT PITCH, WAS BECAUSE DOWNTOWN THE TOURS IS SPECIFICALLY FOR DOWNTOWN.

IF WE CAN'T KEEP IT CLEAN, WELL, THEN WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO USE THOSE INCENTIVES BECAUSE NOBODY'S GOING TO WANT TO COME. SO I JUST I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THAT THAT DISCUSSION IS COMING UP, WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH IT OR NOT, IT'S OKAY, BUT THERE IS AT LEAST SOME OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE SEE IF THERE'S SOME OTHER ADDITIONAL FUNDING.

>> WELL, I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH THE DISCUSSION, BUT BUT WE'VE GOT TO DO BETTER. WE HAVE NOT

DONE WELL ENOUGH. WE GOT TO DO BETTER. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YES.

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY ACCORDING TO WHAT WE RECEIVED IN THE BACKUP MATERIALS. AS FAR AS THE FRIDAY QUESTIONS, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT PARKS AND RECREATION CURRENTLY HAS 80,000 BUDGET. IS, IS THAT STILL IN THE BUDGET? OKAY. AND THAT SUPPORTS THREE DAYS PER WEEK OF LITTER REMOVAL AND QUARTERLY PRESSURE WASHING. WASHING. THIS WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 80,000, WHICH WOULD THEN INCREASE THE VISIBILITY AND FREQUENCY UP TO FIVE DAYS PER WEEK OF LITTER REMOVAL AND MONTHLY PRESSURE WASHING. DOES THAT SOUND CORRECT? I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR. WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHERE WHERE THE BASELINE IS AND WHERE 80,000 WOULD GET US VERSUS 160,000. THANK YOU. YES, THE ADDITIONAL 80 WOULD STEVENS, IF I STEPPED ON YOU ON THAT. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. YES. >> I'M SORRY. THEN I NEED CLARIFICATION. I UNDERSTOOD YOU

TO SAY THAT THAT THAT THIS IS WHAT WE WERE GETTING PREVIOUSLY. >> THE 80,000 IS OUR BASE, THAT THIS WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 80 TO DO THE FOCUSED AND THEN COMPREHENSIVE WOULD BE SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. VERY SIMILAR BECAUSE IT WOULD PUT YOU ALMOST BACK UP TO WHAT WE WERE PAYING ANNUALLY, WHICH WAS ABOUT $300,000 A YEAR FOR THE AMBASSADOR PROGRAM.

>> SO. SO DO YOU SEE THAT TO BE AN IMPROVEMENT? >> YES, THAT WOULD BE AN

IMPROVEMENT. >> OKAY. EXCELLENT. EXCELLENT. GLAD TO HEAR THAT. THANK YOU

MAYOR. >> THANK YOU. YOU BET. MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> SORRY, I JUST NEED ONE CLARIFICATION THEN, BECAUSE YOU SAID IT WOULD IN TOTAL BE ABOUT 300. SO IF IF WE WERE TO DO THIS, WHETHER IT WAS THROUGH A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF FUNDING OR NOT, IT'S THE 80 WE'RE CURRENTLY SPENDING PLUS THE 80. AND THEN IF WE CHOSE TO DO SO PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 160, OR IS IT 80 OR 160 OF THESE TWO UP HERE, THE FOCUSED AND

COMPREHENSIVE. >> THE FOCUSED WOULD GET YOU TO FIVE DAYS A WEEK. THAT WOULD BE IN TOTAL OUR ORIGINAL 80 PLUS 80. AND THEN THE COMPREHENSIVE WOULD BE OUR ORIGINAL 80 PLUS

165. >> I JUST NEEDED THANK YOU. >> OKAY. YES, COUNCILMEMBER

PERRY. >> SO THEN THE HOPE IS, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THEN WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FUNDING, IF WE KNOW THAT WE'RE HAVING A TWO MINUTE PITCH TO DISCUSS UTILIZING PART OF THE TOURS TO SHORE UP THIS 320,000, BECAUSE MINUS THE 80,000 THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE BUDGETED FOR IT. RIGHT. SO THAT BRINGS US TO $240,000 REMAINING TO BE SHORED UP TO HAVE THE SEVEN DAYS A WEEK HIGH VISIBILITY MONTHLY POWER WASHES THAT IN THE BACKUP

THAT YOU ANSWERED THAT LEVEL OF FUNDING. >> YES. AND THIS IS AN ESTIMATE.

WE HAVEN'T BEEN THIS SCOPE YET. SO WE KNOW WHAT IT IS FOR OUR CURRENT LEVEL OF SERVICE. SO WE'RE JUST EXTRAPOLATING THAT NUMBER. AND WE WOULD SEE WHAT THOSE BIDS CAME BACK AT.

>> SURE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> SO JUST BECAUSE YOU SAID SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING. SO THE SEVEN DAYS A WEEK WITH WAS IT

MONTHLY CLEANING POWER WASHING. >> THAT'S NEEDED ON CALL? >> IS THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE?

[00:15:02]

>> THAT'S COMPREHENSIVE. >> AND THAT WOULD BE THE 160 PLUS THE 80 IN PARKS. THE SET

TOTAL OF 240. >> YES. I HEARD I THOUGHT WE WERE AT 300.

>> WAS WHAT THE AMBASSADOR PROGRAM WAS. >> YES, YES.

>> OKAY. I UNDERSTAND AND I APPRECIATE THAT. AND THAT'S BI WEEKLY POWER WASHING FOR COMPREHENSIVE. YES. OKAY. SO 240 WE'VE ALREADY GIVEN 80. WE'RE LOOKING FOR 160 MORE.

WE'RE THINKING WE CAN GET THAT THROUGH TOUR. >> THAT'S A DISCUSSION.

>> A DISCUSSION WE'RE GOING TO HAVE. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I WANT TO MOVE AWAY FROM CLEANING FOR A SECOND, IF THAT'S OKAY, AND HAVE SOME CLARIFICATION ON SOME OTHER QUESTIONS. I'M SO SORRY. SO I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON FIRE COMPENSATION. FIRST OFF, REMIND ME WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE GOING TO BE AT MARKET PLUS FIVE, CORRECT? OKAY. I SEE HEADS.

>> WELL. >> I'M GOING TO BE CAREFUL BECAUSE WE'RE STILL IN

NEGOTIATION. OKAY, SO I APOLOGIZE. >> I DID NOT HEAR ALL OF THE QUESTION WAS ON POLICE. YEAH WE DO. WE HAVE SIGNED WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT APPROVED A GPOA ON THE NEXT AGENDA. AND WE DO HAVE THEIR COMPENSATION AT MARKET PLUS FIVE.

>> I DON'T KNOW. AND IF YOU CAN'T ANSWER IT'S OKAY. BUT THAT MARKET PLUS FIVE IS IT THE

MARKET PLUS FIVE PLUS THE STIPEND. >> PLUS THE STEP INCREASES. YES.

>> IT WOULD BE CLOSER TO 1.6 FOR THE YEAR. >> I DON'T HAVE THE DOLLAR AMOUNT. I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH THAT. BUT THE STEP INCREASES. WE HAVE NOT TALKED ABOUT AS FAR AS BASE COMPENSATION. THOSE HAVE ALWAYS THEY'VE ALWAYS GOTTEN STEP INCREASES.

>> OKAY. AND THEN. >> FOR FIRE. >> AND FIRE COMPENSATION, I KNOW YOU SAID WE'RE SLIGHTLY ABOVE MARKET. HOW MUCH ABOVE MARKET IS SLIGHT.

>> LESS THAN 110,000. >> RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT ABOUT 100. AND IF I DO THE MATH FOR ABOUT 110,000 ABOVE MARKET, WHICH IS NOT 1%. SO IN ORDER TO DO THAT PLUS ONE.

>> OKAY. >> SO. >> YOU'RE 13.

>> OKAY. >> AND THEN EACH PERCENT BEYOND THAT IS FOR 23.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, I MEAN, A LOT OF THIS CONVERSATION IS GOING TO DEPEND ON SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS. I GUESS I'M JUST GOING TO. SO WE HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE. SO I'M JUST GOING TO VOICE WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW, IF THAT'S OKAY. MAYOR. SURE. IS THAT HELPFUL?

>> WE'LL SEE. >> YEAH, WE WILL SEE. I MEAN, I THINK WE ALL COLLECTIVELY SUPPORT THE TWO EMS LIEUTENANTS, WHICH WHICH THAT'S A LITTLE OVER 360. IT'S LIKE 380. I MEAN, I THINK THAT NOT I THINK I, I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THE FIRE COMPENSATION 1% ABOVE MARKET. I THINK A LOT OF THIS IS GOING TO DEPEND ON THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAVE ABOUT THE SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS AS WELL. I HAVE LOOKED AT WHAT CPC HAS DONE AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, I AGREE WITH MOST OF IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SHORE UP ADDITIONAL FUNDING OUTSIDE OF THAT. GO

AHEAD. >> NO, NO, I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE A SEPARATE DISCUSSION.

CPC SOMEWHERE DOWN. I THINK THAT'S A SEPARATE SLIDE. >> SO SO CAN I ASK THOUGH, I

MEAN, HOW HOW DO WE THEN DECIDE THIS WITHOUT DECIDING THAT? >> WELL, I THINK WE CAN LEAVE IT AS A PLACEHOLDER. I MEAN, AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK TO IT. WE CAN EITHER SAY WE LEAVE IT IN THERE OR WE TAKE IT OUT. IT'S REALLY, I THINK FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION, IT'S PROBABLY BEST TO LEAVE IT IN. THEN IF WE USE IT SOMEHOW, IF WE DON'T, IT'S EITHER OKAY.

YEAH, OKAY. IT'S EITHER ONE. WE'LL JUST MAKE A NOTE OF THAT TO COME BACK TO THAT. YES.

COUNCILMEMBER RUMOHR. >> THANK YOU. >> GIVEN WHAT WE KNOW RIGHT NOW WITHOUT HAVING HAD THIS CONVERSATION YET, I WOULD PREFER THAT DOWNTOWN CLEANING THAT THAT REVENUE COME FROM A DIFFERENT SOURCE. SO I'M HAPPY TO, TO HEAR THE DISCUSSION AT A DIFFERENT TIME. SO FOR ME, I WOULD REMOVE BOTH CLEANING ITEMS. WE'VE ALREADY COMMITTED TO THE TWO EMS LIEUTENANTS. SO WHEN I TAKE THAT AWAY FROM THE 796 AND I TAKE AWAY THE WOMAN'S CLUB LEASE 1320, I'M LEFT WITH 417. 680. AND GIVEN THAT THE CPC DISCUSSION WAS BASED ON AN ASSUMPTION THAT WE HAD A. 1681 70, I THINK WE SHOULD GIVE A MINIMUM OF THAT TO ADDITIONAL SPONSORSHIPS, WHICH LEAVES US WITH 2495 TEN, WHICH IS LESS THAN THE 1%. SO WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO WITH THE REST OF THAT. BUT IN TERMS OF, I GUESS I CAN AT LEAST GIVE MY PRIORITY ORDER IS THE EMS LIEUTENANTS ARE MY TOP PRIORITY, FOLLOWED BY WOMEN'S CLUB, BUT THAT'S A SMALL NUMBER, FOLLOWED BY SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS, FOLLOWED BY SEEING IF WE CAN DO ANY OF THE FIRE COMPENSATION. BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH LEFT OVER TO DO A FULL

1%. DOES THAT MAKE. >> SENSE TO YOU? >> YEAH. LET ME MAKE SURE I

UNDERSTAND YOUR MATH. SO YOU WOUND UP WITH 2495 TEN. >> AT THE END.

>> YEAH. BUT THAT DID NOT INCLUDE THE 1% FIRE COMPENSATION.

[00:20:02]

>> CORRECT. >> OKAY. SO OKAY, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.

>> I STOPPED THERE BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A NEGATIVE IF I. >> OKAY. YES. ALL RIGHT. THANK

YOU. >> YES. COUNCILMEMBER JESTER. >> I WOULD SAY MY ORDER OF PRIORITY IN MY OPINION, WOULD BE THE TWO EMS LIEUTENANTS UNDERNEATH THAT, THE FIRE COMPENSATION 1% ABOVE MARKET AFTER THAT WOULD BE ADDITIONAL SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS. AND AFTER THAT WOULD BE DOWNTOWN CLEANING. SO WE CAN SEE WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE MATH. I WISH WE HAD LIKE A REAL TIME NUMBER SO WE COULD KIND OF LOOK AT WHAT EVERYONE'S PERFECT WORLD WAS AND SUBTRACT AND ADD. SO IF WE COULD, IF WE COULD GET THAT LATER, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

LIKE A MAGICAL BOARD THAT DOES MATH. THANK YOU. THAT'LL BE ANOTHER TWO MINUTE PITCH COMING

UP. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. YEAH. I WANT TO DO THIS REAL QUICK. IF THE TWO TWO LIEUTENANTS, THE ADDITIONAL SPONSORSHIP, WHICH IS 168, 170. OH, IT'S NOT A 1681 70. PLUS, THEN IF WE DID THE 3136621 OKAY, NOW THOSE ALONE, THE ONE EIGHT, THE TWO LIEUTENANTS, THE ADDITIONAL SPONSORSHIP AND THE FIRE COMPENSATION, THE 1%, IF MY MATH IS RIGHT, IS 859,000 860,000, WHICH IS ALREADY OVER WHAT. SO AND I, WHEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS, AND AS FAR AS THE DOWNTOWN CLEANING, AND I THINK WE CAN FIND A WAY TO FUND THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE, I MEAN, DEPENDING ON IF IT'S ACTUALLY LEGALLY ALLOWED IN, IN A TERS, IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT WE CAN DO. BUT I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS AND I'VE THOUGHT, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SCRAMBLING AROUND AND WHAT WE'VE DONE TO IN THIS BUDGET IS WE DID ADD 500,000 FOR CASH FUNDING VEHICLES. WE

ADDED 500,000. WAS IT BUILDING MAINTENANCE? >> AND IT WAS 700,000.

>> OH, 700,000. OKAY. 500,000, 700,000. AND THEN I THINK IT WAS 600,000 FOR ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT. IS THAT RIGHT? >> 700, 700, 1 MILLION FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

>> IN MY. >> MIND IS GOING BAD. SO I THINK IF IT COMES DOWN TO IT, I THINK THERE ARE SOME FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE THERE. IF YOU TOOK A LITTLE FROM EACH ONE OF THOSE, IT'S NOT REALLY HURTING EACH ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES, BUT I THINK IT WOULD HELP US, YOU KNOW, GO A LONG WAY TO MAYBE FULFILLING SOME THINGS THAT WE FIND AS A PRIORITY. SO I JUST WANT TO THROW THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY FOR ME, THE PRIORITIES ARE THE TWO LIEUTENANTS, FIRE COMPENSATION, THE ADDITIONAL SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS. WELL, THOSE RIGHT THERE ALONE ARE OVER THAT. 792,000 OR WHATEVER IT WAS. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION. AND MAYBE HAS EVERYBODY VOICED THEIR PRIORITIES OR WHAT THEY I MEAN,

COUNCILMEMBER FERRY, HAVE YOU SORT OF SHARED WHAT YOU THOUGHT? >> NOT YET. AND I THINK MAYBE THAT'S BECAUSE IN MY HEAD, I'M THINKING IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL REVENUE STREAMS, THEN MAYBE THE CPC DISCUSSION NEEDS TO COME BEFORE LIKE A CART HORSE SCENARIO. AND ALSO, I JUST WANTED TO HAVE SOME CLARIFICATION. THE WOMEN'S BUILDING LEASE IS REVENUE, SO WE WOULD BE ADDING THAT TO THE TOTAL, LIKE THE $796,320. THAT'S INCLUDING THE 1320. IS

THAT CORRECT? >> IT'S IT'S MORE IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT REVENUE. SO IT'S IT'S AN EXPENSE, BUT IT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT REVENUE.

>> OKAY. >> HEARD I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS PART OF THAT TOTAL, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT ENDS IN 320. SO I WAS LIKE, THAT'S INCLUDING IT, RIGHT? THANK YOU.

>> YES. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND. >> I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO, TO, TO GET TO TOUCH ON THE CPC THING BECAUSE I THINK THAT IMPACTS THIS. AND I'M GOING TO HOLD OFF ON MY MY RECOMMENDATION UNTIL I

GET THAT, IF THAT'S OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> WELL, WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT DISCUSSION? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S GERMANE TO REALLY TRYING

TO FINALIZE THIS PARTICULAR SLIDE. >> OKAY.

>> AND I AM GOING TO HAVE MATT HAMILTON, OUR CFO, JOIN YOU FOR THIS PART OF THE CONVERSATION.

AND HE HAS AN ADDITIONAL HANDOUT FOR YOU WITH A BIT MORE DETAIL.

>> THANK YOU SIR. >> ONE.

[00:25:13]

>> WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. MATT HAMILTON, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER HERE THIS AFTERNOON TO TALK ABOUT THE COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION FOR HOT AND SPONSORSHIP FUNDS, INCLUDING IN-KIND. SO ON AUGUST 25TH, THE CPC COMMITTEE MET AND THE COMMITTEE IS RECOMMENDING A $329,077 OVERALL INCREASE IN FUNDING. THIS BREAKS DOWN TO 168,001 70 AND ADDED SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS AND 160,907 IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO BE FUNDED FROM THE. FUND BALANCE OF THAT FUND. SO WITH THESE FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS, WE HAD TWO ORGANIZATIONS DECREASE. AND I DO WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT WHEN WE SAY DECREASE, DECREASE FROM THE PRIOR CPC RECOMMENDATION. SO FROM THE INFORMATION THAT COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED TO TODAY, 16 ORGANIZATIONS INCREASED AND SIX REMAINED UNCHANGED, WHAT WE DID HAVE TO DO WAS TO MOVE SOME FUNDING BETWEEN THE HOT AND SPONSORSHIP BUCKETS FOR SIX ORGANIZATIONS IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THE FUNDING IN ANY ONE OF THOSE BUCKETS DIDN'T EXCEED THE AMOUNT THAT THE ORGANIZATION HAD APPLIED FOR. SO THE TOTAL FUNDING THAT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR THE ORGANIZATION DIDN'T CHANGE. IT WAS JUST WHETHER IT WAS CASH, SPONSORSHIP OR HOT REVENUE DOLLARS. SO THE TWO ORGANIZATIONS THAT DID HAVE A FUNDING DECREASE, $18,000 FOR THE DENTON COMMUNITY MARKET AND $64,250 FOR DISCOVER DENTON.

AND THEN I ALSO DO WANT TO NOTE, BECAUSE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF DISCUSSION AROUND TWO ORGANIZATIONS THAT THE CANNABIS YOUTH SERVICES, THE 4TH OF JULY FIREWORKS INCREASED $40,650, WHICH IS AN INCREASE FROM THEIR 2026 FUNDING OF $12,830. AND THEN ALSO THE TEXAS VETERANS HALL OF FAME INCREASED $20,000 FROM THE PRIOR RECOMMENDATION. HOWEVER, THIS IS $19,000 LESS THAN THE TOTAL THAT WAS RECEIVED IN 2026. AND SO WHAT'S BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU IS A SPREADSHEET THAT OUTLINES EACH ORGANIZATION, WHAT THE ORGANIZATION RECEIVED IN 2026, INCLUDING IN-KIND WHAT THE ORGANIZATION REQUESTED FOR 2027. THAT AMOUNT DOES NOT INCLUDE IN-KIND. I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT BECAUSE IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS, THERE'S NOT A SPECIFIC DOLLAR AMOUNT, ONLY AN INDICATION WHETHER OR NOT THE ORGANIZATION WOULD LIKE IN-KIND.

AND THEN THE IN-KIND AMOUNTS ARE BASED ON PRIOR IN-KIND SUPPORT AND STAFF CONSULTATION WITH ORGANIZATIONS. AND THEN THE REMAINDER OF THE SPREADSHEET IS STAFF'S ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION. CPC'S RECOMMENDATION ON JULY 29TH. AND THEN THE RECOMMENDATION

FROM THE CPC COMMITTEE ON AUGUST 25TH. >> SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WE HAD OR IN THE ORIGINAL BUDGET FOR SPONSORSHIPS AND IN-KIND, IT WAS, I BELIEVE, 200,000, WHICH WAS A REDUCTION FROM THE IT WENT FROM, WHAT WAS IT, 400 A COUPLE YEARS AGO THEN TO 200. AND SO THIS IS. AND SO BY ADDING BACK THE. 1681 70, I BELIEVE THAT THAT THAT IS MONEY COMING FROM OTHER SOME OTHER FUNDING SOURCES, JUST GENERAL FUND MONEY. IT'S ALMOST RETURNING US TO THAT LEVEL OF. AND LET ME JUST SAY THIS, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS IS IT'S NOT GOING TO BE REMEMBERED PROBABLY NEXT. BUT THESE ARE REALLY ONE TIME WE'RE TAKING THIS ON A CASE BY CASE, YEAR BY YEAR BASIS. SO I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT WE'RE SETTING A PRECEDENT HERE, THAT WE'RE CHANGING FUNDING LEVELS THAT WILL BE CARRIED FORWARD TO THE NEXT YEAR. WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO ACCOMMODATE, YOU KNOW, THE ORGANIZATIONS AND THE EVENTS THAT REALLY MAKE DENTON, DENTON AND BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE COMMITTING TO ON A YEARLY BASIS. AND I'M JUST TRYING TO PUT THAT OUT THERE JUST AS A STATEMENT OF, YOU KNOW, WHEN MOVING FORWARD. SO BECAUSE WE ARE ALMOST RETURNING BACK TO THE SAME LEVEL THAT WE WERE LAST YEAR, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IF THE FUNDING CONTINUES TO TO HOLD UP, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STILL MAY BE POSSIBLE, BUT IT'S A YEAR BY YEAR DECISION. ALL RIGHT. THANK

YOU. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER HAWLEY. >> MAYOR, I'M REAL CONCERNED ABOUT THE THE DISCOVER DENTON

[00:30:03]

CUT. IN MY MIND, THIS IS THE ONLY ORGANIZATION WHOSE ONLY MISSION IS TO PROMOTE DENTON.

AND I LOVE ALL THESE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. BUT BUT THESE ARE THE THIS, THIS, THIS, THIS GROUP EXISTS SOLELY TO ATTEND CONVENTIONS AND, AND GO TO WHERE THE CUSTOMERS ARE, GO TO WHERE THE FISH ARE AND, AND LOOK FOR, LOOK FOR PEOPLE TO COME TO PLOW MONEY BACK INTO THIS THING. WE CUT THEM $64,000. AND I WOULD SURE LIKE TO, TO FIND A WAY TO, TO RESTORE THAT.

AS I SAY, THEIR, THEIR, THEIR ONLY MISSION IS TO PROMOTE DENTON, HENCE THE NAME DISCOVER

DENTON. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YES. WE'LL GO. COUNCIL MEMBER JUSTIN, THEN

WE'LL COME TO YOU. >> I'M SURE WHATEVER THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS GOING TO SAY, I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH COMPLETELY. SO IT'S GOING TO BE AS IF WE'RE BOTH TALKING. I'M SO SORRY. I FEEL LIKE I'VE JUMPED AHEAD OF YOU. I WANT TO ECHO THE SENTIMENTS OF MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBER. DISCOVER DENTON IS NOW A NEW ENTITY. THIS HAS BEEN A BIG CHANGE FOR OUR CITY, AND WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS START THAT ORGANIZATION WITH A HAND TIED AROUND ITS BACK. THIS ORGANIZATION OF ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS HERE, I MEAN, I CAN'T THINK OF ANOTHER ORGANIZATION HERE THAT PROMOTES ALL OF THE OTHER EVENTS. I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT THE DOLLARS DO.

THEY PROMOTE THE EVENTS TO VISIT THE LOCATIONS. I JUST FROM, FROM THE VERY SMALL INTERACTION I HAD BACK WHEN I WAS ON THE CHAMBER BOARD WITH WHAT DISCOVERED DENTON DID AT THAT TIME. I THINK IF ANYONE GETS FULLY FUNDED, IT SHOULD BE DISCOVERED. DENTON. AND I'VE ALSO NOTICED THAT THERE'S ANOTHER ORGANIZATION THAT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR MORE MONEY THAN THEY EVEN REQUESTED. SO I FEEL LIKE THERE IS SOME MOVING AROUND WE CAN DO. AND I JUST, YOU KNOW, THE WAY THAT WE HAVE RECRUITED SOMEONE TO COME IN TO RUN THIS ORGANIZATION, THE REPRESENTATIONS, NOT ANY PROMISES, BUT THE REPRESENTATIONS THAT WERE MADE AS FAR AS MOVING SOMEONE HERE. I, I, I JUST ECHO COUNCILMEMBER HAALAND'S SENTIMENTS IN THAT OF ALL OF THE EVENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS, THIS IS THE ONE THAT TRULY TAKES DIRECTION FROM THE CITY AND PROMOTES ALL OF THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS EVENTS AS WELL AS DENTON. SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY $0.02. AND THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT THE COMMITTEE DID. I KNOW IT'S BEEN DIFFICULT AND CUMBERSOME. IN THE FUTURE. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD EITHER UTILIZE OUR AUDITORS OR WITH A PITCH REQUEST, SOME KIND OF REPORT ABOUT WHAT OTHER CITIES DO, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE SHOULD BE A BETTER WAY OUT THERE TO TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS. WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON A VERY SMALL AMOUNT WHEN YOU CONSIDER OUR BUDGET ON THIS. NOT THAT IT'S NOT A VERY IMPORTANT. IT IS, BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT SOME IMPROVING TO DO.

THANK YOU FOR MY TIME. >> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> TO ADD ON TO THAT, I JUST I WANTED TO POINT OUT TWO OTHER. ENTITIES ON HERE, THE TEXAS VETERANS HALL OF FAME DECREASED FROM 72 TO 53. AND JUST AS IMPORTANT IS THE DENTON COUNTY OFFICE OF HISTORY. CULTURE WENT FROM 300,000 TO 240,000. YOU KNOW, I WAS TALKING TO SOMEONE ABOUT THIS EARLIER. YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY GIVES US A LOT OF MONEY EVERY YEAR FOR A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS. AND I'M NOT REALLY SURE I'M INTERESTED IN TAKING AWAY 60,000 FROM THEM ON THAT. I THINK WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THAT. I ALSO DON'T WANT TO ARGUE OVER DOLLARS. AND SO WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW IS I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE CPC DID. YOU ALL WENT AT THIS NUMEROUS TIMES WITH ONLY TWO PEOPLE. AND AND THAT'S HARD. AND I APPRECIATE WHAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD. TO BE HONEST, MAYOR, YOU BROUGHT UP ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT WE COULD UTILIZE THROUGH CASH FUNDING, THROUGH VEHICLES. I'M NOT SURE HOW I FEEL ABOUT TAKING IT FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, BUT BUT YOU HAD TWO OTHER AREAS WHERE WE COULD TAKE IT WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW,

BECAUSE WE COULD ARGUE ABOUT THIS. WE DON'T ARGUE. >> WE DELIBERATE.

>> WE DON'T WE COULD DELIBERATE ABOUT THIS ALL DAY. BUT WHERE I'M AT PERSONALLY IS TO REPEAT WHAT THE MAYOR SAID. THE WAY I'M VIEWING THIS IS THIS IS A ONE TIME THING. THIS YEAR. WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO MOVING FORWARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A BETTER PROCESS AND TO

[00:35:02]

IMPROVE UPON OUR PROCESSES. SO WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS, IS TO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF NEEDING AN EXPLANATION OF WHY THE ONE ORGANIZATION RECEIVED MORE FUNDING THAN THEY ASKED FOR, I WOULD NEED. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FUNDING RETURNED TO DISCOVER DENTON. VETERANS HALL OF FAME, BRING THEM BACK UP FROM 53 TO 72, AND TO RETURN FUNDING TO THE COUNTY FROM 240 TO 300. AND I WOULD ASK THAT WE. UTILIZE MONEY THAT THERE IS IN THE BUDGET FROM OTHER PLACES TO FUND THIS, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT OVER THE NEXT YEAR, WE'RE GOING TO WORK

ON A BETTER PROCESS. >> ALL RIGHT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER PERRY.

>> THANK YOU. FIRST, I WANT TO START WITH MAYBE A MISCONCEPTION. I'M REALLY GRATEFUL THAT WE GOT UPDATED SPREADSHEETS WITH THE IN-KIND INCLUDED FOR 2026. I THINK THAT'S BEEN A MISSING METRIC THAT PEOPLE AREN'T REMEMBERING WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING AT 2026 FUNDING. THEY'RE ONLY SEEING SPONSORSHIP AND HOT FUNDS. SO THEN THEY SEE A LOW NUMBER THAT THEY GOT IN 26. THEN THEY SEE THEIR REQUEST FOR HOT AND SPONSORSHIP FUNDS, AND THEN THEY SEE THE TOTAL THAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED WITH IN-KIND INCLUDED. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS MASSIVE JUMP WHEN IN REALITY THE MATH ACTUALLY IS EXACTLY THE SAME FULLY. FOR EXAMPLE, FULLY FUNDING ARTS AND JAZZ WOULD BE THE 145 PLUS THE 76. THEY RECEIVE AN IN-KIND, WHICH EQUALS 221. EXACTLY. SO IT'S NOT ADDING MORE THAN THEY ASKED. IT'S ADDING IT'S IT'S MATCHING THE HOT AND THE SPONSORSHIP ASK, KNOWING WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THE SAME FUNDING FOR IN-KIND THAT I THINK IS THE DISCREPANCY AND WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION IN THE AGENDA AND WHY THIS WAS CHANGED WITH THIS SPREADSHEET TODAY. SO I'M GRATEFUL FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. AND I WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT TO NOT ONLY MY PEERS, BUT THE AUDIENCE AND PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING. MATH IS ALREADY A HARD. MATH IS HARD. MATT AND I HAVE GONE BACK AND FORTH AT LEAST THREE, 4 OR 5 TIMES. THIS IS MY SEVENTH LARGE SPREADSHEET, WHICH I LOVE. I LOVE MATH, I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK THAT'S GONE INTO THIS. I THINK THE SECOND THING I WANT TO MAKE SURE I MAKE CLEAR TO MY PEERS IS IN ONE OF THE FIRST TWO MEETINGS WE HAD ON CPC, I ASKED CITY STAFF, IT'S REALLY EXPENSIVE TO PURCHASE PLACE OR AI OR GIS DATA, AND THE CITY HAS THAT AVAILABLE TO THEM TO LEND IN KIND TO ANY ORGANIZATION THAT WANTS TO UTILIZE THAT TO BEEF UP THEIR APPLICATION, BECAUSE THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO SPEND THAT MONEY FROM THEIR DOLLARS TO PROVIDE BETTER METRICS ON WHO'S ATTENDING THE EVENT, WHO'S STAYING DOWNTOWN AND SPENDING DOLLARS, WHO'S STAYING IN HOTELS, ALL, ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES EXIST FROM A CITY PARTNERSHIP ASPECT. AND I THINK THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY CAN, CAN AND SHOULD COMMIT TO DOING FOR THESE AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS. SO THAT, LIKE I SAID, THEIR APPLICATIONS IN FUTURE CAN PROVIDE MORE NUMBERS AND METRICS THAT MEET A LOT OF THE CRITERIA. WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT WANTING TO, AS A COUNCIL, I THINK, REVISIT THIS ENTIRE PROCESS. LIKE MAYOR SAID, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A ONE TIME SITUATION, AND I THINK MOVING FORWARD, WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL ABOUT WHAT THE APPLICATION IS ASKING, EXPECTING AND WANTING, AND THAT WE'RE PROVIDING ALL OPPORTUNITIES FOR THEM TO BRING THOSE THAT DATA FORWARD. THIRD, I THINK I'VE HAD NUMEROUS CONVERSATIONS WITH EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS, STAFF OF NONPROFITS AND AGENCIES THAT PUT ON EVENTS, AND I'VE ALSO LISTENED TO AND HEARD IN PERSON MEETINGS AND QUITE LITERALLY 200 PLUS EMAILS FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME THAT I NEED TO SEE MORE PARTNERSHIP ON THE MARKETING SIDE OF THESE EVENTS. THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE PARTNERSHIP HAPPENING TO PUSH THESE EVENTS OUT. AND BY UNDERFUNDING AN AGENCY, IT MAKES IT TANTAMOUNT MORE DIFFICULT TO MARKET. I WANT TO SEE MORE OF THAT OCCUR, AND I'M CONTINUING TO HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS WITH ALL OF THESE AGENCIES OVER THE NEXT THREE WEEKS, AT LEAST. BOOKED OUT SOLID. YOUR GIRLS GOT BREAKFAST SCHEDULED 7 A.M. EVERY MORNING.

I ALSO WANT TO. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT. IT'S CLEAR THAT IF WE HAVE ADDITIONAL FUNDING, I THINK THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $143,250 TO SHORE UP THE COUNTY, TO SHORE UP THE MUSEUM AND TO SHORE UP DISCOVER DENTON. AND I THINK $143,250 CAN BE FOUND BETWEEN THE VEHICLE REPLACEMENT AND THE CAPITAL PROJECTS. AND I'M 100% IN FAVOR OF THAT. AND AGAIN, I APPRECIATE MY PEERS AND I APPRECIATE US FINDING MONEY BECAUSE WHILE YES, CORE SERVICES ARE IMPERATIVE, PART ONE MIGHT COULD ARGUE THAT A CORE SERVICE IS HAVING THINGS FOR PEOPLE TO DO IN THE TOWN THEY LOVE AND THE TAXES THAT THEY PAY. SO I LEAVE IT AT THAT. I'M GRATEFUL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ADDING THAT RECOMMENDATION, AND I'M THANKFUL FOR THE CONVERSATION.

[00:40:05]

>> YES, COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR. >> I COULD SUPPORT KIND OF WHAT I'M HEARING FROM FROM MULTIPLE COLLEAGUES, BUT I DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT IT IT WE HAVE TO MAKE THIS A ONE TIME THING. WE GOT THAT AUDIT LAST MEETING THAT WAS SAYING THAT THE WAY WE'RE FUNDING DEBT, FUNDING OUR VEHICLES IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. IT'S COSTING TAXPAYERS MORE. SO WE CAN'T KEEP PULLING INTO THAT.

I'M WILLING TO DO IT THIS YEAR, BUT AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO START CASH FUNDING OUR VEHICLES POSTHASTE SO THAT WE ARE MAKING THE BEST USE OF OUR TAXPAYER MONEY. BUT I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN SOMEHOW WORK ON A BETTER PROCESS FOR NEXT YEAR. SO WE'RE NOT HAVING TO PULL MONEY AND BASICALLY TAKE OUT MORE DEBT FOR FOR VEHICLES AND CAPITAL PROJECTS. BUT BUT I AGREE WITH WHAT MAYOR PRO TEM SAID ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY DOES GIVE US A LOT OF MONEY. WE SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, FRIENDLY, YOU KNOW, RETURN THE FAVOR HERE AND THERE SO THAT THEY'RE NOT IT'S NOT A ONE WAY RELATIONSHIP. AND THEN THE VETERANS HALL OF FAME AS WELL. AND DISCOVER DENTON. SO FOR FOR THIS YEAR, I'M WILLING TO DO THE ONE TIME MOVING OF MONEY FROM CAPITAL PROJECTS AND VEHICLE REPLACEMENT, UNDERSTANDING WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ON MORE DEBT FOR THOSE THINGS. BUT NEXT YEAR, WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO, TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT PULLING INTO THOSE

TWO SOURCES. THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WHAT? OKAY. BECAUSE I AGREE WITH THAT THAT SENTIMENT THAT WE CAN TAKE SOME OF THAT FUNDING, WHICH CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, WE'VE NEVER HAD SET ASIDE ANYTHING FOR CASH FUNDING VEHICLES. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULDN'T. I'M JUST SAYING THAT SOMETIMES WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE MOVE INTO THINGS GRADUALLY, BECAUSE IT'S STILL GOING TO BE FUNDING, YOU KNOW, MORE VEHICLES THAN WE'VE EVER FUNDED. AND I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND YOUR SENTIMENT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, NOT WANTING TO TAKE IT OUT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, BUT THAT IS $1 MILLION THERE. THAT'S DOUBLE THE CASH FUNDING OF VEHICLES AND ONE AND A HALF TIMES THAT OF THE CAPITAL. BUT WHAT I WANT TO DO IS GO BACK. AND SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE GOT THIS PART SETTLED. IF WE MOVE 140, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO ALLOCATE IT FROM EITHER TWO OF THOSE FUNDS OR THREE OF THEM, WHATEVER THE CONSENSUS OF THE COUNCIL IS, WE'VE COME TO, I THINK, A RESOLUTION ON THE CPC, I BELIEVE, IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? EVERYBODY'S OKAY WITH WHAT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. OKAY. YES, YES. GO AHEAD.

>> PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT IS BEING OKAY. >> WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS AND I THINK COUNCILMAN PERRY HAD THE NUMBERS ABOUT 143,000 WITH SOME SOME ODD CHANGE THAT THAT WILL BE TAKEN OUT OF EITHER. AND THE CASH FUNDING RESERVE. WHAT. GO AHEAD. SORRY.

>> I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THE THREE THE THREE ORGANIZATIONS. YES. SO I, I HAVE $19,000 INCREASE TO THE VETERANS MUSEUM, 64,250 TO DISCOVER DENTON AND THEN $60,000 TO DENTON COUNTY HISTORICAL MUSEUM. YES, FOR A TOTAL OF 143,250.

>> YES. >> IN ADDITION TO THE INFORMATION THAT MATT PRESENTED.

SO THE 160,170 IN SPONSORSHIP. >> THAT'S CORRECT. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. SO IS THAT HELPFUL? >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YOU BET.

>> OKAY. SO THAT I BELIEVE IS NAILED DOWN. IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYBODY'S GOT DIRECTION ON

THAT. COUNCILMEMBER PERRY, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> I KNOW.

>> WHERE YOU'RE GOING. SO I WAS. >> GOING TO. >> OKAY. SO IF WE COULD GO AHEAD AND RETURN TO THE FIRST SLIDE AND SORT OF TAKE ANOTHER PULSE, BECAUSE I THINK I FORGOT WHAT THE NUMBER I SAID IT WAS, IS THAT 807,000? SO OKAY, COUNCILMAN PERRY, GO AHEAD.

>> SO IF MY MATH IS CORRECT, THE TWO EMS LIEUTENANT'S THE 1% ABOVE MARKET AT THE 313,000 AND THE ADDITIONAL CPC FUNDING. WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THAT. 168 AND THIS. 143 SUBTRACTED FROM THE 7963 20 AVAILABLE LEAVES US WITH A BALANCE OF NEEDING $206,041. DID ANYBODY ELSE GET THAT MATH MEETING THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPLIT BETWEEN VEHICLE AND CASH

CAPITAL PRODUCTS, CAPITAL PROJECTS. >> OKAY. I'M NOT I THOUGHT MINE WAS A LITTLE LESS THAN THAT. LET ME LOOK. MAYBE NOT. YES. GO AHEAD. COUNCILMEMBER.

>> COUNCILMEMBER FERRY, DOES THE DOES THE 260 INCLUDE THE. 144 THAT WE JUST ADDED TO THE

PAST DISCUSSION, OR IS THAT AN ADDITION TO? >> SO I ADDED THE. 1432 50, THE 168 THAT THAT'S IN THAT LINE ITEM, I ADDED THE 1% ABOVE MARKET AND THE TWO EMS LIEUTENANTS AND I GOT $1,002,361, AND I SUBTRACTED THE 7963 20 AVAILABLE, LEAVING ME WITH A $206,041 REMAINING NEEDED BALANCE THAT WE COULD SPLIT EQUITABLY, EVENLY ACROSS,

[00:45:08]

PULLING THAT MONEY FROM CAPITAL AND AND CASH, CAR VEHICLE CASH. >> OKAY, SO LET ME LET ME TELL YOU WHAT I'M COMING UP WITH. LET ME LET ME TELL YOU WHAT I'M COMING UP WITH. SO NO, NO.

>> IT'S OKAY. >> NUMBER. >> DO WHAT YOU'VE GOT THE

NUMBER. >> I GOT YOUR NUMBER. >> OKAY.

>> OKAY, THEN I'M LEAVING ONE OUT APPARENTLY BECAUSE I'M, I'M DOING THE 18618866188661, 681

70. AND THEN THE 31361, WHICH 1 A.M. I MISSING? >> 621 AND THEN THE. 1432 50 WE

JUST. >> ADDED WHERE'S THE SIX? WHAT? 621 ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?

>> YOU SAID. 313621 CORRECT? YES. >> OKAY. AND THEN YOU JUST

ADDED THOSE THREE ADDITIONAL FUNDING, WHICH IS. 143250. >> I SEE. YEAH. OKAY. RIGHT.

WELL, HONESTLY, THE WAY I WAS LOOKING AT THAT WAS THAT WAS THAT SORT OF CONCLUDED THAT BECAUSE THAT 168 HERE IS INCLUDED IN THAT NUMBER THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED. SO THAT. 143 SOME ODD CHANGE WRAPS UP THE CPC, INCLUDING THIS. 1681 70 SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS 16817188, 661, 88, SIX, 61, 68, 170 AND THE 31361 IS 807,000. SUBTRACT FROM 792 LEAVES ABOUT 40 OR 50,000 FROM THIS BECAUSE THE 143 I'M JUST LOOKING AT IT AS WE JUST DID THAT SEPARATELY. IT'S JUST WE'LL WRAP THAT UP. IT INCLUDES THAT ONE SEAT. SO WE'RE 40,000 $50,000 SHORT OF FUNDING THOSE ITEMS, NOT CLEANING, NOT COMPREHENSIVE OR FOCUSED. AND I DIDN'T INCLUDE THE 1320, BUT THAT'S DE MINIMIS. SO IF WE WANTED TO DO THAT, WE COULD DO THAT. AND QUITE HONESTLY, I WOULD JUST SAY WE PROBABLY DO THE SAME THING BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A SMALL AMOUNT, MAYBE $50,000 IN SMALL, BUT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS THAT IF WE HAD ALMOST A TOTAL OF $200,000 THAT WE TOOK FROM EITHER CASH FUNDING VEHICLES OR MAINTENANCE AND OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, IT WRAPS ALL OF THIS UP. IT FUNDS THOSE EXCEPT FOR THE FOCUS CLEANING COMPREHENSIVE AND THE FIRE PENSION COLA. IT FUNDS ALL THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE THE HOT FUNDS. AND THIS PORTION OF THIS DISCUSSION IS PRETTY MUCH CAN BE WRAPPED UP, IF THAT MAKES SENSE, BECAUSE WE GOT TO FIND THE MONEY SOMEWHERE.

I MEAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THESE THAT WE'VE GOT PRESENTED UP HERE, WE'RE $50,000 SHORT AFTER INCLUDING THE THE 14143 IF WE ADDED THEM ALL TOGETHER. BUT I'M JUST SEEING THAT AS A

SEPARATE DISCUSSION. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> YES.

>> OKAY. ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT? >> SO DID. >> YES.

>> SO DID WE GET THOSE THREE TAKEN CARE OF? THE VETERANS HALL OF FAME, DISCOVER DENTON

AND WHAT WAS IT? >> THE COUNTY. >> THE COUNTY?

>> YEP. YEAH. THOSE WERE TAKEN CARE OF IN THE DISCUSSION ON THE CPC SLIDE BECAUSE WE'RE MOVING 143, SOME ODD CHANGE. AND NOW WE'RE JUST DEALING WITH THIS SLIDE, WHICH INCLUDES THE 1681 70, WHICH WE'VE MOVED THAT'S BEEN MOVED OVER. I MEAN, THAT WAS PART OF THAT DISCUSSION WE JUST HAD. AND SO WE'RE $50,000 SHORT FROM THE 792. AND I'M SAYING WE NEED TO TREAT IT THE SAME. SO WHEN YOU COMBINE ALL THAT TOGETHER, IT'S ABOUT A COUPLE HUNDRED GRAND OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT FROM THE. IT'S ACTUALLY LESS THAN THAT, I THINK. THAT WE CAN MOVE OVER AS

A ONE TIME ACCOMMODATION. >> AND THE SQUARE IS STILL CLEAN.

>> WELL, THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THE 80 OR THE 160. NO, IT'S THE 80 FROM THE PARKS. SO THAT'S WHY I SAID WHEN I ADDED UP THOSE IT WASN'T INCLUDING THOSE. SO IF WE WANT TO INCLUDE THOSE THEN WE'VE GOT TO COME UP WITH THE ADDITIONAL MONEY FOR THE 80 OR THE AND OR THE 160 ACTUALLY, OR 80 OR 160. THE REASON I DID NOT INCLUDE THEM FOR ME WAS BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT IF WE CAN SEE IF WE CAN DO THE TOURIST FUNDING NOW, THAT CONVERSATION IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN UNTIL AFTER THE BUDGET GETS ADOPTED, YOU KNOW, AND ALL, YOU KNOW, TRANSPARENCY. SO IF CAN I WOULD IT BE OUT OF POSTING TO ASK? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET, RIGHT? SO I KNOW WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE ABOUT THE TOURS. EITHER ONE OF THE TOURS THAT CAN IT IS IT LEGALLY LAWFUL TO USE THOSE FUNDS FOR CLEANING, MAINTENANCE OR SOME TYPE OF ITEMS THAT

WOULD SORT OF BE CATEGORIZED AS THOSE EXPENSES? >> SURE. YEAH.

>> IT'S POSSIBLE. >> WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO OUR, OUR PLAN THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE TOURS. BUT IF THOSE CHANGES WERE MADE, IT COULD BE USED FOR WE COULD.

>> WE COULD DO IT AS THE PLAN SETS. >> NOW DO.

>> IT TODAY BECAUSE THERE'S A RESTRICTION PROHIBITION ON IT. BUT YOU CAN AMEND THE PLAN OR

CHANGE THE PLAN IN ORDER TO DO THAT. YES. >> PARDON ME, BUT THE MONEY IS

[00:50:04]

THERE. WERE WE TO TO CHANGE THE THE REGS. >> I'M SORRY.

>> THE MONEY IS IN THE TOURS. >> OH YES. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE FUND BALANCE IS FOR

THE TOURS. I MEAN IT'S A COUPLE MILLION BUCKS I THINK. >> OKAY, I LIKE, I LIKE THAT.

OKAY, I LIKE THAT. ALL RIGHT. JUST AS LONG AS WE GET THESE THREE GUYS SQUARED AWAY HERE.

>> JUST WANT TO POINT OUT ONCE THAT WE DO NOT DIRECT THE TOURS BOARD. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN TOURS BOARD. WE HAVE REPRESENTATION, BUT THAT WOULD BE AT THEIR DISCRETION AND VOTE

JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW THAT. >> WELL. AND I HEAR THAT THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION. BUT THE COUNCIL, AS WE DO WITH ANY OF OUR COMMITTEES, CAN ALSO SAY, WELL, WE'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. AND BUT I THINK THE TOURS BOARD CERTAINLY WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT IF OUR SQUARE IS NOT CLEAN, NOTHING ELSE MATTERS. NOTHING ELSE MATTERS.

YEAH. OKAY. YES. MAYOR PRO. >> TEM. >> JUST BECAUSE I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE DECIDED THEN WHERE THIS OTHER MONEY WOULD BE COMING FROM. OF THE THREE AREAS THAT YOU HAD PROPOSED. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, I JUST WANT TO VOICE THIS, THAT THE REASON I'M NOT WANTING IT TO COME FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION, WE WILL BE TAKING MONEY FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL INTENTS AND

PURPOSES. AND SO THAT'S WHY I WOULD NOT. >> WHICH CONVERSATION?

>> THE DOWNTOWN CLEANING. >> OH, OKAY. GOTCHA. >> COMING FROM TOURS. OKAY. SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I WOULD PREFER WHAT WE'VE DECIDED TO COME FROM THE.

>> OTHER SPLIT BETWEEN THE TWO FUNDS. OKAY. >> YEAH.

>> YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. YES. YEAH. OKAY. YES. ALL RIGHT. >> ANY THAT WAS MY ENTIRE

INTENTION. YEAH. I WAS LIKE, OH. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE AND CHECK IN WITH STAFF THAT OUR DIRECTION IS CLEAR SO THAT IF WE NEED TO MAKE SOME IF IT'S

NOT, THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY CLARIFY IT. >> I AM CLEAR.

>> OKAY. GOOD. ALL RIGHT. FANTASTIC. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES, FOR THAT DISCUSSION.

GOOD WORK. YES, COUNCILMEMBER RUMOHR. >> I JUST WANT TO THANK OUR CPC COLLEAGUES OVER HERE WHO PUT IN A WHOLE LOT OF WORK AND BRAINPOWER, PUTTING ALL OF THIS

TOGETHER. SO I JUST WANTED TO CALL YOU ALL OUT AND SAY THANK. >> YOU AND MR. HAMILTON AND EVERYONE ELSE THAT HAS CONTRIBUTED. WE JUST WANT TO SAY, EVERYONE, WE APPRECIATE

EVERYONE. WE LOVE YOU AND COME OVER. THANKS. GREAT. >> YES. GO AHEAD.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO NEXT UP, YOU HAD NOT SEEN THIS PARTICULAR FEE BEFORE, BUT THIS IS A FEE OF $650 TO BE USED TO ADMINISTER A WHOLE BLOOD PROGRAM IN THE FIELD. SO THIS PROGRAM WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE THE SURVIVAL RATE FOR CRITICALLY BLEEDING PATIENTS BY ALLOWING TREATMENT BEFORE THEY REACH THE HOSPITAL. AND THIS PROGRAM IS DEPENDENT ON THOSE TWO EMS LIEUTENANTS THAT YOU HAVE JUST INCLUDED IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION. ANY QUESTIONS

ON THIS ONE? OKAY. >> FORGIVE ME. I'M SO SORRY. HAVE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS?

>> THIS IS THIS IS NEW SINCE OUR LAST PRESENTATION ON RATES AND FEES. SO WE WANTED TO BRING THAT FORWARD TO YOU TODAY SO THAT YOU WOULD BE AWARE OF THIS PROGRAM THAT AGAIN, CAN BE FUNDED OR CAN BE INITIATED WITH THE ADDITION OF THOSE TWO EMS LIEUTENANTS.

>> IN ADDITION TO THAT, IN ADDITION TO THE TO THE FUNDING OF THE TWO EMS LIEUTENANTS,

RIGHT. >> BECAUSE THOSE EMS BECAUSE THOSE POSITIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT NOW WILL ENABLE THE DEPARTMENT TO IMPLEMENT THAT PROGRAM. AND

CHIEF HEDGES IS IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. >> SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, IS THIS PASSED ON TO THE TO THE CITIZEN OR TO THE PATIENT? SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'RE FUNDING UNLESS

THEY DON'T PAY. IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT. IT'S ALL OUR FEES. IT'S JUST COST FOR US THAT ARE PASSED THROUGH TO THE ACTUAL PATIENTS. WELL, THIS IS A NEW FEE WE'RE PROPOSING. WE WILL NOT IMPLEMENT THIS IMMEDIATELY IF WE GET THE RIGHT PERSONNEL AS WELL. WE'RE ALSO WORKING WITH LOCAL HOSPITAL TO ACTUALLY BE OUR BLOOD SUPPLIER. SO ANY TYPE OF TRAUMA PATIENTS OUT THERE, USUALLY IT'S NORMAL SALINE OR FLUID. SO BLOOD IS A BETTER REPLACEMENT BETTER SURVIVAL RATE. THIS IS KIND OF WHERE THE EMS WORLD IS GOING ACTUALLY ADMINISTER BLOOD IN THE FIELD. BIG THING ON BLOOD. IT HAS A SHORT LIFESPAN, SO YOU HAVE TO ROTATE IT ON A RECURRING BASIS. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HOSPITAL TO WORK WITH YOU ON THAT AS WELL. SO START WITH THOSE ROTATE ACTUALLY TO THE SURGICAL TO ACTUALLY BE USED. IF WE DON'T USE IT WITHIN

A 30 OR 45 DAY WINDOW. >> OKAY. SO ARE THE AMBULANCES CARRYING A SUPPLY OF BLOOD.

>> WE'RE NOT CARRYING BLOOD AT THIS POINT. IT IS A NEW PROGRAM WE'RE PROPOSING THAT WILL GO INTO EFFECT THIS NEXT FISCAL YEAR. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO IMPLEMENT THE FEE NOW WHEN WE

ACTUALLY BRING IT LIVE. >> OKAY. I CAN'T BELIEVE I'M ASKING THIS. HOW MANY HOW MANY TYPES OF BLOOD ARE THERE? HOW MANY, HOW MANY UNITS OF BLOOD WOULD THE AMBULANCE BE CARRYING

AT ANY GIVEN TIME? >> WE HAVEN'T WORKED QUITE THROUGH THE DETAILS. WE'RE STILL WORKING WITH THE HOSPITAL TO ACTUALLY CAPTURE THAT, BUT IT WOULD MEAN NO MORE THAN

[00:55:02]

PROBABLY 2 OR 3 UNITS AT THIS POINT. IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE BASED ON OUR PREVIOUS POSSIBLE USAGE. WE PULL THE DATA. IT'S VERY FINITE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THIS COULD BE IMPACTFUL FOR.

BUT WE DO FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT PROGRAM TO IMPLEMENT. >> OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS? FANTASTIC. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. AND NEXT, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE DME PROPOSED RATE INCREASE. THEY ARE RECOMMENDING A 3% INCREASE TO THE TO THEIR RATES, WHICH WOULD EFFECTIVELY BE A 1.5% INCREASE ON THE BASE. THIS TABLE SHOWS THE IMPACT OF DELAYING THAT INCREASE BY THREE MONTHS. IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $750,000. IMPACT ON THE ELECTRIC UTILITIES REVENUE, AND THEN WOULD IMPACT THE GENERAL FUND BY ABOUT $80,000. BECAUSE OF THE ROI AND FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE ELECTRIC UTILITY. THIS IS THE GENERAL FUND PROFORMA. THIS IS A PROFORMA, AS YOU SAW IT AT OUR LAST SESSION. AND HERE WE SHOW THE IMPACT TO THE GENERAL FUND.

IF THAT RATE INCREASE IS DELAYED AGAIN BECAUSE OF THOSE FRANCHISE FEES AND ROI, ANY REDUCTION IN THE ELECTRIC UTILITIES REVENUES THEN ALSO IMPACT THE GENERAL FUND. IN THIS SCENARIO, WE'RE MAKING A SLIGHT REDUCTION TO THE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR CATEGORY IN ORDER TO OFFSET THAT REDUCTION IN REVENUES. AND THEN YOU SEE THE DME PROFORMA AGAIN, THAT IS AS PROPOSED AT OUR LAST SESSION. AND HERE YOU SEE THE IMPACT ON THE FUND. IF WE DELAY THAT RATE INCREASE UNTIL JANUARY, IT REDUCES THEIR BASE RATE RATE REVENUE. AND AGAIN, THERE ARE EYE AND FRANCHISE FEE TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND THAT IS SHOWN HERE AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE COST. AS A RESULT, THE FUND BALANCE IN EITHER SCENARIO DOES STAY BELOW THE TARGET FOR THE NEXT FEW YEARS AND THEN IS PROJECTED TO BE ABOVE TARGET BY 2031.

THERE'S REALLY NOT A CHANGE BETWEEN EITHER SCENARIO AND THAT STATEMENT.

>> COULD YOU REFRESH MY MEMORY ON WHAT IS THE TARGET FUND BALANCE FOR DME CURRENTLY THE

CURRENT POLICY. >> SO I KNOW I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THIS VERY ELOQUENTLY, BUT IT IS THE WORKING CAPITAL. SO BETWEEN 38 AND 61% OF THEIR WORKING CAPITAL AND OPERATING

RESERVES. >> OKAY, THE FUND BALANCE FORMULA IS TO COME IN AT.

>> IT'S, IT'S 8% OF WORKING CAPITAL, OKAY. OR 8% IS WORKING CAPITAL, SO 8% OF THEIR TOTAL EXPENDITURES. AND THEN THERE'S A RANGE OF BETWEEN 38 TO 61% OF OPERATING RESERVES. AND THAT IS CALCULATED BASED ON THEIR TOTAL EXPENDITURES. SO IT'S A PERCENTAGE OF THEIR

EXPENDITURES ESSENTIALLY. >> BUT THE RANGE IS 38 TO 61%. >> YEAH. IT'S THAT BOTTOM THOSE

BOTTOM TWO GREEN. >> OKAY. YEAH. >> THOSE ARE THE PERCENTAGES.

AND THEN THAT'S THE NUMBERS FOR EACH BECAUSE IT CHANGES EVERY YEAR BECAUSE IT'S A PERCENTAGE.

>> OKAY. I, I GUESS 38% TO 61% RANGE IS A FAIRLY BIG RANGE. I MEAN, THAT'S ALMOST DOUBLE. SO I CERTAINLY THINK NO WONDER WE'RE KIND OF IT'S CHALLENGING TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE FUND BALANCE POLICY. WHEN YOU HAVE A RANGE THAT COULD BE 38% ALL THE WAY UP TO 61%, THAT'S ALMOST A 40 TO 50% INCREASE. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THAT. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, COUNCILMEMBER. >> THIS MIGHT BE A TRICKY

QUESTION, SO I APOLOGIZE. >> DO WE KNOW. >> OH, I CAN'T SEE ANYBODY BEHIND ME. DO WE KNOW WHY IT'S SUCH A BIG RANGE? LIKE I UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAVE A HIGH PERCENTAGE BECAUSE WE CAN AVOID THINGS LIKE WINTER STORM URI, WHERE WE TOOK ON A WHOLE BUNCH OF DEBT BECAUSE WE HAVE RESERVES. BUT WHY? WHY THE THE WIDE RANGE SPECIFICALLY.

>> AT ANYAL MANAGER. SO REALLY, THE TARGET HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT MINIMUM.

THAT'S KIND OF THE BARE MINIMUM THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE. AND. AND THAT MINIMUM IS ACTUALLY THE 8% PLUS THE 30. SO IT'S 46%. SO WHY THE WHY THE RANGE PRETTY CUSTOMARY ACROSS ALL, ALL GENERAL GOVERNMENT TYPE FUNDS TO HAVE THAT RANGE. AND SO THERE MIGHT BE YEARS THAT THERE MIGHT BE A VERY SPECIFIC REASON THAT YOU MAY WANT TO INCREASE THAT. FOR EXAMPLE, YOU MAY BE DOING A LARGE CAPITAL PROJECT OR SOMETHING THAT YOU MAY WANT TO

[01:00:01]

BUILD UP SOME CASH TO CASH FUND THAT. AND THAT'S WHY THAT RANGE IS THERE. I THINK THE RANGE, AND YOU'LL PROBABLY SEE THIS WHEN THE INTERNAL AUDITOR COMES, THE RANGE IS PRETTY COMPARABLE TO WHAT OTHER ELECTRIC UTILITIES HAVE. OURS IS ACTUALLY PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT MORE NARROW, A LITTLE BIT HIGHER ON ON THE MINIMUM SIDE AND PRETTY MUCH ON TARGET ON THE ON THE BACK SIDE, IF YOU REMEMBER THE 200 MILLION THAT I MENTIONED TO YOU, THAT'S KIND OF BEEN THE TARGET. THAT 200 MILLION WAS BASED ON WHAT WE PAID DURING WINTER STORM URI IN 2021. IF YOU INFLATION ADJUST THAT TO CURRENT. NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CLOSER TO 250 TO $280 MILLION IS WHAT THOSE DOLLARS WOULD BE NEEDED IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN AGAIN TODAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> THANKS. AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE YESES AND

THE NOS AT THE BOTTOM ARE BASED ON THAT 38% MINIMUM. >> ON THE 46%.

>> THE 40 TO 46, THAT TOP ONE. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES. >> YES. COUNCIL MEMBER PERRY.

>> THANK YOU. BUT AM I ALSO TO UNDERSTAND, AND THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR TONY. SORRY, AM I ALSO TO UNDERSTAND THAT AFTER WINTER STORM URI, THE TEXAS LAW CHANGED TO HELP PROTECT MUNICIPALITIES FROM THE TYPE OF PRICE GOUGING WE SAW DURING WINTER STORM URI, US GETTING IN THE HOLE THAT FAR RIGHT CHAT LIKE TRIGGERED THIS. IN A FUTURE LED SESSION, I BELIEVE LAWS WERE PASSED TO HELP PROTECT THINGS LIKE THAT OCCURRING AGAIN WHEN A ONE TIME

EVENT LIKE THAT HAPPENS. >> THAT'S CORRECT. COUNCIL MEMBER THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF CHANGES IN THE WHOLESALE ELECTRIC MARKET. FOR EXAMPLE, THE THE HIGHEST PRICE THAT THAT PRICES CAN GO TO WAS REDUCED FROM $9,000 A MEGAWATT HOUR DOWN TO 5000. YOU MAY KNOW THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF WINTERIZATION IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ACROSS NOT JUST GENERATION FACILITIES, BUT TRANSMISSION ASSETS. WE GET AUDITED ANNUALLY ON THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY WAS ALSO REQUIRED TO TO DO A NUMBER OF, OF, OF IMPROVEMENTS. AND SINCE 2021, WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT TYPE OF, OF, OF LARGE SCALE EVENT IN 2023, SUMMER OF 23, WE DID SEE A NUMBER OF DAYS WHERE PRICES DID HIT THAT, THAT $5,000 CAP, THEY STAYED PRETTY HIGH INTO THE EVENING HOURS. DEMAND STAYED UP AND WE INCURRED $30 MILLION WORTH OF OF EXPENSES. WE FINANCED THAT. THE OTHER PIECE TO TO CONSIDER IS WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE AG'S OFFICE IS THAT UNLESS THERE'S ANOTHER SYSTEM WIDE TYPE OF EVENT, THEY'RE GOING TO LIMIT ANY FUTURE FINANCINGS TO NO MORE THAN FIVE YEARS. AND SO IF YOU CAN IMAGINE A $200 MILLION TYPE OF EVENT WOULD BE PRETTY CATASTROPHIC ON AN ANNUAL BASIS TO FINANCE THAT AT A FIVE YEAR TERM, THE $30 MILLION FIVE YEAR TERM IS COSTING RATEPAYERS

ABOUT $8 MILLION A YEAR AGAIN. >> AND THE 200 MILLION, ABOUT SEVEN, $7 MILLION. WE FINANCED THAT OVER 30 YEARS. SO DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER?

>> YES. I'M GRATEFUL TO HEAR THAT THERE HAVE BEEN CHANGES MADE SO THAT WE DON'T GET OVERCHARGED DURING CRISES. AND I DO WANT TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION IN OCTOBER TO DISCUSS THE FUND BALANCE AND HOW WE COULD CHANGE THAT TO PROTECT. I APPRECIATE THE

ANSWER. THANK YOU. >> YES. THANK YOU. >> AND WE DO HAVE IT SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 27TH TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ELECTRIC FUND BALANCE.

>> AND I THINK FOR TODAY, WE'RE JUST SEEKING CONFIRMATION IN THE DELAY UNTIL JANUARY.

>> IS THAT IS THAT THE DIRECTION TO TO WAIT TO DELAY TO IMPLEMENT UNTIL JANUARY? AND IF SOMETHING DEPENDING ON THE DISCUSSION IN OCTOBER, THEN DIFFERENT DIRECTION COULD OCCUR

AT THAT TIME. IF IF DECIDED. ALL RIGHT. >> OKAY.

>> AND WITH THAT NEXT STEPS ARE THE BUDGET AND TAX HEARING OCCURRING. LATER ON TODAY. AND

THEN WE HAVE ADOPTION ON SEPTEMBER 22ND. >> FANTASTIC. ANY QUESTIONS? GREAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM

[B. ID 26-1221 Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding re-implementing ERCOT’s Commercial Emergency Response Service Program for Denton Municipal Electric. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 30 minutes]]

WILL BE AGENDA ITEM THREE B. I'D 26-1221. RECEIVE REPORT WHOLE DISCUSSION. GIVE STAFF DIRECTION REGARDING RE IMPLEMENTING ERCOT'S COMMERCIAL ENERGY RESPONSE SERVICE PROGRAM FOR DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC.

>> ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MY NAME IS STUART BIRDSEYE WITH DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC. AND TODAY WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICE PROGRAM. OR ERS. ERS IS A DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAM THAT'S OFFERED THROUGH ERCOT.

ERCOT ALLOCATES $75 MILLION A YEAR. THAT $75 MILLION COMES FROM CHARGES THAT ARE ALREADY

[01:05:04]

BAKED INTO ALL ENERGY COSTS, THAT ALL CUSTOMERS ACROSS THEIR SYSTEM PAY. THERE ARE FOUR STANDARD CONTRACT TERMS WINTER, SPRING, SUMMER AND FALL. AND IN WITHIN THOSE ARE EIGHT CONTRACT TIME PERIODS. BASICALLY, WHAT THIS PROBLEM OR WHAT THIS PROGRAM IS, IS WHEN SUPPLY AND DEMAND, ENERGY SUPPLY AND DEMAND GETS REALLY TIGHT AND CLOSE. AND THERE'S NOT NECESSARILY PREDICTED GENERATION TO COVER WHAT THAT DEMAND IS. ERS WOULD BE DEPLOYED AT THAT POINT. AND THIS GIVES ERCOT ANOTHER TOOL IN THE TOOLBOX TO IN ADDITION TO INCREASING GENERATION, TO ALSO DECREASE DEMAND BY HAVING COMMERCIAL LOADS WHENEVER THEY'RE AGGREGATED. IT'S A KNOWN AMOUNT OF LOAD AND THEY CAN TAKE THAT OFF THE SYSTEM.

WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO OFFER THE ERS 30 PROGRAM TO COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS. THIS GIVES COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS 30 MINUTES TO GO OFFLINE WITHIN THE PROGRAM. OUR STANDARD WOULD BE 25 MINUTES SO THAT WE CAN ACCOUNT FOR COMMUNICATION, BE ABLE TO TEST TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR LOAD HAS COME OFF THE SYSTEM. FOR THIS PROGRAM, DME WOULD BE THE ONE STOP SHOP. WE WOULD SUBMIT BIDS INTO THE AUCTION. WE WOULD HANDLE DISPATCH COMMUNICATIONS, PROVIDE THE INTERVAL DATA TO ERCOT, AND THEN WHENEVER THEY ISSUE THE CHECK, WE WOULD HANDLE THAT FINANCIAL SETTLEMENT TO TO GIVE THAT MONEY TO THE CUSTOMER. THIS IS AN RFP PROCESS. SO THIS OPENS BEFORE EVERY SEASON. WE WOULD WORK WITH THE CUSTOMER TO DETERMINE WHAT THAT BID AMOUNT IS. AND THEN WE WOULD SUBMIT THAT. SO JUST BECAUSE YOU SUBMIT INTO THE THE PROGRAM DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU WOULD BE APPROVED. ERCOT IS GOING TO LOOK AT ALL THE BIDS, FIGURE OUT FINANCIALLY WHAT WORKS FOR THEM, AND ALSO WHAT KIND OF LOAD THEY NEED TO HAVE ON TO THE INTO THE PROGRAM FOR THAT SEASON. DME THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY PART OF THE GREEN CENTS REBATE PROGRAM, BUT IT WAS REMOVED DUE TO LACK OF PARTICIPATION.

NOBODY WAS USING IT. WE HAD A COUPLE THAT LOOKED INTO IT, BUT NOBODY EVER USED IT. SO THAT WAS RETIRED FROM THE PROGRAM. AND AS YOU'LL SEE IN A FEW SLIDES, WE DO HAVE LOCAL BUSINESSES WHO ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE BRINGING THIS TO YOU NOW. SO THE WAY THAT IT WORKS, WE SUBMIT A BID INTO THE AUCTION, ENROLL IN THE PROGRAM.

IF IT'S SELECTED, THEN ERCOT CONTACTS US TO HAVE THE LOAD DROP OFF LINE. THE WE CONTACT THE CUSTOMER WITHIN 25 MINUTES. THEY'RE GOING TO GO OFFLINE. AND AGAIN, THAT 25 MINUTES GIVES US TIME TO TEST TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT SHOWING ANY LOAD FOR THE DURATION OF THE EVENT. THEY REMAIN OFFLINE UNTIL ERCOT SAYS THAT THEY CAN COME BACK ON. AND ONCE THEY SAY THAT WE WOULD CONTACT THEM AGAIN, THEY WOULD COME BACK ONLINE AND THEN WE WOULD HANDLE, LIKE I SAID, ALL OF THE DOCUMENTATION ON THE BACK END TO PROVIDE TO ERCOT. WITHIN THAT, THERE'S ALSO SOME TESTING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, AND WE WOULD COORDINATE THAT WITHIN WITH THE CUSTOMER AS WELL. SO THERE'S BENEFITS SPREAD ACROSS, YOU KNOW, THE ENTIRE SYSTEM FOR OUR COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS THAT PARTICIPATE. THIS GIVES FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR THE AVAILABILITY TO COME OFFLINE. THEY'RE ABLE TO MONETIZE SOME OF THAT BACKUP GENERATION THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE INSTALLED. AND THERE'S LOW OPERATE, GENERALLY LOW OPERATIONAL BURDEN FOR THEM FOR DME. THIS PROGRAM, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT WE WOULD RECOVER OUR COSTS SO THERE'S NO COST TO US. IT WOULD BE RECOVERED. IT'S AN ADDITIONAL LOAD MANAGEMENT TOOL. SO WE HAVE A KNOWN LOAD WITHIN OUR SYSTEM THAT'S ALSO GOING TO COME OFF WHENEVER THESE TIMES ARE TIGHT. AND IT GIVES US A LITTLE BIT OF OPERATIONAL FLEXIBILITY DURING EMERGENCY SITUATIONS FOR ERCOT AND THE GRID. THIS IS ANOTHER TOOL THAT THEY HAVE IN THEIR TOOLBOX TO SERVE A, A PREDICTABLE LOAD AND TAKE THAT OFF LINE DURING TIMES OF THAT KIND OF UNSTABLE TIMES. IT SUPPORTS STATEWIDE GRID STABILITY AND IT DECREASES THE LIKELIHOOD OF ROTATING OUTAGES.

SO TO PARTICIPATE, WE HAVE THREE RATE CLASSES THE GENERAL SERVICE, MEDIUM, LARGE AND TIME OF USE. WHO QUALIFY FOR THIS. THEY MUST HAVE A HISTORIC PEAK DEMAND OF AT LEAST 200KW, AND THEY MUST BE ABLE TO REDUCE THE LOAD WITHIN 25 MINUTES. WITHIN THE POOL OF THOSE ACCOUNT TYPES, THERE'S ABOUT 200. WE WOULD NEED TO WORK WITH THEM TO DETERMINE IF THEY CAN MEET THOSE OPERATIONAL HURDLES THAT THERE MIGHT BE. SO WE WOULD WORK WITH THEM AND DETERMINE

[01:10:04]

THEIR ELIGIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN MEET THE DEMANDS. AND AS I MENTIONED, THERE ARE TWO BUSINESSES HERE IN DENTON WHO ARE INTERESTED. IT'S BOTH TARGET LOCATIONS. THEY HAVE BACKUP GENERATION INSTALLED, AND BETWEEN THE TWO STORES, THAT'S ABOUT ONE MEGAWATT OF LOAD THAT WOULD BE SHIFTED TO THE GENERATOR. THEY CAME TO US. IT'S OUR GUESS THAT THEY DO THIS AT OTHER LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE STATE. BUT THIS IS KIND OF THE PROFILE OF WHO WE EXPECT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THIS PROGRAM, BECAUSE THEY CAN SWITCH THAT BACKUP GENERATION. AND GENERALLY, THE CUSTOMERS THAT MIGHT BE INSIDE WOULD PROBABLY NOT EVEN NOTICE.

OKAY. AND SO THIS DOESN'T JUST BENEFIT THE BUSINESSES AND ERCOT IN GENERAL. THERE'S ALSO A BENEFIT TO DME CUSTOMERS AND HOW WE WOULD IMPLEMENT IT LOCALLY. AS I SAID, THESE $75 MILLION IS BAKED INTO YOUR ENERGY COSTS ANYWAYS. AND SO YOU'RE PAYING FOR THIS PROGRAM TO SUPPORT STABILITY THROUGHOUT THE STATE. REGARDLESS, THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO RECOVER A PORTION OF THESE DOLLARS THAT ARE ALREADY EMBEDDED IN THAT COST. WE ANTICIPATE THAT WE WOULD NEED A MINIMUM BID OF ABOUT $2,600, BECAUSE IT'S A 75% CUSTOMER TO 25% DME SPLIT TO COVER THOSE COSTS, AND THAT WOULD GIVE US $650 AT MINIMUM. AND THAT'S FOR OUR STAFF TIME AND ANY OTHER OPERATIONAL THINGS THAT WE MIGHT NEED. BUT THAT'S JUST THE MINIMUM. SO IN WORKING WITH THE CUSTOMERS, IT MAY NEED TO BE HIGHER THAN THAT AS WELL. AND THE BIG THING HERE IS THAT IT COULD DROPPING THAT ONE MEGAWATT OFF COULD HELP US AVOID ENERGY COSTS, WHICH ARE CAPPED AT 500,000, $5,000, NOT 500,000, $5,000 FOR PER MEGAWATT. AND SO YOU'RE AVOIDING THOSE COSTS. IF IT'S A FOUR HOUR EVENT, YOU COULD BE AVOIDING $20,000 IN COST. AND OF COURSE, THAT AMOUNT WOULD BE SPREAD ACROSS ALL RATE CLASSES. SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A PROGRAM WHERE WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A LOT OF REVENUE, BUT IT IS THERE IS SOME VALUE IN THOSE AVOIDED COSTS. THERE ARE SOME CONSEQUENCES FOR NONPERFORMANCE. IF YOU THIS THIS IS A LOT OF INFORMATION, BUT BASICALLY WHAT IT'S SAYING IS THAT IF YOU DON'T DELIVER ON YOUR PROMISES, THEN YOU WON'T NECESSARILY GET PAYMENT FOR THAT TIME PERIOD. YOU COULD IT COULD RESULT IN SUSPENSION FROM THE PROGRAM, NOT JUST FOR THE CUSTOMER, BUT ALSO FOR DME. AND SO WHENEVER YOU'RE IN THE PROGRAM, YOU SUBMIT THE BIDS AS A PACKAGE. AND THEN IF ONE OF THEM FAILS TO DELIVER, THAT COULD AFFECT IF THERE'S FIVE CUSTOMERS IN THERE, IT COULD AFFECT ALL FIVE CUSTOMERS, WHICH COULD RESULT IN US BEING SUSPENDED FROM THE PROGRAM. WE WOULD WORK WITH THE CUSTOMER SO THAT WE FEEL VERY CONFIDENT THROUGH THE VETTING PROCESS, THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO MEET ALL OF THOSE OPERATIONAL DEMANDS TO TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS. AND SO WE DO RECOMMEND REESTABLISHING THE URS PROGRAM. THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC ON AUGUST 24TH, AND THEY GAVE UNANIMOUS DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT AND PRESENT IT TO YOU. SO I AM

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND.

>> THANK YOU. I THIS IS INTRIGUING, I LIKE THIS. HOW ARE THE BUSINESSES WARNED THAT

THERE'S GOING TO BE A SHUTDOWN? >> SO THEY'RE ENROLLED IN PART OF THE PROGRAM. AND SO THEY KIND OF KNOW THE THRESHOLDS. IF YOU GO BACK TO THE THE FIRST SLIDE, IT'S WHEN THOSE RESERVES FALL BELOW 3000MW, WHICH IS A IN ERCOT WOULD GIVE KIND OF A WARNING. THEY GO THROUGH A SERIES OF PROGRESSIONS, A AND ONE, TWO, AND THREE. THIS FALLS WITHIN THEIR SECOND LEVEL. AND SO DURING THOSE ENERGY CRISES, WE'RE PRETTY CONSISTENTLY COMMUNICATING THOSE ENERGY NEEDS. SO WE'RE PAST THE CONSERVATION ALERT. WE'RE INTO THE IN ONE, WHICH IS EVERYBODY NEEDS TO CONSERVE. AND THEN THEY'RE STARTING TO ROLL THESE OUT SO YOU CAN SEE IT COMING.

BUT WE'RE IN OUR OFFICES ARE COMMUNICATING WITH THEM AS WELL. >> THEY'RE GOING TO GET AN

EMAIL. >> WE WILL. >> CALL THEM, CALL.

>> THEM TO VERIFY IT. YEAH. >> OKAY. AND IS IT A TOTAL SHUTDOWN?

>> IT WOULD BE WHATEVER LOW THEY AGREE TO. SO DEPENDING ON THE DIFFERENT BUSINESS, IF IF A BUSINESS IS TWO MEGAWATTS AND THEY SAY WE CAN DROP ONE OF THEM OPERATIONALLY, THEN THEY MIGHT SUBMIT THAT BID, BUT IT WOULD BE DEPENDING ON WHAT THEIR OPERATIONAL NEEDS ARE.

[01:15:06]

>> SO THE 30 MINUTES IS TO GIVE EVERYBODY TIME TO GET CUSTOMERS OUT, GET EMPLOYEES OUT. IF

THAT'S THE IF THAT'S THE CASE. >> OR IF THEY NEED A, AN EMPLOYEE TO COME UP AND TURN ON THE GENERATOR AND ACTUALLY FLIP IT OR SOME BUSINESSES THAT WE'VE SEEN CAN JUST COMPLETELY GO DARK BECAUSE THEY MIGHT BE REFRIGERATION AND THEY MAY NOT NEED ELECTRICITY TO MAINTAIN

THOSE TEMPERATURES. >> AND WHAT THIS IS, THIS IS ACCOUNTS, WHAT IS IT, PEAK DEMAND. AT LEAST 200KW. GIVE ME GIVE ME SOME EXAMPLES OF OF THOSE KIND OF BUSINESSES.

>> SO I THINK THAT THESE STORES ARE OKAY. SO PRETTY GOOD EXAMPLES. SO BIG STORES OR SOME MANUFACTURING WOULD FIT IN THAT. BUT BASICALLY THAT'S GOING TO BE THOSE BUSINESSES THAT ARE IN THOSE THREE CATEGORIES, THE MEDIUM, LARGE AND TIME OF USE SERVICE. AND SO IT'S KIND OF

YOUR LARGER AND UP. >> AND HOW DOES ONE NOT PERFORM IF ONE IS COMMITTED TO DO THIS

AND. >> IF THEY DON'T GO OFFLINE. SO IF TARGET SAYS RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T BECAUSE OUR GENERATORS ARE DOWN AND THEY DON'T GO OFFLINE, THEN THEY WOULD BE NOT

PARTICIPATING AND THEY WOULD FAIL THAT. >> I SEE. SO THEY'RE SO THEY'RE AGREEING TO, TO, TO TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AT THEIR PLACE. NOT, NOT FROM YOUR PLACE. CORRECT.

>> YEAH. WE, WE DON'T DO THAT. THEY DO IT ON THEIR END. WE WOULD JUST VERIFY ALL OF THAT.

>> I GOT IT, I GOT IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MAYOR. >> YES THANK YOU. COUNCIL

MEMBER. >> JESTER YES, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE DIRECTION THAT I'M I'M VERY PLEASED THAT TARGET IS INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THIS PROGRAM. AS THE MATERIAL SAYS, WE'RE ALREADY CONTRIBUTING TO IT. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET SOME OF THAT BACK. IT LOOKS LIKE THE WORST CASE SCENARIO IS THAT WE'RE SUSPENDED FROM THE PROGRAM THAT WE'RE NOT PARTICIPATING IN RIGHT NOW ANYWAYS. SO I'M DEFINITELY IN

FAVOR OF SIGNING UP FOR THIS. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> I'LL GIVE THE SAME DIRECTION. I JUST A CAVEAT FOR ME OF INFORMATION I'LL NEED BEFORE VOTING ON THE ORDINANCE, BECAUSE SOMETHING YOU HAD SAID WAS IF WE HAD A GROUP OF BUSINESSES THAT PARTICIPATED IN THIS AND ONE OF THEM CONSISTENTLY FAILED IT, IT COULD POTENTIALLY RISK EVERYONE BEING REMOVED FROM IT. AND SO I WOULD JUST LIKE MAYBE IN THE BACKUP MATERIAL WHEN THE ORDINANCE COMES FORWARD, JUST TO SEE WHAT THE UNDERWRITING PRACTICES ARE GOING TO BE OF DME TO QUALIFY PEOPLE FOR THIS PROGRAM, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO

HAVE THAT INFORMATION. >> YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR. >> I'M ALSO IN SUPPORT OF WORKING WITH US AND SORT OF ECHOING THE BUILDING ON WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER JESTER SAID. I ALSO APPRECIATE STAFF WORKING WITH TARGET TO TRY TO TO GET THIS PROGRAM BACK OFF THE

GROUND. SO I'M IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> COUNCILMEMBER PERRY. >> I'M ALSO IN SUPPORT, AND I AGREE WITH MAYOR PRO TEM SUGGESTION OF IN UNDERWRITING, MAKING SURE THAT WE PROTECT THE OTHER PARTICIPANTS IN THE CITY.

IF WE HAVE A INDIVIDUAL COMPANY THAT'S NOT AS PARTICIPATORY IN THE PROCESS. SO THANK YOU FOR

THIS PRESENTATION. >> ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE THAT'S A SUPPORT TO MOVE FORWARD. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. GREAT PRESENTATION. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

>> PERFECT. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THE NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM

[C. ID 26-0698 Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction on the Citywide Parking Study. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 45 minutes]]

3CD26-0698. RECEIVE REPORT HOLD A DISCUSSION AND GIVE STAFF DIRECTION ON THE CITY WIDE PARKING STUDY.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FARHAN, BUT THE DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION AND I AM HERE TO PRESENT CITY WIDE PARKING STUDY AND. THE STUDY PROCESS BEGAN IN 2024 WHEN CITY ENGAGED NELSON NYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES AND THE STUDY WAS COMPLETED CITYWIDE.

PARKING STUDY WAS COMPLETED IN 20TH AUGUST 2025 AND LATER STAFF TOOK IT TO MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND PRESENTED IT TO MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE. THE INITIAL RECOMMENDATIONS, THE INITIAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STUDY FOR THEIR FEEDBACK AND WITH THIS WORK SESSION PRESENTATION, STAFF ANTICIPATE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ELECTION FOR THE STUDY WOULD BE SOMETIME IN THE LATE OCTOBER. THE KEY FINDINGS OF THIS STUDY COULD BE GROUPED INTO FIVE DIFFERENT FOCUS AREAS, STARTING WITH THE

[01:20:09]

MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS MANAGING PARKING IN THE CITY. THE STUDY HIGHLIGHTS THAT THE PARKING RESPONSIBILITIES ARE SPREAD ACROSS MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS, CREATING ORGANIZATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL AND PLANNING CHALLENGES. IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT LACK OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT WHERE THERE'S NO DEDICATED PARKING FUNDS TO STREAMLINE CENTRALIZED OPERATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS. STUDY ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THAT THERE IS LACK OF ENFORCEMENT WHERE REACTIVE AND UNDER-RESOURCED UNDER-RESOURCED ENFORCEMENT IS LEADING TO INCONSISTENCIES AS WELL AS THERE IS LIMITATIONS TO DATA INTEGRATION AS WELL. AND THEN FROM THE TRIP DISTANCE PERSPECTIVE, STUDY IS HIGHLIGHTING THAT HIGH DEMAND AREAS TRIPS ARE UNDER FIVE MILES, WHICH ALSO HIGHLIGHTS A POTENTIAL FOR NON-DRIVING OPTIONS. ALSO, MEDIAN DWELL TIME FOR THESE SPOTS ARE UNDER TWO HOURS AND PARKING, WHICH ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THAT THE PARKING MAY BE BETTER MANAGED WITH PERMITS AND CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN. AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, IT HIGHLIGHTS THE UNT AND TWU CAMPUSES WHERE THERE IS PERSISTENT SPILLOVER IMPACTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS. AND THAT'S THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE RESOLVED WITH ENHANCED MULTIMODAL SOLUTIONS AND MICRO-MOBILITY OPTIONS AND IMPROVED SIGNAGES. WHEN IT COMES TO RECOMMENDATIONS, THERE ARE SEVERAL IN THE FINAL REPORT, AND STAFF GROUPED THEM INTO SIX CATEGORIES. THE FIRST ONE IS CONSOLIDATING PARKING OVERSIGHT, WHICH ESSENTIALLY HIGHLIGHTS THAT THE THAT CITY SHOULD CREATE A CENTRALIZED PARKING MANAGEMENT DIVISION IN TRANSPORTATION SERVICES. IT ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THAT THERE SHOULD BE A PARKING MANAGER DEDICATED TO THAT AND TWO FTES, AND ALSO FORMALIZE THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE, OVERSIGHT AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPERS TOWNHALLS. AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, WHEN IT COMES TO TECHNOLOGY DRIVEN SOLUTIONS, THE STUDY RECOMMENDS THAT CITY SHOULD INVEST IN LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION SYSTEMS AND PARKING APPS, AND REAL TIME SPACE AVAILABILITY SYSTEMS, AND OUTSOURCE THE CITATION RECOVERY OR COLLECTION SYSTEM. WHEN IT COMES TO ENFORCEMENT AND PARKING DISTRICTS, THE STUDY RECOMMENDS THAT MODERNIZE TO MODERNIZE AND AND TRANSITION TO PARKING ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS THAT ARE ELECTRONIC AND AUTOMATED, AND THROUGH PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS. FOR LONG TERM FINANCIAL STABILITY. THE STUDY RECOMMENDS THAT CITY CREATE A PARKING FUND INTEGRATING PARKING RELATED REVENUES TO THAT FUND AND, AND ALSO FOR FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, STAFFING AND INNOVATION PURPOSES. IT. AS PART OF THE SOLUTION, IT ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THE REDESIGNING OF CURB SPACE, WHERE AT LARGE. IT RECOMMENDS THAT CITY INITIATE THE CURBSIDE DEVELOPMENT OF CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN AS PART OF THE SOLUTION TO THE PARKING MANAGEMENT. AREA IN THE CITY AND WITH CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN. IT ALSO HIGHLIGHTS THAT WE, THE CITY LAUNCHES CITY BRANDED PARKING INFORMATION PORTAL AND UTILIZE MOBILE APPS AND AUTOMATED SYSTEMS TO INNOVATE TO ENHANCE THE PARKING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. AND LAST, IT TALKS ABOUT MODERNIZING DEVELOPMENT CODE AND INCENTIVES, WHERE IT INSISTS THAT AS A RECOMMENDATION, IMPLEMENT A PARKING REGULATION WAIVER PROGRAM IN TERMS OF TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND INCENTIVES FOR BIKE FACILITIES AND DCT PASSES. WITH THESE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, STAFF PRESENTED TO THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE IN FEBRUARY 2026 AND TO DC IN JUNE 2026. THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE INQUIRED ABOUT THE PARKING MANAGEMENT.

[01:25:03]

THE WAY IT OPERATES IN CURRENT SYSTEM AND AND HOW DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS ARE ENGAGING IN THIS PROCESS. ONE MOBILITY COMMITTEE MEMBER INSISTED THAT THAT WE, THE STAFF, GO TOWARDS DEVELOP A PLAN TO HAVE PARKING MINIMUMS LIFTED AND TAKE IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AND OVERALL, THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE AGREED WITH THE NEED FOR CENTRALIZED PARKING MANAGEMENT. WHEN IT COMES TO DC ARC, 50% OF THE MEMBERS OF DC ARC WERE INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE ELIMINATION OF PARKING MINIMUMS COMPLETELY. WHEN IT COMES TO DENTON'S PARKING REGULATIONS, THE PURPOSE OF THESE REGULATIONS INCLUDE ENCOURAGING MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. IT ALSO. THESE REGULATIONS ALSO PROVIDE FLEXIBLE METHODS OF RESPONDING TO THE TRANSPORTATION ACCESS DEMANDS AND ALSO STORMWATER RUNOFF AND HEAT ISLAND EFFECT IMPROVE WATER QUALITY, AND ALL OF THOSE ELEMENTS ARE IN CONSIDERATION WHEN IT COMES TO THESE REGULATIONS. WHEN IT COMES TO MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM, DENTON HAS INCLUDED PARKING MAXIMUMS SINCE 2002, AND GENERALLY THE PARKING MINIMUMS ARE ALSO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED AND THE DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT MAY EXCEED MINIMUM BY UP TO 50% WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL. WHEN IT COMES TO PARKING EXEMPTIONS, CHANGE OF USE THAT INCREASES THE REQUIRED PARKING BY LESS THAN 25% OF CURRENT WOULD BE CONSIDERED, AND THEN ALSO PROPERTIES LESS THAN 5000 SQUARE FOOT, EXCEPT SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DUPLEXES AND TOWNHOMES. DWELLINGS ARE ALSO EXEMPTED. SO WITH THESE SUMMARIZED RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS, STAFF PROPOSE THREE INITIAL ACTIONS. FIRST, PARKING WHEN IT COMES TO PARKING MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT, STAFF PROPOSE CONSOLIDATING PARKING MANAGEMENT UNDER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES TO MANAGE AND COORDINATE WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS FOR ANYTHING RELATED TO PARKING, AND THEN STAFF. ALSO BASED ON THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, STUDY'S RECOMMENDATION PROPOSED AT A POINT, A PARKING PROJECT MANAGER, EXISTING STAFF AND ANDREA WINN HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED AS A TRANSPORTATION PLANNER AND PROJECT MANAGER FOR THIS PARKING MANAGEMENT AREA. ALSO AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, STAFF IS PROPOSING THAT TO ESTABLISH THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE AS THE RESPONSIBLE BOARD FOR PARKING MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT AND AND ALSO PROVIDING UPDATES TO THE TO AND SEEK CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL AS NECESSARY. SECOND.

PAID PARKING IS ONE OF THE PROPOSED IDEA THAT STAFF IS TAKING TO COUNCIL WHERE.

EXPLORING PAID PARKING DOWNTOWN AT WILLIAM SQUARE PARKING LOT. IT DOES INCLUDE RESEARCHING THE OPTIONS THROUGH PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP AND GATHERING PUBLIC FEEDBACK AND PRESENTING OPTIONS TO THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND THE CITY COUNCIL, SUPPORTED BY THE DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY AS WELL. AND LAST ONE YEAR PILOT WITH NO PARKING MINIMUMS WHERE THIS COULD BE, WHICH COULD BE EXTENDABLE WITH COUNCIL APPROVAL THROUGH THIS PILOT PROGRAM WILL WORK. STAFF WILL WORK WITH DEVELOPERS AND RESIDENTS TO ENSURE SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM IN TERMS OF CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT, MULTIMODAL ACCESS AND PAID PARKING, AND ANY OTHER AREAS THAT NEED ATTENTION FOR CODE DEVELOPMENT OR ANY ADDITIONAL NEEDS. STAFF WILL ALSO COLLECT THE DATA TO SHARE WITH THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND CITY COUNCIL FOR DIRECTION. SHARE THE INSIGHTS BASED ON THAT DATA OVER THE COURSE OF ONE YEAR PILOT PERIOD. THIS GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN TO ADJUST AND DEVELOP POLICIES THAT ARE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE DATA. SO AS FOR FURTHER ACTION, THE STAFF WILL ALSO DEVELOP CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN, INCLUDING THE REVIEW OF LOADING ZONES AND MULTIMODAL ACCESS POINTS. RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY FOR PARKING AVAILABILITY AND AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS. WHAT IS FEASIBLE BASED ON THE BEST US BEST PRACTICES AND AND EXPLORE THE RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMITS AND PARKING DISTRICT CREATIONS AND PROVIDE CONTINUOUS PROGRESS TO THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND CITY COUNCIL. STAFF. REQUEST

[01:30:03]

APPROVAL OF OF THE RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSOLIDATION OF PARKING OVERSIGHT AND THEN PARKING FUND AND PAID PARKING RESEARCH, AND TO INITIATE PILOT ELIMINATION, PILOT ELIMINATION OF THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS. WITH THIS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO

ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS. >> COUNCIL MEMBER. >> THANK YOU. MAYOR. FIRST, I WANTED TO SAY I'M REALLY EXCITED THAT WE ARE FINALLY LOOKING INTO PARKING MANAGEMENT.

CURRENTLY, THE STATUS QUO IS NOT WORKING FOR PEOPLE. FOLKS ARE REALLY STRUGGLING WITH PARKING ON THE SQUARE. I KNOW THE NEIGHBORHOODS NORTH OF YOU AND FOR YEARS HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR SOME SORT OF SOLUTION WITH ALL OF THE ON STREET PARKING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE PARKING MANAGEMENT. I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT US LOOKING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PERMITS. I'M EXCITED THAT WE HIRED ANDREA TO, TO OVERSEE ALL OF OUR PARKING POLICY. MAYOR, I WILL ASK, DO YOU WANT ME TO SAY ALL OF MY DIRECTION NOW? OR, OR WOULD YOU

LIKE US TO GO ONE ITEM AT A TIME ON THIS SLIDE? >> YOUR PREFERENCE. IF YOU'VE

GOT DIRECTION FOR ALL OF THEM, I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND SAY IT. >> ALL RIGHT. APPRECIATE IT. ON NUMBER ONE, LET ME JUST ASK FOR CLARIFICATION BEFORE I GIVE DIRECTION ON THAT ONE. IS THAT SAYING THAT ANY PARKING REQUIREMENTS WE HAVE WOULD MOVE UNDER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES OR. NO, THIS IS ONLY SAYING PARKING MANAGEMENT WOULD BE UNDER TRANSPORTATION AND

ENFORCEMENT, MAYBE UNDER PARKING TRANSPORTATION. >> SO PARKING MANAGEMENT AND CONSOLIDATION WILL BE UNDER TRANSPORTATION. THE DEPARTMENTS WILL BE WORKING AS BEFORE ON THEIR PROJECTS. BUT IT'S JUST THAT THE PARKING MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT AND SHARING THE INFORMATION WITH MOBILITY COMMITTEE BY AND COUNCIL WILL BE WITH TRANSPORTATION.

>> OKAY. SO DEVELOPMENT RELATED PARKING ACTIVITIES WOULD STILL STAY WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY. I SUPPORT NUMBER ONE, NO NOTES. AND THEN NUMBER TWO ON THAT ONE, MY, I MEAN, I SUPPORT THE GENERAL IDEA OF, OF LOOKING INTO IT AND TRYING SOME SORT OF PILOT OUT. WHAT I WILL SAY IS WHAT MAKES PAID PARKING HELPFUL TO PEOPLE. THE BENEFITS OF IT IS THAT IT CREATES OPEN SPACES. SO, I MEAN, I'M HOPING ANDREA KNOWS ALL OF THESE PRINCIPLES, BUT FOR THAT PILOT, I WOULD WANT TO SEE THE PRICE BE WHAT LIKE I WOULD WANT IT TO BE PERFORMANCE BASED AND NOT JUST AN ARBITRARY PRICE. IF THE PARKING LOT IS EMPTY, THE COST SHOULD BE $0. ONCE IT STARTS TO BE IN A HIGH DEMAND TIME, THE PRICE STARTS GOING UP SO THAT THERE'S ALWAYS SOME AVAILABLE SPOTS FOR PEOPLE. I FORGET WHAT THAT TARGET NUMBER IS IN A PARKING LOT. I KNOW IT'S ABOUT 85% OCCUPANCY OR 15% AVAILABILITY, 1 TO 2 SPACES PER BLOCK. WHEN YOU'RE TALKING STREET PARKING. I'M NOT SURE HOW TO TRANSLATE THAT TO PARKING LOT, BUT MAYBE THAT'S 10 TO 15%. SO I WOULD WANT US TO TARGET A PERFORMANCE BASED OUTCOME AND BASE THE PRICE ON THAT AND NOT JUST AN ARBITRARY NUMBER, BECAUSE THE LAST THING I WANT IS PEOPLE PAYING FOR PARKING AND THEY STILL CAN'T FIND A SPOT. THAT'S, THAT'S ONE

OF THE BENEFITS OF IT. >> THAT WOULD BE STOPS CONSIDERATION AS WELL.

>> OKAY. AND THEN THE OTHER RELATED TO PARKING FUND REVENUES WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE THAT THAT PARKING, THE, THE PARKING REVENUES THAT ARE GENERATED, LET'S SAY AT WILLIAM SQUARE IS SPENT ON PROJECTS IN DOWNTOWN. AND I THINK TYPICALLY PEOPLE WILL SPEND THAT TYPE OF FUNDING ON, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU REPAVE A PARKING LOT, MAYBE YOU ENHANCE THE PEDESTRIAN STREETSCAPE. I'M CURIOUS IF WE COULD DO A CLEANING OF DOWNTOWN WITH ANY OF THAT REVENUE. I DON'T WE CAN'T ANSWER THAT TODAY, BUT THAT'S JUST SOMETHING I'VE BEEN WONDERING IF THAT COULD BE A REVENUE SOURCE FOR CLEANING DOWNTOWN. POSSIBLY. SO I WOULD JUST WANT TO SEE THAT, THAT IT'S PERFORMANCE BASED AND NOT JUST A RANDOM PRICE. AND THEN THAT THOSE REVENUES ARE SPENT IN DOWNTOWN FOR OTHER TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS,

MAYBE REDOING A PARKING LOT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> THAT WOULD BE PART OF IT.

YES. >> OKAY. AND THEN NUMBER THREE, I, I SUPPORT WE'VE BEEN RECEIVING A LOT OF EMAILS FROM FOLKS. SO I DO SUPPORT A PILOT TO EXPLORE OR TRY OUT LIFTING THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT CITYWIDE, BUT I ONLY SUPPORT THIS PILOT IF, IF THE FOLKS BUILDING, IF IT'S A TRUE ELIMINATION FOR ONE YEAR OF 100%, OR BASICALLY LETTING PEOPLE CHOOSE HOW MUCH THEY WANT TO BUILD, IF STAFF HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY NO, IF STAFF HAVE THE ABILITY TO TELL PEOPLE HOW MUCH THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD, THAT'S THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS SOUNDS LIKE. SO I ONLY SUPPORT THIS PILOT IF PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO BUILD WHAT THEY NEED TO BUILD. I DO WANT STAFF TO TRACK IT. I DO WANT US TO HAVE THE DATA, BUT I DON'T WANT TO SEE AN AN OPTION WHERE STAFF CAN TELL PEOPLE HOW MUCH THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD. SO

THAT'S SORT OF MY CAVEAT ON ON NUMBER THREE. >> ON, ON NUMBER THREE, IF, IF

YOU WANT ME TO ADDRESS RIGHT NOW OR. >> AS FAR AS WHAT.

>> SO IF IT'S CONSIDERED FOR THIS CONSIDERATION, THAT COULD BE PART OF THE STAFF'S

[01:35:03]

CONSIDERATION DURING THE PILOT PROGRAM. >> YEAH. OKAY. YES.

COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND. >> A QUESTION QUICKLY ABOUT ABOUT THE ABOUT NUMBER ONE, HOW MANY HOW MANY STAFF WOULD YOU ENVISION OR WOULD SOMEBODY ENVISION BEING IN THIS PARKING

PARKING PHASE OF THE, OF THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES? >> SO WE HAVE ALLOCATED ONE STAFF FTE ALREADY FROM THE EXISTING STAFF THAT WE HAVE. AND THEN WE AS THE PROGRAM UNFOLDS US WITH THIS PILOT AND, AND AS WE SEE WHAT THE NEEDS ARE, WE'LL BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION. AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE ONE FTE. THAT IS, WE DEDICATED FOR THIS PARKING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. AND AS WE FIND MORE INFORMATION, WE'LL BE ABLE TO REQUEST IT.

>> AND WHAT AND WHAT ABOUT ENFORCEMENT? >> SO ENFORCEMENT IS AS PART OF THE PILOT PROGRAM, WE PLAN TO RESEARCH THE BEST PRACTICES AROUND THE US IN THE US AND AND BE ABLE TO SHARE IT WITH THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL THAT THESE ARE THE BEST PRACTICES, INCLUDING AUTOMATION, INCLUDING IN-PERSON. I MEAN, BASED ON STAFF RESOURCES THAT ARE GOING TO THE CITATION SITES AND ISSUING CITATION, ALL OF THOSE PROCESSES WOULD BE EVALUATED. AND THEN WE'LL SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH THE COUNCIL AND MOBILITY COMMITTEE

FOR FURTHER DIRECTION. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS WOULD NOT BE A FUNCTION OF THE POLICE

DEPARTMENT. >> AT THIS POINT. WE IT IS A CONSIDERATION. WE WILL CONSIDER THAT. BUT IT. IF IT. IF THE BEST PRACTICES SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE AUTOMATED OPTION OR WE HAVE OTHER ALTERNATIVES, WE WILL GIVE DUE CONSIDERATION FOR THOSE AS WELL.

>> OKAY. VERY GOOD, VERY GOOD. MAYOR. I WOULD SUPPORT THE THE PARKING MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT ITEM ONE I'M INTERESTED IN THE PAID PARKING RESEARCH. I'D LIKE TO LOOK INTO THAT. I, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE NO PARKING MINIMUMS. I THINK THAT'S I THINK WE'RE SAYING WE WANT TO WE WANT TO ENHANCE PARKING ON ONE HAND AND, AND GO BACKWARDS ON THE OTHER. I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S WRONGHEADED. AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO CREATE PROBLEMS WITH PRESUMING PEOPLE DO NOT PROVIDE PARKING. THOSE THOSE AUTOMOBILES ARE GOING TO GO TO SOME PLACE WHERE SOMEBODY IS PROVIDING PARKING. IT'S GOING TO INCREASE. IT'S GOING TO INCREASE ILLEGAL PARKING ON STREET PARKING, BLOCKING OF DRIVEWAYS. SOMEBODY'S GOING TO GET THEIR FEELINGS HURT. SO I'M, I'M IN FAVOR OF NUMBER ONE. AND NUMBER TWO, I'M NOT NOT IN FAVOR OF NUMBER THREE. THANK

YOU. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. SURE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER I DID LOOK UP.

THERE'S BEEN A, I THINK 112, 116 CITIES THAT HAVE JUST NOT DONE A PILOT, BUT JUST FULLY ELIMINATED PARKING REQUIREMENTS. AND I READ A STUDY FROM UCLA FROM JULY OF THIS YEAR OF THE STUDY OF THE CITIES THAT HAVE JUST FULLY ELIMINATED THEM. THESE ARE NOT PILOTS. AND WHAT THEY FOUND WAS THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT CONTINUED TO BUILD PARKING. IT WAS A LITTLE LESS THAN BEFORE, BUT NOT A WHOLE LOT LESS. PEOPLE MADE BETTER USE OF EXISTING PARKING, SO THEY WERE MORE EFFICIENT. THERE WERE FEWER JUST VACANT SPACES. SO AS YOU ALL ARE DRIVING AROUND, LOOK AT ALL OF OUR PARKING LOTS AND JUST SEE HOW MANY ARE ACTUALLY FULL. THERE'S A FEW THAT ARE, BUT THERE'S A LOT THAT HAVE A LOT OF EMPTY SPACE IN BUFFALO, NEW YORK, WHICH IS PROBABLY THE MOST SIMILAR TO DUTTON IN TERMS OF SIZE, POPULATION, TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES. THEY SAW DEVELOPMENTS BUILD ONLY 21% LESS PARKING THAN WHEN THE MINIMUMS WERE REQUIRED, SO THEY DIDN'T BUILD ZERO FOR THE MOST PART, MUCH, MUCH LARGER CITIES WITH A WHOLE LOT MORE TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS LIKE SEATTLE, SAN FRANCISCO, THEY BUILT SEVEN, LET'S SEE, 40 TO 70% LESS. BUT THOSE ACTUALLY HAVE REALLY GOOD TRANSIT COMPARED TO TO WE'RE WORKING ON IT. SO OTHER THING THEY SAW WAS PARKING FLEXIBILITY WAS NATURALLY UTILIZED IN TRANSIT RICH AREAS. SO IN AREAS WITH MAYBE LESS TRANSIT, THEY TENDED TO BUILD ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF PARKING, IF NOT MORE, BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT THERE WASN'T TRANSIT. ACCESSIBLE LUXURY HOUSING TENDED TO BUILD SIMILAR MORE PARKING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILT A LITTLE BIT LESS PARKING. AND SO THEY DON'T THE DEVELOPERS DON'T REALLY RESPOND TO OR THIS IS WHAT THE STUDY WAS SAYING IS THE DEVELOPERS DON'T REALLY RESPOND TO THE ELIMINATION OF PARKING MINIMUMS BY REDUCING IT FOR ALL OF THEIR PROJECTS. IT'S VERY CASE BY CASE, DEPENDING ON THE LOCATION OF IT. IS THEIR WALKABILITY NEARBY, THAT KIND OF THING, BECAUSE THEIR PROJECTS STILL HAVE TO BE SUCCESSFUL, THEY STILL HAVE TO GET FINANCING. SO LIKE COMMERCIAL, LARGE COMMERCIAL, THEY CAN'T GET FINANCING IF THEY'RE NOT PROVIDING, THEY TEND TO BASICALLY CITIES ARE THESE DEVELOPMENTS END UP. THEY FOR SURE BUILD PARKING SIMILAR TO BEFORE, MAYBE A TEENY BIT LESS IN SOME CASES, ACTUALLY

MORE IN A FEW CITIES. SO I JUST DID WANT TO ADD THAT. >> YOU COULD I RESPOND? SURE.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MEMBERS OF COUNCIL OWN PARKING LOTS. I DO.

[01:40:05]

AND WHEN THERE'S A PROBLEM AT SOMEBODY ELSE'S PARKING AREA NEAR MINE, THAT'S WHERE THEY COME. SO I DON'T HAVE STATS AND STUDIES ABOUT THAT, BUT I KNOW, I KNOW PEOPLE, PEOPLE PARK WHEN WHEN THE BARS ARE CROWDED AND THEY LEAVE ALL THEIR TRASH IN MY PARKING LOT, I DON'T HAVE A STAT TO TO DEMONSTRATE THAT. BUT IN REAL LIFE IN DENTON, TEXAS, IT'S A PROBLEM.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I'M NOT GIVING DIRECTION RIGHT NOW. I HAVE A QUESTION AS I'M LISTENING TO THIS DIALOG ABOUT NUMBER THREE, BECAUSE I READ THE STUDY, AND THE STUDY DID NOT RECOMMEND THE ELIMINATION OF OF MINIMUM PARKING. IN FACT, SAID WE'RE NOT THERE YET. AND IT DID SAY TO WAIT. BUT THEN AS I WAS LISTENING TO YOU, THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE, IT SAYS ONLY ONE MEMBER OF THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE WANTED THIS AND THAT ONLY 50% OF THE DCSSC WANTED IT. AND SO IF THE STUDY DIDN'T WANT IT, DRC DIDN'T WANT IT, MOBILITY DIDN'T WANT IT. THAT'S JUST HOW I'M READING IT. WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AND RELY ON STAFF FOR WITH YOUR EXPERTISE IS, I THINK, DESPITE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY STAFF FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH IT ANYWAYS?

>> YES. DURING THE YOUR STATS ARE RIGHT AND MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND DRC. YES, 50% OF DRC MEMBERS WERE. IN FAVOR OF LIFTING PARKING MINIMUMS AND THE SAME IS THE CASE WITH MOBILITY COMMITTEE. BUT WE SAW FOR OTHER MEMBERS WE SAW A DESIRE TO TO MOVE EARLIER THAN WHAT STUDIES RECOMMENDING STUDIES, PUTTING THIS LIFTING OF PARKING MINIMUMS IN MID TERM HORIZON, TEN YEAR HORIZON, AND THE LOGIC OR REASON STUDIES OFFERING IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN. AND AS COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND MENTIONED THAT THERE WOULD BE ONCE THE PARKING IS NOT THERE, THEY WOULD BE WE WOULD BE PUSHING. WE MAY BE PUSHING PEOPLE TO PARK ON THE CURBS OR PUBLIC PARKING. AND THEN. SO THAT IS ONE REASON. THE OTHER REASON THE STUDY SUGGESTS, IS THAT THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT, RESEARCH OTHER EXPERIENCES AND FIGURE OUT WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE EXPERIENCING IN TERMS OF PARKING MINIMUMS. FOR EXAMPLE, IT GIVES AN EXAMPLE OF AUSTIN AND DALLAS WHERE IT TOOK THEM TEN YEARS TO GO COMPLETE THE PROCESS. NEAR COMPLETION, THEY ARE REACHING TO NEAR COMPLETION OF PARKING MINIMUMS RIGHT NOW.

SO WITH THAT, WHEN WE SAW THAT EVEN THOUGH STUDIES RECOMMENDING. BUT DC ARC MEMBERS AND MOBILITY COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE SHOWING SOME INTEREST IN DOING IT EARLIER, THE BEST SUGGESTION WE COULD STAFF COULD COME UP WITH WAS THAT, OKAY? WE COULD HAVE A PILOT PROGRAM WHERE WE COULD LOOK AT THE DATA TEST. THE RESULTS OR ANALYSIS, ANALYZE THE DATA AND SHARE IT WITH COUNCIL AND MOBILITY COMMITTEE MEMBERS, AND THEN GET FURTHER DIRECTION. SO THAT'S THE INTENT. THIS GIVES US A MEASURED APPROACH TO PROCEED WITH THE PARKING LIFTING OF PARKING MINIMUMS IN COMPARISON TO JUST LIFTING THEM COMPLETELY, AND

THEN TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DATA IS TELLING US. THANK YOU. >> YEAH. DIRECTION. SORRY. GO

AHEAD. >> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT I WATCHED THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE, AND I WAS AT THE DRC MEETING AND MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND DRC. THERE WASN'T AN EXPLICIT QUESTION OF DO YOU SUPPORT THIS OR DO YOU NOT SUPPORT THIS? SO IN MOBILITY, JUST ONE MEMBER OFFERED IT, BUT IT WAS NEVER A UP DOWN FROM THE COMMITTEE. SO JUST ONE PERSON BROUGHT IT UP. DC ARC. I THINK WHAT I REMEMBER WAS THERE WERE FOUR ATTENDEES AND THREE WERE SUPPORTIVE OF IT, AND ONE DIDN'T SAY NO, BUT THEY WERE MORE AT A MORE CAUTIOUS TONE SO I COULD PUT THEM IN THE IN THE NO. BUT I WOULD SAY IT WAS MORE LIKE 75% SUPPORT FROM MY

RECOLLECTION. YEAH. THANKS, COUNCILMEMBER. >> JUST JUST A QUICK QUESTION.

SO THERE ARE THERE WERE FOUR ATTENDEES. HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ON THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE? SIX. OKAY. SO WE HAD FOUR ATTENDING AND THREE WERE IN FAVOR. HOW MANY ARE ON THE

MOBILITY COMMITTEE? THREE OF THEM. THREE. OKAY. >> JUST FIVE OF THEM. SO IT WAS NOT A DECISION. IT WAS A FEEDBACK FROM THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE. BUT THERE WERE FIVE

OF THEM. >> OKAY. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'VE GOT PERSPECTIVE. THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, WELL, I'LL GIVE MY $0.02. I GOT TO SIGN BACK ON. I BASICALLY READ

[01:45:13]

THE WHOLE STUDY AND IT'S GOT SOME REALLY GOOD THINGS IN IT. AND I CERTAINLY CAN GIVE APPROVAL TO, NUMBER ONE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. NUMBER TWO. I NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M READY TO GIVE FULL APPROVAL TO THAT RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I MEAN, IF WE'RE WANTING TO HAVE IT PAID SO THAT WE CAN GET ADDITIONAL REVENUE, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES THAT DO FOR OUR PARKING CAPACITY DOWNTOWN? SO I'M SO I'M SORT OF ON THE FENCE ON THAT FOR NOW. I THINK, I THINK I WANT TO SEE WHAT WE DO WITH NUMBER ONE, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NOTHING. I MEAN, FROM WHAT WE'RE NOT ENFORCING ANYTHING. WE DON'T HAVE ANY KIND OF SYSTEMS IN PLACE. WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFF IN PLACE. I'LL TELL YOU, I WAS ON THE COUNCIL WHEN WE VOTED FOR A BIG IDEA TO BUILD REVERSE PARKING ON ON HICKORY STREET. I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT IS TO DO THE BACK END PARKING. AND I KNEW I WOULD GET I KNEW I WOULD GET SOME SOUND EFFECTS OVER HERE ON MY LEFT SIDE OF THE ROAD. SO I UNDERSTAND HOW SOMETIMES THINGS SOUND WELL, BUT WHEN, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THEM. NUMBER THREE, I CHAIR MAYOR PRO TEM. HE DIDN'T GIVE DIRECTION, BUT I SHARE HIS OBSERVATION THAT WHEN I READ THE MEMORANDUM, OH, WHAT DID I JUST DO? OH, HERE IT IS. WHEN I READ IT'S THE LAST MEMORANDUM IN THE WHOLE STUDY AND THEY MAKE SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS.

IT SAYS MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS. I'M JUST GOING TO READ IT. MOVING AWAY FROM MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS CAN HELP PROMOTE MORE EFFICIENT LAND USE, REDUCE HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS, AND ENCOURAGE ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION. BY REDUCING OR ELIMINATING THESE REQUIREMENTS, DEVELOPERS CAN HAVE GREATER FLEXIBILITY TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE PARKING LEVELS BASED ON THE MARKET NEEDS. 100% AGREE WITH THAT 100%, BUT THERE'S NO BUT. THE NEXT WORD IS. HOWEVER, IT SAYS. HOWEVER, DENTON IS NOT IN A POSITION TO COMPLETE TO COMPLETELY REMOVE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS WITHOUT FIRST OFFERING OPTIONS TO SHIFT AWAY FROM DRIVING AND PARKING TO OTHER TRANSPORTATION MODES. A LACK OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS WORKS BEST IN DENSE URBAN LOCATIONS THAT PROVIDE TRANSIT, WALKING, AND CYCLE OPTIONS. FIRST, IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO SHOULD LOOK TO ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO BUILD LESS PARKING THAN THE CODE REQUIRES. BY INCLUDING INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS AND DESIGNS THAT IMPROVE ACCESS FROM TRANSIT USERS, CYCLISTS, AND PEDESTRIANS. I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE PARTICULAR GOAL. I THINK IT'S HIGHLY PREMATURE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE'RE STARTING FROM ZERO ON. I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GATHERING DATA WITH THIS. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN PLACE TO GATHER DATA. ARE PEOPLE GOING TO BUILD WHAT THEY NEED? OF COURSE THEY ARE. MOST PEOPLE WILL, SOME NOT WILL SOME IN AREAS WHERE THAT'S NOT THE CASE. SURE. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S RIPE. AND I JUST FIND IT CURIOUS THAT I THINK WE PAID $109,000 FOR THIS STUDY.

AND AT THE VERY END, IT GIVES A REALLY GOOD SUMMARY OF ALL THE THINGS IT SAYS THAT ARE GREAT ASPIRATIONS FOR OUR COMMUNITY. I MEAN, WE DON'T EVEN I MEAN, PEOPLE PARK IN FRONT OF A FIRE HYDRANT AT AN INTERSECTION WHERE YOU CAN'T EVEN SEE. SO I JUST FIND IT KIND OF CURIOUS THAT WE'RE BRINGING THIS FORWARD WHEN WE HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED LAYING SOME OF THE GROUNDWORK. SO I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT AT THIS TIME. THAT DOESN'T MEAN I'M NEVER IN FAVOR OF IT, BUT I CERTAINLY WOULD WANT TO HAVE SOME MORE MOVEMENT ON THESE OTHER THINGS. NUMBER ONE, THAT THAT SEEMS TO LAY THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN ORDER TO REALLY GET A HANDLE ON OUR PARKING. HOW MANY PARKING STUDIES HAVE WE DONE DOWNTOWN IN THE LAST 15 OR 20 YEARS? A LOT, A LOT. WHAT WHAT HAS REALLY CHANGED OUTSIDE OF PUTTING IN BACK END PARKING OR.

YEAH, BACK IN PARKING ON HICKORY STREET, WHICH, YOU KNOW, SO THIS IS ONE I THINK WE COULD REALLY DO THIS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE HANDLE, HOW WE HANDLE A LOT OF STUDIES REALLY GO BY WHAT THEY'VE RECOMMENDED. THEY'VE GIVEN US A ROADMAP FOR LIFTING PARKING MINIMUMS. AND THAT IS LET'S MAKE SURE WE HAVE THINGS IN PLACE THAT CAN GIVE US THE RIGHT KIND OF DATA IN ORDER TO DO THAT. THIS REMINDS ME OF WHEN YOU KNOW DATA IS IMPORTANT. YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS IN OUR TRANSPORTATION, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY ALL OF THIS IS PREDICATED UPON, YOU KNOW, A

[01:50:04]

GREATER OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC TRANSIT WHERE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO NECESSARILY USE THEIR VEHICLES. THERE'S ENOUGH TRANSIT OPPORTUNITIES IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS. AND, YOU KNOW, FIVE, SIX YEARS AGO, PEOPLE BEMOANED, YOU KNOW, ON DEMAND PUBLIC TRANSIT.

AND WE HAD THE CEO STAND HERE BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL THE OTHER DAY AND SAY, BUT FOR THE DATA DERIVED FROM THAT, I MEAN, THEY'RE FINDING A WAY TO REALLY MAKE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENT, EVEN TO THE POINT OF POTENTIALLY ADDING ADDITIONAL BUS BUS ROUTES. SO I WAS A LITTLE SHOCKED, QUITE FRANKLY, WHEN I SAW THAT THE RECOMMENDATION WAS TO INCLUDE THIS WHEN THE STUDY PRETTY CATEGORICALLY SAID, YOU'RE REALLY NOT READY FOR IT. AND SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT. I JUST HAVE SEEN HISTORICALLY THAT WHEN WE KIND OF GET OUT OF ORDER, SOMETIMES THINGS HAPPEN THAT THAT ARE UNINTENDED. SO I CAN'T I CAN SUPPORT NUMBER ONE, I GUESS I NEED TO MAYBE SOME CLARIFICATION ON NUMBER TWO. ARE WE JUST ASKING, ARE YOU JUST ASKING FOR DIRECTION TO RESEARCH IT AND THEN TO BRING IT BACK TO SEE IF WE WANT TO DO PAID PARKING? OR IS THIS SAYING WE'RE GOING TO DO IT? WE JUST NEED TO GET THE RESEARCH AND

PUBLIC FEEDBACK FOR THAT. >> WE WOULD LIKE TO CONDUCT THE RESEARCH AND BRING IT UP, BRING

IT BACK TO COUNCIL AND MOBILITY COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER ACTION. >> OKAY. I CAN SUPPORT THAT. IF IT'S JUST RESEARCH FEEDBACK AND THEN COME BACK FOR A FINAL DECISION INSTEAD OF IT BEING, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THIS FORWARD AND WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT THE RESEARCH AND THE FEEDBACK, HOW TO DO IT THE BEST WAY. OKAY, SO I CAN, I CAN DO IT WITH THAT CAVEAT. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S THE DIRECTION THAT NUMBER TWO IS HEADING. OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S

ALL MY FEEDBACK. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SURE, SURE. GO AHEAD. >> I'LL TRY NOT TO DO THIS ON

OTHER ITEMS FOR THE REST OF THE DAY. >> WELL, I KNOW THIS IS

IMPORTANT. >> TO YOU. YEAH. I MEAN, BECAUSE THIS WHOLE PROCESS, THIS WHOLE STUDY REALLY STARTED IN THE FALL OF 2022, WHEN COUNCIL MEMBER JESSE DAVIS WAS, I THINK, THE ONE WHO BROUGHT IT FORWARD, AND HE WAS EXPLICITLY ASKING FOR A STUDY TO LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF REDUCING OR ELIMINATING PARKING MINIMUMS. AND ONE AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, GETTING AHEAD OF OURSELVES, GETTING OVER OUR SKIS A LITTLE BIT, THAT KIND OF THING. ONE CHALLENGE HERE IS THAT PARKING MINIMUMS, AS THEY STAND HERE IN DENTON, ARE WHAT OURS ARE RIGHT NOW. THEY HAVE IT CREATES HIGHER HOUSING COSTS, URBAN HEAT, ISLAND, ALL OF THESE THINGS. AND IT LOWERS WALKABILITY. AND IT INFLUENCES URBAN DESIGN IN A NEGATIVE WAY, REDUCES PARKS AND GREEN SPACE AND GIVES US LESS TAX REVENUE.

AND IT CREATES OVERSUPPLY. SO AS IT STANDS, THE LONGER WE KEEP THE CURRENT MINIMUMS THAT WE HAVE, IF WE DON'T DO THIS PILOT, ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT IS BASICALLY KEEPING OUR CAR DEPENDENCY GOING AND NOT GIVING PEOPLE THOSE TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS. SO WHEN THINGS ARE REALLY SPREAD OUT, YOU HAVE ALL AND IT'S THE EMPTY PARKING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. PEOPLE NEED PARKING FOR CARS. I DROVE, I DROVE HERE, IT'S THE EXCESS PARKING THAT THAT'S A CONCERN HERE. AND SO WE HAVE ALL THIS DEAD SPACE OF JUST EMPTY ASPHALT AND CONCRETE. AND IF WE JUST CONTINUE AS WE ARE TODAY AND DEVELOPMENT KEEPS BUILDING THE AMOUNT THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY REQUIRING, WE'RE ACTUALLY MAKING IT LESS AND LESS LIKELY THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO SERVE THEM WITH TRANSIT OR WALKABILITY OR BIKEABILITY. SO IT'S KIND OF A CHICKEN AND EGG SITUATION. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE MAKING IT HARDER TO PROVIDE ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION MODES BECAUSE EVERYTHING I'VE EVER HEARD FROM BEST PRACTICE URBAN PLANNING, THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS SPECIFICALLY CALLS THIS BEST PRACTICE TO ELIMINATE OR REDUCE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. BECAUSE IT PROVIDES THAT FLEXIBILITY. IT PROVIDES THAT WALKABILITY, THOSE OTHER TRANSPORTATION MODES. AND I'M JUST CONCERNED IF WE KEEP GOING AS WE'RE GOING, THAT WE'RE NEVER GOING TO CATCH UP. AND WE'RE BASICALLY WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE READY IF WE CONTINUE OUR CURRENT TRAJECTORY IS JUST KIND OF MY CONCERN ON. BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT GETTING AHEAD. AND I

TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. >> AND I MEAN, I HAVE TO SAY, I, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I DON'T KNOW IF I AGREE WITH ALL THE POINTS THAT YOU'VE MADE. NUMBER ONE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOU'RE USING THE WORD URBAN A LOT. AND ABSOLUTELY, IF YOU WANT A VERY URBAN, DENSE CITY WHERE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT WHERE YOU HAVE NO PARKING, THAT I TOTALLY GET IT. I'M NOT SO SURE THAT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY IS NECESSARILY.

SO I'M ALL FOR IF WE WANT TO TAKE A PART OF THE CITY AND LOOK AT HOW DO WE DO THIS IN A CERTAIN SECTION? SURE. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE ARE EITHER OR. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AN ALL OR NOTHING THAT SOMEHOW IF YOU DO THIS, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. OR IF YOU HAVE THIS, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY A LITTLE MORE CREATIVE THAN THAT. SO I HEAR YOU, BUT I DON'T KNOW

[01:55:01]

IF I BUY ALL THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING. I'M SURE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO DID THE STUDY ARE AS AWARE OF WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING. IN FACT, THEY DID. THEY BASICALLY LAID IT OUT IN THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH THAT I READ. SO I UNDERSTAND AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S PEOPLE WHO ARE MORE PASSIONATE ABOUT THAT THAN OTHERS, BUT I'M ALL FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.

I'M ALSO ALL FOR PEOPLE THAT IF THEY DON'T NECESSARILY FEEL COMPELLED TO DO THAT, THAT THEY HAVE OTHER WAYS TO DO IT. AND AS FAR AS EMPTY PARKING LOTS OR I THINK YOU SAID SPACES ARE EMPTY. I MEAN, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MALL AND THINGS SUCH AS THAT. THAT WAS IS THAT WHAT I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO ON EMPTY PARKING SPACES. SURE, EXACTLY.

>> I HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL OVER THE CITY AND JUST LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH PARKING IS USED IN VARIOUS LOTS AROUND THE CITY. THERE'S SOME THAT ARE VERY FULL. THE HOSPITALS ARE VERY FULL. CHICK FIL A IS VERY FULL. DOWNTOWN IS FULL. BUT IF I GO TO A BIG BOX STORE, IT'S ABOUT 40% FULL. IF I GO TO MOST FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS, EXCEPT FOR CHICK FIL A, THEY'RE ALSO 40% OR LESS FULL. AND I WAS TRYING TO FIND ALL THE ALL THE BUSY ONES BECAUSE I COULDN'T TELL WHAT TIME OF DAY IT WAS. I KNEW I COULDN'T LOOK AT RESIDENTIAL, IT WAS CLEARLY DAYTIME. BUT THERE'S ALL THIS EXCESS PARKING. I'M PRETTY SURE JUST ANECDOTALLY, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GETTING LESS THAN 50% UTILIZATION OF A PARKING OR PARKING LOTS IN MANY PARTS OF THE CITY. THAT'S NOT THE CASE EVERYWHERE. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND POINTED OUT SOME AREAS HAVE LESS PARKING. I THINK IT'S BEFORE PARKING REQUIREMENTS GOT SO HIGH. BUT FLEXIBILITY IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR HERE. PEOPLE DO WANT TO DRIVE. THERE'S DEMAND FOR THAT, AND THAT'S WHY DEVELOPERS WILL CONTINUE TO BUILD. IT'S PROVIDING THAT FLEXIBILITY OF LETTING THE BUILDER DECIDE, HOW MUCH DO I NEED TO BE SUCCESSFUL. AND EVERYTHING I'VE BEEN SAYING TODAY HAS BEEN FROM STUDIES. IT'S BEEN FROM BEST PRACTICES, FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT OR THE REGIONAL GOVERNMENT. BUT IT'S JUST PROVIDING THAT THAT FLEXIBILITY SO PEOPLE CAN PROVIDE WHAT THEY THINK THEIR CUSTOMERS NEED BASED ON THE USE AND THAT KIND OF THING. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO, TO LOOK AROUND AT SOME AERIAL VIEWS AND JUST SEE HOW MUCH UTILIZATION THERE ACTUALLY IS. BUT THAT'S WHAT I MEAN IS REALLY ALMOST, EXCEPT FOR VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS, MOST LOTS ARE MAYBE 40% UTILIZED, MAYBE 50%, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>> WHAT I FIND FASCINATING IS ALSO KNOW ANECDOTALLY THAT SOME PEOPLE COME IN AND ASK SOME DEVELOPERS COME IN AND ASK FOR MORE PARKING. I MEAN, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THAT. YOU CAN'T PUT NON PERVIOUS. YOU ONLY HAVE THERE'S A RESTRICTION TO NON PERVIOUS PARKING THAT HAS TO BE PERVIOUS AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT. SO I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND YOUR POINTS THAT YOU'VE MADE. AND I DON'T NECESSARILY DISAGREE WITH THEM. I THINK THOUGH TO GO FROM WHERE WE ARE NOW TO THAT WITH NOTHING IN BETWEEN, MY EXPERIENCE HAS SAID THAT SOMETIMES THAT CAN THAT CAN BE REALLY PROBLEMATIC. NOW, I KNOW THERE'S SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE FEARFUL THAT WE JUST PUT IT OFF AND THE OTHER THINGS WON'T HAPPEN. SO THEREFORE IT PUSHES THIS OUT AGAIN. WELL, THAT'S REALLY UP TO THIS BODY. THAT'S UP TO MANAGEMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE GOT A PLAN, LET'S IMPLEMENT IT. AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED, HOW MANY PARKING STUDIES HAVE WE HAD ON THE SQUARE? BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF STUDIES THAT ARE SITTING ON A SHELF AND HOW MANY HOW MUCH OF THEM THEY'VE BEEN IMPLEMENTED. SO WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE A COMMITMENT TO THIS. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. YES, COUNCILMEMBER FERRY.

>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION AND THE PRESENTATION. I ALSO READ THE ASSESSMENT IN THE BACKUP. AND I KNOW I WAS LOOKING AT THE SAME PAGE YOU WERE PAGE 179. I FIRST WANT TO GET OUT OF THE WAY. I AM FOR POINTS ONE AND POINTS TWO. INITIATING THE RESEARCH AND PUBLIC FEEDBACK FOR PAID PARKING AT WILLIAMS SQUARE PARKING LOT AND CREATING THAT FUND ON ITEM THREE. BECAUSE THERE ARE FOUR SEPARATE BULLET POINTS, I'M WONDERING THE. FOR EXAMPLE, THE SECOND BULLET POINT ALLOWING FOR REDUCTIONS BASED ON THE SAME METHODS ALREADY IN PLACE, AND BY PROVIDING A PARKING DEMAND STUDY IF NECESSARY. ARE THERE OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THIS. NUMBER THREE FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION TO BE GIVEN WHERE IF WE DON'T ALL AGREE OR MAJORITY AGREE TO THE ONE YEAR PILOT FOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, COULD THAT BULLET POINT BE BROKEN UP? COULD THE SECOND BULLET POINT STILL APPLY? I DEFINITELY KNOW THAT THE THIRD ONE COULD. WE COULD STILL RECOMMEND, IF WE WANTED TO LIFT ANY KIND OF MINIMUM, THAT WE WOULDN'T APPLY IT TO THAT SPECIFIC TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.

I'M JUST WONDERING, I'M WANTING TO KNOW FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE HOW WE GIVE DIRECTION ON THE

THIRD ONE. CAN IT BE BROKEN UP OR SEPARATED? >> WELL, SO THAT'S COUNCIL DIRECTION. IF IF THAT'S HOW IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT WE COULD BREAK THESE INTO DIFFERENT FOCUS AREAS OR, OR CHOICES. WE COULD DO THAT. STAFF COULD DO THAT.

>> SO THEN I'M WONDERING IN TERMS OF COMMERCIAL, FOR EXAMPLE, HOW PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT WHAT IF WE WERE TO DO A ONE YEAR PILOT THAT ELIMINATED PARKING MINIMUMS FOR COMMERCIAL.

AND WHILE LOOKING AT WHAT REDUCTIONS COULD LOOK LIKE FOR RESIDENTIAL, AND MAYBE THERE'S

[02:00:03]

A STUDY THAT HAPPENS BEFORE, AND THEN THAT HELPS GUIDE THE CRC COUNCIL, PNC, ON WHAT THOSE REDUCTIONS SHOULD LOOK LIKE BASED ON THE NEED FROM THE COMMUNITY'S FEEDBACK. DOES THAT

MAKE SENSE? >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

>> OKAY. BYRD. YEAH, I, I WANT TO SUPPORT A ONE YEAR PILOT. I'M HEARING THAT MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE DIRECTION THE MAJORITY WANT TO GO IN. SO I'M WONDERING, ARE WE ABLE TO ALTER COURSE?

>> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I MEAN, THEN I'LL GIVE DIRECTION TO THAT END AT LEAST IS WHERE I'M AT. IT'S BEEN HELPFUL TO LISTEN TO EVERYONE ON THIS. I MEAN, I AM FOR ONE AND TWO. I WILL JUST SAY IN THE PRESENTATION, AND I WROTE THIS TO STAFF JUST FOR WHEN IT COMES BACK, THAT THERE WAS A PROPOSAL POSSIBLY FOR USING ALPR FOR ENFORCEMENT. I THINK WE SHOULD BE HAVING LESS OF THAT, NOT MORE OF THAT. AND, AND I THINK THAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD ALSO AGREE WITH THAT. I MEAN, FLOCK, FOR EXAMPLE, IS SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE'S TALKING ABOUT, AND I JUST CAN'T GET BEHIND SOMETHING THAT WOULD INTRODUCE MORE OF THAT INTO THE COMMUNITY WHEN WE SHOULD HAVE LESS OF THAT OR NONE OF THAT. WHEN IT COMES TO THREE, THEN I MEAN, YEAH, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR THEN OF EDITING THIS TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN GET COUNCIL APPROVAL SPECIFICALLY FOR COMMERCIAL OR LARGE RETAIL. I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE. BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY AS SOMEONE THAT LIVES IN AN URBAN AREA OF THE CITY, I DON'T KNOW THAT PARKING MINIMUMS ARE NECESSARY. AND SO I WOULD LIKE FOR STAFF TO COME BACK TO SEE WHAT TO WITH WHAT AREAS ARE RIPE FOR THAT, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD FIND FOR VOTES ON. SO THAT'S

WHERE I'M AT. >> OKAY, SO YOUR DIRECTION IS NUMBER ONE, YOU'RE OKAY. NUMBER

TWO, YOU'RE OKAY. AND NUMBER THREE, I'M NOT QUITE OKAY. >> YEAH. THREE THEN WOULD BE I'M FINE WITH NO PARKING MINIMUMS WHEN IT COMES TO COMMERCIAL OR RETAIL. AND FOR STAFF THEN TO COME BACK TO SEE WHAT PAGE WAS IT? 179. WHICH AREAS OF THE CITY WOULD BE PREPARED FOR THIS? RIGHT. I CAN'T, I CAN ONLY SPEAK ANECDOTALLY ABOUT THE JOHN DENTON NEIGHBORHOOD. I CAN'T SPEAK ABOUT THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY, NOR SHOULD MY ANECDOTAL KNOWLEDGE BE, YOU KNOW, OFFICIAL DIRECTION. AND SO I WOULD LIKE INFORMATION ON THAT. AND, AND, AND MAYBE WE CAN FIND FOUR VOTES FOR SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT I'M

PROPOSING. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER JESTER YES.

>> THANK YOU. SO PLEASE FORGIVE ME. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOUR DIRECTION FOR NUMBER THREE IS TO NOT INITIATE AT THIS TIME A PILOT. HOWEVER, BRING BACK WHERE IT MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO CONCENTRATE A PILOT PROGRAM. IS THAT CORRECT? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M

HEARING YOU CORRECTLY. >> WHEN IT COMES TO RESIDENTIAL. YES. YEAH. OR WHEN IT WHEN IT COMES. YEAH. YES, YES. TO YOUR POINT. YES, THAT THAT IS WHAT I'M ASKING FOR. OKAY.

>> AND THANK YOU SO MUCH. I JUST WANTED TO AGAIN, MAKE. >> SURE YOU REPEAT THAT BECAUSE I'M, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR FROM WHAT YOU SAID.

>> OKAY. SO AND AGAIN, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. I'M JUST WHAT I BELIEVE I HEARD FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM WAS POINT NUMBER ONE IN AGREEMENT. MOVE FORWARD. NUMBER TWO, MOVE FORWARD. WHEN IT COMES TO NUMBER THREE, A VARIATION ON THREE AS OPPOSED TO INITIATING A PILOT ELIMINATION OF THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS. IT IS REQUESTING STAFF TO COME BACK. LOOK AT MAYBE URBANIZED AREAS, RETAIL, COMMERCIAL AND COME UP WITH A SPECIFIC AREA IN THE TOWN. THAT WOULD BE PERHAPS MORE APPROPRIATE TO BEGIN A PILOT PROGRAM WITH NO MINIMUMS. AND AGAIN, I DON'T MEAN TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I

UNDERSTAND. >> I SHOULD HAVE JUST HAD YOU TALK FOR ME, BECAUSE THAT'S A

LOT MORE CLEAR, APPARENTLY. >> NO, NO. >> ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. YES. IF I COULD, I'M GOING TO TAKE JUST A MOMENT TO SAY THANK YOU TO OUR STAFF DIRECTOR. FARHAN. I WANT TO NOTE THAT AT THE LAST REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL MEETING, WE HAD TWO VERY BIG PROGRAMS THAT OUR CITY STAFF APPLIED FOR. AND AND ONE OF THEM WAS ONLY ONE OF THREE AWARD RECIPIENTS, ONE BEING CHARGING SYSTEM PORTABLE CHARGING SYSTEMS AT OUR AIRPORT FOR ELECTRIC HELICOPTERS. AND ONE OF THE REASONS THIS IS SO IMPORTANT IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COST OF HOSPITAL USES OF HELICOPTERS AND THEIR COST WITH INSURANCE, ET CETERA. THEY'RE VERY HIGH BECAUSE OF THE FUEL AND THE SPEED THEY'RE GOING. SO WE WERE

[02:05:06]

AWARDED 92,500 FROM THE NORTH TEXAS ADVANCED AIR MOBILITY READINESS GROUP. SO I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. WE'RE GETTING TWO OF THOSE AT OUR AIRPORT. SECONDLY, AS FAR AS OUR TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CREDITS, DENTON WAS AWARDED $2,300,000. THOSE THINGS DON'T JUST HAPPEN. YOU HAVE TO SCORE POINTS IN COMPETITIONS WITH A LOT OF OTHER DIFFERENT ENTITIES AND AREAS. SO FIRST, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE A QUICK SHOUT OUT TO OUR STAFF DOING SUCH A GOOD JOB ON OUR BEHALF. THANK YOU. SECONDLY, I WILL SAY JUST AS A PRECURSOR, THAT I THINK THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION IS PART OF THE GROWING PAINS OF THE CITY OF DENTON. WE ARE IN A VERY DIFFERENT PLACE FROM WHEN I WAS BORN HERE, AND WE WERE A TOWN OF 30,000. AND WHEN I GRADUATED HIGH SCHOOL, IT WAS 40,000. SO I CAN TELL YOU IN ADVANCE THAT IF AND WHEN WE IMPLEMENT PAID PARKING AT THE WILLIAMS SQUARE PARKING LOT, WE'RE GOING TO GET EMAILS ABOUT THAT. HOWEVER, I THINK THIS IS PART OF OUR GROWING PAINS AND WE ARE GROWING AS A CITY AND NOT JUST A SMALL TOWN. WE'RE A MEDIUM TOWN NOW. SO IN LINE WITH THAT AND WANTING TO BE, YOU KNOW, PROGRESSIVE AND MOVE FORWARD, WHAT I WOULD SAY AT THIS POINT FOR ME IS I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH, NUMBER ONE. I JUST THINK THAT WE ARE OUT THERE NOW. SO I APPRECIATE THE STUDY AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS THERE. AS FAR AS NUMBER TWO, I'M IN AGREEMENT THAT AT THIS POINT, IT'S IT'S RESEARCH AND ASKING FOR FEEDBACK SO WE CAN SAY, HEY, IS THIS SOMETHING PEOPLE ARE OPEN TO ALSO UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT COULD POTENTIALLY FUND AND THE HELP THAT IT WOULD GIVE FOR THE CONSOLIDATING THE PARKING OVERSIGHT AND STAFF THAT'S NEEDED WHEN IT COMES TO THREE, IT'S A DIFFICULT DECISION TO MAKE. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE STUDIES OF OTHER CITIES HOW OTHER OTHER CITIES DON'T HAVE 50, 000 STUDENTS AND TWO UNIVERSITIES THAT MAKE UP A LARGE PROPORTION OF OF WHAT WE ARE. AND THEN LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND, I'VE GOT ANECDOTAL STORIES MYSELF OF THE PROBLEM WITH A COMMERCIAL BUILDING NEXT DOOR TO MY COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH PARKING. AND SO PEOPLE LEAVE THEIR TRASH AND RECEPTACLES AND CIGARETTES AND VAPES AND EVERYTHING ELSE IN OUR PARKING LOT. SO I CAN DEFINITELY ARGUE BOTH WAYS. SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS NOT TO NECESSARILY KICK THE CAN COMPLETELY, BUT I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF FOLLOWING OUR MAYOR PRO TEM AND SAYING MAYBE THERE'S SOME AREAS, CERTAINLY NOT SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES, BECAUSE THAT IS VERY DANGEROUS. WE'VE HAD A CHILD PASS AWAY, BE KILLED IN THE AREA BECAUSE OF THE, IN PART, PARKING ON THE STREETS, NOT ENOUGH PARKING IN THE DRIVEWAYS

AND >> THE DANGER IN THE SMALL STREETS WITH ALL OF THOSE CARS TRYING TO WALK YOUR DOG, TRYING TO WALK TO YOUR FRIEND'S HOUSE. SO I THINK THAT MAYBE THERE IS AN APPROPRIATE AREA TO CONSIDER. I ALSO VERY MUCH APPRECIATE MAYOR, WHAT'S IN YOUR. THE EXPLANATION OF YOUR OPINION IN A STAIR STEP APPROACH. AND SO I'M ALSO THAT THAT ALSO SWAYED ME IN THAT I THINK IT'S ONE STEP AT A TIME. SO THIS MAY BE WHERE WE'RE GOING, BUT I THINK THAT MAYBE WE REVISIT IT IN A, IN A YEAR OR WHEN, WHEN MORE INFORMATION COMES BACK. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT. I'M PRETTY AGNOSTIC ABOUT PARKING MINIMUMS IN GENERAL. HOWEVER, I SEE PROS AND CONS. SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THAT'S WHERE MY OPINION IS. AND I'M CERTAINLY NOT AN EXPERT, BUT IN WHAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE, I THINK THAT'S THE BEST DIRECTION

I CAN GIVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> SO TO RECAP WHAT I HAVE AS FAR AS DIRECTION ONE AND TWO, WE HAVE DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD ON NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO TO MOVE FORWARD ON NUMBER TWO, AS FAR AS THE RESEARCH COMPONENT AND FEEDBACK, IT'S NOT AN IMPLEMENTATION OF IT.

IT'S A FACT FINDING FACT GATHERING. NUMBER THREE, WE DON'T HAVE CONSENSUS ON ANYTHING ABOUT THE CLOSEST THING WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON IS WHICH, WHICH I CAN CERTAINLY GET ON BOARD WITH. THAT IS LET'S IDENTIFY SOME AREAS WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY HAVE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IMPLEMENT A PILOT PROGRAM FOR, FOR ELIMINATING PARKING MINIMUMS, BECAUSE I THINK NUMBER ONE, IT GETS US. AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE STUDY SAID. I MEAN, IT SAID LATER ON, JUST FIND AN AREA THAT YOU WANT TO DO THIS WITH, AND IT CAN GIVE YOU A GOOD IDEA OF HOW IT WILL WORK. IT HELPS YOU MAKE YOUR MISTAKES ON A SMALLER SCALE INSTEAD OF A LARGER SCALE.

SO I CAN GET ON BOARD WITH THAT. AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE DO HAVE AT LEAST THREE WHO HAVE CONSENSUS IN FOR FOR NUMBER THREE. AS FAR AS STUDYING, WHERE CAN WE IMPLEMENT THIS?

[02:10:03]

THAT'S THE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO OUR CITY TO, TO MEET SOME OF THE NEEDS THAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING, YOU KNOW, WHERE CAN WE PROVIDE? BECAUSE A LOT OF THIS STUFF IS ALREADY BUILT.

IT'S WHERE DO WE HAVE THIS KIND OF EMPTY SPACE OR THIS SPACE THAT'S RIPE FOR REDEVELOPMENT WHERE WE CAN GO, OKAY, LET'S TRY IT HERE. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. SO IN THAT REGARD, WE HAVE THREE THERE. IF THERE'S ANOTHER PERSON THAT AGREES WITH THAT, YES.

>> LET ME TRY TO MORPH IT SLIGHTLY BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR ON NUMBER THREE.

SO DOWNTOWN IS CURRENTLY OUR PILOT. IT'S NOT HAD PARKING OR COMMERCIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS

FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR 15 YEARS. >> I DON'T KNOW. >> IT TOOK US IT TOOK US 10 TO 15 YEARS BEFORE BEFORE DOWNTOWN WAS DEAD. THAT WAS BEFORE I GOT HERE. BUT I HEARD DOWNTOWN USED TO BE DEAD. OTHER THAN, LIKE, BETH MARIE'S DOWNTOWN WOULD NOT EXIST IF WE HAD REQUIRED PARKING MINIMUMS THE WHOLE WAY, BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN TEARING THE BUILDINGS DOWN AND PUTTING UP PARKING INSTEAD OF THESE REALLY COOL BUILDINGS THAT ARE GETTING REDONE. SO DOWNTOWN IS OUR PILOT RIGHT NOW. I WONDER WHAT THE COMFORT LEVEL WOULD BE IN THIS GROUP OF EXPANDING THAT TO INSIDE THE LOOP. AND I 35 EXCEPT FOR SINGLE FAMILY AREAS, BASICALLY EXPANDING THE PILOT TO WITH BASICALLY WITHIN THE LOOP AND I 35 EXEMPTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. I WONDER WHAT THE INTEREST WOULD BE THERE THAT WOULD HELP A LOT OF THE INFILL, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT ANOTHER REASON WE HAVE A LOT OF EMPTY LOTS THAT ARE GENERATING ANY TAX REVENUE. THEY'VE GOT ROADS RIGHT THERE AND PIPES RIGHT THERE, BUT THEY AREN'T CONTRIBUTING MUCH TO PAY FOR THOSE ROADS AND STREETS AND, AND ALL OF THAT. THAT THAT'S A BIG BARRIER FOR THOSE INFILL LOTS IS PARKING. I'VE HEARD THAT FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT THAT KILLS A LOT OF PROJECTS. SO I KIND OF WONDER IF INSIDE THE LOOP AND I-35 COULD BE WHERE THIS PILOT COULD GO POTENTIALLY.

>> ON ITS FACE. THE REASON WHY I CAN'T SUPPORT THAT ISN'T BECAUSE I DON'T SUPPORT IT.

IT'S BECAUSE THE DIRECTION THAT I'M GIVING IS FOR STAFF TO GO OUT AND IDENTIFY. BECAUSE WHEN YOU SAY INSIDE THE LOOP, IT'S BASICALLY THE ENTIRE CITY. I MEAN, YOU GOT A LOT OUTSIDE THE CITY, OUTSIDE THE LOOP, BUT IT'S BASICALLY THE ENTIRE CORE OF THE CITY. AND THAT SEEMS TO ME TO BE BASICALLY WHAT I'M HAVING A STRUGGLE WITH. BUT I HAVE NO PROBLEM IF STAFF CAN IDENTIFY SOMETHING, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW TO GET SOME OTHER EYES ON IT. BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF I MEAN, NUMBER ONE, OUR, OUR, OUR LAND IS GETTING PRETTY WELL DEVELOPED OUT. I MEAN, WHEN YOU TAKE INSIDE THE LOOP, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF LARGE PARCELS OF LAND THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON. IT'S USUALLY OUTSIDE OF THE LOOP. SO I'M OKAY WITH WHATEVER THEY COME UP WITH TO LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF THAT WORKS. I JUST, I CAN'T AGREE WITH IT ON THE FLY WITHOUT HAVING MORE INFORMATION OF SOMEONE TAKING A LOOK AT IT, BUT I'M CERTAINLY NOT OPPOSED TO LOOKING AT THE DATA ON THAT. YEAH.

>> OKAY. I GUESS ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS, DID WE GIVE DIRECTION ON HOW QUICKLY WE WANT STAFF TO COME BACK? BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE IT TO BE BEFORE A YEAR, PRETTY MUCH AS SOON AS THEY CAN TURN AROUND AND BRING IT BACK TO US, I'D LIKE TO SEE IF IF THAT'S

AGREEABLE. >> SURE. I MEAN, I THINK I'M GOING TO RELY UPON THE CITY MANAGER. CERTAINLY. HERE'S THAT DIRECTION. AND AND I WOULD CONCUR WITH YOU THAT WE SHOULD EXPEDITE IT AS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, GIVEN THE WORKLOAD AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTING THE PARKING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS, YOU KNOW. SO YES, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT. THANK YOU. YES, COUNCILMEMBER.

>> THAT THAT THAT SEEMS INCONSISTENT TO ME. WE'RE GOING TO DO A. THE QUESTION WAS, ARE WE GOING TO DO A YEAR LONG PILOT STUDY? WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT FOR A YEAR, BUT WE'RE GOING TO REVISIT IT IN LESS THAN A YEAR. THAT SEEMS INCONSISTENT TO ME. AND I WOULD REMIND YOU. WELL, OKAY, THAT'S THAT'S MY OPINION. I KNOW ABOUT PARKING LOTS AND I JUST WANT EVERYBODY TO THINK WHEN YOU WHEN YOU DO WHATEVER YOU DO, WHEN YOU WHEN YOU GO, WHEREVER YOU GO, DO YOU FIND TOO MANY PARKING PLACES OR DO YOU FIND TOO FEW? ONE OF MY FAVORITE THINGS IS A CHAMBER EVENT THAT'S THAT'S HELD THE FIRST WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH. AND MAN, WE'RE PARKING EVERY PLACE IN THE WORLD. WE CAN'T GET CLOSE TO THE PLACE. THERE'S TOO FEW

PARKING PLACES. THERE'S NOT TOO MANY. >> OKAY, SO. WE'VE GOT NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO TAKEN CARE OF. NUMBER THREE, WE'VE GOT KIND OF WHAT I SUMMARIZED AND I HAVEN'T WE HAVEN'T REALLY. YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT, RIGHT? THAT DIRECTION. I MEAN, I KNOW YOU SAID YOU WANTED TO INCLUDE THE OUTER LOOP. IF IT'S NOT INCLUDING THAT AT THIS STAGE OF THE GAME, ARE YOU NOT SUPPORTING THEM COMING BACK AND LOOKING AT A PART OF THE CITY

OR ARE YOU SUPPORTING THAT? >> I'LL TELL YOU MY MY DECISION TREE HERE. OKAY, SO I SUPPORT THE NUMBER THREE AS AS STATED, BUT IF THERE'S NO CONSENSUS THERE, THEN I WOULD PUT FORWARD THE IDEA OF NUMBER THREE, BUT IT'S INSIDE OF THE LOOP SLASH I-35. SO A ONE YEAR PILOT WITH I-35, IF THERE'S NOT A CONSENSUS FOR THAT, THEN JUST I THINK I HEARD AT LEAST A CONSENSUS ON STAFF BRINGING BACK SOME OTHER LOCATIONS BEYOND THE SQUARE, BECAUSE

[02:15:02]

AGAIN, DOWNTOWN IS ALREADY OUR PILOT. IF STAFF WERE TO BRING IT BACK JUST THAT, IT WOULD BE AS SOON AS THEY'RE ABLE TO GET IT DONE. IT WOULD NOT BE A YEAR FROM NOW. OKAY. DOES THAT. YES.

THAT'S CLEAR. >> YEAH, YEAH. WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS YES, YOU SUPPORT THE THREE. YOU'RE GOING TO GO WITH STAFF BRINGING SOMETHING BACK TO GIVE US SOME DIRECTION, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT CONSENSUS FOR THE 100% CITYWIDE. THERE WAS A CONSENSUS FOR INSIDE THE LOOP. SO SO SO YOU'RE YOU'RE THE FOURTH. SO THAT GIVES US DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AT LEAST STAFF COMING UP WITH AN AREA OF THE CITY WHERE WE CAN IMPLEMENT THIS ON A PILOT BASIS. AND AS FAR AS THE TIME FRAME, JUST WORK IT INTO THE WORKFLOW THAT THAT BASED UPON

THE DIRECTION THAT YOU'RE HEARING. >> WOULD YOU CANVASS THAT,

PLEASE? >> I WILL CANVASS IT, YES. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND. FIRST OF ALL, DOES EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THE DIRECTION THAT I HAVE SUMMARIZED FOR NUMBER THREE, THAT I THINK THERE'S BEEN A CONSENSUS. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT MY SUMMARY? BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR SO THAT IF PEOPLE

ARE BEING ASKED TO SUPPORT OR NOT SUPPORT, YES. GO AHEAD. >> ONLY CLARIFICATION IS I DON'T THINK WE DID FULLY CANVASS EVERYBODY ON INSIDE THE LOOP.

>> OKAY. >> SO JUST WE CAN GO THROUGH AND SEE WHAT PEOPLE. YEAH.

>> ALL RIGHT. YES. WE'RE JUST GOING TO START HERE WITH MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> SURE. I WOULD JUST GO BACK TO I WANT TO HAVE STAFF TELL US WHERE WE SHOULD EXPAND THIS.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. >> SO WHAT IS THAT? WHAT IS THAT? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? ARE

YOU. >> FOR IT OR AGAINST IT? >> I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO COME BACK. NICK CAN SHOW US A PICTURE OF A MAP, AND THEY CAN SAY, HERE ARE AREAS OF THE TOWN WHERE WE COULD IMPLEMENT NO PARKING MINIMUMS. IS THAT IS THAT CLEAR?

>> WELL, I HEAR YOU. IT'S NOT CLEAR, I HEAR YOU. >> WHAT'S NOT CLEAR?

>> I DON'T WE'RE WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE NUMBER THREE OR NOT.

AND I DON'T I DON'T I'M NOT GETTING CLEAR A CLEAR MESSAGE FROM. YES.

>> OKAY. WELL, I'M NOT FOR THREE TODAY. I WANT STAFF TO COME BACK AND REVISIT IT WITH SOMETHING THAT'S MORE. THERE ARE NOT FOUR VOTES TO GET RID OF PARKING MINIMUMS CITYWIDE.

>> OKAY. SO IS THAT A NO TODAY? >> I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MORE CLEAR I CAN BE.

>> OH, CAN I, MAY I. >> YES, GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER JESSICA.

>> IF I MAY, PLEASE FORGIVE ME. WHAT I UNDERSTAND THE ONE NUMBER ONE, EVERYONE IS IN FAVOR OR WE HAVE ENOUGH TO MOVE FORWARD. NUMBER TWO, WE HAVE ENOUGH TO MOVE FORWARD. NUMBER THREE HAS COME BACK WITH A MODIFICATION. SO AS OPPOSED TO INITIATING A PILOT ELIMINATION OF THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS, A MODIFICATION OF THAT ITEM HAS BEEN CAN STAFF COME UP WITH A SPECIFIC AREA AS OPPOSED TO CITYWIDE, THAT THEY THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR A ONE YEAR PILOT OF NO PARKING MINIMUMS AND COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND PRESENT THAT AREA AS MAYBE MORE OF THE URBANIZED AREA THAT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND. IF WE'RE GOING TO DO A PILOT

PROGRAM WHERE IT MIGHT BE AS OPPOSED TO CITYWIDE. >> OKAY. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE NOT VOTING ON NUMBER THREE. WE'RE WAITING ON NUMBER THREE.

>> WE ARE VOTING ON WHETHER WE'RE ASKING STAFF TO DO ANYTHING. SO IT'S NOT A YES OR NO. IT'S A MODIFICATION SAYING, PLEASE COME BACK WITH DIFFERENT INFORMATION FOR US TO MAKE A DECISION. SO THIS DECISION IS NOT BEING MADE TODAY. THERE'S A REQUEST TO COME BACK WITH MORE

SPECIFIC AREAS. SORRY. >> NO. NO. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IT'S A VERY BASIC QUESTION YOU'RE ASKING. IS THERE ENOUGH CONSENSUS IN NUMBER THREE TO INITIATE A PILOT ELIMINATION OF THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS? BULLET ONE ONE YEAR PILOT TO LIFT PARKING MINIMUMS TO 100% CITYWIDE. THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS NO. THERE IS NOT A

CONSENSUS. >> THAT'S WHAT I WANTED. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YES. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER FERRY. SO THE QUESTION ON THE TABLE, THE QUESTION ON THE TABLE IS IF THERE'S NOT A CONSENSUS TO LIFT THE ONE YEAR PARKING MINIMUM, BUT THERE IS A MODIFICATION OF THE REST OF THE BULLET POINTS TO SAY, LET'S HAVE STAFF BRING BACK SUBSETS OF THE CITY, THAT THEY WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS RIPE TO CONSIDER. SO WE'RE JUST MAKING THERE'S IT'S A NO. TWO NUMBER THREE, THE BULLET POINT NUMBER ONE. BUT THEN THERE'S A

MODIFICATION OF THE REST OF THAT BULLET POINT. >> I UNDERSTAND, BUT COUNCILPERSON RUMOHR ASKED, IS THERE CONSENSUS FOR THE PILOT BEING INSIDE THE LOOP?

>> SHE DID. SHE DID ASK THAT QUESTION. SO IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT, THAT'S.

[02:20:01]

>> AND I THINK MAYBE THAT'S WHERE THE BREAKDOWN IN COMMUNICATION IS HAPPENING.

MAYBE I, I AM FOR THAT. AND IF THERE'S NOT CONSENSUS, THEN I'M FOR WHAT MAYOR PRO TEM PROPOSED.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO FOR THE INSIDE THE LOOP WE DO HAVE TWO. I AM AS I STATED EARLIER, NOT NECESSARILY I DO NOT I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT AT THIS POINT. I'M IN FAVOR OF THEN FALLING BACK TO THE SUGGESTION THAT WE LOOK AT A STUDY AND HAVE STAFF BRING BACK WHAT'S A GOOD AREA OF TOWN THAT WE CAN MAYBE THEN COME BACK AND REVISIT THE PARKING MINIMUM LIFTING PARKING MINIMUMS, BUT NOT MAYBE NOT CITYWIDE, BUT MAYBE IN A SUBSET OF THE CITY. SO YES, ONE YEAR PILOT PARKING MINIMUMS TO 100% CITYWIDE. IT NO CONSENSUS THERE. SO WE'VE GOT. THREE FOR STAFF COMING BACK AND WE'VE GOT TWO FOR INSIDE THE LOOP. 35 COUNCILMEMBER JESTER.

>> YES, I WOULD GIVE DIRECTION IN FAVOR OF THE MODIFIED PROPOSAL BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT WOULD BE FOR I BELIEVE OR FIVE ACTUALLY. YEAH. FIVE. AND SO THAT'S THE DIRECTION ON BULLET POINT NUMBER THREE WHICH IS BEEN MODIFIED. IT IS NOT WE HAVE NOT APPROVED A ONE YEAR PILOT TO LIFT PARKING MINIMUMS TO 100% OF THE CITY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. LET'S TAKE A WE'VE BEEN GOING AT THIS A WHILE. LET'S TAKE A LITTLE FIVE MINUTE BREAK ORWELCOME, EVERYBODY, BACK TO THIS MEETING OF THE DENTON CITY COUNCIL. ON SEPTEMBER THE 15TH IT IS 447. AND WE'VE SWITCHED THE ORDER A LITTLE BIT. WE'RE

[E. ID 26-0971 Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding streamlining the City of Denton’s boards and commissions processes. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 1 hour]]

GOING TO MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM E, WHICH IS ID 26-0971. RECEIVE REPORT AND WHOLE DISCUSSION REGARDING STREAMLINING THE CITY OF DENTON'S BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS PROCESS.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL KRISTI STAFF. >> THIS WORK BEGAN LAST SEPTEMBER WITH COUNCIL MEMBER JESTERS PITCHED TO STANDARDIZE BOARD TERMS AND STREAMLINE PROCESSES. AND THEN, IN JANUARY 2026, STAFF PUBLISHED AN ISR WITH BOARD BY BOARD CONSIDERATIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. IN JULY, MAYOR PRO TEM STEPHENS PITCHED AN ADDITIONAL ITEM CONSIDERING NOMINATIONS, VACANCIES AND ABSENCES, AND IN AUGUST, STAFF PUBLISHED AN ISR. IN RESPONSE TO THAT TO ADDRESS THOSE POLICY GAPS. SO BOTH OF THESE PITCHES ARE INCLUDED IN THE CONSOLIDATED PRESENTATION FOR TODAY. WE'LL GO THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND SOME DATA THAT WE'VE GATHERED ON THEM. WE'LL GO THROUGH THE EXISTING PROCEDURES, HOW IT WORKS TODAY AND WHERE THE BREAKDOWNS ARE, AND THEN SOME PROCESS CONSIDERATIONS AND POTENTIAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS AND POLICY CHANGES, AND THEN BOARD SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS WHERE TO STANDARDIZE, RESTRUCTURE OR DISSOLVE COMMITTEES. AND THEN WE'LL HOPEFULLY GARNER COUNCIL DIRECTION ON ALL OF THAT INFORMATION. A QUICK OVERVIEW BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE MANAGED BY THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE. COUNCIL MEMBERS NOMINATE RESIDENTS TO SERVE WITH STAFF VETTING ELIGIBILITY BEFORE COUNCIL CONFIRMATION. HERE'S A QUICK BREAKDOWN OF OUR ALL OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. WE HAVE 21 ADVISORY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES, SIX QUASI JUDICIAL BOARDS, FIVE THAT REQUIRE STATE LAW OR ARE REQUIRED IN THE CITY CHARTER, AND THEN EIGHT THAT COUNCIL PARTICIPATES IN EITHER AS A COUNCIL COMMITTEE OR A HYBRID COUNCIL RESIDENT BODY. IN DOING THE RESEARCH FOR THIS, WE ALSO LOOKED AT HOW WE COMPARE TO OTHER CITIES. SO DENTON MAINTAINS MORE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAN EVERY PEER CITY SHOWN, INCLUDING CITIES THAT ARE TWICE OUR SIZE. A HIGHER BOARD COUNT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY MEAN STRONGER ENGAGEMENT, AND MOST PEER CITIES, WE FOUND, ALSO RUN A MORE STRUCTURED ANNUAL CYCLE RATHER THAN OUR YEAR ROUND PROCESS, WHICH WE'LL GET INTO IN A LITTLE WHILE. THE SEATS THAT MAKE UP ALL OF OUR COMMITTEES. THERE ARE 117 COUNCIL APPOINTED SEATS ON ALL OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

OF THOSE 117, THERE ARE 21 TRUE VACANCIES. THAT MEANS THAT THERE IS NO MEMBER SERVING IN THAT SEAT. 16 OF THOSE MEMBERS ARE IN HOLDOVER AWAITING REAPPOINTMENT AND MAKING 32% OF ALL SEATS NOT FILLED BY CURRENT TERM. PART OF OUR PROCESS WAS SURVEYING ALL OF OUR BOARD LIAISONS AND DIRECTORS ON ON THE REASONS THAT THEIR BOARDS MEET OR DON'T MEET. SO 29% OF

[02:25:06]

ALL SCHEDULED MEETINGS BETWEEN 2025 TO PRESENT WERE CANCELED. 25% CANCELED, AT LEAST HALF OF THEIR MEETINGS, AND THEN 27% FLAGGED QUORUM PROBLEMS AS AN ISSUE. AND THEN IN A DIFFERENT QUESTION, CITING REASONS CITED FOR CANCELLATION, WHETHER WAS 10%, NO SUBSTANTIVE AGENDA ITEMS WAS 10%, AND THEN LACK OF QUORUM WAS 20%. THE REMAINDER OF THAT, THOSE PERCENTAGES WERE OTHER OR A COMBINATION OF THE REASONS ABOVE. AND THEN THIS IS THE MEETING CANCELLATIONS BY EACH BOARD. AND THE COLOR SHOWS THE CONSIDERATION THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT LATER TODAY. NOT EVERY HIGH CANCELLATION BOARD IS SLATED FOR A CHANGE. AND NOT EVERYONE LOW ONE IS LEFT ALONE.

SO FREQUENCY IS JUST ONE INPUT AMONGST MANY. AND THEN WE ALSO LOOKED AT OUTPUTS AND OUTCOMES.

THIS CHART SHOWS ONLY ADVISORY BOARDS, AS OUR QUASI JUDICIAL BOARDS OFTEN HAVE THEIR OWN AUTHORITY TO ACT AND MAKE DECISIONS. BUT WE BROKE IT DOWN BY WHETHER OR NOT A BOARD OR COMMISSION WAS FORWARDING ITEMS TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL, OR IF ITEMS THAT A BOARD OR COMMISSION WERE REVIEWING RESULTED DIRECTLY IN STAFF ACTION. SO YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, COUNCIL ACTION BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND THE PBR HAVE A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS GOING DIRECTLY FROM THOSE COMMITTEES TO COUNCIL, AND THEN THOSE LISTED IN THE STAFF ACTION COLUMN ARE ONES WHERE ITEMS MAY NOT NECESSARILY ALWAYS GO TO COUNCIL, BUT THERE'S A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS GOING IN DIRECTLY INVOLVING STAFF ACTION AND THEN BALANCED WITH HIGH ACTIVITY THE D, C, R, C AND THE ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY BOARD COMMITTEE, AND THEN BALANCED BUT WITH MINIMAL ACTIVITY. SO NOT A LOT OF ITEMS GOING TO COUNCIL AND NOT A LOT OF DIRECTION TO STAFF. THE SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK CHIEF OF POLICE ADVISORY BOARD AND COMMITTEE ON PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES. SO NOW I'LL GO THROUGH SOME OF OUR EXISTING PROCEDURES. THE NOMINATIONS PROCESS STARTS WHEN A COUNCIL MEMBER MAKES A NOMINATION. STAFF THEN VETS THE APPLICATION CONFIRMING RESIDENCY. WE CHECK AGAINST CITY AND COUNTY RECORDS, WHETHER THEY ARE 18 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER AND IN NO ARREARS TO UTILITIES, LIBRARIES, CODE PARKS OR MUNICIPAL COURTS. THIS DOES TAKE TIME, SO IT IS OFTEN A COUPLE OF WEEKS FROM THE TIME A NOMINATION IS RECEIVED. AND WE DO HAVE TO LOOP IN DEPARTMENT STAFF AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS. SO THIS IS NOT THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY AN EASY PROCESS. AND THEN SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS, BOTH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AND DEPARTMENT STAFF REVIEW FOR SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS FOR THOSE BOARDS THAT DO HAVE THOSE. AND THEN IF THERE'S ANY QUESTION ABOUT THOSE SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS, IF THAT CANDIDATE MEETS OR DOESN'T MEET, THAT INFORMATION IS THEN FORWARDED TO COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT DECISION. AND THEN ONCE A RESIDENT IS VETTED, THEY ARE PLACED, THEIR NOMINATION GOES ON. THE NEXT AVAILABLE COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA. AND THEN IF FOR ANY REASON THAT ITEM IS PULLED, IT THEN MOVES TO THE I C AGENDA FOR COUNCIL VOTE AND THEN HOLD OVER. WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT AGAIN LATER, BUT MEMBERS SERVE AT COUNCIL'S PLEASURE AND THEY CONTINUE AND HOLD OVER UNTIL REPLACED. SO RESIGNATION, RESIGNATIONS, WHENEVER THEY ARE RECEIVED TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY. A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR ATTENDANCE AND REMOVAL POLICIES. OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR ATTENDANCE ARE IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. MEMBERS ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND ALL REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS AND MUST NOTIFY THE CHAIR OR STAFF LIAISON IF THEY CANNOT ATTEND. ABSENCES ARE DESIGNATED AS EITHER EXCUSED OR UNEXCUSED EXCUSED ABSENCES ARE DEFINED IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCE, INCLUDING ILLNESS, FAMILY EMERGENCIES, JURY DUTY, MILITARY SERVICE, MUNICIPAL TRAINING OR BUSINESS RELATED NEEDS, AND ABSENCES THAT FALL WITHIN THESE CATEGORIES ARE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY BY THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE. MEMBERS CAN ALSO REQUEST AN EXCUSED ABSENCE FOR REASONS LISTED OUTSIDE OF THAT CRITERIA. THOSE REQUESTS ARE REVIEWED BY THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AND THEN PLACED ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL. AND THEN OUR REMOVAL PROCESS. MORE THAN THREE UNEXCUSED ABSENCES IN A YEAR, OR ATTENDANCE BELOW 50%

[02:30:02]

OF REGULAR MEETINGS CONSTITUTES CAUSE FOR REMOVAL. STAFF LIAISONS ARE EXPECTED TO REPORT VIOLATIONS IMMEDIATELY TO THE CITY SECRETARY, WHO THEN IS SUPPOSED TO INITIATE AND NOTICE THE REMOVAL PROCESS. ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT EXPLICITLY STATED IN THE POLICY, BOTH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AND BOARD LIAISONS MONITOR ATTENDANCE, ATTENDANCE AND SHOULD PROVIDE TIMELY NOTICE TO MEMBERS APPROACHING THEIR ABSENCE LIMITS. WHILE THE ABSENCE POLICY APPLIES TO ALL BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES, ENFORCEMENT ON THIS HAS BEEN INCONSISTENT, AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHY IN A MINUTE. AND THEN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A TRUE VACANCY AND A HOLDOVER WE KIND OF ALREADY COVERED. THERE IS NO CITY POLICY CURRENTLY SPECIFYING ADDITIONAL STEPS OR REQUIRING A TIGHT TIME FRAME FOR A VACANCY THAT REMAINS OPEN FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD. SO REALLY, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO IS ANYBODY WHO IS CURRENTLY SERVING AND WILLING TO SERVE IN HOLDOVER STATUS CAN, UNTIL SOMEONE IS APPOINTED TO REPLACE THAT PERSON. AND THEN HERE ARE SOME OF THE PROCESS CONSIDERATIONS THAT STAFF IDENTIFIED. CONSIDER DEFINING A RECRUITMENT AND NOMINATION WINDOW. TODAY WE HAVE A YEAR ROUND ROLLING APPLICATION PROCESS. THIS IS FLEXIBLE. IT ALLOWS RESIDENTS TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION AT ANY TIME. BUT IT IS HARD TO COORDINATE AND MARKET EFFECTIVELY. SO IN LOOKING AT SOME OF OUR PEER CITIES AS WELL, THEY OFTEN DO SOMETHING MORE LIKE A YEAR LONG INTEREST FORM AND THEN A DEFINED APPLICATION PERIOD. WE ARE PROPOSING POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT MAY 15TH TO JULY 15TH OF EVERY YEAR, HAVING A APPLICATION PERIOD, DOING A FOCUSED MARKETING RECRUITMENT WINDOW, AND A CITY WIDE OUTREACH PROGRAM TO GARNER MORE INTEREST IN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. AND THEN ONCE ALL OF THOSE APPLICATIONS ARE RECEIVED, HAVING AUGUST SERVE AS CITY COUNCIL'S NOMINATION AND APPOINTMENT MONTH. DURING THAT MONTH, COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL REVIEW APPLICATIONS AND CAN MEET INDIVIDUALLY WITH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE IN ORDER TO FACILITATE MAKING THEIR APPOINTMENTS. AND THEN, AS I SAID, WE WOULD THEN HAVE A YEAR ROUND INTEREST FORM BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN THE WINDOWS. IT WOULD COLLECT BASIC CONTACT INFORMATION, AND THEN WE WOULD THEN USE THAT INFORMATION PRIOR TO THE APPLICATION PERIOD TO REACH OUT TO THOSE FOLKS AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO APPLY. CONSIDER STANDARDIZING THE TERM CYCLE.

SO RIGHT NOW, MOST TERMS BEGIN AND END SOMEWHERE BETWEEN AUGUST AND OCTOBER. BUT WE DO HAVE INCONSISTENT START AND END DATES THAT CREATE CONFUSION AND ADMINISTRATIVE REWORK. SO COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER DOING ONE UNIFORM CYCLE, HAVING THE TERM START SEPTEMBER 1ST AND AUGUST 31ST FOR EVERY BOARD, COMMISSION, AND COMMITTEE MEMBER. THIS ALIGNS WITH THE BUDGET AND OUR STRATEGIC GOAL CYCLES. AND THEN STAFF HAD INITIALLY RECOMMENDED HAVING EVEN NUMBERED COUNCIL PLACES RENEW IN EVEN YEARS, AND ODD PLACES RENEW IN ODD YEARS JUST FOR ACCESSIBILITY AND UNDERSTANDABILITY FOR THE PUBLIC. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WE RECEIVED IN THE BACKUP MATERIAL WAS IF IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO HAVE THOSE HAVE THEM LINE UP WITH THE ELECTION CYCLE. SO ONE THROUGH FOUR WOULD BE THE SAME YEAR THAT THAT ELECTION IS HELD, AND THEN FIVE THROUGH SEVEN WOULD BE THE SAME YEAR THAT THAT ELECTION IS HELD. THAT IS CERTAINLY WITHIN COUNCIL'S PURVIEW TO PROVIDE DIRECTION FOR AND COUNCIL AND STAFF IS COMFORTABLE WITH EITHER RECOMMENDATION. AND THEN CONSIDER LEVERAGING OUR EXISTING SOFTWARE. SOME OF THIS HAS ALREADY STARTED TO BE KIND OF IN THE WORKS. WE USE GRANICUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, SOFTWARE THAT HAS TWO BUILT IN FEATURES THAT HAVE BEEN HISTORICALLY UNDERUSED AND ARE AT NO ADDED COST. SO THE PACKET FEATURE ALLOWS STAFF TO COMPILE MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS INTO A SINGLE PDF PACKET FOR COUNCIL REVIEW, AND THEN ATTENDANCE.

TRACKING TRACKS MEMBERS ATTENDANCE AND GENERATES REPORTS. BUT WE DO HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH OUR LIAISONS TO ENSURE THAT THAT DATA IS ENTERED CONSISTENTLY. AND THEN FROM MAYOR PRO TEM STEPHENS PITCH CLARIFYING ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS. TODAY, THE REMOVAL GROUNDS TRIGGER AT MORE THAN THREE UNEXCUSED ABSENCES IN A YEAR, OR ATTENDANCE BELOW 50% OF REGULAR MEETINGS. THIS OR STATEMENT KIND OF PROVIDES SOME INCONSISTENCY AND CONFUSION ON STAFF. WHICH ONE DO WE GO WITH? WHICH ONE IS THE RIGHT THRESHOLD? MEETING FREQUENCY RANGES FROM BIWEEKLY TO A FEW TIMES A YEAR. SO A FIXED THREE ABSENCES DOESN'T

[02:35:05]

NECESSARILY MEAN A THING. THE SAME THING ON EVERY BOARD. SO SOMETHING COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER IS REPLACING THE FIXED COUNT TRIGGER WITH A SINGLE PERCENTAGE BASED THRESHOLD.

THAT APPLIES CONSISTENTLY, REGARDLESS OF HOW OFTEN A BOARD MEETS. AND THEN CONSIDER SETTING A FILL BY DEADLINE FOR VACANCY. RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NO REQUIRED TIME FRAME FOR FILLING A VACANT SEAT. SO AND WE DO HAVE 21 TRUE VACANCIES CURRENTLY. SO SEATS CAN SIT OPEN INDEFINITELY. SO COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER ESTABLISHING A FILL BY DEADLINE, ALLOWING FOR NOMINATIONS TO OPEN UP TO OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS AFTER A DETERMINED PERIOD OF TIME. AND THIS COULD APPLY TO THOSE SERVING IN HOLDOVER STATUS OR JUST TO TRUE VACANCIES. AND WE WOULD PROVIDE DIRECTION ON THAT. AND THEN MOVING INTO OUR BOARD, SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS CONSIDERATIONS. THIS IS JUST A SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED. SO YOU HAVE THEM BROKEN DOWN INTO FOUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES, EITHER DISSOLVE OR TRANSITION, RESTRUCTURE MEMBERSHIP, REDUCE MEETING FREQUENCY, OR NO CHANGE. RECOMMENDED. I DO JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE NUMBER OF BOARDS ON THE NO CHANGE RECOMMENDED. WE DO HAVE EXCELLENT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, AND STAFF AND THE PUBLIC ARE SUPER ENGAGED. AND SO I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE NOT AN ISSUE. OUR COUNCIL COMMITTEES AGENDA COMMITTEE, NO CHANGES RECOMMENDED AS WELL AS THE CPC COMMITTEE. AND THEN THE COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT IS THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS. THEY MEET AS NEEDED. COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER DISSOLVING OR TRANSITIONING THIS COMMITTEE IF THEY SEE FIT. THEY ONLY HELD TWO MEETINGS IN 2025 AND HAVE HAD NO MATTERS REFERRED TO THEM BY COUNCIL. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ARE ALREADY FOLDED INTO OTHER COMMITTEES, SO COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER DISSOLVING TO FOCUS RESOURCES ON THOSE BOARDS INSTEAD. THE COUNCIL RESIDENT HYBRID COMMITTEE. SO THESE ARE COMMITTEES THAT SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS PLAY A ROLE IN. BUT THERE'S ALSO RESIDENTS AS WELL. THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE IS THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THREE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS. THEY MEET TWICE A MONTH. MEMBERS OF THIS ALREADY SIT ON THE TWO BODIES THAT APPROVE ALL CODE CHANGES, MAKING THE ROLE POTENTIALLY DUPLICATIVE. SO STAFF OR COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER DISSOLVING OR RETURNING TO AN AD HOC STATUS, CONVENING ONLY WHEN COUNCIL PROVIDES DIRECTION AND THEN CONSIDER RESTRUCTURE OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP BOARD. IT IS CURRENTLY 12 VOTING MEMBERS AND THREE EX OFFICIOS, AND THEY MEET MONTHLY. YOU CAN SEE THE BREAKDOWN OF THE CURRENT MEMBERSHIP THERE BELOW. THIS IS THE ONLY BOARD THAT HAS A SEPARATE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, SO WE RECOMMEND ELIMINATING THE NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE AND BRINGING THAT IN LINE JUST WITH THE SAME PROCESS FOR ALL OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, AND POTENTIALLY REDUCING THE SIZE FROM 13 TO 7 TO MATCH THE STANDARD BOARD SIZE. WE WOULD LOOK FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION ON THE MAKEUP OF THAT SEVEN PERSON COMMITTEE IF COUNCIL WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD AND THEN CONSIDER DISSOLVING OR TRANSITIONING THE DOWNTOWN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. THIS IS THE ONLY SUBCOMMITTEE, FORMAL SUBCOMMITTEE OF ANY COMMITTEE THAT WE HAVE. IT IS 7 TO 13 MEMBERS, AND THEY ARE APPOINTED BY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP BOARD MEMBERS. THEY MEET BI MONTHLY, BUT WE'RE ONLY ABLE TO MEET THREE OF SIX TIMES IN 2025. THEY HAVE FREQUENT CANCELLATIONS, AND THE DOWNTOWN FOCUS NOW OVERLAPS WITH THE NEWLY CREATED MAIN STREET BOARD. AND JUST A NOTE, IF THIS COMMITTEE, IF COUNCIL CHOSE TO DISSOLVE THIS COMMITTEE STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE TERS ONE BOARD BECOME THE SCORING BODY FOR THE DOWNTOWN REINVESTMENT GRANT. AND THEN MOBILITY COMMITTEE IS THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND TWO RESIDENTS. THEY MEET MONTHLY. THEY ARE HIGHLY ENGAGED, BUT DISCUSSIONS SOMETIMES DRIFT INTO OPERATIONAL TERRITORY. COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER ADDING REGIONAL PARTNERS LIKE DENTON ISD, THE COUNTY DCTA OR TEXDOT FOR A MORE STRATEGIC FOCUS OR POTENTIALLY REDUCING TO THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS ONLY. NO CHANGE IS RECOMMENDED ON THE TERS ONE BOARD. IF THE DOWNTOWN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL WAS DISSOLVED, WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THIS BOARD BECOME THE SCORING BODY FOR THE DOWNTOWN REINVESTMENT GRANT AND THEN THE

[02:40:01]

COMPOSITION OF THE TERS. TWO BOARD MIRRORS EDPB. SO DEPENDING ON WHAT ACTIONS ARE TAKEN WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP BOARD, WE WOULD RECOMMEND MIRRORING THAT HERE FOR TERS TO. AND OUR RESIDENT ADVISORY BOARDS. NO CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. WE. THEY HAVE HIGH STAFF SATISFACTION, NO QUORUM ISSUES, AND THEY HAVE AN EFFECTIVE, VALUABLE RESOURCE FOR AIRPORT OPERATIONS AND PLANNING.

COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER REDUCING FREQUENCY FOR THE ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

THIS IS ONE OF OUR STATE LAW REQUIRED MEETING COMMITTEES, AND THEY ARE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW TO MEET THREE TIMES A YEAR. THEY CURRENTLY MEET EVERY OTHER MONTH, SO SIX TIMES A YEAR. SO IN ORDER TO MATCH STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS AND THEIR ACTUAL WORKLOAD, WE COULD CONSIDER REDUCING TO QUARTERLY. AND THEN THE BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. THE ONLY RECOMMENDATION HERE IS JUST GIVING NOMINATION PRECEDENCE OR PREFERENCE TO APPLICANTS WITH PRIOR CITIZEN BOND COMMITTEE EXPERIENCE. SO THAT WOULD STRENGTHEN THE CONTINUITY BETWEEN PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION. IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE A REQUIREMENT, BUT IT WOULD BE A PREFERENCE GIVEN. AND THEN NO CHANGES. RECOMMENDED TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

IT WAS RECENTLY REESTABLISHED UNDER NEW STATE LAW, SO WE'LL HAVE TO REVISIT THAT IN A FUTURE REVIEW. THE COMMITTEE ON PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES MEETS EVERY OTHER MONTH, AND IT WAS LARGELY CREATED TO HELP ASSIST STAFF AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK TO STAFF ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ADA PLANS, WHICH HAS LARGELY BEEN FULFILLED. QUORUM HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE IN RECENT YEARS, SO STAFF PROPOSED TO CONSIDER INTEGRATING IT INTO THE EXISTING ADA STAFF LIAISON GROUP. THEY MEET MONTHLY AND SO THE. THIS GROUP COULD MEET WITH STAFF, WITH THE STAFF GROUP QUARTERLY TO KIND OF INTEGRATE AND PROVIDE A HOLISTIC VIEW OF ADA WORK IN THE CITY. THE COMMUNITY SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THIS ONE IS THE ONLY ONE THAT DOESN'T FALL IN THE SAME CATEGORIES AS ALL THE OTHERS. IT'S JUST MODIFY THE MEETING CADENCE. SO WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY REDUCING THE FREQUENCY OF THEIR MEETINGS, BUT THEY DO ALL OF THEIR FUNDING CYCLE BETWEEN SEPTEMBER AND MAY AND OFTEN CANCEL MEETINGS OUTSIDE OF THAT TIME FRAME. SO THIS WOULD JUST FORMALIZE THEIR EXISTING SEASONAL RHYTHM MEETING MONTHLY FROM SEPTEMBER TO MAY, AND THEN AD HOC IF NEEDED. OTHERWISE, THE CHIEF OF POLICE ADVISORY BOARD IS A 16 MEMBER BOARD. THERE ARE SEVEN RESIDENTS THAT ARE APPOINTED BY COUNCIL, FIVE THAT ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND THEN UP TO FIVE NON-VOTING MEMBERS. CURRENTLY, THEY MEET TWO TIMES A YEAR. THEIR ORIGINAL USE OF FORCE POLICY REVIEW IS COMPLETE, AND QUORUM HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE. SO COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER ANNUAL MEETINGS WITH THE FLEXIBILITY TO CONVENE MORE OFTEN AND POTENTIALLY EVALUATING IF A SMALLER BOARD MIGHT BE TO BRING IT IN LINE WITH OTHER COUNCIL BOARDS. NO CHANGE IS RECOMMENDED ON THE LIBRARY BOARD. HIGH SATISFACTION, NO QUORUM ISSUES, AND IT IS DESCRIBED BY STAFF AS A MODEL FOR OTHER ADVISORY BOARDS. SO THEY'RE DOING GREAT WORK OVER THERE. VERY QUIET PARKS AND RECREATION AND BEAUTIFUL BEAUTIFICATION BOARD. SIMILAR NO CHANGE RECOMMENDED. THEY HAVE CONSISTENT ENGAGEMENT AND NO QUORUM CONCERNS. SO THEY DO HAVE TWO MEMBERS WHO HAVE NOT ATTENDED MEETINGS REGULARLY AND MAY BE APPROACHING THAT THRESHOLD FOR REMOVAL SOON. THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE INCLUDES NINE MEMBERS WITH GREATER DENTON ART COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES, AND THEY MEET BIMONTHLY. THIS ONE IS CONSIDERED FOR DISSOLUTION OR TRANSITION OR RE-ENVISIONING. SOMEHOW, THEIR SCOPE HAS BECOME A BIT UNCLEAR, WITH PROPOSALS SOMETIMES EXCEEDING CITY CAPACITY, SO COUNCIL COULD RELOOK AT THAT AND CONSIDER TRANSITIONING THIS TO THE GREATER DENTON ARTS COUNCIL, WHICH IS ALREADY AN EXISTING CITY CONTRACTOR OR SOMEHOW OTHERWISE RE-ENVISIONING THIS COMMITTEE. NO CHANGES ARE RECOMMENDED FOR THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD. THIS IS ONE OF OUR CHARTER MANDATED BOARDS. SO ANY CHANGES TO CHARTER PROVISIONS RELATED TO THIS WOULD REQUIRE A CHARTER

[02:45:04]

AMENDMENT AND THEN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK ADVISORY COMMITTEE. CONSIDER BIMONTHLY MEETINGS INSTEAD OF MONTHLY MEETINGS. AND THEY'VE HAD QUORUM ISSUES AND VACANCY ISSUES IN RECENT YEARS. SO AND IF BIMONTHLY MEETINGS ARE NOT FEASIBLE, AN ANNUAL TASK FORCE FOR THE FUNDING THAT IS ALLOCATED TO THOSE COMMITTEE TO THAT COMMITTEE COULD BE A FALLBACK IF ISSUES CONTINUE. I'M ALMOST DONE. THE QUASI JUDICIAL BOARDS. NO CHANGES ARE RECOMMENDED FOR THE BOARD OF ETHICS. THEY RECENTLY MOVED FROM MONTHLY TO BIMONTHLY, WHICH BETTER MATCHES THEIR ACTUAL BUSINESS, AND THEY HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO CALL SPECIAL MEETINGS WHEN THEY NEED TO. NO CHANGES TO THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. IT'S ANOTHER STATE LAW PRESCRIBED ROLE, AND THEY ARE ACTUALLY APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER AS OPPOSED TO COUNCIL. AND THEN THE HEALTH AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION POTENTIALLY REDUCING MEETING MEETING FREQUENCY MEETINGS ARE OFTEN CANCELED FOR LACK OF ACTIVE APPEALS. SO CONSIDER A BIMONTHLY SCHEDULE WHILE STILL MEETING THEIR STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS. NO CHANGES RECOMMENDED TO THE HISTORIC LAND COMMISSION OR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

A FUN NOTE IS THIS IS THE LOWEST CANCELLATION RATE OF ANY BOARD SURVEYED, AND THEN THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. REDUCED FREQUENCY MEETINGS ARE SOMETIMES CANCELED FOR LACK OF CASES OR QUORUM. SO CONSIDER A BI MONTHLY OR QUARTERLY SCHEDULE. AND THIS, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS THE HIGHEST CANCELLATION OF ANY BOARD SURVEYED. SO THE COUNCIL DIRECTION THAT WE'RE SEEKING TODAY, THESE ARE KIND OF THE PROCESS ORIENTED DIRECTIONS ATTENDANCE, WHETHER OR NOT COUNCIL WISHES TO ADOPT A PERCENTAGE BASED ATTENDANCE STANDARD, ESTABLISH A FILL BY DEADLINE FOR VACANCIES. STANDARDIZE ALL TERMS TO SEPTEMBER 1ST THROUGH AUGUST 31ST. CYCLE SHIFT TO A DEFINED APPLICATION WINDOW AND THEN PROVIDE DIRECTION ON THE FOUR CATEGORIES OF OF EACH OF THE COMMITTEES. SO ONCE WE RECEIVE COUNCIL DIRECTION THIS FALL, STAFF WILL DRAFT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTING ALL OF THOSE CHANGES. IT'S A LOT OF CHANGES. SO WE'LL HAVE TO CHANGE EACH OF THE ORDINANCES THAT CREATED EACH BOARD AND COMMISSION. SO IT'LL TAKE A LITTLE TIME. AND THEN PRIOR TO MAY 2027, WE'LL DO SYSTEMS AND COMMUNICATIONS UPDATED AHEAD OF THE NEXT RECRUITMENT CYCLE.

SHOULD COUNCIL WISH TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT AND THEN ONGOING, THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE WILL CONTINUE BOARD BY BOARD REVIEW AS DATA COMES IN. AND WITH THAT, I WILL STAND FOR

WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >> COUNCILMEMBER RUMOHR. >> RECOGNIZING WHAT YOU HAVE JUST SAID I WAS GOING TO REQUEST. CAN WE TAKE THOSE ONE AT A TIME? SO WE HAVE ONE THROUGH FIVE, MAKE A DECISION TO MOVE ON. OTHERWISE I'M GOING TO GET VERY LOST. THANK YOU. ON

ATTENDANCE. I DON'T KNOW A GOOD NUMBER. WAS IT 50% BEFORE. >> IT WAS.

>> OR. >> YES. WHY NOT. >> LESS THAN 50% I THINK IS

WHAT I SAW. >> YES. OKAY. UNEXCUSED ABSENCES OR ATTENDANCE BELOW

50%. >> I'M OKAY WITH 50%. I'M ALSO VERY FLEXIBLE ON THAT NUMBER.

>> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> YEAH. AS FAR AS ATTENDANCE GOES. I APPRECIATE THE EDUCATION AND REMINDER ON WHAT THE STANDARD HAS BEEN FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. I WAS ON A BOARD FOR A WHILE. AND YOU KNOW, WHEN I APPLIED TO THAT BOARD AND WAS ACCEPTED, THE CITY SECRETARY AT THE TIME MADE IT VERY CLEAR WHAT THE RULES WERE AND WHAT THE EXPECTATION WAS. AND MY UNDERSTANDING AT THAT TIME EVEN WAS THAT THE THE THREE ABSENCES VERSUS 50% WERE I BELIEVE IT WAS LIKE WHICHEVER CAME FIRST, BECAUSE NOT EVERY BOARD IS CREATED EQUALLY. SOME BOARDS MEET FOUR TIMES, OTHERS MEET 26 TIMES. AND SO I CAN'T GET ON BOARD WITH LIKE A FIXED PERCENTAGE NUMBER, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. AND THIS IS NO ONE'S FAULT. I JUST WANT TO VOICE, I THINK, SOME FRUSTRATION I HAVE, WHICH IS THAT THE PROCESS HASN'T BEEN FOLLOWED. WE HAVE GUIDELINES, WE HAVE EXPECTATIONS. AND SO MY ASK WOULDN'T BE IF WE NEED TO RECLARIFY THAT. IT'S LIKE WHICHEVER ONE COMES FIRST, I

[02:50:03]

DON'T WANT A P AND Z, FOR EXAMPLE. THEY MEET THE MOST OFTEN. I DON'T WANT A COMMISSIONER THERE MISSING 30% OF THE MEETINGS, WHEREAS HASKO MIGHT MEET FIVE TIMES A YEAR RIGHT NOW, I MEAN, THAT'S ONE AND A HALF MEETINGS. THEY CAN IT'S VERY DIFFERENT. AND SO WHAT I WOULD ASK IS THAT WE KEEP IT AS IT IS AND THAT THE CITY SECRETARY LOOK BACK AT THIS PAST YEAR TO SEE WHO'S BEEN IN VIOLATION OF IT AND FOLLOW THAT PROCESS OF, OF WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING THIS YEAR AND, AND CONTINUE AS NORMAL.

>> YES. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND. >> I LIKE WHAT MAYOR PRO TEM SUGGESTED, AND I'M WONDERING IF, IF POSSIBLY THE CITY SECRETARY OR REPRESENTATIVE COULD CONTACT THAT MEMBER AND SAY, HEY, BOB, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE YOU'VE MISSED A COUPLE OF MEETINGS. IS THIS STILL SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DO? AND, AND GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO STEP DOWN WITHOUT, FRANKLY, WITHOUT BEING CALLED BEFORE THE COUNCIL AND BEING REMOVED? BUT, BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S A DIFFICULT FIT BECAUSE ONE MEETING A YEAR, 26 MEETINGS A YEAR, THAT'S, THAT'S

QUITE A THAT'S QUITE A DIFFERENCE. >> ANYONE ELSE? YES. COUNCILOR

MURPHY. >> YES, I, I AGREE, I THINK THAT IT'S WHICHEVER TRIGGERS THE POLICY. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE MEETING FOUR TIMES IN A YEAR, 50% IS TWO. AND THEN BY THE TIME YOU MISSED A THIRD ONE, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE TRIGGERED BOTH OF THEM, RIGHT? WHEREAS IF YOU KNOW YOU'RE MISSING, IF IT'S A MONTHLY MEETING, THAT'S A QUARTER OF A YEAR RATHER THAN HALF OF THE YEAR. AND MAYBE BY THAT POINT WE CAN GET THAT PERSON MAYBE REMOVED AND HAVE THEM REPLACED BY SOMEONE WHO CAN SHOW UP TO MEETINGS, IS MY OPINION. I AGREE WITH WHAT'S

BEEN SAID. >> WITH THE CURRENT POLICY. YEAH.

>> COUNCILMEMBER JESTER YEAH. >> AND I JUST WANT TO ALSO START BY SAYING THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION. YOU CAN TELL HOW MUCH WORK WENT INTO EACH OF THESE REPORTS. AND THEN ALSO ALL THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THIS PRESENTATION WITH SO MUCH INFORMATION. SO I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE IN THE TIME AND EFFORT THAT HAS GONE INTO TRYING TO GIVE US AS MUCH INFORMATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS AS POSSIBLE. WITH THAT, AS FAR AS CLARIFYING ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS, I TEND TO I THINK THAT PERHAPS IF WE CAN DECREASE THE NUMBER EVEN MORE THAN RECOMMENDED, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LESS OF THESE ISSUES, AS WELL AS DECREASING THE FREQUENCY OF SOME OF THESE. SO I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THE CURRENT CONSENSUS OF KEEPING THE GROUNDS AS THEY ARE TODAY. AND ANOTHER JUST SIDEBAR WOULD BE AS OPPOSED TO ASKING THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE, BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE HAD, YOU KNOW, THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE HAS BEEN QUITE OVERWHELMED BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND THE ISSUES WE'VE HAD AND INCONSISTENT PROCESSES THAT MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ASK EACH OF THE CHAIRS TO KEEP TRACK OF AND REACH OUT. I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A BOARD THAT I WAS CHAIRING, AND I WOULD REACH OUT EACH TIME TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE QUORUM. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT JUST MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT'S SHARED. THE LOAD ON THAT IS JUST MY THOUGHT. THANK YOU.

>> YES, COUNCILMEMBER RUMOHR. >> GIVEN THE NEW INFORMATION, I HAD NOT CONSIDERED THAT. I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP. SO I WILL ADD MY VOICE TO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THE CONSENSUS.

AND I ALSO AGREE WITH THE IDEA OF SEEING IF THERE'S AN AVENUE FOR IT TO NOT GO TO THE CITY SECRETARY AND FIND. MAYBE EACH COMMITTEE HAS A LIKE A LIAISON PERSON, SOME SOMEBODY OTHER

THAN CITY SECRETARY. I SUPPORT THAT AS WELL. >> OKAY. YEAH, IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON KEEPING IT AS IT IS. BUT NOW IS THIS MAYOR PRO TEM WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT ALSO, IS THERE A SEPARATE CATEGORY FOR BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPEDITIOUS ON THE ENFORCEMENT? LIKE IF SOMEBODY GOT FOUR APPS? I MEAN, IS THERE ANOTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT OR

IS THAT IS THIS THE TIME TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION? >> THIS IS THE TIME.

>> OKAY. SO YOU HAD MENTIONED KIND OF BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE AWARE OF FOLLOWING THE, THE, THE ABSENCE RULES AND THE REQUESTING UNEXCUSED. OR IF THEY DIDN'T, THEN.

>> AND THAT'S WHY I HAD SAID AT THE BEGINNING THAT I WOULD ASK THE CITY SECRETARY NOW TO LOOK BACK AT THE PAST YEAR TO SEE WHO'S BEEN IN VIOLATION OF, OF THIS YEAR. AND THE REASON I FEEL COMFORTABLE MAKING THAT SUGGESTION IS BECAUSE EVERY SINGLE PERSON THAT SIGNS UP FOR A BOARD OR COMMISSION IS VERY CLEAR OF WHAT THE RULES ARE. THEY'RE VERY CLEAR BECAUSE IT'S IN THE PACKET, IT IS DISCUSSED WITH THEM. AND SO AND SO. THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING.

>> YEAH. AND I'M AND I ASSUME THAT THE THE AGREEMENT WITH HIM AND MOVING FORWARD IS THAT PART

[02:55:04]

OF THAT COMPONENT IN THE CONSENSUS? I MEAN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT

CONFLATING THE TWO. >> I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS BECAUSE I AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I DO NOT WANT TO ADD MORE ON TO THE CITY SECRETARY'S PLATE, THE OFFICE, BECAUSE THEY'RE DOING SO MUCH WITH SO LITTLE. I BELIEVE. HOWEVER, THE FOR EXAMPLE, THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL THAT I'M ON AND SUBCOMMITTEES WE GET IN THE CITY GETS REPORTS. HOW MANY YOU KNOW FOR THE YEAR, WHICH MEMBERS WERE THERE, WHICH HAD EXCUSED ABSENCES, WHICH DID NOT. IN THE PAST, I HAVE ASKED FOR THAT INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC BOARDS. WHO IS SHOWING UP, WHO ARE THE QUORUM ISSUES WHEN I HEAR ABOUT THESE ISSUES, BUT I WOULD I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF THERE WAS A WAY THAT THE SOFTWARE THAT WE HAVE TO TRACK THAT IF HOW DIFFICULT AND HOW MUCH TIME THAT WOULD BE FOR US TO GET REPORTS SHOWING US IF OUR REPRESENTATIVES AND WHO IS SHOWING UP, WHO GOT EXCUSED ABSENCES. AGAIN, I DON'T MEAN TO NECESSARILY CREATE MORE WORK. HOWEVER, I AGREE COMPLETELY WITH THE SENTIMENT THAT WE NEED MORE OF A WATCH ON THESE AND THAT, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE PROBLEM IS WE'VE NOT BEEN MAKING SURE THAT OUR APPOINTEES ARE FULFILLING THEIR DUTIES. AND I ACTUALLY THINK WE SHOULD HAVE ALL THE APPOINTEES SIGN SOMETHING SAYING THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THE OBLIGATIONS, THE ESTIMATED TIME THEY'RE GOING TO NEED TO SPEND ON PREPARING WHAT THE DATES ARE, ETCETERA. SO

ANYWAYS, WE WILL GET TO ALL OF THAT. THANK YOU. >> YEAH, I THINK WE NEED TO

CREATE A COMMITTEE TO. YEAH. I'M KIDDING. I'M. I'M TEASING. >> OH MY STARS.

>> BUT LET'S NOT MAKE THIS MONTH. THAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S RIGHT.

>> OKAY. SO I WE HAVE A CONSENSUS. DO YOU DO YOU HAVE DIRECTION. YOU'VE GOT CLARITY

ON THE DIRECTION. >> I DO. YES SIR. ALL RIGHT. >> YOU WANT.

>> TO GO BACK. OH, GOD. >> AND WE'RE DONE. >> ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. YES.

MAYOR PRO TEM. >> AS FOR NUMBER TWO, I BROUGHT THIS FORWARD. AND TO BE CLEAR, LIKE THE REASON I BROUGHT IT FORWARD IS YOU TALKED ABOUT IT IN HERE, IS THAT THERE WERE SOME BOARDS THAT I THINK ONE OF THE LARGEST CONTRIBUTORS TO THEM NOT BEING ABLE TO MEET QUORUM WAS BECAUSE THERE WERE VACANCIES THAT JUST PEOPLE WEREN'T APPOINTED TO THEM. SO WHAT I WOULD ASK FOR IS THAT WE DO IMPLEMENT A THREE MONTH PERIOD OF FOR THAT COUNCIL MEMBER TO APPOINT SOMEONE, AND AFTER THAT THREE MONTH PERIOD, THEN ANYONE IN THIS BODY COULD COULD MAKE THAT NOMINATION. HOWEVER, I WOULD NOT INCLUDE HOLDOVERS IN THAT BECAUSE HOLDOVERS ARE NOT A PART OF THE PROBLEM. IT'S THE TRUE VACANCY THAT I'M TRYING TO SOLVE. THAT

WAS AT LEAST THE HEART BEHIND IT. >> YES, COUNCILMEMBER JESTER,

>> I, I CAN APPRECIATE THE SENTIMENT AND WHAT IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THIS. WHAT I WOULD SAY PERSONALLY IS I COULD GET ON BOARD WITH THAT, BUT MORE LIKE SIX MONTHS. AND THE REASONING BEING, WHEN I STARTED ON COUNCIL, I STARTED MAKING APPOINTMENTS WITH EVERY SINGLE APPOINTEE, AND I MEET WITH EVERYONE WHOM I MIGHT PUT ON A BOARD OR COMMISSION TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE AS FAR AS EXPECTATIONS, COMMUNICATION, AND WHAT MY EXPECTATIONS ARE AS FAR AS LETTING ME KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING, BECAUSE I CAN'T WATCH EVERY SINGLE. I MEAN, NOT THAT I CAN'T. I WON'T WATCH EVERY SINGLE. I GUESS I COULD IF I JUST DID IT ALL DAY. SO, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT, I WOULD WANT A LITTLE MORE LEEWAY BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE GETS TO PUT IN SOMEONE THAT THEN IS GOING TO BE IN THAT ROLE FOR YEARS. AND MAYBE THERE'S ANOTHER WORKAROUND FOR THAT. MAYBE IT'S AFTER THREE MONTHS, SOMEONE MIGHT SUBMIT TO THAT COUNCIL MEMBER, HEY, YOU MAY NOT HAVE HAD SOMEONE BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES YOU WANT SOMEONE FROM YOUR DISTRICT. AND SO IF SOMEONE ELSE IS NOMINATING SOMEONE TO BE IN THAT COUNCIL MEMBER SEAT, YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY. SO I THINK WE NEED A LONGER RUNWAY, IN MY OPINION.

AND THEN I ALSO THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WE MAINTAIN THAT KIND OF REPRESENTATION THAT WAS INTENDED BY HAVING DIFFERENT COUNCIL MEMBERS APPOINT, HAVE

SEATS TO APPOINT. SO ANYWAYS. >> OKAY. >> SO I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I WOULD PROBABLY MODIFY IT A LITTLE BIT IN MY MIND TO GIVE A LITTLE MORE GRACE. PERIOD.

>> YES. COUNCILMEMBER RUMOHR. >> I WILL HAVE TO AGREE WITH YOU BECAUSE SIX MONTHS WAS ALSO IN MY HEAD. SOMETIMES THREE MONTHS IS A LITTLE TOO FAST TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, TO GO

[03:00:02]

THROUGH THE PROCESS, MEET WITH PEOPLE. SOMETIMES PEOPLE SAY NO OVER AND OVER. I'VE HAD A COMMITTEE I'VE BEEN TRYING TO RECRUIT FOR. I'VE GOTTEN NO LIKE 6 OR 7 TIMES, SO I'M TRYING MY BEST TO GET IT FILLED. BUT I MEAN, AT SOME POINT I WOULD BE AFTER SIX MONTHS IF I COULDN'T DO IT. OKAY, BUT THREE IS A LITTLE SHORT FOR ME. I CAN DO SIX MONTHS, THOUGH.

>> OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT. YES. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND.

>> I LIKE SIX MONTHS. DOES THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE NOTIFY THE COUNCIL MEMBER THAT THERE IS A VACANCY? YES. SIX MONTHS AFTER THAT NOTIFICATION, I'D BE GOOD ABOUT.

>> OKAY. >> RIGHT. ANYBODY ELSE? YES. >> I'M GOOD. WITH SIX MONTHS FROM THE VACANCY DATE, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I RECEIVED THAT SPREADSHEET DAY ONE WHEN I WALKED FROM MISS KRISTI HERSELF. WHEN I WALKED IN DAY ONE MEETING, SHE SAID, HERE ARE YOUR I HAVE 11 PEOPLE I GOT TO APPOINT. RIGHT? SO I UNDERSTAND THAT FOR SOMEONE STEPPING INTO THE ROLE AND JULY 14TH TO HAVE 11 PEOPLE EXPIRING THAT AUGUST, THAT'S BEEN A HARD CHALLENGE.

SO I AGREE WITH SIX MONTHS, BUT I WOULD GO FROM THE DATE THAT THEIR EXPIRATION IS ON, ON THEIR BOARD. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE. SO IF THEY'RE SET TO EXPIRE AUGUST, THAT MEANS I'VE GOT SIX MONTHS FROM AUGUST 20TH, AUGUST 31ST OF 2026. MEANING BY FEBRUARY.

>> WOULD IT, WOULD IT WORK IF IT WERE THE DATE OF THE VACANCY, THE DATE OF THE VACANCY WAS

RECEIVED? OKAY. I THINK. >> THAT'S FAIR. LIKE IF IT DOES BECOME VACANT OUTSIDE OF THAT REGULAR TERM, IF THEY LEFT, IF THEY WHATEVER. YEAH, THAT MAKES SENSE.

>> IS THAT IS THAT GOOD WITH THE PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPRESSING SIX MONTHS THAT THAT IT STARTS

THE WHAT DID YOU SAY. >> THE DATE. >> OF THE VACANCY. VACANCY. YES.

>> JUST A THOUGHT TO PUT OUT THERE. I WAS RUNNING SCENARIOS IN MY HEAD AND IT'S LIKE, OKAY, WHAT IF IT BECAME VACANT AND TWO, 2 OR 3 MONTHS LATER SOMEBODY ELECTED TO THAT POSITION AND NOW THEY HAVE THREE MONTHS. OR IT COULD BE WORSE THAN THAT. THEY MAY HAVE ONE MONTH TO FILL IT IF THE VACANCY STARTED BEFORE THEIR TERM. SO THAT'S JUST A COMPLICATION I WAS CONSIDERING, AND I'M NOT SURE HOW TO GET AROUND THAT YET. I MEAN, IT COULD BE SIX MONTHS IF YOU WERE ALREADY IN THE SEAT SIX MONTHS, BUT IF IT WAS VACANT WHEN YOU GOT THERE, YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS AFTER BEING ELECTED TO WORK ON IT. THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE MORE

COMPLICATED. >> BUT WHAT ABOUT THE DATE COUNT? THE COUNCIL MEMBER WAS NOTIFIED, AND THEN IF A NEW COUNCIL MEMBER WAS ELECTED, THAT DATE WOULD START WHEN THE

THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBER WAS NOTIFIED. >> SO THEY WOULD HAVE SIX MONTHS. LIKE IF THE COUNCIL, A NEW COUNCIL MEMBER, EVEN IF THE PERSON HAS BEEN VACANT FOR A WHILE, THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD HAVE SIX MONTHS. I MEAN, THAT'S MY GOAL. THAT'S WHAT I'M

TRYING TO AIM FOR. YEAH. >> OKAY. MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I DO HEAR THAT. I, I WOULD JUST RESTATE THAT THE GOAL OF THIS IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE AREN'T ANY VACANCIES, BECAUSE THOSE LEAD TO QUORUM ISSUES. AND WE HAVE AN EXAMPLE RIGHT NOW WHERE THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE A SEAT ON PNC FILLED UNTIL NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER, WHENEVER THAT ALL ENDS. AND THAT'S A LONG TIME FOR FOR A SEAT TO BE VACANT TO THEN AT THAT POINT, GIVE THAT INDIVIDUAL ANOTHER SIX MONTHS. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A YEAR THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR THAT CIRCUMSTANCE.

AND SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S NOT EVER GOING TO BE A PERFECT SCENARIO FOR VACANCIES, BUT THAT'S WHY I WOULD DISCOURAGE IT BEING WHAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY. I UNDERSTAND THE HEART OF WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING. I JUST THINK THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT FOR ME

OUTWEIGH THE BENEFITS OF IT. >> OKAY, SO LET'S DO ONE THING AT A TIME. SO WE'VE GOT SIX MONTHS WITHOUT THIS SORT OF CAVEAT OF ONCE THE SEAT IS VACANT. SO IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE GOT A CONSENSUS ON THAT. AND NOW IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT ON SOME OF THESE, IT'S MORE OF AN IT'S HOW DO WE IMPLEMENT THAT? SO IF WE WANT TO GO THROUGH ALL THESE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS, BECAUSE I CAN THINK OF SEVERAL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU APPOINT SOMEBODY, NOMINATE SOMEBODY AND THEY GET VOTED DOWN, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE SIX MONTHS STARTS. I MEAN, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF. SO HOW DO WE WANT TO UP THE ATTENDANCE? WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, LET'S GO AHEAD AND WORK WITH THE SIX MONTHS WHEN IT COMES BACK FOR APPROVAL OR SOMETHING, OR WE CAN TRY TO WORK OUT SOME ADDITIONAL KIND OF RULES IN THAT REGARD TO HELP, BECAUSE WE COULD SPEND ALL THE REST OF THE AFTERNOON TALKING ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT WHAT IFS. BUT THEY'RE GOOD. I MEAN, THEY'RE GOOD. AND IF YOU HAVE SOME OF THOSE SCENARIOS, YOU KNOW, PLEASE FORWARD IT ON TO STAFF SO WE CAN TRY TO GET THOSE ADDRESSED BEFORE WE COME BACK. YES. COUNCILMEMBER

GESTURE. >> SORRY, I WAS TAKING SOME NOTES, SO I APOLOGIZE. WOULD

YOU REPEAT THE SUGGESTION AT THIS TIME? >> YEAH, I'D SAY WE MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A CONSENSUS FOR SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE VACANCY THAT IF IT'S NOT FILLED BY SIX MONTHS, THAT OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN DO IT. THERE WAS A

[03:05:04]

CAVEAT THAT WAS THAT WAS PRESENTED THAT IF THAT HAPPENS IN THE TERM IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ELECTION, WHAT DO WE DO THERE? IS IT JUST A FULL SIX CALENDAR MONTHS AND WHOEVER'S IN OFFICE, THAT'S ALL THEY GET. I MEAN, THAT'S ALL THE SEAT. IT'S MEASURED BY THE SEAT INSTEAD OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER. SO I'M SAYING THAT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO HASH OUT ALL THOSE SORT OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF SCENARIOS, NOW WE'VE AT LEAST GOT THE BASE AND WE CAN COME BACK AND GO, OKAY, HOW DO WE WORK OUT THESE KIND OF CAVEATS? BUT BECAUSE WE COULD SPEND A LOT MORE TIME DOING THAT, IS THAT IS THAT FAIR? CAN WE? OKAY, FANTASTIC. THANK YOU. TERM CYCLE. YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER. PERRY. >> I LIKE STANDARDIZING THE TERMS STARTING SEPTEMBER 1ST THROUGH AUGUST 31ST. I ACTUALLY REALLY LIKED THE QUESTION THAT I BELIEVE COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR ASKED IN THE BIG SHEET BACK UP. I THINK THAT IT IS MOST EQUITABLE TO BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE ELECTION CYCLE. SO POSITIONS ONE THROUGH FOUR WOULD HAPPEN DURING ODD YEARS, AND THEN FIVE, SIX AND SEVEN WOULD HAPPEN DURING EVEN YEARS, SO THAT THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE ELECTED GET TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPOINT THEIR SLATE OF PEOPLE, RATHER THAN IT BEING BASED ON THE EVEN ODD YEAR AND THEN COMING IN AND HAVING MAYBE LITTLE TO NO, OR

JUST A FEW APPOINTEES. >> OKAY. MAYOR PRO TEM. >> YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT.

>> OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER GESTURE. >> IN AGREEMENT. >> OKAY, OKAY. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON THAT. AND THEN RECRUITMENT. ANY. YES. COUNCILMAN PERRY.

>> I AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION. I LIKE THAT IDEA OF HAVING THE INTEREST FORM ALL YEAR, LETTING PEOPLE REACH OUT AND SAY THAT THEY CARE AND THEY WANT TO BE A PART OF SOMETHING. AND THEN YOU SHOOTING THEM AN EMAIL BACK WHEN IT'S ABOUT TIME TO SAY, GREAT, YOU SHOULD APPLY NOW. I LIKE THE WINDOW. I THINK IT ENCAPSULATES WHEN A MAY ELECTION WOULD PROBABLY BE APPOINTED. AND THEN IF THERE'S A RUNOFF, AS SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN IN ONE BEING LIKE YOUR FIRST MEETING JULY 14TH, I THINK THAT THAT WORKS OUT WELL. THAT

THAT'S A GOOD WINDOW. THANKS. GREAT RECOMMENDATION. >> YES. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND.

>> I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE ABOUT THE PERSON THAT APPLIES. JULY 16TH. THEN THEY HAVE THEY HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL MAY TO. WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IS THAT IT BE OPEN ALL YEAR ROUND LIKE IT IS NOW, BUT HAVE A SPECIFIC ADVERTISING PERIOD THAT THAT THAT MAYBE WE USE THE NEWSPAPER TO, TO SOLICIT PEOPLE THAT THAT HADN'T BEEN CONTACTED. MAYBE IF WE CAN'T FIND THEM, MAYBE THEY COULD FIND US. BUT, BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING THIS THING OPEN AND AVAILABLE ALL YEAR

ROUND. >> MAYOR PRO TEM DID YOU, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP?

>> YEAH. I MEAN, I WONDER IF THERE'S A WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THAT BY JUST YEAH, I, IT ACCOMPLISHES THE SAME THING IF WE, IF WE, BECAUSE EVEN IF IT'S AFTER JULY 15TH, WHEN WOULD THE TERM START? SEPTEMBER 1ST? SO IT I MEAN, COULD IT SHIFT FROM MAY 15TH TO AUGUST? WHAT'S THE LAST DAY OF AUGUST? I DON'T KNOW HOW TO COUNT MY KNUCKLES. WAS IT 31ST? I'M. I'M FINE. I'M FINE WITH MAY 15TH TO JULY 15TH. I'M ALSO FINE IF WE EXTEND THAT BECAUSE I HAVE A QUESTION. JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE'S BEING. GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, THE COUNCIL MEMBER COULD STILL NOMINATE SOMEONE OF THEIR OWN, YOU KNOW, DESIRE, EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T GO THROUGH THIS

RECRUITMENT. RIGHT? IS THAT RIGHT? >> IS THAT. YES, YES.

>> WELL. OKAY. ACTUALLY, IN THAT SENSE, THEN I WOULD I WOULD KEEP AS THE AS THE

SUGGESTION IS. YEAH. >> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. >> I SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION

FROM STAFF. >> MAYOR PRO TEM. WHAT DID YOU I MEAN, YOU GOT A CLARIFICATION.

YOU ASKED A QUESTION. AND SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS. SO LET'S SAY LET'S SAY IT'S MAY 15TH TO JULY 15TH. YOU WANT YOU WANT TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY AUGUST 1ST. IN OTHER WORDS, CAN YOU DO THAT IF IF THEY HAVEN'T MADE AN APPLICATION WITHIN MAY 15TH TO

JULY 15TH? I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT CAVEAT OR WHAT. >> WHAT WAS I ASKING?

>> YES. >> WHAT I WAS ASKING WAS MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE WERE GOING TO COLLECT APPLICATIONS DURING THIS TIME OF PEOPLE WHO WERE INTERESTED. YES. AND THEN FORWARD THAT ALONG TO COUNCIL MEMBERS SO THAT THEY COULD REVIEW THESE DOCUMENTS. MY POINT WAS, IS JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE DID IT BETWEEN THOSE THAT TWO MONTH PERIOD OF TIME

DOESN'T LOCK US IN TO JUST THOSE PEOPLE. >> OKAY. WELL, OKAY, SO THEN

[03:10:04]

WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT IF IT'S OUTSIDE OF THIS MAY 15TH TO JULY 15TH, YOU CAN NOMINATE SOMEONE WHO WAS NOT PART OF THAT APPLICANT POOL WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD. CORRECT. OKAY.

YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE GOT HEAD NODS AND EVERYBODY'S COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND YOU YOU.

>> I STILL LIKE THE, THE THE OPEN, THE OPEN APPLICATION. >> BUT BUT CREATE A A A REAL CONSCIOUSNESS AMONG THE CITIZENS. OKAY. OF WHAT'S GOING ON? NOT ALL THE TIME. YOU CAN'T DO IT ALL THE TIME. BUT, BUT DURING DURING THAT, THAT PERIOD, PERHAPS. OKAY, A, A PERIOD.

SURE. PERIOD. >> SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON THAT PARTICULAR TIME FRAME, BUT IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE A COUNCIL MEMBER FROM MAKING A NOMINATION OUTSIDE OF THAT, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE TECHNICALLY ALL YEAR ROUND. I MEAN, IF THEY IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO MAKE A NOMINATION WITHIN THAT TIME FRAME. CORRECT. OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. PERHAPS WE'VE DONE THAT IN THE PAST. I JUST HAVEN'T NOTICED IT. BUT BUT A, A, A FOCUSED EFFORT TO, LIKE I SAY, SOMEBODY MOVES HERE AND THEY DON'T KNOW THEIR COUNCIL MEMBER YET, BUT THEY STILL HAVE AN INTEREST IN X. THEY COULD THEY COULD APPLY.

>> SURE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE'VE GOT THAT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. ARE THESE THE ONLY THINGS WE'RE ASKING DIRECTION ON. BECAUSE I'M KEEPING TRACK OF THE TIME, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET TO THE CLOSED SESSION BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING. SO I'M NOT SURE ON THE AGENDA ITEM THAT WE SORT OF MOVED. SO, OKAY, I JUST WANTED TO SORT OF KEEP TRACK OF

TIME AND WHERE WE WERE. >> YEAH. SO THE, THE REMAINING DIRECTION THAT WE HAVE IS JUST

FOR ALL OF THE INDIVIDUAL. >> THE STRUCTURAL CHANGE. NUMBER FIVE.

>> FOR JUST THE, FOR THE. >> WE'RE GOING TO, WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK AFTER THE COUNCIL MEETING AND TALK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE'LL BE HERE ALL NIGHT. OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO STRUCTURAL CHANGES. SO. LET'S START THE BALL ROLLING. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

>> WE GOT TO START SOMEWHERE. SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'LL START WITH THIS LITTLE TINY SNOWBALL. AND THAT IS WHY. WHY? WHY DO WE FEEL LIKE WE NEED ALTERNATES? FOR EXAMPLE, THE THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IN PASCO ARE CAN WE TALK ABOUT DOES STAFF FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE ALTERNATE ALTERNATES ON. SPECIFICALLY CITIZEN APPOINTED BY COUNCIL BOARDS?

>> I BELIEVE WITH AT LEAST ONE, IF NOT BOTH OF THEM. THE ALTERNATES ARE REQUIRED BY

STATE LAW, BY OUR MAKEUP. >> THANK YOU. I WANTED. >> TO MAKE SURE CHARLIE CAN

COME CORRECT ME. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WASN'T JUST IN OUR CHARTER

OR BECAUSE WE WANTED TO HAVE BACKUP. IF STATE LAW HEARD. >> THANK YOU. YES. COUNCIL

MEMBER JESTER. >> IF I COULD, BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU COULD JUST LIST WHICH OF THESE ARE STATE REQUIRED AND WHICH OF THESE ARE CHARTER REQUIRED. JUST SO WE KNOW KIND OF WHAT THE PLAYGROUND LOOKS LIKE BEFORE WE

JUMP ON THE MONKEY BARS. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE

WAS WRITING. >> EXPLICITLY STATING YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO ALTERNATES FOR ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT. THANK YOU. THOUGH.

>> SO REQUIRED BY STATE LAWS, THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AND THEN THE ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE, AND THEN THE HISTORIC LAND COMMISSION COMMITTEE BASED ON SOME FUNDING THAT WE GET. AND THEN IN THE CHARTER IS PUBLIC PLANNING AND

ZONING AND ZBA. >> CAN YOU REPEAT ALL OF THOSE? >> AND STATE LAW, CIVIL SERVICE, ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY AND HISTORIC LAND COMMISSION, AND THEN IN THE CHARTER, PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD PLANNING AND ZONING AND THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.

>> OKAY. BEFORE WE THIS IS HOW I WANT TO HANDLE THIS. WE'VE GOT I'VE GOT A LIST OF ALL THE COMMITTEES AND I, WE'RE JUST GOING TO. WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO ONE BY ONE. AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, THIS IS THE ONE WE'RE ON. LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.

>> SO ABSENT THESE SIX ABSENT THESE SIX THAT SHE JUST LISTED. >> YES. OR IF I IF I SAY IT, THEN WE'LL DEAL WITH THAT. WE'LL WE'LL IF THEY NEED TO. YEAH. YEAH. WE'LL JUST.

>> THE LIGHTNING ROUND. >> YEP. YEAH. THIS IS OKAY. SO THE FIRST ONE I HAVE ON IS A COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT. THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION TO RESOLVE OR TRANSITION. YES.

COUNCILMEMBER JESTER. >> I WOULD GIVE DIRECTION TO DISSOLVE. WE'VE GOT ANOTHER

APPLICABLE WORD. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. YES. COUNCILMEMBER RUMOHR.

>> I'M GOOD WITH THE RECOMMENDATION. UNDERSTANDING THAT WE ALSO HAVE

SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK COMMITTEE. >> OKAY. OKAY. YES. COUNCILMAN

[03:15:02]

PERRY. >> I AGREE IN DISSOLVING AND I'M GRATEFUL THAT SUSTAINABILITY IS THE FRAMEWORK. AND WE THERE'S FUNDING THAT GETS ALLOCATED BY THEM TOO.

ALSO, I WOULD LOVE ONE OF THOSE CUTE LITTLE MATRICES THAT YOU HAVE.

>> WELL, I DIDN'T CREATE IT. SO YEAH, THANK YOU. WHOEVER DID THAT AND COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND DISSOLVE. MAYOR PRO TEM DISSOLVE. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE DIRECTION ON THAT. NEXT ONE IS DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE. THIS ONE IS EITHER DISSOLVE OR RETURN TO AD HOC.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER RUMOHR. >> AS A MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE, I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT ITS CONTINUATION. THE ONLY REASON GIVEN FOR DISSOLVING IT IS THAT THE ROLES ARE DUPLICATIVE, BUT I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE. THE WORK ABSOLUTELY IS NOT. IF IT WEREN'T FOR THIS COMMITTEE, WE WOULD NOT PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE PASSED OR GOTTEN AS FAR AS WE HAVE ON TREE CODE THAT'S COMING TO COUNCIL SOON. WE WOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN THE ADU ORDINANCE THROUGH. WE WOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN. IT WAS A FEW YEARS AGO BEFORE ALL THE DATA CENTER STUFF GOT REALLY BIG. THEY DID CODE, CODE REVIEW AND CREATED STANDARDS FOR. FOR THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL DID, BUT I GOT A MESSAGE FROM ONE OF MY FELLOW PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS THAT SHE VIEWS IT AS A BRIDGE BETWEEN THESE TWO BODIES. IF THIS GETS DISSOLVED, ALL THAT WORK COMES TO THIS BODY, AND I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT OUR WORK SESSIONS HAVE THE TIME THAT'S NEEDED TO GET INTO THIS. IF YOU'VE SEEN OUR AGENDA FOR TONIGHT, THAT'S A LOT OF CODE REVIEW STUFF THAT MOST PEOPLE AREN'T REALLY GOING TO GET A CHANCE TO SORT OF FLESH OUT. WE GET VERY LIMITED, LIMITED CHANCE TO DISCUSS IT IN THESE BODIES. PLANNING AND ZONING DOESN'T HAVE MUCH TIME. COUNCIL DOESN'T HAVE MUCH TIME. SO IT'S BASICALLY THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY MASSAGE IT BEFORE IT GOES OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND COMES TO THESE BODIES. SO I WOULD I WOULD ARGUE FOR KEEPING IT. MY ROLE IS DUPLICATED ON BASICALLY EVERY COMMITTEE I'M ON, BUT THE WORK IS NOT OKAY WOULD BE MY ARGUMENT FOR THAT.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER JESTER. >> I'D GIVE DIRECTION TO DISSOLVE. I SAT ON THAT COMMITTEE FOR ONE MEETING, AND THAT WAS ENOUGH TO TELL ME THAT IT WAS CREATED AS A TASK FORCE. WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING THE COMPLETE CODE, IT WAS THEN CONTINUED, AND I THINK THEY SPENT OVER A HALF A YEAR ON ONE ORDINANCE MEETING TWICE A WEEK WITH PROBABLY 12 STAFF PEOPLE IN THE ROOM. SO THAT'S HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. I THINK THAT IT SHOULD CONTINUE AS A TASK FORCE AS ITEMS COME UP THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, THAT COUNCIL GIVES DIRECTION TO. HOWEVER, I DO NOT THINK THAT I DO NOT THINK THE USE OF OUR RESOURCES ARE BEST USED. WITH A TWICE A MONTH MEETING WITH 12 STAFF PEOPLE AND FIVE MEMBERS.

OPINIONS, SO I THINK IT SHOULD EITHER BE AD HOC AS NEEDED OR, YOU KNOW, ASSIGNMENTS GIVEN AS NEEDED. AND WHEN THEY'RE WHEN THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMES UP, WE CAN UTILIZE IT.

>> OKAY. >> WHICH ONE WOULD YOU, WHICH ONE WOULD YOU PREFER? WHAT WOULD BE YOUR PREFERENCE ON THAT? BECAUSE DISSOLVE TOTALLY OR HAVE JUST AN AD HOC.

>> I WOULD DISSOLVE UNTIL IT'S NEEDED AND THEN APPOINT ONE. >> OKAY. RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER

PERRY. >> THANK YOU. I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH TRANSITIONING THE AMOUNT OF OR LESSENING MAYBE THE AMOUNT OF TIME WE MEET. BUT I DO AGREE, LIKE WE JUST HAD A MEETING ON MONDAY AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MISSING MIDDLE AND INFILL AND WRITING IN CODE THAT COULD HELP TALK ABOUT SMALLER HOMES, DIFFERENT TYPES OF FILLING IN SOME OF THE LAND THAT EXISTS THAT MOST DEVELOPERS DON'T WANT TO TOUCH FOR, LIKE A REGULAR SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND PROVIDING REAL, AFFORDABLE HOMES FOR FOLKS TO HAVE FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS, WHICH IS A PROGRAM WE'RE FUNDING THROUGH THE CITY TO ASSIST FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS.

SO I JUST FEEL LIKE RIGHT NOW, WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON SOMETHING REALLY POIGNANT. AND I AGREE WITH WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR THAT BASED ON THE SESSIONS WE HAVE HERE, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO DISCUSS THE INTRICACIES. AND WE GET THAT WITH DC ARC. SO YEAH, I WOULD BE OKAY IF YOU WANTED TO LESSEN THE AMOUNT OF TIME WE MEET, BUT MAYBE NOT, BUT NOT DISSOLVING

ENTIRELY. >> OKAY, SO YOU'D BE OPEN TO MAYBE AN AD HOC KIND OF PERSPECTIVE OF AS NEEDED. IS THAT ARE YOU SAYING REDUCE THE FREQUENCY TO ONE? I MEAN, WHAT,

WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU? >> I MEAN, IF WE WANT TO LESSEN IT TO ONCE A MONTH, THAT WOULD CUT THE STAFFING TIME IN HALF IF IT. YEAH, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND. >> I WOULD DISSOLVE AND AND

RECREATE IF WHEN NECESSARY. >> OKAY. >> I KNOW HOW TO COUNT. AND I'M SEEING PROBLEMS GETTING TO FOUR ON THIS ONE EITHER WAY. SO I MEAN. TO COUNCIL MEMBER FERRY.

I WONDER THEN IF YOU MIGHT BE WILLING TO DO AD HOC LIKE AS NEEDED RATHER THAN SETTING A

[03:20:03]

STANDARD OF WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS ONCE A MONTH. I'M NOT SAYING THIS WOULD HAPPEN, BUT THEN I WORRY AT THAT POINT THAT WE WOULD BE FORCING A MEETING TO TAKE PLACE. IT'S NOT NECESSARY. AND SO IF IT'S ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS, RATHER, WE CAN THEN DETERMINE WHEN IT IS APPROPRIATE. TO ME. I'M CURIOUS IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'D BE OPEN TO.

>> IF THAT MEANS NOT DISSOLVING IT, THEN YES. YES, THEN YES, I WOULD BE FINE WITH AD HOC.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WHAT'S YOUR DIRECTION? >> THAT WAS MY DIRECTION TO TO

TO GO AD HOC. >> OKAY. SO. I'M LOOKING FOR A PLACE ONE, BUT THERE'S NOT A PLACE ONE. LET'S SEE. AD HOC. HERE'S NUMBER THREE IS NOT DISSOLVED. ALL RIGHT. SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE THE ABSOLUTE DISSOLVE. IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE TWO, WHICH IS COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND COUNCIL MEMBER GESTURE, I BELIEVE. AND OF COURSE YOU KNOW, BUT IT IS NEEDED. COUNCIL MEMBER FERRY AND COUNCIL MAYOR PRO TEM ARE AD HOC AS NEEDED. IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER, YOU'RE YOU'RE JUST DON'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT.

I MEAN, KEEP IT THAT WAY. >> KEEP AS IS. BUT JUST AS A HEADS UP AS IF IT'S AD HOC, I'M GOING TO START TWO MINUTE PITCHING THE WORK PLAN THAT WE'VE GOT IN THIS COMMITTEE.

>> YEAH. >> YEAH. >> WELL THAT'S.

>> A, WE CAN BRING THOSE TO COUNCIL AND THEN. >> WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, TWO MINUTE PITCHES ARE. THAT DEPENDS ON IF THE COUNCIL MOVES IT FORWARD. SO IT DOESN'T MEAN

IT'S AN AUTOMATIC. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER, HOLLAND. >> MAYOR, AUNT, AUNT, AUNT, MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCIL MEMBER FERRY SAYING THE SAME THING THAT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER JESTER AND I ARE SAYING IT'S IT'S IT DOESN'T IT DOESN'T EXIST UNLESS IT'S NECESSARY.

>> OKAY. IS THAT IS IS THAT WHAT I'M WHAT I'M HEARING? >> SURE. I'M TRYING TO FIND A COMPROMISE SO THAT WE CAN ALL FIGURE OUT SOMETHING TOGETHER. BECAUSE WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU AND WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS I'M NOT ON THE BOARD. I DON'T HAVE THE EXPERIENCE YOU HAVE. AND THAT IT FILLS AN IMPORTANT ROLE WHEN NEEDED. AND SO IF THE GOAL IS FOR IT TO

MEET WHEN NEEDED, NOT AN ARBITRARY NUMBER. >> WELL, I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S YOU SAY POTATO, I SAY POTAHTO DOES THAT MEAN THAT IT QUOTE UNQUOTE EXISTS? AND THEN WHEN IT'S CALLED UP OUT OF THE RESERVES, OH, Y'ALL GO MEET AND IT'S THE SAME BOARD MEMBERS OR IS IT WE WE CREATE IT AS IT COMES UP AS NEEDED. ALL RIGHT. WHO WANTS TO TACKLE THIS ISSUE?

>> I APPRECIATE NEEDING CLARIFICATION ON THAT. I WOULD WANT IT THEN TO STAY. I DON'T WANT TO THEN DISSOLVE IT NOW. OKAY. KEEP CURRENT MEMBERS MEET WHEN NEEDED.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT'S ASSUMING. IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE THINKING ABOUT, COUNCILMEMBER?

>> I CAN LIVE WITH THAT. I CAN I'M I THINK IT'S THE NET. I THINK IT'S THE NET. SAME.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO IT LOOKS LIKE I MEAN, I CAN I CAN LIVE WITH THAT. I MEAN, I WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL ONE WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE CITY WIDE REZONING AND WE MET A LOT.

THEN WHEN I CAME BACK ON COUNCIL, I WAS ON THAT BOARD SIMILARLY TO COUNCIL MEMBER JESTER FOR ONE MEETING, BECAUSE WE SPENT THREE HOURS TALKING ABOUT LIGHT FIXTURES ON TOP OF LAMPPOSTS, AND I THOUGHT WE COULD DO SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT THAN THAT. AND AS FAR AS WHAT'S COMING TO COUNCIL, BECAUSE IF YOU'VE GOT 2 OR 3 COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE WORKING THROUGH ALL THESE THINGS, THERE'S FOUR OF US THAT HAVEN'T HEARD ONE WORD ABOUT IT.

SO IT COULD COME HERE AND BEGIN TO KIND OF UNRAVEL, AND THEN ALL THAT TIME IS KIND OF WASTED.

SO I THINK AS AN AD HOC BASIS, AT LEAST, IT'S A COUNCIL DECISION OF MOVING. LIKE IF YOU MADE A TWO MINUTE PITCH ABOUT A WORK PLAN, WE SAY, OH, OKAY, YEAH. AND WE COULD SAY, WELL, WHY DON'T Y'ALL GO MEET? OR WE CAN DO IT AS A WORK SESSION. I THINK THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY, BUT TO HAVE IT EVERY TWO WEEKS, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S TAKING A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF STAFF TIME. SO I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING, Y'ALL CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THERE'S A CONSENSUS TO NOT DISSOLVE. IN OTHER WORDS, IT GOES AWAY. EVERYBODY'S RELEASED AND WE HAVE TO REFORM IT, CONSTITUTE IT ALL OVER AGAIN, BUT ON AN AD HOC BASIS, AS THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE DETERMINES THAT THAT'S NEEDED FOR PARTICULAR SUBJECTS. THEN IT MOVES FORWARD WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. YEP. OKAY, GOOD. WELL, THAT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S THE DIRECTION. OKAY.

DOWNTOWN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. OH, YES. I'M SORRY, COUNCIL MEMBER.

>> SORRY TO INTERRUPT. I SEE HOW YOU'RE GOING THROUGH. THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. WILL THERE BE OPPORTUNITY TO ALSO CONSIDER THE DISSOLUTION OF ONES THAT AREN'T RECOMMENDED

FOR DISSOLUTION? >> NO. WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THESE. OH, OKAY. YEAH. EACH ONE. YEAH, YEAH. DOWNTOWN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISSOLVE OR SHIFT TO MAIN STREET BOARD SLASH TERMS.

>> I'M SORRY, SIR. WHICH IS IT? >> IT'S THE DEVELOPMENT ECONOMIC. THE DOWNTOWN ECONOMIC

[03:25:02]

DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. YEAH. YES. I'M SORRY, COUNCILMEMBER.

COUNCILMEMBER. >> I'M JUST WEIGHING. I AGREE WITH DISSOLVING AND GIVING THE

TERMS THE SOLE SCORING BODY FOR THE DOWNTOWN REINVESTMENT GRANT. >> OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER.

>> I WOULD I WOULD TRANSITION TO TO THE TERMS. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

ANYBODY ELSE? YES. MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I THINK THEY'RE BOTH SAYING

THE SAME THING. I SUPPORT THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. >> MOVED TO TEARS.

>> YEP. AND SO I'LL BUT WE'VE GOT CONSENSUS. WE GOT FOUR HERE. SO WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN THROUGH THAT ONE. YEAH. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP BOARD IT SAYS REMOVE NOMINATING

COMMITTEE AND REDUCED TO SEVEN. COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND. >> I COULD NOT AGREE MORE

SKINNY THAT THING UP. >> OKAY. >> I ACTUALLY HAD A QUESTION.

DID THIS THIS CHANGED? YES. YES. THIS RECOMMENDATION CHANGED FROM SOMETHING ELSE TO THIS.

>> YES. THERE WAS A MISPRINT. >> OKAY. >> OH. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD.

MADAM CITY MANAGER. >> THE. THE SLIDES CHANGED. IT MATCHED OUR ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION IN THE ISR THAT WAS PUBLISHED IN JANUARY. SO WE JUST HAD AN ERROR ON THE SLIDE.

WE CORRECTED IT. >> OKAY. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> OH. I'M SORRY. OKAY. >> SORRY. >> ALL RIGHT. SO I'VE HEARD FROM COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND. WHO ELSE? ANYBODY? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE.

>> I WAS KIND OF HOPING TO HEAR FROM COUNCIL MEMBER JESTER FIRST, BUT I THINK I SUPPORT

THIS RECOMMENDATION. >> OKAY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER JESTER.

>> SO I SERVED ON THIS BOARD. I'VE SHARED THIS BOARD. I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT CONDUIT BETWEEN THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND WHO REPRESENTS THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, GIVING INPUT AND ALSO USING THEM AS RESOURCES. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS I CAN BE IN FAVOR OF DECREASING THE BOARD SIZE. HOWEVER, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A STICKY SITUATION IN IN DOING SO. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS MOST IMPORTANT IS THAT WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE TWO DELEGATES FROM THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. AND WHAT WE MIGHT DO IS CONSIDER MOVING THE UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT OR APPOINTEES TO EX OFFICIO. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE IS SOME WORK TO BE DONE THERE AS FAR AS REVISING WHAT AREAS WE LOOK AT, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, TWO SEATS ARE REPRESENTED BY THE TOP TEN TAXPAYERS. BUT RIGHT NOW, A LOT OF THOSE TOP TEN TAXPAYERS ARE LARGE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS WHERE THERE'S NO ONE. THE OWNERS DON'T LIVE HERE. THE OWNERS ACTUALLY ARE MEMBERS OF LOTS OF DIFFERENT SHAREHOLDERS OF LARGE COMPANIES. SO I THINK WHAT WE MIGHT DO IS ASK THE BOARD ITSELF TO HOW THEY WOULD RESTRUCTURE. IF WE ASKED TO GET DOWN TO SEVEN MEMBERS, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE THOUGHT ONE AVIATION, NOT WE. I DIDN'T COME UP WITH THIS. THIS EXISTED BEFORE I WAS AROUND, BUT NOT AROUND, BUT THE BOARD. SO I THINK IT COULD BE HELPFUL. AS FAR AS I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE EVER HAD QUORUM ISSUES OR THAT WE'VE CANCELED A MEETING BECAUSE OF QUORUM ON THIS BOARD. BUT I COULD BE IN FAVOR WITH DECREASING THE MEMBERSHIP. LIKE I SAID, MAYBE MOVING SOME TO EX OFFICIO. AND THEN I DON'T KNOW IF WE ARE GOING TO DECREASE THAT. THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE TO BE ON THIS BOARD. WE CAN COME TO THE MEETINGS IF WE WANT TO. WE DON'T HAVE TO BE ONE OF THE VOTING MEMBERS, AND WE TYPICALLY SEE WHAT COMES BEFORE THAT BOARD, BEFORE THE BOARD TO EVEN SAY, GIVE DIRECTION, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO BE INTERESTED IN THIS. AND THEN WE GET IT AGAIN. SO I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT BOARD. I THINK IT CAN BE RESTRUCTURED TO BE MORE CONCISE. BUT I THINK THE KEY PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN OUR CITY AND THE BUSINESS OWNERS LEADERS WE HAVE IN TOWN IS JUST A VITAL IMPORTANCE. SO I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH RESTRUCTURING. I DON'T KNOW IF TODAY WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO COME TO A CONSENSUS OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE. SO WE MIGHT I DON'T KNOW HOW TO COME BACK TO THAT, BUT THAT THAT'S MY $0.02. BUT THE POINT BEING, AND THAT NOMINATING COMMITTEE IS TYPICALLY MADE UP OF TWO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ONE CHAMBER MEMBER. IT'S JUST PART OF THAT

PARTNERSHIP AS WE TRY TO WORK TOGETHER WITH THE SAME GOALS. >> OKAY. YES, MAYOR PRO TEM. OH.

[03:30:03]

I'M SORRY. SORRY. >> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, I THINK AARON KEARNEY IS HERE. WE HAVE OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS OR. I DON'T KNOW WHAT HER INPUT IS. I DID NOT TALK TO HER BEFORE I SAID THESE THINGS. SO SHE'S HERE. IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS, I THINK, OR

ONE OPINION. >> I. SO I'D LIKE TO MOVE IT DOWN TO SEVEN. TO. I'D ALSO RECOMMEND ELIMINATING THE NOMINATION BEING THE WAY IT IS AND ALLOWING THAT TO COME BEFORE COUNCIL. SO I THINK I SUPPORT RESTRUCTURING THAT AS WELL. COUNCIL MEMBER JESTER BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT ABOUT WHAT IS THE COMPOSITION OF THE SEVEN. AND I COULD GET ON BOARD WITH IF IT'S JUST THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT TO ATTEND. BECAUSE TO YOUR POINT, I'VE ONLY BEEN ON THERE FOR ONE MEETING AND I WAS LIKE, I THINK I'VE HEARD THIS BEFORE. AND SO I COULD GET ON BOARD WITH US BEING ABLE TO ATTEND, BUT NOT BE THE SEVEN MEMBERS.

>> PART OF THE QUORUM. >> RIGHT. AND SO, BUT WE MIGHT NEED TO REVISIT THEM, WHAT

THOSE SEVEN MEMBERS LOOK LIKE. >> AND I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS THERE'S THERE'S A DESIRE TO RESTRUCTURE IT, BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF GETTING THE INPUT FROM THE BOARD ITSELF, BUT ALSO BREAKING DOWN THE ATTENDANCE OF THE PARTICULAR LABELS OR THE PARTICULAR CATEGORIES OF WHO'S THERE, LIKE FOR THE UNIVERSITY, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S IF THERE'S A GROUP THAT'S NOT ATTENDING VERY OFTEN, THEN AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE, WE MAY NOT HAVE TO REMOVE TOO MANY OF THEM BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE MIGHT NOT. SOME OF THESE GROUPS MAY NOT BE REPRESENTED. SO DO WHAT.

>> THE UNIVERSITY'S COME. >> YEAH. SO SO YEAH. SO I THINK THAT'S IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT. BUT WE WANT TO GET MORE INPUT FROM THE CHAMBER, FROM THE BOARD ITSELF. AND THEN LOOK AT THE DATA ON WHO'S REALLY ATTENDING. SO IF COUNCIL IS OUT, IT'S GOING TO BE, I THINK, FAIRLY OKAY. I THINK WE CAN FIND A WAY TO GET DOWN TO THAT. AND THEN OKAY. IS THAT IS THAT GOOD? ALL RIGHT. YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE MOVE ALONG. MOBILITY COMMITTEE AND PARTNERS ARE REDUCED TO CITY CITY COUNCIL ONLY. I GUESS SM ONLY COUNCIL

MEMBERS. OKAY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. >> APPRECIATE IT. LOOKING AT THIS, I THINK I WOULD SUPPORT LEAVING AS IS, BUT LOOKING AT WAYS TO CREATE GUARDRAILS, UNDERSTANDING THAT IT DOES SOMETIMES GO INTO OPERATION. SO I'M HAPPY TO TRY TO GET A GRASP ON THAT A LITTLE BIT. MY REASON FOR WANTING TO KEEP THE TWO CITIZEN MEMBERS IS THOSE TWO MEMBERS WERE ADDED IN EXCHANGE FOR US DISSOLVING THE TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION, AND THAT'S HOW THOSE ENDED UP ON MOBILITY COMMITTEE. SO GETTING RID OF THOSE WOULD SORT OF LOSE THAT THAT LOCAL VOICE THAT WE HAVE ON THAT COMMITTEE. I LIKE THE IDEA OF HEARING FROM REGIONAL PARTNERS, BUT I DON'T WANT THAT TO CAUSE US TO LOSE OUR LOCAL FOCUS, WHICH IS THE IDEA WITH MOBILITY COMMITTEE. BUT AGAIN, I KEEP IT AS IS, BUT TRY TO FIND SOME GUARDRAILS TO TO KEEP IT MORE AT POLICY LEVEL. SO IT'S NOT GETTING INTO THE WEEDS TOO MUCH. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. JESTER. >> I, I, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE EITHER GO WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF MAKING IT JUST COUNCIL OR I THINK WHAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS COMMITTEE IS KNOWING WHAT'S GOING ON WITH TXDOT, KNOWING WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE COUNTY. THERE MAY BE SOMETHING THAT'S IN EXISTENCE THAT WE COULD KIND OF GET INVOLVED IN ON A COUNTY LEVEL. BUT I THINK AT MOST AN AD HOC, I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE IN EVERY WEEK. WE HAVE A LOT OF MEETINGS GOING ON WITH MOBILITY. WE CAN'T EVEN MAKE ALL THE MEETINGS WHEN IT COMES TO MOBILITY. SO THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION IS EITHER REDUCING IT TO COUNCIL MEMBERS OR ADDING SOME OF THESE PARTNERS SO THAT WE'RE GETTING THAT INFORMATION, BUT I'M JUST NOT REALLY SURE HOW MUCH. WHEN LOOKING AT THE VAST AMOUNT OF INFORMATION YOU NEED TO REALLY MAKE GOOD DECISIONS IN MOBILITY.

I JUST I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS THE WAY TO DO IT. >> YEAH. CORRECT. YES. COUNCIL.

>> THIS IS SAYING THEY MEET MONTHLY. CORRECT. THAT IS OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I DON'T KNOW WHERE I HEARD. MAYBE I JUST HEARD WEEKLY AND I THOUGHT I MISUNDERSTOOD. I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR THAT WE CAN FIND WAYS TO GUARDRAIL DISCUSSION ABOUT THE POLICY AT HAND, BECAUSE THERE IS HIGH ENGAGEMENT, BECAUSE THAT IS, AGAIN, LIKE A TENANT THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SHORING UP. I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS. YEAH.

>> OKAY. COUNCILMAN. >> I LIKE ADDING REGIONAL PARTNERS AND REDUCING TO THREE

COUNCIL MEMBERS. >> OKAY. >> I THINK GIVEN BETWEEN THE

[03:35:01]

TWO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. I'D PREFER TO KEEP THE MEMBERSHIP AS IS NOT NOT REDUCING MEMBERS,

BUT ALSO ADDING REGIONAL PARTNERS TO THAT CONVERSATION. >> OKAY. I GUESS WHEN IT COMES TO I MEAN, BECAUSE I KNOW AT LEAST IT WAS WHEN I WAS ON MOBILITY COMMITTEE, JOHN POLLSTER PRESENTS A MAKES A PRESENTATION OF EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON IN THE COUNTY ROAD WISE. I MEAN, AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ALSO ADDED TO OUR. IT USED TO BE ADDED TO OUR STAFF FRIDAY STAFF REPORTS OR IT WAS SENT TO US. AND IS IT STILL IS OKAY. SO ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON IN THE COUNTY, WE ARE ALL ABLE TO REVIEW. SO I'M NOT SURE THIS IS A. FIRST OF ALL, I'M NOT EVEN QUITE SURE WHERE THE CONSENSUS IS. I HEAR AN AD HOC. FOR REDUCING IT THE AMOUNT OF MEETINGS OR SET MORE GUARDRAILS OR WHAT?

>> I THINK IT SHOULD BE AD HOC. SO AS NEEDED, IF THERE'S A PROJECT, IF THERE'S A SPECIFIC CONCERN, IF THERE'S SOMETHING. I MEAN, WE'VE GOT THE VISION 2.0 COMMITTEE. WE'VE GOT OTHER REPRESENTATIVES ON OTHER. I MEAN, YOU'RE A PART OF A DALLAS AREA REGIONAL GROUP. I'M PART OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL. SUZI IS PART OF THE DENTON COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY.

I, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S NEEDED ALL YEAR ROUND. SO I WOULD SAY EITHER AD HOC AS A TASK FORCE, OR WE TAKE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND LOOK TO ADD SOME OF THE PARTNERS TO MAKE IT MORE MEANINGFUL OR GO WITH THE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS AS STAFF RECOMMENDED.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO I HAVE ONE THAT SAYS ADD TO IT. ALL RIGHT. OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER, YOU'RE SAYING KEEP IT AS IT IS. MAKE SOME GUARDRAILS. OKAY. WHAT I'M WHAT I'M HEARING IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO WE'RE NOT GOING TO FIND A CONSENSUS HERE RIGHT NOW. SO YES, GO AHEAD.

>> I'LL SWITCH TO REGIONAL PARTNERS. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S TWO FOR AD REGIONAL PARTNERS. THAT STILL DOESN'T GET. DID YOU WANT REGIONAL PARTNERS.

>> TO ADD REGIONAL PARTNERS. THREE COUNCIL. >> THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR YOU. OKAY. YOU'RE SAYING KEEP IT KEEP THE MEMBERSHIP THE WAY IT IS. YEAH. AND COUNCIL MEMBER OKAY. YEAH, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THERE. SO WE'RE JUST GOING TO KEEP THE STATUS QUO THE WAY IT IS. BUT BUT PUT SOME GUARDRAILS ON IT. AND, AND WE WE DO GET WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE COUNTY EVERY WHEN POLLSTER MAKES THAT PRESENTATION. OKAY. NUMBER TWO, REVISIT MEMBERSHIP AFTER ADP BOARD CHANGES. ANYBODY OBJECT TO THAT? ANY OBJECTION? OKAY. SO WE'LL GO WITH RECOMMENDATION THERE. BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE PREFERENCE FOR PRIOR BOND COMMITTEE EXPERIENCE. IS THAT THE ONLY CHANGE THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THERE IS JUST THE ATTENDANCE.

WHO WHO CAN BE ON THAT? >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER

MOORE. >> I STRONGLY SUPPORT THAT RECOMMENDATION. IT'S KIND OF HARD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON. IF YOU WEREN'T ON ONE OF THE BOND COMMITTEES.

>> YES. >> MY ONLY AND I AND I AGREE, MY ONLY CONCERN ABOUT THAT IS THAT NOBODY EVER GETS BOND EXPERIENCE. IF IF THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO ARE EVER ON THE

COMMITTEE HAVE BOND EXPERIENCE, IS THAT IS THAT REASONABLE? >> GO AHEAD, MADAM CITY.

>> SO IT'S IT'S CITIZENS THAT SERVED ON OUR OUR CITIZEN BOND COMMITTEE. SO THEY WERE PART OF LIKE EITHER A 2023 BOND COMMITTEE, 2019 2014. IT'S A COMBINATION OF ALL OF THOSE PRIOR BONDS. SO LIKE OUR 2023 BOND COMMITTEE THAT WE HAD, IT WAS 40 RESIDENTS THAT SERVED.

>> THEN MY CONCERN IS UNFOUNDED. >> THANK YOU. OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER ANY OTHER. I MEAN, I SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. WE WE OKAY. THERE. OKAY. COMMITTEE ON

DISABILITIES. INTEGRATE WITH ADA LIAISON GROUP. OKAY. >> WHAT IS WHAT IS THE ADA

LIAISON GROUP? CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT OR CAN. >> SO FARHAN WORKS ON THE ADA LIAISON GROUP. IT IS A STAFF MEMBER REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH DEPARTMENT, AND THEY MEET MONTHLY AND THEY GO OVER KIND OF THE DOCKET OF ADA PLANS AND IMPLEMENTATIONS. SO IT'S JUST A MONTHLY MEETING FOR, FOR THEM TO CHECK IN ON ANY OF THEIR DEPARTMENT ISSUES, BRING, BRING UP ISSUES, WORK ON STUFF. AND THEN SO THIS, THIS GROUP, THE COMMITTEE ON PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, WOULD JUST BE INTEGRATED INTO THAT GROUP QUARTERLY. SO QUARTERLY, THEY

WOULD GET AN UPDATE SIMILAR TO THE SAME UPDATE THAT STAFF GETS. >> THANK YOU. I'M IN FAVOR.

>> OKAY. ANYBODY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION. CHIEF OF POLICE ADVISORY BOARD. REDUCE FREQUENCY. EVALUATE SIZE. YES COUNCILMEMBER.

>> I WOULD I WOULD REDUCE FREQUENCY. I THINK A YEAR MIGHT ONCE A YEAR MIGHT BE TOO MUCH.

[03:40:04]

BUT BUT THAT'S ABOUT AS MINIMAL AS WE COULD MEET AND CERTAINLY REDUCE THE SIZE.

>> OKAY. >> JUST TO THE, TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER PERRY. >> DO WE UNDERSTAND THE PRIMARY CAUSALITY OF QUORUM ISSUES WITH

THIS BOARD SPECIFICALLY? >> YEAH. SO IT'S JUST THEY MEET TWICE A YEAR CURRENTLY, AND THE SIZE OF THE BOARD MAKES IT DIFFICULT. SO MANY FOR IN ORDER FOR THEM TO HAVE QUORUM. 13 I THINK 16 MEMBERS, THEY HAVE TO HAVE. TEN THEY'RE FOR 9 OR 10 FOR QUORUM. AND SO IT'S JUST BEEN DIFFICULT TO GET FOLKS THERE CONSISTENTLY. I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION

OUTSIDE OF THAT. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME VACANCIES. >> OKAY. LIKE PERIOD. THAT'S

THE END. OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> I'M WONDERING, CAN WE REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF CITY MANAGER APPOINTEES? WHY ARE THERE FIVE? I KNOW, I'M SO SORRY. CASSEY YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RESIDENTS, I ASKED THE QUESTION. AND LET ME BE MORE CLEAR ABOUT WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION. I WANT TO KNOW, IS IT WE HAVE TOO MANY VACANCIES OR RESIDENTS NOT SHOWING UP? OR IS IT THE OTHER VOTING MEMBERS THAT ARE APPOINTED OUTSIDE OF

THE COUNCIL'S SEVEN? >> I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THEIR RECORDS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO

SPEAK. >> SURE. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL INSIGHT FOR ME TO

SAY. >> YEAH, I DO THINK THERE'S BEEN THERE'S BEEN A FEW VACANCIES. AND I THINK AT THIS POINT THEY ARE I THINK WE'RE ALL UP TO DATE ON VACANCIES.

LIKE THEY'RE FILLED FOR THE COUNCIL POSITION SEATS. BUT IN THE PAST THERE HAS BEEN SOME

INCONSISTENCY IN THAT. >> OKAY. AND THEY'RE MEETING TWICE A YEAR OUTSIDE OF IF THERE IS A EVENT THAT ASKS THEM TO MEET. CORRECT. WHEN USE OF FORCE OCCURS, CORRECT. OR DEATH

BY. >> RIGHT. AND THAT'S THEIR MAIN CHARGE IS, IS WHENEVER THEY WERE CREATED, THEY WERE CREATED TO REVIEW OUR USE OF FORCE POLICIES. THEY DID THAT MADE WHATEVER CHANGES THEY MADE. SINCE THEN, THEIR CHARGE HAS BEEN TO REVIEW INSTANCES OF USE OF FORCE AND THAT NONE, NO CASES HAVE COME BEFORE THEM IN THE LAST TWO YEARS.

>> SO WE'RE WE'RE RAPIDLY RUNNING OUT OF TIME BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO PUT OFF THE.

>> I APOLOGIZE. >> NO, NO, IT'S NOT YOU. I DON'T WANT TO PUT OFF THE CLOSED SESSION BECAUSE WE'RE WE'RE CONSIDERING CONTRACTION. SO WE'VE GOT A FEW MORE LEFT HERE. AND THEN I THINK THE ONLY THING WE HAVE LEFT IS A TWO MINUTE PITCH PRESENTATION. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT ANNOUNCEMENT. SO WE'RE GOING TO SEW ON THE CHIEF POLICE

ADVISORY BOARD. WHERE ARE WE COUNCILMEMBER JESTER? >> SO I WAS THE INAUGURAL CHAIR OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE ADVISORY BOARD AND AND SERVED ON IT FOR A COUPLE OF TERMS. I DON'T THINK WE HAD QUORUM ISSUES AT THAT TIME BECAUSE WE HAD A CHARGE. AND SO WE HAD A LOT OF WORK TO DO. I WOULD SAY IN THE IN THE AS THE YEARS WENT ON, THE PURPOSE WAS WANING. THE THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE INCLUDE NOT ONLY REPRESENTATIVES THAT ARE APPOINTED BY EACH OF THESE COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT YOU ALSO HAD THE POLICE UNIONS REPRESENTED. YOU HAD, YOU KNOW, T W AND UNT POLICE REPRESENTED AS EX OFFICIOS AND YOU ALSO HAD DIFFERENT LEVELS OF SERVICE REPRESENTED. YOU HAD COUNCIL APPOINTEES, WHICH WAS TYPICALLY THE CITY MANAGER, AND THEN ALSO PEOPLE OUTSIDE THAT HAD RELEVANT EITHER MILITARY OR POLICE EXPERIENCE TO GO ALONG WITH THE CITIZENS. BUT I'LL BE HONEST, THERE JUST WASN'T A LOT TO DO. A LOT OF IT WAS JUST THE THE CHIEF OF POLICE COMING UP WITH DIFFERENT WAYS TO INFORM US AS TO WHAT KIND OF TRAINING THEY HAVE, WHAT THEY DO. SO I THINK ANNUALLY WOULD BE WOULD BE FINE AND IF NEEDED IN BETWEEN. BUT IT TOOK A LOT OF RESOURCES TO PRESENT ALL OF THE MATERIALS AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WE DID. I, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAYBE MEET ANNUALLY SO THAT THEY'VE GOT A BASE OF KNOWLEDGE BEFORE THEY MAKE SOME KIND OF REVIEW, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE FINE. THANK

YOU. >> OKAY, SO TO GO WITH REDUCED FREQUENCY. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE?

MAYOR PRO TEM. >> YEAH. AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, I'M FOR DECREASING THE MEMBERSHIP. AT ANOTHER TIME. WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT MEMBERSHIP COMPOSITION LOOKS LIKE. I LIKE IT STAYING AT AT TWO TIMES A YEAR. I WILL JUST ADD AS A AS A, AS A REMARK. MY EXPERIENCE COMES AT THIS FROM PASCO AND SERVING ON THAT BOARD STAFF ALWAYS HAD THE ABILITY TO CANCEL A MEETING IF THERE WAS NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT. SO. SO I MIGHT SOUND IGNORANT. IS THAT NOT ACROSS THE BOARD WITH ANY BOARD OR COMMISSION? NO. WAS PASCO UNIQUE IN THAT WAY?

[03:45:04]

>> PROBABLY SO YEAH. >> BECAUSE YEAH, BECAUSE PASCO IS CASE BASED.

>> YEAH. >> OKAY. >> AND THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE ONE

OF THE HIGHEST CANCELLATION RATES. >> SO LET ME TAKE A POLL FOR REDUCED FREQUENCY. WHO'S FOR REDUCED FREQUENCY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY FOR Y'ALL ARE KEEPING IT THE SAME. JEEZ, I KNOW I SHOULD NEVER GO LAST. WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS I'M GOING TO SAY LET'S GO WITH REDUCED FREQUENCY AS A TRIAL. BUT I'M ASSUMING IF SOMETHING COMES UP THAT IT NEEDS TO CONVENE, SORT OF LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BECAUSE THERE THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN WHERE WE NEED BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT THE WHY WE STARTED THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE. SO I'M GOING TO SAY THAT. BUT IF THE COUNCIL WANTS THEM TO CONVENE ABOUT CERTAIN ISSUES OR CERTAIN THINGS WE NEED TO LOOK AT, I WOULD SAY MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. SO WAS THAT FOR IS THAT I THINK IS THAT IS THAT FOR WE'VE GOT I'M FOR OKAY.

YEAH. I'M FOR. YEAH. OKAY. WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE TRANSITION TO ASK ANY

QUESTIONS. ANYBODY, ANYBODY OPPOSED TO THAT COUNCIL MEMBER. >> JESTER WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IF WE I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT. HOWEVER, I DO HAVE A CAVEAT BECAUSE WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IF IF THAT IF IT TRANSITIONS THAT EITHER THE CITY MIGHT NEED A SEAT OR IF THERE'S SOME KIND OF FUNDS BEING EXPENDED FOR PUBLIC ART THAT NEEDS TO COME HERE FOR APPROVAL, BECAUSE GDC IS ITS OWN ORGANIZATION. BUT WHAT I WILL SAY IS I HAVE SEEN PIECES THAT I DO NOT THINK ARE APPROPRIATE FOR TO BE CONSIDERED PUBLIC ART. AND SO I THINK IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD COME, HEY, HERE'S WHERE WE WANT TO PUT IT. HERE'S WHAT WE WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE, HERE'S OUR RECOMMENDATION. AND WE KIND OF GIVE A STAMP. BUT I MEAN, AND THAT'S ART, RIGHT? SO I MEAN, I GET THAT, BUT I THINK I WOULD WANT SOME KIND OF ABILITY TO

SAY, OKAY, BEFORE THE MONEY IS SPENT AND SOMETHING IS. >> ERECTED.

>> WE HAVE THAT. NO, DON'T WE DON'T COUNCIL APPROVE PUBLIC ART PROJECTS.

>> BUT WITH THAT CAVEAT, I'D BE OKAY WITH IT. >> OKAY.

>> YEAH, WE'RE FIXING TO CUT CUT IT SHORT. >> AND YES, YOU'RE CORRECT. ANY CONTRACT OF FUNDS WOULD COME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL WITH A RENDERING

PROJECT. >> WOULD IT LOOK LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S THE WHIRLWIND ON THE SQUARE WITH THE TORNADO OR THE DEER IN THE STORM? OKAY, CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YES.

>> WE DO GIVE 2.4% OF FUNDS TO THE PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE. CORRECT. THAT'S ALLOCATED FOR PUBLIC ART THAT IS GOING THROUGH THAT COMMITTEE. SO WE'RE SAYING THAT MONEY IS STILL GOING TO STAY FOR PUBLIC ART, BUT BE HANDLED BY GDAC AS THIS IS TRANSITIONING INTO GDAC.

>> IT TO. >> MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND. >> THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND.

>> AS LONG AS WE GET. >> TO THAT, YOU KNOW THAT THAT MONEY IS GOING.

>> WE WILL BE APPROVING EXPENDITURES IF IT'S A MONEY. YES. OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. SO ANY SO WE'RE GOING TO TRANSITION THERE TO GDAC. AND SO NOW WE'VE GOT REDUCED MEETING FREQUENCIES FOR THE ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY FROM BIMONTHLY. NO FROM QUARTERLY TO BIMONTHLY. IS THAT WHAT IS THAT HOW THAT READS OR

IS THE REVERSE. YEAH. >> FROM BIMONTHLY. >> TO. BIMONTHLY TO QUARTERLY.

>> EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? YES, YES. OKAY. PASCO EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT BEING. YEAH.

FROM MONTHLY TO BI MONTHLY. BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE ONE YOU SAID SOMETIMES DOESN'T EVEN

MEET ANY OBJECTIONS. YEAH. OKAY. YES. >> ONLY THAT I MEAN IF IT, IF IT MAKES MORE SENSE FOR IT TO BE AS NEEDED. I'M FINE WITH THAT TOO. I'M JUST DON'T WANT

TO WASTE TIME. >> SURE. >> BE A. RECOMMENDATION IS FROM MONTHLY TO OR FROM BIMONTHLY OR MONTHLY TO BI MONTHLY SLASH QUARTERLY.

>> NO QUESTION IS THAT. IS THAT AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD NEED TO CHANGE, OR IS THAT WAS THAT PART OF THE CHARTER? I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE CHARTER. SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN

JUST. >> YEAH, WE'LL. >> CHECK THAT RIGHT NOW. SORRY.

WE MIGHT NEED. >> TO REVISIT. >> YES.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER. >> COULD THAT COULD THAT COMMITTEE BE CALLED AS NECESSARY? I HATE FOR SOMEBODY TO TO WAIT TO WAIT FOR THE NEXT QUARTER TO HAVE A MEETING.

>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT WAS BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE YOU KNOW, THE CHARTER IS IT DOES THE CHARTER TALK ABOUT FREQUENCY OR IS IT JUST EXISTENCE? OKAY. HE'S LOOKING. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK FROM BIMONTHLY, FROM MONTHLY, BI

MONTHLY TO MONTHLY. YES. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. >> ON THAT ONE. I WOULD I WOULD KEEP IT MONTHLY. IT'S ISSUES HAVE BEEN QUORUM. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN BEEN AT LEAST TWO VACANCIES FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS. SO I WOULD IT'S GOT IT'S GOT A LOT THAT IT'S WORKING ON. SO FOR NOW I WOULD KEEP THAT MONTHLY KNOWING THAT WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND GET

[03:50:03]

THOSE VACANCIES FILLED. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. >> I'D BE IN FAVOR WITH BIMONTHLY WITH AN ANNUAL TASK FORCE AS A FALLBACK IF ISSUES CONTINUE.

>> OKAY, SO WE GOT MONTHLY. >> MONTHLY. >> MONTHLY, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE ARE SOME QUORUM ISSUES BECAUSE I THINK I'VE GOT AN APPOINTMENT ON THERE. I NEED TO MAKE. YES. FROM LAST TIME. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING WE'RE GOING TO. OKAY. CHIEF OF POLICE ADVISORY FROM BIANNUAL TO ANNUAL. WE ALREADY DID THAT ONE. OKAY. COMMUNITY SERVICES

ADVISORY FORMALIZED SEPTEMBER THROUGH MAY ONLY. >> YES, SIR.

>> I THINK THAT THAT MAKES SENSE. >> OKAY.

>> ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? ALL RIGHT. NOW THERE'S BOARDS WITH NO RECOMMENDATION CHANGES.

AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. >> I'M SO SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. I THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST ASKING IF WE CAN GET ONE. BUT IF YOU'RE GOING ONE BY ONE, THEN I'LL.

>> WELL, NO, IF I MEAN BASICALLY. OKAY, STAFF'S RECOMMENDING NO CHANGES HERE.

IS THERE SOMEBODY THAT WANTS A CHANGE ON ONE OF THESE? YES, YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

>> JESTER YES, I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT I APPRECIATED THE MAYOR PRO TEM QUESTIONS ON THE BOARD OF ETHICS. I THINK THAT MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT ADDING REQUIREMENTS. I DEFINITELY THINK WE NEED TO REDUCE MEETINGS WHEN THERE'S NOT SOMETHING BEFORE THEM. I MEAN, I THINK FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, YES, BUT THERE ARE LOTS OF MEETINGS I WATCH WHERE THERE'S JUST REALLY NOTHING. AND SO I THINK REDUCE MEETINGS AND CONSIDER ADDING REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN ON PLANNING AND ZONING, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT COUNCIL OR A SUBSECTION OF COUNCIL INTERVIEWS, THERE ARE OTHER CITIES THAT DO THAT AND HAVE HAD GOOD SUCCESS WITH IT. AND I THINK THAT IT'S AN IMPORTANT ENOUGH COMMITTEE THAT WE TAKE SOME TIME FOR THAT. SO THOSE WOULD BE A COUPLE OF RECOMMENDATIONS I HAVE.

>> OKAY, LET ME JUST GO THROUGH THESE INDIVIDUAL AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. ANY CHANGES THERE FOR ANYBODY? OKAY. BOARD OF ETHICS, WE'VE GOT ONE RECOMMENDATION OR. YES.

>> COUNCILMEMBER RECOMMENDATION AS WELL. >> REVISITING THE REQUIREMENTS.

CORRECT. OKAY. >> AND REDUCING MEETING. >> BEG YOUR PARDON. IS IS SEVEN

MEMBERS TOO MUCH FOR THE BOARD OF ETHICS. >> I DON'T I DON'T THINK SO.

>> IT NEEDS TO BE AN ODD NUMBER BUT I WONDER IF SEVEN IS NOT TOO MUCH.

>> OKAY. >> YES COUNCILMEMBER. >> MORE I SUPPORT REDUCING THE FREQUENCY. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF THEY NEED TO HAVE MORE IF NEEDED, I WILL SAY THIS IS THE COMMITTEE THAT I'VE STRUGGLED TO FILL MY VACANCY. I KEEP APPROACHING PEOPLE AND THE PEOPLE WITH THE QUALIFICATIONS DON'T WANT TO BE ON IT OR, YOU KNOW, SO I'M REALLY STRUGGLING WITH THIS ONE. SO I, I LIKE THE SPIRIT OF HAVING DIFFERENT QUALIFICATIONS, BUT I'M ALREADY HAVING TROUBLE AS IS. SO I DON'T SUPPORT THAT RIGHT NOW. I SUPPORT IT IN THEORY, BUT NOT

RIGHT NOW. >> I THINK IT COULD ADD HAVING REQUIREMENTS MIGHT ADD TO WHO YOU'RE ABLE TO RECRUIT POTENTIALLY. SO I SORRY, I'M WITH YOU ON REDUCING MEETINGS

AND ADDING REQUIREMENTS. >> COUNCILMEMBER, ANYTHING ON THE BOARD OF ETHICS? OKAY, SO COUNCILMEMBER HALL, YOU'RE SAYING REDUCE IT, REDUCE IT TO FIVE. OKAY. IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE WE HAVE A CLEAR CONSENSUS ON ANY OF THAT. SO WE'LL LEAVE IT FOR NOW. AND WE CAN ALWAYS REVISIT IT BECAUSE WE'RE SORT OF GOING THROUGH THIS IN LIGHTNING ROUND, BECAUSE I REALLY WANT TO TRY TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF TIME WE HAVE TO KEEP THE PEOPLE WAITING OUTSIDE.

OKAY. ANYBODY ON LIBRARY BOARD? EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THE LIBRARY BOARD? OKAY. PARKS AND REC. ANY OKAY. ANY ANY. ALL RIGHT. NOW, SILENCE HERE MEANS AGREEMENT. SO PARKS AND REC, CAN WE SEE

THAT AGAIN? >> NO CHANGE. RECOMMENDED MODEL. YEAH. MODEL BOARD. FROM WHAT I

UNDERSTAND. >> PLANNING AND ZONING, WE'VE ALREADY HAD A RECOMMENDATION OF YOU KNOW, COULD WE LOOK AT MAYBE SOME MINOR. BECAUSE I THINK YOU CAN WE CAN TALK TO EACH OTHER IN CLOSED SESSION ABOUT PNC, BUT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE IF WE WANT TO BRING PEOPLE IN OR COUNCIL CAN INTERVIEW THEM, CERTAINLY THEIR INDIVIDUAL AS INDIVIDUAL

MEMBERS, PUBLIC UTILITY BOARD. ANY CHANGE THERE. >> YOU HAVE LOST ME ON PNC, BUT

YEAH. >> WELL, SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR. I DIDN'T HEAR ANY CONSENSUS ABOUT. I THINK YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT JUST INTERVIEWING COUNCIL, A SUBSET OF COUNCIL OR COUNCIL

INTERVIEWING. >> NO OTHER SUPPORT FOR ANY. >> YES, YES.

>> SORRY, I DO SUPPORT THAT. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER SUPPORT ON THAT? OKAY. YES, COUNCILMEMBER. >> I'M INTRIGUED BY IT, BUT

WOULD LIKE MORE TIME TO TALK ABOUT IT THAN WE DO. >> OKAY. WELL, WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL REVISIT THAT. WE'LL REVISIT THAT REFRESHING PUBLIC UTILITY BOARD. ANY CHANGES, CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, STATE LAW MANDATED TOURS. NUMBER ONE, IT'S OPERATING AS EXPECTED. ALL

RIGHT. WE GOT THROUGH THAT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. >> I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT

CPC. OH, OKAY. I RECOMMEND THE DISSOLUTION OF CPC. >> OKAY.

>> WE'VE SEEN TWO YEARS IN A ROW IT'S NOT WORKING IN MY OPINION, AND THAT THESE ARE THINGS, IN MY OPINION, THAT SHOULD BE COMING BEFORE THE FULL COUNCIL.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. >> I TEND TO AGREE. I THINK WE NEED TO REVISIT THAT DISSOLVE

[03:55:02]

AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING ELSE. >> I TEND TO AGREE. I BROUGHT THAT UP. OKAY, SO THAT WE'LL LOOK AT THAT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'VE GOT BASICALLY DO A CLOSED SESSION AND A TWO MINUTE PITCH IN TEN MINUTES. SO WE CAN'T DO THAT. YES. I'M SORRY. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO. YEAH. UNLESS YOU WANT TO COME AFTER THE COUNCIL MEETING BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF I WANT TO LEAVE THEM OUT THERE HANGING FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF OR AN HOUR. I DON'T WANT TO. ALL RIGHT.

>> I JUST DON'T WANT TO. I DON'T WANT TO DO IT. IF I DON'T COME BACK, WELL.

>> I'LL SCHEDULE. >> IT, SO. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO. LET'S.

[1. Closed Meeting:]

YEAH. SO MY PLAN IS TO DO THE CLOSED SESSION NOW. AND IF WE END THE PITCH WOULD JUST BE WE'LL COME BACK. WE'LL COME BACK IN HERE REAL QUICK, DO THE PITCH AND THEN COME BACK ANYWAY.

>> ARE WE NOT COMING BACK AFTER THE MEETING BACK IN HERE. >> NO. ONLY TO DO THE PITCH IF

WE CAN GET TO THE CLOSED SESSION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. >> SO OUR HR REP COMING IN.

I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. SO THE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW CONVENE A CLOSED MEETING AT 6:22 P.M. TO DELIBERATE THE CLOSED SESSION MEETING ITEM SET FORTH ON THE AGENDA, WHICH INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING DELIBERATIONS REGARDING PERSONNEL MATTERS UNDER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODEWELCE RECONVENING OUT OF CLOSED

[AFTER DETERMINING THAT A QUORUM IS PRESENT, THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL WILL CONVENE AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT CITY HALL, 215 E. MCKINNEY STREET, DENTON, TEXAS AT WHICH THE FOLLOWING ITEMS WILL BE CONSIDERED:]

SESSION ON SEPTEMBER 15TH AT 642 AND INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH JUDGE PAQUETTE ON A CONTRACT FOR MUNICIPAL JUDGE. AND NOW WE WILL OPEN UP THE DENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 642. AND OUR FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. IF YOU'RE ABLE TO STAND, PLEASE JOIN ME. >> PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION

UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I

PLEDGE. >> ALLEGIANCE TO THEE. TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND

[2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS]

INDIVISIBLE. >> THANK YOU. YOU MAY BE SEATED. WE'VE GOT SOME PROCLAMATIONS.

I'LL BE COMING DOWN TO READ.

OKAY. THE FIRST.

I'M GOING TO YELL. IS IT WORKING? OKAY, IT'S WORKING NOW. ALL RIGHT. THIS ONE IS FOR PAYROLL WEEK. ANYBODY HERE FOR PAYROLL WEEK? WE ALL ARE HERE FOR PAYROLL WEEK. COME ON. COME ON DOWN. INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND TELL US A LITTLE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE

PROCLAIMING TODAY. >> YES. MY NAME IS MARIA VILLANUEVA. I AM A PAYROLL MANAGER FOR A LOCAL BUSINESS HERE IN DENTON. AND WE'RE DOING A PROCLAMATION FOR NATIONAL PAYROLL WEEK. YOU KNOW, WITHOUT PAYROLL, NONE OF THIS WOULD BE HAPPENING.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE PAYROLL. ORG AND IT'S MORE THAN 20,000 MEMBERS HAVE LAUNCHED A NATIONWIDE PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN THAT PAYS TRIBUTE TO THE NEARLY 150 MILLION PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THE UNITED STATES AND THE PAYROLL PROFESSIONALS WHO SUPPORT THE AMERICAN SYSTEM BY PAYING WAGES, REPORTING WORKERS EARNINGS, AND WITHHOLDING FEDERAL INCOME TAXES. AND. WHEREAS, PAYROLL PROFESSIONALS IN DENTON PLAY A KEY ROLE IN MAINTAINING THE ECONOMIC HEALTH OF DENTON, CARRYING OUT SUCH DIVERSE TASKS AS PAYING INTO THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE SYSTEM, PROVIDING INFORMATION FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AND CARRYING OUT TAX WITHHOLDING, REPORTING AND DEPOSITING. AND WHEREAS, PAYROLL DEPARTMENTS COLLECTIVELY SPEND MORE THAN $2.4 TRILLION ANNUALLY COMPLYING WITH THE FEDERAL AND STATE WAGE AND TAX LAWS, PAYROLL PROFESSIONALS PLAY AN INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT ROLE IN ENSURING THE ECONOMIC SECURITY OF AMERICAN FAMILIES BY HELPING TO IDENTIFY NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS AND MAKING SURE THEY COMPLY WITH THEIR CHILD SUPPORT MANDATES. NOW, THEREFORE, I, CHRIS WATTS, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, DO HEREBY DECLARE AND PROCLAIM THE FIRST FULL WEEK IN SEPTEMBER 2026 AS PAYROLL WEEK IN THE CITY OF DENTON IN DUBAI. GIVE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT TO THE EFFORTS OF THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN DENTON AND THE PAYROLL PROFESSIONALS. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ALL ARE GLAD THAT WE HAVE PAYROLL PROFESSIONALS THAT HELP US GET PAID. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH.

[04:00:22]

>> THANK YOU. BET. >> THIS IS UNITED WAY OF DENTON COUNTY UNITED WAY MONTH.

ANYBODY, EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO JOIN GARY DOWN HERE. COME ON DOWN. GARY. TELL US WHAT WE'RE

DOING. >> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. WE'RE SHOWING OFF SOME CITY OF DENTON EMPLOYEES WHO ARE PART OF THE THE CITY'S UNITED WAY CAMPAIGN EMPLOYEE PLANNING COMMITTEE, A BOARD MEMBER, FRANK DIXON FROM THE UNITED WAY BOARD. OLIVIA, MYSELF FROM STAFF. AND WE'RE JUST HERE TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE CITY FOR THE THE WORK YOU DO, THE SUPPORT YOU GIVE US.

BUT THIS MONTH, THE EMPLOYEES WHO GIVE GENEROUSLY THROUGH THEIR UNITED WAY CAMPAIGN, AND I UNDERSTAND COUNCIL WAS ABLE TO WATCH THE HOT ONES VIDEO AND WORK SESSION. CITY EMPLOYEES REALLY GIVE. I MEAN, THEY REALLY, REALLY DO GIVE. I WOULD REMIND COUNCIL AND OUR NEIGHBORS CITIZENS, WHILE THERE ARE OVER 55000 PEOPLE WHO RECEIVED HELP FROM UNITED WAY AND OUR NETWORK OF 17 PARTNERS IN THE LAST YEAR, 17,000 OF THOSE PEOPLE CALLED DENTON HOME.

UNITED WAY'S PARTNERS ARE ACTIVELY WORKING TO SUPPORT THE CITY. ALICE HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLDS WHO ARE IN POVERTY OR LIVE BELOW THE SURVIVAL LEVEL. WHILE THERE'S 110,000 OF THOSE HOUSEHOLDS ACROSS DENTON COUNTY, 25,000 OF THOSE HOUSEHOLDS, ALMOST 26,000 CALL DENTON HOMES. SO WHILE WE DID HELP A LOT OF DENTON RESIDENTS, WE KNOW THERE ARE FOLKS FALLING THROUGH THE CRACKS. SO THE NEED TO RAISE MORE SUPPORT CONTINUES TO GROW. MAYOR.

>> FANTASTIC. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU ALL DO DAY IN AND DAY OUT TO HELP THE RESIDENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND IF YOU DIDN'T, ARE THEY GOING TO POST THAT HOT WINGS VIDEO SOMEWHERE? IS IT GOING TO BE POSTED ON THE CITY WEBSITE? YOU GOT TO SEE IT. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW HOT THAT STUFF WAS, BUT PEOPLE WERE HAVING A LOT OF FUN, LET'S JUST PUT IT THAT WAY.

WHEREAS UNITED WAY OF DENTON COUNTY IMPROVES LIVES BY MOBILIZING COMMUNITIES LIKE DENTON TO ACTION SO ALL CAN THRIVE, AND WHEREBY WORKING TOGETHER TO CO-CREATE SOLUTIONS TO PEOPLE'S MOST PRESSING CHALLENGES, UNITED WAY OF DENTON COUNTY POSITIVELY IMPACTS THE LIVES OF OVER 55,000 LOCAL RESIDENTS ANNUALLY. AND WHEREAS, UNITED WAY OF DENTON COUNTY LEADS THE EFFORT WITH A NETWORK OF NONPROFITS, GOVERNMENTS, BUSINESSES, AND DONORS TO RESPOND TO OUR NEIGHBORS IMMEDIATE NEEDS AND SEEK OUT BETTER SOLUTIONS FOR LARGER, COMMUNITY WIDE ISSUES. NOW, THEREFORE, I, CHRIS WATTS, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 2026 AS UNITED IS THE WAY MONTH IN THE CITY OF DENTON AND PROUDLY JOIN UNITED WAY OF DENTON COUNTY AND IN CALLING ALL RESIDENTS OF DENTON TO TAKE ACTION TO CREATE A FUTURE WHERE EVERYONE HAS A CHANCE TO THRIVE. THANK YOU SO MUCH, GARY. AND TO UNITED WAY AND EVERYBODY THAT PARTICIPATES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU AND THANK YOU TO. WE'RE

GOING TO INTRODUCE YOU ALL. GO AHEAD. >> HI, I'M MEGAN DAVIDSON, I'M WITH THE CAPITAL PROJECTS DEPARTMENT AND I'M THIS YEAR'S CHAIR FOR OUR CITY UNITED WAY

COMMITTEE. >> I'M JESSE KIN, I'M A COMMITTEE MEMBER.

>> AND JAMIE LINDSAY. >> COMMITTEE MEMBER. CHRISTINE TAYLOR, COMMITTEE MEMBER.

>> AND FRANK DIXON, PROUD BOARD MEMBER. >> YEAH.

>> OKAY. NOW, THERE'S ONE PERSON UP HERE WHO GOT TO SAMPLE THOSE HOT WINGS. AND WERE THEY HOT? THEY WERE HOT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR FOR WHAT Y'ALL HAVE DONE FOR THE CITY AND JUST ENCOURAGING EVERYONE TO PARTICIPATE AND CONTRIBUTING TO THE UNITED WAY TO MAKE OUR COMMUNITY BETTER. SO ARE WE READY FOR A PHOTO? YEAH. YOU

GONNA GET EVERYBODY IN? I'M GONNA HOLD THAT. >> THANK YOU. SIR.

>> YEAH. DO WHAT NOW? OH. OH, HE'S COMING AROUND. OH, OKAY. >> HE IS A BOARD MEMBER. WE'LL

TAKE HIM ON OUR SIDE. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, APPRECIATE YOU. THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A PROCLAMATION HERE FOR DOLLY PARTON DAY. WHO'S HERE

FOR DOLLY PARTON DAY. COME ON DOWN. >> YEAH.

>> INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND TELL US WHAT WE'RE WHAT WE'RE PROCLAIMING HERE TODAY. I'M

[04:05:01]

VINCE. >> BOYER. >> NOT NEAR AS SMOOTH.

>> AS GARY OVER HERE. SO I'M GOING TO READ WHAT I PREPARED HERE. SO MAYOR WATTS AND ESTEEMED MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR THIS PROCLAMATION. HOLD ON. SCAM LIKELY AND FOR HELPING DENTON CELEBRATE A DAY CENTERED ON GENEROSITY, LITERACY, KINDNESS AND UNITY. I'M SPEAKING TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE BAHA'I FAITH OF DENTON, WHICH CALLED FOR THIS PROCLAMATION, WHOSE HOPE IS TO HELP BUILD A COMMUNITY WHERE PEOPLE OF EVERY BACKGROUND INCREASINGLY SEE ONE ANOTHER AS NEIGHBORS, PARTNERS AND MEMBERS OF ONE HUMAN FAMILY.

I ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE AMBER BRIGGLE. SHE'S THE OWNER OF SOMA MASSAGE, WHO FIRST RAISED THE IDEA TO ME OF TURNING SEPTEMBER 25TH, 925, INTO DOLLY PARTON DAY HERE IN DENTON.

CENTERED ON SERVICE. SHE, BY THE WAY, IS IN A PLANE ON THE WAY BACK FROM SWEDEN AND REALLY WANTED TO BE HERE TODAY. SENT YOU HER REGARDS. THANK YOU. AND FROM THERE, THE IDEA GREW INTO A COMMUNITY EFFORT. SO SOMA MASSAGE, THE SPINAL DECOMPRESSION AND CHIROPRACTIC CENTER AND A NUMBER OF OTHER LOCAL BUSINESSES AND ORGANIZATIONS ARE PARTICIPATING THROUGH BOOK DONATIONS. YOU'LL PROBABLY ALL HEARD ABOUT THE BAZILLION BOOKS THAT DOLLY DONATED TO SO MANY KIDS AROUND THE US, AND OTHER ACTS OF SERVICE, ESPECIALLY IN SUPPORT OF CHILDREN'S LITERACY. WE HOPE THIS BECOMES ONE MORE SMALL WAY THAT DENTON SHOWS WHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN PEOPLE COME TOGETHER AROUND SOMETHING GOOD. SO THANK YOU FOR HELPING MAKE

THAT POSSIBLE. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU. WHEREAS DOLLY PARTON HAS INSPIRED GENERATIONS THROUGH HER MUSIC, GENEROSITY, WARMTH AND COMMITMENT TO LIFTING OTHERS WHILE BECOMING ESPECIALLY KNOWN FOR EXTRAORDINARY SUPPORT OF CHILDREN'S LITERACY THROUGH DOLLY PARTON'S IMAGINATION LIBRARY. AND WHEREAS DOLLY PARTON HAS MODELED KINDNESS, OPTIMISM, AND A REMARKABLE ABILITY TO BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER ACROSS DIFFERENCES, ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO SEE THE BEST IN ONE ANOTHER. AND WHEREAS DENTON BUSINESSES AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS ARE MAKING SEPTEMBER THE 25TH THROUGH BOOK DONATIONS AND OTHER ACTS OF SERVICE BENEFITING LOCAL CHILDREN WHILE INVITING RESIDENTS, SCHOOLS, FAITH COMMUNITIES, CIVIC GROUPS AND BUSINESSES TO PARTICIPATE IN WAYS THAT PROMOTE LITERACY, GENEROSITY, KINDNESS AND UNITY. NOW, THEREFORE, I CHRIS WATTS, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, DO HEREBY RECOGNIZE AND PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER SEPTEMBER THE 25TH 2026 AS DOLLY PARTON DAY IN THE CITY OF DENTON, AND ENCOURAGE ALL RESIDENTS TO CELEBRATE BY DOING SOMETHING THAT LIFTS ANOTHER PERSON, SUPPORTS A CHILD, STRENGTHENS OUR COMMUNITY, OR HELPS US TO SEE THE BEST IN ONE ANOTHER. AND I WOULD SAY THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO EVERY DAY. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT AND THANK YOU FOR THAT

PROCLAMATION. >> THANK YOU. >> APPRECIATE IT. YOU BET.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

[3. PRESENTATIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC]

>> WOW. THAT GOT SILENT. OKAY, WE'RE MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS AGENDA ITEM THREE PRESENTATION FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. IF WE COULD REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR

ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL, PLEASE. >> THE DENTON CITY COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED RULES OF PROCEDURE, INCLUDING A CODE OF CONDUCT THAT APPLIES TO THE PUBLIC AS WELL AS COUNCIL MEMBERS. THESE RULES WERE ENACTED TO PROMOTE AN ORDERLY PROCESS AND TO PRESERVE DECORUM. SPEAKERS WILL HAVE FOUR MINUTES TO GIVE A SCHEDULED REPORT AND FOUR MINUTES TO GIVE AN OPEN MIKE REPORT. A BELL WILL RING WHEN TIME HAS EXPIRED. IF THE REMARKS ARE NOT CONCLUDED BY THAT TIME, THE SPEAKER WILL BE ASKED TO STOP SPEAKING. IF THE SPEAKER DOES NOT CEASE AND A SECOND REQUEST IS MADE, THE MAYOR MAY REQUEST TO HAVE THE SPEAKER REMOVED FROM THE CHAMBER. SPEAKERS SHOULD NOT APPROACH THE DAIS. IF A SPEAKER HAS MATERIALS FOR THE COUNCIL, PLEASE NOTIFY THE CITY SECRETARY IN ADVANCE FOR SCHEDULED REPORTS. THE COUNCIL MAY INITIATE DISCUSSION OR ASK QUESTIONS FOR NONSCHEDULED OPEN MIC REPORTS. THE COUNCIL MAY LISTEN, HOWEVER, BECAUSE NO NOTICE OF THE SUBJECT OF THE OPEN MIC REPORT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE PUBLIC IN ADVANCE. THE TEXAS OPEN

[04:10:05]

MEETINGS ACT PROHIBITS DISCUSSION OR DECISION BY THE COUNCIL ON NONSCHEDULED ITEMS. AS A RESULT, THE COUNCIL MAY ONLY PROCEED AS FOLLOWS. ON NONSCHEDULED ITEMS PROPOSED TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. MAKE A STATEMENT OF FACTUAL POLICY OR A RECITATION OF EXISTING POLICY. SPEAKERS ARE ASKED TO DIRECT ALL REMARKS AND QUESTIONS TO THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE, AND NOT TO ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER. PLEASE REFRAIN FROM MAKING ABUSIVE, PERSONAL, IMPERTINENT, PROFANE OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS. ANYONE WHO VIOLATES THE COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE MAY BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM THE CHAMBER. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE. COPIES OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE ARE AVAILABLE FROM THE CITY SECRETARY.

>> OKAY. WE'LL MOVE THROUGH OUR LIST OF SPEAKERS. AGENDA ITEM THREE A IS A D26-1368 IS REGARDING ETHICS UPDATE. IF YOU COME DOWN, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR TIME WILL BEGIN. AND I

BELIEVE IT'S FOUR MINUTES. >> LET'S SEE. MY TIME STARTS WHEN I STATE MY NAME. YES.

INTERESTING. >> WELL, IT'S ALREADY STARTED, SO YEAH.

>> I WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR LISTENING TO ME EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS. AS SOME OF YOU GUYS MIGHT KNOW, I COME TO COUNCIL AND KIND OF ASK FOR UPDATES ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND ETHICS.

AND VERY OFTEN I GET SILLY RABBIT, YOU KNOW, SILLY RABBIT. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT.

PRETTY NEW COUNCIL THIS YEAR. SO I'M HOPING TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE TRACTION EVERYTHING. AND THESE ARE SOME BASIC THINGS, A LITTLE BACKGROUND FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T PAY ATTENTION OR TO, TO THIS, GENERALLY SPEAKING, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE MONITORING WHAT HE DOES AND REPORTING ON IT. CONGRESS, SENATE HAVE THOUSANDS AS WELL. AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THAT. WE HAVE MAYBE ONE REPORTER AND A COUPLE OF CRACKPOT MASOCHISTS AMONG THE CONSTITUENTS THAT KIND OF PAY ATTENTION TO THIS KIND OF STUFF. THAT'S ABOUT IT. SO WE KIND OF RELY ON WHAT'S AVAILABLE FROM THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC IN TERMS OF KEEPING TRACK OF WHETHER OR NOT THINGS ARE GOING ACCORDING TO PLAN, IN TERMS OF FINANCE AND REPORTING, IN TERMS OF TRANSPARENCY. A FEW YEARS AGO, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NOTICED WAS THERE WAS AN OUTSIDE DEVELOPER WHO WAS MAKING A LOT OF DONATIONS. THIS IS NOT WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW. I WAS MAKING A LOT OF OUTSIDE DONATIONS TO COUNCIL CANDIDATES WHO WERE RUNNING FORF HIDDEN BY THE FACT THAT IT WAS A CFO, CEO AND A PRESIDENT OF A COMPANY WHO WERE BASICALLY MAKING MAX DONATIONS TO INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES SO WE COULD FIND THEM BY USING THEIR ADDRESSES AND STUFF, RIGHT? BY SEEING WHO'S NAMES LINED UP WITH THE ADDRESSES AND THINGS.

AND THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE OUT THERE FULL NAMES, ADDRESSES, AMOUNTS, THINGS LIKE THAT. WHAT WE HAVE IN THIS SITUATION IS WE DON'T HAVE ADDRESSES, SO IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO FIGURE OUT WHO'S DOING WHAT HOW DOTS ARE CONNECTED. SO ONE OF THE THINGS I'D LIKE TO SEE IS BASICALLY AN UPDATE ON BASICALLY CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND EVERYTHING THAT KIND OF DOES AWAY WITH THE WHOLE IDEA OF REDACTING ADDRESSES OR NAMES OF DONORS.

IF A PERSON DOESN'T WANT THEIR INFORMATION OUT THERE, THEY DON'T HAVE TO DONATE. IF A CANDIDATE DOESN'T WANT TO PUT THE INFORMATION OF A DONOR OUT THERE, THEY DON'T HAVE TO ACCEPT THE DONATION. THAT'S A BASIC CHOICE. YOU KNOW, IN DEMOCRACY, WHEN WE DO THESE, YOU MAKE A YOU MAKE A DECISION. THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES EITHER WAY. SO REAL QUICK THING, THIS HELPS PEOPLE WHO ARE KIND OF PAYING ATTENTION TO STUFF, ESPECIALLY IN THE ERA WHERE WE HAVE PACS DONATING, WE HAVE CITIZENS DONATING TO PACS. WE HAVE CITIZENS DONATING TO PACS AND PACS, DONATING TO CONSULTANTS. AND THEN THERE'S THERE ARE SO MANY LAYERS RIGHT NOW, IT'S HARD TO KEEP TRACK OF WHO DOES WHAT ANYMORE. SO THIS IS SOMETHING I'D LIKE TO SEE GO AWAY. IT WOULD ALSO BE GREAT IF THERE WAS A SOME KIND OF DISCLOSURE ON WHETHER OR NOT PEOPLE WERE RUNNING COORDINATED CAMPAIGNS. IT MAKES IT EASIER TO CHECK OUT WHO'S GETTING MONEY FROM PACS OR WHO'S SAYING THEY'RE GETTING NOT GETTING MONEY FROM PACS, WHEN IN FACT THEY'RE RUNNING A COORDINATED CAMPAIGN AND YOU GET MULTIPLE CANDIDATES ON THE SAME MAILERS, MULTIPLE CANDIDATES, PEOPLE HANDING OUT THE SAME DOOR HANGERS, ETC. IT'S ALL THE SAME MONEY. IT WOULD HELP US TO SEE, YOU KNOW, BEYOND SOMETHING THAT SHOWS UP AS AN IN-KIND FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON TO GO THIS CAMPAIGN COORDINATED WITH ANOTHER ONE RUNNING OUT OF TIME.

SO I'LL KEEP THIS REALLY QUICK. THERE'S A THING THAT WAS NEVER BASICALLY PUT INTO EFFECT WHEN THE LAST CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND ETHICS WAS, WAS PUT THROUGH, AND THAT WAS GOFUNDME'S. OKAY.

GOFUNDME'S ARE A PROBLEM RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S NO DISCLOSURE IN IT. A CITY COUNCIL PERSON CAN TAKE MONEY FROM A GOFUNDME, EITHER AS AN ORGANIZER OR A BENEFICIARY, AND

[04:15:03]

THERE'S NO WAY OF KNOWING HOW THIS COMES BACK TO AFFECT THEIR DECISIONS. ON THE DAIS. WE HAVE A SITUATION LIKE THIS WHERE A PERSON WHO'S ACTUALLY NO LONGER ON COUNCIL HAS A GOFUNDME THAT WAS ORGANIZED BY THE WIFE OF A BUSINESS ASSOCIATE. THERE'S KIND OF AN ARM'S LENGTH THERE THERE, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE DONORS INCLUDE THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPERS WHO'VE HAD ISSUES BEFORE COUNCIL. SO I'D LIKE TO RESTRICT THAT OR HAVE THESE THINGS BASICALLY PUT FORTH WHERE THEY'RE REPORTED. AND ESPECIALLY IF SOMEBODY IS ON COUNCIL, IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THEM BE THE BENEFICIARY, WHERE THERE WERE TONS OF ANONYMOUS DONATIONS THAT CAN NEVER BE TRACKED. ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. HAVE A GREAT DAY. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS.

>> CAN I ASK JUST A QUICK QUESTION? >> OH I'M SORRY. YES. GO AHEAD.

>> DIDN'T SEE YOU. COULD YOU SEND SOME OF THAT TO US VIA EMAIL FORM? I'D LOVE TO LOOK INTO ALL OF IT. YEAH. TRIED TO TAKE NOTES, BUT I PROBABLY MISSED STUFF. SO IF YOU'LL SEND

US AN EMAIL WITH ALL THAT, PLEASE. >> ABSOLUTELY. I'D BE HAPPY TO.

AND I KNOW IT'S A LOT. SO I FIGURED THAT THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE A PITCH OR A WORK SESSION OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD COME UP FOR, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST ME, BUT OTHER PEOPLE CAN DONATE OR NOT DONATE, CAN SUGGEST THINGS THAT THEY THINK WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO TRANSPARENCY.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER AGENDA ITEM B, ID 26-1379. MR. WILLIE HUDSPETH, REGARDING THE HIRING FOR CITY

MANAGER. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, MY NAME IS WILLIE HIGHSMITH. I LIVE AT 623 NEWTON. FIRST I WANT TO LOOK AND SEE IF I HAVE ANY FRIENDS IN MY AUDIENCE AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, IF I HAVE ANY ENEMIES. I WANT TO MAKE SURE MY BACK'S COVERED. BUT YOU KNOW, JUST JOKING, BOY, THAT DIDN'T GO OVER WELL. YOU KNOW, FAMILY AND FRIENDS. AND I SAW SOME FISTS GO UP, BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANYBODY SAY YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. ANYWAY, I DIDN'T PLAY THE MUSIC THAT I PLAYED LAST TIME OF THE NATIONAL ANTHEM TO GET YOU ALL TO STAND OR, OR DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO LET YOU KNOW HOW I FELT. I'M GLAD TO BE AN AMERICAN. I'M GLAD TO. I'VE GOTTEN TO THE POINT WHERE I'M NOW IS BECAUSE OF PEOPLE HELPED ME TO GET TO THIS POINT, BUT TONIGHT I WANT TO. SAY TO YOU THAT I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE NAACP, WHICH IS THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE. I USUALLY TRY TO WORK FROM THIS. THESE THESE LETTERS IN A A ACP NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT FOR ALL PEOPLE. THAT'S HOW I OPERATE THIS ORGANIZATION. I HEAR MORE COMPLAINTS THAN YOU CAN IMAGINE. JUST EVERYBODY COMPLAIN, DON'T LIKE NOTHING, DON'T LIKE ME, DON'T LIKE NOTHING, DON'T LIKE THE ORGANIZATION. FOR THE FIRST TIME, WE HAVE A CITY MANAGER WHO. AND MISS OGDEN, WHO WE LIKE THE ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBERS LIKE HER. THEY LIKE WHAT SHE'S DONE AND WHAT SHE'S BEEN DOING. IT'S A SHAME THAT YOU. SOME OF YOU HAVE ALREADY DECIDED YOU'RE GOING TO IGNORE US. THAT'D PROBABLY BE A BAD IDEA, BUT YOU GO AHEAD AND DO THAT. YOU'RE GOING TO IGNORE WHAT WE'RE SAYING TO YOU. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT PERSON. KEEP THE RIGHT PERSON. QUIT SPENDING MONEY ON THINGS THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO SPEND MONEY ON. YOU KEEP SAYING, WE DON'T HAVE MONEY. WELL, QUIT SPENDING IT IN PLACES WHERE YOU IN WAYS THAT YOU SHOULDN'T. AND JUST SAY WE GOT THE RIGHT PERSON AND PUT THAT TO, TO, TO BED. I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT SHE'S GOING THROUGH NOW. SHE DOESN'T KNOW US. WE DON'T KNOW HER. WE DON'T KNOW HER. WE JUST THOUGHT THAT IN WHAT WE IN OUR CHECKING THROUGH AND DISCUSSING THE POSSIBILITY OF HER BEING THE CITY MANAGER, THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE SAID, YES, SHE'S OKAY. BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE GOING THROUGH. BEING ON A PUBLIC FIGURE IN THE SCHOOL BOARD. I RAN FOR THAT AND WAS ON THERE FOR TWO TERMS AND SOME OTHER PLACES, AND AND I'M REALLY GOING TO EXPERIENCE IT BECAUSE I HAVE IF I'M SUCCESSFUL IN MY BID TO RUN FOR THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, IF I CAN GET MY FUNDS, I HAVE TO GET A 2029 PRESIDENTIAL EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE OFF THE GROUND, AND I HAVE TO RAISE $5,000 SO THAT I CAN PAY THE FEE. SO I, I SEE NOW WHY MANY PEOPLE DON'T RUN FOR THIS OFFICE. IT'S EXPENSIVE. ANYWAY, IF I GET THE MONEY I'M RUNNING AND I'M GOING TO TALK LIKE I ALWAYS DO, AND I HAVE SOME IDEAS, BUT NOTHING LIKE

[04:20:04]

MISS OGDEN IS GOING THROUGH. SHE SITS THERE VERY NICELY PRESENT PRESENTLY, A SMILE ON HER FACE WHILE YOU ALL. TO SAY, WE DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE WHAT WE NEED. WELL, HOW'S SHE BEEN DOING SO FAR? SEEMS LIKE SHE'S DOING REALLY WELL. BUT WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO AND I KNOW IT. I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN MANY, MANY TIMES. IS YOU'RE GOING TO SAY, OKAY, WE DON'T CARE WHAT THEY SAY. WE'RE GOING TO DO IT THIS WAY SO WE CAN COVER OUR BACKSIDES. WELL,

YOUR BACKSIDE IS ALREADY UNCOVERED. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM THREE C I'D 26-1381. EXCUSE ME, MR. LARRY LAWRENCE, REGARDING THE HIRING FOR CITY MANAGER. IS LARRY HERE? ONE MORE TIME? IS LARRY HERE? LARRY YOU HERE? LARRY LAWRENCE, REGARDING THE HIRING OF CITY MANAGER. EXCUSE ME. I DON'T SEE LARRY. WE'LL GO ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER, WHICH IS SPEAKER AGENDA ITEM THREE D I'D 26-1383. MARK BENNING

REGARDING THE HIRING FOR CITY MANAGER. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE DENTON CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS MARK BENNING AND DENTON IS MY HOME.

I GREW UP HERE. I ATTENDED DENTON HIGH SCHOOL WHERE I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PLAY FOOTBALL AND BEGAN A JOURNEY THAT TOOK ME WAY BEYOND THIS CITY. FROM DENTON HIGH SCHOOL, I WENT ON TO ATTEND AND PLAY FOOTBALL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA, AND I WAS BLESSED TO CONTINUE AND PLAY IN THE NFL. BUT AFTER FOOTBALL, I CAME BACK TO DENTON. I RETURNED TO DENTON HIGH SCHOOL. AND JUST BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE. NOT JUST BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE I'VE. WHERE I'M FROM, BUT BECAUSE I WANTED TO GIVE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY, THE COMMUNITY THAT HELPED SHAPE ME.

I'VE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF TEACHING, COACHING, MENTORING, AND WORKING WITH YOUNG PEOPLE HERE IN DENTON. I SPENT MUCH OF MY TIME AROUND TEAMS, AND WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A FOOTBALL TEAM, A SCHOOL OR A CITY, LEADERSHIP MATTERS. THE RIGHT LEADER BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER, EARNS TRUST, HOLDS PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE. AND UNDERSTANDS THAT SUCCESS IS NEVER ABOUT ONE INDIVIDUAL, BUT IT'S ABOUT A TEAM. THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TONIGHT TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR MISS CASSEY OGDEN. AND HER BEING HIRED AS CITY MANAGER FOR DENTON. I BELIEVE DENTON NEEDS LEADERSHIP THAT UNDERSTANDS OUR COMMUNITY, RESPECTS THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE UP THE COMMUNITY, AND IS COMMITTED TO MOVING THE CITY FORWARD. DENTON GAVE ME AN OPPORTUNITY AS A YOUNG MAN. I WAS ABLE TO LEAVE HERE, ATTEND THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA, REACH THE NFL AND THEN COME BACK HOME AND INVEST IN THE NEXT GENERATION FOR DENTON.

TODAY, I'M ASKING THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONTINUE INVESTING IN THE FUTURE OF THIS CITY AND SUPPORTING STRONG LEADERSHIP FOR THE CITY. I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO SUPPORT THE HIRING OF MISS OGDEN AS OUR NEXT CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU. YES. GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD.

>> MR. BENNING, NICE TO SEE YOU. REMIND ME, WHEN YOU WERE AT DENTON HIGH SCHOOL.

>> I GRADUATED IN 1980. >> AND TELL ME YOUR FAVORITE TEACHER.

>> PARDON ME? >> YOUR FAVORITE TEACHER? >> WELL, BEING AN ATHLETE, IT HAD TO BE A COACH. A GUY NAMED KEN GARLAND JUST REALLY IMPACTED ME. I, I COULDN'T

REALLY STAND HIM WHEN I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL. >> FUNNY HOW THAT WORKS, ISN'T

IT? >> YEAH, IT REALLY IS. I'VE HAD THAT CONVERSATION WITH MULTIPLE PEOPLE. WE WE USED TO CALL HIM KINKY BECAUSE HE WAS JUST SO TUNED IN TO KIDS AND, AND TO ATHLETICS. AND WE JUST THOUGHT, MAN, HOW CAN ANYBODY ACT LIKE THAT? BUT LOOKING BACK, HE JUST

[04:25:06]

REALLY HAS A SPECIAL PLACE IN MY HEART. HE CARES. HE CARES. >> GOOD. YEAH. WELL, IT'S NICE

TO SEE YOU AGAIN. WELCOME. I'M GLAD YOU'RE HERE TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? I REMEMBER COACH GARLAND. YEAH. HE DROVE YOU HARD. YEAH HE DID.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS AGENDA ITEM THREE E. I'D 26-1385, WHICH IS JOHN DODD. REGARDING THE NEED FOR A CROSSWALK TO BE BUILT ON EAGLE DRIVE AND SOUTH AVENUE B, IS JOHN HERE? IS JOHN HERE? ALL RIGHT. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY ANY MOVEMENT. SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT. AND I DO WANT TO SAY WE HAD A COUPLE OF SPEAKERS WHO DID FILL OUT CARDS IN CASE PEOPLE DIDN'T SHOW UP. SO IF YOU'RE HERE, WE'VE HAD TWO PEOPLE NOT SHOW UP AND I'VE GOT TWO CARDS. ONE IS ANNIE, I BELIEVE IT'S HEFFLEY, AND THE OTHER ONE IS DAVID BURGESS. SO I WILL BE CALLING YOU UP TO SPEAK ON OPEN MIC ONCE WE FINISH THE REGISTERED CITIZENS REPORT. JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A HEADS UP ON THAT. THE NEXT ITEM IS THREE F ID 26-31384, IS IT CHEYENNE? ALSO, REGARDING FLOCK.

STATE YOUR NAME. YOUR TIME AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE IF I MISPRONOUNCED IT.

>> THAT'S OKAY. HELLO, MY NAME IS SHANNA ALLSUP. I'M A DENTON RESIDENT AND I'M HERE TO EXPRESS. I'M HERE TO EXPRESS WHY I FIRMLY BELIEVE FLOCK AND ALL SIMILAR SURVEILLANCE SHOULD BE BANNED IN DENTON, TEXAS. DRIVING AROUND DENTON, YOU WILL SEE THERE ARE WELL OVER THE TEN CITY CONTRACTED FLOCK CAMERAS. DPD HAS ACCESS TO ALL OF THEM FLOCKS. BEEN IN THE NEWS A LOT LATELY AS IT IS PART OF THE BIG TECH BOOM WE ARE EXPERIENCING. AND MY QUESTION IS WHY ARE WE COMMITTING TO SOMETHING THAT IS STILL LEGALLY BEING WORKED OUT? THERE IS A LOT TO CONSIDER THROUGH THE LENS OF THE RIGHTS OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS. ONE OUT OF EVERY TEN PLATES ARE MISREAD.

THIS IS RISKY CONSIDERING HOW MANY CITIES ARE ALREADY HAVING TO SETTLE CASES REGARDING FLOCK, THE CURRENT OPEN CASE I'M MOST INTERESTED IN IS SCHMIDT VERSUS CITY OF NORFOLK, WHICH IS GOING BEFORE FEDERAL APPEALS COURT, WHERE IT IS BEING ARGUED FLOCKS TRACKING WITHOUT A WARRANT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT IN TEXAS, ABBOTT ORDERED A FUNDING FREEZE IN 18 CITIES, AND FIVE COUNTIES IN TEXAS HAVE ENDED OR SUSPENDED THEIR CONTRACTS WITH FLOCK. WHEN I MADE A LITTLE TIME TO LOOK AT THE SPECIFIC CONTRACT THE CITY HAS WITH FLOCK, IT ELEVATED MY CONCERN. I'M CONCERNED THAT OUR COUNCIL WAS SWINDLED BY SALESMEN IN THE FALSE FEAR OF BEING BEHIND. IF WE DIDN'T JUMP ON THE BANDWAGON, INSTEAD OF DOING THEIR JOB TO KEEP THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS THEY REPRESENT, NONE OF THIS EVER WENT UP TO VOTE.

IT WAS JUST DECIDED WITH NO ABILITY TO OPT OUT. ONE OF THE FIRST ITEMS IN THE CONTRACT IS PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTS WITH COMPANIES THAT BOYCOTT ISRAEL. I ASK EVERYONE TO THINK CRITICALLY ABOUT WHOSE INTEREST IS AT STAKE WHEN. THIS IS ONE OF THE FIRST ITEMS OF CONCERN.

DID COUNCIL EVEN CONSULT THEIR OWN IT SPECIALIST, DATA ANALYST OR RESEARCH THIS COMPANY AND WHO IT MAY BE BENEFITING? THE REST OF THE CONTRACT REPEATS HOW ROYALTY FREE, IRREVOCABLE AND NON-EXCLUSIVE THE ACCESS TO THE DATA IS FROM THE CONTRACTED CAMERAS TO FLOCK. THERE IS MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES THROUGHOUT THE CONTRACT OF FLOCK NOT OWNING OR SELLING THE DATA. BUT WHAT ABOUT USE? THAT IS A CRITICAL VERB NOT LISTED. ONCE FLOCK USES THIS DATA TO PREDICT, TO CREATE PREDICTIVE MODELING AND OTHER LEGALLY GRAY AREA PRODUCTS. IT IS MORE THAN A PIC OF YOUR LICENSE PLATE. IT IS A CLEAR IMAGE NOTING DAMAGE, BUMPER STICKERS, PEOPLE IN THE CAR AND DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF CAMERA, MUCH MORE, INCLUDING ACCESS TO CELL PHONE DATA.

AFTER READING THE CONTRACT, I FILED AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST AND WAS LED THROUGH A LAUGHABLE LABYRINTH. IT TOOK OVER A MONTH FROM THE START OF MY INQUIRY, AND IT WAS NOT EASY TO GET THE LITTLE INFORMATION THAT I DID. I REQUESTED MISUSE AND AUDIT LOGS, SYSTEM AUDITS, DATA SHARING AGREEMENTS, AND OPERATING POLICIES. WHAT I RECEIVED WAS A LINK TO THE FLOCK TRANSPARENCY PORTAL, WHICH HAS FLAWS AND MISREPRESENTS DATA. A TWO PAGE AGENDA INFO SHEET FROM 2024, THREE PAGES OF ALPR PROCEDURES FOR DPD THAT MENTIONED THE BIANNUAL AUDITS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO OCCUR, BUT NO SIGN OF ANY AUDIT METHOD OR THE AUDIT ITSELF. I ALSO RECEIVED THREE PAGES OF STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES FROM DPD.

SEEMS LIKE SUCH AMAZING. NEW TECHNOLOGY WITH COMPLEX LEGAL IMPLICATIONS SHOULD HAVE A LONGER POLICY OR INSTRUCTIONS. THE SOP MENTIONS EMPLOYEES SHALL NOT USE DATA FOR IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT, BUT WHEN LINES ARE BLURRED IN DENTON, WHERE DPD WORKS WITH ICE AND ALLOWS DPD TO ACT IN CERTAIN AREAS AS IMMIGRATION OFFICERS, THIS NEEDS MORE CLARIFICATION AND HONESTLY IS JUST ANOTHER PERFECT EXAMPLE OF HOW FLAWED IT ALL IS AND WHY IT ALL NEEDS TO BE BANNED. AT THE VERY LEAST, I'M REQUESTING ANOTHER PUBLIC FORUM ON FLOCK.

NOW THAT THE CAMERAS ARE MORE VISIBLE AND LEGAL ISSUES ARE ARISING NATIONWIDE, IT DESERVES TO BE REEVALUATED. IF YOU THINK THIS WON'T AFFECT INNOCENT DENTON, INCLUDING YOU AND YOUR OWN RIGHTS, YOU'RE MISTAKEN. WE ARE TRULY FACING THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISIONS AS A CITY DURING A TIME OF MASSIVE ECONOMIC AND SOCIETAL CHANGES, DENTON KNIGHTS DESERVE TO SEE EVERYONE WORKING WITH A FIRE IN THEIR HEART AND A SENSE OF URGENCY THAT REFLECTS HOW

[04:30:02]

SERIOUSLY THIS IS DICTATING THE FUTURE FOR EVERYONE IN DENTON. IF YOU THINK PEOPLE WON'T LEAVE BECAUSE OF ISSUES LIKE FLOCK AND DATA CENTERS, THINK AGAIN. I BELIEVE OUR CITY HAS FAR MORE CREATIVE SOLUTIONS TO OUR PROBLEMS THAN WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED IN THIS LAST YEAR. I DEDICATE THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME AS A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR TERRANCE WILLIAMS, WHO WAS A 28 YEAR OLD RESIDENT EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, WHO WAS FOUND DEAD LABOR DAY WEEKEND WHEN

MANY COOLING CENTERS WERE CLOSED. THANK YOU. >> WE DO HAVE A QUESTION. WE

HAVE A QUESTION FROM MAYOR PRO TEM. >> THANKS. TWO STATEMENTS.

RATHER THAN A QUESTION PER SE. I WANTED TO MAKE A REMARK ABOUT ONE THING YOU SAID AND THEN MAKE A REMARK PUBLICLY OR TO THE COUNCIL AS WELL. YOU HAD MENTIONED THE IN THE CONTRACT, THE BOYCOTT, YOU CAN'T BOYCOTT ISRAEL. AND I DID JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW. I THINK THAT'S A STATE REQUIREMENT. SO I WORK IN CONSTRUCTION AND I DO A LOT OF CONTRACTS WITH TEXDOT FOR MY CLIENTS. I WORK WITH SPECIFICALLY MINORITY OWNED BUSINESSES AND FEMALE OWNED BUSINESSES TO HELP THEM WITH SURETY BONDING, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY TEXDOT. AND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY CLIENTS IS REQUIRED FOR EACH OF THEIR CONTRACTS TO TO SIGN THAT THEY WON'T BOYCOTT ISRAEL. I AGREE WITH YOUR SENTIMENT THERE. AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, KEEP POLITICS OUT OF JUST DOING YOUR JOB. BUT I DID JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WASN'T A CITY MANDATE.

IT'S MANDATED BY THE STATE. ONTO THE GENERAL PREMISE OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THOUGH I AGREE WITH YOU. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, TO THE COUNCIL, I THINK IT IS WORTH HAVING A WORK SESSION ON THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE. THE GOVERNOR, JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO, I THINK, HAD AN ORDER TO STOP USING STATE FUNDING FOR STATE AGENCIES FOR FLOCK. AND YOU'RE SEEING CITIES ALL ACROSS THE STATE. I THINK THE MOST RECENT WAS PFLUGERVILLE. I WOULDN'T CALL THEM THE MOST ACTIVIST OF COMMUNITIES. RIGHT. AND EVERYONE IS REVISITING THIS, AND I THINK IT IS WORTHWHILE FOR US TO REVISIT THOSE CONTRACTS AND CONSIDER IF IT'S SOMETHING WE STILL WANT TO BE DOING. SO THANKS FOR COMING OUT AND SPEAKING.

>> THANK YOU. I AGREE, I APPRECIATE THAT. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM THREE G, WHICH IS ID 26-1448. MIKE MCCORMICK, REGARDING WIND RIVER

HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. >> THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME TONIGHT. I WANTED TO BEGIN BY THANKING COUNCILWOMAN JILL JESTER AND CHRIS WATTS FOR ACTUALLY COMING OUT AND VISITING WITH US, TALKING WITH US AND HEARING US OUT AND JUST, YOU KNOW, LISTENING. MY NAME IS MICHAEL MCCORMACK. I AM THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF WIND RIVER HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. DUE TO TIME RESTRICTIONS, I'M HOPING TO PARTIALLY SHOW YOU AND EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED TO OUR COMMUNITY. ALSO RELAY THAT WE'RE STILL DEALING WITH THE CONSEQUENCES. A YEAR LATER, ON JULY 16TH, 2025, I RECEIVED CALLS FROM HOMEOWNERS REGARDING SOMETHING THAT WAS WRONG WITH ONE OF OUR PONDS. ALL OF OUR FISH WERE IN THE SHALLOWS, JUST DYING. SEVERAL OF US GOT IN THERE AND WE NETTED THEM UP. WE TRANSPORTED THEM TO ANOTHER POND. LATER THAT EVENING, JORDAN WILSON, THE CITY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT MANAGER, CAME TO OUR OUR POND AND LET US KNOW THAT IT WAS RAW SEWAGE BECAUSE JORDAN FOSTER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY HAD HIT A SEWER LINE AND PUMPED A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF SEWAGE INTO OUR POND, KILLING IT. WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO GET OUT OF THE WATER, SANITIZE OURSELVES, DISCARD EQUIPMENT OR CLOTHING, AND THEN SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION TO GET BLOOD WORK DONE FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS. THE FOLLOWING DAY, A WHITE FOAMY MATERIAL CAME DOWN. YOU GUYS HAVE PICTURES AND THEY'RE ALL NUMBERED ON YOUR ON YOUR LISTS. NEXT DAY A FOAMY SUBSTANCE CAME DOWN. SO I WENT TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS HAPPENING, AND I SAW A DEEP PIT THAT WAS FILLED WITH SEWAGE.

THEY CLAIM IT WAS A. GREASE TRAP FROM A TWO TABLE RESTAURANT, WHICH YOU CAN SEE THE PICTURES. THAT'S NOT IT. BUT OVER THE FOLLOWING WEEKS, I CONTINUE TO VISIT THE SITE AND OBSERVE THE CONTAMINATED MATERIAL BEING COVERED IN MULCH. AUGUST 5TH, OUR WATER WAS TESTED. OUR TYPICAL E.COLI LEVELS ARE UNDER 600. I'M NOT GOING TO GET WITH WHAT THE ACTUAL TERMINOLOGY IS, BUT OURS WAS 129,000. TWO WEEKS LATER, IT DOUBLED ALMOST TO 241,000.

BETWEEN JULY 17TH AND AUGUST 5TH, JORDAN FOSTER CONTRACTED OR CONTACTED OUR MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND ASSURED US THEY'D MAKE THINGS RIGHT. UNFORTUNATELY, WHAT HAS FOLLOWED WAS VERY DIFFERENT. FOR THE NEXT 60 TO 75 DAYS, OUR POND WAS REPEATEDLY DRAINED AND LEFT DRY DURING A NORTH TEXAS SUMMER. WE HAVE SO MUCH RETAINING WALL DAMAGE BECAUSE

[04:35:03]

OF THE EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN FILLED WITH WATER FOR 30 YEARS AND NOW IT'S. AND IT WAS DRY FOR TWO MONTHS. WELL, OCTOBER OF 25, OUR TESTING SHOWED THAT THERE WAS IMPROVED LEVELS OF E COLI, BUT IT WAS NOT IN WITHIN TOLERANCES. AND FOR SOME REASON THE CITY GAVE A JORDAN FOSTER A GREEN LIGHT TO START CONSTRUCTION AGAIN. THEY WERE UNDER A STOP WORK ORDER. THEY WERE GIVEN A A GREEN LIGHT TO GO. COMMUNICATION WITH US CEASED. THEY BASICALLY STOPPED. OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE MADE REPEATED EFFORTS TO RESOLVE THIS MATTER AND ALL BEEN MET WITH DENIAL RESPONSIBILITY. WE WENT TO A MEDIATION. THEY SHOWED UP AT THREE ATTORNEYS. WE DID NOT CHOOSE THIS FIGHT. WE DID NOT CREATE THIS PROBLEM.

WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING THAT THE PARTY BE RESPONSIBLE TO FIX WHAT THEY BROKE. THIS IS A WATERSHED DRAINAGE SYSTEM THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE PROTECTED THROUGH LOCAL CODES, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES AND REGIONAL MANAGEMENT PLANS. I'M ASKING THIS COUNCIL TO USE EVERY LAWFUL AUTHORITY AVAILABLE TO THEM, AVAILABLE TO THEM, TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE.

ALSO, JORDAN FOSTER SHOULD NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR FUTURE PROJECTS IN DENTON AND WHERE APPROPRIATE, COMMUNICATING CONCERNS TO STATE AGENCIES. I'M ALSO ASKING THE CITY TO STRENGTHEN PROTECTIONS FOR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS WHEN DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTION CREATES ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION, INFRASTRUCTURE DAMAGE OR OTHER SIGNIFICANT HARM. NO COMMUNITY SHOULD HAVE TO SPEND YEARS AND POTENTIALLY TENS TO HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FIGHTING TO RECOVER FROM A PROBLEM THEY DID NOT CREATE. WE ARE ASKING FOR ACCOUNTABILITY, NOTHING MORE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU MIKE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SEEING. NO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE INTO OUR OPEN MIC SEGMENT NOW. SO IS ANY IS IT HEFLEY IS YES. COME ON DOWN. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR TIME

WILL BEGIN. YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES. >> GOOD EVENING COUNCIL. MY NAME IS ANNIE HEFLEY AND I AM A LIFELONG DENTON RESIDENT AND AN ORGANIZER WITH DATA CENTER FREE DENTON. I AM HERE TODAY TO PRESENT OUR PETITION AGAINST CURTAIL SKY, THE AI DRONE MANUFACTURER THAT IN APRIL WAS OFFERED ALMOST $1 MILLION IN INCENTIVES TO COME TO OUR COMMUNITY. AS OF THIS MORNING, WE HAVE 1241 SIGNATURES ON OUR PETITION OPPOSING CURTAIL SKY.

OUR DEMANDS ARE AS FOLLOWS. ONE THE NEWLY FORMED DENTON CITY COUNCIL VOTE TO RECONSIDER THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF SKY'S PLANNED OPERATIONS AT 3411 MINGO ROAD. COUNCILORS SHOULD DETERMINE GROTOWSKI'S PLANNED OPERATIONS AS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE IS PLANNED. OPERATIONS DO NOT QUALIFY AS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE. WE UNDERSTAND THAT AS A MASSIVE AT SCALE DRONE FACTORY WITH A MANUFACTURING SKY'S PLANNED OPERATIONS ALIGN WITH HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE ZONING.

THERE IS PRECEDENT FOR DRONE FACTORIES BEING ZONED FOR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE AND FOR CITY COUNCILS IN THE UNITED STATES APPROVING REZONING REQUESTS TO CHANGE DRONE FACTORIES FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE TO ALIGN WITH INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION CAPACITY.

THE FACTORY'S APPROVAL FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE WAS A MISTAKE WE SHOULD REVERSE TO AVOID POLLUTION NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL WORSHIP AND SMALL BUSINESS AREAS. TWO THE NEWLY FORMED DENTON CITY COUNCIL VOTE TO RECONSIDER SKY'S TAX INCENTIVES. COUNCILORS VOTE TO REVOKE ALL TAX INCENTIVES DESIGNATED TO CURTAIL SKY. THIS AI DRONE FACTORY IS NOT WHAT OUR COMMUNITY WANTS TO BE INVESTING IN. SKY IS ESTIMATING 60% OF ITS DRONE PRODUCTION WILL BE GEARED TOWARD GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS, MILITARY CONTRACTS. IF THE CITY OF DENTON ALLOWS THIS PROJECT TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE, IT WILL STAIN OUR HANDS WITH THE BLOOD OF INNOCENT PEOPLE WHOSE DEATHS WILL BE SUBSIDIZED BY OUR TAX DOLLARS. THE COST OF THIS FACILITY IS FAR GREATER THAN ANY PROJECTED ECONOMIC BENEFIT. THREE IF AND WHEN SKY IS AI DRONE FACTORY ZONING REQUIREMENT IS CHANGED TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. COUNCILORS SHOULD REFUSE SPECIAL AND SPECIFIC USE PERMITS, REZONING REQUESTS AND PRELIMINARY SERVICE AGREEMENTS FROM SKY AND ANY AFFILIATES. IF SKY IS NOT DETERRED BY THE RETRACTION OF THEIR TAX INCENTIVES, THIS PROVISION WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL BARRIERS TO ENTRY INTO OUR COMMUNITY, FURTHER PROTECTING US FROM THIS SHAMEFUL, UNWANTED FACILITY. THE PEOPLE OF DENTON HAVE SPOKEN. WE DO NOT WANT THIS FACILITY IN OUR COMMUNITY. WHEN WE'VE BEEN OUT COLLECTING SIGNATURES. THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WE HAVE TALKED TO HAVE NOT ONLY BEEN OPPOSED, BUT APPALLED BY THE IDEA OF THIS FACILITY IN OUR BACKYARDS. FEEDBACK FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAS BEEN OVERWHELMINGLY NEGATIVE TOWARD SKY. THIS FACILITY IS NOT WELCOME HERE.

BACK IN APRIL, SKY'S SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF GLOBAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, ELLEN MCCARTHY, STOOD IN THIS VERY ROOM AND SAID THAT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT IF SKY COMES TO

[04:40:03]

DENTED, THEY ARE WANTON. HERE. I AM HERE TO DEMONSTRATE, UNDENIABLY THAT THEY ARE NOT WANTED HERE. OUR COMMUNITY DOES NOT WANT THEM HERE. TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS FACILITY IS TO GROSSLY DISREGARD WHAT OUR COMMUNITY WANTS TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS FACILITY IS TO ACT AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AS COUNCIL MEMBERS TO LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND JOIN US IN DEMANDING SKY OUT OF DENTON. THANK YOU.

>> WE HAVE A QUESTION. WE HAVE A QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER RUMOHR.

>> NOT A QUESTION BECAUSE IT'S OPEN MIC. SO I'M NOT GOING. >> TO OPEN MIC. I'M SORRY.

>> YOU'RE RIGHT. IT'S OPEN MIC. I CAN'T ASK YOU A QUESTION, BUT I'LL JUST SAY, I THINK I HAVE YOUR EMAIL YOU'VE EMAILED US BEFORE. I'D BE HAPPY TO MEET WITH YOU. AND IF MAYBE A FEW FOLKS THAT HAVE HELPED WITH THIS PETITION TO KIND OF GO THROUGH SOME OF THESE AND, AND TALK ABOUT WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE OR ARE NOT AND THAT KIND OF THING. SO YOU'LL SEE AN EMAIL

FROM ME. THANKS. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THE LAST SPEAKER FOR OPEN MIC IS

DAVID BURGESS. DAVID HERE. YES. COME ON DOWN. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS DAVID BURGESS AND I LIVE AT 1808 CARLTON STREET HERE IN DENTON. AND I GUESS THE I HAD THREE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT, BUT TWO OF THEM ARE ALREADY BEEN COVERED. SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO. I DON'T KNOW IF THE COUNCIL IS AWARE ABOUT THE ELECTRIC MOTOR BIKES OR MOTORCYCLES THAT ARE STARTING TO COME INTO OUR COMMUNITY. THEY AREN'T ALLOWED TO BE DRIVEN ON THE ROADS, AS FAR AS I KNOW OF, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE LICENSE PLATES. YOU DON'T PAY TAXES ON THEM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT APPEARS THAT A LARGE NUMBER OF PARENTS ARE PURCHASING THEM FOR THEIR YOUNG CHILDREN TO RIDE ON, AND THESE THINGS CAN GO UP TO MAYBE 50, 60 MILES AN HOUR. AND SO SINCE THEY CAN'T RIDE THEM ON THE STREETS, THEY RIDE THEM ON THE SIDEWALKS. AND THEY, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S AND THEY COULD POSSIBLY ENDANGER PEOPLE THAT ARE WALKING ON THE SIDEWALKS. ALSO, I'M A BUS DRIVER FOR THE DISTRICT, AND THERE'S BEEN MULTIPLE TIMES WHEN THEY'RE DROPPED, WHEN THEY'RE RIDING THROUGH THE SUBDIVISIONS THAT I DRIVE IN, THEY'LL CUT IN FRONT OF ME. AND I MEAN, BASICALLY YOU HAVE LIKE WHAT, A 10 TO 13 YEAR OLD INDIVIDUAL MAKING DECISIONS WHILE THEY'RE RIDING THESE, THESE MOTORBIKES AROUND.

I'VE EVEN SEEN THEM STARTING TO SHOW UP AT THE HIGH SCHOOLS WHERE KIDS ARE GOING TO SCHOOL.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT YOU GUYS MIGHT POSSIBLY BE AWARE OF, BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT AND POSSIBLY ADDRESSED. AS FAR AS FOR SAFETY CONCERNS FOR THE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE RIDING THEM, AND FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY DO RIDE THEM ALSO. SO THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT I HAD TO SAY TONIGHT ON THIS ISSUE. SO THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.

>> HAS A COMMENT, I GUESS BASED UPON THE RESTRICTIONS FOR OPEN MIC.

>> YEAH. WHAT I'LL TELL YOU IS THAT I KNOW THAT A LOT OF CITIES ARE LOOKING AT THOSE AND ADDING REGULATIONS TO THOSE. THEY'RE NOT REALLY THAT REGULATED RIGHT NOW. AND SO I THINK IN THE UPCOMING LEGISLATIVE SESSION THIS YEAR, WE CAN SEE SOME LEGISLATION COMING ONLINE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT I'VE BEEN MONITORING. SO I CAN TELL YOU THE STATE IS LOOKING AT IT, AND THAT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST PLACES FOR THAT POLICY TO LIVE. SO

KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR THAT. >> OKAY. YEAH. BECAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S BEEN SOME INSTANCES WHERE THEY'VE, WHEN I'VE BEEN DRIVING, THEY'VE ACTUALLY LIKE CUT IN FRONT OF ME. AND I HAD TO STOP WITH THE KIDS ON THE BUS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK.

>> YOU, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC SPEAKING OR OPEN MIC AND

[4. CONSENT AGENDA]

REGISTERED PUBLIC REPORTS TODAY. SO WE'LL GO ON TO OUR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS THE CONSENT AGENDA. AND I BELIEVE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, CONSENT AGENDA. OH IS BEING IS NOT BEING PULLED FOR ITEM FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. IT'S REALLY BEING PULLED OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING. SO WE HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER PERRY.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION

TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MAYOR PRO TEM. >> SECOND.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. LET'S VOTE ON THE BOARD, PLEASE, FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.

MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO. THAT BRINGS US TO OUR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE, WHICH ARE

[A. ID 26-0562 Hold a public hearing and receive citizen input on the FY 2026-27 Proposed Budget.]

PUBLIC HEARINGS. OUR FIRST ONE IS AGENDA ITEM FIVE A. I'D 26-0562. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. DO WE HAVE A WE'VE GOT A STAFF PRESENTATION, DO WE NOT? YES.

OKAY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK YOU CAN COME DOWN AFTER STAFF PRESENTATION. AND WE WHEN WE SOLICIT COMMENTS FROM THE FROM THE CITIZENRY. AND THEN AT THE

[04:45:04]

SAME TIME, WHEN YOU FILL OUT A BLUE CARD SO WE CAN HAVE A RECORD OF YOUR, YOUR APPEARANCE.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AMY KASLIK CHIEF STRATEGIC OFFICER, I HERE TO PRESENT AN OVERVIEW OF THE 2020 627 BUDGET AND RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC. SO THIS SLIDE OUTLINES THE PROPOSED TAX RATE, BOTH THE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE RATE AND THE DEBT SERVICE RATE DECREASED FROM THE PRIOR YEAR, RESULTING IN A TOTAL PROPOSED TAX RATE OF 0.548485. THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE IS 0.515958, AND THIS IS THE RATE THAT'S NEEDED TO COLLECT THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE USING THE SAME PROPERTIES ON THE TAX ROLL LAST YEAR. THIS YEAR, THE PUBLISHED MAXIMUM TAX RATE IS 0.553485 AND IS DESIGNED TO GIVE COUNCIL FLEXIBILITY IN THE RATE DISCUSSION AND BUDGET PROCESS. IT IS ALIGNED WITH THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE, WHICH IS THE MAXIMUM RATE ALLOWED TO BE ADOPTED WITHOUT TRIGGERING AN ELECTION. THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET INCLUDES A RATE OF 0.548485, WHICH IS HIGHER THAN THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, BUT LOWER THAN THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE. IN ADDITION, THIS RATE IS NEARLY $0.05 LOWER THAN THE CURRENT TAX RATE. HERE'S A DETAILED HISTORY OF THE ASSESSED VALUES AND TAX RATES. CERTIFIED ASSESSED VALUES ROSE TO $26.7 BILLION.

THIS HAS ALLOWED US TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE RATE WHILE CONTINUING TO MEET GROWING SERVICE DEMANDS. BASED ON TODAY'S WORK SESSION, THE GENERAL FUND REVENUES ARE PROPOSED AT $233,441,949. INCREASES IN REVENUE INCLUDE PROPERTY TAXES, SALES TAXES AND FRANCHISE FEES, AND ROI. GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES ARE PROPOSED AT 233,441,949, RESULTING IN A BALANCED BUDGET. INCREASES INCLUDE PERSONNEL SERVICES WITH ALL POSITIONS, BOTH GENERAL SERVICES AND CIVIL SERVICE. SORRY. GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND CIVIL SERVICES PERSONNEL RECEIVING AN INCREASE IN THIS NEXT YEAR. IN ADDITION, THOUGH SLIGHTLY REDUCED BASED ON TODAY'S WORK SESSION, OUR STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS IN BOTH VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS, CAPITAL MAINTENANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THE FUND BALANCE TARGET IS MET IN FISCAL YEAR 2627, AND IN THE YEARS BEYOND THAT. SO HERE'S A SUMMARY OF THE EIGHT INTERNAL SERVICES FUNDS, WHICH ARE USED TO ACCOUNT FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY ONE DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER.

THIS INCLUDES CUSTOMER SERVICE, TECHNOLOGY SERVICES, MATERIALS MANAGEMENT, FLEET MANAGEMENT, FACILITIES, RISK ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. WITH A TOTAL PROPOSED BUDGET OF $116,419,304 THAT ARE FUNDED THROUGH PAYMENTS FROM THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS. FOR SERVICES PROVIDED. THIS SLIDE SUMMARIZES THE CITY'S 21 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS, EACH TIED TO A SPECIFIC REVENUE SOURCE AND RESTRICTED USE. MAJOR FUNDS INCLUDE TOURISM, STREET IMPROVEMENTS, HEALTH CATALYST, AND THEN VARIOUS IMPACT FEE FUNDS. THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THESE FUNDS IS $110,236,503. NEXT IS WE'LL BE TAKING A LOOK AT THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, WHICH ARE SELF-SUPPORTED THROUGH USER FEES. THE ELECTRIC FUND, AGAIN BASED ON TODAY'S WORK SESSION, IS PROPOSED AT 499,304,148 IN REVENUES AND $487,661,431. IN EXPENDITURES

FOR >> A NET INCOME OF $11,642,718. THIS IS BASED ON A PROPOSED 3% RATE INCREASE BEING DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY. NEXT, WE'LL LOOK AT THE WATER FUND. IT IS PROPOSED AT $61,575,770 IN REVENUES, AND 64,740. 64,749,543 IN EXPENDITURES.

THAT IS A NET LOSS OF $3,000,173 SEVEN 700. THAT'S A LOT OF NUMBERS 173,733 $33,

[04:50:03]

WHICH IS A PLANNED USE OF THE FUND'S BALANCE. A 3% RATE INCREASE IS PROPOSED FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS, AS WELL AS AN INCREASE IN WHOLESALE RAW WATER RATES. NEXT IS THE WASTEWATER FUND BUDGET, WITH BUDGETED REVENUES OF $51,278,645 AND EXPENDITURES OF $51,818,788. THAT IS A NET LOSS OF $540,143. BUT AGAIN, THAT IS A PLANNED USE OF FUND BALANCE. THERE IS A 9% RATE INCREASE PROPOSED ACROSS ALL CUSTOMER CLASSES FOR WASTEWATER. NEXT IS THE DRAINAGE FUND BUDGET, WITH BOTH REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES BUDGETED AT $5,915,669. IT INCLUDES A 5% PROPOSED RATE INCREASE, WHICH IS THE FIRST INCREASE SINCE THIS FEE WAS ADOPTED IN 2002. NEXT UP IS SOLID WASTE. SOLID WASTE IS PROPOSED AT $55,345,497 FOR BOTH REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES, AND THERE ARE NO PLANNED INCREASES FOR SOLID WASTE. SO TOGETHER, THESE RATE INCREASES RESULT IN AN $8.15 PER MONTH INCREASE FOR THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER AND $12.34 FOR THE AVERAGE SMALL COMMERCIAL CUSTOMER. AGAIN, THIS IS BASED ON THAT DELAY. I'M SORRY. THIS IS BASED ON THE 3% ELECTRIC RATE INCREASES GOING INTO EFFECT IN JANUARY. HOWEVER, SHORT OF THAT, THE INCREASE IS $5.94 FOR RESIDENTIAL AND $8.97 FOR SMALL COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS. THE FINAL ENTERPRISE FUND IS THE AIRPORT FUND. IT HAS A PROPOSED BALANCED BUDGET OF. 2 MILLION SORRY REVENUES OF $2,664,698, AND 2,610,182 IN EXPENDITURES. SO IT ACTUALLY HAS A NET INCREASE OF $54,516.

AND IT CONTINUES TO BE SELF-SUPPORTING. NEXT, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. IT INCLUDES $384.8 MILLION IN PLANNED NEW FUNDING FOR 2027.

OF THIS, 48.9 MILLION IS FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT, 67.9 FOR ELECTRIC, 107.9 FOR THE WATER UTILITY. 147.3 MILLION FOR WASTEWATER, 12.5 MILLION FOR SOLID WASTE AND $100,000 FOR THE AIRPORT. SO THIS SLIDE COVERS THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT PORTION OF THE 48.9 MILLION MENTIONED, 5.8 MILLION IS IN GEO BONDS. AS PART OF THE 2023 BOND PROGRAM. THERE ARE ALSO FUNDS FOR FIRE STATION TEN FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS, VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS, TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENTS, AS WELL AS FUNDS TO IMPROVE OUR ROADWAYS. OF THOSE TOTAL FUNDS, AGAIN, 5.8 MILLION ARE IN GEO BONDS, 34.9 IN CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION AND 8.2 IN OTHER FUNDS, INCLUDING REVENUES, IMPACT FEES AND THEN EXTERNAL FUNDING SOURCES. LOOKING AT THE ELECTRIC UTILITIES FIVE YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM, IT HAS 67.9 MILLION IN PROGRAMING TO ADDRESS INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAPACITY NEEDS. OF THAT, 59.5 IS DEBT FUNDED, 3.5 MILLION IS REVENUE FUNDED, AND THEN $5 MILLION IS FUNDED THROUGH COST PARTICIPATION. NEXT WE'LL LOOK AT WATER, WHICH HAS 107.9 MILLION IN ITS CAPITAL PROGRAM TO ADDRESS INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAPACITY NEEDS. NEARLY ALL OF THIS IS DEBT FUNDED, WITH THE MAJORITY GOING TO PLANT IMPROVEMENTS AND REPLACEMENT LINES. WASTEWATER HAS A $47.47 MILLION CAPITAL PROGRAM TO ADDRESS INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAPACITY NEEDS, INCLUDING PLANT AND LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS, AS WELL AS LINE REPLACEMENTS. 143.8 MILLION IS DEBT FUNDED, WITH THE REMAINING 3.5 MILLION

[04:55:09]

FUNDED THROUGH REVENUE DOLLARS. DRAINAGE HAS A $4 MILLION CAPITAL PROGRAM IN ORDER TO IMPROVE OUR STORMWATER SYSTEM, WITH ALL 4 MILLION BEING REVENUE FUNDED. SOLID WASTE HAS $12.5 MILLION IN ITS CAPITAL PROGRAM TO TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THE ENGINEERING AND DESIGN OF THE CITY'S FIRST TRANSFER STATION, AS WELL AS VEHICLES TO ADDRESS SERVICE CAPACITY NEEDS.

5.2 MILLION IS DEBT FUNDED, WITH THE REMAINING 7.2 MILLION FUNDED THROUGH REVENUES. AND THEN THE AIRPORT HAS A CAPITAL PROGRAM OF $100,000, WHICH WILL BE USED FOR A RUNWAY SWEEPER, AND THAT IS FUNDED THROUGH REVENUES. SO TONIGHT'S PURPOSE IS TO RECEIVE PUBLIC FEEDBACK ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET. COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER ADOPTION ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, AND WE ARE ASKING THAT THIS HEARING REMAIN OPEN UNTIL THE NIGHT OF ADOPTION.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> THANK YOU. LET ME SEE IF THERE'S ANY. I SEE NO QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND I HAVE OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DO HAVE A CARD, BUT I'M GOING TO CALL DAVID BURGESS BACK TO THE TO THE DAIS. AND IF YOU ALSO HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER HE SPEAKS, THEN FEEL FREE TO COME DOWN AND SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS AND THEN FILL OUT A BLUE CARD AS YOU AS YOU LEAVE. THANK YOU. STATE YOUR NAME. YOU'LL HAVE

FOUR MINUTES. THANK YOU. >> HELLO AGAIN. COUNCIL. HELLO. WELL, AS FAR AS THE THE INCREASE IN. I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE INCREASE IN THE TAXES. MAYOR WATTS, YOU RAN ON A PART OF YOUR PLATFORM WAS TO REDUCE PROPERTY TAXES, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE DONE.

AND IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT AN 8% DECREASE, WHICH IS GREATLY APPRECIATED. BUT AS WAS JUST SHOWN HERE WITH THE BUDGET, THE TOTAL INCREASE OF TAXES ON, YOU KNOW, WATER, WASTEWATER, DRAINAGE, ELECTRICITY IS GOING TO BE 20%. SO IN ACTUALITY, US, THE CITIZENS OF DENTON ARE GOING TO BE BURDENED WITH A 12% INCREASE IN TAXES. AND THE WAY I VIEW THAT IS IT'S KIND OF LIKE COMING IN THE BACK DOOR. AND I FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, A BIG PART OF THAT OF, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO INCREASE THE TAXES AND EVERYTHING IS THE INCREASED AMOUNT OF APARTMENT CONSTRUCTION THAT IS HERE. AND BECAUSE OF ALL THE APARTMENTS THAT HAVE THAT ARE BEING BUILT AND THAT ARE COMING INTO THE AREA, THEY'VE ACTUALLY REDUCED PROPERTY, HOME PROPERTY VALUES BY 4 TO 8%. SO THAT'S ANOTHER DECREASE IN, IN, YOU KNOW, IN MY FINANCES. BUT YET THE, YOU KNOW, THE TAXES ARE STILL GOING UP. ALSO, BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY APARTMENT COMPLEXES HERE IN DENTON AND THAT ARE COMING IN NOW, THE RENTAL, THE RENT PRICES FOR APARTMENTS HAS GONE DOWN FROM ABOUT LIKE HAS DECREASED 8 TO 11% AND WHICH IN TURN HAS, YOU KNOW, LOWERED THE PROPERTY VALUES ON, ON HOMES AND, AND IN THE AND WITHIN THE RENTAL DISTRICT TO THE OTHER PART OF THE PROBLEM IS WE DON'T HAVE STUDENTS THAT ARE COMING IN. THANKS TO THE RESTRICTIONS OF, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE IMMIGRATION PROBLEMS AND THINGS THAT WE'RE HAVING. SO THE UNIVERSITY ITSELF IS HAVING PROBLEMS. AND IN TURN, ALL THE, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY IS SUFFERING BECAUSE OF THAT. SO I, YOU KNOW, I PRESENTED THE PROBLEM. A SOLUTION MIGHT BE THAT THE, THE COMPANIES THAT ARE BUILDING THESE COMPLEXES OFFSET A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THE TAXES THAT YOU'RE WANTING TO IMPLEMENT. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THE ONES BUILDING IT. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ARE GOING TO BE PROFITING FROM IT. LET THEM PAY MORE OF THE TAXES THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY ARE INCURRING ON US AND THE COMMUNITY. AND ALSO, AT THE SAME TIME, INSTITUTE A RENTAL CAP ON THEM TOO, BECAUSE IF THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY MORE FOR THE TAXES, IT'S NOT FAIR TO PASS THAT COST OFF TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO COME IN AND RENT FROM THEM. SO I WOULD HOPE THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME, SOME FORM OF A SOLUTION THERE THAT WE THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED. AND THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY ON IT.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK COME DOWN. AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR TIME WILL BEGIN. ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK. SEEING NO MOVEMENT. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WILL CONTINUE. THIS PUBLIC HEARING WILL REMAIN OPEN. AND, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, AS FAR AS CONTINUATION, DO WE NEED TO

[05:00:01]

TAKE A VOTE OR SORT OF UNANIMOUS CONSENT? >> YES, IF YOU WANT TO JUST

CONTINUE IT. AND UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, IT WOULD BE. >> ANY OBJECTION TO CONTINUING THIS WITHOUT A VOTE PURSUANT TO THE INSTRUCTION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. ALL RIGHT. SO IT WILL REMAIN OPEN AND CONTINUE TO, I BELIEVE, THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, WHICH IS SEPTEMBER THE

[B. ID 26-0563 Hold a public hearing on proposed property tax increase that will not exceed $0.553485 per $100 valuation. The proposed rate will exceed the no new revenue tax rate ($0.515958 per $100) but will not exceed the voter-approval tax rate ($0.553485 per $100).]

22ND. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS 5BD26-0563. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX INCREASE THAT WILL NOT EXCEED 0.553485 PER $100

VALUATION. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

>> AMY CATHOLIC, CHIEF STRATEGIC OFFICER, HERE TO PRESENT AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED TAX RATE FOR 2627 AND RECEIVE INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC. SO CERTIFIED VALUES FOR THE 2026 TAX YEAR. TOTAL 207 226.7 BILLION, AN INCREASE OF 17.5% COMPARED TO 2025. THE NEARLY 4 BILLION INCREASE INCLUDES 1.9 BILLION IN NEW VALUE AND NEARLY 2.1 BILLION CHANGE IN EXISTING VALUES. NEARLY ALL OF THE INCREASED VALUE, WHETHER NEW OR EXISTING, IT WAS DUE TO AN INCREASE IN BUSINESS, PERSONAL PROPERTY, THE AVERAGE HOME VALUE DECREASE FROM $387,000 TO $383,000. HERE'S A DETAILED TABLE SHOWING THE ASSESSED VALUE AND HISTORIC TAX RATES.

CERTIFIED. AND I MENTIONED THIS EARLIER, BUT CERTIFIED ASSESSED VALUES ROSE TO $26.7 BILLION.

THIS GROWTH ALLOWS US TO REDUCE THE TAX RATE WHILE CONTINUING TO MEET SERVICE DEMANDS. SO THESE ARE THIS IS THE PROPOSED TAX RATE FOR 2627. AS DISCUSSED IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET, BOTH THE O AND M RATES. THE O RATE DECREASED BY NEARLY $0.02 AND THE DEBT SERVICE RATE DECREASED BY NEARLY $0.03 WHEN COMPARED TO THE PRIOR YEAR. THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET INCLUDES A RATE OF 0.548485 PER $100 OF VALUATION, WHICH IS HIGHER THAN THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, BUT LOWER THAN THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE. AND AGAIN, THIS IS $0.05 BELOW THE CURRENT TAX RATE. THE CHANGE IN THE TAX RATE WILL RESULT IN AN ANNUAL SAVINGS FOR THE AVERAGE RESIDENT AVERAGE VALUE OF $203 PER YEAR, OR $16.91 PER MONTH. COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER ADOPTION ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, WHERE A MAJORITY SUPERMAJORITY VOTE WOULD BE NEEDED TO PASS A RATE.

AS IT IS ABOVE, THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM MY COLLEAGUES? IF NOT, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. YOU CAN COME DOWN AND STATE YOUR NAME AND HAVE FOUR MINUTES. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM ON THE PROPERTY TAX RATE. MR. CITY ATTORNEY, DO WE LEAVE THIS OPEN IN A SIMILAR MANNER? DO WE GO AHEAD AND WE'RE CLOSING THIS ONE OUT. OKAY. ONE MORE TIME. ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS? I WILL SAY THAT JUST AS A AS A NOTE THAT THE INCREASE YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE'S ABOUT A $3 BILLION INCREASE, I BELIEVE, WAS FROM BUSINESS, PERSONAL PROPERTY, AND THAT ALL CAME FROM ONE OF THE DATA CENTERS OUT HERE IN THE TOWN NEAR THE AIRPORT. SO THAT WAS THE PROBABLY 90% OR 95% OF THAT INCREASE. ALL RIGHT.

SEEING NO MOVEMENT, I WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS AGENDA ITEM. AND WE'LL

[C. DCA26-0004a Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving and adopting a comprehensive amendment to the Denton Development Code; amendments to include but are not limited to, Subsection 3.7-Measurements and Exceptions, Subchapter 5 - Use Regulations, Table 7.H - Fencing Standards on Individual Lots, Table 7.9-I Parking, Subsection 7.6.9 - Off-Street Parking Layout and Design, Subsection 7.10.3 - Single-Family Detached, Duplex, Townhome, Triplex and Fourplex Dwelling and Site Building Design, Subsection 9.2-Definitions, Appendix A, Exhibit C-2B-Rayzor Ranch South Mixed-Use District-1 and Rayzor Ranch South Mixed Use District-2 Single-Family Residential Guidelines. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted (5-0) to recommend approval of the request. Motion for approval by Commissioner Dyer and second by Commissioner Garland. (DCA26-0004a, Comprehensive Update, Angie Manglaris).]

MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM C, WHICH IS HOLD A PUBLIC. IT'S ITEM C EXCUSE ME, I'D DCA26-0004. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING AND ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT TO THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE AND VARIOUS OTHER CODES IN THAT POSTING, WHICH. I'M NOT GOING TO READ THEM ALL.

>> YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. ANGIE GLASS, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR WITH WITH ME, I ALSO HAVE SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING TEAM. AS THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT, INVOLVES SEVERAL MEMBERS OF STAFF WORKING ON DIFFERENT ASPECTS. BUT REALLY, THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO CONSIDER A COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT TO THE D, D, C PREDOMINANTLY IN SUB CHAPTERS FIVE AND NINE, BUT ALSO AS IT

[05:05:01]

RELATES TO OTHER AREAS, AS EVERYTHING SORT OF INTERCONNECTED WITHIN THE D, D, C, REALLY THE PURPOSE OF THIS SPECIFIC COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT IS TO ENSURE OUR LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE UP TO DATE WITH CURRENT TRENDS. OUR REGULATIONS ARE CLEAR AND CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD, AND THEY'RE USER FRIENDLY AND EFFECTIVE. IN ADDITION, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ACCOUNTING FOR NEW AND EMERGING LAND USES APPROPRIATELY, PLACING THEM INTO ZONING CATEGORIES AND ASSIGNING USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS TO MITIGATE POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS. AS ALWAYS, WE WANT TO SHARE CONSISTENCY WITH STATE LAW. OVERALL, THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE INTENDED TO ADVANCE AN EFFICIENT REVIEW PROCESS BOTH FOR STAFF, APPLICANTS AND RESIDENTS READING THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO STAFF DID WORK WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE OVER SEVERAL MONTHS IN PREPARING THESE AMENDMENTS DUE TO STATE LAW. GOING FORWARD WILL BE PACKAGING SEVERAL AMENDMENTS TOGETHER AS A COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT TO THE D, D C PREVIOUSLY, YOU MAY HAVE SEEN US AMEND JUST A PORTION OR SPECIFIC USE STANDARD, BUT WE'LL BE BRINGING FORWARD PACKAGES OF ELEMENTS THAT ARE SIMILAR TO ONE ANOTHER AS A COMPREHENSIVE CODE AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO TOPICS COVERED IN THIS AMENDMENT REALLY RELATE TO MINOR AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING LAND USES, BOTH IN THE TABLE OF ALLOWED USES, THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND THE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO THOSE TO INCORPORATE CHANGES TO STATE LAW TO INCORPORATE DIRECTOR DETERMINATIONS AS IT RELATES TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS, TO ADD NEW AND EMERGING LAND USES TO THE D, D, C, AND THEN ALSO THERE'S A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE RAZOR RANCH OVERLAY. AND I'LL GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE SECTIONS AND TALK ABOUT SORT OF THOSE BIG PICTURE CHANGES. AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TIME FOR QUESTIONS, AS ALWAYS. SO AS IT RELATES TO AMENDMENTS TO THE EXISTING TABLE OF LAND USES, USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND DEFINITIONS. THESE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS ARE INTENDED TO ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT HAVE COME TO STAFF'S ATTENTION, AND THAT COULD BE FIXED BY MINOR TEXT AMENDMENTS. GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE PURPOSE IS TO REDUCE AMBIGUITY, RESULT IN CLEAR AND CONSISTENT APPLICATION OF THE DDC, AND PROVIDE SPECIFICITY TO TOPICS WHICH ARE REGULARLY COMING UP IN DAY TO DAY WORK TO PROVIDE FOR A MORE EFFICIENT REVIEW PROCESS. AND SO BY PROVIDING CLARIFYING LANGUAGE WHERE NECESSARY, WE'RE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH SOME OF THOSE GOALS.

THERE WERE SEVERAL AMENDMENTS TO THE DEFINITIONS, THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS. BUT I'LL JUST KIND OF HIT SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS. SOME OF THOSE ARE CLARIFYING USES THAT MAY BE CONSIDERED ACCESSORY TO THE PRIMARY USE. THE DDC DOES SAY THAT IN THE DEFINITION, THAT PRIMARY USE DOES NEED TO CONTEMPLATE TYPICAL ACCESSORY USES. SO CLARIFYING THOSE RIGHT SIZING THE GENERAL RETAIL DEFINITIONS WITH THE DESCRIPTION IN WHICH IS PROVIDED, FURTHER DISTINGUISHING LOW AND MEDIUM IMPACT MANUFACTURING. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT REGULARLY REQUIRES DIRECTOR DETERMINATION TO REALLY DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TWO. AS IT IS TODAY. THEY'RE REALLY QUITE SIMILAR. AND SO THIS SHOULD RESULT IN A MORE EFFICIENT PROCESS. AND THEN FURTHER DISTINGUISHING OUTDOOR RECREATION, THE PRIVATE LAND USE FROM PARKS, PLAYGROUND AND OPEN SPACE. THE PUBLIC LAND USE AS IT RELATES TO USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS, WE ARE CLARIFYING THAT MOBILE FOOD COURTS ARE PERMITTED AS AN ACCESSORY USE OR RIGHT SIZING. THE ALLOWANCE FOR MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR MEDICAL CLINICS AND OFFICES WITH THE ZONING DISTRICTS IN WHICH THEY'RE PERMITTED. AND THEN ALSO CLARIFYING THAT A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR FOOD PROCESSING USES WHEN THEY'RE ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. AND THEN, AS IT RELATES TO THE TABLE OF ALLOWED USES, CLARIFYING THAT PERSONAL SERVICES ARE ALLOWED IN R SEVEN, AS THOSE TYPES OF USES ARE WHAT YOU EXPECT TO SEE IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT THAT ALSO ALLOWS FOR COMMERCIAL USES, PARTICULARLY THOSE THAT SUPPORT RESIDENTIAL LIVING. LIKE YOUR LAUNDROMAT OR WHERE YOU WOULD GO TO GET YOUR HAIR CUT.

CHANGES TO STATE LAW. THERE'S REALLY TWO THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. THE FIRST ONE IS SB 785, WHICH WAS APPROVED IN 2025, WENT INTO EFFECT THE FIRST OF THIS MONTH. AND IT DOES REQUIRE THAT MUNICIPALITIES HAVE AT LEAST ONE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH MANUFACTURED HOMES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT, AS IT IS TODAY. MANUFACTURED HOMES ARE CONTEMPLATED WITHIN OUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEFINITION, AND THEY ARE ALLOWED WITHIN SUP IN ALL OF OUR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. THEY DON'T HAVE A SEPARATE LINE ITEM IN THE TABLE OF ALLOWED USES. THEY FALL INTO THAT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY WITH THE CAVEAT THAT THEY DO REQUIRE AN SUP. SO WITH THIS AMENDMENT, THIS WOULD BE COMPLIANT WITH STATE LAW BY PERMITTING MANUFACTURED HOMES IN THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT BY RIGHT, AND RETAINING THE SUP IN ALL OF THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. WITH THAT DOES COME U. SPECIFIC STANDARDS TO ESTABLISH SITING REQUIREMENTS AND DESIGN FEATURES PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE SEE FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AS IT RELATES TO MEDIA PRODUCTION FACILITIES. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS PASSED IN 2023 AND UPDATED THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AREAS TO BE CONSIDERED A MEDIA PRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT ZONE BY REVISING THE MINIMUM POPULATION FOR THE CITY FROM 250,000 DOWN TO 100,000. THESE ZONES ALLOW FOR SALES AND TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR THOSE WHO ARE PROVIDING MEDIA PRODUCTION FACILITIES, AND THE COSTS AND EXPENSES THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT. SHOULD THIS BE SOMETHING THAT THE CITY WANT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IN THE FUTURE, OR WOULD LIKE TO RECRUIT SOMEBODY WHO DOES MEDIA PRODUCTION, WE WOULD FIRST NEED TO HAVE THAT LAND USE. AND SO THIS WOULD UPDATE THE TABLE OF ALLOWED USES. SPECIFICALLY OUR CURRENT DEFINITION FOR MUSICIAN STUDIO TO RE CATEGORIZE IT AS

[05:10:06]

MEDIA PRODUCTION, RETAINING THE MUSICIAN STUDIO PERMISSIONS. SO STILL AUDIO RECORDING AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS, BUT ALSO TO INCLUDE VIDEOGRAPHY SO THAT IN THE FUTURE, SHOULD SOMEBODY WISH TO COME INTO THE CITY AND BRING THAT, THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT, WE'RE PREPARED AND ABLE TO, TO ALLOW FOR IT. SO THIS IS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF SOME OPPORTUNITIES THAT WERE BUILT INTO STATE LAW. AS IT RELATES TO INCORPORATING DIRECTOR DETERMINATIONS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SITE DESIGN STANDARDS. THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO SUBCHAPTER 710 OF THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH OUTLINES ALL OF OUR BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS. BUT THIS IS SPECIFIC TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. THIS SPECIFIC SECTION OF THE DDC DOES ALLOW FOR DIRECTOR DETERMINATIONS TO ALTERNATIVE BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS WHEN THEY'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE DDC. SHORTLY AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE 2019 DDC IN 2021, THE DIRECTOR DID ISSUE A MEMO AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVE FEATURES THAT CAN BE USED TO FURTHER DISTINGUISH SINGLE FAMILY HOMES FROM ONE ANOTHER TO ADD ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS TO THAT LIST. SO WHEN STAFF REVIEWS THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME PERMIT, WE'RE LOOKING TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE CERTAIN FEATURES AND THAT THOSE FEATURES ARE DISTINGUISHED FROM SIMILAR HOUSES SO THAT YOU DON'T SEE THE SAME FACADE ACROSS A BLOCK FACE. SO ADDITIONAL FEATURES WERE ADDED TO ASSIST STAFF. AND THAT MEMO HAS BEEN CIRCULATED FOR SEVERAL YEARS TO ASSIST IN REVIEWS. AND THEN IN THE LAST YEAR, SUBSEQUENT MEMOS HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO ACCOMMODATE FOR CHANGES IN HOUSING PREFERENCE AND TO ACCOUNT FOR UPDATES IN STYLE. AND SO THESE MINOR DETERMINATIONS HAVE EVOLVED OVER TIME. THEY ARE CIRCULATED AMONG STAFF. THEY ARE USED TO ASSIST IN REVIEW AND RESULT IN A MORE EXPEDIENT PROCESS. HOWEVER, THE MOST APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THEM IS NO LONGER IN A MEMO. IT IS IN THE DDC. WHEN YOU'RE SEEING THE SAME CHANGES OVER AND OVER AGAIN, RATHER THAN RELY ON AN INTERNALLY CIRCULATED MEMO, IT IS BEST TO PLACE IT WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO THESE AMENDMENTS DO EXPAND THE AVAILABLE ELEMENTS TO CREATE BUILDING AND MASS AND FORM VARIATION WITHIN THE DDC. THEY ALSO MAKE OUR GARAGE OFFSET REQUIREMENTS MORE FLEXIBLE BY PROVIDING A FIVE FOOT IN FRONT OF THE HOME MAXIMUM, RATHER THAN A MINIMUM OF THREE FOOT IN FRONT OR BEHIND. THAT IS SOMETHING WE CONTINUALLY SEE DEVELOPERS ASK FOR RELIEF FROM. AND THEN THE GRAPHIC ON THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONE WE HAVE TODAY, BUT IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE USER FRIENDLY TO HELP ASSIST IN WHERE SIMILAR ELEVATIONS MAY OR MAY NOT BE USED. SO THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE UPDATED AS WELL. AND THEN FINALLY, OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, SEVERAL NEW AND EMERGING LAND USES HAVE COME UP OR JUST USES THAT DON'T NEATLY FIT INTO A CATEGORY THAT DO RESULT IN SOMETIMES INCONSISTENT APPLICATION OF A SIMILAR LAND USE ACROSS THE CITY. SO SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT CONTRACTOR SERVICES, DRONE DELIVERY SERVICES, AND EVENT VENUES, THESE ARE ITEMS CHALLENGES APPROPRIATELY CLASSIFYING AND ALSO MAKING SURE WE'RE APPLYING CORRECT USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS TO ADEQUATELY MITIGATE ADVERSE IMPACTS. SO TO PROVIDE CLARITY AND DIRECTION, THE STREAMLINES THE REVIEW PROCESS FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT, BUT ALSO MAKES APPLICANTS INTERESTED IN UTILIZING THESE USES A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS THE CITY IS LOOKING FOR, AND THEY KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT WHEN LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO I'LL KIND OF GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THOSE THREE USES AND WHAT THAT CONSISTS OF.

CONTRACTOR SERVICES IS TYPICALLY A SERVICE THAT CONSISTS PRIMARILY OF OFF SITE MANUAL LABOR, BUT SOMETIMES THEY MAY NEED OFFICE SPACE OR SALES OFFICE OR SOME STORAGE.

YOU MAY ASSOCIATE THIS WITH LANDSCAPE COMPANY OR POOL COMPANY OR PLUMBER OR HVAC TECHNICIAN WHERE THEY DON'T QUITE FIT INTO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, BUT THEY'RE ALSO NOT QUITE OUTDOOR STORAGE. AND SO WHAT THIS HAS RESULTED IN OVER TIME, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF THESE USES WITHIN THE CITY, EITHER CLASSIFIED AS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE WITH ACCESSORY, OUTDOOR STORAGE OR OFFICE WITH A SALES USE. AND AT THIS POINT, IT IS BEST TO SORT OF MAKE ITS OWN LAND USE TO ADEQUATELY CAPTURE ALL OF THE IMPACTS THAT THAT USE MAY HAVE. SO THAT IS WHERE THE CONTRACTOR SERVICES LAND USE COMES IN. IT'S GENERALLY DEFINED AS A BUSINESS THAT SPECIALIZES IN PROVIDING SERVICES NOT CLASSIFIED ELSEWHERE IN THE DDC, BUT PRIMARILY CONSISTS OF OFF SITE LABOR THAT INCLUDE PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, OFFICE CLEANING, HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING, AND USES OF THAT TYPE. IT ALSO SPECIFIES REQUIREMENTS FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE WHERE THAT MAY BE ALLOWED AND HOW IT MUST BE SCREENED. IT GOES ON TO SPECIFY THAT OUTDOOR STORAGE SHOULD ONLY BE FOR OPERABLE EQUIPMENT. IT CANNOT BE USED FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE OR VEHICLES THAT ARE NO LONGER OPERABLE, AND ESTABLISHES THAT VEHICLES USED FOR THAT BUSINESS DO NEED TO BE APPROPRIATELY PARKED ON SITE ON A PAVED SURFACE. AS IT RELATES TO EVENT VENUES. THESE ARE VENUES WHICH PREDOMINANTLY CONSIST OF ON SITE ACTIVITIES THAT MAY BE THINGS LIKE A GATHERING SPACE, A RETREAT OR A WEDDING VENUE. AGAIN, THE DDC DOESN'T HAVE A GREAT LAND USE THAT ADEQUATELY CAPTURES AN EVENT VENUE AND ALL OF THE COMPONENTS THAT COME WITH IT, SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO POTENTIAL LODGING ACTIVITIES OR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, THEY HAVE GENERALLY BEEN CLASSIFIED INTO INDOOR OR OUTDOOR RECREATION. BUT AGAIN, WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE SPECIFIC STANDARDS THAT

[05:15:01]

ADEQUATELY CAPTURE ALL OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT COME WITH THAT LAND USE. SO STAFF IS PROPOSING TO CREATE A LAND USE SPECIFIC TO EVENT VENUES THAT PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT BETTER GUIDANCE ON WHERE THOSE MAY BE LOCATED IN THE CITY AND THE STANDARDS THAT THEY MAY COMPLY WITH. SO I'M NOT GOING TO READ THE WHOLE DEFINITION, BUT GENERALLY IT IS A PRIVATELY OWNED AND LEASED FACILITY USED FOR THE HOSTING OF PRIVATE EVENTS THAT COULD INCLUDE CONFERENCES, BANQUETS, WEDDINGS, AND SIMILAR FUNCTIONS. IT DOES ALLOW FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AS WELL AS LODGING. THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS DO SPECIFY THAT THOSE MAY BE PERMITTED WITH WITH THE EVENT, BUT IF SOMEBODY WERE TO WANT TO SELL BEVERAGES OUTSIDE OF AN EVENT OPERATING HOURS, THEY NEED TO MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR AN INDEPENDENT BAR, TAVERN OR LOUNGE. LIKEWISE, IF THEY'RE LOOKING TO HOST LODGING INDEPENDENT FROM AN EVENT, THEY NEED TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IS KIND OF AN EITHER OR PICK YOUR OWN ADVENTURE BASED UPON WHICH WHAT THE USE IS AND HOW THEY FEEL THEY WOULD BEST BE SUITED. SO THEY CAN CHOOSE ONE SPACE PER 250 OR 1 FOR FOR DESIGN OCCUPANCY LOAD, JUST TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY THERE FOR INDIVIDUALS LOOKING TO HAVE THESE BUSINESSES. AND THEN THE LAST OF THE NEW POTENTIAL USES WOULD BE DRONE DELIVERY SERVICES. SO THIS WOULD ESTABLISH A CATEGORY THAT DOES ENCOMPASS UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES THAT ARE USED FOR THE DELIVERY OF GOODS. AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DRONES, IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT REALLY ONCE THEY GO UP IN THE AIR, THE CITY HAS VERY LITTLE THAT WE CAN SAY ABOUT THEIR OPERATIONS THAT IS REGULATED AT THE FAA AND THE STATE LEVELS. BUT WE DO HAVE LAND USE AND ZONING AUTHORITY WHEN IT COMES TO WHERE THEY CAN BE LOCATED AND HOW THEY CAN BE SITED. THIS IS AN INCREASINGLY POPULAR USE. WE DO HAVE TWO WITHIN THE CITY, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A GREAT CATEGORY THAT REALLY ADEQUATELY CAPTURES WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE AND HOW DO THEY OPERATE WITHIN THE CITY OF DENTON? AND SO THE TWO EXISTING SERVICES THAT WE HAVE WERE CLASSIFIED AS ACCESSORY, OUTDOOR STORAGE AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. SO GENERALLY THEY WERE ALLOWED TO BE LOCATED ON SITE. WE DID REQUIRE THEM TO BE SCREENED. BUT GOING FORWARD, AS WE FIELD MORE REQUESTS, WE REALLY NEED SOME BETTER STANDARDS THAT SORT OF HELP PUT PARAMETERS ON WHAT WE WOULD LIKE THAT TO SEE. ALSO, IT DOESN'T PROVIDE FOR A WAY FOR. WE'VE RECEIVED INTEREST IN INDIVIDUALS WHO MAYBE HAVE A PARCEL THAT'S LOCATED NEAR THE MALL OR SOMETHING, AND THEY WANT TO SERVE MULTIPLE VENDORS. WE DON'T HAVE LIKE SORT OF A PRIMARY LAND USE AND LOOKING FOR BETTER WAYS TO BOTH GUIDE STAFF AND APPLICANTS IN WHAT IS EXPECTED OF THESE POTENTIAL DRONE DELIVERY SERVICES. AND SO THIS SPECIFIC AMENDMENT WOULD ADD DRONE DELIVERY SERVICES AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO EXISTING BUILDINGS, THOSE THAT ARE A PRIMARY USE, THAT MAY SERVE SEVERAL BUSINESSES AND DELIVERY TO HOMES, AND THEN ALSO INCLUDING HELISTOP. AND THAT IS MOSTLY TO FURTHER DISTINGUISH WHAT IS A DRONE AND WHAT IS AERIAL VEHICLES USED FOR HUMAN TRANSPORTATION. SO THOSE STANDARDS DO REALLY SPECIFY WHAT WE EXPECT TO SEE OF DRONE DELIVERY SERVICES AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, THEIR STAGING AREAS AND WHERE THEY MAY BE LOCATED ON SITE. SO AS AN ACCESSORY USE, REQUIRING THAT IT'S NOT TAKING UP ANY PARKING REQUIRED FOR THAT BUSINESS, THAT IT IS ADEQUATELY SCREENED FROM VIEW, SPECIFICALLY FROM RESIDENTIAL LAND USES. IT'S NOT TAKING UP ANY REQUIRED LANDSCAPING, VEHICLE MANEUVERING SPACES OR LOADING ZONES, AND THEN ALSO ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM SETBACK FOR MANY ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE OR ZONING, NONE OF WHICH EXIST TODAY. SO THIS DOES GIVE THE CITY A BETTER WAY TO GUIDE APPLICANTS, BUT ALSO POTENTIALLY TO SORT OF PLAN FOR SOME OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT MAY COME FROM THE DRONE DELIVERY SERVICE, LAND USE. SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, THEY DO NEED TO BE SCREENED FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, AS WELL AS ANY ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES, AND THEN ALSO HAVE THAT MINIMUM SETBACK FROM SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AS WELL AS PRE-K THROUGH HIGH SCHOOLS. AND THEN THIS IS THE LAST AMENDMENT, I PROMISE.

THIS IS AMENDMENTS TO THE RAZOR RANCH OVERLAY DISTRICT. AND THIS IS REALLY IT'S A VERY MINOR TEXT AMENDMENT TO REMOVE A SPECIFIC PROVISION AS IT RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN A SPECIFIC SUBSECTION OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT LIMITED THOSE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO BE ONE BEDROOM. SO AS TIMES HAVE CHANGED AND THE HOUSING MARKET HAS CHANGED, THOSE LOTS ARE PLATTED, INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN AND THOSE HOUSES COULD BE BUILT.

HOWEVER, THERE'S THERE'S NOT PROVING TO BE A MARKET FOR SINGLE BEDROOM, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND SO THE REQUEST WOULD BE TO, TO REMOVE THAT ONE BEDROOM REQUIREMENT, ALLOWING THE SECOND STORY LOFT AREA TO BE CONVERTED INTO A SECOND BEDROOM IF DESIRED, TO ASSIST IN SOME OF THE MARKETABILITY OF THAT SPECIFIC SECTION OF HOMES WITHIN THE RAZOR RANCH OVERLAY DISTRICT. SO THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT TO THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SEVERAL AMENDMENTS THAT WE DISCUSSED TODAY, BUT THEY'RE REALLY CENTERED AROUND ENSURING OUR LAND USES ARE CLEAR, CONSISTENT, AND UP TO DATE THAT WE ARE ADEQUATELY CAPTURING NEW AND EMERGING LAND USES AND ESTABLISHING NEW SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR THEM THAT WE ARE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW AND OVERALL SHOULD RESULT IN A MORE EFFICIENT REVIEW PROCESS FOR STAFF, APPLICANTS AND RESIDENTS ALIKE. UTILIZING THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE, THIS WAS

[05:20:02]

CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN AUGUST, AND THEY DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND I ALSO HAVE

SEVERAL MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM WHO CAN ASSIST AS WELL. >> COUNCILMEMBER REIMER.

>> THANK YOU, ANGIE, FOR PRESENTING. I JUST WANTED TO THANK STAFF AGAIN FOR ALL THE HARD WORK Y'ALL DID ON ALL OF THESE UPDATES. THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE LOOKED AT A LOT OF THESE THINGS. I THINK AT ONE POINT WE ALMOST ACCIDENTALLY PREVENTED ALCOHOL SALES IN EVENT VENUES, BUT WE WERE WORKING TOGETHER. WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, A WEDDING COULD POTENTIALLY SELL BEVERAGES AT THEIR EVENT AND NOT US NOT CLASSIFIED AS A BAR. SO THERE WAS A LOT OF GOOD DISCUSSION, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE

WORK YOU PUT INTO THIS. THANKS, >> COUNCILMEMBER. JESTER. >> I COULD BE MISTAKEN, BUT IN THE AGENDA THAT I REVIEWED, THERE WAS PROPOSED AMENDMENTS REGARDING MOBILE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS THAT WERE NOT COVERED IN THIS PRESENTATION. ARE THEY STILL INCLUDED IN

WHAT'S BEING VOTED ON TONIGHT? >> THEY ARE STILL INCLUDED. THEY WERE SORT OF LISTED IN THAT FIRST SLIDE OF OF CLARIFYING EXISTING USES THAT ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DDC. I'M HAPPY TO GO MORE IN DEPTH INTO ANY OF THE SPECIFIC MOBILE FOOD VENDOR QUESTIONS. IF YOU HAVE THEM, GREAT. AS IT IS TODAY, MOBILE FOOD VENDORS, WE HAVE SEVERAL OF THEM AND AROUND THE CITY, AS I'M SURE MANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN, AND THIS IS REALLY LOOKING TO ESTABLISH A POLICY FOR MOBILE FOOD COURTS THAT OPERATE AS AN ACCESSORY FOOD COURT. SO THERE MAY BE A PRIMARY BUSINESS ON SITE, BUT YOU ALSO HAVE SEVERAL FOOD TRUCKS CONGREGATING, WHICH CONSTITUTES A FOOD COURT. RIGHT NOW, THE DDC LACKS SORT OF TEETH TO MONITOR AND ENFORCE THOSE ITEMS. AND SO BY ADOPTING THE ACCESSORY FOOD COURT, WE CAN REQUIRE A CERTIFICATE OF LAND USE TO REVIEW THESE THESE MOBILE FOOD COURTS THAT ARE SORT OF POPPING UP IN VARIOUS

LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. CAN YOU TALK ABOUT SO IT LOOKS JUST PERMITTING BY RIGHT. SO NO SUP NEEDED MIXED USE CORRIDOR NON RESIDENTIAL. SO IT LOOKS LIKE EVERYWHERE EXCEPT STRICTLY RESIDENTIAL. CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT MIXED USE CORRIDOR ET-CETERA. BECAUSE THERE ARE INAPPROPRIATE PLACES FOR MOBILE MOBILE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS. I'VE SEEN SOME COMING IN NEXT TO SOME SMALL MULTIFAMILY WHERE I WORRY ABOUT THE CHILDREN PLAYING NEXT TO SOME, YOU KNOW, YOUNG PEOPLE PARTYING AND NEXT TO OTHER

BUSINESS OFFICES. >> YES, I'M HAPPY TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT. SO GENERALLY, THESE ARE OUR ZONING DISTRICTS WHICH TEND TO ALLOW OUR COMMERCIAL TYPE LAND USES.

SO YOU MAY SEE A RESTAURANT OR THINGS LIKE THAT. AND HISTORICALLY THE DIRECTION HAS BEEN IF IF THAT ZONING DISTRICT ALLOWS THE RESTAURANT USE OR COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES, FOOD TRUCKS ARE GENERALLY ABLE TO OPERATE WITHIN THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS. WE DID KEEP THEM OUT OF THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. LARGELY, THIS DOES MIRROR A LOT OF WHAT WE HAVE FOR FOOD COURT AS A PRIMARY USE. SO WHERE YOU WOULD EXPECT TO SEE ONE JUST LOCATED ON A SINGULAR LOT, THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS DO GO ON TO SET SOME PARAMETERS AS IT RELATES TO WHERE MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS WITHIN THE FOOD COURT MAY BE LOCATED, INCLUDING ESTABLISHING MINIMUM SEPARATION DISTANCE, ENSURING THAT VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AREAS ARE SEPARATED FROM ONE ANOTHER AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, OUT OF THE OUT OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. SO THEY DO HAVE TO BE SITUATED WITHIN THE LOT. AND SO IT DOES PROVIDE SOME GUIDELINES FOR HOW THEY MAY BE SITUATED WITHIN THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, THEY ARE ALLOWED IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT. SO THIS DOES LARGELY MIRROR THE FOOD TRUCKS AS A PRIMARY USE. HOWEVER, I'M

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY MORE SPECIFICS ON THAT AS WELL. >> SO I MEAN MIXED USE. THAT CAN BE WHERE WE'VE GOT RESIDENTIAL AS WELL AS SOME COMMERCIAL COMBINED. IS THAT

CORRECT? >> YES. MIXED USE DOES ALLOW FOR A VARIETY OF RESIDENTIAL AND THEN UP TO MULTIFAMILY OR SOME COMMERCIAL TYPE USES AS WELL, LIKE OFFICES AND

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. >> OKAY. WELL, I, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS. SO JUST ON NOTICE IF, IF THIS PART IS PULLED FOR A SEPARATE CONVERSATION, I'M HAPPY TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF ALL OF THESE CHANGES. BUT IF NOT, I'LL, I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THAT. IT'S, IT'S A PROBLEM IN

SOME AREAS. THANK YOU. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND.

>> THANK YOU. I'M VERY IMPRESSED WITH WITH HOW YOU'RE YOU'RE KEEPING UP WITH ALL THIS STUFF. IT'S A VERY IMPRESSIVE REPORT, BUT KEEPING US ABREAST OF TRENDS AND TERMINOLOGY. AND THE EXAMPLE I WANT TO USE IS HELLA STOP. I HAD NEVER SEEN THAT. I HAD TO GOOGLE IT. I HAD TO SHOW MAYOR PRO TEM HELLA STOP A HELIPORT CELLS FUEL A HELLA STOP. SIMPLY THE HELICOPTER LANDS AND TAKES BACK OFF. BUS STOP. HELLA STOP. I WAS VERY IMPRESSED. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. I HAD SOMEBODY, I HAD SOMEBODY SEND ME A TEXT AND I'M JUST

[05:25:02]

CURIOUS. IT'S IN. IT WAS ONE OF THE CHANGES IN SECTION 5.4.3, WHICH IS GENERAL STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES. THE SECTION I JUST SAYS NON RESIDENTIAL DETACHED CARPORTS GAS STATION CANOPIES. OH THIS IS AN EXCEPTION. EXCUSE ME. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ARE ONLY PERMITTED IN THE REAR YARD WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS. SO THIS IS AN EXCEPTION FOR NON RESIDENTIAL DETACHED CARPORTS GAS STATION CANOPIES GAS STATION CAR WASH FACILITIES AND SECURITY SLASH ENTRY BOOTHS. AND WHAT'S REDLINED IS ARE PROHIBITED IN FRONT AND SIDE YARDS. DOES THAT MEAN THAT THOSE ARE NOW ALLOWED IN FRONT AND SIDE YARDS.

>> I CAN ADD A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY TO THAT SPECIFIC AMENDMENT. SO MANY OF YOU MAY RECALL IN JANUARY, WE ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO OUR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT STANDARDS. IN THAT AMENDMENT, WE INADVERTENTLY PROHIBITED FREESTANDING CARPORTS FOR GAS STATIONS, WHICH IS TYPICAL OF ALMOST EVERY GAS STATION THAT YOU SEE. SO THIS IS CORRECTING THAT ERROR AND HELPING US GO FORWARD WITH MAKING SURE THOSE ARE APPROPRIATELY REGULATED.

AND WE'RE NOT INADVERTENTLY BEING OVERLY PROHIBITIVE. >> AND THAT'S PRIMARILY JUST

FOR A COMMERCIAL SITE. I MEAN, THAT'S YEAH. OKAY. >> YES, THAT IS THE MAIN EXAMPLE THAT THAT DOES COME UP REGULARLY, BUT IT WOULDN'T APPLY TO, TO NON COMMERCIAL USE.

>> YES. AND THEN IN THE THE RAZOR RANCH. CHANGE THAT YOU INDICATED THAT YOU POINTED OUT IS THAT PRIMARILY THOSE LOTS THAT ARE OFF OF BONNIE BRAE THAT ARE DEVELOPED HAVE ALL THE ROADS AND EVERYTHING IN IT. SO THERE WAS A RESTRICTION RESTRICTION THERE ORIGINALLY FOR JUST THOSE HAD TO BE JUST ONE BEDROOMS. IS THAT SO. OKAY, SO THEY'VE CHANGED IT TO WHERE IF THEY NEED TO MODIFY IT WITH, YOU KNOW, GO UP THAT THEY CAN PUT AN ADDITIONAL BEDROOM. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO IDENTIFY THAT AREA. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I BELIEVE THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. SO I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE,

WE WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR. >> I'D LIKE TO MOTION ADOPTION.

>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLAND. SECOND THAT WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND LET'S VOTE PLEASE.

[A. ID 26-1332 Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, adopted concurrently with the Cities of Bryan, Garland, and Greenville, approving the purchase and exchange of certain transmission assets by the Texas Municipal Power Agency (“Agency”); and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0).]

MOTION CARRIES 5 TO 1. WE ARE NOW MOVING TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 6AD26-1332.

>> MAYOR. COUNCIL APPOINTED GENERAL MANAGER. BEFORE I GET STARTED, I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE MR. JESSIE DAVIS IS HERE. HE'S ONE OF YOUR APPOINTEES TO THE NPA BOARD AND NEWLY ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE NPA BOARD AS WELL. SO IF THERE'S QUESTIONS FOR HIM RELATED TO THIS ITEM, HE'S HE'S HERE AND AVAILABLE AS WELL. AND SO WHAT WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT IS A IS AN ASSET SWAP BETWEEN ENCORE AND TMP. A, THIS PARTICULAR AGREEMENT AND THIS RELATIONSHIP ACTUALLY DATES BACK TO 1979. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THE LATEST AGREEMENT DATES BACK TO 1997. AND THE REASON WE'RE HERE IS THAT ENCORE INITIATED SOME IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THIS, THIS ROUTE THAT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED A TMP A TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT. BUT DUE TO SOME SOME CHALLENGES THAT EXISTED IN IN THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE TO SOME OPERATIONAL ISSUES CAME UP WITH A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION. THAT'S TO, TO CONSIDER A SWAP OF ASSETS THAT WOULD BE MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL TO BOTH PARTIES. TMPA JOINT OPERATING AGREEMENT REQUIRES THAT THE SALE OF ANY TRANSMISSION ASSETS, AND WITH AN AGGREGATE NET VALUE OF 500 000 OR SALES CONTRACT IN EXCESS OF $10 MILLION HAS TO COME BACK TO THE MEMBER CITIES FOR FOR APPROVAL. AND SO THIS IS A DIAGRAM AND A MAP OF WHERE THESE ASSETS EXIST TODAY. AND THE RELATIONSHIP, AS YOU CAN SEE AS WE GET DOWN HERE TO THE DUNHAM AND ROANOKE AREA, SOME

[05:30:05]

OF THE RELATIONSHIP HERE GETS PRETTY CONVOLUTED. AND SO AS IT RELATES TO COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS, WHO OWNS WHAT, WHERE THAT LINE OF DEMARCATION IS, WHO'S SUPPOSED WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT BECOMES SOMEWHAT COMPLICATED, ALONG WITH THE COMPLICATION THAT ENCORE IS CROSSING SOME OF THESE LINES HERE AND KIND OF AROUND THE, THE ROANOKE ARGYLE AREA. THAT'S THAT'S CREATED SOME ISSUES AS WELL. AND SO, SO TMPA INITIATED A CONVERSATION WITH ENCORE THE POSSIBILITY OF LOOKING AT A SWAP THAT MIGHT MAKE SENSE FOR, FOR BOTH PARTIES. AND SO THE, WHAT CAME OUT OF THAT DISCUSSION WAS A GOOD LINE OF DEMARCATION. SO ANYTHING ABOVE THIS BLACK LINE TMPA WOULD OWN. CURRENTLY TMP ALREADY OWNS DENTON WEST AND IT WOULD OWN ALL THE WAY ALMOST TO CHROME WEST, SO THAT TMP A CLEARLY OWNS ALL THIS, AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE WOULD BE OWNED BY ENCORE. THOSE ASSETS ARE MAINLY 345 LINE. SO PRETTY LARGE, YOU KNOW, TRANSMISSION LINES THAT CARRY A LOT OF POWER. SO HERE'S A LISTING OF, OF ALL THE ASSETS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT CLOSE TO 30 MILES WORTH OF LINES AND ASSETS THAT ENCORE WOULD CONVEY TO TMP. AND THEN T AND NTM, P A WOULD CONVEY A LITTLE BIT OF A LITTLE BIT OF A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN 36 MILES OF, OF LINES TO ENCORE, INCLUDING RELINQUISHING ABOUT ITS 40% INTEREST IN SOME OF THESE JOINT LINES THAT THAT EXIST AN ADDITIONAL 3.3 MILES.

AND SO THE TOTAL VALUE OF THIS EXCHANGE WOULD BE ENCORE WOULD CONVEY TO TMP ABOUT $14.9 MILLION WORTH OF ASSETS. TMP WOULD CONVEY TO ENCORE $4.5 MILLION WORTH OF ASSETS, INCLUDING CASH PAYMENT OF 10.4 MILLION. THAT 10.4 MILLION WOULD BE 20 YEAR BONDS THAT TMP WOULD ISSUE. THAT REPRESENTS ABOUT $800,000 A YEAR. DEBT SERVICE TMP WOULD THEN AMEND ITS TRANSMISSION COST OF SERVICE RATE FILING TO TO ONE, REMOVE THE ASSETS THAT ARE BEING TRANSFERRED TO ENCORE, AND THEN ADD THE ASSETS THAT IT'S THAT IT'S GETTING ON ITS BOOKS. THAT WOULD GENERATE ABOUT $1.5 MILLION WORTH OF REVENUE. ONCE THAT'S WHEN THAT'S COMPLETED, ANTICIPATE THAT THAT WOULD TAKE ABOUT SIX TO TO NINE MONTHS ROUGHLY TO GET THAT DONE. ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL SAVINGS RELATED TO JUST KIND OF THE GENERAL MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP OF THESE FACILITIES THAT ARE EXISTING TODAY, JUST SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE, DME ACTUALLY MAINTAINS THESE ASSETS ON, ON TMP A'S BEHALF THROUGH A SEPARATE CONTRACT WHERE WE ARE REIMBURSED FOR ANY EXPENSES THAT WE HAVE. AND AN ENCORE. AGAIN, THE WE'LL CREATE THIS. THIS TRANSFER WOULD ALSO CREATE THE OPPORTUNITY. I'LL PULL UP. I'LL GO BACK TO THE MAP. THIS CREATES NOW THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYTHING NORTH OF OF DENTON WEST THAT COULD BE IMPROVED. AND CERTAINLY EXTENSIONS BOTH WEST AND EAST OF THESE LINES. AS YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY CONTEMPLATING THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED TO ERCOT THROUGH THE REGIONAL PLANNING GROUP, IS ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO SOME OVERLOADS, OVERLOADS IN OUR SYSTEM THAT STILL HASN'T BEEN FINALIZED. BUT AGAIN, I THINK THAT THEN PUTS US IN A, IN A GOOD IN A GOOD POSITION WITH A PARTY THAT WE KNOW AND THAT WE THAT THE CITY ALREADY OWNS 21% OF TO BE ABLE TO, TO DO THOSE LINE EXTENSIONS AND FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS. SO ON JUNE 11TH, THE BOARD GAVE APPROVAL FOR THIS ASSET SWAP. THE CITIES OF GARLAND, BRYAN AND GREENVILLE HAVE ALREADY ALSO SIGNED OFF ON THIS ASSET SWAP. WE DID PRESENT THIS TO THE PUBLIC ON AUGUST 24TH, AND THEY UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMEND THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THIS ASSET SWAP. AND OF COURSE, STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT. SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR. >> THANK YOU, TONY, FOR THE FOR THE DETAILS, I WOULD LOVE TO

HEAR FROM. IS IT PRESIDENT DAVIS OR CHAIR DAVIS? >> PRESIDENT.

>> PRESIDENT, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE PRESIDENT. JUST A BRIEF REMARKS FROM THE BOARD'S

PERSPECTIVE ON THIS ITEM. >> SURE. WELL, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD TONIGHT AND FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE AND REPRESENT DENTON ON THE TMP BOARD. I THINK OPERATIONALLY, THIS MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. I'M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU THAT IT WOULDN'T MAKE THAT THE MONEY DOESN'T HELP, BUT OPERATIONALLY, IT'S KEY TO WHAT DENTON IS DOING IN THE AREA, WHAT TMP IS DOING IN THE AREA. AND IT STRATEGICALLY POSITIONS BOTH THOSE ORGANIZATIONS FOR FUTURE EXPANSION, JUST LIKE TONY SAID. AND THE OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES WE HAVE WORKING WITH ENCORE, IT'S NOT THAT THEY'RE NOT A GOOD PARTNER, BUT THEY'RE NOT AS GOOD A PARTNER AS TMPAT

[05:35:01]

MPA. WE CAN PICK UP THE PHONE AND WORK OUT THOSE OPERATIONAL ISSUES VERY QUICKLY.

FINANCIALLY, IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE AND THAT WAS A NO BRAINER FOR THE BOARD BECAUSE YOU SAW IT WAS A ONE FOR ONE SWAP. YOU KNOW, THE CASH MAKES US ALL BASICALLY A WASH, ABOUT $15 MILLION IN A SWAP. BUT ALSO IT MAKES THE CITY'S MONEY AND ALL THE MONEY THAT TMP MAKES FLOWS BACK TO THE CITIES. YOU KNOW, TMPAI KNOW FROM YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH TONY IN THE PAST, YOU KNOW THAT TMPAST COST RATE OF RETURN IS MUCH HIGHER THAN DENTON'S. SO TRANSMISSION ASSETS THAT ARE OWNED BY TMPA ARE A BOON TO ALL FOUR MEMBER CITIES, ESPECIALLY DENTON, WITH OUR 21%. SO FINANCIALLY IT MAKES SENSE. OPERATIONALLY MAKES SENSE. IT WAS A REAL NO BRAINER FOR THE BOARD, AND IT TOOK OUR STAFF A LITTLE WHILE TO WORK OUT WITH ENCORE, BUT

THEY DID A GREAT JOB. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ON THAT BOARD.

ABSOLUTELY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR HIM BEFORE HE SITS DOWN? OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE. COUNCIL MEMBER JESTER.

>> I MOVE APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION. COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND.

>> I SECOND AS PRESENTED. >> ALL RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. LET'S VOTE PLEASE. SEEING NO OTHER REQUEST TO SPEAK. MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO. WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT

[B. ID 26-1511 Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending the fiscal year 2025-2026 budget and annual program of services of the City of Denton to allow for adjustments to the use of funds allocated for personnel for the purpose of providing a one time lump sum payment to eligible employees; declaring a public purpose; directing the City Secretary attach a copy to the 2025-2026 Budget; requiring approval by at least five votes; and providing a severability clause; an open meetings clause and an effective date.]

AGENDA ITEM, AGENDA ITEM SIX B, WHICH IS I'D 26-1511. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS. AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 BUDGET AND ANNUAL PROGRAM OF SERVICES OF THE CITY OF DENTON TO ALLOW FOR AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE USE OF FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR

PERSONNEL. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR. >> AND COUNCIL. AMY CATHOLIC, CHIEF STRATEGIC OFFICER HERE TODAY TO BRING FORWARD AN AMENDMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2526 BUDGET. WHEN COUNCIL ADOPTED THE 2526 BUDGET, IT DID NOT INCLUDE COST OF LIVING OR MERIT INCREASES AT THE TIME. MANAGEMENT COMMITTED TO REVISITING COMPENSATION AND CAN NOW PROVIDE A ONE TIME LUMP SUM PAYMENT USING EXISTING PERSONNEL DOLLARS. EMPLOYEES HIRED ON OR BEFORE MARCH THE 1ST OF 2026, WILL RECEIVE $1,500 FOR REGULAR FULL TIME EMPLOYEES AND 750 FOR REGULAR PART TIME EMPLOYEES. THESE PAYMENTS ARE EXPECTED TO BE PROCESSED ON SEPTEMBER THE 25TH. THIS AMENDMENT IS SIMPLY TO UPDATE THE BUDGET LANGUAGE AND ACCURATELY REFLECT THE AVAILABILITY OF THESE FUNDS AND THE PURPOSE OF THE USE OF FUNDS.

NO ADDITIONAL FUNDING APPROPRIATIONS ARE NEEDED. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED, AND I'M HAPPY TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> NO QUESTIONS, JUST A COMMENT. THANKS FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO THE CITY MANAGER. I KNOW I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE PUBLICLY. I JUST WANT TO SAY IT AGAIN BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT. I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A PRIORITY OF YOURS SINCE I MET YOU, AND YOU SHOULD BE VERY PROUD OF ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE FOR THE BUDGET AND THE AMENDMENT TO THIS BUDGET. YOU'VE DONE A REALLY GREAT JOB. OUR STAFF DESERVES THIS, AND I'M REALLY

EXCITED TO VOTE FOR IT. SO THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER

RUMOHR. >> THANK YOU AND THANKS FOR ALL THE WORK TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

AND I APPRECIATE CITY LEADERSHIP FOR TAKING MY IDEA TO DO THE THE FLAT AMOUNT. IT HELPS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MOST IN NEED RIGHT NOW. AND JUST TO ANYBODY WATCHING THIS, I WILL BE ASKING IT ALL MY ONE ON ONES FOR UPDATES ABOUT HOW OUR FINANCES ARE LOOKING. I REALLY WANT TO SEE AN ACTUAL RAISE NEXT YEAR, BUT I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO

MAKE THIS WORK THIS YEAR. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE. >> A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER FAIRY.

>> A SECOND. >> LET'S VOTE PLEASE. MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO. THANK YOU.

[7. CONCLUDING ITEMS]

WE'RE NOW ON TO OUR CONCLUDING ITEMS. DO WE HAVE ANY CONCLUDING CONCLUDING ITEMS FROM MY COLLEAGUES? WHAT WAS THAT. I THINK I PROBABLY YEAH YEAH I THINK SO. DO WE NEED TO DO THAT NOW OR WE CAN JUST DO IT AFTER THIS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR.

>> THANK YOU. I WANTED TO THANK OUR OUTGOING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERS MARIANNE MCDUFF AND KEITH CARTER SAID, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ON

[05:40:01]

PLANNING AND ZONING. I'VE REALLY APPRECIATED THE HARD WORK BOTH OF YOU PUT INTO IT.

THANKS TO THE MANY FOLKS WHO WORKED SO HARD TO PUT ON ALL OF DENTON'S WONDERFUL FESTIVALS.

WE HAD A LOT OF THEM THIS WEEKEND. WE HAD ARTS AND AUTOS, DOG DAYS OF DENTON, DENTON, DENTON JAZZ AND ARTS FESTIVAL. DID I MISS ANY? THERE WAS A LOT, SO I APPRECIATE. I MEAN, NONE OF THESE THINGS WOULD HAPPEN IF THE COMMUNITY WASN'T PUTTING IN THE WORK TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF THAT WORK. AND SPECIAL THANKS TO EVERYBODY WHO WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT OUT TO ARTS AND JAZZ TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT THIS WEEKEND. THIS IS A DENTON STAPLE. I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH FESTIVAL ORGANIZERS AND TRYING TO FIND A PATH TO BRING IT BACK

TO ITS HOME IN QUAKERTOWN PARK. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER

HOLLAND. >> THANK YOU. WELL, I HAD THAT WRITTEN DOWN. MEMBER RUMOHR TOUCHED ABOUT ALL OF THEM, BUT I HAD A GREAT TIME AT ARTS AND AUTOS ON THE SQUARE. I WENT TO THE ARTS FESTIVAL. IT WAS A BILLION DEGREES. IT WAS SO, SO HOT. BUT NOBODY WAS COMPLAINING.

NOBODY WAS FUSSING. I DIDN'T GO TO DOG DAYS. THERE WAS JUST SO MANY, SO MANY PLACES THAT I COULD BE. BUT ONE OF THE PLACES THAT I WAS WAS THE NORTH TEXAS HOME OPENER. WE JUST BEAT THE STUFFING OUT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LAS VEGAS. I HAD I HAD A GREAT TIME THERE WATCHING NORTH TEXAS RUN UP AND DOWN AND UP AND DOWN THE FIELD AND SCORE EACH TIME, AND I HOPE FOR THAT

TO CONTINUE THIS WEEK AT AT SAN MARCOS. THANK YOU MAYOR. >> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER

PERRY. >> THANK YOU SIR. YEAH. HAD A GREAT TIME THIS WEEKEND. WHICH REMINDS ME TO TELL EVERYBODY, IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO SEE GREAT EVENTS IN OUR TOWN, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOLUNTEER, SIGN UP FOR SHIFTS. I ENCOURAGE YOU TO DONATE IF YOU CAN. I ENCOURAGE YOU TO BUY ART AND SUPPORT THE LOCAL BUSINESSES AND VENDORS AT THESE EVENTS.

WHICH BRINGS UP THIS SATURDAY IS DENTON BLUES FEST IN THE QUAKERTOWN PARK, 10:30 A.M. TO 10:30 P.M. I WILL BE THERE AFTER MY LISTENING SESSION, WHICH YOU ARE ALL INVITED TO IN THE BLUE ROOM AT THE DENTON SENIOR CENTER FROM TEN TO NOON. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH.

>> ANY ANYONE ELSE? I JUST WANT TO TAKE JUST A MOMENT TO THANK CITY MANAGER AND YOUR STAFF AND FINANCE STAFF AND MY COLLEAGUES AND EVERYBODY THAT WORKED ON THE BUDGET. THIS WAS A COMPLICATED BUDGET, GIVEN SOME UNIQUE SITUATIONS WITH REVENUE AND EXPENSES AND NEW VALUES AND COMING OFF OF, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE CHALLENGES FROM LAST YEAR. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE HARD WORK. I APPRECIATE THE COOPERATION AND THE COLLABORATION BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE A LOT OF IDEAS. I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUES IN THIS LAST WORK SESSION JUST TONIGHT TO REALLY HASH OUT SOME THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO I REALLY DO JUST ENJOY THAT WE'RE ABLE TO ROLL OUR SLEEVES UP, TAKE ON THE CHALLENGES AND GET THEM DONE. SO REALLY WANT TO APPRECIATE THAT AND GIVE THAT TO YOU AND YOUR STAFF AND EVERYBODY THAT WORKS SO HARD. ANY OTHER CONCLUDING ITEMS? SO WE'RE GOING TO WE HAD ONE

[F. ID 26-0631 Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction on pending City Council requests for: 1) City Charter amendment regarding qualifications for a person to file to be on a ballot. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 30 minutes]]

AGENDA ITEM LEFT FROM OUR WORK SESSION. DO I NEED TO CLOSE OUT THIS MEETING AND THEN REOPEN IT? MR. CITY ATTORNEY, JUST GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE ON THE WORK SESSION. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OUR LAST REMAINING WORK SESSION HERE IN THE DAIS. AND THAT'S A TWO MINUTE PITCH. LET ME GO AHEAD AND CALL THAT ITEM. AND IT'S ON THE WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS. IT IS. LET ME FIND IT. OH OKAY. IT'S I'D THERE IT IS. IT'S AGENDA ITEM THREE. F IT'S ID 26-0631. RECEIVE REPORT. HOLD DISCUSSION. GIVE STAFF DIRECTION ON PENDING CITY

COUNCIL REQUESTS. >> ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JUSTIN STACKHOUSE, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER. HERE TO PRESENT THE TWO MINUTE PITCH ITEMS. SO AS A REMINDER, REQUESTING COUNCIL MEMBER WILL HAVE UP TO TWO MINUTES TO DESCRIBE AND JUSTIFY THEIR REQUEST. THE REMAINING COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF ONE MINUTE EACH TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK AND INDICATE THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE USE OF CITY STAFF. TIME TO RESPOND TO THE REQUEST. STAFF WILL RESPOND TO ALL REQUESTS FOR A CONSENSUS OF AT LEAST FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS IS MADE, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY PROVIDE WHATEVER COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY KNOW THE PRIORITY OF HIGH, MODERATE OR LOW WHEN SUPPORTING AN ITEM. SO THE PITCH TODAY IS ON THE TOPIC OF A CITY CHARTER AMENDMENT REGARDING QUALIFICATIONS FOR PERSON TO FILE TO BE ON THE BALLOT FROM COUNCIL MEMBER, FERRY AND MAYOR. I'LL HAND IT

OFF TO YOU. >> OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN FERRY, YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR FOR

TWO MINUTES. >> THANK YOU. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS, I AM REQUESTING A WORK SESSION TO DISCUSS AN URGENT OPTIMIZATION OF OUR MUNICIPAL ELECTION PROCESS. SPECIFICALLY, I'M ASKING THAT WE DIRECT A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE ADDING A CONSTITUENT

[05:45:04]

SIGNATURE REQUIREMENT FOR CANDIDATE BALLOT ACCESS. CURRENTLY, OUR BARRIERS TO ENTRY FOR A CITY COUNCIL RACE IN DENTON ARE VERY LOW, AND WHILE WE VALUE OPEN DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION OVER CROWDED BALLOTS FREQUENTLY PREVENT. US FROM REACHING THE 50% PLUS ONE THRESHOLD REQUIRED TO WIN OUTRIGHT. AND THE CONSEQUENCE, MATHEMATICALLY IS WE GO INTO A RUNOFF. RUNOFFS ARE FINANCIALLY DRAINING, AND THEY SUFFER FROM SEVERE VOTER DROP OFF. THE CITY OF DENTON BUDGET IS BUDGETS APPROXIMATELY 187,000 ANNUALLY FOR ELECTION SERVICES. A STANDARD GENERAL ELECTION COSTS US ROUGHLY 90,000. HOWEVER, WHEN WE ARE FORCED INTO A RUNOFF, THE CITY INCURS AN ADDITIONAL 90 TO $120,000 IN EXPENSES. BECAUSE WE NO LONGER SHARE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS WITH OVERLAPPING JURISDICTIONS, THIS COMPLETELY EXHAUSTS OUR ELECTION BUDGET EACH YEAR, EFFECTIVELY COSTING TAXPAYERS SIX FIGURES FOR AN ELECTION DECIDED BY A DRASTICALLY REDUCED FRACTION OF THE ELECTORATE. I'M ASKING THAT WE REQUIRE CANDIDATES TO GATHER A MODEST NUMBER OF CONSTITUENT SIGNATURES TO APPEAR ON THE BALLOT, SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE EACH CANDIDATE HAS A BASELINE OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT. AND THESE METRICS ARE SIMPLE. THEY'RE ALREADY SUCCESSFULLY UTILIZED BY TEXAS CITIES LIKE DALLAS, AUSTIN, FORT WORTH, ARLINGTON, AND RECENTLY EVEN ADOPTED BY OUR NEIGHBORS IN LEWISVILLE.

AND THIS HELPS FILTER OUT SOME OF THE UNVIABLE CANDIDATES, SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING, AGAIN, THAT PROBABILITY OF RUNOFF. SO STATE LAW, SPECIFICALLY THE TEXAS CODE, SECTION ONE FOUR, 3.005, ALREADY PROVIDES THAT EXACT FRAMEWORK FOR THIS, REQUIRING THE GREATER OF 25 SIGNATURES, OR ONE HALF OF 1% OF THE MAYORAL RUNOFF. MAYORAL TURNOUT. EXCUSE ME. IN THAT DISTRICT, IT'S A TESTED LEGAL AND FAIR STANDARD TO RECLAIM TIME. OH, I WAS LIKE.

>> YEAH, NO TIME. YEAH. >> OKAY. >> THANK YOU.

>> THAT'S IT. YEAH. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. YOU BET. ALL RIGHT. I GUESS IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, JUST PUSH YOUR REQUEST TO SPEAK AND I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU. COUNCILMEMBER JESTER.

>> I APPRECIATE WHERE IT'S COMING FROM AND WHAT'S TRYING TO HAPPEN. HOWEVER, WE JUST WENT THROUGH A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS. NOT PRODUCTIVE. IT TOOK A LOT OF TIME AND STAFF, AND I DON'T KNOW, FOR ONE TOPIC LIKE THIS, MY FEAR IS THAT IT WOULD BLOW UP AS THE LAST ONE DID. SO YOU KNOW, AND I'M SOMEONE I DECIDED TWO DAYS BEFORE THE FILING PERIOD ENDED TO FILE, I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO COME UP WITH THOSE KIND OF SIGNATURES. SO I, I THINK IT'S RATHER DEMOCRATIC TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO FILE. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE AT THE SIZE OF SOME OF THE OTHER CITIES. I MEAN, I'M NOT I DON'T I DON'T HATE IT, BUT I DON'T LOVE IT. SO I'M NOT GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT RIGHT NOW.

>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND. >> I'LL SUPPORT THIS AT A

MEDIUM LEVEL. >> OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER RUMOHR. >> I ALSO APPRECIATE THE THOUGHT BEHIND THIS. I UNFORTUNATELY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE PROPOSAL WAS BASED ON THE LANGUAGE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GOT EDITED TO. I THINK IT'S I'M NOT A NO, NEVER. MY MY INITIAL REACTION IS CONCERN ABOUT MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO FILE FOR OFFICE. AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M NOT A NOW A NO, NEVER. BUT I'M NOT RIGHT NOW ON THIS ITEM RIGHT