6. DEPARTMENT REPORTS-BUILDING (MAR/APR), COURT(MAR/APR), FINANCE (monthly financials) (MAR/APR), FIRE (1ST QTR), POLICE (MAR/APR) AND WEBSITE (MAR/APR

[6. DEPARTMENT REPORTS-BUILDING (MAR/APR), COURT(MAR/APR), FINANCE (monthly financials) (MAR/APR), FIRE (1ST QTR), POLICE (MAR/APR) AND WEBSITE (MAR/APR]

SLAUGHTER. YOU WANT TO ADDRESS YOUR ISSUES WITH THE BUILDING REPORT? THE MAIN QUESTION THAT I'VE GOTTEN AND I'VE BROUGHT IT UP BEFORE, BUT I KNOW IN THIS REPORT THAT SEVERAL OF THE PERMITS ARE STILL SHOWING ZERO DOLLARS RECEIVED.

AND IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAD DISCUSSED BEFORE THAT THE MONEY WAS GETTING ACCOUNTED FOR, BUT I WANTED TO FIND OUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE THIS ONE ACCURATE.

WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS WE HAVE A NEW PERSON OVER THERE.

WE'RE ACTUALLY TELLING THEM TO SLOW DOWN AND MAKE SURE THEY CLEAR WHAT HAPPENS.

USUALLY IS THEY GET BUSY OVER THERE AND THEY DON'T GO BACK INTO INTER GOV AND MARK THAT AS PAID. WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE ADDRESSES.

THERE'S RECEIPTS WITHIN THERE THAT SHOW THAT THEY'RE PAID, BUT IT'S JUST SITTING DOWN AND GOING BACK AND DOING. AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT, I THINK THERE WAS ONE THERE'S A COUPLE ON THE SAME DAY. I THINK IT WAS LIKE 3/8, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, WHEN THEY.

HERE YOU GO. YEAH, I THINK I BELIEVE IT'S ON 3/8.

THERE WAS A COUPLE OF THEM AND THEN THERE WAS A COUPLE ON ANOTHER DAY THAT THEY JUST OUR TEMP JUST DIDN'T DO WHAT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO DO.

OK, SO THERE'S NO CHANCE THAT WE DIDN'T GET PAID ON THOSE, THERE'S CHECKS AND BALANCES TO VERIFY? WE HAVE CHECKS AND BALANCES IN PLACE.

WE HAD THIS HAPPEN BEFORE WE WENT SEARCHING HIGH AND LOW.

WE HAD TO GO THROUGH ALL THE FILES, THE RECEIPTS AND EVERYTHING WITHIN THOSE FILES.

YEAH, IT'S JUST DOUBLE.

IF YOU GO IN THERE AND IN CODE, YOU HAVE TO PAY IT AND THEN YOU HAVE TO GO BACK INTO INTER GOV AND MARK IT AS PAID.

[00:10:01]

SO. OK, THANK YOU. IS THERE A WAY TO MAKE THAT ONE STEP? WE, WE'LL GET WITH [INAUDIBLE] OR TYLER TECHNOLOGIES AND SEE IF THERE'S SOME A WAY WE CAN GET THAT SYSTEM STREAMLINED BETTER.

SO.

YEAH, YOU SAID THERE'S CHECKS AND BALANCES, BUT CORRECT ME IF LET ME ASK, IS THIS BALANCED TO THE GENERAL LEDGER? SO INTER GOV [INAUDIBLE] EVERYTHING.

ALL THE TRANSACTIONS, ALL THE MONEY GOES THROUGH IN CODE.

SO IN CODE PART OF IT'S ALL RIGHT WITH TIES TO THE GENERAL LEDGER, IT'S GOING BACK INTO THE PERMIT INTER GOV.

AND IS THAT WHAT Y'ALL ARE WORKING TOWARD? YEAH. OK, GOOD.

WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET IT STREAMLINED AND IT'S YOU HAVE TO GO RIGHT NOW AND GO BACK INTO THAT SYSTEM, CLICK PAID AND THEN IT'S KIND OF CONFUSING.

BUT WE'RE WORKING WITH, YOU KNOW, WHO'S NEW UP FRONT.

WE'RE TOLD HER TO SLOW DOWN SINCE SHE'S NEW.

DON'T WORRY ABOUT WAITING, HAVING A LINE.

JUST DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

SO.

THERE'S A NEW LINE ON HERE ON TOTAL VALUE.

WOULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS? TOTAL VALUATION? MIGHT BE A GARY QUESTION.

I THINK THAT'S JUST THE VALUATION THAT THE HOMEOWNER OR CONTRACTOR PUTS DOWN FOR LIKE A NEW HOME IT SAYS THEIR TOTAL VALUATION'S EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY NINE THOUSAND.

WE DON'T BASE ANYTHING OFF VALUATION.

WE BASE IT OFF SQUARE FEET SO THAT IT'S JUST A VALUATION THAT THE SYSTEM PUTS IN FOR THAT, CORRECT GARY? THAT'S CORRECT.

OK, OK.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE BUILDING REPORT ? [INAUDIBLE] YOU WERE BAD.

WE'RE GETTING USED TO THIS AS WE'RE TRYING TO TRANSITION FROM PAPER TO ELECTRONICS, AND IT'S NOT EASY FOR SOME OF US.

OK, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTION ON THE BUILDING REPORT? IF NOT, I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION.

MADAM MAYOR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE BUILDING REPORT FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. OK, IS IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL MOVE TO SECOND. OK, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER SLAUGHTER WITH A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER ABRAHAM TO ACCEPT THE BUILDING REPORT AS PRESENTED.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING THE BUILDING REPORT.

PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED.

MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.

NEXT UP IS, CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON THE ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT,

[7. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT. [SAVAGE]]

MR. SAVAGE, YOU WANT TO START US OFF? SURE, MR. JOHN WATSON FROM BROOKS WATSON COMPANY IS HERE TO PRESENT THE AUDIT TONIGHT.

OK.

[INAUDIBLE] AND DO THE PRESENTING. NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

NICE TO SEE YOU. WELCOME BACK.

THANK YOU. SO WE COMPLETED OUR AUDIT.

THIS IS OVER THE YEAR ENDED 9/30/20.

SO ALL THIS INFORMATION RELATES TO THAT PERIOD OF TIME.

THERE'S A POWERPOINT ON THE SCREEN THAT I'M GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE HIGH POINTS OF THE YEAR. IN THE AUDIT ITSELF, YOU'LL HAVE A PRINTOUT AS WELL.

SO JUST OPEN UP THE FRONT COVER AND YOU'LL YOU'LL SEE THAT IF YOU'D LIKE TO FOLLOW BY HAND AND TAKE ANY NOTES.

THE AUDIT FOLLOWED US GAAS THAT'S GENERALLY ACCEPTED AUDITING STANDARDS.

GAAS AUDITS GOING TO HAVE THREE PHASES PLANNING PHASE, FIELD WORK PHASE AND CONCLUSION REPORTING PHASE.

PLANNING PHASE. WHAT WE DO IS WE LOOK AT CURRENT YEAR RESULTS.

WE COMPARE IT TO PRIOR YEAR.

WE COMPARE IT TO OUR EXPECTATIONS, ALLOWS US TO FOCUS ON AREAS MOST SUSCEPTIBLE TO RISK OF ERROR, FRAUD. AND SO FIELD WORK IS WHERE WE ACTUALLY TEST THOSE AREAS.

SO IT'S A RISK BASED APPROACH.

WE TEST THAT THROUGH DRAWING SAMPLES, VOUCHING TO UNDERLYING EVIDENCE, CONFIRMING WITH

[00:15:03]

THIRD PARTIES THE ACCURACY OF THE RESULTS ACCOUNTED FOR BY THE CITY.

AND THEN IN THE CONCLUSION REPORTING PHASE, THAT'S WHERE ANY DIFFERENCES WOULD BE PROPOSED AS AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS, WHICH YOU'LL HAVE A COPY OF WE'LL LOOK AT AT THE END HERE AND THEN ANY INTERNAL CONTROL WEAKNESSES WE FIND WILL BE IN THE LETTERS.

AND THEN WE PREPARED THIS REPORT, THIS BOUND REPORT THAT YOU ALL HAVE.

SO US GAAS AUDIT FOR FOR GOVERNMENT GOING TO FOLLOW THAT APPROACH.

THE REPORT ITSELF, THERE'S FOUR SECTIONS TO IT.

THE FIRST SECTION IS THE AUDIT OPINION.

SO THAT'S A LETTER FROM US.

YOUR INDEPENDENT AUDITOR DESCRIBES WHETHER THE FINANCIALS ARE CONSISTENT WITH US GAAP, THAT'S GENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES OR IF THERE ARE ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THAT. NEXT SECTION IS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS.

THAT SHOWS CURRENT YEAR RESULTS COMPARED TO PRIOR YEAR.

GIVE SOME EXPLANATIONS ON SIGNIFICANT VARIANCES, GIVES INFORMATION ABOUT CAPITAL ASSET ACTIVITY, DEBT ACTIVITY.

SO A REALLY GOOD PLACE TO LOOK IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE CITY QUICKLY AND WHAT'S GOING ON. AFTER THAT'S BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, THE HEART OF IT, THE NUMBERS THEY'RE PRESENTED TO THE GOVERNMENT WIDE LEVEL SHOWS ALL YOUR DEBT, CAPITAL, ASSET ACTIVITY, THEN A FUND LEVEL, WHICH IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH HOW YOU BUDGET.

WHERE ARE THE FUNDS GOING? NOTES THE FINANCIALS. FOLLOW THAT.

THAT'S GOT A LOT OF DETAILS ABOUT THOSE RESULTS IN THE BACK.

YOUR REPORT IS THE REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION SECTION.

IT'S GOT YOUR BUDGET ACTUAL SCHEDULE FOR THE GENERAL FUND SO YOU CAN SEE HOW YOU FARED RELATIVE TO YOUR BUDGET. AND WE'LL LOOK AT THAT MINUTE HERE AND THEN YOUR PENSION SCHEDULE. IT'S GOT A FIVE YEAR LOOK AT YOUR PENSION.

SO HOW IS THE PENSION FARING YEAR OVER YEAR IN THE OPEB SCHEDULE, WHICH GOES WITH THE PENSION AS WELL. SO THAT'S EVERYTHING WITHIN THAT REPORT.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THAT FIRST SECTION I MENTIONED IS THE REPORT FROM US.

THE LETTER DESCRIBES WITH THE FINANCIALS ARE CONSISTENT WITH US GAAP, IF THERE ARE ANY MODIFICATIONS. SO UNMODIFIED REPORT IS THE BEST REPORT YOU CAN RECEIVE MEANS THERE ARE NO MODIFICATIONS. IT GETS WORSE FROM THERE.

IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS COLOR CHART HERE, CITY RECEIVED AN UNMODIFIED OPINION.

SO THAT'S A GOOD THING. IT'S HIGHEST LEVEL OF ASSURANCE CBA CAN PROVIDE.

CITY DOES A GREAT JOB OF GETTING US INFORMATION, ANSWERING ALL OUR QUESTIONS.

SO REALLY, REALLY FEATHER IN THEIR CAP.

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS FOR THE YEAR.

SO ALL THIS INFORMATION IS AS OF 9/30/20 AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED THE SAME.

TOTAL ASSETS EXCEEDED TOTAL LIABILITIES BY FIFTY NINE MILLION THREE HUNDRED FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND. SECOND BULLET CITY'S GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS REPORTED A COMBINED END FUND BALANCE OF FIVE MILLION ONE HUNDRED THIRTY NINE THOUSAND THREE EIGHTY NINE, WHICH WAS A DECREASE OF ONE THOUSAND FIFTY FOR THE YEAR.

UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE.

THIRD BULLET IN THE GENERAL FUND WAS THREE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED AND EIGHTY SIX SORRY, THREE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED AND SIXTY EIGHT THOUSAND FOUR NINETY NINE, WHICH WAS EIGHTY FOUR PERCENT OF YOUR ANNUAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES.

SO THAT'S A LITTLE OVER THREE QUARTERS OF A YEAR WORTH OF EXPENDITURES.

THAT'S A METRIC WE ALWAYS LOOK AT TO SEE HOW MUCH UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE YOU HAVE.

SO IT'S PRETTY HEALTHY. IF YOU EVER RUN START TO RUN UNDER SIX MONTHS.

GETTING NEAR THREE MONTHS IS WHEN IT'S RUNNING A LITTLE HOT, LITTLE LEAN.

SO WE'LL POINT THAT OUT IF WE SEE THAT.

LAST BULLET HERE. THE CITY HAD AN OVERALL INCREASE IN NET POSITION FOR THE YEAR.

SIX HUNDRED AND SEVEN THOUSAND FOR THE YEAR.

SO CHANGES FOR THE YEAR AND SEE THIS IS A PIE CHART OF YOUR REVENUES.

THIS ON THE GOVERNMENTAL SIDE ONLY.

SO IT DOES NOT INCLUDE BUSINESS TYPE ACTIVITIES.

SO GOVERNMENTAL REVENUES FOR THE YEAR WERE FIVE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED AND FIFTY THREE THOUSAND SEVENTY NINE.

PRIOR YEAR WAS FOUR MILLION NINE HUNDRED TWENTY THREE THOUSAND.

THE COMPONENTS THAT MADE THAT UP, WE'LL LOOK AT SECOND BULLET.

PROPERTY TAXES MAKE UP SIXTY SIX PERCENT OF YOUR GOVERNMENTAL REVENUES.

THREE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED FORTY NINE THOUSAND PRIOR YEAR WAS THREE MILLION FOUR HUNDRED NINETEEN THOUSAND. SO SOME INCREASE FROM INCREASE IN APPRAISED VALUES THERE.

CHARGES FOR SERVICES WERE TWELVE PERCENT CURRENT YEAR, SIX HUNDRED SEVENTY FOUR THOUSAND THREE FORTY SIX VERY CLOSE LAST YEAR.

PRIOR YEAR WAS SIX HUNDRED SIXTY SEVEN THOUSAND EIGHT FORTY ONE.

FOURTH BULLET DOWN. GRANTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS TWELVE PERCENT SEVEN HUNDRED SIX THOUSAND FOUR NINETY TWO CURRENT YEAR.

PRIOR YEAR WAS THREE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED THIRTY SIX.

THAT WERE DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS PRIMARILY FOR CAPITAL ASSETS, STREETS.

TOTAL SALES TAXES, CURRENT YEAR, FOUR PERCENT, TWO HUNDRED SIXTY TWO THOUSAND FIVE NINETY PRIOR WAS TWO HUNDRED THIRTY THOUSAND.

I'VE NOTICED THAT WITH ALL THE CITIES, IT'S PRETTY INTERESTING HOW THINGS WERE IMPACTED THROUGH SALES TAX NOTICE INCREASED ACROSS THE BOARD.

FRANCHISE AND LOCAL TAXES, FIVE PERCENT, TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE THIRTY THREE PRIOR YEAR WAS TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY NINE THOUSAND THIRTY SIX.

NEXT SLIDE HERE. SO THIS IS THE LAST LOOK WAS GOVERNMENT WIDE LOOK, THIS IS A GOVERNMENTAL FUND BOOK SO WE CAN SEE YOUR FUNDS HERE.

GOT THE GENERAL FUND ON THE LEFT DEBT SERVICE FUND IN THE MIDDLE, AND THEN YOUR NON MAJORS ARE GROUPED ON THE ON THE THIRD FROM THE RIGHT HERE.

SO START WITH THE GENERAL FUND.

YOU CAN SEE ABOUT FOUR POINT SEVEN BILLION IN REVENUES AND FOUR MILLION SIX HUNDRED TWENTY SEVEN THOUSAND IN EXPENDITURES.

SO YOU DID OPERATE AT A SLIGHT SURPLUS THERE OF SEVENTY TWO THOUSAND ONE EIGHTY ONE NEGATIVE OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OF EIGHT HUNDRED FORTY SIX THOUSAND.

THOSE WERE TRANSFERS OUT.

SOME NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS STARTED IN CURRENT YEAR, WHICH IS DEFINITELY A GOOD IDEA.

THERE'S A LOT OF IN THE PAST, THERE WERE A LOT OF BASICALLY EARMARKED OR RESTRICTED FUND

[00:20:06]

BALANCE WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH WHICH CITIES ARE ALLOWED TO ACCOUNT FOR THOSE THINGS WITHIN GENERAL. BUT IT SURE MAKES IT A LOT TO ME MORE USER FRIENDLY WHEN YOU BREAK THOSE OUT INTO SEPARATE FUNDS.

AND THOSE ARE WHAT A LOT OF WHAT MAKE UP YOUR NON MAJORS.

SO I THINK THAT WAS A POSITIVE CHANGE BY THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT WITH THE CHANGE IN THE ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE THIS YEAR, BREAKING OUT THOSE NEW FUNDS, A GREAT WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE RESTRICTIONS ARE ALWAYS BEING CAPTURED.

SOMETIMES WHEN YOU LOAD THEM ALL UP IN ONE FUND, IT'S EASY TO MISPLACE AND NOT ALWAYS TAKE THE BEST TRACK OF THOSE.

SO GOOD, POSITIVE CHANGE THERE.

THAT'S WHERE THAT A LOT OF THAT DECREASE IS THERE THAT WE SEE.

SO THAT FED THROUGH THE NET NEGATIVE CHANGE THERE, SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY FOUR THOUSAND THREE TWENTY ONE.

OTHER CHANGES WORKING CONSISTENT WITH EXPECTATION.

NON MAJOR. THERE WERE SOME TRANSFER OVER TO WATER SEWER.

THAT'S A NEGATIVE THREE FIFTY THREE IN BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER.

THAT'S THE CHANGE FOR THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, WE'LL FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE HERE.

SO THIS IS A SUMMARY OF YOUR BUDGET.

SO THERE'S SOME MORE DETAILS ON PAGE SIXTY NINE OF YOUR REPORT.

THE LEFT COLUMN REPRESENTS YOUR FINAL BUDGET.

SO THIS IS YOUR ORIGINAL BUDGET WITH ALL AMENDMENTS.

THE MIDDLE COLUMN IS YOUR ACTUAL RESULTS AND THEN ON THE RIGHT OR THE VARIANCES BETWEEN YOUR FINAL BUDGET AND YOUR ACTUAL.

SO JUST WORKING FROM TOP RIGHT DOWN IN THE VARIANCE COLUMN, YOUR ACTUAL REVENUES WERE UNDER BUDGET BY EIGHTY ONE THOUSAND THIRTY SEVEN.

FINES AND FORFEITURES CAME UNDER INTERGOVERNMENTAL WHICH ARE GRANTS, CAME UNDER FINES AND FORFEITURES. ANOTHER AREA I'VE NOTICED EVERY CITY WAS DOWN FOR FOR OBVIOUS REASONS WITH COVID.

TOTAL EXPENDITURES, YOU HAD A POSITIVE BUDGET VARIANCE.

YOUR ACTUAL EXPENDITURES WERE UNDER BUDGET BY FIVE HUNDRED AND SIX THOUSAND FIVE EIGHTY TWO. SO I'M LOOKING AT THE RIGHT COLUMN.

SECOND NUMBER, EVERY DEPARTMENT WAS UNDER BUDGET, SO EVERY DEPARTMENT CONTRIBUTED TO THAT POSITIVE BUDGET VARIANCE.

SO THIS FLOWED THROUGH TO YOUR OVERALL POSITIVE BUDGET VARIANCE OF FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY NINE THOUSAND ONE TWENTY EIGHT IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER.

SO ALL THAT INFORMATION WAS UNDER GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS SIDE, GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITY SIDE.

THE OTHER SIDE IS THE BUSINESS TYPE ACTIVITIES YOUR PROPRIETARY FUND.

YOU GOT YOUR WATER, SEWER AND SANITATION FUND HERE.

SO WE CAN SEE WORKING TOP TO BOTTOM TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES, FOUR MILLION SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY ONE THOUSAND.

OPERATING EXPENSES, THREE MILLION SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY NINE THOUSAND.

SO THAT LEAVES YOU WITH ALMOST A MILLION DOLLAR OPERATING INCOME THERE, NINE HUNDRED AND NINETY ONE THOUSAND. THERE WERE SOME TRANSFERS IN AND CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM DEVELOPER, WHICH ARE ABOUT EIGHT HUNDRED AND SIXTY EIGHT THOUSAND NINE THIRTY THREE.

THIS ALL FED INTO THAT POSITIVE CHANGE FOR THE YEAR OF ONE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED SIXTY THOUSAND SIX FIFTY EIGHT.

AND YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT FLOWS THROUGH TO YOUR ENDING NET POSITION.

TWENTY MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND NINE FORTY EIGHT.

NEXT SLIDE. OK, SO TOWARD THE BACK OF THAT REPORT I MENTIONED, THERE'S A LOOK AT YOUR PENSION AND THE CHANGES YEAR OVER YEAR.

SO MOST RECENT IS OUR LEFT COLUMN AND WORKING BACKWARDS RIGHT.

THE MOST RECENT ACTUARIAL VALUATION IS 12/31/19.

THAT'S WHY YOU SEE IN THE LEFT COLUMN THAT 2019.

BOTTOM LEFT HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW AND RED LETTERS.

THAT'S YOUR NET PENSION LIABILITY AS OF YEAR END NINE HUNDRED THIRTEEN THOUSAND FIFTY FIVE. SO IT'S AN IMPROVEMENT OVER PRIOR YEAR JUST TO THE RIGHT OF IT.

ONE MILLION FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND ONE SIXTY EIGHT.

SO WE LOOK AT BENCHMARK, WE LOOK AT FOR PENSIONS ARE FUNDED RATIOS.

HOW DOES THE ASSET COMPARE TO THAT TOTAL PENSION LIABILITY? SO AT THE TOP IS A SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO PENSION LIABILITY.

YOU GET TO A TOTAL PENSION LIABILITY, MIDDLE LEFT, FOUR MILLION TWO HUNDRED NINE THOUSAND. YOUR ASSET IS THREE MILLION TWO HUNDRED NINETY SIX THOUSAND DOWN WITH THE ASSETS. THE BOTTOM SECTION HERE, THAT IS A FUNDED POSITION OF SEVENTY EIGHT PERCENT.

OK? YOUR ASSET IS SEVENTY EIGHT PERCENT OF THAT PROJECTED LIABILITY.

THE ASSET IS MEASURABLE.

THE PENSION IS ACTUARIAL ESTIMATE.

OK? PRIOR YEAR WAS SEVENTY THREE PERCENT.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHERE YOU'RE AT AND WHERE YOU'RE TRENDING.

WHAT'S NICE ABOUT TMRS IS THEY'RE ALWAYS ADJUSTING THE CONTRIBUTION RATE.

SO THEY'RE REALLY TO A LARGE EXTENT CAN CAN INFLUENCE YOUR FUNDED RATIO.

THE OTHER BIG INFLUENCE INFLUENCER IS THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME.

YOU CAN SEE THAT TOWARD THE BOTTOM, THE FOUR HUNDRED FORTY ONE THOUSAND SIX FORTY FIVE.

SO YOU CAN SEE LAST YEAR YOU ACTUALLY HAD A NET INVESTMENT LOST, SO YOUR ASSETS ARE GOING TO EBB AND FLOW.

TMRS PROJECTS AROUND SEVEN PERCENT, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE UNDER MAYBE SIX POINT SEVENTY FIVE PERCENT, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT.

WHICH IS A PRETTY CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE.

SO OVERALL, IF YOU HIT THAT MARK, THEY'LL CONTROL YOUR CONTRIBUTION RATES.

JUST THE BOTTOM BULLET HERE, YOUR LAST THREE YEARS WORTH OF CONTRIBUTION RATES, YOU'RE AT TWELVE POINT NINE PERCENT, TWELVE POINT FOUR PERCENT, TWELVE POINT FIVE PERCENT.

I'D SAY THAT'S KIND OF A MEDIAN WITH WHAT I SEE SOME LOWER AND SEE SOME HIGHER, SAW ONE THE OTHER DAY THAT WAS IN THE LOW 20 PERCENT.

AND THAT'S WHERE IT HITS THE BOTTOM LINE.

RIGHT. THAT'S WHERE IT HITS YOUR BUDGET, THAT'S A PERCENTAGE OF PAYROLL.

SO IF YOU'RE IN A POORLY FUNDED PENSION, TMRS IS GOING TO RAISE THOSE CONTRIBUTION RATES

[00:25:01]

AND IT'S GOING TO IMPACT YOUR BUDGET.

FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

OK, SO THAT IS EVERYTHING ABOUT RESULTS THAT I WANTED TO GO OVER.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE ARE TWO LETTERS.

THESE ARE REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDITOR.

THE FIRST ONE, JUST STANDARD COMMUNICATIONS.

WE'RE INDEPENDENT. WE HAVE NO RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY OUTSIDE OF OUR ENGAGEMENT.

THERE IS NO FRAUD, THEFT MATERIAL NATURE ENCOUNTERED THROUGH OUR AUDIT OR IMMATERIAL NATURE FOR THAT MATTER. TALKS ABOUT SOME ESTIMATES.

ALSO IN THE BACK OF THAT LETTER ARE THE PROPOSED AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS.

SO ANY TIME YOU GET AN AUDIT, THEY SHOULD BE LISTING THOSE AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS.

SO THAT'S IN THE BACK OF THAT LETTER.

OK, SO THAT'S KIND OF SUMMARY OVER THAT.

THE OTHER LETTER, INTERNAL CONTROLS GOES OVER INTERNAL CONTROLS.

WE ENCOUNTER ANYTHING.

THOSE WILL BE LISTED IN THERE.

WE HAVE AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS.

WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE FINDING IN REGARDS TO THAT.

SO THAT'S NUMBER ONE, NOTHING TO BE TOO CONCERNED ABOUT.

AND THEN I THINK THE OTHERS WERE NOT MATERIAL WEAKNESSES OR SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCIES.

THOSE WERE JUST THINGS THAT WE NOTED AS WE DO OUR INTERNAL CONTROL WALKTHROUGHS OF PROCESSES IN REVIEWING DOCUMENTATION.

SO THAT'S REALLY THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

I JUST HAVE ONE SIMPLE QUESTION.

SURE. ON THE GENERAL FUND.

TOTAL REVENUES, IS THE TWO HUNDRED FORTY THREE ONE HUNDRED FIFTY SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE CARES ACT REFERENCED IN HERE? SO THE TOTAL IS NOT.

THE ONLY AMOUNT THAT IS GOING TO BE RECOGNIZED IN THERE IS THERE IS GONNA BE THE EXPENSE AMOUNT I JUST HAPPENED TO NOTICE AS I WAS READING THIS ON PAGE THIRTY THREE OF YOUR REPORT, YOU LISTED THE A COUNCIL MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT.

THAT IS INCORRECT. OK, WE'RE STRONG MAYOR COUNCIL FORM OF GOVERNMENT.

UNDERSTOOD. I JUST HAD A QUESTION, I'M NEW TO THE COUNCIL AND YOU SAID THAT THIS IS A KIND OF STANDARD WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING FROM ONE YEAR TO THE LAST YEAR TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR. AND JUST IN GENERAL, I WAS JUST WANTING TO GET MAYBE A FEEL FOR WHERE WE ARE NOW VERSUS WHERE WE WERE.

AND MAYBE YOU COULD GIVE KIND OF AN EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW OF KIND OF WHERE WE ARE.

YEAH, THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY THIS YEAR, CAPITAL ACTIVITY.

I THINK THE FUNDED SO SO THE GENERAL FUND IS WHERE THE MAJORITY OF ACTIVITY OCCURS FOR MOST CITIES. AND I THINK THE UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE WAS ABOUT A HUNDRED PERCENT.

SO IT'S ABOUT A YEAR'S WORTH OF EXPENDITURES.

YOU BUDGETED SPENDING A LOT OF THAT MONEY AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IN YOUR BUDGET.

SO IT WAS EXECUTED AS PLANNED.

SO THE CITY'S SITTING ON A DECENT RESERVE THERE.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE FROM OBVIOUSLY THE OUTSIDER LOOKING IN, THEY'RE EXECUTING THAT PLAN FROM A BUDGET PERSPECTIVE.

SO I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS GOING, YOU KNOW, STREET AND WATER, SEWER. AND SO WE OBSERVE THAT CONTINUING.

SO BUT NO, NO SIGNIFICANT WEAKENING.

IF I DID OBSERVE THAT, I WOULD LET YOU KNOW.

AND THEN ON THE PENSION FUND, IS 100 PERCENT FUNDING REALLY WHERE YOU WANT TO BE OR WHAT IS THE BENCHMARK THERE? YEAH, SO THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AND I WISH I WOULD HAVE PUT THIS IN THERE. SO AVERAGE NATIONWIDE.

THIS WAS A STUDY I READ IN 2018.

IS I THINK IT WAS SEVENTY TWO POINT SIX PERCENT.

SO THAT'S AVERAGE. SO YOU'RE ACTUALLY ABOVE AVERAGE.

LAST YEAR YOU WERE PRETTY MUCH AVERAGE.

OK, I'VE SEEN OTHER STUDIES FROM LIKE FITCH AND MOODY'S WHERE THEY SAY 90 PERCENT IS WELL ABOVE AVERAGE. OK, SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT NECESSARILY YOU SHOULD SHOOT FOR ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE BENCHMARK THAT TMRS SHOOTS FOR.

OTHERWISE THEY WOULD BE YOUR CONTRIBUTION RATE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER.

I THINK THE FUNDING.

YOU KNOW, I, I KIND OF THINK OF LIKE FUNDING MY KIDS COLLEGE.

IT'S IT'S NOT I'M NOT I'M NOT TRYING TO FUND IT TODAY.

I'M TRYING TO FUND IT DOWN THE ROAD.

SO IT'S OK IF I'M 50 PERCENT FUNDED THAT MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE BEST EXAMPLE, BUT WHATEVER PERCENTAGE. BUT EVEN THEN, IF YOU WERE FUNDING YOUR KIDS COLLEGE, IT'S DISCOUNTED.

RIGHT. SO THE ACTUARIES DISCOUNTED IT BACK TO TODAY'S DOLLARS.

SO YOU COULD BE AN 80 PERCENT FUNDED RATIO.

BUT ULTIMATELY, YOU DON'T HAVE TO FOOT THAT BILL UNTIL THOSE FOLKS START RETIRING.

AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE FUNDING.

YOU'RE NOT FUNDING IT. YOU'RE FUNDING IT TODAY, BUT YOU'RE NOT PAYING IT UNTIL DOWN THE ROAD. SO IT'S REALLY A CASH FLOW STREAM YOU'RE TRYING TO FUND.

MR. WATSON, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.

MORE FROM A.

SURE. AUDIT, AUDITING SIDE.

FIRST QUESTION IS THE AUDITOR'S OPINION DATE IS MAY THE 12TH THIS YEAR.

AND LAST YEAR IT WAS JANUARY 14.

WHY DID THE AUDIT PROCESS THIS YEAR TAKE APPROXIMATELY FOUR MONTHS LONGER THAN LAST YEAR? RIGHT. YEAH, AND I WOULDN'T SAY IT TOOK FOUR MONTHS LONGER.

[00:30:02]

THE REPORT WAS ISSUED LATER.

WE STARTED LATER.

THE CITY TRANSITIONED FROM ONE ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE TO ANOTHER ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE.

THERE WERE SOME THINGS I THINK IN ALL HONESTY, I THINK WE COULD HAVE ISSUED EARLIER.

WE ALSO DEALT WITH THINGS INTERNALLY.

WE LOST A WEEK OF PRODUCTIVITY FROM THE FREEZE.

UNFORTUNATELY, OUR FIRM WAS SHUT DOWN.

SO BUT EVEN IF YOU TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT, REALISTICALLY, I THINK IN ALL WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUING IN APRIL.

BUT YEAH, WE STARTED EARLIER.

THIS USED TO BE THE FIRST AUDIT ON MY SLATE IN THIS YEAR.

WE ASKED WE WERE ASKED TO PUSH IT BACK AND RIGHTFULLY SO, CHANGING ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE IS NO, NO EASY CHORE.

IN FACT, THIS ONE, I THOUGHT WAS HANDLED PRETTY WELL.

AND I'VE SEEN SOME THAT WERE TRULY DISASTERS.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK GRANT AND EVERYBODY DID A GREAT JOB WITH THAT.

BUT YEAH, IT'S PART OF IT.

AND I'M NOT THROWING OUT EXCUSES AS STATED.

I, ON US, I THINK ABSOLUTELY COULD HAVE ISSUED IN APRIL.

WE'D ALWAYS ISSUED THIS ONE EARLY.

WE'VE DONE THIS AUDIT SEVERAL YEARS AND WE ALWAYS ISSUE IT PRETTY EARLY, USUALLY JANUARY.

AND IF WE IF THE CITY DOES WANT TO GET BACK IN THAT FIRST AUDIT OF THE YEAR, SECOND AUDIT OF THE YEAR, THERE'S NO REASON TO EXPECT WE WOULDN'T BE BACK IN JANUARY.

SO. NEXT QUESTION, AND I KIND OF CREATED MY QUESTIONS BEFORE I SAW YOUR ALL THE DIFFERENT LETTERS, BUT PERHAPS WE CAN KIND OF WALK THROUGH.

YEAH. IT RELATES TO THE ADJUSTING ENTRIES AND RECLASSIFICATION ENTRIES, WONDERING HOW MANY OF THOSE WE HAD THIS YEAR COMPARED TO LAST YEAR.

AND AS AND I DID SEE THAT IN THIS YEAR.

YEAH. IN YOUR IN YOUR LETTER YOU INDICATE THAT THERE IS A MATERIAL WEAKNESS IN CONTROLS OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND THAT CONCERNS ME AS AN AUDITOR.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING.

AND PLEASE.

YEAH. SO LET ME YEAH. SO AND SO.

SO YOU'RE A FORMER AUDITOR OR ACTIVE AUDITOR? OK, SO MATERIAL WEAKNESS.

INTERNAL CONTROLS, AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, JUST INDICATES THAT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT LIKELIHOOD THAT SOMETHING COULD BE MATERIALLY MISSTATED IF WE WERE NOT TO INTERVENE.

IT IS I HAVE IT ON EVERY CITY BUT ONE CURRENTLY.

I HAVE THAT SAME FINDING.

WHY? BECAUSE WE HAVE AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS.

THERE'S AREAS IN PARTICULAR PENSION AND OPEB OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS THAT ARE HIGHLY SPECIALIZED.

AND THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT THIS CITY COULD MASTER IT.

BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THE COST BENEFIT TO TO KIND OF WRAP THOSE THOSE MULTIPLE JOURNAL ENTRIES. I THINK IT'S PRETTY COMMON FOR THE AUDITOR PROPOSE ADJUSTMENTS OVER THOSE.

SO.

WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT PENSION BENEFIT ADJUSTMENTS, ARE WE? NO, WE'RE NOT.

WE CAN DO AS A CITY TO CHANGE THAT.

WHERE WE AREN'T, YEAH, WE AREN'T RECEIVING AN OPINION OR A LETTER THAT SAYS WE HAVE A MATERIAL WEAKNESS IN INTERNAL CONTROLS.

YEAH. SO KIND OF GETTING BACK.

I WAS GIVING A AN EXAMPLE OF EVEN IF A LOT OF THESE I THINK, YOU KNOW, CHANGING OVER SOFTWARE, YOU KNOW, THESE THESE COULD BE REDUCED, THERE'S NO DOUBT.

AND THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT'S GOOD.

AND WE'LL WORK WITH THEM TO DECREASE THE NUMBER OF JOURNAL ENTRIES HERE.

EVEN WITH THAT, MY POINT WAS PENSION AND OPEB ARE DIFFICULT AREAS.

THEY'RE GOING TO REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, QUITE A BIT OF WORK JUST TO JUST TO CATCH UP WITH HOW IT'S BEING DONE. I'M HAPPY TO HELP WITH THAT.

BUT EVEN THEN, THAT IS THAT IS A MATERIAL ADJUSTMENT ITSELF.

SO WHAT I'M TELLING YOU IS IF THAT IS THE ONLY AREA THAT IT REQUIRES ME WHO'S NOT A PART OF INTERNAL CONTROLS TO COME IN AND FIX, THAT REPRESENTS MATERIAL WEAKNESS.

AND WHILE THAT WORD MAY SEEM YOU KNOW, I TAKE I TAKE THE DEFINITION VERY LITERALLY, BECAUSE WITHOUT WITHOUT INTERVENTION, IT WOULD BE A MISSTATEMENT.

AND SO I TAKE IT I TAKE IT THAT'S MY INTERPRETATION.

SO AS STATED, I HAVE THAT ON EVERY CITY EXCEPT FOR ONE.

AND I DON'T THINK I DON'T THINK IT'S BENEFICIAL TO HAVE ALL CITIES NECESSARILY TO GET THAT LEVEL OF EXPERTISE, BECAUSE IT MIGHT THE COST BENEFIT MIGHT NOT MAKE SENSE ARE YOU PREPARING OR ARE YOU MAINTAINING THE CITY, ANY OF THE CITY'S RECORDS? NO, ABSOLUTE. I SO WE WE TAKE THE THE ACTUARIAL REPORT AND WE WE DO PROPOSE ADJUSTMENTS.

THESE ARE PROPOSED ADJUSTMENTS, WHICH IS COMMON IN AUDIT.

AND THEY CAN EITHER ACCEPT THEM OR NOT ACCEPT THEM.

THEY ASK QUESTIONS AND WE'LL PROVIDE EXPLANATIONS.

[00:35:02]

BUT NO, WE'RE WE'RE SIMPLY WE TAKE THE INFORMATION AND PROPOSE ADJUSTMENTS WHERE APPROPRIATE. SO ASSET SCHEDULES AND THINGS LIKE THAT ARE MAINTAINED TOTALLY BY THE CITY? I THINK WE HELP THEM QUITE A BIT ON CERTAIN AREAS.

AND, YOU KNOW, DEFINITELY PENSION WOULD BE ONE AND CAPITAL ASSET.

THEY SHARE A LOT OF [INAUDIBLE] INFORMATION AND.

YEAH. SO THEY RETAIN THOSE SCHEDULES.

I BELIEVE SO. YEAH. YEAH.

SO I WANT TO ASK KIND OF LOOKING AT YOUR LETTER, BECAUSE IT KIND OF FOLDS INTO WHAT I ASKED EARLIER, IT LOOKS LIKE HERE THAT THERE WERE PERMITS THAT WERE MISSED BEING PAID FOR ? I THINK THAT WAS SIMILAR TO YOUR COMMENT EARLIER.

IT'S AND I'LL REREAD THAT COMMENT, BUT ISSUED OR PAID TO THE TRANSITION FROM CITY FROM [INAUDIBLE] TO ENCODE.

SO WAS THE PERMIT ACTUALLY NEVER PAID FOR? YEAH, GO AHEAD.

THE PERMIT WAS NEVER ISSUED.

IT WAS BACK INTO INTER GOV AND MAKE THE SAME ADJUSTMENTS THAT YOU'RE DOING IN AND SO THAT'S WHAT THEY CAUGHT.

YEAH. JUST YOUR EARLIER QUESTION THAT YOU ASKED WHY WASN'T IT MATCHING? IT WAS THE SAME. SO THERE'S NO REVENUE LOST BY THE CITY ON THE PERMITTING FEES? NO, NO, NO. YEAH, I THINK I STATED IT SAYS IT WAS NEVER ISSUED.

SO SO IT STARTED IN THAT SYSTEM, BUT WAS NEVER ISSUED.

THAT WE HAD A WE HAD TO PULL A LOT OF FILES FOR JOHN AND HIS TEAM FOR THAT JUST TO PROVE THAT WE DO HAVE THE RIGHT THINGS IN PLACE.

YEAH. AND I THINK I MENTIONED THIS.

THESE ARE OTHER MATTERS.

THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE GENERALLY DISCLOSE THINGS, IS WHILE WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE OTHER MATTERS TO COUNCIL, WE DO DISCLOSE THEM BECAUSE WE'RE WE FEEL MORE INFORMATION IS ALWAYS BENEFICIAL.

AND YOU GUYS CAN DO WHAT YOU WILL WITH IT.

I THINK WE WOULD AGREE. SO THANK YOU.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. BUT IT DID SEEM VERY SIMILAR TO KIND OF THE DISCUSSION EARLIER ABOUT THE THAT SOFTWARE INTER GOV, THAT DUPLICITY AND EFFORT.

IT'D BE GREAT IF, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD TO STREAMLINE IT SO WE COULD GET ONE ENTRY AND IT SYNCHRONIZES WITH THE OTHER SO.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? THANK YOU, MR. WATSON, APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

OH, OK.

COUNCIL. OH.

AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK IF THERE IS A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AUDIT REPORT PROVIDED BY BROOKS WATSON.

MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT.

IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. OK, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ACCEPT THE AUDIT REPORT AS PROVIDED BY AND PRESENTED BY JOHN WATSON, PROVIDED BY BROOKS WATSON.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? DISCUSSION? OK, THEN I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING THE AUDIT BY BROOKS WATSON, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ANYONE OPPOSED? NOT HEARING ANYONE, IT PASSES 5-0.

I DO WANT TO SAY THAT WHILE THAT THIS HAS BEEN TOUGH IN THAT WE'RE CHANGING FROM ONE SYSTEM TO ANOTHER SYSTEM, WE CHANGE FROM A PREVIOUS PERSON TO GRANT, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULTIES IN THE CHANGEOVER AND GETTING EVERYTHING WORKED OUT.

OUR GOAL IS TO GET EVERYTHING WORKED OUT.

AND I REALLY WANT TO COMPLIMENT GRANT AND LUKE AND THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE WORKED ON THIS TO GET US AS FAR AS LONG AS THEY HAVE.

YOU'VE DONE AN AWESOME JOB AND I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. OKAY, NEXT ITEM NUMBER EIGHT,

[8. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ACCEPTING A DONATION IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1,250 FROM THE PARKER WOMEN’S CLUB (PWC) TO BE ALLOCATED, AS FOLLOWS: [PWC REP]]

CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ACCEPTING A DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF TWELVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS FROM THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB.

THAT WOULD BE FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS TO THE PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT.

FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS TO THE PARKER FIRE DEPARTMENT AND TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE.

ANY COMMENTS ON THAT?

[00:40:01]

IF NOT, I WILL ACCEPT A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AMOUNT OF THE DONATION OF TWELVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS FROM THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB TO BE ALLOCATED.

AS I STATED.

MADAM MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ACCEPTING A DONATION IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS FROM THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB TO BE ALLOCATED, AS STATED.

OK, HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER ABRAHAM TO ACCEPT THE DONATIONS OF TWELVE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS FROM THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB TO BE ALLOCATED AS DESCRIBED, IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND.

OK, COUNCIL MEMBER REED SECONDS THE MOTION.

OH OK.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ABRAHAM AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER REED TO ACCEPT THE DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF TWELVE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS FROM THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB TO BE ALLOCATED FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS TO THE PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT, FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS TO THE PARKER FIRE DEPARTMENT AND TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS TO PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.

NOT HEARING ANY.

I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING THE DONATION OF TWELVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS FROM PWC PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ANYONE OPPOSED? I WOULD BE SHOCKED.

MOTION ACCEPTED, MOTION PASSES.

EXCUSE ME. OK, ITEM NINE.

[9. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 799, APPROVING THE 2021 CITY FEE SCHEDULE. [OLSON/MACHADO]]

CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE 799 APPROVING THE 2021 CITY FEE SCHEDULE.

MR. OLSON YOU OR MR. MACHADO WANT TO TALK TO US ABOUT THAT? I WAS GOING TO LET GARY GET INTO IT.

THIS IS HIS AREA OF EXPERTISE.

WE JUST I JUST WENT THROUGH AND CLEANED UP SOME STUFF AND CONSOLIDATED.

WE HAD A A CHANGE.

IT WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, BUT WE HAD TO CHANGE BECAUSE OF A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE.

WE COULDN'T CHARGE BASED ON THE VALUE, HAD TO CHARGE BASED ON SQUARE FOOTAGE.

GOT THAT IN THE NEW FEE SCHEDULE AND HAVE UPDATED SOME OF THE COSTS FOR LIKE THE FIRE HYDRANT METERS THAT WE RENT OUT TO BE OR THAT WE LOAN OUT TO PEOPLE.

INCREASING THE DEPOSIT AMOUNTS TO COVER DAMAGE THAT IT COST TO REPLACE THOSE THINGS AND THEN THE FEES THAT IT COST TO REPLACE THOSE THINGS WHEN THEY DAMAGED.

AND THEY GET DAMAGED QUITE OFTEN AND THEN CLARIFIED ON SOME METER TYPES WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE FEES AND THE COST FOR REPLACEMENT OF A WATER METER.

A RESIDENTIAL WATER METER, AND THEN UPDATED THE COST OF TREES FOR THE LIVING LEGACY TREE PROGRAM BECAUSE THOSE TREES ARE VERY EXPENSIVE.

NO. OK, I'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED IN READING THIS . I THINK WE FORGOT TO PUT THE DATE, THE 2021 ON TOP OF THE FIRST SECTION HERE, GOT EVERYTHING ELSE. BUT WE'VE MISSED THAT PART.

OK. AND WE HAVE.

RIGHT. THIS IS GOING TO BE CHANGED TO 2021.

THAT'S. OK. [INAUDIBLE] OK.

THERE WERE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT APPEARED TO BE DUPLICATES AND I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND LIKE PAGE TWO NINETY AND TWO NINETY SEVEN APPEAR TO BE THE SAME THING.

THEY ARE THE SAME THING.

THIS IS, THIS IS TWO DIFFERENT COPIES OF IT.

ONE OF THEM WAS HIGHLIGHTED THE CHANGES AND ONE OF THEM, THE CHANGES WERE NOT HIGHLIGHTED. THAT'S THAT, THAT SHOULD BE THE DIFFERENCES.

OK, AND WE ARE GOING TO CORRECT THE DATE ON THE TOP THE YEAR TO 2021.

OK, THOUGH, IF IT'S IN YELLOW, IT'S CHANGED.

NO, YELLOW WAS A STAY AND THAT WAS IN YELLOW WAS THE CHANGES ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.

THE CHANGE, OK. WHAT IS THE YELLOW? THERE MUST BE A CODE TO IT.

NO THAT THAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL AND I THOUGHT SOMEBODY ELSE HAD IT THERE FOR A REASON.

SO I LEFT IT THAT IT'S NOT MY CODE.

IF IT'S A CODE. WE LOOK FOR MESSAGES, GARY.

PROBABLY FOR EASY REFERENCE TO FIND IT WHENEVER SOMEBODY IS LOOKING I WOULD IMAGINE.

GARY, I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION.

JUST IN TERMS OF JUST OUR RESIDENTS, JUST EVERYDAY RESIDENTS, NOT INCLUDING CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPERS, ANY OF THAT.

IS ARE THERE ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO FEES THAT RESIDENTS SHOULD BE AWARE OF IN THIS NEW FEE SCHEDULE? NO.

SO THIS IS STAYING THE SAME FROM WHAT YEAR?

[00:45:04]

THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY INCREASES? THE ONLY. SPECIFIC TO JUST RESIDENTS LIKE.

WELL, IF YOU BUILD A NEW HOME, THERE WOULD BE A SLIGHT INCREASE TO THAT THAT TAP FEE ON THAT. THAT WOULD GO FROM THE DEVELOPER THAT'S UP TO THE DEVELOPER HOW THEY PASS THAT ON.

BUT ANYTHING SPECIFIC FOR RESIDENTS? I DON'T SEE ANYTHING.

NO, THE FEES HAVE NOT INCREASED SINCE I THINK IT'S 2016 OR MAY HAVE BEEN EVEN BEFORE THAT, THAT WE INCREASED THE FEES TO COMPETE WITH SURROUNDING CITIES AND WHAT THEY'RE CHARGING. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.

SO I HAD JUST A FEW QUESTIONS ON ON THE CONTRACTOR REGISTRATIONS.

IT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU REALLY DIDN'T LOOK AT THAT.

BUT SINCE IT'S IN HERE AND WE'RE ADJUSTING THE FEE SCHEDULE, I JUST WANTED TO ASK ONE, WHY ARE FIRE SPRINKLERS AND PLUMBERS NOT CHARGED A FEE, BUT EVERYBODY ELSE IS CHARGED AN ANNUAL FEE? BY STATE LAW. WE CAN'T CHARGE THEM A FEE.

THE PLUMBERS AND? PLUMBERS. YEAH, OK.

AND IS IT NECESSARY TO HAVE AN ANNUAL FEE OR WOULD IT BE? YEAH. IS THERE IS THERE A REASON THAT IT HAS TO BE RENEWED ANNUALLY VERSUS.

THIS IS JUST FOR THE. KICKING SOMEONE OUT IF THEY ACT BAD? I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO KICK CONTRACTORS OUT WHEN, WHEN AND WE CAN REFUSE TO RENEW THEM AND THEN THEY CAN'T WORK IN THE CITY ANYMORE.

SO THAT'S KIND OF HOW YOU? WE DON'T DO THAT MUCH.

I'LL JUST TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T DO THAT MUCH BECAUSE MOST THESE CONTRACTORS LIKE WORKING IN PARKER AND THEY DO A GOOD JOB.

BUT YEAH, THE ANNUAL RENEWAL I THINK IS A GOOD THING TO KEEP THEM COMING IN EVERY YEAR AND UPDATE THEIR INFORMATION WITH US.

AND SO WE HAVE GOOD CONTACT INFO FOR THEM AND WE'VE GOT TO GET INSURANCE INFORMATION ON THESE CONTRACTORS, TOO. SO.

WE JUST DOUBLE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE UP TO DATE ON THEIR LICENSES.

YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE UP TO DATE WITH THEIR LICENSES.

EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T CHARGE THE PLUMBERS AND THE FIRE SPRINKLER CONTRACTORS, WE STILL CHECK ALL THEIR INFORMATION, THEY STILL HAVE TO PROVIDE US.

THEY ACTUALLY PROVIDE US MORE INFORMATION THAN ANYBODY ELSE, BUT WE JUST CAN'T CHARGE A FEE.

OK. ON THE CITY METER.

I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT A CITY METER IS VERSUS A COMPANY METER, THAT THE CITY METER FEE WENT UP? IF THEY PROVIDE METER FOR CONSTRUCTION. AND WE JUST READ IT.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE AN INITIAL READING AND THEN WE'LL READ IT ONCE A MONTH WHILE THEY'RE USING IT. AND THAT'S THEIR METER.

AND WE CHARGE THEM A FIVE HUNDRED DOLLAR DEPOSIT FOR THAT FOR WATER USAGE.

OK, AND THEN THIS DAMAGE AND REPLACEMENT FEE IS IF IT COMES BACK BAD? YES. OK. OR IF WE NOTICE THE DAMAGE WHEN WE GO OUT BECAUSE WE USUALLY GO TO THE FIELD AND READ IT ONCE A MONTH.

WE KNOW WHERE THE METERS ARE.

AND THEN IF WE NOTICE DAMAGE WE'LL CHARGE THEM.

AND THEN ON THE WATER METER FEES, I'D SEE YOU'VE ADDED AN EXCEPTION, I GUESS THERE'S SOME HOUSES THAT YOU HAVE A VERY LONG SERVICE LINE THAT WE NEEDED TO ACKNOWLEDGE.

WELL, THAT WELL, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE INCLUDE UP TO 100 FEET OF SERVICE LINE AND THEN AFTER THAT, WE CHARGE THEM FOR FOR THE SERVICE LINE BEYOND THAT.

TYPICALLY THE NEW SERVICE LINES ARE DONE BY THE DEVELOPER.

WE DON'T DO MUCH OF THAT.

BUT WE OCCASIONALLY WILL GET SOMEBODY REQUESTING A TAP AND WE MAY GET THEM TO REQUEST WE TAP THE LINE TWO MILES AWAY FROM THEIR HOUSE AND RUN A LINE TO IT.

WE CAN'T DO THAT. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE FEE SCHEDULE? OK, THEN I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION.

MADAM MAYOR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE FEE SCHEDULE AND ORDINANCE 799 WITH JUST MAKING THE CHANGE TO THE FEE SCHEDULE TO STATE THAT IT IS ORDINANCE 799 AND TO UPDATE IT TO 2021.

IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND THAT. OK.

ARE YOU OK WITH THE UPDATING TO 2021? AS AS NOTED WITH THE CORRECTIONS.

THANK YOU. OK WE HAVE A MOTION BY MICHAEL SLAUGHTER AND A SECOND BY TERRY LYNCH.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING ORDINANCE SEVEN NINETY NINE ADOPTING THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2021 PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ANYONE OPPOSED.

OK. MOTION CARRIES AND YOUR FEE SCHEDULE IS NOW IN EFFECT.

ITEM 10.

[10. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ACCEPTING A PARKS AND RECREATION (P&R) COMMISSION RESIGNATION. [PETTLE]]

[00:50:04]

WE HAVE LET ME READ IT, CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ACCEPTING A PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION RESIGNATION, WE HAVE RECEIVED A RESIGNATION FROM PARKS AND REC ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER PATTI CORDINA, WHO INDICATES FOR HEALTH REASONS, SHE WOULD RESIGN FROM THE PARKS AND RECS COMMISSION.

THIS IS JUST A NOTE FROM THE RECORD AND WE CAN VOTE TO ACCEPT IT, WHICH WOULD THEN ALLOW PARKS AND RECS TO APPOINT ANOTHER COMMISSIONER SHOULD THERE BE ONE AVAILABLE TO THEM THAT THEY WISH TO APPOINT.

MADAM MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO FIRST SAY THANK YOU TO MS. PATTI CORDINA FOR ALL HER SERVICE TO THE CITY AND I MAKE A MOTION TO GO AHEAD AND ACCEPT HER RESIGNATION FROM THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION.

OK, IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. OK, WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER ABRAHAM AND A SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER REED TO ACCEPT THE RESIGNATION OF PARKS AND REC COMMISSIONER ALTERNATIVE MAUN PATTI CORDINA FOR HEALTH REASONS AND TO THANK HER FOR HER SERVICE.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ANYONE OPPOSED? OK. MOTION ACCEPTED MOTION PASSES.

OK. THIS COMES UP TO YOU.

ITEM 11 CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2021-667

[11. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2021-667, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PARKER, TEXAS FINDING THAT ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY LLC’S APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO AMEND ITS DISTRIBUTION COST RECOVERY FACTOR TO INCREASE DISTRIBUTION RATES WITHIN THE CITY SHOULD BE DENIED; AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION WITH OCSC; AUTHORIZING THE HIRING OF LEGAL COUNSEL AND CONSULTING SERVICES; FINDING THAT THE CITY’S REASONABLE RATE CASE EXPENSES SHALL BE REIMBURSED BY THE COMPANY; FINDING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION IS PASSED IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW; REQUIRING NOTICE OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE COMPANY AND LEGAL COUNSEL. [SHELBY]]

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PARKER, TEXAS, FINDING THAT ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY LLC'S APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO AMEND ITS DISTRIBUTION COST RECOVERY FACTOR TO INCREASE DISTRIBUTION RATES WITHIN THE CITY SHOULD BE DENIED.

AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION WHAT THE OCSC AUTHORIZING THE HIRING OF LEGAL COUNSEL AND CONSULTING SERVICES, FINDING THAT THE CITY'S REASONABLE RATE CASE EXPENSES SHALL BE REIMBURSED BY THE COMPANY, FINDING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION IS PASSED IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW REQUIRING NOTICE OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE COMPANY AND LEGAL COUNSEL.

MR. SHELBY. YES, MADAM MAYOR, THE THE OCSC IS THE ONCOR CITY'S STEERING COMMITTEE.

IT IS A GROUP OF CITIES THAT WE ARE AND HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THAT HANDLE THESE TYPE OF NEGOTIATIONS CASES WITH WITH ONCOR, AS YOU KNOW, ONCOR'S EVERYBODY'S FAVORITE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY. THEY HAVE FOUND THAT THEY, IN THEIR INFINITE WISDOM, DECIDED TO ASK FOR A NINETY SEVEN MILLION DOLLAR REVENUE DISTRIBUTION INCREASE.

THEY FILED THAT ON APRIL 8TH.

OUR LEGAL COUNSEL CONSULTANT HAS ADVISED US TO DENY THAT RATE INCREASE AND THEY WILL ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS AND OR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS TO TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE WITH WITH ONCOR. THE PUC REQUIRES 60 DAYS TO ACT ON THAT APPLICATION.

THAT DEADLINE IS JUNE 7TH.

SO IF WE ARE GOING TO DENY THE RATE INCREASE, WE NEED TO DENY IT AT THIS MEETING SO THAT WE CAN GET EVERYTHING ON FILE AND OFF IN TIME FOR THE THE PROCEEDINGS.

ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? JUST A QUESTION KIND OF CLARIFICATION.

THIS PRETTY MUCH WE SEE THIS JUST ABOUT EVERY YEAR, ISN'T THAT? IS IS THIS AMOUNT SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN PAST YEARS? I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, BUT IT IS ALWAYS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT THAT THEY ASK FOR. AND THIS IS ONCOR SAYING THAT IT COST THEM 97 MILLION MORE DOLLARS THAN THEY EXPECTED IT TO, AND THEY'RE TRYING TO RECOUP THAT COST FROM THE CITIES.

AND EVERY YEAR THAT I'VE BEEN A CITY ATTORNEY FOR ANY CITY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, THEY'VE ASKED FOR AN INCREASE. AND EVERY CITY I'VE EVER WORKED FOR HAS DENIED THAT AND REACH SOME SORT OF SETTLEMENT. AND TYPICALLY, THE SETTLEMENTS ARE LESS THAN WHAT THEY'VE ASKED FOR.

AND OUR COST, IF I RECALL LAST YEAR, WAS PRETTY.

THE OUR PORTION OF THIS IS REALLY PRETTY SMALL.

YEAH. YES, MA'AM. WE WE PAY PER POPULATION TO BE A MEMBER OF THIS GROUP, AND IT IS NOT

[00:55:08]

THAT MUCH ANNUALLY.

AND THE ONCOR IS REQUIRED TO REIMBURSE US FOR THE MONEY WE SPEND FIGHTING THIS RATE CASE SO THAT THAT ALL COMES BACK TO THE GROUP.

I GUESS THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.

MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE.

WHERE IS IT? 667.

RESOLUTION 667 REGARDING THE ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANIES APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO AMEND ITS DISTRIBUTION COST RECOVERY FACTOR, ET CETERA.

OK. I'LL SECOND IT.

OK. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2021-667 WHERE THE CITY OF PARKER DENIES THE RATE INCREASE AS REQUESTED BY ONCOR.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN I'LL ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF PASSING RESOLUTION NUMBER 2021-667.

PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ANYONE OPPOSED.

THAT WOULD SHOCK ME.

THE MOTION PASSES 5-0.

THAT SOUNDS LIKE A TV SHOW.

OKAY.

AT THIS TIME WE WILL GO TO A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING ZONING REGULATIONS AND

[12. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING ZONING REGULATIONS AMENDMENTS. [OLSON/MACHADO]]

AMENDMENTS.

AT 7:57.

BEFORE. WELL, NO, I'LL GO AHEAD.

AT THIS TIME, I HAVE ONE PERSON I SEE MR. MEYER YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS.

PLEASE COME FORWARD.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY IS THERE ANYBODY HERE, MR. BECK, YOU WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON THIS? AND I THINK YOUR SALARY SHOULD BE DOUBLED.

AND IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, BLAME IT ON THE MAYOR BECAUSE SHE'S THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS THE POWER TO DO THAT. MERRY CHRISTMAS.

I HAD THE WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY THE LAST THREE YEARS TO GO TO A LOT OF THE ZONING MEETINGS. AND AND I THINK IT WAS VERY, VERY CLEAR THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO CHANGE THE WORD THE, AND AND CLEAN IT UP.

IT WASN'T SUPPOSED TO BE A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE.

AND IN THE P&Z, THAT VERSION THAT THEY SET UP AND, YOU KNOW, AND LOOKING AT IT AT 30,000 FEET, THEY DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF IT.

I HAVEN'T LOOKED THROUGH IT WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB, BUT FOR SOME REASON, IN THE 485 PAGE DUMP FROM THE CITY, WHICH I'M SURE YOU ALL HAVE MEMORIZED, PAGE 332, CAN YOU TELL ME? AS VOLUNTEERS, HOW DO YOU DO THAT TO PEOPLE? BUT SEPARATE ISSUE.

THERE'S A SECOND ONE THAT CONCERNS ME IMMENSELY BECAUSE IT'S NOT WHAT P&Z SAID TO SEND UP.

AND IT IS A TOTAL GRAB AND TAKE AWAY OF MANY LAND USE RIGHTS.

AND IT ISN'T CLEANING IT UP.

IT HAS A LOT OF SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES.

THAT MAKES ME FEEL LIKE WE'RE BACK IN PLANO, WHERE I RAN FROM AND MOVED FROM.

AND I'VE LIVED AT MOSS RIDGE AND I'VE BEEN THERE.

I DON'T WANT TO ADMIT IN PUBLIC HOW LONG I'VE BEEN THERE.

THAT'D MAKE ME REALLY OLD, BUT I'VE BEEN THERE SINCE THE 90S.

AND WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IN THAT SECOND ONE IS MORE LIKE PLANO OR RICHARDSON.

IT IS NOT COUNTRY, IT IS NOT PARKER, AND IT'S A TOTAL LAND GRAB.

SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO PLEASE UNDERSTAND, WE LIVE IN A RED STATE, A RED COUNTY AND A RED CITY AND PLEASE KEEP IT CONSERVATIVE AND DO NOT STEAL OR TRY TO TAKE AWAY OUR LAND RIGHTS. ANY QUESTIONS? NO, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE ON THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ZONING PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES? OK, NOT HEARING ANYONE ELSE.

I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT, PATTI.

WHAT TIME?

[13. DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 800, AMENDING ZONING REGULATIONS. [CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 156: ZONING REGULATIONS] [PETTLE/MACHADO/SHELBY] ]

ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE EIGHT HUNDRED, AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS.

OK, BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING.

[01:00:14]

IN A CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON I BELIEVE IT WAS 7/11/2017, MAYOR MARSHALL.

ASSIGNED A SUBCOMMITTEE CONSISTING OF COUNCIL MEMBER LEE PETTLE, COUNCIL MEMBER CINDY MEYER, MAYOR MARSHALL, CITY ATTORNEY BRANDON SHELBY AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR JEFF FLANIGAN WAS APPOINTED TO REVIEW ALL CODES AND ORDINANCE AND TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS. A REQUEST WAS MADE TO FAST TRACK THE MOST IMPORTANT ONES AND FOR THE CITY SUBCOMMITTEE TO GET STARTED QUICKLY.

AND THE SUBCOMMITTEE DID START IN JULY 2017.

IN AND WORKED UNTIL MAY OF 2018, I THINK IT WAS, AT WHICH TIME? THE DRAFT WAS SENT TO BRANDON ON JANUARY 18TH, 2018.

[INAUDIBLE]. OK.

JANUARY. OK, AND AND I BELIEVE IT WAS ALSO SAID TO MR. FLANIGAN AT THAT TIME.

OK. WHEN I BECAME MAYOR, WHICH WAS IN MAY OF 2018, I WAS CONCERNED BECAUSE THESE HADN'T COME BACK.

I PUT IT ON MY FIRST OR SECOND AGENDA.

I APOLOGIZE. I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH AND ASK AND BROUGHT IT TO COUNCIL AND THE THAT COUNCIL. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO, YOU KNOW, AND COUNCIL AFTER DISCUSSION DECIDED TO REFER IT TO P&Z FOR THEM TO LOOK AT WHAT HAD BEEN DONE TO GO FORWARD.