>> [BACKGROUND] [LAUGHTER] IT'S NOW 7:00 PM. [00:00:01] WE WILL BEGIN THE PARKER [CALL TO ORDER ] CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING. CALLING TO ORDER. MAY I ASK MR. OLSON [INAUDIBLE] >> YES, MADAM, MAY YOU DO. >> AT THIS TIME I WILL ASK THE [INAUDIBLE] TO PLEASE READ US THE AMERICAN PLEDGE. [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE TEXAS PLEDGE. >> READING PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WISHES TO MAKE THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT HAS NOT TO DO WITH [PUBLIC COMMENTS] THE BUDGET AND TAX RATE. OKAY. [INAUDIBLE] >> YEAH. >> [INAUDIBLE] YOU'RE ON. >> SOMEONE FROM THE CITY CALLED AND LEFT A MESSAGE ON MY [OVERLAPPING] >> [INAUDIBLE] >> SOMEBODY LEFT A MESSAGE ON MY CELL PHONE AND I HATE MY CELL PHONE, AND LOST THE MESSAGE, ABOUT FENCING IN MY YARD. I JUST STOPPED AT MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE ON THE EXPRESSWAY THAT WE HAVE OVER HERE ON ANGEL, ABOUT HAVING ANY KIND OF PROTECTION FOR THE NOISE ABATEMENT FOR THIS HIGHWAY HERE, THIS IS A SUPERHIGHWAY. YOU CAN BE IN YOUR BACKYARD AND TRY TO BE ON YOUR CELL PHONE AND YOU'VE GOT ALL THE NOISE FROM THE HIGHWAY HERE. THIS IS LIKE A SUPERHIGHWAY. RIGHT NOW, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MANY CARS THAT ARE UP AND DOWN THE STREET HERE, BLOCKING THE INTERSECTIONS. YOU GET DOWN HERE FROM MY STREET. WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. PEOPLE HERE DESERVE THE SAFETY OF WHAT IS GOING TO BE BECAUSE OF THIS, SIX LANES OUT THERE, AND THE TRAFFIC IS GOING 65 MILES AN HOUR OUT THERE. WE DESERVE PROTECTION AND FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM MY NEIGHBORS, THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY PROTECTION. THEY'RE GOING TO PUT A SIDEWALK OUT THERE ALONG THE STREET. WHAT PROTECTION IS A SIDEWALK GOING TO GIVE ANY OF US? THE NOISE, THE TRUCKS, EVERYTHING GOING UP AND DOWN THERE. JUST BECAUSE WE'RE A LITTLE SECTION, DOES IT MEAN THAT WE'RE LOW CLASS PEOPLE THEN WE DON'T DESERVE ANYTHING. A LOT OF YOU LIVE BACK WHERE THERE'S NO SUPERHIGHWAY. THERE'S A SUPERHIGHWAY OVER THERE AND WE DESERVE PROTECTION AND IF WE DON'T GET IT, THERE'S GOING TO BE HELL RAISED. SORRY TO SAY THAT, WE HAVE SOME RIGHTS. WE DON'T HAVE HOA AND STUFF LIKE THAT. WHAT WE COULD ONLY HAVE BIG BOOMS LIKE THEY HAVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM US AND THE TREES. THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN HAVE THAT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT THE ROOM. WELL, WE GOT TO HAVE SOME KIND OF PROTECTION AND A METAL FENCE WITH SLITS IN IT, IT'S NOT GOING TO DO IT. WE NEED PROTECTION. WHERE DO WE GO IF WE CAN'T COME TO THE CITY TO GET IT? THAT'S MY SPIEL FOR TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT THAT HAS NOT TO DO WITH THE BUDGET [INAUDIBLE] ITEMS OF INTEREST. [ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST] DON'T FORGET THAT WE DO HAVE HOME HAZARDOUS WASTE. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS CONTACT THE PEOPLE, LET THEM KNOW YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO BE PICKED UP AND THEY WILL PICK IT UP AT YOUR HOUSE AND TAKE IT AWAY. OUR NEXT MEETING, CITY COUNCIL MEETING, IS ON AUGUST 22ND, WHICH IS ON A MONDAY AND AT THAT TIME, WE WILL VOTE ON THE BUDGET AND A PROPOSED TAX RATE. THE PEANUT BUTTER DRIVE WILL START ON SEPTEMBER 1ST. THIS IS FOR PEOPLE TO DONATE, PLEASE. PEANUT BUTTER JELLY LIKE THAT. IT WILL GO TO THE NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK AND THE FOOD BANK HAS CHALLENGED EVERY CITY IN NORTH TEXAS TO SEE HOW MUCH THEY CAN COLLECT IN PEANUT BUTTER, [00:05:07] JELLY, HONEY, THOSE KIND OF ITEMS. COMPLAINT COMMITTEE, I SEE, SEPTEMBER 7TH AT 9:00 AM. IS THAT CORRECT, MICHAEL? >> YES, MADAM MAYOR, THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING IS SEPTEMBER 14TH AT 4:00 PM. NATIONAL NIGHT OUT IS SCHEDULED TO BE OCTOBER 4TH FROM 6:00-9:00 PM. IF YOU WANT YOUR AREA TO BE VISITED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, CITY COUNCIL, ANY OF US. PLEASE START MAKING ARRANGEMENTS NOW, YOU CAN CONTACT MR. OLSON, YOU CAN CONTACT CHIEF BROOKS, CHIEF SHEFF, AND WE WILL TAKE IT FROM THERE. PARKER FEAST IS COMING BACK AND IT IS TENTATIVELY SET FOR OCTOBER 30TH FROM 3:00 PM TO 6:00 PM. EARLY VOTING. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE ALWAYS VOTING. EARLY VOTING WILL START ON OCTOBER 23RD, AND WILL GO THROUGH NOVEMBER 8TH, WHICH IS THE ELECTION DAY. NEXT, WE WILL MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. [CONSENT AGENDA] THERE ARE FIVE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 28TH, APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 2ND, CONSIDERATION IN ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 22-711, APPROVING THE NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT BETWEEN ATMOS CITIES STEERING COMMITTEE AND ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID TAX DIVISION REGARDING THE COMPANY'S 2022 TAX REVIEW MECHANISM, FILING AND ADOPTING TARIFFS TO REFLECT THE RIGHT ADJUSTMENTS. ALSO, WE HAVE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, CONSIDERATION AND ANY ACTION CANCELING THE OCTOBER 4TH REGULAR MEETING BECAUSE THAT'S NATIONAL NIGHT OUT AND CONSIDERATION AND ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON CANCELING THE NOVEMBER 1ST REGULAR MEETING DUE TO VOTING WILL BE GOING ON IN THIS ROOM ON THAT DAY. THEREFORE, THE ROOM IS NOT AVAILABLE TO US. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WOULD LIKE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? THEN I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION. >> MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS LISTED. >> OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? >>MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION. >> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. ANY DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY. I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES, FIVE, ZERO. NEXT, WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER 6, [6. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED FY2022-2023 BUDGET AND TAX RATE.] PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 BUDGET AND TAX RATE. AT THIS TIME, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IT IS 7:08 PM AND I WILL ASK OUR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, GRANT SAVAGE TO LEAD US IN THIS. >> THANK YOU. THE PROPOSED TAX RATE THAT'S BEING PRESENTED IS RATES $0.329289, THAT'S AN ACTUAL DECREASE THIS YEAR OF $0.036695 FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND EVEN THOUGH IT'S A RATE DECREASE, THE COUNCIL HAS GOT TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE BECAUSE IT EXCEEDS THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE. THE FINAL ACTION ON THE TAX RATE IS SET TO BE NEXT MONDAY, AUGUST THE 22ND AT 7:00 AT CITY HALL. JUST A REVIEW OF THE TAX RATE CALCULATIONS. YOU CAN SEE THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE WAS AT $0.320101 THIS YEAR AND THE VOTER-APPROVAL TAX RATE IS ACTUALLY THE PROPOSED TAX RATE, $0.329289 AND YOU CAN SEE THE M&O RATE, THE DEBT TAX RATES, AND THE TOTAL OF THE PROPOSED TAX RATE ARE WELL BELOW THE DE MINIMIS RATE. [00:10:11] THEN IF YOU WANT TO LEAVE THIS OPEN, WE CAN DISCUSS THE TAX RATE AND THEN WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH THE TAX RATE, GOING INTO THE BUDGET. SEE IF THERE'S QUESTIONS ON THE TAX RATE FIRST. >> NO. COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS AT THIS TIME? IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE? IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET? [OVERLAPPING] >> JUST QUICKLY REVIEW. GO OVER THE OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET CALENDAR. STARTED BACK IN MAY 23RD WITH THE BUDGET PLANNING WORKSHOP. WE'VE HAD COUNCIL GOALS WORKSHOP, ANOTHER BUDGET PLANNING WORKSHOP, THE FIRST AND SECOND BUDGET WORKSHOP, SET THE PROPOSED TAX RATE, AND THEN FILED THE BUDGET WITH THE C SECRETARY AND POSTAL WEBSITE. TONIGHT WE'RE HAVING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE AND BUDGET, AND THEN NEXT WEEK ON THE 22ND, WE'LL HAVE THE FINAL ACTION ON THE TAX RATE AND BUDGET. THE BUDGET HAS BEEN PREPARED USING THE PROPOSED TAX RATE OF $0.329289. LIKE I SAID, THE FINAL ACTION IS GOING TO BE TAKEN NEXT TUESDAY OR NEXT MONDAY, THE 22ND, SEVEN O'CLOCK. THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR THE GENERAL FUND OF $5,699,824, AND THE TOTAL OVERALL BUDGET IS $14,666,215. THIS YEAR INSIDE THE BUDGET WE'VE INCLUDED A FEW SUPPLEMENTALS. SUPPLEMENTALS CONSIST OF THESE FOLLOWING ITEMS: FIBER OPTIC CABLE FOR THE CITY HALL, REMODELING THE FIRE STATION TO SLEEPING QUARTERS, A CARDIAC DEFIBRILLATOR INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WE'RE GOING TO REPLACE A FEW ITEMS FOR PUBLIC WORKS, THE VAC- TRAILER, A KUBOTA TRACTOR, A DUMPED TRAILER, PURCHASING A SAND SPREADER, AND DOING REPAIRS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SEPTIC SYSTEM. YOU CAN SEE THE IMPACT OF THE PROPERTY RATE REDUCTION OF THAT $3.6695 IS LOW $535,000. THAT'S ALL I HAVE ON THE BUDGET. >> COUNCIL, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE BUDGET AT THIS TIME? IS THERE ANY? >> I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY, THANK YOU, GRANT, FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS BECAUSE I KNOW WE WENT BACK AND FORTH A BUNCH OF TIMES AND YOU REALLY SQUEEZED EVERYWHERE THAT YOU COULD TO GET THIS IN LINE WITH WHAT WE WERE ASKING YOU FOR IT. I THINK YOU WORK SOME MIRACLES THIS YEAR AND WE APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. >> EXCELLENT JOB. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT HAS ANY COMMENTS THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE ON THE BUDGET? >> I HAVE ONE COMMENT. GRANT, ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE DONE. JUST TO CLARIFY TO SOME OF THE RESIDENTS THAT FEEL THAT EVEN THOUGH WE'VE REDUCED THE TAX RATE, THAT PROPERTY TAXES ARE GOING UP. IS THERE SOME CLARIFICATION THAT YOU CAN JUST DO ON THE RECORD FOR THOSE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE THOSE QUESTIONS? I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT, SO THAT THEY DON'T GET THE IMPRESSION THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY INCREASING THE TAX RATE, EVEN THOUGH THE PROPERTY VALUE IS NOT GOING UP. >> THE TAX RATE REDUCED, HOWEVER, PROPERTY VALUES HAVE GONE UP. THIS TAX RATE IS THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE, WHICH ALLOWS A 3.5 PERCENT INCREASE IN VALUES. I GUESS THEY TAKE THE VALUES INTO CONSIDERATION. TAXES MIGHT GO UP, BUT THE RATE IS GOING DOWN. >> AS A RESULT OF THE TAXES RATE GOING DOWN, HOW MUCH IS THE APPROXIMATE WE ARE GOING TO LOSS SHOULD WE ANTICIPATE? >> THAT'S ABOUT $535,000. >> ONE COMMENT. I GUESS, JUST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE IS THAT JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THE REVENUE, IS THE REVENUE STREAM FROM LAST YEAR TO THIS FISCAL YEAR COMING UP IS GOING TO BE MORE, SO THE REVENUE BENEFIT THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT OR THE REVENUE THAT IS NOT BEING COLLECTED WAS BASED ON A MUCH HIGHER TAX RATE. [00:15:01] >> CORRECT. >> THAT'S WHERE WE STARTED WAS AT THE DE MINIMIS RATE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A WISH LIST. JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE TAX AMOUNT THAT IS BEING PAID IS HIGHER FOR PARKER THIS YEAR VERSUS LAST YEAR. NOW WHAT WE DID IS WE TRIED TO DO THE BEST WE CAN TO MINIMIZE THAT, SO THAT THE RATE IS LOWER, BUT THE ACTUAL VALUATION AND ALL THOSE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING WITHIN THE CITY, IT ACTUALLY IS HIGHER. >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY, I HAD A LOT OF RESIDENTS WHO HAD ASKED ME TO CLARIFY THAT. >> OH, SURE. EVERYONE. >> GOOD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE ON OUR BUDGET? IF NOT, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IT IS 07:15 PM. SORRY ABOUT THAT. NEXT, WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER 7, [7. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2022-712 APPOINTING AN AUDITOR AND ENTERING INTO A SERVICE CONTRACT WITH SAID AUDITOR FOR 2021-2022 AUDIT.] CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2022-712, APPOINTING AN AUDITOR AND ENTERING INTO A SERVICE CONTRACT WITH SAID AUDITOR FOR THE 2021-2022 AUDIT. THIS IS FOR OUR OUTSIDE OVERSIGHT AUDITOR. GRANT, DO YOU WANT TO INTRODUCE THIS? >> YES. ON JUNE 23RD, THE CITY ADVERTISED THE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR AUDIT SERVICES IN THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS AND AT THE SAME TIME I ALSO SEND OUT AN RFQ TO NON-ACCOUNTING FIRMS. WHEN IT WAS ALL SAID AND DONE, WE RECEIVED FOUR BIDS AND WE RECEIVED THOSE BIDS FROM BROOKSWATSON & CO., WHICH IS OUR CURRENT AUDITOR, FOX, BYRD & COMPANY, LAFOLLETT AND COMPANY, AND PATTILLO, BROWN & HILL. IN THE RFQ, THERE WAS EVALUATION CRITERIA. JUST TO SUMMARIZE THOSE REAL QUICK, IT WAS QUALIFICATIONS, AUDIT EXPERIENCE RESOURCES, THEIR ABILITY TO COMPLETE IN TIMELY MANNER, AUDIT QUALITY, AUDIT PLAN, THE COST. ON THE FOUR FIRMS THAT WE DID RECEIVE BIDS, TWO OF THE FIRMS GAVE US A FIVE-YEAR BID AND THE PRICE OF THE SINGLE AUDIT, TWO OTHER FIRMS GAVE US A ONE-YEAR BID AND THE PROCESS OF A SINGLE AUDIT. YOU CAN SEE THAT THEIR RANGES GO ANYWHERE FROM $20,085 FOR YEAR ONE UP TO $34,000. EVERYONE HAS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME QUALIFICATIONS, THEY ALL HAVE OFFICES ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THE AUDIT EITHER REMOTELY OR IN PERSON. I DIDN'T PUT THE AUDIT EXPERIENCE ON THIS BECAUSE ONE OF THE FIRMS HAD REQUESTED THAT WE DON'T DISCLOSE THAT INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT. THAT'S WHY YOU SEE BID PROPOSAL OR SEE BID DOCUMENT FOR THE NUMBER TWO AUDIT EXPERIENCE THERE. WITH THAT, I TURN THAT OVER TO COUNCIL TO REVIEW AND GIVE ME DIRECTION. >> OKAY. WHO WAS THE LOW BIDDER? >> BROOKSWATSON WAS THE LOWEST BIDDER, FOLLOWED BY LAFOLLETT AND COMPANY. >> I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T. >> FOLLOWED BY LAFOLLETT AND COMPANY, WAS THE NUMBER TWO. >> OKAY. >> GREAT, GRANT. ONE THING I WANTED TO SAY, I KNOW PATTILLO WILL PROBABLY HAVE A LOT OF STUFF WITH HER BACKGROUND, HAVE A LOT OF DETAILS TO GO THROUGH, BUT JUST FROM A 10,000 FOOT LEVEL, I APPRECIATE THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE SOME OPTIONS HERE. I THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND IN MY OPINION, IT'S ALSO GOOD TO HAVE DIFFERENT SETS OF EYES COME IN. IN MY BUSINESS AND WHAT I DO DAY-TO-DAY, WE DO LOTS OF AUDITS FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR FINANCIAL AUDITS, SO IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO HAVE A DIFFERENT SET OF EYES COMING IN AND LOOKING AT IT. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. I THINK THAT IT WAS A PRETTY NICE CROSS-SECTION OF DIFFERENT FOLKS THAT COME IN TO GIVE US OPTIONS. I JUST THINK THAT'S A VERY, VERY GOOD PATH FORWARD. I'M SO GLAD TO SEE THAT. THANKS FOR ALL THE WORK BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO DO THAT. >> DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION? >> WELL, I FEEL IT'S PROBABLY YOU-ALL'S DECISION RECOMMENDATION. I FEEL THAT ALL FOUR ARE DEFINITELY QUALIFIED. I THINK THAT OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LARGE DISCREPANCY IN THE PRICING BETWEEN THE NUMBER ONE AND THE NUMBER FOUR, THE FIRST THREE FIRMS ARE FAIRLY CLOSE IN PRICE. [00:20:03] LIKE I SAID, AS FAR AS THE PEER REVIEW, THEY ALL PASSED, WHICH IS THE HIGHEST RATING. I FEEL PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH ANY OF THOSE THREE FIRMS. THE SECOND FIRM NOT KNOWING THE PRICING FOR YEARS TWO THROUGH FIVE, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A CONCERN WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THAT'S GOING TO BE, BUT IT'S SURPRISINGLY HOW CLOSE THE BIDS WERE. I`M SURPRISED THAT THEY WERE THAT CLOSE TO EACH OTHER. >> [INAUDIBLE] DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS YOU WANTED TO MAKE ON THIS OR A RECOMMENDATION? >> I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THIS. >> DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, YOU WANTED TO MAKE? >> I COULD HAVE NOT USED BROOKSWATSON HERE AND WE'VE USED LAFOLLETT AT NO POINT. WE HAVE WORKING RELATIONSHIPS WITH ALL OF THEM, THOSE TWO FIRMS. >> OKAY. COUNSEL, IS THERE ANY COMMENTS TO YOUR QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE? >> I JUST WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS. FIRST, THANKS GRANT FOR PUSHING THROUGH THIS, PUTTING THE RQ TOGETHER AND CONTACTING THE COMPANIES. I THINK GETTING BIDS IS A VERY GOOD THING. ALL OF THESE COMPANIES DO APPEAR TO BE QUALIFIED, AND I WAS IMPRESSED TO SEE ALL OF THE INFORMATION. HOWEVER, NUMBER 2 CONCERNS ME IN THE LOW NUMBER OF HOURS THAT THEY PRESENTED AND IN READING THEIR PROPOSAL, IT APPEARED THAT THEY WERE ANTICIPATING. THEY STATED A FEW MORE THINGS THAT IT SOUNDED LIKE THEY WERE EXPECTING FROM OUR STAFF TO DO THAT. MAYBE WE HAVEN'T DONE IN THE PAST THAT WE OUGHT TO BE VEER OFF OF ON THAT END. LAFOLLETT HAD SOME GREAT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SOME OF THEIR COMPANIES THAT WERE IN THERE THAT I THOUGHT WAS VERY HELPFUL TO SEE AND GAVE SOME CONFIDENCE IN WHAT'S THEIR LAFOLLETT'S LOCAL CLOSE COMPANY. THEY JUST NORTH OF MCKINNEY AND I THINK THAT'S GOOD WITH THE PRICING AND THINGS. WELL, I'M GOING TO GO IN PIGGYBACK OFF OF JIM'S COMMENT ON ROTATION. WE'VE HAD BROOKSWATSON FOR 10 YEARS AND I THINK YOU ALL HAVE BEEN SATISFIED WITH THEM. I DO THINK ROTATION AFTER A WHILE IS REALLY CRITICAL TO AN ORGANIZATION, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE AN OPTION. YEAH, LAST YEAR WE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE AN OPTION. THIS YEAR WE DO HAVE OPTIONS TO TAKE A LOOK AT AND I THINK QUALIFIED OPTIONS. I REALLY WOULD ASK THAT WE CONSIDER ROTATING THE AUDITORS THIS YEAR. WE MAY GET THIS ONE AND DECIDE WE REALLY DON'T LIKE THEM AND IN THREE YEARS WE CAN CHANGE THAT BUT IT GIVES US A CHANCE TO SEE SOMETHING NEW, GET SOME DIFFERENT FEEDBACK FROM ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE AND OTHER AUDIT FIRMS PERSPECTIVE. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. >> MY COMMENT WOULD BE NUMBER 4, WAY TOO EXPENSIVE. I MEAN, THAT ONE IS OUTSIDE. NUMBER 2, MY CONCERNS WITH NUMBER 2, BESIDES ONLY BEING A ONE-YEAR PRICE POINT, AN AUDITOR'S JOB IS TO FIND ERRORS, MISTAKES, BUT ALSO TO DETERMINE THAT WE'RE FOLLOWING THE RULES. IN THE COURSE OF THE PROPOSAL THAT THEY SUBMITTED TO US, THEY REFERRED TO US AS A HOME RULE. THEY TALKED ABOUT OUR CITY MANAGER AND FURTHER THEY HAD THREE TYPOS IN THE FIRST FOUR PARAGRAPHS. IF YOU'RE GOING TO AUDIT SOMETHING, YOU PROBABLY SHOULD START WITH YOUR PROPOSALS. [LAUGHTER] I'M A LITTLE BIT OF A STICKLER ON THAT. LOOKING AT THESE, I DO AGREE THAT IT'S PROBABLY TIME TO LOOK AT SOMEBODY ELSE. I LIKED THE FACT THAT THE ONE IS HERE AND TOM BEAN, WHICH ISN'T VERY FAR, BUT I KNOW THAT BROOK WATSON, I THINK NOW HAS AN OFFICE IN FORT WORTH. BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS WITH WE'VE HAD THE SAME ONE FOR A DECADE. I ALSO LIKE THE IDEA THAT THEY ARE ACCOUNTING FOR ALMOST 260 HOURS, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE HIGHER NUMBERS THERE, BUT THEY'RE NOT BILLING US IN AN EQUIVALENT RATE OF THE OTHERS SO THEIR ACTUAL COST PER HOUR IS MUCH LESS. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> I JUST WANT AGREE WITH BOTH WHAT COUNCIL MS. LAURA AND LYNCH WAS SAYING. >> I CAN'T HEAR YOU. >> I WAS AGREEING WITH WHAT COUNCILMAN LAURA AND LYNCH HAD TALKED ABOUT AND I THINK THE ROTATION IS A GOOD THING. I THINK THE PROXIMITY IS A GOOD THING. I THINK THE FACT THAT THE RATE IS LOWER WITH HIGHER HOURS IS A GOOD THING AND AS I SAID, [00:25:01] AGAIN, IN MY EXPERIENCE, WHENEVER SOMEBODY NEW COMES IN, YOU FIND NEW THINGS THAT MAKE YOU BETTER SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION AS WELL, I'M LEANING TOWARDS THE FLA. >> I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION GRANT FOR LUKE, HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING NEGATIVE ABOUT EITHER ONE OR THREE THAT WOULD CONCERN YOU IF WE DECIDED TO GO WITH EITHER. I DON'T WANT US TO PICK ONE, NOT KNOWING FOR SURE IF THERE'S ANYTHING NEGATIVE THERE AND THEN WE END UP HAVING TO PAY HIGHER COSTS FOR SOMETHING LATER. >> I DON'T THINK THAT I'VE HEARD ANYTHING THAT WOULD PUSH ONE FIRM OUT MORE THAN THE OTHERS. YOU PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE DIFFICULTIES IN EVERY AUDIT SO NO, I DON'T I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE. >> GRANT, DID YOU FOLLOW UP WITH EDDY WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE NOTED IN THE AUDIT FIRM FOR THE REFERENCES? >> I DID NOT FOLLOW UP A LOT OF THE SEASON. I KNEW FOR SURE THAT THEY HAD BEEN WORKING THERE. I DO HAVE PERSONAL CONTACTS WITH ONE OF THE CITIES THAT USES ONE OF THESE FIRMS AND SO I HAD THEIR COMMENTS SO THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAD TO WORK OFF OF. >> [INAUDIBLE] AS LONG AS YOU GUYS DON'T HAVE ANY SERIOUS CONCERNS AS FAR AS THEIR THOROUGHNESS OR CREDIBILITY OR WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER CITIES. >> HOW ABOUT CONCERNS? DO YOU HAVE CONCERNS? THERE WAS OBVIOUSLY A HESITATION HERE [LAUGHTER]. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> IF YOU HAVE A LEGAL QUESTION, WE CAN GO INTO EXECUTIVE HERE. >> TRAY, I HAVE QUESTION, IF WE WERE TO GO WITH ANY OF THESE CONTRACTS, EITHER ONE OR THREE. >> WAIT A MINUTE, WE'VE GOT SOMETHING ON THE FLOOR. >> CAN TREY I TAKE LIKE A TWO-MINUTE BREAK AND GO OUT AND TALK REAL QUICK? YEAH. I DIDN'T THINK. YEAH. JUST ME AND TREY. >> TAKE A RECESS. >> TAKE A RECESS FOR TWO MINUTES. >> WE WILL TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS AT THIS TIME. IT IS 7:28. WE ARE RECONVENING THE PARKER CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 7:32. AT THIS TIME WE WILL CONTINUE, I BELIEVE DIANA, YOU HAD A QUESTION FOR MR. OLSON? >> NO, THAT WAS JUST THE SAME QUESTION, WHICH IS THAT. >> WELL, WE CAN'T GO INTO CLOSED SESSION. WHAT I WILL SAY IS FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, I THINK GRANT AND I, BOTH, WITH BROOKSWATSON AND LAFOLLETT. PERSONALLY, I FELT BROOKSWATSON WAS A MORE THOROUGH AUDIT THAN WHAT I'VE HAD IN THE PAST WITH LAFOLLETT. THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL TAKE ON IT FROM WHEN WE'VE DONE IT IN THE PAST. NO PROBLEM WITH LAFOLLETT, NO PROBLEM WITH BROOKSWATSON. I JUST FELT LIKE WE HAD A BETTER AUDIT AND WE FELT MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE NUMBERS WITH BROOKSWATSON. THAT'S IT. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. GRANT, WAS THERE A REASON WHY TWO OF THE VENDORS PROVIDED FIVE YEARS WORTH OF PRICING AND TWO OF THEM PROVIDED ONLY ONE YEAR? >> I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT. THE SAME RFQ WAS SENT TO EACH OF THE FIRMS. THESE WERE ACTUALLY FOUR OF THE NON FIRMS THAT I REACHED OUT TO. I SENT THE SAME RFQ TO ALL OF THEM AND WE ONLY RECEIVED TWO WITH A FIVE-YEAR BIDS. >> THEY'RE NOT ASSUMING THAT WE ENGAGE IN A FIVE-YEAR CONTRACT WITH THEM. >> NO. THE CONTRACT IS FOR A THREE-YEAR WITH TWO YEARS OF RENEWABLE. >> QUESTION. IF WE PROVE OR A POINT, AN AUDITOR, [00:30:03] YOU-ALL WOULD STILL BE GOING OUT TO THAT AUDITOR FOR CONTRACT TO MAKE SURE ALL THE TERMS AND EVERYTHING ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT WE UNDERSTAND, CORRECT? >> YES. >> TO THE SCOPE AND EVERYTHING ELSE. >> RIGHT. >> WOULD WE DO THAT ANNUALLY OR WE'RE APPOINTING A CONTRACT FOR THREE YEARS? >> IT'D BE A CONTRACT FOR THREE YEARS, WITH A TWO-YEAR RENEWABLE. THE TOTAL POSSIBILITY OF FIVE. >> IS EVERYONE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? BECAUSE THAT'S A BIT DIFFERENT FOR US. >> I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. I AM ASSUMING THERE WOULD BE SOME FORM OF ESCALATION CLAUSE OR SOMETHING INSERTED IN THE CONTRACT THAT IF THEY DO NOT DO THE JOB THAT WE REQUEST, WE CAN TERMINATE THEM AFTER THE YEAR AND DO THIS AGAIN. >> WELL, IF THEY DON'T DO THEIR SIDE OF THE CONTRACT, THEN IT WOULD BE A BREACH OF CONTRACT ISSUE AND MOST LIKELY THERE WOULD BE A STANDARD TERMINATION CLAUSE. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION IF THERE IS ONE. >> MADAM MAYOR, UNDERSTANDING SOME CONSIDERATIONS AND POSSIBLY SOME HESITANCY I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPOINT LAFOLLETT AND COMPANY AS OUR AUDITOR AND ENTER INTO A SERVICE CONTRACT WITH THEM FOR THE 2022 AUDIT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2022-712. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? >> MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH LAFOLLETT AND COMPANY TO BE AN AUDITOR FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY AGAIN THAT IF THE AUDIT ISN'T PERFORMED TO OUR STANDARDS OR WHAT WE FEEL IS ACCEPTABLE, WE ARE NOT COMMITTED FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS, CORRECT? >> I THINK TRACE IT HAD TO BE LIKE A BREACH OF THE AGREEMENT OF SOME SORT. >> WELL, USING NEBULOUS TERMS LIKE UP TO OUR STANDARDS, THE CONTRACT IS GOING TO BE FOR AUDIT SERVICES AND IF THEY PERFORM THOSE SERVICES, WHETHER WE LIKE THE OUTCOME OR NOT IS. [OVERLAPPING] >> NO, I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT THE OUTCOME I MEANT THE SERVICES THEMSELVES. >> AS LONG AS THEY PERFORM THE SERVICES IT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A BREACH. >> LET'S SAY FOR SAKE, THEY COME IN AND THEY MISADD NUMBERS. THEY PULL INCORRECT FIGURES AND PUT THAT INTO THE AUDIT WHERE WE HAVE TO SEND IT BACK FOR CORRECTIONS. WOULD THOSE CONSTITUTE THEIR BREACH IF IT IS AN INVALID AUDIT? >> WITHOUT HAVING THE EXACT TERM IN FRONT OF ME, I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN ACTUAL LEGAL RULING ON THAT PER SE, BUT IF THE AUDIT ITSELF TURNS OUT TO BE FAULTY I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE A BREACH. >> BUT THOSE NUMBERS ARE COMING FROM. [OVERLAPPING] >> CORRECT. BUT I'M SAYING IF WE GIVE THEM A CERTAIN NUMBER, IF WE GIVE THEM 100,000 AND WHEN THEY GO TO PUT IT IN THE AUDIT, SOMEBODY KEYS IN 105 BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT VERY THOROUGH AND SO IT THROWS OFF EVERYTHING, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. >> I WILL SAY THAT WOULD ALSO FALL BACK ON ME ALSO BECAUSE I'LL BE REVIEWING THE AUDIT AND I SHOULD POINT IT OUT AT THAT TIME AS WELL. AS FAR AS THAT GOES, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A REAL CONCERN WITH THAT. >> DO WE WRITE THE CONTRACT OR DO THEY WRITE THE CONTRACT? >> NO, WE DO. I THINK IT WAS PART OF THE BID PACKAGE, WASN'T IT? >> WAS. WE'LL LOOK AT THAT. >> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE OUTCOME OF THE ODD. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE. IF WE'RE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE PERFORMANCE, THERE WILL BE AN OUT CLAUSE FOR US. >> IN THE ABSTRACT. I DON'T HAVE THE LANGUAGE IN FRONT OF ME I'D HAVE TO REVIEW IT. >> I THINK THE PURPOSE OF JUST GO WITH THREE YEAR WITH A RENEWABLE HAVE THE TWO YEARS FOR RENEWING IS OUR OUT CLAUSE. BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE FIRST YEAR [00:35:01] IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF WORK THEN GATHERING HISTORICAL INFORMATION, PUTTING EVERYTHING TOGETHER, YOU WANT TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO AT LEAST HAVE A COUPLE OF YEARS ON THE JOB. I THINK THREE YEARS IS FAIR WITH THE TWO-YEAR RENEWABLE. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO AWARD THE AUDIT CONTRACT TO LAFOLLETT. I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES 5-0. THANK YOU, GRANT, YOU HAVE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB ON ALL THE FINANCIAL FUNDS. YOU'VE WORKED YOUR HEART OUT. WE DO APPRECIATE IT AND RECOGNIZE HOW DIFFICULT WE CAN BE TO WORK WITH SOME DUMB WHEN WE CHANGE SOMETHING AND NEED THE NEW NUMBERS THE NEXT DAY, WE DO APPRECIATE YOU A LOT. NEXT, ARE THERE ANY COMMITTEES THAT HAVE AN UPDATE? [8. UPDATE(S)] >> I WILL ADD THAT I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT WE HAVE MAPS FORTHCOMING AFTER MUCH ANTICIPATION AND REQUEST, SO THAT WILL BE GREAT FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IF THOSE MAPS REALLY DO COME FORTH. >> [LAUGHTER] ONE HOPES. >> I'LL SAY QUICKLY ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WE'RE PULLING INFORMATION TOGETHER AND WE'RE CLOSE. HOPEFULLY BY THE NEXT MEETING WE'LL HAVE A DATE OR BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY. WE CAN WORK TOGETHER TO GET THIS ON COUNCIL'S AGENDA. >> MR. OLSON, DO YOU HAVE AN UPDATE ON 2551? >> GARY WAS ON THE CALL TODAY. I THINK PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING IS A STANDSTILL RIGHT NOW IS WHAT WE GOT. >> THAT IS ON HOLD UNTIL NOVEMBER. [OVERLAPPING] >> THEN I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CONTRACTORS. THE ELECTRIC PROVIDERS HAVEN'T MOVED IN OR STARTED STAGING ANYTHING. AT THIS POINT, I'D PROBABLY TAKE AT LEAST THREE MONTHS JUST FOR THEM TO GET THAT STUFF MOVED AND OVER. THAT'S IF THEY WORKED ON IT EVERY DAY AND WE ARE COMING INTO RAINY SEASON, SO COMING UP SOON, SO FINGERS CROSSED. WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT PROJECT. I'LL TELL YOU THAT I HAVE NO OTHER INFORMATION ON IT. >> THEN FOR THE RECORD, I WOULD LIKE TO ACCEPT SOME DONATIONS THAT WERE MADE FOR THE POLICE FIRE, AND CITY STAFF. THE SANTI FAMILY DONATED HOMEMADE COOKIES VALUED AT $10 TO THE PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT. JULIE MCGARY, WHO IS A TEACHER AT BOLIN ELEMENTARY DONATED FLAVORED BREADS AND A VEGETABLE TRAY VALUED AT $30. WE APPRECIATE AND ARE VERY GRATEFUL FOR ALL OF OUR DONATIONS. AT THIS TIME ARE THERE ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, COUNCIL? NOT HEARING ANY, [10. MUNICIPAL COMPLEX AND BOND] THEN WE WILL GO TO A WORKSHOP ON MUNICIPAL COMPLEX AND BOND. I BELIEVE MR. OLSON YOU HAVE SOME INFORMATION. >> YES, MADAM MAYOR, AT THE LAST MEETING, WE WERE ASKED TO SEE IF WE COULD REACH OUT TO THE COMPANY THAT PREVIOUSLY HAD DONE THE ORIGINAL PLANS FOR CITY HALL. WE WERE FINALLY ABLE TO GET A HOLD OF THEM, THANKS TO COUNCIL ARCHITECT. WE DID GET WELL, THE THREE THAT WE WERE ASKING FOR, THE COMPLETE PROJECT AS ONE WHICH WOULD BE THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. POLICE, AND ADMINISTRATION ALL IN ONE BUILDING. THAT PROJECT COST CAME IN AT 8,250. THEN TO BREAK OUT THE OTHER SECTION, THE CITY COUNCIL ADMIN PROJECT, THAT WAS 5,250 AND THEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT PROJECT ESTIMATE WAS 3,750, AND THAT WAS JUST TO ADD THE 2,500 SQUARE FEET HERE AND REMODEL THIS BUILDING SO THOSE ARE THE THREE NUMBERS WE GOT FROM THEM. I THINK OTHER ONE WE HAD, I THINK THIS IS A BETTER BID PROPOSAL, AND I DO BELIEVE WE DO HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. THEY DID DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB FOR US LAST TIME IN COMING PRETTY CLOSE [00:40:03] TO WHAT OUR NUMBERS WERE FROM THAT HIGH LEVEL. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST GOING TO BE HIGH-LEVEL NUMBERS. THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE EVERY BOARD EVERY SCREW NAIL IS JUST 30,000 FOOT VIEW BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENGINEERED PLANS. >> HOWEVER, IN RELATIVE TERMS, IT SHOULD TELL US SOMETHING. >> IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET US FAIRLY AND THEN WE GET ENGINEERED PLANS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, THAT NUMBER WILL EITHER SHRINK OR MAYBE GO UP DEPENDING ON INFLATION AND EVERYTHING ELSE, BUT THAT DOES GIVE US AN IDEA. >> IT SEEMS IRONIC THAT DOING IT SEPARATE OR DOING IT TOGETHER IS ABOUT THE SAME COST AS FAR AS ESTIMATE IS CONCERNED. >> IT IS ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF WORK. ONE THING WE COULD DO IS IF I KNOW I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THIS WHEN I WAS SPEAKING TO MICHAEL, WAS WE COULD DO THE CITY COUNCIL AND ADMIN PROJECT THAT WOULD GIVE US BASICALLY SQUARE FOOTAGE NUMBERS JUST FOR THAT BUILDING, SO WE COULD ADD THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE TO THAT, AND THEN STILL GET THE BID FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT REMODEL HERE. WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS AND SEE. I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THAT EARLIER. >> SO YOU'RE SAYING WE WOULD TAKE THE COUNCIL AND ADMIN AND TAKE THE PRICE PER FOOT AND JUST MULTIPLY THAT BY THE SIZE OF THE PDF. WE DECIDED TO ADD IT. >> CORRECT. I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY GET US PRETTY ACCURATE. >> SAY THAT AGAIN, MICHAEL. >> HE WAS SAYING BECAUSE ON THE SECOND PROPOSAL AT CITY COUNCIL AND THE ADMIN, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND WE WOULD TAKE THAT COST, DIVIDE IT BY THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE TO GET A PRICE PER FOOT. MULTIPLY THAT BY THE SIZE OF THE, IF WE WERE TO PUT THE PD ONTO THE NEW BUILDING AND IT WOULD GIVE YOU A ROUGH IDEA OF WHAT THAT WOULD COST. >> THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD BRING UP I'M SORRY, I INTERRUPTED. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY IF ALL THREE WERE AT ONE LOCATION, THE COST PER SQUARE FOOT SHOULD DROP SLIGHTLY BUT. >> YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE DIRT WORK. YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE YOUR FOUNDATION AND YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE SOME OF THE BASICS. >> BUT DON'T BE ALL IN ONE LOCATION VERSUS TWO LOCATIONS. >> CORRECT. >> BUT IT GETS US IN THE BALLPARK ANYWAY. >> CORRECT. >> I AGREE WITH WHAT WAS SAID. THE OTHER THING I WAS SAYING IS THAT THERE'S ANOTHER FACTOR IS IF YOU'RE JUST TAKING THIS SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR A NON-POLICE DEPARTMENT, THERE ARE SOME HARDENED AREAS AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT ARE INVOLVED INTO POLICE AREAS THAT WOULD ACTUALLY RAISE THE COST A LITTLE BIT, SO IT MAY NOT BE EXACTLY ON BECAUSE I REMEMBER WHEN WE INITIALLY DID THE COSTING WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS BUILDING HERE AND REMODELING IT, THERE WAS CONCERNS THAT THE ADDITIONAL COST TO MAKE IT A POLICE WHERE THE BUILDING WAS A CONCERN. JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND. >> BUT THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE OFFSET BY THE COST DECREASE THAT YOU WOULD SEE PER FOOT IF IT WAS ALL ONE BUILDING, SO I THINK WE WOULD PROBABLY WASH AT THE END BECAUSE WE'D BE APPLYING A HIGHER COST PER SQUARE FOOT BECAUSE WE WERE ORIGINALLY BIDDING OUT A SMALLER PROJECT, SO I THINK YOU WOULD BE PRETTY CLOSE TO WATCH FOR THAT. >> OF COURSE, YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO BUILD THAT EITHER. >> WHAT I WAS SAYING IS WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COST PER FOOT, IF WE TAKE THE NEW BUILDING, THE NEW ADMIN TOGETHER, AND WE COME UP WITH THE COST PER FOOT AND MULTIPLY THAT FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WILL COST MORE, BUT BY ADDING THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE ENTIRE PRICE PER FOOT SHOULD DROP, SO IT'LL PROBABLY WASH ITSELF. SO THAT WOULD, I THINK GIVE US A FAIRLY DECENT IDEA IN THE BALLPARK REALM OF WHAT IT WOULD COST WITHOUT HAVING TO SPEND THE EXTRA $8,000. >> AS I SPOKE TO DANIEL, MR. BLANCHARD ON THE PHONE, WE CAN GIVE HIM SOME ASSUMPTIONS, SO THAT COULD WORK INTO THAT BECAUSE I DIDN'T TELL HIM LIKE ONE OF THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT YOU NEED TO TAKE THIS BUILDING HAS GOT TWO RIFFS IN THIS SECTION, SO THAT'S ONE ASSUMPTION YOU NEED TO MAKE AND SO HE WASN'T JUST GOING IN AND COMPLETELY BLIND, NOT KNOWING WHAT WAS ACTUALLY ON THE GROUND. WHAT DO WE HAVE? >> SURE. >> WHEN YOU WENT INTO THE LAST PRICING WITH HIM, WE DID NOT HAVE ENGINEERED PLANS, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> IT WOULD BE AN APPLES FOR APPLES KIND OF OLD BUILDING VERSUS THE NEW PROJECT. WE WILL BE GETTING THE SAME PRODUCT IF WE HAD BEFORE. >> IT'S THE SAME COMPANY. HIS FATHER PASSED AWAY, SO IT'S DANIEL'S TAKING THIS OVER NOW, BUT IT'S STILL THE SAME COMPANY. I DO FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THEM. I THINK THE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH MR. BLANCHARD WAS A LOT BETTER THAN THE FIRST CONVERSATION I HAD WITH THE OTHER COMPANY. >> MY QUESTION, THOUGH, IS WE SHOULD GET A SIMILAR PRODUCT TO WHAT WE SAW IN THE PAST. >> CORRECT. >> THE TIMEFRAME FOR THEM TO COME UP WITH A PROJECTED COSTS IS IT'S NOT IN THE SWEATER THAT I SAY? >> WE DIDN'T GET TO THAT. IT WAS JUST TRYING TO GET THE NUMBERS AND GOING. [00:45:01] I CAN FIND THAT OUT. I THINK WAS IT 45 DAYS IS WHAT TOOK LAST TIME? >> AT LEAST. >> AT LEAST 45 DAYS, BUT IT TOOK THE FIRST TIME, WE WILL USE THEM, SO YEAH. >> THIS TIME MIGHT BE A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED ON SOME JUST BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHETHER HE WOULD NEED TO COME OUT AND WALK ON THIS BUILDING BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN ADDED ON ON BOTH DANCE. >> YEAH. I GAVE HIM THE SCHEMATICS WHERE THE ADDITIONS WERE DONE, AND THEN I ALSO POINTED OUT CERTAIN THINGS, CERTAIN ASPECTS TO HIM. WHAT THE REMODEL FOR THIS ONE. >> OKAY. >> SO HE'S VERY FAMILIAR WITH WHAT WE HAVE ON THE GROUND HERE RIGHT NOW. >> OKAY. FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, IT SOUNDS LIKE COUNSEL WOULD LIKE TO GO AND GET THE FIGURES. IS THAT CORRECT? WE'RE NOT VOTE AND WE'RE JUST GOING TO ASK HIM FOR DIRECTION. [LAUGHTER] >> COUNCIL'S OKAY WITH ME GOING WITH THE SECOND, THE CITY COUNCIL ADMIN AND THEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT PROJECT ESTIMATE? >> YEAH. >> I WILL GET WITH MR. BLANCHARD AND WE'LL GET THAT SIGNED AND READY TO GO FOR THAT. >> IF YOU COULD LET US KNOW HIS TIME ESTIMATE. >> I WILL GET THAT. >> FOR THE NEXT MEETING,. >> YES MA'AM. >> [NOISE] SO WE JUST HAVE A CLUE. >> YES I WILL GIVE YOU ALL I'LL EVEN SEND YOU ALL AN EMAIL TO ON THAT. >> AT THIS TIME, [EXECUTIVE SESSION] WE WILL RECESS INTO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY CONTAIN DOWN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.07 FOR OUR PERSONNEL TO DELIBERATE, THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT, EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT, DUTIES, DISCIPLINE, OR DISMISSAL OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0711, CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY CONCERNING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0712, CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY ON A MANNER IN WHICH THE DUTY OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY, UNDER THE TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS, CLEARLY CONFLICTS WITH THIS CHAPTER OPEN MEETINGS ACT. WE ARE RECESSED AT 7: 51. [NOISE] [INAUDIBLE]. >> NO MATTER MAYOR. >> [INAUDIBLE]. [NOISE] * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.