>> [MUSIC] THAT'S WHAT SHE ALWAYS SAYS. [OVERLAPPING] [00:00:01] >> I ALWAYS WANTED THE CAR, I ALWAYS WANTED A TRUCK. [CALL TO ORDER] >> [INAUDIBLE] >> YES MADAM MAYOR, YOU HAVE A QUORUM. >> AT THIS TIME WE WILL RECESS TO CLOSE EXECUTIVE EXTENSION SESSION AND [EXECUTIVE SESSION START TO FINISH] ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY AND TELL YOU THAT GOVERNMENT HAS SECTION 551 NUMBER 74 PERSONNEL TO DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT, DELIBERATIONS, REASSIGNMENTS [INAUDIBLE]. OKAY WE ARE RECONVENING THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION. COUNSEL IS THERE ANYTHING FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS? >> NO MATTER MA'AM. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. WE ARE RECONVENING AT 06:40. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] NEXT, WE'LL DO THE PLEDGES. LUCY, IF YOU WOULD DO THE AMERICAN PLEDGE AND ED IF YOU WOULD DO THE TEXAS PLEDGE. [NOISE] >> I 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 INDIVISIBLE. >> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS? [PUBLIC COMMENTS] PATTY DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT CARDS? >> NO MA'AM. >> THEN WE WILL MOVE RIGHT ALONG TO ITEMS OF INTEREST. [ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST] JUST TO NOTE THAT PARKS AND RECS WE'LL MEET TOMORROW AT 05:00 O'CLOCK IN THIS ROOM. IT IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME TO THE PARKS AND RECS MEETING. NEXT WEDNESDAY THERE IS A SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 06:00 P.M. IT WILL BE IN THIS ROOM. THE FILING DEADLINE FOR CANDIDATES FOR CITY COUNCIL IS FEBRUARY [NOISE] 17 AT 05:00 P.M. IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED YOU SEE PATTY TO GET AN APPLICATION. THURSDAY, APRIL 6TH IS THE LAST DAY TO REGISTER TO VOTE. CANDIDATES NIGHT FOR OUR CANDIDATES THAT WILL BE RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL, IS PRESENTED BY THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB ON THURSDAY, APRIL 13TH AT 07:00 P.M. AT VICTORY CHURCH. THEN WE HAVE THE NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION DRUG TAKE BACK, WHICH WILL BE SATURDAY, APRIL 22ND, 10:00 - 2:00. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, CHIEF PRICE. BUT YOU OR SOMEONE WILL BE OUT IN THE DRIVEWAY WHERE PEOPLE CAN JUST DRIVE BY HANDLE. >> YES MA'AM, WE'LL BE RIGHT OUTSIDE. >> THANK YOU. THEN I'M NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE ELECTION AT THIS TIME. WE'LL TALK [LAUGHTER] ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT LATER. THEN LET'S MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA, [CONSENT AGENDA] WHICH HAS THREE ITEMS ON IT. THEY'RE ALL MEETING MINUTES. FIRST ONE IS JANUARY 10TH OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORKSHOP. SECOND ONE IS JANUARY 11TH ON A MUNICIPAL COMPLEX WORKSHOP. THE THIRD ONE IS FOR A COUNCIL MEETING THAT WAS HELD ON JANUARY 17TH, 2023. [00:05:07] IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO TAKE OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM? >> YES. I WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE ITEM NUMBER 1 OF THE MINUTES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORKSHOP. >> MADAM MAYOR I WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE ITEM 2 [LAUGHTER] OF THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX WORKSHOP. >> CAN WE PROCEED ON ITEM NUMBER THREE? [LAUGHTER] IF SO, THEN IF NO ONE WANTS THAT TO BE REMOVED OR HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON IT, I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING THE MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 17TH, 2023, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYBODY AGAINST? IT PASSES 3-0. I WILL NOTE THAT DR. ABRAHAM IS NOT HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE SHE IS ILL, AND MICHAEL SLAUGHTER IS NOT HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE HE'S NOT IN THE COUNTRY. MOVING BACK TO ITEM ONE, MS. MYER. [1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 10, 2023 [COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORKSHOP, 5:30 PM – 7:30 PM].] >> JUST A SMALL CHANGE ON ITEM NUMBER 1 THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORKSHOP. THE NOTES START OUT WITH THE VISION STATEMENT, AND THE CHANGE NEEDS TO BE THE COMMA THAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE WORKSHOP. THE COMMA GOES AFTER THE WORD GROWS AND NOT AFTER THE WORD VALUES. SO JUST MOVE THE COMMA FROM ONE PLACE TO THE OTHER. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER ONE. THEN I WILL ASK FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER 1, THE MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 10TH, 2023, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORKSHOP AS AMENDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MYER PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND IF YOU ARE IN FAVOR. ANYONE OPPOSE? MOTION PASSES 3-0. THANK YOU. THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX, MS. LYNCH? [2. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 11, 2023 [MUNICIPAL COMPLEX WORKSHOP, 5:30 PM – 7:30 PM].] >> YES, MADAM MAYOR, THE ITEM UNDER THE WORKSHOP INDICATES THE COUNCIL ASKED FINANCIAL HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR GRANT SAVAGE TO OBTAIN ESTIMATED BOND CALCULATIONS. I BELIEVE WHAT WAS REQUESTED WAS THE DEBT CAPACITY, AS WELL AS THE TAX IMPACT OF ANY SCENARIOS. >> SAY THAT AGAIN THE VERY FIRST PART. >> WHAT WAS REQUESTED WAS THE DEBT CAPACITY. [NOISE] >> BEAR WITH ME FOR JUST A MINUTE. [NOISE] HOW COME IT ALWAYS WORKS FOR YOU AND IT NEVER WORKS FOR ME [LAUGHTER]. THIS IS WHY I DON'T DO ANY ELECTRONIC AGENDA [LAUGHTER]. YEAH. >> THAT'S GOOD. >> LET ME FIND ANOTHER. [NOISE] MAYBE I DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR TERM, DEBT CAPACITY. [00:10:05] I'M NOT GETTING IT HERE. [LAUGHTER] >> GETTING IT WHERE? >> ON THIS, IT SAYS INFORMATION TO SHOW WHAT THE CITY COULD AFFORD BASED ON TODAY'S PRICES. THAT'S NOT DEBT CAPACITY? >> WHAT YOU CAN AFFORD BASED ON CURRENT PRICING, YEAH, THERE'S MANY DIFFERENT WAYS YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT, BUT IN OUR DISCUSSIONS, WE WERE SPECIFICALLY ASKING FOR A DEBT CAPACITY. HOW MUCH DEBT CAN THE CITY AFFORD TO PUT ON? TYPICALLY, WHEN I LOOK AT A DEBT CAPACITY, IT'S TO HELP ME IDENTIFY AT WHAT POINT IS MY RATING GOING TO CHANGE? I DON'T THINK THE CITY HAS ANY SPECIFIC PARAMETERS OR GUIDELINES OR POLICIES WITH RESPECT TO DEBT, BUT HOW MUCH IMPACT IS THAT GOING TO HAVE ON THE TAX PAID BY RESIDENTS, AT WHAT POINT? THAT ALL COMES INTO A DEBT CAPACITY? BOND CALCULATIONS ARE SIMPLY THAT. IT TELLS ME HOW MUCH THIS BOND IS GOING TO COST, BUT IT DOESN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ALL THE CAPACITY THE CITY HAS. IT'S LOOKING AT ONE INDIVIDUAL SITUATION AND NOT THE CITY AS A WHOLE. >> [BACKGROUND] GRANT, FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE YOU MIGHT ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT. >> [OVERLAPPING] WAIT A MINUTE. THANK YOU. DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT, MR. REED >> I'M SORRY. I WAS JUST SAYING I AGREE WITH WHAT TERRY WAS SAYING. I WAS JUST SAYING THAT IF GRANT COULD MAYBE COMMENT A LITTLE BIT FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE. I KNOW YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> SURE. THE DIRECTION I FELT THAT I WAS DIRECTED TO GO TOWARDS WAS HOW MUCH CAN THE CITY AFFORD WITH THE EXISTING TAX RATE THAT WE HAVE WITH NO GROWTH BEING INCLUDED BECAUSE MR. SLAUGHTER WAS PRETTY SPECIFIC WITH NOT WANTING TO INCLUDE GROWTH, SO WHAT COULD THE CITY AFFORD WITH THE EXISTING TAX RATE THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW WAS THE DIRECTION THAT I WENT, BUT I AGREE. IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT DEBT CAPACITY AS A WHOLE, THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT FOR THAT, BUT WITH THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE WANTED TO KNOW HOW MUCH COULD WE AFFORD WITHOUT AFFECTING THE TAX RATE AND NOT INCLUDING ANY GROWTH PROJECTIONS. >> WE'RE WE'RE PUTTING THE MINUTES DOWN OF WHAT WAS REQUESTED AT THE MEETING. I THINK IN THE MEETING, I KNOW MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES DEBT CAPACITY MULTIPLE TIMES MYSELF, MICHAEL, JIM, GRANT, AND WE ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION. WE ASKED ABOUT THE TAX RATE. THE REQUEST WAS DEBT CAPACITY. THAT IS WHAT THE MINUTES SHOULD, IN MY OPINION, REFLECT. >> AT THIS TIME, I THINK WHAT WE MAY NEED TO DO IS TO PULL THIS ITEM OFF THE AGENDA AND GET OVERVIEW AND THEN FIND OUT EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS SO WE DO GET THE MINUTES CORRECT. >> PULL THE MINUTE OFF? I'M FINE WITH THAT. >> ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO DOING THAT? BECAUSE I'M WITH YOU, TERRY. I WANT THEM TO REFLECT WHAT HAPPENED. YOU GOT ME CONFUSED. I THOUGHT THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED, BUT APPARENTLY, WE DIDN'T COMMUNICATE IN THE SAME FASHION, SO LET'S TAKE CARE OF IT. NOW LET'S MOVE TO THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEMS. [4. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 835, CALLING AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON SATURDAY, MAY 6, 2023 TO ELECT THREE (3) CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AT-LARGE; PROVIDING FOR EARLY VOTING; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A GENERAL AND SPECIAL ELECTION SERVICES CONTRACT WITH COLLIN COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR THE ORDER AND NOTICE OF THE ELECTION; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE IS PASSED WAS NOTICED AND IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW.] NUMBER 4, CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 835, CALLING FOR AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON SATURDAY, MAY 6, 2023, TO ELECT THREE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AT LARGE, PROVIDING FOR EARLY VOTING, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A JOINT GENERAL AND [00:15:05] SPECIAL ELECTION SERVICES CONTRACT FOR ELECTION SERVICES WITH COLLIN COUNTY, PROVIDING FOR THE ORDER AND NOTICE OF THE ELECTION FUNDING IN DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE IS PASSED WAS NOTICED AND IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW. COUNCIL, ANY DISCUSSION? >> MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 835, CALLING FOR AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON SATURDAY, MAY 6TH TO ELECT THREE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AT LARGE AND PROVIDING FOR EARLY VOTING, ET CETERA. [LAUGHTER] >> [LAUGHTER] IS THERE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND THAT, MADAM MAYOR. >> CAN I JUST GET A CLARIFICATION REAL QUICK. PATTY, ARE THOSE THE RIGHT TIMES ON THOSE? THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH THE TIMES. >> ON NUMBER 4? >> YES. >> THEY CHANGED SATURDAY APRIL, THE 29TH FROM 7:00 AM TO 7:00 PM. THEY CHANGED IT TO 8:00-5:00. THEY MADE THAT CORRECTION. >> [OVERLAPPING] ON THE 24TH? >> NO, ON APRIL, THE29TH, THAT SATURDAY. IT WAS 7:00-7:00 ORIGINALLY. >> IT'S THE 24TH. >> 24TH. >> IT'S THE EARLY VOTING DAY? >> 29TH IS A THURSDAY. >> LET'S GO OVER THE CONTRACT. HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE CONTRACT? >> [INAUDIBLE] >> WILL THE DATES THEN BE CHANGED? THOSE AREN'T THE CORRECT DATES. >> EARLY VOTING DATES? THAT'S CORRECT? >> APRIL 24TH IS A MONDAY AND IT'S SATURDAY ON HERE. >> CORRECT. >> MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY IS CORRECT. I [INAUDIBLE] ORIGINALLY. >> BUT IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF IT'S NOT RIGHT. SORRY, INSIDE THE ORDINANCE ITSELF IT'S NOT CORRECT. I APOLOGIZE. ON PAGE 51 FOR THE PACKET. >> THEN THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT SHOW APRIL 18TH IS SATURDAY, APRIL 19TH IS MONDAY, APRIL 20TH IS TUESDAY. I THINK THE DATES ARE ALL WITHIN. >> THEY ARE. >> I THINK WE COPIED AND PASTED OVER. ROME HAD IT. >> I DIDN'T DO THIS. >> OKAY. >> YEAH. BECAUSE IT SHOWS MONDAY, APRIL 19TH. >> I THINK IT'S LAST YEAR'S DATES. >> OH, OKAY. I DIDN'T DO THAT. >> OKAY. >> CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT WE PUT WITH AMENDMENT OF THE CORRECT DATES BEING PUT IN WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, IS THAT DOABLE? >> MS. LYNCH WILL HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER THAT. >> JUST CHECK WITH LEGAL COUNSEL. IS THAT DOABLE? >> YES. >> MS. LYNCH, YOU WILLING TO AMEND YOUR MOTION? >> YES. TO DATES TO BE UPDATED TO CORRECT. >> TO CORRECT DATES. JIM, ARE YOU WILLING? >> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION WITH THE CORRECTED DATES. DATES AND TIME IS THE ONE THAT'S FIVE O'CLOCK AND THAT WAS REFERRED TO EARLIER. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN, I WILL GO FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ORDINANCE SEC 35 AS CORRECTED. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED. NO OPPOSE. MOTION CARRIES THREE ALL. IT'S GOING TO BE THAT NIGHT, ISN'T IT? [LAUGHTER] NUMBER 5, [5. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 836, CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MAY 6, 2023 FOR THE PURPOSE OF VOTING ON A TERM OF OFFICE FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THREE (3) YEARS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 11, SECTION 11 OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION; PROVIDING FOR EARLY VOTING; PROVIDING THAT THE ELECTION SHALL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO A JOINT GENERAL AND SPECIAL ELECTION SERVICES CONTRACT WITH COLLIN COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR THE ORDER AND NOTICE OF THE ELECTION; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE IS PASSED WAS NOTICED AND IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW.] CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER A36, CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MAY 6TH, FOR THE PURPOSE OF VOTING ON A TERM OF OFFICE FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THREE YEARS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 11, SECTION 11, OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, PROVIDING FOR EARLY VOTING, PROVIDING FOR THE ELECTION TO BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO [00:20:03] A JOINT GENERAL AND SPECIAL ELECTION SERVICES CONTRACT WITH COLLIN COUNTY, PROVIDING FOR THE ORDER AND NOTICE OF ELECTION, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE IS PASSED WAS NOTICED IN OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW. AS YOU ALL MAY REMEMBER, WE HAD A WORKSHOP ON THIS A WHILE BACK AND THE DIRECTION WE WERE GIVEN FROM THAT WAS TO BRING IT TO COUNCIL FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AND OR A VOTE ON WHETHER WE WANTED TO CONSIDER PUTTING ON THE BALLOT. WOULD BE EMOTION AT THAT POINT TO CHANGE OUR TERMS OF OFFICE FROM TWO YEARS TO THREE YEARS. >> I JUST HAD A QUESTION. I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THIS IS ON HERE AND I'M STILL IN FAVOR OF IT. THE ONLY THING IN THINKING ABOUT SCENARIOS OF WHAT COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN IS THAT [LAUGHTER] IF THE TERMS OF THE OFFICE WERE CHANGED TO THREE-YEAR TERMS. IF SOMEBODY WERE TO LEAVE, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AN ELECTION WITH A SPECIAL ELECTION WOULD HAVE TO BE CALLED. HOW MUCH DO SPECIAL ELECTIONS RUN? >> IT COULD BE THE SAME COST. >> YOU HAVE TO CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. >> I THINK IT SAYS 120 DAYS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> PATTY DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA OF WHAT A SPECIAL ELECTION WOULD COST? >> IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU HAVE AN ELECTION ON, BUT GENERALLY IT'S ABOUT THE SAME. IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT TIME PERIOD. >> WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE OTHER ENTITIES INVOLVED IN A SPECIAL ELECTION, SO IT MIGHT BE SOME ADDED COST. I WOULD THINK MAYBE IT COULD BE MORE. >> THAT WOULD BE MY UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE THEY JUST PRORATE OUT THE VOLUME BASED ON THE LOCATION WHERE THE LION'S SHARE IS PAID BY THE LARGE CITIES. WE WOULD BE PAYING THE FULL COST OF IT. BUT AGAIN, YOU'D HAVE TO FIND THAT OUT. AFTER THINKING ABOUT THIS QUITE A BIT, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS. ONE IS THE BENEFITS OF GOING TO A THREE-YEAR TERM WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD ELIMINATE ONE ELECTION OUT OF THREE, [LAUGHTER] WHICH ISN'T A WHOLE LOT TO ELIMINATE. IT'S 33%. BUT THERE'S A LOT OF CONS INVOLVED WITH THIS AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. ONE IS THE APPOINTMENT IF A PERSON CANNOT SERVE THEIR FULL TERM. MAYOR, IN THE CURRENT SITUATION, THE MAYOR HAS THE ABILITY TO APPOINT A REPLACEMENT GOING TO THREE OR FOUR-YEAR TERMS, WE LOSE THAT AND WE HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION, SO THAT COULD BE COSTLY. IN FACT, IN THIS CITY IT'S HAPPENED, [LAUGHTER] A FEW TIMES IN RECENT HISTORY. THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. THE OTHER THING IS THAT FOR A PERSON COMING ON COUNCIL, PEOPLE ARE MORE INCLINED TO COMMIT TO TWO YEARS RATHER THAN THREE-YEARS. IT'S A BIG COMMITMENT THAT PEOPLE MAKE WHEN THEY SIGN UP FOR THIS. IT TAKES A LOT OF TIME AND A LOT OF EFFORT MORE THAN I THINK THE GENERAL PUBLIC IS AWARE SOMETIMES. THE OTHER PROBLEM I HAVE WITH IT, AND THIS IS PROBABLY THE MAJOR PROBLEM, IS IF WE'RE NOT HAVING AN ELECTION FOR THE CITY OF PARKER, WOULD PARKER STILL BE A VOTING CENTER? BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME. AS A VOTING CENTER, WE WOULD STILL HAVE SCHOOL BOARD ELECTIONS FOR ALLEN IN PLANO COUNTY ELECTIONS ON OCCASION WHETHER THERE ARE BOND PROPOSALS. THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON, USUALLY IN THE MAY BALLOT OTHER THAN JUST CITY COUNCIL. FOR THOSE REASONS, WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO HOLD AN ELECTION IF WE CHOSE TO, WHICH I WOULD STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT WE DO. WHAT ARE WE GAINING? TO ME DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. [00:25:01] I THINK THE CONS OVERTAKE THE BENEFITS OF GOING TO A THREE-YEAR TERM, IN MY OPINION. >> JIM, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD? >> I SEE THE PROS AND CONS BOTH WAYS. THERE ARE BENEFITS OF HAVING MAYBE A LITTLE LONGER TERM IN OFFICE AND TRYING TO GET THINGS DONE SINCE THINGS SOMETIMES TAKE AWHILE TO GET MOVING. HAVING A CONSISTENT GROUP OF PEOPLE MIGHT FACILITATE THAT. THAT'S PROBABLY MY BIGGEST REASON FOR MAYBE SUPPORTING IT. I CERTAINLY DO UNDERSTAND WHAT COUNCILMAN MEYER WAS TALKING ABOUT AND NOT REALLY BENEFITING IF WE CONTINUE TO HAVE ELECTION ANYWAY. NOW, IF THE GENERAL ELECTION OCCURS, THAT IT DOESN'T INCLUDE US, ALTHOUGH WE'RE USING THE SPACE, WE DON'T HAVE THE PAYMENT FOR IT, CORRECT? WE DON'T PAY FOR IT. >> WE STILL PAY. >> WE STILL PAY EVEN IF WE JUST HOLD THE ELECTION HERE? >> WE DON'T, LIKE THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. WE DON'T GET A BILL FOR THAT. >> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. >> I'M SORRY. WOULD WE GET A BILL FOR MAY ELECTION? >> YEAH. >> IF WE DIDN'T HAVE CANDIDATES WE WON'T, RIGHT? >> IF THERE WAS AN ELECTION WHERE WE WERE ABOUT THE CENTER, BUT WE THE CITY OF PARKER HAD NOTHING ON THAT BALLOT. >> I DON'T THINK SO. I DON'T KNOW. WE HAVE ONE EVERY YEAR. [LAUGHTER] >> ACTUALLY, IF THAT TAKE THAT OFF THE TABLE. HOW WOULD IT BENEFIT THE CITY? I CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT THE TERM OF OFFICE, BUT YOU CAN ALWAYS RUN FOR REELECTION IF YOU WANT TO. [OVERLAPPING] >> IF TERM CAN SIGN FOR A LONG PEOPLE RUNNING FOR REELECTION OR ELECTION. IT DEPENDS HOW MUCH TIME AND EFFORT THEY WANT TO PUT INTO. [LAUGHTER] BUT I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO TAKE OVER WHICH YOU WERE SAYING, BUT TO ME THE BENEFITS AREN'T THERE ENOUGH TO OVERCOME THE OBSTACLES THAT I SEE. >> WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE IS THE PRO-SEROUS YOU DON'T HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY DARN YEAR. THERE IS AT LEAST A LITTLE BREAK AND IT GIVES SOME CONSISTENCY. JIM WAS SAYING FOR SOME PROJECTS WOULD TAKE MORE THAN A YEAR OR TWO BECAUSE YOUR FIRST-YEAR AS COUNCIL, YOU'RE LEARNING WHAT'S GOING ON, YOU'RE REALLY NOT HITTING THE STREET RUNNING USUALLY. THE DOWN-SEROUS, AND I'VE HEARD THIS FROM MORE THAN ONE PERSON. IF YOU GIVE SOMEBODY ON COUNCIL THAT IS NOT COMPETENT, DOESN'T COME TO SHOW UP, THEN YOU TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY. YOU'VE GOT THEM FOR THREE YEARS IN ESSENCE, RATHER THAN TWO. WHATEVER COUNCIL WANTS. MICHAEL SLAUGHTER WAS THE ONE THAT BROUGHT THIS UP AND WANTED US TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT TO SEE WHAT THE WILL OF THE CITIZENS IS, SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE NOW. DO WE WANT TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT OR NOT? >> I STILL THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO PUT ON THE BALLOT, TO SEE WHAT THE RESIDENTS HAVE TO SAY. I STILL BELIEVE THE THREE-YEAR TERM VERSUS A TWO-YEAR TERM, THAT CAN BE BRUTAL, I'M SORRY. [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] IT ALSO TAKES WORK. THE CAMPAIGNS ARE TOUGH, AND THEY TAKE A LOT OF YOUR TIME THAT YOU COULD BE USING, IN MY OPINION, TO DO WORK FOR THE CITY INSTEAD OF PROMOTING YOURSELF. [LAUGHTER] THIS ABILITY TO APPOINT, MY RESPONSE TO THAT IS IN SOME WAYS, I THINK IT'S GOOD THAT THAT HAS TO GO TO THE RESIDENTS FOR A VOTE, IF SOMEBODY LEAVES COUNCIL, BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE ELECTING THE REPRESENTATIVES AND NOT THE MAYOR OR COUNCIL. I FEEL THAT'S A GOOD THING. ARE WE FINISHED DISCUSSION? CAN I MAKE A MOTION NOW? >> DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO DISCUSS AT THIS TIME? [00:30:01] [BACKGROUND] >> I WOULD LIKE TO [LAUGHTER] MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 836, CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MAY 6TH FOR THE PURPOSE OF VOTING ON A TERM OF OFFICE FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THREE-YEAR TERMS, ETC, SUBJECT TO CHANGING THE TIME. >> ON THE 29TH. >> ON THE 29TH. >> THAT'S FROM 8:00-5:00? DATES IS RIGHT ON IT'S OWN. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] >> BUT WE DO, IT'S 7:00 AM TO 7:00 PM ON SATURDAY. HAD SAID 8:00- 5:00, THAT CHANGE CAME IN LATER. >> ALL GOOD. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, IS THERE A SECOND? >> I WOULD SECOND THAT, MADAM MAYOR. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 836. IS THERE ANY LAST WORDS OR DISCUSSION? THEN I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. MOTION CARRIES 2:1. MS. MAYOR VOTING AGAINST. SO MOTION DOES PASS. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 6. [6. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2023-727 AUTHORIZING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION WITH THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF CITIES SERVED BY ONCOR; AND AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF TEN CENTS PER CAPITA TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE TO FUND REGULATORY AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND ACTIVITIES RELATED TO ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY, LLC.] CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2023_727, AUTHORIZING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION WITH THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF THE CITY SERVED BY ENCORE AND AUTHORIZING A PAYMENT OF 10 CENTS PER CAPITA TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE, DEFINED REGULATORY AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND ACTIVITIES RELATING TO ENCORE ELECTRIC SERVICE, DELIVERY GOT MADE BY MR. [INAUDIBLE]. >> MAYOR, COUNCIL, THIS IS JUST OUR ANNUAL ITEM HERE FOR THE STEERING COMMITTEE. I THINK IT BREAKS OUT TO JUST OVER $500. I THINK IT'S WHAT WE PAY TO [LAUGHTER] BE A PART OF THIS COMMITTEE AND GET ALL THE RESOURCES FROM THOSE ATTORNEYS, HELPS US DRAFT THOSE ORDINANCES AND EVERYTHING ELSE. I WOULD ASK THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THIS. IT MAKES EVERYONE'S LIFE A LITTLE BIT EASIER FOR YOU. [LAUGHTER] >> ONE OF THE THINGS IT DOES IS IT ALLOWS US TO PARTICIPATE WITH A NUMBER OF OTHER SMALLER CITIES WHO FIGHT ENCORE ON RIGHT HIKES AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. WE HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THIS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS TO OUR BENEFIT, I THINK. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THEN I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION. >> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2023-727, TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATION WITH A STEERING COMMITTEE OF CITIES SERVED BY ENCORE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, IS THERE A SECOND? >> I SECOND THAT. >> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2023-727, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN I'LL CALL IT FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING RESOLUTION NUMBER 2023-727, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 3: 0. ITEM NUMBER 7. [7. UPDATE(S): FM2551] MR. ALISON, YOU WANT TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON 2551 IF THERE IS ONE. [LAUGHTER] >> GARETH LEE CALLED THIS MORNING? >> I DIDN'T KNOW I WOULD NEVER MAKE THAT CALL THIS MORNING. WE HAVE SUBMITTED ALL OUR ADMISSIONS TO TEXTILE, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY FEEDBACK. >> MR. BROOK PROMPTED TEXTILE, I THINK YESTERDAY, BUT OUR INFORMATION HAS NOT GOTTEN ANY FEEDBACK, SO WILL WAIT ON THAT, AND THAT'S TWO. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF MOORINGS AND A CROSSING, I BELIEVE, A COUPLE OF CROSSINGS WE HAVE TO DO AS WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR THAT INFORMATION BACK ON THAT. APPEARS THE WATER LINE FOR NORTH TEXAS IS MOVING FORWARD. I THINK THEY'RE CLEANING UP OUT THERE NOW. [LAUGHTER] I GUESS IT'S THE BEST WAY TO PUT THAT. AT THIS POINT, THEY'RE STARTING TO CLEAN THAT UP. I DO NOT KNOW AT THIS POINT WHERE GRAYSON OR ENCORE, ANY OF THEM STAND ON THEIR LINE THAT RELOCATES. >> NORTH TEXAS. THIS LINE RELOCATION IS COMPLETE. [OVERLAPPING]. >> CORRECT? >> WHEN YOU SAY THEY'RE CLEANING UP CURTIS ROAD, IS THAT? >> THAT'S PART OF IT. THEY'RE GOING TO PASS THAT. [BACKGROUND] >> WE'RE GOING TO COME IN THERE AND DO [OVERLAPPING] THE ENTRANCE TO [00:35:08] PARKER VILLAGE AND CURTIS AT THE SAME TIME. THAT'S ALL I GOT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD, UNDER AUTOMATE, [8. ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION(S) FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND CITY STAFF FOR THE RECORD (Each valued at between $0 - $500)] ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND CITY STAFF. FOR THE RECORD, THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB DONATED TREATS, CANDY, COOKIES, AND CUPCAKES TO THE PARKER FIRE DEPARTMENT AT A VALUE OF $30. NEXT, I'LL ASK, ARE THERE ANY INDIVIDUAL FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AT THIS TIME? [9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS] IF NOT, YOU CAN ALWAYS SEND AN EMAIL AND LET US KNOW WHAT YOU WANT PUT ON THE AGENDA WITH A BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT IT AND WE WILL TAKE IT FROM THERE. NEXT WE'RE GOING GO TO THE WORKSHOPS. I AM A BIT CONFLICTED ABOUT THIS. [NOISE] IF I COULD, I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS CRP BECAUSE THAT'S FAIRLY EASY TO DO. WE NEED TO HAVE A LONG WORKSHOP ON CRP BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO NEED TO BE BROKEN DOWN INTO ROADS, AND DRAINAGE, AND OTHER ISSUES LIKE EASEMENTS AND THAT SORT OF THING. I'M TALKING ABOUT A THREE TO FOUR-HOUR WORKSHOP. I WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHEN YOU ALL CAN BE AVAILABLE FOR A LONG WORKSHOP. ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, OR HAVE YOU SEND TO LUKE, MYSELF OR PATTY IN ADVANCE, WHAT INFORMATION YOU WANT PRESENTED AT THIS WORKSHOP. BECAUSE WHAT I DON'T WANT IS TO HAVE ANOTHER WORKSHOP AND, WELL, WE CAN'T DO THAT BECAUSE WE NEED THIS INFORMATION. LET'S GET ALL THE INFORMATION WE POSSIBLY CAN, AHEAD OF TIME, SO THAT WE CAN MAKE PROGRESS WITH THIS WORKSHOP. IF YOU ALL WOULD SEND YOUR INFORMATION ON WHEN YOU COULD BE AVAILABLE. YOU WANT TO COME TO YOU AS A PARTY? >> PLEASE SEND IT TO ME, THAT WAY WE'LL NOT TRY TO GO OUR DIFFERENT PLACES HERE ON TIMES. >> BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO GET THIS DONE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD [NOISE] ON SOME OF THIS STUFF. NOW LET ME GO BACK TO THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX AND SALES TAX. WE HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING ON BOTH OF THOSE ITEMS NEXT WEDNESDAY. WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PRESENT INFORMATION TONIGHT, BUT WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS IS WE'RE BASICALLY GOING TO PRESENT IT AGAIN NEXT WEEK BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO MEMBERS THAT ARE ABSENT, [NOISE] AND THEY'RE WILL WANT TO KNOW AND HEAR IT. I THINK IT WOULD MAYBE SERVICE BETTER AS WE'LL DO IT ALL ON THE SAME EVENING, BUT I'M OPEN TO WHAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO DO. >> MADAM MAYOR, I HEAR YOU, AND I AGREE WITH YOU TO A POINT. THE ONLY REASON I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO AT LEAST DISCUSS IT TONIGHT, IS TO TALK ABOUT WHAT MIGHT BE MISSING, BECAUSE I FEEL SOME THINGS ARE MISSING FROM THAT INFORMATION TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION NEXT WEDNESDAY. [NOISE] I KNOW THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HOPING FOR, IS [NOISE] MAKE A DECISION NEXT WEDNESDAY. IF WE COULD HASH OUT WHAT MIGHT BE MISSING FROM THIS INFORMATION, MAYBE THEN WE CAN HAVE IT READY FOR THE MEETING NEXT WEEK. >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT BOTH OF THESE, OR ONE OF THESE? WHICH ONE? >> WELL, THIS IS RELATED TO THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX. >> OKAY. >> IF WE ARE HASHING OUT IF SOMETHING'S MISSING, WE MIGHT AS WELL DO THE SAME WITH SALES TAX, BECAUSE IF SOMETHING'S MISSING, [NOISE] WE MIGHT AS WELL HAVE THAT BENEFIT OF OUR BEING HERE, [NOISE] RATHER THAN WASTING OUR TIME COMING FOR NOTHING. [LAUGHTER] >> A LOT OF IT DOES NEED TO WIPE BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'RE GOING TO DO IT TWICE. >> I HEAR YOU, AND I AGREE WITH YOUR COMMENT THERE. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? ANY OTHER OPINIONS? >> I GUESS THE SAME TYPE OF THOUGHTS IN MY MIND, BUT I DO THINK PROBABLY INTRODUCING THE TOPICS, THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD THING TO GO THROUGH, WE JUST INTRODUCE THE TOPICS AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A MORE COMPLETE MEETING WHEN WE DO IT ON THE 15TH. >> OKAY. >> I UNDERSTAND THERE'S NEVER REALLY GOING TO BE A LOT [NOISE] MORE CONVERSATION WITH THE OTHER MEMBERS THAT ARE GOING TO BE BACK, [00:40:01] BUT AT LEAST WE CAN GET THINGS STARTED. >> OKAY. >> AFTER GRAY, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD PROCEED WITH AND ANXIOUS TO HEAR GRAHAM'S PRESENTATION, JUST WE CAN REVIEW SOME OF THAT, BUT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE MISSING TONIGHT ALSO CAN WATCH IT ON VIDEO SO THEY CAN BE UP TO SPEED. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE DISCUSS IT TONIGHT AND THEN COMPLETE THE DISCUSSION NEXT WEEK. >> OKAY. WELL THEN LET'S START WITH [10. MUNICIPAL COMPLEX] ADAM 10 MUNICIPAL COMPLEX DO REALIZE WE'RE IN WORKSHOP GRAHAM YOU WANT TO GIVE YOUR PRESENTATION? >> SURE. >> IS IT ONE THAT YOU CAN PUT UP ON? >> NO, IT'S GOING TO BE THE HANDOUT. THIS HANDOUT HERE THAT I PROVIDED WILL POST IT ONLINE FIRST THING TOMORROW MORNING. >> OKAY BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT MAY. [OVERLAPPING] >> DO YOU HAVE AN ELECTRONIC VERSION I CAN TRY TO THROW UP GRAHAM? >> YEAH. I'VE GOT ELECTRONIC RESOURCES I SAID EARLIER TODAY. >> YES, I WASN'T. >> YES. >> I HAVE AN EXTRA COPY IF SOMEBODY WANTS ONE. >> WELL, BEFORE WE GET TO THIS DOCUMENT, I'LL ADDRESS SOME OF THE DEBT CAPACITY QUESTIONS THAT LYNCH WAS ALLUDED TOO WHILE AGO. GOING FROM MY UNDERSTANDING WAS TO CHECK THE DEBT CAPACITY WAS OUR EXISTING TAX RATE AND NO GROWTH. HOW MUCH COULD WE AFFORD? THE WAY THAT I WENT ABOUT THIS WAS RIGHT NOW, WE ARE CURRENTLY TRANSFERRING $300,000 A YEAR TO THE FACILITY IMPROVEMENT FUND. IF WE WERE TO ISSUE A BOND, OBVIOUSLY, WE WOULDN'T BE TRANSFERRING THAT 300,000 ANYMORE. THAT WOULD GO TOWARDS A DEBT PAYMENT. IF WE USE 300,000 AND THEN OUR EXISTING DEBT THAT WE HAVE FOR OUTSTANDING BONDS AND THEN WE'LL CONTINUE THOSE AFTER THOSE WERE PAID OFF WE WOULD HAVE A MAX DEBT CAPACITY OF 8.63 MILLION OVER A 20-YEAR PERIOD. IF YOU DREW THAT OUT TO A 30-YEAR PERIOD, IT'S JUST AROUND $9.5 MILLION. OBVIOUSLY, FROM THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAD OVER THE FACILITIES, WE WERE IN THE BALLPARK OF AROUND 14 MILLION WAS THE NEEDS SO JUST WITH NO GROWTH AND NO INCREASE IN TAX RATE, THAT'S WHAT WE CAN AFFORD. THEN I'LL REACH OUT TO MR. ERIC MOCKER WITH HILLTOP SECURITIES AND I ASKED HIM TO RUN SCENARIOS FOR $14 MILLION AND TO GIVE A SCENARIO FOR A 20-YEAR REPAYMENT AND A 30-YEAR REPAYMENT, WHERE EIGHT SCENARIOS THEY PROVIDED UNDER A 20-YEAR SCENARIO I ASKED THEM TO DO ONE THAT WOULD HAVE LOW GROWTH AND ONE THAT HAD A HIGHER GROWTH PROJECTION ON TAXABLE ASSESSED EVALUATIONS AND THEN ALSO ONE THAT WOULD PROVIDE THE SAME ANNUAL PAYMENTS TO KEEP THOSE CONSISTENT AND ONE THAT WOULD KEEP THE TAX RATE, ITSELF-CONSISTENT SO AND THEN THE SAME THING FOR THE 30 YEARS. THAT'S WHY THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT SCHEDULES THAT ARE THERE'S A SCHEDULES WITH A DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. AS FAR AS THE HISTORICAL TAXABLE ASSESS VALUATION THERE'S A CHART ON THERE AND IT'S THE BAR GRAPH ON PAGE 2, GO UP A LITTLE BIT LUKE. YEAH, THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS, THIS IS ARE THE GRAY BARS ARE TAXABLE ASSESS VALUATIONS. THE RED WOULD BE THE PERCENT INCREASES EACH YEAR AND THEN THE BLUE LINE IS GOING TO BE THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE. YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE ALL OVER THE PLACE FROM 3% UP TO 15% OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS. IN HIS ASSUMPTIONS HE USED FOR THE LOW GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS, HE USED 3% FOR THE FIRST YEAR, 2% FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS, AND THEN 1% FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. THAT'S THE BEST OF THE CHART THERE ON THE RIGHT. FOR HIS HIGH GROWTH, HE USED 10% FOR THE FIRST YEAR, 8% FOR THE NEXT FOUR, AND THEN IT FELL FROM 7 TO 6 TO 5 TO 3 TO NOTHING. THOSE WERE THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT HE USED FOR THE GROWTH PROJECTIONS. GO TO THE NEXT ONE. THIS ONE, THE TOP CHARGES [00:45:04] SHOWS WHAT I JUST WENT OVER ABOUT THE DIFFERENT ASSUMPTIONS MADE 20-YEAR, 30-YEAR, LOW GROWTH, HIGH GROWTH, AND THE STRUCTURE IF IT'S LEVEL PAYMENTS OR LEVEL TAX RATE SO DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THAT BOTTOM CHART I HAVE A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT LATER. NEXT CHART. THIS IS THE FIRST SCHEDULE. THIS WAS THE 20-YEAR REPAYMENT WITH A LOW GROWTH ASSUMPTION AND THIS WAS KEEPING THE TAX ANNUAL PAYMENTS FAIRLY CONSISTENT ONCE WE HAVE THE NEW DEBT HIT THE BOOKS. IF YOU LOOK AT COLUMN K, OUR DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT WOULD GO FROM 419,000-1.1 MILLION AND IT WILL STAY CONSISTENT FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS THERE. SCHEDULE 2 IS A 30-YEAR WITH A LOW GROWTH AND KEEPING THE PAYMENTS CONSISTENT AND IT'S GOING FROM $419,000 A YEAR TO 972,000 AND THEN STAYS CONSISTENT FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS. SCHEDULE 3 IS BACK TO 20-YEAR REPAYMENT WITH LOW GROWTH BUT THIS ONE'S KEEPING THE TAX RATE CONSISTENT. IT'S REAL SIMILAR TO SCHEDULE 1. IT'S REAL SIMILAR AND THE DEBT PAYMENT, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENCE IN THAT ONE. SCHEDULED 4 SAME THING, EXCEPT THIS IS THE 30-YEAR REPLACEMENT WITH LOW GROWTH AND THE TAX RATES STAY CONSISTENT AND IT'S REAL SIMILAR TO SCHEDULE 2. GO TO SCHEDULE 1A ON PAGE 9. THIS IS WHERE WE'RE STARTING TO GET TO THE HIGH GROWTH. THIS IS THE 20-YEAR REPAYMENT HIGH-GROWTH. YOU CAN SEE THAT OUR PAYMENTS IN COLUMN K GO FROM 419,000-1.1 MILLION. SO IT'S ABOUT $700,000 INCREASE THERE. SCHEDULE 2A IS THE THIRD YEAR REPAYMENT HIGH-GROWTH WITH CONSISTENT DEBT PAYMENTS GOES FROM 419,000-972,000 SO IT'S ABOUT A $553,000 INCREASE. SCHEDULE 3A PAGE 11 IS THE 20-YEAR REPAYMENT, HIGH-GROWTH WITH THE TAX RATE STAYING CONSISTENT AND THAT'S GOING TO BE SIMILAR TO 1A AND THEN 4A IS GOING TO BE REAL CONSISTENT WITH TWO-WAY REAL SIMILAR NUMBERS. ALL THAT BEING SAID. I HAVE ANOTHER CHART THAT I WAS WORKING ON TODAY THAT I WAS TRYING TO FINALIZE AFTER I SENT THIS TO ME ON SATURDAY. I SPENT YESTERDAY AND TODAY PUTTING TOGETHER SOME MORE INFORMATION AND I JUST FINISHED UP BEFORE THE MEETING. BUT BASICALLY, TO SUMMARIZE, SCHEDULE 1, I KNOW IN THE MEETING WE HAD WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW MUCH WOULD IT COSTS THE AVERAGE HOME OWNER, ASSUMING THE AVERAGE HOME VALUE IS $950,000 OVER THE COURSE OF 20 YEARS, SCHEDULE 1, THE HOME OWNER WOULD PAY $12,000 TOWARDS THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX. ON SCHEDULE 2, THE 30 YEAR, THE AVERAGE HOME OWNER WOULD PAY ABOUT $16,000. >> I'M SORRY IS THAT. >> THAT'S THE TOTAL COST. >> TOTAL COST. WHAT DOES THAT COME DOWN TO PER YEAR? GIVEN A CALCULATOR YOU CAN JUST. >> SCHEDULE 1, THE REASON I TOLD YOU NOT TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE CHART THAT HE HAD IS BECAUSE THE RATES ARE CHANGING EACH YEAR. THE RATES ARE CHANGING DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH GROWTH IS BEING ASSUMED AND OTHER FACTORS. ON SCHEDULE 1, THE ANNUAL COST TO THE HOME OWNER WOULD RANGE FROM $667 DOWN TO $506 A YEAR. BUT IN TOTAL, IT'D BE $12,000 OVER THE COURSE OF THE TERMS. SCHEDULE 2, THE PAYMENTS WOULD RANGE FROM $411-$581 FOR A TOTAL OF $16,134 OVER THE COURSE OF 30 YEARS. SCHEDULE 3, THE INCREASE OR THE PAYMENTS WOULD RANGE FROM $456 A YEAR TO $667 A YEAR FOR A TOTAL OF $12,071. SCHEDULE 4, PAYMENTS WOULD RANGE [00:50:04] FROM $360-$572 FOR A TOTAL OF $15,960. SCHEDULE 1A, PAYMENTS RANGE FROM $317-$524 FOR A TOTAL OF $7,430. SCHEDULE 2A, PAYMENTS WOULD RANGE FROM $276-$1,700 FOR A TOTAL OF $10,876. SCHEDULE 3A, PAYMENTS RANGE FROM $323-$504 FOR A TOTAL OF $7,385. FINALLY, SCHEDULED 4A, PAYMENTS WOULD RANGE FROM $276-$424 FOR A TOTAL OF $9,000 OVER THE COURSE OF THE 30 YEARS. THOSE ASSUMPTIONS ARE ALL BASED ON THE HIGH-GROWTH, LOW GROWTH, DEPENDING ON WHAT SCHEDULE IT WAS. BUT THEN I TOOK IT A LITTLE STEP FURTHER. THIS DOESN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE $300,000 THAT WE CURRENTLY TRANSFER TO THE FACILITY FUND. IF WE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AND WE WERE LOOKING AT THE TAX RATE THAT WE HAVE WITH THAT BUILT INTO IT, OVER THE COURSE OF THOSE SAME SCHEDULES. THE ACTUAL TAX IMPACT TO THE AVERAGE VALUE HOME, FOR SCHEDULE 1, IN TOTAL IT'D $4,030. SCHEDULED 2, WOULD BE $3,375. SCHEDULE 3, WOULD BE $4,045. SCHEDULE 4, WOULD BE $3,202 AND THIS IS WHERE IT GETS INTERESTING. SCHEDULE 1A, IT'D BE A TAX REDUCTION OF $1,020. SCHEDULE 2A, WOULD BE A REDUCTION OF $3,961. SCHEDULE 3A WOULD BE A REDUCTION OF $1059 AND 4A WOULD BE A REDUCTION OF $4,107. LET ME EXPLAIN WHY THERE WOULD BE A REDUCTION. THE REASON IS OUR EXISTING TAX RATE RIGHT NOW IF WE BUILD IN THE $300,000 IS 0.0488. THE TAX RATE, AS IT'S GETTING PAID OFF, IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO GO DOWN AND FALL INTO THE 3 'S ON EVERY SCENARIO. ACTUALLY, A MATTER OF FACT, ONE OF THE SCENARIOS THAT DROPS DOWN TO SIX, BUT THERE WAS A REDUCTION ACTUALLY IN THE TAX RATE ON THOSE SCENARIOS WHEN WE TAKE THAT 300,000 INTO CONSIDERATION AND WE PUT GROWTH. WHAT THAT'S SHOWING IS THAT THE FUTURE GROWTH IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE PAYING FOR THE COMPLEX. BUT I'VE GOT COPIES OF ALL OF THIS AND I'LL MAKE SURE TO GIVE YOU ALL THOSE. I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO DO BEFORE THIS MEETING. >> QUESTION I HAVE IS THAT WHEN YOU TALK HIGH-GROWTH, WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOR THE NUMBER OF HOUSES THAT ARE BEING INCREASED. >> IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE NUMBER OF HOMES IS WHAT A TOTAL EVALUATION WOULD BE. HIGH GROWTH FOR 2024 WAS 10%. I WOULD SAY THAT'S FAIR BECAUSE WE'RE AT 13% FOR 2023 AND 15% YEAR BEFORE. THEN IT WOULD FALL TO 8% FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS AND THEN SEVEN. BUT IF YOU HAVE THAT DOCUMENT ON PAGE 3, YOU CAN SEE ON THE RIGHT TABLE THERE, YOU'LL SEE THE LOW GROWTH AND HIGH GROWTH IN THE ASSUMPTIONS. THE LOW GROWTH IS VERY CONSERVATIVE. BUT I THINK THE HIGH-GROWTH IS REALISTIC BASED ON THE LAST 10 YEARS. >> THE ONLY THING THAT I MIGHT SEE SHORT-TERM IS THAT 24 AND 25 COULD BE LOWER THAN THAT WITH THE INFLATIONARY THINGS THAT WE'RE SAYING AND THE ABILITIES OF PEOPLE [00:55:01] TO TAKE THAT AND IT LOOKS LIKE HOUSING PRICES ARE STARTING TO BUFFER, SO IT'S HARD TO SAY EXACTLY HOW IT'S GOING TO GO. >> I WENT BACK AND HE PROVIDED THE NUMBERS FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS. I TOOK A LITTLE STEP FURTHER AND I WENT BACK AS FAR BACK AS I COULD GET NUMBERS FOR. I WENT BACK TO 2005 BECAUSE I WAS WORRIED ABOUT 2007, 2008, I THOUGHT WE MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE NEGATIVE GROWTH DURING THOSE YEARS. WE NEVER HAD NEGATIVE GROWTH WHERE WE BASICALLY GO DOWN TO NO GROWTH. FOR TWO YEARS, WE HAD A HALF A PERCENT INCREASE. BUT OTHER OUTSIDE OF THOSE TWO YEARS, EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN AROUND THE 3-6% AND UP GROWTH OVER THE LAST 17 YEARS. >> GRANT, CAN WE GO BACK TO YOUR INITIAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DEBT CAPACITY? >> SURE. >> YOU SAID THAT WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING AT IS TAX RATE STAYING THE SAME AND NO GROWTH. THEN YOU ALSO ASSUME THAT 300,000 THAT'S CURRENTLY IN THE GENERAL FUND GOING INTO THE FACILITIES FUND WOULD DISCONTINUE AND OUR INTEREST AND SINKING FUND RATE WOULD GO UP TO THE AMOUNT OF THE 300,000. THAT WOULDN'T INCREASE THE TAXES, ALTHOUGH WE'RE ALREADY TAXING THE RESONANCE FOR THAT. THAT'S ALREADY PART OF WHAT WE'RE TAXING THE RESONANCE. BUT YOU CAME TO A NUMBER OF 8.63 MILLION OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME AGAIN? WHAT THAT REPRESENTS? >> IT REPRESENTS A 20-YEAR REPAYMENT. THAT WOULD BE KEEPING OUR ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE 419,000 PLUS A 300,000. IT WOULD KEEP OUR PAYMENTS AROUND THE $720,000 RANGE, OUR ANNUAL PAYMENTS. THAT'S FIGURING 4.3% INTEREST RATE. >> WHAT'S THAT INTEREST? >> 4.3%. >> HOW MANY YEARS? >> TWENTY, AND THEN AT 30 YEARS, I DIDN'T BRING THE 30-YEAR. BUT THE INTEREST RATE WENT UP. I WANT TO SAY, IT PULLED 5%. FINANCING AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEARS ONLY ADDED US ABOUT A MILLION MORE DOLLARS. >> NOW, WITH RESPECT TO MORE OF WHAT I THINK OF AS DEBT CAPACITY IN OUR BONDING COMPANY. WHAT CHANGES, WHAT AFFECTS THE INTEREST RATE? OUR BONDING COMPANY RATING. WHAT RATING ARE WE LOOKING AT FOR THESE SCENARIOS? I THINK HE'S ASSUMING THE SAME INTERESTS OR SAME RATING THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, WHICH IS, IS IT AA, AA NEGATIVE, OR JUST AA? >> IT'S NOT A AAA, IT'S JUST A AA. >> RIGHT. >> KEEPING IT THERE. 8.63 MILLION THAT WOULD BE KEEPING OUR DEBT ABOUT THE SAME. THESE SCENARIOS, LOOKING AT SCENARIO 1 WOULD BRING OUR DEBT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER? >> YEAH, I'LL SAY IT WOULD INCREASE IT. IN SCENARIO 1, AS FAR AS THE ANNUAL PAYMENT, IT WOULD INCREASE IT BY 700,000. BUT IF YOU TOOK THE 300,000 OUT OF THAT EQUATION, IT'D BE AN INCREASE OF ABOUT 400,000. >> WE CAN WORK THROUGH NUMBERS AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND SAY, WELL, THIS IS WHAT A $14 MILLION FACILITY WOULD BE. BUT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IS, WE'RE WORKING ON ROADS OR IN OUR STREETS AND WE'VE IDENTIFIED WHAT THIS COST COULD RUN TO AND HOW WOULD THAT PLAY INTO OUR DEBT SCENARIO? WHEN WE HAVE TO GET DEBT TO FIX OUR ROADS? [01:00:02] >> WELL, IT WOULD JUST BE IN ADDITION TO THIS. AS FAR AS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR AFFORDABILITY, HOW MUCH MORE COULD WE AFFORD? >> EXACTLY. >> THAT WOULD ALL BE BASED ON IF WE TOOK GROWTH INTO CONSIDERATION. OBVIOUSLY, THERE WOULD BE A TAX RATE INCREASE. IF WE WERE TO GO 14 MILLION, THEY'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO BE A SMALL INCREASE AT LEAST UNLESS DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS. WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THESE NUMBERS, WE DECIDED TO CUT COSTS AND WITHIN THE M&O OF THE GENERAL FUND AND THEN INCREASE THE INS ABOUT THE SAME. IT WOULD BE MORE OF A PROBABLY DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING TO ADD THE ROADS AND STUFF TOO. THAT'S HOW WE'D HAVE TO FIGURE OUT IF WE CAN AFFORD MORE JUST BASED ON US CUTTING OTHER STUFF. >> IN RESPONSE OR COMMENT REGARDING THAT IS, I THINK WE'RE MIXING APPLES WITH ORANGES BECAUSE NUMBER 1, NOBODY SAID WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUT A LARGE BOND FOR ROADS, THAT HASN'T BEEN ESTABLISHED. WE DON'T EVEN KNOW ROADS AS A COUNCIL OR AS A COMMUNITY WE DON'T HAVE AN IDENTIFIED. WE'RE FAR FROM THAT POINT IN MY ESTIMATION. THE FACILITIES IS SOMETHING THAT'S NECESSARY AND IT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS. I THINK FRANKLY, EVERYBODY'S TIRED OF GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. BUT I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO KEEP IT IN THE BACK OF OUR MIND, BUT IT'S NOT A GIVEN THAT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUT A $10 MILLION BOND FOR ROADS. I JUST THINK THAT IT'S A MISTAKE TO START MIXING ONE WITH THE OTHER. >> MY ONLY COMMENT TO THAT IS THAT, I THINK THAT FOR OUR COMMUNITY, WE NEED NOT BE BLIND AND JUST HAVE IT SITTING IN THE BACKGROUND. WE KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO BE AS THE COMMUNITY IS AGING, WE NEED TO HAVE THAT COMPREHENDED. IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT WE DO HERE, I THINK WE STILL NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE THOSE MONIES WILL HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED IN IT. I THINK AS MUCH AS WE TALK ABOUT WHAT WE NEED FOR OUR FACILITY AND THE THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED THERE. I THINK MOST COMMUNITY RESIDENTS, WHEN THEY DRIVE DOWN THE ROAD EVERY DAY, IT MAY ACTUALLY BE A LITTLE MORE REALISTIC WHEN THEY'RE GETTING FRONT-END WORK, AND OTHER THINGS DONE IN THEIR CAR BECAUSE OF ROAD ISSUES AS OPPOSED TO THE FACILITY EVEN THOUGH THEY OF COURSE WANT THEIR CITY TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE. I DO THINK THEY NEED ALL BOTH TO BE CONSIDERED PERSONALLY. >> THE CITY HAS BEEN A CITY FOR OVER 50 YEARS AND WE'VE ALWAYS HAD ROADS IN PARKER, AS FAR AS I CAN REMEMBER, FOR THE LAST 37 YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED HERE. WE'D NEVER TAKEN OUT THAT, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, A LARGE BOND TO DO ROADS. WE HAVE A PLAN AND I KNOW YOU'RE WORKING ON THE PLAN, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ADDRESS ON AN ONGOING BASIS. THE FACILITY IS A ONETIME INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE AND IT'LL LAST FOR 50 YEARS. ROADS WILL CONTINUE TO DETERIORATE NO MATTER IF YOU PAVE IT TODAY OR PAVE IT TOMORROW, IS STILL GOING TO DETERIORATE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. ONCE WE ESTABLISH A PLAN, AND I KNOW TERRY, YOU'RE WORKING ON THIS, BUT ONCE YOU IDENTIFY THE ROADS THAT NEED ADDRESSING IMMEDIATELY AND PUT TOGETHER A PLAN AND IT'S AN ONGOING PLAN. I WOULD ASSUME IT'S NOT A ONETIME PLAN. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS LIKE I SAID, I THINK IT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE. I KNOW IT IMPACTS THE CITY OBVIOUSLY. RESIDENTS DO NEED ROADS THAT THEY CAN DRIVE ON. BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS, A ONETIME INVESTMENT IN A FACILITY VERSUS AN ONGOING ROAD MAINTENANCE AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION WHERE NECESSARY. >> ONE THING IT MAY NOT BE TO THE LEVEL BECAUSE I THINK WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU'RE DOING ROAD CONSTRUCTION, ESPECIALLY TOTALLY REFURBISH, IT WINDS UP BEING A LOT LARGER MONEY BUT THAT NEW FACILITY, IF WE WERE TO GO AHEAD AND I CAN SNAP MY FINGERS AND IT APPEARED NEXT WEEK. THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE ONGOING MAINTENANCE. WE HAVE $300,000 THAT ARE APPROPRIATED FOR UPKEEP FOR THIS ONE, WE DIDN'T SPEND ALL THAT MONEY, BUT IT'S OUT THERE IN OUR BUDGET, SO THERE WILL BE MAINTENANCE ON THE BUILDING ALSO. >> I WOULD SAY THAT WITH RESPECT TO ROADS, [01:05:04] OUR CURRENT PROCESS HASN'T BEEN SUCCESSFUL. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE HAVE 20% OF OUR ROADS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN POOR CONDITION. THAT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE RESIDENTS CAME WHEN WE DID THIS BOND PROPOSAL BEFORE, WHEN WE HAD THE BOND ON THE BALLOT BEFORE. RESIDENTS CAME AND SAID, WE HAVE TO ADDRESS ROADS. I THINK IT'S A REAL BIG MISTAKE TO TRY AND SAY, WELL, WE'RE NOT TO TALK ABOUT ROADS QUITE THERE YET. BUT WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT WHEN WE'RE READY TO CONSIDER SOME DEBT, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IMPACT IT WILL HAVE. CAN WE GET THE DEBT AT THAT TIME IF WE DO $14 MILLION FACILITY? I THINK IT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER. THE TOTAL CAPACITY OF WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO SHOULD BE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> ANYTHING ELSE ON THE NEW FACILITY AT THIS TIME OR PROPOSED FACILITY AT THIS TIME OR ANYTHING? WHAT INFORMATION TERRY, DO YOU NOT HAVE THAT YOU NEED FOR THE NEXT MEETING? BE VERY SPECIFIC SO GREG CAN KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THAT YOU NEED. BECAUSE YOU'VE TOTALLY CONFUSED ME ON THAT. >> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT. I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY. I'VE BEEN CLEAR. >> IF YOU ARE CLEAR, YOU CAN EXPLAIN TO US WHAT IT IS YOU NEED? >> WHERE I FEEL I HAVE BEEN CLEAR IS THAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DEBT, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE TOTAL DEBT THAT THE CITY CAN AFFORD, NOT CAN WE PUT THIS BOND ON FOR $14 MILLION. >> WHAT INFORMATION IS IT? YOU SAID TONIGHT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION AND YOU WANTED TO GET THE INFORMATION. TELL ME WHAT THE INFORMATION IS THAT YOU NEED SO THAT WE CAN GET IT FOR YOU. >> GRANT DID PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO DEBT CAPACITY. HOWEVER, WHEN WE PUT THESE THINGS IN, AGAIN WE HAVE GOT TO CONSIDER THE FUTURE ADDING [NOISE] DEBT FOR ROADS. BECAUSE IT'S UNREALISTIC TO THINK WE'RE NOT GOING TO NEED SOME FUNDS TO ADDRESS THIS ROAD CONDITION. >> ROADS ARE NOT ON HERE. YOU'RE BRINGING UP OBSTACLES AGAIN AND I'LL JUST REALLY RESENT THE HELL OUT OF THAT. NOW, IF YOU SAID YOU NEEDED MORE INFORMATION, TELL ME WHAT IT IS THAT YOU NEED SO WE CAN HAVE IT FOR YOU. >> WELL, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YOU RESENT MY BRINGING THIS UP, BUT I WILL SAY THAT AT THE FACILITATED MEETING THAT WE HAD ON THE FACILITY WHERE WE HAD THE BIG FACILITATOR, THIS DEBT WAS ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES THAT WAS IDENTIFIED, STREET WAS IDENTIFIED AS THINGS WE NEED TO TRULY UNDERSTAND OUR TOTAL PICTURE. I DON'T HAVE ANY ANSWER FOR YOU, LEE. I DO NOT HAVE AN ANSWER. I GOT THIS TODAY, GRANT PROVIDED A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION, I WILL THINK ABOUT IT AND I WILL LET YOU KNOW IF THERE'S OTHER SPECIFIC INFORMATION THAT I'M NEEDING. >> I'M NOT TRYING TO GET ANGRY, I'M TRYING TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING GOING ON AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS. YOU SAID EARLIER, YOU THOUGHT WE SHOULD PROCEED SO WE CAN FIND OUT WHAT INFORMATION WE DON'T HAVE. THEREFORE, I'M FOLLOWING UP ON THAT TO TRY TO FIND OUT WHAT INFORMATION YOU FEEL WE NEED. I'M GOING TO ASK JIM THAT, I'M GOING TO ASK CINDY THAT. WHAT INFORMATION DO YOU FEEL JIM THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT WE'LL NEED? >> I DO THINK THAT WE DID GET MORE INFORMATION. WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO MIX APPLES AND ORANGES EITHER. I'M JUST LOOKING AT WHEN WE DO CONSIDER THE DEBT CAPACITY, THAT WAS THE ONE TOPIC THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE LAST ONE, WHEN I LOOK AT IT. I'M JUST SAYING THIS NOT TO BE ANTAGONISTIC IN ANY REGARD. I'M JUST SAYING THAT BASED ON WHAT A NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS HAVE SHARED WITH ME. [01:10:08] >> NAME THEM. >> I'M GOING TO KEEP THAT IN CONFIDENCE, BUT THERE'S A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE CONCERNED ABOUT OUR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. MY POINT BEING IS THAT ALL OF THE DEBT CAPACITY AND MORE WOULD BE PUT INTO THE FACILITY. SO LET'S CALL A SPADE A SPADE. WE TALKED ABOUT DEBT CAPACITY IN THE MEETING WHERE WE HAD THE WORKSHOP, WANTED TO KNOW WHAT DEBT WE COULD TAKE AND WHAT DEBT CAPACITY COULD WE ACCEPT. WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS, THE NUMBER WAS EITHER 8.6 FOR 20 YEARS OR 9.6 FOR 30 YEARS. MY POINT IS THAT WHEN I LOOK AT THAT AND I SEE ALL OF THAT IS GOING INTO THE FACILITY, I JUST THINK THAT THAT MIGHT BE OUT OF BALANCE WITH NOT JUST ROADS, BUT OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN THE CITY. THAT'S WHY I NEED TO SIT BACK AND TAKE THAT IN AND SEE HOW THAT WOULD WORK. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. >> I'M JUST ASKING IT'S REAL HARD FOR GRANT TO GET NUMBERS IF HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. >> I AGREE. WE DON'T WANT TO OVERWHELM HIM AND WHAT HE'S DONE [OVERLAPPING] GIVES US SOME IDEA. BUT AGAIN, WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT, I'M JUST LOOKING AT THAT NUMBER AND I'M THINKING THAT THAT'S MAYBE A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF ALL OF OUR DEBT GOING INTO ONE BASKET. >> IN MY COMMENT OR MY QUESTION FOR TERRY IS ON THE DEBT CAPACITY AND I HEARD YOU SAY THAT IN THE LAST MEETING. WHEN YOU DEFINE DEBT CAPACITY, YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT WHAT CAN WE AFFORD BEFORE WE HAVE TO INCREASE THE TAX RATE, CORRECT? OR ARE YOU REFERRING TO WHAT WE CAN AFFORD OR WHAT CAN WE BORROW BEFORE IT AFFECTS OUR BOND RATING? >> I THINK IT NEEDS TO INCORPORATE WHAT CAN WE AFFORD. I'M GOING TO REFER TO THE GFOA, JUST LOOKING AT SOME OF THEIR GUIDANCE AND I COULDN'T GET TO EVERYTHING BECAUSE I'M NOT A MEMBER. BUT GFOA GIVES OTHER GUIDANCE, IDENTIFIES, KNOWING WHAT DEBT WE CAN AFFORD AND I THINK I MENTIONED THAT RIGHT NOW THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE ANY POLICY WITH RESPECT TO HOW MUCH DEBT, IN THE STATES AS A GENERAL LAW CITY, OUR LIMIT IS PRETTY [LAUGHTER] LOOSE. >> IT'S REALLY HIGH. >> IT'S QUITE HIGH. >> WE WOULDN'T BE ANYWHERE NEAR THAT, REALLY. [OVERLAPPING]. >> MOST COMPANIES HAVE POLICIES THAT SAY WE WILL NOT HAVE DEBT MORE THAN X PERCENT OF MARKET VALUE, OF SOME RATING. BUT IN ADDITION, YOU HAVE SOME GUIDANCE AS TO WHERE DO WE STAND WITH RESPECT TO, AND GFOA SHOWS THIS A LOT, WITH RESPECT TO OTHER CITIES. WHAT ARE THE RATIO OF DEBT TO AVERAGE TAX VALUE? A LOT OF DIFFERENT RATIOS. HOW DO WE COMPARE TO OTHER CITIES CLOSE BY AND AROUND? I DO KNOW AND I WILL ACKNOWLEDGE, OUR DEBT IS VERY LOW RIGHT NOW, WE'RE VERY FORTUNATE ON THAT END. THAT GIVES US A BIT OF CAPACITY. >> I'VE GOT IT ALREADY IN SPREADSHEETS, BUT TAKE ALL THE INS RATES WITH ALL THE SURROUNDING CITIES, LIKE OUR SISTER CITIES AND PROVIDE WHERE WE STAND WITH THEM. THEN ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IF WE WERE TO ISSUE DEBT AND WITH THE NEW INS RATE, WHAT IT WOULD BE COMPARED TO WHAT OUR SURROUNDING CITIES HAVE? THAT'D BE FAIRLY EASY TO PUT TOGETHER. >> ONE THING ABOUT THE INS RATE THOUGH, IS CITY SIZES ARE SO DIFFERENT AROUND US SO OUR RATE AND THE AVERAGE MARKET VALUE OF HOMES HERE IS SO DIFFERENT THAN SAY ALLEN OR PLANO. >> SURE, I WOULDN'T USE THOSE CITIES. BUT I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE FAIR TO USE LUCAS OR MAYBE EVEN MURPHY TO SOME EXTENT, FAIRVIEW, SOME OF THOSE OTHER CITIES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO US. I WOULDN'T PUT ALLEN OR PLANO OR MCKINNEY OR ANY OF THOSE LARGER CITIES ON THAT COMPARISON. JUST TO ADD SOME MORE, JUST TO TELL YOU WHERE WE WERE SAYING IF WE WERE TO ISSUE WITH THE LOW VALUE OR LOW GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS, [01:15:02] IF WE WERE TO ISSUE 20 YEAR, IT WOULD BE ABOUT A 2.1 CENT SHORTAGE THAT WE'D HAVE ON THE TAX RATE FOR MAKING THOSE PAYMENTS. IF WE WENT 30 YEARS, IT WOULD BE SHORT, 1.1 CENT. THAT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT WE'D HAVE TO MAKE UP WHETHER IT'D BE A TAX RATE INCREASE OR A REDUCTION AND LIKE I SAID, THE MNO EXPENSES TO BE ABLE TO OFFSET THAT. IF WE WERE TO USE THE HIGH-GROWTH ASSUMPTION, THAT'S WHERE WE'D ACTUALLY HAVE OUR SAVINGS BECAUSE THE TAX RATE WOULD ACTUALLY FALL JUST BEING BASED ON THE NEW GROWTH COMING IN. >> IT WAS NICE TO SEE YOUR HIGH AND LOW AND THE TRUTH IS, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE THERE. THAT WAS HELPFUL TO SEE THOSE DIFFERENT COMPARISONS. >> TRUE. >> JUST SO I'M CLEAR, AT THIS TIME, TERRY, YOU DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT YOU MIGHT NEED. YOU'RE GOING TO THINK ABOUT IT AND LET US KNOW IF YOU'VE COME UP WITH SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU FEEL WOULD BE BENEFICIAL? >> YES. >> GRANT, IF YOU GOT A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, I NOW UNDERSTAND TO SOME EXTENT THIS WOULD DEPEND ON HOW DETAILED THE INFORMATION MIGHT HAVE TO BE, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED TO PREPARE THAT, TO GET THE INFORMATION? >> WE HAVE UNTIL THE 15TH MEETING. THIS WEEK FOR SURE I WOULD NEED IT AND I WOULD HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GET IT BACK TO YOU THIS WEEK AS WELL SO IN THE NEXT DAY OR TWO. >> IS THAT FEASIBLE TERRY? TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE. [LAUGHTER] WHAT I DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN IS WE GET TO THE NEXT MEETING AND WE NEED THIS INFORMATION OR GRANT GETS IT AT NOON ON TUESDAY AND WE HAVE A MEETING ON WEDNESDAY AND HE DOESN'T HAVE TIME ENOUGH TO GET IT DONE. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET ALL THE DUCKS IN A ROW LINED UP SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. CINDY, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER INFORMATION THAT YOU MIGHT NEED? >> IF I NEED OTHER INFORMATION, I'LL LET YOU KNOW IN THE NEXT DAY OR SO. >> JIM? >> SAME WITH ME. I THINK THE CITY INFORMATION WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO HAVE IN COMPARISON ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVEN'T, I CAN GET READY. WE'LL WORK TOGETHER. >> WE WANT YOU TO HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION YOU NEED, IS JUST WE GOT TO GIVE GRANT TIME TO GET IT AND PUT IT TOGETHER AND MAKE SURE WE DO HAVE IT. BECAUSE TERRY, I UNDERSTAND YOUR FRUSTRATION WELL, IT'S LIKE WE SEE UP HERE WHERE WE'RE PUTTING THINGS OFF BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION. THAT'S WHY I'M REALLY COMING DOWN ON YES, SO WE CAN HOPEFULLY GET IT AND ON THE 15TH WE'RE IN A PLACE TO MOVE FORWARD. THAT WAS FACILITY NOW FOR [11. SALES TAX] SALES TAX. GO AHEAD. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SALES TAXES BEFORE AND IT WAS ON THE BALLOT, I THINK, FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO. AT THAT TIME, THOUGH, IT WAS IT WAS IDENTIFIED AS GOING INTO THE GENERAL FUND. AS WE'VE BEEN TALKING THROUGH THE THE STREETS ISSUE, WE'RE THINKING ABOUT WAYS OF GETTING FUNDING TO HELP ADDRESS OUR STREET MAINTENANCE. WE LEARNED THAT THE STATE DOES ALLOW FOR CITIES TO CHARGE PART OF THEIR SALES TAX UP TO A PENNY, BUT THEY CAN'T GO OVER TWO CENTS TOTAL REVENUE FOR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF MUNICIPAL STREETS. WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THAT, LOOKING AT THAT AS AN OPTION THAT LOOKED APPEALING BECAUSE ONE, [01:20:05] IF WE LOOK AT OTHER CITIES THAT ARE IN COLLIN COUNTY AND REALLY MOST OF THE CITIES IN TEXAS. BUT IN COLLIN COUNTY, ALL BUT THREE CITIES CHARGE TWO CENTS TOTAL SALES TAX. IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE'RE PROVIDED, WE SHOWED WHAT ALL SOME OF THESE WERE FOR. THEY WEREN'T ALL TWO CENTS TOTAL TO THE GENERAL FUND. SOME OF THEM WENT TO SPECIFIC FUNDS. THE STATE RULE SAYS THAT CITIES CAN CHARGE A SALES TAX FOR STREET MAINTENANCE. THE ONLY STIPULATION, WELL ONE, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE USED FOR STREET MAINTENANCE, AND TWO, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REAUTHORIZED EVERY FOUR YEARS. OKAY. QUESTION, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION: WHEN YOU SAY FOR STREET MAINTENANCE THAT MEANS EXISTING STREETS NOT NEW STREETS? THAT IS CORRECT. IT IS EXISTING STREETS. THOSE DEVELOPERS BETTER BE DOING THE NEW ONES. [LAUGHTER]. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD THAT. LUKE WAS TELLING ME THAT'S WHY THE REAUTHORIZATION. HONESTLY, AFTER A FEW YEARS, THE CITY MIGHT DECIDE, WELL, WE DON'T REALLY NEED IT DESIGNATED SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE MAYBE WE'VE GOT A GOOD PROGRAM GOING ON STREETS AND DON'T NEED IT SPECIFICALLY THERE. BUT I LIKE IT THERE BECAUSE WE'VE GOT ACCOUNTABILITY FOR IT. RIGHT NOW WE'VE RECEIVE ONE CENT, ONE PENNY OF SALES TAX AND WE'VE RECEIVED JUST OVER $400,000 IN THE LAST. I GOT NUMBERS FROM THE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE AND THEY LIKE CALENDAR YEAR NUMBER. IT'S ON A CALENDAR YEAR BASIS WHICH IS IN THE DOCUMENTS, BUT IT DOES AGREE WITH WHAT GRANT GETS AS FAR AS THOSE RECEIPTS. JUST OVER $400,000 IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AS WE TALKED ABOUT OUR STREETS THERE'S SEVERAL THINGS THAT WE COULD DO. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK GARY AND LUKE HAD MENTIONED IS IMPROVING OR ENHANCING OUR MAINTENANCE PROGRAM. HAVING A MORE STRUCTURED MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, HOPEFULLY, OUR STREETS WILL START. LAST LONGER. LAST LONGER WITHOUT HAVING TO BE REHABBED. BUT EVEN IF SOME OF THEM NEEDED TO BE REHABBED, I THINK SOME OF THIS MONEY COULD BE USED FOR PARTS OF THAT. WHAT ELSE DID I PROVIDE IN HERE? FUNDING FOR MAINTAINING. THIS WAS THE OTHER THING IS RIGHT NOW 76 PERCENT OF OUR GENERAL FUND EXPENSES ARE COVERED BY PROPERTY TAXES. WE WERE LOOKING AT WAYS OF NOT GOING BACK TO THE PROPERTY TAX PEOPLE AGAIN, OUR HOMEOWNERS, AND SAYING WHERE ELSE CAN THOSE FUNDS COME FROM? SALES TAXES, ALL OTHER CITIES EXCEPT FOR TWO OTHERS HERE IN COLLIN COUNTY ARE ALREADY CHARGING THE TWO CENTS. IN SOME WAYS IT'S PUTTING US ON AN EQUAL PLAYING FIELD WITH THESE OTHER CITIES. THEY'RE GETTING THE BENEFIT OF THE TWO CENTS. WE OUGHT TO GET THE BENEFIT AS WELL. THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I THINK WOULD BE IMPORTANT IS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE A COMMITMENT THAT IF WE PASSED THIS OR IF WE HAVE THE RESIDENTS DECIDED, THAT DOES HAVE TO GO TO THE RESIDENCE FOR A VOTE, IF THE RESIDENTS DECIDED THAT THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COMMITMENT AND MAYBE NOT CITY BUT COUNCIL, THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE TO FUND OUR STREET MAINTENANCE FUND, OUR STREET IN DRAINAGE FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND NOT REDUCE THAT BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING] THIS WOULD BE AN ADDITION TO AND NOT A REDUCTION BECAUSE OTHERWISE THAT WOULDN'T BE A BENEFIT. IT REALLY WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP THE RESIDENTS BY FINDING MORE MONEY TO FIX STREETS. QUESTIONS. OUT OF CURIOSITY, IS THERE A LIMIT ON WHEN YOU HAVE TO SPEND THIS MONEY BAG WITHIN THE FISCAL YEAR SO YOU COULD ROLL IT TO HAVE IT BE A LOT OF MONEY. [01:25:07] THOSE WOULD BE RESTRICTED FUNDS OR RATHER SOLELY RESTRICTED TO THAT ACCOUNT. SO IT COULD ONLY BE USED FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE IT'S JUST LIKE CHILD SAFETY FUNDS, WATER FUNDS, STUFF LIKE THAT. IT'S SPECIFICALLY TIED TO THOSE ACCOUNTS. BUT IT COULD ROLL THOUGH? [OVERLAPPING] YEAH, IT'S RESTRICTED. YOU CAN BUILD UP MONEY FOR A PROJECT OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE. [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] BECAUSE IF WE WERE BLESSED ENOUGH TO TAKE CARE OF OUR NORMAL ROADS UNDER THAT, WE COULD USE THIS AS A SPECIAL FUND TO BUILD UP. [OVERLAPPING]. IN OUR PREVIOUS CITY AT NO POINT, WE HAD LARGE CULVERTS UNDERNEATH THE ROADWAY, 86 INCH CULVERTS, I THINK, IN SOME AREAS. THEY WERE QUITE EXPENSIVE, BUT WE'RE REDOING THOSE ROADWAYS. WE GOT THE OPINION THAT IF THE SUB-BASE ISN'T GOOD AND THE CULVERTS ARE ROTTED OUT THAT WE CAN REPLACE THOSE BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THE ROADWAY STRUCTURE IN ITSELF. THERE ARE THERE SOME THINGS YOU CAN USE FOR THOSE AS LONG AS PART IS TIED TO THAT ROADWAY MAINTENANCE. THE OTHER THING TOO IS THAT IF YOU RAN INTO PROBLEMS WITH THE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION, RESERVICING OR WHATEVER AND IT INVOLVED DRAINING STUFF OR EASEMENT ISSUES OR WHATEVER WE COULD TRIM THOSE UP AS LONG AS THE FUNDING WENT TO THE ROAD CONSTRUCTION, CORRECT? IT WOULD BE A FINE LINE. WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT EACH SPECIFIC AREA. IF IT'S CAUSING THE ROAD ISSUES, I THINK WE COULD WORK SOMETHING OUT. [OVERLAPPING] FROM OUR ENGINEER A LOT OF THE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS THAT WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH IN THE CIP ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE BASE AND ALL THAT THINGS. THAT'S THE WHOLE THING TO SIGN COURT SAMPLES. I'D JUST WANT TO DOUBLE-CHECK THAT SPECIFICALLY BEFORE I GIVE AN ANSWER ON THAT SPECIFIC PORTION, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE DETERMINED BASED ON THE CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE. NEVERTHELESS, IT STILL WILL BE A NICE PARLAY TO BE ABLE TO PUT INTO SOME OF THAT ROAD CONSTRUCTION. IF ASSUMING THIS WENT ON THE BALLOT AND ASSUMING THAT IT PASSED, COUNSEL, DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS THE TIME FROM THE TIME IT'S APPROVED TILL IT CAN BE PUT INTO EFFECT? DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CLUE? IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE LAST TIME WHEN I WENT THROUGH THIS, THERE WAS A DELAY. BUT THEN THE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE NEEDS TO NOTIFY ALL THE BUSINESSES. I THINK THAT'S LIKE A THREE PERIOD. YOU REALLY DON'T SEE ANY BENEFIT UNTIL SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS OUT. I THINK NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER IS WHEN YOU START SEEING THAT THOSE FUNDS ARE COMING IN. YEAH. I WANT TO SAY IT HAS TO DEAL WITH THE ELECTION CYCLE. I THINK IT'S MAY, AUGUST TO NOVEMBER AND NOVEMBER GOES TO MAY. I COULD BE WRONG ON THAT. I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOMETHING THE LAST TIME THAT THE CITY GOT TO DECIDE WHEN THEY WOULD START COLLECTING OR CHANGE THEIR SALES TAX ONCE IT WAS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS AND THE CITY COULD DECIDE SIX MONTHS. I THINK THE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE IS IN LIGHT OF THAT. BECAUSE I THINK IF THERE WAS A DELAY, THEY HAVE TO NOTIFY EVERY BUSINESS AND THEN THEY HAVE TO GIVE THE BUSINESSES, I THINK, IT'S THREE OR FOUR MONTHS TO START IMPLEMENTING IT. THAT ALL TAKES TIME, BUT THEY CAN GIVE YOU SPECIFIC TIMES FOR ALL THAT. I'LL GIVE THOSE DATES SO THAT WE CAN ANSWER THAT. I WAS JUST CURIOUS. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? JIM, ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? I JUST LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING A SHOT IN THE ARM TO BE ABLE TO MAYBE GET AHEAD SOME OF THIS STUFF. I THINK THE PAIN FOR THE CITIZENS IS NOT VERY MUCH. IN FACT, NOT ALL OF IT WOULD BE BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE MONEY COMES IN. IT WOULD BE A NICE SHOT IN THE ARM FOR US. WELL, SINCE THIS IS A WORKSHOP, I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS THE DIRECTION IS THIS GOES TO NEXT WEEK. IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH. WELL, ANYTHING ELSE ON ANYTHING? IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THEN WE ARE ADJOURNED. IT IS 8:08, MY GOSH. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.