[00:00:01]
>> I'M AS BAD AS SOME OF THE REST OF THEM.
[LAUGHTER] AT THIS TIME, I WILL CALL THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING OF
[CALL TO ORDER]
THE CITY OF PARKER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON OCTOBER 2ND, 2023, AT 05:03 PM.MR. OLSON, DO WE HAVE A QUORUM?
>> MADAM MAYOR, YOU HAVE A SUPER QUORUM.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A CARD FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT.
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
MS. MYERS, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE A PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME?[BACKGROUND] IT IS WORKING. DON'T START THE CLOCK YET.
>> I'VE STARTED IT. [LAUGHTER].
>> CINDY MYERS, 6618 OF STATUS DRIVE.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL, AS MOST OF YOU ARE AWARE, THE COMP PLAN COMMITTEE FIZZLED OUT A YEAR OR TWO AGO.
BUT DURING THAT TIME, WE NOTICED THAT THE COMMITTEE LACKED PROGRESS.
AND I SPOKE WITH MICHAEL SLAUGHTER, COUNCILMAN, WHO HEADED THE COMMITTEE AND MADE AN OFFER TO HELP IN THE BACKGROUND TO GET THINGS MOVING.
HE SAID, HE WAS IN PROCESS OF CONVERTING THE TYPEWRITTEN DOCUMENT TO WORD AND THAT HE APPRECIATED MY OFFERING AND LET ME KNOW.
LAST SUMMER, HE SENT ME WHAT HE HAD, BOTH THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS FROM 1987 AND THE 87 DOCUMENT WITH HIS COMMITTEE CHANGES, AND BOTH WERE IN YOUR PACKET.
AT SOME POINT IN 2002, I BELIEVE, WE HAD A JOINT COUNCIL PNC MEETING AND DETERMINED AN AGREED UPON WHAT INFORMATION AND FORMAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE COMP PLAN.
IN THE FALL OF LAST YEAR, I PUT TOGETHER THE BEGINNING OF A ROUGH DRAFT WHICH WAS ALSO INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.
AT THAT TIME, OR SINCE THAT TIME, AND EVEN AFTER I LEFT COUNCIL IN MAY, I SPENT HOURS DEVELOPING IT TO A POINT MINUS THE CIP PORTION THAT IT WOULD BE READY TO GO TO COUNCIL ON PNC, IF YOU CHOOSE TO USE IT.
I HAVE NOT SHARED THE REVISED DOCUMENT WITH ANYONE.
SO IT IS UNCLEAR ON HOW IT WAS GOING TO BE HANDLED GOING FORWARD, AND IF ANYBODY WOULD USE IT.
AND THAT INCLUDED THE TWO BRIEF MEETINGS I HAD WITH COUNCILMAN KERCHO.
PERSONALLY, I THINK YOU WOULD WANT TO USE IT, BUT THAT DECISION IS YOURS AND PNCS.
I'VE DONE MY PART, SO I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO YOU.
AND IF COUNCIL AS A WHOLE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN IT, I'D BE HAPPY TO FORWARD IT ON.
AND I HAVE ANOTHER SUBJECT TO TALK ABOUT REAL QUICKLY.
I GLANCED THROUGH THE CIP PLAN THIS WEEKEND, AND I NOTICED THAT THERE'S SOME PRETTY AGGRESSIVE THINGS IN THERE.
AND I'D LIKE TO REMIND COUNCIL TO KEEP IN MIND THE CURRENT LAND BEING DEVELOPED.
ONCE THE CURRENT LAND BEING DEVELOPED IS COMPLETE, WE HAVE RELATIVELY LITTLE ETJ LEFT FOR DEVELOPMENT COMPARED TO THE WHOLE CITY, IT'S SOMETHING LIKE 17%.
SO I KNOW MUCH NEEDS TO BE ACCOMPLISHED.
AND THERE HAVE BEEN COORDINATED EFFORTS IN THE PAST TO DEFEAT BONDS AND DELAY PROGRESS AND ALL THAT.
BUT IT WINDS UP COSTING THE TAXPAYERS OF PARKER A LOT OF MONEY.
POSTPONING THINGS TO THE FUTURE WITH EVER-INCREASING COSTS OF MATERIALS AND INTEREST RATES.
SO PLEASE CONSIDER A METHODICAL SOLUTION GOING FORWARD SO OUR TAXPAYERS AREN'T STRAPPED WITH A MOUNTAIN OF HIGH-INTEREST DEBT.
LASTLY, I'D LIKE TO REMIND COUNCIL THAT WE NEED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF [OVERLAPPING] THESE COUNTY GRANTS WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE.
IT'LL BE ON THE BOND ELECTION COMING UP.
>> THANK YOU. I'D ASK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS, BUT SEEING NO PUBLIC HERE.
I HAVE FAILED TO DO MY DUTY IN TERMS OF I DIDN'T INTRODUCE EVERYBODY TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE WATCHING.
AT THAT END IS COUNCIL MEMBER RANDY KERCHO.
NEXT TO HIM IS COUNCIL MEMBER TERRY LYNCH.
NEXT TO HER IS MAYOR PRO-TERM JIM REED.
NEXT TO HIM IS CITY ATTORNEY AMY STANPHILL.
THIS IS LUKE OLSON OUR CITY ADMINISTRATOR, NEXT TO HIM IS AMANDA NOE COUNCIL MEMBER.
AND NEXT TO HER IS COUNCIL MEMBER TODD FECHT, SITTING ON THE FRONT ROW AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL CAN SEE HIM OR NOT,
[00:05:04]
IS BRENT SAVAGE, OUR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.NEXT TO HIM IS GARY MACHADO, OUR DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
AND NEXT TO HIM IS OUR CITY'S SECRETARY AND ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR, PATTI SCOTT GREY.
[LAUGHTER] WELL, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE WATCHING, THEY INDICATE THAT IT'S HARD BECAUSE THEY CAN'T SEE OUR NAMEPLATES, SO IT'S HARD FOR THEM.
[1. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) CONSIDERATION OF PHASED APPROACH]
WE WILL GO TO ITEM 1 WHICH IS THE CIP CONSIDERATION OF PHASED APPROACH.>> WHO WANTS TO START? [LAUGHTER]
>> SO MADAM MAYOR, I'LL JUST DO AN INTRODUCTION IN TERMS OF THE CONTENT OF YOUR PACKET WITH A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE NEW MATERIAL, THAT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE PACKET FOR TODAY.
SO JUST AS A QUICK RECAP OF OUR LAST MEETING.
[BACKGROUND] SO WE CAME FROM OUR LAST MEETING ON PAGE 31, THERE IS THE SPREADSHEET THAT WE WERE WORKING WITH AND TALKING ABOUT IDEAS ABOUT PRIORITIZING ROAD REPAIRS IN TERMS OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WHICH YOU'LL SEE IS THE RECAP OF THE SUMMARY OF WHERE WE LEFT OFF SHOWN HERE ON THE PACKET ON PAGE 31.
SINCE THAT TIME, SINCE THAT LAST MEETING, COUNCIL MEMBER LYNCH AND I WORKED TOGETHER ON INCORPORATING THAT INFORMATION THAT WAS ON OUR LAST MEETING SPREADSHEET INTO A INITIAL DRAFT 0.1 DRAFT VERSION OF THE START OF A CIP DOCUMENT THAT JUST STARTED WITH THE ASSUMPTION OF THESE ITEMS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
BUT REALLY THE CONCEPT IS TO PUT IT INTO A FORMAT WHERE IT STARTS TO TAKE FORM INTO A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, AND HAVE A DOCUMENT THAT WE CAN ALL COLLECTIVELY TALK THROUGH AND WORK ON SUCH THAT WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH OUR MEETINGS, WE END UP WITH A FINAL PRODUCT WHICH IS A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEN WE'RE FINISHED.
SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS TAKING AS A START WHERE WE LEFT OFF LAST TIME, PUTTING IT INTO A WORD DOCUMENT, AND THEN ADDING OTHER INFORMATION FROM OUR PREVIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT IMPACT STUDY FOR WATER THINGS.
[LAUGHTER] THANK YOU. AND INCORPORATED THE IDEAS OF WHERE WE LEFT OFF ON THE STREETS, INCORPORATING IDEAS FROM THE WATER IMPACT FEE STUDY, INCORPORATING THE CONCEPT OF FUTURE FACILITIES THAT WE MAY NEED TO BUILD.
WE'RE JUST PUTTING IT ON PAPER SO THAT WE CAN GO THROUGH PAGE BY PAGE, AND JUST START TALKING ABOUT IT AND CONSIDERING WHAT THINGS DO WE WANT TO HAVE THAT PLAN.
BUT THIS GIVES US A MORE SOLIDIFIED FRAMEWORK FOR DISCUSSION.
SO WE WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF TALK THROUGH THAT TODAY.
>> IF I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT IS A ROUGH DRAFT.
>> ABSOLUTELY. SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE NAMED IT WORD 0.1 WITH THE INTENTION OF REVIEWING IT, REVISING IT THROUGH 0.3, 0.5,0.7, 0.9 FINALLY TO THE FINAL RELEASE OF 1.0.
SO THIS IS THE VERY FIRST DRAFT.
THE CONCEPT HERE IS TO TALK THROUGH EACH PAGE AND COLLECTIVELY DISCUSS, DO WE WANT TO MAKE IT CHEAP? DO WE LIKE WHAT'S HERE? DO WE WANT TO MAKE CHANGES TO WHAT'S HERE? BUT WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH THE WHOLE PROCESS, WE'LL END UP WITH A DOCUMENT THAT WE'VE ALL TALKED THROUGH AND AGREED ON AS A COUNCIL.
>> IF I CAN ELABORATE, MAYBE IF WE LOOK AT IT FROM A STRATEGIC STANDPOINT TO FOLLOW UP WITH WHAT OUR COUNCIL MEMBER NOAH IS TALKING ABOUT, IS THAT WHAT WE WANTED TO TRY TO DO AND WHAT HAS BEEN PUT TOGETHER HERE BY COUNCILMAN LYNCH AND COUNCILMAN NOAH IS AN OVERVIEW.
WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS WE WANT TO COMPREHEND ALL OF THE POTENTIAL ITEMS THAT
[00:10:03]
WE CAN AT LEAST FORESEE RIGHT NOW FOR THE FUTURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF PARKER.WE ALL KNOW THAT'S WHAT THE CAPITAL PERMANENT PAIN IS, BUT WE HADN'T HAD THAT IN THE PAST AND WE'VE STUMBLED A LITTLE BIT ON THAT.
I'M TRYING TO GET IT TOGETHER.
WITH THE INITIAL OUTLINES THAT WERE PUT TOGETHER IN PREVIOUS COMMITTEES AND OTHER MEETINGS THAT BOILED DOWN TO WHAT CAME FROM THE LAST MEETING, THIS IS THE OUTPUT OF THAT.
THE BOTTOM LINE HERE, FROM MY OPINION OF THIS, OF HOW I THINK IT SHOULD GO FORWARD IS THAT THIS WILL PROVIDE US WHEN WE GO INTO OUR ANNUAL BUDGETS, A VERY GOOD STRAW MAN FOR HOW WE PULL THAT INTO EACH YEAR.
YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S COMING UP IN TWO OR THREE YEARS.
WHEN THOSE TWO OR THREE YEARS COME TO PRESENT, WE'LL BE SEEING THAT IN ADVANCE.
YOU CAN PULL THAT IN AND IT'S NOT A SURPRISE TO ANYBODY.
I THINK THAT'S WHY SOME OF THE OTHER EQUIPMENT AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT ARE LISTED ON HERE, WE TRIED TO MAKE IT FAIRLY COMPREHENSIVE AND THEY'VE DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF THAT, I THINK.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO GOING THROUGH IT.
AS I SAID, THIS IS THE FIRST REVISION OF IT.
BUT I DO THINK THAT IT HAS A LOT OF GREAT INFORMATION IN HERE AND HATS OFF TO THEM FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER AND PULLING IT DOWN.
>> MEREDITH, MY WIFE WAS ACTUALLY ON THE COMMITTEE FOR YEARS WITH MICHAEL, AND THIS IS A PHENOMENAL PIECE THAT THEY PUT TOGETHER.
IT MIGHT BE REALLY GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE WATCHING.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, JUST EXPLORE EACH PAGE TO US, WE DISCUSS IT AS WE GO.
>> I DO WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING.
THIS IS NOT THE WORK THAT WAS BEING DONE BY MICHAEL, THAT WAS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THIS IS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
I AGREE, I THINK GOING THROUGH PAGE BY PAGE, EVEN THOUGH THE TABLE OF CONTENTS, I THINK WILL BE IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE THAT WERE IN AGREEMENT OF THE STRUCTURE OF THINGS.
ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS A RESULT OF THIS.
WE CAN PUT ALL THESE THINGS IN THE DOCUMENT, BUT AS COUNCIL MEMBER MEYER MENTIONED, THIS HAS A LOT OF IDEAS IN IT AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THIS IS SAYING TO US.
IS THIS REALISTIC? THIS REALLY WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
OR DO WE NEED TO STEP BACK AND SAY, IS THIS WHO PARKER IS? THAT'S PART OF THIS PROCESS IS GETTING THAT REALITY INTO US.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT IN READING, IT IS AN EXCELLENT STOCK.
BUT THERE'S THINGS THAT WHEN YOU READ IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A DONE DEAL THAT WAS VOTED ON IN BESOTTED BY ALLAH COUNCIL AND THAT'S NOT TRUE.
THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING IS THIS A ROUGH DRAFT?
>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. WE TRIED TO PUT DRAFT ACROSS THE PAGES, TRIED TO PUT RAB0.1 WITH AS MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO STATE THAT THIS IS A DRAFT FIRST PROPOSAL.
>> IT'S HELPFUL TO CONTINUE TO REITERATE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING WE'RE PUTTING OUT THERE FOR DISCUSSION EXACTLY.
>> BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME RESIDENTS THAT BELIEVE IT OR NOT, READ ALL STUFF.
>> YEAH, WE WE TRIED TO PUT DRAFT IT WAS POSSIBLE ACROSS ALL THE PAGES. HOPEFULLY.
>> LIKE I SAID, THAT'S WHERE I WANT IT TO BE VERY CLEAR ON THE TERM.
>> MADAM MAYOR, ONE OTHER COMMENT TOO, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS AS WE GO THROUGH AND IT'S IN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT.
BUT THE IDEA HERE IS THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE AN EVERGREEN DOCUMENT.
IT'S GOING TO BE A DOCUMENT THAT'S GOING TO MOLD, CONTINUE TO CHANGE AS NEEDED FOR WHAT WE'RE SEEING.
AGAIN, THE IDEA HERE IS THAT LET'S GET SOME BIT OF CONCRETE IDEA OF WHAT THE PIECES OF THIS ARE GOING TO BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS DONE FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ACTUALLY GET SOMETHING DOWN ON PAPER.
LET'S USE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN START WITH HERE.
I THINK IT'S A GREAT START AND I LOOK FORWARD TO DIGGING INTO IT.
KUDOS ON THIS, THIS IS EXCELLENT AND I'M GLAD THAT IT'S A DRAFT THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED AS WE GO ALONG. WONDERFUL.
>> ABSOLUTELY. COUNCIL MEMBER LYNCH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THE-
>> QUICK REQUEST, LOOK, CAN YOU MAKE THAT BIGGER SO PEOPLE- [LAUGHTER]
>> ME TOO. COUNCIL MEMBER LYNCH I'LL LET YOU TALK THROUGH EACH PAGE AS WE GO WHEN WE GET TO THAT PART.
>> HERE IS ONE COMMENT FROM A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PERSPECTIVE, WOULD WE INCLUDE VEHICLES AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, AND THEIR ASSOCIATED BE INCLUDED IN YOUR INDEX.
REALLY ANYTHING THAT IS CONSIDERED, "A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT WITHIN THE CITY PROBABLY SHOULD BE INCLUDED."
>> THERE'S SOME DEFINITIONS WHERE WE GET INTO THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT.
[00:15:03]
WHEN WE DIG INTO THE DOCUMENT, THERE'S SOME DEFINITIONS AND SOME BROAD CATEGORIES OF THESE DIFFERENT THINGS WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT DEFINE IT AND SOME DID IT.>> THAT YOU'LL SEE IT'S ACTUALLY IN HERE, BUT OUR TERMINOLOGY MIGHT BE A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
>> WHEN YOU COME ACROSS THAT, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE POINT OUT THAT SO IT'S CLEAR FOR EVERYBODY WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT TOO, BECAUSE AS WE GO THROUGH IT, THIS ISN'T A DONE THING.
THIS IS WHAT WE PUT TOGETHER AND WE REALLY DO WANT INPUT FROM COUNCIL TO SAY I DON'T LIKE THAT.
LET'S CHANGED THE TERMINOLOGY.
LET'S GET RID OF THAT, THAT TYPE OF THING.
I'LL START WITH THE TABLE OF CONTENTS.
I'LL DO THE EASY PART [LAUGHTER] AND GIVE AMANDA THE REST.
OUR DOCUMENT STARTS WITH JUST A BASIC INTRODUCTION OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE.
THEN WE IDENTIFY OR PROVIDE A LIST OF THE ACTIVE CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING OR THAT'S BEING PLANNED.
YEAH, IT'S NOT ANTICIPATING IS BEING PLANNED.
IT'S IN THE BUDGET FOR THIS UPCOMING YEAR.
THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE IN THE NEXT SECTION.
THEN THE NEXT SECTION, THE CAPITAL PROJECTS SCHEDULED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR THROUGH '28, '29, WHICH IS THE CURRENT YEAR, PLUS FIVE MORE YEARS.
IT'S NOT A LONG TERM, BUT IT'S A MIDTERM PROJECTION OF WHAT WE SEE COMING IN THE FUTURE SO THAT WE DON'T GET SURPRISED ON SOME OF THE THINGS WE FIND OURSELVES GETTING SURPRISED ON.
FROM THERE, THE NEXT PIECE, WE PROVIDE THE SPECIFIC DETAILS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS FOR EACH OF THE SPECIFIC AREAS.
THE FIRST THING IS CAN WE MIGHT GO AHEAD AND LOOP.
IF YOU CAN FLIP THROUGH, LET'S FLIP THE INTRODUCTION, PAGE DOWN TO THE INTRODUCTION.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY TO DO THIS.
WELL, LET ME FINISH, JUST GIVING THE OVERVIEW AND THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD ON IT.
THIS NEXT PIECE IS SPECIFIC SCHEDULES, SPREADSHEETS THAT SHOW ALL OF THE ITEMS WITHIN THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES AND THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES WE HAVE IS FACILITIES.
WE'VE GOT THE FACILITIES, WE'VE GOT STREETS AND DRAINAGE, WE'VE GOT WATER INFRASTRUCTURE.
THOSE ARE THE MAJOR AREAS THAT WE'VE GOT.
>> WE DO HAVE VEHICLES IN THERE.
MAYBE IT'S JUST NOT SHOWING AS A SPECIFIC LINE ITEM IN THE CONTENTS, BUT THEY'RE IN THERE.
>> ACTUALLY, THAT WOULD BE IN THE CAPITAL PROJECT SCHEDULE.
THE THING YOU'RE NOT SEEING, THAT'S WHERE THE ACTUAL SPREADSHEETS ARE.
DIFFERENT SUMMARIZATIONS WE'VE HAD [LAUGHTER] ON OUR THING, BUT THE SPREADSHEETS THEMSELVES WILL SEE ALL OF THE INDIVIDUAL SCHEDULES IN ALL OF THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS WE'RE LOOKING AT AND WE'LL GET TO THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT SPECIFICS.
THEN THIS NEXT PIECE IS DETAIL OF THE PROJECT.
>> LET ME ASK A QUESTION, RANDY DID YOU TELL ME THAT SOFTWARE AND THAT THING SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS PLAN?
>> CAPITAL PROJECTS OR CAPITAL ITEM IS REALLY ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO LAST BEYOND A YEAR.
SOFTWARE WOULD BE INCLUDED, BUT I SEE READING AHEAD THAT THEY'VE SAID CAPITAL PROJECTS AND AT $25,000 LIMIT, WHICH I GUESS IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
BUT THEN PERHAPS SOME OF SOFTWARE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WOULD BE BELOW THAT ANYWAY.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE DO TALK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THAT'S SOME GOOD POINTS IN THERE.
WE DEBATED BACK-AND-FORTH ON THAT, WHAT TO INCLUDE AND WHAT NOT.
I THINK THAT'S WORTHY OF MORE DISCUSSION.
>> AGAIN WE HAVE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE'VE GOT INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS THAT ARE PLANNED FOR THIS NEXT YEAR THAT ARE IN THE BUDGET.
TYPICALLY WHAT I'VE SEEN AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS IS YOU MIGHT GET THE FIRST YEAR AND SECOND YEAR MORE DETAILED BECAUSE IN THEORY YOU'RE WORKING ON THAT SECOND YEAR TRYING TO PULL THINGS TOGETHER, BUT THEN YOU GET TB TO BE DETERMINED TYPE OF ITEMS.
[00:20:01]
NOT A LOT OF DETAIL.IF YOU'RE HERE FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION MEETING, IT'S IN THE FIRE STATION.
IF YOU'RE HERE FOR CIP, WONDERFUL. GO AHEAD.
>> THESE ARE THE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS AND THEN WE PROVIDE SOME REFERENCE REPORTS FOR THE CAPITAL NEEDS.
WHERE ARE WE GETTING SOME OF THIS INFORMATION? ALL OF THIS INFORMATION ISN'T BEING CREATED BY THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN COMMITTEE, IT'S BEING DONE IN OTHER AREAS AS AMANDA MENTIONED EARLIER.
THE WATER IMPACT FEE STUDY, WE'VE GOT THE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PLAN SCHEDULE.
WE'VE GOT THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS.
THE STREET CONDITIONS SURVEY, THOSE THINGS ARE CRITICAL TO THIS AND WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS IT.
THEN WE HAVE FINANCING, HOW ARE WE GOING TO FINANCE THE CIP? THAT I'M SURE WILL BE ANOTHER GOOD DISCUSSION, BUT WE TRIED TO PROVIDE SOME OF THE BASICS.
WHAT ARE THE CURRENT SOURCES OF FUNDS THAT WE COULD HAVE? HOW DO WE CURRENTLY FUND? WHAT'S OUR EXISTING DEBT OBLIGATIONS? WHAT SOME CONSIDERATIONS ON LONG-TERM DEBT? THE LAST SCHEDULE OR THE LAST SECTION IS CAPITAL PLANNING CYCLE GOING FORWARD.
HOW IS THIS CAPITAL PLAN GOING TO CONTINUE? AS JIM INDICATES, AS AN EVERGREEN DOCUMENT, IT'S GOT TO BE MAINTAINED ON A REGULAR BASIS.
THERE'S A PROPOSAL THERE OF HOW THIS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN COMMITTEE WILL PROGRESS AND CONTINUE THIS PROCESS. NOW TO AMANDA.
>> THANKS TERRY. [LAUGHTER] FIRST OF ALL, ANY QUESTIONS OR SUGGESTIONS FOR CHANGES ON THE FIRST TABLE OF CONTENTS.
WE'LL GO INTO THE NEXT SECTION, WHICH IS THE INTRODUCTION.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS JUST A PICTURE OF A CONCEPTUAL REVISION FOR THE NEW PARKER WATER DEPARTMENT FACILITY IS JUST A VISUAL OF THE TYPE OF BUILDING THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO TRY TO ACHIEVE AS ONE OF OUR NEAR-TERM PROJECTS.
THEN WE GO THROUGH HERE WITH AN INTRODUCTION.
THE CONCEPT HERE IT'S MEANT TO BE A TOOL FOR THE CITY OFFICIALS AND THE PUBLIC SO THAT ALL ARE AWARE OF OUR FUTURE PROJECT NEEDS.
ULTIMATELY THE PLAN ENCOURAGES CAREFUL PROJECT PLANNING AND DESIGN TO AVOID THE COSTLY MISTAKES THAT COULD COME FROM NOT BEING ABLE TO HAVE EVERYTHING IN THE COMPREHENSIVE IN A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
NEXT, WE TALK ABOUT ALL THIS SEVERAL [OVERLAPPING]
>> I HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS JUST MINUTIA.
I THINK OVERALL WHAT'S ON HERE, I THINK IS VERY GOOD.
THE FIRST BULLET UNDER THE WELL-PLANNED CITY, I WAS SUGGESTING THAT WE MIGHT SAY SOMETHING THAT MAXIMIZE THE UTILIZATION OF THE MISCIBLE ASSETS AS OPPOSED TO MAKE FULL USE.
BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S POSSIBLE TO MAKE FULL USE WHEN WE HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT ARE PIECE PART THINGS WERE EITHER HAVE THREE OR FOUR, AND THREE DOESN'T GET IT DONE BUT FOUR US MAYBE A LITTLE EXCESS, SO MAYBE MAXIMIZE THE USAGE MIGHT BE A BETTER WAY TO SAY THAT.
I DON'T KNOW. THE OTHER THING IS I DIDN'T NECESSARILY LIKE THE DECREASE RISK OF PILING UP HUGE.
JUST PERSONALLY, I WAS SAYING MAYBE WE WANT TO SAY SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT.
WHAT DO I HAVE HERE? I WRITE A WORD DOWN HERE AND I'M GOING TO UNABLE TO READ MY WRITING NOW.
I MAXIMIZE UTILIZATION AND THEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT INFLATED RATHER THAN PILING UP A HUGE INCREASE RISK INFLATED FUTURE EXPANSIONS OR SOMEBODY LIKE THAT, [INAUDIBLE].
>> LET ME OR SHE IS INTERESTED IN WORDSMITHING OR ARE YOU MORE INTERESTED IN THE COMMENTS IN THE OVERHAUL AT THIS POINT.
>> WE ARE IN THE OVERHAUL ACTUALLY.
AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, BUT IT WAS JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> TO ME WE WOULD WORDSMITHIDED TOWARD TWO OR THREE MEETINGS MAYBE FOREVER.
I DON'T WANT THIS RIPPED APART BECAUSE OF THIS WORD OR THAT WORD. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT WAS ONLY BECAUSE THIS IS JUST TO VERY FIRST.
>> YEAH, JUST TWO COMMENTS OF COURSE.
>> THAT WAS THE ONLY REASON I SAID THAT.
>> I JUST NEED A CLARIFICATION ON WHAT WE [OVERLAPPING].
>> NO ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IT COULD SOUND LIKE I'M GOING TO FIT, I'M CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO WORDSMITH ALL THESE BITS.
SINCE IT WAS THE FIRST SEVEN BULLETS OF THIS, I THOUGHT MAYBE THOSE WE MIGHT WANT TO JUST [OVERLAPPING].
[00:25:03]
>> LET ME SEE. THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT GOALS THAT THIS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CAN ACHIEVE TO MAKE FULL USE OF OUR ASSETS, TO MINIMIZE REPLACEMENT COST, DECREASE RISK OF LIABILITY, ENHANCE OUR EFFICIENCIES, AND HOW WE OPERATE AS A CITY, INCREASE THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF PARKER AS A PLACE TO LIVE.
IT'S INTENDED TO BE UPDATED ANNUALLY.
AS WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A LIVING DOCUMENT.
THIS IS INTENDED TO BE UPDATED ANNUALLY.
I'M EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF ESTABLISH A FIRST DRAFT, BUT THEN KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE UPDATES TO COME OVER TIME.
AND JUST CONTINUALLY BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE TO CAPTURE THE NEEDS AS THE CITY'S NEEDS CHANGE.
HERE'S JUST A LITTLE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE INTRODUCTION.
NEEDING ADEQUATE FUNDING OF CAPITAL NEEDS PRESENTS SMALL CITIES WITH SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES, AND PARKER IS NO EXCEPTION.
WITH APPROPRIATE PLANNING AND CAREFUL USE OF RESOURCES, THE CITY CAN ADJUST MANY OF OUR MOST PRESSING NEEDS AND IN AN AFFORDABLE AND SUSTAINABLE WAY.
THEN WE GO THROUGH AND WE TALK ABOUT THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CAPITAL PLANNING PROCESS.
TO MAINTAIN OUR PHYSICAL ASSETS, TO PURSUE A PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, TO PROVIDE AND PRESERVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND EQUIPMENT NEEDED FOR OUR CITY ARE SOME OF THE KEY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THIS PLANNING PROCESS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THIS SECTION SO FAR? TERRY, I THINK I'LL LET YOU CONTINUE FROM HERE ON THE DEFINITION OF THE CAPITAL ASSETS.
>> THE DEFINITION OF A CAPITAL ASSET.
WELL, THE ASSET DESCRIPTION WITH THE ESTIMATED USEFUL LIFE CAME DIRECTLY FROM THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
THIS IS WHAT OUR AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS REFLECT.
IT ALSO IDENTIFIES THAT ASSET WITH A COST OF 5,000 OR MORE AND USEFUL LIFE IN EXCESS OF ONE YEAR IS TO BE CONSIDERED.
>> I THINK GOING BACK TO [INAUDIBLE] COACH'S QUESTION EARLIER, IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE SOME SOFTWARE PACKAGES SHOULD BE THEN INCLUDED IN THE PLAN.
IS THAT KIND OF WHAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND?
>> COULD WE INCORPORATE GRANT INTO THE DISCUSSION A LITTLE BIT HERE, SINCE HE'S FAMILIAR WITH WHAT WE HAVE ON THERE?
>> I DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT PIECE INTO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED OF THE MINUTIA, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE SOFTWARE YET IN COMPUTERS, ETC., WOULD BE IN THERE.
>> SURE. I THINK THAT AS FAR AS IT STUFF, OBVIOUSLY, IF WE WERE TO BUY A NEW PHONE FOR A DESK, THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE IN THERE AS A CAPITAL ASSET.
BUT ON THE INITIAL PURCHASE, WHENEVER WE BUY THE PHONE SYSTEM, WE'RE ABLE TO INCLUDE ALL THE PHONES IN THERE.
IT'D BE INCLUDED, GROUPED TOGETHER.
SAME THING WITH KIND OF COMPUTERS.
COMPUTERS, TYPICALLY, THE AUDITORS DON'T CAPITALIZE COMPUTERS.
MOST OF THEM DON'T REACH $5,000.
SO IT WOULDN'T BE INCLUDED ON THE CAPITAL ASSET SCHEDULE.
BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT IT BE ON THE SCHEDULE BECAUSE WHENEVER YOU ARE REPLACING 30, 40 COMPUTERS, HONESTLY, THAT'S A LARGE EXPENSE.
AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.
I THINK, WHEN WE FIRST GOT HERE, EVERYONE'S COMPUTER WAS REPLACED BECAUSE THEY ARE OLD.
NOW HERE WE ARE FIVE YEARS LATER, AND EVERYONE'S COMPUTERS PROBABLY AT THE END OF ITS LIFE.
I PROBABLY THINK THAT IT WOULDN'T BE A BAD IDEA TO HAVE THAT TYPE OF STUFF IN THE POLICY OR THE SCHEDULE HERE BECAUSE IT WASN'T KIND OF DEFINITION WHEN TO LOOK TO REPLACE THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
SO I THINK THIS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THAT.
>> WOULD THAT BE UNDER EQUIPMENT OR IS THAT A SEPARATE DEAL, OR WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY EQUIPMENT?
>> MAYBE I CAN ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON THIS BECAUSE WITH MY COMMENT IS THAT, SO ON THE ACTUAL [INAUDIBLE]
[00:30:06]
$5,000, IF YOU WERE TO KIND OF PULL IT OUT.IN THE ABOVE CASE HERE YOU'D HAVE 5,000 LIMIT, BUT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT, HOW WE WANT TO DO IT.
THAT WAS KIND OF WHAT WAS KEEN AND SEEMED TO WORK PRETTY WELL.
BUT IF WE HAVE TO MANIPULATE THAT A LITTLE BIT, I THINK FINE.
BUT I THINK THAT WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT IT, I THINK 99% OF THE TIME THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BE NESTED WHERE THEY FALL IN THERE.
BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO MESSED UP INTO MINUTIA OF THIS SIMILAR TO THE SNIPPING.
BUT I'M ALSO LOOKING AT LIKE A SERVER.
THE SERVER CAN BE VERY EXPENSIVE AS OPPOSED TO JUST A REGULAR COMPUTER.
IS THAT A CAPITAL? IS THAT FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT?
>> [OVERLAPPING] ONE THING WOULD BE TO LOOK AT AS S GRANT IS ON THE BALANCE SHEET, WHAT CATEGORIES DO YOU HAVE UNDER ASSETS? DO YOU HAVE SOFTWARE AS ONE OF THE DESCRIPTIVE ITEMS ON YOUR BALANCE SHEET?
>> YES, IT'S GROUPED SIMILAR TO THE [INAUDIBLE].
>> IS IT SEPARATE FROM FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT, YOU HAVE SOFTWARE LINE ITEM OR WHAT?
>> IT'S ALL GROUPED TOGETHER, AND SO OFTEN THE FINANCIALS THIS IS GOING TO HAVE ONE BIG TOTAL FOR DISRUPTION, ONE BIG TOTAL FOR FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT.
>> MORE BASED UPON WHAT WE WOULD WANT TO LOOK AT IT AND WHAT FORMAT WE'D WANT TO LOOK AT IT.
IF IT IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO LOOK AT DIFFERENTLY, OR WE CAN GROUP IT AND EQUIPMENT AS WELL.
EACH GET IT OR WORKING ON THIS.
>> ANOTHER ASPECT THAT COMES TO MY MIND AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS.
AGAIN, IT'S THAT THE DISTINCTION THAT THERE'S TO ME TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS.
THE SERVERS, THE BIG DOLLAR ITEMS, AND ALL THESE LITTLE ITEMS. THE LITTLE ITEMS, I'M OF THE BELIEF THEY'RE MORE OF A BUDGET ITEM THAN A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ITEM, AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED THERE AND NOT INCORPORATED MORE INTO A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
HOWEVER, THE LARGER ITEMS, DEFINITELY NEED TO BE CONSIDERED FOR CAPITAL NEEDS. RANDY.
>> WELL, I THINK GRANT SPELLED IT OUT.
IF IT'S A SMALL ITEM AND IF I BUY ONE COMPUTER AND IT'S A $1,000, I DON'T DO IT.
IF I GO OUT AND BUY 30 COMPUTERS, IT BECOMES A CAPITAL ITEM BECAUSE I TRACK THAT ENTIRE PURCHASE.
IF IT'S A SERVER ABOVE $5,000, I TRACK IT.
IT BASICALLY IS WHAT AUDITORS IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SHOW HERE IS THAT IF YOU MAKE A PURCHASE THAT IS $5,000 OR MORE, WHETHER IT'S ONE ITEM OR A WHOLE GROUP OF ITEMS, AND IT'S GOING TO LAST MORE THAN ONE YEAR, THEN IT SHOULD BE ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
>> BECAUSE AS FAR AS SOFTWARE, THE LAST BIG SOFTWARE PACKAGE WE BOUGHT WAS IN CODE OR THE TYLER TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE AND THAT WAS WHAT?
>> SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY-ISH, I DON'T KNOW.
>> THAT WAS GOING TO BE OUR BIG ONETIME PURCHASE FOR THAT PACKAGE.
>> AGAIN, WE CAN TWEAK THIS A LITTLE BIT, BUT I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE VERY FEW ITEMS THAT FALL OUTSIDE OF THESE CATEGORIES.
AND IF IT WOULD BE FOR SOME REASON, IT PROBABLY IS A SUBCATEGORY OF A BIGGER PROJECT AND IT WILL BE NESTED.
>> I UNDERSTAND AND NOT GETTING INTO THE MINUTIA, BUT I DON'T WANT ANYTHING THAT WE THINK IS MINUTIA THAT FRED DOESN'T, THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER.
>> THE OTHER PIECE IS THE FUND, BECAUSE IT'S ONE FUND THAT USES THE MINUTIA AND THE LARGE DOLLAR NUMBERS IS THE OTHER KIND OF CHALLENGE WITH THAT AND MAYBE WE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT, BECAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT THAN FIGURING OUT OUR FUNDING SOURCES FOR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
SO MAYBE WE JUST TAKE A LOOK AT HOW WE SPLIT THAT OUT AS WE LOOK AT IT. I COULD HANDLE THAT.
>> DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THE DEFINITION OF THE PROJECT, TERRY?
>> THE DEFINITION OF A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT? [NOISE] THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND JIM WAS ALLUDING TO THIS EARLIER, WE HAVE CAPITAL ASSETS,
[00:35:04]
BUT ALL CAPITAL ASSETS DON'T HAVE A PHYSICAL PROJECT THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT.FOR PURPOSES OF OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND MONITORING AND ESPECIALLY FOR COUNCIL PURPOSES, PROJECT COST OF 25,000 OR GREATER IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
THE PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND ALL OF THE RELATED COST OF THAT AND THE EQUIPMENT NEEDED TO PURCHASE THAT OR TO FURNISH THE BUILDING.
RENOVATIONS THAT WE MAKE, MAJOR RENOVATIONS ON THE EXISTING BUILDINGS WITHIN THE PARAMETERS, EQUIPMENT ACQUISITIONS, NEW CONSTRUCTION, OR MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS, FEASIBILITY STUDIES BECAUSE THOSE ARE PART OF THE CAPITAL AND THE WATER IMPACT.
THOSE TYPES OF THINGS ARE IMPORTANT AND ARE THINGS THAT WE FEEL SHOULD BE PART OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
WE HAVE A THING IN HERE FOR FACILITIES MAINTENANCE, AND WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING WITH RESPECT TO STREET MAINTENANCE PROJECTS.
STREET MAINTENANCE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, BUT THAT'S ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE THINK IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A BIGGER BUCKET.
THE GOAL HERE IS THAT WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT ALL THE MINUTIA, BUT WE'LL SEE WHAT THE MAJOR PROJECTS ARE.
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO BE ACCOMPLISHING ON MAINTENANCE DURING THE YEAR? THAT'S MOVE ON.
IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ANYTHING ABOVE 5,000 OR MORE IS PART OF IT.
BUT WE DON'T CALL IT A PROJECT UNLESS IT'S ABOUT 25,000.
BUT THE POINT IS CALLED THE PROJECT.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN VERSUS JUST BEING A NOUN, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN?
>> THE WAY I LOOK AT THAT IS IF IT'S UNDER $25,000, COUNCIL, WE NEED TO ALLOW OUR STAFF TO DO THEIR WORK WITHOUT MICROMANAGING THEM.
IF THEY SEE THAT IT'S A PROJECT THAT'S ON THE THINGS THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE FOR THE YEAR, BUT IT'S UNDER THAT LIMIT, THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND IT'S IN THE BUDGET.
THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MOVE FORWARD ON IT TO MAKE PROGRESS, WHETHER IT'S FOR THE CURRENT YEAR OR THE FUTURE YEARS TO MAKE PROGRESS ON THAT ITEM WITHIN THOSE PARAMETERS.
>> THEN AS AN EXAMPLE, THE NEW WEB PROGRAM, $15,000 IF I RECALL.
WE DISCUSSED WITH THE COUNCIL, WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE THING.
FOR THIS, WE WOULDN'T. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> I DON'T KNOW IF I AGREE WITH THAT.
I THINK IT'S JUST THAT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE LONGER RANGE BECAUSE THAT 15,000 WAS SOMETHING THAT WE WERE APPROVING THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.
THAT WAS A DONE DEAL OF WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH.
IN THIS CASE, WE'RE LOOKING AT PROJECTS THAT ARE A LITTLE LARGER SCOPE SO THAT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
IT COULD COME DOWN FROM 20 TO 15,000 IF WE WANT TO.
BUT IT'S JUST A CUTOFF WHERE IT ALLOWS FOR THE LITTLE LARGER PROJECTS ARE FOR AS FAR AS SCOPING.
BECAUSE I THINK SOMETIMES THEN THEY'RE SMALLER THAN THAT, IT'S HARD TO DETERMINED.
>> RANDY, I THINK WHAT THE DIFFERENCE HERE IS, IS WHAT TERRY WAS TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER NORDIC COUNCIL IS IF YOU'RE MOVING OVER I FORGET WHAT AMOUNT OF MONEY WHAT $15,000 FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER DEPARTMENT.
WHERE IT SAY I WANTED TO MOVE SOMETHING FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THAT SHOULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL IF IT'S OF A CERTAIN AMOUNT, THE STAFF JUST CAN'T DO IT.
IF I UNDERSTOOD THAT CORRECTLY.
>> I'M NOT SURE I WOULD PUT THIS ITEM IN THAT CATEGORY.
>> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS TANGIBLE ITEMS HERE, LIKE ANYTHING THAT'S DEALING WITH A PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO BE LIKE A ROADWAY.
ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE INFRASTRUCTURE WISE IS WHAT YOU GUYS ARE GETTING AT HERE, IS HOW I'VE LOOKED AT IT.
LIKE YOUR ROADS, IF YOU DO ANY ALTERATIONS TO A BUILDING, I COUNT THE WHOLE ALTERATION.
IF WE DID, LET'S JUST SAY CITY HALL AND WE PUT NEW DESKS,
[00:40:02]
EVERYTHING HERE AND IT TOTALED UP TO OVER 25,000 AS A PROJECT WHOLE, THEN THAT WOULD BE A DEFINITION OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.IS HOW I READ THIS, IF I'M READING THAT CORRECTLY.
>> I AGREE. TO ME THE REASON THE WEBSITE CAME TO COUNCIL IS BECAUSE WE AS A COUNCIL IDENTIFY THE WEBSITE AS SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT TO COUNCIL AND WE WANT TO PLAY A PART IN THAT PROJECT BECAUSE OF THE COMMUNICATION ASPECT OF IT TO OUR RESONANCE, NOT BECAUSE IT'S PART OF A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN OR A PROJECT.
[LAUGHTER] TRYING TO UPDATE THAT.
>> WHAT I UNDERSTOOD IS THAT WAS A BUDGETED ITEM.
THE BUDGET HAD ALREADY BEEN PASSED.
SO IF SOMETHING GOT CHANGED THAT COUNCIL HAD APPROVED IN THAT BUDGET AND IT WAS OVER SO MUCH AND IT WAS GOING DEPARTMENT TO DEPARTMENT.
COUNCIL WANTED TO SEE IT BACK.
THAT'S NOT A PROJECT [LAUGHTER].
IT'S A BUDGET ITEM IS MY POINT.
DOES THAT HELP OR DID WE JUST CONFUSE YOU MORE?
>> LET'S TRY AGAIN. ASK, WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE?
>> YES. COUNCIL MEMBER KIRK, I HEAR YOUR QUESTION AND I DO HAVE THE SIMILAR SENTIMENT AS YOU WHERE WE'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT NUMBERS CITED.
WE HAVE ONE THAT SAYS IF IT'S ABOVE $5,000 AND IT'S AN ASSET, IT'S GOING TO BE COVERED IN THIS PLAN.
BUT THEN ON THE SECOND PAGE WE HAVE IF IT'S A PROJECT OVER $25,000 IT'S INCLUDED IN THIS PLAN AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S TWO DEFINITIONS HERE.
I THINK YOU'RE ASKING TO TRY TO CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THE PREVIOUS TEXT WAS TAKEN DIRECTLY OUT OF THE FINANCE BUDGET DOCUMENT.
WE COPIED AND PASTED THAT DIRECTLY OUT OF.
>> THE DEFINITION OF A CAPITAL ASSET.
>> YEAH. THE DEFINITION OF THAT CAPITAL ASSET ON THE PRIOR PAGE WAS VERBATIM FROM OTHER TEXTS FROM A DOCUMENT IN THE CITY WHERE THAT DEFINITION WAS ESTABLISHED.
WE WANTED TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THAT DEFINITION IN HERE SO THAT WE'RE NOT CREATING A DIFFERENT DEFINITION THAT WASN'T CONSISTENT.
BUT THE DEFINITION HERE OF A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, WAS INTENDED TO I THINK SCOPE LIKE A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, BUILDING A BUILDING, BUILDING A ROAD BUILDING SOMETHING A LOT MORE COMPLEX WITH A LOT OF ADDITIONAL PARTS NEEDED IN ORDER TO SCOPE IT.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS ADDITIONAL DEFINITION HERE.
BUT DEFINITELY OPEN FOR FEEDBACK IN TERMS OF TRYING TO MAKE IT CLEAR, TRYING TO DIFFERENTIATE. ABSOLUTELY.
I THINK MAYBE WE COULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AGAIN, IN MY MIND AND MAYBE I'M MAKING IT TOO SIMPLISTIC BUT IN MY MIND, I SEE A PROJECT AS SOMETHING THAT HAS MULTIPLE LINE ITEMS TO IT.
USUALLY A PROJECT ALWAYS HAS MULTIPLE LINE ITEMS. IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT SAP, [LAUGHTER] IT'S A BOMB.
IT HAS A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT BILL OF LADINGS THAT ARE, THAT ARE A PART OF THAT.
WHEREAS A CAPITAL ASSET IS PROBABLY ONE ITEM, THAT $5,000 ITEM.
THAT'S WHY I WAS SAYING THAT THEY'RE NESTED IN ALMOST EVERY CASE BECAUSE YOU'D PROBABLY HAVE MULTIPLE $5,000 PURCHASES WITHIN A PROJECT AND IT QUICKLY CAN GET TO THAT 25,000 LEVEL
>> THAT GOES TO THE PROJECT WHOLE.
WE MIGHT JUST PUT A GENERATOR HERE.
THAT'S ONLY GOING TO BE, $100,000-200,000.
IF WE JUST NEED ONE SERVER, WE'RE TALKING 25,000.
IT'S ONE ASSET OR PURCHASING, WE'LL TRACK THAT BASED ON ITS SERIAL NUMBER OR STUFF LIKE THAT.
WHERE IF WE'RE DOING A WHOLE PROJECT AND WE'LL HAVE TO TRACK ALL OF THE ASSETS INDIVIDUALLY AND BASED ON THE PROJECT WE'RE DOING.
THAT'S HOW I'M TAKING THIS WHOLE.
>> BUT WE'RE DEFINITELY OPEN TO REVIEWING IT, STUDYING IT, THINKING ABOUT IT, AND COMING BACK WITH ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS IN TERMS OF HOW WE CAPTURE THIS DEFINITION WOULD DEFINITELY OPEN TO ALL OF US TO COLLABORATE ON WHAT WE WANT TO SEE.
>> I MAY NEED A LITTLE CLARIFICATION ON THIS.
>> I TALKED OVER YOU. I'M SO SORRY.
COUNCILMAN KIRK, YOU MAY HAVE SOME IDEAS THAT MAKE IT MORE CLEAR AND WE'RE CERTAINLY VERY OPEN TO THAT.
>> BUT AT 30,000 FEE, I REMEMBER COUNCIL MEMBER LYNN SAID TO GIVE THE EMPLOYEES ROOM TO GO SO WE'RE NOT MICRO-MANAGING THEM IF THINGS HAPPEN.
[00:45:06]
>> SO NOW WE'RE GOING INTO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING PROCESS, DEFINING IT HERE AS BEING AN ANNUAL CAPITAL PLANNING PROCESS BY WHICH THE CITY IDENTIFIES THE NEEDS TO ACQUIRE NEW CAPITAL ASSETS, REPAIR OR REPLACE EXISTING ASSETS, AND THE PROPOSED FINANCING FOR EACH OF THESE THINGS.
THE COLLECTION OF INTERESTED STAKEHOLDER PARTIES ARE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS, INCLUDING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR, FINANCE DIRECTOR, CITY ATTORNEY, DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS, CITY ENGINEER, AND THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO THIS IS BASICALLY A GROUP EFFORT THAT WORKS TOGETHER TO WORK TOGETHER ON THE PROCESS.
THE FEATURES OR THE PROCESS WILL INCLUDE TO CONDUCT AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OF THE CITY, AS WELL AS PROPOSALS ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF THE CITY FOR UPCOMING PROJECTS.
MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, PREPARE AND PRESENT AN ANNUAL REPORT OF WHAT WAS COMPLETED IN THE PRIOR YEAR, AND UPDATE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO CAPTURE THE NEW ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE COMING IN.
SO AS WE MENTIONED, IT'S A LIVING DOCUMENT OR LIVING PLAN AND CONTINUES TO TRACK WHERE EVERY EFFORT IS MADE TO MAKE A SIX-YEAR PLAN IS ACCURATE, THOROUGH, UNPREDICTABLE AS POSSIBLE.
>> SO I LOVE THE FACT THAT IT'S A LIVING PLAN.
A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO HOW THAT LIVING PLAN WOULD BE UPDATED.
BUT LOOKING FORWARD I KNOW THAT AS WE GET INTO SOME AREAS, IT'S LIKE, WE'RE GOING TO REPAIR A SECTION OF A STREET FOR $5,000, $7,000, WHATEVER.
WELL, THAT COULD COME UP CONTINUALLY THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
SO IF WE SAY, HEY, THIS STREET NEEDS TO HAVE SOME REPAIRS DONE THROUGH IT AND IT'S GOING TO COST $5,000.
DO WE GO IN AND UPDATE THE CIP PLAN? THAT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF WORK JUST TO GO DO THE REPAIR.
IT'S ON HERE RIGHT NOW FOR CERTAIN LOCATION.
SO IS THE CIP PLAN FROM UPDATING IT REALLY BETTER TO BE ANNUAL, RIDE AROUND THE BUDGET TIME AND BASICALLY SAY, AS WE GO INTO BUDGET, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT, WILL DROP ON THERE WHAT WE'VE LOOKED AT AN APPROVED AND IS OTHER STUFF COMES UP ALONG THE WAY.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO UPDATE THE CIP PLAN UNTIL WE COME TO BUDGETING AGAIN.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT MY INTENT WAS WITH THIS.
ANY WAY THAT WE WOULD DO THIS, THIS IS A LONGER-RANGE LOOK AT IT.
SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING COMES UP WHERE A ROAD NEEDS REPAIR AND YOU GOT TO DO FIVE OR 10 OR $20,000, WHETHER REPAIR AND THE ROAD.
THAT'S GOING TO BE IN THE CURRENT YEAR THAT YOU'RE IN.
SO THAT'S GOING TO BE ITEM THAT GOES THROUGH AN APPROVAL COUNCIL AND WE GET THAT DONE, THEN IT HAPPENS RIGHT AWAY.
BUT IN THE FUTURE, ALL WE CAN DO IS TAKE AN ESTIMATE.
SO MAYBE MR. MCCONNELL COMES TO US AND SAYS, HEY, LOOK THAT 20,000 THAT WE SPENT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THAT NOW EVERY THREE YEARS ON THAT PARTICULAR ROAD OR A CERTAIN INDEX OF DIFFERENT ROADS.
THEN AT THAT POINT THAT NEXT YEAR, I WOULD THINK WE WOULD GO IN THERE AND MAYBE WE'LL BUMP THAT $20,000 IN FOR EACH TIME IF THAT WAS THE CASE, BUT I THINK IN MOST CASES, IT WILL BE AT ONE-TIME ITEM THAT WE WOULD DO NOW AND EVERYTHING ELSE WE WOULD DO AS A SCHEDULE.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IT BEING A LIVING DOCUMENT WITH IT BEING ANNUALLY UPDATED.
THAT COULD ALSO BE QUARTERLY UPDATED IN CERTAIN INSTANCES.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE YEAR THAT DUBLIN ROAD WASHED OUT, THAT WAS AN EMERGENCY SITUATION.
IT WAS VERY EXPENSIVE AND IT HAD TO BE, I WOULD WANT TO SEE THAT UPDATED IN THE PLAN AS SOON AS IT'S KNOWN.
I THINK OTHER ISSUES WHETHER SHOULD BE DONE IN THAT FASHION.
SO THE PLAN SOMEWHAT STAYS CURRENT AT ALL TIMES.
>> I AGREE WITH YOUR COMMENTS THERE. I TOTALLY AGREE.
I THINK THAT THAT'S ONE OF THE KEY THINGS IS GETTING SOME FEEDBACK OF HOW ARE THINGS GOING.
NOW IF IT'S A MAINTENANCE ITEM THAT ENDS UP DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS ANTICIPATED, THE MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE WOULD KIND OF INCORPORATE THAT INTO AND ADJUST AND FIGURE HOW TO MAKE IT WORK BASED ON THE NUMBERS.
HOPEFULLY, WE'RE NOT HAVING TO REPAIR MULTIPLE TIMES.
[LAUGHTER] THE SAME THING, BUT THAT'S THE KIND OF THING WE NEED TO HEAR ABOUT IF THAT IS HAPPENING.
WE DO WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THAT AND WHEN WE GET TO THE ANNUAL AT THE VERY LAST PAGE, WE HAVE THAT SCHEDULE THAT SHOWS AND IT'S BY MONTH.
THIS IS THE ACTIONS OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN COMMITTEE AND THE ANTICIPATION IS
[00:50:05]
THAT THAT WILL HELP TO FACILITATE THE REGULAR WHATEVER THAT PERIOD IS, REGULAR UPDATES TO COUNSEL AS TO WHERE THINGS ARE SO THAT WE ARE ALL INFORMED, BUT NOT A FORMAL UPDATE OF THE DOCUMENT THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.I AGREE WITH YOU RANDY ON THAT BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE ONEROUS TO STAY OFF AND THAT'S NOT THE OBJECTIVE EITHER.
>> WE HAVE A TECHNICAL ISSUE OVER HERE.
>> GO AHEAD TERRY, [OVERLAPPING] JUST THE TECHNICAL ISSUE.
>> [INAUDIBLE] TO BE EFFECTIVE CAPITAL [INAUDIBLE] I THINK WE'RE READY TO GO.
NEXT IS WHAT WE IDENTIFIED AS THE ACTIVE CAPITAL PROJECTS THOSE PROJECTS WERE ANTICIPATING DOING IN THE CURRENT YEAR.
WHAT'S LISTED ARE THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN.
>> EXCUSE ME, WHAT PAGE ARE YOU ON?
[BACKGROUND] WE'RE STILL HAVING TROUBLE.
SO WITH THIS LIST IS THE ITEMS, THE CATEGORIES, AND THE EXPENDITURES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S STILL SOME FINAL DECISIONS TO BE MADE ON THESE ITEMS, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS THINGS TO BE ADDRESSED AND WORKED ON THIS YEAR.
THIS IS PROBABLY MAKES SENSE TO GO THROUGH THEM.
WE CAN GO THROUGH THEM AND IF THERE'S QUESTIONS WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT NOW.
THE FIRST IS THE WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING COUNCIL MEMBER NOW MENTIONED.
THIS IS FOR PURPOSES OF BUILDING A STRUCTURE IN THE WATER DEPARTMENT AT THE CURRENT WATER STORAGE.
>> AT THE PUMP STATION. THANK YOU.
[LAUGHTER] AT THE DILLEHAY PUMP STATION.
THE STATUS OF THAT IS STILL IN DESIGN. AMANDA, YOU WANT TO?
>> THE STATUS IS STILL IN DESIGN AND WE HAVE JUST A PLACEHOLDER NUMBER FOR A TOTAL APPROPRIATED AMOUNT AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'LL NEED TO TALK THROUGH.
IS THIS AMOUNT CORRECT IN TERMS OF JUST OUR ESTIMATE OR DOES IT NEED TO BE DIFFERENT? SO MAYBE WE CAN JUST START BY TALKING ABOUT THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE CAPTURED HERE.
BUT THEN ALSO NOTE WE TRY TO CAPTURE THE ISLANDS THAT WE LEFT OFF WITH DURING OUR LAST CONVERSATION.
BUT BY NO MEANS IS THIS A SET-IN-STONE LIST OF PROJECTS THAT WE, FOR SURE, AGREE.
THIS IS WHERE THE DISCUSSION NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE IN TERMS OF: ARE THESE THE PROJECTS WE WANT TO DO.
ARE THESE PROJECTS WE CAN ACHIEVE IN THIS TIME PERIOD FOR ONE YEAR? DO WE HAVE DIFFERENT HIGHER-PRIORITY PROJECTS? THIS IS WHERE WE WANT TO CAPTURE WHAT WE AS A COUNCIL, FEEL LIKE WE WANT TO TRY TO ACHIEVE DURING THIS NEXT UPCOMING YEAR.
MAYBE MR. MIKADO CAN ALSO LET US KNOW A FEW THINGS THIS SCOPE OF PROJECT IS ACHIEVABLE WITHIN THE TIME FRAME OR MAYBE IF HE FEELS LIKE THEY SHOULD ALL BE CAPTURED IN THIS YEAR, OR ANY DIFFERENT TIMES OF SCHEDULING, THINGS LIKE THAT ALL AMOUNTS.
>> MR. OLSON MAY BE A BETTER PERSON TO ASK SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.
>> BECAUSE I THINK YOU HAVE TALKED ABOUT WHAT THE NEEDS ARE FOR BASIC DESIGN.
>> IT'S JUST GOING TO BE A BASIC RECTANGULAR, SQUARE DESIGN.
VERY LARGE BAY DOORS TO GET EQUIPMENT IN AND A GENERAL AREA FOR STAFF.
>> SO WE CAN START WITH THIS AMOUNT AND THEN MAYBE AS WE GO IF WE NEED TO MODIFY THE AMOUNT, WE'RE HAPPY TO ADJUST IT. GO AHEAD.
>> WATER APARTMENT BUILDING, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND THAT BOND THAT WE HAD OUT THERE PREVIOUSLY, WE'VE GOT LIKE 600,000 OR SOMETHING LEFT ON IT OR WHAT'S THE NUMBER?
>> SOMEWHERE. [LAUGHTER] EXECUTIVE [INAUDIBLE] RECEIVES INTERESTS ALSO FOR SOME OF THAT SO [INAUDIBLE]
[00:55:05]
>> BUT WE STILL HAVE MONEY BEING HELD OUT FOR THE CONNECTION AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'D BE STOPPED TO MAKE FOR THAT. SO THERE IS.
>> JUST FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, AS WE LOOK AT IT, CERTAINLY 875,000 SEEMS A LOT FOR BUILDING THAT.
LIKE TO LOOK AT IT IN TERMS OF FUNDING AND DETERMINING WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE MONEY THAT WE'VE GOT.
>> JUST TO SAY, SOMETIMES IT'S HARD TO PUT EXACT BIG WITH INFLATION AND COST OF THE BUILDING, AND THE BUILDING IS IN DESIGN.
UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE ARE GOING TO BE BALLPARK ESTIMATES AND COULD GO EITHER WAY.
>> THAT WILL BE THE CASE FOR A LOT OF THESE NUMBERS.
THEY ARE GOING TO BE BALLPARK AND WE MIGHT BE HIGH, WE MIGHT BE LOW.
BUT THE CONCEPT HERE IS TRUE THAT THESE WILL BE BALLPARK NUMBERS.
>> THESE ARE THESE ARE BUDGETARY AT BEST WHEN WE DO THIS BECAUSE YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW, BUT I STILL THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU SOME SENSE OF VISIBILITY AT LEAST OF WHAT'S OUT THERE.
OBVIOUSLY, COUNCILMAN KIRK CHARLES THE STUDENT LOOK AT THIS.
IF THAT NUMBER IS REALLY 500, 000 RATHER THAN 875, WE NEED TO CHANGE IT.
BUT IN GENERAL, WE TRY TO PUT SOMETHING IN THERE AND IT MAKES SENSE AND THEN GO WITH THAT.
AS WE GO THROUGH AND WE UPDATED EACH YEAR, IF IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED, THEN WE CAN.
>> I ASSUME THAT WE'RE NOT LIKE OKAYING THIS NUMBER AT THIS POINT.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF GOING THROUGH EACH OF THESE NUMBERS RIGHT NOW THEN?
>> I THINK THE FIRST PASS THROUGH, WE WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN AGREE ON WHAT ARE THE RIGHT PROJECTS TO HAVE ON THE CHART.
THEN IF WE CAN GET TO THE AGREEMENT OF WHICH PROJECTS ARE ON THE CHART, THEN WE CAN GO BACK THROUGH AND ASSESS HOW MUCH MONEY DO WE HAVE ASSOCIATED WITH EACH PROJECT? I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. DO YOU ALL AGREE?
>> I AGREE, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO GET MORE FIRM NUMBERS ON THE FUND.
HOW MUCH IS IN THE FUND? MY UNDERSTANDING, I THOUGHT THAT FUND WAS A LITTLE LOWER THAN THE 500,000 RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S YEAR-END AND SO IT'LL BE NICE TO HAVE A FIRM NUMBER OF WHAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE IN THAT FUND.
I'M TRYING TO THINK OF HOW WE GET MORE FIRM COSTS ON THIS BECAUSE WE CAN'T KEEP TALKING ABOUT, THIS IS A GENERAL NUMBER.
I THINK IF IT'S SOMETHING WE'RE PLANNING TO DO THIS YEAR, WE NEED TO GET A LITTLE MORE CLOSE AS TO WHAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING SO THAT WE CAN AGREE OR NOT TO ALLOW THEM TO GO TO BID OVER WHATEVER YOU-ALL HAVE TO DO.
>> TOOK DURING THE BUDGET CYCLE WAS THIS WAS AN ITEM THAT COUNCIL WANTED TO SEE DONE.
I KNOW GARY HAS BEEN WORKING, ALSO HAS GOTTEN SOME NUMBER ESTIMATES.
>> I KNOW THAT GARY'S GOT TO GET SOME PEOPLE INVOLVED NOW ON GETTING THIS WORKED OUT.
WE'RE AT THAT POINT NOW WHERE WE NEED TO GET THINGS GOING.
>> THIS NEVER DID COME FROM A PRETTY DETAILED LINE ITEM ESTIMATE THAT WAS ROLLED UP.
THEN AT THE NEXT STEP, WE'RE GETTING CONTRACTORS WHO ARE ON THE BUY BOARD TO COME IN AND ACTUALLY QUOTE IT.
THAT'S HAPPENING ACTUALLY REAL TIME RIGHT NOW.
WE'LL HAVE ESTIMATES AROUND THE CONTRACTORS COMING SOON.
BUT THIS NUMBER DID GET ROLLED OUT BY A VERY DETAILED ITEMIZED LINE ITEM COST ESTIMATE VERSUS MORE COARSE THAN THAT.
>> MR. BOCHARO, WHAT'S THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THIS BUILDING?
>> TWELVE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET.
>> WAS THIS HONESTLY NUMBERED, DOES THAT NUMBER COME FROM PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETINGS AND COUNSEL SAID, LET'S GO FOR THE 875.
>> NO, IT'S STILL GOING TO HAVE TO COME BEFORE COUNCIL, BUT THIS IS A PLAN.
>> WE'RE GOING OUT TO GET ESTIMATES, ETC., FOR PLAYING THAT COUNCIL HASN'T EVEN SEEN.
>> WELL, IT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT BEFORE I WAS ON COUNCIL,
[01:00:08]
SO I GUESS, SOMEBODY ELSE IS GOING TO HAVE TO FILL IN THE HISTORY.>> I THINK ONCE THE PLAN IS OUT THERE THEN WE CAN GO OUT AND GET SOME MORE INFORMATION, THEN THAT INFORMATION CAN COME BACK TO COUNCIL ON THE PLAN TO APPROVE OR NOT APPROVE IT, TO PROVE THE FUND, ALL THOSE.
BUT FIRST, WE HAVE TO KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING, WE HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS.
I WOULD THINK ON SOME OF THIS, ONCE YOU HAVE A BUILDING DESIGN, YOU WOULD GET A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT THE COST WOULD BE.
YOU WANT TO GO FOR ESTIMATES, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'D GO FOR BOND OR GO OUT FOR BID.
>> WE'VE GOT A GENERAL LAYOUT OF WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE YOU IN THAT BUILDING WITH THE 18-FOOT DOORS, I THINK GARY, THAT WAY WE CAN GET THE TALLER EQUIPMENT IN THERE DURING THE WINTER TIME SO THE DIESEL DOESN'T GEL UP ON US AGAIN.
>> I WOULD SAY COUNCIL HAS BEEN INFORMED ABOUT THIS BEFORE YOUR TIME.
CONCEPTUALLY, I THINK WE HAVE AGREED IN CONCEPT THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO AND WE NEED TO GET MOVING ON IT.
>> THIS HAS BEEN A PREVIOUS PLANNING SESSIONS IN THE PAST.
SOME OF YOU-ALL MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN HERE AT THAT TIME, WE CAN TRY TO FIND THAT INFORMATION IF YOU NEED IT.
>> BUT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO KEEP YOU IN THE DARK.
>> BUT GETTING TO THAT AMOUNT AND SEEING THE BIGGER PICTURE, I THINK IS IMPORTANT.
EIGHT HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-FIVE THOUSAND, IT'S A LOT OF MONEY
>> WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, IT'S A LOT OF MONEY, BUT WHEN YOU START ADDING CONCRETE AND SOME OF THE STEEL, THOSE NUMBERS START ADDING UP REAL QUICK.
>> IT DOES VARY, BUT THOSE TWO NUMBERS ALONE ARE GOING TO START EATING THAT UP REAL QUICK.
>> BUT AT $72 A SQUARE FOOT, THAT'S A STEAL OF A DEAL FOR 12,000 SQUARE FEET.
>> WE HAVE TO MAKE IT A VERY SECURE BUILDING BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR WATER FROM BAD ELEMENTS, SHALL WE SAY?
>> I THOUGH THE FENCE DID THAT.
>> I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE ONE DOWN ON PARKER ROAD.
I KNOW GARY'S DONE SOME THINGS, BUT I STILL WORRIES.
>> SOME OTHER LINE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE, IF WE'LL JUST GO OVER THE OVERVIEW.
THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BUILDING, THERE'S A DESIRE TO BUILD A DIVIDER WALL IN THE LOBBY.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE FEEL LIKE WE CAN DO COMING UP THIS YEAR.
IT JUST BARELY GOES OVER THE DOLLAR AMOUNT, BUT WE JUST CAPTURED IT HERE.
GOING INTO THE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT, THEY'RE KIND OF VEHICLE REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE.
WE'VE CAPTURED A CONCEPT OF REPLACING THE POLICE VEHICLES AND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLES WITH LEASED VEHICLES.
THEN THERE'S A SCHEDULE THAT'S REFERENCED IN TERMS OF LIKE WHAT VEHICLE IS GETTING REPLACED DURING THIS PLANNING YEAR.
>> REPLACING THE POLICE AND PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLES, THIS COMES FROM THE ENTERPRISE SCHEDULED THAT I'M ANTICIPATING.
ONCE WE GET FIGURING THAT OUT, YOU WILL POSSIBLY UPDATE YOUR SCHEDULE TOO.
ONCE WE HAVE SOME MORE FACTS OF WHERE WE'RE MOVING, BUT THERE'S ALSO AN OFFSET TO THAT OF SOME MONEY'S COMING IN IN SELLING VEHICLES.
>> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, AT 24481, IF I'M REMEMBERING RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, WE PAY HALF OF THAT UPFRONT AND THEN THE OTHER HALF IS THROUGH THE LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT. IS THAT CORRECT, GRAD?
>> IT'D BE LIKE SO 12, 2, 4 OR WHEREVER THE MONEY IS.
>> IT WAS CALCULATED AT $120,000 NUMBER.
THAT NUMBER TOOK TO DO CONSIDERATIONS, SOME OF YOU POSTED [INAUDIBLE]
>> I JUST GOT AN EMAIL THE OTHER DAY THAT UAW [LAUGHTER] STRIKE IS NOT HELPING THINGS OUT.
WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT'S GOING TO DO.
[01:05:01]
>> SOME OF YOU LIKE BUILDING CARS.
>> I DO NOT KNOW HOW TO BUILD A CAR.
[LAUGHTER] JIM DOES THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> FOR CHIEF PRICE ON THE ONE-TWENTY, THE PIECE THAT YOU'RE GETTING, IS THAT ENOUGH TO KEEP US SAFE OR IS IT JUST PUTTING A BAND-AID ON A PROBLEM?
>> THAT'S POLICE AND PUBLIC WORKS AND FIRE.
OR THE FT50 AND THE TAHOE OVER THERE.
>> NOW IF WE CAN JUST KEEP THEM OUT OF THE SHOP.
>> [LAUGHTER] UNDER PUBLIC WORKS, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS SHOULD BE INCLUDED OR NOT, GARY HAD ASKED FOR A DUMP TRUCK BECAUSE WITH A DUMP TRUCK, THAT WOULD HELP HIM IN HIS ABILITY TO DO SOME THINGS LIKE FILLING POTHOLES, AND IN THE WINTER TIME, WE'VE HAD A NEED TO SAND STREETS, THAT KIND OF THING.
IN ONE OF THE PLANNING SESSIONS, WE TENTATIVELY APPROVED THAT FOR, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS, $90,000, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT STILL A NEED.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU WANT TO PUT THAT UNDER PUBLIC WORKS OR NOT.
>> IS THAT ONE WE HAD APPROVED LAST YEAR? [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT WE'RE STILL TRYING TO?
>> WE HELD OFF ON IT BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED WAS INTERNATIONAL.
>> THEY'RE FOUR YEARS OUT, THE BILL TIMES AND THEN THE BOXES AND EVERYTHING WE WERE LOOKING AT WENT SKY HIGH.
WE HAD ORIGINALLY SET ASIDE 90 AND THEN THAT WENT UP TO LIKE 140.
THEN WE SAID NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED AT THIS POINT.
>> WE'LL UPDATE THAT SCHEDULE.
>> GOOD CATCH. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE GOT.
>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT SECTION WE HAVE CAPTURED SOME MAINTENANCE/PATCH TYPE OF WORK.
THE SPIRIT HERE WAS TO TRY TO CAPTURE OUR CONVERSATION FROM OUR LAST MEETING OF SOME OF THE ROADS THAT WE WANTED TO PUT A MAINTENANCE OR PATCH APPROACH ON IT WITH SOME FUNDING AMOUNTS.
THIS IS DEFINITELY OPEN FOR DISCUSSION, OPEN FOR ADDITIONAL INPUT.
WHAT WE HAVE CAPTURED HERE IS TO PUT A PATCH OVERLAY ON A CROSSROAD BETWEEN DILLEHAY AND SOUTHRIDGE PARKWAY.
TO APPLY A FOG SEAL AND CRACK SEALANT TO SOME OF THE ROADS THAT ARE LISTED IN THE PAVEMENT STUDY.
WE HAVE A LIST OF FOUR ROADS HERE AT PECAN ORCHARD, WAGON WHEEL, SYCAMORE, AND SPRINGHILL ESTATES.
AGAIN, DEFINITELY OPEN TO CONVERSATION, DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER THESE ARE THE RIGHT ROADS OR WHAT WE WANT TO DO HERE FOR THIS COMING YEAR'S MAINTENANCE.
THIS IS WHAT WE'VE CAPTURED FOR A DISCUSSION.
THE REPAIR IS MORE OF LIKE A REBUILD OF SOME OF THESE ROADS.
THE SECTIONS WE HAVE LISTED HERE ARE FROM LEWIS LANE, FROM KING'S CROSSING PHASE 4 NORTH TO KING'S CROSSING PHASE 3 NORTH, THAT SECTION THERE, TO DO A REMIX OF THAT SECTION USING THE ASPHALT WITH THE GLAS PAVE.
WE ALSO HAVE GRAY LANE BETWEEN PARKER ROAD AND GREGORY LANE LISTED.
IT'S GOT A PCI RATING OF 25, WHICH IS PRETTY POOR SO WE THINK THAT ONE'S IN NEED.
THEN WE HAVE MOSS RIDGE ALL TO DO CONCRETE REPAIRS WITH PATCH SECTIONS.
WE HAVE ESTIMATED AN AMOUNT OF 256,000 FOR THAT ONE.
THEN WE HAVE DUBLIN ROAD SOUTH, WHICH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE IN TERMS OF DRAINAGE.
THEN WE HAVE THE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS WHICH ARE ASSOCIATED FROM THE WATER IMPACT FEE STUDY.
>> IN PROGRESS. [OVERLAPPING] WHICH ONE IS THE FIRST ONE? WHAT WAS THAT? OH, THERE'S THE STUDY.
THAT'S TO GO DO THE NEW STUDY.
25,000 THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL ON APRIL 18TH, SO THAT'S IN THE WORKS.
FOR WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, WE HAVE FOR DILLEHAY IN 2551, THAT'S IN THE WORKS.
JUST CAPTURES OUR PORTION OF THAT PROJECT FOR THE WATER LINES.
THEN FOR DUBLIN ROAD, AS WE DISCUSSED DURING OUR LAST MEETING, WE FELT LIKE WE HAVE TO FIX ANY WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FIRST SO THAT WE'VE FOLLOWED TO
[01:10:05]
THE SCOPE OF THIS NEXT COMING YEAR WITH THE INTENTION OF LATER TO REPAIR THE ROAD ITSELF, BUT WE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE CAN GET TO THE ROAD UNTIL WE DO THE WATER FIRST, SO THE ROAD WILL BE COMING INTO OUR FUTURE YEAR SCHEDULE.FOR NEXT YEAR, WE'RE CAPTURING THE CONCEPT OF DESIGNING NEW WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, PLANNING FOR DUBLIN ROAD, NORTH AND SOUTH, AND IMPLEMENTING THE NEW WATER PIPES FOR DUBLIN ROAD SOUTH SECTION.
>> AND DRAINAGE ABOVE THERE TOO.
>> RIGHT. THEN DRAINAGE FOR DUBLIN ROAD SOUTH.
CURRENTLY, WE HAVE $300,000 AVAILABLE.
IT'S POSSIBLE WE'LL NEED MORE MONEY THAN THAT, WE'LL SEE, SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS.
FIRST OF ALL, JUST FEEDBACK ON THE ITEMS WE CAPTURED FOR NEXT YEAR.
ARE THESE ALL THE RIGHT ITEMS TO CONSIDER? IS THERE ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS FOR DIFFERENT ITEMS OR CHANGES FOR WHAT WE'D CONSIDER FOR THE SCOPE FOR NEXT YEAR?
>> WHAT ARE WE CONFUSED ON DUBLIN ROAD WHAT WE'RE DOING ACTUALLY TO FIX THE S CURVE? THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE DOING IS THE ENGINEERING STUDY OF DRAINAGE.
>> NO, WHAT I THOUGHT WE'D DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING WAS WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT STUDYING THE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, WHERE WE NEED TO TAKE THAT DRAINAGE WATER.
WHETHER OR NOT WE NEEDED TO TAKE IT TO THE WEST IF WE HAD ACQUIRED ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY.
GARY, WHAT'S THAT PRIVATE ROAD THERE CALLED?
>> SMITH. TAKING IT DOWN SMITH THROUGH A SPECIAL EASEMENT THAT WE'D HAVE TO PURCHASE, OR IF THERE'S SOME OTHER OPTIONS THAT WE COULD DO THROUGH THERE.
THEN WE HAD TO ALSO LOOK AT LOOPING THAT LINE ON THE SOUTH SIDE THERE FOR THE WATERLINE USING THE ARPA MONEY.
WE'VE USED THE ARPA MONEY FOR SOME OF THE PLANNING AND THE BUILDING OF THAT LINE, AS LONG AS WE HAVE IT ALLOCATED BY 2025.
>> I THOUGHT IT WAS '6, BUT OKAY.
>> I THINK WE HAVE TO SPEND IT BY 2026, BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE IT ALLOCATED BY 2025.
THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT.
THAT WAS PHASE 1, PHASE 2, AND THEN THE PHASE 3 WAS RECONSTRUCTING THE S CURVES THEMSELVES, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS AROUND HERE.
>> IT WOULD BE ON THE NEXT YEAR, SO IT'S IN THE FUTURE PLAN.
>> BECAUSE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, I REMEMBER THAT WE SAID, CAN WE GET IT DONE THIS YEAR AND I WAS ASKING MR. [INAUDIBLE] AND HE SAID, NO WAY, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IN THE NEXT YEAR, SO THAT'S WHY IT'S IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
WE WERE LOOKING AT ABOUT 18 MONTHS TOTAL, OF WHICH MAYBE SOME OF THIS STUFF, AND IT MIGHT OVERLAP SOME YEARS HERE.
>> I RECALL TALKING ABOUT THE POTENTIAL DRAINAGE PROBLEM AT THE S CURVE, I NEVER RECALL SAYING THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANTED TO DO REGARDING TO DO WITH [INAUDIBLE] COSTS.
FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, I LIVE CLOSE TO THAT S CURVE AND IT OBVIOUSLY IS UNDER DIRE NEED OF REPAIR, BUT I NEVER SEE WATER POOLED OUT THERE.
WATER POOLED IS YOU GO BEYOND THE S CURVE, FURTHER DOWN TOWARDS THE STATE'S LANE AND STUFF AND IN FRONT OF ONE OF THE RESIDENT HOUSES THERE.
BUT THE S CURVE ITSELF DOESN'T.
AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE LOST SOME BASE, AND [INAUDIBLE] SAYS THERE COULD HAVE BEEN JUST A BUNCH OF THEM THAT HAD SOME WATER BEING LEAKED DOWN THERE FOR A WHILE.
THAT COULD HAVE WASHED IT OUT.
WELL, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE DRAINAGE DOWN THERE MEANT THAT THE WATERLINE WASHED IT OUT.
I DON'T EVER RECALL SAYING I WANTED TO DO THE ENGINEERING STUDY PRIOR TO FIND AND FIX SOMETHING ON THAT [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING] MOVING ON TO THE WATERLINE, [INAUDIBLE] THAT WE WERE GOING TO TRY AND DO THE ENTIRE WATERLINE ALONG DUBLIN AND [INAUDIBLE] PROPOSE A MILLION, THREE MILLION BUT I DON'T RECALL SAYING THAT WE WERE ALL GOING TO DO THE SOUTH.
I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON WHAT TO SAY ON THOSE WHO WERE INVOLVED IN DUBLIN.
>> I AGREE THAT WE NEVER AGREED TO DO SPECIFIC DRAINAGE WORK ON DUBLIN ROAD.
WE PERHAPS PUT THAT NUMBER THERE.
WE DO FEEL SOME REVIEW OF THE DRAINAGE NEEDS TO BE DONE ON DUBLIN ROAD, 300,000 A BIT EXCESSIVE TO PUT THERE, SO WE PROBABLY SHOULD CHANGE THAT NUMBER.
BUT I'VE SEEN SOME THINGS FROM THE ENGINEER THAT HAVE INDICATED THAT THERE ARE SOME DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT NEED
[01:15:01]
TO BE ADDRESSED OR THAT AT LEAST NEED TO BE LOOKED AT AGAIN.>> THE WATER IS GOT TO GET AWAY FROM THAT BASE AND THAT'S THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT WE HAVE THERE IS THAT AREA STAY IT HOLDS THE WATER AT TIMES IN THAT SUB BASS, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, GARY.
IT DOESN'T DRAIN OFF VERY WELL THERE.
>> BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO FIX IT. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO [INAUDIBLE]
>> BUT IF IT'S NOT POOLING ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE WATER IS COLLECTING UNDERNEATH THE ROAD BUT SHOWS NO SIGNS OF IT ABOVE GROUND LEVEL?
>> NO, IT DOES COLLECT LITTLE BIT IN THE S-CURVE.
WELL, THE WATER WAS STANDING THERE FOR A GOOD WHILE WITH THAT LEAK THAT WAS THERE.
THAT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM THAT THAT STAYS WET.
THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS IT DOES GET TO THE BASE AND CAUSES THE ROAD TO FAIL.
BUT RIGHT NOW THE CRACKING IN THE ROAD IS BECAUSE OF THAT STATE WENT FOR SO LONG WITH THAT LEAK.
THEN NOW THAT LEAK HAS BEEN REPAIRED AND HAS DRIED UP, BECAUSE IT IS HOT SUMMER.
IT'S CONTRACTING THE BASE CAUSE IT TO CRACK IS OUR PROBLEM.
>> BUT THAT DOESN'T AGAIN MEAN THAT IT HAS A DRAINAGE PROBLEM OTHER THAN PERHAPS THE WATER LEAK IN THERE BECAUSE, AFTER HEAVY RAINS AGAIN, I DON'T SEE THE POOLING OF WATER THERE.
>> WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THE DRAINAGE IN THAT AREA.
>> I DO SUGGEST WE TAKE A LOOK AT SOME OF THE ENGINEERS' REPORTS BECAUSE IT SEEMS I RECALL SOME COMMENTS ABOUT DRAINAGE.
>> I THINK IT WAS PART OF SOME OF THE REX OUT THERE TO SOME OF THE DRAINAGE ISSUES.
>> DID GEORGE BIRKHOFF ALREADY DO AN ENGINEERING STUDY ON THIS S-CURVE.
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW DETAILED IT WAS.
>> WE LOOKED AT THE TRAFFIC ACCIDENT COUNTS AND WHAT WAS THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS, I BELIEVE.
>> BUT I THINK I SAW SOMETHING FROM ONE BIRKHOFF.
IT WAS KIRCHHOFF AND IT WASN'T A DETAILED STUDY, BUT WAS HIS IMPRESSION OF WHAT [OVERLAPPING] NOT THE SPEEDS IT WAS ABOUT THE DRAINAGE.
THERE WAS SOMETHING ABOUT THE DRAINAGE.
>> YEAH. WE CAN FIND THAT AND SEND THAT OUT.
>> YEAH. I THINK THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO TAKE A LOOK AT.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER KIRK CHARLES, DO YOU HAVE, I GUESS A PROPOSAL OR A RECOMMENDATION OF WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE INSTEAD, WE'RE DEFINITELY OPEN TO ALTERNATIVE IDEAS.
>> MY ONLY POINT IS THAT I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAD AGREED UPON ENGINEERING STUDY, SO I THINK THAT NEEDS FURTHER DISCUSSION.
SECONDARILY, I THINK THAT THAT S-CURVE IS IN TERRIBLE IN DIRE NEED OF REPAIR AND THE QUESTION IS, I DON'T SEE.
>> I GUESS IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THAT WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS TO FORGO THE DRAINAGE STUDY, JUST WORK ON THE WATER PIPE REPLACEMENT AND TRY TO GET THE ROAD SURFACE DONE QUICKER, IS THAT CORRECT OR MAYBE-
>> I'M NOT AGAINST THE DRAINAGE DEAL.
I JUST HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING THAT SAID ABSOLUTELY, WE SHOULD SPEND A CHUNK OF MONEY ON IT.
I DO THINK WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ON THAT ROAD IN THE NEXT YEAR, THAT CURVE ANYWAY.
>> THE ONE QUESTION I GUESS, I WOULD HAVE IS THAT WITH THAT, AND I AGREE WITH YOU.
I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DONE PROMPTLY AS WE CAN, BUT WHAT I REMEMBER FROM THE LAST MEETING ABOUT HOW YOU COULD DO SOMETHING, WE HAD TO DO A MAJOR RECONSTRUCTION ON IT AND A MAJOR RECONSTRUCTION WOULDN'T ALLOW US TO DO IT WITHIN THIS YEAR.
WHAT WE CAN DISCUSS, WHICH I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO IS THAT YOU COULD DO SOME REPAIR TO GET YOU THROUGH AND THEN DO THE FULL RECONSTRUCTION LATER ON, THAT WOULD THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY OTHER OPTION THAT I CAN THINK OF RIGHT NOW.
>> LAST MEETING, I DON'T RECALL EVERYTHING [LAUGHTER] BUT THE BEST THAT I RECALL WAS THAT THE REASON THAT YOU COULDN'T GO INTO THE S-CURVE AND REDO IT IS BECAUSE IF YOU DID THE DRAINAGE AND YOU HAD TO TEAR THE WHOLE THING UP TO TAKE THE DRAINAGE GEORGE SMITH, ETC.
THAT IN FACT, YES, YOU COULDN'T DO ANYTHING ON THE S-CURVE.
NOW, THE DRAINAGE DOESN'T NEED TO BE DONE CERTAINLY IN THIS STUFF.
>> GOOD POINT. I WAS ASSUMING THAT THE TIME IS LONGER. [OVERLAPPING]
>> AT ONE POINT THERE WAS A MOVE TO TAKE THE S-CURVE OUT AND THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE IN THAT AREA STRONGLY OBJECTED TO THAT SO IT WASN'T DONE.
>> THANK YOU. MY RECOLLECTION OF FILL A HEADACHE WITH RESPECT TO WATER INFRASTRUCTURE,
[01:20:03]
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE CITY STAFF WAS GOING TO GET WITH BIRKHOFF OR THE CITY ENGINEER TO REVIEW WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO DO THE WATER LINES BOTH NORTH AND SOUTH.IN ADDITION, WHILE NOT JUST REPLACING THE LINES BUT THE CONNECTIONS AS WELL AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE AN ENGINEERING YEAH, WHETHER IT'S AN ENGINEERING STUDY BUT OUR ENGINEERING COSTS.
THAT'S WHAT THOSE ENGINEERING COSTS ARE RELATED TO.
THEN WITH RESPECT TO DOING DUBLIN ROAD, ANY ASPECT OF DUBLIN ROAD, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS IF WE WERE DOING THE WATER LINES, WE HAD TO DO THEM BEFORE WE DID THE ROAD.
IT WOULD TAKE THE YEAR TO GET THE WATER LINES DONE OR IT COULD TAKE A YEAR TO GET THE WATER LINES DONE IN SOUTH.
AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME WORK INVOLVED WITH RIGHT OF WAYS.
[LAUGHTER] IS THAT DETAILED? [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT'S HOW WE DISCUSSED THAT.
>> YEAH, I WOULD START ON THE SIDE.
>> I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE WATER LINES.
PROBABLY GARY CAN ANSWER THAT FOR US.
BUT I DO RECALL AT THE LAST MEETING, ALMOST FOR SURE [LAUGHTER] THAT WE WANTED TO COME TO THIS MEETING WITH SOME TYPE OF ESTIMATE ALONG ALL OF DUBLIN ROAD BECAUSE TO MY UNDERSTANDING, WE HAD TO GET THIS ON OUR AGENDA PRIOR TO END OF YEAR AS A PROJECT IN ORDER TO UTILIZE THE FUNDS AVAILABLE.
THAT WAS THE NUMBER 1 ITEM TO GET DONE AND MOVE ON THAT WE WANT IT MORE OF A STUDY DONE TO DETERMINE REALLY WHAT THE WHOLE COST WAS SO WE COULD LOOK AT IT AND APPROVE IT.
>> THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION TOO.
>> THE DEAL WAS THAT THE WATER LINES ON PARTS OF DUBLIN, IN PARTICULAR SOUTH DUBLIN WERE AGE.
GARY, HOW OLD ARE THOSE WATER LINES? I THINK YOU INDICATED.
>> THAT'S ORCHARD WATER LINES.
>> IT WASN'T THAT THEY DIDN'T NEED TO REPLACE.
WE JUST SAID, YEAH, SOMETHING WE SHOULD LOOK AT.
WE GOT TO GET IT ON PROJECT LISTING BEFORE END OF YEAR, WE NEED SOMETHING MORE SOLID TO LOOK AT AND DECIDED WHETHER WE'RE APPROVING OR NOT.
AT THIS MEETING, IT WAS HOPEFUL THAT WE WOULD GET THAT INFORMATION TO BEGIN LOOKING AT IT.
>> TOM, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT?
>> NO. I JUST SAID I AGREE WITH IT.
THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION TOO, IS TRYING TO GET DOWN TO SOME BARE BONE NUMBERS BECAUSE AT $1 MILLION, NOW GO AT 500,000 GREEN-LIGHT.
>> BIRKHOFF, HE'S BEEN OUT OF THE COUNTRY FOR THE LAST TWO-AND-A-HALF WEEKS.
WE'LL SEE WHERE HE'S AT WITH THAT NUMBER.
>> PAGE 5 ON THE PACKET DOES HAVE SOME NUMBERS.
IS THAT PART OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR? JUST I WANTED TO ASK REAL QUICK.
THAT'S WHERE THE S CURVE PAVING ONLY.
>> I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE WATER LINES IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING TO THEM I KNOW.
I THINK ON PAGE 5, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS REALLY THE WATERLINE, WHICH TO THAT POINT, WE'LL RUN ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF DUBLIN, WHICH THEN COUNCILMEN QUESTION IS THAT IT'S GOING TO START TAKING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ISSUES.
THERE'S A LOT TO CONSIDER BEFORE WE APPROVE IT, BUT WE GOT TO PROVE IT BEFORE YEAR END.
THAT WAS THE PUSH TO SAY, LET'S GET GOING UNLESS WE STARTED GETTING ALL THE INFORMATION WITH HOPES THAT WE WOULD GET SOME OF THAT INFORMATION AT THIS MEETING.
>> LOOK IN THE LAST MEETING, DIDN'T YOU TALK ABOUT COST-CUTTING TO THE COUNTY OR SOME DIFFERENT SOURCES ON THE EASTMAN ISSUES?
>> THAT WAS FROM LEWIS LANE, I BELIEVE.
>> THAT WAS LEWIS LANE WE'RE WORKING WITH, ACTUALLY, THEY SENT THE E-MAIL.
THEY WANT THE CCNE FIXED FIRST BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE LEWIS LANE ISSUE? I'VE TO GO BACK AND LOOK.
I KNOW WE KNOW HOW MANY LINEAR FEET OF THE PIPE EIGHT INCH LINE WE NEED IN THAT AREA.
[01:25:03]
IT'S JUST UPDATING THE NUMBER.>> DUBLIN, DOWN THAT WHOLE STRETCH BECAUSE JOHN DID THAT NUMBER BACK IN 2020, IF I REMEMBER CORRECT.
I KNOW HE'S GOT THAT ESTIMATE OUT THERE, SO WE'D HAVE JUST HAVE TO UPDATE THAT NUMBER.
>> IT'S HARD TO COME UP WITH EXACT NUMBERS.
WHAT DO YOU GET CLOSE AND THEN YOU DON'T GET EXACT NUMBERS TO EACH MINUTE.
>> I THOUGHT WE HAD A BUDGETARY NUMBER FOR THE DUBLIN ROAD SOUTH WATER LINES TO BE AROUND 1.3 MILLION IS THAT?
>> WE HAVE 1.2 FOR [INAUDIBLE] SOUTH.
>> SO THEY'LL EACH RUN ABOUT 1 MILLION TO, IT'S NOT TOTAL.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. THAT VARIES ON THE MARKET.
>> BUT THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE NORTH WHERE WE HAVE TO ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY OR ANYTHING DOWN THAT NUMBER.
>> WELL, HOW WE'VE CAPTURED IN THIS DOCUMENT FOR THIS COMING YEAR, WE HAVE 1.2 CAPTURED FOR THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH DUBLIN ROAD SOUTH WATER LINES.
AND THEN IF WE LOOK AT THE CHART FOR THE UPCOMING YEARS, FROM NOW, WE COULD DO DUBLIN ROAD NORTH AND THERE'S ANOTHER 1.2 AND THEREFORE DUBLIN ROAD NORTH, I BELIEVE, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I THINK THE OVERALL COST IS ESSENTIALLY A BALLPARK-ISH 2.4. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THEN THE OTHER THING ON THE SCHEDULE HERE RELATES TO THE DELAY AND HOW MUCH THAT'S GOING TO ACTUALLY COST US.
WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT WON'T COST US.
>> WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY THAT WE COMPLETED LAST YEAR.
>> WE HAVE ABOUT ALMOST 1.2 MILLION WHITMAN COUNTY. I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THAT NUMBER.
IF THE PROJECT GOES OVER THAT, WE HAVE TO PAY THE DIFFERENCE WHICH WERE CONSERVATIVES, PLEASE SHOUT AROUND [INAUDIBLE] MILLION.
WE HAVE A COUPLE OF HUNDRED THOUSAND IF WE HAVE A PROBLEM.
>> WE REALLY OVERSHOT THAT NUMBER, I THINK WILL BE MORE THAN FINE BASED ON WHAT JOHN HAD.
>> WHEN WE PUT A GOOD SET OF PLANS TOGETHER THAT REALLY ACCOUNT FOR ABOUT EVERYTHING, I'D BE SURPRISED IF WE HAVE ANY PROBLEM.
>> GOT IT. I GUESS IN THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, WE HAVE THAT AS BEING A PROJECT SCOPED ABOUT ZERO DOLLAR AND ASSOCIATED WITH IT THAT WE NEED TO BUDGET, WHICH IS PERFECT. THANK YOU.
>> LOOK WHAT DO WE, FROM A PERSPECTIVE, JUST GETTING DOWN TO THE BASICS THAT BEING COMPLIANT.
>> RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T NEED ANYTHING.
COUNCIL CAN MAKE ANY BUDGETARY ADJUSTMENTS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
CURRENTLY WE HAVE THE BUDGET IN PLACE.
IT STARTED AS OF YESTERDAY, THE NEW FISCAL YEAR.
AT ANY POINT THAT BUDGET CAN BE CHANGED NOW.
COUNCIL CAN DIP INTO RESERVE FUNDS WITHIN THE WATER FOND AND ANY OTHER RESERVES AND DO ANY TRANSFERS THAT THEY PLEASE OR IF THEY WANT TO GO FOR [OVERLAPPING]
>> NOT THE RESERVE FUNDS, BUT I MEAN, THE ACTUAL GRANT MONEY OR THE ARP MONEY.
>> [INAUDIBLE] WE'LL JUST HAVE TO BRING YOUR BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS, CORRECT?
WATCH IT. WOULD THIS BE THE ALLOCATION AND DO BUDGETING FOR THAT?
>> WERE YOU SAYING WE HAD UNTIL 25?
>> 2025 IS MY UNDERSTANDING. I'LL DOUBLE-CHECK.
>> DECEMBER OF 2025 IS MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHEN IT HAS TO BE ALLOCATED BY AND THEN IN DECEMBER OF 2026 IS WHEN IT HAS TO BE SPENT BY BECAUSE WE HAVE TO USE THE FEDERAL CALENDAR.
BUT I WILL DOUBLE-CHECK THE NUMBER, I'M PRETTY SURE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, THAT'S CORRECT.
[01:30:02]
>> WELL, 31, 2024 AND THEN SPIT BY 12, 31 OF 2026.
FOR ALLOCATE IT, THAT JUST MEANS AS A COUNCIL, WE SAY WE'RE GOING TO SET ASIDE 1.3 MILLION FOR WATER LINES TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE END OF '25.
WE JUST NEED A RESOLUTION TO THAT OR WHAT?
>> YOU JUST GOT TO APPROPRIATE THE FUNDS AND THAT'S ALL THAT YOU HAVE TO DO.
>> YOU JUST PUT IT IN THE BUDGET.
>> YEAH. YOU JUST DO A BUDGET AMENDMENT, YOU APPROPRIATE THE FUNDS ACCOUNT.
THAT'S WHAT THEY CONSIDER THE ALLOCATION.
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS REGARDING THE NEXT YEAR'S LIST OF PROJECTS? THEN WE'LL MOVE ON.
THE NEXT SECTION HERE IS THE FORWARD-LOOKING PROJECTS, FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR '28-'29.
HERE WE'RE JUST GOING TO DO FORWARD-LOOKING PROJECTS.
THERE'S JUST AN INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH ABOUT IT.
THEN THE NEXT PAGES START TO TALK ABOUT THOSE FORWARD-LOOKING PROJECTS.
STARTING WITH FACILITIES, WE HAVE RECAPTURED AGAIN THE WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING AS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO COMPLETE THIS UPCOMING YEAR.
I GUESS WHAT YOU'LL SEE HERE IS THE WAY THIS DOCUMENT IS STRUCTURED.
THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL THE PROJECTS WHERE WE HAVE THE ONES THAT ARE JUST FOR THIS COMING YEAR IN A SEPARATE TABLE BROKEN OUT SO WE CAN JUST SEE WHAT'S SCOPED FOR THE COMING YEAR.
THEN THIS WILL ROLL EACH YEAR.
AS THOSE PROJECTS GET COMPLETED, OUR WELL-OFF AND THEN THE NEXT BUDGET YEARS, OUR PROJECTS NOW ROLLING AND POPULATE THAT TABLE IN THE NEXT ANNUAL CYCLE OF THIS DOCUMENT.
>> WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING.
>> THIS IS A FIVE-YEAR ROLLING.
>> YOU'RE FINE. YES. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BUILDING.
NEW ON THIS LIST ARE CAPTURING THE PROJECT FOR A NEW ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITY AND A NEW POLICE STATION BUILDING AND SCOPING THOSE PROJECTS AND PLANNING AND BUDGETING THOSE PROJECTS.
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING HERE IS A FEASIBILITY STUDY AND THEN PLANNING FOR THOSE FUTURE PROJECTS.
GOING INTO THE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT, WE HAVE THE POLICE AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAVE BASICALLY A LIST OF VEHICLES THAT NEED REPLACEMENT AND THE SCHEDULE FOR THOSE REPLACEMENTS PROJECTED OUT AND CAPTURED HERE IN THE TABLE THAT REFERS OVER TO A DOCUMENT THAT HAS THE VEHICLE REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE.
IT'S BROUGHT INTO HERE AND TO THIS DOCUMENT.
CONTINUING ON, THERE ARE SOME VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT TO REPLACE.
THE FIRE TRUCK, WE HAD A VOTE ON THAT.
IT WAS APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 19TH.
FOR THE FIRE TRUCK WE SHOW THAT WE'LL HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT IN 2025, 2026.
WE SHOW THAT FORECASTED IN THE TABLE.
ADDITIONALLY, SOME OF THE OTHER FIRE, THE BRUSH TRUCK, AND ALSO OUR FORD F250 WITH A PROJECTION OUT IN 2025, 2026.
THEN WE'LL MOVE INTO THE STREETS AND LOOKING AT THE PROJECTION FOR THE STREETS.
THIS COMES INTO THE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.
MAYOR PEDO ASKED EARLIER IF WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE TO DO SOME STREET MAINTENANCE THAT DO WE CAPTURE IT HERE AND CAN WE ADJUST THE PLAN? THIS IS WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO DO THAT.
FOR INSTANCE, WE HAVE PROJECTION FOR A $50,000 ON STREET MAINTENANCE.
WHAT WE WANT TO HAVE IS A SEPARATE SCHEDULE OF WHAT STREETS ARE PROJECTED TO BE MAINTAINED.
BUT IN THE EXAMPLE WE OFFERED WHERE WE HAD A BILLION DOLLAR STREET MAINTENANCE ISSUE, THEN WE'LL ROLL THAT BACK INTO THIS PLAN AND PROJECT THAT WE HAD THAT EXPENSE WHEN WE DO THE RECONCILIATION REPORT AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
IN THAT PARTICULAR CATEGORY, WE WOULD HAVE GONE OVER FOR THAT EMERGENCY SITUATION.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE THOUGH IS JUST $50,000 WHERE THEY CAN SEPARATELY DECIDE WHAT STREETS GET DOWN IN THAT LARGE NUMBER.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE OF AN EMERGENCY AND WE DO IT TO A STREET THAT'S THE NEXT ONE UP,
[01:35:02]
WE GO AHEAD AND UPDATE THE PLAN SO WE DON'T A YEAR FROM THIS, OH WELL, LOOK AND WE'VE ALREADY DONE THAT.I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THIS WOULD GO ON HERE.
THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP ON THE STREETS THAT THEY ARE A MAJOR PROJECT IN MY OPINION.
FOR EXAMPLE, AT SOME POINT IN TIME WE'RE GOING TO GET TOLD BY COLLIN COUNTY OR WHOEVER, THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SPRING HILL ESTATES A FOUR-LINE STREET.
WE'VE GOT A LAWSUIT THAT IS GOING TO TELL US THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT FOUR LINES ON CHAPEL RALPH FROM SPRING HILL ESTATES AROUND HEIGHT AT THAT POINT TO THE END OF PARKER [INAUDIBLE].
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT A BRIDGE IN THAT'S VERY EXPENSIVE OVER WHAT DOES THAT COTTONWOOD CREEK AT THAT POINT OR IT'S GOT SO MANY NAMES I FORGET OVER THERE BY CHAPARRAL AND LIFTS STATION AND ALL THAT.
THE ONLY REASON I'M POINTING THIS OUT IS THEY ARE CAPITAL THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO COME UP AT SOME POINT IN TIME AND WE NEED TO BE PREPARED FOR THEM.
>> ACTUALLY PATTY, SHE'S BEEN OUT IN THE STORAGE FACILITY LATELY.
WE'VE HAD HER PULL OUT THOSE DOCUMENTS.
DEFINITELY IT'S BEEN AWHILE SINCE I'VE PUT MY HANDS ON THOSE DOCUMENTS, SO WE WANTED TO GO THROUGH THEM AGAIN AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE EVERYTHING IN ORDER FOR THAT.
WE CAN GIVE YOU GUYS THE RIGHT INFORMATION.
>> PERIODICALLY, THE CITY OF ALLEN HAS ASKED US TO GO AHEAD AND PUT TWO MORE LINES ON CHAPARRAL.
WE HAVE NOT SEEN THE NEED TO DO THAT BY TRAFFIC COUNT STUDIES AND OTHER THINGS, BUT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AT SOME POINT IN TIME I SUSPECT.
IT WILL BE PROBABLY A VERY EXPENSIVE, ESPECIALLY WITH THAT BRIDGE.
>> YOU'RE ON SPRING HILL, ALLEN HEIGHT AT CHAPARRAL.
TURN LEFT, THE TWO LINES THAT ARE CURRENTLY THERE, THAT'S ALL CITY OF ALLEN.
OUR TWO LINES ARE THE BACK YARDS, IF YOU WILL, OF THE NODES.
YOU CAN SEE IF YOU DRIVE WHERE THE BERM IS BECAUSE THEY'VE MOVED.
>> THE EQUIPMENT BACK IN ALL FENCE THERE AND ALL OF THAT.
>> HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE SOME TIME BEFORE THIS COMES UP.
I JUST DIDN'T WANT IT NOT TO GET INTO A PLAN.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PEDO, THAT'S GOOD INPUT.
WHAT WE'LL DO IS ADD THOSE LINE ITEMS IN THE TABLE, AND THEN WE'LL GET WITH YOURSELF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY LUKE, TO GET A PLACEHOLDER ESTIMATE NUMBER.
WE'LL MAKE OUR BEST GUESS AT WHAT YEAR TO PUT IT IN NOW AND WE'LL CAPTURE THAT AS PART OF A PROJECTION FOR A CAUSE.
>> ALLEN'S BEEN REALLY EASY TO WORK WITH.
BUT YOU GET PUNCHED IN THE MOUTH, YOUR PLAN CHANGES.
WE JUST NEED TO GET A PLAN AT SOME POINT, BUT YOU HAVE GREAT POINTS.
I THINK THE NEXT ACTION ITEM I'M STARING AT THREE PAGES OF NOTES.
I KNOW SOMEONE'S GOT SOME OVER THERE.
IF WE INCORPORATED THOSE NOTES INTO THOSE CHANGES AND GET IT RIGHT BACK ON THE NEXT AGENDA AND KEEP THIS THING MOVING.
WHAT DOES EVERYBODY ELSE THINK?
GET IT TO A POINT WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY HAVE A POINT.
MAYBE I'LL SAY THIS ONE. THAT'S THE EXACT POINT IS THAT WE WANT TO GET IT TO WHERE WE HAVE A PRODUCT THAT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND RELEASE.
>> ARE YOU RECOMMENDING WE STOP?
>> NO. L WAS JUST MAKING A [INAUDIBLE]. [LAUGHTER]
>> AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A PLAN AND GETTING PUNCHED I WAS LIKE WE GOT TO PLAN FIRST.
ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE AS WE DO THE RESEARCH ON THESE TWO ISSUES IS LOOKING AT THE PROBABILITY OF WHEN THIS MIGHT HAPPEN BECAUSE THE PROBABILITY ISN'T FOR 10 YEARS.
I THINK IT'S STILL IMPORTANT TO CAPTURE IT AND PUT IT AS A FUTURE ITEM SOMEHOW IN THE CIP, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO PUT THAT IN OUR CURRENT NEEDS.
>> I JUST WANT IT THERE SO NOBODY SAY FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, WE MAY ALL BE GONE OR WHATEVER.
THEY SAY, "MY GOD, WHAT'S THIS ABOUT A BRIDGE?"
[01:40:01]
NO, L WANT THEM BECAUSE ON THE ALLEN HEIGHTS, SPRING HILL, THAT STREET IS ON THE COLLIN COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PLAN.BUT THEN THERE'S A PORTION AROUND CHAPEL.
I GUESS IT'S FROM PECAN ORCHARD ON UP WHERE THERE'S ALREADY SOME LINES THERE.
THE CITY ALLEN IS VERY UNHAPPY WITH THE WAY THAT IS BECAUSE THE LINES AREN'T OPENED.
MR. BOLIN'S HOUSE IS RIGHT THERE.
WE DON'T WISH TO EMINENT DOMAIN.
IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS YOU DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S GOING TO GO, OR WHEN IT'S GOING TO GO.
I DON'T WANT US NOT READY FOR ANYTHING.
>> I ALSO HAVE A COMMENT ABOUT THE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.
FIFTY THOUSAND IS NOT GOING TO SUFFICE.
I COME BACK TO SOMETHING THAT WAS IN THE STREET CONDITION SURVEY THAT MR. BIRKHOFF MENTIONED IS THAT HE FELT WE NEEDED, IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I'VE READ IT, BUT WE NEED A DELIBERATE OR A REGULAR STREET MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.
WE NEED TO HAVE A REGULAR OPERATION WHERE WE GO THROUGH OUR STREETS AND WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, AND WE GO AHEAD AND FIX THOSE THINGS AS THEY COME UP SO THAT WE DON'T WAIT UNTIL THE ROADS POP AND WE HAVE A BIGGER PROBLEM.
I THINK THAT WAS A VERY GOOD COMMENT, A COMMENT WE NEED TO TAKE AND GET SOMETHING DOWN ON.
BUT 50,000 ISN'T GOING TO COVER US.
>> NO. THAT'S A DROP IN THE BUCKET.
[LAUGHTER] WE HAVE THE NEW SALES TAX MONEY THAT WILL BE STARTING TO COME IN HERE.
>> WE'LL SEE THAT FIRST FUNDS.
DECEMBER WE'LL START SEEING THOSE FUNDS COME IN, SO WE'LL SEE WHAT THOSE NUMBERS START LOOKING LIKE THEN.
>> WELL, AS WE PULL THIS PLAN TOGETHER, WE NEED TO IDENTIFY HOW MUCH IS A REASONABLE NUMBER TO MAINTAIN OUR STREETS THAT WILL HELP TO REDUCE.
WE'VE GOT A BACKLOG THAT WE'VE GOT TO DEAL WITH.
BUT WHAT IS THAT MAINTENANCE NUMBER THAT IF WE KEEP THAT GOING, THE AMOUNT OF REPAIRS THAT ARE NEEDED IS SOMETHING WE CAN DEAL WITH?
>> MINOR REPAIR AND MAJOR REDO STREETS.
MR. MACHADO, HOW WOULD WE GET THAT NUMBER? MAINTENANCE FOR ROADS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS? WHAT'S REALISTIC? I KNOW YOU'VE WORKED ON THIS A LOT.
>> THAT'S HARD TO SAY BECAUSE IT CAN VARY.
IF WE DO A GOOD JOB ON SOME STREET REPAIRS, MAINTENANCE NUMBER IS GOING TO GO DOWN.
BUT IF WE DON'T, THEN THE MAINTENANCE NUMBER IS GOING TO BE UP. IT'S HARD TO SAY.
>> IF WE HAVE HOT SUMMERS AND WET SUMMERS, IT DOES ALSO AFFECT MAINTENANCE.
[LAUGHTER] EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION OF THE GROUND AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
>> LET'S GIVE IT JOHN AND SEE. JOHN.
>> IT'S JUST GOING TO BE A LOT MORE.
>> MAYBE THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS, IT MAKES SENSE TO GO AHEAD AND JUST PUT A BALLPARK.
MAYBE WE TAKE THE SAME TAX NUMBER, AND PUT THAT THERE FOR NOW, BUT THEN DEFINE A STREET MAINTENANCE PROGRAM AND THEN START PUTTING NUMBERS TO THAT.
>> THAT'S RIGHT, WE COULD ALWAYS UPDATE IT.
>> THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT, BUT $380,000 IS.
>> I THINK YOU'VE GOT SOME STREET MAINTENANCE IN THERE WITH THE FOG SEAL, AND THEN FOR CRACK SEALING, FOG SEALING, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE STREET MAINTENANCE ISSUES.
I THINK YOU'RE STARTING TO IDENTIFY THOSE, WELL ACTUALLY WITHIN THIS PLAN.
>> WELL, WE HAVE THAT INNER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH ELLIS COUNTY.
>> THE TEXAS BID STUFF AND EVERYTHING ELSE THERE.
>> THEIR BARE MINIMUM IS $200,000.
>> IN THE PAST AND I'M TALKING WAY BACK, WE USED TO PUT $300,000 TOWARDS STREET MAINTENANCE EVERY YEAR, AND IT WAS NEVER ENOUGH EVEN BACK IN THE DAY.
>> MAYBE IF GRANT CAN TELL US WHAT HE HAS IN THE CURRENT BUDGET YEAR, WE CAN PERHAPS JUST CHANGE THE NUMBER TO THAT, AND THEN EVERY YEAR WE GO THROUGH THIS, WE'LL BE ABLE TO SEE HOW CLOSE WERE WE ON OUR BUDGETING, AND THEN DIAL IT IN OVER TIME POTENTIALLY OR IF IT VARIES A LOT, THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO DIAL IT IN.
I GUESS JUST USING ANY OF THAT INPUT DATA WOULD BE HELPFUL.
[01:45:05]
DO YOU WANT TO MOVE INTO THE MUNICIPAL FACILITIES PROJECTS, OR ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECTIONS? CHARITY DO YOU WANT TO START OR YOU WANT ME TO GO OVER IT?>> ONE OF THE THINGS ON THE SCHEDULE THAT WE DID INTO THE STREETS ON THE REPAIR OF THE STREETS WAS TO IDENTIFY AND FACTOR THOSE GROUPS THAT ARE ON THE [INAUDIBLE].
THOSE ARE THE ONES WE SAID WE VOWED TO IMMEDIATELY ADDRESS.
OUR STREET OUR GOAL IS TALKED ABOUT IN THE PAST BASED ON THAT.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DISPLAY, AND IN ADDITION TO DISPLAYING THE NAMES OF THE STREETS, I THINK YOU NEED TO PUT THE NUMBER OF COSTS THESE ARE SO THAT WE GET BACK NIL YOU START GETTING TO THE REALITY OF WHAT OUR COSTS ARE.
>> IF THE CRP PLAN IS REVIEWED ANNUALLY, THOSE NUMBERS WOULD ALSO CHALLENGE.
>> THAT'S FINE. NEW DATA THAT COMES IN EACH YEAR, WE'LL JUST MAKE THIS PLAN MORE ACCURATE EACH TIME WE REVIEW IT.
>> THE BENEFIT WILL BE ONCE YOU DO IT THE FIRST TIME THAT IT'S JUST AN AUGMENTATION OF WHAT IT IS.
AND IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, THEN YOU CAN LEAVE IT THE SAME, BUT IF YOU HAVE DIFFERENT DATA THAN OBVIOUSLY WE CAN UPDATE IT.
>> SO THE QUESTION BECOMES, HOW DO WE DO THAT? WE HAVE THOSE NUMBERS, USING THE NUMBERS FROM OUR CITY ENGINEER OF COST PER LINEAR FEET, AND SITTING WITH MR. MIKADO ABOUT THE CONDITIONS OF THE STREET, AND I'M JUST TALKING STREETS RIGHT NOW, I'M NOT TALKING THE DRAINAGE PIECE THAT LATER.
AND SO WE HAVE A NUMBER THAT WE BEST GUESS RIGHT NOW.
THIS IS THE BEST GUESS OF WHAT THESE THINGS WOULD BE.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS DO WE NEED TO ADJUST THEM FOR.
ONE WOULD BE IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH MR. BIRKHOFF, HE MENTIONED THAT THOSE NUMBERS DIDN'T INCLUDE THE ENGINEERING FEES.
THAT WAS JUST THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
SO DO WE NEED TO INCLUDE A NUMBER FOR THAT? ONE. NUMBER 2, FOR THE YEARS GOING OUT, DO WE NEED TO INCLUDE A NUMBER FOR INFLATION? IF WE'RE ASSUMING THIS IS GOING TO BE DONE IN THREE YEARS FROM NOW, DO WE INSULATE THAT NUMBER SO THAT WE HAVE THAT? THOSE ARE TWO QUESTIONS, AND THEN I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND IF WE CAN GET AN ANSWER ON THAT, THAT MAYBE AMANDA AND I GO BACK IN TAKEN THAT NUMBER, COME UP WITH SOMETHING.
IF THERE'S SOME THAT YOU PARTICULARLY WANT TO HAVE DONE IN A SPECIFIC TIME-FRAME, ON THE SCHEDULE YOU CAN TELL US TO MAKE SURE WE PUT IT IN A CERTAIN PLACE, BUT WE CAN JUST FIGURE BASED ON TRAFFIC, BASED ON THE CONDITION OF THE STREET AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
WE CAN MAKE A GUESS AS TO PUT IT IN A PLACE THAT THEN WE CAN COME BACK FOR ANOTHER MEETING, AND THEN MASSAGE THAT RATHER THAN AN EMPTY BLANK SHEET.
>> THAT SOUNDS GREAT AT ABOUT 8% IN THERE, WE HAVE NO SURPRISES ON INFLATION.
>> EIGHT PERCENT PER YEAR INFLATION YOU THINK, AND WHAT ABOUT THE ENGINEERING?
>>THAT NUMBER NEEDS TO BE IN THERE? I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE NUMBER IS, BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE AN ENGINEERING NUMBER IN THERE BECAUSE IT'S GOT [OVERLAPPING].
>> TEN PERCENT OF THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
>> I THINK HE HAD SAID THOUGH, IF I'M WRONG, MAYBE I'M WRONG.
I THOUGHT HE HAD SAID THAT [INAUDIBLE]
>> I HEARD THAT NUMBER, BUT THAT SOUNDS SO HIGH. [LAUGHTER].
>> I THINK THAT'S- [BACKGROUND]
>> TWENTY FIVE PERCENT OF ENGINEERING IN THE TOTAL.
>> ENGINEERING JUST OVERALL COST.
I GOT INTO TRAFFIC FLOW, ETC, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE THINGS THAT AREN'T IN THERE.
>> BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO DO SOME ROADS.
>> WITH TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN ON, STUFF LIKE THAT.
YOU HAVE TO READ BARRICADES, STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO YOU WOULD INCLUDE THOSE COSTS AND EVERYTHING, YOU TECHNICALLY COULD INFLATE THAT NUMBER 25%.
[01:50:04]
WE CAN SEE WHAT THE ANNUAL INCREASES HAVE BEEN JUST IN PAVEMENT NUMBERS.WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS AND JUST GIVE IT A ROUGH ESTIMATE [OVERLAPPING].
>> WHERE THERE'S A STORM, WE DON'T HAVE A FUTURE.
>> BUT WE CAN LOOK AT THE HISTORICAL NUMBERS AND SAY, HEY, IT'S BEEN 6% OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
WE CAN SAY, WE'LL SCREW UP 6% IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
>> FUEL COSTS DRIVES A LOT OF THAT.
>> WE'LL GO WITH THE 25%, OR WE COULD PUT RANGES ON THERE, LIKE 5%, 10%.
>> WHAT I'D SUGGEST IS LET'S COME UP WITH A NUMBER, BUT THEN COME UP WITH RANGES AND WE CAN HAVE, SO WHEN WE GET INTO THE DISCUSSION, WE CAN TALK ABOUT RANGES OF WHAT IT MIGHT BE, BUT SO THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING TO START WITH BECAUSE I'M AFRAID IF WE ARE SEEING RANGES, WE'RE GOING TO GO NUMBER CRAZY.
>> I THINK WE DO HAVE TO HAVE TO END UP AT A NUMBER, BECAUSE IT GOES THROUGH AND TOTALS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE TABLE AND SO ARRANGE WILL BE DIFFICULT.
>> I'M USED TO LOOKING NOW AT CERTAIN THINGS AND THEY'LL SAY YES, AND PLUS 5%, PLUS 10%, AND I'M SO USED TO TRY AND [INAUDIBLE].
>> MAKE SENSE. WOULD IT MAKE SENSE FOR MR. MIKADO, AND LUKE TO TRY TO HELP US TO GET COST ESTIMATES FOR EACH LINE ITEM THAT WE HAVE CAPTURED IN THE TABLE? IS THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN HELP US WITH?
>> WE'VE GOT SOME PRETTY GOOD NUMBERS RIGHT NOW, JUST FROM TEXAS BIT ABOUT.
>> GOT SOME CONTACTS WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS.
>> YEAH. I THINK COUNSEL WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT TO FILL IN ANY BLANK LINE THAT DOESN'T HAVE A NUMBER AND A YEAR TO USE YOUR BEST JUDGMENT IN TERMS OF, WHEN WOULD IT MAKE SENSE SEQUENTIALLY, AND THEN HOW MUCH DO YOU ESTIMATE IT TO COST, AND THEN WE CAN TALK THROUGH THAT DURING OUR NEXT SESSION.
>> I WOULD PUT A CAVEAT IN THERE, BASICALLY SAYING THAT WE'VE GOT THE NUMBERS FROM BIRKHOFF THAT SAYS, HERE'S HOW MUCH WE'RE BASICALLY ASKING [INAUDIBLE] BALLPARK. LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND SAY.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.
YOU HAVE PUT IT TOGETHER AND SHOW GARY AND LUKE.
BECAUSE I THINK THEY CAN LOOK AT IT AND SAY, NO, THAT'S OVER.
YOU ARE WAY OUT OR OUT OF RANGE, AND WE CAN LOOK AT IT AGAIN.
MAYBE IT'S A PROBLEM WITH THE TYPE OF RECONSTRUCTION NUMBERS THAT I USED, AND THAT TYPE OF THING.
>> IT VARIES BECAUSE WE WERE TALKING TO TEXAS BID, AND THEY CAN GIVE US NUMBERS ON CERTAIN THINGS, BUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT, THEY DON'T EVEN DO.
[OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE TO CONTRACT THAT OUT ON OUR OWN.
>> YEAH. IT EITHER WE CONTRACTED OUR OWN OR WE CONTRACT WITH THEM AND IT'S COST PLUS, AND SO THEY DON'T DO THE GLASS PAY FOR THE GLASS MAT, SO THAT'S COST-PLUS.
IF THEY DO IT, WE WOULD HAVE TO CONTRACT WITH JUST A COMPANY THAT DOES IT.
THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT, JUST THE MAT ON THOSE FACTS.
>> I'M GOING TO ASK IF IT WOULD MAKE SENSE IF AMANDA AND I, AND LUKE AND GARY LOOKED AT WHAT WE HAD PULLED TOGETHER, AND THE DETAIL BEHIND IT.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO GET PRECISE, BUT WE WANT IT TO BE CONSERVATIVE.
BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO FIND 100% MORE THAN WHAT WE ESTIMATED, [LAUGHTER] THAT WOULD BE BAD.
I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST AT THIS POINT, THIS PIECE IS NOT RELATING TO DRAINAGE.
THAT WE JUST DEAL WITH THE STREET.
I WOULD TO SUGGEST WE NEED TO HAVE DRAINAGE AS A SEPARATE CONVERSATION.
>> I WOULD AGREE. WELL, THEN IT NEEDS TO BE YOUR SHEET HERE.
[01:55:03]
YOU CAN'T BASICALLY LEAVE IT OFF.>> TO YOUR POINT, WE WOULD NEED TO REPLICATE THIS TABLE AND HAVE DRAINAGE AT THE TOP OF IT ASSOCIATED WITH EACH ONE OF THESE STREETS SEGMENTS.
>> I WOULD SAY THAT THE NUMBERS THAT WE GOT FROM BIRKHOFF, ETC., THAT AS LONG AS WE COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S CONSISTENT, I THINK IT'S BETTER TO USE SOMETHING THAT'S CONSISTENT AS LONG AS PEOPLE GENERALLY ARE OKAY WITH THE NUMBERS, BECAUSE, THE END RESULTS, SOME WILL BE ABOVE, SOME WILL BE BELOW, BUT AT LEAST, YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD, AND HOW YOU LOOKED AT IT.
>> I THINK THE PEOPLE WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN THEY'RE SAYING, "I SEE. NOT MY STREET." I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
>> QUESTION. WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO HAVE A, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE SOME ROADS I WOULD HOPE AT LEAST THAT DON'T HAVE A DRAINAGE ISSUE.
>> MY POINT BEING IS THAT, IT'S ALREADY A PRETTY WIDE SPREADSHEET, I KNOW.
BUT IT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT HAD DRAINAGE, AND HE HAD AN X THERE, AND THEN YOU'D HAVE ANOTHER COLUMN ON WHAT THAT COST WAS GOING TO BE ESTIMATED, AND THEN IT COULD BE IN THE SAME SPREADSHEET AS OPPOSED TO HAVING IT SEPARATELY.
>> THANKS. THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.
I'M ALL FOR TRYING TO KEEP AS [LAUGHTER] COMPACT AS POSSIBLE.
THE VIEWERS PAGES AS POSSIBLE ALSO.
>> MIGHT BE WHEN YOU GET DOWN HERE.
>> I THINK YOU COULD WIND UP MAYBE THE SUBTOTAL.
YOU GET SUBTOTAL, AND BASICALLY SAY HERE'S WHAT THE STREET COSTS ARE, AND THEN HERE'S A SUBTOTAL, AND THEN THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OR [LAUGHTER] LINE ITEM THAT SAYS COULD BE X AMOUNT MORE.
>> WELL, I THINK WHEN YOU GUYS GET DOWN HERE TO EACH PROJECT, THAT'S WHERE THE COSTS ARE ALL TIED TOGETHER.
YOU PUT FUNDING, DRAINAGE NEEDS TO BE DONE.
IF THERE'S DRAINAGE, WATER LINES HAVE TO BE DONE IN THE STREET, YOU'LL TIE THAT.
I HOPE THAT YOU GUYS WOULD DO IS TIE IT TO THAT FUNDING AREA THERE.
THAT WAY YOU CAN PULL THAT SHEET AND SAY, HEY, THIS IS WHAT WE'VE GOT.
THIS IS THE BACKGROUND ON THE STREET.
THIS IS THE TIMELINE WE'RE LOOKING AT.
THIS IS EVERYTHING FOR THAT SPECIFIC PROJECT, AND THAT GOES BACK TO THE CAPITAL OF WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.
HE'S IDENTIFYING THE WHOLE PROJECT HIMSELF.
IT'S OBVIOUS TO GO. IT'S A NICE LITTLE BOW FOR EVERYTHING.
>> THAT WILL BE ROLLED IN SHAPE, CHECK WHATEVER THAT LINE IS.
>> WE HAD CALLED THIS MEETING FOR 5:00-7:00 PM.
IT IS 7:00 PM, AND I SEE SOME OF THE STAFF IN PARTICULAR OR/AND OTHER PEOPLE ARE READY.
[LAUGHTER] I THINK OUR BRAINS ARE FRIED, AND WE NEED TO UPDATE WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT, AND COME BACK, AND GO FORWARD.
I KNOW THIS IS A STUPID QUESTION, BUT I'LL ASK IT ANYWAY.
WHEN WOULD YOU ALL TO MEET AGAIN? [LAUGHTER] DARN IT.
I THOUGHT WE'D START AT NOON TOMORROW, AND THEN GO ON TO NATIONAL NIGHT OUT.
[LAUGHTER] DO YOU HAVE EVERYBODY'S SCHEDULED FOR THE 17TH, I THINK IT IS?
>> WE HAVE TO GIVE STAFF TIME TO GET THE INFORMATION.
>> RANDY, I THINK YOU WERE IN ON THAT SUM TOO?
>> BUT [INAUDIBLE] FOR A [INAUDIBLE].
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.