>> AT THIS TIME, I AM CALLING TO
[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:10]
ORDER THE PARKER CITY COUNCIL, SPECIAL MEETING OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN IS OCTOBER 17TH, 2023, AND AT THIS TIME, IT IS 4:00 PM. MR. OLSON, DO WE HAVE A QUORUM?>> MADAM MAYOR, YOU HAVE A QUORUM.
[1. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) CONSIDERATION OF PHASED APPROACH]
>> WE WANT TO DO A RECAP OF WHERE WE WERE.
>> YES. MADAM MAYOR, AFTER THE LAST MEETING, COUNCILMEMBER LYNCH AND I DISCUSSED INCORPORATING SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WAS PROVIDED DURING THE LAST MEETING.
WE HAVE REVISIONS THAT WE'VE ADDED, AND WE'VE ADDED A PAGE IN THE VERY BACK OF THE DOCUMENT THAT HAS A REVISION HISTORY SUMMARY, WHICH MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR PEOPLE TO KIND OF SEE LIKE WHAT THINGS AT A HIGH LEVEL HAVE CHANGED IN THE DOCUMENT SINCE OUR LAST REVISION, REV01 TO OUR NEW REVISION, REV02.
>> SIXTY-SIX OF THE PACKET, PAGE 31 OF THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS [INAUDIBLE]?
>> SURE. I'LL GO AHEAD AND START JUST GOING THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS.
IF IT'S OKAY WITH YOU, IF WE COULD JUST START AGAIN AT THE TOP OF THE DOCUMENT, FIRST PAGE, AND WE'LL CLICK THROUGH TO THE FIRST SECTION THAT HAS THE REVISIONS UPDATED.
WE ACTUALLY EVEN REFORMATTED THE TABLE OF CONTENTS TO MAKE THE PROJECTS AS ITS OWN SECTION AND THE FINANCING SUBCATEGORIES AS A SUBCATEGORY TO THE FINANCE SECTION.
TERRY DID A NICE JOB TO RESTRUCTURE THE TABLE OF CONTENTS TO MAKE IT EASIER TO FOLLOW IN THE FLOW.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER LYNCH. VERY NICE.
THE INTRODUCTION IS PRIMARILY THE SAME AS LAST TIME.
THIS SECTION HERE WHERE WE GET INTO THE DEFINITION OF A CAPITAL ASSET.
WELL, WE MET LAST TIME, IT WAS STRUCTURED SUCH THAT WE HAD A DEFINITION OF AN ASSET AND THEN SEPARATELY A DEFINITION OF A PROJECT.
THE ASSET MINIMUM DOLLAR AMOUNT WAS $5,000.
THE PROJECT MINIMUM DOLLAR AMOUNT WAS $25,000, AND WE, AS A COUNCIL, HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AND IT SEEMED TO BE CONFUSING IN TERMS OF THAT DEFINITION.
COUNCILMEMBER LYNCH RECALLED THAT THERE WAS A RESOLUTION PASSED IN 2022, RESOLUTION 2022-700, THAT IS A SEPARATE STANDALONE RESOLUTION THAT DEFINES CAPITAL ASSETS IN VERY GOOD DETAIL.
WE DECIDED TO INSTEAD OF REDEFINING IT HERE IN THIS DOCUMENT, RATHER TO REFER TO THE RESOLUTION AND ANY CHANGES THAT WE WANT TO MAKE TO A CAPITAL ASSET DEFINITION COULD BE DONE ON THAT RESOLUTION AND THEN REFERENCED HERE ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
SHE DID GO AHEAD AND INCLUDE JUST AT A HIGH LEVEL TABLE HERE, WHICH IS HELPFUL IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT, BUT WE JUST COPIED AND PASTED MINIMUM AMOUNT TEXT FROM THE OTHER DOCUMENT TO PUT IT IN CONTEXT, BUT THEN REFER TO THAT OVERRIDING DOCUMENT FOR THE PLACE WHERE THAT DEFINITION RESIDES.
I GUESS ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS REGARDING THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH CATEGORY ON THE TABLE?
>> IS THERE A NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT RESOLUTION,
[00:05:03]
AND ALL ARE GETTING A SUMMARY OF THAT?>> WE THOUGHT THAT WHAT'S IN HERE GIVES YOU A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT THE RESOLUTION IDENTIFIES OR EXPLAINS TO US.
>> YEAH, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS A REFERENCE.
>> THEY HAVE IT REFERENCED THERE.
>> I INTENDED TO PUT A LINK TO THE RESOLUTION ITSELF AND I JUST FAILED TO DO THAT, BUT DO YOU ALL WANT TO DO A QUICK LOOK THROUGH THE RESOLUTION AT THIS TIME OR IF WE CAN GET THAT TO YOU ALL LATER AS WE GO THROUGH IT? HOPEFULLY.
>> I THINK IF YOU JUST PASS THAT.
>> WELL, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? WERE YOU HERE AT THAT POINT, TERRY?
>> WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION AS TO WHY VEHICLES AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT MIGHT BE A DOLLAR?
>> ANYTHING VALUED ABOVE A DOLLAR WAS PROBABLY A VEHICLE.
>> GENERALLY DISCUSS WITH THE AUDITORS AND THEIR [OVERLAPPING]
>> TYPICAL THRESHOLDS THAT THEY USE.
WHAT WE JUST ADOPTED, WHAT WAS INDUSTRY STANDARD, I GUESS?
>> YOU WOULD SAY THAT MACHINERY, EQUIPMENT, 2,500, BUT ANYTHING OVER A DOLLAR FOR A VEHICLE?
>> WELL, YEAH BECAUSE WE HAVE AN INSTANCE WHERE MAYBE THAT VEHICLE WAS GIFTED TO US.
WELL, SOLD TO US FOR $25, BUT IT ACTUALLY HAD A VALUE OF SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS.
THAT'S WHY IT WAS SET AT A DOLLAR TO CAPTURE ANYTHING BECAUSE OF ITS USEFUL LIFE AND ACTUAL VALUE.
>> THAT'S VEHICLES AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT, THEN THERE'S THE MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT.
GRANT AND I HAD A DISCUSSION AFTER MY MEMORY CAME BACK TO ME THAT WE ACTUALLY DID THIS A YEAR AGO.
THIS IS FAR BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAD BEFORE.
I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND OR EXPECT THAT IT'S GOING TO BE UPDATED AS GRANT LOOKS AT HOW THE PROCESS WORKS WITHIN HIS STRUCTURE AND WHAT MAKES SENSE FROM A CAPITALIZATION STANDPOINT.
WE DID TALK ABOUT WHETHER THE 2,500 FOR THE MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT WAS A NUMBER THAT WE SHOULD STICK WITH OR IF WE SHOULD CONSIDER SOMETHING A BIT HIGHER ON THAT END BECAUSE THAT DID SEEM TO BE A BIT SMALL.
LOOKING AT SOME OF THE EXPENDITURES THAT COME THROUGH.
GRANT, DO YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFICS?
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT SHOULD BE, BUT I DO AGREE THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULD AT SOME POINT LOOK AT RAISING THAT THRESHOLD TO A LARGER NUMBER THAN 2,500.
WHETHER WE MAKE THAT 5,000, 10,000, BUT I DEFINITELY THINK THAT NUMBER SHOULD BE INCREASED AT SOME POINT.
>> I THINK IF WE REMEMBER WHEN WE LOOKED AT IT LAST TIME THAT FIT INTO THE ACTUAL STANDARD THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY AUDITING US FROM.
SINCE THAT THRESHOLD WAS THERE, IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE AT LEAST FOR NOW, TO LEAVE IT.
>> [INAUDIBLE] EVERYBODY, THEY'RE PROBABLY WONDERING WHO WE'RE TALKING TO.
[INAUDIBLE] COUNCILMEMBER RANDY KERCHO, WE HAVE CITY COUNCILMEMBER TERRY LYNCH, WE HAVE MAYOR PRO TEM JIM REED, WE HAVE [INAUDIBLE], WE HAVE [INAUDIBLE], WE HAVE [INAUDIBLE] ADMINISTRATOR, WE HAVE CITY COUNCILMEMBER AMANDA NOE, WE HAVE CITY COUNCILMEMBER TODD FECHT.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE WATCHING ONLINE, [INAUDIBLE].
>> FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME,
[00:10:14]
THIS SEEMS TO TALK ABOUT A SINGLE ITEM WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME, WHETHER THERE'S A CUMULATIVE OF ITEMS ALL PURCHASED AT THE SAME TIME.I DIDN'T SEE THAT IN THE RESOLUTION, A DEFINITION OF THAT TYPE OF SCENARIO OR IN HERE.
SHOULD WE PULL REFERENCE TO THAT?
>> AS WE'RE LOOKING AT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR SAY, MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT MIGHT BE THE EXAMPLE OF MULTIPLE PIECES THAT REACHED A $25,000 LIMIT OR SOMETHING, WHATEVER THAT LIMIT MIGHT BE.
>> MULTIPLE DESKTOP COMPUTERS OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
>> SORRY COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR QUESTION?
>> THE QUESTION WAS, I DID NOT SEE IN THE RESOLUTION OR IN THE CIP PLAN THAT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN.
THE SCENARIO WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME HAVING A PURCHASE OF MULTIPLE ITEMS AT THE SAME TIME THAT CUMULATIVE REACHED ABOVE THE THRESHOLD.
>> I THINK WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE USING AT THIS POINT.
I DO SEE OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN INCREASING AS TIME GOES ON, AND IMPROVING AS WELL WITH THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED.
BUT I THINK WE'RE CONSIDERING THE MAJOR ASPECTS OF OUR CAPITAL ASSETS WITH RESPECT TO VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT.
WE INDIVIDUALLY TALKED ABOUT OTHER ITEMS.
>> WE'VE IDENTIFIED A LOT OF THIS STUFF WITHIN ACTUALLY THE REPLACEMENT SCHEDULES WITHIN ITSELF.
I KNOW WE'RE KEEPING TRACK OF COMPUTERS NOW.
CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON THAT, GRANT, I KNOW WE'VE DONE A WHOLE SERIAL NUMBER THING WITH THEM.
>> WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF PUTTING TOGETHER A DOCUMENT THAT HAS ALL BEEN IN THERE.
>> WE'RE KEEPING TRACK OF ALL OF THAT INFORMATION THAT WAY WE KNOW YEARS, AND MODELS AND STUFF LIKE THAT OF OUR EQUIPMENT LIKE COMPUTERS.
>> PERHAPS THAT WOULD HELP INFORM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN IN THE FUTURE.
ONCE WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, TO BE MORE FINE TUNED TO TRULY BE MORE COMPREHENSIVE OF ALL OUR CAPITAL ASSETS.
>> WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW LIKE, CAN WE REPLACE LIKE FIVE COMPUTERS A YEAR AND GET LIKE A SCHEDULE OF LIKE FIVE OR SIX.
IF WE DO SIX, WE'RE ONLY GOING TO REPLACE FIVE.
BUT ONE'S JUST IN CASE WE HAVE SOMETHING MAJOR GO WRONG OR SOMETHING WITH A COMPUTER OR SOMETHING DOWN THAT LINE.
THAT'S OUR GOAL IS TO GET LIKE SOME REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE WITH STUFF.
>> I WAS CONFUSED TOO, BUT THAT'S WHAT CITED THAT NUMBER.
>> DO WE HAVE THE WRONG NUMBER MAYBE.
>> THOSE INNER LOCAL AGREEMENTS ARE GOING TO COME UP TOO IN DISCUSSION.
>> THERE'S ANOTHER FOLLOW-UP ITEM THAT I WILL DO IS TO VERIFY THE NUMBER OF THE RESOLUTION AND GET THAT SO THAT EVERYBODY, ONE, THAT WE HAVE A LINK AND TO PERHAPS SHARE THAT WITH YOU ALL SO THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT IT.
>> YOU SENT ME THE RIGHT [BACKGROUND]
>> ANYTHING ELSE IN THAT SECTION?
>> TERRY AND COUNCILMAN LYNCH HAD A COPY OF THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT THERE, AND I READ THROUGH IT AND IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, AND I THINK IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE. IT TIES PRETTY WELL.
>> JUST SO I'M CLEAR, AS WE GO THROUGH THIS,
[00:15:01]
LIKE THIS LAST EXAMPLE, I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHERE WE ENDED.GENERAL COUNSEL SAYS NO, THEY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT OR.
>> I TOOK A NOTE THAT, WE WEREN'T SUCCESSFULLY CAPTURING YOUR REQUEST, WHICH WAS TO IF A LARGE PURCHASE OF COMPUTERS NOW BECOMES A CAPITAL ITEM, IT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN IS THE REQUEST.
THE COMMENT WAS THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE A CAPITAL SCHEDULE.
WHAT WE CAN DO IS POTENTIALLY, AT THE END, THERE'S A LIST OF DOCUMENTS THAT INFORM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT POTENTIALLY WE CAN INCLUDE THE CAPITAL SCHEDULE AS ONE OF THESE DOCUMENTS THAT WILL INFORM THE CAPITAL PLAN, AND THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE DOCUMENT.
>> THIS IS WHY RANDY SAYING IS IT FINISHED.
BECAUSE THAT SCHEDULE IS NOT COMPLETE.
THAT SCHEDULE IS BEING DEVELOPED AT THIS POINT IN TIME, SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A SCHEDULE THAT CAN BE INCLUDED IN THIS YEAR'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE, PERHAPS THERE'S A QUESTION OF ARE THERE ANY BIG PURCHASES OF COMPUTER EQUIPMENT THAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING IN THE CURRENT YEAR, THAT'S NOT IN THE BUDGET?
>> I WOULD SAY NO, I THINK THAT EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE ANTICIPATED IS WHAT'S BEEN INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET OR ANYTHING ELSE OUTSIDE OF THAT BECAUSE WE'VE HAD IT FOR RADIOS.
>> LET'S HOPE NOT AT THIS POINT.
SINCE OCTOBER 1ST, WE'VE HAD SOME ISSUES, BUT LET'S HOPE NOT.
>> GRANT IN LOOKING AT THE BUDGET FOR THE YEAR, THERE ARE SOME CAPITAL ITEMS THAT PERHAPS THIS IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE ADDING TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
THE RADIO REPLACEMENTS OF 60,000, THE COMPUTER REPLACEMENTS OF 30,000, AND REPLACING A POLICE DEPARTMENT COPY OR 15,000.
THOSE ARE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING IN THE CURRENT YEAR.
WE DON'T HAVE FUTURE YEARS, BUT WE HAVE THE CURRENT YEAR THAT WE CAN GET A START WITH YOU.
>> GENERALLY OWNER OVER 25 ANYWAY.
>> BUT THEY WEREN'T LISTED IN WHAT WE HAVE SO FAR.
>> [INAUDIBLE] I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT. [INAUDIBLE]
>> I WOULD THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THIS SPOT AS WELL. YES.
>> WHAT WAS THIS ABOUT? THE MOTOROLA.
>> FOR THE POLICE. THE PHONES AND THE UPDATE FOR THE MOTOROLA PHONES.
[00:20:02]
>> THIS IS WHY WE CREATED THE TECHNOLOGY FUND IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS TO HAVE THE FUNDS AVAILABLE, SO THAT'S WHY THE MONEY IS COMING INTO THIS.
I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT WE WERE BUDGETING FOR.
THIS IS WHAT WE'LL BE USING IT FOR IN THE CURRENT YEAR.
>> YES, MA'AM. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IN SIX MONTHS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVEN'T HAD TO REPLACE SOME OF THOSE COMPUTERS OR WHATNOT.
IF WE DID HAVE TO REPLACE ALL THE BODY CAMERAS, BEDTIME, WE EITHER DO A BUDGET AMENDMENT AND LOOK AT WHAT WE SPENT SO FAR AND THEY WOULD WISH ALL WE'RE PLACING SOME COMPUTERS OR RADIOS TO NEXT YEAR SO WE CAN DO WITH THIS BUDGET YEAR WITH THE DOLLARS THAT ARE ALREADY BUDGETED.
BUT THEY WOULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WHENEVER THAT WE CAME UP WITH TO BRING BACK YOUR BODY CAMERAS OR NOT.
>> THAT'S WHAT THIS FUND IS FOR.
THAT'S THE INTENT OF WHY WE AGREED TO START THIS FUND.
>> BUT IF WE INCLUDE IT AS IT'S IDENTIFIED ON THE BUDGET, THAT SHOULD GIVE US A REASONABLE DESCRIPTION AT THIS POINT, AND AS WE GET UPDATES ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN OF ACTUAL TO WHAT WE BUDGETED AT THAT POINT, WE'LL GET MORE CLARIFICATION OF WHAT THOSE NUMBERS WERE. DOES THAT WORK?
>> I THINK THAT'S GOOD. ONE OTHER COMMENT AND MAYBE GRANT, YOU CAN ALLUDE TO THIS AS WELL IS THAT, ALTHOUGH I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN KIRK TRAWL THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT FALLS ON THE GAP.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT HE WAS LOOKING FOR THE MIXTURE.
I THINK MOST OF THE CATEGORIES LIKE COMPUTER EQUIPMENT, IF THERE WAS MULTIPLE COMPUTERS THAT WOULD FALL INTO THAT.
IF SOME OF THIS OTHER EQUIPMENT, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT IS PROBABLY HEAVIER EQUIPMENT, WHICH IS OF COURSE ANOTHER CATEGORY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE POLICE STUFF WOULD FIT INTO THE MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT CATEGORY RATHER THAN VEHICLES AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR IF WE NEED TO AUGMENT WHAT GOES UNDER EACH ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES, I'M NOT SURE.
ANYWAY, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THAT OR THEN THAT WAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO AMEND VERY MUCH.
IF YOU NOTICE, THERE'S ANOTHER LINE THAT SAYS WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM BECAUSE IN THE IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM IS SHOWN AS A SEPARATE CATEGORY.
I ALWAYS THINK OF IT AS INFRASTRUCTURE, GRANT WITH RESPECT TO CAPITALIZATION, WHAT WOULD YOU CALL THE CAPITALIZATION THRESHOLD OF THAT?
>> I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO FOLLOW THE SAME AS INFRASTRUCTURE OR POSSIBLY MACHINERY EQUIPMENT, I GUESS IT WOULD BEST CATEGORIZE, I GUESS WHATEVER IT IS, IT'S BEING REPLACED OR FIXED OR BUILT.
>> WHEN I LOOKED THROUGH SOME OF THE ITEMS IN THERE THAT INCLUDES NOT ONLY THE HARD STRUCTURES THAT ARE BEING BUILT, IT ALSO INCLUDES METERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE LOWER-COST.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT AND MAYBE THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THAT SOMEHOW WE NEED TO SPLIT IT OUT EVEN FOR PURPOSES OF INFORMING COUNCIL OF WHAT OUR COST ARE ON THAT SEEING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TO MEET INFRASTRUCTURE VERSUS WHAT ARE THOSE THINGS THAT HAVE A SHORT LIFE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO NEED TO REPLACE ON A MORE FREQUENT BASIS.
>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT, AND I THINK FURTHER ON WE SPLIT IT OUT, BUT AFTER WE GO THROUGH IT, MAYBE WE OUGHT TO TAKE A LOOK AGAIN AND SAY, ARE THERE MORE CLARIFICATIONS?
[00:25:03]
BECAUSE THAT IS A BIG DIFFERENCE OF WHERE THINGS COME FROM.I KNOW EVEN ON COUNCIL, SOMETIMES IT GETS CONFUSING.
>> WHAT BUCKET IS THIS COMING FROM? [LAUGHTER]
>> DO YOU WANT TO GO TO THE NEXT SECTION? I DON'T THINK WE HAD CHANGES IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING PROCESS.
WE'LL JUST GO DOWN TO THE ACTIVE CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR '23-'24.
COUNCILMEMBER LYNCH, DO YOU RECALL ANY CHANGES IN THIS TABLE?
>> THE ONLY CHANGE I RECALL IS, PECAN ORCHARD SHOULD HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THE CURRENT SCHEDULED BECAUSE THE LINEAR FEET INCLUDES ALL OF PECAN ORCHARDS, EVEN THOUGH ALL OF PECAN ORCHARD ISN'T IN A LESS THAN FAIR CONDITION.
WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE SIZE OF THAT, THOUGHT THAT THAT WASN'T THE BEST USE OF OUR CURRENT FUNDS AND IDENTIFIED THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO FLIP BACK AND CONSIDER IS THERE OTHER STREETS THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING?
>> THE STREET CONDITIONS SURVEY IS FROM JUNE OF '21.
>> I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO SAY IT WAS BETTER.
>> BUT I'M WONDERING IF THAT WAS [INAUDIBLE]
>> I'VE GOT A THREE BY FOUR AREA ON THE FRONT OF MY YARD THAT'S GONE.
LIKE YOU ALMOST HAVE TO DRIVE AROUND AND DO SINGLE TRAFFIC.
>> WE HAD CHURCH ON THE LIST, BUT I'VE GOT TO RECALL.
MAYBE GARY, IF WE CAN ASK YOU A QUESTION ON CHURCH AND EVEN LOUIS LANE, THINGS FOR THIS YEAR FOR MAINTENANCE, PATCHING TYPE OF THINGS.
IS THERE SOME PATCHING OR MAINTENANCE THAT CAN BE DONE TO THOSE STREETS? I THINK WE'RE ALREADY ADDRESSING MOSS RIDGE
>> IS THERE SOME PATCHING THAT WOULD BE REALISTIC TO DO THAT? I THINK BOTH OF THOSE STREETS, THE MINUTE IT RAINS, ANYTHING YOU PUT DOWN WASHES OUT. SUGGESTIONS?
>> I DON'T THINK THERE'S REALLY MAINTENANCE FOR CHURCHES.
>> CHURCH IS IN REALLY BAD SHAPE, WE ALL KNOW THAT.
ANYTHING YOU DO THERE SHORTER REBUILDING THAT ROAD IS GOING TO BE A WASTE OF MONEY A LITTLE BIT TO A POINT.
BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN SOMETHING DOESN'T NEED TO BE DONE.
>> I THINK THE KEY COUNCILMAN EFFECT ALREADY TALKED ABOUT, IF ANYTHING THEY'RE GETTING WORSE.
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT WERE ALREADY BAD PROBABLY STILL NEED TO BE DONE, AND THEN WE CAN REASSESS WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THEM ALL ANYWAY AS WE KNOW.
SO I THINK MAYBE WE JUST KEEP THIS ORDER FOR NOW, AND IF WE GET OTHER INFORMATION THAT WHERE WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S CATASTROPHIC, THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN ONE OF THOSE STREETS HAS TO HAVE PRIORITY CHANGED.
WE CAN DO THAT AS NEEDED, I THINK, BUT I THINK FOR NOW, AT LEAST THE WAY I SEE IT JUST FROM A HIGH LEVEL, I WOULD STAY WITH THIS, AND LET'S JUST MOVE FORWARD.
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED A NEW ROAD STUDY TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS ON THE CIP, ALTHOUGH THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE AS A DOCUMENT THAT'S GOING TO INFORM THE CIP.
[00:30:08]
IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE DO WANT TO DO REGULARLY AS PART OF THE OVERALL PROCESS.BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED NEW DATA TO MAKE DECISIONS ON THE CIP.
I WILL NOTE, SO LUKE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU MIGHT GO BACK UP TO THAT HIGHLIGHTED CHART THAT WE HAD, THE PAGE PRIOR TO THIS ONE.
SO THIS IS A DOCUMENT THAT WE WERE USING BEFORE WE STARTED WITH OUR CIP DOCUMENT.
NOTE THERE THAT TERTULLIAN WAS THE FIRST ONE ON THE LIST AND IT WAS HIGHLIGHTED, AND I THINK WE PUT A QUESTION MARK THERE BECAUSE WHERE WE THINKING THAT WE SHOULD WAIT UNTIL 2551 STONE BEFORE WE DO THIS, OR THERE'S SOMETHING THERE WAS A REASON WHY WE LOOKED AT WE HAD A QUESTION MARK THERE.
>> THAT TRAFFIC COUNTS IS WHAT WE LOOKED AT IN THE AMOUNT OF VOLUME OF TRAFFIC THAT WAS GOING DOWN THAT ROAD COMPARED TO THE REST OF THE STREETS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED.
FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS, THE TRAFFIC VOLUME WAS JUST NOT THERE TO JUSTIFY THE AMOUNT OF MONEY TO BE SPENT ON IT RIGHT THIS TIME.
BUT THE OTHER STREETS, AND WE WERE FOCUSING ON THE MORE THE POOR CONDITION STREETS AND NOT THE VERY SEVERE AT THAT TIME, IS THAT?
>> WHAT BLUE JUST SAID WAS CORROBORATED ALSO BY JOHN MARKOFF, WAS THAT CHURCH IS A MUCH LESS TRAVELED STREET.
IT ISN'T THE WORST CONDITION PROBABLY, BUT IT'S MUCH LESS TRAVELED.
>> AND THE OTHER THING THAT I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ON CHURCH, THE OTHER PROBLEM OR SITUATION WE HAVE WITH IT IS IT'S GOT SIGNIFICANT DRAINAGE ISSUES.
IN ORDER TO FIX IT, WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THE DRAIN [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT AND ALSO THERE'S A POTENTIAL FOR SOME DEVELOPMENT NEAR THE END OF CHURCH, AND IF THAT HAPPENS, FOR ME CAN, BUT IF THAT HAPPENS, THAT DEVELOPER MAY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROVING THAT.
>> MIGHT BE WIDENED A LITTLE BIT AT THAT POINT.
THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT'LL JUMP ALONG THAT POINT THERE WITH THAT 35 ACRES BACK THERE.
MAYBE SOME OF THAT ACREAGE UP IN THE FRONT PART THERE THAT PLANO ISD OWNS AND A COUPLE OTHER LAND OWNERS OWN THERE.
>> THAT'S GOOD DISCUSSION. I THINK WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS INCLUDED AS A LINE ITEM ON THE FUTURE ROADS TO BE IMPROVED SO THAT IT GETS TRACKED AND CONSIDERED EACH TIME, AND MAKE SURE THAT WE KIND OF KEEP THAT ON OUR RADAR WITH IN THAT WAY.
SO IF IT'S NOT ON THAT LIST, WHEN WE GET TO THAT NEXT TABLE, WILL MAKE A NOTE AND ADD IT DOES THAT SEEM REASONABLE?
>> QUESTION HERE. NOW THAT WE'VE REDEFINED CAPITAL ASSETS PER SE.
SOME OF THE ITEMS ON HERE ARE NOT ACTUALLY AT THE CAPITAL ASSET THRESHOLDS. HOW ARE WE GOING TO DEFINE IT? SHOULD WE HAVE REALLY LIKE ESPECIALLY LIKE ON ROAD MAINTENANCE, ET CETERA, I THINK WE BUDGET BASICALLY X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE FOR A YEAR.
SHOULD THAT BE KIND OF OFF PER SE, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN AND CONSIDERED SEPARATELY UNDER MAINTENANCE AND LESS, IT REACHES A LEVEL OF A CAPITAL ASSET.
>> AND AMANDA AND I TALKED ABOUT THAT AS WE WERE FIRST PUTTING THIS DOCUMENT TOGETHER BECAUSE OF THAT SAME ISSUE, PARTICULARLY ON THE STREET MAINTENANCE.
AND WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY SINCE THESE ARE STREETS THAT ARE IN LESS THAN FAIR CONDITION THAT WE WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE SOME WORK BEING DONE [LAUGHTER]
>> ON THE STREETS TO GIVE ENCOURAGEMENT MAYBE TO OUR RESIDENTS THAT WE'RE NOT IGNORING YOU.
WE REALLY ARE TRYING TO MAKE SOME HEADWAY ON THIS.
BUT THAT TOTAL MAINTENANCE, THAT'S THERE WHEN WE GET TO THE TO THE PROJECT SCHEDULE, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S STILL MORE FUNDS FOR JUST GENERAL MAINTENANCE AS WELL, THAT GARY IN HIS CAPACITY WILL BE IDENTIFYING WHAT HE WANTS TO DO AND THAT WON'T BE INCLUDED AS INDIVIDUAL ITEMS.
>> AND I THINK IDENTIFYING THIS IS WHEN YOU CAPITALIZE THESE ITEMS HERE LIKE THE MAINTENANCE, YOU ARE LOOKING AT, YOU'RE EXTENDING THE LIFE OF THAT ROAD, WHICH IS ALSO EXTENDED IN THAT LIFE OF THAT CAPITALIZATION.
YOU'RE WHICH WE CALL IT WELL, NO, YOUR BLANK HERE, WHAT THAT WORD? [LAUGHTER]
>> JUST YOU'RE ABLE TO PROLONG THE LIFE.
>> YEAH. YOU'RE PROLONGING THE LIFE OF THE ROAD AND YOU'RE ABLE TO , I FORGOT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.
[00:35:01]
BUT YEAH, YOU'RE BASICALLY THAT ROAD COST IS STILL THERE, BUT YOU'RE ALSO LAYING IN OR DEFER YEAH.DIFFERENT GET WITH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA MAINTENANCE.
SO YOU'RE CAPITALIZE ON THAT COST BACK INTO THAT ROAD A LITTLE BIT UNLESS THAT'S CORRECT. GREAT.
>> WELL, AS LONG AS THE AS LONG AS IT STILL HAS AN EXTENSIVE OFF BY 25%.
>> I WOULDN'T SAY IT'S GOING TO BE EXTENDING THE LIFE OF THE WORLD BY 25%.
BUT SOME OF THOSE OTHER WEIRD SAMPLE SECTION THAT YOU'RE REPAIRING THE RISK OF ROAD IS SURE.
>> SAME SECTION I THINK WE HAD A DISCUSSION LAST TIME.
IS THE DOLLAR ON HERE LIKE THE APPROPRIATION AND SOME OF THESE DOLLARS, I DON'T EVER REMEMBER APPROPRIATING.
SO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH A SECTION AND SAY AS SOMEHOW COUNSEL, [LAUGHTER]
>> THESE NUMBERS BECAUSE THEY CERTAINLY DIDN'T.
SO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, REWILD LEAVE ALWAYS.
BLANK OR HOW DO YOU WANT TO APPROACH HIM?
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, AND I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE NUMBERS ON THE PLAN AND WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT THEM AND AGREE THAT THIS NUMBER SHOULD BE ON EACH SQUARE.
BUT ALSO NOTE THAT THIS IS A BALLPARK NUMBER, THIS IS A GUIDELINE, AND THEN AT THE END OF THE YEAR, THERE'S BASICALLY A RECONCILIATION REPORT THAT WILL BE PART OF THIS PROCESS TO SEE HOW CLOSE TO BECOME TO THE ESTIMATE THAT WE THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS GOING TO COST, ARE WE WEIGH OVER? DO WE COME UNDER? IT'LL HELP TO INFORM FUTURE PLANS TO BECOME MORE ACCURATE OVER TIME.
>> YEAH, THAT MAKES TOTAL SENSE.
>> A LOT OF THIS IS BASED OFF ENGINEERING ESTIMATES THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT THAT MR. BIRKHOFF'S LOOKED AT AND GOT THOSE UNIT COST.
>> ESTIMATES I'VE GOT FROM CONTRACTORS AND STUFF.
>> THESE ARE KIND OF GETTING YOU TO COST BASED ON WHAT'S BEING BID OUT CURRENTLY.
>> BUT I WOULDN'T BE BIDDING ON STUFF UNLESS THE COUNCIL BASICALLY IS APPROVED.
>> WE'RE NOT BIDDING ON IT, IT'S WHAT'S BEEN BID OUT AMONGST OTHER CITIES, THERE'S A BID BOARD THAT WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN BID OUT AND WHAT THE UNIT COSTS ARE.
SO WE CAN GET AN IDEA OF WHAT'S BEEN BID OUT, WHAT THOSE UNIT COSTS ARE SO WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND PLUG OUR NUMBERS IN TO GET A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF WHAT AN ENGINEERING COST ESTIMATE WOULD BE ON THAT COST.
>> LET ME BACK UP FOR A SECOND.
I THINK IS GOING TO COME UP ANYWAY.
SO FROM A CAPITAL PROJECTS PERSPECTIVE, WHICH IS ARE GREATER THAN 25,000.
SOME OF THESE MAY OR MAY NOT FINISH UP IN A YEAR.
IT MAY TAKE LONGER THAN A YEAR OR WHATEVER.
AND THERE'S GOING TO BE CONSTANT GAIN OF JUST LIKE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN ITSELF.
THERE'S GOING TO BE CONSTANT REITERATIONS.
SO FROM A TRUE PROJECT PLANNING PERSPECTIVE, THEN TYPICALLY THERE'S A PROJECT PLAN AS OPPOSED TO A LINE ITEM, AND A CIP.
SO THERE'S A TON OF OR AT LEAST A LARGE NUMBER OF THREE PROJECT PLANNING SOFTWARE PROGRAMS OUT THERE.
I WOULD THINK IT WOULD RECOMMEND THAT BASICALLY IF WE'RE GOING TO CREATE A PROJECT PLAN THAT WE BASICALLY ASSIGN IT, A NUMBER AND KEEP ALL THE DETAILS OF EACH PROJECT PLAN IN SOMETHING.
SO EVEN IF COUNCIL TURNS OVER OR WHAT HAVE YOU AND IT'S STILL GOING.
THE QUESTIONS IS JUST RE-ARISE CONSTANTLY.
SOMEONE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT EVERYTHING THAT'S CURRENTLY CURRENT ON THAT PROJECT PLAN AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
AND THEN WE COULD EASILY SEE THE CIP PLAN ITSELF A NUMBER THAT WE COULD THEN REFERENCE IT SOMEPLACE ELSE TO GET ALL THE INFORMATION THAT'S NEEDED.
SO WE KEEP UP-TO-DATE AND ARE BOTHERING STAFF OR OTHERS, GO DIG OUT INFORMATION.
>> IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT YOU'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO DANCE TO IT.
WE WOULD ASSIGN THAT PROJECT NUMBER TO EACH ONE OF THESE AND TRACK IT INTERNALLY.
FOR FINANCIAL PURPOSES THAT WAY WE CAN RECONCILE THAT WITH THE AUDITORS AND THEY CAN PULL THOSE DOCUMENTS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
>> WE USE ENCODE. IT'S TYLER TECHNOLOGIES IS WHAT EVERY PRETTY MUCH EVERY CITY AROUND HERE USES.
IN NORTH TEXAS, PRETTY MUCH ALL OF TEXAS AND OKLAHOMA, AND KANSAS AND EVERYWHERE.
>> HE SAID WHAT PROJECT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE IS THAT JUST YOUR ACCOUNTING?
>> THERE IS A PROJECT TRACKING COMPONENT TO THE SOFTWARE.
[00:40:03]
WE'VE NEVER UTILIZED BECAUSE WE'VE NEVER HAD PROJECTS.REALLY SO, BUT IT DOES HAVE THE CAPABILITY, MIGHT BE AN ADD-ON FEATURE, BUT.
>> DOES IT ALLOW YOU TO BASICALLY STORE AWAY DOCUMENTS, ETC.
SO SOMEONE WENT THROUGH IT, THEY COULD SAY, OKAY, HERE'S ALL THE INFORMATION ON HERE.
HERE'S DOCUMENTS, HERE'S NOTES, WHATEVER.
>> YES, SIR. WHAT WE DO EVERY EVERY TRANSACTION, EVERY INVOICE, WOULD YOU CALL IT TO THAT PROJECT NUMBER AND THEN IT WOULD TRACK THE HISTORY.
PROJECTS ARE SO IMPORTANT HISTORY ON IT.
>> THE PROBLEM WE'LL RUN TO IF WE WERE TO DO THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD ALL COME DOWN TO ME BECAUSE IT'S FINANCIAL SOFTWARE.
I'D BE THE ONLY ONE THAT WOULD REALLY HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO GO IN AND TO BE ABLE TO ADD NOTES TO IT AND STUFF.
I MIGHT PROBABLY DO THAT, I'M NOT CERTAIN.
YOU MIGHT HAVE THAT FEATURE, BUT IT WILL COME DOWN TO PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT I'LL HAVE TO DO TO BE ABLE TO PLAY,
>> I WOULD THINK THAT YOUR PROJECT MANAGEMENT, YOU WANT THE PERSON DOING THE PROJECT TO BE IN CHARGE OF THAT ASPECT.
YOUR ROLE IS TO MAINTAIN THAT ACCOUNTING AND TO PROVIDE THE ACCOUNTING INFORMATION TO THE PROJECT MANAGER WHENEVER REQUESTED.
>> I THINK YOU'RE SAYING THAT BASICALLY THEY HAVE ACCESS TO EVERYTHING FINANCIAL IF YOU GIVE THEM ACCESS TO THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT PORTION.
>> WELL, SO RIGHT NOW THE SOFTWARE WILL HAVE SO MANY LICENSES.
IT'S MYSELF AND PAT WOULD BE THE ONLY ONES THAT HAVE ACCESS TO FINANCIAL SOFTWARE, AS FAR AS THAT PART OF IT GOES.
IT WOULDN'T BE SOMETHING THE GARRY HAS ON HIS COMPUTER.
HE DOESN'T HAVE HIS COMPUTER OR ANYTHING.
IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO HAVE ACCESS TO.
>> WILL IT WILL ALLOW ANYTHING ELSE TO IMPORT INTO IT. IT MAKES ME GRANT.
MATTER OF FACT, OUR CORE SOFTWARE RIGHT NOW IS NOT TYLER TECHNOLOGIES AND IT'S COMPATIBLE, WE DO A DAILY IMPORT EVERY DAY.
>> I GUESS, WHAT I'M THINKING IS THAT IF THE INDIVIDUAL MANAGERS HAD ANOTHER SOFTWARE THAT WAS COMPATIBLE, THEY COULD DO THEIR PROJECT MANAGEMENT STUFF AND THEN YOU COULD IMPORT THAT INTO THE OTHER TOOL.
THEN THAT WAY THEY'RE MANAGING IT SEPARATELY, BUT THEN IT COULD BE UPLOADED ON A PERIODIC BASIS AND THEN ALL THE INFORMATION WOULD BE THERE TO BE ABLE TO ROLL UP SO THAT THEY ALL FIT INTO THESE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THAT YOU HAVE FOR THE ASSET ACCUMULATION.
BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IF IT'S ONLY 12 OR $15,000 WORTH OF FUN FOR THAT ROAD PROJECT, BUT THE ENTIRE ROAD BUDGET IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE CATEGORY IS GOING TO BE MUCH MORE THAN THAT.
THAT WOULD BE THE RATIONALE FOR HAVING THAT.
>> DOES EXCEL UPLOADING INTO THAT?
>> IT DOES I KNOW IT'S A LIMITED CAPACITY TO US BECAUSE THAT'S HOW I IMPORT VIA THE BUDGET EACH YEAR.
I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS IMPORTANT TO THE PROJECT SIDE OF IT.
BUT EVEN IF IT DIDN'T, WE CERTAINLY USE EXCEL TO TRACK PROGRESS NOTES AND ADD NOTES TO IT AND THEN JUST RUN A PROJECT REPORT EACH WHATEVER ATTACH IT TO THAT.
>> THANKS. I REGRESSED THAT LITTLE BIT BECAUSE THE NEXT QUESTION THEN CAME BACK DOWN TO THE WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING.
I KNOW WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION LAST TIME AS WELL.
I SAY THAT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK I BROUGHT IT UP BEFORE.
I CERTAINLY WASN'T ON COUNCIL WHEN 875,000 GOT APPROPRIATED TO IT OR IF IT EVER WAS.
FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE THAN IF IT WAS THEN INSERT, IT MAY JUST BE SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE THAT SOMEONE COULD LOOK BACK AT AND SEE.
BUT AS WE GO THROUGH THIS DOCUMENT NOW, THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION.
AS AGAIN, AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, WHERE THESE NUMBERS ARE COMING FROM AND WHETHER WE AS A COUNCIL TOGETHER, AGREE ON THE NUMBER.
>> I THINK IN THE LAST MEETING AND GARY, TELL ME IF I'M WRONG.
YOU SAID IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 12,000 SQUARE FEET AND IT WAS LIKE 70 SOME DOLLARS A SQUARE FOOT, WHICH WAS A SCREAMING DEAL. IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT?
>> I BELIEVE THAT'S THE NUMBER, YEAH.
>> I'LL JUST BUILDING FOR THE MOST PART RIGHT.
>> CONCRETE FINISHED OUT WITH SOME OFFICE SPACE AND IT'S GOING TO BE INSULATED.
IT'S GOING TO HOLD OUR CASCADED SYSTEM IN THERE.
BASICALLY EVERYTHING IN THE CURRENT BUILDING IS GOING TO MOVE OUT THERE.
>> THE QUESTION IS, AS I LOOKED AT, I ONLY SAW IT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU PULLED THE PICTURE FROM.
[00:45:03]
IF THAT WAS SOMETHING FROM BEFORE, JUST SOME RANDOM CITY.>> IT'S FROM A DIFFERENT STORY WITH PERMISSION
>> BECAUSE I LOOKED AT THE STORY, [OVERLAPPING]
>> ITS STAIRCASE IS GOING UP STAIRS AND THAT'S PROBABLY NOT ADA AND THAT'S WHERE THE OFFICES ARE.
I WAS LIKE, ALL THESE QUESTIONS ARE POPPED HERE IN MY MIND.
>> IT WAS A PICTURE COPIED WITH PERMISSION OR A VISION.
>> I DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER WE SHOULD BE BUDGETING MORE THAN WHAT WE'VE GOT IN OUR BOND TO CURRENTLY PAY FOR IT UNTIL WE AGREE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE MORE THAN WHAT WE HAVE TO SPEND WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY ALLOCATED TO BUILD IT.
>> THOSE ARE ALL GOOD QUESTIONS.
I THINK MAYBE TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION, WHICH IS IF WE HAVE A NUMBER DOWN ON A LINE ITEM, TAKE THE WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING.
THIS IS BASICALLY FOR THE MOST PART, NONE OF THESE NUMBERS HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATED EXCEPT THE FIRE TRUCK, WE HAD A COUNCIL MEETING AND WE APPROVED IT.
WE KNOW WHEN THAT WAS APPROVED AND THAT BRUSHSTROKE WAS APPROVED IN THE COUNCIL MEETING AND AS WELL, THESE OTHER PURCHASES BE APPROVED AND FUTURE COUNCIL MEETINGS.
WITH RESPECT TO THE WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING, THE NEXT STEP IS TO GET A QUOTE TO DO A PLAN AND THEN GET AN ESTIMATE FROM AN ACTUAL ESTIMATE.
THOSE TWO THINGS WILL COME BACK BEFORE COUNCIL.
THIS IS PREEMPT THE VISION OF WHAT WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO SPEND IN THE FUTURE.
BUT THEN THE PROCESS WOULD BE SUCH THAT EVERYTHING WOULD COME BEFORE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL IN ORDER TO GET THE PROJECT COMPLETED.
>> I CAN CERTAINLY LIVE WITH THAT.
I WOULD APPRECIATE IF WE GO THROUGH HERE JUST SO THAT AS WE GO THROUGH IT AGAIN IN ANOTHER MEETING OR WHATEVER, THAT WE SIGNIFY IT SOMEHOW.
IF WE JUST ITALICIZE THAT OR SOMETHING OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE TO BASICALLY SAY, IT'S A NUMBER IN THERE, BUT IT CERTAINLY HASN'T BEEN APPROPRIATE IT AND HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED.
>> YOU COULD FOOTNOTE IT SOMEHOW.
>> BUT WHAT HAPPENED WAS I THINK THERE WAS THIS ASSOCIATION OF WHAT WAS ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THAT BOND.
WHEN WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE BOND PACKAGE, IT NEVER DID INCLUDE THE WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING.
THERE WAS A MISCONCEPTION THAT IT WAS INCLUDED IN THERE WAS NEVER INCLUDED.
WHEN THE BUILDING CAME IN FOR LESS, THE CENTRAL PUMP STATION CAME IN FOR LESS THERE WAS SAVINGS IN IT.
WHEN WE GOT WITH BOND COUNSEL, IT WOULD STILL BE CLASSIFIED AS THE WATER DEPARTMENT PROJECTS, SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CLASSIFY THAT AS PART OF THAT PROJECT.
WE COULD USE THAT MONEY THAT WE HAD ISSUED FOR THAT PROJECT FOR THIS PROJECT.
>> BUT IT STILL CAN BE CANCELED.
>> BUT YEAH, IT'S STILL ALL THAT IS THOUGHT TO COME TO COUNCIL ALL OF THAT, ANYTHING THAT GETS DONE HAS TO COME TO COUNCIL STAFF.
MAYOR, NO. INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER NO, I CAN JUST GO AND DO IT.
GARY CAN'T GO DO IT. I THINK THAT WAS WHERE THAT ROLLED IN THAT WE LOOKED AT USING OUR INITIAL COVID FUNDS.
WE'VE LOOKED AT THE RPA FUNDS, WE'VE LOOKED AT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS WE JUST CAN'T USE TO CO-MINGLE WITH THAT BUILDING AT THIS POINT.
>> WITH RESPECT TO YOU OVERARCHING POINT ABOUT THESE THINGS NOT BEING APPROVED.
PERHAPS ONE OF THE ISSUES OR ONE OF THE THINGS WE COULD DO IS INSTEAD OF SHOWING THIS IS TOTAL APPROPRIATED, IDENTIFY IT WITH SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT APPROPRIATED DOLLARS.
THESE ARE ANTICIPATED EXPENDITURES.
THEN ALSO IN THE VERBIAGE, ADD A SENTENCE, PROBABLY MULTIPLE SENTENCES, ONE AT THE TOP AND ONE AT THE BOTTOM.
>> THAT SAYS THESE NUMBERS ARE ESTIMATES AND ALL FINAL PROJECTS WILL ALL COME THROUGH COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
[00:50:09]
OR I NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE SOME WON'T COME THROUGH COUNCIL BECAUSE THE MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT, SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE ALREADY IN THE BUDGET AND DON'T COME BACK AGAIN.DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? CHANGE THE VERBIAGE?
>> I PUT SOMETHING IS EXPECTED THAT MEANS THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION OVER IT.
>> SOMEONE CAME UP AND EXPECT THAT NUMBER.
>> COULD IT BE A PROJECTED VALUE? BECAUSE IS JUST A PROJECTION IS WHAT IT IS.
>> SAME THING PROJECTED BY WHOM? IT ISN'T.
THERE'S NO NUMBER THERE UNTIL SOMEONE COMES TOGETHER AND WE SAY THE COUNCIL, THEN THIS IS APPROXIMATELY WHAT WE THINK WILL DO IT.
WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO CHANGE NO NUMBERS EVER EXACT.
>> BUT MY POINT BEING IS THAT MAYBE MAYBE ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING IT.
I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING EXACTLY.
MAYBE ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING IS THAT YOU WOULD ACTUALLY WHATEVER WE WANT TO DEFINE IT AS A COUNCIL PROJECTED VALUE, WHATEVER VERBIAGE YOU WANT TO PUT IN THERE, BUT THEN THAT HAS AN ASTERISK ON IT AND THEN IT HAS A DEFINITION UNDERNEATH.
IT SAYS THAT THIS IS AN ANTICIPATED VALUE FOR THE PROJECT THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED AND GO THROUGH THE DUE PROCESS OF THE CITY OF PARKER'S CITY COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION BEFORE IT GETS FULLY APPROPRIATED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT YOU WANT.
>> BUT THERE'S A NUMBER THERE.
IT COULD BE TWO MILLION, I COULD SAY I'M GOING TO FILL OUT THE SHEET AND I'M GOING TO PUT TWO MILLION THERE AS MY PROJECTION.
DOES THAT MEAN WE SHOULD HAVE A DOCUMENT OUT THERE THAT IS ACCESSIBLE ON THE WEBSITE THAT SAYS, HEY OUR ESTIMATE FOR SOMETHING IS TWO MILLION BECAUSE I CAME UP WITH THAT NUMBER?
>> I THINK YOU PUT IT IN THERE THIS BEST GUESSED ESTIMATION UNTIL FINAL APPROVED.
>> BEST GUESSED BY WHO? THAT WOULD BE MY BEST GUESS.
>> WHOEVER UNTIL FINAL APPROVAL IS THE KEYWORD. FINAL APPROVAL.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER GOOD JOB, REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOUR TALKING AND DISCUSSION AND IDEAS ABOUT THIS, IS REALLY GOOD.
I THINK DUE TO THE RULES OF BLOCKING QUORUM, WE CAN'T SEPARATELY DISCUSS WHAT IT SHOULD BE.
REALLY OUR FORUM TO DO THIS DISCUSSION IS THAT THIS IS AN INFORMAL MEETING AND THIS IS WHERE WE WANT TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU'RE JUST DESCRIBING THERE.
THE SPIRIT HERE TODAY IS ANY NUMBER ON THIS PAGE THAT TERRY AND I DID BECAUSE MORE THAN TWO PEOPLE CAN'T MEET IS HERE NOW, CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION WHERE EVERYBODY BRINGS IN WHAT NUMBER DID THEY THINK IT SHOULD BE, WHAT PROJECTS DO THEY THINK IT SHOULD BE, THEN WE MOVE FORWARD ON THE PLAN.
BUT THAT'S JUST THE LIMITATIONS OF HOW WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER.
HERE AT THIS TIME, IF YOU HAVE ANY NUMBER YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS, THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO DISCUSS THE NUMBERS.
>> I THINK I DISCUSSED THAT, AS I SAID, THAT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD PUT A NUMBER LARGER THAN WHAT WE'VE CURRENTLY GOT TO SPEND ON IT UNTIL WE HAVE FURTHER INFORMATION AS TO WHAT THE THING IS GOING TO BE, WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
COUNSEL HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE WHAT THE MERITS ARE OR NOT TO SPEND ADDITIONAL MONEY.
HOWEVER, THE CHALLENGE TO ME IS AS WE'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN OF WHAT OUR EXPENDITURES ARE GOING TO BE IN THE NEXT CURRENT PLUS THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, THE GOAL OF THAT IS TO GET A BEST ESTIMATE BASED ON THE KNOWLEDGE IN THE ROOM OF WHAT THOSE COSTS COULD BE.
HOPEFULLY A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE SO THAT WE CAN THEN FIGURE OUT WHAT MONEY WE HAVE AVAILABLE AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED.
HOW DO YOU PUT THOSE TOGETHER? HOW DO WE DEAL WITH BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE.
WE WOULD BE HERE FOREVER TRYING TO COMPLETE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO HAVE THAT MUCH SPECIFICITY IN EACH OF THE ITEMS.
>> FROM MY CORPORATE BACKGROUND, YOU HAVE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, BUT PEOPLE THAT WANT TO HAVE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT COME WITH ALL THE INFORMATION AND SAY, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE WHINING, HERE'S WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST.
HERE'S THE BENEFIT OF THIS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.
WHAT DO YOU THINK? IT'S NOT? LET'S THROW IN.
[00:55:01]
DOCUMENT WITHOUT ACTUALLY GETTING INFORMATION AND PRESENT IT TO US AND SAID, HERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD LIKE AS A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ITEMS. HERE'S ALL THE INFORMATION ON THAT. WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK? OKAY THAT'S POSSIBLE.HERE'S WHAT THE NUMBERS LOOK LIKE.
WE'RE TRYING TO JUMP AHEAD IN FUTURE YEARS, HOPEFULLY, DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS WE WILL GET AND THE SITUATION THAT SOMEONE WHO'S DONE A BOARDER AND SAY HERE'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE IF THE GAP FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR.
HERE'S ALL THE INFORMATION ON THAT IF THERE'S A DISCUSSION ON IT.
THEN WE WILL HAVE SOME GENERAL INFORMATION AMONGST EVERYBODY AS TO WHAT ESTIMATE THAT NUMBER IS.
THE PERIOD [INAUDIBLE] IS SOMETHING [INAUDIBLE] WAS GOING TO BE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE THAT WE REALLY HAD VERY LITTLE, IF ANY OF THAT.
[INAUDIBLE] WE'VE GOT AVAILABLE TO THEM THAT WE KNOW WE CAN.
AS WE GET MORE INFORMATION AND INCREASE [INAUDIBLE] WHAT IT IS OR WHEREVER YOU WANT TO GO, ET CETERA, MEAN THAT WE SHOULD PUT MORE MONEY IN THIS, BUT NOT ON EDGE AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MORE MONEY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE CURRENTLY ESTIMATE THIS FUN STUFF WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED.
>> WELL, AND TO SAY WE HAVEN'T SEEN SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING AND SEEING THOSE NUMBERS.
I AGREE WITH YOU. WE'RE JUMPING THE GUN IN SOME RESPECTS.
IN FUTURE YEARS THAT THE PROCESS YOU EXPLAINED, I LOVE IT.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE STRIVING FOR.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET OUR INITIAL DRAFT.
WITH RESPECT TO THIS BUILDING, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME DETAILED DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT.
I THINK THIS IS A NUMBER THAT THEY HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY FEEL WE CAN ACHIEVE THE PROJECT SUCCESSFULLY.
>> ACTUALLY [INAUDIBLE] COMPARED TO DISCUSSIONS WE'VE BEEN HAVING LATELY.
>> IT'S $70 A SQUARE FOOT 70, SOMETHING [OVERLAPPING]
>> I AGREE WITH WHAT RANDY IS SAYING WHOLEHEARTEDLY.
GARY, COULD YOU JUST EDUCATE US HOW WE CAME UP WITH 875? WAS THAT JUST A DARK OR WHAT WAS BEHIND THAT?
>> NO. THAT WAS NOT JUST A DARK THAT WAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNTS AND WORK THAT AMANDA PUT INTO THIS THEN CAME UP WITH THOSE NUMBERS.
>> I BASICALLY DID A DETAILED LINE ITEM ROLL UP WHERE I BASICALLY COUNTED EVERY SINK FAUCET, DOOR KNOB, EVERYTHING.
YEAH ALL THE STUDS, EVERYTHING.
IT BASICALLY IS A COST OF MATERIALS AND AN ESTIMATED COSTS FOR THE H BACK FOR THE PLUMBING, FOR THE PAINT, FOR THE INSTALLATION, FOR EVERYTHING.
IT'S REALLY A DETAILED MATERIAL COSTS ROLL UP BASED ON RETAIL NUMBERS THAT YOU HAVE ACCESS TO ON THE INTERNET.
THE SEPTIC SYSTEM WAS FROM JUST A BUDGETARY QUOTE FROM A PERSON NOT GIVING ANY PROJECT SPECIFIC INFORMATION, BUT TRYING TO GET AS DETAILED OF A NUMBER AS POSSIBLE WITH THE SCENARIO THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
THIS NUMBER CAME FROM PROBABLY, I DON'T KNOW, TWO OR 300 LINE-ITEM SPREADSHEET WITH A ROLL OUT.
NOW THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE LINE ITEMS THAT AREN'T CAPTURED.
THAT'S WHERE THE ADDITIONAL OVERHEAD MIGHT COME IN.
MAYBE THE CONCRETE THAT I CALCULATED IT, THERE'S MORE TO IT BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE DRIVE GOING IN, NOT JUST THE PAD UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING.
THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME ADDITIONAL COSTS COMING IN.
BUT THIS NUMBER CAME FROM THAT PROCESS.
THE NEXT STEPS ARE GET A DETAILED PLAN DONE SO THE NEXT STEP IS GET A QUOTE FROM AN ARCHITECT TO DO THE PLAN.
THAT SHOULD BE OUR NEXT STEP AND GOING FORWARD IS TO GET A QUOTE FROM THE ARCHITECT, GET A DETAILED PLAN.
THEN WITH A DETAILED PLAN, WE CAN GET A SPECIFIC BID.
THEN BASED ON GOING OUT FOR THAT RFQ AND GETTING A BID, THEN WE WILL HAVE A BETTER NUMBER.
BUT IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS, THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE.
NOW WE COULD PUT IT UP AT 1.2 BASED ON JUST A VERBAL BETTER ESTIMATE FROM A PERSON.
BUT I THINK ALL THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE IN THE FUTURE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS WHERE BEFORE YOU BEGIN THE PROCESS AND HAVE A DETAILED PLAN, YOU HAVE TO MAKE AN EDUCATED GUESS.
IF THIS TEAM HERE HAS A BETTER EDUCATED GUESS BASED ON YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE,
[01:00:04]
THEN THIS WOULD BE A GREAT CONVERSATION TO SAY, WELL, I THINK THIS NUMBER SHOULD BE HIGHER AND THIS IS WHY AND THEN WE JUST ALL CHANGE IT AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN ORDER TO GET THE INITIAL PLAN DONE.>> I APPRECIATE THAT EXPLANATION.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET THROUGH IS, AND CERTAINLY THAT'S WHY I TOOK THAT BIG STEP BACKWARD AND SAID WE SHOULD HAVE THIS PROJECT SOFTWARE.
BECAUSE I'M NEW TO COUNCIL AND I WASN'T AT EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL MEETING PRIOR TO.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT NECESSARILY DISCUSSED, APPROVED, WHATEVER.
I'M LOOKING AT THIS MAINLY FROM RIGHT NOW. I DON'T KNOW.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND SET AND SAID HERE, YOU HAD TO DO IT OFF SPEC.
OBVIOUSLY THERE'S SPEC SOMEPLACE AND MAYBE THOSE SPECS WERE PRESENTED THE COUNCIL OF PREVIOUSLY AND COUNSEL SAID, LOVE IT, LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AND AND SAYING [LAUGHTER]
>> LINE ITEM SHOWS UP ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
I COULDN'T TELL YOU THAT WE'VE EVEN HAD MUCH OF A DISCUSSION ON IT. THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM.
>> LOOKING AT 875,000 YOU TOLD ME 300 LINE ITEMS? I THINK YOU'VE PUT MORE TIME INTO THIS THAN ALL OF US TOGETHER.
I MOVE WITH DOUBLE YOUR SALARY AS A CITY COUNCIL WOMAN.
>> YEAH. BECAUSE WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS LIKE WITH OUR CITY ENGINEER PIGGYBACKING ON AMANDA HERE IS IN WHAT WE DO IS TYPICALLY GO AND LOOK AT THE BID BOARDS THAT AFTER EVERY PROJECTS BID, THEY PUT ALL THEIR NUMBERS OUT THERE, AND WE CAN SEE UNIT COSTS FOR THE PROJECT SO WE CAN SEE WHAT ALAN OR PLANO OR ARLINGTON WHAT THEIR NUMBERS WERE FOR DIFFERENT PROJECTS.
SO WE CAN GO ON OUR ENGINEERING CAN GO ON THERE AND LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS AND GET A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF WHAT THOSE PROJECTS ARE COSTING, WHAT IT'S COSTING OUT THERE RIGHT NOW AND GIVE US A PRETTY GOOD ENGINEERING ESTIMATE.
THAT'S HOW HE'S GOING TO PLAY IN HIS NUMBERS WHEN HE GIVES THEM TO US, SO HE'S GOING TO LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS AND THEN MODIFY THEM.
MAYBE IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF INFLATION.
AND THEY GIVE TO US, KNOWING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO BE A COUPLE OF MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD BEING BID OUT.
THAT'S TYPICALLY HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK OUT AND THAT'S HOW ROAD PROJECTS.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S PRETTY ACCURATE. THAT ALSO SHOWS TRENDING INFLATION OR TRENDING INCREASES OR DECREASES OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, CORRECT.
>> HAS THIS ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED, THE COUNCIL SPECS WERE DONE, WHICH YOU DID TREMENDOUS WORK WITH A NUMBER SO YES.
>> I'M ASKING WHAT IS IT ALREADY PRESENTED THE COUNCIL AND THEY APPROVE THE SPECS AND THEY SAID, YES, LET'S GO FORWARD WITH THIS OUT OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
>> HE DID UP A LITTLE DRAWING WITH IT AND THEN KIND OF DID LAY OUT WITH IT WITH SOME JUST GENERAL LAYOUTS AND THAT'S NEVER BEEN ENGINEERED.
>> LET ME JUST QUICK GO TO THIS THING.
IS THAT MY RECOMMENDATION THEN WITH THIS SCHEDULE WOULD BE IF WE WANT TO SHOW THE ESTIMATES, ETC, AND WE THINK THAT'S THE NUMBER BASED UPON SOME SPECS, EVEN THOUGH IT HASN'T BEEN THE COUNCIL, ETC, IS TO HIGHLIGHT IT, ITALICIZE IT OR SOMETHING, CALL IT, REQUEST IT.
IT HASN'T BEEN APPROPRIATED, IS NOT OUT THERE.
IT'S REQUESTED AND IF APPROVED THIS WOULD BE THE NUMBER.
SO IF YOU WOULD DECIDE TO INCLUDE IT IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, THEN IT WOULD ALL ADD UP TO THIS PARTICULAR NUMBER.
BUT IT'S BEING REQUESTED AS OPPOSED TO BEING ON A SHEET THAT'S ALREADY SHOWN ON APPROPRIATED DOLLARS OF THAT NATURE.
>> LIKE REQUESTED UNTIL APPROVED.
>> YOU WANT TO FOLLOW THEM? WHAT WE USE FOR THE BUDGET.
TYPICALLY, WE SAY PROPOSED NUMBER AND THEN ADOPTED ONCE ONCE COUNSELS ADOPTED THAT.
>> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT UPGRADE FROM BEST ESTIMATION OF MY IDEA.
>> ONE ITEM I GUESS, ITEM TO MALL OVER IS THAT ANYTHING THAT WE DO THAT'S GOING TO BE IN FUTURE YEARS IS GOING TO LIKE THE TERRY WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.
IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME DEAL BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE AND HOPEFULLY THE IDEA IS, I MEAN, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING BUDGETS FOR THE NEXT YEAR,
[01:05:02]
BUT REALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT BUDGET FOR SEVERAL YEARS OUT TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS, TO HAVE THOSE NUMBERS IN THERE.THEN THE SECOND FOLLOW-UP QUESTION, WHICH I DON'T WANT TO DERAIL THIS ANYMORE, BUT I JUST HAVE IN MY MIND IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOFTWARES LIKE SAP AND OTHER SOFTWARES THAT BIG COMPANIES UTILIZE, THEY DO THESE LIKE BILL OF MATERIALS, LIKE A BOMB, THEY CALL IT, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
THE QUESTION I THINK I WOULD HAVE AS AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SYSTEMS THAT WE'RE UTILIZING IS THAT IF LUKE IS GOING OUT THERE AND GETTING A ASSAY OF WHAT SOMETHING IS FROM OUR ENGINEERING FIRM.
AND THAT'S DOCUMENTED IN A DOCUMENT SOMEWHERE.
I KNOW FOR A FACT BECAUSE WHEN YOU BUILD WAFER FABS, THEY'RE MUCH MORE COMPLICATED THAN THESE BUILDINGS.
IT IS ALL ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO BE DOWNLOADED AND THEN IT CAN BE UPLOADED, AND OBVIOUSLY THEY HAVE MORE COMPLEX SYSTEMS. BUT YOU CAN UPLOAD ALL THAT INFORMATION INTO A BILL OF MATERIALS THROUGH SAP, BUT THERE'S OTHER SOFTWARES THAT ARE AVAILABLE ALSO.
THEN YOU CAN BE UTILIZED IN IT AND INFORMATION THAT YOU'RE GETTING FROM THESE OTHER BIDS.
YOU GET A BILL OF MATERIALS FROM ENGINEERING THAT CAN BE DOWNLOADED INTO, AND THAT PROCESS MIGHT BE A LITTLE EASIER FOR US TO DO THIS IN THE FUTURE. JUST AN IDEA.
>> I LIKED THE PROPOSED AND APPROVED BECAUSE TO YOUR POINT, ALL FUTURE YEARS WITH THE PROPOSED.
BUT IT GIVES US A NUMBER OUT THERE TO LOOK AT AND AND PUSH OF A LIVING DOCUMENT.
IT WOULD ALSO HELP US AS WE GO FORWARD TO CONTINUE TO LOOK BACK AT THIS AND SAY, OKAY, WHICH WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT AND ALREADY APPROVED BECAUSE THAT WOULD THEN SHOW IS APPROVED AND WHICH ONES WE STILL THAT THEY CONSIDER IF IT'S IN OUR CURRENT YEAR OF CAPITAL BUDGETING.
THAT'S MONOPOLIZE IT, BUT IT'S JUST THE ONE POINT IS ON THE NEXT PAGE WHICH GOES BACK TO DUBLIN.
I SEE THAT REALLY HASN'T CHANGED AND I KNOW THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSION LAST TIME ABOUT THE WHOLE DRAINAGE DL AND WHETHER WE WERE GETTING REALLY BYPASS THAT AND MOVE TO TRY TO DO SOME WORK ON IT.
>> WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEING 275.
SO I THINK MAYBE WE CHANGED IT IN THE OTHER TABLE, POSSIBLY.
>> WE'RE LOOKING NORTH VERSUS SOUTH, CORRECT?
>> WE WERE TALKING ABOUT FORGOING THAT DRAINAGE AND BASICALLY WORKING ON THE ROAD BECAUSE WE DETERMINED THAT IF YOU WERE GOING TO DO DRAINAGE, YOU COULDN'T REALLY DO THAT ROAD PRIOR TO DOING THE DRAINAGE.
BUT THEN AT LEAST THERE ARE SOME DISCUSSION OVER WHETHER THERE'S REALLY A DRAINAGE ISSUE OR NOT AND WHETHER WE COULD JUST MOVE FORWARD WITH DOING ROADWORK AND THAT THE ACTUAL WATER LINE ITSELF WAS NOT GOING TO IMPACT THE ROAD IMPROVEMENT?
>> YEAH, I THINK WE DID DISCUSS THAT CAN MEAN WHERE DID WE LEAVE THAT? DO WE HAVE A DRAINAGE PROBLEM THERE OR NOT?
>> I THINK WE DO. THERE ARE SEVERAL WAYS WE CAN ATTACK THAT PROBLEM.
>> BUT ALSO I THINK WE WERE MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT THE PLAN IS TO DO THE WATER LINES FIRST.
WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WATER LINES THAT MAYBE WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ALL THE CONNECTIONS.
>> THE LOOPING TO HELP THIS PROJECT MOVE FASTER, BUT THE WATERLINE NEEDS TO BE DONE FIRST AND THEN THE ROAD.
>> THAT WOULD BE A VERY WISE CHOICE BECAUSE YOU'LL TELL THE ROAD UP DOING THE WATER, I'M MAKING CROSSES INSTEAD. WHAT I WANT TO DO THAT.
>> IS THERE I GUESS SMITH ROAD WOULD BE A CROSSING.
SO THERE IS A CROSSING UNDERNEATH THAT S CURVE RIGHT THERE THAT YOU COULDN'T THAT'S GOING TO BE IMPACTED.
>> I DON T KNOW IF THERE'S A CROSSING THERE, JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
I'M NOT SURE WHICH SIDE OF THE ROAD THE NAME WOULD BE ON.
>> MAIN IS GOING TO BE ON THE EAST SIDE.
>> IF IT'S ON THE EAST SIDE OF IT, YES, IT'LL CROSS.
>> I THINK WITH RESPECT TO DRAINAGE, ACTUALLY, I THINK AT THIS POINT WE DON'T HAVE ANY NUMBER DOWN FOR THE DUBLIN ROAD DRAINAGE. WE LEFT IT.
>> ON PAGE 12, TERRY, I THINK WE DID CHANGE IT TO TWO-FIFTH.
WE DID. YEAH. WE'LL GO TO THAT REAL QUICK, AND I THINK WE JUST MADE.
>> NOT IN THE CURRENT YEAR, IS IT.
[01:10:02]
>> RIGHT. REMEMBER WE PUT 250 DOWN THERE FOR THE DRAINAGE STUDY FOR THE S CURVE.
I THINK THAT'S THE SAME PROJECT.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. [INAUDIBLE] SOMETHING FROM THE [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER]
>> YEAH. IT WAS REFERENCING A DOCUMENT THAT WE HAD FROM MR. BIRKHOFF'S? I THINK SO.
>> YEAH. THIS NUMBER CAME FROM A DOCUMENT FROM AN ENGINEER AT OUR ENGINEERING FIRM, AND SO WE PUT IT IN THERE AS A PLACEHOLDER, BUT WE CAN CHANGE IT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE [OVERLAPPING]
>> HAVE A PROPOSAL FOR A DIFFERENT NUMBER.
>> MAY I ASK YOU FROM WHAT WE PREVIOUSLY TALKED ABOUT IF IT SHOWS THEM AS A PROPOSED, IT'S JUST THE NUMBER.
WE MIGHT NEED IT AND WE MIGHT NOT.
>> AS LONG AS WE HAVE HIGHLIGHTED I THINK THAT'S [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK IF F IT TRULY IS THAT WE HAVE TO DO THE WATER LINES FIRST THOUGH [NOISE], IT'S UNFORTUNATE, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS.
>> WE'LL MAKE THAT EDIT TO THE PREVIOUS TABLE THAT MATCHED THE 250 IN THE TABLE ON PAGE 12.
>> AMANDA, I GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU.
WITH ABOUT 30 MINUTES LEFT BEFORE THIS MEETING'S OVER, WHAT ARE THE OTHER HIGHLIGHT POINTS THAT YOU WANT TO BRING UP SO WE KEEP THIS MOVING?
>> I GUESS WE HAVE PUT DOWN NUMBERS FOR ALL THE ROADS THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE NUMBERS IN THE TABLE FOR FUTURE YEARS SINCE THE LAST TIME WE MET.
I DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE HAVE HAD THE CHANCE TO REVIEW THOSE PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND DO THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
THESE NUMBERS CAME WITH INPUT FROM GARY AND LUKE AS THEIR BEST GUESS IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH THESE ITEMS MIGHT COST.
THERE WAS DATA THAT WAS PROVIDED FROM THE STUDY THEN WE PUT IN CAPTURED INTO THE TABLE.
>> ONE THING I DIDN'T PUT A NOTE ABOUT, AND I'LL ADD THAT TO THE BOTTOM CHANGES WITH RESPECT TO THE COST THAT ARE INCLUDED IN HERE IS WHAT WE'VE DONE FOR THESE ROADS IS WE'VE TAKEN THE INFORMATION, PER LINEAR COST FROM THE ENGINEER AND WITH THE LENGTH OF THE STREET BASED ON THE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION OR REPAIR THAT'S NEEDED BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH GARY AND LUKE.
THAT'S THE FIRST NUMBER THAT WE HAD AND THEN WE TOOK THAT AND WE ADDED 25%.
THIS WAS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME.
WE ADDED 25% FOR THOSE OTHER COSTS THAT AREN'T CAPTURED YET.
THEN FOR EVERY YEAR, IF IT'S LISTED TO COME IN ON THE YEAR 3, WE ADD 7% PER YEAR FOR YEARS TWO AND THEN THREE TO THE COST OF THAT.
THAT'S WHERE THOSE NUMBERS COME FROM, EXCEPT FOR [LAUGHTER]
DUBLIN ROAD WE HAD THE ESTIMATES FROM THE ENGINEER FOR THE DUBLIN ROAD SOUTH, SO WE USE THAT.
THEN DUBLIN ROAD NORTH, WE CHANGE THAT FROM A RE-CONSTRUCT TO A REMIX, WHICH IS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN DUBLIN ROAD SOUTH.
THEN ADDED THE 25% AND THE 7% PER YEAR UNTIL WE WORK ON THAT.
THAT'S WHERE THE NUMBERS CAME FROM.
THE YEARS WAS BASED UPON CONDITION OF THE ROAD AND THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC THAT GOES THROUGH THE ROAD.
>> I THINK IF I CAN ADD, EVERYBODY CAN READ IT.
THE SOBERING THING WHEN I WENT THROUGH THIS IS 21 MILLION.
WE KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BE A BIG CHUNK OF CHANGE TO ROADS OR IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD REASON FOR GOING THROUGH THIS AGAIN, ALBEIT AS RANDY IS SAYING THAT THESE ARE JUST ESTIMATED OBVIOUSLY, WE DON'T HAVE THAT APPROPRIATION FOR ANY OF THIS.
BUT IT IS GOOD TO HAVE THAT NUMBER OUT THERE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN SEE.
BECAUSE, I THINK EVERYONE WHO KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT CONSTRUCTION KNOWS THAT IT'S A BIG DEAL. I THINK IT'S WELL DONE.
>> AMANDA, POLICE STATION, DID YOU DO ONE OF YOUR AMAZING JOBS ON THAT? [LAUGHTER]
>> FIVE OR WHERE THE NUMBER COME FROM.
>> FOR THE POLICE STATION, WE WE BASICALLY PUT DOWN THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE ANTICIPATE TO HAVE IN THE FACILITIES FUND, IS THAT CORRECT NAME? FACILITIES FUND THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE ON THAT YEAR TO BE USED TOWARDS THE PROJECT.
>> THAT'S WHERE THAT 1.5 MILLION COMES FROM.
[01:15:03]
>> THAT SEEM SUPER CHEAP, A MILLION, FIVE FOR A POLICE [LAUGHTER]
>> TO YOUR POINT, WHAT WE'VE PUT IN HERE IN THE PAGES BELOW ARE THE INTENTION TO DO A NEW STUDY AND STUDY WHAT POSSIBILITIES WE HAVE FOR OUR NEW PLACE STATION.
DO A NEW STUDY, STUDY WHAT POSSIBILITIES WE HAVE FOR A NEW ADMINISTRATION BUILDING.
IN TERMS OF GUIDING, IN TERMS OF THE COST, WE JUST PUT DOWN, WELL, THAT'S HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE.
WE COULD SAY WHATEVER IS LEFT IN THE BOND, BUT THAT NUMBER BUT WE HAVE A MILLION FIVE AND IT PLEASE THING BUT IF IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE TO WHAT A REAL NUMBER WOULD BE IS, I WOULDN'T WANT SOMEONE TO GET AN IDEA THAT WE'RE GOING TO SOMEHOW PROPOSING TO BUILD THE POLICE BUILDING FOR MILLION FIVE.
>> HOW MANY SQUARE FEET IS THAT MILLION FIVE GET US APPROXIMATE?
>> WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS YET.
ALL WE HAVE IS JUST MONEY IN THE BUCKET THAT WE NEED TO GO FIGURE OUT.
>> IT WASN'T A HOUSE LIKE, 6,000 SQUARE FEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WE WERE LOOKING THROUGH ALL.
>> WELL, THAT WOULD BE ONE, THE FACILITY'S FUN.
WE DON'T HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THE TOTAL NEEDS ARE GOING TO BE OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS UNTIL WE DO THAT STUDY.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THE WATER BUILDING IS A LITTLE MORE AHEAD IN THE PROCESS, AND SO I'M COMFORTABLE WORKING WITH THAT NUMBER.
BUT THE POLICE STATION, WE COULD TAKE THAT OFF AND LEAVE IT BLANK AT THIS POINT, THAT'S EASY.
>> OR WE COULD JUST CALL IT FACILITY'S IMPROVEMENTS AND LEAVE IT AT THAT.
IT DOESN'T REALLY SAY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, JUST WE HAVE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND IMPROVE SOMETHING EITHER WITH THAT OR MORE.
>> THAT'S FINE. JUST AS A ROUND NUMBER, IT'D BE ABOUT 250 A SQUARE FOOT, BY THE WAY, IF IT WAS 6,000 SQUARE FEET.
>> YEAH. IT'S NOT LIKE TOO FAR FETCHED TO TRY TO STRIVE FOR THAT, IT SEEMS.
>> I LIKE COUNCILMAN BIRKHOFF'S IDEA THAT HABIT AS SOMETHING GENERIC LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, IN THAT WAY IT LEAVES AN OPEN-ENDED, SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE IT TIED INTO ANY ONE THING.
THAT I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.
>> ABSOLUTELY. ANY OTHER REQUEST TO CHANGES FEEL FREE TO LET US KNOW AND WE'RE GLAD TO INCORPORATE THOSE.
WE'LL DEFINITELY DO THAT WE'LL MAKE THAT ONE MORE ABOUT A GENERIC TYPE OF LINE ITEM.
>> WHAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE IT?
>> I'LL NEED TO LOOK AT THAT ITEM TO SEE WHAT THE FACTS ARE.
I'M SURE IT'S AS YOU DESCRIBED, BUT I WANTED TO SEE WHAT THE ACTION WAS AND WHETHER WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO COUNCIL OR YOU-ALL WOULD HAVE TO GET BACK TO COUNCIL TOO REVERSE.
BUT I NEED TO SEE THE ACTUAL ITEM WHEN IT IS DONE.
>> DEFINITELY WE WANT TO DO THINGS IN THE RIGHT MANNER.
JUST FYI MY RECOLLECTION OF WHAT WE WOULD HAVE DONE IN AN UPDATE WOULD HAVE BEEN TO THE EFFECT OF,
[01:20:02]
YEAH, WE HAVE AGREED WITH CITY STAFF AND THE MAYOR AT THIS POINT TO ONLY FOCUS ON THE STREETS AND DRAINAGE AT THIS TIME.OUR INTENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO DO A FULL CIP, BUT TO MOVE FORWARD, WE WERE WILLING TO JUST WORK ON STREETS AND DRAINAGE.
>> [INAUDIBLE] SO THAT THE COMMUNITY COULD BE CONSERVATIVE.
WELL, WHAT I'M SAYING IS, DO WE NEED TO [INAUDIBLE]
>> WELL, IF IT WASN'T AN OFFICIAL COUNCIL ACTION, IS MORE LIKE AS THIS HAS BEEN MORPHING SINCE THE BEGINNING OF MY TIME WITH IT.
SO ALL OF THIS HAS TO GO TO COUNCIL ULTIMATELY FOR APPROVAL.
JUST AS WE'RE MOVING THINGS AROUND, I'M SURE YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND ADD WHAT WE'RE DOING FOR THESE POSSIBILITIES BECAUSE IT ALL HAS TO BE APPROVED IF IT WASN'T AN OFFICIAL ACTION.
>> CORRECT. I REMEMBER BECAUSE I THINK I PRESENTED AND I STILL HAVE THE REVIEW, AND IT WAS TO DO WITH ACTUALLY WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE FACILITY AND WE WERE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACTUALLY HAVE A COMMITTEE TO WORK ON THE FACILITY SEPARATE FROM THE REST OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT WERE GOING ON ONLY AS A COMMITTEE WITHIN THE COUNCIL.
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED. ACTUALLY THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN AND ALL THAT, BUT THE INFORMATION IS THERE, BUT IT TALKED ABOUT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE BUILDING.
>> I'M SURE HE WILL DO HER RESEARCH, LOOK AT CASE-LAW AND GET US A GREAT ANSWER.
>> BUT OFF THE CUFF, I DO BELIEVE THAT IF YOU COULD REMOVE IT THROUGH PRESENTATION, WE'RE DOING WORKSHOPS NOW, IT CAN BE ADDED AND IT'S NOT CONFLICTING WITH ANYTHING ELSE OR ANY OTHER COMMITTEES BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY COMMITTEES.
>> ANOTHER THING I WOULD ADD IS THAT FROM A SECTION NOT ANYTHING THAT YOU HAVE OUT HERE, BUT JUST WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE A SECTION ON IT OR NOT.
THERE'S SOME TYPE OF RECOMMENDED STANDARD SECTION.
I KNOW WE HAVE A RECOMMENDED STANDARD SECTION, AND I THINK WE MAY EVEN HAVE AN ORDINANCE ON WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS [LAUGHTER]
>> ARE FOR STREETS, ET CETERA, IS WHETHER WE SHOULD, IN A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, HAVE SOMETHING EITHER REFERENCING THAT SO THAT WE CAN GO BACK AND SAY, HEY, HERE'S THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT OR IN TERMS OF WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO DETERMINE WHAT TO WORK ON.
I KNOW THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TRAFFIC AND DEGREE OF ROAD, ET CETERA, WHETHER WE COULD JUST HAVE A SHORT FEW SENTENCES THAT BASICALLY SAYING DETERMINING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, DIRECTION ON STREETS AND DRAINAGE, WHATEVER, WE WOULD RECOMMEND, OR THE COUNCIL OR THE CITY LOOKS AT THESE BULLET POINTS OR SOMETHING.
WE CAN LAY IT OUT THERE HOW WE'RE REASONING IN DETERMINING WHAT WE DO AS A COUNCIL.
>> BASELINES THAT WE WANT TO ESTABLISH FOR WHAT WE WANT TO DO, IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, RIGHT?
>> IF THIS WAS SOMEONE READING IT, I THINK I'D SAY HOW ARE THEY LOOKING AT THIS THAT WE GIVE THEM? IT'S NOT BLACK AND WHITE, BUT IT BASICALLY SAYS HERE'S THINGS THAT WE CONSIDER.
>> SOME OF THE CONSIDERATION ITEMS THAT WE PUT INTO SELECTING STREETS. I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
>> WHETHER IT HAS MULTIPLE LEVELS, WHERE YOU PUT THE BARRIER IN BETWEEN IT AND ALL THAT STUFF.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY GOOD.
COMING INTO THIS A WHILE BACK AND OBVIOUSLY, TERRY AND AMANDA HAVE TAKEN THIS TO A MUCH BETTER LEVEL THAN I EVEN THOUGHT OF,
[01:25:03]
BUT THE GREAT THING ABOUT IT IS THAT HAVING THAT DETAIL IN THERE, SOMEBODY COMES BEHIND YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THAT AGAIN BECAUSE THAT'S DIFFICULT.SINCE WE HAVE IT NOW, IT'S FRESH, WE MIGHT AS WELL GET THAT DOCUMENT, AND THAT'S AN AWESOME IDEA.
>> THE NOTE SCRIBE HAS THAT COVERED OVER HERE.
DID YOU WANT GO TO THE SUMMARY TABLE TO JUST SEE SOME OF THE NUMBERS AND HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THEM? BECAUSE COUNCILMEMBER REED DID NOTE THAT I'S AN EYE-OPENING NUMBER TO SEE THAT TOTAL THAT IS BEING ROLLED UP HERE.
SO MAYBE WE CAN JUST TALK ABOUT THESE NUMBERS NEXT.
>> YOU'LL SEE WITHIN THE INFRASTRUCTURE AS WHEN WE IDENTIFIED THE STREETS, WE DID TRY TO SPREAD IT OUT OVER THE YEARS, BUT YET ALSO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT AMOUNTS SO THAT FROM A BIDDING AND WORK STANDPOINT, YOU ALL CAN GET THE BEST DEALS ON [LAUGHTER]
>> YOUR WORKERS SO THAT OUR PROJECTS CAN BE AS COST-EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE.
>> THEN JUST CONTEXT OF THIS, IF I'M CORRECT, AND GRANT, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IS THAT GENERALLY WHEN WE LOOK AT EACH YEAR, FOUR MILLION, FIVE MILLION, SEVEN MILLION, WHATEVER IS THAT PREVIOUSLY GENERALLY, OUR OPERATING BUDGET WAS A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IN TERMS OF STREET MAINTENANCE.
THEN THIS LAST YEAR AND A COUPLE OF OTHERS, WE PULLED SOME MONEY FROM THE GENERAL FUND BUT DIDN'T REALLY GENERATE THOSE FUNDS.
WE JUST PULLED IT FROM PREVIOUS NUMBERS THAT WE HAD.
THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, IF WE LOOKED AT IT AGAINST THE OPERATING BUDGET VERSUS WHAT WE BROUGHT IN, THERE'S LIKE AN EXCESS OF 900,000 OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.
IF ALL THE FUNDS THEMSELVES DIDN'T HAVE EXCESS MONEY IN THEM, WHAT WE REALLY HAD IS HALF A MILLION TYPICALLY THAT WE PUT IN FOR A MAINTENANCE BUDGET.
IN THIS LAST YEAR, 900,000 GENERATED IS EXCESS IN THE GENERAL FUND WHICH AMOUNTED TO A MILLION FOR ONE YEAR VERSUS THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE EACH YEAR.
>> YES. HISTORICALLY, IT'S BEEN FOUR TO $500,000 IN GENERAL FUNDS TRANSFERRED UNTIL OUR CURRENT YEAR, RIGHT NOW UNDER 7,000, SO THAT IS CORRECT.
>> THERE'S A RECAP OF THE CURRENT FUND'S ANTICIPATED BALANCE.
WELL, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE ANTICIPATED BALANCE YET.
SINCE THE CURRENT FUND BALANCE IS PRELIMINARY, WE DIDN'T WANT TO ROLL IT FORWARD.
BUT THIS IS THE CURRENT FUND BALANCE WE ANTICIPATE TO BE AVAILABLE.
IT SHOWS THE TRANSFERS THAT COME FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND THEN OTHER REVENUES WE'RE ANTICIPATING.
>> FOR 2023-2024, WE SHOULD HAVE, I GUESS, THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF MONEY NEEDED FOR THE STREETS.
ALL OF THAT MONEY IS AVAILABLE FOR THE STREETS, YES.
[01:30:02]
>> THAT'S RIGHT. BECAUSE WE DIDN'T USE THAT.
>> THE GOAL IS TO CREATE A SCHEDULE SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE OF THE PROJECTS, OF THE ANTICIPATED REVENUES, AND THEN THE NET.
THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ANTICIPATING SPENDING.
THIS IS WHAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING COMING IN AND THIS IS OUR MISSING PIECE THAT THEN WE CAN START WORKING ON WHERE WE GET THIS FROM.
>> I GUESS IN A HIGH LEVEL, I THINK WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR PLAN IS GOING TO EXCEED OUR ANNUAL ALLOCATION OF FUNDS TOWARDS FIXING THE STREETS SO THERE'S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE DO WE GET THAT MONEY FROM IN THIS.
THE OPTIONS OF WHERE WE GET MONEY FROM ARE ALSO SPELLED OUT IN THIS DOCUMENT TOO.
WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO FIND GRANTS AVAILABLE THROUGH THE STATE, LOCAL, OR FEDERAL PLACES.
THOSE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO RESOLVE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO DO THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE PUT DOWN HERE IN THIS DOCUMENT OF WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE DONE.
THERE'S DEFINITELY A CHALLENGE TO FIGURE OUT, WELL, HOW ARE WE GOING TO FUND IT? THAT'S WHY FOR EACH ITEM, WE HAVE AN ALLOCATION OF AN ASSUMPTION ABOUT WHAT FUND IS GOING TO FIND IT.
BUT EVERY YEAR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SEE WHERE DO WE STAND WITH WHAT WE WANT TO DO VERSUS WHAT WE CAN DO.
>> ON TOP OF THAT, JUST TO REITERATE, WHAT COUNCILMEMBER AMANDA NOE IS SAYING IS THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE A FUND EXCESS RIGHT NOW.
WHEN YOU GET INTO 24, 25, THAT'S GOING TO BE MORE BACK TO FOUR OR 500,000.
BUT THAT'S WHAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE FOR BUDGET BASED ON A CURRENT BUDGET WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT HISTORICALLY.
>> IT WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL FOR THE NEXT MEETING BECAUSE TWO OF THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE MISSING ON HERE THAT COULD BE ALMOST EQUAL TO WHAT THE TOTAL IS IS OUR CHAPARRAL ROAD AND BRIDGE AND SPRING HILL ROADS.
>> WE COULD GET SOME GENERAL NUMBER.
>> WHATEVER WE DEFINED THAT AS EARLIER.
>> BUT SPRING HILL IS ACTUALLY NOT OURS.
THAT SECTION FROM PARKER ROAD TO THE OTHER SET OF BOLENS' PROPERTY.
WE WOULD HAVE MADE THAT FOUR-LANE.
>> BECAUSE I THOUGHT I WAS ASKING ABOUT THAT BEFORE AND I HAD ASKED THAT QUESTION BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ON WHO THAT REALLY WAS. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I KNOW PATTY PULLED SOME OF THE DOCUMENTS.
WE'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH ALL THE DOCUMENTS.
>> YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE STREETLIGHTS ARE RUNNING OVER CHAPARRAL.
>> ON THAT. BUT I WAS TELLING HIM ABOUT SPRING HILL ALSO.
>> HAVE YOU ALL STARTED LOOKING INTO WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, AND WHAT TIMEFRAME WE MIGHT BE LOOKING AT ON THAT?
WE'VE STARTED LOOKING AT DOCUMENTS.
I BELIEVE THERE WAS TRAFFIC COUNTS.
IT'S WHAT ACTIVATE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR WHEN THOSE THINGS HAVE TO BE BUILT IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY FROM LOOKING AT THOSE A COUPLE OF SEVERAL YEARS AGO NOW WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE.
I DO BELIEVE IT'S TRAFFIC COUNTS THAT ACTIVATE WHEN THOSE ROADS HAVE TO BE DONE AND IT'S GOT TO BE AN AGREEMENT WITH US AND ALLEN FOR THOSE TRAFFIC COUNTS.
>> IS THAT FOR BOTH ROADS? OF CHAPARRAL AND SPRING HILL?
>> DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT, BUT I BELIEVE SO.
>> I WOULD HAVE TO READ THAT SINCE IT WAS DEALING WITH A LAWSUIT, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE CAN USE COUNTY FUNDS OR NOT.
>> THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT ACTUALLY.
BUT AGAIN, I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE OUT THERE BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE KNOW IS ON THE RADAR SCREEN.
MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THAT I DRIVE THOSE ROADS ALL THE TIME AND IT'S NOT THAT MUCH TRAFFIC ON THERE.
THERE'S TWO OR THREE CARS MAYBE DURING RUSH HOUR THEN MAYBE FOUR OR FIVE CARS AT CHAPARRAL AND SPRING HILL.
BUT I WOULDN'T THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IS IMMEDIATE FUTURE.
MOST OF HIGHLAND AREA IS BUILT OUT ALREADY.
>> MY CONCERN IS WHEN 2551 GETS UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
>> CORRECT. NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN, BUT THAT'S A TEMPORARY THING. YEAH.
[01:35:01]
>> ONE SUGGESTION I HAD AS WE WERE WORKING ON THIS IS POTENTIALLY TO JUST PUT IT UNDER A SECTION OF FUTURE PROJECTS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE IT REALLY PEGGED FOR SOMETHING IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, BUT WE WANT TO KEEP TRACKING IT.
MAYBE WE'LL JUST ADD A SECTION OF FUTURE PROJECTS AND PUT THEM THERE.
I THINK THAT'S A SAFE BET TO SAY THAT.
STICK IT OUT THERE. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. JUST ONE PERSON.
>> IT WOULD BE GOOD OBVIOUSLY. IT'LL BE GOOD TO SEE THE DOCUMENT.
>> TO SEE WHERE THE TRAFFIC COUNT IS AND WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY.
BUT I AGREE IT'S NOT THAT BUSY.
>> WE NEED TO SEE WHAT OUR COMMITMENT IS.
FIRST, AMANDA AND I WILL TAKE THE ITEMS ADDRESSED TODAY AND INCORPORATE THOSE INTO THE DOCUMENTS [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEN THE NEXT PIECE IS TRYING TO GET THE BLANKS.
>> FILL IN THE BLANKS FOR THINGS LIKE CHAPARRAL FOR OTHER AREAS THAT [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING]
>> JUST LOOK AND SEE WHAT OTHER PIECES WE NEED A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON.
WE, MAYBE, COME INTO Y'ALL TO ASK TO HELP FINALIZE SOME OF THE SPECIFICS.
WE ARE TRYING TO CREATE THE BINDERS OF THAT INFORMATION THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OF WHAT HAS BEEN DONE ON THESE DIFFERENT STREETS SO THAT THE PROJECT IS READY.
I KNOW GARY, MR. MIKADO, AND MR. OLSEN HAVE A LOT OF THE FILES TOO.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'LL BE IMPORTANT IS CREATING A REPOSITORY, SO TO SPEAK, THAT WE CAN ALL GET TO THE THINGS QUICKLY.
THAT WE'RE NOT HAVING TO GO THROUGH EACH CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE WAS THAT ON.
>> THAT WILL WORK TOWARD MAKING THAT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO RESEARCH.
>> ANYTHING ELSE THAT JOEL THINK NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN HERE?
>> MAYBE LOOK IF YOU COULD JUST PULL UP REALLY BRIEFLY PAGE 23, JUST TO SHOW THE TABLE OF THE REFERENCE DOCUMENTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW TO JUST GIVE YOU A LIST OF THE ONES THAT WE ENVISIONED.
I'LL GIVE YOU A MINUTE. PAGE 58.
>> IN THERE YOU NOTICE WE IDENTIFY THAT NEEDS TO BE CREATED SOME UPDATED ANNUALLY.
SOME OF THESE I THINK WE DO NEED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION OF HOW OFTEN SHOULD WE UPDATE THESE THINGS.
I DON T THINK THE STREET CONDITION SURVEY NEEDS TO BE DONE EVERY YEAR.
THAT'S A BIG PROJECT THAT YOU ALL AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH, THE BIG DOCUMENT.
PUBLIC WORKS PEOPLE REALLY WORKED HARD WITH OUR ENGINEERS TO GET THAT DONE AND IT'S BEEN TREMENDOUSLY HELPFUL.
YES, THE STREETS ARE CHANGING, BUT I THINK WE CAN WORK WITH IT FOR A COUPLE YEARS AT LEAST AND MAYBE WE TALK ABOUT HOW FREQUENT.
>> TERRY JUST HELD UP THE STREET CONDITIONS SURVEY DOCUMENT.
IT'S A GREAT DOCUMENT THAT THE CITY PUT TOGETHER.
THEN THESE ARE THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS THAT WE EXPECT TO BE ABLE TO REFERENCE TO.
SOME WE HAVE TO CREATE, SOME WE CAN LEVERAGE AND CONTINUE TO UPDATE BUT WE FEEL LIKE ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS,
[01:40:04]
ONCE THEY'RE AVAILABLE, WILL BASICALLY BE DOCUMENTS THAT WOULD INFORM BACK INTO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.THIS IS WHAT WE SEE AS THE NEXT STEPS AFTER WE FINISH THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR THIS YEAR TO THEN BUILD THESE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS THAT ARE USED TO INFORM THE PLAN.
>> IN THE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM, THE CIP OUR HOPE IS THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE THE NEW CIP FOR THE WATER IMPACT FEE TO INCORPORATE EVEN IF IT'S DRAFT INFORMATION INTO THIS DOCUMENT RATHER THAN THE INFORMATION FROM 2016 BECAUSE I THINK SOME OF THAT STUFF IS NO LONGER THERE SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S AS CURRENT AS POSSIBLE.
IS THAT REQUIRED EVERY FIVE YEARS?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. EVERY FIVE YEARS. OR I SHOULD SAY EVERY FIVE YEARS A REVIEW HAS TO BE DONE, YOU DO THE PLAN FOR 10, BUT EVERY FIVE YEARS IT HAS TO BE REDONE.
>> OKAY. ONCE WE GET COMFORTABLE WITH THE EXPENDITURES OR THE PROPOSED COST I'D LIKE TO GO OVER THE FINANCING A LITTLE BIT MORE AND TALK ABOUT THAT AND HOW WE ADDRESS THAT.
THEN ALSO IT TALKS ABOUT LONG-TERM DEBT AND THEN THE RIGHT BEFORE THE FINANCING IS THE FUTURE, HOW WE DO THIS IN THE FUTURE.
I THINK YOU WERE PRETTY MUCH ON TARGET WITH WHAT WE ENVISIONED THIS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO BE.
WHERE YOU DO COME IN WITH THIS IS WHAT WE WANT AND THIS IS WHAT WE THINK IT'S GOING TO COST AND HERE'S THE DOCUMENTS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
I THINK STREETS ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A CHALLENGE JUST BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THINGS.
BUT I THINK AS TIME GOES ON, THAT WILL BE IMPROVED AS WELL.
BUT OUR TIMING ON THAT, WE MIGHT NEED TO LOOK AT AND SEE IF OUR TIMING IS GOOD AND WORKS IN WITH THE BUDGET.
THE INTENT IS THAT IT WORKS IN WITH THE BUDGET TIMING AS WELL.
>> TO COUNCILMEMBER LYNCH'S POINT, WE'RE JUST SHOWING HERE REALLY QUICK THAT TOWARDS THE END OF THIS DOCUMENT, WE HAVE A PROPOSED CAPITAL PLANNING CYCLE WHERE IT GOES ALONG WITH THE BUDGET, JUST LIKE SHE JUST MENTIONED, BUT IT'D BE GREAT FOR EVERYBODY TO REVIEW WHAT WE HAVE HERE.
THIS IS OUR FIRST ATTEMPT AT CAPTURING A PLANNING CYCLE AND THEN ANY ADDITIONAL INPUT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
>> I THINK WE NEED TO DO THAT.
ABSOLUTELY. YOU WAIT TOO LONG, THEN YOU'RE REITERATING THINGS.
AGAIN, I TAKE MY HAT OFF TO ALL THE HARD WORK HAS BEEN DONE. THIS HAS BEEN GREAT.
THANKS SO MUCH FOR ALL OF THAT.
I THINK IT'S A GREAT PATH FORWARD AND SOMETHING WE NEED AND WE'VE NEEDED FOR A LONG TIME SO APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORT BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF WORK.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LYNCH DID THE BULK OF THE UPDATES ON THIS ONE, AND I REALLY RECOGNIZE HER FOR ALL HER TIME AND EFFORT, AND ENERGY. THANK YOU, TERRY.
>> SINCE WE CHANGED THAT MEETING, I DO HAVE A CONFLICT ON THE 7TH, SO NOT THAT IF YOU STILL HAVE A QUORUM, THAT'S FINE.
>> THE OTHER ISSUE IS, DOES EVERYBODY ELSE WANT TO STAY ON A TUESDAY?
>> I CAN MEET OTHER DAYS OF THE WEEK.
>> I'M COOL WITH IT OTHER DAYS. JUST WHEN WE VOTED TO CHANGE IT IN NOVEMBER, I ALREADY HAD A CONFLICT WITH THURSDAY.
>> THAT WEEK I'M OUT MONDAY AND TUESDAY, THE 6TH OF NOVEMBER, AND 7TH.
>> DOES BEFORE IT COUNCIL MEETING.
>> THE 24TH WE'RE DOING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
[01:45:04]
IS THAT TOO MUCH FOR ONE DAY?>> JERRY, YOU SAID YOU'RE OUT 6TH.
>> I'M OUT 6, 7, 8 ACTUALLY, SO I'LL COME BACK ON 8TH ACTUALLY, SO I COULD PHYSICALLY DO IT ON THURSDAY OR WEDNESDAY.
>> PATTY, WHAT TIME IS THAT COMP PLAN MEETING?
>> I COULD DO IT ON 8TH, BUT IT CAN'T BE LIKE TWO O'CLOCK OR SOMETHING CRAZY.
>> OR MONDAY IS OKAY IN GENERAL.
>> THAT WEEKEND OF THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOVEMBER I'M OUT 6, 7, AND 8.
I GET BACK 8. THAT MONDAY IS NOT GOOD FOR ME IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT WEEK.
>> I WAS LOOKING AT THE 23RD MAYBE BECAUSE WE'VE GOT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE 24TH SO IS MONDAY THE 23RD A POSSIBILITY?
>> THERE'S TWO THINGS GOING ON, I'LL BE VOTING, AND PNR.
THERE'S TWO THINGS GOING ON ON THE 23RD.
>> I'M COMING BACK FROM SEATTLE.
>> CO-PLANS STARTS AT 6:00 OVER AT FIRE.
>> IS THE COMP ON OCTOBER 23RD?
>> I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY THINGS GOING ON.
>> BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE PUT PNR OVER THERE.
>> IN THE 6TH, 7TH 8TH YOU'RE OUT, THE TWO OF YOU.
>> 30TH ASSIGNED FOR ME. OCTOBER 30TH.
I DON'T THINK PNR SHOULD BE DONE, BUT WE COULD MEET OVER AND MOVE.
>> DO YOU HAVE TIME ON IT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M LOOKING FOR MONDAY NIGHT
>> WE DO THAT ON MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL.
WHO'S PLAYING? IF YOU PUT THE GAME ON I'M ALL IN.
>> WE'LL JUST PUT IT ON. WHO'S PLAYING?
>> THAT'S GOOD. THAT GIVES TWO WEEKS TO TURNAROUND.
[BACKGROUND]
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.