[00:00:06]
>> IT IS 5:00 PM ON FEBRUARY 25TH, 2025,
[CALL TO ORDER]
AND I HEREBY CONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF PARKER, TEXAS.THE FIRST PART OF THIS MEETING IS A WORKSHOP ON THE PROPOSED PERSONNEL POLICY MANUAL, AND WE WILL BE IN THE WORKSHOP FOR APPROXIMATELY ONE HOUR.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I WILL ASK PATTI SCOTT GREY, DO WE HAVE A QUORUM?
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR, WE HAVE A CITY QUORUM.
AT THIS POINT, WE WILL GO TO THE WORKSHOP.
[WORKSHOP ]
I BELIEVE WE LEFT OFF WITH AND ARE PREPARED TO START ON SECTION 2.1 EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS IS PAGE 20 OF THE PROPOSED POLICY PERSONNEL MANUAL.DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ON THE FIRST PARAGRAPH THERE? NOT HEARING ANYTHING, WE'LL MOVE TO EXEMPT EMPLOYEES, WHICH IS SECTION 2.2.
>> I'VE GOT A QUICK QUESTION THERE.
WE'VE GOTTEN HERE EMPLOYEES ARE EARNING 684 PER WEEK OR MORE.
OBVIOUSLY, THAT WILL CHANGE AS TIME GOES ON.
IS THERE SOMETHING PEOPLE ARE USING JUST TO REFERENCE SOMETHING RATHER THAN HAVING TO GO BACK AND CHANGE THAT?
>> YES. I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THAT AND THINKING BECAUSE THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO CHANGE JANUARY 1ST, AND THEN IT DIDN'T.
YES, I'M GOING TO CHANGE THAT LANGUAGE TO SOMETHING THAT JUST REFLECTS THE REQUIREMENTS OF FLSA.
>> THAT'S UNDER EXEMPT EMPLOYEES?
>> YES. THIS IS THE [INAUDIBLE].
>> ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING UNDER THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH? IF NOT, WE'LL MOVE TO THE SECOND PARAGRAPH.
ON THE SECOND PARAGRAPH, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IN, "HOWEVER, EXEMPT PERSONNEL MAY BE ALLOWED TO FLEXTIME AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR AND/OR WITH NOTIFICATION TO THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES SO HE CAN KEEP THE RECORDS OR MAKE WHATEVER AMENDMENTS NEED TO BE MADE."
>> MADAM MAYOR, WHERE WOULD YOU INSERT THAT SENTENCE, PLEASE?
>> WHERE WOULD YOU INSERT THAT SENTENCE?
>> AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR OR DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES.
>> AT THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE OF THE PARAGRAPH, ARE YOU SUGGESTING?
>> IT WILL BE AFTER THE WHOLE.
>> AT THE END OF THE WHOLE PARAGRAPH, JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.
>> YEAH. OR SOMEWHERE IN THAT PARAGRAPH. [LAUGHTER]
>> I THINK SHE'S TALKING ABOUT THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH AND JUST ADDING OR WITH THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES. IS THAT YOUR LANGUAGE?
>> YEAH. IF FOR ANY REASON THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR WASN'T PRESENT, AND YOU NEED TO FLEX, I WOULD LIKE THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES TO BE ABLE TO SAY, THAT'S AN OKAY THING FOR YOU TO DO.
IT'S WITHIN THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
>> THAT MAKES SENSE. THANKS FOR CLARIFYING.
YOU'RE JUST ADDING IN THAT JUST PHRASE OR THE HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR.
>> I THINK YOU'RE SAYING SOMETHING DIFFERENT, AREN'T YOU? WELL, I THINK YOU SHOULD PROBABLY CONSIDER SAYING, "AND NOTIFY HUMAN RESOURCES" SO THAT WE HAVE ONE PERSON THAT THEY GO TO.
THEY GO TO THE [INAUDIBLE] CITY ADMINISTRATOR AS THEIR BOSS.
THEY WOULDN'T GET PERMISSION, I WOULDN'T THINK FROM HUMAN RESOURCES, THEY'D GET PERMISSION OR APPROVAL FROM THEIR BOSS AND NOTIFY HUMAN RESOURCES FOR RECORD KEEPING PURPOSES.
>> IF YOU DO WORK IN PUBLIC WORKS, WOULDN'T YOU GO TO THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS? WOULD YOU GO TO THE CITY ADMIN?
>> WELL, THEN MAYBE IT NEEDS TO SAY, YOUR SUPERVISOR.
GO TO YOUR SUPERVISOR FOR APPROVAL AND NOTIFY
[00:05:02]
THE HUMAN RESOURCES PERSON FOR RECORD KEEPING PURPOSES.> WE WOULD STRIKE THE WORD CITY ADMINISTRATOR AND REPLACE IT WITH THE EMPLOYEE SUPERVISOR?
>> GRANT, WHAT'S YOUR FEELING ON THIS ON THE EXEMPT BECAUSE THAT DOES HAVE SOME IMPLICATIONS ON YOU.
>> I THINK THAT'S FINE. I DO THINK THIS SENTENCE THOUGH, STARTING WITH, EXEMPT PERSONNEL WISHES TO FLEXTIME COULD PROBABLY BE STRIKED.
WE STRIKE THIS SENTENCE BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY SAYING YOU HAVE TO GET PERMISSION TWICE THERE.
>> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE EXEMPT EMPLOYEES WHO WILL NOT BE PAID? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THAT? WELL, YOU'VE LOST THIS?
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE SENTENCE WHERE IT SAYS EXEMPT PERSONNEL WISHES TO FLEXTIME ARE OFTEN EXPECTED TO OBTAIN APPROVAL IN ADVANCE.
BUT THEN THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE OF THAT PARAGRAPH SAYS, THAT IT'S AT THE DISCRETION OF THE SUPERVISOR.
>> I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT WOULD BE A DOUBLE PERMISSION.
KATHERINE, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT?
>> NO. I THINK TAKING THAT OUT IS FINE.
ALSO, JUST FOR INFORMATION, GRANT, HOW MANY EXEMPT EMPLOYEES DO WE HAVE?
>> MOST OF ADMINISTRATION IS NOT IT SAYS. IS PATTI EXEMPT.
>> CHIEF PRICE IS. HOW ABOUT SERGEANT VERDI? NO, HE'S NOT EXEMPT.
[LAUGHTER] ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON THAT PARAGRAPH? IF NOT, WE WILL MOVE TO NON EXEMPT EMPLOYEES.
THIS IS PROBABLY A STUPID QUESTION, BUT I'M GOING TO ASK IT ANYWAY.
WHO KEEPS UP WITH NON-EXEMPT EMPLOYEES HOURS? IS IT THEIR SUPERVISOR? DO THEY KEEP UP WITH THEIR OWN HOUR? WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT?
>> TYPICALLY, THE EMPLOYEES HAVE IT.
IT'S ON THEIR PAY STUB AND THEN, OF COURSE, I'LL HAVE AN OFFICIAL RECORD OF IT MYSELF.
>> YOU DO. HOW DO YOU GET THAT RECORD? HOW DO YOU GET THAT INFORMATION?
I'VE GOT A REPORT AND I KEEP THAT.
>> GRANT, IS THAT INFORMATION ON THEIR TIME CARD OR WHEN THEY POST THEIR TIME?
WHENEVER THEY GET THEIR CHECK STUB, IT'S ON THERE.
ALSO, THEY CAN SEE IT IN THE ATTENDANCE, WHERE THEY ENTER THEIR TIME OUT?
>> I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PAY IS? DID THEY HAVE OVERTIME?
FOR EVERY PAY PERIOD, EVERYBODY SUBMITS A TIME SHEET.
>> THEY SUBMIT A TIME SHEET TO WHO?
>> THEIR TIME SHEET GOES TO THE DEPARTMENT HEAD, AND THEN ONCE THE DEPARTMENT HEAD SIGNS OFF ON IT, THEN THEY ALL COME TO ME.
>> IS THE MAYOR'S QUESTION, IS THERE ANYONE CHECKING THE TIME OR ARE PEOPLE SELF REPORTING THEIR TIME OR DO THEY CLOCK IN OR CLOCK OUT?
[00:10:03]
>> THEY SELF REPORT AND THEN THEY SELF REPORT INTO OUR SYSTEM, AND THEN IT'S APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD.
ONCE THE DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVES IT, THEN IT GOES INTO MY QUEUE AND THEN I REVIEW IT.
>> IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? FULL TIME EMPLOYEES.
HOW ABOUT PART TIME EMPLOYEES?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THE NUMBER OF HOURS.
TYPICALLY NUMBER OF HOURS, I DON'T KNOW, IT USED TO BE 30, IT MIGHT BE 28 OR SOMETHING, NOW.
BUT I MAY WANT TO KNOW THAT WE NEED TO SAY 18 IF THERE'S A PARTICULAR MAXIMUM BEFORE THEY TURN FULL TIME, THEN MAYBE WE PUT THOSE HOURS, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'VE GOT 18 IN THERE.
>> I THINK THE REASON THAT WE HAVE 18 IN THERE IS BECAUSE TMRS REQUIRES THAT ANYBODY WHO WORKS OVER A 1,000 HOURS A YEAR PARTICIPATE IN TMRS, AND THEY CAN COME BACK AND THE CITY HAS TO PAY A PENALTY IF WE MISS THAT.
SO I THINK THAT'S THE CITY'S WAY OF TRACKING THAT.
THE OTHER WAY TO DO IT WOULD BE SAYS THAT WORK FEWER ON AVERAGE OR TO SAY TO WORK FEWER THAN 980 IS A GOOD NUMBER OF HOURS JUST TO BE SAFE LIKE, SAY, FEWER THAN 980 HOURS A YEAR.
I'LL DEFER TO GRANT IF HE HAS A DIFFERENT ANSWER TO THAT.
>> ON PART TIME PEOPLE, YOU KEEP THEM AT 18 OR SHOULD WE SAY 18 ON AVERAGE.
>> I THINK 18 IS FINE. THE ONLY PART TIME PEOPLE WE HAVE ARE IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THAT'S TYPICALLY SOMETHING WE HAVE TO RUN REPORTS, AND IT CAN'T NECESSARILY BE 18 HOURS JUST BECAUSE OF THE WAY THEY RUN THEIR SHIFTS.
USUALLY, I KEEP TRACK OF THAT OVERALL AND WHEN SOMEBODY'S GETTING CLOSE TO A 1,000 HOURS, WELL, BEFORE 1,000 HOURS, I'LL GO AHEAD AND NOTIFY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SO THAT WAY THEY CAN START MAKING ACCOMMODATIONS TO START HAVING SOMEONE ELSE TO COVER THAT SHIFT.
>> ANYTHING ELSE ON PART TIME EMPLOYEES? SEASONAL EMPLOYEES, DO WE HAVE ANY SEASONAL [LAUGHTER] EMPLOYEES? ANYTHING MORE ON ANY OF THAT AT ALL? OTHERWISE, WE'LL MOVE TO SECTION 2.4.
SECTION 2.4, TRAINING AND EVALUATION PERIOD.
>> QUESTION, I GUESS, FROM THE POLICE SIDE.
I KNOW IT SAYS IN HERE 12 MONTHS.
IS THAT TRULY A 12 MONTH PROBATIONARY PERIOD, OR DOES IT CHANGE DURING THE 12 MONTHS?
>> I HAVE A COMMENT GOING BACKWARDS FOR A MINUTE.
AS I READ THIS DEPARTMENT HEAD COMMENT IN SECTION 2.3 IN THE SELECTION PROCESS, IT MAKES ME WONDER IF JUST FOR CONSISTENCY AS WE GO THROUGH HERE WHEN WE'RE REFERRING TO THE PERSON FROM WHOM SOMEONE NEEDS TO RECEIVE APPROVAL, LIKE ON THE ISSUE, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A MINUTE AGO IN FLEXPAY, WE JUST USED THE TERM THE DEPARTMENT HEAD CONSISTENTLY THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT SO THAT IN SOME PLACES WE DON'T HAVE DEPARTMENT HEAD, AND IN OTHER PLACES WE HAVE SOME OTHER TERM.
>> MY ONLY COMMENT ON THAT IS IF YOU HAVE A SUPERVISOR WHO IS NOT THE DEPARTMENT HEAD.
>> WOULDN'T THE DEPARTMENT HEAD BE THE ONE THAT WOULD ACTUALLY APPROVE THE MAJORITY OF THESE? WOULD A SUPERVISOR WHO'S NOT A DEPARTMENT HEAD, FOR EXAMPLE, APPROVE FLEXTIME FOR AN EMPLOYEE OR WOULD THE DEPARTMENT HEAD BE THE ONE WHO WAS ACTUALLY APPROVE IT?
I'M THINKING OF PUBLIC WORKS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE BOBBY, WHO IS A WATER SUPERINTENDENT, HAS TO LET SOMEBODY FLEX BECAUSE THEY NEED TO GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING.
[00:15:07]
DOES BOBBY APPROVE THAT OR DOES GARY APPROVE THAT?>> THAT ANSWERS THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> I ALSO HAD A QUESTION REGARDING 2.3 WHERE WE SAY USING JOB REQUIREMENTS.
DO WE HAVE JOB REQUIREMENTS AS A STANDARD WITHIN THE CITY? IN OTHER WORDS, THOSE DOCUMENTS THE CITY HAS ON FILE OR RECORD.
>> DO WE? WE HAVE SOME [INAUDIBLE].
>> PROBABLY THE JOB DESCRIPTION THAT WAS USED DURING THE HIRING PROCESS.
>> IT JUST HOWEVER THE JOB THAT WAS POSTED, JUST REFER TO WHAT THAT SAYS, AND THAT'S THE REQUIREMENTS.
>> YEAH. BACK QUINN AND TERRY HAD ASKED FOR JOB DESCRIPTIONS FOR ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES AND I KNOW WE STARTED WORKING ON THAT, BUT I THINK IT'S LIKE GRANT SAID, I THINK IT'S IN THE POSTING THAT WE KEPT.
NOW, I THINK IT'D BE A GOOD IDEA FOR US TO DO THAT JUST TO BE CLEAR.
>> GRANT, IS IT IN THE POSTING, OR DO WE ACTUALLY HAVE POSITIONS DEFINED IN A WRITTEN PARAGRAPH, IN A WRITTEN FORM?
>> NOT FORMALLY. THE ONLY THING WE HAVE IS THE JOB DESCRIPTION THAT WE USE WHERE WE POSTED POSITION.
>> I HAD A QUESTION. FROM THE DEPARTMENT HEAD AND OUR SUPERVISOR, ETC, THE QUESTION THAT WAS RAISED, DID WE MAKE A DETERMINATION THERE? ARE WE GOING TO USE DEPARTMENT HEAD THROUGHOUT? TO ME, WE DON'T HAVE 100 EMPLOYEES.
TO ME, THE DEPARTMENT HEAD PROBABLY WANTS TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITHIN THEIR DEPARTMENT, WHETHER THEY HAVE A COUPLE OF SUPERVISORS OR NOT.
I WOULD JUST USE DEPARTMENT HEAD INSTEAD OF SUPERVISOR IN ANY POINT WITHIN THE POLICY.
>> I WOULD ASSUME THAT THE SUPERVISOR IS GOING TO TELL OR COORDINATE WITH THE DEPARTMENT HEAD, SO THAT PERSON IS GOING TO KNOW OR SIGN OFF ON ANYWAY.
>> NO, THAT'S ALWAYS A PROBLEM WHEN YOU'RE OUT OF TOWN.
>> WOULD THAT CAUSE ANY PROBLEMS?
>> NO, IF WE WERE DOING THAT, WE WOULD SAY DEPARTMENT HEAD OR DESIGNEE.
>> QUESTION AGAIN, ARE WE GOING TO USE DEPARTMENT HEAD THROUGHOUT THE POLICY?
>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE AGREED.
>> IS THAT WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS TO DO? I WANT TO MAKE SURE. TODD?
>> YEAH, I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
>> NOW ARE WE READY FOR 2.4? TRAINING AND EVALUATION PERIOD.
IS THERE ANYTHING IN THERE THAT ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS, CHANGE, TALK ABOUT? HOW ABOUT 2.5, WORKING HOURS ATTENDANCE?
>> ARE WE OPENED 8:00-5:00? I THOUGHT IT WAS 8:30-4:30.
I THOUGHT THAT THAT CHANGED FOR WORK THIS YEAR.
>> WORK HOURS IS 8:00-5:00, BUT AS FAR AS THE DOOR BEING UNLOCKED, IT'S 8:30-4:30.
>> BUT THERE'S SOMEBODY HERE 8:00-5:00.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? THEN MOVING TO SECTION 2.6, PROMOTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES.
[00:20:03]
>> SEEMS GOOD. SEEMS STRAIGHTFORWARD.
>> I WAS GOING TO MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT WE MUST APPLY THROUGH HUMAN RESOURCES/ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT BECAUSE I THINK HUMAN RESOURCES NEEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN ANY PROMOTIONAL TYPE OF ACTIVITY.
>> I GUESS I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS THEN.
IF THERE'S AN OUTSIDE APPLICANT AND THE JOB IS POSTED ONLINE, THEN THEY'LL GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO POST THEIR APPLICATION THROUGH THE ONLINE PORTAL, CORRECT? IS THERE A SIMILAR METHOD FOR INTERNAL EMPLOYEES TO POST INTERNALLY FOR THE SAME JOB THROUGH AN INTERNAL PORTAL? OR IS IT MORE OF A PAPER PROCESS VERSUS ONLINE PROCESS?
>> FROM ANYTHING THAT WE'VE HAD SO FAR, EVERYTHING HAS BEEN POSTED OUTSIDE.
IF AN INTERNAL APPLICANT WAS INTERESTED, THEY WOULD HAVE TO APPLY AS IF THEY WERE AN OUTSIDE EMPLOYER.
>> I THINK THAT THAT MAKES SENSE, AND IT'S AN EASY SOLUTION TO NOT NEEDING A NEW SYSTEM TO BE INVOLVED, AND IT'S I THINK A SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD METHOD. IT SOUNDS GOOD.
>> ALL APPLICANTS SHOULD BE TREATED EQUALLY WHETHER THEY'RE INSIDE OR OUTSIDE, WOULD BE MY THOUGHTS.
>> I THINK THIS COVERS THAT WELL THOUGH, TO ACHIEVE THAT.
>> ANY COMMENTS ON THE SECOND SENTENCE THERE? RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SELECT INDIVIDUALS THAT IT DEEMS BEST SUITED FOR POSITIONS CONSISTENT WITH EQUAL OPPORTUNITY LAWS AND FAIRNESS.
DO WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT? [LAUGHTER]
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT FAIRNESS IS.
CAN YOU END WITH JUST EQUAL OPPORTUNITY LAWS?
>> YEAH. I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THEN WE'RE AT 2.7, TRANSFERS.
>> GRANT, DO Y'ALL USE PAID CLASSES, THE CATEGORIES? YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING?
>> NOT OFFICIALLY. WHENEVER I DO A SALARY STUDY, I BREAK IT UP INTO CLASSIFICATIONS, JUST TO COMPARE WITH OTHER CITIES, BUT WE DON'T USE IT REALLY INTERNALLY.
>> I WAS JUST WONDERING IF IT HAS TO BE AT THE SAME RATE OF PAY OR IF IT SHOULD JUST BE IN THE SAME JOB CLASS FOR TRANSFERS.
>> IT WILL PROBABLY BE EASIER TO LEAVE IT AT THE SAME RATE OF PAY.
>> SHOULD THAT BE THROUGH HUMAN RESOURCES RATHER THAN THE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT?
>> THE ONLY QUESTION IS, I WOULDN'T THINK HUMAN RESOURCES SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR TRANSFERS, MAYBE THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECT OF THE TRANSFER.
ADMINISTRATION WOULD BE APPROVING A TRANSFER, OR IS THIS TRANSFER COMING FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE?
>> SEE, THAT'S WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
IF I WORKED FOR PUBLIC WORKS AND I WANT TO TRANSFER FROM WATERSIDE TO CODE ENFORCEMENT, COULD THAT ALL BE HANDLED BY PUBLIC WORKS, OR DOES IT HAVE TO COME TO THE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, WHATEVER THAT IS IN THE FIRST PLACE, OR WOULD THAT COME TO HUMAN RESOURCES? I TAKE IT, IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT IF IT WAS DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, LIKE I'M TRANSFERRING FROM ADMINISTRATION TO PUBLIC WORKS.
IT'S JUST NOT REAL CLEAR TO ME.
[00:25:03]
>> [OVERLAPPING] I WAS GOING TO SAY, I DEFINITELY THINK HR SHOULD BE INVOLVED JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE THAT'S IN ONE DEPARTMENT WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT THE SALARY PARTICULARLY IS IN ANOTHER DEPARTMENT.
JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RATE OF PAY WOULD BE THE SAME, I THINK IT DEFINITELY NEEDS TO GO THROUGH HR INITIALLY.
>> IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S THE SAME THING WITH YOUR PROMOTIONS.
IF YOU'RE POSTING A JOB, IS THERE ANY REASON? DO YOU HAVE OCCASIONS WHERE THE JOB ISN'T POSTED AND YOU'RE TRANSFERRING PEOPLE BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS?
>> WE HAVE IN THE PAST. IF IT WAS IN THE SAME DEPARTMENT, MAYBE WE WOULD ALLOW SOMEONE TO MOVE AROUND INTERNALLY, AND THEN THEY WOULD POST THE POSITION THAT MAYBE GOT FILLED.
>> WHEN YOU'RE DOING THAT, IS THAT THE SUPERVISOR TRANSFERRING THEM FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONVENIENCE, OR IS IT THE PERSON SAYING, I WANT THIS JOB AND THEY'RE MAKING SOME APPLICATION? DO YOU HAVE A PROCESS THAT THEY USE?
>> IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO BE CONSISTENT ABOUT IT SO THAT EVERYBODY HAS THE SAME OPPORTUNITY.
IF YOU POST IT, THAT LETS YOUR PROCESS ALWAYS STAY THE SAME, SO IT'S POSTED, ANYBODY CAN APPLY FOR IT, INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL.
OTHERWISE, YOU WOULD WANT TO HAVE, I THINK THE SAME PROCESS WHERE, HEY, WE HAVE THIS POSITION OPEN, IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO POST IT TO THE PUBLIC YET, IF SOMEBODY IS INTERESTED INSIDE THE CITY, E-MAIL THIS PERSON, AND THEN YOU'RE SETTING UP THIS ADDITIONAL PROCESS, BUT IT'S PROBABLY EASIER TO JUST LEAVE IT.
>> WE'VE HAD TWO INSTANCES SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE.
ONE WAS IN PUBLIC WORKS, SMALLER DEPARTMENT.
I KNOW THAT GARY HAD CHECKED WITH EVERYONE WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT TO SEE IF ANYONE WAS INTERESTED AND THEN MADE A DECISION.
ANOTHER ONE WAS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND ANYONE THAT WAS INTERESTED WAS REQUESTED TO APPLY FOR IT AND THEN THEY WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS.
I GUESS IF THERE WERE MULTIPLE PEOPLE INTERESTED IN THE PUBLIC WORKS SCENARIO, OBVIOUSLY, WE WOULD HAVE HAD THEM APPLY FOR IT, BUT THERE WAS ONLY ONE PERSON THAT WAS INTERESTED.
>> THERE'S NOT ANYTHING WRONG WITH HAVING THAT PROCESS, AND THAT'S WHAT I EXPECT IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE TYPICALLY, POLICE DEPARTMENTS DON'T DO LATERAL HIRES.
THEY WANT TO PROMOTE PEOPLE FROM WITHIN, AND SO THAT'S VERY STANDARD IN POLICE DEPARTMENTS TO DO AN EMAIL PROCESS FOR PROMOTION.
FOR TRANSFERS, IT'S UP TO THE CITY HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT, AS LONG AS IT'S CONSISTENT.
>> I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PHRASE "MUST APPLY THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT" MEANS.
[LAUGHTER] I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT IS.
IT SEEMS TO ME THE PROCESS WOULD BE YOU WOULD NOTIFY YOUR DEPARTMENT HEAD THAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN THE TRANSFER, AND YOU WOULD APPLY TO WHATEVER DEPARTMENT THE OPENING IS IN, WHICH WOULD BE YOU WOULD APPLY JUST WHATEVER NORMAL PROCESS THE APPLICATIONS ARE TAKEN.
>> YOU KNOW HOW AT TIMES YOU APPLY TO HR AND HR RUNS A THING AS OPPOSED TO MAYBE GOING DIRECTLY TO THE DEPARTMENT HEAD.
>> THAT'S WHY I JUST SAY I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW, SO I JUST WANT TO NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD AND THEN APPLY THROUGH NORMAL CHANNELS.
>> OTHERWISE, YOU'RE GOING TO GET TO THE SITUATION WHERE, "HI, GARY, I UNDERSTAND YOU GOT AN OPENING.
I WANT TO MOVE FROM ADMINISTRATION OVER TO YOU, ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT?" GARY MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW OF ANYBODY ELSE THAT ALSO WANTED TO TRANSFER.
NO ONE ELSE MAY KNOW ABOUT THE POSITION.
BUT I SEE YOUR POINT, AND WE DO WANT TO BE FAIR.
OTHERWISE, YOU GET INTO, "HEY, GRANT, I JUST WANT YOU TO COME AND WE'LL WORK HERE.
I'M NOT GOING TO CONSIDER ANYBODY ELSE AND JUST TAKE AN INCREASE." [LAUGHTER]
>> WE COULD CHANGE THE SENTENCE TO READ THAT EMPLOYEES INTERESTED IN A TRANSFER MUST APPLY FOR THE POSITION WHEN SUCH AN OPPORTUNITY IS OFFICIALLY POSTED.
ALL YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU'RE JUST GOING TO APPLY FOR THE POSITION AND THAT PROCESS IS UNDERSTOOD.
>> THE OPPORTUNITY HAS TO BE POSTED.
[00:30:01]
I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY.>> ARE YOU SAYING POSTED WITHIN THE CITY OR POSTED EXTERNALLY? I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT IF IT'S OFFICIALLY POSTED, WHICH I UNDERSTAND AS YOU'VE POSTED IT THROUGH YOUR REGULAR JOB POSTING PROCESS OR BY THE DEFINED PROCESS FOR JOBS NOT POSTED EXTERNALLY.
YOU WOULD PUBLICIZE IT AND THEN IF WE GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BULLET POINTS, BOTH DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE TO BE AWARE OF IT AND AGREE TO IT, ETC, WHICH I THINK ADDRESSES THE NOTIFYING YOUR SUPERVISOR PART OF IT.
I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING FROM Y'ALL THOUGH IS THAT WE PROBABLY ALSO NEED TO ADD SOMETHING THAT SAYS SPECIFICALLY, A JOB NOT POSTED EXTERNALLY SHOULD BE POSTED DEPARTMENT-WIDE OR CITYWIDE AS APPROPRIATE. IS THAT FAIR?
>> YEAH. IS EVERYBODY GOOD WITH THAT?
>> ARE YOU GOING TO LEAVE IN SOMETHING ABOUT NOTIFYING YOUR SUPERVISOR? BECAUSE I WOULD THINK OF NOTIFYING A DEPARTMENT HEAD BECAUSE I WOULD THINK A DEPARTMENT HEAD WOULD WANT TO KNOW IF SOMEBODY IS WANTING TO MOVE TO ANOTHER DEPARTMENT, AND WE SHOULDN'T PREVENT SOMEBODY FROM MOVING IF THEY'RE QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB, AND IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO ADVANCE THEIR CAREER, THAT'S GOOD.
BUT I WOULD THINK THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WOULD WANT TO KNOW BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY IT ULTIMATELY.
>> I THINK IN THE BULLET POINTS, THOUGH, BECAUSE IT SAYS BOTH THE DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE TO BE AWARE OF IT AND BE AGREEABLE, THAT THAT PRESUMES THAT THEY ARE.
>> I THINK THAT'S TRUE WHETHER IT'S A LATERAL OR A PROMOTIONAL.
>> DO WE HAVE A SET POLICY OR NOT? IF IT'S THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, DOES THE INFORMATION GO TO CHIEF PRICE OR DOES IT GO TO HR? I ASSUME THE POSTING IS GOING TO TELL YOU HOW TO APPLY.
IF YOU'RE INTERESTED AND IT'S POSTED SOME PLACE, IT WILL SAY, SEND IN YOUR APPLICATION TO WHATEVER OR CONTACT SO AND SO.
WHO MAKES THAT DETERMINATION AND IS THAT ACROSS THE BOARD, THE SAME REGARDLESS OF WHAT POSITION IS OPEN WITHIN THE CITY, OR THEY VARY?
>> I KNOW IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, YOU WOULDN'T POST A HIGHER POSITION, WOULD YOU? IF YOU WERE PLANNING ON DOING IT INTERNALLY?
>> YEAH. [INAUDIBLE] BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WHEN THEY FILE AN APPLICATION TO GO TO [INAUDIBLE] IF SOMEBODY HAD SENT ONE DIRECTED TO ME, HE ALSO CAN COPY [INAUDIBLE].
>> THAT'S HOW IT WORKS FOR ALL THE DEPARTMENTS, ONE APPLICATION.
>> YOU ARE THE ORIGINATOR OF ALL THAT.
THEY ALL COME TO YOU ALLEGEDLY FIRST BEFORE THEY GO OUT TO [INAUDIBLE].
>> I HAD ONE OTHER COMMENT BEFORE WE MOVE ON, FROM THE PAY PERSPECTIVE.
I KNOW THAT WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE CITY SECRETARY, PART OF THE INFORMATION THAT CAME BACK.
I KNOW I'M SAYING CITY SECRETARY IN TERMS OF TRAINING FOR THE POSITION.
SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT CAME BACK SAID, I'M NOT INTERESTED AND ONE OF THE REASONS I'M NOT INTERESTED IS THAT I'VE GOT A FULL PLATE AND I'M NOT GETTING PAID ANY MORE TO GO TRAIN FOR A CITY SECRETARY.
IS THERE ANYTHING SET UP WITHIN THE CITY TO GIVE SOME ADDITIONAL MONEY TO SOMEONE? IF THEY'RE TAKING ON, BESIDES THEIR OWN JOB, SOME EXTRA WORK, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE SET UP TO ALLOW FOR THAT?
>> TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, ANYTIME WE ADD ADDITIONAL DUTIES TO SOMEONE, I BELIEVE THEY ARE COMPENSATED FOR IT IN SOME WAY.
>> BUT THIS WOULD BE PURELY TEMPORARY, THOUGH, RIGHT? IT'S NOT SAYING TAKE THIS ON, THIS IS YOUR NEW JOB.
IT'S JUST SAYING TEMPORARILY, YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE ON THIS TRAINING AS WELL.
>> SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD BE CASE BY CASE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING RIGHT NOW FOR THAT TYPE.
IF IT WAS A BUDGET ITEM, POTENTIALLY, IF WE HAD SOME SALARY SAVINGS OR SOMETHING, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT IF THERE WASN'T AT THE SAVINGS, THEN IT WOULD BE A COUNCIL ACTION ITEM WITH A BUDGET AMENDMENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, SO I'D HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL.
>> DO WE HAVE A TRAINING BUDGET THOUGH? CAN THAT BE UNDER A TRAINING BUDGET?
>> WE DO HAVE A TRAINING BUDGET.
I SUPPOSE YOU COULD IF IT WAS A TEMPORARY TYPE THING.
IT NEVER HAS COME UP, SO WE REALLY HAVEN'T GIVEN IT MUCH THOUGHT.
BUT I GUESS IF IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS A ONE-TIME DEAL, THEN I SUPPOSE WE COULD USE TRAINING MONEY FOR THAT AND THEY'D HELP.
[00:35:05]
>> TO RANDY'S QUESTION IN PARTICULAR, THERE HAS BEEN A TIME WHEN PATTI WAS NOT HERE AND LAURIE CAME IN AND DID THE COUNCILMAN MEETING FOR HER.
WAS SHE COMPENSATED IN ANY MANNER FOR THAT?
>> YES, BECAUSE SHE'S NON-EXEMPT, SO SHE WOULD HAVE GOT OVERTIME HOURS FOR THAT.
ON THE NEXT ONE IN THE LAST SENTENCE, BEFORE SECTION 2.8, IT SAYS, "AND IT WILL NOT CREATE UNDUE HARDSHIP IN THE DEPARTMENT THAT THE EMPLOYEE IS LEAVING." WILL YOU DEFINE UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR ME?
>> UNDUE HARDSHIP. IT IS A TERM OF ART USED IN FOR EXAMPLE, THE ADA.
IT DOESN'T APPLY HERE, BUT UNDUE HARDSHIP BASICALLY SAYS, WE CAN'T DO OUR JOB IF THIS PERSON LEAVES.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO DO TO PREVENT SOMEBODY FROM TRANSFERRING.
IT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WELL, THIS PERSON SHOULD TRANSFER, BUT IT WOULD LEAVE US WITH NOBODY IN THIS POSITION, SO WE NEED TO DELAY IT, POTENTIALLY.
>> I'D AGREE WITH THAT. AT LEAST MAYBE PHASE IT INTO THE NEW POSITION TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRAIN SOMEONE TO COME IN AND FILL THEIR OLD POSITION.
>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING ON ANY OF THOSE ITEMS BEFORE WE MOVE TO SECTION 2.8? THEN LET'S GO TO SECTION 2.8, VOLUNTARY DEMOTION.
>> THAT SEEMS STRAIGHTFORWARD.
>> I WOULD ADD HUMAN RESOURCES IN THERE [LAUGHTER] JUST BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT HAD HUMAN RESOURCES AND THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR JUST SOMEWHERE IN THAT GROUP.
>> HOW ARE YOU GOING TO ADD IN HUMAN RESOURCES THERE?
>> IF SOMEBODY IS TAKING A VOLUNTARY DEMOTION, THE DEPARTMENT HEAD AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR NEED TO BE INVOLVED, BUT SO DOES HUMAN RESOURCES BECAUSE THERE'S A SALARY CHANGE.
>> IN TERMS OF DECISION-MAKING PROCESS, I'M MORE OF A BELIEVER OF DEPARTMENT HEADS ARE THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THE DEPARTMENTS AND SHOULD MAKE THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS.
HUMAN RESOURCES ARE ADVISORS, JUST LIKE LEGAL COUNSEL IS AN ADVISOR THAT IS THERE TO ADVISE AND COUNSEL YOU ON ISSUES OF HR REGULATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND DOING THINGS PROPERLY.
BUT ULTIMATELY, I BELIEVE IN GIVING DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITIES TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THE POSITION TO RUN THE DEPARTMENT, AND I DON'T LIKE TYING THE HANDS OF DIRECT LINE MANAGERS WITH BUREAUCRACY.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE DEALING WITH THAT PERSON WHO HAS THE BUDGET, THE TALENT POOL, AND THE LAST THING YOU WANT TO DO IS HANDCUFF THEM.
>> I AGREE THAT MY WORDING WAS PROBABLY POOR.
I MEANT NOTIFICATION OF HUMAN RESOURCES BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED OF THE CHANGES.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT POST-TENSE. AFTER THE FACT?
>> IT COULD BE. THAT'S UP TO THE PEOPLE INVOLVED.
[00:40:04]
IF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR SAY, GEE, I'D LIKE TO SIT DOWN WITH GRANT ON THIS AND SEE IF HE HAS ANY ISSUE.>> MEANING AFTER THE FACT, ONCE THEY DETERMINE THIS IS A GOOD THING.
>> I THINK, AND YOU MAY NOT BE ASKING THIS QUESTION, BUT NORMALLY HR IS INVOLVED BECAUSE HR HAS AUTHORITY FOR POSITION CONTROL.
WE TEND TO THINK OF HR AS THE TEDDY BEARS OF THE ORGANIZATION, BUT IT'S REALLY A CONTROL FUNCTION THAT'S ESSENTIAL TO MAINTAIN YOUR BUDGET AND BUDGETARY CONTROL.
THAT'S WHAT I TYPICALLY SEE IS HR IS GOING TO BE THE ONE WHO SAYS, THIS IS WHAT THIS POSITION CAN PAY BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT IT'S BUDGETED FOR.
THEN THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR IS GOING TO BE THE ONE THAT SAYS, I'M WILLING TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION IF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD ASKS FOR IT OR NOT.
BUT THAT'S TYPICALLY WHERE I SEE THE ROLE OF HR IN THIS, OTHER THAN ACTUALLY THE NUMBERS OF MOVING THIS POSITION FROM THIS, OR THIS PERSON INTO THIS POSITION FROM THIS POSITION.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON ANY OF THAT?
>> DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BUDDY?
>> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH HR BEING NOTIFIED EVEN DURING THE PROCESS.
I JUST DON'T THINK HR SHOULD BE THE ONE WHO MAKES THE DECISION FROM THE PROCESS.
IF IT'S NOT WITHIN THE BUDGET, THE ACTUAL PERSON RUNNING THAT DEPARTMENT HAS GOT A RESPONSIBILITY TO STAY WITH THEIR OWN BUDGET ANYWAY OR TO GET AN EXCEPTION FOR IT.
IF THERE IS A PROBLEM, HR SAYS, THAT'S GREAT, BUT THAT'S NOT BUDGETED.
ANYTHING ELSE ON SECTION 2.8? IF NOT, LET'S MOVE TO 2.9, INVOLUNTARY DEMOTION.
AGAIN, THE ONLY THING I DO IS I THROW IN HUMAN RESOURCES [LAUGHTER] BECAUSE I THINK THEY SHOULD AT LEAST BE NOTIFIED OF ANY ACTIONS OF THAT NATURE.
ANYBODY ELSE? THEN TEMPORARY ASSIGNMENTS, SECTION 2.10.
>> I THINK THIS SECTION ADDRESSES SOME OF THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD REGARDING TEMPORARY ASSIGNMENTS, WHETHER THEY GET PAID FOR THAT TEMPORARY ASSIGNMENT, OR ARE THEY JUST COMPENSATED, OR ARE JUST DOING IT AS PART OF EXTRA DUTIES.
I THINK THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN COVERS THE SCENARIO EFFECTIVELY.
>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THOUGHTS, COMMENTS ON THAT? THEN WE'RE TO SECTION 2.11, LAYOFFS.
>> DOES THAT EFFECTIVELY SAY THAT THE ONLY TIME THERE CAN BE A LAYOFF IS WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL ELIMINATES THE POSITION FOR BUDGETARY REASONS?
>> I THINK THIS IS IF THERE'S A REDUCTION IN FORCE BASED ON PROBABLY A BUDGET ISSUE.
BUT SHOULD THAT ALSO MENTION IF THERE WAS ANOTHER POSITION THAT WAS AVAILABLE, THEY'D BE AVAILABLE TO DO A TRANSFER TO THAT OPEN POSITION.
>> OR COULD IT BE A LAYOFF BECAUSE THE CITY INADVERTENTLY HIRED TOO MANY PEOPLE TO GO OUT AND FIX WATER LINES? I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO WORD THAT.
[00:45:01]
I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE ONLY WAY THAT THERE COULD BE A LAYOFF.IT JUST PROVIDES THAT POSSIBILITY IF THERE'S A RIFF BECAUSE POSITIONS ARE ELIMINATED.
TO YOUR POINT, GRANT, YOU COULD ADD MORE IF YOU WANT TO, BUT THAT'S ALSO IMPLICIT THAT THEY COULD SO WE CAN.
>> [LAUGHTER] ARE YOU THINKING ON THAT?
>> WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO CONSIDER JUST SAYING, "DUE TO THE ELIMINATION OF BUDGETED POSITIONS." WHETHER THE ELIMINATION OF THE POSITION IS DUE TO THE CITY COUNCIL, OR DUE TO THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT, OR DUE TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR, OR ANYBODY ELSE WITHIN THEIR AUTHORITY DECIDED THE POSITION SHOULD BE ELIMINATED?
>> I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE ANOTHER SENTENCE THAT'S AN OUT CLAUSE AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE CITY, AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD, OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.
>> THE PURPOSE OF THIS SENTENCE, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, OR THIS SECTION, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, IS JUST TO SAY, EMPLOYMENT MAY BE TERMINATED JUST BECAUSE OF LAYOFFS, NOT BECAUSE OF PERFORMANCE, NOT BECAUSE OF OTHER REASONS JUST ONE OF THE REASONS YOUR EMPLOYMENT COULD BE TERMINATED HERE IS BECAUSE YOU GET LAID OFF.
IF THAT'S IT, I WOULD JUST MAKE IT THAT SIMPLE, THAT IT'S A LAYOFF AND ONLY SOMEBODY THAT IS AUTHORIZED IS GOING TO IMPLEMENT A LAYOFF.
>> YOU'D SAY STRIKE EVERYTHING, SENTENCE, YOU COULD BE LAID OFF. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'D MAYBE NOT EVEN SAY BUDGETED, JUST BECAUSE DUE TO THE ELIMINATION OF A POSITION.
BECAUSE THE PURPOSE IS REALLY TO HAVE IN POLICY WHEN SOMEONE IS HIRED THAT THEY KNOW YOUR JOB IS NOT PERMANENT.
YOU CAN BE TERMINATED BECAUSE OF PERFORMANCE REASONS, OR YOU COULD BE TERMINATED BECAUSE WE ELIMINATE THE POSITION, OR YOU COULD BE TERMINATED BECAUSE WE JUST HAVE A GENERAL 10% LAYOFF THAT'S CARRIED OUT BY THE CITY.
LAYOFFS CAN BE ONE OF THE REASONS THAT YOUR JOB COULD BE TERMINATED.
>> SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS "THE EMPLOYEE MAY HAVE HIS OR HER EMPLOYMENT TERMINATED DUE TO LAYOFF."
>> THE QUESTION IS, DOES THE CITY COUNCIL HAVE TO APPROVE EITHER AN ADDITIONAL POSITION OR ELIMINATION OF A POSITION?
>> THEN ABSOLUTELY, IT SHOULD DISAPPEAR IF THE CITY COUNCIL HAS TO APPROVE EITHER ELIMINATION OR A NEW POSITION, THEN I THINK IT'S FINE AS IS.
>> YOUR POSITIONS ARE AUTHORIZED IN YOUR BUDGET, RIGHT?
>> I THINK THE REAL PURPOSE OF THIS, YOU HAVE.
>> I MEAN THE QUESTION IS, LIKE IF PUBLIC ANYBODY, ANY DEPARTMENT? SUDDENLY IS GOING THROUGH THE YEAR.
SOME OTHER COST IS HIGH OR SOMETHING? DEPARTMENT HAS SAYS, HEY, I THINK IN ORDER TO COME BACK WITHIN BUDGET, I COULD DO WITHOUT THIS PERSON, AND THAT'S A DECISION THAT THEY MAKE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO LAY THAT PERSON OFF TO COME WITHIN A BUDGET AREA THAT THEY AGREED TO AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.
DOES THAT HAVE TO COME TO COUNCIL OR CAN THAT JUST GO THROUGH AS A US?
>> I TYPICALLY SEE THAT DONE BY COUNSEL IF THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO FREEZE THESE POSITIONS.
YOU NORMALLY GO IN AND FREEZE OPEN POSITIONS BECAUSE YOU NEED TO CORRECT SOMETHING IN THE BUDGET IN THE MIDDLE OF THE YEAR.
THAT'S HOW MOST OTHER CITIES DO IT.
THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION, YOUR EMPLOYEES HERE ARE AT WILL, SO THEY CAN BE TERMINATED AT ANY TIME.
THE REAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PROVISION IS THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE LAID OFF DUE TO BUDGETARY REASONS OR FINANCIAL SHORTFALLS ARE NOT THAT DECISION IS NOT SUBJECT TO AN APPEAL WHERE OTHER DECISIONS ARE.
THAT'S THE REAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION.
>> I WOULD AGREE TO GET RID OF WHERE COUNSEL AND THEN.
>> KATHERINE, WHAT WOULD THE NEW SENTENCE OR PARAGRAPH IN THE SITUATION READ?
>> AN EMPLOYEE MAY HAVE HIS OR HER EMPLOYMENT TERMINATED DUE TO THE ELIMINATION
[00:50:03]
OF A POSITION OR INSUFFICIENT AVAILABLE FUNDING.>> BECAUSE IF COUNSEL APPROVED THE POSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE, COUNSEL OUGHT TO BE INVOLVED IN THE OTHER SIDE OF IT.
DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU? SECTION 2.12 SUGGEST.
>> I THINK THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE INSTANCES WHERE IT SAYS THE CITY, AND WE SHOULD BE MORE SPECIFIC OF THE MEANING OF THE CITY IN THIS CASE.
WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THAT ACROSS THE DOCUMENT, SO IT'LL BE ADDRESSED.
>> KATHERINE THIS IS REALLY A LEGAL ISSUE OF WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO.
ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THIS, OR WOULD YOU LIKE SOME CHANGE IN THE LANGUAGE?
>> I THINK THIS GIVES THE AUTHORITY THAT YOU NEED, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S GOING TO UNDERTAKE TO ENGAGE IN DOING SEARCHES WITHOUT PROBABLY REACHING OUT TO THE ATTORNEY.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IN THE SECOND SENTENCE WHERE IT SAYS, ALL SEARCHES MUST BE AUTHORIZED.
I THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY NEEDS TO WEIGH IN ON THAT UNLESS IT'S SOME EMERGENCY SITUATION.
BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT THE ATTORNEY FEELS THAT THE SEARCH IS JUSTIFIED.
>> YOU'D SAY AUTHORIZED WITH US INDUCTED UNDER THE DIRECT.
>> OR IF WE WANTED TO BE JUST SUPER DUPER CAREFUL, WE COULD ALWAYS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE WHO I THINK KNOWS ABOUT SEARCHERS AND MAY BE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN ANY CITY ADMINISTRATOR THAT WE MAY HAVE.
LIKE I SAID, I'M TRYING TO BE REAL CAREFUL HERE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY OF US JUST GO MAKE A BIG BOO BOO.
GETS THE CITY SUED FROM ONE END TO THE OTHER, WHICH PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAPPEN, BUT.
>> IT PROBABLY BE GOOD TO ADD IN THERE TO ALSO BY TWO OR MORE EMPLOYEES.
THEREFORE, YOU GET THE WITNESS FACTOR.
>> TWO EMPLOYEES IN ADDITION TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR?
>> NO, NOT FOUR, JUST SAYING THAT WE DEFINITELY HAVE AT LEAST TWO EMPLOYEES, SO NO EMPLOYEE GOES AND DOES IT ON THEIR OWN OR A SUPERVISOR DOES IT ON THEIR OWN SPECIFICALLY.
LIKE, IF WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THE POLICE CHIEF DO IT, HE WOULD HAVE SOMEONE WITH HIM.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ACTUALLY CONDUCTING THE SEARCH?
>> UP HERE WHERE IT SAYS, IF REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS, AT THAT POINT, IS WHEN TO ME, IT WOULD GO TO THE ATTORNEY AND OR THE POLICE CHIEF TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE THINK IS REASONABLE THEY AGREE WITH.
>> CHIEF PRICE, YOU'RE AN EXPERT ON THIS. HOW WOULD YOU WORD IT? WITH TWO OR MORE EMPLOYEES IN LEGALS INVOLVEMENT?
[00:55:43]
IT'D BE THE CITY MAY CONDUCT SEARCHES WITH TWO OR MORE EMPLOYEES AND LEGALS INVOLVEMENT IN THE FIRST SENTENCE, MAYBE, KATHERINE, YOUR CALL FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE?>> I HAVE IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH IS ALL SEARCHES MUST BE AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CONDUCTED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR, EMPLOYEES WHO REFUSED TO COOPERATE.
THERE'S JUST AN ADDITIONAL SENTENCE AT THE END OF THAT THAT SAYS ANY SEARCH SHOULD BE CONDUCTED BY TWO OR MORE EMPLOYEES.
>> I'M GOOD WITH THAT IF EVERYBODY ELSE LIKES IT.
>> WE'RE PROBABLY WORRYING AN AWFUL LOT OVER SOMETHING THAT MAY NEVER HAPPEN.
BUT I WOULD RATHER DO IT THAT WAY. THANK YOU.
WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO FINISH 2.13 IN FOUR MINUTES.
ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ON TELEPHONE CONTACT?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL AND SERVICE PERSONNEL.
ONE, TO ME, EVERYONE IS PERFORMING HER SERVICE.
SERVICE PERSONNEL TO ME IS I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
AS FAR AS SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY LOW.
THEN YOU'RE SAYING, WELL, IT'S A SUPERVISOR, IF THAT SUPERVISOR HAS A DEPARTMENT HEAD, THEN THEY BOTH ARE SUPPOSED TO BE, PROVIDING IT.
TO ME, IT'S LIKE A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND EMERGENCY PERSONNEL OR SOMETHING.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WORDING WE WOULD USE, BUT I'M NOT HAPPY WITH THE CURRENT WORDING OUT THERE.
>> I WAS THINKING MAYBE IT SHOULD JUST SAY ALL EMPLOYEES MUST HAVE A TELEPHONE NUMBER.
>> I AGREE. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.
>> WHY WOULDN'T WE JUST HAVE ALL EMPLOYEES.
HAVE TO GIVE US A PHONE NUMBER TO CONTACT THEM.
>> THE QUESTION THEN IS, IS THERE SOMETHING THAT THE PERSON DOESN'T ANSWER THE PHONE? IF YOU SAY YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PHONE NUMBER, ANYONE CAN GIVE YOU A, HERE'S MY PHONE NUMBER, THAT'S IN THEIR PERSONNEL RECORDS.
QUESTION IS, DO THEY HAVE TO ANSWER THE PHONE? IF THEY DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THE PHONE, THEN THEY ALREADY HAVE THE NUMBER.
THIS TO ME IS THE QUESTION OF WHO NEEDS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE THE PHONE AND THEY'RE GOING TO ANSWER THE PHONE.
>> I THINK THAT POLICE AND FIRE PROBABLY HAVE THE REQUIREMENT TO ANSWER THEIR PHONE.
THEN I'M GUESSING THAT LEAVES PUBLIC WORKS.
DO YOU ALL HAVE THE SAME POLICY?
>> NO OFFICIAL POLICY BUT NO ANSWER IN THIS CASE.
>> WE DID HAVE AN EMPLOYEE AT ONE POINT IN TIME THAT MISSED WITHOUT CALLING TWO OR THREE DAYS IN A ROW.
WHEN WE WENT TO CALL HER TO FIND OUT, ARE YOU QUITTING? YOU SAY WHAT'S GOING ON? WE DIDN'T HAVE A GOOD PHONE NUMBER.
THAT WAS A LITTLE PROBLEMATIC.
BUT THAT'S THE ONLY INSTANCE I CAN THINK OF WHERE THAT HAS COME UP.
I THINK ONE OF OUR POLICE OFFICERS WENT UP AND CHECKED ON THE SITUATION.
>> I ASK, IS THERE A DISCIPLINARY ACTION IF YOU DON'T ANSWER YOUR PHONE?
>> I THINK IT'S ONLY TRUE FOR THOSE SPECIFIC EMPLOYEES.
I ASSUME IF THEY CANNOT ANSWER THE PHONE IMMEDIATELY, DO YOU HAVE A SET PERIOD OF TIME THAT THEY HAVE TO CALL BACK IN, LIKE, 10 MINUTES OR SOMETHING? IS THAT YOURS? MY POLICY. WE DON'T HAVE POLICY TYPICALLY THE GUY WILL SAY [INAUDIBLE]
>> I THINK THE DISTINCTION THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IS WE WANT NUMBERS FOR ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES, BUT WE HAVE DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS FOR ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL.
[01:00:01]
>> RIGHT. TO ME, PUBLIC WORKS, POLICE, FIRE, ARE DIFFERENT THAN ADMINISTRATIVE.
IF I'M GOING TO CALL ANYBODY WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, DO THEY HAVE TO HAVE THEIR PHONE AND IS THEIR DISCIPLINARY ACTION IF THEY DON'T ANSWER THE PHONE?
>> HOW ABOUT ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL ARE REQUIRED TO ANSWER THEIR PHONE OR RETURN CALLS TO SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL WITHIN 10 MINUTES?
>> ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL ARE REQUIRED TO ANSWER THEIR PHONE OR RETURN CALLS TO SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL WITHIN 10 MINUTES.
>> I GUESS ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL DEFINED AS 10 MINUTES SHORT.
>> WE COULD DEFINE IT IN THE POLICY OR WE JUST PUT IT IN THE JOB DESCRIPTION TO SAY, THIS IS AN ESSENTIAL POSITION.
EITHER WAY, THE CITY CHOOSES TO IT.
>> DOES Y'ALL WANT TO GIVE THEM MORE THAN 10 MINUTES? GRANT WHAT'S MORE THAN 10 MINUTES.
>> BUT I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT, IF SOMEBODY'S IN CHURCH, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PROBABLY JUMP UP AND RUN OUT THE DOOR AND MAKE A PHONE CALL RIGHT BACK, IN 10 MINUTES OR SOMETHING, OR IF THEY'RE AT A USE SPORTING EVENT OR SOMETHING, AND THEY'RE USING THEIR PHONE VIDEO OR SOMETHING DOCTOR'S OFFICE OR SOMETHING.
I THINK SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE 10 MINUTES MIGHT BE A BIT SHORT.
>> IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.
>> EVERYBODY ELSE HAS A POLICY.
>> OF COURSE, WE COULD ALWAYS SAY, EXCEPT FOR THOSE EMPLOYEES, ALL OTHERS HAVE AN HOUR, BUT THEY HAVE THEIR RULES, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BY THE RULES OF THEIR DEPARTMENT, SET FORTH BY THEIR DEPARTMENT HEAD.
>> I THINK I WAS OKAY WITH THE ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL.
I'M ADJOURNING THE WORKSHOP AND CALLING TO
[CALL TO ORDER]
ORDER THE PARKER CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 25TH, 2025, AT 6:00 P.M.THE FIRST THING I NEED TO DO IS ADMINISTER THE OATH OF OFFICE TO TERRY LYNCH.
[2. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE TO NEWLY APPOINTED OFFICIAL]
I WILL ASK THAT YOU WE CAN VOTE.>> I TERRY LYNCH, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I HAVE NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, PAID, OFFERED, PROMISED TO PAY, CONTRIBUTED OR PROMISED TO CONTRIBUTE ANY MONEY OR THING OF VALUE OR PROMISED ANY PUBLIC OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT FOR THE GIVING OR WITHHOLDING OF A VOTE AT THE ELECTION AT WHICH I WAS ELECTED FOR AS A REWARD TO SECURE AN APPOINTMENT OR CONFIRMATION, WHICHEVER THE CASE MAY BE, SO HELP ME GOD.
>> THE OTHER IS A RESIGNATION FROM CDI.
LET ME GET ONE OTHER DOCUMENT HERE.
>> I, TERRY LYNCH, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF PARKER, TEXAS, AND WILL TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY TO PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE, SO HELP ME GOD.
>> WELCOME BACK TO THE COUNCIL.
AT THIS TIME, WE WILL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
[EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 1 of 2)]
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED IN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.074 PERSONNEL TO DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT, EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT, DUTIES OR DISCIPLINE, OR DISMISSAL OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE.GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071, CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY CONCERNING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION.
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.072,
[01:05:03]
CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY ON A MATTER IN WHICH THE DUTY OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY UNDER THE TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE STATE BAR, TEXAS, CLEARLY CONFLICTS WITH THIS CHAPTER, OPEN MEETINGS ACT.AT THIS TIME, WE ARE IN RECESS AT 6:05 PM.
I HEREBY CALL THE FEBRUARY 25TH,
[RECONVENE SPECIAL MEETING (Part 1 of 2)]
2025 CITY COUNCIL MEETING BACK INTO SESSION FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION.COUNCIL, I WILL ASK YOU, IS THERE ANY ACTION OR DELIBERATION FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSION?
>> THANK YOU. MOVING RIGHT ALONG.
I WILL ASK MR. BARN IF HE WILL LEAD US IN THE AMERICAN PLEDGE AND MS. MODRONO, IF YOU WOULD LEAD US IN THE TEXAS. [BACKGROUND]
>> THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.
IT IS GREAT TO SEE A FULL ROOM.
NEXT, I WILL CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
I HAVE A BUNCH OF CARDS HERE IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER.I WILL START THE FIRST CARD I HAVE IS BILLY BARN.
>> BILLY BARN 6707, OVERBROOK.
I WANT TO SAY THAT MY COMMENTS TONIGHT ARE ON BEHALF OF THE WHOLE BROOKS FARM ESTATES HOA BOARD.
WE ARE DIRECTLY ACROSS MCCRARY ROAD FROM WHERE THE BUCKINGHAM ESTATES DEVELOPMENT WILL BE.
OUR BOARD IS FIRMLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSAL TO HAVE IT ANNEXED WITH ONE ACRE LOTS.
WE FEEL LIKE THAT IS THE BEST CASE SCENARIO.
WE THINK THE WORST THING TO DO WOULD BE TO TURN DOWN THIS PROPOSAL, AND THEN WE WOULD END UP WITH STORAGE UNITS OR TRUCK PARKING OR MORE FIREWORK STANDS OR WHO KNOWS? THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
IF YOU'D COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND TALK TO US.
EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS I DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK.
>> THAT'S FINE. I'M MICHAEL WHITE WITH EMILY WHITE AT 4301, DOVER DRIVE.
WE ARE FAIRLY NEW TO PARKER AS OF MAY, BUT WE'VE BEEN COMING TO THESE SINCE WE'VE BEEN BUILDING THE HOUSE OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS.
WE HAVE SPENT NEARLY THREE MILLION DOLLARS ON OUR HOME, AND WE'RE DRIVING OVER POTHOLES EVERY SINGLE DAY.
IT'S ABSURD THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH THAT IN THE ENVIRONMENT THAT WE ARE IN TODAY.
I KNOW THIS IS A BIG DISCUSSION TONIGHT, SO I'M SURE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE THE SAME CONVERSATION, BUT WE'VE GOT TO HAVE A SOLUTION.
IT'S KILLING OUR PROPERTY VALUES.
IT'S KILLING PEOPLE WANTING TO COME VISIT US AND WE HAVE WAY TOO MUCH MONEY IN THIS TOWN WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO STILL HAVE THIS AS A PROBLEM.
>> EMILY WHITE 4301, DOVER DRIVE. WHAT? I'M SHORT.
[LAUGHTER] LEWIS LANE, IT'S DANGEROUS.
WE'RE NOT EVEN DRIVING ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ROAD AT TIMES, WE'RE DRIVING ON THE OTHER SIDE TO AVOID TRAFFIC.
THE POTHOLES CONTINUE TO FAIL.
THANK YOU FOR REPAIRING THEM, BUT THEY'RE ALREADY STARTING TO FAIL.
IT'S NOT EVEN THAT IT'S AN EYESORE AND THAT IT DOES BRING PROPERTY VALUES DOWN, BUT IT'S DANGEROUS.
YOU'RE HAVING TO DRIVE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE ROADS.
SCHOOL BUSES HAVE YOUR CHILDREN IN THEM, AND I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S SAFE, AND I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED.
PLEASE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.
[01:10:10]
> CINDY MEYER 6618 OF STATUS DRIVE.I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENT.
I WANT TO START OUT BY SAYING I'M NOT AGAINST IT.
HOWEVER, I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS.
WHEN I WAS ON COUNCIL, I HEADED UP THE DRAINAGE COMMITTEE.
ONE OF THE THINGS I DID DO IS I WENT TO EVERY HOUSE IN MOSS RIDGE AND TALKED TO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE HOME, AND IF THEY WEREN'T HOME, I LEFT THEM A LITTLE MAP OF THEIR PROPERTY AND ASKED THEM TO INDICATE WHERE THE WATER FLOWS ONTO THEIR PROPERTY AND NOW, BECAUSE WE KNOW MOSS RIDGE IS ONE OF THE TWO SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE SEVERE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS. WELL, SOME OF THE HOMES ARE ADJACENT TO THE FARM FIELD WHERE THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE.
I WAS INFORMED BY SOME OF THOSE HOMEOWNERS THAT BACK UP TO THIS FARM FIELD, THAT THE WATER COMES OFF THE FIELD, THAT THE ELEVATION OF THE FARM FIELD, AND I DID LOOK AT DOUBLE CHECK THIS IS SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN THE ELEVATION OF MOSS RIDGE, SO THE WATER FLOWS DOWNHILL, OF COURSE.
THEY CAN'T HANDLE OR THEY'RE HAVING TROUBLE HANDLING THE VOLUME OF WATER COMING INTO THEIR SUBDIVISION.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT WITH ONE ACRE LOTS IN THIS AREA, ACCORDING TO OUR GUIDELINES, 20% OF THE PROPERTY IS IN PERVIOUS SURFACE.
BUT ACTUALLY IN REALITY, IT'S MUCH MORE THAN THAT.
WHAT THEY DON'T INCLUDE IN THAT ARE DRIVEWAYS, SIDEWALKS, PATIOS, POOLS, POOL DECKS, AND OTHER CONCRETE STRUCTURES THAT WOULD BE IN THEIR BACK YARD.
WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO REALITY, IT'S PROBABLY TWICE THE 20%.
IT'S PROBABLY 40 OR 50% THAT'S IMPERVIOUS.
WITH ONE ACRE LOTS, THAT INCREASES THE WATER RUNNING OFF THE PROPERTY, AND SINCE THEY'RE HIGHER THAN MOSS RIDGE, PART OF IT WOULD RUN INTO MOSS RIDGE, A SUBDIVISION THAT CAN'T HANDLE ANY MORE WATER.
ALSO, I WAS INFORMED BY THE RESIDENTS THERE THAT BACK UP TO MCCRARY ROAD AND THIS IS IN SEVERE CASES, WHICH HAPPENS EVERY FEW YEARS, BUT THEY'RE GETTING WATER OFF OF MCCRARY BECAUSE THE STORM SEWERS ARE TOO SMALL AND THERE'S NOT ENOUGH OF THEM.
IT'S ACTUALLY BACKING INTO MOSS RIDGE.
THE CITY THEY HAVE NOT ADDRESSED THE TWO SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE SEVERE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS, AND THAT WOULD BE MOSS RIDGE AND POCO STATUS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE BUDGET NUMBERS AREN'T THERE, BUT TO BUILD A SUBDIVISION AND INCREASE THE VOLUME OF WATER COMING INTO MOSS RIDGE IS REALLY DETRIMENTAL TO MOSS RIDGE, BUT TO THE CITY IN GENERAL.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE CITY REQUIRES THE DEVELOPER TO PRESENT A MAP OF HOW THE WATER IS GOING TO FLOW, HOW THEY EXPECT TO GET THE WATER OUT OF THAT PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WITHOUT IMPACTING THE NEIGHBORING SUBDIVISION OF MOSS RIDGE. THANK YOU.
>> SUSAN MODRONO, I LIVE AT 4406 DOVER DRIVE.
I AM ALSO HERE ABOUT LEWIS LANE.
I DO REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE CITY DID TAKE SOME STEPS TO FILL THE HOT POTHOLES BECAUSE QUITE HONESTLY, IT WASN'T JUST HAZARDOUS.
I DRIVE THAT ROAD EVERY MORNING AT 7:00 AM.
THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT GOES ACROSS THERE, I'VE WATCHED A SCHOOL BUS ALMOST GET HEAD ON HIT BY SOMEBODY DODGING POTHOLES.
IT'S JUST FLAT OUT, NOT SAFE, AND I DO THINK THAT THE CITY HAS TO TAKE ACTION AHEAD OF AN INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH LUCAS,
[01:15:05]
WHICH I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE WORKING ON.WE APPRECIATE THE COMPLICITY OR THE COMPLICATEDNESS OF THE ROAD AND THE DIFFERENT OWNERSHIPS, BUT YOU GOT TO SOLVE THAT, AND YOU GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE ROAD BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET KILLED ON THIS ROAD, AND PARKER IS GOING TO GET HELD ACCOUNTABLE RIGHT ALONG WITH LUCAS BECAUSE YOU KNOW ABOUT IT.
THE SECOND REASON THAT I WANTED TO SPEAK TONIGHT IS THAT I UNDERSTAND THE COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING HAVING A NEW CITY MANAGER REPORT TO COUNCIL AND NOT TO THE MAYOR.
QUITE FRANKLY, I'VE WATCHED 80 HOURS OF COUNCIL MEETINGS, AND THERE'S ZERO CHANCE THAT I WOULD WORK FOR THE COUNCIL COLLECTIVELY OR INDIVIDUALLY.
I WOULD SAY THAT IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE WAY THE CITY IS STRUCTURED, PUT IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE ELECTION AND LET THE PEOPLE SAY THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT VERSUS JUST DECIDING TO CHANGE IT ON YOUR OWN.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? IN YOUR PACKET, COUNCIL, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A STATEMENT THAT WILL BE ATTACHED TO THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING.
I BELIEVE ONE IS FROM RICHARD LAVENDER AND STEVE LOY.
BOTH OF THOSE STATEMENTS WILL BE ATTACHED TO THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING AND AVAILABLE TO ANY AND ALL TO READ AT THE TIME.
BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE ALL COUNCIL DID GET A COPY.
COUNCIL MEMBER PILGRIM, DID YOU GET A COPY, COUNCIL MEMBER PRO TEM?
NEXT, WE WILL GO TO ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST.
[ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST]
I'LL NOTE THAT THE NOISE COMMITTEE IS SCHEDULED TO MEET ON FEBRUARY 5TH AT 2:00 PM IN THIS ROOM.[BACKGROUND] I'M SORRY. MARCH 5TH.
I HAVEN'T CAUGHT UP WITH THE MONTHS MOVING AS FAST AS THEY ARE.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION IS MEETING MARCH 12TH AT 5:00 PM IN THIS ROOM.
ON APRIL 3RD, THAT IS THE LAST DAY TO REGISTER TO VOTE IN OUR MUNICIPAL ELECTION.
IF YOU ARE NEW TO PARKER, YOU MAY STILL BE REGISTERED TO VOTE IN THE COMMUNITY FROM WHICH YOU MOVED.
PLEASE CHANGE YOUR VOTER REGISTRATION AND VOTE IN OUR MUNICIPAL ELECTION.
WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOU AND WE REALLY WANT YOU TO BE INVOLVED IN OUR GOVERNANCE.
PLEASE GO GET REGISTERED TO VOTE IF YOU'RE NOT.
CANDIDATES NIGHT IS SCHEDULED TO BE APRIL 17TH AT 7:00 PM AT VICTORY CHURCH, WHICH IS DOWN THE STREET A LITTLE BIT AND ON THE NORTH SIDE.
ALL THE CANDIDATES FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WILL BE THERE AND WE'LL BE ANSWERING QUESTIONS REGARDING THEIR CANDIDACY FOR CITY COUNCIL.
THERE ARE THREE SEATS UP FOR ELECTION, AND I BELIEVE THERE ARE SIX CANDIDATES. GOOD LUCK TO ALL.
NEXT, WE HAVE NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION DRUG TAKE BACK DAY, WHICH IS SATURDAY, APRIL 26TH, FROM 10:00 AM - 2:00 PM.
I'LL ASK CHIEF WILL THERE BE SHARPIES OR NEEDLES TAKEN IN THIS DRUG TAKE BACK?
>> THANK YOU. [LAUGHTER] THAT'S OKAY.
IT'S JUST A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE GETTING BIG COLLECTION OF NEEDLES.
>> THANK YOU. OUR GENERAL ELECTION IS SATURDAY MAY 3RD, AND THAT FOLLOWS THE EARLY VOTING DAYS.
EARLY VOTING WILL START APRIL 22ND AND END ON APRIL 29TH, AND LIKE I SAID, MAY 3RD IS ELECTION DAY.
THAT'S ALL THE ITEMS OF INTEREST.
NOW WE WILL MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
THERE ARE TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.THE FIRST ITEM IS APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 4TH, 2025, WHICH WAS A JOINT MEETING BETWEEN CITY COUNCIL AND PARKS PLANNING AND ZONING ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE SECOND ISSUE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA IS CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-835, AUTHORIZING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION WITH THE ATMOS CITY STEERING COMMITTEES,
[01:20:01]
AND AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS PER CAPITA TO THE ATMOS CITY'S STEERING COMMITTEE TO FUND REGULATORY AND RELATED ACTIVITIES TO THE ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION.COUNCIL, FIRST, I WILL ASK IF THERE ANYONE THAT WANTS EITHER ONE OF THOSE PULLED OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA?
>> MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER TERRY LYNCH AND A SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER RANDY KERCHO TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANY OPPOSED? NO HEARING ANY OR SEEING ANY? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
NEXT, WE HAVE OUR INDIVIDUAL ITEM CONSIDERATIONS.
[6. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2025-833 APPOINTING THE 2024-2025 MAYOR PRO TEM. [REMAINDER OF MAYOR PRO TEM REED’S TERM - RES. NO. 2024-792]]
THE FIRST IS ITEM NUMBER 6, CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-833, APPOINTING THE 24 25 MAYOR PRO TEM.THIS PERSON WILL BE SERVING THE REMAINDER OF JIM REED'S TERM AS MR. REED HAS RESIGNED AND LEFT US.
ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR MAYOR PRO TEM?
>> MADAM MAYOR. I NOMINATE TODD BECK FOR MAYOR PRO TEM.
>> MR. BECK, ARE YOU GOING TO BE AVAILABLE?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER NOE AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER LYNCH TO PROPOSE THAT TODD BECK SERVE AS MAYOR PRO TEM.
>> I'D LIKE TO ASK A FEW QUESTIONS.
SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE COMMENTED, AND I'VE NOTICED THAT YOU HAVE MISSED SEVERAL MEETINGS.
COULD YOU EXPLAIN YOUR ABSENCE DURING THE EARLIER?
>> YEAH. THOSE TWO SITUATIONS I HAD COVID, SO I WAS ACTUALLY IN BED FOR THREE WEEKS.
ONCE I CAME BACK FROM THAT, I HAD FALLEN DOWN THE STAIRS, AND I WAS ACTUALLY IN BED FOR ANOTHER FOUR WEEKS FROM BRUISES AND LACERATIONS ON THAT, BUT I AM HEALED, AND MY 40 TIME IS NOT AS GOOD AS THE NFL, BUT WE'RE BACK.
>> AS A FOLLOW UP, I KNOW THIS IS A SHORT TERM, BUT IT'S A CRITICAL TERM OR A PIECE OF TIME.
AS THE MAYOR ASKED, ARE YOU COMMITTED TO BEING AVAILABLE?
>> YEAH. ABSOLUTELY. WE JUST FINISHED THE REMODEL FROM THE WATER DAMAGE TO MOVE BACK IN THE HOUSE.
I'M EIGHT MINUTES AWAY VERSUS 45, SO IT'S A LOT EASIER.
>> WE'RE GLAD YOU'RE BACK IN PARKER.
>> DO YOU REALIZE A LOT OF THE MEETINGS ARE DURING THE DAYTIME?
>> I AM AWAKE DURING THE DAY AND READY TO DO IT.
>> I'LL JUST ASK ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THAT, TODD.
I KNOW SOME OF THE TIME YOU'VE MISSED HAVE BEEN BECAUSE OF BUSINESS TRAVEL.
DO YOU FORESEE ANY BUSINESS TRAVEL THAT WOULD DISRUPT YOU FROM BEING ABLE TO ATTEND THE REST OF THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS AND SOME SPECIAL MEETINGS?
>> YEAH. NO. I ONLY TRAVELED FOUR TIMES LAST YEAR FROM BUSINESS TRAVEL BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE FLY TO ME.
THE ONLY TRAVEL I'VE HAD THIS YEAR WAS TWICE FOR MINISTRY EVENTS AND A SPEAKING EVENT AT A MINISTRY.
BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION SPECIFICALLY, I HAVE NO MORE TRAVEL PLANS IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS PLUS? DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
>> YOU SAID YOU HAVE NO TRAVEL PLANS IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS.
>> I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK I HAVE NO PLANE TICKETS BOUGHT AND NOTHING'S ON MY SCHEDULE TO TRAVEL.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER RANDY KERCHO?
>> IS IT POSSIBLE TO THROW IN ADDITIONAL NOMINATIONS OR NEED TO VOTE ON THIS ONE FIRST?
>> AT THIS POINT IN TIME, IT IS A MOTION.
AS SOON AS THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, THEN I WILL CALL FOR THE VOTE.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> [BACKGROUND] WELL, IT'S STYLED AS A MOTION INSTEAD OF NOMINATIONS BEING TAKEN.
[01:25:03]
TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE CITY OF PARKER HASN'T SPECIFICALLY ADOPTED ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, SO WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING SPECIFIC TO LOOK TO FOR THAT.>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF TODD BECK SERVING AS MAYOR PRO TEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
ALL THOSE AGAINST, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
BUDDY, ARE YOU ABSTAINING? I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T SEE YOU OVER THERE.
THEN MOTION CARRIES FOUR TO ONE.
I WILL GET WITH YOU ON YOUR DUTIES.
[7. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2025-834 ON UPDATING THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE.]
CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-834 ON UPDATING THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE.COUNCIL MAYOR PRO TEM JIM REED DID SERVE ON THE FINANCIAL COMMITTEE OR INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, AND WE WILL NEED TO REPLACE HIM ON THAT COMMITTEE.
I WOULD LIKE PEOPLE TO KNOW THAT MAY BE INTERESTED IN THIS POSITION, IF YOU DO GET NOMINATED AND SUCCESSFULLY APPOINTED TO IT, YOU DO HAVE TO TAKE THE PUBLIC FINANCE PFIA.
TERRY, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT STANDS FOR?
>> PUBLIC FUNDS INVESTMENT ACT.
>> PUBLIC FUNDS INVESTMENT ACT.
IT'S A 10 HOUR COURSE THAT YOU MUST TAKE.
YOU CAN TAKE IT ONLINE OR YOU CAN TAKE IT IN PERSON.
ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR THAT?
>> PRIOR TO NOMINATIONS, I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION.
TERRY WHEN YOU TOOK THAT CLASSES, ARE YOU UP TO HAVE TO REDO IT AGAIN OR IS IT STILL WITHIN YOUR TIME FRAME?
>> I'VE PASSED THE TWO YEARS, SO I WOULD HAVE TO TAKE IT. [LAUGHTER]
>> I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE BUDDY PILGRIM TO THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE.
>>WE HAVE A NOMINATION BY COUNCIL MEMBER LYNCH TO NOMINATE BUDDY PILGRIM TO THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MEETING, AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RANDY KERCHO.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF NOMINATING BUDDY PILGRIM TO SERVE ON THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
YOU GET TO VOTE. [LAUGHTER] WELL, YOU CAN ABSTAIN IF YOU WANT.
ANY OPPOSED? COUNCIL MEMBER PILGRIM, YOU WILL SERVE ON THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE.
I WILL GET WITH YOU AND GO OVER ALL THE DETAILS AS WE'LL PROBABLY GRANT ON THAT BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE TO SIGN SOME CARDS BECAUSE YOU WILL BE SIGNING CHECKS FOR THE CITY AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. THANK YOU ALL.
>> NEXT, WE WILL GO TO ITEM NUMBER 8,
[8. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2025-831 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PARKER AND BUCKINGHAM LOT VENTURE, LTD., AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT AND TAKE ALL ACTION NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THIS RESOLUTION; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BUCKINGHAM ESTATES).]
CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2025-831, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PARKER AND BUCKINGHAM LOT VENTURE, LTD, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT AND TAKE ALL ACTION NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THIS RESOLUTION, PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.I WILL ASK IS BUCKINGHAM ARE YOU HERE? THERE YOU ARE. DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION?
I THINK I DO. I GET TO PUSH THE BUTTON AND POPS UP? THERE IT IS. MUCH QUICKER THAN LAST TIME.
I'M JOHN ARNOLD WITH SKORBURG COMPANY, 8214, WESTCHESTER SUITE 900, DALLAS, TEXAS 75225.
THE PRESENTATION IS BASICALLY THE SAME PRESENTATION.
[01:30:01]
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO MAKE THIS ON THE FULL SCREEN.THAT'S GOOD. DOES EVERYBODY SEE IT? [BACKGROUND] I PICKED THE WRONG ONE.
SAME PRESENTATION AS LAST TIME.
I THINK EVERYBODY WAS HERE SO I'M NOT GOING TO WASTE EVERYBODY'S TIME AGAIN WITH WHO WE ARE OUR PROJECTS.
I'LL JUST RUN THROUGH THEM REAL QUICK.
IF YOU'LL WANT TO REFRESHER, SKORBURG COMPANY, SINGLE FAMILY, LOT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, DFW.
WE'VE BEEN IN PARKER AND BEEN DFW FOR OVER 40 YEARS.
THIS WAS A SLIDE I SHOWED LAST TIME OF ALL THE PROJECTS WE'VE DONE IN PARKER, LUCAS FAIRVIEW.
I'LL JUST RUN THROUGH THESE REALLY QUICKLY.
BUT THE MAIN REASON I'M GOING THROUGH THIS IS LAST TIME WHEN I WAS HERE, SOME QUESTIONS WERE RAISED ABOUT DRAINAGE.
WE GOT WITH OUR ENGINEER AND DID A PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY.
WE LOOKED AT THE GAS TOPO AND DID SEE THAT PART OF THAT PROPERTY DOES FLOW TO THE SOUTH AND MOST OF IT FLOWS TO THE NORTH.
WE PUT A PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE PLAN TOGETHER, SEE IF I CAN JUST GO TO THAT.
>> IS THIS THE SAME AS YOU SHOWED US LAST TIME?
>> IT'S JUST THE SAME I JUST ADD ADDED IN TWO SLIDES ON DRAINAGE.
>> WHAT SPECIFICALLY IS THE PROTOCOL?
>> WHEN HE IS MAKING HIS PRESENTATION, HE MAKES HIS PRESENTATION. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> AGAIN, IF I'LL RUN THROUGH IT REAL QUICK IF YOU WANT, THESE WERE JUST PROJECTS WE DID, IN PARKER FAIRVIEW, I'LL GO A LITTLE SLOWER SO YOU CAN SEE THEM AGAIN.
THESE ARE TWO PROJECTS WE'RE DOING ACRE LOTS IN IN SUNNYVALE, I AND CLINTON CHISHOLM WITH WINDSOR, TOOL BROTHERS, DREES, ALL VERY LOCAL BUILDERS TO PARKER.
OUR DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AS I SAID, IT'S 39 LOTS.
THEY'RE ONE ACRE, ALL OF THEM ARE A MINIMUM ONE ACRE.
QUITE A FEW OF THEM ARE GREATER THAN ONE ACRE.
MINIMUM HOME SIZE 3,000 SQUARE FOOT, HOA MAINTAINED PERIMETER, LANDSCAPE FENCING, AND COMMON AREA OF DRAINAGE.
OUR HOME BUILDERS ARE GOING TO BE DREES AND HIGHLAND HOMES.
THEY'VE SIGNED UP WITH US AND THEY'RE PROJECTED HOME SQUARE FOOTAGE RANGE, 03,200-5,100 SQUARE FOOT, PROJECTED HOME PRICING STARTING AT $1.2 MILLION I'LL JUST TAKE YOU THROUGH.
WE SAW THESE LAST TIME, BUT THESE ELEVATIONS OF BOTH BUILDERS THAT POSSIBLY COULD BE USED.
WAIT, WHERE'S MY DRAINAGE SLIDE? OH, MY GOD, ARE YOU KIDDING ME? LET ME SEE IF IT'S ON THERE.
I WENT TO THE ONE FOR LAST TIME.
THESE WERE THE SLIDES I WAS LOOKING FOR.
GO TO PDF. WE COULDN'T MAKE IT EASY, COULD WE? THAT'S THE AGENDA. I DO HAVE TO GO TO POWERPOINT.
HE'LL SAW THE SLIDE THAT WAS THERE.
HOPEFULLY, IT'S ASKING ME TO SIGN IN OR CREATE ACCOUNT. HERE.
>> I BROUGHT THIS [INAUDIBLE].
>> [INAUDIBLE] IF NOT, I'M JUST GOING TO GO TO MY OTHER PRESENTATION AND I'LL SHOW YOU [INAUDIBLE] I'LL GO BACK TO MY OTHER PRESENTATION AND JUST SHOW YOU.
IT ISN'T FAIR. IT'S JUST THE AGENDA.
[01:35:04]
LET ME JUST GO BACK TO THIS.IF I CAN REMEMBER, THERE'S A BREAK CURRENTLY. CAN YOU'LL SEE THE MOUSE?
>> THERE'S BASICALLY A BREAK IN THE PROPERTY THAT COMES RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE HERE, AND THERE'S A HIGH POINT.
OUR PROPERTY IS HIGHER, AND MOST OF THIS WATER COMES DOWN ONTO THE SUBDIVISION TO THE SOUTH CURRENTLY.
OUR DRAINAGE PLAN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE, AND I HAD BEAUTIFUL PRETTY ARROWS ON IT, AND IT WAS GOING TO SHOW YOU EVERYTHING WAS GOING TO GO.
BUT EVERYTHING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE STREET HERE IS GOING TO GO UP TO THE NORTH, COME DOWN HERE AND THEN HIT.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE DETENTION POND BACK HERE.
WE'RE GOING TO STUDY THE CREEK.
THIS IS EXISTING VERSUS NON EXISTING.
WE'RE GOING TO PUT A DETENTION POND BACK HERE IF NEEDED.
WE'RE GOING TO STUDY THE CREEK, SEE HOW MUCH FLOWS IN THERE, SEE HOW MUCH FLOW WE'RE ADDING, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO ADD FLOW TO IT IF IT'S NOT ALLOWED.
WE'RE GOING TO PUT A DETENTION POND BACK HERE.
WE'RE GOING TO CATCH THE DRAINAGE THERE.
THESE LOTS CURRENTLY, I THINK THE NUMBERS, THERE'S I THINK ALMOST THREE ACRES GOING TO IT RIGHT NOW.
WE'RE NOW GOING TO BE TAKING LESS THAN TWO ACRES TO THE SOUTH, JUST THIS AREA.
THEN AS FAR AS CUBIC FEET PER SECOND, WE'RE DROPPING IT DOWN LIKE TEN OR 15%, I THINK OVERALL BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO CALCULATE IN, THE HOUSES ARE GOING TO BE THERE NOW, HOUSES WEREN'T THERE.
WE'RE DROPPING THE ACREAGE BY ALMOST HALF, BUT THE DRAINAGE THAT'S ACTUALLY GOING ON THE COMMUNITY TO THE SOUTH IS GOING TO DROP 10 OR 15%.
ONCE WE GET INTO THE FULL ENGINEERING PLANS, IF IT'S ACTUALLY POSSIBLE TO BRING MORE NORTH, SOME OF THESE OTHER LOTS NORTH AND GO INTO THIS BAR DITCH, WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT.
WE'RE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO KEEP, IT WILL BE BELOW WHAT'S GOING THERE NOW, BUT KEEP AS MINIMAL AS WE CAN GOING ONTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE SOUTH BECAUSE WE DO UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOME PROBLEMS TO THE SOUTH.
GARY'S TOLD US THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE BAR DITCHES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 30 YEARS OR SO.
THOSE HAVE BEEN FILLED IN SO THAT IT'S HARD TO KEEP, HOLD THE DRAINAGE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY SUPPOSED TO GO THERE AND THEN ELEVATION OF THE DRAINAGE, IT STARTS SLOWING DOWN.
TWO THINGS WE DO IS IN OUR HOA DOCKS AND THE BUILDER PACKAGES AND EVERYTHING THAT GOES TO THE HOMEOWNERS.
THERE'S GOING TO BE INFORMATION ON THERE THAT TELLS THEM THAT THEY ARE IN CHARGE OF MAINTAINING THEIR DRAINAGE SWELLS ON THE SIDE OF THE YARDS, ADJACENT TO THE ROAD AND ALL OF THAT.
HOA DOES HAVE THE RIGHT IF THEY NEED TO GO IN AND FIX THOSE DRAINAGE AREAS.
WHAT WE TYPICALLY DO IS WE PUT MONUMENTS ALONG EACH LOT CORNER IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE ELEVATION THAT THE SWELL IS SUPPOSED TO BE SO WE'RE NOT GOING OUT THERE AND GUESSING, DOES THIS FLOW ANYMORE.
EACH BUILDER HAS TO HIT THOSE MONUMENTS, THERE WILL BE CONCRETE PILLARS 2-3 FEET IN THE GROUND.
IF YOU GO OUT THERE AND THERE'S A DRAINAGE PROBLEM AND YOU DON'T SEE THAT MONUMENT OR THE GROUND RIGHT BESIDE THAT MONUMENT IS HIGHER THAN SUPPOSED TO BE, THEN YOU CAN TELL THAT PROBLEM IS IN THIS LOCATION.
IT'S REALLY HELPED US BE ABLE TO KEEP THAT SAME COUNTRY FIELD, BUT KEEP THE WATER FLOWING, AND EACH BUILDER AS THEY BUILD, HAVE TO HIT THOSE MONUMENTS, HAVE TO SEND IN TO US A SURVEY THAT SHOWS WHEN THEY GOT THERE, THIS IS HOW WE LEFT IT, THIS IS HOW YOU RECEIVED IT, AND THIS IS HOW YOU LEFT IT AND HAND IT OVER TO THE HOMEOWNER.
WE'VE BEEN DOING ONE ACRE LOTS, TWO ACRE LOTS.
WE'VE DONE THIS ON 110,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.
IF WE GET DOWN TO THE ELEVATION OF THIS IS NOT STEEP ENOUGH.
SOMETIMES WE'LL PUT FLUMES IN SECTIONS WHERE THAT'LL CONTINUE.
BUT OUR MAIN GOAL IS NOT TO LEAVE A PROBLEM FOR THE CITY.
WE'VE BEEN IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THOSE ARE PROBLEMS, AND WE DO NOT WANT TO BE PART OF THAT OR LEAVE A PROBLEM FOR THE CITY.
IF YOU'LL HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE PROJECT ITSELF, I'M HERE.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER BRANDT, DID YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS YOU WISH TO ASK?
>> YEAH. YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, AND AGAIN, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED HERE.
I'M ASSUMING THE GREEN SIDE IS A NORTH SIDE CREEK THAT'S VERY CLOSE TO PARKER, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YOU MADE THE COMMENT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO EVALUATE THE CREEK AT A FUTURE DATE AFTER WE "APPROVE" YOU TO DETERMINE IF THERE'S GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL RETENTION PUMP PLANS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
THEN YOU TALKED ABOUT YOU'LL EVALUATE IT AFTER FULL ENGINEERING PLANS, ETC.
>> WE DO PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING.
WE DO LIKE EXISTING VERSUS PROPOSED.
THEN WHEN EVERYTHING ACTUALLY GETS ON THE GROUND, THE GRADING PLAN GETS PUT IN,
[01:40:02]
VELOCITIES CHANGE OF THE WATER, SO THINGS CHANGE ON IT.THEN THE CREEK, SOMETIMES WE WON'T STUDY THE CREEK, WE'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE SURE WE PUT ATTENTION UPON IT.
DON'T PUT ANYTHING INTO IT AND INCREASE IT.
BUT A LOT OF TIMES WE'LL ACTUALLY STUDY THE CREEK AND LOOK AT THE WATER FLOW UPSTREAM, DOWNSTREAM.
BUT THAT ALL COMES DURING FULL ENGINEERING.
>> THEN YOU TALKED ABOUT ON THE SOUTH SIDE, I CAN'T SEE VERY GOOD.
I DON'T HAVE MY 32-YEAR-OLD EYES ANYMORE.
YOU TALKED ABOUT ON THOSE LOTS, THEY'RE GOING TO BE SMALLER, LARGER. WHAT DID YOU SAY?
>> NO. WHAT I WAS SAYING IS RIGHT NOW, AND IF I HAD MY MAP THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR, THIS WOULD BE MUCH EASIER.
>> UNDERSTOOD. I'LL GIVE YOU GRACE THERE.
>> ALONG HERE, CAN YOU SEE THE CURSOR? > YEAH.
>> ALONG HERE, THIS AREA THROUGH HERE, AND I'M GUESSING BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE THAT, BUT IT'S ABOUT THROUGH HERE.
ALL OF THIS CURRENTLY FLOWS TO THE SOUTH BECAUSE THERE'S A RIDGE TO THE MIL OF PROPERTY THAT DIAGONALLY COMES IN.
ALL THIS WATER FLOWS DOWN HERE.
>> WE'RE PAINFULLY AWARE OF THAT BECAUSE MOSS RIDGE IS ONE OF THE MOST FLOODED NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE PLANET HERE IN PARKER, AND I HAPPENED TO HAVE BOUGHT A LOT THERE IN '99 AND DIDN'T DO MY HOMEWORK, SO IT'S MY FAULT.
>> YES, SIR. IT'S TYPICALLY IN THAT SITUATION WHEN YOU HAVE WATER COMING ONTO YOU FROM AN OPPOSING NEIGHBOR, YOU'RE GOING TO CREATE A DRAINAGE SWELL BEHIND THE HOUSES BEFORE IT GETS TO YOU.
>> DEFINE A DRAINAGE SWELL. WHAT IS THAT?
>> YOU'RE EITHER GOING TO PUT A PIPE OR A DITCH OR SOMETHING.
TYPICALLY, IN FRONT OF YOUR STREET RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE A BAR DITCH.
>> BEHIND YOUR HOUSE, YOU'RE BASICALLY PUTTING ANOTHER BAR DITCH TO CAPTURE THAT WATER BEFORE IT COMES THROUGH YOUR LOT AND IT COMES AROUND.
TYPICALLY, THAT'S WHAT YOU DO IF WATER IS COMING ON YOU, BUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IN THIS SITUATION IS WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT AREA AND BRING IT DOWN.
I'M HAVING SO MANY PROBLEMS. EVERYONE, THING WANTS ME TO BUY A TRIAL.
I'M GOING TO TAKE IT DOWN TO ABOUT A LITTLE LESS THAN HALF OF THAT CURRENT AREA THAT IS FLOWING THAT WAY.
JUST THAT AREA, BASICALLY FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE BACK WILL BE FLOWING SOUTH INSTEAD OF THIS AREA.
IT'LL DECREASE THE FLOW THAT'S GOING THERE TODAY.
>> IT'S LIKE FORMER COUNCILMAN MEYER SAID, SHE'S TALKED TO ALL MY NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S A DISASTER.
IT WAS PLANTED IN 1980, AND THERE WAS A REALLY NICE DEVELOPER WITH A BEARD AND A NICE JACKET.
HE CAME IN AND PROMISED US ALL THIS STUFF AND LEFT US WITH NO CANOES.
I'M GOING TO THROW IN A NUMBER BECAUSE I DO A LITTLE BIT OF REAL ESTATE.
YOU'RE GOING TO ADD ABOUT 30% SOLID SURFACE THERE THAT'S NOT THERE, MAYBE 40.
I'M NOT AS SMART AS YOU THOUGH, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE WHOLE DYNAMICS OF THAT.
HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT OR ARE YOU PLANNING ON PUTTING SAY A FIVE OR SIX FOOT BERM ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE SOUTH SIDE THAT'S CLAY BASED IN THE REAL THING VERSUS JUST SOME HUMPED UP DIRT?
>> THEN YOU'RE GOING TO BLOCK ALL THAT WATER.
IT'S JUST SITTING IN THOSE PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS.
>> YEAH. IT'S GOING TO BLOCK IT.
IT'S NOT GOING TO FLOW ANYWHERE.
>> IF YOU DO IT WITH THE RIGHT GRADE, YOU COULD RUN IT OFF ON THE BACKSIDE TO THE EAST.
>> TO THE EAST AND TO THE ROAD?
>> TO THE EAST OF YOUR 120 ACRES OR WHATEVER IT IS.
ALL THE WAY ACROSS THAT PROPERTY LINE, IF YOU HAD A BERM OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE THAT RAN THE WATER.
>> WATER RIGHT NOW FLOWS THIS WAY.
>> ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF MOSS RIDGE, WHICH YOU WOULD BUT UP TO.
>> IF YOU HAD A BERM ACROSS THERE OR SOMETHING THAT KEPT YOUR WATER TO BE YOUR PROBLEM AND NOT DUMP IT IN OUR YARD.
>> WE CAN LOOK AT PULLING THOSE LOTS UP IN THE BACK AND BRINGING IT FORWARD, BUT THEN IT CREATES A PROBLEM TO THE NORTH AND THE CREEK BECAUSE THEN THERE'S EXTRA WATER GOING TO THE NORTH THAT TYPICALLY [OVERLAPPING].
>> BUT YOU HAVE GREAT HYDRO ENGINEERS THAT CAN FIX ALL OF THAT.
>> WE WILL LOOK AT IT, AND I'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT WE PLAN ON THAT.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A FULL ENGINEERING PLANS.
I'D LIKE TO SEE YOUR HYDROPLANES AND A REAL SOLUTION HERE VERSUS PROMISES OF FLOWERS AND CANDY IN THE FUTURE.
>> OUR PLANS WILL BE IN AT THE CITY AND WE WILL GO THROUGH IT WITH GARY AND HIS TEAM AND CONSULTANTS.
WE'VE BEEN DOING ACRE LOTS AND DRAINAGE AND EVERYTHING FOR 40 YEARS.
I HAVEN'T BEEN DOING IT FOR 40 YEARS, BUT I'M 15 INTO IT.
>> I SHARED WITH YOU AS I'M PLANNING AND ZONING PRIOR TO THIS ON OUR ACTUAL ORDINANCES STATE TWO ACRES.
>> BUT WE'D LOVE YOU TO DO TWO ACRES AND COME ON HOME.
[01:45:01]
>> STOP, PLEASE. COUNCIL MEMBER, NOE, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> NO. I THINK YOU ADDRESSED OUR QUESTIONS REGARDING DRAINAGE THAT WE DID HAVE CARRIED OVER IN THE LAST MEETING, AND I APPRECIATE HAVING THE TIME FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE PLANS THAT YOU PUT FORTH BEFORE COUNCIL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR PROVIDING THESE TO THE PACKET SO THAT WE WERE ABLE TO REALLY REVIEW THEM AND STUDY THEM AND ASK THE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAD. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE TIMING.
I'M GLAD MY LANDOWNER GAVE ME THE TIME TO COME BACK AND GIVE YOU ALL THE TIME.
I HAVE I THINK SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU AND FOR MR. MACHADO, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
FIRST, I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR REVIEWING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH US AND MAKING THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES.
THEY DO HELP TO IMPROVE WHAT'S BEEN PROVIDED IN THE OVERALL AGREEMENT.
ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE IS IN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, THE MAXIMUM UNDER TWO, THE LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS, IT'S GOT THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE IS 25%, WHICH, AS COUNCIL MEMBER MEYER MENTIONED, OUR CITY ORDINANCE IS 20%.
I GUESS THIS IS WHERE I COME TO YOU, MR. MACHADO, IF THEY ARE ALLOWED 25% COVERAGE IN THEIR ENGINEERING, WILL THEY HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS, IS THAT THE RIGHT WORD? IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SO THAT WHEN WE GET THE ENGINEERING STUDIES, ALL OF THAT WOULD BE ACCOUNTED FOR, AND YOUR ENGINEERS WOULD BE LOOKING FOR THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S ACCOUNTED FOR? THE OTHER THING IS KIND OF A CLARIFICATION ON MY PART.
MY UNDERSTANDING WHEN DRAINAGE, WHEN DEVELOPMENTS ARE DONE, A NEW DEVELOPMENT CAN'T SEND ANY MORE WATER INTO THE EXISTING AREA.
>> THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING IS YOU WILL MANAGE IT TO WHERE IT'S NOT SENDING ANY MORE WATER THAN IT IS ALREADY THERE, AND YOU'RE HOPING TO MAKE THAT LESS.
I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE'LL DECREASE IT RIGHT NOW.
TO THE NORTH WHERE THE DETENTION POND IS, IT'LL PROBABLY BE DECREASED OR AROUND THE SAME.
TO THE NORTH, WE'LL TAKE THE WATER TO THE NORTH, PUT IT IN A POND, AND THEN IT'LL COME OUT OF A STRUCTURE, OR WE'LL STUDY THE CREEK AND SEE IF IT CAN RECEIVE MORE WATER.
BUT WE HAVE AREA PLAN FOR DETENTION SO THAT NO MORE WATER LEAVES OUR PROPERTY THAN IS ALREADY CURRENTLY LEAVING.
>> THEN THE GREEN AREA THAT IS REFERRED TO, IS THAT GOING TO BE DEDICATED TO THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION AT THE END SO THAT SOMEBODY HAS ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THAT TO KEEP IT MAINTAINED?
>> RIGHT NOW, YES, IT WILL BE A NATURE WAY LOT, OR OUR NEIGHBOR MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE IT AND CONTINUE IT AS NATURAL STATE AS IT IS.
>> I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
>> HOA DOES HAVE THE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY ON THAT.
>> YES. WE HAVE A PETROL EASEMENT AND PETROL MAINTENANCE ON THAT.
YES. BUT WE ARE IN THE MEANTIME, PROBABLY GOING TO CONTINUE THE FAMILY'S PROPERTY FOR RIGHT NOW, AND THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO RUN SOME CATTLE BACK AND FORTH SO THEY CAN MOVE THEM BACK AND FORTH.
IT'S OURS, AND WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN IT.
>> IT'S JUST MAKING SURE THAT IT GETS MAINTAINED BECAUSE THAT'S CRITICAL.
>> WELL, IT'S CRITICAL TO US, TOO BECAUSE IT'S THE VIEW CORRIDOR INTO OUR SUBDIVISION.
>> A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND YOUR DRAINAGE PLAN.
ON THE STREET THAT'S TO THE SOUTHMOST THERE, ALL THE LOTS THAT ARE SOUTH OF THE SOUTHERN STREET, ALL OF THOSE LOTS WILL CONTINUE TO DRAIN TO THE SOUTH AS THEY DO NATURALLY NOW, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES. THAT'S THE PLAN RIGHT NOW.
I'VE JUST BEEN ASKED TO LOOK AT THAT A LITTLE DEEPER JUST SO I CAN BRING SOME MORE WATER TO THE NORTH OR IF I CAN REDIRECT IT.
I CAN'T TAKE SOMEBODY ELSE'S WATER AND SHOVE IT ONTO SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY TO THE EAST.
IF I CAN GET INTO A NATURAL WATERWAY, THE MORE I CAN GET TO THE NORTH, THE BETTER.
I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN ACTUALLY GET IT ALL TO THE NORTH UNTIL I GET A GRADING PLAN.
>> YEAH. YOU CAN'T REDIRECT THOSE SOUTHERNMOST LOTS, THE WATER OFF OF THAT TO THE EAST OR TO THE WEST.
I CAN TRY TO GET AS MUCH AS I CAN TO THE NORTH.
I CAN'T JUST DUMP IT ON THE GO TO THE EAST.
>> THE LOTS THAT ARE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SOUTHERN STREET, THERE ARE 11 LOTS THERE.
SOME OF THEM FACE THE SOUTH STREET, SOME OF THEM FACE THE CENTER STREET, BUT THERE ARE 11 LOTS IN THAT LOWER MIDDLE PORTION RIGHT THERE.
THE MAJORITY OF THOSE, I UNDERSTAND IT,
[01:50:01]
YOU SAID THERE'S A DIAGONAL RIDGE THAT RUNS ACROSS THOSE THAT'S THE DIVIDING POINT.ESSENTIALLY, YOU'RE GOING TO TRY TO TAKE THE WATER FROM ALL OF THOSE LOTS AND TAKE IT TO THE NORTH TO THE RETAINING BOND UP THERE.
>> WHAT'S THE MECHANISM THAT YOU'RE GOING TO USE TO GET THE WATER FROM THOSE 11 LOTS ROUT IT TO THE NORTH.
ARE YOU GOING TO PUT A DRAINAGE DITCH ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE THAT'S IN THE CENTER BETWEEN THE TOP SET OF THOSE 11 LOTS AND THE BOTTOM SET OF THOSE 11 LOTS?
>> THE MOST LIKELY IDEA WOULD BE TO BRING IT AROUND IN THE BAR DITCHES.
WORST CASE, IF WE COULDN'T, SOME OF THEM MIGHT GO TO THIS LOT AND COME DOWN, BUT WE'RE GOING TO USE THE BAR DITCHES AND RAISE THE SITE UP ON THIS SIDE TO GET IT DOWN.
>> GREAT. YOU'RE GOING TO ELEVATE THE PROPERTY SO THAT IT NATURALLY DRAINS IN THAT DIRECTION AND THEN TAKE ALL OF IT UP TO THE CREEK?
>> YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD OUT THE RETENTION POND.
YOU'RE GOING TO DO A HYDRAULIC STUDY SO THAT YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT YOU NEED TO, HOW MUCH OF A BUILD OUT YOU NEED TO DO ON THE RETENTION POND, CORRECT?
>> WE'LL DO ALL OF THAT. YES, SIR.
>> LAST QUESTION. HOW MANY OF THE LIGHTS AS IT'S CURRENTLY LAID OUT ARE LARGER THAN ONE ACRE?
>> I DON'T HAVE THE PLAT IN FRONT OF ME.
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT ANSWER RIGHT NOW.
BUT I WOULD SAY THAT'S SOMEWHERE AROUND HALF OF THEM, I THINK, OR BUT I CAN'T SAY IF THAT'S MORE THAN LIKE 30 SQUARE FEET OR MORE, SOME OF THEM ARE A COUPLE THOUSAND FOOT OR A COUPLE THOUSAND FOOT.
THE CORNER LOTS ARE MUCH LARGER.
THE ONES OF THE NORTH ARE ALMOST TWO ACRES.
>> YOUR EXPECTATION IS THAT ALL OF THE HYDRAULIC PLAN THAT YOU PLAN ON PUTTING IN PLACE, YOU EXPECT THAT TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY BEFORE IT'S FINALIZED?
>> OH, YES, SIR. BEFORE WE START.
>> I JUST HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION FROM A PERSPECTIVE, ASSUMING IT WOULD GET APPROVED WHAT IS YOUR AND, OF COURSE, A NUMBER OF VARIABLES, BUT WHAT YOUR TIMELINE ON THE DEVELOPMENT?
>> I WOULD HOPE TO START IN MAY OR JUNE.
CONSTRUCTION. WE HAVE ENGINEERING, WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND PLATTED ZONE IT ALL THOSE THINGS.
THEN WE'LL HAVE ENGINEERING, AND HOPEFULLY, I CAN GET THE GRADING STARTED IN JUNE.
GARY'S ALREADY TOLD ME HE'S GOING TO WORK NIGHT AND DAY WITH ME.
MAY AND JUNE, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO START IN JULY BECAUSE IT GETS HOT, SOILS CHANGE.
SO I REALLY WANT TO START BY MAY OR JUNE.
THAT WOULD PUT US DONE ABOUT THIS TIME NEXT YEAR, HOPEFULLY, AND STARTED HOMES.
DONE WITH THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND STARTING HOMES, PERMITS WILL PROBABLY BE GOING IN ABOUT THIS TIME NEXT YEAR.
>> BECAUSE I KNOW THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, I GUESS TREES AND HIGHLAND? IS THERE ANY TYPE OF AGREEMENTS OR DISCUSSIONS WITH THOSE TWO GROUPS WHAT KIND OF IS THE STATUS OF THAT?
>> THEY ARE SIGNED UP AND READY TO GO WITH US.
WE PLAN ON WELL, CLOSING IN TWO DAYS.
>> MEANING THEY HAVE CONTRACTS WITH US AND HAVE PUT DOWN PAYMENTS ON LOTS.
>> ONE LAST QUESTION. THIS GOES AND I'M GOING TO PUT YOU A LITTLE BIT ON THE SPOT HERE PUBLICLY.
BUT WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS HOW MUCH CONFIDENCE DO YOU HAVE IN THIS DEVELOPER THAT THEY ARE REASONABLE TO WORK WITH FOR THE CITY.
>> I KNOW, BUT I WANT TO KNOW.
ARE THESE REASONABLE PEOPLE TO WORK WITH IN THE CITY? BECAUSE WE HAD SOME THAT WEREN'T REASONABLE TO WORK WITHIN THE CITY.
>> YES, TO MY KNOWLEDGE BECAUSE WHEN I STARTED A PARKER WORKING IN, I BELIEVE IT WAS. I DON'T REMEMBER.
>> I DIDN'T HEAR A 10, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR A ONE EITHER, BUT YOU'VE BEEN WORKING WITH HIM SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS, CORRECT?
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR.
>> I WAS NOT IMPLYING THAT YOU SHOULD RUN IT ONTO SOMEONE ELSE'S LAND.
WHAT I WAS SAYING WAS, WOULD YOU CONSIDER POTENTIALLY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RUNNING IT THERE AND MAYBE PUTTING ANOTHER RETENTION POND OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE? I WAS NOT PROMOTING.
>> I GET IT. I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED MYSELF.
YOU CAN ONLY LIFT EVERYTHING UP SO MUCH.
[01:55:01]
I CAN'T IF I PUT A POND THERE, ONE EAR NEIGHBORS JUST GOING TO HAVE A REAL BAD ONE EAR NEIGHBORS IS GOING TO HAVE A REAL BAD PROBLEM, AND I DON'T WANT TO DRAW STRAWS ON WHO THAT IS BECAUSE THAT WATER HAS TO COME OUT SOMEWHERE.IF I PUT A POND TO THE SOUTH, THE WATER DOESN'T STAY.
AT SOME POINT, IT DOES COME OUT, AND THEN IT'S A POINT DISCHARGE.
IF IT'S FLOWING EVENLY ACROSS, THAT'S A DIFFERENT THING AND IT HAS ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX PLACES TO HIT AND COME ACROSS.
OR FLATLY ACROSS THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY? IT'S DIFFERENT.
IF I DO A POND BACK THERE, AND I PUT IT THROUGH ONE PERSON'S YARD BETWEEN THEIR YARD, THEN THEY'RE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE BE ABLE TO PUT A CANOE IN THERE AT TIMES AND RUN IT OUT.
>> I UNDERSTAND ON A ONE AND 100, BUT IF A PROPERLY DONE POND, IT'S GOING TO HELP, YOU KNOW, 85 95% TIME.
HELP ME UNDERSTAND FROM CURE ROAD, HOW FAR BACK DOES THIS GO? LIKE, IS IT 200 YARDS, 900 YARDS? WHERE'S THE END OF YOUR GREEN THERE? I CAN'T SEE YOUR NUMBERS, BUT YOUR CORNER.
>> THIS EDGE. HOW FAR BACK IS THAT?
>> FROM MCCRARY ROAD TO THAT EDGE.
>> IT'S ALMOST 100 FEET, I GUESS. JUST GIVE OR TAKE.
A LITTLE MORE. THERE'S ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN LOTS. SO 10,000-1,500 FOOT.
>> IS KING'S BRIDGE RIGHT BEHIND YOU?
>> BEHIND US. NO. THAT'S UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY.
>> DID YOU RENEW THE CONTRACT OR EXTEND THE CONTRACT?
>> NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, MADAM MAYOR.
>> OKAY. ANYBODY? DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION?
>> NO, I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION.
>> IF YOU'RE READY, I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2020 5831 APPROVING THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PARKER AND BUCKINGHAM LOT VENTURE, LTD PROVIDING FOR THE ANNEXATION OF AND THE DEVELOPMENT AND A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR APPROXIMATELY 46.69 ACRES OF LAND IN THE TERRESTRIAL JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF PARKER, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS BUCKINGHAM ESTATES.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I SECOND THE MOTION.
>> I HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER PILGRIM TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2020 5-831, AND A SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER AMANDA, AGAIN TO APPROVE.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MR. KERCHO.
>> I WANT TO MAKE ONE OTHER COMMENT FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD ON THIS.
SOME HAVE HEARD ME SAY THIS BEFORE, BUT NOT EVERYONE WHO'S HERE TONIGHT HAS HEARD ME SAY THIS.
I'M VERY COMMITTED TO TWO-ACRE LOTS FOR EVERYTHING THAT'S ALREADY WITHIN THE CITY OF PARKER.
I WISH EVERYTHING THAT'S IN OUR ETJ OR EVEN OUTSIDE OF HERE WOULD ALWAYS BE DEVELOPED AS TWO-ACRE LOTS.
BUT REALISTICALLY, I KNOW IT'S NOT GOING TO BE.
I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR OUR CITY TO GET CONTROL OF AS MUCH OF THE ETJ LAND AS POSSIBLE SO THAT WE DON'T END UP IN ANOTHER SITUATION LIKE WE'VE BEEN IN FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS WITH THE HUFFINES ON THAT 101 ACRES OF ETJ LAND THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE OUT OF THE ETJ NOW AND DEVELOP, AND WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S GOING TO END UP.
WE ONLY KNOW WHAT THEY PROPOSED ORIGINALLY, WHAT THEY PROPOSED IN A COUNTERPROPOSAL, AND WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW WITH IT.
I THINK IF WE CAN TAKE THIS ROUGHLY 47 ACRES OF ETJ LAND AND GUARANTEE THAT IT COMES INTO THE CITY BY AGREEING TO DO ONE-ACRE LOTS ON IT BECAUSE IF IT DOESN'T COME INTO THE CITY, WE CAN'T EVER CONTROL WHAT'S ON IT.
WE'RE BETTER OFF AGREEING TO ROUGHLY ONE ACRE LOTS HERE, GETTING IT INTO THE CITY, HAVING CONTROL OF IT FROM HERE ON, AND HAVING SOMEWHERE $50-60 MILLION WORTH OF HOUSES BUILT THERE THAT WE'LL GAIN THE PROPERTY TAX FROM, THEN RISKING LETTING IT GO TO THE COUNTY AND NOT HAVING ANY CONTROL OVER IT AFTER THAT.
SO THAT'S THE REASON I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS.
IT'S NOT THAT I LIKE ONE-ACRE LOTS VERSUS TWO-ACRE.
>> WELL, THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN PILGRIM, BASICALLY, EXPRESSED MY THOUGHTS COMPLETELY IN REGARDS TO THE ETJ AND DIRECTION AND THE DESIRABILITY OF BRINGING THIS IN.
THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD IS THAT NOT ONLY THE TWO AND ONE-ACRE DEAL AND WHY WE WOULD PROBABLY ACCEPT THE ONE-ACRE DEAL, BUT ALSO AS WE BRING IN A PROPERTY LIKE THIS, IT REALLY DEPENDS TOO UPON THE PEOPLE THAT ARE DEVELOPING IT.
THE DEVELOPERS ARE A BIG PORTION OF THIS.
THAT PERSPECTIVE, THIS DEVELOPER NOT ONLY HAS BUILT OUT OTHER AREAS WITHIN PARKER THAT WE'RE HAPPY WITH AND DONE A GOOD JOB, BUT THEY HAVE SHOWN A GREAT ABILITY TO COMPROMISE ON THEIR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
[02:00:03]
FROM WHAT COUNCILMAN LYNCH INDICATED, HAS MADE A NUMBER OF CHANGES TO THEIR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO THE BENEFIT OF WHAT WE'VE ASKED FOR, AND I MEAN, FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE AND WORKING WITH THE CITY I THINK IS FANTASTIC, AND IT'S ONLY AN EXTRA POSITIVE TO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT.>> I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF TWO-ACRE LOTS.
I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 1999, BEING ON PLANNING AND ZONING AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH 90% OF WHAT BUDDY SAID, AND CONTROLLING OUR DESTINY IS AN IMPORTANT THING.
BUT THE PROBLEM IS WHEN I CAME HERE AND I SAT IN THIS ROOM, WE WENT 2-1 0.75.
THEN AS I SAT IN THIS ROOM AND GOT GRAY HAIR, WE WENT TO 1.5.
AT WHAT POINT DO WE SAY STOP AND CONTROL OUR CITY BETTER? ARE WE GOING TO STOP AT A HALF-ACRE, QUARTER-ACRE? WHERE DO WE GO? I MEAN, WE'RE JUST GOING DOWNHILL THE WRONG WAY.
>> I'VE HEARD THE FEAR-MONGERING, AND I'M NOT SAYING ANYONE HERE IS IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM, BUT I'VE BEEN UP HERE FOR MEETINGS WHERE WALMART'S COMING OR THIS IS COMING.
I JUST HAVE A HEARTBURN WITH THIS.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THEN I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
I WILL REMIND YOU THAT COUNCILMEMBER PILGRIM MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2020 5831.
COUNCIL MEMBER NO SECONDED THAT.
AT THIS TIME, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
OKAY. FOUR TO ONE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER FACH VOTING AGAINST MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.
NOW WE WILL GO TO ITEM NUMBER 9,
[9. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION, ACCEPTING THE 2024 RACIAL PROFILING REPORT AND THE 2024 PARKER PD ANNUAL REPORT.]
CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION EXCEPTING THE 2024 RACIAL PROFILING REPORT IN THE 2024 PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT.CHIEF PRICE APPARENTLY GOING TO COME UP HERE AND GIVE US A PRESENTATION MAKE IT LIVELY.
>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT LIVELY, BUT EACH OF US HAS HAD A PART IN GETTING THESE REPORTS READY, AND I THOUGHT IT BEST TO LET SERGEANT VERDI PRESENT HIS PART OF THAT, ALONG WITH HIS HELP WITH MICHELLE, AND THEN TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THE RACIAL PROFILING, WHICH IS THE REPORT THAT I COMPLETED.
ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHER STAFF THAT HELPED OUT.
BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION YOU HAVE.
I NOTICE YOU'LL NOTICE THAT OUR TRAFFIC CONTACTS HAVE GREATLY INCREASED OVER THE LAST YEAR LARGELY ON THE FACT THAT WE'VE BECOME FULL STAFFED OR VERY CLOSE TO.
>> THIS IS THE SECOND YEAR WHERE YOUR DEPARTMENT HAS DONE THIS REPORT.
THERE'S NO COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE PARKER PD.
>> I AM SO PROUD OF YOU ALL AND WHAT Y'ALL HAVE DONE, YOU ARE TO BE COMMENDED ON AN EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT JOB.
>> IT'S NOT ME. IT'S THE STAFF THAT WE HAVE WORKING FOR YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT?
I CAN READ IT TO YOU IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT WE'LL BE HERE A WHILE. IT'S IN YOUR PACKET.
>> AT THIS TIME, I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT.
>> ARE THESE SET AS ONE AGENDA ITEM?
>> THAT'S HOW IT'S LISTED, BUT TO ME, THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. ONE IS THE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT, THE OTHER IS THE ANNUAL POLICE REPORT.
>> I JUST DON'T WANT TO MISS THE POLICE REPORT.
>> SORRY, IT'S COMING NEXT. YOU'LL GET IT.
>> I WILL TAKE A MOTION ON THE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE PROFILING POLICE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT AS PRESENTED.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I SECOND THE MOTION.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER LYNCH AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER NO TO ACCEPT THE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT OF 2024 AS PRESENTED.
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? NOT HEARING ANY.
[02:05:05]
I'LL CALL FOR YOU VOTE.ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING THE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT AS PRESENTED, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
>> WE WILL GO TO THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT.
>> THIS WAS THE WORK OF SERGEANT VERDI AND MICHELLE, SO I'LL LET HIM PRESENT THAT TO YOU.
>> SERGEANT VERDI. MICHELLE AND I PUT TOGETHER THE ANNUAL REPORT.
WE DETAIL SOME OF THE STUFF IN THE CHIEF MESSAGE, HOW THE YEAR WENT.
I'M SURE YOU GUYS. DID EVERYBODY GO OVER IT? READY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CHIEF MESSAGE? HOW DID YOUR YEAR WENT?
>> I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION. I HAVE A COMMENT.
>> AGAIN WAS VERY, VERY IMPRESSED AND PLEASED WITH THIS.
I NOTICED THAT Y'ALL HAVE HAD NO COMPLAINTS.
THAT IS, I THINK THE SECOND OR THIRD YEAR IN A ROW, AND THAT IS JUST AMAZING FOR A POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THAT REALLY SAYS HOW HARD Y'ALL ARE WORKING TO DO COMMUNITY POLICING IN VALUE ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS AND EVERYBODY ELSE YOU COME IN CONTACT WITH.
THIS REPORT IS VERY WELL DONE.
>> SOME OF THE THINGS I DO WANT TO LOOK AT LOOKING FORWARD, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE SOME ISSUES IN THE NEXT YEAR THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT, WHICH IS THERE ARE SOME STATE MANDATES ARE COMING DOWN THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO.
WE DO WANT TO FIND SOME PERSONNEL THAT FIT PARKER.
WE WANT TO BECAUSE OUR OFFICERS HAVE TO BE A LITTLE MORE DYNAMIC.
THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DO COMMIT OUTREACH WHILE ALSO BEING A POLICE OFFICER AND DO DIFFERENT THINGS.
ON TOP OF THAT WE'RE ALSO LOOKING TRYING TO DEVELOP SOME PROGRAMS THAT WERE HERE BEFORE, BUT THE COFFEE WITH THE COP, AND SHOP OF THE COP, SOME THINGS WE'VE NEVER DONE IN THE PAST.
SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO MOVE TOWARDS.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THOSE THINGS?
>> THOSE ARE GREAT IDEAS, AND I WOULD JUST ECHO THE SENTIMENTS OF THE MAYOR THAT THE POLICE FORCE IS JUST FABULOUS.
THIS REPORT IS REALLY WELL DONE AND THE INFORMATION THAT YOU'VE SHARED WITH US IS OUTSTANDING.
I AGREE THAT TO NOT HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS, BUT JUST THE WORK THAT YOU DO WITHIN THE WHOLE POLICE FORCE OF PARKER, TEXAS IS JUST SO APPRECIATED, AND SO JUST EXCELLENT IN TERMS OF YOUR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY, AND I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU.
>> YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT KNOWING THAT FOR PART OF THE TIME, THEY WERE DOWN TO THREE POLICE OFFICERS.
THEY WERE DOING THE BEST THEY COULD TO MAKE SURE WE WERE ALL SAFE DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME AND YOU-ALL HAVE JUST BEEN AWESOME. GO AHEAD.
>> ALSO, I APPRECIATE THE REPORT.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FIVE YEAR HISTORICAL, AND IT APPEARS THAT YOU'LL TRULY TRY TO MANAGE THE ISSUES THAT ARE COMING UP.
I LIKE THE IDEAS OF THE PROGRAMS. ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I NOTICED YOU SAID IN HERE WAS WITH RESPECT TO SOCIAL MEDIA.
I DO THINK IN THIS DAY AND AGE, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME WAY OF HAVING A SOCIAL PRESENCE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN FIND YOU.
I'M NOT A FAN OF ALL THE APPS.
I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH ONE I'M SUPPOSED TO GO TO, BUT I DO THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY FOR OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
>> YEAH AND I THINK, DON'T YOU LAUGH, CHIEF.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET OUR RESERVE PROGRAM UP AND GOING BECAUSE THAT WILL HELP YOU-ALL IN THE LONG RUN.
I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF WORK TO GET IT DONE, BUT I THINK YOU'LL FIND MORE HELP OUT IN THE COMMUNITY THAN YOU KNOW OF.
I'M HOPING YOU WILL LOOK AT THAT.
>> IT'S IN OUR TO DO LIST, MA'AM.
>> JUST ONE COMMENT, AND THIS GOES TO YOUR COMMENT EARLIER CHIEF ABOUT WHAT A GREAT CREW OF PEOPLE YOU HAVE WORKING FOR YOU, YOU SAID IT'S NOT YOU, IT'S THEM.
THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART THAT YOU PUT IN HERE, PROBABLY THE AUDIENCE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO SEE IT, BUT IT'S ONE OF ONLY TWO TIMES WHERE I'VE SEEN AN INVERTED ORGANIZATIONAL CHART, WHERE THE PERSON IN CHARGE IS AT THE BOTTOM AND THE PEOPLE THAT REPORTS TO THEM ARE AT THE TOP OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART AND THAT SPEAKS TO YOUR ROLE AS A LEADER IN THIS.
I'VE ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT A MANAGER WHO OVERSEES PEOPLE, THEIR PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO HELP ENSURE THE SUCCESS OF THE PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR THEM.
IT'S NOT TO TELL THEM WHAT TO DO.
[02:10:01]
IT'S NOT TO MICROMANAGE THEM.IT'S TO ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE THE PHYSICAL, FINANCIAL RESOURCES THAT THEY NEED AS WELL AS THE DELEGATED AUTHORITY THAT THEY NEED TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN THEIR JOB AND IT'S OBVIOUS TO ME THAT YOU CARRY OUT THAT PHILOSOPHY AND YOUR LEADERSHIP, BOTH OF YOU GUYS DO, AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO, AND YOU'RE ONE OF THE REASONS PARKER IS A SAFE COMMUNITY TO LIVE IN. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE THAT.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? IF NOT, I WILL TAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
>> MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT 2024 ANNUAL REPORT AS PRESENTED.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER NOE AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER LYNCH TO ACCEPT THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
ANYBODY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 5-0. THANK YOU-ALL.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
DISCUSSION AND OR CONSIDERATION REGARDING THE USE OF CITY RESOURCES TO REPAIR PORTIONS OF LEWIS LANE BETWEEN PARKER ROAD AND THE LEWIS LANE LIFT STATION.
I'M NOT SURE. WERE YOU GOING TO START OFF OR [BACKGROUND].
AT THIS TIME, WE ARE GOING TO RECESS INTO
[EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 2 of 2)]
EXECUTIVE SESSION UNDER WHICH ONE? I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH MY COMPUTER.IT'S GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.07 CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION. IS THAT THE CORRECT ONE?
>> UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551P 0712, CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY ON A MATTER IN WHICH THE DUTY OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY UNDER THE TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS CLEARLY CONFLICTS WITH THIS SECTION OPEN MEETINGS AT.
HOPEFULLY, WE WILL NOT BE GONE LONG AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE.
>> WE DON'T ANTICIPATE THIS BEING A LENGTHY CLOSED SESSION, RIGHT?
>> I SEE. I AM NOW RECONVENING THE MEETING.
[RECONVENE SPECIAL MEETING (Part 2 of 2)]
IT IS 8:32 PM.COUNCIL, IS THERE ANY APPROPRIATE DELIBERATION OR ACTION FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSION?
>> THEN WE WILL GO TO ITEM NUMBER 10,
[10. DISCUSSION AND/OR CONSIDERATION REGARDING THE USE OF CITY RESOURCES TO REPAIR PORTIONS OF LEWIS LANE BETWEEN PARKER ROAD AND THE LEWIS LANE LIFT STATION]
DISCUSSION AND OUR CONSIDERATION REGARDING THE USE OF CITY RESOURCES TO REPAIR PORTIONS OF THE LEWIS LANE BETWEEN PARKER ROAD AND THE LEWIS LANE LIFT STATION.>> MAKE A MOTION TO SEE IF WE GET A SECOND SO WE CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ON THIS ISSUE.
MADAM MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF CITY OF PARKER RESOURCES TO REPAIR PORTIONS OF LEWIS LANE BETWEEN PARKER ROAD AND THE LEWIS LANE LIFT STATION WITH THE UNDERSTANDING FOR BOTH US AND THE CITIZENS THAT A PORTION OF THIS ROAD THAT'S GOING TO BE REPAIRED IS NOT OWNED BY THE CITY OF PARKER, NOT WITHIN THE CITY OF PARKER CITY LIMITS.
IT IS WITHIN THE CITY OF LUCAS, NOT PARKER AND THAT THIS IS ONLY BEING DONE FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD BECAUSE WE HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF CITIZENS OF PARKER THAT DRIVE ON THIS ROAD ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND IT HAS BECOME A TRAFFIC HAZARD, A DANGER TO THEIR AUTOMOBILES, AND A DANGER, POSSIBLY EVEN TO LIFE AND LIMB.
[02:15:03]
THAT WOULD BE THE REASON FOR POSSIBLY CONSIDERING THE EXPENDITURE OF PARKER RESOURCES ON IT SO THAT'S THE MOTION.>> LET ME FINISH. I'M SORRY, I GOT INTO DISCUSSION, REALLY.
I WANTED TO ADD ONE OTHER THING.
THAT IS TO AUTHORIZE THESE FUNDS BE SPENT WITH THE CONDITION THAT IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT OCCURS BETWEEN OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND OUR CITY ENGINEER IN THE DISCUSSIONS WITH LUCAS THAT AFFECT THE TIMING OF WHEN THIS OCCURS, THAT WOULD BE GIVEN CONSIDERATION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE EXPENDITURE.
>> COULD YOU RESTATE THE MOTION? [LAUGHTER]
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY BUDDY PILGRIM TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION EXPENDING CITY FUNDS FOR REPAIRS OF LEWIS LANE FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD, KNOWING THAT WHAT WILL BE REPAIRED IS NOT PARKER ROAD AND AUTHORIZED AND I DID NOT GET AND IF THE ILA COMES THROUGH THAT MAY CHANGE.
[OVERLAPPING] GIVE CONSIDERATION TO THE NEGOTIATIONS THAT ARE GOING ON WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY, CITY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND THE CITY OF LUCAS.
>> IS THAT PART OF THE MOTION?
>> MADAME MAYOR, I'M SORRY. COULD YOU PLEASE RE RESTATE THE MOTION? BECAUSE I WANT TO AMEND IT.
I'M NOT TRYING TO BE DIFFICULT.
PLEASE RESTATE SO I UNDERSTAND THE WORDS TO SAY.
>> I'M GOING TO ASK COUNCILMEMBER PILGRIM TO PLEASE RESTATE IT BECAUSE I'M STILL RIGHT.
>> GOOD QUICK QUESTION, BUDDY.
FROM PERSPECTIVE OF ANDERSON ASPHALT, I KNOW THE MOTION TALKED ABOUT BASICALLY EXPENDING FUNDS FOR THE REPAIR FROM PARKER TO LIFT STATION.
BUT I KNOW WHAT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO COUNSEL TONIGHT IS SPECIFICALLY THIS PARTICULAR PORTION OF LEWIS LANE IN THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT IN REGARDS TO THE 15,000.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF THE MOTION SHOULD BE SPECIFIC AS TO THAT.
>> I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. I'LL WITHDRAW THE MOTION IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT AGAIN, JUST SPECIFIC TO THAT ONE, GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD.
>> PLEASE DO IF YOU DON'T MIND.
>> THANK YOU. THEN WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESTATE THE MOTION?
>> MISS LYNCH. NO. EXCUSE ME, MR. FECHT, DO YOU WITHDRAW.
>> I APPRECIATE YOUR PERSPECTIVE, COUNCILMEMBER KERCHO, IF WE COULD JUST PLEASE THEN RESTATE THE MOTION. RESTATE A MOTION.
>> MAKE A MOTION THAT CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF UP TO $15,341.39 WITH ANDERSON ASPHALT AND CONCRETE PAVING LLC FOR THE SPECIFIC REPAIR OF PORTIONS OF LEWIS LANE THAT ARE BETWEEN PARKER ROAD AND THE LEWIS LANE LIFT STATION WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THOSE SECTIONS OF ROAD ARE NOT WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF PARKER AND THAT THIS IS BEING DONE FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD OF PARKER CITIZENS AND WITH CONSIDERATION ON THE TIMING OF THAT EXPENDITURE BEING GIVEN WITH CONSIDERATION ON THE TIMING, ALSO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE NEGOTIATIONS THAT ARE GOING ON BETWEEN OUR CITY ENGINEER AND OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND THE CITY OF LUCAS.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST TAKE A MINUTE TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT THE AREA WHERE THIS ROAD REPAIR IS BEING CONSIDERED SHOULD PROBABLY BE CLEARLY DEFINED AND STATED BY OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO PLEASE CLEARLY DEFINE WHERE THIS PATCH IS TO BE APPLIED TO THE ROAD IN THIS MOTION.
>> MR. MACHADO, CAN YOU DO THAT, PLEASE?
[02:20:02]
>> THE EASIEST WAY TO DEFINE IT IS THERE'S A IT'S ON THE NORTHBOUND LANE OF LEWIS ROAD.
>> THERE'S A LITTLE TREES THE ROAD IS RIGHT ADJACENT TO THAT IN THE ROAD.
>> YEAH. I JUST WANTED THAT STATED FOR THE RECORD.
>> ADJACENT TO WHAT, I'M SORRY, I MISSED A WORD THERE.
>> I'D ALSO LIKE TO ASK, IS THAT SECTION OF ROAD LOCATED WITHIN THE TRACT, WHICH IS FULLY WITHIN THE CITY OF LUCAS?
>> JUST TO RESTATE THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS FROM COUNCILMEMBER PILGRIM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FECHT TO EXPAND THE CITY OF PARKER FUNDS ON REPAIRING A SECTION OF ROAD THAT IS FULLY CONTAINED WITHIN THE CITY OF LUCAS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC GOOD.
IS THAT AN ACCURATE DEPICTION?
>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? QUESTION? IF NOT, I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF COUNCILMEMBER PILGRIM'S MOTION.
[LAUGHTER] I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO TRY.
ANYBODY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 5-0.
[11. UPDATE(S)]
TO UPDATES AND THE FIRST UPDATE IS 2551.MR. MACHADO, IS THERE ANY UPDATE ON TO 2551?
>> THEY REMOVING ALL THE OLD ATTENDANTS AC FIGHT RIGHT NOW.
>> ARE THEY STILL ON THEIR TIME SCHEDULE, JUST A LITTLE BEHIND BECAUSE OF WEATHER OR ARE THEY WAY BEHIND.
YEAH. ANY TIME IT RAINS [INAUDIBLE]
>> UPDATE ON TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, MR. PILGRIM.
>> NOTHING REALLY NEW FROM TCEQ ON THE SEWER PERMIT CHALLENGE IN DISTRICT COURT IN AUSTIN.
THAT CASE WAS ORIGINALLY ASSIGNED TO A JUDGE A YEAR AGO WHO RAN FOR THE APPELLATE COURT IN NOVEMBER.
HE WAS ELECTED TO THE APPELLATE COURT, HADN'T TAKEN ANY ACTION ON THAT CASE ANYWAY, SO THE CASE WAS THEN MOVED TO A NEW JUDGE IN DECEMBER AND THAT NEW JUDGE HAS TAKEN NO ACTION.
THERE'S NOTHING NEW ON THE MUD CASE EITHER.
THAT'S BEEN BACK IN TCEQ'S LAP FOR A YEAR NOW AND THEY'VE TAKEN NO ACTION ON IT WHATSOEVER.
>> THANK YOU. ENGINEERING REVIEW.
COUNCILMEMBER NOE OR DIRECTOR MACHADO, WHO WANTS TO GIVE AN UPDATE?
>> YES. WE HAVE MET TO START THE REVIEW OF THE ENGINEERING PROPOSALS.
THERE WERE MANY DIFFERENT CATEGORIES UNDER WHICH THE PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED.
WE HAVE ORGANIZED ALL OF THE PROPOSALS INTO EACH CATEGORY FROM A TO?
>> [LAUGHTER] FROM A-O AND EVERY LETTER IN BETWEEN.
WE HAVE THEM ALL SORTED, WE HAVE AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET PREPARED FOR ALL THE PROPOSALS IN EACH CATEGORY.
THERE WAS A SCORING ASSOCIATED WITH EACH ONE OF THESE PROPOSALS SO UPON OUR COMPLETION OF OUR REVIEW, WE WILL BE ABLE TO ISSUE A REPORT REGARDING THE SCORES AND COMMENTS
[02:25:02]
THAT EACH ONE OF THE REVIEWERS HAS TAKEN AWAY FROM EACH ONE OF THESE PROPOSALS, SO THE REVIEW IS UNDERWAY.>> DO YOU HAVE ANY TIMELINE OR IS IT STILL JUST IN PROGRESS?
WE'RE JUST COMPLETING INDEPENDENT REVIEWS, WHICH ALLOWS IT TO GO FASTER.
IT'S NOT REQUIRING US TO BE TOGETHER IN A ROOM.
WE'RE BASICALLY TAKING REPORTS AND DOING REVIEWS AND REPORTING OUR SCORES AND THEN MEETING AGAIN AND THEN MAKING PROGRESS IN THIS WAY.
>> THANK YOU. NOISE COMMITTEE, MR. KERCHO.
WE CONTINUE TO REVIEW VARIOUS OTHER CITIES' NOISE ORDINANCES FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL INCLUSION IF WE PROPOSE A NEW NOISE ORDINANCE.
I BELIEVE AT OUR LAST MEETING WE HAD ASKED CHIEF PRICE TO LOOK AT THAT INTERSECTION AND GIVE US SOME FEEDBACK.
>> WE HAVE COLLECTED THE FIRST WEEK OF DATA FROM LAST WEEK.
IT SHOWS SUPPORT [INAUDIBLE] WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO USE SOME MORE TIME TO GET THAT AT THE CENTER OF THE STALL, IN PARTICULAR, TO MAKE SURE THOSE STALLS ARE AT THE SAME INTERVALS.
RIGHT NOW, IT DOESN'T REALLY APPEAR, BASED ON IT NOT BEING THE [INAUDIBLE] STOP THAT THERE IS A WALL IN THAT SECTION.
EVERY WEEK [INAUDIBLE] I SHOULD HAVE A MORE BROAD VIEW OF THE TIME THAT TRAFFIC IS INVOLVED OR NOT INVOLVED.
WE DO HAVE SOME ENFORCEMENT ISSUES IN THERE OBVIOUSLY.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING A STOP SIGN UP THERE PERMANENTLY, MAKING THAT A FOUR-WAY STOP PERMANENTLY.
OBVIOUSLY, THE STOP SIGNS THAT ARE UP THERE NOW IN THOSE TRASH BARRELS ARE NOT WHAT YOU'D CONSIDER PERMANENT STOP SIGNS, NOT THE KIND YOU IDEALLY HAVE.
WHAT IF WE WERE TO DO A FOUR-WAY STOP THERE ON AN INTERIM BASIS, AS A TRIAL RUN TO SEE WHAT PROBLEMS IT CREATES?
>> WE WOULD HAVE TO GET THAT COORDINATED IN THE CITY LINE BECAUSE INSIDE THAT INTERSECTION, ALL OF IT WOULD BE OURS.
WE JUST DON'T WANT THAT STOP SIGN FROM AFFECTING OURS SO WE WOULD HAVE TO GET THEM TO PUT THAT TEMPORARY [INAUDIBLE] IN THAT AREA AND COME BACK TO SEE IF THEY WILL DO THAT OR NOT.
>> IF THAT'S THE CASE THEN WE'LL RESTUDY THAT AND [INAUDIBLE].
>> THAT MAY BE THE ONLY WAY TO FIND OUT FOR SURE, WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A BACKUP THAT OCCURS THAT WOULD IMPACT THE KNOLLS.
>> IT'S GOING TO SHOW A TREND WHEN THERE'S SOME TRAFFIC FLOWING THROUGH PEAK HOURS BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO SHOW THE STOP.
>> IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE CITY OF ALLEN, ANYTHING THEY DID FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS WOULD BE TEMPORARY UNTIL WE COULD SEE WHETHER IT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE OR NOT.
WHETHER IT WAS A ROUNDABOUT, WHETHER IT WAS A FOUR-WAY STOP.
>> IF IT WERE TO BE PRACTICAL TO DO A TRIAL RUN LIKE THAT, I THINK WE'D ACTUALLY KNOW DEFINITIVELY AFTER A FEW WEEKS BECAUSE WE'D HEAR FROM THE CITIZENS THAT LIVE IN THE KNOLLS.
>> THAT INTERSECTION HAS SEVERAL DIFFERENT ISSUES.
ONE IS, WHEN YOU'RE COMING FROM ALLEN INTO PARKER, YOU'RE COMING FROM A 40-MILE-AN-HOUR SPEED LIMIT IN PARKER'S 30.
IF YOU'RE COMING FROM CHAPARRAL, IT'S 25.
THERE ARE JUST SO MANY ISSUES THAT HAVE TO BE LOOKED AT.
THEN AT SOME POINT, THE POINT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE CHAPARRAL HAS THOSE TWO EXTRA LANES, AT SOME POINT, THEY'RE GOING TO BE PART OF THE STREET.
WHEN THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, YOUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS MINE. I DON'T KNOW.
>> THE 24,000, IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? IN SEVEN DAYS?
>> BASED ON PREVIOUS STUDIES THAT Y'ALL HAVE DONE ON OTHER STREETS, THAT'S A PRETTY HIGH VOLUME.
>> THEN WE'VE ALSO GOT THE CHAPARRAL. THAT'S PRETTY GOOD.
>> WE ONLY HAVE THE CHAPARRAL [INAUDIBLE].
>> I DO LIKE COUNCILMEMBER PILGRIM'S RECOMMENDATION OF JUST PUT A FOUR-WAY STOP,
[02:30:01]
AT LEAST YOU HEAR QUICKLY WHAT PEOPLE THINK.>> WELL, ALSO, CHAPARRAL IS NOW OPENED.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE REALIZED IT YET, BUT IT'S OPEN FROM DELAHAYE ALL THE WAY OVER.
YOU CAN GO ALL THE WAY TO FIVE AND ONCE THAT GETS DISCOVERED BY MORE RESIDENTS.
>> I CAN TELL YOU IT'S MORE THAN 24,000.
[LAUGHTER] THEY KNOW. [INAUDIBLE]
>> CHIEF PRICE, WHEN YOU SAID THAT THERE'S 24,000 CARS, DO YOU HAVE THAT BREAKDOWN AT ALL BY WHAT DIRECTION THEY'RE TRAVELING BY CHANCE?
>> IT DOESN'T BREAK DOWN ALL THOSE [INAUDIBLE].
I CAN GO IN AND DO A REPORT, TO PULL THAT INFORMATION, BUT WHERE I JUST DOWNLOADED THE WHOLE REPORT, IT SHOWS THAT THERE ARE 24,000 VEHICLES.
>> JUST GOING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION?
>> IT WAS NORTH-SOUTH. IT WASN'T THE CHAPARRAL TRAFFIC, EAST-WEST?
>> WELL, IT IS NOT CHAPARRAL TRAFFIC, BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO SEE [INAUDIBLE] IS COMING FROM KNOLLS, SO IT'S ACTUALLY DIRECTED BETWEEN THE KNOLLS AND THE CHAPARRAL FACING BACK SOUTH TOWARDS THE KNOLLS SO THEY JUST [INAUDIBLE].
>> IF I RECALL, YOU COULD IDENTIFY THE TIME OF THE TRAFFIC, IS THAT RIGHT? YOU COULD DO A TRAFFIC COUNT?
>> IT WILL BREAK IT DOWN WITHIN 15 [INAUDIBLE].
>> YOU'VE ALREADY BROKEN THAT DOWN?
>> FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A RUSH-HOUR TRAFFIC, WAS THAT 30% OF THAT?
>> IT DOESN'T GIVE ME THE PERCENTAGES OF IT.
IT JUST TELLS ME THE BEST TIMES [INAUDIBLE] WHEN THE TRAFFIC IS MOST AND SO WHAT WE DO IS WE TAKE ONE READING AND THEN COMPARE IT TO THE NEXT READING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ACCURATE.
THEN WE DON'T HAVE THE NORMAL [INAUDIBLE] SO WE TAKE THE FOUR WEEKS OVER AND AVERAGE THAT OUT.
NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, I'LL RUN THE FIRST ORIGINAL REPORT, AND PRINT IT OUT, SO YOU GUYS CAN SEE THAT, I CAN EMAIL IT TO YOU IF YOU'D LIKE AND EVERYBODY CAN REVIEW IT.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN EMAIL BACK.
>> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU.
>> THAT WOULD BE GOOD. NEW ORDER, POST OFFICE, MS. LYNCH.
>> ON OUR TABLE THIS AFTERNOON, WE GOT A LETTER FROM [INAUDIBLE] US POSTAL SERVICE TO DESIGNATE A SINGLE UNIQUE ZIP CODE FOR SPECIFIC COMMUNITIES.
WELL, THIS BILL, IT'S A TYPICAL GOVERNMENT BILL, BUT IT IDENTIFIES INDIVIDUAL CITIES.
AT THE PRESENT TIME, THERE ARE 51 CITIES LISTED, WHICH INCLUDE MURPHY AND FAIRVIEW.
MR. LAVENDER SAYS, WELL, WHY AREN'T WE ON THIS? HIS GOAL IS FOR US TO FINALLY GET OUR OWN POST OFFICE TO GET SOME IDENTITY FOR THE CITY OF PARKER SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW PARKER REALLY DOES EXIST.
WE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING WORTHY OF SEEING IF COUNSEL WOULD BE AGREEABLE FOR US TO ASK WHETHER IT'S POSSIBLE OR NOT, WE DON'T KNOW, BUT WHETHER WE COULD ASK TO BE ADDED TO THIS BILL SO THAT PARKER WOULD BE ANOTHER CITY.
THERE'S CURRENTLY THREE IN TEXAS.
THE OTHER ONE IS SOME OBSCURE.
>> NO, THE OTHER ONE IS IN TEXAS.
THERE'S THREE IN TEXAS PRESENTLY.
THE QUESTION HERE IS, ARE Y'ALL OKAY IF WE PURSUE THIS AND JUST SAY, YES, THE CITY OF PARKER HAS SAID, THEY'D LIKE OUR NAME TO BE LISTED IN THIS BILL.
THE BILL IS LITERALLY ONE SENTENCE LONG [LAUGHTER] AND IT LISTS ALL THE CITIES.
>> IN FACT, MORE THAN JUST ASK, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OTHERS OF YOU KNOW CONGRESSMAN SELF, OUR CONGRESSMAN, I KNOW HIM WELL.
I THINK WE SHOULD WRITE HIM A LETTER AND ASK HIM TO AMEND THE BILL TO INCLUDE PARKER, TEXAS.
>> QUICK QUESTION REGARDING THE IMPLICATIONS.
IF WE ARE ABLE TO BE SUCCESSFUL, IT SOUNDS LIKE A REALLY GREAT THING TO DO, AND SO I'M VERY ENCOURAGED BY IT.
BUT THEN THAT WE WOULD NEED TO ESSENTIALLY STAFF AND RUN A POST OFFICE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF PARKER OR NO?
>> I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT CLARIFIED. THANK YOU.
>> FOR CLARIFICATION, THE BILL HAS PASSED THE HOUSE AND IN DECEMBER WAS RECEIVED BY THE SENATE.
BUT CONGRESSMAN SELF, I THINK, WOULD STILL BE A GOOD PERSON.
[02:35:02]
THE BILL WAS AUTHORED BY CONGRESSMAN BOEBERT.IT'S SITTING IN THE SENATE, WAITING TO BE ACTED UPON.
IT IS STILL ACTIVE EVEN THOUGH IT WAS FROM THE LAST SESSION, SO WE FIGURED IT WOULDN'T HURT TO TRY, SO IF Y'ALL ARE OKAY, WE'LL PURSUE THAT.
>> BUDDY, DO YOU THINK WE WRITE ONE AS A GROUP OR INDIVIDUAL TO MAKE MORE NOISE?
>> I THINK AS A CITY, WE NEED TO SEND A LETTER.
IF WE WANT TO DO ONE INDIVIDUALLY AS WELL, I WILL CERTAINLY CONTACT HIM IN MY INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE AN OFFICIAL LETTER FROM THE CITY.
>> TERRY HAS VOLUNTEERED TO DO THAT.
IT'S JUST SHE NEEDS TO HAVE THE AUTHORIZATION BY COUNCIL FOR HER TO GO AHEAD AND DO IT.
THERE'S A LOT OF IMPLICATIONS BECAUSE OUR ZIP CODE, TO SOME DEGREE, TALKS ABOUT OUR TAXES, AND I'M TIRED OF OUR MONEY GOING TO OTHER CITIES.
>> ARE YOU ABLE TO MAKE A MOTION DURING THE UPDATES TIME?
>> I DON'T THINK A MOTION IS NECESSARY.
>> IT'S NOT, YOU JUST NEED FEEDBACK. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I DIDN'T WANT TO WITHOUT COUNCIL BEING AWARE AND SAYING THAT'S OKAY TO GO FORWARD.
>> I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. THANKS FOR BRINGING.
>> THANK YOU, TERRY. THE LAST THING I HAVE IS JUST TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, THE NEWSLETTER IS IN PROGRESS.
IT WILL GET OUT SOON, HOPEFULLY, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING ON IT.
>> I HAD ONE MORE THING SINCE IT IS IN PROGRESS RIGHT NOW IS JUST PEOPLE TRAVELING ON DUBLIN.
OUR WATER LINE REPLACEMENT IS UNDERWAY AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY STARTING BOTH AT THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH PORTION OF DUBLIN, SOUTH OF BETSEY, BUT ALSO AT THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF PARKER.
THEY'RE WORKING ON BASICALLY THE ROAD IN BOTH DIRECTIONS AND WILL MEET IN THE MIDDLE SOMEPLACE.
IF YOU'RE TRAVELING DUBLIN, IT'S DOWN TO ONE LANE IN AT LEAST TWO SPOTS, AND IT IS GETTING VERY NARROW AS THEY'RE ACTUALLY CUTTING THROUGH THE STREET AND PILING THE DIRT ON BOTH SIDES.
OBVIOUSLY, PUSHING IT TO ONE SIDE IS CUTTING INTO THE REMAINING LANE THAT'S OUT THERE.
JUST BE CAREFUL AND KNOW THAT AS WE CONTINUE TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION, IT'S GOING TO GET MORE AND MORE DELAYED UNTIL IT DOES COMPLETE.
FROM THAT QUESTION, I DON'T REMEMBER, GARY, IS THERE A TIMELINE ON THE COMPLETION OF THAT?
>> NINE DAYS. WHICH IS AWFULLY FAST.
>> I'LL DRIVE THERE TOMORROW MORNING TO SEE [INAUDIBLE] JUST TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ACCESS TO [INAUDIBLE].
>> CAN YOU MAKE SURE THAT ANY UPDATES OR INFORMATION ABOUT THAT ROAD GET ON OUR WEBSITE SO THE CITIZENS CAN SEE IT?
>> MAYOR PETTLE. WHILE THAT'S ON MY MIND, WHAT'S THE STATUS OF THE LOOP IN THE WATER LINE THAT'S GOING TO BE PUT IN GOING DOWN BLUFFS LANE AND ACROSS BACK TO DUBLIN ROAD?
>> IT DIDN'T MAKE IT. WE'RE ONLY DOING THE FIRST SECTION, WHICH IS BETSEY SOUTH.
>> THAT'S GOT TO BE DONE BEFORE THE LOOP CAN BE PUT IN?
>> NO. THAT WAS WHAT WAS DECIDED TO DO, WAS JUST THAT PHASE 1 FROM BETSEY SOUTH
>> WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A DIFFERENT PHASE, AND ALL THAT WAS AUTHORIZED WAS PHASE 1, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
WHEN THAT'S FINISHED, IT WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL, AND THEN COUNCIL WILL DECIDE WHETHER TO AUTHORIZE PHASE 2, PHASE 3, PHASE 4, HOW THEY WANT TO DO IT.
NEXT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DONATIONS.
[12. ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION(S) FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND CITY STAFF FOR THE RECORD (Each valued at between $0 - $1,000 [RES. NO. 2024-801])]
ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND CITY STAFF FOR THE RECORD.AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK OF TEXAS DONATED SIX PACKS OF COOKIES FROM CRUMBLE WITH A VALUE OF $22.99 TO CITY STAFF.
MARYAM BOROUJERDI AND MOHAMMAD MASSOUDI DONATED ONE DOZEN, NOTHING BUNDT CAKES BUNDTINIS VALUED AT $28 TO OUR CITY STAFF,
[02:40:04]
AND WE'D REALLY LIKE TO THANK THE PEOPLE FOR REMEMBERING OUR STAFF AND BEING SO GENEROUS IN THEIR DONATIONS.IT REALLY IS GREATLY APPRECIATED BY THE CITY.
LASTLY, I WILL ASK IF THERE'S ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.
[13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
NOT HEARING ANY, THEN WE ARE ADJOURNED.[BACKGROUND]
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.