[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:04]
>> I HEREBY CALL THE CITY OF PARKER COUNCIL MEETING TO ORDER.
AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK COUNCIL, DO I HAVE A SUPER QUORUM?
[WORKSHOP]
WE WILL GO TO THE BUDGET PROCESS OVERVIEW, WHICH WILL BE LED BY OUR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, GRANT SAVAGE, MR. SAVAGE?>> YES. MAYOR, COUNCIL, I KNOW THAT WE'VE BLOCKED OFF AN HOUR AND A HALF TO GO THROUGH THIS.
I REALLY DON'T ANTICIPATE IT TAKING THAT LONG.
I THINK WE CAN BE DONE BY PROBABLY AROUND SIX O'CLOCK, AND I'VE GOT FOOD COMING IN AT SIX O'CLOCK, SO GIVE YOU ALL AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO EAT BEFORE THE MEETING TONIGHT.
I START OFF LOOKING AT THE BUDGET CALENDAR FOR THE REST OF THE BUDGET PROCESS.
WE HAVE THE BUDGET OVERVIEW TONIGHT.
NEXT TUESDAY, WE'LL HAVE THAT BUDGET WORKSHOP FROM 10:00 -4:00.
AUGUST THE 5TH, WILL BE A COUNCIL MEETING IT SAYS IF NEEDED FOR SECOND BUDGET WORKSHOP, BUT I ANTICIPATE NEEDING THAT MEETING TO BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH ANY CHANGES FROM NEXT WEEK UNTIL THAT TIME FRAME.
THEN AT THAT MEETING, WE'LL ALSO BE SETTING THE PROPOSED TAX RATE.
THEN ON SEPTEMBER 9TH, WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKING FINAL ACTION ON THE TAX RATE AND THE BUDGET.
I'VE RUN A OVERVIEW OF OUR FUND STRUCTURE.
THERE'S TWO MAIN TYPES OF FUNDS.
YOU HAVE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, AND PROPRIETARY.
UNDER THE GOVERNMENTAL FUND, YOU HAVE THE MAIN FUND OF THE CITY, WHICH IS THE GENERAL FUND, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS THAT SERVICE CAPITAL PROJECTS.
THEN UNDER THE PROPRIETARY FUNDS, YOU GET INTO YOUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS, THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SOLID WASTE.
LIKE I SAID, THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS THE MAIN FUND OF THE CITY.
IT'S USED TO ACCOUNT FOR FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS THAT REALLY AREN'T INCLUDED FUNDS.
THE PRINCIPAL SOURCE OF REVENUE INCLUDES PROPERTY TAXES, SALES TAXES, FRANCHISE FEES, LICENSE PERMITS, FINES AND FORFEITURES, AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES.
THE EXPENDITURES INCLUDES THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT, POLICE, FIRE, PUBLIC ROADS, BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT, AND CITY PROPERTY.
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AS USED TO ACCOUNT FOR RESOURCES RESTRICTED TO OR DESIGNATED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES.
I'M GOING TO SIDE BACK HERE, BACK TO THIS CHART AGAIN.
UNDER THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT FUND.
JUST GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF THESE FUNDS.
THE LAW ENFORCEMENT FUND IS GOING TO BE FOR SEIZED PROPERTY, SIZED ASSETS. IT'S GOING TO GO INTO THIS FUND.
IT CANNOT BE SPENT ON CERTAIN THINGS THAT THEY HAVE THE GUIDELINES FOR.
CHIEF USUALLY HAS TO REVIEW AND MAKE SURE IT'S ELIGIBLE EXPENSE BEFORE IT CAN SPEND THOSE.
THE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND, THAT'S WHERE WE TRANSFER MONEY INTO THAT FUND TO BE ABLE TO BUY FIRE TRUCKS, TRUCKS, TRACTORS, COP CARS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
COURT SECURITY AND TECHNOLOGY FUNDS, PORTION OF COURT CITATIONS GOES INTO THESE FUNDS AND THE RESTRICTIVE THERE IT'LL BE USED.
COURT SECURITY, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE PAST, WE'VE USED THOSE FUNDS TO PUT BULLET PROOF GLASS OUT HERE, THE BULLET PROOF, THE STRUCTURE UP THERE, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS FOR SECURITY.
COURT TECHNOLOGY, THAT'S BEING USED FOR THE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FOR OUR SOFTWARE FOR A COURT.
CHILD SAFETY FUNDS, WE GET THOSE MONEY BACK FROM THE COUNTY FOR TICKET SEAT BELT VIOLATIONS.
THAT MONEY HAS TO BE USED ON TYPICALLY SUFFER SCHOOLS.
BIG USE OF IT IS LIKE SRO PROGRAMS. OBVIOUSLY, WE DON'T HAVE SRO PROGRAM, SO WE'RE PRETTY LIMITED ON HOW WE CAN USE THAT, BUT IN THE PAST, WE'VE USED IT FOR LIKE SPEED TRAILER FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT THEY SET UP IN SCHOOL ZONES.
WE'VE ALSO USED IT FOR MARKINGS FOR SCHOOL CROSSING.
YOU CAN USE IT FOR EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL, STUFF LIKE THAT.
POLICE DONATIONS, FIRE DONATIONS, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.
IT'S MONEY THAT'S DONATED FROM CITIZENS USUALLY, AND WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE KEEP THOSE IN SEPARATE FUNDS THAT WAY THEY'RE USED FOR THE PURPOSE THAT THEY WERE GIVEN.
TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT SIMILAR TO THE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND, EXCEPT IT'S FOR COMPUTERS, SERVERS, PRINTERS, COPY MACHINE, THAT TYPE OF STUFF.
THEN THE PARKS OBVIOUSLY IS FOR THE PARKERFEST, WE USE THAT FOR PARKERFEST AND THEIR DONATIONS THEY RECEIVE AND MONEY THAT IS TRANSFERRED FROM THE GENERAL FUND.
NOW, DEBT SERVICE FUND, THAT'S USED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST
[00:05:05]
AND PRINCIPAL ON GO AND OTHER LONG-TERM DEBT OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.PRIMARY SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR DEBT SERVICES IS PROPERTY TAXES.
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, THOSE ARE USED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE COP, THE MAINTENANCE OF STREETS, DRAINAGE, FACILITY PROJECTS, IS FINANCED FROM BONDS, GRANTS, OR TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS.
OVER TO THE PROPRIETARY FUNDS, THIS IS GOING TO BE THOSE ACTIVITIES THEY ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE FOUND IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
USUALLY YOU TRY TO MAKE PROFIT ON THESE FUNDS IN THE ENTERPRISE FUND, THIS IS THE WATER, SEWER, GARBAGE SERVICES, AND YOU HAVE THE ADMINISTRATION IN THERE, MAINTENANCE THE WATER PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, WATER COLLECTION, AND TREATMENT SYSTEMS, AND THE ACCUMULATION OF RESOURCES FOR PAYMENT OF LONG-TERM DEBT, AND ALL COSTS ARE FINANCED THROUGH CHARGES TO UTILITY CUSTOMERS.
NOW, CURRENTLY WE'LL MOVE OVER TO LOOK AT THE STAFFING THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY.
IN ADMINISTRATION OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE WERE EIGHT EMPLOYEES FOR A LONG TIME UNTIL '23, '24, WE ADDED AN ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT POSITION.
THAT WAS THAT POSITION ABOUT A MONTH AGO HAD BEEN FROZEN AND COUNCIL UNFROZE THAT AND NOW IT'S BEING RE-TITLED A DEPUTY CITY SECRETARY.
I ALREADY HAD THIS PUT TOGETHER BEFORE THAT, SO I HAVEN'T MADE THAT CHANGE YET, BUT THAT'S WHY YOU'LL SEE THAT AS ASSISTANT FROZEN THERE AT THE BOTTOM. YES, SIR.
I WILL SAY FROM POPULATION STANDPOINT, WE'VE GROWN ABOUT 20% IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
YOU'LL SEE THAT WE HAVE A PRETTY LEAN STAFF, PRETTY EFFICIENT.
WHEN I GET INTO THESE OTHER DEPARTMENTS, YOU'LL SEE THAT WE REALLY HAVEN'T HAD ANY GROWTH IN STAFF OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
MOVING ON TO POLICE, YOU'LL SEE THAT WE'VE MAINTAINED 12 EMPLOYEES FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
THEY'VE DONE SOME INTERNAL CHANGES THERE, THEY MOVED A CAPTAIN TO A ASSISTANT POLICE CHIEF FOR A WHILE AND THEY MOVED THE OFFICERS UP SO THEY HAD TWO SERGEANTS.
BUT OCTOBER EMPLOYEE COUNT HASN'T CHANGED THOUGH.
SAME WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THESE ARE ALL PART TIME POSITIONS, BUT THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY CHANGES IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
I'LL NOTE THAT THE FIRE CHIEF UP UNTIL A FEW MONTHS AGO HAD BEEN A VOLUNTEER FOR 40-PLUS YEARS.
THEN WHEN HE RETIRED, JESSA MILLER STEPPED INTO THAT FIRE CHIEF POSITION.
>> IN A POLICE WITH 12 STAFF, ARE ALL THOSE POSITIONS FILLED OR DO WE HAVE OPENINGS? ARE THOSE COUNTED IN THERE OR HOW DOES THAT WORK?
>> THESE ARE JUST AUTHORIZED POSITIONS.
>> HE MIGHT HAVE ONE VACANCY RIGHT NOW.
I KNOW FOR SURE, THE ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE IS VACANT.
I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY POSITION THAT'S VACANT RIGHT NOW.
>> SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER RECORD, DID YOU JUST RE-TITLE THAT POSITION.
AT THE TIME WHEN CHIEF BROOKS WAS HERE, HE FELT THE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER WAS A PROMOTION THAT THEY HAD STARTED DOING ADDITIONAL DUTIES AND HE WANTED TO CHANGE THAT TITLE AT THE TIME.
MOVE ALONG TO THE PUBLIC WORKS.
YOU CAN SEE THAT IN '23, '24, THERE WAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT POSITION ADDED AS WELL.
OTHER THAN THAT, HE'S HAD THE SAME STAFF FOR OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND EVEN LONGER THAN THAT.
THAT ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT POSITION WAS JUST FILLED HERE RECENTLY IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
HE'S AT THAT POINT, AND I THINK RIGHT NOW YOU'VE GOT ALL THESE POSITIONS FILLED EXCEPT ONE.
HE SAID THAT HE WENT THROUGH A LITTLE REORG WHEN ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES RETIRED.
HE DID A REORG A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AS WELL.
>> DID THE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR JUST GET FOLDED IN WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTOR?
>> NO, SIR. AT THAT TIME, THAT WAS THE EMPLOYEE THAT RETIRED.
HE WAS A CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR, AND THEN HE WAS A BUILDING INSPECTOR AS WELL AT THAT TIME.
INSTEAD OF HIRING ANOTHER CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR, DILLON JUST TOOK ON THOSE DUTIES.
[00:10:01]
>> THE PUBLIC WORK SUPERINTENDENT TOOK OVER THE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR DUTIES.
>> WITH THE BUILDING WAR WE'VE HAD IN PLACE FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, PROBABLY HAVEN'T BEEN DEMAND FOR THIS POSITION IS THERE, IS THERE DEMAND ON THOSE POSITIONS NOW SINCE THE BUILDING WAR BEEN LIFTED AND GOING TO BE MORE BUILDINGS?
>> NO. THERE THERE WAS STILL PLENTY OF DEMAND BECAUSE WE HAD A CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED CONSTRUCTION THAT WAS ALLOWED DURING THAT TIME.
IT MIGHT BE A SLIGHT INCREASE, BUT IT WILL BE IF IT STARTS LOOKING LIKE WE'LL NEED SOMETHING I'LL COME I ASK.
>> EARLIER TODAY, ALSO, JUST FOR COMPARATIVE PURPOSES, I TRIED TO PULL THE CITY THAT WAS LIKE SIMILAR SIZE TO US, I THINK THAT LUCAS IS PROBABLY THE MOST SIMILAR SIZED CITY TO US, AT LEAST IN THE AREA, AND AS FAR AS EMPLOYEE COUNTS GO IN THE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, THEY CURRENTLY HAVE 10 POSITIONS IN THEIR ADMIN.
FIRE IS HARD TO COMPARE JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE A FULL-TIME STAFF, AND PURSE IS GOING TO BE BASED ON PART-TIME FIREFIGHTERS RIGHT THERE.
BUT PUBLIC WORKS IS THE OTHER ONE THAT IS COMPARATIVE.
WE HAVE NINE, AND THEY CURRENTLY HAVE 17 EMPLOYEES IN THEIR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SO JUST FOR COMPARATIVE.
>> IS THEIR PUBLIC WORKS DOING SOMETHING ELSE IS SUCH A BIG DIFFERENCE?
>> IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE A PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, LIKE WE DO, BUT THEY ALSO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR AND COORDINATOR, THEY HAVE TWO BUILDING INSPECTORS, A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, A PLANNING COORDINATOR, PUBLIC WORK SUPERVISOR, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS MANAGER, BUT I THINK WHERE THEY REALLY GET OTHER EMPLOYEES IS THEY HAVE THREE PUBLIC WORK SPECIALISTS, TWO, AND THEN A FIVE PUBLIC WORK SPECIALIST, ONES.
THEY'VE GOT EIGHT PUBLIC WORK SPECIALISTS, WHEREAS GARY RIGHT NOW HAS THREE.
>> IS THERE THIS THEM HAVING COMMERCIAL.
>> COMING ON TO THE GENERAL FUND REVENUES, THIS IS BASED ON THE CURRENT BUDGET THROUGH RIGHT NOW, THE '24, '25 BUDGET.
YOU CAN SEE THAT 75% OF OUR REVENUE SOURCE COMES FROM PROPERTY TAXES.
IN COMPARISON, LUCAS HAS 44% OF THEIR REVENUES COME FROM PROPERTY TAXES, MURPHY HAS 51% OF THEIR REVENUE THAT COMES FROM PROPERTY TAXES.
COMPARED TO EVERYWHERE ELSE AROUND, WE'RE ON OUR PROPERTY TAXES A LOT MORE.
OUR NEXT LARGEST REVENUE SOURCE IS INTEREST, AND UP UNTIL ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO, THAT WAS PROBABLY ONE OF OUR SMALLEST REVENUE SOURCES, BUT INTEREST RATES HAVE REALLY CLIMBED OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS, AND SO THAT'S BECOME THE LARGEST PORTION OF OUR REVENUE SOURCE NOW.
BEDDING FEES HAS DECREASED OVER THE YEARS.
IN THE PAST, THAT WAS ONE OF OUR BIGGER REVENUE SOURCES.
SALES TAX HAS BEEN PRETTY CLOSE, REMAINED THE SAME FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS.
TALKING ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES, THE RATE ITSELF IS MADE UP OF TWO PORTIONS.
YOU'VE GOT THE M&O PORTION AND THE I&S PORTION.
THE M&O IS WHAT GOES INTO THE GENERAL FUND, HELPS FUND THE GENERAL FUND, AND THE I&S PORTION IS WHAT GOES OVER TO THE DEBT SERVICE, AND THAT'S WHAT WE MAKE OUR PAYMENTS ON THE OUTSTANDING BONDS.
LOOKING AT THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE M&O AND I&S RATE.
THE BLUE IS GOING TO BE THE M&O PORTION, THE GRAY'S INS.
YOU CAN SEE AS DEBT IS PAID OFF, THAT GRAY AREA GETS SMALLER EACH YEAR, AND THAT BUILDS UP TO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO THE NEXT SLIDE HERE IS OUR OUTSTANDING BONDS.
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TWO BONDS THAT ARE SUPPORTED BY PROPERTY TAXES.
BUT THE 2015 CO BOND, AND IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS WE'LL BE MAKING THE FINAL PAYMENT ON THAT, AND THAT WILL BE COMING OFF THE BOOKS.
THAT WOULD JUST LEAVE US WITH ONE OUTSTANDING BOND AND THAT'S THAT 2019 ONE, AND IT'LL BE PAID OFF IN FISCAL YEAR '27, '28.
[00:15:02]
'28, AFTER THAT YEAR, WE WILL HAVE NO I&S PORTION OF THE TAX RATE UNLESS WE ISSUE NEW DEBT.>> I LIKE TO DO THIS SLIDE HERE, JUST TO GIVE A WAY OF SEEING WHERE YOUR TAX DOLLARS GOES.
THE VALUE IN '24-'25, OUR CURRENT YEAR RIGHT NOW, THE AVERAGE VALUE OF A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME IS ABOUT $1.1 MILLION.
AVERAGE HOMEOWNER PAYS ABOUT $3,500 IN PROPERTY TAXES, THAT'S THE CITY PORTION, AND THIS IS A BREAKOUT OF WHAT YOU GET FOR $3,500.
YOU GET A LITTLE OVER $1,000 GOES INTO TRANSFERS.
THAT MONEY GOES OVER FUNDS A CIP, THAT FUNDS THE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND, THAT FUNDS THE FACILITY FUND, DRAINAGE FUND.
NEXT ONE IS ABOUT $740 GOES OVER TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO FUND OUR POLICE SERVICES, $670 GOES OVER TO GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND THAT FUNDS OUR ADMIN, LEGAL, IT, CREW, $450 GOES TO FIRE AND EMS, $390 GOES OVER TO PUBLIC WORKS, $832 GOES TO PAY OUR DEBT, AND THEN $55 GOES TOWARDS THE CITY PROPERTY, WHICH IS LIKE INSURANCE UTILITIES, THOSE TYPES OF EXPENSES.
MOVE FORWARD TO THE FUTURE YEAR HERE, THE '25-'26, WHERE WE RECEIVED THE CERTIFIED ESTIMATES BACK IN APRIL, AND JUST A LITTLE OVER TWO BILLION DOLLARS.
WE WILL RECEIVE THE CERTIFIED TOTAL SOMETIME PROBABLY TOWARDS THE END OF NEXT WEEK.
ONCE I RECEIVE THOSE NUMBERS, WE CAN DO THE TAX RATE CALCULATIONS AND ALL THAT.
THE MEETING THAT WE HAVE NEXT WEEK ON TUESDAY, THE BUDGET WILL BE PREPARED ON A TWO BILLION DOLLAR AMOUNT HERE, AND THE EXISTING TAX RATE THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.
WHENEVER I RECEIVE THE UPDATED TAX RATES AND THE UPDATED CERTIFIED TOTALS, THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE CHANGES BETWEEN THE FIRST BUDGET WORKSHOP AND THE SECOND BUDGET WORKSHOP.
THIS TWO BILLION DOLLARS WE HAVE ON THE CERTIFIED ESTIMATE, THAT'S AN INCREASE OF ALMOST $135 MILLION FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
THAT'S ALMOST 7%, AND THAT'S GOING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL $418,000 OF REVENUE.
OF THAT, ABOUT HALF OF IT IS FROM NEW PROPERTY THAT'S ADDED, $71 MILLION, AND THEN THAT EQUATES ABOUT $221,000 OF NEW REVENUE.
WHENEVER WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CITY BUDGET AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THE TAX RATE, YOU HAVE FOR IMPACT REASONS, YOU CAN SEE THAT ONE CENT IN THE PROPERTY TAX RATE AFFECTS OUR CITY BUDGET BY $208,000, AND IT AFFECTS THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER ABOUT $114.
FOR YOUR DECREASED TAX RATE SAVES THE HOMEOWNERS ABOUT $114 FOR A CENT AND DROPS THE CITY BUDGET BY ABOUT $208,000.
THE INCREASE OF 135 MILLION FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR ACCOUNTING TO 418,775 INCREASE OF REVENUES.
TYPICALLY, ON COLLIN COUNTY ASSESSMENTS, THEY RAMP THE INCREASE ON TAXATION.
IS THIS REFLECTING A RAMP, OR IS THIS REFLECTING THE END OF THE RAMP?
>> IF YOUR HOME GOES FROM SAY 1.1-1.3 MILLION, THEY'LL INCREASE OR LADDER YOUR TAX DUE.
>> THIS METRIC IS GOING TO REPRESENT ONLY THE 10%, NOT THE TOTAL VALUE THAT WE HAVE INCREASED, ONLY THE RECOGNIZABLE VALUE.
LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY VALUES OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS.
YOU CAN SEE IT'S BEEN A PRETTY STEADY CLIMB.
THIS YEAR, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE ALMOST 8% INCREASE IN THE TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE FROM PRIOR YEAR.
THAT'S ONE OF THE SMALLER INCREASES.
PRIOR TO THAT, THE SMALLEST INCREASE THAT WE'VE SEEN FROM YEAR TO YEAR WAS 2020-2021, WHEN WE HAD A 9% INCREASE.
WE'VE HAD INCREASES AS LARGE AS 19% FROM 21-22.
THIS IS ONE OF THE MORE CONSERVATIVE YEARS SO FAR FOR US.
LOOKING AT THE TOTAL TAX RATE ON AN INDIVIDUAL.
YOU CAN SEE THAT ABOUT 67% IN THOSE FOLKS THAT LIVE IN THE ALLEN ISD SCHOOL DISTRICT, ABOUT 67% OF THE TAXES THEY PAY GOES TOWARDS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S TAX BILL, 19% GOES TO THE CITY OF PARKER,
[00:20:01]
AND THEN ABOUT 9% GOES TO COLLIN COUNTY AND 5% GOES TO THE COLLEGE.SIMILARLY, PLANO ISD, ABOUT 66% OF THE TAX BILL GOES TO PLANO, 20% GOES TO PARKER, 9% COLLIN COUNTY, AND 5% COLLIN COLLEGE.
THIS HAS A LIST OF ALL THE CITIES IN COLLIN COUNTY, AND IT HAS A FIVE-YEAR HISTORICAL RATES HERE.
YOU CAN SEE PARKER'S HIGHLIGHTED THERE IN BOLD, ABOUT 3%, 9% DECREASE FROM THE PRIOR YEAR WAS LAST TAX RATE.
OVER A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, THE TAX RATE HAS DROPPED ABOUT 15%.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL TAX RATE RIGHT HERE COMPARED TO THE AVERAGE OF COLLIN COUNTY CITIES, WERE ABOUT 11 CENTS LESS THAN THE AVERAGE IN THE COUNTY.
LOOK AT CITIES WHERE THE SIXTH-LOWEST TAX RATE IN COLLIN COUNTY.
WE'LL SAY THAT LOWRY CROSSING, NEW HOPE, AND ST PAUL, THOSE FIRST THREE, DON'T OFF FOR THE SAME SERVICES THAT WE DO.
REALLY, IF YOU TAKE THOSE OUT OF CONSIDERATION, WE'RE PROBABLY THE THIRD-LOWEST TAX RATE IN COLLIN COUNTY.
EVEN THE LUCAS DOESN'T HAVE A POLICE DEPARTMENT.
BUT THEY DO HAVE A FULL-TIME FIRE DEPARTMENT.
>> AS A PERCENT. WE HAD THE SLIDE EARLIER BY DOLLAR VALUE, WHERE YOUR TAX DOLLARS GOES.
BUT LOOKING AT IT FROM A PERCENT STANDPOINT, 32% IS GOING TO THE TRANSFERS, 22% POLICE, 13% FIRE, 14% ADMIN, PUBLIC WORKS 12%, NON-DEPARTMENTAL 7%.
TYPICALLY, IN A CITY, IF FIRE WAS FULL-TIME, YOU WOULD SEE ABOUT 50% OF THE BUDGET GOES TO PUBLIC SAFETY BETWEEN POLICE AND FIRE.
LOOKING AT IT FROM CATEGORY-WISE, ABOUT 31% OF THE BUDGET IS SALARY BENEFITS, 32% TRANSFERS, AND THE SERVICES/SUNDRIES 20%, AND THEN FOLLOWED BY MAINTENANCE AND SUPPLIES.
GETTING BACK TO THE FUTURE MEETINGS.
I'M GOING TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME THIS CALENDAR HERE THAN I DID EARLIER, JUST BECAUSE I WANT TO GIVE YOU SOME DETAIL ON WHAT WOULD BE HAPPENING AT THESE OTHER MEETINGS.
AT THE BUDGET WORKSHOP NEXT TUESDAY, THE MAYOR COUNCIL IS GOING TO BE PRESENTED WITH LINE-ITEM BUDGETS FOR ALL FUNDS, AND THEY'LL ALSO BE PRESENTED WITH SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS FROM DEPARTMENT HEADS.
THIS IS WHERE THE COUNCIL WOULD PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON THE LINE-ITEM BUDGETS AND SUPPLEMENTALS.
MIGHT NOT MAKE ANY FINAL DECISIONS. NEXT USE.
I SUSPECT WE WOULD BE MAKING FINAL DECISIONS, BUT AT LEAST GIVE DIRECTION ON WHAT CHANGES YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE BUDGET, AND GIVE ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT BEFORE THE SECOND BUDGET WORKSHOP ON AUGUST 5TH.
AUGUST 5TH, THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD REVIEW THE CHANGES FROM THE FIRST BUDGET WORKSHOP.
WE'D HAVE UPDATED NUMBERS FOR PROPERTY TAXES, THE RATES, AND ALL THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET.
THEN THAT YOU HAVE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE BUDGET, AND CAN MAKE ADDITIONAL CHANGES IF YOU NEEDED.
ON AUGUST 5TH, WE'LL ALSO BE SETTING A PROPOSED TAX RATE.
NOW THIS TAX RATE DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE THE FINAL TAX RATE, BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE THE MAX TAX RATE THAT WE WOULD USE.
AT A LATER DATE, IF YOU DECIDED YOU WANTED TO DECREASE THE TAX RATE, OBVIOUSLY, WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE UP UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9TH.
SEPTEMBER 9TH, THERE'LL BE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE AND THE BUDGET.
THE TAX RATE WILL BE ADOPTED AT THIS MEETING, BUT IF NOT, THIS WILL ALLOW US ADDITIONAL WEEK TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING IF WE HAD TO.
BECAUSE IT'S DUE TO COLLIN COUNTY, THE BUDGET IS DUE AT NOON ON THE 17TH.
ALSO WE'LL BE TAKING THE FINAL ACTION ON THE BUDGET TAX RATE ON THE 9TH.
UNLESS IT'S DECIDED TO DO A WEEK LATER. QUESTIONS?
>> MAYBE COMMENT AS ME FOLLOW BY QUESTION.
I'D LIKE YOU TO LOOK INTO WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT ON OUR REVENUE IF WE RECOGNIZE THE OVER-65 GAP RATHER THAN GIVING
[00:25:02]
AN EXEMPTION FOR OVER-65 [INAUDIBLE].>> I ASKED I DON'T KNOW THE FIGURE THAT OUT.
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU HAVE TO KNOW.
I GUESS THE COUNTY WOULD KNOW ALL THE HOMES THAT QUALIFY.
>> I WOULD HAVE TO CONTACT THEM WHEN THEY'D HAVE TO RUN THOSE NUMBERS FOR ME.
>> IT'S BASICALLY JUST THE PRINCIPLE THAT WHEN A PERSON IS RETIRING, THEY'RE OVER 65, THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO CONTINUALLY FACE INCREASING COSTS TO LIVE IN A HOUSE, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO RETIRE, WHICH IS THE WHOLE PURPOSE FOR THE OVER-65, MOST TAXES RECOGNIZE THAT.
WE DON'T. I THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE INTO LOOKING INTO IT BECAUSE, AS YOU KNOW, EVEN WITH AN EXEMPTION, THE COUNTY KEEPS RAISING THE APPRAISAL VALUES.
IF YOU LIVE IN A HOUSE, YOU ON IT FIVE YEARS, 10 YEARS, 20 YEARS, WHATEVER YOU FINALLY RETIRE, AND THE GOVERNMENT JUST KEEPS RAISING THE VALUE OF YOUR HOUSE, TAXING MORE FOR IT EVEN WHEN YOU RETIRE SUPPOSE YOU PAY OFF YOUR HOUSE YOU LIVE DEBT FREE, BUT WE ALL THE GOVERNMENT FOR A HOUSE.
THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS LIVING IN A HOUSE DEBT-FREE.
>> YOU MUST PAY YOUR GOVERNMENT RENT EVEN WHEN YOU RETIRE AND PAY TAXES.
>> I'LL REACH OUT TO COLLIN COUNTY TOMORROW AND SEE IF THEY CAN RUN THAT NUMBER FROM ME EASILY.
I'LL GET BACK WITH YOU ALL ON THE 22ND, LET YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IMPACT WOULD BE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> ARE WE GOING TO OBSERVE THE [INAUDIBLE] BUDGET BEFORE?
>> YES, SIR. YOU HAVE THE LINE ITEM BUDGETS.
I WILL EMAIL THOSE TO YOU NO LATER THAN 5:00 ON FRIDAY.
I'LL ALSO EMAIL ALL THE SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS AND HAVE THOSE IN THERE AS WELL.
>> WELL, THE WAY YOU PRESENT THE INFORMATION TO US ON THE TRANSFERS OF MONEY OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND INTO THE VARIOUS FUNDS GIVES US A CLEAR INSIGHT INTO HOW WE'RE WHAT WE'RE ESSENTIALLY DOING IS WE'RE PREPAYING THE DEBT.
WE DON'T ISSUE BONDS FOR THE MOST PART.
WE GOT TWO THERE OUT THERE, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, WE PAY CASH FOR [INAUDIBLE], WE PAY CASH FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS.
WHEN WE PAY CASH FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS, THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR IT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE NOT SIMPLY INCURRING SOMETHING THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE KNOWN AS DEBT, BECAUSE DEBT IS A RETIREMENT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST, SO WE'RE PREPAYING FOR ALL OF OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS BY SETTING ASIDE MONEY IN ADVANCE.
I WANT TO SEE HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE SETTING ASIDE EACH YEAR IN ADVANCES BECAUSE OUR CITIZENS THAT LIVE HERE TODAY ARE PAYING FOR PROJECTS THEY'RE GOING TO BE YEARS AND LIKE THE WATERPOWER PROJECT.
A SEVEN-MILLION-DOLLAR PROJECT IS GOING TO BE USED FOR THE NEXT 75 YEARS HERE IN PARKER.
MOST OF US WILL BE DEAD AND GONE,75 YEARS FROM NOW, WE'LL HOPEFULLY LIVE SOME SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THAT.
BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE PEOPLE WHO'VE LIVED HERE FOR THE LAST I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG TWO TO 10 YEARS HAVE BEEN ACCRUING THE MONEY TO PAY THAT SEVEN BILLION DOLLARS FOR THE BENEFIT OF PEOPLE WHO LIVED HERE FOR THE NEXT 75 YEARS.
I WANT TO GET A BETTER FEEL FOR HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE ALLOCATED IN SAVINGS TO BUILD THOSE FUNDS UP TO AVOID THAT, AND WHAT THAT COST IS ON THE BOARD.
>> I GET THAT FOR. I CAN SPEAK THE LINES.
THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING ALSO WE WERE TO DISCUSS THE WATER RATES.
I MISSPOKE ON THAT MEETING BECAUSE I SAID THAT WE HAD RAISED OUR RATES TO CASH FUND PROJECTS.
IN FACT, WHEN THAT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNSEL, THEY WERE GIVEN TWO SCENARIOS.
OUR COUNSEL CHOSE THE SCENARIO THAT WOULD RAISE THE RATES TO MAKE THE DEBT PAYMENTS OF DEBT WERE ISSUED.
IT WOULD PREFUND SIMILAR PROJECTS, BUT ULTIMATELY, IT WAS DEPENDENT ON ISSUING DEBT.
BUT BY THE SAME TOKEN, THERE WERE ALSO A FEW PROJECTS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY THOUGHT THAT WE NEEDED AND WE DON'T NEED.
I THINK A LOT OF THAT HAD TO DO WITH SOME MONEY THAT WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY FOR NORTH TEXAS MISS WATER DISTRICT FOR THE WATER CONNECTION ITSELF.
WE THOUGHT THERE WAS GOING TO BE SOME UPFRONT COSTS THAT WE ENDED UP NOT HAVING TO PAY.
I THINK THAT'S WHY WE HAVE SUCH A SURPLUS OF FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE, THAT THERE'S NOT AS A DIRE NEED TO ISSUE DEBT.
[00:30:03]
>> I APPRECIATE COUNCILMAN GRAM'S QUESTION.
WHEN YOU'RE ROLLING UP THOSE COSTS, COULD YOU INCLUDE, SO WHEN WE STACK AWAY MONEY, WE HAVE CONSERVATIVE INTEREST-BEARING INSTRUMENTS THAT TYPICALLY LAG THE RATE OF INFLATION, OR AT LEAST OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
THERE'S THE COST OF HOLDING THE MONEY, IN WHICH YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY- IT'S CONTRACTION, NOT CONTRACTING.
THE VALUE OF THE HOLDING AGAINST BOND ISSUANCE WHERE YOU HAVE AN INTEREST RATE, WHICH HAS A COST.
BUT YEAH, I THINK WHAT WOULD BE INTERESTING IS OVER THE TIME HORIZON OF THE SAVINGS, HOW MUCH ARE WE AT TREATING OUT OF THAT SAVINGS FROM HOLDING IT VERSUS WHAT WOULD WE PAY LIFE OF THE BOND WHERE OVER THE COURSE OF A 30 YEAR, 25 YEAR PERIOD, YEAH, OF COURSE, INFLATION, WHICH, OF COURSE, YOU REALIZE IN A POSITIVE MANNER, THEN.
>> DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION [INAUDIBLE]?
>> YEAH, THEY ALREADY ANSWERED.
>> SINCE WE'RE AHEAD OF SCHEDULE, I THINK, CAN I ASK A MORE GENERAL QUESTION?
>> CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CO BONDS AND GO BONDS?
>> SURE. MAKE SURE I'LL GET IT RIGHT.
CO COUNSEL CAN ISSUE WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL, GO REQUIRES VOTER APPROVAL.
CO COUNSEL COULD GO IN AND ISSUE BONDS WITHOUT WAITING FOR AN ELECTION.
THE GO WOULD REQUIRE THE ELECTION.
>> THAT WOULD BE IF WE DEEMED THE WATER TOWER CRITICAL ENOUGH THAT COUNSEL SAID, WE'VE GOT TO DO THIS.
WHEREAS, IF WE DECIDED TO ADD A BIG PAVILION IN THE PARK THAT HAD 30 SPACES, THAT SHOULD GO TO THE VOTERS.
>> THERE'S ALSO SOME RESTRICTIONS ALSO.
[INAUDIBLE] NEED TO BE ISSUED OR ANSWERED BY ON COUNSEL BECAUSE YOU'RE RESTRICTED ON WHAT YOU CAN ISSUE CO4, WHAT YOU CAN ISSUE GO4.
USED TO THEY WERE A LOT MORE LENIENT, AND PEOPLE STARTED ISSUING CO BONDS TO COVER A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT WAS BYPASSING BOULDER APPROVAL.
THEN THEY'VE CLAMPED DOWN ON THAT IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, AND THEY'VE MADE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO ISSUE THOSE BONDS NOW.
NOW IT'S REQUIRED TO ISSUE GO BONDS.
BUT WE SHOULD BE INVOLVED BY COUNSEL ON THOSE RESTRICTIONS.
>> CITY MURPHY DID A CO FOR THE CITY HALL. DID NOT GO WELL.
>> I THINK THAT CHANGED 2017-19 [INAUDIBLE]
>> I WOULDN'T THINK THAT WOULD BE WISE, EVEN IF WE COULD.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
>> THANK YOU, ROSE. THIS IS A GREAT PRESENTATION. I APPRECIATE.
>> CONGRATULATIONS. YOU MONEY GOES.
I REALLY LIKE THAT. THAT WAS A GOOD ONE. I LIKE THAT ONE.
>> GREAT JOB. GOOD DOING YOUR JOB. REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
>> THANKS, [INAUDIBLE] WILL BE HERE.
>> GREAT ANY PRELIMINARY INDICATION FROM THE COUNTY WHERE PROPERTY VALUES ARE GOING TO COME IN FOR THIS YEAR.
>> TYPICALLY PRIOR YEARS, IT'S USUALLY COME IN HIGHER THAN WHAT THE CERTIFIED ESTIMATE THAT THEY GAVE US.
BUT I THINK IT WAS LAST YEAR, IT CAME IN UNDER THE CERTIFIED ESTIMATE KIND OF SURPRISED ME.
BUT TYPICALLY IT COMES IN A LITTLE OVER.
BUT LIKE I SAID, WHEN HE DOES THOSE MEETINGS EVERY YEAR AT THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, HE SAID THIS IS A GUESS.
IT ALL DEPENDS ON, I GUESS I LOOK THEIR HEARINGS THAT THEY HAVE ON APPRAISAL TEST SERIES.
IT COMES IN JUST A LITTLE OVER WHAT THE CERTIFIED ESTIMATE IS.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. [INAUDIBLE] P
[ADJOURN]
FIVE, AND THEY WERE ADJOURNED.[00:35:02]
THE BUDGET PROCESS OVERVIEW WORKSHOP.[CALL TO ORDER]
I HEREBY RECONVENE THE PARKER CITY COUNCIL MEETING THAT IS JULY 15, 2025 AND 7:00 P.M. AT THIS TIME, I WILL AGAIN ASK IF THERE IS A SUPER FORUM.>> MADAM MAYOR REALLY GOOD TO SEE YOU TODAY.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, WE WILL GO TO THE PLEDGES AND I WILL ASK PASTOR KELLY WAS TRYING TO MAKE AN ESCAPE.
WELL, SHE WILL DO THE AMERICAN PLEDGE AND MARCUS [INAUDIBLE] WILL DO THE TEXAS PLEDGE.
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
I WILL ASK IF THERE ARE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS.I DID HAVE ONE LETTER OF PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT IS FROM STEVE ROY THAT WILL BE ATTACHED TO THE MINUTES OF THE RECORD.
DID YOU FILL OUT A GRAND CARD MARCUS? IF YOU JUST HAND THE GREEN CARD COUNSEL.
[NOISE] THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED.
>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JOHN.
I HAVE HEARD ABOUT THE COMMENTARY ABOUT OUR PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE.
ONE PART OF THE PARTICULAR COMMENT, WHICH I FIND VERY INSULTING OF OUR DEMOCRACY, I HAVE NEVER SEEN A SITE OF TOTALITARIANISM IN PARKER IN OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT FOR A NOISE ORDINANCE PROPOSAL.
LET'S ALL UNDERSTAND WHY LAWS FORM OUR DEMOCRACY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
ED LYNCH CLAIMS IT TAKES AWAY OUR FREEDOM.
BUT LET'S UNDERSTAND THE TRUTH.
FREEDOM ISN'T FREE IF YOU BREAK THE LAW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
IF YOU WERE BREAKING THE LAW, WOULD HAPPENED DURING FEBRUARY 17 OF THE PROTEST OF LAST YEAR FROM VIOLATING OUR TRAFFIC LAWS, IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
FREEDOM ISN'T FREE WHEN SOMEONE DISTURBS THE PEACE OF A NEIGHBOR OR AN ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD UNDER LOCAL LAW.
TO THE PREVIOUS COMMENT FROM ED LYNCH SAID IN THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS IS AN INSULT TO US.
WE KNOW THAT IF A IS BEING BROKEN, IT MUST BE SET AS A DEMOCRACY.
SETTING UP LAWS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE DISTURBING THE PEACE IS BREAKING THE ROW IN THE CITY OF FARBER.
[00:40:03]
WE LIVE IN THE CITY OF OUR OWN LAWS AND OF OUR OWN FINAL CONSEQUENCES ISSUED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.THESE FIRST CHANGED MR. LYNCH GIVES ABOUT THE PROPOSAL IS A MOTIVE TO GIVE MORE CHAOS WITHOUT THE LAW OR THE ORDER MUST BE BROUGHT.
IT'S CONCERN THAT SOME PEOPLE AND OTHER RESIDENTS WOULD SHOW A MOTIVE FOR QUESTIONABLE REASONS TO BRING MORE NOISY CHAOS INTO PARKER.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS?
[ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST]
THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEMS OF INTEREST.WE HAVE COMING UP ON AUGUST 13.
AT 5:00 P.M., THE PARKER AND RECREATION COMMISSION WILL BE MEETING HERE IN THIS.
WE ARE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO ATTEND AND WE ARE STILL LOOKING FOR MEMBERS, IF ANYBODY WAS INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING OR JOINING PARKER AND LYNCH, PLEASE FILL OUT AN APPLICATION.
WE CAN DOWNLOAD ONE OFF OUR WEBSITE.
THE ONLY OTHER THING ON ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST IS THE NEXT BUDGET WORKSHOP, WHICH WILL BE ON TUESDAY, JULY 22, FROM 10:00 A.M. TO 4:00 P.M. EVERYBODY IS WELCOME.
NEXT, WE'LL GO TO THE CONSENSUS AGENDA.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
THERE ARE TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, THE APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 22, AND THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR APRIL 30.DOES ANY COUNCIL MEMBER WISH TO HAVE ANY OF THOSE PULLED OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK KATHERINE SOME QUESTIONS ON WHO'S ALLOWED TO VOTE ON THESE BECAUSE MOST OF THE PEOPLE HERE WERE NOT COUNCIL PEOPLE DURING THAT TIME.
IN PARTICULAR I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
FOR MYSELF, I WAS A COUNCIL PERSON ON OF THESE AND SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE.
I DID ATTEND THE APRIL 30 MEETING THOUGH, BUT I DID NOT ATTEND THE APRIL 22 MEETING.
WHO IS APPROPRIATE TO VOTE ON THESE ITEMS?
>> THERE'S NOTHING THAT DISQUALIFIES YOU FROM VOTING ON THEM.
SOMETIMES COUNCIL MEMBERS CHOOSE TO ABSTAIN FOR MEETINGS THAT THEY WERE NOT PRESENT FOR, WHICH IS ALSO APPROPRIATE.
IN THIS CASE, THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY PRESENT AN ISSUE GIVEN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY ABSTAIN.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT? AGAIN, I'LL ASK, IS THERE ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? NOT HEARING THAT.
THEN I WILL ASK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS WRITTEN.
>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS WRITTEN.
>> WELL WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BOB AND THE SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM BUDDY PILGRIM.
TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED, ARE THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> I JUST WANT TO ASK THE TWO THAT WERE ACTUALLY SET ON COUNCIL AT TIME.
IF YOU BELIEVE THEY ARE ACCURATE AS PRESENTED. IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THEM.
>> MADAM MAYOR, YOU WERE AT THE MEETING AND BUDDY WAS AT THE MEETING.
>> COLIN WAS JUST ASKING IF YOU THINK THAT MINUTES ARE ACCURATE. THAT'S ALL.
>> SORRY, THE REGISTER THAT WAY.
I DO THINK THE MINUTES ARE ACCURATE. MR. PILGRIM.
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR. I HAVE LOOKED BACK OVER THEM AND I BELIEVE THAT.
>> FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT MAY NOT REMEMBER THE MEETING ON APRIL 22 WAS HELD IN THE FIRE STATION.
IT WAS NOT HELD IN THIS ROOM BECAUSE THIS ROOM HAD EARLY VOTING OR I THINK IT WAS GOING ON AT THAT PERIOD OF TIME.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS? THEN I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
[00:45:01]
NONE OPPOSED.[5. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2025-853 SUSPENDING THE JULY 31, 2025 EFFECTIVE DATE OF ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY’S REQUESTED RATE CHANGE TO PERMIT THE CITY TIME TO STUDY THE REQUEST AND TO ESTABLISH REASONABLE RATES.]
NOW WE'LL GO TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEMS. CONSIDERATION OR APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-53, SUSPENDING THE JULY 31, 2025, EFFECTIVE DATE OF CORE ELECTRICITY DELIVERY, COMPANIES REQUESTED RATE CHANGE TO PERMIT THE CITY TIME TO STUDY THE REQUEST AND TO ESTABLISH REASONABLE RATES.IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? I'M NOT HEARING ANY I'D CALL FOR A MOTION.
>> I GO TO THE MOTION. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET DOWN TO FINDING IT IN THE [INAUDIBLE] THE MOTION.
>> WHY DON'T WE GO BACK TO DISCUSSION AND WE CAN GIVE YOU THE MINUTE THAT YOU NEED.
WHAT'S THE EXPECTED DELAY THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR?
>> LOOKS LIKE THAT. THE CITY OF PARKER AS WELL AS A LOT OF OTHER CITIES PARTICIPATE IN A STEERING COMMITTEE THAT REPRESENTS US IN NEGOTIATIONS, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE TIME TO STUDY AND CALL FOR REQUESTED RATES.
I DON'T REMEMBER SIGNING A VOTE IF THEY WILL COME FORWARD. GO AHEAD.
>> THIS IS WHAT THEY SENT THEIR APPLICATION.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE STEERING COMMITTEE IS [INAUDIBLE].
>> THIS IS SOMETHING WE DO EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS AND IT'S THIS GAME ENCORE SENDS THESE RATES OVER.
THEN WE JOIN THE STEERING COMMITTEE WHO NEGOTIATES BACK WITH THEM AND TRIES TO GET THE RATE DOWN.
ANYWAY, IT'S A REPEATED ITEM THAT COMES UP EVERY COUPLE YEARS.
>> I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION 2025-853, SUSPENDING THE JULY 31, EFFECTIVE DATE OF ENCORE ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANIES REQUESTED RATE CHANGE TO PERMIT THE CITY TIME TO STUDY THE REQUEST AND TO ESTABLISH REASONABLE RATES.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BILLY BEAR AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER DAR SHARP.
TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-53.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
[6. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2025-848 ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR COUNCIL NOMINATIONS.]
>> CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-848, ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR COUNCIL NOMINATIONS.
NOW, IT SHOULD HAVE SAID, AND THIS WAS UPDATED, SO I HOPE EVERYBODY PULLS THE UPDATE BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO VERSIONS OF THE PROCEDURE.
THE COUNCIL MAY NEED TO DISCUSS THIS OR DECIDE WHICH ONE THEY PREFER, OR IF THEY DON'T LIKE EITHER OF THEM.
>> THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SECTION 4.
>> THE REAL DIFFERENCE IS WHETHER IT JUST COMES OUT AS A MOTION, ESSENTIALLY, OR WHETHER IT'S A NOMINATION PROCESS, AND THEN IT IS RECORDED BY MINUTE ORDER AS OPPOSED TO RESOLUTION.
>> MY PERSONAL FEELING WAS, I THOUGHT THE SECOND ONE WAS OVERLY COMPLEX.
THERE'S ADDED EXTRA COMPLEXITY THAT DIDN'T MAKE ANY GAIN IN THE LONG RUN.
>> I THINK THE SECOND ONE GAVE SOME CHANCE FOR THE NOMINATIONS TO BE LISTED,
[00:50:06]
SO LET ME VOTE FOR ONE PERSON, SO THAT WE COULD LOOK AND SEE IF THERE WERE OTHER NOMINEES FROM OTHER PEOPLE ON THE BOARD BEFORE WE VOTED TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER INTEREST.>> I AGREE WITH THAT. IT DID, WHICH IS WHAT STARTED DRIVING THIS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
I WAS THE ONE WHO ORIGINALLY ASKED THAT WE FORMALIZE SOME PROCEDURES BECAUSE WE'VE HAD AT LEAST THREE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS THAT I WAS AWARE OF WHERE PEOPLE WERE EITHER PUT ON A COMMITTEE OR PUT ON COUNCIL AND IT WAS AT LEAST APPEARED TO HAVE JUST BEEN RAMMED THROUGH, PRE PLANNED, NO OPPORTUNITIES FOR NOMINATIONS, MULTIPLE NOMINATIONS TO BE CONSIDERED.
I THINK THE REVISED VERSION GIVES US THAT OPPORTUNITY.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? IF NOT, I WOULD ACCEPT THE MOTION.
IF YOU MAKE THE MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE WHICH VERSION YOU'RE GOING WITH.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD MOVE THE RESOLUTION 2025-848, THE RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR APPOINTMENTS BY CITY COUNCIL AND A REPEAL AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, THE REVISED VERSION, THE NEW VERSION OF SECTION 4 BE ADOPTED AS AN ORDINANCE AND POLICY OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF PARKER.
THAT'S THE SECOND VERSION LISTED ON THE AGENDA?
>> THANK YOU. THE REVISED VERSION.
>> 2.2. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE HERE. WAS THAT A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM PILGRIM AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HALBERT TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2025-848 VERSION 2.2.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION AT ALL?? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL OF US IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
MOTION CARRIES 4:01, ONE AGAINST IS COUNCIL MEMBER BARRON.
[7. UPDATE(S)]
NOW, WE WILL GO TO UPDATES.MR. MACHADO, I WILL ASK YOU TO PLEASE GIVE US AN UPDATE ON 2551.
>> HAVE THEY STOPPED BECAUSE OF THE RAIN?
>> IT'S SLOWED DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
>> I WAS READING THE COUNTY WITH THEIR TRAILS,,, GROUP AND THE COUNTY SAYS THAT TXDOT WAS TELLING THEM THAT THERE WOULD BE A FIVE TO SIX FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK WITH A THREE FOOT BUFFER FROM THE ROAD ALONG THAT STRETCH.
DO YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THAT? [BACKGROUND] WE WERE JUST WONDERING IF IT WAS, WHAT THE WIDTH IS, AND WHETHER THERE IS A BUFFER OR IT IS DIRECTLY NEXT TO THE ROAD LIKE THE OTHER TXDOT SIDEWALKS ARE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THIS RIGHT THIS MINUTE.
YOU CAN CONTACT ME LATER WITH THE INFO.
>> ONE BRIEF UPDATE. I RECEIVED NOTICE TODAY THAT THE DEVELOPER OF THE HUFFINES IS NOW PUSHING, THAT'S THE WORD THAT OUR COUNCIL USED IN THE APPEAL IN DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SEWER PERMIT, THAT THE HUFFINES ARE PUSHING FOR THE APPEAL TO MOVE FORWARD AND GET PUT ON THE TRIAL SCHEDULE FOR THE DISTRICT COURT IN AUSTIN.
THEY'RE STILL INTERESTED IN THEIR SEWER PERMIT BEING APPROVED.
THEY'RE LOOKING AT SOME DATES IN FEBRUARY.
I GAVE THEM MY INPUT IN TERMS OF MY INVOLVEMENT BECAUSE I WAS AN INDIVIDUAL PROTESTANT ON THAT PERMIT, NOW REPRESENTED BY LEGAL COUNSEL, AS ARE ABOUT NINE OTHER CITIZENS IN PARKER AND MURPHY, REPRESENTED BY THE SAME COUNSEL.
THE CITY OF PARKER IS GOING TO NEED TO GIVE ITS FEEDBACK, AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE'LL HAVE TO DISCUSS IN CLOSED SESSION AS TO WHAT FEEDBACK WE GIVE FOR TIMING FOR THAT TO BE HEARD IN AUSTIN.
>> IS THERE ANY UPDATE ON MUD?
[00:55:07]
>> IS THERE ANY UPDATE ON [INAUDIBLE]? NONE.
>> ANY UPDATE ON THE POST OFFICE SIP CODES?
>> ON THE DUBLIN ROAD WATER LINES, MR. MACHADO.
>> THE [INAUDIBLE] UP ON PAGE 72 OF THAT SOUTH [INAUDIBLE] ROAD TO THAT.
>> ARE THEY AWARE WE ARE BLOCKING OFF ONE LANE?
>> I WANT TO JUST REMIND THEM THAT THIS IS A MUCH ABOUT THEIR EMPLOYEE SAFETY AS IT IS ABOUT THE CARS TRAVERSING, CONSIDERING HOW MANY ACCIDENTS WE HAVE ON THAT STRETCH.
>> [INAUDIBLE] IS IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING THE RESOLUTION REVISED AND BROUGHT BACK TO COUNCIL, AND THAT'S ON ME, SO I'M WORKING AS FAST AS I CAN.
CRP, I'M HOPING THAT WE WILL HAVE A CITY ADMINISTRATOR WHO WILL ALLOW US MORE INFORMATION TO GO FORWARD ON THE CRP PLAN.
I WOULD LIKE IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A NEW PERSON TO HAVE THEM INVOLVED IN THAT.
I BELIEVE, [INAUDIBLE] WE HAVE SENT OUT LINES COUNTY VERSION.
>> I SENT A VERSION BACK FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO GIVE ME THEIR FEEDBACK ON, AND I'VE ALREADY RECEIVED SOME OF THAT FEEDBACK.
I THINK WE SAID I NEED TO GET BACK BY THE MIDDLE OF AUGUST LAST TIME.
WE WOULD GET THE REST OF THAT BACK BY THE END OF JULY.
>> COUNTY PLAN IS HOPEFULLY GOING TO BE SCHEDULED FOR A WORKSHOP VERY SHORTLY.
>> NOISE COMMITTEE, IS THERE ANY UPDATE ON THE NOISE COMMITTEE?
>> LAST TIME THE COUNCIL WAS INVOLVED, IT WAS SENT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT THREE ISSUES.
THE THREE ISSUES WERE A MINIMUM FINE.
THE COMMITTEE DIDN'T HAVE ANY STRONG FEELINGS EITHER WAY ABOUT THAT.
WE ENDED UP NOT MAKING ANY CHANGES TO THAT, SO THERE'S NO MINIMUM FINE RIGHT NOW.
OF COURSE, THE COUNCIL HAS THE OPTION OF CHANGING THAT.
THE SECOND ONE WAS ABOUT THE MEASUREMENT DISTANCE.
WE CHANGED IT SO THAT THE POLICE WILL TAKE MEASUREMENTS 30 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
>> IT WAS ORIGINALLY FROM THE [INAUDIBLE], AND NOW IT'S FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
IF YOU HAVE A TWO-ACRE LOT, IT'S FROM THE BEGINNING END OF YOUR LOT AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL FOOT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE.
>> THEN THE FINAL ISSUE WAS DETERMINING WHO WAS, I'LL USE THE TERM, AT FAULT.
ONLY TWO OTHER CITIES, WHICH WERE 20 OR SO, WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT, DEALT WITH THAT ISSUE AFTER READING OVER WHAT THEY SAID, AND ALSO INPUT FROM SERGEANT BERDICK.
WE DECIDED THAT THE ISSUE WAS TOO HARD TO CODIFY, AND THE SERGEANT'S FEELING WAS THAT WE DIDN'T NEED TO DEFINE THAT, SO THE COMMITTEE DECIDED NOT TO MAKE ANY CHANGES ABOUT THAT.
SINCE THE COMMITTEE MEETING, DON HEADLAND SENT OVER A WRITTEN LETTER OUTLINING SOME OF HER LEGAL OBJECTIONS.
KATHERINE, DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT, OR DO YOU MEAN SUMMARIZE WHAT YOU SAID? ANYWAY, KATHERINE'S FEELINGS WERE THAT WE DIDN'T NEED TO CHANGE ANYTHING BASED ON THAT LETTER.
DON DID DISCOVER THAT THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT WORDINGS.
[01:00:03]
ONE SPOT SAID, I THINK A REASONABLE PERSON OF ORDINARY SENSIBILITIES, AND ANOTHER SPOT SAID REASONABLE NERVOUS SENSIBILITIES.BOTH OF THEM HAD BEEN COPIED OVER FROM THE ALLEN ORDINANCE.
KATHERINE FELT LIKE WE DO NEED TO CHANGE IT, BUT MAYBE WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND CHANGE IT SO THAT IT WOULD BE CONSISTENT, AND THAT WAS MY FEELING AS WELL.
I UPDATED THE INTERNAL VERSION THAT WE'VE GOT RIGHT NOW OF THE ORDINANCE SO THAT EVERYWHERE IT SAYS REASONABLE PERSON OF ORDINARY SENSIBILITIES.
THEN THE COMMITTEE HAS PUT TOGETHER AN FAQ, WHICH I ASSUME WE'RE GOING TO GET POSTED HERE ON THE CITY WEBSITE SOON, AND I SENT IT AS YOU REQUESTED, LEE, YESTERDAY.
>> CAN WE ASK SOME OTHER COMMENTS ABOUT THAT, OR ASK SOME QUESTIONS? I'VE ATTENDED ONE OF THE NOISE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
YOU'RE AWARE THAT THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT I'VE ATTENDED.
I THINK THAT WAS THE ONE THAT WAS A LITTLE BOISTEROUS.
I DON'T SPEND ANY OF MY TIME ON FACEBOOK.
I DON'T TRY TO RESPOND TO PEOPLE ON FACEBOOK BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A WASTE OF TIME; IT TAKES PLACE ON SOCIAL MEDIA WHERE PEOPLE GET INTO ARGUING BACK AND FORTH ABOUT ISSUES.
BUT THAT HAVING BEEN SAID, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE BEING COMMUNICATED IN THE COMMUNITY EITHER THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA OR PERSONAL MEETINGS OR TELEPHONE CALLS OR WHATEVER ABOUT THE NOISE ORDINANCE THAT ONE, ARE INCORRECT, AND TWO, SOME RAISE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE HAVE.
SOME ARE GRAND EXAGGERATIONS, SUCH AS YOU CAN'T MOW YOUR YARD, YOU CAN'T WALK A DOG, OR YOU CAN'T RIDE A HORSE, OR YOU CAN'T RIDE A BICYCLE.
THOSE THINGS ARE NOT PRODUCTIVE IN MY OPINION, TO GET AN ORDINANCE THAT WORKS FOR THE CITY.
IT'S NOT PRODUCTIVE TO THE WHOLE PROCESS.
BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE OUT THERE, I THINK THIS Q&A THAT YOU'RE DOING IS GOING TO BE IMPORTANT.
I THINK BEFORE WE CONSIDER PASSING ANYTHING IN THIS ORDINANCE, WE'VE GOT TO GET THAT OUT THERE AND THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE HAVE A WORKSHOP OR A HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY SO THAT WE CAN AT LEAST HEAR FROM THEM ONE MORE TIME.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO SATISFY EVERYBODY WITH THIS.
THERE MAY HAVE TO BE A FEW MORE CHANGES THAT HAVE TO BE MADE TO IT.
MAYBE WE WALK BEFORE WE RUN ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IN THERE.
I DO THINK WE NEED THE MAJORITY, NOT ALL OF THE CHANGES IN THERE, BUT I'LL SAY THE MAJORITY OF THEM.
I DON'T KNOW IF EVERY SINGLE ONE IS NEEDED.
BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT OUR CITIZENS HAVE SOME LEGITIMATE CONCERNS, AND SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS ARE REAL, SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS ARE BASED ON FALSE INFORMATION.
BUT TO THEM, THEY'RE AT LEAST A REAL CONCERN.
I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS THOSE SO THAT PEOPLE FEEL LIKE THEY'VE BEEN HEARD, WHETHER WE MAKE CHANGES FOR ALL OF THEM OR NOT.
I DON'T KNOW, BUT I THINK PEOPLE HAVE TO FEEL LIKE THEY'VE BEEN HEARD BEFORE WE IMPLEMENT SOMETHING.
>> I SEE THIS QUESTION MOVING UP A FEW PLACES.
HOW WAS DETERMINED TO CREATE A NOISE COMMITTEE RATHER THAN USING OUR PLANNING AND ZONING. JUST CURIOUS.
>> REALLY THE QUESTIONS ON THE FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTION SHEET THAT'S GOING TO BE POSTED WAS ON JULY 2, 2024, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 8, PAGE 4 AND 5.
COUNCILMEMBERS FE PILGRIM, REED, KIRSCH AND NO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO FORM THE COMMITTEE TO REVIEW PARKER'S NOISE ORDINANCE.
A LINK TO THE ACTUAL MOTION WILL BE ON THE FREQUENTLY ASKED A QUESTION.
>> I SEE THAT THERE WAS A CALL TO INVESTIGATE THE NOISE ORDINANCE.
WHY WAS THERE A COMMITTEE CREATED FOR THAT AS OPPOSED TO HANDING IT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING?
>> YOU'LL HAVE TO ASK THOSE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
THOSE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE THE ONES THAT FORMED THE COMMITTEE.
>> MY RECOLLECTION OF THE DISCUSSION IS WE'VE ALREADY HAD A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE'VE PUT ON PLANNING AND ZONING.
A NOISE ISSUE IS NOT TECHNICALLY PART OF PLANNING AND ZONING.
I CAN SEE HOW IT'S RELATED IN SOME WAY TO IT, BUT IT'S REALLY A SEPARATE ISSUE THAN ZONING ORDINANCES.
WE JUST DECIDED THE MOST EFFECTIVE THING TO DO WOULD BE TO CREATE A SPECIAL COMMITTEE AND GIVE CITIZENS THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE INPUT.
[01:05:04]
I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE I FORGOT A POINT THAT I'M GOING TO MAKE.ONE OF THE THINGS WE ORIGINALLY DID WAS WE ESTABLISHED A STRUCTURE FOR THE COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS A COUNCIL PERSON ON IT, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY COUNCIL COUNCILMAN TECH, AND THEN A POLICE OFFICER REPRESENTATIVE, AND CITIZENS REPRESENTATIVES.
OVER TIME, THAT CHANGED BECAUSE EFFECT WAS NEVER TAKE REMOVED FROM THE COMMITTEE ALTHOUGH HE WAS REMOVED FROM BEING CHAIRMAN AND REPLACED BY A PERSON WHO WOULD BE VOTED ON BY THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, AND THAT WAS RANDY WHO BECAME THE CHAIRMAN AFTER THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE EVER DONE ANYTHING AS A COUNCIL TO CODIFY THE CURRENT STRUCTURE OF THE COMMITTEE.
I DID NOTICE WHEN I WAS THERE THAT DAY, THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN ATTENDING THE MEETINGS AND PARTICIPATING ON A REGULAR BASIS WHO WEREN'T CONSIDERED VOTING MEMBERS, AND IT SEEMED LIKE THEY PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE.
I WONDER IF MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T EVEN REVISIT.
WHAT'S THE STRUCTURE OF THE COMMITTEE IN TERMS OF VOTING MEMBERS AND NON VOTING PARTICIPANTS?
>> THANK YOU. I SEE YOUR DISCUSSION THERE, BUT THIS HAS BEEN A YEAR LATER AND THE COMMITTEE HAS ALREADY DONE ALL THE WORK AND ALL THE MEETINGS AND WE'RE AT THE END OF IT.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MORE VOTES WE'RE GOING TO BE TAKING AND NEED TO BE HAD, SO I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE VOTE.
THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE IS GOING TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL WILL MEET TO MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS OR CHANGES.
I THINK THE COMMITTEE WAS SATISFIED WITH WHAT THEY WERE PRESENTING, I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE STILL BEING WORKED ON.
>> ALSO, I WOULD STATE THAT THE TWO PEOPLE WHO WERE NOT ON THE COMMUNITY WHO SHOWED UP LABOURLY THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS WERE LAURA WALSH AND ROXANNE BOGDEN.
I THINK BOTH OF THEM, IF YOU TALK TO THEM, THEY'LL FEEL LIKE THEIR VOICE HAS BEEN FAIRLY REPRESENTED ALONG THE WAY AND THROUGH THE END.
>> WELL, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE PLAN IS.
ONCE THESE NOISE ORDINANCE IS REVISED, WE WOULD HAVE A WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AND WE CAN DISCUSS ALL OF THESE POINTS AT THAT TIME TO SEE WHAT'S NECESSARY.
>> MY FEELING IS WHAT I SENT TO YOU YESTERDAY IS THE ORDINANCE THAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO TALK ABOUT.
IT'S RED-LINED FROM WHAT WAS IN THE LAST COUNCIL PACKET SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE CHANGES ARE.
IT'S ONLY IN TWO AREAS, ONE BEING THE DISTANCE AND ONE CHANGING THAT SENSIBILITIES CLAUSE.
>> ARE YOU TELLING ME WE'RE READY TO HAVE A WORKSHOP SCHEDULED?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. WHY DOES IT NEED TO BE A WORKSHOP? WHY CAN'T WE JUST DO THAT AS PART OF OUR AGENDA?
>> A WORKSHOP TO GO OVER THE ORDINANCE AND TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
>> IF I MIGHT ASK. DO FAQS AT THIS POINT HAVE SOME EXAMPLES OF DISTANCE FALL OFF FOR DECIBEL LEVELS?
>> NO, WE DID NOT WANT TO GO THAT TECHNICAL.
WE'RE MAINLY TRYING TO ADDRESS THE COMMON QUESTIONS THAT PEOPLE HAD, AND I DIDN'T WANT TO GET INTO THE TECHNICAL ASPECTS.
THE 40 FEET, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THE PROPERTY LINE, VERSUS 30 FEET AWAY IS, FOR THE MOST PART, NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER.
>> WELL, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, WHAT I FOUND AS I POLLED THE CITIZENS OF PARKER, PEOPLE I KNOW, PEOPLE I DON'T REALLY KNOW, IS THE STRUGGLE WITH THE FACT THAT DECIBELS ARE MEASURED ON A LOGARITHMIC SCALE, AND SO 75 DECIBELS IS PERCEIVED BY HUMANS TO BE DOUBLE THE VOLUME OF 65 DECIBELS.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY FAMILIAR WITH AS A CONCEPT.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING SAY THAT YOU MEASURE A 100 DECIBEL NOISE 30 FEET AWAY BECOMES A 68 DECIBEL NOISE.
A LOT OF THE DETAIL IN THE NOISE ORDINANCE TAKES A LOT OF THESE CONCEPTS INTO WHY THEY WERE FRAMED.
I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE PROVIDED A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES THAT ARE VISUAL IN NATURE.
>> I SEE THE PURPOSE OF A WORKSHOP.
>> IT SOUNDS WE'RE GETTING INTO IT.
>> I WAS GOING TO MAKE THE SAME THING. I THINK THIS ILLUSTRATES THAT WE DO NEED TO HAVE A WORKSHOP BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE SOME TIME TO DISCUSS IT.
[01:10:01]
>> DARRYL, CAN YOU SEND ME YOUR SPECIFIC TECHNICAL QUESTIONS SO THAT I CAN PREPARE BECAUSE I THINK I KNOW WHAT THE DROP OFF NUMBER IS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I DEFINITELY WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK IT BEFORE I STATE IN PUBLIC WHAT IT IS.
>> YES, I CAN SEND THAT TO YOU.
>> I'D LIKE TO SEE A COPY OF THE FAQS AND THE ANSWERS BEFORE WE SEND THEM OUT AS WELL.
>> LEE HAS THEM. SHE CAN GIVE YOU THOSE.
>> YEAH, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A COPY AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE ADD SOME TO THEM.
>> BILL, WILL YOU PLEASE MAKE SURE COUNCIL HAS A COPY OF THEM WHERE THEY CAN COMMENT AND GET THEM BACK TO YOU?
>> IS THAT NOT BREAKING SOMETHING?
>> I CAN'T SEND BACK TO ALL OF COUNCIL AND HAVE DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.
>> EITHER KATHERINE OR PATTY WILL DO IT.
THAT'S WHAT I MEAN. LAST STEP THAT I HAVE IS TRAILS.
>> LAST WEEK, ROXANNE AND I HAD A ZOOM MEETING WITH THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY'S CONSULTANTS, AND THE PURPOSE OF THAT WAS THE COUNTY SENT US THEIR PROPOSED TRAIL PLAN FOR PARKER, AND OUR PRIMARY PURPOSE ON THAT MEETING WAS TO OUTLINE THE AREAS THAT WE SAID, WE DON'T THINK THIS IS EVER FEASIBLE LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, THEY HAVE A TRAIL GOING THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF YOUR BACK YARD AND PROBABLY BUDDY'S YARD IN THE DUBLIN AREA, AND WE'RE LIKE, NO, THAT'S NOT GOING TO FLY.
WE OUTLINED THE PROBLEM AREAS WE HAVE.
THEN TODAY, THEY HAD IN-PERSON MEETING.
FRANK DACOSTA, THE CHAIR OF PARKS & REC, AND I WENT AND SO THEY WERE GOING OVER STUFF AT A HIGHER LEVEL.
WE HAD SOME MORE RUN-IN TIME WITH THEM TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUES IN PARKER, AND PART OF THE REASON I ASKED GARY THAT QUESTION WAS BECAUSE THEY GOT INFORMATION FROM TXDOT ABOUT THE STATE OF SIDEWALKS ON 2551 AND 2514, AND MUCH OF THAT INFORMATION I KNOW IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT.
I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE PARK BUT'S STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
WE ARE WORKING WITH THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW.
THE MAIN TRAIL THROUGH PARKER NORTH SOUTH GOES ALONG MAXWELL CREEK.
AS WE KNOW, THAT'S GOING TO RUN THROUGH, I DON'T KNOW, 15, 20 PEOPLE'S PROPERTY ALONG THE WAY, AND IT'S JUST INFEASIBLE.
AFTER FRANK AND I DISCUSSED IT WITH THEM TODAY, THEY'RE IN AGREEMENT OF THAT.
WE'RE LOOKING WHERE CAN WE PUT AN ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT TO GET THEIR SPINE TRAIL THROUGH PARKER.
MAYBE ALONG 2551, THERE'S A POSSIBILITY.
ANYWAY, WE GOT TO LOOK AT THAT.
ALSO, THEY INDICATED THAT THERE WILL BE SOME GRANT OPPORTUNITIES COMING UP MAYBE NEXT YEAR.
THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO FINALIZE THEIR PLAN NEAR THE END OF THIS YEAR.
I DON'T WANT TO GET OVER TECHNICAL HERE, BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE MAY NEED TO DISCUSS BEFORE THEN, PARTICULARLY ABOUT ALTERNATIVE ARRAIGNMENTS AND ALSO ONE OF THE PLATS THAT I THINK IS GOING TO COME IN.
WE GOT TO DISCUSS MAKING SURE THAT THAT PLAN AND THAT PLAT ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH ONE ANOTHER AND SO ON.
>> I'D LIKE TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER BARRON FOR THE WORK THAT HE PUT INTO THIS BECAUSE WE DROVE AROUND THE CITY AND WE WERE LOOKING ON EVERY LITTLE ALLEY AND HE KNEW EVERY LITTLE STREET.
HE PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO THAT MAP AND UPDATING THE COUNTY. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> ALSO, I MENTIONED I TALKED WITH FRANK DACOSTA, AND HIM AND I ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT PARKS & REC NEEDS TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THIS ITEM AWAY FROM ME, BUT HE NEEDS TO IDENTIFY WHO THE POINT PERSON IS GOING TO BE.
>> I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU IF THIS WAS GOING THROUGH PARKS & REC OR NOT.
[01:15:03]
>> I JUST GOT IT OFF THE GROUND BECAUSE I'M STILL A MEMBER OF A TRAIL SUBCOMMITTEE THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER SIX YEARS AGO THAT WAS NEVER DISBANDED, AND I HAD DONE ALL THE RESEARCH BACK THEN, SO I WAS THE PERSON WHO STARTED IT, BUT THE PLAN IS I'LL HAND IT OFF TO SOMEBODY.
>> THAT'S ALL THE UPDATES I HAVE.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING? THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT DONATIONS.
[8. ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION(S) FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND CITY STAFF FOR THE RECORD (Each valued at between $0 - $1,000 [RES. NO. 2024-801])]
THE ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND CITY STAFF FOR THE RECORD.MELISSA TIERS DONATED A CASE OF BODY ARMOR VALUED AT $25 TO THE PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT.
I THINK IT SHOULD BE LYON HERMAN, ALYSSA AND ALEX FINK DONATED $500 CASH MONEY TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
DEBORAH MONO DONATED A TRAY OF PASTRIES AT $25 TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
I'D LIKE TO GIVE SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO THE NICHOLSON FAMILY AT 3900 MCCRAY ROAD WHO SET THEIR HOUSE FOR DECORATION AS A PART OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, AND THEY PROVIDED THE PARKER FIRE DEPARTMENT WITH A RARE AND VALUABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR TWO WEEKS TRAINING.
THANKS TO JAMES MURPHY OF BUCKINGHAM VENTURES, AND THE ASSIGNED LIABILITY LEASE.
CREWS WERE ABLE TO CONDUCT ESSENTIAL TRAINING, EVOLUTIONS THAT WILL GREATLY ENHANCE OUR PREPAREDNESS.
THEY ALSO WOULD LIKE TO THANK KATHERINE CLIFFORD, OUR CIVIL ATTORNEY, FOR HER PARTICIPATION, DURING CHINA FOR THIS PARTICIPATION, AND JOHN ARNOLD WITH BUCKINGHAM VENTURES.
EVERYBODY, THANKS WE'RE EXTREMELY GRATEFUL FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE IT REALLY HELPS OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT TO HAVE HANDS-ON TRAINING OF THIS KIND.
IS THERE ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? THE LAST SHEET OF PAPER THAT I SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN WITH YOUR PACKET WAS THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS THAT YOU HAD SO FAR.
IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING OR HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT UP TO DATE AND AS GOOD AS WE CAN GET IT.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS AT THIS TIME? IF NOT, WE WILL
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
RECESS AND TO CLOSE EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED.GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551074, PERSONNEL TO DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT, OR DUTIES OF A CITY ADMINISTRATOR.
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.074, TO DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT, EVALUATION, OR ASSIGNMENT, DUTIES, DISCIPLINE, OR DISMISSAL OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE.
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071, CONSULTATION WITH A CITY ATTORNEY CONCERNED EMPLOYMENT OR CONTEMPLATIVE LITIGATION.
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.072, CONSULTATION ATTORNEY ON A MATTER IN WHICH THE DUTY TO THE RETURN TO THE GOVERNMENT BODY UNDER THE TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE STATE BOARD OF TEXAS CLEARLY CONFLICTS WITH THIS CHAPTER.
AT THIS TIME, 7:45, WE ARE IN RECESS.
I AM PRESENTING THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PARKER.
[RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING]
IT IS 9:43.[01:20:03]
COUNCIL, IS THERE ANY APPROPRIATE DELIBERATION AND OR ACTION ON ANY OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION SUBJECTS LISTED ABOVE? IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS AT ALL? HEARING NONE, WE WILL ADJOURN.IT'S 9:44.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.