[00:00:02]
I HEREBY CALL THE CITY COUNCIL
[CALL TO ORDER]
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF PARKER TO ORDER, WHAT IS APRIL 21ST, 2026, AT 6 P.M.AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK MS. HALL, DO I HAVE A QUORUM? YES, MADAM MAYOR, YOU HAVE A QUORUM.
[WORKSHOP]
TO THE WORKSHOPS.THE FIRST WORKSHOP IS ON CODE OF CONDUCT FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS.
AND, UM, KATHLEEN, YOU HAD PUT TOGETHER SOME STUFF FOR US BASED ON THE REVISIONS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE LAST WORKSHOP.
PRINCIPALLY, THE REVISIONS AFTER THE LAST ONE WERE TO SPELL OUT THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AS REFERRING BACK TO CHAPTER 171, WHICH HAS BEEN ADDED, AND THEN TO ADD APPLICATIONS FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
AND WHEN I WENT IN TO ADD THE APPLICATION FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS...
IT BECAME NECESSARY TO RESTRUCTURE IT, SO IT KIND OF LOOKS DIFFERENT, BUT SUBSTANTIVELY IT'S THE SAME.
IT DID STREAMLINE THE REPORTING PROCESS.
WELL, I HAVE A VERY MINOR TECHNICAL COMMENT.
IN SECTION H-1, THE SECTION TALKS ABOUT MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, BUT THEN IN THAT ITEM ONE, IT SAYS DISAPPROVAL OF A COUNCILMAN'S CONDUCT, AND I THINK THAT PROBABLY SHOULD READ COUNCILMEMBER OR MAYOR'S CONDUCT.
ANYTHING ELSE? MS. BOXES? I WAS PRETTY HAPPY WITH THE ADJUSTMENTS.
I THINK EVERYTHING WE ASKED FOR PREVIOUSLY, ALL THE BOXES GOT CHECKED.
I REALLY LIKE THAT WE ADDED WHEN ACTING, WHEN THE COUNCIL OR COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE ACTING IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY, SO IF YOU RUN INTO THEM AT THE GROCERY STORE.
SO I LIKE HOW THAT WAS ADDED, AND I'M HAPPY WITH IT.
MS. SHARP? ACTUALLY, I'M QUITE PLEASED WITH THE CHANGES.
I THINK OVERALL THEY ADDRESSED IT.
I KNOW THAT SOME OF OUR CITIZENS HAVE VOICED CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS COULD BE USED AS A POTENTIAL WHACK-BAT TO EXCLUDE PEOPLE FROM THE COUNCIL, BUT I THINK YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE WHETHER OR NOT YOU'LL HAVE ONE PERSON BEHAVE POORLY.
OR AND BET THAT THAT'S THE ONLY ONE? OR DO YOU THINK REALLY THAT THE PEOPLE OF PARKER WOULD ELECT THREE OR MORE BAD OFFICIALS OR ILL-INTENDED OFFICIALS? AND I THINK THE SINGLE INSTANCE OF BEHAVIOR IS A FAR MORE LIKELY SCENARIO THAT THE COUNCIL CAN REMEDIATE AND DEAL WITH.
I THINK THE OTHER SCENARIO IS ONE THAT YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY BUILD POLICY AROUND.
SO WITH ALL OF THAT SAID, I'M JUST TRYING TO ADDRESS...
CITIZEN COMMENTS THAT WE'VE ALL RECEIVED, I THINK.
I'M QUITE HAPPY WITH THE CHANGES.
MS. HALBERT, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? I DON'T.
I KNOW ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP WAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MISCONDUCT AND DIFFERENCES IN OPINION, AND I FEEL LIKE THAT ACTUALLY IS PRETTY EASY TO CLARIFY, AND IF WE GET TO A POINT WHERE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION BECOMES MISCONDUCT, I THINK THAT LINE WILL BE OBVIOUS FOR...
EVERYBODY ON THIS DAIS, EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE, AND EVERYBODY AT HOME.
IT WOULD BE SOMETHING SO EGREGIOUS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO.
ARE THERE ANY EDITS OR CHANGES? OKAY.
MADAM MAYOR, I THINK YOU'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF INCORPORATING THE FEEDBACK FROM THE POINT THAT I'VE MADE.
YEAH, AND I THINK THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AND BEING MEAN OR I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT, YEAH, BEING RUDE, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.
IT COMES DOWN TO HOW YOU EXPRESS YOUR DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.
YOU CAN HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION, THAT'S FINE, BUT WHEN YOU EXPRESS IT IN A WAY THAT BECOMES ABUSIVE, THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
AND YOU'VE ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED
[00:05:12]
THAT.AND I JUST WANT TO ADD, YES, THIS IS THE SIX OF US WITH OUR STAFF HELP, LIKE MAKING SURE THAT THAT DOESN'T GET TO THAT POINT, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT IT'S INCUMBENT UPON...
THE RESIDENTS, THE VOTERS, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE ELECTING REASONABLE INDIVIDUALS WHO CAN CONDUCT BUSINESS ACCORDINGLY.
SO THERE'S SOME RESPONSIBILITY ON ALL PARTS.
ANYTHING FURTHER, MR. BARRON? TO MR. BARRON'S EARLIER POINT, I HAVE ADDED THE PHRASE OR MAYOR'S CONDUCT IN THAT SECTION, SUCH THAT IT NOW READS...
DISAPPROVAL OF A COUNCIL MEMBERS OR MAYOR'S CONDUCT IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO EVERYONE FOR THAT TO BE ADDED ANYTHING ELSE ON THE CODE OF CONDUCT WELL I'LL GO AHEAD AND STOP WE HAVE ONE COMMENT I KNOW IN PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT CAME IN THAT WAS REQUESTING THAT WE HAVE ALMOST LIKE A POLICY PROCEDURE IS FOR HOW COUNCIL, IF THEY FIND SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED WITH STAFF, LIKE THEY WERE LOOKING TO HAVE THAT PUT IN HERE, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S A PLACE FOR THIS.
I BELIEVE THIS IS FOR CODE OF CONDUCT.
THAT REALLY WOULD BELONG MORE IN A POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL, SO I REALLY WANT TO ADDRESS THAT THEY'VE COMMENTED THAT, BUT I DISAGREE WITH IT BEING IN THIS SPECIFIC ORDINANCE.
MS. SHORT? SO RUN THAT BACK TO ME ONE MORE TIME.
IT WAS AROUND POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR REMEDIATING BEHAVIOR ON BEHALF OF THE TARGETED AUDIENCE FOR THE CODE OF CONDUCT, OR IT WAS SOMETHING ELSE? I TOOK IT AS IF A COUNCIL MEMBER SAW SOMETHING, A PROBLEM IN THE CITY OR A PROBLEM WITH ONE OF THE STAFF MEMBERS, WE DON'T HAVE A PROCEDURE FOR WHAT THEY DO IN THAT INSTANCE.
SO I DON'T REALLY TAKE THAT AS CODE OF CONDUCT.
I THINK THAT BELONGS MORE IN A PROCEDURE MANUAL.
OR HR POLICY MANUAL OR EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK THAT WE'VE ALREADY ISSUED, YEAH.
ANYTHING FURTHER ON THAT? JUST ONE FINAL COMMENT.
I THINK WE ALL SAW THAT IN KMU, MY CHIP CAN BE A FORFEITABLE FEE.
YEAH, I THINK THE POSSIBILITY OF SOMEBODY WEAPONIZING THIS POLICY IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY, AND IF FOR SOME REASON THAT DOES HAPPEN, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO BRING IT BACK AND DISCUSS HOW.
THAT, IN FACT, WOULD BE PROBABLY A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE.
YOU CAN'T HAVE SOMEBODY DOING THAT.
I WANT TO COMMEND DARRELL SHAW FOR BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION BECAUSE THE CODE OF CONDUCT CAME UP UNDER HIS SUGGESTION AND I THINK THAT WAS AN EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT SUGGESTION.
AND I THINK IT WILL MAKE US A BETTER CITY AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THAT.
AND IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ON THE CODE OF CONDUCT, WE WILL CLOSE THAT WORKSHOP AND GO TO OUR NEXT WORKSHOP.
OKAY, WE'RE CLOSING THE WORKSHOP ON THE CODE OF CONDUCT AT 6.10, AND WE WILL NOW GO TO THE WORKSHOP ON COUNCIL AGENDA PROCEDURES.
YOU'VE ALL GOT THE PROCEDURE HERE.
[00:10:01]
HOPEFULLY HAVE READ IT.THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANTED TO SAY ABOUT IT.
IT'S BASICALLY THIS IS HOW ALL WE'RE DOING IS PUTTING IN WRITING EXACTLY WHAT WE DO.
THERE'S TWO COMMENTS I WANTED TO MAKE, AND THAT IS ACCORDING TO THE LAW IN TML, THE AGENDA IS UNDER THE MAYOR.
UNDER SECTION 5, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD, OR IT MAY BE COVERED ACTUALLY UNDER 7B, IF THERE IS A DISAGREEMENT, AN ITEM MAY BE BROUGHT TO FULL COUNCIL TO DETERMINE IF IT SHOULD BE PLACED ON AN AGENDA.
I WANT THAT TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR IN THE PROCEDURE.
THE OTHER THING I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT.
IT SAYS ANY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER MAY REQUEST THE REMOVAL OF AN ITEM FROM AN AGENDA, WHICH I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH, BUT I ALSO WANTED TO KNOW, DOES THAT MEAN THE MAYOR CAN REMOVE AN ITEM OFF AN AGENDA? FOR EXAMPLE, IT MAY BE THAT FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THE MEETING I FIND OUT THAT THIS ISN'T READY FOR WHATEVER AND I WOULD LIKE TO PULL IT.
AND I'M GOING TO ASK CATHERINE TO PLEASE ADDRESS THAT.
I APOLOGIZE I WAS STILL TRYING TO PULL THAT UP I BELIEVE THAT YOU HAVE THE SAME ABILITY AS ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT WHAT WE SEE IN OTHER CITIES TYPICALLY WHEN SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE PULLED FROM THE AGENDA IT'S BECAUSE STAFF HAS SAID WE'RE NOT READY TO GO ON THIS ITEM FOR WHATEVER REASON SO YOU MAY WANT TO ADD SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS FOR STAFF TO REQUEST REMOVAL AND THE MAYOR JUST TO SAY STAFFS REQUESTED THIS SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ON THIS AGENDA.
THAT'S A POSSIBILITY RATHER THAN GOING TO A FULL VOTE TO REMOVE AN ITEM.
HOW DO Y'ALL FEEL ABOUT THAT? I WONDER IS IT NECESSARY? I MEAN, WE'RE CLEARLY NOT READY.
IF THERE'S SOME INFORMATION THAT WE WERE WAITING ON, WHY WOULDN'T IT JUST STAY ON THE AGENDA SO THAT WE CAN...
FOR THE AUDIENCE, I THINK PERCEIVED BY OUR CITIZENS OUT THERE THAT ARE WATCHING, THEY'RE OUR ULTIMATE AUDIENCE.
SO IF THEY'RE WATCHING AND THEY'VE BEEN THINKING, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TOPIC A TONIGHT, AND IT GETS PULLED RIGHT BEFORE THE MEETING, I WOULD RATHER HAVE IT ON THE AGENDA.
WE HAVE TOPIC A ON THE AGENDA.
WE WERE EXPECTING SOME INFORMATION.
I WOULD RATHER BE ABLE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT THAN JUST PULL IT AND NOT HAVE ANY OTHER.
ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE PULLED AT THAT POINT, THERE WOULD BE AN EXPLANATION.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE OTHER NIGHT WE PULLED SOMETHING OFF THE AGENDA.
WE DIDN'T GO ON ONE PLAT BECAUSE THE SUBMITTER OF THE PLAT ASKED IT TO BE WITHDRAWN.
IT WAS STILL LISTED ON THE AGENDA, AND WE PULLED IT AT THE MEETING EXPLAINING TO THE PEOPLE, AND THAT'S WHAT I MEANT.
BUT WHAT WOULD BE THE OTHER TIME WE WOULD PULL IT? BETWEEN WHEN THE AGENDA IS PUBLISHED, PRELIMINARY LAYOFF? I'M TALKING ABOUT AT A MEETING.
I'M NOT SURE IT VERY WELL, I GUESS.
YEAH, I FIND MYSELF STRONGLY AGREEING WITH COUNCIL MEMBER PILGRIM'S INTENT HERE, WHICH IS I THINK PROCEDURALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PRINTED AGENDA ON THE WEB, YOU KIND OF EXPECT TO SEE THAT AGENDA ITEM THERE, AND YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SOME EXPLANATION.
SO I THINK MY SUGGESTION IS PROCEDURALLY WE SHOULD, WHEN THE AGENDA ITEM IS PRESENTED, THE MAYOR THAT IS WANTING TO PULL IT OFF THE AGENDA, SAY THAT I'M NOMINATING THIS FOR EXCLUSION BECAUSE STAFF IS NOT READY.
WE'RE WAITING FOR, AS BUDDY SAID, WE'RE WAITING FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, AND YOU GAIN CONSENT OF THE COUNCIL AND MOVE ON.
AT LEAST THAT WAY PEOPLE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, WHY IT HAPPENED, AND IT CAN BE PRETTY EXPEDIENT.
YEAH, I GUESS I AGREE WITH YOU.
I THINK THAT'S A BETTER WAY TO HANDLE IT THAN TO TRY TO GO ON IT.
BUT HE MAKES A MOTION THAT IT BE POSTPONED TILL THE END.
NEXT MEETING YOU KNOW I JUST FEEL BETTER TO JUST WITHDRAW
[00:15:05]
AT THAT POINT BUT WE DO EXPLAIN WHY WE WOULD BE WITHDRAWING IT WOULDN'T JUST BE YOU KNOW WHERE IT WENT WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT IS THE WORDING OF THAT THAT ANY TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN PULL SOMETHING FROM THE AGENDA AND THERE'S ZERO DISCUSSION I MEAN THAT IS A PROBLEM BECAUSE IF IF THERE IS AN ITEM THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO GO FORWARD THEY COULD JUST PULL IT AND THEN THERE'S NOT EVEN A VOTE ON IT FOR THE REST OF COUNCILS.SO I GET WHEN WE'RE NOT PREPARED A GOOD REASON TO PULL IT, BUT WHAT IF SOMEBODY POLITICALLY WANTS TO PULL SOMETHING FOR NO REASON? LIKE THAT WORRIES ME.
ANY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER MAY REQUEST A REMOVAL OF AN ITEM FROM AN AGENDA AND SUCH ITEM MAY BE REMOVED BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S PRESENT.
ZERO DISCUSSION? I MEAN, LIKE WHY? WELL, IF YOU MADE A REQUEST FOR REMOVAL, I WOULD EXPECT YOU TO...
I'VE SEEN IN PAST COUNCIL MEETINGS WHERE SOMEBODY HAS SAID, I'M PULLING THIS, AND THERE WAS ZERO DISCUSSION, AND THEY VOTED, AND IT WENT ON, AND THAT WAS VERY DISAPPOINTING AS A RESIDENT WATCHING THAT.
MADAM MAYOR, I HAVE A QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION FOR CATHERINE ON THAT POINT.
IF SOMEBODY MADE A MOTION AND IT WAS SECONDED, THEN WOULD THAT NOT REQUIRE DISCUSSION? I MEAN, WOULD THE MAYOR NOT BE REQUIRED TO SAY IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ANYTIME THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND, I ASK, IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION? OKAY.
ASSUMING THERE'S ALREADY BEEN A LITTLE BIT, MAYBE.
BUT IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, NO ONE NEEDS TO VOTE AT THAT POINT.
THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, IT WOULD NOT EVEN REQUIRE IT.
THAT'S THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN.
I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS TRADITIONAL CAR PROCEDURE, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT BINDS US TO IT.
TO IT SO THIS WOULD JUST ALLOW FOR HEY I REQUEST THAT WE REMOVE IT AND THERE CAN BE A VOTE THERE CAN CERTAINLY IS A PLEASURE CHAIR BE DISCUSSION ON IT AND THAT IT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY I WOULD RATHER NOT JUST HAVE IT AT THE CHAIR I WOULD RATHER HAVE IT SO THAT THE PROCEDURE IS THE SESSION WOULD BE ABOUT THE MOTION TO REMOVE IT SOME SUBSTANCE OF THE ISSUE MIGHT COME UP IN ONE THIS ISSUE, BUT THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISCUSSION WOULD BE ABOUT WHETHER THEN ANYBODY JUST HAVING A RIGHT TO GO STRAIGHT TO PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE AND THE LACK OF NEED FOR A SECOND...
WE WOULDN'T WANT TO PUT IT IN THAT CATEGORY, SO I WOULD THINK THAT WE WOULD BE BETTER OFF A SECOND AND THEN DISCUSSION.
SOMEBODY MAKES A MOTION, THEN WE GET A SECOND, THEN WE ASK IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, AND THEN WHEN THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, THEN WE CALL FOR THE VOTE.
IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE ALL PRETTY MUCH IN AGREEMENT ABOUT NEEDING A SECOND.
CAN WE JUST CHANGE THE WORDING TO MATCH THAT? WE CERTAINLY CAN.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT CAME UP ON THIS.
IN SOME COMMENTS WE GOT, IT TALKED ABOUT HOW WOULD A CITIZEN GET AN ITEM THEY WANTED ON AN AGENDA.
AND THERE'S SEVERAL WAYS TO DO THAT.
BUT WE DO THIS TO, BUT ALREADY IN EFFECT.
ANY CITIZEN DOING PUBLIC COMMENTS CAN SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE COUNCIL CONSIDER X, Y, COUNCIL THEN GETS THAT AND SAYS, HEY, WOULD YOU PUT THAT ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? THAT'S SOMETHING WE WANT TO DISCUSS.
ANOTHER WAY IS THEY CAN MAKE SUCH A WRITTEN REQUEST TO ANY COUNCIL MEMBER.
AND THE COUNCIL MEMBER SAYS, GEE, I WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE ON THE AGENDA.
THE OTHER WAY IS THEY CAN MAKE IT THROUGH A PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU KNOW, AND ASK THAT IT BE CONSIDERED.
SO ANY CITIZEN CAN GO TO ANY COUNCIL MEMBER AND SAY, HEY, BUDDY, I REALLY WANT THIS ON THE AGENDA.
WOULD YOU BE THE PERSON THAT? MAKES THAT REQUEST FOR ME.
YOU CAN THEN DECIDE, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DO OR NOT? IF YOU DON'T WANT TO, YOU MIGHT AS WELL TRY.
[00:20:01]
MAYBE SHE'LL DO IT.THERE IS A WAY FOR EVERY CITIZEN TO GET THEIR ITEM ONTO AN AGENDA SHOULD THEY WANT IT.
IN SECTION 2, WE TALK ABOUT ANY COUNCIL MEMBER CAN REQUEST AN ITEM.
OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE STATES THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO PEOPLE.
SO I AM NOT CRAZY ABOUT ONE PERSON JUST SAYING, HEY, I WANT THIS, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHERE WE GO TO TWO PEOPLE, SO A MOTION AND A SECOND, OR SOMEONE BACKING THAT IDEA, MORE THAN ONE PERSON.
SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
KEEP IN MIND THAT ON EVERY AGENDA THAT WE HAVE, INCLUDING TONIGHT, IS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. AT ANY POINT IN TIME, COUNCIL CAN SAY, WHY IS THIS ON HERE? IS THERE AN APPETITE THAT WE CONSIDER THIS? IF THERE ISN'T, YOU CAN ASK FOR IT TO BE REMOVED.
OR YOU CAN ASK THAT THEY MOVED UP.
YOU KNOW, I MADE A REQUEST FOR SUCH AND SUCH AND I DON'T SEE IT ON THE LIST.
WHY ISN'T IT ON THE LIST? OR WHY HAVEN'T WE GONE ON IT? ALL THAT COMES UNDER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AND IT'S ON EVERY AGENDA WE HAVE.
IS THERE A WAY THAT SOMEONE...
BEFORE GOING THROUGH ALL THE WORK OF STAFF HAVING TO PUT THIS THROUGH, WHERE WE WOULD HAVE, I THINK, TWO PEOPLE AGREEING THAT THAT SHOULD BE ON BEFORE WE EVEN PUT ALL THAT WORK INTO THE ITEM? I'M TRYING TO THINK OF AN EXAMPLE WHERE...
I'M SURE WE BOTH HAVE A GOOD ONE.
I FIND MYSELF IN SUPPORT OF THE SINGLE PERSON, AND I RECOGNIZE THE CHALLENGES THAT YOU PRESENT, BUT THE RESTRICTIONS THAT WE HAVE ON WALKING QUORUM MEAN THAT, LIKE, IF I HAVE AN ISSUE THAT I WANT TO BRING THAT REQUIRES SOME LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE ISSUE TO EVEN CONSIDER, THEN I WON'T NECESSARILY FIND SUPPORT IN AN OPEN COUNCIL MEETING.
AT LEAST BY BRINGING IT ONTO THE AGENDA, WHAT WE CAN PROMOTE IS OPEN DISCUSSION WITHIN THANK YOU.
THE CONTEXT OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON WHETHER IT BELONGS ON THE AGENDA OR NOT YEAH AND IF YOU BROUGHT UP SOMETHING AND IT'S ON THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AND YOU SAY IT AT THE NEXT MEETING AND YOU WHAT THE HECK IS THIS WHY ARE WE GOING ON IT YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS AT THAT TIME AND IT CAN BE DISCUSSED AS I UNDERSTAND IT DURING THE FUTURE AGENDA SECTION WE CAN DISCUSS IT SO THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION IS, CAN THAT BE, AS LONG AS WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THE MERITS OF THE AGENDA ITEM, BUT THE AGENDA ITEM BEING ON IT, WE CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION? YES.
AND I DID ACTUALLY HAVE SOMETHING.
SECTION 4 SAYS REVIEW A REQUEST THAT THE AGENDA COMMITTEE SHALL REVIEW EACH REQUEST.
IT TALKS ABOUT STAFF AND THE TIME AMOUNT.
BUT IT SAYS THERE SHALL BE NO SPECIFIC TIME REQUIREMENT FOR WHEN AN ACCEPTED ITEM MUST BE PLACED ON AN AGENDA.
AND I ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE ADD A 90-DAY UPDATE.
BECAUSE IF IT GOES 90 DAYS, I'D LIKE TO KNOW, IS THIS JUST LINGERING IN THE POOL, NEVER TO BE ADDRESSED, OR IS IT BECAUSE STAFF DOESN'T HAVE THE BANDWIDTH TO LOOK AT IT RIGHT NOW, OR NO, WE JUST DON'T WANT TO EVER TALK ABOUT IT, BUT WE'LL LET IT.
UNDER THE LAW, THERE IS NO TIME LIMIT.
MY CONCERN WITH THAT IS WE GENERALLY DO THINGS PRETTY TIMELY.
BUT WE ALSO KEEP OUR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS LOST.
AND I DO THAT ON SOME THINGS SO IT DOESN'T GET LOST.
I'VE HAD SOME THINGS ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS FOR TWO YEARS.
FOR EXAMPLE, SOUTHRIDGE ASKED ABOUT A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.
WE DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION.
WE NEED TRAFFIC STUDIES, BLAH, AND I PUT IT ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS KNOWING IT WASN'T GOING TO COME UP.
DOES SECTION 4 RELATE TO THAT IT SAYS NO SPECIFIC TIME REQUIREMENT FOR IT TO BE PLACED ON AN AGENDA, BUT DOES IT PROHIBIT GIVING AN UPDATE? OKAY.
THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, THERE SHOULD BE NO SPECIFIC TIME REQUIRED FOR WHEN AN ACCEPTED ITEM MUST BE PLACED ON AGENDA.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S PER THE STATE.
BUT DOES IT PROHIBIT GIVING AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE'RE AT? NO.
LIKE I SAID, ON EVERY MEETING, YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET, JUST LIKE YOU DID TONIGHT, A LIST.
[00:25:01]
THE FUTURE AGENDA LIST.THAT LIST DOESN'T TELL ME ANYTHING.
SO I JUST DON'T WANT TO END UP WHERE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM BECOMES A 25-MINUTE THING ABOUT ASKING.
I FEEL LIKE IF A COUNCIL MEMBER HAS REQUESTED THIS, THE COURTESY OF THE COUNCIL SHOULD BE TO GIVE AN UPDATE AND NOT JUST, WE DON'T CARE WHAT SHE ASKS FOR AND IT DOESN'T MATTER, AND SHE'S FORCED TO NOW ASK FOR ALL OF HER UPDATES.
WE CAN OBVIOUSLY GIVE UPDATES, BUT OVER HERE IS THE DATES.
IT SAYS TO BE DETERMINED BECAUSE I HAVEN'T HAD ANY.
AND WHAT I'M ASKING IS IF IT GOES PAST 90 DAYS, CAN YOU JUST TELL ME WHY? OKAY.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
WE CAN GO OVER THIS IN EVERY COUNCIL MEETING.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE IT.
AT ANY POINT IN TIME YOU WANT TO BECAUSE THIS CHANGES.
RELATED TO THAT SAME TOPIC, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A METHOD TO CONNECT DATE CERTAIN FOR A DEADLINE.
DOESN'T MEAN EVERY ITEM'S GOT TO HAVE A DATE CERTAIN BY WHICH IT'S GOT TO BE ADDRESSED BECAUSE THERE MAY BE SOMETHING LIKE THE GATE THAT YOU GAVE AN EXAMPLE OF A MINUTE AGO.
YOU JUST DIDN'T WANT TO LOSE SIGHT OF IT SO THAT WE'D KNOW IT SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE.
BUT ULTIMATELY, THAT'S GOING TO COME UP.
WHEN IT'S READY, ANYWAY, WHETHER YOU HAVE IT ON THE LIST OR NOT, I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT IF WE'VE GOT AN AGENDA ITEM THAT WE WANT TO HAVE ON THERE, WE SUGGEST IT, IT GOES ON TO THE LIST, AND WHOEVER SUGGESTS IT THINKS THEY'RE SUGGESTING IT BECAUSE THERE'S SOME REASONABLE SENSE OF URGENCY FOR US TO DEAL WITH IT.
IT'S NOT SOME JUST THEORETICAL ISSUE.
IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO DEAL WITH.
IT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT AT THE NEXT SESSION.
IT MAY BE SOMETHING WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IN THE NEXT...
SIX MONTHS BECAUSE WE'VE GOT SOMETHING COMING UP.
WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PUT A DEADLINE ON IT.
I'LL GIVE YOU, IN FACT, THIS JUST CAME TO MIND.
WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT A SIGN ORDINANCE, OKAY, TO PREVENT EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE RIGHT NOW WHERE WE'VE GOT CANDIDATES PUTTING UP A HUNDRED SIGNS AND IT MAKES THIS PLACE LOOK RIDICULOUS, OKAY? I WISH WE HAD HAD A DEADLINE ON GETTING THAT DONE SO WE WOULD HAVE HAD IT PASSED.
WHETHER THE ORDINANCE ENDED UP SAYING YOU CAN PUT UP 100 SIGNS OR YOU CAN ONLY PUT UP ONE SIGN.
WHATEVER WE ENDED UP VOTING ON WOULD HAVE BEEN FINE, BUT WHAT WE ENDED UP DOING IS PUNTING THE BALL AND WE NEVER GOT IT HANDLED.
SO I WOULD HAVE RATHER HAD A DATE CERTAIN THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN...
COUNCIL REFERRED IT TO PNC AND IT DIDN'T COME BACK FROM PNC.
AS COUNCIL COULD UNDERSTAND IT, SO IT WENT BACK TO PNZ AND NOW IT'S BACK ON TONIGHT.
SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT SITUATION.
THE PERSON WHO WANTED THAT DONE SHOULD HAVE STILL, PNZ DIDN'T GIVE US A RECORD.
WE'VE GOT AUTHORITY AS COUNCIL TO GO AHEAD.
WE NEED TO AT LEAST HANDLE IT.
THIS NEEDS WITHIN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I'D LIKE TO HAVE A MECHANISM TO ATTACH A DATE TO ONES WHERE THEY MATCH.
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS DURING FUTURE AGENDA DAY, OKAY, CAN THIS COME UP IN TWO WEEKS? CAN THIS COME UP AT OUR NEXT MEETING? NOW, IT REACHES THE LEVEL AT THAT POINT BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS I'M TRYING TO DO WHEN I DO AN AGENDA IS BALANCE IT OUT.
I'M TRYING TO MANAGE A MEETING.
AND I DON'T WANT TO SET UP AN AGENDA THAT'S GOT 37 ITEMS ON IT, AND THEN THE NEXT WEEK WE'VE GOT, OR THE NEXT MEETING, THERE'S TWO ITEMS. YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT WORK.
AND THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT COME UP THAT NEED TO BE HANDLED IN A MORE EXPEDITIOUS FASHION THAN SOMETHING ELSE, BECAUSE IT'S THAT IMPORTANT.
AND THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WAY YOU'VE BEEN HANDLING THINGS, OKAY? I'M JUST LOOKING AT SOME OTHER MAYOR COMES IN IN THE FUTURE.
WHAT I THINK COLLEEN, BUDDY, AND NOW MYSELF ARE TRYING TO SAY IS THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT COUNCIL HAS SOME ABILITY ON SOME ITEMS, NOT ALL ITEMS, TO SAY, HEY, THIS ITEM'S IMPORTANT, THIS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE NEXT 60 DAYS.
MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS AND NOT HAVE A MAYOR WHO IS SITTING ON OUR REQUESTS.
[00:30:01]
YEAH, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND THAT'S WHERE, UNDER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, YOU CAN DEAL WITH THAT PUBLICLY.OR WHEN YOU SAY, WHY HASN'T THIS ITEM COME UP? YOU KNOW, THE OTHER THING IS, THIS IS A FLUID DOCUMENT.
IT CAN BE BROUGHT BACK AT ANY POINT IN TIME AND CHANGED.
LIKE I SAID, I JUST WANT TO GET SOMETHING IN WRITING TO CODIFY WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.
I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU'RE DOING IT.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME VERBIAGE.
TO THE EFFECT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE COULDN'T PUT IT WILL BE ON THE AGENDA WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME, JUST USE THE WORD REASONABLE, BUT IT MUST BE, LIKE IN AN UPDATE, PREVIOUSLY IN THE SECTION IT TALKS ABOUT BEING COMPLETELY REVIEWED AND WHAT APPROPRIATE FOR CONSIDERATION.
I THINK THAT COVERS IF IT'S A TWO-YEAR, THE ROAD'S NOT GOING TO BE DONE.
IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE FOR CONSIDERATION BECAUSE THAT ROAD'S NOT DONE.
WE PUT THE WORDING A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE ITEM THAT IS CONSIDERED BECAUSE EACH ITEM IS DIFFERENT.
SOME THINGS NEED TO BE EXPEDITED AND SOME THINGS WE CAN'T GET TO IT FOR TWO YEARS.
I WOULD PREFER NOT TO USE THE WORD REASONABLE.
AND WHOEVER IS PROPOSING THIS AGENDA, THEY'VE GOT TO HAVE SOME SUPPORT.
THE PERSON THAT'S SUPPORTING IT, IF THERE ARE TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE SUPPORTING IT, WOULD BOTH HAVE TO BE IN AGREEMENT THAT THE TIME FRAME IS 90 DAYS OR 120 OR SIX MONTHS OR THE VERY NEXT COUNT BUT IF THOSE TWO PEOPLE AGREE ON THAT TIME FRAME I WOULD RATHER HAVE A PROCEDURE WHERE THEY CAN PUT IN TIME CERTAIN THOUGH WHICH IS GOOD SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF REQUESTS FOR THIS SHEET ONE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS IS DATE AND OTHER INFORMATION AND THOSE ARE APPARENTLY THE DATES THAT THIS MAY LAND ON AN AGENDA I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DATE REQUESTED SO WE CAN SEE IF IT IS IN FACT REASONABLE.
BECAUSE I KNOW THAT I HAVE ONE THAT I REQUESTED NOT LONG AFTER THE ELECTION LAST YEAR, AND IT'S STILL TBD.
SO I DON'T EVEN KNOW EXACTLY HOW LONG AGO THAT WAS, SO THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW.
THE OTHER THING IS IN THE NOTES SECTION, I THINK THAT IS DEFINITELY WHERE WE CAN SAY I THINK THIS SHOULD BE A 90-DAY VERSUS A SIX-MONTH SITUATION.
YEAH, OR THIS IS A MEDIAN REQUEST.
IT'S ON EVERY PUBLIC AGENDA SO THAT YOU CAN BRING IT UP AND SAY, HEY, WAIT A MINUTE, HOW COME THIS ISN'T THERE? I WANT IT THERE.
YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THINGS DO, I THINK THERE WAS ONE THING I ABSOLUTELY MISSED AND IT DIDN'T GET ON A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AND IT WASN'T UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING AND IT WAS A ROXANNE ITEM WHEN SHE SAID, WELL, WAIT A MINUTE, MY DEAL ISN'T ON HERE.
AND I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP BECAUSE IT DID THEN GO ON THE AGENDA.
BUT, LIKE I SAID, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET WHAT WE DO CODIFIED SO THAT WE MAY HAVE SOMETHING IN WRITING THAT REFLECTS WHAT WE ACTUALLY DO AT THIS TIME.
ANY DOCUMENT WHERE WE PASS, WHETHER IT'S CODE OF CONDUCT, WHETHER IT'S AGENDA, WHETHER IT'S PROCEDURES FOR X, Y, Z, CAN ALWAYS BE BROUGHT BACK FOR REVISION OR CHANGE OR REPEAL, WHATEVER.
MR. PILGRIM, YOU APPARENTLY HAVE SOMETHING ELSE TO SAY.
YEAH, I'M JUST STILL STRUGGLING WITH IT BECAUSE IT APPEARS LIKE YOU WANT TO...
AND ACTING TO UNDERSTAND YOURSELF.
WHETHER THEN YOU JUST WANT US TO PUT THAT IN THERE.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND I FEEL THERE'S A WAY TO DEAL WITH THAT NOW.
MS. HELMS. YES, SO HERE'S THE THING.
[00:35:01]
SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT FUTURE COUNCILS HAVE SOME THINGS IN PLACE.BUT, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS A WORKSHOP, AND THEN THE WORKSHOP DOESN'T HAPPEN, AND IT, EXCUSE ME, ENDS UP ON AN AGENDA ITEM, BECAUSE THERE'S BAGGAGE WITH THAT ITEM.
AND SO IT'S BETTER TO JUST DO IT AS AN AGENDA ITEM THAN ACTUALLY HAVE THE DISCUSSION IN A WORKSHOP.
THAT SORT OF THING CAN HAPPEN.
I THINK THAT THAT'S NOT FAIR TO THE PUBLIC.
IT'S REALLY NOT FAIR TO STAFF EITHER.
I AGREE WITH MR. SHARP THAT I DON'T THINK TWO PEOPLE NEED TO MAKE A REQUEST.
BUT, MS. BAUGH, I'D KIND OF LIKE TO HANDLE THIS LIKE WE DID THE NOISE ORDINANCE, WHERE WE KIND OF WENT, OKAY, ABOUT 11 O'CLOCK, YES, NO, LET'S TAKE A LITTLE MINI VOTE FOR EACH OF THESE SECTIONS.
MAYBE WE CAN GET TO A CONSENSUS THAT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO LOOK AT THIS AS A BIG PICTURE, MAYBE LOOK AT SMALLER PICTURES AND GET THROUGH THESE VOTES QUICKLY AND THEN PUT IT ALL TOGETHER AT THE END.
I MEAN, WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK OF THAT? I CAN DO IT IN FIVE MINUTES.
THE ISSUE I'VE RAISED AT THE LAST THAT THE ONLY ANY VOTE AND IT IS SO I WOULD WHAT A MAYOR'S RIGHT TO DO THE AGENDA AND THE COUNCIL CAN ADOPT A RESOLUTION THAT THAT ESTABLISHES AGENDA SETTING THERE'S NOTHING THAT SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITS OR AUTHORIZES A COMMITTEE AS YOU CONTEMPLATE THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, IT TALKS ABOUT A COMMITTEE, AND IN MY VIEW, THAT'S NOT REALLY A COMMITTEE BECAUSE THERE ARE NO VOTES.
I HAVE SEEN AGENDA COMMITTEES THAT ARE SET UP WHERE YOU HAVE THE MAYOR AND THE MAYOR PRO TEM ON THEM.
AND IF IT'S 1-1, YOU NEED A TIEBREAK.
AND THAT PERSON ENDS UP BEING THE CITY MANAGER, OR IN THIS CASE, THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR, WHICH PUTS THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR IN A REALLY DIFFICULT POSITION.
SO THAT, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH, YOU MENTIONED THAT BEFORE, THAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO PUT THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR BEING IN A POSITION OF BRINGING A TIE BETWEEN THE MAYOR AND THE PRO TEM.
WE'VE ACTUALLY GOT THE MAYOR, THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR, THE CITY SECRETARY, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE MAYOR PRO TEM THERE.
AND LET ME MAKE ONE SIDEBAR COMMENT FOR THE SAKE OF THE AUDIENCE WHILE WE'RE HERE.
IN THE LAST 10 MONTHS, I'VE ATTENDED NEARLY EVERY SYNC YOU'VE HAD.
SOMEBODY ELSE IS GOING TO BE EVENTUALLY.
BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT PERSON'S RECORD IS A SIGNIFICANT VOICE IN THE MEETING THAT SETS THE AGENDA.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND I'M GETTING MY INFORMATION FROM TML, IN CASE ANYBODY WONDERS, THE AGENDA IS UNDER THE MAYOR, PERIOD.
THE MAYOR CAN ASK FOR STAFF TO HELP HER WITH THAT.
STAFF BEING THE CITY ATTORNEY, CITY SECRETARY, CITY ADMINISTRATOR.
THAT'S WHO THE MAIN COMMITTEE IS, OR HOW IT'S DONE.
THIS MAYOR PRO TEM IS THERE AD HOC.
IN CASE THE MAYOR DROPS DEAD SO THAT THEY CAN GO ON AND KNOW WHAT'S ON THE BILL.
THIS IS HOW WE'VE ALWAYS DONE IT.
[00:40:01]
CITY OF PARKER AND ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS PUT THAT IN WRITING SO WE HAVE WHAT WE DO CODIFIED.THE COUNCIL HERE IS SAYING THAT LAW DOESN'T SPECIFY THAT THE COUNCIL REALLY CAN DETERMINE THE PROCEDURES FOR ESTABLISHING AN AGENDA.
IN THE ABSENCE OF THIS RESOLUTION.
I MEAN JUST TO PULL BACK FOR A MOMENT I THINK WHAT WE'RE YOU KNOW WE'RE NOT ALLEGING BAD BEHAVIOR ON ANYONE HERE YOU KNOW I LOOK AT I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU READ ABOUT THE SUPER MAYOR TIFFANY HENYARD FROM TOWNSHIP AND YOU KNOW SHE DID USE A NUMBER OF PROCEDURAL DEVICES TO PREVENT THE COUNCIL FROM EXERCISING THEIR DISCRETION THEIR THEIR JUDGMENT AND THEIR ULTIMATELY, GUIDANCE LEADERSHIP AS A CITY COUNCIL, AND SHE DID IT TO DEFRAUD THE CITY, ALLEGEDLY, BECAUSE IT'S NOT, I THINK...
WHAT'S THAT? AND, YOU KNOW, BY WEAPONIZING THINGS LIKE THE AGENDA, YOU KNOW, IS HOW PEOPLE LIKE THAT GET AWAY WITH WHAT THEY DO.
AND IF YOU CAN PARKING LOT AGENDA ITEMS TO SUIT...
WHAT YOU WANT AND PRIORITIZE THE THINGS THAT YOU WANT.
AND REALLY, BASED ON YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE MAYORAL DUTY OF SETTING THE AGENDA, THAT IS POSSIBLE.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE TO SIGNIFICANTLY PUT ANYONE OUT TO PUT IN A SAFEGUARD AGAINST THAT.
AND I THINK IT'S NOT PERFECT, RIGHT? THE FIVE OF US AREN'T PERFECT, AND AT SOME FUTURE JUNCTURE, ALL FIVE OF US WILL BE HIGHLY IMPERFECT FOR ALL WE KNOW.
BUT IT IS A SAFER MECHANISM TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ONE PERSON THANK YOU.
ESSENTIALLY CLOG THE CITY FOR THEIR OWN INTERESTS.
I WILL COMMENT ON ONE MORE THING, AND I'M SORRY.
TO BUDDY'S POINT ABOUT THE AMERIPROTEM, I'D LOOK TO CATHERINE.
WHAT CAN COUNCIL DO TO PRIORITIZE WHAT IS SEEN IN THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS TODAY, AND WHAT CAN WE POSSIBLY SET? INTO THIS ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT PRIORITIZATION OF WHAT GETS HEARD FIRST.
WHEN YOU HAVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU COULD ALWAYS SAY IS, I WANT THIS TO BE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AND I WANT IT TO BE ON THIS DATE.
YOU ARE DOING IT IN A PUBLIC MEETING.
IF YOU HAVE OTHER PEOPLE WHO AGREE, YES, IT SHOULD BE ON THIS DATE, THEN IT'S GOING TO GO ON THAT AGENDA.
NOW, IF IT GOES ON THAT AGENDA AND IT'S NOT READY, IT'S SIMPLY...
NOT READY AND THAT'S WHAT STAFF OR THE SPONSORING COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD HAVE TO SAY LIKE THIS ISN'T ACTUALLY READY TO GO ETC WE TALKED AND THERE WAS A REFERENCE EARLIER TO POSTPONING ITEMS IF THEY'RE NOT READY AND IT'S NOT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRED THAT THERE EVEN BE A MOTION TO POSTPONE UNLESS YOU WANT IT TO BE A CERTAIN DATE IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT IT'S CLEAR TO STAFF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL THEN STAFF WILL BRING IT BACK AND SAY HEY THIS NEEDS TO GO TO AGENDA I THINK I'VE WANDERED OFF FROM YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION NOW WELL I GUESS WHAT WHAT RECOURSE WOULD COUNCIL HAVE SAY LET'S JUST SAY WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THREE THINGS WERE PUT ON THE AGENDA IN THE NEXT MONTH AND YOU KNOW NOT SO UH DEMANDING US TO PUT 30 THINGS BUT JUST THREE THANK YOU.
WHAT REAL RECOURSE DO WE HAVE? I MEAN, I SUPPOSE YOU COULD REFUSE TO HEAR ANYTHING THAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE AGENDA, WHICH IS TO GIVE IT A NO VOTE DURING A COUNCIL SESSION.
BUT WHAT OTHER MEANS DO THEY HAVE TO ENSURE THOSE PRIORITIZATIONS ARE RECOGNIZED? I PRESUME THAT IF WE HAVE A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL THAT SAYS WE WANT THIS ITEM TO DATE, THAT IT WILL BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA.
THAT AGENDA IS GENERALLY, THE PHYSICAL TYPING OF IT IS CREATED BY STAFF.
AND I ANTICIPATE THAT STAFF WOULD PUT THOSE THINGS ON THE AGENDA.
IF STAFF IS DIRECTED TO THEN TAKE THINGS OFF THE AGENDA, WHICH I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE CONTEMPLATING, WHAT IS THE RECOURSE FOR THAT? MAYBE YOUR CODE OF CONDUCT.
YOU SAID IF WE ASK FOR IT TO BE PUT ON BY A CERTAIN DATE, YOU PRESUME THAT WOULD BE DONE.
THE QUESTION IS, BUT WHAT IF IT'S NOT? WHAT'S OUR RECOURSE IF IT'S NOT? BASED ON THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, THERE IS NO RECOURSE.
[00:45:01]
A RECOURSE WOULD BE IF WE WROTE IT DIFFERENTLY, OTHER THAN REVERTING TO CENSURE.WELL, THE RECOURSE WOULD BE THAT IF WE WANTED IT ON BY DATE CERTAIN, IT GOES ON AT DATE CERTAIN.
WELL, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ALREADY SAYING, THOUGH.
AND THEN IF IT DOESN'T GET ON THERE, WHAT CAN YOU DO? I MEAN, YEAH.
WELL, YOU COULD STRUCTURE THIS TO WHERE THE DIRECTION OR VOTE OF COUNSEL...
DICTATING THAT IT GOES ON ON DATE X MEANS IT'S ON THERE ON DATE X, PERIOD, FULL STOP.
WHETHER THE MAYOR OR ANYBODY ELSE POINTED IT ON THERE OR NOT.
YOU STILL HAVE THE SAME QUESTION, THOUGH.
WHAT IF THAT DIRECTION IS SPECIFICALLY GIVEN AND IT'S IN THE POLICY AND IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, WHAT'S THE CONSEQUENCE OF IT? THAT ULTIMATE QUESTION IS SOMETHING I'M KIND OF MULLING OVER.
YOU ALSO HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S BUILT IN IN 7 THAT ADDRESSES TIME-CONSUMING REQUESTS OR SPECIFIC ITEMS. TO BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL AND SO THAT ONE COUNCIL MEMBER GETS TO SAY IN PUBLIC SESSION, THIS IS WHAT I WANT, THIS IS WHY I WANT IT ON THE AGENDA, AND STAFF WOULD HAVE SAID, WE ANTICIPATE THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE X AMOUNT OF TIME, AND THEN COUNCIL GIVES DIRECTION AS TO WHETHER IT SHOULD BE ON THE AGENDA.
IT'S A MORE FORMAL PROCESS THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OR WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, WHICH MAY ALSO BE MORE CUMBERSOME THAN WHAT WE WANT.
SO IF WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT WE WANT THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO BE THIS EX-OFFICIO MEMBER, THEN WHO SITS THERE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF REALLY LISTENING AND NOT ENGAGING IN THE EVENT OF THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE MAYOR, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT SAID THAT THEY ARE A NON-VOTING MEMBER, BECAUSE EX-OFFICIO DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT.
SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN I WANT THAT CLARIFIED.
I ALSO DON'T KNOW WHY WE COULDN'T, IF THIS PERSON ISN'T VOTING, WHY IT COULDN'T JUST BE ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL.
IF WE'RE GOING TO LET THEM HAVE SOME INPUT, LET IT BE A COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE AND NOT AN EX-OFFICIO JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE THE MAYOR PRO TEM.
WHAT IF ROXANNE LOVES TALKING ABOUT AGENDA ITEMS AND HAS THE TIME, BUT BUDDY GOES AND GETS HIS JOB AT THE HOME DEPOT AND IS NOT AVAILABLE WEDNESDAYS, THEN WHY WOULD WE, I WOULD LIKE THE FREEDOM TO DO THAT.
AT THE CURRENT TIME, ALL AGENDA MEETINGS ARE POSTED SO EVERYBODY CAN BE THERE.
AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, I WON'T LET ANYBODY TALK THAT THEY WANT TO IN THE AGENDA MEETINGS OVER SOME PEOPLE'S VAST CRITICISM OF ME FOR ALLOWING THAT.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT I WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO BE THE MAYOR OF PRO TEM BECAUSE I HAVE A JOB AND I'M NOT AVAILABLE NECESSARILY TO ALWAYS...
SO I WOULD TURN DOWN THAT POSITION BECAUSE I'M NOT AVAILABLE.
OR WE'LL MOVE THE AGENDA MEETING TO A TIME WHEN YOU ARE AVAILABLE.
WE HAVE DONE THAT AT VARIOUS TIMES.
AT ONE TIME, PATTY, I THINK THE AGENDA MEETING WAS ON TUESDAYS AT 9 A.M.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE ACCOMMODATE AS BEST WE CAN.
I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT THAT OVER AGAIN.
THE PART WHERE COLLEEN WAS RIGHT, THAT'S GOOD.
I SAY, YOU KNOW, IF THE INTENT IS TO SAY NON-VOTING MEMBER, THEN I SUPPOSE MAKE THAT EXPLICIT.
BUT GOING BACK TO TRYING TO ENSURE SOMETHING IS HEARD BY A PARTICULAR DATE, COUNCIL CAN STRIKE THINGS FROM FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. OF COURSE.
CAN THE MAYOR ADD THINGS BACK IN? AS A MEMBER OF COUNCIL, I HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA AS ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER.
IF SOMETHING WAS STRUCK, THOUGH I THINK I WOULD, AND I ONLY SPEAK FOR ME, I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK FOR ANYBODY ELSE, I THINK WHAT I WOULD DO IS IN FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS I WOULD TALK ABOUT IT, YOU KNOW.
THIS IS WHY I'M TAKING IT OFF.
IN MY TIME AS MAYOR, I CAN ONLY REMEMBER ONE THING THAT GOT STRUCK OFF THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. WE HAD A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT
[00:50:01]
MADE A PARTICULAR...I'LL BE VERY HONEST ABOUT THAT.
I ASKED THEM WOULD THEY COME IN AND DISCUSS IT WITH ME SO I COULD AT LEAST UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ASK WAS FOR.
WHEN THEY CAME IN AND EXPLAINED IT TO ME AND TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CITY ATTORNEY, THEY VOLUNTARILY WITHDREW IT BECAUSE THEY REALIZED WE ALREADY HAD AN ORDINANCE IN EFFECT THAT COVERED WHAT THEY WERE ASKING.
AND THAT'S THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF LIKE THAT.
SO I THINK YOU APPROACH THIS, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK YOU HAVE BEEN EXCELLENTLY WELL-INTENTIONED, YOU KNOW.
I FIND NO FAULT WITH HOW YOU'VE MADE THE AGENDA.
I'VE SAT IN ON AN AGENDA SESSION AND I WASN'T AN EX OFFICIO OR ANYTHING AND I FELT LIKE MY INPUT WAS VALUED AND RESPECTED.
BUT I ALWAYS COME BACK TO WHAT IF YOU WERE A CRAZY PERSON, YOU KNOW.
YOU'VE BEEN TALKING TO MY HUSBAND.
AND SO I THINK ABOUT, AND GOING BACK TO THE ADDING AND SUBTRACTING THINGS FROM THE FUTURE AGENDA, CAN THEY ONLY BE ADDED DURING A COUNCIL MEETING OR CAN THEY BE ADDED DURING NON-SESSION TIMES? YEAH, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS EITHER DURING THE MEETING, YOU CAN ASK FOR SOMETHING, YOU CAN SEND AN EMAIL SAYING, WOULD YOU PLEASE PUT THIS ON THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEM, YOU CAN TELL ME IN PERSON, WOULD YOU ADD THIS? AND IF YOU DO THAT, PLEASE MAKE SURE I WRITE IT DOWN.
SO AS SOME OF YOU PROBABLY PICKED UP, I'M THINKING ABOUT STRIKING THINGS FROM THE FUTURE AGENDA AS A SAFEGUARD AGAINST, LIKE, GAMESMANSHIP, BUT I GUESS THAT DOESN'T REALLY WORK OUT.
SO OPEN TO OTHER SUGGESTIONS ON HOW WE APPROACH THIS.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO RESOLVE THIS.
WE'VE GOT TIME TO GET TO ROXANNE'S QUESTIONS REAL QUICK TO AT LEAST MAKE THAT A TRUTH.
WELL I WAS LOOKING AT ALL THE TOPICS THAT WE'VE SPOKEN TONIGHT.
A QUICK RAPID FIRE THIS YES OR NO AND THUMBS UP THUMBS DOWN AND THEN MAYBE I IS THAT CONSIDERED VOTING CATHERINE? BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT ALL TOGETHER AND THEN VOTE IN THE COUNCIL MEETING VERSUS THE WORKSHOP.
CAN WE VOTE ON THE LITTLE PIECES? WHAT WE USUALLY SAY IS WE'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION.
SO YOU GO AROUND THE HORN AND EACH PERSON WOULD SAY, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, ET CETERA.
TO GIVE FEEDBACK, WE CALL IT DIRECTION.
SO I WOULD STATE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO, SHOULD WE MAKE IT A STATEMENT LIKE, ALMOST LIKE A MOTION LIKE I WOULD I WOULD SUGGEST TO COUNCIL PEOPLE MAKE THE REQUEST VERSUS ONE YES YOU CAN SAY THAT AND THEN EVERYBODY ELSE CAN RESPOND OKAY I THINK TWO PEOPLE SHOULD REQUEST TO PUT AN ITEM SO YOU WOULD BE AGAIN I WOULD I WOULD REQUIRE FURTHER INPUT ON IT YES NOT NOT IN AGREEMENT NOT AN AGREEMENT THERE LET'S DO IT THAT WAY HE WANTS TWO PEOPLE, AND BUDDY.
I WANTED TO HEAR MORE OF DARYL'S REACTION.
THAT THINKING COMING IN WAS TWO, BUT I'M OPEN TO CHANGING MY MIND.
WELL, ONE, WE CAN STRIKE IT FROM THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS BY MAJORITY VOTE.
TWO, IF I CAN'T APPROACH AND GET SUPPORT FOR SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE COMPLEX OR DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND WITHOUT TALKING TO YOU.
AND SO IF I SAY, HEY, BILLY, WE NEED TO MAKE AN ORDINANCE ABOUT SELF-DRIVING VEHICLES IN THE CITY OF PARKER, AND I TRY TO EXPLAIN TO BILLY, YOU KNOW, SAY THE MULTIPLE AI MECHANISMS AND HOW THEY'RE AFFECTED, AND MAYBE I'M JUST A REAL NERD ABOUT IT, BUT BILLY SAYS, I JUST CAN'T SEE WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.
I CAN'T TALK TO ANYBODY ELSE ABOUT IT AND BRING IT AS AN AGENDA ITEM.
SO I THINK IT'S SAFER IN TERMS OF TML.
OR TEXAS POLICY ON QUORUM TO SIMPLY ALLOW SOMEONE TO BRING IT AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AND ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO LATER STRIKE IT.
PERSUASIVE DISCUSSION, BUT BECAUSE OF SOME OF MY TEN DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN TOTAL...
[00:55:05]
NEXT QUESTION SHOULD WE INCLUDE THE MAYOR PRO TEM AS A VOTING MEMBER NOT THE OFFICIO EX OFFICIO IS THAT HOW WE SAY IT IS THAT HOW WE WANT THAT WORD IN EX OFFICIO INCLUDING VOTING RIGHTS AND I ALSO LIKED YOUR YOUR COMMENT IT TO PUT IN MAYOR PRO TEM OR COUNCIL MEMBER DESIGNATED COUNCIL MEMBER SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YES OR NO YES OR NO THAT'S A GOOD VOTE YES BUT PICK A REPRESENTATIVE YES YOU'RE ON BOARD OKAY YEAH I AGREE ABOUT DESIGNATED SOMEONE ELSE WHAT WAS THE OTHER HALF THE QUESTION THAT INCLUDE THEM IN THE COMMITTEE YEAH I WOULD INCLUDE IN THE COMMITTEE BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU'VE GOT AN EVEN NUMBER OF VOTES SO MAYBE THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO BE APPOINTED AHEAD OF TIME.OKAY, THE NEXT ONE, I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT ITEMS BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WAS REQUESTED, BUT IT MUST BE COMPLETE, LEGALLY REVIEWED, AND APPROPRIATE FOR CONSIDERATION FOR THE ITEM REQUEST.
HOW DO YOU DO A COUNTERCLAUSE? OKAY I MEAN I AGREE BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE SOME ABILITY TO MAKE IT A TIME DEFINITE IF NEEDED OKAY SO THAT'S THE THUMBS DOWN RIGHT BECAUSE I REALLY HAVE A LOT OF TIME IN THE SPECIFIC TIME WE'RE VERY DIFFERENT SO BUT WE ARE SAYING THE PERSON WHO COULD CONSIDER THERE'S GONNA BE A TIME FRAME CONNECTED TO BUT INSTEAD OF A REASON I DON'T THINK THEY'RE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.
I THINK THAT IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY, MAKE A REASONABLE TIME FRAME UNLESS THERE IS A REQUESTED DATE.
SPECIFIC DATE YET TO ME IF YOU MAKE A REQUEST AND YOU SAY AND I'D REALLY LIKE THIS TO BE ON THIS IS A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME UNLESS DATE SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED EVERYBODY'S GOOD WITH THAT AND CERTAINLY A DATE AND MAYBE CITY ADMINISTRATION THING WILL MAKE WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN OKAY SO THAT WAS THAT SECTION 5, THE MAYOR HAD REQUESTED THAT IF THE AGENDA COMMITTEE DENIES A REQUEST, THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO REJECTED IT MAY BE ABLE TO APPEAL IT TO THE ENTIRE COUNCIL.
EVERYBODY GOOD WITH THAT? YEP.
AND THEN WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY COUNCIL MEMBER COULD REMOVE AN ITEM FROM THE AGENDA.
THAT WAS VERY MESSY, THAT CONVERSATION.
SO WE DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT.
THIS IS ACTUALLY POSTED AS AN AGENDA ITEM.
CAN WE CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION FOR A SHORT TIME DURING THE MEETING TO FINALIZE THAT ONE? CAN WE JUST CONTINUE AND GO INTO THAT? DO WE HAVE TO STOP? NO, WE DON'T HAVE TO STOP.
SO DOES ANYBODY HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON WHERE WE WOULD GO WITH THAT? I DON'T LIKE THAT ANYONE COULD JUST PULL IT FOR NO REASON AND NO DISCUSSION.
SO HOW DO WE WORK? AND I THOUGHT WE SETTLED ON SUGGEST THE REMOVAL AND APPROVE IT BY A MAJORITY VOTE.
THAT'S THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW, I THINK, RIGHT? YEAH.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO STAY AS WRITTEN.
RIGHT? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES? SO IT'S FUNNY.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? AND WE'VE COVERED ALL THE TOPICS, SO WE COULD GET SOMETHING PASSED TONIGHT, RIGHT? OKAY.
WHEN WE GO ON IT, ON THE AGENDA, ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO SAY IT'S AMENDED AND TALK ABOUT EACH ONE OF THOSE?
[01:00:01]
I CAN TRY.OKAY, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS? IF NOT, IT IS 7 O'CLOCK.
[ADJOURN ]
I NEED TO CLOSE THIS WORKSHOP.[CALL TO ORDER ]
AND AT THIS TIME, WE WILL GO TO THE...PARKER CITY COUNCIL REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGAIN IT'S APRIL 21ST 2026 WHAT IS 7 OR 1 P.M.
AND I'M CALLING THIS TO ORDER.
MS. HILL DO WE HAVE A QUORUM? YES MA'AM WE HAVE A QUORUM.
AT THIS TIME I'M GOING TO ASK THAT MRS. HAND DO THE AMERICAN PLEDGE AND JOE MARSHALL IF YOU WILL DO THE TEXAS PLEDGE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
I HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG, AND I PLEDGE TO BE A TEXAS, ONE STATE, UNDER GOD, AND UNDER THE VISIBLE.
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK IF THERE ARE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS, BECAUSE I...PATTY, DO YOU HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS? FIRST ONE I HAVE IS CAROLYN MOBIUS.
HI, I'M JUST MOVING OVER HERE.
CAROLYN MOBIUS, I LIVE AT 1412 PARKVIEW ROAD IN LIFFEY, TEXAS.
I WANT TO PROVIDE A BRIEF UPDATE BASED ON INFORMATION RECENTLY OBTAINED THROUGH THE DISCOVERY.
RELATED TO THE PROPOSED MED AND TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
SORRY IF SOME OF THIS IS REPETITIVE, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
FIRST, THE TLA TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SUBMITTED ON MARCH 19TH CONTAINS NOTABLE INACCURACIES.
IT ASSIGNS ONE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH AFFECTS TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND IS EXPECTED TO INCREASE U-TURN MOVEMENTS THAT WERE NOT PROPERLY EVALUATED.
SECOND, THE BACKGROUND GROWTH DATA USED IN THE REPORT ONLY EXTENDS THROUGH 2022, DESPITE THE REPORT BEING PREPARED IN MARCH 2026.
THIS DOES NOT REFLECT CURRENT OR ONGOING DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY IN THE AREA.
I ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT ON APRIL 16TH, I WAS INFORMED BY THE CONE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND TXDOT THAT THESE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN FORWARDED TO LJR ENGINEERING.
HE PREPARED THE TIA, AS WELL AS THE COUNTY'S THIRD-PARTY REVIEW TEAM.
HERE IS KIM LEE HONG, ANOTHER ENGINEERING FIRM.
THE COUNTY AND TXDOT HAVE TOLD LJA THEY NEED TO RESUBMIT THE TIA BASED ON THE INFORMATION I PROVIDED THEM.
ADDITIONALLY, THROUGH DISCOVERY, AN EMAIL DATED EARLY ABOUT JULY 2023 INDICATES THE DEVELOPER'S CONTRIBUTION TO TYING TO DUBLIN.
ROAD LIFT STATION IS APPROXIMATELY 3.5 MILLION COMPARED TO APPROXIMATELY 17.8 MILLION IF THEY DO GROUNDWATER WELLS IN THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.
AND A SEPARATE EMAIL DATE ON JULY 13, 2023 ANTICIPATED HOME SALES WERE DISCUSSED.
AND WHAT IT WAS DISPLAYING WAS BACK IN 2021, THE PRICE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO SELL TOWNHOMES FOR WAS $315,000.
THAT IN 2023 NEED TO BE MOVED UP TO $400,000 TO $475,000.
AND FOR THE 40-FOOT LOTS, SINGLE HOME, IT WAS $400,000 BACK IN 2021.
NOW THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT $550,000.
THE COSTS HAVE NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2021, AT LEAST NOT IN PUBLIC NOTICE.
WHILE EXHIBITS WERE SUBMITTED THROUGH EARLY 2023, THE LAST NOTICE ISSUED IN 2024 DID NOT REFLECT UPDATED COSTS.
THE NEW AND OR THAT THE PROPERTY WAS NO LONGER IN PARKER'S ETJ.
LACK OF UPDATE COST INFORMATION
[01:05:03]
MAY RESULT IN THE MUD BEING DENIED BY THE TCEQ.THE COMMISSION HAD PREVIOUSLY DENIED THE LAKEVIEW MUD CREATION APPLICATION IN PART DUE TO RELIANCE ON OUTDATED COST ASSUMPTIONS, AN ISSUE THAT IS APPEARING TO REPEAT ITSELF.
THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART I WANT YOU ALL TO HEAR.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? THAT'S THE ONLY CARD I HAVE.
SOMETHING THAT MS. MOVIUS MENTIONED WAS THIS PROPERTY NO LONGER BEING IN PARKER'S ETJ.
CAN CATHERINE CLARIFY WHAT THAT ACTUALLY IS? BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE CONFUSING FOR ANYBODY WHO'S NOT BEEN FOLLOWING ALONG DILIGENTLY.
THERE ARE PROPERTIES THAT WERE REQUESTED TO BE REMOVED FROM THE ETJ UNDER STATE LAW.
HOWEVER, THAT LAW HAS BEEN CHALLENGED AND REMAINS UNDER CHALLENGE AND PENDING LITIGATION.
[PRESENTATION(S) ]
THEN THE NEXT THING WE HAVE IS A PRESENTATION BY THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB.THE CITY OF PARKER, IN OUR DESIRE TO SUPPORT THE CITY, WE WANT TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING GIFT.
$500 FOR A CREATION COMMISSION TO USE FOR $618.87 FOR REFLECTIVE...
$500 FOR USE IN COMMUNITY OUTREACH EFFORTS AND OFFICE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND A CAREER FOR THE POLICE AS WELL VALUED AT APPROXIMATELY 100 OUR TREASURER WE'RE INCREDIBLY GRATEFUL AND HOPE THAT YOU REMEMBER HOW MUCH YOU APPRECIATED EVERY TIME YOU GET A CUP OF COFFEE.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
NEXT WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM LINDA NELSON.
PLEASE DON'T, PROVIDED YOU ALL HAVE COMMENTS, PLEASE DON'T READ AHEAD.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
I CURRENTLY RESIDE AT 5802 CORINTH CHAPEL ROAD IN PARKER VILLAGE, ALONG WITH MY MOTHER, ELAINE HAND, WHO'S SITTING IN THE BACK.
IN MID-MAY, WE WILL BE RELOCATING TO HERITAGE RANCH IN FAIRVIEW, AS THIS WILL BE THE LAST CITY COUNCIL AT WHICH I OFFER COMMENTS.
I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE SOME REFLECTIONS.
AND THERE'S THREE POINTS, JUST LIKE A GOOD SERMON.
RIGHT, BETTY? FIRST, A TOPIC THAT HAS COME UP FREQUENTLY IN OUR COMMUNITY IS TRANSPARENCY, SPECIFICALLY WHETHER THERE'S ENOUGH OF IT.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT TRANSPARENCY IS NOT A ONE-SIDED RESPONSIBILITY.
IT REQUIRES ACTIVE PARTICIPATION FROM BOTH THE CITY AND ITS CITIZENS.
ON THE CITY'S PART, TRANSPARENCY MEANS PROVIDING INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT, ACCURATE, AND TIMELY, SHARED IN WAYS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE AND UNDERSTANDABLE.
ON THE CITIZEN'S PART, TRANSPARENCY REQUIRES ENGAGEMENT.
INFORMATION IS ALREADY AVAILABLE THROUGH TOWN HALLS, COUNCIL MEETINGS, PUBLIC FORUMS, AND THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
IT IS UP TO US AS RESIDENTS TO...
SEEK OUT THAT INFORMATION, STAY INFORMED, AND ASK QUESTIONS WHEN SOMETHING IS UNCLEAR.
AT PRESENT, THERE IS NO SINGLE CENTRALIZED SOURCE THAT COMPILES EVERY ISSUE INTO SIMPLE REAL-TIME SUMMARIES.
THERE IS NO PARKER WIKIPEDIA OR AI CHATBOT.
[01:10:02]
THIS MEANS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR STAYING INFORMED RESTS AT LEAST IN PART WITH EACH OF US AS CITIZENS.IF WE WANT A MORE INFORMED AND CONSTRUCTIVE PUBLIC DIALOGUE, WE SHOULD RECOGNIZE THAT TRANSPARENCY IS A SHARED EFFORT, ONE THAT WORKS BEST WHEN INFORMATION IS NOT ONLY PROVIDED, BUT ACTIVELY RECEIVED, THOUGHTFULLY CONSIDERED, AND DISCUSSED IN GOOD FAITH.
THE SECOND TOPIC, SECOND OF THREE, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A BRIEF REFLECTION ON CIVILITY IN OUR PUBLIC CONVERSATIONS.
MANY WISE VOICES THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE ENCOURAGED US TO BE THOUGHTFUL IN HOW WE SPEAK, WHETHER IN PERSON, BY EMAIL, OR ON WHAT IS KNOWN AS TOXIC SOCIAL MEDIA.
TOXIC IS NOT IN THE WRITTEN VERSION.
ONE SIMPLE APPROACH IS TO ASK OURSELVES THREE QUESTIONS BEFORE WE SPEAK IN ANY OF THESE FORUMS. THE FIRST, IS IT TRUE? ARE WE CERTAIN THAT WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS ACCURATE, OR ARE WE REPEATING ASSUMPTIONS OR HEARSAY? THE SECOND IS, IS IT KIND? EVEN WHEN SOMETHING MAY BE TRUE, ARE OUR WORDS RESPECTFUL AND CONSTRUCTIVE, OR ARE THEY SHAPED BY FRUSTRATION? AND THIRD, IS IT NECESSARY? NOT EVERY THOUGHT NEEDS TO BE EXPRESSED IN EVERY MOMENT.
IT IS WORTH ASKING WHETHER OUR WORDS WILL BUILD UNDERSTANDING, UNTRUST, OR SIMPLY ADD MORE NOISE.
THESE QUESTIONS ARE NOT MEANT TO DISCOURAGE DISAGREEMENT.
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES DEPEND ON OPEN DIALOGUE AND DIFFERING PERSPECTIVES.
RATHER, THEY ENCOURAGE US TO EXPRESS THOSE DIFFERENCES IN WAYS THAT PRESERVE DIGNITY AND KEEP THE FOCUS ON SOLUTIONS INSTEAD OF DIVISION.
IN PUBLIC SERVICE, SOME PEOPLE ARE READING AHEAD, I SEE, IN PUBLIC SERVICE AND IN PUBLIC DISCOURSE, WORDS MATTER.
THEY CAN DEEPEN DIVISIONS OR THEY CAN HELP BRIDGE THEM.
AND SOMETIMES RESTRAINT, SAYING NOTHING AT ALL, IS THE MOST CONSTRUCTIVE CHOICE WE CAN MAKE.
BUT MY THIRD POINT, FINALLY, IS I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE.
MY LATE HUSBAND AND I MOVED TO PARKER IN 2009 DURING THE EARLY PLANNING STAGES OF FARM TO MARKET ROAD 2551.
I REMEMBER GOING THROUGH THOSE EARLY COMMENT DISCUSSIONS FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE IMPATIENT BY THE PROGRESS THAT GETS MADE AT CITY COUNCIL.
FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, WE WERE WELCOMED AND ENCOURAGED TO GET INVOLVED, THANKS IN PART TO THE STAFF AT CITY HALL, WHO HELPED US CONNECT US TO COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB.
WE WERE PROUD TO BE FOUNDING MEMBERS OF THE PARKER HISTORICAL SOCIETY, NOT IN THE NOTES, BUT REALLY THAT WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO RESURRECT, AND TO SUPPORT THE EFFORT TO PRESERVE THE BARN AT THE PARKER PRESERVE.
OVER THE YEARS, WE STAYED ENGAGED, FOLLOWED CITY ISSUES CLOSELY, AND AT TIMES OFFERED, AS YOU ALL WELL KNOW, PASSIONATE FEEDBACK.
ALONG THE WAY, WE EXPERIENCED THE CARE AND DEDICATION OF THIS COMMUNITY IN VERY PERSONAL WAYS.
I REMAIN DEEPLY GRATEFUL TO THE FORMER FIRE CHIEF FOR PROTECTING OUR HOME DURING A FIRE AND FOR HIS CANDID ADVICE TO MY HUSBAND IN THAT MOMENT.
AND IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD THAT STORY, MY HUSBAND WANTED TO SUPERVISE THE FIRE WHILE ON HIS OXYGEN MACHINE.
I AM GRATEFUL TO THE CURRENT POLICE CHIEF FOR HIS CARE AND JUDGMENT DURING A DIFFICULT SEASON IN MY HUSBAND'S LIFE.
AS WE HAD JUST PERSUADED MY HUSBAND TO STOP DRIVING, AND NOT IN YOUR COMMENTS, BUT FOR THOSE WHO ARE NERVOUS ABOUT THE NOISE, THE POLICE CHIEF DID NOT SHOW UP AT MY HOUSE WITH A WARRANT.
HE ENTERTAINED THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSIONS SO THAT WE COULD COME TO THE RIGHT SOLUTION TO GET MY HUSBAND OUT FROM BEHIND THE DRIVER'S SEAT, FOR WHICH I AM FOREVER GRATEFUL THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO ARREST HIM.
TO THE CURRENT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, WHO I UNDERSTAND HAS TAKEN HIS FIRST VOCATION IN 10 YEARS, I AM GRATEFUL TO HIM FOR HIS EFFORTS TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT TO OUR PROPERTY THAT BACKS UP TO FORM TO MARKET 2551.
I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE CURRENT AND PAST MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND I SHOULD ALSO SAY THE PAST AND CURRENT MAYORS OF THE CITY, FOR THE TIME, EFFORT, AND THOUGHT YOU HAVE INVESTED IN SERVING THIS COMMUNITY, THE WORK TO ADDRESS INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS, STRENGTHEN FINANCIAL RESERVES AND IMPLEMENT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REFLECTS A CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO PARKER'S FUTURE.
A LAYER PEDAL, IF YOU COULD COME UP.
I WOULD LIKE TO ESPECIALLY, YOU HAVE TO GET OUT FROM UNDER YOUR, BACK
[01:15:01]
BEHIND YOUR CHAIR.AND I WOULD LIKE TO ESPECIALLY ACKNOWLEDGE MAYOR PETAL.
WHILE WE HAVE NOT ALWAYS AGREED ON EVERY ISSUE, NOT IN WRITTEN COMMENTS, BUT I WILL SAY WE DIDN'T HASH IT OUT ON SOCIAL MEDIA, WE HAD LIVELY DISCUSSIONS OVER LUNCH AT CHOCOLATE ANGEL WHERE WE VOICED OUR DISAGREEMENTS AND OUR AGREEMENTS.
WHILE WE'VE NOT ALWAYS AGREED ON EVERY ISSUE, YOUR CARE FOR THIS COMMUNITY HAS ALWAYS BEEN EVIDENT.
YOUR OUTREACH TO MY FAMILY DURING TIMES OF HARDSHIP HAS MEANT MORE THAN I CAN EXPRESS.
MAYOR PETTER, YOU SPOKE AT MY HUSBAND'S CELEBRATION OF LIFE LAST MAY, WHERE HIS CHEROKEE BOOKS ARE NOW PRESERVED AT THE COLLIN COUNTY HISTORY MUSEUM.
AND AS A SMALL TOKEN OF APPRECIATION, I WANT TO PRESENT YOU WITH AN ITEM FROM HIS PERSONAL COLLECTION ON BEHALF OF OUR FAMILY, TO EVERYONE HERE, CITY COUNCIL, STAFF, AND FELLOW RESIDENTS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, YOUR CARE, YOUR FRIENDSHIP, AND YOUR COMMITMENT TO THIS COMMUNITY.
I WISH PARKER CONTINUED SUCCESS AND ALL THE VERY BEST IN THE YEARS AHEAD.
AND MAYOR PETTO, WHO IS WHAT I'M PLEASING TO YOU, THANK YOU, AND THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, FOR GETTING ME ON THE AGENDA.
[ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST ]
I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST.ON SATURDAY, WE WILL HAVE THE NATIONAL DRUG TAKE BACK, WHERE YOU CAN JUST DRIVE BY OUR POLICE STATION, AND THERE WILL BE A POLICE OFFICER OUT FROM 10 IN THE MORNING UNTIL 2 IN THE AFTERNOON.
FOR YOU TO HAND OFF YOUR UNUSED DRUGS FOR YOUR SHARPS, BECAUSE WE ARE TAKING SHARPS DURING THAT TIME.
ALSO, THERE IS STILL EARLY VOTING.
IT STARTS BACK UP TOMORROW, AND IT GOES THROUGH SATURDAY, AND THEN ON SUNDAY, AND IT'S 8 TO 5.
AND THEN ON MONDAY AND TUESDAY, IT'S 7 TO 7 P.M., AND THEN THERE'S ELECTION DAY ON MAY 2ND. WE HOPE ALL OF YOU WILL VOTE.
NEXT, I WOULD NOTE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 5TH IS CANCELLED AND RESCHEDULED FOR MAY 12TH BECAUSE THE CANVAS OF VOTING WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE UNTIL THAT TIME.
SO WE MOVE THE MEETING BECAUSE WE REALLY NEED THE CANVASSING OF THE VOTE.
THERE WILL BE A COUNCIL MEETING MOST LIKELY IN THE FIRE STATION.
CAN WE ALSO MENTION THAT THE GREAT AMERICAN CLEANUP HAS BEEN MOVED TO MAY 9TH AT 9 P.M.
HERE AT CITY HALL DUE TO WEATHER? AND THEN I JUST HAD A QUESTION, BECAUSE I ALWAYS HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT DRUG TAKE-BACK.
ARE PET MEDS TAKEN BACK AS WELL? HUH THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION I NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE CREDIT BUT I READ IT SOMEWHERE OKAY NEXT WE WILL
[CONSENT AGENDA]
MOVE TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA ON WHICH WE HAVE THREE ITEMS THE FIRST ITEM IS APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 7TH 2026 THE SECOND ITEM IS CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE 912, AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE...[01:20:04]
AND APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE FY 2025-2026 OPERATING BUDGET.AND ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, CONSIDERATION AND OR INAPPROPRIATE ACTION, ACCEPTING A DONATION IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1,619.17 FROM THE PARKER WINNINGS CLUB.
TO BE ALLOCATED AS FOLLOWS, $500 FOR PARKER FEST FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION, $619.17 FOR REFLECTIVE SAFETY VESTS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND $500 FOR COMMUNITY OUTREACH EFFORTS PLUS A COFFEE POT FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
COUNCIL, IS THERE ANY ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT ANY OF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE PULLED OFF? OKAY, THEN I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION.
I MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SHARP AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BARRON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
[8. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 913 TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER ON LOT 1 IN SECTION C OF KINGS CROSSING 6 AND PLACING CONDITIONS THEREON. ]
OKAY, MOTION CARRIES 5-0.NEXT, WE WILL GO TO THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEMS, STARTING WITH ITEM NUMBER 8.
CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 913.
WELL, A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER ON LOT ONE IN SECTION THREE OF KING'S CROSSING 6 IN PLACING CONDITIONS THEREON.
MR. SALMON, YOU WANT TO COME UP AND TELL US ABOUT THIS? MAYOR, I WILL JUST MENTION THAT STAFF DOES HAVE A PRESENTATION IF WE WANT TO GET INTO THE STAFF SIDE OF THINGS FIRST.
STEVE SOLOMON, 4040 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, DALLAS, TEXAS.
WE'RE THE DEVELOPERS OF KING'S CROSSING 6, AND THIS IS A SPECIALLY USED PERMIT THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED BY ONE OF OUR BUILDERS, PARTNERS IN BUILDING FOR A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE FOR THEM TO GET STARTED ON THEIR MODEL HOME THAT WILL BE BUILT.
YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND DO YOUR PRESENTATION, SIR? YES, MADAM MAYOR.
WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE DYLAN MERCED COME UP AND GIVE A PRESENTATION ON THIS ONE.
IT SHOULD BE RELATIVELY BRIEF, AND THEN AFTER THAT, IF THERE'S ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT HERE, WE DO HAVE A, AS MR. SOLOMON MENTIONED, HE IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
I'M DOING MORE SET FOR THE 700 EAST PARKER ROAD.
I'M JUST GOING TO KIND OF GO OVER THE SLIDES WE HAVE UP HERE.
AS FAR AS ANY QUESTIONS, I'M NOT SURE IF KIM WOULD LIKE ME TO ANSWER ANY.
THE REASON FOR THE REQUEST IS CHAPTER 156.51 OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR TEMPORARY STRUCTURES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF REAL ESTATE.
THE BUILDER PARTNER IN BUILDING IS REQUESTING THE STRUCTURE BE INSTALLED WHILE MODEL HOMES FOR THE NEW SUBDIVISION IS BEING BUILT, AS HE SAID, ACROSS THE STREET.
THE STRUCTURE WILL BE REMOVED MORE LATER THAN DECEMBER 31ST OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR.
AS FAR AS THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU'LL SEE THE PRELIMINARY SURVEY SHOWING THAT THE JOB TRAILER WILL BE UP TO THE FRONT, AS ARE MOST HOMES IN THIS AREA.
THEY WILL HAVE A GRAVEL ACCESS AREA BEHIND IT FOR TEMPORARY, ANY TYPE OF MATERIAL STORAGES OR ACCESS FOR TRUCKS TRYING TO GET THAT SAID MATERIAL.
THIS WILL BE TREATED AS ANY OTHER HOUSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BE TREATED.
I WILL MAKE SURE THAT THEY WILL COMPLY WITH ALL ORDINANCES THE CITY OF PARKER HAS ADOPTED.
LOCATION JUST SHOWING AGAIN ACROSS THE STREET TOWARDS THE NORTH SIDE OF MAYFAIR AND LUCAS ROAD.
THIS IS KIND OF THE NEXT SLIDE AS A MOCK-UP OF WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE.
IT WILL BE MAINTAINED AND HAVE LANDSCAPE AND ALL PROPER YOU KNOW UNSIGHTLY MATERIALS IN THE BACK TAKEN CARE OF.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION, THE DISCRETIONARY ITEM, THE COUNCIL MAY APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS, AMEND, DENY, OR DIRECT STAFF TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.
THE RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, DO I FILE A VOTE, MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
THE STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL ON THE CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE, AND ANY UNNECESSARY APPURTENANCES BE REMOVED NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 31ST OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR.
ADDITIONAL TIME IS NEEDED OR A SEPARATE SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION SHOULD BE SUBMITTED FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION.
[01:25:02]
COUNCIL, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I WATCHED THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THIS ITEM.
SO IS THIS FOR THE THIRD MODEL HOME BUILDER? BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAD A MODEL HOME FOR GRAND AND FOR SHATTUCK IN KING'S CROSSING.
THIS WOULD BE SPECIFIC TO PARTNERS IN BUILDING, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY.
STEVE, WOULD YOU MIND COMING UP AGAIN IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS HERE? AND I THINK I SEE, YES, SIR, I'M SORRY, I DID FORGET YOUR NAME, BUT STEVE AS WELL.
YES, THIS IS INTRODUCING OUR THIRD BUILDER TO PARKER.
THE TWO BUILDERS IN THIS PARTICULAR PHASE WILL BE SHATTUCK HOMES.
AND PARTNERS IN BUILDING WHO DO A GREAT JOB OF CUSTOM HOMES.
SO WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE THEM IN THE PROJECT FOR A NEW ADDITION AND ANOTHER BUILDER COMING TO PARKER.
ARE YOU PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE FINISHED BY DECEMBER 31ST? IS THAT A PRETTY GOOD GUESSTIMATE? YES, THEY THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE FINISHED BY THE END OF OCTOBER, BUT WE REQUESTED UNTIL...
OTHER QUESTIONS? ANYTHING? OKAY.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 913 TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER ON LOT 1 IN SECTION C OF KING'S CROSSING PHASE 6 AND PLACING CONDITIONS THEREON.
WHAT CONDITIONS WOULD YOU LIKE PLACED? OH, I WAS JUST READING THE ITEM.
I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 913 TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER ON LOT 1 IN SECTION C OF KINGS CROSSING PHASE 6 AND PLACE THE CONDITION THAT IT WILL, THE STRUCTURE AND ANY UNNECESSARY ACCOUTREMENTS BE REMOVED NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 31ST, 2020.
IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND, AND I DARE ANYONE TO USE A PERTINENCE IN A SENTENCE.
OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARRON AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER SHARP TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE BUILDING IN QUESTION GETS MOVED BY 1231.26.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
ANY OPPOSED? NOT HEARING ANYBODY, MOTION CARRIES 5-0.
[9. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2026-893 AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO APPLY FOR A GRANT FOR LICENSE PLATE READERS. ]
NEXT WE HAVE...CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026893 AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO APPLY FOR A GRANT FOR A LICENSE PLATE READER.
IN COUNCIL, I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A PRESENTATION BY CHIEF PRICE, SERGEANT BURDICK, AND I GUESS THIS GENTLEMAN RIGHT HERE.
THIS AGENDA ITEM IS ACTUALLY...
SO I'M GONNA START WITH WHILE WE'RE PURSUING IT, ACTUALLY REACH OUT TO US AND THERE ARE SOME ADVANTAGES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
WITH REAL TIME ACCESS TO WHO'S ACTUALLY COMING TO THE CITY PARK AND IT WOULD GIVE US ACCESS TO OTHER CITIES CAMERAS AS WELL.
AS FAR AS IN OUR AREA PLANO HAS A CAMERA AROUND EAST PARKER AND COLDWATER CREEK.
WE'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING A CAMERA EAST PARKER ON THE OTHER SIDE COMING IN.
[01:30:01]
SO WE'D HAVE BOTH SIDES.MURPHY HAS CAMERAS ALREADY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MURPHY ON HOPE ROAD.
WE PUT ONE ON THE SOUTH SO WE KNOW WHO'S COMING IN FROM THERE.
THERE'S NOT A CAMERA ON THE EAST SIDE, BUT WE WOULD KNOW WHO'S COMING INTO OUR CITY.
THESE CAMERAS WILL GIVE US THE ABILITY TO, WE CAN HAVE HITS AND ALERTS ON STOLEN VEHICLES, WHETHER THEY'RE INVOLVED IN CRIMES SUCH AS MURDER OR ROBBERIES.
THERE'S A COS ON IT THAT WOULD TELL US RIGHT AWAY, HEY, THIS IS IN OUR CITY RIGHT NOW.
AND OUR OFFICERS COULD RESPOND.
WOULD THESE CAMERAS BE COMPATIBLE TO THE ONES IN MURPHY AND THE OTHER CITIES AROUND US? YES.
AS LONG AS WE GAVE THEM ACCESS TO OUR CAMERAS, WE WOULD HAVE ACCESS WITH THEIRS.
WE CAN CONTROL WHO WE WANT TO GIVE ACCESS TO.
HOWEVER, WE LOSE ACCESS WHEN WE DON'T GIVE THEM CONTROL.
NOW, HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT FUNDING THIS IS ON AN 80-20 GRANT THROUGH MVCPA.
IT'S ACTUALLY THROUGH TXDOT, TXDOT ENTITY.
WE WOULD BE ON THE HOOK FOR, WE'RE LOOKING AT JUST FOUR CAMERAS RIGHT NOW, AND THE PROGRAMS AND SETUP COSTS, WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT $4,070 FOR OUR COSTS.
WE JUST WENT WITH THOSE CAMERAS.
I PUT IT UP AS HIGH AS $10,000 IN CASE SOMEBODY SAID, HEY, WE WANT MORE CAMERAS.
WE CAN DO WHATEVER WE WANT AS FAR AS WHAT WE WANT TO APPLY FOR ON THE GRANT, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE...
WE AT LEAST WANT TO START WITH FOUR.
THOSE ARE ALL GOING TO BE ON THE MAJOR ROADWAYS, WHICH WOULD ALLOW US TO KNOW WHO'S COMING IN AND OUT OF OUR CITY.
CRIMINAL LOTS, WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR NORMAL PEOPLE.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE A HIT ON THEIR CAR, PEOPLE THAT MAYBE THEY'RE INVOLVED IN A CRIME IN PARKER, AND WE WANT TO PUT A HIT ON THAT, AND IF THEY DROP TO THE CITY OF PARKER, WE CAN FIND THEM.
WE'VE ALREADY USED THAT ON AN AGGRAVATED ASSAULT WE HAD ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, I BELIEVE.
AND WE WERE ABLE TO LOCATE THE VICTIM SLASH SUSPECT USING PLOT CAMERAS, FIGURING OUT WHEN HE WENT TO WORK.
BECAUSE EVERY TIME HE WENT THROUGH THAT CAMERA, IT TOLD US, HEY, THIS GUY'S THERE.
I TALKED WITH THE CHIEF IN LE BON.
HE USED THOSE PLOT CAMERAS TO SOLVE A MURDER CASE AND ALSO LOCATE THE SUBJECT IN NEW YORK CITY BY USING THE PLOT NETWORK.
SO THERE ARE MAJOR ADVANTAGES.
THE COST FOR US, AGAIN, WOULD BE $40,000 THE FIRST YEAR.
THE FOLLOWING YEAR THE COST WOULD BE $3,400 FOR JUST THE FOUR CAMERAS.
IF I WANT TO GO FOR ADDITIONAL CAMERAS, I COULD APPLY FOR ADDITIONAL CAMERAS AS A GRANT.
THE STATE WOULD STILL PAY 80% OF THAT, AND WE'D BE ON THE HOOK FOR $20.
SO AT THIS POINT I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO IAN, UNLESS YOU GUYS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE GRANT.
WELL, I WANTED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.
YOU SAID FOUR CAMERAS IDENTIFIED LOCATIONS OF TWO, ONE BEING ON PARK ROAD, ONE BEING ON HOGUE.
WHAT ARE THE OTHER TWO LOCATIONS? THE OTHER TWO WOULD BE DELAHAYE AT PARKER SEA LIMITS, AND THE OTHER ONE WOULD BE AT EAST PARK ROAD.
OH, I GUESS YOU PICKED LEWIS LANE BECAUSE LUCAS STARTS THE...
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL TURN IT OVER TO IAN.
PLEASURE TO BE HERE WITH YOU GUYS THIS MORNING, CITY OF PARKER.
I'M THE REGIONAL PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER FOR FOX.
I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH A SHORT BRIEF PRESENTATION ON HOW THE TECHNOLOGY WORKS, SOME POLICY ASPECTS BEHIND IT, AND THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH ANY QUESTIONS LATER ON.
STARTING OFF WITH WHO FLOCK IS.
FLOCK IS THE LEADING PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNOLOGY COMPANY HELPING SMALL COMMUNITIES, MIDDLE, MEDIUM SIZED CITY COMMUNITIES AND LARGE COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE U.S.
AND SO WE ARE REPRESENTING ABOUT 5,000 COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
AND SO ATLANTA BASED COMPANY, AGAIN, WE'RE REALLY PROUD OF THAT U.S.
BASED COMPANY ASPECT, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE TOPIC OF TECHNOLOGY AS FAR AS IT'S GROWING.
YOU KNOW, UM, I'M SORRY, I'M THINKING ABOUT AN EARLIER CONVERSATION, BUT JUST IN TERMS OF TECHNOLOGY GROWING, HOW FAST IT'S GROWING, U.S.
OWNERSHIP IS A BIG TOPIC GOING ON.
AND SO WE'RE HERE, GREAT TO BE REPRESENTING YOU GUYS HERE TODAY.
AND SO AS WE THINK ABOUT CRIME AND HOW IT'S BEEN EVOLUTIONIZED, IT DOESN'T, IT'S NOT...
HELD TO JUST ONE CITY, IT'S NOT HELD TO ONE JURISDICTION, RIGHT? AND SO IN TERMS OF HOW WE PROVIDE OUR SOLUTIONS, BOTH HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE, TO DIFFERENT AGENCIES, WE ARE SOLVING ABOUT 14% OF CRIME WITH OUR THOUGHT CAMERAS ACROSS THE U.S., WHICH I THINK HAS UP TO 20, 25.
SO THAT'S A LARGE PART OF CRIME.
AND AS SERGEANT SPOKE, THAT'S HUMAN TRAFFICKING, DRUG TRAFFICKING, ASSAULT, ALL OF THAT IS PRETTY MUCH TIED TO A VEHICLE.
AND LIKE I SAID, THAT'S NOT CONFINED TO JUST...
ALSO, WE RECOGNIZE THAT OUR CUSTOMERS ARE DEALING WITH STAFFING SHORTAGES.
85% OF AGENCIES ARE OPERATING AT LESS THAN WHAT THEY NEED AS FAR AS OFFICES.
OUR SOLUTION TO THAT IS PROVIDING TECHNOLOGY THAT IS EFFECTIVE WITH SERVING THEIR COMMUNITIES.
[01:35:01]
WE WANT TO SEE THIS AS A FORCE MULTIPLIER.I AM A HUGE ADVOCATE OF TECHNOLOGY DOES NOT...
IT'S NOT AN END-ALL, BE-ALL IN TERMS OF SOLVING AND ELIMINATING CRIME, BUT WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE ARE SUPPLYING OUR CUSTOMERS AND OUR COMMUNITIES WITH THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY OUT THERE.
AND SO WE DO THAT THROUGH ARPRS, HARDWARE SYSTEMS, SOFTWARE SYSTEMS, BECAUSE, AGAIN, WHEN PUSH COMES TO SERVE, WE NEED SOMETHING THAT CAN OPERATE QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY.
AS A PARTNER, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SPECIFICALLY FOCUS ON IS NOT JUST GIVING YOU TECHNOLOGY THAT IS GOING TO BE OUTDATED IN TWO YEARS.
AND SO WHAT WE DO IS WE OPERATE ON A SUBSCRIPTION MODEL.
WE ALLEVIATE ANY HEARTACHE ON YOUR END, AND SO WE PROVIDE THE CAMERAS.
YOU GUYS ARE JUST USING THE CAMERAS ON A SUBSCRIPTION BASIS.
SO IF ANYTHING HAPPENS TO THEM, WE'RE TAKING THE HIT FOR THAT.
AND SO IF ANYTHING IS WRONG WITH THEM, WE WILL COME OUT AND DEAL WITH THAT AS WELL.
ANY OTHER TECHNOLOGICAL VENDORS COMING IN HERE SELLING NEW CAMERAS AND THEN TWO YEARS LATER THOSE CAMERAS ARE OUTDATED.
JUST THINK ABOUT HOW QUICKLY AI AND JUST DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES ARE HAPPENING.
AND SO THIS IS SOME PERTINENT INFORMATION I WANTED TO PUT IN THERE FOR YOU GUYS.
SO FORMERLY KNOWN AS AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS OR ALPRS.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THESE SLIDES, WE HAD A CHIEF SAID, THIS IS THE BEST TECHNOLOGY SINCE SLICED PIE.
IT'S GAME-CHANGING IN TERMS OF DNA.
AND SO AN AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER TAKES A POINT-IN-TIME IMAGE OF THE BACK OF THE LICENSE PLATE OF THE VEHICLE.
AND SO I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE POINT-IN-TIME.
IT'S NOT TRACKING SOMEBODY THROUGHOUT THE DAY.
IF YOU PASS THE CAMERAS, YOU GO LEFT, IT'S NOT A SURVEILLANCE TOOL.
AND SO AS SERGEANT STATED, IT'S AN INVESTIGATIVE TOOL AS WELL.
AND SO WHAT I LIKE TO REITERATE WITH THESE TYPE OF CAMERAS IS IT'S AN INVESTIGATIVE TOOL.
IT CAPTURES THAT POINT IN TIME, AND IT DOES NOT CAPTURE ANY PERSONAL IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION.
WHAT DO I MEAN BY THAT? IT DOES NOT CAPTURE GENDER.
IT IS CAPTURING THE BACK OF THE LICENSE PLATE AND ANY VEHICLE CHARACTERISTICS BEYOND THAT.
AND SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR WITH THAT.
IN TERMS OF ALERTS, WE HAVE NATIONAL PARTNERSHIPS WITH NECMEC, NATIONAL CENTER OF MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN.
YOU HAVE HOT LIST ALERTS, SO ANY LICENSE RECEIVED AS HOT LIST AND IS DEEMED AS A STOLEN VEHICLE, A VEHICLE TIED TO A MURDER, ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THOSE ARE THE LICENSES THAT WE'RE GOING AFTER.
IT'S NOT SIMPLY JUST COLLECTING DATA ON INNOCENT CITIZENS JUST DRIVING ABOUT GOING ON THEIR WAY TO WORK.
ALSO WITH THAT TECHNOLOGY, THERE IS NO FACIAL RECOGNITION.
EMBEDDED IN THE TECHNOLOGY AND SO THAT JUST GOES BACK TO MY STATEMENT THAT WE'RE NOT USING THIS AS A TRACKING TOOL OR SURVEILLANCE TOOL.
THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT POLICY, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENTS.
I KNOW AI, FACIAL RECOGNITION IS A HOT TOPIC AND SO AI DO NOT HAVE FACIAL RECOGNITION.
ALSO AS WELL, IT'S NOT A PIECE OF THE PUZZLE.
WE ARE SERVING, CAPTURING LICENSE PLATES TO CAPTURE CRIMINALS WHO ARE, AGAIN, GOING FROM CITY TO CITY, DOING CRIME, AND LEAVING THE JURISDICTION, RIGHT? AND SO, GO AHEAD, NEXT SLIDE FOR THAT.
PRIVACY IS A BIG CONCERN AND TOPIC OF MINE WHEN IT COMES TO TECHNOLOGY, RIGHT? AND SO THIS...
TECHNOLOGY THAT WE ARE SUPPLYING OUR CUSTOMERS IS BUILT WITH THAT IN MIND.
YOU HAVE CURRENTLY TODAY, I THINK THERE'S OVER 60 CASES IN THE DISTRICT AND FEDERAL COURTS SAYING THAT AOPIS DO NOT VIOLATE THE FOURTH AMENDMENT.
AND SO GOING BACK TO THAT PERSONAL IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION, SURVEILLANCE, THESE ARE KEY THINGS THAT WE SEE COMMUNITIES CONCERNED ABOUT WHEN WE'RE ROLLING OUT DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGIES.
OH, THIS CAMERA'S POPPING UP, IS IT TRACKING MY DAY-TO-DAY? IS IT COLLECTING INFORMATION ON YOU? AND SO NONE OF THAT PERSONALIZED INFORMATION IS COLLECTED.
SO THINK ABOUT DATE OF BIRTH, SOCIAL SECURITY, YOUR DMV RECORDS, NONE OF THAT IS ASSOCIATED TO THE CAMERAS.
ALSO, AS WELL AS THE INFORMATION BEING COLLECTED BY THE CAMERAS, ALL OF THAT HAS A HARD DEFAULT DELETION AFTER 30 DAYS PER THOUGHT POLICY, BUT AS WELL AS YOUR POLICY AS WELL.
AND SO WE BELIEVE THAT COMMUNITIES SHOULD HAVE THEIR RIGHT AND ACCESSIBILITY TO REMOVE THE TECHNOLOGY OUT.
THAT MEETS THEIR COMMUNITY VALUES, AND SO WE ALLOW YOU THAT ABILITY TO DEFINE WHAT YOUR AUDIT LOG LOOKS LIKE, WHAT YOUR POLICIES LOOK LIKE, AND HOW YOU ULTIMATELY WANT TO UTILIZE THE CAMERAS.
WE RECOMMEND THAT OUR AGENCIES DO AUDITS EVERY 30 DAYS, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER IS APPLICABLE TO THEIR POLICY, BUT AGAIN, THAT IS COMPLETELY UP TO YOU ALL.
ALSO, WE OPERATE AT THE HIGHEST STAGES OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEMS, SO IN TERMS OF DATA SECURITY, WHERE IS THE DATA GOING, ALL OF THAT IS COLLECTED, STORED AT THE HIGHEST CERTIFICATIONS THAT THE FBI USES.
AND SO I KNOW THAT'S ANOTHER KEY THING THAT COMMUNITIES ARE WORRIED ABOUT.
FURTHERMORE, USING AAPL IS A INVESTIGATIVE TOOL THAT WILL ALLOW OFFICERS TO USE OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE VERSUS SUBJECTIVE EVIDENCE.
SO IF YOU THINK OF A CAR AS STOLEN, YOU HAVE ABOUT 30 SECONDS TO RECOLLECT WHAT THAT CAR LOOKS LIKE.
[01:40:01]
SOMETIMES YOUR DETAILS ARE WRONG, SOMETIMES YOUR DETAILS ARE SPOT ON, RIGHT? THIS IS GOING TO ALLOW OFFICERS TO USE THAT OBJECTIVE DETAILS MORE EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY AND BE ABLE TO RESPOND IN REAL TIME.TRANSPARENCY PORTALS, THIS IS KIND OF MY FAVORITE ASPECT OF THE PRODUCT HERE.
AND SO WHAT WE DO FROM DAY ONE, WE'VE ALLOWED AGENCIES TO HAVE WHAT WE CALL A TRANSPARENCY PORTAL.
THIS ALLOWS FOR THEM TO GO TO THEIR COMMUNITY AND SAY EXACTLY HOW THEIR CAMERAS ARE BEING USED, WHAT THE CAMERAS DO NOT DO, FOR INSTANCE, FACIAL RECOGNITION.
IMMIGRATION HAS BEEN A LOT OF A HIGHER TOPIC THROUGHOUT DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES, RIGHT? AND SO THIS EXPLICITLY STATES THOSE PROHIBITED USES AS WELL AS YOUR DATA RETENTION POLICY.
OTHER POLICIES, NUMBER OF PR CAMERAS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE.
FOR INSTANCE, HE BROUGHT UP, LIKE, OKAY, HEY, HOW MANY CAMERAS ARE WE HAVING? WE'RE ALSO ABLE TO PUT IN HERE WHERE THE CAMERAS ARE AT.
THAT WAY, AGAIN, TRANSPARENCY IS THE HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR YOU GUYS.
SARGENT ALSO ALLUDED TO SHARING YOUR DATA WITH NEIGHBORING AGENCIES.
IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE LIKELY TO DO, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS CAN OPT INTO.
THAT IS NOT AUTOMATICALLY, THE DECISION IS NOT AUTOMATICALLY MADE BY US ON WHO YOU WANT TO SHARE IT WITH.
AND THAT IS REFLECTED IN YOUR TRANSPARENCY PORTAL.
TYPICALLY, JUST TO GIVE YOU GUYS AN EXAMPLE, WE HAVE AGENCIES.
SHARE WITH THEM MAYBE A 10 MILE RADIUS WHERE THEY CAN OPT INTO STATEWIDE LOOKUPS.
STATEWIDE LOOKUP ALLOWS THEM TO SHARE THEIR DATA WITH AGENCIES WITHIN THE STATE.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE NATIONAL LOOKUP.
AGAIN, THAT DECISION OF WHAT YOU GUYS OPT INTO IS AT YOUR GUYS' DISCRETION.
WE DO NOT MAKE THAT DECISION FOR YOU GUYS.
OH, YEAH, I THOUGHT I HAD ONE MORE IN THERE.
BUT THAT'S JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW, AGAIN, OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND THEN JUST SOME POLICY ASPECTS THAT YOU GUYS MAY HAVE BEEN EITHER SEEING IN THE NEWS OR JUST HAD QUESTIONS ON.
AND SO HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE AS FAR AS COMMENTS, CONCERNS, OR QUESTIONS.
SO I HAVE JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
WE CAN SHARE WITH OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES, BUT IF WE WANT TO BE INVOLVED WITH THE NCIC OR THE EMBER ALERTS, DO WE HAVE TO THEN GIVE THEM ACCESS TO RCEP AS WELL? NO.
SO, WE HAVE THE PARTNERSHIP WITH THEM, AND SO IT'S BASICALLY YOU'RE, AS HAVING THE THOUGHT DATABASE IN THE BLOCK SYSTEM, YOU'RE AUTOMATICALLY HOOKED INTO THOSE ALERTS.
MAKEMAKER IS JUST, WE'RE ABLE TO TAP INTO THEIR HEART.
AND THEN I GUESS THE OTHER THING IS WHAT DOES THE IMPLEMENTATION LOOK LIKE? OBVIOUSLY WE'VE GOT THE POLLS, BUT IT'S GOING TO INTERACT WITH OUR SYSTEMS, WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, VEHICLES, WHAT HAVE YOU.
WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE AND WHO GENERALLY IS RESPONSIBLE? SO I WOULD, IT'S DIFFERENT CITIES TO DO STATISTICS, SO I DON'T WANT TO SAY SPECIFICALLY WHAT IT WOULD BE FOR YOUR GUYS' AGENCY, BUT TYPICALLY IT IS THE ONE KIND OF THANK YOU.
OVERSEEING THAT PROCESS AS FAR AS INTEGRATION WITH DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. SO HAVING THE CAMERAS ALLOWS YOU TO GO TAP INTO THE SOFTWARE.
AGAIN, IT'S A HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE PRODUCT, SO THAT NATIONAL LOOKUP, THAT STATE LOOKUP, THAT DATA RETENTION, ALL OF THAT DATA KIND OF BEING COLLECTED WHEN IT'S OWNED BY YOU, BUT IT'S ALL INTEGRATED INTO OUR PLATFORM.
SO YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO GET DIFFERENT CAMERAS THAT ALL HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER AND SPEAK TOGETHER AS FAR AS THAT.
IN IMPLEMENTATION, AGAIN, IT'S A SUBSCRIPTION AUDIT, SO WE'RE COMING OUT, WE'RE PLACING THE CAMERAS, WE'RE PROVIDING MAINTENANCE ON THE CAMERAS, THAT'S THE WHOLE WAY OF TAKING.
WE DON'T PUT THAT ON YOU GUYS AS WELL, AND IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE CAMERAS, THEN WE COME UP AND USUALLY RESOLVE THAT WITHIN 30 DAYS.
LET'S SAY WE GET THIS AND WE END UP NOT LIKING IT.
DO WE HAVE ANY TERMINAL LIABILITY THERE? SO, WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT I KNOW THERE ARE, AGAIN, I'M NOT LEGAL, SO I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFICS OF WHAT YOUR GUYS' CONTRACT IS, BUT I KNOW THERE IS EARLY TERMINATION FEES OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
AND AGAIN, I THINK THAT WOULD, I WOULD, I WOULD...
IS IT A NAME OF CONTRACT? IT'S...
I'M NOT SURE SPECIFICALLY FOR YOUR GUYS' CONTRACT.
DO YOU HAVE ANY ENTITLEMENTS? I DON'T KNOW.
THE GRANTS CAN BE FOR ONE YEAR AND AFTER THAT WE...
OKAY, I'VE GOT A COUPLE OTHER QUESTIONS.
ONE, SO LET'S SAY WE'VE GOT SOMEBODY ON A HOT LIST OR WHATEVER.
HOW ARE OUR POLICE OFFICERS NOTIFIED? YEAH, SO SAY THE...
[01:45:01]
AT THE EGRESS AND INGRESS OF THE CITY.FOR INSTANCE, IT'S OUT OF LIKE FOUR POINTS OF THE CITY.
AS SOON AS THE CAR PASSES THAT LICENSE PLATE, IT IS TRIGGERED BY OUR VEHICLE MOTION.
AND SO IT WILL TAKE A SNAPSHOT OF THAT LICENSE PLATE, GOES AND DOWNLOADS INTO OUR SYSTEM, IS CONNECTED WITH THE NICMEC HOT LIST, CJIS HOT LIST, AND THEN AUTOMATICALLY NOTIFIES YOUR AGENCY THAT, HEY, THIS LICENSE PLATE, THIS CAR, THIS MAKE, THIS MODEL IS ON THE HOT LIST.
AGAIN, THIS CAR MAY BE RENTED IN LOUISIANA FOR DRUG TRAFFICKING.
I WAS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT LAST PART.
AND THEN I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE DATA SHARING A LITTLE BIT.
LET'S SAY WE GIVE CITY OF MURPHY ACCESS TO IT.
CAN THEY SEE ALL OF THE CARS THAT COME IN, OR JUST THAT THEY HAVE A LIST? HOW DOES THAT WORK? GREAT QUESTION.
SO REMEMBER, IT IS AN INVESTIGATIVE TOOL.
AND SO WHY I EMPHASIZE INVESTIGATIVE TOOL IS THERE HAS TO BE A SEARCH REASON TO WHY THE SYSTEM IS BEING USED.
IT'S AUDIT TRAIL SEARCH FILTERS TO WHY AM I GOING INTO THE SYSTEM AND LOOKING FOR A RED CHEVY CRUZE OR WHATEVER, RBSE, RIGHT? OKAY, SO THERE'S THE POTENTIAL FOR THE CITY IF THEY, AND I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
IF WE HAD AN OFFICER SEARCHING FOR ILLEGITIMATE REASONS, THERE WOULD BE A PERMANENT LOG OF THAT.
ALSO, TOO, WE HAVE BITS IN THE SYSTEM SAFEGUARDS TO PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING.
BUT ALSO, THE SYSTEM IS SO TRANSPARENT THAT IF THERE IS ANY MISUSE, IT IS FLAGGED.
MADAM MAYOR, A QUESTION? OKAY.
FOLLOWING UP ON COUNCILMAN DEVERE'S QUESTION A MINUTE AGO ABOUT...
THE INFORMATION BEING PUSHED OUT TO THE OFFICE.
PROBABLY 5 TO 10, 15, KIND OF JUST DEPENDING ON WI-FI, CONNECTIVITY, ALL THAT TYPE OF STUFF.
SECOND QUESTION, AND I'LL TELL YOU, I'LL PREP THE QUESTION.
PUSHES INFORMATION OUT TO OUR OFFICERS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE IN ANY OF YOUR CURRENT CITIES WHERE INFORMATION GOT PUSHED OUT AND THEY CAN GO PURSUE THIS PERSON.
IT MAY BE VERY WORTHWHILE TO GO PURSUE THIS PERSON THAT'S IN THE CAR.
IF THEY FAIL TO GO PURSUE THIS PERSON, DO YOU HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE WITH A CITY INCURRING A LIABILITY FOR HAVING NOT? I WILL SAY NO, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
AND I CAN DEFINITELY DO SOMETHING, I'VE NEVER GOTTEN THAT QUESTION.
TYPICALLY, AGAIN, WE EMPHASIZE THEM AS AN INVESTIGATIVE TOOL.
THERE'S STILL PER POLICY, WHATEVER YOU GUYS, IF THAT'S THE END OF THE POLICY, YES, THAT STILL HAS TO BE FOLLOWED.
THE KEY THING WITH THAT IS THEY'RE STILL IN CARS ALL THE TIME, RIGHT? BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE DRIVING THE CAR, IS YOUR SON DRIVING THE CAR, SO THE CAPTURED IMAGE DOESN'T ALWAYS DELIVER INTENT.
WE'RE JUST CAPTURING, HEY, THIS VEHICLE WE SEE, IT'S CONNECTED TO THIS, YOU KNOW, LET'S...
YOU CAN PUT YOUR POLICY, DO WHATEVER INVESTIGATIVE MEASURES TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
IT MAY NOT BE THE PERSON DRIVING THE CAR THAT NECESSARILY DID THE WRONG ACT.
SO KEY PIECES OF INVESTIGATIVE TOOL AND THEN PUT YOUR POLICY WHAT THAT INVESTIGATION IS.
THIS IS FOR OFFICER BERGER, CHIEF PRICE.
SO IF THE INFORMATION IS PUSHED OUT AND YOU WANT TO ACT ON IT, HOW DO YOU SET YOUR PRIORITIES FOR WHEN TO ACT ON IT AND WHEN YOU HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU'VE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF? SO WHEN YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT AN LPR READER, IT'S KIND OF WE'RE STOPPING ON REASONABLE SUSPICION, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A PROBLEM.
WE'RE STOPPING AND BELIEVING THAT THIS CAR WAS INVOLVED IN A WAR BASED ON WHATEVER INFORMATION THEY'RE PROVIDING, WHETHER IT'S A WARRANT.
THAT PERSON MAY NOT BE IN THE CAR, SO IT REALLY IS JUST A REASONABLE SUSPICION.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE KNOW THIS PERSON WAS INVOLVED IN IT, IT'S JUST AN INVESTIGATIVE STOP.
WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO MAKE AN INVESTIGATIVE STOP.
HOWEVER, IF THERE'S A GUY IN THE CITY OF PARKER WHO HAD MAYBE CAUSED, MURDERED SOMEBODY IN THE CITY OVER, WE WANT TO STOP THAT PERSON BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THEM IN OUR CITY.
I WANT THOSE PEOPLE TO STAY OUT OF OUR CITY AND GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
AND BY BEING ABLE TO BE PROACTIVE AND KEEPING THEM OUT OF HERE, ESPECIALLY WITH THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TO WORK.
WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT SOME WAY OF MAKING SURE THAT, HEY, THIS ISN'T A PLACE TO COME
[01:50:01]
TO DO CRIME.IT'S NOT A PLACE TO COME IF YOU ARE A CRIMINAL.
THE FOLLOW-UP TO THAT IS, WOULD YOU SPEAK TO THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT COMES THROUGH PARKER ON A DAILY BASIS, SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS? EIGHT YEARS AGO...
I'M SORRY, I DID HAVE A QUESTION.
WHAT KIND OF POLICY, SAMPLE POLICY, OR PROPOSED POLICY DO YOU HAVE TO GO ALONG WITH THIS? SO RIGHT NOW WE DO HAVE A POLICY TEMPLATE TO WORK WITH.
HOWEVER, I NEED TO GET THAT TO WORK.
IT'S PRETTY MUCH FOR OTHER AGENCIES WE DECIDED TO SHARE IT WITH.
THEY DO SOMETHING HERE THAT GIVES US, AND WE CAN TRACK THEM ALL THE WAY DOWN TO DALLAS THAT WE GAVE THEM.
SO, WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE HAVE TO, I WANT TO SHARE IT BECAUSE I WANT THEIR INFORMATION.
AND BEFORE BEING IMPLEMENTED, AND BEFORE THEY'RE IMPLEMENTED.
SERGEANT DID HAVE A CONVERSATION THE OTHER DAY, I'M GOING TO SUPPLY HIM WITH SOME INFORMATION.
FOR SOME OTHER TEXAS JURISDICTION AS WELL.
I'M ALSO A BIG FAN OF BASICALLY DOING WHAT IS ORDINARY MANUAL WORK JUST IN AN AUTOMATED FASHION? IN THEORY, IF THERE WERE SO FEW CARS THAT YOU COULD JUST SIT OUT THERE WITH AN ARBITRARILY SIZED POLICE FORCE, YOU COULD DO THIS IN PERSON.
I AM A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S TRANSMITTED, AND I JUST WANTED YOU TO WALK ME THROUGH THE DATA FLOW.
SO IS IT A PHOTOGRAPH THAT'S TRANSMITTED FROM CAMERA TO, LET'S GO WITH FLOCK-OWNED INFRASTRUCTURE ASSETS? OR DOES THE CAMERA ACTUALLY HAVE SOME KIND OF MACHINE LEARNING THAT IT APPLIES AND JUST TRANSMITS THE LICENSE? IT HAS AI MACHINE LEARNING IN IT.
SO A GREAT EXAMPLE FOR THAT IS WE'RE CONSTANTLY TESTING AND TRYING TO INNOVATE THAT.
SO, FOR INSTANCE, THINK WHEN THE TESLA CAME OUT OR THE CYBERTRUCK CAME OUT, THE BODY OF THAT CAR IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HAD EVER BEEN SEEN BEFORE, AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE USING THAT AI MODEL TO CONSTANTLY TRAIN ON NEW VEHICLES, NEW MAKES, NEW MODELS CONSTANTLY COMING OUT.
AND SO THE DATA SOVEREIGNTY? I KNOW YOU MENTIONED CEGIS, WHICH KIND OF MAPS TO SOMETHING I'M MORE FAMILIAR WITH, WHICH IS FEDRAMP HIGH OR FEDRAMP MODERATE.
SO I ASSUME THAT THE PEOPLE THAT OWN AND OPERATE THE DATA CENTERS ARE OF U.S.
NATIONALITY AND IN THE DATA CENTERS.
YEAH, WE HAVE THE AWS GO CLOUD.
THAT'S THE ONE IN THE EDITION OF THE DATA.
OKAY, MS. HALBERT, YOU HAD MORE QUESTIONS? YEAH, I HAD ANOTHER ONE.
SO WHERE IS THE, AND I GUESS THIS IS A QUESTION POSSIBLY FOR GRANT AS WELL, THE MATCHING FUNDS, $4,600, WHERE IS THAT COMING FROM IN THE BUDGET? SO WE HAVEN'T REALLY DISCUSSED IT.
I GUESS IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON THE TIMING OF THIS, IF IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS THIS FISCAL YEAR.
IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE THIS FISCAL YEAR.
WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT, SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING THEY HAVE WITHIN THEIR BUDGET TO BE ABLE TO COVER IT, AND IF NOT, WE'D BE COMING BACK WITH A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE BUDGET.
AND THEN THE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO THAT IS IF WE...
THE MVCPA ACTUALLY MAKES SURE THAT THE FUNDING DOESN'T HIT UNTIL OUR FISCAL YEAR, NEW FISCAL YEAR STARTS, SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD THAT INTO THE BUDGET.
SO IT WOULD BE A BUDGET ITEM, AND WE'RE NOT ASKING...
AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, BLOCK...
WON'T START CHARGING US UNTIL THE LAST CAMERA'S PUT IN.
SO IF WE DON'T GET THE CAMERAS, LET'S SAY WE SIGN THE CONTRACT
[01:55:02]
OCTOBER 1ST, AND THEY DON'T GET A CONTRACT UNTIL FEBRUARY, WE DON'T START PAYING UNTIL FEBRUARY.AND THEN IN THE EVENT THAT WE ARE LIKE, WE DON'T ACTUALLY WANT, WELL, NO, MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE DON'T GET THE GRANT FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR OR THE YEAR AFTER THAT, WHAT'S THE PLAN IN PLACE FOR, DO WE CEASE THAT? DO WE LOOK FOR OTHER MONEY? HOW DOES THAT WORK? THAT WOULD BE UP TO COUNCIL.
DEPENDING ON HOW WE DO THE CONTRACT, WE'D HAVE THE YEAR-TO-YEAR.
THAT WAY WE HAVE A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY.
SO LET'S SAY NOBODY LIKED THE CAMERAS, WE COULD JUST SAY, HEY, WE'RE DONE.
BUT IF, LET'S SAY, WE LIKED THEM AND YOU GUYS EVEN WANTED ADDITIONAL CAMERAS, I COULD GO TO THAT GRANT AGAIN.
AS LONG AS WE'RE ADDING, THEY'RE WILLING TO FUND IT.
SO IF WE TAKE ANYTHING AWAY, THEY CAN THEN BRING IT BACK.
THEY'LL FUND WHATEVER WE TAKE.
BUT IF WE CONTINUE TO ADD CAMERAS, THEY'LL CONTINUE TO FUND THEM.
SO DO YOU HAVE TO STATE MAYBE ANY STATEMENTS ABOUT THEIR INTENTION ABOUT HOW LONG THEY'RE GOING TO BE FUNDING THESE CAMERAS? SO THE GRANT I'M SEEKING IS ACTUALLY FOR CADILLAC CONVERSA, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE DOING IT UNDER.
AND THEY ALSO ARE DOING IT UNDER A THEFT, AUTO THEFT TEAMS. WE HAVE TEAMS THAT GO IN AND THERE'S MAYBE 20 AGENCIES THAT HAVE ONE OFFICER WHO'S ON THIS TEAM, AND THEY'RE TRYING TO REDUCE AUTO THEFT.
THEY HAVE TASK FORCE TYPE SITUATION, YES.
WE'RE ACTUALLY DONE DOING IT UNDER THE CADILLAC CONVERTER GRANT.
I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO BE AROUND FOR A WHILE.
LIKE I SAID, IT'S A TECH STOP.
TEXAS TRYING TO GET THESE CAMERAS OUT.
I DON'T SEE THE GRANT GOING AWAY, AND IF WE DON'T GET FUNDING, THAT'S WHERE WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE TABLE AND GO, HEY, WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO? FLOC WILL COME IN IF WE SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT.
THEY'LL COME AND GET THEIR STUFF, AND WE JUST MOVE ON FROM THERE.
ARE WE ALREADY USING LPRS IN THE VEHICLES? WE DO HAVE LPRS THROUGH AXON, BUT THEY ARE LIMITED ON WHAT THEY CAN DO.
AND GIVES US MORE INFORMATION THAN WHAT WE'RE GETTING.
WE'RE ONLY GETTING NCIC WITH AXON.
SO TCIC IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT DATABASE.
AND THEN IF YOU GET THE HOT LIST, THAT'S WHEN SOMEBODY PUTS IN THERE, HEY, CAN YOU LOOK FOR THIS CAR? SO BASICALLY...
LIKE, LET'S SAY SOMEBODY COMMITTED LIKE THE AGGRAVATED ASSAULT WE HAD A COUPLE YEARS AGO.
THEY COMMIT THAT IN THE CITY OF PARKER.
OUR INVESTIGATOR GOES AND GOES, HEY, I WANT TO TRACK THIS VEHICLE.
GIVES A DESCRIPTION, GIVES A PLATE NUMBER.
HE CAN NOW TRACK THAT VEHICLE THROUGHOUT THE METROPLEX, DEPENDING ON WHO HE CAN SHARE IT WITH.
AND THE OTHER NICE PART ABOUT IT IS IT WILL ALSO, LET'S SAY HE ONLY GETS A WHITE VAN, IT WILL ALSO GIVE THE WHITE VANS THAT ARE GOING THROUGH.
SO WE'LL BREAK IT DOWN BY MAKE, MODEL OF THE VEHICLE.
SO LET'S SAY THAT'S ALL WE GET.
LET'S SAY ONE OF OUR HOUSES OR SOMEBODY BREAKS INTO A HOUSE AND THE ONLY DESCRIPTION WE GET IS A WHITE PICKUP TRUCK.
WELL, THEN WE CAN GO THROUGH ALL THE WHITE PICKUP TRUCKS, FIND THE ONE WITH FRONT-END DAMAGE, AND NOW WE HAVE A POSSIBLE SUSPECT VEHICLE WITH A PLATE.
SO IT DOES BECOME VERY USEFUL.
SO YOU ARE STORING THAT IMAGE LIKE THAT ON EVERY READ.
IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE, YES, CORRECT.
YEAH, AFTER 30 DAYS OF ATTENTION POLICY.
MS. BACHMAN, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I HAVE TO SAY I'M A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED THAT WE DIDN'T GET A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE GRANT IN OUR PACKET, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COPY OF THE GRANT REQUIREMENTS.
SO IF YOU COULD EMAIL ME, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ALL WANT THAT.
I MEAN, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I ASSUME? SO I LITERALLY JUST GOT BACK FROM THE CLASS.
WEEK AGO YEAH SO IT'S VERY RUSHED AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT WE DIDN'T EVEN START MOVING THIS DIRECTION UNTIL ABOUT MAYBE A MONTH AGO YEAH AND NOW WE'RE TRYING TO EXPEDITE AND I HAVE TO HAVE THE GRANT IN BY MAY.
THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION WHEN IS THE DEADLINE FOR THAT? SO I HAVE LIKE TWO WEEKS AND I HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED THE GRANT YET BUT I'LL GET IT DONE IF WE WANT IT DONE.
OKAY JUST THE REQUIREMENTS LIKE WHAT THEY ABOUT MATCHING AND WHAT PERCENT AFTER A YEAR AND ALL OF THAT KIND OF STUFF.
SO BASICALLY EVERY YEAR YOU RE-UP IT, AND IT STAYS AT 80-20.
BUT THE NUMBERS AND ALL OF THAT INFORMATION WOULD HAVE BEEN HELD BACK? BUT IS THAT ONLY IF WE'RE ADDING CAMERAS? IF WE STAY THE SAME, WE'RE STILL 80-20.
AND THEN IS THERE A COST LIST? LIKE, HEY, IF YOU WANT TO ADD MORE CAMERAS, THIS IS WHAT THE COST.
I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL, TOO,
[02:00:01]
TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION.SO IN THE FUTURE, IF WE WANTED TO ADD MORE, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THAT COSTS.
AND THEN YOU TALKED ABOUT OPTING IN WITH DIFFERENT AGENCIES.
IS THERE A DIFFERENT COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, OR IS THERE REASONS WE WOULDN'T WANT STATEWIDE? WE DON'T WANT TO GET DINGED FROM CORPUS CHRISTI BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE REASONING FOR THAT? SO, DOUG, THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL COST.
AS SOON AS YOU OPT IN, YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE SYSTEM.
BURDICK, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING AS FAR AS WHICH AGENCIES, JUST LIKE COLLIN COUNTY? I MEAN, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? I WOULD BE OKAY WITH ANY AGENCY UNLESS WE KNEW THERE WAS LIKE AN AGENCY THAT'S JUST A PROBLEM OR AN ISSUE.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE REALLY HAVE THOSE ISSUES BECAUSE I THINK BLOCK WOULD ACTUALLY FILE.
YOU'RE NOT USING OUR SYSTEM, ESPECIALLY WITH CJIS.
THE DATA HAS TO BE CONTROLLED.
IT'S PROTECTED AND WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH CLASS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE...
EVEN OUR MDT, NOBODY CAN JUST WALK UP AND LOOK AT...
SERGEANT, DO YOU MIND SPEAKING A LITTLE BIT TO THE COST LAYER FOR THE TRAFFIC TRACKING? COMPONENT, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT WAS AN ADDITIONAL ADD-ON.
THAT DOESN'T COME AS STANDARD PACKAGE.
REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR ME AGAIN.
SO IF COUNCIL WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN ELEMENT THAT TRACKS TRAFFIC COUNT ON, SAY, PARKER ROAD, AND WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT IN AGGREGATE, HOW MANY VEHICLES ARE COMING BY AT THIS TIME OF DAY, THIS TIME OF DAY, THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL SERVICE.
OUTSIDE OF LICENSE PLATE READER, CORRECT? I WANT TO SAY I BELIEVE SO.
I'M NOT TOO SURE, BUT I CAN DEFINITELY GET YOU THE FINAL ANSWER ON THAT.
I JUST KNOW THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT EARLIER.
SO, YES, THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL PACKAGE, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS LIKE $2,500. BUT IT DOES GIVE YOU LIKE A, IT DOES COUNT TRAFFIC, AND YOU CAN USE IT FOR TRAFFIC STUDIES AND POTENTIALLY SHOW HOW MUCH VEHICLE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE DOING TO YOUR ROAD.
IT WOULD BE MORE OF A PUBLIC WORKS ISSUE, AND IF OUR TECHNOLOGY HELPS THEM AS WELL AS HELPS US, IT'S A BENEFIT FOR EVERYBODY.
MS. ALBERT? SO THIS IS FIRST SERGEANT.
YOU'VE GIVEN A LOT OF BENEFITS, BUT TO THE AVERAGE RESIDENT OF PARKER, WHAT IS THE BENEFIT TO THEM? I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
THOSE CAMERAS ARE ACTUALLY HELPING US MAKE THE COMMUNITY SAFE.
I CAN'T HAVE AN OFFICER EVERYWHERE, AND I'LL BE HONEST, OUR CITIZENS DO A GREAT JOB OF DOING ONE THING FOR US, WHICH IS AS SOON AS THEY SEE A SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE, WE KNOW ABOUT IT.
BUT THIS IS THE WAY WHERE IF NO CITIZENS THERE, IT'S 2 OR 3 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, WE KNOW THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THERE THAT WE DON'T WANT THERE, AND WE CAN ACT AND RESPOND TO IT QUICKLY.
I'M NOT SAYING IT CAN'T HAPPEN, AND I DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN TO OUR CITIZENS.
WE SHOULD TRY TO PUT IN ANY SAFEGUARD WE CAN TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS.
AND IF THIS IS A USABLE TOOL, I THINK WE SHOULD GO FORWARD WITH IT.
SORRY FOR ASKING YOU TO REPEAT THIS.
HOW MANY CITIES DO YOU HAVE THIS? SERVICE IN PLACE IN 5,000, AND THAT ENCOMPASSES NON-PERSON AGENCIES, PRIVATE AGENCIES, AS WELL AS CDS AND HOAS AS WELL.
I SPOKE WITH BURDICK EARLIER REGARDING THIS ISSUE, AND HE DID GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF IF A HOME IN MURPHY WAS BURGLARIZED, AND THEY HAVE A CAR, A SUSPECT, THEY CAN TRACK THE CAR ALL THE WAY INTO OTHER CITIES BY THESE CAMERAS.
WE'RE STILL WHERE THE VEHICLE ACTUALLY GOES SOMETIMES WITH THAT.
I GUESS FOR ME IS WITH US BEING SHORT STAFF, DO WE HAVE THE STAFF TO ACTUALLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS? YEAH.
I HAVE LIKE NEARLY THE OPPOSITE.
LIKE, DOESN'T THIS KIND OF TAKE SOME...
SOME OF THE LOAD OFF OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE FACT THAT IT TAKES A DUTY THAT- IT'S TWOFOLD.
IT WILL TAKE SOME OF THE LOAD OFF, BUT IT WILL ALSO- MANY, MANY, MANY YEARS AGO THERE WAS BANK ROBBERY AND THEY COULD SHOOT OUT-
[02:05:08]
TO ECHO A LITTLE BIT WHAT CHIEF IS SAYING, A LOT OF THE DATA THAT CITIES LIKE TO PULL OUT IS AN INCREASE IN CRIME.IT INCREASES THE PRODUCTIVITY OF AN INDIVIDUAL OFFICER.
AND SO, I MEAN, COMPARATIVELY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU...
MEASURE THAT AGAINST A POLICE OFFICER'S SALARY, IT'S REALLY QUITE COST EFFECTIVE.
MR. FARRER, A QUESTION FOR CHIEF PRICE.
SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS TRAFFIC COUNTING FEATURE, AND YOU JUST MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT TRAFFIC COUNTING, HOW MUCH IS BUYING AN ACTUAL TRAFFIC COUNTER COST? THEY RANGE FROM $1,000 UPWARDS TO $10,000, $12,000.
THE ONE THAT I'M CURRENTLY LOOKING AT IS ABOUT $2,500, AND IT'S VERY DISCREET AND LESS LIKELY, AND IT'S LESS TECHNOLOGICALLY CHALLENGING AS THE ONE I HEARD.
YEAH, OKAY, BUT THE ADVANTAGE OF THAT IS YOU CAN MOVE THAT AROUND.
I CAN MOVE IT ANYWHERE WE WANTED IT.
WHEREAS IF WE GO WITH THIS BLOCK THING, IT'S JUST GOING TO GIVE US TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR PARKER ROAD AND HOGUE SLASH DILLAHAY.
THE CITY OF LE BON TOOK AN OLD TRAFFIC TRAILER, SIMILAR TO THE ONES WE HAD, AND PUT A FLOCK CAMERA ON IT, AND THEY CAN MOVE IT ANYWHERE IN THEIR CITY THEY WANT TO.
AND WE KNOW, BASED ON CONVERSATIONS THAT SERGEANT FURTICK HAS HAD WITH THEM, THAT THAT'S EXACTLY HELPED THEM SOLVE SOME CRIMES IN THEIR CITY.
I DON'T THINK Y'ALL CAN FIT, RIGHT? DO WE STILL NEED THEM UP HERE? BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE AWKWARD.
BUDDY, BEFORE YOU MAKE THE MOTION, DO WE NEED TO DECIDE ABOUT THIS TRAFFIC COUNT ISSUE? WELL, IF I CAN PUT...
PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY ON WHERE I WAS COMING FROM.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT DISTINCTION WAS MADE, THAT THIS IS NOT A PART OF THE PACKAGE.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING I NECESSARILY RECOMMEND.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FEELS ABOUT IT, BUT I THINK BETWEEN DEVICES THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY PURCHASE, WE COULD DO ON OUR OWN.
ALSO, TXDOT HAS A LOT OF DATA.
SOME OF THAT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT OUTDATED, BUT WE CAN CAPTURE THAT, AND THAT SHOULD INFORM OUR NEEDS FOR THE MOST PART.
ALSO, ON THE AGENDA, IT IS A GRANT FOR A LICENSE PLATE LATER.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER AT THIS TIME.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS AT THIS TIME? IF NOT, I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026893, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR A GRANT TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE CRIME PREVENTION AUTHORITY FOR A LICENSE PLATE READER TECHNOLOGY, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF REQUIRED MATCHING FUNDS IN A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT, WHICH I BELIEVE IS $10,000 SPECIFIED IN HERE, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO ACT AS THE CITY'S AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL.
ACKNOWLEDGING REPORT EFFECTIVE DAY IS THERE A SECOND SECOND OKAY WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM PILGRIM AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SHAW IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION YES MADAM MAYOR SO I ACTUALLY A COUPLE THINGS ONE DO WE WANT TO LEAVE IT AT $10,000 NOT TO EXCEED IF IT'S IF WE'RE LOOKING AT $4,600 MAYBE MAKE IT 05,000.
CAN WE ASK, WHERE DID YOU COME UP WITH THE 10 VERSUS THE 46? I PUT THE 10,000 ON IT.
IN CASE SOMEBODY COUNTS TO THE SIDES, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE EARNING.
THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR FOR THE FOUR CAMERAS AT THIS TIME? I THINK IT'S 41.
SO THAT'S FOR THE FOUR AT THIS TIME.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD PLACE TO START.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I NEED TO DOUBLE THAT YET.
LET'S SEE HOW IT GOES WITH THE FOUR.
I THINK WE SHOULD START WITH THE FOUR.
THEN IF IT TURNS OUT IT HAS CHANGED THE WAY WE DO POLICING IN THIS TOWN, THEN WE CAN LOOK AT MORE THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
[02:10:01]
I THINK IT WAS 4070 IS THE NUMBER GIVEN, SO 4100.WHY CAN'T WE JUST DO IT AT 5,000? OKAY, YEAH, YEAH.
DO YOU WANT TO AMEND THE MOTION? I'LL AMEND THE MOTION.
AND THEN I HAD A COMMENT, AND I'M LIKE HAVING ANXIETY RIGHT NOW.
THIS IS, I'M NOT HAPPY THAT I'M...
HAVING THE FAILS, I HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS, WHERE THE COMMUNITY I LIVED IN, IN PART BECAUSE OF THAT AK-47 FIGHT OUT, BASICALLY THE CITY ADMINISTRATION WAS, WE WANT TO MAKE IT WHERE CRIMINALS DO NOT WANT TO COME TO OUR COMMUNITY.
AND UNFORTUNATELY THAT ALSO MEANT THE RESIDENTS DID NOT WANT TO COME TO OUR COMMUNITY.
AND SO THAT WAS A REALLY, AND YOU REMEMBER THIS, THIS WAS AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND UM WHAT IS THAT UM NO THIS IS NO THIS IS AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FROM 2007 UM IN ANOTHER CITY AND SO I JUST I'M JUST I'M REALLY TRYING TO WEIGH THE BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE RESIDENTS WITH THE COST OF THIS AND THE BENEFIT I MEAN I SEE THAT THERE'S BENEFITS I JUST AM TRYING TO WEIGH BOTH SIDES OF THIS I DON'T EVER WANT OUR RESIDENTS TO THINK THAT WE ARE SURVEILLING THEM AND IT'S AND HONESTLY I I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BUT HOW MANY RESIDENTS ARE SITTING IN THIS ROOM AND HOW MANY ARE WATCHING ONLINE AND WE AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER TRANSPARENCY IS NOT AS GOOD AS IT COULD BE I'M JUST REALLY NOT AS COMFORTABLE WITH THIS AS I WOULD LIKE TO BE SO THAT'S I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION NOT HEARING ANY, THEN I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-893, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
THIS WOULD BE LIMITING THE AMOUNT TO $5,000.
ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY, MOTION CARRIES FOR ONE.
MS. HALBERT IS THE ONE PERSON THAT IS VOTING AGAINST IT.
HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SINCE COUNCIL HAS APPROVED IT, I NOW SUPPORT IT.
[EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 1 of 2)]
BEFORE WE GO TO ITEM NUMBER 10, WE NEED TO GO TO A BRIEF EXECUTIVE SESSION TO RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE UNDER 551.071.WE ARE IN RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
[RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING. (Part 1 of 2)]
OKAY.THE PARKER CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 21ST, 2026 IS RECONVENED AT...
[10. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 914 AMENDING TITLE III OF THE CITY OF PARKER CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING CHAPTER 35, A CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER; AND PROVIDING FOR CENSURE, PROCEDURAL TIMING, AND NON-RETALIATION. ]
YES.IS RECONVENED AT 9.01PM AND WE'RE AT THIS POINT GOING TO ITEM NUMBER 10.
CONSIDERATION AND OR INAPPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 914, AMENDING TITLE III OF THE CITY OF PARKER CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING CHAPTER 35, A CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT, PROVIDING FOR A REPEALER AND PROVIDING FOR CENSURE, PROCEDURAL TIMING, AND NON-RETALIATION.
OKAY, COUNSEL, YOU HAVE ALL SEEN THE CODE OF CONDUCT IN YOUR PACKET, AND WE HAD A DISCUSSION ON IT EARLIER THIS EVENING.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION.
I MOTION THAT WE MOVE TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 914.
AMENDING TITLE III OF THE CITY OF PARKER CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING CHAPTER 35, A CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT PROVIDING FOR REPEALER AND PROVIDING FOR CENTRAL PROCEDURAL TIMING AND NON-RETALIATION.
WAS THERE ANY CHANGES EDITS MADE TO IT TONIGHT IN THE WORKSHOP? YES, MAYOR.
THERE WAS THE CLARIFICATION TO ADD MAYOR AS WELL AS COUNCILMEMBER IN SECTION H-1.
[02:15:02]
WOULD YOU...ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION.
I WOULD ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THE MOTION AS AMENDED.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER SHARP TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 914 AS AMENDED.
WE HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER COLLEEN HARBOUR.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE CODE OF CONDUCT? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 5-0.
[11. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2026-890 ADOPTING AGENDA PREPARATION PROCEDURES AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2006-114. ]
REALLY GOOD DEAL.OKAY, NOW WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 11, CONSIDERATION AND OR INAPPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-890, ADOPTING AGENDA PREPARATION PROCEDURES IN YOUR SIMILAR RESOLUTION NUMBER 2006-114.
OKAY, COUNCIL, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? ON RESOLUTION NO.
OKAY, MS. BARRETT? WE, IN THE WORKSHOP, WE DISCUSSED SEVERAL DIFFERENT ITEMS AND KIND OF LOOKED FOR DIRECTION FROM EACH OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS REGARDING EACH OF THESE THINGS.
AFTER SOME LEGAL UPDATES, WE HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE.
SO I'D LIKE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT SECTION 2 OF THE AGENDA WORKSHOP PROCESS.
AND WE HAD KIND OF LOOKED TO GO IN THE DIRECTION OF HAVING POSSIBLY TWO PEOPLE INSTEAD OF ONE PERSON, BUT THE MAYOR BROUGHT UP THAT THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS REALLY THAT IF SOMEONE WANTS TO EMAIL HER AND SAY, HEY, I'D LIKE THIS ADDED TO THE AGENDA, THAT SHE THEN WOULD HAVE TO GO AND FIND A SECOND FOR THAT.
CREATE A WALK-IN QUORUM FOR HER TO GO HAVE TO DIG UP THE SECOND, OR EVEN IF A COUNCIL MEMBER HAD TO GO FIND A BACK SUPPORT.
NOW, IF WE'RE IN AN OPEN MEETING LIKE THIS, IT'S DIFFERENT, WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM, BUT THE WHOLE POINT OF SOMEONE CALLING IN OR ASKING, IT WOULD CAUSE A WALK-IN QUORUM.
I WOULD HAVE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE GO BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN WITH THE ONE PERSON REQUEST DUE TO THAT, FOR THAT REASON.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? OKAY.
AND THEN SECTION 3, AGAIN, WITH THE LEGAL COUNSEL, I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN CURRENTLY, AND I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE OFF THAT.
IF THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS UNAVAILABLE OR THE COUNCIL MEMBER MAY SERVE IN THEIR PLACE, WE HAD DISCUSSED EARLIER IN THE WORKSHOP POSSIBLY ALLOWING THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO VOTE, AND WE DID TALK ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT IF THERE WERE A TIE IN A VOTE AND IT BEING PUTTING THE MAYOR PRO TEM AGAINST THE MAYOR, AND THAT COULD...
SO FOR LEGAL REASONS, I'M GOING TO REQUEST THAT WE TAKE THAT OUT.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO DISSOLVE THE WORDING OF THE AGENDA COMMITTEE, AND SO TAKE OUT THAT SENTENCE, THE AGENDA COMMITTEE SHALL MEET ON A REGULAR WEEKLY BASIS OR OTHERWISE NECESSARY TO REVIEW REQUESTS FOR FUTURE ITEMS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO MOVE IN TO BE CONSIDERED A REQUEST MUST MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF 70 BELOW.
THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO CHANGE ABOUT SECTION 3.
ON SECTION 4, WE HAD DISCUSSION IN A WORKSHOP REGARDING THE TIME REQUIREMENTS.
THE WAY IT WAS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, IT HAD NO TIME REQUIREMENT, AND WE KIND OF LOOKED INTO THE DIRECTION OF POSSIBLY PUTTING SOME WORDING IN.
ADD THE SENTENCE, ACCEPTED ITEMS MUST BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE ITEM REQUESTED, UNLESS IT IS A SPECIFIC DATE THAT IS REQUESTED.
SO THAT GIVES COUNSEL THE AUTHORITY TO ADD A SPECIFIC DATE IF IT IS TIME SENSITIVE, AND ALSO THE OTHER ITEMS CANNOT BE INDEFINITELY POSTPONED.
IT'S WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE ITEM THAT'S BEING REQUESTED.
SO IT COULD BE UP TO TWO YEARS IF THE ITEM, IF IT'S IN THE GATE SITUATION THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER.
[02:20:01]
AMOUNT OF TIME.SO IT DOES GIVE SOME KIND OF STRUCTURE TO THAT.
IN SECTION 5, WE ALSO DISCUSS...
WHAT WAS SECTION 5 ABOUT ORIGINALLY? SECTION 5 WAS ABOUT...
WE HAD A PROBLEM WITH THE MAYOR BEING ABLE TO SAY NO TO SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY.
AND WE WANTED TO HAVE AN AVENUE FOR THE PERSON, IF YOU GOT DENIED ACCESS TO PUTTING SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA, TO COME.
AND SO I'D LIKE TO ADD THE SENTENCE, IF A MEMBER OF COUNCIL DISAGREES WITH THE DECISION OF THE MAYOR NOT TO PUT AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA, THAT AN APPEAL MAY BE SUBMITTED TO THE ENTIRE COUNCIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 7 BELOW.
SO I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT TO SECTION 5 AS WELL.
COUNCIL, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS? CATHERINE, DID WE COVER EVERYTHING? I THINK YOU DID COVER EVERYTHING.
IN RESPONSE TO SECTION 3, I HAVE SOME LANGUAGE DRAFTED, IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE FOR ME TO READ THAT.
AND NOW I'LL READ SECTION 3, AGENDA CREATION.
THE MAYOR SHALL CREATE AGENDAS IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR, CITY SECRETARY, AND CITY ATTORNEY.
TO BE CONSIDERED, A REQUEST MUST MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7B BELOW.
AND ACTUALLY, AS I READ THAT, IT SOUNDS FUNKY WITH THAT SECOND SENTENCE NOW.
SO I THINK IT SHOULD BE AN AGENDA, TO BE CONSIDERED AN AGENDA REQUEST, MUST MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7 BELOW.
IT SAYS IN THE PREFERRED RESPONSE FORMAT.
THAT'S INTENDED FOR IF A COUNCIL MEMBER HAS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM THE CITY AND THEY SAY I WANT YOU TO GO OUT AND PROVIDE ME A STATUS OF THE CONDITION OF ALL THE ROADS AND I WANT IT IN POWERPOINT OR A SPREADSHEET.
THAT'S WHAT'S MEANT BY PREFERRED FORMAT.
LIKE BEING SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW DO YOU WANT TO RECEIVE THIS INFORMATION.
MISS HUBBARD? OH, YOU'RE LOOKING LIKE YOU HAVE A QUESTION.
MS. DAWKINS? I'D ALSO LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE WORKSHOP WHERE WE ALSO DISCUSSED THAT WE HAVE...
A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION AS FAR AS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, BUT YOU KIND OF IMPLIED THAT WE COULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCUSSION DURING THAT IF A COUNCIL MEMBER WAS REQUESTING TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA AND TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT ESPECIALLY WHEN, AND COUNCIL MEMBER HALBERT RECOMMENDED ADDING TO THAT LIST AS FAR AS WHERE WE CAN KEEP IN THE NOTES SECTION ANY NOTES THAT WE HAVE ON THAT.
AND THEN WHAT WAS THE OTHER? THE DATE REQUESTED SO WE CAN START TRACKING HOW LONG IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN ON THERE SO WE CAN USE THAT TO QUALIFY WITH THE REASONABLE LANGUAGE THAT WE ADDED IN THE ORDINANCE SO YEAH AND ANY COUNCIL AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED ANY COUNCIL MEMBER CAN UPDATE THAT LIST AND AND AND BRING IT TO THE THE COUNCIL MEETING AND SAY OKAY ON THIS YOU YOU LEFT A NOTE OFF OR WOULD YOU ADD THIS TO ME, THE LIST IS JUST AS MUCH FOR YOU AS IT IS FOR ME.
AND I THINK WE ALSO WERE TALKING ABOUT IN THE WORKSHOP THAT WE MIGHT ALLOW MORE TIME IN ONE MEETING FOR A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM DISCUSSION.
AND I GUESS I WOULD ASK, WOULD YOU ALL PREFER THAT TO BE THE FIRST? SINCE WE MET ON THE FIRST AND THIRD TUESDAY, WOULD Y'ALL PREFER THAT TO BE ON THE FIRST ONE OR THE THIRD ONE? OR DOES IT DEPEND ON WHAT OTHER ITEMS? I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.
IT DEPENDS ON WHAT ELSE THEY DO.
YEAH WELL WE CAN CALL A SPECIAL MEETING AND YOU KNOW ON A SATURDAY AND OKAY I'M JOKING THAT'S A JOKE WAS THERE A DESIRE TO HAVE THOSE CLARIFICATIONS IN THIS RESOLUTION OR WAS THAT JUST STAFF DIRECTION I THINK THAT CHANGES THE WORDING OF THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE RIGHT
[02:25:01]
LIKE WHAT WE JUST THE PART THAT I READ BACK YES BUT THE OTHER THINGS ABOUT ADDITIONAL TIME MORE TIME TO TALK OH NO THAT'S THAT'S JUST DIRECTION YEAH YEAH THAT'S NOT AN ORDER OKAY ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR THINGS IF NOT I WILL ASK FOR A MOTION I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2006-114, ESTABLISHING PROCESS AND REQUEST FOR THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, PROVIDING FOR THE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-890, REPLACING RESOLUTION 2026-114.SO YES, RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-890, REPLACING THE RESOLUTION 2026-114.
ESTABLISHING A PROCESS FOR A REQUEST FOR THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, PROVIDING FOR THE RULE OF THE AGENDA COMMITTEE.
WELL, WE JUST TOOK THAT OUT, SO LET'S TAKE THAT OUT.
AGENDA CREATION, CHANGE THAT TO AGENDA CREATION, AND PROVIDING FOR AGENDA MODIFICATION AND REMOVAL OF ITEMS, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WITH THE SAID PREVIOUS CHANGES.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BOGDAN AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER HALBERT TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-890 AS AMENDED.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? OKAY, NOT HEARING ANY.
CAN I SAY SOMETHING REAL QUICK TO PATTY? CAN I SAY SOMETHING? SURE.
PATTY, I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I'VE GOT IT IN WRITING FOR YOU SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO KEEP UP WITH ALL OF THAT.
[12. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2026-889 REGARDING MEETING DATES AND TIMES AND ADOPTING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO MEETINGS OF CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. ]
CLEAN COPY TO YOU, SURE.CONSIDERATION AND OR INAPPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO.
2026.889 REGARDING MEETING DATES AND TIMES AND ADOPTING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO MEETINGS OF THE CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
OKAY, I THINK WE ALL NOTICED THERE WAS NO EXHIBIT I IN OUR PACKET BECAUSE IT SAID THAT WOULD SHOW WHEN THE MEETINGS WERE.
AND I UNDERSTAND THE REASON WHY WE DON'T HAVE EXHIBIT I IS THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CREATING HERE TONIGHT.
I THOUGHT WE WERE GETTING INPUT FROM THE BOARDS ABOUT...
WE DO HAVE THAT, AND THAT'S WHY STAFF NEEDS A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL IN ORDER TO CREATE THAT EXHIBIT.
SO ABOVE HERE ON THE SLIDE, WE DO HAVE THOSE RESULTS FROM THE SURVEY THAT WAS SENT OUT TO OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
OF COURSE, ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS BECAUSE THEY MEET ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS WHEN CASES ARISE.
YOU SHOULD HAVE GOT THIS IN A SEPARATE EMAIL AS WELL TO HAVE SOME MORE TIME TO DIGEST IT.
I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, PROVIDE CLARIFICATION.
THERE'S ADDITIONAL RESPONSES...
INFORMATION WE NEED TO GATHER, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT AS WELL.
WAS LYNETTE ONE OF THE RESPONSES FOR PLANNING AND ZONING? BECAUSE SHE RESIGNED SINCE THEN.
AND WE DON'T KNOW WHICH ONES ARE HER RESPONSES, ARE YOU? NOT RIGHT IN THIS MOMENT, NO.
EVERYTHING IS PUT TOGETHER SO THAT YOU CAN SEE IT AS A COLLECTIVE.
WELL, LET'S START WITH PARKS AND REC.
IT SEEMS LIKE THE MAJORITY WANTS TO KEEP IT WEDNESDAYS AT 5 ONCE A MONTH, JUST LIKE THEY DO NOW.
SO, I THINK THAT ONE'S AN EASY ONE.
ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION FOR PARKS AND REC? WELL, ARE WE DOING ONE BIG MOTION? RIGHT.
THE IDEA WAS TO HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, BUT AS I WAS GOING THROUGH THIS, I REALIZED THAT PARKS AND RECREATION AND ZBA ALSO HAVE ORDINANCE PROVISIONS THAT GOVERN THE SETTING OF THEIR MEETINGS AS PLANNING AND ZONING DOES.
SO FOR THE COUNCIL TO SET THEIR MEETING SCHEDULES, WE WILL NEED TO GO BACK AND CHANGE THOSE ORDINANCES ALSO.
[02:30:01]
SO I THINK IN OTHER WORDS YOU'RE SAYING...WE GIVE DIRECTION TONIGHT AND THEN IT'S GOING TO COME BACK AT A FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING.
YES, OR YOU COULD SET P&Z TONIGHT.
OKAY, WHY DON'T WE GIVE DIRECTION ON PARKS AND RECREATION AND GO AHEAD AND DEAL WITH P&Z.
I GAVE MY DIRECTION ON PARKS AND RECREATION.
WHICH IS TO KEEP IT WEDNESDAYS AT 5, WHICHEVER WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH THEY'VE GOT NOW, ONCE A MONTH.
SO PLANNING AND ZONING, I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE DO KEEP IT ON THURSDAY AND THAT WE MAKE IT TWO MEETINGS A MONTH UNTIL AND UNLESS THERE'S NOTHING FOR THEM TO MEET ON.
I THINK ONE OF THE MEETINGS NEEDS TO BE AT A TIME THAT'S CONVENIENT TO THE PUBLIC.
ONE OF THE CRITICISMS HAS BEEN WHEN THEY MEET AT 4 O'CLOCK AND THERE IS A HIGHLY PUBLICIZED PLAT, A LOT OF THE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY WERE NOT HAPPY WITH THAT.
THEY THOUGHT THEY HAD TO TAKE OFF WORK OR MISS THE MEETING.
AND SO I WOULD THINK MAYBE WE COULD DO ONE MEETING LIKE AT 6 P.M.
AND TREAT THE SECOND MEETING MORE LIKE A WORKSHOP AT 4 P.M.
OR SOME, OR WE COULD DO BOTH AT 6.
BUT THEY'VE GOT A PRETTY FULL PLATE, WHICH IS WHY I'M SAYING TWO MEETINGS A MONTH.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF TWO MEETINGS A MONTH JUST BECAUSE IN CASE THEY DON'T HAVE PLOTS GOING ON, THEY ALSO CAN BE REVIEWING ALL THE AUDIENCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE, FOR SURE.
BUT I DON'T SEE 6 O'CLOCK AS EVEN AN OPTION WITH THEM.
I MEAN, WAS THAT NOT EVEN ASKED OF THEM? OR THEY CAME UP WITH THESE CHOICES? IS THAT HOW THAT CAME ABOUT? NO, PLANNING AND ZONING IS JUST FOUR OR FIVE.
SO, I MEAN, FIVE O'CLOCK IS KIND OF IN BETWEEN A FOUR AND A SIX.
SO, I JUST FEEL FIVE O'CLOCK IS TOO EARLY FOR A LOT OF OUR RESIDENTS TO GET TO MEETINGS.
AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF ARE COMING FROM.
BUT WE'VE HAD AN AWFUL LOT OF NEGATIVE FEEDBACK OVER THOSE 4 O'CLOCK MEETINGS.
I MEAN, I WAS ASKED WERE WE INTENTIONALLY TRYING TO EXCLUDE PEOPLE FROM BEING THERE, AND THAT'S HORRIBLE.
BUT ARE YOU EXCLUDING THE ELDERLY AND PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT TO DRIVE THAT WAY? SO, I MEAN, YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO GET DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
I'M GOOD WITH THE TWO MEETINGS.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, ON ONE HAND YOU DO HAVE PEOPLE LIKE MY MOM WHO WON'T DRIVE AT NIGHT AND YOU JUST HAVE TO SETTLE ON THE FACT THAT 5 P.M.
IS A HAPPY MEDIUM, THAT IT IS MORE ACCESSIBLE THAN 4, MIGHT NOT BE PERFECT, BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT PERFECT FOR EVERYBODY, AND I THINK YOU ALSO HAVE TO CONSIDER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THEIR ABILITIES TO MAKE MEETINGS AS WELL.
SO I THINK TWO MEETINGS, 5 O'CLOCK THURSDAY. OKAY.
SO TWO MEETINGS, TWO TIMES A MONTH ON THURSDAY AT 5 O'CLOCK? YEP.
THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SECOND AND FOURTH, AS FAR AS I CAN REMEMBER.
BILLY, DO YOU REMEMBER ANYTHING DIFFERENT? NO.
MAYOR, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS A SET LIST OF MEETINGS THAT I THINK WERE PROVIDED FOR Y'ALL BASED ON HOT SUBMISSION DATES.
SO, AND I DON'T KNOW, I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT.
AND I WROTE A NOTE ON IT EARLIER AND GAVE IT TO THE MAYOR, SO I DON'T HAVE MINE.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT ALIGNS PERFECTLY WITH 1ST AND 3RD OR 2ND AND 4TH.
THAT IS A VERY GOOD POINT, KATHY.
AND I HAVE NOT REVIEWED THIS TO CROSS-REFERENCE AND SEE IF THAT ALL LINES UP.
[02:35:02]
THURSDAY OF EVERY MONTH.AND MAYBE WE CAN KIND OF LEAN TOWARDS THE SECOND THURSDAY BEING PLATS AND THE OTHER MEETING BEING FOCUSED ON ORDINANCES BECAUSE THEY'VE STILL GOT ELECTRONIC SIGNS TO LOOK AT, THEY'VE STILL GOT COMMERCIAL ZONING AND I DON'T KNOW, AND FIRE, FIREWORKS AND FIRE PITS AND ALL THAT TO LOOK AT.
SO THEY'VE GOT A LOT ON THEIR TABLE STILL.
THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF STUFF, BUT IF THE...
PLATS AND METALS SHOWS THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE GOING ON A PLAT ON JULY 9TH. I THINK THAT IS THE SECOND THURSDAY OF THAT MONTH.
SO IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, TO GO ON THE SECOND THURSDAY? I WAS SUGGESTING THAT WE PRIMARILY FOCUS THE SECOND THURSDAY MEETINGS ON PLATS AND THE FOURTH ON OTHER ISSUES.
AND IF WE HAVE A MONTH WITH NO PLATS, THEN THEY CAN WORK BOTH MEETINGS.
AND I WILL SAY THE PLAT SUBMITTAL CALENDAR THAT WE HAVE ESTABLISHED, AND CATHERINE, FEEL FREE TO CHIME IN ON THIS ONE, BUT THAT'S THE DATE THAT WE ACCEPT THOSE PLATS.
IF WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL MEETING OPTION FOR PLANNING AND ZONING, THAT PLAT SUBMISSION, AS LONG AS IT'S WITHIN THE 30-DAY SHOT CLOCK, COULD BE PLACED ON A DIFFERENT MEETING AS LONG AS WE GIVE PROPER NOTICE.
SO THAT ACTUALLY GIVES US FLEXIBILITY.
SO DO WE WANT TO INCLUDE THE DIRECTION THAT IT'S PLOT, OR DO WE JUST WANT TO KEEP IT HIGH LEVEL THAT IT'S JUST SECOND AND FOURTH, AND THEN STAFF CAN WORK WITH THEM ON THIS IS WHAT THE IDEA IS.
IF THERE IS A CONFLICT AND WE NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING, CAN A SPECIAL MEETING BE CALLED? BY THE CHAIR OF PLANNING AND ZONING.
IF WE HAD TO, BECAUSE OF A PLANT? IT WOULD BE AT THE CHAIR'S REQUEST OR AT THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REQUEST.
INCLEMENT WEATHER, PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS, LACK OF A QUORUM, DECLARED EMERGENCY, OR OTHER GOOD CAUSE, AS DETERMINED BY THE CHAIRPERSON AND THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR.
I'M GOOD WITH THAT FLEXIBILITY.
IS IT THE DESIRE OF COUNCIL TO...
DRAFT THAT INTO THE RESOLUTION OR TO REFER TO AN ATTACHMENT AND DO YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT ATTACHMENT DONE FOR A CALENDAR YEAR AND DONE EVERY NOVEMBER WHEN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE APPOINTED AND YOU SET ALL THE DATES SPECIFICALLY OR DO WE WANT TO GO SECOND AND FOURTH OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT AND DO THIS AS ONE COMPREHENSIVE RESOLUTION WHEN WE'RE READY TO COME BACK WITH PARKS AND REC OR IF YOU WANTED TO DO IT TONIGHT SO ONE I THINK WE SHOULD JUST MAKE IT SECOND AND FOURTH ONGOING AND NOT HAVE TO REDO IT EVERY YEAR SECOND OF ALL WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR PARKS AND RECS WHAT THEY'RE DOING ANYWAY SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY URGENCY TO GET THAT IN ACT IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING THAT ANYWAY SO I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH PNZ TONIGHT WE CAN THE ONLY DIFFERENCE WOULD BE POSSIBLE HOLIDAYS OR RESCHEDULES, SO THERE ARE SOME THINGS LIKE THAT, SO MAYBE SOME DATES AHEAD OF TIME WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THAT.
SO I THINK WE CAN DO THIS, JUST GO AHEAD AND PUT THIS IN, BUT THEN ALSO SET THE CALENDAR FOR THE YEAR, WHICH WE HONESTLY SHOULD BE DOING FOR US AS WELL.
[02:40:05]
TO BE MY RECOMMENDATION, IS STAFF CAN CERTAINLY HANDLE THE CALENDAR ON THAT ONE.AND IF THERE WERE A HOLIDAY THAT CONFLICTED, THAT WOULD BE FOR GOOD CAUSE, AND THE CHAIR AND THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR COULD CANCEL FOR THAT.
AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THEM THAT THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MOVE IT IF THERE IS A GOOD REASON.
OKAY, DOES THAT TAKE CARE OF THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE? DOES THAT GIVE YOU ENOUGH DIRECTION, KATHY? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SHALL MEET ON THE SECOND AND FOURTH THURSDAYS OF EACH MONTH AT 5 P.M.
AND THE REST OF THAT REMAINS THE SAME, THE ADDRESS AND TIME.
ARE WE READY TO MOVE ON TO ITEM 13? ITEM 13.
DON'T WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT? WELL, WE WERE JUST GIVING STAFF DIRECTION.
NO, WE WERE, I THOUGHT WE WERE MOVING FORWARD ON THE...
OKAY, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION 2026-889, SETTING THE REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE OF, AND I'M GOING TO CHANGE WHAT'S WORDED HERE, OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL MEETINGS, AUTHORIZING THE CANCELLATION OF MEETINGS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE AS PRESENTED BY CATHERINE A MINUTE AGO.
OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARRON AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BOND.
TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026, I DATE 9, AS AMENDED BY CITY ATTORNEY CATHERINE CLIFTON.
OKAY ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT NOT HEARING ANY I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-889 AS AMENDED PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND ANY OPPOSED NOT SEEING ANYONE MOTION CARRIES 5-0 OKAY, NOW
[13. RECEIVE A PRESENTATION AND GIVE STAFF DIRECTION ON DESIGN AND FUNDING OF A WATER TOWER.]
WE'RE TO ITEM 13.RECEIVE A PRESENTATION AND GIVE STAFF DIRECTION ON DESIGN AND FUNDING OF THE WATER TOWER.
MR. PILGRIM, I THINK THIS HAS YOUR NAME ON THE START.
ADMINISTRATOR MANTON, CAN YOU PUT THE POWERPOINT UP? YOU BETCHA, SIR.
WHAT IS THAT? IT'LL HELP EVERYBODY KIND OF...
LUCKILY WE HAVE TWO COMPUTER PEOPLE HERE.
...AND GO INTO SLEEP, OKAY? YOU DID A GOOD JOB TONIGHT, DYLAN.
GRANT, DYLAN, WOULD YOU MIND GRABBING ONE OF THESE LITTLE DEVICES UNDERNEATH THE PODIUM?
[02:45:54]
YEAH, JUST UNPLUG YOURS, DARYL.ALL RIGHT, SO AS EVERYONE KNOWS, WE HAVE MADE A DECISION AS A CITY, AS A COUNCIL, TO BUILD A NEW WATER TOWER THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE.
FEBRUARY 3RD, THE CITY ENGINEER, CRAIG KIRKHOFF, CAME UP AND GAVE US AN UPDATE ON WHAT IS CALLED A CHAPARRAL ELEVATED STORAGE TANK.
...PUBLICLY CALLED THE NEW WATER TOWER.
IT'S BASICALLY NECESSARY WITHIN TWO YEARS TO ENSURE ADEQUATE PRESSURE AND VOLUME.
THE COST ESTIMATE FOR IT, AND THIS IS A REALLY WIDE RANGE, IS FROM $7 TO $8.5 MILLION.
I DON'T THINK THE RANGE IS REALLY THAT HIGH, BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN PUT OUT FOR BID YET, SO WE'LL GIVE YOU THE OUTSIDE RANGES HERE FOR THIS DISCUSSION.
THE DESIGN AND ENGINEERING IS VIRTUALLY COMPLETE.
THE CONSTRUCTION TIME FOR IT IS GOING TO BE 18 TO 24 MONTHS.
SO COUNCIL RECENTLY CREATED A FINANCING COMMITTEE TO EXPLORE OUR VARIOUS FUNDING OPTIONS.
MYSELF WAS APPOINTED AS THE COMMITTEE CHAIR.
DARRELL SHARP JOINED ME AS A COUNCIL MEMBER ON THE COMMITTEE.
KENT MANTON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR.
GRANT SAVAGE AND CRAIG KIRKHOFF.
AND HERE'S THE APPROACH THAT WE TOOK TO THIS.
TO GIVE YOU A BIG PICTURE OVERVIEW, WE KIND OF TOOK A MAXIMUM MINIMUM.
ANALYSIS OF BOTH THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND THE AVAILABLE CASH.
AND THAT GAVE US A RANGE OF FUNDING OPTIONS.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE LITTLE MATRIX SPREADSHEET THERE ON THE BOTTOM, LEASE COST, MAXIMUM CASH.
LEASE COST WOULD BE IF IT'S A $7 MILLION WATER TOWER AND WE USE THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF CASH THAT'S AVAILABLE WITHOUT GOING INTO THE GENERAL FUND, THAT WOULD BE $5.3 MILLION AND WE WOULD STILL BE $2.7 MILLION SHORT.
IF WE HAD THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF COST, $8.5 MILLION, AND WE USED THE LEAST AMOUNT OF CASH THAT'S AVAILABLE, AND REALLY, LET ME GIVE YOU A LITTLE CABOT TO THAT, IT SAYS $4.8 MILLION, BUT REALLY THE LEAST AMOUNT OF CASH WITHOUT DIGGING INTO SOMETHING OTHER THAN JUST THE UTILITY FUND IS $3 MILLION, BUT THIS SHOWING $4.8 MILLION, I'LL SHOW YOU WHY IN A MINUTE, THAT WOULD STILL LEAVE A $3.7 MILLION FUNDING SPREAD THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO COVER.
SO THAT'S THE BIG PICTURE, AND HERE ARE THE FIVE DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT.
OPTION ONE, ABOUT $3 MILLION FROM THE UTILITY IMPACT FEES.
SO THAT'S USING 100% OF THE UTILITY IMPACT FEES AND THEN GOING OUT AND GET $4 TO $5.5 MILLION OF BONDS AND GRANTS.
AND THAT WOULD GET US TO THE $8.5 MILLION NUMBER OR THE $7 MILLION NUMBER ON THE LOW END.
OPTION NUMBER TWO IS MORE CASH, LESS BONDS, BUT STILL BONDS.
THAT'S USING $3 MILLION, WHICH WOULD BE 100% OF THE UTILITY IMPACT FEES THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
$1.8 MILLION, WHICH GOT YOU TO THE $4.8 ON THE FIRST PAGE, OF THE UTILITY CONSTRUCTION FUND FEES.
AND THEN THAT WOULD LEAVE US NEEDING TO BORROW EITHER $2.2 OR $3.7 MILLION IN BONDS AND GRANTS.
[02:50:01]
AT IS TO GO 100% CASH.SO WE'D HAVE TO USE $3 MILLION OR 100% OF THE UTILITY IMPACT FUNDS.
WE'D HAVE TO USE 100% OF THE $1.8 MILLION OF UTILITY CONSTRUCTION FUNDS.
AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO BORROW $2.2 TO $3.7 MILLION, THE SAME NUMBER AS BEFORE, FROM THE GENERAL FUND OR USE THE WATER FUND BALANCE AND GRANTS.
THE FOURTH OPTION IS 100% BONDS.
SO WE WOULD BE SIMPLY GOING OUT FOR BONDS, LESS WHATEVER WE GET IN A GRANT, FOR EITHER $7 TO $8.5 MILLION.
AND THE LAST OPTION THAT WE WOULD WANT TO AT LEAST BE THINKING ABOUT AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS IF WE INCLUDED THE NEW PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING AS A PART OF THIS BECAUSE IT'S RELATED TO IT, BECAUSE IT'S A WATER STRUCTURE, SO WE WOULD USE CASH PLUS BONDS IN AN AMOUNT TO BE DETERMINED.
WE DON'T KNOW THAT AMOUNT YET BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFIC COST OF THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING.
SO I'LL JUST TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT WHY USE UTILITY IMPACT FEES.
SO THAT'S THE $3 MILLION NUMBER THAT WAS SHOWN UP ON ALL OF THOSE.
THE UTILITY IMPACT FEES ARE RESTRICTED IN YOUR USE.
THEY'RE A ONE-TIME CHARGE THAT WE ASSESS ON NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE COMMUNITY ACCORDING TO CHAPTER 395 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
AND THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY ASSESSED SO THAT GROWTH IS PAYING FOR ITSELF, SO THAT OUR CURRENT CITIZENS DON'T HAVE TO LAY OUT THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES FOR NEW PEOPLE MOVING INTO THE COMMUNITY AND THE GROWTH THAT'S NEEDED.
IN FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE HAVE TWO WATER FUND BONDS CURRENTLY.
ONE OF THEM MATURES IN 2028, THE OTHER ONE IN 2038.
AFTER THE 2028 ONE MATURES, OUR BOND PAYMENTS WILL DROP ABOUT $200,000 A YEAR.
SO WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO THAT, ONLY TWO YEARS AWAY.
THE LAST WATER STUDY THAT WAS DONE BY THE CITY WAS DONE IN 2022.
THE RATES WERE SET FOR 2023 THROUGH 2024 AND 2026 THROUGH 2027.
A NEW RATE STUDY IS GOING TO BE NEEDED FOR FY YEAR 27-28, AND THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE BONDS THAT WE TAKE OUT FOR THIS PROJECT WILL DETERMINE THE NEW RATES, SO WE'LL HAVE SOME IMPACT ON THE RATES.
NOW, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT A PERSON'S, I'M GOING TO SAY, OVERALL PAYMENTS TO THE CITY NECESSARILY HAVE TO GO UP, BECAUSE AS WE...
IF WE USE SOME FINANCING AND LESS CASH, WE ACTUALLY COULD REDUCE OUR TAX RATE TO OFFSET ANY AMOUNT THAT THE WATER RATES NEEDED TO GO UP.
THE WATER RATES WILL BE DICTATED BY THE BONDS BECAUSE THEY ARE REVENUE BONDS, SO YOU HAVE TO GENERATE THE REVENUE TO PAY THE BOND OFF.
THERE'S ALSO A GRANT APPLICATION POSSIBILITY, AND I WANT KENT TO TALK ABOUT THE GRANT.
BEFORE HE TALKS ABOUT THAT, I WANT TO MENTION THIS FOR JUST A MOMENT FOR THE SAKE OF EVERYONE THAT'S LISTENING.
WHEN WE WERE HIRING, WHEN WE WERE INTERVIEWING FOR THE NEW CITY ADMINISTRATOR, ONE OF THE CRITERIA WE SET WAS SOMEONE WHO HAD SOME EXPERIENCE IN GRANTS.
AND WE LOOKED AT SOME WHO HAD A VAST AMOUNT OF EXPERIENCE.
WE FOUND SOME THAT HAD ALMOST NO EXPERIENCE.
GRANT IS, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHY I KEEP CALLING HIM GRANT.
KENT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT RANGE, BUT I WOULD SAY NOT MORE IN THE MIDDLE.
HE'S PROBABLY HAD THE UPPER, HE WAS IN THE UPPER PORTION OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAD EXPERIENCE WITH GRANTS.
IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS YOU'RE HERE, AND IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE'RE GLAD YOU'RE HERE.
AND, GRANT, WE DO APPRECIATE YOU FOR CREATING THESE SLIDES FOR US AND KIND OF SHORTENING EVERYTHING UP.
SO SPEAKING OF GRANTS, FOR ANYBODY WHO'S NOT AWARE, THERE'S ONLY SO MANY PROGRAMS HERE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS WHERE WE COULD POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, PETITION THE STATE FOR FUNDING FOR A PROJECT SUCH AS THIS.
THIS IS A WATER SUPPLY PROJECT.
TRADITIONALLY, THOSE GRANTS HAVE COME WITH STRINGS ATTACHED.
SO THOSE STRINGS ARE TYPICALLY IN THE LINE OF, YOU KNOW, A SCORING CRITERIA THAT IS TARGETING A DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITY, ECONOMIC FACTORS, AND THE SUCH.
SO WHILE WE CERTAINLY CAN APPLY FOR GRANTS FOR PROJECTS SUCH AS THIS, OUR LIKELIHOOD OF BEING ABLE TO BE AWARDED THOSE MAKES THEM ALMOST, YOU KNOW, NOT.
NOT REASONABLE TO APPLY FOR A LOT OF THESE.
THERE ARE A LOT OF PROGRAMS WITH THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD WHERE WE COULD APPLY FOR A LOAN FINANCING, LOW-INTEREST LOAN FINANCING.
BUT, AGAIN, THAT IS KIND OF A LONGER PROCESS, AND THE SPREAD ON THE RATES BETWEEN THOSE LOW-INTEREST LOANS AND WHAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET JUST GOING THROUGH A REVENUE BOND IS PROBABLY NEGLIGIBLE.
I DID WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS ONE-TIME GRANT APPLICATION, THE WISIG.
A PROGRAM, IT'S A COMPONENT OF THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, SO IT'S A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT THE STATE IS LOOKING TO GET OUT THE DOOR VERY QUICKLY.
AND SO WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION FOR THIS.
IT IS A BIT OF A LONG SHOT BECAUSE THERE IS A COMPONENT TO LOW
[02:55:01]
TO MODERATE INCOME AS PART OF THE SCORING CRITERIA, ALTHOUGH THIS PROGRAM IS NOT HEAVILY FOCUSED ON THAT.WHAT THEY'RE REALLY TRYING TO DO IS GET MONEY OUT ON WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS.
PREFERABLY THOSE THAT ARE IN LINE WITH THE STATE WATER PLAN, SO THAT PROJECTS ARE CONTINUING AND THEY'RE GOING OUT THE DOOR FASTER.
SO THERE'S A VERY SMALL APPLICATION PERIOD.
THAT APPLICATION PERIOD IS NOW OPEN.
SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS SUBMIT AN APPLICATION USING A CONSULTANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE OUR BEST FOOT FORWARD ON THIS.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD BENEFIT THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT IS THAT IT'S SHOVEL READY.
WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE WATER LINES RUN.
WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE DESIGN ESSENTIALLY COMPLETE.
AND THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF AWARD FOR THIS WOULD BE $5 MILLION, AND WE WOULDN'T KNOW THE RESULTS OF THIS AWARD UNTIL LATE 2026 OR 2027.
SO IT'S A VERY QUICK TURNAROUND COMPARED TO OTHER GRANT FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES.
THIS IS, LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A BIT OF A LONG SHOT, BUT I THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE.
I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO, AND THE TIMELINES REALLY LINE UP VERY WELL WITH US, YOU KNOW, WANTING TO PURSUE THIS ELEVATED STORAGE TANK AND THIS GRANT FUNDING APPLICATION.
SO I THINK IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY OF PARKER TO AT LEAST GIVE IT A SHOT.
AND WHAT ARE THE COSTS FOR APPLYING FOR THIS GRANT? SO I HAVE NOT GOTTEN PROPOSALS BACK ON THAT ONE.
STAFF'S ABILITY TO REALLY PUT TOGETHER A TIGHT PACKAGE BY THE JULY, I THINK IT'S 30TH, APPLICATION PERIOD WOULD BE QUITE A CHALLENGE TO DO SO.
AND SO RIGHT NOW I'M LOOKING AT SOME PROPOSALS FROM SOME CONSULTANTS WHO WOULD EITHER HAVE A COMPONENT OF A GRANT ADMINISTRATION BUILT INTO THE GRANT PACKAGE OR THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A ONE-TIME FEE UP FRONT, AND OF COURSE I WOULD BRING THAT TO CITY COUNCIL.
SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS VERSUS THE MILLION DOLLAR THAT THIS...
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD BE FOR.
I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS MAYBE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE AT HOME UNDERSTAND IS EVERYONE ELSE THAT WE INTERVIEWED TALKED ABOUT GRANTS, TALKED ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT THEY USED TO GET THEM, AND VIRTUALLY ALL OF THEM USE OUTSIDE ASSISTANCE IN TRYING TO APPLY FOR GRANTS BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A COMPLICATED AND TIME-CONSUMING THING, SO IT'S A WORTHWHILE EXPENDITURE.
THE ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME, HOW IS THAT MEASURED? IS THAT AVERAGE ACROSS THE COMMUNITY? IS IT IDENTIFYING SUB-COMMUNITIES? SO TYPICALLY THEY USE CENSUS TRACTS.
SO CENSUS TRACTS ARE, I WOULDN'T EVEN SAY GEOPOLITICAL LINES, BUT THEY'RE LINES THAT ARE DEVELOPED BY THE CENSUS BUREAU, AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD MEDIUM INCOME IN THOSE TYPICALLY.
THERE ARE SOME OTHER WAYS THAT THESE DIFFERENT GRANT PROGRAMS GO ABOUT ADDRESSING THAT.
BEFORE YOU GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, GO BACK TWO PAGES BEFORE THAT TO THAT PAGE RIGHT THERE.
I WANT TO JUST REVIEW THIS QUICKLY BECAUSE I DIDN'T SPEND MUCH TIME ON IT BEFORE WE GO TO THE RECOMMENDATION PAGE.
SO FOUR BASIC OPTIONS, THE IMPACT CASH PLUS BONDS, MORE CASH, LESS BONDS, 100% CASH OR 100% BONDS.
AND FOR NOW, WE'RE JUST GOING TO SET ASIDE OPTION FIVE.
BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THE COST YET OF THE BUILDING.
ONE IS, DO WE KNOW WHAT AN INTEREST RATE WOULD BE ON THE BOND? AND TWO, HOW LONG OF A BOND WERE YOU THINKING ABOUT, 20-YEAR, 30-YEAR, OR HAD YOU GOTTEN THAT FAR? I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER ON THE INTEREST RATE YET.
WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE LENGTH OF TIME.
I PERSONALLY WOULD RECOMMEND 30-YEAR.
BECAUSE THIS IS AN ASSET THAT'S GOING TO SERVE THE CITY FOR 75 TO 50 TO 100 YEARS.
75 IS THE NUMBER I'VE BEEN USING IN THE MIDDLE.
SO 30 YEARS IS A REASONABLE TIME FRAME FOR THAT.
DARRELL, ANY COMMENTS YOU WANT TO MAKE? I AGREE WITH THE LONGER TIME FRAME.
AND CURRENTLY MUNICIPAL BONDS, PARTICULARLY REVENUE BONDS, ARE GETTING ISSUED IN THE HIGH FOURS, WHICH IN THE...
REALM OF INTEREST RATES OVER THE COURSE OF HISTORY, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE YEARS WHERE WE HAD 0% BACKING INTEREST, IS EXCEPTIONAL.
AND ANYTIME YOU HAVE AN EXCEPTIONAL INTEREST RATE SCENARIO, IT IS GENERALLY IN YOUR BEST INTEREST TO AVAIL YOURSELF OF IT.
SO REVENUE BONDS, FOR THOSE WHO, FOR THE FANS AT HOME WHO REALLY ARE ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THIS TOPIC, REVENUE BONDS ARE CONSIDERED SLIGHTLY HIGHER RISK.
THAN, SAY, GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS BECAUSE THEY'RE CONTINGENT UPON, SAY, THE ASSET, WHATEVER IS BEING FINANCED, IN THIS CASE WATER, IS ACTUALLY ABLE TO PAY IT.
AND SO THEY TEND TO HAVE A SLIGHTLY HIGHER RATE THAN GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.
THEY STILL GET RATED FOR A COMMUNITY LIKE PARKER OR AA OR AAA, BUT THEY'RE JUST ASSESSED A SLIGHTLY HIGHER
[03:00:01]
RATE, AND THAT'S WHY I SAY HIGH FOURS.YOU'LL SEE MUNICIPAL BONDS RIGHT NOW PASS FOR 4-4 OR 4-3, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY...
A GENERAL INDICATOR BASED ON SOMEONE WHO LIKES TO INVEST IN MUNICIPAL BONDS, WHAT WE'LL LIKELY SEE FOR A 30-YEAR TERM.
LET'S GO TO OUR RECOMMENDATIONS PAGE, KIM.
SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS OPTION ONE, AND THAT IS USE 100% OF OUR IMPACT CASH, BUT ONLY THE IMPACT CASH, AND PAY FOR THE REST OF IT WITH BONDS AND A GRANT, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN GET A GRANT.
BUT IF YOU DON'T GET A GRANT, ALL THE REST OF IT WOULD BE BONDS.
SO THAT'S $3 MILLION IN UTILITY IMPACT FEES THAT WE HAVE, 100% OF IT USED.
THAT GIVES US $4 TO $5.5 MILLION THAT WE NEED A REVENUE BOND FOR TO PAY THE BALANCE.
NOW THAT LEAVES US WITH A $1.8 MILLION UTILITY CONSTRUCTION FUND REMAINING, BUT WE WOULD SAVE THAT FOR OTHER ISSUES RATHER THAN USING IT ALL ON THIS ONE WATER TOWER BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN USE THOSE FUNDS FOR.
WE COULD USE THEM FOR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS AND OTHER KINDS OF PROJECTS.
THIS IS A 75-YEAR ASSET, SO THE IDEA IS TO PAY FOR IT OVER THE USEFUL LIFE, NOT LITERALLY 75 YEARS, BUT IF WE GO FOR 30 YEARS, THAT WOULD BE LESS THAN HALF OF THE USEFUL LIFE OF THE ASSET.
IT LEAVES OTHER CASH AND FUND BALANCES FOR OPERATIONS AND FOR LEVERAGING OTHER ASSET FINANCING, SUCH AS THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING.
A NEW ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITY AND OTHER MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS LIKE THAT, AS WELL AS ROADS AND OTHER CAPITAL EXPENDITURES.
IT WILL HAVE MINIMAL IMPACT, WE BELIEVE, ON THE WATER RATES, BUT THAT WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE FUTURE WATER RATE STUDY.
AND BEFORE I GET TO OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A HISTORICAL RESISTANCE TO DEBT IN THE CITY AND TO BONDS.
PEOPLE WANT TO GENERATE ALL THE CASH UP FRONT AND PAY FOR IT, AND THEY THINK THAT'S CHEAPER.
AND IT KIND OF REMINDS ME OF, YOU REMEMBER THE CARTOON POPEYE? YOU DON'T SEE MUCH OF POPEYE ANYMORE, BUT HE HAD HIS FRIEND WIMPY, YOU KNOW, AND WIMPY USED TO SAY, HE LOVED HAMBURGERS, AND HE USED TO SAY, I'LL GLADLY PAY YOU ON TUESDAY FOR A HAMBURGER TODAY.
AND FOR US TO ASK OUR CITIZENS TO PAY CASH TODAY FOR A 75-YEAR ASSET IS KIND OF THE OPPOSITE OF WIMPY.
IT'S KIND OF LIKE US SAYING, IF YOU WILL PAY ME TODAY IN ADVANCE, HE SAID, I WILL GLADLY PAY YOU TODAY FOR A HAMBURGER ON TUESDAY.
NOW, I WILL, YEAH, JUST THE OPPOSITE.
HE SAID, I'LL GLADLY PAY YOU ON TUESDAY FOR A HAMBURGER TODAY.
IF YOU WILL PAY ME 100% IN ADVANCE TODAY, I WILL GLADLY SUPPLY YOU AND YOUR FUTURE NEIGHBORS WITH A HAMBURGER FOR THE NEXT 75 YEARS.
SO, NOBODY WOULD WANT TO TAKE THAT DEAL TO PAY IN ADVANCE FOR THE NEXT 75 YEARS WORTH OF HAMBURGERS, NOR SHOULD WE WANT TO PAY IN ADVANCE FOR THE NEXT 75 YEARS WORTH OF USE OF A WATER TOWER.
I REALLY LIKE YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS.
WHERE YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE MOVING IN AND THAT WILL BE USING IT ALSO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING SOME OF THE DEBT ON IT.
WE'RE GOING TO BE MAKING A GOOD DOWN PAYMENT WITH $3 MILLION, AND IT'S MONEY THAT WE REALLY CAN'T USE FOR ANYTHING ELSE, SO WE'D BE FOOLISH NOT TO USE THAT.
BUT I THINK WE WOULD BE EQUALLY AS FOOLISH IF WE TRIED TO PULL ANOTHER $4.5 OR $5 MILLION OUT OF OUR CASH RESERVES TO PAY CASH FOR IT.
AND NOT HAVE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE USING THIS ASSET FOR THE NEXT 75 YEARS PAY AS THEY GO, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT PROBABLY 90% OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS CITY, MAYBE MORE THAN THAT, HAVE A MORTGAGE ON THEIR HOME BECAUSE THEY'RE PAYING FOR THEIR HOME AS THEY LIVE IN IT, AS THEY USE IT.
IF WE TRY TO PAY CASH FOR THIS, WE'RE REALLY ASKING THEM, YEAH, YOU HAVE A MORTGAGE ON YOUR HOME, BUT WE WANT YOU TO PAY CASH IN ADVANCE FOR A CITY ASSET.
AND THAT'S PROBABLY NOT A REASONABLE THING FOR US TO ASK OF OUR CITIZENS, AND IT'S NOT THE CHEAPEST THING FOR OUR CITIZENS.
DARRELL? I ALWAYS LOVE IT WHEN YOU GET TO AGREE WITH SOMEONE FOR AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT REASON, HOW YOU GOT TO YOUR REASONING.
SO, UNDERSTANDING THE RESISTANCE TO DEBT IN THE CITY, ANYTIME YOU TRY TO ACCUMULATE OR CREATE THE CASH THAT YOU NEED OVER A MULTI-YEAR TERM TO PAY OFF AN ASSET LIKE THIS, SO SAY IT WOULD TAKE, I DON'T KNOW, THREE YEARS.
TO GENERATE THE REVENUE NECESSARY.
IT'S PROBABLY LONGER, BUT LET'S GO WITH IT.
THE CITY WOULD KEEP IT IN WHAT WE WOULD CALL A HIGH-YIELD ACCOUNT, OR CEDARS OR ANY OTHER INVESTMENT VEHICLES WE HAVE, BUT IN REALITY, ALL OF THOSE INVESTMENT VEHICLES LAG BEHIND THE RATE OF INFLATION, SO IT WILL MAKE THE ASSET MORE EXPENSIVE WHEN YOU PURCHASE IT, AS OPPOSED TO BUYING IT RIGHT NOW WHEN THE INTEREST RATE IS RIGHT AROUND THE LINE
[03:05:01]
OF INFLATION.SO THE ACCUMULATION OF CASH IN GENERAL NOT ALWAYS, BUT MOST OF THE TIME, MAKES BUYING ASSETS, ESPECIALLY PERMANENT ASSETS, MORE EXPENSIVE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY I ACKNOWLEDGE COUNCIL MEMBER PILGRIM'S REASONING IS SOUND, BUT I TILT MORE TOWARDS WHY PAY MORE FOR EVERYTHING.
AND I THINK WE'VE SEEN MAJOR INFLATION IN ALL CONSTRUCTION COSTS OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS WITH FUTURE INFLATION NOT LOOKING PARTICULARLY LOW.
I THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
YEAH, I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP.
I'M IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH YOU ON THAT POINT.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THIS PERCEPTION THAT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE MEANS NEVER SPENDING THE MONEY, THAT IS, I DON'T KNOW, I JUST LIVE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
IT'S NOT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE TO ASK OUR CITIZENS TO SHELL OUT PROPERTY TAX MONEY IN ADVANCE SO THAT WE CAN BUILD UP THIS BIG CASH RESERVE FUND SO THAT AT THE END OF BUILDING UP THE FUND...
WE CAN SPEND IT FOR AN ASSET THAT'S GOING TO SERVE THE CITY FOR DECADES INTO THE FUTURE.
THE SAME ARGUMENT IS ULTIMATELY GOING TO APPLY TO WHATEVER FUNDING WE NEED TO DO FOR A NEW ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A HUGE BURDEN TO THE CITIZENS TODAY.
IT'S GOING TO BE A BURDEN THAT IS SPREAD OUT OVER THE DECADES IN THE FUTURE AS THE FACILITY, IN THIS CASE, A WATER TOWER, OR IN ANOTHER CASE IT MAY BE A NEW BUILDING, AS THAT FACILITY PROVIDES UTILITY AND BENEFIT TO THE CITY.
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS OR OUR REQUEST TONIGHT IS THIS.
WE REQUEST THAT COUNCIL PROVIDE ALIGNMENT OR DIRECTION ON OUR RECOMMENDATION.
WE WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO ACCEPT OUR RECOMMENDATION OF OPTION ONE AND DIRECT US TO PURSUE DETAILED PROPOSALS TO BRING BACK TO YOU.
WE'LL COORDINATE WITH A FINANCIAL ADVISOR, PROBABLY HILLTOP SECURITIES.
WE WILL BRING BACK FINANCIAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE, WHICH WILL INCLUDE PROPOSED BIDDING AND A CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE, DETAILED CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE FOR THE WATER TOWER, AND IT WILL INCLUDE ANY FUTURE ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE FURTHER REVIEW AND DISCUSSION ON, INCLUDING THE RATE OF THE BONDS, THE AMOUNT OF THE BONDS, THE TERM OF THE BONDS, AND ALL THOSE THINGS.
SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION.
CAN YOU TALK TO US ABOUT HOW THIS WILL AFFECT THE BUDGET? WE'RE GOING WITH OPTION ONE AS FAR AS AFFECTING THE BUDGET.
WE WON'T KNOW THE IMPACT UNTIL WE DO A NEW WATER RATE STUDY WHERE IT TAKES THOSE DEBT PAYMENTS INTO CONSIDERATION.
AS FAR AS OUR CURRENT BUDGET, IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT PROBABLY THAT ONE OR EVEN THE NEXT ONE BECAUSE OF THE TIME FRAME.
BUT REALLY, WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING A BIG INCREASE BECAUSE OF THE 2028 MATURITY OF THAT ONE BOND COMING OFF THE BOOKS AS THIS ONE WOULD BE COMING ON THE BOOKS.
SO WE'RE HOPING TO NOT HAVE MUCH OF AN EFFECT ON THOSE RATES.
SO WE ARE ACTUALLY NOT WRITING A CHECK TO SAY IT'S 7.8 MILLION, 8 POINT WHATEVER MILLION.
LIKE, WE'RE NOT WRITING A CHECK IN THIS BUDGET YEAR OR NEXT YEAR.
IS THERE PROGRESS PAYMENTS THAT ARE SPREAD OUT? I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT THIS IS NOT AN OPTIONAL EXPENSE FOR US.
ACCORDING TO OUR CITY WORKS DIRECTOR, GARY MACHADO, WE'RE OUT OF WATER PRESSURE EFFECTIVELY.
IS TAPPING US OUT, AND SO WE DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF DEFERRING THIS TO A FUTURE YEAR.
WE'RE AT A SPOT WHERE WE'RE REALLY RISKING, CAN WE GET THIS UP IN TIME TO SERVE OUR CITIZENS NOW? SO THAT WASN'T A PART OF THE DISCUSSION, BUT IT DOES HELP DRIVE HOME HOW VALUABLE ISSUING A BOND IS IN THIS CASE.
THE IMPORTANT PART OF THE DISCUSSION, IT REALLY SAYS WE CAN'T SIT ON THIS MUCH LONGER.
WE'VE GOT TO GO AHEAD AND GET ON IT RIGHT AWAY BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME WORK.
TO GET THE COST FINALIZED ON THE TOWER, TO GET SOME BIDS SO THAT WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS WITHOUT SOME KIND OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING, DESPITE WHAT SOME PEOPLE MAY BE ACCUSING US OF POTENTIALLY DOING.
SO WE'VE GOT TO GET THOSE BIDS IN AND THEN MAKE THE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE BONDS.
AND THERE'S REALLY NOT A REASONABLE OPTION AT ALL WITHOUT SOME BONDS.
IT WOULD NOT BE A WISE THING AT ALL TO DIG INTO OUR GENERAL FUNDS TO TAKE OUR...
ESSENTIAL SAVINGS ACCOUNTS THAT WE HAVE FOR OTHER MAJOR EXPENDITURES AND USE THAT.
WE'VE HAD SOME RESIDENT QUESTIONS REGARDING WHY WE WOULDN'T GO OUT FOR BID FIRST AND THEN COME UP
[03:10:01]
WITH A MORE ACCURATE.SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN HOW BONDS WORK THAT JUST BECAUSE WE GO OUT FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER AND IF THE BIDS COME IN LESS THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO CASH IN ALL OF THOSE? CAN YOU EXPLAIN HOW THAT ALL WORKS? WELL, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACTUALLY ISSUE THE BONDS UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED.
THIS IS A VERY WIDE RANGE OF $7 TO $8.5 MILLION.
SO WE'RE GOING TO NARROW THAT DOWN BEFORE WE SELECT THE AMOUNT OF BONDS THAT WE GO FOR, TOO.
I THINK WHAT MS. BOGDEN IS REFERRING TO IS WE TAKE OUT A BOND FOR, SAY, $10 MILLION, BUT WE FIND OUT WE'RE ONLY GOING TO NEED $8 MILLION.
THEREFORE, WE ONLY CASH IN THE AMOUNT WE NEED WHEN WE NEED IT.
AND WE RETURN THE REST WITHOUT EVER USING IT.
DID YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO THAT? OH, OKAY.
WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE A MOTION.
WE CAN JUST GIVE DIRECTION TO YOUR COMMITTEE TO PURSUE THE DETAILED PROPOSALS AND THEN COORDINATE WITH THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR WHO WILL TALK TO YOU.
SECURITIES, AND THEN BRING THE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS BACK TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL? YOU NAILED IT.
THANK YOU FOR PUTTING IT ALL UP THERE.
I DO HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION, AND THIS IS FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LISTENING.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT, OR YOU, DARYL, GRANT, WHOEVER, ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A REVENUE BOND AND A MUNICIPAL BOND AND A GO AND A CO? BECAUSE I DON'T THINK SOME PEOPLE KNOW WHAT THE DIFFERENCES ARE IN BONDS.
WELL, I THINK WE CAN GIVE A VERY HIGH-LEVEL POINT OF THE DIFFERENT BONDS.
IT'S SUCH A NICHE AREA OF EXPERTISE THAT I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF, ONCE WE ENGAGE WITH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR, WE COULD HAVE HIM OUT HERE AT ONE OF OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETINGS, AND HE COULD REALLY EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENT NUANCES.
BUT ON A HIGHER LEVEL, YOU'VE GOT A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND, WHICH IS A TAX-SUPPORTED, PROPERTY TAX-SUPPORTED.
FINANCING MECHANISM THAT USUALLY REQUIRES SOME SORT OF VOTER APPROVAL.
REVENUE BONDS SPECIFICALLY ARE A LEVERAGE ON YOUR WATER SYSTEM.
AND SO IT'S ALL BASED UPON HOW MUCH REVENUE YOU'VE GOT COMING IN THERE AND EXPENDITURES GOING OUT.
IT ISN'T NECESSARILY TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION ANY OF YOUR PROPERTY TAX RATES.
AND IT DOESN'T TAKE MORAL APPROVAL EITHER.
SO, YEAH, AND TO FURTHER, YOU KNOW, I GET THAT THERE'S SOME TRANSPARENCY AND MAYBE, YOU KNOW, ACCOUNTABILITY ISSUES WITH THAT, BUT REALLY THIS IS MORE LIKE A BUSINESS TAKING OUT A LOAN BECAUSE THIS IS OUR ENTERPRISE FUND THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S BEING LEVERAGED.
COUNSEL, ARE WE READY TO GIVE OUR RECOMMENDATION, OR OUR STAFF DIRECTION ON RECOMMENDATIONS? I THOUGHT I DID.
WELL, I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH WHAT COLLEEN SAID, DARRELL.
[14. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 915 AMENDING TITLE XV, CHAPTER 153 OF THE CITY OF PARKER CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO SIGN CONTROL. ]
CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 915, AMENDING TITLE 15, CHAPTER 153 OF THE CITY OF PARKER CODE OF ORDINANCE RELATING TO SIGN CONTROL.COUNCIL, WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM P&Z, AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THEY'RE RECOMMENDING FOR POLITICAL SIGNS AT A POLLING PLACE, NO MORE THAN FOUR SIGNS PER CANDIDATE, AND THE SIGNS CAN'T BE MORE THAN A CERTAIN 16 SQUARE FEET? GO AHEAD.
OKAY, SO THEY SAID A TOTAL OF 16 SQUARE FEET, WHICH DOES NOT MATCH THE DRAFT ORDINANCE WE HAVE HERE, WHICH INDICATES...
SO I HAVE SEVERAL COMMENTS ABOUT THIS DRAFT ORDINANCE.
ONE BEING THE REALITY IS THE SIGNS THAT ARE PLACED OUT THERE, THE LARGE ONES ARE 4 FEET BY 4 FEET, OR IN OTHER WORDS, 16 SQUARE FEET.
THE SMALL ONES ARE TYPICALLY 18 BY 24, WHICH IS WHAT, 3 SQUARE FEET? YEP.
AND I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND...
SO MY FIRST COMMENT IS THERE'S 16 FEET TOTAL AND THEN THE FOUR SIGNS DON'T, YOU'RE BASICALLY AT THAT POINT SAYING EITHER ONE BIG SIGN OR FOUR SMALL SIGNS.
AND IF THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO DO, THAT'S FINE.
IF WE WANT TO GIVE PEOPLE THE OPTION OF
[03:15:02]
HAVING ONE LARGE SIGN AND THREE LITTLE ONES, I WOULD SUGGEST WE ADJUST THAT NUMBER TO 25 SQUARE FEET.YOU MEAN FINISH BY QUITS OR YOU WANT ME TO JUMP IN? I DIDN'T READ IT THAT WAY.
IT SAYS IT'S AN OFFENSE FOR A PERSON TO PLACE AN ELECTIONEERING SIGN SINGULAR THAT EXCEEDS 16 SQUARE FEET OR MORE THAN 8 FEET TALL.
SO THAT TELLS ME ANY INDIVIDUAL SIGN CAN'T BE BIGGER THAN 16 SQUARE FEET.
BUT THE NEXT ONE SAYS YOU CAN PLACE UP TO FOUR SIGNS.
SO ACCORDING TO THAT YOU CAN PLACE FOUR.
16 FOOT SIGNS, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT P&Z SAID.
P&Z SAID 16 FEET, SQUARE FEET TOTAL ACROSS THE FOUR SIGNS.
NOW, I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE EIGHT FEET BECAUSE...
THE EIGHT FEET NEEDS TO BE DELETED.
WELL, YEAH, BUT BY THIS, I MEAN, YOU WOULD HAVE A TWO FOOT...
BY EIGHT FOOT SIGN I MEAN IT'S JUST NOT GONNA HAPPEN SO NOT NECESSARILY I MEAN JUST THINKING THIS THROUGH 18 MIGHT MIGHT NOT BE THE SURFACE AREA OF THE SIGN IT MIGHT JUST BE THAT YOU ELEVATED ON THE T T POSTS FURTHER AND YOU COULD HIT EIGHT FEET THAT WAY IF YOU WERE ATTEMPTING TO KIND OF GAME YOU PUT YOUR SIGN BEHIND SOMEONE ELSE'S SIGN AND YOU NEED TO BE VISIBLE YOU MAKE IT EIGHT FEET TALL I MEAN IT'S POSSIBLE I I LIKE THE PROVISION BEING THERE TO ENSURE YOU KNOW, ABSURD SITUATIONS DON'T ARISE.
IF YOU WANT TO LOWER IT, I'D BE OKAY WITH THAT.
YEAH, I ACTUALLY WANTED FOUR FOOT TOTAL.
THERE'S NO REASON FOR ANY SIGN TO BE MORE THAN...
I HAD AN EIGHT FOOT BY FOUR FOOT SIGN, PIECE OF PLYWOOD, TWO OF THEM, AND THAT WAS RIDICULOUS.
I WOULD SUGGEST WE MAKE IT FIVE BECAUSE, AS I SAID, THE SIGNS ARE FOUR FEET HIGH.
IF WE SET THE HEIGHT LIMIT TO FOUR, THEN THEY'VE GOT TO BE DRAGGING THE GROUND, SO YOU WANT TO LEAVE SOME SPACE FOR WIND TO BLOW UNDERNEATH THEM.
AND THE RADIATORS, SO THE RADIATORS CAN GET AROUND THEM.
SO WHAT WERE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS? OKAY, SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WHERE IT SAYS FEED 16 SQUARE FEET, WE CHANGE IT TO SAY...
25 SQUARE FEET TOTAL ACROSS ALL SIGNS OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.
THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION WE CAN DISCUSS IF OTHER PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS.
HOW MANY SIGNS WOULD THAT BE? THAT WOULD BE ONE LARGE SIGN AND THREE SMALL SIGNS.
OKAY, SO 25 SQUARE FOOT TOTAL ACROSS UP TO FOUR SIGNS WITH NO GREATER HEIGHT THAN FIVE FEET? YEAH.
CAN WE MAKE IT SO SPECIFIC TO SAY A TOTAL OF 25 SQUARE FOOT, ONE LARGE SIGN, SUCH AND SUCH SIZE, AND THREE SMALL? I WOULD.
SO YOU SPECIFY EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WELL, I FEEL LIKE IF YOU'VE GOT 25 SQUARE FOOT, I MEAN, THAT'S FIVE FOOT BY FIVE FOOT.
I MEAN, I'M OKAY WITH SOMEBODY PUTTING ALL THEIR MONEY INTO ONE BIG SIGN, BUT IF THEY DO THAT, THEY CAN'T HAVE THREE OTHERS.
THAT MATH DOESN'T WORK OUT BECAUSE IF THEY'RE THREE SQUARE FEET APIECE, OKAY, NINE.
THREE SQUARE FEET APIECE FOR THE SMALL ONES, YOU WANT TO HAVE THREE OF THEM? SO THAT'S NINE.
OKAY, AND 16 IS 25, SO YOU'RE ALREADY DOING THREE AND THREE.
YEAH, HOWEVER THEY WANT TO CONFIGURE THAT IS UP TO THEM AS LONG AS THE MAXIMUM SIGN IS NOT OFFENSIBLE TO...
WHAT ELSE YOU GOT? OKAY, ANY MORE COMMENTS ON THE SIZE BEFORE I MOVE TO THE NEXT ISSUE? OKAY, THE NEXT ISSUE IS THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE LIMIT BE ON, WELL, I THINK IT EVEN SAYS THAT HERE.
WELL, OKAY, SO THE WAY IT'S WORDED HERE IS IT'S FOR A PERSON PUTTING UP MORE THAN, LET ME SIGN, SO I GRAB ALL MY, 20 FRIENDS COME OVER AND THEN PUT OUT A BILLION SIGNS, OR 80 SIGNS.
WE WANT TO TRY TO ELIMINATE THAT.
SO WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS WE GET RID OF THE CRIMINAL PENALTY, AND WE JUST SAY FOR EACH CANDIDATE OR PROPOSITION ON THE BALLOT THAT WE LIMIT THE SIGNS AND THAT CITY STAFF CAN PULL UP THE EXCESS SIGNS, BUT WE DON'T IMPOSE ANY CRIMINAL PENALTIES.
SO I ACTUALLY HAVE WRITTEN THINGS THAT, SO ON E, NO MORE THAN FOUR ELECTIONEERING SIGNS FOR EACH CANDIDATE OR ADVANCE ADVOCATED POSITION ON A MEASURE ON THE PROMISES OF A POLLING LOCATION, WITH F BEING REMOVING THE IN ADDITION TO IMPOSING ANY
[03:20:03]
CRIMINAL PENALTY AND JUST LEAVING THAT EXCEEDING FOUR ELECTIONEERING SIGNS FOR THE SAME CANDIDATE MAY BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF.ANY COMMENTS OVER HERE? TAKING WHICH ONE, D? WELL, NO, BECAUSE ACTUALLY I WAS THINKING THAT WE COULD CHANGE D.
IT IS AN OFFENSE FOR ANY PERSON TO PLACE AN ELECTION SIGN ON THE PREMISES THAT EXCEEDS 25 SQUARE FEET AND IS MORE THAN...
FIVE FEET IN HEIGHT, TOTAL HEIGHT.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE ATTEMPTING TO SAY, THOUGH.
WE WERE TRYING TO SAY, WE WANT TO SAY 25 SQUARE FEET TOTAL SIGNAGE FOR A CANDIDATE OR ADVOCATED POSITION ON A MEASURE.
OKAY, SO THEN JUST TAKE OUT D AND MAKE, WELL, OBVIOUSLY MOVE EVERYTHING UP.
YEAH, I MEAN, I GUESS WHERE ARE WE SAYING THAT 25, I'M JUST CHANGING THE NUMBERS IN D IS ALL I'M DOING.
I THINK KIND OF THE FIRST QUESTION FOR THE COUNCIL TO GIVE DIRECTION ON IS WHETHER YOU WANT TO HAVE THE CRIMINAL PROVISION ON THE NUMBER OF SIGNS OR IF YOU JUST WANT TO MAKE IT A LIMITATION SUCH THAT ANYTHING EXCEEDING IT WOULD BE REMOVED.
OKAY, SO TAKING OUT D BUT THEN MOVING THE 25 SQUARE FEET TOTAL.
TO F WITH THE FOUR TOTAL SIGNS.
YOU MEAN TO E? WHICH WILL BE THE NEW E.
IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN? WELL, ACTUALLY, YOU'RE COMBINING B, E, AND E.
WELL, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO WORD IT, I THINK YOU KNOW OUR...
BUT ARE WE GOING TO GET TO VOTE ON IT TONIGHT? CAN WE...
CAN WE DEAL WITH TENTS AND CANOPIES? NO.
I DON'T LIKE THAT ANSWER, BUT I KNOW IT WAS COMING.
I GUESS I'M WONDERING WHY WE WANT TO DO THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE RATHER THAN JUST LIMIT THE SIZE OF ANY PARTICULAR SIGN AND THE NUMBER OF TOTAL SIGNS.
I'D RATHER JUST SAY YOU CAN HAVE FOUR SIGNS, WHETHER THEY'RE FOUR BIG ONES OR FOUR SMALL ONES, DOESN'T MATTER.
BIG ONE CAN'T BE BIGGER THAN FOUR BY FOUR I THINK IF WE HAVE FOUR BIG ONES OUT THERE AND LIKE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE ON THE BALLOT THAT'S BECAUSE WE GOT ONE PERSON OUT THERE THAT'S GOT EIGHT BIG SIGNS AND IT'S NOT ME AS MANY AS I GOT AROUND TOWN I DON'T HAVE EIGHT OF THEM SITTING OUT THERE SO FOUR SIGNS NO GREATER THAN FOUR FOOT BY FOUR FOOT HOLD ON, WE'RE DEBATING THAT RIGHT NOW.
I'M OPPOSED TO ALLOWING FOUR BIG SIGNS.
I THINK ONE BIG SIGN IS ENOUGH FOR ANYBODY.
I THINK ONE BIG SIGN AND THREE SMALL SIGNS.
ROXANNE, WHAT DO YOU THINK? I'M GOOD WITH THAT.
IF WE DID FOUR BIG SIGNS TIMES SEVEN, THAT'S 28 BIG SIGNS OUT THERE.
LAST YEAR WE HAD OUR ELECTION SIGNS OUT AT THE SAME TIME AS OUR ELECTION, SO THAT COULD ADD UP PRETTY QUICK.
HONESTLY, I'M OKAY WITH ONE BIG, THREE SMALL, BUT I'D ALSO JUST BE OKAY WITH ONE SIGN.
AND YOU CAN MAKE IT UP TO FOUR BY FOUR, SIMPLY BECAUSE IT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A PARKING LOT.
I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT THERE'S MUCH VALUE FOR THE CANDIDATES TO...
I'M FINE WITH THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU GET TO GENERAL ELECTION SEASON AND WE'VE GOT ALL THOSE CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR SO MANY DIFFERENT OFFICES.
HOW DO WE HANDLE THE SIGNS THAT A RESIDENT MADE WITH TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT PROPOSITIONS OR CANDIDATES ON IT AT ONCE? SO IT'S LIKE I WOULDN'T, IF I WAS RUNNING, I WOULD HAVE MY SIGN THAT I MADE, BUT...
THERE'S RESIDENTS THAT SUPPORT CANDIDATES AND MAKE THEIR OWN SIGNS.
SO DO THEY GET THE SAME REAL ESTATE? THEY BUY THEM THEMSELVES.
THE WAY IT'S PHRASED CURRENTLY IN HERE IS THAT IT'S FOR ANY CANDIDATE OR PROPOSITION.
[03:25:06]
SIGN, IT WOULD BE ONE OF THE SIGNS.FOR EACH CANDIDATE, IT WOULD BE ONE OF THE...
YEAH, SO NOW YOU GET THREE BECAUSE THAT'S YOUR FOUR.
THAT MIGHT HAVE TO BE SPELLED OUT PRETTY CLEARLY, BUT, YOU KNOW.
AND I WANT TO SAY, IF WE DECIDE ON ONE SIGN LIKE WAS SUGGESTED, I'M FINE WITH THAT TOO.
ONE SIGN IS GREAT FOR JUST THE VISIBILITY, BUT LIKE IN FRONT OF YOUR TENT OR WHERE YOU'RE STANDING OR A LITTLE KID WANTS TO COME UP AND HOLD A SIGN FOR YOU.
I MEAN, I DON'T LIKE JUST ONE SIGN.
I'M FINE WITH ONE 4X4 AND THREE 18X24S. DO YOU WANT TO SPELL IT OUT TO THAT SPECIFICITY? I DON'T KNOW.
THAT'S ON THE CANDIDATE TO FIGURE OUT.
IF THEY ONLY BOUGHT LITTLE SIGNS, THEN THEY GET FOUR.
THEY MAY NOT BE AS BIG SQUARE FOOTAGE TOTAL, BUT THAT'S ON THEM, NOT ON US TO FIGURE OUT FOR THEM.
YEAH, I MEAN, IF THEY DON'T BUY ANY BIG SIGNS, THEN THEY CAN PUT FOUR LITTLE SIGNS OUT.
THEY CAN PUT SEVEN LITTLE SIGNS.
NOPE, THEY CAN'T BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO SAY THEY ONLY GET FOUR SIGNS.
FOUR SIGNS, ONE CAN BE THIS SIZE, AND THREE LITTLE SIGNS, OR FOUR LITTLE SIGNS.
YEAH, WE'D HAVE TO SPECIFY WHAT'S THE LIMITING FACTOR.
IS IT SQUARE FOOTAGE OR NUMBER OF SIGNS? WE'VE GOT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
WELL, OKAY, I THINK THE WAY WE CAN WORK THIS IS YOU CAN HAVE ONE SIGN THAT'S UP TO 4 BY 4 FOOT, AND YOU CAN HAVE THREE SIGNS, AND ADDITIONALLY YOU CAN HAVE THREE SIGNS UP TO 18 BY 24 INCH.
AND THEN IF THE PERSON DOESN'T HAVE ANY BIG SIGNS, I'M GOING TO USE THAT FIRST ONE.
WITH A SMALL SIGN, THEN IT'S HANDLED.
CATHERINE, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION? AM I HEARING...
AM I HEARING THAT Y'ALL WANT TO SPECIFY A CERTAIN NUMBER, A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF LARGE SIGNS AND A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF SMALL SIGNS? I THINK THE SIMPLE WAY TO PUT IT IS YOU CAN HAVE ONE 4X4 AND YOU CAN HAVE THREE 18X24S. ONE 4X4 IS SMALLER.
SO, OKAY, I GUESS THE THING IS FOR ME, YOU CAN HAVE UP TO FOUR SIGNS WITH NO SINGLE SIGN BEING GREATER THAN 4 FOOT BY 4 FOOT BECAUSE IF YOU WANT TO PUT TWO 4X4 SIGNS UP, THAT'S FINE TOO.
YOU DON'T WANT TO 4 BY 4 EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT? THAT WOULD BE 32 SQUARE FEET.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE GO BACK TO THE 25 SQUARE FOOT TOTAL AND LET THEM FIGURE OUT.
BECAUSE NOT ALL THE SIGNS ARE 18 BY 24.
YEAH, I JUST GO WITH THE, YOU'RE ENTITLED TO FOUR SIGNS.
OR ALL FOUR OF THEM CAN BE 18 BY 24.
BUT I DON'T THINK WE EVEN NEED TO SAY THAT.
THEY'VE GOT ROOM TO WIGGLE IN THERE.
THEY CAN WIGGLE, BUT THEY'RE STILL SMALLER THAN THAT ONE 4 BY 4.
LYDIA WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT YOU'RE STILL GOING TO LIMIT THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SHE'S SAYING LET'S GO WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
JUST TO MOVE THIS ALONG, ANYBODY OPPOSED TO GOING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ROUTE? NOPE, I THINK...
I THINK WHAT WE ALSO HAVE TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND IS EVERY PERMUTATION THAT WE'VE CONSIDERED HERE IS AN IMPROVEMENT ON OUR CURRENT SCENARIO.
SO, CATHERINE, WHAT WE'RE SAYING NOW IS FOUR SIGNS WITH A TOTAL OF 25 SQUARE FEET.
WITH NO SINGLE SIGN GREATER THAN 400.
WELL, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO STATE THAT.
WE DO, OR WE MIGHT END UP WITH AN 8 BY 8.
WE CAN LIVE WITH A FIVE BY FIVE.
AND THEN NO HEIGHT GREATER THAN FIVE FEET.
WHAT I HAVE DRAFTED WOULD DELETE D AND E AND F WOULD READ ELECTIONEERING SIGNS LOCATED IN VIOLATION OF SUBSECTION C5
[03:30:02]
OR EXCEEDING FOUR ELECTIONEERING SIGNS OR A TOTAL OF 25 FEET OF SIGNAGE FOR THE SAME CANDIDATE OR ADVANCED POSITION ON A MEASURE.OR A SIGN EXCEEDING FIVE FEET IN HEIGHT MAY BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF BY THE ENTITY IN CONTROL OF THE PUBLIC PROPERTY.
NOW, CAN WE MAKE IT EFFECTIVE TODAY? YES, WE KNOW.
WE'RE LEAVING THE OFFENSE FOR A, B, AND C, THOUGH, CORRECT? THAT'S JUST UNCHANGED.
CAN WE MAKE A MOTION? GO AHEAD.
I MOVE TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PARKER, COLLIN COUNTY, AMENDING CHAPTER 153 OF THE CITY OF PARKER CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO SIGN CONTROL, PROVIDING FOR REPEALER, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WITH THE CHANGES TO D, E, AND F AS PRESENTED BY LEGAL COUNSEL.
OKAY DO YOU HAVE AN EFFECTIVE DATE THE EFFECTIVE DATE IS MAY 6 AS INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION OKAY IS THERE A SECOND ORDINANCE SECOND OKAY CAN I HAVE A MOTION BY COLLEEN HALBERT IN A SECOND BY DARRELL SHORT AND I'LL NEVER GET IT RIGHT IF I TRY TO SAY IT TO AMEND OUR SON ORDINANCE METAL WOULD YOU READ IT FOR ME YEAH I'M ORDINANCE 9 NUMBER 915 AMENDING CHAPTER 153 RELATED TO SIGN CONTROL OKAY IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION MR. PILGRIM SO AND I'M SERIOUS ABOUT THIS WHY WOULD WE NOT GO AHEAD AND IMPLEMENT THIS AS OF 12 OR 1 A.M.
NEXT MONDAY I MEAN NOT TOMORROW NOT THE NEXT DAY GIVE US ALL TIME TO GET OUR SIGNS OUT OF THERE.
BUT WHY NOT GO AHEAD AND IMPLEMENT THIS FOR EVERYBODY ON AN EVEN PLAYING FIELD, MIDNIGHT NEXT WEEK.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO STEP IN AND JUST SAY IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF STAFF HAD A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO PREPARE.
MAYBE WE COULD DO A LITTLE HANDOUT AND EDUCATE THE CANDIDATES WHO ARE COMING UP THE NEXT TIME.
I UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW AND WHY THIS ITEM WAS BROUGHT BEFORE COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION, BUT I DO JUST WANT TO THROW OUT THERE THAT THERE COULD BE SOME CONSTERNATION IF WE HAVE TO GO OUT AND ENFORCE UPON THAT.
TRULY, WE'D ALL COME GET THEM.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN ENFORCE UNTIL AFTER THIS ELECTION.
WE CAN FOR THE PRIMARY, THE RUNOFFS, BUT I DON'T THINK WE CAN.
WHY NOT? I THINK YOU CAN ARGUE THE VALUE OF PUTTING OUT A THOUSAND SIGNS OUT THERE, BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS A PART OF SOMEONE'S STRATEGY TO DO IT.
WHETHER THAT ENTAILED THEM BUYING THE SIGNS OR SIMPLY PUTTING IN THE SWEAT EQUITY OF PUTTING IN THE SIGNS, THAT'S WHAT THEY DID.
I THINK CHANGING THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME IS SOMETHING THAT MOST PEOPLE WOULD CONTEST IF IT DISADVANTAGED THEM IN ANY WAY.
SO I THINK CHANGING A SITUATION, PARTICULARLY AS IT PERTAINS TO CITY PROPERTY IN THE MIDST OF THE ELECTION, IS NOT THE WISEST COURSE OF ACTION FOR US.
AND QUITE HONESTLY, COUNCIL WAS BACKED INTO THIS BY INACTION AT THE LOWER LEVELS.
SO THIS WAS BROUGHT UP ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE LAST ELECTION.
THE FACT THAT IT'S TAKEN AS A YEAR IS NOT ENTIRELY ON THE CITY COUNCIL.
NO, AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE ON ANY FUTURE ACTION.
SO, CATHERINE, WOULD YOU GIVE US OR SUGGEST TO US AN EFFECTIVE DATE? MAY 6TH IS WHAT I HAD IN THE...
THAT WOULD BE AFTER THE CURRENT, THE ORDINANCE IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, REQUIRES EVERYTHING TO BE REMOVED 72 HOURS AFTER THE ELECTION, AND THAT PUTS IT BEYOND THAT.
IS EVERYBODY GOOD WITH THAT? BILLY, YOU'RE GIVING ME A FUNNY LOOK.
I THINK, ARE WE GOOD WITH IT, OR ARE WE ACCEPTING OF IT? OKAY.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY, THEN I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE ON THE MOTION BY MS. HALBERT AND THE SECOND BY DARYL SHARP.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF REVISING AMENDMENT OR AMENDING OUR SIGN ORDINANCE AS DESCRIBED HERE TONIGHT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
[03:35:03]
MOTION CARRIES 5-0.ONE OF THE THINGS, WELL I GUESS I CAN DISCUSS THAT IN FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, BECAUSE I'M GOING TO PUT ON TENSE.
[15. UPDATE(S)]
NOW WE CAN GO QUICKLY, MAYBE, TO ROUTINE ITEMS. UPDATES, WHO'S GOING TO GIVE THE UPDATE ON 2551? I CAN DO IT, MADAM MAYOR.YES, SO 2551 IS A LITTLE BIT BEHIND SCHEDULE.
THEY HAVE FINISHED THE PAVING ALONG THE S CURVE THERE.
I DID JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THEY'VE HAD SOME WEATHER DELAYS.
THEY'VE ALSO HAD SOME CONTRACTOR DELAYS.
TXDOT IS WORKING THROUGH THOSE.
RIGHT NOW, CONTRACTORS ARE GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON THE DRAINAGE ASPECTS OF DILLEHAY, 2551.
DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW IF THEY'RE STILL PLANNING TO START? PAVING NEXT MONTH I DO NOT OKAY OKAY JUST FOR THE RECORD MR. MACHADO IS ON VACATION IS NOT HERE WITH US TONIGHT AND SINCE IT'S HIS FIRST VACATION IN LIKE 10 YEARS IT IS MOST FORGIVABLE OKAY MR. PROGRAM YOU WANT TO TALK TO US ABOUT TCEQ FRIDAY MAY 1ST THAT'S THE DATE OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HEARING IN AUSTIN.
THE ONLY OTHER THING GOING ON IS THE MUD IN SOA AND TOMORROW IS THE DEADLINE FOR PARKER AND FOR THE INDIVIDUAL PROTESTANTS TO SUBMIT THEIR INITIAL DISCLOSURES AND EXPERT WITNESSES.
THEIR INITIAL DISCLOSURES? INITIAL DISCLOSURES AND EXPERT WITNESSES.
LEWIS LANE? DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT OR IS THERE...
NO, I CAN CERTAINLY GET AN UPDATE ON THAT ONE.
SO I HAVE DISCUSSED WITH THE CITY MANAGER IN THE CITY OF LUCAS.
HE GAVE ME AN UPDATE ON THE SURVEYING WORK THAT'S BEING DONE FOR LEWIS LANE.
SO HE DID MENTION THAT AS OF LAST THURSDAY THEY GOT AN UPDATE FOR THEIR SURVEYING.
THEY'VE DONE THE FIELD WORK ON THAT ONE.
THEY'VE HAD A FOLLOW-UP MEETING ON THAT TO TALK ABOUT WHEN THOSE MEETS AND BALANCE ARE GOING TO BE PROVIDED TO THEM.
WE'RE EXPECTING THAT NEXT WEEK.
AND SO AFTER THAT, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PREPARE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS AND GET THIS ON A COUNCIL AGENDA, HOPEFULLY IN THE MONTH OF MAY, AT THE LATEST MAYBE IN JUNE.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT LAURA'S LINE IS PACED.
IT IS, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S A VALID REASON THAT IT IS WONDERFUL.
CARRIE AND HIS CREW HAVE DONE A FANTASTIC JOB MOVING AS FAST AS I HAVE DONE.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK HIM AND CONGRATULATE HIM.
AND THEN IF YOU WOULD TELL EVERYBODY IN PUBLIC WORKS THAT I'D APPRECIATE IT.
THE ONLY REASON IT IS, IS IT IS NOW FINISHED.
THEY'VE GOT THE BUTTONS, THEY'VE GOT THE STRIPES, EVERYTHING IS DONE AS FAR AS I KNOW ON DUBLIN ROAD.
DRONES, WE, WELL, I'LL LET YOU TALK.
I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO BE ADDING THAT ONE UP.
NO, WE DID HAVE A MEETING LAST WEEK WITH STATE REP.
KENNY NOBLE'S OFFICE ABOUT DRONES.
TALKED ABOUT IT AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL.
ASK ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE MAYBE FACING SOME OF OUR OTHER COMMUNITIES. AND SO SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH, ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS ARE GOING TO BE HAD ON THIS ONE.
THIS IS CERTAINLY A NOVEL CONSIDERATION. THESE DELIVERY DRONES ARE STARTING TO HIT OUR AREA VERY HARD. AND SO WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR REPRESENTATIVES AND POTENTIALLY REPRESENTATIVES OF THOSE COMPANIES. OKAY. IS EVERYBODY FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THE ISSUES ARE WITH THE DRONES? OKAY, JUST CHECKING. OKAY, ZIP CODE ADVOCACY. ARE YOU TAKING THAT OR IS MS. HALBERT? SO JUST A QUICK UPDATE. SO THE U.S.
HOUSE BILL HAS PASSED, BUT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE PARKER. WE DID SEND LETTERS OF SUPPORT, OR RATHER MAYOR PUDDLE DID, LETTERS OF SUPPORT TO OUR SENATORS CORNYN AND CRUZ FOR SUPPORT OF A UNIQUE ZIP CODE IN SENATE BILL 1455 AND 2961.
DURING THAT MEETING THAT THEY HAD REGARDING THE GERMS, THEY ALSO ASKED REPRESENTATIVE NOBLES TO INCLUDE A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THIS AS WELL. VERY GOOD.
AND I WILL JUST CLARIFY, SO THE HOUSE BILL THAT PASSED
[03:40:01]
DID INCLUDE THE CITY OF PENNSYLVANIA? YES. SORRY, THERE WERE A LOT OF... THERE WAS A LOT OF EXCHANGES, YES. PLENTY OF GRACE. WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S HAVING SOME MOVEMENT, SO THAT'S ENCOURAGING. OKAY.ANY OTHER UPDATES? YOU OKAY? PATTY HAS INCLUDED THE LINKS TO ALL THE MONTHLY REPORTS,
[16. ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION(S) FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND CITY STAFF FOR THE RECORD (Each valued at between $0 - $1,000 [RES. NO. 2024-801])]
SO THAT'S ON HERE. NEXT WE HAVE DONATIONS. I'D LIKE TO ACCEPT DONATIONS FROM MIRIAM BERGERDI AND MAHANA MASADI, WHO HAVE DONATED ONE DOZEN NOTHING BUT CAKES.BONTINI'S VALUED AT $28 TO CITY STAFF. WE REALLY THANK THEM. THEY REGULARLY GIVE THIS.
TO OUR CITY STAFF. AND I JUST SO APPRECIATE, I KNOW ALL OF US DO, THE FACT THAT THEY REMEMBER OUR STAFF ON REGULAR BASIS. THAT IS JUST WONDERFUL. AND WE THANK THEM.
[17. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ]
WE'VE ALREADY THANKED THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB FOR THEIR WONDERFUL DONATION AND LINDA NELSON FOR HER DONATION. NEXT WE HAVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. I'M GOING TO ADD AN ITEM TO CONSIDER CANOPIES, TENTS, AND LIKE THAT AT THE POLLING PLACE. THANK YOU. CAN WE ACTUALLY JUST EXPAND THAT A LITTLE BIT TO ELECTIONEERING AT THE POLLING LOCATIONS? SO NOT JUST TENTS, BUT LIKE LOOK AT THE WHOLE REALM OF ELECTIONEERING. YEAH. I'D BE HAPPY TO HELP THAT TOO. YEAH.IF ANYONE NEEDS MY HELP. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY, WELL IT CHANGED IN I THINK 23.
BEFORE THAT, THE ONLY TIME YOU EVER SAW A TENT OUTSIDE OR A CANOPY WAS ON ELECTION DAY.
AND THAT YEAR, ALL OF A SUDDEN, EVERYBODY BROUGHT THEIR BACKYARD. AND IT'S GOTTEN TO BE A LITTLE BIT MUCH. AND I THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW IN THE SPACE WE HAVE AND WHEN WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW IT. SO, ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? OKAY, EVERYBODY STILL ALIKE? OKAY, JUST CHECKING. I WAS JUST GOING TO MENTION THAT I THINK IT WAS REFERENCED EARLIER IN THE NIGHT THAT WE DID HAVE A RESIGNATION ON OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. SO I THINK PATTY WAS ALREADY PLANNING ON DOING AN ANNOUNCEMENT FOR ADDITIONAL APPLICANTS FOR OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
BUT IF Y'ALL WANTED TO CONSIDER MAKING ADDITIONAL APPOINTMENTS AS A COUNCIL, Y'ALL MAYBE ADD THAT TO AN UPCOMING MEETING. YEAH, SINCE YOU PUT IT IN MY FACE, I DIDN'T SEE IT. YEAH, PUT IT ON THE WEBSITE IF YOU WOULD.
AND THEN WE'LL GET IT OUT THAT WE ARE ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS FOR ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
[EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 2 of 2)]
THANK YOU, TOM. ANYTHING ELSE? AND THAT BEING THE CASE, WE WILL RECESS THE CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED IN TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071, CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY ON PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR A SETTLEMENT OFFER, OR TWO, CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY ON A MATTER IN WHICH THE DUTY OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY UNDER THE TEXAS RULES OF DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE STATE LAW OF TEXAS CLEARLY CONTRADICTS THIS CHAPTER.ON ANY OF THE ITEMS LISTED ELSEWHERE WITHIN THIS AGENDA AND OR THE SUBJECT MATTER LISTED BELOW.
RESTORE THE GRASSLANDS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT MODE AND EQUATION ZONING. AT THIS TIME WE ARE IN RECESS. IT IS 10.39. I'M
[RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING. (Part 2 of 2)]
RECONVENING THE CITY OF PARKER'S REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 21ST, 2026.WE ARE RECONVENING AT 11 O'CLOCK, 11 O'CLOCK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION. COUNCIL, IS THERE ANY APPROPRIATE DELIBERATION OR ACTION ON ANY OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION SUBJECTS LISTED? NO, MADAM MAYOR. OKAY. NOT HEARING ANYTHING ELSE, WE ARE ADJOURNED. IT IS 1110.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.