Sep 17, 2024 City Council Work Session

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:07]

GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. I SAID GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. TODAY IS TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17TH YEAR 2024. IT IS 301 IN THE AFTERNOON. WE'RE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 222 NORTH TENNESSEE

[Proclamation for Food Safety Education Month]

ITS PROCLAMATION FOR FOOD SAFETY EDUCATION MONTH. IF I COULD HAVE THOSE PRESENT TO RECEIVE THE PROCLAMATION. PROCLAMATION. MEET ME UP FRONT. OH, GOD, I CAN'T STAND YOU.

ALRIGHT HOW ARE YOU, SIR? GOOD. HOW ARE YOU, MISTER MAYOR? WHEREAS FOOD THAT OFFERS FOOD THAT OTHERS HAVE PREPARED SHOULD MEET OR EXCEED ESTABLISHED STANDARDS OF SAFETY. AND WHEREAS IN MCKINNEY, MORE THAN 900 FACILITIES PROVIDE FOOD SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC, INCLUDING RESTAURANTS, GROCERY STORES, MOBILE FOOD VENDORS. AND WHEREAS THE RISK OF FOOD BORNE ILLNESS IS EVER PRESENT IN THE LIVES OF MCKINNEY CITIZENS AND VISITORS AND PREVENTATIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE TAKEN TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH. AND WHEREAS THE CITY OF MCKINNEY HEALTH COMPLIANCE IS WORKING WITH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES AND THE NORTH TEXAS CHAPTER OF THE TEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION TO ENCOURAGE EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN GOOD FOOD HANDLING PRACTICES FOR FOOD SERVICE WORKERS. WHEREAS THE CITY OF MCKINNEY HEALTH COMPLIANCE IS DEDICATED TO TAKING A LEADERSHIP ROLE IN ENSURING THAT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT OPERATORS ARE PROVIDED WITH ADEQUATE TRAINING AND INFORMATION TO MAINTAIN FOOD SAFETY AND LOCAL ESTABLISHMENTS. WHEREAS THE CITY OF MCKINNEY HEALTH COMPLIANCE IS HIGHLY COMMITTED TO FOOD SAFETY AND TAKING A PROACTIVE APPROACH TO SUPPORT THE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING OF CITIZENS OF MCKINNEY AND ITS VISITORS THROUGH THE PREVENTION OF FOODBORNE ILLNESS. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE FULLER, BY THE POWER VESTED IN ME AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MCKINNEY, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2024 AS FOOD SAFETY EDUCATION MONTH IN MCKINNEY, TEXAS. WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL THIS 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOR RECOGNIZING SEPTEMBER AS NATIONAL FOOD SAFETY MONTH, IN OUR BUSINESS, WE HAVE A PHRASE THAT PREVENTION IS NOT MEASURABLE AND THAT'S TRUE. THERE'S MANY STATISTICS OUT THERE FROM THE CDC AND THE FDA OF THE NUMBER OF FOODBORNE ILLNESSES THAT ARE CAUSED EACH YEAR THAT EITHER GO REPORTED OR UNREPORTED. BUT THANKS TO THIS TEAM, UP HERE, WE'RE ABLE TO PREVENT FOOD SAFETY ILLNESS IN NOT ONLY THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF MCKINNEY, BUT VISITORS AS WELL. AND I'D LIKE TO AGAIN THANK THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL FOR RECOGNIZING FOOD SAFETY MONTH AND KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT A GREAT TEAM THAT'S OUT THERE PREVENTING THOSE FOODBORNE ILLNESSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SECOND. THANK YOU. THAT'S FOR YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ORDER OF

[PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS]

[00:05:03]

SO I JUST WANTED TO SHOW MY SUPPORT FOR THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. SETTLE DOWN, I SEE YOU. YEAH. YEAH, I SEE YOU, JOE MOSES. GOOD AFTERNOON. EXCUSE ME. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE, AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND, AGREE WITH MY GENTLEMAN BEFORE ME IN SUPPORT OF THE POSITION. OPTION THREE ON THE GOLF COURSE. GOLF CARTS, ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO ADD. OR AMEND TO IT WOULD BE DAYLIGHT AND NIGHTTIME. THE AMENDMENT JUST SHOWS RIGHT NOW, TYPICALLY DAYLIGHT, WHICH IS GOOD IF YOU'RE EATING LUNCH, BUT KIND OF TRICKY AT NIGHT WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO GET HOME FROM DINNER. I THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE, ADDENDUM THAT WOULD BE ADDED TO IT. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS LIKE THE GENTLEMAN BEFORE ME, A GOOD, SAFE OPTION WITHIN THE CITY OF MCKINNEY. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU SIR. CELESTE COX. GOOD AFTERNOON. MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER. MY NAME IS CELESTE COX. I LIVE AT 13. OH ONE OAK STREET, JUST OUTSIDE OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT IN MCKINNEY, DOWNTOWN. I PURCHASED MY GOLF CART AFTER READING AN EMAIL FROM THE FORMER CITY OF MCKINNEY POLICE CHIEF GREG CONLEY IN AUGUST OF 2021. RESPONDING TO HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS STATING THAT GOLF CARTS ARE ALLOWED IN DOWNTOWN MCKINNEY, AS DID MANY OTHER DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS. THIS MESSAGE WAS ALSO RECONFIRMED BY CHIEF JOE ELLENBURG IN AUGUST OF 2023. THESE MESSAGES HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH THE RESIDENTS OF DOWNTOWN AND THE MEMBERS OF THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I VISIT DOWNTOWN AT LEAST THREE TIMES A WEEK FOR BUSINESS DINING SHOPPING. SINCE MY OTHER VEHICLE IS A LARGE PICKUP TRUCK, THE GOLF CART IS MUCH EASIER TO NAVIGATE AND PARK. MY CART IS REGISTERED, TAGGED, HAS A LICENSE, HAS SEAT BELTS IN THE FRONT AND BACK, HAS A TRIANGLE FOR SLOW MOVING VEHICLE AND EVERYTHING THAT IS REQUIRED. MCKINNEY IS A DESTINATION CITY WITH AIRBNBS, FESTIVALS, AND A HISTORIC DOWNTOWN. GOLF CARTS ARE COMMON IN MANY TOURIST DESTINATIONS LIKE MCKINNEY. SOME GOLF CARTS ARE ELECTRIC, SO THEY USE CLEAN ENERGY, PRODUCE NO EMISSIONS, AND HAVE SMALLER CARBON FOOTPRINT COMPARED TO CONVENTIONAL VEHICLES. THEY ARE SLOW 20 TO 25 MILES MAXIMUM, WHICH CREATES LESS CHANCES FOR ACCIDENTS. GOLF CARTS ARE EASIER TO PARK AND TAKE UP LESS SPACE. THEY FOSTER A UNIQUE SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND CAMARADERIE, ESPECIALLY IN AREAS WHERE LOTS OF RESIDENTS OWN THEM. MANY TIMES AS I'M DRIVING DOWN THE STREET, PEOPLE WAVE AT ME AND SAY HELLO. IT OFFERS OPENNESS AND ACCESSIBILITY, ENCOURAGING FRIENDLY WAVES, CHATS AMONG NEIGHBORS, AND STRENGTHEN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY BONDS.

THE CITY OF MCKINNEY CURRENTLY OPERATES A GOLF CART AT THE SENIOR CENTER TO SHUTTLE MEMBERS TO AND FROM THEIR VEHICLES, AND ALL OF THE CITY EVENTS DOWNTOWN TOWN, LAKE AND THE FIREWORKS USE GOLF CARTS FOR CITY STAFF THAT HELP PLAN AND IMPLEMENT THE EVENTS. THEY ALSO DRIVE THOSE ON

[00:10:03]

AND I ALSO AGREE WITH HIM. AND NIGHTTIME WITH THE FOLLOWING STATE REQUIRED CONTINGENCIES, WHICH I AM COMPLIANT WITH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. SO YEAH, JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, THERE ACTUALLY WILL NOT BE A VOTE TODAY. THIS IS A THIS IS A PRESENTATION ON LEGISLATIVE OPTIONS REGARDING GOLF CARTS. SO THERE WON'T BE A SPECIFIC VOTE. BUT CELESTE, I HAVE SEEN YOU ON YOUR GOLF CART DOWNTOWN. YOU WAVED TO ME WHEN I WAS ON MY BIKE, I PASSED YOU. OF COURSE. I WAS GOING FASTER THAN YOU, BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY REALLY NICE SEEING YOU. WE WILL NOW MOVE.

[DISCUSS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEMS for the City Council Regular Meeting to be held on Tuesday, September 17, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. ]

[00:15:11]

AND I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING SOME OF THOSE AS WELL WITH OUR COMMUNITY LAND TRUST.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT 80 TO 120, NOW THAT THE HFC IS IN PLACE AS A DESIGNATED COMMUNITY LAND TRUST, WE ARE GOING TO START ADDRESSING THOSE ITEMS FORWARD AS WELL. AND THEN WITH MAGNOLIA, WITH MHR, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE SOME OF THOSE 30%. THEY ADDED THE 30%. SO I, I, I, I GUESS IT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE THAT WE SPEND THE NEXT YEAR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST, RATHER THAN LETTING THIS GET IN THE WAY OF OUR TIME AND RESOURCES ON THAT. I WOULD ALSO SAY, IF WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, THAT WE HOLD VERY CLEARLY TO SOME LINE OF EITHER, RESOURCE THAT ALLOWS US TO DO THIS OR, 30% DEALS OR 30% UNITS IN THE DEALS BECAUSE OTHERWISE I FEEL LIKE WE'RE JUST WE'RE NOT GETTING ANYTHING OUT OF IT. WE'RE NOT GETTING ANYTHING THAT WE'RE WE'VE IDENTIFIED AS NEED OUT OF IT. SO, ANYWAY, THAT'S MY THOUGHTS.

I DON'T THINK IT'S THE RIGHT TIME TO DO IT, BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO DO IT, THEN I THINK THAT WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE GETTING SOMETHING OUT OF IT AND NOT JUST DOING IT TO DO IT, BECAUSE I THINK IT OCCUPIES A LOT OF OUR TIME AND ENERGY. BUT I JUST IF I CAN CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. JUSTIN. SO IN THE IN THE MATH THAT GETS US TO 76,

[00:20:01]

THAT NUMBER. SO WE'RE AT BEFORE ALL THESE UNITS COME ONLINE, WE ARE AT 88 UNITS PER OR CITIZENS PER UNIT WITH ALL THE UNITS ONLINE. I GET THAT WE COME TO 76. THAT'S TODAY'S POPULATION WITH FUTURE WITH WITH AN AVERAGE GROWTH RATE APPLIED AND MAGNOLIA COMING ONLINE WILL STILL BE AT 73 TO 70 4 IN 3 YEARS. AND SO 88 WHERE BEFORE ALL THIS COMES ONLINE DOWN TO 76 DOWN TO 69.

AND WE'RE ONLY GOING TO GET BACK UP TO 7374 IN A THREE YEAR TIME PERIOD BASED OFF POPULATION GROWTH, BECAUSE WE'RE GROWING AT AN AVERAGE OF OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS, ABOUT 4000 PEOPLE, A YEAR. SO WE DON'T NEED A WHOLE LOT OF ADDITIONAL UNITS EVERY YEAR, I THOUGHT WE WERE GROWING IT. I THOUGHT OUR, OUR, OUR POPULATION RATE WAS MORE LIKE 3.5%, THE POPULATION ESTIMATES I PULLED FROM OUR DEVELOPMENT ARE 2022. IT WAS 206 TO 200 AND 6.6 TO 2, 11.3 TO 2, 14.8. RIGHT YEAH, BUT YOU AGREE WITH WHAT I STATED THAT THAT THAT THAT IS THE THINKING AGAIN, WE CAN CHALLENGE THOSE THOSE NUMBERS. I DO BELIEVE IT'S MORE THAN 4000 A YEAR, BUT, YOU'RE GETTING THAT FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, I GUESS. I THINK THE CENSUS SHOWS SOMETHING CONSIDERABLY DIFFERENT, BUT ANYWAY, THAT THAT THAT IS THE THINKING THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT A, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A PRODUCT THAT WOULD BE IN THE GROUND, ON THE GROUND 3 TO 5 YEARS FROM NOW WITH A AND TRYING TO KEEP US IN THAT AROUND 70. YES UNITS. I MEAN, 70 RESIDENTS PER UNIT. WE HAVEN'T EVEN SAID THAT 70 IS THE NUMBER WE WANT. WE'VE NEVER EVEN REACHED 70. IS THAT IS THAT THE GOAL? LAST TIME IT WAS MENTIONED AROUND THAT NUMBER, IT'S NEVER BEEN STATED. AN ACTUAL NUMBER. SO IF THE NUMBER SHOULD BE A HIGHER NUMBER, WE'RE ABSOLUTELY YOU KNOW, AGAIN I CALCULATE THAT WE'RE AT 70 TO WE'RE AT 76 TODAY WITH 900 UNITS COMING ONLINE. WE ONLY GET TO 69 WITH THE ADDITIONAL 290 MAGNOLIA UNITS THAT HAVEN'T CLOSED YET. SO AGAIN, TODAY'S POPULATION WITH TOMORROW'S INVENTORY. SO THE 200, THE 900 UNITS ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION LIKE PALLADIUM AND MILLSTREAM AND SPHINX THAT WILL BE ONLINE WITHIN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS OR SO. THE 290 UNITS ARE NOT CONSTRUCTION UNITS, AND SO THEY WILL BE ONLINE ONCE THAT PROJECT CLOSES IN THE NEXT 45 DAYS. SO THAT THAT'S NOT A LONG PROJECTED TIMELINE OUT. IT'S A FAIRLY RELATIVE. YEAH. THAT'S 2024 POPULATION. YEAH. PLEASE MR. MAYOR, COUNCILMAN BELCHER, THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO ADD SOME PERSPECTIVE. I THINK WHAT COUNCILMAN BELLER'S RAISING IS A BIGGER ISSUE. AND THE BIGGER ISSUE HE'S EXPRESSED, HE'S EXPRESSED TO ME PRIVATELY, BUT ALSO TO THE TO THE GROUP IS WE DON'T HAVE A STATED POLICY PER SE. WE WE SOMEWHAT WING IT, AND THAT'S NOT I DON'T MEAN THAT IN A PEJORATIVE WAY. THAT'S HOW A LOT OF COMMUNITIES DO IT. WE KNOW WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

STAFF HAS DONE AN AMAZING EFFORT AT MOVING THE NEEDLE AND GETTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. BY MY MATH, BASED ON POPULATION GROWTH, WE NEED AROUND 60 EXTRA UNITS EVERY YEAR JUST TO KEEP UP WITH THE POPULATION GROWTH. BUT YOU CAN'T JUST BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR 60 UNITS A YEAR. IT DOESN'T WORK THAT LINEARLY, RIGHT? IT'S YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD YOU'RE GOING TO BRING UNITS ONLINE, AND SOME YEARS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE, BECAUSE THAT'S JUST THE WAY THE DEVELOPMENT CYCLE WORKED. AND OTHER YEARS YOU MAY HAVE LESS, BUT YOU WANT TO TRY TO AVERAGE SO THAT WE CAN KEEP UP. BUT IF THE RATIO IN FACT IS 70 TO 1, IS THAT WHAT OUR STATED OBJECTIVE IS? WE HAVEN'T REALLY GOTTEN THAT FROM THE COUNCIL. WE HAVEN'T SET UP A POLICY ABOUT WHAT ARE THE PARAMETERS WE WANT.

WHAT WE ARE DOING, THOUGH, IS BRINGING AN ITEM FOR YOU FOR A COMPETITIVE PROCESS TO ISSUE AN RFQ. SO WE KNOW WE CAN KEEP THAT PIPELINE FULL. IT'S NOT A PERFECT PROCESS. WE DO THINK

[00:25:01]

SO JUST I HAVE A QUESTION. DO YOU MIND IF I'M SORRY. WE ARE LOOKING AT ABOUT A RATIO OF FOR EVERY 70 CITIZENS TO HAVE ONE OF THESE LOW INCOME UNITS WHERE ARE FRISCO AND ALLEN WITH RESPECT TO THAT RATIO, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY IDEA? FRISCO'S AT ABOUT 550. HOW MUCH? 551. FOR EVERY 550 RESIDENTS. OKAY WE ARE SOLVING FRISCO'S PROBLEM RIGHT NOW. I'M GOING TO SPEAK FOR COUNCILMAN KELLER HERE, AND IT'S NOT FAIR, BUT I'M GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY. HE WAS AT A RESTAURANT ON THE SQUARE A FEW WEEKS AGO. MAYBE IT WAS A FEW MONTHS AGO, AND THERE WAS A BARTENDER THERE, AND THIS BARTENDER, AND HE GOT IN A CONVERSATION, AND IT WAS A VERY HAPPY CONVERSATION BECAUSE THIS BARTENDER FOUND A UNIT THAT HE COULD AFFORD. IT'S WHAT'S CALLED A 60% AMI UNIT. WHAT 60% OF AMI MEANS HE MAKES ABOUT 60% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME, GIVEN HIS FAMILY STATUS WITH THE NUMBER OF DEPENDENTS HE HAS. IS IT A PLACE CALLED THE INDEPENDENCE, WHICH IS. IT'S NOT IN MY DISTRICT ANYMORE. IT'S IN YOURS. BUT IT USED TO BE IN MINE. RIGHT OVER THERE BEHIND EL FENIX. THESE PEOPLE, IF WE WANT TO HAVE BARTENDERS, THESE PEOPLE NEED A PLACE TO LIVE AROUND US. AND WE THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO PULL OUR WEIGHT. I THINK IF WE'RE AT 1 TO 70 1 TO 81, TO 90, WE'RE PULLING OUR WEIGHT BETTER THAN FRISCO I. WHERE DO YOU THINK FRISCO'S BARTENDERS LIVE NOW? HERE'S A WHOLE NOTHER MATTER. WALL STREET JOURNAL HAD SOME GREAT ARTICLES ABOUT WHAT IS THE GROWING THE FASTEST GROWING POPULATION OF HOMELESS PEOPLE. IT'S BABY BOOMERS REACHING 70 WHO, UNLIKE THE GREATEST GENERATION AND UNLIKE THE SILENT GENERATION, DID NOT HAVE PENSIONS. THEY HAD 401 K'S AND THEY SPENT THEIR 401 K'S, AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE 70 YEARS OLD AND THEY HAVE $3,000 IN SOCIAL SECURITY. THEY ARE WHAT WE CALL IT 30 OR BELOW OF AMI. THEY MAY BE MARRIED, SPOUSE MAY HAVE SOCIAL SECURITY, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT AMI AREA, MEDIAN INCOME, THEY FALL BELOW 30% OF THAT. NOW WE'VE GOT SOME PROPERTIES WHERE SOME OF THESE SENIORS LIVE RIGHT NOW. BUT WHAT I DON'T WANT TO AGAIN PUT WORDS IN MR. BELLER'S MOUTH, BUT THE REAL PROBLEM, WHEN WE LOOK AT WHERE THE PUCK IS GOING IS THAT, IN MY MIND NOW, THE OTHER THING MR. BELLER SAID IS HE TALKED ABOUT THE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST. MANY OF US IN HERE ARE HOMEOWNERS, AND WEHOME COMPRISET ARE TAXABLE THE STRUCTURE AND THE LAND. RIGHT. IMAGINE A SCENARIO. AND THIS IS WHAT A COMMUNITY LAND TRUST DOES WHERE THE CITY OWNS THE LAND. BUT YOU OWN THE STRUCTURE THAT TAKES AWAY ABOUT $100,000 OF TAXABLE VALUE IN YOUR HOME THAT YOU'RE NOT PAYING TAX ON ANYMORE. NOW,

[00:30:06]

LET'S CALL IT 100%. MAYBE IT'S 80% 60% OF AMI. BUT YOU KNOW, WHAT THAT DOES IS THAT GIVES AN ANSWER FOR A YOUNG FAMILY TO BE ABLE TO STAY IN MCKINNEY AND OWN A HOME IN MCKINNEY, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT THESE STRUCTURES THAT WE'RE CALLING THESE THESE THESE INCOME PROJECTS, THEY DON'T PAY CITY TAXES WHEN THEY GET BUILT. THEY DON'T PAY SALES TAXES ON THE MATERIALS. BY AND LARGE, THAT HURTS THE STATE HURTS US. BUT WHAT IT DOES IS IT GIVES US THESE UNITS. WHAT I WILL SAY AND MAYBE COUNCILMAN BELLER ISN'T SAYING THIS, BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE 80% OF AMI UNITS, WE GOT A BUNCH. I'M NOT SURE WE NEED ANY MORE. MAYBE FRISCO DOES. WHY AREN'T THEY DOING IT? SO WE HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES IN MY MIND. IN CRYSTAL. I'M SORRY YOU'RE STANDING HERE. THERE'S PROBABLY NO QUESTION THIS DUSTY LAW BOOK. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? WHAT? I'M WONDERING IS, HOW MUCH EFFORT DO WE WANT TO GO INTO SOLVING FRISCO'S PROBLEM VERSUS TRYING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE HERE IN MCKINNEY? THESE ARE NOT EASY QUESTIONS, MAN. BUT I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN BELLER THAT PERHAPS WE NEED TO TAP THE BRAKES ON THIS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS IT THAT OUR LIMITED RESOURCES WANT TO DO? CERTAINLY WITH ME, I'D LOVE TO SEE ABOUT GETTING SOME 30% AMI UNITS SO WE DON'T HAVE A BUNCH OF HOMELESS BABY BOOMERS WALKING AROUND HERE. I'D ALSO LIKE TO SEE THE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST ACTUALLY GET OFF THE GROUND. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND TO THAT POINT, I WOULD SAY THAT, THE REASON WHY WE ARE ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE, DECIDED TO GO DOWN THIS VENTURE OF EXPLORING THESE DEALS IS BECAUSE IT DOES JUST THAT THERE'S IT'S ONE AVENUE AND ABILITY FOR US TO FUND THE LAND, THE OUR LAND TRUST, WHICH ALLOWS US TO DO THE OTHER, AND I WOULD ALSO SAY, ALTHOUGH I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT FRISCO ISN'T DOING BUT THE LAST THING I WOULD EVER WANT TO DO IS GOVERNANCE IN OUR COMMUNITY BASED ON WHAT ANOTHER COMMUNITY IS OR ISN'T DOING. WE SHOULD DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR WHAT'S NEEDED IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND AS WAS JUST STATED, THERE IS A GUY THAT ANECDOTALLY THAT WAS ELATED THAT HE WAS ABLE TO FIND A PLACE HERE IN THIS CITY. AND THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THE SUCCESS STORY OF EVERYONE LOOKING FOR A PLACE THEY CAN AFFORD IN THE CITY. SO AS MUCH AS I LAMENT THAT FRISCO DOESN'T CARE, THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF REASONS. THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT SITUATION WHERE IT'S JUST NOT IMPORTANT TO THAT COMMUNITY, I WOULD NEVER WANT TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THEIR LACKING, HERE, THOUGH I, I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT THAT I WOULD CERTAINLY LOVE IF WE WERE ABLE TO DICTATE THAT IT WAS MCKINNEY RESIDENTS OR MCKINNEY EMPLOYED PEOPLE THAT COULD LIVE IN THE UNITS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS STILL NOT IN OUR PURVIEW TO DO LEGALLY, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE DO HAVE THOSE BARTENDERS THAT WE JUST THAT WAS JUST DISCUSSED. AND WE DO HAVE A LAND TRUST COMPANY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FUND. SO FOR ME, I DON'T SEE THE HARM AND DANGER IN PUTTING OUT AN RFQ FOR A TO HAVE AS CITY MANAGER REFERRED TO AS A PIPELINE, THAT IS THERE IF WE SO MAKE THE DECISION THAT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO AS WE LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, WHAT TRENDS OVER THE NEXT YEAR OR 2 OR 3? MR. MR. MAYOR, JUST TO REPLY TO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID, MR. GRIMES SAID THAT TO KEEP PACE, WE NEEDED TO ADD ABOUT 60 UNITS PER YEAR. THE 1152 UNITS THAT WE'VE ADDED IN THE LAST 24 MONTHS IS A PACE THAT IS EQUALS WHAT WE NEEDED OVER THE LAST 19 YEARS. AND SO IT'S JUST IT IS A VERY, VERY FAST PACE THAT WE'RE ADDING. AND I DON'T DISAGREE THAT TO MAINTAIN WHATEVER LEVEL THAT WE CAN'T TURN OFF AND TURN ON THE PIPELINE. BUT WE'VE WE'VE HAD THE PIPELINE OPEN FOR BUT TO BE FAIR, BUT WE, WE WENT FROM 90 OR 100 OR 110 AND I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS IN FRONT OF ME. BUT OVER THE LAST 19 YEARS, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'VE ADDED THOSE, WE'VE HAD TO RIGHT. THE SHIP, IF YOU WILL. I DON'T DISAGREE, AND WE'VE HAD A HIGHER POPULATION GROWTH TO DEAL WITH THAN THE ROUGHLY 4500 THAT WE'VE AVERAGED OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR US ALL TO LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS AND UNDERSTAND THEM, THAT WE ARE AT THE LOWEST POINT WE'VE EVER BEEN. WE, EVEN WITH MODEST OR AVERAGE GROWTH OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS, WE WILL STILL BE LOWER THAN ANY POINT WE'VE EVER BEEN, THAN THAN WE THAN RATHER THAN WHEN WE ARE. RIGHT? RIGHT. WHEN MAGNOLIA CLOSES AND SO THE

[00:35:04]

NOW SET THAT ASIDE BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS PRODUCT. WE STILL HAVE WAITLIST. WE STILL HAVE WAITLISTS. I'D LIKE TO MENTION THAT WE DID FUND THE INDEPENDENCE. THAT'S OUR OUR FIRST I KNOW WE DID. SO THANK YOU FOR I KNOW WE DIDN'T. AND I DON'T WANT ANY OF MY REMARKS TO MAKE ME YOU THINK YOU'RE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB. YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB. I'D LIKE TO TALK TO FRISCO'S PEOPLE, THOUGH. YEAH. NO DOUBT, BUT YOU SAY WE HAVE WAIT LISTS. YES. YOU ANTICIPATE THOSE WAIT LISTS TO GROW OVER THE NEXT 3 TO 5 YEARS? THE PALLADIUM'S ALREADY PRE-LEASING, AND THEY HAVE A WAITLIST. SO, YES, I ANTICIPATE IT WILL CONTINUE TO GROW. WE MAY BE

[00:40:06]

THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION THAT BOY, THE COUNCIL'S REALLY SUPPORTIVE OF GETTING TO A LOWER NUMBER TO ADDRESS WHAT I THINK COUNCILMAN BELLER IS TRYING TO LOOK FOR IN THIS. AGAIN, IF THEY DON'T MEET THAT CRITERIA AND IT GOES TO THE MFCC AND THE MFCC SAYS, LISTEN, WE DON'T THE ONLY PROPOSALS WE GOT ARE 80% DEALS AND WE'RE NOT INTERESTED ANYMORE. 80%. THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO ANY OF THEM. YOU DON'T HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD. THIS IS JUST A RESOLUTION TO BASICALLY GIVE A THUMBS UP ON THE RFQ THAT'S GOING TO HIT THE STREET.

EXACTLY. THAT WOULD BE DONE AT THE COUNCIL MEETING WHEN YOU LATER ON, I KEEP AN EYE ON THE CLOCK FOR THE OTHER ITEMS WE HAVE YET HERE AT WORK SESSION. YOU CAN CALL THIS ITEM OFF SEPARATELY AND THEN YOU CAN DISCUSS THAT. AND YEAH, DO THAT IN THE RESOLUTION. AND CAN I JUST SAY TWO THINGS, MR. MAYOR? CORRECT. I MADE THESE EXACT SAME COMMENTS IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR WHEN THIS WAS PRESENTED. AND THERE WAS LIKE SOME AGREEMENT THAT, YES, WE SHOULD LOOK AT THAT METRICS. WE SHOULD EVALUATE THAT WHEN MAKING THESE DETERMINATIONS. WE DIDN'T TAKE A VOTE ON IT. WE DIDN'T. WE JUST KIND OF SAID, YES, THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. WE TALKED ABOUT THREE OTHER INITIATIVES. WE SAID, YES, THERE'S GOOD IDEAS THERE. SO THIS ISN'T A NEW THING THAT THAT I AND BUT WITH THE CONSENSUS THE COUNCIL WAS IN EACH OF THOSE MEETINGS WAS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN RFQ PROCESS. I I WATCHED THAT MEETING YESTERDAY. I WOULD SAY THAT I SAID THIS AND EVERYBODY AGREED WITH LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. I SAID THE EXACT SAME THING. LET'S LOOK AT A METRIC. AND EVERYBODY SAID SOUNDS GOOD. AND WE STILL HAVEN'T LOOKED AT A METRIC. SO I MEAN, WE CAN THERE'S SOME WE DIDN'T TAKE A VOTE. WE DIDN'T GET INTO LANGUAGE. BUT I SAID THE SAME THING A YEAR AGO. AND WE SEEM TO, TO PROVIDE THE FEEDBACK THAT WE WANTED TO LOOK AT A METRIC. THE OTHER THING I WILL SAY, AND I MEAN PATRICK SAID, IT MADE ME KIND OF FEEL LIKE I'M DOING SOMETHING I'M NOT. THIS ISN'T ABOUT CRYSTAL, FOR SURE. THIS IS WE'VE DONE TOO GOOD OF A JOB IN THIS, AND WE DO NEED TO FIND OTHER WAYS TO DO IT. I'VE KNOWN CRYSTAL FOR YEARS IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND SHE DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB. AND I'M EXCITED ABOUT WHAT MARGARET IS GOING TO BRING. BUT THIS THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH, AND SO JUST BECAUSE PATRICK SAID THAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I WASN'T COMING ACROSS LIKE THIS, THIS ISN'T AN INDICTMENT ON, ANY, ANY STAFF OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THIS IS THERE IS AN EASY PATHWAY FORWARD AND THERE ARE DIFFICULT ONES. AND WE NEED TO WORK ON THE DIFFICULT ONES AND STOP CHASING THE EASY ONES. AND WE DO THAT AS A COUNCIL JUST AS MUCH AS ANYTHING. THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS, I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL PITFALLS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF US FOR CONTINUING TO GO DOWN THIS ROUTE IS THAT WE DO FILL OUR APPETITE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITH THIS PRODUCT, AND WE, WE LOSE THE ABILITY TO ADDRESS THE ONES THAT ARE OUT THERE THAT WE NEED. AND SO, I JUST I THINK THAT IT'S MORE THAN JUST THE DEAL. IT IS. WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB WITH THIS. WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT OTHER WAYS TO, TO SOLVE HOUSING ISSUES THAT WE HAVE. SO CRYSTAL. NOT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE. DID YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAD CONSENSUS FROM COUNCIL TO BRING THIS RFQ, OR DID YOU NOT? I'LL LET YOU OFF THE HOOK.

[00:45:02]

[Discuss City Fire Service in the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)]

OF COURSE 380 CUSTER AREA. THERE'S 380 AND NEW HOPE. THERE'S AN AREA JUST BELOW THE TRINITY FALLS SUBDIVISION AS WELL. THAT'S ANOTHER HOTSPOT THAT WE HAVE. BUT OF THAT, IN 2023, WE HAD 631 RESPONSES OUT INTO THAT AREA. AND IN THIS THIS YEAR, WE'RE ON PACE TO RUN ROUGHLY THE SAME, MAYBE JUST A LITTLE BIT UNDER THAT RIGHT NOW. AND THAT'S ABOUT 3% OF THE CALLS THAT WE RUN TOTAL FOR THE MCKINNEY FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO TO GIVE YOU SOME HISTORY ON THAT, COLLIN COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE A FIRE DEPARTMENT. I THINK MANY OF YOU KNOW THAT ALREADY, AREAS THAT THE MCKINNEY FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS RESPONDED TO OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS FOR A NUMBER OF DECADES, AS YOU KNOW, MCKINNEY FIRE DEPARTMENT BECAME A COMBINATION DEPARTMENT IN 1980. AND FULLY PAID STAFF IN 1993. WE'VE BEEN PROVIDING EMS TRANSPORTS SINCE 1969. SO YOU CAN IMAGINE, AS THE CITY HAS GROWN AND THE ENTIRE AREA HAS GROWN, PLACES LIKE MELISSA AND PRINCETON THAT WERE ONCE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENTS HAVE NOW TRANSITIONED TO COMBINATION DEPARTMENTS, FULLY, PAID DEPARTMENTS OVER THAT TIME PERIOD. BUT THERE WAS YEARS TALKING TO RETIRED FIREFIGHTERS THAT MCKINNEY FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS RESPONDING TO THESE AREAS ALL THE WAY PAST, AND THAT WAS THE ONLY FIRE SERVICE THAT WAS AVAILABLE, ESPECIALLY DURING THE DAYTIME WHEN PEOPLE WERE WORKING. SO WE'VE HAD A HISTORY OF RESPONDING OUTSIDE INTO OUR ETJ FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. TIMES HAVE CHANGED. SO TO EXPLAIN THE AGREEMENT THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW, THIS AGREEMENT WAS SIGNED IN OCTOBER OF 2013. IT IS STRUCTURED TO COMPENSATE US FOR PROVIDING FIRE PROTECTION, FIRE RELATED SERVICES, AND THAT'S THE EXACT LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THERE FOR A FIRE DISTRICT. SO THIS IS THE MAP THAT WE HAVE. IT'S NOT THE PERFECT COLOR. IT'S YOU CAN SEE THE SHADED AREAS, BUT ESSENTIALLY WE RESPOND IN A FIRE DISTRICT THAT IS OUR ETJ OUTSIDE OF OUR CITY LIMITS. IT IS FUNDED $950,000. IT IS BASED ON SQUARE MILES AND POPULATION. SO 200,000 OF THAT MONEY IS BASED ON THE SQUARE MILES WE RESPOND TO 35MIS OUTSIDE OF OUR CITY. AND THEN THE POPULATION THAT'S CUT UP WITH THE $750,000. AND ACCORDING TO THE TO THE COUNTY, THERE'S A LITTLE OVER 5 OR 4000 PEOPLE THAT RESIDE IN THAT AREA. MUDS ARE NOT PART OF THE DISTRICT AGREEMENT. SO MUD ONE, MUD TWO DOESN'T DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR ANYTHING IN THIS. THEY ACTUALLY REMOVED THAT ON THE COUNTY SIDE. AND THEN THE COUNTY HAS A CONTRACT WITH AMR AND THEY PROVIDE FIVE AMBULANCES. THERE'S ONE IN MELISSA. THERE'S TWO IN PRINCETON, THERE'S ONE IN FARMERSVILLE, AND THEN ONE THAT KIND OF FLOATS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE COUNTY IN DIFFERENT AREAS. AND THEN THE COUNTY ALSO PROVIDES DISPATCH TO A LOT OF THOSE FIRE DEPARTMENTS, JUST MCKINNEY AND WILEY HAVE THEIR OWN FIRE DISPATCH. SO THERE'S THE BREAKDOWN OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN

[00:50:07]

HE'S BEEN GREAT, HE SAID. OBVIOUSLY, IF WE NEED HELP, MOST OF THE TIME, WE WOULD ONLY REQUEST RESOURCES FROM THEM ON BRUSH FIRES. THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT THERE IS SOME OVERLAP IN DIFFERENT AREAS. AND THEN IN JULY, THE COUNTY FIRE MARSHAL HAD REQUESTED PRINCETON AND MCKINNEY TO ABSORB WHAT WOULD BE THE MELISSA FIRE DISTRICT. AND OF COURSE, WE DENIED THAT. AND THEN WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS AT THE COLLIN COUNTY FIRE ASSOCIATION MEETING, AND THE LAST ONE BEING IN AUGUST. AND IN THOSE MEETINGS, WE DISCUSSED SOME OF THE FRUSTRATIONS THAT WE HAVE AS FIRE CHIEFS. YOU CAN IMAGINE THE YOU KNOW, JUST AS FIREFIGHTERS, YOU WANT TO JUST RESPOND TO THE CALLS. YOU'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE POLITICS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY'S HOUSE IS ON FIRE. WE'RE GOING SOMEBODY IS CHOKING, CARDIAC ARREST. WE'RE GOING IT'S A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED THAN JUST THAT WHEN YOU HAVE MULTIPLE PARTIES INVOLVED. SO WHAT WE DISCUSSED WITH THE COLLIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEFS WAS REDOING THIS AGREEMENT AT SOME POINT. THE AGREEMENT IS JUST IT'S 2013. IT'S WAY TOO OLD. INFLATION HAS GONE UP LIKE 35% SINCE THAT TIME. SO THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IS NOT NOT CORRECT. AND THEN IT'S NOT COMPENSATING FOR EMS CALLS, WHICH IS A BIG PART OF WHAT WE PROVIDE AS FAR AS A SERVICE. AND IT'S NOT BASED ON CALL VOLUME. SO CHIEF, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? I'M SORRY I'M HUNG UP ON. SO THEY PAID US 71,586. THAT'S FOR 631 CALLS. YES, SIR. WHICH WOULD BE 112 ISH BUCKS, A 112 BUCKS A CALL. RIGHT? THAT'S SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REIMBURSED, $112 FOR A SERVICE CALL OUT INTO THE ETJ. YES, SIR. AND I'LL GET YOU A LITTLE MORE OF THAT IN JUST A LITTLE BIT. BUT YOU CAN EVEN SEE ON THIS CHART RIGHT HERE, BASED ON SQUARE MILES OF POPULATION, US WITH GETTING 71,000, YOU KNOW, BLUE RIDGE IS 82,000. I'M PRETTY SURE THAT BLUE RIDGE IS NOT RESPONDING TO 631 CALLS. SO JUST THE WAY IT'S BROKEN DOWN, THERE'S SOME SOME ISSUES WITH THAT. SO OBVIOUSLY OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY IS TO THE MCKINNEY RESIDENTS. THEY ARE PAYING FOR OUR EQUIPMENT, OUR FIREFIGHTERS, OUR FIRE STATIONS. THAT IS THE RESPONSE. AND THAT HAS TO BE OUR PRIORITY IS THE CITIZENS OF MCKINNEY. AND AGAIN, THE AGREEMENT DOES NOT SPECIFY EMS CALLS. IT'S JUST BASICALLY SAYING FIRE AND MOTOR VEHICLE RESPONSES. HOWEVER WE PROVIDE THOSE EMS RESPONSES, ALL OF THOSE AMBULANCES I DESCRIBED TO YOU ARE NEVER GOING TO HIT THAT 380 CORRIDOR. THEY'RE JUST NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND. SO YOU CAN'T EVEN MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THE COUNTY HAS AN EMS AMBULANCE READY TO PROVIDE SERVICE DOWN THERE. OBVIOUSLY, AS MORE POPULATION MOVES INTO THOSE AREAS, CALL VOLUME IS GOING TO INCREASE. AND AGAIN, THE CURRENT AGREEMENT IS DOES NOT BASE IT ON CALL VOLUME. SO LIKE YOU HAD MENTIONED BEFORE, THERE'S KIND OF THE BREAKDOWN OF WHERE WE SIT. AGAIN, IF YOU BASE IT ALL ON THE 631 CALLS, IT'S $120 A CALL IF YOU BASICALLY BREAK IT DOWN THE WAY THE COUNTY WOULD LIKE TO EXPLAIN IT IS THAT IT'S 127 CALLS THAT WERE RESPONDED TO. THAT'S FIRES AND MBAS. THAT'S 597 CALLS. BUT THEN AGAIN, WHO RESPONDS TO THE EMS CALLS? WE'RE STILL RESPONDING TO THOSE EMS CALLS, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED INTO THE AGREEMENT, NOT BASED ON SQUARE MILES AND POPULATION. SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO PRESENT TO YOU IS REIMBURSEMENT EXAMPLES THAT ARE ALREADY EXISTING THAT ARE OUT THERE. I REACHED OUT TO YOUR CHIEF GLOVER AND FRISCO. THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT IN DENTON COUNTY, THERE'S SOME THINGS I REALLY LIKE ABOUT IT. SO HE SHARED THIS WITH ME. BASICALLY, THEY'RE GOING OFF OF A $10,000 BASE AND THEN $700 PER FIRE CALL. THEY HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF NUMBER OF CALLS THEY HAVE AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT TO, TO THE COUNTY AS WELL. ON OUR SIDE, AMBULANCES, THEY HAVE A BASE OF 34,000, AND THEN IT'S 254 PER CALL. AND WE ARE STILL ABLE TO BUILD FOR THE EMS TRANSPORTS. IF WE WERE TO TRANSPORT SOMEONE TO A LOCAL HOSPITAL, WE ALREADY HAVE THAT BILLING BUILT INTO OUR FEE STRUCTURE. THE OTHER MODEL THAT WE HAVE IS THE FEMA RATES. SO BASICALLY LIKE WHEN WE GO INTO DEPLOYMENT OUT TO CALIFORNIA OR SOMEWHERE ELSE IN TEXAS, THERE'S A SPECIFIC RATE THAT FEMA PROVIDES FOR THAT APPARATUS, DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF APPARATUS THAT IT IS. IT'S A BRUSH TRUCK, IT'S AN ENGINE. IT'S AN AMBULANCE. AND THAT RATE INCREASES EVERY YEAR. WE COULD GO OFF OF THAT RATE BASED ON A MINIMUM OF ONE HOUR. SO FOR EXAMPLE, AN MVA THAT SENDS TWO ENGINES AND A MED UNIT AT $765 PER HOUR, STRUCTURE FIRE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST A MINIMUM OF

[00:55:03]

IT'S JUST PEPPERED UP ON THE NORTH SIDE WHERE WE ACTUALLY RESPOND IN THE FIRST PLACE. THE MAJORITY OF OUR CALLS AGAIN, 380 CUSTER. 380 NEW HOPE AND JUST BELOW TRINITY FALLS ARE THE MAJORITY OF OUR AREAS. CHIEF, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE ESD, HOW DOES THAT HAVE YOU SEEN THAT PLAY OUT? AND DOES IT MERIT PURSUIT BY WHETHER IT'S I DON'T KNOW THAT THE COUNTY CAN INITIATE THAT, BUT RESIDENTS CAN IN THE TJ HOW DOES THAT END UP IMPACTING SOMETHING LIKE THIS? YES, SIR. MAYOR COUNCIL THE ESD IS A IS STILL AN OPTION. IT'S ALWAYS AN OPTION. MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT WAS VOTED ON SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND IT DID NOT PASS. I THINK AT THIS POINT AND TALKING TO SOME OF MY PEERS WHO HAVE BEEN IN THIS AREA FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, DO NOT FEEL THERE'S MOMENTUM TO GO AHEAD AND GET THAT TO PASS, THERE WOULD BE SOME CHALLENGES, EVEN IF YOU SAY IT DID, IT DID GET ON THE BALLOT. LET'S JUST SAY IF IT GOT ON IN NOVEMBER, THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE. BUT IT DID GET ON THERE. THAT SOON. YOU'RE STILL YEARS AWAY FROM ACTUALLY FORMING AN ACTUAL FIRE DEPARTMENT AND SERVICE. YEAH AND FUNDING IT. IT'S AN EMERGENCY SERVICE DISTRICT FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. I KNOW THAT IT WAS ON THE BALLOT ONCE BEFORE. I HEAR RUMBLINGS THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IT AGAIN.

BUT I JUST WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU THAT. YEAH, EVEN IF THAT WAS SUCCESSFUL, IT'S YEARS FROM FROM BEING ANY ANY HAVING ANY EFFECT. YES, SIR. IMPACT. CHIEF. I'LL TELL YOU, MY PREFERENCE IS YOU GO AHEAD AND GIVE THE ONE YEAR NOTICE IF THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF OUR AGREEMEN.

AND THAT GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY TO RENEGOTIATE SOMETHING THAT'S MORE FAVORABLE. IF NOT, YOU HAVEN'T WASTED ANY TIME IN GIVING YOUR NOTICE. THANK YOU. SIR MR. MAYOR. YEAH. SHE'S CORRECT ABOUT THE TIMING. IF IT WERE FORMED, THOUGH, THE ESD COULD FUND CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY. YEAH IN THE INTERIM, WHILE THEY'RE BUILDING THEIR DEPARTMENTS. RIGHT? YEAH. YEAH, BUT BUT EVEN THAT, I THINK WHAT IS IT, A I GUESS THEY SET THE RATE, BUT IT'D BE SOME 2.5%, THERE'S A MINIMUM. MINIMUM. EXCUSE ME, A MAXIMUM TAX. MAXIMUM TAX THEY CAN IMPOSE. I

[01:00:01]

HOW ARE THEY GOING TO GET TO SOME OF THOSE AREAS AGAIN? THE 380 AND CUSTER AREA, WHERE WE'VE STILL GOT AREAS, THAT'S STILL THE COUNTY THAT WE'RE RESPONDING TO. SO I'M GOING TO TAKE A WILD GUESS THAT THERE IS CONSENSUS BY COUNCIL THAT WE DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE. GOING IN THE HOLE AT $120 PER CALL INTO THE COUNTY. AND THAT WE NEED TO. YEAH. AND THIS IS US GIVING A ONE YEAR NOTICE. RIGHT. SO IT GIVES THE COUNTY A CHANCE TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM. THIS IS A CONTINUATION TO BE THE LAST ITEM. IS THE PROBLEM FALLING ON THE MCKINNEY TAXPAYER TO BENEFIT THE NON MCKINNEY TAXPAYER. SO YEAH I HAVE EVERY APPETITE TO DISCONTINUE THIS AGREEMENT AND START NEGOTIATING A NEW ONE. AND I GUESS WE CAN HAVE MORE. I'LL HAVE I'LL HAVE MORE DISCUSSION WITH COUNTY ON, ON AND SEE IF THERE'S, IF THERE'S APPETITE TO TRY TO PURSUE THAT AGAIN. I THINK I, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THE APPETITE CHANGES BY RESIDENTS WHEN THERE'S NO LONGER GOING TO BE A SERVICE. AND THE COST TO. I'D ALSO IMAGINE THAT THE COST TO A ETJ RESIDENT FOR THAT ADDITIONAL TAX IS PROBABLY LESS THAN WHAT THEIR INSURANCE PREMIUM WILL GO UP. IF ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY HAVE NO FIRE SERVICE. SO I IMAGINE THAT ALTHOUGH IT FAILED ONCE BEFORE, IT FAILED ONCE BEFORE WHEN THERE WAS SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT WAS PROVIDING SERVICE AT 112. AT THAT TIME, PER CALL, WE ARE VERY OPEN TO ANNEXING SUCH RESIDENTS INTO THE CITY TO ENJOY CITY SERVICES AT THE RATE THEY HAVE BEEN NOW. SO DO YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED FROM US? YES SIR. ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT ARE WE SAYING? WE'RE GIVING A YEAR TO RENEGOTIATE OR JUST LEAVE OR JUST LEAVE, PERIOD. WE CAN LEAVE, BUT WE'RE GIVING A YEAR NOTICE UNDER THE CURRENT AGREEMENT. THAT'S IT FOR US. AND I MEAN, THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THE RENEGOTIATION IS, IS WE PAY COUNTY TAXES TOO. SO IF WE INCREASE OUR RATE, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY TAXING OURSELVES. I WOULD RATHER JUST SAY WE'RE LEAVING AND GIVE THOSE PEOPLE THE OPTION. BUT THAT'S AN OPTION, RIGHT? YEAH. THE COUNTY'S GOT TO COME UP. THE COUNTY'S GOT TO COME UP WITH WITH ALTERNATIVES AND SERVICES FOR COUNTY RESIDENTS THAT AREN'T IN CITIES. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A BIG CONVERSATION. BUT CITIES HAVE BEEN UNDER FIRE FOR A LONG TIME NOW. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE FIDUCIARY FOR TAXPAYERS, THE CITY OF MCKINNEY. AND THAT'S WHO I WANT TO GUARD. YEAH. AND IT'S A DIFFERENT THING WHEN THAT EXPENSE IS AMORTIZED OVER 1,000,001 RESIDENTS VERSUS 200,000. SO THIS PROBLEM IS NOT GOING AWAY. I MEAN, IT'S WITH ALL THE STUFF THAT'S GOING ON IN THE COUNTY AND NOT BEING ABLE FOR US TO ANNEX THESE COMMUNITIES IN, IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE BECAUSE THE MUD DISTRICTS AND EVERYTHING ARE GROWING EVERYWHERE. BUT THE MUD DISTRICTS DO PAY A SEPARATELY, RIGHT? I MEAN, LIKE TRINITY FALLS. YOU'RE SAYING THEY'RE NOT IN HERE, RIGHT? THEY HAVE A SEPARATE AGREEMENT WITH US AND THEY'RE PAYING THEIR WAY. YES.

RIGHT. THEY PAY A FAIR SHARE, RIGHT? NO PROBLEM WITH THEM. BUT A LOT OF THEM DON'T. A LOT OF THEM DON'T. ALL RIGHT. YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED FROM US, PAUL. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

[Presentation on Legislative Options Regarding Golf Cart Operation]

[01:05:01]

[01:10:01]

PROBABLY ONE OF THE BIGGEST COMPLAINTS WE GET IS THE GOLF CART CIRCUMVENTING, CARPOOL LINES AT THE SCHOOLS DURING PICKUP OR DROP OFF. SO, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, GOLF CARTS IS A BIG ISSUE IN THE CITY OF MCKINNEY. IT'S THE MOTOR VEHICLE INSURANCE REQUIRED TO COVER THE GOLF CART ITSELF. IT SAYS LIABILITY INSURANCE. I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE FOR, BECAUSE IT'S NOT RATED ON A PUBLIC ROADWAY AND IS, SUSCEPTIBLE TO GETTING INTO WRECKS. NEXT QUESTION IS, WILL INSURANCE COMPANIES COVER A GOLF CART BEING OPERATED ON A PUBLIC STREET? YEAH. CHIEF, BASED ON THE DEFINITION OF MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY, JUST AN HOA SUFFICES TO MEET THE STATE MINIMUMS. SO REALLY, THE ONLY THERE'S ONLY A FEW PLACES IN MCKINNEY WHERE THIS ISN'T ALLOWED TODAY. AND THAT'S MAINLY OLD MCKINNEY, WHERE WE DON'T HAVE HOA'S. CORRECT. SO, YES, DOES DOES THE INTENDED USE OF A GOLF CART CHANGE THE STATE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT GOLF CART? SO YOU MENTIONED SOMEONE DRIVING IT TO A PICKUP LINE AT SCHOOL. THEY AREN'T COMPLYING WITH THAT FIRST TRANSPORTATION CODE OF GOING TO AND FROM A GOLF COURSE WITHIN A FIVE MILE RADIUS. DO THEY HAVE TO HAVE INSURANCE PLATE. SO THE TO AND FROM A GOLF COURSE IS ONLY IN THE I'M SORRY TO AND FROM A GOLF COURSE ONLY APPLIES TO OUTSIDE OF A MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY INSIDE OF MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY GOLF COURSE, THE EXISTENCE OF A GOLF COURSE IS IRRELEVANT, AND IT ONLY STATES ITS OWN ROADWAYS OF 35MPH OR LESS. OKAY, I'M GONNA ASK A SECOND QUESTION. I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO THIS ONE UP HERE. YOU SAY LIMIT OF 35 MILES AN HOUR OR LESS DURING THE DAYTIME.

IS THERE ALL OF ITS DAYTIME EXCEPT THEY MADE AN EXCEPTION FOR MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES. IF YOU CHANGE IT TO ALLOW IT CITYWIDE, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO HAVE DAYTIME. OKAY. YEAH. SO IF YOU IF OPTION UNDER OPTION THREE IT WOULD NOT REQUIRE THE DAYTIME REQUIREMENT OKAY. WE LEAVE IT ALONE. IT DOES RIGHT OVER THERE AND OPTION. AND SO IF WE TAKE OPTION THREE THEY CAN OPERATE DAY OR NIGHT. AND MY QUESTION GOING BACK TO THE OTHER ONE IS DOES THAT GOLF CART IN A MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY. THEN HAVE TO HAVE HEADLAMPS AND TAIL LAMPS. SO IS THERE ARE WE CREATING RISK IN THOSE COMMUNITIES BY NOT REQUIRING, I MEAN, I'M TRYING TO THINK THROUGH THAT BECAUSE IT WOULD SEEM LIKE THE OLD MCKINNEY WOULD BE THE ONLY ONES WHO WOULD JUSTIFY DRIVING AT NIGHT, SO LONG AS THEY ARE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SET FORTH AND NOBODY ELSE HAS TO MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS. BUT I'M GETTING THE SENSE THAT, LET'S CALL IT OLD MCKINNEY, THAT DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO USE IT. NOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE BANDWIDTH VIA THE STATE LAWS.

AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, CHIEF, TO ALLOW THEM WHAT STONEBRIDGE HAS WITH THE NO HEADLIGHTS AND THIS AND THAT. OUR BANDWIDTH UNDER THE STATE LAWS, OUR ALLOWANCES ARE OPTION THREE. IF YOU'RE NOT IN THIS BECAUSE WE CAN'T MAKE IT EQUAL TO STONEBRIDGE, WE JUST CAN'T.

RIGHT? CORRECT SO BASICALLY THE LAW IS THE LAW AND THE STATE LEGISLATORS DECIDE TO MAKE AN

[01:15:05]

AND I DID GET A QUESTION FROM A RESIDENT IN HISTORICAL DISTRICT, AND I DIDN'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO WE HAVE THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION BOARD, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, SET UP TO KIND OF MONITOR THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDINGS IN THE AREA. COULD THEY FORM THEIR OWN HOA AND CALL THEMSELVES, YOU KNOW, THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, LIKE A HISTORICAL DISTRICT WITH AN HOA? THE, THE CODE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE DUES. AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WOULD WOULD AGREE TO THAT. YOU'D HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER. YOU'D HAVE TO ADD A, OR YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE AWAY A PROPERTY RIGHT OF THEIRS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE 100%. I'M I'M IN FAVOR OF OPTION THREE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR TO PEOPLE WHAT IS REQUIRED AND WHY IT'S REQUIRED. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HAS AN ISSUE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE LISTED THERE. I THINK MOST PEOPLE ARE ALREADY ABIDING BY THOSE BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF BEEN WHAT'S EXPECTED OF IT BEING ON A ROADWAY. I LIKE HAVING THEM IN DOWNTOWN FOR A LOT OF THE REASONS THAT WERE SAID. THEY SEEM TO SLOW TRAFFIC DOWN A LITTLE BIT IN A LOT OF OUR STREETS. AND, SO I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH WITH ADDING IT. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WHEN SOMEONE COMES AND SAYS, WHY DON'T THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE SAME THING THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE? THAT'S BECAUSE OF STATE LAW AND HOA'S. AND, NOW YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE TWO WEBSITES OR TWO THINGS ON YOUR WEBSITE ABOUT HERE'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOR IN THESE AREAS, AND HERE'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE IN THESE AREAS.

AND IT'S GOING TO GET CONFUSING. BUT I THINK IT'S A IT'S A SERVICE. I MEAN, IT IT'S NOT HURTING ANYBODY. SO I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT. IT CHIEF, MY INCLINATION IS TO I WANT TO SUPPORT THREE AS WELL. I HATE THOUGH THAT IT PUTS EXTRA BURDEN ON YOU. THAT'S WHY I ASKED THAT QUESTION BEFORE. DOES IT? AND I'M HOPING THE ANSWER IS YES TO THIS QUESTION, BUT ONLY IF IT REALLY IS BY BY GETTING CLARITY ON THOSE THINGS, MIGHT IT MAKE IT A LITTLE NOT QUITE AS AS ONEROUS? OR IS IT JUST IT'S A PAIN IN THE PERIOD ON THE POLICE DEPARTMENT? YEAH. I BELIEVE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT STANCE ON GOLF CARTS IF DRIVEN. COMPATIBLE WITH STATE LAW IS HAS REALLY BEEN FOCUSED SOLELY ON ON A SAFETY ISSUE. GOLF CARTS DO NOT FARE WELL WHEN THEY HAVE A COLLISION OR WRECK OR THEY'RE HIT BY A MOTOR VEHICLE. YEAH. NO DOUBT THEY'RE NOT EQUIPPED WITH SEAT BELTS NOR DOORS, AND SO OUR IT'S I PROBABLY HAVE A SKEWED PERSPECTIVE, BUT WHEN I DEAL WITH GOLF CARTS, IT'S USUALLY BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN A WRECK. AND, IT'S SOLELY FROM A SAFETY CONCERN. HOW UPSET WILL YOU BE WITH US? SUPPORTING THREE. SWITZERLAND WILL WE ALL RECEIVE TICKETS WHEN WE'RE DRIVING HOME TONIGHT? CHIEF, THANKS FOR SHARING THAT. AND

[01:20:02]

FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND. SO, AS LONG AS WE HAVE INSURANCE AND ALL THE APPROPRIATE SAFETY MEASURES PUT IN PLACE, I AGREE. LET'S ALLOW THE USE DOWNTOWN AND EVERYWHERE. SO OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THIS, BUT IT SEEMS THERE'S CONSENSUS TO GO WITH THREE. CHIEF, I THOUGHT I SAW SOMEWHERE THAT THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT FOR A PLATE, OR MAYBE SOMEONE TOLD ME THAT. YES, SIR, IT HAS TO HAVE A LICENSE PLATE, BUT IT DOES NOT EXPIRE. SO THAT DOES NOT TRANSFER EITHER. THAT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO INCLUDE ON THE WEBSITE. IF YOU GET YOUR CART PLATED AND THEN SELL IT TO SOMEONE ELSE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET IT REPLATED. AND JUST FROM THE STANDPOINT OF, THAT'S ONLY FOR PEOPLE IN NON HOA'S HAVE TO GET PLATES AND THAT PLATE IS THROUGH THE COUNTY AND IT COSTS ABOUT $10 OR SOMETHING, SO IT'S NOT A HIGH BURDEN. AND I AGREE WITH DOCTOR FELTZ, I THINK I'VE NOT HEARD OF ANYBODY WHO DOESN'T HAVE MEET THE MINIMUM KIND OF ROADWAY REQUIREMENTS. AND SO MAYBE THERE ARE SOME PROBABLY CELESTE. I THINK HERS IS MORE OF A DRAGSTER. SHE DOES SOME LATE NIGHT RACING. SHE COMES ZOOMING PAST MY HOUSE ALL THE TIME, BUT WE KNEW THERE WAS SO MUCH CONFUSION ON THIS. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT DUE TO US GETTING CLARIFICATION ON THE STATE LAW, WE WENT ON MORE OF AN EDUCATION CAMPAIGN. THERE HAVE BEEN NO CITATIONS WRITTEN FOR OPERATING A GOLF CART IN DOWNTOWN. YEAH, I THINK I'VE EMAILED YOU EVERY TIME WE'VE PULLED SOMEBODY OVER, BUT, I JUST WANT TO ADD, IF THAT'S THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION TO BRING AN ORDINANCE TO ALLOW THE EXISTENCE OF SEVERAL SUBDIVISIONS THAT DON'T HAVE HOAS ON THE WEST SIDE OF 75, NORTH SOUTH. SO IT'S NOT JUST A DOWNTOWN MCKINNEY ISSUE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE AWARE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF EAST SIDE MCKINNEY, YOU KNOW, AND MARK, HE CHIEF JUST MENTIONED THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY CITATIONS GIVEN FOR VIOLATIONS WITH THIS. I CAN IMAGINE IF YOU KNOW, SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN AND THEY'RE NOT THEY DON'T HAVE A LICENSE PLATE FOR INSTANCE. THEY PROBABLY WOULD BE A CITATION GIVEN. DO WE HAVE A FEE SCHEDULE IN OUR POLICY FOR GOLF CARTS OR DO THEY JUST FOLLOW THE MOTOR VEHICLE POLICY? IT'D BE THE SAME FOR MOTOR VEHICLES. MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE WE IF WE PULL THEM OVER FOR SWERVING AROUND. AND ARE THEY SUBJECTED POTENTIALLY TO A BREATHALYZER? YES I'M ACTUALLY THAT'S ACTUALLY A SERIOUS QUESTION. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO A DECENT JOB, AT LEAST DOWN HERE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, ABOUT EDUCATION AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. SO I'D LIKE TO SEE A GOOD MARKETING STRATEGY PUT IN PLACE SO THAT THE COMMUNITY IS UPDATED ON ALL OF THE THINGS REQUIRED SO THAT WE CAN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF STOPS AND EMAILS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE GOING ON AS WELL. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR,

[Non-Consent Tow Services Update]

WE WERE ALSO RESEARCHING BEST PRACTICES WITHIN NORTH TEXAS, AND I HAVE A SLIDE THAT ADDRESSES THAT SPECIFICALLY HERE IN A MINUTE. AND WITH THE HELP OF PROCUREMENT, WE ISSUED AN RFP FOR TOW SERVICE CONTRACT IN PARTNERSHIP WITH PROCUREMENT. WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IS WE'RE

[01:25:04]

LABOR FEE, TRUCK AND TRAILER AT 190 AND 325 DEPENDING ON LOAD. THIS IS JUST A LIST OF SOME OF OUR SISTER CITIES. WHEN WE LOOKED INTO IT, AND ALL OF THEM WERE DOING A COMPETITIVE BID PROCESS WITH A SINGLE SOURCE RECORD COMPANY, AND WE WERE THE ONLY ONES ON A ROTATION WITH THREE WRECKER SERVICES. SO AGAIN, WE'VE ALREADY GONE OVER WHAT OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE STATES. WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS THAT WE REPEAL THE CITY ORDINANCE AND TRANSITION THE RECORD PROCESS TO A COMPETITIVE SELECTION TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH STATE OF TEXAS PROCUREMENT GUIDELINES, AND HAVE INVOICING AND BILLING REQUIREMENTS ADDRESSED IN THE RFP PROCESS. SO WITH THIS, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO TRACY TO GO OVER THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS. GOOD AFTERNOON, ON JULY 14TH, WE ISSUED A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND AUGUST 29TH WE OPENED THOSE PROPOSALS. WE RECEIVED FIVE PROPOSALS, EACH PROPOSAL WAS SCORED FROM THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE, WHICH INCLUDED PROCUREMENT SERVICES, POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND ACTUALLY FLEET AS WELL, THE OVERALL SCORES DETERMINED THE RECOMMENDATION, AND THE SCORES REFLECT THAT.

ROPER'S RECORD SERVICES RECEIVED THE HIGHEST POINTS. AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING AWARD TO ROPER'S RECORD SERVICES. A QUESTION FOR YOU. THE UNIT PRICE, LIGHT DUTY, TOW SERVICES. RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE AT 95. THAT'S CORRECT. BUT WE'RE CURRENTLY AT 130. THAT'S CORRECT. HOW ARE THEY MAKING THAT WORK? WHEN DO YOU KNOW WHEN THIS CONTRACT WAS WE JUST THE CURRENT RATES WE JUST RECEIVED THIS PRICING WITHIN THE LAST. WELL, SINCE WHAT WAS THAT, AUGUST 29TH, SO THEY JUST BID THAT PRICE OF $95. SO SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY GETTING, YOU WOULD THINK WITH INFLATION AND THE COST TO DELIVER SERVICES, THAT THAT PRICE WOULD BE HIGHER.

WE STILL HAVE A CONFIDENCE THAT THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DELIVER AT THAT PRICE. WE HAVE NOT HAD A PRE AWARD MEETING WITH THE VENDOR, BUT THEY DID PUT THAT AS THEIR PRICE. AND THEY HAVE CONFIRMED THAT THEY WOULD HONOR THAT PRICE. IT'S JUST THE PRICE FOR THAT. THEY'RE CHARGING THE CITY CORRECT TO PICK UP. THEY ARE GOING TO BE BUILDING THE CITIZENS OR THE VEHICLE OWNER, NOT THE CITY. THERE'S GOING TO BE AN AUDIT PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE ONLY CHARGING THEM $95 TO PICK UP THEIR VEHICLE. WE DO HAVE AN AUDIT PROCESS WITHIN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL THAT WE CAN REACH OUT AND SEE INVOICES AT ANY TIME AND DO AN AUDIT ANYTIME WE WANT, BECAUSE I'M JUST WITH DOCTOR FELTON, IT SEEMS SO LOW THAT IT'S LIKE THE BASE PRICE. OKAY, WE PICKED IT UP FOR 95, BUT THEN THEY'RE GOING TO START HITTING THEM WITH CHARGES WHEN THEY GET THERE TO PICK UP THEIR VEHICLE. SOME MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND THINGS OF THAT SORT. I COULD JUST FORESEE IT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE REALLY READ THE CONTRACT AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY THE CUSTOMER GETS, YOU KNOW, OUR CITIZENS GET PICKED UP THEIR CAR GETS PICKED UP, THEY'RE PAYING $95. SO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT'S $95 PER HOUR. SO IT COULD COULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT. IF THEY'RE OUT THERE FOR TWO HOURS, IT'S GOING TO BE DOUBLE THAT. SO 150 ON JORDAN'S WOULD BE DOUBLE THAT BECAUSE THAT'S AN HOURLY RATE TOO RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT, ALSO, IF I MAY, IN THE INVOICING REQUIREMENTS, WHEN WE SEE CHARGES THAT ARE IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME THEY'RE OUT THERE, THAT'S WHERE THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY IT WAS LEAKING CONTAMINATED FLUIDS AND WE HAD TO CLEAN UP. I MEAN, IT SHOULD JUSTIFY WHY THOSE CHARGES WOULD OR WOULD NOT LINE UP WITH OUR TIME CALCULATIONS.

WAS THIS ONE OF THE WRECKER SERVICES THAT DID HAVE SOME ISSUES ON THAT? THE AUDIT THAT WAS DONE BACK IN JANUARY, YES. THIS IS A RECORD COMPANY THAT WAS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL THREE ON THE ROTATION. BUT LET ME BE CLEAR IN THE FACT THAT WE COULDN'T PROVE NOR DISPROVE THAT THERE WAS ANY OVERCHARGING GOING ON. THE INVOICING WAS JUST NOT REGULATED. AND PRETTY POOR. SO YOU WOULD BE ASKING A RECORD DRIVER THAT TOWED THIS VEHICLE 45 DAYS AGO, HOW DID YOU GET TO THIS NUMBER? BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ITEMIZATION OF WHAT WAS ACTUALLY DONE TO THE VEHICLE. SO IN NO WAY DO I WANT TO INDICT TE JUST COULD NOT COME TO A SATISFACTORY CONCLUSION. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, HAVE THEY NOW CLEANED THAT UP? DO WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE WITH THEM WHERE THERE IS ITEMIZED AND ITEMIZED LIST OF SERVICES THAT THEY'RE CHARGING FOR? NOT. YES.

[01:30:06]

IT'S ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA. YEAH, THE ORDINANCE CHANGE, RIGHT? THE AWARDING OF THE CONTRACT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. YEAH. TRUE. SO ARE THE QUESTIONS TO ASK OF THE CHIEF NOW OR DO YOU WANT TO COMMENT NOW BECAUSE THIS BEING ON THE REGULAR AGENDA WILL COME WITH THE RESOLUTION WITH THE NAME FILLED OUT, I BELIEVE THE NAME. WELL, I'D KNOW THE NAME IS ROPERS RIGHT NOW.

IT'S ON THERE. IS THAT THE CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL? YES, SIR. YES I'D LIKE TO THANK. ALL RIGHT. ALL YOU HAVE A COMMENT TO MAKE BEFORE WE GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION? YEAH, I'M GOING TO.

WE'VE GOT A COUPLE NEW DIRECTORS THAT WE'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE. THEY'RE HERE, I DON'T KNOW IF KIM'S GOING TO DO IT OR MR. QUINT, BUT KIM'S GOING TO DO IT. VERY GOOD. QUINT HAD A FULL SLIDE DECK, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, NO, I'M VERY EXCITED. AS YOU KNOW, WE HAD BEEN WITHOUT A HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AND CO-DIRECTOR SINCE VERY EARLY THIS YEAR. WE DID A NATIONAL EXECUTIVE SEARCH FOR BOTH AND REALLY LUCKED OUT WITH TWO INCREDIBLE CANDIDATES. SO MARGARET AND PHIL, IF YOU COULD STAND UP SO MARGARET LYNN JOINS US. SHE HAS EXPERIENCE FROM SOUTH PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, WHICH IS WHERE SHE'S FROM, BUT SHE CURRENTLY LIVES IN FRISCO, TEXAS, HAS GREAT EXPERIENCE, GREAT POLICY KNOWLEDGE, EVEN EXPERIENCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SIDE. PHIL JOINS US MOST RECENTLY FROM OREGON, BUT HAS EXPERIENCE IN CHANDLER, ARIZONA AS WELL. A LOT OF GREAT EXPERIENCE IN CODE. WE ARE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE THEM BOTH ON BOARD, AND I KNOW THEY ALL LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. THANK YOU. WELCOME BOTH OF YOU. THANK YOU. WE'RE NOW GOING TO

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]

[01:35:03]