[00:00:03]
READY. ALL RIGHT. I'D LIKE TO CALL ON FOR CONSIDERATION. AND ALWAYS EXCITING MEETING OF THE CITY OF MCKINNEY, TEXAS. REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER ONE. FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS WOULD BE
[PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS (For Non-Public Hearing Agenda Items)]
[CONSENT ITEMS]
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS. SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT ITEMS. 25 283 SEVEN MINUTES OF THE TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE. ONE CHURCH ONE BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 31ST, 2025. ANY COMMENTS ON THE MEETING? IF NOT, I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.SECOND, COUNCIL MEMBER LEBO AND A SECOND BY MEMBER FELTUS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE
[Consider/Discuss/Act on TIRZ 1 Funding for Chestnut 0.5 MG Elevated Storage Tank Rehabilitation Project (CIP Project WA2240)]
CONSENT ITEMS PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. MOVING TO REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. NUMBER 25 2838. CONSIDER. DISCUSS. ACT ON TOURS ONE. FUNDING FOR CHESTNUT 0.5MG ELEVATED STORAGE TANK REHABILITATION PROJECT CIP PROJECT 2240 SHOW THAT BLAKE SILLS OR PAUL TUCKER AND I'VE GOT GARY GRAHAM. THE FLOOR IS YOURS. THANK YOU SIR. BOARD MEMBERS I'M GARY GRAHAM, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING. WE WANT TO TALK TO YOU TONIGHT ABOUT OUR CHESTNUT TANK RENOVATION PROJECT WE HAVE ONGOING. THIS IS THE OLD WATER TOWER JUST ACROSS THE STREET OF HIGHWAY FIVE. THERE HAS SERVED BASIC HAS BECOME AN ICON KIND OF MONUMENT FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, YOU CAN TELL THE MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED. SOME RUST ON THERE, BUT THERE'S ALSO SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WE NEED TO GO OUT THERE AND ADDRESS. SO LET ME START WITH A LITTLE HISTORY. WE BEGAN THE PROJECT, THE DESIGN OF IT, IN MARCH OF 2023. THAT DESIGN INCLUDES REMOVING THE LEAD PAINT THAT'S ON THE EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR OF THE TANK. WE'VE GOT STRUCTURAL REPAIRS. IT WILL INCLUDE REPAINTING THE TANK WITH A NON LEAD BASED PAINT AND PUTTING THE MC LOGO THAT'S UP THERE TODAY. THE HISTORIC LOGO, INCLUDING A ROBUST LED LIGHTING SYSTEM AND DOING SOME SIDE IMPROVEMENTS. THOSE INCLUDE LANDSCAPING, IRRIGATION AND SOME PAVING REPAIRS TO THE SITE TO HELP OFFSET SOME OF THE COSTS FOR THE PROJECT, WE WENT TO THE CDC BOARD AND ASKED FOR A $500,000 GRANT TO HELP PAY FOR THE LIGHTING SYSTEM, WHICH THEY GRANTED US, AND SO WE WENT OUT. WE FINISHED THE DESIGN AND WE BID THE PROJECT. WE. IN JULY OF LAST YEAR, 2024, AND WE DIDN'T GET ANY BIDDERS, SO WENT BACK, REVAMPED THE BID, MAKE SURE WE TALK TO OUR BIDDERS, SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON. WE THINK IT WAS JUST A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE BUSY AT THAT TIME, SO WE IMMEDIATELY REBID THE PROJECT. JUST ABOUT A MONTH LATER WE GOT ONE BID WHICH WAS WAY MORE EXPENSIVE, AND WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT COSTS IN A SECOND, BUT WAY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN OUR BUDGET. SO WE RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WE DIDN'T DECLINE THAT BID, REJECT THAT BID. AND SO THEY DID. WE LOOKED AT SOME STRATEGIES TO TRY TO REBID IT TO GET THE PRICE DOWN. AND SO WE BID IT AGAIN THIS LAST MAY. MAY 1ST WE HAD THE OPENING. WE GOT A BETTER BID. HOWEVER IT'S STILL MORE THAN OUR BUDGET. WE'LL TALK ABOUT COST A SECOND. AS I SAID, ONE ITEM THOUGH WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF IS THE LIGHTING SYSTEM. IT IS A VERY BIG COMPONENT COST WISE, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE COST BREAKDOWN WE HAVE THREE DIFFERENT LIGHTING LEVELS. WE HAVE THE TOP LIGHTING OF THE CATWALK. WE'LL LIGHT THE TOP OF THE TANK. WE'VE GOT A LIGHTING SYSTEM THAT WILL LIGHT THE BOTTOM OF THE TANK, AND THEN WE'VE GOT SOME LIGHTING THAT ARE ON THE LEGS. SO THREE LEVELS AND THERE'S A FULLY PROGRAMABLE FULL SPECTRUM LED LIGHT. SO MAIN STREET WILL BE ABLE TO PROGRAM IT TO WHATEVER EVENTS. THEME THAT THEY WANT TO DO. SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT ADDING THAT FUNCTIONALITY TO THE AGED LIGHTING SYSTEM THAT'S OUT THERE TODAY THAT'S NOT FULLY FUNCTIONAL. LET'S TALK ABOUT COSTS. OUR ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE WAS ABOUT 2.6 MILLION. OUR FIRST ESTIMATE THAT WE REJECTED WAS ABOUT $5 MILLION. SO WE COUNCIL REJECTED THAT BID. AND OUR CURRENT BID. WELL, IT DID COME DOWN A MILLION. IT'S STILL ABOUT 50% MORE THAN WHAT OUR BUDGET IS. SO THAT'S JUST UNDER $4 MILLION. WE TOOK ALL THE BID ITEMS. WE CATEGORIZED THEM INTO FIVE MAIN COMPONENT AREAS AND WE COMPARED THEM TO THE OPC. THE FIRST BID FROM BLASKO. THE SECOND BID FROM BLASKO. BOTH TIMES WE'VE ONLY RECEIVED ONE BID FROM THE SAME COMPANY, BLASKO. AND YOU CAN SEE ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR THAT LIGHTING SYSTEM IS A HUGE ASK OR HUGE INCREASE IN WHAT OUR ESTIMATE WAS. THE.ALSO DURING THE FIRST BID, THE TANK COATING AND STRUCTURAL REPAIRS. THAT WAS ASTRONOMICAL AS WELL. $3 MILLION COMPARED TO OUR JUST OVER $1 MILLION ESTIMATE. HOWEVER, WE THINK
[00:05:01]
WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, FROM OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DIFFERENT TANK COMPANIES AND OUR BIDDERS AND OUR ENGINEER, WE THINK THIS $4 MILLION COST IS ABOUT WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE, BUT WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO FUND IT. SO WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF OPTIONS. WE WANT TO PRESENT TO THE COUNCIL ABOUT HOW WE OR EXCUSE ME TO THE BOARD ABOUT HOW WE FUND THIS, DEPENDING ON HOW THIS BOARD ACTS AND WANTS TO POTENTIALLY FUND ANY OF THE PROJECT, WE WANT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL AT THE MEETING TONIGHT AS FAR AS A BUDGET AMENDMENT, AND THEN ALSO A RECOMMENDATION FOR AWARD OF A CONTRACT BASED ON THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS DISCUSSED AT THIS MEETING TODAY. AS WE TALK ABOUT OPTIONS, THERE'S TWO MAIN OPTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO LIST AS OPTIONS. WE FEEL AS STAFF THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED FOR INCLUDING OR REMOVAL. THOSE ARE THE LEG COLUMN LIGHTING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT A MINUTE AGO, WHICH HAS A VALUE OF ABOUT $210,000.AND THEN THE PHOTO AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN ILLUSTRATES THE POTENTIAL LANDSCAPING WORK THAT WE WOULD DO. THE LEFT IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TODAY. ON THE RIGHT YOU WOULD SEE THE COLUMN STONE COLUMNS, THAT BRICK COLUMNS THAT WE PUT IN WROUGHT IRON FENCING, LIVING SCREEN REALLY PRETTY UP THE AREA AS YOU'RE ENTERING TO DOWNTOWN AND NOT SEEING THE IMAGE ON THE LEFT, MAKING IT MORE ATTRACTIVE AS YOU'RE COMING INTO DOWNTOWN. SINCE THIS IS VISIBLE FROM HIGHWAY FIVE. THIS FIRST OPTION, THOUGH, IS THE ALL IN OPTION. IT IS AWARDING THE BID, AS IS FINDING THE FUNDING TO COVER THE GAP FOR THE FULL $4.5 MILLION PROJECT THAT INCLUDES A CONTINGENCY WITH BLASKO, AND SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE BOTH OF THESE ITEMS. OPTION NUMBER TWO IS WE REMOVE IS THE LIGHTING OPTION. WE WOULD RECOMMEND REMOVE THE LIGHTING OPTION SO WE REMOVE $210,000.
THIS WOULD STILL BE A $4.275 MILLION PROJECT. AND THEN THE THIRD OPTION IS REMOVE THE LIGHTING AND REMOVE THE LANDSCAPING. SO BETWEEN THE TWO $210,000 FOR THE LIGHTING, $400,000 FOR THE SITE WORK AND LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION. SO YOU'RE REMOVING 600,000 ROUGHLY FROM THE PROJECT. SO IT'S STILL JUST UNDER A 3.7, $3.7 MILLION PROJECT. GARY. YES, SIR. MAY I ASK, IN THAT LAST PICTURE, THERE'S A LITTLE SUBSTATION DOWN THERE AT THE BASE ON THE GRASS.
IS THAT FUNCTIONING IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, OR WAS THAT THERE SOLELY FOR THE WATER TOWER, THE GRASS AREA? NO, THE LITTLE ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION. ALL THE ELECTRICAL IS FOR THE WATER TOWER. FOR THE WATER TOWER. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. YEP. AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE ELECTRICAL THERE IS THE OLD OPERATIONAL BUILDING THAT WOULD BE DEMOED AS PART OF THE PROJECT. SO WE'RE CLEANING UP SOME OF THE WORK UNDERNEATH THERE. BUT THAT ELECTRICAL SYSTEM HAS TO REMAIN BECAUSE THERE IS A CELL PROVIDER ON THE TOWER. AND WE NEED SOMETHING FOR THE, THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. THANK YOU. GARY, I'VE ASKED THE QUESTION A NUMBER OF TIMES OR BROUGHT UP NUMBER OF TIMES. THE CELL TOWERS, THE CELL TOWERS, THE ANTENNAS AND WHATNOT. THE IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THIS KIND OF MONEY, I, I WOULD BE A HUGE FAN OF FIGURING OUT HOW TO MITIGATE THE LEASES THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE, EITHER MOVE THEM TO OTHER LOCATIONS OR WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A TOP CAP. THAT'S THAT'S A MUCH, MUCH, MUCH MORE ESTHETICALLY PLEASING WAY TO HIDE ALL OF THOSE ANTENNAS. BUT TO DO ALL THIS WORK AND, YOU KNOW, PUT, REPAINT IT AND PUT ON THE NEW LOGO AND LIGHT IT UP TO HAVE ALL THE UGLY CELL ANTENNAS AROUND IT. IS, IS ANY OF THIS ANY OF THESE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION OR IS IT SO THERE IS A LOT OF EXCESS MATERIAL THAT'S UP THERE THAT'S BEEN ABANDONED IN PLACE AFTER SEVERAL OF THE CELL TOWER COMPANIES OR CELL COMPANIES HAVE MOVED OFF. SO WE'LL BE CLEANING THAT UP. THERE IS STILL ONE ACTIVE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE WITH T-MOBILE THAT RUNS TILL 2030, SO THAT WOULD STILL BE UP THERE, BUT WE WOULD TRY TO GO WITH A WHITE AND, YOU KNOW, MINIMALLY, YOU KNOW, HAVE IT BLENDED AS BEST AS POSSIBLE TO THE CATWALK THAT'S UP THERE. BUT WE WOULD BE REMOVING A LOT OF THE OTHER EQUIPMENT THAT MAKES THE TOWER LOOK LESS ATTRACTIVE. AND THEN AT 2030 WE COULD NOT RENEW THAT CONTRACT WITH T-MOBILE. THERE IS ANOTHER CELL TOWER JUST ACROSS THE STREET OF HIGHWAY FIVE AT VIRGINIA. WE COULD URGE THEM TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO GO AND MOVE TO THAT LOCATION. I KIND OF THOUGHT THE OPPOSITE. I DON'T EVEN NOTICE THE CELL EQUIPMENT UP THERE, BUT I SEE THIS UGLY THING RIGHT ACROSS FROM THIS BEAUTIFUL. YOU KNOW, BUILDING WE BUILT AND PATIO WE'VE GOT THAT JUST STARES RIGHT IN OUR FACE. AND I WAS KIND OF DISAPPOINTED. WE LET CONTRACTS GO TO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I'D I'D PREFER TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, MORE EQUIPMENT OR AT LEAST MORE FUNCTIONAL
[00:10:02]
EQUIPMENT ON THERE TO COVER SOME OF THE COST OF, OF KEEPING THE THING, BECAUSE I WILL UP YOUR LOATHING FOR THAT AND SAY I LOATHE BOTH OF THEM. YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE A GRAVEYARD OF PAGER COMPANIES UP THERE ON THE WATER TOWER JUST FROM ANCIENT. AND I DON'T LIKE THAT ONE AT HIGHWAY FIVE. YOU KNOW, WE HAD A WORK SESSION ITEM TODAY WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT USING CITY ASSETS TO DO STUFF. I'D MUCH RATHER USE THIS CITY ASSET WHERE WE'RE SITTING RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW TO LOOK AT REPLACING THAT THING ON HIGHWAY FIVE WITH SOME KIND OF A MONOPOLE OR SOMETHING.BUT AT ANY RATE, I DON'T MEAN TO BOG DOWN THAT DETAIL, BUT BUT I DO HAVE AN APPETITE TO MITIGATE WHAT WE HAVE UP ON THAT WATER TOWER, ESPECIALLY THE GRAVEYARD OF PAGER ANTENNAS AND 2G AND STUFF. YEAH, UNFORTUNATELY. UNFORTUNATELY, WITH 5G IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE REQUIRES MANY MORE TOWERS THAN WE COULD WITH 4G OR EARLIER TECHNOLOGY. SO AS MUCH AS WE HATE ALL THESE LITTLE MONOPOLES AND UGLY STRUCTURES THAT ARE SCATTERED AROUND, IT'S KIND OF REQUIRE THEY CAN'T THEY CAN'T UTILIZE THAT LOCATION AS MUCH AS THEY COULD IN THE PAST. RIGHT? YEAH, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT TOO IN WORK SESSION. THOSE ARE 20 OR 30 FOOT VERTICAL SMALL NODES THAT ARE TYPICALLY IN THE IN THE RIGHT OF WAYS IN THE CITY. AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO HAVE THOSE GROWING. I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE COATINGS, THE PAINT. YOU TALKED ABOUT IT BEING LEAD BASED. ARE THEY ACTUALLY GOING TO REMOVE THE PAINT OR ARE THEY PAINTING OVER THE PAINT. NO, WE WOULD BE REMOVING PUTTING IN A SHROUD UP TO CAPTURE ALL THE LEAD CONTAMINANTS. SOME OF THAT'S ALREADY FLAKED OFF AND GONE, FOUND FALLEN TO THE GRASS. AND SO WE NEED TO CONTAMINATE THE SOIL AS WELL. SO WE'RE REMOVING EVERYTHING AND SHIPPING THAT OFF. YEAH. SO YOU'LL HAVE TO SCRAPE IT OR HEATGUN IT OFF.
YES, SIR. GARY. WHAT WHAT'S THAT. ONCE WE DO ALL THIS AND FIX UP THE WATER TOWER, WHAT'S THE LIFE OF THAT PROJECT? GREAT QUESTION. I'M GOING TO LOOK BACK AT PAUL TUCKER. WHAT'S THE LIFESPAN OF THE PAINT? SO 15 TO 20 YEARS IS THE LIFESPAN OF A PAINTING OF A TANK. OKAY. BUT WE NEVER HAVE TO DO REMEDIATION. YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THE REMEDIATION AGAIN. THAT'S CORRECT. SO ON THE ON ARE WE DO YOU HAVE MORE TO DO ON THE SLIDES OR. I'VE GOT ONE MORE SLIDE TO WALK THROUGH I'LL LET YOU. COULD I ASK A QUESTION BEFORE YOU LEAVE THIS 403,000 FOR LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION AND FENCE WORK SITE WORK. THAT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE HIGH. CAN YOU BREAK THAT DOWN ANY BETTER? PAUL, DO YOU HAVE THAT BID? DO YOU HAVE IN THERE THE YOU KNOW, BASICALLY IT'S WROUGHT IRON FENCING, SOME SMALL ORNAMENTAL TREES. IT'S, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY INCLUDES SOME OF THE MATERIAL FOR THE REMEDIATION OF THE SOIL THAT WE HAVE TO DO IN THAT AREA.
BUT THEN JUST, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAVE ONE BIDDER, YOU'RE AT THE MERCY OF WHAT THAT BIDDER PUTS ON THE VALUE OF THAT. HE MAY BE ADDING OTHER ITEMS IN THERE THAT WE DON'T KNOW. IT'S JUST WE SEE THE LINE ITEMS IN THERE. WE, WE SHRINK DOWN THE BID FROM A WHOLE BUNCH OF ITEMS TO TRY TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE MANAGEABLE, BUT I DON'T HAVE IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
THE LANDSCAPING PORTION OF IT BE BID OUT SEPARATELY TO SOMEBODY ELSE OTHER THAN THE ONE THAT'S DOING THE TOWER. WE COULD FOR SURE. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE OPTIONS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT. IF WE DECIDE NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE LANDSCAPING, WE COULD DO THAT. THE CHALLENGE WAS WHEN YOU BREAK APART INDIVIDUAL PIECES, WHEN YOU GO OUT AND GO TO ANOTHER LANDSCAPING CONTRACTOR OR WHATNOT, YOU MAY GET A BETTER PRICE. YOU MAY NOT. YOU JUST DON'T KNOW. YOU KNOW, IT DOES SEEM A LITTLE BIT HIGH, BUT WHEN YOU ADD IN ALL THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS, I CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET A BETTER PRICE BY GOING WITH A DIFFERENT CONTRACTOR BY ITSELF. DOES IT INCLUDE THE DEMO OF THE BUILDING THAT YOU SPOKE OF? YEAH, THE DEMO IS IN THE SITE. CIVIL AND PAVING WORK. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO I THINK I WALKED THROUGH ALL THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. SO CURRENT FUNDING AVAILABILITY WE HAVE FROM OUR WATER FUND A BIG CHUNK OF THE COST OF THIS PROJECT, 3.265 MILLION. WE HAVE THE $500,000 MCDC GRANT. SO OUR PROJECT BUDGET IS 3.765. WE HAD A DESIGN CONTRACT OF 465,000, MATERIAL TESTING OF 25,000. AND SO WE HAVE 3.275 LEFT. SO OUR FIRST OPTION THE ALL IN WE NEED 1.2125 1.225 MILLION. WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THE HOTEL MOTEL FUND FOR 500,000. AND SO IT WOULD BE IF WE WANT TO GO WITH THE ALL IN OPTION, IT WOULD BE ASKING THIS BOARD FOR 725,000. OPTION TWO REMOVING THE LIGHTING IS 400 OR 4,275,000. SO WE NEED ANOTHER MILLION. REMOVING WHAT? LIGHTING? THE LIGHTING WAS ABOUT A MILLION. ONLY ON THAT ONE LEG. ONLY THE LEG PORTION. CORRECT. WE THE UPPER PORTION WOULD STAY
[00:15:03]
THERE, BUT JUST THE COLUMN LEG COLUMN LIGHTING. SO WE WOULD NEED 500,000 FROM THIS BOARD.STILL 500,000 FROM THE MOTEL HOTEL FUND. AND THEN OPTION THREE, IF WE REMOVE THE LIGHTING AND THE LANDSCAPING, AND IF THERE WAS A DIFFERENT VARIATION THAT THE THIS BOARD WANTED US TO CONSIDER, IT WOULD BE NOTHING FROM THIS BOARD. AND THEN WE WOULD USE 415,000 FROM THE HOTEL MOTEL FUND. SO THE ASK FROM THIS BOARD IS WHAT IS THE APPETITE FOR MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT? WHAT ELEMENTS ALL IN TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS OF REDUCING COSTS THAT WE COULD TAKE TO THE CITY COUNCIL THIS AFTERNOON, THIS EVENING'S MEETING, AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT AND THEN ALSO A AWARD OF CONTRACT. WHAT IS OUR WHAT IS THE FUND BALANCE FOR RIGHT NOW? THERE WE GO. WELL, MR. HOLLOWAY IS COMING UP. I WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING. IT'S IF THE IF THE BOARD OR THE COUNCIL WANTED TO DECIDE NOT TO DO ANYTHING. IF YOU WERE TO SAY, LET'S NOT DO ANYTHING, THIS IS TOO MUCH MONEY. THAT'S NOT AN OPTION EITHER. THIS WATER TOWER HAS TO BE ADDRESSED. YOU EITHER TEAR IT DOWN, WHICH WILL COST YOU $1 MILLION, OR YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SHORE IT UP ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. YOU CAN'T LET IT STAY LIKE IT IS BECAUSE THE REMEDIATION THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. SO JUST UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S NOT AN OPTION EITHER. WE EITHER HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD AND TELL US HOW YOU WANT TO MOVE FORWARD AND WHAT LEVEL, OR TO TAKE ANOTHER OPTION, WHICH IS DO NOTHING, WHICH IS STILL GOING TO COST YOU PROBABLY $1 MILLION, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REMOVE THE WATER TOWER AT SOME POINT OR DO SOME SORT OF REMEDIATION. THANK YOU. WHY IS THIS MONEY COMING OUT OF, OR WHY IS THE ASK FOR IT TO COME OUT OF TOURS AND HOTEL MOTEL VERSUS THE WATER LIKE INFRASTRUCTURE FUND? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I PREVIOUS TOURIST MEETING I SAW A REPORT ABOUT LIKE THE AIRPORT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A COUPLE MILLION DOLLARS, A MILLION AND A HALF, I BELIEVE, IF I'M RECALLING CORRECTLY. YEAH. SO WE HAVE FROM FROM OUR WATER WATER CONSTRUCTION FUND, WE'VE, WE, WE SWEPT SOME, SOME FUND BALANCES THERE. I DON'T HAVE A DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCE FROM THAT AT THIS TIME. I MEAN WE COULD MOVE THINGS AROUND. WE LOOKED AT THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF PIECE PIECES TOGETHER. WE THOUGHT IT WAS SOME GOOD OPTIONS TO USE DIFFERENT TYPES OF DOLLARS THAT QUALIFIED FOR THIS PROJECT. SO THAT'S THE SIMPLE ANSWER. MARK, THIS ISN'T A QUESTION FOR YOU. AND MAYBE PAUL NEEDS TO COME BACK UP AND ANSWER, BUT THE MUNICIPAL COURTS BUILDING AND THE BUILDING JUST TO THE WEST OF THE WHAT ARE THE PLANS FOR THAT? I MEAN, WE HAD A BOND FOR THE MUNICIPAL COURTS RELOCATION TYPE EFFORT, WHICH FAILED. BUT I STILL THINK WE UNDERSTAND THAT BUILDING HAS A SHORT LIFESPAN. AND I GUESS THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE OTHER BUILDINGS PROBABLY IS NOT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR US THAT THAT BUILDING IS BEING USED FOR OUR METER SERVICES DIVISION. AND SO RIGHT NOW IT'S SERVING THE NEEDS OF METER SERVICES. BUT LIKE LIKE YOU SAID, WHAT'S THE FUTURE OF THAT BUILDING? WHAT'S THE FUTURE OF COURTS. THAT'S I CAN STAND DOWN OR PAUL TALK ABOUT THAT. BUT YOU KNOW FOR NOW THEY ARE FUNCTIONING AS I SAY, THAT THINKING THAT THEY'VE GOT SOME LIFESPAN ON THEM, WHETHER THAT'S THEY HAVE SOME, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY ON THE COURTS REDOING THE LOBBIES, THE FLOORING AND SOME THINGS LIKE THAT. THE COURTS.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR ANOTHER OPTION, THE BOND. THE VOTERS REJECTED THE BOND. SO WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT SOME OTHER OPTIONS, POTENTIALLY A LEASE PRODUCT. THAT WOULD BE A CONVENIENT LOCATION. WE HAVEN'T FOUND THAT SOLUTION YET, BUT WE ARE EXAMINING THAT. SO THE COURTS I THINK IT'S SAFE TO SAY THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE AT THAT LOCATION FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. AND THEN THE OTHER ONE IS THE METER SHOP. I THINK WHEN WE REDO THE COLLEGE CAMPUS, THE PUBLIC WORKS CAMPUS ON COLLEGE STREET, THE METER SHOP WILL PROBABLY BE RELOCATED, AND THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO VACATE THAT BUILDING AND OR DEMOLISH IT. BUT THERE'S NO IMMINENT PLAN TO DO THAT, AND I DON'T I'M NOT ASKING FOR ONE, BUT THERE'S SOME FORECASTS IN THE FUTURE WHERE WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS THIS SITE. AND I GUESS SPENDING $400,000 IN LANDSCAPING AND DESIGN OR, YOU KNOW, LANDSCAPING, IRRIGATION, ALL OF THOSE KIND OF ESTHETIC IMPROVEMENTS TO MAKE THIS LOOK BETTER. AND THEN THAT MAY CHANGE IN THAT FORESEEABLE TIME FUTURE OR MAYBE CONSOLIDATED WITH IT MIGHT CHANGE, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S IMMINENT. SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, ANY ANY LANDSCAPING WORK, IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU CHOSE TO PROCEED WITH, EITHER AS PART OF THIS PACKAGE OR AS A SEPARATE BID PRODUCT THAT WE WERE TO DO, MAYBE WE'LL GET MORE BIDS FOR A LANDSCAPE PRODUCT. THAT'S FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD. I THINK OUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU CHOSE TO DO, AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT WHAT THE NEXT USE IS OF THAT METER SHOP, BECAUSE IT MAY BE A LITTLE WHILE. FROM MY STANDPOINT. I LIKE OPTION THREE IN THIS. I THINK EXTENDING $600,000 IN FUNDING. IS SOMETHING WE CAN SAVE ON. I ALSO LOOK AT WHAT WE DID WITH
[00:20:06]
MITCHELL PARK, WHERE WE'VE GOT EQUIPMENT THAT IS EXPOSED, AND WE CAME UP WITH A, YOU KNOW, A I GUESS, A SOLUTION IN THE SHORT TERM OR WITHOUT GOING AND MAKING, YOU KNOW, BRICK AND WROUGHT IRON IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT AREA AS WELL. BUT SO ANYWAY, I AGREE, MR. HOLLOWAY, WE'LL COME BACK TO. YES, THANK YOU, I DO I DID WE WERE TALKING I NEEDED I DO NEED TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. SO AT THE END OF FISCAL YEAR 25, WE ANTICIPATE TOURS ONE TO HAVE A FUND BALANCE OF ABOUT $28,800,000, WITH $2.6 MILLION OF THAT BEING RESTRICTED FOR TRANSPORTATION PURPOSES.OKAY. DON'T WE HAVE A COMMITMENT TO THE VENUE AS WELL? YES. AND SO I'VE GOT CASH FLOWS IN FRONT OF ME. WE HAVE COMMITMENTS TO VENUE MOVING OUT INTO FISCAL YEAR 26. AND THEN I HAVE IT ESTIMATED THROUGH THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 31. I MEAN, WHAT THE FUND THE FUND REMAINS VERY STRONG AND STILL WITHOUT ANY OTHER PROJECTS ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW. AND THAT CAN CHANGE AT ANY TIME WITH, WITH WITH THINGS YOU MAY OR MAY NOT ADOPT. YOU KNOW, WE STILL HAVE SUFFICIENT CASH FLOW. RIGHT NOW I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT WHAT IS THE UNCOMMITTED THEN FUND BALANCE IS ESSENTIALLY I GAVE YOU THE ACTUAL THE UNCOMMITTED FUND BALANCE WOULD BE $26.2 MILLION AFTER YOU REMOVE THE TRANSPORTATION DOLLARS. OKAY. AND THEN THE I KNOW WE HAD AN EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT AND THIS MAY BE A VERY PREMATURE QUESTION, BUT ABOUT FIRE SUPPRESSION FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND LOOKING AT TERS FUNDING FOR THAT, I'M JUST TRYING TO GAUGE HOW WE'RE GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, DOING ONCE WE COMMIT FUNDS FOR THAT PROJECT, WHAT'S THEN OUR ESTIMATION IN TERMS OF WHAT WILL BE LEFT. SO LET ME JUST JUST FOR LET ME LET ME SUM IT UP THIS WAY FOR FISCAL YEAR 25, WE'RE ANTICIPATING REVENUES OF JUST UNDER $8 MILLION. ONCE I COMMIT FUNDING, EVEN OUT THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 30. ONE OF EVERYTHING THAT IS CURRENTLY COMMITTED, INCLUDING NOTES LIVE, YOU WOULD HAVE EXPENSES IN THE AMOUNTS POSSIBLY OF AROUND $7 MILLION. BUT THEN BY FISCAL YEAR 31, YOU HAVE YOU'RE MAKING OVER $10 MILLION A YEAR IN THAT FUND. IF YOU JUST TAKE A STRAIGHT A STRAIGHT LINE APPROACH TO MOVING THE SALES AND PROPERTY TAX INCREMENT UP. SO EVEN AT THAT POINT, YOU WOULD STILL BE GENERATING SOMEWHERE OVER $3 MILLION A YEAR OF SURPLUS THAT COULD BE PUT TOWARDS ANY OTHER PROJECT. WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE SURVEY OF THE WATER MAINS DOWNTOWN? I WILL HAVE TO. THAT WOULD HAVE TO. YEAH THAT THAT WOULD BE. SO FOR THE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM. YES. RELATED TO THAT. YES. SO THE FIRE SUPPRESSION PROJECT, WE'RE CURRENTLY IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS SCORING. IT'S ACTUALLY DUE I WAS JUST LOOKING ON THE 12TH. SO I'VE GOT TO GET MY SCORES IN. SO WE'VE HAD TWO RESPONDENTS. WE DON'T HAVE A COST ESTIMATE FOR WHAT THAT INITIAL PHASE WOULD BE. BUT WHAT WE'LL BE BRINGING BACK TO YOU ONCE WE SELECTED A VENDOR WORK THROUGH THE SCOPE IS A COST FOR THE DESIGN PORTION. SO THEY'LL THEY'LL DO AN ASSESSMENT OF OUR EXISTING.
STATUS DOWNTOWN. THEY'LL DO AS BUILTS FOR THE BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN. AND THEN THEY WILL BE DESIGNING EACH OF NINE BLOCKS DOWNTOWN. SO THAT FIRST PHASE THAT WE'LL BE BRINGING TO YOU WILL JUST BE THE DESIGN PORTION. THEN WE CAN SPACE THE CONSTRUCTION PORTION OF THAT OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS. SO WE ANTICIPATE GOING BACK WITH A CALL IT A GUINEA PIG BLOCK. THAT GUINEA PIG BLOCK WILL BE A BLOCK WHERE WE CAN GET ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO COOPERATE AND PARTICIPATE, AND THEN THE CITY WILL INCENTIVIZE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FIRE SUPPRESSION AFTER THE FIRST. THEN WE CAN SCHEDULE THE OTHER EIGHT AS AS BUDGETS ALLOW. WILL IT INCLUDE SOME KIND OF ESTIMATION ON THE FINISH OUT OF THE SPRINKLERS INSIDE EACH FACILITY? YES, THEY WOULD GET THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE US A DESIGN, BUT THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO GIVE US OPTIONS AND COST OF THOSE OPTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE FIRE SUPPRESSION BEFORE I SIT? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MAY I COMMENT ANYONE MIND? YOU KNOW, THIS IS MY LAST MEETING TO LEAD THIS BOARD. AND AS A PARTING GIFT, I'M GOING TO SHARE WITH YOU MY BEST ADVICE IN ESTATE PLANNING. WHEN FOLKS COME TO ME FOR WILLS AND TRUSTS, AND I ALWAYS TELL THEM, SPEND IT ALL BEFORE YOU GO AND DON'T LEAVE THEM ANYTHING TO
[00:25:04]
FIGHT OVER. AND I THINK THAT'S QUITE APPLICABLE HERE, BECAUSE I HAVE THE TENDENCY TO FUND IT UNDER OPTION NUMBER ONE, BECAUSE THIS IS A PROJECT. AND TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF INFLATION, WE VOTED ON THE LIGHTING SYSTEM THAT'S UP THERE RIGHT NOW IN ABOUT 2017 OR 18. AND IT WAS $40,000. AND IT'S A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN THAT. NOW WE'VE GOT A FUND THAT IS GENERATING $8 MILLION PER YEAR. WE'VE GOT OUR COMMITMENTS COVERED. AND I THINK IT IS THE BEST FOR THE CITY OF MCKINNEY TO GO WHOLE HOG ON THIS THING AND MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BE PROUD OF, BOTH NOW AND WELL INTO THE FUTURE. MY THOUGHTS I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH CHARLIE. THE ONLY REASON THIS MAKES SENSE TO REFURBISH IT AND SPEND ALL THIS MONEY IS NOT BECAUSE IT'S A WORKING TOWER, NOT BECAUSE IT PROVIDES ANY, ANY REAL USEFUL ANYTHING TO THE CITY OTHER THAN THE COMMUNITY. LET US KNOW LAST TIME THAT THIS IS A PART OF THE SKYLINE THAT THEY FEEL IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND IS ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT, AND HAD HAD NO APPETITE WHATSOEVER TO SEE IT TORN DOWN. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO PRESERVE IT, I GO BACK TO THE CELL TOWERS. I MEAN, THE CELL ANTENNAS FROM THAT TO THE LIGHTING FROM THE BOTTOM UP TO THE LANDSCAPING AND FENCING, IF WE'RE GOING TO PRESERVE IT AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT A PART OF THE PRESERVE IT AS PART OF THE SKYLINE. MAN, YOU'LL BE SITTING HERE IN TWO YEARS OR THREE YEARS. AND ONCE HIGHWAY FIVE IS BEING REDEVELOPED AND REDONE, AND HOPEFULLY THAT PARK CONTINUES, IF PEOPLE HAVE THAT SAME VISION WITH OUR $35 MILLION OF FUNDING WE'VE ALREADY GOTTEN, MAN, YOU'LL BE LOOKING AT DOING IT THEN AND IT WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN IT IS TODAY. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO PRESERVE IT, PRESERVE IT IN A WAY THAT IS PRESENTS IT THE BEST IT CAN BE PRESENTED FOR THE DOWNTOWN AND THE REVITALIZATION OF HIGHWAY FIVE THAT WE'RE AIMING TO DO. WHY PUT OFF? WHY PUT THAT OFF? SO I'M IN FAVOR OF OPTION ONE. IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, DO IT RIGHT.OTHERWISE LET'S TEAR IT DOWN. I HOPE, LIKE YOU SAID, THE ANTENNAS CAN BE CLEANED UP INSTEAD OF HAVING WIRES ALL OVER THE PLACE. WE WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE THIS PICTURE THAT THEY'RE SHOWING US. EXACTLY. AND I MEAN, WE'RE WE'RE RESTORING IT TO LOOK BECAUSE IT'S THIS VINTAGE, QUOTE UNQUOTE, PART OF THE CITY. THERE WAS NO CELL ANTENNAS BACK THEN. I MAY BE TRYING TO PICK UP DIMES IN FRONT OF A STEAMROLLER, BUT THE DELTA BETWEEN OPTION ONE AND THREE IS ONE LEG OF LIGHTING, NOT THE REMEDIATION AND PRESERVING THIS WATER TOWER. AND IT IS THE LANDSCAPING BELOW WHICH IS NOT A VISUAL ESTHETIC FROM THE NIGHT SKY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S A VISUAL ESTHETIC SIMPLY FROM HIGHWAY FIVE ON THAT PART. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M A HUGE FAN OF DOING THIS AND I'M GRATEFUL THAT WE'RE GETTING IT DONE, BUT I'D SURE PREFER OPTION THREE ON THIS THING, NOT TO PRESERVE TRES MONEY, BECAUSE I THINK THE CASE HAS BEEN MADE THAT WE'VE GOT THE MONEY IN TRES TO DO IT, BUT SIMPLY IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S ONE LEG OF LIGHTING AND THEN IT'S THIS LANDSCAPING DOWN BELOW ON SOME CITY PROPERTIES THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE ALL FEEL HAVE.
THESE ARE MY WORDS, NOBODY ELSE'S. SO AT LEAST I FEEL THIS WAY THAT THEY'VE SERVED THEIR USEFUL LIFE AND THEY HAVE A BETTER LIFE AHEAD OF THEM THAN WHAT THEY DO, AND THAT WE MAY BE AMORTIZING A $400,000 LANDSCAPING THING OVER 4 OR 5 YEARS, WHICH IS EXPENSIVE TO ME, SO I'D BE A FAN OF OPTION THREE. I'D ACTUALLY BE AN OPTION OF 1 OR 2. I COULD GO EITHER WAY. I COULD SEE ONE LEG OF LIGHTING. I MEAN, PEOPLE THAT ARE LOOKING UP AT THE WATER TOWER, THEY'RE GOING TO NOTICE THE LIGHTING AROUND THE WATER TOWER, NOT THE LEG. BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE LANDSCAPING DOWN BELOW, BECAUSE IT IS IN AN AREA WHERE YOU WANT TO IMPROVE THE THINGS AROUND IT AND COVER UP SOME OF THE EQUIPMENT. SO I'D BE MORE OPTION. THE DELTA BETWEEN OPTION ONE AND OPTION TWO IS REALLY NOT ENOUGH FOR ME TO MAKE A DECISION. I THINK IT, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT, OPTION ONE OR OPTION THREE ARE THE TWO THAT I'M CONSIDERING AND KEEPING IN MIND ALSO THAT WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING THAT WE STILL HAVE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING UP, AND I'M SURE WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT USING TERS FOR PART OF THAT. BUT HAVING SAID THAT, I DO UNDERSTAND HAVING TALKED TO A LOT OF THE RESIDENTS, HOW ICONIC THIS STRUCTURE REALLY IS TO THEM. AND, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE CONSTANTLY GRAPPLING WITH IS THIS OVERALL REDEVELOPMENT OF THE EAST SIDE THAT IS FILLING A LITTLE BIT MORE AND MORE FOREIGN TO FOLKS. AND FOR WHATEVER REASON, THIS GIVES THEM SOME SENSE OF COMFORT AND A NOD TO THE PAST. AND I THINK FOR THAT REASON, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT DONE AS WELL AS POSSIBLE. SO I'M GOING TO SIDE WITH OPTION ONE AT THIS POINT. YEAH. PAUL'S COMMENT EARLIER
[00:30:04]
THAT OUR OPTIONS ARE EITHER TEAR IT DOWN OR DO IT. I WANT TO REMIND THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO ARE ON HERE, AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW, COUNCIL MEMBER HALE AND MEMBER LEBO ARE NOT MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. BUT YOU GUYS ARE SITTING IN A $100 MILLION PLUS INVESTMENT IN DOWNTOWN MCKINNEY, PROTECTED. BECAUSE WITHOUT FAIL, EVERY VISITOR I'VE EVER TALKED TO WHO HAS BEEN TO MCKINNEY FROM OUT OF STATE, ALWAYS TALKS ABOUT HOW WONDERFUL DOWNTOWN IS. I'VE REFERRED TO IT AS THE CROWN JEWEL OF NORTH TEXAS. DON'T SKIMP ON PENNIES AND DIMES.PROTECT YOUR INVESTMENT IN DOWNTOWN MCKINNEY BECAUSE YOU WANT TO SEE IT GROW THIS WAY.
AND WITH WHAT WE HAVE OUT THERE RIGHT NOW, THAT'S NOT CONDUCIVE TO THAT KIND OF GROWTH. LET'S DO IT THE BEST WE CAN DO IT. I THINK THE CITIZENS OF MCKINNEY DESERVE OUR VERY BEST. WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. WELL, I HAVEN'T MADE ANY COMMENTS YET, OR VERY FEW. I AGREE WITH THE REMEDIATION PART. IT'S DEFINITELY PART OF THE TOUR'S MISSION. I THINK THIS IS A VERY EXPENSIVE ITEM. IN GENERAL. EVEN THE DELTA BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S STILL GOING TO COST US IF WE HAVE TO TEAR IT DOWN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COST IS $1 MILLION. IF IT'S $1 MILLION TO TEAR IT DOWN AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, 4 TO 5 TO, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHAT OPTION GETS PICKED, YOU'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT BASICALLY A 3 OR $4 MILLION DELTA FOR WHAT AMOUNTS TO, YOU KNOW, JUST A SYMBOL. AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE ONGOING COSTS EVERY, YOU KNOW, 15 YEARS OR SO TO REPAINT, KEEP IT STRUCTURALLY SOUND. YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE AN ONGOING COST. IT'S A VERY EXPENSIVE PIECE OF CULTURE AT THAT POINT, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT'S BEING KEPT FOR, IS CULTURE. THERE'S SO MANY OTHER NEEDS. EVEN THOUGH THERE'S A HEALTHY FUND BALANCE, THERE'S SO MANY OTHER NEEDS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN VOTE YES ON IT. YOU KNOW, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY SOME PEOPLE IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA LIKE IT WHEN I'VE VISITED DOWNTOWN. I DON'T THINK WATER TOWER. I DON'T THINK THE WATER TOWER THAT'S THERE, YOU KNOW. YES. WHENEVER YOU SEE ALL THE. AND THAT'S BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT IT FROM, YOU KNOW, A WALKING AROUND VANTAGE POINT IN DOWNTOWN. I DON'T I DON'T SEE AND YOU MAY BE ALONE ON THAT, MAN. I MEAN, I CAN HEAR FROM EVERYBODY ON THIS THING WE HEARD IS INSANE. SO IF YOU'RE ON CITY COUNCIL, I GUARANTEE YOU WOULD HAVE HEARD IT FROM A MILLION PEOPLE. IF YOU LOOKED AT PRISONERS TATTOOS FROM MCKINNEY. THEY ALL HAVE THE WATER TOWER. YOU LOOK AT ALL THIS STUFF. IT IS THE WATER TOWER THAT IS THE ICON. SO YOU CAN VOTE NO ON IT. THAT'S GREAT. BUT, YOU KNOW. BUT MY VOTE'S NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THERE YOU GO. WELL, BUT BUT TRULY WHEN FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE ON COUNCIL, WHEN WE WHEN WE REHABBED WHAT WE HAD TO DO STRUCTURALLY THE FIRST TIME AND I CERTAINLY WAS ONE TALKING ABOUT TEARING IT DOWN, IT WAS WORSE THAN THE SITUATION WHEN I HAD 50 PROTESTERS WITH AIR FIFTEENS OUTSIDE MY HOUSE. IT WAS WORSE. THE, THE, THE PUSHBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY, IF YOU WILL, DIFFERENT ERA. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M AT IS THEY WOULD THEY WOULD HAVE NOT APPROACHED ME SAYING, OH, WE GOT TO TALK TO THAT GUY ON THE TOURIST BOARD. YOU KNOW, GEORGE, I RECALL THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW WHO'S GOING TO BE SITTING IN THIS CHAIR IN TWO WEEKS, BUT THERE'S NO ONE ON THE BALLOT THAT I DISLIKE ENOUGH TO WISH THAT KIND OF BACKLASH ON THEM. YEAH. I MEAN, PERSONALLY, I IF IT WAS A PERSONAL DECISION, I'D SAY TEAR THIS THING DOWN. I MEAN, IT HAS NO VALUE. IT'S JUST IT'S A METAL STRUCTURE AND I AND TO ME, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE HISTORY OF MCKINNEY. MCKINNEY IS AN OLD, OLD CITY. AND THIS IS A METAL STRUCTURE. THERE'S FAR MORE BUILDINGS THAT ARE MORE HISTORICAL THAN THIS WATER TOWER. BUT THE GENERATIONAL PEOPLE THAT DO LIVE DOWNTOWN AND THAT HAVE BEEN HERE IN MCKINNEY, THEY, THEY, THEY WANT THIS AND, AND WE DO REPRESENT THEM. SO FOR THAT, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, THEN, LIKE YOU SAID, WE NEED TO BE ALL IN AND DO IT. I AGREE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. WE APPROVE THIS ITEM. WHICH OPTION? WHICH OPTION? O OPTION ONE. I'LL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR. AYE, AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? NO. WOULD THAT MAKE IT AN EIGHT ONE VOTE WITH COUNCILMAN OR MEMBER HALE DISSENTING, ITEM PASSES. AND I BELIEVE THAT IS LAST ITEM THAT WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA. I WANT TO THANK EACH AND ALL OF YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO FEEL IMPORTANT BY LEADING THESE MEETINGS. AND I
[00:35:04]
WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.