[I. Call Meeting to Order]
[00:00:07]
UM, MUCH OF THIS INFORMATION WILL BE VERY, VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE PRESENTED TO YOU IN EARLY JULY.
SO, WITH YOUR INDULGENCE, I'M GONNA REALLY TRY TO FOCUS ON JUST THE CHANGES FROM WHAT WE HAD FROM THE JULY 6TH PRESENTATION.
WE'RE HERE TO GO THROUGH ANY DETAIL THAT YOU HAVE, EVERY SINGLE SLIDE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO DO.
UM, BUT AGAIN, OUR PREFERENCE IS JUST TO TRY TO HIT THE HIGH POINTS AND THE CHANGES IF EVERYONE'S OKAY WITH THAT.
WE ALSO HAVE, UH, A LOT OF STAFF HERE, UH, OBVIOUSLY, SO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS THAT, UH, I CAN'T ANSWER OR PAVA CAN'T ANSWER, THEN WE'LL BE HAPPY TO HAVE ONE OF THEM COME UP AND HELP YOU WITH THAT.
[III. Consider and Possible Action]
THAT, LET'S JUST GET, GO AHEAD AND GET GOING.UM, AGAIN, THESE ARE THE SAME, UH, OVERVIEWS THAT WE HAD FOR THE LAST TIME, BUT WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE KEY BUDGET INITIATIVES.
THE PRELIMINARY PROPOSED, UH, FINANCIALS IS ACTUALLY BE MY, UH, PROPOSED, UH, PLAN FOR THE COMING FISCAL YEAR, UH, THE C I P, AND THEN ALL THE, THE SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS AND HOW WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.
SO AGAIN, THIS HAS BEEN A LONG PROCESS ON THE BUDGET.
UH, IF YOU GO BACK INTO FEBRUARY, THIS IS WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS.
SO IT'S BEEN A NUMBER OF MONTHS.
UH, WE'RE NOW AT THE JULY 29TH, UH, BUDGET WORK SESSION.
AND THEN JUST A COUPLE MORE OPPORTUNITIES BEFORE WE ASK THE COUNCIL TO ADOPT THE BUDGET.
ON AUGUST 24TH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID IS LOOK AT ALL THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK AND THE SURVEYS AND INFORMATION THAT WE'D RECEIVED FROM THE COMMUNITY TO BUILD THIS BUDGET.
THIS IS A RECAP OF SOME OF THE THINGS I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT, UH, ON JULY 6TH, BUT THESE ARE ALL THE SURVEY RESULTS.
AND SO PROFESS IF YOU COULD KIND OF JUST FLIP THROUGH THOSE AND TO THE NEXT CHART, THIS IS, AGAIN, A, A WORD CLOUD OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE REALLY IMPORTANT.
UH, PEOPLE WANT CHANGE, RESTAURANTS, ROADS, TRAFFIC, AND YOU'LL SEE THE BUDGET TRY TO ADDRESS ALL THESE PARTICULAR THINGS THAT CAME UP IN THAT, UH, PARTICULAR, UH, SURVEY.
THE BUDGET IS REALLY BUILT AROUND THESE SEVEN DIFFERENT AREAS.
AND AGAIN, WE TALKED ABOUT THESE.
THERE'S A FEW CHANGES THAT, THAT I WANNA TALK ABOUT AS WE GO THROUGH THIS.
UH, BUT LET'S, UH, QUICKLY WALK THROUGH COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
THIS IS THE, OH, YOU'RE TRYING TO MESS ME UP.
SEE IF I, YOU'RE SEEING
SO WE HAVE, UH, THE QUARTERLY MAILER IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE IN THIS BUDGET, AS WELL AS A NEW AUDIO AND FILM PRODUCTION SPECIALIST POSITION TO HELP US WITH, UH, PROVIDING SOME MORE VIDEOS.
WE'RE FINDING THOSE ARE MORE AND MORE POPULAR TO GET OUT IN THE, THE PUBLIC REALM.
UH, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND BUSINESS RETENTION.
UH, SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
AND ONE OF THE, THE ELEMENTS THAT I DID WANT TO, TO, UH, TALK ABOUT IS WE DID REVISE THIS FROM THE ORIGINAL, UH, JULY 6TH PRESENTATION.
SO YOU'LL SEE IN THAT THIRD BULLET POINT, ONE OF THE THINGS WE TOLD YOU BEFORE WAS CREATING AN INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF RETAIL CENTERS AND GROCERY STORES ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE CITY.
UH, BUT THIS BUDGET AND THE PROPOSED BUDGET THAT I'VE GIVEN TO YOU ACTUALLY INCLUDES REAL DOLLARS TO DO THAT, UH, INCLUDES $2 MILLION TO BEGIN THE DESIGN OF GOFOR.
AND THIS IS FROM THE LIMESTONE CREEK DEVELOPMENT ALL THE WAY UP TO FM ONE 50.
IT DOES NOT INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION.
THAT WILL BE ANOTHER PHASE THAT WE'LL HAVE TO WORK THROUGH WITH EITHER THE PROPERTY OWNER OR A DEVELOPER TO HELP US WORK THROUGH THAT OR POTENTIALLY FUND IT ON ALL ON OUR OWN.
BUT WE DO HAVE 2 MILLION FOR THE DESIGN OF THAT ROADWAY.
AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE $2 MILLION FOR THE DESIGN OF EXTENDING WATER AND WASTEWATER LINES TO THAT, THAT, THAT, UH, PARTICULAR AREA THAT THE GOAL FOR THAT IS TO TRY TO IDENTIFY THAT RETAIL CENTER AND GROCERY STORE THAT I KNOW THE COUNCIL'S BEEN FOCUSED ON.
I THINK, IS THERE A QUESTION? YES, SIR.
UM, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT PROMOTING MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS, UM, WHICH IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I AM TOTALLY FOR, UM, UH, MY QUESTION IS HOW DO WE CONFIRM THE PRICE POINTS AND WHAT ARE OUR PRICE POINTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING RENT THAT'S MORE EXPENSIVE THAN A MORTGAGE? YEAH.
SO THERE, THIS IS REALLY, UM, THE, ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE GOT BACK FROM THE PUBLIC WAS WANTING TO MAKE SURE THEY HAD DIVERSITY OF HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS.
AND POINT HERE IS THAT WHEN WE BRINGING FORWARD DEVELOPMENTS, WE'RE NOT ONLY, UH, GOING TO HAVE JUST SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, WHICH TYPICALLY CAN BE MORE EXPENSIVE, THAT WE'RE GOING TO, UH, BE OPEN TO OTHER IDEAS THAT WILL HAVE LOTS OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
THERE WILL BE NO, UM, PRICE CONTROLS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT FROM THE CITY STANDPOINT.
BUT WHEN YOU HAVE THAT DIVERSITY OF HOUSING, YOU HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO HAVE LOTS OF DIFFERENT PRICE POINTS.
SO, UM, IT'LL TO BE MARKET DRIVEN, BUT THE IDEA WOULD BE THERE'S LOTS OF CHOICES FOR THE COMMUNITY, WHETHER IT'S TOWN HOMES, APARTMENTS, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
LOTS OF DIFFERENT ONES WILL BE AVAILABLE.
SO THERE'S REAL, NO, NO REAL CONFIRMATION THAT THOSE PRICE POINTS ARE GONNA BE LOWER THAN SAY, A MORTGAGE.
UH, NO, NO, NOT, NOT RIGHT NOW.
AND I, I THINK, UM, THERE ARE SOME COMMUNITIES THAT DON'T ENCOURAGE MIXED USE THAT DON'T ENCOURAGE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT,
[00:05:01]
AND THAT DOES HAVE A DEFINITE PRICE INCREASE ON SOME OF THE FOLKS IN THEIR COMMUNITIES.BUT THIS ONE, THIS PROPOSAL IS DIFFERENT THAN THAT.
UM, EVERYTHING ELSE HERE IS THE SAME, BUT I DID WANNA CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THAT.
UM, ON PUBLIC SAFETY, AGAIN, A BIG FOCUS OF THE BUDGET IS ON, UH, ENHANCING PUBLIC SAFETY.
ALL OF THIS IS THE SAME INFORMATION THAT YOU SAW BEFORE.
SO THERE'S SEVERAL NEW POSITIONS ACROSS THE, UH, POLICE DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME IS THIS BUDGET DOES INCLUDE MONIES FOR CONDUCTING A STAFFING STUDY OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
AND THIS WOULD BE A LONG-TERM STAFFING STUDY THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT.
AND BASED ON THAT STAFFING STUDY, WE WOULD THEN WANT TO BRING FORWARD SOME, UH, NEW THINGS TO IMPLEMENT.
SO THE BUDGET ALSO INCLUDES $250,000 FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WHATEVER THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE.
AND THE CHIEF AND I WILL BE COMING BACK IN IN THE FUTURE TO WALK YOU THROUGH, UH, THAT PROCESS.
YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE, JUST THE NUMBER OF OFFICERS PER 1000 RESIDENTS, UH, KYLE'S SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE.
UH, THIS IS A SOMEWHAT SIMPLISTIC ANALYSIS THAT WE HAVE.
IT DOESN'T LOOK AT ALL OF THE, UH, UH, TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, TYPES OF CALLS, ALL THOSE THINGS.
BUT WE THINK THIS IS A, AT LEAST A GOOD STARTING POINT TO START LOOKING AT THINGS.
WHEN WE DO THE STAFFING STUDY.
WE'LL BRING YOU A LOT MORE DATA AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THAT GOING FORWARD, UH, TECHNOLOGY AND, UH, EQUIPMENT.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE DIFFERENT THINGS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
AGAIN, NONE OF THESE HAVE CHANGED, SO WE'LL KEEP MOVING.
UM, MARKET BASED EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION AND, UH, BENEFITS PROGRAM, AGAIN, WE WANTED TO, ONE OF THE THINGS THIS, UH, WE HAD PROPOSED TO YOU IN JULY, AND THIS BUDGET DOES, IS MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE GOOD BENCHMARKS.
SO WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THESE 10 CITIES TO TARGET IN THE CORRIDOR THAT WE WOULD USE AS BENCHMARKS.
WE'RE USING THOSE FOR COMPENSATION.
WE'RE ALSO USING THEM, UH, FOR, UH, BENEFIT COMPARISONS.
AND I'M GONNA SHOW YOU SOME INFORMATION IN A MOMENT THAT WE'LL COMPARE THAT.
THESE ARE ALL THE ELEMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED FOR COMPENSATION, OUR MERIT INCREASES, THE POLICE STEP, INCREASES A REVIEW OF THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN BASED ON OUR STUDY OF THE, THE PAY PLAN.
WE'VE ALSO INCLUDED SOME DOLLARS TO HELP US MAKE ADJUSTMENTS THAT WILL BE NECESSARY.
THE EQUITY-BASED ADJUSTMENTS IS 400,000.
UH, WE'RE ALL, THAT COMPENSATION STUDY IS, UH, 75,000 TO DO THAT WORK.
AND THEN WE'LL CONTINUE TO REVIEW OUR HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO DO A SELF-FUNDED PLAN GOING FORWARD.
WE THINK WE'RE AT THE SIZE NOW WHERE THAT POTENTIALLY MAKES SENSE.
SO THIS IS A NEW SLIDE, SLIDE 16.
I WANTED TO SHARE THIS WITH YOU.
UH, IF YOU LOOK AT, THIS IS A BUSY SLIDE, UH, BUT AT THE TOP OF OF THE CHART, YOU'LL SEE, UM, THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS AND FOR JUST AN EMPLOYEE OR EMPLOYEE HAS AN OPTION TO SELECT JUST THEMSELVES, OR THEY CAN SELECT THEMSELVES AND A SPOUSE THEMSELVES AND A CHILD OR THEMSELVES IN THEIR ENTIRE FAMILY.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THAT SELECT THAT I'M WALKING FROM LEFT TO RIGHT THROUGH THERE, THE TOTAL MONTHLY PREMIUM.
SO THIS IS THE TOTAL COST TO THE CITY FOR THESE, UH, YOU KNOW, COVERAGES THAT ARE THERE, AND THEN WHAT THE CITY CONTRIBUTES.
SO YOU CAN SEE ON THIS PARTICULAR CHART, UH, THAT CURRENTLY THE CITY PAYS FOR A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE EMPLOYEE'S COST, BUT DOES NOT PAY ANY COST TOWARDS DEPENDENT COVERAGE.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THEN, WHAT THAT MEANS OF THE EMPLOYEE HAS TO PAY ON A MONTHLY BASIS, THAT'S VERY HIGH RATES, IS, IS MY OPINION.
I'M GONNA SHOW YOU THAT IN A MOMENT.
BUT FOR AN EMPLOYEE, UM, WITH THEIR SPOUSE, IT'S $729 A MONTH, EMPLOYEE WITH THEIR CHILDREN IS $518 A MONTH, AND EMPLOYEE PLUS FAMILY IS $1,145 PER MONTH.
WE'VE FOUND THAT THEY, THAT'S A VERY EXPENSIVE PREMIUM FOR EMPLOYEES TO AFFORD.
PARTICULARLY IF YOU LOOK AT THE AVERAGE WAGE OF A CITY EMPLOYEE, WHICH IS 45 TO $50,000, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO AFFORD $1,100 A MONTH.
AND YOU SEE THAT IN THE UTILIZATION OF THE PLAN.
WE ONLY HAVE SEVEN EMPLOYEES THAT SELECT FAMILY COVERAGE.
UH, WE BELIEVE BECAUSE OF THE COST.
SO WHAT'S ON THE BOTTOM OF THE CHART IS A PROPOSAL TO, UH, TO ADD A, UH, COMPONENT TO THE PLAN THAT THE CITY PAYS 65% OF THE DEPENDENT COVERAGES FOR, UH, SPOUSE, CHILDREN OR FAMILY PLANS.
AND THAT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY DROP THE PREMIUMS FOR EMPLOYEES.
YOU CAN SEE FOR AN EMPLOYEE, IT WOULD GO FROM SEVEN, EXCUSE ME, EMPLOYEE WITH A SPOUSE.
IT WOULD GO FROM $729 A MONTH TO 255, AN EMPLOYEE WITH, UH, CHILDREN FROM FIVE 18 TO 180 1.
AND THE FAMILY COVERAGE DROPS SIGNIFICANTLY FROM 1144 TO $400 PER MONTH.
IF I COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, AND THEN I'LL PAUSE HERE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.
I DID WANNA SHOW YOU THAT, THAT COMPARISON WITH ALL OF THE OTHER CITIES, THE BENCHMARK CITIES THAT WE LOOKED AT ON THE VERY RIGHT HAND, UM, COLUMN, UM, IN, IN, IN RED IS OUR CURRENT PLAN.
AND I KNOW THIS IS A BUSY SLIDE, BUT THIS IS THE PERCENTAGE OF, UH,
[00:10:01]
THAT THE CITY CONTRIBUTES FOR AS ANY OF THESE PREMIUMS. SO IN THE BLUE, A HUNDRED PERCENT FOR US IS WHAT THE CITY PAYS FOR EMPLOYEES, WHICH IS A HUNDRED PERCENT.BUT ALL OF THE OTHER NUMBERS FOR KYLE IS ZERO.
AND YOU CAN SEE VERSUS ALL OF THESE OTHER CITIES, WE'RE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT IN THAT REGARD, AND THAT SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECTS THE PREMIUMS THAT EMPLOYEES PAY.
SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THE 65%, WHICH IS THEN THE MIDDLE OF THE CHART AND THE GREEN COLOR, UH, WHICH WOULD, WHICH WOULD PUT US IN THE MIDDLE, UH, OF THE CITIES THAT WE'RE COMPARING TO.
SO I'M GONNA PAUSE HERE FOR A MOMENT, JUST SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT.
I, I THINK THAT'S, SAW IVONNE HAD A QUESTION.
NO, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION.
UM, USUALLY YOU WORK IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR FOR THE BENEFITS, CERTAINLY NOT THE PAY.
SO, UM, SEEING HOW MUCH IT WAS WAS REALLY CONCERNING FOR ME.
AND THEN SEEING HOW MANY OF OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE THEIR FAMILIES COVERED WAS, UH, REALLY EYE-OPENING.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION.
I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO ADDRESS, AND I BELIEVE WE, WE, UH, WE VOTED ON THIS ABOUT A YEAR OR TWO AGO, UM, GOING WITH, UH, UNITED HEALTHCARE, IS THAT WHO WE WERE WITH? OKAY.
SO IT'S GOOD TO SEE THE NUMBERS NOW FROM WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TO SEE WHERE WE'RE AT AND IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT WHERE THE EMPLOYEES ARE, ARE FEELING MORE OF A PINCH AT THE END OF THE MONTH OR, UM, AND WE ALL KNOW THE RISING COST OF HEALTHCARE AND MEDICATIONS AND SO FORTH.
I THINK THIS WOULD, UM, NOT ONLY BE SOMETHING AS FAR AS YOU COULD USE AS A RECRUITING TOOL ON THAT TO SHOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY SUPPORTS THAT, BUT IT'S, WE JUST GOTTA LOOK AT THE OVERALL OF WHAT THESE, THE EMPLOYEES ARE, ARE FACING.
YOU KNOW, IT'S GOOD TO SEE THAT WE CAN SEE THE NUMBERS FINALLY.
WE CAN KINDA SEE WHERE WE'RE AT, HOW MUCH THE, THE EMPLOYEES ARE PAYING.
I THINK, UM, FOR SOME OF OUR EMPLOYEES, AND, YOU KNOW, OVER THE COURSE OF MY CAREER, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A CHALLENGE WHERE YOU WERE GIVING OUT MERIT INCREASES, BUT YOU'RE, AT THE SAME TIME YOU'RE INCREASING HEALTH INSURANCE, UH, PREMIUMS. AND A LOT OF EMPLOYEES WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOTTEN A RAISE, BUT THE HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM IS REALLY TAKING UP ALL THAT RAISE.
OR IN SOME CASES I'M GOING NEGATIVE BECAUSE OF THE, THE COST.
SO THIS IS ACTUALLY, UM, GOING TO BE DIFFERENT THIS YEAR.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE A VERY SHARP DECREASE IN THE PREMIUMS FOR EMPLOYEES AT THE SAME TIMES PROVIDING MERIT INCREASES.
SO WE'RE EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
AND THIS BUDGET INCLUDES THE FUNDING TO DO THESE THINGS.
IN FACT, I JUST HAVE ONE FOLLOW UP ON THIS.
WHAT WOULD BE THE PERCENTAGE THE CITY WOULD PAY AS A WHOLE IF WE WERE TO GO WITH THE 65%? LIKE, LIKE A, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WHAT PERCENTAGE? LIKE, UM, HOW MUCH OF THE BUDGET THAT CITY, A DOLLAR AMOUNT AS FAR AS WHAT THE CITIES WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO, TO THE EMPLOYEES.
IT PROBABLY WOULD BE THE AVERAGE BETWEEN THAT A HUNDRED PERCENT AND THE 65.
IT'S PROBABLY AROUND 80 SOMETHING PERCENT IF YOU DOLLAR WEIGHTED, AVERAGED IT OUT.
LOOK AT THE ACTUAL CALCULATION.
PERVE, DO YOU HAVE A NUMBER ON THAT? YES.
SO THE ADDITIONAL COST TO THE CITY TO GO MOVE TO 65% PARTICIPATION FOR THE CITY TO PAY FOR THE EMPLOYEES IS AN ADDITIONAL $603,000, WHICH THE PROPOSED BUDGET INCLUDES IN IT.
CHAIR MEINA, CHAIR ME, TRAVIS OG IS THAT, ASSUMING THAT E EVERYBODY WOULD BE ON THE PLAN? UH, WE, WE'VE MADE SOME ASSUMPTIONS OF WORK WORKING WITH OUR BENEFITS CONSULTANT OF HOW THE, THE COVERAGES WOULD SHIFT.
AND IF ON SLIDE 16 YOU CAN SEE HOW WE THINK THERE'LL BE MORE PEOPLE ON THE, UM, EMPLOYEE PLUS SPOUSE, MORE PEOPLE ON THE EMPLOYEE PLUS CHILDREN AND FAMILY, IT'S AN ESTIMATE BASED ON THEIR UTILIZATIONS THAT THEY SEE.
BUT, UM, COULD BE HIGHER OR LOWER.
OKAY, WELL, LET'S KEEP ROLLING.
UH, ANOTHER MAJOR COMPONENT OF THIS BUDGET IS TO INCREASE STREET MAINTENANCE.
WE'VE, UH, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS QUITE A BIT, UM, AT THE LAST MEETING, BUT WE'RE ADDING 2.3 MILLION.
THIS IS THE RECONSTRUCT THE ROADWAYS FOR GO FORTH AND HIDE AND REICH, THAT'S IN THE BUDGET.
AND WE ARE ALSO ARE INCREASING THE STREET MAINTENANCE FROM 750,000 PER YEAR TO 1 MILLION PER YEAR.
AND THESE ARE ALL THE ROADS THAT ARE PLANNED.
UM, AND WE'LL JUST KIND OF GO THROUGH SOME OF THESE.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THESE SLIDES, BUT THESE ARE THE CALCULATIONS, THE, THE, UH, THE LINKS OF THE SEGMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET ON THE ROADWAYS.
UH, THESE WERE ALL THE SAME AS WHAT YOU SAW LAST TIME.
SO WE'LL JUST KIND OF FLIP THROUGH THESE UNLESS THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.
SO HOW WAS IT, UM, HOW, HOW WAS HIDE AND DRY CHOSEN? I KNOW I ADVOCATED FOR THAT
SO, AND WE CAN ADVOCATE, BUT MY QUESTION IS, THERE HAS TO BE SOME KIND OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AS TO LIKE, WHY.
AND SO, AND I'M JUST GENUINELY CURIOUS, UH, WHAT STAFF FOUND OUT ABOUT HEID ANDRE THAT MADE IT A A PRIORITY? YEAH, I THINK WE, WE LOOKED AT THE, UH, QUALITY OF THE ROADWAYS, AND THERE'S AN ACTUAL, UH, CALCULATION
[00:15:01]
OF THE, UM, PAVEMENT CONDITION.UH, THERE'S AN INDEX THAT YOU CAN CALCULATE TO SEE WHAT THAT PAVEMENT CONDITION IS WORKING WITH OUR PUBLIC WORKS TEAM.
WE'VE ALSO LOOKED AT THE, HOW, HOW MUCH THESE ROADS WERE TRAVELED.
SO YOU COULD HAVE A ROAD THAT'S NOT TRAVELED VERY OFTEN THAT HAS A POOR SCORE, BUT WE'VE RANKED THE ONES THAT ARE TRAVELED MORE FREQUENTLY HIGHER THAN THAT.
UH, SO THAT'S HOW THESE TWO WERE SELECTED.
AND HARPER, I KNOW I'M CATCHING YOU, UH, ON THE CUFF HERE, BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER DETAILS ABOUT HIDEN RECH, I THINK IT'D BE GOOD TO SHARE THOSE.
UH, THAT IS A VERY BAD ROAD, AND WE'VE DISCUSSED IT BEFORE, BUT, UM, SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS BROUGHT UP HIDEN, RECH AND GOFORTH FROM, UH, THE CASSETTE ROUNDABOUT TO BB ROAD.
AND SO WE KNEW THAT WAS A HIGH PRIORITY, UH, FOR, AND IF I MAY ADD TO THAT, YES.
UM, THIS WAS CONVERSATIONS I HAD WITH THE RESIDENTS, AND I BASICALLY WENT THROUGH, SEE HOW MANY, HOW MANY OF THESE ROADS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED BY EACH RESIDENT.
THIS ONE WAS ONE OF THE TOP ONES THAT MOST RESIDENTS ADDRESS AS IN NEED.
AND THEN WE DID, UM, DRIVE UP, YOU KNOW, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS TO BE, JUST TO SEE THOSE ROADS.
AND I KNOW THESE ONES WERE A BIG PRIORITY.
BOTH OF THE, BOTH OF THOSE ROADS ARE NORTH, SOUTH, CUT, CUT THROUGHS, UH, USED REGULARLY.
HOW MUCH OF THAT ROAD IS IN THIS KYLE CITY LIMITS? I KNOW SOME OF IT'S IN THE COUNTY.
IT GOES, I, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT, UH, DISTANCE ON IN HAND RIGHT NOW, BUT IT GOES ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WHERE THE NEW, UM, WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ENTRANCE IS.
UM, AND THAT WOULD BE WHAT WE WERE GONNA WORK.
UM, WE ASKED ABOUT GOING TO THE BRIDGE JUST TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT AND CONTINUOUS ALL THE WAY TO THE BRIDGE.
BUT THE, IF YOU GO TO THE BRIDGE, YOU'RE ACTUALLY OUT OF THE CITY LIMITS, SO I DON'T HAVE THE DISTANCE, BUT IF ANY, IF YOU DRIVE DOWN HENRIKE, YOU CAN SEE ALL THE WAY TO OUR TREATMENT PLANT ENTRANCE.
SO WILL THAT INCLUDE JUST MAINTENANCE OR EXPANDING IT? AND THAT'S PULLED UP.
IT'LL BE FULL DEPTH, FULL DEPTH OF REPAIR.
SO CONTINUING ON, UM, ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE IS ALSO ONE OF THE THINGS WE LOOKED AT AND, AND LOOKING AT THE ORGANIZATION, THE POSITIONS THAT WE HAVE, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE NEED FROM A, UH, STAFF PERSPECTIVE.
SO THE BUDGET HAS SEVERAL CHANGES IN THIS.
UH, THREE POSITIONS HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED TO BE ELIMINATED.
THAT'S FOR ABOUT $460,000 IN SAVINGS.
THERE'S ALSO A CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER POSITION THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT AS WELL AS A NEW PURCHASING AND CONTRACT COMPLIANCE, UH, WORK UNIT.
THE BUDGET ALSO INCLUDES THE ADDITION OF AN IN-HOUSE CITY ATTORNEY POSITION.
AS THE CITY CONTINUES TO GROW AND HAVE A MORE INCREASINGLY COMPLEX ORGANIZATION, WE FEEL LIKE WE NEED THAT POSITION TO ASSIST US ON A DAILY BASIS.
THIS IS A, ANOTHER CHART THAT WE'VE ADDED.
THIS IS NEW FROM LAST, LAST TIME, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO TRY TO LOOK AT IS THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THAT WE HAVE FOR A THOUSAND RESIDENTS VERSUS THOSE 10 BENCHMARK CITIES THAT, THAT WE LOOKED AT BEFORE.
UH, THIS IS AGAIN, SOMEWHAT OF A SIMPLISTIC ANALYSIS.
SOME OF THE CITIES HAVE DIFFERENT SERVICES, DIFFERENT OPERATIONS, BUT JUST AS A QUICK BENCHMARK, YOU CAN SEE, UH, WE'RE VERY EFFICIENT HERE AT THE CITY OF KYLE.
WE HAVE A FEW EMPLOYEES FOR THE, THE SIZE OF POPULATION THAT WE HAVE.
WE'RE DOING A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
WE'LL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THIS MORE IN THE FUTURE.
FUTURE BUDGETS WILL PROVIDE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, DETAIL OF HOW WE CAN COMPARE OURSELVES TO THESE OTHER CITIES AND, AND DIRECT LINES OF SERVICE.
UH, SO AUSTIN, FOR EXAMPLE, MAY HAVE AN AIRPORT.
THEY DO HAVE AN AIRPORT, OTHER OPERATIONS.
SO THEY'RE PROBABLY SOME THINGS THAT ARE NOT APPLES TO APPLES HERE, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT LEANDER OR BUTA, THOSE CITIES, IT'S VERY, VERY COMPARABLE.
HEY, BRIAN, I JUST WANNA BACKTRACK, I GUESS ON THE FACILITY MANAGER SINCE WE'RE ELIMINATING THAT POSITION, BUT WE'RE HIRING A CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER.
UM, THE QUESTION IS CURRENTLY IF THE LIBRARY HAS A A PROBLEM, WATER LEAK OR AIR CONDITIONER OUT, OR PARKS AND RECS BUILDING DOES, HOW, HOW IS THE CITY NOTIFIED FROM THAT? THE, THE PERSONNEL IN THE BUILDINGS? SO, SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ASK JERRY TO ANSWER THAT.
WE DON'T END UP WITH A LOT OF DETERIORATED.
NO, THAT'S BUILDINGS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A SUPERVISOR.
WE'RE LOOKING TO RESTRUCTURE THE FACILITIES AREA.
SO I'LL LET JERRY COMMENT ON THAT.
UH, FOR THE RECORD, JERRY HENDRICKS, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, WE'VE, WE'RE REORGANIZING THAT DEPARTMENT AND THE CURRENT DIVISION MANAGER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND TRADES, ENVIRONMENTAL TRADES AND SERVICES.
IT'S GOING, WE'RE COMBINING THAT WITH FACILITIES.
UM, YOU KNOW, CHANCE HAS BEEN WITH, UH, SURE.
E, S AND T SINCE IT WAS FORMED AND WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH THE FACILITIES.
AND WE THINK IT'S TIME TO COMBINE THOSE TWO FOR EFFICIENCIES.
AND, UM, IN TERMS OF NOTIFICATION ABOUT BUILDING MAINTENANCE
[00:20:01]
NEEDS, THERE'S A REQUEST FOR SERVICES FEED THAT EMPLOYEES HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO AND EMAIL THAT IT GOES STRAIGHT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT FOR, FOR THAT GROUP AS WELL AS THE CHANCE.AND THEY JUMP ON THOSE THINGS IMMEDIATELY.
IT'S USUALLY INSTANTANEOUS THAT THEY SEE IT AND RESPOND VERY QUICKLY.
AND IN TERMS OF, UH, PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE, WE HAVE A SCHEDULE FOR ALL THE BUILDINGS, ALL THE AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS, ALL THE CLEANING.
'CAUSE UH, LAST YEAR I DID SEE, WE APPROVED SOME CONTRACTS FOR MORE ACS AND HEATERS HERE, SO, AND ALL THOSE HAVE BEEN, SO MY WORRY WAS ARE, ARE WE STILL GONNA HAVE A PERSON, UM, THAT GETS NOTIFICATIONS? YES.
AND I GET COPIED ON THOSE ROS'S TOO, SO MULTIPLE PEOPLE CAN SEE THOSE.
ALRIGHT, JUST A COUPLE MORE SLIDES FROM ME AND THEN WE GET TO THE FUN STUFF WITH PREVE.
UM, SO, UH, STRATEGIC PLANNING, UH, AGAIN, AS I'VE TALKED TO YOU GUYS IN THE PAST ABOUT, ONE OF THE THINGS I'D LIKE TO DO IS HAVE A STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT THIS FALL.
WE DO, WE DO HAVE SOME FUNDING IN THAT TO, TO LOOK AT THAT, UH, DEVELOP A CITYWIDE STRATEGIC PLAN BASED ON THE INPUT OF COUNCIL.
UH, JERRY'S GONNA BE WORKING WITH US TO TRY TO CONNECT ALL THE VARIOUS MASTER PLANS THAT WE HAVE, UH, WITH THAT STRATEGIC PLAN, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SO THAT WE HAVE A, A COMPLETE VISION AND WORK PLAN FOR THE CITY GOING FORWARD.
THE BUDGET IS DEVELOPED WITH A LONG-TERM FOCUS.
SO, UH, RATHER THAN JUST SHOWING YOU A NUMBER FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WE'RE TRYING TO SHOW YOU A, A LONG-TERM FINANCIAL PLAN.
SO FOR EACH OF THE MAJOR FUNDS, UH, THERE IS A FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
UH, WE'VE INCLUDED A LOT OF THOSE DOCUMENTS IN HERE.
WE'LL GO THROUGH THEM IN SOME, SOME LEVEL OF DETAIL.
UH, WE DO HAVE THE TS, UH, FUNDS IN HERE THAT WE ADDED.
I KNOW THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT LAST YEAR, BUT OUR LAST, UH, MONTH WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE, THE DETAILS, BUT ALL OF THE FUNDS ARE LOOKED AT FROM A LONG TERM BASIS.
WE DON'T WANNA MAKE DECISIONS TODAY THAT WE CAN'T PAY FOR IN THE FUTURE.
SO, UM, THAT'S HOW WE DEVELOPED THE BUDGET.
WELL THAT'S ALL I HAVE UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME.
I'M GONNA ASK TO GO THROUGH THE DETAILED FINANCIALS WITH YOU.
AGAIN, MUCH OF THIS WILL BE THE SAME, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL TRY TO GO THROUGH IT EXPEDITION EXPEDITIOUSLY.
JUST TO CLARIFY, ON GREG ROAD RANGER THAT'S IN, THAT'S OBVIOUSLY IN FRONT OF THE SWIMMING POOL.
UH, HARPER, THE QUESTION IS, UH, GREG IN FRONT OF GREG ROAD IN FRONT OF THE SWIMMING POOL.
THAT'S GOING TO BE DONE WITH THIS.
GREG ROAD FROM RANGER TO VETERANS.
AND THEN ON SLIDE 11 AGAIN, UM, CHIEF, WE'RE, ARE WE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY DOING AN IN-HOUSE PROMOTION OR ARE WE GONNA LOOK OUTSIDE FOR A, A PROFESSIONAL OR SOMEBODY THAT'S, UM, ALREADY HAS THE CERTIFICATIONS FOR THE MENTAL HEALTH? UH, THE FIRST PART IS INTERNAL.
THESE OFFICERS WOULD COME FROM INTERNAL STAFF AND THEN WE WOULD BACKFILL THEIR ENTRY LEVEL POSITION.
MOST OF, MOST OF OUR OFFICERS ARE ALREADY TRAINED TO THE BASIC LEVEL MENTAL HEALTH OFFICER.
UM, SO WE HAVE SOME GOOD OFFICERS TO CHOOSE FROM FOR THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT INTRODUCTORY SECTION? NO.
NOW THAT EVERYBODY HAS THEIR BREAKFAST DONE,
SO BEFORE I START, I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND COUNSEL THAT FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, THE RULES SLIGHTLY CHANGE SO FAR.
BUDGET WORK SESSION ONE AND TWO WERE EXERCISES BETWEEN COUNCIL AND STAFF.
FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, ONCE THE CITY MANAGER RELEASES THE PROPOSED BUDGET BASED ON THE CITY CHARTER, ANY CHANGES TO THE BUDGET WILL HAVE TO BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND COUNCIL WILL TAKE A MUST TAKE A VOTE.
SECONDLY, THE STATE LAW ALSO KICKS IN REGARDING PROPERTY TAX REQUIREMENTS NOTICES.
MOVING FORWARD, YOU WILL SEE ON YOUR AGENDA FOR TODAY, THERE'S AN ITEM.
UH, THE SECOND ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A RESOLUTION TO RECORD COUNCIL'S VOTE.
AND I'LL DESCRIBE THAT IN DETAIL AS WE GET TO THE TAX RATE SLIDES.
BUT PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT ANY CHANGES YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, UH, WOULD HAVE TO BE IN THE FORM OF A MOTION AND AMENDMENT TO THE CITY
[00:25:01]
MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET BASED ON CITY CHARTER REQUIREMENTS.SO WE HAVE SEEN THIS SLIDE BEFORE.
THIS IS THE CITY'S OVERALL FUND STRUCTURE.
AND THE FUND STRUCTURE IS VERY SIMILAR TO AN OR ORGANIZATION CHART.
IT SHOWS YOU HOW THE CITY'S BUDGET IS SET UP AND HOW IT'S ACCOUNTED FOR AND TRACKED.
I WON'T GO INTO THE DETAILS, WE'VE GONE OVER THIS BEFORE.
BUT TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA ON THE LEFT SIDE, THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, UH, THE FUNDS THAT WE ACCOUNT, TAX SUPPORTED ACTIVITIES AND FUNCTION AND THE PROPRIETARY FUNDS IN THE MIDDLE, THESE ARE THE BUSINESS TYPE ACTIVITIES AND, AND, UH, FUNCTIONS OF THE CITY.
ABOUT 70% OF OUR FUNDS, WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 50 FUNDS AND WE'RE KEEP ADDING SOME.
SO I THINK NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WE'RE GONNA BE ABOUT 55 TO 60 FUNDS OF THE BUDGET THAT'S PROPOSED.
WE HAVE 50 SEPARATE FUNDS IN IT, AND 70% OF THOSE ARE TAX SUPPORTED ACTIVITIES AND FUNCTIONS.
30% OF THOSE FUNDS ARE BUSINESS TYPE ACTIVITIES.
SO BASED ON THE OVERALL FUND STRUCTURE, THE CITY'S CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET FOR ALL 50 FUNDS PUT TOGETHER IS $250,690,888.
ANOTHER THING TO KEEP IN MIND AS WE GO THROUGH, WHILE THE NUMBERS MAY SEEM BORING, THERE ARE SOME ASPECTS OF IT THAT I MUST READ INTO THE RECORD, SO PLEASE BEAR WITH ME.
SO THIS IS THE OVERALL 50 FUNDS OF 250 MILLION.
AND IF YOU NOTICE, I'LL POINT OUT THE, THE LARGEST SHARE OF THE BUDGET IS C I P PROJECTS, WHICH IS ABOUT 62%.
THE SECOND IS GENERAL FUND, 22% OR $55 MILLION.
THE THIRD IS WATER UTILITY, 6% OR 16 MILLION.
THE FOURTH IS DEATH SERVICE, 5% OR $13 MILLION.
GOING BACK TO THE FUNDS ON SLIDE 28, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS ONE.
DOES THAT MEAN WE DON'T HAVE A TRA LIKE THAT DOES NOT TAKE INTO EFFECT OR CONSIDERATION, UH, THE UBER PROGRAM AT ALL? NO.
WE HAVE A TRANSPORTATION FUND THAT WE BUDGET, BUT FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR, THE, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE'RE SPENDING OUT OF THAT FUND IS SO SMALL THAT IT, IT DOESN'T PICK UP IN THE ROUNDING.
SO WHEN WE GET TO THE C I P BUDGET, I WILL SHOW YOU HOW MUCH OF THAT IS COMING FROM TRANSPORTATION FUND.
AND THEN UNDER THE GENERAL FUND, C I P, THE 15.12 MILLION, CAN YOU TELL ME HOW MUCH OF THOSE IS ROADS AND HOW MUCH OF THOSE WE WILL SHOW YOU THAT WE HAVE DETAILED SLIDES TO SHOW YOU.
SO OVERALL OF THE $251 MILLION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR ALL CITY FUNDS, 176.6 IS FOR C I P SPENDING.
NEXT FISCAL YEAR PLAN, 33 NEW POSITIONS FOR A COST, UH, 33 NEW POSITIONS FOR A TOTAL OF 390 NET POSITIONS.
AFTER WE ELIMINATE THE THREE POSITIONS THAT THE CITY MANAGER TALKED ABOUT, OUR PROPOSED CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET INCLUDES A PROPOSED TAX RATE OF 46.93 CENTS.
THIS IS THE SAME RATE AS THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE THAT WE JUST RECEIVED FROM THE TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR.
THE PROPERTY TAX RATES ARE CERTIFIED AND CALCULATED BY, IN HAYES COUNTY, BY THE TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR FOR ALL TAXING JURISDICTIONS.
SO WHEN WE RECEIVED OUR, OUR RATE CALCULATIONS FROM THE HAYES COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR, THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE IS 46.93, WHICH IS THE SAME RATE AS WHAT THE CITY MANAGER IS PROPOSING FOR NEXT YEAR.
THE CURRENT IN COMPARISON, THE CURRENT RATE TODAY IS 50.82 CENTS.
THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY INCREASE FOR WATER SERVICE RATES, NO INCREASE FOR WASTEWATER SERVICE RATES, NO INCREASE IN STORM DRAINAGE FEES.
THE SOLID WASTE OR TRASH SERVICES IS GOING UP SLIGHTLY 2.52% BASED ON THE CONTRACT WE HAVE WITH T D S.
[00:30:01]
STAFF IS PROPOSING EIGHT NEW FEES.AND WE'LL WALK YOU THROUGH WHAT THOSE EIGHT FEES ARE AND WHY.
I THOUGHT THAT WE WERE GOING TO INCREASE WASTEWATER AND WATER FEES.
UM, WERE WES, I THOUGHT THE, BUT WE WERE GONNA MAKE A VOTE.
THAT IS, UH, I BELIEVE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE IMPACT FEES, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE TYPICAL SERVICE RATES WHICH ARE HERE.
SO THE IMPACT FEES WOULD BE FOR NEW CUSTOMERS COMING IN SURE.
THAT ARE, THAT ARE CONNECTING.
AND THAT'S, THAT IS COMING, UH, IN THE FUTURE.
SO, SO FAR WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE OVERALL BUDGET FOR ALL 50 FUNDS.
WE'RE GONNA START DRILLING DOWN.
THE CITY HAS FOUR MAJOR OPERATING FUNDS.
SO WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE FOUR MAJOR OPERATINGS FIRST.
THEN WE WILL FURTHER DRILL DOWN TO INDIVIDUAL FUNDS THAT MAKE UP THE FOUR MAJOR OPERATING FUNDS OF THE CITY.
THE FOUR MAJOR OPERATING FUNDS OF THE CITY ARE GENERAL FUND WATER UTILITY FUND, WASTEWATER UTILITY FUND, AND THE STORM STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY FUND.
SO COMBINED AT, FOR THOSE FOUR MAJOR FUNDS, THE REVENUE IS INCREASING BY 2.4 MILLION FOR PROPERTY TAX.
JUST THE M AND O PORTION, THIS IS ASSUMING A 15% GROWTH, 1.2 MILLION INCREASE IN SALES TAX REVENUE, ASSUMING A 10.2% GROWTH, $1.8 MILLION INCREASE IN DEVELOPMENT REVENUES WITH A 9% GROWTH, $1 MILLION INCREASE IN WATER SERVICE REVENUES, ASSUMING A 6% GROWTH IN THE CUSTOMER BASE.
$670,000 INCREASE IN WASTEWATER SERVICE REVENUES.
AGAIN, WE'RE ASSUMING A 6% CUSTOMER GROWTH, $120,000 INCREASE IN STORM DRAINAGE FEES, ASSUMING A 6% GROWTH IN CUSTOMER BASE INTEREST INCOME CITYWIDE $3.6 MILLION INCREASE.
AS YOU WELL KNOW, INTEREST RATES HAVE BEEN INCREASING IN THE LAST 12 TO 16 MONTHS AND WE, WE ARE ASSUMING THAT THEY WILL GO UP SLIGHTLY.
SO BASED ON OUR CASH RESERVES AND OUR INVESTMENTS, WE ARE CALCULATING THAT WE WILL RECEIVE 300, 3.6 MILLION MORE IN INTEREST INCOME NEXT YEAR.
ONE IS, UH, LIKE ON THE SALES TAX REVENUE GROWTH, ARE YOU PROJECTING THAT BASED ON THE ACTUAL SALES TAX RECEIPTS? OR ARE YOU PROJECTING THAT BASED ON LAST, THIS CURRENT YEAR'S BUDGETED SALES TAX INCOME? SO SALES TAX IS GROWING SO RAPIDLY THAT THE HISTORICAL NUMBERS DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE ANYMORE.
SO WE HAVE BEEN PROJECTING BASED ON YEAR OVER YEAR.
SO WHEN YOU COMPARE BETWEEN BUDGET, CURRENT BUDGET TO NEXT YEAR'S PROPOSED BUDGET IS 10.2% INCREASE.
WHEN YOU COMPARE ACTUAL, WHAT WE ESTIMATE WE'RE GONNA COLLECT THIS YEAR TO WHAT WE THINK WE'RE GONNA COLLECT NEXT YEAR IS ABOUT 6%.
SO THAT'S A, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE'VE, SO THIS YEAR WE COLLECTED 13% NEARLY YEAR OVER YEAR ACTUAL GROWTH, 12.96% YEAR OVER YEAR ACTUAL GROWTH.
AND SO YOUR BUT THAT YEAR PROJECTION FOR NEXT YEAR IS 6%? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND WE'RE TIGHTENING THAT MAYOR, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE YEAR TO DATE SALES TAX COLLECTIONS WE'RE ONLY 5% OFF.
SO I THINK 6% IS A GOOD CONSERVATIVE NUMBER TO ASSUME AT THIS POINT.
YEAH, I I BUT I DO THINK IT'S CONSERVATIVE.
ESPECIALLY WITH ALL THE SALES TAX GROWTH.
I, I THINK IT'S VERY LIKELY THAT WE WILL DOUBLE OR TRIPLE THAT.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S ROOM THERE.
AND THEN THE, THE SECOND QUESTION WHEN I REMEMBER IT, I'LL ASK IT.
SO THIS IS THE OVERALL REVENUES FOR THE, FOR FUND MAJOR FUNDS.
NOW WE'RE GONNA GET INTO THE EXPENDITURES.
THE OVERALL EXPENDITURES FOR THE MAJOR FOUR OPERATING FUNDS OF THE CITY EXPENDITURES ARE GOING UP BY $10.2 MILLION OR 15%.
SO I'M GONNA START FIRST WITH THE BOTTOM OF THAT SCREEN THAT YOU, THAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU.
OF THE $10.2 MILLION INCREASE, 8.9 PER 8.9 MILLION IS IN THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH IS THE LARGEST OPERATING FUND OF THE CITY.
8.9 REPRESENTS ABOUT 87% OF THE TOTAL.
10.2 PER, UH, MILLION DOLLARS INCREASE, $600,000 INCREASE IN WATER UTILITY EXPENDITURES,
[00:35:01]
$300,000 INCREASE IN WASTEWATER UTILITY FUND EXPENDITURES, FULL HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN STORM DRAINAGE.SO WHAT'S DRIVING THESE, UH, INCREASES? SO GO, WE WILL GO BACK TO THE TOP OF THE SLIDE.
5.8 MILLION OR 17% IS IN PERSONNEL CATEGORY, MEANING NEW POSITIONS, UH, PAYROLL TAXES, HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS, MERIT INCREASES, ANYTHING RELATED TO PERSONNEL IS $5.8 MILLION BETWEEN THE FOUR OPERATING FUNDS.
2.9 MILLION OR 3 MILLION IN ROUND NUMBERS.
11% IS IN CONTRACTUAL EXPENDITURE CATEGORY.
THIS CATEGORY CAPTURES THOSE COSTS THAT ARE CONTRACTS, AGREEMENTS, SERVICES THAT THE CITY PAYS FOR TO RECEIVE, WHETHER THEY ARE ATTORNEYS, ENGINEERS, ACCOUNTANTS, UH, SURVEYORS AND THAT TYPE INSURANCE, THOSE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES FALL IN THAT CATEGORY.
COMMODITIES, THIS IS WHERE WE BUY OFFICE SUPPLIES, UH, PRINTING SUPPLIES, ANYTHING OF COMMODITY NATURE IS IN THAT CATEGORY.
AND LASTLY, $800,000 IS FOR NON C I P CAPITAL.
THESE ARE EQUIPMENT, MACHINERY, THOSE TYPES OF EXPENSES.
SO THIS IS ONE OF THOSE SLIDES THAT I'M GONNA HAVE TO READ INTO THE RECORD, SO PLEASE BEAR WITH ME.
UM, THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET INC.
IS UH, PROPOSING TO INCLUDE 33 NEW POSITIONS.
AND I'LL GO THROUGH THESE REAL QUICK.
UM, FROM LEFT TO RIGHT, WE'LL IDENTIFY THE DEPARTMENT, THE POSITION TITLE, HOW MANY POSITIONS, THE BUDGET AMOUNT THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT THE BUDGET AMOUNT IS THE TOTAL COST FOR THAT POSITION.
NOT ONLY THE, THE COMPENSATION FOR THAT POSITION, BUT ALSO SUPPORT COSTS, PAYROLL TAXES, INSURANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES, ANY EQUIPMENT, LAPTOP, UH, VEHICLES.
SO IT'S ALL INCLUSIVE COST, NOT JUST THE BASE.
WAGES FOR BUILDING INSPECTION.
ONE CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER FOR A TOTAL COST OF 199,745.
AND IT IS GOING TO BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE ONE CITY ATTORNEY 290,000 955 9 51 PAID WITH GENERAL FUND CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE ONE GRANTS ADMINISTRATION GRANT ADMINISTRATOR POSITION FOR A COST TOTAL COST OF 119,483.
SOURCE OF FUNDING IS GENERAL FUND CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE, ONE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT FOR A TOTAL COST OF 67,517.
SOURCE OF FUNDING IS GENERAL FUND COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT AUDIO AND FILM SPECIALIST 63,155.
SOURCE OF FUNDING IS GENERAL FUND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ONE ENGINEER IN TRAINING FOR 93,381.
THE SOURCE OF FUNDING IS FROM WATER AND WASTEWATER.
YOU UTILITY FUND A STORM DRAINAGE INSPECTOR POSITION IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FOR A TOTAL COST OF 99,864.
THIS POSITION WILL BE PAID EXCLUSIVELY FROM THE STORM DRAINAGE U UTILITY FUND FOR THE BEAUTIFICATION AND FACILITIES DEPARTMENT.
WE HAVE THREE BEAUTIFICATION TECHNICIANS FOR A TOTAL COST OF 199,007 50.
WE'LL BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND IN THE FACILITIES MAINTENANCE DIVISION.
WE HAVE TWO BUILDING MAINTENANCE TECH TECHNICIAN POSITIONS FOR A TOTAL COST OF 107,629 TO BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL SERVICES PURCHASING MANAGER FOR 125,565 TO BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND.
ANOTHER PURCHASING TECHNICIAN POSITION FOR A COST OF 98,202 PAID FROM GENERAL FUND.
AND THEN A CITY CONTROLLER POSITION FOR THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT FOR A TOTAL COST OF 179,162 TO BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND FOR OUR LIBRARY DEPARTMENT.
WE HAVE AN OUTREACH CHILDREN'S LIBRARIAN POSITION FOR 74,841 TO BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND FOR OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT.
WE HAVE A NUMBER OF POSITIONS.
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR A TOTAL COST OF 1 43 8 0 5 FROM GENERAL FUND, A CERTIFIED THERAPEUTIC RECREATION SPECIALIST FOR A COST OF 75,000 7 0 4 TO BE
[00:40:01]
PAID FROM GENERAL FUND.A RECREATION PROGRAMMER FOR ATHLETICS PROGRAM 75,000 7 0 4 PAID FROM GENERAL FUND A POOL MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN POSITION FOR COST OF 65,464 TO BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND THREE PARKS MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN POSITIONS FOR A TOTAL COST OF $189,094 TO BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND A PARKS MAINTENANCE CREW LEADER FOR A COST OF 70,232 TO BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND.
NOW WE MOVE ON TO POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THEY HAVE A TOTAL OF SIX POSITIONS.
ONE NARCOTICS INVESTIGATOR FOR A TOTAL COST OF 88,992.
AND ALL OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT POSITIONS WILL BE PAID FROM GENERAL FUND, A ONE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT SLASH HR SPECIALIST POSITION FOR A COST OF 74,386.
ONE MENTAL HEALTH OFFICER POSITION FOR A COST OF 88 992 1 EQUIPMENT MANAGER SLASH QUARTERMASTER FOR A TOTAL COST OF 79,698.
ONE FACILITY SLASH FLEET COORDINATOR FOR A TOTAL COST OF 79,698.
ONE RECRUITING SLASH BACKGROUND INVESTIGATOR POSITION FOR A TOTAL COST OF 88,992.
NOW FOR PUBLIC WORKS WE HAVE TH THREE POSITIONS AND THEY WILL BE PAID FROM EITHER WATER UTILITY FUND, WASTEWATER UTILITY FUND, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH.
ONE INSTRUMENTATION TECHNICIAN 85,431 WATER PRODUCTION OPERATOR FOR 92 727.
AND ONE WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR FOR 92,727.
SO THAT MAKES UP THE TOTAL NEW POSITIONS 33 FOR A TOTAL COST OF 3,110,890.
AS CITY MANAGER MENTIONED EARLIER, WE ARE ELIMINATING AND THE PROPOSED BUDGET ELIMINATES THREE VACANT POSITIONS FOR A TOTAL COST OF 460,300.
SO THE NET INCREASE IS A TOTAL OF 30 POSITIONS AND THE TOTAL COST IS 2,000,002, UH, SIX 50 AND $590.
REAL BRIEFLY, UH, THE NEW EQUIP EQUIPMENT REQUESTED BY VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS TOTALS $2.4 MILLION AND ALL OF THE DETAILS.
WHAT MAKES UP THIS NUMBER IS IN YOUR, IN YOUR PACKET IN THE BUDGET DOCUMENT, C I P SPENDING PLAN, UH, FOR THE FIVE YEAR C I P FOR THE NEXT YEAR OF THE FIVE YEAR SPENDING PLAN.
THE PROPOSED BUDGET INCLUDES $176,549,855.
I JUST, THE, UM, TECH GRANT THAT'S BEEN APPLIED FOR, DO WE HAVE A STATUS ON THAT? I DON'T KNOW IF LEON IS HERE.
HE'S, HE'S, OH, I'LL SAY IT LOUDER.
UH, WE'RE WAITING TILL THE END OF THE YEAR TO HEAR BACK FROM THEM.
UH, THEY'RE STILL IN THE RUNNING, BUT UH, WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT OUR CHANCES ARE IN GETTING THOSE.
UH, WE HAVE THREE PROJECTS IN THERE RIGHT NOW, SO WE'RE STILL WAITING TO HEAR FROM THEM.
SO IF IT'S NOT, IF THE GRANT, IF WE DON'T GET IT, ARE WE GOING TO JUST PAY OUTTA THE GENERAL FUND? WE'LL HAVE TO REASSESS AND I WILL LET BRIAN SPEAK TO THAT.
YEAH, POTENTIALLY WE WOULD LOOK AT COMING BACK TO YOU AND POTENTIALLY REALLOCATING SOME OF THE C I P TO GET SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS DONE.
BUT HOPEFULLY WE WILL, WE'LL BE SUCCESSFUL.
SO THE PROPOSED, UH, BUDGET INCLUDES C I P SPENDING PLAN FOR NEXT YEAR TOTALS 176000000.6.
WHAT MAKES UP THAT REAL QUICKLY, UH, 9% IS FROM GENERAL FUND 15.1 MILLION.
NEXT LARGEST IS 12, UH, 10% FROM GEO BONDS, 12% IS FROM WATER UTILITY.
AND THEN, UM, 14% IS FROM THE TXDOT GRANT, BUT THE LARGEST SPENDING IS 26% FROM FOR THE ROAD BONDS PRO UH, PROGRAM.
SO NOW WE'RE GONNA DRILL DOWN TO INDIVIDUALLY THOSE FOUR MAJOR OPERATING FUNDS AND WE'LL BEGIN WITH GENERAL FUND.
[00:45:03]
YOU'VE SEEN THIS SLIDE BEFORE.THESE ARE THE KEY ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE USED TO DEVELOP THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK AND WORK SESSIONS ONE AND TWO.
UH, BUT THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED OUR ASSUMPTIONS.
SO FOR THE GENERAL FUND, THE TOTAL REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN FOR NEXT YEAR IS 63.2 MILLION TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND TRANSFERS OUT IS 71 MILLION.
WE ARE DRAWING DOWN THE FUND BALANCE BY $7.8 MILLION FOR ONE TIME EXPENDITURES.
ONE TIME EXPENDITURES ARE THOSE THAT DO NOT RECUR AGAIN, IN OTHER WORDS, THEY'RE MORE CAPITAL AND EQUIPMENT TYPE EXPENDITURES.
THE FUND BALANCE, UH, FOR THE GENERAL FUND IS PROJECTED TO BE AT 22.6 MILLION AT THE END OF NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WHICH IS A VERY HEALTHY FUND BALANCE.
WE ARE PROPOSING IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET 15.1 MILLION TO BE CASH FUNDED FROM C I P 2.7 MILLION FOR 28.
OF THOSE 33 POSITIONS THAT WE REVIEWED WITH YOU ARE FROM GENERAL FUND 1.6 MILLION FOR NEW EQUIPMENT AND 2.52% INCREASE IN THE T D S FOR SOLID WASTE SERVICES.
I HAVE A QUESTION 'CAUSE IT MAKES ME SUPER UNCOMFORTABLE TO SEE THAT WE'RE TAKING OUT OF OUR SAVINGS AND I, I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A HEALTHY BALANCE, BUT, UM, SO MY ONLY CONCERN WOULD BE, UM, THESE ARE ITEMS THAT DON'T HAPPEN AGAIN, BUT IF THAT HAPPENS THREE MORE YEARS, THEN OUR BALANCE WILL BE ZERO.
WE WILL SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE WHAT THE FORECAST IS FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
AND LIKE BRIAN WAS SAYING EARLIER, WHEN WE PREPARED THIS BUDGET, WE DIDN'T JUST PREPARE IT FOR ONE YEAR BY ITSELF.
WE'RE LOOKING DOWN THE FUTURE HOW TODAY'S DECISIONS WILL IMPACT THE FUTURE BUDGETS OF THE CITY.
SO WE PACKAGE THE PROPOSED BUDGETS IN SUCH A MANNER THAT IT DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT FUTURE YEARS FOR THE GENERAL FUND OR FOR ANY OF OUR MAJOR OPERATING FUNDS.
AND WE'LL SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE.
I, I MEAN I WENT OVER ALL THESE LAST NIGHT, I LOOKED AT 'EM AND THAT'S WHY I DREW MY CONCERN.
UM, ONLY BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE'S THINGS THAT MAYBE COULD BE CUT AS FAR AS PURCHASES AND MOSTLY BEING COUNCIL, UM, ITEMS WHERE WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO DRAW DOWN ANY KINDA SAVINGS.
UM, I THINK THOSE PURCHASES EQUAL MORE WELL OVER 20 MILLION AND THAT WOULD COVER THE 7.8.
SO I JUST WANTED TO, TO EXPRESS MY CONCERNS REGARDING THAT.
SO THIS NEXT SLIDE I'VE TRIED TO COMPRESS AND SUMMARIZE ABOUT WHAT WOULD YOU SAY ABOUT 1500 BUDGET LINE ITEMS INTO ONE SLIDE.
SO THIS IS A VERY HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY ROLL UP FOR THE GENERAL FUND.
AND I WON'T GO THROUGH THE DETAILS BECAUSE I'VE ALREADY HIGHLIGHTED WHAT THE REVENUE EXPENDITURES OFFER NEXT YEAR.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE LAST TWO LINES.
AND THIS PRETTY MUCH WILL ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION.
COUNCIL MEMBER FLORES KALE, THAT FOR THE GENERAL FUND, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST SECOND TO THE LAST LINE, THE UNDER THE PROPOSED CITY MANAGER PROPOSED BUDGET COLUMN, WE'RE SHOWING THAT THE FUND BALANCE IS GOING TO BE $5 MILLION MORE THAN ABOVE.
THE CITY CHARTER REQUIRES THAT WE SHALL MAINTAIN 25% OF OUR TOTAL EXPENDITURES IN RESERVE AT ALL TIMES.
SO THAT NUMBER, THAT 25% NUMBER FOR NEXT YEAR IS $17.7 MILLION.
AND IF YOU LOOK RIGHT ABOVE IT, OUR PROJECTED FUND BALANCE IS $22.6 MILLION.
IN OTHER WORDS, WE HAVE 27.6% MORE MONEY IN THE FUND BALANCE IN RESERVES THAN WHAT THE CHARTER REQUIRES.
SO THIS, THIS IS A VERY HEALTHY BALANCE, VERY STRONG FINANCIAL POSITION FOR THE GENERAL FUND.
YEAH, AND JUST A ANOTHER POINT ON THAT, IF YOU LOOK AT, UM, MIDWAY AND THE EXPENDITURES WHERE IT SAYS CASH FUNDING, C I P, THAT'S ALL, UM, ONE TIME C I P PROJECTS THAT ARE PROPOSED OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH IS FRANKLY VERY UNIQUE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO FUND THAT KIND OF CAPITAL
[00:50:01]
OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND.YOU DON'T SEE THAT IN A LOT OF CITIES.
SO ABOUT $12 MILLION PER YEAR, UH, THAT WE HAVE IN 2324, IT'S UH, $14 MILLION PER YEAR FOR, FOR THAT PARTICULAR YEAR THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO, TO HAVE CASH FUNDED CAPITAL.
SO THE OPERATING IMPACT ON ON ANY OTHER, UH, PROGRAMS IS, IS, IS MINIMAL.
GIVES YOU A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY IS IN MY OPINION, BRIAN IS SO GLAD TO BE WITH CITY OF KYLE THAT HE DOESN'T HAVE TO FACE THOSE CHALLENGES LIKE BURLESON.
PERVE KEEPS TELLING ME WE'RE THE ENVY OF TEXAS.
SO IF WE WERE TO MAKE BUDGET AMENDMENTS THAT WILL COME OUT OF THIS POCKET, CORRECT? YES.
THEY SAY UNLESS YOU, YOU IDENTIFY SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU WANNA REPLACE? NO, NO, NO.
AND AS LONG AS WE ARE MAINTAINING THE 25% THAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE KEEPING, THEN WE WILL SHOULD BE IN A HEALTHY POSITION, CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
I I JUST WANT TO MAKE AN ADDITIONAL COMMENT ABOUT THAT.
IT DEPENDS ON WHAT TYPE OF EXPENDITURE.
IF YOU WANTED TO ADD 10 DIFFERENT POSITIONS AND THERE'S AN ONGOING IMPACT FOR THOSE COSTS, THEN THAT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF QUESTION.
WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE LONG-TERM IMPACT.
BUT IF IT'S A ONE-TIME CAPITAL PROJECT OR A STREET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEN IT'S A ONE, IT CAN DEFINITELY COME OUT OF THOSE FUNDS.
LET'S SAY THAT WE ARE THE PROJECTING, LIKE LAST YEAR WE HAD A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF POSITIONS THAT WE WERE TRYING TO GET FOR THE CITY AND THOSE WERE NOT FAILED.
WELL THOSE FUNDS WILL COME BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND.
YES, IT ROLLS INTO THE FUND BALANCE.
THOSE WILL GO BASICALLY INTO THIS SAVINGS ACCOUNT, RIGHT.
AND THEN WE WILL ACCOUNT FOR IT IN THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE.
YEAH, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY TO THAT POINT, I THINK IT'S BEEN, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE EVER ACTUALLY ACHIEVED 100% CAPITAL, LIKE OF THE BUDGET ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO GET THOSE RESOURCES DEPLOYED.
IT'S LIKE IT'S A REAL CHALLENGE TO HAVE ALL THESE PROJECTS SET UP AND ACTUALLY DEPLOY THE CAPITAL.
SO IT WOULD TAKE A LOT OF FOCUS AND EFFORT IN ORDER TO ACTUALLY EVEN DELIVER ALL, ALL THESE CAPITAL PROJECTS.
SO, SO JUST TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN, UM, 'CAUSE IT'S REALLY KIND OF CLEVER THE WAY THEY WORD IT, ACCESS OF MINIMUM REQUIRED.
UM, SO WE'RE REALLY JUST FLOATING $4 MILLION ABOVE THE 17 WE'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE.
AND THAT'S NOT ASSUMING, LIKE THE MAYOR WAS SAYING EARLIER, WE MAY HAVE MORE SALES TAX REVENUES, WE MAY HAVE MORE PROPERTY TAX REVENUES OVER AND ABOVE WHAT WE'RE PROJECTING AND YOU MAY HAVE LOWER EXPENDITURES THAN WHAT WE ARE PROJECTING.
UM, SALARY SAVINGS, VACANCY SAVINGS.
THE OTHER THING I'D SAY IS JUST TO REITERATE, THIS IS ALSO DROPPING OUR TAX RATE OVER ALMOST FOUR, FOUR PENNIES THIS PARTICULAR YEAR, WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE TAX RATE.
AND YOU STILL HAVE A VERY STRONG FUND BALANCE, LOW FEES AND NO FEE INCREASES.
SO THIS IS THE CLOSEST, I GUESS WE'VE BEEN TO THE THRESHOLD.
UM, NO, WE'VE PRETTY MUCH COVERED A AROUND THIS.
UH, THAT HAS BEEN ONE OF OUR SELLING POINTS WHEN WE GO BEFORE THE CREDIT RATING AGENCY THAT WE HOPE WE KEEP SUCH A STRONG HEALTHY BALANCE AND RESERVES AND THEY GIVE US CREDIT FOR THAT.
SO IF WE GET LOWER INTEREST RATES, I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION.
NOW THAT I WANNA RAISE TAXES, BUT IF WE WERE TO NOT RAISE NOT LOWER OUR TAXES AND CONTINUE TO COLLECT THE SAME AMOUNT, WOULD IT BE HELPFUL TO PAY ANY SORT OF DEBT THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE? OKAY,
SO, UM, YOU, YOU COULD, THERE'S A WAY TO DO THAT WHERE YOU COULD DE FEES DEBT AND AND AGREE TO KEEP THE TAX RATE CURRENTLY WHERE IT IS OR NOT DROP IT AS MUCH.
AND YOU WOULD TAKE SOME OF THOSE FUNDS AND ESSENTIALLY PAY OFF SOME OF YOUR DEBT THROUGH AN ESCROW ACCOUNT.
UM, BUT THERE'S NOT ANY DEBT CURRENTLY THERE THAT'S THERE.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO PASS AN ORDINANCE CREATING THAT, THAT UH, DEFIANCE PROGRAM.
YOU'D HAVE TO DO THAT BEFORE AUGUST 24TH.
UM, BUT I THINK AS WE'VE, WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS WITH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS AND PROS AND I, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY WHEN WE HAD DONE THE BOND PROGRAM A A YEAR AGO, WE HAD ANTICIPATED THAT THE RATES WOULD TOP OUT AROUND 59 CENTS.
UM, ONCE ALL OF THOSE BONDS HAD BEEN SOLD.
NOW WITH THIS RATE REDUCTION, WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT RATE POTENTIAL, THAT TOP END RATE BEING NO MORE THAN 55 CENTS.
UM, SO, SO THE, SO THE RANGE HAS CHANGED A LITTLE BIT AND IT'S ALL COME DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY.
SO, BUT TO, TO YOUR POINT, IF THE PROJECTIONS BASED ON THE DEBT THAT WE ARE, WE KNOW WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO
[00:55:01]
ISSUE, UH, IS GOING TO HAVE US TOP OUT AT 55 CENTS, WOULDN'T IT BE SMART FOR US TO CREATE THAT DFE PROGRAM SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO WHIPSAW THE DEBT RATE SO STRONGLY IN THE COMING YEARS? IT'S STILL JUST A POTENTIAL.IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE, THE PROJECTIONS THAT SAMCO HAD FOR THE RATE FOR THIS YEAR, IT WAS GOING TO BE 56 CENTS.
SO WE'RE 9 CENTS BELOW THE PROJECTED RATE THAT WAS AT THAT TIME, WHICH IS SUBSTANTIAL EVEN WITH ALL THE DEBT SALES THAT WE HAVE.
SO IT'S VERY POSSIBLE THAT WE WON'T HAVE TO HAVE THOSE KINDS OF RATE CHANGES GOING FORWARD IN THE FUTURE.
BUT THAT'S CERTAINLY A POLICY QUESTION FOR THE COUNCIL.
IF YOU LOOK AT RAISING, IT'S ARTIFICIALLY RAISING THE RATE THIS YEAR OVER WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE DEBT.
YOU COULD DO THAT, UH, TO TRY TO MINIMIZE ANY KIND OF FLUCTUATIONS.
BUT THE RATE IS JUST A, IT'S A REALLY A, A FACTOR OF SOLVING FOR WHAT IS THE DOLLARS THAT ARE NEEDED TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE, RIGHT? RIGHT.
SO IF WE, IF CREATE, SO WE'RE STILL RAISING MORE DOLLARS IF WE CREATE A DEFIANCE FUND ESSENTIALLY AND PUT, UM, LEAVE OUR TAX RATE THE SAME AND PUT THE DOLLARS IN THERE THAT KEEP THE RATE THE SAME AND THEN PAY THE OUR DEBT DOWN FASTER, THEN WHEN WE GO TO ISSUE NEW DEBT FOR NEW PROJECTS, CAN WE USE THAT FUND? CAN WE SWITCH FROM HAVING IT BE AN ADVANCED DEFIANCE FUND TO UH, JUST A REGULAR INTEREST IN SINKING DEBT PAYMENT? YES.
WHICH DOESN'T THAT THEN CREATE CAPACITY FOR US IF WE DO IT THAT WAY? IT COULD.
I MEAN, THE LONG-TERM BENEFIT OF DOING A DEFIANCE FOR THIS ONE YEAR, UH, WOULD, WOULD BE, IT'S ALL THE SAME DOLLARS, BUT THE SAVINGS POTENTIALLY WOULD BE A QUARTER TO A HALF A CENT IS OUR PROJECTIONS IN A 10 TO 15 YEAR SCENARIO BY DOING THE DFE.
IT DOES GIVE YOU, UH, FLEXIBILITY TO DO THAT.
THE WAY I LOOK AT IT IS THE VOTERS APPROVED UP TO 59 CENTS FOR THE BOND PROGRAM.
YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO RAISE THAT RATE WHENEVER YOU'RE NEEDING TO RAISE THAT RATE.
OH, THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO ASK.
WE DO, BUT IF WE LOWER IT NOW THAT AND HAVE TO RAISE IT IN IN THE FUTURE, I MEAN, I'M JUST SAYING ISN'T THERE, ISN'T THERE A LOT OF IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE WOULD SAVE ON INTEREST BY DOING IT THIS WAY, WHICH IS YOUR QUARTER HALF POINT POINT.
IT'S THE CAPACITY THAT WE WOULD BE RESERVING BY NOT GOING DOWN TO 46 CENTS, BUT BY KEEPING IT AT 50 CENTS.
WELL THAT CASH FLOW YOU MEAN? WELL, I DON'T BELIEVE THE, I DON'T BELIEVE THE CAPACITY CHANGES BECAUSE YOU'D STILL BE ABLE TO GO, GO BACK TO 52 50 CENTS OR 52 CENTS.
IF YOU RAISED IT NEXT YEAR, YOU STILL HAVE THE SAME CAPACITY AS IF YOU WOULD'VE KEPT THE RATE AND THEN NEVER LOWERED IT BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME TAX RATE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE.
UM, BUT IT DOES MINIMIZE THE FLUCTUATION IN THE RATE IF THAT'S A CONCERN FOR THE COUNCIL TO NOT FLUCTUATE THE RATE'S NO FINANCIAL BENEFIT PER SE.
IT'S A, YEAH, IT'S A FLUCTUATION IN THE RATE, IT'S ALSO THE PROJECTION TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE IF WE DROP IT WAY DOWN, IT'S MUCH HARDER TO BRING IT BACK UP.
I'VE, I'VE JUST SEEN THAT AND JUST TO MAKE SURE, ESPECIALLY STATE LAW, IT'S ALSO EXTREMELY HARD TO BRING IT BACK UP.
JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, WHEN WE PASS A ROAD BOND, THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT THAT THE TAX WILL COULD GO UP UP TO 59.
SO AT ANY POINT IF WE WERE TO, YOU KNOW, GET INTO ANY DEBT, THE TAXES COULD POTENTIALLY GO TO THAT.
IT WAS, UH, MARKETED TO THE COMMUNITY OF THOSE WOULD BE THE IMPACTS.
AND SO THAT WE BELIEVE THAT RANGE HAS ALL, UM, COME DOWN.
AND TO, TO TOP END WOULD BE THE 55.
BUT IT IS A QUESTION OF IF YOU WANTED TO TRY TO MINIMIZE TAX RATE FLUCTUATION, YOU COULD DO IT TO FEASANCE PROGRAM TO DO THAT, BUT YOU'RE CHARGING MORE THIS YEAR THAN YOU WOULD OTHERWISE NEED.
WELL, I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
YOU WOULD BE, BUT THE FINANCIAL BENEFIT IS MANY YEARS INTO THE FUTURE.
WELL, SO, BUT IT'S JUST, IT'S, IT'S A SITUATION WHERE AT LEAST IN, IN MY MIND, IT'S MUCH HARDER TO RAISE THE RATE.
SO WHEN YOU SAY OUR CAPACITY DOESN'T CHANGE, IF WE JUST GO AHEAD AND LOWER IT ALL THE WAY TO 46 AND THEN NEXT YEAR BRING IT UP TO 52, THEN THE CAPACITY COMES BACK.
BUT THAT IS A MUCH HEAVIER LIFT THAN TO JUST MAINTAIN IT AT, AT THE 50 CENTS THAT IT CURRENTLY IS, BECAUSE THEN WE CAN, WE HAVE MORE CAPACITY WITHOUT HAVING TO RAISE THE RATE.
IT, IT'S, IT'S THE SAME PLAN THAT WE HAD, UH, WHEN WE DID THE BOND PROGRAM THOUGH, IS WHAT I WOULD TELL YOU IS, UM, AGAIN, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO UP 6 CENTS THIS YEAR AND, AND WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THAT 'CAUSE IT'S JUST NOT NECESSARY.
BUT THAT WOULD BE THE SAME PLAN.
IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT VERSION OF IT.
SO IT'S FOR, WELL, IT'S, IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, REALLY IT'S THE PREROGATIVE OF THE COUNCIL.
IF YOU, IF YOU DO WANT TO HAVE LESS TAX RATE FLUCTUATION, WE WANT TO BE CLEAR WITH YOU, THERE'S A PATH TO DO THAT AND YOU COULD DO IT IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO YOU TO NOT DROP THE RATE.
I DO UNDERSTAND THE, THE CONCERN ABOUT GOING BACK UP, THIS IS A WAY YOU COULD DO IT WITH THE DFE PROGRAM.
WE CAN COME BACK AND SHOW YOU THAT.
IF WE KEPT THE RATE THE SAME, WOULD WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT TO THE VOTERS? YES.
SO, SO THIS IS, THAT'S EXACTLY, THIS IS A POINT.
THE REASON WHY WE LOWER THE RATE IS
[01:00:01]
BECAUSE WE GO OVER THE THRESHOLD THAT THE CITY'S ALLOWED TO, TO GO OVER.WE GO RIGHT TO WHERE WE NEED TO BE WITHOUT TAKING IT TO THE VOTERS TO SAY, HEY, DO YOU GUYS WANT US TO RAISE YOUR TAXES? BECAUSE SURE, AS THE SUN COMES UP, THEY'RE GONNA SAY NO.
BUT WE NEED TO GO BACK TO PEREZ'S YES.
SO YEAH, THAT, THAT IS A COMPLETE CHANGER IN TERMS OF, WE WERE JUST TOLD AND MEAN.
IT'S TOLD THE WHOLE REASON WHY WE KEEP THE RATE THE SAME LOWER RATES JUST TOLD IN ORDINANCE BY AUGUST.
SO THANK YOU FOR INTERRUPTING ME.
WELL, I WAS STILL AT THE FLOOR, BUT WE WERE JUST TOLD THAT THE AUGUST 22ND IS WHEN WE HAD TO PASS AN ORDINANCE IN ORDER TO CREATE A DFE PROGRAM TO KEEP THE I N S RATE THE SAME.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT IN ORDER FOR US TO KEEP THE I N S RATE THE SAME, UH, WE HAVE TO TAKE IT TO A VOTE IN NOVEMBER.
LET ME ADD SOME CLARIFICATION TO THE DEFIANCE OPTION OR STRATEGY.
LET'S SUPPOSE COUNSEL WANTS TO MAINTAIN THE I N S RATE THE SAME AS THIS YEAR, RIGHT? WE'RE AT 50 82 OR MAINTAIN THE TOTAL RATE RIGHT AT 50 CENTS CURRENT RATE, WHATEVER DEFIANCE AMOUNT IS THAT WE COME UP WITH, THAT WE HAVE TO RAISE THROUGH PROPERTY TAX RATES TO KEEP IT LEVEL NEXT YEAR IF WE DON'T ISSUE ANY DEBT AND THE TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATIONS KEEP A RISING AT THE RATE THEY'RE ARISING, NEXT YEAR'S DFE NUMBER IS GONNA BE TWICE AS BIG.
SO WE HAVE TO BE AWARE OF THAT, THAT THIS IS GONNA GROW IF WE DON'T CATCH UP ON NEW DEBT.
SECOND, THE STATE LAW SAYS VERY CLEARLY THAT IF YOU EXCEED THE VOTER AUTHORIZED TAX RATE, WHICH AT THIS POINT WHAT WE GOT LAST WEEK IS 46 93, THERE IS AN AUTOMATIC ELECTION REQUIRED IN NOVEMBER FOR THE VOTERS TO DECIDE.
IF THEY SAY NO, THEN THE LAW SAYS THOU SHALL IMPLEMENT THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE, WHICH IS 44.74.
WELL, AND AND I THINK, AND I DON'T KNOW IF CITY ATTORNEY WANTS TO ADD ANYTHING TO WE, WE HAVEN'T.
I PROFESS AND I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THAT BEFORE TODAY.
THAT'S JUST NOT EXPLAINED TO ME WITH THE DFE PROGRAM.
BUT WHAT I HAD HEARD FROM THE SAMCO, UH, FIRM IS THAT IT WOULD BE AN INSTRUMENT ORDINANCE NOW THAT WOULD CREATE BASICALLY, UH, A DEBT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PAID THROUGH, THROUGH THE RATE, SO WE CAN GO BACK AND MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR.
IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU'D LIKE US TO DO, WE CAN GET WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AND SAMCO AND BRING THAT BACK TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION, UM, AND GET CLARIFICATION TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GIVING YOU THE RIGHT ADVICE ON THAT.
I WAS JUST THINKING IN DIFFERENT TERMS, LIKE IF WE WERE TO KEEP THE SAME RATE AND WE WERE TO USE THOSE FUNDS TO EITHER PAY SOME OF THE DEBT OR ADD TO THE GENERAL FUND TO FUND OTHER THINGS, BUT I I, THAT WAS BASICALLY IT.
WE CAN KEEP INCREASING THE I N S RATE AS MUCH AS WE WANT, AS MUCH AS WE CAN AFFORD.
THAT WON'T TRIGGER THE ELECTION.
BUT THE, THE M AND O RATE, IF IT GOES UP MORE THAN WHAT THE TAX LAW ALLOWS, THEN IT TRIGGERS THE ELECTION.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, I MEAN, THERE'S TWO COMPONENTS TO THE RATE.
THERE'S THE GENERAL FUND M AND O RATE, AND THERE'S THE DEBT SERVICE RATE.
SO I, I THINK WHAT PROFESS IS SAYING, IF I'M WANNA MAKE SURE I'VE CLARIFIED THIS, THE M AND O RATE HAS TO FALL.
OKAY? AND IT MUST FALL BY STATE LAW UNLESS YOU TAKE IT TO THE VOTERS.
BUT THE DEBT SERVICE RATE, THE LAW GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO PAY DEBT THAT YOU HAVE, MEANING BONDS.
AND, AND SO IF YOU HAVE DEBT OR THIS OTHER INSTRUMENT IS MY UNDERSTANDING ON THE ORDINANCE THAT WE CREATE THE DFE PROGRAM, THOSE WOULD ALL BE PART OF THAT RATE, RIGHT? NOT, THAT DOESN'T TRIGGER A NOVEMBER ELECTION, OR AT LEAST WE NEED TO FIND THE ANSWER TO THIS.
I, I BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE, BUT WE'LL NEED, BUT WE DO NEED TO, I WOULD, IF THAT'S A STRATEGY WANT YOU WANT TO LOOK AT, WE CAN BRING THAT BACK TO YOU AND GIVE YOU ALL THE DETAILS TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT CONTEMPLATED IN THIS BUDGET.
AND THE, THE POINT IS THAT THE, THE STRATEGY IS WE KNOW NOT ONLY ARE WE TRYING TO DEPLOY THE MONEY FOR A, UH, ROAD BOND PROGRAM, WE'VE ALSO, UH, STARTED DOWN THE PATH OF WORKING ON A COMMUNITY CENTER.
SO A COMMUNITY CENTER DEBT ISSUANCE WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO A ROAD BOND.
SO IF WE MAINTAINED, IF WE USE THE DFE STRATEGY TO MAINTAIN THE RATE AT 50 CENTS, WE CREATE THAT 4 CENTS OF CAPACITY BY BASICALLY CREATING A FUND, FILLING THAT FUND, PAYING THE DEBT DOWN FASTER.
AND THEN IN 2024, IT WOULD ULTIMATELY BE 2025.
WHENEVER WE GO TO ISSUE THE DEBT FOR A COMMUNITY CENTER, WE THEN COULD TRANSFER THAT, REDUCE THAT DIFFUSE OR ELIMINATE THAT PROGRAM.
THEN THE DEBT SERVICE BACKFILLS
[01:05:01]
IT ESSENTIALLY, IT'S A WAY OF THE, THE POINT IN THE STRATEGY IS TO CREATE CAPACITY FOR SOMETHING LIKE A COMMUNITY CENTER BOND IN 20 NOVEMBER, 2024 GOING INTO 2025.IT JUST MINIMIZES THE TAX RATE FLUCTUATION.
YOU DON'T DROP THE RATE, YOU KEEP IT WHERE IT IS.
AND IF, IF THE GOAL IS TO NOT HAVE TO RAISE THE RATE, THEN THAT'S A STRATEGY THAT HELPS YOU DO THAT.
IF, IF IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE THE, THAT'D BE THE BENEFIT.
YOU DON'T DROP THE RATE IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'RE GONNA HAVE SOMETHING COMING IN THE FUTURE.
AND I DO NOT THINK THAT THAT TRIGGERS, UH, AN ELECTION, BUT WE NEED TO FIND OUT.
I DO NEED TO GET YOU, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU A LEGAL OPINION HERE.
I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE WE'RE CLEAR ON THAT, BUT, UM, I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT, BUT IF I, IF I COULD JUST FINISH ONE THOUGHT REAL QUICK.
SO, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO TALK THE, I DO WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ABOUT THE DFE GOING FORWARD.
I THINK PERVEZ IS RIGHT, THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THIS YEAR AND YOU POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE TO DO THAT FOR ANOTHER TWO OR THREE YEARS OF KEEPING THAT RATE ARTIFICIALLY HIGHER THAN IT WOULD NEED TO BE.
SO IF, IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, IT'S JUST SOMETHING YOU NEED TO KNOW AS A POLICY, THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE KEEPING THE RATE.
SO, AND THAT LEADS ME TO ANOTHER ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION THAT BUILDS ON THAT CONCEPT.
THERE IS A CONCEPT WHEN IT COMES TO RATE MAKING OF INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY.
IN OTHER WORDS, YOU HAVE TAXPAYERS THAT ARE HERE TODAY, THEY'RE HERE TOMORROW, AND THEY'RE GONE IN TWO YEARS.
SO THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES IT, THIS CONCEPT APPLIES ACROSS THE BOARD, TAX RATES, UTILITY RATES, TRASH RATES, WHATEVER KIND OF RATES.
THE EQUITY QUESTION IS, SHOULD FUTURE COSTS BE BORN BY TODAY'S TAXPAYERS OR SHOULD THEY BE BORN BY FUTURE TAXPAYERS? THAT'S THE EQUITY QUESTION.
SO IF I AM A RESIDENT HERE, A HOMEOWNER IN KYLE, TEXAS, AND WE INCREASE THE TAX RATE ARTIFICIALLY FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS, BUT I'M GONNA SELL MY HOME NEXT YEAR, WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO PAY A HIGHER TAX RATE TODAY AS COMPARED TO SOMEBODY WHO'S GONNA BENEFIT IN THE FUTURE YEAR? WHY ARE YOU MAKING ME PAY TODAY? SO THAT'S THE INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY QUESTION THAT WE WILL HAVE TO ALSO CONSIDER WHEN THIS POLICY DECISION OR DIS UH, DISCUSSION TAKES PLACE.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND.
DID I MUDDY IT UP? YVONNE? ARE YOU GONNA ASK SOMETHING? YES, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU QUESTION.
I THINK THOSE ARE ALL GREAT, GREAT POINTS.
SO MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE, DOES THE INCREASE IN THE THRESHOLD, DOES THAT HAVE TO BE BONDS OR DEBT THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE? OR CAN YOU USE FUTURE DEBT, WHICH IS NOT YET CREATED FOR THIS, THIS FUND THAT YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT? OKAY, SO THE, THE LAW IS VERY CLEAR.
CHAPTER 26 OF THE TEXAS TAX CODE, YOU CAN ONLY RECOUP THROUGH RATES IN THE I N S RATES.
M AND O I N S I N S IS THE DEBT SERVICE PRINCIPLE AND INTEREST PAYMENTS.
YOU CAN ONLY RECOUP FROM NEXT YEAR'S TAX RATE FOR I N SS PORTION, WHAT IS DUE NEXT YEAR FOR PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST THAT OUR TAX SUPPORTED DEBT, IN OTHER WORDS, GENERAL FUND, TO MAKE THIS DFE HAPPEN, THE COUNCIL WILL HAVE TO VOTE ON AN ORDINANCE THAT SAYS WE ARE CREATING ADDITIONAL DEBT NEXT YEAR BY PREPAYING PRINCIPLE OF OUR EXISTING DEBT.
SO BY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OPINION IS, BUT THE BOND COUNCIL HAS ADVISED OUR CITY FINANCIAL ADVISOR THAT THIS CAN BE DONE AND THAT THEY HAVE DONE IT IN OTHER CITIES.
SO I'M ASSUMING IT'S, IT'S OKAY.
SO LET'S ASSUME IT'S OKAY THEN THE CITY COUNCIL NOW, BY ADOPTING THAT ORDINANCE, YOU HAVE CREATED AN ADDITIONAL DEBT FOR NEXT YEAR THAT CAN BE RECOUPED IN THE I N S TAX RATE.
SO IF WE WERE TO NEXT YEAR PUT ON A BOND, UM, THIS, UH, COMMUNITY CENTER THAT MAY NOT TRIGGER, I MEAN IT WILL, IT WILL CREATE POSSIBLY A TAX RATE INCREASE FOR 2025, BUT SINCE VOTERS ALREADY APPROVE AN INCREASE TO UP TO 59 CENTS, BUT, AND IT WON'T GO ABOVE THAT.
[01:10:01]
CAN PUT IT ON A BOND AND SAY IT WILL NOT CREATE A TAX RATE INCREASE OTHER THAN THE ONE THAT YOU ALREADY APPROVED IN 2022.THAT'S WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE TRUE, AND THAT'S THE STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE THERE.
WE, WE RAN THERE, WE RAN, WE RAN THE, WE RAN THE NUMBERS WITH SAMCO, AND, AND THESE ARE ALL DIFFICULT
SO, BUT WE'VE LOOKED AT THAT PRETTY CAREFULLY OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS, AND YOU COULD DO POTENTIALLY ALL OF THE BOND PROGRAMS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN ISSUED.
SO ALL OF THE ROAD BONDS PLUS THE REST OF THE, THE PARK C I P AND WE JUST PLUGGED IN FOR SAKE OF ARGUMENT, IT IS NOT A ENGINEERED NUMBER.
IT IS NOT A NUMBER THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THIS COUNCIL, BUT WE PUT IN $80 MILLION FOR AN ADDITIONAL ISSUANCE TO SEE COULD WE DO THAT.
YOU COULD ALL, YOU COULD DO ALL OF THOSE THINGS AND STILL BE BELOW THE 59 CENTS.
SO THAT, SO THAT WOULD BE AN ARGUMENT.
ANOTHER ARGUMENT IS TO KEEP THE RATE HIGHER AND NOT EVER HAVE, TRY TO HAVE AN INCREASE OVER THE RATE THAT YOU HAVE.
IT'S A, AGAIN, A POLICY QUESTION FOR YOU GUYS TO LOOK AT.
UM, BUT THAT'S HOW WE TRIED TO APPROACH IT.
AND 80 MILLION IS JUST A PLANNING NUMBER.
AND THAT'LL BE UP TO THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE IN THE FUTURE.
BUT I WANTED TO SEE, DID YOU HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DO IT? OKAY.
ANY OTHER, CAN WE MAKE CLEAR THAT AN INCREASE IN, IF WE KEEP THE RATE THE SAME, IT'S STILL GONNA INCREASE HOW MUCH YOU PAY.
SO EVEN IF WE SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA KEEP IT EXACTLY WHAT IT IS, HOMEOWNERS WILL STILL PAY MORE.
IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE GONNA PAY THE SAME, THEY'RE GONNA PAY MORE NOW.
I MEAN, WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT RATE WILL INCREASE EVENTUALLY, HOWEVER, IT'S AN INCREASE THAT THEY ALREADY APPROVED.
AND IF HERE'S MY, BUT THIS IS WHAT I, I THINK IS IMPORTANT.
IF WE DO NOTHING, IT'S GONNA INCREASE.
THAT'S WHY WE LOWER IT DOWN TO KIND OF KEEP IT TO WHERE WE'RE CURRENTLY PAYING.
IS THAT CORRECT? PEREZ? LET'S DO THIS.
I THINK THE PROBLEM IS, Y'ALL ON TAXES, IF Y'ALL DON'T MIND, IF Y'ALL DON'T MIND, LET'S GET THROUGH THE, UNTIL WE GET TO THE PROPERTY TAX RATES SECTION OF THE PRESENTATION, THEN WE CAN REALLY GET INTO IT BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE THE SLIDES IN FRONT OF YOU.
SO HERE'S THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST FOR THE GENERAL FUND, AND I WOULD LIKE TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO LINE 14 AND 17.
LINE 14 IS THE ESTIMATED OR PROJECTED FUND BALANCE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE FUND BALANCES, IT RANGES ANYWHERE FROM $20 MILLION TO $31 MILLION OF THE FIVE YEAR PERIOD.
AND EVERY SINGLE YEAR WE ARE PROJECTING WE'RE GONNA BE ABOVE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FUND BALANCE BY THE CITY CHARTER, ANYWHERE FROM 17% TO 56% OVER AND ABOVE WHAT THE, UH, CHARTER REQUIRES.
SO HERE'S THE, UH, REVENUE AND TRANSFERS IN, UH, FOR THE GENERAL FUND FOR NEXT YEAR.
HOW IS IT BROKEN DOWN? 29% IS FROM PROPERTY TAX REVENUES, 28% FROM SALES TAX REVENUES AND DEVELOPMENT FEES, 18% OR $11.4 MILLION.
AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE REST OF THE, THE, UH, SOURCES OF REVENUES FOR THE GENERAL FUND ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE IS 70.98 OR $71 MILLION.
AND I'LL GIVE YOU THE TOP FOUR WHERE THE BULK OF THE GENERAL FUND REVENUES ARE SPENT BY THE CITY.
UH, POLICE IS 25%, 17.8 MILLION.
TRANSFERS OUT TO THE C I P IS 15.8.
ALSO INCLUDED IN THE TRANSFER OUT IS THE M AND O PORTION OF THE TURS INCREMENT TAX REVENUES.
WE COLLECT IT ALL IN THE GENERAL FUND AND THEN WE TRANSFER OUT TO THE INDIVIDUAL TSS FUNDS, WHAT BELONGS TO EACH TSS.
FOR THE M AND O PORTION, THE, UH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVENUES IS ABOUT 9%.
AND PUBLIC WORKS, UH, FOR STREET MAINTENANCE AND REHAB IS SEVEN 7% OR $5 MILLION.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE REST OF THE CITY, UH, PARKS SOLID WASTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION.
SO NOW WE'RE GETTING INTO THE TAX PROPERTY TAX SECTION OF THE DISCUSSION.
THE 2023 CERTIFIED TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATIONS ALSO COMMONLY REFERRED AS THE CERTIFIED TAX ROLL WE RECEIVED FOR 2023 TOTALS $5.9 BILLION AS COMPARED TO 2022, WHICH WAS 4.9 BILLION.
SO A NET INCREASE OF $1 BILLION IN TAXABLE
[01:15:01]
ASSESSED VALUATION.MIND YOU, THESE ASSESSED VALUATIONS DOES NOT INCLUDES TURS.
SO I HAVE REMOVED THE TURS, UH, TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATIONS FROM THESE NUMBERS.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE NET NUMBER FOR THE CITY, THAT'S THAT $1 BILLION INCREASE IN THE TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATION IS 21%.
AND IN THE ASSUMPTIONS WE HAVE USED FOR THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST, WE'RE USING 15% FOR NEXT YEAR, AND THEN IT DROPS DOWN TO 10.
BUT HERE YOU, AS YOU CAN SEE, IS 21% FOR NEXT YEAR.
SO HOW DOES THAT TRANSLATE INTO TAX RATES? SO 2023 PROPERTY TAX RATES CALCULATION, CERTIFIED TAX RATE CALCULATIONS THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE HAYES COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR.
SO HERE AGAIN, THE TWO COMPONENTS OF THE PROPERTY TAX RATES, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS ARE M AND O RATE.
AND THEN INTEREST IN SYNCING OR THE DEBT SERVICE RATE MAKES UP THE PROPERTY TAX RATE PER $100 OF TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATION.
SO THE CURRENT RATE IS 50 82 OF THAT 21 POINT 16 IS FOR DEBT SERVICE.
AND 29.66 IS FOR MAINTENANCE OF OPERATIONS.
THE TAX RATES THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE CERTIFIED TAX RATES, THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE, MEANING YOU WOULD GET THE SAME AMOUNT OF TAX FROM THE SAME PROPERTIES THAT WERE ON THE TAX ROLL LAST YEAR.
NOT ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION OR ANY OTHER ADDITIONS, SAME PROPERTIES LAST YEAR TO THIS YEAR.
THE TAX RATE FOR THAT IS 44 7 4.
THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE IS 46 93.
WHAT THE LAW SAYS IS IF YOU EXCEED 46 93, THERE'S AN AUTOMATIC ELECTION IN NOVEMBER.
NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THE TWO COMPONENTS, WHAT WE WERE TALKING EARLIER IS IF THE DEATH SERVICE MOVES FROM 1901, SO LET'S SAY 25, THE OTHER RAID HAS TO DROP, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
YEAH, I I HONESTLY, WE, WE, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS, BUT MY THOUGHT IS, IS THAT YOU COULD DO THAT, YOU COULD INCREASE THE DEBT SERVICE RATE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A LEGAL DEBT THAT'S REQUIRED TO BE PAID BY THE CITY, BUT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN ORDINANCE.
YOU WOULD PASS THAT DEFE PROGRAM.
WE WILL, WE WILL MAKE SURE WE CLARIFY THAT FOR YOU.
UM, IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE LAW ON THAT.
UM, WE, SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN, WE GOT THIS RATE THURSDAY, SO
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS, LET'S SAY YOU, YOU INCREASED THE I N S RATE TO 20 OR 25, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT BE, THE BOTTOM LINE, 46.93 IS GONNA CHANGE, RIGHT? THAT'S GONNA GO UP HIGHER.
SO IF THAT HAPPENS BY ITSELF, IF I N S IS THE ONLY RATE THAT MOVES, THEN NO, THERE IS NO ELECTION REQUIRED.
BUT IF THE M AND O INCREASES AT THE SAME TIME AS YOU'RE INCREASING I N S YES.
SO WE JUST HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF IF WE'RE INCREASING THE ION S BY ITSELF AND NOTHING ELSE MOVES.
SO OUR CURRENT TAX RATE IS 50 CENTS, UH, A COURT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T GO ABOVE THE THRESHOLD FOR A VOTE.
THEY'RE SAYING WE NEED TO BE AT 44 7 4.
I'M JUST SAYING WITHOUT THE BONDS, WITHOUT ANY, WITHOUT ANY VOTER APPROVED.
I JUST, OKAY, I'M JUST GONNA, LET ME JUST, LET ME TALK AND THEN GO AHEAD AND THEN YOU CAN ANSWER ME.
THE NO NEW RATE SHOULD BE 44 7 4 BECAUSE VOTERS HAVE APPROVED BONDS AND SPENDING, WE CAN GO UP TO 0.4631.
SO THAT'S WHY WE GO WITH 0.4631.
WHERE DO YOU SEE 4 6 3 1, UM, VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE, UH, TOTAL PROPERTY 4 6 9 3 OH, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS TOLD ME? SORRY.
[01:20:01]
YES, I TOLD MYSELF NOT TO DO THAT.SO YES, USING THOSE SAME NUMBERS, OOPS, LET ME GO BACK.
ALRIGHT, SO GOING BACK 50 IS OUR CURRENT, WE'RE WE'RE ALLOWED 44, BUT BECAUSE THERE'S BONDS AND OTHER OUTSTANDING DEBT THAT ARE APPROVED BY THE VOTERS, WE'RE ALLOWED TO GO TO 0.4693.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS RIGHT.
YOU'RE CORRECT, BECAUSE I SEE VOTER, I SEE ALL THESE DIFFERENT RATES AND I WANNA KNOW, AND I WANT COUNSEL TO KNOW HOW THEY CHANGE AND WHY THEY'RE DIFFERENT.
BUT IF WE DECIDE TO GO ABOVE THE 0.4 6, 9 3 AND NOT ADJUST THE M AND O RATE, MEANING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS OF THE CITY, THEN WE HAVE TO TAKE THIS TO A VOTER.
IF WE DECIDE, OKAY, WE COULD TAKE AWAY FROM THE CITY REGARDING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, THEN WE DO NOT HAVE TO GO TO A VOTE WITH THE, WITH THE RESIDENTS.
SO I JUST WANNA TRY TO CLARIFY A COUPLE THINGS.
SO THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE IS A CALCULATION REQUIRED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND IT BASICALLY SAYS FOR ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WERE OUT THERE BEFORE, WHATEVER THEY WERE PAYING IN TERMS OF DOLLARS, WOULD NOW WITH THE INCREASED VALUATIONS, WHAT IS THE RATE THAT WOULD BE TO WHERE THEY WOULD PAY NO NEW, DO NO NEW, UH, TAXES, NO NEW COST FOR THEM.
SO THAT'S A CALCULATED RATE SAYING WHAT, WHAT THAT WOULD BE THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE.
THIS GOES BACK TO SB TWO A FEW YEARS AGO THAT CHANGED.
IT USED TO BE ABLE TO GO 8% HIGHER THAN THE, THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE.
IT USED TO BE CALLED THE EFFECTIVE RATE USED TO BE ABLE TO GO 8% HIGHER THAN THAT.
NOW, SB TWO SAYS YOU CAN ONLY GO 3.5% OVER THAT.
SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.
ONE IS JUST A CALCULATION OF WHAT'S ACTUALLY GONNA BE A TAX INCREASE TO, TO EXISTING PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO ANYTHING OVER THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE IS RAISING MORE REVENUE, MORE DOLLARS FROM ANY EXISTING TAXPAYER AND ANYTHING, UM, UP TO THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE IS YOUR ABILITY TO DO THAT.
SO THIS BUDGET, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IS PROPOSING 3.5% INCREASE FOR EXISTING TAXPAYERS THAT ARE, THAT ARE IN THE BUDGET.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE IS.
WELL, SO LOOK, THE, EVERYTHING THAT SB TWO CONTEMPLATES, THAT OUR EFFECTIVE RATE, OUR ROLLBACK RATE, ALL OF THAT IS THE M AND O RATE.
AS HAS BEEN STATED MANY TIMES THE I N S RATE IS NOT, IS, IS SET BASED ON OUR DEBT SERVICE.
IT IS NOT SUBJECT TO ROLLBACK EFFECTIVE RATES, NO NEW REVENUE RATES, VOTER APPROVED RATES.
IT'S WHAT IS OUR DEBT, WHAT IS THE PAYMENT AND HOW DOES THAT CALCULATE OUT? SO THAT'S 0.1901.
BASED ON OUR CURRENT DEBT NEEDS, IF WE HAD A HIGHER DEBT NEED, THAT NUMBER WOULD BE HIGHER AND OUR VOTER APPROVED RATE WOULD BE HIGHER AND IT WOULD NOT TRIGGER AN ELECTION.
WHAT THE DFE PROGRAM DOES IS THE, THE VOTER APPROVED M AND O RATE OF 0.2792 IS NOT TOUCHED, WHICH DOES MEANS THAT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT TRIGGERING AN ELECTION.
WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WE ARE INCREASING FROM 0.1901 TO 0.229 TO MAINTAIN OUR TAX RATE AT 0.5082.
AND BY DOING THAT, THE WAY YOU GET THAT IS BY INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT WE PAY NEXT YEAR.
THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO TAX REV, THERE'S NO TAX OR THERE'S NO ELECTION TRIGGERED.
THERE'S NO ALTERATION TO OUR M AND O RATE.
ALL WE ARE DOING IS CREATING AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT WE PAY NEXT YEAR IN ORDER TO BRING THE 0.901 NUMBER UP TO 0.229 SO THAT OUR TAX RATE OVERALL STAYS THE SAME.
SO WE INCREASED 0.1% OH, OF OUR, SO THE NUMBER THREE AND HALF PERCENT 0.19 TO 0.2, WHICH IS 0.1 INCREASE.
SO, SO THE M AND O RATE HAS TO COME DOWN, RIGHT? BECAUSE OF THE ROLLBACK RATE, BECAUSE OF THE EFFECTIVE RATE, THE NO NEW, IT HAS TO COME DOWN.
THE I N S RATE, AS YOU CAN SEE, DOES NOT CHANGE BECAUSE IT'S NOT SUBJECT TO THAT THE I N S RATE IS SET BASED ON THE DEBT WE PAY EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, OR, OR WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED IS TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT WE PAY NEXT YEAR AND PAY AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT ON PRINCIPLE SO THAT THE VOTER OR SO THAT THE INTEREST IN SINKING RATE, UH, GOES FROM 0.1901 TO 0.229 SO THAT OUR OVERALL TAX RATE STAYS THE SAME AND THAT ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT WE ARE PAYING CAN BE BACKFILLED WHENEVER WE ISSUE A NEW, UH, AMOUNT OF DEBT IN THE FUTURE YEARS SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO INCREASE THE TAX RATE WHEN WE DO INCREASE OUR DEBT.
I, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OR IF IT'S IN HERE SOMEWHERE.
WHAT I KIND OF WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS TO SEE WHAT CAN WE
[01:25:01]
LEGALLY DO IF WE WERE TO MAINTAIN THE, THE, THE SAME TAXES, UM, PERCENTAGE WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.UM, IF, WHAT CAN WE PAY WITH THAT, IF IT MAKES SENSE FINANCIALLY FOR THE CITY OR IF WE NEED TO JUST GO DOWN, WHAT, WHAT WILL BE MORE BENEFICIAL THAT WE CAN LEGALLY DO WITH OUR TAXES, WHETHER KEEP IT THE SAME OR LOWER IT? YEAH, I, I THINK WE, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT LEGAL, UH, YOU KNOW, OPINION ON THAT.
BUT, UM, I, I THINK I, I WOULD AGREE WITH THE MAYOR'S ANALYSIS OF THAT.
I THINK YOU CAN, AND AGAIN, IT'S A THINK, IT'S NOT A FOR SURE THING, WANT TO GET THE LEGAL OPINION MM-HMM.
AND SO IT'S FROM A, THAT'S THE POLICY QUESTION FOR THE COUNCIL.
ARE YOU COMFORTABLE CHARGING THAT? WE'RE GONNA SHOW YOU, IN FACT ON THE NEXT SLIDE, IF YOU DON'T MIND, CAN WE JUST SWITCH TO THE NEXT SLIDE? THIS IS THE AVERAGE TAX BILL, UM, FOR HOMEOWNERS FOR THIS CURRENT YEAR IN 2022 AT THE CURRENT, AT THE PROPOSED RATE.
SO THESE NUMBERS WOULD SHIFT, UM, BASED ON A DIFFERENT PROPOSED, IF YOU INCREASE THE TAX RATE BY, UM, WHATEVER IT WAS, 3 CENTS OR 4 CENTS, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT POLICY QUESTION IS CLEAR FOR YOU.
IT WOULD BE CHARGING THE TAXPAYERS MORE THAN WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY BEING PAID.
LOOKING AT THIS, WHAT THEY'RE PAYING.
SO THIS IS JUST CHANGE IN THE AVERAGE HOME TAXABLE VALUATION AND TAX BILL.
SO WHEN, WHEN I SEE THIS, IT CAN BE MISLEADING TO SOME PEOPLE TO THINK THAT IF YOU OWN A HOME FOR $356,000, THAT THEY'RE JUST GONNA HAVE TO PAY 1600 OR 1,670.
RIGHT? BUT THE, THE TRUTH OF THAT MATTER IS IT'S AN INCREASE OF WHAT THEY CURRENTLY PAY OF $1,670.
SO ACT THERE IS NO, THERE'S NO TOTAL AMOUNT ON HERE, WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
'CAUSE I THINK AT THIS RATE IT WOULD PROBABLY BE THAT THE HOMEOWNER IS PAYING FIVE TO $6,000 A YEAR IN TAXES.
WELL, YOU, YOU'D BE LOOKING AT OVERALL TAX BILL TO ALL OF THE TAXING ENTITIES.
IS THAT THE QUESTION? NO, MY QUESTION IS, IF I OWN A HOME FOR $356,000, WHAT IS MY MONTHLY PAYMENT TOWARDS THOSE TAXES? YOUR TAX BILL WOULD, WELL, YOUR MONTHLY PAYMENT, YOUR AVERAGE, YOUR TAX BILL WOULD BE $1,483 UNDER THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, THAT'S THE NUMBER FOR THIS.
THIS IS ONLY THE CITY PORTION.
THIS THE, THIS IS THE CITY OF KYLE.
WE DON'T SET THE RATES AND ALL THE, SO, SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT ALL THE TAXES FOR ALL THE OTHER ENTITIES.
THAT'S A DIFFERENT CALCULATION.
THIS IS OUR TAX RATE THAT YOU SAID MM-HMM.
SO, AND THIS IS THE, AND THIS IS 22 VERSUS 23.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE.
THE PROPOSAL IS THAT THE AVERAGE TAX BILL FOR THE AVERAGE HOME, AND AGAIN, THE AVERAGE HOME IS CHANGING, IS GOING DOWN.
THAT'S WHAT THIS, UH, IS SHOWING YOU THE AVERAGE TAX BILL IS GOING DOWN.
AGAIN, MY CONCERN IS JUST OVERALL WHAT PEOPLE ARE PAYING, AND I UNDERSTAND WE NEED, WE CAN ONLY CONTROL THE CITY, BUT THE, THE TRUTH IS THEY'RE NOT PAYING JUST $1,400 A MONTH.
THEY'RE PAYING FIVE TO $6,000 A MONTH.
UM, AND THAT'S MY CONCERN AS A HOMEOWNER, AS SOMEBODY WHO REPRESENTS PEOPLE WHO HAVE MORTGAGES, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE TAKE A, A LOOK AT THE OVERALL PICTURE IT WHEN WE DECIDE IF WE WANT TO INCREASE OR KEEP THE TAXES THE SAME AS OPPOSED TO MAKE IT MATCH WHAT WE'RE LEGALLY ALLOWED TO CHARGE.
BUT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT TAXES PAY FOR ALSO.
SO THEY PAY FOR SERVICES, THEY PAY FOR SCHOOLS.
SO I DON'T THINK WE WERE DEBATING THAT.
SO I MEAN, WHAT IS THE QUESTION HERE? THAT WE DON'T WANT TO PAY TAXES? NO, NO.
FOR TAXES FEE? NO, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE QUESTION.
THE QUESTION IS, IF WE WERE TO KEEP THE SAME RATE WE HAVE AS A CITY, CAN WE PAY ANYTHING ELSE ADDITIONAL OR INCREASE OUR CAPACITY OR WE KEEP IT THE SAME.
SO BASICALLY WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING IN THIS CHART, WHICH IS MAKES SENSE, IS LIKE IF WE KEEP IT THE SAME, YOU KNOW, A, A HOUSE WITH THE SAME VALUE, WE'LL PAY, I DON'T KNOW, 17, 15, IF WE LOWER IT TO WHAT WE LEGALLY HAVE TO DO, POSSIBLY, REALLY WHAT YOU ARE GONNA PAY IN DECREASE IS WHAT, 70, 40, $50.
NOW THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE PROPERTY TAX IS NOT GONNA INCREASE BECAUSE OF THE SCHOOL BOND OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO, SO, SO MY QUICK MATH ON THIS IS IF, IF YOU KEPT THE CURRENT RATE AT 50 82 FOR AN A HOME THAT'S NOW $356,000 AND YOU CALCULATE THAT ACROSS, THE TAX BILL WOULD GO FROM 1483 TO ABOUT 1600, THAT'S THE NUMBER, ROUGHLY SPEAKING, 1621.
[01:30:04]
SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE, THE MAGNITUDE OF THAT RATE.OF COURSE, I I WOULD SAY THIS TOO.
UM, THAT'S KEEPING THE RATE EXACTLY THE SAME.
YOU COULD END UP SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANTED TO BE AT 48 CENTS AND NOT GO ALL THE WAY BACK UP OR YOU WANTED TO BE AT 49, YOU, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, IT HAS TO BE 50 82.
BUT IF THE STRATEGY IS TO NOT TO TRY TO MINIMIZE RATE FLUCTUATIONS, THAT'S PROBABLY THE THE SAFEST THING TO DO IF YOU WANTED TO DO THAT, GIVEN ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE PLANNED IN THE FUTURE.
WHAT WAS IT THAT Y'ALL WERE PROPOSING TO US FOR, TO BALANCE, TO GET THE BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR? IS IT THE FIVE? IT'S THE SAME TAX RATE AS THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE.
BUT NOW THE DISCUSSION IS THAT WE'RE GONNA COME BACK WITH A STRATEGY OF MINIMIZING THE UP AND DOWN IN THE TAX RATE.
WHAT WILL THAT TAKE FOR NEXT YEAR? AND THE, WHAT I HEARD WAS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE TAX RATE AT 50 82 OR CLOSE TO IT.
AND I GUESS JUST FROM THE COUNCIL'S PERSPECTIVE IS, IS THAT WHAT YOU'D LIKE US TO DO IS BRING YOU BACK THAT INFORMATION AND, AND HOW TO DO THAT? IS THAT WHAT I'M GETTING FOR THE MAJORITY? I, I WOULD BE OKAY IN FAVOR OF THAT.
CAN YOU ALSO, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU BRING IT, CAN YOU MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THIS? 'CAUSE I THINK THIS IS REALLY HELPFUL.
AND THAT, AND THAT'S EXACT, WE'LL DEFINITELY WE CAN UPDATE, UPDATE THAT FOR YOU.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST INDICATING.
INSTEAD OF THAT NUMBER BEING FOR 2023, THE AVERAGE TAX BILL BEING 1483, IT WOULD BE 1620, THEREABOUTS.
SO BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I'D LIKE TO, ON SLIDE 31 THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU NOW, KIND OF EXPLAIN AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO.
SO, BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S GONNA BE IN A HURRY TO ADJOURN, UH, WHEN WE GET DONE WITH THESE SLIDES.
SO LET ME JUST BRIEFLY EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY THAT RESOLUTION IS ON THE AGENDA.
THE TAX LAW REQUIRES THAT THE GOVERNING BODY, WHICH IS THE CITY COUNCIL, WHEN A TAX RATE IS SET OR PROPOSED TO BE SET, THAT THE COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING THAT IS HIGHER THAN THE NO REVENUE TAX RATE IN OUR CASE, IS 44 74.
ANY RATE THAT IS HIGHER THAN THAT, YOU MUST TAKE A VOTE AND RECORD YOUR VOTE THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER THAT PROPOSAL AT A FUTURE MEETING.
WE HAVE TO NOTICE, WE HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO IT JUST GIVES US A RECORD VOTE OF IF YOU AS COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL CONSIDER A PROPOSAL TO INCREASE THE TAX 'CAUSE THAT STATE LAW CONSIDERS ANYTHING HIGHER THAN NO REVENUE TAX RATE TO BE AN INCREASE IN TAX RATE.
SO THAT'S AGENDA NUMBER TWO FOR LATER TODAY.
THIS IS OUR TAX RATE HISTORY SLIDE, SO I WON'T SPEND TIME ON IT.
THIS IS THE TOTAL TAX RATE IN KYLE.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS WILL DO, BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S TOTAL 2.43.
THE TWO LARGEST COMPONENTS ARE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND CITY OF KYLE.
AND THEN RIGHT BEHIND US IS HAYES COUNTY.
THIS IS A NEW SLIDE FOR THIS YEAR.
YOU'VE SEEN THESE, THE, THIS SLIDE BEFORE.
WE'VE DONE IT EVERY BUDGET YEAR.
BUT WHAT WE HAVE CHANGED THIS TIME AROUND IS WE'VE INCLUDED THE 10 BENCHMARK CITIES.
WE'RE NOW COMPARING WITH THE 10 10 BENCHMARK CITIES OUR CURRENT TAX RATES, THE 50 82, HOW DOES THAT STACK? UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ARE NUMBER NINE OF 12 WHEN YOU ADD KYLE TO THE BENCHMARK CITIES, WE'RE A TOTAL OF 11 CITIES.
AND IN THIS SLIDE I HAVE ADDED CROSSWINDS MUD BECAUSE THEY'RE CLOSE TO US.
UH, AND A LOT OF TIMES YOU WILL HEAR PEOPLE TALK ABOUT CROSSWIND MUD TAXES.
SO THIS KIND OF GIVES YOU A GAUGE AS TO WHERE, HOW WE COMPARE TO THE BENCHMARK CITIES AS WELL AS CROSSWINDS MUD.
YOU KNOW, WHAT I'VE ALWAYS FOUND HELPFUL IN THIS ANALYSIS IS ALSO TO CONSIDER THE MEDIAN HOME VALUE BECAUSE THE RATE IS BASED ON THE VALUE.
AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE, BETA'S, UH, MEDIAN, UH, HOME VALUE IS OVER A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS HIGHER THAN OURS.
SO IF OUR HOMES ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS HIGHER, WE COULD LOWER THE TAX RATE AND COLLECT THE SAME AMOUNT.
SO IT'S GOOD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IF YOU, IF YOU PUT WHAT IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF TAX PROPERTY TAXES PER HOME THAT THE CITY OF KYLE COLLECTS, AND THEN BENCHMARK THAT AGAINST THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF TAXES THAT
[01:35:01]
SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, UH, LEANDER OR CEDAR PARK OR GEORGETOWN OR BUTTA OR ROUND ROCK, WHICH ALL HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER HOME VALUES THAN THE CITY OF KYLE, UH, THOSE NUMBERS WOULD CHANGE.CAN WE GET THAT INFORMATION? SORRY, GO AHEAD.
YEAH, LIKE SAN MARCOS COLLECTS MORE RETAIL TAX TOO, SO RIGHT.
THEY'RE ABLE TO HAVE A LOWER OH NO, THEIR, THEIR RATE IS IN, AND THIS IS ACTUALLY HIGHER.
AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE SAN MARCOS IS THE ONE CITY ON THIS LIST WHOSE AVERAGE HOME VALUE IS ON PAR WITH WHAT OURS IS.
SO BUT'S HOME VALUES ARE JUST SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER.
SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE AS HIGH OF A RATE TO COLLECT THE SAME AMOUNT OF DOLLARS.
IS THERE ANY WAY WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION IN THE NEXT, LIKE NEXT TIME SO WE CAN SEE THAT? SURE.
BECAUSE I MEAN, WE HAVE TO JUSTIFY TO THE RESIDENTS WHY WE RANK THIS HIGH.
WE CAN GIVE YOU, UM, VALUES AND WE CAN GIVE YOU AVERAGE TAX BILLS FOR ALL OF THESE SO YOU CAN SEE IT.
SO I, AND I DON'T WANNA GO TOO FAST HERE.
UM, SO, SO WE HAVE A CURRENT 50 50 CENTS, UM, TAX RATE IF WE ADOPT 2023 AT 46 93, WHICH IS WHAT Y'ALL ARE RECOMMENDING, THAT THAT SATISFIES THE BUDGET NEEDS, RIGHT? OTHERWISE Y'ALL WOULD NOT PROPOSE 46 93 FOR 2023, RIGHT? SO IT, ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED WITH YOU IN THE BUDGET CAN BE PAID FOR WITH THAT RATE.
UM, IT JUST DOES NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THAT POLICY QUESTION OF TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE RATE GOING FORWARD.
IT STILL WOULD HAVE FLUCTUATION GOING FORWARD IN THE FUTURE WITH THE BOND PROGRAMS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT MM-HMM.
AND WHEN DO WE NEED TO MAKE THE DECISION IF THAT'S THE RATE WE WANT TO ADOPT? UM, IS THIS A TODAY DECISION? NO.
NO, BUT YOU'LL, YOU'LL ADOPT THE BUDGET BY, I BELIEVE IT'S AUGUST 24TH, IS, IS THE DATE.
SO WE, WE'LL NEED TO QUICKLY BRING SOMETHING BACK TO YOU SO YOU CAN HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS AND DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
WE WANT THE A DIFFERENT RATE THOUGH, IF WE DECIDE TO KEEP THE RATE THE SAME.
IS THAT, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE VOTE THAT WE'RE GONNA TAKE TODAY? THE ONLY VOTE YOU'RE GONNA TAKE UNDER AGENDA NUMBER, ITEM TWO IS THAT YOU'RE GONNA, YOU'RE WILLING TO CONSIDER A RATE THAT IS HIGHER THAN THE NO REVENUE TAX RATE, OKAY? NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE.
SO IT COULD BE WHAT THE MANAGER HAS PROPOSED.
IT COULD BE KEEPING THE RATE THE SAME AS CURRENT RATES.
'CAUSE THEY'RE ALL GONNA BE HIGHER THAN THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE.
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHEN, WHEN YOU, UM, WHEN YOU MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT A RATE THAT'S HIGHER THAN THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, THERE'S VERY PARTICULAR LANGUAGE THAT THE STATE MAKES YOU READ AND ALL, ALL OF YOU WHO'VE SEEN THIS IN IN THE PAST, YOU HAVE TO READ VERY PARTICULAR LANGUAGE THAT YOU MOVE TO RAISE TAXES BY X PERCENT AND X DOLLARS.
AND THEN THAT, THAT'S REQUIRES THAT TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD, PUT IN THE ORDINANCE AND VOTED ON.
SO THE REAL PARTICULAR YOU GUYS HAVE ALL SEEN THIS IS, IF YOU'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL FOR A WHILE, JUST WANNA BE CLEAR WITH YOU, THAT'S WHY THESE RATES, THEY'RE SOMEWHAT ARCHAIC TO KIND OF GO THROUGH HOW THEY'RE CALCULATED AND SO FORTH, BUT THAT'S WHY THEY, THEY ALL LEAD TO HOW YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY APPROVE THE, THE RATES.
THE PROJECTED SALES TAX IS 17.5 MILLION FOR NEXT YEAR, WHICH IS A $1.6 MILLION INCREASE FROM THE CURRENT APPROVED BUDGET OR 10.2%.
THE CITY'S TAX, TAX SALES TAX RATE IS 1.5%.
MOST CITIES HAVE 2%, BUT IN KYLE'S CASE, THE OTHER 0.5, THE VOTERS AUTHORIZED TO GIVE IT TO HAYES COUNTY SALES TAX COLLECTION HISTORY, YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE.
WE ARE TRENDING UPWARDS AND MOST LIKELY IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, IT WILL CONTINUE THIS SAME TREND, IF NOT AT A MUCH FASTER PACE WITH ALL THE NEW RETAIL BUSINESSES COMING INTO TOWN.
SO HERE'S A COMPARISON OF MONTHLY SOLID WASTE OR TRASH RATES FOR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS FOR THE BENCHMARK CITIES.
THIS WAS ONE VERY DIFFICULT SLIDE TO PUT TOGETHER BECAUSE EVERY CITY HAS A VERY DIFFERENT TRASH COLLECTION PROGRAM, NUMBER OF DAYS, SIZE OF THE CARTS, UH, RECYCLE PROGRAM.
BUT WE TRIED TO KEEP IT AS CLOSE AS APPLE TO APPLES FOR CITY OF KYLE.
AND BASED ON THIS COMPARISON, YOU CAN SEE KYLE IS CLOSER TO THE MIDDLE, IF NOT SLIGHTLY.
WE'RE NUMBER EIGHT OF THE 11 CITIES OUTTA CURIOSITY, WHO DOES BEAUTY USE? T D S T D S AND THEY GET IT FOR ALMOST $10 CHEAPER.
[01:40:01]
BE THE TOP OF SURFACE FREQUENCY, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.WE HAVE THREE DIFFERENT WASTE STREAMS THAT ARE HERE.
YEAH, I I'M NOT SURE WE CAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT THEIR, WHAT THEIR MODEL IS.
AND DIDN'T THEY WANT TO INCREASE THIS TOO, LIKE LAST YEAR AFTER WE SIGN A CONTRACT FOR NOW, THEY CHANGED THEIR HOURS.
OKAY, THE SECOND OF THE FOUR MAJOR UTILITY, I MEAN MAJOR FUNDS, WATER U UTILITY FUND, THESE WILL GO NOW REAL FAST.
SAME ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE TALKED BEFORE.
SO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE WATER U UTILITY FUND IN THE PROPOSED YEAR, THERE IS NO RATE INCREASE FOR WATER SERVICE RATES PROPOSED BY THE CITY MANAGER.
TOTAL REVENUES IS $17.5 MILLION.
EXPENDITURES IS ABOUT THE SAME.
THIS INCLUDES A $650,000 TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FIRM FROM THE WATER UTILITY FUND, NO NET DRAWDOWN OF FUND BALANCE, 10.1 MILLION IN ENDING FUND BALANCE OF VERY HIGH FUND BALANCE HERE AGAIN, A HEALTHY FUND BALANCE, 21.3 MILLION IN PLANNED C I P SPENDING FOR THE WATER UTILITY PROJECTS.
$168,000 FOR 1.8 PROPOSED NEW, UH, POSITIONS.
THE REASON IS IT'S INFRACTION BECAUSE WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITIES ARE SPLIT BETWEEN FUNDS.
AND THEN, UH, 62,500 FOR NEW EQUIPMENT.
HERE'S A FUND SUMMARY OR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR.
HERE AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO LINE 19 AND 20.
UH, LINE 19 IS HOW MUCH MORE OR ABOVE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED WE'RE 5.7 MILLION OVER AND ABOVE WHAT IS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN.
THAT'S ALMOST 131% MORE THAN REQUIRED.
THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW OR FORECAST.
I'D LIKE TO POINT YOUR ATTENTION TO 19 LINE 19 AND 20.
UH, IF YOU LOOK ACROSS THE FIVE YEAR PROJECTION HORIZON EVERY SINGLE YEAR, THE WATER UTILITY FUND HAS A POSITIVE FUND BALANCE.
AND OVER AND ABOVE WHAT IS REQUIRED, HERE'S THE REVENUE AND TRANSFERS IN FOR WATER UTILITY FUND FOR NEXT YEAR, $17.5 MILLION.
UH, MOST OF IT COMES FROM OUR 96% IS FROM WATER SERVICE OR WATER SALES.
AND THEN WE HAVE OTHER FEES, A SMALL COMPONENT OF THAT.
UM, THE GENERAL FUND TRANSFER, I, I'VE SEEN THIS IN A LOT OF THE DIFFERENT FUNDS AND I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT IT GOES TO WHEN IT GOES TO THE GENERAL FUND.
LIKE WHAT IS THE NEED TO TRANSFER THIS OUT OF THESE INDIVIDUAL FUNDS? SO YOU REMEMBER WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE FUND STRUCTURE? THERE IS THE TAX SUPPORTED TYPE OF FUNDS AND THEN THE BUSINESS TYPE ACTIVITIES THAT THE CITY HAS.
WATER SYSTEM, WASTEWATER SYSTEM, STORM DRAINAGE.
THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR TO A COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE.
IF THE WATER UTILITY IN CITY OF KYLE WAS OWNED AND OPERATED BY A PROFIT ORGANIZATION, THEY WOULD BE PAYING US FRANCHISE TAX, PROPERTY TAX AND OTHER FEES AND CHARGES.
SINCE THE CITY OWNS THIS UTILITY, THE THE TAXPAYERS, THE GENERAL FUND TAXPAYERS ARE THE OWNERS OF THIS SYSTEM.
SO THEY'RE GETTING A DIVIDEND ON THEIR INVESTMENT.
ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT IT, THEY'RE GETTING SOME MONEY IN LIEU OF PROPERTY TAX.
SO THIS IS A VERY COMMON PRACTICE ACROSS ALL MUNICIPALITIES.
MOST MUNICIPALITIES HAVE THIS TRANSFER.
WHEN THE TRANSFER MONEY, $650,000 FROM THE WATER UTILITY GOES INTO THE GENERAL FUND.
IT IS APPLIED AS A WHOLE, WHATEVER THE NEEDS ARE FOR THE GENERAL FUND, IT IS NOT EARMARKED FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE.
ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, $17.5 MILLION JUST SO HAPPENS TO BE RIGHT ON THE MONEY AS REVENUE STREAM.
THE THREE LARGEST COMPONENTS OF THE EXPENDITURE SIDE WATER SUPPLY IS 51% OR $9 MILLION.
WATER OPERATIONS IS 21% OF 3.7 MILLION.
AND THEN UTILITY BILLING WITH WHERE WE HAVE THE METER READING AND BILLING AND COLLECTIONS, IT'S ABOUT 8%, $1.5 MILLION.
AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE REST.
SO NOW WE'LL SHOW YOU HOW DO WE COMPARE WITH OUR, UH, BENCHMARK
[01:45:01]
CITIES AS WELL AS THIS IS THE MONTHLY RESIDENTIAL AVERAGE WATER BILL HERE AGAIN, IN ADDITION TO THE BENCHMARK CITIES, WE'VE ADDED THE OTHER UTILITY PROVIDERS THAT ARE WITHIN OUR AREA.AND THAT HAPPENS TO BE GOFOR, UM, AQUA TEXAS COUNTY LINE AND SOUTHWEST WATER.
SO, SO THE TWO HIGHEST ARE MONARCH AND CITY OF KYLE.
I, I THINK THE OTHER UTILITIES ARE JUST MATTER OF TIME TO CATCH UP WITH US AND BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO MAKE INVESTMENTS JUST LIKE WE DO.
UM, BUT WE ALSO DON'T KNOW FROM THE RATES IF THE GENERAL FUND IS SUBSIDIZING THEIR WATER RATES.
THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS THESE ARE THEIR RATES AT THE TIME THAT WE PULLED 'EM.
WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY RATE INCREASES.
SO ALL OF THESE COULD HAVE RATE ADJUSTMENTS THAT ARE NOT REFLECTED IN THIS CHART.
IT'S ALWAYS A POINT IN TIME KIND OF COMPARISON.
WASTEWATER ARE YOU TOTALLY FINE.
SO THE HIGHLIGHTS FOR THE WASTEWATER SYSTEM IS WE'RE NOT, THIS MANAGER'S NOT PROPOSING ANY RATE INCREASE FOR WATER SERVICE RIGHTS.
11.1 MILLION IN TOTAL REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IN 10 MILLION IN TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND TRANSFERS OUT HERE.
AGAIN, $650,000 TRANSFER OUT TO THE GENERAL FUND, NO NET DRAW DOWN OF FUND BALANCE, 9.5 MILLION IN ESTIMATED ENDING FUND BALANCE FOR NEXT YEAR, WHICH IS A VERY HEALTHY FUND BALANCE HERE AS WELL.
UH, 15 MILLION IN PLAN C I P SPENDING IN 24 FOR WASTEWATER TYPE PROJECTS.
$197,000 FOR 2.2 PROPOSED NEW POSITIONS AND 92,500 FOR NEW EQUIPMENT.
THE FUND SUMMARY FOR NEXT YEAR, SAME THING HERE.
I'D LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO LINE 19 AND 20.
UH, LINE 19 SHOWS YOU IN THE CMM PROPOSED BUDGET COLUMN.
UH, WE HAVE 6.9 MILLION OR $7 MILLION OVER AND ABOVE WHAT IS REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED ALMOST 300% MORE THAN WHAT WE NEED.
AND THIS WILL, YOU'LL SEE THAT THIS THIS WILL COME DOWN OVER TIME AS WE'RE SPENDING MORE MONEY IN THE WASTEWATER SYSTEM.
SO HERE'S OUR FIVE YEAR FORECAST.
IF YOU WOULD LOOK AT LINE 20 AND 21, UM, POSITIVE FUND BALANCES ACROSS THE FIVE YEAR PLANNING HORIZON.
AND THE FUND BALANCES EVERY SINGLE YEAR IS OVER AND ABOVE WHAT IS REQUIRED.
SO HERE'S A GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION OF THE TOTAL REVENUES.
98% IS FROM WASTEWATER SERVICE REVENUES, 2% FROM MISCELLANEOUS AND LESS THAN 1% FOR OTHER TYPES OF FEES THAT WASTEWATER UTILITY COLLECTS ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE.
AND PAGE 66, AND YOU MAY HAVE MENTIONED THIS AND I DIDN'T HEAR YOU FOR THE APPROVED BUDGET, THE 2223, IT SAYS A REQUIRE MINIMUM, IT'S 3.5 MILLION AND WE ENDED UP WITH 1.7 MILLION EXCESS THAT'S EXCESS ABOVE.
IT'S REALLY THE FIVE OH THE APPROVED BUDGET.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE APPROVED BUDGET FOR CURRENT YEAR.
BUT IT, THE WAY TO READ THAT IS LINE 17 IS WHAT WAS THE FI FUND BALANCE AND WHAT WAS THE REQUIRED.
SO WE HAD 5.3, BUT THE REQUIRE WAS 3.5.
SO IT'S 1.7 MORE THAN THE REQUIREMENT.
SORRY, I WAS LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS WRONG.
SO HOW DO WE STACK COMPARED TO OTHER BENCHMARK CITIES? FOR THE AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL WASTEWATER BILL, WE'RE RIGHT SMACK IN THE MIDDLE AS COMPARED TO EVERYBODY ELSE.
AND LIKE BRIAN SAID, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OTHER UTILITIES OR CITIES WILL DO WITH THEIR NEXT YEAR'S RATES.
THEY MAY HAVE RATE INCREASES OR RATE DECREASES.
STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY FUND, UH, SAME ASSUMPTIONS FOR CUSTOMER GROWTH.
NO INCREASE IS PROPOSED FOR STORM DRAINAGE FEES.
1.9 MILLION IN TOTAL REVENUES,
[01:50:01]
2.3 MILLION IN TOTAL EXPENDITURES.WE'RE DRAWING DOWN THE FUND BALANCE BY ABOUT $370,000.
THE ESTIMATED ENDING BALANCE NEXT YEAR FOR A STORM DRAINAGE IS $621,000, WHICH FOR THIS FUND IS ALSO A VERY HEALTHY BALANCE.
500,000 IS BEING, UH, PLANNED FOR SPENDING IN C I P FROM THE STORM DRAINAGE NEXT YEAR.
AND THEN 99,864 FOR ONE NEW STORM DRAINAGE INSPECTOR POSITION TO BE FUNDED NEXT YEAR.
WE ALSO HAVE $260,000 FOR NEW E COLI REDUCTION STUDY AND SOME NEW SOFTWARE.
THE HERE'S THE FUND SUMMARY AND UH, IF YOU WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT LINE 12, 13, AND 14 COUNCIL MEMBER, UM, PARTIALLY I'LL, I'LL MAKE SURE I I DON'T SKIP THE, THAT EXPLANATION.
SO LINE 12, IF YOU LOOK UNDER THE CMM PROPOSED BUDGET COLUMN, THE REQUIRED MINIMUM BALANCE IS 568 AND RIGHT ABOVE IT, YOU'LL SEE WHAT THE ACTUAL PROPOSED ESTIMATED BALANCE IS.
SO IT'S $53,000 MORE THAN OR ABOVE WHAT IS REQUIRED.
THE FIVE YEAR, UH, PLANNING HORIZON OR THE FIVE YEAR FOR FINANCIAL FORECAST.
IF YOU SEE LINE LOOK AT LINE 12 ACROSS THE BOARD, UH, IT IS MORE THAN THE REQUIRED, UH, MINIMUM FUND BALANCE EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
TOTAL REVENUES FOR NEXT YEAR IS $1.9 MILLION.
53% COMES FROM COMMERCIAL DRAINAGE FEES AND 47% FROM RESIDENTIAL DRAINAGE FEES.
AND THEN WE HAVE LESS THAN 1% FROM MISCELLANEOUS TYPE REVENUES.
SO HOW DO WE SPEND THE MONEY THAT COMES INTO THE DRAINAGE UTILITY FUND? 46% IS FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, 32% FOR, UH, STAFFING PUBLIC WORKS AND ONE POSITION IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
AND THEN 22% OR HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IS GONNA GO TOWARDS C I P PROJECT NEXT YEAR
SO NOW WE'RE GONNA GET INTO TS ONE AND TWO TS NUMBER ONE, THE CITY AND COUNTY, WE BOTH PARTICIPATE AT A HUNDRED PERCENT IN TAX INCREMENT REVENUES.
NEXT YEAR IS PROJECTED THATT ONE WILL HAVE 2.6 MILLION IN INCREMENT REVENUES, 1.8 MILLION IN TOTAL EXPENDITURES FORT ONE.
THERE ARE NO ADMINISTRATIVE OR MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES PROPOSED NEXT YEAR.
THE ONLY EXPENDITURE IS DEBT SERVICE OR PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PAYMENT BACK TO THE BOND HOLDERS.
AND THAT IS THE $1.8 MILLION IN 2024.
HERE'S THE, UH, PROPOSED BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CITY MANAGER PROPOSED BUDGET COLUMN 2.6 MILLION IN REVENUES, $1.8 MILLION IN EXPENDITURES.
AND THESE ARE ALL DEBT SERVICE RELATED EXPENDITURES, PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST.
WE HAVE $810,000 LESS IN EXPENDITURES THAN REVENUES.
THAT ADDS TO THE FUND BALANCE.
THE FUND BALANCE IS PROJECTED TO BE SLIGHTLY OVER $1 MILLION FOR NEXT YEAR FORTS.
NUMBER ONE, HERE'S THE FIVE YEAR FORECAST.
FORTS NUMBER ONE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST LINE, AS DEBT SERVICE DECREASES OVER TIME, THE FUND BALANCE IS GROWING BECAUSE, UH, WE'RE THE EXPENDITURES ARE PRETTY MUCH LIMITED TO DEBT SERVICE INTS NUMBER ONE.
SO THE FUND BALANCE IS PROJECTED ANYWHERE FROM A MILLION DOLLARS NEXT YEAR TO 8.4 MILLION IN YEAR NUMBER FIVE.
UM, MONEY THAT WAS PAID INTO THIS BY THE GENERAL FUND, WILL THAT BE, UM, REFUNDED BACK TO THE CITY? SO THAT'S A VERY MUCH A POLICY DECISION.
THE PAST COUNCIL NOR THE CURRENT COUNCIL HAS GIVEN DIRECTION TO STAFF TO REPAY THAT MONEY.
THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT AT THE TIME, IT WAS THE OBLIGATION OF THE GENERAL FUND.
IF THERE'S ANY SHORTAGE IN, IN MEETING THE BONDHOLDER REQUIREMENTS, IT WAS MADE UP FROM GENERAL FUND EACH YEAR.
IN THE PAST, IF COUNCIL WISHES
[01:55:01]
US OR GIVES DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER, UH, WE CAN IMPLEMENT THAT POLICY.I JUST WOULD LIKE TO BE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD.
SO, BUT IN THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET OR IN THE FIVE YEAR PLANNING HORIZON, WE HAVE NOT ASSUMED ANY REPAYMENT BACK TO GENERAL FUND FROM TUR NUMBER ONE.
HOW MUCH DO YOU, I GUESS ESTIMATE WOULD BE COMING BACK TO THIS GENERAL FUND FROM TURS? ONE THAT HASN'T BEEN REPAID? DON'T HOLD ME TO IT.
UH, THE LAST TIME I LOOKED AT IT WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, UM, IT WAS CLOSE TO 10 MILLION.
HOW DO WE GO ABOUT THAT, BRIAN? I MEAN, I GET THAT THE, IS THIS FOR 1626, THE FUNDS THAT WERE ALLOCATED? MM-HMM.
I, I THINK, UM, IT'S NOT BEEN CONTEMPLATED THAT THIS WOULD, THIS FUND WOULD EVER PAY BACK THOSE DOLLARS AT THIS POINT.
I, I DON'T THINK WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITHOUT RE EITHER WAY.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO RECONSTITUTE THE TS ONE BOARD.
THE TURS ONE BOARD WAS, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT WAS EVER CONSTITUTED INITIALLY BECAUSE IT WAS MM-HMM.
BUT THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR, FIRST SERIES WHERE THE REVENUES INTS ONE EXCEEDS THE DEBT SERVICE.
SO, UH, I THINK IT'S GONNA NEED TO COME FORWARD PROBABLY PRETTY SOON TO RECONSTITUTE THE TURS BOARD AND HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT TO DO WITH FUTURE REVENUES THAT ARE IN EXCESS OF THE DEBT SERVICE.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT THEN.
UM, IF THET BOARDS HAVEN'T BEEN MEETING FORTS, ONE, HOW HAS THERE BEEN SPENDING, BECAUSE THE FOUNDING DOCUMENTS OF THE TSS REQUIRES THE GENERAL FUND TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE ON 1626 AND THE TS REVENUES TO BACKFILL THAT DEBT SERVICE.
SO THERE'S NO APPROVAL NEEDED FROM A TSS BOARD.
Y YOU DON'T HAVE TO, YEAH, IT'S JUST AN AUTOMATIC THING, BUT NOW THE REVENUES ARE IN EXCESS AND SO THERE'S FUNDS THAT ARE UNALLOCATED AND SO NOW THERE'S A REASON TO RECONSTITUTE THE BOARD TO DECIDE HOW TO SPEND THOSE DOLLARS OR WHAT TO DO WITH THEM.
SO MAYBE I'M ASKING THE WRONG QUESTION.
THE STATE STATUTE SAYS THAT THERE'S A BOARD THAT OVERSEES THIS TURS.
SO WHEN SPENDING IS DONE, WHO'S OVERSEEING THAT?
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE MAYOR IS REFERENCING IS THAT THERE WAS A FUNDING STREAM SET UP, BUT FOR MANY YEARS ALL IT DID WAS PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THAT STREAM.
AND YOU CAN SEE IN 22, 23, THAT IS THE FIRST TIME WHERE YOU'VE HAD, OR, UH, THAT'S THE FIRST TIME YOU'VE HAD THESE EXCESS FUNDS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED, BUT THEY'RE PROJECTED TO GROW.
AND SO IF THE USE CHANGES TO CHANGE THE USE, YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND HAVE THAT BOARD MEET TO DO THAT.
I, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I SUSPECT THEY MET AT SOME YEARS AGO AND ESTABLISH THAT AND CREATED THOSE, UM, YOU KNOW, COSTS AND LIABILITIES FOR THE FUND.
WE COULD GO BACK AND HAVE, I'D HAVE TO RESEARCH THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF VEZ HAS THOSE DOCUMENTS AGAIN.
IT'S BEEN, NO, THAT'S BEFORE MY TIME.
THAT'S PRETTY MUCH HOW IT HAPPENED.
THE, THE BOARD DECIDED AND VOTED ON THAT THEY WILL ASSUME THIS LIABILITY, THE DEBT FOR THE 1626 RECON, UH, CONSTRUCTION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, AND THAT THE TURS WOULD HEREBY APPROVES PAYMENT OF FUTURE DEBT, UH, PRINCIPLE AND INTEREST.
SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO APPROVE THE INVOICES INDIVIDUALLY IF THEY'RE A LARGE AMOUNT.
SO WHO OVERSEES TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S NOT GETTING OVERSPENT.
THE, THE CITY IS AND THE BOND TRUSTEE IS OH, SO THE CITY STAFF IS YES.
SO THE BOARD IS NOT REQUIRED BY THE STATE? WELL, WE'RE NOT INCREASING THE DEBT.
THE DEBT IS STILL THE SAME AS WE ARE PAYING OFF, THE DEBT IS COMING DOWN.
SO THE OBLIGATION OF THE CITY AND THE TURS HAS NOT CHANGED.
SO WE HAVE NOT ADDED ANY NEW TYPES OF EXPENDITURES.
WE'VE NOT ADDED, ADDED ANY MAINTENANCE COSTS.
THE ONLY THING THIS TS PAYS IS THE EXISTING DEBT THAT THE TS BOARD APPROVED TO TAKE ON AND OBLIGATED ITSELF TO PAY IN THE FUTURE.
SO JUST TO, TO, TO AMPLIFY THAT POINT A LITTLE BIT, IF YOU, YOU LOOK ON THIS SLIDE AND THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES, THOSE ARE ALL JUST P AND I, PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PAYMENTS RELATED TO THE DEBT.
THAT'S ALL THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE EXPENDITURES WHEN WE GO TO T TWO YOU'RE GONNA SEE DEBT PLUS OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IN THERE.
THE REPAYMENT BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND.
THIS ONE IS, IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THAT ONE.
SO, UM, BUT I DO THINK IT'S, UH, THE MAYOR SAID, AND I THINK, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER FLORES KALL IS, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THAT THE, THE SITUATION IS CHANGING, WE PROBABLY NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND
[02:00:01]
COME BACK AND HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD ABOUT WHAT, WHAT'S THE FUTURE LOOK LIKE FOR THIS FUND? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WELL, WELL, IF THE MONEY THAT NOW WE'RE GETTING IN PROFIT, THERE ISN'T COMING, IT IS COMING BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND, EVEN ON, ON ITS OWN.THEN WHERE WOULD IT, WHERE WHERE IS IT GOING? IT'S TURS.
IT'S STAYING IN THE TURS FUND.
AS LONG AS IT'S NOT REINVESTED IN THE TURS EITHER, AS LONG ASTS IS ALIVE.
BUT WHAT IS IT DOING THERE IF IT'S, IF WE'RE NO LONGER INCREASING MAINTENANCE EXPENSES OR OPERATING EXPENSES, THAT THAT'S THE FIGURE OUT.
SO, SO WHY WOULD WE JUST LEAVE MONEY GROWING THERE? THIS IS JUST THE FIRST YEAR THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY HAVING MONEY.
NO, IT'S GREAT'S A GREAT PROBLEM.
FLEXIBILITY, YOU KNOW, IT'S A GREAT PROBLEM THAT NOW MONEY IS ARRIVING.
BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF WE JUST SAY DO NOTHING, UM, AND WE WALK AWAY AND WE HAVE NO, NO ACTION ON THIS, THAT THAT PILE JUST KEEPS GROWING.
I, I MEAN, AND, AND WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT SAYING DO NOTHING, UH, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE CURRENT YEAR ESTIMATE FOR 2223, WE'RE ESTIMATING THIS YEAR WILL END WITH 275,000.
UM, BUT IT DOES GROW TO 8.4 MILLION BY YEAR FIVE.
SO IT'S A GREAT DISCUSSION TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD TO SAY, WHERE DO THESE FUNDS GO? HOW DO YOU WANNA REINVEST IT? WHAT ARE THE, WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF IT? UM, BUT IT JUST HASN'T BEEN A POINT IN THE PAST WHERE I THINK YOU'VE HAD SIGNIFICANT DOLLARS TO, TO REALLY HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.
BUT I, I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, $8.4 MILLION IS A LOT OF MONEY POTENTIALLY OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
IT'S A FORECAST, BUT IT COULD BE A LOT.
IT HELPS TO KIND OF THINK ABOUT IT AS, AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH MORE OF THE TALKS.
SO MOVING ON TO TS NUMBER TWO.
THIS IS, TS NUMBER TWO IS OVER IN THE PLUM CREEK CREEK AREA.
IN TSS TWO, THE CITY AND THE COUNTY PARTICIPATES AT A 50% RATE IN THE INCREMENT REVENUES, MEANING 50% OF THE TAX REVENUES CAPTURED WITHIN THE TSS BOUNDARIES STAYS WITHIN THE TS.
THE OTHER 50% GOES BACK TO THE TAXING JURISDICTIONS.
SO WE GET THE GENERAL FUND GETS 50% OF THE TAX INCREMENT WITHINT NUMBER TWO, TOTAL REVENUES PROJECTED FOR NEXT YEAR IS $2.4 MILLION.
WE'RE ESTIMATING THATT NUMBER TWO WILL ISSUE $15.3 MILLION IN NEWTS BONDS.
THEY WILL BE REPAID SOLELY BY THE REVENUES OF THE TURS.
NUMBER TWO EXPENDITURES ESTIMATED FOR NEXT YEAR, $14.6 MILLION.
WHAT MAKES UP THAT $161,000 IS FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.
THIS IS THE UPKEEP LANDSCAPING TYPE EXPENSES.
THERE ARE NO ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD COSTS, $400,000 FOR ANNUAL REPAYMENT TO THE GENERAL FUND.
THIS IS THE REPAYMENT SCHEDULE, UH, PAYING BACK GENERAL FUND ON THE COST FUNDED UPFRONT BY THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE TWO PARKS, LA VERDE AND HEROES MEMORIAL $507,000 FOR DEBT SERVICE IN FISCAL YEAR 2024.
IF YOU RECALL, TS NUMBER TWO ISSUED $8 MILLION, $8.2 MILLION INTS REVENUE BONDS.
SO THAT'S THE DEBT SERVICE ON THAT.
SORRY FOR THE TS TO, UH, I, I SENT AN EMAIL REGARDING ABOUT WATER USAGE.
HOW MUCH MONEY DO WE USE? DID WE, DID WE PAY FOR WATER USAGE? AND HOW ARE WE TRACKING THAT FOR THE POND AND LANDSCAPING? SO THE PARKS ARE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY'S PARKS DEPARTMENT, AND THE CITY HAS HAD A LONGSTANDING POLICY THAT IT WOULD NOT MOVE MONEY FROM THE LEFT POCKET TO THE RIGHT POCKET.
SO WE DON'T BILL OURSELVES FOR THE USE OF THE WATER, BUT THERE IS A ACCOUNTING FOR HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING PUSHED THROUGH THOSE METERS OUT THERE.
SO IF THE QUESTION IS HOW MUCH TURS TWO HAS PAID THE GENERAL FUND OR THE WATER UTILITY FUND FOR WATER, UH, WE HAVE NOT BILLED OURSELVES OR COLLECTED OURSELVES.
HOW MUCH HAS THE CITY SPENT? NOW WE'LL HAVE TO WORK WITH PUBLIC WORKS TO FIGURE OUT WHICH POT OF WATER THEY USE TO SEND TO, BECAUSE WE HAVE FIVE DIFFERENT SOURCES OF WATER.
GUADALUPE, G B R A, EDWARDS, BARTON SPRINGS, SAN MARCUS, AND THEN WE HAVE OUR OWN WELL WATER.
SO WE'LL HAVE TO AVERAGE THOSE COSTS, THE, THE COST, AND THEN FIGURE OUT WHAT THE DOLLAR TAG IS.
NOT THE RETAIL COST, BUT THE COST TO THE CITY, TO THE CITY FOR THAT VOLUME OF WATER.
SO IF WE HAVE AN AMOUNT, SAY IT WAS 200,000 GALLONS, COULD WE FIND A PRICE OR ARE THE PRICES DIFFERENT FOR THE
[02:05:01]
DIFFERENT WATER ENTITIES? THEY'RE VERY DIFFERENT AND THEY'RE BASED ON PER ACRE FOOT.SO WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND AVERAGE THAT OUT, AND WE CAN PROVIDE THAT.
IT'LL JUST TAKE A LITTLE TIME TO CALCULATE AND I COULDN'T GET TO IT BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO GET READY FOR THIS.
UM, SO $4.5 MILLION FOR DESIGN AND ENGINEERING FOR THREE TRAFFIC ROUNDABOUTS, ONE AT CROMWELL, ONE AT BENNER, ONE AT SANDERS.
UH, THE CITY ENGINEER GAVE ME THIS POINTER TO, THE BEST WAY TO REMEMBER THIS IS C B S 'CAUSE I ALWAYS KEPT FORGETTING, WHICH INTERSECTION ARE WE TALKING ABOUT,
UH, $1 MILLION IS THE ESTIMATED FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A TEMPORARY PARKING LOT, UH, AND CHARGE NUMBER TWO NEXT YEAR.
AND HERE'S THE FUND SUMMARY FORT NUMBER TWO.
AND LIKE WE'VE DONE BEFORE IN THE OTHER FUNDS, I LIKE TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO, UM, THE LAST LINE, WHICH IS THE FUND BALANCE.
UM, IN NEXT YEAR'S, WE'RE ESTIMATING THAT THE FUND BALANCE WILL BE AROUND $13 MILLION, BUT MOST OF IT IS FROM BOND PROCEEDS.
SO IF YOU LOOK IN THE REVENUE SECTION, LINE THREE, WE'RE PLANNING TO ISSUE $15.3 MILLION IN TURS REVENUE BONDS.
AND THAT ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, YOU WILL SEE THE ROUNDABOUTS 4.5 MILLION AND, UH, 8 MILLION IN RETAIL ROADS.
SO THAT LEAVES YOU A NET BALANCE OF $13 MILLION.
NOW IT'S CLEAR IN THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW FORECAST HOW THAT BOND PROCEED IS BEING USED.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT LINE THREE 8 MILLION IN 2223 THAT WE ISSUED FOR THE, UH, RETAIL ROADS, 15.3 MILLION IS PLANNED TO BE ISSUED NEXT YEAR, AND THAT'S FOR ROUNDABOUTS.
AND THEN ANOTHER 10 MILLION IS PLANNED TO BE ISSUED IN YEAR 25 DASH 26, YEAR NUMBER THREE.
AND THAT IS FOR A PLANNED, UH, PARKING GARAGE, UH, IN CHARGE NUMBER TWO.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIVE YEAR FORECAST, UH, EVERY YEAR THERE'S A POSITIVE FUND BALANCE AND THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND IS BEING REPAID.
IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT LINE NUMBER 12, NEXT YEAR IS 400,000, AND YEAR NUMBER TWO IS FULL 40.
IT INCREASES AS DETER CASH AVAILABILITY IMPROVES EACH YEAR.
SO IT GOES FROM 250,000 IN THE CURRENT YEAR TO 400,000 NEXT YEAR.
AND THEN IT KEEPS INCREASING EACH YEAR TO ABOUT 600,000 IN YEAR NUMBER FIVE.
SO, I HAVE A QUESTION, TWO QUESTIONS.
SO, HAS THERE BEEN ANY TALKS WITH THE RETAIL DEVELOPMENTS TO PAY BACK FOR THOSE RETAIL ROADS, PAY BACK FOR THE RETAIL ROADS WITH, UM, THAT WERE ISSUED WITH THE BOND FUNDS? IS THAT, WAS THAT WHAT YOUR QUESTION? YES.
SO MY QUESTION IS, WE DON'T GO TO WALMART AND BUILD THEIR ROADS.
SO, UH, MY ASSUMPTION IS IF THE CITY WANTS TO PAY FOR IT, IS THERE SOME KIND OF LIKE, UM, PAYBACK, WHAT WILL THEY BE REIMBURSING THE CITY? NO, NO.
THAT THAT, THE CONCEPT IS WE'VE GOTTA BE FACTUALLY ACCURATE.
YOU'VE ASKED THIS QUESTION MULTIPLE TIMES.
YEAH, I'M, I STILL DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE, THE $8 MILLION RETAIL ROADS THAT WE ARE CONSTRUCTING IS IN EXCHANGE FOR $8 MILLION IN VALUE THAT WE ARE RECEIVING BACK IN THE FORM OF DEDICATED LAND AND OBLIGATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO THE DEVELOPERS THAT ARE BEING WAIVED.
SO WE ARE NOT BUILDING THEIR ROADS.
WE ARE TRADING THEM $8 MILLION IN ROADS FOR $8 MILLION IN VALUE.
AND WE RECEIVED THAT LAND ALREADY AND DEEDED IN OUR NAME.
WE HAVE VOTED ON EXACTLY THE MECHANISM FOR HOW THOSE LANDS ARE TO BE DEDICATED AND THEY'RE OBLIGATED TO CONVEY WITHIN CERTAIN PERIODS.
WE ALSO HAVEN'T BUILT THEIR ROADS.
SO MY QUESTION IS WHEN WILL WE CAN, WHEN WILL WE RECEIVE THAT LAND? SO WE, IT'S, IT'S IN THE AGREEMENT THAT WE VOTED ON.
SO, OKAY, GOING BACK TO MY OTHER QUESTION, YOU DON'T KNOW, BUT IT WAS IN THE AGREEMENT DON'T THAT WE VOTED ON EXACTLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO, THAT'S ALSO BEEN SENT OVER IN A MEMO FROM
[02:10:01]
LEGAL EXPLAINING EXACTLY WHEN THE LAND IS BEING CONVEYED TO THE, TO THE DAY.YEAH, WE NEED TO BE ON MY PAGE.
IF YOU NEED TO, YOU CAN COME DOWN TO THE PAGE.
SIGNED CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE RECORD, THE LAND FOR THE UNDERLYING ROADS HAS BEEN CONVEYED TO THE CITY ALREADY.
UH, THE OTHER, THE SOCCER PARCEL WILL BE CONVEYED BY SEPTEMBER 12TH.
THE OTHER PROPERTIES ARE GOING TO BE, THE DEEDS ARE GONNA BE PLACED IN ESCROW BY SEPTEMBER 12TH.
THEY'LL BE RELEASED TO THE CITY WHEN THE CITY COMMENCES CONSTRUCTION OF THE, UM, THE ROADS.
AND THEN THE, THERE'S A WAIVER OF IMPACT FEE CREDITS.
THE DEVELOPER HAS A IMPACT FEE CREDIT THAT THEY COULD DRAW ON THAT THE CITY WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO PAY, AND THE DEVELOPER IS AGREEING TO NOT DRAW ON THAT FOR A PERIOD OF 18 MONTHS.
AND THEN ONCE THE CITY COMMENCES CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROADS, THEN THAT IMPACT FEE CREDIT IS FORGIVEN.
DO WE KNOW HOW MUCH THAT IS? IT'S OVER A MILLION DOLLARS.
I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER.
UM, SO MY OTHER QUESTION IS, I KNOW YOU DON'T WANNA, YOU'VE SAID YOU DIDN'T WANNA INTERMIX TS FUNDS WITH GENERAL FUNDS, BUT WHEN WE DO CIPS AND THEY RECEIVE THE, ANY TS RECEIVES MONEY FOR A C I P.
IS THERE A REASON WHY WE DON'T PUT THAT IN THEIR BUDGET OR SHOW LIKE MONEY IN AND MONEY OUT? WE, WE DON'T, WE DO NOT CO-MINGLE, UH, ANY FUND.
SO WE DON'T CO-MINGLE FUNDS, BUT WE DO CO-MINGLE PROJECTS.
SO WELL CIPS ARE BOTH CITY ANDERS.
SO WE'LL SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE.
WHEN WE PLAN THE FIVE YEAR C I P SPENDING PLAN, EACH PROJECT IS IDENTIFIED WITH A FUNDING SOURCE.
SO ALL THESE PROJECTS, FORT NUMBER TWO, THEY HAVE DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCES, WHETHER THEY'RE TS BONDS, UH, CASH FUNDED PROJECTS RIGHT HERE, YOU CAN SEE CLEARLY THAT TS TWO IS BORROWING MONEY, TUR BONDS, AND BUILDING THESE PROJECTS.
THERE IS A TEMPORARY PARKING LOT THAT WE'RE ABLE TO PAY CASH FOR THAT, THAT $1 MILLION, UH, TEMPORARY PARKING LOT.
THERE IS A REPAYMENT SCHEDULED TO PAY BACK THE MONEY THAT WAS BORROWED FROM GENERAL FUND EACH YEAR.
U C A TRANSFER OUT, GOING BACK TO GENERAL FUND TO REPAY FOR LA VERDE PARK AND FOR HEROES MEMORIAL PARK.
SO THERE IS REALLY NO CO-MINGLING IS IT IS VERY CLEARLY IDENTIFIED EACH PROJECT AND THE FUNDING SOURCE.
SO THEN THAT BUDGETING ISN'T THE LAST.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, FOR A TS TO GET $20 MILLION, IT WOULD HAVE TO SHOW A TRANSFER IN, CORRECT? OH, YES.
THE GENERAL FUND SENT MONEY TO TTS NUMBER TWO, COUNCIL VOTED ON IT.
AND ON THE FLIP SIDE, THE TS TWO SHOWED MONEY COMING IN FROM GENERAL FUND THE COUNCIL VOTED ON.
OKAY, SO SPEAKING OF C I P, WHAT DOES THE FIVE YEAR C I P LOOK LIKE? WE'RE ALMOST THERE.
SO THE FIVE YEAR SPENDING PLAN THAT COVERS FISCAL YEAR 2024 TO FISCAL YEAR 2028 HAS 141 PROJECTS.
OF THAT 68% IS FUNDED THAT WE KNOW OF TODAY.
THAT EQUALS 467,000,200 16 MILLION IS UNFUNDED AT THIS POINT, OR 32%.
AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS SCREEN, WE'VE ADDED TO SHOW YOU HOW THAT 682 MILLION IS PLANNED FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE FIVE FISCAL YEARS.
IT RANGES FROM 176.6 MILLION AND 24 TO ABOUT 116 AND 2028.
[02:15:02]
THESE PROJECTS ARE PLANNED PROJECTS.THESE ARE JUST A PLANNING, UH, SPENDING PLAN.
THEY WILL MOVE IN AND OUT OF EACH FISCAL YEAR AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
SO YOU WILL SEE THE 1 76 MAY BECOME ONE 50 BECAUSE THERE WERE DELAYS OR DESIGN OR ACQUISITION DELAYS, WHAT, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
THESE ARE JUST ESTIMATES PROJECTED FOR NEXT FIVE YEARS.
SO THIS GOES BACK TO YOUR QUESTION.
COUNCIL MEMBER FLORES KALE, THAT TOTAL $682 MILLION FIVE YEAR C I P PLAN, WHERE'S THE MONEY COMING FROM? GENERAL FUND, 75 MILLION.
IF YOU LOOK ACROSS EACH YEAR, YOU'LL SEE HOW MUCH GENERAL FUND IS CASH FUNDING, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, PARK DEVELOPMENT FUND, $7.1 MILLION, WATER UTILITY FUND, 2.5 WASTEWATER, UH, WATER IMPACT FEE, 42.6, WASTEWATER UTILITY FUND, 2.7 WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE FUND, 45.1, STORM DRAINAGE, 2.5 STREET REHABILITATION FUND, 7 MILLION TURS NUMBER 2 34 $0.4 MILLION.
THATT PLAN PLANS TO ISSUE DEBT.
WE, WE, JUST A FEW SLIDES BACK, WE SHOWED YOU WHAT THE PLAN UHT BONDING PLAN IS.
UH, THIS WAS A QUESTION EARLIER ON WHAT ARE SPENDING, THE REASON IT SHOWED ZERO ON THE FUND STRUCTURE, BECAUSE THERE IS NO EXPENDITURE PLANNED IN 24, BUT THERE IS 2.6 AND 25 AND 6.6 AND 27.
TEXT DOT GRANT, IF WE GET IT, IS 43.5 MILLION 2008.
GEO BOND, 1.4 2020 GEO BOND IS 8.9.
ONLY HALF, UH, OF THAT IS 8.9 IS CITY'S GEO FUND.
THEN IT IS DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR MATCH BY COUNTY'S MATCHING BONDS.
ANOTHER 8.9, UH, NUMBER 16, 278 0.9 IS FROM 2022.
UH, GEO BOND, THESE ARE PRIMARILY ALMOST ALL OF IT FOR ROAD BOND PROGRAM.
THIS IS FOR THE CITY'S WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN EXPANSION PROJECTS.
WE WILL COME TO COUNCIL FOR AUTHORIZATION.
BUT ON THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA, THERE IS A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION THAT YOU'LL BE ASKED TO APPROVE THAT BASICALLY SAYS GO AHEAD AND SPEND THE MONEY NOW.
AND THEN WHEN WE ISSUE THE DEBT, WE'LL REIMBURSE, UH, THE CITY FUNDS WHERE THE MONEY WAS BORROWED.
SO THERE WILL BE TWO ITEMS RELATED TO THE TREATMENT PLAN EXPANSION PROJECT.
HE IS REQUESTING COUNSEL'S AUTHORIZATION TO, TO APPROVE A DESIGN CONTRACT FOR THE EXPANSION.
AND THEN THE CITY'S BOND COUNCIL WILL BRING FORWARD A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION.
SO THAT'S THE BREAKDOWN OF THE 682 MILLION OR 683,000,005 YEAR SPENDING PLAN OF HOW IT'S GOING TO BE FUNDED.
I'M GONNA GO OVER JUST TOP 35 REAL QUICK.
AND THESE ARE ALL OF SPECIAL INTERESTS TO COUNCIL.
THESE ARE ALL BASED ON COUNCIL PRIORITIES.
SO WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED THESE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
WE HAVE 10.5 MILLION IN THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW.
COMMUNITY CENTER MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY, 1.3 MILLION GO FORTH ROAD RECONSTRUCTION FROM CA RANCH ROUNDABOUT TO BIBB, 1.1 HENREKE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION, 1.2 STREET REHABILITATION PROGRAM.
5 MILLION STREET MICROSURFACING, 2.5 DACY LANE ILLUMINATION PROJECT, 1 MILLION TRAFFIC CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS, 7 MILLION KOHLER'S CROSSING ILLUMINATION, 1.3 MILLION.
THESE ARE ALL IN THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW.
SO JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE HERE DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE, UH, ON NEXT YEAR'S WINDOW, THEY CAN MOVE IN AND OUT.
KOHLER'S CROSSING REHAB, 2 MILLION PROPERTY ACQUISITION PROGRAM, 10 MILLION OVER THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW.
PROPERTY ACQUISITION FOR FUTURE PARK DEVELOPMENT.
4 MILLION FIRE STATION PROPERTY ACQUISITION RENOVATION.
THIS IS A PLACEHOLDER PROJECT.
[02:20:01]
10 MILLION IS UNFUNDED AT THIS POINT.CITYWIDE BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAM, $5 MILLION.
FESTIVE LIGHTING IN CITY PARKS.
REGIONAL SPORTSPLEX, 50% OF THIS IS GONNA BE PAID BY HAYES COUNTY.
PLUM CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS HERE AGAIN, 50% WILL BE MATCHED BY COUNTY 3.8 MILLION A BIKE.
B M X PARK, 1 MILLION PARKING LOT, FIVE DIFFERENT PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS AT FIVE DIFFERENT PARKS, 2 MILLION AND VARIOUS OTHER IMPROVEMENTS THROUGHOUT CITY PARKS.
T NUMBER TWO AS WE DISCUSSED, IS $34.3 MILLION OVER THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW.
AS YOU CAN SEE, 1 MILLION IS FROM CASH, THE REST IS GONNA BE BORROWED FROM TTS REVENUE BONDS.
2022 ROAD BOND IS ANTICIPATED IN THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW TO SPEND ABOUT $279 MILLION.
ADDITIONAL LANE ON I 35 SOUTHBOUND FRONTAGE ROAD 2.9 MILLION WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS, 45 MILLION CASH 32 BORROWED 12.9 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN EXPANSION FROM FOUR MG FOUR AND A HALF.
M G D TO NINE M G D IS $101 MILLION AND MOST LIKELY THIS IS GOING TO BE A C O BOND ISSUE.
WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS IS 47.7.
RIGHT NOW WE THINK WE CAN PAY 32 WITH EXISTING CASH IN THE FIVE YEAR WINDOW AND ANOTHER 15 MILLION WOULD HAVE TO BE BORROWED.
NUMBER 27 IS THE DEMOLITION OF THE OLD POLICE DEPARTMENT BUILDING RIGHT ACROSS THE, UH, PARKING LOT HERE.
WELL, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, IT'S NOT 1.3 MILLION TO DEMOLISH, THAT'S THE AMOUNT LEFT OVER FROM THE ORIGINAL BOND.
THAT WAS GONNA BE MY QUESTION.
LIKE WHAT DOES IT MEAN? GO AHEAD.
WELL THIS IS THE MONIES THAT WERE INCLUDED AT ONE POINT TO RENOVATE THAT FACILITY.
AT ONE POINT WE WERE LOOKING AT CHANGING THE USE OF THE FACILITY AND THE DIRECTION THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN TO, UH, DEMOLISH THAT BUILDING, WHICH I WOULD EXPECT TO BE A HUNDRED THOUSAND OR SO, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE THE KIND OF THE COST TO DEMOLISH IT.
IT LIKELY WE NEED TO DO AN ASBESTOS CHECK AND ALL THOSE KINDS OF THINGS THAT GO WITH IT.
BUT THEN THAT FUNDING WOULD THEN BE AVAILABLE TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT IN DOWNTOWN.
BUT THAT'S JUST ESSENTIALLY TAKING THE DOLLARS THAT WE'RE THERE TO RENOVATE THE BUILDING AND SAYING WE'RE GOING TO DEMOLISH IT.
NEXT THREE PROJECTS ARE TEXT GRANT APPLICATION THAT'S PENDING.
THE FM ONE 50 SHARED USE PATH FROM LAYMAN TO HIGHWAY 21 IS 21 MILLION FM 1626 PEDESTRIAN OVERPASS AT THE RAILROAD CROSSING IS 8.5 MILLION EAST SIDE RETAIL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT, UH, CITY MANAGER TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.
GO FORTH ROAD DE AND DESIGN, UH, AT THE WEEKEND TRACK, 2 MILLION EAST SIDE RETAIL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN.
WATERLINE DESIGN WE TRACK IS MILLION EAST SIDE RETAIL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR WASTEWATER LINE WE TRACK IS ANOTHER MILLION WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT BEAUTIFICATION $75,000 IS IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.
WATER LEAF PARK IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS.
75,000 IS INCLUDED IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.
RAINWATER COLLECTION BARREL PROGRAM IS INCLUDED IN THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR $25,000.
AND THAT'S THE END OF THE C I P.
YOU CAN'T TALK C I P WITHOUT TALKING BONDS.
CAN WE ADD, SORRY, I KNOW THESE ARE THE REQUESTS.
SO COULD WE LOOK AT MAYBE ADDING MONEY INTO C I P FOR MORE PURPLE PIPE TO SAVE ON SOME OF THIS WATER USAGE? UM, AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD? WE, WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT.
THERE ARE, THERE ARE RESTRICTIONS ABOUT HOW TO DO IT.
AND I THINK HARPER AND I HAVE HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
I KNOW IN WATER LEAF, UH, THE QUESTION WAS, HEY, YOU'RE RIGHT NEXT TO THE TREATMENT PLANT.
CAN'T YOU JUST PUT SOME OF THE, UH, YOU KNOW, FLUENT OUT THERE? THERE'S SOME TECHNICAL CHALLENGES.
IT CAN, OF COURSE ANYTHING CAN BE DONE, BUT I'LL ASK HARPER TO COMMENT ON THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
SO RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T JUST LIKE THE POND OVER THERE AT HEROES MEMORIAL, WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T DO THAT.
NUMBER ONE IS THE DETENTION POND.
THAT'S WHAT THEY ADVISE US GOING TO THE STORM WATER.
BUT ALSO THE, THE, THE LEVEL OF TREATMENT THAT WE DO RIGHT NOW AT THE PLANT, WE CAN'T PLACE THAT ANYWHERE.
THE ONLY PLACE THAT T C Q HAS ALLOWED US TO IS THE GOLF COURSE.
[02:25:01]
AT THE LATE HOURS OF THE NIGHT WHEN MORE LIKELY THERE'S GONNA BE NO HUMAN, UH, PEOPLE OUT THERE WALKING AROUND AND STUFF THAT CAN GET, GET POSSIBLY INTO IT.SO AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND WE GET TO TERTIARY ONE TREATMENT THAT ALLOWS US TO DO A LOT MORE, UM, POSSIBLY IRRIGATE WITH THAT ON A REGULAR BASIS, BUT WE'RE JUST NOT AT THAT POINT YET.
ARE YOU DONE? YEAH, GO, GO AHEAD.
BECAUSE I WAS, UM, I KNOW AT SOME POINT WE DISCUSSED LIKE THE PURPLE PIPE A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, AND I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS SOME, UM, DOCUMENT GONNA COME BACK FOR US TO REVIEW.
AND PART OF THE ISSUE THAT WE WERE HAVING WAS CONNECTIVITY IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO EXTEND THE PURPLE PIPE TO THE REST OF THE CITY.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF PURPLE PIPE THAT'S BEEN PUT IN AND LEON'S BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN GETTING THAT IN EACH OF THE PROJECTS WHAT WE LACK RIGHT NOW WE HAVE DIFFERENT, LET'S SAY VEINS.
UM, WE HAVE DIFFERENT VEINS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW.
WE DON'T HAVE A CENTRAL HUB, WE DON'T HAVE A PUMP STATION.
WE DON'T HAVE THINGS THAT CAN ACTUALLY PUSH THIS OUT.
AND THEN THE INTERCONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THIS CENTRAL HUB AND THESE VEINS, WE NEED TO CONNECT THESE TWO DOTS AND RUN THOSE PIPES.
SO A LOT OF THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE.
SO HOW ARE WE GIVING WATER TO THE GOLF COURSE? THE GOLF COURSE IS AN EXISTING LINE THAT WAS THERE BACK WHEN.
SO WHEN THEY FIRST BUILT THE PLANT, WHEN AQUA TEXAS, UH, WAS CONTRACTED TO BUILD THAT PLANT AND THEY BUILT A LINE AS WELL, ALL THE WAY FROM THE PLANT TO THE GOLF COURSE AS A WAY TO GET RID OF SOME OF THE EFFLUENT.
UM, SO THAT WAS ALREADY THERE THROUGH AQUATEX AND DEALING WITH THE CITY.
SO IN ORDER FOR US TO HAVE A PURPLE PIPE HUB, WHAT WOULD WE NEED TO DO IF WE ARE SENDING WATER TO THEM? I WAS JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN JUST ATTACH FROM THAT AND JUST BUILD FROM THERE.
THERE'S A STUDY RIGHT NOW THAT WE'RE GETTING THAT WE'RE GOT BACK, GOT BACK OR GETTING BACK.
LEON, I THINK THAT'S THE ONE AFFLUENT STUDY.
I, YES, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT.
AND SEE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A, A HUGE PRIORITY RIGHT NOW.
WOULD THAT INCLUDE THE PRICE OF IF WE WENT THE HUB ROUTE OR IS IT ONLY IF WE TRY TO PLUG AND PLAY? I DON'T REMEMBER IF THAT HAS THE PRICE.
IT, IT, IT, IT, IT GIVES THE, BUT DOES IT GIVE COSTS AND EVERYTHING? IS IT THAT DETAILED? LEON, DO YOU REMEMBER? MAYOR AND COUNCIL, WE EXPECT TO GET A REPORT, A FINISHED REPORT FROM COBB FINLEY.
THEY'RE THE ENGINEER THAT'S BEEN ASSIGNED TO DO THIS PROJECT.
UH, WE'VE BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH THEM WITH COMMENTS AND UH, THEY'RE, WE'VE ASKED 'EM TO WRAP UP THE REPORT SO WE CAN HAVE A PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL, HOPEFULLY WITHIN A MONTH OR SO.
SO WE WON'T BE ABLE TO ADD ANY OF THAT TO THE BUDGET.
THE COSTS THAT I'VE SEEN ARE VERY SIGNIFICANT FOR THEIR PLAN.
IT, UM, I MEAN IT INCLUDES EVEN THAT EIGHT INCH LINE THAT WE HAVE THERE TODAY, THEY'RE PROPOSING TO MAKE THAT AN 18 INCH LINE.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASSUMING.
IT'S GONNA BE A FAIRLY LARGE COST INVOLVED.
THEY'VE, THEY'VE BROKEN IT UP INTO PHASES.
THEY'VE RECOMMENDED SOME PHASES IN HOW WE SHOULD, UH, IMPLEMENT THE, UH, MASTER PLAN.
AND UH, SO WE'LL BRING YOU ALL THOSE DETAILS, UH, HOPEFULLY WITHIN A MONTH OR SO, IF NOT SOONER.
I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT, THAT, THAT SHOULD BE ON THE TOP OF THE C I P FOR LIKE WASTEWATER.
THE DILEMMA THAT WE HAVE IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE PIECES CONNECTED.
UH, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S ONE PROJECT THAT I HAVEN'T EVEN PUSHED OUT FOR DESIGN YET.
UH, FROM LAYMAN BACK TO A, A JUNCTION THERE ON THAT MAIN WATER LINE OR WASTEWATER LINE WE'RE TRYING TO UPGRADE.
SO THAT SECTION WILL COME WITH THAT.
WHAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO AS WE BUILD THESE NEW WASTEWATER LINES, WE'RE INCLUDING UH, PURPLE PIPE IN THOSE LINES.
BUT HAVE, SO ALL THE PIECES AREN'T THERE.
DO WE HAVE LIKE A MASTER PLAN FOR PURPLE PIPE? IS THAT WHAT IS COMING TO US? WE, WE DO, YES.
AND LIKE, WHAT, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO PUSH THE PURPLE PIPE FROM THE GOLF COURSE TO THE REGIONAL SPORTS PLEX SITE? 'CAUSE WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOCCER FIELDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IRRIGATING LINES AND I KNOW WE'VE JUST PUT PURPLE PIPE UNDERNEATH KOHLERS, BUT I, I GET VARIOUS TALKING POINTS.
YOU KNOW, I NEVER KNOW EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE AT.
AND I, I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO MAKE A VERY AFFIRMATIVE DECISION ABOUT PUTTING THAT PURPLE PIPE ALL THE WAY UP TO WHERE THE REGIONAL SPORTSPLEX GOES SO THAT WE CAN WATER THAT IN A, IN A HEALTHY WAY, UH, WITHOUT HAVING TO USE POTABLE WATER.
AND WE'RE ON A, WE'RE ON A TWO, THREE YEAR HORIZON FOR HAVING THAT PART CONSTRUCTED.
SO WE SHOULD BE ON A TWO OR THREE YEAR HORIZON TO GET THAT PURPLE PIPE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SPORTSPLEX AND NOT JUST THE SPORTSPLEX.
THERE'S ADDITIONAL POTENTIAL USES FOR EFFLUENT WATER IN THAT, IN THAT REGION.
SO I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE, WHERE WE'RE AT.
I JUST WANT TO ECHO WHAT'S BEING SAID HERE.
THAT'S A VERY, VERY HIGH PRIORITY FOR US TO AT LEAST KNOW WHAT OUR ACTUAL SITUATION IS AND WHAT DECISIONS CAN WE MAKE TO EXPEDITE THAT.
I THINK WE'RE ON A TIME CLOCK.
[02:30:01]
OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.UH, JUST LIKE TO ADD, IT DOES TAKE 8 MILLION GALLONS OF WATER TO MAINTAIN IRRIGATE THE HERO'S MEMORIAL.
SO IF WE CAN FIND A WAY TO REUSE THAT PURPLE PIPE, RECLAIM WATER THERE.
WE'RE SAVING AND THERE PURPLE, PURPLE PIPE'S ALREADY IN THE LANDSCAPING INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE JUST GOTTA PLUG IT IN AND TURN IT ON.
NO, I THINK IT HAS TO BE AFFLUENT.
WE NEED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
YOU CAN'T, OH, YOU CAN'T DO, YOU CAN'T FILL THE, THE TANK RIGHT.
BUT YOU CAN IRRIGATE THE LANDSCAPE.
THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THE WATER THAT CUTS HALF OF IT DOWN.
IT DOES, BUT WE CAN'T RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE VEINS AREN'T, THEY'RE NOT CONNECTED.
THERE'S NO CONNECTION THERE YET.
RIGHT? THERE'S NOTHING TO PUMP IT NOR IS THERE, UH, DEFINED STORAGE YET.
SO THOSE THINGS HAVE TO BE ALL DETERMINED THROUGH THIS STUDY.
SO THAT STUDY, 'CAUSE I SPOKE WITH YOU BY THE TIME THAT WE SPOKE ABOUT THE ROAD, SO THAT WAS PROBABLY ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS AGO.
AND BACK THEN I THOUGHT THAT THE, THE STUDY WAS GONNA COME BACK NEXT MONTH.
SO WHO DO WE NEED TO PUSH TO GET THAT LIKE NEXT WEEK?
I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN DO IT NEXT WEEK, BUT I'LL, I'LL, I'LL DEFINITELY WORK WITH LEON TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO EXPEDITE IT.
IT, AND IF, EVEN IF WE DON'T HAVE THE FINAL STUDY, IF THERE'S SOME INFORMATION THAT WE CAN HAVE TO TRY TO PUT TOGETHER, HERE'S AT LEAST THE BASIC PLAN.
WHO IS DOING IT THOUGH? IS IT THE C CO FINLEY? NO, IT'S AN OUTSIDE ENGINEERING FIRM.
CAN WE PUSH HIM? WHAT'S
WE'VE ALREADY TOLD HIM WE NEED TO GET THE FINAL REPORT READY.
WE ACTUALLY HAD A SLIDE PRESENTATION WE WORKED ON.
AND SHARED IT WITH 'EM TO SHOW 'EM, THIS IS KIND OF WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE.
SO WE'LL BE, UH, TRYING TO CLEAN THAT UP, UP, UP TO YOU.
AND WHAT I'M, WHAT I MEAN IS LIKE, I WOULD LIKE TO GET SOMETHING IN THE BUDGET FOR US TO START WORKING ON IT, LIKE UNDERSTAND NEXT YEAR.
AND MAYOR AND COUNCIL, DON'T FORGET THAT WE WERE, UH, WE AWARDED A FEDERAL EARMARK FROM DOGGETT'S OFFICE FOR $2 MILLION FOR PURPLE PIPE.
AND WE ARE GOING THROUGH, THEY, THEY ASSIGNED IT, I BELIEVE TO FE E P A.
AND WE ARE WORKING THROUGH, UH, THE E P A PROCESS TO GET THAT, UH, MONEY OFFICIALLY IN OUR HANDS.
SO WE, WE WOULD HAVE SOME FUNDING TO DO SOME OF THESE PROJECTS.
ONE LAST THING I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT RIGHT NOW, JUST IN CASE IF IT HITS LATER, UM, TIM'S PUSHING ON A REGULAR BASIS, UM, THE MAJORITY THAT HE CAN TO TRY TO FULFILL THE, UM, PLUM CREEK GOLF COURSE CONTRACT.
THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE A CERTAIN ALLOTTED AMOUNT THAT WE HAVE TO PROVIDE THEM DAILY.
HE'S PUSHING REGULARLY AS MUCH AS HE CAN IN THESE TIMES, BUT IT IS A DROUGHT TIME.
SO HE'S PUSHING AS MUCH AS HE CAN TO 'EM TO FULFILL THAT CONTRACT.
SO THAT STUDY COMES IN AND, AND, AND, AND WE HAVE CERTAIN THINGS LINED OUT.
WE MAY STILL HAVE TO, WELL WE WILL STILL HAVE TO BUILD THAT LINE FROM THE PLANT, A LARGER LINE THAT RIGHT NOW THERE'S NOT ROOM, UH, WITH THE EASEMENT.
SO ADDITIONAL EASEMENT I WOULD THINK IS GONNA HAVE TO BE DONE.
THAT MEANS YOU HAVE TO GO TO EVERY PROPERTY ON THE WAY.
I JUST WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME TIME HERE TO GET ALL THAT IN ORDER, BUT ONCE THAT HAPPENS, YES.
WE'LL HAVE A, A GREAT PRODUCT.
WELL, AND IN REGARDS TO THE SPORTS COMPLEX, MOST OF THOSE COMPLEXES USE ARTIFICIAL GRASS.
THEY DON'T USE, UH, REAL GRASS IF YOU GO UP TO, YOU KNOW, THE WESTLAKE AREA AND UP NORTH.
UH, SO HOPEFULLY THAT DOESN'T DETER IT.
IS MY WHOLE POINT TO THAT IS LET'S NOT MAKE THAT CONTINGENT ON THE SPORTSPLEX BECAUSE I THINK WE REALLY NEED THAT.
I JUST, I I I WANT US TO NOT, I DON'T WANT IT TO BE SOMETHING IN THE BACK OF THE MIND.
LIKE WE, WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THIS BECAUSE A LOT OF US ARE PLANNING ON BEING ABLE TO DELIVER, YOU KNOW, UH, THE SPORTSPLEX FOR EXAMPLE.
AND THEY'RE DEFINITELY GONNA HOPEFULLY BE ARTIFICIAL, UH, FIELDS, BUT THEY'LL PROBABLY BE GRASS FIELDS AND GRASS COMPONENTS AS WELL.
AND THERE'S GONNA BE SOME KIND OF WATERING COMPONENT.
WE DON'T WANNA GET ALL, YOU CAN'T ALLOW FOR THOSE KIND OF FACILITIES TO BE, UH, ON THE SAME SCHEDULE AS A DROUGHT PLAN BECAUSE THEN, THEN YOU LET YOUR FIELDS DIE AND YOU, IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S NOT GOOD.
AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE INSTALLING THAT PURPLE PIPE, BUT WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS AND HOW WE'RE GONNA DELIVER IT AND HOW WE'RE GONNA FUND IT.
AND THAT'S WHY IF WE KEEP BRINGING IT UP, YOU KNOW RIGHT.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I SAID THAT OUT.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO MAKE EVERYONE AWARE.
AND WHEN THE STUDY COMES BACK, THEY MAY HAVE A TEMPORARY SOLUTION FOR RIGHT NOW, BUT THE OVERALL PLAN IS A LARGER PIPE COMING FROM THE PLANT.
BUT TO COUNCIL MEMBER PARSLEY'S POINT, THAT OVERALL PLAN IS NOT IN OUR C I P IT'S NOT IN OUR THIS YEAR OR OUR FIVE YEAR OR 10 YEAR.
WE WANT TO GET THAT ON THE BOOKS SO THAT WE CAN KNOW, SO THAT WE CAN MARCH FORWARD AND DELIVER IT.
[02:35:01]
SAID.HE'S BEEN WAITING FOR THEM TO PROVIDE IT.
UM, I KNOW HE'S REACHED OUT TO THEM IN THE PAST.
I, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THAT FIRM.
WHAT, WHAT I, WHAT I CAN DO IS, UM, GET WITH THIS FIRM, SEE WHERE WE ARE WITH THIS REPORT AND, AND TRY TO PUT SOME AT LEAST PRELIMINARY NUMBERS TOGETHER FOR YOU AND THEN POTENTIALLY WE COULD AMEND THE BUDGET TO INCLUDE THOSE ITEMS TO HAVE IT IN.
CAN I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS? OH, GO AHEAD.
AND THEN THE UBER VOUCHER PROGRAM.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO DELIVER MORE TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS THAT PEOPLE THAT ARE LIMITED, UH, HAVE SOME WALKABILITY OR TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS AND EVEN 20 VOUCHERS A MONTH AND NOT EVERYBODY'S GONNA USE THEM.
I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE A GREAT THING TO DO FOR THE RESIDENTS TO, WHO NEEDS SOME KIND OF WALKABILITY AROUND THE VIBE OR WHATEVER THAT YOUR SITUATION IS.
WE, WE PUT TOGETHER SOME, SOME BASIC NUMBERS ON THE COST OF INCREASING THE NUMBER OF RIDES TO GO TO 20 RIDES PER MONTH IS APPROXIMATELY $90,000.
SO IF THE COUNCIL'S INTERESTED IN DOING THAT, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO PEREZ'S COMMENTS BEFORE, YOU'D NEED FOUR OF YOU TO ASK FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THAT.
SO I'M ASKING FOR THE FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SUPPORT 20 RIDES A MONTH.
WHAT, WHAT DOES GIVE YOU THAT NUMBER? HE GAVE ME THE NUMBER.
IS THAT WHAT MO'S RESIDENCE ARE ASKING FOR? HE DID IT ON A, BASED ON A POPULATION.
WELL, YOU ASKED ME FOR THE COST, RIGHT? WE, I GAVE YOU THE, I GAVE YOU THE COST.
WE NOW, RIGHT NOW THEY GET 10 RIGHT UP TO UP TO 10.
SO I'VE GOT A COUPLE NUMBERS ON IT.
SO RIGHT NOW, 76% OF OUR USERS DO NOT MAX OUT 10 RIDES PER MONTH.
SO IT'S A SMALL PORTION WHO USE IT IN THAT WAY, BUT THEY'RE, SO THEY'RE USING IT TO COMMUTE REGULARLY TO JOBS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO THAT'S THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE GONNA BE IMPACTED BY INCREASING THE ALLOTMENT.
BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS FOR THOSE WHO ARE RELYING ON IT, WE'RE GONNA INCREASE IT TO A TOTAL OF 20 OR 30 OR, OR REALLY WHATEVER THAT NUMBER NEEDS TO BE.
BUT THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS DID WE INCREASE THE BUDGET THIS YEAR BECAUSE WE GOT REAL CLOSE TO HITTING THE BUDGET.
AND IF, IF WE, IF WE HAVE, UH, IF WE SEE THE TRENDS LINE CONTINUE, ARE WE GOING TO STILL BE WITHIN OUR, UH, BUDGETED AMOUNT? ARE WE GONNA RUN OUTTA MONEY? JUST IN GENERAL, WE'VE INCREASED THE AMOUNT IN, UH, NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET TO 300,000 FROM 230,000.
BUT DID YOU BASE THAT ON THE, THE ACTUAL TRENDS OR, OR THE, BECAUSE THE WAY I'M READING THE TRENDS THAT IT'S GONNA BE HIGHER THAN THAT.
THIS WILL BE THE FIRST YEAR THAT WE RUN.
YEAH, I THINK IT WILL BE HIGHER THAN THAT.
AND WE'RE, THE TRENDS ARE GOING UP PARTLY BECAUSE OF RIDERSHIP, BUT ALSO THE INCREASED COST FOR THE ADA A PROGRAM.
AND PEREZ AND I ARE, AND BRIAN AND I ARE TRACKING THAT, UH, RIGHT NOW, WE'LL PROBABLY NEED TO BRING A BUDGET AMENDMENT BACK TO YOU FOR THIS YEAR AND, AND REANALYZE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET TO, TO SEE HOW THAT TRACKS AS WELL.
I WOULD THINK IT MAKES MORE SENSE FOR THOSE USERS THAT ARE COMMUTING CONSTANTLY TO COME TO THE CITY AND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL VOUCHERS INSTEAD OF JUST DOING AN AMENDMENT TO PUT 20 MORE 20 RIDES FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE NOT USING IT.
I THINK WE HAVE A REAL TRANSPORTATION PROBLEM AND IT'S ONLY GONNA AFFECT OUR, ALL THE RETAIL THAT'S GOING IN BECAUSE OUR, I THINK OUR HOPE IS TO GET MAYBE HIGH SCHOOL AGE KIDS TO BE ABLE TO WORK IN THESE, UH, RETAIL JOBS THAT WE BRING TO INCLUDE ALL THE NEW RESTAURANTS WE HAVE.
I DON'T KNOW, I KNOW WHEN I WAS 17, I COULDN'T SPEND $6 AND 28 CENTS A DAY TO GET TO AND FROM WORK TO MAKE SURE, UM, AND I WAS ON TIME.
I ALSO DON'T THINK AT EIGHT, I THINK 18, YOU HAVE TO BE 18 YEARS OLD TO HAVE AN ACCOUNT.
SO CAN A 17 YEAR OLD GET AN ACCOUNT FOR AN UBER? PROBABLY NOT.
SO WHO IS GONNA BE THE WORKFORCE THAT DRIVES ALL THIS RETAIL THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN? AND IS, IS UBER GONNA BE THE LONG TERM SOLUTION THAT WE WANT INSTEAD OF HAVING A REAL TRANSPORTATION PLANE WHERE SOMEONE CAN BUY SOME KIND OF PASS, WHETHER THAT BE A BUS OR A TROLLEY OR SUBWAY OR A HORSE.
SOMETHING THAT'S FEASIBLE THAT OUR RESIDENTS CAN USE LONG TERM AND NOT BE DEPENDENT ON.
UM, SOMETHING SUCH AS AN UBER.
I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT POINT UP.
'CAUSE THAT'S WAS SOMETHING I KEPT BRINGING UP BEFORE.
WHAT'S GONNA BE OUR LONG TERM CITY TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
YOU KNOW, WE CAN GIVE OUT VOUCHERS ALL DAY LONG, BUT AGAIN, HOW LONG WILL THIS UBER PROGRAM CONTINUE TO LAST? SO WE HAVE TO LOOK LONG TERM AS FAR AS, AS WE'RE CONTINUING TO GO FIVE YEARS, 10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.
UH, THERE COULD BE DISCUSSIONS IN THE NEXT COMING YEARS WHERE WE WOULD NEED TO REALLY START LOOKING AT A CITY.
WELL, WELL, ALL I WOULD SAY TO THAT IS GIVE
[02:40:01]
ME, I WOULD ASK, GIVE ME ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT THERE'S A PROGRAM OUT THERE THAT WILL GET PEOPLE FROM POINT TO POINT MORE EFFICIENTLY FOR CHEAPER.'CAUSE RIGHT NOW OUR AVERAGE COST THAT, THAT, THAT WE'RE HAVING TO SUBSIDIZE IS $11 PER RIDE.
IT'S THE MOST EFFICIENT GROWING WIDELY PUBLIC ADOPTED AND, AND, AND, UH, BELOVED PROGRAM THAT WE'VE PUT TOGETHER IN REGARDS TO TRANSPORTATION, UH, PERIOD.
I MEAN, THERE JUST HAS NOT BEEN ANYTHING EVEN COME CLOSE.
SO WHILE IT MIGHT, MIGHT, MIGHT SAY, OH, IF YOU'RE 17, YOU CAN'T GET AN UBER 16, 15, 16, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS FINE.
THAT'S A, I GUESS THAT'S A VALID POINT.
BUT, BUT THIS PROGRAM IS BEING ADOPTED AND WE'RE NOT EVEN PROMOTING IT.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S BEEN A SINGLE UBER, UH, UH, UH, POST OR PROMOTION, UH, ALL YEAR LONG FROM THE CITY'S SOCIAL NETWORK.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'RE HEAVILY, IT'S, IT'S ORGANICALLY GROWING.
AND AGAIN, IT'S 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, 365 DAYS A YEAR.
POINT TO POINT $11 SUBSIDIZED RIDES A $300,000 PROGRAM.
HOW MUCH DOES ONE BUS COST? WHAT ARE YOU GONNA HAVE ONE BUS TRYING TO RUN 1500 PEOPLE ALL OVER TOWN? I MEAN, THERE'S LIKE 1500 PEOPLE A MONTH THAT ARE USING THIS PROGRAM AND THEY'RE, IT'S JUST BEING HIGHLY, HIGHLY ADOPTED.
SO YOU GOTTA BACK UP THE CLAIM THAT THIS ISN'T THE LONG-TERM SOLUTION BECAUSE EVERY SINGLE STATISTICAL ELEMENT OF THIS PROGRAM IS BLOWING THE COMPETITION AWAY AND IS INFINITELY MORE AFFORDABLE AND EFFICIENT THAN ANY OTHER PROGRAM THAT COULD BE OUT THERE.
SO I'M JUST ASKING FOR SOMETHING.
WE SHOULD BE CELEBRATING THIS PROGRAM.
WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE INFORMATION THAT YOU JUST CLAIM.
SO YOU'RE ASKING US TO PROVE TO YOU THAT THIS, THIS ISN'T WORKING.
AND I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR ADULTS THAT WANNA DRINK AND NOT DRIVE.
AND I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR ADULTS THAT WANT TO GET TO THE AIRPORT, BUT FOR THE MAJORITY OF OUR RESIDENTS WHO DO NOT USE TRANSPORTATION IN THAT WAY, I DON'T THINK IT BENEFITS THEM.
I DON'T THINK IT BENEFITS THE MAJORITY AS A WHOLE.
SO IF YOU'RE GONNA CLAIM THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE NUMBERS ON, ON HOW IT'S NOT COST EFFECTIVE OR, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AS FAR AS HOW IT POSITIVELY AFFECTS THE MAJORITY OF OUR RESIDENTS INSTEAD OF THE MINORITY.
'CAUSE I THINK THE NUMBERS WERE RELATIVELY LOW.
HOW MANY, HOW MANY PEOPLE USED IT? WE'RE AT 1500 RIDES PER MONTH.
I'LL GO, I'LL TAKE, I'LL GIVE YOU 2000 A MONTH.
RIGHT? YOU GO TO ANY CITY SUCH AS SAN MARCOS OR ANYWHERE ELSE AND YOU TELL ME HOW MANY PEOPLE TAKE THE BUS, HOW MANY RIDES THERE ARE OVER ALL A DAY.
I PROMISE YOU IT PROBABLY FAR EXCEEDS THE 1500 WE'RE DOING A MONTH.
SO MY WHOLE POINT BEING THERE IS A NEED FOR TRANSPORTATION WITHIN OUR CITY.
NOT JUST TO GET TO THE GROCERY STORE, TO GET MILK, BUT TO STAFF THESE BUSINESSES THAT THE CITY IS PUSHING TO BRING IN TO MAKE OUR RESIDENTS HAPPY.
AND JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE WHEN IT COMES TO CONSUMER, YOU WANT TO GIVE PEOPLE OPTIONS.
THAT'S REALLY WHAT I'M LOOKING AT AS WELL, IS YOU'RE GIVING PEOPLE, NOT EVERYBODY'S GOING TO USE UBER.
BUT YOU, BUT FROM A CITY POINT, IF THERE'S A PLAN, MASTER PLAN LATER ON, 'CAUSE AGAIN, WE'LL BE A HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE BEFORE YOU KNOW IT.
AND, AND, AND IS AND IS UBER GONNA BE THE ONLY THING WE'RE GONNA HAVE AVAILABLE TO GET FROM PLACE TO PLACE? IT'S, IT'S LOOKING LONG TERM LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE WAY I'M LOOKING AT IT.
I THINK THOSE ARE THE GOOD THINGS FOR US TO BE PLANNING.
I MEAN, THIS IS NOT THE MEETING TO DO THAT.
WE DEFINITELY SHOULD HAVE A WORKSHOP ABOUT WHAT THE FUTURE OF OUR TRANSPORTATION IS GONNA LOOK LIKE.
I WOULD JUST OFFER THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING NEXT YEAR, THAT WE CAN ADD THAT INTO OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING.
CAN I THINK THAT, THAT ANYTHING THAT INVOLVES, UH, MUD, MONEY, BUDGET DECISIONS, OF COURSE IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR A BUDGET WORKSHOP.
THAT'S THE DEFINITION OF WHAT BUDGETING IS.
YOU SET ASIDE MONEY, YOU TALK ABOUT THE NEEDS.
YOU, YOU HEAR FROM WHAT THE RESIDENTS TELL YOU NOW.
I WAS JUST SUGGESTING 20 BECAUSE TO BE GENEROUS TO, TO RESIDENTS, EVERYBODY DOESN'T WANT TO USE 'EM OR USE THAT MANY.
BUT, UM, THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE, RESIDENTS HERE, AND WE'RE A GROWING CITY WHO DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO GET FROM EAST, WEST, UH, OR WHEREVER AROUND THE CITY.
SO THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO LIMIT THE 25% OF RIDERS WHO USE 10, 10 RIDES EVERY MONTH IS A QUESTION.
BUT ALSO IF, IF, IF THE TREND LINES ARE SHOWING, IF THERE'S THIS A PARTICULAR BUDGET AMOUNT THAT WE CAN FORECAST TO FULLY FUND THE PROGRAM, WHY ARE WE NOT FULLY FUNDING THE PROGRAM IN THE BUDGET? THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION BECAUSE IF WE'RE GONNA, IF WE'RE GONNA FIND OURSELVES SIX MONTHS IN AND WE'RE OUTTA MONEY, THIS IS THE TIME TO MAKE THAT ADJUSTMENT.
NOT, NOT TO PLAN FOR SIX MONTHS.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO AMEND THE BUDGET BECAUSE WE KNOW WITH 100% CERTAINTY THAT WE ARE UNDERFUNDING IT BECAUSE OF THE TREND LINES.
[02:45:01]
WELL, I I WOULD JUST SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW WHAT THE PROGRAM CRITERIA IS.THE 10 RIDES THAT, I THINK IT'S TWO RIDES TO THE AIRPORT PER MONTH, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT MAY NOT BE IN THAT LINE ITEM, BUT IN THE APPROPRIATIONS THAT YOU GIVE US, WE'LL HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO FUND THAT TO THE CRITERIA THAT YOU HAVE.
IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE PROGRAM AND YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT BUDGET DISCUSSION OF HOW MUCH MORE YOU WANT TO ADD FOR THAT, THAT'S A A DIS DISCUSSION WAY TO HAVE NO, WHAT I'M SAYING IS BASED ON THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR THE CURRENT PROGRAM AND THE TRENDS THAT ARE GOING, THAT HAVE BEEN ALMOST LIKE LINEAR IN TERMS OF HOW THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN GROWING, 300,000 IS NOT GOING TO COVER NEXT YEAR'S, UH, AMOUNT.
DO WE, WE HAVE A PROJECTION OF THAT, OF WHAT THAT NUMBER WOULD BE.
WE'RE WORKING ON THAT WITH OUR, OUR UBER CONTRACTOR.
THE, WHEN WE FIRST CAME UP WITH $300,000, IT WAS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE BUDGET PROCESS, AND WE'VE SEEN THOSE INCREASES THE LAST THREE OR FOUR MONTHS.
SO THE, THE LINEAR PROJECTION HAS CHANGED, BUT, UM, WE CAN GO, WE CAN USE THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE AND BRING FORTH A MORE ACCURATE PROJECTION FOR NEXT YEAR BASED ON THE CRITERIA COUNCIL GIVES US ON NUMBERS OF MAXIMUM NUMBERS OF RIGHTS.
DO WE, DO WE GET TO KNOW WHERE ARE THE MOST COMMON PLACES PEOPLE WRITE TO? YEAH, I HAVE THAT DATA BECAUSE I THINK THAT WILL BE IMPORTANT TOO TO SEE IF IT'S WITHIN LIKE KYLE.
UM, AND THEN MAYBE WE CAN USE THAT INFORMATION FOR NEXT YEAR WORKSHOP AND SEEING WHERE REALLY PEOPLE ARE NEEDING TO TRANSFER.
LIKE THE, THE UBER 3 1 4 BASE PROGRAM IS LIMITED TO CAL STATE LIMITS IN SOME AREAS JUST OUTSIDE THE PRIMARY DESTINATIONS ARE TYPICALLY THE, THE SHOPPING CENTERS, WALMART, UM, H E B TARGET.
BUT, UM, THEN WHAT I WAS SAYING IS LIKE, MAYBE WE CAN DO A WORKSHOP SO WE CAN GET NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, LIKE 20 24, 20 25, A PROGRAM THAT WILL TARGET THIS PLACES AND THAT AND, AND MAYBE SEE IF IT'S COST, WHAT'S COST EFFECTIVE, MAYBE DOING A TROLLEY THAT GOES TO SPECIFIC POINTS OF WITHIN THE CITY, OR IF WE NEED TO STICK TO UBER.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO TELL YOU.
SO, TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT COUNCIL MEMBER ZUNIGA IS BRINGING UP, IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN ADJUST THE APP AND HAVE, MAKE A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL ONES SO THAT WAY WE'RE NOT, UM, INCREASING THEM OVERALL, BUT THEY CAN INCREASE THEM PER THE PERSON.
IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO ALONG THOSE LINES FOR OUR ACCOUNT? BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA LIMIT IT, BUT I WELL, WE CAN, BUT THE REALITY IS, WE, WE ALREADY, THE DATA IS THERE THAT TWO, THREE QUARTERS OF THE PEOPLE DON'T MAX IT OUT CURRENTLY.
SO THIS IS A, BECAUSE OF THE LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT USE THIS PROGRAM, STATISTICALLY, YOU CAN DEFINE EXACTLY WHAT THE COST IS AND HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LIKELY TO, UH, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A PROGRAM.
SO THE SIMPLEST WAY IS, AS COUNCIL MEMBER ZUNIGA REQUESTS SAID, JUST INCREASE THE MONTHLY ALLOTMENT, BUT YOU'RE REALLY ONLY INCREASING IT FOR THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY MAXING IT OUT.
THE OTHERS USE IT FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, SINGULAR TRIPS.
I USED UBER THREE 14 LAST NIGHT, BUT I'VE NEVER ONCE COME CLOSE TO MAXING IT OUT.
MY MONTHLY AVERAGE IS MAYBE TWICE, THREE TIMES A MONTH.
BUT THERE'S A GROUP OF PEOPLE, ROUGHLY A QUARTER OF THEM, WHO USE IT MUCH MORE FREQUENTLY, BUT THEY'RE, THEY JUST MAX OUT.
AND THEN THAT OPTION, THAT BENEFIT IS JUST GOING AWAY.
SO YOU CAN, THERE'S STATISTICAL, UH, REPORTS THAT YOU CAN RUN TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT YOUR EXPOSURE WOULD BE AND THEN HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD BENEFIT FROM INCREASING THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF VOUCHERS.
UH, AND, AND SO IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST NOT THAT COMPLICATED.
BUT I'M IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH INCREASING IT, UH, BECAUSE IT WILL MAKE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE PEOPLE WHO RELY ON THE PROGRAM THE MOST.
IN PARTICULAR, THOSE WHO ARE TRYING TO WORK AND DON'T HAVE TRANSPORTATION TO WORK AND ARE COMING TO OUR MAJOR, UH, EMPLOYMENT CENTERS AND POWER CENTERS TO WORK.
THAT'S WHAT THAT PROPOSAL TO INCREASE THE TOTAL, UH, ALLOTMENT OF VOUCHERS WOULD TARGET AND WOULD IMPACT.
WELL MY, MY CONCERN WOULD BE LIKE INCREASING IT FOR EVERYBODY IS GONNA TAKE AWAY MONEY FROM THE GENERAL FUND THAT MAY NOT GET USED.
UM, WHICH I THINK WE'VE SEEN AS AN ISSUE BEFORE ON CERTAIN, BUT THAT'S NOT HOW YOU BUDGET IT.
YOU DON'T BUDGET IT, ASSUMING EVERYONE'S GONNA RIDE IT, GO BACK 30 TIMES, GO BACK.
YOU, YOU, WE HAVE ENOUGH DATA NOW TO BE ABLE TO TARGET WITHIN A VERY NARROW WINDOW.
HOW MUCH
WELL, THAT'S THE ESTIMATE THAT WE PROVIDED, YOU KNOW, $90,000 IS OUR ROUGH ESTIMATE AND YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD USE IT.
IT'S BASED ON WHAT THE MAYOR'S SAYING.
IT'S THE SEGMENT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE HITTING MAX, UH, THE 10, SOME OF THOSE ARE GONNA GO ALL THE WAY UP TO 20, SOME WILL ONLY HIT 15 OR 16.
SO IT'S, IT'S HARD FOR US TO GIVE, YOU KNOW, ACCURATE, COMPLETE ACCURATE INFORMATION.
BUT THAT WOULD BE OUR BEST ESTIMATE IS ABOUT 90 GRAND, 20 RIDES.
SO WHAT YOU, WAIT, WHAT YOU PROPOSE IS, IS WHAT MAYOR MITCHELL'S TALKED ABOUT.
IT'S IT'S BASED ON LOOKING AT JUST THE SEGMENT THAT'S HITTING THE CAP.
BECAUSE THE OTHERS, YOU WOULD ASSUME, WELL, THEY'RE STILL NOT GONNA HIT THE CAP BECAUSE
[02:50:01]
THEY HAVEN'T HIT IT IN THE PAST.SO ADDITIONAL RIDES ARE OF NO INTEREST TO THEM REALLY.
BUT CONCEPTUALLY, IT'S LIKE WE'RE REALLOCATING UNUSED VOUCHERS TO THOSE WHO WILL MAX OUT ON A MONTHLY BASIS.
BUT YET IT IS, IT IS SOME, IF YOU SAID FOR EVERYONE IN THE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S IN THE PROGRAM YOU HAVE 10, THE ONES THAT DIDN'T USE ALL 10, YES.
THEY'RE BEING REALLOCATED IN ANOTHER, THEIR GROUP, BUT IT IS GONNA COST YOU MORE.
THE PAYMENT IS BASED ON RIGHTS, NOT VOUCHERS.
SO WE'RE NOT PREPAYING THOUGH.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT WE'RE RE IF WE'RE RIGHT NOW WE'RE PAYING FOR 500, NO ARBITRARILY, BUT ONLY 300 GET USED WHAT HAPPENED? NO MONEY.
IT'S NOT THE WAY IT'S WORTH BUDGET.
NO, THE THERE'S NO COST ISSUE.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S ACTUALLY THE, THE BEAUTY OF THE PROGRAM IS YOU ONLY PAY WHEN SOMEBODY ACTUALLY TAKES A RIDE.
UH, SO WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? I GET THAT.
I MEAN LIKE THE MAYOR OF WHY ARE WE DEFEATING A GOOD A PROGRAM THAT SEEMS TO WORK IF WE'RE ONLY PAYING FOR TRYING TO MAKE, WE'RE NOT DEFEATING THE PROGRAM.
NOWHERE IN THERE DID I SAY, OR ANY OF US SAY, DEFEAT THE PROGRAM.
IT'S A GREAT PROGRAM, PEOPLE USE IT, BUT IT'S ALSO LOOKING AT OPTIONS LAYER ON DOWN THE ROAD AS WE GROW AS A CITY, THERE COULD BE OTHER OPTIONS WE COULD LOOK AT.
EVERYBODY I'D LIKE TO KEEP IT THE SAME FOR I DON'T WANNA INCREASE IT.
I'M OKAY WITH THE WAY IT IS, JERRY.
DID YOU MENTION TO ME A WHILE BACK SOMETHING ABOUT UBER DABBLING IN SOME PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, SOME MORE MASS TRANSIT SOLUTIONS? NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
WELL, BUT THE QUESTION OF FUTURE PROGRAMS AND, YOU KNOW, BUS SERVICE AND ALL OF THAT IS TAKING AWAY FROM THE QUESTION OF DO WE WANT IN THIS NEXT YEAR TO INCREASE THE ALLOCATION OF RIDES TO ALLOW FOR THOSE WHO ARE HITTING THE CAP TO HA HAVE THE ABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM MORE AND COMMUTE? THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT'S BEFORE US.
SO WHAT WOULD, WHAT WOULD THE ASK BE HYPOTHETICALLY GO FROM 300,000 BUDGETED? WELL, TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF VOUCHERS FROM 10 TO 30, WHICH IS WHERE IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE TO ALLOW FOR PEOPLE, THAT'S A TOTAL OF 15 ROUND TRIPS OR ROUGHLY 20 WORKING DAYS.
YOU ASSUME MAYBE YOU WOULDN'T BE, YOU KNOW, STILL WOULDN'T GET SOMEONE 20 WORKING DAYS, BUT IT WOULD GET THEM 15 WORKING DAYS TO AND FROM.
AND, UH, I THINK THE COST ON GOING TO 30 WOULD BE LIKE 180 GRAND OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO HOW MUCH DID WE PAY THAT YEAR? 180 GRAND MORE IN THE PROGRAM.
SO WE'RE THINKING IT WOULD GO ROUGHLY FROM SOMEWHERE AROUND 300,000 IS WHAT WE'RE PAYING.
MAYBE THAT ESTIMATE NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER, BUT 300 TO FIVE 80 OR FOUR 80, EXCUSE ME.
YEAH, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO COUNT IN, UH, INCREASES IN THE 80 A PROGRAM, WHICH IS VERY EXPENSIVE.
SO TO, TO GET UP TO 20 RIDES WOULD BE PUSHING US CLOSE TO THE HALF A MILLION DOLLAR MARK, WHICH WOULD BE ANOTHER 200,000 ON TOP OF OUR ALREADY BUDGETED 300,000.
I I WILL TELL YOU, AND I KNOW THIS IS PROBABLY A, YOU KNOW, A FUTURE DISCUSSION TOO, BUT THAT IS A FRACTION OF WHAT YOU WOULD SPEND ON A BUS SERVICE AND BUS ITSELF WOULD BE SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA EVER MAKE A PROFIT IN A, IN A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.
THAT IT'S A POST OFFICE, IT'S A POLICE, IT'S A FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THESE ARE RESOURCES FOR OUR RESIDENTS.
THEY'RE NOT A WAY TO MAKE MONEY.
WELL, YOU, YOU, YOU, WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH SOMETHING IS GONNA COST.
SO THIS WILL ALWAYS COST THE CITY A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY WITH, WITH THE RETURN ON IN, IN INVESTMENT BEING MAKING OUR RESIDENTS LIVES HAPPIER.
SO ULTIMATELY, SO IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE SPEND.
BUT, UH, BUT IF, IF YOU'RE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT $11 PER RIDE VARIABLE COST STRUCTURE.
IT'S ABOUT USING YOUR DOLLARS WISELY.
IT'S A VARIABLE COST SYSTEM, WHICH MEANS THAT WE PAY AS THE SERVICE IS BEING USED.
IF YOU, A BUS ISN'T COMING TO YOUR HOUSE, YOU HAVE TO GO TO A PICKUP LOCATION AND IT'S ONLY RUNNING CERTAIN PERIODS OF TIME.
BUT TO HAVE A TRUE BUS SERVICE THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF KYLE WHERE YOU CAN REALLY HAVE RELIABLE TRANSPORTATION CLOSE TO YOUR HOME IS A MULTIMILLION DOLLAR PROPOSAL.
THAT'S NOT WITHIN OUR ABILITY TO FUND AT THIS TIME.
WHAT WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO FUND, WHICH AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M HAVING TO DEFEND THIS, IS 24 HOURS A DAY, POINT TO POINT FOR $11 PER RIDE.
SO WE'RE ALLOW, BY JUST INCREASING BY A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, WE'RE GIVING PEOPLE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A BUS SERVICE AT THEIR HOUSE, TAKING THEM TO WORK AND BACK HOME, AND THEY HAVE TO WAIT 10 MINUTES AND IT PICKS THEM UP AT THEIR DOOR.
IT'S A VERY, VERY GOOD PROGRAM.
AND SO DO WE WANT TO ALLOW FOR PEOPLE TO USE THIS PROGRAM AS A WORKFORCE MODEL, WHICH IS WHAT PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IS, AND ALL IT'S GONNA COST IS 180 GRAND IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT, IN ORDER TO DELIVER THAT VALUE TO OUR RESIDENTS.
[02:55:01]
SO I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO GO UP, UP, BUT I WANNA SEE THE AVERAGE WHERE PEOPLE ARE GOING.IF IT'S JUST TO SERVICES LIKE WALMART OR H E B OR PHARMACY, STUFF LIKE THAT.
IF THAT'S HOW IT'S BEING UTILIZED, THEN I WOULDN'T HAVE ISSUES INCREASING IT.
I, I CAN PRODUCE A HEAT MAP, UH, THAT SHOWS DESTINATIONS AND WHERE PEOPLE ARE COMING FROM AND WE'LL PUT THAT IN THE NEXT FRIDAY REPORT.
I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ON SOME OF THESE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE JUST FOR, UM, CLARIFICATION.
SO, UM, MY FIRST QUESTION IS GOING TO BE THE COMMUNITY CENTER FACILITY PROJECT.
UM, WHAT IS, WHAT IS THAT, WHAT, WHAT PAGE ARE YOU ON? I'M SORRY.
SO AFTER THE VISIONING SESSION, THE C I P PROGRAM, A PROJECT WAS ADDED FOR A MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY IN THE FUTURE.
THIS IS A PLACEHOLDER PROJECT UNTIL COUNCIL DECIDES WHAT THEY WANNA DO, WHETHER THEY'RE GONNA CASH FUNDED, BOND FUNDED, GO TO THE VOTERS.
BUT UNTIL THEN, $1.3 MILLION HAS BEEN SET ASIDE TO AT LEAST LOOK AT OPTIONS, UH, FOR LOCATION, CONCEPT DRAWINGS, UH, THOSE KINDS OF, UH, GROUNDWORK.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S ALL THAT IS.
WHEN WILL WE HAVE A DISCUSSION AND A VOTE FOR THOSE TWO ITEMS. WELL, THAT'S PART OF THE BUDGET.
SO IT'S, UH, AUGUST 24TH, YOU'LL BE ASKED TO, TO VOTE ON THIS AS A CAPITAL PROGRAM, UH, TO HAVE IN HERE, UH, FOR THIS CAPITAL PROGRAM.
THE PROPERTY ACQUISITION IS REALLY THE SAME THAT YOU'VE ALWAYS HAD 2 MILLION A YEAR.
SO THIS IS OVER A FIVE YEAR PERIOD.
SO IT'S THE SAME THAT YOU'VE ALWAYS HAD.
AND THE PROPERTY ACQUISITION FOR THE FUTURE PARK DEVELOPMENT, THAT CAME OUTTA THE VISIONING SESSION ALSO FROM THE COUNCIL TO INCLUDE FUNDS FOR THAT, FOR A SITE YET TO BE IDENTIFIED.
BUT THAT'S, UM, THAT'S BASED ON COUNCIL DIRECTION.
SO THIS WILL BE ASKED, YOU'LL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON THIS PROGRAM AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS.
BUT WE DO HAVE SPECIFIC RETAIL OR SPECIFIC BUILDINGS THAT THE CITY IS LOOKING TO BUY.
SO WHEN ARE WE GONNA RECEIVE THOSE APPRAISALS? WELL, EACH OF THOSE WILL COME FORWARD INDIVIDUALLY AS, AS PROJECTS ARE IDENTIFIED.
THEY'LL COME FORWARD AND YOU'LL BE ASKED TO CONSIDER THOSE INDIVIDUALLY AS THEY COME.
BUT THIS IS JUST FUNDING FOR PROP CITYWIDE PROPERTY ACQUISITION POTENTIALLY.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT MY, MY POINT IS, HOW DID WE COME UP WITH 10 MILLION AND $4 MILLION? 10 MILLION IS THE SAME DOLLARS THAT YOU'VE ALWAYS HAD $2 MILLION PER YEAR TO, TO HAVE PROPERTY ACQUISITION.
I DUNNO, THAT'S ALWAYS, BUT IT'S BEEN IN THE LAST BUDGET.
I THINK LAST YEAR WAS 1.2, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF WE HAD IT THE YEAR BEFORE, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
IT HAS GONE UP OVER THE YEARS.
WELL, 2 MILLION IS AN INCREASE OF $800,000 A YEAR.
WHEN YOU MAKE SUCH A STATEMENT, MY, MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WELL, WELL, I DO KNOW, AND I, I'LL, I'LL BE CLEAR THAT THIS IS THE INFORMATION THAT WE SHOWED YOU IN THE VISIONING SESSION WE SHOWED YOU.
HOW MUCH WAS THERE PER YEAR? I DON'T RECALL WHAT IT WAS THE LAST FEW YEARS, BUT 2 MILLION IS EXACTLY WHAT WE SHOWED YOU IN THE VISIONING SESSION OVER EACH YEAR.
SO IT'S THE SAME AS WHAT'S BEEN SHOWN TO YOU IN THE PAST.
AND I'M GONNA MAKE CLEAR THAT I DID NOT ARGUE, I DID NOT DISCUSS, 'CAUSE I, I KNEW THAT SOME OF THIS WAS GONNA COME TO THE COUNCIL, AND SO THAT WAS NOT A DISCUSSION FOR ME TO HAVE IN A MEETING WHERE NO MINUTES WERE BEING ACCURATELY TAKEN, NOR WAS IT TELEVISED.
SO I WANNA MAKE THAT CLEAR WITH EVERYBODY THAT I WAS NOT TRYING TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.
MY NEXT QUESTION IS THE FIRE STATION PROPERTY ACQUISITION, HAVE WE, DO WE HAVE CONFIRMATION THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS GONNA SELL THEIR BUILDING? NO.
SO WE ARE GOING TO SET ASIDE $23 MILLION AND WE'RE NOT, LIKE, WHEN DO WE PLAN ON FINDING OUT? I THINK THIS IS AN ONGOING CONVERSATION.
UH, PRIOR TO ME GETTING HERE, UH, A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO.
I THINK THE COUNCIL'S HAD CONVERSATIONS ON THAT.
I DON'T THINK THE, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS READY TO HAVE A FINAL DECISION, IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF, OF THAT ISSUE.
THIS IS NOT FOR NEXT YEAR, BUT IN THE FIVE-YEAR PLAN, THAT FUNDING IS THERE.
IF THAT WERE TO OCCUR, THAT YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO, TO FUND IT, UM, IF IT DOES NOT OCCUR OR YOU DON'T WANT TO PROCEED WITH THAT, THEN THAT FUNDING COULD BE REALLOCATED.
AND THEN NUMBER 16, THE REGIONAL SPORTS COMPLEX, UM, HOW IS THAT GONNA BE DIFFERENT? LIKE
[03:00:01]
HOW THAN THE, THAN THE REC CENTER? UM, I DON'T, I I DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION ON THE SPORT PLEX.MARIANA CAN, DO YOU MIND PROVIDING SOME DETAILS ON THAT OR, I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ENOUGH, ENOUGH MICS DOWN THERE.
MARIANA SPINOSA, PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR, SO THE KYLE REGIONAL SPORTS PEX AS PART OF THE PARK BOND THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2020.
AND THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM, UM, THE PROPOSED RECREATION FACILITY.
I WAS NOT AT THE COUNCIL VISIONARY RETREAT, SO I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS ON THAT.
BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS, AS A KYLE REGIONAL, SPORTSPLEX INCLUDED, INCLUDES BOTH OUTDOOR AND INDOOR, UH, SPORTS AMENITIES.
WHEREAS I BELIEVE THE VISION FOR THE INDOOR RECREATION CENTER IS A MORE OF A TRADITIONAL COMMUNITY FACILITY THAT COULD HOUSE, UM, INTERGENERATIONAL PROGRAMMING AND EVENTS.
SO ULTIMATELY THE GOAL OF THE CITY IS TO HAVE A REGIONAL SPORTS AND REC CENTER.
I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BEING, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE PAPER BOTH.
OH, WAIT, ONE MORE QUESTION FOR THE NUMBER 36.
WHEN ARE WE GONNA RECEIVE INFORMATION BASED ON WHAT THAT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE? THAT'S COMING FORWARD THE NEXT FEW MEETINGS.
UM, I'M LOOKING AT A LOT OF THESE COLUMNS AND THERE ARE SECTIONS FOR PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND ALSO FOR THE ONE I SAW.
PARK DE FUTURE PARK DEVELOPMENTS.
I WAS WONDERING COULD WE SET, BECAUSE LAST YEAR WE MOVED SOME MONEY, UH, THAT WAS DEDICATED OVER FOR THE PARKS TO BE ABLE TO LOOK FOR NEW NEW PARK AREAS.
MAYBE WE COULD PUT THAT BACK THIS YEAR.
THAT WAS, UH, WHAT 500 K THAT WAS MOVED OVER FOR THE SPLASH PAD.
BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO MAYBE HAVE THAT BACK.
SO IF PARKED, WE SPENT THAT MONEY, RIGHT? WE SPENT IT, BUT WELL, THERE'S IN THE, IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE THAT BACK STRATEGICALLY.
SO THERE'S SEVERAL PARK IMPROVEMENT ITEMS IN HERE.
SO ONE IS THE PROPERTY ACQUISITION, SO THAT'S 4 MILLION, THAT'S A PART OF THE PROGRAM.
BUT THEN I THOUGHT THERE WAS, WHAT WAS IT, 2 MILLION FOR GENERAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS, PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT, PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS FOR 2 MILLION, THAT WAS FIVE.
BUT SOMETHING WHERE WE CAN, THERE, THERE'S ALSO SET ASIDE FOR, FOR MORE PARK LAND, THERE'S MONEY PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET FOR US TO LEASE VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS AT CITY PARK.
ITEM NUMBER 20, IT'S 2.1 MILLION.
SO THERE'S STILL, THERE'S STILL MONEY ALLOCATED FOR US TO IMPROVE PROOF PARKS OVER TIME.
BECAUSE I WOULDN'T WANNA MISS OUT ON THAT.
THE, WHATEVER OPPORTUNITIES OR PARK LANDS WERE LOOKED FOR WITH THAT MONEY.
WE HAVE LATA PARK, RIGHT? THAT'S THE LAND THAT'S RIGHT OVER THERE BY CHOPPA.
SO THERE IT IS JUST A MATTER OF IDENTIFYING THE CERTAIN AREAS OF WHAT WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT THE POPULATION AND SO FORTH, IS THE WAY I WOULD LOOK AT THAT ON THAT.
SO MAY, JUST TO CLARIFY THAT $2.1 MILLION, IS IT ALLOCATED TO ANY CERTAIN PART? OKAY.
I THINK THAT IF YOU JUST EXPLAIN THAT, THAT THAT COULD BE SPENT ANYWHERE.
SO INSTEAD OF THE 500,000 YOU THINK IS A GOOD IDEA, THEY'RE DOING 2.1 MILLION.
SO FOR THIS SLIDE, WE LUMPED IT TOGETHER, BUT WHEN YOU GO TO THE C I P SPENDING PLAN, YOU WILL SEE EACH PARK IDENTIFIED SPECIFICALLY AND WHAT YEAR AND HOW MUCH.
AND MARIANI, IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADD SOME, IF YOU WANT TO, THAT WAS RICH.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, UM, AS YOU'RE SEEING LIKE THIS YEAR'S BUDGET AND IN THE FUTURE PROPOSED BUDGETS, UM, EACH PARK HAD ABOUT $10,000 IN PARK IMPROVEMENT MONEY.
AND WE DID ASK FOR AN INCREASE IN THAT ANNUALLY.
UM, THAT INCLUDES SIGNAGE, THAT INCLUDES BALL FIELD, SAND AND GRAVEL, FENCING, TRASH CANS, BLEACHERS, BENCHES, JUST ONGOING ITEMS THAT OVER TIME, UM, DO NEED IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'VE ASKED PERVE, UH, TO KEEP THAT, THAT MONEY ALLOTTED IN EVERY YEAR FOR THE BUDGET.
OH, AND I, I SENT AN EMAIL A COUPLE WEEKS AGO ABOUT THE POOL GETTING SOME ASTROTURF OVER IN THAT AREA.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT COULD BE, IF THAT'S WITHIN THIS BUDGET OR IF IT COULD BE ALERTED TO THAT.
SO ON THE IDENTIFIED LIST OF GREG CLARK PARK, POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS, WE DID ADD THAT TO THAT LIST.
THERE'S A WHOLE AREA THAT'S JUST LIKE CHIPPED WOODS FROM WHERE TREES WERE.
AND I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A REALLY GOOD AREA SO YOU COULD GO AND NOT CUT YOUR FEET AS YOU WALK ON IT.
SO I THINK THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE
[03:05:01]
ORIGINAL PLANS WHEN THOSE TREES WERE GONNA COME DOWN.IT'S JUST A MATTER OF DOING IT STRATEGICALLY, GETTING IT ALL DONE, ALL THAT IN.
WE DID GET THE MURAL UP, SO THAT'S NICE.
ITEM 20, WAS I, I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I MISSED.
OUTSTANDING BOND DEBT AND NEW FEES.
SO HERE'S A CHART REAL BRIEFLY.
WE HAVE LONG-TERM DEBT THAT ARE SUPPORTED BY THESE FIVE FUNDING SOURCES.
THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY BONDS ISSUED BY PITS.
THE PIT DEBT IS PITS DEBT AND THEY DO NOT SHOW UP ON CITY'S BALANCE SHEET.
SO WHAT WE ARE PROJECTING AT THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR, PROPERTY TAX SUPPORTED DEBT WILL BE 110.2 MILLION.
WATER UTILITY, 2.2 WASTEWATER, 27 POINT THREET NUMBER ONE, 11 POINT SEVENT NUMBER TWO, 8.3.
SO COMBINED WITH EVERYBODY, ALL THE FUNDING SOURCES, WE ARE PROJECTING 159.7 MILLION AFTER PAYING PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST.
THIS FISCAL YEAR WILL BE THE PRINCIPAL BALANCE AT THE END OF THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
MOVING ON TO THE NEXT YEAR, SAME FUNDING SOURCES.
IT IS PROJECTED THAT THE PRINCIPAL BALANCE OUTSTANDING AT 9 30 20 24 WILL BE 205.9 MILLION.
AND THAT'S BECAUSE PRIMARILY IF YOU LOOK AT PROPERTY TAX SOURCE, THE ENGINEERS ARE FORECASTING THAT THEY WILL NEED US TO ISSUE $25 MILLION FOR ROAD BONDS.
UM, WE DON'T THINK BASED ON THE CASH POSITION WE HAVE IN THAT FUND, THAT A BOND ISSUE WOULD BE NECESSARY NEXT FISCAL YEAR.
HOWEVER, WE WANTED TO SHOW COUNSEL WHAT THE ENGINEERS ARE SAYING THAT THEY WILL BE SPENDING OVER AND ABOVE WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY GIVEN THEM FROM THE 2020 BOND ISSUE.
WATER UTILITY IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO ISSUE ANY NEW DEBT.
WASTEWATER UTILITY WILL ISSUE DEBT.
UH, THIS IS FOR THE EXPANSION.
SO AS WE PROCEED WITH THAT PROJECT, DEBT WILL BE ISSUED OVER TIME, NOT ALL IN ONE TIME.
THE ENTIRE A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS TTRS NUMBER ONE IS NOT ISSUING ANY DEBT.
THAT'S WHY YOU SEE A DECREASE.
TS NUMBER TWO WILL ISSUE DEBT OVER THE, UH, NEXT 12 MONTHS, OUR PLANT ISSUE.
SO THEIR BALANCE WILL BE ABOUT 13.9.
SO THE NET CHANGE BETWEEN 9 30 23 AND 9 30 24 WILL BE AN ADDITION OF 46.2 MILLION IN OUTSTANDING PRINCIPLE.
ANOTHER, ANOTHER QUICK QUESTION.
HEY, SORRY FOR JUST JUMPING IN.
UH, BRIAN, UH, WHEN I THINK I SENT YOU EMAILS MAYBE WHAT OTHER CITIES WERE DOING, UH, A ROAD IMPACT FEE, UH, DID WE EVER GET ANY MORE INFORMATION ON MAYBE CONSIDERING CREATING A NEW FEE, A STREET IMPACT FEE? IS THAT, IS THAT THE QUESTION? I THINK, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF HOW YOU WORDED A STREET IMPACT SOMETHING THAT WOULD, IT WOULD BE MAYBE A ONE-TIME FEE, BUT IT COULD HELP REPAIR SOME OF OUR OLDER ROADS, UM, AS MORE AND MORE DEVELOPMENTS COME IN.
TYPICALLY THE STREET IMPACT FEES ARE GONNA BE ASSESSED LIKE A WATER IMPACT FEE OR A WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE.
WHEN A BUSINESS COMES IN, UH, THEY'LL OR A HOME, THEY PAY A PROPORTIONAL SHARE OF THE COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO, UH, SERVICE THAT AREA.
UM, IT WOULD REALLY BE FOR NEW GROWTH THAT'S COMING IN.
UM, ANYWAY, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW I'VE SEEN THOSE IN THE PAST.
BUT WE COULD CERTAINLY LOOK AT HAVING A STREET IMPACT FEE DISCUSSION.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S BEEN HAD HERE IN THE PAST.
WELL, CITY OF COLLEGE DOES HAVE A ADJACENT LANE MILE FEE ADJACENT LANE, SIMILAR, SIMILAR NATURE THAT A DEVELOPER WILL PAY PAY AND, AND IT HELPS TO.
AND, AND, UH, WILL IS BACK THERE.
JUST TO BE CONSISTENT, IF AS WE'RE GROWING AND OTHER CITIES ARE GROWING, WHAT IF THEY HAD THESE OTHER FEES THAT MAYBE WE MIGHT NOT HAVE THAT WE COULD COLLECT? UH, WILL I, CANON DIRECTOR OF PLANNING FOR THE RECORD, UH, AS, UH, UH, MR. LANGLEY AND PROFESS HAD BOTH MENTIONED, WE DO HAVE THE ADJACENT LAYAL FEE AND IT IS ASSESSED AT TIME OF DEVELOPMENT.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, A SINGLE FAMILY
[03:10:01]
NEIGHBORHOOD, EACH RESIDENTIAL UNIT WOULD PAY APPROXIMATELY A LITTLE OVER $1,200.SO, UH, LET'S SAY YOU HAVE A A HUNDRED UNIT, UM, SUBDIVISION COMING IN.
SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT AROUND A $120,000 PAID.
AND SO DEPENDING ON THE AMOUNT OF VALUE THAT THEY PROVIDE, THEY EITHER MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS OR THEY PAY THE FEE DEPENDING ON THE SCALE OF THE PROJECT.
AND THE FEE GOES INTO WHICH ACCOUNT FUND, STREET REHAB FUND, WE HAVE A SEPARATE FUND.
BUT IS, ISN'T THIS ONE THAT YOU HAD A ZERO IN? NO, THAT THE TRANSPORTATION.
SO WHAT IS THE FUND THAT WAS COLLECTED? UH, IF YOU, THE, THE, WHAT'S THE NUMBER COLLECTED LAST NAME? OKAY.
LET, LET ME HAVE ANDY CALL IT A REAL COURSE.
CAN I SEE IT? CAN'T READ IT SHOULD BE THE NUMBER SHOULD BE IN THE BUDGET.
IT'S NOT ON THE SLIDE, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE C I P, LET ME GO BACK TO THE C I P AND THIS HELPS TO MAINTAIN OUR ODOR.
UM, STREET PAVING AND STREET SIDEWALK STUFF.
MOSTLY STREET IMPROVEMENTS, SIR.
UM, I BELIEVE TYPICALLY, UM, PUBLIC WORKS, UH, PUTS TOGETHER A PLAN OF WHAT STREETS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED THE MOST THAT ARE EXISTING.
AND THEN, UM, AND THEY GO FROM THERE DEPENDING ON THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING IN THAT LINE ITEM STREET REHAB.
SO ON SLIDE 88, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT STREET REHAB FUND, WE'RE SHOWING WE'RE GONNA SPEND $7 MILLION OUT OF THAT FUND OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
AND YOU CAN SEE EACH YEAR WHAT IS PLANNED ALSO IN THE CHART THAT WE HAVE HERE ON ALL THE FUND STRUCTURES STREET FUND.
SO, SO WE HAVE THAT MECHANISM.
IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, WITHIN, IN, IN RELATIONSHIP TO SOME OF THE OTHER COSTS THAT YOU HAVE.
A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR IS SIGNIFICANT, BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, A STREET COULD BE 20, $30 MILLION DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS.
SO WE'RE ON THE LAST ITEM, AT LEAST FOR THE BUDGET.
BEFORE I TURN IT BACK TO CITY MANAGER, THERE ARE EIGHT NEW FEES BEING PROPOSED.
AND VERY BRIEFLY, NUMBER ONE, TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FEE IN THE BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT.
THE FEE AMOUNT IS $750 PER 30 DAYS.
NUMBER TWO, A POOL RENTAL ADD-ON FEE.
THIS IS, I SUPPOSE, WHEN VOLLEYBALL AND BASKETBALL NETS ARE RENTED.
NUMBER THREE, CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FEE HAS THREE TIERS.
BASE FEE OF 5001.5% PER ACRE FOR REVIEW.
UM, WHICH IS $900 PER ACRE, THEN A 2% FOR INSPECTION, WHICH IS $1,200 PER ACRE.
NUMBER FOUR IS A TREE REPLACEMENT FEE BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS $300 PER CALIPER INCH UP TO A MAXIMUM OF $2,000 PER SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING.
NUMBER FIVE IS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FEE.
THIS HAS, UH, THREE COMPONENTS BASE FEE OF $3,000, A DEPOSIT OF $15,000 FOR LEGAL REVIEW.
AND IF THERE ARE ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IT'LL BE $1,500 PER AMENDMENT.
NUMBER SIX IS FROM OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY TESTER, OR B A ANNUAL REGISTRATION FEE, WHICH IS A HUNDRED DOLLARS PER YEAR.
NUMBER SEVEN IS A BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTING FEE, $40 PER TEST.
AND THE LAST ONE IS A METER TECHNICIAN'S TRIP CHARGE.
THIS IS WHEN HOME BUILDER SCHEDULES A NEW WATER METER INSTALLATION AND THE TECHNICIAN SHOWS UP AND THE METER BOX IS NOT READY FOR METER INSTALLATION.
SO THIS IS TO RECOUP OUR TIME AND EQUIPMENT MONEY SPENT ON THAT WASTED TRIP.
WELL, I HAVE OVER, I HAVE ONE CONCERN ABOUT THE, UM, THE AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
OFTENTIMES IT'S THE CITY MAKING THE AMENDMENTS.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IN THE EVENT THE CITY MAKES AN AMENDMENT THAT THEY'RE, THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA CHARGE THE DEVELOPER.
LIKE HOW DO WE SPECIFY, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS? OTHERWISE WE COULD JUST AMEND IT ALL THE TIME AND JUST COLLECT A BUNCH OF MONEY.
SIMILAR LINE OF QUESTIONING IS JUST, YOU KNOW, IF, IF A DEVELOPER WISHES TO AMEND OR PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT, IF THEY PAY $1,500, DOES THAT GUARANTEE THAT THAT AMENDMENT HAS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL? AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S A DIFFERENT SORT OF WORKFLOW.
I MEAN, I THINK THE WAY IT CURRENTLY IS, IS THEY MAKE A PROPOSAL AND THEN STAFF
[03:15:01]
CONSIDERS IT AND DECIDES WHETHER THEY WANNA BRING THAT AMENDMENT FORWARD OR NOT.IF WHEN YOU PUT A FEE INTO IT, IT, YES, IT'S A COST TO THE DEVELOPER, BUT IT ALSO EMPOWERS THE DEVELOPER.
IT GIVES THEM A, GIVES THEM AN AVENUE TO MAKE THAT REQUEST.
MOST OF THE TIME, THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD OR COMING FORWARD WITH A LOT OF STAFF, I, I THINK THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
IF SOMEONE SAID, CONCEPTUALLY WE'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT AND HERE'S THE DISCUSSION AND KIND OF WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE, THAT CAN JUST BE A DISCUSSION.
BUT IF IT'S WE WANT TO ENGAGE YOUR CITY ATTORNEYS TO DRAFT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE TO, TO AMEND A, A SPECIFIC SECTION OR SECTIONS OF THE AGREEMENT TO DRAFT IT AND US SPEND TIME AND COST ON IT, THEN THAT'S WHAT THE FEE WOULD BE FOR.
BUT IF IT'S REALLY JUST A DISCUSSION OF CONCEPTUALLY WOULD YOU DO THIS? WELL, THAT'S A DIFFERENT, I THINK, THINK THAT'S RE REGARDLESS OF APPROVAL, RIGHT? CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSION COULD BE, WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS AND WE COULD SAY WHETHER WE'D SUPPORT IT OR NOT.
THERE'S NOT A FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT DISCUSSION.
BUT IF IT'S, WE WANT YOU TO DRAFT SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY AND THERE'S A CO THERE'S A COST TO IT, WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE DON'T INCUR COSTS THAT ARE, THAT, THAT ARE NOT PAID FOR BY THE DEVELOPER.
BECAUSE SOMETIMES DEVELOP DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AREN'T APPROVED OR THEY DON'T HAVE, UM, SUPPORT FROM THE COUNSELOR FOR WHATEVER REASON.
AND, BUT WE SPENT SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES ON IT.
WELL, I SEE WHAT MAYOR MITCHELL'S SAYING 'CAUSE I DON'T WANT THE DEVELOPERS TO THINK JUST BECAUSE THEY PAY THIS FEE THAT IT'S GONNA PASS, BUT IT'S GONNA BE FOR CONSIDERATION.
SO MAYBE WE CAN HAVE THEM SIGN SOMETHING STATING WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE PAYING THIS FEE, THIS IS NOT, UM, GUARANTEE US A APPROVAL.
I I I THINK THERE ARE OTHER FEES IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WHERE THEY'RE PAYING A FEE TO GO THROUGH ZONING PROCESS OR WHATEVER IT IS.
THERE'S NO GUARANTEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT EITHER.
BUT IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A COST RECOVERY ITEM FOR THE CITY.
BUT DO THOSE USUALLY COME TO THE, TO THE COUNCIL? MANY OF THEM DO FOR ZONING CASES, YES.
WELL I'M JUST, I'M THINKING OF SITUATIONS WHERE A DEVELOPER WANTS TO AMEND THE AGREEMENT, BUT STAFF DOESN'T SUPPORT IT AND THERE'S NO ONE ON COUNCIL TO, UH, SPONSOR THE ITEM.
'CAUSE THERE'S NO ONE WHO'S MOTIVATED TO DO THAT EITHER.
DOES THIS PROVIDE THEM AN AVENUE TO FORCE EVERYONE'S HAND TO TAKE UP OUR TIME IN A COUNCIL MEETING WHERE WE HAVE TO HEAR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND DELIBERATE AND THEN VOTE ON IT ALL BECAUSE THEY PAID $1,500 AND NOBODY IS SUPPORT HISTORICALLY, IT JUST WOULDN'T COME FORWARD, IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
AND SO I'M THINKING THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A FINANCIAL COMPONENT TO IT, NOW THEY'RE GONNA WANNA COMPEL THE COUNCIL TO TAKE UP THEIR ITEM.
I I I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THE NEGOTIATIONS LIKE ARE SIMILAR IN, UM, YOU KNOW, ZONING.
SO TYPICALLY DEVELOPERS DON'T WANT TO BRING FORWARD ANYTHING THAT STAFF'S NOT GONNA SUPPORT.
UM, SO ULTIMATELY IT DOES COME DOWN TO THEY WORK TO GET SOMETHING IN FRONT OF COUNCIL THAT STAFF WILL SUPPORT AND RECOMMEND.
I KNOW THAT REALLY DOESN'T ANSWER YOUR QUESTION,
I SEE YOU'RE TRYING TO GET EVERYONE'S ATTENTION BACK THERE.
SO PAGE SIGNED CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE RECORD.
I THINK THAT IF THEY WOULD NOT, THERE'D BE AN, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE AN APPLICATION CONNECTED WITH THE, THE FEE AND, BUT THE, THEY WOULDN'T BE PROMPTED TO SUBMIT THE APPLICATION UNTIL STAFF HAS GIVEN AN INDICATION THAT THE AMEND AMENDMENT IS SUPPORTED BY STAFF.
AND SO THERE WOULD BE NO MECHANISM FOR THEM TO PAY THE FEE UNTIL THAT HAS OCCURRED.
AND SO THERE, THERE'D BE THE INITIAL CONSULTATION WITH STAFF, AND THEN IF STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF AN AMENDMENT, THEN THEY, WOULD THE DEVELOPER BE INVITED TO MAKE THE APPLICATION SO THAT THE AGREEMENT COULD BE DRAFTED.
AND THE APPLICATION CAN CONTAIN THE DISCLAIMER LANGUAGE.
IF THERE'S NO GUARANTEE OF APPROVAL BY COUNSEL.
I, I WOULD THINK OF IT LIKE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
YOU, YOU COULD REQUEST TO HAVE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND, AND PART OF THAT IS A CONSULTATION WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND YOU'D KNOW, IS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT GONNA SUPPORT THAT OR NOT? AND THEY COULD DECIDE, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT WHETHER THEY WANTED TO PROCEED OR NOT.
BUT THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT OF OTHER CASES LIKE THAT IN THE PLANNING, THE PID APPLICATION WOULD WE HAVE A FEE FOR A PI? AND WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T BRING FORWARD PIS UNTIL, LIKE PAIGE SAID, THAT STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
AND, AND WE DON'T USUALLY HAVE THEM GO THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS UNTIL WE'VE INDICATED THAT WE'RE SUPPORTIVE OF IT AND READY TO BRING IT TO Y'ALL.
[03:20:01]
THESE FEES THAT ARE NEW NEVER COLLECTED BEFORE? CORRECT.SO I GUESS THERE WOULD BE LOSSES JUST IN GOING TO INSPECT THE BUILDINGS.
WE WERE JUST SPENDING OUR TIME.
WHICH, WHICH FEE IS THAT, SIR? THE, WELL, LIKE THE MASTER TECH TRIP AND I GUESS THE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION.
SO, SO THE METER TECH TRIP CHARGE, SO THE COST IS ALREADY THERE.
WE HAVE OUR STAFF, UH, THERE'S NO NEW COST FOR, UH, THE STAFF THAT'S THERE.
BUT THE POINT IS, IS IF THEY GO TO THE HOME SITE MM-HMM.
THEN THIS WOULD HELP US RECOUP SOME OF THE COSTS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE.
IT'S, IT'S ALREADY, ALL THESE COSTS ARE ALREADY EMBEDDED IN THE BUDGET.
IT'S AN ATTEMPT TO TRY TO RECOVER SOME COSTS FROM THEM.
WELL, I SEE THAT WITH EVERYTHING BUT THE TREE REPLACEMENT FEE.
I DON'T NECESSARILY UNDERSTAND THE, THE LOGIC OF THAT BECAUSE IN OUR LANDSCAPING ORDINANCE WE REQUIRE, IF YOU TAKE A CERTAIN TYPE, IF YOU REMOVE A PARTICULAR CALIPER TREE, YOU WERE REQUIRED TO REPLACE THAT TREE WITH AN EQUALLY, YOU KNOW, WITH A CERTAIN NUMBER OF CALPERS OF TREES.
BUT THAT'S STILL A, SO THERE'S A COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT ON THE DEVELOPER'S SIDE TO, BUT WHY IS THERE A, A $300 PER TREE CHARGE TO THE CITY? I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE, WHERE OUR, WHAT COSTS WE'RE TRYING TO RECUPERATE WITH THAT FEE.
WILL ATKINSON, UH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING FOR THE RECORD? UH, WITH OUR CURRENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE, WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A PER CPER INCH FEE FOR REPLACEMENT COSTS.
UM, TYPICALLY WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH WITH DEVELOPERS IS APPROXIMATELY $150 PER CPER INCH.
UM, BUT THAT NUMBER CAN GO UP AND GO DOWN BASED ON THE MARKET.
AND IT'S ALSO KIND OF BASED ON WE'RE RECEIVING INFORMATION FROM THE DEVELOPERS.
SO WE LOOKED AT, UM, UH, LOOKED AT THE CITY OF ALAMO HEIGHTS, UM, ORDINANCE AND THEY CHARGE, I WANNA SAY ABOUT $300 PER TREE AS A REPLACEMENT COST.
BUT THEN THEY ALSO HAVE, UM, A CAP WHEN IT COMES TO SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT AT, OF $2,000 PER PER RESIDENCE BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO BREAK IT OUT BETWEEN, UM, COMMERCIAL AND SMALLER RESIDENTIAL.
WE DON'T WANT TO OVERBURDEN RESIDENTS, BUT IF A BIG DEVELOPMENT COMES IN AND SAYS WE WANT TO REMOVE ALL THESE TREES AND AT FIRST WE DON'T WANNA DO THAT, I'LL SAY THAT, BUT WE WANT TO HAVE AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF FEE.
THAT IS A LITTLE BIT, UM, MAKES 'EM THINK, IF YOU WILL.
BUT I GUESS I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE CHARGING A FEE.
LIKE HAVING A POLICY THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T RE YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T CUT DOWN CERTAIN TYPES OF TREES OF CERTAIN CALIPER.
OR IF YOU DO, YOU HAVE TO REPLACE THAT TREE.
AND THAT'S A COST TO THE DEVELOPER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE CONSIDERING THAT, THAT YOU KNOW, THE TREES WITHIN THEIR PROJECT.
WHY ARE WE SAYING YOU HAVE TO PAY US ESSENTIALLY? I MEAN, A TREE COSTS, UH, 300 BUCKS PER CALIPER.
SO NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR THE TREE, YOU HAVE TO PAY TWICE OVER FOR THE TREE.
YOU HAVE TO PAY 300 BUCKS PER CALIPER TO INSTALL THE TREE AND IN THE FORM OF A FEE TO THE CITY, AN ADDITIONAL $300.
SO WE ONLY CHARGE THE FEE WHENEVER THEY RUN OUTTA ROOM ON THAT SITE TO REPLACE THE TREE.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY CAN ONLY FIT 50 EXTRA REPLACEMENT TREES AND THERE'S STILL A BALANCE THAT, THAT THEY CAN'T PUT ON SITE, TYPICALLY WE WANT THE, THE REMAINING VALUE IN A FEE PERSPECTIVE.
SO WE CAN PROVIDE IT TO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT SO THEY CAN PLANT FUTURE TREES AND MAINTENANCE.
SO THEY'RE NOT REPLACING ALL OF THE TREES, IS WHAT HE'S SAYING.
AND IN THE EVENT THE SITE DEVELOPMENT CAN'T HOLD ALL THOSE TREES THAT THEY NEED TO REPLACE, THEY WANT $300 PER CAL BRANCH.
SO COUNSEL, WE HA, OF THE $270 MILLION BUDGET, WE HAVE COVERED 95% OF THE BUDGET AND THIS ONE SLIDE WILL COVER THE LAST PART.
THESE ARE ALL OTHER CITY FUNDS THAT WE DID NOT COVER.
THERE ARE DETAILED LINE ITEM BUDGET FOR EVERY SINGLE FUND.
I'VE LISTED SOME EXAMPLES OF THESE FUNDS.
YOU'VE GOT THE SERVICE FUND, HOTEL OCCUPANCY FUND, UM, PARK DEVELOPMENT FUND.
SO YOU CAN LOOK AT SPECIFIC DETAILS FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE FUNDS.
AND AS A REMINDER, NEXT AUGUST 15TH BUDGET WORK SESSION NUMBER FOUR IS 7:00 PM
[03:25:01]
WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARING ON BUDGET AND TAX RATES.AND THE FIRST READING ON THE ADOPTION OF PROPERTY TAX RATE AND BUDGET ORDINANCES.
THURSDAY, AUGUST 24TH IS BUDGET SESSION NUMBER FIVE AT 6:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING ON BUDGET AND TAX RATES.
AND THE SECOND READING ON ADOPTION OF PROPERTY TAX RATE AND BUDGET ORDINANCES.
WITH THAT, I'M GONNA HAND IT BACK TO CITY MANAGER.
SO 102 SLIDES FOR A PRESENTATION.
IT'S A RECORD THAT SHOULD NEVER BE BROKEN.
BUT IT'S, IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION.
WE DO APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE AND UH, UNDERSTANDING AS WE TRY TO WALK THROUGH THIS.
I THINK OUR TAKEAWAYS THAT I RECALL FROM THE DISCUSSION, I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS, BUT WOULD CERTAINLY BE THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT, UH, STABILIZING THE TAX RATE, THE DFE PROGRAM.
WE TALKED ABOUT THAT AS A GROUP.
SO WE'LL BRING THAT BACK TO YOU.
ALSO BRING YOU BACK A PLAN ON THE, UH, UH, REUSE WATER PLAN THAT WE HAVE FOR, FOR THE WASTEWATER SYSTEM.
WE'LL TALK SOME MORE ABOUT THAT, OF HOW TO BRING THAT BACK.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER THINGS THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE IN THIS BUDGET, UH, THAT YOU CONSIDER FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGET? UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY OF THOSE WE NEED DIRECTION FROM YOU OF WHAT YOU'D LIKE, WE CAN THEN BRING THEM BACK, UH, FOR YOU FOR ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION.
OTHERWISE, THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET, YOU KNOW, PROPOSED BUDGET AS I'VE PRESENTED TO YOU, WILL GO FORWARD THROUGH THE PROCESS.
IT'S A PROPOSAL TO REMOVE THE, THE OR REALLOCATE THE, THE FIRE STATION $13.4 MILLION TO THE DOWNTOWN OF SOME OTHER KIND, YOU KNOW? OKAY.
BASICALLY I THINK THERE WAS 10.5 MILLION.
I'M NOT SAYING WE'RE MAKING A PROPOSAL, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT, THAT THAT PROGRAM THERE IS DEAD AND THERE'S A LOT OF, A LOT OF MONEY IN THAT.
I JUST, IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IN MY, IN MY VIEW TO KEEP THOSE DOLLARS THERE.
WE CAN CERTAINLY CONSOLIDATE THAT WITH, UH, THE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND JUST MAKE IT ONE LINE ITEM.
AND THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU'VE BEEN PROPOSING? YES SIR.
IT WILL REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT THOUGH, AS PROFESSOR.
ON WHAT PAGE IS IT ON? UM, I BELIEVE THAT'S ON PAGE 90 IS THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
AND PAGE 91 IS THE FIRE STATION, UH, ACQUISITION.
SO ESSENTIALLY YOU'D BE ASKING TO COMBINE THOSE TWO LINE ITEMS, ONE AND 13, IS THAT CORRECT? TO CALL IT LIKE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT? ALL DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE PROPOSED BUDGET TO ELIMINATE ITEM 13 ON THE FIVE YEAR C I P PLAN, WHICH IS THE FIRE STATION PROPERTY ACQUISITION.
AND TO REALLOCATE THOSE DOLLARS TO NUMBER ONE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
SECOND ALL MOTION BY THE MAYOR, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FLORES KA.
IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANY OTHERS SIR? CAN WE JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE INFORMATION FOR BOTH UBER AND I THINK THERE WAS ONE OTHER THING THAT WE WANTED.
OH, THE RAIN BARREL HARVESTING TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE CORRECT INFORMATION.
I KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT TO COUNCIL MEMBER HEISER AND WORKING ON THAT.
I'LL BE BRINGING THAT AND I'LL BE BRINGING THAT BACK IN MR. ZUNIGA.
UH, I THINK WE HAVE THAT SCHEDULED FOR THE 15TH IF I RECALL TO COME BACK.
WHAT IS THE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED FROM THE UBER PROGRAM? UM, I THINK ME AND COUNCIL MEMBER, WE WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THEY, WHERE THE MONEY WAS.
WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD, WE JUST WANT JUSTIFICATION IN INCREASE.
WE CAN INCLUDE THAT IN A FUTURE FRIDAY REPORT.
I MUST HAVE, MAYBE I MISSED IT, BUT THAT A HUNDRED THOUSAND THAT WE HAD EARMARKED FOR A FUTURE MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAM.
I UM, I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND FIND EXACTLY WHERE IT IS, BUT YES SIR.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE RAIN BARRELS.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE CAN PUT IN OUR LANDSCAPING ORDINANCE WHERE WE WILL, UM, MAYBE INCENTIVIZE, PROPOSE OR ANYTHING LIKE WE COULD REQUEST FROM AT LEAST COMMERCIAL NEW DEVELOPMENTS TO HAVE IT INSTALLED? WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA TRY TO GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAM.
UM, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY TO MAKE IT WORK FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
IT'S FRANKLY VERY EXPENSIVE TO PIPE IT IN FROM THE, THE, THE, UM, THE DOWNSPOUTS OF YOUR HOUSE INTO A RAINBOW BARREL AND THEN TO TRY TO PUT IT INTO SOME KIND OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY USE.
AND THE SIZE OF THE BARRELS ARE REALLY, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED GALLONS OR 200 GALLONS IS REALLY A DI MINIMIS AMOUNT.
AND YOU'D HAVE ALL THIS INFRASTRUCTURE AND COST FOR REALLY JUST A FEW MINUTES ON YOUR IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
AND WHEN YOU NEED THE WATER, IT'S GONNA BE IN THE SUMMERTIME WHEN IT'S NOT RAINING.
SO IT DOESN'T REALLY HELP YOU.
SO WE DON'T THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE ON, ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, ALTHOUGH
[03:30:01]
SOME PEOPLE MAY WANT TO DO IT BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.THEY JUST MAY HAVE A REASON EVEN THOUGH THAT THE FINANCIALS DON'T WORK, THEY WANT TO DO IT.
THERE MAY BE SOME OPPORTUNITIES ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT THAT TO SEE IF LARGER PROPERTIES WOULD WOULD WORK.
UM, BUT WE'RE DOING THAT ANALYSIS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'D LIKE TO BRING BACK TO YOU ON THE 15TH.
'CAUSE I SAW THE NEW, IT'S NOT AS EASY AS YOU THINK THE NEW GAS STATION HAS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE A RAIN BARREL OUTSIDE AND SOMETIMES THOSE ARE DECORATIVE FEATURES AND I WAS WONDERING IF THAT WAS JUST DECORATIVE, WHICH IT'S FINE.
I JUST THOUGHT OKAY, IF ONE CAN DO IT THEN MAYBE MORE CAN, THAT'S ALL.
DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING AMBER? IT'S IT'S NOT DECORATIVE.
IT ACTUALLY IS A, A WORKING RAIN BARREL.
I GUESS EVENTUALLY WHEN YOU RAIN.
SO YEAH, SOME PLACES THEY ARE DECORATIVE
CAN, CAN WE ALSO GET LIKE, UM, AN IDEA OF WHAT THE DOG PARK AT WATER LEAF WOULD LOOK LIKE? UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IF WE PUT SOMETHING UP THERE THAT IT'S GONNA BE NOT JUST A FENCE BUT YOU KNOW, MAYBE SOMETHING WITH WELL, YEAH.
IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WANT IN CONTEXT OF THE BUDGET OR DO YOU JUST WANT US WHEN WE BRING THE PROJECT FORWARD TO GIVE YOU THE PROJECT PLAN? WELL, I THINK WE NEED ONE FOR THE OTHER, RIGHT? SO IS $75,000 ENOUGH OR CAN WE MAKE IT MORE? CAN WE, BECAUSE EVERYBODY THAT I TALKED TO AND I DID ASK PEOPLE, THEY SAID THEY WANTED A SHADED AREA, THEY WANT SEATING.
SO IF WE'RE GONNA DO A DOG PARK, I WANNA JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE DO IT RIGHT AND THAT PEOPLE REALLY GET THE FULL ENJOYMENT OUT OF IT.
THERE'S NOTHING FUN WHEN YOU'RE LIVING IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND YOU'RE OUTSIDE WITH YOUR DOG AND IT'S HOT AND IT, YOU DON'T WANT TO REALLY BE THERE.
BUT IF WE CAN MAKE IT ENJOYABLE AND RELAXING, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING I CAN GET BEHIND.
I GUESS WE CAN WAIT FOR, I WOULD LOVE TO STEP POSTLY IF THERE IS ANY IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED THEN WE CAN DEFINITELY UNEVEN THE BUDGET FOR THAT.
AND ALSO, I GUESS IF THAT IS WHAT, UM, IS THE BEST THING OUT THERE BECAUSE IT IS A VERY NATURAL, ONE OF OUR BEST PARKS.
WHAT IS THAT? DISK PICKLEBALL.
I'M JUST SAYING, I'M JUST SAYING LOOK, THEY DID SAY IT, THERE WAS A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WANTED LIKE A FISHING POND AND WIFI AT THE PARK.
WHAT CAN WE DO? WIFI IN ALL THE PARKS? SO I WANNA HAVE THE DISCUSSION IF THAT IS THE BEST USE OF THE MONEY AND WHAT DOES IT GONNA LOOK LIKE? UM, ALRIGHT.
ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGET THAT WANTS TO BE PROPOSED OR LEMME FINISH UP 'CAUSE I WAS, I WAS TRYING TO, I WAS TRYING TO JUST ASK THE CITY MANAGER, UM, FOR THE FEEDBACK ON THAT BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR ALONG WITH THE, WITH THE DOG PARK, BECAUSE THAT IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I LIVE IN.
SO WE CAN CERTAINLY BRING YOU WHAT'S THE DESIGN OF THE DOG PARK? I BELIEVE THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE PARK BOARD IF I, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY.
SO WE CAN BRING YOU A, A PRELIMINARY DESIGN FOR THAT AND THEN IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO PROCEED WITH THAT, YOU CAN, IF YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO PROCEED WITH SOME OTHER AMENITY, THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO.
BUT THE FUNDING IN THE BUDGET WOULD BE THE 75,000.
SO THAT WOULD SET ASIDE JUST, THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE NUMBERS FOR THAT PARTICULAR PARK.
SO IF YOU WANTED OTHER THING, DISC GOLF IS FRANKLY VERY INEXPENSIVE.
WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT TO SEE HOW IT WORKS.
BUT FISHING PONDS, ALL THOSE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DOLLARS CHANGE AND THE, THE EXPENSES GET MORE.
SO I THINK WE CAN DEFINITELY BRING IT FORWARD TOO.
AND YOU GUYS CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION ABOUT IF YOU THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT LOCATION OR NOT.
SO, SO ONE THING TO DO, LIKE, 'CAUSE WE CAN'T ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS NOW, BUT IF YOU WANTED TO MAKE A PROPOSAL TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED, THAT'S SOMETHING YOU COULD DO NOW.
IF YOU, YOU WANTED TO SAY YOU WANTED A HIGHER DOLLAR, MAKE IT A HUNDRED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE A BASELINE AND WE KNOW WHAT WE CAN GET WITH THAT BASELINE WOULD LOOK LIKE JUST FENCES AND GATES.
SO IF THAT IS WHERE WE GO, THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.
MY VISION OF A DOG PARK IS A GREEN AREA WITH NICE, UH, PLAY FEATURES FOR THE DOG, WATER FEATURE FOR THE DOG, SHADED AREAS FOR THE DOG.
IT'S NOT GONNA BE, LET'S JUST CREATE A VIKING FENCE MM-HMM.
AND, AND THIS IS WHAT YOU GET BECAUSE EVERYONE'S GONNA BE DISSATISFIED IF THAT IS THE RESULT.
WELL THE ONE AT THE ONE AT STEEPLECHASE IS SLOWLY GETTING THERE.
BUT IT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
RIGHT? IT WAS NOT, IT WAS NOT FUNDED TO THE LEVEL THAT WOULD REALLY MAKE IT USABLE.
THE ONE IN PLUM CREEK'S THE SAME WAY.
IT'S GOT A COUPLE SHADE STRUCTURES.
BUT SO, BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS HOW IT MAYOR TO, TO, TO, TO ALLOW THAT.
WELL IT IT'S ARBITRARY AT THIS POINT, RIGHT.
BUT IF YOU INCREASE THE FUNDING NOW WHEN THERE'S TIME IT, IT, IT GIVES STAFF MORE DIRECTION AS THEY'RE BRINGING FORWARD PROPOSALS, THEY'RE GONNA TRY TO BRING FORWARD A PROPOSAL THAT MEETS THAT.
SO I
WHAT WE HAD TO DO, I KNOW WE HAD TO INCREASE THE, WE HAD TO LIKE, BUT IT CAME TO US IN A VERY PARTICULAR WAY BECAUSE OF THE BUDGET.
AND THAT'S WHAT I DON'T WANNA SEE WITH THIS.
LIKE IF, SO LET'S HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT A NUMBER
[03:35:01]
EITHER NOW OR LATER TO INCREASE THE BUDGET TO, OR WE NEED TO GIVE STAFF DIRECTION TO NOT WORRY ABOUT THAT NUMBER AND DESIGN TO AN PARTICULAR OUTCOME.I KNOW BRIAN WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING.
YEAH, LET ME JUST A COUPLE THINGS.
I AGREE WITH THAT WHOLE COMMENT.
UM, THE FIRST THING IS FOR THE WATER LEAF AREA, THERE ARE THREE PARTICULAR THINGS THAT WE'VE INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET.
THERE'S 75,000 FOR THE DOG PARK, 75,000 FOR IRRIGATION AND 75,000 I BELIEVE FOR THE LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN THE PARK AND THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.
SO THAT'S THE, THE DOLLARS 2 25 IS KIND OF THE OVERALL NUMBER.
IT COULD BE SPENT DIFFERENTLY BASED ON HOW YOU WOULD DO IT FOR THE DOG PARK ITSELF.
UM, THE 75,000 IS A MINIMALISTIC BUDGET, RIGHT? SO IT'S A VERY BASIC PARK.
TYPICALLY YOU'RE GONNA NEED TO SPEND THREE TO $400,000 FOR A DOG PARK TO HAVE PLAY STRUCTURES, FIELDS THAT CAN BE ROTATED, IRRIGATION AND SOME KIND OF SHADE STRUCTURES THAT YOU HAD BEEN IN THERE PUT IN THERE.
IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THE QUALITY SUBSTANTIALLY MORE, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU THINK ABOUT THREE 50 IS, BUT THE, IF YOU DON'T, IF YOU'RE NOT SURE THE DOG PARK IS EVEN WHAT YOU WANT TO HAVE THERE, THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION.
BUT IF YOU WANTED TO MAKE THE DOG PARK, YOU KNOW, A FIRST CLASS DOG PARK, I THINK YOU'RE GONNA NEED TO SPEND, THOSE ARE MINIMAL DOLLARS TO GET THE, YOU CAN SPEND MUCH MORE THAN THAT AS WELL.
I LIKE TO SEE CAN WE ASK MARIA? I DON'T, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY.
WHY DON'T WE TELL MARIANA ASK THE PERSON WHO'S GONNA BUILD IT.
WELL CAN WE ASK THE PERSON THAT LIVES THERE, YOU KNOW? WELL YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT SHE WANTS TO BRING.
I PAID, BUT HAVE YOU SEEN THE PROPOSAL ALREADY? NO, I HAVEN'T SEEN.
THEN WHY DON'T WE MARIA? I DON'T WANNA MAKE MORE THAN ONE.
WELL OBVIOUSLY IT WAS BEING BROUGHT WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION OF A DESIGN.
BUT JUST LIKE THE BATHROOMS, YOU KNOW, WE MADE IMPROVEMENTS AS THE PROPOSAL CAME FRONT US.
BUT THAT IS A MUCH MORE DIFFICULT PATH.
CAN WE HAVE, HOW ARE WE GONNA THROW A NUMBER RIGHT NOW IF WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT SHE'S GOING TO PROPOSE? EXACTLY.
WHAT ARE YOU PROPOSING, MARIANA? BECAUSE WE DID HAVE A TALK ABOUT WHAT MM-HMM.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MARIA ESP, ESPINOZA PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR.
SO WITH ALL BUDGET REQUESTS, WE REQUEST A FUND AMOUNT AND WE RARELY BRING TO BRING FORWARD THE FINAL PLAN, THE FINAL PRODUCT.
SO IF THIS ITEM IS TO GET APPROVED, THEN WE WOULD GO BACK AND WE WOULD POST THE R F P AND WE WOULD GET THE FINAL PLAN AND THE WORK WITH THE DESIGN.
SO WHAT WE, WE CAN DO THOUGH, IS WE CAN LOOK AT CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS AT WHAT KIND OF DOG PARK COULD GO IN THE SPACE THAT WE PROPOSE.
NOTHING IS FINAL, NOTHING'S SET IN STONE, BUT THEY'D JUST BE POSSIBILITIES OF WHAT COULD GO IN THE SPACE.
UM, YEAH, IF IT'S NOT A DOG PARK, OKAY FINE.
BUT IF IT IS A DOG PARK, IT WAS A RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF THAT WAS SUPPORTED BY THE PARK BOARD BECAUSE WE HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH DOGS OFF LEASH AT WATER LEAF PARK.
UM, SO IF THE DECISION IS TO KEEP WATER PARK AS A PARK THAT FOLLOWS CITY ORDINANCE WHERE DOGS MUST REMAIN ON LEASH, WE DEFINITELY RECOMMEND A DOG PARK.
UH, AT TIME DOWN THE ROAD, IT TURNS INTO AN OFF LEASH DOG PARK OR PARK.
WE HAVE TO MEND CITY ORDINANCE.
BUT RIGHT NOW DOGS MUST BE ON LEASH AND THAT'S WHY WE RECOMMENDED THE DOG PARK.
BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY COME UP WITH CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS WHAT COULD GO THERE.
BUT IT WOULDN'T BE A FINAL DESIGN, A FINAL PRODUCT AT ALL.
SO THE BUT TO, TO ADD TO THAT, THE, IF WE HAVE 75,000 IN THE BUDGET AND WE GO OUT TO R F Q, THE WHAT THEY'RE GONNA PROPOSE IS GONNA BE WITHIN THAT BUDGET PARAMETER.
SO IT, THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO SET A HIGHER BUDGET IF WE'RE WANTING, IF WE KNOW.
BUT YOU GOTTA BE CLEAR, WE'RE GOING FOR A DOG PARK.
IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE IT UP, THEN WE JUST GOTTA WAIT.
SO I'M TRYING TO HELP YOU GET INCREASED FUNDING HERE FOR THIS THING.
BUT WE GOTTA GET CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
IF WE WANT TO SAY YES TO THE DOG PARK, LET'S MOVE THIS THING FORWARD.
BUT WE DON'T WANT YOU TO DESIGN TO THE MINIMALISTIC $75,000 STANDARD.
NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO GO TO A HIGHER AMOUNT.
WE'RE NOT COMMITTING THE DOLLARS, BUT WE ARE ALLOCATING THEM.
WE ARE CREATING THAT WINDOW SO THAT THEY CAN, SO THAT THEY CAN DESIGN A PARK TO THAT, TO THAT NUMBER.
AND THERE'S PLACES WHERE YOU CAN GET THAT RIGHT NOW.
SO, BUT THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BRING FORWARD A, A BID RIGHT.
IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE BEFORE WE ADOPT THIS BUDGET, I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A $250,000 DOG PARK.
IF WE'RE GONNA DO A, A NICE CLASSY OR A NICER GREENER, SHADED WATERED DOG PART BECAUSE WE, WE, WE CAN LOOK AT STEEPLECHASE AND THAT'S, THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.
THAT THAT'S NOT ENOUGH FOR THE, FOR DOGS.
IF WE INCREASED IT, THEN WE'D HAVE TO, WE'D HAVE TO INCREASE THE OVERALL BUDGET.
'CAUSE WE, YOU JUST SAID THERE'S 150 IN ADDITION TO THIS 75.
SO WHAT IS IT? 2 25? SO WHAT YOU WANNA DO IS EXCEED THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT WE HAVE ALLOCATED THERE RIGHT NOW, JUST FOR THE DOG PARK.
SO YOU WANT TWO, YOU WANT TWO 50, WHICH THREE 50? TWO 50.
I WANTED TWO 50 JUST FOR THE DOCTOR.
SO OVERALL, 2 25 IS IS ALLOCATED THERE RIGHT NOW 400,000? YES.
SO IT WOULD BE ALMOST A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS
[03:40:01]
FOR ONE PARK, WHICH THAT IS NEXT TO A TREATMENT PLAN.WE, WE HAVE WELL, BUT HANG ON.
NO, THE TREATMENT PLAN IS NEXT TO THIS.
WE, WE HAVE SPENT, I DON'T KNOW, MORE THAN HALF A MILLION DOLLARS ON STEEPLECHASE.
WE'VE SPENT $2 MILLION ON GREG CLARK PARK.
IT'S NOT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK.
LEAF PARK IS A CITY PARK THAT IS VERY LARGE WITH A LOT OF AMENITIES THAT ATTRACTS FOLKS FROM ALL OVER.
AND SO TO MAKE A DOG PARK THERE WHERE NOT ONLY WATER LEAK RESIDENTS BUT OTHER RESIDENTS COULD USE MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
AND IF YOU'RE GONNA DO IT, WE MIGHT AS WELL DO IT THE RIGHT WAY.
JUST AS WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH ALL OF OUR PARKLAND IMPROVEMENTS.
SO I MEAN IT, I DON'T LIVE THERE.
BUT I IT IS A, IT IS A MAJOR CITY PARK IN OUR COMMUNITY.
IF WE'RE GONNA GO WITH THE DOG PARK, I UNDERSTAND THE WALK.
I JUST WANNA DO IT RIGHT, LIKE YOU'RE SAYING AND NOT I TAKE SHORTCUTS.
WHAT 75 K TO ME IS A SHORTCUT.
SO I THINK THERE'S ALSO OTHER NEEDS LIKE A PLACE TO SIT OR SOME SHADE FOR THOSE BASEBALL FIELDS THAT WE SHOULDN'T, WE SHOULDN'T GO ALL OUT ON A BEAUTIFUL BIG DOG PARK, BUT HAVE A NICER ONE THAN 75,000 AND THEN ALLOCATE EXTRA MONEY FOR SHADY.
WELL HOW ABOUT, HOW ABOUT THIS? CAN WE INCREASE THE BUDGET FOR THE PARK ITSELF, RIGHT? AND THEN LET THE PARKS DEPARTMENT MAKE THE BEST RECOMMENDATIONS OF WHAT WILL MAKE THE PARK.
THAT'S MY, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
AND I WOULD SAY SINCE WE'VE DONE 500 AT, UH, AT STEEPLECHASE, WE DID 500 AT GREG CLARK PARK.
THAT GIVES THEM A, A LARGER PARAMETER TO DETERMINE WHAT KIND OF IMPROVEMENTS WILL MAKE SENSE AND THEN THEY CAN BRING THAT FORWARD WITH A LARGER BUDGET.
AND THIS IS 500 FOR, FOR THE DOG PARK? NO, NO, FOR THE PARK OVERALL, I THINK WHAT, YEAH, THE PARK SCORE'S GONNA DECIDE THAT.
I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY IS, IS A $350,000 AMENDMENT TO THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET TO MAKE A TOTAL ALLOCATION OF $500,000 FOR THIS PARK WATER LAKE PARK.
AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE TAKE IT OUT OF THE $20 MILLION.
NUMBER ONE DOWNTOWN MONEY, WHICH IS A VERY LARGE AMOUNT.
SO I DON'T WANNA TAKE IT OUT OF RESERVE FUNDS.
BUT WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A VERY LARGE NUMBER WITH UNALLOCATED.
WE'RE NOT GONNA SPEND THAT $20 MILLION IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS.
LET'S TAKE IT OUT OF THERE SO THAT THE, THE BUDGET STAYS BALANCED.
BUT, BUT DON'T INCLUDE THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT BEAUTIFICATION, TAKE THAT OUT OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT.
THAT'S, THAT'S THEIR OWN, THAT'S, THAT'S, NO, THAT'D BE A DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCE SAR.
SO I DON'T WANT BEAUTIFICATION TO BE ATTACHED TO THIS 500,000.
'CAUSE THAT IS, THAT, IS THE TREATMENT PLAN ITSELF EXPANDING A HUNDRED, A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS? WELL, I, I THINK WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS, IS THAT WE PLANT THE TREES AND THE SCREENING ON THE PARK SIDE OF THE FENCE SO THAT IT'S, IT'S ALL IN THE PARK AREA TO SCREEN IT.
UM, I DON'T KNOW ON THE FUNDING STREAM, I'D HAVE TO THINK THROUGH THAT FOR A LITTLE BIT OF WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD USE WATER AND WASTEWATER FUNDS TO PLANT BE TREES ON THE, ON THE PARK.
BUT, UM, ISN'T IT CITY PROPERTY, CITY OWNED? IT'S CITY OWNED PROPERTY? BUT AGAIN, I THINK THAT WE CAN LOOK AT THE FUNDING STREAM ITSELF, BUT I THINK THE BOTTOM LINE IS YOU'RE ASKING FOR A $350,000 AMENDMENT TO THE BUDGET FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS OF WATER LEAF TO THAT PART.
WHAT PAGE IS THE C I P STUFF ON? I'M SORRY, I'VE LOST IT AGAIN.
ALRIGHT, SO THE, SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE FIVE YEAR C I P, UH, PLAN TO INCREASE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF C I P FOR, UH, WATER LEAF PARK TO $500,000 AND TO REDUCE THE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM BY THE AMOUNT REQUIRED TO MAKE THAT INCREASE.
SECONDED BY COUNCILOR FLORES KALE.
THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL.
ALRIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE GO TO NUMBER TWO? ALL RIGHT.
UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO, APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO RECORD.
CITY COUNCIL'S VOTE TO PLACE A PROPOSAL ON THE AGENDA OF A FUFU CITY COUNCIL MEETING AS AN ACTION ITEM TO ADOPT AN ADOR TAX RATE FOR TAX YEAR 2023 FOR THE CITY OF KYLE, MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND PROVIDING FOR, UH, RELATED MATTERS.
DID YOU SAY THERE'S A VERY SPECIFIC MOTION THAT HAS TO BE MADE? HAS SOMEONE EMAILED THAT TO ME? NO.
WHEN WE ADOPT THE ACTUAL TAX RATE.
THAT'S WHEN YOU'RE GONNA NEED THAT.
I'LL MAKE BUT FOR THIS ITEM, MAYOR, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S ON THE RECORD.
VERY CLEAR THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE VOTING
[03:45:01]
TO CONSIDER A PROPOSAL AT A FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING THAT THE TAX RATE INCREASE, YOU WILL CONSIDER A TAX RATE INCREASE AT A FUTURE MEETING BECAUSE THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE IS LOWER THAN WHATEVER THE CITY'S MANAGER'S GONNA PROPOSE EVENTUALLY.THIS BUDGET THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS THE VOTER APPROVED RATE, NOT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE.
BRING BACK THE VOTER APPROVED RATE, NOT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE.
MOTION BY MAYOR, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FLORES.
YOU WANT A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS? YES SIR.