>> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. 
          [1. Call to Order, Roll Call, and Establishment of Quorum.]
          [00:00:06]
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA WILL MEET ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 12TH, 2025 AT 6:00 PM IN THE ANNA MUNICIPAL COMPLEX COUNCIL CHAMBERS, LOCATED AT 120 WEST 7TH STREET, TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. WELCOME TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. 
          IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON AN OPEN SESSION AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE FILL OUT THE OPINION SPEAKER REGISTRATION FORM AND TURN IT INTO THE CITY SECRETARY BEFORE THE MEETING STARTS. 
          JEFF, CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY IN THE MIDDLE? THANK YOU. 
          AT THIS TIME, I WILL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER AT 6:04 PM. 
          FOR THE RECORD, WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. 
          EVERYONE IS HERE AND ACCOUNTED FOR. 
          AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO ASK COUNCILMAN CARVER, IF YOU'D GIVE US OUR INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 
          >> JOIN ME IN A QUICK PRAYER. 
          LORD, THANK YOU FOR LETTING US BE ABLE TO GATHER. 
          I PRAY THAT AS WE ENTER INTO OUR FALL THAT YOU JUST BLESS OUR SCHOOLS, BLESS OUR STUDENTS, BLESS OUR PARENTS. 
          JUST TENDS TO BE A REALLY FUN, HIGH SPIRITED TIME. 
          THANK YOU FOR POLICE BEING SO VIGILANT AND STOPPING CRIME GOING ON IN THIS CITY AND PUTTING A STANDARD THAT THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO DO THAT BEHAVIOR. 
          WE'VE GOT A LOT TO WORK THROUGH. 
          I PRAY THAT YOU GIVE US EXPEDIENCY, BUT ALSO GIVE US WISDOM AS WE TRY OUR BEST TO HANDLE THE GOVERNANCE OF THIS CITY. 
          I ASK FOR YOUR FAVOR TO ALWAYS BE UPON US. IN JESUS NAME. 
          AMEN. 
          >> THANK YOU, SIR. THAT TAKES US AS THIS TIME TO NEIGHBOR COMMENTS. 
          [3. Neighbor Comments.]
I ONLY HAVE TWO SPEAKER FORMS. WELL, WAIT A MINUTE. 
          ON THESE ITEM 7G, H, AND I, THOSE ARE NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. 
          IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO DO THAT. 
          FIRST UP, I HAVE TERRELL CULBERTSON. 
          >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR CAIN, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. 
          MY NAME IS TERRELL CULBERTSON. 
          I LIVE AT 10429 COUNTY ROAD 289, ANNA, TEXAS, WHERE I'VE LIVED FOR 32.5 YEARS, LONG TIME. 
          I WANT TO SPEAK TO YOU THIS EVENING REGARDING ITEM 7G ON THE AGENDA, WHICH, AS YOU SAY, IS NOT POSTED AS A PUBLIC HEARING. 
          TO FOLLOW ON AFTER THAT, ITEM 7H AND I. I AM OPPOSED TO THIS ITEM IN ITS CURRENT FORM. 
          I'LL GO INTO THE REASONS IN JUST A MOMENT. 
          WHEN I FIRST SAW THE AGENDA A FEW DAYS AGO, THE LYRICS FROM A 1960S ROCK SONG LEAPED INTO MY HEAD. 
          THE LYRICS ARE FROM HERMAN'S HERMITS SONG, HENRY THE VIII. 
          THE LYRICS ARE SECOND VERSE, SAME AS THE FIRST. 
          SOME OF YOU ARE OLD ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT, OTHERS PROBABLY HAVE NEVER HEARD THE SONG. 
          SECOND VERSE, SAME AS THE FIRST. 
          THIS COUNCIL, THE STAFF, THE CITIZENS, SPENT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME OVER MANY MONTHS WORKING ON AN UPDATE TO THE 2050 MASTER LAND USE PLAN. 
          WHILE WE ENDED UP WITH A PLAN THAT PROBABLY WAS NOT IDEAL TO EVERYBODY, IT GAVE AS MUCH LEEWAY, GAVE AS MUCH INFORMATION, GAVE AS MUCH SAY, GAVE AS MUCH CONSIDERATION TO ALL PARTIES. 
          THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT ITEM THAT CAME BEFORE YOU AFTER YOU ADOPTED THAT PLAN WAS THE OAK RIDGE DEVELOPMENT. 
          I STOOD BEFORE YOU AND I POINTED OUT THE ELEMENTS OF THAT PLAN THAT WERE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE 2050 MASTER PLAN. 
          IN SPITE OF THAT, YOU VOTED TO APPROVE THE PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT AS IT WAS PRESENTED. FIRST VERSE. 
          SECOND VERSE YOU HAVE TONIGHT, SECOND OPPORTUNITY WITH THE TRINITY CREEK DEVELOPMENT. 
          [00:05:04]
THERE ARE ELEMENTS IN THAT PLAN THAT ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE 2050 MASTER LAND USE PLAN UPDATE THAT YOU ADOPTED AND SPENT A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY AND TIME DEVELOPING AND ADOPTING. 
          I WOULD ASK YOU TO REALLY LOOK AT THAT, AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO APPROVE IT, PUT SOME REQUIREMENTS ON IT, OR SEND IT BACK AND MAKE IT BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THAT PLAN. 
          BOTH OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS WERE BROUGHT TO YOU WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION. 
          THEY'RE BROUGHT DIRECTLY TO YOU. 
          AS I THINK ABOUT THE REASONS FOR THAT, I'M A REALLY SKEPTICAL PERSON. 
          THE ONLY REASON I CAN THINK THAT WAS DONE WAS BECAUSE, AND MR. LAW, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IF YOU GET A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING & ZONING, IT TAKES A SUPERMAJORITY TO OVERRIDE THAT. 
          IF IT COMES DIRECTLY TO YOU AS THESE TWO ITEMS HAVE, THEN YOU ONLY NEED A SIMPLE MAJORITY. AM I CORRECT? I DIDN'T EXPECT YOU TO GIVE ME AN ANSWER. 
          I'M THROUGH? WELL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. 
          PLEASE KEEP THESE COMMENTS IN MIND AS YOU VOTE AND CONSIDER THIS ITEM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          >> THANK YOU, MR. CULBERTSON. 
          NEXT UP, I HAVE STEPHANIE DINGLE. 
          >> HI. STEPHANIE DINGLE, 820 ANNE COURT. 
          I'M SPEAKING ON ITEM 7I-G. 
          THANK YOU. MY TIME HAS STARTED. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO READ THIS TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF BETTY SHARP, WHO, AS YOU KNOW, WOULD BE HERE IF SHE COULD. 
          THIS IS WHAT SHE SAYS. PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THIS PADA BEFORE OBTAINING THE FACTS REGARDING THE BUILDING AND RESIDENCY IN ANNA AND SURROUNDING AREAS. 
          PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THE TWO RESOLUTIONS NO OBJECTION. 
          REMEMBER WHAT HAS HAPPENED WITH ANACAPRI, NORTHPOINTE CROSSING, AND OTHER APPROVED PADAS WHERE THE DEVELOPERS CHANGED AND VOIDED THE CONCEPT PLANS. 
          RESOLUTIONS OF NO OBJECTION ONLY BENEFIT THE DEVELOPER, NOT ONLY THE CITY AND ITS RESIDENTS. 
          AS FAR AS I CAN RESEARCH IN LIMITED TIME, SHOULD YOU APPROVE THESE RESOLUTIONS, WHAT POSITION WOULD THE CITY BE IN IF THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN COUPLED WITH SLOWER GROWTH? WITH SUCH RESOLUTIONS IN HAND, COULD THE DEVELOPERS TAKE ANY TURN THEY WISH WITH THIS PROPERTY? THE SECOND ONE. 
          BEFORE CONSIDERING AN APPROVAL OF THIS PADA, ANNA CITY STAFF SHOULD PROVIDE FOR P&Z COUNSEL AND THE PUBLIC UP TO DATE STATISTICS REGARDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO A CURRENT AND APPROVED APARTMENTS, PROBABLY REACHING 18,000 PLUS BY NOW, CURRENT AND APPROVED MULTIFAMILY UNITS OF ALL TYPES, CURRENT AND APPROVED LOTS, 40 BY 100, 50 BY 100, AND 60 BY 100, CURRENT VACANCY RATES IN ANNA APARTMENTS AND MULTIFAMILY UNITS, INCLUDING THOSE DESIGNED OVER 55, SIMILAR STATISTICS TO THE SAME WITHIN A 10 MILE OR SO RADIUS OF ANNA CITY LIMITS FOR MCKINNEY, MELISSA, AUSTIN. 
          THIS INFORMATION SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FROM THOSE CITIES AND STAFF. 
          WITH THESE FACTS, HOW CAN A REASONABLE DECISION BE MADE FOR THE FUTURE OF ANNA? THREE, A QUICK LOOK AT DEALS FOR APARTMENT RESIDENTS AS JUST TWO MASSIVE APARTMENT DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN A FEW MILES OF CITY HALL BRINGS UP OFFERS FOR TWO MONTHS FREE RENT, FOREGOING DEPOSITS AND REDUCING RENT BY 50% FOR SO MANY MONTHS. 
          THAT WOULD BE WATERVIEW ON THE HIGHWAY 5. 
          THIS BEGS THE QUESTION, IF ANNA HAS 32,500 RESIDENTS USING 18,000 APARTMENTS, IS 55% APARTMENTS OF THE CURRENT POPULATION FINALLY ENOUGH? THIS 18,000 NUMBER DOES NOT INCLUDE RENTAL MULTIFAMILY, JUST APARTMENTS. 
          ARE PLACES LIKE ARDEN PARK LIKELY TO FILL UP AND MAINTAINED WELL? THERE ARE NUMEROUS MULTIFAMILY. 
          SUCH DEVELOPMENTS ARE READY. 
          DO WE NEED ANOTHER? THIS IS THE LAST ONE SHE SAYS. 
          [00:10:05]
I DIDN'T MAKE IT. I THINK SHE HAS A LOT OF POINTS AND I AGREE WITH BETTY. 
          THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR LETTING ME BE HERE AND SPEAKING ON HER BEHALF. 
          IT WAS A PLEASURE. THANKS. 
          >> THANK YOU, MS. DINGLE. PENDING ANY OF THE CARDS, WHICH I DON'T SEE, WE'RE GOING TO GO ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4, REPORTS. 
          [4. Reports.]
RECEIVE REPORTS FROM STAFF OF THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST. 
          ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING FOR US THIS EVENING? 
          >> YES. THANK YOU. EVERYBODY'S PROBABLY NOTICING WHY WE'RE WEARING PURPLE UP HERE. 
          JUST WANTED TO LET EVERYONE KNOW IF YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED US. 
          SCHOOL STARTS BACK THIS WEEK. 
          WE'RE WEARING PURPLE TONIGHT TO SHOW OUR SUPPORT FOR ANNA ISD, STUDENTS, TEACHERS, AND STAFF. 
          HOPEFULLY, THEY'RE OFF TO A GREAT START. 
          WE WISH THEM ALL THE BEST AND A SAFE AND SUCCESSFUL SEMESTER. 
          ALSO WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO ANNA PD FOR TWO THINGS. 
          NUMBER 1, FOR THEIR RAPID RESPONSE TO COUNTRY CHARM AND THE INCIDENTS THAT HAPPENED THERE, AND FOR THE BREAKERS. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHIEF. THANK YOU, ISD. APPRECIATE YOU GUYS. [APPLAUSE] 
          >> I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING. 
          THE INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED AT COUNTRY CHARM OVER THE WEEKEND, SINCE THAT INCIDENT HAPPENED, THERE WAS A GO FUND ME ACCOUNT THAT WAS MADE FOR HIM. 
          WHEN I CHECKED IT TODAY AT 3:30, IT HAD $8,910 SO FAR. 
          THE EVENT THAT HAPPENED AT 3 NATIONS HAS GARNERED $1,100 TO GO TOWARDS KEVIN'S MEDICAL BILL. WELL DONE. [APPLAUSE] 
          >> WE SAW THE PROPRIETOR, KEVIN DAUGHERTY, BACK IN ACTION YESTERDAY MORNING. 
          HE GOT AN OVATION FROM STAFF AND CUSTOMERS AS HE CAME IN. 
          HE'S HEALING WELL. 
          IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN HIS FACEBOOK POST, HE HAD A VERY NICE THING TO SAY TO THIS COMMUNITY. 
          I ALSO HAVE A VERY NICE THING TO SAY. 
          IT'S ABOUT THIS COUNCIL. 
          IT WAS AT THE RETREAT. 
          NO CITIZENS JOINED US. 
          THIS WAS ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO, THREE WEEKS AGO. 
          WHEN WE GOT THERE, I WILL TELL YOU, WITH ALL OF THE CONTENTIOUSNESS THAT WE'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH OVER, I'D SAY ABOUT TWO YEARS UP HERE, MAYBE A LITTLE LONGER, I DON'T THINK ANY OF US WERE REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. 
          A FEW COMMENTS WERE MADE. 
          BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW THIS, EVERYBODY SHOWED UP. 
          WE CLEARED THE AIR ON OUR DISGRUNTLEDNESS, IF YOU WILL, WITH EACH OTHER ABOUT CERTAIN BEHAVIORS, CERTAIN AGENDAS, ITEMS, CERTAIN THINGS THAT INFLUENCE STAFF, INFLUENCE THE CITY, SOCIAL MEDIA. 
          I'M TELLING YOU, WE WERE RAW. 
          WE HAD RICK FROM RAMSEY CONSULTING MODERATING. 
          IT WAS THE RIGHT DUDE. 
          HE KNEW HOW TO DRAW IT OUT OF US AND KEEP US ON POINT. 
          I TELL YOU ALL THAT BECAUSE BY THE END OF THE DAY, I'D SAY PROBABLY THE LAST TWO HOURS BEFORE WE WENT TO DINNER, WE GELLED AND PEOPLE THREW DOWN IDEAS, VISIONS. 
          WE SHARED WITH EACH OTHER WHAT WE WANTED TO ACCOMPLISH. 
          WE SHARED WITH EACH OTHER WHAT WE DID NOT WANT TO ACCOMPLISH, IF YOU WILL, BEHAVIORS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. 
          PRESSURE TESTED A FEW IDEAS. 
          THEN WE WENT TO DINNER. YOU COULD THINK THAT IT WAS GOING TO END THERE, BUT I WANT TO TELL YOU, AND I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE ON THIS DAIS, WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE DECIDED THE SEVEN OF US SHOULD WORK TOGETHER. 
          WE DIDN'T DECIDE THIS FOR OURSELVES. 
          BY THE END OF THE NIGHT, THE END OF DINNER, OUR MAYOR WENT THROUGH AND SHOOK EACH PERSON'S HAND AND PUT IN THEIR HAND A CHALLENGE COIN. 
          PEOPLE WHO ARE IN MILITARY SERVICE, POLICE, SAFETY, THEY KNOW WHAT THIS IS. 
          BUT IT HAS SOME WORDS ON HERE, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO SHOW THIS. 
          I'LL LEAVE IT. STAFF CAN PUT IT ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA IF THEY WANT TO. 
          ON THE FRONT OF IT SAYS, NEIGHBORS FIRST, PK, AND IT HAS GOT A PICTURE OF OUR ANNA WATER TOWER. 
          ON THE BACK, IT SAYS, 
          [00:15:03]
SERVICE ORIENTED PROFESSIONALISM, INTEGRITY-DRIVEN, AND INNOVATIVE. 
          I WANTED TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU ALL BECAUSE I'M EXPECTING THAT. 
          AS WE DO THE BUSINESS TONIGHT AND HERE FORWARD, I HOPE THAT WE WILL MAKE ALL OF YOU PROUD AS NEIGHBORS AND STAFF, AND THAT WE'RE ABLE TO LEAD THIS CITY. 
          THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU. 
          >> WELL, DID NOT SEE THAT COMING. 
          THANKS. THAT'S GOING TO TAKE US INTO AGENDA ITEM 5, WORK SESSION. 
          [5. Work Session.]
ITEM A, RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM HILLTOPSECURITIES INCORPORATED REGARDING PROPOSED PLAN OF FINANCE FOR THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE BOND, SERIES 2025, SHERLEY TRACT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2, IMPROVEMENT AREA NUMBER 1 PROJECT, AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO CITY STAFF FINANCE TEAM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SAID PLAN OF FINANCE. 
          FINANCIAL ADVISOR, ANDRE AYALA. 
          >> THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCIL. ANDRE AYALA WITH HILLTOPSECURITIES. 
          >> I'M HERE THIS EVENING TO TALK ABOUT A PLAN OF FINANCE RELATED TO THE SHIRLEY TRACK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2. 
          IN 2020, THE CITY CREATED THE SHIRLEY TRACT PID NUMBER 2. 
          IN 2021, THE CITY LEVIED ASSESSMENTS ON THE LAND ON AREA 1 OF THAT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN AN AMOUNT OF $13.5 MILLION IN CHANGE. 
          HOWEVER, THE CITY ONLY BONDED $9.4 MILLION WORTH OF THOSE ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PROJECT DEVELOPER, WHICH LEFT US WITH $4.1 MILLION IN CHANGE AS A REIMBURSEMENT OBLIGATION PAYABLE BY THE CITY TO THE PROJECT DEVELOPER ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AS CASH FLOW. 
          IN THAT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PROJECT DEVELOPER, IT SAID THAT AFTER CERTAIN METRICS HAVE BEEN MET, THE DEVELOPER COULD ASK THE CITY TO BOND THE REMAINDER OF THAT ASSESSMENT REVENUE FROM AREA NUMBER 1 OF THIS PID, AND THAT'S WHAT HAS HAPPENED NOW. 
          THE PROJECT DEVELOPER HAS COME FORWARD AND ASKED THE CITY TO CONSIDER BONDING THE REMAINDER UP TO $4.1 MILLION WORTH OF ASSESSMENTS THAT WERE LEVIED IN IMPROVEMENT AREA 1. 
          BUT THOSE BONDS CAN ONLY BE ISSUED IF CERTAIN TESTS HAVE BEEN MET. 
          OUTLINED THE MOST IMPORTANT TESTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE TRUST INDENTURE FOR THE ORIGINAL BONDS THAT WERE SOLD IN 2021. 
          OBVIOUSLY, THE DEVELOPER HAS TO BE IN PERFORMANCE OF THE AGREEMENT, WHICH THEY ARE. 
          WE NEED TO HAVE THE DEVELOPER BE COMPLIANT WITH ALL THE ASSESSMENTS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN PAYING, WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PAYING THOSE. 
          WE NEED TO HAVE CERTAIN VALUE ON THE GROUND FOR THIS SERIES B BONDS OR PARITY BONDS TO BE ISSUED AGAINST THE SAME LAND. 
          WE ARE COMPLIANT WITH THAT, AND WE NEED TO HAVE NO LESS THAN 300 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS FOR SINGLE FAMILY LOTS WITHIN AREA 1 OF THAT PID. 
          OF THOSE TESTS AMONG OTHERS THAT ARE JUST TECHNICAL TESTS HAVE BEEN MET. 
          THEREFORE, WE ARE READY IF YOU GUYS WANT TO PROCEED WITH THIS BOND FOR AREA NUMBER O1 OF THAT SHIRLEY TRACT PID NUMBER 2. 
          I DO WANT TO OUTLINE THE STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT AND THIS IS THE LATEST PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. 
          THIS INFORMATION COUNCIL HAS CHANGED FOR THE BETTER. 
          WE NOW HAVE MORE DIVERSIFICATION. 
          WE'RE GOING THROUGH ALL THE DISCLOSURES THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE IF YOU DECIDE TO PROCEED WITH THIS BOND. 
          BUT I DO WANT TO OUTLINE THAT AREA 1 CONTAINS 499 LOTS, THEY ARE SUBDIVIDED INTO 40S, 50S, 60S, AND TOWN HOMES. 
          BACK IN MARCH WHEN THE DISCLOSURE WAS PUBLISHED, WE HAD FIVE ACTIVE HOMEBUILDERS IN THERE. 
          WE ALREADY HAD 259 HOMES THAT WERE SOLD TO END USERS. 
          THE DEVELOPER ONLY OWNED 57 OF THOSE LOTS. 
          THE PROJECT IS FULLY DIVERSIFIED AT THIS POINT IN TIME. 
          WITH THAT, WHAT I'M SUGGESTING THAT YOU CONSIDER IS ENTERTAINING THE ISSUES OF THESE BONDS. 
          THIS WOULD BE UNLIKE OTHER PAY TRANSACTIONS THAT YOU HAVE UNDERTAKEN BEFORE, THIS WOULD BE JUST A FULL BOND OFFERING BECAUSE THIS IS A DIVERSIFIED PROJECT. 
          WE DON'T HAVE ONE SINGLE PAYER LIKE YOU WOULD ON ANY START UP PROJECT. 
          IMPORTANT THINGS TO NOTE IS THAT THE BOND CANNOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF ASSESSMENTS OUTSTANDING. 
          TO BE VERY PRECISE, THE AMOUNT OF ASSESSMENTS OUTSTANDING RIGHT NOW IS $4,156,132.29. 
          THE BOND CANNOT EXCEED THAT AMOUNT. 
          IT CAN BE LESS, BUT IT CANNOT BE HIGHER. 
          THE BOND HAS TO MATURE NO LATER THAN 2051 BECAUSE WHEN THE ASSESSMENTS WERE 11 IN 2021, THEY WERE AMORTIZED OVER 30 YEARS. 
          WE CANNOT EXCEED THEM TERM. 
          IT CAN BE SHORTER BUT NOT LONGER. 
          WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS STAYING WITH THE SAME AMORTIZATION AS THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. 
          [00:20:02]
WE HAVE TO HAVE A RESERVE FUND AS PER THE TRUST INDENTURE. 
          EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A FULLY DIVERSIFIED PROJECT, THE SUBSEQUENT BOND HAS TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE YEARS WORTH OF RESERVES OUT OF THE BOND PROCEEDS, THAT STAYS IN ESCROW, JUST IN THE EVENTUALITY THAT SOMEONE DOESN'T PAY THEIR ASSESSMENT, YOU TAP INTO THAT RAINY DAY FUND. 
          THEN VERY IMPORTANT IS THAT THE CASH FLOW OF THIS FUTURE BOND CANNOT EXCEED ROUGHLY $279,000 IN CHANGE. 
          WE CAN HAVE THE BOND BE 4.1 MILLION, BUT IF THE INTEREST RATE IS HIGHER AS THEY ARE NOW, HIGHER THAN IN 2021, OUR CASH FLOW HAS TO BE $279,000 OR LESS. 
          BECAUSE IF WE DO MORE CASH FLOW, THAT MEANS ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENTS IN THE RESIDENTS, WHICH WE DON'T WANT TO DO. 
          WHAT WE HAVE HERE, COUNCIL, AS I MENTIONED, IS, I'M SUGGESTING THAT YOU CONSIDER A FULL OFFERING THIS TIME. 
          WE STILL HAVE TO SELL THE BONDS IN THE SAME DENOMINATIONS THAT THE 21 BONDS WERE SOLD. 
          BUT WE ARE GOING TO TAKE YOU TO THE BOND INSURANCE COMPANIES NOW. 
          THIS IS NOT A BOND THAT WOULD BE INVESTMENT RATE YET. 
          IT IS DIVERSIFIED, BUT WE STILL HAVE HOMEBUILDERS IN THE MIX. 
          IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE HOMEBUILDERS AND WE JUST HAD RESIDENTS, AND WE WOULD PROBABLY BE A LOW INVESTMENT RATE CREDIT RATING, BUT WE'RE NOT THERE QUITE YET. 
          HOWEVER, THERE IS A CHANCE THAT WE CAN GET THIS BOND INSURED, WHICH MEANS THAT THE RATING WOULD BE BUMPED A AA INSURED RATING. 
          THAT JUST HELPS WITH THE PRICING OF THAT TRANSACTION. 
          THE BOND INSURANCE IS ONLY BOUGHT IF IT MAKES SENSE. 
          THE BOND INSURANCE PREMIUM HAS TO BE LESS THAN THE DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT BOND INSURANCE PREMIUM, THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I HAVE TO CERTIFY. 
          ONCE WE GET THE BID FROM THE INSURER, IF IT MAKES SENSE, AND I WOULD BE RECOMMENDING TO YOUR STAFF TO TAKE IT IF IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE AND WE JUST SET IT ASIDE, AND WE CAN SELL THE BONDS WITHOUT THE BOND INSURANCE. 
          THIS BOND, IF YOU DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD, IS EXPECTED TO BE EXECUTED AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, AUGUST 26TH, WITH AN EXPECTED CLOSING DATE OF SEPTEMBER 23RD. 
          THIS WOULD BE JUST LIKE ANY OTHER BOND THAT THE CITY OFFERS APPROVED AND REVIEWED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS. 
          THIS BEING A PIT BOND THAT IS NOT SECURED BY WATER SEWER, TAXES, OR ANY OTHER CITY MONEY DOES NOT HAVE A CREDIT IMPACT ON THE CITY. 
          YOU MAY RECALL A CITY WAS RECENTLY RATED AA BY SMP AND AA [INAUDIBLE]. 
          I PUT TOGETHER SOME NUMBERS, COUNCIL, TO GIVE YOU A FEEL OF HOW BIG THIS BOND COULD BE. 
          I MENTIONED THAT OUR CEILING IS $4.1 MILLION, HOWEVER, BECAUSE WE HAVE THE CASH FLOW CONSTRAINT OF $279,000, OUR INTEREST RATES ARE HIGHER NOW THAT BACK IN 2021, I HAVE TO DOWNSIZE THIS TRANSACTION. 
          NOW, IF INTEREST RATES COOPERATE AND MAYBE WE GET BOND INSURANCE AND THE INTEREST RATE DROPS, THIS BOND AMOUNT CAN GO UP. 
          IT CANNOT GO BEYOND 4.1 MILLION, BUT IT COULD GO BEYOND $3,599,000. 
          BUT THIS IS WHAT I'M ESTIMATING RIGHT NOW WITHOUT BOND INSURANCE. 
          THIS MEANS, COUNCIL, IS THAT THE DEVELOPER, INSTEAD OF GETTING CASH PAYMENTS FROM YOU ON THAT REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, YOU'RE COLLECTING THE ASSESSMENTS ANYWAY AND PAYING THEM ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. 
          THEY WOULD JUST GET A LUMP SUM OF APPROXIMATELY $2,950,000 AND THEY GO AWAY AS FAR AS AREA 1 GOES. 
          THE REST OF THE BOND PROCEEDS ARE USED TO PAY FINANCING COSTS AND THAT RESERVE FUND THAT I TOLD YOU ABOUT, WHICH HAS TO BE ROUGHLY $279,000 BECAUSE THAT'S OUR ANNUAL PAYMENT ON THE TRANSACTION. 
          THE TOTAL INSTALLMENTS WOULD BE EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW, ABOUT $7.2 MILLION. 
          THAT DOESN'T CHANGE. YOU'RE STILL COLLECTING THOSE. 
          YOU WOULD BE COLLECTING THOSE ANYWAY EVEN IF YOU DON'T BOND THIS. 
          THE EXPECTED INTEREST RATE THAT I'M BUDGETING WITHOUT BOND INSURANCE IS ABOUT 5.65%. 
          IF WE DO GET BOND INSURANCE, COUNSEL, THEN THIS INTEREST RATE DROPS, BUT AGAIN, IT HAS TO MAKE SENSE. 
          IF THE BOND INSURANCE PREMIUM IS LOW ENOUGH THAT IT MAKES SENSE FOR US TO PURCHASE IT, WE WILL BUY IT. 
          IF IT DOESN'T, AGAIN, WE'LL SAY THANK YOU AND SET IT ASIDE. 
          THIS IS TOO SMALL, BUT JUST TO SHOW YOU THE CASH FLOWS AS TO HOW WE GET TO THE $279,000. 
          THE $279,000 WOULD BE A COMBINATION OF PRINCIPAL INTEREST, AND ADDITIONAL INTEREST LEVY FOR DELINQUENCY AND PREPAYMENT RESERVES, AND THAT SHOULD TOTAL UP TO $279,000 FOR THIS TRANSACTION. 
          AGAIN, SUBJECT TO CHANGE ON THIS 5.65% AVERAGE INTEREST RATE THAT WE ARE RUNNING. 
          WITH THAT, COUNCIL, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS IN. 
          >> COUNCIL. 
          >> FOR ANYBODY OUT THERE WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE TECHNICAL ISSUES, CAN YOU SUMMARIZE THIS AS TO EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE? BECAUSE SOME OF IT MAY HAVE GONE OVER PEOPLE'S HEADS. 
          >> SURE. LET'S RECAP. 
          IN 2021, THE CITY LEVIED ABOUT $13 MILLION WORTH OF ASSESSMENTS ON A SUBSET OF THE SHIRLEY TRACK PID NUMBER 2. 
          HOWEVER, THE CITY DIDN'T BOND $13 MILLION. 
          [00:25:02]
THE CITY ONLY BONDED $9.4 MILLION. 
          THE REMAINDER OF THE ASSESSMENT, AND THAT'S BASED ON THE NEGOTIATION BETWEEN THE THE DEVELOPER BACK THEN. 
          THE CITY LEFT ABOUT $4.1 MILLION AS A REIMBURSEMENT NOTE PAYABLE TO THE DEVELOPER. 
          THE ASSESSMENTS WERE LEVY AND ARE BEING COLLECTED RIGHT NOW, BUT YOU'RE PAYING THE DEVELOPER ON AN ANNUAL BASIS CASH FLOW AND THAT WILL BE PAID UP UNTIL 2051. 
          IN THAT SAME AGREEMENT, IT SAYS THAT IF ALL THESE TESTS ARE MET, AND BASICALLY THAT THE PROJECT IS DIVERSIFIED AND THEY'RE PERFORMING ON THE AGREEMENT, IF ALL THOSE TESTS ARE MET, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK YOU TO BOND THIS TRANSACTION, WHICH THEY HAVE DONE. 
          WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE NOW IS SAYING, WE'RE USING THAT MONEY THAT WE'RE COLLECTING ANYWAY TO PAY THE DEVELOPER. 
          THEY WANT US TO CONSIDER PAYING THEM A LUMP SUM. 
          THEY UNDERSTAND IS LOWER THAN ANNUAL PAYMENTS. 
          WE'RE TAKING THAT MONEY THAT WE'RE USING, AND INSTEAD OF GIVING HIM ANNUAL PAYMENTS AS CASH FLOW, WE'RE PUTTING THAT INTO A BOND FOR AREA 1. 
          WE ALREADY HAVE AN AREA 1 BOND OUT THERE THAT WAS ISSUED IN 2021. 
          THIS 2025 BOND WOULD BE ON PARITY OR AS THE SAME DIGNITY AS THAT 2021 BOND. 
          THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE HERE. THE DEVELOPER JUST GETS THE MONEY NOW INSTEAD OF UP UNTIL 2051. 
          >> PERFECT. I APPRECIATE YOU EXPLAINING THAT. 
          JUST TO SUMMARIZE, IS THIS STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE WITH STANDARD DEVELOPERS, AND IS THERE ANY RISK? 
          >> THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS AGREED TO BY THE CITY BACK THEN, WHERE THE CITY SAID, WE WILL BOND A PORTION OF THE ASSESSMENTS, BUT NOT ALL. 
          THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS AS COMMON ANYMORE. 
          WHAT MOST OF THE CITIES DO IS THAT THEY SAY, WE'RE GOING TO LEVY 13 MILLION, WE'RE JUST GOING TO BOND 13 MILLION, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO COME BACK WITH THIS. 
          NOW, 2021 WAS A DIFFERENT TIME. 
          THERE WERE DIFFERENT PEOPLE HERE, AND WHAT THEY NEGOTIATED WAS TO SAY, WE'LL BOND A PIECE OF IT, BUT NOT ALL. 
          WE ARE NOW BONDING IT ALL. 
          HAS THAT HAPPENED BEFORE? YES, A LOT. 
          OTHER CITIES THAT BACK IN THE DAY DID THE SAME STRUCTURE ARE DOING THIS AND THEY CALL THEM B BONDS BECAUSE THEY'RE PARITY WITH THE ORIGINAL ONES. 
          YES, IT IS COMMON. IT HAPPENS. 
          NOW, DOES IT HAVE A RISK ON THE CITY? NOT ON THE GENERAL FUND, NOT IN THE UTILITY FUND? THIS IS JUST LIKE ANY OTHER [INAUDIBLE] TRANSACTION THAT THE CITY HAS DONE BEFORE, EXCEPT THAT THIS ONE IS SO MUCH BETTER BECAUSE IT IS NOW DIVERSIFIED. 
          YOU DON'T HAVE A HANDFUL OF PAYERS, YOU HAVE HUNDREDS OF PAYERS NOW. 
          THAT'S WHY WE BELIEVE THAT THERE'S A HIGH LIKELIHOOD WE CAN GET THIS INSURED, AND THIS WOULD JUST LOOK LIKE ANY OTHER REGULAR MUNICIPAL BOND OUT THERE, EXCEPT THAT IT SAYS ASSESSMENT REVENUE. 
          >> PERFECT. THANK YOU FOR TAKING A MOMENT TO CLARIFY. 
          I APPRECIATE YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS COUNCIL? THANK YOU, ANDRE. 
          >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE YOUR DIRECTION TO PROCEED? 
          >> THAT'S A WORK SESSION ITEM. 
          >> HE WANTED TO KNOW WHAT DIRECTION FOR STAFF. 
          >> ANDRE, YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING THAT THIS IS ADVANTAGEOUS FOR US TO COMBINE IT ALL INTO ONE, CUT DOWN ALL OF THE PAYERS AND ALL OF THAT STUFF AND YOU FEEL THIS IS THE DIRECTION WE SHOULD GO AS A CITY? 
          >> THIS MEETS THE AGREEMENT THAT THE CITY CUT WITH THIS SPECIFIC DEVELOPER BACK 2021. 
          RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE PAYMENTS OF BONDS, AND PAYMENTS OF THE NOTE, GOING FORWARD, YOU WOULD JUST GIVE THE PAYMENTS TO THE TRUSTEE AND THEN THE TRUSTEE. 
          >> CORRECT. IT'S JUST CONTINUING ON THE AGREEMENT WE ALREADY HAVE WITH THIS DEVELOPER. 
          I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT AT ALL. UNLESS I'M WRONG. 
          >> YOU'RE NOT WRONG. 
          >> THANK YOU, ANDRE. 
          >> MAYOR, CAN I TAKE A MOMENT REAL QUICK? THIS IS REALLY MORE TOWARDS THE STAFF. 
          GOING THROUGH THAT AND WATCHING IT, I GOT SCARED WITH THE SHIRLEY FARMS NEIGHBORHOOD NOW. 
          I SEEN THE WORDS LENNAR AND D. R. HORTON AND PUT IN FOR THE BUILDERS. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE VISIONING. 
          IF THE STAFF COULD HAVE A MEETING WITH [INAUDIBLE], I WOULD APPRECIATE IT, OR I THINK WE ALL WOULD BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE ON FROM THOSE TWO BUILDERS. 
          WE HAVE ENOUGH OF THEM, AND WE WANT A DIFFERENT PRODUCT ESPECIALLY FOR THE VISION OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE WANTED TO SEE AT THE BEGINNING OF IT, SO I APPRECIATE IT. 
          >> KEVIN, YOU MENTIONED BEFORE THAT THOSE BUILDERS HAVE A HIGHER CLASS PRODUCT. 
          >> ONE'S ALREADY PROMISED THAT AND DIDN'T DELIVER, SO I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE CHANCE AGAIN. BURNS ONCE. 
          >> LET'S GET INTO THE CONTRACT. 
          [00:30:05]
          >> THAT WILL TAKE US ITEM 5B, PRESENTATION OF THE PROPOSED 2025, 2026 BUDGET, ACTING CITY MANAGER MARC MARCHAND. 
          >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. COUNCIL. AS THE ACTING CITY MANAGER AND ON BEHALF OF THE STAFF, IT'S MY HONOR TO PRESENT THIS BUDGET BEFORE YOU. 
          IT ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THAT WE ASK COUNCIL TO DO EVERY YEAR IS THE FUEL AND THE ENGINE. 
          IT ALSO REPRESENTS STAFF'S CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO THOUGHTFUL PLANNING, TO FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, AND TO SERVICE EXCELLENT. 
          I ALSO WANT TO THANK STAFF WHO PUT IN COUNTLESS HOURS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE PRESENTING SOMETHING TO YOU THAT MET YOUR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND YOUR MISSION IN THE MOST RESPONSIBLE WAY. 
          I'D LIKE TO ASK OUR BUDGET MANAGER, THE BEST BUDGET MANAGER I HAVE EVER WORKED WITH, MS. TERRI DOBY, TO WALK YOU THROUGH SOME OF THESE THINGS. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS I WILL MENTION IS THAT UP UNTIL THIS POINT, I'M QUOTING MS. DOBY, THIS HAS BEEN STAFF'S BUDGET TO WORK ON. 
          EVENING WE'RE PRESENTING IT TO THE COUNCIL, AND SO FOR THE NEXT MONTH OR SO, YOU'VE GOT SOME LIGHT READING TO DO. 
          SHE'S GOING TO GET YOU STARTED ON THE RIGHT FOOT WITH THAT. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES. 
          >> GOOD EVENING. TERRI DOBY BUDGET MANAGER, AND AS MR. MARCHAND SAID, THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SAYS IT IS THE CITY MANAGER'S DUTY TO PROPOSE A BUDGET TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT IT WILL BE YOUR DUTY TO ADOPT THAT BUDGET IN SEPTEMBER ON SEPTEMBER 9. 
          I'M JUST GOING TO GO OVER SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS. 
          I'LL LEAVE TIME FOR QUESTIONS AT THE END. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. 
          YOU HAVE YOUR NOTEBOOKS IN FRONT OF YOU THAT GIVE YOU ALL THE WONDERFUL INFORMATION I HOPE YOU COULD POSSIBLY WANT. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS I REMIND PEOPLE OF IS YOU START WITH YOUR REVENUES. 
          THIS IS NOT WASHINGTON, DC. 
          WE DON'T DO ANY DEFICIT SPENDING. 
          OUR BUDGETS HAVE TO BE BALANCED. 
          WE START WITH HOW MUCH MONEY WE HAVE. 
          OUR MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES, ARE PROPERTY TAX FOR BOTH OPERATIONS AND PAYING OUR DEBTS, SALES TAX, AND BUILDING PERMITS IN THE CITY OF ANNA BECAUSE WE'RE SO FAST GROWING. 
          BECAUSE PROPERTY TAX IS OUR PRIMARY SOURCE OF REVENUE AND BECAUSE IT IS A HIGHLY REGULATED SOURCE OF REVENUE, I PUT UP HERE A CALENDAR OF EVERYTHING THAT GOES INTO HOW WE ADOPT OUR PROPERTY TAX. 
          IT STARTS WITH THE CERTIFIED VALUES. 
          PROPERTY TAX IS BASED ON AD VALOREM OR PER HUNDRED DOLLAR A EVALUATION OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY. 
          WE GET THOSE VALUES FROM THE COLLIN CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT, AND THIS YEAR, I THINK WE GOT THEM ON JULY 24. 
          THEN WE SUBMIT THE TAX RATES TO YOU TONIGHT FOR YOU TO VOTE ON A PROPOSED TAX RATE. 
          THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING THAT NOTICE OF THAT PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE PUBLISHED IN THE PAPER, AND THEN WE'LL ASK YOU TO VOTE ON THE TAX RATE. 
          >> WE'LL GO OVER THOSE ITEMS. THE PROPOSED TAX RATE IS ANOTHER ITEM ON THE AGENDA LATER. 
          AS I SAID, IT'S BASED ON TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUE. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'VE BEEN VERY BLESSED HERE IN THE CITY OF ANNA. 
          I ARRIVED HERE IN LATE 2019, AND YOU SEE IT DOWN IN THAT LITTLE BAR ON THE FAR AS I LOOK AT IT, LEFT, AND THEN YOU SEE THE BIG GIANT RED BAR HERE FOR 2026. 
          WE ARE A GROWING COMMUNITY. 
          THE STATE REQUIRES THAT WE CALCULATE THREE DIFFERENT, YES, TWO DIFFERENT TAX RATES NOW. 
          WE USED TO HAVE THREE. 
          WE ARE NOW ABOVE 30,000 IN POPULATION, SO THE DE MINIMIS RATE IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE TO US. 
          BUT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, THE WAY IT'S IN THE CODE, IT SAYS THAT IT IS THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY TAX THAT WILL RAISE THE SAME REVENUE ON THE SAME PROPERTIES THAT WERE TAXED IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR. 
          IT DOESN'T TAKE INTO OR YOU DON'T YOU DON'T GET PENALIZED FOR YOUR GROWTH, BUT YOU CANNOT, I MEAN, IT JUST MEASURES IT BASED ON PROPERTIES FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR. 
          THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE IS 3.5% OVER THAT. 
          BUT THE CALCULATION IS IN THE NOTEBOOK. 
          IT'S IN THE BACK PAGES. 
          IF YOU'RE CURIOUS, THE WAY IT'S DESCRIBED IS NOT ALWAYS THE WAY IT COMES OUT. 
          IT'S A VERY POLITICAL CALCULATION. 
          IT HAS A LOT OF INS AND OUTS TO IT. 
          BUT SIMPLY IT SHOULD BE ABOUT 3.5% OVER WHAT WE PROPOSED LAST YEAR FOR THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE. 
          [00:35:06]
TO GO ANY HIGHER THAN THAT, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS FOR APPROVAL. 
          THIS YEAR, THOUGH, WE ARE PROPOSING A PROPERTY TAX RATE OF 0.525073 PER $100 EVALUATION. 
          NOW, THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OVER WHAT THE ACTUAL TAX RATE WAS LAST YEAR, BUT IT'S NOT QUITE THE 3.5%. 
          IT DOESN'T GO ALL THE WAY TO THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE. 
          THE REASON IT'S A LITTLE BIT HIGHER IS BECAUSE YOU CALCULATE YOUR DEBT RATE FIRST. 
          YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO PAY YOUR BONDS AND THEN FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH YOU HAVE TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THE GENERAL FUND. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, WE FOR THE PRIOR TWO YEARS HAD ABOUT A 14 CENT INTEREST AND SINKING FUND THIS YEAR WITH THE ADDITION OF THE POLICE STATION BONDS. 
          IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT ALMOST $0.17. 
          BUT IF YOU LOOK UP AT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF HOLDING THE LINE ON EXPENSES, AND OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE RATE IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT LOWER. 
          THIS SHOWS YOU ON THE GRAPH, AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS YEAR WE ISSUED A LITTLE BIT MORE DEBT BECAUSE WE'RE GROWING AND WE HAVE TO BUILD FACILITIES, BUT WE ARE MAINTAINING OUR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE RATE AT ABOUT THE SAME RATE. 
          NOW, THE THING THAT'S CHALLENGING FOR A LOT OF FOLKS IS BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RATE, THAT DOESN'T TELL YOU THE FULL PICTURE OF WHAT YOUR TAX BILL IS GOING TO BE, BECAUSE YOUR TAX BILL IS ALSO DRIVEN BY THE VALUE OF YOUR HOME. 
          TAX RATES GO UP AND DOWN, AND SOMETIMES DEPENDING ON YOUR AVERAGE VALUE OF YOUR HOME, THOSE RATES OR YOUR TAX BILL DOESN'T ACTUALLY CHANGE. 
          I USE AN AVERAGE UP HERE, WHICH IS CALCULATED. 
          THIS IS THE AVERAGE HOME VALUE IN ANNA, BUT YOU MAY NOT BE AVERAGE, SO THIS MAY NOT REFLECT YOUR EXPERIENCE. 
          THIS YEAR, THE MARKET VALUE IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE LOWER THAN LAST YEAR. 
          I THINK WE'VE ALL SEEN THAT IF YOU'RE WATCHING THE ECONOMY AND WATCHING THE NEWS. 
          MARKET VALUE OF HOMES IS A LITTLE BIT FLAT RIGHT NOW. 
          AVERAGE TAXABLE VALUE IS A LITTLE BIT UP. 
          THAT IS PROBABLY BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE, IF YOUR HOME RISES IN VALUE MORE THAN 10%, THE STATE CAPS YOU AT A 10% INCREASE. 
          BUT THEN THE NEXT YEAR YOU MIGHT GET CAUGHT UP AND CAUGHT UP AND CAUGHT UP EVENTUALLY. 
          YOU CAN ONLY GO UP 10% A YEAR ON THE VALUE OF. 
          AS YOU SEE, IF WE APPLY THE TAX RATE, WHICH IS ABOUT 0.018 MORE THAN IT WAS LAST YEAR. 
          THAT CALCULATES OUT TO ABOUT $98 FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR ON SOMEONE'S TAX BILL FOR THE CITY. 
          OUR THE OTHER CHALLENGE IS THAT OUR TAX BILLS GOES TO OUR NEIGHBORS AND IT'S GOT EVERYBODY'S TAXES ON IT. 
          IT'S GOING TO HAVE A HIGH TAXES FOR THE CITY. 
          IT'S GOING TO HAVE THE COUNTY, IT'S GOING TO HAVE THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. 
          I CAN ONLY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CITY OF ANNA. 
          ONTO THE BIG HIGHLIGHTS OF THE GENERAL FUND. 
          THE GENERAL FUND, WE USE FUND ACCOUNTING IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN ACCOUNTING AND NOT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT. 
          THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A CHALLENGE, THAT WE SEGREGATE OUR DOLLARS BASED ON THE FUNCTION THAT WE EXPECT THEM TO PERFORM. 
          THE GENERAL FUND IS YOUR MAJOR OPERATING FUND. 
          THAT'S WHERE YOU CONSIDER OR WHERE YOU FIND ALL YOUR BASIC CITY SERVICES, POLICE, FIRE, PUBLIC WORKS, STREETS, ALL OF THOSE ITEMS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE OUR GENERAL FUND REVENUES IN THE GENERAL FUND. 
          THEY ARE PROPERTY TAXES, SALES TAXES, PERMITS, LICENSES, AND FEES, AND THEN A SMALLER CATEGORY THAT'S A MISCELLANEOUS OTHER REVENUES. 
          THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT GO IN THERE. 
          IT'S A HODGEPODGE. 
          AS I SAID, WE DON'T DO ANY DEFICIT SPENDING IN THE CITY OF ANNA. 
          WE HAD 29.7 IN REVENUE RIGHT NOW IN THE BUDGET. 
          I HAVE 29.7 IN EXPENSES. 
          WE ARE NOT A FACTORY. 
          WE DON'T PRODUCE WIDGETS, WE PRODUCE A SERVICE, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, MOST OF OUR DOLLARS ARE TIED UP IN OUR PEOPLE. 
          THEN, AS I SAID, WE SEGREGATE OUR FUNDS. 
          UTILITY FUND IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THE GENERAL FUND. 
          IT'S USED TO PAY OUR WATER, WASTEWATER, AND SOLID WASTE SERVICES TO OUR NEIGHBORS. 
          IT IS ALSO BALANCED. 
          [00:40:03]
WE ONLY CHARGE AS MUCH REVENUE AS WE NEED TO COVER OUR EXPENSES. 
          WE'RE AT 30.9 MILLION IN REVENUE FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, SOLID WASTE, AND WE'VE GOT 30.9 MILLION IN EXPENSES IN THE UTILITY FUND. 
          FORTY-SEVEN PERCENT OF THAT IS GOING TO OUR THIRD-PARTY PROVIDERS. 
          WE HAVE TO PASS ON ANY INCREASES OR DECREASES OR ANY OF THAT FROM NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL FOR SEWAGE TREATMENT, FOR GREATER TEXOMA UTILITY AUTHORITY FOR OUR WATER, AND THEN SOLID WASTE, WE USE CARDS. 
          THAT'S ALMOST A STRAIGHT PASS THROUGH. 
          WE ARE HOLDING THE LINE ON REVENUES THIS YEAR. 
          THROUGH A SERIES OF PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS. 
          WE'RE NOT BUYING ADDITIONAL WATER AS MUCH. 
          WE'RE STARTING TO TREAT A LOT OF OUR OWN SEWAGE. 
          IT HASN'T BEEN A CRAZY WEATHER YEAR. 
          WITH ALL OF THOSE THINGS TOGETHER, WE'RE ABLE TO HOLD THE LINE WITH OUR GROWTH ON OUR REVENUES FOR THIS YEAR. 
          I THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO BE TIME IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR TO RE-EVALUATE THE RATE MODEL, BRINGING THE HURRICANE CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN ONLINE, LOOKING AT SOME MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO MEET OUR GROWTH. 
          THIS YEAR, WE'RE GOING TO HOLD THE LINE, BUT I WOULD TELL YOU THAT INTO THE FUTURE, IT'S GOING TO BE A HARD EVALUATION BECAUSE WE'VE GOT SOME BIG INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS ON THE UTILITY SIDE. 
          BUT SPEAKING OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, WE HAVE GOT 109 MILLION, ALMOST $110 MILLION IN PROJECTS GOING ON RIGHT NOW. 
          THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE MAJOR PROJECTS WE EXPECT TO BE SOON COMPLETED BEHIND ME. 
          LIKE I SAID, WE'RE GOING TO BUILD A NEW POLICE STATION, BRYANT PARK IS ALMOST FIVE MILLION, FINLEY PARK IS SEVEN MILLION, AND THEN TAKING HURRICANE CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FROM THE 0.5 MILLION GALLONS TO THE TWO MILLION GALLONS IS $54 MILLION IN THE UPCOMING YEAR. 
          WOO COSTS A LOT OF MONEY. 
          THIS YEAR, AS FAR AS WE'VE HELD THE BUDGET FAIRLY FLAT AND REALLY ONLY ADDED THOSE THINGS THAT WE ABSOLUTELY NEED TO TRY TO HOLD THE LINE ON THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE. 
          THE POLICE STAFFING PLAN WAS PRESENTED TO YOU EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND AT COUNCIL DIRECTION, THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET. 
          FIVE POLICE OFFICERS, A DETECTIVE, AND A LIEUTENANT. 
          THEN WITH THE ADDITION OF THE LIBRARY, WE HAVE GOT TO ADD TWO MORE CUSTODIANS. 
          THAT'S GOING TO BE A PUBLICLY OWNED ACCESSIBLE FACILITY, A LOT OF HOURS OF THE DAY. I MADE A JOKE. 
          IT'S GOING TO BE HOW IT IS IN THIS ROOM IF MUNICIPAL COURT WAS EVERY DAY. 
          WE'RE GOING TO ADD TWO CUSTODIANS BECAUSE I JUST DON'T SEE HOW WE DO WITHOUT THEM. 
          WITH THAT, I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          >> ANY QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? 
          >> I HAVE ONE. WHY DIDN'T WE ADD ANY FIRE PEOPLE? 
          >> RIGHT NOW, THE CALL VOLUME IS NOT JUSTIFYING IT AT THIS POINT. 
          WE ARE PURSUING SAFER GRANT TO TRY TO USE GRANT DOLLARS TO ADD SOME FIREFIGHTERS AND CUT DOWN ON OVERTIME. 
          BUT AT THIS POINT, IT WOULD REQUIRE US GOING UP QUITE A BIT ON THE PROPERTY TAX. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> COUNCIL, I'D LIKE TO ADD SOMETHING TO THAT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF I MENTIONED TO THE COUNCIL. 
          I MENTIONED EARLIER HOW PROUD OF THE STAFF THAT I AM. 
          THE SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST IS A FAIRLY LARGE BOOK. 
          I HAVE IT HERE WITH ME, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT HEADS PRESENTED THINGS THAT THEY NEED. 
          THERE'S NOTHING IN ALL MY YEARS OF PUBLIC SERVICE THAT I WOULD CONSIDER FLUFF. 
          WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE CHALLENGES ACROSS THE BOARD, STAFFING AND RESOURCES, AND TOOLS AND WHATNOT. 
          I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT OUR PEOPLE OVER IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, AS WELL AS OUR FOLKS IN PUBLIC WORKS, AND PARK MAINTENANCE AND FINANCE, AND HUMAN RESOURCES, WHATNOT, ARE NOT FORGOTTEN. 
          I THINK TERRI AND I HAVE TALKED QUITE A BIT IN THIS PROCESS THAT SO MUCH OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, AND THE THEME OF THIS HAS BEEN, IT'S NOT NO, IT'S JUST NOT YET. 
          WE HAVE IT ON OUR RADAR. WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING TOWARDS ACHIEVING ALL THOSE THINGS, JUST NOT YET. 
          >> TERRI, WOULD YOU MIND BACKING UP? IT WAS TO THE CIP SLIDE. 
          [00:45:12]
IT'S IN THERE. I THINK IT WAS JUST TWO FROM THE END. 
          >> THERE. 
          >> I WAS TRYING TO FIND THAT IN OUR BOOK. 
          >> CONTENT. ALL THE PROJECT [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> PAGE 120, I THINK IS [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> I KNOW IT STARTS ON PAGE 119, BUT THOSE NUMBERS I DIDN'T [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> YES. STARTS ON PAGE 120. 
          I WANT TO SEE A DETAIL. 
          THAT'S THE 120 IS THE SUMMARY OF THE ENTIRE CIP. 
          THESE ARE THIS IS JUST BULLET POINT, THE MAJOR PROJECT. 
          >> PERFECT. ACTING CITY MANAGER. 
          I SAY THAT WITH THE MOST RESPECT. 
          WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED THIS EVENING, YOU'VE COMMENTED THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO RUN A CITY, TAKE CARE OF STAFF, ALL THAT, BUT ALSO ALLOW THE PERSON THAT WE HIRE TO BE ABLE TO COME BACK AND BE ABLE TO WORK. 
          WITH WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TONIGHT, DO YOU FEEL LIKE WE'RE RIGHT IN THAT GRAVY SPOT, OR WE GOT ANY WIGGLE ROOM HERE? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? 
          >> YES, SIR, AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP BECAUSE IT'S QUITE A CHALLENGE IN ALL THE BUDGETS THAT ARE WORKED ON OVER THE YEARS TO BUILD ONE FOR OUR FUTURE NEW BOSS AND WE DON'T KNOW WHO THAT'S GOING TO BE JUST YET AND WHAT THEIR PHILOSOPHY AND PRIORITY IS GOING TO BE AND HOW THEY'RE GOING TO APPROACH ACCOMPLISHING COUNCIL'S VISION AND MISSION. 
          BUT WITH BOTH OUR CIP, OUR OPERATING BUDGET, SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT WE'VE MADE OPERATIONALLY, I FEEL VERY CONFIDENT THAT WE'RE SETTING THEM UP FOR SUCCESS. 
          >> HEY, TERRI. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU. 
          IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND THAT SHOWS THE TAXES OVER THE LAST NINE YEARS. 
          KEEP GOING RIGHT THERE. 
          I BELIEVE THAT WAS IT ALL THE WAY BACK TO 17. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT HERE IS, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THE TAX RATE IS EVENTUALLY CURVING UP AFTER HOW MANY YEARS. 
          COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT EXACTLY IS HAPPENING HERE? JUST IN MOST SIMPLEST TERMS. I KNOW THAT'S [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> IN THE SIMPLEST TERM. 
          THIS IS THE LOWEST INCREASE IN THE PRICE VALUE THAT I HAVE SEEN SINCE I ARRIVED. 
          NORMALLY, AS I SAID, THE TAX RATE HAS TWO COMPONENTS, OR YOUR TAX BILL HAS TWO COMPONENTS. 
          WHEN THE APPRAISED VALUES GO UP, WE CAN TAKE THE RATE DOWN AND STILL COLLECT THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE. 
          BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY COLLECTING ABOUT 14 OR THE GROWTH AND APPRAISED VALUE WAS ONLY ABOUT 14%. 
          THAT'S LIMITING. 
          I MEAN, IN THE YEARS WHEN YOU SAW THESE BIG DIPS IN THE TAX RATE, 23 AND 24, I WAS SEEING OVER 20% GROWTH IN APPRAISED VALUE. 
          IT'S JUST SHOWING A FLATTENING OF THE HOUSING MARKET. 
          TO MR. MARCHAND'S POINT, IT'S NOT NO. 
          IT'S NOT YET BECAUSE AS THESE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS COME ONLINE, THE APPRAISED VALUE IS GOING TO GO UP. 
          WE'RE GOING TO GROW OUR WAY OUT OF THIS TAX RATE TO SOME DEGREE. 
          >> DEFINITELY. THE REASON IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALWAYS A TOUGH CONVERSATION TO RAISE TAXES ON ANY INDIVIDUAL. 
          I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE VERY THOROUGH ABOUT THIS. 
          HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW CLOSE THIS IS TO THE COST OF INCREASE FOR INFLATION. 
          >> I HAVE A FEELING THAT'S LOWER, TO BE HONEST. 
          I HAVEN'T CALCULATED IT. 
          AS I SAID, YOUR MILEAGE IS GOING TO VARY. 
          THAT'S THE CHALLENGE IS IF WE FOCUS TOO MUCH ON THE ACTUAL TAX RATE, THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS TELL THE WHOLE STORY FOR THE INDIVIDUAL. 
          ALSO SOMETIMES THE INDIVIDUAL DOESN'T ALWAYS SEE WHEN ALL THE TAX BILLS ARE COMBINED FROM ALL THE ENTITIES, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY, IN THEIR MINDS, BREAK IT OUT TO WHO'S DOING WHAT. 
          I WILL SAY THAT THE STATE IS GOING TO INCREASE THE EXEMPTION, THE SENIOR EXEMPTION ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES, AND THAT'S GOING TO LOWER EVERYONE'S OVERALL TAX BILL. 
          SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES ARE ACTUALLY THE BIGGEST PART OF THE TAX BILL. 
          THEY'RE GOING TO SEE A SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS. 
          AS I SAID, IF YOUR HOME VALUE WENT DOWN, EVEN IF YOUR TAX RATE GOES UP A LITTLE BIT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE A DIFFERENCE IN YOUR BILL. 
          [00:50:03]
          >> I'M REALLY THANKFUL THAT YOU MENTIONED, ESPECIALLY IN SOME OF THE YEARS WHERE YOU SEE THE BIG DECLINES. 
          IT WAS REALLY BASED ON THE MARKET. 
          YOU HAD A LOT OF PRODUCT COMING ON, A LOT OF PROPERTY TAXES COMING ONTO THE ROLLS. 
          THAT'S WHAT KIND OF HELPED CAUSE THAT. 
          I APPRECIATE YOU DOING THAT. 
          NOW, CAN YOU TAKE ME TO THE PARAGRAPH FOR THE PAYROLL, WHICH WAS 73%? 
          >> PERFECT. NOW, HOW DOES THIS COMPARE TO OTHER CITIES? WERE YOU ABLE TO MAYBE TAKE A LOOK? 
          >> THIS IS PRETTY STANDARD FOR A GENERAL FUND. 
          I WOULD TELL YOU THAT TWO THIRDS OF OUR BUDGET IS DEVOTED TO POLICE AND FIRE, AND POLICE AND FIRE IS ABOUT THE PEOPLE, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE 70% PAYROLL. 
          ALMOST EVERY BUDGET EVER SEEN IN THE GENERAL FUND, TWO THIRDS OF IT IS GOING TO BE POLICE AND FIRE OR HALF OF IT IS GOING TO BE POLICE AND FIRE, AND THOSE ARE GOING TO BE YOUR BIGGEST DEPARTMENTS. 
          LARGEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE, WHERE YOU WANT THE PEOPLE, AND THAT'S WHAT DRIVES MOST OF WHAT WE DO IN THE GENERAL FUND IS PUBLIC SAFETY. 
          >> PERFECT. THANKS FOR CLARIFYING EXACTLY WHAT THOSE PAY ROLLS ARE, JUST IN CASE ANYONE HAD ANY OTHER IDEAS. 
          CAN YOU ALSO GO TO UTILITY AS WELL? SPECIFICALLY ON THE EXPENSES FOR SEWAGE. KEEP GOING FORWARD. 
          KEEP GOING, RIGHT HERE. 
          RIGHT HERE, NOW, I SEE THAT THERE'S THE $54 MILLION SEWAGE PLANT, WHICH I THINK IS A REAL BENEFIT. 
          IT ALLOWS SOME OF THE OTHER NEIGHBORING CITIES TO HELP PAY DOWN OUR DEBT SERVICE, BUT HELP ME UNDERSTAND, I'M SORRY IF I DIDN'T COME TO THIS WITH THIS BEFORE, BUT WHEN DO WE ACTUALLY START GENERATING A REVENUE OFF OF THESE ASSETS? 
          >> VERY SOON. 
          >> PERFECT. 
          >> I ALREADY SEEN ONE OF THOSE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS. 
          THE EXPANSION TO 2 MGD IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US AND OUR NEIGHBORS. 
          IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I SAY WE CAN HOLD THE LINE THIS YEAR ON THESE RATES, BUT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO REEVALUATE THE RATE MODEL AND START TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE THE MONEY COMING IN FROM NON ANTI NEIGHBORS. 
          >> REALLY THIS PROBABLY WAS ONE OF THE TOUGHEST BUDGETS YOU'VE DONE IN A WHILE. 
          >> IT WAS TOUGH. IT WAS. 
          I THINK THE THING THAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE HURRICANE CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, I KNOW IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE PUTTING FORTH $54 MILLION. 
          IF WE WEREN'T SPENDING THIS 54 MILLION ON THIS PLANT, WE'D BE SPENDING IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. 
          >> YES. 
          >> BECAUSE IT'S GOT TO GO SOMEWHERE. 
          >> JUST SO PEOPLE UNDERSTAND, IT'S A STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE FOR US TO BUILD THESE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS NEAR US BECAUSE THEN MELISSA, ALL THESE OTHER CITIES, THEY BECOME NUMBER 1 DEPENDENT, THEY HELP SERVICE OUR DEBT. 
          IT ALSO PROVIDES US LEVERAGE IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE NEGOTIATE WITH NORTH TEXAS WATER MUNICIPAL DISTRICT TO GET BETTER DEALS, TO BECOME BETTER PARTNER CITIES, WHICHEVER IT IS. 
          DEFINITELY THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. 
          THEN ONE MORE QUESTION ON THE CIP SINCE WE'RE HERE, IT'S MY FINAL QUESTION. 
          WHERE DO ROADS FALL IN HERE ON THE BUDGET? 
          >> RIGHT NOW, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY MAJOR CIP ROAD PROJECTS. 
          IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS DISCUSSED IF WE CONTINUE TO ISSUE DEBT. 
          PROBABLY IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS, YOU WILL NEED TO ISSUE SOME DEBT FOR ROADS. 
          THIS YEAR, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE POLICE STATION, THE 30 MILLION WAS A BIG ASK. IT IS A BIG LIFT. 
          WE DISCUSSED 10 TO $11 MILLION IN ROAD PROJECTS, $12 MILLION IN ROAD PROJECTS, BUT THAT IS PROBABLY A FUTURE BOND ISSUE. 
          RIGHT NOW, WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO MAINTAIN WHAT WE'VE GOT, AND FOR NEW ROADS, IT'S COMING OUT OF IMPACT FEES FROM THE DEVELOPERS. 
          >> NOW, THE IMPACT FEES ARE REALLY JUST DEPENDENT ON AS LONG AS THE MARKET STAYS STRONG, IT CONTINUES TO EXPAND. 
          HOPEFULLY INTEREST RATES COME DOWN. 
          >> WELL, THE PRINCIPLE OF IMPACT FEES IS THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO BRING US DEVELOPMENT AND BRING US A NEED, YOU NEED TO GIVE US THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE FOR YOUR NEEDS. 
          >> A HUNDRED PERCENT. IT JUST DEPENDS ON ECONOMIC CONDITIONS. 
          I UNDERSTAND THERE, BUT MY PROBLEM STILL IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT I'VE SEEN IN THIS CITY IS ROADS. 
          I'M SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS HERE. 
          SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S AT THE TOP OF OUR MIND, WHETHER IT'S IN THIS BUDGET OR NOT, THERE'S OTHER AVENUES WE CAN GO DOWN, BUT I WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN THOUGH IT MAY NOT APPEAR HERE, THAT IT'S TOP OF MIND, THESE ROADS ARE SOMETHING, ARE ROADS WE DRIVE EVERY DAY, TOO, WE'RE STUCK ON THE SAME TRAFFIC. 
          WE'VE GOT TO DEAL WITH THE SITUATION WE'VE BEEN GIVEN, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ARE LOOKING FOR A WAY FORWARD. 
          WE JUST HUMBLY REQUEST A LITTLE BIT OF PATIENCE. 
          HOPEFULLY, WE CAN ROLL OUT SOMETHING HERE. 
          [00:55:01]
I'M CONFIDENT THAT THE REST OF COUNCIL HERE IS WILLING TO GIVE A PUBLIC COMMITMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO FUND THESE ROADS. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU. 
          >> I GOT A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS [NOISE] AND CONCERNS. 
          MARC, ACTING CITY MANAGER. 
          THE FIRE STAFF CONCERNS ME. 
          BECAUSE I KNOW WE MEET OUR OVERTIME BUDGET REALLY QUICK WITHIN THE FIRST OF THE YEAR AND THE FIRST OF THE BUDGET, AND THAT'S ONLY BECAUSE WE HAVE THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF FIRE FIREMEN, WHETHER SOMEONE TAKES A DAY OFF, SOMEONE'S GOT TO COVER. 
          IT HAPPENS EVERY SHIFT. 
          IT'S JUST A WAY OF LIFE. 
          IT'S HAVING THE 24, 96 OR WHATEVER SCHEDULE ONE ON THREE OFF THAT THEY'RE ON, MORE DAYS OFF HAPPENS, BECAUSE THAT'S ANOTHER CONVERSATION WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO NEED TO HAVE IN THE FUTURE SO WE CAN RETAIN AND HELP WITH THE USE OF OVERTIME. 
          IT'S ABOUT THE FIRE, THAT CONCERNS ME. 
          EVERY SEVEN YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN ON, WE'VE RELIED ON THIS SAFER GRANT. 
          WELL, SOME YEARS WE RELIED ON IT, SOME YEARS WE WERE JUST WHATEVER, TO SUPPLY, JUST TO SEE ENTERTAIN OURSELVES. 
          WE SEE OTHER CITIES THAT DON'T NEED IT, GET IT, AND CITIES THAT ARE GROWING GET NOTHING. 
          THAT'S JUST A POLITICS THING AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION. 
          I'M NOT A BUDGET PERSON, TERRI, AND I THINK I'VE TOLD YOU THAT. 
          ARE WE LOSING ALL THOSE PEOPLE? 
          >> WHAT DO YOU MEAN? NO. 
          >> PAGE 39. 
          >> WE BROKE UP THAT DEPARTMENT INTO PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS AND ENGINEERING. 
          IT'S THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE. 
          I JUST SPLIT OUT THE COST. 
          >> I'VE JUST GONE BY HOW I'M READING. 
          [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> LIKE I SAID, FLIP THE PAGE, AND WE JUST BROKE OUT PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS FROM ENGINEERING, AND THAT'S JUST MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS. 
          >> THANK YOU. IT'S JUST. 
          >> A GROWING CITY, BUT LOSING SPOTS LIKE THAT IS CRAZY. 
          >> I KNOW EVERYTHING YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED. 
          WE DID THAT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES AND IT HELPS US [OVERLAPPING] ENGINE THE DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET. 
          >> HOLD ON. LET HER EXPLAIN. 
          YOU'RE TRYING TO CREATE A TABLE HERE IN A SETTING. 
          WELL, SHE'S TRYING TO EXPLAIN THAT IT'S NOT ACTUALLY WHAT YOU BELIEVE IT IS. JUST GIVE HER A MOMENT, MARC. 
          >> SHE JUST ANSWERED IT. I GET IT. 
          I UNDERSTAND IT NOW, AND I APPRECIATE IT. 
          IT'S THE FIRST TIME I'M GETTING THIS BOOK, BY THE WAY, TO THE PUBLIC. I'M LEARNING. 
          >> YOU CAN CONTINUE TO READ FOR THE NEXT 2-3 MINUTES, THERE'S MUCH YOU WOULD LIKE. 
          >> I APPRECIATE. THE PARKS PLANNING MANAGER, HAS THAT ALWAYS BEEN UNDER THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FUND? 
          >> IT HAS. ONE OF THE PARK PLANNING IS ONE OF THE ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURES OUT OF THAT. 
          SOMETIMES WE WOULD USE THAT TO OUTSOURCE THAT PLANNING, BUT IN THIS CASE, WE WERE ABLE TO TAKE PRESSURE OFF OF THE GENERAL FUND SO THAT WE COULD GET MORE PUBLIC SAFETY STAFF AND USE THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FUND FOR THAT PLANNING PURPOSE. 
          >> THEN, LIKE WE RELY ON THE SAFER GRANT, ARE WE TAKING FULL ADVANTAGE OF THE GRANTS FOUND IN THE COUNTY FOR TRAILS BECAUSE I SEE THAT WE'RE SPENDING 1.3 MILLION ON THE HALLOW TRAILS EXTENSION. 
          ARE WE APPLYING FOR EVERY YEAR THE COUNTY HAS MONEY SET ASIDE FOR TRAIL EXTENSIONS AND EVERYTHING? WE'RE RELYING ON THE SAFER GRANT. 
          I WANT TO TAKE A FULL ADVANTAGE OF THAT MONEY AS WELL. 
          I HEARD OUR COMMISSIONER TALK ABOUT EVEN THE ROADS. 
          WE FINALLY GOT AWARDED SOME OF THAT, BUT EVERY YEAR WE NEED TO TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THAT, SO THAT HELPS WITH OUR BUDGET. 
          BUT I APPRECIATE, TERRI. 
          YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH A LOT OF THESE WITH US, AND YOU'VE ALWAYS DONE REALLY GOOD IN EXPLAINING. 
          ONE QUICK QUESTION. 
          WHERE DO WE START TALKING ABOUT THE EXEMPTIONS? ABOUT THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, WE FINALLY ADDED A HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION FOR THE CITY TAX. 
          WE TALKED ABOUT AND WE HAVEN'T TOUCHED IT SINCE. 
          >> WE ADDED IT AND THEN WE RAISED IT THE NEXT YEAR, AND THE NEXT YEAR, 
          [01:00:04]
WE ADDED THE SABLE TO THE SAFER, AND THEN WE HAVE TAKEN A YEAR BREAK OR SO. 
          I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S SOMETHING ONCE YOU GET YOUR NEW CITY MANAGER IN PLACE, TELL HIM THAT THAT'S AN ISSUE YOU WANT TO START ON IN SPRING. 
          >> I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, TERRI. 
          >> COUNCILMEMBER TOTEN. ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I WANTED TO REVISIT WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE FIRE STAFFING AND OVERTIME BECAUSE YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON. 
          I KNOW CHIEF ISOM AND HIS TEAM HAVE WORKED REALLY HARD ON UPDATING THEIR LONG TERM PLANS AND WHATNOT. 
          IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE COUNCIL, I'D LIKE TO SCHEDULE SOME TIME BEFORE LONG TO HAVE CHIEF ISOM'S TEAM COME UP AND DISCUSS THAT PLAN WITH YOU ALL, JUST SIMILAR TO WHAT POLICE DID HERE FOR YOU RECENTLY, GIVES YOU A BETTER IDEA AND A PICTURE OF WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE AND THEN WHAT DIRECTION THEY THINK THEY NEED TO GO IN IN ORDER TO PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE AND REDUCE SOME OF THAT OVERTIME. 
          >> THERE'S ONE QUESTION I HAVE THAT'S BURIED IN THE NUMBERS HERE. 
          IT'S NOT AS OBVIOUS, BUT WHEN I FIRST MOVED TO ANNA NINE PLUS YEARS AGO, OUR GENERAL FUND WAS FUNDED BY ABOUT 70% OF OUR PROPERTY TAX OR OBVIOUSLY. 
          DO YOU KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF OUR GENERAL FUND IS COMING FROM PROPERTY TAX? 
          >> IT IS A PERCENTAGE, BUT IT IS ALWAYS VERY EXCITING TO ME TO SEE THAT SALES TAX IS GROWING. 
          YOU'RE RIGHT. WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE, SALES TAX WAS A ROUNDING ERROR. 
          IT JUST WASN'T SOMETHING I EVER LOOKED AT, AND IT IS DEFINITELY A GOING CONCERN. 
          THE CAUTION ABOUT SALES TAXES TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT DEPENDING ON IT TOO MUCH BECAUSE IT GOES UP AND DOWN WITH THE ECONOMY, BUT WHEN YOU GET IT, IT'S CERTAINLY NICE TO HAVE. 
          EVERY TIME WE ADD A BUSINESS, EVERY YEAR, I DO DETAILED REPORTS EACH MONTH, LOOKING AT THINGS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CONFIDENTIAL, I CAN LOOK AT AND LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE. 
          I WILL TELL YOU THAT I THINK OUR HIGHEST MONTH WITHOUT AN AUDIT COLLECTION, HAS GOTTEN CLOSE TO $900,000. 
          I THINK WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE, OUR HIGHEST MONTH WAS AROUND $300,000. 
          >> THAT COMES BASICALLY BECAUSE WE HAD WALMART, BUT NOW WE HAVE A HOME DEPOT. 
          ADDING QSRS AND GAS STATIONS, THAT THING WILL HELP THE SALES TAX, BUT GET IN THE BIG BOX AND STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          I'M JUST POINTING OUT THE FACT THESE NUMBERS ARE BURIED IN HERE. YOU HAVE TO DEFEND IT. 
          WE ARE TRYING TO WHITTLE AWAY AT THAT PROPERTY TAX DEPENDENCY. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN, VERY WELL SAID. 
          IF I MAY ADD TO THAT, FOR US TO REALISTICALLY LOWER THE BURDEN ON RESIDENTIAL, A LOT OF THAT GROWTH IS GOING TO COME FROM COMMERCIAL. 
          AS YOU SEE, SOME OF THE CHANGES WE'VE MADE IN EDC, WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON GOING AFTER A LOT OF COMMERCIAL GROWTH. 
          IT HAS TO BE THE RIGHT COMMERCIAL PIECES. 
          WE'RE NOT JUST LOOKING FOR ANYTHING, BUT ULTIMATELY THE GOAL IS TO PROVIDE A BETTER COMMUNITY FOR YOU TO LIVE IN AND A BETTER EXPERIENCE AS WELL. 
          THANK YOU, AGAIN, ON THE FINANCE SIDE. I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS. 
          >> ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU, MRS. DOBY. 
          APPRECIATE THAT. A LOT OF WORK. 
          THAT TAKES US TO ITEM 6, CONSENT ITEMS. 
          [6. Consent Items.]
THESE ITEMS CONSIST OF NON CONTROVERSIAL OR HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS REQUIRED BY LAW. 
          ITEMS MAY BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY BY ANY COUNCIL MEMBER MAKING SUCH REQUESTS PRIOR TO A MOTION AND VOTE ON THE CONSENT ITEMS. IS THERE ANY ITEMS THAT ANY MEMBER OF THIS COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO HAVE REMOVED? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION? 
          >> I DON'T WANT TO REMOVE THIS, BUT I DO WANT TO COMMENT ON ITEM E. CHIEF, I APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH OUR SURROUNDING MUNICIPALITIES TO PROVIDE A BETTER SAFETY MEASURE FOR OUR COMMUNITY. 
          >> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS A-I. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          KELLY, DID YOU GET THOSE? DO YOU WANT ME TO CALL THEM OUT? 
          >> [INAUDIBLE]  >> THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          THAT TAKES US ONTO AGENDA ITEM 7, ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. 
          BEFORE WE GET INTO THIS PART OF THE AGENDA, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A FEW MOMENTS IN CLOSED SESSION. 
          WE HAVE SOME THINGS THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS THE SAME INFORMATION ON BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. 
          CAN I GET A MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071, 
          [8.  Closed Session (Exceptions).]
          [01:05:03]
551.072, 551.087, AND 551.074? 
          >> MAYOR, YOU HAVE YOUR MOTION. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> MOTION AND A SECOND. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          GRACE IS QUICK WITH IT. PASS. 
          >> WE ARE IN CLOSED SESSION AT 7:09 PM. 
          IT IS 8:24 PM. WE'RE OUT OF CLOSED SESSION. 
          THAT'S GOING TO TAKE US UP TO AGENDA ITEM 7, 
          [7. Items For Individual Consideration and Public Hearings. ]
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AND PUBLIC HEARINGS. 
          AT THE TIME AND PLACE OF ANY PUBLIC HEARING HELD DURING THIS MEETING, ALL PERSONS WHO DESIRE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD IN OPPOSITION OR TO IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE APPLICATION OR OTHER PROPOSED ITEM. 
          WE'LL START OF ITEM A. CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION NAMING THE DATE AND PLACE OF A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2025/'26 BUDGET. 
          BUDGET MANAGER, TERRI DOBY. 
          >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          I AM TERRI DOBY. 
          AS IT SAYS UP HERE ON THE SLIDE, SECTION 7.02 OF THE CITY CHARTER STATES THAT, ON OR BEFORE THE AUGUST 15TH OF THE FISCAL YEAR, THE CITY MANAGER MUST SUBMIT TO THE COUNCIL A BUDGET, AS WE DID TONIGHT. 
          AT THAT BUDGET SUBMISSION, WE NEED TO NAME THE DAY, TIME, AND PLACE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET. 
          THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU WILL SET THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER 2ND, 2025 AT 6:00 PM HERE IN THE CITY OF ANNA MUNICIPAL COMPLEX AT 120 WEST 7TH STREET, ANNA, TEXAS. 
          I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          >> ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'LL TAKE A MOTION. 
          >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THAT RESOLUTION. [LAUGHTER] 
          >> IT'S EASY FOR YOU TO SAY. 
          >> I KNOW. 
          >> I SECOND. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          [NOISE] HELLO. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          TAKES US TO ITEM 7B. CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION TO PROPOSE A PROPERTY TAX RATE OF 0.525073 FOR $100 PROPERTY VALUATION FOR THE CITY. 
          THE COUNCIL MAY ADOPT FOR THE 2025 TAX YEAR, AND SETTING THE DATE AND TIME FOR A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE TAX RATE. MS. DOBY. 
          >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS SUPPORTED BY A TAX RATE OF 0.525073. 
          UNDER THE TEXAS PROPERTY TAX REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2019, A CITY THAT ADOPTS A RATE EXCEEDING THE LOWER OF THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE OR THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE MUST APPROVE ONE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          I'M JUST FLIPPING THROUGH THE SLIDES THAT I SHOWED YOU EARLIER TALKING ABOUT THE PROPERTY TAX APPROVAL PROCESS. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, OUR NO NEW REVENUE RATE WAS 0.495928, OUR VOTER APPROVAL RATE WAS 0.532173, AND THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS AT A 0.525073 TO FULLY SUPPORT THE PROPOSED BUDGET. 
          TAX RATE PUBLIC HEARING WILL OCCUR THE SAME NIGHT AS THE BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING, SEPTEMBER 2ND, 2025, AT 6:00 PM, HERE IN THE CITY OF ANNA MUNICIPAL COMPLEX. 
          I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          >> COUNCIL, ANY COMMENTS, OR QUESTIONS, OR MOTIONS? 
          >> QUICK QUESTION. CAN YOU REITERATE THAT THE INCREASE IS UNDER THE INCREASE OF INFLATION OR THE COST OF INFLATION INCREASE? 
          >> I WOULD SAY YES, 
          [01:10:01]
THE INCREASE FOR AVERAGE HOMEOWNER WILL BE ABOUT $98, WHICH WOULD BE UNDER WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER NORMAL INFLATION. 
          WE ARE NOT INFLATING OR INCREASING REALLY THE OPERATION SIDE OF THE BUDGET. 
          IT IS RELATIVELY FLAT. 
          MOST OF THAT INCREASE IS GOING TOWARDS BUILDING THE NEW PULLING STATION. 
          >> PERFECT. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. 
          >> TERRI, IF YOU ROLL BACK ONE SLIDE. 
          BY HAVING THE PUBLIC HEARING, BASED ON THE INPUT THAT THIS COUNCIL RECEIVES FROM THOSE THAT SPEAK, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO OPERATE BETWEEN THE 0.53 AND THE 0.49. 
          >> IT WOULD REQUIRE CUTS TO THE OPERATIONS BUDGET. 
          TO CUT DOWN BELOW THE 525 THAT I PROPOSE, WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE CUTS TO THE OPERATIONS BUDGET. 
          >> JUST WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT'S WORTH SHOWING UP AND SPEAKING PEOPLE'S MIND AND IT'S NOT SETTING STONE. 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO BE HEARD. 
          RIGHT NOW, THE BUDGET IS BALANCED, BUT IF THE DECISION IS TO LOWER THE PROPERTY TAX RATE BEYOND THE 0.525, THEN WE WOULD GO BACK AND REBALANCE THE BUDGET TO THAT PROPERTY TAX RATE. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> WHEN'S THE LAST TIME WE'VE RAISED TAXES? 
          >> IF I WENT BACK TO THE SLIDES I SHOWED THIS MORNING, I WANT TO SAY IT'S GOING BACK TO FY '22 MAYBE. 
          >> MIGHT HAVE KEPT IT THE SAME? 
          >> I DON'T THINK WE RAISED TAXES ANYTIME IN THE LAST 10 YEARS. 
          THE ONLY THING WE DID RAISE WAS THE UTILITIES. 
          >> ON PAGE 22 OF YOUR BUDGET DOCUMENT, THERE'S A PRETTY GOOD HISTORY. 
          THE LAST TIME THAT WE WENT UP WOULD HAVE BEEN 2019. 
          I TAKE THAT BACK. WE'RE GOING BACK TO 2017. 
          THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRIOR TO SENATE BILL 2. 
          PAGE 22 OF YOUR BUDGET DOCUMENT HAS A HISTORY THERE. 
          >> WAS THIS ANTICIPATED AT ALL? HOW FAR OUT DID YOU GUYS SEE THAT WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE AN ISSUE? BECAUSE WE HAD THE LIBRARY COMING ON, WE HAD THE FIRE STATIONS IN LINE. 
          I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW FAR OUT. 
          >> I WOULD SAY, WHEN I STARTED SEEING THE ECONOMY OF THE HOUSING MARKET FLATTEN OUT AND APPRAISALS FLATTEN OUT A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO, AND I KNEW WE WERE GOING TO NEED TO ISSUE DEBT FOR THE POLICE STATION, I BECAME CONCERNED. 
          >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          THIS IS JUST LEADING TO THAT THIS IS THE IMPORTANCE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, MAKING SURE WE GET THE COMMERCIAL SALES TAX UP BECAUSE HOPEFULLY IN THE FUTURE, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THIS. 
          WE CAN CONTINUE OUR TREND OF DOWNWARD TAXES. 
          FORTUNATELY, THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE THE FIRST RAISE IN ALMOST A DECADE, GIVE OR TAKE. 
          THIS IS NOT HOW I PLANNED ON VOTING FOR ANY TYPE OF TAX RAISES, BUT IT IS UNDER WHAT INFLATION COST IS, AND MAJORITY OF IT IS GOING TO PUBLIC SERVICES. 
          IT'S A HARD BULLET TO SWALLOW, BUT I GET IT. 
          >> VERY IMPORTANT ON COMMERCIAL TAXES, BUT ALSO BRINGING IN THE RIGHT BUILDERS, LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER IN THAT NICE TOWLES NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I'VE SEEN LENNAR AND D.R. 
          HORTON BRINGING IN THE BUILDERS WE DON'T HAVE THAT BUILD THOSE MILLION DOLLAR HOMES ON THE TINY LOTS AND STUFF. 
          THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO LOOK AT AS WELL. 
          I'M RIGHT THERE WITH YOU ON THE COMMERCIAL. 
          >> I THINK WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          ANOTHER THING I WANT TO THROW OUT THERE FOR THE PUBLIC, MAYBE THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER IS, MAYBE WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT MINIMUM LOT SIZES AND RE-EVALUATE WHERE WE STAND WITH THAT. 
          BUT HOW OFTEN IS IT ENFORCED? ON TOP OF THAT, DOES THAT LEAD TO OUR ULTIMATE GOAL OF CREATING A QUALITY CITY? IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A QUARTER ACRE, HALF ACRE? JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT. OR IS SOMETHING TO CONSIDER? THANK YOU. 
          >> THESE ARE GREAT EXAMPLES OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN IN A PUBLIC HEARING. 
          I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. 
          >> I SECOND. 
          [01:15:01]
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, YOU CAN CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          MOTION PASSES 6-1. 
          TAKES US TO ITEM 7C. 
          FIRST READING OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025/2026 ANNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ANNUAL BUDGET. 
          ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NATASHA ROACH 
          >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          TONIGHT, I BRING BEFORE YOU THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR CDC'S FISCAL YEAR '25/'26. 
          THIS BUDGET WAS APPROVED BY OUR BOARD BACK IN JULY. 
          BUT BEFORE HAVING DISCUSSION AND MAKING A MOTION, WE DO NEED TO DO THE TWO READINGS. 
          DO I READ THOSE, CLARK? 
          >> NO. THE MAYOR READS THOSE ACTUALLY. 
          >> WE'LL NEED TO DO THE FIRST READING, THEN WE'LL DO THE SECOND READING, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM E AND WE'LL DO THE DISCUSSION AND ACTION. 
          >> IT'S A SUMMARY IN THE ATTACHMENT, RIGHT? NO. 
          >> CAPTION. 
          >> IT'S THE RESOLUTION. 
          >> WE JUST NEED THE CAPTION OF THOSE RESOLUTIONS. 
          THE BOLD LANGUAGE AT THE TOP. 
          >> ALL I HAVE IN HERE IS THE AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AND THE FINANCIAL IMPACT. 
          >> I HAVE COPIES OF THE RESOLUTION. IF I CAN SHARE IT. 
          >> THAT'D BE GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          [BACKGROUND] CLARK, DO I NEED TO READ ALL OF THIS? 
          >> NO. JUST THE BOLD LANGUAGE AT THE TOP. 
          FIRST PARAGRAPH IN FORM OF A CAPTION. 
          >> THIS IS THE FIRST READING. 
          A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, RATIFYING AND APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025/'26 BUDGET FOR THE ANNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 
          NOW A SECOND READING OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, RATIFYING AND APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025/'26 BUDGET FOR THE ANNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 
          THAT TAKES ME TO ITEM E. CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR '25/'26 ANNA CDC BUDGET. 
          ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATASHA ROACH. 
          >> AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY BEFORE THE READINGS, WE BRING TO YOU TONIGHT OUR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR '25/'26. 
          WE STAYED PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AS WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST WITH A FEW ADJUSTMENTS. 
          I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          >> COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. 
          >> MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM D. 
          >> I SECOND THAT MOTION. 
          >> WE'RE AT E. 
          >> E. 
          >> THANK YOU, NATASHA, FOR ALL THE WORK YOU DID ON THE BUDGET. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          THAT TAKES US TO ITEM F. CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR '25/'26 ANNA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ANNUAL BUDGET. 
          ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NATASHA ROACH. 
          >> SAME THING WITH THE EEC. 
          THIS IS OUR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR '25/'26. 
          THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGE AS FAR AS THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BUDGET FROM THIS YEAR TO LAST YEAR. 
          >> COUNCIL. 
          >> I MOVE TO APPROVE. 
          >> I SECOND. 
          >> MOTION AND A SECOND. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES ON THIS. 
          MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          THAT TAKES US TO ITEM G. CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE TRINITY CREEK PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. 
          PLANNING MANAGER, MS. LAUREN MECKE. 
          >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. THE TRINITY CREEK PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS FOR A PROPERTY THAT IS TO THE WEST OF 75 ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE OF WEST WHITE STREET. 
          A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ABOUT THIS PROJECT. 
          I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT FOR OVER TWO YEARS NOW. 
          THEY FIRST CAME TO COUNCIL IN AUGUST OF 2023. 
          [01:20:01]
EARLIER THIS YEAR, THEY WENT TO BOTH THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE CITY COUNCIL FOR WORK SESSIONS. 
          WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IN THIS DEVELOPMENT IS FIVE AREAS, AN INDUSTRIAL AREA WITH RESTRICTED USES, A COMMERCIAL AREA, A MULTI-FAMILY AGE RESTRICTED OR COMMERCIAL AREA THAT WOULD BE LIMITED TO MEDICAL RELATED USES, AND TWO SINGLE FAMILY AREAS. 
          WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THIS PADA IS A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, A SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPACT FEE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, PARKLAND DEDICATION AND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, REQUIRED DEADLINES FOR SPECIFIC ITEMS SUCH AS; THE SCREENING WALLS, LANDSCAPING, ENTRYWAYS, WHEN ANNEXATION HAS TO OCCUR, AS WELL AS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE CONCEPT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ON USE OF MASONRY. 
          THE REASON WHY THIS DID NOT GO TO THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION LAST WEEK IS BECAUSE IT WENT TO THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION IN THE APRIL. 
          THE CONCEPT PLAN CHANGED VERY SLIGHTLY. 
          THE APPLICANT TOOK COUNCIL'S FEEDBACK AND CHANGED THE MULTI-FAMILY AREA TO BE A C-1 BASE ZONING IF IT DOES NOT DEVELOP AS MULTI-FAMILY. 
          PREVIOUSLY, THEY WERE SHOWING IT AS MULTI-FAMILY ONLY. 
          [NOISE] THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO START OFF WITH THE INDUSTRIAL AREA, AND WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IT OUTLINES EVERYTHING FROM THE ANNEXATION ALL THE WAY THROUGH BUILDING THE PROPERTY. 
          THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. 
          >> THANK YOU, MS. MECKE. COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS? 
          >> YES. HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS IN THIS PADA. 
          >> WHAT'S THE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM? 
          >> HOW ARE WE GOING TO ENFORCE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THEY ABIDE BY THE AGREEMENT? 
          >> THERE ARE CERTAIN STIPULATIONS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ITSELF. 
          I THINK CLARK MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. 
          >> IF THERE'S A MATERIAL BREACH IN THE AGREEMENT, THEN THE CITY WOULD HAVE VARIOUS OPTIONS AND REMEDIES, PURSUE A LAWSUIT, TRY TO GET COMPLIANCE OR PROVE UP MONEY DAMAGES. 
          IF THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T MEET CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS AND DEADLINES, THEN THEY'RE NOT ENTITLED TO HAVE THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CREATED OR ASSESSMENTS LEVIED ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH THEY HAVE A VERY, VERY LARGE INCENTIVE TO MEET THOSE OBLIGATIONS IN ORDER TO GET THAT BID FINANCING. 
          >> DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ANY CAPTURED ESCROW, ANYTHING LIKE THAT SIMILAR? DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN ESCROW TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S SOME TYPE OF COMPLIANCE? 
          >> THEY'RE ONLY REQUIRED TO PUT SOMETHING IN ESCROW TO THE EXTENT THAT A BOND ISSUANCE FOR THE PD WOULD NOT COVER ALL OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THAT PHASE, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO GIVE A DEVELOPER'S DEPOSIT. 
          >> THEN WHAT ABOUT LET'S JUST SAY HYPOTHETICALLY, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE PEOPLE TONIGHT MENTIONED THAT IF THERE'S A RECESSION OR A DOWNTURN, WHAT LEEWAY IS THERE FOR THEM TO CHANGE THE PROJECT OR DO SOMETHING ELSE IN THAT SPECIFIC SPOT? 
          >> IF IT WERE A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO THE PROJECT, CONCEPT OF THE PROJECT, THAT WOULD VERY LIKELY HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT. 
          >> FORGIVE ME. WHAT WOULD SUBSTANTIAL BE? I'M SORRY. 
          >> IT'S WRITTEN INTO THE AGREEMENT THAT IF THEY MAKE A CHANGE TO THE CONCEPT PLAN, THAT THE ZONING WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL. 
          >> FOR SURE. I WAS JUST TRYING TO CIRCLE AROUND TO THE LIKE, HOW DO YOU DEFINE THAT SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE? 
          >> ANY AMENDMENT OR ANY CHANGE TO THE AGREEMENT THAT'S NOT COVERED IN THE AGREEMENT NOW. 
          >> THEN IS THERE ANY PROVISIONS IN THERE TO ENSURE THAT ROADS INFRASTRUCTURE GETS LAID OUT FIRST BEFORE THEY GET PERMISSION VERTICAL? 
          >> THEY WOULD HAVE TO FINISH OUT THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR EACH PHASE BEFORE THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT PHASE. 
          >> WHAT ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS DO WE HAVE? ONCE AGAIN, MAY BE ASKING A REDUNDANT QUESTION, BUT JUST SO THE PEOPLE OUT THERE UNDERSTAND WHAT ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS DO WE HAVE TO ENSURE THAT THEY BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE FIRST? WELL, THEY WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO FUNDING IF THEY INVOLVE AND THAT'S CRITICAL TO THEIR DEVELOPMENT. 
          >> LIKE I SAID, IT PROBABLY AN OBVIOUS QUESTION, 
          [01:25:02]
BUT JUST IN CASE SOMEONE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THAT, I WANTED THEM TO TO HEAR THAT. 
          ANOTHER THING IS HERE, THEY WANT TO CHANGE I KNOW THEY HAVE A MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT OF IT. 
          CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS THIS COMMERCIAL TRACK BEFORE? WAS IT MULTI-FAMILY? 
          >> THAT SAW THE PINK TRACK PREVIOUSLY WHEN IT WAS SHOWN WAS A SENIOR LIVING FACILITY INDEPENDENT LIVING. 
          COUNSEL ASKED THAT IT BE C1, THAT IT CAN BE CONVERTED BETWEEN THE TWO, IF IT'S NOT DEVELOPED AS MULTI-FAMILY OR AS AGE RESTRICTED MULTI-FAMILY, THEN IT COULD ALSO BE DEVELOPED AS COMMERCIAL. 
          >> THAT BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT. 
          REMEMBER THE ISSUE WHERE WE HAD THE STORAGE CENTER, AND THEN THERE WAS TALKS ABOUT PUTTING A MOTEL SIX THERE. 
          BECAUSE I THINK THE ISSUE WITH THAT WAS WASN'T IT C2, IT ALLOWED SOME TYPE OF VARIANCE, SOME TYPE OF FLEXIBILITY FOR THEM TO WHERE THEY WERE ABLE TO POTENTIALLY CONSIDER ADDING A MOTEL SIX RIGHT NEXT TO HOMES, IS THERE? BY RIGHT IS THERE ANY ISSUE LIKE THAT BETS? 
          >> THE ISSUE WITH THAT PROJECT WAS PLAN DEVELOPMENT SPECIFICALLY, AND AT THE TIME, C2 AND C1 ALLOWED HOTEL BY RIGHT. 
          AFTER ALL OF THAT, WE CHANGED THE ZONING ORDINANCE, WHERE HOTELS ARE REQUIRED BY SUP EVERYWHERE. 
          >> I LOVE THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR CLARIFYING BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WAS THESE ARE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT I GOT AND I THINK WE HEARD THEM TONIGHT AS WELL, SO, HOPEFULLY, APPRECIATE THE ANSWERS THAT WE GOT FOR THEM. THANK YOU. 
          >> I DO APPRECIATE IT BEING AGE RESTRICTED. 
          THAT'S ABOUT THE ONLY MULTI-FAMILY THAT I'LL BE OKAY WITH THE HFC PFC. 
          I BELIEVE I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBERS, BUT I BELIEVE PAIR OR OTHER ONE I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE A WAIT LIST, BUT THEY'RE PROBABLY MOST THEY DO HAVE A WAIT LIST. 
          IT'S A NEED IN THIS AREA. 
          DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO START WITH COMMERCIAL FIRST? 
          >> THE PROPERTY OWNER INTENDS TO DEVELOP THE INDUSTRIAL SITE FIRST. 
          >> THE NORTH SIDE OF CV? DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING FOR INDUSTRIAL? NO, SIR. 
          >> THE INDUSTRIAL AREA, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE CONCEPT PLAN IS A FLEX BASE. 
          >> IS IT OKAY. THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION. 
          I'M SORRY ABOUT YOU WALK ALL THAT WAY AD. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW ANY PARTICULAR TENANTS. 
          >> FLEX PASS, YES. 
          THANK YOU. I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE. 
          THIS ONE HAS BEEN ON OUR RADAR FOR A WHILE. 
          YES, IT IS I'M WANT TO SPEAK TO THE PUBLIC. 
          YES, IT IS MULTI-FAMILY, BUT IT'S AGE RESTRICTED MULTI-FAMILY, MEANING 55 AND OVER IS SOMETHING THAT IS NEEDED. 
          WE WENT BACK TO THE DEVELOPER ASKING, WE WANT COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL FIRST. 
          WE DON'T WANT MORE HOMES FIRST, AND THEN LIKE WE'VE SEEN IN OTHER PLACES, THE COMMERCIAL EITHER JUST DIES AWAY OR TRIES TO REZONED TO SOMETHING ELSE. 
          I CAN APPRECIATE THAT AS WELL. 
          THANK YOU TO THE DEVELOPER, WHICHEVER YOU WERE POINTING AND THEN HE GOT UP. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHO WHO I'M TALKING TO. 
          >> ANOTHER QUESTION, DOES THE CITY HAVE ANY PLANS TO ENSURE THAT WHEN THIS GROWTH HAPPENS AND THESE UNITS COME ONLINE THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING ROADS AS WELL. 
          THIS MAY NOT BE A QUESTION FOR YOU, BUT JUST IN GENERAL. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE'VE CONSIDERED? BECAUSE ROADS ARE IMPORTANT. 
          >> EVERY PROPERTY WILL PAY IMPACT? 
          >> NO, 100%. BUT IT'S JUST SPECIFICALLY WHERE THEY'RE BEING BUILT. 
          I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE UNITS THAT WE'RE PUTTING UP DOES NOT CONTINUE TO ADD ON TO THE LINEUPS ON COLLIN COUNTY OUTER LOOP ON WHITE THAT EXTEND FOR MILES AND MILES? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE BEING THOUGHTFUL AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S TOP OF MIND MOVING FORWARD. 
          THEN ALSO THE MULTI-FAMILY. 
          I THINK ONE OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT LATER ON IS CREATING A FRAMEWORK OF WHAT THE COUNCIL SEES IN MULTI-FAMILY ZONED AREAS, BUT I THINK THE AGE RESTRICTED IS A GOOD ONE. 
          JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME HIGHLIGHTS, LESS TURNAROUND, USUALLY LESS VEHICLES, USUALLY MORE MEDICAL STAFF ON BOARD, LESS WEAR AND TEAR ON THE PROPERTY. 
          ASSETS USUALLY HELD A LITTLE BIT LONGER AS WELL BY THOSE DEVELOPERS. 
          I THINK THERE'S SOME BENEFIT IN THAT. 
          I APPRECIATE THE DEVELOPER FLEXING WITH US ON THAT. THANK YOU. 
          [01:30:02]
          >> LET ME JUST SPEAK ABOUT ONE OTHER PART OF THIS. 
          IT WAS EITHER A MUD OR WE ANNEX AND WE NEGOTIATE. 
          I HEARD THAT A GOOD MEDIATION WHEN BOTH PARTIES AREN'T HAPPY, YOU'VE REACHED A GOOD DECISION. 
          THEY GAVE, WE GAVE, AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE LANDING. 
          I WOULD LOVE TO SEE LARGER LOTS. 
          AS FAR AS AS COUNSEL GOES, I'D LIKE TO CLARK AND CITY MANAGER, I'D LIKE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT OTHER TOOLS WE CAN PUT IN OUR QUIVER TO GET THE LOT SIZES THAT WE NEED. 
          WE'RE NOT ON THE DENSITY WAGON ANYMORE. WE'VE GOT PLENTY. 
          NOW WE NEED TO WORK ON SIZES AND A FLUENCIES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. 
          AS PEOPLE CAN SEE TONIGHT, THOSE PROPERTIES HELP US TO KEEP THE TAX RATE DOWN. THANK YOU. 
          COUNSEL MCOLIVER, CAN I SPEAK ON THAT? IT DOESN'T TAKE LARGER LOTS TO GET MILLION DOLLAR HOMES. 
          I INVITE YOU TO DRIVE THROUGH TUCKER HILLS OFF OF 380 AND MCKINNEY. 
          THEY'RE ALL LIKE FOUR. 
          40S AND 50S, AND THOSE HOMES OR THERE'S NO YARDS. 
          LET'S JUST SAY IT THAT WAY. 
          THOSE ARE THE TYPE OF HOMES AND DEVELOPERS AT BUILDERS THAT WE NEED TO ATTRACT. 
          LIKE LAUREN YOU CAN SPEAK ON THIS. 
          I'VE SAID I DON'T LIKE THE SMALL LOTS EITHER. 
          BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO KEEP CONTINUE TO GET THE SMALL LOTS DEVELOPMENTS, LET'S TRY TO GET THE BUILDER TO BUILD BIG NICE HOMES, AND THAT'S IF SO YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? THAT'S WHERE A DEVELOPER. 
          WE ALREADY HAVE ENOUGH $325,000 HOMES IN ANA. 
          BRING US SOMETHING THAT IS 750 OR $1,000,000 ON A 40 FOOT OR A 50 FOOT LOT BECAUSE IT CAN BE DONE. 
          IT'S DONE ALL AROUND US. 
          BRING US THAT, PLEASE. 
          >> I WOULD EVEN TO TOUCH ON THAT. 
          I DO LIKE THE POINT ON HIGHER HOMES, BUT THIS IS THE STRATEGIC CONCEPT OF PUTTING A MINIMUM LOT SIZE. 
          NUMBER 1, IT SLOWS DOWN THE TYPE OF GROWTH THAT WE DON'T WANT, WHICH IS SMALLER LOTS. 
          NUMBER 2, IT BRINGS THE DEVELOPER AND IT GIVES US SOME LEVERAGE TO NEGOTIATE WITH BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF THEY WANT TO GO DOWN FROM A MINIMUM OF HATS, HALF ACRE OR A QUARTER ACRE, WHATEVER WE AS COUNSEL DECIDE, THEY GOT TO BE WILLING TO TAKE AND GIVE JUST LIKE US, AND IT CREATES A LITTLE BIT MORE LEVERAGE FOR US. 
          THEN ALSO JUST DOING ROUGH MATH, I KNOW THE CITY'S FULL GROW IS SITTING AT ABOUT 250K, AVERAGE HOME PRICES, PROBABLY SITTING AT ABOUT 380 TO 400K. 
          IF WE ACTUALLY LOOK AT NOT GROWING WITH DENSITY AND ACTUAL QUALITY, WE CAN GROW THE CITY OUT TO A MAXIMUM ABOUT 175K POPULATION WITH OVER $500,000 MINIMUM HOME VALUES. 
          THERE'S A WAY FOR US CALCULATION WISE WHERE WE CAN BUILD HIGHER QUALITY HOMES, GATED COMMUNITIES, BIGGER LOTS, CREATE SOMETHING LIKE WEST LAKE, SOMETHING LIKE SOUTH LAKE, AND STILL HAVE SIMILAR, IF NOT MORE LEVELS OF PROPERTY TAXES BY CREATING HIGHER HOMES, HIGHER AVERAGE SALES VALUE. 
          D AND WITH THAT IS THE CORRECT COMMERCIAL. 
          THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IS GOING TO BE KEY BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO HELP GENERATE A LOT OF THAT VALUE, A LOT OF THAT AD VALOREM TAX THAT WE DON'T NEED THE DENSITY FOR. 
          I THINK ULTIMATELY, YES, I THINK AS A TRANSITIONARY POINT, WE CAN WORK WITH SOME DEVELOPERS TO BUILD THE NICER LOTS ON THE SMALLER HOMES. 
          BUT ULTIMATELY, IT NEEDS TO MOVE INTO LARGER LOTS, HIGHER QUALITY, AND IF THEY WANT TO DO ANYTHING UNDER THAT, THEN THEY GOT TO COME AND JUST TALK TO US. 
          WELL, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THERE'S A 360 WIN, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THESE SMALLER LOT HOMES, I MEAN, THEY'RE ADDING A LOT OF DENSITY WHEN WE ARE, I'M JUST WORRIED ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE HANDING A FUTURE COUNSEL, JUST LIKE TODAY'S COUNCIL, WE'RE DEALING WITH ISSUES FROM PREVIOUS COUNCILS THAT MAY HAVE NOT THOUGHT THIS FAR OUT. 
          >> BUT I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION, BUT LET'S WORK OF THE AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> SIR, DO YOU HAVE A HOME-BUILDER PICKED YET? 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> I WAS ALL HAVE WORKED WITH THIS VERY WELL, 
          [01:35:01]
YOUR GROUP TO NAVIGATE ALL THIS. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE BRINGING THE INDUSTRIAL COMPONENT FIRST. 
          I THINK IT'S GOING TO I SUSPECT IT'S GOING TO SELL OUT VERY QUICKLY. 
          WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DEMAND. 
          YOU HEAR THE CONVERSATION? I THINK YOU HAVE AN INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY BUILDING SOME VERY NICE HOUSES THAT HANDLE THE EBBS AND FLOWS OF THE ECONOMY, SO I HOPE YOU ALL WILL DO IT. 
          MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. 
          >> SECOND. I CAN SEE THAT SOUNDS LIKE A MOTION. 
          >> MOTION IN A SECOND, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          MOTION PASSES. TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM H. CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION, I'M SORRY, ON A REQUEST FOR A RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION, MISS MECKE. 
          >> FOR MY PRESENTATION, I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT BOTH H AND I BEFORE I BRING UP THE APPLICANTS. 
          A RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION IS BASICALLY A CITY STATING THAT THERE IS NO OBJECTION TO THIS APPLICANT PROPOSING THIS DEVELOPMENT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE STATE FOR TAX CREDITS. 
          THE FIRST PROPERTY THEY'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS OVER IN THE ANNA RANCH DEVELOPMENT. 
          THE PROPERTY IS ZONED MF WITH A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, WHERE IT COULD BE DEVELOPED EITHER AS MULTI-FAMILY OR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. 
          THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IDENTIFIES IT AS URBAN LIVING. 
          THE SECOND PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE ETJ. 
          FOR A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT, IT'S HARD TO SEE ON THIS IMAGE, BUT YOU HAVE THE SHIRLEY FARMS COMMERCIAL TRACK TO THE EAST AND TO THE SOUTH IS THE SHIRLEY FARMS SINGLE FAMILY ON FM 2062. 
          THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IDENTIFIES THIS AREA AS ESTATE RESIDENTIAL. 
          I'M GOING TO BRING UP ALEXA ABBOTT FROM DOMINIUM, AND I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT TO HER AS THIS IS NOT MY AREA OF EXPERTISE. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL MEMBERS. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT TO YOU GUYS TODAY. 
          MY NAME IS ALEXA ABBOTT AND I AM WITH DOMINIUM. 
          I AM GOING TO FIRST TALK ABOUT OUR FIRST DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS THE LEONARD AVENUE SITE. 
          I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION ON MULTI-FAMILY TODAY AND MANY CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS BEFORE TODAY. 
          I DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, WE'VE REALLY TRIED TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE'VE HEARD AS WE'VE WATCHED OTHER CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH A FEW OF YOU AS WELL AS WELL AS STAFF. 
          THE FIRST THINGS I WOULD SAY BEFORE I GET INTO THE PRESENTATION BECAUSE WE DO ACKNOWLEDGE IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU UNDERSTAND WHO WE ARE AS A DEVELOPER. 
          BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE CONCERNS AROUND BATON SWITCHING AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHO WE ARE, AND THEN I'LL GET INTO THE DEVELOPMENT. 
          BUT FIRST, AS LAUREN SAID, WE'RE HERE FOR RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION. 
          THIS SITE IS ALREADY ZONED FOR MULTI FAMILY, AND SO WE WOULD JUST BE ADHERING TO EVERYTHING IN THE PD. 
          EVERYTHING YOU'LL SEE TODAY ON THIS SITE DOES ADHERE TO THE PD THAT WAS APPROVED IN NOVEMBER 2023 FOR ZONING. 
          THE OTHER THING I'LL SAY IS THAT THIS IS NOT AN HFC OR PFC DEAL. 
          I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF THOSE COME THROUGH IN THE PAST. 
          THIS IS NOT THAT, AND THIS WOULD BE PAYING TAXES TO THE CITY. 
          THE THIRD THING I WOULD JUST SAY IS THAT I KNOW THERE WAS A COMMENT EARLIER IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT A CONCERN THAT WE DID NOT GO TO PLANNING AND ZONING FOR THIS RESOLUTION BEFORE. 
          THAT IS BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A ZONING RELATED ITEM. 
          IT'S STRICTLY A FINANCING RELATED ITEM, AND THIS IS ALREADY APPROVED THROUGH ON THE PD THAT WAS DONE IN NOVEMBER OF 2023. 
          NOW I WILL GET INTO SOME OF THE ACTUAL THINGS ABOUT DOMINIUM AND WHO WE ARE AS A COMPANY. 
          WE ARE A LONG TERM OWNER OF PROPERTY. 
          WE ARE NOT A DEVELOPER THAT PURCHASES THE LAND AND THEN FLIPS IT AND GOES AWAY. 
          WE'RE ALSO NOT A DEVELOPER THAT PURCHASES THE LAND, BUILDS THE PROPERTY, AND THEN FLIPS IT IMMEDIATELY AFTER CONSTRUCTION. 
          THE REASON THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE WE ARE INCENTIVIZED IN THE SAME WAY THAT YOU ARE TO HAVE A REALLY HIGH QUALITY PRODUCT BECAUSE WE OWN OUR NEW CONSTRUCTION SITES FOR 30 YEARS. 
          IT DOESN'T BENEFIT US TO BE A BAD PARTNER TO YOU GUYS. 
          WE HAVE TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS BECAUSE WE OWN PROPERTY HERE LONG TERM. 
          [01:40:01]
IT ALSO DOESN'T BENEFIT US TO BUILD A POOR QUALITY PRODUCT BECAUSE WE'RE THE ONES WHO FOOT THE BILL AT THE END OF THE DAY IF THE PROPERTY FALLS APART OR LOOKS POORLY OR DOESN'T LEASE WELL BECAUSE IT LOOKS POORLY. 
          WE HAVE BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR OVER 50 YEARS. 
          WE OWN OVER 200 SITES ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND ACROSS 20 STATES IN THE COUNTRY AS WELL. 
          WE ARE ONE OF THE LARGEST DEVELOPERS, AND SO WE HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF NOT ONLY BEING ABLE TO EXECUTE, BUT ALSO BEING ABLE TO EXECUTE WELL. 
          WE HAVE ABOUT 1,500 PEOPLE WHO ARE EMPLOYED AT DOMINIUM. 
          THE THING I'LL EMPHASIZE HERE IS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO YOU WOULD INTERACT WITH ON OUR SITE IF WE WERE APPROVED, THOSE ARE PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR DOMINIUM. 
          WE DO NOT THIRD PARTY OR OUTSOURCE THE MANAGEMENT, AND THE PEOPLE THAT WOULD INTERACT WITH ANNA'S RESIDENTS AND YOU ALL AT THE SITE ARE PEOPLE WHO REPORT TO OUR DOMINIUM'S LEADERSHIP. 
          A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT, I'LL GET MORE INTO THIS NOW. 
          YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE SITE. 
          AS I SAID, IT IS ZONED MULTI-FAMILY THROUGH THE PD THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2023. 
          THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. 
          THIS SITE PLAN ADHERES TO WHAT IS APPROVED IN THE PD. 
          THE THING I'LL ALSO EMPHASIZE IS THAT TECHNICALLY THROUGH THE PD, WE COULD BUILD ABOUT 650 UNITS OF MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE BECAUSE WE KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO YOU GUYS THAT WE'RE NOT JUST BUILDING A TON OF HOUSING AND CRAMMING IT INTO A SITE. 
          WE'VE REALLY TRIED TO THOUGHTFULLY DESIGN THIS SITE TO REALLY BE RESPONSIVE TO SOME OF THAT FEEDBACK AROUND DENSITY. 
          THIS IS ALSO NOT A THREE STORY GARDEN STYLE WALK UP BUILDING, WHICH I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS ARE ALSO EXHAUSTED OF. 
          THIS IS GOING TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL STYLE PRODUCT, AND THERE ARE NOT OTHER TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENTS IN ANNA THAT HAVE THAT SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL STYLE PRODUCT, AND SO WE BELIEVE WE'RE ABLE TO TAILOR THIS TO A DIFFERENT DEMOGRAPHIC THAN OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST. 
          THIS IS A POTENTIAL. 
          THIS IS THE RENDERING OF THE SITE THAT WE'VE PUT TOGETHER. 
          IT'S SIMILAR IN QUALITY TO OTHER NEW CONSTRUCTION, SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL STYLE PRODUCTS THAT WE HAVE UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW. 
          WE'RE VERY CONFIDENT IN OUR ABILITY TO EXECUTE ON THE DESIGN SOMETHING THAT'S HIGH QUALITY. 
          THE OTHER THING THAT WE REALLY HEARD IN TRYING TO GET FEEDBACK ON THIS WAS THAT YOU GUYS LIKE MORE OF A CRAFTSMAN STYLE PRODUCT. 
          YOU DON'T WANT SOMETHING THAT'S JUST LOOKS LIKE YOU PLOPPED IT DOWN AND REPLICATED IT A BUNCH OF TIMES. 
          WE'VE REALLY TRIED TO ADD SOME CHARACTER TO THE BUILDINGS, MAKE SURE WE'RE BRINGING IN GREEN SPACE, AND THAT WE'RE ALSO JUST THOUGHTFULLY DESIGNING THROUGHOUT THE SITE. 
          AS I SAID BEFORE, TECHNICALLY, WE COULD BUILD 655 UNITS ON THIS SITE. 
          WE ARE NOT PROPOSING THAT. 
          WE'RE PROPOSING 330 UNITS, THREE AND FOUR BEDROOMS, AND ALL OF THE UNITS WOULD BE RESTRICTED TO PEOPLE MAKING AT OR BELOW 60% OF THE AREAS MEDIAN INCOME. 
          I'VE HIT ON A NUMBER OF THESE POINTS ALREADY, BUT JUST WANT TO STRESS, AGAIN, WE ARE NOT AN HFC OR PFC DEAL. 
          THIS RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION IS REALLY FOR THE FINANCING. 
          THIS WILL ALLOW US TO APPLY FOR THE FINANCING WE NEED TO REALLY BUILD THIS HIGHER QUALITY PRODUCT THAT WE KNOW IS IMPORTANT TO THE CITY. 
          WE BELIEVE THAT THIS FITS WITHIN WHAT THE CITY'S VISION FOR THIS AREA IS BECAUSE IT IS ZONED, WE BELIEVE WE'VE TRIED TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT BY REALLY, LIKE I SAID, RESTRICTING OUR UNIT COUNT AND PROVIDING A SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL STYLE PRODUCT. 
          THEN THE OTHER THING I WOULD JUST SAY IS THAT WE DO WANT TO, LIKE I SAID, BE A LONG TERM PARTNER WITH YOU GUYS BECAUSE IF APPROVED, WE'D BE IN THE COMMUNITY FOR A LONG TIME. 
          SOMETIMES THERE'S A MISCONCEPTION WITH DEVELOPMENTS, ESPECIALLY TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENTS THAT THERE'S NOT AMENITIES ON SITE, AND WE REALLY DO PRIDE OURSELVES IN BRINGING HIGH QUALITY AMENITIES TO THE SITE. 
          I ACTUALLY USED TO WORK IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BEFORE I STARTED WORKING AS A DEVELOPER AT DOMINIUM. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE EMPHASIZED WITH ALL OF OUR CLIENTS AND ALL THE DEVELOPERS WE WORKED WITH IS THAT YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO WALK INTO A AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT AND NOT BE ABLE TO TELL THAT IT'S AFFORDABLE. 
          IT NEEDS TO BE INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM A MARKET RATE PRODUCT. 
          ONE OF THE REASONS I DID DECIDE TO START WORKING AT DOMINIUM IS BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS AND I'LL SHOW YOU SOME PHOTOS THAT EXEMPLIFY THAT. 
          BUT THIS IS THE PHOTOS YOU SEE HERE ARE EXAMPLES OF AMENITIES THAT WE'VE BUILT AT OTHER PROJECTS, SPECIFICALLY IN ARLINGTON. 
          BUT THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE AMENITIES THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO RESIDENTS. 
          [01:45:05]
THERE WOULD BE AN OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOL, THERE'D BE A FITNESS CENTER. 
          PEOPLE WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO A FULL SIZE WASHER AND DRYER IN THEIR UNITS. 
          A LOT OF THE HIGH QUALITY AMENITIES THAT ARE REALLY TYPICALLY SEEN IN MARKET RATE PROJECTS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN OURS AS WELL. 
          JUST TO SHOW YOU GUYS, YOU'VE HEARD IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT HOW DO WE KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD WHAT YOU SAY YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD? I THINK THE BEST WAY TO EXEMPLIFY THAT IS THROUGH JUST SEEING WHAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE DONE. 
          THIS IS A SITE IN MATLOCK FLATS. 
          IT'S OUT IN ARLINGTON, TEXAS, AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO TOUR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO COME LOOK. 
          THIS IS EXACTLY THE TYPE OF AMENITY PACKAGE AND QUALITY WE'D LIKE TO BUILD, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT THE EXACT PRODUCT OF BTR THAT WE'D BE DOING HERE. 
          IN TERMS OF FINISHES AND AMENITIES, IT IS ON PAR WITH WHAT WE'D BE PROPOSING AND DOING HERE AT THIS SITE. 
          THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS OF CROSS ROAD COMMONS. 
          AGAIN, JUST SOMETHING WE'VE DONE BEFORE AND ARE WELL EQUIPPED TO DO AGAIN. 
          THAT IS THE CONCLUSION OF MY PRESENTATION FOR THIS SITE, SO I WILL STOP THERE AND SEE IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          >> COUNSEL, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. 
          I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. 
          I'M GOING TO POINT THIS OVER TOWARDS CLARK, OUR ATTORNEY. 
          I'M NEW HERE, SO HOPEFULLY YOU CAN MAYBE PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT. 
          I UNDERSTAND IF YOU CAN'T. 
          MAYBE WE CAN CIRCLE BACK ON THAT. 
          BUT CAN YOU CONFIRM THE HISTORY IN THE ZONING BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS IN NOVEMBER 23 THAT THIS WAS A PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNSEL, CORRECT? 
          >> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT REMAINS SO TODAY HAS NOT CHANGED. 
          >> PERFECT. AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, THAT MEANS THERE'S ALREADY MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS BUILT INTO THE ZONING, CORRECT? 
          >> I WOULD ASSUME SO. ALMOST ALL OF OUR PDS, DO HAVE MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          >> IN THIS SITUATION, SINCE IT'S ALREADY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY A PREVIOUS COUNSEL, DO THEY NEED TO COME THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING? 
          >> NO, AND THEY CAN DEVELOP UNDER THE ORIGINAL PD AT THE HIGHER DENSITY IF THEY CHOOSE. 
          >> PERFECT. COUNCILMEMBER TOTEN, YOU WERE ON COUNSEL AT THE TIME. 
          DO YOU RECALL WHEN YOU VOTED FOR THIS THE DESIGN STANDARDS BEING A PART OF WHAT WAS APPROVED? 
          >> NO. 
          >> MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK AT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE BARE MINIMUM STANDARDS THAT WERE REQUIRED FOR THIS. 
          >> I MEAN, WERE YOU WERE HERE, COUNCILMAN BAKER, I BELIEVE YOU WERE HERE. 
          >> I DON'T MIND ANSWERING THAT. 
          WE HAVE REQUESTED OF STAFF THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGES IN THE LAWS AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS, BUT IN 2023, I THINK IT WAS STILL FAVORABLE FOR US TO BE ABLE TO REQUEST A MUCH HIGHER STANDARD THAN WHAT THE STATE HAD PUBLISHED THAT SAME YEAR. 
          >> PERFECT. NOW, BEING THE PFC, I BELIEVE SECRETARY, IS THERE ANY PFC ASSOCIATED WITH ANY OF THESE PD APPROVEMENT PFC HFC, IS THERE? 
          >> WHY ARE YOU ASKING? 
          >> I'M JUST ASKING BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE PFC SECRETARY. 
          I'M JUST UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE YOU WERE WHEN THIS WAS VOTED. 
          I'M NOT I PROMISE YOU'RE NOT ACCUSING YOU I'M JUST ASKING. 
          >> I'M NOT WHY DON'T YOU ASK THE PFC PRESIDENT OR THE VICE PRESIDENT. 
          >> I'M ASKING YOU AS A SECRETARY YOU CONTROL THE FINANCES OF IT. 
          I MEAN, I'M SORRY IF THIS IS UPSET. 
          >> I DO NOT CONTROL THE FINANCES BECAUSE I'M NOT ON THE PFC BOARD. 
          >> YOU WERE WHEN THIS WAS APART, BUT THANK YOU. MOVING FORWARD. 
          >> WELL, IF YOU KNEW HOW PFCS WORK, THE FINANCES DON'T COME IN ACTION UNTIL YEARS AFTER. 
          >> WELL, I'M GLAD THAT YOU ARE THE PFC EXPERT AND THANK YOU FOR REITERATING FOR PUBLIC BECAUSE YOU WERE THERE, YOU WERE PSC SECRETARY. 
          >> WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW. 
          >> ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE CLARIFYING. THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          >> CARING FINING WHAT? 
          >> I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO MY NEXT POINT. 
          SINCE THE BASE STANDARDS ARE ALREADY IN PLACE, IF COUNSEL WERE TO CONSIDER RONA OR RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION, IS THE DEVELOPER A QUESTION FOR YOU OPEN ARE YOU OPEN TO GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND IN YOUR FACADE DESIGN, YOUR COLORS, YOUR USE OF STONE BRICK PERCENTAGES? 
          >> WE'D BE HAPPY TO HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY ABOUT DESIGN AND FACADES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          [01:50:01]
          >> THIS MAY BE A TRICK QUESTION, WHAT IS YOUR DEVELOPMENT DENSITY THRESHOLD, MAY I MAY BE THROWING YOU A CURVE BALL THERE. 
          >> ARE YOU SAYING LIKE THE MINIMUM? 
          >> WHAT IS THE MINIMUM LEVEL OF DENSITY THAT YOU CAN WORK WITH TO MAKE SOMETHING LIKE THIS WORK WITHOUT HSC, PSC OR ANYTHING? 
          >> THIS IS ABOUT, QUITE FRANKLY, THE DENSITY. 
          WE REALLY TRIED TO DRIVE DOWN TO THE MINIMUM THAT WE NEEDED BECAUSE WE UNDERSTOOD THAT YOU GUYS DON'T WANT TO SEE 650 UNITS DEVELOPED? WE HAVE OUR COMPANY HAS DONE 650 UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, BUT LIKE I SAID, TRIED TO DRIVE DOWN TO THE MINIMUM. 
          >> I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE THAT LEADS TO ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE. 
          CLARK, CAN YOU JUST SO EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS. 
          BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A THERE MIGHT BE A BIT OF CONFUSION ON WHAT HFC, PFC PROJECT REALLY IS. 
          CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHO GETS THE TAX CREDIT OR WHO GETS THE TAXES FOR ANY HFC, PFC DEAL? IS IT THE CITY AND THE SCHOOL OR HOW DOES WHO GETS THE TAXES THERE? 
          >> THIS IS NOT AN HFC OR PFC PROJECT? 
          >> I UNDERSTAND. 
          >> IT'S A TAX CREDIT PROJECT WHERE IF THE DEVELOPER AGREES TO CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS, INCLUDING SOME PERCENTAGE OF PRICE CONTROL, SOME PERCENTAGE OF UNITS, THEN THEY GET TAX CREDITS FROM THE STATE, AND THOSE CAN BE USED ALMOST LIKE CASH TO FUND OR HELP FINANCE THEIR DEVELOPMENT OR WHATEVER IT IS, BUT THEY'RE LOCKED INTO FULFILLING THOSE OBLIGATIONS. 
          DIFFERENT THAN HFC OR PFC, WHERE THOSE ARE ACTUAL SEPARATE CORPORATIONS THAT CONTRACT WITH THE DEVELOPER. 
          I ALSO INVOLVES SOME TAX BENEFIT, BE SURE. 
          BUT IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PROGRAM. 
          >> THE CONTRAST I'M TRYING TO CREATE IS HFC, PFC, CITY GETS AD VALOREM TAXES, SCHOOLS DON'T. 
          WHEN IT'S THIS TYPE OF A DEAL IS STRUCTURED, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I LEARNED RECENTLY IS THE AD VALOREM GOES TO THE SCHOOLS AND THE CITY? THAT WAS SOMETHING I LEARNED. 
          MAYBE YOU CAN IS THAT ACCURATE? 
          >> I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS INCOME TAX CREDITS. 
          >> YES. 
          >> DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO HOW THAT PROGRAM WORKS IN TEXAS? I KNOW IT. IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN IT USED TO BE. 
          >> ARE YOU SO TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU ASKING TO SPEAK ABOUT THEM. 
          >> OBLIGATIONS DOES THE DEVELOPER HAVE IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THOSE TAX CREDITS? 
          >> YES. WE HAVE TO AGREE TO SET OUR INCOME LIMITS AT A CERTAIN LEVEL, USUALLY ANYWHERE BETWEEN 30% AMI AND ABOVE 60% AMI IS WHAT WE'VE ELECTED FOR THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE ESSENTIALLY THAT'S THE EXCHANGE IS AGREEING TO ESSENTIALLY THE SALARY. 
          >> DOES THE DEVELOPER HAVE TO OWN THE PROJECT FOR A MINIMUM LENGTH OF TIME? 
          >> FIFTEEN YEARS IS HOW LONG YOU HAVE TO KEEP THE DEVELOPMENT AT THAT LEVEL, BUT USUALLY IT ENDS UP BEING CLOSER TO 30 YEARS. 
          >> DOES THE DEVELOPER HAVE TO OWN THE DEVELOPMENT FOR ANY PERIOD OF TIME? 
          >> YES. THAT 15-30. 
          >> PERFECT. THANK YOU. THAT REALLY HELPS CLARIFY THE LONG-TERM OWNERSHIP PART. 
          HYPOTHETICALLY, IF WE WERE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO SIGNING A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT THAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CURRENT PD DESIGNATION? 
          >> YEAH. WE WERE DEFINITELY OPEN TO HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY THE FACADES WOULD LOOK LIKE AND GOING THROUGH THAT. 
          >> THAT MEANS A LOT. I APPRECIATE IT. 
          CLARK, LET ME ASK YOU, INSIDE THIS PD, IS THERE ANY UNIT RESTRICTIONS WE HAVE? COULD IT GO UP TO 600 UNITS IF ANOTHER DEVELOPER COMES IN? IS THERE ANY RESTRICTIONS WE HAVE ALREADY PUT IN? ONCE AGAIN, YOU MAY NOT KNOW OFF THE TOP / 
          >> JUST THE MAXIMUMS UNDER THE EXISTING PD. 
          THEY CAN GO UP TO THAT NUMBER OF UNITS. 
          THAT DENSITY, THE MAXIMUM THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE EXISTING PD. 
          IF THE COUNCIL WERE TO ADOPT THE NO OBJECTION RESOLUTION, THE DEVELOPER COULD JUST CONTINUE TO DEVELOP. 
          WHAT WE HEARD TONIGHT WAS A BIG DEPARTURE FROM WHAT'S IN THE PD IN TERMS OF REDUCING DENSITIES, BUT THAT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE UNLESS THE DEVELOPER GOES THROUGH THE P&Z PROCESS TO THE COUNCIL WITH THE ZONING AND ACTUALLY CHANGES THAT PD ZONING. 
          [01:55:02]
          >> ULTIMATELY, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY BE A HIGHER AMOUNT THAT'S INITIALLY APPROVED WHEN THAT PD HAPPENED, IT'S UP TO THE DEVELOPER WHETHER THEY WANT TO BRING THAT THRESHOLD DOWN. 
          SORRY, I'M NOT FULLY UNDERSTANDING. 
          >> THEY CAN REDUCE IT IN TERMS OF DENSITY AND INTENSITY OF THE USE, BUT THEY CANNOT SURPASS THE MAXIMUM. 
          THEY CAN'T MAKE IT ANY MORE OF AN INTENSIVE USE. 
          RIGHT NOW, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE PD, THEY'RE MULTIFAMILY AND THEY'RE CAPPED AT A CERTAIN DENSITY. 
          IF THEY WANT TO HAVE LESS UNITS, THEY CAN, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY COULD ENFORCE. 
          >> WAIT A MINUTE. I'M SORRY. 
          >> NO, IT'S FINE. 
          >> I DIDN'T MEANT TO INTERJECT. I NEED TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ABOUT THIS PROJECT FIRST. 
          >> FANTASTIC. BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET. THANK YOU. 
          >> ANNA RANCH IS A VERY LARGE AREA THAT GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE PARKS AT FOSTER CROSSING TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS ORIGINALLY IN 2007. 
          IT'S ALWAYS INCLUDED A COMPONENT OF MULTIFAMILY. 
          IN 2021, THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER DID AN AMENDMENT. 
          HE SOLD OFF THE PHASE 1 ANNA RANCH, AND AFTER THAT PART, HE DID NOT OWN THE PORTION TO THE EAST OF ANNA RANCH PHASE ONE. 
          HE REZONED IT AFTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOUGHT A PORTION AND REZONED IT TO INDUSTRIAL, AND HE REZONED THAT LARGE PORTION TO INDUSTRIAL AND THE TOWN HOMES AND THE MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL. 
          IN 2023, THEY CAME BACK AND MADE SOME AMENDMENTS. 
          NOW, YOU ALSO HAVE TO REMEMBER IN 2023, WE DID A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, WHERE THE SINGLE UNIT DUPLEX UNIT PARK, WHICH IS WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. 
          WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING AT THE LOWER DENSITY DOES REQUIRE GOING AND GETTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. 
          >> THIS WOULD STILL REQUIRE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT? 
          >> CORRECT. 
          >> INTERESTING. SEE, HISTORY IS GOOD. 
          >> THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT FROM MY END. 
          I JUST WANTED TO ASK SOME OF THESE CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. 
          >> COUNCIL, ANYTHING ELSE? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. 
          >> I THINK THE PRODUCT IS REALLY NICE. 
          I JUST DON'T WANT ANY MORE OF IT HERE IN ANNA. 
          WE'RE LOOKING AT OTHER HOUSING OPTIONS FOR WHAT WE HOPE WILL BE CAPITALIZING ON A LOT OF WHAT'S BEING DEVELOPED JUST NORTH OF THIS. 
          THE PROFESSIONALS WILL BE WORKING AT THE THREE SILICONE BUSINESSES UP THERE IN ALL OF THE ANCILLARY BUSINESSES. 
          IF YOU'D COME JUST TWO YEARS AGO, THREE YEARS AGO, WE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE SNATCHED THIS UP AND SAID, BRING IT, BUT RIGHT NOW, THIS IS JUST NOT WHERE WE ARE AS A CITY. 
          I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> I APOLOGIZE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DENY. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES ON ITEM H. 
          MOTION TO DENY IS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 
          THAT TAKES US TO I, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME THING. 
          ANY MORE CONVERSATION WITH THAT? 
          >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY 7I. 
          >> IT IS A DIFFERENT PROJECT. 
          >> YEAH, GO AHEAD. 
          >> THIS IS A DIFFERENT PROJECT LOCATED IN THE ETJ OF ANNA. 
          I WOULD SAY WHAT MAKES THIS ONE DIFFERENT, IT'S SIMILAR, IN THAT, WE WOULD BE DOING SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL STYLE PRODUCT. 
          THIS WOULD BE THE SITE PLAN FOR THAT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 
          TRIED TO REALLY INCORPORATE THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT AND HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH SOME OF YOU AND STAFF TO DO MORE OF A LOWER DENSITY PRODUCT. 
          THIS ONE, BECAUSE IT IS IN THE ETJ, WE RECOGNIZE THAT AT TIMES, IN THE PAST, MAYBE DEVELOPERS HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THAT BECAUSE THEY COULD BUILD WITHOUT MUCH RESTRICTION OR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY. 
          [02:00:02]
WE WOULD BE WILLING TO BRING SOME INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE ROADS, WE'VE HEARD ABOUT WASTEWATER BEING A CHALLENGE. 
          WE'D BE WILLING TO BRING INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. 
          WE ALSO WOULD BE WILLING TO DO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH YOU GUYS TO HASH OUT SOME MORE OF THE MINUTE DETAILS AROUND FACADES, BUILDING MATERIALS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT AS WELL. 
          WE REALLY THINK THAT THIS COULD HELP, ONE, GIVE YOU GUYS A GREATER LEVEL OF CONTROL WITH WHAT HAPPENS IN THE ETJ VERSUS SOME DEVELOPER JUST COMING IN AND DOING WHAT THEY WANT WITHOUT HAVING TO COME HERE AND WORK WITH YOU GUYS. 
          WE THINK THAT'S THE BENEFIT OF THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 
          SIMILAR TO THE LAST PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, WOULD BE A TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT. 
          OTHER TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENTS, THIS TYPE OF STYLE DON'T EXIST CURRENTLY IN ANNA. 
          THEY'RE THE THREE-STORY GARDEN STYLE WALK UP STYLE BUILDINGS. 
          THOSE ARE THE MAIN DIFFERENCES I WOULD SAY FOR THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 
          >> YOU AND YOUR GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT ARE REPRESENTING ALL THIS, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO DO A WORKSHOP WITH US AND BE ABLE TO HASH OUT THOSE IDEAS AND SEE IF WE COULD COME TO AN AGREEMENT, RATHER THAN DOING A DENIAL TONIGHT? IF SO, HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU NEED TO PREPARE FOR THAT? 
          >> WE'D LOVE TO DO A WORK SESSION. 
          TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU SAYING FOR THIS SITE AND THE PREVIOUS ONE, OR JUST THIS ONE? 
          >> I'M SORRY. SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME. 
          >> THE ANSWER IS YES, WE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT. 
          I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, IF YOU WANT TO DO A WORK SESSION JUST FOR THIS PROPOSED SITE OR THE PREVIOUS ONE AS WELL. 
          >> LET ME CONSULT MY LEGAL COUNSEL. 
          WOULD WE BE ABLE TO TABLE THIS, OR WOULD WE NEED TO DO A DENIAL AND THEN BRING THEM BACK? WHAT'S THE PROCEDURE? 
          >> IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING, SO WE CAN'T BE TABLING IT. 
          >> IT'S DENIED. 
          MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND VOTED ON TO DENY IT TONIGHT. 
          IT'S NOT NECESSARY FOR YOU TO TAKE ANY ADDITIONAL ACTION ON THIS. 
          YOU COULD REVERSE YOURSELF AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE AND GRANT THE NO OBJECTION RESOLUTION. 
          >> THEY HEARD IT. 
          >> THE NO OBJECTION RESOLUTION THIS EVENING BECAUSE YOU'RE ON A DEADLINE TO GET THE TAX CREDIT OF THE LOW INCOME HOUSING CREDIT, CORRECT? 
          >> THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. 
          >> YES. 
          >> THE LONGER WE DELAY THAT, THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT BECOMES MORE IN JEOPARDY. 
          >> IS THAT ALL YOUR COMPANY DEVELOPS, IS TAX CREDIT TYPE? 
          >> THAT'S OUR SPECIALTY, YES. 
          >> YOU'RE NOT GIVING ME A LOT OF OPTIONS HERE. 
          >> WE TRY TO MAKE IT LESS DENSE BUT YES, THAT'S OUR SPECIALTY. 
          >> I THINK THE PEOPLE WE REPRESENT WOULD BE UPSET WITH US IF WE APPROVED ANY MORE OF THIS. 
          THEY HAVE BEEN VERY VOCAL TO THIS COUNCIL. 
          FOR THINGS LIKE TRAFFIC, INFRASTRUCTURE OUT IN THIS PART OF THE WORLD, ROADS ARE CERTAINLY A BIG DEAL. 
          I THINK YOUR PRODUCT IS GREAT. I REALLY DO. 
          I THINK THE AMENITIES ARE REALLY GOOD, BUT WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE OF THIS RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF YOUR COMPANY OR ANYTHING ABOUT YOUR PRESENTATIONS. 
          IT'S WHERE WE ARE TODAY. 
          I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DO A DENIAL. THAT'S MY MOTION. 
          >> THERE'S ALREADY A MOTION. IS THAT A SECOND? 
          >> THAT'S MY SECOND. 
          >> BEFORE WE DO THAT, CAN WE TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY AS A COUNCIL TO HAVE AN OPEN CONVERSATION OF WHAT WE DO WANT TO SEE IN THESE MULTIFAMILY PLACES? 
          >> NOT ON THIS AGENDA ITEM, NO. 
          >> THAT WAS THE CONVERSATION AND UNDERSTANDING WE HAD IN THE BACK THAT THIS WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO PROVIDE CLARITY TO OUR DEVELOPERS AND ANYONE ELSE. 
          >> NO WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT, BUT WE NEED TO PUT IT ON AGENDA SO IT'S PART OF THE AGENDA, WE'RE DOING OUR DISCUSSION. 
          I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT. WE CAN DO IT ON THE NEXT MEETING. THAT'S FINE. 
          >> JUST LIKE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT? 
          >> SURE. 
          >> PERFECT. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? DID YOU SECOND THAT? I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          MOTION PASSES. 
          THAT TAKES US ON TO AGENDA ITEM J. 
          [02:05:01]
          >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. 
          >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 
          >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR PROFESSIONALISM. 
          >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          ITEM J, CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON APPROVING A RESOLUTION TO UPDATE THE STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK WITH VISION STATEMENT. 
          ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER TAYLOR LAW. 
          >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          THIS ITEM IS BRINGING BACK FOR YOUR ACTION FROM YOUR RETREAT THAT YOU HELD ON JULY 25TH. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER CARVER MENTIONED THAT EARLIER TONIGHT IN REPORTS. 
          IF YOU'LL RECALL, IN 2023, YOU CREATED A STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK, LOOKS A LITTLE BIT LIKE THIS, IT'S ALSO IN YOUR PACKET, THAT INCLUDED STRATEGIC OUTCOME AREAS LIKE NEIGHBORLY, UNIQUE, VIBRANT, SAFE, RESILIENT, ACTIVE, AND EXCELLENT. 
          WE'VE COME BACK SINCE 2023 WITH THE INTERNAL WORK PLAN THAT STAFF'S DEVELOPED. 
          YOU'VE SET A VISION FOR THE COMMUNITY. 
          LAST YEAR, IN 2024, THIS BODY ADDED A VISION STATEMENT TO THAT STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK, JUST FURTHER OUTLINING OPERATIONAL BUDGETARY GUIDELINES FOR STAFF. 
          ESSENTIALLY, YOU PROVIDE THE WHAT THROUGH THIS DOCUMENT., THIS IS WHERE WE WANT TO GO AND STAFF COMES BACK WITH A WORK PLAN THAT PROVIDES THE HOW WE WILL GET THERE. 
          THIS ITEM TONIGHT IS TO UPDATE THE RESOLUTION FROM 2023 TO ADD THAT VISION STATEMENT WITH THE UPDATE THAT YOU CREATED ON JULY 25TH SO THAT ANNA IS A PREMIER COMMUNITY ROOTED IN SMALL TOWN VALUES, DRIVEN BY STRATEGIC GROWTH, AND COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE. 
          THROUGH THOUGHTFUL PLANNING, EXCELLENT INFRASTRUCTURE, AND VIBRANT LOCAL ECONOMY, ANNA OFFERS FAMILIES AND BUSINESSES AN EXCEPTIONAL PLACE TO THRIVE. 
          THAT'S TO SAY, I WILL ADD TO, ALSO, ON YOUR RETREAT, CREATED SOME PRIORITIES. 
          THAT WAS ONE OF THE LAST THINGS THAT YOU DID. 
          THIS VISION, WHAT THE FRAMEWORK SETS OUT, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH. 
          THIS IS WHERE WE SEE ANNA GOING IN THE FUTURE. 
          STAFF WILL THEN TAKE YOUR FIVE PRIORITIES TO DIVERSIFY THE TAX BASE, INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO SUPPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, DESTINATION, ATTRACTION, FACILITIES, BOARD SENIORS, WATER PARKS, ETC, HISTORIC DISTRICT AND DOWNTOWN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN WE BRING BACK A WORK PLAN IN THE FUTURE. 
          >> THANK YOU. COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK AND VISION STATEMENT. 
          >> I MOVE TO APPROVE. 
          >> I'LL SECOND. 
          >> I'M SORRY, WHO SECONDED? 
          >> MANNY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          WAITING ON YOU. 
          >> IT DIDN'T SHOW UP. 
          CAN I JUST GIVE IT TO YOU? 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] . 
          >> APPROVE. 
          >> THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          EVENTUALLY, THAT'LL TAKE US TO ITEM K. CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON APPROVING A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE GOVERNANCE GUIDE. MS. LAW. 
          >> SIMILARLY, IN 2021, THE COUNCIL CREATED A GOVERNANCE GUIDE THAT PROVIDES A MEANS FOR COUNCIL TO SET PROTOCOL AND GUIDELINES FOR WORKING TOGETHER. 
          THIS WILL AMEND THAT 2021 RESOLUTION. 
          FOR THE FIRST PAGE, THE CODE OF CONDUCT THAT THE COUNCIL HAS SET FOR THEMSELVES. 
          YOU CAN SEE THOSE FIVE ITEMS LISTED HERE, RESPECT AND HONOR THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, BE PREPARED AND INFORMED, COMMUNICATE IN AN OPEN, TRUTHFUL, HONEST, AND DIRECT MANNER, WORK AS A TEAM, ALWAYS SERVE AS GOOD AMBASSADORS OF THE CITY. 
          THIS ITEM ALSO CREATES A ROLE OF COUNCIL THAT YOU HAVE CREATED. 
          YOUR ROLE OF THE ANNA CITY COUNCIL IS TO CREATE A STRATEGIC LONG-TERM SHARED VISION FOR THE CITY OF ANNA, PROVIDE GUIDANCE AND RESOURCES NEEDED TO EXECUTE OUR VISION, AGAIN, GETTING BACK TO THE STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK. 
          ENSURE EXCELLENCE THROUGH CITY MANAGEMENT BY PROVIDING CLEAR EXPECTATIONS AND CONSISTENT FEEDBACK. 
          REPRESENT OUR NEIGHBORS BY CREATING STRATEGIES AND ESTABLISHING POLICIES THAT WILL MAKE ANNA A VIBRANT AND THRIVING COMMUNITY. 
          WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          >> COUNCIL? 
          >> I HAVE A REQUEST. IF THIS GETS APPROVED, COULD WE FRAME THIS IN OR MAKE A POSTER OR SOMETHING AND KEEP IT IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS THE FIRST TWO PAGES AND THE STRATEGIC VISION? 
          [02:10:04]
THAT'S ALWAYS BEFORE US EVERY TIME WE'RE BACK THERE DELIBERATING. YOU GO FOR IT. 
          >> YOU HAVE TO PROOF. 
          >> [LAUGHTER] THE FIRST AND SECOND, TAKE THE PICK. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION FROM BAKER, SECONDED BY ANNA. 
          I HOPE THAT'S RIGHT. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          THAT TAKES US TO ITEM L. CONSIDER DISCUSS AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION FOR THE BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS APPOINTMENT PROCESS, CITY SECRETARY CARRIE LAND. 
          >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS HOW THE INTERVIEW COMMITTEE IS APPOINTED OR IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN INTERVIEW COMMITTEE. 
          I HAVE PREPARED A DRAFT OF HOW WE DO THE BOARD APPOINTMENTS NOW, AND THAT'S JUST DRAFT AND WE'RE READY TO TAKE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS OR CHANGES FROM THE COUNCIL. 
          >> YOU'RE SAYING THIS DRAFT THAT YOU INCLUDED IN THE PACKET IS HOW WE DO IT NOW? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. 
          >> I DON'T THINK SO. 
          >> NO. 
          >> NO. NOW, ALL SEVEN OF US DECIDE WHO'S ON THAT COMMITTEE. 
          WE TAKE A VOTE FOR THE THREE PEOPLE ON IT, AND THOSE THREE PEOPLE INTERVIEW THE CANDIDATES FOR THE BOARDS. 
          >> I MAY HAVE THE WRONG POLICY. 
          IF WE NEED TO BRING THIS BACK TO A FUTURE MEETING, WE CAN DO THAT. 
          MAKE SURE YOU'VE GOT THE RIGHT DOCUMENT. 
          >> I THINK WE. 
          >> DO YOU WANT TO DISCUSS IT? 
          >> THE COUNCIL INTERVIEW COMMITTEE IS IN HERE. 
          THE COMMITTEE CAN CONSIST OF THE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS SHALL BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPOINTMENT BY THE MAYOR WITH CONCURRENCE THROUGH MOTION OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL. 
          APPOINTMENT AT THIS TIME WILL ALLOW THE COMMITTEE TO ADEQUATE TIME TO CONSIDER CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS REQUESTING ANOTHER TERM PRIOR TO THE ANNUAL RECRUITMENT. 
          THE COMMITTEE IS CHARGED WITH SCREENING APPLICATIONS, CONDUCTING INTERVIEWS, AND MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPOINTMENT FOR ADVISORY BOARDS, AND QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARDS WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE APPLICANT. 
          THE COMMITTEE MAY CONSIDER THE APPLICANT FOR SERVICE ON ANOTHER BOARD IF THE COMMITTEE DETERMINES THAT THE SKILLS AND COMPETENCIES OF THE APPLICANT ARE MORE SUITED FOR SERVICE ON THAT BOARD. 
          >> BUT WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDED BY THE MAYOR. 
          THE SEVEN OF US MAKE THAT CHOICE. 
          >> YES. I'M JUST TELLING YOU WHAT'S WRITTEN DOWN HERE. 
          >> I KNOW, BUT THAT'S HOW WE HAVE TO DO IT. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING? 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] CORRECT LANGUAGE. 
          >> WOULD YOU GUYS LIKE TO HASH THAT OUT BETTER? I REALLY LOUD WHEN I TURNED MY HEAD. 
          >> [LAUGHTER] JUST LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS. 
          >> BUT I DON'T WANT TO HAVE JUST THREE PEOPLE PICKING THE BOARD AND COMMISSION. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ENTIRE COUNCIL INVOLVED. 
          THESE ARE ALL OF OUR RESPONSIBILITIES, THAT EITHER GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO SAY, WELL, I DIDN'T PICK THAT BOARD MEMBER OR COMMISSIONER, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? OR I DID PICK THEM AND SO I SUPPORT THEM 100%. 
          THEN IF WE'RE GOING TO ALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE PEOPLE, MAYBE WE SHOULD ALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SELECTING THEM. 
          >> I WANT TO ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, AND I'M GLAD YOU TOUCHED ON THAT. 
          A COUPLE OF YES OR NO QUESTIONS, SIR. 
          UNDER THE CURRENT PROCESS, ALL SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS DECIDE WHO SERVES ON THE THREE MEMBER INTERVIEW COMMITTEE, CORRECT? THOSE THREE CAN BE ANY OF US, NOT AUTOMATICALLY YOU, CORRECT? 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. 
          >> YOU SERVED ON THAT COMMITTEE BEFORE, CORRECT? 
          >> YES. 
          >> KEVIN HAS SERVED ON THE TWO, CORRECT? 
          >> YES. 
          >> YOU VOTED FOR THE CURRENT THREE MEMBERS, CORRECT? 
          >> CORRECT. 
          >> CORRECT. 
          >> OH, THROUGH THE INTERVIEW. YES. I'M SORRY. 
          >> YES. FOR THE CURRENT THREE MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR THAT, SIR. 
          FORGIVE ME, SOME OF THESE ARE MORE JUST QUESTIONS FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND BETTER. 
          FOR RIGHT NOW, YOU CAN ATTEND ANY BOARD MEETING RIGHT NOW AT YOUR VOLITION IN WILL, CORRECT? 
          >> SURE. 
          >> UNDER YOUR PROPOSAL, YOU YOURSELF WOULD SELECT THE NOMINEES MOVING FORWARD, CORRECT? 
          >> NO. 
          >> CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT? 
          >>COUNCIL WOULD. THE COUNCIL. 
          >> BUT YOU'RE STILL SELECTING THE NOMINEES, CORRECT? 
          >> I'VE DONE IT BEFORE. 
          >> I THINK WHAT HE'S SAYING IS, INSTEAD OF US APPOINTING THREE OF COUNCIL, INCLUDING OR THE MAYOR, SEVEN OF US FOR AN INTERVIEW COMMITTEE. 
          HE'S WANTING ALL SEVEN OF US TO INTERVIEW EACH PERSON THAT IS APPLYING FOR A BOARD. 
          >> WHAT I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING IS THE THREE PEOPLE THAT YOU ALREADY ALLOWED AND APPROVED YOU HAD NO ISSUE WITH, BUT NOW THERE'S AN ISSUE. 
          ULTIMATELY, WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WHAT IS THE ISSUE? 
          [02:15:03]
BECAUSE THAT'S A CHANGE FROM TODAY WHERE ALL SEVEN PEOPLE DECIDE TOGETHER ALREADY ON WHO THE FINAL PEOPLE ARE. 
          ALL SEVEN DECIDE WHO THE THREE PEOPLE ARE. 
          A SEVEN ULTIMATELY DECIDE WHO THE THREE PEOPLE PROPOSE. THAT'S A DIFFERENCE? 
          >> NOT REALLY, BECAUSE THEY ONLY BRING US ONE PERSON PER SEAT. 
          >> HOLD ON. THAT IS INCORRECT BECAUSE THERE'S MULTIPLE SEATS RIGHT NOW THAT HAVE MULTIPLE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE PROCESS. 
          WE'VE ALSO USED THIS PROCESS FOR YEARS WITHOUT ISSUE, CORRECT? 
          >> NOT VERY MANY. 
          >> WELL, NO. ACTUALLY, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME MAYOR PETE SIGNED THIS? KELLY, DO YOU HAVE THAT YEAR? 
          >> THEY CHANGED IT FROM A PUBLIC INTERVIEW WITH ALL SEVEN PEOPLE IN 2019. 
          >> THANK YOU. IT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE. 
          EARLIER QUESTIONS HAVE CONFIRMED THAT COUNCILMAN KEVIN AND MAYOR PETE HAVE BENEFITED FROM BOTH OF THESE. 
          NOW, LET ME ASK YOU THE FINAL MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION. 
          >> WAIT. HOW HAVE I BENEFITED? 
          >> I ASKED YOU BEFORE, SPECIFICALLY, WHERE WAS THAT? YOU SERVED ON THAT COMMITTEE BEFORE, KEVIN HAS SERVED ON THAT COMMITTEE TOO. 
          BOTH OF YOU HAVE UNDER THE CURRENT RULES THAT WE HAVE SERVED ON THE COMMITTEES ACTIVELY. 
          THAT'S WHY I ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS FIRST TO CLARIFY THOSE. 
          ULTIMATELY, THE FINAL REAL BIG DILEMMA THAT I HAVE ON ANY OF THESE CHANGES IS, I WENT AND WATCHED THOSE VIDEOS BACK WHEN THIS ORIGINAL CHANGE WAS MADE UNDER THE PREVIOUS MAYOR, AND THE REASON WAS, YOU ARE IN A SMALL TOWN. 
          YOU'RE PUBLICLY GOING TO EXCRUCIATE PEOPLE ON A YES OR NO. 
          HOW DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE? OVERLAPPING] THE WORLD. 
          >> I DON'T THINK HE'S TRYING TO GO BACK TO THE OLD WAYS WHERE WE DID IT IN FRONT OF COUNCIL MEETINGS. 
          WE HOLD INTERVIEWS LIKE THE THREE PEOPLE HAVE IN THE PAST SIX YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN A PART OF, THAT EVEN NATHAN I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE DID IT ONCE. 
          WE'VE ALL DONE IT, BUT YOU BECAUSE YOU NOW GOT APPOINTED COUNCIL. 
          WE'RE ALL SEVEN GOING TO BE UP HERE ON A SATURDAY, INTERVIEWING 30 PEOPLE, NOT IN FRONT OF COUNCIL OR NOT IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC, IT'S AN INTERVIEW COMMITTEE INTERVIEWING THEIR STATEMENT. 
          >> WHAT'S CHANGED? YOU'RE NOT ANSWERING THAT QUESTION. 
          >> I THINK YOU'RE ASKING ME THE QUESTION. 
          NOTHING'S CHANGED. 
          I JUST WANT TO US ALL TO BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WE PUT ON THE BOARDS AND COMMISSION. 
          >> BUT IS THERE A SPECIFIC PROBLEM OR AN INSTANCE YOU CAN POINT TO WHERE SUDDENLY FROM 2019 TO NOW THAT IT BECOMES AN IMMEDIATE CONCERN? THAT'S JUST MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          >> NO. IT CAME UP THIS YEAR. 
          >> THEN I WOULD RECOMMEND A MOTION THAT WE RETAIN THE SAME, AND WE DON'T CHANGE THIS IF I HAVE A SECOND. 
          >> ARE YOU MOTIONING TO DENY WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA? 
          >> YES. JUST KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS. 
          >> I'LL SECOND. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DENY. 
          ANY CONVERSATION ON THIS OTHER THAN THAT? NOT, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          >> I HAD A LITTLE BIT OF CONVERSATION. 
          FOR THOSE THAT WERE PRESENT, WE WENT TO A THREE MEMBER INTERVIEW COMMITTEE BECAUSE IT TAKES ONE OR TWO DAYS, SOMETIMES THREE DAYS TO GO THROUGH ALL THE INTERVIEWS. 
          WE WERE ABLE TO DO THREE MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL AND BE ABLE TO APPEASE THE STATE OF TEXAS BY NOT HAVING A QUORUM. 
          BY DOING IT THIS WAY, THIS ENTIRE COUNCIL WILL BE CONVENED FOR POSSIBLY THREE DAYS. 
          >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          >> WHY ARE WE ADDING ANOTHER LAYER OF COMPLEXITY WHEN WE'VE GOT OTHER THINGS TO DO? THAT'S JUST MY UNDERSTANDING, RESPECTFULLY, SIR. 
          >> IT'S VERY SIMPLE. I WANT US ALL TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE PUT ON THERE. 
          WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS NOT ACCURATE. 
          >> HOW ARE WE NOT ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR WHO IS ON THE BOARD'S OVERLAPPING]? 
          >> IF I DON'T GET TO INTERVIEW THAT PERSON, HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO MAKE A REALLY LOGICAL CHOICE ON WHETHER OR NOT TO VOTE FOR THEM? 
          >> ARE YOU SAYING MOVING FORWARD YOU OR ANY MAYOR WILL SEE WHO IS ALLOWED AND THAT WE WILL ONLY SEE WHO YOU PRESENT FORWARD? 
          >> NO. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO, THIS IS A COUNCIL DEAL, NOT A MEDAL. 
          NO WANT US ALL RESPONSIBLE. 
          >> I THINK THE WAY THAT YOU GUYS HAD IT INITIALLY IS CORRECT. 
          THERE HAS BEEN NO ISSUES. 
          THERE'S BEEN NO PROBLEMS. THERE'S BEEN NO SPECIFIC COMPLAINT THAT YOU CAN POINT TO. 
          ONCE AGAIN, I WILL MAKE THE MOTION. 
          >> THE MOTION IS ALREADY MADE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN. 
          >> OH, SORRY. THANK YOU. 
          >> COULD I SUGGEST A VARIATION ON THIS. 
          I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT. 
          IT'S A VERY LONG PROCESS. 
          >> WELL, I'VE DONE IT. I KNOW. 
          >> I THINK LOOKING AT IT FROM BOTH SIDES. 
          [02:20:03]
I'M PLACE OF DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE OR WHATEVER. 
          NO ONE'S THE DEVIL, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING. 
          WHAT I DON'T LIKE WHAT KEVIN REFERENCES WHERE, HERE'S OUR PICKS, AND IN SOME CASES, WITH THE ADVISORY BOARDS, YOU CAN'T EVEN ASK QUESTIONS AMONGST THE COUNCIL, WHY THIS PERSON. 
          THAT'S HOW IT WORKS FOR THE ADVISORY BOARDS. 
          THE ENTIRE COUNCIL IS HAVING TO TRUST THREE PEOPLE'S MOTIVES AND DECISION MAKING FOR SOMETHING WE'RE ALL ACCOUNTABLE FOR. 
          ON THE FLIP SIDE, I DON'T WANT TO INCREASE OUR DAYS. 
          IF WHOEVER WE'VE POINTED, AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE OFTEN TO DO THE INTERVIEWS, I'D LIKE TO SEE IT THAT THEY BRING BACK ALL OF THE INTERVIEWS BASED ON THE QUESTIONS AND ALL THAT AND LET THE COUNCIL BE ABLE TO VET THAT INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> THAT ATTAINS THE SAME EXACT GOAL THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. 
          JUST THAT WE ALL GET TO SEE THE APPLICANTS AND HAVE A KNOWLEDGEABLE VOTE ON THAT PERSON. THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT. 
          >> BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PARADING IN FRONT OF THE FULL OVERLAPPING] 
          >> NO. BIG GRIEF, NO. 
          I DO NOT WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT. NO. 
          >> I'M GOING TO CHIME IN HERE. 
          TO CLARIFY IN THE PAST, AND YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS, WE WOULD HAUL EVERYBODY UP IN FRONT OF EVERYONE IN TOWN AND HAVE A VOTE EACH INDIVIDUAL PERSON. 
          THAT'S NOT FAIR. NOT FAIR TO THEM OR THEIR FAMILY TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          HOWEVER, TO HIS POINT, HOW DO WE ALL HAVE A SAY SPECIFICALLY IN WHICH PERSON? THERE MAY BE FOUR OF US THAT SAY, THERE'S SOMETHING NOT RIGHT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT. 
          MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE SAW AND WHAT THEY PUT DOWN. 
          MAYBE THERE'S THREE OF US THAT DON'T. 
          MAYBE THAT JUST HAPPENS AS THOSE THREE THAT WE HAD APPOINTED IN THE PAST TO PICK THAT PERSON. 
          GIVE EVERYBODY THE OPPORTUNITY. 
          I LIKE WHAT WE DID IN THE PAST, EXCEPT FOR HAVING IT DONE IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY. 
          I WOULD RATHER HAVE IT BE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD HAVE INTERVIEW EVERYBODY AND THEN VOTE ON IT AS A WHOLE COUNCIL. 
          THAT'S JUST ME, MY OPINION. 
          BUT THAT'S SOMETHING I MISSED ABOUT WHAT WE CHANGED BEFORE I LEFT COUNCIL. 
          WE STARTED HAVING TWO OR THREE PEOPLE GO OUT AND INTERVIEW EVERYBODY. 
          >> DOES COUNCIL RIGHT NOW NOT VOTE ON THOSE PEOPLE ARE ON THE BOARDS? 
          >> BUT YOU GET ONE PERSON. THIS IS YOUR OPTION. 
          >> BUT JUST TOUCHING ON YOUR POINT, EVERYBODY DOES GET A SAY ON WHO GOES. 
          THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. 
          >> IF THREE OF YOU ALL BRING BACK ONE OPTION FOR US, FOR A PARTICULAR BOARD. 
          >> HOW MANY HAVE YOU GUYS BROUGHT BACK THIS YEAR? I THINK, TWO FOR EACH SPOT. 
          >> NO. 
          >> HOW MANY WAS THAT? 
          >> THAT'S HOW WE DID IT THIS LAST TIME, BUT BEFORE THAT BECAUSE THAT'S ALWAYS JUST BEEN ONE CHOICE PER SEE. 
          >> US GOING TO TWO, DOES THAT HELP SOLVE THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE INITIALLY ADDRESSING THAT WE'RE SEEING WHO'S APPLYING, WHO WE'VE AT LEAST A COUPLE OF BACKUPS IN EACH POSITION THAT WE CAN CHOOSE FROM? 
          >> I THINK WHAT I THINK WHAT MAYOR IS SAYING IS ALL SEVEN OF US IN THAT ROOM AND WE ALL INTERVIEW AND WE ALL ASK THE QUESTIONS. 
          THAT WAY WE CAN SEE THE PERSON THAT'S BEING INTERVIEWED? WE ALL GET TO SEE THE BODY LANGUAGE AND THE WAY THEY ANSWER THE QUESTIONS AND THE KNOWLEDGE AND ALL OF THAT. 
          WHAT I DON'T LIKE IS THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN. 
          >> BECAUSE THAT'S MY ISSUE. 
          IT'S NOT SO MUCH WHAT WE'RE BEING TALKED ABOUT. 
          I'M TRYING TO DRILL DOWN INTO WHAT'S WRITTEN BECAUSE WHAT'S WRITTEN DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. 
          I THINK WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS MORE APPLICABLE AND MORE PALATABLE AS TO I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. 
          BUT WITH THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE DISCONNECTION IS RIGHT NOW. 
          >> HOW ABOUT HOW WE DID IT MAYOR? HOW ABOUT YOU RETRACT YOUR MOTION? WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN, CONVERSATION THAT COUNCILMAN HERNDON SUGGESTED. 
          WE TAKE NO ACTION AND THEY BRING IT BACK TO US NEXT MEETING. 
          >> WITH OUR INPUT OF HOW DO YOU WANT TO DO IT TO MAKE IT WHAT IT REALLY WANT? 
          >> COUNCILWOMAN? 
          >> [LAUGHTER] I'M COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE]. 
          >> I APOLOGIZE. 
          >> WHAT IS WRONG? 
          >> I THOUGHT [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> I WAS EXPLAINING FOR LADY. 
          >> [LAUGHTER] SORRY. BUT YOU HAVE TO RETRACT YOUR MOTION. 
          THAT CAN BE DONE, CLARK? 
          >> CLARK, IF THE PERSON WHO SECONDS THE MOTION AGREES. 
          >> WE HAD TO GO BACK TWICE, AND THEN WE TAKE NO ACTION, AND THEN NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, IT'S WORDED DIFFERENTLY. 
          >> WHY NOT JUST CONTINUE WITH THE DENIAL AND BRING IT BACK NEXT. 
          [02:25:01]
          >> JUST DENY IT. THEN WE CAN START IT OVER AGAIN IF WE NEED TO. 
          BUT AT LEAST THE WAY IT STANDS ON PAPER, IT'S NO. 
          I THINK THE COMMITMENT I CAN GIVE TO EVERYBODY IS THE WAY IT'S ON PAPER, NO, BUT IF WE WANT TO REWRITE IT, I'M TOTALLY OPEN TO IT. 
          I THINK THE CONVERSATION AS LONG AS IT STAYS ALONG THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD OPENLY, I THINK THAT'S FAIR. 
          >> WHY CAN'T WE JUST VOTE ON IT AS IT IS. 
          >> IT'S STILL DENIAL WITH THE FIRST AND THE SECOND. 
          >> IT'S JUST THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN. 
          I THINK THE ULTIMATE GOAL, I THINK NOW THAT WE'VE HAD A DISCUSSION OPENLY. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT. 
          I THINK THAT'S FAIR, BUT I THINK THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN IS WRONG, AND WE HAVE TO DENY IT BASED ON THAT. 
          NOW IF WE WANT TO BRING IT BACK UP TO THE NEXT COUNCIL, TOTALLY ON BOARD. 
          I THINK THAT'S A FAIR ASSESSMENT IN A CONVERSATION TO HAVE. 
          IS EVERYONE'S OKAY WITH THAT? 
          >> I'M FINE, CLARK. 
          >> I APPRECIATE THIS COUNCIL TALKING IT OUT. 
          >> I THINK THAT THE CLEAREST WAY TO DO IT WOULD BE TO PULL BACK TWO OF YOU PULL BACK THE MOTION AND JUST TABLE IT. 
          >> CAN'T TABLE IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT WE CAN PUT IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> WHICH I'M WILLING TO DO, OF COURSE [BACKGROUND]. 
          >> YOU BRING IT BACK. 
          >> I'D RATHER YOU DO THAT. 
          >> I'M OKAY WITH IT. 
          >> LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOTION. 
          LET'S JUST DENY AND THEN HOPEFULLY WE CAN COME BACK WITH ANOTHER WRITTEN DOCUMENT THAT I THINK EVERYBODY ON COUNCIL HERE WOULD BE OPEN TO CONSIDERING. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          MOTION PASSES, TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM M, CONSIDER TO DISCUSS AND ACT ON THE OFFICIAL CITY COLOR, AND THAT IS PUT ON HERE BY ME. 
          WHEN I FIRST GOT ON COUNCIL, THE CONSENSUS WAS THAT THE SCHOOL WAS PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE THREE OR FOUR HIGH SCHOOLS, SO NOBODY WANTED TO WORRY ABOUT THE CITY COLOR BEING BLUE AT THAT TIME. 
          THAT'S NOT THE CASE ANYMORE. 
          THERE WAS GOING TO BE ONE HIGH SCHOOL AND IT'LL BE THAT WAY FOR A COUPLE OF DECADES, SO I WOULD LIKE TO GET US ON THE SAME PAGE AS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND HAVE THE OFFICIAL CITY COLOR BE PURPLE. 
          I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO GO OUT AND REPAINT ANYTHING, I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO REBRAND ANYTHING. 
          GOING FORWARD, I WOULD LIKE TO IMPLEMENT THAT COLOR INTO WHAT WE DO. 
          THAT'S ALL I HAD TO SAY ON THAT MOTION. 
          >> JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS IS THE REASON THAT I WORE MY PURPLE SHIRT. 
          I'VE BEEN WANTING THIS FOR A WHILE. 
          EVEN BEFORE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DECIDED JUST TO STAY OR GO TO ONE SCHOOL, BECAUSE WHENEVER WE LIGHT UP THE TOWER BLUE, THE BIGGEST ONE WAS A POND AT NATURAL SPRINGS PARK, IT GOT A BLUE LIGHT. 
          I GOT SO MANY PHONE CALLS ABOUT, WHY ARE WE LIGHTING OUR WATER POND BLUE LIKE VAN ALSTYNE? BUT I THINK US BEING PURPLE ALONG WITH THE SCHOOL, IT SHOWS UNITY THAT OUR SCHOOL AND OUR COUNCIL IS WORKING TOGETHER AND WE HAVE THE SAME GOAL. DID YOU MAKE A MOTION? 
          >> YEAH. 
          >> HOLD ON. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. 
          WE LOVE OUR ANNA ISD. 
          I THINK THERE'S A DEFINITE OPPORTUNITY HERE. 
          I LOVE THE COLOR IDEA. 
          HOWEVER, I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT IF WE DO ANYTHING LIKE THIS, WE NEED TO FIRST SIT WITH ISD. 
          WE NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM, AND THEN I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE FORMALLY ROLLED OUT. 
          ALTHOUGH IN THE SPIRIT OF IT, I THINK I'M THERE WITH YOU GUYS. 
          I THINK THE WAY WE NEED TO DO IT IS CRITICAL BECAUSE NUMBER 1, WHAT MESSAGE ARE WE SENDING TO OUR RESIDENTS? WHAT'S OUR PRIORITIES? IF WE JUST RAISE TAXES TODAY, REGARDLESS OF IF IT'S JUST UNDER INFLATION, IF WE JUST RAISE TAXES, WHERE DOES THIS FALL ON THE PRIORITY LIST? BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND TODAY, WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE COLORS, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE DONE AT SOME POINT. 
          WATER TOWERS, WHAT, 50-75,000 TO GET THOSE PAINTED? AT SOME POINT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THOSE. 
          ALL I ASK IS JUST WE RAISE TAXES TODAY, WE'VE DONE A LOT TODAY. 
          I THINK THE BEST WAY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS IS TO HAVE A JOINT SESSION OR SOMETHING WITH ANNA ISD, HAVE AN AGREEMENT AND THEN FORMALLY ROLL IT OUT THAT THIS IS THE OFFICIAL COLOR OF THE CITY. 
          AM I MAKING SENSE? THEY'RE MORE OF A FORMALITY, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE, INSTEAD OF JUST A CHECK IN THE BOX TONIGHT? 
          >> YEAH, BUT SHOULDN'T WE CONSULT THE CITIZENS TOO? 
          [02:30:01]
          >> FOR SURE, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT POINT. 
          >> IF YOU WANT, YEAH. 
          >> MAYOR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 7M. 
          >> I HAVE A QUESTION, IF YOU DON'T MIND. 
          >> GO AHEAD. 
          >> I'M RIGHT THERE WITH YOU. WHEN WE FIRST LIT UP THAT POND, ALL OF OUR PHONES BLEW UP, PARKS BOARD, COUNCIL. 
          I THINK COUNCILMAN BRIAN WAS ON AT THE TIME, AND I KNOW THE PARKS BOARD HAD RECOMMENDED THAT WE'D BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE COLOR OF IT, AND WE FOUND OUT IT WAS JUST ONE SINGLE BLUE BULB, PROBABLY BY DESIGN. 
          I THINK YOU KNOW WHERE I STAND, [LAUGHTER] SO I THINK IT'S PRETTY SAFE TO SAY, YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE NOT ASKING TO MAKE ANY CHANGES YET. 
          CITY MANAGER, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU. I LIKE TALKING WITH YOU. 
          THIS COMMUNITY, IF WE DID A SURVEY, I THINK THEY WOULD HAVE OVERWHELMINGLY SHOW US THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT. 
          IT'S MY SUSPICION, BUT I CAN'T PROVE IT. 
          BUT IF WE DID IT, AND THEY SAY YES TO THIS, THEN THEY'RE SAYING YES THAT THEY UNDERSTAND IT'S GOING TO TAKE TAX MONEY TO PAY FOR IT. 
          IF THEY SAY NO TO THIS, THEN WE, AS A COUNCIL, STILL WIN. 
          >> WHAT ARE WE PAYING FOR? [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> MARKETING MATERIAL, TOWERS. [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO REMAKE NEW MARKETING MATERIALS. 
          IN THE FUTURE, WHEN WE MAKE MARKETING MATERIALS, IS IT GOING TO HAVE A COLOR ON IT? [OVERLAPPING] IT WON'T MATTER IF IT'S BLUE OR PURPLE IN THE FUTURE, IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME COST OF THE MARKETING MATERIALS. 
          >> IT COULD BE HANDLED ROUGH ATTRITION. 
          WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY TO UPGRADE THINGS OVER TIME ANYWAY. 
          >> [OVERLAPPING] FLAGS FADE, T-SHIRTS GET TORN. 
          YOU RUN OUT OF STICKY NOTES OR WHATEVER THESE THINGS RIGHT HERE THAT'S BLUE. 
          >> NOBODY'S ARGUING. I JUST THINK WHERE ARE THE PRIORITIES? I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT. 
          I'M GOING TO GO ON A LIMB HERE. 
          I THINK WE ALL LOVE THE COLOR PURPLE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE. 
          I THINK THE TIMING AND THEN PARTNERSHIP WITH ISD TO ROLL THIS OUT IS THE TWO KEY COMPONENTS THAT I WOULD REQUEST. 
          >> I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US. 
          I THINK HONESTLY, IT'S NOT VERY OFTEN THAT YOU HAVE A CITY COUNCILMAN WHO'S ALSO BEEN A BOARD MEMBER FOR THE ISD, AND WE'VE NOT HAD AN ISD JOINT MEETING IN A LONG TIME. 
          >> WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT WITH DR. DUNCAN. 
          HE'S GOING TO INVITE US ALL FORMALLY, BUT THEY WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THEY'RE SETTLED IN THAT NEW BUILDING AND THEN GET ALL THE KINKS OUT AND THEN INVITE US ALL FOR JOINT. 
          >> I THINK THIS IS A GREAT CONVERSATION FOR THAT FIRST. 
          >> WELL, I THINK AS A MAYOR, I'M 100%, I'VE TOLD YOU I WILL HAVE YOUR BACK AS BEST I CAN ALL THE TIME. 
          I THINK IF WE HAVE THAT JOINT MEETING AND LET THE PUBLIC BE ABLE TO TELL US THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE WANTING TO DO AND ALLOW STAFF TO GIVE US A ROLLOUT PLAN OR WE GIVE THEM A ROLLOUT PLAN. 
          >> I DON'T WANT TO ROLLOUT PLAN BECAUSE THAT TELLS TAX MONEY. 
          >> [OVERLAPPING] THIS IS GOING TO COST TAX MONEY TOO. 
          >> I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> JUST ANNOUNCE IT ON THE WEBSITE. 
          >> HERE'S THE THING. HERE'S YOUR COMMUNITY SURVEY. 
          DID ANYBODY COME AND SPEAK ON IT? NO. 
          >> THAT'S NOT FAIR. 
          >> THAT'S NOT FAIR. 
          >> THAT'S NOT FAIR BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE ONLINE. 
          KEVIN, YOU OF ALL PEOPLE KNOW THIS. 
          THERE'S PEOPLE ONLINE AND IN-PERSON THAT DON'T EVER HAVE THE TIME TO COME OUT HERE, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE REALLY BEEN HARPING ON IS WE NEED TO PROVIDE THESE PEOPLE AN AVENUE TO SPEAK UP, AND [INAUDIBLE] TODAY, HAVE BEEN A GREAT NIGHT TO HEAR THEIR VOICES, [OVERLAPPING] REGARDLESS OF WHICH WAY. 
          >> I DO HAVE A MOTION. 
          >> I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE HAD THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE IT GOT PUT ON THE AGENDA. 
          >> AGREED. 
          >> BUT THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL FEELING. 
          >> THAT'S PRETTY RICH. 
          >> ONCE AGAIN, ANNA ISD, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO JOIN TOGETHER. 
          I THINK FOR THE FIRST TOPIC THAT WE HAVE ON THE JOINT SESSION WITH ANNA ISD, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT CONVERSATION TO HAVE. 
          ONCE AGAIN, I THINK IF THIS NEEDS TO BE ROLLED OUT, IT NEEDS TO BE HAND IN HAND WITH ANNA ISD BECAUSE WE ARE FAMILY AT THE END OF THE DAY. 
          WE DON'T LEAVE OUR UNCLES, WE DON'T LEAVE OUR AUNTS OUT. 
          AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE FAMILY. 
          WE SHOULD ALL ROLL THIS OUT TOGETHER AND HAVE THIS AS A UNIFIED DECISION. 
          IF ANNA ISD'S ON BOARD AND THEY'RE OKAY WITH US DOING THIS, I'VE GOT MY COLORS, I'VE GOT MY PURPLE TURBAN, BUT I'VE KEPT IT FOR A SPECIAL DAY, AND I'M GOING TO ROLL IT OUT REAL SOON. THANKS, EVERYONE. 
          [02:35:02]
          >> WELL, I CAN TELL YOU THAT THEY'RE ON BOARD. 
          >> I THOUGHT I WAS THE FORTUNE TELLER WITH THE TURBAN OVER HERE, SORRY. [LAUGHTER] 
          >> I'M NOT TELLING FORTUNES. I WORK WITH THEM ALL WEEK EVERY WEEK. WE HAVE A MOTION. 
          DO I HAVE A SECOND? NO. 
          >> I'M AGREEABLE TO THIS IF WE COULD HAVE A JOINT MEETING. 
          >> I DON'T I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH A JOINT MEETING AT ALL. THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. 
          >> I WILL GIVE MY COMMITMENT TO YOU. 
          IF WE DO A JOINT MEETING, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WE CAN'T ACCOMPLISH WITH THE ISD. 
          I THINK THAT'S A FAIR COMMITMENT WE CAN ALL MAKE. IS THAT FAIR? 
          >> SURE. 
          >> PERFECT. 
          >> MAYOR, I WORE MY PURPLE. 
          YOU'RE THE VOICE OF THE COYOTES. 
          I'M ASSUMING IT'S PURPLE, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE BEEN NOTICED THAT THIS WAS THE COLORS SO THAT THEY COULD LET US KNOW, BUT THAT'S ALL. 
          >> WE LOVE THE IDEA, SIR. 
          HONESTLY, I LOVE THE IDEA. 
          >> [OVERLAPPING] IF YOU YOU AMEND YOUR MOTION TO A JOINT MEETING WITH THE ISD AND I'D BE MORE HAPPY TO SECOND IT. 
          >> NO. I'M STICKING TO MY ORIGINAL MOTION TO APPROVE 7:00 AM. 
          >> WELL, WITHOUT A SECOND, IT'S GOING TO DIE. 
          SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER MOTIONS? 
          >> WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO TABLE OR DENY? WHAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE ONE HERE, CLARK? BECAUSE WE WANT TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION LATER AT A JOINT SESSION. 
          >> WHETHER IT'S TABLE OR YOU JUST TAKE NO ACTION. 
          >> NO ACTION. 
          >> IT'S THE SAME RESULT. 
          >> IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, I'D LIKE TO TAKE NO ACTION IF I CAN GET A SECOND. 
          >> I'LL SECOND. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, IF YOU WOULD CAST YOUR VOTES? MOTION PASSES, 4-3, TAKES US TO ITEM N, CONSIDER DISCUSS AND ACT ON AN ORDINANCE CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION ON THE NOVEMBER 4TH, 2025 BALLOT. 
          WELL, IS CLARK GOING TO HANDLE THIS? 
          >> I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE DATES. 
          WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING A NOVEMBER SPECIAL ELECTION TO DISCUSS CHARTER REVIEW. 
          THE DEADLINE TO CALL THE ELECTION IS AUGUST 18TH. 
          I THINK NOW WE'LL PASS IT ON TO CLARK. 
          >> THANK YOU. MAYOR, COUNCIL, THIS ITEM IS THE RESULT OF A LOT OF DEDICATION AND HARD WORK BY YOUR CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, WHO SPENT A LOT OF WEDNESDAY EVENINGS MEETING AND GOING OVER THE CHARTER AND TRYING TO HASH OUT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COUNCIL, WHICH YOU PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED THE ELECTION ORDINANCE THAT'S IN THE PACKET CONTAINS ALL OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. 
          HOWEVER, UNDER STATE LAW, THE COUNCIL HAS FULL AUTHORITY AND DISCRETION AS TO WHETHER IT APPROVES THOSE PROPOSITIONS, WHICH WOULD ULTIMATELY GO TO THE VOTERS IN NOVEMBER, OR COULD DECIDE AGAINST SOME OF THOSE PROPOSITIONS OR COULD DECIDE TO REVISE THE LANGUAGE OF SOME OF THOSE PROPOSITIONS, OR ADD OR SUBTRACT OTHER PROPOSITIONS. 
          AS CURRENTLY RECOMMENDED, YOU'RE LOOKING AT 20 PROPOSITIONS, PROPOSITIONS A THROUGH PROPOSITION T. TONIGHT, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A DECISION, WHAT THAT FINAL ELECTION ORDER WILL CONTAIN. 
          JUST FOR THE GOAL OF EFFICIENCY, IF THERE ARE PROPOSITIONS THAT ALL OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREE TO, WITHOUT REVISION, YOU COULD MAKE ONE MOTION TO ADOPT EACH OF THOSE, A SINGLE MOTION TO ADOPT ALL OF THOSE PROPOSITIONS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO REVISE. 
          IF THERE ARE OTHER PROPOSITIONS WHERE YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE DISCUSSION, POTENTIALLY REVISE OR MAYBE JUST NOT APPROVE THEM, THOSE WOULD NEED TO BE DONE BY INDIVIDUAL VOTES. 
          [02:40:04]
THAT TURN THE DISCUSSION OVER TO THE COUNCIL. 
          >> CLARK, THE ONE ON THE MEMO YOU SENT, IT'S TALKING ABOUT THE SIGNATURES. 
          WHAT LETTER IS THAT ONE? I'VE BEEN LOOKING FOR IT. 
          REQUIREMENT FOR THE SIGNATURE TO GET ON THE BALLOT? 
          >> IT WAS IN HIS CONFIDENTIAL MEMORY. 
          >> NO, I KNOW THAT, BUT WHAT LETTER IS IT ON THE PROPOSITION? 
          >> IT'S NOT ONE. IT WAS ONE THAT WAS ADDED. 
          >> WE WANT TO ADD IT. I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY. 
          THAT WOULD BE LETTER? 
          >> NUMBER 2. 
          >> BUT WE HAD TO ASSIGN A LETTER. 
          >> U. 
          >> U. 
          >> U. MAYOR, I, FOR ONE, WOULD LIKE TO SEE A, E, G, M, AND T VOTED SEPARATELY OR DISCUSSED AND THEN VOTED UPON. 
          >> WHICH ONES DID YOU SAY? 
          >> A, E, G, M, AND T. 
          >> T AS IN TOM? 
          >> T AS IN TOM. 
          >> THANK YOU, AND U NOW. 
          I ALREADY WROTE DOWN THE REST OF THE ALPHABET, SO I'M GOOD. 
          >> WELL, I'LL ADD J, L, AND M TO THAT. 
          >> WHAT? 
          >> NO, I DON'T HAVE TO. 
          >> WHAT DID YOU SAY, COUNCIL LADY? 
          >> J. 
          >> J. WHAT'S THE OTHERS? 
          >> L, M, N. 
          >> A, E, G, J, L, M. 
          >> LIKE WE'RE BACK IN. [OVERLAPPING] KINDERGARTEN. ANY OTHERS? 
          >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE PROPOSITION B, C, D, F, H, I, K, O, P, Q, R, S. 
          >> SOMEBODY ELSE SAYING THE PHONE IN YOUR HEAD? 
          >> I HAD THE SAME [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> CAN SOMEONE JUST REPEAT WHAT THOSE EXACT LETTERS ARE JUST FOR EVERYONE? THANK YOU. JUST LIKE THE CAPTION OF THEM. 
          >> I WAS TRYING TO TAG ALONG TOO. 
          >> JUST THE LETTERS. [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> WITH EACH LETTER. 
          >> WELL, HE MOVED AND I SECOND IS FOR B, C, D, F, H, I, K, O, P, Q, R, S. DO YOU MIND JUST. 
          [BACKGROUND] 
          >>. IF WE COULD JUST GET JUST WHAT EACH OF THOSE LETTERS ARE [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> ARE YOU WANTING TO DISCUSS EACH ONE? 
          >> NO. I'M JUST SAYING LIKE, WHAT IS A, WHAT IS B, WHAT IS C AS WE'RE JUST GOING DOWN IT? 
          >> I SAID, I'M NOT READING ALL THAT. 
          >> I CAN READ IT FROM HERE. 
          >> I THINK SHE HAS A SUMMARIZED ONE IF YOU WANT TO TRY. 
          >> B READS, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT A WRITTEN RESOLUTION AFTER GIVING NOTICE AND HOLDING A HEARING BEFORE THE MAYOR OR A COUNCIL MEMBER SAT BECOMES VACANT FOR ABSENTEEISM OR IS FORFEITED DUE TO CEASING TO POSSESS REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS OF OFFICE. 
          PROPOSITION C READS, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO MAKE CITY ORDINANCES BECOME EFFECTIVE AFTER PUBLISHING OR POSTING THE ORDINANCE. 
          I THINK THAT'S A TYPO. 
          ORDINANCE ONCE INSTEAD OF TWICE. 
          PROPOSITION D, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THAT THE PUBLIC HAVE ACCESS TO THE ANNA CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE CHARTER, ORDINANCES AND AMENDMENTS ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. 
          PROPOSITION F. SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO GIVE ADMINISTRATORS AND BAILIFFS OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT TO CARRY OUT THEIR DUTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW? H SAYS, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE PUBLICATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED BUDGET ONCE INSTEAD OF TWICE? I, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE PUBLICATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED BUDGET ONCE INSTEAD OF TWICE? 
          [02:45:06]
IS THAT ON IT TWICE? [OVERLAPPING] SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO ALLOW CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS TO SEND MEETING MINUTES OF THEIR PROCEEDINGS TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITHIN SIX WEEKS INSTEAD OF THREE WEEKS. 
          PROPOSITION P. DID SOMEBODY PULL O? 
          >> WHAT ABOUT N? [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> BECAUSE THAT WASN'T WRITTEN ON HERE. 
          IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS SCRATCHED OUT APOLOGY. 
          PROPOSITION, O SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO ELIMINATE THE POSITION OF SECRETARY OF THE CITY'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. BLESS YOU. 
          PROPOSITION, P SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE MEETING MINUTES OF THE CITY'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO BE APPROVED WITHIN THREE SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS AND BE KEPT BY THE CITY SECRETARY AS PUBLIC RECORDS IN ACCORDANCE TO STATE LAW. 
          PROPOSITION Q, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THE CITY'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO ADOPT ITS OWN RULES OF PROCEDURE AND SUBMIT THEM TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITHOUT REQUIRING RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CITY MANAGER? PROPOSITION R, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE REVISIONS TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO BE ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE WITH NO DEADLINE. 
          PROPOSITION S, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THAT PROPOSED DEVIATIONS FROM THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BE REVIEWED BY THE CITY'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THAT THE P AND Z MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO THE REVISIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL BEFORE A FINAL DECISION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          THOSE WERE ALL THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO HAVE NO ARGUMENT AND NO DISCUSSION. 
          >> I'LL SECOND THOSE. 
          >> THANK YOU FOR READING THAT. BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE, I JUST WANTED ANOTHER THANK YOU TO THE CHARTER BOARD THAT WE APPOINTED AND THE CITY STAFF THAT WAS INVOLVED FOR THE WORK DONE. 
          >> SURE. 
          >> BEFORE THE VOTE ON THE CONSENT, SO TO SPEAK, IT APPEARS THAT H AND I ARE DUPLICATES. 
          I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT ONE OF THOSE PROPOSITIONS NOT MAKE THE CONSENT LIST. 
          THERE IS A TYPO IN PROPOSITION C, SO THE MOTION ALSO INCLUDE FIXING THAT TYPO. 
          >> DO I NEED TO READ OUT THE TYPO OR JUST SAY FIX THE TYPO? 
          >> YOU CAN JUST SAY FIX IT. 
          >> I'LL AMEND MY MOTION TO APPROVE THE PREVIOUS LETTERS, ELIMINATING PROPOSITION I AND FIXING THE TYPE PROPOSITION C, CORRECT. 
          >> YES. 
          >> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. 
          >> WE DO HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND, IF YOU WOULD GO AHEAD AND CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          [BACKGROUND] 
          >> THAT'S CORRECT. 
          >> MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          FIRST ONE WE PULLED IS PROPOSITION A. SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO SET THE TERM OF THE OFFICE OF MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TO FOUR YEARS WITH STAGGERED TERMS AND TERM LIMITS OF NO MORE THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE FULL TERMS. [NOISE] 
          >> AT THE BEGINNING OF ALL THIS. 
          ONE OF MY SUGGESTIONS WAS TERM LIMITS, BUT MY PERSONAL VISION WASN'T HAVING FOUR COUNCIL SEATS UP IN ONE YEAR. THAT'S ASKING FOR IT. 
          >> I AGREE WITH THAT AND IT COMPLICATES IT EVEN MORE AND THAT THE FOUR SEATS INCLUDES THE MAYOR. 
          BE MORE PALATABLE, IF IT'S JUST FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT THROWING THE MAYOR ON THE MAJORITY, THAT REALLY UPSETS THE APPLE CAR. 
          >> LET ME PULL UP THE E MAIL. 
          [02:50:03]
I LIKE THE FOUR YEARS AND THE TWO TERMS. I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN KEPT IT THE SAME. 
          THE VARIATION A IS WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR US TO GET APPROVED. 
          >> VARIATION B OR A? 
          >> A, THAT'S KEEPING IT 35, ONE, MAYOR, 246, AND WE HAVE AN OFF YEAR. 
          >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LIKE THAT THEY DID WAS THEY SKIPPED 2026. 
          THEY GAVE EVERYBODY ELECTORAL BREAK, SO TO SPEAK. 
          >> WELL, IT'S IT'S IT'S OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE. 
          SOME PEOPLE TAKE PRIDE IN IT. I GET TO BREAK. 
          IT IS A LITTLE BIT REDUNDANT, ESPECIALLY DURING ELECTION YEAR OR FEDERAL PRESIDENTIAL YEARS. 
          >> I DON'T LIKE ADDING A YEAR ON THE SOMEBODY'S TERM THAT THEY GOT VOTED INTO OFFICE AND WE ADD A YEAR TO THAT TERM. 
          >> WE WERE VOTED ON FOR A THREE YEAR TERM AND US GETTING UP HERE, ADDING A YEAR TO OUR TERMS. EVEN IF ADDING A YEAR TO MY TERM, I WOULDN'T BE OKAY DOING THAT. 
          BECAUSE I WASN'T VOTED UP HERE BY THE NEIGHBORS FOR LONGER THAN THREE YEARS. 
          >> KEEP IN MIND, THESE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CHARTER. 
          ULTIMATELY, THESE WILL GO TO THE VOTERS. 
          THEY WILL HAVE A SAY ON THESE. 
          JUST WANT TO PREFACE THAT. 
          THANK YOU. THE ULTIMATE QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE WE AS A COUNCIL WILLING TO SEND TO VOTERS. 
          THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN BRIAN. I APPRECIATE YOU. 
          >> MY MOTION WILL BE ON PROPOSITION A, VARIATION A OF KEEPING IT STILL 2, 2, 3 OF THE SEATS, AND EVERY FOURTH YEAR, WE HAVE AN OFF YEAR. 
          >> YOU'RE WILLING TO SKIP A NO ELECTION THEN, BUT JUST NOT NOW BECAUSE? 
          >> WE'RE ADDING A YEAR THAT THEY DIDN'T GET ELECTED. 
          >> WE'RE NOT ADDING ANY EVERY YEAR TO ANYONE [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> THAT JUST FINISHES OUT THE THREE YEAR TERMS AND AWAY WE GO. 
          >> THEN IT WILL BE WELL, NEXT YEAR IF IT DOES PASS, SOMETIMES I HAVE TO MAKE SURE MY PHONE IS RIGHT. 
          IF IT DOES PASS, SO NEXT YEAR IF WHOEVER IT IS, THE NEXT YEAR, THE TERMS START FOUR YEARS. 
          >> FOUR YEARS. 
          >> BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT WE ALL TERM OUT FIRST. 
          >> BEFORE WE GO TO A FOUR YEAR TERM, CORRECT. 
          THEN THAT'S WHEN YOUR FOUR YEAR TERM START? 
          >> FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, CLARK, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. 
          OUR TERM WE'RE GRANDFATHERED IN. 
          KELLY, WHEN YOU RUN IF YOU RUN NEXT I'M NOT WHATEVER EXAMPLE IN THREE YEARS, AND YOU WIN, YOU CAN SERVE EIGHT MORE YEARS. 
          >> WHY I'M GOING TO PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE. 
          WHY NOT JUST ADDRESS IT INSTEAD OF KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD? 
          >> NOT KICKING THE CAN. THEY DIDN'T GET ELECTED FOR FOUR YEARS, THEY GOT ELECTED FOR THREE YEARS. 
          >> WHAT I'M SAYING IS WHO HAS ULTIMATE SAY ON THIS? 
          >> THE PEOPLE. 
          >> LET THEM VOTE. LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR US, AND THEN LET'S SEND IT TO THEM. 
          >> THEY HAVE TO VOTE. WE'RE DECIDING WHAT VARIATION WE'RE SENDING. 
          >> WHICH ONE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW? A? 
          >> PROPOSITION A, VARIATION A. 
          >> IT WOULD BE? 
          >> IT'S ON YOUR COMPUTER. 
          >> IS IN MY TERM LIKE IT WAS GOING TO [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> UNLESS YOU'RE RE ELECTED. [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> MY APOLOGIES. ELDENS IN MY TERMS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE UP NEXT. 
          OURS WOULD END AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME THAT WE WERE ELECTED TO SEATS 3 AND 5. 
          THEN JUST LIKE CLOCKWORK, SEATS 1 IN THE MAYOR. 
          I ALMOST WISH THE MAYOR COULD JUST RUN BY HIMSELF BECAUSE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ONE. 
          WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE IN 2029, WE HAVE A BREAK. 
          WE AS THE COMMUNITY, CITY MANAGER. 
          I WANT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT JUST A MOMENT. 
          WHILE WE'RE OUT LOOKING FOR A NEW CITY MANAGER, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IS 
          [02:55:01]
HOW OFTEN THIS COUNCIL WILL ROTATE OUT AND ALL OF THAT. 
          VARIATION A. 
          ON THE SURFACE, IT LOOKS APPEALING. 
          DO YOU THINK A INCOMING CITY MANAGER WOULD SEE THIS AS APPEALING AS WELL? I'M ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION BASED ON YOUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE WITH MANY CITY MANAGERS. [LAUGHTER] 
          >> ABSOLUTELY. I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          ANSWER TO THAT IS THAT WE'RE PROFESSIONALS AND RIGHT NOW. 
          >> I'M SORRY TO THIS WILL BE DECIDED OR THIS WON'T EVEN BE DECIDED HOW THIS EVEN LAYS OUT BEFORE. 
          WE'LL HAVE A NEW CITY MANAGER. 
          IT'S NOT GOING TO PLAY A ROLE IN WHO COMES HERE OR WHO APPLIES HERE. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? 
          >> WELL, THEY'RE STILL GOING TO SEE THIS. 
          I'VE ACTUALLY HAD ANOTHER CITY MANAGER CONTACT ME AND SAY, BE VERY CAREFUL HOW YOU GO ABOUT VOTING FOR THIS BECAUSE AS WE ALL KNOW, AS COUNCIL CHANGES, SO COULD STAFF. 
          THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. 
          >> I'D LIKE THE CONVERSATION THAT YOU'RE HAVING. 
          WHAT IF WE DID INSTEAD OF HAVING FOUR YEARS, WE KEEP EVERYTHING THE SAME, AND WE DO THREE YEAR TERMS. NO. WE DON'T HAVE TERM LIMITS. 
          >> THE IDEA, I THINK BEHIND THIS THE CHARTER WAS PART OF IT WAS TO [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> PART OF THE IDEA BEHIND THIS, I THINK, FROM THE CHARTER WAS TO LESSEN SOME OF THE BURDEN ECONOMICALLY AND SOME OF THE BURDEN ON THE CITIZENS HAVING TO DEAL WITH CAMPAIGNS, AND SOME OF THEM GET LENGTHY, AND THEN THERE'S SOME RUNOFFS AND SO FORTH, AND HAVING THAT ONE-OFF YEAR. 
          THEN ALSO THE TERMS BEING LONG ENOUGH, THAT TWO TERMS, IT'S EIGHT YEARS, IF YOU RUN EIGHT YEARS CONSECUTIVELY, THEN YOU'RE LIMITED OUT AND YOU HAD TO BE OFF FOR A YEAR, AND THEN YOU CAN COME BACK. 
          FOR ONE, I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT IT'D BE NICE TO HAVE JUST A TERM LIMIT PERIOD BE LIMITED EITHER THREE OR FOUR, 3-YEAR TERMS, AND BE DONE. 
          PERSONALLY, IF YOU CAN'T GET SOMETHING DONE IN THAT AMOUNT OF TIME, YOU'RE NOT DOING IT RIGHT. 
          BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF FOUR-YEAR TERMS. I THINK THE OTHER THING IT'S GOING TO LEND TO IS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE SPEND SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER AMOUNTS OF MONEY TO RUN CAMPAIGNS FOR FOUR-YEAR TERMS. 
          >> SURE. THERE'S ANOTHER ITEM RELATED TO THE ELECTION PROCESS THAT HOPEFULLY WILL HELP WITH RUNOFF SITUATIONS AND ALL THAT. I COULD GO FOR A. 
          >> KEVIN, YOU MADE THE MOTION FOR A, CORRECT? 
          >> YES, SIR. 
          >> I'LL SECOND. 
          >> MY PLACE AGAIN. WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND ON ITEM A. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] PROPOSITION A WITH VARIATION A? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME VARIATION IN WHAT THE CLERK SENT US? 
          >> YES. 
          >> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. OKAY. 
          >> I'M CURIOUS WHAT THE VOTERS THINK. 
          >> WE'LL FIND OUT. 
          >> THE VOTE DID, YEAH. 
          >> MOTION PASSES, TAKES US TO ITEM E. IS THAT CORRECT? A E. 
          SORRY. SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY MANAGER, WITHIN ONE YEAR AFTER SUCH APPOINTMENT, RESIDE WITHIN THE CITY? ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ON THAT? 
          >> YES. 
          >> GO AHEAD. 
          >> I THINK, AND THIS IS JUST SIMPLY MY OPINION. 
          I THINK WHOEVER THE CITY MANAGER IS SHOULD LIVE WITHIN THE CITY. 
          THEY SHOULD HAVE AN INVESTMENT HERE JUST LIKE WE DO. 
          THEY NEED TO SEE THE SAME THINGS THAT WE SEE. 
          BUT I WOULD SUGGEST ADDING AN EXTRA SIX MONTHS TO THEIR REQUEST IF THEY HAVE ISSUES WITH MOVING HERE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE MOVING HERE FROM UTAH, NEW JERSEY, OR WHEREVER. 
          I THINK THAT WOULD BE FAIR TO WHOEVER THE CANDIDATE IS. 
          >> WITHIN 12 MONTHS, OR WE CAN EXTEND SIX MONTHS ONCE OR TWICE. 
          [03:00:02]
          >> TWICE. SIX-MONTH INCREMENTS? 
          >> I FOUND WE CAN ALREADY DO THAT, RIGHT, CLERK? 
          >> CAN WE EXTEND TWICE? 
          >> WE CAN DO IT. 
          IT'S BEEN A YEAR NOW, WITH A SIX-MONTH EXTENSION. 
          I'M SAYING ADD ANOTHER SIX-MONTH EXTENSION TO THAT, SO IT GIVES THEM TWO YEARS. 
          >> I THINK WE CAN ALREADY DO THAT, THOUGH. 
          >> I DIDN'T THINK WE COULD EXTEND TWICE. 
          >> I DIDN'T THINK SO EITHER. SOUTHWEST WRITTEN. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] PRESSURE TEXAS. 
          >> ANY ONE OF US APPLYING FOR A JOB AND WE TOLD THEM WE WERE GOING TO SHOW UP FOR A YEAR OR TWO? IT SEEMS LIKE SOMEBODY DOESN'T REALLY WANT THE JOB. 
          >> I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING THE CITIZENSHIP REQUIREMENT, BEING ABLE TO EXTEND IT AD NAUSEAM. 
          >> BECAUSE CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE. 
          >> CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE. 
          >> MARKETS CHANGE. 
          >> WELL, IF THEY'RE OUT OF STATE, THEY HAVE TO MOVE HERE, RIGHT? 
          >> YEAH, I THINK THIS JUST GIVES US FLEXIBILITY DOWN. 
          >> IT'S JUST FLEXIBILITY. 
          RIGHT NOW IN THE MIDDLE OF A NATIONAL SEARCH FOR A CITY MANAGER. 
          MARKETS ARE IN FLUX. 
          THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO SELL THEIR HOME, THE KIDS ARE IN SCHOOL. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF COMPONENTS. 
          I WOULD THINK THAT JUST GIVING THEM AN EXTRA SIX MONTHS ON TOP OF THE CURRENT SIX MONTHS OR TWO, SIX-MONTH EXTENSIONS, BASED ON COUNSEL, I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. 
          IT GIVES US FLEXIBILITY. 
          BUT ALSO, IF WE NEED TO, WE CAN ALSO NOT GIVE IT. 
          WE CAN JUST SAY, NO, WE'RE GOING TO DENY IT. 
          >> DID YOU FIGURE OUT IF WE CAN ALREADY EXTEND IT AGAIN? 
          >> CURRENTLY, IT READS ONE SIX-MONTH EXTENSION. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> THAT'S WHY I SUGGESTED A SECOND SIX-MONTH [INAUDIBLE] I'M ABOUT TO. [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> AS A CAVEAT, JUST A THOUGHT HERE. 
          IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY MOVE HERE FROM GOSH, IDAHO, OR WHEREVER, NEW YORK, GOD FORBID. 
          BUT IF ANYBODY WANTS TO COME AND DECIDE MAYBE THEY WANTED TO HAVE A RANCH IT OR A LITTLE BIT OF PROPERTY. 
          IS THERE A THOUGHT MAYBE TO ETGA BEING PART OF THAT INCLUDED LIVING IN DOES IT HAVE TO BE IN CITY LIMITS? TO BE IN CITY'S TERRITORY. [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> IT NEEDS TO BE IN THE CITY LIMITS FOR TAX REASONS. 
          BECAUSE THE ETGAS CAN'T VOTE IN CITY THINGS. 
          THEY DON'T GET CITY SERVICES, SO IN ORDER FOR A CITY MANAGER TO FEEL WHAT WE FEEL AS HOMEOWNERS AND NEIGHBORS, THEY NEED TO BE HERE AND THEY NEED TO BE INVESTED JUST LIKE WE ARE. 
          >> I THINK IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. 
          >> I DON'T SEE THE LONG-DISTANCE MOVES AS BEING THE ISSUE. 
          SOMEBODY FROM NEW YORK THAT APPLIES GETS THE JOB, THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO MOVE HERE. 
          >> THE ISSUE IS, IF WE HAVE SOMEBODY QUALITY COMES IN AND THEY'VE GOT KIDS IN SCHOOL IN ONE OF THE OTHER NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES, THE ONE NORTH OR SOUTH OF US FOR SOMEWHERE REGIONAL. 
          IT GIVES THEM THE OPTION TO LET THEIR KIDS FINISH HIGH SCHOOL AND OR WHATEVER THEY'VE GOT GOING ON. 
          HAVING THE RESIDENCY WITHIN ONE YEAR WITH POSSIBILITY OF SIX-MONTH EXTENSIONS, I THINK THAT IS MORE THAN ADEQUATE TO GET YOUR FAMILY SITUATION SITUATED TO WHERE YOU KNOW. 
          >> AGREE. 
          >> WAS THAT A MOTION? 
          >> CORRECT. I WILL MOTION FOR ITEM E WITH THE EXTRA SIX-MONTH INCREMENT. 
          >> I SECOND THEN. 
          >> THE WAY THIS READS, THIS E, IF YOU MOVE TO APPROVE E, THAT REMOVES A REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY MANAGER MOVE WITHIN ONE YEAR. 
          >> LET ME REPHRASE MY MOTION. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT, BECAUSE THAT WAS SCARY. 
          >> PROPOSITION E; NO TO THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN, LEAVE THE CHARTER AS IT IS, BUT ADD A SIX-MONTH INCREMENT. THAT IS MY MOTION. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE]. 
          >> DID SOMEONE SECOND THAT? 
          >> NATHAN SECOND. 
          >> WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE REWRITE. 
          GRACE, DID YOU GET THAT, OR DO YOU NEED SOME HELP? 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] 
          >> LOOKS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD TO ME. 
          ANYBODY ELSE I'LL LOOK RIGHT, YOU GUYS? 
          >> YES. 
          >> MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          WE ARE NOW ON G. EVERYBODY WITH THAT? ARE WE ON THE SAME PAGE? G SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE PERIODIC EVALUATIONS OF CITY EMPLOYEES AND APPOINTED OFFICERS? ANY COMMENTS? 
          >> CAN WE DEFINE PERIODIC AND MAYBE MAKE IT BY WEEK BIANNUALLY, OR SOMETHING MORE SPECIFIC? 
          >> I GET THE CITY EMPLOYEES, BUT WHAT APPOINTED OFFICERS? CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT? 
          [03:05:01]
          >> NO. I PULLED IT BECAUSE THIS ONE SKIPPED BY ME BECAUSE I WAS WORRIED ABOUT ALL THE OTHERS. 
          WHO'S DOING THE EVALUATIONS? THE CITY EMPLOYEES AND APPOINTED OFFICERS? 
          >> WHO ARE THE APPOINTED OFFICERS? 
          >>BOARD AND COMMISSION. 
          >> BOARD AND COMMISSION. BUT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHO'S DOING THE EVALUATIONS. 
          IS IT I? IS THAT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING? 
          >> THE COUNCIL ONLY EVALUATES THOSE FOUR POSITIONS THAT THEY APPOINT. 
          >> BUT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THIS CHARTER IS SAYING? 
          >> IT'S CHANGING IT FROM ANNUAL ORAL AND WRITTEN EVALUATIONS TO SEPARATE PERIODIC EVALUATIONS SO THAT THERE'S MORE FLEXIBILITY IN HOW AND WHEN AN EMPLOYEE OR AN APPOINTEE GETS EVALUATED. 
          >> I DON'T LIKE THE WORD PERIODIC WITHOUT MEASURABLE [INAUDIBLE]. 
          >> IT NEEDS TO BE QUARTERLY BIANNUAL, SOMETHING THAT WE CAN STICK BY THAT THIS IS A STANDARD. 
          >> YEARLY EVALUATION? 
          >> A BARE MINIMUM. 
          >> CLERK, BY DEFINITION, WHO'S EVALUATING WHO SPECIFICALLY, I THINK IS WHAT KEVIN'S WANT TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND. 
          >> SPECIFICALLY, THE COUNCIL EVALUATES THE CITY SECRETARY, THE CITY ATTORNEY, THE CITY MANAGER, AND MUNICIPAL BOARD OF JUDGE. 
          >> IT JUST SAYS CITY EMPLOYEES. 
          THAT'S WHAT CONFUSED ME. 
          WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT A YEARLY EVALUATION OF OUR FOUR DIRECT [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> OUR DIRECT REPORT. 
          [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> THE PEOPLE THAT ARE APPOINTED TO BOARD COMMISSIONER. 
          >> THIS SECTION ALSO UNDER THE PERSONNEL SYSTEM INCLUDES [INAUDIBLE] AND CITY MANAGER. 
          THIS SECTION IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. 
          READ EVALUATIONS BASED ON A JOB DESCRIPTION FOR ALL CITY EMPLOYEES BY THEIR IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR, INCLUDING THE EVALUATION OF THE CITY MANAGER, CITY SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE, CITY ATTORNEY, BY THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          CITY COUNCIL EVALUATES YOUR APPOINTED OFFICIALS. 
          CITY EMPLOYEES ARE EVALUATED BY THEIR IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR. 
          WHAT THE CHARTER COMMISSION ACT RECOMMENDED WAS MORE FLEXIBILITY IN ALL OF THOSE BASED ON THE NEEDS OF EITHER STAFF OR COUNCIL. 
          >> LET ME JUST ADD A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT ON THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION BECAUSE ALL IT DOES IS REQUIRE THE COUNCIL TO PUT THIS EVALUATION PROCESS IN PLACE AS PART OF THE PERSONNEL SYSTEM. 
          THE COUNCIL CAN DEFINE BY ORDINANCE WHAT PERIODIC MEANS. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, WE ALREADY GIVING AUTHORITY TO THE COUNCIL AFTER THIS CHARTER IS ADOPTED. 
          IT'S GIVING THE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE WHAT PERIODIC [INAUDIBLE]. 
          >> TAYLOR, HOW DID THIS COME UP? BECAUSE NOT ONLY DID YOU ALL TAKE A SURVEY FROM THE COUNCIL ASKING WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE. 
          DID IT COME FROM A CITY EMPLOYEE OR DIRECTOR? 
          >> SOME OF THIS DISCUSSION WAS ACTUALLY SURROUNDING THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE. 
          WE KNOW THAT YOU HAVE PERIODIC AND ANNUAL EVALUATIONS OF THE CITY MANAGER, CITY SECRETARY. 
          OFTEN, THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE ONLY COMES UP WHEN THERE ARE CHANGES TO THE AGREEMENT. 
          THAT'S BEEN THE PRACTICE. 
          BY SAYING THAT THERE ARE ANNUAL ORAL WRITTEN EVALUATIONS HASN'T BEEN THE PRACTICE. 
          THIS PROVIDES PERIODIC, AND YOU COULD CALL IT AT THE TIME, OR IT COULD JUST BE [INAUDIBLE]. 
          >> THEN IF THIS IS ADOPTED IN THE CHARTER, WE DECIDE WHAT PERIODIC IS AFTER THAT. 
          >> THEN IT'S NOT ANNUALLY, IT'S JUST WHENEVER WE FEEL LIKE IT. 
          >> WHATEVER WE DECIDE. WE CAN SAY, KEEP IT ANNUAL, MAKE IT EVERY SIX MONTHS. 
          IT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE. 
          >> THAT'S MY QUESTION, JUST PUTTING PERIODIC AND WE COULD DECIDE EVERY 10 YEARS, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE AT LEAST A MINIMUM PERIODICITY. 
          WE COULD DO IT MORE OFTEN. 
          >> WE ALREADY DO IT EVERY YEAR. 
          >> YEAH, CHANGING IT TO AT LEAST ANNUALLY OR SOME WORDING TO THAT EFFECT TO ALLOW FOR MORE OFTEN OR BIANNUALLY WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE OFTEN. 
          I JUST DON'T LIKE THE WORD PERIODIC WITHOUT DEFINING WHAT THAT IS. 
          >> WELL, YOU COULD SAY PERIODICALLY, WITH THE MINIMUM OF ANNUALLY? [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> I ACTUALLY LIKE IT BECAUSE IT ALLOWS US TO DO IT AS NEEDED OR DIRECTORS TO DO IT AS NEEDED. 
          IT'S NOT JUST A BIG EVENT AT THE END OF THE YEAR, AND EVERYBODY CRAMS FOR THE EVALUATION. 
          [03:10:02]
IT'S [INAUDIBLE] NEEDED. 
          >> HOW ABOUT THIS? AM I OUT OF LINE IF I JUST ASK THE EMPLOYEES, WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK OR AM I OUT OF LINE ASKING THAT? 
          >> I CAN SHARE THAT OUR PRACTICE HAS BEEN TO DO AN ANNUAL EVALUATION, A FORMAL ANNUAL EVALUATION. 
          IN FACT, DURING THAT PERIOD RIGHT NOW, WE JUST WENT TO A NEW SOFTWARE SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS FOR AUTOMATION OF THAT, AND SO IT SEEMS SEAMLESS. 
          WE ALSO HAVE IN-PERSON MEETINGS AS REQUIRED AS PART OF THAT PROGRAM. 
          ORAL AND WRITTEN EVALUATIONS ARE ALREADY TAKING PLACE BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT'S IN THE CHARTER RIGHT NOW. 
          MORE OFTEN, THOUGH WE'RE HAVING OTHER COACHING CONVERSATION THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. 
          >> HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY FEEDBACK ON PEOPLE REQUESTING OTHER PERIODIC REVIEWS? I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE CONVERSATION CAME UP. 
          >> I HAD ASKED THAT, AND I DON'T THINK I STILL GOT THE QUESTION OF WHERE DID THIS AMENDMENT [INAUDIBLE] CHARTER TO COME FROM. 
          >> I THINK PART OF THE REASONING BEHIND A LOT OF THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WAS STAFF EVALUATING WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING IN PRACTICE, AND DOES IT MATCH WITH THE CHARTER? IF IT DOESN'T MATCH, IS THERE A WAY TO MODIFY THE CHARTER SO THAT IT'S CONSISTENT? I THINK THE THOUGHT PROCESS WAS, IF WE'RE NOT EVALUATING THIS COURT JUDGE ANYWAY, THEN THIS WOULD ALLOW THE COUNCIL AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEFINE THE FREQUENCY OF THOSE EVALUATIONS IN A MORE CUSTOMIZED IN FLEXIBLE WAY. 
          I THINK THAT WAS THE THOUGHT. 
          OBVIOUSLY, I CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH IT, BUT I THINK THAT WAS THE LOGIC. 
          >> MAYOR, I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ELIMINATE PROPOSITION, DID YOU? I DIDN'T HEAR YOU. WHAT? 
          >> WELL, I HAD A QUESTION, BUT YOU WANT TO ELIMINATE THIS ONE? I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ELIMINATE PROPOSITION G. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? 
          >> A SECOND. 
          >> IS THAT MANY? THANK YOU. 
          WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND TO ELIMINATE THIS ITEM. 
          YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          I'M TALKING SLOWER NOW, GRACE. 
          >> IT'S 10:00 O'CLOCK. 
          >> I NEED TO TALK FASTER, IT'S 1030. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] PLEASE. 
          >> THAT PASSES 6-1. 
          TAKES US TO ITEM J. SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THAT THE CITY'S ENTIRE ANNUAL AUDIT BE PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE? 
          >> I PULLED THIS ONE, I WANT TO ADD. 
          BECAUSE OUR WEBSITE IS NOT NECESSARILY USER-FRIENDLY. 
          WHEN YOU GO TO LOOK FOR SOMETHING, YOU REALLY HAVE TO HUNT FOR ESPECIALLY THESE FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS. 
          CAN WE ADD THAT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIND THIS WITHIN THREE CLICKS? CAN WE EVEN DO THAT? 
          >> I THINK THAT'S STATE MINIMUM. 
          >> YOU CAN ADJUST THE LANGUAGE. 
          >> I WOULD I WOULD APPROVE PROPOSITION J TO JUST ADD WITHIN THREE CLICKS, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO HIT ON THAT. 
          >> THREE CLICKS ON WHAT? 
          >> ON THE WEBSITE. 
          >> WHEN YOU LAND ON THE HOME PAGE, THREE CLICKS. 
          THE FIRST ONE IS MAYBE THE SEARCH. 
          >> THAT'S WHY I WAS CURIOUS. 
          >> IT'S THREE CLICKS. 
          >> THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY. 
          IS THAT FROM THE HOME PAGE, OR WHEN YOU GET TO THE SEARCH PAGE, OR WHEN YOU GET TO THAT PARTICULAR PORTION THAT YOU'RE IN? 
          >> THE WAY HE EXPLAINED IT. 
          >> I THINK A GOOD EXAMPLE IS, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, HOW MY CANDIDATE FINANCIAL REPORTS ARE WITHIN THREE, I THINK, MANDATED BY THE STATE, IF WE COULD HAVE A SIMILAR CONCEPT. 
          BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD PROVIDE A LOT MORE TRANSPARENCY. 
          >> OR JUST A HYPERTEXT LINK STRAIGHT TO IT. 
          >> OFF THE MAIN PAGE. 
          >> STRAIGHT TO IT. 
          >> TAYLOR, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING? 
          >> IT'S ONLY WITHIN THREE. 
          >> THE CITY HAS ACTUALLY BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THE TEXAS COMPTROLLER FOR OUR TRANSPARENCY STARS FOR OUR FINANCIAL REPORTING. 
          THE ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE WITHIN THREE CLICKS. 
          IF YOU CLICK ON THE TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE RIGHT ON THE HOME PAGE IN TRADITIONAL FINANCES, YOU CAN GET TO OPENING THAT PACK. 
          >> DO WE HAVE A Q&A SECTION, OUT OF CURIOSITY? BECAUSE THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING GOOD TO ADD ON IF WE DON'T, BECAUSE LITTLE THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT'LL BE GOOD CONTEXT FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON IF IT'S POSSIBLE. 
          >> SURE. 
          >> JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT. THANK YOU. 
          >> OR JUST MAKE A SIMPLE CLICK, LIKE YOU SAID, JUST BOOM, IT'S THERE. 
          >> RIGHT OFF THE MAIN PAGE. 
          FINANCES OR CITY FINANCIALS BREAKS OUT INTO THREE DIFFERENT SECTIONS, AND THEN YOU CAN CLICK AND BOOM, YOU THERE. 
          >> YES. THE MAIN LINKS ON THE PAGE WERE REQUIRED FOR UNDER GOVERNMENT AND THEN TRANSPARENCY. 
          THAT'S THE COMPTROLLER TRANSPARENCY STARS PROGRAM. 
          IT'S UNDER CITY, BUT WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AND SEE. 
          [03:15:01]
          >> CAN WE ALSO ADD THAT IT NEEDS TO BE SENT OUT ON ALL SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS TOO? WHATEVER WE USE, FACEBOOK, WHATEVER WE USE, INSTAGRAM, THAT ANY TYPE OF FINANCIAL DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE PUBLISHING, THAT WE ALSO GOT TO PUBLISH IT ON THERE SO IT'S JUST EASE OF ACCESS FOR PEOPLE. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD WORK, BUT JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT. 
          >> I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE MINUTIA OF THIS. 
          THAT'S WHERE GOVERNMENT CREATES A LOT OF PROBLEMS BECAUSE THE WEB'S CHANGING EVEN AS WE SPEAK, VERSUS WHEN WE BUILT THE WEBSITE. 
          IF THE WORDING ISN'T CLEAR OR WE NEED TO SAY TO MATCH THE STATE'S TRANSPARENCY REQUEST OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I THINK WE NEED TO ADJUST THE WORDING TO SAY EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH, BUT SITTING THERE TALKING WEB LANGUAGE AND THREE CLICKS AND FACEBOOK AND ALL THAT [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> THREE CLICKS IS STATE, BY THE WAY. 
          >> I HAVE A QUESTION. I DID IT RIGHT. GOOD. 
          >> NOT REALLY, BUT OKAY. 
          >> WE DON'T NEED A CHARTER TO TELL US HOW TO RUN OUR WEBSITE. 
          HOW ABOUT WE ELIMINATE PROPOSITION J, WE HAVE A WORKSHOP ON A NEXT COUNCIL MEETING WITH ALL STAFF THAT WORKS ON OUR WEBSITE, BECAUSE I KNOW EVERYBODY HAS DIFFERENT ACCESS, AND WE LAY OUT WHAT US AS A COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SEE? 
          >> IS THAT A MOTION? 
          >> I CAN TURN IT INTO ONE. 
          >> I SECOND YOUR REMOVAL OF THAT. 
          >> I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO ELIMINATE PROPOSITION J. 
          >> I'LL SECOND IT. 
          >> HE DIDN'T MAKE IT FIRST BEFORE HE SECONDED. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. 
          MS. LAND, DID YOU GET THE SECOND ON THAT? 
          >> NO, I DID NOT. 
          >> KELLY. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, EVENTUALLY AT SOME POINT WHEN I GET TALKING BECAUSE GRACE IS, I'M SURE ALREADY READY FOR ME, GO AHEAD AND CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          >> AT LEAST THAT WAS EASY. 
          >> BY THE WAY, I JUST DID A SEARCH, IT POPPED RIGHT UP. 
          >> MAYOR, I THINK YOU NEED TO GO BACK ACTUALLY TO PROPOSITION I. 
          ALTHOUGH, IN THE LIST OF PROPOSITIONS, IT WAS A DUPLICATE, IT ACTUALLY IS ITS OWN PROPOSITION, AND I CAN EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS. 
          IT'S ON PAGE 10 OF THE ELECTION ORDINANCE. 
          IT CHANGES ONE WORD. 
          THIS INVOLVES THE CAPITAL PROGRAM OF THE CITY. 
          CURRENTLY, IT READS THE CITY MANAGER MUST SUBMIT A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE ANNUAL BUDGET. 
          THEN IT DESCRIBES WHAT'S IN THE PROGRAM. 
          THIS PROPOSITION, INSTEAD OF SAYING A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM, IT SAYS A MULTI-YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM. 
          >> ON OUR END, CLARK, IT'S THE SAME FROM WHAT I'M SEEING. 
          >> NO. IT'S WORD-FOR-WORD. 
          H AND I, THEY READ EXACTLY THE SAME. 
          >> NO. IF YOU GO DOWN FURTHER IN THE ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 2.10. 
          >> WHAT WE HAVE HERE. 
          >> IT'S ON PAGE 10. 
          >> WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS A PROPOSITION FOR H AND I. 
          THE ONLY CONTEXT WE HAVE IS WORD-FOR-WORD, THEY READ EXACTLY THE SAME THING. 
          >> I KNOW. WHAT HE'S SAYING ID SCROLL DOWN TO PAGE 9. 
          IT'S PROPOSITION SECTION 2.9, FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROPOSITION H, IS WHERE H IS. 
          THEN THE NEXT PAGE IS SECTION 2.10 FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROPOSITION 1. DO YOU SEE IT? 
          >> YEAH, I SEE IT NOW. 
          >> PROPOSITION I. 
          >> I. SORRY, IT'S 1030. 
          >> INSTEAD OF ELIMINATING IT, WE BRING IT BACK. 
          >> DO WE CONSOLIDATE? 
          >> WE'RE JUST CHANGING IT. 
          >> BUT YOU DIDN'T ELIMINATE IT. 
          YOU JUST DIDN'T PUT IT ON THE CONSENT. 
          >> WE HAVE TO APPROVE. 
          >> LET'S GO TO PROPOSITION I. 
          >> LET'S FINISH WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE AND GO BACK. 
          >> YOU'RE RIGHT. 
          >> WE'RE IN L. 
          >> I'LL COME BACK TO THAT. 
          WE HAVE THE VOTE ALREADY. OH MY GOSH. 
          L. SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS, HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THAT THE QUESTION OF FORFEITURE OF OFFICE HELD BY A MEMBER OF A BOARD, COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE DUE TO ABSENTEEISM BE REFERRED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND PROVIDE FOR A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE TO DECIDE AGAINST FORFEITURE? 
          [03:20:17]
          >> I PULLED IT BECAUSE I THINK COUNCIL MUST RESPECT THE CHAIR'S DECISION IF THERE'S AN ISSUE OF ATTENDANCE. 
          THERE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE A SUPERMAJORITY FOR THAT. 
          THAT SHOULD BE UP TO THE CHAIR OF THAT BOARD THE WAY IT IS NOW. 
          >> I GET THAT PART, BUT WE APPOINT THE CHAIR. 
          >> WE DON'T APPOINT THE CHAIR. THEY CHOOSE THEIR CHAIR. 
          >> I KNOW, BUT THEY'RE APPOINTED TO THAT BOARD BEFORE THEY CHOSE THE CHAIR. 
          >> I DON'T THINK THAT THE SUPERMAJORITY IS NEEDED. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARY. 
          >> I MOVE THAT WE ELIMINATE ITEM L. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ELIMINATE ITEM L. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          IN A MINUTE, JUST AS SOON AS I'M DONE TALKING, GRACE IS READY, BUT I HAVE THINGS I WANT TO SAY AND SPEAK ABOUT AND AMBLE ON ABOUT WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. 
          PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          I WILL FORGET IT. LET'S GO BACK TO I BECAUSE IT'S OUT OF ORDER. 
          PROPOSITION I, SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE PUBLICATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED BUDGET ONCE INSTEAD OF TWICE? 
          >> NO. THAT'S NOT IT. 
          I IS ON, I THINK, PAGE, ON MINE, IT'S 10. 
          PAGE 9 WOULD BE ELECTION. 
          SECTION 2.10 HAS TO DO WITH THE CAPITAL PROGRAM. 
          >> RIGHT HERE. IT'S NOT 2.8. 
          2.10? THERE WE GO. 
          FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROPOSITION I, IT IS PROPOSED THAT SECTION 7.11 OF THE CHARTER BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS. 
          ADDITIONS ARE INDICATED BY TEXT, DELETIONS BY A SLASH THROUGH THE TEXT. 
          IT LOOKS LIKE THE AMENDMENT IS CITY MANAGER MUST SUBMIT A MULTI-YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE ANNUAL BUDGET INSTEAD OF A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAM. THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE. 
          >> I MOTION WE ACCEPT THAT. 
          >> I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? 
          >> I'LL SECOND. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON ITEM I TO APPROVE IT AS WRITTEN. 
          PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. TAKES US TO ITEM M. 
          >> TAYLOR LAW. SORRY. WOULD GIVE ME WHIPLASH. 
          I'D LIKE TO ASK THAT WE GO BACK TO J WHILE WE'RE ON PAGE 10 REGARDING THE INDEPENDENT AUDIT. 
          THE INTENT OF THIS ONE WAS NOT, SPECIFICALLY, WE'RE ALREADY PRACTICING PUBLISHING THE AUDIT ON THE WEBSITE OR AT LEAST THE ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT. 
          THIS IS TO REMOVE THE NEWSPAPER REQUIREMENT, TO REMOVE THE ABILITY. 
          IF YOU'D LIKE TO KEEP THE CITY PUBLISHING A SUMMARY OF THE AUDIT IN THE NEWSPAPER, WE CAN LEAVE IT AS IS. 
          THAT'S THE ACTION THAT'S BEEN TAKEN, BUT IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THE CURRENT PRACTICE, WHICH IS TO PUBLISH THE ENTIRE ON THE WEBSITE, THAT'S WHAT THIS ITEM IS PROPOSING. 
          >> DO I RETRACT MY MOTION FOR THAT ONE? 
          >> THE MOTION HAS BEEN VOTED ON. 
          >> THAT'S TRUE. 
          >> WE CAN MAKE A NEW MOTION TO ACCEPT IT, THOUGH. 
          >> YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION TO RESCIND THAT. 
          >> I WILL MOTION TO RESCIND THE VOTE. 
          >> CAN THE PERSON WHO SECONDED THE EARLIER MOTION SECOND? 
          >> THAT WAS ME. I SECOND IT. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO RESCIND THE VOTE ON ITEM J. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT, MS. LAW. 
          ITEM PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          WE'RE GOING BACK TO THAT ITEM. 
          >> CAN I ASK THE QUESTION, MAYOR. 
          >> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          >> WILL THESE ITEMS BE MUCH MORE CLEAR ON THE BALLOT. 
          [03:25:04]
          >> WE ARE GOING TO SUGGEST, AT THE VERY END OF THIS, THAT YOU MAKE A FINAL MOTION TO DIRECT THAT THE ITEMS BE RENUMBERED AS THEY'RE APPROVED 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> THAT TAKES US TO ITEM J. 
          LET ME FIND IT IN THE REAL WORLD OVER HERE. 
          FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROPOSITION J, IT'S PROPOSED THAT SECTION 7.18 OF THE CHARTER BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS. 
          WHAT'S THE CHANGE? THERE WE GO. 
          THE CHANGE IS THE ENTIRE AUDIT MUST BE PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, AND COPIES OF THE AUDIT MUST BE PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE PERSON PERFORMING THE DUTIES OF CITY SECRETARY. 
          >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE PROPOSITION J. 
          >> I'M CONFUSED BECAUSE WE APPROVED THAT WITH THE THREE CLICK THING. 
          THEN WE JUST RESCINDED IT. 
          >> THE THREE CLICK THING WAS ABOUT THE FINANCIALS. 
          >> THAT WAS I. 
          >> THE VOTE WAS TO ELIMINATE IT. 
          >> YOU'RE RIGHT. MY BAD. I'LL SECOND. 
          >> MOTION AND A SECOND FROM THE SAME TWO PEOPLE THAT DID THIS THE FIRST TIME. 
          >> JUST BACKWARDS. 
          >> IF YOU WOULD, GO AHEAD AND CAST YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. 
          THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          THAT TAKES US TO ITEM M, AS IN, MIKE OR MAMA. 
          SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO SET STAGGERED TWO-YEAR TERMS OF OFFICE FOR BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS WITH TERM LIMITS OF THREE CONSECUTIVE TERMS AND TO ALLOW THE CITY COUNCIL TO DESIGNATE THE TERMS OF COMMITTEES? 
          >> IS THREE TOO MUCH? IS TWO-YEAR TERMS? 
          >> I THINK TWO-YEAR TERMS ARE TOO SHORT BECAUSE JUST LIKE GETTING ON COUNCIL, WHEN YOU PUT A BOARD MEMBER ON THERE, IT TAKES THEM A WHILE TO GET THEIR FEET WET, SO MAYBE IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT TERM LIMITS ON THEM, EXTEND THE TERM TO THREE YEARS. 
          >> JUST DO TWO>? 
          >> YOU CAN DO TWO OR YOU CAN EVEN DO THREE. 
          >> I'M GOOD WITH TWO. 
          >> BUT YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER, THEY SERVE AT OUR PLEASURE ANYWAY. 
          >> THAT'S REDUNDANT. 
          WE CAN CUT THEM OFF ANY TIME WE WANT WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF RULE. 
          THIS IS JUST AN EXTRA LAYER OF FORMALITIES. 
          >> I'M GOOD WITH EXTENDING IT TO THREE IF WE DO A TWO-TERM LIMIT. 
          SORRY. THREE-YEAR TERM, TWO-TERM LIMIT, SIX YEARS TOTAL. 
          >> THEN THEY'RE DONE, OR DO YOU WANT TO GIVE THEM A YEAR TO COME BACK? 
          >> THEY CAN COME BACK ON ANOTHER BOARD. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW. 
          >> GIVEN THAT THEY CAN COME BACK BECAUSE WE DO THE SAME THING FOR THE COUNCIL. 
          WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT. WE'RE OFF A YEAR, WE CAN COME BACK. 
          >> IT WOULD AT LEAST HAVE TO MATCH THAT. 
          >> THEY CAN'T AUTOMATICALLY COME BACK. [OVERLAPPING] 
          >> THEY RECEIVE THE ONE YEAR OFF, AND YOU CAN COME ON HOWEVER YOU WANT. 
          >> THREE-YEAR TERMS, AND THEY HAVE TO BE OFF A YEAR TO COME BACK. 
          >> I GET, THOUGH. WE CAN REMOVE THEM ANY TIME, BUT WHY THE COUNCIL THAT JUST WANTS TO REMOVE SOMEBODY FOR NO REASON? I'LL WATCH. 
          >> I KNOW. 
          >> I WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. 
          >> I KNOW. WE ALSO GOT TO PUT A SIMILAR VOTE FOR THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND ALL OF THESE TWO AT SOME POINT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT HERE OR SOME OTHER POINT, BUT THAT'S A GOOD POINT YOU TOUCH ON. THANK YOU, SIR. 
          >> I PROPOSE THAT WE APPROVE THIS CHANGE. 
          WE GIVE THEM THREE-YEAR TERMS. TWO YEARS, THEY TERM OUT. 
          >> TWO TERMS. 
          >> TWO TERMS, THEY TERM OUT. 
          THEY HAVE TO BE OFF FOR A YEAR, AND THEY CAN COME BACK TO WHATEVER BOARD THEY WANT. 
          >>RE-APPLY. I'LL SECOND IT. 
          >> YOU GOOD, GRACE? 
          >> ALMOST THERE. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, GO AHEAD AND CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          >> VOTE PASSES, TEXAS TO PROPOSITION. 
          SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THE CITY'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO HOLD AN ANNUAL ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING IN NO PARTICULAR MONTH? 
          >> I PULL THIS ONE TOO. SINCE WE MOVED THEIR TO START AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. 
          P AND Z, I THINK THE CHARTER READS NOW THAT THEY HAVE TO DO IT IN JULY. 
          [03:30:04]
WHEN WE WERE APPOINTING THEM IN MAY, YOU HAD TO DO IT WHEN YOU CAME ON AND THEN YOU HAD TO DO IT AGAIN IN JULY. 
          SO SINCE WE MOVED THEM TO JANUARY, I THINK INSTEAD OF LETTING THEM CHOOSE THEIR CHAIR IN JANUARY, THEY CHOOSE THEIR CHAIR IN FEBRUARY EVERY YEAR. 
          THAT PUTS IT ON AN EVEN KEEL AND THEY KNOW WHAT'S EXPECTED AND YOU DON'T HAVE THIS BACK AND FORTH. 
          >> ARE THEY OTHER COMING BOARDS? 
          >> WELL, THIS ONE JUST SAYS P&C SPECIFICALLY. 
          >> BUT WE CAN [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> APPLY TO ALL BOARDS. 
          >> APPLY TO ALL BOARDS. 
          >> CAN WE DO THAT? I MOVE TO MAKE THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CHOOSE THEIR CHAIR IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY FROM THIS POINT FORWARD. 
          PROPOSITION. THANK YOU. 
          >> BEFORE WE VOTE, WE HAD AN ISSUE RECENTLY WHERE THEY COULDN'T CONVENE. 
          I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH BOARD IT WAS, BUT THEY COULDN'T CONVENE TO BE ABLE TO THEIR OFFICERS. 
          BY SAYING I DON'T REMEMBER. 
          JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS I DON'T REMEMBER. 
          >> BUT I KNOW WHAT BOARD YOU'RE TALKING. 
          >> WE'RE FORCING IT TO BE ON THE NEXT MEETING AFTER THEY SIT IN. 
          >> IF THEY'RE APPOINTED IN NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, THEY START IN JANUARY. 
          THEIR NEXT MEETING IN FEBRUARY IS WHEN THEY CHOOSE THEIR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIRS. 
          ACROSS THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. 
          >> LET'S SEE A STUMBLING BLOCK, BUT I GET THE SPIRIT OF IT. 
          >> I'LL SECOND THAT. 
          >> I THINK THEY CAN FLY THROUGH THAT. 
          >> SECTION 91C ONLY DEALS WITH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. 
          I WOULD RECOMMEND GOING BACK TO M BECAUSE M DEALS WITH ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND ADDING A SENTENCE THAT SAYS THAT IN FEBRUARY OF EACH YEAR IS WHEN THEY SELECT THEIR CHAIR. 
          >> I SEE. 
          >> PROPOSITION, AS I SAID THE FIRST, PLEASE, AS IT APPLIES TO PLANNING AND ZONING. 
          THEY WILL CHOOSE THEIR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR IN FEBRUARY, AND THAT IS PROPOSITION. 
          >> I'LL SECOND THAT VERSION. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          >> WE MIGHT ACTUALLY THINK THAT WE HAVE THE SAME NUMBER. 
          >> WE'RE GOING TO OR I'M GOING TO. 
          >> ARE WE GOING BACK TO M? 
          >> I'M GOING TO RESCIND THE VOTE FOR M. YOU SECONDED? 
          >> YOU HAVE TO RESEND AS WELL. MIKE. 
          >> I'LL SECOND THAT. SORRY. 
          >> BACK ON M. 
          >> I NEED TO GO TO SLEEP. 
          >> RESENDING THE VOTE FOR M, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> DON'T SAY SECOND. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE. 
          THAT'S UNANIMOUS. TAKES US BACK TO M, MAMA. 
          SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS HOME LE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO SET STAGGER TWO YEAR TERMS OF OFFICE FOR BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS WITH TERM LIMITS OF THREE CONSECUTIVE TERMS, ALLOW THE CITY COUNCIL TO DESIGNATE THE TERMS OF THE COMMITTEES. 
          >> I WILL MOTION FOR THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS TO HAVE THREE YEAR TERMS TWO TERM LIMIT, ONE YEAR OFF, COME BACK ON AND THEY CHOOSE THEIR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIRS IN FEBRUARY. NICE. 
          >> WHAT DAY IS IT? 
          >> ANYWAY I'II SECOND THAT. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. 
          ELDON. SORRY, COUNCILMAN BAKER. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          >> MY CLICKERS WEED OUT. I WENT TO SLEEP. 
          [03:35:26]
          >> MOTION PASSES, TAKES US TO ITEM T. SHALL THE CITY OF ANNA, TEXAS HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO FORBID, TO THE EXTENT PROHIBITED BY STATE LAW, ANY OFFICER OF THE CITY FROM HAVING SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OR THE SALE OF ANY LAND, MATERIAL SUPPLIES, OR SERVICES TO THE CITY. 
          >> HEY, MAYOR AND COUNSEL, I CAN HAVE A PERSONAL BENEFIT FROM VOTING ON THIS. 
          IF 'ALL DON'T MIND, I'D LIKE TO RE MYSELF FROM THIS ONE. 
          >> THANK YOU. 
          >> YOU'LL COME GET ME. 
          >> TO CLARIFY, CLARK. 
          ANY OFFICER, DOES THAT MEAN COUNCIL AND BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS? 
          >> YES. 
          >> WELL, NON ADVISORY. 
          >> NON ADVISORY. HOW DO WE CHANGE THAT? 
          >> YOU CAN ADD TO IT ALL BOARDS. 
          >> ANY OFFICERS AND ALL ADVISORY BOARDS? 
          >> YES. 
          >> EARLIER, WE DISCUSSED ADDING SOMETHING TO THIS FOR YOU. 
          >> TWO YEAR EXIT PERIOD. 
          FROM THE LAST TIME ON YOUR BOARD, TWO YEARS OUT, YOU CANNOT DO ANY BUSINESS WITH THE CITY BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN SOME PEOPLE TAKING PRIVILEGE AND KNOWLEDGE UNDER PUBLIC? CLARK. 
          >> DOESN'T THE TERMS THE TERMINOLOGY HERE, ANY OFFICER OF THE CITY, DOES THAT NOT ENCOMPASS EMPLOYEES AND BOARDS COMMISSIONS AND COUNCIL MEMBERS IN THAT? 
          >> IT ALREADY LISTS EMPLOYEES SEPARATELY. 
          BUT AN OFFICER OF THE CITY IS A PERSON WHO HAS SOME TYPE OF DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY. 
          IT WOULD NOT INCLUDE PURELY ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS. 
          >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR PROPOSITION T TO APPROVE. 
          WE ADMIT ANY OFFICER AND ADVISORY BOARD? ANY MEMBERS OF ALL BOARDS? WELL, OFFICERS IS P&G AND STUFF. 
          BUT SO ANY OFFICERS AND ADVISORY BOARDS AND TO ADD. 
          WHAT'S THE CORRECT WORDING FOR THAT ONE? A TWO YEAR. 
          >> LIKE A TWO YEAR MORATORIUM ON SELLING. 
          >> A TWO YEAR MORATORIUM FOR ANY BUSINESSES AFTER THEY LEAVE OFFICE WITH THE CITY. 
          >>SECOND. 
          >> IS YOUR MOTION ALSO DELETING THE LANGUAGE REFERENCING STATE LAW? 
          >> IT SHOULD BE, YES. 
          >> BECAUSE OURS IS STRICTER THAN STATE LAW, CORRECT? 
          >> MUCH. THERE IS NO STATE LAW ON THIS. 
          >> I'LL GO AGAINST STATE AT ANY TIME. GOOD. 
          >> I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE I'M AT. DID WE HAVE A MOTION? 
          >> HE MOTIONED I SECOND. 
          >> MOTION IN A SECOND. PROPOSITION T AMENDING. 
          >> FOR ANY INDIVIDUAL AFTER LEAVING OFFICE. 
          P IS BETTER VERSUS THE BUSINESS? 
          >> INDIVIDUAL VERSUS THE BUSINESS? 
          >> REPLACE BUSINESS WITH INDIVIDUAL? 
          >> YES. THAT WAY, ANY INDIVIDUAL LEAK ASSOCIATE. 
          >> WE'RE NOT A BUSINESS HERE. 
          >> CLARK, DOES THAT ALSO COVER GETTING A JOB WITH THE CITY? 
          >> I THINK THAT'S ALREADY IN THE CHARTER, ISN'T IT? 
          >> GAINING EMPLOYMENT AFTER LEAVING. 
          >> WELL, IF YOU'RE ON A BOARD AND YOU GET HIRED BY THE CITY, YOU HAVE TO LEAVE YOUR POSITION ON THE BOARD? 
          >> YEAH, FOR SURE. 
          >> IT DOESN'T PREVENT YOU FROM BECOMING AN EMPLOYEE. I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD. 
          >> I THINK THIS IS START OF BUSINESS. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW. 
          >> SCHOOL BOARD WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT COMPLETELY. 
          >> MAYBE FOR SURE, THE COUNCIL SHOULDN'T. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN ADD TONIGHT, CLARK? 
          [03:40:02]
          >> YES. 
          >> COUNCIL CAN'T GET BECOME AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY WITHIN TWO YEARS? 
          >> IT'S WITHIN ONE YEAR RIGHT NOW, RIGHT? 
          >> NOT THAT I WANT TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS. 
          >> NO. I THINK ONE YEAR'S PLY. IF THAT'S GOOD. 
          >> ON THIS ONE, IT NEEDS TO ADD ELITE LANGUAGE REFERENCING STATE LAW. 
          >> MAYOR COUNSEL, I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION ON THIS ONE. 
          SINCE YOU'VE ADDED ADVISORY BOARDS, ARE YOU INTENDING TO INCLUDE THAT SOMEONE FROM AN ADVISORY BOARD COULDN'T BE HIRED BY THE CITY WITHIN THAT SAME PERIOD OF TIME. 
          WE RECENTLY HAD SOMEONE WHO [OVERLAPPING]. 
          >> THIS IS JUST DOING BUSINESS. 
          >> AS FAR AS EMPLOYMENT WITH THE CITY, I I WOULD CONTAIN THAT TO THIS GROUP RIGHT HERE. 
          >> JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. THANK YOU. 
          >> YES. 
          >> YOU HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. 
          IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          YOU'RE GOING TO GET STAN? THANK YOU. 
          ANYTHING ELSE? I THINK YOU WAS INSTEAD OF T, WASN'T IT? 
          >> THIS IS ONE WE ADDED. 
          >> IT'S ON THE E-MAIL HE SENT US. 
          >> I GOT IT RIGHT HERE. 
          >> YOU GOT IT. 
          >> PROPOSITION, PETITION REQUIREMENT FOR CANDIDATE BALLOT, ADD A PROVISION REQUIRING A CANDIDATE TO COLLECT A MINIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNATURES ON A PETITION BEFORE THEIR NAME CAN BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT FOR A HOME RULE UN MUNICIPALITY THAT DESIRES TO HAVE SUCH A CHARTER PROVISION, STATE LAW DICTATES THE MINIMUM NUMBER, WHICH CAN BE ADDED TO CHARTER SECTION 5.02, REQUIRING A CANDIDATE TWO HAVE FILED WITH THE CITY SECRETARY AT THE TIME OF THE FILING AN APPLICATION FOR A PLACE ON THE BALLOT, A PETITION THAT COMPLIES WITH THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE AND SUPPORTS THE CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE WITH A MINIMUM NUMBER OF VALID SIGNATURES THAT IS THE GREATER OF A 25 OR B ONE HALF OF 1% OF THE TOTAL VOTE RECEIVED IN THE CITY BY ALL CANDIDATES FOR MAYOR IN THE MOST RECENT MAYORAL GENERAL ELECTION. 
          >> THANK YOU, KELLY. 
          >> YOU'RE WELCOME. 
          >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE PROPOSITION. 
          >> SECOND. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          NOT ENOUGH TYPING FOR GRACE, IF YOU WOULD, GO AHEAD AND CAST YOUR VOTES. 
          >> MR. MARSHALL, PLEASE TELL ME WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE CLOSED SESSION BUSINESS. 
          >> NO, MAYOR. I WANT TO THANK YOU AND THE COUNCIL AND CONGRATULATIONS. 
          YOU READ UP FRIDAY TO. 
          BUT IT NEEDS TO BE ONE FINAL MOTION TO DIRECT THAT THE PROPOSITIONS BE AND RE LETTER MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SO THEIR SEQUENCE. 
          SO THEIR PROPER SEQUENCE. 
          >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT THE PROPOSITIONS BE REORDERED AND PROPERLY LETTERED. 
          >> I'II SECOND. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IN A MINUTE, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO PLEASE CONSIDER CASTING YOUR VOTES. 
          >> MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. PARK ARE WE GOOD? 
          >> SURE. 
          >> WELL, THEN SEEM NO OBJECTION. 
          WE'RE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU ALL.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.