Apr 01, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting

[7) Receive a report, hold a discussion, and provide staff direction regarding a phase 1 update of the comprehensive feasibility study for the City of Kyle Animal Care Center.]

ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ADD TO THAT? ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'LL MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM SEVEN. RECEIVE A REPORT. HOLD DISCUSSION, PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION REGARDING THE PHASE ONE UPDATE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE CITY OF KYLE ANIMAL CARE CENTER. MR. ELIZONDO. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. WE HAVE AN UPDATE FOR YOU ALL TONIGHT. THIS IS A UPDATE ON THE COMPLETION OF PHASE ONE FOR OUR FULL NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND FEASIBILITY THAT WE'RE DOING FOR THE ANIMAL CARE CENTER HERE WITHIN KYLE. SO FOR ANYONE WATCHING THAT MAY NOT KNOW THE BACKGROUND ON THIS, I'LL GIVE A QUICK OVERVIEW. THE CITY OF SAN JUAN, THE SAN MARCOS REGIONAL ANIMAL SHELTER, LET EVERYONE KNOW TOWARDS THE END OF LAST YEAR THAT THEY'LL BE RELEASING ITS INTERLOCAL PARTNERS WITHOUT THE ABILITY TO RENEW. SO THAT LED THE CITY OF KYLE TO GO EXPLORE SELF-SUSTAINING OPTIONS THAT WE WILL NEED FOR OUR ANIMAL CARE SERVICES FOR THE CITY.

STAFF PREPARED AN RFQ AND FOUND JACKSON AND RYAN THROUGH THAT PROCESS TO DO A FULL NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND FEASIBILITY STUDY, WHICH COUNCIL APPROVED A CONTRACT FOR ON JANUARY OF 2025.

THIS CONTRACT, THIS FEASIBILITY STUDY LETS US KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED IN OUR IN OUR AREA. WE BROKE IT DOWN IN THREE MAIN PHASES. SO THE FIRST PHASE WAS A FULL NEEDS ASSESSMENT, A OPERATIONS PROGRAMING ASSESSMENT, DATA ANALYTICS OF EVERYTHING THAT WAS FROM THE SAN MARCOS REGIONAL SHELTER AND EVERYTHING IN OUR AREA, AND THEN A COMMUNITY INPUT PHASE AS WELL.

THE WE HAVE COMPLETED THAT PHASE. AND SO WE WANTED TO TAKE A PAUSE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CRUCIAL PHASE, WHICH WILL BE SITE SELECTION AND OPERATIONAL FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY. WE WANT TO TAKE A PAUSE AND COME AND GIVE YOU GUYS AN UPDATE ON EXACTLY WHAT WHAT THAT FIRST PHASE ENTAILED, WHAT WE FOUND OUT, WHAT WE DID, RUN YOU GUYS THROUGH IT, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE SECOND PHASE. ONCE WE GET THROUGH THAT SECOND PHASE, WE'LL PAUSE AGAIN.

COME BACK TO YOU GUYS. WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THE SITE SELECTION, THE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY OPERATIONS, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE INTO THE THIRD PHASE, WHICH WILL BE A LITTLE BIT QUICKER, BUT WE'LL END WITH CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS OF A FACILITY ON A SPECIFIC SITE. THIS WILL TAKE US TO ABOUT THE END OF SUMMER AUGUST SEPTEMBER TIME FRAME. AT THAT POINT OF THIS YEAR. AT THAT POINT, WE'LL BE READY TO GO INTO GET A CONTRACT AND GO INTO FULL DESIGN AND EVENTUALLY INTO CONSTRUCTION PRETTY QUICKLY. SO WE'RE MOVING ALONG WITH THIS STUDY, BUT WE WANTED TO STOP AS WE FINISHED PHASE ONE TO GIVE YOU GUYS A FULL, A FULL UPDATE. SO I HAVE KIM HANSEN WITH JACKSON AND RYAN. SHE'S GOING TO RUN YOU GUYS THROUGH KIND OF THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH AND EVERYTHING FOR THAT FIRST PHASE. I ALSO THEY'VE BEEN A TREMENDOUS PARTNER WITH US. THEY'VE DONE AN INCREDIBLE JOB. I ALSO WANT TO TAKE ONE SECOND TO COMMEND BRIANNA AND HER ACOS. THEY HAVE BEEN AN INCREDIBLE RESOURCE FOR US AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, NOT JUST IN THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS IN KYLE, BUT ALSO CONNECTING US WITH ALL OF THE PARTNERS AND NONPROFITS THAT THEY WORK WITH. IT'S BEEN A REALLY GREAT TEAM, COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. SO I WILL HAND IT OVER TO KIM AND THEN AT THE END WE'LL GO OVER ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS HAVE AS WE MOVE INTO THE NEXT PHASE. BY THE WAY, WE'RE EXISTING FORWARD. LET'S GO FORWARD OKAY. HI, I'M KIM HANSEN WITH JACKSON RYAN ARCHITECTS, AND AS JESSE SAID, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A NEW ANIMAL CARE CENTER FOR THE CITY OF KYLE. I JUST WANTED TO GO THROUGH BRIEFLY THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE UNDERTAKEN SO FAR, BEGINNING WITH A SITE VISIT, WE WENT TO THE SAN MARCOS REGIONAL SHELTER TO EXAMINE THE STATE OF THAT FACILITY AND TO LEARN ABOUT THE CHALLENGES THEY FACE, AS WELL AS LOOK AT OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE COULD MAKE, IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SITUATION THAT THEY'RE FACING IN A FACILITY FOR THE CITY OF KYLE.

WE ALSO WENT THROUGH A VISIONING SESSION, AND WE REACHED OUT AHEAD OF THE SESSION. AND AGAIN, THANK YOU TO BRIANNA FOR THIS, FOR REACHING OUT TO A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS FROM

[00:40:02]

AROUND THE REGION, WILLIAMSON COUNTY, HAYS COUNTY, AS WELL AS REACHING OUT TO PAWS AND PALS.

AND WE HAD A LOT OF GREAT INPUT, BOTH VIRTUALLY AND IN PERSON FOR THESE SESSIONS, LOOKING AT A BROAD VISION, LOOKING AT FUTURE TENSE GOALS, PRIORITIES, TRYING TO DETERMINE WHAT THE BROAD VIEW GOALS WERE FOR THIS FACILITY. WE ALSO LOOKED AT THINGS LIKE ESTHETIC IMAGES OF WHAT THIS FACILITY COULD LOOK LIKE. WE LOOKED AT SPACES FOR PEOPLE AND STAFF TO IDENTIFY THINGS THAT WERE IMPORTANT TO STAKEHOLDERS. WE LOOKED AT ESPECIALLY SPACES FOR ANIMALS, THE ANIMAL HOUSING COMPONENTS, ALL THAT REPRESENT BEST PRACTICES. BUT THERE'S DIFFERENT ELEMENTS THAT PEOPLE GAVE FEEDBACK ON TO SAY WHAT WAS GOING TO BE BEST FOR THE ANIMALS OF THIS COMMUNITY. WE ALSO LOOKED AT SITE ELEMENTS AND THINGS THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY AS WELL. WE THEN WENT INTO A PROGRAMING SESSION AND IN PROGRAMING. THESE WERE VERY DETAILED INTERVIEWS THAT TOOK PLACE OVER THE COURSE OF TWO DIFFERENT DAYS. THIS WAS NITTY GRITTY DETAILS ABOUT WHAT EACH SPACE WOULD NEED IN ORDER TO SERVE THE OPERATIONAL GOALS THAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE. THIS WAS BROUGHT IN TO SPREADSHEETS AND TO ACTUAL AREAS AND SPACES, AND TO ADJACENCIES AND FLOWS, SO THAT WE COULD START TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH SPACE THE BUILDING WOULD ACTUALLY REQUIRE. AND AS JESSE MENTIONED, WE ALSO WENT THROUGH A COMMUNITY INPUT PERIOD THAT INVOLVED INPUT SESSIONS AS WELL AS A SURVEY. AND WE GOT A LOT OF GREAT INFORMATION. AND ONE OF THE KEY POINTS HERE ON THAT MOSTLY BLUE CIRCLE IS THAT EVERYONE WAS OVERWHELMINGLY IN SUPPORT OF A NEW FACILITY FOR THE CITY OF KYLE. AND ADDITIONALLY, WE SAW A LOT OF SUPPORT FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT IN THAT FACILITY. AND FINALLY IN THE COMMUNITY INPUT AREA. WE GOT A LOT OF INPUT ON THE CHALLENGES, CONCERNS THAT INDIVIDUALS HAD, OVERCROWDING IN THE CURRENT FACILITY, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING THOSE KINDS OF HABITAT ISSUES, ESPECIALLY IN CREATING HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR THE ANIMALS, WERE ALL STATED AS BEING VERY IMPORTANT. WE ALSO SAW A DESIRE TO PROVIDE VETERINARY SERVICES AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO IN ALL OF THIS PROCESS OF ALL THIS DATA ACQUISITION, BOTH QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE, WE TOOK THIS INFORMATION STAKEHOLDER INPUT, COMMUNITY INPUT DATA FROM SAN MARCOS AND CREATED A SCALED DIAGRAM. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PLAN. IT'S JUST A DIAGRAM. IT DOESN'T EXIST ON A SITE. SO THAT WE COULD FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH SPACE WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE NEEDED. RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE A VERY, VERY PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF ABOUT 21,000FT■!S. WE DO THIK THAT WILL ADJUST GIVEN AN ACTUAL SITE. THIS DIAGRAM ALLOWED US TO EXAMINE HOW TO ADDRESS HEALTHFUL ADOPTION SPACES, EFFECTIVE ISOLATION, VETERINARY SERVICES AND THE COMMUNITY SERVICES THAT THE THAT WE FOUND. STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS STATED WERE REALLY IMPORTANT TO THEM. AND OUR NEXT PHASE, AS MENTIONED, WE HAVE THE SITE VALUATION. WE HAVE, AGAIN, A VERY CURSORY START OF SAYING WE NEED APPROXIMATELY 2 TO 4 ACRES ONCE WE GET SITE SITES TO EVALUATE, WE'LL LOOK AT ACCESSIBILITY, VISIBILITY, ACCESS TO CARE. WE'LL LOOK AT A WHOLE BUNCH OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS IN THAT AND CREATE SOME POTENTIAL FACILITY SITE PLANS FOR TO LOOK AT. AND THEN FINALLY, THE OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY WILL ALLOW US TO LOOK AT THE FEASIBILITY AND STAFFING COSTS, OPERATIONAL COSTS, AS WELL AS A CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE. AND SO WE'LL BE MOVING INTO THOSE PHASES AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO CREATE A SITE SITE PLAN OR MULTIPLE SITE PLANS FOR REVIEW ON ACTUAL SITES. SO BEFORE WE MOVE INTO QUESTIONS, I JUST WANT TO SAY YOU CAN SEE HOW ALL OF THAT TOGETHER IS KIND OF LIKE THE BEHIND THE SCENES WORK THAT SETS THE STAGE FOR THIS NEXT PHASE, WHICH IS LOOKING AT SITES, LOOKING AT TAKING THOSE OPERATIONS AND ALL THAT DATA, WORKING IT INTO A FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY PLAN. SO THIS NEXT PHASE, WHEN WE COME BACK TO YOU GUYS, WILL BE A MORE FLESHED OUT PLAN ON A SITE, BUT WITHOUT ALL OF THIS BACKGROUND, WITHOUT THE OPERATIONS BEING BUILT IN, WITHOUT THE DATA, YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS IN THE NEXT PHASE. SO WE'RE EXCITED TO MOVE FORWARD. HERE YOU ALL'S FEEDBACK AND TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU JESSE. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS COUNCILMEMBER TOBIAS OKAY. THANK YOU. SO IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS DIAGRAM IT'S BASICALLY CATERED OUT TO A LOT OF THE SMALLER ANIMALS SUCH AS DOGS CATS SO FORTH. WHAT WOULD BE THE SITUATION TO WHERE YOU WOULD RUN INTO LARGER ANIMALS THAT NEED HOUSING, SUCH AS LIVESTOCK SUCH AS ABANDONED HORSES AND OR OR FOWL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT?

[00:45:03]

WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO LEAD FROM THERE. BECAUSE IF IT'S GOING TO BE AN ENTIRE ANIMAL CENTER, I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT EVERYTHING FROM REPTILES TO ABUSED GOATS TO YOU NAME IT, AND THEY'RE STILL OUT THERE. WE EVEN HAVE A SMALL SPACE FOR THE WILDLIFE, WHICH WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. SOMETIMES THERE'S WILDLIFE THAT COMES IN AND NEEDS TO BE SENT OUT. WE DO HAVE IN OUR PROGRAM DOCUMENT A SMALL BARN THAT WOULD HAVE SEVERAL STALLS THAT WOULD BE FLEXIBLY USED FOR VARIOUS ANIMALS. BUT I THINK THAT THE HORSE, THE HORSES, THERE'S AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY. IS THAT CORRECT ABOUT SO THEY WOULDN'T BE HELD FOR VERY LONG, BUT GOATS AND PIGS AND OTHER OCCASIONAL LARGE ANIMALS WOULD NEED A SPACE AND THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE THAT. SO IT WOULD BE IN A PADDOCK SPACE THAT'S FENCED, ALLOW FOR EASY DROP OFF. AND THE BARN, IT'S WE WERE LOOKING AT MAYBE A FOUR STALL BARN THAT WOULD HAVE A SPACE FOR STORAGE AND A COUPLE STALLS FOR ANIMALS THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR FLEXIBLE HOLDING FOR THOSE LARGE ANIMALS AS WELL. AND WE DO HAVE A SMALL A SMALL MAMMALS AND EXOTIC SPACE WITHIN THE FACILITY, AS WELL AS A ROOM FOR WILDLIFE. SO WE ARE LOOKING ACROSS THE SPECTRUM, BUT I THINK THE HORSES ARE ONE THAT WOULDN'T BE KEPT FOR. YEAH, YEAH, ANIMAL CONTROL SUPERVISOR. YES, THE COUNTY UNDER STATE LAW COVERS ALL OF OUR LIVESTOCK ISSUES. TECHNICALLY, ONCE WE'VE DONE OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO TRY AND FIND AN OWNER, THEY HAVE THEIR WRANGLER COME OUT AND HANDLE ALL THAT. OKAY, SO THE MAJORITY OF THOSE KIND OF ANIMALS WILL BE HANDLED THROUGH THE COUNTY THROUGH THEIR THEIR PROCEDURE AND PROCESS. AND THEN. OKAY, SO THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS THE FOLLOW UP ON THE VETERINARIAN. SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE WOULD PROBABLY NEED TO ACQUIRE A VETERINARIAN SERVICES IN THIS FACILITY THAT WOULD NOT ONLY JUST BE BUDGETED FOR I GUESS. WOULD THIS BE POSSIBLY FOR A CITY EMPLOYEE OR WOULD THIS BE OUTSOURCED? DO WE KNOW? I MEAN, I KNOW I'M GOING A LITTLE BIT INTO DETAIL, BUT I'M SURE THESE ARE GOING TO BE QUESTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO COME UP. THE COST OF THE VETERINARIAN SERVICES, OR IS IT GOING TO BE SOMETHING WHERE WE WOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP IT OPEN FOR THE PUBLIC TO BRING IN THEIR ANIMALS? YOU KNOW, HOW THEY HAVE SOME OF THESE? I GUESS THESE THINGS THAT YOU SEE AT H-E-B WHERE YOU BRING YOUR CAT OR YOU BRING YOUR DOG TO GO GET NEUTERED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WILL THESE SERVICES POSSIBLY BE IN THERE AS WELL? AND THEN, OF COURSE, WHERE WOULD WE KEEP THEM FOR THE DAY, INCLUDING THE OTHER INDIVIDUAL, OTHER ANIMALS THAT ARE THERE AS WELL? SO WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT SEVERAL DIFFERENT STRATEGIES FOR STAFFING A VETERINARY CLINIC WITHIN THE SHELTER. THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF THE VETERINARY CLINIC HERE WOULD BE TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE SHELTER ANIMALS. SO THE ANIMALS THAT ARE UNDER THE CARE OF THE CITY. THERE ARE LAWS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT SEPARATE VETERINARY CARE IN AN ANIMAL SHELTER VERSUS PRIVATE CARE. SO THE IDEA IS THAT WE COULD CREATE FLEXIBLY USED SPACES IN OUR KIND OF MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM THAT MAYBE ALLOW OUTSIDE NONPROFITS TO COME IN AND UTILIZE THE SPACE TO PROVIDE LOW COST SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT WAYS TO FLEXIBLY USE SPACES TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY. BUT THE STAFF OF THE SHELTER WOULD BE SERVICING THE NEEDS OF THE SHELTER ANIMALS IN TERMS OF VETERINARY STAFF AND COSTS. IT'S A IT'S A BIG CHALLENGE ACROSS THE COUNTRY AS WELL, IS JUST FINDING VETERINARIANS AS WELL AS THE COST OF IT. SO WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT AT DIFFERENT OPTIONS, A FULL TIME STAFF OR A FULL TIME VET, VET, VETERINARY TECHNICIAN ALONGSIDE A PART TIME VET HAVING CONTRACTS WITH LOCAL VETERINARIANS TO COME IN CERTAIN DAYS A WEEK TO DO THE WORK. WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND THEN OUTLINING KIND OF THE PROS AND CONS AND THE COSTS OF THAT, SO THAT A DECISION FOR HOW TO ACTUALLY STRUCTURE IT COULD BE MADE WITH, WITH OPEN EYES, THAT MOVES A LITTLE BIT INTO THAT PHASE TWO OF THE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY.

OKAY. THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S ALL I GOT, SIR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU KIM I WAS ACTUALLY VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE OUTREACH THAT AND THE SURVEY THAT Y'ALL PUT OUT. HOW HOW MUCH INPUT AND FEEDBACK DID Y'ALL GET? I GUESS IN THE WORKSHOPS THAT THAT WILL BE A QUESTION YOU CAN ANSWER. BUT I DO LIKE THE SCALE FLOW DIAGRAM DESIGN. I BELIEVE YOU'RE CAPTURING THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY ROOM, THE ADOPTION ROOM, THE MEETING ROOM, ALL OF THAT THAT REALLY ORIENTS THE, I GUESS, THE OWNERS TO ADOPT THE PETS. RIGHT. SO WHAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO PUSH FOR THAT HIGH QUALITY, GREAT FACILITY ADOPTED, YOU KNOW, IS THE DESIRED GOAL, RIGHT? NOT NOT TO HAVE THEM STAY BUT HOPEFULLY ADOPTED SO THAT THAT VISION I HOPE THAT YOU REALLY CAN CAPTURE IN THE EARLY PRESENTATIONS THAT WHERE YOU SHOWED A LOT OF THE

[00:50:03]

VERY NICE RENDERINGS AND, AND I REALLY WANT TO SEE THIS PROJECT BECOME THAT, THAT ONE THAT WE'RE REALLY PROUD OF HERE IN THE CITY OF KYLE, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S WELL DESERVED. I THINK OUR RESIDENTS ARE BEHIND IT. YOU SAW THE UNANIMOUS SUPPORT FOR IT. SO YEAH. ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU KNOW, YOU GOT FROM THE COMMUNITY. AND I'M ALSO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR GOING AND LOOKING AT THE OTHER SHELTERS AND GETTING SOME COMPARISONS OF WHERE YOU CAN IMPROVE UPON THOSE, THOSE FACILITIES AND WITH STAFF AND WITH THE ACOS TO HELP YOU TO COORDINATE A LOT OF THE VERY NEEDED PROGRAMS THAT ARE GOING TO BE NEEDED TO SUSTAIN AN ANIMAL, ANIMAL ADOPTION SHELTER.

WELL, WE SAW A LOT WITH THOSE. COMMUNITY, WITH ALL THE COMMUNITY INPUT, WAS JUST A, A, AN ENTHUSIASM FOR A BROAD SPECTRUM OF POSSIBLE SERVICES. AND SO THE IDEA THAT THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT THIS FACILITY COULD DO, AND WE'RE TALKING WITH STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL. WE HEARD THE SAME THING. THERE ARE SO MANY POSSIBILITIES. AND SO WHAT WE REALLY WANT TO CAPTURE NOW IS CREATING A FACILITY THAT THAT MAKES SPACE FOR THOSE POSSIBILITIES, EVEN IF NOT EVERYTHING IS ABLE TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON DAY ONE, THAT WE CAN HAVE A STRATEGY FOR IMPLEMENTATION INTO THE FUTURE, BUT THAT WE START WITH BEST PRACTICES AND GIVING THE COMMUNITY THE IMMEDIATE SERVICES THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR. BUT IT HAS BEEN IT WAS A REALLY GREAT RESPONSE. IT WAS GREAT TO SEE. AND I FEEL LIKE WE GOT A LOT OF REALLY IMPORTANT FEEDBACK WITH IT. AND THEN I GUESS FOR BRIANNA, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

THE CAPACITY, BRIANNA, IS 21,000FT■!S ABOUT AVERAGE RIGHT NOW. WHAT WHAT KIND OF I GUESS INTAKE ARE WE LOOKING AT THAT THAT THIS WOULD HOLD ON A MONTH OR AT A YEAR. SO A PART A BIG PART OF THIS IS FACTORING IN PROGRAMS AND FACTORING IN FOSTER TO MOVE THINGS OUT OF THE FACILITY. AND WE'VE BEEN DOING 14. YOU'VE BEEN CALCULATING BASED OFF OF THE 14 DAY LENGTH OF STAY. SO THAT'S THAT'S A HARD THING TO REACH. BUT KIND OF MAKING THOSE PROGRAMS IN EXISTENCE AHEAD OF TIME, MAYBE LOOKING INTO SOME PROGRAMS SO WE CAN MOVE ANIMALS OUT OF THE AREA. BECAUSE MOVING ANIMALS UP NORTH HAS BEEN A VERY COMMON THING. AND THEN FOSTER PROGRAMS, GOOD RESCUE COORDINATIONS WE'VE GOT THE LIST OF ALL THE RESCUES THAT WE'VE SAN MARCOS HAS BEEN WORKING WITH, WITH OUR ANIMALS. SO WE'VE GOT ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO MAKING SURE PROGRAMS ARE GOING TO BE HELPING TO PUSH THESE ANIMALS OUT. WE HAVE BEEN KIND OF TALKING ABOUT LIKE WE DO START TO SEE SOME INCREASES IN THE NUMBERS RECENTLY, AND WE'RE NOT SURE WHETHER OR NOT THOSE ARE LONG TERM THINGS OR JUST KIND OF SHORT TERM BASED OFF OF WHAT OTHER ENTITIES AROUND THE AREA ARE DOING FOR INTAKE AND CLOSING INTAKE. SO WE'RE KIND OF LOOKING AT I WAS TALKING TO KIM EARLIER THAT I'M LIKE SOME OF THOSE SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS LOOK LIKE WE MIGHT BE A LITTLE TIGHT, BUT IT'S THAT WHOLE PROGRAMS AND GETTING THINGS OUT INSTEAD OF KEEPING THEM THERE FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME. SO WE HAVE ALMOST MORE KENNELS THAN SAN MARCOS. IS THIS BIGGER OR ABOUT THE SAME SCALE OR SMALLER STILL? SO SMALLER. SAN MARCOS IS OPERATING AS A FULL REGIONAL SHELTER. AND WE'RE THIS IS ALL CONTEMPLATING THE CITY LIMITS OF KYLE. I HAVE TO DO I HAVE TO GIVE THEM A BIG KUDOS. THEY HAVE SHARED THEY WERE IN ALL OF OUR VISIONING AND WORKSHOPS. THEY HAVE SHARED ALL OF THEIR DATA ACROSS THE WHOLE REGION WITH US. THEY'VE BEEN AN INCREDIBLE PARTNER AS WE GO THROUGH THIS FEASIBILITY. BUT THIS IS NOT CONTEMPLATING A FULL REGIONAL SHELTER LIKE THEY ARE CURRENTLY TODAY. AND I GUESS THE LAST THING I'LL SAY, I DO LIKE SOME OF THE LOCATIONS Y'ALL ARE ALREADY LOOKING AT ON Y'ALL'S MAP. IT LOOKS LIKE ALL OF THEM WOULD BE REALLY COMPLEMENTARY TO AN ANIMAL SHELTER Y'ALL STARTED. LOOKS LIKE Y'ALL HIT ALL THE OPEN GREEN AREAS ON THE MAP THERE. THOSE WERE ACTUALLY FROM THE COMMUNITY INPUT SESSION, SO THEY WEREN'T. BUT YES, PEOPLE WERE DEFINITELY GROUPING AROUND THOSE GREEN AREAS THINKING ABOUT HOW THEY COULD BE TIED INTO PARKS AND PARKS PLANS AND THE VIBE TRAIL. AND I FEEL LIKE THE THERE'S AN INTEREST IN THAT FROM THE COMMUNITY. WE HAVEN'T STARTED IN EARNEST LOOKING AT SITES, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DO RIGHT NOW. SO I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY GOOD JOB WITH THIS. I'VE BEEN IMPRESSED WITH WHAT I'VE SEEN WITH THE DESIGNS AND THE PLANS SO FAR. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? I HAVE A COUPLE THINGS. NUMBER ONE IS I'M ASSUMING THAT WITH THE SAN MARCOS SHELTER CEASING OPERATIONS IN TERMS OF THEIR REGIONAL PARTNERS, THEIR INTENTION IS TO BECOME A LOCAL SAN MARCOS SERVING SHELTER, WHICH MEANS THAT SAN MARCOS IS NOT NEEDING THEY'RE NOT PLANNING ON MAKING ANY CHANGES. THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE THE SAN MARCOS REGIONAL SHELTER A SAN

[00:55:01]

MARCOS CITY OF SAN MARCOS ANIMAL SHELTER. I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THEM, BUT THAT'S DEFINITELY WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE BASED ON THEIR PLANS OF. SO WHEN IS THE LAST TIME THAT THAT YOUR GROUP HAS ENGAGED WITH THE COUNTY? BECAUSE THE COUNTY WAS USING SAN MARCOS AND NO LONGER WILL. SO THEY'RE IN THE EXACT SAME TIMELINE AS WE ARE. HAVE YOU ALL ENGAGED WITH THEM RECENTLY? WE HAVE AND WE ARE IN VERY, VERY PRELIMINARY TALKS WITH THEM ABOUT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAMING OVER OVERLAPPING WHAT THEY WHAT THEY HAVE PLANNED. BUT IT'S WE'RE AT THE VERY BEGINNING STAGES OF, OF MEETING WITH THEM. OKAY. WELL MY ENCOURAGEMENT AND IT'S REALLY UP TO THE COUNCIL.

IT'S SORT OF A POLICY DECISION IS DO WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROGRAM, WHICH ONLY CONSIDERS THE LOCAL NEEDS, THE CITY'S NEEDS SEPARATELY FROM THE COUNTY, OR DO WE PAUSE WHERE WE ARE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE ENGAGED THE COUNTY FULLY, SO THAT WE ARE COORDINATING WHAT WE DO WITH WHAT THEY DO? AND IF IT'S TWO SEPARATE FACILITIES AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE 1 OR 2 OR MULTIPLES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, THEN THAT'S FINE. BUT IF THEY'RE WANTING TO PARTNER WITH US, THEN IT WILL CHANGE THE FLOOR PLAN. IT WILL CHANGE THE LAYOUT, IT'LL CHANGE POTENTIALLY THE SERVICES OFFERED, AND IT WILL ALSO POTENTIALLY CHANGE THE SITES SELECTION. SO IT'S LIKE EVERYTHING THAT MOVES FORWARD FROM HERE. IF WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, WHETHER WE'RE JUST BUILDING TO SOLVE FOR OUR ANIMAL SHELTER NEEDS OR WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO BE IN COLLABORATION WITH HAYS COUNTY, I FEEL LIKE THE WE MAY BE MAKING A MISTAKE. NO, THAT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT. AND LET ME PUT YOU AT EASE, MAYOR. WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT OUR TIME FRAME HAS TO STOP AT ALL. BASED ON OUR INITIAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COUNTY, WE THINK THAT WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE PHASES, WALKING THROUGH THE PHASES OF THIS FEASIBILITY STUDY AND THIS NEEDS ASSESSMENT. AND IN THAT TIME, WE CAN DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST OUTLINED, THE NEEDS OF THE COUNTY, IF THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME SORT OF PARTNERSHIP OR PROGRAMING OVERLAP. AND BY THE TIME WE GET TO WE STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED KIND OF A CRITICAL PHASE WITH JACKSON AND RYAN. BY THE TIME WE GET TO THAT CRITICAL PHASE, WE WILL HAVE WORKED OUT WHATEVER IT'S GOING TO BE AND IT WILL NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HINDER, STOP OR CHANGE THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE GOING IN. SO WE'RE WE'RE RUNNING THOSE TWO IN TANDEM. IS THE COUNTY UNDERGOING A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THEIR NEEDS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS? I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE COUNTY, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THEY ARE. OKAY. SO IF THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET, THEN HOW DO WE KNOW THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS ACCURATE? BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY WOULD NEED OR HOW MANY CANDLES OR WHAT THEY WOULD EXPECT THE DEMAND WOULD BE. SO THE ONE THING THAT I'LL ADD WITH THIS IS THE WAY THAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT MOVING THIS FORWARD IS TO HAVE A DESIGN, ESPECIALLY IN THIS CONCEPTUAL PHASE, THAT WILL BE FLEXIBLE, TO ALLOW IT TO MEET THE INTAKE NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS OF WHATEVER THE POPULATION THAT IT'S BEING SERVED. SO THAT'S THE FIRST IS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF MAKING SURE THAT IT CAN IT COULD EXPAND, IT COULD GROW IF IT NEEDED TO GROW. AND BECAUSE WE'RE IN THIS CONCEPTUAL PHASE, WE'RE NOT IN THAT KIND OF DETAILED DESIGN PHASE WHERE IT WOULD REALLY IMPACT A SCHEDULE. I KNOW THAT HAYS COUNTY DID A FEASIBILITY STUDY A WHILE BACK, AND WE ALSO DID HAVE SOME REPRESENTATION OF HAYS COUNTY DURING THE VISIONING AND PROGRAMING SESSIONS. SO THERE WAS SOME INITIAL INTERACTIONS THERE. I THINK THAT IN, IN, IN CONSIDERATION OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE, THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE WOULD BE THE NUMBER OF ANIMALS THAT WOULD BE BEING TAKEN IN. RIGHT. BUT THAT'S SO BRIANNA JUST SAID THE 21,000FT■S GOING TO WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER ZUNIGA WAS ASKING MIGHT BE TIGHT FOR THE CITY OF KYLE. SO HOW IS IT THAT GOING FROM THE CITY OF KYLE TO THE CITY OF KYLE, PLUS EVERYTHING OUTSIDE OF SAN MARCOS CAN CAN? HOW CAN YOU ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? MAYOR, IF I CAN TRY TO CHIME IN AND PERHAPS ANSWER THAT QUESTION, I THINK THE COUNTY'S ONE OF THE PROPOSALS THEY'RE LOOKING AT IS, IS RATHER THAN HAVING ONE FACILITY FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTY IS TO PERHAPS HAVE TWO TO 3 TO 4 OF THOSE AROUND IN THE COUNTY. AND SO IF THE PARTNERSHIP WAS WITH THE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF KYLE, WE WOULD LOOK AT TAKING WHAT DO WE NEED? THIS IS A DESIGN BASED ON JUST THE CITY OF KYLE'S NEEDS THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED, AND PERHAPS ENLARGING THAT SLIGHTLY TO ENCAPSULATE A SLIGHTLY LARGER SERVICE AREA THAT WE MIGHT HAVE FOR ONE OF THESE REGIONAL TYPE CENTERS. SO THAT'S THE DISCUSSION WE'VE BEEN HAVING IS, WELL, WHAT EXACTLY WOULD BE THE BOUNDARIES OF THAT REGION? HOW WOULD IT LOOK? AND THEN WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS OF ANIMALS THAT WE THINK WE WOULD NEED FROM THAT LARGER REGION, WHICH WOULD THEN TAKE THESE FOUR PLANS, THIS FLOW, AND SIMPLY ENLARGE IT FOR THE LARGER NUMBER OF ANIMALS THAT WOULD BE EXPECTED. THEN THERE WOULD BE THE COST RELATED TO IT AND THE OPERATING COST OF THE FACILITY. AND THEN THERE WOULD BE THE OPERATIONS WITH IT AS WELL. SO WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS PREPARE BOTH OF THOSE IN TANDEM. SO WE WOULD HAVE A STANDALONE FACILITY COST, A STANDALONE OPERATING COST. AND

[01:00:01]

THEN PERHAPS IF THERE WAS A PARTNERSHIP, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE. SO WE CAN SHOW THOSE THOSE DIFFERENCES TO BOTH THE COUNCIL AND THEN THE COUNTY TO SEE IF A PARTNERSHIP CAN BE HAD.

ARE WE GOING TO HAVE GOOD, RELIABLE DATA ON THE DEMAND? EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.

MAYOR, I THINK THE SECOND PART TO THAT OF HOW WE HOW WE CAN KNOW AND HOW WE CAN RUN BOTH OF THESE IN TANDEM TOGETHER IS THE FACT THAT WE HAVE ALL OF THE DATA FROM THE SAN MARCOS REGIONAL SHELTER, WHICH IS INTAKE FROM THE ENTIRE REGION. AND THEY HAVE THEY HAVE GOOD DATA, GOOD ENOUGH DATA TO WHERE WE CAN SEE WHERE THOSE ANIMALS ARE COMING FROM ACROSS THE ENTIRE REGION. AND WE CAN WE CAN BUILD FORECASTS AND GROWTH CHARTS OFF OF THAT SO THAT IF WE ARE LOOKING AT TWO DIFFERENT MODELS, ONE BEING JUST THE CITY LIMITS OF KYLE AND ONE BEING OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS OF KYLE, NO MATTER HOW FAR OUT WE GO, WE CAN USE THAT DATA TO ANALYZE WHERE IT WOULD BE NOT ONLY IN THE COMING YEAR, BUT OVER THE NEXT 5 OR 10 YEARS. OKAY. WELL, MY ONLY SUGGESTION MIGHT BE TO HAVE A I KNOW THEY HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT THEY'VE TASKED, AND I THINK IT'S JUDGE BECERRA AND COMMISSIONER INGALSBE IS WHAT I WAS TOLD. SO IT MIGHT DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY ARE IN THEIR PROCESS, THERE MIGHT BE SOME SYNERGIES THAT COULD BE CREATED IF WE OFFERED UP JACKSON AND RYAN TO POTENTIALLY PARTICIPATE IN A FEASIBILITY STUDY ON THEIR BEHALF AS WELL. SO THAT WE HAD WE HAVE ONE GROUP THAT'S TAKING IN BOTH CONSIDERATIONS AND FOLDING THAT INTO A, YOU KNOW, A UNIFIED PROGRAM. SO IT'S JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT IS TRYING TO IS TRYING TO CREATE THAT ALIGNMENT AND SYNERGY WITH THE COUNTY, BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THAT'S COMING. IT JUST, YOU KNOW, I MET WITH A DIFFERENT COMMISSIONER TODAY WHO'S VERY MUCH LOOKING AT KYLE AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COUNTY TO PARTNER. AND SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT'S COMING, AND I WOULD LOVE FOR JACKSON AND RYAN TO BE ENGAGED IN THAT WAY. AND, YOU KNOW, IF YOU ALL COULD TAKE THAT MESSAGE TO THE COMMITTEE AND OBVIOUSLY THEY DO WITH IT 100% WHAT THEY WANT. BUT IF THAT'S SOMETHING THEY WANT TO EXPLORE, IT MIGHT BE GOOD FOR YOU TO BE RETAINED TO SO THAT IT'S WITHIN YOUR SCOPE. WHEREAS RIGHT NOW YOUR SCOPE IS VERY LIMITED TO JUST THE CITY OF KYLE. WE FEEL THE SAME WAY AND IT'S FULLY ON OUR RADAR. OKAY. I'M DONE. COUNCILMEMBER HEIZER YEAH, JESSE, I'M GLAD WE'RE MOVING FORWARD AND NOT WAITING. BUT WITH WITH THAT SAID, ARE WE THINKING ABOUT A POSSIBLE DEADLINE THAT WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THE COUNTY? YES, IT'S ACTUALLY MORE THE DEADLINE IS LESS OF A DATE AND MORE OF A TIMEFRAME OF OUR MOVING FORWARD WITH THE STUDY. SO ONCE WE ONCE WE MOVE INTO ACTUAL DESIGN, YOU KNOW, ONCE WE GET THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS OUT, COUNCIL'S GOOD WITH THEM AND WE START TO MOVE INTO A CONTRACT WITH CONCEPTUAL DESIGN. I MEAN, WITH ACTUAL DESIGN, THERE'S ELEMENTS OF DESIGN THAT WE DON'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH UNLESS WE KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH A PARTNERSHIP. LIKE THE MAYOR WAS SAYING, IF WE NEED TO RIGHTSIZE IT TO HAVE ANOTHER 10,000FT■!S OR HAVE A DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION BASED ON THE TYPES OF ANIMALS THAT ARE COMING IN, THERE'S WE HAVE WE HAVE ELEMENTS OF GOING ALL THE WAY THROUGH CONSTRUCTION WHERE WE WOULD NEED TO KNOW AT THOSE POINTS, AND WE WILL AND HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATING THOSE TO THE COUNTY AS WE TALK TO THEM. SO THEY'VE BEEN MADE FULLY AWARE O, OF WHERE OUR OF OUR EXPECTATION OF THE PHASED OUT PLAN OF WHEN WE NEED A YES OR A NO. I WOULD SAY WE'RE IN PRELIMINARY TALKS WITH THEM. THEY WILL BE MADE FULLY AWARE. YES, SIR. SO Y'ALL Y'ALL HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COUNTY BEFORE ABOUT AN ADOPTION CENTER, HAVEN'T Y'ALL? I HAVE NOT I DON'T THINK THIS IS LIKE A NEW A NEW CONVERSATION. I THINK THAT WE'VE HAD THE CONVERSATIONS WHEN IT WAS DECIDED THAT SAN MARCOS WAS NO LONGER GOING TO BE THE SHELTER THAT MAY HAVE PREDATED ME. I HAVE NOT HAD PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COUNTY. I THINK WE'VE HAD THE CONVERSATIONS, HAVEN'T WE, WITH DIFFERENT MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, COMMISSIONERS COURT.

WE HAVE NOT HAD A FULL BRIEFING AND IN FRONT OF THE FULL BODY, BUT WE HAVE HAD INDIVIDUAL CONVERSATIONS, AND I KNOW ALL OF THOSE MEMBERS ARE AWARE IN SOME FORM OR FASHION. I THINK WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET FROM A CONCEPTUAL PHASE OF IT'S POSSIBLE. HERE'S WHAT IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE TO HEAR SOME SPECIFIC NUMBERS OF HOW IT WOULD WORK, HOW MANY SQUARE FEET, WHAT THE FOOTPRINT OF THE FACILITY WOULD BE, WHAT THE COST WOULD BE, WHAT THE PARTNERSHIP WOULD LOOK LIKE.

SO WE COULD ACTUALLY OUTLINE SOME BUSINESS TERMS. WE'RE JUST NOT THERE RIGHT NOW. AND THAT'S AGAIN, THAT'S THE GOAL OF THE PROCESS, IS TO FLUSH THIS OUT SO WE CAN HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT A PARTNERSHIP WOULD LOOK LIKE. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE INTERESTED IN TOO. SO WE COULD TRY TO SEE IF WE COULD MOVE FORWARD. YEAH I JUST WANT TO SAY LIKE, YOU KNOW LIKE WITH ALL THE PROJECTS, THE LONGER YOU DO WAIT ON THEM, THERE'S THAT. THE COST GOES UP ON WITH MOVING. RIGHT.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO CAPTURE WHAT WE CAN AND BE AS READY FOR WHEN THE TIME COMES THAT WE NO LONGER HAVE SAN MARCOS AVAILABLE. WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF PAUSING OUR DIRECTION OF WHERE WE'RE GOING.

WE'RE. EVA. THANK YOU. I COULD JUST ADD ONE MORE POINT. YOU KNOW, THESE ARE GREAT CONVERSATIONS TO HAVE. AND I AND I KNOW THE RESIDENTS NEED TO BE ABLE TO HEAR THIS, BUT THE MAYBE

[01:05:07]

SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE CONCERNS MAYBE I'M HAVING WHEN WE START PARTNERING UP IS, LET'S SAY WE HAVE A FACILITY HERE IN KYLE AND WE PARTNER UP WITH THE COUNTY. THAT ALSO MEANS WE'RE GOING TO SERVE OTHER JURISDICTIONS AS WELL. CORRECT. THAT MEANS PEOPLE FROM BUDA ARE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PICK UP ANIMALS FROM THERE, FROM DRIPPING SPRINGS, DRIFTWOOD ALL OVER THE PLACE WOULD END UP IN OUR FACILITY HERE. SO WHERE WOULD THE TAX DOLLARS FROM THOSE JURISDICTIONS ASSIST WITH IF IT CAME TO OUR JUST THE CITY OF KYLE, OR IF WE GO WITH JUST THE CITY OF KYLE MODEL? WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT WE CAN JUST ADJUST OUR POPULATION GROWTH AS A CITY AND KEEP IT WITHIN OUR REGION. AND, AND IF ANYTHING THAT THE COUNTY HAS, WE WOULD TRY TO WORK SOMETHING OUT ON THEIR END. BUT I THINK THE MAIN THING WHEN IT COMES TO INTAKE IS YOU WANT TO GET THESE ANIMALS IN AND OUT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. THIS IS NOT A VACATION HOME FOR THESE THESE ANIMALS, THEY ARE STRAYS. THEY ARE DOGS AND CATS THAT ARE PROBABLY 90% NEGLECTED AND PROBABLY WOULD HAVE A VERY HARD TIME BEING ADOPTED BECAUSE OF MAYBE THE CONDITION OF THE HEALTH OF THE ANIMAL. SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE'VE GOT TO CONSIDER AS WELL. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHEN I'M STARTING TO THINK ABOUT WHEN WE'RE PARTNERING UP WITH THE COUNTY, WHERE WHERE DOES IT DRAW IN THE AGREEMENTS. BECAUSE LET'S SAY WE DRAW A FIVE YEAR AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY.

FIVE YEARS LATER, FIVE YEARS IS GOING TO GO BY QUICK. THEN WE GOT TO DRAW UP ANOTHER CONTRACT AND THEN WE'RE ALREADY OUTGROWN, AND THEN WE'RE STUCK THERE BRINGING IN OTHER, OTHER AREAS OF ANIMALS FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT. AND OF COURSE, THAT TIES INTO MANPOWER, THAT TIES INTO VET VETERINARIAN COSTS, FOOD COSTS, AIR CONDITION, HEATER, AC, WATER. YOU GOT TO ADD ALL OF THOSE IN FOR THOSE ANIMALS. SO IT'S JUST SOMETHING TO MAYBE TO CONSIDER WHEN WE'RE MAKING THESE PLANS. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT POINT. AND WHAT WE WOULD SAY IS, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE TO BE DETERMINED ALL ALL THE DIFFERENT BUSINESS TERMS. BUT THE IDEA WOULD BE ANY ANIMAL THAT'S COMING INTO THIS FACILITY, IF THERE IS A PARTNERSHIP WITH US IN THE COUNTY, ANY ANIMAL THAT'S COMING IN OUTSIDE OF KYLE, THE COUNTY IS PAYING THE FULL COST OF THAT INTAKE, THE FULL COST OF THE BUILDING COSTS THAT WE'VE HAD TO UPSIZE THE BUILDING TO, TO TAKE IT AS WELL AS THE OPERATING COST. SO WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE DETAILS OF EXACTLY HOW THAT WOULD WORK. BUT THAT'S BEEN THE PREMISE OF OUR DISCUSSIONS. AND THE ALSO PART OF THAT, THE IDEA IS THAT WE BOTH GET A NICER FACILITY THAN WE WOULD OTHERWISE GET BY OURSELVES. SO THE COUNTY BENEFITS FROM THE ARRANGEMENT BECAUSE IT'S LESS COST FOR THEM.

THEY ALSO HAVE A NICER FACILITY THAN THEY WOULD OTHERWISE PROBABLY BE ABLE TO DO ON THEIR OWN. AND THE SAME IS TRUE FOR US. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT IT AS A WIN WIN OPPORTUNITY THAT WE WOULD HAVE LOWER COSTS AND A BETTER FACILITY, AND MORE ACCESS TO THE TYPES OF SERVICES THAT ARE NEEDED. BUT TO YOUR POINT, THOSE ARE ALL SPECIFIC DEAL POINTS THAT HAVE TO BE NEGOTIATED AND PUT THROUGH. BUT IT STARTS WITH UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS THE TRUE COST AND THE NEED, AND THEN WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO DIVIDE IT UP. OKAY, SO THEN JUST ONE LAST POINT WHEN IT COMES TO THE MONEY, BECAUSE THE FINANCES SURE. ARE THERE GRANT OR FEDERAL FUNDING OR STATE FUNDING THAT ASSIST WITH THESE TYPES OF PROGRAMS OR THESE TYPES OF SHELTERS? I'M SURE THERE ARE, COUNCILMAN, AND MAYBE BRIANNA KNOWS OF A FEW, BUT I WOULD SAY WHEN IT COMES TO THE FUNDING AND THE OPERATIONS OF IT, WE THE GRANTS WOULD BE SECONDARY. AS YOU KNOW, A BONUS. YEAH. YOU ASKED A QUESTION OF WHERE DOES WHERE WHERE DO ALL THOSE DEAL POINTS COME TOGETHER? AND I THINK I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT STAFF IS LOOKING AT IT IN THE EXACT SAME WAY THAT YOU ARE. THOSE POINTS COME TOGETHER THROUGH A GOOD, STRONG AGREEMENT. AND WE'VE TALKED WE'VE ALREADY STARTED TALKING ABOUT THAT INTERNALLY. AND THOSE THAT WOULD BE AN AGREEMENT THAT COMES BEFORE THIS COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. LOTS TO THINK ABOUT. ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP IS THE

[VII) Consent Agenda]

CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS EIGHT THROUGH 16. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ITEMS THEY WISH TO PULL OR REMOVE TO DISCUSS. LET THE PULL NUMBER 13. ANYONE ELSE? MOTIONS? MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS EIGHT, NINE, TEN, 11, 12, 14, 15 AND 16. SECOND.

ALL RIGHT. MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TOBIAS. DO WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEMS EIGHT THROUGH 12 AND 14 THROUGH 16? IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. I ALL OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES 7 TO 0. ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP IS AGENDA

[VIII) Items Pulled from Consent Agenda]

[01:10:05]

ITEM NUMBER 13. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 1446, ADDING MARK MCKINNEY, COUNCILMEMBER. DISTRICT FIVE IS A SPORTSPLEX TASK FORCE MEMBER, COUNCILMAN ZUNIGA. THANK YOU. MAYOR. YEAH, I WAS LOOKING AT THIS ITEM, AND I REMEMBER WHEN THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT A YEAR AGO ABOUT LETTING THE MEMBER OF THE DISTRICT THAT REPRESENTS THAT DISTRICT BE ON THE TASK FORCE. I THINK MARK, MARK WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, GREAT FOR IT. BUT I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, DOUBLE CHECK THAT, YOU KNOW. MAYBE DOCTOR LAURA LEES WOULD LIKE TO BE ON THAT BECAUSE IT IS HER DISTRICT. AND I JUST WANT TO BE CONSISTENT. WELL, THANK YOU, DOCTOR ZUNIGA. I AM ON THE LAKE KENSINGTON TASK FORCE, WHICH IS OUR OTHER MAJOR TASK FORCE. TIME WISE. THAT'S GOING TO BE A BIT OF A PROBLEM FOR ME TO SERVE ON BOTH. I APPRECIATE THE CONSIDERATION. I'D LOVE TO DO THAT. BUT I DO THINK THAT IT WOULD. IT WOULD PLACE A TIME BURDEN ON ME. SO, MARK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE NOMINATED OR. ABSOLUTELY. SO I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE COUNCILMEMBER MARK MCKINNEY TO SERVE ON THE ON THE SPORTSPLEX TASK FORCE SECOND.

ALL RIGHT. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER ZUNIGA, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS, THAT WE APPOINT COUNCILMEMBER MCKINNEY TO THE SPORTSPLEX TASK FORCE. IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES 6 TO 0. I'M ABOUT TO SNEEZE. TIME TO

[26) Consider and Possible Action to direct city manager and staff to have a dedication sign/plaque made for the Adell Hurst room at Krug.]

WORK. SORRY, MAYOR. MAYOR, I HAD TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, I WASN'T I? ALL RIGHT, NEXT UP IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 26. CONSIDERING POSSIBLE ACTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF TO HAVE A DEDICATION. SIGNED PLAQUE MADE FOR THE ADELE HURST ROOM AT KRUG. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AS YOU ALL HEARD, THE CASS SENIOR CENTER. YOU KNOW, GROUPS AND MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS REACHED OUT AND SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'D BE A GREAT HONOR TO RECOGNIZE ADELE HURST WITH THE PLAQUE AT THE KRUG ROOM. AND SO THEY THEY WERE REQUESTING TO SEE IF CITY COUNCIL WOULD, YOU KNOW, DEDICATE A SIGNED PLAQUE, SOMETHING THAT THEY THEY COULD HONOR, YOU KNOW, ADELE HURST FOR HER CONTRIBUTIONS, LEADERSHIP AND BEING THE FOUNDER OF THE CASS. SO I HAVE A COUPLE THOUGHTS THAT NUMBER ONE IS YES, FOR SURE. IF THE IF THE PRIOR COUNCIL DEDICATED THAT ROOM IN HER HONOR, THERE SHOULD BE SOME PLAQUE THAT COMMEMORATES THAT 100%. SO THAT'S A GOOD CATCH. ONLY A COUPLE OF THINGS. NUMBER ONE IS THAT WE'RE GETTING THAT THE SENIORS ARE VACATING THE CREW ACTIVITY CENTER FOR A NEW HOME SHORTLY. AND ALL THE TESTIMONY I HEARD WAS REALLY HAVING TO DO WITH HER PURSUIT OF THE FLOURISHING OF THE SENIOR COMMUNITY, AS WELL AS OTHER THINGS. BUT THAT WAS A PRIMARY CONCERN. SO NUMBER ONE, IS IT IS IT APPROPRIATE AND BEST FOR HER AND TO HONOR HER MEMORY THAT WE CONTINUE WITH THE KRUG BALLROOM DEDICATION? OR PERHAPS IS IT BETTER TO DEDICATE THE NEW FACILITY AND OR A ROOM IN HER HONOR, AND THEN SECONDARILY, THAT IT'S JUST THE KRUG ACTIVITY CENTER IS A PROJECT THAT I THINK COUNCIL IS GETTING READY TO UNDERTAKE RE-ENVISIONING POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, REDESIGN OF THE INTERIOR. SO I WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT THOSE THINGS. I THINK WE SHOULD DO A PLAQUE, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD AT LEAST CONSIDER POTENTIALLY MOVING THE WAY THAT WE HONOR HER FROM KRUG TO THE NEW SENIOR CENTER SO THEY WOULD BE MATCHED UP. I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT. ARE YOU SUGGESTING BOTH? NO. NOT BOTH. I'M SUGGESTING THAT THE THAT WE WOULD CHANGE IN OUR ORDINANCE, THAT WE WOULD NAME THE, YOU KNOW, THE NEW SENIOR CENTER IN SOME WAY AFTER EITHER THE FACILITY ITSELF OR THE, YOU KNOW, MAIN, MAIN DESIGNATED AREA, BECAUSE I THINK THAT JUST THE REASON THAT THAT BUILDING THAT THE CREW BUILDING WASN'T CALLED THAT AT THE TIME WAS NAMED AFTER HER WAS BECAUSE OF THE SENIORS. AND SINCE THEY'RE MOVING, I FEEL LIKE HER MEMORY WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO MOVE WITH THEM. BUT IT'S JUST A THOUGHT. I DON'T I DON'T HAVE A I THINK THAT'S A VALID THOUGHT. I EITHER WAY, WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND DO A PLAQUE RIGHT AWAY, IS WHAT I'M SAYING. IT SHOULD GO INTO INTO ONE SPOT. COUNCIL MEMBER ZUNIGA, DO YOU HAVE THOUGHTS ON THAT? YEAH. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THAT DECISION. I THINK I THINK IT'S A GREAT, GREAT IDEA. I MEAN, HOW DO YOU ALL FEEL ABOUT. YEAH. MAY I ASK THEM? WE'RE GOING TO GET THE PLAQUE EITHER WAY. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU AGAIN FOR LOOKING AT IT, I THINK. YEAH, FOR THE MOMENT THAT WE'RE THERE, A PLAQUE WOULD BE NICE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN DEDICATED FORMERLY IN 2019, BUT PERHAPS THAT IS SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT GOING ON, LIKE MOVING IT TO THE

[01:15:04]

NEW BUILDING IN SOME WAY. KRUG IS GOING TO BE CHANGING. IT'S WHAT IT'S DOING. BUT, YOU KNOW, HAVING BOTH OF THOSE IN THAT PROJECT WOULD BE SOMETHING I DIDN'T EVEN CONSIDER ABOUT IN THE NEW BUILDING. SO WHY DON'T WE TABLE IT AND YOU CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS AND. YEAH, BECAUSE IT IS FOUND ON THE WEBSITE. YEAH, IT IS FOUND ON THE WEBSITE. SO I KNOW EVENTUALLY I GUESS THAT WOULD CHANGE. WELL WE CAN AT A MINIMUM WE COULD DIRECT STAFF TO ORDER THE PLAQUE. WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO DIRECT THEM, BUT STAFF NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE IF WE HAVE SOMETHING NAMED IN THAT WAY, WE JUST AS WITH MISS FALCONE HERE, WHICH MAKES A LOT OF SENSE BECAUSE THIS IS CITY HALL AND SHE SHE OWNED THIS PLACE. YOU KNOW, YOU MAKE THE MOTION. I WOULD, IF YOU DON'T MIND. I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO. YEAH. EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID. IF WE TABLE IT TO WHERE WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION LATER TO WHERE, LET'S SAY ONE OF THE NEW ROOMS THAT IS OVER THERE AT THE SENIOR CITIZENS ROOM, YOU CAN DEDICATE A ROOM UNDER HER NAME, WHETHER IT'S WHAT, WHAT SHE WAS. I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO GET TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE OF WHAT SHE WAS INVOLVED WITH. WAS SHE INVOLVED WITH COOKING? WAS SHE INVOLVED WITH THE SEWING? IF THERE'S A ROOM THERE WHERE IT'S AN ACTIVITY ROOM THAT COULD BE NAMED AFTER HER IF WHATEVER THE ROOM WOULD BE USED FOR ASSIGNED TO, IF IT WAS FOR A SPECIFIC ARTS AND CRAFTS ROOM AND SHE WAS REALLY INTO SEWING, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF LIKE WITH THE MISS FALCONS, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS LIKE HER FRONT AREA OFFICE. SOMETHING TO CONSIDER IN THAT WAY. SO WHEN THE NEWER SENIORS COME IN, THEY CAN SEE THE NAME AND THEY CAN GET THE HISTORY OF IT VERSUS LIKE AT THE KRUG. THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHT. YEAH, I THINK THE PLAQUE SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT UP. IT SHOULDN'T JUST BE SOMETHING SMALL, BUT SOMETHING THAT TELLS A STORY. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO START BUILDING THAT INTO OUR ETHOS THAT WE'RE WITH WHEN WE DEDICATE THINGS. IF IT'S THE JAMES ATKINS POOL, IF IT'S ADELE HURST OR IF IT'S KRUG OR, YOU KNOW, ANY, ANY OTHERS THAT WE SHOULD WE SHOULD LOOK TO INVEST IN THE MEMORIAL, IN THE DEDICATION, MORE THAN JUST WITH THE NAME, BUT WITH THE STORY OF WHY AND MAKE IT HIGH QUALITY AND INTENDED TO LAST FOR A LONG TIME. SO I THINK THAT THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE OUR STANDARD FOR HOW WE HOW WE HONOR FOLKS. SO ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'LL MOVE ON, BUT WE'LL EXPECT THAT SOMETHING WILL COME BACK SHORTLY. DOES THAT SOUND GOOD OR DO YOU WANT TO DO A MOTION? GO AHEAD. MAYOR, MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO WORK WITH STAFF TO BRING ABOUT A DEDICATION PLAQUE ELEMENT FOR ADELE HURST AND THAT THE COMPONENTS OF THAT PLAQUE WILL BE AS WHAT WE JUST DISCUSSED, THAT YOU KNOW, WHERE A STORY IS TOLD. THIS WOULD BE THESE WOULD BE GREAT ASSIGNMENTS FOR A HISTORICAL ARCHIVES COMMISSION AT SOME POINT. BUT THAT'S STILL ALL OF IT'S STILL TO COME. WE'RE WORKING ON ALL THESE THINGS. THEY WILL HAPPEN.

SECOND MOTION. MOTION BY THE MAYOR, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ZUNIGA. IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES SEVEN, 7

[17) Consider approval of a resolution finding Public Convenience and Necessity and authorizing the use of eminent domain to condemn if necessary a 8.944 acre parcel of land in fee simple and a public utility easement over seven parcels totaling 6.191 acres of land, (all as described in Exhibits “A” and “B” to the Resolution) from certain real property owned by WZ Investments, LLC, for the public use and purpose of construction of public roadway improvements and public drainage and utility infrastructure improvements for the Kyle Parkway/Lehman Road Extension Project. (ROLL CALL VOTE REQUESTED)]

TO 0. ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP IS AGENDA ITEM 17. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION, FINDING PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY, AND AUTHORIZING THE USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO CONDEMN, IF NECESSARY, AN 8.944 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND AND FEE SIMPLE AND A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT OVER THE SEVEN PARCELS TOTALING 6.191 ACRES OF LAND, ALL AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBITS A AND B TO THE RESOLUTION FROM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY DWS INVESTMENTS LLC FOR THE PUBLIC USE AND PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND PUBLIC DRAINAGE AND UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE KYLE PARKWAY LEEMAN ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT. THIS ITEM HAS A ROLL CALL VOTE REQUESTED. MISS SCHMITZ, GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AMBER SMITH, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. FOR THE RECORD, TONIGHT WE HAVE A PARCEL ON FOR KYLE PARKWAY IN THE LEEMAN ROAD EXTENSION, THE PC AND RESOLUTION. IN 2022, THE VOTERS APPROVED THE ROAD BOND PROJECTS. KYLE LEEMAN ROAD IS AN EXTENSION NORTHEAST FROM BUNTON CREEK ROAD TO DACEY LANE, AND IT WILL EXTEND KYLE PARKWAY TO MEET THE NEW SEGMENT OF LEEMAN ROAD. A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT THIS PROJECT. THE ALIGNMENT AND DESIGN FEATURES WERE APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN JANUARY OF 2024, AND A TASK ORDER TO CONFIDENTLY TO COMPLETE FINAL DESIGN WAS APPROVED IN MARCH OF 2023. HERE'S THE PARCEL. PARCEL NUMBER 12 THAT WE NEED TO ACQUIRE. THE RIGHT OF WAY NEEDED FOR THE ROADWAY SURVEY WAS COMPLETED. WE PERFORMED THE APPRAISAL AND THE PROPERTY INTERESTS INCLUDE 8.944 ACRES OF FEE. SIMPLE RIGHT OF WAY. AND THEN WE ALSO NEED 6.191 ACRES OF A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS THERE, COLORED IN PURPLE. THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY. WE NEED THAT FOR THE ROADWAY, DRIVING LANES AND SIDEWALK

[01:20:02]

INFRASTRUCTURE INDICATED IN YELLOW THERE. AND THEN ALSO THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND UTILITIES. SO SUMMARY OF THIS. WE'RE ASKING FOR A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THIS AS A PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY. AND IT WE IF WE ARE UNABLE TO COME TO AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS, THE THIS AUTHORIZES THE CITY COUNCIL TO USE EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY. ANY QUESTIONS? DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS SCHMITZ? ALL RIGHT.

SEEING NONE, I MOVE. COUNSELOR. SORRY. OKAY. I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE COMING DOWN ON US BECAUSE OF THESE. ROAD PROJECTS THAT WE'RE DOING, THAT WE ARE APPROACHING THE PROPERTY OWNERS FOR A LOT OF THIS. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR YEARS, GOING BACK TO 2017, 2021. WE'VE HAD OPEN HOUSES, WE'VE HAD TOWN HALLS. WE HAVE CONSTANT PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT OUR TRAFFIC AND OUR ROADS AND ABOUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY ARTERIES. WE'VE GOT WE'RE ALWAYS STUCK AT TRAFFIC LIGHTS. WE'RE ALWAYS STUCK AT STOP SIGNS. THIS IS HOW WE'RE MAKING THESE IMPROVEMENTS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THIS IS HOW WE'RE TRYING TO GET THIS DONE. WE ARE COMING. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE. LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION FOR THIS, BUT WE'VE GOT TO START LOOKING AT IMPROVING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND OUR ROADS. AND THEY MAY NOT BE THE BEST WAY TO DO IT, BUT WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AT THE BEST WAY MOVING FORWARD TO GET THESE THE THESE STREETS AND ROADS COMPLETED. WE PUT IT ON A ROAD BOND IN 2020. I REMEMBER GOING TO THESE AND ADVOCATING FOR A LOT OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE. SO I JUST NEED THE RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND WHEN WE'RE DOING THIS. WE ARE DOING OUR BEST TO REACH OUT ON THE PROPERTY OWNERS, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE TO COME, ESPECIALLY IN THE EAST EAST OF KYLE. ONCE WE START BUILDING A ROAD, THOSE FOUR, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT MORE. SO I NEED PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TAKING AWAY PEOPLE'S PROPERTY. THESE WERE THINGS THAT WE NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO GET OUR OUR INFRASTRUCTURE BETTER FOR OUR CITY IN THE FUTURE AND FOR THE IRONICALLY, THE NO PUN INTENDED FOR THE LONG ROAD DOWN THE ROAD. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? NO. COUNSELOR HARRIS, I'D LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THAT THIS THESE ACTIONS ON EMINENT DOMAIN ARE NOT TAKEN LIGHTLY. THEY THESE RESULT IN MONTHS AND MONTHS OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS. THEY ARE WELL COMPENSATED FOR THE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO USE FOR THESE ARTERIALS. AND THEY HAVE EVERY, EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE CITY FOR A FAIR COMPENSATION. THIS IS A LAST RESORT FOR US BECAUSE WE REALLY HAVE TO HAVE THE PROPERTY. WE TRY TO MAKE IT AS EASY FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS AS POSSIBLE, WHERE WE TAKE AS LITTLE LAND AS POSSIBLE AND AS FEW STRUCTURES AS POSSIBLE. WE TAKE ALL OF THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. SO IT'S A HARD DECISION ON THE COUNCIL'S PART TO HAVE TO USE EMINENT DOMAIN.

WE DON'T LIKE DOING THAT, BUT THESE ROADS, IT'S TIME TO GET THEM BUILT. LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER TOBIAS SAID, THIS IS YEARS IN COMING. THESE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE HAD NOTICE FOR YEARS THAT THE ROADS WILL BE GOING THROUGH THIS PARTICULAR AREA. CAN I ADD ON TO THAT? AND JUST THOSE TWO STATEMENTS? I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT, AND I JUST WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW JUST BECAUSE WE'RE TAKING THESE VOTES DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN WE WILL BE USING THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN. WE ARE IN NEGOTIATION ON ALL OF, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THESE WHEN THEY COME UP FOR THE MOST PART. AND THERE IS A VERY DEFINED LEGAL PROCESS THAT WE MUST FOLLOW, THAT ANY CITY WHO IS ENTERING INTO THE STAGE OF EMINENT DOMAIN HAS TO FOLLOW. SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE JUST FIRING FROM THE HIP, YOU KNOW, EVERY SINGLE ONE IS TREATED THE SAME WAY FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT.

ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. I MOVE THAT THE CITY OF KYLE AUTHORIZE THE USE OF THE

[01:25:03]

POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE 8.944 ACRES OF LAND IN FEE SIMPLE AND A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT OVER SEVEN PARCELS OF LAND TOTALING 6.191 ACRES FROM PROPERTY OWNED BY DWS INVESTMENTS, LLC, IS DESCRIBED IN AGENDA ITEM 17 FOR THE PUBLIC USE OF CONSTRUCTING AND OPERATING PUBLIC ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE KYLE PARKWAY LEEMAN ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT. SECOND MOTION BY MAYOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM THAT WE APPROVE. AGENDA ITEM 17. IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION ROLL CALL VOTE? ZUNIGA. YEAH. RIZZO I. HEIZER. YES. MCKINNEY. YES. HARRIS. YES. TOBIAS. YES.

MITCHELL. YES. ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES 7 TO 0. ARE WE DOING 18? WE DO NOT NEED TO DO 18. WE WILL HAVE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT THAT COMES BACK FOR YOU. ALL RIGHT. WHAT ABOUT 19? WE BELIEVE WE DO

[20) Consider approval of a resolution finding Public Convenience and Necessity and authorizing the use of eminent domain to condemn if necessary a 2,297 square foot parcel of land in fee simple (as described in Exhibit “A” to the Resolution) from certain real property owned by Plum Creek Square, Ltd., for the public use and purpose of construction of public roadway improvements for Jack C Hays Trail. (ROLL CALLVOTE REQUESTED)]

NOT NEED TO DO 19 AS WELL. SO WE'RE GOING TO 20. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP IS AGENDA ITEM 20. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION FINDING PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND AUTHORIZING USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO CONDEMN, IF NECESSARY, A 2297 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL OF LAND IN FEE SIMPLE AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A TO THE RESOLUTION FROM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY PLUM CREEK SQUARE LIMITED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLIC USE AND PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR JACK C HAYES TRAIL. THIS ITEM ALSO HAS A ROLL CALL VOTE REQUESTED MR. SCHMITZ, THIS PROJECT IS TO IMPROVE JACK C HAYES TRAIL AS IT FEEDS INTO OLD STAGECOACH ROAD. HERE IS AN ALIGNMENT OF THE PROJECT IT GOES TO WOODY ROAD. IN JANUARY 2024, THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE ALIGNMENT AND DESIGN FEATURES, AND A TASK ORDER WAS AWARDED TO PAVE DAWSON TO COMPLETE THE VINYL DISC DESIGN. IN OCTOBER OF 2024. THIS IS PARCEL NUMBER SIX.

IT'S RIGHT OF WAY NECESSARY FOR THE VIBE TRAIL, AND WE COMPLETED A SURVEY. WE PERFORMED AN APPRAISAL AND WE NEED JUST SHY OF 3000FT■!S OF RIGHT OF WAY HE. FEE. SIMPLE. HERE'S WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE. THE GRADING, DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE VIBE TRAIL AS SHOWN IN BLUE. AND AGAIN WE'RE REQUESTING A PCN FOR THIS PARCEL. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MISS SCHMITZ. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM. SAME STATEMENTS APPLY I WOULD ASSUME. ALL RIGHT. I MOVE THAT THE CITY OF COWELL AUTHORIZE THE USE OF THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE 2297FT■!S OF LAND IN FEE SIMPLE FROM PROPERTY OWNED BY PLUM CREEK SQUARE LIMITED, AS DESCRIBED IN AGENDA ITEM 20, FOR THE PUBLIC USE OF CONSTRUCTING AND OPERATING PUBLIC ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR JACK C HAYES TRAIL. SECOND MOTION BY THE MAYOR, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS. IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ROLL CALL VOTE. TOBIAS. YES, MA'AM. MCKINNEY. YES. RIZZO. I. HARRIS.

YES. ZUNIGA I. MITCHELL. YES. HEIZER. YES. ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES 7 TO 0. ALL RIGHT. NEXT

[21) Consider approval of a resolution authorizing a license agreement with Kyle Radio for placement of an antenna and other needed equipment at the La Verde Elevated Storage Tank.]

UP IS AGENDA ITEM 21. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH CAL RADIO FOR PLACEMENT OF AN ANTENNA AND OTHER NEEDED EQUIPMENT AT THE LA VERDE ELEVATED STORAGE TANK, MISS SCHMITZ. THIS IS FOR. IT'S A RESOLUTION THAT WOULD AUTHORIZE A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH KYLE RADIO. WE HEARD FROM THEM A COUPLE OF THEM TONIGHT. THEY WOULD LIKE TO PLACE AN ANTENNA AND OTHER EQUIPMENT AT THE LA VERDE ELEVATED STORAGE TANK.

THERE ARE A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION. THE COST OF THE INSTALLATION OF THE EQUIPMENT WILL BE PAID FOR BY KYLE RADIO. THEY'LL BE ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF REPAIRING ANY DAMAGE TO THE CITY FACILITIES. THE KYLE RADIO WILL BROADCAST EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE CITY AS WELL, SO YOUR OPTIONS ARE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED, APPROVE WITH CHANGES OR DENY.

AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS I WILL NEED TO ABSTAIN FROM THIS VOTE, MR. MAYOR. RECUSE. RECUSED. YES. BECAUSE I AM A MEMBER OF THE CAL RADIO BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE KYLE RADIO IS ENTIRELY VOLUNTEER. NONE OF US ARE COMPENSATED FOR ANY OF OUR WORK WITH THE STATION, NOR WILL WE RECEIVE ANY COMPENSATION RELATED TO THIS ITEM. BUT GIVEN THAT WE ARE, I AM ON THE BOARD. I'LL RECUSE MYSELF. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? COUNCILMEMBER? MAYOR? I'LL

[01:30:02]

HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FOR THE SAME STATEMENT THAT DOCTOR HARRIS SAID. I AM A BOARD MEMBER. I AM NOT COMPENSATED IN ANY WAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? MOTION TO APPROVE. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 21. OKAY. SECOND MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER, MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY THE MAYOR THAT WE APPROVE. ITEM 21. IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION, COUNCILOR? YES. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE PLACING IF IT GOES THROUGH PLACING AN ANTENNA, HOW MANY ANTENNAS WOULD THEY NEED? DO YOU KNOW IF IT'S JUST 1 OR 2. AND THE SIGNAL. IT'S ONE. IT'S AN ANTENNA PACKAGE. ACCESS TO ELECTRIC AND GENERATORS AND RACK SPACE IN THE ON SITE SHED. OKAY. I HAD A QUESTION. HAD A RESIDENT ASKED ME THAT QUESTION. THIS WAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER ZUNIGA. I JUST WANTED I KNOW THEY SAID THAT THERE'S NO COMPENSATION, BUT ARE THERE ANY BENEFITS OR FAVORS? NONE WHATSOEVER. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES 5 TO

[22) (First Reading) Consider approval of an ordinance amending the City's capital improvement program (CIP) budget for fiscal year 2024-2025 and the associated 5-year CIP spending plan by increasing total appropriations in the amount of $36,500,000 for the addition of new capital projects including Kensington Nature Park, Animal Shelter, Senior Activity Center, and for improvements to the administrative building for the parks and recreation department. ]

0. THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS AGENDA ITEM 22. THIS IS FIRST READING. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2425 AND THE ASSOCIATED FIVE YEAR CIP SPENDING PLAN BY INCREASING TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS, THE AMOUNT OF $36,000,500 FOR THE ADDITION OF NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS, INCLUDING KENSINGTON NATURE PARK, ANIMAL SHELTER, SENIOR ACTIVITY CENTER, AND FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT. MR. MOHIT MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM COUNCIL MEMBERS. FOR THE RECORD, I'M PERVEZ MOHIT, CITY'S DIRECTOR OF FINANCE. THIS ITEM BEFORE YOU IS THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY'S APPROVED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025. THIS AMEND THIS ACTION WILL AMEND THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR 24 DASH 25, AND IT WILL ALSO AMEND THE ASSOCIATED FIVE YEAR CIP SPENDING PLAN FOR THE CITY. THE AMENDMENT INCREASES TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR CIP EXPENDITURES BY $36,500,000. IT WILL AUTHORIZE CITY STAFF TO ESTABLISH BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS KENSINGTON NATURE PARK $17 MILLION. ANIMAL SHELTER $10 MILLION. SENIOR ACTIVITY CENTER $4,300,000. THIS WILL BE IN ADDITION TO THE $3 MILLION THAT WAS ALREADY APPROPRIATED BY CITY COUNCIL. AND LASTLY, PARKS DEPARTMENT'S FACILITY $5.2 MILLION. THIS FACILITY IS LOCATED ON REPUBLIC DRIVE. THE FUNDING PLAN IN THE CITY STAFF IS PROPOSING IS CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION. AS CIP EXPENDITURES ARE INCURRED, CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATIONS WILL BE ISSUED TO REIMBURSE CIP PROJECT ACCOUNTS FOR THESE PROJECTS. STAFF IS RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE CIP BUDGET AMENDMENT AS PRESENTED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. MOHIT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I HAVE ONE, I FIGURE IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME AS WHAT ZUNIGA HAS TO SAY, BUT IT'S JUST 10 MILLION FOR THE ANIMAL SHELTER AT 21,000FT■!S. THE MATH ON THAT JUST DOES NOT DOES NOT WORK. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WHAT ANIMAL SHELTERS COST ON A PER SQUARE FOOT BASIS FOR 50, 450 BUCKS A FOOT IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

10 MILLION IS THE ROUNDED NUMBER. THAT'S 450. AT 21,000FTS IS $10 MILLION. YEAH. AND AGAIN, THE 21,000FT■!S IS AN APPROXIMAE AMOUNT. BUT THE ESTIMATED COST THAT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM JACKSON RYAN IS $450 A SQUARE FOOT IS WHAT WE SHOULD ANTICIPATE FOR THE COST. IT'S EXPENSIVE. OKAY.

DO YOU THINK IT'S A LOW NUMBER? WELL, I, I THINK THAT IT PROBABLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE PUT AT THIS MOMENT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DESIGN SOMETHING AND THEN TAKE IT TO BID AND GET THE NUMBER. I'M JUST. I'M JUST TELLING YOU THAT I'M COMMITTED TO WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS. SO.

YEAH. YEAH, IN IN THE BACK OF MY MIND, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO GET US THERE, BUT I'M HOPING THAT IT DOES JUST BECAUSE OF THE VISION. AND WE WANT SOMETHING THAT'S HIGH QUALITY.

BUT I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT THE FACILITIES THAT WE HAD BUDGETED. WHAT IS THAT. WHAT IS THAT FACILITIES AMOUNT FOR LOCATED ON REPUBLIC DRIVE BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE ALREADY OWNED THE BUILDINGS.

SO THIS IS THE PURCHASE OF THE REPUBLIC DRIVE FACILITY. AND IT'S ALSO THE BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE MADE TO IT TO HOUSE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND SOME OF OUR COMMUNICATION STAFF. SO THERE WERE INTERIOR FINISH OUT IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE AUTHORIZED, AS WELL AS THE CONSTRUCTION, THE ACQUISITION OF THE FACILITY ITSELF. SO THE PROPERTIES WERE NEVER ACQUIRED?

[01:35:07]

NO, HE'S TALKING ABOUT REIMBURSING OR REIMBURSE. THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS. IT'S A REIMBURSEMENT. I DID NOT WRITE. THIS IS TO ALLOW FOR THOSE COSTS. THESE THESE PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED AND THEY'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION. THAT'S CORRECT, THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S $3.8 MILLION FOR THE ACQUISITION REIMBURSEMENT AND $1.4 MILLION FOR INTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE FACILITY. OKAY. SO IT IS GETTING REIMBURSED BACK IN. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, COUNCILOR TOBIAS? OKAY. MINE ARE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED BY ONE OF THE RESIDENTS THAT CAME UP AND SPOKE. I KNOW THAT THEY'RE SHOWING SOME CONCERNS ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO RECOVER SOME OF THIS DEBT BACK. COULD YOU BE ABLE TO MAYBE PROVIDE SOME EXAMPLES ON HOW WE CAN BE ABLE TO RECOVER SOME OF THIS BACK IN THE LONG RUN? AND ALSO, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT KENSINGTON NATURE PARK AT AT THE AMOUNT THAT IT HAS, IF WE WERE TO AMEND MAYBE A SMALL PORTION OF THAT THAT CAN BE USED FOR THE STREET LIGHTS ON DAISY, THAT THAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE PARK ITSELF. TO GET THAT GOING AS FAR AS SOLAR LIGHTS, IS THAT ALL ONE PACKAGE? IS THAT JUST WHAT WE'RE JUST ASSUMING THAT IT'S GOING TO COST AS A WHOLE, OR ARE WE JUST IT'S ON THAT MEASURE, AND I JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO REASSURE OUR RESIDENTS AS WE'RE MAKING THESE BUDGET AMENDMENTS, HOW WE'RE GOING TO COVER A LOT OF THESE COSTS IN THE LONG RUN. WELL, I'LL TRY TO ADDRESS THE FIRST ABOUT THE COST ELEMENT. SO THE 17 MILLION, IT'S AN EVEN FIGURE. SO YOU CAN TELL RIGHT THERE IT'S A IT'S A HIGH LEVEL ESTIMATE. WE'VE ENGAGED MESA AS YOU KNOW, TO WORK ON THE CONCEPTUAL PLANS FOR LAKE KENSINGTON PARK. AS WE THOSE PLANS PROGRESS AND WE GET MORE DETAILS ABOUT IT, WE'LL BE ABLE TO REFINE THAT FIGURE TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT WE THINK IT IS AND WHAT THE COST IS. RIGHT NOW, IT'S JUST A HIGH LEVEL PLANNING ESTIMATE. IF THERE'S SOME LIGHTING THAT WE WANT TO LOOK AT ON DAISY LANE AS PART OF THAT, WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT AS WELL. BUT THIS IS JUST THE HIGH LEVEL ESTIMATE THAT WE'VE THAT WE'VE HAD, AGAIN, TRYING TO HAVE A HIGH QUALITY NATURE PARK. THIS IS A AN ASPIRATIONAL GOAL TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, JUST A GREAT PARK OUT THERE. BUT IT'S NOT AN ENGINEERED OR A DESIGN NUMBER AT THIS POINT. AGAIN, THESE ARE ALL VERY ROUND AMOUNTS THAT ARE HERE. BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE IN THE CAPITAL PLAN SO THEY CAN BE REFLECTED. WELL, WE MADE DIRECTION TO PUT IT IN THE CAPITAL PLAN WITH LAST BUDGET CYCLE. SO I'M ASSUMING IT'S ALREADY THERE. SO I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE DOING IT YET AGAIN. DID IT NOT EVER MAKE IT INTO THE BUDGET? IT WAS DONE AFTERWARDS AFTER THE BUDGET WAS ADOPTED. RIGHT. THAT'S WHY WE BUT WE DID. AND COUNCILMEMBER TOBIAS AND I HAD A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS. AND SO WE GAVE THAT DIRECTION. AND JUST SO WE'RE NOT BRINGING THE BUDGET AMENDMENT ALL AT ONE TIME FOR COUNCIL TO ADOPT. OKAY. WELL THE, THE 17 MILLION IS NOT BASED ON ANY COMPARABLE IT'S LITERALLY THE, THE, THE APPROXIMATE INVESTMENT THAT WE MADE IN HEROES MEMORIAL PARK AND LA VERDE COMBINED. SO THE IDEA WAS FOR EQUITY. SO SINCE WE CONSTRUCTED THOSE PARKS INITIALLY WITH THE IDEA OF THOSE PARKS BEING REFUNDED BACK FROM TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT, BUT IF WE FUNDED THOSE PARKS UPFRONT WITH 17 MILLION AS A CITY PARK, THAT WE SHOULD TRY TO HAVE A COMPARABLE PROJECT ON THE EAST SIDE. AND SO THAT'S WHERE THE NUMBER THE GOAL STARTED OUT. IT'S LIKE THIS IS A VERY LARGE PARK. SO, YOU KNOW, AS THE ONES ON THE WEST SIDE ARE SMALL, THIS ONE'S MASSIVE. BUT AND I'D LIKE TO SEE US AT LEAST CONSIDER MAKING A COMPARABLE INVESTMENT. BUT AS BRIAN SAID, WE DON'T KNOW UNTIL WE UNTIL WE GET THERE. YOU KNOW, IT MAY MAY BE A LOT LESS. FOR ALL WE KNOW, IT MAY IT COULD BE. YEAH, IT COULD BE ON THAT END. BUT IT'S JUST BASICALLY HAVING A BUDGET ALIGNMENT THERE.

BUT YES, SIR, IT CERTAINLY COULD BE. YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AS WE COME FORWARD WITH OPTIONS AND CONCEPTS. THE COUNCIL CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE US OPTION WITH OPTIONS OF HOW THEY'D WANT TO PROCEED AND WHAT THE BUDGET'S APPROPRIATE. AND I WOULD ALSO MENTION FOR THE ANIMAL CENTER AS WELL, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT COUNTY POSSIBILITIES AND COUNTY PARTNERSHIPS. HOPEFULLY THAT WOULD OFFSET SOME OF THAT COST. I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT JUST YET. BUT THESE ARE JUST ROUNDABOUTS THAT WE'VE INCLUDED BECAUSE OF. THESE ARE THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE AT THIS POINT. AND, COUNCILMEMBER, TO ANSWER YOUR SECOND PART OF YOUR QUESTION, ALL OF THESE ITEMS ARE GOING TO BE PAID THROUGH PROPERTY TAX. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT PART OF THE DISCUSSION UNDER ITEM NUMBER 24 LATER THIS EVENING. OKAY. MAYOR, JUST I JUST WANT TO TOUCH ON SOMETHING COUNCILMEMBER TOBEY HAS TALKED ABOUT. WAS THE LIGHTING IN FRONT OF KENSINGTON. IS THAT SOMETHING WE COULD ADD, BRIAN, TO OUR CIP BUDGET? I KNOW WE'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH SOME OF IT, BUT I WANT TO SEE IF

[01:40:03]

THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN GET DONE IN REAL TIME. I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT WE FIND A FUNDING SOURCE.

WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE BUDGET TO REALLY ADDRESS THAT REALLY DARK ROADWAY. I THINK IT'S A HAZARD. AND I THINK MICHAEL BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT WHERE WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT IN REAL TIME. SO, COUNCILMEMBER RIZZO, YES, WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE A LOOK AT SOME LIGHTING OPTIONS AND SEE WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO DO THAT. I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF WHAT THAT WOULD REQUIRE, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT WITH OUR TRANSPORTATION GROUP. AND THEN WE COULD POTENTIALLY TALK TO MESA AS WELL TO SEE HOW TO INCORPORATE THAT POTENTIALLY INTO THE ENTRY OF THE PARK AND WHAT WE COULD DO, BUT WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.

YEAH, I'M JUST WORRIED ABOUT PUTTING IT ON THE PARK DESIGN BECAUSE THE PARK STILL YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, I THINK THE LIGHTING NEEDS TO BE A MORE URGENT MATTER, AND THAT'S WHY I'M BRINGING IT UP. UNDERSTOOD? YES, SIR. THANK YOU. I JUST LIKE TO SAY, MAYOR. SORRY. I DIDN'T WANT TO JUMP IN. BUT I DO AGREE WITH YOU THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT, LIKE, EQUAL SPENDING WHEN WE DO PROJECTS LIKE THIS. AND I DO LIKE HOW YOU SAY FROM HEROES AND LA VERDE, YOU TAKE THE SUM. YOU SHOULD DO A PROJECT OF THIS VERY LARGE SCALE. IT PROBABLY IS GOING TO NEED ABOUT THAT MUCH MONEY BECAUSE IT'S YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 81 ACRES OVER THERE. SO IT'S NOT IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S A ONE ACRE. SO IT'S 81 RIGHT. AND YOU GOT 25 OF IT. THAT SHOULD BE USABLE. SO YOU'RE INVESTING THAT THERE. SO AND YOU YOU'RE SPENDING EQUALLY IS THE POINT HERE. COUNCILMEMBER HARRIS I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE A NOTE THAT WE DO HAVE SOME PLANS PENDING FOR SOME RECONSTRUCTION OF DACEY ROAD. IS THAT RIGHT? SO. THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AND WHICH PORTION ARE YOU REFERRING TO? THE IN THAT AREA GENERALLY. AND ABOVE IT AND BELOW IT, THERE MAY BE SOME ROUNDABOUTS, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS, POTENTIALLY DOWN AT BUNTON. I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY THAT INTERSECTION. I DON'T RECALL ANY OTHER AREAS RIGHT NOW, BUT WE COULD TAKE A I'D HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK IN FRONT OF THE SENIOR CENTER. YEAH. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY HAVING SOME KIND OF DECELERATION OR ACCELERATION LANE, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS FOR THAT RIGHT NOW. BUT POSSIBLY YES. YEAH. AND THEN OF COURSE, THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO PARK THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE ENGINEERED. SO THERE'LL BE A NUMBER OF CHANGES ON DACEY. AND I'M SURE ALL OF THAT WILL INCLUDE. WELL, I'M NOT SURE. TELL ME ALL OF THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDING LIGHTING. RIGHT. AGAIN, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT. I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC PLANS FOR LIGHTING TONIGHT. MOTIONS. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 22. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER MCKINNEY, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM, THAT WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 22. IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES 7 TO 0. NEXT UP IS AGENDA ITEM 23.

[23) (First Reading) Consider approval of an ordinance adopting the updated Debt Management Policy of the City of Kyle, repealing ordinances 648 and 826, and providing for an effective date. ]

CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE UPDATED DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY OF THE CITY OF KYLE, REPEALING ORDINANCES 648 AND 826 AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

MR. MOHIT. SO COUNCIL, THE CITY'S DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY WAS ADOPTED WAY BACK IN 2011.

IT'S TIME TO UPDATE IT, TO MODERNIZE IT. SO WE'RE BRINGING THIS FORWARD FOR YOUR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. WE'LL COVER REAL QUICKLY SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION. WE'LL GIVE YOU REASONS FOR THE UPDATE TO THE DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY, AND HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE MAJOR CHANGES IN THE POLICY FROM THE CURRENT POLICY TO THE NEW RECOMMENDED POLICY, AND THEN GO OVER THE OPTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL. THE AGENDA PACKET THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU. I HAVE ATTACHED A FOUR PAGE LINE BY LINE, SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON OF THE OLD POLICY VERSUS THE NEW UPDATED POLICY. SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL, BUT JUST TOUCH ON SOME HIGHLIGHTS OF MAJOR CHANGES REAL QUICK. SO BACKGROUND. ON APRIL 5TH, 2011, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED ORDINANCE 648 A ADOPTING THE CITY'S DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY. I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE FIRST POLICY FOR THE CITY OF KYLE. AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY, ON SEPTEMBER 16TH, 2014, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED ORDINANCE 826 AMENDING THE CITY'S DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY, PRIMARILY TO REPEAL THE REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN A SEPARATE EMERGENCY RESERVE FUND, AND THIS WAS DONE BECAUSE THE CITY CHARTER ALREADY COVERED THAT REQUIREMENT. SO REASONS FOR THIS UPDATE. WE ARE RECOMMENDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE POLICY TO PROVIDE CLEAR GUIDELINES FOR THE ISSUANCE AND EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT OF THE CITY'S SHORT AND LONG TERM DEBT TO INCORPORATE LATEST COMPLIANCE

[01:45:03]

REQUIREMENTS FROM THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE FOR MUNICIPAL DEBT. PROVIDE CLEAR DISTINCTION OF COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS AND TREATMENT OF BOTH TAX SUPPORTED AND NON-TAX SUPPORTED DEBT OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY. CLARIFY POLICY DIRECTION FOR THE TREATMENT OF ASSESSED VALUATIONS WITHIN TWO YEARS. THE CURRENT POLICY IS NOT VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. THEN CLARIFY VARIOUS TERMS AND PROVISIONS PROVIDED THROUGHOUT THE POLICY AND ALSO INCLUDE SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF WHAT TYPE OF CAPITAL ASSETS CAN BE FINANCED BY THE VARIOUS TYPES OF DEBT OBLIGATIONS. SO HERE ARE THE SIDE BY SIDE HIGHLIGHTS. ON THE LEFT SIDE IS THE UPDATED DEBT AND DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY, BEING RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS THE CURRENT POLICY. SO THE PURPOSE OF DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY IN IN THE PROPOSED RECOMMENDED POLICY, WE HAVE ADDED 19 SECTIONS TO CLARIFY INDIVIDUAL PROVISIONS, WHEREAS THE CURRENT POLICY ONLY HAS SIX SECTIONS. SECTIONS. SO IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A WHOLE LOT OF DETAIL AND GUIDELINES, POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES IN IN THE CURRENT POLICY IS NOT COVERED AT ALL. WE ARE PROVIDING DETAILED EXPLANATIONS WITH TEN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES PROVIDED IN THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE UNDER CONDITIONS OF DEBT ISSUANCE, UNDER WHICH TYPE OF CONDITION CITY WOULD CONSIDER ISSUING SHORT TERM OR LONG TERM DEBT UNDER THE CURRENT POLICY, IT'S VERY LIMITED. IN EXPLANATIONS, IT GIVES YOU THREE GENERIC CONDITIONS UNDER THE PROPOSED OR UPDATED VERSION, WE ARE PROVIDING DETAILED EXPLANATIONS. WE ARE PROVIDING TEN SEPARATE CATEGORIES WITH SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF CAPITAL ASSETS. AND I'LL COVER SOME OF THE DETAILS ON THE NEXT SLIDE. SO CONTINUING ON THE CONDITIONS OF DEBT ISSUANCE, IF YOU LOOK ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THE CURRENT POLICY HAS ONLY THREE CONDITIONS. MEETING COMMUNITY NEEDS FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENT FOR QUALIFIED PROJECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE CIP PROGRAM AND EMERGENCY PURPOSES. IT DOESN'T GO INTO VERY MUCH DETAIL OR PROVIDES DETAILED GUIDELINES FOR STAFF TO COMPLY WITH. UNDER THE RECOMMENDED UPDATE, WE ARE PROVIDING VERY DETAILED AND THOROUGH GUIDELINES FOR STAFF TO FOLLOW AND COMPLY WITH, BOTH FOR SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM DEBT ISSUANCE. IT COVERS ACQUISITION OF MACHINERY, HEAVY EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES, STREET SWEEPERS, DUMP TRUCKS, ACQUISITION OF LAND AND BUILDINGS, CONSTRUCTION OF CIP PROJECTS INCLUDED IN THE CITY'S FIVE YEAR CIP SPENDING PLAN. WE PROVIDE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES SUCH AS ROADWAYS, STREET RESURFACING, ROUNDABOUTS, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, SIDEWALKS, BRIDGES, TUNNELS, PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES, BUILDINGS FOR CITY OPERATIONS AND SERVICE DELIVERY SUCH AS PUBLIC WORKS, SENIORS PROGRAM, CODE ENFORCEMENT, ANIMAL SHELTER, AND THEN WATER WASTEWATER STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS. SO IT GOES INTO VERY SPECIFIC DETAILS UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS WE CAN ISSUE OR SHOULD CONSIDER ISSUING LONG TERM DEBT. THE REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS AS SPECIFIED IN THE CITY CHARTER.

THE CURRENT POLICY DOES NOT COVER THAT. SO YOU HAVE TO REFER TO TWO DIFFERENT SEPARATE PLACES TO COMPLY WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. UNDER THE UPDATED OR RECOMMENDED POLICY, WE ARE BRINGING ALL OF IT IN ONE PLACE. SO IT'S ONE REFERENCE DOCUMENT. THE CITY CHARTER HAS SIX VERY SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR DEBT OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY. SO WE'VE INCLUDED ALL OF THAT, ALL SIX OF THEM. RESTRICTIONS ON DEBT ISSUANCE ON IN THE CURRENT POLICY, WE HAVE FIVE SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS. IN THE PROPOSED POLICY, WE HAVE ADDED TWO ADDITIONAL ONES TO CLARIFY FOR STAFF TO COMPLY. THE FIRST FIVE, WE HAVE CONTINUED FROM THE CURRENT POLICY, WE HAVE ADDED VARIABLE INTEREST RATE DEBT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. ISSUANCE OF PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND IS PROHIBITED AND WHICH IS NOT VERY CLEAR IN THE CURRENT POLICY. AND WE HAVE ADDED CLARIFICATION TO DEFINE GENERAL FUND REVENUE TO INCLUDE REVENUES IN THE INTEREST AND SINKING FUND AS WELL.

[01:50:05]

CONTINUING WITH LIMITATIONS ON OUTSTANDING DEBT. THIS IS THE LIMITATION ON THE OUTSTANDING DEBT BALANCE OF THE CITY. THE PROPOSED POLICY IN INCLUDES THE SAME LIMITATION AS THE CURRENT UNDER SIX A, WHICH BASICALLY SAYS DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS FOR TAX SUPPORTED DEBT SHALL NOT BE GREATER THAN 40% OF BUDGETED GENERAL FUND REVENUES FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. THIS IS SIMILAR TO WHAT'S IN THE CURRENT POLICY. HOWEVER, WE HAVE DEFINED WHAT GENERAL FUND REVENUE MEANS.

IT MEANS TO INCLUDE THE INTEREST AND SINKING FUND REVENUE AS WELL. THE CURRENT POLICY DOESN'T DO THAT. ON SIX B, THE TOTAL BOND DEBT PAYABLE. THIS IS THE PRINCIPAL PORTION OF IT FROM THE GENERAL FUND WILL NOT EXCEED 12% OF THE ASSESSED VALUATION FOR THE SAME YEAR. THIS IS IN THE PROPOSED. THE CURRENT POLICY STAYS THE SAME THING, BUT IT IS 6%. AND FURTHERMORE, WE HAVE CLARIFIED THAT THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE INCLUDES THE INTEREST IN SINKING FUND. UNDER SIX C. THIS REFERS TO CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION PAYABLE FROM THE GENERAL FUND. IN OTHER WORDS, TAX SUPPORTED CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION. UNDER THE NEW POLICY, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE INCREASED TO 6% OF ASSESSED VALUATION FOR THE SAME YEAR COMPARED TO THE CURRENT POLICY. THE CURRENT POLICY STATES 3%. AND THEN HERE AGAIN, WE HAVE CLARIFIED THAT THE REVENUES INCLUDE BOTH THE GENERAL FUND OPERATING REVENUE, AS WELL AS THE INTEREST IN SINKING FUND. WE HAVE FURTHER CLARIFIED THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF TERS WOULD BE EXCLUDED IN THIS CALCULATION, BECAUSE THE REVENUE GENERATED WITHIN THE TERS BOUNDARIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE DEBT SERVICE FOR THE CITY. AND THEN LASTLY, WE HAVE CLARIFIED THAT FOR NON-TAX SUPPORTED DEBT, THIS IS SIX D SUCH AS WATER WASTEWATER SYSTEM TERS PIDS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE OUTSTANDING DEBT BALANCE LIMITATION PERCENTAGES AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF DEBT ISSUANC. WHEN YOU ISSUE DEBT, THESE ARE THE CORRECT CHARACTERISTICS THAT THE POLICY REQUIRES. COMPLIANCE. THERE ARE EIGHT REQUIREMENTS IN THE CURRENT POLICY AND IT ALSO REQUIRES LEVELIZED DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS. IN OTHER WORDS, THE PRINCIPAL PAYMENT WOULD BE EQUALLY PAID OVER THE TIME THE DEBT IS ISSUED FOR WHETHER IT'S 20 YEARS, 25 YEARS, OR 30 YEARS.

UNDER THE PROPOSED POLICY CHANGE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDED THAT WE CONTINUE WITH THE LEVELIZED ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENT, BUT COUNCIL MAY APPROVE A CHANGE FOR ACCELERATED REPAYMENT SCHEDULE OR FOR DEBT DEFEASANCE PURPOSES. SO UNDER THOSE CONDITIONS, COUNCIL MAY AUTHORIZE DEVIATING FROM THE LEVELIZED DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS. THE TERM OF THE DEBT IS NOT VERY CLEAR IN THE CURRENT POLICY. IT TALKS ABOUT 30 YEARS DEPENDING ON CASH FLOW, ASSUMPTIONS AND USEFUL ASSET LIFE. THEN, WHEN IT COMES TO CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, IT TALKS ABOUT NOT TO EXCEED 20 YEARS. IF YOU LOOK ON THE LEFT SIDE, THE RECOMMENDED PROPOSED POLICY, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THE TERM FOR ALL TAX SUPPORTED GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND DEBT, BE IT CLARIFIES IT THAT IT WILL NOT EXCEED THE USEFUL LIFE OF CAPITAL PROJECTS, THAT THE MONEY IS BEING USED TO FINANCE, OR A MAXIMUM OF 30 YEARS. AND THEN FOR CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION FOR TAX SUPPORTED DEBT, WE ARE DOING THE SAME CLARIFICATION THAT THE DEBT WILL NOT EXCEED THE USEFUL LIFE OF THE CAPITAL ASSETS, OR A MAXIMUM WILL NOT EXCEED A MAXIMUM OF 30 YEARS.

[01:55:01]

AND THEN FINALLY, THE CURRENT POLICY DOESN'T REALLY CLARIFY WHEN IT COMES TO NON-TAX SUPPORTED DEBT. IT KIND OF LEAVES YOU HANGING. SO YOU HAVE TO KIND OF ASSUME BETWEEN THE LINES. WE ARE VERY SPECIFICALLY CLARIFYING IN THE POLICY THAT TERM FOR ALL NON-TAX SUPPORTED CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SUCH AS FOR WATER UTILITY SYSTEM, WASTEWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM, NOT TO EXCEED THE USEFUL LIFE OF THE CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT IT IS FINANCING, OR A MAXIMUM NOT TO EXCEED A MAXIMUM OF 30 YEARS. S, UNDER SECTION EIGHT, TYPES OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF DEBT OBLIGATIONS. UNDER THE CURRENT POLICY, THERE IS A VERY BRIEF, SHORT DISCUSSION OF WHAT IS A SHORT TERM, WHAT IS A LONG TERM, WHAT TYPES OF DEBT OBLIGATIONS YOU CAN ISSUE. THERE'S VERY FEW EXAMPLES PROVIDED. SO UNDER THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE WE ARE INCLUDING DETAILED DISCUSSION AND EXPLANATIONS OF THE TYPES OF SHORT AND LONG TERM DEBT OBLIGATIONS THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED AND ISSUED BY THE CITY. WE ALSO INCLUDE UNDER EACH ONE OF THOSE TYPE OF DEBTS WHAT CAN BE WHAT KIND OF CAPITAL ASSETS CAN BE EITHER ACQUIRED, DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED WITH THOSE TYPES OF DEBT OBLIGATIONS? AND THEN FINALLY WE HAVE ADDED A NEW FEATURE THE USE OF COMMERCIAL PAPER AS AN ALLOWABLE SHORT TERM DEBT OBLIGATION HAS BEEN ADDED AS A INSTRUMENT OF OBLIGATION FOR THE CITY. THIS IS. THIS ALLOWS THE CITY TO BENEFIT FROM EFFICIENCY AND FLEXIBILITY IN MANAGING DEBT ISSUANCE, WHICH IS NOT COVERED IN THE CURRENT POLICY AT ALL.

AND FINALLY, THE CURRENT POLICY REQUIRES THAT THE CITY'S STRATEGIC PLANNING AND FINANCE COMMITTEES TO REVIEW ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AT LEAST THREE MONTHS PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE BUDGET PROCESS, TO REVIEW THE POLICY AND UPDATE IT. THE CITY'S. UNFORTUNATELY, THE CITY'S STRATEGIC PLANNING AND FINANCE COMPANY COMMITTEE DOES NOT EXIST. IT WAS DISSOLVED AND ELIMINATED. I BELIEVE IT WAS IN 2014. SO THE NEW POLICY OR UPDATED POLICY CLEARLY CLARIFIES THAT AND SAYS THAT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, CITY STAFF WILL BRING FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL'S REVIEW AND TO MAKE ANY NECESSARY CHANGES. AND WITH THAT MERITS, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE UPDATED DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. PERVEZ, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER TOBIAS OKAY. WHEN WE GO TO PAGE 11, IT SAYS THE LIMITATION OF THE OUTSTANDING DEBT BALANCE OF WILL NOT EXCEED 3%. BUT THE PROPOSED CERTIFICATION OBLIGATION FROM JENNIFER IS BEING INCREASED BY 3%, CORRECT? YES, SIR. SO DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH MORE OF A OF AN INCREASE THAT THE RESIDENT WOULD HAVE, I GUESS, TOWARDS THEIR TAX BILL IF THIS WAS TO GO TO, TO GO FORWARD. SO THIS PORTION OF THE POLICY DOES NOT REFER TO THE CALCULATION OR IMPACTS THE CALCULATION OF THE PROPERTY TAX RATE. OKAY. SO THIS BASICALLY ALLOWS THE CITY TO HAVE OUTSTANDING DEBT EQUAL TO A MAXIMUM OF 6% OF THE ASSESSED VALUATION FOR THE SAME YEAR. FOR CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION. SO THE REASON THIS IS BEING INCREASED FROM 3% TO 6%, IT ALLOWS THE CITY TO MANAGE THE FINANCING REQUIREMENTS FOR ITS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. SO WHEN YOU BUILD AN ANIMAL SHELTER, WHEN YOU BUILD THE KENSINGTON NATURE PARK, WHEN YOU IMPROVE THE PROPERTIES THAT FOR PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS WILL ALLOW YOU THAT CAPACITY TO BE ABLE TO ISSUE THOSE DEBT AS NEEDED. SO WHEN WE DO ISSUE THE DEBT, THAT'S THE TIME WE WILL SHARE WITH COUNCIL WHAT THE TAX IMPACT IS EACH YEAR. OKAY. BUT I GUESS PEREZ TOBIAS, QUESTION. AREN'T YOU NOW TAKING MORE OUT OF THE

[02:00:06]

GENERAL FUND TO PAY COS. SO IN THE SAME YEAR FROM, FROM THE, I GUESS THE EXISTING DEBT BALANCE.

SORRY. FROM THE CURRENT NOW TO THE UPDATED AREN'T AREN'T YOU ALLOWING MORE, MORE MORE LEEWAY TO PAY MORE DEBT OFF FROM THE GENERAL FUND? THAT'S HOW I'M READING IT. YES. SO THIS SUBSECTION BASICALLY INCREASES THE AMOUNT OF PRINCIPAL OUTSTANDING AT ANY ONE TIME. SO THIS BASICALLY SAYS THAT YOU CANNOT EXCEED 6% OF THE ASSESSED VALUATION FOR THAT SAME YEAR. SO DEBT IS A FUNCTION OF OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM AS WE SPEND ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WE'RE GOING TO NEED FINANCING. HOW DO WE PAY FOR IT? AND AS WE ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION AS OUR CIP PROGRAM EXPANDS AND WE'RE ALSO AT THE SAME TIME, YOU'VE BEEN HEARING FROM EVERY CITY DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR THAT MANAGES CIP PROJECTS. THEY'RE ON A FAST TRACK, THEY'RE ON A COMPRESSED TIME FRAME. SO IF THIS IS A FUNCTION OF OUR CIP SPENDING PLAN, WE HAVE TO HAVE ROOM TO ALLOW THOSE CIP PROJECTS TO HAPPEN AND THE CITY BE ABLE TO FINANCE THOSE PROJECTS. GOTCHA. PEREZ, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR TEAM FOR THE OUTSTANDING WORK ON THIS UPDATE. WITH THAT MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OPTION ONE. ALL RIGHT. THERE'S A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER RIZZO THAT WE APPROVE THE PLAN AS PRESENTED.

IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND MOTION BY COUNCILMAN RIZZO, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM THAT WE APPROVE OPTION ONE, IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? I JUST WANTED TO THANK PEREZ ALSO FOR SUMMARIZING AND ADDING MORE DESCRIPTIONS OF WHAT THE WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THEM. FROM THE CURRENT, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S MUCH BETTER IMPROVEMENTS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO ISSUE DEBT FOR HOW LONG FOR AND FOR WHAT PROJECTS THAT THAT THAT'S GREAT TO SEE THAT INFORMATION IN A MUCH MORE CONCISE WAY FOR US. THANK YOU. YEAH, I MIGHT JUST ADD A COUPLE A COUPLE COMMENTS RELATED TO HISTORY. I'VE DONE A LOT, AND PERVEZ IS AWARE OF HOW OFTEN I BUG HIM FOR STATISTICAL INFORMATION REGARDING CALL HISTORY. ONE OF MY FAVORITE CALCULATIONS TO RUN IS THE DEBT TO TAV RATIO THAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING. SO YOU KNOW HOW MANY DIFFERENT TIMES I'VE LOOKED AT THAT. AND THEN ALSO THE TAX RATE DISCUSSION IN PARTICULAR. SO THERE'S JUST A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT YOU CAN GLEAN FROM COUNCILS AND THE DECISIONS THAT THEY MADE IN THE PAST AND THE IMPACTS OF THOSE DECISIONS. YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, WE WENT THROUGH ABOUT A SIX YEAR PERIOD FROM 2010 TO 2016, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE HIGHEST TAX INCREASES THAT WE'VE EVER HAD, FROM JUST OVER $0.30 ALL THE WAY UP TO $0.58. AND THAT WAS BECAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL HAD HAD TO REACT TO THE COUNCIL'S FROM SIX YEARS PRIOR TO THAT. THAT HAD A PHILOSOPHY AND A MENTALITY OF BASICALLY ELIMINATING THEIR ABILITY TO INVEST AS THE CITY WAS GROWING. IF YOU'RE ON A CASH STRAPPED BASIS WHERE YOU CAN'T BORROW MONEY AND YOU DON'T WANT TO RAISE TAX RATES, YOU CANNOT INVEST IN YOUR FUTURE. AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LATE TO ZERO EIGHT, OH NINE, TEN RANGES. AND THE COUNCIL APPROPRIATELY HAVING NO CHOICE BECAUSE THEY AND IN 2013 THEY WENT AND ISSUED DEBT FOR ROADS BOND THAT CAUSED THE TAX RATE TO GO UP AS WELL. AND SO IT GOES UP BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE THESE BIG GENERATIONAL INVESTMENTS AND THEN IT STARTS TO COME BACK DOWN AS THOSE INVESTMENTS THAT YOU MAKE MATURE. AND SO WE'RE WE'RE KIND OF BECAUSE OF THE $294 MILLION ROADS BOND, WHICH WAS VOTER APPROVED, AND THE $37 MILLION PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER, WHICH WAS VOTER APPROVED, THE $10 MILLION FOR PARKS INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH WAS VOTED, VOTER APPROVED, ALL OF THOSE INVESTMENTS, YOU KNOW, ARE HITTING OUR BOOKS. AND NOW WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY RAISE THE RATE. BUT ONE WAY WE CAN MITIGATE THAT IS BY LAYING OUT THE COST OF THAT GENERATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE OVER THE FUTURE TAXPAYERS, AS OPPOSED TO THE CURRENT TAXPAYERS. AND THEN THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY WAS THAT 6% DEBT TO TAV WHEN I WAS FIRST ELECTED, BECAUSE OF THAT INCREASE IN THE INVESTMENTS THAT THE COUNCIL'S MADE THROUGH THOSE YEARS IN INFRASTRUCTURE, WE WERE AT THE VERY TIPPY TOP,

[02:05:05]

RIGHT AT 5 TO 6% OF OUR DEBT TO TAV IS WHERE WE WERE AT. SO VERY LEVERED. AND I REMEMBER AT ONE POINT, PERVEZ MANY YEARS AGO SAYING WE HAD IN THE CURRENT MOMENT IN TIME, WE HAD BASICALLY NO MONEY THAT WE COULD BORROW WITHOUT INCREASING THE TAX RATE. I THINK THE NUMBER WAS $2 MILLION OR SOMETHING, WHICH IS JUST A SIMPLE CALCULATION THAT HAS, OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST MANY YEARS, THAT THAT NUMBER HAS CHANGED DRAMATICALLY. THE CITY OF CARLISLE HAS GONE FROM ROUGHLY $2.5 BILLION IN TAV TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATION TO THE REIT AS OF THIS MORNING. THE NEW PROJECTIONS SHOW THE CITY OF $7.5 BILLION IN TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUATION. THAT'S A HUGE JUMP IN VALUATION, WHICH MEANS THAT OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT'S NEW INFRASTRUCTURE AND WE HAVE TO LAYER OUR INFRASTRUCTURE OVER THAT. SO IF WE'RE NOT MAKING INVESTMENTS, THAT'S HOW YOU GET BEHIND. SO I THINK THAT EVERYTHING THAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE IS VERY MUCH APPROPRIATE AND WILL LEAD ULTIMATELY TO DOWNWARD PRESSURE ON THE TAX RATE, BECAUSE IT WILL ALLOW FOR US TO USE OUR MONIES MORE IN A MORE DYNAMIC WAY. SO I'M VERY I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE THIS POLICY COMING FORWARD. IT'S A GROWN UP POLICY, AND I APPRECIATE THE SOPHISTICATION OF IT IN THE WAY THAT IT SEEKS TO MAXIMIZE THE VALUE OF OUR RESOURCES AT MINIMAL COST TO THE TAXPAYERS. THAT'S WHAT I THINK THIS POLICY DOES. I MEAN, WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT? ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? IS IT JUST BECAUSE OF THE OVERALL GROWTH THAT WE'RE HAVING IN OUR CITIES, JUST THE DEMAND FOR THE WASTEWATER DEMAND FOR THE ROADS, THE DEMAND FOR EVERYTHING ELSE? I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M MAKING THE RIGHT CHOICE BY INCREASING THIS. IF I GO THAT ROUTE BECAUSE OF THE DEBT BALANCE, I THINK IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LINE AS FAR AS WHERE OUR PROPERTY TAXES ARE AND HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO AFFECT RESIDENTS. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU JUST LOOK AT OUR CITY AND YOU LOOK AT EACH DEPARTMENT, OUR WASTEWATER, THEIR. THEIR, THEIR, THEY'RE BUILDING MORE WATER TANKS BECAUSE IT'S NEEDED THERE. YOU KNOW, WE NEED MORE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE. SO IT'S JUST TRYING TO BALANCE THAT TO SEE WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE REAL WORLD. AND THAT'S WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW. I WOULD JUST SAY ONE THING TO THINK ABOUT FOR THE CITY, IT'S WHERE WE ARE IN OUR GROWTH CURVE. AS CITIES GROW VERY RAPIDLY, THERE ARE LARGE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE FOR WATER SYSTEMS, WASTEWATER SYSTEMS, ROADS. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. OBVIOUSLY, YOU SEE THOSE IN THE CIP. AS THE CITY AGES AND MATURES, YOU'LL PROBABLY SEE THOSE INVESTMENTS LEVEL OFF AT LEAST AS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS OF KIND OF WHAT THEY WILL BE GOING FORWARD. BUT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE DEFINITELY IN THAT GROWTH PERIOD. WE'RE TRYING TO, IN SOME WAYS CATCH UP ON SOME OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE SEE ACROSS THE CITY. SO I THINK THAT'S A FUNCTION OF IT. HOPEFULLY THAT HELPS A LITTLE BIT AS YOU THINK THROUGH THE QUESTION. YEAH. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES 7 TO 0. ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP IS AGENDA

[24) Consider approval of a resolution directing the City Manager to proceed with the debt financing plan and property tax rate management option selected by the City Council based on the three options to be presented by the City's financial advisor for implementation in the fiscal year 2025-2026 budget.]

ITEM NUMBER FOUR. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH THE DEBT FINANCING PLAN AND PROPERTY TAX RATE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS SELECTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL BASED ON THE THREE OPTIONS TO BE PRESENTED BY THE CITY'S FINANCIAL ADVISOR FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2526 BUDGET. MR. MOHIT. YES, SIR.

SO COUNCIL LAST LAST SUMMER WE SOUGHT YOUR DIRECTION ON HOW BEST TO FINANCE OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS HOW BEST TO MANAGE TAX RATES, PROPERTY TAX RATES.

AND YOU GAVE US DIRECTION. SO IT IS THAT TIME OF THE YEAR THAT WE ARE COMING BACK TO YOU TO REVIEW AND UPDATE AND SEEK CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION. SO I'M GOING TO VERY QUICKLY COVER PURPOSE AND UPDATING CITY COUNCIL AND SEEKING DIRECTION. WHY ARE WE HERE? CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS. WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN. AND THEN OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR WILL COVER THE STATUS OF VOTER AUTHORIZED BONDS, FUNDING REQUIREMENTS FOR TAX AND NON-TAX SUPPORTED DEBT FINANCING OPTIONS, AND ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAX RATE IMPACTS. AND THEN FINALLY, SEEK YOUR DIRECTION. SO THE LAST UPDATE TO CITY COUNCIL ON DEBT DEFEASANCE FINANCING OPTIONS AND ESTIMATED

[02:10:08]

PROPERTY TAX RATE IMPACTS WE DISCUSSED ON JUNE 8TH, 2024 FOR DIRECTION ON THE FISCAL YEAR 25 BUDGET. THE BUDGET THAT WE'RE IN AND YOU GAVE US DIRECTION AND WE FOLLOWED THAT. SINCE THEN, ECONOMIC TRENDS AND FACTORS AFFECTING PROJECTIONS HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED SINCE JUNE OF 24. IN ADDITION, AFTER THE 25 DEBT, DEFEASANCE WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, AN ANNUAL ASSESSMENT OF DEBT DEFEASANCE OPTIONS OR ACCELERATED DEBT REPAYMENT IS NECESSARY FOR FY 26 AND FUTURE BUDGETS. SO IT'S THAT TIME OF THE YEAR THAT WE NEED YOUR DIRECTION AND GUIDANCE TO PREPARE THE FY 26 BUDGET, AND ALSO TO PREPARE FOR THE DEBT ISSUANCE THAT WE ARE PLANNING IN THE JUNE JULY TIME FRAME. WE ARE GOING TO BE ISSUING ABOUT ROUGHLY $125 MILLION IN TAX AND NON-TAX SUPPORTED DEBT THIS YEAR. JUNE. JULY TIME FRAME. WE HAVE REQUESTED OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR, SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS, TO RUN SOME SCENARIOS FOR CITY COUNCIL. THEY HAVE COME UP WITH THREE FINANCING OPTIONS THAT THEY WILL REVIEW WITH YOU, AND FOR EACH FINANCING OPTION WITH THE TAX RATE IMPACT WILL BE. WE ALSO HAVE TONIGHT WITH US, STEPHANIE. LIBBY. SHE'S OUR CITY'S BOND COUNSEL WITH NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT. SO IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I THINK BETWEEN OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR, OUR BOND COUNSEL, CITY MANAGER AND MYSELF WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. SO THE UPDATE FOR 26 TO CITY COUNCIL IS BASED ON CONSERVATIVE ASSUMPTIONS BASED ON FAST CHANGING TRENDS IMPACTING BOTH NATIONAL AND LOCAL ECONOMY. THESE INCLUDE REDUCED GROWTH RATE. WE'RE SEEING A SLOWDOWN IN GROWTH RATE, INCREASED INTEREST RATES, INCREASED COST OF CONSTRUCTION BOTH FOR MATERIALS AND LABOR FOR OUR CIP PROGRAM. AND THERE ARE IMPACT OF ADDED ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTIES, BOTH AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL THAT IS TRICKLING DOWN TO THE LOCAL LEVEL. OUR CIP SPENDING PLAN HAS SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED FOR MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR ROADS, SIDEWALKS, INTERSECTIONS, PARKS AND RECREATION, AND OTHER QUALITY OF LIFE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. AND FINALLY, I HAD TOUCHED UPON THIS IN OUR PREVIOUS AGENDA ITEM. OUR CIPS ARE BEING PLANNED FOR COMPLETION AND DELIVERY OVER AN EXPEDITED AND COMPRESSED TIME SCHEDULE. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT HAPPENING WITH THE PARKS PROJECTS. YOU WILL SEE THAT HAPPENING WITH THE STREET PROJECTS, ROAD PROJECTS, WATER, WASTEWATER, ALL OUR CIP PROGRAMS IS MOVING FASTER THAN EVER BEFORE. THE CITY MANAGER AND HIS MANAGEMENT TEAM HAVE STARTED THE PROCESS FOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPING THE CITY'S PROPOSED BUDGET FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR 26.

AS I MENTIONED, JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO, THE CITY IS PLANNING TO ISSUE APPROXIMATELY $125 MILLION, BOTH OF TAX AND NON TAX SUPPORTED DEBT THIS SUMMER. SO WE NEED DIRECTION FROM YOU HOW TO STRUCTURE THAT DEBT BASED ON YOUR YOUR PREFERENCE. SO CITY STAFF IS REQUESTING POLICY GUIDANCE AND DIRECTION TO DEVELOP THE CITY'S PROPOSED BUDGET FOR 26, BASED ON THE CITY COUNCIL'S PREFERRED OPTION FOR FINANCING AND PROPERTY TAX RATE MANAGEMENT.

AND THIS ONE IS IMPORTANT. STAFF IS NOT REQUESTING TONIGHT TO SET A PROPERTY TAX RATE THAT WILL OCCUR IN AUGUST SEPTEMBER TIME FRAME AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS. WE ARE ONLY SEEKING CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION AS YOUR YOUR PREFERENCE. HOW BEST TO MANAGE THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.

AND THEN FINALLY, BEFORE I ASK MR. MARK MCCLAIN WITH WHO'S OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR TO COME UP, ALL INFORMATION THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TODAY IS BASED ON BEST ASSUMPTIONS AND COST ESTIMATES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO STAFF AND OUR CONSULTANTS AT THIS TIME. SO THEY ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS WE GO THROUGH THE SUMMER MONTHS UNTIL WE ADOPT THE TAX RATE. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO ASK MR. MCCLAIN TO COME UP. OH, THERE HE IS. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS MARK MCCLAIN. I'M

[02:15:05]

WITH SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS. WORK WITH YOU AS YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR. PERVEZ HAS DONE A GREAT JOB OF OUTLINING EVERYTHING, AND THE STEP BEFORE THE DEBT POLICY REALLY HELPS US REALLY STRUCTURE THIS GOING FORWARD. SO YOUR SNAPSHOT RIGHT NOW IS YOU HAVE GOT THE 2020 BONDS THAT WERE VOTED FOR, PARKS LEFT, AND THAT'S $7 MILLION. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE 2022 BONDS YOU HAVE 246 MILLION. OOPS. WHAT'S THAT $256 MILLION LEFT OF THE 294 THAT WAS VOTED BY BY THE CITIZENS. THE PLAN IS NEEDING 38,000,900 THIS YEAR, 50,000,000 IN 26, 65,000,000 IN 27, 50 AND 28, AND THEN THE BALANCE IN 2029. YOU CAN SEE THAT I THINK EASIER IN THIS SLIDE. IF YOU CAN READ IT, IT BREAKS OUT ALL OF THE YEARS WHEN WE'RE GOING TO BE BORROWING GOING FORWARD. AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT SLIDE IN JUST A MOMENT. SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR IS SOME DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL. WE'VE REALLY LAY OUT THREE OPTIONS. ONE IS REALLY KIND OF FOLLOWING YOUR OLD DEBT POLICY. EVERY BOND ISSUE IS LEVEL DEBT AND IT'S ALL ISSUED IN A VACUUM. AND WHAT THAT RESULTS IN BOUNCING UP AND DOWN TAX RATES AND PAYING MORE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST BACK OVER THE LIFE. IT COSTS MORE OVER THE TERM OF THE BONDS. THE SECOND OPTION IS STRUCTURING THE DEBT.

AND ONE OF THE CHANGES IN THE DEBT MODEL THAT YOU I MEAN, THE DEBT POLICY THAT YOU APPROVED WAS ALLOWING US TO PUSH DEBT FORWARD, PAY IT OFF QUICKER, JUST LIKE AT YOUR HOME. IF YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, PAY DEBT OFF FASTER. THAT'S A GOOD THING. SO WE HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY NOW TO PAY OFF DEBT FASTER. THE STEPS THE THIRD OPTION IS KIND OF A MIX. WE JUST KIND OF SET IT AND SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO EVENTUALLY GET TO ABOUT $0.59 AND WE'RE GOING TO JUST TAKE TWO STEPS TO GET THERE. SO IT'S JUST TRYING TO CHOOSE ONE OF THOSE OPTIONS WHICH IS BEST FOR THE CITY. ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS IS WE'VE GOT A LOT OF OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ON OUR DRAWING BOARD WHEN THE BOND ELECTION WENT PAST, AND THAT'S THE KENSINGTON PARK. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT THE ANIMAL SHELTER, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, PARK IMPROVEMENTS AND OTHER ROAD IMPROVEMENTS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. THE TAX RATE IMPACT FOR EACH OF THESE PROJECTS IS AN ADDITION TO WHAT'S ON THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. SO WHEN WE SOLD THE BONDS, WHEN WE WHEN WE GOT THE BONDS APPROVED FROM THE VOTERS, WE SAID THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, WE COULD GET THIS DONE AT 59.9 $0.09. YOU ALL PROBABLY REMEMBER THAT THE ONES ON COUNCIL, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE COULD KEEP IT UNDER $0.60. WELL, THAT'S THE GENERAL OBLIGATION. BONDS COUNCIL HAS DIRECTED THESE OTHER PROJECTS. SO THIS TAX RATE FOR THE OTHER PROJECTS IS IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE SAID TO THE VOTERS. THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. HEARS THAT THE PROJECT. SO IN 20 AND WE'VE BROKEN THEM OUT BETWEEN 25 ALL THE WAY TO 29 GEOS ARE NOT HIGHLIGHTED. CEOS ARE HIGHLIGHTED. SO YOU CAN SEE THE GEOS FOR THE 25 ARE GOING TO BE 45,000,900. THAT'S 7 MILLION FOR PARKS AND 38,900,000 FOR STREETS. IN ADDITION, WE'RE GOING TO DO A MILLION 150 FOR KENSINGTON PARK, 4,000,007 FOR INTERSECTIONS AND 9,000,005 FOR OTHER PARK IMPROVEMENTS. SO THIS IS ALL ITEMS THAT ARE GOING TO BE INCLUDED AT YOUR DIRECTION FOR CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION OR TAX SUPPORTED. NOW, IF WE GO THROUGH THIS, WE CAME UP WITH THOSE THREE OPTIONS. AND I KNOW THESE ARE A LOT OF NUMBERS, BUT I WANT TO POINT CERTAIN THINGS OUT. HERE'S OPTION ONE. OPTION TWO. OPTION ONE IS THE LEVEL DEBT. THIS TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE BOND ISSUES THROUGH 2029. STRUCTURED. OPTION TWO IS STRUCTURED DEBT. AGAIN ALL OF THE BOND ISSUES ARE THERE. AND THEN THE MIXED OPTION IS OPTION THREE. YOU'LL SEE TAX RATE IN THE MIDDLE OF EACH OF THE GROUPINGS. SO THERE'S THE LEVEL DEBT TAX RATE IT'S HIGHLIGHTED

[02:20:02]

AT. WHAT I SEE IS THE PEAK THERE 5959. THEN AN OPTION TWO IT WE HIT 5894, BUT WE HIT 5894 IN YEAR ONE NEXT YEAR. AND THEN IT STAYS AT 5894 BEFORE IT STARTS FALLING IN 2031 AND 32. THE MIXED OPTION HITS 5939, BUT OUT IN 2030. NOW THE GREEN ON THE BOTTOM. YOU'LL SEE TOTAL CITY DEBT SERVICE. SO WE ISSUE ALL THE BONDS THROUGH THAT TIMETABLE. WHAT DOES THE CITIZEN COLLECTIVELY THE CITY, PAY BACK 593 MILLION UNDER OPTION ONE, 580 MILLION IN OPTION TWO. THE STRUCTURED DEBT AND THEN THE MIXED, AS YOU MIGHT EXPECT, BECAUSE WE'RE DOING KIND OF AN IN BETWEEN IS 583 MILLION. THIS WAS PUT IN THE AGENDA PACKETS EARLY ON, AND I THINK WE GOT SOME INPUT. I KNOW WE GOT SOME INPUT. WE SAID WHAT HAPPENS IF WE JUST GO TO WHAT WE SAID THE VOTERS WOULD FACE 59.99. SO WE ADDED A2B. SO WE'RE GOING TO STRUCTURE THIS AS OPTION TWO B.

AND IT THROWS IT. WE'RE GOING TO THAT 59.99 NEXT YEAR FOR THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT HERE. ONE THE TOTAL DEBT SERVICE REDUCES TO 575 MILLION. VERSE 593 580 OR 583. SO IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY LESS. BUT I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THE TAX RATE. SO WE DID THAT THAT TAX RATE. LOOK AT 2031 OR 2032 ACROSS THE BOARD HERE. IT'S ROUGHLY 5654 AND 55. IT STARTS DECLINING AFTER WE GET TO THE TOP. BUT IN OPTION TWO B IT DECLINES FURTHER. SO SOMETHING THAT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER IS THAT CURVE. YOU'RE ON THAT UPWARDS CURVE. WELL UNDER THE STRUCTURE DEBT YOUR TAX RATE BY 2030 IT STARTS TO GET LOWER EACH YEAR THEREAFTER WITHOUT ADDING ADDITIONAL PROJECTS IN THE FUTURE. BUT IT'S CHEAPER IN THE LONG RUN TO THE TAXPAYER WITH A LOWER TAX RATE. AND OVERALL REPAYMENT. WE ALSO INCLUDED WHAT THE LEVY IS ON EACH OPTION FOR THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER AFTER THEIR $40,000 EXEMPTION. SO THAT'S A I THINK IT WAS $285,000. AND YOU SAY WHAT THE LEVY FOR THE CITY TAXES WOULD BE EACH YEAR IF WE HIT THESE LEVELS. ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT PERVEZ DID MENTION, THESE ARE PROJECTIONS. I PROMISE YOU THEY'RE GOING TO BE DIFFERENT. BUT WHAT WE CAN DO WITH DIRECTION IS WE CAN WORK TOWARDS THOSE GOALS, THOSE TAX RATE GOALS. SO YOU HAD THOSE OTHER PROJECTS. I REALLY WANTED TO POINT THIS OUT. THESE ARE STANDALONE. THESE ARE THE OTHER PROJECTS. IF YOU LOOKED AT KENSINGTON PARK BY ITSELF, WHAT WOULD THAT BE ON THE TAX RATE.

AND YOU CAN SEE 1.7 $0.03, ALL OF THOSE, IF THEY WERE ALL DONE RIGHT NOW, IT WOULD BE 9.3 CENTS. IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THE 59.99. THE TAX RATE JUST FOR THE GOES. NOW WE'RE GOING TO SPREAD THIS OUT OVER MULTIPLE YEARS. YOU GO BACK TO THAT CHART THAT LISTS THOSE PROJECTS. SO THIS 9.3 AGAIN IS IF WE DID THEM ALL. NOW YOU'LL SEE IN THE NEXT SLIDE WHEN YOU COMBINE THEM AND SPREAD IT OUT YOU GET A LOWER TAX RATE. SO AGAIN APOLOGIZE FOR THE NUMBERS AND EVERYTHING WE'RE SEEING. WE'VE DONE THIS ONE. WHOOPS. OH I'M SORRY WE HAVEN'T DONE THIS ONE. SO HERE IS THE SLIDE THAT COMBINES ALL DEBT TOGETHER. GENERAL OBLIGATION AND COS. AND WITH THE DIFFERENT YEARS OF ISSUANCE SAME SCENARIO WHERE YOU CAN SEE TOTAL TAX RATE AND WHERE IT DECLINES AND WHERE IT MAXES OUT. AND I DO WANT TO POINT OUT SOME THINGS. AND PERVEZ BROUGHT IT UP EARLIER ON ASSUMPTIONS. SO WE'VE USED 25 YEAR MATURITIES. WE HAVE THE ABILITY IF WE NEED TO OR IF WE HAVE LONGER LIFE PROJECTS TO EXTEND IT TO 30 YEARS. WE'VE USED COS FOR 20 YEARS. WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO EXTEND THOSE TO 30 YEARS. WE'VE USED WHAT WE THINK IS CONSERVATIVE TAXABLE VALUES AT 7% GROWTH. NOW THAT SOUNDS AGGRESSIVE. UNTIL YOU LOOK AT

[02:25:01]

OUR HISTORY OF GROWTH, THE PAST TEN YEAR AVERAGE IS 16.75. THE LAST FIVE YEARS IS 15.75. BUT LAST YEAR WAS 10.61%. SO I WANT TO PULL THAT GROWTH RATE DOWN. AND WE DID THAT ON PURPOSE.

INTEREST RATES. WE USE 4.5% AND INCREASING TO 5%. AND TODAY'S MARKET, IF WE DID A 20 YEAR KO WE'RE GOING TO BE CLOSE TO 4%. SO I'M TRYING TO GIVE WORST CASE SCENARIO. I HIGHLIGHTED THEIR LEGISLATION. AUSTIN IS IN SESSION. THEY ARE PUTTING SOME WHAT I WOULD THINK ARE VERY RESTRICTIVE. BILLS FOR CONSIDERATION THAT CAN HIGHLY RESTRICT WHAT YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO MOVING FORWARD. THERE'S THERE ARE SOME REAL RESTRICTIONS THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING, MAKING CEOS HARDER TO DO, MAKING GOES. I'VE SEEN READ SOME THINGS THAT MAY TAKE TWO THIRDS VOTE TO GET THEM PASSED, TO GET AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CITIZENS. I WOULD SUGGEST THE SIDEBAR. TALK TO YOUR REPRESENTATIVES IF YOU HAVE ANY CONNECTIONS, BECAUSE THEY'RE MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR CITIES NEXT YEAR. WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DO SOME OF THE PROJECTS WE HAVE PLANNED. THAT'S SOMETHING I REALLY WANT TO HIGHLIGHT. WE HOPE THAT THE CO THE RULES BECOME A LITTLE MORE LENIENT OR LESS THAN WHAT IT'S BEING PROJECTED RIGHT NOW, BUT WE DON'T KNOW. AND THEN THE TOTAL TAX RATE ASSUMES THAT THE RATE STAYS CONSTANT. AND THAT'S GOING TO GO UP AND DOWN. ALSO WITH HIGHER GROWTH IT GETS FORCED DOWN. AGAIN. WE ADDED OPTION TWO B THIS IS LATE. AND THIS WAS JUST AGAIN ALL WE DID IS TOOK THE COS. AND THEN WE FORCED THE GEOS TO HIT THAT 59.99 TAX RATE. TO GIVE YOU WHAT THE OPTION TWO B STRUCTURE WOULD BE WHEN YOU ADD IN THE COS IF YOU LOOK THERE ON THE COS AND THIS ONE'S EASY TO SEE THE MAX RATE THERE IN 2030 FOR THE COS IS 8.7 $0.06. REMEMBER WHEN I WENT BACK JUST A FEW SLIDES IT WAS 9.3. IF WE DID IT ALL TOGETHER AGAIN. SO SPREADING IT OUT GIVES YOU SOME BENEFITS. NOW IF YOU GO WITH OPTION TWO WE WANT TO PROVIDE WHAT YOUR TAX RATE WOULD BE COMPARED TO OTHER COMMUNITIES. SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING NOW IS DIRECTION OPTION ONE WOULD MAINTAIN THE LOWEST TAX RATE FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE, KNOWING THAT EVENTUALLY THE RATE WILL INCREASE TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL AND POTENTIALLY ABOVE THE DESIRED TARGET OF THAT 59.99.

OPTION TWO INCREASE THE TAX RATE TO THE ANTICIPATED TARGET IMMEDIATELY BY STRUCTURING THE DEBT, MEANING MOVING PRINCIPAL IN THAT. PAY THAT DEBT OFF FASTER SO THAT THE CITY PAYS MORE PRINCIPAL IN THE EARLY YEARS, THUS RESULTING IN LESS INTEREST PAID OVER THE LIFE OF THE BONDS. THEN MIXED OPTION IS AGAIN TAKING KIND OF IN BETWEEN. STAFF RECOMMENDS TO PROCEED WITH OPTION TWO, WHICH RESULTS IN THE LOWEST OVERALL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PAYMENTS, AND EVENTUALLY THE LOWEST OVERALL TAX RATE FOR THE RESIDENTS. OTHER COUNCIL DECISIONS IS WE NEED DIRECTION TO PROCEED. PROCEED WITH THE 15,350,000 COS FOR THIS YEAR, WHICH IS GOING TO INCLUDE THE KENSINGTON PARK FOR MILLION ONE, 50 INTERSECTIONS FOR 4 MILLION, SEVEN OTHER PARK IMPROVEMENTS AT 9,000,005. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH 63,700,000 NON-TAX SUPPORTED COS SELF-SUPPORTING COS SUPPORTED BY THE UTILITY SYSTEM FOR 40 MILLION FOR WATER, 14,000,001 FOR WASTEWATER, AND 9,000,006 FOR TERS, NUMBER TWO FOR THE THREE ROUNDABOUTS IN THE ILLUMINATIONS THERE. AND STAFF AGAIN RECOMMENDS PROCEEDING ON ALL THOSE PROJECTS AS OUTLINED ABOVE. ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR 2026. SO WE WANT TO JUST JUST HAVE BEGINNING DISCUSSIONS. IS COMMERCIAL PAPER. COMMERCIAL PAPER IS A SHORT TERM TOOL. IT'S SIMILAR TO A CONSTRUCTION LOAN THAT GETS TAKEN OUT WITH YOUR IF YOU'RE BUILDING A HOME, YOU GET A CONSTRUCTION LOAN AND YOU TAKE IT OUT WITH PERMANENT FINANCING. SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT. WE HAVE THE ABILITY NOW IN YOUR DEBT

[02:30:03]

POLICY, AND WE'D HAVE TO STRUCTURE AND LEGALLY GET SET UP. BUT WE'LL NEED DIRECTION FROM YOU ALL AFTER WE GET THROUGH THIS YEAR'S BOND ISSUES. AND WHAT HAPPENS HERE IS YOU BORROW MONEY ON A SHORT TERM ON THE FRONT END OF THE YIELD CURVE, AT THE LOWEST AMOUNT, AT THE LOWEST INTEREST RATE. AND AS YOU ACCUMULATE THAT OVER A YEAR OR TWO, UP TO ABOUT 75 MILLION, YOU WILL ROLL IT OUT INTO PERMANENT FINANCING. SO IF WE START THIS COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM, WHAT THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO DO IS SKIP PERHAPS THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ISSUE IN 2026, PUSHING THE BOND ISSUE INTO 2027. WHEN YOU ROLL IT OUT. SO YOU'D HAVE YOU'D ISSUE COMMERCIAL PAPER NEXT YEAR, ALLOWING YOU TO ACCUMULATE THE 75 MILLION. SO YOU'RE ONLY PAYING INTEREST ON THE AMOUNT YOU'VE TAKEN DOWN. WHEN YOU GET A LOAN AT $50 MILLION, YOU'RE PAYING AS IF YOU ISSUE GEO BONDS FOR 50 MILLION. YOU'RE PAYING INTEREST ON ALL 50 MILLION IMMEDIATELY. HERE YOU MIGHT GET 5 MILLION, 5 MILLION, THEN A 10 MILLION. AND SO YOU'RE ONLY PAYING INTEREST. WHAT YOU NEED AND WHAT YOU'VE RECEIVED. AND SO YOU PUSH OUT PROJECTS, FINANCING PART OF THE PROJECTS ANOTHER YEAR, WHICH WILL HELP YOU FUNNEL OTHER PROJECTS, OTHER THINGS THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE ON YOUR DECK TO PAY IT OFF QUICKER BECAUSE YOU WON'T BE USING THAT 59.99 NEXT YEAR. YOU'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE COS IN THERE THAT YOU HAVE COMMITTED TO PAY FOR, AND SO YOU CAN MANAGE THAT TAX RATE AND DRIVE THE OVERALL TAX RATE LOWER. YOU COULD TAKE THE CPE CAN BE OUTSTANDING FOR UP TO 270 DAYS. THAT'S WHY I'M TALKING ABOUT YOU HAVE THAT ABILITY TO ROLL IT FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT YEAR. SO 26 MIGHT NOT SEE A GEO BOND, BUT 27, WE WOULD ROLL IT INTO A PERMANENT FINANCING. THE LAST BULLET POINT, THE COMMERCIAL PAPER SHOULD HELP THE CITY LOWER THE OVERALL TAX RATE REQUIRED TO REPAY THE DEBT. REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION. SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ASK IS TO PROVIDE STAFF WITH DIRECTION ON THE GEO FUNDING, WHAT ROUTE YOU WANT TO GO, OPTION ONE, OPTION 2 OR 2 B OPTION THREE AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE COES FOR THE TAX SUPPORTED DEBT AND THE NON-TAX SUPPORTED DEBT. IF YOU ALL ARE, GIVE US THAT PERMISSION. WE'LL COME BACK FOR THE COES WITH A NOTICE OF INTENTION IN JUNE AND LIKELY THE SALE IN AUGUST FOR BOTH THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND THE COES, AND HAVE MONEY IN HERE LATE AUGUST. AND THAT IS WHAT WE'RE ASKING. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MARK. THAT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION. AND THANK YOU FOR STICKING WITH ME THROUGH THAT. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR MARK? COUNCILOR ZUNIGA THANK YOU. MARK. WHAT IF LIKE YOU DID THE MIX OPTION AND YOU SPREAD OUT THE SEALS AND THEN YOU ALSO TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE COMMERCIAL PAPER, AND THEN YOU'RE WAITING A LITTLE BIT BEFORE YOU GET TO YOUR TO THE HIGHEST TARGET. BUT THEN YOU ALSO HAVE MORE PEOPLE NOW TO SHARE THE WHOLE OVERALL COST WITH. AND THEN IT DROPS BACK DOWN. WELL, THE COMMERCIAL PAPER DOESN'T WORK YET BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT. WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH THE LEGAL PROCESS AND DON'T HAVE THAT. THAT'S GOING TO BE 26 IN, IN, OUT. SO I WAS THINKING THE MIXED OPTION WHAT IT DOES SPREAD THE COST OF THE SEALS LIKE YOU HAD SAID THAT YOU WOULD DO IN OPTION TWO B SO THAT THAT'S I THINK THIS OUTLINES PRETTY MUCH WHAT THIS ONE OUTLINES WHERE IT IS. YEAH. NO THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE COES. HERE'S WHERE THE COES. SO YOU CAN SEE THE TAX RATE ONE IS NOT RIGHT. OPTION ONE COULD WORK. OPTION TWO COULD WORK.

OPTION THREE COULD WORK. ONE IS NOT MORE CORRECT THAN THE OTHER. SO ONE DOES MAKE IT YOU KNOW, THE OPTION. THREE THE MIXED OPTION THAT YOU BROUGHT UP JUST ALLOWS A SECOND STEP IN THERE.

IT JUST RESULTS IN MORE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST REPAYMENT. IF YOU SEE HERE'S THE THIS IS JUST THE GEO. BUT YOU CAN SEE THE 583 VERSUS THE 580 MILLION AND ALSO RESULTS AFTER 3 OR 4 YEARS, I'M SORRY, IN 2031. COMPARE THE TAX RATES 5542 VERSUS 5592. SO WHAT YOU DELAY, YOU GET, I GUESS WORSE OFF IN THE FUTURE. SO THERE'S REALLY IT'S I HATE TO SAY IT THIS WAY.

[02:35:02]

IT'S YOU PAY NOW OR YOU PAY LATER. RIGHT. AND THERE'S NO WAY AROUND GETTING THAT BECAUSE IF YOU'RE THE CIP THAT YOU HAVE ON YOUR PLATE. THE OTHER POINT I WAS JUST GOING TO ADDRESS, AS MARK WENT THROUGH ALL OF THE OUT YEARS, THESE ADDITIONAL YEARS OF LOOKING FORWARD, WE'VE TRIED TO HAVE GROWTH RATES FOR THE CITY. WHAT APPRAISED VALUES ARE GOING TO DO. SO THAT'S THE GROWTH OF THE CITY. MORE RESIDENTS, MORE PROPERTY VALUES. WE'VE TRIED TO FACTOR THAT IN. IT IS AN ESTIMATE. HOPEFULLY THESE ARE CONSERVATIVE FIGURES AND IT'LL BE BETTER THAN THOSE GOING FORWARD. BUT WE'VE TRIED TO PUT THOSE IN THE ESTIMATES. I THINK THAT WAS PERHAPS PART OF YOUR QUESTION. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ADDRESSED IT. YEAH. IT WAS. SO YOU SHARE A GREATER A GREATER COST. BUT AND THE ONLY THING IS THAT YOU'RE VERY GRADUALLY GETTING UP THERE IN OPTION THREE. SO THAT IS A BENEFIT THAT YOU'RE MOVING SLOWLY. AND I GUESS IN TWO YEARS YOU'RE GOING TO GET THERE REALLY FAST. IN 2027, 2028. BUT THAT'S. AGAIN, THERE'S NOT A RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER. YOU KNOW I'M A FINANCE GUY. SO I LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LINE. THE TOTAL THAT'S NOT LOOKING AT ANNUAL YEAR END AND YEAR OUT. I THINK JUST TO CLARIFY, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO LOOK AT OPTION TWO AND IS TO GET AS CLOSE TO THAT 60 CENT RATE AS POSSIBLE. WE'RE OBVIOUSLY NOT ASKING YOU TO SET THE RATE THIS EVENING. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WE'VE GOT OUR ASSESSED VALUES. WE'LL BE GOING THROUGH A PROCESS TO LOOK AT THOSE, AND THAT WILL COME LATER ON IN THE YEAR AND THE BUDGET PROCESS. BUT AS A GOAL OF HOW DO YOU WANT TO STRUCTURE THE DEBT? THAT'S REALLY THE QUESTION. AND WE'RE PROPOSING OPTION TWO SIMPLY BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU THE LOWEST COST OPTION OVER TIME. THE OVERALL RATE IS PAID, IS LESS FOR THE CITY IN THE FUTURE, AND IT REDUCES THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST GOING FORWARD. SO THAT'S THE REASON I THINK, AS MARK SAID, THERE'S PROBABLY AN ARGUMENT THAT CAN BE MADE FOR ANY OF THESE OPTIONS THAT ARE HERE ON THE TABLE. BUT AS WE'VE LOOKED AT IT, WE WANT TO AT LEAST GIVE YOU SOMETHING FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE AND THE FINANCIAL PROFESSIONALS OF WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND. AND THAT'S OPTION TWO. COUNCILMEMBER MCKINNEY, IN REGARDS TO THE COMMERCIAL PAPER, IS THERE A SEPARATE COST FOR FINANCING? WHENEVER WE DO THOSE AND THEN WE ROLL THEM OVER INTO THERE WOULD BE. SO IT'D BE A YOU SET IT UP AND IT'D BE STRUCTURED SO IT'D BE BASED OFF THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS THAT WE HAVE VOTED AND UNISSUED AT THE TIME.

SO ASSUMING THAT WE ISSUE THE 38 MILLION, THE 40 MILLION ROUGHLY, SO WE'D HAVE $200 MILLION, YOU WOULD HAVE THAT SET UP CHEAPER OVERALL BECAUSE THE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A 3% INTEREST RATE OR TWO. TWO AND THREE QUARTERS VERSUS 5% OR FOUR. YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE LONGER END OF THE YIELD CURVE KEEPS GOING UP MOST OF THE TIME. YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WE WERE IN AN INVERTED YIELD CURVE. AND WE WOULDN'T WANT TO RECOMMEND IT AT THAT TIME. BUT BECAUSE OF THAT TWO THINGS. ONE, YOU'RE BORROWING LESS MONEY OR YOU'RE PAYING INTEREST ON LESS BECAUSE YOU'RE ONLY PAYING INTEREST WHAT YOU HAVE. AND WE'RE ON THAT FRONT END OF THE YIELD CURVE.

BUT THERE WILL BE LEGAL COSTS AND ALL THE STRUCTURING COSTS OF A CEO OF THE COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM. I'M SORRY. AND THEN THERE WILL BE A REFUNDING WHEN YOU TAKE IT INTO A PERMANENT. SO THERE WILL BE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THE FACT, THOUGH, THAT IT SHOULD BE ALL LESS BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING THAT FRONT END OF THE YIELD CURVE AND YOU'RE ONLY PAYING INTEREST ON WHAT YOU'RE PAYING. THANK YOU MARK. THAT WAS MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION WAS WHETHER WE THOUGHT THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE MORE COST SAVINGS OVERALL TWO YEARS AGO, WE WOULDN'T HAVE BROUGHT THIS TO YOU OR THREE YEARS AGO WHEN WE HAD AN INVERTED YIELD CURVE, BECAUSE THE LONGER DEBT THINGS OUT, 20 YEARS WERE LOWER THAN YEAR ONE AND TWO. SO IT'S JUST AND WE MAY GET THE COMMERCIAL PROGRAM SET UP AND THEN RECOMMEND NOT DOING IT, BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE IT SET UP IN ORDER TO PROCEED AND USE THAT AS A TOOL. THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION. SO I'M GLAD YOU SAID THAT. I JUST I HAVE A JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. I THINK A FEW THINGS. ONE IS THE LION'S SHARE OF THE GEO SUPPORTED TAX OR THE TAX RATE INCREASES COMING FROM GEO SUPPORTED DEBT, WHICH MEANS THAT THE EXISTING RESIDENTS WHO LIVED HERE SAID THEY WERE WILLING TO INCREASE THEIR TAX RATE UP TO $0.59 IN ORDER TO HAVE US DELIVER THESE ROAD PROJECTS. THAT'S THAT'S A YOU KNOW, WE ARE WE HAVE WE ARE TAKING EVERY STEP NECESSARY TO DELIVER THOSE PROJECTS. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE STEPS THAT I THINK HELPS US THE FURTHER OUT WE GO AWAY. FROM 2020 NOVEMBER 2022, THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE CITY SHIFT.

[02:40:07]

PEOPLE MOVE IN, PEOPLE MOVE OUT WHO WEREN'T A PART OF THAT VOTE. AND COUNCILS CHANGE TOO. SO, YOU KNOW, FOR THAT REASON, I THINK WE HAVE THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE IMPERATIVE NOW TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT CHANGE. AND THEN SECONDARILY, I THINK THAT WE'VE EVERY PROJECT WE'VE CULTIVATED, IN ADDITION TO THE ROAD BOND PROJECTS SUCH AS LAKE KENSINGTON NATURE PARK, THE ANIMAL SHELTER AND THOSE CO PROJECTS I WOULD SAY ARE ALSO HIGHLY IMPORTANT TO THE RESIDENTS. AND IF WE WERE TO GO OUT AND ASK THEM RIGHT NOW, I WOULD THINK THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT THOSE PROJECTS AS WELL.

SO KNOWING THAT THOSE INVESTMENTS ARE COMING, THAT WE ARE PREPARING TO MAKE THOSE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS, I THINK IT'S BEST TO TAKE THE BIGGER PICTURE AND UNDERSTAND THAT OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO BE MAKING A LOT OF INVESTMENTS. AND IF A DEFEASANCE PLAN THAT GOES UP TO THE VOTER SUPPORTED RATE THAT THE FROM 2022 ALLOWS FOR US TO SAVE MONEY, IT JUST MAKES SENSE TO DO IT THAT WAY. I THE IDEA OF HAVING A TAX RATE INCREASE EVERY SINGLE YEAR, YEAR AFTER YEAR, IT IT WILL IT WEARS ON YOU FOR SURE, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU KNOW YOU'RE GOING UP EVERY SINGLE YEAR. AND THEN IF AT ONE POINT A COUNCIL CHANGES AND THEY DECIDE NOT TO RAISE THE TAX RATE, THEN THE PROJECTS LANGUISH, WHICH I THINK IS ALSO BEEN VERY CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED WITH THIS MATH, THAT IF WE DON'T RAISE OUR TAX RATE IN ORDER TO PAY FOR THE PROJECTS WHICH THE VOTERS APPROVED US TO DO, IF WE IF WE DON'T MAKE THAT MOVE, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SLOW DOWN OUR PROJECTS, WHICH I DON'T THINK THE PUBLIC WANTS. I THE INTERACTIONS I HAVE SAY MOVE AND MOVE QUICKLY. SO I THINK EVERYTHING WE'RE DOING IS IN ALIGNMENT FROM THE WAY WE'RE BRINGING ALL THE ROAD PROJECTS, NOT JUST ONE AT A TIME, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM HOW THEY DID IT. BOND PROGRAMS PASSED TO THE MOVEMENT ON RIGHT OF WAY, AND JUST REALLY OUR INTENTION TO CULTIVATE AND EXECUTE ON THESE ROAD PROJECTS, THIS, THIS, THIS POLICY THAT YOU'VE PROPOSED HERE, THIS DEBT STRUCTURE AND CORRESPONDING TAX RATE IS THE EQUIVALENT TO THAT. SO IT'S IN HARMONY WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING. SO FOR THAT REASON I SUPPORT IT AS WELL. SO THOSE ARE THOSE ARE JUST MY THOUGHTS I THINK YOU'RE YOU'RE REALLY CORRECT ABOUT THAT. AND PEREZ SAID THAT THIS IS AN EXPEDITED AND A COMPRESSED TIME SCHEDULE. BUT I SEE THIS AS NOW WE HAVE THE PEOPLE AND THE STAFF, RIGHT. WE HAVE A DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION, DIRECTOR OF WATER MASTER PLANS. AND TO REALLY GET THERE IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. YOU'RE RIGHT. WE'VE GOT TO GET TO THAT, TO THAT $0.59 OR $0.60 AND DELIVER THESE PROJECTS, BECAUSE NOW THERE REALLY ARE NO EXCUSES. WE HAVE WE HAVE THE PEOPLE IN OUR IN OUR DEPARTMENTS NOW TO WE HAVE PARKS, WE HAVE LARGER PARKS NOW AND MORE PEOPLE STAFFED AND HIGH LEVEL DIRECTORS IN EVERY DEPARTMENT. SO YEAH. AND ANOTHER WAY TO THINK OF IT IS IF WE CHOOSE A SLOWER PATH THAT STRETCHES OUT THE PROJECTS EVEN LONGER, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IS THE INCREASE IN CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND DESIGN COSTS AND LAND ACQUISITION COSTS GOES UP BY EXCEEDINGLY MORE THAN EVEN THE GROWTH RATE OF THE CITY, WHICH MEANS THAT THE PROJECTS BECOME MORE EXPENSIVE AND THE DELAY MAKES THE TAX RATE GO UP EVEN MORE, WHICH IS NOT A FIGURE THAT'S EVEN ACCOUNTED FOR HERE.

DELAYED PROJECTS COST MORE. SO I, I'M I'M THANKFUL FOR THE COUNCIL'S JUST WILLINGNESS TO ENTERTAIN THIS. AND IT IT SHOWS A COMMITMENT TO PROJECT DELIVERY, WHICH I AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER ZUNIGA IS WHAT I THINK WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO CULTIVATE SINCE MR. LANGLEY GOT HERE. SO CUSTOMER HEIZER. YEAH. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I JUST WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER ZUNIGA JUST BROUGHT UP SOMETHING I HADN'T EVEN CONSIDERED. AND I THINK THAT'S SPOT ON, JUST IN TERMS OF THE DELIVERY OF PROJECTS AND THE TIMELINES AND HOW STAFF IS MOVED, ESPECIALLY WITH THE ROAD BOND IS. YOU KNOW, I REMEMBER LAST YEAR WE WERE LOOKING AT EACH OTHER, SHAKING OUR HEADS, WONDERING WHY THE ROAD BOND PROJECTS GET KEPT GETTING KICKED YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. AND NOW TIMELINES ARE MOVING UP AND UP AND UP. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S VERY MUCH NEEDED AND APPROVED BY THE VOTERS FOR US TO DO. SO I'M IN SUPPORT. I'D SUPPORT OPTION TWO B. THAT'S WHERE I START. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS PAGE? THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT ITEMS YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. FEEDBACK ON THAT ONE. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS I CAN MAKE A MOTION. ALL RIGHT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO

[02:45:06]

PROCEED WITH THE OPTION TWO STRUCTURED DEBT STAFF RECOMMENDATION PLAN WITH AN ASIDE FOR AN OPTION TO BE IF NECESSARY, AS WELL AS AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PROCEED WITH 2025 CO FUNDING FOR THE OTHER TAX SUPPORTED PROJECTS, AND TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH 2025 CO FUNDING FOR NON TAX SUPPORTED PROJECTS. SECOND MOTION BY THE MAYOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM THAT WE APPROVE THE ITEMS BASED ON WHAT WAS DISCUSSED. IS THERE DISCUSSION. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED.

ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES 7 TO 0. FINAL ITEM. AGENDA ITEM 25. FIRST READING. THIS ITEM DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE FOR THE ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 35.57 ACRES ALONG BUTTON LANE, DACEY LANE EAST AND RANCH ROAD 150 FM 2770 AN OLD STAGECOACH ROAD TO ALIGN AND FULLY INCORPORATE THESE STREETS INTO THE CITY LIMITS. MISS MCCOLLUM.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS ITEM IS KIND OF A CONTINUATION OF KIND OF THE CLEANUP AND BRINGING FULLY INTO OUR ROADWAYS SOME OF THE ROADWAY ANNEXATIONS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. AGAIN, THIS WILL BRING THIS 35 ACRES THAT WAS KIND OF LEFT OUT OR UNINCORPORATED INTO FULLY OUR CITY LIMITS. WE HAVE NOTIFIED FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE'RE HAVING TODAY. AND AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE LOOKING AT AT BRINGING BUNTON DACEY. 150 2770 AND OLD STAGECOACH ROAD FULLY INTO THE CITY LIMITS. I'VE SHOWED THESE EXHIBITS A COUPLE TIMES BEFORE, BUT THE AREAS IN LIGHT BEIGE IS OUR CURRENT CITY LIMITS AND KIND OF THE YELLOW IS OUR ETJ. AND WHAT IS RED? THERE IS REALLY KIND OF THE PORTIONS OF THE ROADWAY THAT ARE NOT WITHIN OUR CITY LIMITS CURRENTLY. SO THIS WOULD BE ALONG BUNTON LANE HERE. THIS WOULD BE A DACEY. SO YOU CAN SEE THE MAJORITY OF DACEY IS IN OUR CITY LIMITS. BUT THIS LIGHT PORTION IS WITHOUT. SO THIS WOULD BRING THIS INTO AND THEN ALONG 150 THIS TWO WOULD BE IN OUR CITY LIMITS AS WELL. THIS WOULD HELP CLARIFY REALLY OUR EMERGENCY RESPONSES ALONG THESE RIGHT OF WAY. SINCE THIS IS A TXDOT ROAD. SAME WITH THIS ONE TOO. FOR 2770. AND THEN STAGECOACH AGAIN. THIS PROJECT IS PART OF OUR ROAD BOND AS WELL, AND IT'S JUST A SLIGHT PORTION THAT'S OUTSIDE. AND THIS WILL REALLY KIND OF CLARIFY ALL OF THAT FOR OUR GIS. AGAIN, WE DID THE RESOLUTION FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE MARCH 18TH MEETING. TODAY IS OUR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE. AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW, WE WILL ACTUALLY HAVE THE SECOND READING ON JUNE 3RD. SO THE 45 DAYS AFTER. AND WITH THAT, I WOULD ASK, UNLESS IT'S FINALLY PASSED, I BELIEVE.

SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN DO THAT. THIS ITEM HAS A PUBLIC HEARING. IF THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS, I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW. SEEING NONE, WE FINALLY PASSED. OKAY. SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK

[25) (First Reading) Consider approval of an ordinance for the annexation of approximately 35.57 acres along Bunton Lane, Dacy Lane, E RR 150, FM 2770, and S. Old Stagecoach Road, to align and fully incorporate these streets into the city limits. (ANNX-25-0024) Public Hearing ]

ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND MOTION BY MAYOR, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER TOBIAS THAT WE APPROVE. AGENDA ITEM 25. IS THERE A DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION, COUNCILMEMBER TOBIAS OKAY, I'M LOOKING AT THE DAISY LANE ANNEX SECTION. I THINK IT'S ON PAGE FOUR. SO THE RED IS GOING TO BE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF DAISY LANE IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ANNEXING. CORRECT? CORRECT.

OKAY. SO WITH THAT, MAYBE IN THE FUTURE OR MAYBE HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT YEAR OR SO, WE COULD LOOK AT A CFP PROJECT TO MAYBE ADD SIDEWALKS TO THAT SIDE OF THE ROAD. NOW TO WHERE YOU'RE SAYING HAVE TO CROSS THE ROAD TO GO ON THE LEFT SIDE AND THEN WALK IN FRONT OF CHIAPAS AND THEN HAVE TO CROSS OVER AGAIN. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? YEAH, WE CAN WE CAN NOW ANNEX IT AND SAY IT BELONGS TO THE CITY, THAT WE COULD USE AN ADDITIONAL SIDEWALK IN THE FUTURE. IF WE LOOK AT THAT TO WHERE WE CAN ADD THAT DOWN. AND THEN ALSO, I'VE BEEN ASKING ABOUT SUNFLOWER CIRCLE, THAT ROAD TO FINALLY GET PAVED, BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE THERE, IT IS A CITY

[02:50:03]

STREET, BUT THOSE INDIVIDUALS THERE THROUGH THE YEARS HAVE DONE THEIR OWN MAINTENANCE ON THAT ROAD. AND IT'S LIKE ONE YEAR. IT'S ONE FAMILY THAT PICKS FIX THE POTHOLES AND SO FORTH.

SO IF THIS GOES THROUGH, I'D REALLY LIKE FOR THE CITY TO REALLY LOOK AT FINALLY GETTING MAYBE THOSE TWO ITEMS. YES, SIR. WE'LL BE GLAD TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON IS THE SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING THAT BACK TO YOU IN THE NEXT FEW MEETINGS TO TALK ABOUT. WE THE ANNEXATION WILL CERTAINLY MAKE IT EASIER TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN. WE WOULD STILL NEED TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY FROM ALL OF THOSE PARCELS THAT YOU SEE HERE TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT DOING THAT. AND I AM AWARE OF THE SUNFLOWER CIRCLE AS WELL. WE'LL COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT. YES, SIR. CAN I QUICKLY LOOK AT 158 OR 150? I THINK YOU HAD THOSE ON THERE AS WELL. I DON'T SEE THE SAME THING. IS APPLYING OR DOESN'T APPLY. THAT'S ALL. 150, ISN'T IT? IT IS. IT'S KIND OF A YEAH, A LARGE, A LARGE PORTION OF THIS RIGHT OF WAY. AND AGAIN, THIS IS STILL A TXDOT RIGHT OF WAY. BUT THIS IS A PRIMARILY FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE. RIGHT. SO YOU KNOW WHO'S WHO CAN HONESTLY RESPOND TO THE TRAFFIC ACCIDENT THAT'S GOING ON. AND THEN IT IT ALSO HELPS CLARIFY A JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WHEN YOU'RE TALKING TO TEXDOT AND DIFFERENT THINGS ABOUT ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS, YOU KNOW, THEY KNOW WHO TO WORK WITH AS WELL. YEAH. THIS IS NOT AS CLOSE TO THE SCHOOL AS I THOUGHT. BUT YEAH, IT'S A GOOD THING TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN WE LOOK AT THOSE SIDEWALKS. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 7 TO 0. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO ITEMS 22 AND 23 BEING FINALLY PASSED? SEEING NONE, THOSE ITEMS ARE FINALLY PASSED. MOTION TO

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.