[00:00:01] >> I NOW DECLARE THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL HAS CONVENED INTO OPEN SESSION. [PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING] >> RECORDING IN PROGRESS. >> THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COUNCIL-MEMBER RICCIARDELLI, MAYOR PRO TEM, PRINCE. COUNCIL-MEMBER RICCIARDELLI IS NOW HERE. COUNCIL WILL NOW RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION IN THE WEST HARDY ROOM TO HOLD TO CLOSE THE EXECUTIVE MEETING PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF VERNON'S TEXAS CODES ANNOTATED GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551. THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED IN SECTION 551.O71 TO CONSULT WITH THE ATTORNEY TO RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE AND DISCUSS LITIGATION. SECTION 551.O87 TO DISCUSS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MATTERS AND SECTION 551.O74 TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS. THANK YOU. I NOW DECLARE THAT THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING IS RECONVENED IN OPEN SESSION, THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT. OUR FIRST ITEM ON THE PRELIMINARY AGENDA IS CONSIDERATION AND ACTION RESULTING FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE HAVE ONE ITEM, THE APPOINTMENT OF THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THIS NEXT YEAR. I'D LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS MARIA TU AND THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM IS JULIE HOLMER. CONGRATULATIONS OR MY CONDOLENCES, ONE OF THE TWO. [LAUGHTER] [APPLAUSE] >> CAN I SAY A FEW WORDS, MR. MAYOR? >> PLEASE. >> I ACTUALLY REALLY ENJOY BEING A DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BECAUSE YOU GET THE TITLE BUT NONE OF THE WORK. I COULD SHOW UP WHENEVER I WANT TO AND WHEN I DON'T. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK KAYCI FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS OF BEING IN THE FRONT AND HELPING TO MAKE SURE THAT I DON'T GET OVERWORKED. BUT NOW, KAYCI, YOU DON'T GET TO GET OFF THAT EASY. JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE NOW SETTING ASIDE TIME FOR YOUR FAMILY AND FOR YOUR OWN LIFE, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU COULD JUST WALK AWAY FROM BEING A MAYOR PRO TEM. [LAUGHTER] NO, IT DOESN'T. MR. MAYOR, PLEASE DO NOT SET SUCH HIGH EXPECTATION STANDARD FOR ALL OF US. YOU GO TO EVERYTHING. >> IT'S TOO LATE. >> ANYWAY, I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE MR. MAYOR FOR GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY. >> THANK YOU. >> JUST AS A POINT OF ORDER, I BELIEVE WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT, CORRECT? >> YES. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. I THOUGHT WERE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPOINT MARIA AS MAYOR PRO TEM AND JULIE HOLMER AS DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> I HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES 8-0. THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS. NEXT ITEM. APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL LIAISONS. FIRST ITEM IS THE NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT BOARD, REAPPOINTMENT OF MR. RON KELLY. I THINK RON IS IN THE AUDIENCE. RON RAISE YOUR HAND. A LITTLE HIGHER. [LAUGHTER] RON, THAT'S A GREAT JOB THAT YOU'VE DONE. IT'S PROBABLY A VERY THANKLESS JOB, BUT WE THANK YOU VERY MUCH FROM THE BOTTOM OF OUR HEARTS. THANK YOU. DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THESE SEPARATELY? >> ACTUALLY, THIS IS JUST THE COUNCIL LIAISONS TO APPOINT THE MEMBERS TO THESE BOARDS. THESE WEREN'T ON YOUR LIST LAST TIME. >> RIGHT. >> IT'S THE COUNCIL PEOPLE, NOT NECESSARILY THE PEOPLE SERVING ON THE BOARD. >> I'VE GOT IT. [LAUGHTER] THE LIAISONS CAN MAKE THIS. WHO'S ON THE LIAISONS OF THIS WATER DISTRICT BOARD? >> [INAUDIBLE] >> GO AHEAD. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> WE ALREADY DID THAT. BUT JUST GO AHEAD. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> OKAY. SORRY. >> YOU'RE GOOD. [LAUGHTER] [INAUDIBLE] >. WE'VE FALLEN APART. IT'S RICK AND RICK, RIGHT? >> RIGHT. >> OKAY. THE NEXT ONE, 2025 BOND REFERENDUMS CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND AMAZINGLY ENOUGH, I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND RICK SMITH AND RICK HORN. [00:05:10] >> [INAUDIBLE]. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] >> OH, MY GOD. [BACKGROUND] >> DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT? NO? OKAY. THEN FINALLY, THE ZONING SUBDIVISION STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY COMMITTEE WOULD CONSIST OF THE MAYOR PRO TEM, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, THE CHAIR AND THE VICE CHAIR OF P&Z. YES. NEXT ITEM. ITEM 3, DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION OF THE ARTS FUNDING AND GRANT GUIDELINES. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. FIRST, I NEED TO EXTEND A BIT OF AN APOLOGY FOR SOME OF THE CONFUSION THAT'S BEEN OUT THERE WITH REGARD TO THE ARTS FUNDING. OVER THE COURSE OF OUR PREPARATION FOR BUDGET, I HAD INDICATED TO STAFF AND TO OTHERS A WILLINGNESS TO ENTERTAIN AN INCREASE IN FUNDING FOR THE ARTS COMMUNITY OUT THERE. SOMEHOW THROUGH MY COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSLATIONS, THINGS HAVE TAKEN A FEW STEPS FURTHER THAN PROBABLY WHERE THEY SHOULD. AFTER HAVING A NUMEROUS DISCUSSIONS WITH A COUPLE OF THE COUNCIL LIAISONS. I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE LIAISONS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT HAS BEEN SHOWN TO THE PUBLIC. WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A RECEPTIVITY TO INCREASING THE FUNDING AS A POOL, THE DIRECTION FROM THE LIAISONS WAS TO STICK TO THE $1 MILLION IN THIS FISCAL CYCLE AND THEN TAKE THE ADDITIONAL $500,000 AND SET THAT ASIDE IN A POOL FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION AFTER THE CONSULTANT HAS COMPLETED THEIR WORK AND IN LOOKING AT WHAT MAY COME OUT OF THAT. I WANTED TO AGAIN, APOLOGIZE FOR ANY MISCOMMUNICATION, AND I THINK COUNCILWOMAN HOLMER MAY HAVE SOME MORE TO ADD TO THAT. >> WELL, I THINK REALLY WHAT WAS MISSING WAS THE EXPECTATION THAT THERE WOULD BE DISCUSSION AMONGST COUNCIL ABOUT HOW WE DO AS A COUNCIL, ALL WANT TO SUPPORT THE ARTS AND INCREASING FUNDING TO THE ARTS, AND THAT CLEARLY WAS SOMETHING THAT WE AGREED ON. BUT BECAUSE OF CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD HEARD IN CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION MEETINGS, AND THERE'S BEEN SOME ONGOING DISCUSSION ABOUT CHANGING ALLOCATIONS OF FUNDS, WHICH WE PUT ON HOLD WAITING FOR THE CONSULTANT'S RECOMMENDATIONS, AND I HAD FORGOTTEN THAT NOT ALL OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE IN THOSE MEETINGS TO HEAR THE SAME THINGS THAT THE LIAISONS HERE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THE REST OF THE COUNCIL ARE EVEN AWARE THAT THAT THERE'S BEEN THIS ONGOING DISCUSSION. ANTHONY WAS THE PRIOR LIAISON WITH ME SO HE HAD HEARD IT, AND MARIA HAD HEARD IT, AND SO WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT INCREASING THE ARTS FUNDING, I THOUGHT WE WERE UNDER THE DIRECTION ALREADY THAT WE WOULDN'T MAKE CHANGES UNTIL WE HEARD WHAT THE CONSULTANT HAD TO SAY. THAT'S WHAT MARIA AND I, AS LIAISONS HAD IN MIND, AND THOUGHT THAT WAS THE DIRECTION WE WOULD GO, AND NOW IT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE EITHER WE NEED TO HEAR, WELL, I'D LIKE TO PUT IT OUT THERE FOR DISCUSSION. I'D LIKE TO FIND OUT IS THAT WHAT EVERYONE ELSE THOUGHT A LOT OF THAT WHILE THE ARTS GROUPS WERE SHOWN THE INCREASE BEING PUT BACK INTO THE FUND, WHICH WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A SURPRISE AND JUST MISCOMMUNICATION, BUT WE DIDN'T REALIZE THAT UNTIL JUST LAST WEEK. >> I PERSONALLY HAD IN MIND THAT BECAUSE WE WERE IN LIMBO AND WAITING TO GET THIS FEEDBACK THAT WE WOULD USE THE MONEY IN A MANNER THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO ALL OF THE ARTS GROUPS. I HAD A NUMBER OF SUGGESTIONS AND IDEAS AND WAS ALSO OPEN TO THE IDEA OF LOOKING TO OUR WONDERFUL CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL. BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD A DISCUSSION AND WHATEVER THE COUNCIL DECIDES IS WHAT WE DECIDE, BUT I THINK A DISCUSSION NEEDS TO BE HAD AND NOT JUST ASSUME THAT THAT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE FUNDS BECAUSE IT IS A 50% INCREASE. >> I WOULD ASK THAT THE COUNCIL HEED OUR RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS TO HOLD OFF ON THE ADDITIONAL POINT $0.5 MILLION AND HOLD THAT UNTIL [00:10:03] THE ACTUAL CONSULTANT IS ABLE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE. AT THIS TIME, EVEN IF THERE IS MONEY AVAILABLE TO NOT DISPENSE THAT UNTIL WE HEAR WHAT THE CONSULTANT HAS TO SAY. THAT'S THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION. WHAT WAS THE SECOND RECOMMENDATION? >> HOW LONG WILL WE BE WAITING FOR? SINCE YOU AND I'VE SPOKEN, I HAVE SPOKEN TO SOME OTHER PEOPLE THAT BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT THAT THAT IS A LONG TIME FOR THAT MONEY THAT COULD BE BENEFITING THE ARTS COMMUNITY TO NOT BE USED, WHICH WAS WHY I BROUGHT UP THE IDEA OF MAYBE LOOKING TO THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION FOR RECOMMENDATIONS OR LETTING US SHARE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ON WAYS THE MONEY CAN BE USED TO BENEFIT THE ARTS COMMUNITY SOONER AS A WHOLE. >> WHEN IS THAT? WHEN ARE WE WAITING? >> WELL, WHEN ARE WE EXPECTED TO HEAR BACK FROM? >> MY UNDERSTANDING FROM TALKING TO JULIE IS THAT THE CONSULTANT WAS JUST HIGHER, AND APPARENTLY, THE RECOMMENDATION SHOULD COME WITHIN 14 MONTHS. WITHIN A YEAR OR LIST ABOUT IT. >> WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE IT, WE GOT TO USE IT, WE CAN'T JUST HAVE IT SITTING THERE NOT HELPING ANYBODY. >> IF WE ARE GOING TO USE IT, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, I GUESS, SOME TYPE OF RECOMMENDATION BE MADE BY EITHER THE CULTURAL COMMISSION OR TO COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE CAN ADOPT. >> ANTHONY. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD ONE THING, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND I'M NO LONGER A LIAISON TO THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION, SO PLEASE MAYOR PRO TEM TO AND DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM HOMER, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. BUT I BELIEVE THERE IS AN ONGOING DISCUSSION THAT'S PART OF THE CONSULTANTS WORK THAT YOU MENTIONED ABOUT CAPPING ANY GROUP'S SHARE OF THE GRANT FUNDS AT 25%. I THINK AS I UNDERSTAND, ONE REASON MAYBE TO NOT GO ALL THE WAY TO JUST INCREASING THE PRO RATA SHARE BY 50% FOR SOME OF THESE BIG GROUPS IS THAT THEN THEY WOULD BE SO FAR OVER THE 25% EVEN OF 1.5 MILLION THAT, IF THEY COME TO DEPEND ON THAT MONEY, AND THE NEXT YEAR, WE SAY, WE GOT THE CONSULTANTS REPORT, YOU'RE CAPPED AT 25%, THEY'RE GOING TO SEE A BIG DECREASE YEAR OVER YEAR. I THINK I AGREE, WE NEED TO PUT THIS MONEY TO WORK. THERE'S NO SENSE IN APPROPRIATING MONEY AND THEN HAVING IT SIT THERE FOR A YEAR UNTIL THE BUDGET AFTER THAT. BUT I THINK THE POINT IS WELL TAKEN THAT MAYBE WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE RELIANCE ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THERE THE NEXT YEAR AFTER THE CONSULTANTS REPORT COMES IN IF THE 25% CAP IS IMPLEMENTED. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT MAYBE WE LOOK AT NOT INCREASING SOME OF THE BIGGEST RECIPIENTS QUITE SO MUCH AND LOOKING AT OTHER, UP AND COMING ARTS ORGANIZATIONS FOR THAT. >> WELL, MR. MAYOR, I WANT TO ADD TO THAT. THAT WAS THE SECOND PART OF WHAT JULIE AND I TALKED ABOUT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE IN AGREEMENT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT JUST BECAUSE SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS ARE GETTING MORE AND MORE SUCCESSFUL IN THEIR ORGANIZATION, I DON'T THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE EQUATED TO THE AMOUNT OF GRANT THEY RECEIVE FROM THE CULTURAL ART, FROM THE GRANTS THAT WE'RE GIVING OUT. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE AN OBJECTIVE, WHICH WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT ON FRIDAY FOR OUR RETREAT. THE OBJECTIVE AND GOALS THAT WE WANT TO SET FOR THESE GRANTS AND HOW THEY SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED, AND I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE BETTER SERVED TO TALK ABOUT ON FRIDAY WHEN WE ACTUALLY HAVE MORE TIME TO DISCUSS. BUT TODAY, REALLY, I GUESS, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET A DIRECTION AS TO HOW WE GO ABOUT YOU KNOW, WITH REGARD TO THE $0.5 MILLION FUNDS,. >> LIKE I SAID, I ORIGINALLY THOUGHT WHEN WE ALL SAID, YES, WE WANT TO DO AN INCREASE BEFORE I REALIZED THAT THERE WAS A PRESUMPTION THAT THE MONEY WOULD BE ADDED TO THE POOL, THAT I HAD THOUGHTS SUCH AS AS WE STILL DON'T HAVE A FORWARD FACING CALENDAR FOR THE ARTS. WE HAVE THE ARTS GROUPS PUTTING THEIR EVENTS ON A CALENDAR, BUT IT'S NOT OUT THERE FOR THE PUBLIC, ADDITIONAL SPACE BEING AVAILABLE. BUT IF THE CITY WERE TO PAY THE RENTAL FEE, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR THE ROBINSON TO HAVE A COLLABORATIVE ART GROUP, THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WOULD BENEFIT ALL OF THE ARTS AS A WHOLE. LONG TERM WE HAVE A NEED FOR MORE PERFORMANCE SPACE, REHEARSAL SPACE, THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES. I THINK MARIA IS RIGHT, I THINK SOME OF THIS IS A DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE IN OUR STRATEGY SESSION TO UNDERSTAND WHERE EVERYBODY IS. I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A MEETING RECENTLY WHERE THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT [00:15:03] THE ROLE OF THE COMMISSIONS AND I THINK THEY'VE HAD SO MUCH DISCUSSION AMONGST THEMSELVES THAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOME DIRECTION GIVEN TO THEM TO ASK FOR THEIR FEEDBACK ON HOW TO SPEND THE MONEY. BUT I DO FEEL VERY UNCOMFORTABLE JUST PUTTING THE MONEY BACK INTO THE POOL WHEN I THOUGHT WE HAD AGREED TO HOLD OFF UNTIL THE CONSULTANT TOLD US HOW TO DIRECT THOSE FUNDS. THAT'S WHERE I WAS ON IT. I CLEARLY SUPPORT THE ARTS, I KNOW WE ALL DO, AND I AGREE, CASEY, I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE THE MONEY SITTING THERE UNUSED. THAT DOESN'T HELP, BUT I WANT TO FIND A WAY THAT WE CAN USE IT TO THE BENEFIT OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. >> TRYING TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON DIRECTION, BECAUSE I HEARD TWO THINGS. ONE IS WAITING TILL THE CONSULTANT'S DONE, BUT I THINK THE MAJORITY OF COUNSEL IS SAYING, NO, THIS SHOULD BE SOONER RATHER THAN THAT. ARE YOU ASKING FOR THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BACK TO COUNCIL ON THE FULL $1.5 MILLION? >> I APOLOGIZE, MARIA. I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THIS, BUT MEETING. SOME OF THIS WAS THE RESULT OF CONVERSATIONS OVER THE WEEKEND AND THROWING OUT IDEAS AND REALIZING THAT WE DO HAVE THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION AS A RESOURCE THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY. I THINK WE SHOULD DEFINITELY HAVE THE MILLION DOLLARS IN THERE THAT'S EXISTING JUST AS WE HAD ALREADY PLANNED, AND THEN MAYBE SET A TIMELINE, MAYBE DURING OUR RETREAT ON WHEN WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A DECISION ON HOW TO ALLOCATE THE ADDITIONAL $500,000. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DON'T HAVE FULL DIRECTION YET ON THE ASPECT FOR THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION THEN. >> IF I HAVE BUY-IN HERE, I WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE THIS SUGGESTION, IF OTHERS AGREE, TO GIVE THE DIRECTION TO THE ARTS COMMISSION TO GIVE US SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO SPEND THE MONEY, KNOWING THAT WE MAY STILL HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. >> IS IT THE FULL 1.5 OR IS IT JUST 500,000 ADDITIONAL? >> JUST THE 500. >> JUST THE $500,000 ADDITIONAL. >> IS IT OKAY TO LET THE CULTURAL ARTS? >> I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE THEM A DEADLINE BECAUSE WE NEED THIS DECISION SOON BECAUSE OF THE BUDGET. >> BUT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND AGREE ON THE AMOUNT WITHOUT SPENDING THE DOLLARS WAS WHAT I UNDERSTOOD. >> CORRECT. >> I ALSO WANT THE COUNCIL'S FEEDBACK AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY AGREE WITH WHAT I JUST TALKED ABOUT, THAT THE GRANT SHOULD NOT GROW WITH THE ORGANIZATIONS OR THE APPLICANT'S ORGANIZATION. >> WE CAN DISCUSS THAT AT THE RETREAT, I THINK. >> I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM IS, IF THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT FITS OUR GUIDELINE. >> ARE YOU ALL SAYING YOU DO NOT WANT THEM TO JUST TO ALLOCATE MORE MONEY TO ORGANIZATIONS, YOU WANT THEM TO COME UP WITH A BROADER IDEA OF HOW TO BENEFIT THE ARTS AS A WHOLE AND NOT JUST DIVING UP THIS $500,000 TO INDIVIDUAL ARTS ORGANIZATIONS, IS THAT OUR ASK OF THEM? >> THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL THOUGHT, WAS THAT IF WE RAISED THE MONEY UNTIL A FINAL DECISION WAS MADE ON HOW ALLOCATIONS WOULD BE DONE MOVING FORWARD, THAT THE MONEY SHOULD BE SPENT IN A WAY THAT WOULD BENEFIT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. >> I COULD AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK FOR THIS TIME, IT WOULD MAKE SENSE. BUT IN THE FUTURE, WE COULD TALK ABOUT THAT AT THE FRIDAY RETREAT. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, FOR THIS TIME AROUND, THE $500,000, I WOULD PREFER THAT IT DOES NOT JUST GET PRO RATA SHARE TO ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE SEEKING GRANTS. >> BUT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS, WHAT I HAD RECALLED, AND AGAIN, WE ALL HAD DIFFERENT THINGS IN MIND, IS THAT THE FULL AMOUNT WOULD GO INTO THE FUND, AND THAT AS WE HAVE DONE IS WE RELY ON THE COMMISSION, THE GROUP OF CITIZENS THAT EVERYBODY HAD APPOINTED, TO REVIEW IT AND MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS EITHER GIVE IT ALL TO ONE GROUP IF THEY THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE AND THEN IT COMES TO COUNCIL. COUNCIL HAS THE ULTIMATE DECISION, BUT TO REALLY RELY ON THEM TO GIVE THAT DIRECTION. BUT I STILL AGREE, WE NEED TO GET THE MONEY IN THERE AND GET IT OUT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T DO ANYONE ANY GOOD JUST SITTING THERE. >> WE HAVE SOME DIFFERING DIRECTION, COUNCIL. WHAT I'VE HEARD OVER HERE WAS THE MILLION DOLLARS DIRECTLY TO ARTS ORGANIZATIONS SEEMS TO BE FINE. IT'S THE 500,000. COUNCILMAN, TO YOUR POINT, WOULD THE COMMISSION HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ASSIGN THAT TO INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATIONS OR DO BROADER COMMUNITY STUFF? [00:20:08] >> WE PUT THE MONEY IN THERE, THE COMMISSION MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS, THE LIAISONS WORK WITH THE COMMISSION. THIS THING ABOUT DOING SOMETHING FOR BROAD FOR ALL ARTS, AS JULIE WAS MENTIONING, MAY BE A GREAT IDEA. I DON'T THINK THAT THE ARTS COMMISSION UNDERSTANDS THAT THAT MIGHT BE A POSSIBILITY. GIVING THEM THAT CAUSE AND HAVING THE FUNDS THERE TO WORK WITH I THINK WOULD BE THE ULTIMATE SOLUTION. >> IF WE GAVE THEM THAT DIRECTION, AND WE'LL SEND THE VIDEO SO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HEAR THE DISCUSSION. >> NO. THAT'S A BAD IDEA. >> I THINK IT'S GIVING THAT LATITUDE. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE HEARING THE SAME THING, BECAUSE THAT 500,000, I'VE HEARD BROAD COMMUNITY IMPACT, AND THEN I'VE HEARD, BUT ARE WE ALLOWING THAT TO BE ASSIGNED TO INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATIONS OR NO? >> I THINK YOU GIVE THAT PREROGATIVE. >> THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S THEIR PREROGATIVE AND THEN THE LIAISONS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COMMISSION, MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION, BRING IT TO COUNCIL. >> THAT'S FINE. >> WE JUST GIVE DIRECTION AT WHAT WE THINK SHOULD BE USED. BUT I THINK ULTIMATELY, IT IS THE COMMISSIONERS WHO NEED TO TELL US HOW THEY BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE EASED. >> THEY'VE DONE THE WORST, SO THEY KNOW. >> IS THAT OKAY? >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. GOT IT. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM, DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING THE USE OF THE RAINY DAY FUNDS FOR CLEANUP OF THE STORM RELATED DEBRIS. MARK? >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THE CITY HAS A RAINY DAY FUND, AND LITERALLY A WEEK OR TWO AGO, IT WAS NOT ONLY RAINY, BUT VERY, VERY WINDY, AND SO THERE IS A GREAT AMOUNT OF DEBRIS OUT IN THE COMMUNITY. THE GOAL THAT WE HAVE FOR THE ORGANIZATION AND FOR THE COMMUNITY IS TO GET BACK TO NORMAL AS FAST AS POSSIBLE, AND CLEANUP IS GOING TO TAKE AN EXTENDED PERIOD IF WE JUST USE CITY RESOURCES. WE ARE WORKING THROUGH MEDIANS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES. THERE IS QUITE A BIT IN OUR PARKS THAT NEED TO BE CLEANED UP. THERE'S QUITE A BIT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT NEEDS TO BE CLEANED UP. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A CONTRACT IN PLACE TO BE ABLE TO HELP EXPEDITE THAT. SEARS IS A GROUP THAT'S ACTUALLY, WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE IN THE BACK, HAS GIVEN US AN ESTIMATE OF JUST UNDER $500,000 TO HELP EXPEDITE THAT. ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE ANOTHER CONTRACT FOR JUST OVER $100,000 IN CARRY TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS. WE THINK THAT BEING ABLE TO USE THE RAINY DAY FUND WILL HELP US EXPEDITE THAT CLEANUP, AND THE USE OF IT WOULD BE MEANINGFUL FOR THE COMMUNITY. WHAT I WOULD ASK IS, IF COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, TO PROVIDE ME DIRECTION TO GO AHEAD AND UTILIZE THOSE FUNDS, IT'S SUBJECT TO RATIFICATION COMING BACK ON A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM FOR THOSE CONTRACTS, SO THAT WE COULD BEGIN SOONER RATHER THAN LATER AND START TO EXPEDITE THAT CLEANUP. THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> MARK, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT AS A TIMELINE HERE SO WE CAN TELL CITIZENS WHEN TO EXPECT TO HAVE US BACK TO NORMAL? >> COUNCILMAN, I'D LOVE TO BE ABLE TO GO AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. PART OF THE CHALLENGE IS GOING TO BE MOTHER NATURE. IF THERE'S MORE STORMS COMING THROUGH, WE'RE GOING TO FACE THAT. THE INITIAL TIMELINE WE WERE LOOKING AT WAS 4-6 WEEKS TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. IF WE CAN GET IT DONE SOONER, WE WOULD, OBVIOUSLY, AND WE THINK THAT BY HAVING THESE CONTRACTS SUPPLEMENTING THE EXISTING STAFF SERVICE, THAT WE FEEL FAIRLY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. >> ANY PROGRESS ON THE SECONDARY SITE FOR THE STORAGE OF DEBRIS AND GRINDING? >> IT IS UP AND BEING DEPOSITED AS WE SPEAK. THAT SITE IS UP AND WORKING. WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT. >> SHELBY? >> IRONICALLY, THIS IS ACTUALLY NOT WHAT I HAD IN MIND BY THE RAINY DAY FUND, BUT IT'S FULLY APPROPRIATE. I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF IT. WHAT I WOULD REQUEST IS THAT WHAT WE USE FROM THE RAINY DAY FUND BE TO SUPPLEMENT THE DELTA ON TOP OF WHAT OUR NORMAL BUDGET WOULD ANTICIPATE FROM STORMS CLEANUP. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THE FIRST THING I WILL SAY IS, YEAH, I AGREE WE NEED TO DO IT, AND I ALSO WANT TO GIVE KUDOS TO STAFF. UNBELIEVABLE JOB. THERE'S STILL A LOT OF BRUSH OUT THERE, BUT OUR THOROUGHFARES ARE PRETTY MUCH OPEN NEXT DAY WITHOUT FAIL. OUR RED LIGHTS WERE UP AND WORKING. IT WAS A GREAT JOB BY ALL. ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP FINALIZE THAT AND GET EVERYTHING CLEANED UP, WE'RE GOING TO BE WAY AHEAD OF THE GAME AND I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE'S DOING. >> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. ONCE WE USED UP THE RAINY DAY FUND, DOES IT GET REPLENISHED? [00:25:02] >> COUNCIL WILL HAVE THAT OPTION AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. IF WE HAVE EXCESS SALES TAX AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, WE CAN ALWAYS BRING THAT BACK FOR ONE-TIME USE OR TO PUT IN THE RAINY DAY FUND, SO WE MAY HAVE THAT OPTION LATER ON THIS FALL. BUT I AGREE, COUNCILMAN, THANK YOU FOR THE KIND WORDS ABOUT OUR PUBLIC WORKS AND PUBLIC SAFETY PARKS GROUPS. THERE'S A LOT OF THEM OUT THERE WORKING. THEY'RE CONTINUING TO WORK OUT THERE, BUT WE THINK THIS WILL PUT US BACK TO NORMAL AS FAST AS POSSIBLE, AND WE THINK THAT'S WHAT THE CITY OF EXCELLENCE SHOULD DO. WE'LL MOVE FORWARD, AND WE'LL BRING BACK ANY OF THOSE CONTRACTS FOR RATIFICATION. THANK YOU. >> IS EVERYBODY GOOD? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM 5, DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING EXTRA DUTY SOLUTIONS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. CHIEF? >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'D LIKE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THIS SECONDARY EMPLOYMENT OR OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION THAT WE'RE USING EDS. FIRST THOUGH, LET ME SAY THAT AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND AS THE CHIEF, I THINK HAVING OFFICERS WORK OUT AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS ACROSS THE CITY CHURCHES, HOSPITALS, BUSINESSES IS TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE CITY, AND WE'D LIKE TO SEE THAT AS MUCH AS WE CAN. I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF OUR GUYS GOING OUT THERE TO WORK. BUT THERE ARE SOME ISSUES, AND I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THOSE NOW. THERE WE GO. GOT IT. THERE ARE THREE CATEGORIES OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT. THE FIRST IS WHAT WE CALL LONG TERM ASSIGNMENTS, AND THOSE ARE BUSINESSES, HOSPITALS, CHURCHES THAT OBITUARY HIRE OFFICERS. IT ALSO INCLUDES OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT AS WELL AND PARTICULARLY PISD. THEN WE HAVE WHAT WE CALL CALL-IN ASSIGNMENTS. WELL, LET ME GO BACK TO THE LONG-TERM ASSIGNMENTS. HOW THOSE JOBS ARE SET UP IS THAT A BUSINESS, A CHURCH, OR A HOSPITAL WILL JUST CONTACT AN OFFICER ON THEIR OWN OR THE OFFICER CONTACTS THAT EMPLOYER, AND THEY DISCUSS THE NEED FOR HAVING SECURITY AT THAT LOCATION. THE OFFICER THAT BECOMES THE COORDINATOR FOR THAT JOB NEGOTIATES THE PAY RATES FOR THE OFFICERS, HOW MANY OFFICERS THEY NEED TO DO THAT, AND ASSIST WITH SCHEDULING. THE SECOND TYPE OF CATEGORY THAT WE HAVE ARE CALLED CALL-IN ASSIGNMENTS. THOSE ARE TYPICALLY ONE DAY OR MAYBE TWO DAY OR THREE DAY EVENTS, BUT THEY ARE NOT ONGOING, WHERE THEY CALL INTO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THEY CALL INTO OUR PATROL SERVICES DIVISION. WE HAVE WHAT WE CALL TWO ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANTS, THEY WORK 10 HOUR SHIFTS, DIFFERENT DAYS. THEY TYPICALLY RECEIVE THOSE AND SEND THEM BACK OUT. BUT SOMETIMES NEITHER ONE OF THOSE GUYS ARE THERE, AND PRETTY MUCH ANY OF THE 20 PATROL SERGEANTS CAN ANSWER THAT PHONE LINE AND TAKE THOSE CALLS. THEY SEND THOSE JOBS OUT TO THE OFFICERS, AND THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING SURE THAT THOSE JOBS GET FILLED. THEN WE HAVE SPECIAL EVENTS ASSIGNMENTS. THEN THOSE ARE THE TYPICAL ONES LIKE YOU SEE PARADES IN 4TH OF JULY EVENTS, BALLOON FEST. WE HAVE AN ON-DUTY PERSON, A SPECIAL EVENTS COORDINATOR OR A SERGEANT WHO COORDINATES THOSE JOBS. BUT WHAT'S KEY ABOUT THOSE JOBS IS THAT THE PAY FOR THOSE JOBS COME ON THEIR REGULAR CITY PAYROLL. SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE WITH OUR CURRENT OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM IS WE HAVE SOME OFFICERS THAT ARE WILLING TO WORK OFF DUTY, AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO ON THOSE JOBS THAT ARE HANDLED BY COORDINATORS. THE COORDINATORS GO OUT AND SELECT WHO'S GOING TO WORK ON THOSE JOBS. THOSE JOBS DON'T OPEN UP TO EVERYBODY. ONE OF THE REASONS THOSE ARE A PROBLEM IS, WE'RE A POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT'S A BENEFIT FOR OFFICERS TO GET OUT AND GO DO THAT AND THOSE JOBS DON'T OPEN UP TO EVERYBODY. WHAT WE TYPICALLY DO IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS WE DO THINGS BY SENIORITY, OR WE DO THINGS BY SOME TESTING PROCESS OR SOME BOARD PROCESS. BUT HERE THOUGH, IT'S DONE BY BASICALLY CLICKS WITHIN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH THE APPROVE LONG TERM LOCATIONS IS VERY LABOR INTENSIVE. EVERY YEAR, BY THE END OF JANUARY, COORDINATORS THEY SUBMIT VIA PAPER APPROVAL UP THE CHAIN OF COMMAND UP TO THE ASSISTANT CHIEFS. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO KEEP TRACK OF THAT. WE CANNOT TRACK WHETHER THE POLICY HAS BEEN FOLLOWED WHEN ESTABLISHING LONG TERM ASSIGNMENTS. WE CAN'T TRACK WHETHER OFFICERS ARE CERTIFIED TO WORK CERTAIN ASSIGNMENTS. BY THAT, I MEAN, IF A LOCATION SERVES ALCOHOL, THEN THE OFFICERS THAT WORK THERE ARE REQUIRED TO BE CERTIFIED IN STANDARDIZED FIELD SOBRIETY TESTING, BASICALLY WHERE THEY'RE USING THE PIN AND LOOK IN THEIR EYES, AND WE CAN'T TRACK THAT RIGHT NOW. WE'VE GOT INCONSISTENCY IN PAY RATES. IF YOU LOOK AT OUR LONG TERM ASSIGNMENTS, WE HAVE SOME JOBS ARE PAYING AS LOW AS $50 AN HOUR, [00:30:03] SOME ARE PAYING AS HIGH AS $90 AN HOUR. SOME OF THE JOBS ARE VERY SIMILAR IN WHAT THEY DO, BUT YET YOU HAVE THAT DISPARITY IN PAY. WE HAVE MORE CONSISTENCY IN THE CALL-IN JOBS. WE HAVE A SECONDARY EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE THAT TRIES TO KEEP THOSE JOBS CONSISTENT, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT SERGEANTS THAT CAN HANDLE THAT, THERE CAN BE SOME INCONSISTENCY THERE. MOST JOBS ARE PUT OUT AT $65 AN HOUR, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN ESCALATION RATE BECAUSE SOMEONE MAY CALL TODAY AND WANT SOMEONE TOMORROW OR DAY AFTER TOMORROW, THEN THE RATE'S GOING TO BE HIGHER. ONE PERSON MAY SAY, WELL, YOU'RE CALLING IN LATE, IT MAY NEED TO BE $85 AN HOUR, SOMEONE ELSE MAY SAY IT NEEDS TO BE $65 AN HOUR, AND WE NEED TO HAVE SOME CONSISTENCY THERE. WE CANNOT MONITOR WHETHER OFFICERS WORK MORE HOURS THAN ALLOWED BY POLICY THAT'S 16 HOURS A DAY. WE CAN, OF COURSE, TRACK THEIR ON-DUTY HOURS, BUT IT INCLUDES THEIR OFF-DUTY WORK AS WELL. TOO MUCH ON-DUTY TIME IS USED TO COORDINATE OFF-DUTY EMPLOYMENT. THOSE PATROL SERGEANTS THAT TAKE IN THOSE CALLS, THEY'VE GOT TO TYPE UP THE JOBS, THEY'VE GOT TO SEND OUT AN EMAIL, THEY'RE GOING TO TYPICALLY GET PHONE CALLS, THEY'VE GOT TO PHYSICALLY POST THEM UP, IF THEY DON'T GET THEM ALL FILLED BY EMAIL, AND IT JUST TAKES UP A LOT OF TIME. OUR POLICY DOES NOT SAY COORDINATORS CAN'T WORK ON THEIR OFF-DUTY EMPLOYMENT, BECAUSE IT'S PROBABLY NO WAY THEY CAN GET IT DONE WITHOUT DOING SOME OF IT ON-DUTY. THAT INVOLVES PICKING UP PAYCHECKS SOMETIMES AND HAVING TO DRIVE THEM ACROSS THE CITY AND DISTRIBUTE THOSE. IT'S JUST A LOT OF ON-DUTY TIME IS BEING CONSUMED WORKING ON OFF-DUTY EMPLOYMENT. EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NO DIRECT MONEY THERE, TIME, OF COURSE, IS MONEY. THEN WE HAVE THE ISSUE OF, AS I SAID, OFFICERS STOPPING BY, PICKING UP MULTIPLE CHECKS. WE HAVE SOME JOBS WHERE OFFICERS ARE PAID IN CASH AFTER WORK. ALL OF THOSE ARE JUST NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR A POLICE DEPARTMENT IN MY OPINION. OVERALL, THERE'S A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN THE PROGRAM. I GET COMPLAINTS ALL THE TIME, AND THERE'S JUST NO WAY, WE DON'T HAVE THE DATA, WE DON'T HAVE THE SYSTEMS TO GO BACK AND TRACK THAT. WE CHECKED WITH OTHER CITIES ROUTINELY ON MANY DIFFERENT THINGS. HERE IN THE METROPLEX, THERE ARE ABOUT 12 CITIES NOT COUNTING DALLAS AND FORT WORTH THAT ARE OVER 100,000. THOSE ARE THE CITIES THAT WE TYPICALLY BENCHMARK AGAINST. AS YOU CAN SEE, ALL OF THE CITIES UP THERE HAVE SOME TYPE OF VENDOR OR OUTSIDE SOFTWARE THAT THEY'RE USING TO DO THEIR WORK, EXCEPT FOR ARLINGTON AND GARLAND. IN THE CASE OF ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON IS IN A UNIQUE SITUATION CONSIDERING THE SIZE OF THEIR CITY BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT THE COWBOYS THERE AND THE RANGERS, THEY'VE GOT SOME CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENTS. THESE THIRD PARTY VENDORS ARE NOT GOING TO WORK WELL FOR ARLINGTON SITUATION SO THEY'VE GOT AN ENTIRE UNIT THAT HANDLES THAT FOR THEM. THEY'VE GOT HUNDREDS OF GUYS THAT DON'T EVEN WORK FOR THEIR POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT ARE PART OF THEIR SYSTEM, AND NONE OF THESE VENDORS ARE PROBABLY GOING TO WORK FOR THEM. OUT OF THESE 12 CITIES, 13, COUNTY PLANO, THAT ARE OVER 100,000, GARLAND IS THE ONLY ONE THAT DOES NOT USE SOME VENDOR TO ASSIST WITH THEIR OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT. THESE WERE THE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR VENDORS. THESE WERE REQUIREMENTS THAT I GAVE TO MY PERSON AND THE TEAM THAT WAS WORKING ON THIS. WE NEEDED THEM TO BE CAPABLE OF HANDLING ALL CATEGORIES OF OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT WITHOUT CHARGING THE CITY. WE WANTED THE LOWEST FEE FOR THE EMPLOYERS ON AN APPLES-TO-APPLES COMPARISON. WE WANTED THE ELIMINATION OF COORDINATORS, EVEN THOUGH IN THIS CASE, WE DECIDED TO LEAVE COORDINATORS AT THE HOSPITALS AND AT THE FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS FOR SOME SPECIFIC REASONS. WE WANTED TO ALLOW FOR THE ELIMINATION OF CASH PAYMENTS AND WE WANTED ALL OFFICER PAYMENTS TO BE PUT DIRECTLY INTO THEIR BANK ACCOUNT. SOME OF OUR SECONDARY EMPLOYERS CAN DO THAT ALREADY, SOME CANNOT, OF COURSE. WE WANTED TO ALLOW THE PD TO USE THE VENDORS PLATFORM TO MANAGE THE CITY APPROVED SPECIAL EVENTS AT NO CHARGE TO THE CITY. WE WANTED THE CREATION OF CLOSED GROUPS. AT THE TIME WE WERE THINKING ABOUT CLOSED GROUPS, THERE WERE CERTAIN JOBS YOU MAY HAVE TO HAVE CERTAIN QUALIFICATIONS OR CERTIFICATIONS TO DO, AND WE WANTED TO HAVE CLOSED GROUPS SO THAT WE CAN DO THAT. BUT THEN WE'VE ALSO CREATED CLOSED GROUPS, AS I SAID, FOR FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS THAT HOLD SERVICES AND FOR THE HOSPITALS. WE NEEDED THE SYSTEM TO BE ABLE TO ROUTINELY PROVIDE US WITH REPORTS ON DEMAND AND ALLOW US TO GENERATE OUR OWN REPORTS SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE PROGRAM. THESE ARE THE FIVE VENDORS THAT WE LOOKED AT, THE OFF-DUTY MANAGEMENT, ROLLKALL, EXTRA DUTY SOLUTIONS, ILLUNO, AND POWER DETAILS. PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THE TOP FOUR CAN MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS THAT I TALKED ABOUT EARLIER. ALL OF THEM COULD HANDLE THE CASH PAYMENTS. ALL OF THEM COULD ALLOW US TO USE THEIR PLATFORM TO DO OUR ON-DUTY SECONDARY EMPLOYMENT OR OUR ON-DUTY SPECIAL EVENTS WORK. THEY PRETTY MUCH ALL COULD DO THOSE THINGS. THEY COULD ALL FLOAT TO PAY. POWER DETAILS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT PLATFORM. WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY THEM MONEY TO USE THEIR SYSTEM, BUT THEN WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO USE PD EMPLOYEES TO DO THE WORK. THEIR PLATFORM IS PRETTY GOOD, THEIR SOFTWARE, THE PROBLEM IS, THOUGH, [00:35:01] IT WOULD NOT ANSWER ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS, AND PARTICULAR WITH PAY. IT WOULD NOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE WITH PAYROLL AND SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS SO IT WAS NOT GOING TO WORK FOR US. THE REASON THAT WE SELECTED EDS, WE DID NOT DO AN RFP ON THIS PROGRAM BECAUSE WE WERE ABLE TO PIGGYBACK OFF SOMEONE ELSE. THE DEMONSTRATIONS THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WERE JUST INFORMAL ZOOM MEETINGS WHERE THEY DEMOED THIS IN FRONT OF MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM, AND THEY WOULD JUST WRITE DOWN WHAT THEY GAVE THEM. IN SOME CASES, THEY SENT E-MAILS OF THEIR RATES, BUT NO ONE HAD A LOWER RATE THAN THE COMPANY WE SELECTED EDS. ROLLKALL WAS AT 11%, ILLUNO WAS AT 12%. POWER DETAILS IS OUT OF THE PICTURE HERE. THE RATE THAT I DON'T HAVE THAT I CAN'T FIND IN WRITING IS OFF-DUTY MANAGEMENT, BUT OFF-DUTY MANAGEMENT WAS NOT ANY LOWER THAN 10%. FOR SURE, THERE WAS NO ONE THAT WAS LOWER THAN THE VENDOR THAT WE SELECTED. MY TEAM ALSO LIKED THE EDS SEEMED TO HAVE THE MOST FLEXIBILITY FOR DOING SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO DO. ONE OF THE BENEFITS THAT WE GOT OUT OF SELECTING EDS WAS, EDS OFFERED TO PROVIDE US WITH AN ON-DUTY PLATFORM AT NO COST TO THE CITY, AND AS DID ROLLKALL. ROLLKALL ALSO OFFERED TO PROVIDE US THIS PLATFORM AT NO COST TO THE CITY. BUT ROLLKALL'S PLATFORM WAS NOT FINISHED OUT, AND EDS'S PLATFORM WAS. WE DID PICK UP THAT SOFTWARE, AND AGAIN, THAT WAS AT NO COST TO THE CITY TO DO THAT. BUT I WANT TO KEEP IN MIND, AND I WANT TO STRESS THAT EVEN THOUGH THEY OFFERED THAT, THERE WAS NO OTHER VENDOR THAT HAD A LESS THAN 10% FEE AGAIN ON AN APPLES-TO-APPLES COMPARISON. ONE OF THE REASONS WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO AN RFP IS BECAUSE WE DID WHAT'S CALLED A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT. THE CITY OF DENTON ALSO SELECTED EDS, AND WE WERE ABLE TO BASICALLY PIGGYBACK OFF OF THEIR CONTRACT IS HOW WE DID THAT. OUR CONTRACT WAS REVIEWED BY CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND BY PURCHASING, EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NO MONEY BEING PAID OUT BY THE CITY. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO FUNDS EXPENDED BY THE CITY, THERE WAS NO NEED FOR THIS CONTRACT TO COME BEFORE THIS GROUP, THE CITY COUNCIL. TO GET EDS UP AND RUNNING, AFTER WE DECIDED THAT WE WERE GOING TO SELECT THEM, I HAD AN AD HOC COMMITTEE PUT TOGETHER WITH MY TECHNICAL SERVICE LIEUTENANT WHO LAID IT. WE HAD MEMBERS OF OUR SECONDARY EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVES ON THERE. WE HAD MEMBERS OF THE PLANO POLICE ASSOCIATION ON THERE. THEN WE HAD OUR CITY SPECIAL EVENTS COORDINATOR, AND SOME OF OUR HIGH VOLUME EMPLOYERS FOR PISD AND OUR HOSPITALS, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT USE THIS PROGRAM THE MOST. PISD IS OUR HEAVIEST USER BY FAR, AND THEN IT'S GOING TO BE OUR HOSPITALS BECAUSE MOST OF THEM OR THREE OF THEM YOU MAY HAVE GONE TO 24/7 COVERAGE BY OUR OFFICERS. BY VOLUME OF OUR LONG TERM EMPLOYERS, IT'S GOING TO BE FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS. OF ABOUT 48-50 THAT WE HAVE, ABOUT 30 OF THEM ARE FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS. >> THERE WERE TWO THINGS ONCE WE GOT EDS THAT WE NEEDED TO WORK ON. WHAT ARE OUR OPERATING GUIDELINES, OUR POLICIES THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE AND THEN WHAT IS OUR PAY RATE STRUCTURE GOING TO BE LIKE? I GAVE THAT TO MY AD HOC COMMITTEE TO TAKE A CHOP AT THAT FIRST. WITH OUR OPERATING GUIDELINES, AND I GAVE THEM SOME GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS, SO THIS IS WHAT WE CAME UP WITH. EDS PROVIDED US WITH A GO BY THAT WE HAD TO FILL OUT TO DO THIS, IT WAS SEVERAL PAGES. BUT THESE ARE THE KEY OPERATING GUIDELINES. ALL POLICE RELATED OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT MUST GO THROUGH EDS. PAY RATES FOR CURRENT LONG TERM EMPLOYERS ARE GRANDFATHERED. THE COMPANIES AND BUSINESSES THAT WE WERE ALREADY USING, WHETHER IT WAS $50 AN HOUR OR MORE, THAT WAS NOT GOING TO CHANGE BECAUSE THE RATES, WHICH I'LL SHOW YOU HERE IN A MINUTE, ARE GOING TO BE HIGHER TYPICALLY THAN WHAT WE'RE PAYING NOW, THE RATES GOING FORWARD. COORDINATORS WOULD BE ELIMINATED AT MOST OF OUR LONG TERM EMPLOYERS, EXCEPT FOR OUR FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS THAT HOLD SERVICES AND OUR HOSPITALS. THE REASON THAT WE NEED OUR COORDINATORS AT OUR FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS IS IF WE HAVE A CHURCH SERVICE AND YOU HAVE TO GET THEM OUT AND YOU HAVE TO SET UP A CON PATTERN, WELL, I PROBABLY COULDN'T SET UP A SAFE BECAUSE I'M NOT A REAL POLICE. DAVID COULD PROBABLY SET UP A SAFE COM PATTERN, AND TERRY COULD SET UP A SAFE COM PATTERN, BUT IT MAY NOT BE THE SAME ONE EVERY SUNDAY. THE PEOPLE AT THAT CHURCH NEED TO SEE THE SAME THING AS THEY'RE COMING IN AND COMING OUT EVERY SUNDAY AND SO THAT'S WHY WE DECIDED TO KEEP THEM PRIMARILY. AT THE HOSPITALS, THERE ARE SOME SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS SOME OF THE HOSPITALS HAVE. SOME OF THAT IS EASED UP BECAUSE OF COVID, SOME WANTED TO SEEK COVID VACCINATIONS. SOME WANTED THEM TO TAKE ONE OR TWO HOUR LITTLE TEST ON SOME SAFETY RELATED THINGS. BUT THE HOSPITALS, THE EDS ARE A UNIQUE SCENARIO, AND WE THOUGHT THAT WE NEEDED TO LEAVE THEM THERE AS WELL. WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THE COORDINATORS THERE. BUT EVEN AT THE OTHER LOCATIONS WHERE WE HAVE COORDINATORS, THE OFFICERS THAT ARE CURRENTLY WORKING THERE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK THERE. HOWEVER, AS THEY LEAVE, THOUGH, AND IF THAT EMPLOYER NEEDS MORE PEOPLE, THEY WILL CONTACT EDS. EDS WILL SEND THAT OUT, [00:40:02] AND ANY OFFICER THAT'S QUALIFIED TO WORK AT THAT POSITION CAN PUT IN FOR IT ON A FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS. THEN WE'VE GOT SOME SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LOCATIONS THAT SERVE ALCOHOL. IF THEY'RE WANTING TO DO THAT ON A LONG TERM BASIS, THEY WOULD WANT TO REVIEW THAT AND BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A FEW ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENTS THAT WE'VE HAD TO HAVE MORE INTENSE DEALINGS WITH THAN OTHERS. WE JUST WANT TO LOOK AT THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PUTTING OUR GUYS OUT AT LOCATIONS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE A BAD IMAGE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THEN IF ANYBODY WANTS TO USE OFFICERS IN A PLAIN CLOSE ASSIGNMENT, WE ALSO WANT TO LOOK AT THOSE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLOSELY AS WELL. THESE ARE THE PAY RATES THAT WE CAME UP WITH, SO INITIALLY, I GAVE THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, I ASKED THEM TO COME UP WITH SOME PAY RATES. THEY WERE A LITTLE BIT HIGH FOR ME. THEY BASICALLY WANTED TO START OUT AT AN OFFICER'S TOP THAT OVERTIME RATE, WHICH IS ABOUT 79 AND SOME CHANGE. THEY DIDN'T JUST BUMPED IT UP TO $80 AN HOUR TO START, AND THEN THEY WOULD GO UP ROUGHLY $5 INCREMENTS FROM THERE, AND I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS HIGH AFTER JUST DOING MY OWN INTERNAL POLLING OF SOME OF THOSE OTHER 12 CITIES. I BUMPED THOSE DOWN BY ABOUT $10 AN HOUR FOR THE OFFICER RATES. THESE RATES WILL NOT APPLY TO OUR EXISTING EMPLOYERS, OUR LONG TERM EMPLOYERS. BUT FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE CALLING IN, THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD PAY, AND ANY NEW LONG TERM FOLKS COMING IN NOW WOULD PAY THESE RATES AS WELL. A MINUTE AGO ON ONE OF THE SLIDES THAT TALKED ABOUT ESCALATION, WE HAVE TO ESCALATE THE PAY. AS THE JOB GETS CLOSER AND NO ONE IS SIGNED UP, YOU'VE GOT TO RAISE THE PAY EVENTUALLY, IT WILL GET FILLED. BUT YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A SYSTEM FOR THAT, AND NOW IT'S JUST AD HOC. HOW THAT WORKS DEPENDS ON WHO'S WORKING THE CALL, THEY DECIDE ON WHAT THAT RATE OUGHT TO BE. WE'VE GIVEN THE COMPANY INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO DO THAT SO THAT WE'VE GOT A CONSISTENT ESCALATION OF PAY RATES. THIS IS THE TIMELINE FOR THIS, WE SIGNED THE CONTRACT LAST YEAR, ABOUT A YEAR AGO, JUNE 6. WE'VE ALREADY GONE LIVE WITH THE CALL IN ASSIGNMENTS AND SPECIAL EVENTS ON APRIL 1. NO MAJOR ISSUES HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO ME ON THAT. WE INTEND TO GO LIVE WITH OUR CURRENT LONG TERM EMPLOYERS ON JULY 1 OF THIS YEAR AND WE'LL GO LIVE WITH PISD ON OCTOBER 1 OF THIS YEAR. ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE EXTENDED IT FOR PISD IS IN A UNIQUE SCENARIO BECAUSE THEY ARE, AS I SAID, BY VOLUME, NOT EVEN CLOSE. THEY'RE OUR BIGGEST EMPLOYER THEY HAVE FACILITIES THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF OUR CITY. NOW, I DON'T LET OUR OFFICERS WORK OUTSIDE OF THE CITY, BUT THEY ALSO HAVE OTHER OFFICERS. THEY'RE USING THEIR OWN APP, THEY'VE GOT GUYS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY THAT'S WORKING ON THAT APP, AND THEY'VE GOT TO COVER DOWN ON DIFFERENT CITIES, AND THEY'VE JUST GOT SO MANY PEOPLE THAT THEY HAVE TO GET INTO THE SYSTEM. THAT'S WHY WE WENT LIVE WITH THEM ON OCTOBER 1. I BELIEVE THAT'S MY LAST SLIDE. WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE? >> THANKS, CHIEF. >> APPRECIATE IT. >> SHELBY. >> THANK YOU. ON THAT LIST OF SOLUTIONS IN THE AREA OF CITIES THAT I SAW CHIEF. >> YES. >> OF COURSE, EXTRA DUTY SOLUTIONS WAS UNDER DENTON, WE'RE USING THE COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT WITH DENTON. BUT THAT WAS THE ONLY CITY I SAW USING EDS. YOU MENTIONED ROLL CALL. I SAW FOUR DIFFERENT CITIES USING ROLL CALL, TWO OF WHICH ARE SIMILAR IN SIZE TO US, MCKINNEY AND IRVING IN ADDITION TO LOUISVILLE AND RICHARDSON. DID WE CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS AND THOSE FOUR CITIES TO ASK ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCE WITH ROLL CALL? OBVIOUSLY, WE'VE SPOKEN WITH DENTON ABOUT ADS, SINCE WE'RE USING THEIR COOP AGREEMENT, BUT DID WE SPEAK WITH MCKINNEY, LOUISVILLE, RICHARDSON AND IRVING? >> NO, WE DIDN'T. MCKINNEY WAS USING SOMETHING CALLED POWER DETAILS THAT I SHOWED YOU WHERE WE BUY IT, AND THEN YOU USE YOUR TEAM TO USE IT AND THEY JUST SWITCHED OVER TWO WEEKS AGO TO ROLL CALL, SO THEY WOULD'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. THEN ALSO, FRISCO IS USING POWER DETAILS THEY'RE ALSO SWITCHING OVER TO ROLL CALL AS WELL. NO, WE DIDN'T CALL THOSE CITIES. WHAT WE DID WAS, WE LOOKED AT WHAT THEY OFFERED US. ROLL CALL OFFERED TO DO WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH EDS FOR 11% AND PROVIDE US WITH AN ON DUTY APP THAT WAS NOT FINISHED. EDS WAS DOING IT FOR 10% AND COULD PROVIDE US WITH AN ON DUTY APP THAT WAS FINISHED. WE DIDN'T FORMALLY REACH OUT BUT AGAIN, I MEET WITH THE CHIEFS OF THOSE CITIES THAT YOU SAW UP THERE EVERY MONTH, AND EVERY CHIEF IS NOT THERE AT ALL OF THEM. MOST OF THESE GUYS ARE PRETTY CLOSE IN WHAT THEY DO, QUITE FRANKLY. I DID NOT THIS VENDOR THAT WE'RE USING, OFFICER ODM, I USED THEM IN A DIFFERENT CITY OUT WEST. SIMILAR SIZE IS OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. THEY DID A FINE JOB. THE ONLY THING I TOLD MY TEAM WITH THAT GROUP IS, I SAID, JUST MAKE SURE WE INCLUDE THEM IN THE DEMO. BUT THEY WERE PRETTY CLOSE AND I BELIEVE THEY WERE ALSO AT 10%. BUT THE REASON THAT MY TEAM WENT WITH THIS ONE AGAIN IS BECAUSE THEY OFFERED THAT ON DUTY SOLUTION AND AND ODM DID NOT OFFER THEIRS. [00:45:01] >> OKAY. DID WE ONLY EVALUATE EDSS OFF DUTY SERVICES COMPARED TO ROLL CALLS OFF DUTY SERVICES, OR DID WE ALSO EVALUATE THE ON DUTY SOFTWARE? >> THE ON DUTY SOFTWARE WAS NOT A PART OF MY CRITERIA THAT I GAVE THE TEAM TO LOOK AT. WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO CHARGE THE EMPLOYERS AND CAN THEY HANDLE ALL THE FUNCTIONS THAT WE NEEDED HANDLING, INCLUDING PAYROLL? THE OTHER THING THAT WAS IMPORTANT, I DIDN'T PUT IT ON MY SLIDE, BUT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO MY AD HOC COMMITTEE WAS THE WORKERS COMP. I WASN'T SETTING IN ON THOSE MEETINGS, AND I WASN'T AWARE THAT WAS A BIG DEAL, BUT THE COMPANIES WERE PROVIDING WORKERS COMP, SO WHEN THEY PROVIDED THE WORKERS COMP, WHEN THEY CAN DO ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WAS ON THE CHART BEFORE THAT, AND THEY COULD COVER THE PAYROLL. THEY WERE ALL PRETTY CLOSE. THEY WERE ALL WITHIN ONE OR TWO POINTS OF EACH OTHER, QUITE FRANKLY. >> OKAY. WHEN YOU SAY ROLL CALLS SOFTWARE ISN'T FINISHED, DO WE KNOW FROM ROLL CALL WHEN THEY ANTICIPATE HAVING A COMPLETED PRODUCT? >> IT WASN'T EVEN IMPORTANT ENOUGH FOR US TO ASK, QUITE FRANKLY SO NO, WE DON'T KNOW. >> OKAY. FROM MY VANTAGE POINT, NOW AND IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, FIRST UNDERSTANDING MCKINNEY JUST CAME ON LINE WITH ROLL CALL, BUT FRISCO IS ABOUT TO? >> RIGHT. >> THAT MAKES FIVE AREA CITIES THAT ARE GOING WITH ROLL CALL. DO THEY KNOW SOMETHING WE DON'T? >> I DON'T KNOW, I KNOW THAT ROLL CALL WAS 1% HIGHER THAN EDS. THAT'S WHAT I KNOW. >> OKAY. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY OFFERED AND AT WHAT POINT THEY OFFERED HIM. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG SOME OF THOSE CITIES HAVE BEEN WITH ROLL CALL I DON'T KNOW, BUT WHAT WE CAN DO IS BASE OUR DECISION ON THE INFORMATION THAT THEY PROVIDE US. ROLL CALL ON APPLE TO APPLE COMPARISON WAS GOING TO BE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN EDS. >> OKAY. BUT WE ARE PLANNING ON IMPLEMENTING THE ON DUTY SOFTWARE THAT EDS IS PROVIDING US? > IF WE CAN, AS YOU KNOW, THOSE SOLUTIONS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ARE MUCH HARDER TO IMPLEMENT THAN THEY ARE FOR SAY, A FIRE DEPARTMENT OR A DISPATCH CENTER. WE STILL DON'T HAVE IT UP AND RUNNING PARTLY BECAUSE IT JUST TAKES A LONG TIME TO GET THEM SET UP AND WITH AN AGENCY, OUR SIZE, AND WITH ALL OF THE. >> SURE. >> IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH ALL, IT'S NOT THAT WAY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT GOT UNITS WITH THREE PEOPLE, SOME WITH 20 PEOPLE, AND THE DIFFERENT HOURS. IT IS VERY VERY TIME CONSUMING AND LABOR INTENSIVE TO SET UP. BUT IF WE CAN GET IT AND USE IT, WE WILL. >> OKAY. I APPRECIATE THAT. >> YES. >> I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTH CONTACTING THE OTHER CITIES ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCE WITH ROLL CALL, BUT ALSO BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT IMPLEMENTING THE ON DUTY SOLUTION. IT MAKES SENSE TO COMPARE IT AGAINST THE ON DUTY SOLUTION OFFERED BY ROLL CALL, EITHER IF IT ISN'T FINISHED, OR AT LEAST ASK THEM WHEN THEY'RE ANTICIPATING HAVING A FINISHED PRODUCT. >> I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY OF THE OTHER CITIES COMPLAIN ABOUT ROLL CALL, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY OF THE OTHER CITIES COMPLAIN ABOUT ANY OF THE OTHER COMPANIES OUT THERE AS WELL. AGAIN, THEY ALL DID A GOOD JOB ON THEIR DEMONSTRATIONS, BUT EDS HAD THE LOWEST FEE, AND THEY HAD THE MOST EXTRAS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO THROW IN SO THAT'S WHY WE WENT WITH THEM. >> THANK YOU, CHIEF. >> THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I JUST HAVE A FEW CONCERNS THAT I'D LIKE TO BRING UP. FIRST IS JUST THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION TO THE ORGANIZATIONS, HOW THIS WAS ROLLED OUT. I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF GREAT COMMUNITY PARTNERS, AND I THINK WHETHER THEY'RE FOR PROFIT, NON-PROFIT, SO MANY OF THEM GIVE BACK TO OUR COMMUNITY IN SUCH A GREAT WAY, AND I THINK WE COULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB OF INCLUDING THEM IN THIS PROCESS. THE SECOND IS THE INCREASED COST BURDEN TO THESE ORGANIZATIONS, WHO A LOT OF THEM THIS IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR COST INCREASE TO, AND SOME OF THEM ARE GOING TO BE FORCED TO CHOOSE TO NO LONGER WORK WITH THE PLANO PD. THAT'S GOING TO LEAD TO INCREASED SECURITY RISK ACROSS OUR CITY, WHETHER WE WANT TO SAY THEY'RE PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS, IT'S NOT A PUBLIC EVENT. IT IS BETTER FOR US TO HAVE MORE OFFICERS OUT THROUGHOUT OUR CITY THAN IT IS TO NOT. WHEN WE HAVE MORE OFFICERS IN DIFFERENT PLACES, IT MAKES OUR WHOLE CITY SAFER. THE FACT THAT WE MAY HAVE LESS OFFICERS AT THESE, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I FEEL IS GOOD FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR CITY OVERALL. THEN PLANO ISD, THEY CAN'T AFFORD THIS, WE ALL KNOW THEY'RE IN A MAJOR BUDGET DEFICIT, SO ADDING THIS EXTRA COST TO THEM TO ME IS TROUBLING. THEN THE LACK OF SUPPORT I'VE HEARD FROM OUR OWN POLICE ASSOCIATION IS CONCERNING TO ME. THEN FINALLY, JUST GETTING A BENEFIT OF THE OFF-DUTY PLATFORM AT THE EXPENSE OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS. I KNOW THAT WE DON'T GET TO VOTE ON THIS, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S COMING TO US, BUT I JUST FELT THE NEED TO EXPRESS MY CONCERNS WITH THIS AND HOW IT'S MOVING FORWARD. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IF IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE CITY TAKE ON SOME OF THIS COST INSTEAD OF THE FULL BURDEN GOING ON TO ALL OF OUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS. [00:50:03] >> ON THE POINTS YOU MADE ABOUT PISD, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU, MAYBE WE COULD HAVE DONE BETTER WITH THE ROLLOUT, WE RELIED ON THE COMPANY TO DO THAT. ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THOUGH IS, THE SYSTEM WE HAVE NOW, WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHO ALL THE LONG-TERM EMPLOYERS WERE, WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE A SYSTEM. IT'S THE OFFICERS SETTING IT UP AND IT'S THE OFFICERS THAT ARE DOING IT. IN THE CASE OF PISD THOUGH, THEY ARE A HEAVY HITTER HERE, THEY ARE A VERY IMPORTANT PARTNER WITH US. WHEN I MET WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THEIR CHIEF OF SECURITY AND OTHERS ON OUR STAFF ABOUT A VARIETY OF THINGS, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AS A SIDEBAR. THE ONLY THING THEIR CHIEF OF SECURITY BROUGHT UP TO ME WAS, HE DIDN'T COMPLAIN ABOUT THE COST, HIS PROBLEM IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THAT, WHAT HE WANTED TO FIND OUT IS IF THE OFFICERS FROM THE OTHER CITIES, IF WE COULD LOAD THEM INTO OUR PLATFORM SO THAT IF OUR OFFICERS DON'T TAKE A JOB IN PLANO, THAT HE CAN RELY ON THOSE OTHER GUYS TO DO THAT, AND WE WERE ABLE TO WORK THAT OUT WITH THE VENDOR TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. THAT'S BEEN THE ONLY REQUEST THAT THEY'VE MADE TO ME. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY COMPLAINTS FROM PISD ABOUT THE COST. >> RICK. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. CHIEF, THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION. I THINK ONE OF PRIMARY QUESTIONS SOME OF US HAD WAS, DO WE NEED SOMETHING LIKE THIS? I THINK YOU'VE EXPLAINED THROUGH YOUR PRESENTATION THAT THERE'S A LOT OF REASON THAT WE REALLY DO NEED TO COORDINATE AND HAVE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT WHERE OUR STAFF IS AND HOW THEY'RE BEING REPRESENTED OR HOW THEY'RE BEING VIEWED BY THE PUBLIC, SO I THINK THAT'S GOOD. WITH THE OTHER THINGS YOU EXPLAINED, WOULD YOU CONSIDER BEING ABLE FOR OUR CUSTOMERS AND CHURCHES, BUSINESS, WHATEVER, TO RECEIVE OFF-DUTY SERVICE BY OUR LICENSED PD, PUBLIC SAFETY BENEFIT THAT THEY GET? >> WELL, DOES IT CONTRIBUTE TO PUBLIC SAFETY? YES. I THINK IF WE'VE GOT OUR UNIFORMED OFFICERS IN PARTICULAR OUT AT BANKS, HOSPITALS, CHURCHES, WHEREVER, I THINK THAT BENEFITS PUBLIC SAFETY. >> I LIKE THE IDEA ABOUT THE GROUPING BECAUSE THAT ALLOWS OFFICERS TO STAY AT CERTAIN LOCATION, AND I BELIEVE IN SOME CASES THEY'RE ACTUALLY EVEN CONSIDERED THEY'RE ACTUALLY W-2 EMPLOYEES AT SOME OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS, THAT'S CORRECT? >> THE OFFICERS THAT ARE WORKING NOW, WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THAT TO CONTINUE AS MUCH AS WE CAN. THE ISSUE OF COORDINATORS, COPS GOING OUT AND HIRING OTHER COPS, IN GENERAL, IS NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR A POLICE DEPARTMENT. IT DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE TO GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE. WE HAVE HAD SITUATIONS WHERE SOME OFFICERS ARE WORKING AT A JOB, AND THE COORDINATOR IS AN EMPLOYEE OF THEIRS ON REGULAR DUTY, THAT'S JUST NOT GOOD AND HEALTHY. THEN IF THERE'S A JOB THAT BECOMES OPEN, IT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO ANYBODY IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT MEETS THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THAT JOB, IT SHOULDN'T BE I GET TO HIRE HIM JUST BECAUSE HE'S MY FISHING BUDDY I GET TO BRING HIM ON MY TEAM, AND HE'S MY RUNNING BUDDY AND I GET TO BRING HIM ON MY TEAM, IT NEEDS TO BE OPENED UP TO EVERYBODY ON THE DEPARTMENT ON AN EQUAL BASIS. THAT'S MY POSITION ON HOW IT SHOULD GO. >> I SEE SOME REAL BENEFITS OF THAT, BUT I THINK YOU ALSO HAD MADE AN EXAMPLE WITH OUR TWO OFFICERS THAT ARE HERE ABOUT SIMPLE THING ABOUT PLACING CONES OUT THERE, AND THEY'RE THERE ON A REGULAR BASIS, THEY KNOW HOW TO SET THEM UP, AND THE PARISHIONERS OR THE PEOPLE THERE KNOW HOW TO MOVE IN AND OUT BASED ON THEY'VE HAD EXPERIENCE WITH THESE TWO PARTICULAR OFFICERS ON A LONG-TERM BASIS. I DO BELIEVE THERE IS A DEFINITE BENEFIT TO KEEPING PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY ONES WHO ARE W-2 EMPLOYEES, KEEPING PEOPLE WITH THE ORGANIZATION AT THE PLACE THAT THEY'VE BEEN FOR A LONG TIME BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE ORGANIZATION AND THE PEOPLE THERE KNOW THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT. WHAT I'M GETTING TO IS WITH THE WHOLE PUBLIC SAFETY THING. I DON'T THINK THERE'S A DOUBT ABOUT THE NEED FOR THIS TYPE OF SERVICE, I THINK IT'S ABOUT, HOW IS THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FOR THAT GOING TO BE HANDLED? I THINK AS, YOU CAN SAY FORMER MAYOR, PRO TEM PRINCE THAT IT WAS A SHOCK TO A LOT OF, ESPECIALLY OUR FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS AND THOSE THAT HAD BEEN USING SET OFFICERS FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. GIVING DIRECTION, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS I THINK IT'S A NECESSARY PROGRAM, BUT I THINK BEING THE PUBLIC SAFETY BENEFIT THAT IT IS IN THE PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICE AND HAVING UNIFORMED PLANO PD ON A SITE CAN ALSO TAKE A LOAD OFF OF OUR OTHER STAFFED EMPLOYEES THAT ARE OUT THERE IN THEIR ZONES. I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S GREAT TO DO. WE SHOULD BE COVERING THAT AS A CITY AS A PART OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY BUDGET, AND I WOULD CERTAINLY BE IN SUPPORT OF DOING THAT, AND SO LOOKING FOR A DIRECTION, THAT'S DIRECTION THAT I'D GIVE YOU. I THINK THE NEED FOR THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, BUT I THINK WE AS A CITY SHOULD PAY FOR IT AS AN EXTENSION OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES THAT WE PROVIDE TO OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. CHIEF, I APPRECIATE. [00:55:03] >> MR. MAYOR, ACTUALLY I CONCUR WITH COUNCILMEMBER SMITH AND FORMER MAYOR PRO TEM PRINCE. >> CHIEF TRAN, I APPLAUD YOU BECAUSE I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS SYSTEM IS GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO ALL OFFICERS RATHER THAN JUST I GUESS, THE BUDDY-BUDDY SYSTEM, OR IN A, WHAT IS THAT WORD, THE INSIDE CIRCLE TYPE OF DEAL AND YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THEY EQUALLY APPLIES TO EVERYONE. BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE APP ITSELF IS COSTING, IS THROWING BURDEN ONTO THE ORGANIZATION THAT HAVE BEEN USED TO NOT HAVING TO INCUR ALL THAT COST. I WOULD SUGGEST, ALSO THE SAME DIRECTION IS, I GUESS, EVEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAVE TO COME UP WITH A BUDGET TO WORK THAT INTO THE BUDGET SYSTEM. >> I'M SORRY. WORK INTO WHAT?. >> WORK THIS FEE INTO THE BUDGET. >> OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO PAY IT? PUT TO PAY TO? >> WELL, FOR THE CITY TO BE ALLOCATING THE BUDGET TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. >> IT'S A BIG NUMBER. IT WOULD BE A VERY BIG NUMBER. >> WELL, I THINK WE SHOULD TRY. I THINK THE CONSENSUS HERE IS THAT WE GET IT BECAUSE IT'S PUBLIC SAFETY, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS ARE NOT HARMED BY NOT BEING ABLE TO USE OUR WONDERFUL POLICE DEPARTMENT. >> WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THE CHART THAT I SHOWED THAT HAD THE OTHER CITIES WE ARE OUTSIDE THE LINES NOT USING SOMETHING. WE WERE USING THIS IN THE CITY OF AMARILLO SIX YEARS AGO. WE'RE OUTSIDE THE LINES, AND MOST OF THOSE CITIES, NOT ALL OF THEM, SOME OF THEM ARE USING POWER DETAILS. THE EMPLOYER IS PAYING THE FEE. THAT'S THE MODEL THAT IT GOES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AND FOR US NOT TO USE ANYTHING, WE'RE OUTSIDE THE LINES OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN LAW ENFORCEMENT TODAY. BECAUSE THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE HERE ARE NOT UNIQUE TO PLANO. DALLAS JUST EVEN DID AN AUDIT ON THEIRS. THAT'S HOW THEY ENDED UP GETTING THE COMPANY THAT THEY GOT BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE PROBLEM. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET MY ARMS AROUND A PROBLEM THAT I HAD TO SET ASIDE BECAUSE OF COVID. NOW THAT THAT'S OVER, I NEED TO GET BACK ON. >> I NEED TO KNOW WHAT MONEY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND I NEED TO KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD COST, RICK, WHICH WOULD BE FINE, BUT I THINK WE ALL NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT POSSIBLE NUMBER MIGHT BE. >> HOLD ON. THAT'S STOPPING THE DIRECTION TO GET THE DATA. IF IT'S A HALF CENT ON OUR TAX. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> IT'S PUBLIC SAFETY. WE ARE SECOND TO NONE IN PUBLIC SAFETY. CHIEF, I'M SUPPORTING. NO ONE IS SUGGESTING THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THIS. I THINK THAT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED WE NEED THIS TYPE OF ORGANIZATION. IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF, DO WE PASS THAT ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE TO OUR RESIDENTS AND TO OUR BUSINESSES OR DO WE COVER AS PART OF THE LARGER PUBLIC SAFETY ENVELOPE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING FOR THE CITY OF PLANO. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT MERKEL. >> ANTHONY, REAL QUICK IF YOU DON'T MIND. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO SAY, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK ON THIS ISSUE, CHIEF TRAN. I DO THINK THAT PURSUING SOME COST RECOVERY MAKES SENSE. IT'S LIKE BUILDING PERMITS. THAT'S A PUBLIC SERVICE AS WELL, BUT WE CHARGE FOR OUR STAFF TIME IN ISSUING BUILDING PERMITS. BUT WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME HERE IS THAT IT'S ONLY THE ACTUAL COST THAT WE'RE PASSING ALONG AND THAT IT'S THE LOWEST POSSIBLE COST. ALSO AS NOW, FORMER MAYOR PRO TEM, FRANCIS WAS TALKING ABOUT, CASEY WAS TALKING ABOUT. IF WE'RE GETTING AN ON DUTY SOLUTION THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE, THEN I THINK WE'RE ALSO RECEIVING A BENEFIT ON THAT PUBLIC SIDE OF THE LEDGER, AND I DO THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE CITY THROUGH TAXES TO PAY FOR THE VALUE OF WHATEVER WE MIGHT USE ON DUTY SIDE OF THE LEDGER. I ALSO BECAUSE WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUDGET YEAR FOR US, BECAUSE A LOT OF ORGANIZATIONS ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUDGET YEAR. I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DELAY IMPLEMENTATION FOR SIX MONTHS, THAT WOULD AVOID A MID YEAR BUDGET IMPACT ORGANIZATIONS AND OR TO US. I'D ALSO LOVE TO SEE US MAYBE GO THROUGH A FORMAL RFP PROCESS BECAUSE I WONDER IF WE CAN'T, WHEN THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY COMPETE AGAINST EACH OTHER AND SUBMIT THINGS IF WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET A BETTER DEAL THAN ANY OF THE EXISTING DEALS. WHEN I LOOK AT HOW MUCH THIS MIGHT COST IN NUMBERS AROUND 500,000 OR ONE MILLION. JUST AS YOUR REACTION CHIEF, [01:00:02] WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAKING IT ON AS A CITY. IT'S A BIG NUMBER FOR ANYONE WHO'S PAYING IT AND I WONDER IF THERE'S A MORE COST EFFECTIVE WAY TO DO THIS AND MAYBE, THE POWER DETAILS WAY, IF WE CAN HIRE AN OUTSIDE BOOK KEEPER TO RUN IT. >> POWER DETAILS IS NOT GOING TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE BECAUSE I NEED TO GET MY STAFF OUT OF THIS BUSINESS. THE REASON HAVING STAFF IN IT IS BECAUSE OF RELATIONSHIPS THAT I CAN'T CONTROL WHEN I'VE GOT 600 EMPLOYEES. IF ANOTHER EMPLOYEE COMES AND SAYS, WELL, HE'S GIVEN THAT TO HIS BUDDY. I DON'T EVEN WANT TO THINK ABOUT THAT. I NEED SOMEBODY ELSE TO DO THIS FOR US AND GET THAT OFF OF OUR PLATE. USING SOMETHING WHERE WE BUY AN APPLICATION, BUT NOW I'VE GOT TO HAVE A UNIT OR TWO OR THREE GUYS THAT THAT'S ALL THEY DO ALL DAY AND THAT'S STILL NOT GOING TO ADDRESS THE PAY ISSUE. THAT MEANS SOMEBODY STILL GOT TO GO PICK UP THE CHECKS, OR THEY'VE GOT TO MAIL THEM TO US, AND THEN WE'VE GOT TO GO PUT THEM IN MAILBOXES. HAVING JUST THE APPLICATION, LIKE WHAT DALLAS IS DOING WITH ROLL CALL IS NOT GOING TO WORK FOR US HERE IN PLANO, AND NOT TO MEET THOSE CRITERIA THAT I HAVE. >> SHELVEY. >> THANK YOU. I'LL BE BRIEF. >> REAL QUICK, PLEASE. >> I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS HERE, CHIEF. I'M A BIG PROPONENT OF USING TECHNOLOGY TO MAKE ORGANIZATIONS MORE EFFICIENT, AND I DO IT FOR A LIVING. I SEE THE VALUE OF USING A SOLUTION. THE MORE I THINK ABOUT IT, WE'RE LOOKING AT IMPLEMENTING AN ON DUTY SOLUTION WHICH WILL EFFECTIVELY BE PAID FOR BY OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND NON PROFITS BECAUSE THE BENEFIT WE'RE GETTING FROM THE ON DUTY SOLUTION IS BORNE BY THEIR FEES. BUT WE'RE NOT EVEN COMPARING THAT ON DUTY SOLUTION TO THE ALTERNATIVES, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE CITY OF PLANO, WHICH PRIDES OURSELVES IN THE QUALITY OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY. I WOULD FEEL MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE IF WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING AN ON DUTY COMPARISON OF EDS VERSUS ROLL CALL VERSUS OTHER LEADING SOLUTIONS BEFORE WE ACCEPT THE FREEBIE OF THE ON DUTY SOLUTION, ESPECIALLY EFFECTIVELY BORNE BY THE PAYMENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS. >> MAYOR, COUNCIL, I KNOW THAT WE'RE READY FOR OUR REGULAR MEETING. I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT FRIDAY WE HAVE OUR RETREAT. WE WILL HAVE A BUDGETARY ITEM FOR THIS ON THERE TO GET FINAL DIRECTION FROM YOU ON FRIDAY. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. >> THANKS. >> NEXT ITEM IS CONSENT THE REGULAR AGENDAS. ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO PULL OUT ON THIS AGENDA, ADD TO THE FUTURE AGENDAS? >> SORRY MAYOR, I'M HAVING A SIDEBAR HERE. RICK AND I ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL OF ISSUE NOW THAT WE SETTLE STR. THERE'S A CONCERN THAT'S COMING UP WITH REGARD TO MULTI ROOM RENTALS IN A SINGLE HOUSE RESIDENTIAL, LIKE THE BOARDING HOUSES. I WOULD LIKE BEFORE IT ACTUALLY GET ON THE AGENDA TO HAVE SOME PRELIMINARY I GUESS, INFORMATION IF THERE IS SOME AND THE CONCERNS FROM THE RESIDENT, SO THAT WE COULD DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO SPEND THE RESOURCES AND GOING DOWN THAT ROAD. >> I'LL BE HAPPY TO HAVE STAFF PUT TOGETHER A WHITE PAPER ON THAT AND WE'LL SEND IT OUT TO COUNCIL. >> THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE ON. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.