[00:00:01]
[PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING]
THE COUNCIL WILL NOW RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION IN TRAINING ROOM A TO HOLD A CLOSED 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 551071 TO CONSULT WITH THE ATTORNEY, RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE, AND DISCUSS LITIGATION.THANK YOU. I NOW DECLARE THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING IS RECONVENED IN OPEN SESSION THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.
COUNCIL IF I COULD HAVE A SHOW OF HANDS. DO YOU AGREE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CAN PROCEED WITH THE CIVIL ENFORCEMENT ACTION RELATED TO EVANA GROVE APARTMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LEGAL ADVICE, DISCUSSION IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES 8 TO 0. OKAY. NEXT ITEM, OUR PERSONNEL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ALTERNATE MEMBER.
COUNCIL MEMBER KEHR. MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE RAY [INAUDIBLE] SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES 8 TO 0.
THE NEXT ITEM IS HERITAGE COMMISSION CHAIR. MR. MAYOR I MOVE TO APPOINT MAYOR ALI RASOOL AS THE CHAIR FOR 2025-26 HERITAGE COMMISSION MAYOR. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. OKAY.
THANK YOU. SO I MOTION A SECOND TO APPOINT THE HERITAGE COMMISSION CHAIR.
ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES 8 TO 0.
GO AHEAD, MR. LAVINE. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPOINT ANTHONY DOCTOR ANTHONY HALL AS A REAPPOINTMENT OF AS OUR VETERINARIAN ON THIS BOARD. OKAY, I'LL SECOND THAT.
ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES 8 TO 0.
AND, MR. MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND THAT MOTION.
ALL RIGHT. SO I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND FOR THE SENIOR ADVISORY BOARD CHAIR.
ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES 8 TO 0.
AND THEN THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER 2 AND NUMBER 3 BOARDS CHAIR.
MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO APPOINT LIZ LANSING AS THE CHAIR OF TIF 2 AND 3 BOARD.
OKAY, MAYOR, I'LL SECOND IT. OH, THERE YOU GO.
ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES 8 TO 0. THANK YOU.
OUR NEXT ITEM IS THE ARTS IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE UPDATE AND DIRECTION.
ANDREW. DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND GOVERNMENT RELATIONS.
WE WANTED TO COME FORWARD BOTH FOR STAFF DIRECTION AND DIRECTION FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
[00:05:01]
01, COULD AN ORGANIZATION APPLY FOR BOTH CULTURAL ARTS FUNDING AND HERITAGE FUNDING? THIS SUBCOMMITTEE WAS OF THE OPINION THAT. NO BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COUNCIL WAS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THAT.YOU COULD ONLY APPLY FOR 1 OR THE OTHER 2 CAN LET'S SEE, CAN AN ORGANIZATION APPLY FOR FUNDING FOR AN EVENT WITHIN AN EVENT? AGAIN, THE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT NO EVENTS SHOULD BE SELF PRODUCED AND STANDALONE.
ALSO, AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO FISCAL YEAR 27-28, THE THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THAT COMMITTEE ARE HOPEFUL TO MOVE TOWARDS AN EVENT BASED GRANT PROGRAM. BUT BEFORE WE ENDEAVOR THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAD ALIGNMENT WITH THE FULL COUNCIL.
AND IN THE MEANTIME, AS WE WORK THROUGH THAT WITH THE COUNCIL SUPPORT, A TEMPORARY RETURN TO THE ORIGINAL GRANT GUIDELINES, ALLOWING LIMITED EXCEPTIONS FOR VENUES OUTSIDE OF PLANO.
SO AS WE'RE REVAMPING THE PROGRAM TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER FOR THIS NEXT AWARD YEAR, WE'D LIKE TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH HOW WE'VE BEEN MOVING FORWARD.
BUT WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM HOLMER FOR FURTHER COMMENTS AND DIRECTION.
THANK YOU. ANDREW, I THINK YOU COVERED EVERYTHING.
STEVE, WAS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU OR CHRIS WOULD LIKE TO ADD? I THINK IN IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE THE 3RD ITEM, THE RETURNING? I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT PLANO DOES HAVE SOME LIMITATIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT TYPES OF FACILITIES WE HAVE.
AND BUT EVEN WITHIN THAT OUR ARTS ORGANIZATIONS ARE GOING TO WHATEVER LENGTHS THEY CAN TO DO WHAT THEY CAN TO STAY IN PLANO AND TO THAT EFFORT OUR SYMPHONY HAS MADE THE EFFORT THIS YEAR TO DECIDE NOT TO USE THE ICEMAN, AND WILL TAKE ON ADDITIONAL DATES THAT THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET AT THE ROBINSON AND WILL MOVE AT OTHER DATES TO CHURCHES. SO THEY ARE WORKING WITH US TO DO THAT.
AND THERE ARE NOT EVERYONE CAN DO THAT. BUT I THINK THE THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE A GOOD STEP RIGHT NOW SO THAT WE CAN DO A MORE COMPREHENSIVE REVAMP FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
I HAVE A QUESTION. SO OBVIOUSLY, STEVE AND JULIE IS MUCH MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN I AM.
BUT THE SECOND QUESTION THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT THE FUNDING WITHIN THE FUNDING, CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THAT MEANS? SURE. SO 1 EXAMPLE WOULD BE ONE OF OUR FESTIVALS.
WE MIGHT HAVE AN ORGANIZATION THAT WANTS TO BE PRESENT AT A FESTIVAL AND HOST AN EVENT, OR SEEK FUNDING FOR A TABLE. ANY NUMBER OF PRODUCTIONS WITHIN THAT FESTIVAL.
AND SO I THINK THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S THOUGHT IS, IS THAT THIS IS REALLY FOR THOSE SELF PRODUCED ITEMS. SO, YOU KNOW, STANDALONE FESTIVAL, A STANDALONE EVENT, PERFORMANCE, ETC..
I SEE. I THOUGHT IT MAY HAVE MEANT LIKE IF THERE WAS A I GUESS A SUB ORGANIZATION WHO NEEDS FUNDING FROM THE ORIGINAL FUNDRAISER OR ORIGINAL APPLICANT.
BUT THIS IS ACTUALLY THEY JUST WANT GRANTS FROM HAVING LIKE A TABLE AT AN EVENT OR A PERFORMANCE.
YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE A FESTIVAL AND THEN WE HAVE A GROUP THAT'S GOING TO PERFORM AT THAT FESTIVAL, THAT FESTIVAL, WE'RE NOT FUNDING BOTH. WE WE'D BE LOOKING AT FUNDING ONE OR THE OTHER.
THAT MAKES SENSE. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER.
SO IF I'M SEEING HEADS NOD AND I'M NOT SEEING ANY QUESTIONS ALONG THOSE LINES.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE, THE SUGGESTIONS ARE SEEM ACCEPTABLE TO COUNCIL AND JUST DOUBLE CHECKING.
I JUST WANT TO ADD ONE MORE COMMENT, WHICH IS I AGREE THAT I THINK IT'S A REALLY, REALLY GREAT THING WHAT COUNCILMAN LAVINE WAS TALKING ABOUT, WHERE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY MAKING AN EFFORT TO STAY IN PLANO OR TO HAVE THE EVENT IN PLANO, AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE WANT TO MOVE TOWARDS.
I MEAN, WE'RE NOT PUTTING A HARD LINE SAYING IT HAS TO HAPPEN TODAY, BUT RATHER SEEING EFFORTS OF PEOPLE ACTUALLY MOVING AND FOCUSING IN PLANO. AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY GOOD.
GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. ITEM 4 COST RECOVERY UPDATE REGARDING BUILDING INSPECTIONS, PLANNING AND ENGINEERING.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I'M SHELLEY SEYMOUR, ONE OF THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGERS, ALONG WITH THE 3 DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS FROM PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND BUILDING UNSPECTIONS. SO TONIGHT WE ARE HERE TO GIVE YOU KIND OF.
[00:10:07]
I'LL GIVE JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW AGAIN OF COST RECOVERY AND WHERE WE ARE TO DATE.AND THEN THE 3 DEPARTMENTS WILL TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT WHERE THEY ARE WHAT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE FOR THEIR TARGET FEES, AS WELL AS GIVE SOME EXAMPLES. AND THEN WE'LL GET SOME DIRECTION FROM YOU ALL.
SO JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS IS THE WHOLE POLICY IN 1 GRAPHIC.
BASICALLY, THE COST RECOVERY MODEL IS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE CITY TO RECOUP COSTS FOR PROGRAMS AND SERVICES THAT DO CHARGE FEES. AND IT'S BASED ON 3 DIFFERENT REALLY CONTINUUMS. 1 IS WHO BENEFITS. IS IT THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE OR IS IT AN INDIVIDUAL THAT BENEFITS? THE OTHER IS WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF COST RECOVERY? IS IT 100% TAX SUPPORTED. SO VERY NO FEES OR VERY MINIMAL FEES FOR THAT SERVICE.
OR IS IT 100% FEE SUPPORTED. AND WITHIN THAT CONTINUUM FALLS DOWN TO THE NEXT 1.
WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THOSE FEES? TYPICALLY BEST PRACTICES.
WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT USING OUR TAX DOLLARS THE MOST EFFECTIVE BUT AS WELL AS ON THE OTHER CONTINUUM OR THE OTHER SIDE IS WHAT ARE WE RECOVERING AS FAR AS ALL OF OUR DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS SO SPECIFIC TO PLANO.
WHAT IS IT COSTING US TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES? AND THEN WE LOOK AT MARKET AS A POINT OF INFORMATION FOR THE DEPARTMENTS TO LOOK AT WHEN THEY'RE MAKING THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU ALL FOR SETTING SOME OF THOSE INDIVIDUAL FEES. SO HERE IS A BRIEF TIMELINE.
CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE NEW COST RECOVERY POLICY IN MARCH OF THIS PAST YEAR.
THEN, ALONG WITH THE BUDGET PROCESS, THE BUDGET TEAM WORKED WITH THE DEPARTMENTS AND A CONSULTING FIRM, MGT, TO CONDUCT THE COST RECOVERY STUDY. WE HAVE USED THEM FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS WITH VARIOUS OTHER DEPARTMENT REVENUE COST PROVIDERS. AND THEN REALLY SINCE THEN, THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE LOOKED AT WHERE FROM WHAT MGT RECOMMENDED AND THEIR STUDY, WHAT FEES WHERE WE ARE TODAY AND HOW TO GET TO A MORE EFFECTIVE OR WHATEVER IS THOUGHT OF AS FAR AS WHAT IS OUR TARGET RANGE TO RECOUP COSTS? THOSE ARE WHAT WE'RE PRESENTING TONIGHT TO GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM YOU ALL.
AND THEN IN NOVEMBER, IT WILL BE AN ACTUAL EITHER RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE SETTING THOSE FEES.
SO LET ME JUST REVIEW THE FORMAL FEE REVIEW STUDY.
SO EVERY REVENUE GENERATING DEPARTMENT THAT IS OPERATING BUDGETS WE WILL LOOK AT THEIR FEES THROUGH LIKE AN MGT STUDY EVERY 4 YEARS. AND IN THE INTERIM YEARS OR REALLY RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS. THEY LOOK AT WHAT IS THE FULL COST, DIRECT INDIRECT COSTS OF PROVIDING THOSE SPECIFIC SERVICES. AND THEN ON THE INTERIM YEARS, BASICALLY IT'S THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS.
THE BUDGET DEPARTMENT WILL WORK WITH THE INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTS AND LOOK AT REVIEWING WHAT THEIR PAST, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE ACTUAL COST. SO IT'S KIND OF IN ARREARS 1 YEAR.
SO THIS NEXT YEAR THEY'LL BE LOOKING AT WHAT FISCAL YEAR 24-25 COMPLETED AS FAR AS ALL THE REVENUES AND ALL THE EXPENSES TO MAKE SURE THAT BASED ON THAT CONTINUUM, ARE THERE ANY ADJUSTMENTS THAT NEED TO TAKE PLACE THE FOLLOWING YEAR? AND THEN I PUT ON THE SLIDE MARKET AWARENESS.
AND THEN OF COURSE, OUR NEIGHBORING CITIES, WHAT ARE THEY CHARGING FOR THESE SIMILAR FEES OR SIMILAR SERVICES? SO I'LL SPEND A LITTLE BIT OF TIME ON THIS SLIDE BECAUSE WHAT THIS SHOWS YOU IS THE FIRST COLUMN IS WHAT ARE WE CURRENTLY RECEIVING IN OUR COST RECOVERY. SO FOR THE 3 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENTS LISTED THERE,
[00:15:01]
WE ARE RIGHT NOW RECOUPING 58.7% OF OUR TOTAL COSTS.AND THEN YOU CAN SEE HOW THOSE RELATE TO EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTS.
AND THOSE ARE THE FEES THAT THEY ARE RECOUPING FROM THOSE SERVICES.
84.4% FOR BUILDING INSPECTIONS, 22.8% FOR ENGINEERING AND 20.4% FOR PLANNING.
WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS, HOW CAN WE PROPOSE MAYBE A PHASING IN APPROACH TO THE FEES OVER A 3 YEAR PERIOD? AND SO WE CHALLENGED THE DEPARTMENTS TO LOOK AT ACHIEVING A 40% COST RECOVERY FOR YEAR 1, 60% FOR THE NEXT YEAR AND 80% FOR YEAR 3. KNOWING YEAR 4 IS BASICALLY GOING TO BE THE STUDY AGAIN TO SEE WHERE WE FALL AND WHAT THEY HAVE COME BACK WITH IS THE YEAR 1 PROPOSED FEES TOTAL FROM ALL 3 DEPARTMENTS WOULD BE 73.5% COST RECOVERY. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT IMPACTS THE OR WHERE THE OTHER EACH OF THE 3 DEPARTMENTS FALL WITHIN THEIR REVIEWS.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE BUILDING INSPECTIONS DID A FULL COST RECOVERY STUDY IN 2020 WITH MGT.
AND SO THEY HAVE IMPLEMENTED, ENDED UPDATES IN 2020 THAT ALIGN WITH THE SAME STUDY.
IN FACT I THINK THAT THEY HAVE BEEN MOSTLY MARKET BASED, LOOKING AT OUR AREA CITIES AND WHAT THEIR COMPARISONS ARE WITH ENGINEERING MAKING SOME CHANGES IN 2023 BASED ON SOME LEGISLATIVE CHANGES AND PLANNING HAS AS WELL DID A MARKET STUDY IN 2017. AT THAT TIME, IT WAS DETERMINED NOT TO CHANGE FEES ON A WHOLE SCALE.
SO THAT'S SOME OF THE THE BACKGROUND, I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE.
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR FROM YOU, WHEN THE DEPARTMENTS TALK ABOUT THEIR SPECIFIC AREAS AND TARGETS, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO EVERY INDIVIDUAL FEE.
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT PROPOSED YEAR 1 TARGET AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TOWARDS FOR THE NEXT 3 YEARS WITH THOSE PHASE IN FEES? AND THEY'LL SHOW YOU SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT THOSE TARGETS ARE BASED ON, KIND OF SIMILAR SERVICE AREAS AND HOW THAT FITS ON THE CONTINUUM.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE FOCUSED ON GIVING YOU SOME NUMBERS BASED ON THAT YEAR 1 COLUMN.
IF YOU TELL US DIFFERENTLY, WE'LL GO AND ADJUST.
CELSO MATA BUILDING INSPECTIONS. GOOD EVENING. COUNCIL. AS YOU CAN SEE IN OUR TIER 4, 61% TO 90%.
WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION. BEING MOSTLY HOME CONSTRUCTION AND RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS.
TIER 5. WE HAVE COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION AND CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION THAT MAKES UP THE BULK OF MOST OF OUR PERMITTING, WHICH IS IN COMMERCIAL WORK. HERE YOU CAN SEE SOME FEE EXAMPLES WHICH WE HAVE FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. SIMPLE TRADES REINSPECTION FEES AND AFTER HOURS.
OUR CURRENT FEES ARE SHOWN. YOU CAN SEE WHAT WE PROPOSE FOR YEAR 1 AND THEN THE BENCHMARK CITIES.
AS WAS MENTIONED BEFORE, OUR COST RECOVERY IS ALREADY AT 84.4%.
80% WAS THE GOAL. WE'RE ALREADY THERE. AND THEN THE PROPOSED YEAR 1, WE WOULD MOVE UP TO 88.6%.
SO A LITTLE BIT OF CHANGE, BUT I THINK THAT WE'RE ALREADY IN THE GOAL THAT WE'RE TRYING TO REACH.
AND I STATED EARLIER WE'VE HAD SEVERAL YEARS REVIEW OF OUR FEE SCHEDULE.
I THINK THE LAST TIME WE REVIEWED OUR FEE SCHEDULE AND HAD A CHANGE TO IT WAS IN 2020.
[00:20:04]
AND I THINK AT THIS TIME, I WILL BE HANDING OFF TO CALEB THORNHILL WITH ENGINEERING.ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING. CALEB THORNHILL, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING. SO SIMILAR TO WHAT? CELSO MENTIONED. WE'VE GOT OUR FEES IN THE TIER 4 AND TIER 5 CATEGORY.
TIER FOUR INSPECTIONS ARE GOING TO BE SITE INSPECTIONS.
WE INSPECT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, BUT WE'VE GOT THOSE IN THE TIER 4RBECAUSE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NEEDED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND TIER 5 FOR THAT PLAN REVIEW. WE'VE WE'VE GOT THAT AT THE TOP TIER.
SO UNFORTUNATELY ENGINEERING FEES ARE A LITTLE BIT MESSIER THAN BUILDING INSPECTIONS.
SO WE'VE THIS IS NOT ALL OF OUR FEES, JUST SOME EXAMPLES.
YOU SEE THE ASTERISK THERE FOR THE BENCHMARK CITIES? WE HAVE VERY LIMITED DATA. SHELLY MENTIONED EARLIER THAT IN 2023, LEGISLATIVE CHANGES OCCURRED THAT CHANGED THE WAY WE DO INSPECTION FEES. THE INDUSTRY HAD TRADITIONALLY WAS 4% OF THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 2023, THE STATE LEGISLATURE SAID WE CANNOT DO THAT ANYMORE.
SO EVERY CITY HAS CHOSEN OR CHOSEN A DIFFERENT PATH.
SO WE'VE GOT THE NUMBER THERE OF INCREASING FROM 4.4 TO 0.65.
THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH SOME OTHER CATEGORIES THAT WE INSPECT ON A SQUARE FOOT BASIS.
BUT IT'S A LITTLE BIT OUT OF LINE WITH THE BENCHMARK CITIES.
BUT THERE'S ONLY 2 OTHER BENCHMARK CITIES THAT DO IT THE SAME WAY WE DO.
SO WE COULD NOT USE THE OTHER 7 OR 8 DIFFERENT CITIES TO COMPARE THAT.
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. YOU CAN SEE IT'S ON THE OTHER END.
AGAIN, SIMILAR. WE ONLY HAD 2 OTHER CITIES THAT WE CAN COMPARE IT TO.
AND THEN ENGINEERING PLAN REVIEW FEE. THAT IS NOT A FEE WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
AND SO WE'RE IN LINE WITH THAT. BUT THERE'S ONLY ONE OTHER CITY THAT DOES A RESUBMITTAL FEE.
SO IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES TO THAT.
1 COMBINES WITH INSPECTION FEES, 1 CHARGES ON A 1500 PLUS A 911 DISTURBED PER ACRE.
SO AGAIN, VERY CHALLENGING TO COMPARE THOSE SIDE BY SIDE.
AND THAT'S A 33% INCREASE. SO WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO CHRISTINA.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO PLANNINGS TARGETS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM SOME OTHERS.
YOU SEE, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A SPLIT BETWEEN ALL THE WAY DOWN FROM TIER 1 TO TIER 5.
WE HAVE SOME UNIQUE ITEMS IN TIER 1 HERITAGE PRESERVATION.
WE'RE ACTUALLY IN THE PRESERVATION PROGRAM ASKING PEOPLE TO TO PREDICT AND PREVENT SOME OF THE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY TO PRESERVE THE VALUE AND THE ESTHETICS FOR THE FUTURE OF THE COMMUNITY.
A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION THAT IS ACCESSIBLE TO MAKE A PROPERTY MORE ACCESSIBLE FOR AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY AND A CHARGING A FEE FOR THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED A HINDRANCE TO THE INDIVIDUAL WITH THAT DISABILITY.
SO WE DO NOT WANT TO CHARGE A FEE FOR THAT REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST.
SO THOSE ARE SOMEWHAT UNIQUE. TIER 3 DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND PLATS.
BUT THERE'S SORT OF, I BELIEVE, A SHARED BENEFIT TO THOSE THINGS.
SO AGAIN, A SHARED COMMUNITY BENEFIT. SO IT'S SOME SORT OF GIVE AND TAKE ON A LOT OF WHAT WE DO.
SO THAT'S WHY WE THOUGHT TIER 3 WAS APPROPRIATE.
[00:25:02]
AND THEN TIER 5 VARIANCES ZONING REALLY REZONING A PROPERTY.AND WHEN SOMEONE COMES AND ASKS FOR WHAT'S ESSENTIALLY AN EXCEPTION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WE BELIEVE THOSE THINGS ARE ALL AN INDIVIDUAL BENEFIT BECAUSE THEY'RE ACTUALLY PEOPLE ASKING FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT, NEW OR OUTSIDE THE BOX, AND THEREFORE ARE TIER 5.
SO WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE? SOME EXAMPLES FOR PLANNING AGAIN VARIANCES SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
BUT THEIR PROCESSES ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
SO THAT MAKES SENSE THAT THERE'S A LITTLE MORE EXPENSIVE BECAUSE IT'S A MORE EXPENSIVE PROCESS.
ZONING CHANGES. THIS IS A BIG SHIFT FOR US. THEY ARE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE EXPENSIVE.
YOU'LL SEE, THAN OUR CURRENT FEES. BUT THAT'S STILL ONLY AT ABOUT 25%.
IT'S STILL SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN OUR BENCHMARK CITIES.
SO WE'RE NOT COMING CLOSE TO MEETING THAT 80% ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE.
BUT AGAIN, WE'RE STILL TRYING TO STAY WITHIN A REASONABLE REALM OF NOT TOO FAR AHEAD OF OUR BENCHMARK CITIES FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS AND SPECIFIC USE PERMITS. AND THEN ON HERITAGE RESOURCE DESIGNATION.
THAT'S 1 WHERE IT'S HARD TO BENCHMARK, BECAUSE NOT EVERY CITY IN THE AREA HAS A HERITAGE PROGRAM.
AND AGAIN, BECAUSE IT BENEFITS THE COMMUNITY TO PRESERVE THOSE RESOURCES.
BUT AGAIN, WE DIDN'T FIND MANY OTHER CITIES. I THINK ONLY WACO WAS 1.
AND THAT'S NOT ONE OF OUR BENCHMARK CITIES WAS CHARGING.
SO THIS IS A LITTLE UNUSUAL, BUT RECOUPING SOME COST DID SEEM REASONABLE.
THEN FINAL PLAT REPLAT AGAIN, INCREASING THAT COST FROM $300 TO $800.
THAT WOULD STILL BE LESS THAN MANY OF THE BENCHMARK CITIES, BUT STILL CLOSE TO THE MEDIAN AND ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, INCREASING THAT COST AS WELL. IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN THE TRUE COST OF DOING THOSE.
BUT AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THOSE BENCHMARKS AT $290 AND $250.
SO PLANNING WE ARE CURRENTLY AT 20%. WE WOULD GO UP BY OVER, OVER TWICE WHAT WE ARE CHARGING NOW. SO AT 46.7% FOR A TOTAL OF 26% INCREASE AND A NET VALUE OF $566,000 TO THE COMMUNITY OF FOR THE CITY'S BUDGET.
SO THAT'S OUR PROPOSAL. AND WITH THAT, I'LL JUST REITERATE SOME OF THE KEY DATES.
WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO GET FEEDBACK, FEEDBACK ON THE TARGET CATEGORIES.
THEN MOVING FORWARD ON NOVEMBER 10TH, WE'LL BRING YOU THE SPECIFICS OF EACH OF THE FEES.
AND THEN IN JANUARY WE'RE PROPOSING THE EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THE FEE OF JANUARY 1ST.
AND THEN WE'RE ALL AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THIS ITEM.
SO MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THIS HAS BEEN AN EFFORT.
THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A BIG EFFORT FOR OUR DEPARTMENTS TO GO THROUGH AND LOOK AT, LOOK AT ALL THE COSTS.
BUT AS PART OF OUR FISCAL ROADMAP PROJECT THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, COST RECOVERY AND COST SHARING HAS BEEN A SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSION OF HOW MUCH IS THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT VERSUS THE INDIVIDUAL BENEFIT.
AND SOME OF THIS TAKES QUITE A BIT OF WORK AND ANALYSIS.
I KNOW THAT ALL 3 OF THESE DEPARTMENTS HAVE SPENT EXTENSIVE TIME LOOKING AT THIS, BUT WE DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET ON A REGULAR SCHEDULE NOW THAT THAT WE HAVE AS FAR AS THE THE EVALUATION, THE REVIEW AND THE ADJUSTMENTS.
[00:30:01]
AND THAT'S KIND OF A CRITICAL FEATURE THAT WE'RE WORKING WORKING FOR RIGHT NOW IS YOU HAVE TO KIND OF STEP OFF AND GET GOING.BUT WE DO THINK THAT PHASING THESE IN OVER TIME AND THEN HAVING THAT RECURRING SCHEDULE FOR, FOR REVIEW AND EVALUATION IS GOING TO BE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO GET US ON THAT PROGRAM AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
STAFF IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY OF THE HARD QUESTIONS, SO WE'LL LET THEM GO FORWARD FROM THERE.
COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE. YES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION.
IS THAT CORRECT? AND WE'RE STILL NOT GOING TO BE AT 100% COST RECOVERY FOR THAT SPECIFIC ITEM.
THAT'S CORRECT. RIGHT. SO CORRECT. THE TARGET IS ONLY 80%.
80%, SO 20% WILL STILL BE BORNE THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND.
YES, ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. MY CONCERN REALLY IS THE THE SMALL DEVELOPER.
BUT WHEN WE HAVE THE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP SMALL PARCELS OF LAND, YOU KNOW, IT'S I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE FAIR TO THEM AND WE GIVE THEM EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO WORK WITH PLANNING, WORK WITH ENGINEERING, WORK WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT.
SO I'M CONCERNED THAT THERE MAY BE SOME UNEVENNESS HERE, IF YOU WILL, OR AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN ON A SMALL BUSINESS THAT TO CARRY FORWARD WITH TRYING TO GET SOMETHING COMPLETED WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO.
AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT. COUNCIL MEMBER, I THINK THE CHALLENGE IS THE COST TO THE CITY FOR THE HOURS THAT THE STAFF IS SPENDING THE MATERIALS DOES NOT CHANGE WHETHER IT'S A LARGE DEVELOPER OR SMALL DEVELOPER, THOSE COSTS TO THE CITY ARE THE SAME.
SO WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE THERE, ECONOMICS MAY BE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.
THE COST BORNE TO ACTUALLY PRODUCE THAT MAY NOT BE DIFFERENT FROM THE CITY PERSPECTIVE.
I THINK THAT THE CHALLENGE IS, AND THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO, IS HAVE AN EFFICIENT PROCESS TO GO THROUGH THAT SO THAT WE WE AREN'T TAKING UNNECESSARY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT BECAUSE WE DO UNDERSTAND THE SENSITIVITY.
WE DO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT OF THE RATE SHOCK AS WELL.
BUT WE THINK THAT THAT CONSISTENCY IS, IS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AS WE MOVE FROM PROJECT TO PROJECT.
AND IT IS MY HOPE THAT IF WE DO, IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES THESE RATE INCREASES, IT WILL HELP US WITH REGARDS TO MANAGING THE GENERAL FUND MORE EFFICIENTLY AND THEREFORE PROVIDING WELL HOLDING OUR CURRENT AD VALOREM TAX RATE AT THE SAME.
IF NOT, TRY TO REDUCE IT IN THE FUTURE. AND AGAIN, THAT'S DEPENDING ON THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT WE HAVE GOING THROUGH THE 3 DEPARTMENTS I RECOGNIZE THAT. OKAY. SO BUT THAT'S WHERE I HOPE THIS LEAD LEADS US EVENTUALLY.
LIKE MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE REINSPECTION FEES.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO CHARGE FOR EACH INSPECTION, BUT ARE THESE BECAUSE WE FOUND SOMETHING WRONG AND IT WASN'T? I MEAN, HOW ARE WE DOING THIS REINSPECTION FEE WHERE WE GO IN AND WE SAY, HEY, YOU NEED TO, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO DOUBLE CHECK THIS. AND THEN SO WE COME BACK AGAIN, AND SO THEREFORE WE CHARGE A FEE.
I MEAN, HOW DOES THAT WORK? REINSPECTION FEES ARE MEANT TO BE PUNITIVE.
SO IN THE CASE OF A REINSPECTION FEE, WE GO OUT.
SO WE INSPECT, WE SEE THINGS, WE PASS IT. IF WE DON'T PASS IT, WE'LL WRITE A FAIL TICKET.
AND THE ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED ON THE FAIL TICKET ARE WHAT THE CONTRACTOR MUST FIX TO GET IT TO CODE.
SO THEY'LL CALL FOR THAT REINSPECTION. AND WE'LL GO LOOK AT THE ITEMS FROM THE FAIL TICKET.
AND IF ALL OF THOSE ITEMS ARE STILL THERE THEY DIDN'T FIX THE ITEMS. SO WHY DID THEY CALL US TO COME INSPECT? AND SO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE MUST BE PERFORMED.
AND THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD CONTRACTORS OUT THERE, BUT SOMETIMES WE ARE THE PROJECT MANAGERS IN TELLING THEM THAT ALL THESE THINGS ARE NOT. SO WE WILL APPLY A RE-INSPECTION FEE BECAUSE WE REALLY SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN OUT THERE.
AND THEN AGAIN, IT'S THE 2ND AND 3RD TIME. AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THAT HAPPENS.
[00:35:06]
AND IF YOU'RE CERTAINLY WATCHING YOUR, YOUR, YOUR JOBS, THEY'LL NEVER BE A FEE ON, ON YOU AT ALL.WELL, THAT WAS I GUESS, 1 OF MY FOLLOW UP COMMENT IS THAT IF IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE PUNITIVE, THEN AFTER THE 3RD TIME, I MEAN, I THINK IT SHOULD ACTUALLY BE INCREASED BY A LOT.
AND THEN BUT I ALSO AM I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROTECT THOSE WHO MAY THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE JUST BEING HARD NOSED ON SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE INSPECTIONS AND ALLOW THEM TO HAVE A PROCESS OF APPEALING IT OR YOU KNOW, HAVING SOMEONE ELSE REVIEW IT. BUT IN ANY EVENT, I THINK IF IT'S GOING TO BE PUNITIVE, IT NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER. AFTER THE 3RD TIME AND YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT IT AFTER THE 3RD TIME.
AND SO IF WE'RE GOING OUT THERE A 3RD TIME, WE REALLY IT'S VERY RARE.
WE REALLY HAVE AN ISSUE THERE. THAT'S VERY RARE.
SO THAT'S WHAT I SUGGEST. AND THEN THE 2ND PART IS TO PROTECT THOSE THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE BEING REINSPECTED THAT IF THEY DO HAVE A COMPLAINT OR A GRIEVANCE, THAT THEY HAVE SOMEWHERE TO GO.
CERTAINLY. DEPUTY MAYOR. THANK YOU. I ALSO JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT IF YOU'RE COMING OUT FOR REINSPECTION, DO YOU GO THROUGH THE WHOLE LIST OF ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE REPAIRED, OR DO YOU STOP IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT IS FOUND THAT NEEDS TO BE REDONE AND THEN LEAVE AND COME BACK? YEAH, IT'S A LIST THAT'S ALREADY BEEN MADE.
THE INSPECTORS ACTUALLY ARE NUMBERING EACH ITEM 2, 03, 4, 5.
SOMETIMES THE LISTS WILL HAVE THINGS. MAYBE IT'S NUMBER 3, 5 AND 7.
AND SO WHEN THEY WRITE IT TO BE CONSISTENT, THEY'LL WRITE 3, 5 AND 7AGAIN.
AND SO THEY'LL BE CHECKING FOR THAT. JUST THE ITEMS THAT WERE ON THE PREVIOUS LIST.
YOU WOULD GO THROUGH THE WHOLE LIST JUST TO CONFIRM. I'VE HEARD COMPLAINTS BEFORE ABOUT IONSPECTORS COMING OUT SAYING, OH, THIS HASN'T BEEN FIXED. LEAVING, BUT NOT GOING THROUGH THE REST OF THE LIST. SO I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE CLEAR ON WHAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED THE NEXT TIME. I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT THAT HASN'T OCCURRED.
IT'S GOING TO MAKE THE PRODUCT SAFER, AND WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE CONTRACTOR ON THAT.
ALSO, THE INSPECTORS HAVE DISCRETION. THEY DON'T HAVE TO CHARGE THESE FEES.
SO WE WANT TO HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE WITH THE WITH THE WITH THE CONTRACTORS.
IT'S A PARTNERSHIP. AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO DO.
TRUTH BE TOLD, WE DON'T REALLY CHARGE A LOT OF REINSPECTION FEES.
WE TRY TO WORK WITH THE CONTRACTORS, BUT WE HAVEN'T CHANGED THE REINSPECTION FEES IN, IN MANY, MANY YEARS. AND SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING, WE SIMPLY GOING UP THE WHAT? WE'VE GONE UP SOME $25 EACH. I THINK 1 OF THEM IS 50.
YEAH. THANK YOU. AND THEN MY ONLY OTHER COMMENT WAS IN REGARDS TO THE HERITAGE DESIGNATION FEE, THAT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS A PRETTY BIG JUMP. AND I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF EXPENSE THAT GOES INTO GETTING A PROPERTY TO THE LEVEL TO RECEIVE THAT DESIGNATION.
AND AS WE WERE LOOKING AT THE TIERS AND WHERE THAT FALLS AND THAT BEING A COMMUNITY BENEFIT, I ASSUME WE'LL HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO REVIEW ALL OF THE DIFFERENT FEE CHANGES.
SO IT MAY BE SOMETHING TO BRING UP LATER, BUT THAT WAS JUST AN OBSERVATION I MADE THAT I WAS A LITTLE SENSITIVE TO THAT, THAT MAYBE WE DON'T WANT THAT TO BE SO HIGH, BECAUSE WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BE INTERESTED IN BRINGING THEIR, THEIR PROPERTIES TO, TO THAT LEVEL. WE COULD HAVE THAT BE LESS.
IT IS A ZONING CHANGE. AND SO IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL EXPENSE TO THE CITY TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
SO AND IT DOES THEN QUALIFY THE INDIVIDUAL FOR THE TAX BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH.
I MEAN, WE CAN CONSIDER WHETHER THE $350 IS REASONABLE OR NOT.
I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION.
MAYBE. I MEAN, THEY ARE GETTING THE BENEFIT OF THE, THE, THE PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION.
BUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT.
AND WHEN YOU SEE THE WHOLE LIST, I THINK MAYBE WE CAN JUST WEIGH EVERYTHING.
THE OTHER HERITAGE ITEMS, SUCH AS CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS, ARE AT ZERO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THINGS THAT PEOPLE THAT HAVE COME IN AFTER THE FACT, IT'S THE ONLY PLACE WE'RE CHARGING. SO I THINK MAYBE WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE PROGRAM.
[00:40:06]
COUNCIL MEMBER QUINTANILLA. THANK YOU. MAYOR.I KNOW OUR GOAL IS TO GET TO 80% IN 3 YEARS. DO WE PLAN TO STAY THERE AT 80% FOR A WHILE ONCE WE GET THERE? OR DO WE PLAN ON DOING 100% AT SOME POINT? SO RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE BECAUSE WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS PUBLIC BENEFIT, 80% IS THE GOAL. AND SO THE THE ASPECT IS TO GET THERE IN THAT, THAT 3RD YEAR AND THEN THE 4TH YEAR, DO THE EVALUATION AGAIN TO SEE WHERE WE ARE ON THAT.
AND THEN EVERY 4 YEARS BECOMES THE CYCLE. DO IT AGAIN.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH.
WE APPRECIATE THAT. CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDAS.
IS THERE AN ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA A COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE? COUNCIL MEMBER KEHR. YES. I'D LIKE TO REMOVE ITEM O AS AN OSCAR, PLEASE.
MAYOR PRO TEM. I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO. WELL, WE'LL DO THAT IN REGULAR.
YEAH, WE'RE JUST PULLING. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NO, YOU'RE READY TO GO, I LIKE THAT.
IS THERE ANY ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION ON FUTURE AGENDAS? OKAY, WE WILL TAKE A 4 MINUTE BREAK AND WE WILL BE BACK AT 7:00.
WILL EVERYBODY COME ON IN AND GET A SEAT? AND WE'LL BE BACK AT 7.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.