* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] ALL RIGHT. I NOW DECLARE THE PLAINTIFF [PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING] CITY COUNCIL IS CONVENED INTO OPEN SESSION THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT. 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 5 51. THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED IN SECTION 5 51 0 71 TO CONSULT WITH THE ATTORNEY, RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE AND DISCUSS LITIGATION SECTION 5 51 0 87 TO DISCUSS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MATTERS AND SECTION 5 51 0 74 TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS. THANK YOU. I NOW DECLARE THE PLAINTIFF, CITY COUNCIL PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING IS RECONVENED INTO OPEN SESSION THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT. OUR FIRST ITEM ON THE PRELIMINARY AGENDA IS CONSIDERATION AND ACTION RESULTING FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. COUNSEL, UH, IF, 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 IVANNA GROVE APARTMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LEGAL ADVICE DISCUSSION IN EXECUTIVE SESSION? ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSES. A TO ZERO. OKAY. NEXT ITEM, OUR PERSONNEL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, ALTERNATE MEMBER COUNCIL MEMBER KERR. MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE RAY C SORRY, GO AHEAD, RICK. SECOND. OKAY. SO I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE ALTERNATE MEMBER FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO. THE NEXT ITEM IS HERITAGE COMMISSION CHAIR, MR. MAYOR, UM, I MOVE TO APPOINT MAYOR ALI RASU AS THE CHAIR FOR 20 25, 26 HERITAGE COMMISSION. MAYOR, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO, I, UH, MOTION IS SECOND TO APPOINT THE HERITAGE COMMISSION CHAIR. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO. NEXT ITEM IS PERSONNEL APPOINTMENTS ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THE, UH, MEMBER AS A VETERINARIAN. GO AHEAD. MR. LO. UH, MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPOINT, UH, ANTHONY, DR. ANTHONY HALL, UH, AS A REAPPOINTMENT OF, AS OUR VETERINARIAN ON THIS BOARD. OKAY, I'LL SECOND THAT. SO I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO, UH, APPOINT THE ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER, SPECIFICALLY THE VETERINARIAN. ALL IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO. NEXT ITEM IS SENIOR ADVISORY BOARD CHAIR. MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO APPOINT DEBORAH ARANGO AS OUR SENIOR ADVISORY BOARD CHAIR. AND MR. MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL RIGHT. SO I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND, UH, FOR THE SENIOR ADVISORY BOARD CHAIR. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO, AND THEN THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER TWO. AND NUMBER THREE, BOARD'S CHAIR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO, UM, MOVE TO APPOINT LIZ LANSING AS THE CHAIR OF TIF TWO AND THREE BOARD. OKAY. MAYOR, I SECOND IT. OH, THERE YOU GO, MAYOR. I SECOND IT. ALL RIGHT. SO I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND, UH, TO APPOINT THE, UH, THE TIFF ZONE TWO AND THREE BOARD'S CHAIR. ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSES. EIGHT TO ZERO. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT ITEM IS THE ARTS IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE UPDATE AND DIRECTION. ANDREW, THE MAYOR, COUNCIL DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND GOVERNMENT RELATIONS. WE WANTED TO COME FORWARD, UM, BOTH FOR STAFF DIRECTION AND DIRECTION FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE. UM, AS WE ARE WORKING, UH, TO OVERHAUL THE GRANTS, UH, PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 27 28. WE HAD A FEW QUESTIONS FOR GENERAL COUNSEL DIRECTION. UM, [00:05:01] ONE, COULD AN ORGANIZATION APPLY FOR BOTH CULTURAL ARTS FUNDING AND HERITAGE FUNDING? UH, THIS SUBCOMMITTEE WAS OF THE OPINION THAT NO, UH, UH, BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COUNCIL WAS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THAT. UM, YOU COULD ONLY APPLY FOR ONE OR THE OTHER. UM, TWO CAN AN, UH, LET'S SEE. CAN AN ORGANIZATION APPLY FOR FUNDING FOR AN EVENT WITHIN AN EVENT? UM, AGAIN, THE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT NO EVENTS SHOULD BE SELF PRODUCED AND STANDALONE. UM, ALSO, UM, AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO, UH, FISCAL YEAR 27, 28, THE COUNT, THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THAT COMMITTEE ARE HOPEFUL TO MOVE TOWARDS AN EVENTS BASED GRANT PROGRAM. UH, BUT BEFORE WE ENDEAVOR, UM, THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAD ALIGNMENT WITH THE FULL COUNCIL. UM, AND IN THE MEANTIME, AS WE WORK THROUGH THAT, UM, WOULD THE COUNCIL SUPPORT A TEMPORARY RETURN TO THE ORIGINAL GRANT GUIDELINES, UM, ALLOWING LIMITED EXCEPTIONS FOR VENUES OUTSIDE OF PLANO. SO AS WE'RE REVAMPING THE PROGRAM, UH, TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER FOR THIS NEXT AWARD YEAR, UH, WE'D LIKE TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH HOW WE'VE BEEN, UH, MOVING FORWARD. BUT WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO, UH, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO, TIM HOMER, UM, FOR FURTHER COMMENTS AND DIRECTION. THANK YOU. ANDREW, I THINK YOU COVERED EVERYTHING. STEVE. WAS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WERE CHRIS WOULD LIKE TO ADD? I, I THINK IN, IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE, UM, THE THIRD ITEM, UH, THE RETURNING, UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT, UM, PLANO DOES HAVE SOME LIMITATIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT TYPES OF FACILITIES, UH, WE HAVE. UH, AND, BUT EVEN WITHIN THAT, UM, OUR ARTS ORGANIZATIONS ARE GOING TO WHATEVER LENGTHS THEY CAN TO DO WHAT THEY CAN TO STAY IN PLANO AND TO, UH, THAT EFFORT. UM, OUR SYMPHONY, UH, HAS, UH, MADE THE EFFORT THIS YEAR TO, UH, DECIDE NOT TO USE THE ICEMAN, UM, AND WILL TAKE ON ADDITIONAL DATES THAT THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET AT THE ROBINSON, AND WE'LL MOVE AT OTHER, UH, DATES TO, UH, CHURCHES. SO THEY ARE WORKING WITH US TO DO THAT, AND THERE ARE NOT EVERYONE CAN DO THAT, BUT, UM, I THINK THE, UM, THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, ARE, ARE A GOOD STEP, UH, RIGHT NOW, UH, SO THAT WE CAN, UH, DO A MORE COMPREHENSIVE REVAMP, UH, FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR. I HAVE A QUESTION. YES, MA'AM. SO OBVIOUSLY STEVE AND JULIE'S MUCH MORE, UM, KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN I AM, BUT THE SECOND QUESTION THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT THE FUNDING WITHIN THE FUNDING, CAN YOU GIMME AN EXAMPLE WHAT THAT MEANS? SURE. SO, UH, ONE EXAMPLE WOULD BE ONE OF OUR, OUR FESTIVALS. WE MIGHT HAVE, UM, AN ORGANIZATION THAT WANTS TO BE PRESENT AT A FESTIVAL AND HOST, UM, AN EVENT OR, UM, 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, A STANDALONE FESTIVAL, A STANDALONE EVENT PERFORMANCE, ET CETERA. I SEE. MM-HMM . I THOUGHT IT MAY HAVE MEANT LIKE IF THERE WAS A, UM, A, I GUESS A, A SUB, UM, ORGANIZATION WHO, UM, NEEDS FUNDING FROM THE ORIGINAL, UM, FUNDRAISER OR ORIGINAL APPLICANT. BUT THIS IS ACTUALLY, THEY JUST WANT, UM, GRANTS FROM HAVING LIKE A TABLE AT, AT A EVENT, RIGHT? OR, OR A PERFORMANCE, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE A FESTIVAL AND THEN WE HAVE A GROUP THAT'S GOING TO PERFORM AT THAT FESTIVAL, AT THAT FESTIVAL, WE'RE NOT FUNDING BOTH. WE, WE'D BE LOOKING AT FUNDING ONE OR THE OTHER. THAT MAKES SENSE. THANK YOU. MM-HMM . OKAY. ANY OTHER, YOU'RE STILL SO MAYOR AND COUNCIL, WE, WE WOULD LIKE DIRECTION, SO IF, IF I'M SEEING HEADS NOD AND I'M NOT SEEING, UM, ANY QUESTIONS ALONG THOSE LINES. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE, UH, THE, THE SUGGESTIONS ARE SEEM ACCEPTABLE TO COUNCIL. AND JUST DOUBLE CHECKING, I JUST WANT TO, UH, ADD ONE MORE COMMENT, WHICH IS, I AGREE THAT I THINK IT'S A REALLY, REALLY GREAT THING WHAT COUNCIL LEVI WAS TALKING ABOUT, WHERE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY MAKING AN EFFORT TO STAY IN PLANO OR TO HAVE THE EVENT IN PLANO. AND, 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, I THINK THAT'S REALLY GOOD. GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, ITEM FOUR, COST RECOVERY UPDATE REGARDING BILLING, INSPECTIONS, PLANNING AND ENGINEERING. GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M SHELLY SEAMER, ONE OF THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGERS, ALONG WITH THE THREE DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS FROM PLANNING, ENGINEERING [00:10:01] AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS. UM, SO TONIGHT WE ARE HERE TO GIVE YOU KIND OF, I'LL GIVE JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW AGAIN OF COST RECOVERY AND WHERE WE ARE TO DATE. AND THEN THE THREE DEPARTMENTS WILL TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT WHERE THEY ARE, UM, WHAT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE FOR THEIR TARGET FEES, AS WELL AS GIVE SOME EXAMPLES AND, UM, THEN WE'LL GET SOME DIRECTION FROM YOU ALL. SO, UM, JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS IS THE WHOLE POLICY IN ONE GRAPHIC. BASICALLY, THE COST RECOVERY MODEL IS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE CITY TO RECOUP COSTS FOR PROGRAMS AND SERVICES, UM, THAT DO CHARGE FEES. AND, UM, IT'S BASED ON THREE DIFFERENT REALLY CONTINUUMS. ONE 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 A HUNDRED PERCENT TAX SUPPORTED, SO VERY, UH, NO FEES OR VERY MINIMAL FEES FOR THAT SERVICE, OR IS IT, UM, A HUNDRED PERCENT FEE SUPPORTED? AND, AND WITHIN THAT CONTINUUM, UM, FALLS DOWN TO THE NEXT ONE. WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THOSE FEES? TYPICALLY BEST PRACTICES, WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT USING OUR, UM, TAX DOLLARS, THE MOST EFFECTIVE. UM, BUT AS WELL AS ON THE OTHER CONTINUUM OR THE OTHER SIDE IS WHAT ARE WE, UM, UH, 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, UH, 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, UH, A BRIEF TIMELINE. CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE NEW COST RECOVERY POLICY IN MARCH OF THIS PAST YEAR. THEN ALONG WITH THE BUDGET PROCESS, UH, THE BUDGET TEAM WORKED WITH THE DEPARTMENTS AND A CONSULTING FIRM, MAN, MGT, TO CONDUCT THE COST RECOVERY STUDY. WE HAVE USED THEM FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS WITH VARIOUS OTHER DEPARTMENT, UH, REVENUE COST PROVIDERS. UM, AND THEN REALLY SINCE THEN, THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE LOOKED AT WHERE, UM, FROM WHAT MGT RECOMMENDED AND, AND THEIR STUDY, WHAT FEES, UM, WHERE WE ARE TODAY AND HOW TO GET TO, UM, A MORE EFFECTIVE OR, OR WHATEVER IS THOUGHT OF AS FAR AS WHAT IS OUR TARGET RANGE TO RECOUP COSTS. UH, 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, UH, JUST REVIEW THE FORMAL FEE REVIEW STUDY. SO EVERY, UH, REVENUE GENERATING DEPARTMENT THAT IS OPERATING TO BUDGETS, UM, WE WILL LOOK AT THEIR FEES THROUGH LIKE AN MGT STUDY EVERY FOUR YEARS. AND IN THE INTERIM YEARS, UH, OR REALLY RIGHT NOW WE ARE LOOKING AT PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS. UM, THEY LOOK AT WHAT IS THE FULL COST, DIRECT, INDIRECT COSTS OF, UM, PROVIDING THOSE SPECIFIC SERVICES. AND, UM, 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 COSTS. SO IT'S KIND OF IN ARREARS ONE 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. UM, AND THEN I PUT ON THE SLIDE MARKET AWARENESS. WE WILL ALWAYS LOOK AT SIMILAR CITIES. THESE ARE THE BENCHMARK CITIES WE'VE IDENTIFIED FOR OUR COST RECOVERY AND FEE-BASED, UM, STUDIES. SO THE DEPARTMENTS THEN LOOK AT, UM, THE TOP TIER IS SIMILAR CITIES BASED ON POPULATION AND WHERE THEY ARE IN THEIR GROWTH. THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR TO PLANO IN, THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH BUILT OUT JUST LIKE PLANO, SIMILAR SIZE IN POPULATION. 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, UM, RECEIVING IN OUR COST RECOVERY? SO FOR THE THREE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENTS LISTED THERE, [00:15:01] WE ARE RIGHT NOW, UH, RECOUPING 58.7% OF OUR TOTAL COSTS. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE HOW THOSE, UH, RELATE TO EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTS. UM, AND THOSE ARE THE FEES THAT THEY ARE RECOUPING FROM THOSE SERVICES. UM, 84.4% FOR BUILDING INSPECTIONS, 22.8 FOR ENGINEERING, AND 20.4 FOR PLANNING. WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS HOW CAN WE, UM, PROPOSE MAYBE A PHASING IN APPROACH TO THE FEES OVER A THREE YEAR PERIOD. AND SO WE CHALLENGED THE DEPARTMENTS TO LOOK AT ACHIEVING A 40% COST RECOVERY FOR YEAR ONE, 60% FOR THE NEXT YEAR, AND 80% FOR YEAR THREE. KNOWING YEAR FOUR IS BASICALLY GONNA BE THE STUDY AGAIN TO SEE WHERE WE FALL. AND, UM, WHAT THEY HAVE COME BACK WITH IS THEIR YEAR ONE PROPOSED FEES TOTAL FROM ALL THREE DEPARTMENTS WOULD BE 73.5% COST RECOVERY. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT IMPACTS THE OR, OR WHERE THE OTHER DE EACH OF THE THREE DEPARTMENTS FALL WITHIN THEIR REVIEWS. UM, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE BUILDING INSPECTIONS DID A FULL COST RECOVERY STUDY IN 2020 WITH MGT. AND SO THEY HAVE IMPLEMENTED, UM, UPDATES IN 2020 THAT ALIGN WITH THE SAME STUDY. PRACTICE ENGINEERING AND PLANNING REALLY HAVEN'T DONE A FULL IN-DEPTH COST RECOVERY STUDY IN A NUMBER OF YEARS. IN FACT, UM, I THINK THAT THEY HAVE BEEN MOSTLY MARKET BASED LOOKING AT OUR AREA CITIES AND WHAT THEIR COMPARISONS ARE. UM, WITH ENGINEERING MAKING SOME CHANGES IN 2023 BASED ON SOME LEGISLATIVE CHANGES AND PLANNING HAS, UM, AS WELL DID A MARKET STUDY IN 2017. AT THAT TIME, IT WAS DETERMINED NOT TO, UH, CHANGE FEES ON A WHOLE SCALE. UM, SO THAT'S SOME OF THE, THE BACKGROUND. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE. UM, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FROM YOU WHEN THE DEPARTMENTS TALK ABOUT THEIR SPECIFIC AREAS AND TARGETS, THEY'RE NOT GONNA GET INTO END EVERY INDIVIDUAL FEE. THEY'RE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT PROPOSED YEAR ONE TARGET AND, AND WHAT WE'RE, UM, LOOKING TOWARDS FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS WITH THOSE PHASE IN FEES. UM, 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. AND THEN, UM, WE'LL LOOK FOR FEEDBACK FROM YOU THAT WILL THEN TRANSLATE INTO A FEE RESOLUTION IN ORDINANCE. RIGHT NOW WE'RE FOCUSED ON, UM, GIVING YOU SOME NUMBERS BASED ON THAT YEAR ONE COLUMN. IF YOU TELL US DIFFERENTLY, WE'LL GO AND ADJUST. UM, SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO OUR CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL ADA TO TALK ABOUT THE BUILDING INSPECTION FEES. IT'S ALSO MATA BUILDING INSPECTIONS. GOOD EVENING COUNSEL. SO YOU CAN SEE IN OUR TIER 4 61 TO 90% WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION BEING MOSTLY HOME CONSTRUCTION AND ANY RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS. TIER FIVE, 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, UM, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, SIMPLE TRADES, REINSPECTION FEES, AND AFTER HOURS OUR CURRENT FEES ARE SHOWN. YOU CAN SEE WHAT WE PROPOSE FOR YEAR ONE AND THEN THE BENCHMARK CITIES. AND, UH, THERE IS A, A DIFFERENCE IN MANY OF THE CITIES, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT WE ARE COMPETITIVE WITH WHAT WE PROPOSE IN YEAR ONE. AS WAS MENTIONED BEFORE, OUR, UH, COST RECOVERY'S ALREADY AT 84.4%. 80% WAS THE GOAL. WE'RE ALREADY THERE. AND THEN THE, UH, PROPOSED YEAR ONE, WE WOULD MOVE UP TO 88.6%. SO A LITTLE BIT OF CHANGE, BUT I THINK THAT WE'RE ALREADY IN THE, UH, GOAL THAT WE'RE TRYING TO REACH. AND AS STATED EARLIER, WE'VE HAD, UH, SEVERAL YEARS, UM, REVIEW OF OUR FEE SCHEDULE, AND I THINK THE LAST TIME WE REVIEWED OUR FEE SCHEDULE AND, UH, HAD A CHANGE TO IT WAS IN 2020. [00:20:04] AND I THINK AT THIS TIME, I WILL BE HANDING OFF TO CALEB THORN HERE WITH ENGINEER. ALL RIGHT, GOOD EVENING. CALEB THORNHILL, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING. SO, UM, SIMILAR TO WHAT, UH, CELSO MENTIONED, WE'VE GOT OUR FEES IN THE TIER FOUR AND TIER FIVE CATEGORY. UH, TIER FOUR INSPECTIONS ARE GONNA BE SITE INSPECTIONS. UH, WE, UH, INSPECT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. UH, BUT WE'VE GOT THOSE IN THE TIER FOUR BECAUSE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NEEDED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. UH, AND THEN TIER FIVE FOR THAT PLAN REVIEW, WE'VE, UH, WE'VE GOT THAT AT THE TOP TIER. SO UNFORTUNATELY, ENGINEERING'S FEES ARE A LITTLE BIT MESSIER THAN BUILDING INSPECTIONS. UH, SO WE'VE, UH, THIS IS NOT ALL OF OUR FEES, JUST SOME EXAMPLES. UH, YOU SEE THE ASTERISK THERE FOR THE BENCHMARK CITIES. UH, THEY, WE HAVE VERY LIMITED DATA. UH, SHELLY MENTIONED EARLIER THAT IN 2023 LEGISLATIVE CHANGES OCCURRED THAT CHANGED THE WAY WE DO INSPECTION FEES. THE INDUSTRY TRADITIONALLY WAS 4% OF THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. 2023, THE STATE LEGISLATOR SAID WE CANNOT DO THAT ANYMORE. SO EVERY CITY HAS SHOWN 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. UH, BUT IT'S A LITTLE BIT OUT OF LINE WITH THE BENCHMARK CITIES, BUT THERE'S ONLY TWO OTHER BENCHMARK CITIES THAT DO IT THE SAME WAY WE DO. SO WE COULD NOT USE THE OTHER SEVEN OR EIGHT DIFFERENT CITIES, UH, TO COMPARE THAT DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. YOU CAN SEE IT'S ON THE OTHER END, AGAIN, SIMILAR, WE ONLY HAD TWO OTHER CITIES THAT WE COULD COMPARE IT TO. UH, AND THEN ENGINEERING PLAN REVIEW FEE, THAT IS NOT A FEE WE CURRENTLY HAVE. UH, AND SO WE'VE PROPOSED THAT FOR YEAR ONE. AGAIN, THERE WAS ONE OTHER CITY THAT DOES A FLAT FEE FOR ENGINEERING PLAN REVIEW FEE, AND SO WE'RE IN LINE WITH THAT. BUT THERE'S ONLY ONE OTHER CITY THAT DOES A RESUBMITTAL FEE. UH, AND THAT WAS, UH, THE 900. UH, THERE ARE OTHER CITIES THAT DO RESUBMITTAL FEES, UH, BUT ONE WAS 50% OF THEIR ORIGINAL FEES. SO IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES TO THAT. UH, THERE ARE SOME OTHER CITIES THAT DO ORIGINAL OR INJURING REVIEW SUBMISSIONS, BUT UH, ONE WAS 101 PLUS A $300 PER HOUR. ONE COMBINES WITH INSPECTION FEES, ONE CHARGES ON A 1500 PLUS A NINE 11 DISTURBED ACRE. SO AGAIN, VERY CHALLENGING TO COMPARE THOSE SIDE BY SIDE FROM A REVENUE STANDPOINT. SHELLY MENTIONED THIS ENGINEERING WOULD INCREASE, UH, BY TWOFOLD, ESSENTIALLY UP TO 56%. UH, AND THAT'S A A 33% INCREASE. SO WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO CHRISTINA. ALRIGHT, 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 ONE TO TIER FIVE. WE HAVE SOME UNIQUE ITEMS IN TIER ONE HERITAGE PRESERVATION. WE'RE ACTUALLY IN THE PRESERVATION PROGRAM ASKING PEOPLE TO PRE, UH, TO PREDICT AND PREVENT SOME OF THE, UM, USE OF THEIR PROPERTY TO PRESERVE THE VALUE AND THE AESTHETICS FOR THE FUTURE OF THE COMMUNITY. SO WE BELIEVE THAT IS LARGELY A COMMUNITY BENEFIT BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE RESTRICTING THE USE OF THEIR OWN PROPERTY. UM, A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION THAT IS, UH, AN 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 T UH, FEE FOR THAT, UM, REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST. SO THOSE ARE, ARE SOMEWHAT UNIQUE. UM, TIER THREE DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND PLATS, THOSE ARE REALLY A RANGE OF THINGS, BUT THEY PROVIDE SOME COMMUNITY BENEFITS. SOME INDIVIDUAL BENEFITS. UM, I'LL GIVE YOU A FEW EXAMPLES. THEY'RE THINGS LIKE OUR TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM PROVIDES A BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY, UM, IN THAT IT BEAUTIFIES THE COMMUNITY. UM, IT PROVIDES CLEARLY BENEFITS TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AS WELL BY BEAUTIFYING AND PROVIDING A BENEFIT TO THE PROPERTY. BUT THERE'S SORT OF, I BELIEVE, A SHARED BENEFIT TO THOSE THINGS. ADDITIONALLY, THE, IN ENFORCING OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, THINGS LIKE CROSS ACCESS, THAT IS A RESTRICTION AND BURDEN ON THE PROPERTY OWNER. UM, BUT ALSO IT DOES PROVIDE ACCESS TO THAT PROPERTY OWNER, BUT IT ALSO PROVIDES ACCESS TO OTHERS TO GO THROUGH THAT PROPERTY. 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 [00:25:01] THREE WAS APPROPRIATE. AND THEN TIER FIVE VARIANCES, UH, ZONING REALLY REZONING A PROPERTY. AND WHEN SOMEONE COMES AND ASKS FOR WHAT'S ESSENTIALLY AN EXCEPTION THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WE BELIEVE, UH, THOSE THINGS ARE ALL AN INDIVIDUAL BENEFIT BECAUSE THEY'RE ACTUALLY PEOPLE ASKING FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT, NEW OR OUTSIDE THE BOX. AND THEREFORE, UM, OUR TIER FIVE. SO WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE? SOME EXAMPLES FOR PLANNING, AGAIN, VARIANCES. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, WE REALLY TOOK A KIND OF HARD LOOK AT OUR OPERATIONS AND CAME UP WITH 10 THINGS THAT WE WERE NOT CHARGING FEES FOR THAT WE WANTED TO LOOK AT. WHAT IS THE COST? AND SO WE'RE PROPOSING, UM, YOU'LL SEE WHEN WE BRING THIS BACK, A NUMBER OF NEW FEES TO RECOUP THE COST TO THE COMMUNITY ON A NUMBER OF THINGS. SO WHEN WE TAKE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE VARIANCES TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WE ARE NOT CURRENTLY CHARGING A FEE FOR THAT. WE, UH, IN OUR ESTIMATES WITH MGT FOUND IT COST ABOUT $185 EVERY TIME WE TAKE ONE OF THOSE ON AN AGENDA. SO PROPOSED FEE IS $150. IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN THE COUPLE OF OTHER CITIES WE FOUND THAT WE'RE CHARGING THIS FEE. BUT THEIR PROCESSES ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. UM, THOSE, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY ABOUT WHAT DENTON'S PROCESS, BUT IN RICHARDSON THERE GO THROUGH THE COUNCIL AS WELL. SO THAT MAKES SENSE THAT THEIRS ARE A LITTLE MORE EXPENSIVE 'CAUSE IT'S A MORE EXPENSIVE PROCESS. ZONING CHANGES, THIS IS A BIG SHIFT FOR US. UM, THEY ARE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE EXPENSIVE, YOU'LL SEE THAN OUR CURRENT FEES. UM, BUT THAT'S STILL ONLY AT ABOUT 25% WE'RE ESTIMATING OF THE CURRENT COST BECAUSE ZONING IS SUCH AN EXTENSIVE PROCESS IN THE CITY OF PLANO. UM, 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 PLAN DEVELOPMENTS AND SPECIFIC USE PERMITS. AND THEN ON HERITAGE RESOURCE DESIGNATION, THAT'S ONE 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. SO WE ARE PROPOSING A $350 FEE. IT IS A ZONING ACTION, SO IT IS A SUBSTANTIAL EXPENSE TO THE COMMUNITY. UM, BUT AGAIN, WE DIDN'T FIND MANY OTHER CITIES. I THINK ONLY WACO, UM, WAS ONE, AND THAT'S NOT ONE OF OUR BENCHMARK CITIES WAS CHARGING. UH, SO THIS IS A LITTLE UNUSUAL, BUT RECOUPING SOME COST, UM, DID SEEM REASONABLE. THEN FINAL PLAT REPL, UH, AGAIN, INCREASING THAT COST FROM 300 TO $800, UM, THAT WOULD STILL BE LESS THAN MANY OF THE BENCHMARK CITIES, BUT STILL CLOSE TO THE MEDIAN AND ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. UM, INCREASING THAT COST AS WELL. IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN THE TRUE COST OF DOING THOSE, BUT, UM, AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THOSE BENCHMARKS AT TWO 90 AND TWO 50. WE ALSO WANNA NOTE THAT SEVERAL OF THESE ITEMS DO INCLUDE PUBLIC NOTICE FEES THAT ARE NOT PART OF THESE EXAMPLES. SO PLANNING, WE ARE CURRENTLY AT 20%. UH, WE WOULD GO UP BY, UH, OVER, OVER TWICE WHAT WE ARE CHARGING NOW. SO IT TOOK 46.7% FOR A TOTAL OF 26% INCREASE AND A NET, UH, VALUE OF $566,000 TO THE COMMUNITY, UH, UH, 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, UH, 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, UM, THIS HAS BEEN, UH, AN, AN EFFORT. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A, 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, THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT VERSUS THE INDIVIDUAL BENEFIT. AND SOME OF THIS TAKES QUITE A BIT OF WORK AND ANALYSIS. I KNOW THAT, UH, ALL THREE 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, AND EVALUATION IS GONNA BE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO GET US ON THAT PROGRAM AS WE MOVE FORWARD. BUT WITH THAT STAFF IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY OF THE HARD QUESTIONS, SO WE'LL LET THEM, UH, GO FORWARD FROM THERE. COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE, YES, THANK, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATIONS. I, I FULLY APPRECIATE THAT AND I KNOW A LOT OF HARD WORK WENT INTO THIS, BUT I I I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. RIGHT NOW. THIS ADDITIONAL FEE INCREASE REALLY IS TO COVER, UH, BASICALLY PROFESSIONAL SERVICE, UH, MATERIALS AND OTHER DIRECT COSTS. IS THAT CORRECT? AND WE'RE STILL NOT GONNA BE AT A HUNDRED PERCENT COST RECOVERY FOR THAT SPECIFIC ITEM. THAT'S CORRECT. RIGHT? THAT IS SO CORRECT. THE, THE TARGET IS ONLY 80%. 80%. SO 20% WILL STILL BE BORN THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. YES. UM, MY CONCERN REALLY IS THE, THE, THE, THE SMALL DEVELOPER MM-HMM . OKAY. BECAUSE A LOT OF THOSE COSTS, YOU KNOW, A LARGE, THE LARGE DEVELOPERS, THEY KNOW THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS, BUT THE, WHEN WE HAVE THE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP SMALL PARCELS OF LAND, YOU KNOW, IT'S, I WANNA 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 I I'M CONCERNED THAT THERE MAY BE SOME UNEVENNESS HERE, IF YOU WILL, OR AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN ON A SMALL BUSINESS THAT TO, TO, TO CARRY FORWARD WITH TRYING TO GET SOMETHING COMPLETED WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO. AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCIL MEMBER, I, I, 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. THO THOSE COSTS TO THE CITY ARE THE, THE SAME. SO WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT THEIR, THEIR ECONOMICS MAY BE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, THE COST BORN TO ACTUALLY PRODUCE THAT MAY NOT BE DIFFERENT, UM, FROM THE CITY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THAT THE CHALLENGE IS, AND THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO, IS HAVE, UH, AN EFFICIENT PROCESS TO GO THROUGH THAT SO THAT WE, WE AREN'T TAKING UNNECESSARY COSTS, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. 'CAUSE WE DO UNDERSTAND THE SENSITIVITY, WE DO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT OF THE RATE SHOCK, UM, AS WELL. BUT WE THINK THAT THAT CONSISTENCY IS, IS CONS 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'LL HELP US WITH REGARDS TO UH, UH, MANAGING THE GENERAL FUND MORE EFFICIENTLY AND THEREFORE PROVIDING, WELL HOLDING OUR CURRENT A VALOREM TAX RATE AT THE SAME, IF NOT, TRY TO REDUCE IT IN THE FUTURE. ABSOLUTELY. AND AGAIN, THAT'S DEPENDING ON THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT WE HAVE GOING THROUGH THE THREE DEPARTMENTS, I RECOGNIZE THAT, OF COURSE. OKAY. SO, BUT THAT, THAT'S WHERE I HOPE THIS LEAD LEADS US EVENTUALLY. YES, SIR. UNDERSTOOD. AND WE ARE LOOKING AT SCALE. YOU'LL SEE WHEN YOU GET THE DETAIL THAT SOME OF THE FEES ARE SCALED TO THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT. I GO ON A PER ACRE BASIS, LIKE MAYOR PROTO. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, UM, THE REINSPECTION FEES. SO, UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO CHARGE FOR EACH INSPECTION, BUT UM, 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 SECOND FEE. I MEAN, HOW DOES THAT WORK? REINSPECTION FEES ARE, UH, MEANT TO BE PUNITIVE. SO IN THE CASE OF A RE-INSPECTION FEE, WE GO OUT, UH, LET'S, LET'S TALK ABOUT A PROJECT. WE GO OUT, WE GIVE 'EM A PERMIT, THEY GET THEIR FIRST INSPECTION AS PART OF THE FEES. 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, UH, FIX TO GET IT TO, UH, 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, UH, THEY DIDN'T FIX THE ITEMS, BUT DO THEY, SO WHY DID THEY CALL US TO COME INSPECT? I SEE. THEY NOTIFY YOU TO COME. EXACTLY. AND SO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, UH, MUST BE PERFORMED. AND UH, AND THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD CONTRACTORS OUT THERE, BUT SOMETIMES, UH, WE ARE THE, UH, PROJECT MANAGERS AND TELLING THEM THAT ALL THESE THINGS ARE NOT. SO WE WILL, UH, APPLY A RE-INSPECTION FEE 'CAUSE WE, WE REALLY SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN OUT THERE. AND THEN, UH, AGAIN, IT'S A SECOND AND THIRD TIME AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THAT HAPPENS. AND SOMETIMES THEY'LL CALL [00:35:01] US OVER AND OVER AND WE'LL GO OUT THERE EVEN A THIRD TIME. AND SO WE'RE RAISING THE FEES TO MAKE IT A BIT MORE PUNITIVE. AND IF YOU'RE CERTAINLY WATCHING YOUR YOUR, YOUR JOBS THERE, THERE'LL NEVER BE A FEE ON, ON YOU AT ALL. WELL THAT WAS, I GUESS ONE OF MY FOLLOW UP COMMENT IS THAT IF IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE PUNITIVE, THEN AFTER THE THIRD TIME, I MEAN, I THINK IT SHOULD ACTUALLY BE INCREASED BY A LOT. AND THEN, BUT I ALSO, UM, AM I, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE PROTECT THOSE WHO MAY THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE JUST BEING HARDNOSED ON SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE INSPECTIONS AND ALLOW THEM TO HAVE A PROCESS OF APPEALING IT OR, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVING SOMEONE ELSE, UM, REVIEW IT. BUT IN ANY EVENT, I THINK IF IT'S GONNA BE PUNITIVE, IT NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER AT AFTER THE THIRD TIME AND, AND YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT THE AFTER THE THIRD TIME. AND SO NO, IF, IF WE'RE GOING OUT THERE A THIRD TIME, WE REALLY, IT'S VERY RARE. WE, WE REALLY HAVE A ISSUE THERE THAT THAT'S VERY RARE. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHAT I SUGGEST. AND THEN THE SECOND PART IS TO PROTECT THOSE, UM, THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE BEING REINSPECTED, THAT IF THEY DO HAVE, UM, A COMPLAINT OR A GRIEVANCE THAT THEY HAVE SOMEWHERE TO GO. CERTAINLY THAT'S ALL DEPUTY MAYOR, THANK YOUS. ALSO, JUST WANNA 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. UM, THE INSPECTORS ACTUALLY ARE NUMBERING EACH ITEM 2, 3, 4, 5. SOMETIMES THE LISTS WILL HAVE THINGS, SO MAYBE IT'S NUMBER THREE, FIVE AND SEVEN. AND SO WHEN THEY WRITE IT TO BE CONSISTENT, THEY'LL WRITE THREE, FIVE, AND SEVEN AGAIN. AND SO THEY'LL BE CHECKING FOR THAT, JUST THE ITEMS THAT WERE ON THE PREVIOUS LIST. OKAY. AND, BUT YOU WOULDN'T STOP AT ITEM THREE IF THREE WASN'T, YOU KNOW, WASN'T FIXED, YOU WOULDN'T STOP AND LEAVE, YOU WOULD GO THROUGH THE WHOLE LIST. JUST TO CONFIRM, I'VE HEARD COMPLAINTS BEFORE ABOUT INSPECTORS 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 GONNA SAY THAT THAT HASN'T OCCURRED. IT HAS, BUT THEN WHEN WE GET A PHONE CALL, IT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE PROBABLY COULDN'T LET GO AND WE SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT IT ON THE FIRST TIME. IT'S GONNA MAKE THE PROJECT SAFER AND UH, WE'LL HAVE A CON UH, DISCUSSION WITH THE CONTRACTOR ON THAT. UH, ALSO THE INSPECTORS HAVE DISCRETION. THEY DON'T HAVE TO CHARGE THESE FEES. WE WORK WITH THE CONTRACTORS OVER AND OVER IN CERTAIN JOB SITES, CERTAIN COMMUNITIES THAT ARE REPEAT CUSTOMERS. SO WE, 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. UM, UH, TRUTH BE TOLD, WE DON'T REALLY CHARGE A LOT OF REINSPECTION FEES. WE TRY TO WORK WITH THE CONTRACTORS, BUT UH, WE HAVEN'T CHANGED THE REINSPECTION FEES IN, IN MANY, MANY, 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 ONE OF THEM'S 50. YEAH. THANK YOU. AND THEN MY ONLY OTHER COMMENT WAS IN REGARDS TO THE HERITAGE, UM, 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. SO REALLY IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT IT IN REGARD TO THAT'S THE STEP THAT QUALIFIES THEM FOR THE TAX BENEFIT. I MEAN, WE CAN CONSIDER WHETHER THE $350 IS REASONABLE OR NOT. I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION AND THAT MAY BE KIND OF WHERE I MIGHT AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER HORN TALKING ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT. MAYBE, I MEAN, THEY ARE GETTING THE BENEFIT OF THE, THE, UM, THE PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION. BUT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE WANNA ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT, WE WANNA ENCOURAGE PRESERVATION. SO JUST TRYING TO WEIGH OUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT WORKS BEST IN BOTH CA SITUATIONS. 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 UM, THINGS THAT PEOPLE THAT HAVE COME IN AFTER THE FACT IS THE ONLY PLACE WE'RE CHARGING. SO I THINK MAYBE WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT THE PROGRAM. WHEN YOU LOOK AT [00:40:01] THE PROGRAM AS A WHOLE, YOU CAN KINDA WEIGH OUT WHETHER YOU THINK IT'S FAIR OR NOT. ALRIGHT, COUNCIL MEMBER, NIA, I THINK YOU, YOU MAYOR, UM, SO I KNOW OUR GOAL IS TO GET TO 80% IN THREE YEARS. DO WE PLAN TO STAY THERE AT 80% FOR A WHILE ONCE WE GET THERE? OR DO WE PLAN ON DOING A HUNDRED PERCENT AT SOME POINT? SO RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE, BECAUSE WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS PUBLIC BENEFIT, 80% IS THE GOAL. AND SO THE, THE, THE ASPECT IS TO GET THERE IN THAT, THAT THIRD YEAR AND THEN THE FOURTH YEAR DO THE EVALUATION AGAIN TO SEE WHERE WE ARE ON THAT. AND THEN EVERY FOUR YEARS BECOMES THE, THE CYCLE DO IT AGAIN EVALUATION. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH. WE APPRECIATE THAT. UM, WE CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDAS. IS THERE AN ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA A COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE? COUNCIL MEMBER CARE? YES. I'D LIKE TO REMOVE ITEM O AS AN OSCAR PLEASE. OKAY. ANY OTHER MAYOR PROTO? 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. UH, IS THERE, UH, ANY ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION ON FUTURE AGENDAS? OKAY, WE WILL TAKE A FOUR MINUTE BREAK AND WE WILL BE BACK AT SEVEN O'CLOCK. WE'LL LET EVERYBODY COME ON IN AND GET A SEAT AND WE'LL BE BACK AT SEVEN. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.