[2. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE THE OPENING OF AN APPLICATION PERIOD FOR CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION APPLICANTS AND PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.]

APPLICATIONS. AND PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, BACK TO NOVEMBER 8TH, WE BROUGHT TO YOU A MEMO DETAILING THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION AND PROCESS.

BACK THEN IT WAS IN THE FORM OF A DISCUSSION, JUST KIND OF HIGHLIGHTING THE NEED TO UPDATE OUR CHARTER AND LOOKS LIKE US CONVENING A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.

SO WHAT THIS SMALL, BRIEF PRESENTATION AIMS TO DO IS GIVE YOU A BASIC TIMELINE AND AN OUTLINE FOR WHAT WE WOULD ASK TO DO IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2025. AND WE'LL BE MODELING THIS AFTER WHAT WAS DONE BACK IN 2001 AND 2002, WHEN OUR CHARTER WAS VOTED ON AND APPROVED BY THE BY THE VOTING BODY.

SO THE OBJECTIVE HERE IS TO ESTABLISH A CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT AND LEGALLY APPROPRIATE PROCESS FOR DETERMINING WHO WILL SERVE ON THE CHARTER COMMITTEE.

AND UNLESS YOU GUYS DIRECT US, OTHERWISE, WE'LL FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES.

AS I STATED EARLIER FROM THE 2002 CHARTER COMMISSION PROCESS, THIS IS WHAT YOUR BASIC TIMELINE MAY LOOK LIKE.

JANUARY. WE WILL OPEN APPLICATION PERIOD JANUARY 1ST.

CLOSE IT. ON FEBRUARY 1ST WE'LL CALL A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OR AT THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY.

WE'LL REVIEW THE CANDIDATES AND IDENTIFY AN INTERVIEW DATE IF NECESSARY.

AND THEN IN MARCH, OUR GOAL WOULD BE TO GET TO WORK, BEGIN ESTABLISHING THE GUIDELINES FOR MEETINGS.

THE MEETING FREQUENCY, THAT SORT OF THING.

BUT THE FIRST STEP IS OPENING UP AN APPLICATION PERIOD.

WE WOULD HOPE TO DO THAT IN JANUARY, CLOSING IT IN FEBRUARY.

WELL, THEY NEED TO BE CITIZENS.

CITIZENS OF THE CITY? YES, SIR. SO, WE'LL ANNOUNCE THE PUBLICATION PERIOD.

WE'LL USE ALL THE MEANS THAT WE HAVE ACCESS TO WEBSITE, SOCIAL MEDIA, NEWSPAPER.

WE'LL HAVE A STANDARD APPLICATION FORM LIKE WE DO WITH ANY OTHER WORKING BODY OF THE CITY.

WE'LL ALLOW FOR ONLINE SUBMISSION IN PERSON OR MAIL IN, PROVIDED THAT THOSE ARE SUBMITTED WITHIN THE DATE RANGES ALLOWED.

WE'LL REVIEW ALL OF THOSE DOCUMENTS THAT COME IN EVALUATE THE QUALIFICATIONS AND AVAILABILITY OF EACH CANDIDATE.

CANDIDATE DIVERSITY OF EACH CANDIDATE.

AND THEN WE'LL COME UP WITH A SHORT LIST FOR INTERVIEWS.

[00:05:02]

THEN WE'LL RUN THROUGH THE CANDIDATE INTERVIEW PROCESS.

AND THE GOAL IS TO GET TO 16 MEMBERS 14 BEING CHARTER REVIEW MEMBERS.

AND THEN WE'LL NEED A CHAIR AND A VICE CHAIR.

SO, WE'LL NEED 16 TOTAL PERSONS.

WOW. AND THEN STEP FOUR, WE'LL NOTIFY THE APPLICANTS AND THEN HOLD AN ORIENTATION SESSION TO DISCUSS THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES ONCE SELECTED.

AND THEN THE FIRST MEETING COULD BE AS EARLY AS MARCH 1ST.

AND AT THAT SAME MEETING WE'LL APPOINT A VICE CHAIR AND CHAIR.

AND THEN FROM THERE WE'LL MOVE ON PRIORITIES AND GET TO WORK ON UPDATING THE 12 SECTIONS OF OUR CHARTER.

JUST I WILL ASK THIS QUESTION AND MAYBE I CAN WAIT TILL THE END.

SO I'LL GIVE YOU THE OPTION QUESTION NOW OR WAIT TILL THE END.

QUESTIONS. OH, WE ARE.

BUT HOW CONVENIENT WAS THAT? WE ARE AT THE END.

SO YOU CAN JUST GO AHEAD AND ASK YOUR QUESTION.

SO IT DID SAY 16 PEOPLE.

SO I'M SURE THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT OR BUT IT DOES SEEM LIKE THAT'S A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS TO PARTICIPATE IN A BOARD FUNCTION.

YEAH NATE, IF IT'S OKAY WITH YOU I'D LIKE TO RESPOND.

YEAH. THANK YOU. SO YEAH.

YOU BET. SO WHEN NATE AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, WE THOUGHT A BEST PRACTICE WOULD BE TO FOLLOW THE PROCESS THAT WAS FOLLOWED WHEN THE CHARTER WAS INITIATED FOR THE AMENDMENT TO THE CHARTER, YOU CAN DECIDE TO DO LESS THAN 16 IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO.

SO JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST SAY THE WORD AND WE WILL MAKE THAT A LESSER NUMBER.

AND THAT IS OKAY.

THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.

THANK YOU, PAM., CAN WE ADJUST THAT NUMBER AFTER WE SEE HOW MANY APPLICANTS WE HAVE FOR IT OR DOES IT.

YES. YOU HAVE IT. YES.

YOU'RE STILL IN TIME TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

YOU'VE NOT LOST ANY TIME OTHER THAN.

I MEAN, IF YOU END UP.

I WOULD JUST SAY THAT'S A THAT'S A GREAT NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO HAVE.

I FEEL LIKE THAT MAY NOT BE AS CONDUCIVE FOR DISCUSSION.

HAVING THIS IS JUST MY OPINION.

CONSENSUS. YEAH.

TO DEVELOP A CONSENSUS, I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH MAKING A NUMBER LESS THAN THAT TODAY VERSUS WAITING UPON THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

I. OUR CITY IS A LOT LARGER THAN IT WAS 23 YEARS AGO.

WE HAVE A LOT MORE NEW PEOPLE TO THE COMMUNITY.

I DON'T THINK 16 IS THAT MANY.

I MEAN, HELL, THEY PULLED IT OFF IN 2002.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE CAN'T TODAY.

AND, YOU KNOW, AS WE SIT HERE, MY MIND STARTS GOING ABOUT PEOPLE THAT I WOULD LET KNOW THAT THIS WAS HERE TO APPLY FOR SURE.

OTHER THOUGHTS? I AGREE WITH EDDIE.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO CUT BACK.

I THINK WE NEED AS MUCH INVOLVEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY IS ABSOLUTELY POSSIBLE.

YEAH, I'M NOT PUSHING TO CUT BACK.

I JUST I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL HAVE THAT MANY APPLICANTS.

MAYBE WE WILL. AND IF WE DON'T THEN WE CAN CUT BACK.

THAT WAS MY QUESTION. I SEE IT, YEAH.

I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE WE SHOULD ADJUST IT LIKE THE COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYOFFS.

YOU KNOW, YOU GO FROM FOUR TO.

I KNOW NOTHING LIKE THAT.

FOUR TO 8 OR 4.

FOUR FROM 2 TO 4 TO.

YES, SIR. TO 12.

NO, I'M ON BOARD WITH EVERYBODY.

THAT SOUNDS GOOD. OTHER THOUGHTS? WE LEAVE IT AT 16 FOR NOW.

ALL RIGHT. SOUNDS GOOD.

ALL RIGHT. SO, FOR CLARITY AND MARCHING FORWARD IN JANUARY WHEN WE OPENED THE APPLICATION PERIOD, THE NOTIFICATIONS WILL READ UP TO 16 PERSONS RESIDING IN THE CITY TO SERVE ON THIS ON THIS PARTICULAR BOARD.

AND THEN IN FEBRUARY, ONCE WE HAVE THAT LIST FORMULATED AND VALIDATED, WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU WITH THE NEED FOR INTERVIEWS.

DOES THAT SOUND OKAY? SOUNDS GOOD.

ALL RIGHT. SO I DO HAVE ACTION FOR YOU TONIGHT.

AND THIS IS A POSSIBLE MOTION IF YOU SO CHOOSE.

ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION.

NO. MAYOR. MICHAEL, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE OPENING OF AN APPLICATION PERIOD FOR CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION APPLICANTS FOLLOWING THE PROCESS PRESENTED BY THE CITY MANAGER.

AND I'LL SECOND THAT.

ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BEFORE US.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

I OPPOSED SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES.

ITEM THREE CONSIDERS SECOND READING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS.

[3. CONSIDER SECOND READING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE CREATION OF A TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE. ORDINANCE 2024-12-35]

ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE CREATION OF A TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL. WHEN WE SPOKE ABOUT THIS AT OUR LAST MEETING, THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT REDUCING FROM THE 50% MARK

[00:10:03]

ON THE TIRZ AND IN CONTACTING OUR CONSULTANTS.

THEY REMINDED ME THAT WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT OBLIGATES US TO ENTER AT THE 50% MARK ON THE TOURS.

I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH A HANDFUL OF COUNCIL MEMBERS SINCE THEN AND DISCUSSED THE DETAILS OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

WE DID HAVE LENGTHY CONVERSATIONS WITH P3 WORKS, AND THEY REMINDED US OF THAT AND A HANDFUL OF OTHER THINGS THAT MADE THE 50% MARK A GOOD IDEA.

JUST A REMINDER THAT WE CAN USE FUNDS FROM THE TIRZ DISTRICT FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES.

THAT WAS ANOTHER ITEM THAT WE DISCUSSED BRIEFLY AT OUR LAST MEETING.

YOU JUST HAVE TO ALLOW FOR THE TOURIST BOARD TO GRAPPLE WITH THOSE NEEDS, THOSE MUNICIPAL SERVICE NEEDS, AND THEN APPROVED THEM BY VOTE OF THAT BODY TO BE ABLE TO USE THOSE FUNDS. AND I GUESS THE FINAL PIECE THAT I WOULD POINT OUT IS JUST BECAUSE WE APPROVE A 50% TIRZ, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE HAVE OBLIGATED OURSELVES TO SPEND ANY OF THOSE FUNDS TODAY.

RIGHT NOW, AS THE TIRZ IS BEING CREATED.

WE'RE FULFILLING OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OBLIGATIONS, AND WE ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO SPEND ANY MONEY FROM THOSE INCREMENTS COLLECTED AS OF THIS MEETING HERE TODAY. SO AS LONG AS WE'RE YOU KNOW, CAREFUL WITH OUR FUTURE GIVES, IF YOU WILL, ON DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, THOSE FUNDS CAN BE DIVIDED UP AS NEEDED TO SUPPORT THE NEEDS OF THE CITY.

SO A COUPLE OF JUST CATCH UP ITEMS FROM THE LAST MEETING.

OTHERWISE, THIS DOCUMENT HAS NOT CHANGED FROM WHEN YOU SAW IT LAST.

VERY GOOD. AND IT IS KIND OF THE CONSENSUS OF CITY STAFF THAT TO KEEP IT AT THAT 50%.

YES. AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD LOTS OF DISCUSSION REGARDING THIS PROCESS IN EDUCATION.

I WANT TO THANK THE CITY FOR PROVIDING ALL THAT INFORMATION TO US AS WELL.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2024-1235.

SECOND. I THINK I GOT IT RIGHT HERE FIRST.

I WILL YES.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

I OPPOSED SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT, THAT PASSES ITEM FOUR.

CONSIDER A SECOND READING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS TO ADOPT IMPACT FEES AND PROVIDE FOR COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES FOR

[4. CONSIDER SECOND READING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS TO ADOPT IMPACT FEES AND PROVIDE FOR THE COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, AND ROADWAY FACILITIES PURSUANT TO THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN. ORDINANCE 2024-12-36 ]

WATER, WASTEWATER, AND ROADWAYS.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM ANDREW FROM KIMLEY-HORN AT OUR LAST MEETING.

I BELIEVE HE'S STANDING BY ON THIS MEETING IF WE HAVE ANY DETAILED QUESTIONS FOR HIM.

BUT THIS DOCUMENT ALSO HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE YOU SAW IT LAST WEEK.

AND JUST A REMINDER, WATER, WASTEWATER AND ROAD IMPACT FEES ARE ALL DRIVEN BY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS THAT SUPPORT EACH OF THOSE AREAS.

AND SO THE DOLLARS THAT ARE COLLECTED ON IMPACT FEES ARE THE ACTUAL DOLLARS THAT GO TOWARDS THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S IN THE GROUND OR ON TOP OF THE ROADWAY.

SO IN THE SPIRIT OF DEVELOPMENT, PAYING FOR DEVELOPMENT, THIS IS HOW IT GETS DONE THROUGH THE COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES.

SO THE ONLY OTHER REMINDER I'LL GIVE YOU BEFORE YOU START GRAPPLING WITH CONVERSATION OR VOTE IS THAT ROADWAY IMPACT FEES ARE NEW.

WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE HISTORICALLY IN THE CITY.

SO IF THEY ARE APPROVED TONIGHT, THERE WILL BE A ONE YEAR PERIOD WHERE THEY'RE NOT COLLECTED BECAUSE THAT'S A NEW FEE.

SO ALL THE OTHER FEES FOR WATER WASTEWATER WOULD BEGIN ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE.

WELL, I KNOW THAT WE BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THOSE IMPACT FEES UPDATED, OBVIOUSLY.

ISN'T THERE IS THERE SOMETHING IN THIS MOTION THAT NEEDS TO BE ABOUT PERCENTAGES? THERE ARE ITEMS RELATED TO PERCENTAGE.

AND ANDREW, IF I GET THIS WRONG, HOP IN HERE AND CORRECT ME.

BUT IF YOU LOOK ON PAGE STARTING ON PAGE 15 OF YOUR PACKET, IT TALKS ABOUT THE FEES THAT CAN BE COLLECTED.

I WOULD JUST TELL YOU THAT ON WATER AND WASTEWATER, IT'S MY RECOMMENDATION AND I WOULD ALSO NOT SPEAK FOR ANDREW, BUT I BELIEVE THAT HE WOULD SAY WE NEED TO BE AS CLOSE TO 100% COLLECTION ON WATER AND WASTEWATER AS WE CAN, AS WE COMFORTABLY CAN BE ON THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEES SIDE OF THE HOUSE. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY DOWN THROUGH THE DIFFERENT LAND USES, BUT FOR EXAMPLE, ON PAGE 16 OF YOUR PACKET, YOU SEE RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CATEGORY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOUSE AT 113,677.

IF YOU SAY WE WANT TO STAY AT 100% ON RESIDENTIAL, THAT'S WHAT WOULD BE COLLECTED PER NEW RESIDENTIAL LIVING UNIT.

[00:15:01]

GO TO PAGE 17.

JUST CONTRAST THAT FOR A MOMENT TO SAY A COFFEE SHOP UNDER THE DINING LAND USE CATEGORY.

THAT COFFEE SHOP HAS A $83,313 PER THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM AT 100%.

SO YOU MIGHT, IN THE SPIRIT OF THINKING THROUGH INCENTIVIZING CERTAIN STYLES OF LAND USE IN OUR CITY, YOU MIGHT CONSIDER LOWERING THOSE PERCENTAGES ON THINGS LIKE DINING OR INDUSTRY OR RETAIL AND LEAVING THINGS THAT ARE LESS INCENTIVIZED TODAY, AT THIS MOMENT, AT A HIGHER RATE.

AND I WOULD ADD ONE MORE POINT OF CLARITY.

ANDREW AND I TALKED AT LENGTH AFTER THE LAST MEETING ABOUT THIS AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT SUPPORTS ROADWAY IMPACT FEES ASSUMES THAT WE WOULD HELP COST PARTICIPATE WITH TXDOT AT A 20% VALUE ON FUTURE PROJECTS.

NOW, THOSE FUTURE PROJECTS ARE THE ONES THAT LIVE INSIDE OF OUR 2050 COMP PLAN UNDER THE ROADWAY PLANS.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'VE HISTORICALLY GRAPPLED WITH, AND THAT DOES DRIVE THE NUMBER UP.

BUT AS WE ALL KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF ROAD WORK TO DO IN THE CITY OF DECATUR.

SO THOSE ASSUMPTIONS AT 20% COST PARTICIPATION, I THINK IS STILL CONSERVATIVE, BUT THIS IS A NUMBER THAT YOU CAN REEL DOWN FROM THE 100% ON ROADS. MAYOR, I HOPE THAT I, WELL, AND MAYBE ANDREW, YOU COULD WALK THROUGH THOSE ITEMS FOR US. I KNOW PERSONALLY I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE 100% ON BOTH WATER AND WASTEWATER.

AND I GUESS IT'S REALLY MAYBE FOR THIS GROUP, IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHERE TO ESTABLISH OR SET, OR MAKE SURE WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE AS AS WRITTEN WITH THE ROADWAYS.

CAN EVERYONE HEAR ME? OKAY.

YES, SIR. OKAY.

AND IT MIGHT ACTUALLY BE EASIER IF YOU'RE ABLE TO PULL UP THE POWERPOINT THAT I SENT YOU THAT SHOWS THAT TABLE.

AND I'M REFERRING TO IF YOU GO TO SLIDE EIGHT.

ARE YOU ALL SEEING ON YOUR END? WE'RE SEEING ANDREW.

OKAY. PERFECT. YEAH.

NATE HIT EVERY, I THINK HIT ON EVERYTHING.

JUST AS I WOULD HAVE SAID IT, BUT YEAH, JUST AS A REMINDER IS WATER AND WASTEWATER IS COLLECTED BASED OFF OF A METER SIZE.

SO WHETHER THAT'S A 3/4 INCH RESIDENTIAL METER OR A LARGER 1IN OR 2 INCH METER THAT YOU MIGHT GET FOR A COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SITE. SO THOSE ARE NOT SPECIFIC TO A LAND USE TYPE.

SO TYPICALLY, MOST CITIES WON'T MAKE A DISTINCTION BASED OFF A LAND USE TYPE.

THEY MIGHT SAY WE'RE GOING TO CUT ALL OF THE RATES FOR WATER OR WASTEWATER AT 50% OR 75% OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER YOU MIGHT CHOOSE IT TO BE, AS NATE SAID, ON THE ROADWAY SIDE, BECAUSE THERE IS AN EXTENSIVE LAND USE TABLE THAT DOES ALLOW YOU TO DIFFERENTIATE PRETTY EASILY BETWEEN A RESIDENTIAL OR A COMMERCIAL LAND USE TYPE.

THAT IS A COMMON TECHNIQUE TO, AS NATE WAS SAYING, INCENTIVIZE INDUSTRY OR COMMERCIAL TO THE AREA AND MAYBE NOT GIVE THAT SAME INCENTIVE TO RESIDENTIAL.

MR. MAYOR IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE FOR ME TO ELABORATE ON COUNCIL WHEN IT SAYS LIKE 100% MAX COLLECTED.

CAN YOU? I'M KIND OF MISSING, I GUESS.

MAYBE MISSING THE POINT THERE.

LIKE, DO WE HAVE A CHOICE TO COLLECT UP TO 100%? YES, SIR. SO, YEAH, THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY ESTABLISHED THE MAXIMUM, THE 100% COLLECTION RATE THAT WE CAN'T COLLECT ANY MORE THAN THAT RATE.

BUT YOU, AS THE BODY CAN SELECT ANYTHING FROM ZERO ALL THE WAY UP TO 100% AT YOUR DISCRETION, AND I'LL REMIND YOU, IS THIS CAN BE CHANGED AT ANY TIME.

WE DON'T HAVE TO REDO THE ENTIRE STUDY FOR YOU TO CHANGE THE COLLECTION RATE SIX MONTHS FROM NOW, IF YOU SO DECIDE ON LIKE SO.

IF WE IDENTIFY AN AREA THAT WE NEED TO DEVELOP, WE CAN LOWER THAT PERCENTAGE.

YOU CAN LOWER THAT PERCENTAGE.

NOT BY DEVELOPMENT OR AREA SPECIFIC, BUT YOU CAN LOWER IT CITYWIDE BY LAND USE TYPE, IF YOU SO CHOOSE.

AND THEN SOMETHING ELSE I'LL ADD TO THAT POINT IS IMPACT FEES ARE COMMONLY PART OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND CONVERSATIONS AS PART OF IF A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND THEY BUILD A PART OF A ROADWAY OR A WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE ELIGIBLE PROJECT.

[00:20:05]

SO A PROJECT THAT WE'RE SHOWING ON THE IMPACT FEE, IT'S VERY COMMON TO GIVE THAT DEVELOPER CREDITS.

SO THEY'RE NOT HAVING TO PAY TWICE, SO TO SPEAK.

OKAY. SO WHAT ABOUT INFILL? SORRY, MR. MAYOR WHAT ABOUT INFILL.

SO WE'VE CONSTANTLY, WE'RE TRYING TO CONCENTRATE ON INFILL.

SO IS THERE A WAY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A PERSON WITH A SMALL LOT THAT DOESN'T HAVE A METER AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, THEY'RE GETTING CHARGED? I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT IT ON THE PHONE THE OTHER DAY, NATE.

15,000 FOR A ROADWAY FEE.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DEVELOP THAT LOT.

AND SO NOW WE'RE NOT RIGHT.

YEAH, THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT'S PART OF THE INFILL TOOLKIT IS WAIVING OF CERTAIN IMPACT FEES.

AND IT JUST TAKES THE FORM OF SOME SORT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

OR THEY PURCHASE LAND OR STRUCTURE THAT'S IN A DEFINED DISTRICT THAT WE'VE SET FORTH AS AN INFILL DISTRICT.

SO AND I GUESS THIS IS KIND OF WHERE YOU'RE GOING AT.

BUT I THINK FOR MY COMFORTABILITY, TOO.

BUT SO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEY CAN COME IN THROUGH AN APPROVAL WHICH WOULD BE A VARIATION OF THAT.

SO THERE'S STILL THAT FLEXIBILITY THROUGH THAT COURSE OF ACTION.

YEAH, I WOULD SUSPECT MAYBE TO JUST KIND OF SAY IT DIFFERENTLY THAN WHAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR.

LET'S SAY YOU LEFT EVERYTHING AT MAX COLLECTION 100% ACROSS THE BOARD.

I WOULD SUSPECT PRETTY MUCH EVERY DEVELOPMENT THAT CAME THAT WASN'T RESIDENTIAL WOULD PROBABLY BE SOME SORT OF ASK FOR A WAIVER OF SOME SORT, AND IT WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE FORM OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, A 380 AGREEMENT, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, TO WHERE THE BODY COULD WAIVE THOSE FEES OR RETURN THEM AT A LATER DATE.

SO I THINK THAT'S WHY BALANCING THAT PERCENTAGE NOW MIGHT BE A LITTLE BETTER.

WE HAVE NOT HAD THESE ROADWAY IMPACT FEES HISTORICALLY.

AND WHEN YOU SAY WHEN YOU SAY BALANCING THAT THAT THIS NOW THE PERCENTAGE NOW DO WE NEED TO ADJUST THESE PERCENTAGES IN THIS DOCUMENT.

YEAH. YOU CAN JAKE.

THAT'S THE OPTION THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, YOU COULD SAY, HEY WE WANT TO LEAVE RESIDENTIAL AT 100 WHERE IT IS, AND WE WANT EVERYTHING ELSE TO BE X PERCENT, WHATEVER THAT IS IN YOUR MIND OR BASED ON THE CONVERSATION HERE TONIGHT.

OR YOU COULD LEAVE IT AT 100% AND JUST KNOW THAT THAT'S GOING TO CREATE SOME BARRIERS TO DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE PRETTY QUICKLY. SO THE WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE, AS WE'VE GOT IT WRITTEN, WHERE? WHERE ARE WE AT ON THESE PERCENTAGES? LOOKS LIKE 100% ACROSS THE BOARD.

WELL, THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT I SAW FROM THAT PAGE.

THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. AND THIS MAY BE FROM THAT THAT SLIDE, YOU'RE ABLE THIS MAY BE A GOOD TIME FOR YOU TO HOP IN AND MAYBE GIVE SOME GUIDANCE ON WHAT WE DISCUSSED ABOUT YOU KNOW, GETTING A VISION FROM THE COUNCIL AND THEN ADJUSTING IT, PENDING LEGAL REVIEW.

YES. SO THE TABLES WILL NEED TO BE UPDATED IF YOU DECIDE A DIFFERENT PERCENTAGE, SAY, FOR EVERYTHING OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL.

AND SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE SUBJECT TO THE ENGINEER CORRECTING THE TABLES OR AMENDING THE TABLES TO REFLECT YOUR PERCENTAGE CHOICE AND LEGAL REVIEW.

SO MAYBE IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US TO KIND OF GO THROUGH.

WE'VE GOT THREE AREAS.

WE'VE GOT ROADS, WE'VE GOT WASTEWATER AND WATER.

I KNOW FOR ME I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE WATER AND WASTEWATER.

IT SEEMS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE REST OF COUNCIL FEELS THAT WAY OR NOT.

SO THEN IT LOOKS LIKE ROADWAY IS KIND OF WHAT WE NEED TO KIND OF TALK THROUGH, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE WE WOULD WANT TO PERCENTAGE ON IF AT ALL CHANGED THAT SINCE WE CAN'T ACTUALLY COLLECT ROADWAY FOR A YEAR.

WHAT KEEPS US FROM ACCEPTING THE DOCUMENT AS WRITTEN TODAY AND OVER THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO MONTHS OR THREE MONTHS? HAVE A COUPLE OF WORKSHOPS, FIGURE OUT THE NUMBER WE WANT, AND THEN FIX THE ROADWAY FEE BECAUSE WE CAN'T COLLECT THE ROADWAYS FOR A YEAR.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE ANYTHING WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN FORCE DOWN AND MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT IS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DONE.

I LIKE THAT IDEA. I AGREE WITH THAT, EDDIE, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY VARIABLES THAT WE ARE UNKNOWN IN ANYTHING THAT COULD HAPPEN, AND WE CAN'T POSSIBLY THINK OF THEM ALL TONIGHT. YEAH.

WELL, AND I AGREE WITH THAT TO A CERTAIN TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.

BUT WE HAVE THE THREE CATEGORIES.

BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE CATEGORIES IN THE CATEGORIES.

YOU KNOW WE HAVE INDUSTRIAL, RESIDENTIAL, RECREATIONAL, INSTITUTIONAL, MEDICAL OFFICE COMMERCIAL.

YOU KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CATEGORIES IN THERE THAT FROM A COUNCIL, I THINK SOME OF THOSE WE REALLY WANT HERE.

[00:25:03]

AND SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE WHEN YOU GET, YOU KNOW, AN OFFICE BUILDING COMING IN THAT WE WANT IN A CERTAIN AREA, IS THERE A VARIANCE WE CAN GIVE THEM.

DOES EACH BUILDING HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT LIKE IF IT'S JUST A SMALL LOT, IS THERE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THAT SMALL LOT? IF IT'S NOT PART OF A LARGER DEVELOPMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH MIXED USE, YOU MAY HAVE ONE LARGE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT BLANKETS THE WHOLE THING.

BUT A LOT OF TIMES WHAT WE SEE IS, YOU KNOW, A BUSINESS HERE, A RETAIL SHOP HERE, A RESIDENTIAL UNIT HERE.

SO IT'S DIFFERENT PIECES, RIGHT.

AND FOR AND MAYBE I'M TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

SO FOR LIKE A NEW DEVELOPMENT I'M FINE KEEPING EVERYTHING 100%.

AND THEN IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ADJUSTING THOSE.

MY CONCERN IS MORE LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT JUST A MINUTE AGO INFILL.

SO, I'M TRYING TO THINK SO.

JUST LIKE A FEW MONTHS AGO WE HAD YOU PUT A MAP UP OF ALL THE AREAS THAT NEEDED INFILL.

SO ONE OF THOSE AREAS, ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE'S A SMALL, I DON'T KNOW, A COFFEE SHOP THAT WANTS TO COME IN THERE.

EVERYBODY SUPPORTS IT.

IT'S A GREAT IDEA.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO COME IN THERE IF THEY HAVE TO PAY $15,000.

OR IS THERE A PROCESS THAT WE CAN SAY, WHAT'S THAT? OR 83,000. YEAH.

OR 83. DEFINITELY NOT 83,000.

SO IS THERE A PROCESS IN THAT PROCESS THAT WE CAN GIVE THEM A VARIANCE.

YEAH. IT WOULD LOOK LIKE A 380 AGREEMENT, JAKE, WHERE YOU'RE ASKING FOR CERTAIN PERFORMANCE METRICS UP FRONT PROVIDED THAT BUSINESS MEETS THOSE PERFORMANCE METRICS. WE WOULD BE WILLING TO WAIVE THEIR IMPACT FEES ON THE FRONT SIDE.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM CITY? NO. THAT ANSWERS I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A LIKE A LIKE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT INFILL.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A DETERRENT.

IF I DON'T WANT TO VOTE ON THIS, VOTE YES ON THIS.

AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE'VE DETERRED A LOT OF STUFF THAT WE WANT COMING IN FROM COMING IN.

SO I THINK IMPACT FEES RELATED TO INFILL, THAT'S DEFINITELY GOING TO BE PART OF THE INFILL TOOLKIT THAT WE STILL HAVE WORK TO DO ON.

SO, I THINK THAT'LL BE ONE OF THE HIGH PRIORITY ITEMS TO BRING TO YOU WHEN WE HAVE THAT INFILL TOOLKIT CONVERSATION.

IS THE WAIVING OF THOSE FEES, RIGHT? SO AS FAR AS THE INCENTIVES IN YOUR INFILL OR IN THOSE TOURIST DISTRICTS.

WHAT HAVE YOU. IT COULD POTENTIALLY WE COULD OFFSET SOME I GUESS IT JUST INFILL PERIOD.

YOU CAN OFFSET THAT.

YES. AS AN INCENTIVE.

YEAH. OKAY.

SOUNDS GOOD. I WOULD ASK GO BACK TO COUNCILMAN ALLEN'S COMMENT, PAM OR ANDREW.

ANY OBSTACLES OR UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IN TAKING THE PATH THAT EDDIE DETAILED A MINUTE AGO? YEAH, WELL, THERE'S A FEW NUANCES THAT I WANT TO ADD TO THE GRACE PERIOD.

SO THE GRACE PERIOD IS ONLY APPLICABLE TO PROPERTIES THAT ARE ONLY ALREADY PLATTED.

SO IF YOU'VE GOT A IF YOU'VE GOT A PROPERTY THAT'S ALREADY PLATTED, THEN THEY HAVE ONE YEAR TO BASICALLY PULL THEIR BUILDING PERMIT.

AND IT'S WHEN THEY PULL THEIR BUILDING PERMIT, THAT'S WHEN THE IMPACT FEE IS ASSESSED.

SO IF THEY DO THAT WITHIN A YEAR, THEN THAT ROAD IMPACT FEE.

ROADWAY IMPACT FEE IS NOT COLLECTED, RIGHT? BUT IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT YOU KNOW, LIKE SAY IT'S AN INFILL LOT, OR SOMEONE THAT SHOWS UP IN PLATS AND PULLS A BUILDING PERMIT ALL WITHIN A YEAR, THEN THAT ROW OR VERY QUICKLY, THAT ROADWAY IMPACT FEE IS GOING TO GET ASSESSED.

SO I THINK FOR THE ONE YEAR GRACE PERIODS APPLICABLE FOR PROBABLY LARGER DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE PLATTED AND ARE KIND OF MOVING TOWARDS A LARGER DEVELOPMENT.

BUT IT MIGHT YOU MIGHT CATCH SOME OF THESE SMALLER LOTS.

SURE. SO HOW DO YOU SUGGEST IT'S WORDED TO KEEP US FROM, YOU KNOW, MAKING A MISTAKE WHEN WE HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THAT COULD HAPPEN THAT WE CAN'T FORESEE.

SO WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND THE READING TO BE? YEAH. AND TO PIGGYBACK OFF MELINDA, LIKE, IS THIS COMMON FOR OTHER CITIES LIKE ROANOKE OR 100% DOWN THE BOARD? NO, IT'S NOT JOSEPH.

IF YOU COULD FIND IN ANDREW'S POWERPOINT THERE'S A COUPLE OF PAGES THAT COMPARE AND CONTRAST THESE FEES.

A PAGE OR SLIDE TEN HAS THE ROADWAY FEES ON IT.

THIS SLIDE NINE RIGHT HERE.

THAT'S UP. THIS SHOWS SOME OF OUR BENCHMARKING CITIES.

THE LAST TIME THEY UPDATED.

AND THEN YOU KNOW WHAT IS THEIR HIGHEST COLLECTED SERVICE AREA.

AND THEN THE PERCENTAGE THAT IT IS.

SO FOR EXAMPLE CORINTH IS AT 100% BUT THEIR TOTAL COLLECTIONS IS MUCH LESS THAN OURS.

[00:30:08]

OTHERS ARE LOWER.

SO WE'RE ALMOST DOUBLE EVERY TRIPLE.

I MEAN, WHAT HOW DO WE GET TO THIS POINT TO BEING SO MUCH HIGHER THAN EVERYBODY ELSE? ANDREW, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'RE PREPARED TO WALK THEM THROUGH? WELL, I MEAN, I THINK JUST IN SHORT, IS THE CITY IS DEVELOPING, I MEAN.

AND SO, IF YOU LOOK AT LIKE AUBREY, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE COLLECTING 8000.

SO, THEIR MAX WOULD BE THEIR MAX ALLOWABLE IS 16,000 CONTRASTED WITH YOUR 13 SIX.

BUT IF YOU CONTRAST THAT WITH CORINTH FOR EXAMPLE, I MEAN THEY'RE A CITY THAT'S ALMOST BUILT OUT.

SO YOU MIGHT EXPECT THAT THEIR FEES MIGHT BE LOWER.

AND THEN IF YOU TAKE DENTON, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY'RE ONLY COLLECTING 20%.

SO AGAIN, THEIR MAX IS 15 OR 16.

AGAIN, KIND OF IN THE SAME BALLPARK AS YOURS.

SO I DON'T THINK THE, YOU KNOW, THE TOTAL MAX AVAILABLE VERSUS I DON'T GET WHY WE HAVE TO HAVE A PERCENTAGE.

THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THROWING.

WHY DON'T WE JUST PUT THE NUMBER AND NOT HAVE A PERCENTAGE.

IT'S A GUIDANCE FOR US BECAUSE ROADWAY FEES ARE SO BROAD BASED ON LAND USE CATEGORIES.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE YOUR PACKET OPEN LOOK ON PAGE 16.

YOU CAN SEE JUST LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.

IF YOU LEAVE RESIDENTIAL AT 100% AND THEN YOU JUST GO ONE LINE UP TO MINI WAREHOUSE, YOU LEAVE THAT AT 100%. THERE'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE THERE.

IT'S BECAUSE OF THE VEHICLE MILE PER UNIT CALCULATION THAT'S ADDED HERE.

SO THAT I THINK THE, THE BIG DEAL HERE IS ALL THE DIFFERENT LAND USE CATEGORIES IS WHY WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT PERCENTAGE.

AND ANDREW SAID THIS TO ME EARLY ON IN THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT THESE ROADWAY FEES.

A LOT OF CITIES USE THE LAND USE CATEGORY TO DIAL IN THEIR PERCENTAGE TO HELP ADDRESS THE NEEDS FOR ATTRACTING DIFFERENT STYLES OF BUSINESS AND OPPORTUNITIES.

SO CITIES MAY HAVE LOWER RESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEES BECAUSE THEY'RE NEEDING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS AND HIGHER COMMERCIAL BECAUSE THEY'RE GOOD ON COMMERCIAL.

OURS IS THE OPPOSITE.

WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO ATTRACT COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL OPTIONS, AND WE'VE ALL AGREED HISTORICALLY THAT WE HAVE PLENTY OF RESIDENTIAL INBOUND.

SURE. I DON'T KNOW.

I'M NOT SURE THAT I DIRECTLY ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION ON THAT, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS ON ROADWAY FEES THAT WEIGH IN HERE.

I'D LIKE TO TAKE THIS TIME JUST TO ASK IF ANYONE ELSE FROM CITY STAFF HAS A COMMENT OR WANTS TO HAVE SOME INPUT.

WAYNE? ANYBODY ELSE? THAT'S. YEAH.

YEAH. YOU ARE DEFINITELY GOING TO BE ABLE TO DIAL IN WHAT SPECIFIC USES YOU'RE WANTING TO BRING IN.

IT IS GOING TO IMPACT DEVELOPMENT IN IN MULTIPLE WAYS DEPENDING ON HOW YOU USE THIS ROAD IMPACT FEE.

AND SO I THINK THAT THAT GOES BACK TO WHAT THE COUNCIL THE DIRECTION THAT YOU FORESEE THIS GOING AND YOU USE THAT TO INCENTIVIZE CERTAIN DEVELOPMENTS.

SO IF WE STARTED OFF AT 100% FOR RESIDENTIAL, 50% COMMERCIAL, AND THEN IT WOULD ALLOW US OVER THE NEXT YEAR TO MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS THAT WE NEED TO AS THINGS COME ON.

SO THEY'RE NOT JUST AUTOMATICALLY BECAUSE YEAH.

AS I LOOK HERE, I'M NOT GOING.

I DON'T SEE A NEW MOVIE THEATER POPPING IN ANYTIME SOON.

BUT, YOU KNOW, $248,000 DOES SEEM LIKE A LOT OF MONEY, BUT IT'S ALSO A LOT OF PEOPLE DRIVING ON OUR ROADS.

CAN WE ADJUST THESE PERCENTAGES AS WE GO, I GUESS.

DID WE ALREADY ANSWER THAT QUESTION? WE CAN. OKAY.

YEAH. AND YOU CAN DO IT THROUGH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

YOU OR A PLAN AGREEMENT OR JUST DO IT OR JUST DO IT.

SO THAT'S. YES.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO WE CAN CHANGE IT.

WE CAN AMEND THE PERCENT AT ANY TIME FROM DAIS.

AND THEN WE CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED ON A PLAN.

AGREEMENT LEGAL TELLS ME OTHERWISE.

THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTAND IT.

YES, I CAN SEE ANDREW'S UNMUTED, SO I WANT TO LET HIM RESPOND.

WELL, I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD, YES, YOU'RE ABLE TO CHANGE THE PERCENTAGES AS A BODY, BUT NOT AGAIN, JUST AS A REMINDER, NOT SPECIFIC TO A DEVELOPMENT AT ANY GIVEN TIME.

IT HAS TO BE DONE WHOLESALE ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY.

SURE. EDDIE, I THINK YOU WERE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AT THINKING ABOUT ESTABLISHING A PERCENTAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL FIRST, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN GRAPPLING WITH THAT FOR A LONG TIME, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN FROM THERE, LOOKING DOWN THE REST OF THE LAND USE CATEGORIES AND DETERMINING A

[00:35:10]

STARTING POINT FOR EVERYTHING ELSE.

HEY, IF NATE, IF I COULD JUST ONE MORE THING AND IF WE COULD GO TO SLIDE 15 AND IT'S ACTUALLY HIDDEN.

I PULLED A LITTLE BIT MORE DATA FOR TONIGHT.

AND THEY'RE NOT WHAT WE CALL COMPARABLE CITIES TO THE CITY OF DECATUR.

BUT THEY ARE.

I JUST WANTED TO PULL SOME OTHER HIGH RATES IN THE METROPLEX THAT ARE BEING COLLECTED.

JUST SO YOU DO HAVE A FLAVOR FOR OTHER AREAS.

CAN WE MAKE THAT A LITTLE SMALLER? CAN YOU GO ONE MORE SLIDE? YOU'LL HAVE TO UNHIDE IT.

IT'S HIDDEN RIGHT NOW.

YOU'RE ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO, ARE YOU SAYING THIS IS AN ADOBE VERSION AS OPPOSED TO? OH, I SEE. OKAY. WELL, I'LL JUST I'LL JUST READ THEM OFF TO YOU THEN.

SO, CITY OF FORT WORTH, THE HIGHEST RATE ON ROADWAY THEY'RE CURRENTLY COLLECTING, IS A LITTLE OVER 16,000.

FLOWER MOUND IS THE HIGHEST RATE.

THEY'RE COLLECTING IS JUST UNDER 18,000.

IN MCKINNEY IS ABOUT 16,500.

SO NONE OF THOSE ARE WHAT I LIKE I SAID, COMPARABLE TO THE CITY OF DECATUR, BUT THOSE ARE SOME OTHER HIGH RATES CURRENTLY BEING COLLECTED IN THE METROPLEX.

IT'S INTERESTING, I WOULD ALMOST SAY, TO GO OFF EDDIE'S.

WE DO 100% FOR RESIDENTIAL AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE, 50% ALMOST.

I DON'T KNOW, I WELL, I GUESS I WILL ASK FROM, FROM THE ENGINEER'S ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND, AND NATE OR STAFF, IS THERE A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU GUYS ARE MAKING TO THE COUNCIL REGARDING THE PERCENTAGES? I, I WAS HOPEFUL FOR THIS CONVERSATION TO BE ABLE TO GET THESE SHOCKING NUMBERS OUT AND TALK THROUGH THEM.

I THINK YOU GUYS ARE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION WITH RESIDENTIAL AT 100%, AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE AT A VALUE THAT YOU CAN ALL AGREE ON AS A STARTING POINT. FROM THERE, I THINK IT WILL NEED YOUR CONSTANT ATTENTION BASED ON THE NUMBER OF ASKS OR THE NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT ARE UNINTENTIONALLY CREATED BY THAT HIGHER NUMBER, I THINK SOME OF THEM, AS YOU LOOK AT THEM AND AS CERTAIN TYPES OF THINGS THEY'RE TRYING TO COME, THEY MAY GO DOWN TO 10% OR 20 OR 20, YOU KNOW, TO A NUMBER THAT IS THAT A NEW DEVELOPMENT CAN STOMACH AND UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE PAYING THEIR SHARE, BUT NOT PAYING EVERYONE'S SHARE.

CAN WE APPROVE THIS AS IS, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION AND BREAK THESE DOWN AND COME UP WITH A CONSENSUS FOR WHAT THE PERCENTAGES SHOULD BE FOR EACH CATEGORY.

IT CAN BE APPROVED AND THEN ADJUSTED AFTER THAT.

SO AT A VERY BASIC LEVEL, YES, MA'AM.

YOU CAN DO THAT.

I'M ASSUMING YOU WANT TO HAVE A WORKSHOP FOR MORE DETAILS ON ROADS SPECIFICALLY.

YES. LET'S NOT DO IT IN JANUARY WHERE WE HAVE LIKE NINE NIGHTS IN JANUARY.

IT LOOKS LIKE. YOUR COMFORT LEVEL WITH THAT, PAM.

IT MAKES SENSE TO ME.

I'D PROBABLY JUST LOOK TO PAM TO.

I DO BELIEVE THE CODE ALLOWS YOU TO COME BACK AND CHANGE IT AGAIN, SO I DON'T SEE WHY NOT.

I THINK WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ONE TIME BEFORE, WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ADJUSTING, AND I COULD BE MISREMEMBERING OR MELDING TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT IT SEEMED, ANDREW, LIKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION AT THAT POINT WAS TO START LOWER AND ADJUST HIGHER RATHER THAN THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

AM I REMEMBERING THAT CORRECTLY? I DON'T RECALL THAT.

I MEAN, REALLY, IT'S I MEAN, WHEN IT COMES TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PERCENTAGES, IT'S TRYING TO STAY WITHIN MY LANE.

IT STARTS TO GET OUTSIDE OF MY LANE, I'D SAY IS, YOU KNOW, THE MAX FEES HAVE BEEN CALCULATED BASED OFF OF THE, YOU KNOW, KNOWN GROWTH COMING TO THE CITY, THE UPCOMING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS.

AND SO REALLY JUST THE RATIONALE IS FOR EVERY DOLLAR WE'RE NOT CHARGING ON THE IMPACT FEES IS A POTENTIAL DOLLAR THAT WILL HAVE TO BE BORNE BY RATES, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THAT'S PROPERTY TAX RATES OR UTILITY RATES.

SO IT'S YEAH, IT'S IT'S A KIND OF A GIVE AND TAKE IF YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALL LOOKING AT KIND OF THE SAME PIE OF FUNDING THAT'S NEEDED.

AND PAM AND YOU MAY AND THIS IS KIND OF WHERE I WAS THINKING, IF YOU'RE AT A, LET'S JUST SAY YOU'RE AT 100% AND THERE'S ACTUAL UTILIZATION OF THAT 100% IMPACT FEE, SAY, ON ROADS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, AND THEN WE DROP IT TO 50%, WOULD WE NEED TO

[00:40:01]

REIMBURSE THE OTHER 50% BACK TO THAT INDIVIDUAL OR THAT INDIVIDUAL, OR WOULD THAT BE FROM THAT DATE FORWARD? THAT WOULD BE FROM THAT DATE FORWARD? BUT YOU RAISE AN INTERESTING QUESTION.

YEAH. WELL, AND TO THAT POINT, MAYBE IT'S WISE THEN TO START LOWER TONIGHT AND THEN IF YOU SO SEE FIT, COME BACK HIGHER IN THE FUTURE RATHER THAN, LIKE YOU SAID, POTENTIALLY CREATING THAT SITUATION OF SOMEONE WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO, GETTING STUCK IN THE IN BETWEEN.

THAT IS A GREAT POINT.

I IF WE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD, BUT THAT COULD HAPPEN.

YEAH. WE COULD FALL INTO THAT ESCROW-ISH.

YEAH. KIND OF AN ISSUE.

YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD ANALOGY, JAKE.

ALL RIGHT.

SO NO ESCARGOT.

ALL RIGHT, SO THE ORDINANCE, IF WE APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS IS, WE'RE JUST WE'RE MAKING THE APPROVAL OF WHAT'S BEEN PRINTED OR DO WE NEED TO.

I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY EARLIER ABOUT ADJUSTING THE RATES OR THE PERCENTAGES.

SO IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMEONE MIGHT WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE WITH 100% FOR RESIDENTIAL AND 50% FOR EVERYTHING ELSE ON THE ROADWAYS.

AND THAT THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE ENGINEER AMENDING THE TABLES TO REFLECT THE 50% AND LEGAL REVIEW.

RIGHT. AND YOU'RE STILL GOOD WITH INFILL.

I'M FOR, I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE IF YOU CAN SEE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE ME POINT AT NATE.

NATE YOU'RE GOOD WITH THAT BECAUSE THAT IS A WHOLE NOTHER ANIMAL.

OKAY. WE WILL HANDLE SEPARATELY.

JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A PATH PARTICULAR ORDINANCE.

YEAH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A GOOD PATHWAY.

YES, SIR. NOT BOXING OURSELVES IN.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL REGARDING OUR DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION.

SURE. HOW TO MAKE THE MOTION? MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE IMPACT FEES THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO US 100% FOR WATER, 100% FOR WASTEWATER, AND ON THE ROADWAYS, ON RESIDENTIAL, 100%, 50% FOR EVERYTHING ELSE.

WITH THE CONSENSUS THAT THE ENGINEER WILL REVISE THE TABLE AND LEGAL HAS FINAL REVIEW.

PERFECT. WHAT A BEAUTIFUL MOTION.

I'LL SECOND THAT. IT'S SUCH A GOOD MOTION.

WE HAVE A SECOND.

ALL RIGHT.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION OTHER THAN IT IS A GREAT MOTION.

ALL RIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. ALL RIGHT.

THAT PASSES. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

GREAT DISCUSSION ON THAT ITEM.

ITEM? YES.

POINT OF CLARITY, IF I MAY, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A WORKSHOP SOMETIME IN FEBRUARY TO REVISIT THIS.

OR DO WE JUST WANT TO MOVE ON WHAT'S BEEN APPROVED, SEE HOW IT TREATS US AND REEVALUATE AS NECESSARY.

I THINK IF ANYTHING THAT WE DO, I THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO, TO LEARN OR GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

I THINK AT SOME POINT IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR US TO REVIEW THAT.

AND I THINK THAT FEBRUARY TIME FRAME SEEMS REASONABLE, WHERE WE COULD AT LEAST HAVE A PRESENTATION, WHETHER IT'S AT COUNCIL OR A WORKSHOP, JUST TO STAY ON TOP OF THAT. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. ITEM FIVE CONSIDER SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX B, ZONING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

[5. CONSIDER SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX “B,” “ZONING” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS TO GRANT A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A TATTOO SHOP IN A C-1A, DECATUR SQUARE BUSINESS DISTRICT, ON APPROXIMATELY 0.06 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 104 N. TRINITY STREET. (SPECIFIC USE PERMIT APPLICATION 2024-10—MR. BRENDAN MITCHELL). (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL, 5-0, COMMISSIONER HICKS ABSENT.) SUP2024-10 ORDINANCE 2024-12-37]

CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS, TO GRANT SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW TATTOO SHOP AND AC ONE A NO CHANGES TO ITEM FIVE.

SINCE THE LAST TIME YOU SAW IT AND THE TEAM STANDING BY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY COUNCIL? I HAVE NO QUESTIONS.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SUP 2024-10 AND ORDINANCE 2024-1237.

SECOND, I GOT IT.

THAT'S ME. OKAY, HE'S GOT IT.

ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

I OPPOSED SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT, THAT ITEM PASSES ITEM SIX.

[6. CONSIDER SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX “B,” “ZONING” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS TO GRANT A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW PERMANENT MAKEUP APPLICATION, AS A SECONDARY USE, AND A TATTOO SHOP IN A C-1A, DECATUR SQUARE BUSINESS DISTRICT, ON APPROXIMATELY 0.523 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 206 N. STATE STREET, SUITE 205. (SPECIFIC USE PERMIT APPLICATION 2024-11—MS. PAIZLEE HENRY, ON BEHALF OF INKED BY PAIZ) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL, 5-0, COMMISSIONER HICKS ABSENT.) SUP2024-11 ORDINANCE 2024-12-38]

CONSIDER SECOND READING AND ORDINANCE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX B, ZONING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

CITY DECATUR TEXAS TO GRANT A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW PERMANENT MAKEUP APPLICATIONS AS A SECONDARY USE AT A TATTOO SHOP IN A C-1, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

NO CHANGES TO ITEM SIX.

TEAMS STANDING BY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM.

[00:45:01]

COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS? LOOK FOR A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SUP 2024-12 ORDINANCE 2024-1237.

SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION, EDDIE.

DID YOU MEAN 2024-1238.

DID I SAY SOMETHING DIFFERENT? SO, 37 MAKES IT 3738.

GOOD, GOOD. POINT OF CLARITY.

SO, FIRST AND SECOND, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES.

ITEM SEVEN.

[7. CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS REGARDING PARTICIPATION IN A REGIONAL WATER COALITION AND PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR THE CREATION OF A WATER DISTRICT. ]

CONSIDER OR TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS, REGARDING A PARTICIPATION IN A REGIONAL WATER COALITION AND PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR THE CREATION OF A WATER DISTRICT.

MAYOR, I'M HAPPY TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM, EVEN THOUGH I THINK YOU MIGHT BE MORE PREPARED THAN I.

THIS IS OUR CONTINUED EFFORTS TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND GOOD PARTNERS IN THE REGIONAL EFFORTS TOWARDS FINDING VIABLE SOLUTIONS FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER FOR OUR PARTNERS, PARTICULARLY IN THE SOUTH END OF THE COUNTY.

THEY DESIRE TO CREATE A REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSES OF IMPROVING SURFACE OR GROUNDWATER OPTIONS, AND ALSO WAYS TO TREAT WASTEWATER.

SO THIS WOULD JUST BE A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT AS THEIR AS THEIR NEIGHBOR.

WE RECOGNIZE THAT WATER IS A CRITICAL RESOURCE, AND WE WANT TO BE A GOOD PARTNER.

THIS WILL ACCOMPANY THE LEGISLATION THAT THEY HAVE MOVING FORWARD THIS YEAR.

WELL SAID. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS, REGARDING PARTICIPATION IN A REGIONAL WATER COALITION AND PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE CREATION OF A WATER DISTRICT. SECOND.

SO WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND, A MOTION.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYR. OPPOSED SAME SIGN.