[00:00:08]
          ALL RIGHT. WELL, WELCOME, EVERYBODY, TO OUR FIRST JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING WITH THE CHARTER
REVIEW COMMITTEE. 
          [1. DISCUSS AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF DECATUR CHARTER. ]
I SHOW THE CITY COUNCIL HAVING A QUORUM, AND WE'VE REACHED OUR APPOINTED MEETING TIME AT
SIX. 
          I'M MIKE MCQUISTON, THE MAYOR OF DECATUR, AND I'LL BRING THE CITY COUNCIL PORTION TO
ORDER. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHRIS FAUBUS CHAIR OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. 
          I SEE THAT WE HAVE A QUORUM OF OUR COMMITTEE HERE AS WELL,
AND I'LL CALL OUR MEETING TO ORDER AND PASS THE BATON BACK TO YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. EXCELLENT. IF ABLE, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STAND AND JOIN ME IN A MOMENT OF
SILENCE. 
          AND IF YOU WOULD FACE THE FLAG AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE,
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. 
          ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. 
          THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WELL, REALLY APPRECIATE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE GETTING
TOGETHER AND GETTING US TO THIS PLACE. LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU REGARDING THE REVIEW. 
          SO, CHRIS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. 
          CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THE MEMBERS OF OUR
CHARTER COMMISSION. 
          WE HAD A GREAT MIX OF FOLKS WHO HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT QUALITIES TO THEM. 
          WE HAVE A MIX OF PEOPLE WHO'VE LIVED HERE ALL OUR LIVES,
AND SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE VERY NEW TO THE AREA. 
          WE'VE HAD SOME FOLKS WHO ARE USED TO SMALL TOWN AND MIDDLE SIZED LIFE,
AND WE'VE HAD SOME FOLKS WHO WORKED FOR AND MOVED HERE FROM SOUTHLAKE AND VERY LARGE COMMUNITIES. AND SO THAT WIDE PERSPECTIVE, I THINK,
WAS VERY GOOD FOR THE COMMITTEE. 
          SO I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE ISAAC GROVE, AMANDA CROSS,
DANNY CROSS, SHELBY HICKS, BRAD MORGAN, VICE CHAIR, KASEY NARCISSE, CHANCE OVERTON. AND WITH THAT,
I'LL BEGIN OUR REVIEW OF THE BULLET POINTS THAT WE HAVE HERE FOR THE REVIEW. SO FIRST OFF, THERE ARE A LOT OF MINOR CORRECTIONS THAT WE MADE ARE NOT
SUBSTANTIVE. 
          SO WE'VE CORRECTED THINGS SUCH AS GRAMMAR PUNCTUATION,
SENTENCE STRUCTURE. 
          AND BUT THEN WE HAVE MORE SUBSTANTIVE UPDATES,
WHICH WOULD BE THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE THE SUBJECT OF THE ELECTION. 
          SO SOME OF THE THINGS WE CHANGED AND CORRECTED WOULD BE CAPITALIZATION,
PUNCTUATION, GRAMMAR, AND SENTENCE STRUCTURE. WE TRIED TO HARMONIZE ANY CONFLICTING SECTIONS THAT WE HAD REMOVE
REFERENCES TO OUTDATED POSITION TITLES. 
          OBVIOUSLY, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES IN THE LAW. STATE WIDE,
THAT AFFECT WHAT CITY CAN AND CAN'T DO THAT WE'VE TRIED TO RECOGNIZE AND HANDLE BOTH PROSPECTIVELY AND PRESCRIPTIVE. WE HAVE ALSO REMOVED REFERENCES TO SPECIFIC STATE LAWS. 
          WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THIS DOCUMENT MORE OF A LIVING,
BREATHING THING WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND AMEND IT AS OFTEN. 
          CERTAINLY IT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED PERIODICALLY. 
          BUT AS LONG AS WE'RE NOT PAINTING OURSELVES IN A CORNER BY REFERENCING A SPECIFIC LAW THAT
MAY GET CHANGED OR RENUMBERED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE'VE TRIED TO HANDLE THAT IN A WAY THAT CHANGES IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION OR STATE CODES
WILL NOT AFFECT THE VALIDITY OF WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE TODAY OR WOULD POTENTIALLY DO. AND THEN THE THIRD THING WE'VE TRIED TO HARMONIZE SECTIONS THAT
WERE IN CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW. 
          WE'VE ADDED CLAUSES TO NOTE THAT IF THERE IS ANY CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW,
THAT THE STATE LAW WOULD PREVAIL. 
          AND THAT'S A BURGEONING ISSUE, AS YOU'RE ALL WELL FAMILIAR WITH. 
          WE'VE ALSO REMOVED REFERENCES AND ADJUSTED THEM,
THAT WOULD INDICATE THAT THE CHARTER POST 2025 ELECTION IS THE ORIGINAL CHARTER. 
          SO WE HAD TO REMOVE SOME OF THE LANGUAGE FROM THE ORIGINAL ONE TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. 
          ONE OF THE BIGGER ISSUES THAT WE ADDRESSED BASED ON FEEDBACK WE GOT FROM A VARIETY OF
SOURCES, WAS COUNCIL TERMS. THE FEELING BEING THAT TWO YEARS IS TOO SHORT OF A TERM FROM THE
STANDPOINT OF SOME PEOPLE FELT LIKE THAT. AFTER YOU'VE BEEN ELECTED. 
          BEFORE YOU KNOW IT, AND ABOUT THE TIME YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING,
IT'S TIME TO RUN AGAIN, AND YOU SPEND ALL YOUR TIME WITH THE ELECTION. SO IT'S CHANGING TO 
          [00:05:03]
A THREE YEAR TERM SEEMED TO BE ADVISABLE. WE LOOKED AT LONGER ONES,
AND WE THINK WE ALL AGREED ON THREE YEARS BEING THE OPTIMAL TERM LENGTH AT THIS POINT. 
          SO OUR NEXT TASK, AND ALSO AN IDEA THAT WAS FLOATED AROUND AND WE THOUGHT WAS A GOOD ONE,
WOULD BE TO TRY TO STAGGER THE ELECTION TERMS, MUCH LIKE THE US SENATE, SO THAT NOT EVERYONE IS GOING OFF AT THE SAME TIME,
THAT WE HAVE A LITTLE CONTINUITY OF LEADERSHIP AND EXPERIENCE, AND ALSO HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE'VE CREATED AN INTEREST IN THE ELECTION EVERY YEAR
BECAUSE THERE'LL BE A MUNICIPAL ELECTION EVERY YEAR UNDER THIS SETUP. 
          AND SO THE WAY WE'VE DONE THAT IS TO MAKE IT WHERE AS THESE THREE YEAR TERMS COME INTO
PLAY EVERY YEAR, EITHER ONE OF THE AT-LARGE PLACES OR THE MAYOR,
ALL THREE RACES AFFECT THE WHOLE CITY, SO PRESUMABLY WOULD GENERATE INTEREST IN ALL THE CITIZENS TO COME OUT AND VOTE. WHEREAS IF WE HAD ANOTHER ELECTION THAT WAS JUST LIMITED TO
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE SMALLER PLACES THAT DOESN'T GO ACROSS THE WHOLE CITY,
WELL, THEN SOME PARTS OF THE CITY WOULD SAY, OH, I DON'T NEED TO SHOW UP FOR THIS ELECTION ANYWAY,
SO I DON'T CARE. SO WE'VE GOT IN THIS SYSTEM WE'VE CHANGED THE TERM LENGTH AND IT TOOK US A LITTLE WHILE MATHEMATICALLY AND SCHEME WISE,
TO COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT DOESN'T CUT ANYONE'S TERM SHORT TO ONE YEAR FOR ANY REASON. BUT OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS,
THE TERMS WILL EITHER BE 2 OR 3 YEARS. 
          AND SO EVENTUALLY, EVERY TWO YEARS, THERE'LL BE ANOTHER TWO OFFICES UP FOR A THREE YEAR
TERM. 
          AND WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE COME UP WITH A GOOD PLAN FOR THAT. 
          WE ALSO HAVE ADJUSTED THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE CANDIDATES FOR MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER
TO CLARIFY. 
          A CANDIDATE MUST BE 20 YEARS OLD ON THE DATE OF THE ELECTION,
AND THAT NO CANDIDATE MAY BE IN ARREARS IN PAYMENT OF TAXES OR OTHER LIABILITIES THAT ARE DUE TO THE CITY. FURTHER, WE HAVE CLARIFIED THE DUTIES OF MAYOR TO REMOVE SOME OUTDATED
POWERS AND TO FOLLOW STATE LAW AS FAR AS THE MAYORAL DUTIES GO. ANOTHER ITEM WE ADDRESSED WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY
THE VOTING THRESHOLD OF A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FILLING OF A VACANCY ON THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE ALSO ADDED THE MAYOR AND THAT THE MAYOR OR THE CITY COUNCIL,
CITY ATTORNEY, TO THE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO CAN PLACE AN ITEM ON A CITY COUNCIL AGENDA, BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY THE CASE. WE'VE ALSO ADDED PUBLICATION,
I'M SORRY. 
          WE'VE ALSO ADDED PROVISIONS TO ALLOW ELECTRONIC PUBLICATIONS TO THE LIST FOR PUBLICATION
MECHANISMS WHEN PUBLICATION IS REQUIRED UNDER THE CHARTER OR OTHER LAW. WE'VE ADJUSTED THE TERM OF OFFICE FOR MUNICIPAL JUDGE TO BE THE MINIMUM
ALLOWABLE TERM PROVIDED BY STATE LAW, BECAUSE THAT'S A NUMBER THAT IS FLUCTUATED BY STATUTE FROM TIME TO TIME. 
          AND THAT WAY WE'RE GOING TO DO WHATEVER THE STATE SAYS IS THE MAX AND NOT BE WORRYING
ABOUT THAT CHANGED BY THE LEGISLATURE. 
          WE'VE ALSO CHANGED AS FAR AS THE MUNICIPAL COURT GOES. 
          THE COURT CLERK MUST KEEP A COPY OF THE TRIAL IF THERE'S A TRIAL IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT. 
          ORIGINALLY, IT WAS 21 DAYS, AND THIS NOW IS NOW UP TO 120 DAYS TO ALLOW FOR THE APPELLATE
TIMETABLE TO BE COMPLIED WITH. 
          WE HAVE CLEARED, WE'VE ALSO CLARIFIED THE CITY ATTORNEY'S DUTIES TO INCLUDE THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S REPRESENTATION OF THE CITY IN ALL FORESEEN, CONTEMPLATED OR PENDING LITIGATION AND THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S DUTIES AND RIGHTS TO
ACCESS AND REVIEW EVIDENCE AND INTERVIEW WITNESSES IN THOSE TYPE SITUATIONS. FURTHER, WE CLARIFIED THAT THE CITY MAY MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR ANY ELEMENTS
NECESSARY FOR THE CONDUCT, THE CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS, INCLUDING SECURING ELECTION JUDGES AND COVERING THE EXPENSES FOR
HOLDING ELECTIONS THROUGHOUT ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY SUCH AS WISE COUNTY. 
          AND THAT WILL SAVE THE CITY SOME TROUBLE THERE. 
          FURTHER, WE'VE CLARIFIED THAT THE CANDIDATE FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE SHALL MAINTAIN THE
QUALIFICATIONS FOR THAT OFFICE CONSISTENTLY FROM THE DATE THEY FILE THEIR APPLICATION TO RUN FOR OFFICE THROUGH THE ELECTION. SO THAT WOULD KEEP SOMEONE FROM WHO'S QUALIFIED WHEN
THEY FILE THEIR APPLICATION, BUT LATER BECOMES DISQUALIFIED FROM BEING ABLE TO BE ELECTED. 
          FURTHER, AND THIS ONE SAYS THAT WE'RE CLARIFIED IF A RECALL ELECTION RESULTS IN A TIE
VOTE. 
          THE RECALL PETITION DID NOT PASS WITH A MAJORITY OF VOTES CAST,
AND ELECTED OFFICIALS SHALL CONTINUE IN OFFICE, SO WE HAVE TO HAVE A MAJORITY TO REMOVE SOMEONE IN ORDER TO HAVE THE RECALL ELECTION. 
          I'M SORRY. FURTHER, FOR LIABILITY PURPOSES, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO REQUIRE
THAT ALL EMPLOYEES WHO HANDLE MONEY WOULD EXECUTE 
          [00:10:09]
SURETY BONDS. AND WE ALSO INCORPORATED A 2010 ORDINANCE THAT CREATED THE DECATUR MUNICIPAL
COURT OF RECORD INTO THIS DOCUMENT. WE ADDED A ANTI NEPOTISM PROVISION AND WE ADDED A DEFINITION
SECTION. 
          AND WE ALSO OUTLINED AND ADDED A SECTION CONCERNING THE POSITION AND DUTIES OF THE CITY
SECRETARY. 
          AND IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE BRING THEM UP NOW. 
          ALL RIGHT, COUNSEL, WHAT KIND OF QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE REGARDING THE CHANGES OR COMMENTS? WHAT IS THE POLICY THAT WAS CHANGED? THERE WASN'T ONE. 
          SO WHAT IS THE NEW POLICY? BECAUSE I DIDN'T BRING MY GLASSES AND I WAS TRYING TO READ IN
THE TRUCK AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. 
          THAT'S OKAY. WHAT? PAGE NINE. HAVE WE NOT BEEN FOLLOWING ALONG? WELL, I KNOW WHAT NEPOTISM IS, BUT IT'S LIKE,
WHAT IS THE POLICY RIGHT HERE? SO WHAT WAS THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION LOOKED AT EXAMPLES FROM A LOT OF
CHARTERS IN NORTH TEXAS AND PROBABLY OUTSIDE OF NORTH TEXAS TOO. 
          AND WHAT THEY LIKED WAS A MELDING OF TWO OF THE PROVISIONS THAT THEY STUDIED. 
          AND SO THIS IS HOW IT BECAME TEXT, A PROPOSED TEXT. 
          AND ALSO, BRAD MORGAN HAD SOME GOOD IDEAS ABOUT SPECIFYING WHAT THE PARTICULAR WORDS THAT
MIGHT NOT BE EASILY UNDERSTANDABLE TO SPECIFY WHAT THEY MEAN IN THERE. SO THE WAY THIS CAME OUT FOR DECATUR IS NO PERSON RELATED
WITHIN THE SECOND DEGREE OF AFFINITY BY MARRIAGE, OR WITHIN THE THIRD DEGREE OF CONSANGUINITY BY BLOOD TO THE MAYOR OR ANY CITY COUNCIL
MEMBER, OR THE CITY MANAGER SHALL BE EMPLOYED BY OR CONTRACTED WITH THE CITY. 
          THIS PROHIBITION SHALL NOT APPLY TO A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN CONTINUOUSLY EMPLOYED BY THE
CITY FOR TWO OR MORE YEARS PRIOR TO THE ELECTION OF THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, OR THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY MANAGER TO WHOM THE EMPLOYER
CONTRACTOR IS SO RELATED. 
          CORRECT. OR IF THIS. WHICH ISN'T UNCOMMON IN A LOT OF CITIES. 
          IT'S VERY, THIS PROVISION IS COMMON. YES. 
          WOULD IT ALSO BE REVERSED IF SOMEBODY WAS APPLYING FOR COUNCIL AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS
AND THE CITY IT GOING FORWARD? THEY WOULD, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A FAMILY DECISION OF IF IF THIS PROVISION WAS GOING TO
PROHIBIT ONE OR THE OTHER, THE FAMILY WOULD DECIDE WHAT TO DO. OKAY. SO I GUESS THE PERSON RUNNING FOR COUNCIL COULD
FORCE THEIR HAND. I'LL CLARIFY THAT. SO IN RESPONSE TO THAT,
IF ONE OR THE ONLY ONE OR THE OTHER, A COUNCIL MEMBER OR AN EMPLOYEE, ONLY ONE PERSON COULD HOLD ONE OF THOSE POSITIONS UNDER
THIS PROVISION, THEN I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE A FAMILY DISCUSSION. 
          IS THIS EMPLOYEE GOING TO GO BE EMPLOYED ELSEWHERE AND THE PERSON GOING TO RUN FOR THE
SEAT ON THE COUNCIL OR NOT? BUT THEN I WAS KIND OF ADDING IN JEST, BUT ALSO IN REALITY THAT I GUESS THE COUNCIL MEMBER
COULD FORCE THE EMPLOYEE'S HAND BY RUNNING, BECAUSE IN THAT CASE,
THEN THE EMPLOYEE COULDN'T BE EMPLOYED. 
          IF ELECTED. IF ELECTED. YEAH. THEN THAT'D BE FUN THANKSGIVING DISCUSSION. 
          WHO DID YOU VOTE FOR? EXACTLY. [LAUGHTER] YES. 
          IN THE THOUGHT PROCESS HERE, I THINK, IS THAT WE'VE KIND OF EVOLVED FROM SMALL TOWN CITY,
WHERE WE ALMOST HAVE TO EMPLOY PEOPLE WHO ARE RELATED TO PEOPLE ON THE COUNCIL SOONER OR LATER TO NOW, WE'RE BIG ENOUGH WHERE THAT SHOULDN'T OCCUR TOO OFTEN,
AND IT CERTAINLY WASN'T GOING TO PREJUDICE ANYBODY WHO'S ALREADY IN THAT POSITION. YEAH, I DO KNOW THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION. 
          [00:15:02]
BEING THE HUMAN RESOURCE PERSON OVER TO ORGANIZATIONS IN DECATUR,
TEXAS, THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION THAT'S COME UP BECAUSE SOMETIMES THE POOL OF APPLICANTS COMES DOWN TO THERE WASN'T ANYBODY BETTER QUALIFIED THAN THIS
INDIVIDUAL. 
          AND HERE YOU ARE. ONE PLACE HAD VERY SIMILAR PROCESSES IDENTIFIED THROUGH THROUGH MARRIAGE
OR THROUGH THREE ITERATIONS BY BLOOD. AND THEN THE OTHER WAS A REVIEW PROCESS THAT WAS CONDUCTED BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY,
IT REALLY KIND OF CAME DOWN TO, IF YOU'RE A LICENSED INDIVIDUAL. 
          THEY MEET THOSE LICENSES. I MEAN, THERE IS CERTAIN CRITERIA THAT YOU HAVE TO MEET. 
          SO HOPEFULLY THEY MEET ALL THOSE CRITERIAS AND IT WOULDN'T BE PROHIBITED BY THAT
RELATIONSHIP. 
          BUT IT'S AN THERE'S OBVIOUSLY SOME PROS AND CONS. 
          BUT I MEAN THAT'S A REALLY YOU ALWAYS WANT TO SAFEGUARD YOURSELF. 
          CAN WE STEP BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL ELECTION. 
          SO GOING TO A THREE YEAR TERM, IS THERE A LIMIT ON HOW MANY TERMS? SO CURRENTLY IT'S FOUR TERMS FOR TWO YEARS PIECE. 
          I BELIEVE IT SAYS IN THE DOCUMENT THREE YEARS THE THREE TERMS. THREE TERMS NINE YEARS INSTEAD OF EIGHT YEARS. 
          RIGHT. YES. WE'VE ADDRESSED ALSO THE PERMUTATION OF SOMEONE WHO'S ON THE COUNCIL FOR
PARTIAL TWO YEAR TERMS AND THREE YEAR TERMS. SO WE'VE TRIED TO ADDRESS EVERY SCENARIO, BUT YOUR LIMIT IS EITHER THE FOUR TWO YEAR
TERMS, THREE THREE YEAR TERMS, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF THAT EXCEEDS THE 18 YEARS TOTAL. 
          AND THAT'S IN THAT PROVISION RIGHT AFTER THE THE TERM LIMITS PROVISIONS WHERE DESCRIBES
ALL THAT. 
          IF I COULD CHRIS FORBES REALLY DID AN EXTRAORDINARY JOB WITH THIS. 
          THIS WAS NOT EASY. AND HE WORKED THROUGH THIS SEVERAL TIMES AND TOOK IN ADDITIONAL GOOD
IDEAS AND REWORKED IT. 
          AND I JUST WANT YOU ALL TO KNOW HOW MUCH REALLY EFFORT AND BRAINPOWER HE PUT INTO THIS TO
MAKE THIS ALL WORK OUT. 
          IT WAS REALLY WONDERFUL. WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS? SO, MR. FORBES AND ESTEEMED GUEST. SO FOR THE PAST TWO CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS,
WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY COMPETITION. 
          SO WHAT IS THE PRECIPICE OR WHAT IS THE THOUGHT PROCESS ON THAT IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY
WILLING TO SERVE BUT THEY'VE TERMED OUT, BUT NOBODY STEPPED UP TO RUN AGAINST THEM OR STEPPED UP TO RUN AT ALL. 
          WELL, YOU WOULD STILL. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. I MEAN,
NOTHING WOULD CHANGE. 
          AND IF THERE'S ONLY ONE CANDIDATE, THEN YOU STILL HAVE THAT SITUATION. 
          BUT IF THEY'RE TERMED OUT, THEN YOU'VE TERMED OUT. 
          I'M ALWAYS WELCOME TO ATTEND THE MEETING IN PUBLIC. WHAT OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? HOW ABOUT FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE? WHAT WERE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU,
WHAT WERE SOME OF THE DISCUSSION POINTS THAT YOU HAD ON SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT COME TO MIND? AND IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, JUST PRESS YOUR MIC SO IT TURNS GREEN. 
          THE MIC CLOSEST TO YOU, LIKE AMANDA AND I CAN SHARE,
FOR EXAMPLE, AND SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WITH THE COUNCIL. 
          SO I'LL SHARE. THERE WE GO. SO I'M CATHY, A LOT OF OUR DISCUSSION JUST FOCUSED ON FUTURE
PROOFING AND TRYING TO REMOVE, LIKE A LOT OF OUR DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT THE WORDING,
HOW CAN WE MAKE SURE WE'RE REFERENCING THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE LONG TERM, NOT BOXES INTO CORNERS? AND REALLY JUST ENSURING THAT THE CURRENT STRUCTURE DOESN'T LIMIT
US OR MAKE US COME BACK FOR THINGS JUST BECAUSE STATE LAW MODIFIED AT LEGISLATURE. 
          [00:20:01]
SO WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME GOING LINE BY LINE BY LINE,
JUST MAKING SURE THAT EVERYTHING COULD WITHSTAND THE CHANGES THAT ARE COMING IN THE FUTURE. SPECIALLY LIKE WE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT ELECTRONIC POSTING OR WHAT'S IT
GOING TO LOOK LIKE AS WE MOVE FORWARD INTO A LARGER CITY? PERFECT. YEAH. AGAIN, A WELL THOUGHT OUT. I APPRECIATE THAT THOUGHT PROCESS BECAUSE,
YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING MORE FRUSTRATING THAT YOU WORK SO HARD ON A ON A POLICY AND YOU MISS
SOMETHING BECAUSE IF WE JUST EASILY HAD THIS ITEM, THIS IS YOU KNOW, STATE LAW IS THE DIFFERENT,
YOU KNOW, WHERE WE DEFER TO ANYTHING ELSE THAT COMES TO MIND. 
          ANOTHER THING THAT'S NOT REALLY EXPLICITLY STATED HERE,
BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO ADVISE THE COUNCIL AND STAFF TO TO MAKE SOME SORT OF NOTE ON, YOU KNOW, THIS ORIGINALLY WAS DONE IN 2002. WE'RE HERE IN 2025. 
          THIS IS THE FIRST REVIEW OF THE CHARTER THAT WE'VE HAD. 
          AND SO I THINK WE AS A GROUP THOUGHT IT WOULD BE ADVISABLE FOR A POLICY TO COME UP WITH ON
YOUR PART TO SAY EVERY 5 OR 10 OR WHATEVER AMOUNT OF YEARS YOU DEEM BEST THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS
AGAIN AND NOT JUST WAIT UNTIL THE LIGHT BULB GOES OFF IN SOMEONE'S HEAD. 
          AT MY AGE AND RETENTION ABILITY, THE COUNCIL ELECTION THING WAS PROBLEMATIC AT FIRST FOR
ME. 
          WHEN I FIRST LOOKED AT THAT, I THOUGHT, MAN,
THIS IS. 
          THIS IS A PUZZLE. THIS IS A REAL PUZZLE BUT THANKS TO CHRIS AND PAM'S WORK IN OUR OTHER
EDITIONS, I THINK WE GOT IT FIGURED OUT. I HOPE WE DID ANYWAY. 
          BUT THAT TO ME WAS THAT WAS A STRUGGLE, A REAL STRUGGLE. 
          I WILL ECHO THIS. I BROUGHT THAT UP TO A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT GROUPS,
SOME OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, KIND OF REGARDING THAT PROCESS OF IF YOU START AS A COUNCIL PERSON AND YOU'RE ELECTED
EVERY TWO YEARS, THERE'S A CHANCE THAT MAYBE YOU ROLL OFF IN THAT TWO YEAR PERIOD. 
          BUT I COMMUNICATED THE THOUGHT OF, YOU KNOW,
WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR CHARTER REVIEWS, LOOKING AT GOING TO A THREE YEAR PERIOD AND TO A PERSON THEY ALL WERE LIKE, YEAH, IT FEELS LIKE YOU JUST LEARN EVERYTHING IN THAT FIRST
YEAR. 
          AND BY YEAR TWO IT'S LIKE, SO THE THIRD YEAR MADE A LOT OF SENSE TO EVERYBODY. 
          SO JUST TO SHARE THAT POINT WITH YOU, I ALSO LIKE THE BALANCE THAT YOU GUYS PUT OUT TO
HAVE A A CITYWIDE ELECTION EVERY YEAR FOR THAT THREE YEAR PERIOD AND SO YOU'RE CONSTANTLY HAVING THE
ENTIRETY OF THE CITY VOTING FOR COUNCIL. 
          IT WAS REALLY NEAT. SO AGAIN AND THEN THE PROCESS OF HOW DO YOU DO THE CHANGE MANAGEMENT
FROM WHERE WE ARE NOW TO GOING FORWARD. 
          AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WELL THOUGHT OUT AND YOU KNOW,
WHERE IT DOESN'T AFFECT ANY OF US AS IN OUR CURRENT PLACES. 
          SO. VERY NICE. WELL, I'LL GIVE CREDIT TO EDDIE. 
          THAT WAS HIS SUGGESTION TO US TO TRY TO COME UP WITH A WAY WHERE EACH ONE OF THOSE
ELECTIONS MATTERED. 
          VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? MAYBE BEFORE YOU TAKE THE FINAL OR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? CHRIS AND I WERE EMAILING LATE IN THE DAY TODAY,
AND THIS IS REALLY A QUESTION FOR CHARTER REVIEW, AND WE'RE NOT POSTED FOR ACTION. RIGHT. BUT CHRIS WAS RECALLING A CONVERSATION REGARDING
2.08 C, WHICH IS ON PAGE EIGHT OF THE CRC REVISED,
AND THERE WAS A DISCUSSION THAT BOTH CHRIS AND I RECALL,
BUT WE DON'T RECALL THE CONSENSUS THAT CAME OUT OF IT, IF ANY. SO THIS IS REGARDING THE FORFEITURE OF OFFICE. 
          AND THE PROVISION READS UPON AN AFFIRMATIVE THREE QUARTER VOTE OF THE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP. 
          BUT IF YOU RECALL CHRIS BROUGHT UP THE POINT THAT IF THE PERSON WHOSE OFFICE IS BEING
FORFEITED, THAT MAYBE THEY COULD BUY THAT LANGUAGE OF ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COUNCIL,
MAYBE THEY COULD STALL THAT VOTE BY NOT SHOWING UP. 
          AND DO OTHERS OF YOU REMEMBER THAT CONVERSATION? AND DID YOU INTEND TO TAKE OUT ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP OR,
TO MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL? 
          [00:25:07]
THEN I REMEMBER HAVING THIS CONVERSATION. AND SO IT WOULD REQUIRE FIVE PEOPLE TO VOTE
AFFIRMATIVE, AND IF WE HAVE THE SEVEN SEATS YOU STILL HAVE,
YOU HAVE ENOUGH WIGGLE ROOM EVEN IF THAT OTHER PERSON FAILED TO SHOW UP. 
          YES, IT WOULD BE ACTUALLY SIX BECAUSE THE THREE QUARTER MAKES IT FIVE POINT SOMETHING. 
          GOTCHA. AND THERE ARE NO POINT SOMETHINGS OF PEOPLE. 
          CORRECT. SO IT WOULD BE SIX VOTES OUT OF THE SEVEN. 
          SO IF THE, IF THE ONE WHO WAS BEING FORFEITED REFUSED TO VOTE,
IT COULD BE UNANIMOUS OF THOSE SIX AND IT WOULD STILL BE OF THE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP. BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE UNANIMOUS IN ORDER TO PASS. 
          RIGHT IN THAT INSTANCE. AND IF SOMEBODY DIDN'T SHOW UP,
IT WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BE VOTED ON. 
          SO IF YOU ONLY HAD SIX THERE THAT NIGHT, BECAUSE IT'S A THREE QUARTERS OF THE ENTIRE
COUNCIL, NOT JUST THE COUNCIL THAT'S PRESENT. RIGHT. AND I THINK THAT WAS AT THE HEART OF THIS
DISCUSSION THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION HAD. 
          SHOULD WE CHANGE THAT TO IT COULD STILL BE A THREE QUARTER VOTE. 
          OF THOSE PRESENT. THE LANGUAGE SAYS OF THE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP. 
          IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP HAS TO BE PRESENT. 
          BUT PERHAPS THAT'S THE POINT WHICH COULD BE FINE TUNED. 
          MEMBERSHIP. THAT WE COULD DO IT THAT WAY. IT COULD BE THAT WAY. 
          ARE YOU SAYING WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF ATTENDANCE? WELL, WE ARE IN THE DEFINITION SECTION GOING TO DEFINE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP BECAUSE IT SHOWS
UP SEVERAL TIMES IN THE CHARTER. 
          SO THAT'S ONE OF THE DEFINED TERMS. BUT I THINK THE ISSUE HERE IS COMING DOWN TO DOES THIS
MEAN THE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP HAS TO BE PRESENT, OR IS IT JUST THREE QUARTERS OF THE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO ALL BE
PRESENT, BUT AT A MINIMUM, IT'S GOT TO BE SIX. SO NOT TO MAKE IT MORE COMPLICATED,
BUT JUST KIND OF BACK UP. 
          SO FOR THE CHARTER, IT ALLOWS FOR SOMEBODY TO BE ONLINE TO VOTE. 
          SO I WOULD JUST MAKE SURE THAT'S PART OF THE QUORUM. 
          SO THAT WOULD BE A PART OF ATTENDANCE. YES. SO VERY GOOD. 
          SO THEN IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO HOW YOU WANT TO DO THAT MIX OF IS IT GOING TO REQUIRE SIX
VOTES OR IS IT THE THREE QUARTERS OF WHO'S AVAILABLE? YEAH. GOTCHA. SO CASSIE, DID YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER IMPRESSIONS ON THAT
DISCUSSION? FROM MY RECOLLECTION DURING THAT DISCUSSION,
WE TALKED ABOUT WANTING IT TO BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD, WE DON'T WANT ONE PERSON TO BE ABLE TO STALL THE VOTE. 
          WE DON'T WANT THE PERSON WHO IS IN JEOPARDY OF BEING REMOVED FROM THE COUNCIL TO HAVE THE
POWER, THEN TO ABSTAIN JUST BECAUSE YOU KNOW ONE OTHER PERSON IS NOT PRESENT THAT EVENING. 
          SO THE INTENTION OF OUR DISCUSSION WAS TO FIND A WAY TO ADJUST IT SO THAT THAT COULDN'T
HAPPEN. 
          BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE LANDED ON SPECIFIC LANGUAGE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT JUST YET. 
          OKAY, THAT RINGS TRUE FOR ME. OKAY. OKAY. SO WE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION HAS A
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULED FOR THE 22ND SO THAT ANY FEEDBACK THEY GOT FROM YOU HERE TONIGHT,
THEY COULD DISCUSS THAT AND ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS. 
          SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 28TH. 
          AND THEN IF YOU DECIDE TO CALL AN ELECTION FOR ANY OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS,
THAT ELECTION WOULD BE CALLED ON AUGUST 11TH. 
          SO IT COULD BE THAT THIS IS JUST ONE LITTLE LOOSE STRING THAT WE NEED TO TIE UP. 
          AND THAT COULD COME FORWARD TO YOU AT YOUR JULY 28TH MEETING ON THIS POINT. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE FROM COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT. 
          IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU GUYS WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE'RE AWARE OF? ANYONE ELSE ON THE COMMISSION HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? OKAY. I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL. ALL RIGHT. MR. MAYOR,
I JUST WANT TO TALK THROUGH TIMELINE, IF I MAY. 
          JUST ONE MOMENT. SURE. 
          OH, GOOD. DO YOU HAVE THE CLICKER? YES. THANK YOU CHRIS. 
          SO PAM HINTED TO THIS A MOMENT AGO. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL CLEAR. 
          SO HERE WE ARE TONIGHT, HAVING THIS DISCUSSION,
GAINING FEEDBACK. 
          [00:30:01]
PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 28TH, WHICH IS YOUR NEXT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING THAT IF WE
WE'RE IN A SPOT TO KEEP CARRYING ON, WE'LL CALL FOR THE ELECTION ON AUGUST 11TH AND CREATE BALLOT ITEMS FOR THE NOVEMBER
4TH ELECTION. 
          I JUST WANTED THIS TO BE BEFORE YOU AND JUST MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT
HOW WE MOVE FORWARD RELATIVE TO A TIMELINE BASED ON THE FEEDBACK TONIGHT. 
          SO IF THIS ENDS UP ON THE ELECTION, WELL, EACH ONE OF THESE THINGS WILL BE VOTED ON OR AS
A WHOLE, THE NEW DOCUMENT. SO THE GENERAL CORRECTIONS CAN BE VOTED ON IN ONE BALLOT ITEM. 
          BUT THERE ARE GOING TO BE NUMEROUS BALLOT ITEMS FOR THE SUBSTANTIVE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          AND THE CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE TO PUT ANY OF THESE,
OR THEY CAN SELECT THE ONES THAT THEY WANT TO PUT ON THE BALLOT OUT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS. SO YOU WILL ULTIMATELY DETERMINE WHAT AMOUNT OF BALLOT ITEMS GO ON AN
ELECTION. 
          OKAY. THIS THIS SORT OF THING WAS DISCUSSED BY THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION,
AND THEY WERE VERY COGNIZANT OF NOT OVERLOADING THE VOTERS WITH A LONG LIST. 
          BUT THE POINT WAS MADE, AND I'M SORRY, I CAN'T RECALL WHO WHO MADE THE POINT BUT AFTER,
I THINK IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN SHELBY, AFTER THIS LONG OF TIME BETWEEN THE INCEPTION OF THE CHARTER TO NOW,
THIS IS NOT AN UNREASONABLE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? CITY MANAGER? NO, SIR. 
          THANK YOU. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. WELL, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS,
I WILL ADJOURN THIS WORKSHOP FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AT 06:31 BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT. AND I WILL DO LIKEWISE FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK. 
          THANK YOU GUYS. ALL RIGHT. I WILL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE 
          [CALL TO ORDER ]
REGULAR MEETING TO ORDER AT THE CONCLUSION OF OUR WORKSHOP. 
          WE STILL HAVE A QUORUM AND MY NAME IS MIKE MCQUISTON MAYOR OF DECATUR. 
          AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND START ON OUR FIRST ITEM. 
          ITEM ONE IS CITIZEN COMMENTS. DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP? SUSIE. ALL RIGHT. ITEM TWO IS DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A PROCEDURE
FOR INFILL. 
          [2. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A PROCEDURE FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT. ]
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. CITY MANAGER. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH, RHONDA. IF YOU'LL PUT ITEM TWO OF THEIR FORCE FROM THE PACKET. 
          SO, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR PACKET,
YOU'LL SEE A DRAFT PROCEDURE FOR THE PURPOSES OF INFILL SPECIFIC TO RESIDENTIAL. 
          AND IF YOU'LL RECALL, WHEN WE WALKED THROUGH THE CHANGES TO THE LOT SIZES AND WHEN WE
WALKED THROUGH CARPORT SCENARIOS AND OFF STREET PARKING, AND THERE'S VARIOUS SCENARIOS WE'VE WALKED THROUGH OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. 
          THEY KIND OF POINTED US TO A TOOL THAT WE NEEDED TO HELP INFILL OTHERWISE VACANT OR
UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTIES OR LOTS INSIDE THE CITY OF DECATUR. 
          AND SO AS WE MADE THE CHANGE ON MINIMUM LOT SIZES,
STAFF GOT TO WORK WITH AN INFILL PROCEDURE. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BRINGING FOR YOU TONIGHT. SO THE PURPOSE HERE IS TO ESTABLISH AND
PROMOTE RESIDENTIAL INFILL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF DECATUR. AND THE GOAL IS TO REVITALIZE UNDERUTILIZED,
VACANT OR BLIGHTED PROPERTIES, REDUCE SPRAWL, ENHANCE NEIGHBORHOOD ESTHETICS, RESTORE PROPERTIES TO THE TAX ROLL,
AND SUPPORT SUSTAINABLE GROWTH ALIGNED WITH THE CITY'S HISTORICAL AND ECONOMIC VISIONS. 
          SO YOU GET INTO THE VARIOUS SECTIONS HERE. SECTION TWO HAS DEFINITIONS AND I'M JUST GOING
TO COVER THE DEFINITION OF AN INFILL LOT, A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED WITHIN A FULLY OR PARTIALLY DEVELOPED AREA,
CURRENTLY VACANT OR UNDERUTILIZED, WITH ACCESS TO CITY UTILITIES ON SITE OR WITHIN 300 LINEAR FEET. 
          THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER DEFINITIONS THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL,
DEPENDING ON THE SCENARIO THAT COME INSIDE OF USING THIS POLICY. 
          SECTION THREE TALKS ABOUT ELIGIBLE CRITERIA. THE BIGGEST ITEM THERE ON SECTION THREE IS
THAT IT'S A RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENT OF NOT LESS THAN $50,000 TO QUALIFY FOR THESE INCENTIVES FOR THE INFILL TOOLKIT OR INFILL PROCEDURE. 
          AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE ASKING EVERYONE TO COMPLY WITH OUR EXISTING CODES AND THAT SORT
OF THING. 
          SECTION FOUR TALKS ABOUT SOME OF THE TOOLS THAT MAY BE UTILIZED HERE. 
          AND IF YOU APPROVE THIS POLICY TONIGHT, THEY WOULD BE AT MY DISCRETION,
SO WE WOULD USE THIS PROCEDURE FOR STAFF TO REFLECT BACK TO THE POLICY. 
          [00:35:04]
IF THERE'S ANY QUESTION ABOUT IF THE PROJECT QUALIFIES ON THE POLICY. 
          WE WOULD HOPE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS INTERNALLY. 
          SO IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION FOUR ITEM A THAT TALKS ABOUT FINANCIAL INCENTIVE,
LOOKING TO WAIVE UP TO 50% FOR QUALIFYING INFILL LOTS ON THEIR PERMIT AND INSPECTION FEES, AND THAT WOULD BE IN THE FORM OF A REIMBURSEMENT,
SO THEY, A PROPERTY OWNER, MAY ELECT TO BUY A VACANT PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT QUALIFIES,
IT'S WITHIN CITY INFRASTRUCTURE, IT SITS ON A RESIDENTIAL STREET. THEY BRING THE CORRECT PLANS. 
          THEY FOLLOW THE RIGHT CODES AND ORDINANCES. THEY PAY ALL OF THEIR FEES. 
          AND AT THE MOMENT THAT STAFF SAYS THIS, THE STRUCTURE IS READY TO BE OCCUPIED. 
          THEN WE WOULD WORK THROUGH A REIMBURSEMENT AMOUNT FOR THAT PROPERTY. 
          THAT'S GOOD. YOU SEE ALSO AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE,
I'M ON PAGE TWO. 
          IF YOU'RE FOLLOWING ALONG SALES TAX REBATE UP TO 50% SALES TAX REBATE ON LOCALLY PURCHASED
BUILDING MATERIALS, THAT WOULD BE THE CITY PORTIONS ONLY, THE CITY PORTION ONLY,
AND THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY OBVIOUSLY, THE ATTORNEY AND STAFF. AND THE IDEA THERE WAS THAT AS THESE INFILL PROPERTIES BEGIN TO
COME TO LIFE, THOSE FOLKS ARE BUYING THEIR MATERIALS HERE LOCALLY IN DECATUR KEEPING THE BUSINESS HERE. 
          MOVING ON. REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY JUST ALLOWING FOR A MINIMUM LOT SIZE VARIANCE,
AS SMALL AS 3500 SQUARE FOOT MAY BE CONSIDERED WITH CONTEXTUAL COMPATIBILITY AS DEFINED HEREIN. WE'VE THOUGHT THROUGH THAT A LOT. 
          YOU KNOW, ALL THE PROPERTIES IN THE IMMEDIATE DOWNTOWN AREA,
THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE QUITE TIGHT. 
          THAT COMES FROM BEING AN OLD BUT GROWING AND MATURING CITY. 
          AND THAT SAME DOWNTOWN AREA WITHIN 5 TO 6 BLOCKS OF THIS BUILDING IN ANY DIRECTION,
THERE ARE DOZENS OF PROPERTIES THAT COULD THAT COULD REALLY STAND TO BE RAISED AND, OR REPURPOSED. 
          AND I THINK THIS TOOL COULD BE VERY HELPFUL FOR FOLKS THAT ARE LOOKING TO BEAUTIFY OR
REPURPOSE PROPERTIES HERE IN THE IMMEDIATE DOWNTOWN AREA, OR REALLY ANYWHERE ACROSS THE CITY. THERE'S SOME OTHER REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY,
SETBACK VARIANTS OR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, OFF STREET PARKING REDUCTIONS. AND WE GAVE YOU A SCENARIO WHERE THIS PROCEDURE WOULD ALLOW
FOR STAFF TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY WHEN DEALING WITH THESE LOTS THAT WE'VE LABELED OFF THE TOP AS INFILL ITEM C, STREAMLINED PROCESS,
WORKING TO FAST TRACK APPLICATIONS AND PERMIT REVIEWING. FOR THOSE LISTENING AND THOSE WHO JUST MAY NOT KNOW,
WE ALREADY, STAFF HAS DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB OF OFFERING DESIGN STUDIOS. 
          I GIVE FULL CREDIT TO LISA AND WAYNE ON THAT. 
          THEY HAVE A ONCE A WEEK OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE WHO'S INTERESTED IN DOING A PROJECT,
WHETHER IT'S INFILL OR OTHERWISE, TO SCHEDULE SOME TIME TO COME IN AND ASK ALL THEIR QUESTIONS AND HOPEFULLY GET ALL THEIR
ANSWERS, OR AT LEAST LEAVE WITH HOMEWORK FOR BOTH PARTIES TO FOLLOW UP ON. 
          SO THAT'S BEEN A VERY USEFUL USEFUL TOOL FOR STAFF. 
          AND WE THOUGHT IT MOST APPROPRIATE TO INCLUDE IT AS A ITEM TO HELP THE INFILL POLICY OR
PROCEDURE, RATHER. AND THEN SECTION FIVE IS ESSENTIALLY A CHECKLIST. 
          SECTION SIX GETS US INTO OVERSIGHT AND REPORTING. 
          IT WOULD BE MY DESIRE TO TRACK THESE PROPERTIES AS THEY COME ALONG AND REPORT TO THE
COUNCIL QUARTERLY ON OUR PROGRESS. 
          WE WOULD BE ABLE TO THROTTLE THE USE OF THIS POLICY FORWARD AND BACKWARDS BASED ON FUNDS
AND TIMING ON STAFF. 
          AND I WOULD JUST ALSO POINT OUT THAT SECTION SEVEN HAS A REVIEW AND EXPIRATION. 
          SO WE WOULD WE WOULD LOOK TO ASK COUNCIL THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS EVERY YEAR,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE THE INFILL INCENTIVE POLICY? WOULD YOU LIKE TO PAUSE IT. WOULD WE LIKE TO REVISIT THAT? ETC.. SO I WILL PAUSE RIGHT THERE AND SEE IF I'VE GAINED ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL,
AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER OR GET MY WONDERFUL STAFF TO HELP OUT. I HAVE A QUESTION. YES, MA'AM. HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT THE BUDGET IMPLICATIONS
WOULD BE ON ON THAT AT ALL, OR IS THERE I MEAN, WE HAVE BUDGET COMING UP,
AND I JUST THINK WE NEED TO KIND OF HAVE AN IDEA OF THOSE IMPLICATIONS. 
          YES, MA'AM. GREAT QUESTION. WE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THAT AT LENGTH. 
          AND THE WAY WE SEE IT IS SIMILAR TO HOW WE DO OTHER DEALS WITH,
SAY, DEVELOPERS OR BUSINESSES IN WHICH WE ASK THEM TO PAY FULL PRICE AND THEN WORK ON A REIMBURSEMENT. AND THE IDEA HERE IS THERE'S PEOPLE CURRENTLY NOT ATTRACTED TO THESE LOTS
THAT WE'RE LABELING AS INFILL BECAUSE THERE'S SOME SORT OF BARRIER THERE. 
          THEY'RE EITHER TOO SMALL OR THEY DON'T HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE ON THEM,
OR THERE'S SOME SORT OF LIEN ATTACHED TO THEM. 
          OUR THOUGHT WAS, IF WE COULD GET SOME OF THOSE BARRIERS OUT OF THE WAY,
THESE WOULD BE PROPERTIES THAT WE WOULDN'T SEE NORMALLY AND WE WOULD STILL RETAIN 50% OF 
          [00:40:02]
THE COSTS FOR PERMITTING IMPACT FEES, ETC. SO WE WOULD BE GETTING 50% OF SOMETHING WE
HADN'T BEEN GETTING HISTORICALLY, BASED ON THE LIST OF PROPERTIES THAT WE'VE PUT TOGETHER AS A CONCEPT IN THE IMMEDIATE
DOWNTOWN AREA. 
          AGAIN, THOUGH, THAT'S A FANTASTIC QUESTION. THAT'S WHY WE PUT HERE IN SECTION SEVEN THAT
WE WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THIS AT BUDGET TIME AND CONFIRM THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE AT YEAR OVER YEAR. I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION,
MISS REEVES. 
          NATE. SO YOU PARTIALLY ANSWERED MY QUESTION WITH,
THAT'S A GOOD SEGUE, BY THE WAY. 
          SO HAVE YOU HAD ANY LANDOWNERS OR PROPERTY OWNERS THAT HAVE BEFORE THE INCEPTION OR
THEORETICAL ITERATION OF THIS? HAVE YOU HAD ANYBODY THAT'S COME THROUGH AND SAID,
HEY, I'VE GOT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, I WAS GIFTED THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, I OWN THIS, I WANT TO REHAB IT AND PROVE IT. WHAT CAN YOU DO TO HELP? I'VE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE COMMUNITY WILL WITH FOLKS THAT SAY,
MAN, I'D REALLY LIKE TO GET THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THEY'LL GIVE ME AN ADDRESS, TALK ME THROUGH IT. BUT THEY'LL SAY, YOU KNOW,
MAN, THE THE IMPACT FEES OR THE FACT THAT I, THE PERMITS ARE EXPENSIVE OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE BARRIER IS AND WE KIND OF TALK
THROUGH THAT. 
          I KNOW THAT STAFF HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO SEVERAL DEVELOPERS,
AS THEY HAVE FOLKS THROUGH THEIR OFFICE PULLING PERMITS EVERY DAY. 
          THEY MAY HAVE MORE INSIGHT ON SPECIFICS, BUT I HAVE ANSWERED THAT QUESTION A HANDFUL OF
TIMES, AND IT JUST SEEMS TO BE EITHER LOT SIZE OR LOCATION,
OR THE FACT THAT THERE'S AN EXISTING STRUCTURE THERE THAT'S KIND OF A BARRIER. 
          MY THOUGHT IS IF WE MAKE THE PROCESS A LITTLE EASIER AND A LITTLE LESS EXPENSIVE ON THE
BACK END, MORE PEOPLE MAY BE ATTRACTED TO THOSE WHAT WE'RE SAYING INFILL AREAS. 
          I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, I'LL LET WAYNE OR LISA WEIGH IN. YES,
SIR. WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF INTEREST IN THIS PROGRAM. 
          WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR SEVERAL MONTHS NOW AND WORKING THROUGH WHAT THAT PROCESS
WOULD BE LIKE. 
          AND I'VE GOT SEVERAL CONTRACTORS AND DEVELOPERS THAT ARE WAITING TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH
THIS IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD FURTHER AHEAD WITH THEIR PROJECTS. 
          SO WE WOULD HAVE IMMEDIATE ACTION ON THIS IF IT GETS APPROVED. 
          GOOD. VERY GOOD. MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE YOU'RE AWARE OF THE ONES THAT ARE BEING,
THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT BY ME. 
          YES, MA'AM. THE FRONT OF THE HOUSES LOOK GREAT. 
          THE BACK OF THE HOUSE IS NOT SO MUCH. THOSE HOUSES ARE NOT GOING TO ATTRACT LONG TERM
RESIDENTS, THEY'RE GOING TO END UP BEING RENTALS, BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO WANT TO HAVE A TEN
FOOT BACKYARD AND HAVE THEIR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE WITHIN. 
          YOU KNOW, OPEN YOUR WINDOW AND THROW DINNER ACROSS THE STREET. 
          SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT DESIGNS, IT MIGHT BE THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE BENEFICIAL TO DO
A DUPLEX WITH EACH HOUSE HAVING AN ENTRANCE WITH A GARAGE BEING IN THE CENTER SECTION WHERE IT WOULD HAVE GIVEN A DIFFERENT
LOOK. 
          SO MAYBE JUST MAKING SURE THAT THE DESIGN ACTUALLY FITS THE TRUE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          YES, MA'AM. AND THAT'S A GREAT THAT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE. 
          AND YES, MA'AM, I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTIES YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          IF WE ALLOW FOR STAFF TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY UNDER,
I BELIEVE IT'S SECTION FOR ITEM B, ALLOWING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY WITH SETBACKS AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. I DO THINK THAT WILL BE HELPFUL IN POSITIONING SOME
OF THOSE LOTS IN A USABLE SPACE AREA RELATIVE TO THEIR NEIGHBORS. SO THAT'S A GREAT POINT. THANK YOU. 
          SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REIMBURSING. SO IF THEY HAVE TO GO IN FRONT OF CBA AND AND INCUR
THOSE FEES. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING ELSE WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT REIMBURSING. YES. 
          YES, SIR. THE WAY THIS IS DRAFTED IS IT WOULD ALLOW US TO,
AND I WANT TO POINT YOU TO A GREAT QUESTION, BY THE WAY. SECTION FOUR, ITEM A THAT FIRST BULLET APPLICATION PERMIT INSPECTION FEE
REIMBURSEMENT. 
          SO LET'S ASSUME THAT THEY MAKE SEVERAL STOPS IN THE PROCESS,
BECAUSE THAT'S VERY POSSIBLE IN SOME OF THESE SMALLER, OLDER LOTS. WE WOULD LOOK AT THE TOTALITY OF THEIR COSTS ON OUR BEHALF. 
          AND THEN AT THE POINT THEY CROSSED THE FINISH LINE,
WORK ON A REIMBURSEMENT ON THE TOTALITY OF THOSE FEES. 
          ONE MORE THING. AND I UNDERSTAND MISS ELTON'S ISSUES,
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S NOT REALLY OUR I DON'T FEEL IT'S OUR DECISION WHERE PEOPLE LIVE OR DON'T LIVE. 
          PEOPLE COMPLAIN ABOUT THINGS EVERY DAY AND I'M LIKE,
YOU KNOW WHAT? BOTH SET OF APARTMENTS ARE WITHIN A HALF MILE OF ME. 
          I VOTED YES. THE NEW HOUSING ADDITION WAS WITHIN A MILE OF ME. 
          SO EVERY PIECE OF EXPANSION IN THIS CITY IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS IS WITHIN A MILE TO A MILE
AND A HALF OF ME. 
          SO IT ALL AFFECTS ME EVERY SINGLE DAY, BUT ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT I'M NOT THE PROPERTY
OWNER. 
          I'M NOT THE PERSON WHO MADE THE INVESTMENT. AND,
YOU KNOW, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT TELLING PEOPLE WHAT WE DO AND DON'T 
          [00:45:05]
LIKE ABOUT THE COLOR OF THEIR HOUSE, OR THE WAY THE SIDING LOOKS OR THE WAY IT LOOKS. 
          AND MY BROTHER AND SISTER IN LAW LIVED IN A HOUSE FOR 26 YEARS THAT HAVE A TEN YEAR,
TEN FOOT BACKYARD, AND THEY DON'T HAVE RENTERS BEHIND THEM, AND THEY LIVE WHERE THEY LIVE. 
          SO I DON'T THINK IT'S OUR DECISION AND OUR CHOICE TO MAKE OTHER PEOPLE'S IDEAS OF WHAT'S A
GOOD PLACE TO LIVE. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. SO, NATE, JUST SOFTBALL QUESTION. 
          WHAT WOULD BE A PIECE OF PROPERTY REHAB THAT GO THROUGH ALL PERMITTING PLANNING ALL THE
THINGS. 
          HERE'S YOUR SEAL, EVERYTHING'S DONE. WHAT WOULD BE THE TIME OF REPAYMENT? WOULD IT BE. GREAT QUESTION WILL. AND SO I'LL LET WAYNE THINK THROUGH A SCENARIO WHERE WE
MIGHT HAVE AN ASSUMED VALUE OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          WAYNE, IF YOU CAN BE THINKING ABOUT THAT. AND THEN WE INTERNALLY RUN CHECKS EVERY OTHER
WEEK. 
          SO DEPENDING ON HOW LONG IT TAKES TO PROCESS THAT REQUEST AND IF THERE'S ANYTHING
SPECIFIC, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY'RE USING THE SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT OPTION,
THERE WILL BE AN AGREEMENT THAT COMES BEFORE THIS GROUP THAT WILL HAVE TO BE SIGNED OFF ON. SO THAT COULD ADD A LITTLE BIT OF TIME, BUT IN THEORY,
WELL, IF IT'S AS SIMPLE AS RETURNING SOME PERMITTING FEES A COUPLE OF WEEKS BASED ON THE PROJECT BEING COMPLETED, THEN I'LL LET WAYNE ANSWER,
I THINK WHAT WOULD BE A VALUABLE PIECE TO THAT ANSWER? BEFORE YOU GET, WE'RE GOING TO GET RIGHT TO YOU NEXT. 
          BUT IN THAT, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT, I'M HERE ALL NIGHT. 
          THE SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT, ADMINISTRATIVELY,
THE WHOLE PROCESS SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. 
          YES, SIR. BUT THE SALES TAX PORTION, I'M RACKING MY HEAD ABOUT HOW YOU IDENTIFY THIS WAS
FOR, THIS PURCHASE WAS FOR THIS LOT OR THIS HOME OR WHAT HAVE YOU. 
          THAT SEEMS LIKE THAT COULD GET OUTSIDE SCOPE POTENTIALLY. 
          MAYBE THERE'S A PIECE OF BUBBLE GUM THAT I BOUGHT AT THE STORE WITH IT OR SOMETHING LIKE
THAT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT SEEMS LIKE ADMINISTRATIVELY POTENTIALLY DIFFICULT IN MY HEAD. 
          SO WE DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT, MAYOR, WHICH IS WHICH IS WHY WE WOULD ASK LEGAL TO REVIEW
THAT, TO CONFIRM THAT WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK. AND ALSO,
AS WITH ANY POLICY OR PROCEDURE THAT WE ROLL OUT, IT'S THE FIRST ONE OF ITS KIND INDICATOR. I DO THINK THERE MAY BE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, BUT BEING A NEW PROGRAM AND I THINK BEING PRETTY ATTRACTIVE TO DECATUR OR THOSE THAT
DESIRE TO CALL DECATUR HOME, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE PLENTY OF SCENARIOS TO WALK THROUGH TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING IT
RIGHT. 
          SURE. THERE ARE LOTS OF SCENARIOS THAT THIS COULD APPLY TO. 
          WHETHER THAT IS A REMODEL AND REHAB OF AN EXISTING PROPERTY OR NEW CONSTRUCTION FROM THE
GROUND UP. 
          AND THAT COULD ALSO INCLUDE ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING PROPERTY,
AS LONG AS IT MEETS THAT THRESHOLD OF THAT MINIMUM VALUE OF $50,000 INVESTED IN THAT PROPERTY. SO SOMEONE'S NOT GOING TO COME IN AND JUST UPDATE THE
SIDING ON THEIR HOUSE AND BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. 
          BUT IT DOES APPLY, IT DOES WORK THROUGH THE DIFFERENT APPLICATION PROCESSES DEPENDING ON
WHAT THE PROPERTY CALLS FOR, WHETHER THERE'S SETBACK VARIANCES, WHETHER THERE'S PLANNING REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE TO GO
INTO PLACE FOR THAT. 
          BUT ALL OF THOSE THINGS WOULD COME TOGETHER FOR THAT REIMBURSEMENT AND THAT INCENTIVE FOR
THEM TO MOVE FORWARD THROUGH THAT PROPERTY AND MAKE THAT PROPERTY A MORE VALUABLE PROPERTY FOR THE CITY. 
          YEAH, WELL, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'M JUST GOING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING. 
          I AS AN EXAMPLE. SO IN RECRUITING SOMETIMES YOU GET TO THERE'S THE HEY,
I'M GOING TO REIMBURSE YOU FOR YOUR RELOCATION. SO YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S A RENTAL PROPERTY,
MAYBE THERE'S THE VAN COST, MAYBE THERE'S THE LABOR ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. 
          AND SO THE THE WELL-MEANING PART OF IT IS I WANT YOU TO HAVE A ZERO COST WITH YOUR
RELOCATION, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF DETAIL IN IT. AND THEN THERE'S THE CONCEPT OF,
I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU X DOLLARS FOR COMING TO THIS ORGANIZATION. 
          AND SO ADMINISTRATIVELY, JUST AS AN EXAMPLE,
IS THERE AN AVERAGE COST THAT YOU'RE ANTICIPATING TO YOUR BUDGET QUESTION,
ETC., THAT YOU WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO PROVIDE A PERSON TO DO INFILL WHERE IT WOULD BE EASIER TO JUST SAY, HEY, YOU INFILL HERE,
YOU COMPLETE THIS PROJECT HERE AND WE WILL REIMBURSE YOU X OR SOME PORTION. 
          MAYOR, WE DO CALL OUT AS AN EXAMPLE SECTION FOR ITEM A,
THE SECOND BULLET POINT UP TO $25,000 IN IMPACT FEE 
          [00:50:05]
REIMBURSEMENTS. WE COULD CERTAINLY ADD A LIMIT TO THE BULLET ABOVE THAT WHERE WE TALK
THROUGH PERMITTING AND INSPECTION FEES. 
          SURE. IF THAT'S MORE PALATABLE FOR THE COUNCIL BODY. 
          OH JUST TO HAVE A CONVERSATION, NOT JUST NOT NECESSARILY TO LIMIT,
ALTHOUGH I KIND OF I LIKE THE CONCEPT OF NOT TO EXCEED BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY IMPORTANT. BUT AS OPPOSED TO LOOKING AT ALL THE LINE ITEMS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TO
SAY, YOU MAKE THIS HAPPEN AND THE VALUE IS OF THIS,
THE ANTICIPATED VALUES THIS, AND YOU MEET THESE CRITERIA, THEN WE JUST SAY HERE WE'RE REIMBURSING THIS X AMOUNT. 
          I SEE WHAT THE MAYOR IS SAYING, BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT'S
GOING TO BE MANUALLY FOR STAFF TO HAVE TO KEEP UP WITH ALL OF THIS. 
          IS IT MORE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE JUST A DOLLAR AMOUNT SET ASIDE OF INFILL THIS AMOUNT? THANK YOU FOR ALWAYS SAYING THINGS SIMPLER. 
          THAT'S A MUCH BETTER WAY TO LOOK AT IT. GREAT POINTS. 
          THIS WAS JUST THE FIRST ROUND OF GIVING THIS TO YOU. 
          WE THOUGHT THAT YOU MIGHT APPROVE THIS BASED ON SOME OF THE OTHER CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD
WITH THE NEED FOR INFILL PROCEDURE. 
          HAPPY TO BRING IT BACK WITH A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ON THESE ITEMS IF THAT'S SOMETHING
YOU'RE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH, IS THERE ANY OTHER FEEDBACK THAT YOU MIGHT OFFER? WELL, I THINK THE CONSENSUS IS WE LOVE THIS IDEA AND CONCEPT FOR SURE. 
          I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR OUR CITY, AND I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR CITIZENS TO IMPROVE THOSE
LOTS. 
          IT'S A WIN WIN. WELL, IN AN EFFORT TO BRING BACK THE ABSOLUTE BEST VERSION OF THIS
PROCEDURE, LET ME ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR US. WE TALK THROUGH HERE EXTENSIVELY THE VARIOUS
SECTIONS. 
          I WISH I HAD KEPT TRACK OF THE AMOUNT OF TIMES WE MET AND TALKED THROUGH THIS,
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE THREE IN YOUR PACKET IT'S SECTION FOUR. 
          ITEM B THE THIRD BULLET DOWN, WE CALL IT OFF STREET PARKING. 
          AND WE REFERENCE APPENDIX A, WHICH WOULD BE A LIST OF PROPERTIES THAT SOMEONE COULD PULL
THIS PROCEDURE OFF OUR WEBSITE AND FIND A PROPERTY ON THAT LIST AND GO LOOK AT WHAT IT MIGHT TAKE TO SECURE THAT,
OR CONTACT THE OWNER AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THEM. 
          DO YOU LIKE THE IDEA OF INCLUDING PROPERTIES AS A LIST,
OR HAD YOU RATHER NOT DO THAT? I'M CURIOUS WHAT YOUR FEEDBACK IS HERE. WE LEFT THAT LIST OFF OF THIS DRAFT WITH THE
INTENT TO GAIN THAT FEEDBACK FROM YOU TONIGHT. 
          I KIND OF DO LIKE THE IDEA. HOPEFULLY IT'LL BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO THOSE PROPERTIES AND
IT WON'T BE A QUESTION IF IT QUALIFIES. 
          SO IT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN A LITTLE BIT QUICKER. 
          THANK YOU. EDDIE. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. MAYOR. 
          COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME ON THIS ITEM. WE'LL MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS,
AND WE'LL BRING THIS BACK TO YOU AT OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING. EXCELLENT. 
          THANK YOU. NATE. ITEM THREE. CONSIDER TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A FIRST AMENDMENT
TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR AND PALOMA TRAILS. 
          [3. CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR AND PALOMA TRAILS, LLC REGARDING INSTALLATION OF THE PIPELINE TO SERVICE THE DEVELOPMENT.]
THANK YOU. MAYOR. THIS ITEM CAN BE FOUND IN YOUR PACKET ON PAGE FIVE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO
FOLLOW ALONG. 
          TODD WINTERS, REPRESENTING PALOMA TRAILS IS HERE WITH US TONIGHT,
AND I'M SURE HE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, BUT I'LL ATTEMPT TO WALK YOU THROUGH THIS. THIS IS OUR FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND PALOMA TRAILS. 
          YOU'LL SEE AN ITEM IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THIS ONE RELATED TO BNSF PERMITTING. 
          AND THE REASON FOR THE PERMITTING IS TO INSTALL INFRASTRUCTURE UNDER THE RAILROAD AND
OBVIOUSLY BNSF AS A GOOD PARTNER, QUITE SENSITIVE TO PEOPLE WORKING AROUND THEIR RAIL. 
          AND SO THEY HAVE ASKED FOR US TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH THEM. 
          SO THAT ITEM READS THAT IT'S BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR AND BNSF. 
          BUT AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE IT WILL BE CITY OF DECATUR INFRASTRUCTURE THAT
EVENTUALLY LIVES UNDER THE RAILWAY. 
          BUT IN THIS SCENARIO, THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT,
IF YOU APPROVE IT TONIGHT, AS AMENDED WOULD BE CALLING OUT SPECIFICALLY THAT BNSF CONTRACT AND ALLOWING FOR PALOMA TO PAY THE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT CONTRACT BECAUSE IT COULD BE
EXTENSIVE. 
          AND THAT'S OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THE CITY WASN'T INTENDING ON COVERING PALOMA,
AS A PARTNER HAS SAID THEY WILL COVER THAT. 
          THEY PUT THAT IN AN EMAIL AND THEY ADMINISTRATIVELY JUST NEED A LITTLE MORE TIME TO GET
THEIR PARTIES TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT. 
          SO IF YOU APPROVE ITEM THREE, WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU APPROVE IT,
CONTINGENT ON THE FOLKS AT ALLUVIUM AND PALOMA EXECUTING THEIR SIDE OF THE DOCUMENT. ALL RIGHT. AND ALSO, IF I COULD ADD IN MAYOR,
THE NEXT ITEM IS THAT BEING A 
          [00:55:06]
BNSF AGREEMENT. AND THAT ONE ALSO WOULD, IF YOU APPROVE,
THAT WOULD BE APPROVED CONTINGENT ON THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT IN ITEM THREE. ALL RIGHT. 
          VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM
THREE. 
          LOOK FOR A MOTION. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR AND PALOMA TRAILS, LLC REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF THE PIPELINE TO SERVICE THE DEVELOPMENT
CONTINGENT UPON THE SIGNATURE AS STATED. 
          EXCELLENT. SECOND, AND WE HAVE A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. 
          ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES. ITEM FOUR IS DISCUSSED. 
          [4. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A PIPELINE LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR AND BNSF RAIL RELATED TO THE PALOMA TRAILS DEVELOPMENT. ]
TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A PIPELINE LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY,
DECATUR AND RAIL RELATED TO THE PALOMA TRAILS DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND I'M HAPPY TO DIVE FURTHER INTO THAT. I DON'T KNOW THAT IF I SAID IT OR NOT,
BUT IT IS FOR A PIECE OF WATER SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE PLACED UNDER THE RAIL. 
          VERY GOOD. SO ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT QUESTION? WHERE IS IT GOING IN PHYSICALLY? WHERE IS IT GOING IN? GREG, DO YOU HAVE A LOCATION? OR MAYBE TODD. 
          IT WOULD JUST BE BASICALLY STRAIGHT ACROSS THERE. 
          OKAY. SO DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANY MORE COLOR? RIGHT THERE AT THAT CROSSING? ABOUT 200 YARDS SOUTH OF THE BNSF SUBSTATION. 
          RIGHT THERE. SO JUST YOU HAVE AN EXISTING SEWER LINE THERE. 
          WE'RE MOVING OVER TEN FEET AND PUTTING ONE PARALLEL. 
          SO THAT'S A VERY GOOD THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU TODD. 
          THANK YOU. GREG. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON ITEM FOUR? LOOK FOR A MOTION. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE A PIPELINE LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DECATUR AND BNSF. 
          IF BNSF RAIL RELATED TO THE TRAIL'S DEVELOPMENT CONTINGENT UPON THE FIRST AMENDMENT
PROFESSIONAL SALES SERVICE AGREEMENT STATED PREVIOUSLY IN ITEM THREE, I HAVE A MOTION. 
          SECOND, AND WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL RIGHT, MELINDA,
FOR THE SECOND. 
          ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. ALL RIGHT. THAT ITEM PASSES. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          ITEM FIVE IS A CONSENT AGENDA. IF ANYONE HAS AN ITEM FULL OFF,
WE CAN DO SO. 
          [5. CONSENT AGENDA]
OTHERWISE, WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA IS
WRITTEN. 
          SECOND, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. 
          ALL RIGHT. THAT ITEM PASSES. ITEM SIX ARE REPORTS FOR DISCUSSION. 
          [6. REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS]
WE HAVE A POLICE REPORT. 
          I CAN TURN IT BACK ON. THANK YOU. MAYOR AND COUNCIL,
WE ARE EXPERIMENTING WITH A CHANGE IN QUARTERLY REPORTS. 
          AND THE THE INTENT HERE IS FOR THESE TO BE TREATED LIKE A CONSENT ITEM. 
          WITH OUR CHANGES TO THE DASHBOARDS THAT WE'VE BEEN PUSHING OUT. 
          STAFF HAS BEEN VERY HELPFUL AT GETTING VERY GOOD INFORMATION TO THE DASHBOARD. 
          OUR THOUGHT IS EVERY OTHER QUARTERLY REPORT COULD BE STAND AND DELIVER TO THE CITY COUNCIL
BODY. 
          AND THEN THE OPPOSITE COULD BE HERE IN THE FORM OF A CONSENT ITEM. 
          YOU KNOW, IT'S THERE FOR YOU TO LOOK THROUGH AND READ OR PULL AND ASK QUESTIONS AS THE
DEPARTMENT HEADS ARE HERE, PRESENT, WILLING TO ANSWER OR APPROVE AS AS PUBLISHED IN THE PACKET. 
          SO THAT'S THE CHANGE THAT WE'RE BRINGING TO YOU AND MAYOR. 
          I KNOW ITEM SIX LISTED AS AN ITEM THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED BY EACH DEPARTMENT. 
          THAT'S JUST SIMPLY A CLERICAL ERROR ON MY PART. 
          IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE LIKE THE CONSENT ITEMS WHERE THEY'RE THERE AND PUBLISHED,
AVAILABLE TO BE PULLED. 
          VERY GOOD. HAPPY TO CLARIFY. ALL RIGHT. QUESTION ABOUT THAT NEW PROCEDURE. 
          YES, MA'AM. SO, FOR INSTANCE, THE FOUR THAT ARE LISTED HERE TONIGHT. 
          YES, MA'AM. IF THEY STOOD UP AND PRESENTED TONIGHT,
THEN THE NEXT PRESENTATION TIME, IT WOULD BE THE OTHER ONES. 
          WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE SAME ORAL PRESENTATION OF THE SAME PEOPLE EVERY TIME,
AND THEN MISS THE OTHERS ALL THE TIME. 
          YES, MA'AM. I THINK I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. 
          IT WOULD BE MY DESIRE, AND I'VE TALKED A LOT WITH STAFF ABOUT THIS OVER THE PAST FEW
MONTHS. 
          WHEN WE COME UP ON THIS PARTICULAR QUARTER. ALL OF THE REPORTS ARE GIVEN TO YOU IN PRINT
VERSION, AND NO ONE STANDS AND DELIVERS. THE NEXT ONE THAT YOU'LL SEE IS CLOSER TO THAT YEAR END
CLOSEOUT. 
          AND EVERY DEPARTMENT HEAD OVER TO COUNCIL MEETINGS WOULD STAND AND DELIVER THEIR DATA TO
YOU. 
          AND THEN WE WOULD BE BACK TO A TIME WHERE IT WOULD JUST BE PROVIDED IN THE PACKET. 
          [01:00:04]
NO ONE STANDS AND DELIVERS, BUT THEN WE'LL BE BACK TO. 
          EVERYBODY DOES GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO STAND AND DELIVER. 
          YES, MA'AM. AT LEAST TWICE A YEAR. AND THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THIS WAS THEY WOULD GIVE
YOU OF SORTS, EITHER A BEGINNING YEAR REPORT OR A CLOSEOUT REPORT. 
          HOWEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THAT. AND THEN THEY WOULD ALSO STAND AND DELIVER TO YOU
AROUND BUDGET TIME. 
          SO TO ME, THOSE WOULD BE COMPLEMENTARY TO EXISTING PROCESSES THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN
MOTION. 
          ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION, MR. REEVES? YEAH, I JUST I WASN'T SURE ON. 
          I DON'T I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE US. 
          YES, MA'AM. SO GOING FORWARD, THE SUGGESTION IS IF,
AND THIS IS ITEM SIX IS REPORTS AND SLASH DISCUSSION. 
          SO WE CAN DISCUSS THIS. IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TWICE A YEAR,
AN ORAL PRESENTATION FROM EACH DEPARTMENT. AND TWICE A YEAR WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE THAT PRESENTATION,
BUT OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE PART OF THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE PULLED. 
          YES, SIR. VERY GOOD. THEN THE OTHER I WANT TO MAKE SURE IS LIKE FROM A DISCUSSION
STANDPOINT, WORKS, WHEN WE HAVE WORKSHOPS, DO WE WANT TO START THESE MEETINGS AT IN THE EVENT THAT WE
PULL, DO WE WANT TO HAVE THESE MEETINGS AT 5:30 OR DO WE WANT TO HAVE THEM AT SIX? I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE. SO 5:30 FOR WORKSHOP. 
          WHAT IF IT'S ON THE CONSENT AGENDA PIECE, BE HARDER FOR ME. 
          I'M WITH YOU. WHAT IF IT'S THE CONSENT AGENDA TYPE? WOULD YOU WANT THAT TO BE AT SIX, WHERE WE MAY NOT OR MAY NOT FOLD THAT ITEM? SO TWO TIMES A YEAR, THE REPORTS WILL BE LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          SO THERE ISN'T THE NECESSITY FOR AN ORAL REPORT. 
          SO WOULD YOU WANT THAT MEETING TO START AT SIX OR AT 5:30. 
          I WANT ALL MEETINGS TO START AT SIX PERSONALLY. 
          I'M UP THERE WITH YOU. GET THERE AT 5:30 FOR ME. 
          I DON'T CARE. I'M FLEXIBLE. OKAY. ANY OTHER? JUST. 
          THIS IS OUR DISCUSSION WORKSHOPS. THAT WAY, IF THEY GO ALONG AND COUNCIL CAN START AT A
REGULAR TIME INSTEAD OF MAYBE COUNCIL STARTING LATER, IT'S LIKE SEVEN. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. I'LL. 
          START TILL THEY END. I DON'T WANT US. THE WORKSHOP GOES. 
          YOU DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THE WORKSHOP IS GOING TO GO. I DON'T WANT TO SLOW DOWN DISCUSSION. 
          I'M GLAD THAT YOU BROUGHT THAT UP, MAYOR. STAFF WILL SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL. 
          THE THOUGHT HERE WAS TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF WORKSHOPS THAT YOU DO ATTEND WHILE STILL
HAVING THEIR STAND AND DELIVER TIME BE VERY MEANINGFUL. 
          STARTING A LITTLE EARLIER. 5:30. SO WE WERE HAPPY TO CHANGE THAT ON THE FLY. 
          JUST PROVIDE THE FEEDBACK TO US. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? ITEM SIX. DOES ANYBODY WANT TO HAVE ANY OF THESE FOLKS DO
A REPORT? GOOD. OTHERWISE WE WILL MOVE TO SEVEN. THANK YOU. 
          MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO ANY ITEM SEVEN. 
          ANY MEMBERS HAVE A REQUEST FOR A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM. 
          ITEM EIGHT IS ADJOURNMENT, AND WE WILL ADJOURN AT 7:11 BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU EVERYONE. OH. THANK YOU. 
          [LAUGHTER] ONE DAY YOU'RE GOING TO MISS AND YOU'RE GOING TO HIT YOUR PHONE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.