Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:06]

IT IS THURSDAY, AUGUST 19TH, 2021, AND WE ARE HERE FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE GARLAND

[Call to Order]

CITY COUNCIL TO THIS IS THE CONTINUATION OF OUR BUDGET DISCUSSIONS THAT IS BASICALLY OUR ENTIRE AGENDA FOR THE EVENING.

WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT PRESENTATIONS AND SO MR. BRADFORD IF YOU WANT TO GET US GOING.

[A. Council Discussion/Deliberation]

YES, SIR, THANK YOU, MAYOR.

TONIGHT'S BEEN SET ASIDE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

COUNCIL MAY HAVE TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION, IF IT'S NEEDED, ON MANY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED SO FAR AND TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY PARTICULAR DIRECTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE US TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER.

WHILE YOU CERTAINLY. IT IS THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 2021, AND WE ARE HERE FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE GARLAND CITY COUNCIL TO THIS IS THE CONTINUATION OF OUR BUDGET DISCUSSIONS THAT IS BASICALLY OUR ENTIRE AGENDA FOR THE EVENING. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT PRESENTATIONS AND SO MR. BRADFORD IF YOU WANT TO GET US GOING.

YES, THANK YOU, MAYOR.

TONIGHT'S BEEN SET ASIDE TO TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL MAY HAVE TO TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION, IF IT'S NEEDED, ON MANY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED SO FAR AND TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY PARTICULAR DIRECTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE US TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER.

WHILE YOU CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE TO MAKE ANY FINAL DECISIONS TONIGHT, NEXT WEEK, WE ARE HOPING TO, WE'LL CERTAINLY SET ASIDE SOME TIME FOR THE OPERATING BUDGET THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING NOW. BUT WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO TO USE A GOOD BIT OF THAT TIME TO START INTRODUCING THE ARPA FUNDS AND THE CHOICES THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED AND THE COST ESTIMATES GOING FORWARD THERE.

SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE BASICALLY TWO BUDGETS GOING AT ONCE HERE FOR A LITTLE WHILE.

BUT WE'RE HOPING TO SEE IF THERE WERE ANY PARTICULAR ISSUES OR QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS OR WOULD LIKE FOR US TO EXPLORE FURTHER.

ALL RIGHT, AND AS MR. BRADFORD SAID, I HAVE SEEN THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIAMS AND COUNCILMAN SMITH.

SO AT THIS POINT, OUR AGENDA ITEM A IS COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND DELIBERATION.

SO AT THIS POINT, I WILL OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSION AND DELIBERATION.

COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH? THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'LL JUST KICK US OFF.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THE ANSWERS TO ALL THE QUESTIONS, I DROP THAT ON STAFF LATE ON TUESDAY AND IT LOOKS LIKE THEY WORKED VERY HARD TO GET THAT RESPONSE BACK TO ME.

SO VERY MUCH APPRECIATED FOR THE QUICK TURNAROUND OF EVERYTHING I RECEIVED SO FAR MAKES QUITE A BIT OF SENSE. IT LOOKS GOOD.

I'M STILL GOING TO HAVE MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE EMS PRICING ISSUES.

I DON'T KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER THERE.

AND I'M HOPING THE COUNCIL CAN PROVIDE SOME WISDOM AND SOME DIRECTION.

AND IT MAY BE THAT WE JUST GO WITH THE RECOMMENDED PATH.

BUT I DO WORRY ABOUT THAT.

EVERYTHING ELSE, I THINK, LOOKS PRETTY GOOD, SO I'LL HOP OFF THE MIC.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIAMS? THANK YOU, MAYOR, I WILL ECHO COUNCILMAN SMITH TO MR. BRADFORD AND TEAM.

THANK YOU FOR THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS.

THEY'RE VERY CLEAR TO ME THAT I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

I WOULD LIKE TO.

MR. BRADFORD, IF YOU, JUST A COUPLE OF ITEMS. IF YOU COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT AND I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE RESPONSE ABOUT THE THE FAIR HOUSING FUND, IF YOU CAN JUST KIND OF TALK ABOUT THAT.

THE SECOND PIECE IS I, TOO, HAVE SOME CONCERNS AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT NUMBERS ARE.

[00:05:01]

AND I KNOW TRADITIONALLY AS A COUNCIL, WE, THE EMS FEES, WE'VE ALWAYS, WE'VE NEVER BEEN , THAT'S NOT ONE OF OUR PROFITABLE AREAS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS, BUT THAT I, TOO, HAVE SOME CONCERNS MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT. AND THAT PRIMARILY BASED ON THE CONSTITUENTS, BASED ON WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY IN THE MIDST OF A WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS GONE, OR AT LEAST, WE TURNED THE CORNER IN A PANDEMIC AND THE ECONOMIC IMPACT THAT THIS IS HAVING ON OUR OWN FAMILIES.

SO THAT, SIR, IS THE GENESIS OF MY CONCERN.

AND AGAIN, I SAY THAT I DON'T I DON'T HAVE NUMBERS IN MY HEAD AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS, THAT IS AN AREA THAT I WOULD LIKE WE VISITED AND MAYBE SOME WISE COUNSEL FROM FROM THIS COUNCIL AND FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE ON THAT.

THE LAST THING IS AND I KNOW, ALISON, I SUBMITTED TWO OR THREE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND I KNOW ALLISON RESPONDED LATE TODAY, I DID NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THOSE.

SO, MR. BRADFORD, IF YOU HAVE THOSE, IF THOSE WERE NOT SHARED WITH SOMEONE, AND I'M ASSUMING THEY WERE SHARED WITH THE REST OF COUNCIL, BUT IF YOU, OK.

THEY WERE, MAYOR? OK. I SCANNED THEM, BUT I REALLY DID NOT HAVE TIME TO READ THEM.

SO, MR. BRADFORD, IF YOU WANT TO JUST QUICKLY GO OVER THOSE, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. ALISON IS ONLINE WITH, WHO? ALISON. OK, OK.

ALISON, I APPRECIATE THAT RESPONSE.

AND AGAIN, ALISON, I DID NOT HAVE TIME TODAY TO TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE.

SO IF YOU COULD TALK TO THOSE ONE, JUST JUST WALK ME THROUGH AGAIN THE FAIR HOUSING FUNDING AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO GO ABOUT THAT SINCE WE DIDN'T DO THE RENAMING AND IDENTIFICATION OF THAT FUNCTION.

CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT? AND THEN ALISON, IF YOU WILL BRIEFLY GO OVER THE RESPONSES TO THE PIECE THAT YOU SENT TO COUNCIL TODAY, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO? YES, GO AHEAD. OK, THANK YOU.

TO ANSWER YOUR, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM'S FIRST QUESTION REGARDING FAIR HOUSING, THE OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS IS PROPOSED TO HAVE A BUDGET OF NINETY ONE THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE DOLLARS FOR FISCAL YEAR 21-22.

WHAT YOU ARE SEEING ON REFERENCE ON PAGE 44 IS THAT THERE WILL BE NO TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE FAIR HOUSING FUND FOR FY 21-22, BECAUSE WE WERE ABLE TO UTILIZE SOME AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE TO FUND THE DEPARTMENT THIS YEAR.

HOWEVER, WE WILL ADD IN OUR DISCUSSION AND NOTES FOR THE ADOPTED BUDGET, WE'LL MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO CLARIFY THAT THE OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS WILL RECEIVE SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING ON AN ANNUAL BASIS THROUGH A TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND SHOULD FUNDING BE REQUIRED.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT RESPONSE.

YES, SIR. AND NOW COULD YOU BRIEFLY, JUST A WALK THROUGH RESPONSES ON A PIECE THAT YOU SAID TODAY. YES, SIR, I WILL.

SEVERAL OF THE RESPONSES HAD A GRAPH INCLUDED, SO I'M NOT SURE IF IT MAKES SENSE TO SHARE MY SCREEN FOR THAT.

SURE. WE DO THAT.

ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE MY SCREEN NOW WITH THE PDF DOCUMENT? IT'S STILL COMING UP.

THERE WE GO. LET ME KNOW IF THE SIZING IS OK.

YES. THANK YOU.

SO YOUR FIRST QUESTION WAS REGARDING THE PERCENT OF ACTUAL COST RECOVERY REFLECTED IN THE PROPOSED FEE INCREASE.

SO BY OUR FEE TYPE, WE REFLECT THE CURRENT RECOVERY LEVEL AND THE PROPOSED RECOVERY LEVEL. JUST THIS IS BASED ON THE COST TO DELIVER SERVICES BASED ON EACH ONE OF THESE FEES AND WHAT THE REVENUE IS RECOVERING FROM THAT.

SO YOU WILL SEE THAT WITH THE PROPOSED FEE INCREASE, OUR TOTAL E`MS COST RECOVERY IS PROJECTED TO INCREASE FROM 11 PERCENT TO 13 PERCENT.

TO RESPOND TO YOUR SECOND QUESTION, DID ANY ASPECT OF THE COST RECOVERY STUDY REFERENCE

[00:10:01]

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ON END USERS? SO THE STUDY INCLUDED SEVERAL ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS.

THE FIRST WAS ESTABLISHING FEES AT THE LEVEL THAT PERMITS LOWER INCOME GROUPS TO USE THE SERVICE THAT THEY MIGHT NOT OTHERWISE BE ABLE TO AFFORD.

SECOND IS TO PROVIDE COMMUNITY WIDE BENEFITS VERSUS INDIVIDUAL BENEFITS.

THIRD, WE CONSIDERED WHO IS A SERVICE RECIPIENT VERSUS WHO IS A SERVICE DRIVER.

FOURTH, THE ELASTICITIES OF DEMAND, INCREASING THE PRICES OF SOME SERVICES, RESULTING IN THE REDUCTION OF DEMAND FOR OTHER SERVICES AND VICE VERSA.

AND THEN FINALLY, PUBLIC SECTOR AGENCIES HAVE A MONOPOLY ON PROVIDING CERTAIN SERVICES WITHIN THEIR BOUNDARIES.

NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES OR THE PRIVATE SECTOR MAY PROVIDE OTHER SERVICES, THEREFORE, DEMAND FOR OUR SERVICES MAY BE HIGHLY DEPENDENT ON WHAT ELSE MAY BE AVAILABLE AT LOWER PRICES. SO THAT KIND OF TALKS ABOUT JUST THE ECONOMIC LENS, THE BUDGET DEPARTMENT, THE CITY DEPARTMENTS AND THE CONSULTANTS USED WHEN WORKING THROUGH THE FEE STUDY.

FINALLY, WRITTEN INFORMATION FROM CUSTOMER SERVICE REGARDING CURRENT AVAILABLE PAYMENT PLANS OR ARRANGEMENTS TO ASSIST FAMILIES IN MINIMIZING THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIPS CREATED BY THE USE OF GARLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT'S EMS SERVICES.

SO TO ASSIST INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS, PATIENTS CAN BE REQUESTED TO BE PLACED ON A PAYMENT PLAN, TOO ANY PS IN THAT SENTENCE, WITH MINIMUM MONTHLY PAYMENTS STARTING AT 25 DOLLARS.

THERE ARE NO LATE FEES OR PENALTIES CHARGED AS A RESULT OF LATE OR NONPAYMENT SITUATIONS, AND BASED ON WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED BACK IN MAY 2019, WE IDENTIFY THE CURRENT CHARITY CARE POLICY LISTED OUT HERE BASED ON THE WAIVER, DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU FALL IN LINE WITH THE FEDERAL POVERTY LINE.

I CAN READ THAT OUT IF Y'ALL NEED.

I THINK WE CAN ALL SEE IT.

OK. FINALLY, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND CUSTOMER SERVICE ARE RESEARCHING NEW GUIDELINES THAT COULD POSSIBLY MAKE THE CHARITY CARE POLICY AUTOMATIC SO THAT THE PATIENT OR THE FAMILY OF THE PATIENT DOES NOT HAVE TO APPLY FOR THESE REDUCTIONS.

IS THERE A MINIMUM OR MID RANGE WHEREBY THE EMS FEE INCREASES CAN BE PHASED IN TO PREVENT A NEGATIVE BOTTOM LINE FOR COST OF SERVICES AND LESSEN THE IMMEDIATE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP ON POTENTIAL USERS? HERE WE STATE THE PROPOSED FEES DO NOT RESULT IN A POSITIVE BOTTOM LINE AS OUR COST RECOVERY, AS I INDICATED, THE BEGINNING ARE WELL BELOW 50 PERCENT, RIGHT ON 13 PERCENT.

IT IS ALWAYS AN OPTION TO INCREMENTALLY INCREASE THE RECOVERY LEVELS OVER MULTIPLE YEARS TO REDUCE THE EMS SHORTFALL SHOULD THE COUNCIL CHOOSE.

WE HAVE A STATEMENT FROM CHIEF LEE, SPECIFICALLY ON THIS ABOUT WHERE HE WOULD LIKE HIS RECOVERY TO GO. FINALLY, IN TERMS OF EMS QUESTIONS, IF APPROVED AS PROPOSED, WHERE WOULD GARLAND RANK AMONG COMPARABLE SIZED METROPLEX CITIES IN TERMS OF EMS SERVICES? AND THIS INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED BY CHIEF LEE, AS YOU CAN SEE, FOR ALL OF OUR FEE TYPES, GARLAND IS STILL BELOW THE COMPARISON AVERAGE IN COMPARISON MEDIAN.

AND THEN THIS IS JUST KIND OF WHERE WE RANK OUT OF THE 17 CITIES WHERE OUR FEE RANKS IN TERMS OF COST FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST.

AND THEN FINALLY, YOUR LAST QUESTION IS YOU WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE GENERAL FUND, NON DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURES TO INCLUDE NLC MEMBERSHIP DUES AND STAFF WILL BE SEEKING FINAL DIRECTION FROM THE CITY COUNCIL ON PROPOSED CHANGES AT THE MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 13TH, REGULAR WORK SESSION.

THERE IS AN AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE IN THE GENERAL FUND OF APPROXIMATELY SEVENTY TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT IS ABOVE THE 30 DAY FUND BALANCE REQUIREMENT.

THESE FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR APPROPRIATIONS SHOULD THE COUNCIL CHOOSE.

[00:15:09]

AND I WILL TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS FROM TODAY, SO I'LL STOP SHARING MY SCREEN, BUT I CAN ALWAYS SHARE AGAIN IF WE NEED TO REVIEW THE INFORMATION.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ALISON.

I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU FOR THE RESPONSES.

I JUST HAVE A QUESTION DIRECT TO OUR CITY MANAGER, GIVEN THAT INFORMATION, PARTICULARLY ON THE CHARITABLE PROGRAMS, HOW DO WE HOW DO WE ENVISION MESSAGING THAT INFORMATION ON THAT ASPECT? AND AGAIN, I GO BACK TO TALKING ABOUT THE ABOUT THE SHOCK VALUE.

SO IA THERE ANY DISCUSSION AND I'M NOT LOOKING FOR, MR. BRADFORD, I'M NOT LOOKING FOR AN ABSOLUTE RESPONSE TONIGHT.

BUT ANY THOUGHTS ALONG THE LINES OF SHOULD WE GO WITH THE RECOMMENDED SCHEDULE OF INCREASES? WHAT, ANY PRELIMINARY THOUGHTS ON HOW WE CAN OUR MESSAGING ON THIS, HOW WE CAN MESSAGE THIS SO THAT WHAT THE TABLES WE GO FROM, WE GO FROM 450 TO 700, SOMEBODY ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY PICK UP, THEN THEY GET A MAILBOX AND THEY GET A BILL FOR 700 DOLLARS.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE VERY EASY TO DO [INAUDIBLE].AND SO ANY PRELIMINARY THOUGHTS, MR. BRADFORD, ON HOW WE MIGHT MESSAGE THAT SUPPORT MECHANISM THAT ALISON SHOWED ON THE SCREEN TO HELP, IF NOT FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, SOFTEN THE BLOW SHOULD COUNCIL DECIDE TO GO WITH A RECOMMENDED SCHEDULE OF FEE INCREASES . THANK YOU THEN. THAT'S MY LAST QUESTION, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTUALLY, I'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON THOSE QUESTIONS AND A FEW OTHER THINGS RELATED TO THE EMS FEES. I LIKE, LIKE A LOT OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, GET CALLS FROM CITIZENS WHO HAVE AN EMERGENCY AND THEN ARE QUITE SURPRISED WHEN WHEN THEY GET A BILL IN THE MAIL AND THEY'RE QUITE SURPRISED BY THE SIZE OF IT.

MATTER OF FACT, I PROBABLY GET MORE CALLS ABOUT EMS BILLS THAN I GET ABOUT ANYTHING.

AND FOR THAT REASON, I HAD MY OWN PERSONAL HESITATIONS ABOUT COMING FORWARD WITH AN INCREASE. I WILL ALSO CONFESS TO THE WHEN WE WERE MAKING THE STAFF BUDGET DECISIONS IN JULY, WE WERE FACED WITH AN UPTICK IN COVID CASES.

WE THOUGHT WE WERE AT THE TAIL END OF THE PANDEMIC.

I THINK IF IF I HAD IT TO DO OVER, I PROBABLY WOULDN'T COME FORWARD WITH THOSE INCREASES THIS YEAR. NO, IF I'D KNOWN WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH NOW.

THERE, AT THE SAME TIME, DO WE NEED TO INCREASE THEM? YES, WE DO.

OUR COST RECOVERY IS DISMAL.

WE ARE SIGNIFICANTLY BEHIND OTHER CITIES.

AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVEN'T EDUCATED OUR OUR CITIZENS ABOUT THE CHARITY POLICY.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ON THE BILL ITSELF, SO THAT WHEN SOMEONE IS GETTING THE BILL, THEY INSTANTLY, YOU KNOW, HEY, THERE ARE PAYMENT PLANS AVAILABLE.

THERE ARE SOME CHARITY PROVISIONS.

SO THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THAT INITIAL OPENING OF THE ENVELOPE SHOCK, SO TO SPEAK.

I GUESS WHAT I WOULD PUT OUT THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE TO RAISING THE FEES AT THIS TIME, YOU KNOW, IS WE COULD CERTAINLY DELAY THIS UNTIL NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.

IN THE MEANTIME, WE CAN EDUCATE OUR CITIZENS MORE ABOUT THE PAYMENT PLAN OPTIONS THAT ARE AVAILABLE WITH THIS, THE CHARITY PROVISIONS THAT ARE AVAILABLE WITH THIS.

I DO NOT WANT FOR THIS TO IN ANY WAY CAUSE SOMEONE TO THINK TWICE ABOUT CALLING AN AMBULANCE, PARTICULARLY IN THIS ENVIRONMENT.

THEY, THAT DOES LEAVE A 120 THOUSAND DOLLAR HOLE IN THE BUDGET.

HOWEVER, SINCE JULY, THE SALES TAX RECEIPTS HAVE INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY.

[00:20:09]

WE'RE, WE'VE BEEN GETTING DOUBLE DIGIT INCREASES IN SALES TAX REVENUE, AND SO THERE IT INCREASED OUR SALES TAX PROJECTIONS AND STILL BE ULTRA CONSERVATIVE.

AND SO IF IT IS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL TO DELAY THESE FOR A YEAR, WE COULD CERTAINLY MANAGE THAT FINANCIALLY AND GIVE US MORE TIME TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC.

OK, THANK YOU, SIR.

ALL RIGHT, AND WE'LL SWING BACK AROUND TO THIS EMS THING.

WE'VE GOT SEVERAL OTHER FOLKS IN THE QUEUE, BUT JUST KNOW WE'LL SWING BACK AROUND TO THIS ONE TO TRY TO GET SOME CONSENSUS TOWARDS THE END OF THE DISCUSSION IF WE CAN GET THERE.

I MEAN, THE IDEA IS OBVIOUSLY THE THE MORE THINGS WE CAN CLEAR AS FAR AS YES/NO, POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, THEN STAFF CAN BE PREPARING THE DOCUMENTATION FOR. SO, WE'LL COME BACK AROUND.

NEXT UP I HAVE COUNCIL LADY MORRIS.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HAD A QUESTION EARLIER, AND I HAVE HEARD THIS RAISED BY SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE AS WELL ABOUT THE EOC POSITIONS, BECAUSE IN OUR UNFUNDED POSITIONS, THERE WAS ONE DEPUTY COORDINATOR, MANAGER FOR OUR OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

IT WAS SAID TO BE UNFUNDED.

AND WE ALSO HAVE ONE THAT IS FUNDED.

AND SO I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO, WAS IT HALF OF A REQUEST GOT FULFILLED OR THESE DIFFERENT THINGS? AFTER THE LAST TWO YEARS WE'VE BEEN THROUGH WITH DISASTER AFTER DISASTER.

I AM IN FAVOR OF MAKING OUR OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AS ROBUST AS WE POSSIBLY CAN.

SO JUST, MR. BRADFORD, CAN YOU JUST SPEAK TO THE POSITIONS? DID WE FULFILL ONE POSITION AND NOT ANOTHER? AND IF SO, CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE THOUGHT BEHIND THAT PROCESS? I THINK MITCH MAY HAVE THAT ANSWER.

HE'S GOT HIS HAND UP.

OK.

SOMEBODY DOES. YEAH.

YEAH. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS, THAT'S ACTUALLY A DEPUTY DIRECTOR POSITION THAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT THE MISTIE AND I HAVE BEEN HAVING SOME DISCUSSIONS.

BUT AS WE WERE REVIEWING THE STAFFING, OUR RECOMMENDATION ONCE WE GOT INTO PUTTING THE BUDGET PIECES TOGETHER WAS TO HOLD OFF ON THAT POSITION FOR ANOTHER YEAR.

WE HAVE SOME NEW STAFFING THAT'S IN THERE THAT WE'RE EVALUATING AND MOVING FORWARD.

AND AS COUNCIL KNOWS, THERE'S A NUMBER OF NEW THINGS, NEW PROPOSED FUNDED ITEMS THAT ARE WITHIN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

SO AS WE DISCUSSED ALL OF THAT, WE DECIDED TO KIND OF PULL THAT BACK AND PASS THAT ON TO NEXT YEAR. SO BUT WE DID WE HAD RECENTLY HAD SOME VACANCIES IN THERE.

WE'VE GOT TWO NEW STAFF IN THERE THIS YEAR IN ADDITION TO MISTIE.

YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB.

BUT WE DID BASICALLY POSTPONE THAT DEPUTY DIRECTOR POSITION, SO.

OK. AND SO OTHER THAN THAT, IS OUR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

I CAN'T TALK. AND THAT'S NOT EVEN A BUNCH OF KEYS IN THE ROW.

ARE THEY? DO THEY HAVE EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO BE ROBUST? AND I KNOW WE'LL APPROVE YEAR BY YEAR, NO DOUBT.

BUT FOR THIS YEAR, IF WE EVEN GAVE THEM MORE FUNDING, WOULD THEY HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF PUTTING IT INTO A PRODUCTIVE ACTION.

OR ARE THEY GOOD FOR THE NEXT YEAR WITH WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY IN THE BUDGET? YEAH, AND I KNOW, MISTIE IS ON AS WELL, BUT MISTIE AND I HAVE TALKED QUITE A BIT ON THIS AND I, AS MUCH AS WE'VE GIVEN THEM THIS YEAR, THEY WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME.

I MEAN, I KNOW MISTIE AND I KNOW EVERY DEPARTMENT WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MORE, MORE, MORE, BUT I DON'T THINK WE COULD EVEN IMPLEMENT ANY MORE EVEN IF WE ADDED SOME MORE THIS YEAR.

SO IN FUTURE YEARS, LIKELY THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL REQUESTS.

BUT I THINK WE'RE AT THAT POINT THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT AND ADDED EVERYTHING THAT WE COULD FOR THIS YEAR. I THINK THE ONE THING THAT YOU MAY HAVE NOT SEEN AMONG THE FUNDING LIST IS THERE'S FUNDS THERE TO CLONE MISTIE.

GOOD.

I'VE ALREADY SIGNED IT AND SO, WE'RE DOING IT.

I'VE ALREADY SIGNED THE ORDER SO.

EXCELLENT. YEAH, IF ONLY WE COULD.

ACTUALLY WE HAVE SEVERAL STAFF WHO I WOULD LOVE TO CLONE.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

[00:25:02]

AND MY ONLY OTHER COMMENT FOR NOW UNTIL WE CIRCLE BACK TO THE EMS FEES, IN OUR LIST OF FEE INCREASES UNDER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.

AND MOST OF OUR FEE INCREASES ARE IN PLACE PROSPECTIVELY BY A PERCENTAGE OR SOMETIMES DOUBLED IN RARE INSTANCES TRIPLED.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT, THE PRE FILING, ONCE IT HITS AN ACRE OR MORE, GOES FROM ONE THOUSAND TO SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS.

AND THEN YOU GO FURTHER TO THE 30 DAY APPLICATION AND IT GOES FROM SIX THOUSAND TO NINE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED.

DO WE HAVE THAT MANY DOWNTOWN PARCELS LEFT THAT ARE ONE ACRE OR MORE? PROBABLY NOT MANY, BUT THERE ARE SOME.

AND THIS IS NOT THE TIME IN MY MIND FOR US TO BE PUTTING ANY OBSTACLES IN FRONT OF DEVELOPERS WHO MIGHT WANT TO STEP IN AND DO SOMETHING HERE.

SO, IT WOULD BE MY HOPE THAT WE COULD TAKE AWAY THOSE TWO LARGE INCREASES FOR THE ACRE AND ABOVE AND JUST LET THEM STAY WITH WHAT THEY WERE.

IT ISN'T SHOWN THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A REVENUE IMPACT OF ANY KIND, EVEN THOSE INCREASES. SO I DON'T THINK PUTTING THEM BACK TO WHERE THEY WERE, WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE REVENUE IMPACT.

BUT THAT WOULD BE MY REQUEST.

JUST, I DO NOT WANT TO DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FROM DEVELOPING DOWNTOWN.

AND THAT IT'S ALL I HAVE, MAYOR.

THANK YOU. OK.

AS FAR AS THE SIZE OF THE PARCELS THAT ARE REMAINING DOWNTOWN, I DON'T KNOW THAT ANSWER, MAYOR I'M HERE. I APOLOGIZE FOR YOU.

I APOLOGIZE, MY CAMERA IS NOT WORKING FOR MY LAPTOP HERE, BUT HOPEFULLY YOU CAN HEAR ME OK, AT LEAST. YES, SIR.

I HAD MY ANALYST PULL THIS DATA EARLIER, BUT THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY SIX HUNDRED AND EIGHTY SEVEN PARCELS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND OF THOSE THERE ARE ABOUT 30 THAT ARE OVER ONE ACRE. SO IT CONSTITUTES ABOUT FOUR AND A HALF PERCENT OF THE PARCELS DOWNTOWN THAT ARE OVER ONE ACRE.

I THINK I MENTIONED THIS LAST SATURDAY, BUT WE DID HAVE TWO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PLANS COME THROUGH THE LAST FEW YEARS THAT WERE OVER ONE ACRE.

THAT WAS THE DRAPER PROJECT AND THE CITY SQUARE LOSS.

OK. ALL RIGHT.

COUNCIL LADY MORRIS, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL.

OH, I DON'T HAVE ADDITIONAL, EXCEPT JUST TO SAY SINCE THIS, IF NOTHING ELSE, I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE THIS STANDING THE WAY IT IS AND REVISIT THIS NEXT YEAR IF WE NEED TO.

BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS A TIME FOR US TO BE MULTIPLYING TIMES SIX FEES FOR DEVELOPING DOWNTOWN. I'D RATHER NOT DO THAT.

SO. OK, THANK YOU.

WE'LL SWING BACK AROUND TO THAT ONE AS WELL.

AND COUNCIL MEMBER AUBIN? THANK YOU, MAYOR. I GUESS I'LL JUST JUMP RIGHT IN ON THAT TOPIC AS LONG AS WE'RE DISCUSSING IT. WELL, ON THAT.

HOW DID WE COME UP WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT? HOW DO WE COME UP WITH THE 6000 FEET FROM THE ONE THOUSAND? WERE WE JUST WAY, WAY, WAY BELOW MARKET BEFORE? NOT SO MUCH THAT IT WAS BELOW MARKET COUNCIL MEMBER, IT WAS MAINLY THE COST OF SERVICE JUST RECUPERATING.

THE PERCENTAGE WAS QUITE LOW SO THAT THAT REALLY CAME OUT OF FEE STUDY IN TERMS OF THAT REGARD AND THE, YOU KNOW, STAFF TIME, RESOURCES, THAT SORT OF THING, WAS COMPARABLE TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS AND DETAILED PLANS AND WHATNOT.

AND I BELIEVE DOWNTOWN IT WAS A FLAT FEE, OBVIOUSLY, WHEREAS PDS KIND OF HAVE FIFTY DOLLARS PER ACRE. SO I BELIEVE THAT THOUGHT WAS JUST KIND OF KEEPING A FLAT FEE AS WELL AS CAPTURING THAT COST OF SERVICE RECOVERY, BUT CERTAINLY ESPECIALLY FOR THE PRE FILING.

IT COMES DOWN TO A POLICY MATTER.

AND IF WE WANT TO KIND OF ENCOURAGE MORE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT, CERTAINLY WE CAN ADJUST THAT FEE AS NEEDED. SO, I MEAN, THIS MAY BE A LITTLE OUT OF THE WHEELHOUSE.

AND DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT ON A ONE ACRE DEVELOPMENT, DO YOU THINK A FIVE THOUSAND DOLLAR DIFFERENCE WOULD CHANGE WHAT GETS DEVELOPED IN DOWNTOWN? YOU KNOW, TAKING THE DRAPER AND CITY SQUARE LOSS, THOSE WERE PRETTY MAJOR, PRETTY MAJOR

[00:30:01]

PROJECTS. I MEAN, A DEVELOPER COULD SPEAK TO THIS BETTER THAN I COULD.

BUT AS AN OBSERVATION, USUALLY APPLICATION FEES FOR SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS ARE PRETTY NEGLIGIBLE COMPARED TO THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE COST OF DEVELOPMENT AND SOMETIMES FACTOR IN THINGS LIKE MITIGATION FEES AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEES, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S TWO THOUSAND OR SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS, APPLICATION FEE IS PRETTY NEGLIGIBLE COMPARED TO SOMETIMES WHAT THAT CAN ADD UP TO.

SO, YEAH, I MEAN, I GUESS AND I'M HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT IT MORE AS COUNCIL.

I KIND OF FEEL LIKE IF YOU'RE DEVELOPING A ONE ACRE PROPERTY IN DOWNTOWN AND THE ADDITIONAL FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS IS TOO MUCH FOR YOU, THEN MAYBE THAT'S NOT A PROJECT WE REALLY WANT TO SEE.

I MEAN, I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S IN THE SCOPE OF, IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS OTHERWISE.

I MEAN, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS HOW MUCH OF OUR COST DO WE RECOVER? IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A PROFIT ON THESE THINGS.

AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO RECOVER COST EVERY DOLLAR THAT WE DON'T RECOVER FROM, THE BIG DEVELOPERS DOING A ONE ACRE PROJECT, IT COMES OUT OF SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SO AS A POLICY, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO BRING ALL OF THESE IN LINE WITH THE MARKET STUDY. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE DIRECTION I WOULD GO WITH THAT.

EVEN IF IT DOES HAVE ZERO, WE DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT ZERO IMPACT THIS YEAR MIGHT HAVE AN IMPACT NEXT YEAR, WHATEVER, I THINK IS JUST A GOOD POLICY.

SPEAKING OF GOOD POLICY, THE OTHER ISSUE, COUNCIL, THAT I WANTED TO DISCUSS IS.

IS THE USE OF SAFE FLIGHT FUNDS? I'M OPPOSED TO I UNDERSTAND THE PROGRAM IS OVER AND THE RESTRICTIONS MAY HAVE CHANGED, BUT THAT'S MONEY THAT WE ACQUIRED ASSOCIATED WITH TRAFFIC SAFETY, ENFORCING TRAFFIC SAFETY. AND I THINK THAT SHOULD GO TO SOMETHING IN THE SAFETY REALM.

AND SO I'D LIKE FOR STAFF TO FIND, I MEAN, WE'RE ALWAYS HEARING FROM TRANSPORTATION ABOUT HOW THEY JUST ARE JUST A LITTLE BIT SHORT OF MONEY TO PAINT ALL THE LINES AND CROSSWALKS AND EVERYTHING THAT THEY'D LIKE TO PAINT.

SO MAYBE FOR A YEAR WE GET MORE CROSSWALKS PAINTED OR SOMETHING ELSE.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT GO TO SOME KIND OF PUBLIC SAFETY OR CONCERN.

AND THEN IF WE WANT TO CONSIDER THE MOBILE BOXING GYM AS PART OF ARPA AND MAYBE I'M JUST SHIFTING MONEY AROUND, BUT TO ME IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE AND IT MATTERS.

AND SO IF WE WANT TO CONSIDER THE MOBILE BOXING GYM, ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE CONSIDER IN ARPA, I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.

ON THE EMS FEES, DO WE HAVE OR CAN WE GET SOME KIND OF BREAKDOWN OF WHO'S ULTIMATELY PAYING THESE FEES? I MEAN, IS IT INSURANCE COMPANIES THAT ARE PAYING THE BULK OF THESE? OR IS IT INDIVIDUALS? IS IT A LITTLE MIX OF BOTH? WHAT ARE OUR RECOVERY RATES FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES VERSUS INDIVIDUALS? I KNOW WE PROBABLY WE MAY NOT HAVE THAT DATA TONIGHT, BUT I'D LIKE TO GET IT IN.

AND ALSO TO CONSIDER ON THE EMS FEES THEN IF WE CAN RECOVER SOME OF THAT THROUGH ARPA? IF WE ARE HAVING MORE TRANSPORTS THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO COVID, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A COST THAT WE COULD RECOVER, AT LEAST PARTIALLY THROUGH ARPA, SOME KIND OF PROGRAM IN ARPA, AND THAT WOULD KIND OF REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE BUDGETARY CONCERN THERE. AND I KNOW WE DO ALSO HAVE I ASSUME WE ALSO HAVE ADDITIONAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH COVID TRANSPORTS JUST BECAUSE THE DISINFECTION PROCEDURES, MAYBE WE HAVE THAT INCREASED COST FOR ALL OF OUR EMS TRANSPORTS.

YOU JUST NEVER KNOW THESE DAYS.

AND THEN MY FINAL POINT OF DISCUSSION ON THE COMMITMENT TO WELLNESS, I DID GET A RESPONSE TODAY FROM STAFF THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT ANY TIME SOMEBODY IS OUT BECAUSE OF THE CONTACT OR BECAUSE OF A COVID ISSUE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOSING 10 DAYS TO THAT.

I WOULD LIKE US TO FIND A WAY, WE ARE ENCOURAGING VACCINATIONS.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT WE'RE ENCOURAGING THAT THROUGH A.

IT'S A CREDIT, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, COUNCILMAN AUBIN.

IT IS ONE OF THE WAYS OUR.

OK? OK, OK.

[00:35:02]

THAT IS ONE OF THE WAYS TO EARN C2W CREDIT, JUST ONE OF THE WAYS TO EARN THAT PREMIUM.

CURRENTLY, THEY GET THEIR COVID VACCINATION.

SO THAT'S A PREMIUM REDUCTION.

SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE CITY INSURANCE, THERE'S NOT AN INCENTIVE FOR YOU, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT.

AND HOW MUCH IS THE CREDIT CURRENTLY? IT'S 20 DOLLARS PER MONTH, DEPENDING ON WHICH HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM THEY PARTICIPATE IN OR THIRTY DOLLARS PER MONTH IF THEY GO WITH C2W PLUS.

OK, SO THIS IS LIKE AN OVERALL LIKE IF YOU DO THREE OR FOUR THINGS, YOU GET THE CREDIT ANYWAY, REGARDLESS OF THE VACCINATION STATUS, WHATEVER? THAT'S CORRECT. OK, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBERS, COUNCIL, ON WHAT IT COSTS.

I DON'T WHAT'S OUR, WHAT'S THE AVERAGE TWO WEEK PAY THAT IF WE LOSE SOMEBODY FOR TWO WEEKS, WHAT'S THAT AVERAGE COST THAT WE'RE PAYING OUT? DO WE KNOW? DO YOU MIND IF I TAKE THAT AS AN ACTION ITEM? IT'S PROBABLY BETTER TO KIND OF GROUP THAT IN FRONT LINE STAFF VERSUS ADMIN STAFF, IT'S A PRETTY BIG GAP. SO I CAN BREAK THAT DOWN BY GROUPING OF WHAT AN AVERAGE KIND OF DAY OF WORK LOOKS LIKE [INAUDIBLE] POPULATION.

OK, THAT'S FINE, I DON'T NEED THE ANSWER NOW, I'M JUST CONCERNED.

IT'S LIKE, HOW MUCH IS IT ACTUALLY AS WE GO THROUGH AND WE'RE NOW SEEING THAT, THAT THE PANDEMIC HAS LARGELY, ALTHOUGH NOT ENTIRELY, BUT LARGELY BECOME THE PANDEMIC OF THE UNVACCINATED AND THEN WHAT CAN WE DO TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GET VACCINATED? BECAUSE THERE IS A LOSS TO THE CITY OF PRODUCTIVITY THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING.

AND THEN ON OTHER POSITIONS, WE OFTEN HAVE TO PAY OVERTIME TO SOMEBODY TO FILL THAT POSITION. AND SO THERE'S SOME ASSOCIATED COST WITH THAT.

AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT ADDING SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A STRAIGHT UP INCENTIVE WITHIN COMMIT TO WELLNESS AND THAT WOULD EITHER, MY THING WITH THE CREDIT IS NOT EVERYBODY HAS, NOT EVERYBODY HAS INSURANCE IN THE CITY, BUT WE ARE OPENING TO C2W OTHER FOLKS THIS YEAR. IS THAT RIGHT? EVERYBODY? THEY CAN PARTICIPATE IN C2W, BUT THEY DON'T RECEIVE A PREMIUM INCENTIVE, OBVIOUSLY.

SO IF YOU'RE TRYING TO DRIVE SOME OTHER BEHAVIOR, THEN IT'S NOT DIRECTLY TIED TO VACCINATIONS UNLESS THEY ARE HEALTH CARE PARTICIPANTS.

RIGHT, RIGHT. RIGHT. WELL, I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THAT IS THAT THE C2W PROGRAM IS NOT ONLY FOR FOLKS WHO ARE INSURED WITH THE CITY.

SO WE COULD BE ABLE TO PERHAPS THROUGH C2W, ADMINISTER THAT AND MAKE A DIRECT VACCINE INCENTIVE PAYMENT.

AND IT'S AVAILABLE TO ALL EMPLOYEES, THAT'S RIGHT.

AVAILABLE TO ALL EMPLOYEES.

FOLKS WHO'VE ALREADY GOTTEN VACCINATED, FOLKS WHO COME AND GET VACCINATED AND HOPEFULLY BY DOING THAT, REDUCE COST TO THE CITY FROM HAVING FOLKS WHO ARE OUT.

THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

PRO TEM HEDRICK, YOU WERE IN, YOU WERE OUT AND THEN YOU WERE BACK IN.

JUMPING IN, JUMPING OUT, YES, SIR.

THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME IN.

AND I'D HAVE TO AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN AUBIN ON THE COST OF SERVICE FOR THE PDS.

I THINK THAT AS A PERCENTAGE OF A LARGE PROJECT, ESPECIALLY AS THE PROJECT GETS LARGER AND LARGER, THAT PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL PROJECT JUST GETS SMALLER AND SMALLER, ALTHOUGH THE STAFF TIME FOR A SMALL PROJECT VERSUS A LARGE PROJECT IS GENERALLY ABOUT THE SAME.

AND IN MY EXPERIENCE, DOING LAND DEVELOPMENT WORK, THE DEVELOPER USUALLY COMPLAINS MORE ABOUT THE COST OF MY FEES RATHER THAN THE COST OF FEES THAT THEY'RE PAYING TO A CITY.

SO I'M HAPPY TO HAVE THOSE GO TRY TO RECOVER MORE OF OUR COST OF SERVICE.

I ALSO AGREE WITH THE SAFE FLIGHT FUNDS USING IT FOR TRAFFIC FUNDING.

I GET A LOT OF INPUT FROM MY DISTRICT MEMBERS ABOUT WANTING NEW LIGHTED STOP SIGNS THAT THEY'RE SEEING IN OTHER CITIES OR ADDITIONAL CROSSWALKS.

SO I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THAT AS WELL FOR USING FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY.

AND FINALLY, I'LL AGREE ON THE EMS FEES AND THE CITY MANAGER POSSIBLY DELAYING IT THIS YEAR. IF THAT'S AN ISSUE, I'M HAPPY TO RAISE THEM MAYBE BY HALF THIS YEAR AND HALF THE NEXT YEAR TRYING TO GET CLOSER TO THAT COST RECOVERY.

BUT HOPEFULLY THAT'S A ONE TIME COST IF PEOPLE ARE USING THAT RATHER THAN OTHER FEES THAT ARE RECURRING COST OVER TIME, LIKE A WATER BILL.

SO HOPEFULLY AND I DO REALIZE THAT IS A MAJOR COST.

[INAUDIBLE] BUT BY AND I AGREE WITH THE COST THE FEE STUDY THAT WE DO START GETTING IN LINE WITH THESE OTHER CITIES.

AND APPARENTLY, IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET IN A CAR ACCIDENT, GARLAND HAS BEEN ONE OF THE BEST CITIES FOR VALUE FOR GETTING A EMS SERVICE.

[00:40:03]

BUT I THINK WE HAVE WE NEED TO MOVE CLOSER TO TRYING TO RECOVER SOME OF THOSE COSTS.

SO HALF OF THE FEE RATE IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE AT THIS TIME THEN, COUNCIL, THAT WOULD BE A GOOD, MAYBE A GOOD SOLUTION THERE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH? THANKS. AND I THINK DYLAN PROVIDED A REALLY GOOD SEGUE INTO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE EMS AGAIN.

I THINK EVERYBODY'S GOTTEN TO GO AT LEAST ONCE, SO MAKING SURE I'M NOT REVISITING THIS BEFORE EVERYBODY GETS TO PUNCH IN.

IF WE HAVE A CERTAIN SET OF TIME THAT WE NEED TO DO THE COMMUNICATIONS WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS AND LET THEM KNOW THIS IS COMING AND WHAT THE CHARITY OPTIONS ARE, I'D BE FINE STARTING THAT FEE INCREASE MIDYEAR OR AT WHATEVER APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT THE PR AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT NEED TO GET THAT WORD OUT AND GET THOSE THINGS IN PLACE SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR OCTOBER 1, 2022.

WE COULD WE COULD START IT SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE COMMUNICATION AND THE PROCESSES ARE IN PLACE FIRST.

AND I'LL ADD MY VOICE TO COUNCIL MEMBER AUBIN AND MAYOR PRO TEM HEDRICK ON THE SAFE STUFF STUFF, LET'S ASSIGN THAT MONEY TO THE RIGHT PLACE.

AND, YOU KNOW, IF WE NEED TO MOVE IT AROUND TO MAKE THAT CORRECT, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO. THANK YOU SIR.

OK, VERY GOOD. OH OK.

THAT WAS SORT OF OUR FIRST ROUND.

IS THERE, BEFORE I START RECAPPING AND GOING THROUGH, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENT? OR COUNCIL LADY MORRIS? THANK YOU. I'M SORRY I DIDN'T SPEAK TO EMS FEES BECAUSE I MEAN, YEAH, THE AMBULANCE FEES BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT YOU HAD ASKED US TO DEFER THAT TO LATER.

SO I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR INTENT.

YEAH, I THINK I LIKE THAT MAYOR PRO TEM HEDRICK'S THOUGHT OF OF GOING WITH HALF FEES TO START TOWARD RECOVERY.

AND I'M ALSO FINE WITH DELAYING THE WHOLE THING UNTIL NEXT YEAR.

BUT THE BIGGEST EMPHASIS IS I FEEL LIKE IS WITH THE CHARITY CARE PROGRAM, WHICH WE JUST WE HEARD ABOUT TODAY IN THE RESPONSE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT IN PLACE FIRST, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT IN PLACE AUTOMATICALLY BEFORE WE START INCREASING FEES.

I THINK IF THAT WAS ALREADY AUTOMATICALLY HAPPENING, AND REALLY FOR THAT REASON I'LL RETRACT. I WOULD RATHER US NOT RAISE THE FEES RIGHT NOW, LET THE CHARITY CARE PROGRAM BECOME AUTOMATIC AND THEN DOWN THE ROAD, LOOK AT INCREASING THE FEES.

MAKING PEOPLE WHO HAVE JUST BEEN THROUGH A TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE FILL OUT THE HEINOUS FORMS IS JUST ANOTHER SLAP IN THE FACE.

SO I WOULD LIKE, WITH ALL DUE SPEED TO GET THE CHARITY CARE PROGRAM AUTOMATED SO THAT THEY DON'T EVER GET A BILL THAT THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH FILLING OUT FORMS. AND ALSO, JUST AS FAR AS ACTUALLY RECOVERING COSTS AND THIS IS TRUE ACROSS THE BOARD, BUT ESPECIALLY TRUE WITH THE EMS, THE, YOU KNOW, WE LOST OUR HOSPITAL BECAUSE OF UNPAID BILLS. AND IN MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH PEOPLE IN MY CIRCLE, I HAVE SEEN A GREAT NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE USED OUR AMBULANCE SERVICES AND HAVE THROWN THE BILL AWAY AND JUST NOT BOTHERED SO WE CAN TO SOME EXTENT INCREASE BILLS A LOT AND NOT NECESSARILY RECOVER.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT AN EQUAL RECOVERY WITH THE PRICE WE PUT ON IT.

SO I GUESS MY QUESTION WITH THAT IS THAT SOMEBODY MAY HAVE ASKED THIS EARLIER, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR A CLEAR ANSWER TO IT.

HOW MUCH DO WE KNOW? HOW MUCH OF THE COST RECOVERY FOR THESE EMS FEES ACTUALLY COME STRAIGHT THROUGH INSURANCE PAYMENTS VERSUS INDIVIDUAL PAYING BILLS? BECAUSE A LOT OF OUR PEOPLE ARE NOT.

AT TWENTY SIX PERCENT OF OUR UNDER 65S IN GARLAND, ACCORDING TO THE CENSUS, DO NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE. MAYOR, IF I COULD? GO, YES.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DIG DOWN AND STUFF INTO SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS, IT WILL TAKE US A COUPLE OF DAYS, BUT WE'LL PROVIDE THAT FOR THE COUNCIL.

BUT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

THERE'S NOT A ONE ON ONE CORRELATION BETWEEN PRICE INCREASED AND THAT'S SHOWING UP IN THE BOTTOM LINE. I'VE SEEN AT TIMES WE'VE INCREASED THE FEE AND THE TOTAL REVENUE DECREASED. AND SO BUT I THINK YOU'LL BE ABLE TO JUDGE BETTER WHEN WE KNOW WHAT OUR PAYOR

[00:45:09]

MIX IS. WE'LL CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT FOR THE COUNCIL.

OK, THANK YOU. SO I WILL JUST CONCLUDE TO SAY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US NOT RAISE THESE FEES NOW, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CHARITY CARE PROGRAM BECOME FULLY AUTOMATED PRIOR TO US CONSIDERING EVEN HALF RAISING THEM WITH THIS YEAR'S PROPOSED NUMBERS.

SO THANK YOU, MAYOR.

GOOD, GOOD POINTS.

OK, AS FAR AS THE EMS TOPIC, WE WILL HOLD OFF ON ANY DECISIONS ON THAT UNTIL , WE'LL TAKE THIS UP AGAIN NEXT THURSDAY NIGHT.

BY THEN, STAFF WILL GET, HAVE A CHANCE TO GET US SOME NUMBERS AND SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. AND WE CAN LOOK AT IT FROM THE POINT OF YES, MR., BRADFORD, YES, WE DO NEED TO TO ENGAGE THE CHARITY CARE NOTIFICATION INFORMATION AND COUNCIL, WE CAN LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, IS THIS A.

IS THIS I HAVE A HALF THIS YEAR, HALF NEXT YEAR? YES, I DO BELIEVE WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO BE INCREASING THE THOSE FEES.

BUT DO WE DO A HALF YEAR THIS YEAR, DO IT AND THEN THE OTHER HALF NEXT YEAR? I MEAN, WE CAN WE CAN LOOK AT THAT A LITTLE BETTER ONCE WE HAVE SOME MORE THE INFORMATION . OR DO WE PUT THE WHOLE THING UP TO NEXT YEAR? SO VERY GOOD POINTS ON THAT.

ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE? THANK YOU, MAYOR. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR. GO AHEAD. OK, THANK YOU.

I AGREE THAT I THINK WE SHOULD PUT THIS EMS SITUATION OFF UNTIL ANOTHER TIME [INAUDIBLE]. COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS AND COUNCIL MEMBER MORRIS.

AND IF IT COMES DOWN TO WE'RE DOING THIS AS IT RELATES TO A MARKET STUDY AND BEING COMPARABLE WITH OTHER CITIES, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT.

AND I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US.

AT THE SAME TIME, I DO THINK THAT IT IS MORE IMPORTANT AT THIS POINT THAT WE ARE IN LINE WITH OUR CITIZENRY, AND THAT IS IF IT'S GOING TO CAUSE A REAL PROBLEM TO THEM IN THE WAY OF DO THEY CALL AN AMBULANCE OR DO THEY NOT? I'D MUCH RATHER SEE THEM CALL THE AMBULANCE.

SO I APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING THAT ONE OFF.

IN THE WAY OF THE CHARITY CARE FUND.

I HAVE TO AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN AUBIN THERE THAT, IN FACT, THAT THOSE FUNDS PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE GEARED TOWARDS PUBLIC SAFETY VERSUS GOING TOWARDS THE BOXING GYM.

I THINK WE CAN FIND MONEYS FOR THAT, FOR THAT PROJECT IN OTHER AREAS.

AND I'M STILL KIND OF ON THE FENCE AS IT RELATES TO OUR THIRD SITUATION HERE.

BUT FOR THE MOST PART, I'LL TELL YOU AS A NEW COUNCIL MEMBER, THIS IS VERY INVIGORATING AND VERY ENGAGING. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WITH THE CITIZENRY WOULD COME AND THAT MORE OF THEM WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT IT, BECAUSE THIS IS OBVIOUS TO ME THAT WE HAVE A LEADERSHIP TEAM, WE HAVE A LEADERSHIP TEAM THAT IS TRULY INTERESTED AND DOING THE VERY BEST THAT CAN BE DONE FOR OUR CITY.

THE BEST CAN BE DONE FOR OUR PEOPLE.

SO THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR, AGAIN, JUST THE EDUCATION THAT I'M LEARNING AS A RESULT OF BEING HERE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, SIR.

ALL RIGHT, COUNCIL, I THINK WE'VE CLEARED THE QUEUE.

I'M GOING TO GO BACK DOWN THROUGH THE LIST OF ITEMS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP AND KIND OF WHERE WHERE WE SEEM TO BE ON THEM.

THE FIRST WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD BY DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIAMS ON THE NLC AND I BELIEVE MR. BRADFORD. NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS.

SO IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ATTEND NLC EVENTS WITHOUT US BEING MEMBERS. NOW THEY, OUR MEMBERS WON'T BE ABLE TO BE ON THE COMMITTEES, ET CETERA, BUT WE CAN STILL GO TO AND PARTICIPATE IN THOSE EVENTS THROUGH BASICALLY THAT WOULD BE COVERED THROUGH OUR COUNCIL TRAVEL BUDGET.

IS THAT CORRECT, MR. BRADFORD? DID I GET THAT ALL OUT CORRECTLY? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR.

SO WE CAN STILL PARTICIPATE IN NLC WITHOUT BEING FULL MEMBERS.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN CONSIDER WHEN THAT COMES BACK AROUND.

LET ME SEE, STARTING AT THE TOP, OBVIOUSLY, EMS WE'RE GOING TO HOLD OFF ON.

THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT POSITION, WE'RE GOOD WITH.

[00:50:05]

LET'S SEE THE NEXT ONE WAS THE DEVELOPMENT FEES IN THE DOWNTOWN FOR PARCELS OVER ONE ACRE.

I AM NOT OPPOSED TO INCREASING THOSE FEES AND KEEPING THAT GETTING US BACK IN LINE, IS THERE? I KNOW COUNCILMAN MORRIS WAS WANTING TO HOLD OFF ON THOSE.

IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR THAT? I GUESS IS WHAT I'LL ASK FOR.

ARE WE GOOD WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH THOSE FEES, WITH THE WITH THE PLANNED FEES? COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE? I'M STILL A LITTLE HESITANT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BECAUSE WHAT I'M HEARING IS GOING FROM ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS TO FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS, A FOUR THOUSAND PERCENT INCREASE, AND I'VE HEARD THE RATIONALE AS IT RELATES TO WHY WE THINK THAT WE NEED TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT TO PUT US IN LINE WITH THE OTHER CITIES.

OF COURSE, THE DEVELOPERS, THAT PROBABLY WOULD NOT BE A BIG DEAL.

I EVEN LIKE THE IDEA OF IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD THAT FIVE THOUSAND DOLLAR FEE, THEN MAYBE YOU SHOULD NOT BE DOING HERE.

AT THE SAME TIME, IT JUST SEEMED LIKE AN AWESOME INCREASE GOING FROM ONE THOUSAND TO FIVE.

SO RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, I'M STRADDLING THE FENCE.

I DON'T REALLY LIKE TO HEAR MORE [INAUDIBLE].

OK, LET'S SEE HERE BEFORE WE GET ANY FURTHER.

MR. BRADFORD, OR WILL, CAN WE GET SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THAT FOR THE MEETING ON THE 26TH OR ACTUALLY BEFORE THAT, BUT JUST SOME COMPARISONS, SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS ON THAT. YES, SIR.

WE'LL DIG INTO THE ISSUE AND SEND COUNCIL SOME SOME THOUGHTS, THINGS YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER THE PROCESS OF COMING TO A DECISION.

OK, VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU SIR. COUNCIL LADY MORRIS? THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, GOING FROM ONE THOUSAND TO SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE PRE FILING, WHICH IS NOT SUPER LABOR INTENSIVE, I DON'T BELIEVE, AND WILL CORRECT ME IF THIS IS NOT TRUE.

THIS IS, IT IS A FIVE THOUSAND DOLLAR INCREASE.

IT'S NOT A FOUR THOUSAND DOLLAR INCREASE.

AND IT'S LOOKING TO ALL OF OUR OTHER FEE INCREASES.

I'M NOT FINDING ANYTHING ELSE THAT CAME CLOSE TO INCREASING TO THAT LEVEL.

SOME THINGS WERE INCREASED, SOME FEES DOUBLED.

A COUPLE FEES TRIPLED.

I DON'T FIND ANYTHING ELSE THAT JUMPED TIMES SIX AND SO WOULD I OBJECT TO US DOUBLING OR TRIPLING THIS IN ORDER TO TO EDGE UPWARD? I WOULD NOT. AND I DON'T HAVE THAT BIG OF AN OBJECTION TO THE ACTUAL 30 DAY APPLICATION FEE GOING FROM SIX THOUSAND TO NINE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED, BECAUSE THAT IS MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE OTHER INCREASES ACROSS THE ENTIRE APPENDIX F OF FEE INCREASES.

THIS ONE JUST STANDS OUT.

I DON'T SEE A JUSTIFICATION FOR IT.

AND WHEN WILL SOMEONE ELSE WILL? THIS WAS BASED ON WHAT OTHER CITIES WERE DOING IN OTHER CITIES.

HE SAID NO, BUT HE SAID THAT IT WAS MORE MORE TRYING TO CAPTURE BACK COSTS OF STAFF.

AND THAT IS TOTALLY VALID.

AND I WOULD NOT OBJECT TO A LESSER INCREASE.

I DO OBJECT GOING FROM ONE THOUSAND TO SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS IN ONE LEAP THIS YEAR.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT.

THANK YOU, SIR. WE'LL GET SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OUT TO EVERYONE AND WE'LL TAKE THAT ONE BACK UP AGAIN NEXT THURSDAY.

THE NEXT ITEM WAS SAFE LIGHT FUNDS OF REDIRECTING THAT BACK TO PUBLIC SAFETY [INAUDIBLE] . HELLO. HELLO.

I DON'T KNOW, DID YOU UNMUTED YOURSELF, NOT ME SO WELL, BUT IF IT'S OK FOR YOU, WHAT'S THE NEXT ITEM? ALL RIGHT.

I DIDN'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR DOWN THE ROAD AND ASK YOU ABOUT THAT.

I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT WE PASSED, [INAUDIBLE].I MEAN, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE AS FAR AS ATTENDING NLC EVENTS, I HAVE FUNDING

[00:55:06]

AVAILABLE FOR THAT.

RIGHT. AS FAR AS MEMBERSHIP IN NLC, WE'LL TAKE COUNCIL ACTION.

AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A REQUEST FOR, JUST FOR INFORMATION, [INAUDIBLE]THE STAFF TO PROVIDE COUNCIL WITH A AN OVERVIEW, IF YOU WILL, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM OF NLC, AND PARTICULARLY THE COMMITTEE STRUCTURE AND THE COMMITTEE FUNCTIONS PRIOR TO OUR NEXT BUDGET SESSION. JUST FOR INFORMATION, JUST AN OVERVIEW.

I'D LIKE FOR THAT TO BE DONE AND SENT TO EACH COUNCIL MEMBER PRIOR TO OUR DISCUSSION REGARDING THE MEMBERSHIP ISSUE.

ALL RIGHT.

COUNCIL MEMBER BASS, I THINK YOU WERE IN THE QUEUE, BUT THEN YOU WEREN'T, SO I'M JUST DOUBLE CHECKING THAT, IF YOU WANT TO BE IN THE QUEUE, NOW'S THE TIME.

THANK YOU. EACH TIME I'VE RAISED MY HAND, YOU'VE SAID THAT WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS IT IN THE NEXT SESSION. SO I JUST PUT MY HAND BACK DOWN.

SO, ARE YOU AGREEING WITH ME TO DISCUSS IT IN THE NEXT SESSION OR? YES, EXACTLY.

VERY GOOD. VERY GOOD.

ALL RIGHT. SO LET ME COME BACK TO SO I THINK I WAS AT, SAFE LIGHT FUNDS AND REDIRECTING THAT FUNDING BACK TO PUBLIC SAFETY, TRANSPORTATION AND LOOKING AT ADDRESSING THE MOBILE BOXING GYM THROUGH THE ARPA FUNDS OR SOME OTHER SOME OTHER MEANS.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT EVERYBODY'S REACTIONS? AND IS THAT SOMETHING WE ARE GOOD WITH TONIGHT? IS THERE ANYBODY OPPOSED TO THAT? SO WE ARE GOOD WITH MOVING FORWARD, WITH REDIRECTING SAFE LIGHT FUNDS BACK TO PUBLIC SAFETY, TRANSPORTATION AND LOOKING FOR ALTERNATIVES FOR THE MOBILE BOXING GYM.

ALL RIGHT. LOOKIE THERE.

WE'VE MADE IT LOOK THAT WE MADE A DECISION.

HOW ABOUT THAT.

MAYOR? I'LL BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT WITHIN THE BUDGET.

WE DON'T THINK WE WANT TO WORK TOGETHER.

THAT'S EVEN BETTER.

ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE LAST THING I HAVE, AND IT'S ONE THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BACK WAS THE C2W THE AVERAGE LOST TIME PAY VERSUS WHAT THE COST OF THAT WAS.

SO THAT WILL COME BACK AROUND TO US AS WELL.

SO WITH THAT, WE HAVE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX.

SO OUT OF SIX ITEMS, ONE WAS DECIDED.

AND WHO SAYS GOVERNMENT DOESN'T WORK? COME ON. ALL RIGHT.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE WANT TO TURN TO TO BRING BACK THROUGH FOR NEXT WEEK OR MORE INFORMATION BEFORE NEXT WEEK? ALL RIGHT, LOOKS LIKE WE'VE CLEARED THE QUEUE AND OUR ATTORNEY SENT ME A MESSAGE EARLIER THAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS, I HAD IT WRITTEN IN MY NOTES AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE, BUT OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T READ IT.

SO AT THIS POINT, WE WILL OPEN UP THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL AT THIS TIME WE'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

AND OBVIOUSLY, WE ARE STILL MEETING IN THE VIRTUAL CAPACITY, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, EXCUSE ME, IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL, IF YOU CAN USE THE RAISE YOUR HAND FEATURE, WE WILL QUEUE YOU UP.

AND HEAR FROM YOU. LOOKING AT THE LIST OF ATTENDEES, THEY ARE MOSTLY STAFF, IF NOT ALL BUT ONE, AND I DON'T SEE ANYBODY COMING FORWARD.

SO AT THAT POINT, AGAIN, WE WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARING OPPORTUNITY AND DISCUSSION NEXT WEEK ON THE 26TH.

AND THAT WILL CONTINUE TO MOVE US FORWARD TO OUR SEPTEMBER 14TH MEETING, WHERE WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING, OUR FINAL PUBLIC HEARING, AND BE PREPARED TO, HOPEFULLY, BE PREPARED TO VOTE ON THE BUDGET THAT EVENING.

WITHOUT ANYTHING ELSE AT SEVEN O'CLOCK, WE ARE ADJOURNED.

[01:00:02]

THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.