Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[00:00:05]

ALL RIGHT, WELL, GOOD EVENING, AND WELCOME TO THE JANUARY 9TH, 2023 WORK SESSION FOR THE GARLAND CITY COUNCIL.

THIS IS OUR FIRST MEETING OF THE NEW YEAR, SO GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY.

WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF EXTENDED TIME OFF FROM OUR NORMAL, SO LET'S GET, LET'S GET TO IT.

[1. Public Comments on Work Session Items]

UH, FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.

UH, ITEM ONE IS PUBLIC COMMENTS ON WORK SESSION ITEMS. AND I DO HAVE A SPEAKER THIS EVENING.

UH, PERSONS WHO DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ANY ITEM ON THE WORK SESSION AGENDA ARE ALLOWED THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

SPEAKERS ARE TAKEN ONLY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING OTHER THAN INVITED TESTIMONY.

SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO ADDRESSING ITEMS ON THE WORK SESSION AGENDA.

ANY ITEMS RELATING TO REGULAR SESSION AGENDA ITEMS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED AT THE REGULAR SESSION.

AND ANY ITEM, NOT ON AN NOT ON AN AGENDA MAY BE ADDRESSED DURING THE OPEN MICROPHONE AT THE END OF THE REGULAR SESSION.

UH, DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER, UH, AND THIS IS FOR COUNSEL.

THIS IS ON ITEM FOUR, A NUMBER TWO, AND LISA CRAWFORD, IF YOU CAN COME FORWARD PLEASE.

AND, UH, YOU CAN PICK ANY SEATS YOU LIKE.

I GUESS THERE'S NO, YOU KNOW, , THAT ONE STINKS.

DON'T.

AND, UH, IT'S ON.

AND, UH, IF YOU COULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, AND THEN YOU'RE OFF.

LISA CRAWFORD.

63 PERDIDO DRIVE, GARLAND, TEXAS, UH, 75,043 IN DISTRICT FOUR.

AND I AM HERE TO VOICE SUPPORT FOR ZONING CHANGES REGARDING RETAIL PET STORES.

ITEM 4 82, EL PASO, AUSTIN, FORT WORTH, WACO, THE COLONY, SAN ANTONIO ULI COLLEGE STATION, SHERMAN, HOUSTON, BRIAN PASADENA, AND DALLAS HAVE AL ALREADY PASSED SIMILAR LEGISLATION.

UM, GARLAND, MOVING FORWARD ON THIS IS A WELCOME PROGRESSION.

UH, WHEREAS HAVING THESE STORES PACK UP AND MOVED TO GARLAND IS A SLAP IN THAT FACED OUR NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE WORKED HARD ON THIS, AND IT NEGATIVELY IMPACTS OUR RESIDENTS WITHOUT BEING PRIVY TO NUMBERS.

UM, I'M FAIRLY CERTAIN ANIMAL SERVICES IS HIGH ON THE LIST OF CITY EXPENSES, FULL SHELTERS, FULL RESCUES, SLOW ADOPTIONS, TOO MANY STRAYS, ACCIDENTAL LITTERS AND OWNER SURRENDERS HAVE ALL MADE A HUGE IMPACT.

THE LAST THING WE NEED IS TO IMPORT MORE DOGS AND CATS TO AN ALREADY UNMANAGEABLE OVER POP OP OVERPOPULATION.

RETAIL PET STORES NEGATIVELY AFFECT SHELTER AND RESCUE ADOPTIONS, WHICH NEGATIVELY AFFECT SHELTER COST.

RE RETAIL PET STORES NEGATIVELY AFFECT LOCAL SMALL BUSINESS RESPONSIBLE BREEDERS WHO CANNOT COMPETE WITH WHOLESALE ONLINE ADVERTISING THAT FLOODS THE COMMUNITY.

AND GARLAND, JUST TAED BUY LOCAL CHRISTMAS AGENDA.

YOU KNOW, A LITTLE CHRISTMAS COMMUNITY THING, UM, BY LOCAL SHOULD INCLUDE ETHICAL LOCAL BREEDERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

THEY VET THEIR, THEIR, THE HOMES THEIR DOGS ARE GOING TO, AND MOST HAVE A CONTRACT TO ALWAYS TAKE BACK ANY OF THEIR PETS.

RETAIL PET SELLS DO NOT DO THIS.

RETAIL.

PET CELLS ALSO ENCOURAGE UNETHICAL BREEDING.

BACKYARD BREEDERS INCREASE WHEN THEY BELIEVE THERE IS PROFIT TO BE MADE ON THE LATEST DESIGNER DOG.

A RESCUE THAT I FOSTER FOR THIS WEEKEND TOOK IN 20 DOGS FROM A BACKYARD BREEDER.

THAT'S 20 DOGS THAT WILL NOT BE RESCUED FROM THE SHELTER.

THESE BACKYARD BREEDERS AND THE STORES THEMSELVES CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERPOPULATION, UM, BECAUSE THEY DO NOT REQUIRE ANY CONTRACT AS SPAY OR NEUTER, WHICH IS A CITY LAW.

UM, FOR GOOD REASON.

RE RETAIL PET STORES HAVE EXTREMELY PREDATORY LOANING PROCEDURES, WHICH CATCHES MANY CONSUMERS OFF GUARD.

AND LAST RETAIL PET STORES ARE A PIPELINE FOR PUPPY MILLS.

THEY FUND HORRIFIC TREATMENT, UM, INCURRED IN THOSE PLACES.

AND THAT'S A STATEMENT OF FACT.

THERE'S A LIBRARY OF RESEARCH TO BACK THAT UP.

AND THESE ARE A FEW OF THE ECONOMIC AND ETHICAL REASONS TO PROCEED WITH THIS ORDINANCE.

THANK YOU.

I WANT YOU TO KNOW, I, I SPOKE TO, I SPOKE TO YOU BEFORE WE STARTED THE MEETING.

YOU SAID YOU HAD TIMED US, PRACTICED IT OUT.

I WANT YOU TO KNOW YOU HIT THREE MINUTES.

EXACTLY.

[00:05:01]

.

IS THERE AN AWARD? ? I'M GONNA WRITE ONE OUT RIGHT HERE AS WE SPEAK.

I DO HAVE, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS. THE MAYOR STOLE MY THUNDER.

.

GOOD EVENING, MS. CRAWFORD.

HELLO.

I'M ALWAYS EXCITED WHEN ONE OF MY CONSTITUENTS COME DOWN AND VOICE THIS, YOUR OPINION.

AND YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY DONE YOUR RESEARCH.

YOU, YOU HAVE A LOT MORE EXPERTISE THAN I DO.

I DON'T MIND ADMITTING THAT, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE THE INTEREST.

THAT'S WHAT I, UH, PRAY AND HOPE FOR ALL THE TIME.

WANNA REALLY HEAR FROM THE FOLK AND THANK YOU.

AND I'VE PROBABLY SEEN YOU PAST, PAST YEAR STREET, YOUR HOUSE A HUNDRED TIMES.

I'VE PROBABLY SEEN YOU WALKING YOUR PATHS.

HEY, UH, YES.

A AROUND THE, AROUND THE, AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO I REALLY APPRECIATE, UH, YOUR INVOLVEMENT AND APPRECIATE WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND, UH, THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO COME TO COUNCIL.

THANK YOU.

AND, UH, I'M SURE THAT THIS WILL NOT BE YOUR LAST INVOLVEMENT, .

IT WON'T.

CAN I, CAN I ADDRESS THAT? SURE.

I, I ACTUALLY HAVE, UM, A PETITION IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I GOT IN ONE DAY, UH, IN A 10 BLOCK RADIUS.

UM, 38 PEOPLE SIGNED IN SUPPORT OF THIS ORDINANCE, AND ONE PERSON WANTED TO DO MORE RESEARCH.

AND IF THAT'S REPRESENTATIVE OF THE RIGHT, THE CITIZENS OF GARLAND, UM, 37 OUT OF 38 IS PRETTY HIGH.

IT'S PRETTY, IT'S PRETTY HIGH.

HAVE YOU TURNED THAT IN TO THE MAYOR, OR, I HAVE NOT.

I DO YOU HAVE IT WITH, WHEN YOU SHARE THAT WITH ME, I, YES, ABSOLUTELY.

IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT TONIGHT, I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE.

YOU CAN, YOU CAN GET IT TO ME LATER.

I'D, I'D VERY MUCH LIKE TO, LIKE TO HAVE THAT NOW.

IT'S A SMALL NUMBER, BUT IT TOOK AN HOUR.

IT'S NOT NO NUMBERS, A SMALL NUMBER.

THOSE ARE ALL IN YOUR DISTRICT.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR COMING DOWN.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND WE WILL GET TO THE DISCUSSION OF THAT ITEM HERE SHORTLY.

.

WOW.

I THINK SHE WAS ACTUALLY GONNA TAKE ME UP ON, THANK YOU, .

OKAY.

PIECES OF PAPER GOING AT ME IN EVERY DIRECTION NOW.

UH, OKAY.

UH, AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS OUR ONLY SPEAKER, UH, FOR THE E THAT'S, THAT IS, OKAY.

VERY GOOD.

UH, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM

[2. Consider the Consent Agenda]

TWO.

CONSIDER THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UH, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY REQUEST, UH, TO HAVE ANY ITEMS PULLED, BUT OBVIOUSLY THERE'S STILL TIME IF IT, IF YOU NEED IT.

UH, NEXT WE'LL MOVE ON TO WRITTEN BRIEFINGS.

ITEM THREE, ITEM

[3. Written Briefings:]

THREE A IS THE 2023 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

C I P.

UH, EVERYONE RECEIVED THEIR BINDERS? YES.

UM, AND WE'RE JUST DOING A VERBAL OR A, A WRITTEN BRIEFING THIS EVENING.

UM, AND, UH, ALISON WANTED TO REMIND YOU THAT, UH, WE HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING COMING UP ON THE 21ST.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PRIOR TO THAT, UH, TO SEND THEM TO HER.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, NEXT ITEM, ITEM THREE B PURDUE DRIVE, PARKING RESTRICTIONS, THREE C GREEN BELT PARKWAY PARKING RESTRICTIONS, 3D NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY MATCHING GRANT, FALL 2022 APPLICATIONS.

ITEM THREE E AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SHARING VIA DALLAS COUNTY PROSECUTOR AND DALLAS COUNTY JUVENILE CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.

ITEM THREE F, HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN, ADOPTION RESOLUTION ITEM THREE G 2022, HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM, APPLICATION RESOLUTION, AND ITEM THREE H, OPTIONAL REDEMPTION OF TAX NOTES.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

MOVING

[4.a. Development Services Committee Report]

ON TO VERBAL BRIEFINGS UNDER ITEM FOUR, UH, FOUR, A DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT.

WE'VE GOT MULTIPLE TOPICS, UH, MULTIPLE TOPICS IN HERE.

COUNCIL MEMBER HEDRICK, YOU WANT TO GET US STARTED? YES, SIR.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

WE HAVE THREE ITEMS THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO REPORT ON TODAY, THE FIRST OF WHICH IS CHANGES TO THE G REGARDING TREE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS.

AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT, AND WE MIGHT HAVE A LITTLE PRESENTATION FOR YOU HERE TO REVIEW SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE PROPOSED.

MR. GARRON?

[00:10:01]

YES, SIR.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN AND AARON.

COUNCIL, UM, THE PRESENTATION IS FAIRLY BRIEF.

I'LL JUST KIND OF, UH, GIVE A LITTLE BACKGROUND AND TOUCH ON A FEW ITEMS AND THEN HAND IT TO, UH, MATT TO GO OVER, UM, SOME OF THE OTHER, UH, RECOMMENDED CHANGES THAT CAME OUT OF COMMITTEE.

UM, BUT JUST TO KIND OF START AS A REMINDER, THE PURPOSE OF THE TREE MITIGATION, THIS IS FROM THE GARLAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE TREE MITIGATION, UM, ORDINANCE AS PART OF THE GC THAT IS, UH, TO REQUIRE THE PRESERVATION OF EXISTING HEALTHY TREES AS PROPERTIES ARE DEVELOPED OR REDEVELOPED, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF TREES WHEN THEY'RE REMOVED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF LANDS.

AS A REMINDER, THE TREE MITIGATION FEE, UH, PER THE G IS $150 PER CALIPER INCH REMOVED AND NOT REPLANTED.

UM, UH, TREES CURRENTLY IN THE GC SIX INCHES AND ABOVE ARE PROTECTED.

UM, ALTHOUGH THE RATIOS OF MITIGATION DEPEND ON THE SIZE OF THE TREE AND THE SPECIES TYPE.

AND THERE IS A REFORESTATION AND TREE MANAGEMENT FUND THAT THE TREE MITIGATION FEES GO INTO, UH, TO BE USED BY THE CITY TO PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN LANDSCAPING, IRRIGATION, AND OTHER SIMILAR RELATED ACTIVITIES ON PROPERTIES WITHIN THE, UH, TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF THE CITY.

SO I'LL TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF ITEMS, UH, THAT CAME OUT OF, UM, UH, OR WERE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE AUDIT REPORT THAT LOOKED AT TREE MITIGATION.

UH, SO WE'VE ADDRESSED THESE, UM, IN THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES, WHICH, UM, THE RED LINES ARE IN YOUR, UM, PACKET THIS EVENING.

UM, ONE OF WHICH HAD TO DO WITH, UH, UH, TREE TA, TREE AND SHRUB TABLES IN THE G.

AND PARTICULARLY WHAT CAME UP VERY OFTEN IN LOOKING AT SOME TREE MANAGEMENT PLANS IN THE PAST WERE EASTERN RED CEDARS.

THERE'S JUST SOME CONFUSION WITH THE WAY THE G IS WORDED ON HOW, UM, THEY SHOULD BE ADDRESSED AND WHAT MITIGATION RATE THEY SHOULD FOLLOW, OR IF AT ALL, IF THEY'RE CONSIDERED PROTECTED.

SO, UM, MATT WILL TOUCH ON THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES, BUT THAT WAS ADDRESSED IN HERE.

UM, OFFSITE TREE PLANTING CREDITS, THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED NOT TO ALLOW, UM, IF, IF A SITE, IF A DEVELOPER CANNOT MITIGATE AND REPLANT A TREE ONSITE, UM, THEY SH THEY SHOULD SIMPLY PAY INTO THE TREE MITIGATION FUND RATHER THAN ALLOWING THEM TO PLANT, UM, TREES OFFSITE, WHICH, UM, IS, IS DIFFICULT TO TRACK, AND IT'S KIND OF PROBLEMATIC.

IN FACT, ONE OF OUR NEIGHBOR CITIES, UM, TESTIFIED TO THAT AND ACTUALLY CHANGED THEIR ORDINANCE TO GET AWAY FROM THAT.

EITHER YOU REPLANT ONSITE OR PAY INTO THE FEE.

UM, THERE WAS ALSO A, A CURRENTLY LANGUAGE IN THE GC ABOUT A 30% LIMITATION ON TREE PRESERVATION CREDITS ON SITE, UM, BOTH STAFF, UM, CITY AUDITOR.

AND, UM, EVERYONE WAS REALLY KIND OF CONFUSED AS TO WHY THERE WAS A 30% LIMITATION.

IT WAS JUST KIND OF CONFUSING LANGUAGE ANYWAYS.

SO, UM, IT WAS RECOMMENDED TO REMOVE THAT.

UM, AFTER ALL, THE PURPOSE OF THIS ORDINANCE IS TO PRESERVE HEALTHY TREES.

UM, AND THEN FINALLY, IT'S MORE OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER, BUT ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE.

UM, THERE'S SOME, UM, ILLUSION TO HAVING TO DO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS EVERY TIME A DEVELOPER PURSUES ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE, WHICH, UM, WAS, IS A BIT EXCESSIVE AND UNNECESSARY.

ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.

UH, SO WE JUST KIND OF CLEANED UP THAT LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT.

UM, BUT I WANNA HAND IT OVER TO MATT.

UM, WE'VE REALLY IN THESE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE RED LINES KIND OF RESTRUCTURED, UM, HOW THE, UM, UH, TREE MITIGATION ORDINANCE IS, IS HANDLED AND HOW PROTECTED TREES AND PRESERVED TREES ARE, ARE KIND OF CALCULATED AND HANDLED.

SO I'LL THANK MATT.

UH, GOOD EVENING, MARY COUNSEL.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT.

UH, WE HAD A LOT OF GREAT, UH, DISCUSSION AT COMMITTEE AND REALLY WE'RE ABLE TO DIVE INTO THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE.

UH, SO WE'LL KIND OF JUST GO OVER WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME OUT OF THERE.

FIRST OF ALL, I'LL JUST KIND OF GIVE YOU A HIGH LEVEL, UH, SYNOPSIS OF, OF WHAT WE HAVE.

CAUSE WE ACTUALLY HAVE, TREES ARE ACTUALLY MENTIONED IN TWO OF OUR DIFFERENT CODES OF ORDINANCES.

ONE OF 'EM IS ACTUALLY WITHIN CHAPTER 25 OF OUR PARKS AND RECREATION ORDINANCE.

AND WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY CHANGES TO THAT.

UH, PRETTY MUCH JUST STATES THAT IT'S ILLEGAL TO, TO DAMAGE CUT, DAMAGE, REMOVE, UH, BRAKE, UH, RUN OVER THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.

AND, UM, WITHIN OUR, OUR PARKS.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO OBVIOUSLY KEEP AND STAY.

SO THE BULK OF IT COMES INTO, UH, THE, THE FULL G D C AND THE TREE MITIGATION ORDINANCE IN, WHEN I LOOK AT A A TREE ORDINANCE, I TRY TO KEEP IT SIMPLER, THE BETTER, UH, MAKE IT EASIER FOR DEVELOPERS TO BE ABLE, ABLE TO UNDERSTAND, MAKE IT EASIER FOR OUR PLANNING STAFF AND THOSE THAT ARE REVIEWING THE ORDINANCE TO UNDERSTAND.

UH, AND THE GREAT THING WAS IS WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A, A REALLY GREAT TREE ORDINANCE.

UH, AND THIS TREE ORDINANCE HAS BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE FOR, FOR A LONG TIME SINCE IT'S BEEN, UM, IN, IN, IN, IN PROCESS.

UH, THERE'S JUST A FEW TWEAKS THAT, THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF BRING IT CURRENT.

UM, SOME OF IT IS, IS VERNACULAR IN NATURE.

FOR ONE, WE MENTIONED THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE, WE REFERRED TO TREE MEASUREMENTS IN INCHES, UH, IN CALIPER INCHES.

UH, CALIPER INCHES IS A STRICTLY MEASUREMENT OF NEWLY PLANTED TREES.

IT'S A NURSERY INDUSTRY TERM.

UH, AND SO WE WENT TO AND CHANGED EVERYTHING TO DBH, WHICH IS

[00:15:01]

DIAMETER BREAST HEIGHT, WHICH IS THE INDUSTRY STANDARD FOR MEASURING TREES IN THE FIELD.

IT'S MEASURED AT FOUR AND A HALF FEET ABOVE THE GROUND, WHEREAS CALPER INCHES ARE MEASURED AT SIX FEET ABOVE THE GROUND, OR 12 FEET ABOVE THE GROUND, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE TREE.

UM, ONE OF THE THINGS WE ALSO WANTED TO LOOK AT WAS WHAT IS DESIGNED AS A PROTECTED TREE.

UH, SO RIGHT NOW HOW WE DEFINE A PROTECTED TREE IS WE LOOK AT A LIST, IT'S, EVERYTHING'S REFERRED BACK TO A LIST.

AS LONG AS IT'S SIX INCHES IN DIAMETER, THEN YOU HAVE TO, TO REFER BACK TO A LIST.

I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF LISTS WHEN IT COMES TO ORDINANCES, BECAUSE THEN ANYTIME YOU WANT TO CHANGE THAT LIST, IT HAS TO COME BACK THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS.

AND TREE SPECIES, UH, ESPECIALLY THIS WAS RELATED TO LANDSCAPING AS WELL, AND THERE'S ALWAYS NEW VARIETIES OF TREES THAT ARE COMING ON THE MARKET.

THERE'S ALWAYS A WAY TO BE ABLE TO GIVE MORE FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF THE TYPES OF TREES WE CAN USE.

AND SO I TRY TO GET AWAY FROM LISTS AND ORDINANCES THAT THEN HAVE TO GO THROUGH A WHOLE, UH, PROCESS TO BE ABLE TO UPDATE THOSE, AND IT KIND OF CAN SLOW THINGS DOWN.

SO WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS CHANGING THE, THE DEFINITION OF WHAT WE CALL A PROTECTED TREE.

AGAIN, IT'S KEEPING THINGS THAT ARE SIX INCHES, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAD BEFORE.

AND THEN INSTEAD OF CLASSIFYING THEM IN A LIST, WHAT WE DO IS GONNA CLASSIFY THEM INTO A CATEGORY.

UH, AND THE FIRST THING THAT WE LOOK AT IS WHAT ARE THE TREES THAT WE DON'T WANT TO PROTECT? UH, AND WHY WOULD WE NOT WANT TO PROTECT A TREE? SO WE'RE NOT GONNA WANT TO PROTECT TREES THAT ARE INVASIVE TREES THAT, UM, ARE NOT THE TYPES OF TREES THAT WE WOULD NECESSARILY WANT BECAUSE THEY TAKE OVER AN AREA, UH, SUCH LIKE CALORIE REPAIR, CHINA BERRY, CHINESE TALLAH, TALLOW, UH, CERTAIN HOLLY SPECIES, PALMS TREE OF HEAVEN, WHICH IS A HORRIBLY INVASIVE SPECIES, UH, EASTERN RED CEDAR, UH, AND THEN OTHER TREES.

AND YOU PUT THIS OTHER TREE, THIS IS KIND OF A CATCHALL.

UH, OTHER TREES THAT ARE LISTED ON THE A AND M FOREST SERVICE INVASIVE SPECIES LIST.

THEY HOLD A LIST OF WHAT ARE CONSIDERED INVASIVE SPECIES LIST.

IF IT'S A TRULY INVASIVE SPECIES, IT'S NOT FAIR THAT WE'RE REQUIRING A DEVELOPER TO MITIGATE IF THEY'RE CUTTING THOSE THINGS DOWN.

SO WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE REST OF THE TREES THAT ARE OUT THERE? WE WANT TO CLASSIFY THOSE.

WHEN WE LOOK AT, WHEN I APPROACH A TREE ORDINANCE, WHAT I LIKE TO SAY IS WE WANT TO PROTECT OUR BIGGEST AND OUR BEST.

WE WANNA LOOK AT THOSE TREE SPECIES THAT ADD VALUE, UH, IN TERMS OF CARBON REDUCT REDUCTION, STORM WATER, URBAN HEAT ISLAND.

AND THOSE ARE OUR, OUR BIG MATURE TREES THAT HAVE AGED TO 'EM.

IT'S TAKEN 'EM A LONG TIME TO GET THAT BIG, AND WE WANT TO PUT THE VALUE ON THERE THAT THEY, THAT THEY DESERVE.

AND WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT YOU CAN'T CUT THOSE TREES DOWN, JUST WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE PUT IT AN APPROPRIATE CREDIT, UH, RATIO TO THOSE TREES.

SO INSTEAD OF HAVING A LIST, WHAT WE RECOMMEND IS, AND WHAT CAME OUT OF COMMITTEE WAS A CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM.

ONE WOULD BE CLASS ONE TREES.

THESE WOULD BE OUR BIGGEST AND OUR BEST TREES.

SO THESE WOULD BE HEALTHY TREES WHOSE AGE, SIZE, AND UNIQUE NATURE, OUR NATURAL HISTORICAL CHARACTER ARE ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT TO THE CITY AND MEET THE FOLLOWING SPECIES AND SIZE REQUIREMENTS.

THESE WOULD BE TREES THAT ARE LARGER THAN 18 INCHES IN DBH.

UH, AND THEN IN OUR MOST COMMON SPECIES, AMERICAN ELM, SIBERIAN ELM, SLIPPERY ELM, CEDAR, ELM, ALL SYCAMORES, CHITHAM, WOOD COTTON, COMMON PERCENTM, SIMMONS, PECAN OAKS AND WALNUTS.

THAT'S THE MAJORITY OF THE GOOD QUALITY TREES, UH, THAT WE HAVE IN GARLAND.

CLASS.

TWO TREES.

LET ME GO TO CLASS THREE TREES.

CLASS THREE TREES WOULD BE ONES THAT WE CONSIDER TREES THAT HAVE VALUE, BUT THEY'RE NOT INVASIVE, SO TO SPEAK.

UM, BUT THEY TEND TO BE A FASTER GROWING SPECIES.

THEY TEND TO NOT BE LONG AS LONG LIVED, UH, AND MAYBE DON'T HAVE AS QUITE THE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS THAT SOME OF OUR BIGGEST AND OUR BEST TREES DO.

AND WHAT WE DO WANT TO REALIZE THAT THOSE TREES HAVE VALUE, THEY PROBABLY DON'T HAVE AS MUCH VALUE AS SOME OF OUR BIGGEST AND BEST TREES IN THERE.

SO, UH, WHAT WE WOULD PUT INTO, WHAT WE WOULD CALL A CLASS THREE TREE WOULD BE ALL OF OUR ASH TREES, ALL OF OUR WILLOW SPECIES.

THINGS LIKE COTTONWOOD, MESQUITES, HACKBERRY, SUGARBERRY, MIMOSAS.

UH, YOU CAN READ THE REST ONE THERE.

AGAIN, THESE ARE USUALLY FASTER GROWING TREES.

THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE SUPER, SUPER LONG-LIVED, BUT THEY DO HAVE VALUE.

WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THESE BE RE REPLACED AT A RATIO OF 0.5 TO ONE WHERE OUR SIGNIFICANT TREES WOULD HAVE A REPLACEMENT RATIO OF A TWO TO ONE.

AND THIS AGAIN, STAYS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN OUR TREE ORDINANCE.

IT JUST KIND OF BROADENS THE NUMBER OF SPECIES THAT ARE ON THAT LIST.

AND THEN AGAIN, YOUR CLASS TWO TREES THEN WOULD BE ANYTHING THAT'S NOT CATEGORIZED AS A CLASS ONE TREE OR A CLASS THREE TREE, OR AS AN UNPROTECTED TREE.

AND THOSE WOULD BE MITIGATED AT A STRAIGHT ONE-TO-ONE RATIO.

SO I'LL, I'LL KIND OF STOP THERE FOR A SECOND.

CAUSE I KNOW THAT'S A, AN ENTIRELY A LOT OF INFORMATION AND A KIND OF A CHANGE IN CONCEPT OF, OF HOW WE LOOK AT OUR TREE ORDINANCE.

THIS IS REALLY THE BIGGEST CHANGE THAT IS OUT THERE, UH, THAT WE HAD SOME TIME TO, TO SPEAK TO THE COMMITTEE ABOUT, BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, UH, AT THIS TIME ABOUT THIS SECTION BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SECTION.

I'VE GOT NO ONE IN THE QUEUE.

UM, THE OTHER THING IS WE LIKE TO DO IS WE LIKE TO BE ABLE TO OFFER, UH, OR WHAT I'D LIKE TO TRY TO DO IS OFFER DEVELOPERS A CHANCE, IS ANOTHER WAY BESIDES WRITING A CHECK TO TOWARDS TREE PRESERVATION TO BE ABLE TO MITIGATE THOSE TREES ON SITE.

UH, AND SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS ADDED SOME PROVISIONS

[00:20:01]

FOR PRESERVING TREES.

ONE IS THROUGH TRANSPLANTING.

SO IF THEY'RE ABLE TO TRANSPLANT TREES WITHIN THEIR PROPERTY TO SAVE THOSE TREES, UH, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO RECEIVE A CREDIT FOR THAT.

AND THE LARGER A TREE IS THE MORE EXPENSIVE IT IS TO TRANSPLANT IT.

AND SO THE LARGER THE CREDIT YOU SHOULD GET.

SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE A BREAKDOWN OF THE CREDIT THAT THEY COULD GET FOR TRANSPLANTING A TREE OF THAT SIZE.

THE OTHER IS FOR PRESERVATION.

AND IF THEY'RE ABLE TO PRESERVE TREES ON SITE, ESPECIALLY TREES THAT WE WOULD SEE AS VALUABLE, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO, UH, GET A CREDIT TOWARDS THAT AS WELL.

BECAUSE WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS INCENTIVIZE BETTER DEVELOPMENTS, PRESERVE PRESERVING TREES ON SITE, PRESERVING THE CANOPY THAT WE HAVE.

AND SO, UH, AND THIS IS ACTUALLY, UH, THIS SLIDE DIDN'T GET UPDATED FROM WHAT WAS PROPOSED FROM COMMITTEE.

THERE'S ACTUALLY A THIRD CRITERIA HERE WHERE WE HAD, UH, SIX TO 12 INCHES WOULD BE A ONE TO ONE, UH, EXCUSE ME, SIX TO SEVEN, AND THEN EIGHT TO 12.

AND THEN 12 IN LARGER WOULD BE A THREE TO ONE CREDIT, IF I'M REMEMBERING THAT CORRECT.

JUST DOUBLE CHECK TO MAKE SURE I HAVE THE RIGHT NUMBERS ON THAT.

SIX TO 11 WOULD BE EQUAL ONE TO ONE.

UH, 12 TO 17 WOULD BE A TWO TO ONE, AND 18, ANOTHER WOULD 18, AND A GREATER WOULD BE A THREE TO ONE CREDIT.

UH, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE COMMITTEE THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO, TO, WE REALLY WANNA INCENTIVIZE PRESERVING TREES, GIVING MORE CREDIT FOR THE LARGER TREES.

UH, AND SO THOSE ARE THE BIGGEST CHANGES THAT WERE OUT THERE.

UM, THERE WAS A COUPLE ADDED DEFINITIONS, UM, THAT WERE IN THERE.

THE OTHER THING THAT WAS A BIG ADDITION, AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE THAT THIS DIDN'T MAKE IT TO THE, THE SLIDE DECK THAT WE ADDED KIND OF AT, AT THE LAST MINUTE WAS WE PUT IN A SEPARATE DEFINITION FOR TAKEOUT, OUR TAKE AREA BOUNDARY.

UH, WE'VE HAD INCIDENCES WHERE TREES HAVE BEEN REMOVED WITHIN THE TAKE AREA AND ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF DALLAS AND WHAT'S IN OUR LEASE AGREEMENT IS THOSE, THOSE INFRACTIONS FALL BACK ONTO OUR LOCAL ORDINANCES.

AND OUR CLASS THREE TREES ALONG OUR LAKE FRONTAGE HAVE HIGHER VALUE TREES.

A LOT OF WHAT ADDS VALUE TO A TREE IS WHERE THEIR PLACEMENT IS.

SO A HACKBERRY OR WILLOW OR A COTTONWOOD IS GONNA HAVE A LOT MORE VALUE IN OUR RIPARIAN AREA OR ALONG THE LAKE WHERE IT'S HAVING BR BANK STABILIZATION FUNCTIONS.

IT'S HAVING ADDITIONAL WILDLIFE STABILIZATION FUNCTIONS, IT'S HAVING FLOODING, UH, UH, UH, BENEFITS TO IT.

SO WHAT WE DID CHANGE IS IF THOSE TREES WON, UM, WE, WE GIVE A DEFINITION FOR THE TAKE AREA.

AND THEN WE ALSO SAID THAT ANY TREE THAT IS REMOVED WITHIN THE TAKE AREA, THERE WOULD BE NO CLASS THREE TREE.

THERE'S ONLY BE A CLASS ONE AND A CLASS TWO TREE.

SO IF IT WAS TECHNICALLY A CLASS THREE TREE, IT WOULD FALL INTO A CLASS TWO TREE.

SO IT MEANS IT WOULD BE MITIGATED AT A HIGHER LEVEL.

AND AGAIN, WE THOUGHT THAT WAS IMPORTANT, THAT WOULD JUST FALL WITHIN THE TAKE AREA BOUNDARIES, UH, IF TREE IF TREES WERE REMOVED WITHIN THE TAKE AREA.

AND I THINK THAT WAS ALL THE CHANGES.

AM I CORRECT? WILL? YEAH, I BELIEVE SO.

YEAH.

VERY GOOD.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? GOVERNOR WILLIAMS? THANK YOU.

MAYOR.

WOULD YOU EX, WOULD YOU EXPLAIN AGAIN, THE TAKE AREA AND YOU SAID THE CITY OF DALLAS, UM, THE DEFINITION OF THE TAKE SORT OF DEFERS TO OUR LOCAL CITY ORDINANCE.

YOU CAN CLARIFY FOR ME WHAT'S THE ROLE OF THE CITY OF DALLAS IN THIS WHOLE PROCESS? WELL, CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH THAT BRIEFLY? YES.

AS IT RELATES TO THE TAKE AREA IN, IN RELATION TO THE TAKE AND WITH THE TREES ARE ACTUALLY LEGALLY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS JURISDICTION, NOT IN OURS.

CAN YOU? RIGHT.

SO THE TAKE AREA IS A, IS A, IS A SECTION OF LAND THAT IS, AND THERE'S ACTUALLY A DEFINITION THAT'S IN HERE.

I'LL READ IT TO YOU IF YOU CAN.

SURE.

YEP.

YOU CAN.

UH, IT'S THE LAND OWNED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS MM-HMM.

BETWEEN THE TAKE LINE AND THE NORMAL LAKE RAY HUBBARD POOL ELEVATION 435.4 MEANS SCENE LEVEL FEET.

UH, WE HAVE A, UH, INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS, THAT CITY ATTORNEY.

I'M GONNA LET YOU KIND OF, UH, GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE DEFINITION ON, IN TERMS OF WHAT OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS, CUZ I KNOW A LITTLE BIT OF IT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO GO ASTRAY.

SO I'M GONNA LET BRIAN GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT BETTER EXPLANATION.

THIS IN SIMPLE TERMS, THE TAKE AREA IS THE ELEVATION, 4 35 0.5 FEET, UM, UM, AT SEA LEVEL, UM, IT'S THE, IT'S THE AREA BETWEEN PROPERTY, THE, THE, THE WATER, RIGHT.

AND PROPERTY OWNED BY, UM, UM, UH, OR THE CITY LIMITS OF GARLAND.

SO OFTENTIMES WE'VE ENTERED INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH EVERY OTHER CITY AROUND THE LAKE WITH, UM, THE CITY OF DALLAS, THAT, THAT THEY, WHERE THEY LEASE THAT TAKE AREA TO US.

AND ONE OF THE CONDITIONS OF THAT LEASE IS THAT WILL, UM, APPLY OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE TO THAT AREA AS LESS EASE TO THAT.

AND SO THAT'S THE TAKE AREA.

IT'S THAT AREA BETWEEN THE WATER AND THE CITY LIMITS OF GARLAND.

UM, IT'S STILL WITHIN THE CITY OF DALLAS, BUT WHERE SOME OF IT ACTUALLY IS IN THE CITY, BUT I WON'T GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THAT.

BUT MOST OF THE TIME IT'S WITHIN THE CITY OF GARLAND.

[00:25:01]

AND, UM, BUT IT'S OWNED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS STILL.

AND WE'RE LEASING IT FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS.

AND WITHIN, WE SUBLEASE THAT AREA TO RESIDENTS, UM, TO DEVELOP THAT AREA OR TO COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS.

AND THERE'S RULES WITHIN THAT LEASE, WITHIN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR HOW WE SUBLEASE THOSE AREAS.

AND IN THIS CASE, THAT'S HOW THIS WOULD COME UP, IS IN THOSE SUBLEASES TO DEVELOPERS THAT WANT TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, WHETHER THAT'S A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

OKAY.

BUT OUR LOCAL ORDINANCE IS A GUIDING FORCE, NOT THE CITY OF DALLAS.

THAT IS CORRECT.

THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

YOU DID A MUCH BETTER JOB WITH THAT THAN I WOULD'VE.

THANKS.

BRIAN , DEPUTY MAYOR PRO, TIM SMITH.

UH, THANK YOU MAYOR.

UH, COUPLE OF QUICK THINGS.

FIRST OF ALL, MATT, GREAT JOB.

REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

I KNOW THIS IS, UH, SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN A COMMITTEE FOR A WHILE AND I APPRECIATE YOU GETTING IT DONE.

UH, SECOND IS, UH, FORMER COUNCIL MAYOR, UH, FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, DAVID GIBBONS WILL BE EXCITED ABOUT THE RED CEDARS.

UH, HE WISHES WE'D TAKE A FLAME THROUGH TO ALL OF THEM.

UM, LAST ISSUE IS, UH, PUBLIC SAFETY.

UH, ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT HAD, UH, PROMPTED THE INITIAL REFERRAL A FEW YEARS BACK WAS THE IDEA OF, UH, BEING ABLE TO REQUEST CLEARANCE OF TREES TO PROMOTE, UH, IN, IN SPECIFIC AREAS TO PROMOTE PUBLIC SAFETY.

DOES THESE ORDINANCE CHANGES ADDRESS THAT AT ALL? WELL, I WOULD KIND OF ARGUE THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THAT WAS INHIBITING THOSE BEFORE.

UH, TWO MAJOR THINGS IS ONE, IF YOU'RE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, THERE'S NO REGULATION THAT SAYS WHAT YOU CAN DO ON YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY.

AND TWO, WE HAVE A SIX INCH LIMIT.

SO REALLY ANYTHING UNDER SIX INCHES, UH, CAN BE REMOVED WITHOUT MITIGATION.

UH, AND SO THOSE AREAS THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE CLEARING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, THE MAJORITY OF THE TREES, REALLY A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TREES THAT YOU'RE REMOVING ARE, ARE ALL LESS THAN SIX INCHES IN SIZE.

SO THINKING ALONG THE LINES OF THE, THE SOUTHERN TRIANGLE AT CENTRAL PARK, UH, THAT KIND OF GOT THAT TREATMENT AS WELL.

YES, SIR.

AND CLEAN TO THAT, THAT'S SORT OF THE, UH, THE THE GOAL THAT YOU, YOU WOULD HAVE IN MIND IN THAT KIND OF CLEARANCE.

CORRECT.

AND, AND AGAIN, EVEN ALL OF THE TREES THAT WE REMOVED IN THERE, WE DIDN'T REMOVE ANYTHING, UH, LARGER THAN SIX INCHES.

UH, AND MOST OF THE THINGS THAT WE REMOVED OUT OF THERE AND WHY THOSE AREAS LIKE THAT GET SO OVERGROWN IS BECAUSE IT'S MOSTLY IN THOSE INVASIVE TYPE OF SPECIES.

IT'S A LOT OF THAT LANTIS, IT'S A LOT OF THOSE ITALIC SPECIES.

IT'S A LOT OF GREENBRIAR, IT'S A LOT OF THAT STUFF THAT WILL NOW BE IN THAT UNPROTECTED LIST.

SO I FEEL REALLY COMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE GONNA BE OKAY IN THAT MATTER.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

WELCOME.

VERY GOOD.

UH, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THIS TOPIC? AND I THINK EVERYBODY SEEMS TO BE IN AGREEMENT WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH IT AS PRESENTED.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK, THANK YOU WILL.

THANK YOU.

UH, THE SECOND ITEM UP IS CONSIDERED CHANGES TO ZONING RULES REGARDING PET RETAIL STORES.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

UH, WE HAD A DISCUSSION ON COMMITTEE AS WELL REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF PET RETAIL STORES IN OUR LAND USE MATRIX.

YOU HEARD THE SPEAKER, MS. CRAWFORD TALK ABOUT THAT AND MANY OF THE SAME ISSUES SHE BROUGHT UP, WE DISCUSSED IN OUR COMMITTEE AS WELL.

AND IF YOU LOOK ON PAGE TWO 19 OF YOUR PACKET, WE HAVE A REVISED DEFINITION OF PET RETAIL STORES.

IT ESSENTIALLY REMOVES THE SALE OF CATS AND DOGS FROM THAT DEFINITION, STILL BY GOLDFISH AND OTHER SMALL PETS, IF YOU WISH, AT A PET STORE.

BUT CAT AND DOGS ARE REMOVED FROM THEM.

.

OKAY.

UH, ANY QUESTIONS, UH, ON THAT ITEM? MAYOR PRO TIM MORRIS? THANK YOU.

THIS ISN'T A QUESTION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSCORE WHAT, WHAT MS. CRAWFORD SAID.

IN, IN LIGHT OF CITIES ALL AROUND US THAT ARE, UM, FLAT PROHIBITING RETAIL, PET, UM, STORES THAT SELL DOGS AND CATS SOURCED FROM ANYWHERE OTHER THAN SHELTERS OR RESCUES, THE LAST THING WE NEED IS TO HAVE GARLAND BECOME THE NEW GO-TO STORE, THE GO-TO CITY TO OPEN ADDITIONAL, UM, RETAIL PET STORES THAT ARE NOT WELCOME IN OUR SURROUNDING CITIES.

SO THIS IS A, A KIND OF A FIRST STEP, BUT CLOSING THE DOOR STOP THE, STOP THE PROLIFERATION OF THOSE BUSINESSES IN GARLAND.

AND THERE MAY EVENTUALLY BE MORE TO COME, BUT I THINK THIS IS A WISE MOVE.

THANK YOU.

VERY GOOD.

UH, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO, TIM SMITH.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

UM, AND JUST TO ADD TO THAT, UH, THE COUNCIL DID VOICE SUPPORT FOR THIS, UH, TYPE OF RESTRICTION AT THE, THE STATE LEVEL, UH, THAT WAS PASSED AS PART OF OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.

AND I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE COUNCIL BEING ON BOARD WITH THAT.

SO THANK YOU.

AND WE'LL PROBABLY SEE THIS, UH, AS A STATEWIDE CHANGE, UH, WITHIN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS.

VERY GOOD.

VERY GOOD.

ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? AND COUNCIL WILLIAMS, EXCUSE

[00:30:01]

QUESTION, AND THIS IS PROBABLY MORE FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY IF THIS OR THIS, THESE CHANGES, UH, TAKE EFFECT.

ARE THERE ANY GRANDFATHER PROVISIONS OR, OR REQUIREMENTS, UM, I'VE GOT, I'M NOT GONNA MENTION, BUT I'VE GOT ONE STORE IN MY DISTRICT SO THAT, THAT ARE ALREADY IN OPERATION.

SO HOW DOES THIS IMPACT? THEY WILL HAVE VESTED RIGHTS IN THEIR, UM, UM, CURRENT USE, BUT THEY WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO EXPAND THOSE NON-CONFORMING USES.

AND IF THEY ABANDON THOSE NON-CONFORMING USES, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO REESTABLISH THOSE.

BUT THEY WILL HAVE WHAT IS COMMON COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS, UM, GRANDFATHERING, BUT IT'S VESTED RIGHTS IS WHAT THE LEGAL TERM FOR IT IS.

RIGHT, RIGHT.

AND, AND, UH, ANY, ANY REVIEW BY, BY OUR CITY WOULD BE UNDER THAT GRANDFATHER PROVISION, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE, MAKE SURE THAT, THAT THAT APPOINTMENT WAS MADE, YOU KNOW, TO THE PUBLIC THAT THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CITY ATTORNEY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

SIR, I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE ON THIS.

UM, AND EVERYBODY GOOD WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH IT AS PRESENTED? UNANIMOUS? YES.

MM-HMM.

.

AND NOW ITEM THREE UNDER THAT SECTION, REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR EV CHARGING SPACES AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

YES.

THE FINAL ITEM WE'D LIKE TO REPORT ON IS EV PARKING SPACES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

AND MR. G I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION OR THERE'S JUST, I'M HAPPY TO HAVE, UH, WELL, WE DID A LITTLE RESEARCH THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF THE EV CHARGING STATIONS THAT ARE PROVIDED.

THERE'S ONE HERE IN THE CITY HALL PARKING GARAGE.

THERE'S A REC CENTERS HAVE THEM AS WELL, A FEW OF 'EM.

SO THEY'RE AROUND TOWN.

AND I DUNNO IF YOU WANT TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BACKGROUND DETAILS OF THAT.

YES, SIR.

SO I BELIEVE WE HAVE 14 DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.

WE'VE GOT A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT CHARGERS AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.

UM, BUT, UH, MATT WATSON AND HIS TEAM HAVE LOOKED INTO THIS, UH, TOTAL COST TO THE CITY.

WE DISCUSSED WITH THE COMMITTEE IS LESS THAN ABOUT $20,000 A YEAR.

AND THAT'S FOR THE VENDOR, THE COST OF THE VENDOR, THE MAINTENANCE, UH, INCLUDING ANY CHARGES TO VEHICLES THAT ARE USING IT.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE, THE VEHICLE CHARGES ARE COMING FROM NON-CITY EMPLOYEES, PROBABLY 90 TO 95% OF THAT IS FROM JUST CITIZENS THAT ARE USING THOSE CURRENTLY.

SO STAFF RECOMMENDED LOOKED AT WHAT WOULD IT COST, UH, WHAT WHAT CHARGE WOULD, NOMINAL CHARGE WOULD BE INVOLVED TO MAKE IT A COST NEUTRAL PROGRAM THAT WOULD COVER THOSE $20,000 IN EXPENSES.

UH, AND THEN I BELIEVE, AND MATT, I'M GONNA, I THINK IT WAS 49 CENTS A KILO KILOWATT.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

SO 49 CENTS A KILOWATT, WHICH IS THE SAME CHARGE THAT SOME CITIES ARE CHARGING.

SOME CITIES ARE NOT CHARGING A FEE YET THAT HAVE THESE, BUT THOSE CITIES THAT DO CHARGE OR CHARGING THIS SIMILAR RATE, IF WE CHARGE THAT RATE, AND IF THE USAGE STAYED THE SAME, UH, THEN IT WOULD BE A COST NEUTRAL PROGRAM.

OF COURSE, IF THE USAGE GOES DOWN, THEN THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE GOES DOWN, BUT THEN THE USAGE IS LESS.

SO, UM, SO THAT'S WHAT WE DISCUSSED DURING THE COMMITTEE.

YEP.

AND TO BE CLEAR, THESE CHARGING STATIONS WERE FREE TO USE PREVIOUSLY, AND THE COMMITTEE AS A MATTER OF EQUITY, WE THOUGHT, WHY ARE WE SUBSIDIZING THE CHARGING OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES WHEN GAS POWERED VEHICLES DON'T GET THAT BENEFIT? SO WE DECIDED TO INSTALL THESE PAY SYSTEMS AND HAVE THE CHARGERS THEMSELVES UPGRADED TO HAVE A PAY SYSTEM INVOLVED.

SO THE, THE VENDOR THAT WE CURRENTLY USE IS, AND WE ARE, IF COUNCIL AGREES TO MOVE FORWARD, WE WOULD, UH, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF WORK TO DO ON THE, THE CURRENT CONTRACT WE HAVE, IT'S MINIMAL.

UH, BUT THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THAT NOMINAL CHARGE IF COUNCIL AGREES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

SO, OKAY.

I HAVE NO ONE IN THE QUEUE.

UM, NOW I DO I THINK THE, UM, YOUR ON, YEAH, I THINK THE OTHER PART OF THIS THAT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE LOOKED AT WAS, UH, WHETHER, UH, TO COUNT EV DESIGNATED PARKING SPACES IN THE, IN THE G D C, UH, WHETHER THAT COUNTS TOWARDS YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

UM, WILL, CAN YOU REVIEW THAT AS WELL? I, I THINK THE COMMITTEE DECIDED NOT TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THAT.

YES.

I, I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WANTED TO TAKE THAT EV CHARGING SEPARATE FROM THIS SIDE, BUT YEAH, THAT'S ANOTHER PART THAT, YES, THAT WE LOOKED AT.

AND WHEREAS SOME PARKING LOTS DESIGNATE EV ONLY PARKING, AND WE WANTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHETHER THAT WOULD BE COUNTED COMBINED OR SEPARATELY FROM THE STANDARD PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

AND IT WAS, THE COMMITTEE'S THOUGHT TO HAVE THOSE, UH, BE COUNTED SEPARATELY BECAUSE IF YOU'RE, UM, WE DON'T KNOW QUANTITY OF EV PARKING OR EV CARS IN THE FUTURE, AND TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT, WHETHER IT'S A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF 5% OR 10%, IT MIGHT BE 50% IN SEVERAL YEARS, BUT TO BLOCK THOSE SPOT SPOTS OFF FOR CURRENT USE WOULD BE, UH, DIFFICULT IN COUNTING PARKING RATIOS.

SO WE DECIDED TO NOT HAVE THOSE, IF

[00:35:01]

YOU'RE GONNA MAKE SEPARATE SPACES, NOT HAVE THOSE COUNT IN YOUR PARKING RATIO.

MAKES SENSE.

UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? SORRY, GO AHEAD.

I, NO, I WAS JUST GONNA TURN MY MIC ON.

OH, .

I HAVE NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE.

AND THAT WOULD LEAD ME TO ASSUME THAT WE'RE IN FAVOR OF MOVING FORWARD WITH IT AS PRESENTED.

ALL RIGHT.

THAT WOULD BE UNANIMOUS.

YES.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU.

UH, MOVING ON TO ITEM

[4.b. Audit Committee Report]

FOUR B IS AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT.

GO AHEAD, SIR.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

UH, JED, ALL YOURS, SIR.

THERE YOU GO.

AS GOOD AS I GET.

CHAIRMAN .

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN .

GOOD EVENING.

MAYOR COUNCIL DID A GREAT JOB OF, OF, OF PASSING YOU PASSED THAT SO SEAMLESSLY TO HIM THAT IT WAS JUST ALMOST UNRECOGNIZABLE.

IT'S GOOD.

YEAH.

WE'RE ALL WEAK FOLKS.

, AS WE AUDITOR NORMALLY SAY WE ARE HERE TO HELP .

I NEED A LOT.

YEAH.

WELL, HAPPY NEW YEAR TO EVERYBODY.

YES, PLEASE, PLEASE START, GET US OUT OF THIS MAYOR.

WE COVERED MAINLY THREE ITEMS DURING THE AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING IN DECEMBER.

THE FIRST ONE WAS THE ALARM PERMITTING PROGRAM, AND THEN WE ALSO COVERED THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE PROGRAM AUDIT, AS WELL AS THE FISCAL YEAR 2023, UH, AUDIT PLAN AMENDMENTS.

UM, THE FIRST ITEM WAS THE ALARM PERMITTING PROGRAM.

AS YOU'RE AWARE, THE CITY ORDINANCE ARTICLE SEVEN REQUIRES HONORS OF ALARM, ACTIVE ALARM SYSTEM TO OBTAIN PERMITS, UH, FROM THE CITY, UM, ON AN ANIMAL BASIS.

THERE ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF FEES FOR THE PERMIT.

FOR EXAMPLE, FOR A BUSINESS, IT'S A HUNDRED DOLLARS PER YEAR RESIDENTIAL, IT'S $50.

FOR SENIOR CITIZENS, IT'S $25.

UH, ON TOP OF THAT, UH, THE ORDINANCE ALSO COVERS IF THERE ARE, UM, UM, BILLS THAT ARE, THAT COME THROUGH BECAUSE OF FALSE ALARMS, AFTER EXCEEDING THEIR RESPECTIVE FALSE ALARM THRESHOLD FOR THE PROCEEDING, UH, 12 MONTHS, UM, THERE ARE COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, THE, THE POLICE, UH, CHIEF MAY ALSO ASSESS AN ADDITIONAL $250 CHARGE FOR ANY FALSE BURG ALARMS FOR THOSE WITHOUT A PERMIT.

UH, LITTLE BACKGROUND, UH, PRIOR TO 2019, UH, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ADMINISTERED THIS PROGRAM, BUT SINCE 2019, THEY HAVE OUTSOURCED THIS TO A, UH, A THIRD PARTY VENDOR, WHICH IS CALLED PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION, OR THEY'RE ALSO KNOWN AS CRY WOLF.

UM, SO OUR OBJECTIVE OF THIS AUDIT WAS TO DETERMINE IF THE SERVICES THEY'RE PROVIDED AND THE PAYMENTS PROCESSED US BY THE THIRD PARTY, UH, WE'RE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY ORDINANCE AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT.

THE SCOPE OF THE AUDIT COVERED FROM FEBRUARY, 2019 THROUGH AUGUST, 2022.

I DO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO THANK THE VENDOR AS WELL AS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR WORKING WITH US THROUGHOUT THIS AUDIT.

UH, IT WAS A VERY SMOOTH AUDIT.

UM, UH, JUST, JUST HIGH LEVEL SINCE WE, UH, OUTSOURCED THIS PROGRAM, UH, FROM 2019, THE CITY COLLECTED IN NET PAYMENTS APPROXIMATELY 2.7 MILLION, UH, FROM, FROM THIS PROGRAM.

SO THAT'S A HUGE SUCCESS.

UH, DURING THIS AUDIT AUDIT, WE ALSO FOUND A FEW AREAS WHERE WE COULD MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS.

CURRENTLY, AS PART OF THE AUDIT, WE IDENTIFIED THAT APPROXIMATELY 1.49 MILLION WERE IN OUTSTANDING CUSTOMER PAYMENTS.

SOME OF THESE PAYMENTS WERE, UM, MORE THAN 90 DAYS, 60 DAYS, UM, A YEAR, TWO YEARS OLDER.

AND SO ONE OF OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS FOR, UH, FOR THE CITY MANAGEMENT TO DECIDE, UH, WHETHER TO PURGE SOME OF THESE OLD ACCOUNTS AND TO FOCUS ON, UH, ON THE NEW OUTSTANDING ACCOUNTS.

SO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT CONCURRED WITH THAT, AND THEY AGREED, UH, TO PURGE THE INVOICES GREATER THAN TWO YEARS AND DECIDED TO MAKE FURTHER COLLECTION EFFORTS ON ANYTHING THAT'S LESS THAN TWO YEARS.

SO THAT WAS THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION.

UH, WE ALSO, AS PART OF THE AUDIT, WE IDENTIFIED THAT THIS WEBSITE CURRENTLY ONLY HAS TWO OPTIONS FOR WHEN YOU GO TO, UH, APPLY FOR THE PERMIT.

YOU CAN EITHER REGISTER AS A COMMERCIAL CUSTOMER OR A RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER.

HOWEVER, UH, AS I INDICATED BEFORE, IF YOU ARE A SENIOR CITIZENS, YOU DO GET A 50% DISCOUNT ON YOUR PERMIT.

SO WE WANTED TO MAKE IT, UH, EASIER FOR, FOR THE CITIZENS, UH, WHEN THEY GO TO, TO THE WEBSITE TO APPLY FOR IT, UM, UH, TO SELECT THE APPROPRIATE, UH, APPROPRIATE CRITERIA.

UH, BECAUSE WHEN WE DID SOME TESTINGS, WE DID IDENTIFY THAT A FEW ACCOUNTS WERE INCORRECTLY CHARGED.

SO, UM, AS SOON AS WE BROUGHT THIS UP WITH THE

[00:40:01]

VENDOR, THEY WERE OPEN ABOUT IT.

I BELIEVE THIS MAY HAVE ALREADY FIXED.

UM, SO WE, WE WORKED WITH THEM.

WE THANK THEM FOR, UH, FOR WORKING ON THAT.

WE ALSO IDENTIFIED THE SERIES AND THE VENDOR'S WEBSITE CONTAIN SOME OUTDATED, UH, ALARM PERMITTING FEE SCHEDULE.

UM, THAT, THAT WAS ALSO BROUGHT TO, UH, BOTH PARTIES ATTENTION, AND THEY CONCUR TO FIX THAT.

UH, WHEN WE INITIALLY TRANSFERRED THIS ADMINISTRATION TO, TO THIS THIRD PARTY, UH, THEY REACHED OUT TO PRETTY MUCH EVERY ALARM COMPANIES WHO ARE OPERATING IN GARLAND AND OBTAINED THE LISTING, UH, OF THE CUSTOMER LISTING FROM THEM.

BUT SINCE THEN, THAT HASN'T HAPPENED.

SO IT'S BEEN A FEW YEARS.

SO ONE OF OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS FOR THEM TO GO BACK AND PERIODICALLY VERIFY THAT INFORMATION.

SO WE KNOW, UH, WE ARE COLLECTING, UH, FROM THE INFORMATION ACCURATELY, WE ARE ALSO ASSESSING THE FEES ACCURATELY.

UH, AND WE CAN ALSO, IF, IF, IF OUR CITIZENS ARE NOT AWARE OF THE REQUIREMENTS, WE CAN THIS WAY INFORM THEM AS WELL.

SO, UM, POLICE DEPARTMENT CONCURRED WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.

THE VENDOR WILL UPDATE THE CUSTOMER LISTING GOING FORWARD ON A BIANNUAL BASIS, SO AT LEAST TWICE A YEAR.

THE NEXT ITEM, UH, WE DID IDENTIFY, UH, VERY MINIMALLY, UH, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT DO TAKE SOME PAYMENTS.

THERE WERE SOME DELAYS IN, UH, DEPOSITING THOSE PAYMENTS.

SO, UM, WE, WE MADE THAT, UH, MADE, MADE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AWARE OF THAT, AND THEY HAVE, UH, CONCURRED AND THEY WILL BE PROCESSING, UH, PAYMENTS GOING FORWARD ON A WEEKLY BASIS.

UM, WE ALSO IDENTIFIED A LITTLE OVER $1,000 IN INCORRECT FEES ASSESSED BY THE VENDOR.

UH, AS SOON AS WE BROUGHT, BROUGHT THIS TO THEIR ATTENTION, THEY ACTUALLY CORRECTED THEIR, UH, MONTHLY STATEMENTS, AND WE'VE GOT THE MONEY BACK FROM THEM.

SO THAT WAS GOOD.

UH, ONE OF THE THINGS, ANOTHER THINGS THAT WE IDENTIFIED, THERE WAS ONE SECURITY PROTOCOL FROM AN IT PERSPECTIVE THAT WAS NOT FULLY IMPLEMENTED ON THE VENDORS WEBSITE.

WE BROUGHT IT TO THEIR ATTENTION AS I DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN THE IMPORTANCE OF ENFORCING THOSE SECURITY PROTOCOLS.

UH, I BELIEVE THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT.

UH, THEY APPRECIATED THAT WE INFORMED THEM.

UH, AND ALSO, UM, THERE IS A REPORT CALLED SERVICE ORGANIZATIONAL CONTROL, OR SOC TOOL REPORT THAT WE CAN GET, UH, AND REQUIRE OUR VENDORS TO GO THROUGH.

IT'S AN AUDIT, UH, PROCESS THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO GIVE US AN ASSURANCE THAT, UM, THERE OUR CUSTOMER INFORMATION IS PROTECTED.

UH, THE CONFIDENTIALITY AND THE PRIVACY OF THE INFORMATION IS, UM, IS PROTECTED.

SO WE CAN GET AN ASSURANCE FROM THE THIRD PARTY.

UH, AUDITORS, UH, THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH THAT AUDIT BEFORE, UH, WHICH IS, WE'RE NOT GETTING THOSE REPORTS OR GOING FORWARD.

THEY AGREE TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO US.

THE LAST ITEM, UM, THAT WE NOTED AS PART OF THE AUDIT WAS, UH, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE REQUIRES A 10 DAY APPEAL SUBMISSION IF THE, IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH, UH, THE PAYMENTS OR THE INVOICES THAT THE CITY SENT OUT, UH, TO YOU.

SO THERE IS A LIMIT YOU HAVE TO APPEAL WITHIN 10 DAYS.

WE DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS, UH, ENOUGH TIME, UH, FOR PEOPLE TO APPEAL.

IN FACT, UH, WE WERE ACTUALLY BEING VERY FLEXIBLE, UH, IN, IN CASES.

SO, UH, SO THAT NEEDED TO BE LOOKED AT.

THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION TO THAT, THE ORDER COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION WAS, UH, TO REMOVE THAT REQUIREMENT FROM THE ORDINANCE AND TO PUT IT BACK INTO THE, UH, HANDS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND ADD THAT TO THEIR INTERNAL POLICY.

SO THAT WAS ONE THING THAT THE COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE RECOMMENDED.

UM, IN FACT, UM, UH, I BELIEVE, UH, SO YOU WILL SEE THAT COMING THROUGH YOU.

UH, SOME CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE, UH, THAT WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ORDINANCE ALSO, UH, THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT, UH, MANAGEMENT INCORPORATE SOME OF THESE AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS WHEN WE UPDATE THE, UH, THE CONTRACT WITH THE VENDOR.

THAT'S ANOTHER THING.

THE COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE RECOMMENDED TO THE, TO MANAGEMENT.

SO IN A NUTSHELL, THAT WAS THE, UM, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT'S WHAT CAME FROM THAT AUDIT.

UM, ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE NONE THE QUEUE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

GOOD.

UH, THE NEXT AUDIT THAT WE COVERED WAS THE TAKE HOME LOCAL PROGRAM AUDIT.

UH, ONE, ONE THING, UH, THE, UH, PREVIOUS PRO AUDIT THAT WE DID, I FORGOT TO MENTIONED THIS.

IT WAS THE AUDIT COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN WHO REQUESTED THAT AUDIT.

SO APPRECIATE HIM FOR DOING THAT.

THIS AUDIT, THE TAKE HOME LOCAL PROGRAM AUDIT WAS REQUESTED BY COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS. UM, SO IT'S BEEN A PROGRAM, UM, THAT WE IMPLEMENTED BACK IN 1977, A LONG TIME AGO.

UM, THE WITH PROPER JUSTIFICATION AND ALL THE RECESSION, THIS PROGRAM ALLOWS EMPLOYEES TO TAKE, TAKE, UH, CITY VEHICLES HOME IN ORDER TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENTLY PERFORM THEIR JOB DUTIES.

THERE ARE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.

SO THERE IS A DIRECTIVE, UM, THAT THE CITY PUTS TOGETHER AS A GOVERNING DOCUMENT, UM, FOR, TO MANAGE THIS PROGRAM.

IN 2008, DURING THE RECESSION, UH, THIS DIRECTIVE WAS UPDATED AND THE CITY MANAGEMENT DECIDED TO REQUIRE

[00:45:01]

THE CITY FOR AT LEAST THE FUEL COST.

UH, SO THAT WAS THE, UH, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE IMPLEMENTED BACK IN 2008.

AND THERE WAS A FORMULA WHICH WAS DEVELOPED, HOW TO CALCULATE THAT.

IT WAS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF MILES THE EMPLOYABLE, UH, DRIVES TO TAKE THE VEHICLE.

HOME TEMPS, THE BIWEEKLY, UH, FACTOR, TEMPS, THE FUEL FACTOR, THE FUEL FACTOR WAS COMING FROM, UM, FROM THE FLEET DEPARTMENT.

SO SINCE THEN, WE STARTED IMPLEMENTING THIS PROGRAM.

OBVIOUSLY, UM, THE CITY MANAGER COULD MAKE SOME EXEMPTIONS, UM, TO, TO, TO, UH, TO ELIMINATE PEOPLE FROM PAYING FOR, UH, THE FUEL COST.

UH, THIS, UH, THIS IS A TAX CONSIDERED AS A TAXABLE FRINGE BENEFITS PER IRS RULES.

SO REGARDLESS, UH, UNLESS IF YOU'RE A PUBLIC SAFETY EMPLOYEE, IF YOU ARE TAKING A CITY VEHICLE HOME, IT IS CONSIDERED A TAXABLE FRINGE BENEFIT.

SO WE WANTED TO LOOK INTO THIS PROGRAM.

THERE WERE FOUR OBJECTIVES.

UH, WE WANTED TO SEE IF THE DIRECTIVE WAS UP TO DATE, AND IF THE CITY MAINTAINED A CURRENT AND COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF TAKE HOME VEHICLES.

AND ALSO WE WANTED TO SEE THE ASSIGNMENTS WERE JUSTIFIED ON REASONABLE AND HOW THE TAXABLE VALUE WAS DETERMINED, AND HOW EMPLOYEE PAYROLL REDUCTION IS CALCULATED.

UH, THE SCOPE WAS THE PAST TWO YEARS, UH, IN THIS AUDIT.

UM, UH, WE DID CONDUCT A SURVEY THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND IDENTIFIED APPROXIMATELY 197 VEHICLES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

AND PER THE CITY MANAGERS, UH, DISCRETION, 20 OF THESE WERE EXEMPTED, UH, FROM PAYING, UM, UH, THE, THE FUEL COSTS BACK TO THE CITY.

SO APPROXIMATELY 177 PEOPLE FOR NON-EXEMPT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.

SO, ONE THING THAT WE WANTED TO FIND OUT, UH, HOW MUCH WAS IT COSTING THE CITY? SO IN, UH, IN 2021, FISCAL YEAR 2021, IT COST THE CITY APPROXIMATELY $283,000.

AND IN 2022, IT COST THE CITY APPROXIMATELY $419,000 IN FUEL COST.

UH, WHEN WE DID THE CALCULATION AND ANALYSIS, WE IDENTIFIED THAT IN 21, WE RECOUPED ALMOST HALF OF THAT FROM THESE REIMBURSEMENT.

AND 2022, WE RECOUPED ABOUT ONE THIRD OF IT.

THE MAIN REASON FOR THAT WAS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T UPDATED THE FUEL COST RATE FOR A WHILE, THE LAST TIME IT WAS UPDATED BACK IN 28, 20 15.

UM, SO IT TOOK A WHILE.

UH, ALSO KEEP IN MIND THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WERE NOT IN RECESSION AT THAT POINT AND THE CITY WAS DOING FAIRLY WELL.

UH, SO ANOTHER THING THAT WE ALSO LOOKED AT EARLIER, I MENTIONED THAT, UH, WE REQUIRED THE EMPLOYEES TO REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR THE FUEL COST.

AND, UM, WE WANTED TO SEE IF EVERY EMPLOYEE WAS DOING IT.

WE DID IDENTIFY ABOUT 17 EMPLOYEES WHO WERE NOT.

IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF THEIR FAULT, CUZ THE CURRENT PROCESS IS VERY MANUAL.

THE DEPARTMENT WILL FILL OUT THE FORM, THEN IT GOES TO THEIR MANAGING DIRECTOR, THEN IT NEEDS TO GO TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, THEN THAT NEEDS TO COME TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

SO, TRACKING AND COMMUNICATION, THAT WAS, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE ISSUES WITH THAT.

WE ALSO DID IDENTIFY THAT APPROXIMATELY 11 EMPLOYEES, UM, FRINGE BENEFITS WERE NOT BEING REPORTED, UM, UM, TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE IRS RULES.

UH, WE DID IDENTIFY, WE LOOKED AT, UH, WHERE DO WE TAKE THESE VEHICLES? OR WE DID SOME ANALYSIS ON THAT, OR OVERALL, UH, THIS PROGRAM WAS NOT NECESSARILY TRACKED, UM, EFFECTIVELY, UM, THE AGREEMENT WAS NOT EXTREMELY CLEAR, CAUSING SOME CONFUSION AMONG DEPARTMENTS, UH, MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS ARE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS.

UH, HIGH LEVEL, UH, IT'S BEEN INVOLVED SINCE WE TAKE, TOOK A LOOK AT THIS PROGRAM.

THERE WERE ALSO SOME OTHER REQUIREMENTS IN OUR CITY SAFETY MANUAL.

ONE, FOR EXAMPLE, THOSE WHO ARE DRIVING THE CITY VEHICLE, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO, THE CITY'S SUPPOSED TO CHECK, UH, DRIVING, DRIVING RECORDS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

UM, THAT DID NOT HAPPEN SINCE 2017.

SO THERE WERE A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT WE IDENTIFIED IN THE NUTSHELL.

UM, THIS PROGRAM NEEDED TO BE, UM, LOOKED AT ONCE AGAIN.

UM, SO, UM, MITCH, UH, AND WE, HE WORKED GREATLY WITH OUR DEPARTMENT, OBVIOUSLY.

UH, WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE HIM FOR WORKING THROUGH, THROUGH, THROUGH THIS BC SCHEDULE.

UM, EH, SOME OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS WERE, UH, WE WANTED TO REEVALUATE THE CURRENT TAKE HOME VEHICLE ASSIGNMENTS TO DETERMINE IF ALL THOSE WERE NECESSARY.

AND WE ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE TAXABLE FRINGE BENEFITS ARE APPLIED ACCURATELY.

AND WE ALSO WANTED TO LOOK AT THE CURRENT STRUCTURE.

ARE WE GONNA HAVE A MONITORING FUNCTION? ARE WE GONNA HAVE A CENTRALIZED TRACKING? ARE WE GONNA AUTOMATE THE WORKFLOW? SO WE MADE ALL THESE RECOMMENDATIONS AND, AND CITY ADMINISTRATION CONCURRED WITH IT JUST TO INFORM YOU.

UM, THE ADMINISTRATION DECIDED NOT TO MOVING FORWARD,

[00:50:01]

UH, DUE TO OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION NOT TO ASSESS, UM, THE, UM, THE FUEL COST GOING FORWARD.

HOWEVER, THEY WILL BE EVALUATING, UM, THE ASSIGNMENTS.

THEY WILL BE PUTTING MORE REQUIREMENTS, OKAY, HOW FAR ARE YOU TAKING THESE VEHICLES FROM THE CITY? AND, UH, AND HOW, YOU KNOW, HOW SOON CAN YOU REPORT, UH, FROM, FOR AN EMERGENCY PURPOSES.

SO THE, SO THEY'RE GONNA DO SOME THOROUGH EVALUATION OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS.

SO, UH, DO APPRECIATE THEM, UM, FOR GOING THROUGH WORKING WITH US THROUGHOUT THIS AUDIT.

THE AUDIT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED, UH, UH, THAT, UM, TO BRING BACK, UH, SOME OF THESE CHANGES AND TO REPORT BACK TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE IN THE THIRD QUARTER OF THE, UH, 2023 AUDIT COMMITTEE.

AND MITCH DID INDICATE THAT BUDGET AND STAFFING IMPACT WOULD, WILL BE MINIMAL.

SO I'M SPEAKING FOR HIM HERE, BUT, UH, HE'S NODDING HIS HEAD.

OKAY, GOOD.

.

SO THAT WAS THE SUMMARY, SUMMARY OF THAT AUDIT, SO, OKAY.

UH, ANY QUESTIONS, UH, ON THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE AUDIT COUNCILOR? LOOK.

HI.

HI.

UM, WILL ANY OF THOSE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS BECOME EASIER TO MAINTAIN WITH THE NEW PAYROLL SYSTEM OR IS THAT GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE LIKE A HUGE PAPER TRAIL? THAT, THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT MITCH INDICATED THAT MITCH, DO YOU WANNA COVER? YES, IT WILL BE MUCH EASIER WITH THE NEW SYSTEM.

.

I COULD GO INTO GREAT DETAIL ON THAT, BUT IT'S, WE'VE GOT A 2008 POLICY THAT HAS A PAPER PROCEDURE, MANUAL COPIES EVERYWHERE AND ALL THAT.

THE NEW SYSTEM WILL MAKE IT, UH, MUCH EASIER.

UH, AND THEN AS JTA HAS TALKED ABOUT, HAVING SOME THINGS CENTRALIZED TO MAKE SURE WE KNOW IRS REGULATIONS TOP, THAT'S PRIORITY NUMBER ONE TO MAKE SURE ALL EVERYTHING GETS TO WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO.

SO YEAH, WE'LL HAVE, AND, AND THE SYSTEM WON'T BE IMPLEMENTED TILL A LITTLE BIT LONGER, BUT WE'LL HAVE ALL THAT WORKED OUT BEFORE THEN.

GREAT, THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UH, CUSTOMER BASS.

THANK YOU.

UM, I'M SORRY, JED, CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE, ABOUT THE, THE FUEL FACTOR COST? SURE.

UM, SO, UH, HOW THAT CALCULATED, UH, THE CITY FLEET DEPARTMENT, UM, THE, THE, THE KEEP TRACK OF HOW MANY MILES, UM, THESE VEHICLES HAVE BEEN YOU USED.

RIGHT.

AND THEY ALSO HAVE THE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW MUCH IT COSTS THE CD FOR, UM, TO PROCURE FUEL.

SO THEN THEY DO A CALCULATION, SO PER MILE, HOW MUCH DOES IT COST, UM, FOR AN EMPLOYEE TO TAKE THESE WORK HOME? AND SO WHEN WE DID THE CALCULATIONS CURRENTLY, UH, ON AVERAGE, UM, IT'S COSTING THE CITY 23 CENTS PER MILE, UM, TO, TO DRIVE A CITY VEHICLES, UM, INCLUDING, UM, THE SUVS, SEDANS AND ALL KINDS OF STUFF.

THE, WE ALSO DID A, UM, AN ANALYSIS TO FIND OUT HOW MUCH IT COSTS PER CATEGORY, BUT ON AVERAGE IT COSTS 23 CENTS PER MILE.

SO THAT'S HOW THEY COME UP WITH THAT, UM, FUEL FACTOR.

OKAY.

AND, UM, YOU SAID THAT HASN'T BEEN ADJUSTED SINCE 2015, IS THAT CORRECT? RIGHT.

SO, SO WE, LAST TIME WE ADJUSTED WAS IN 2015 AND THAT WAS 10 CENTS PER MILE.

AND SO CURRENTLY THE AVERAGE IS 23 3 CENTS PER MILE.

SO IT'S ALMOST DOUBLE.

OKAY.

AND DO WE HAVE A PLAN GOING FORWARD TO ADJUST THAT FACTOR, THE FUEL FACTOR BIANNUALLY, OR, AND I THINK I CAN ANSWER THAT ONE.

SO ACTUALLY THAT WAS PART OF WHAT, I THINK YOU MENTIONED IT, BUT WE'RE DISCUSSING, THERE'S, THERE'S NO OTHER CITY IN NORTH TEXAS THAT CHARGES ANYTHING LIKE THIS.

THERE'S, THERE'S ONLY ONE CITY IN TEXAS THAT CHARGES MISS ANY KIND OF CHARGE FOR A TAKE HOME VEHICLE.

THERE ARE A FEW CITIES OUTSIDE OF THAT.

WHEN, WHEN THIS POLICY WAS MADE IN 2008, OF COURSE THERE WERE GREAT RECESSION WAS GOING ON, I WAS PART OF THAT DISCUSSION AND MY PREVIOUS ROLE.

SO THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WENT ON FOR QUITE A BIT, WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW DO WE MITIGATE SOME OF THAT COST IN VERY DIFFICULT FINANCIAL SITUATIONS.

SO WHAT WE'VE SEEN OVER TIME IS, DEPENDING ON WHAT THAT, AND IT'S THE AVERAGE COST OF FUEL TO AND FROM HOME, FOR THOSE THAT HAD THE TAKE HOME VEHICLES, AND THEN IT BECAME A, BECAUSE OF OUR MANUAL PAPER PROCESS SYSTEM, EVERY TIME WE CHANGE THAT RATE, AND I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE NUMBER WAS, 200 VEHICLES, I HAD 180, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER WAS, THAT'S THAT MANY FORMS THAT HAD TO BE FILLED OUT EVERY SINGLE TIME THAT HAD TO GO THROUGH THE MANUAL PROCESS TO GO EVERYWHERE IT NEEDED TO GO AND GET TO PAYROLL, THAT MANUALLY ENTERS IT IN.

AND WHAT WE SAW OVER TIME IS THERE'S TIMES THAT WERE COLLECT, COLLECTING A LITTLE MORE REVENUE THAN THE AVERAGE COST OF THE CITY WOULD BE, AND THEN IT GOES DOWN AND WE'RE COLLECTING A LITTLE BIT LESS OF THE REVENUE.

SO WE SAW THE CYCLE OVER TIME THAT IT WAS GOING BACK AND FORTH ON A GIVEN YEAR ON SOME, THERE'S TIMES THAT WE DIDN'T COLLECT EVERYTHING THAT

[00:55:01]

THE POLICY SAID.

SO, UH, BUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS, WHAT WE'VE LOOKED AT AS, AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT STILL, AND I'M STILL REVISING THE, THE WORKING WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE TO REVISE THE ACTUAL DIRECTIVE, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE THE ONLY CITY REALLY CHARGING FOR THAT AMOUNT RIGHT NOW.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO WORK THAT AS WE WORK THAT OUT, THEN THAT WON'T BE A PROBLEM, BUT WE GOTTA MAKE SURE THE REST OF IT'S IN THERE.

ALL THE IRS PROCEDURES, ALL THE REST OF IT, THE TRACKING MECHANISMS, DEPARTMENTS WERE REVIEWING AND APPROVING, THEY KNOW WHO HAS WHAT VEHICLES AND WHO'S TAKING 'EM HOME.

LIKE OFTENTIMES WE JUST GOTTA WORK AND BETTER OUR DOCUMENTATION AND BETTER OUR PROCESSES SO SOMETHING DOESN'T SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS.

OKAY.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA ASK NEXT.

SO WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ASSESSING IT, TALKING ABOUT ASSESSING WHETHER WE EVEN NEED TO CHARGE THAT BACK OR NOT.

WELL, AND THEN WE CONSTANTLY, REGULARLY LOOK AT WHO NEEDS A TAKE HOME VEHICLE AND WHO DOESN'T KIND OF THING.

AND IT'S USUALLY IT'S BASED ON THE POSITION, UH, THE POSITION THAT THEY'RE IN, THAT KIND OF THING.