[K2. 2025-240 Hold a Public Hearing, Present and Discuss the City of Princeton’s Proposed 2025 Property Tax Rate for the City of Princeton for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.]

>> 2025-240, HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, PRESENT AND DISCUSS THE CITY OF PRINCETON'S PROPOSED 2025 PROPERTY TAX RATE FOR THE CITY OF PRINCETON FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025/2026, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE KELLY WILSON.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNSEL.

AGAIN, TONIGHT, WE ARE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE TAX RATE THAT WILL GO INTO EFFECT FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR 2025 '26, AS REQUIRED BY LAW, WE ARE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING.

THE TAX RATE PROPOSED IS 0.440226 PER $100 VALUATION.

IT IS ONE OF THE LOWEST RATES IN COLLIN COUNTY.

THE LOWER RATE EASES THE BURDEN ON OUR TAXPAYERS, BUT LIMITS THE REVENUE GROWTH THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE AT THE CITY OF PRINCETON.

THERE ARE SOME CONSTRAINTS, ABILITY TO EXPAND PUBLIC SAFETY, ROAD INVESTMENTS THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM COUNSEL WHEN WE HAVE THIS LOW TAX RATE.

THIS WAS POSTED IN THE NEWSPAPER AS REQUIRED BY LAW, AND I WANTED TO BRING THIS OUT THAT AGAIN, WE ARE NOT INCREASING THE TAX RATE.

WE ARE LOOKING AT THE AVERAGE HOMESTEAD TAXABLE VALUE DOES SHOW A 3.11% INCREASE.

THAT IS WHAT THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT DOES IN ASSESSING WHAT IS A TAXABLE VALUE OF A HOME.

THE TAX ON AVERAGE OF THAT HOMESTEAD INCREASES $43.96 A YEAR OR 3.11.

THEN THE TOTAL TAX LEVY ON PROPERTIES, WE'RE SEEING AN INCREASE OF 3 MILLION OR 18.69.

AGAIN, LOOKING AT BALANCING AFFORDABILITY AND THE SERVICES TO PROVIDE FOR THE RESIDENTS, TAX REMAINS UNCHANGED.

WE'RE LOOKING AT A LOW RATE THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT FISCAL STEWARDSHIP AND PROVIDES RELIEF FOR HOMEOWNERS.

BUT DEMAND FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY FOR POLICE AND FIRE AND ROAD PROJECTS IS INCREASING RAPIDLY.

THE FLUCTUATION OF THE HOME VALUES PLUS THE LOW RATE, AND WE'RE SEEING THE REVENUE LAGGING BEHIND THE COMMUNITY NEEDS, AND SOMETHING ELSE TO CONSIDER TO IS KEEPING THE TAXES AFFORDABLE OR INVESTING TO KEEP PRINCETON SAFE AND MOVING FORWARD.

THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME?

[00:55:01]

>> I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

NO QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL FOR KELLY? THE TIME IS 8:24, AND THIS WILL OPEN UP PUBLIC HEARING.

IS ANYBODY HERE WISH TO SPEAK FOR PUBLIC HEAR? MEXICANOS?

>> I'LL JUST REITERATE WHAT I WAS SAYING ABOUT TAXES DURING THE BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT OUR BUSINESSES AND HAVE OUR BUSINESSES HELPING WITH THIS TAXES.

THERE'S NO AND ANYBODY CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN WHERE ANY BUSINESSES PAY A SALES PART OF THEIR SALES TAX TO OUR CITY.

I HAVEN'T SEEN IT. IF I'M WRONG, CORRECT ME, BUT I'M NOT SEEING IT, AND I PROMISE YOU, I USED MY OWN PERSONAL PRINTER AND PRINTED OUT EVERY SINGLE PAGE OF THE BUDGET.

I HAVE THE ENTIRE BUDGET THAT I PRINTED OUT MYSELF TO REVIEW.

I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT A TAX INCREASE, BUT IT REALLY IS, BECAUSE IT'S TO OUR PROPERTY VALUE, WHICH IS AN INCREASE, WHICH MEANS I'M PAYING MORE MONEY.

I ALSO AND I KNOW THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE LAST ONE, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, GUYS? VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THIS ENTIRE BOARD.

YOU ALL DID NO OTHER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION BESIDES GIVING SOMEBODY THREE MINUTES TO STAND.

I SUGGESTED I RECOMMENDED TOWN HALL.

LET THE PUBLIC HAVE SOME MORE TIME.

WHEN YOU DID THE BUDGET MEETING, I SAT THROUGH THAT ENTIRE MEETING THE ENTIRE DAY.

HOW MUCH OF THE PUBLIC DID YOU ALLOW TO SPEAK DURING THAT? ZERO. NOW THE PUBLIC GETS MAYBE SIX MINUTES IF YOU GOT UP HERE AND SPOKE TWICE.

IT'S VERY DISAPPOINTING.

I GUARANTEE YOU ALL ARE GOING TO APPROVE THE BUDGET TONIGHT NO MATTER WHAT THE PUBLIC SAYS, AND YOU GET NO FURTHER INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC.

[APPLAUSE]

>> I JUST WANT TO JUST BE CLEAR, THAT SALES TAX FROM COMMERCIAL IS SET BY THE STATE, I BELIEVE.

WE GET $2 THAT GOES TO THE EDC.

IT WOULDN'T COME INTO OUR GENERAL.

NO, WE GET $1 MAXIMUM.

>> TWO PERCENT. ONE PERCENT FOR THE CITY SIDE GENERAL FUND.

THE OTHER SIDE SPLIT BETWEEN THE EDC, CDC.

>> THAT IS ON THE LAST, WAS THAT IN THE BUDGET?

>> IT WAS ON THE LAST PRESENTATION, SECOND LINE ITEM, BUT IT'S UNDER SALES TAX.

YOU'LL SEE JUST OVER, I THINK, 4.2 MILLION IN THERE SALES TAX.

>> BUT WE CANNOT RAISE THE SALES TAX FOR COMMERCIAL.

>> THAT'S A LEGAL LIMIT, RIGHT.

>> DID ANYBODY ELSE HOW TO SPEAK.

KEN. COME.

>> GOOD EVENING. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME AT THE MEETING.

I JUST WANT TO SAY, I HAVE FOUR KIDS.

I LIVE IN PRINCETON. MY KIDS LOVE PRINCETON.

WHEN I FIRST PURCHASED MY HOUSE, I WAS A BIT IGNORANT.

I DID NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE WHOLE PROPERTY IN, INCREASED MY MORTGAGE.

THAT FIRST YEAR NOT ONLY DID I HAVE TO PAY $4,000 TO CHANGE WHAT I GUESS I OWED, BUT ALSO MY MORTGAGE WENT UP 200, $300.

I WENT FROM PAYING $1,400 TO PAYING ALMOST $1,700 FOR A DOWNTOWN HOME.

THIS MATTERS, THIS AFFECTS YOUR POCKET, MY POCKET.

NOW I STRESS OUT EVERY YEAR KNOWING, AM I GOING TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO CONTINUE LIVING HERE.

I ASK YOU TO REALLY CONSIDER WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE APPROVING BECAUSE IT DOES AFFECT ALL OF US.

I LIVE DOWNTOWN.

I DON'T HAVE ANY SIDEWALKS.

THERE'S NO LIGHTS FOR THE KIDS COMING TO SCHOOL THAT WALK FROM GODWIN OVER TO THE HIGH SCHOOL BEHIND ME.

THERE'S LIKE I SAID, NO SIDEWALK.

MY ROADS AREN'T FIXED, SO THEN I SAY, WHAT AM I PAYING FOR? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU. IS ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK?

[01:00:09]

>> I HAVEN'T SPOKEN ON PUBLIC SAFETY FOR A WHILE, BUT THAT HAS FOR QUITE A WHILE BEEN A BIG CONCERN OF MINE.

I KNOW YOU'VE EXPRESSED IT'S A BIG CONCERN.

I WAS GLAD TO SEE THAT THERE WAS MORE DISCUSSION OF IT TODAY, BUT TWO ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICERS IS NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO WHAT WE NEED.

I HOPE YOU GUYS REALIZE THAT.

IN THE 2024 BUDGET, POLICE DEPARTMENT SAID THEY NEEDED 30 POLICE OFFICERS TO GET WHERE THEY NEEDED TO BE.

THAT NUMBER DIDN'T SOUND GOOD, AND ONE IS, THEY KNEW THEY WEREN'T GOING TO GET IT, AND THEY WERE GIVEN A BUDGET FOR SEVEN POLICE OFFICERS.

THE CITY DIDN'T LIKE HEARING TALK LIKE THAT THAT SO MANY POLICE OFFICERS NEEDED.

THEY DID A NEW STUDY, HIRED ANOTHER CONSULTANT, AND NOW WE'RE PRETTY MUCH WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

THEY SAID WE NEED ONE ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICER.

THAT WAS WHAT I HEARD AT CITY COUNCIL ONE TIME.

>> NOT TOO LONG SHORT SEVEN YEAR SO BUT YEAH.

>> THAT THE UPDATED CONSULTANT STUDY SAID WE NEEDED ONE ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICER.

IF A SEVEN, I THINK THAT'S GREAT BECAUSE IF EVEN IF WE GREW AT HALF THE RATE THAT WE GREW LAST TIME, THAT'S ANOTHER FIVE OR 6,000 RESIDENTS AT THE VERY MINIMUM OF ONE POLICE OFFICER PER THOUSAND RESIDENTS AT SIX OR SEVEN POLICE OFFICERS.

THAT'S THE VERY MINIMUM STANDARD.

IS ONE POLICE OFFICER PER THOUSAND.

WE NEED PUTTING THESE PEOPLE ON NOW.

THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS DOING A FANTASTIC JOB WITH THE RESOURCES THEY HAVE.

THEY HAVE FANTASTIC PEOPLE.

THEY'RE DOING SMART POLICING.

THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO DO MORE WITH LESS.

BUT THEY NEED MORE PEOPLE. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU GUYS TALK TO THE POLICE OFFICERS, BUT THEY NEED MORE PEOPLE, AND YOU'LL HEAR IT IF YOU TALK TO THEM.

I WENT TO THE POLICE ACADEMY TO SEE FOR MYSELF.

THEY'RE GREAT PEOPLE. THEY HAVE THEY'RE WORKING SMART AND HARD.

THEY NEED MORE PEOPLE.

AT THE LAST COUNSEL PRE-COUNSEL MEETING, IT WAS SAID THAT ONE PENNY WOULD PAY FOR TWO ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICERS.

IF THAT'S WHAT IT TOOK TO GET EXTRA POLICE OFFICERS, $33 A YEAR. I WOULDN'T HAVE A QUESTION.

EXCEPT I SEE HOW YOU SPEND THE MONEY, AND I DON'T TRUST YOU WITH THE MONEY YOU'RE GETTING NOW, TO BE HONEST.

ON THE MULTI GEN CENTER, TALKING ABOUT TAXES.

YOU GUYS ARE FINDING WAYS TO WORK AROUND THE TAX RATE.

MAXINE SAID, SO IN THE MEMO ATTACHMENT TO THE MULTI GEN CENTER, IT SAYS THAT IT WAS BUDGETED TO BE 35 MILLION.

NOW IT'S LOOKING AT 75 MILLION.

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY FOR THAT? IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE COMING ME ON, 30 MORE SECONDS.

I'VE HEARD YOU SAY THAT THERE'S OTHER OBLIGATIONS YOU CAN ISSUE WITHOUT A BOND ELECTION, THAT THAT'S ONE OF THE WAYS YOU'RE GOING TO PAY FOR IT.

I HAVE TO DATE, I DON'T THINK THERE HAS BEEN ANY PUBLIC VOTES ON EXPANDING THE COST OF THIS PARKS BOND THAT USED TO BE 108 MILLION.

I HAVE NOT SEEN ONE PUBLIC VOTE ON THE EXPANSION OF THIS BUDGET.

THERE'S NOT BEEN A TOWN HALL.

THERE'S NOT BEEN A PUBLIC VOTE.

THAT'S JUST ANOTHER REASON WHY, THAT MULTI GEN CENTER SOUNDS GREAT, BUT IT'S JUST WE CAN'T AFFORD IT, NOT WHEN WE CAN'T DO DRAINAGE NEEDED DRAINAGE STUDIES AND HIRE THE POLICE OFFICERS WE NEED.

>> WE'RE NOT GOING OVER TO 109 MILLION BONDS, SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE EXPENSING ANY ADDITIONAL MONEY BESIDES WHAT IS COMING OUT OF THE BOND ITSELF.

>> JUST TO CLEAR THAT UP. THE BOND MONEY WAS VOTER APPROVED, AND IT IS RESTRICTED TO ONLY PARKS AND RECREATION PROJECTS.

COUNSEL DID TALK ABOUT THIS A NUMBER OF TIMES.

I FORGET THE EXACT DATE.

I WAS IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS THAT YOU ALL AFFIRMED THE PROJECT LIST AND MAYOR, COUNSELMAN WASHINGTON, YOU AND I HAD SPOKE MANY TIMES ABOUT THIS ON HOW TO PRIORITIZE THE MONEY FOR THE RESIDENTS.

ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE IMPACT FEES WITH THE PARKS THAT WE ARE UTILIZING TO DO SOME OF THESE PARKS PROJECTS THAT ARE RESTRICTED JUST TO THAT.

THE BUDGET IS A VERY COMPLEX ORGANISM.

HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND TALK TO ANYBODY THAT NEEDS TO HAVE MORE CLARIFICATION.

>> KEVIN.

>> THIRD TIME TO TRY. THIS CAN BE SHORT AND SWEET, TWO THINGS.

ONE, LIKE ANOTHER GENTLEMAN MENTIONED, I DON'T FEEL LIKE I'M GETTING A GREAT RETURN OF INVESTMENT ON MY TAXES.

WHATEVER YOU GUYS CAN DO TO WORK ON THAT,

[01:05:04]

I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD AGREE WITH ME.

IT'S VERY GENERALIZED STATEMENT.

THE OTHER THING IS THAT WE HAVE A VOTE.

RIGHT THAT YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO DO RIGHT NOW THAT IS FOR WHETHER OR YES OR NO ON KEEPING THE TAX RATE THE SAME.

THE OTHER OPTION WAS TO DO A NO NEW NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE.

I'M CURIOUS ABOUT HOW THE DECISION TO VOTE FOR THIS, YES OR NO ON THIS, VERSUS MAKING THE VOTE YES OR NO ON THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE? HOW DID YOU ALL COME TO THAT? BECAUSE YOU ALL DIDN'T SPEAK ABOUT THAT IN AN OPEN SESSION? WAS THAT SPOKEN ABOUT BETWEEN ALL AND THE CITY MANAGER? I'M CURIOUS, SINCE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN IN OPEN SESSION, I'M CURIOUS IF THAT IS A OPEN MEETINGS ACT VIOLATION.

PERHAPS THE ATTORNEY CAN ANSWER THAT. THANK YOU.

>> THAT ACTUALLY WAS TALKED ABOUT IN OPEN SESSION RECENTLY.

>> I THINK WE SPOKE ABOUT IT DURING THE RETREAT, I BELIEVE.

>> IN ADDITION TO THE BUDGET RETREAT THAT WE HAD IN JULY, WE ALSO BROUGHT TO COUNCIL ON AUGUST 8TH, THE PROPOSED TAX RATE.

THAT WAS WHEN IT WAS PROPOSED.

I SAID THAT THAT TIME, THIS IS THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE, WHICH IS THE MAXIMUM RATE THAT YOU CAN ADOPT.

THEN TONIGHT IS YOUR DECISION.

>> THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR A PUBLIC HEARING? THE TIME IS 8:35, AND THIS WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

THIS WILL MOVE US TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA. ONE. MS. COKE.

[L1. 2025-242 Presentation and discussion for JJ Book Wilson Memorial Park design and utilizing additional Park funds; and take appropriate action.]

>> L1, 2025,242, PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION FOR JJ BOOK WILSON MEMORIAL PARK DESIGN, AND UTILIZING ADDITIONAL PARK FUNDS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

MR. BRYANT. NATE BECKY.

>> GOOD EVENING. MAYOR. COUNSEL, CHASE BRYANT, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION.

BRING SOMETHING EXCITING TO THE BOARD.

I KNOW I BROUGHT THIS PRESENTATION BACK A FEW WEEKS AGO, BUT SOME MORE THINGS HAVE EVOLVED, AS MR. MASHBURN SAID, IT'S A LIVING ORGANISM THAT KEEPS EVOLVING.

A LITTLE MORE DETAILED IMAGING AND FUNDING SOURCES ASSOCIATED THAT YOU'LL SEE.

WE'RE GOING TO START OUT WITH THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR JJ BOOK.

MR. LONG, YOU MENTIONED, WHERE THE FUND BALANCE FOR PARKS FEES.

WE HAVE 13 MILLION IN THE PARKS FUNDS.

HOWEVER, WE HAVE ALLOCATED AND ENCUMBERED ABOUT 4.8 OF THAT 13.

THAT CONTINUES TO EVOLVE AS MORE PROJECTS COME ONLINE, AND WE'RE IDENTIFYING SOME OF THOSE DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES VERSUS GO BONDS OR PARK FEES.

BUT RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ABOUT 4.8 DEDICATED OUT OF THE PART FUNDS.

WHAT YOU SEE IS THE THREE DIFFERENT OPTIONS, OPTIONS 1, 2, AND 3.

DR HORTON'S CONTRIBUTION TO THIS PROJECT IS 5.1 MILLION.

THOSE FUNDS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED.

IT IS READY FOR THE EXPENDITURES AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF OPTION 2.

WHEN I GET INTO THESE DIFFERENT OPTIONS, I'LL BREAK DOWN THE DIFFERENT AMENITIES.

OPTION 2 IS 800, AND THEN WHAT YOU SEE WITH OPTION 3 IS AN ADDITIONAL 1.4.

MY MOUSE IS NOT WORKING.

TURN IT OFF AND GO BACK.

HERE WE GO. THANK YOU, ARE.

I PUT ALL THREE IMAGES ON ONE SLIDE SO YOU CAN SEE THEM, YOU'LL SEE THEM HERE, AND YOU'LL SEE IT AT THE END, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OPTIONS 1,2 AND 3.

THEN I BROKE DOWN SOME OF THE AMENITIES AND THE IMAGING ALLOCATED BETWEEN EACH.

WHAT YOU HAVE WITH OPTION 1, THIS IS REQUIRING NO ADDITIONAL FUNDING.

THIS WOULD BE ROUGHLY 51, WHICH IS DR HORTON'S CONTRIBUTION.

THERE WOULD BE NO ADDITIONAL PARK FUNDING NEEDED FOR THIS OPTION 1.

WHAT WE HAVE IS WE BROKE IT DOWN INTO TEN DIFFERENT SECTIONS.

ONE IS A DROP OFF TURNAROUND.

[01:10:04]

IN THIS PARK DESIGN, PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT DOES INCLUDE THE EXTENSION FOR THE PARKING, THE FIRE LANE, AND THE TURNAROUND THAT IS REQUIRED TO MEET FIRE CODE.

IT ALSO INCLUDES A RESTROOM FACILITY.

RIGHT NOW, IT'S JUST A PAVILION AND OPEN PAVILION, BUT THIS WILL INCLUDE A RESTROOM FACILITY.

THOSE NUMBERS ARE INCLUDED IN THIS 51 AS WELL.

WHAT YOU SEE AN OPTION WITH THE NUMBER 1, WHICH IS A FOOD TRUCK DROP OFF, I'LL LET YOU READ THOSE 1-10, WHAT WE'VE GOT.

OPTION 2, THE DIFFERENCE IS THE PLAY COMPONENTS.

WHAT YOU HAVE BETWEEN 1 AND 2, AND THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL 800 TO GO WITH OPTION 2 IS MORE PLAY, BUT A SMALLER SKATE PARK.

OPTION 3 IS WHERE THE PARK IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED AT THIS MOMENT.

THIS IS ALL IN WITH THE LARGER SKATE PARK AND MORE PLAY COMPONENTS.

YOU CAN SEE BETWEEN 1 AND 2 AND 3 THE DIFFERENCE IN THOSE DIFFERENT AMENITIES.

RIGHT HERE, WHAT YOU HAVE IN OPTION 1.

THIS IS THE SKATE PARK.

YOU HAVE REALLY TWO DIFFERENT STYLES ON SKATE, WHICH IS STREET SKATE AND THAT'S AN OPEN PLAZA.

GRINDING RAILS, STAIRS, THOSE TYPES THAT'S WHAT'S CONSIDERED STREET SKATE.

THEN WHAT YOU SEE IN THAT LITTLE CIRCLE TRACK THAT'S MORE OF A FLOW BOWL FOR MORE INTERMEDIA SKATERS.

FLEX TURF PLAY CRIME, YOU SEE THOSE ON AREAS TO THE RIGHT? YOU LOOK AT OPTION 2 FROM OPTION 1.

THERE'S A FEW DIFFERENT AMENITIES ADDED.

BUT THE ONE THAT I REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON WOULD BE THE PLAY CLIMB AREA, MOVING MORE IN THE CENTRAL LOCATION AND YOUNGER AGE SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE WOULD BE, PLAY STRUCTURES FROM THAT 2 TO 5 AND REALLY EVEN UP TO THAT 5 TO 12 RANGE.

THEN WHAT YOU SEE IN OPTION 3, WHICH IS WHAT I WOULD SAY, FULLY LOADED, IS ALL OF THE PLATE COMPONENTS WITH THE EXPANSION TO THE SKATE PARK.

YOU SEE BETWEEN THE TWO SIZES ON THE SKATE PARK, THAT 50% ENLARGEMENT.

HERE IS A LITTLE MORE SIMPLIFIED BREAKDOWN IN THE ADDED COMPONENTS 1-3.

I'M SEEKING DIRECTION FROM COUNSEL.

WE WOULD NEED TO TAKE A VOTE.

THIS PART DOES HAVE FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR OPTIONS 1 THROUGH OPTION 3.

WE ARE IN DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT GETTING THIS UNDER CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS SO WE CAN EXECUTE WHAT THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE, WRAP UP WITH DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, BRING BACK CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, AND EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO BEGIN.

HOPEFULLY, WE ARE GETTING INTO THE THIRD QUARTER, SO HOPEFULLY THAT WOULD BE FINALIZED BEFORE THE END OF THIS YEAR AND CONSTRUCTION CAN COMMENCE.

WITH THAT, I ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.

>> HAVE YOU GONE TO SEE THE ANNA SKATE PARK?

>> I HAVE.

>> BECAUSE THEY SPENT 2.5 MILLION TO DO THEIRS, AND IT HAS THE SPLASH PAD AND EVERYTHING.

IN FACT, THEIR BOND WAS ONLY 58 MILLION, AND THEY JUST BUILT A REALLY NICE LIBRARY AS WELL.

>> THEIR BOND WAS WIDE.

>> 58 MILLION. IT'S LESS THAN OURS, BUT THEY'RE DOING A LOT OF THE SAME THINGS WE'RE DOING.

WHAT'S UNIQUE IS THAT THEY'RE COMBINING THE STRAIGHT UP STRUCTURE WITH SOME PREFABS LIKE THEIR BATHROOM WAS A PREFAB STRUCTURE, SO IT SAVED THEM A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THE COST OF BUILDING FOR THE RESTROOMS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

HAVE WE EXPLORED ANY OF THOSE THINGS, AND ALSO WHY IS THE COST SO DRASTIC? IS OURS REALLY GOING TO BE SO MUCH BIGGER THAN THEIRS? IS THAT WHY OURS IS GOING TO BE THIS MUCH MORE THAN HOW MUCH THEY SPENT?

[01:15:04]

THEY JUST BUILT IT. IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S AN ECONOMY DIFFERENCE.

>> I'LL ANSWER THESE ONE AT A TIME.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT AS FAR AS SOME OF THE PREFAB STRUCTURES.

HOWEVER, WHAT I CAN SAY ABOUT PREFAB, RESTROOM FACILITIES, SHADE SALES, THEY'RE ACTUALLY NOT A COST SAVINGS.

THEY'RE ACTUALLY MORE COSTLY OVERALL.

THE CONVENIENCE IS WHERE YOU ACTUALLY IT COMES INTO PLAY.

WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS THEY'RE BUILDING THESE STRUCTURES OFFSITE AND THEN DELIVERING THEM AND ASSEMBLING THEM IN A DAY.

YOU GET THE CONVENIENCE, BUT THE COST IS ACTUALLY MORE.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE ON A JJ BOOK, A PRE MANUFACTURED RESTROOM FACILITY.

WE HAVE IT ALSO AT COLWELL PARK.

I DO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SOME OF THE PRE MANUFACTURED RESTROOM AND SHADE STRUCTURES THAT ARE BUILT OFF SITE AND BROUGHT IN FOR THE CONVENIENCE.

BUT ONCE AGAIN, THAT IS AT A HIGHER COST, NOT A LOWER COST.

GOING BACK TO ANNA SKATE PARK, THAT BOND WAS A $28 MILLION BOND IN 2021.

IT IS ACTUALLY THE FUNDS WERE ALLOCATED.

NOW, THEIR SKATE PARK DIRECT WAS A IT'S A LITTLE OVER A $2 MILLION SKATE PARK FOR 25,000 SQUARE FEET.

WHAT YOU ACTUALLY SEE HERE IS ACTUALLY THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 25,000 SQUARE FEET.

ON OPTION 3, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE PUSHING 2022 TO 25,000 SQUARE FEET ON OPTION 3.

>> OPTION 3 FOR 6.5 IS THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT THEY PAID 2.54.

>> BUT I BELIEVE THAT WAS JUST FOR THE SKATE PARK.

IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

I BELIEVE THE SKATE PARK COST 2.5 MILLION.

>> YES.

>> BUT THIS IS FOR THE ENTIRE PARK FOR THE ENTIRE PARK?

>> CORRECT. THOSE WERE THE POINTS THAT I WANTED TO MAKE.

THIS ALSO INCLUDES THAT 6.5, FULLY LOADED.

THAT'S THE PLAY COMPONENTS, THAT'S THE RESTROOM FACILITY, THAT'S THE ADDITIONAL PARKING, THE FIRE LANE.

ALL OF THAT IS ROLLED INTO THIS 6.5.

ANNA HAD THE PARKING LOT.

I WAS AT AN EXISTING PARK.

THEIR 2.5 WAS JUST FOR THE SKATE PARK ALONE.

IT WAS A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN THAT.

BUT YES, FOR THE ROUGHLY THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE FOOTPRINT. VERY SIMILAR.

NOW, AND I WILL ALSO NOTE THAT SPA, WHICH IS THE CONTRACTOR THAT WE HAVE UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE DESIGN BUILD FOR THE SKATE PARK IS THE SAME ONE THAT ANNA USED AS WELL.

THEY'RE THE LEADING DESIGN BUILD CONTRACTORS IN NORTH TEXAS.

A LOT OF SCHOOLS USE THEM, CITY OF MCKINNEY, GREENVILLE, ANNA.

THEY'RE VERY FAMILIAR, AND THEY LEAD THE INDUSTRY IN THE SKATE PARK DESIGN IN TEXAS DIRECTLY.

BUILT SOME OF THE LARGEST AND THE BEST.

THAT WAS THE ONE OF THE DIRECTIONS WE WENT WITH WHEN WE INTERVIEWED SKATE PARK DESIGN, BUILD COMPANIES.

WHO KNOWS THE AREA, WHO'S BUILT THAT WAY WE CAN TOUR SOME OF THOSE FACILITIES, AND ANNA WAS THE ONE THAT WAS ACTUALLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, SO I DID GET TO WATCH IT FROM START ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

THEN WHAT I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU ON SPOT HERE, BUT WHAT WAS THE OTHER LAST SECTION TO THAT QUESTION?

>> REALLY, THE PART THAT I DIDN'T GET TO IS YOU CAME TO US 27 JANUARY AND PRESENTED ONE CONTRACTOR PRICING.

THIS ONE'S FROM THE 28TH AND IT'S OF AUGUST, IT'S DIFFERENT, AND IT ALSO DOESN'T MATCH WHAT'S INSIDE THE BUDGET BOOK FOR JJ BOOK.

THE NUMBERS DON'T MATCH AT ALL.

I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S A REASON FOR WHY THREE DIFFERENT THINGS HAVE THREE DIFFERENT SETS OF NUMBERS.

>> ABSOLUTELY. CAN YOU EXPAND A LITTLE BIT? THE ONLY REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO ACTUAL DESIGN COST UNTIL THE FINAL DESIGN OF THE PARK WAS IDENTIFIED, WHICH IS WHERE WE ARE NOW.

WE HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN BETWEEN 51 AND 65.

THAT IS WITH SOME VALUE ENGINEERING, TAKING A LOOK AT THE OVERALL SCOPE OF THE PROJECT AND SAYING, HEY, OKAY, WE'VE GOT AN OPTION THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE AT ANY ADDITIONAL COST AND USING ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCE FROM DR HORTON OR HEY, WE ARE DESIGN, WHEN WE GET INTO DESIGN AND YOU REALLY GET INTO THOSE FINE DETAILS OF WHAT THE COST IS, THAT'S WHERE THE 65.

[01:20:01]

>> WELL, WE CAN START WITH AT THE SAME MEETING, I GOT THE BINDER.

YOU DID THIS PRESENTATION.

YOU SAID THE 5.1, WE NEEDED MORE MONEY.

IN THE BINDER, IT'S $4,802,232 THAT WE HAVE FOR JJ BOOK.

ON HERE, THE JANUARY 1 HAS THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN AND EVERYTHING.

IT HAS ENDED UP WITH THE 2,409,000, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAD APPROVED FOR.

THIS ONE THAT I GOT ON 828.

IT'S FUNNY. THE BUDGET ALREADY SHOWED THE MONEY WAS RECEIVED, BUT IT SHOWS THAT ON THE SAME DAY THAT I GOT THIS WAS THE DAY THAT DR HORTON GAVE US THE 5.1.

BUT IT ALSO SHOWS THAT DALLAS FUND IS NOW BEING ADDED.

WE HAVE ANOTHER $250,000 GOING TOWARDS JJ BOOK.

>> THEN IT SHOWS THE RESOLUTIONS ON HERE FOR, LIKE, THE 449,425.

[OVERLAPPING].

>> THE 449 IS WITH OUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DESIGN.

WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT COMPONENTS HERE.

PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE SKATE PARK IS A DESIGN-BUILD.

IT'S I SAY ONE SEPARATE PROJECT.

THEY WORK IN TANDEM WITH OUR CONTRACTOR TO BUILD THE PARK.

YOUR SKATE PARK COMPANY, THEY SPECIFY IN ONE SPECIFIC CATEGORY, WHICH IS SKATE PARKS.

YOU DON'T WANT JUST ANY CONTRACTOR OR ANY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO DESIGN YOUR SKATE PARK; YOU WANT THE PROFESSIONALS.

WE HAVE A DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT OF 2.4, FOR THE SKATE PARK DESIGN-BUILD, AND YOU ALSO HAVE THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, WHICH DESIGNS THE ENTIRETY OF THE PARK AROUND IT.

THAT'S WHAT THAT 449 IS.

THEN YOU ALSO COME IN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, WHICH IS THE CONSTRUCTION IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE.

>> I GUESS I MUST HAVE NOT GOTTEN THAT ONE WHEN I ASKED FOR STUFF.

THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACT.

>> HTLA.

>> YES. I'LL JUST PUT IN A REQUEST TO GET THAT SINCE I DON'T HAVE THAT.

DO YOU KNOW OR DOES ANYONE IN THE ROOM CURRENTLY KNOW, LIKE HOW MUCH THAT CONTRACT IS FOR FOR THE LANDSCAPING?

>> WHEN YOU'RE SAYING LANDSCAPING, WE'RE TALKING ARCHITECT.

THAT'S DESIGN. THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT YOU HAVE WITH THAT 449. THAT'S WHAT I KEEP SAYING.

>> GO AHEAD. I THINK MAYBE I CAN CLEAR UP.

I THINK THERE'S A FEW DIFFERENT ELEMENTS GOING ON.

WE'RE TRYING TO DECIDE DOES COUNCIL WANT OPTION 1, 02, OR 3, THAT'S GOING TO DICTATE THE REMAINING AMOUNT.

WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED A CONTRACT FOR THE DESIGN-BUILD FOR THE SKATE PARK ELEMENT ONLY, ALONG WITH HTLA, WHICH IS DESIGNING THE ENTIRE PARK.

THEY'VE ALREADY DESIGNED THREE OPTIONS.

WE JUST NEED TO PICK ONE.

THEN WE'LL BRING BACK ANOTHER CONTRACT TO FINISH UP THE OTHER ELEMENTS FOR YOU ALL TO APPROVE.

I THINK MAYBE THAT'S WHERE THE CONFUSION LIES.

>> THIS 6.5 IS ACTUALLY MORE THAN THAT FOR THE WHOLE COMPLETION OF THIS PART, OR IS IT 6.5 MAX WITH THE DESIGN, WITH THE CONTRACT, AND LANDSCAPING, EVERYTHING THAT IS 6.5 ENCOMPASSES ALL OF THAT.

BUT WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THE DIFFERENT BREAKDOWNS OF DIFFERENT BASIC PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.

>> CORRECT.

>> WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE DIFFERENT PHASES.

>> WE HAVE ALL THE REVENUE IN HAND.

WE'VE ONLY ALLOCATED CONTRACTS TO HTLA AND THE SKATE PARK CONTRACTOR.

WE JUST NEED TO COMPLETE THE REST OF THE PARK WITH THIS.

I THINK WHAT CHASE IS TRYING TO ILLUSTRATE IS THE TWO SKATE PARKS DESIGNED BY THE SAME COMPANY, ROUGHLY THE SAME COST, ROUGHLY THE SAME SIZE.

WE'RE TRYING TO JUST FILL IN THE OTHER ELEMENTS.

WE CAN ONLY DO A SKATE PARK IF YOU WANT, BUT YOU'RE MISSING RESTROOMS, CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA, SYNTHETIC TURF, ETC.

THERE'S A LOT OF ELEMENTS IN THERE.

>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW EVERYONE ELSE FEELS, BUT I THINK OPTION 3 WOULD BE A GREAT OPTION FOR JUST RESIDENTS OVERALL.

I GOT A LOT OF FEEDBACK FROM THE RESIDENTS, MAJORITY THAT I'VE RECEIVED, THEY WANT OPTION 3.

MY WHOLE RESERVES ON IT WAS WHAT OUR BALANCE IN OUR ACCOUNT WAS, AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH TO COVER THE EXTRA 1.4.

ESPECIALLY WITH THIS BEING THE FIRST PART THAT WE PROBABLY GET ONLINE FULLY, I THINK THAT WE DO THIS THE RIGHT WAY, AND WE SHOULD DO IT ALL THE WAY BECAUSE THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE THE FIRST PARK THAT THE RESIDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO OUTSIDE OF COWELL.

[01:25:01]

>> YOUR HONOR, IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE OPTION 3 FOR THIS PROJECT.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES.

>> THAT MOVES US TO

[L2. 2025-232 Consider approving Gentry Kelton’s voluntary resignation from her appointed office of Planning & Zoning Commission, Place 1; and take appropriate action.]

ITEM L2, MS. COOK.

>> 2025,232.

CONSIDER APPROVING GENTRY C KELTON'S VOLUNTARY RESIGNATION FROM HER APPOINTED OFFICE, OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, PLACE ONE, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

>> I WANT TO SAY I KNOW SHE'S NOT HERE RIGHT NOW, BUT EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE FOR HER SERVICE TO PLANNING AND ZONING AND THE IN DEPTH THOUGHTS AND QUESTIONS THAT SHE ASKED WHILE SHE WAS UP THERE SERVING THE CITY.

IT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED. SHE'LL BE MISSED.

>> I'D LIKE TO ECHO THOSE SENTIMENTS.

GENTRY KELTY IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE RESIDENTS I REACHED OUT TO TO COME AND JOIN A BOARD AND BE A PART OF THE PROCESS.

I THINK SHE DID THAT IN AN EXEMPLARY WAY, AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE.

HOPEFULLY WE'LL SEE YOU IN ANOTHER POSITION SOON.

THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, I DID SAY A MOTION.

>> A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RESIGNATION OF GENTRY KELTON.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION PASSES 70. THIS WILL TAKE US TO ITEM L3, MISS COOK.

[L3. ORD-2025-09-08-01 Presentation and discussion regarding Ordinance No. 2025-09- 08-01; Adopting a Budget and Appropriating Resources for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026; Beginning October 1, 2025, and Ending September 30, 2026; In Accordance with Existing Statutory Requirements; Repealing All Conflicting Ordinances; Containing a Severability Clause; and Providing for an Effective Date; and take appropriate action.]

>> ORDINANCE 202-509-0801.

PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING ORDINANCE 202-509-0801, ADOPTING A BUDGET AND APPROVING RESOURCES FOR FISCAL YEAR 25 26, BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2025, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2026, IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXISTING STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, REPEALING ALL CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION, DIRECTOR KELLY WILSON.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

AGAIN, TONIGHT HAS REQUIRED UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, AS WELL AS OUR CITY CHARTER.

THE ANNUAL BUDGET IS FOR YOUR ADOPTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 25/26.

I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

THIS DOES REQUIRE AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE.

>> MY QUESTION IS, IS THIS NOT BACKWARDS? SHOULDN'T WE VOTE ON THE TAX?

>> NOW BY LAW, YOU HAVE TO DO THE BUDGET FIRST, AND THEN RATIFYING THE REVENUE AND THEN THE TAX.

>> THANKS. IT'S WEIRED BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR TAXES ME, BUT OKAY.

>> YOUR HONOR, BEFORE MOTION IS MADE, I'D JUST LIKE TO THANK KELLY FOR THE WORK SHE'S DONE ON THIS.

I'M GOING TO SAY IT'S FROM, HAS BEEN I'VE BEEN REFERRED TO AS PROBABLY THE OLD MAN UP HERE OR WHATEVER I'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME.

BUT IT IS PROBABLY THE BEST BUDGET PRESENTATION I'VE EVER SEEN.

BARNA, HE DID AN OUTSTANDING JOB.

THANK YOU. WITH THAT, YOUR HONOR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 202-509-0801, ADOPTING THE BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING RESOURCES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025/2026, BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2025.

>> WELL, I GUESS THIS OFFICIALLY MAKES IT A SECOND.

I JUST WANT TO SAY I CAN'T SUPPORT THE BUDGET PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE DISMISSAL OR I GUESS THE EMBARRASSMENT OF THIS BODY TO CONTINUOUSLY DISMISS THE PLEAS OF THE RESIDENTS AT EVERY TURN OF THE WAY, EVERYTHING.

IT'S AN EMBARRASSMENT TO SIT UP HERE AND CALL MYSELF A COUNCILMAN AND TO BE WITH THIS BODY.

IT'S EXHAUSTING TO COME UP HERE AND FIGHT, AND THERE HAS BEEN NO COMPROMISE IN MY EIGHT MONTHS OF SERVING UP HERE FOR THE RESIDENTS.

EVERYONE UP HERE CONTINUES TO SAY HOW THEY REPRESENT THE RESIDENTS.

I BELIEVE THAT YOU ALL FORGOT YOUR OATH, AND WHAT OUR POSITION IS, IT'S THE OVERSIGHT.

IT'S NOT YOUR JOB TO FIND THE MONEY IN THE BUDGET. IT'S THE STAFF JO.

IT'S YOUR JOB TO PUSH FOR WHAT THE RESIDENTS WANT.

THAT'S WHY I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS BUDGET.

>> I'M CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO DIFFERENT BECAUSE,

[01:30:05]

LIKE I SAID, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE A MOTION, WE CAN DISCUSS IT AT THIS POINT, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS BUDGET THAT WE DIDN'T ACHIEVE?

>> I BELIEVE AT THE LAST MEETING, HE ACTUALLY GAVE A LIST OF SUGGESTIONS.

I THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE LIKE SENT BACK, I EVEN DID A PUBLIC REQUEST TO SEE IF I COULD GET WHAT THOSE NUMBERS WOULD LOOK LIKE, BECAUSE HE DID GIVE US A LIST OF SUGGESTIONS, AND THINGS THAT WE COULD DO TO FREE UP FUNDS AND GET MORE OFFICERS EVEN.

>> EXAMPLE. I'LL QUOTE COUNCILMAN LONG, THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE DOING A FORENSIC AUDIT.

WHEN I'VE ASKED TO PUT IT IN THE LINE ITEM TO MAKE IT SO WE CAN FORECAST TO PUT A VALUE EFFORT TO WHAT THIS COMMUNITY HAS BEEN ASKING FOR, FOR YEARS.

COUNCIL MANG, THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE DOING THIS.

HOWEVER, WE CAN FIND MONEY FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO RENOVATE HIS OFFICE AND ADD A FIREPLACE INTO HIS OFFICE OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, BUT WE CAN'T FIND MONEY FOR WHAT THE RESIDENTS ARE WANTING.

IT'S AN EMBARRASSMENT.

>> IF I CAN MAKE A CORRECTION TO THAT STATEMENT, I SAID A FORENSIC AUDIT OF THE ENTIRE CITY IS UNREASONABLE AND IT'S NOT CONSERVATIVELY RESPONSE.

>> I NEVER ASKED FOR CITYWIDE.

>> THAT'S WHAT MY STATEMENT WAS ABOUT.

IT WASN'T ABOUT NOT DOING AN AUDIT.

IT WAS ABOUT NOT DOING A COMPLETE CITYWIDE AUDIT BECAUSE LIKE THIS BUDGET, I'VE HAD VERY FEW CITIZENS EVEN ENGAGE BEYOND WHAT THE ENGAGEMENT WE SEE HERE.

THAT'S IT. VERY FEW PEOPLE EVEN REACHED OUT TO ME TO TALK ABOUT THIS BUDGET.

THE ONLY PEOPLE I SEE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE HERE.

SEEMS LIKE THE ANSWERS AREN'T GOOD ENOUGH.

I THINK WE NEED MORE TAXES TO FUND EVERYTHING WE NEED.

I THINK WE NEED TO RAISE THE TAX RATE BECAUSE OUR CITY DOESN'T HAVE THE MONEY TO JUST SUPPORT BASIC SERVICES.

BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN UNDER MY WATCH.

I DON'T WANT TO RAISE THE RATE.

THAT'S NOT A GOOD THING.

HOW DIFFICULT THIS BUDGET MAY BE, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO DO.

I CAN'T JUST LIVE ON WISHFUL DREAMS, AND THOUGHTS THAT I CAN JUST HAVE WHATEVER I DESIRE IN A BUDGET, ESPECIALLY WITH THINGS THAT DON'T EVEN HAVE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM YET.

WHEN IT COMES TO AUDITS, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IS STOPPING AN AUDIT.

WE'RE JUST TRYING TO APPROACH IT RESPONSIBLY AND GET OUR RFQS ABOUT IT.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE CAN DO BETTER, AND THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE CAN CUT.

RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NOTHING OUT OF THIS BUDGET THAT WE CAN REALLY GET RID OF.

WE CAN'T RELOCATE FUNDS.

EVERYTHING WE TAKE A FUND FROM IS HARMING THAT SERVICE, IS HARMING THAT DEPARTMENT BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S ALREADY OPERATING AT SUCH MINIMAL BUDGETS RIGHT NOW.

I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS BUDGET, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T LIKE IT.

IT'S NOT THE BEST THING IN THE WORLD.

IT'S NOT GETTING WHAT WE NEED.

IT'S SOMEWHERE CLOSE TO GETTING WHAT WE NEED.

I THINK EVERY SINGLE PERSON UP HERE AND EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE KNOWS THAT DARN WELL, THAT WE DON'T GET WHAT WE WANT, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET WHAT WE WANT FOR NUMBER OF YEARS BECAUSE WE'RE RUNNING THE CITY OFF OF PEOPLE'S RESIDENTIAL TAXES, AND THAT'S IT.

GIVE IT A FIVE YEARS AND WE HAVE A LOT MORE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT HERE AND WE HAVE MAYBE A HOTEL GIVING US THAT GIANT TAX RATE THAT WE CAN INCREASE LEGALLY, THEN MAYBE WE MIGHT HAVE SOME MORE MONEY TO DO THE THINGS THAT WE REALLY WANT TO DO.

UNTIL THEN WE HAVE SOME THINGS TO DEAL WITH, AND THIS IS A BUDGET THAT WORKS.

FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GREAT JOB PUTTING ALL THIS TOGETHER.

ALL THE DEPARTMENTS THAT PUT IN THE EFFORT TO MINIMIZE SPENDING AS BEST YOU CAN.

ALL THE DEPARTMENTS THAT PUT TOGETHER THE EFFORT TO MAKE COST IMPROVEMENTS TO DO THINGS MORE SMART.

I'VE WITNESSED EVERY DEPARTMENT HERE DO THINGS A LITTLE BIT SMARTER TO WHERE WE DON'T NEED TO HIRE SO MANY EXTRA PEOPLE.

PLEASE FIRE EVERYBODY.

THAT TAKES A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BY A LOT OF REALLY GOOD PEOPLE THAT ARE ALL SITTING OVER THERE.

IT'S NOT EVERYTHING THEY DESIRE.

I'M SURE THEY WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A BIG CHUNK OF CHANGE THROWN IN THEIR BUDGET, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE TAX REVENUE FOR IT.

THIS IS WHAT WE GET RIGHT NOW.

I KNOW IT'S NOT WHAT WE DESIRE, BUT IT'S WHAT WE GET TO WORK WITH.

THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY.

[01:35:01]

>> I AGREE OUR STAFF IS DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN WITH THE MONEY THAT WE HAVE.

BUT LET'S BE CLEAR ABOUT DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE PAST.

$0.18 FOR EVERY $0.44 GOES TO COVER OUR DEBT.

WHEN YOU DO THE MATH, THAT MEANS WE'RE GETTING 59% OF OUR TAX REVENUE TO THE CITY.

THE REMAINING 41% GOES TOWARDS DEBT.

WHEN WE START LOOKING AT THE CITY, ABOUT 25% OF OUR CITY IS AT TRS BECAUSE PREVIOUSLY, WE'RE HANDING OUT TRS QUITE FREQUENTLY.

ACCORDING TO THE BUDGET, ABOUT HALF OF THE NEW PROPERTY GROWTH WILL BE INSIDE A TRS, WHICH MEANS FROM THOSE COMMUNITIES, WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE GETTING THE FULL TAX RATE FROM THEM, WHICH MEANS THE REMAINING RESIDENTS BASICALLY, THEIR TAX DOLLARS HAVE TO PICK UP THAT GAP, AND THE EXCESSIVE APPROVAL OF TOURS AND PIDS IN THE PAST HAS PUT US IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN'T AFFORD OFFICERS.

WE HAVE DUG A HOLE SO DEEP AND WE ARE TRYING TO CLIMB OUT, AND WE CAN'T AFFORD OFFICERS BECAUSE OF IT.

I MEAN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW MANY HOMES WE'VE GOT, LET'S SEE, WHITE WING HAS

>> THREE HUNDRED AND SIXTY SIX IN PHASE 1, 230 IN PHASE 2A, 255 IN 2B, 120 2C, OUT TO GET 523 IN PHASE 3 EASTRIDGE HAS 1,255, THEN SICILY HAS THE 296, SOUTH RIDGES 223.

WHEN YOU START ADDING UP HOW MANY OF THESE HOMES WE'RE NOT GETTING PULL TAX DOLLARS FROM.

THAT'S WHY OUR CITY HAS SUCH A STRETCHED BUDGET.

IT IS THE DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE UP HERE AT THIS DIAS.

QUESTIONS NOT BEING ASKED, THINGS BEING PASSED BY.

WE HAVE NEW LEADERSHIP IN CITY STAFF.

LET ME EMPHASIZE THAT.

BUT PREVIOUSLY, THINGS WERE BROUGHT BEFORE COUNCIL, DECISIONS WERE MADE, AND NOW OUR CURRENT STAFF HAS TO LIVE WITH THOSE BALANCES, THOSE RESTRICTIONS IN FUNDS, AND IT'S BECAUSE QUESTIONS AREN'T BEING ASKED UP HERE.

DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE JUST BLINDLY, JUST GOING WITH IT AND NOW WE ARE IN A VERY TIGHT POSITION WITH THIS BUDGET.

LOOKING AT IT AND SEEING CHARGES THAT ARE THE EXACT SAME FOR THE EXACT SAME ACCOUNT ON THE SAME DAY, MULTIPLE TIMES.

I HAVE TO AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN JOHNSON, I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS BUDGET.

WE HAVE NOT BEEN FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR RESIDENTS, AND THAT IS CONCERNING.

KELLY, YOU ARE A SAINT FOR TAKING THIS ON.

EVERYTHING YOU ARE DOING AND TRYING TO FIX IT AND FIND EVERYTHING AND PUT IT TOGETHER, YOU ARE A SAINT FOR THAT AND I APPRECIATE IT DEEPLY AND I HATE THAT IT IS A BURDEN YOU TOOK ON, BUT I TRULY APPRECIATE THAT YOU DO THIS SAME TO OUR DIRECTORS WHO HAVE INHERITED THE THINGS THAT THEY HAVE INHERITED.

EVERYONE IS TRYING TO DO THE BEST THAT THEY CAN WITH WHAT THEY'VE GOT.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ARE THE ONES WHO MAKE THE DECISION UP HERE.

WE ARE THE ONES WHO MAKE THE FINAL SAY, AND WE HAVE FAILED OUR RESIDENTS, WE HAVE FAILED OUR STAFF AND WE NEED TO DO BETTER.

>> SO ARE YOU AGAINST THE BUDGET BECAUSE OF PAST DECISION? WHAT IS THE SOLUTION THAT YOU HAVE?

>> I'M AGAINST THE BUDGET BECAUSE I'VE GOT DOCUMENTS OF DOUBLE CHARGES ON HERE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW BEFORE I VOTE ON A BUDGET.

I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHY SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE GOING THROUGH MORE THAN ONCE ON THE EXACT SAME ACCOUNT ON THE SAME DAY FOR THE SAME TRANSACTION.

>> WHAT DATES ARE THOSE?

>> WELL, WE'VE GOT 10/3/2024.

WE GOT THE PAYMENT NUMBERS, THE EXACT SAME.

>> COULD I HELP YOU WITH ADDRESSING? I THINK THAT WAS THE INFORMATION YOU ASKED FOR A PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST FOR THE DEVELOPMENT FEES?

>> YEAH, I WOULD LOVE TO.

>> SO THAT WOULD BE PERMITS THAT COME IN FROM VARIOUS RESIDENTS SO IT'S NOT THE SAME DUPLICATE CHARGES.

IT MIGHT BE A PERMIT FOR HOME A, HOME B, HOME C ON THAT DAY AND THAT IS RUN THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OFFICERS.

>> THESE ONES SPECIFICALLY ARE PARKS, AND A LOT OF THEM DON'T ACTUALLY THEY HAVE INNER CODE COVER INVOICE.

>> THAT'S DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SOFTWARE TO OUR CODE SYSTEM, THE ACCOUNTING SYSTEM.

[01:40:05]

>> THE HODGSON AND DOUGLAS, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS A DOUBLE CHARGE SAME AMOUNT.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT YOU'RE DOING ALL THAT YOU CAN.

YOU WERE HANDED THIS INFORMATION.

THIS IS FROM WAY BEFORE YOU GOT HERE.

I HONESTLY APPRECIATE YOUR HONESTY IN PUTTING TOGETHER ALL OF THIS AND GIVING ME THE THINGS THAT YOU GAVE ME.

THAT GIVES ME A LOT OF TRUST IN YOU THAT YOU GAVE IT TO ME THE WAY IT IS, RAW INFORMATION.

>> ALL RIGHT, CHRISTINA, YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH THESE CHARGES BEFORE YOU THE BUDGET, WHAT ABOUT THE BUDGET ITSELF? ARE YOU NOT BESIDES YOUR DISTRUST FOR THE CITY?

>> THE NUMBERS DON'T MATCH.

>> WHICH NUMBERS?

>> I'VE BEEN SAYING IT.

WE'VE GOT NUMBERS ON REPORTS THAT JUST DON'T MATCH WHAT'S INSIDE THE BOOK SO I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.

THEY DON'T LINE UP WITH WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS IN THE BINDER TOGETHER.

I NEED TO EMPHASIZE THAT THAT IS NOT ANYTHING TO DO WITH HER.

IT'S LITERALLY THESE ARE CHARGES THAT IMPACT.

>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO SOLVE THIS RIGHT NOW SO WHAT IS THE SOLUTION? I MEAN, THE THING IS THAT, LISTEN, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, BUT THIS DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING AND BRING THIS BUDGET BACK SO I'M REALLY CONCERNED INTO WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME THAT HAVE WE DON'T HAVE TO APPROVE THIS RIGHT NOW.

BUT I JUST DON'T SEE US DELAYING THIS, AND WE'RE GOING TO GET TO SOMEWHERE DIFFERENT.

>> YOU JUST GO AHEAD AND MOVE IT TO A VOTE.

>> SO WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE GET A SECOND ON THAT MOTION? YEAH, I THINK WE DID GET A SECOND. NO SECOND.

I THINK STEVE MADE THE MOTION AND HE DID SECOND BECAUSE HE STARTED SPEAKING SO THAT IS CONSIDERED A SECOND.

AT THIS TIME, WE CAN TAKE A VOTE.

>> PLEASE MAKE IT AN INDIVIDUAL RECORD VOTE FOR YOU.

>> YES. I WILL HAVE TO ROLL CALL. MISS DAVID GRAVES?

>> ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES.

THIS WILL TAKE US TO FOUR.

[L4. ORD-2025-09-08 Presentation and Discussion regarding Ordinance No. 2025-09- 08; an ordinance ratifying the property tax revenue increase reflected in the annual budget for Fiscal Year 2025–2026, beginning October 1, 2025, and ending September 30, 2026; and providing for related matters; and take appropriate action.]

>> ORDINANCE 2025/09/08, PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING ORDINANCE 2025/09/08, AN ORDINANCE RATIFYING THE PROPERTY TAX RATE REVENUE INCREASE REFLECTED IN THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR '25/'26, BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2025, AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2026, AND PROVIDING FOR RELATED MATTERS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. DIRECTOR WILSON.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THIS IS REQUIRED UNDER STATE LAW, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 102.007 SUBSECTION C OF RATIFYING THE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.

I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

>> IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> YOUR HONOR, IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM L4.

>> I SECOND IT.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> THERE HAS TO BE A CERTAIN WORDING, ISN'T IT?

>> THE NEXT ONE IS A LOT, SO I'LL GUIDE YOU THROUGH THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE BEEN MADE SECOND, SO THIS TIME WE CAN TAKE A VOTE.

FOR THIS ONE, DO WE HAVE TO DO AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE AS WELL? GRANT?

>> NO, JUST A NORMAL VOTE IT'S FINE.

>> THE MOTION PASSES. THIS WILL TAKE US TO ITEM L5. MISS CO.

[L5. ORD-2025-09-08-02 Presentation and discussion regarding Ordinance No. 2025-09- 08-02; Approving and Adopting a tax rate for year 2025-2026 (TAX YEAR 2025) of $0.440226 per $100 of assessed valuation and levying taxes to be assessed on all taxable property within the corporate limits of the City of Princeton; providing when taxes shall become due and when the same shall become delinquent if not paid together with penalties and interest thereon; providing for an effective date; and containing other provisions relating to the subject; and take appropriate action.]

>> PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING ORDINANCE 2025/09/08/02, APPROVING AND ADOPTING A TAX RATE FOR THE YEAR '25/'26, TAX YEAR 2025 OF 0.440226 PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUATION, AND LEVYING TAXES TO BE ASSESSED ON ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF PRINCETON, PROVIDING WHEN TAXES SHALL BECOME DUE, AND WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME DELINQUENT, IF NOT PAID TOGETHER WITH PENALTIES AND INTEREST THEREON, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION, DIRECTOR WILSON.

>> THANK YOU AGAIN, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

AGAIN, THIS IS THE ADOPTION OF THE TAX RATE UNDER TAX CODE, SECTION 26.06 AND THE TRUTH AND TAXATION LAWS,

[01:45:03]

A CITY MUST ADOPT AN ORDINANCE LEVYING ADVALORM.

THIS ONE DOES REQUIRE SPECIFIC MOTION TO BE READ IN A CERTAIN WAY, AND I HAVE THE FIRST MOTION, WHICH IS ADOPTING THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION TAX RATE AND NEEDS TO BE STATED, WHAT YOU HAVE ON YOUR PACKET, AS WELL AS WHAT IS UP ON THE SCREEN AND REQUIRES AN INDIVIDUAL RECORD VOTE.

>> IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

IT NEEDS TO BE TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS AS WELL.

LET ME VOTE ON THEM SEPARATE, CORRECT? ANYBODY MAKE A MOTION.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

I MOVE THAT THE AD VALOREM TAX RATE BE INCREASED BY THE ADOPTION OF A TAX RATE OF 0.254309 ON THE DOLLAR ON EACH $100 OF ASSESSED VALUATION OF TAXABLE PROPERTY FOR GENERAL CITY PURPOSES AND TO PAY THE CURRENT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION EXPENSES OF THE CITY OF PRINCETON FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2025 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30TH 2026 FIXING AND LEVYING THE SAME FOR A TOTAL TAX OF 0.440226 ON EACH $100 OF ASSESSED VALUATION.

THIS INCREASE IS EFFECTIVELY A 3.50% INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE.